This commentary is a most welcome contribution to the scholarship on Apuleius’ Golden Ass or Metamorphoses. It benefits from G.'s vast expertise on this work and his involvement in the latest instalment of the celebrated Groningen Commentaries on Apuleius’ Metamorphoses series (hereafter GCA), focusing on Book 11 and published in 2015. Exclusively devoted to Met. 1–3, this is the first instalment of a series comprising four commentaries: the forthcoming volumes will cover Met. 4–6, by C. Lazzarini and L. Nicolini (vol. 2), Met. 7–9, by S. Mattiacci and G. Moretti (vol. 3), and Met. 10–11, by A. Barchiesi (vol. 4).

Following the format of the Valla series, the volume opens with a rich and informative introduction, authored by G. and structured in seven sections (pp. xi–lxxv), where he touches upon Apuleius’ life and oeuvre, then addresses on different aspects of the novel. Section 1 discusses Apuleius’ origins and career as a sophist (a term that G. accepts only if used without disparaging connotations), a Platonist and a polymath, leading to his diversified production. From Section 2 onwards, G. focuses on the Metamorphoses: since this work is not explicitly mentioned in Apuleius’ surviving writings, G. cautiously accepts – with the majority of scholars – that it might perhaps have been written in the mature period of his life. Section 3 examines Apuleius’ Greek models: the story of Lucius turning into an ass is independently attested in the Onos, spuriously attributed to Lucian of Samosata. According to Photius (Bibl. 129), who is sure about the Lucianic paternity of the Onos, this would be an epitome of a longer ass-novel by Lucius of Patrae, and G. agrees with the current scholarly trend identifying the latter as the source of both pseudo-Lucian and Apuleius. G. also takes into account the possible correspondences of tropes between the story of Cupid and Psyche (Met. 4.28–6.24) and the Greek novels, probably attesting to the fortune of the genre in the Imperial period. Section 4 summarises the plot of the Metamorphoses, discussing how the book division goes back to Apuleius, as well as the geography in which the story is set and the possible time lapse between beginning and end, in a fashion that is reminiscent of the GCA introductions. In the ensuing sections G. assesses the different interpretations to which Apuleius’ Metamorphoses lends itself. Section 5 gives an overview of earlier scholarly trends, paying particular attention to the aporetic views proposed in J.J. Winkler, Auctor & Actor (1985). According to Winkler, the novel is meant to elicit different reactions (serious or comic) from the readers – a position recently reprised with new argument by G.C. Benson, Apuleius’ Invisible Ass (2019). G.'s own interpretative line is expressed in the two remaining sections, in which he draws on and updates two of his earlier studies, i.e. Literature and Identity in The Golden Ass of Apuleius (2012), pp. 95–132; ‘Come si deve leggere un romanzo’, in M. Carmignani, L. Graverini and B.T. Lee (edd.), Collected Studies on the Roman Novel (2013), pp. 119–39. Sections 6 and 7 attempt to elucidate how Apuleius’ Metamorphoses could be read: G. lays emphasis on the serio-comic nature of the novel, a trait that also characterises ancient satire. Bearing in mind what the expectations of the ancient readership might have been, G. suggests that it is possible to appreciate the moral and Platonic features in the story as well as to consider it a form of escapism, since these levels are not mutually exclusive.

The general introduction is followed by a useful outline of the plot, a bibliography and a list of abbreviations adopted, and a ‘Nota al testo’ by the editor, N. (pp. cxvii–cxxx). There she discusses the transmission of Apuleius’ novel and, following G. Ammannati's suggestions (still unpublished), proposes that the forerunner of the oldest and most authoritative manuscript (Laurentianus 68.02, siglum F) might even be the apograph of the copy edited in late antiquity by Sallustius, whose name and activity are recorded in F's subscriptions. Ammannati's textual research is positively appraised, and her emendations are accepted in the Latin text, which N. dedicates to the 1897 editor J. Van der Vliet, known for his conjectural approach.

The Latin text, provided with a streamlined critical apparatus, is accompanied by a facing translation into Italian by G., which is both enjoyable and accurate. Then comes G.'s commentary on the first three books. Directed towards both an expert and a general audience, Greek and Latin citations from other works are provided with a translation. A short essay at the outset of each section of the novel summarises and highlights its content and diegetic features. A comparison with the GCA on Book 1 by W. Keulen (2007) and that on Book 2 by D. van Mal-Maeder (2001), as well as with R. van der Paardt, L. Apuleius Madaurensis. The Metamorphoses: a Commentary on Book III with Text and Introduction (1971), is inevitable and reveals G.'s scholarly achievement. The traditionally slender format of the Valla commentaries was bound to impose a tighter discussion in the lemmata compared to the wealth of detail offered by the GCA. However, G. succeeds in providing readers with an original stylistic and content-based analysis, which draws and expands on the results of the GCA, while taking more recent scholarship into account. Matters of language are discussed, such as, for example, Apuleius’ penchant for archaisms or his use of colloquial expressions, as well as metaliterary, narratological and textual aspects presented by a passage.

G., N. and the Fondazione Lorenzo Valla are to be thanked for producing such a helpful volume, which will amply fulfil the expectations of all readers. One may only hope that an English version of this commentary will soon become available, similar to the Valla commentaries on the Odyssey and on Herodotus.