Garth Tissol's commentary on Book 1 of Ovid's Epistulae ex Ponto is not only a significant addition to the well-known series of Cambridge green-and-yellows, but also a most welcome contribution to the renewed interest in Ovid's exilic poetry. As one can read on the back cover, the author aspires to assist ‘intermediate and advanced students in understanding Ovid's language and style, while guiding them in the appreciation of his poetic art’. Indeed, T. has done a masterful job of making Ovid's poem accessible to modern students of Latin by providing a sound text accompanied by a readable and engaging medium-size commentary.

In the Preface (vii), T. pays his debts to previous commentators — especially M. Helzle (2003) and J. F. Gaertner (2005) — and mentions the most important commentaries available. §1 of the Introduction (1–2) places the collection within Ovid's exilic production, the Tristia in particular (the Ibis receives no mention). §2 (2–6) offers an insightful discussion of the poet's use of poetic epistle in terms of generic innovation. However, it is rather unfortunate that the discussion is restricted almost exclusively to the literary precedent of Horace's Epistulae, leaving aside the Ovidian Heroides. Even so, T. manages further to enrich his discussion by including Ovid's interplay with the tradition of philosophical consolation in exile (Cicero, Seneca). The heart of the introduction is taken up by §3 (6–18), which stands out for its learned and stimulating insights. This section is in two parts. The first one treats Ovid's successful integration of epic features and themes into elegy. T.'s sound command of allusion and intertextuality become evident in his brilliant examination of Ovid's manipulative use of the myth of the Gigantomachy in the Epistulae in view of his earlier treatment of the same myth in his Metamorphoses. The second part of §3 offers an informative and erudite discussion of Ovid's use of hyperbole (linguistic, thematic) as a means of most effectively representing the inappropriateness of his punishment and the extremity of his hardship in exile. The close comparative reading with Vergil's use of the same trope of excess in the Aeneid is a telling example of T.'s acute criticism. §3 ends with a defence of the reality of Ovid's exile in Tomis. §4 (18–23) examines the presence of the addressees’ names in the Epistulae as opposed to the Tristia, where their names are suppressed. T. offers a valid explanation for the poet's choice to name his friends as a means not merely of immortalization but also of claiming friendship and/or making a public appeal to people who were not numbered among his close friends (like Messalinus: Epist. 1.7 and 2.2). §5 (23–5) argues for Ovid's unfailing poetic competence in exile, offering a rather concise overview of the poet's main stylistic features in the collection; a more comprehensive list would be desirable. The following section (25–7) on the early reception of the collection in antiquity, Pliny the Younger in particular, is equally informative. The final section of the Introduction is on the text (27–8). T. relies heavily on Richmond's Teubner edition (1990), from which he differs only occasionally. He gives the merest summary of the text and transmission of the poem. Immediately after the introduction follows the Latin text with a minimal apparatus criticus (31–52).

Given the student-orientated nature of his commentary, T. offers a comprehensive blend of useful comments on language, style and literary background. His emphasis is put primarily on translation, grammar, philological observations and interpretation. Each poem is preceded by an introductory note of the following arrangement (more or less): identification of the addressee, structure of the poem, discussion of (intra)textual issues, and a concise kind of ‘running-commentary’ on the poem with linguistic and narrative remarks.

T. has interesting and stimulating things to say about Ovid's linguistic and stylistic features, which essentially counterbalance the rather restricted treatment in the Introduction: for example, the idiomatic substitution of pluperfect for imperfect (on 1.11–12), the postponement of conjunctions (on 1.39–40), Ovid's interlocking word order (on 5.1–2), the use of hyperbaton (on 6.27–8). Appropriate attention is also given to metrical issues: for example, the aphaeresis producing a dissyllabic ending to the pentameter (on 2.139–40), the trisyllabic endings (on 1.65–6, 8.40), the rare elision of –ē before an initial short vowel (on 6.11–12). T. also offers richly informative notes on Augustus' exploitation of Mark Antony's letters (on 1.23–4), Ovid's use of mythologica exempla (on 3.61–84, 7.31–2) and on hysteron proteron (on 8.15–16). The defence of Epist. 1.7.21–2 and 1.7.61–6 (pace Gaertner) are two fine examples of solid and clear textual argumentation. Equally sound is the discussion of the phonological variants pinna/penna in Epist. 1.5.71–2.

The bibliography is up-to-date. However, a noteworthy omission is Peter Green's (2005) translation (with introduction and notes) of Ovid's exilic poetry (both the Tristia and the Epistulae). With regard to the Indexes, one feels the lack of an index locorum. The book is carefully edited. I have not come across any significant misprint.

To conclude, this is an admirably lucid and judicious commentary, which clearly benefits from the author's philological acumen and rigour. T. has succeeded in producing not only an appropriate teaching aid for the student readership at which it is primarily targeted, but also an attractive and helpful tool for scholars and readers of Augustan poetry.