All three were familiar with the republican tradition,
and none saw lot as being something odd, explicable only by the
distinctive features of Greek culture. To them it was an institution
capable of being analysed in a general way, and with relevance for
other cultures and systems of government. Lot, in their eyes, was
one of the tried and tested methods of conferring power in a nonhereditary
manner. It fell into the same category as election, and
they compared the characteristics and effects of the two institutions.