Prosecutor and Athenian Legal Procedure

The American Journal of Comparative Law, 1991

BOOK REVIEW 447 istration, human rights protection, the general principles of the civil law, the law of obligations, property, family law, urban and regional planning, successions commercial law, intellectual property, insurance law, business associations, admiralty and private maritime law, labor law, social insurance, judicial organization and civil procedure, conflicts of law, tax and investment incentives, and criminal law and procedure. Obviously, to have all of this in one volume requires summary and succinct description. The volume's major problem is that the one volume space limit constrains the scope and depth of each chapter. Yet the book provides tremendous comparative insight into a continental legal system. Indeed, it calls for many of the authors to produce a major comparative article or book in English on his or her topic of expertise. To provide a bit of the flavor, I will focus on a few of the chapters which I personally found of interest. Some were chosen because of their import for the comparativist as a bridge between the "civilian" and the common law models. Others I discuss, primarily because they are within my own interest and expertise. Some chapters, although done by masters of their subject, I do not discuss, because of my lack of expertise in the particular subject matter. Chapter 1,1 presents the Historical Development of Greek law and the Greek legal system, from the mysts of classical mythology and epic poetry to modern Greece. It provides the reader with more than that, however. It is a concise and pithy summary of the legal history of Greek Civilization. We are reminded that not only legal philosophy, but also comparative law, have their origins in the works of Plato, Aristotle and Theoprastus, legal philosophers concerned with the ideal of justice, the sources and function of law. We are also reminded that the origin of systematic elaboration on a legal system is to be found in the works of the Roman jurisconsults.2 We learn that some things have not changed that much, even since the Classical period: although tribunals were not bound by precedent, judges and juries were impressed by it and prior cases were frequently cited in court. Demosthenes not only cited cases in his speeches, but also strived to distinguish adverse precedent.3 We even see some affinity to ourselves: Aristophanies' comedies show how Athenians were fond of litigation, regarding it as a pleasant pastime.4 We also note that Greek law is the basis for Continental Civil Law and for Canon law, thereby influencing England, Continental Europe and America, as well.5 This is due to the early Greek con

American Journal of Philology, 1998

For archaic Greece, outside of Attica, cp. E. Cantarella, Studi sull' omicìdio in diritto greco e romano (Milan, 1976), 81ff. The Greek preoccupation with procedural rules was both innovative and important, as is properly stressed by M. Gagarin, Early Greek Law (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 1986), 12ff" 72ff" 86ff" 106ff. 2 For the historical origins of modern law, see (by way of introduction) M. Bloch,

Classics Ireland, 2007

Classical World, 1999

For archaic Greece, outside of Attica, cp. E. Cantarella, Studi sull' omicìdio in diritto greco e romano (Milan, 1976), 81ff. The Greek preoccupation with procedural rules was both innovative and important, as is properly stressed by M. Gagarin, Early Greek Law (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 1986), 12ff" 72ff" 86ff" 106ff. 2 For the historical origins of modern law, see (by way of introduction) M. Bloch,

Journal of Ancient Civilizations, 2018

This is a survey of recent work in Ancient Greek Law and covers several areas such as the unity of Greek Law, law in the Archaic period, literacy and Greek Law, legislation (nomothesia), the sources for Greek Law, homicide law at Athens, law and economy, and law and religion.

www.sfu.ca/nomoi, 2022

Dike, 2022

This paper analyses Euxitheus' legal arguments in the trial against Eubulides (Dem. 57) and proposes a new analysis of the ephesis procedure. Within this framework it argues that Euxitheus' forensic strategy is not only relevant to the question at issue-to prove his status as a legitimate citizen (gnesios polites), as someone born from two citizen parents-but is also characterised by a strict adherence to the laws and procedure involving his case. The relation between rhetoric and law emerging in Euxitheus' speech reveals a rhetorical strategy grounded on legal evidence and documents. This essay will especially focus on two important arguments in the speech, that is, the use of religious arguments and the theme of the plot against Euxitheus, which prove extremely enlightening in showing the how the relevant procedure shaped Euxitheus' arguments. To this aim section II compares Dem. 57 and other probable cases of ephesis in order to reassess how the ephesis procedure worked when it arose from a diapsephisis. Section III shows that the arguments used by Euxitheus are to be considered relevant to winning an ephesis case in court. The entire speech is effectively constructed to demonstrate 'what is true' against Eubulides' 'false accusations' and 'defamatory statements' (57.1), that is, to use legal arguments against 'the sykophant's game': to allege everything but prove nothing'.