This is the second volume of W.'s collected essays. The first volume concerned epic, which R.B. Rutherford (BMCR [2012.11.33]) has reviewed. The second volume focuses on lyric (including elegy and iambus) and tragedy. The third and final volume contains pieces on philosophy, metre and music, and general comments on literary texts. The whole collection will be concluded with Obiter Dicta on W.'s entire output.
The second volume contains 30 articles, a condensed review and four miscellaneous pieces of verse composition (one in German, the rest in Greek). These pieces date from 1965 to the present day, and include a newly published piece on Zeus in Aeschylus, which was a memorial lecture in honour of W.'s supervisor, Hugh Lloyd-Jones. The volume is organised chronologically from Archilochus to the Anacreontea. In the middle, after Pindar, there is a jump back in time to the origins of tragedy (Chapter 12), from where the chronological march continues through tragedy and lyric.
All the essays have been reset with the original page numbers placed superscript to the right of a vertical bar. Some of the chapters are extracts from larger works (1, 18, 22, 23, 24, 27, 30) or are an amalgamation of pieces published at different times (3, 9). The first chapter is an English translation of a German piece on the Cologne Archilochus (196a IEG) and is paired with a piece (pp. 6–16) on the ‘New Archilochus’ (P. Oxy. 4708). This pairing, like those on Sappho (4, 5) and Stesichorus (8, 9), promotes further understanding of a poet's extant corpus. The footnotes have been renumbered, though W. indicates what the original numbering would have been in the introductory footnote. Additions appear in square brackets usually in footnotes or sometimes in the main text, and there are supplementary notes attached to several chapters (3, 4, 8, 9, 16, 18, 19, 26, 28, 30). Some of these add bibliographical references, mainly where W. has later expanded upon the topic, or corrections, or reaffirmations such as ‘In my paper I assumed Stesichorean authorship, and I continue to believe in it’ (p. 106). Comments are inserted into the main text in square brackets to show a change of opinion (p. 224 n. 3, 376). There are very few typographical errors: ‘Promctheus’ (p. 254), and the reference (p. 127) to Callimachus, Aet. 1.33–6 Pfeiffer is missing.
In the preface (p. v), W. states his ‘selection focuses on items that treat questions of literary history or longer passages of text rather than those concerned with individual textual problems’, though Chapters 5, 9, 10, 23, 26, 28, 29 could be considered to do both, as they are on the constitution of a text or on new papyrus fragments. While I acknowledge that these pieces are selective, I would still suggest that ‘New Fragments of Ibycus’ Love Songs' (ZPE 57 [1984], 23–32), with some changes in presentation, ought to have been included. This would bring attention to lesser-known Ibycean papyri (P. Oxy. 3538 = S257a PMGF), offer comments on monodic praise poetry, and would be an example of how to deal with a number of fragments.
Chapter 6 is a two-paragraph note that changes the transmitted name of Alcaeus' brother into its Aeolic Lesbian form. A valid suggestion, but its brevity and specificity raise a question mark over its inclusion. The title of Chapter 25 (‘A Vagina in Search of an Author’) will raise eyebrows; this paper proposes that a hexameter quotation in a treatise attributed to Hippolytus of Rome is from the Margites. This is a good piece of detective work, but the first supplementary note reveals that W. Burkert came to the same conclusions in 1987, which W. was unaware of in the initial publication. I am unsure why the article was reprinted. The chapter on Carcinus' Medea (pp. 334–50), however, is an excellent piece of deduction, and a better didactic piece for students and scholars on how to examine and interpret a new literary text, and present these results in a useful and clear format. The text has been re-collated and a musical score added.
In Chapter 8, W. should acknowledge that the solo/choral argument of Stesichorus is still ongoing. The evidence (in my opinion) leans towards initial choral performance (following the works of E. Cingano and F. D'Alfonso), but with examples of solo sympotic reperformance (Stes. TB23 PMGF). The first part of Chapter 9 ‘Stesichorea’ (pp. 98–106) concerns a papyrus that is usually assigned to Ibycus (S166 PMGF), though W. has maintained that it is Stesichorean. W. now considers this fragment to refer to the expedition of the Tyndaridae to Attica (W. had previously argued for Troy) to recover Helen, who had been abducted by Theseus (cf. Stes. 191 PMGF). Ibycus has short mythological paradigms (S151.36–48, S226, 289a PMGF) as part of a strategy of erotic and athletic praise, and J.P. Barron (BICS 31 [1984], 13–24) made persuasive arguments for Ibycean authorship.
The provocative review (pp. 223–6) of Garvie's commentary on Aeschylus' Choephori (1986) adheres to the principles of the preface. W. urges the reader not to be blinded by the classic status of an author when offering interpretations, and rejects the ‘structural significance of recurrent imagery’ (p. 223), arguing that they should not be treated like Wagnerian leitmotifs, since the salient features of Aeschylus' style are ‘unconscious (or uncaring) repetition of words and phrases’ and any significant imagery is merely ‘lodged in his mind like bacteria in a well’ (p. 225). There is recurring thematic imagery in the Oresteia and elsewhere. R.B. Rutherford has a recent study on this (Greek Tragic Style: Form, Language and Interpretation [2012], pp. 128–37) and comments on W.'s review (p. 129 n. 25). Metre could also be included in the study of the continuity of words and imagery in tragedy. The lekythion is the most common trochaic line in Aeschylus' Oresteia. It is first introduced in the ‘Hymn to Zeus’ (Ag. 160–91), and then when the chorus attempts to comprehend and interpret the events that have happened and are happening (e.g. Aesch. Eum. 490–565, 916–1020).
Several titles and comments show W.'s waggish side. Some of the papers have been re-titled: ‘Who's Afraid of Dating Corinna’ or ‘Where Eagles Dare: the parodos of the Agamemnon’. There are comments: ‘Pindar was, I imagine, a difficult man to live with’ (p. 129) and ‘Do dolphins dance with their gills? Of course not, any more than Nereids dance with their noses’ (p. 352). The four miscellaneous pieces are certainly amusing. Chapter 14 opens with several humorous anecdotes about a young W. as a student of Hugh Lloyd-Jones, such as the antics of Lloyd-Jones' Persian cat at their first meeting, or Lloyd-Jones' wife attempting to get Lloyd-Jones' attention during a tutorial by throwing rocks through an open window.
The volume strikes a balance between matters of detail and broader issues. There are many chapters that are influential, useful and learned examples of methodology and interpretation. These papers show interpretations and reconstructions based on close readings of the text, and an extensive knowledge of literature. W. offers precise and carefully worded answers or plausible reconstructions. These are hallmarks of W.'s style and approach to fragmentary texts and dramatic works. They may not to be everybody's taste, the lack of theory-led readings may infuriate some, but often these papers lay the foundations and supporting walls from which further scholarship is made.
W. has made significant and useful contributions to the study of Greek lyric and tragedy with critical editions of Aeschylus, Greek elegy and iambus, the Anacreontea, the Theognidea and Phocylides, along with a commentary on Euripides' Orestes, and a select translation of Greek melic poetry (bar Pindar and Bacchylides). Despite the minor criticisms above, this volume forms part of a treasure house of scholarship on a variety of topics that are essential works to consult, and is a demonstration of W.'s long and distinguished career.
