This volume (215 pages excluding the bibliography and indexes) provides a detailed examination of the presence of Theban cults and myths in Pindar's works. Although this aspect could seem obvious or banal for an author of Theban origin, O.'s book deepens a problem which scholarship has not studied enough. O. analyses Pindar's corpus from the point of view of a specific polis according to a geographical approach to Pindar's world which dates back to 1922, when Wilamowitz focussed on Boeotia (U. Von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Pindaros [1922], pp. 12–61). Since scholarship has clearly demonstrated that Pindar's odes, far from being a mere literary artefact, may contain precise allusions to different aspects of contemporary religious rites and ceremonies, O.'s aim is to investigate Pindar's poems as a document of real cults and Theban traditions. The book is divided into five dense chapters, each dealing with relevant myths connected with Theban history. O. does not limit her research to Pindar, but critically presents the non-Pindaric mythographic tradition, underlining and trying to explain the remarkable differences. As the book's structure suggests, O. approaches Pindar's works thematically rather than on the basis of the classification of extant compositions. This approach will benefit both scholars of Pindar and those dealing with a wider range of related disciplines (history, mythology, religion, archaeology). Although O. presents each problem exhaustively and critically, the book is accessible to non-specialists as the texts discussed include an Italian translation, and O. explains clearly the intricate legends and rites.

Chapter 1 discusses the myth of the founding of Thebes. Archaic and classical authors testify to the existence of two complementary legends centred on Cadmus and the twins Amphion and Zethus. The first, probably reflecting Theban tales, names Cadmus as the founder, a hero who introduced new cults and was considered responsible for introducing the Greek alphabet from Phoenicia. A problematic passage in the Nekyia in the Odyssey (11.260–5), however, ascribes the foundation of the city to Amphion and Zethus (263: hoi protoi Thebes hedos ektisan heptapyloio). These apparently discordant versions (the second one has Boeotian origins) were taken by the ancients (see Paus. 9.5.6–7) as representing two building phases (a hypothesis which seems to be confirmed by archaeology. Cf. A. Dakouri-Hild, ʻThe House of Kadmos in Mycenaean Thebes Reconsidered: Architecture, Chronology, and Contextʼ, Ann. Brit. School Athens 96 [2001], 81–122): Cadmus was the founder of the Cadmea (the acropolis), whereas Amphion and Zethus later built the lower part of Thebes surrounded by walls and doors.

O. observes that in Pindar's extant works there is a clear preference for the myth of Cadmus. He plays an important role as founder (Isthm. 6.75; Pyth. 8.47, 9.83) and Pindar treats some thematic nuclei of his story: the wedding of Cadmus with Harmonia (frr. 29, 70b; Pyth. 3.89–95); the daughters of Cadmus and Harmonia (Ol. 2.25–30; Pyth. 11.1–7); the destiny of Cadmus after death (Ol. 2.68–78). Concerning the other tradition, although Pindar does not mention Amphion, a passage of Paean 9 may allude to both founding myths (line 44 Kadmou straton an Zeathou po[lin).

Chapter 2 is concerned with two eminent prophets in Theban history: Tiresias and Amphiaraus. If tragic poetry emphasises the role of Tiresias as prophet of the misfortunes of the Labdacids, Pindar prefers to depict the blind prophet in connection with the glory of Heracles. In the first Nemean for Chromius of Etna Pindar, reminding the audience of the story of the infant Heracles strangling the snakes sent by Hera (a legend not attested before Pindar), describes the prophecy of Tiresias (lines 60–72), who had been summoned by Amphitryon, about the future of the child. The Pindaric Tiresias, who is different from the Apollonian priest depicted by Attic tragedy, acts as prophet of Zeus in the sanctuary of Zeus Hypsistus erected on the southern extremity of the Cadmea near the Pylai Hypsistai. O. examines fr. 198b (two lines about the Boeotian spring Tilphussa), reconstructing the context and persuasively hypothesising a connection with the death of Tiresias. Regarding the presence of Amphiaraus, there is an interesting analysis of Pyth. 8.38–60, an important and controversial passage which may contain an allusion to a Theban cult of the prophet/warrior Amphiaraus.

Chapter 3 focusses on the Theban biography of Heracles. O. emphasises the significance of Isthm. 4.61–72b: Pindar is the only Greek author who takes a stand on Heracles' infanticide, exonerating the hero from blame. According to Pindar the eight sons of Heracles are adult and have died in battle (line 63 chalkoaran okto thanonton). Scholars are divided as to the origin of this story, but two not mutually exclusive hypotheses could account for it: Pindar deliberately modifies the myth in order to rehabilitate the hero or simply reflects a peculiar Theban variant of the myth. The latter is more probable considering that, as the passage suggests, this ode may have been composed and performed during an important Theban festival connected with Heracles and his sons (Heracleia).

Chapter 4 presents an exhaustive overview of the ambivalent and complex figure of Dionysus, explaining the peculiarities of his representation by Pindar. The relationship between Dionysus and Thebes is significant because, according to the dominant legend (accepted by Pindar), he was born at Thebes and was conceived by Zeus and Semele, the daughter of Cadmus. The topography of the cult of Dionysus and his mother includes the Cadmean acropolis, where the god was worshipped as Cadmeius or Pericionius (surrounded by columns), and the temple of Dionysus Lysius (Liberator) near the Proetidian gate. Most allusions to Dionysus come from the Dithyrambs. O. analyses the Dionysian digression of Dithyramb 2 (fr. 70b lines 5–23) composed for the Thebans probably after 470 b.c. The description of the celebration in honour of Dionysus on Olympus (line 6 Bromiou [tele]tan) could reflect a precise earthly ceremony, perhaps the nocturnal orgiastic rite on Mt Cithaeron, and is emblematic for the understanding of the relationship between Pindar's poetry and real performance. This critical approach to Dithyramb 2 reveals the assimilation of the Magna Mater to Demetra (of whom Pindar seems to have been a devotee) at Thebes and, as a comparison with Isthm. 7.3–4 may suggest, the fact that Demetra was worshipped on the Cadmea in a sanctuary close to Dionysius Cadmeius.

Chapter 5 describes the characteristics of the Theban cult of Apollo in Pindar's poetry. Outside the walls of Thebes, on the south-east side beyond the door of Helen and by the river Ismenus, Apollo Ismenius was venerated in a sanctuary famous for its influential oracle. The temple was the destination of the Daphnephoria procession and the receptacle of the tripods offered to the god. O. clarifies the ritual of the Daphnephoria, comparing the accounts of Proclus (Chrest. ap. Phot. Bibl. 321b 23–32) and Pausanias (9.10.4) with the fragment of Parthenion 2 (fr. 94b), and discusses other fragments dealing with the rite of the tripodephoria (frr. 57–60, 66). Pindar's ninth Paean (A1 Rutherford), dedicated to Apollo Ismenius and composed probably after the eclipse of 463 b.c., shows Pindar as spokesman of the entire city in an effort to avert the consequence of the threatening phenomenon. This dense chapter closes with a discussion of the cult of Apollo Ptoius which includes a careful discussion of the fragments belonging to the so-called Hymn to Apollo Ptoio (frr. 51A–D).

This book is an excellent contribution not only to Pindaric scholarship but also to the religious history of ancient Thebes.