The presentation of the arrangement and ‘cycles’ introduces well the main topics of these epigrams: the relation, established by various strategies, to Domitian and to the reader, to other patrons and friends. 12-58) discusses Martial’s fifth book in content, form, relation to Domitian, arrangement, date and Saturnalian context (Canobbio decides convincingly for a publication in December 89 C.E.), transmission and modern textual criticism. The reader of the commentary will recognize and appreciate Canobbio’s profound knowledge and the balanced representation of current opinions in the growing body of scholarship on Martial.
This commentary is the result of Canobbio’s long occupation with Martial that has its beginnings with his PhD thesis on the epigrams in book five regarding the lex Roscia theatralis (1995-1999), published in 2002, 4 which has generated a series of important articles.
3 Comparisons withwith Lindsay, Heraeus and Shackleton Bailey (1990)are listed on pp. Moreover he gives a new, mostly convincing critical text – although without revolutions for interpretation – often in matters of punctuation and quotation marks. Canobbio is much more detailed (the book is over 600 pages!) and up to date, also in his methods and theoretical approaches. With Canobbio’s new commentary the many questions remaining after Howell are finally answered.
1 The work of Peter Howell from 1995, also on Martial’s book five, 2 is considerably smaller and shows its origin for school teachers (BMCR 97.9.07). With Alberto Canobbio’s commentary on Martial’s fifth book the exegesis of Martial’s epigrams that began with Mario Citroni in 1975 on book one can be regarded nearly finished (only book twelve is still looking for a published commentary).