This relatively slim volume contains a number of papers presented at a two-day workshop (‘“A Magic Stronger than the Governors’ Power”. Literature and Society in the Fourth Century a.d.’) held at Ghent and Brussels in September 2010, to which a number of other papers have also been added. In their introductory chapter, the editors explain that the purpose of the book is to explore ‘the social role of literature’, with an emphasis on ‘how literature impacts on society and how that impact is exploited by its practitioners’ (p. 4). In particular, they wish to contest the idea that rhetoric lost its prominent role in wider society during the fourth century so that it was increasingly confined to schools – themselves subject to increased competition from what one might describe now as more vocational skills, shorthand and law. The result is a collection of twelve papers, including the introduction, dealing with the social impact of a variety of different types of literature under three main themes that provide the subtitles for the volume.

After the introductory chapter explaining the purpose and structure of the volume, M. Vessey discusses the modern periodisation of ancient literature in a paper that, whatever its other merits, does not seem to belong here, since it does not actually address the main subject of the volume, the role of rhetoric in the fourth century. The main body of the volume really begins with a set of three papers asking what role paideia and rhetoric could play in a changing society. B. Lançon explains that literary training was still valued at the imperial court, and that men with such training could still hope to become emperor, despite their lack of traditional military experience in some cases. In contrast, N. McLynn focuses on the provincial level, on the manner in which bishop Gregory of Nazianzus was able to exploit his skill as a writer of letters in order to exert influence over the provincial governor Olympius, although cautioning against the assumption that such success was more common than it actually was. Finally, V.H. demonstrates that Libanius’ Oration 31 (For the Teachers), a key text often used to prove the decline in the social importance of rhetoric, cannot be interpreted in the way that it often has been in the past because it contains a great deal of exaggeration for rhetorical effect, statements that should not be abstracted and taken literally as proof of the poverty of teachers of rhetoric at Antioch by the mid-fourth century.

The next two papers focus on authorial self-presentation. M. Ludlow discusses how bishop Gregory of Nyssa presents himself as a pupil turned teacher in the case of his works in praise of his siblings Basil and Macrina, through which works he continues to preach in their stead. J. Weisweiler examines three cases of apparent inconsistencies in the narrative of Ammianus Marcellinus, all from his account of the reign of Constantius II, to conclude that these were deliberate and intended to provoke the reader to question both the status of his work and the historiographical method itself. In so doing, he argues, Ammianus presents himself as more methodologically aware and therefore more reliable than other historians.

The last group of papers deals with the literary construction of reality, how authors create a different imaginary world in order to influence the perception of the real world. S. Mratschek analyses the way in which bishop Paulinus of Nola combines classical form and Christian imagery in a letter addressed to the vicarius Urbis Romae on behalf of a shipowner whose ship and cargo of grain had been stolen following its stranding off the coast of Bruttium. The intended effect of this letter was to force the vicarius to re-think the relationship between the various parties to this dispute, not least to treat the lowly seaman witness to these events as a living relic deserving to be left unharmed rather than interrogated by means of torture. C. Coombe turns to the mythological depiction of the general Stilicho in the poetry of Claudian, and how it worked to persuade his audience to view Stilicho as a hero in the real world also. R. Djikstra examines how the past is idealised in order to influence a contemporary world eager to imitate that past. In particular, he examines how a number of Christian poets seek to promote both unity within the church and the primacy of St Peter, and therefore of the bishop of Rome, through their depiction, first, of the unity of the twelve apostles and then, of the unity of SS Peter and Paul. Finally, in a paper that perhaps better deserves to be placed alongside those dealing with self-presentation, V.N. discusses how, despite protestations to the contrary, Christian preachers used rhetoric as a means of social advancement, focusing on the competition between Christian preachers at Constantinople about the turn of the fourth and fifth centuries.

The papers are generally convincing and cohere well together. The editors, and some authors, exaggerate somewhat the failure to treat prose texts in particular as literary works and cannot help but adopt a slight air of superiority when talking about historians (pp. 7–8). The first may explain the relative neglect of poetry within the volume, but the second makes the even greater neglect of historiography all the more surprising. Nevertheless, the volume does succeed in reminding the reader that the term literature encompasses a wide variety of texts, not just poetry. My one serious reservation about the arguments advanced therein relates to J. Weisweiler's treatment of Ammianus Marcellinus, but raises broader questions also about the literary interpretation of historiographical texts. I am happy to accept that ancient historians, including Ammianus, do sometimes play literary games. For example, Weisweiler, following G. Kelly, is right to reject a literal interpretation of Ammianus’ apparent claim that he was able to see even the smallest objects at a distance of 50 miles away while conducting a reconnaissance mission on a mountain top in Corduene (pp. 115–21). Yet this was not intended as a contribution to the debate concerning the value of autopsy in historiography, but parodies rather the gospel account of the temptation of Christ in the wilderness, according to which Satan led Christ to a very high mountain top and showed him all the kingdoms of the world (Matt. 4:8), in continuation of that long stream of anti-Christian polemic within Ammianus’ text. However, one can take the literary interpretation of a text too far, and the attempt to explain all or most of the errors or inconsistencies within Ammianus’ text as a deliberate device to provoke thought about the nature of historiography itself does exactly that.

This is an enjoyable volume, readily accessible even to those who have never previously heard of the ‘Third Sophistic’ (pp. 1–3). It is not quite as radical as it sometimes pretends, but will make a useful addition to the bookshelf of anyone interested in the literary history of the fourth century a.d.