The topic of drawing lots is back in fashion, whether in ancient history (we need but think of I. Malkin and J. Blok's recent Drawing Lots (2024)) or in contemporary political science (see e.g. the work of J. Rancière and Y. Sintomer). As far as ancient history is concerned, while the drawing of lots had already been the subject of significant scholarship pertaining to the Greek world, it has been rather neglected in Roman history. Julie Bothorel's book (a revised version of a doctoral thesis defended in November 2019) seeks precisely to fill this gap, within limits. Indeed, the book does not address all kinds of drawing of lots, and focuses on its use for the allocation of provinces during the Republic: from 227 b.c. to Augustus. The introduction sets out the issues at stake quite efficiently, noting the great importance of the practice of drawing lots in the Roman world and explaining why the provinces were chosen by lot. A useful review of the historiography and a study of the lexicon of the sortitio (perhaps a little short) complete this introduction.

The rest of the book is divided into two rather different parts. The first (the most traditional) traces the development of the drawing of lots for the provinces from 227 to the Augustan reforms (the book ends with the reform of the lex Iulia de Prouinciis, dated between 5 b.c. and the beginning of the reign of Tiberius). Organised chronologically, this part discusses in detail all aspects of the practice: the regulations governing it, how it was carried out, the possibilities for circumventing it and so forth. There are also judicious analyses explaining the difference between sortitio, comparatio and extra sortem procedure. The first three chapters deal with the operation of the sortitio prouinciarum between 227 and 124 and are essentially based on the analysis of Livy's data. This is a classic institutional study, but one that is well conducted and most welcome on a subject that has received little attention. Ch. 4 returns to the laws of C. Gracchus and Sulla concerning the allocation of provinces. It is well executed and up to date on thorny issues, with useful historiographical overviews. B.'s conclusions, which sometimes go against recent interpretations (such as that of F. J. Vervaet on Sulla's legislation) in favour of older hypotheses, are well argued and clearly stated. One can also find some compelling discussions on extraordinary commands. Ch. 5 deals with the period from Pompey to Augustus and provides a useful clarification of some complex issues.

The reader will appreciate B.'s ability to stick closely to her topic and not to drift into a complete new account of the crisis of the Republic: this rightly remains in the background. The Augustan section is obviously heavily influenced by the work of F. Hurlet (B.'s thesis supervisor) and the author's own contribution is less evident here, given the amount of recent scholarship on Augustus, even though putting this period into perspective with the Medio-Republic allows it to be seen from a different angle. For instance, the way B. emphasises the change in the meaning of extra sortem in the days of Augustus is of particular relevance. Throughout this first part, the rationale is solid and well grounded, though it can be a little cluttered at times, and readers unfamiliar with political and institutional topics might find it a little heavy going in places.

The second part of the book is even more valuable for its innovative character: it offers a detailed analysis of the tangible and symbolic methods of sortitio. B. begins with a rich description of the equipment used (sitella, urna versatilis and sors), combining a lexical analysis with an assessment of the mechanical operation of these objects. The physical operation of the procedure is explained in great detail, providing the opportunity for a fascinating chapter on the possibilities and techniques of fraud (ch. 8, which also raises the question of social origin and career as an influence on the drawing of lots). This material analysis (which relies on an entirely different set of documents from the first part) serves as the basis for a presentation of the drawing of lots as a ritual: a divine ritual, to be sure, but B. goes beyond that. She seeks indeed to highlight the political virtues of the practice in order to account for its use over a long period of time. The conclusion sums up the overall argument, and the book is accompanied by valuable indices (although the absence of a subject index is regrettable). As is often the case, it is unfortunate that the early years of the Republic have been neglected, particularly the episode of the military tribunes with consular powers, despite the existence of R. Stewart's monograph on that particular subject. Nevertheless, the book lives up to all its promises and is essential reading for anyone interested in the practice of drawing lots in the Roman world, whether for its legislative or political aspects or for its practical details.