诉讼与合作:古典雅典法庭上的支持演讲者作者:Lene Rubinstein(书评)

IF 0.2 0 CLASSICS
C. Cooper
{"title":"诉讼与合作:古典雅典法庭上的支持演讲者作者:Lene Rubinstein(书评)","authors":"C. Cooper","doi":"10.1353/MOU.2002.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to Lene Rubinstein \"the synegoros has occupied a marginal position in modern scholarship on Athenian law and litigation\" (14). This has now changed: through a detailed and carefully argued study of the role of supporting speakers in Athenian litigation she has successfully shown that synegorial activity was a widespread practice largely ignored by more recent scholars. Now in any reconstruction of Athenian litigation \"the synegoros must be moved from the margin to the centre of Athenian legal proceedings\" (233). In the first chapter Rubinstein argues that modern scholars have failed to understand the role of synegoroi. They have either regarded the synegoros as a kind of \"super-witness\" who shows his solidarity with the main litigant. or at the other extreme as a \"vicarious voice\" of the main litigant (17). What modern discussions have failed to consider is \"the possibility that the rhetorical performance in court could be genuinely shared between several individuals\" and that litigation was in fact a team effort where the synegoros did not see himself exclusively as a mouthpiece of the main litigant or was merely there in court to display his willingness to back the main litigant (17). As she notes, \"the existence of truly joint litigation at Athens may force us to reconsider what we actually mean when stating that 'an Athenian litigant was expected to plead his own case\"· (18). And here Rubinstein takes issue with the current reconstruction (advocated by Cohen, Todd, Christ, among others) that sees legal agones as trials of strength between elite individuals competing for honour and prestige. Part of the problem with this simple agonistic modeL as Rubinstein sees it, is that it downplays the real differences between public and private suits. Both types merely become intensely fought \"personal agones between individual members of the elite\" (19), the only difference being that a public action represents a more advanced stage in the escalating feud between two litigants. Under such a reconstruction of Athenian politics and litigation","PeriodicalId":52031,"journal":{"name":"Mouseion-Journal of the Classical Association of Canada","volume":"14 1","pages":"71 - 76"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Litigation and Cooperation: Supporting Speakers in the Courts of Classical Athens by Lene Rubinstein (review)\",\"authors\":\"C. Cooper\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/MOU.2002.0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"According to Lene Rubinstein \\\"the synegoros has occupied a marginal position in modern scholarship on Athenian law and litigation\\\" (14). This has now changed: through a detailed and carefully argued study of the role of supporting speakers in Athenian litigation she has successfully shown that synegorial activity was a widespread practice largely ignored by more recent scholars. Now in any reconstruction of Athenian litigation \\\"the synegoros must be moved from the margin to the centre of Athenian legal proceedings\\\" (233). In the first chapter Rubinstein argues that modern scholars have failed to understand the role of synegoroi. They have either regarded the synegoros as a kind of \\\"super-witness\\\" who shows his solidarity with the main litigant. or at the other extreme as a \\\"vicarious voice\\\" of the main litigant (17). What modern discussions have failed to consider is \\\"the possibility that the rhetorical performance in court could be genuinely shared between several individuals\\\" and that litigation was in fact a team effort where the synegoros did not see himself exclusively as a mouthpiece of the main litigant or was merely there in court to display his willingness to back the main litigant (17). As she notes, \\\"the existence of truly joint litigation at Athens may force us to reconsider what we actually mean when stating that 'an Athenian litigant was expected to plead his own case\\\"· (18). And here Rubinstein takes issue with the current reconstruction (advocated by Cohen, Todd, Christ, among others) that sees legal agones as trials of strength between elite individuals competing for honour and prestige. Part of the problem with this simple agonistic modeL as Rubinstein sees it, is that it downplays the real differences between public and private suits. Both types merely become intensely fought \\\"personal agones between individual members of the elite\\\" (19), the only difference being that a public action represents a more advanced stage in the escalating feud between two litigants. Under such a reconstruction of Athenian politics and litigation\",\"PeriodicalId\":52031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mouseion-Journal of the Classical Association of Canada\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"71 - 76\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mouseion-Journal of the Classical Association of Canada\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/MOU.2002.0007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"CLASSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mouseion-Journal of the Classical Association of Canada","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/MOU.2002.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

根据Lene Rubinstein的说法,“synegoros在现代关于雅典法律和诉讼的学术研究中占据了边缘地位”(14)。这种情况现在已经改变了:通过对雅典诉讼中辅助发言人角色的详细而仔细的研究,她成功地表明,主教活动是一种广泛的做法,在很大程度上被近代学者所忽视。现在,在雅典诉讼的任何重建中,“必须将会议从雅典法律诉讼的边缘移到中心”(233)。在第一章中,鲁宾斯坦认为,现代学者未能理解synnegoroi的作用。他们要么把犹太律师视为一种“超级证人”,表现出与主要诉讼当事人的团结;或者在另一个极端,作为主要诉讼当事人的“替代声音”(17)。现代讨论没有考虑到的是“法庭上的修辞表现可以在几个人之间真正共享的可能性”,而且诉讼实际上是一种团队努力,在这种情况下,犹太代表并不仅仅把自己看作是主要诉讼当事人的喉舌,或者仅仅是在法庭上显示他支持主要诉讼当事人的意愿(17)。正如她所指出的,“雅典真正的共同诉讼的存在可能会迫使我们重新考虑当我们说‘雅典诉讼当事人被期望为自己的案件辩护’时,我们的实际意思是什么”·(18)。在这里,鲁宾斯坦对当前的重构(由科恩、托德、克里斯特等人倡导)提出了异议,这些重构将法律诉讼视为精英们为荣誉和声望而竞争的力量考验。在鲁宾斯坦看来,这个简单的竞争模式的部分问题在于,它淡化了公共诉讼和私人诉讼之间的真正区别。这两种类型都只是激烈的“精英个人之间的私人恩怨”(19),唯一的区别是,公共诉讼代表了两个诉讼当事人之间不断升级的恩怨的更高级阶段。在这样的重建下,雅典的政治和诉讼
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Litigation and Cooperation: Supporting Speakers in the Courts of Classical Athens by Lene Rubinstein (review)
According to Lene Rubinstein "the synegoros has occupied a marginal position in modern scholarship on Athenian law and litigation" (14). This has now changed: through a detailed and carefully argued study of the role of supporting speakers in Athenian litigation she has successfully shown that synegorial activity was a widespread practice largely ignored by more recent scholars. Now in any reconstruction of Athenian litigation "the synegoros must be moved from the margin to the centre of Athenian legal proceedings" (233). In the first chapter Rubinstein argues that modern scholars have failed to understand the role of synegoroi. They have either regarded the synegoros as a kind of "super-witness" who shows his solidarity with the main litigant. or at the other extreme as a "vicarious voice" of the main litigant (17). What modern discussions have failed to consider is "the possibility that the rhetorical performance in court could be genuinely shared between several individuals" and that litigation was in fact a team effort where the synegoros did not see himself exclusively as a mouthpiece of the main litigant or was merely there in court to display his willingness to back the main litigant (17). As she notes, "the existence of truly joint litigation at Athens may force us to reconsider what we actually mean when stating that 'an Athenian litigant was expected to plead his own case"· (18). And here Rubinstein takes issue with the current reconstruction (advocated by Cohen, Todd, Christ, among others) that sees legal agones as trials of strength between elite individuals competing for honour and prestige. Part of the problem with this simple agonistic modeL as Rubinstein sees it, is that it downplays the real differences between public and private suits. Both types merely become intensely fought "personal agones between individual members of the elite" (19), the only difference being that a public action represents a more advanced stage in the escalating feud between two litigants. Under such a reconstruction of Athenian politics and litigation
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信