Book 4 of the Thebaid falls into three sections that anticipate and cover major themes of the epic: the catalogue of Argive heroes (1–344); the Theban scene of necromancy (345–645); and the start of the Nemean episode with Hypsipyle (646–850). Micozzi's excellent commentary (2007) covers none the less only the heroic catalogue, as did Steiniger's briefer commentary (2005). P.'s volume provides a meticulously researched commentary on the whole of Book 4. P. provides her own revised text with a brief apparatus, using as its basis Hill's 1996 text but particularly taking into account the textual challenges posed by the new editions of Shackleton Bailey (2003) and Hall (2007 text and apparatus, and 2008 secondary apparatus). While acknowledging that the Puteanus (P) is the most valuable single manuscript of the Thebaid extant, P. expresses caution about putting too much faith in it; she also acknowledges Hall's (2008) radical stemmatic critique of the polarised manuscript tradition but does not take a position on it. All the readings in the apparatus are fully discussed in the commentary; the result is a conservative, judicious and highly readable text of Thebaid 4.

The book is attractively produced with clear type and facing text and prose translation. P.'s commentary is richly informative and meticulously researched, covering matters of historical, geographical and cultural importance. A strength of her commentary is also the wealth of literary allusions, which range from early Greek poetry to Renaissance literature, including references to the twelfth-century epic poet Joseph of Exeter whose De Bello Troiano draws importantly on Statius. Her note for instance on lines 95–100 is exemplary. There, P. teases out the multiple significance of the snake simile in the Theban narrative and in the characterisation of Tydeus, while also situating it within a broader European literary tradition that highlights its creative adaptation in later works such as Spenser's Fairy Queen and Ariosto's Orlando Furioso.

Sometimes, however, in a work as densely researched as this, it is hard to sift out the relative importance of the many points P. often makes in one note or to see where they may be leading. At other times too P. seems hesitant to develop literary judgements. In her note on horrentem in the book's opening line (tertius horrentem zephyris laxauerat annum /Phoebus), she adduces Alain de Lille and Joseph of Exeter to support the translation ‘shivering’ for horrentem (annum). Yet surely there is also a metaphorical aspect to horrentem; every aspect of the Theban universe, from city to armies to landscape and time itself, is infected with horror at the imminent civil war. There is thus irony in the opening relaxation of winter's chill: this spring sees the assembling of the Argive troops and the march towards Thebes. (Incidentally P. translates this opening line with an awkwardly placed modifier as ‘for the third time Phoebus had loosened the season of shivering with the Zephyrs’; for clarity it would have been better phrased thus, ‘Phoebus had loosened with the Zephyrs the season of shivering’). Likewise P.'s note at lines 6–7 on the Roman goddess Bellona, who declares war by throwing a spear from Argos to Thebes (5–11), makes the interesting observation that Statius alludes to a specific Roman ritual whereby war was declared when a fetialis hurled a spear from Bellona's temple. Here P. could have explored the spear-throwing further, drawing attention to Theseus' hurling of a spear as he himself sets out for Thebes (12.649). The note concludes with a brief discussion and helpful listing of Roman anachronisms in the poem, though P. seems unwilling to explore their political implications beyond stating vaguely that they ‘relate mythical Greece to historical Rome’. Several critics, however, have argued that Theban myth had troubling implications for Rome's own history, with its foundational fratricidal myth and recent pattern of civil war.

The introduction, which is divided into six parts, provides a clear exposition of the special character of Book 4 within the epic. Part 1 briefly covers Statius' career and the plot of the Thebaid. Here P. repeats the conventional wisdom that Statius had ‘the backing of rich patrons from the aristocracy and the emperor Domitian himself’ (p. xv), though it is worth noting that Statius' patrons were rich but not necessarily aristocratic. Pollius Felix for instance, the dedicatee of Book 3 of the Siluae, was a wealthy businessman from the Bay of Naples who was very likely of freedman origins, while Domitian's backing was clearly intermittent (Newlands, Statius: Poet between Rome and Naples [2012], pp. 18–19, 20–36). Parts 2 and 3 deal with particular aspects of the narrative art of Book 4. P. has interesting remarks to make on the relationship of Book 4 to the catalogue of Theban heroes in Book 7 (243–373) and to the catalogue of the female Argive mourners in Book 12 (105–28). Following Georgacopoulou's article (Epicedion [1996], 93–129), she concludes with uncharacteristic firmness, ‘the implications of the intratextuality are damning. The spotlight is on war's futility (a glorious train of warrior is replaced by a band of their female mourners) …’ (p. xxviii). Part 4 discusses the literary tradition about Thebes, the array of texts that inform Statius' epic. Here P. observes that the first half of Thebaid 4 systematically alludes to Lucan 1, thus underlining the internecine nature of the conflict, while setting Thebaid 4 up as the beginning of war. The final two parts provide an overview of the poem's reception (Part 5) and a rationale for her text (Part 6).

This introduction should be essential reading for any student of the Thebaid. My major criticism is P.'s privileging in Part 2 of the tropes of ‘excess and redundancy’, cast as faults of ‘Silver’ Latin poetry. Although she claims in a footnote (p. xx n. 23) that a stylistic feature such as hyperbole could be strategic, P. does not develop this point. The opening of Lucan's epic, bella … plus quam ciuilia, programmatically necessitates a rhetoric of ‘excess’ for civil war epic. Moreover, Statius is capable too of remarkable concision. For instance P. notes on lines 490–1 that the grand patronymic Oedipodioniden (line 491) seems to be a Statian coinage. P. finds it ‘slightly incongruous’ when applied here to Eteocles, who is fearful as the dead start to rise in the necromancy scene. Yet Oedipodioniden surely demonstrates both pointed concision and grandiosity; it emphasises Eteocles' tainted descent from Oedipus, the inescapability of his past. He feels fear for, as the decadent scion of a polluted family line, he cannot be a hero.

P.'s bibliography is thorough and up to date. I will add only a few items. The date of the death of Statius' father has been debated; the date of Statius' birth depends on it. P. (p. xv) cites Coleman (Siluae 4 [1988], p. xviii) for discussion; but Gibson (Siluae 5 [2006], pp. 262–6) provides a more thorough discussion of the arguments. At pp. 88–9, the note on line 81 cites only Davis (in C. Deroux [ed.], Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History VII [1994], pp. 464–83) for ‘Theseus’ questionable associations'. The benchmark article for Statius' Theseus is S. Braund, ‘Ending Epic: Statius, Theseus and a Merciful Release’, PCPhS 42 (1996), 1–23. R. Edwards' 2001 commentary, John Lydgate: the Siege of Thebes would have been a valuable addition to footnote 115 on medieval reception (p. xxvi). The timing of publication presumably meant that it was not possible to include F. Bessone's major new book, La Tebaide di Stazio: Epica e Potere (2011), with its emphasis on Statius' use of Greek tragedy.

P.'s commentary is an impressive one that provides a solid foundation for future research on Statius and Flavian poetry.