Between September 57, when Cicero returned to Rome after his exile, and April 52, when Milo was tried, Cicero pronounced various speeches to the senate, to the people and in court. Some of these speeches may have never been published (e.g. De potestate rei frumentariae Pompeio danda, 57 b.c.e., Pro Asicio, 56 b.c.e., De libertate Tenediorum, 54 b.c.e.; cf. Marinone, Chronology, 2004, 112, 118 and 131); some were circulated but have not survived (e.g. De aere alieno Milonis, in Crawford, Fragmentary Speeches (1994): 265–88), but thirteen others, plus the Pro Milone, that Cicero prepared for April 52 and never delivered, do survive and continue to be read. ‘Post reditum’ can indicate the corpus of these fourteen speeches or, stricto sensu, can apply to a selection comprising those orations that are most directly entwined with Cicero’s return, including, but not limited to, the Post Reditum in Senatu and Post Reditum ad Quirites (aka Cum populo gratias egit). Manuwald’s volume takes post reditum in this stricter sense and provides an introduction, text, translation and commentary for these two orations plus the Oratio pridie quam in exilium iret, which is spurious.

After a short review of scholarship, M. sets her goal: ‘to bring together textual and linguistic observations from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (valuable, even though often made in the context of the authenticity debate) and modern approaches to Ciceronian oratory and thus produce a commentary that will give both these speeches an up-to-date scholarly tool and thus encourage people interested in Republican oratory and history to engage with them more thoroughly’ (x). These goals are beautifully achieved, especially thanks to a thorough and balanced treatment of various secondary literature. The introduction gives a concise and canonical account of the historical background (xi–xix), followed by a treatment of the two post reditum speeches. This treatment includes everything one would expect: an excursus on the debate regarding their authenticity (xix–xxii), an assessment of their rhetorical genre and structure (xxii–xxiv) and of their delivery and publication (xxiv–xxix), and a useful overview of Cicero’s argumentative strategies (xxix–xxxvi) and style (xxxvi–xl). At times, M. seems to accept the communis opinio without challenging or illustrating it. For example, the main stylistic features that previous scholars (especially von Albrecht, Cicero’s Style (2003); Johnson, Luxuriance and Economy (1971); and Nicholson, Cicero’s Return (1992)) have identified as typical of post reditum speeches are listed and assumed to be correct (xxxvi–xxxvii); the same applies to the treatment of clausulae, which relies on the works by Zielinski (1904) and especially by Keeline and Kirby (2019). M. agrees with Keeline and Kirby that their computerised approach ‘should be supplemented by other methods’ (xxxix), but the commentary does not provide such a supplement (not even for a sample of either speech). It simply reports and accepts their statistics and conclusion that ‘the pattern of clausulae in the two speeches Post reditum in senatu and Post reditum ad Quirites is not unusual’ (xxxix). In fairness, the commentary includes many observations regarding style, and some regarding rhythm, but these are scattered and do not amount to a unitary assessment.

Having thus presented the two post reditum orations, M. introduces the third speech included in the volume, the spurious Oratio pridie quam in exilium iret. I applaud the bold choice to include this speech next to the two post reditum: the juxtaposition between authentic and spurious Ciceronian oratory highlights his skill and gives a refreshing glimpse into the history of scholarship, that is, how Cicero’s unique style came to be recognised and appreciated through the centuries. The last section of the introduction deals with the textual transmission, which is based on the editions by Maslowski for the two post reditum (Teubner, 1981) and Di Marco (Mondadori, 1991), with a dozen departures listed at the end of the volume.

The translation is literal and accurate throughout, admittedly less fluent than other ones (e.g. the one by Shackleton Bailey (1991)), but it serves its purpose ‘to be a guide to understanding the Latin text’ and to provide ‘a means to elucidate the Latin in the context of a commentary’ (xlviii).

A quick comparison demonstrates the differences. Having thanked many people who supported his recall, Cicero reminds the senators that he would rather pass over the injustices he suffered:

The commentary shares the merits and limits of the introduction: it is clear, careful and reliable; as such, it certainly succeeds in providing a useful tool that invites students and scholars interested in Republican oratory and history to engage with the post reditum speeches more thoroughly. But this volume achieves more than that, because the choice to include the text, translation and commentary of the spurious Oratio pridie quam in exilium iret opens avenues toward less-trodden paths, including the history of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Ciceronian scholarship, which M. knows well, and the production and circulation of spurious literature, against which Cicero’s original can be reassessed.