This volume by D. is a commentary on the fragments of minor Greek lyric poets, divided into four sections (with addenda), according to the order of the edition by D. Campbell (Loeb). An accompanying volume of the text of the poems or fragments is forthcoming. In my opinion this division presents the greatest difficulty in consulting the volume, as the context and the whole text of a poem are essential to understanding the philological observations and commentary on them. Moreover, these poems are different in both value and breadth, and have rarely been the subject of specific monographs as their lines (or single words) were of interest especially because of their musical or lexical meaning. The volume lacks an initial introduction: D. prefers a brief preface (pp. v–vi), because he claims ‘to supply such information at the start of the commentaries on each fragment ad loc. in the first instance, with cross-references thereafter’ (p. xi). Each poem is preceded by a brief introduction with summarised bibliography. The commentary is limited to indicating the different interpretations of other scholars, and D. rarely proposes an original reading of the texts. This is regrettably one of the most frequent aspects of modern anthologies. The metrical analysis too is not by D., who prefers to indicate bibliographic references: if such a choice can be justified in some instances, in others it would have been interesting to learn D.'s own ideas. He apparently recognises it: ‘Again, I can only summarise the difficulties’ (p. 98). Without a doubt, this collection of texts or fragments usually neglected will be useful when we have the second book with the texts.
This approach also affects the discussion of stylistic and mythical innovations, introduced by the New Dithyrambographers: for instance, in the commentary of Hymn to Demeter at Hermione (F 702) of Lasus of Hermione D. keeps to the article of L. Prauscello (in B. Kowalzig and P. Wilson [edd.], Dithyramb in Context [2013]) and considers the musical innovations with some perplexity: the figure of Laso is traditionally linked to the dithyramb and its innovations, and to the role that he played in auletic music. In order to understand this hymn, where Laso used a ‘hypodoric harmony’ (see Athen. 14.624e–f), a modified Aeolic loud harmony (i.e. ‘tuning’) defined as βαρύβρομον (‘loud sounding’), it would have been preferable to contextualise the history and landscape of the poetical performance (see e.g. L. Breglia, DialHistAnc. 12 [1986]).
D. gives ample space to the New Dithyrambographers (pp. 84–146): the characteristics of the New Music (dithyramb or paean) become more apparent as soon as one reads the main words in the fragments of Pratinas: the poet criticised the new style of music, where the aulos dominates the song's words, and therefore he overused repetitions, onomatopoeia and polyptotus, mainly parodically. On the other hand, the repetition was probably also a stylistic feature of the poet himself, which we have to accept: for instance, the repetition in F 712b.2–3 (ἀοιδολαβράκτας / Αἰολὶς ἁρμονία) is not ‘redundant’ (p. 24), but instead proves consistent with the style and poetic thought of Pratina, a great admirer of the Aeolian Harmonia (or ‘tuning’). This feature was characteristic of the New Music, and D. could have emphasised it through clearer links between the different fragments (e.g. Melanippides the Younger, F 757.3; 760.3; 761; Telestes, F 805a.1; b1): it is the same with the musical terminology (kampe, poikilia, anabolai), often hidden in compound names (Telestes, F 808.4: καμψιδίαυλον). To look at another brief example: Pratinas claimed the priority of song over music and stated that the aulos could be ‘the general’ of the song (στρατηλάτας: F 708.9) only in the Dionysiac komos: D. defines this metaphor as ‘paradoxical, given that komos and war were regarded as antithetical opposites’ (p. 17). In fact, the choros, like the komos, had been compared metaphorically with the army since the fifth century bc: this is shown by the correlation between both orchestic and military terminology, i.e. between χορός and στρατιά (see F. D'Alfonso, Helikon 33–4 [1993/1994]). D. examines, sometimes too cursorily, the innovations in myth: for instance, the representation of the Danaides as Mainades or Amazons (Melanippides, Danaides, F 757), or the paradoxical inversion between Marsyas and Athena in connection with aulos (Marsyas, F 758; Telestes, Argo, F 805). Instead, the study of the different interpretations of the mythological variant of the story of Endymion, asleep with open eyes (Licymnius, F 771) is very fascinating, but, in this case too, D. avoids making judgements. (p. 98).
D. also examines fragments of Greek female poetesses (Telesilla and Praxilla; Myrtis is only quoted). As regards the method used for Telesilla, both the bibliography (outdated) and the contextualisation of the references to her dating are poor. In this respect it could be useful to explore the use of Telesillean (the song metre named after her): it is meaningful that this metre was used during the fifth century bc in military and female contexts: for instance, in Aristophanes’ Assembly of Women (Eccl. 288ff.) the chorus of women, disguised as men, performs a song in Telesilleans kata stichon in order to urge themselves to go to the Assembly (as regards the disguise, Telesilla, and the stories about Argos, see M. Valdés Guía, Gerión 23 [2005], 109–14; E. Franchi, in: V. Foderà, Le tradizioni del Peloponneso tra epica e storiografia locale [2016], pp. 99–127).
D. gives ample attention to a useful commentary of the poems of Philoxenus of Cithera (especially to his poem Cyclops or Galateia: F 815–24), of the Poem in Honour of Hermias, traditionally attributed to Aristoteles (T 842), and of The Song of Hybrian the Cretan (T 909): I found this one of the more stimulating and original sections of the book.
The third and fourth sections likewise contain useful material (‘Popular Poetry’, ‘Lapidary Inscriptions’, ‘Inscriptions on Vases’ and ‘Citational Fragments’). The analysis of The Swallow Song (T 848) is interesting because D. gathers together the interpretations of other scholars, combining the results of different analyses (metre, genre, myth, ritual). The commentary on ‘Anonymous Fragments Preserved on Papyri’ (in Section 4) is more original, especially the analysis both of F 926, in which a locus amoenus is described, maybe an otherworldly scene, and of F 929, again of Dionysiac character. In the latter the arrival of springtime seems to be a good omen to the epiphany of the God. As regards a rare epithet (F 929f.2) attributed to a goddess (νύμφαν φοινικοπ[τέ]ρυγα: ‘the nymph with wings of purple’), it would have been worth focusing on it more in order to contextualise the hymn better. The epithet (a hapax) is similar to φοινικόπεζα (‘ruddy-footed’: of Demeter in Pind. Ol. 6, 94; of Hecate in Pind. Paean. II, 77 = D2 Rutherford), which belongs to a chthonian dimension as well as the winged Deities (Artemis/Hecate, Sirens). In Stesichorus too (F 90.10 Davies–Finglass) we find a similar combination (Χρυσόπτερε παρθένε: ‘maiden/girl with wings of gold’, maybe a Siren).
The volume ends with short index rerum, index nominum and index verborum. In conclusion, despite the lack of Volume 2 and too few original readings of the texts, D. offers a readable and highly desirable commentary on poetry otherwise not easily accessible.
