This valuable study of civic discord in ancient cities is perhaps best approached by beginning at its end. On pages 334-345, readers encounter a remarkable document that vividly illuminates the actual workings of ancient municipal politics: P.Oxy. XXIV 2407, one of the longest surviving assembly protocols from third-century Oxyrhynchus. As the author demonstrates in the introduction (18-19), such protocols offer unique insights into civic life, being far less mediated than other available sources. Unlike literary narratives, decrees, or official correspondence, which inevitably present only one perspective on any given dispute, council minutes captured multiple voices within civic debates. In addition, they underwent minimal editorial revision, an immediacy that makes them particularly useful for understanding the actual dynamics at the ground level of municipal politics. The protocol in question, though lacking certain contextual details (the exact nature of the assembly and the location where it took place are unclear), is unusually revealing about both the culture of debate and the atmosphere within civic assemblies.

Based on Förg's dissertation, "Discordia Civium" examines civic discord and administrative conflicts in ancient cities of the Roman Empire, primarily through the lens of magistrate elections and office-holding. In contrast to earlier work on the subject, this study extends beyond specific actors, particular types of sources, or single regions of the Roman Empire, and thus provides broader insights into everyday political life of imperial cities (6). It begins with a case study of Polemon from Laodicea (1-6) before establishing the methodological framework. The main analysis (22f.) is structured around three themes: First, the book examines the technical terminology and procedures of magistrate elections, including the complex dynamics of counter-nominations. Second, it investigates tensions connected with assuming public office, including irregular appointments and cases where officials refused positions - often citing insufficient means or their status as 'outsiders' (69-181). Third, it discusses administrative misconduct and social tensions, examining cases ranging from negligent market officials to Hadrian's criticism of municipal officers, and exploring how social networks and factions influenced local politics (183-266). The final chapter (5, 267-295) summarizes the preceding discussion and offers concluding remarks.

The study draws equally on literary, epigraphical, legal and papyrological evidence, but its particular strength lies in the extensive and skillful integration of papyrological material alongside the other source types. While other sources have received considerable attention in previous scholarship on civic politics in the Roman period, papyrological material has largely remained the preserve of specialists, its insights rarely incorporated into broader historical syntheses. The appendix includes the original texts and German translations of 9 papyri, primarily from Oxyrhynchus. This distinguishes the monograph not only for being the first comprehensive examination of civic discord in Roman-era cities, but also for bringing papyrological evidence into dialogue with literary and epigraphic sources.

Förg uses the terms conflict, tension, or dispute largely as synonyms, to refer to non-violent social confrontations within the urban elite, which could take quite different forms (14). She identifies several potential areas of conflict (15-16), including nominations of people who lacked the necessary minimum wealth for office (123-155) or were exempted by privilege from civic obligations (163-181), as well as the reverse situation, where someone is accused of having fraudulently obtained a position for which they were not qualified by status or wealth (111-121). Other major potential areas of conflict involve the conduct of civic magistrates: their neglect of duties (184-214), procedural errors in administration, such as discrepancies in registering those liable for liturgies (234-245), and favoritism that reveals the entanglement of private relationships with political decisions (246-254). Finally, and paradoxically, disputes could arise from outstanding civic and euergetic engagement that could provoke envy (254-266).

The author suggests two possible root causes explaining discord in cities of the Roman Imperial period (289-295): the fact the poleis were highly heterogeneous, often including elite members who came from other communities and/or regions - that is, elite mobility had such effects according to Förg (290); and the rivalries that had always existed within civic elites, but for which in the Imperial period the only outlets were euergetism, the holding of offices, and ultimately external legal authorities like the governor or emperor (291). One might note, however, that the key difference compared to earlier periods, which also saw competition through public benefactions and office-holding, was that the Roman Imperial framework channelled such conflicts into legal proceedings before provincial governors rather than the extreme scenarios of earlier times, when rivals might summon foreign powers to intervene and maybe even occupy the city. It is also worth remembering that our impression of the scale of private expenditures in Imperial times depends heavily on evidence from honorific inscriptions - while the shift in the epigraphic habit is undeniable, it remains uncertain whether this reflects an equally dramatic shift in the scale of civic competition.

Among the more specific results of Förg's investigation, she makes a convincing case, based on diverse sources from both the East and the West of the Roman Empire, that already in Hadrianic times the right of nomination of successors in office lay with the respective officeholder, at least for prominent magistracies (40). Additionally, nominated candidates had the possibility of themselves proposing others in their place (55), a practice known in the West since the Flavian period and in the East since Hadrian. Equally compelling is her study of "the voluntary and involuntary nature of office-holding" (58-68), where she aptly remarks that "In a framework of competition and pressure, driven by forces ranging from elites seeking social recognition to non-elites aspiring to join the ranks of civic leadership, the boundaries between voluntary and involuntary service may not always have been clear even to contemporaries themselves" (65).

Turning to points of detail, in a study that deals with such a wide array of sources in both Greek and Latin, from both East and West, it is inevitable that not all interpretations of difficult texts will convince every specialist in every detail. Förg's discussion of an interesting passage from Hadrian's letter to the Koinon of the Macedonians (SEG 37.593; 33-36) is partly based on a misinterpretation of the phrase παρὰ τὸν τελευταῖον τῆς ἀρχῆς ἑαυτῶν χρόνον which actually means "in their last year in office," rather than "at the end of their term in office," as she translates. It is to her credit that she brings attention to this interesting passage, but it probably concerns a 30-day period given to candidates before their candidacy is publicly announced, so that they are forewarned rather than being surprised by the proposal of their name, or being proposed in absentia, without a chance to raise objections ad hoc. (Cf. 173, n. 468: this was a consideration in Aristides' case, too). The interpretation of μελλοπρύτανης as "intended (desired) prytanis" (35 with n. 88) also misses the mark, since this is much more likely interpreted simply as "future/designated" prytanis. Further, on p. 196, Förg bases her discussion on a translation of the phrase εἰ μή τι καὶ αὐτοὶ λάβοιεν that has been revised by C.P. Jones in ZPE 161, 2007, 153: we are, in fact, dealing with bribes. Note also that in TAM V.1 517, discussed on pp. 223-224, ἐκ χρημάτων λογιστείας Οὐ‹α›λερίου Ἀπολλωνίδου more likely points to means assembled through Apollonides, that is, money pledged/promised (policitationes, voluntary promises of contributions), which the other men mentioned in this inscription helped collect.

The editing is not flawless, with some omissions in the bibliography and a few typos here and there. The book would also have benefited from consistent cross-referencing between the appendix and the main text: references from the appendix to the relevant pages in the main text are absent, while references from the main text to the appendix are inconsistently provided.

But these are trivial criticisms in a book that makes a very significant contribution to understanding what went on at the ground level of municipal politics, skillfully evaluating an admirably diverse array of sources and interpreting them for the most part compellingly as it invites readers away from the sanitized narrative of honorific inscriptions to plunge into a wealth of colorful detail about civic life in ancient communities. This book is essential reading for anyone interested in life and politics in ancient societies, including students at all levels. Förg's prose is clear and engaging and will appeal equally to non-native readers of German.

Christina Kokkinia