This volume, conceived as a comprehensive analysis of Silius Italicus’ Punica based primarily on the concept of moral example, is divided into two main parts. The first one consists of a general introduction both to the figure of Silius Italicus, of whom an accurate biography is provided, and to his epic poem, with particular attention to its early fortune, especially as far as Pliny and Martial are concerned. Moreover, two sections are devoted to exploring the relationship of the Punica with its main literary and historical models. Among the literary ones, Virgil's Aeneid and Lucan's Bellum Civile receive most attention, but the influence of Ennius and Homer is also properly recognised. The brief discussion of the intertextual relationship with Statius’ Thebaid and Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica has the merit of introducing the issue to readers rather than offering an exhaustive treatment (in this case a mention of recent studies on the topic, such as G. Manuwald and A. Voigt [edd.], Flavian Epic Interactions [2013]; F. Ripoll, ‘Statius and Silius Italicus’, in Brill's Companion to Statius [2015], pp. 425–43, would have been useful).

As far as the historical sources are concerned, B.'s (convincing) premise is that the Punica should be read first and foremost as a work of poetry, which offers an interpretation of the historical events functional to the moral programme of its poet, rather than as a historical document. From this perspective, he underlines how Silius is able to engage critically with Livy's account of the Second Punic War; special attention is drawn to the passages in which the poet chooses not to follow the version of the story presented in the Ab urbe condita and alludes directly to Polybius. Valerius Antias is mentioned as a possible alternative source, while the influence of other annalists is not scrutinised. Thus, despite not offering a comprehensive analysis of all possible sources (an analysis which, considering the size of the works in question, would undoubtedly have required a whole monograph), this chapter still provides a useful introduction, which allows even less experienced readers to become familiar with Silius’ modus operandi and to appreciate better the interpretation of the poem offered in the rest of the volume.

Overall, Part 1 constitutes a rich and detailed status quaestionis on the Punica that updates the essay of F.M. Ahl, M.A. Davis and A. Pomeroy (ANRW II.32.4 [1986], 2492–561) and complements Brill's Companion to Silius Italicus edited by A. Augoustakis (2009), and it can be profitably used by anyone seeking a general introduction to the poem.

Part 2, which represents the heart of the volume and contains its most innovative discussion, aims mainly at analysing the role played in the most important episodes of the poem by virtus, fides and pietas as well as the reciprocal interactions between these three cornerstones of Roman morality. A first chapter is thus devoted to the long episode of the siege of Saguntum, in which, according to B., the strenuous fides of which the inhabitants give proof by not surrendering to Hannibal fails to redeem their lack of pietas, since during the last day of the city they either commit suicide or even brutally kill their nearest and dearest in order to prevent them from falling into the hands of the Carthaginians. In Chapter 2 Regulus is similarly incapable of successfully combining the requirements of fides with those of pietas, and even though he sticks to the word given to his enemies by returning to Carthage after his diplomatic mission in Rome, nevertheless he neglects the moral obligations imposed on him by the pietas towards his family. Chapter 3 deals with Fabius Maximus, who proves to be a valuable moral example with respect to his virtus, but is not equally endowed with pietas and fides: hence even the Cunctator, in spite of the great contribution that his strategy makes to the war, cannot be considered as a perfect synthesis of core Roman values.

Chapter 4 alone occupies over 100 pages – just under a quarter of the entire work – and constitutes one of the most innovative parts of B.'s research. The focus here is on the battle of Cannae and its prodromes (in particular the intervention in Book 8 of the sister of Dido, Anna, now turned into an Italic nymph, and the involuntary patricide committed by young Solimus in Book 9). As for the course of the battle, B. scrutinises the action of both Varro and Aemilius Paullus, traditionally considered respectively as the negative and the positive hero of this episode. B., however, provides a new analysis: on the one hand he highlights how, if Varro's behaviour on the battlefield is affected by a complete lack of virtus, subsequently his pietas towards his maiores redeems him, since he asks for Fabius’ forgiveness and adopts a humble and resigned conduct at the time of his return to Rome (p. 282); on the other hand, he tends to scale down Paullus’ moral stature, since his devotio is ultimately ineffective – a fact that is also emphasised by Scipio when he meets the dead consul during the nékyia (Sil. 13.712–13) – and can therefore be interpreted as the result of Paullus’ excessive desire for glory rather than as a sign of his pietas.

And even Marcellus, who at a first reading seems to be able to balance virtus, pietas and fides, on closer inspection reveals that his conduct has been tainted by the pursuit of personal glory (Chapter 5). Hence, the one and only character of the Punica who can offer an indisputably positive example remains Scipio, the future Africanus, whose morally irreproachable action is, not surprisingly, crowned by the final triumph. Chapter 6 is devoted to Scipio, in which B.'s argument reaches its conclusion: the ultimate message that can be reckoned in Silius’ work is that Rome's final victory has to be considered as the fruit of the moral superiority of the Romans over the Carthaginians. Finally, Chapter 7, conceived as a sort of short appendix, explores what happens after the end of the war and shows how the end of metus hostilis also represents the end of Roman moral supremacy.

B.'s reading has the merit of providing an extremely coherent interpretation of the poem, which consistently demonstrates how Silius Italicus continuously filters the historiographic tradition through the lens of the mos maiorum. Therefore, even though some of B.'s arguments may not entirely persuade all readers (e.g. the fact that both Aemilius Paullus’ and Marcellus’ virtues are at least partially spoilt by their pursuit of personal glory), nevertheless, his analysis as a whole appreciably contributes to call attention to the pervasive influence of traditional morality on the Punica and represents a good starting point from which to set up a renewed critical debate on individual characters and episodes.