Following his extensive study of Greek satyric drama and its relationship with Greek comedy (2014), S. provides a new monograph focused on the only extant complete Greek satyr play: Euripides’ Cyclops. S. offers a thorough analysis of the satyric genre, a comprehensive overview of the plot of Cyclops and a detailed consideration of the dramatic, satyric, philosophical and epic themes within the play. What a reader will find highly useful is S.’s precise portrayal of the matrix of genres within which the Cyclops is located. Many of Euripides’ jokes can be fully comprehended only if considered in relation to the archetypal texts to which they ironically refer. Therefore, by presenting such a complete study of Euripides’ Cyclops, the overall result of the book is definitely positive.

Chapter 1, ‘The Cyclops and Satyr Drama’, aims to contextualise Euripides’ play through the consideration of the occasion on which it was performed (i.e. the Athenian City Dionysia); the history and functions of such a Dionysiac genre and its usual characters (i.e. satyr drama and satyrs); the mythological background (i.e. Homer's Odyssey); and, briefly, the date and text of the play. The first chapter guides the reader (in particular, the non-specialist reader) into the ancient Greek cultural and literary world, providing the essential information to an initial understanding of satyr play and its main features. Even though a reader could be initially overwhelmed by the amount of information collected by S., they will later find themselves sufficiently prepared to contextualise and interpret Euripidean words. In his opening section, S. prepares the ground for his further discussion: a fil rouge holds the whole discussion of the play, and each detail analysed in the first parts of the book will be recalled and reconsidered (although sometimes in an overly repetitive fashion) in the final parts of the discussion. One can readily appreciate the coherence and completeness with which the Cyclops is examined. A detail: I would suggest a reader carefully keep in mind S.’s early words about the two possibilities of dating the play (412 or 408 bc), as, at the book's close, extremely interesting hypotheses will be raised.

Chapter 2, ‘Viewing the Play: Plot and Performance’, is exclusively devoted to the performance of the Cyclops. Unfortunately, the original text is not included in the book. However, S. provides a plentiful narration of what occurs on stage. He not only describes the plot, but also supplies the ‘viewing of the plot’, with meticulous explanations of actors’ words and gestures: this allows the reader to understand when, how and why the Greek audience might have laughed. By narrating the satyric story, the second chapter anticipates several themes that will be analysed in the following chapter, such as slavery and friendship, the importance of wine (and, consequently, Dionysus), culinary motifs and Homeric topoi. Two minor notes: with regards to the religious and performative connections between wine, dance and the City Dionysia, it should be noted that wine and dance were also main features of the Anthesteria (celebrated in February/March), especially during its first two ‘hyper-Dionysiac’ days, the Pithoigia and the Choes; it is likely that references to the Anthesteria's celebration of wine with dances, processions and wine-tastings are also present in Euripides’ play. Second, in this chapter (as well as throughout the whole book) the ‘Athenian audience’ is often mentioned: that part of the audience surely better understood references to Athenian characters and politics (and Athenian culture in general). However, we should not forget that the City Dionysia was attended by a Panhellenic audience, which enjoyed less specifically Athenian topoi too: it would be interesting, in this way, to investigate the less Athenocentric satyric gags which might have entertained a Megarian, Chian, Corinthian or Spartan.

With Chapter 3, ‘Themes, Issues, and Functions’, the reader comes to the core of the book and the specific analysis of the play. After having described the play, S. demonstrates: (i) the Dionysiac essence of the play; (ii) the (meta-)performative and religious character of the play; (iii) the modernity of the play, encapsulated in the numerous references to Athenian culture, society and contemporary figures; (iv) the main themes of xenia, barbarism and philosophy; and (v) a brief overview of the connections between the play and the recent Athenian expedition in Sicily. S. argues that the Cyclops, although Dionysus is not present on stage, should be considered a strongly Dionysiac play: the many invocations to Dionysus, the prominence of wine and dance, and the theme of (the satyrs’) voluntary and (Polyphemus’) involuntary slavery to Dionysus are clear proof of how the Cyclops necessarily has something to do with Dionysus. Although not extensively developed, S.’s intuition of the relationship between Cyclops’ Polyphemus and Bacchae’s Pentheus is noteworthy (both at pp. 69 and 78), and it reveals the link also with Euripides’ own tragic production. The section ‘Self-awareness of performance’ is particularly interesting, as it explains ‘the perpetual dialogue between the City Dionysia's multiple satyr plays, multiple Silenuses, and multiple satyr choruses from the past, present, and future’ (p. 70). The consideration of several passages further informs the reader of the huge amount of performative elements (such as the dance sikinnis and the kômos-song) to be found within the satyrs’ words. Next, S. moves to the analysis of the Homeric themes of xenia and ‘civilised vs. uncivilised’: here the irony resides in Euripides’ portrayal of Odysseus as ‘somewhat more barbaric’ (p. 77) and Polyphemus more cultured (in culinary matters). Both characters question and dismiss the gods: such a detail allows S. to compare these positions with the fifth-century bc Athenian philosopher Callicles. In this way, he also demonstrates Euripides’ engagement with contemporary sophists. S. closes this section reminding the reader of the recent catastrophic Sicilian expedition. We know from Plutarch that many Athenians saved their lives by quoting Euripidean lines before their Sicilian enemies, who particularly appreciated his plays. Thus, given the play's Sicilian context and Odysseus’ suffering before fleeing from the island, S. interestingly hypothesises that the playwright wanted to enhance the importance of his production, which both saved and entertained Athenian people.

The last chapter, ‘Euripides’ Cyclops in its Literary Context’, reconsiders the themes examined so far and contextualises them into various literary panorama. Hence, each theme and character is compared with the original genre/text to which Euripides ironically (and competitively with other literary genres) refers: the kômos-song with comic tradition; Odysseus and Polyphemus with Homer's Odyssey; Odysseus and his fellow sailors with the Homeric Hymn to Dionysus; the myth of Odysseus and Polyphemus with Epicharmus’ and Aristias’ Cyclops, Cratinus’ Odysseis and Callias’ Cyclopes. Lastly, the Cyclops’ relation with tragic and comic plays offers a double interpretation of its meta-theatrical value. For, if the Cyclops was performed in 408 bc, it would ironically refer, through the expressions ἔα· τίν’ ὄχλον τόνδ’ ὁρῶ (Cyc. 222) and δι’ ἀμϕιτρῆτος (Cyc. 707), both to Sophocles, Ph. 19 (409 bc) and Aristophanes, Th. 1105 (411 bc). But Aristophanes was already parodying Euripides, fr. 125 C.–C. (Andromeda): such an intertextual operation would create a unique case of a satyr play's para-comic section referring to a comedy's para-tragic section. However, S. seems to be more attracted by M. Wright's hypothesis that the Cyclops was the fourth play of the 412 bc Euripidean ‘escape’ trilogy composed of Helen, Andromeda and Iphigenia among the Taurians: in this way, Euripides was parodying himself on the same day, and Aristophanes parodied Euripides’ parody of himself. Thus, S. brilliantly terminates his discussion with these attractive hypotheses, leaving the reader free to interpret further.

By the end of the book, one can admire the abundance of evident as well as ambiguous themes that make Euripides’ play a sourcebook of ironic jokes and subtle intertextual allusions. A monograph dedicated to Euripides’ Cyclops was doubtless needed, and S.’s skill in offering a useful and in-depth study, comprehensible to a heterogenous audience, is much appreciated.