T.g.K.'s commentary, a revised version of his doctoral thesis, focuses on the final episode of Book 12 in Silius Italicus’ historical epic on the Second Punic War and the terror Hannibal's proverbial arrival ad portas famously caused in Rome (12.507–752). The volume contains a comprehensive introduction, the Latin text, T.g.K.'s own German translation, a commentary, a bibliography and three selective indexes (locorum, nominum et rerum, verborum). It is well designed and has been meticulously edited, with only a few typos and inconsistencies remaining. The structure is laid out clearly in the introduction, and three overviews (pp. 59–61, 84, 103) and the volume's typography facilitate the reader's orientation within the individual sections. T.g.K. is very systematic in his use of quotations and carefully navigates the frequent repetitions that occur as a result of his detailed introduction with copious cross-references.
The introduction is divided into six sections: it begins with a justification of the author's decision to publish a partial commentary and a succinct literature review, which is restricted to the most important commentaries and companions to the Punica in favour of a more generous inclusion and discussion of pertinent quotations from influential publications in T.g.K.'s interpretation of the episode. In Section 2 T.g.K. establishes the pivotal role of Book 12, highlighting the ring composition and many parallels between Books 12 and 17, as well as Book 7, which is modelled on Aeneid 2 and 9. In Section 3 he discusses the symbolic importance of the ad portas episode and elaborates why the described events became engrained in Rome's cultural memory. Section 4 offers an in-depth analysis of the protagonists (esp. Hannibal, Jupiter, Juno, the Romans). Adopting W.G. Müller's concept of interfigurality (1991), T.g.K. argues for a plurality of literary models for Hannibal (esp. Aeneas, Turnus, Caesar, Pompey, Capaneus, Typhoeus). He follows R. Marks (From Republic to Empire [2005], pp. 78–81) in characterising Hannibal as a ‘synecdochic leader’ (cf. P. Hardie, Epic Successors [1993], pp. 3–11), whose increasing frustration with and isolation from his army culminates in a gigantomachic duel with Jupiter. Section 5 focuses on Silius’ use of narrative techniques that strengthen the internal cohesion (esp. his prefiguration and recapitulation technique) and illustrates Silius’ structural and compositional changes in comparison to his epic and historiographic sources, most importantly Livy (26.7.3–11.8). Section 6 examines the episode's key motifs: for example, the symbolic role of Rome's walls and the Capitolium allegorically representing Jupiter's Olympic seat, the urbs capta motif, the importance of the number 3 for Book 12 and the entire epic, and the structuring function of day and night. Building on H. Lovatt's seminal study on epic gaze (2013), T.g.K. scrutinises the collective fear in Rome, the frequent changes of focalisation, the central role of visuality, and the intricate interplay between physical and psychological warfare.
Particularly convincing are his analysis of Silius’ storm trilogy as a gigantomachy and his interpretation of the entire episode with its key term pandere as a metapoetic comment on the epic tradition. He shows that, in an expansion of Livy's mysterious two-day storm, Silius creates the unusual (cinematic) effect of a time loop (pp. 86–8) and reverses the traditional epic sea-storm, which is generally instigated by Juno/Neptune to destroy or at least delay the protagonist in defiance of Jupiter and the fata, into a land-storm (with excessive rainfall), which is generated by Jupiter himself to save an entire city from the antagonist and to enforce the fata. Hannibal is cast as successor of the storm-giant Typhoeus, while Jupiter's direct involvement resembles Statius’ Jupiter and the deus ex machina in ancient drama. In Silius’ historical epic, Hannibal is doomed to fail: he becomes an ‘almost giant in an almost gigantomachy’ (p. 32). In accordance with his disregard for natural and artificial borders, he also metaleptically tries to surpass the boundaries of the epic plot and genre: by replacing the Livian dichotomy of speeches with Hannibal's six cohortationes, Silius turns Hannibal into an Epicurean vates who proposes an alternative version of the Second Punic War (to his army and the reader) and acts as a literary critic of epic poetry and its divine machinery when he rationally attempts to demythologise the origin of the storm and continues to reject divine influence. With the gods’ triumph over the Carthaginian contemptor deorum and Juno's remythologisation of the storm with her ekphrastic revelation of the divine involvement to Hannibal, her ‘miniature epic’ (p. 35 n. 119) demotes Hannibal to the role of spectator and discredits him as an ignorant narrator and virum indocilem pacisque modique (12.726).
The Latin text follows J. Delz's Teubner edition (1987) and is printed with the German translation on facing pages. T.g.K. takes a minimalist approach to textual criticism: he limits his discussion of the transmission of the Punica to a single footnote (p. 12 n. 18) and does not offer a list of sigla or a comprehensive critical apparatus, but simply annotates the seven instances in which he departs from Delz's text with a footnote. He generally defends the lectio difficilior of the manuscripts against Delz's conjectures (and the misprint lenitur: 12.539), except for 12.669 venturam caeli rabiem and 12.685 minis when he adopts Lefebvre's (1781) and Bauer's (1907) conjectures because of cogent parallels and palaeographic considerations. By not annotating all the textual variants he assesses in his commentary (12.518 instincti, 12.522 alno, 12.567 lentus, 12.650 castris, 12.658 quo, 12.672 invicti and iacuisse, 12.675 fulmine and telis, 12.716 saevis, 12.736 volentis, 12.749 Hammon) and not including all the older editions and commentaries he discusses (e.g. Dausque 1615, Blass 1875) in his bibliography or providing more information about the manuscripts, T.g.K. unfortunately renders his volume inconvenient for readers who are unfamiliar with the transmission of the Punica or have a particular interest in textual criticism.
T.g.K.'s incorporation of his translation into his commentary is commendable: he addresses difficult passages, reviews older editions and translations, and carefully assesses intra- and intertextual parallels to offer a historically accurate translation that stays close to the literal meaning and the Latin syntax, but breaks up longer sentences into more digestible units.
The commentary is rich in detail. It is divided into five main scenes, all of which are introduced by a summary and are further subdivided into a line-by-line analysis. T.g.K. effortlessly combines his discussion of Silius’ micro- and macrostructure, narrative pace, metre, grammar, syntax, literary techniques, and historical, geographical, mythological references with a critical assessment of Silian scholarship and textual criticism. In addition to traditional motifs and type-scenes, T.g.K. also takes into consideration ‘almost episodes’ (H.-G. Nesselrath [1992]) and duly indicates instances of anachronism and interpretatio Romana. Among his many astute observations about minor aspects, T.g.K.'s discussion of Hannibal's speeches, the nature of his ‘knocking on Rome's doors’ and his negligible injuries through Jupiter's thunderbolts, Juno's seemingly disproportionate fear for Hannibal as well as his interpretation of the episode's purification and lustration rituals as closural devices deserve special mention.
T.g.K.'s bibliography is up to date and comprehensive, with the exception of the aforementioned older editions and commentaries, and perhaps with Italian and Spanish scholarship being slightly under-represented; to give just two examples: T.g.K. does review the most important English, French and German translations but fails to consult the Italian and Spanish translations by M.A. Vinchesi (2001) and J. Villalba Álvarez (2005); similarly, he does not mention the two new Spanish and Italian commentaries on Punica 9 by I. García Amutxastegi (2015) and S. Zaia (2016), while including recent doctoral dissertations and forthcoming commentaries in English (p. 11 n. 14).
T.g.K.'s monograph offers a wealth of information. It is the first partial commentary on Book 12 and an excellent addition to F. Spaltenstein's full-scale commentary on the Punica (1986–1990). This carefully balanced discussion, full of interesting details and stimulating observations, is a great resource for scholars and students of Silius’ Punica, and the best advertisement for the publication of partial commentaries, especially when they are dedicated to one of the most influential episodes in the epic tradition.
