Venantius Fortunatus’ four-book epic poem on the life and miracles of St Martin of Tours (Vita Sancti Martini, henceforth VSM, composed between 573 and 576) is essentially a verse paraphrase of Sulpicius Severus’ writings on Martin (Vita Martini and a large part of the Dialogi). Though limited to the verse preface and to Books 1 and 2, K.'s edition, translation and commentary constitute an important and welcome addition to existing scholarship. K.'s critical text is based on a fresh reappraisal of the manuscript tradition, whereas his translation complements M. Roberts's 2017 translation of the Carmina for the Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library series. Perforce, K. does not use the commented translation by W. Fels published this year (in Hiersemann's Mittellateinische Bibliothek series).

Though succinct, the introduction covers all the key themes, starting with Fortunatus’ life and works (a fuller account is found in S. Di Brazzano's introduction to his 2001 Italian translation of the Carmina). It then reassesses the letter to Gregory of Tours that has so far been treated almost unanimously as a dedication epistle attached to a gift copy of the VSM. In contrast, K. argues that this was ‘probably a covering letter enclosing a different work for him’ (p. 3), with no direct link to the VSM. Accordingly, he prints and translates the letter separately as Appendix 1. This bold statement is likely to spark future debate. Subsequently, K. explains Fortunatus’ VSM as a literary artefact at the crossroads between hagiography and epic paraphrase, to which K. ascribes a role of ‘private edification’ (the edificatory aim of the genre being the overarching theme of R. Herzog's Die Bibelepik der lateinischen Spätantike. Formgeschichte einer erbaulichen Gattung [1972]). Then, K. compares and contrasts Fortunatus’ VSM with the hagiographical epic about Martin composed by Paulinus of Périgueux in the late fifth century, which is also largely a paraphrase of Sulpicius Severus’ works on Martin. For this section, K. relies on the well-established works by S. Labarre, M. Roberts and K. Pollmann. In discussing the narrative and literary style of the VSM, K. highlights the contrast between the simplicity of the narrative structure (a series of isolated scenes) and the deliberate obscurity of the literary expression. Accordingly, he points out the ‘effort and concentration’ required of the reader to ‘decipher the text and its message’ (p. 14) as an important aspect of Fortunatus’ VSM. The following section deals with literary influences both exerted on Fortunatus by earlier poets and exerted by Fortunatus on later medieval Latin poetry. First, K. highlights Fortunatus’ debt to Virgil and Sedulius in particular; then he provides a brief survey of the Nachleben of Fortunatus’ VSM in medieval Latin poetry. K.'s catalogue complements F. Stella's ‘Venanzio Fortunato nella poesia mediolatina’ (in Venanzio Fortunato e il suo tempo [2003], pp. 269–90). K. then discusses the metrical peculiarities of Fortunatus’ hexameters. The manuscripts on which K. bases his edition are the same as those used for S. Quesnel's 1996 Budé edition, with the addition of Z (Oxford, Bodl. Auct. T. 2.25).

K.'s recensio and stemma are comparable to Quesnel's. In the edition's criteria K. discusses the difficulties that Fortunatus’ syntax poses to editors in terms of punctuation and states his aim ‘admittedly impossible … to arrive at what Fortunatus intended to write’ (p. 37). This statement explains a great deal of editorial intervention, to an extent that has not been seen since – and which perhaps surpasses – F. Leo's 1881 MGH edition. In comparison, Quesnel is definitely more conservative. K.'s interventions come to the fore in several transpositions of lines, which are argued for in the commentary, and in many conjectures, which often provide an improvement on the text: among the most accomplished, 1.301 triduana is consistent with Sulp. Sev. VM 14.4 per triduum, whereas 2.329 Unde probanda probo, reprobo reprobandaque probra restores the flashy syllogism implied by the sentence.

Fortunatus’ VSM is an obscure poem whose condensed narrative is interspersed with paradoxical remarks that are more mindful of epigrams than of classical epic. One of the major accomplishments of this book is to make accessible the many elliptical phrases and allusive expressions by means of lucid explanations. Only in rare instances do K.'s interpretations lend themselves to debate. For example, he interprets Tartarei … tyranni at 1.4 as referring to ‘Hades or Pluto’ (p. 137) – an entirely distinct entity from Satan – and justifies this interpretation with the account of the harrowing of hell given by the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus (perhaps fourth century). However, there are other sources in which Satan appears as the sole ruler of hell, such as the Eusebius ‘Gallicanus’ sermon collection (Serm. 8, ed. Glorie 1971 = CCSL 101B), dated to the latter half of the fifth century. Moreover, Paulinus of Périgueux employed the phrase Tartareus tyrannus twice (Paul. VSM 3.261; 6.203), both times with reference to Satan. In particular, Paulinus’ VSM 6.203 (Tartarei feralia busta tyranni) appears closely imitated by Fort. VSM 1.4 (Tartarei feralia iura tyranni). Since Paulinus already identified Satan with the King of the Underworld, the same may be true of Fortunatus, who imitates Paulinus.

Another minor point that can be debated concerns Martin's praises of the ascetic lifestyle embraced by Paulinus of Nola at 2.385 (uno stando loco et dant bruta ad sidera saltum). K. interprets bruta as referring to ‘the animals on Paulinus’ estates’ (p. 462), imagined as following their former master into heaven. This explanation, however, seems to imply that animals can effectively go to heaven, which is doctrinally dubious precisely because animals, as bruta, are devoid of rational soul. As noted by K., this passage and the one before (2.365–90) revolve around the idea that earthly possessions such as wealth and estates are a burden for the human soul and an obstacle in ascending to heaven. By giving up his riches, Paulinus turned them into a means by which to acquire a true ‘treasure in heaven’. Therefore, an alternative explanation can be that bruta is to be translated with its primary meaning of ‘heavy’, ‘inert’ (= ‘heavy possessions’); accordingly, line 2.385 can be a variation on the preceding line (2.384 fecit et in caelum pigras ascendere terras).

At the beginning of each new section, K. provides a brief comparison with the corresponding sections in Sulpicius Severus’ Vita Martini and in the verse Vita Martini by Paulinus. These comparisons are most helpful to understand the narrative of Fortunatus, who sometimes seems to assume that his readers know the basic events of Martin's life. There is just one slight imprecision at p. 161: Fort. VSM 3.24–73 does not actually include a miracle where Martin's arms appear bejewelled after giving his tunic to a beggar; this episode occurs instead at 4.305–20 (~ Sulp. Sev. Dial. 3.10.6). The two events, however, are merged at Carm. 1.5.11–20 and 10.6.5–10; 107–12 (see H. Delehaye, in Mélanges Camille de Borman [1919], pp. 19–26 = Mélanges d'hagiographie grecque et latine [1966], pp. 204–11). Sulpicius’ Vita and the corresponding Books 1–3 of Paulinus’ poem are included as Appendix 2 and 3: this is a very helpful aid for readers, who thus have the three main texts gathered in the same volume.

This book is a very valuable contribution. The linguistic remarks of the commentary constitute the most extensive treatment of Fortunatus’ language since the studies by S. Blomgren. At the same time, Fortunatus’ relationship with earlier Latin poetry is thoroughly acknowledged. In the future, scholarship on Fortunatus will be further enriched by a forthcoming commented translation into Italian of his prose hagiographies by a team led by D. Manzoli and by a study on the theology of his religious writings by B. Wheaton. Hopefully, this book will pave the way for the inclusion of more late antique works in the Cambridge ‘orange’ series.