SearchMy accountHelpBasket0 items

New Approaches to Ancient Greek Institutional History

Keeping to the Point in Athenian Forensic OratoryLaw, Character and Rhetoric

Edited by Edward M Harris and Alberto Esu

Format

£24.99

Out of stock

About this book

The first volume to connect legal institutions and court arguments in a series of close readings of selected speeches from the Attic Orators

  • Showcases new trends in the study of Athenian Law and Forensic Oratory by creating a fruitful dialogue with modern legal theory about the Rule of Law
  • Offers an analysis of the legal arguments and forensic techniques in the Attic Orators by combining institutional and legal analysis with the study of rhetoric, character, narrative, and moral concepts
  • Fosters a renewed theoretical and methodological reflection within Greek law and forensic rhetoric about the importance of legal institutions and how they should be studied
  • Individual chapters contribute to close reading of Athenian speeches and timely scholarly debate (e.g. violence and disrespect; rule of law and accountability; religion in Classical Athens, family and economy)
  • Provides ancient historians, literary scholars and legal historians with sophisticated and up-to-date interpretation of the key texts of Attic Oratory and promotes interdisciplinary debates about legal studies, ancient rhetoric and studies on ancient Greek behaviour and democracy


When a litigant initiated a lawsuit in Classical Athens, he submitted a written plaint to the relevant magistrate. This document contained his name, the name of the defendant, the legal procedure employed, and the specific violations of part of the law. If the magistrate accepted the plaint, the legal charges were read to the court before and after the litigants spoke, and the judges swore in their oath to vote only about the charges in the plaint, that is, whether the defendant had violated a specific law or not. In private suits, litigants took an oath to ‘keep to the point’, that is, discuss only the legal charges. In public cases litigants were under the same obligation. This volume examines several Athenian court speeches and show that litigants paid close attention to legal relevance in court. Consequently, the essays in this volume make the case for integrated approach to rhetoric and law emphasizing an institutional understanding of Athenian forensic oratory.

Reviews

A well-documented, clear and comprehensive analysis of the institutional aspect of Athenian forensic oratory, highlighting the relevance of legal arguments in Classical Athens. An essential reading for the study of Athenian forensic oratory, emphasising its inherently legal character and advocating for a balanced historical perspective, without the pitfall of comparing ancient Athenian practices to modern legal ideals.
This is an important book. By bridging the gap between law and rhetoric, it provides new methodological insights into the question of consistency in the legal arguments deployed by the Attic orators. Keeping to the point is a milestone in the debate on the rule of law in classical Athens.
Table of contents

Preface and Acknowledgements
List of Abbreviations
List of Contributors

Introduction
Alberto Esu and Edward M. Harris

Part I. Keeping to the Point in Major Public Procedures
1. The Rhetoric of the Graphē Paranomōn in the Trial on the Crown
Guy Westwood
2. Law, Office and Honour: Legal Relevance and Forensic Arguments in Demosthenes’ Against Androtion
Alberto Esu
3. Gossip, Morals and Poetry: Legal Relevance in Aeschines’ Against Timarchus
Matteo Barbato
4. How Does Lycurgus Keep to His Point? Legal and Rhetorical Relevance in Against Leocrates
Jakub Filonik
5. Institutions, Character and Relevance: Keeping to the Point in Dokimasiai
Peter A. O’Connell

Part II. Keeping to the Point on Hybris, Violence and Disenfranchisement
6. The Legal Charge in Demosthenes’ Against Meidias
Edward M. Harris
7. Did Ariston Keep to the Point? Dikē Aikeias and Graphē Hybreōs in Demosthenes’ Against Conon
Linda Rocchi
8. Trial and Error: Impiety and Legal Relevance in Andocides’ On the Mysteries
Rebecca Van Hove

Part III. Keeping to the Point on Inheritance and Damages
9. Character Evidence in Isaeus’ Speeches from Inheritance Disputes
Brenda Griffith-Williams
10. Against Timotheus: Keeping to the Point in a Suit for Damage
Giacinto Falco

Conclusions: Some Rules of Thumb in the Study of Athenian Forensic Oratory
Mirko Canevaro

Bibliography
General Index
Index Locorum

About the contributors

Edward M Harris

Edward M. Harris is Professor Emeritus of Ancient History at Durham University. He has published Aeschines and Athenian Politics (OUP, 1995), Democracy and the Rule of Law in Classical Athens (CUP, 2006), and The Rule of Law in Action in Democratic Athens (OUP, 2013). He has translated Demosthenes, Speeches 20-22 (UT Press, 2008) and Demosthenes Speeches 23-26 (UT Press, 2018) and co-edited with L. Rubinstein, The Law and the Courts in Ancient Greece (Duckworth, 2004) and with D. Leão and P. J. Rhodes, Law and Drama in Ancient Greece (Duckworth, 2010).

Alberto Esu

Alberto Esu is Lecturer in Classical Greek History at the University of Manchester. He has published on ancient Greek law and institutions, political thought, and Athenian oratory. He is the author of Divided Power in Ancient Greece: Decision-Making and Institutions in the Classical and Hellenistic Polis (2024) and has co-edited (with E. M. Harris), Keeping to the Point in Athenian Forensic Oratory: Law, Character and Rhetoric (EUP, 2025).

More in this series

See the series →