H. has undertaken mammoth tasks as an editor and commentator. In the former category belongs the overwhelming Oxford Classical Dictionary (co-edited with A. Spawforth), in the latter the Commentary on Thucydides, extending to three volumes and over 2,200 pages. As a researcher H. focuses on the interface between history and poetry (his 2004 monograph explores the contextual and intertextual affinities between Pindar and Thucydides), and he is regularly involved in projects about Ancient Greek onomastics and the study of inscriptions. Obviously H.'s academic work is widely known and hardly needs an introduction here. This preamble only aims at demonstrating that his new commentary on Lycophron's Alexandra is a combination of these diverse philological skills.

No doubt the iambic poem of the 1,474 verses attributed to the Hellenistic grammarian Lycophron of Chalcis offers the ideal opportunity for heavy academic exercise. Scholars have struggled since antiquity and the Byzantine era (I refer here to the celebrated Tzetzes' Scholia) to provide exegesis for decoding Alexandra's riddling discourse. It appears that this ‘minor poetic masterpiece’, as H. characterises the Alexandra, has attracted scholars throughout the centuries less for its literary merits than for its rich philological, mythological, religious and historical texture.

The historical background of the Alexandra, in particular, requires detailed consideration, because this tragic poem records, albeit in codification, a large part of history (H. calls its scope ‘pan-Mediterranean’) from the archaic to the late Hellenistic era, of events ranging from the founding of Troy to the Roman dominance over Greece. In the introduction H. asserts the significance of the historical perspective for an in-depth analysis of the Alexandra by stressing that previous commentaries on the poem ‘tend to concentrate on literary matters to the detriment of the historical’ and by stating that ‘the Alexandra is not only a powerful and richly plotted literary creation, but a text of the first importance for the understanding of some central aspects of ancient Greek religion and social history’ (p. 4). Along these lines, H. is already working on a follow-up volume (Lykophron's Alexandra and the Hellenistic World) where he intends to demonstrate how historians can use the evidence found in the Alexandra.

This does not mean that H. neglects the literary and other aspects of the poem in the present commentary; on the contrary he seeks to balance the various readings and enrich the current state of discussion. The multifaceted introduction proves the point. The main philological problems traditionally associated with the Alexandra, namely the range of literary sources, the dating and authorship of the poem and its performative context, are systematically explored before H. lends a fresh insight into the historical and cultural background of the poem. H. sides with those scholars who consider the poem to be pseudonymous and falsely attributed to the third-century Lycophron of Chalcis. He also puts forward two fascinating hypotheses regarding the identity of the author: the possibility that through ‘Lycophron’ speaks a female voice (a hypothesis abandoned eventually in favour of the idea that it is rather a male poet who adopts the persona of Alexandra) and that the author comes from a South Italian milieu (on the basis that a plethora of foundation myths relating to the Western Mediterranean can be found in the poem). Other literary aspects briefly discussed include the theme of foundation and metamorphosis, female cult and religion, narrative and language, and the Roman reception of the poem – limited to Ennius and Virgil outside the Aeneid, authors who have not been treated so far by the Alexandra-scholarship. But, as already noted, H. is extremely interested in a historical reading, as his survey of the archaeological remains supporting the foundation myths of the Alexandra demonstrates (pp. 53–62). He furthermore emphasises, in a separate chapter (pp. 62–93), the relationship between cult epithets and epigraphic material by highlighting onomastics as a defining feature of the poem's discourse – this is one of H.'s most original contributions to the interpretation of the Alexandra.

The last part of the introduction (pp. 100–13), dedicated to the history of the text and the scholia in the manuscript tradition as well as to an evaluation of the modern editions, is authored by the late P.M. Fraser. As H. notes, the chapter probably dates back to the 1990s, but it is updated with supplementary comments and bibliographical references. The list of modern editions, which begins with L. Bachmann's 1830 Leipzig edition and extends to the latest A. Hurst/A. Kolde 2008 Les Belles Lettres text, translation and commentary, is written both by Fraser (up to the 1991 M. Fusillo/A. Hurst/G. Paduano commentary) and supplemented by H. This section is very useful, because it helps contemporary readers and scholars place H.'s commentary within the history of research on the Alexandra.

The main body of the book comprises the text of the Alexandra with a slim apparatus criticus, a new prose translation – a valuable contribution by H., since this is the first rendering of the text into modern English of this almost untranslatable Hellenistic poem for nearly 100 years – and the commentary running parallel beneath the text. The headings at the top of the page clearly indicate the thematic section, according to the division of the 1,474 verses of the poem into more than 100 subsections (a helpful chart of all subsections is published as a ‘Synopsis’ of the poem on pp. 115–18). An innovative feature of the commentary is the comprehensive introduction to each of these subsections: a brief mythological summary of each story is followed by a discussion of the literary and archaeological evidence, its function in the context of the Alexandra and a review of the bibliography.

The core of this edition is the commentary, comprising the subsection introductions and the detailed annotation of the ancient text. The scale and variety of philological exegesis deployed in the commentary cannot be described within the limited space of the present review. However, some of its distinctive features may be pointed out. H. meticulously examines the poem's outlandish vocabulary and especially the alternative, archaicising and enigmatic naming strategies employed by ‘Lycophron’. Moreover, H. highlights the rich intertextuality of the Alexandra by analysing passages from the entire range of Greek literature, with emphasis on epic and tragedy, Hellenistic poetry, historiography, mythography and the ancient and Byzantine scholiastic tradition. H.'s method is a combination of philological analysis and archaeological exploration, for example when epigraphical and iconographical material is examined alongside literary sources. Toponyms are systematically located on the Barrington Atlas of the Classical World (2000) and the evidence found in the Alexandra is tested against historical documentation (like that collected in M.H. Hansen/T.H. Nielsen, Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis [2004] and the various epigraphic corpora). Special attention is given to cross-referencing between the notes but also through exhaustive indexes (of literary and inscriptional citations, notable Greek words, mythical and place names, cultic adjectives, themes and motifs); an impressive 40-page bibliography completes the volume.

Yet viewing the volume as a huge collection of data does not do justice to the overall design and concept of H.'s commentary. Behind the impressive display of knowledge – indispensable to decoding this Hellenistic tour de force – H. seeks to provide answers to crucial questions pertaining to the interpretation of the Alexandra as a literary œuvre per se. By using his immense learning as a guide, H. helps us find our way through ‘Lycophron's’ obscure labyrinth and eventually penetrate into the dark world of the mysterious Alexandra.