{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02575932333717801, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008842752787389465, 'mean_word_length': 5.180522565320665, '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 RULE OF CONSTANTIUS II

a more limited extent, friends, subjects, and allies’ (p. 107). Chapter 5, ‘Time’, is an illuminating study that examines various examples of how Roman and local systems of timekeeping established relations of rapprochement and remoteness between imperial, provincial and local spheres, producing a plurality marked by the actions of diverse actors and interests in communication and competition. The last chapter, ‘Epilogue: Becoming Roman’, develops the main conclusions and the complexity of the theme analysed throughout the book. One of the main conclusions is the invitation to ‘appreciate the performative aspects of identity in the Roman empire, and, just as profoundly, the thinly stretched nature of Roman Power, and its coexistence with competing systems of power and authority, along with the opportunism engendered by the Roman empire’s substantial reliance on local states and groups’ (p. 157). The book is well written and has a clear and sophisticated language, already familiar to those who have read D.’s Romulus’ Asylum (2005). There are minor editorial problems such as references to Benefaction and Rewards in the Ancient Greek City: the Origins of Euergetism, quoted on pp. 49 and 74 as Gygax 2016, but listed in the bibliography as Domingo Gygax 2016. The volume has great merit in pointing out important and new ways for the analysis of the empire and its relations with political cultures, establishing important alternatives for future studies. The book seems to be of more interest to those already studying the subject than to those seeking an initial introduction to the topic. Undergraduate and especially graduate students will find an outstanding contribution to the debate and an important source to reflect more profoundly on different approaches to the topic and some future perspectives. D. highlights more structural aspects of the empire operating alongside those that were the product of the action of individuals and groups, without considering one or another alone as a determinant in the processes analysed, and also articulates the impulses of the centre (in its multiplicity) and the peripheries (in their plurality) in the building of a complex imperial framework, without pre-established determinations around consensus or resistance. This diversity does not produce a fresh model of analysis in my view (alternatives to ‘Romanisation’ or ‘globalisation’) but allows us to think provocatively about the alternatives we have to think about the Roman empire and its cultural diversity. It is a great achievement for a short book.