Starting with the arguments posed in his ample 2015 commentary, in this slender volume H. expands upon the political, religious and sociocultural dimensions of Lycophron's Alexandra. Specifically, by maintaining a second-century bce date and the composition by a pseudonymous author, H. connects the poem and its emphasis on Italian places and Roman power (1226–80; 1446–50) with the historical reality of Roman military ascendance in the 190s bce. The monograph thus displays a chiefly historical approach in its interpretation of this famously cryptic poem.
The monograph is split into two sections. In the first (Chapters 1–4) H. approaches the Alexandra through a geographic lens, linking the various cities and regions mentioned in the poem to their history and political status in the ‘Hellenistic world’ (p. 7). The first chapter encompasses the widest geographic scope, dealing with references to the Hellenistic kingdoms, cities (e.g. Athens and Thebes) and the federations of Old Greece. In this way the chapter also serves as a pithy overview of the complex geopolitical situation of the Hellenistic period. The subsequent three chapters are narrower in geographic scope. For instance, Chapter 2 tackles the poem's treatment of Sicily and Magna Graecia, while Chapter 4 covers Campania and Latium. In the third chapter H. treats Rhodes and its relations with Rome, while also evaluating the evidence for Rhodian presence in south Italy.
The second section (Chapters 5–7) addresses the Alexandra within the broader cultural and religious contexts of the Hellenistic world. In Chapter 5 H. situates the poem amidst the trend of apocalyptic and prophetic literature, drawing comparisons with the Sibylline Oracles, Phlegon of Tralles, the Book of Daniel and the Oracle of the Potter. Accompanying these comparisons is an analysis of the intersections between the Alexandra and Polybius, who likewise dealt with the rise of Roman power. Chapter 6 collates the literary and epigraphic evidence for myths in the Alexandra that pertain to ritual and civic identity, such as the cult of Hector at Thebes (1189–213) and the Locrian Maidens (1141–73). In the final chapter H. asserts the Alexandra's status as a ‘political’ (p. 187) and ‘historical’ (p. 196) poem. At the same time, he considers the poem's intended audience in conjunction with its pro-Roman stance.
As is evident from the monograph's title and the above summary, Rome dominates the monograph and its central arguments about the date and author. Indeed, a reading of this book is ultimately coloured by one's acceptance or at least serious entertaining of this underlying hypothesis. At the same time, one must reject theories of later interpolation. Fortunately, H. does a satisfactory job restating and condensing the arguments in the commentary, citing both historical and literary arguments to reject the third-century date. Most obviously, such emphasis on Roman military power does not make sense so early. Combined, the evidence is convincing, and for the purposes of defending this later date, H. does not even need the debated kinsman wrestler at 1447 to be Titus Quinctius Flamininus, the victor at Cynoscephalae. Nevertheless, this persuasive identification not only establishes a terminus post quem of 197 bce, but, as H. notes (p. 5), Flamininus’ activities at the Isthmian and Nemean games would explain the poem's pervasive athletic imagery (e.g. 13, 41 etc.).
Additionally, H. strengthens his argument for the date by observing the poem's focus on places (e.g. Balearic Islands and Croton) involved in the struggle with Hannibal. For H. such references reflect the impact of Hannibal on recent memory, particularly in south Italy (p. 192). Similarly, H. notes an overlap between certain locations (e.g. Croton and Tempsa) in the poem and Roman colonial activities in the 190s bce (p. 80). While such suggestions would not convince in isolation, taken together they not only bolster the case for the second-century date, but also attest to the poem's considered architecture and the predominance of Western locations (p. 49). It is striking, however, that Lycophron did not provide a more overt allusion to Hannibal, as he did when alluding to the torch race established by the Athenian commander Diotimus at Naples (732–7). Moreover, H. detects no direct references to Carthage (p. 9) or to Dido, whom he comments would constitute an apt analogue for Cassandra (pp. 119–20). H. could have explained further the absence of direct references to Hannibal. Perhaps, the trauma caused by Hannibal's campaigns necessitated ‘coded allusions’ (p. 119) for Lycophron's Italian audience.
H. also observes the paucity of references to the Seleucid-controlled territories (p. 15) and to Egypt. In the case of certain Egyptian passages (e.g. 847–51) H. downplays the Ptolemaic connection, instead tying these references to the needs of Menelaus’ nostos myth and the negative portrayal of Helen (p. 26). It might have been also helpful to stress that this derogatory depiction of Helen clashes with the Ptolemaic association of Helen with the queens (Theoc. Id. 15.110). This seems to me further proof that the poem did not arise from a Ptolemaic milieu of the 270s bce.
Although I find H.'s arguments for the second-century date solid, the monograph could have benefited from expanded discussion of the author's pseudonymity (mentioned at p. 7 n. 18 with reference to the commentary). If the author himself assumed the name, why would he choose ‘Lycophron’, which H. admits is common when mentioning a Rhodian diplomat called Lycophron (p. 84)? Was it solely to recall the tragedian Lycophron of Chalcis? Or does the name play a thematic role, corresponding to the poem's emphasis on wolves (e.g. 102) and other animal images? Nevertheless, by emphasising the prevalence of Italian locations in the poem, H. produces a robust case for the poet's links with south Italy, a thesis suggested by even some proponents of an earlier date (e.g. G. Amiotti, Athenaeum 60 [1982], 455).
Aside from its compelling stance on the question of date and authorship, this monograph is invaluable for elucidating the historical, political and social value of this difficult poem, in the same way that C. McNelis and A. Sens (2016) showed its literary richness. Indeed, in posing a comparison between Lycophron and Polybius, H. demonstrates Lycophron's ‘seriousness’. Yet I think that the comparison between Lycophron and Herodotus would have benefited from some additional discussion. Indeed, not only does the poem abound with Herodotean influences (S. West, in Lycophron: éclats d'obscurité [2009]), ἱστορεῖς occurs in the very first line, spoken by the messenger. Perhaps, a deeper analysis of Lycophron's historical methods might shed additional light on the question of the poem's intended audience.
Befitting the monograph's ‘unapologetically’ (p. vi) historical approach, extended quotations of the Alexandra are relegated to the footnotes or appendices. H. also devotes appendices to the Lindian Chronicle and the Locrian Maiden inscription, the latter of which also features a commentary. Further aid is provided by a synopsis of the poem and a map of important locations. However, a timeline of major events would have also been useful, especially one pairing these events with the proposed allusions in the text.
Ultimately, I judge this book a welcome addition, not just to the 2015 commentary, but to the thankfully now expanding corpus of Lycophron scholarship.
