Recent years have yielded a remarkable abundance of editions and translations of Callimachus. D'Alessio's full commentary and Massimilla's first volume on the first two books of the Aetia, to name only two, appeared as recently as 1996, with Massimilla's second volume published in 2010. Despite negotiating a somewhat crowded field since she began her edition of the Aetia in the late 1980s, H. has succeeded in crafting a magnificent work of scholarship that will surely become a standard tool for Callimachean and Hellenistic scholars.

H.'s commentary comprises two volumes: the first contains the introduction, text and translation, and the second consists entirely of commentary. In her preface, H. explains that her goal in writing her commentary was ‘to make the Aetia accessible to its readers at a micro- and meso-level’ (vol. 1, p. vii). Though such a schema accurately emphasises the ‘micro-’ and ‘meso-levels’ inherent to the relatively narrow view of the commentary, one should not overlook the ‘macro’ level discussions in the introduction. H. mentions that the introduction ‘incorporates the results of the small-scale investigations in the line-by-line commentary’ (vol. 1, p. vii), but the full weight of that notion is not apparent until one realises the wealth of discussion of literary, historical and a variety of other issues that can be found throughout the commentary. Rather than merely offering background information on the composition of the Aetia and salient points of scholarly debate (though these features are present and thoroughly discussed), the introduction offers a considerable number of fascinating interpretative points (especially in regard to Callimachus' poetic programme) born out of the analyses found in the commentary (for example, H.'s discussion of the ordering and programmatic value of the aitia in Books 1–2 and 3–4 [vol. 1, pp. 8–12]). There is much in the introduction that even seasoned Callimachean scholars would be remiss in overlooking, such as H.'s discussion of intertextuality in the Aetia, particularly regarding the figure of Heracles (vol. 1, pp. 49–56), and her comments on the role of the Aetia in its Ptolemaic context (vol. 1, pp. 40–1). These are but two examples.

The introduction treats, all too briefly, the Aetia's date of composition, size, contents, generic aspects, contemporary context, literary techniques, metre and transmission. H.'s discussions are entirely devoted to the Aetia and lack, without harm, a discussion of the Aetia's Nachleben. More noticeably absent, perhaps, is a section devoted to Callimachus as a historical figure, or the inclusion of other background material not directly related to the composition of the Aetia. While H.'s focussed approach is a great boon for scholars due to its propensity for detailed analyses, those who are unfamiliar with Callimachus or Hellenistic poetry, or who are perhaps reading the Aetia for the first time (particularly undergraduates or graduate students), may wish to seek a general introduction elsewhere. That being said, those with even a cursory knowledge of Callimachus and his Hellenistic milieu will be quickly brought up to speed by H. on the major issues surrounding the Aetia.

Though there is much of value in the introduction, the commentary, as one might expect, is where H.'s work truly shines. Her writing is clear, concise and engaging, and each fragment, particularly the longer ones, is conveniently organised using a semi-regular schema of subheadings, a feature reminiscent of Gow's famous commentary on Theocritus. For the longer fragments one routinely finds subheadings for ‘contents’, ‘position in the Aetia’, ‘the aition’, ‘other fragments connected with this passage’ and of course ‘commentary’. Additional subheadings appear as appropriate for each entry (thus fragment 1 has, for example, additional subheadings for ‘the status of fr. 1’ and ‘the position of fr. 1 in the ancient literary tradition’). The division into subsections is necessitated by the length and richness of many of H.'s introductions to individual aitia (the introduction to fr. 1, for example, spans six pages, the introduction to frr. 54–60 spans ten). The schema is enhanced by H.'s inclusion of bibliographical material relevant to each fragment at the head of the fragment's introduction. For scholars working on the major fragments, such as fr. 1 (against the Telchines) and fr. 110 (lock of Berenice), these targeted bibliographies are tremendous time-savers. The only caveat, though, is that works since 2006 have not been systematically included in the bibliography, as H. notes (vol. 1, p. 77).

When reading through the commentary, it becomes quickly apparent that H. is acutely aware of the entirety of the Aetia and its cultural and political milieu even as she delves into the minutiae of individual lines and words. In the introduction to frr. 3–7 (the Charites), for instance, H. remarks on the programmatic and political value of the aition, noting both that the Charites as subject matter ‘suggests a meta-poetic agenda’ and that ‘the emphasis on Dionysus as the true father of the Charites may be associated with his being considered one of the Ptolemies’ ancestors' (vol. 2, p. 118). Soon after, H. observes of the early heroic age figure Minos, who sacrifices to the Charites in the aition, that his position early in the Aetia acts as ‘a kind of sequel to Hesiod's Theogony’ and provides ring composition with a subsequent aition involving his son Androgeus (vol. 2, p. 121). These thoughtful and tantalising observations reveal how much work there is yet to be done with the Aetia.

H.'s sensitivity to broad issues of poetics and culture enhances her work, but does not replace a close analysis of the fragments. In this regard H. demonstrates thoroughness and judiciousness, and frequent caution. In her note on 64.9 (the tomb of Simonides), H. offers an examination of the problematic term τὰ περισσά. Her note considers two possibilities, the first that the term refers to the Greek double consonants Simonides was said to have invented, and the second that it indicates Simonides' exceptional talent. H. details the evidence for each before concluding in favour of the former on both grammatical and literary grounds. One particularly noteworthy result of H.'s careful method occurs in her discussion of fr. 1.3, in which two separate and lengthy discussions of the terms ἕν and διηνεκές are synthesised to provide a solid argument against the notion that the criticisms to which Callimachus refers in his prologue are made on Aristotelian grounds. This is where H. is at her best: using the results of her careful study to offer interpretative analysis of Callimachus' text. In this regard her work exceeds expectations for even a scholarly commentary.

In all her analyses H. is meticulous with bibliography. The great care she takes to make bibliographic information conveniently available makes it all the more regrettable that her sources are only reliably comprehensive up to 2006. Beyond the expected bibliography on the Aetia, however, H. has also filled her commentary with countless gems, complete with bibliography, on a dizzyingly wide array of subjects. Some of these topics relate to the Aetia's literary or historical context (for instance, fr. 22 offers bibliography on Heracles as a Ptolemaic ancestor). Other topics are less predictably connected to Callimachus or Hellenistic society and yet are just as well documented and discussed (such as H.'s comment on baths in her note to fr. 68.2). Thus one can find discussions with sources on anything from the state of Miletus in the third century (frr. 80–83b introduction) to the ‘lost wax’ technique (fr. 85.10–14) to the difference between the Muses and Charites (fr. 3 introduction) to the militia amoris of Latin love poetry (fr. 110.13/14). The vast range of subjects treated ensures that H.'s work will be of lasting value even to scholars not primarily interested in the Aetia.

H.'s commentary is a masterful achievement and will quickly become a necessary component of any research on the Aetia, and perhaps also of scholarship on Callimachus and Hellenistic poetry in general. Given the importance of H.'s work, I will echo the familiar lament about the hefty cost of these two volumes. At £225/$350 for the pair, the text is priced as a purchase for libraries rather than individuals. This quibble aside, H.'s commentary is in all respects an outstanding resource and a welcome addition to the ranks of magisterial commentaries.