The volume consists of an illuminating introduction by Bruno Currie and Ian Rutherford and 21 essays that offer a good, if obviously partial, overview of the reception (‘ancient reworkings of the texts’, 1) and transmission (‘the process by which literary works passed on to later generations and made available to listener and readers’, 1) of Greek lyric poetry from Classical times to Byzantine scholarship. The study of the circumstances of the transmission and reception is essential for our knowledge of ancient Greek lyric, because, as the editors point out, ‘few texts from these genres survive complete, and much of what comes down to us takes the form of short fragments scattered in the texts of other writers. Many of these are presumably faithful citations, but other could be distorted or even invented’ (2).

It is not the purpose of the volume to offer a systematic study of such a vast and complex subject, but to expose some of its main themes and problems through the treatment of selected questions. The book is divided into chapters arranged more or less chronologically, encompassing a wide temporal spectrum that covers all the stages up to the Byzantine period. Within each chapter an exhaustive treatment of the reception and transmission of Greek lyric poetry in the corresponding period is not carried out, nor are the same topics reviewed in each of the periods (for example, the reception and transmission of Sappho or Solon or Archilochus in each of the periods), but different topics have been selected for each chapter. Inevitably, this approach gives rise to an unequal treatment of the issues and the periods. For example, the section dedicated to reception of ancient Greek lyric in all Latin literature includes only two contributions, both on similar aspects (Catullan and Horatian readings of Alcaeus and Sappho and also of their Hellenistic commentators, by Ewen Bowie; and the creative use by Horace, Propertius, Ovid and Statius of Pindar’s text and its Hellenistic commentaries, by Gregor Bitto). Instead, the section dedicated specifically to the Second Sophistic is much longer (but not much more varied); it includes five contributions: two essays (by Stefano Caciagli and Renate Schlesier) concern the image that Athenaeus offers of Sappho and the context in which her verses were performed; two others (by Jessica Romney and Jacqueline Klooster) deal with the way that the ancient biographical tradition on Solon and the personal approach of individual authors have conditioned the interpretation of his political action and his poetry in the indirect transmission (Plutarch above all); and finally Francesca Modini’s essay studies the reception of lyric poetry by Aelius Aristides. Eveline van Hilten-Rutten’s essay on Tyrtaeus in Plutarch and Diodorus also deals with this period.

Contributions relating to the Classical period also deal with some aspects of reception (Krystyna Bartol on the reception of elegy; David Fearn on New Music and specifically on Timotheus as a continuator of dithyrambic traditions; Andrea Capra on Plato’s reception of Stesichorus), but above all they deal with ‘canonization’, namely the shaping of the ‘lyric nine’ canon: Gregory Nagy argues for the crucial role played by Athens in the shaping of the canon; Claude Calame, on the contrary, maintains that the testimonies from Old Comedy invite us to think that the Alexandrian canon of the nine lyric poets was not yet clearly established in late fifth-century BC Athens. Theodora Hadjimichael, for her part, analyses the Peripatetic philosophers’ studies on the lyric poets (she sees the Peripatetics as paving the way for the great Hellenistic commentaries) and their role in the canonization and transmission of lyric, considering (against Nagy) Athens’ role relatively unimportant to the transmission of lyric; in contrast to this, Elsa Bouchard downplays the influence of the Peripatetics on Alexandrian scholarship.

Two more contributions focus on very specific aspects of the great Hellenistic commentaries: Tom Phillips on how the interpretation of the historical context of Pindar’s poems by the Hellenistic commentators influenced the poet’s readers, and Enrico Emanuele Prodi on the role that poem titles played in the reception of lyric. Two other essays deal with the reception and transmission of Greek lyric poetry in Imperial and Byzantine times: Johannes Breuer with Porphyrio’s commentary on Horace, and Arlette Newmann-Hartmann on Eustathius as commentator of Pindar.

So, readers of this excellent book should look not for a general exposition of the reception and transmission of Greek lyric poetry in the Ancient and Byzantine world (this was not the purpose of the editors). But they will find very valuable and stimulating individual contributions on the subject that offer varied and complementary perspectives (even defending opposing opinions) to address many of the abundant questions and problems raised by the reception, transmission and canonization of ancient Greek texts.