blending, which have been central to Ovidian scholarship since Heinze's seminal study of 1919.13 He offers no explicit analysis in the Introduction of the role generic conventions play in shaping Ovid's use of sources, although many individual notes in the commentary will be fruitfully employed in such analysis by others. H. has established his own (very readable) text and apparatus criticus on the basis of the work of earlier editors and, conveniently, he has been able to consult R.J. Tarrant's forthcoming OCT edition of the Metamorphoses in advance of publication. H. gives only the merest summary of the text and transmission of the poem but refers the reader to Tarrant's standard discussion of the issues14 and has explained his own editorial practices succinctly. Although he keeps textual notes to a minimum in the commentary, he occasionally addresses textual problems and is always scrupulously clear, concise and fair in outlining the problem and his preference for its solution. The commentary itself is admirably lucid and judicious, and will constitute a helpful introduction not only to Met. 13 but also to many areas of current scholarly interest in the Metamorphoses as a whole and Ovidian poetry more generally. The care and attention H. devotes to Ovid's use of sources, allusion and intertextuality in the Introduction continues to be a prominent focus in his notes. (...) The richness of the literary discussion on offer here make this an important contribution to Ovidian studies which will prove indispensable for teaching and research alike.' (ALISON KEITH in Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2001.11.02).