We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
It is widely recognized that the procedural complexity of the Athenian administration of justice provides us with an important key to understanding how the legal system worked in practice. The way in which individual statutes were framed meant that a citizen who wished to bring a complaint before a court would often have a range of different procedures to choose from, each of which would have different consequences for the defendant if he was found guilty as charged. What has not attracted similar attention from modern scholars is the extent to which the choice of procedure affected the rhetorical strategies employed by the litigants involved in the action. Nor has there been much discussion of the question whether the nature of the dispute itself affected the way in which the litigants were expected to present their cases before the courts.