{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025222551928783383, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0025964391691394658, 'mean_word_length': 4.875816993464053, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
THE BIOGRAPHY AND INFLUENCE OF FULVIA

study of ‘how gender plays a role in the construction of individual diviners’ (p. 32). M. analyses that ‘her gender, her ethnicity, her backstory and her sacrificial skill . . . must have formed a standard model of divination and women’s participation thereof’ (p. 140); and in the sixth and last full chapter Calpurnia and her dream are the central topic, illustrating gender in prophetic dreaming more broadly. Women could dream prophetically, but acting upon these dreams in the public sphere was something else. The main conclusion is that gender played a central role in the performative relationship with traditions thought to allow communication with the supernatural. In other words, gender was central to the practice of religion. It did not ‘hinder people from establishing, sustaining, and asserting that relationship’ (p. 33). In fact, M. convincingly argues that Roman religion was more inclusive in terms of gender than has often been argued. Not in the sense that all performance of gender was deemed acceptable (one need only think of the prodigies of the birth of intersex children), but in the sense that, when participating in the performance that is religion, most gender performances could have a function at particular times and places – furthering perceived communication with the supernatural. In the conclusion M. states that the arguments made and theoretical framework related to divination and gender performance could be applied to other ancient and modern societies. How this should be done is not shown or exemplified, but this would make for a most interesting follow-up methodological publication. What has certainly become clear is that the nature of gender was dynamic and that binary thinking about gender, as well as about divination, is not useful. As a consequence, changes and varieties in gender performance must in turn have facilitated changes and dynamic practices in the field of divination (and vice versa). The interplay between these transformations would also be an interesting issue to consider in further research, for example exploring and contrasting divinatory practices from the Late Republic to the high Empire and Late Antiquity. The argument is well annotated; and a bibliography, a subject index and an index locorum complete the volume. Any student of divination should add this book to their shelves. It is, however, also of much interest to those interested in ancient religions in a wider sense. M. has shown that a gendered approach to divination provides new insights into the functioning of Roman religion – such a gendered reading can be taken up for the study of other religious phenomena.