H.'s book is a wonderful addition to the burgeoning field of classical reception, all the more so as it deals with a subject that has thus far failed to receive a systematic treatment. The ‘traditions’ of the title are primarily those of the Second Sophistic, while the ‘silent stream’ of the subtitle alludes to Longinus' characterisation of the Platonic style as a ‘noiseless flow’ (On the Sublime 13.1), itself an echo of a Platonic expression, Theodorus' description of Theaetetus' quiet devotion to his studies as ‘like a stream of oil which flows noiselessly’ (Theaetetus 144b5). This chain of allusions illustrates the nature of H.'s work in this astonishingly erudite book, the tracing of the flow of words within a particular text and the flow of language and ideas from one author to the next. Plato becomes the focal point of a vibrant and kaleidoscopic engagement with the tradition of his reception of the poetic past and with his reception in the literature of the second century c.e. Doubtless, the growth of the rhetorical and poetic criticism in the later third and second centuries b.c.e. brought Plato to the foreground and made Phaedrus central to his reception. Indeed, as H. avers, that dialogue ‘has gathered around itself a body of metatextual commentary and interpretation, which has almost coalesced with the Platonic text itself’ (p. 4). The book consists of six major chapters or journeys, each punctuated by countless digressions from the main path, into the intellectually exciting and rich terrain of Plato's debts and afterlife in ancient literature.

In the first part of Chapter 1, H. studies the ways in which the critical tradition exploited various Platonic themes. The locus amoenus of Phaedrus is reflected in Lucian's Hermotimus and Anacharsis, while Nigrinus deploys Phaedrus' motifs of the absent–present beloved and of philosophy as performance of someone else's text. Symposium and Republic 9 are echoed in Aeschines' Against Timarchus, while Dio's Oration 13 is read in connection with Clitophon and Apology. In the lengthy Chapter 2, H. looks at the reception of Plato's complicated relationship with Homer by authors such as Longinus, ‘Heraclitus’, Proclus, Plutarch and, most excitingly, Maximus of Tyre for whom ‘Plato is Homer's offspring, no less than Telemachus is Odysseus'’ (p. 58). In the second part of the chapter, one of the finest in the book, H. examines Plato's use of images in Republic 6 and 9. He embeds the ‘Ship of State’ in the work of Alcaeus, Theognis, Aristophanes and Thucydides, and the image of the soul as a tripartite beast in Dio 32, showing that ‘these images are … part of the creation of an activity which will replace traditional forms of authority’ (p. 87). His discussion of Ion suggests that the blurring of the boundary between poet and rhapsode may foreshadow the scholar-poets of the Hellenistic period whose poetry involved the study of the poetry of the past as well as its display.

Chapters 3–6 have a more circumscribed range. Chapter 3 traces the reception of Apology from Isocrates to Apuleius. The discussions of Philostratus' Life of Apollonius of Tyana and Apuleius' Apology are particularly illuminating. H. draws interesting similarities between the Socrates of Apology and Apollonius without obliterating the differences between them: for example, although both men taught that the soul was immortal, Apollonius refrained from investigating the issue philosophically. Apuleius' speech is ‘drenched in Plato’ (p. 145): the reference to Socrates' daimonion, for example, is seen as an antecedent of magical practices, while the need to clear up slanders before addressing the accusation proper echoes Socrates' procedure in his self-defence. Yet, as H. acknowledges, these allusions do not necessarily establish a direct line of descent but may spring from a tradition steeped in Plato's Apology. Chapter 4 is devoted to Dionysius of Halicarnassus and his engagement with Phaedrus and Menexenus in his essay Demosthenes. Dionysius reprimands Phaedrus' use of the grand style and a heavily poetic diction (another connection between Homer and Plato), and faults Menexenus for deploying a style that is too plain for its subject. His stylistic evaluations betray his preference for purity and clarity, hallmarks of the much-extolled Lysianic style. In Chapter 5, H. shows how Plutarch's Amatorius captures the spirit of the Greek literature of the period by refashioning and simultaneously emulating Plato. Phaedrus and Symposium weave the fabric of the work, to which Plutarch adds threads from the Greek novel. This generic admixture reflects the way in which Plato's predecessors straddle the divide between philosophy, rhetoric and literature. It also gives Amatorius a dramatic texture, even though it is a narrated dialogue. Finally, Chapter 6 explores how Apuleius' Metamorphoses and Petronius' Satyrica present themselves as Platonic texts, especially in their representation of affection and desire, while being concerned with the creation of fiction. Interesting remarks abound, ranging from comments on the connections between Apuleius' Socrates and Odysseus (following in Alcibiades' footsteps in Symposium 220c), as well as between Petronius' Odysseus and Socrates, to issues of historicity, truth and fiction as they pertain both to Plato's œuvre and to the novels of the Second Sophistic.

The book is a testament to H.'s impressive breadth of knowledge, his ability to provide close and insightful readings of texts from a variety of genres and periods and to trace strong connections among them in images, literary techniques and thematic motifs, as well as less obvious allusions and echoes. His readings are embedded in nuanced discussions of the wider context of the Greek intellectual world, which give them depth and historical relevance. He has done something similar in his Critical Moments in Classical Literature (2009), which may fruitfully be read as a predecessor of the book under review, especially in its treatment of Homer and Plato and their influence in the shaping of ancient literary criticism. The tradition of literary criticism engaged with Plato just as the latter's writing was itself an engagement with the preceding literature, primarily that of Homer. H. shows that the authors of the Second Sophistic used Plato ‘as a chief witness against Plato’ (p. 183), thereby intimating that it was Plato himself who inspired the critical and literary tradition to take the turn it did. His discussion of Plato's Nachleben is often peppered with prudent reminders of the difficulty of establishing cases of mimesis because the accumulated tradition makes it hard to show clear signs of indebtedness; nevertheless, his suggestive links and faint echoes are illuminating and open new paths. His study is far from exhaustive, as he himself admits. For example, the ways in which the strictures of Gorgias influenced the critical and rhetorical traditions receive scant attention, as does Cicero's refashioning of Plato's dialogues. Occasionally, one longs for a deeper engagement with the ideas on the page, especially when the compared authors and passages reveal not only similarities but also intriguing differences. These quibbles notwithstanding, there is more than enough material here to teach students and scholars of the reception of Plato in antiquity and to inspire further work in the field.