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 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).

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.

• Preface and AcknowledgementsList of Abbreviations List of ContributorsIntroductionAlberto Esu and Edward M. HarrisPart I. Keeping to the Point in Major Public Procedures 1. The Rhetoric of the Graphē Paranomōn in the Trial on the CrownGuy Westwood2. Law, Office and Honour: Legal Relevance and Forensic Arguments in Demosthenes’ Against AndrotionAlberto Esu3. Gossip, Morals and Poetry: Legal Relevance in Aeschines’ Against TimarchusMatteo Barbato 4. How Does Lycurgus Keep to His Point? Legal and Rhetorical Relevance in Against LeocratesJakub Filonik5. Institutions, Character and Relevance: Keeping to the Point in DokimasiaiPeter A. O’ConnellPart II. Keeping to the Point on Hybris, Violence and Disenfranchisement 6. The Legal Charge in Demosthenes’ Against MeidiasEdward M. Harris 7. Did Ariston Keep to the Point? Dikē Aikeias and Graphē Hybreōs in Demosthenes’ Against CononLinda Rocchi8. Trial and Error: Impiety and Legal Relevance in Andocides’ On the MysteriesRebecca Van Hove Part III. Keeping to the Point on Inheritance and Damages 9. Character Evidence in Isaeus’ Speeches from Inheritance DisputesBrenda Griffith-Williams10. Against Timotheus: Keeping to the Point in a Suit for DamageGiacinto FalcoConclusions: Some Rules of Thumb in the Study of Athenian Forensic OratoryMirko CanevaroBibliographyGeneral IndexIndex Locorum

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 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).

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.

• Preface and AcknowledgementsList of Abbreviations List of ContributorsIntroductionAlberto Esu and Edward M. HarrisPart I. Keeping to the Point in Major Public Procedures 1. The Rhetoric of the Graphē Paranomōn in the Trial on the CrownGuy Westwood2. Law, Office and Honour: Legal Relevance and Forensic Arguments in Demosthenes’ Against AndrotionAlberto Esu3. Gossip, Morals and Poetry: Legal Relevance in Aeschines’ Against TimarchusMatteo Barbato 4. How Does Lycurgus Keep to His Point? Legal and Rhetorical Relevance in Against LeocratesJakub Filonik5. Institutions, Character and Relevance: Keeping to the Point in DokimasiaiPeter A. O’ConnellPart II. Keeping to the Point on Hybris, Violence and Disenfranchisement 6. The Legal Charge in Demosthenes’ Against MeidiasEdward M. Harris 7. Did Ariston Keep to the Point? Dikē Aikeias and Graphē Hybreōs in Demosthenes’ Against CononLinda Rocchi8. Trial and Error: Impiety and Legal Relevance in Andocides’ On the MysteriesRebecca Van Hove Part III. Keeping to the Point on Inheritance and Damages 9. Character Evidence in Isaeus’ Speeches from Inheritance DisputesBrenda Griffith-Williams10. Against Timotheus: Keeping to the Point in a Suit for DamageGiacinto FalcoConclusions: Some Rules of Thumb in the Study of Athenian Forensic OratoryMirko CanevaroBibliographyGeneral IndexIndex Locorum