This book contains an edition, with detailed introductions and commentaries, of three papyrus texts from the Michigan collection from the Ptolemaic period (third–second centuries b.c.): a list of lyric and tragic incipits, some fragments of lyric in a Euripidean style and a third text which to a large extent is still obscure. The group of papyri, P. Mich. inv. 3498 and 3250a, b and c, had been published partly by earlier scholars and has been explored afresh by B. and S. in the light of new evidence: after R. Merkelbach had published the list of incipits on the recto of inv. 3498 (in 1973) and D. Page took care of the lyric fragment on the verso (in 1974) the fragments did not receive much attention until it turned out, in 1999 when the papyri were digitally catalogued, that inv. 3250, until then labelled as ‘Coptic’, in fact joined inv. 3498. B. and S. offer a new edition and discussion of all these fragments in relation to each other for the first time.

In the introduction B. describes the papyri and their interesting and complex history and appearance (the incipits were written on top of an earlier text, which was erased, and the roll was repaired at least once; inv. 3250a verso is written in the hands of the recto and the verso of the other fragments). Then the authors devote chapters to the individual groups of fragments: (1) the list of lyric and tragic incipits in inv. 3498 + 3250b recto, 3250a and c recto (pp. 9–35, B.); (2) the lyric fragments in inv. 3498 + 3250b verso and 3250c verso (pp. 36–129, S.); (3) the problematic fragment in inv. 3250a verso (pp. 130–46, S.).

The list of incipits is, as B. rightly remarks, ‘a valuable testimony to the ways in which Ptolemaic readers of the Greek classics organized and catalogued their reading material’ (p. 10) and its text has greatly profited from the new join. B. begins this section with an introduction, in which she describes the contents of the list (among the lyric incipits there are known lines from Alcaeus and Anacreon, among the tragic ones lines from the Bacchae and Orestes of Euripides) and places it in the contest of other similar lists. She draws attention to the fact that the combination of two genres in one list is unusual and discusses the question whether the hand and overall shoddy appearance of the papyrus may point to a school-text or rather to the private work of a more advanced scholar. The text is followed by a commentary in which each incipit is discussed in detail.

The section about the lyric fragments is the longest part of the book. It begins with a description of the fragments and the hand. Then follows a diplomatic text with palaeographical commentary, a reconstructed text with translation, a general discussion of the text and a commentary. The material offered is rich and equips the reader with all he needs for a proper understanding, but the presentation forces him to move to and fro through the book all the time: for example for the possible Φ]ρύγιοϲ in col. I line 4 we get the transcript and an apparatus with Page's two texts on p. 41, S.'s palaeographical comments on the text on p. 42, the reading text on p. 52 (with Page's supplement printed, but not mentioned in the apparatus), and finally Page's supplement is recorded and discussed in the commentary on p. 82.

S. offers an extensive and well-organised discussion of the nature of the lyric fragments. They are from a Trojan context, mentioning the rivers Scamander and Simois, and contain commands of an unidentified speaker, which refer to woodcutting, and the rather agitated responses of his audience, both in direct speech. Many elements are unclear: the genre, the author, the narrative framework and the narrator, and the exact nature of the mythological episode. In a careful, systematic and detailed manner S. deals with the various possibilities concerning the episode (constructing funeral pyres, building the wooden horse, building ships, or fortifying the Greek wall). Altogether he considers the wooden horse as the most likely option and suggests that the fragments may be from the episode in which ‘the captured Helenus’ orders ‘its construction to the Achaean army’ (p. 61). A good candidate for the narrator would then be Sinon although, as S. admits, there is no solid proof for this.

As to author and genre the title of the chapter is a little misleading: although S. points to elements which give the text a Euripidean flavour, he eventually regards it as non-dramatic lyric from the late fifth or fourth century b.c., such as the New Musical dithyramb or citharodic nomos written by Timotheus, who shared the poetological views and practices of Euripides. S. adduces several convincing arguments for this view, particularly the fact that the direct speech is much longer than is usual in tragic lyrics and rather resembles the use of direct speech in Timotheus' Persae (p. 80).

S.'s discussion of P. Mich. inv. 3250a verso is much shorter. This fragment, written in two hands and in a rather bad state, still defies identification: its contents are of an agricultural and mythological nature, its style shows poetic as well as prosaic elements and firm conclusions are not possible.

The book is carefully and clearly written, and the editions and commentaries are very useful and help our understanding of these fragments a great deal. The discussion in the commentaries is very detailed and often includes comments and views of other scholars as well. Of course, sometimes one might think differently or have questions about details; for example p. 93 n. 110: IA 1006 does not seem quite similar as in ψευδῆ λέγων the words are also closely linked, conveying the notion of ‘lying’; pp. 102–4: the basis of the reading text in I 4 does not seem very strong and it seems hard to explain τε; p.110: I should like some discussion about a possible οἱ δέ after οἱ μέν in I 9; p. 114: as to the puzzling τριχώματα one might perhaps consider the possibility that it refers to the trees' foliage, like κόμη elsewhere.

One thing that might have deserved more attention on a general level is the papyrus roll itself (although there are some useful remarks in the section on the list of incipits on pp. 12–17). I would have liked to hear more about this kind of roll of mixed contents as a cultural phenomenon: what other examples do we have of this kind of collection, apart from the well-known Firmin-Didot papyrus? Could one say anything about their use or purpose? It would also be interesting to consider the list of incipits from the point of view of canonisation. Even so, one can imagine that this was felt to be outside the scope of this edition and these desiderata certainly do not lessen the book's overall quality and usefulness.