SCANSION OF EPIGRAMMATA MARTIALIA I FULL

The format of the Commentary, which constitutes the bulk of the work, is clearly delineated: after the text and translation of the prose preface and each epigram, there are short essays on their themes and, in the case of the poems, their structure, and there follow notes on individual lines and words.

More attention might perhaps also have been paid to M’s metrical skill and his technical artistry, although this is a lack less keenly felt in the Introduction than in the Commentary. ‘sequences of poems’) and have given his readers more help than the half-page of ‘suggestive sequences’ on pp.10-11. This is admittedly a very complex area, and W’s diffidence is understandable when he remarks (vi) that ‘a commentary does not seem the most effective context in which to make a sustained contribution’ but he might nonetheless usefully have collected together in the Introduction the observations of other scholars (which he reports in the Commentary: see his index s.vv. Here, however, a more detailed discussion of the structure of the book and the relationship to one another of the epigrams within it would have been useful, especially as the integration of the text into the Commentary makes it difficult to appreciate epigram sequences. The longest section of the Introduction, dealing with the characteristics of M’s epigrams, again covers material that has been well-treated elsewhere but usefully relates this material specifically to Book Two.

instances where two MS families agree against the third but arguments can be made for both readings), is clear, succinct and all that is needed - along with his list of differences from Lindsay’s OCT and Shackleton Bailey’s Teubner. W’s summary, and presentation of some of the issues (e.g.

SCANSION OF EPIGRAMMATA MARTIALIA I FULL

Similarly, there is little point in providing yet another full discussion of the transmission. In the Introduction this generally does not matter: detailed treatment of M’s life and works is unnecessary, given existing assessments, and topics such as his debt to earlier epigram and his Nachleben and Reception are too large to deal with properly in a general introduction anyway but W’s well-balanced surveys nonetheless provide useful background for the immediate convenience of his readers.

Such benefits as generous spacing and large type must nonetheless necessarily be offset by some restriction on content. This is an easy and pleasant book to use. The volume is beautifully produced: the text is clean, uncluttered and generously spaced, the font is large and clear, and the paper is of good quality and does not shine under artificial light. The book closes with a fourteen-page bibliography and seven pages of indexes (Names and Subjects, Latin words, Passages). The text and translations of the epistolary prose preface and epigrams are integrated into the Commentary. The book is clearly set out, with introductory sections as follows: (1) M’s Life and Works (2) Epigram before M (3) Characteristics of M’s Epigrams (Themes Characters Formal Features: Point, Bipartite Structure, Length, and Meter Book Structure) (4) Nachleben and Reception (5) Manuscript Tradition. Rather than replicate what is easily available elsewhere, I prefer here just to welcome Williams’ (W’s) contribution to the wealth of material now available.

It has become something of a convention when reviewing a new commentary on Martial (M) to mark the recent upsurge of interest in the poet with a catalogue of the commentaries which have previously appeared (see e.g.

Scansion of epigrammata martialia i