?Professor White?s book, which (apart from a long Introduction) takes the form of a continuous summary of and commentary on the ?Republic?, has two aims. One is to provide an introduction which can be used by students with varying levels of background knowledge and philosophical sophistication. The other is to put forward his own interpretation of the work as a closely articulated unity which is pine of the wide range of Plato?s concerns forms a single argument. The two aims harmonise well. As a ?companion? for those reading the ?Republic? for the first time, the book gains from the fact that W. Is concerned to let Plato?s argument speak for itself rather than focussing on the work through a set of modern philosophical concerns. In his comments W. Refers to the secondary literature, but does not often directly take issue with it; the form and scope of his discussion always follows the text rather closely. (?) W. Sees the ?Republic? primarily as a work of moral (and political) philosophy, putting less stress on the epistemology and metaphysics. (?) The basis of W.?s overall interpretation is sketched in the Introduction: by making goodness the primary notion in ethics, and insisting on its objectivity, Plato avoids the unanswerable problems that arise for those who see morality in terms of the conflict of duty and interest; hence he is neither an egoist nor a utilitarian. W. Is importantly right here, and his book will, I hope, help to free students from the tendency to interpret Plato in modern ethical terms that condemn the Republic?s argument to failure before it begins. (?) The book as a whole is far superior, philosophically and in its approach to Plato, to other recent introductions. It will be useful to students and of interest to the specialist.? (JULIA ANNAS in The Journal of Hellenic Studies 1981, p.154).