The Poenulus and Truculentus, both likely stemming from Plautus’ later period, are also comparable in that they treat themes of much relevance to today's and the poet's own society, namely the relationship to foreigners and the status of women. This latest volume in the bilingual series Classici Greci e Latini contains a new Italian translation of both plays together with an introduction and notes. The book provides insight into how the comic poet handled the aforementioned topics and how through his plays he reproduced the related issues, values and prejudices that flourished in Roman culture at the beginning of the second century b.c.

In the well-written introduction G. outlines key aspects of the Roman theatre, underscoring its complex and multicultural origins as well as the resultant mix of various models and traditions that, from the very beginning, was its most important characteristic. G. rightly asserts that it is only by taking these aspects into consideration that we can understand the fabula palliata and Plautine comedy. In addition to the scarce and insecure biographical details surrounding the playwright, the cultural significance of his literary activity is highlighted. Plautus’ vortere conforms to the mixing of styles, repertoires and registers that are distinctive of Roman drama. He alters, dissects and contaminates models in creative ways, generating a product which arrives at its essential traits of innovation and originality precisely because it depends on older paradigms. Plautus’ ability to adapt another culture's artistic form of expression to his own world and, conversely, to present Roman relationships and problems in the guise of the exotic, is significant not only because it leaves the palliata open to the most heterogeneous of influences, but also because it transforms this comedy into the privileged medium for Romans to reflect on themselves and the ‘other’.

G.'s comments on the above matters serve to introduce the two comedies together with the main themes of their respective plots; both are, namely, variations on the idea of the ‘other’ that the palliata so regularly examines.

In the Poenulus, the ‘other’ is above all connected to the ethnic origins of the play's principal characters. G. shows how these origins – even though they, as with the plot, can be traced back to the Greek model – gain new meaning for the play's contemporary spectators (probably c. 189 b.c.), who saw Carthaginians as paradigms of the foreigner and the enemy. G. demonstrates how Plautus makes use of these ethnic stereotypes, anchored as they were in Roman society, for the construction of his plot. It is thus no coincidence that the theme of deception is connected primarily with Hanno, who has travelled from Carthage in search of his daughters. Already in the prologue, this character is introduced as ‘Poenus plane’ in so far as he is a master of trickery and dissimulation (Poen. 112–13). And so he in fact appears in his first dialogue, leading his interlocutors to believe that he speaks only Punic (Poen. 994–1027). That these qualities do not, however, turn him into a perfidus, is made clear by his subsequent behaviour, which aligns itself rather with the Roman value of fides. With this character, Plautus thus allows his Roman spectators to consider potential similarities between themselves and foreigners. In this way, G. claims, Plautus is playing with the ‘possibilità di romanizzare l'altro’ and recognises ‘l'esigenza di pensare a un nuovo assetto internazionale per la res publica’ (p. xxii).

Concerning Truculentus, G. offers convincing arguments for taking thoughts on the ‘other’ as essential for the play's interpretation. With this approach, many of the play's peculiarities can be explained. The comedy, as mentioned above, centres on the ‘other’ par excellence within the society of Roman viri, namely the female. By granting the insatiable and clever prostitute Phronesium absolute centrality within the play and by doing so at the expense of the male characters (including the eponymous Truculentus) and of the development of a proper storyline, G. claims the poet was reflecting on the vices of women at a time in the social history of the civitas when women's rights were on the rise, as well as on the subversive potential of this development.

Following the introduction, there is a short ‘Nota al testo’ and a rich and up-to-date ‘Bibliografia’, which does not, however, include all the works cited in abbreviated form (W.M. Lindsay, CQ 12 [1918], 140, appearing on p. 254 n. 136 merely as LINDSAY 1918, is missing, for example).

The Latin text reproduces that of the Oxford edition (W.M. Lindsay, T. Macci Plauti Comoediae ², II [1910]), with G. altering his translation when he opts for a different reading. The translation of both comedies generally arrives at an appreciable balance between a literal reproduction of Plautus’ text and the need to make the text accessible to a non-specialist readership. G. attempts to reproduce certain effects of Plautus’ language (such as characters’ names, which are translated so that they remain ‘speaking names’ also for the modern reader) or, where this is not possible, to mention these effects in the notes and explain how they are accomplished. Lines 696–7 of Poenulus are an exception – G.'s translation does not reproduce the neat polyptoton lepido … lepide … lepidam.

In some passages, more stage directions would have helped immediately to clarify turns spoken a parte, characters’ movements on the stage and the addressees of certain turns (e.g. Hanno in Poen. 1292ff., addressed by his daughter Adelphasium as if he were a lover and with language typical of a hetaira, or the people in the house to whom Astaphium in Truc. 95ff. and 114 speaks).

The odd decision to translate the interjections hercle, mecastor/ecastor and pol/edepol with ‘Io Mercole’, ‘Io Castore’ and ‘Io Polluce’ should have been explained in the notes.

Missing from the translation of Poenulus is line 31, in which Prologus reveals the non-altruistic motives for his earlier requests, as well as lines 181b–187 (likely the result of a saut du même au même in the translation, since lines 181b and 188 are very similar).

The translation of the dative amicae in line 171 of Truculentus by ‘per l'amica’ (instead of ‘per la bella’), i.e. by a term that with the article can, in Italian, also signify a man's mistress, might better have explained Diniarchus’ thoughts on the difference between amicus and amator that follow.

The notes chiefly discuss the most important text-critical problems, provide the rationale for a given translation and explain unclear or not immediately intelligible passages. These notes are almost always lucid and appropriate in their length to the issue under discussion. Only rarely does one find overly detailed presentations of stories and personalities that even a non-specialist ought to be familiar with (e.g. the Sphinx and her riddle, presented with an excess of detail on p. 243 n. 58), or conversely too terse mentions of facts/names that will not always be known to the non-specialist (for example the Egyptian god Serapis on p. 256 n. 153). A discussion of the choice of nefacere at Truc. 877 should, in my opinion, have been included.

There are quite a few typos. Examples include ‘dazione’ for ‘datazione’ (p. xix), ‘peripatheia’ for ‘peripeteia’ (p. xxvi), ‘Reichlin’ for ‘Richlin’ (p. xx), ‘Reinisches’ for ‘Rheinisches’ (p. xli), ‘Poenulo’ for ‘Poenuli’ (p. xlvi), the ascription of line 1309c to Anterastilis instead of to Antamoenides in the Latin text of Poenulus, ‘epanlettico’ for ‘epanalettico’ (p. 238 n. 21), νυμϕολήπτος for νυμϕόληπτος (p. 242 n. 48), ἀμϕιδρομία for ἀμϕιδρόμια (p. 265 n. 59).

In spite of the aforementioned criticisms, G.'s intelligent interpretative approach, the mostly sensible translations and the wealth of information in the notes will offer the interested reader easy access to these plays and to Plautus in general.