Scholars interested in the ancient novel may recall a monograph by G.G. Gamba, Petronio Arbitro e i cristiani (1998), who unconvincingly read the Satyrica as a narrative addressed to Nero and allegorically promoting Christianity – see C. Panayotakis, CR 49 (1999), 412–13, for a balanced appraisal that highlights the limits of Gamba's interpretation. The volume under review does not go as far as to propose a Jewish or a Christian reading of Apuleius’ Metamorphoses. What it does, instead, is to suggest that Apuleius had knowledge of Jewish and especially early Christian literature and that this, in turn, is reflected in various episodes of the novel. These allusions are not meant to show Apuleius’ penchant for Christianity or Judaism, with which he was at odds. S. motivates this by examining passages from the Metamorphoses that show certain analogies with the Bible, and Jewish and early Christian writings. His conclusion is that the novel, particularly Lucius’ conversion and his initiations into the mysteries of Isis and Osiris in Metamorphoses 11, would have offered an alternative to curtail the spreading of Christianity during the second century. This expands on a view expressed by P.G. Walsh and summarised in the introduction to his translation of the novel for the Oxford World's Classics series (1994, pp. xxxvii–xxxix).

The preface, where S.'s general ideas are expounded, is followed by ten chapters. Chapter 1 is a collection of passages from the Old and the New Testament, as well as classical authors, on the ass. S. argues that Jewish and Christian writings point to a less negative perception of this animal, which was mocked and demonised by the Greeks and the Romans. Among the passages mentioned we do not find Job 11:12, where a witless person becoming wise is compared per absurdum to a young ass turning into a human, contradicting the trend S. establishes. For S., the compassion that the initiates into the cult of Isis show to Lucius-ass in Met. 11 is similar to the sympathetic treatment of donkeys in Christian and Jewish sources. However, the positive treatment of Lucius-ass does not correspond to a positive perception of the animal in Apuleius: thanks to his anamorphosis Lucius is, in fact, liberated from his abominable asinine shape (Met. 11.14.4). The following chapters are loosely related to S.'s main argument and investigate various thematic aspects of the Metamorphoses. Chapter 2 focuses on the inset tale of Aristomenes and Socrates (Met. 1.5–19), a story about witches that sets the tone for the initial books of the Metamorphoses. Attention is also paid to the novel's Greek counterpart, the Onos, preserved in Lucian's corpus and spuriously attributed to him. S. focuses on Lucius’ host in the Thessalian city of Hypata, Milo in the Metamorphoses, Hipparchus in the Onos, drawing attention to the different characterisation of the two figures. Chapter 3 continues the parallel exploration of the Metamorphoses and the Onos, considering the function of fortune and providence within their plots. S. notes how the ironic tone of the Onos is consistent throughout whereas the tone of the Metamorphoses changes substantially in Book 11. Chapters 4 and 5 are respectively devoted to the figures of the robbers and their heroic self-fashioning in Met. 4 and to the tale of Cupid and Psyche (Met. 4.28–6.24). Chapter 6 goes back to S.'s idea that the allusions to Jewish and Christian literature in the Metamorphoses are meant to offer a negative depiction of these beliefs in an attempt to curb these cults, Christianity in particular. S. discusses the episode of the evil baker's wife, who sacrilegiously believed in one God (Met. 9.14.5). This is generally taken as a reference to Judaism or Christianity, though Apuleius might not have differentiated one religion from the other (cf. B.L. Hijmans et al., Apuleius Madaurensis. Metamorphoses Book 9 [1995], pp. 380–2). Such prejudice and imprecise knowledge are also visible in Apol. 90.6, a passage not cited in the volume, which is largely modelled on Plin. Nat. 30.11. There Moses and the Egyptian priest Jannes are listed among various practitioners of magic (cf. L. Costantini, Magic in Apuleius’ Apologia [2019], pp. 244–5). S. analyses the writings of Justin the Martyr, Minucius Felix and Tertullian, proposing that they might be levelling criticism at Apuleius’ novel. If this is true, it does not show Apuleius’ engagement with any of these authors.

Chapters 7–10 discuss other possible Apuleian allusions to Christianity. The most interesting of them is perhaps Charite's speech in praise of Lucius-ass at Met. 6.28.3–29. Given that Christians were believed to worship a donkey-headed god, S. argues that Charite's promise to venerate the ass may be evidence of her status as a Christian. This speech foreshadows the ensuing scene at Met. 7.12.5–13.2, in which Charite is brought back to her village on the donkey's back, which S. compares to Mary's escape to Egypt also on a donkey's back (Matthew 2:13–14). However, no direct mention of an ass is given in Matthew, and the same scene in the Metamorphoses features in the pseudo-Lucianic Onos 26.5–27.1 (ed. H. Van Thiel). Both probably derive from the lost Ur-ass-novel by Lucius of Patras (Photius, Bibl. 129), and the scene should not be seen as an innovation by Apuleius to hint at Christian traditions. Chapter 10 serves as a conclusion, recapping how Apuleius attempts to challenge Jewish and Christian beliefs in his novel. This is followed by an appendix on Met. 11.27.9, a passage where the identity of the narrator Lucius and that of author Apuleius seem to overlap. The volume closes with a bibliography and a general index.

There are a few small misprints, and some illustrations are not of the same quality as others (e.g. fig. 7.3 on p. 91). In general, engaging with recent scholarship on the novelistic features of hagiographical writings as well as on the possible influence of Jewish literature on the novelistic tradition (on the latter, see T. Whitmarsh, Dirty Love [2018], pp. 87–121) could have provided a broader literary framing for S.'s ideas. Ultimately, I find this reading of Apuleius’ novel unpersuasive, given that the analogies detected are vague if not unconvincing. For this interpretation to be more compelling, it would have been helpful to address its potential ramifications. For instance, why would Apuleius need to write his novel as an anti-Christian response without explicitly engaging with or criticising these beliefs, as did for example the second-century Platonist Celsus? And, if that truly was Apuleius’ scope, why did he have to be so (unnecessarily) cryptic in the novel, at a time in which Christianity was forbidden and persecuted? Whether readers will be persuaded, they will undoubtedly find in this book a different take on the Metamorphoses and much food for thought, inviting further reflection on the religious and socio-cultural background of Apuleius and his contemporaries.