希腊古典时期诉讼制度研究
详细信息    本馆镜像全文|  推荐本文 |  |   获取CNKI官网全文
摘要
时下有一种观念认为,研究西方的哲学、政治学、文学、自然科学应当溯源于古希腊,而研究西方的法律制度则应当从古罗马开始。受这种观点的影响,作为西方文明的历史家园,古希腊的法律制度和文化在我国外国法制史研究中并没有得到应有的重视,特别是对于古希腊的诉讼制度而言,相关的研究更是寥若晨星。但事实上,古希腊诉讼制度上承埃及和两河流域之源,下启罗马之流,在东西方法律文明之间架起了一座沟通的桥梁,并通过罗马法传播到世界各地,影响至今,其历史作用之巨无法估量。
     本文试图从法社会学的视角,在古典时期希腊的整体社会背景下对诉讼制度及其司法实践进行综合性的考察,这一研究理路不同于传统法史学研究“对制度的描述”,而是转向“对司法实践的描述”。不仅探究相应的法律条文,还对其在实践过程中的具体运用,社会政治、经济、文化背景与诉讼制度及其司法实践之间的相互作用进行探讨。具体而言,除导论和余论外,本文的结构安排如下:
     第一章主要对雅典古典时期的陪审法庭制度进行考察。陪审法庭(heliaea)由梭伦于公元前六世纪初改革时初创,其在雅典城邦的政治生活中起着重要的作用,是雅典城邦的最高司法机关和监察机关,承担着司法审判的重任。本文以公元前462年、410年、340年、322年这四个时间节点为线索,对陪审法庭制度在雅典城邦的确立过程进行梳理,并对其具体运作程序、组织结构、人员配置以及庭审设备进行分析。指出陪审法庭不仅是雅典城邦最重要的司法审判机构,而且还对城邦的立法和行政活动进行监督,对维护雅典民主政治体制起着不可替代的巨大作用。最后,对雅典的陪审法庭制度进行评价,指出陪审法庭作为雅典城邦民主制的组成部分,既有优点,也有缺点,在具有灵活性、民主性、代表性等优势的同时,它也存在着非专业性、陪审团权力过大、判决易受舆论左右等缺陷。
     第二章主要对古代雅典的控诉程序及其运作情况进行梳理分析,指出在古典时期的雅典,大多数的案件都没有公诉人,根据诉讼程序的不同,雅典人把所有案件分为自诉案件(dikai,亦可译为私诉案件,即侵犯个人利益,只有利害关系人才可以对此类案件提出诉讼)和代诉案件(graphai,亦可译为公诉案件,即触犯城邦利益,所有雅典公民都可以对此类案件提出诉讼)两类,上述分类虽然不同于现代诉讼制度中民事案件与刑事案件的分类方法,但是在形式上它们具有一定的相似性,可以把前者视为后者的原初形态。在雅典,只要某种行为被认为危害了整个城邦的利益,任何自由人都可以提起代诉案件的诉讼,但被剥夺公民权利者除外。此外,某些案件的诉讼只能由雅典公民提起。在雅典,任何一个全权公民都有权扮演类似现在公诉人的角色,向陪审法庭提出指控。而且,雅典为了鼓励广大公民参与诉讼,使他们能够积极起诉犯罪,对起诉获胜者给予丰厚的奖励。在物质利益的驱动下,到公元前五世纪后半期,雅典逐渐形成了一个职业控诉者阶层(sykophantes),这些告密者通常精通法津,知道如何通过诉讼来获得最大的利益,有时甚至会为了获取报酬而采取不正当的手段。本章通过对“sykophantes”的词源分析,梳理了雅典职业控诉者阶层产生的历史背景及过程。指出,职业控诉者阶层的出现是雅典民主政治的一个必然产物。因为,根据雅典城邦民主政治的制度设计,必须有一些毫无顾虑的公民来揭发违犯城邦法律、侵害城邦利益的行为,对活跃在城邦政治舞台上的公众人物实施监督。虽然职业控诉者阶层的存在为雅典民主与司法公正作出了相当的贡献,但是告密者为谋取私人利益而胡乱揭发或故意诽谤的行为却给雅典社会造成了巨大的负面影响。可以说,由于告密者的存在,在雅典,诽谤成为司空见惯之事。
     第三章主要对雅典控辩技巧的发展进行了考察,指出,在古典时期的雅典,虽然没有我们今天意义上可以代替双方诉讼当事人出庭控告或辩护的律师。然而,尽管如此,古代雅典还是产生了律师阶层的初步萌芽,他们通常被称为演说家。而且,在雅典的司法审判中,案件的一般正义要重于严格的法律条文。在一个没有主审法官,在法律和事实两个方面均由非专业的陪审团来作出裁决的审判方式中,这是必然的结果。这具有某些显著的影响,其中之一就是导致了法庭控辩技术的发展。概言之,在雅典,当事人及其代理人试图在法庭上说服陪审员作出有利于己方的判决所采用的诉讼技巧是多种多样的。有的是通过在演说中称赞自己或贬抑对手的品质,有的是通过反复提醒陪审员牢记自己就职时所做的宣誓,有的是通过力陈自己或自己的先辈对城邦所作的贡献,并援引相应的公益捐赠记录(liturgy),有的是通过将诉讼内容与城邦和民众的利益密切联系起来,强调城邦公民团体的团结统一,有的则是充分利用陪审员们的怜悯心通过语言、动作等来恳请他们的同情,或者用幽默诙谐的语言博取他们的好感,进而说服他们以便赢得诉讼等等,不一而足。而且,本文通过对留存至今的阿提卡演说作家演说词的实证分析,指出诉讼当事人会根据适用的不同诉讼程序、诉讼形式,以及己方在诉讼中的不同位置,采取不同的诉讼策略与技巧。与之相对应的是,如果被告在陪审法庭的案件审理过程中自命清高,不屑采用一些诉讼技巧,不愿向陪审员们祈求同情,那么等待他的可能是灾难性的判决,“苏格拉底的审判”就是一个例证。
     第四章主要对雅典古典时期的非讼解决机制(Alternative Dispute Resolution)进行了系统的整理,认为在古典时期,雅典存在有誓言挑战、仲裁程序以及刑讯挑战这三种非诉解决机制,并对这三种机制创立的历史背景、发展脉络、运作程序、受案范围,以及实施成效进行了梳理分析,指出,在古典时期的雅典,非讼解决机制在纠纷争议解决方面发挥着不容忽视的重要作用,有效缓解了陪审法庭的压力,弥补了其固有缺陷,并缓和了社会的矛盾,维护了城邦的稳定。最后,第五章和第六章对斯巴达司法制度进行了系统的整理研究,指出虽然古典时期斯巴达司法制度的发展水平不如雅典来的发达完善,还保留着较浓厚的神明裁判成份,也没有建立雅典古典时期那种完善的陪审法庭制度。但它的一些具体制度、原则也有其独特可取之处。斯巴达古典时期也出现了“公诉”和“私诉”的区分,完整的法庭建制,律师阶层的初步萌芽,完善的私人仲裁程序。尤其是监察官的创设,使得斯巴达拥有了一个常设的监察和公诉机构,其广泛庞大的职权,可以被视为现代检察官制度的原初形态。古代斯巴达司法制度作为古希腊法律文明的代表,对于后世司法制度的发展有着无可估量的巨大作用。
Abstract:Nowadays there is a perception that the study of Western philosophy, political science, literature, science should be traceable to ancient Greek, while the study of Western legal systems should start from ancient Rome. Affected by the impact of this view, the ancient Greece legal system and culture as one source of Western civilization did not receive much attention in China's Foreign Legal History study; especially there was very little relevant research for the ancient Greece litigation system. But in fact, the ancient Greece legal system was starting from Egypt and Mesopotamia, and the next fused by Rome culture, it is the bridge of the communication between the East and West legal culture, it spread around the world through the Roman law, it has an impact so far and its historical effect is giant.
     This paper attempts to undertake a comprehensive study of ancient Greece's litigation and judicial practice in the classical period of Greece, using the perspective of sociology of law. This study is different from the traditional legal historical research of "the description of the system”, it’s about "the description of the judicial practice." It Not only explored the relevant legal provisions in old days, but also the practice and the process of these specific theories, and includes the social, political, economic and cultural backgrounds, the interaction between legal system and judicial practice. In particular, besides the introduction and ending part, the paper is structured as follows:
     ChapterⅠmainly study on the heliaea system in classical period of Athens. heliaea was created by Solon in the 6th century BC, in the beginning of the reform. Heliaea plays an important role in Athens’s city-state political system, it’s the supreme judicial authority and supervisor organs, and it has the heavy responsibility of the judicial judgment. In this paper, there are four important time points: 462 years BC, 410 years, 340 years, 322 years, from these time point we could find the course of Heliaea establishment. The paper also analyses its specific operational procedures, organizational structure, staffing and equipment. And the conclusion is that the Heliaea is the most important judicial organ, and also important for the city's legislative and administrative activities and plays an irreplaceable role of a democratic political system of the citizen. Finally, it’s about the value of the Heliaea system in Athens court system, it’s an integral part of democracy of Athens, it has both advantages and disadvantages, advantages are the flexible, democratic and representative and the disadvantages are non-professional nature and too much power, the verdict vulnerable to being swayed by public opinion.
     Chapter II mainly analyses the complain procedure system and it’s operation instance in Athens, pointing out that there are no public prosecutor in ancient Athens in most of the cases , according to the different procedures, the Athenians divided all the cases into two categories :the private prosecution cases (dikai, can also be translated into Private cases, as violation of personal interests, only interested or the related people can bring a lawsuit), and Proctor prosecution cases (graphai, can also be translated into public prosecution cases, as violated the interests of all citizens, all the Athens can bring a lawsuit), although the two categories of cases are different from the modern classification in civil and criminal cases, but they have a certain degree of similarity in the form, the classification of Athens can be original shape of modern classification. In Athens, any person in the city can bring a lawsuit as long as certain torts are considered to be a danger to the interests of the entire city, but the people who were deprived of their civil rights are the exception. In addition, some cases of litigation could bring only by the citizens of Athens. In Athens, any citizen who has the full politic right played an important role to bring accusation to the jury court as the public prosecutor in the lawsuit. There are rich rewards for the winner of the litigation which could encourage the citizen take into the part of litigation and bring the all the crime into the court. Driven by these material interests, there appeared a special estate of people who provide the complainant (sykophantes) services for other people in the latter half of the 5th century BC, they master the legal knowledge and know how to obtain the maximum benefit by litigation, and sometimes they use the improper means to get the pay. This chapter discusses the history background and the process of the "sykophantes" establishment by analysis the etymology of "sykophantes”. The paper pointed out that the estate of professional legal service is an inevitable product of democracy in Athens. The reasons of this conclusion are as follows: according to the democracy system design of Athens city-state, there must be a group of citizen who could disclose the act that violates the city law and against the interests of the city; also they could supervise the political public characters. Although the existence of sykophantes has made a considerable contribution for the Athens democracy and justice, the randomness of sykophantes gave a negative effects to the Athens sociality which will random disclose the legal act or intention defamation for personal benefits, so sometimes there was common that there were too much defamatory cases in the Athens.
     Chapter III is mainly about the development of defense and prosecution techniques in ancient Athens. The paper discusses that there is no lawyer of modern society who could appear in court and accused or defense for the litigants in ancient Athens, but there is an original pattern of lawyer in ancient Athens which usually be called of public speakers. In the sense of judicial judgments in ancient Athens, the real justice of the case is more important than the strict legal provisions or the code. This is the inevitable end of the special judicial mode which has no chief umpire and no professional group for both the legal and fact trial. This has some significant impact for the legal system, one of which is the high development of court prosecution and the defense. There are lots of skills by which the parties and the agents convince the jurors to make the decision for their own benefits in ancient Athens. The skills maybe displayed as praised themselves or detract the other party, also maybe reputably put the swear of the judge into the listening course, maybe put some public service liturgy or contribution to the city of their predecessors on the desk of court, maybe use the content of the litigation to leak the public order together, maybe stress on group comity and unification, maybe use some commiserate words for the sympathize of the court, maybe use the language of his humor to win their favor, and then persuade them to made the party, maybe some other pattern. The paper discusses that the party will use different skills and strategy when they have the different lawsuit, according to the different procedure and different cases, or the different role in the lawsuit, the conclusion is demonstrated by famous speaker Attica‘s speech. By contrast, if the defendant insist on the point of their own in the court and they are not reluctant to pray for compassion, the sentence of the case will catastrophic for them ,and "the trial of Socrates" is an example .
     Chapter IV is mainly about the Alternative Dispute Resolution system of the ancient Athens in the special classic period. The paper discusses that there are three special Alternative Dispute Resolution measures: challenges for the oath, the arbitration proceedings and challenges for inquisition by torture. And the paper analyses their history background, development lines, running procedure and the jurisdiction of the special measures. The end of this chapter pointed out that the Alternative Dispute Resolution system play an important role in the classical period of Athens, and the Alternative Dispute Resolution measures should not be overlooked and it can effectively alleviate the pressure of the court, and make up for the court’s shortcomings.
     Finally, Chapter V and VI are mainly about the Sparta judicial system. It is said that the development level of the judicial system in the classic period of ancient Sparta is not as good as the ancient Athens, and there still have some parts of gods’judgments and there is no jury court system as well as the ancient Athens. There is also some special rules and principles in the ancient Sparta judicial system. In ancient Sparta, there is the classification of“public lawsuit”and“private lawsuit”, and there is the integrated courtroom system and the appeared of lawyer, also have perfect arbitration system. Especially in the permanent monitoring and prosecution agencies, the prosecutor institution is a creation, it have large power and is an original conformation of the modern prosecutor system. The judicial system of ancient Sparta is the representative of the ancient Greece’s legal civilization and has a great effect for the later development of the judicial system.
引文
1 [法]克洛德?德尔玛:《欧洲文明》,郑鹿年译,上海人民出版社1988年版,第3页。转引自何勤华主编:《外国法制史》,法律出版社2001年版,第63页。
    2胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第39页。
    3胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第5页。
    4 [意]朱塞佩·格罗索:《罗马法史》,黄风译,中国政法大学出版社1994年版,第77页。
    1需要指出的是,黄洋、晏绍祥老师同时也认为,“历史发展本身是没有分期的。所以这样的分期虽然是一代代西方学者严谨而细致研究的成果,是依据希腊历史发展各个阶段显示出来的突出特征而划分的,但并不意味着这些分期就不存在问题。”黄洋、晏绍祥:《希腊史研究入门》,北京大学出版社2009年版,第7页。
    2 [英]基托:《希腊人》,徐卫翔、黄韬译,上海人民出版社1998年版,第59页;缪鸿孺、金萍:《雅典和斯巴达城邦的政体及启示》,载《江西教育学院学报(综合)》第27卷第6期。
    3顾准:《顾准文稿》,中国青年出版社2002年版,第462页。
    4典型的希腊城邦领土面积大约为五十至一百平方公里之间,城邦之间通常以山河海洋等为自然边界。不仅范围小,而且城邦的人数也不多。希腊单个城邦公民人数大致在六百二十五至一千二百五十人之间,总人口一般在数千人,达到数万人的并不多。(参见徐大同主编:《西方政治思想史》,天津教育出版社2001年版,第18页。)作为“小国寡民”典型的希腊城邦,可能包括以下三种主要因素:城市(不管有无城墙,但要有市),统治政权(行使统治管理)及公民集体(权力的主体)。缪鸿孺、金萍:《雅典和斯巴达城邦的政体及启示》,载《江西教育学院学报(综合)》第27卷第6期。
    1包括拉哥尼亚和美塞尼亚。有关希腊城邦的详细介绍,见孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第22—23页;缪鸿孺、金萍:《雅典和斯巴达城邦的政体及启示》,载《江西教育学院学报(综合)》第27卷第6期。
    2孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第42页。
    1 P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007.
    2 [古希腊]希罗多德:《历史》,王嘉隽译,商务印书馆1959年版。
    3 [古希腊]修昔底德:《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》,谢德风译,商务印书馆1978年版。
    4 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版。
    5 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版。
    6 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《修辞学》,罗念生译,三联书店1996年版。
    7 Xenophon, History of My Times(Hellenica), translated with an introduction by rex warner, Penguin Books 1966.
    8 [古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版。
    9 [古希腊]柏拉图:《法律篇》,张智仁、何勤华译,上海人民出版社2001年版。
    10例如[古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿里斯托芬戏剧二种》,罗念生译,湖南人民出版社1981年版;[古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿卡奈人骑士》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版;[古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《云马蜂》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版。
    1胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第8页。
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版。
    3 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Boeotia, Classical Philology, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Jan., 1945), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in Rural Attica, Classical Philology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jan., 1928), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in the Age of Hesiod, Classical Philology, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Jan., 1912), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7 Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in the Age of Homer, Classical Philology, Vol. 6, No. 1 (Jan., 1911), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    8 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in the Delphic Amphictyony, Classical Philology, Vol. 38, No. 1 (Jan., 1943), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    9 Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Athenian Oligarchies, Classical Philology, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Jul., 1926), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    10 Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Pisistratus, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    11 E. Poste, Attic Judicature, The Classical Review, Vol. 10, No. 3 (Apr., 1896), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    12 J. W. Headlam, Attic Law, The Classical Review, Vol. 7, No. 12 (Feb., 1893), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    13 Christopher Carey, The Shape of Athenian Laws, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 48, No. 1 (1998), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Gorham Phillips Stevens, The Periclean Entrance Court of the Acropolis of Athens, Hesperia, Vol. 5, No. 4 (1936), Published by American School of Classical Studies at Athens.
    3 Raphael Sealey, The Athenian Courts for Homicide, Classical Philology, Vol. 78, No. 4 (Oct., 1983), Publishedby The University of Chicago Press.
    4 E. Poste, Juror-Panels at Athens, The Classical Review, Vol. 7, No. 5 (May, 1893), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    5 Gertrude Smith, The Jurisdiction of the Areopagus, Classical Philology, Vol. 22, No. 1 (Jan., 1927), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Gertrude Smith, Dicasts in the Ephetic Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    8 Alfred Paul Dorjahn, Anticipation of Arguments in Athenian Courts, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 66 (1935), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    9 Alfred Paul Dorjahn, Intimidation in Athenian Courts, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 66 (1935), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    10 Robert J. Bonner, Did Women Testify in Homicide Cases at Athens Classical Philology, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Apr., 1906), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    11 Robert J. Bonner, Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    12 Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    13 Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3张帆:《古希腊陪审制度初探》,西南政法大学2005年硕士学位论文,第1—2页。
    4胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第1—2页。
    5蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第1页。
    1高红清:《程序民主的完美典范:雅典陪审法庭》,载《邢台职业技术学院学报》第23卷第4期。
    2李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    3靳艳:《雅典城邦法治论》,载《兰州大学学报》2001年第2期。
    4蔡连增:《论公元前四世纪雅典陪审法庭的政治权力》,载《厦门大学学报》1997年第1期。
    5黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期。
    6吴爱孙、胡志刚:《苏格拉底悲剧成因探析》,载《哈尔滨学院学报》第27卷第10期。
    7徐琳:《苏格拉底之死与雅典民主政治》,载《历史教学》1998年第10期。
    8梁治平:《从苏格拉底之死看希腊法的悲剧》,载《读书》1987年第8期。
    9崔丽娜:《古典时期雅典的投票选举制度》,首都师范大学出版社2007年版。
    1祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    2晏绍祥:《古典斯巴达政治制度中的民主因素》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    3顾准:《顾准文稿》,中国青年出版社2002年版。
    4杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版。
    5黄洋、晏绍祥:《希腊史研究入门》,北京大学出版社2009年版。
    6 [美]萨拜因:《政治学说史》,盛葵阳、崔妙因译,商务印书馆1986年版,第29页。
    1李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    1 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第122页。
    2 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第255—256页。
    1胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第13页。
    2孙运德:《古代希腊的民主形式》,载《郑州航空工业管理学院学报(社会科学版)》第25卷第6期。
    3 P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.154-155.
    4 Antiphon, VI. On the Chorus-Member, 49. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.155.
    1 [美]萨拜因:《政治学说史》,盛葵阳、崔妙因译,商务印书馆1986年版,第28页。
    2胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第13页。孙运德老师认为,雅典五百人议事会的前身是古希腊时期的氏族民主议事会,这种议事会是氏族民主社会中常设的权力机构,最初由氏族的首领们组成,后来则由氏族成员选举产生的一部分代表组成,这些人后来便逐步发展成为氏族中的贵族。孙运德:《古代希腊的民主形式》,载《郑州航空工业管理学院学报(社会科学版)》第25卷第6期。
    3 [美]斯科特·戈登:《控制国家》,应奇译,江苏人民出版社2001年版,第72页。
    4 [美]萨拜因:《政治学说史》,盛葵阳、崔妙因译,商务印书馆1986年版,第29页。
    5胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第13—14页;[美]萨拜因:《政治学说史》,盛葵阳、崔妙因译,商务印书馆1986年版,第28—30页;孙运德:《古代希腊的民主形式》,载《郑州航空工业管理学院学报(社会科学版)》第25卷第6期。
    1 [法]克琳娜·库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第104页。
    2 Gr. Staatsalt2. I (1893), p. 153; Eng. tr. p. 139.吉尔伯特的观点也与以下论文中的观点相一致:E. Meyer, Geschichte des Alt. ii (1893), p. 659; Beloch, Gr. Geschichte, I, 1 (1924), p. 365; Busolt, Gr. Geschichte, II (1895), pp. 283-287; Lipsius, Das Attische Recht und Rechtsverfahren (1905), pp. 27-30; Schoemann, Gr. Alt., I (1897), p. 348; Wilamowitz, Aristoteles und Athen (1893), pp. 59 ff.; Greenidge, Greek Const. Hist. (1914), p. 137; Bonner, Class. Phil. xix (1924), 359; Gertrude Smith, ib. 353,贯穿整篇文章始终的推断是陪审法庭存在于梭伦时代;Schulthess, Das Attische Volksgericht (1921), p. 4. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Ath. Pol. 7, 3; 9, 1; Pol. 1274, a, 3-5; Lys. x, 15-16; Plut. Solon, 18, 2; Comp. Solon. et Pop. 2, 1; Dem. xxIV, 148, 212; Poll. VIII, 53. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4它是相当可能的,就像Linforth (Solon the Athenian (1919), pp. 7-13)暗示的那样,梭伦诗作的完整版本在公元前四世纪广为流传。然而,看起来似乎如果有任何有关司法改革的参考文献存在的话,昂德拉逊(Androtion)和亚里士多德一定会对其进行记载。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5爱德考克(F. E. Adcock)说:“《雅典政制》一书有关梭伦章节的来源,”Klio, XII (1912), 1-16; Linforth: op. cit. pp. 19-20;马修(G. Mathieu)在对《雅典政制》(ed. Les Belles Lettres, 1922)一书进行介绍的过程中声称亚里士多德的资料来源于不同的和具有党派性的渠道。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Goettling, Aristoteles: Politik, p. 345,认为这段文献是伪造的;苏塞米尔(Susemihl)和希克斯(Hicks)在《亚里士多德的政治学(The Politics of Aristotle)》一书英文版的第316页对它的真实性也提出了质疑。所以,Newman, The Politics of Aristotle, vol. II, p. 373,也对其持怀疑态度。另一方面,苏塞米尔在1894 text edition, p. 70对这段文献并没有提出质疑。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Busolt, II, p. 285; Meyer, ii, p. 659; Wilamowitz, p. 60, n. 29,坚持认为Lys. x, 16中援引的法律证明在梭伦所处的年代陪审法院已经存在了。但是并不清楚即使陪审法院那个时候已经创设,它的机构设置与职能和公元前五世纪之后“dikasteria”术语所指代的法庭是否一致。但是在Poll.VIII, 22中找到了下列特定的陈述:。在这里,原本预期会见到单词,实际却看见了单词,因此有学者对该文献的真实性提出了质疑:Grote, History of Greece (London, 1869, ed. Murray), III, p. 128, n. 1.演说家在相关事件记载上的不可信可能已经为他们的听众所周知,这一点已经在Wyse版本的伊萨优斯(Isaeus)口中得到证实。当我们诉诸于一位古代立法者的生平与神话般的立法经历时,或者当文件因为一个直接的和功利主义的目的被演说词引用时,我们应该对其真实度持特别仔细谨慎的态度。例如,Isocr. 15, 231-232突出了梭伦那个时代的整个政治体系。布洛赫(Beloch)使得我们认为议事会也是由梭伦通过同样的Rückprojizierung创立的:Beloch, I, 2 (1913), p. 321。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Isocr. 7, 25, 52; Arist. Pol. 1305, a, 18-24; 1317, a, 24-29. Beloch, I, 1, p. 306. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 Solon, frag. 3 (ed. Linforth, Solon the Athenian, 1919). Beloch, I, 1, p. 363; Grote, III, pp. 94-96; Linforth, pp. 48 ff. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Solon, frag. 9, 5-6. Grote, iII, p. 95; Beloch, i, 1, pp. 306-7, 364; Meyer, II, p. 642. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6 Ath. Pol. 7, 3; 9, 1. Beloch, r, 1, p. 365. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Ath. Pol. 27, 4. Grote,Ⅳ, p. 69. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4通过撤销先前存在的与他们强烈的乡土忠诚有关的部落,Ath. Pol. 21, 2-6. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Arist. Pol. 1304, a, 20-24. Meyer, in (1901), p. 476. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6 Ath. Pol. 24, 1. Meyer, II, pp. 546-548. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    7 Grote, II, p. 128, n. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    8 P.-W. Realencyclopddie, s.v. , p. 566, 54 ff.; Lipsius, pp. 135-136. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1雅典的公民人数:(1)希波战争结束之后,大概有五万名公民:Meyer, II, p. 474;(2)在极端民主制时代,公民总数大约为六万:Meyer, II, p. 548;(3)在公元前431年,大概为五万五千五百人:Meyer, iv (1915),p. 56。布洛赫(Beloch)对雅典公民人数的估计值更低,例如,当伯罗奔尼撒战争爆发时,他认为大概有四万名公民:Beloch, in, 2 (1923), p. 393。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at AthensTransactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Population of Athens 394-322 B.C.: Meyer, v (1921), p. 289. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Ar. Plut. (ed. Blaydes): 1166-7 and scholia; Lipsius, p. 144. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 "Die Bürgerzahl Attikas . . . kann in Kleisthenes' Zeit nicht wohlüber 30,000 betragen haben:" Beloch, I, 1, p. 280, n. 2. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 "Korinth . . . kann unter Periandros kaum mehr als 25,000 Einwohner gez?hlt haben, und Athen ist, auch einschliesslich seiner Vororte, in der Peisistratidenzeit schwerlich gr?sser gewesen:" Beloch, i, 1, p. 280. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Lipsius, pp. 220, 222 ff. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Grote, iv, p. 68; v, p. 212. Zimmern, The Greek Commonwealth4 (1924), p. 137看上去似乎赞成这种观点。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4因此,昂德拉逊和亚里士多德所采纳的传统观点是一个时代错误。对于梭伦时代通行的简单司法形式来说,古代的考古专家不严格地,无知地,或者出于党派动机地运用普通一般的和位置格的词汇“dikasteria”。现代学者已经为它们所误导,而且将这个单词理解为我们在公元前五世纪和四世纪之间见到的单词“dikasteria”。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Ath. Pol. 3, 5; 9, 1. Schulthess, p. 4; Gertrude Smith, The Administration of Justice from Hesiod to Solon (1924), p. 22. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第6页。
    7吴寿彭先生认为,雅典约在公元前第八世纪间始有“执政官”,代替先前部落诸王(酋长)的权力,于平时发号施令,诸王在出征时仍旧为领军。执政由民选,其初为终身职,后改为十年任期。公元前第七世纪中叶,执政官自一人增至九人:(一)首席执政,(二)司祭执政(即原有的君王),(三)军事执政(亦原为君王),(四)另六人为司法官,审理民刑讼案。九执政无俸给,由各族勋阀(亦为富室)中选任。任职期满即转入“元老院”。元老院有监督并裁判现任执政的权力,设于战神山上,故名亚留巴古布利,即“在战神山上的议事会”。战神山在雅典卫城之西。[古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第106页。
    1 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第62—63页。
    2 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第61—62页。
    3 Gertrude Smith, op. cit. pp. 11 ff.; Lipsius: pp. 121 ff. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第61、63页。
    5胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第21页。
    1 Demosthenes,XXIII. Against Aristocrates, 67-9. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.153.
    2“埃非特”法院由51人组成,由抽签选出,所以又称为五十一人委员会。而日知、力野先生认为,“Ephetae”是古时阿勒俄琶菊斯派出审理案件的审判官的名称,凡五十一人;自阿勒俄琶菊斯于公元前五世纪中叶改组,Ephetae已失其意义,或许名称仍存,而实际上审判者已为陪审官。[古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第62页;胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第21页。
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第61页。
    4 Gertrude Smith, Class. Phil. xix (1924), 353 ff. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第21页。
    6 Demosthenes,XXXV. Against Lacritus, 47. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p. 152.
    7斯坦利?巴尼?史密斯认为似乎没有必要对是否是庇西特拉图和他的追随者创立了陪审法庭这一问题进行讨论。不只是因为没有证据表明庇西特拉图曾这样做过,而且这种猜测是完全不可能的。庇西特拉图一直将雅典城邦的最高权力掌握在自己手中(Hdt. I, 59; Thuc. vI, 54, 6)。虽然他的名字和一次司法改革联系在一起,即的创制(《雅典政制》16, 5),该项创新的目的可能是为了防止当不重要的的诉讼案件等待判决或接受审判的时候,在雅典城内发生人民集会。有关克里斯梯尼改革的相关情况可参见Hdt. v, 69; vi, 131; Ath. Pol. 21, 2-22, 2.对于克里斯梯尼改革主要的现代讨论有:Grote,Ⅳ, pp. 55-75; Meyer,Ⅱ, pp. 800 ff.; Beloch, I, 1, pp. 395-399; Greenidge, p. 157. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1《雅典政制》,参见前文引用的相关文献,尤其是22, 1.有关陪审法庭的民主特质参见亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,9, 1; Beloch,Ⅱ, 1 (1914), p. 154. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Ath. Pol. 21, 3; 62, 1对五百人议事会的席位分配方式进行了说明;Ath. Pol. 22, 2和Lys. 31, 2的校勘整理说明了他们的选举方式。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3有关在不同时期,陪审法庭的选举方式和席位分配方式的讨论,参见P.-W. Realencyclopddie, s.v. p. 566, 54ff.; Lipsius, p. 140; Ath. Pol. 63, 1 ff.;有关部落的分配方式参见Ath. Pol. 63, 4. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), pp. 106-119, Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Meyer,Ⅲ, p. 476. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions andProceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Arist. Pol. 1304, a, 20-24; 1274, a, 12 ff. Plut. Aristid. 22, 1. Greenidge, pp. 162 ff. 112. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Busolt, III, 1 (1897), pp. 51-53. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Schulthess, p. 7; Meyer, III, 489-491. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 Ath. Pol. 24, 1. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Pseud. Ath. Pol. 1, 16-17. Meyer, II, pp. 496-500. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6 Ath. Pol. 22, 5. Ferguson, Klio, iv (1904), 1 ff.; Meyer, III, pp. 340-341; Beloch, II, 1, pp. 26-28; Busolt, II, p. 639.该论断的理由如下。(亚里士多德的陈述,Ath. Pol. 8, 1,即多数制度已在梭伦时代用于选举执政官,该叙述与同一个作家对于公元前580年至579年之间战争的记载完全不一致,观点参见13, 1-2。)希罗多德也声明了同样的观点(vi, 109:参见Paus. I, 15, 3,然而它提出了一个相反的观点。),即多数制度已经在公元前490年运用于军事执政官(polemarchos,音译为“波勒马克”)的选举,在批评者中间有一种相当可观的一致意见认为希罗多德的观点是错误的(参见罗林森(Rawlinson)的评论,马侃(Macan),阿伯特(Abbot)和豪(How)以及威尔斯(Wells)也对该段陈述提出了质疑:也可参见Meyer,Ⅲ, p. 342)。有关Ath. Pol. 22, 5最简单和最有说服力的证据可以通过研究在公元前487年至486年前后担任官职的那些公民的姓名来得到证实。假如我们推断这场变革的领导人是地米斯托克利(Themistokles),我们不应该误入歧途。那时,他是雅典最重要的政治家。在公元前493年至492年之间,他曾经担任执政官一职(Thuc. I, 93, 3; Dion. Hal.Ⅵ, 34, 1)。他也是将新发现的洛里昂(Laurion)银矿的收入用来建设海军这一建议的主要提倡者(Ath. Pol. 22, 7)。他使得长城的建设成为可能(Thuc. I, 89-93)。在大约十四年的时间里,他一直领导着城邦(Ath. Pol. 23, 2-3)。在他领导城邦的年代,他可能已经是十将军委员会的主要成员(Meyer, II, pp. 344-347),一位选举产生的官员,同一个个人可以担任连续的任期。因而,地米斯托克利领会了将军一职与生俱来的固有权力。因此,我们可以合理地推测他或他的党派是被领导的,无论是因为真诚的民主渴望,还是政治家对于不择手段地自我扩张权势的天生热情,都削弱了执政官这一对手职位的权力,并提高了将军一职的权威。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Beloch,Ⅱ, 1, p. 150. 我们可以用任何方式对战神山最高法院的成员人数进行估计。一个不可能的高额数字是两百七十名成员,因为它要求九位一年任期的前执政官在尽可能低的年龄担任职务,这样,在六十岁之前,大概没有成员会去世。认为组成人员人数为两百人或两百二十五人的推测看起来似乎是不合理的(Ferguson, Hellenistic Athens, p. 420)。例如,在二十年中,陪审法庭的组成人员发生了相当大的变化。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Ath. Pol. 22, 4; Lycurgus, Leoc. 117-118; Beloch, I, 2, p. 332;Ⅱ, 1, p. 30. 对于这里给出的特定年代,确实有相当可观数量的证据提供证明。贝壳放逐法的设立一般都归功于克里斯梯尼(Ath. Pol. 22, 1, 4; Ael., V. H.ⅩⅢ, 24; Philoch. F. G. H. frag. 79, b; Pseud. Heracleid. Pont. 1, 7; Diodorus, Ⅺ, 55, 1; Aristid. II, p. 317, Dind.; Harpocration: ; Meyer, II, p. 804; Busolt, II, pp. 439, 639; Grote,Ⅳ, pp. 77 ff.; Greenidge, pp. 160-161; Gilbert, pp. 167-169; Schoemann, p. 354)。无论是根据古代的还是现代的权威著作,布洛赫的结论看起来都是正确的。根据Ath. Pol. 22, 4的文献记载,这里存在着内在的不可能性。因此,它非常明确地阐明有关陶片放逐法的法律是由克里斯梯尼为了流放希帕科斯(Hipparchos)这一明确的目的引入雅典宪法的,但是它直到二十年后才得到第一次运用。我们可以更可信地解释程序的演进。在希波战争期间,在雅典毋庸置疑存在着一个支持庇西特拉图后裔的党派(How and Wells, A Commentary on Herodotus, II, pp. 359-360)。陶片放逐法被设计用来反对这一派别中的任何人建立僭主统治,并领导城邦向波斯投降的企图。而且,我们应该回忆起在克里斯梯尼之后的年代里,将军职位一直存在着(Meyer,Ⅱ, p. 803),我们应该做出这样的推论,即在古典时期,雅典人已经意识到年复一年担任军事指挥官职务所会带来的固有危险。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Dem. 24, 45, 59; 59, 89; Andocides, 1, 87. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1陶片放逐法中所涉及的六千名投票人代表了所有投票人的总数,这一数字可能相当于雅典选举人总数的八分之一或十分之一(布洛赫(II, 1, p. 29)认为它相当于四分之一的“Bürgerzahl”)。该问题在Class. Phil. Ⅷ(1913), 223-225中,得到了罗伯特?保诺(R. J. Bonner)完整和简练的论述。Carcopino, Histoire de l'ostracisme支持这样一种理论,即六千名投票人代表了所有投票人的大多数。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2陶片放逐法,像其他形式的优先权(privilegia)一样,可以被认为是“Volksversammlung”原初功能的暂时性恢复。优先权在任何政治体系中都是一个弱点,因为它们可能会导致该程序的滥用。因而,它只有通过保持六千名投票人的先决条件,即雅典人需确保这类行为不会过度频繁地发生,它们可能代表了整个城邦平民团体深思熟虑的判决。就像Fr?nkel指出的那样(Die Attischen Geschworengerichte (1877), pp. 14-16): "Es bildet sich also für das Staatsrecht der Grundsatz, dass der von sechstausend Bürgern ausgesprochene Wille der allgemeine sei: sechstausend Athener sind alle Athener." Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Ath. Pol. 23, 1; 25, 1; 41, 2; Pol. 1304, a, 20; Cic. Off., I, 75混淆了传统;Meyer,Ⅲ, 315-316; 343; Schoemann, p. 355. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4它的名望是相当可观的,这一点可以从Aeschylus, Eum. (ed. Oxford) 683 ff.中得到证明;从Dem. 23, 65中可以看出它的名誉延续了很长时间。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Grote, v, p. 216; Schulthess, p. 6,他将陪审法庭描述为"Bollwerk der Aristocratie"。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6梭伦不问出身门第,按财产状况(年收入折合成农产品计算)将雅典公民划分为四个等级:第一等“富农”,年收入达五百斛(麦斗)者;第二等“骑士”,年收入达五百斛者;第三等“双牛”,达两百斛者;第四等“贫农”,年收入不满两百斛者。第一、第二等级可任高级官职(如担任执政官,进入元老院),为城邦提供骑兵队;第三等级可担任中下级官职,为邦国提供重步兵;第四等级不任官职,只提供轻装步兵或在海军服役。各等级享有不同的权利,亦负担相应的义务。这种使财力与权利成比例的原则,是梭伦改革中加进的全新因素,也是雅典法制建设中的里程碑。引自孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第55页。
    1 Ath. Pol. 25, 1-2; Pol. 1274, a, 7; Plut. Kimon, 10; 15; 17; Per. 9, 3-4; Praecept. Ger. Rei Pub. 805, D; Philochorus: F. G.. H. frag. 141, b; Diod.Ⅺ, 77, 6; Paus. I, 29, 15. Grote, v, pp. 214 ff.; Meyer,Ⅲ, pp. 570 ff.; Busolt,Ⅲ, 1, p. 262; Beloch,Ⅱ, 1, p. 153; Cavaignac, Hist. de l'Ant. II (1913), pp. 60- 62; Gilbert, p. 171; Lipsius, p. 34; Greenidge, p. 147; Vinogradoff, Outlines of Historical Jurisprudence, II, p. 137. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Plut. Kimon, 15; 16, 6; Per. 9, 3. Meyer, III, 564; Beloch, in, 1, p. 147; Busolt, III, 1, p. 140. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Thuc. I, 102; Plut. Kimon, 16, 6 ff.; Diod.Ⅺ, 64; Beloch, II, 1, p. 152-3; Grote, v, p. 221. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 Beloch, II, 1, p. 153.民主派迈着频率很快的步伐大步向前,这一点已经为Aristotle, Pol. 1303, b, 10; 1304, a, 22 ff.; 1321, a, 13所证实。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Ath. Pol. 25, 2; Beloch, II, 1, p. 153 ff.; Lipsius, p. 34 ff. 格特鲁德?史密斯(Class. Phil.ⅩⅨ(1924), 353 ff.)得出了这样的结论,即传统一般归功于伯利克里的后来的变化(Ath. Pol. 27, 1; Plut. Per. 9, 1),即在"ephetic"团体中的陪审法庭取代了由战神山议事会演化而来的最早的五十一人(ephetai)委员会。传统观点认为这种变化(它当然发生在伊索克拉底所处年代之前,ⅩⅧ, 52, 54, Blass, Die Attische Beredsamkeit, II (1892), p. 214将其归于公元前399年前后,Jebb, The Attic Orators, II, p. 235则认为其发生于公元前402年)发生在公元前409年至408年之间或者更晚的德拉古法(Draconian nomoi)修订之时。Busolt, Gr. Alt. (1892) I, p. 273认为这种变化发生在公元前四世纪;Schoemann, I, p. 512则指出它发生于德摩斯梯尼时代。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6 Dem. 23, 22, 24(谋杀、故意伤害、纵火和投毒);23, 66(谋杀);Ath. Pol. 57, 3(谋杀、伤害、投毒和纵火);Lys. 7, 1-2(圣橄榄树案件);Dem. 18, 134(得洛斯神庙的监督管理);有关之后战神山最高法院复兴情况的记载,参见Ferguson, Hellenistic Athens, p. 419 ff。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    7解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第114页;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第84—85页;杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第65页。
    1 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Harp. ; Poll.Ⅷ, 128. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 I. G. I (1924), no. 11, lines 12, 14, 16(公元前446年至445年之前)中曾经提及一些司法程序,但是并没有关于陪审法庭的文献记载。规定法塞利斯人(Phaselis)与雅典人之间法律关系的法典(I. G. I, no. 16,日期是公元前465年)提及了“dikai”,但是词汇“dikasteria”或“dikasterion”都没有找到。这些单词的第一个例证出现在I. G. I, no. 22, lines 39, 45 (公元前450年至449年之间)。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第23页。
    5 [古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第185页。
    1 Grote,Ⅳ, p. 70;Ⅴ, p. 208 ff.,尤其是第211页,也可参见第213页。亚里士多德《雅典政制》一书更加清楚地证明了这位英国历史学家直觉判断的正确。Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Pausanias,Ι. 28.6-11.转引自解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第100页。
    3解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第100页。举行审判的地点在不同时期随案件的不同而不同。在雅典,民众大会、集市或阿雷奥帕古斯山,以及普尼克斯山(Pnyx)是有关政治和法律事务的主要场所。公民大会通常是在普尼克斯山上举行的,在那里,伯里克利和其他著名政治家用雄辩的口才,感动了公民大会的代表;在那希腊温暖的蓝天之下的广场上,在每个公民都是立法者的场合,在黑压压的人群之前,政治演讲的伟大艺术,在世界历史上第一次获得了发展。另一座阿雷奥帕古斯山,是奉献给传奇英雄奥雷斯特斯(Orestes)的,在早期,这里是专门用于审理某些特定的杀人案件的。在传奇故事中,奥雷斯特斯故意杀害了他那与人通奸的母亲,因此遭到审判;主控官是福瑞斯(Furies)或阿维杰斯(Avengers);雅典娜女神主持审判,她明白地宣称她自己准备投票支持奥雷斯特斯。陪审员最后判他无罪,出于感激,奥雷斯特斯为司法建立了一个纪念坛。这里,曾一度是雅典的最高法院,也曾经是一百个由雅典娜女神任命的成员组成的元老院所在地。雅典娜的任命词说道:“这个法庭,是我所在的这块土地的庄严的、廉洁的、永不睡眠的守护者。见[美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第253页。
    4解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第100页。
    5 Demosthenes, XXV.23.转引自解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第100页。
    6 Iliad XVIII. 497 ff. ; cf. Iliad XI. 807. Odyssey XII.439.转引自解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第100页。
    7 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第56页。
    8 Demosthenes,24.9, DemosthenesⅢ, C.A.Vince & J.H.Vince (trans), Loeb Classical Library, 1926. p.377.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第33页。
    9 [古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》(上册),陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第494页。
    1 Andocides, 1.17, Minor Attic OratorsⅠ,K.LMaidment (trans), Loeb Classical Library, 1941. p.353.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第33页。
    2 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第66页。
    3 L. Adkins and R. A. Adkins: Handbook to Life in Ancient Greece, P.37.转引自解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第115页;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第84—85页。王敦书先生认为,一个陪审团由单数而不是双数组成,以便投票结果不至于对等的做法,迟至公元前4世纪才在雅典实行。见王敦书:《贻书堂史集》,中华书局2003年版,第563页。转引自解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第115页。
    4 DemosthenesⅠ,J.H.Vince(trans),Loeb Classical Library,1930.p.569.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第33页。
    5 Demosthenes,24.149-151,DemosthenesⅢ,J.H.Vince(trans),Loeb Classical Library,1935.p.469.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第33页。
    1 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第224页。
    2 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第65—66页。
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第69页。
    4奥波尔(obol),雅典货币单位,相当于人民币的“角”,在古希腊,1塔兰特合60迈那,1迈那合100德拉克马,1德拉克玛合6奥波尔(约为0.718克白银)。当时一个城镇居民一年的吃穿费用大约是120德拉克马。[美]斯东:《苏格拉底的审判》,董乐山译,三联书店1998年版,第95页。
    5 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第65页。
    6 M.H.Hanson, The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes, Blackwell, 1991. p.223.转引自解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第120页。
    7 Plato, Gorg. 515 E; Ath. Pol. 27, 4; Pol. 1274, a, 8; Beloch, II, 1, p. 155; Grote,Ⅳ, p. 69; v, p. 213. StanleyBarney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Aristotle, Ath. Pol. 27.3-4 (cf. Politics 1274a8). Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Plutarch, Perikles 9.4-5. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 Harrison, 1971, p. 49. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5根据文献得出的推论是他的对手是客蒙:Beloch, II, 1, pp. 153 ff. Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6 Rhodes 1981, pp. 338-340; Hignett 1952, pp. 342-343; Thucydides, commentary 1.112.1, p. 328. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 H. T. Wade-Gery , "Two Notes in Theopompos, Philippika, X," AFP59, 1938 [129-134], pp. 131-134. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第32页。
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第107页。
    4孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第84—85页。
    1 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第233—234页。
    2 [法]克琳娜·库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第105页。
    3 Mikalson, 1975, p. 201. ibid., p. 203. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Wasps, lines 660-663. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5 M. H. Hansen, How Often Did the Athenian Dicasteria Meet? GRBS 20, 1979, pp. 243-246. Pritchett 1979, p. 66 with note 83, pp. 220-229. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    6 M.H.Hanson, The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes, Blackwell, 1991. p.222.
    7 Cohen, 1973, pp. 12-59. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1参见IG II2 1641, lines 25-33 (163); 1646, line 8 (159);以及Aischines 1.79 (252). Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3参见Boegehold 1963. J. A. 0. Larsen ("The Origin and Significance of the Counting of Votes," CP 44, 1949 [pp. 164-181], p. 172)回顾了公民大会作为可信的审判地点的三种早期形式,并将其作为投票程序的开端。但是投票程序首先是公开的。最初组成公民大会的是贵族,而不是普通平民。他们都是骄傲的人,他们希望(而且确实将其作为他们的贵族特权)通过投票来坚持与鉴别自己。斯巴达的Amompharetos (Herodotos 9.55)提供了这种风气的相关例证,假如它不是人们在这样的会议上所会遇到的正确的程序。但是对于有弱点的普通公民来说,一旦他们可以秘密投票,而且不需要害怕遭到报复的话,他们仍然需要报酬的刺激。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4对于程序的变化与改进,例如像特别组成的陪审团,对某人提出控告的方式,地方法官不同的责任,在诉讼中,当事人采用的策略与办法的种类与整个范围,可以参见Lipsius 1905-1915; Bonner and Smith 1938; Harrison 1971; MacDowell 1978;以及Hansen 1976中的相关章节。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Hansen, 1979, p. 11. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2参见Boegehold 1963. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4参见Boegehold 1984, pp. 23-29. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5“Apollo Pythios”,雅典的“patroios”,在行政决定中起着重要的作用。例如,雅典人是如何着手命名十个克里斯梯尼(Kleisthenian)部落的:Aristotle, Ath. Pol. 21.60。有关观念,参见Plato, Laws 741 B;参见id. 759B. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Stroud (1968, pp. 75-83)描述了一起案例,在该案件中亚里士多德负责任地使用了充分可信的德拉古和梭伦文献。然而,参见K. Walters, "The 'Ancestral Constitution' and Fourth Century Historiography in Athens," AJAH 1, 1976 [129-144], pp. 129-135. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Pitt,Syll,3,111.转引自《古代希腊史参考资料(译草)》,吉林师范大学1960年版,第6-11-12页。
    2波桑尼阿‘希腊记事’Ⅵ?Ⅺ?6,转引自《古代希腊史参考资料(译草)》,吉林师范大学1960年版,第6-10-11页。
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第110页。
    4何勤华主编:《外国法制史》,法律出版社2001年版,第65页。
    1荷马以及赫西奥德(公元前8世纪,希腊诗人)有关德拉古时代之前诉讼程序状况的最早证词,并不能证明雅典的实践:Wolff 1946, pp. 34-62.然而,它是值得进行评述的,在荷马记载的审判场景中,Iliad 18, lines 497-508,一位单独、高贵的地方官员并没有担任法官职务;该职能通常由同伴公民组成的机构和元老院承担。在稍晚的年代,菲拉(Phlya)的米隆(Myron)以及由三百名陪审员组成的陪审法庭被选为:Plutarch, Solon 12.雅各比(Jacoby, 1949, p. 367, note 81)认为该时代在庇西特拉图(Peisistratid)被驱逐之前。我们需要注意有关在智慧女神广场(Palladion)五十名加五十名法官(他们以ephetai的身份闻名于世)的记载(45, 46, 48, 50, 53)。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2见IG I3 104 with Stroud 1968.参见Gagarin 1981, pp. 37-48. Humphreys (1983, pp. 231-251)将法官、仲裁程序以及自力救济列举为早期解决司法问题的基本方式。在p. 235, note 11,她对德拉古有关谋杀罪的法条中的以及进行了区分:“埃菲特法官将令人信服地在国王们建议的解决方案中间进行裁决。”但是,一个不同的区别将会被提议,换句话说,利用相当于或的中的,以及实质性的计票程序,。意义是陪审团或五十一人埃菲特法官只能赞同或不做决定。这一高度受限的选择是希波达摩斯(Hippodamos)对公元前五世纪投票方法批评指责的基础,也是他提议对其进行改革的理由(Aristotle, Politics 1267b22-1268b3)。无论这一赞同或不做决定怎样,在由国王进行宣告之前,它都不是官方认可的和生效的。当国王宣告判决之时,他会声明权力,例如:有关该单词的具体含义可见Wolff 1946, pp. 34-57。在国王结束宣告之后,传令官将接着向陪审团和聚集在法庭上的其他人宣告( )判决。在继承案件和其他案件中使用的动词的复合形式可能意味着主持审判进程的地方法官必须首先在两位或者更多的(根据权利)提出要求者之间进行区分,随后声明判决是什么,例如。在Demosthenes 23.28 (134)中,我们可以将其推定为执政官和陪审法院法定职责之间的区别。控诉人向任何一位有资格在法庭日程表上制定案件位置的地方法官提出谋杀罪指控。在地方法官完成这项工作之后,他将在正确的日子参与审判。在陪审法庭作出判决之后,例如,他宣读判决,例如。与该动词的这一含义相一致,条款可以被评注为,“相关每一位地方法官的职责是被授权宣读判决。”参见Hansen 1981-1982, p. 27. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3例如,见Hignett 1952, p. 79. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4对于"eliaia"的讨论,见Ostwald 1986, p. 10, note 27. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2例如,见Hignett 1952, p. 74, 84; Busolt and Swoboda 1920, p. 443;以及Ostwald 1986, p. 77. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Hansen 1981-1982; Ostwald 1986;和Hansen 1989, "Addenda," pp. 258-262,对早期赫里埃亚(heliaia)陪审法院进行了系统的研究,取得了丰硕的成果。以下的草图主要根据这两位学者的成果做出。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Hansen 1981-1982, pp. 10-15. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5见Hansen 1981-1982, pp. 9-15.参见133-138的介绍.参见98, 130-132. LSJ并没有包含这一含义,s.v..注意136,一条法律命令十一人委员会将特定案件移交给赫里埃亚(heliaia)法院进行审理。这里“赫里埃亚”(heliaia)的含义可能是指“十一人委员会须将案件移交给的作为一个整体的司法体系的那个部门。”实际的审判地点可能在Parabyston。参见Hansen,观点引自第16页:“假如一份新发现的史料告诉我们,一起诉讼由赫里埃亚(heliaia)法院在‘Parabyston’进行审理的话,我们不必对此感到惊讶。”Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1雅各比(Jacoby, FGrHist 324 F59, commentary, p. 150)引用“Th. Bergk在Verh. 9 Philol. Vers. 1847的一项古老建议,乍看是很有吸引力的,”克里斯梯尼可以被设想已经创设了四个永久性的陪审法庭,其中三个由执政官负责主持,第四个由司法执政官(thesmothetai)主持。我们可以看到,伯格(Bergk)接管了这一体系,在公元前五世纪早期,对他来说这个体系似乎已经(在实质上)运作了,该体系可以被理解为作为“赫里埃亚”(heliaia)的整体,并且推断它在克里斯梯尼时代就已经存在了。将时间在往前回溯一点,并假设梭伦时代的赫里埃亚(heliaia)有相似的人员组成结构看起来似乎是很自然的步骤。无论是梭伦还是克里斯梯尼创立了赫里埃亚(heliaia)法院,该词汇早在公元前六世纪就已经使用,就像它在公元前五世纪中期被用来指代四种赫里埃亚(heliaia)法院一样。根据他们宣读的誓言所定义的陪审员机构,可能根据陪审员所属的部落进行划分,一旦五千或六千名陪审员作为一个整体被召集到一起并组成一个难以控制的主体之时,这一点就表现得很明显了。然而,由宣誓陪审员组成的机构,可能是一个不必是机构的机构。参见Hansen 1981-1982, pp. 27-39. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2见Chantraine 1968和Frisk 1960, s.v. . Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3赫里埃亚(heliaia)作为履行司法职能的一个机构的观点为斯特夫利(Staveley, 1972, pp. 25-26),保诺(Bonner)和史密斯(Smith, 1938, pp. 151-158),希格奈特(Hignett, 1952, pp. 97-98),以及罗德斯(Rhodes, 1981, p. 160)所接受,在这里,由于篇幅所限,我们只列举了一些具有代表性的学者。参见Hansen 1981-1982, p. 45, note 83. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4只能用来指代一种集会,例如在公元前五世纪Knossos和Tylissos (Meiggs and Lewis 1989, no. 42, line 44)之间达成的条约显示的那样。汉森(Hansen, 1981-1982, pp. 28-30)也提出了同样的观点,但引用了其他例证。参见Ostwald 1986, p. 10, note 29. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 1966, F16 (Lex ap. Dem. 23.28)以及F23c (Lysias 10.16) (cf. F23d, Lex ap. Dem. 24.105). Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3可能是一个特定的陪审团,但是该词汇也援引了这个体系。我们需要注意韦德—格雷(Wade-Gery)在"The Judicial Treaty with Phaselis and the History of the Athenian Courts" (Wade-Gery, 1958, pp. 185-186)中作为由独任地方法官管理的简易审判庭的证据加以引用的词汇,就像阿里斯托芬使用的词汇一样(Ekklsiazusae, line 655),viz. ,在那个时代,民众法庭体系已经充分地建立起来。与格案件中一个由前置词加地方保安官组成的词组并不能在司法背景下证明简易法庭的存在。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1在梭伦颁布的法律中,惯用语句并不能理解为“假如一个大型的集会决定了一项刑罚”,而应该理解为“假如地方法官控制的法庭之一决定了一项刑罚,”例如,假如审判从简易判决发展至另一次审判。那起案件中的将是一次从简易判决到陪审法庭审判的转换,例如陪审团。参见E. Ruschenbusch,“, Ein Beitrag zur griechischen Rechtsterminologie,”ZRG 78, 1961, pp. 386-390 and Hansen 1981-1982, p. 37. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Smith 1925, pp. 106-119.参见Hommel 1927, p. 36, note 80a. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2他负责保管这些记载,就好像是自己的一样。在一年的任期结束之后,执政官要经历一次对他们代表官方处理事务履行职责的司法审查。那个时候,这类在石蜡写字板上所做的记录作为备忘录对于审查是有助益的。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Euripides, Alkestis, lines 30-31 (with A. M. Dale, Euripides. Akestis. Edited with Introduction and Commentary, Oxford 1966, pp. 54-55)中达拿都斯(Thanatos)使用了这一措词。阿里斯托芬在Wasps, line 897他的滑稽表演中使用了这一公式。我们注意到建议适用的刑罚不用任何连接虚词就可另外加入指控。同样的连接词省略在德摩斯梯尼45.46和Diogenes Laertios 2.40中也可以看到。无论建议适用的刑罚是否是由法律规定的,或者还是由原告提出的,它是一个也许在“anakrisis”程序中进行回答的问题。存在着多种对与特定犯罪行为进行描述、控诉以及惩罚的方式。见Antiphon 5.18-19.参见Hansen 1976, pp. 99-108; MacDowell 1978, pp. 214-219;以及Wolff 1966, p. 120. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4根据德摩斯梯尼21.103中的回溯。伊索克拉底15.237 (342)中的“sanides”或公告板,可能张贴了即将开始的审判进程的通知,但是他们记录下来的可能是有罪判决。参见MacDowell 1990, p. 326以及Harrison 1971, p. 91, note 1。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1见"A Curse Tablet," pp. 55-57以及Ill. 4. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2至少在一种情况下,多达六千名陪审员被认为是正确的数字(Andokides 1.17)。在其他时候,该数字可能是两千五百名,两千名,一千五百名,一千名,五百名,四百名或者两百名(在公元前四世纪的某个时间点之后,还要加上一位额外的男性公民)。See Harrison 1971, p. 47, with notes 2 and 3. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3雅典人并没有将特定的审判程序专门限定在特殊的建筑内举行。柱廊(Stoa Poikile),剧场(Odeion),狄厄尼索斯(酒神)剧场在不同时间以不同的方式得到运用。Hansen (1981-1982, pp. 15-27)指出剧场(Odeion)可以容纳人数远多于一千五百名的陪审团,但是他没有讨论该区域并没有被正式指定为陪审法庭的审判地点的可能性。司法执政官(Thesmothetai)可能确定了陪审团的规模,以及陪审团举行审判的日期,就和稍晚的一样:参见亚里士多德,《雅典政制》,59.1。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Philetairos, Months F12: A. ; B. .也可注意IG I3 20, lines 32-33,它指出在雅典,特定种类案件的审判可以在该月进行.参见IG I3, line 68: [ ]以及IG I3 41, line 90: ] […],以及阿里斯托芬,《鸟》,第1047行,,以及Schol. to lines 1047 and 1478.参见Lipsius 1905-1915, p. 808. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3参见R. Sealey, "How Citizenship and the City Began in Athens", AJAH 1983 [pp. 97-129], pp. 98-99.在特定案件中,陪审团的所有成员都必须满足特殊的资格限制条件,例如在某些案件中,所有陪审员都必须是古代希腊埃莱夫西斯(Eleusis)市行会的新加入者(Andokides 1.17),或者是被告的战友。参见Harrison 1971, p. 32. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Aristophanes, Wasps, lines 552-561 [208]. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3参见Sophokles' Inachos (328)中的短语。阿里斯托芬创造使用的新语,“beanweevil”,与陪审法庭服务相比,运用于城邦平民(Knights, line 41)可能具有更广阔的职权范围。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Aristophanes, Wasps, line 240 (with MacDowell 1971)表明当一位陪审员一大早动身前往陪审法庭参加审判的时候,他知道自己将去哪个法庭报到。参见Antiphon 6.21 (97):。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 [法]克琳娜·库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第105页。
    3 Artemidoros 2.27 (ed. Pack)保存了一项确定无疑众所周知的明喻说法。参见Triantaphyllopoulos 1975, p. 176, note 177. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 1976, 97a-d; Bonner and Smith 1938, pp. 152-155. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    6 Epikrates Fl 1 (PCG V = Pherekrates Fl 1 [ed. Kock] F260 PCG VII [247])用纪念一位一直将获得前排位置作为一项生意的人。参见Aristophanes, Wasps, lines 89-90 (106). Alan L. Boegehold, JohnMck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 [法]克琳娜·库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第106页。
    2参见V. Bers, "Dikastic Thorubos,"in Crux, pp. 1-15. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3阿里斯托芬,《马蜂》, line 690 with MacDowell 1979, comm. ad loc. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 James Riddell (The Apology of Plato, Oxford 1877, p. xxi)援引了一些有关这种绪言的例证。瑞德尔(Riddell)并没有引用Euripides, Hippolytus, lines 986-987,提醒我们这种(修辞学上的)惯用语句可能早在公元前482年就已经使用了。将Aristophanes, Wasps, lines 959( ),989 (271)与MacDowell 1971, p. 256进行比较。形式与公式,因为它们是有规律的和一目了然的陈述要素,揭示了陪审员们希望获得什么。另外一项对于完全即兴脱稿的法庭演讲不利的考量因素是由水时计记录的时间。当一位演说人的演讲时间受到水时计的限制时,假如他想保护他的生命与财产安全,他必须在水时计中的水流光之前到达他想说内容的中间或结尾。然而一个没有获得任何指导说明的男人几乎不可能知道他需要说什么或者他阐明自己的观点需要花多长时间,当时间是有限和宝贵的时候,他也不可能估定不相干的枝节问题的程度与轻重。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1例如,参见M. Gagarin, "The Vote of Athena," AJP 96, 1975, pp. 121-127. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2崔丽娜:《古典时期雅典的投票选举制度》,首都师范大学出版社2007年版,第128—130页;高红清:《程序民主的完美典范:雅典陪审法庭》,载《邢台职业技术学院学报》第23卷第4期; [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第69—70页。
    1参见Illustration 1有关这种程序的推测性陈述。虽然在Aischylos, Agamemnon, lines 814-818中并没有被提及,可以将其想象为处于两个水壶之上的适当位置。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2崔丽娜:《古典时期雅典的投票选举制度》,首都师范大学出版社2007年版,第128—130页。
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.有关雅典陪审法庭判决投票的具体情况可见崔丽娜:《古典时期雅典的投票选举制度》,首都师范大学出版社2007年版,第128—130页;高红清:《程序民主的完美典范:雅典陪审法庭》,载《邢台职业技术学院学报》第23卷第4期; [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第69—70页。
    1有关古典时期雅典监禁的具体讨论另可参见:Irving Barkan, Imprisonment as a Penalty in Ancient Athens, Classical Philology, Vol. 31, No. 4 (Oct., 1936), Published by The University of Chicago Press; Danielle Allen, Imprisonment in Classical Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 47, No. 1 (1997), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2当法庭判决的细节公开时,它们可以在地方法官的普通帐目中被找到。参见148, inter alia,以及那儿相似的注释。参见Harrison 1971, p. 168, with note 5.陪审法庭的判决结果也可能以名单表格的形式公布。例如,IGⅡ2 1928 with Lipsius 1905-1915, pp. 593-594,以及D. M. Lewis, "Notes on Attic Inscriptions," BSA 49, 1954 [pp. 17-50], p. 37. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3例如,七迈那(minae,即4200奥波尔)就可以在一年的时间里保有五十五个奴隶,每天的生活费大概是四分之一奥波尔(Demosthenes 27.36)。哈里森(Harrison, 1971, pp. 48-49)对陪审员给薪制度的历史进行了简要的回顾,并接受了琼斯(A. H. M.Jones)关于公元前四世纪雅典陪审法庭人员构成的观点(Athenian Democracy, Oxford 1957, pp. 36-37)。但是琼斯对于Demosthenes 21.83以及21.95的理解是武断的(p. 31):有人可以负责任地给予单词一个相当不同种类的强调。参见F. W. Walbank, Rev. of C. Mossé, La fin de la democratie athenienne, in CR n.s. 13, 1963, p. 318; F. D. Harvey, "Literacy in the Athenian Democracy," REG 79, 1966 [585-635], p. 597, note 18;以及M. M. Markle, 'Jury Pay and Assembly Pay at Athens," in Crux, pp. 265-297.现在也可参见S. Todd, "Lady Chatterley's Lover and the Attic Orators," JHS 110, 1990, pp. 146-173以及W T Loomis, "Wages, Welfare Cost and Inflation in Classical Athens" (diss. Harvard University 1993), pp. 22-24, 31.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2有关僭主统治时期雅典司法管理体制的详细讨论,可见Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Athenian Oligarchies, Classical Philology, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Jul., 1926), Published by The University of Chicago Press.在三十僭主统治时期(公元前404年至403年),陪审法庭不再拥有之前的权力与威信。亚里士多德对三十僭主有过这样一段描述(Ath. Pol. 35.2): ,例如,他们废除了陪审法庭的权力,但是他们采用了何种精确方式我们并不清楚。三十僭主曾经出于对司法程序的歪曲和曲解要求投票程序要公开,而不是进行秘密投票,并且对陪审员的选择权顺序进行了转向。换句话说,一位陪审员首先被给予了“宣判某人无罪”的选择权,然后是“判决某人有罪”,而雅典更早与稍晚的司法实践都始终如一地显示了相反的顺序(284)。参见MacDowell 1979, p. 259.公开投票制度令人不快的效果是很容易了解的,但是颠倒了陪审员的选择顺序的效果作用则不是很明晰。可能原初的选择顺序,首先是判决罪名成立,然后是宣判无罪,之所建立这种顺序可能是有人发现陪审法官有这样一种趋向,即倾向于停在第二项选择,而不是返回第一项。无论原初的理由如何,到公元前404年为止,对于这种倒序的改变是一个显著的曲解。根据Demosthenes 45.4的记载,在公元前371年至362年这段时间内,由于战争的影响,在雅典并不存在私诉案件。Demosthenes 39.17中的演说人讲述在那篇演说词发表之前的某个时间(公元前348年之前),陪审员并不因为参加审判工作而获得报酬。因此,假如陪审法庭被三十僭主关闭的话,我们并没有被告知什么样的司法程序将取代它的位置与作用。然而,我们确实知道,在那段时间,官方仲裁制度的相应规则已经得到很好的建立,当陪审法庭被关闭时,仲裁程序可能提供了相应的法律救济途径。一般,陪审法庭看起来似乎一年工作少于两百天。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3参见Stroud 1968.从公元前404∕403年直至公元前401年,私诉案件的种类包括未经审判的谋杀案件。参见Wallace 1989, pp. 142-143 with note 32。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4他应该在犯罪行为发生后的五年内实施这种行为。参见Cohen 1973, pp. 10-12. Demosthenes 21.112将其作为富裕诉讼当事人控制他们审判时间能力不平等的一个众所周知的例证。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5这些雕像树立在早期的位置上,直到该世纪中期之后它们的地基才向北移动了五十米,来到“Metro?n”之前。参见Agora XIV, pp. 38-41. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Demosthenes,XLV. Against Stephanus, i.8, 46. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.148.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Boegehold 1984, pp. 23-39提出的观点支持了这一日期,而不是公元前403年至402年之间,通常学界都认为该变化发生在这一年,因为他们将该变革与欧克里德(Eukleides)执政官联系在一起。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3参见Kroll 1972.有关身份牌(pinakion)的多重含义与意义的论述,参见Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4崔丽娜:《古典时期雅典的投票选举制度》,首都师范大学出版社2007年版,第95—103页;高红清:《程序民主的完美典范:雅典陪审法庭》,载《邢台职业技术学院学报》第23卷第4期。
    1 See pp. 58, 230-231 with Dow 1939. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3亚里士多德(325)使用了单词,该单词有“骰子”的含义,代表被摇匀并被投入管道的签。但是在阿果拉广场考古发掘现场发现的青铜球(以及两种赤土陶球)拥有相同的规格,可以以同样的方式使用。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Dem.47.17; Dem.37.39-42. Din.2.13提及了这一时间。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    4 Dem.21.4. Dem.47.17; Dem.37.39-42. Din.2.13提及了这一时间。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    1 Dem.19.1; Aesch.3.1.当然,不可能证实这些声明的正确性,而且一些怀疑是为了表明对手试图用欺诈的策略逃避司法的审判。但是除非陪审员们将其理解为普通实践,它们都不会有道理。哈普克雷逊(Harpocration)引用了这两篇文献,第三篇为Dinarchos所引用(Loeb frag.A.2),它可以很好地指代类似的行为,但是因为它只是一个片断,所以我们不能肯定。德摩斯梯尼看上去认为埃斯基涅斯的兄弟可能已经卷入了在审判前某个时间哀求陪审员以拯救他的行为(Dem.19.239)。虽然,上下文提到了他兄弟即将发表的对埃斯基涅斯演说词的结论支持言论,动词时态暗示这是之前的行为,而且复数不定代词应该意味着不是所有的陪审员都曾这么失礼。我们不清楚的是在Dem.19.283中是否指的是在审判之前进行的游说。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    2色诺芬:《雅典政制》.1.18。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3亚里士多德在《雅典政治》第四节中说陪审法庭由四百零一名陪审员组成,已经被判定为是同一章节中数个时代错误之一。对于雅典,情况可能确实如此,但是,在雅典之外,也有其他早期行政或司法机构由奇数成员组成:来自埃律特莱亚(Erythrae)的一部法典中记载的六十一名陪审员(Schwyzer 1923, no. 701, lines 22-25);洛克里斯(Lokris)法典中记载了一百零一名陪审员(Meiggs and Lewis 1989, no. 13, lines 7-8);在IGIX i 334, line 15中有九位或十五位陪审员组成的审判机构。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1这些演说词肯定是经过编辑的,而且有时在法庭使用之后,也会进行编辑。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2阿里斯托芬在他的戏剧《地母节妇女(Danaids)》(F274, PCG III.2 [299])中,使用了一个单词,一位古代注释者将其解释为是这个容器的含义。参见阿里斯托芬,《马蜂》,第1435-1437行(288),在其注释(289)中有一个类似的解释。该解释可能是推论性的,而且还可能是一个时代错误,但是事实上该单词在两部戏剧中都被作为文件的储藏器皿。假如确实是这样的话,雅典陪审法庭引入书面证据制度的时间,足够谨慎的现代研究认为是在公元前388年至387年之间,甚至可以回溯到更早的一些时间。参见MacDowell 1978, pp. 242-243.当一些古代注释家传递有关“echinoi”的信息时,他们给人一种可靠的信心;参见Boegehold 1982. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Boegehold 1982. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2亚里士多德,政治学,1268b.3-l 1记载,绝大部分立法者针对这种机会都做出了特别规定。Boegehold 1982. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1一位学者在阿里斯托芬的戏剧《马蜂》第九十五行解释道拇指、中指和食指是菲洛克勒翁(Philokleon)手持选票所用的三根手指。在公元前420年代,这种手持选票方式是正确的。参见voters on the earlier Dijon Cup, Pl. 5. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995. [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第69—70页。
    3我们并不能肯定苏格拉底在他被判处死刑之后是否像柏拉图在Apology 38c-42中记载的那样向陪审团发表演说,而色诺芬在Apology 24并没有作出这样的记载。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4见MacDowell 1978, pp. 153-154. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1见Rhodes 1981, pp. 719-728; MacDowel 1985; and I. Worthington, "The Duration of an Athenian Political Trial," JHS 109, 1989, pp. 204-207. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2见亚里士多德,雅典政制,63-69 (110, 249, 276, 315, 325)为如下论断提供了论据:在这三年里,雅典法庭的机能看起来似乎并没有发生较大的破坏。IG II2 1629, lines 204-217保存的一道命令表明,特定案件的审判由雅典的司库提供资金资助,但是我们并不清楚它是普通惯例,还是临时性的补助津贴。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4将Peristyle广场的建筑与这个公认的复合体联系起来是很令人感兴趣的。在该区域内发现的公元前四世纪票箱(psephoi)和青铜块(symbola)的集合与阿果拉广场其他位置不同。但是,没有办法可以证明有新的和统一的陪审法庭是确实存在的。见Plates 3, 7对于程序规划和构思的讨论。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1亚里士多德说“从字母拉姆达”开始,但是有人可能会怀疑在一个特定的日子,需要使用在字母克西之外的字母,因为在正常情况下,任何一天都不止三至四个陪审法庭进行案件的审理。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3见T. L. Shear, Jr., "The Demolished Temple at Eleusis," in Thompson Studies [pp. 128-140], pp. 129-130.参见Chambers 1990, comm. ad 65.2.现代读者或多或少同意将翻译为“门楣”,但是该用法是奇特的。通常该单词的含义是指“横梁”。
    4 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2在公元前四世纪早期,一个陪审法庭的首席法官(epistates)可能已经是首先审理案件,听取当事人陈述的地方法官。在亚里士多德所处的年代,看起来似乎在地方行政长官的种类与审判的种类之间并没有明确和必要的联系。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3颜色肯定是红色和绿色的(see Batrachioun and Phoinikioun at 1),以及其他剩余颜色中可以很容易加以区别的一至两种颜色,例如黑色,白色,黄色,蓝色,以及紫色。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2对于这类公元前四世纪的青铜灯柱,我们并不清楚它们是如何制作的。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. CampII, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5波西迪昂(Posideion)月包括哪些一年中白天最短的日子。任何在那段时间使用的日晷都将成为其他月份的标准。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    6 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School ofClassical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1在不同的情况下它们的精确形态是什么,这一点我们并不是非常清楚。见MacDowell 1978, pp. 244-245. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3两造当事人票数相等的情况依然是一种可能发生的偶然事件,甚至在陪审团增加了一名额外的成员,使得陪审员人数保持奇数之后,这种情况依然可能出现,因为不是所有五百零一位陪审员都会参与案件的审判,也不是所有参加案件审理的陪审员都会进行投票。曾经有段时间,反方当事人同意对选票进行混淆,所以不存在官方的计票程序:Isaios 5.18. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Hommel 1927, p. 134援引了Suda, s.v.表示雅典早期法院体系在公元前322年至321年的终结。但是苏达(Suda)所使用的单词的含义只是“(暂时)终止”。例如参见亚里士多德(《雅典政制》35.2),亚氏在叙述三十僭主统治时期陪审法庭发生了什么的时候使用了同样的单词。在三十僭主统治被推翻之后,陪审法庭立即获得了重建,并有了一段漫长和活跃的时期,大概又是八十年的黄金期。而且,根据我们所掌握的其他证据,就像霍梅尔(Hommel)自己在loc. cit中指出的那样,虽然陪审法庭对公共生活的影响已经减弱了,但是在公元前322年之后,这种影响就永远消失了。当狄奥弗拉斯图(Theophrastos)在他的《法律篇》一书中指出陪审法庭不再在阿德托斯(Ardettos)山进行官方宣誓时(173),我们并不清楚他的含义是说陪审员职务已不存在,还是陪审员依然存在,但是他们停止宣誓,或者陪审员进行宣誓,但是不在阿德托斯山。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3将纠纷提交法律进行裁决的喜剧化威胁viz.在Menander, Kolax,第132行(produced ca. 315, according to Gomme and Sandbach [Menander, Commentary, p. 422]),在Menander, Dyskolos (316/5 B.C.E.), lines 743-744对的一般暗示,一个没有上下文的词组,viz. ,在Menander, F840 (ed. Koerte)是一些种类的陪审法庭体系依然运作的暗示。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4帕勒隆(Phaleron)的德米特里厄斯(Demetrios)可能对自己所处时代这种程序进行了书面记述。见F141a (ed. Wehrli) and H.-J. Gehrke, "Politik und Philosophie bei Demetrios von Phaleron," Chiron 8, 1978 [pp.149-193], p. 154, with note 24. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1我们需要注意美好的旧单词的使用,它可能作为古代宪法观念的支持物而存在。Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Cf. Shear 1978, p. 16. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4他曾经被称为,当他履行一项特定义务之时,他是一位司法执政官(thesmothetes)。见IG II2 1163中的评论。IGII2 847, lines 27-30 (ca. 215/4)保存了一个惯用语句,其中单独的代表着一个普通法庭。在IG II2 958, lines 17-18中,有关陪审法庭的参考文献并没有提及一个相似的惯用语句,在陈述过程中的司法官将被假设,而不是陪审法庭的缺席。我们需要注意IG II2, iv (Index), s.v.中类似的惯用语句(p. 6 1),整个公元前三世纪,单数和复数形式的被无差别的使用。
    1 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    2假如票箱(psephoi)用单独的字母“lambda”和“mu”标明,证明了两个增加的部落,安提戈涅斯(Antigonis)以及德迈特里阿斯(Demetrias),就像玛贝尔?朗(Mabel Lang)指出的那样,我们对于公元前307年至306年之后陪审法庭活动的传统方式掌握有额外的证据,在那个年代,雅典人创建了那些部落以对玻利奥基提斯表达敬意,见B 35, B 36, B 52 and lead tokens in Agora X, nos. L 144-L 166. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    3 Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    4参见Dow 1963, pp. 676-685对于一个来自于辛诺普(Sinope),以及三个来自于萨索斯岛(Thasos)的身份牌的使用与鉴别进行了讨论;以及P. M. Fraser, "Notes on Two Rhodian Institutions," BSA 67, 1972 [113-124], pp. 119-124对五个罗得斯岛(在希腊东南端)居民身份牌的讨论。也可参见SEG XXX 1037. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    5见Herodas, pp. 70-107. Cf. I. C. Cunningham, Herodas. Mimiamboi, Oxford 1971, pp. 80-81. Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey 1995.
    1李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    2 Hansen. M. H. Eisangelia: the Sovereignty of the People’s Court in Athens in the Fourth Century B. C. and the Im-peachment of Generals and Politicians. Odense University Press, 1975. P51-57.转引自李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    3李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    4埃菲厄尔特(Ephialtes,公元前500—461年),是雅典民主派的重要人物,他家境贫寒,但享有廉洁正直的声誉。他在担任执政官期间所采取的民主措施,主要在于限制战神山议事会的权力,提高平民的权利和社会地位,因此他也成为失权贵族仇视的目标,终被暗杀身亡。引自孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第81—82页。
    1孙运德:《古代希腊的民主形式》,载《郑州航空工业管理学院学报(社会科学版)》第25卷第6期;李琼、段海霞:《浅析古代雅典的民主政治》,载《怀化学院学报》第26卷第12期;缪鸿孺、金萍:《雅典和斯巴达城邦的政体及启示》,载《江西教育学院学报(综合)》第27卷第6期。
    2 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第52页。
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第56—57页。
    4李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    1 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第111页。
    2 Hansen. M. H. Eisangelia: the Sovereignty of the People’s Court in Athens in the Fourth Century B. C. and the Im-peachment of Generals and Politicians. Odense University Press, 1975. P60-64.转引自李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    3 [美]斯科特·戈登:《控制国家》,应奇译,江苏人民出版社2001年版,第77页。
    4李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    5 M.H.Hanson,The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes,Blackwell, 1991. p.180.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第34页。
    1胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第34页。
    2胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第35页。
    3李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    4 Demosthenes. Demosthenes I. The Loeb Classical Library, 1953. P569.转引自李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    5 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第245页。
    6 [英]梅因:《古代法》,商务印书馆1959年版,沈景一译,第43—44页。
    7 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第245页。
    1 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第244页。
    2李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    3李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    4 [古希腊]色诺芬:《回忆苏格拉底》,吴永泉译,商务印书馆1984年版,第8页。
    5吴寿彭先生认为,拈阄复选的制度使“平民”不论任何资格,只凭机会,就可当陪审员来投票裁决案件;这些案件却包括贵族富室(“勋阀”和“财阀”)的利益,也有军政人员(“才德”)的被控事项。这样就使资产和才德两要素都向“人数”(即“平民”)低头。参看《雅典政制》章九。[古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第106页。
    1 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第105—106页。
    2李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期;胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第43页。
    1孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第85页。
    2胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第24页。
    3孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第85页。
    4现代刑事程序可以分为对抗制和纠问制两种,这种划分法与雅典的情况并不相关。关于这种划分法的讨论,可见G. Sawer, Law in society (Oxford 1975) 72 ff. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德著:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1999年版,第12页。
    4 Harrison 1971 (n. i) 77. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5 G. Glotz, La solidaritéde la famille dans le droit criminel en Grèce (Paris 1904) 369-82. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    6例如P1. Leg. 767b f., 856bc,尤其是730d. Lykourg. in Leoc. 4. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 [古希腊]普鲁塔克著:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第186页。
    3 [古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第186页。
    4 Lipsius (n. i) 237-8. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1罗宾?奥斯本将任何公民都可以在“ekklesia”程序中发表演说和公元前四世纪对修辞学者的不良观感进行比较。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Isok. xv 314. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3很清楚的是,当演说人提及立法者的目的时,他们是通过实践来理解他们隐藏在背后的意图。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1科恩(Cohen, n.Ⅰ)对该案例进行了激烈的讨论。科恩对该证据和议题的解释是巧妙有力的,但是他的阐述,为花招、技巧、策略留下了更多的空间。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Xen. Mem. ii 9. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4假如Dem. xxiv 103提及了“graphē”程序。Cohen (n.Ⅰ)则认为只有在极恶昭彰的案件中,死刑才会作为一种刑罚加以适用,例如,当适用“apagōgē”、“ephēgēsis”程序时。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5因为法律一定能够应付犯罪环境一致,但发现的环境不同的犯罪行为,而且也一定存在这种可能,掌握着可以提起更严厉指控的证据类型、性质的控诉人最终提起的诉讼,好像他们的证据并不强势一样。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1这一点使汉森(Hansen)感到烦恼,汉森宣称自己对于公元前四世纪雅典的司法管理体制持悲观态度,因为“根据已为大家所接受的关于法律和司法的现代观念,一个罪犯不管对他提起的控诉使用的是何种司法程序,他都应该被处以同样的刑罚,但在雅典,情况却不是这样”。Hansen I976 (n.Ⅰ) I20. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 On the asapheis nomoi see E. Ruschenbusch, Historia vi (1957) 257-74. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5有关更加妥协折衷的立场可参见Pl. Leg. 766d-768e, 956b-957c。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in ClassicalAthens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1有关对“开放式架构”性质和重要性这一话题的非常精彩的现代讨论可见H. L. A.Hart, The concept of law (Oxford I961) 124-32. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第27页。
    4 D.M.Macdowell, The Law in Classical Athens, Oxford, 1978, p.59.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第27页。
    1胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第28页。
    2完整的刑罚随特定的犯罪行为而变化。犯有未婚同居罪的外邦人(“xenoi”和“xenai”)通常会被变卖为奴;而与“xenai”未婚同居的雅典人会被罚款一千德拉克马;出卖“xenai”的雅典人就和承受“atimia”的雅典人一样。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Harrison I968 (n. I) 27. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5“Apographē”程序和“apographei”程序有一种非司法和非技术的使用,它使得使用的评估和行为的性质复杂化。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    6这种分类所依靠的案例基础可见Appendix i.也可参见Harrison 1971 (n. I) 212 ff.有关利普西斯(Lipsius)的不同分类法。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1克里斯梯尼创设了类群的警察首长(demarch),并对雅典的行政区域进行了重新划分,将类群划分为三十个被称为“三一区”的区域单位。类群警察首长并没有真正的司法职权。但是,就像雅典的地方法官主持陪审法庭的审判进程一样,类群警察首长主持公民大会的司法程序,并监督宣誓。但是,这一点并没有意义,因为类群警察首长主持议会的所有会议。像雅典所有的行政官员一样,他有权对没有履行自己职责的类群成员处以罚款(Schoeffer, art. "Demarchoi" in Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl., IV, 2708.)。这种权力,罗马人称之为“coercitio”,它类似于现代法官对藐视法庭行为施加惩罚。首席地方法官和类群警察首长在所有司法程序中都代表自治团体作为一方当事人参加诉讼。因此,当一位申请雅典公民资格失败的人,就议会对公民名单审查投票的结果,向陪审法庭提起上诉的时候,类群警察首长在五位选出的代诉人的帮助下,反对上诉。此外,类群警察首长还对没收债务人财产和对罪犯定罪量刑的程序实施干预。Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in Rural Attica, Classical Philology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jan., 1928), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Dem. liii 2. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 D. M. Lewis in E. Badian, ed., Ancient society and institutions: studies . . . Ehrenberg (Oxford I966) I9I n. 67, using Hesperia xix (1950) 237 no. 14.42. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2即使这类案件可能会由于通过出售财产来获得清偿的债务的存在而变得复杂化:参见SEG xii I00。这些一定在任何告发者或城邦根据权利提出的要求被考虑之前已经解决了。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Hansen 1976 (n. I) 144 ff.认为Dem. Xxv是真实的。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5很清楚的是,财产被没收充公了,然后被人购买了——该案件并不是简单地由爱尤诺莫斯(Eunomos)清偿了债务。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    6 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1对于Telemakhos可参见Osborne, LCM viii (I983) III;对案件更进一步的评论可见Osborne, Demos: the discovery ofclassical Attika (Cambridge I985) ch. i.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4有关将自己的财产存放于自身所在类群做法的持续盛行,可见R. Dareste, Inscr. juridiques ii 146 ff. no. 26. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1关于这个短语和相关案例的完整版可见Osborne 1985 (n. 28) ch. 3。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2在“apographē2”程序中,很少会请求获得奖励,这一现象可以说明制定该程序的目的是为了处理与“apographē1”程序相关的事务,只有衍生物适用于“apographē2”程序。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Lys.fr. 26a Thal.但是在Lys. xiii 65 (cf. xiii 10)中,“apographai”看起来并不具有它的技术含义。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Harrison 197I (n. I) 2I5 n. 2. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 M. B. Walbank, Hesperia li (1982) 74-98.在Stele I, col. I lines 8, 15, 24; and Stele 3, col. 2 or 3 line 13中,可以被阅读和恢复。当一个公民的财产被告发时,告发他的人通常来自于同一个类群,因此,告发之人很可能是类群的警察首长。宣判安提丰(Antiphon)和阿耳刻普托勒摩斯(Arkheptolemos)有罪的判决确实规定由类群的警察首长负责登记他们财产,但是使用的术语却是([Plut.] Mor. 834ab)。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3部分解释可能是“apographē1”程序可能是该程序的原初任务,“apographē2”程序和“apographē3”程序则是该程序后来的发展。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Harrison 1971 (n. i) 218 ff.,在不敬神案件中“phasis”程序的运用,可能是它在非法持有公共财产案件中适用的拓展。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985),Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2有关“phasis”程序在非法占有和利用公共财产案件中的运用,可见下文中的卡尔马寇斯(Kallimakhos)案件,以及Harpok. s.v. , Pollux viii 47, Bekker Anec. Graec. 313.20 ff.有关“phasis”程序在采矿罪案件中的运用,可见Hyp. iii 35, Pollux viii 47.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4有关Lys. Vii的问题可见L. Gernet and M. Bizos, Lysias: Discours i. Cf. Lys. frr. 37, o05 Thal中路易?热尔内的介绍。这是两起有关孤儿的更进一步的“phasis”程序案件。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens,The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Ar. Ach. 819-24; Equ. 3o00; and cf. Ach. 542. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Tod 123.44 if., 162.20 f., Hesperia xliii (i974) 157 f. lines 28 ff. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Harpocration, Lexicon to the Ten Orators. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.151-152.
    1 Demosthenes,XLVII. Against Evergus and Mnesibulus, 41-3. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.155.
    2 Antiphon, V. On the Murder of Herodes, 9. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, PP152.
    3 Antiphon, V. On the Murder of Herodes, 9. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, PP152.
    1有关雅典诉讼程序的相关内容见D.M.MacDowell,The law in Classical Athens, New York: Cornell University Press, 1978. pp.57-58; M.H. Hansen, The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes, Blackwell, 1991. pp.218-224.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第28页。
    2 [古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第471页。
    3在“apographē”程序诉讼中,提起诉讼者主要是告发与本人无任何关系的其他人的财产,分为三种:1.对被剥夺公民权的雅典人,起诉者由于愿意整理和拍卖其财产而提起的财产诉讼(这一工作有时由地方司法官负责);2.对拖欠国库债务的人,起诉者由于愿意登记其财产而提起的财产诉讼;3.对私占公共财产的人,起诉者对其提出返还公共财产的诉讼。见胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第29页。
    4 D.M.MacDowell,The law in Classical Athens,New York:Cornell University Press,1978. p.62.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第28页。
    1 Harpocration, Lexicon to the Ten Orators. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.152.
    2 L. Adkins and R. A. Adkins: Handbook to Life in Ancient Greece, P.37.转引自解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第116页。
    3 Herodotus i. 59. Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Pisistratus, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No.
    4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4观点引自Aristotle iii. 5. Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Pisistratus, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5观点引自Aristotle xvi.另参见Bonner, "Institution of Athenian Arbitrators," Class. Philol., XI, 193 ff. Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Pisistratus, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Pisistratus, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2参见Bonner, Classical Philology, XI, 191 ff.; XIX, 359 ff. Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in Rural Attica, Classical Philology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jan., 1928), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3有关任命三十位农村法官原因的讨论,可参见De Sanctis, Storia della Repubblica Ateniese, p. 136. Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in Rural Attica, Classical Philology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jan., 1928), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in Rural Attica, Classical Philology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jan., 1928), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第55页。
    1 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第55—56页。
    2 Demosthenes, 46.26, DemosthenesⅣ, A.T.Murray (trans), Loeb Classical Library, 1936. p.133.转引自解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版,第115页。
    3陶片放逐法(Ostrakismos)旧称贝壳放逐法,孙道天先生认为此种翻译不准确,“Ostrakon”本意为陶片。引自孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第63页。
    4孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第63页。
    1 [英]赫·乔·韦尔斯:《世界史纲》,吴文藻、谢冰心、费孝通等译,人民出版社1982年版,第316页。转引自梁治平:《从苏格拉底之死看希腊法的悲剧》,载《读书》1987年第8期。
    2 Harrison I968 (n. I) I 115-21.“eisangelia”程序也可以指“graphē”程序;见Rhodes (n. 3) 629。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 J. K. Davies, Athenian propertied families, 600-300(Oxford 1971) 7. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Davies (n. 42) 43 ff. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Davies (n. 42) 151I ff. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 S. C. Humphreys, The family, women and death (London 1983) 5. Humphreys在证据方面是相当随便,并没有提及“eisangelia”程序的已知案件,认为Dem. Xxxvi中的案件是一起由被监护人提出的关于遗产的案件,忽视了在Lys. Xxxii中被监护人姊妹的丈夫所扮演的角色,并推测在Dem. xxxviii 23中“phasis”程序的结果必然是不公正的或不明智的。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robert J. Bonner, Apollodorus vs. Phormio, Criminal Assault Classical Philology, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Jan., 1919), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1一直以来,在雅典,诉讼当事人都不愿意承认自己是因为金钱而达成和解协议的,因为他们害怕自己会被归入恶意诉讼者的行列。参见Lofberg, Sycophancy in Athens, p. 86. Robert J. Bonner, Apollodorus vs. Phormio, Criminal Assault Classical Philology, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Jan., 1919), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 W. Wyse, The speeches of Isaeus (Cambridge 1904) 622认为对戴克里斯(Diokles)提出的“graphai hybreōs”程序指控的控诉人是Is. viii中的演说人,虽然在那起案件中的演说人已经使他的攻击变得稍微有点不合时宜。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Davies (n. 42) 406 and 68-9.对这起案件进一步的评论见D. M. MacDowell, 'Hybris in Athens', G & R xxiii (1976) 1I4-3I, esp. 28-9. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1有关该案件的详细情况可见Rhodes (n. 3) 659-60。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Lys. Vii可以提供第四个不敬神案件的案例。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Publishedby The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Aristophanes, Wasps, 1406-8. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.148.
    2 Isaeus,Ⅵ. On the Estate of Philoctemon, 12. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007,, p.149.
    3 [Lysias],Ⅵ. Against Andocides,11. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.148.
    1参见Hansen 975 (n. i). Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol.105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3有一种稍微有点愤世嫉俗的观点认为“pseudomartyria”应该被视为一种上诉程序,这可能是真相。RobinOsborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 P. Bohannan, Justice and judgment among the Tiv (Oxford 1957) 65; A. Epstein 'The case method in the field of law', in A. Epstein, ed., The craft of social anthropology (London 1967) 205-30 (quotation from 230). Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5 W. A. J. Watson, The nature of law (Edinburgh 1977) Preface. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 M. Gluckman, The judicial process among the Barotse (Manchester I955) 297 (cf ch. i). Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 V. Turner, Schism and continuity in an African society (Manchester 1957) 91-3, 230-2. See generally P. Bourdieu, Outline of a theory of practice (Cambridge 1977) i6 f. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 B. S. Cohn in P. Bohannan, ed., Law and warfare (N.Y. 1967) 139-59提供了有关司法体系可以在特定环境中被理解的独特倾向的戏剧化例证。科恩(Cohn)指出在印度北方的拉其普特人中间,作为社会团结粘合剂的战争的消失导致了“法律不是用来解决纠纷,而是助长冲突的升级与蔓延,法庭被看做是折磨人或者获得报复快感的地方这种状况”。Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Dem. liii 2. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3参见P. H. Gulliver, Social control in an African society (London I963) 232, on the Arusha. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    4 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    5 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1 Gulliver (n. 57) 298. Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    2 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    3 [法]克琳娜·库蕾著:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第124—125页。
    1 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿卡奈人骑士》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第125—127页。
    2 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿卡奈人骑士》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第131页。
    1 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《云马蜂》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第12—13页。
    2 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《云马蜂》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第21页。
    3 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《云马蜂》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第40—41页。
    4 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《云马蜂》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第109页。
    1 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第126页。
    2 [古希腊]色诺芬:《回忆苏格拉底》,吴永泉译,商务印书馆1984年版,第1页。
    3徐琳:《苏格拉底之死与雅典民主政治》,载《历史教学》1998年第10期。
    4徐琳:《苏格拉底之死与雅典民主政治》,载《历史教学》1998年第10期。
    5徐琳:《苏格拉底之死与雅典民主政治》,载《历史教学》1998年第10期;黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期;吴爱孙、胡志刚:《苏格拉底悲剧成因探析》,载《哈尔滨学院学报》第27卷第10期。
    1 M. I.芬雷:《苏格拉底和雅典》,载《我们失去了特洛伊战争》(On a perdu la guerre de Troie)一书,第76—77页。转引自[法]克琳娜·库蕾,邓丽丹译:《古希腊的交流》,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第126页。
    2 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第119页;胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第37—38页。
    3 [古希腊]德摩斯梯尼:《斥亚里斯托吉东》,I,52。转引自[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第120页。
    4 [古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第185页。
    1 P. Chantraine, Dictionnaireétymologique, ad loc, I, 393.转引自[法]克琳娜·库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第1119页。
    2 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第119页。
    3 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《财神》,905以下。转引自[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第120页。
    4 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第120—121页。
    1 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿卡奈人骑士》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第67页。
    2 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿卡奈人骑士》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版,第60—61页。
    1 [古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿卡奈人》,载《阿里斯多芬戏剧集》,罗念生等译,人民出版社1954年版,第46—47页。
    2 [古希腊]德摩斯梯尼:《斥亚里斯托吉东》,I,47。转引自[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第121页。
    3 [古希腊]色诺芬:《回忆苏格拉底》,吴永泉译,商务印书馆1984年版,第81页。
    4 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第122页。
    1 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第122页。
    2有关十将军审判的详细情况可以参见[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第122—123页。贾薇:《对雅典民主政治的批判与反思》,载《青海社会科学》2003年第3期。
    3 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》,I,7,5;I,7,7。转引自[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第122—123页。
    4 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》, I,7,8。转引自[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第123页。
    1 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》,I,7,9;I,7,11;I,7,15。转引自[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第123页。
    2孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第120页。
    3孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第120页。[法]克琳娜·库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第123页。
    4胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第38页。
    5 D.M.MacDowell,The law in Classical Athens,Oxford,1978,p.65.转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第38页。
    1有学者认为存在这种情况的部分原因在于,每位公民都知法并实施法律,因此不存在律师代表公民的做法。[美]约翰·赞恩:《法律的故事》,刘昕、胡凝译,江苏人民出版社1998年版,第105、109、416页。转引自胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第36页。
    2米尔提亚戴斯由于进攻帕洛司不利,遭到阿毕普隆起诉。由于他腿部腐烂,无法出庭应诉,只得由朋友代其出席庭审,为其辩护。参见希罗多德:《历史》VI. 1360。转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第58页。
    3 [法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第106—107页。
    4从词源上看,其意即为“与之交谈的人”。[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版,第107页。
    1梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第173页。
    2芬利认为雅典陪审法庭是由从未接受专业训练和对法律不感兴趣的公民组成的,他们要么对法律一无所知,要么听凭个人喜好,抛弃法条,滥用权力。参见M. I. Finley, Democracy Ancient and Modern, London: The Hogarth Press, 1985, pp.116-117;梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第173页。
    3参见普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》,伯里克利传15.40。的确,大多数雅典法律对犯罪都没有明确的定义,而只是简单规定如果有人犯罪,受害者应该寻求法律补偿。因此法律并没有提供陪审员用于解决争执的规则和界限。比如侮辱罪(hybris)就是很好的一个例子。在古希腊,侮辱罪大多常用于指待人态度,通常被描述为一种无法控制的、一直想侮辱或者至少蔑视他人的权利和声望的行为,它可以用于指任何侮辱,从口头嘲弄到身体攻击,包括强奸。然而,在雅典法律上此术语含义十分不精确,通常理解为身体伤害。因此,侮辱罪定义是具有弹性的,它主要与诉讼人的案件陈述和陪审员对此的接受程度相关。蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第71页。Matthew R. Christ, The Litigious Athenian, London: The John Hopkins University Press, 1998, p. 129. N. R. E. Fisher,“Hybris and dishonour: I”, Greece & Rome, 2nd Ser., Vol. 23, No.2 (Oct., 1976), 177-193. N. R. E. Fisher,“Hybris and dishonour:Ⅱ”, Greece & Rome, 2nd Ser., Vol. 26, No. 1 (Apr., 1979) 32-47. Douglas MacDowell,“Hybris in Athens”, Greece & Rome, 2nd Set., Vol. 23, No. I (Apr., 1976),14-31. Douglas L. Cairns,”Hubris, Dishonour, and Thinking Big”, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116(1996), 1—32.
    1 Matthew R. Christ, The Litigious Athenian, London: The John Hopkins University Press, 1998, p.41.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in AncientAthens, Austin: University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 1-2.
    3 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第256—257页。
    4希佩里德斯(Hypeiides,公元前390—322年),公元前四世纪雅典演说家,支持德摩斯梯尼反对马其顿,曾动员他的城邦参加雅典反抗马其顿统治的最后一次决战——拉希米亚战争(公元前323年)。
    5埃莱夫西斯(Elefsis),古希腊城市,在雅典以西约23公里处,是埃莱夫西斯神秘宗教的发祥地,也是大地和丰收女神德墨忒尔的故乡。
    6 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第257页。
    1蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第58—59页。
    2 [美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第266页。
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 46.
    1 Dem. 55.Ⅰ-2, 3Ⅰ-35. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 46.
    2 Millett 1991, 139-140,和Christ 1998, ch. 5,探索了泰西阿斯之子陈述中提到的那种邻里关系的意义。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 47.
    3虽然在这个案件中,双方当事人在一些事实方面存在争论(例如,干枯河床的天然走向),但在很多方面,他们还是达成了共识(例如泰西阿斯在马路边修筑了一道防水堤坝,曾经发生过一场洪水,卡里克利斯因此受到了一定的损失。)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 47.
    4 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 47.
    1 Aes. 1.173;有关Aeschines 1的创作日期,见Harris 1985; Wankel 1988. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2参见Vlastos 1983, 495-96; Stone 1988, 177-78; Irwin 1989, 186-87; Hansen 1995, 29-30; Parker 1996, 201-2; Carey 2000, 81, n. 183; Fisher 2001, 319-20. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1参见蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第59—69页。
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 5.
    3蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第65页。
    4 Andocides, On the Mysteries 148-149.转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第65页。
    5 Aesch. 2.179. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 109.
    1 Dem. 19.310.他在SS228, 257, 281和283中也发表反对怜悯的预期主张。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 109-110.
    2亚里士多德在他的《修辞学》(1354a)中讨论了这种方式。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 110.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 110.
    4被告明确请求获得怜悯的文献记载有:Aesch.2.179; Andoc.1.67; Ant.5.73; Isae.2.2; Isoc.16.48; Lys.3.48;
    4.20; 18.1; 19.53; 20.34-36; 21.25; 24.7.另外,在阿里斯托芬的戏剧《四联剧》中,三位被告中的两位祈求怜悯(Ant.2.2.13; 3.2.2; 3.2.11)。控诉人请求获得怜悯的文献记载有:Dem.27.67-68; 28.20; 45.88; 54.43; 58.69(在这之中,只有一件公诉案件);Lys.32.19.参见Ant.3.1.2; 3.3.3.在一起“paragraphe”程序的案件中也有祈求怜悯的记载:Dem.36.59.在四起公诉案件中,控诉人也主张,相比于被告,城邦(或者它的某一方面)更值得同情(Din.1.109-110; 3.13; Lys.22.21; 28.14)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 111.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 111.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 111.
    3 Isae.5.10,35; Lys.14.39; 2.73; Dissoi Logoi 1.14. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 111.
    4 Dem.24.171. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 111.
    5 Ant.3.2.2. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 111.
    6 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 111.
    1更准确地说,他们对严厉刑罚的结果进行了戏剧化的夸张描述,但是被告看起来已经省略了区别。注意到这种差异,一些控诉人认为虽然祈求怜悯在核定刑罚的过程中是可以接受的,但是不应该涉及罪与非罪的问题(Aesch.3.197-198; Dem.54.21)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 112.
    2 Dem.57.70.参见Aesch.2.179; Lys.7.41. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 112.
    3假如被告败诉的话,他所面临的风险要比控诉人大得多,虽然假如控诉人没能获得五分之一陪审团成员的投票支持的话,他们也会被处以罚款,但是假如他们胜诉的话,被告将面临的刑罚会比这个严重许多。科恩(D. Cohen)看起来偶然会暗示(例如1995,92)被告不需要冒什么风险,因为他们可以逃避刑罚和奖励。虽然有些人可能会逃避向获胜控诉人支付罚金的刑罚,但是建立在这种所谓逃避行为(例如Dem.30; Isae.5)基础上的案件并没有为推断这种行为的频繁程度提供根据,因为只有当获胜的控诉人没能获得奖励时,才会引发法律诉讼。因此,关于需要支付罚金的被判定有罪的被告人的证据是系统的、充分的。当罚金缴纳的对象是城邦时,没有缴纳罚款会导致会导致罚金数目翻倍,监禁,甚至被剥夺公民权(ManDowell 1978,165-167; Todd 1993,144-145)。实际情况是,城邦通常将这些刑罚交由自愿控诉人执行,而且有人指控城邦债务人的案件并不能为总结这多久发生一次提供根据(因为非常类似的原因:因为控诉人的缺席不会导致案件的发生)。然而,没有支付奖励或罚款给予对方一个潜在的优势,不仅仅是发动另一起司法案件的平台(像早期引用的那些文献表明的那样),而且为获得奖励施行自我救济提供了充分的理由(Dem.47.52-61表明了为什么一个人会想逃避这样的执行措施。然而,同一篇演说词也显示了自我救济执行者将会面临的危险[SS36-46]。)。这种风险的不对称分配机制更好地回答了为什么诉讼不能被看作是为了获得荣誉而进行的社会竞争的简单扩展。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 112.
    1 Christ 1998从细节上对这种既爱又恨的矛盾心理进行了讨论。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 112.
    2 Lys.3.48.一个相似的观点,那些人应该在审判中获得怜悯,看上去好像成为了德摩斯梯尼攻击阿里斯托革顿(Aristogeiton)的基础(Dem.25.82)。在另一次审判中(Dem.27.68),德摩斯梯尼明确反对认为那些接受审判的人应该获得同情的观点。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 112.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 112.
    4 Stevens 1944, 15-17. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    5 H. Thompsom 1952. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    6控诉人对于怜悯在一个不恰当的环境中表现出来的普遍忧虑间接肯定了大多数被告可以请求同情。在五十五篇控诉演说词中,有二十六篇警告陪审员不要同情可怜被告,与之相对的是,二十五位被告中只有一位做了同样的表述(47%对4%)。在所有控诉人当中,几乎有一半警告陪审员不要同情可怜被告,与之相对的是,只有一位被告做了同样的表述。参见表三。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    7 Dem.19.57; 25.76; Isae.5.35. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    1 Ant.1.26.有关没有对别人怀有怜悯之心的被告不值得别人的同情的论断,参见:Dem.19.283; 21.100-101,185; 25.81-83; Din.2.11; Lyc.1.141.另参见Dem.28.20.在一些案件中,控诉人没有一颗同情之心,参见:Dem.24.111; 27.65; Isae.5.10; Din.1.24. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    2 Dem.21.184-185. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    3 Dem.21.225; Lyc.1.150; Lys.14.40; Lys.15.9(第二篇演说词发生于同一次审判,见Lys.14)。Isae.10(一个关于继承纠纷的“diadikasia”程序案件)中的演说人说因为他的对手不能提出与法律以及公平正义观念相违背的论断,相反,他将花时间表达对战争死难者的同情(SS22)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy:The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    4在他对埃斯基涅斯提出的指控中,德摩斯梯尼对一个关于公共利益的问题,即城邦会受到私人感情动机的伤害,其中之一便是怜悯(Dem.19.228)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    5 Lyc.1.150. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    6 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 113.
    1 Dem.22.57-58. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 114.
    2 Dem.24.171. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 114.
    3 Dem.25.81.参见Dem.27.65,一起德摩斯梯尼败诉的案件,案中受欺骗的孤儿值得同情。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 114.
    4 Dem.25.26,50. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 114.
    5 Dem.21.195. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 114.
    6 Fisher 1990. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 114.
    1 Demosthenes.38.27.转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第65页。
    2蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第65页。
    3 Arist., Rhet. 1386a-b. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 114.
    4 Frag.D 1.我们并不清楚这一评论的背景;它可能并不是一起司法案件(虽然看起来有互相竞争的演说人,而且复数形式的“你们”也暗示这是一篇向很多听众发表的演说词)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    5 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    6 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    7在陪审法庭庭审过程中发生的哭泣看起来不如为死者举行的葬礼来得形式化,至少对根据词汇的运用来进行判断是这样。关于这种仪式化的哀痛的两个常用单词,从不用来描述诉讼当事人或他们亲属的行为。虽然它们特别可以用来指代任何形式的哭泣(Alexiou 1974,226n.6),但是在具体使用中人们有意识地避免了这种用法。对于描述法庭上的哭泣行为的常用词汇是另两个单词。在某种情况下,其中一个单词也被用来指代哭泣(Lys.20.34);在Thuc.2.34中,它被用来描述在战死者的公共葬礼上,妇女们悲痛欲绝的场景。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    1控诉案件是是Aesch.3.209,210; Dem.19.310; 21.99,186,194,204; 39.35; 45.88; 53.29; 54.43; Din.1.109,110; Hyp.5,frag.9,col.40; Lyc.1.33,150; Lys.27.12.在“paragraphe”程序案件中有四位控诉人提及了他们的对手哭泣的可能性:Dem.36.36; 37.48; 38.19.27; Isoc.18.35,37. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    2 Dem.38.27. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    3 Dem.30.32; Hyp.5.frag.9, col.40; Lys.27.13.参见Lys.18.24. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    4 Lys.20.34.参见Dem.19.281; Hyp.2.9; Lys.21.25.有两位被告明确宣布了将自己的孩子带至陪审团面前的意图:Aesch.2.179; Hyp.4.41.另一位被告则对没有孩子可以带至陪审团面前感到遗憾、惋惜:Andoc.1.149. 将可怜的孩子带至庭审现场的现象在古典时期的雅典是如此普遍,以至于阿里斯托芬对这种现象进行了讥讽(Wasps 975-978和Lys.877-888),而伊索克拉底(Isocrates, Isoc.15.321)和柏拉图(Apol.34c)则对其进行了谴责。绝大部分的参考文献表明孩子一般在法庭演说将要结束的时候被带至法庭庭审现场(Aesch.2.152是例外),而且他们整齐地排列在演说人的讲台上(例如Dem.19.310; Hyp.4.41)。(MacDowell 1990,339,对演讲台进行了描述。Boegehold 1995,201-205引用了关于它的古代文献证据。) 与儿童不同,妇女们看起来很少出席庭审,即使就去哭泣。与有大量充分的证据(既有演说词,也包括外部资料来源)证明孩子会被带至庭审现场相反,只有一份关于女性出庭支持诉讼当事人的文献例证(Dem.25.84)。假设诉讼当事人甚至不愿意在法庭上说出他们女性亲属的名字(Schaps 1977)这一论断是正确的话,那么我们对于女性几乎不出席庭审这一现象就没有什么好奇怪的了。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    5 Dem.21.99. MacDowell 1990,321,并没有为他关于“应该是孩子哭泣,德摩斯梯尼认为美迪亚斯(Meidias)将亲自哭泣是带有讽刺挖苦意味的”论断提供任何理由。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    6 Lys.20.34. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    7 Dem.27.65. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 115.
    1 Isae.2.44.这三个单词的组合看起来已经是一种常规请求。在这篇演说词中,它出现了十一次;三个单词中的两个组合在一起出现了十八次。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 115-116.
    2 Gould 1973,101.佩得瑞克(Pedrick)对古尔德(Gould)的标准说明进行了补充说明。Herman 1987,54-58说明了哀求可以引起“xenia”,一种仪式化的友谊关系。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    3 Dem.21.7; 45.1; 57.1; 58.3; Isae.2.2; 6.57.也可参见Aesch.3.156; Dem.42.19.然而,即使那些“隐喻意味”的使用也是意味深长的。德摩斯梯尼现存的对公民大会发表的演说词中没有一篇他曾经哀求过观众,即使是请求他们保持注意力也没有出现过。斯蒂文?约翰斯通怀疑这反映了公民大会与陪审法庭上演说人与听众的关系是不同的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    4在悲剧中哀求的频繁出现表明在公元前五世纪这一仪式还没有失去效力。例如Eur.,Hecuba 342-345(奥德修斯(Odysseus)将他的手和脸都藏起来,以防止任何哀求的发生);Hippolytos 324(保姆强迫费德拉(Phaedra)承认她的爱,通过抓紧她的手);Herakles 963-968(赫拉克勒斯(Herakles)的父亲用手向他哀求)。参见Aristoph., Lys.1139,在那里,一位斯巴达人以恳求者的身份坐在那里请求雅典人的援助。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    5 Gould,1973,77. Herman 1987,50-54,表明紧握右手的重要性,“dexia”,在“xenia”关系中。这种仪式在公元前四世纪晚期依然是非常有效的,就像Aesch.3.224认为的那样。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    6 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    7 Dem.18.107(对公民大会的请愿书是由权利受到不法侵害的三列桨战舰指挥官提出的); 24.12(一份由战争期间俘获财产的所有人向公民大会提出的请愿书); Aesch.1.104(一位老年人向五百人议事会提出的希望将其重新纳入有资格享受城邦救济的残疾人名单的请求[参见亚里士多德《雅典政制》49.4]);Dem.24.50-53(一条限制被宣判有罪的人哀求获得宽大的法律); Andoc.1.110-116(在节日期间,通过将恳求枝条置于Eleusinium的祭坛之上,向众议院提出的请愿书,然而,在那时,好像法律已经禁止了这种行为).参见Menander, Sykionios 190。外邦人士向雅典人所做的请求据说也要进行哀求仪式:Dem.50.5; IG II2 218.8,24; 276.5; 336.frag.b.16; 337.34; 502.14.(词组173在IG II2 192.2; 211.p1; 404.4中得到了恢复。)Rhodes 1972,55-57,认为hiketeria对参加公民大会的公民发表直接演说,不需要首先通过五百人议事会。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    1亚里斯多德:《雅典政制》.43.6。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    2 Rhodes 1981b, 528.参见Hdt. 5.51, 7.141,在那里,树枝同样代表请求。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    4 Aristoph., Wealth 382-385.这在司法背景中是非常明晰的,因为Blepsidemos已经想像Chremylos窃取金钱,并因此受到指控。橄榄枝在这里是一个喜剧发明(阿里斯托芬照字面对哀求进行了戏剧化的比喻描述),但是它在其他对雅典人民所做的祈求中的广泛运用使得我们很难将其在这如此不一致的运用当成是笑话。然而,幽默看起来起源于Blepsidemos过于热切地将犯罪行为归因于Chremylos想变富裕的计划,以及将他为家庭所做的哀求比作一幅关于英雄主题的著名油画。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 116.
    5 Dem.43.83. Steven Johnstone指出,没有证据表明陪审法庭内设有祭坛以放置祈愿树枝(Boegehold 1995没有对此的任何说明),但是有一点不利于这种论断。然而,祭坛的缺失并不是决定性的:我们不知道在陪审法庭内是否会举行祭祀奉献。当证人拒绝同意诉讼当事人准备的证词的时候,他们进行宣誓(Lyc.1.20)。(在亚里斯多德所处的年代,诉讼当事人也在审判开始前宣誓:雅典政制67.1和罗德斯1981b的评论。在阿里斯托芬关于家庭法庭的喜剧概念中,法庭以奠酒祭神仪式和祈祷作为开庭的前奏:Wasps 859-884。)这表明祭坛的存在还有实践足够的弹性,我们可以想像哀求仪式没有官方的规定也可以进行。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 116-117.
    1阿里斯托芬:《马蜂》552-556。在公元前三世纪早期,喜剧诗人波赛狄波斯(Poseidippos)创作的一个角色说当高级妓女佛里恩(Phryne)接受审判时,通过握紧每位陪审员的右手并哭泣的方式,赢得了诉讼,被陪审团宣布为无罪(Athen.591e-f)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    2色诺芬:《雅典政制》.1.18;阿里斯托芬:《马蜂》555,560。这两项是关于哀求陪审员的直接证据,《马蜂》(公元前422年)和《雅典政制》(在公元前446年之后,不会晚于公元前412年)的创作时间都早于公元前四世纪法庭演说词大量出现的年代。MacDowell 1990,292(与学界通说一致),认为“到这个时代[公元前353年—352年,Dem.21的日期],这种游说行为在普通法庭上已经变得近乎不可能,因为陪审员分配体制的建立使得不可能提前知道哪些陪审员将审理哪些案件。”然而,关于游说的演说词中的参考文献都来自于公元前四世纪中期,包括Dem.21,就是麦克道尔(MacDowell)对其进行评论的那篇演说词。(Dem.19创作于公元前343年;Lavency 1964认为Dem.37创作于公元前346年—345年之间,Dem.47则创作于公元前355年—354年之间。)而且,麦克道尔的论断所依靠的,亚里士多德对陪审法庭陪审员分配机制的特别详细的描述(《雅典政制》.63-65),可以追溯至公元前328年—322年之间,几乎晚于Dem.21创作年代三十年,看起来似乎与考古学证据并不一致(见Rhodes 1981b, 63.2);即使它是正确的,看上去它也不能排除在陪审员分配结束以后,当他们进入指定的法庭审判室时,对其进行游说的可能性。Boegehold 1995对陪审法庭的设备与空间方面进行了详细的描述。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    3 Isoc.15.321. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    4 Aesch.1.113; Dem.30.32; Dem.47.43(在元老院面前); Dem.58.27-28(在公民大会面前); Dem.59.81(在战神山议事会面前);以及Hyp.5, frag.6.26.所有案件都是公诉案件。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    5 Din.1.109; Lyc.1.143; Lys.6.55; 15.3; 22.21. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 117.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 117-118.
    2 Din.3.21. Lyc.1.150通过国家和家族对陪审团提出了隐喻意味的哀求,而不是控诉者本人。公共案件中的控诉人进行哀求的可能性更小,因为他经常将自己描述为不是由于自己和自己得家庭所受到的伤害而提起诉讼,而是因为雅典城邦作为一个整体受到了被告行为的伤害,促使自己提起控诉。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    3 Dem.27;45;和48. Dem.28和46是在同一次审判中分别紧跟着Dem.27和45的第二篇演说词。Dem.56.4是一个例外。Dem.45和46是监护权案件,因为虽然对于虚假的证人、证人证言的技术性指控已经存在于反对监护人的新声明中,但是演说人阿波罗多罗斯花了很多时间复述他对自己监护人身份职责的牢骚和委屈。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    4 Dem.43.83-84; Isae.8.45; 9.37. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    5在希腊,孤儿经常在失去父亲的情况下做出这样的指控,即使他们的母亲依然还活着。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    6有四位要求获得怜悯的控诉人符合这一标准:Dem.27.67-68; 28.20; 45.88;和Lys.32.19。而另外两位控诉人则不符合:Dem.54.43; 58.69.然而,最后,Epichares起诉Theokrines,以报复他曾起诉Epichares的父亲,导致他的父亲被判有罪,并被剥夺了公民权。前一起案件判决中数额巨大的罚款已经摧毁了他们的家族,在Dem.58中,Epichares将自己描述为家族的代表。只有一个被告,瑟俄彭珀斯(Theopompos),他被控虐待孤儿,认为他案件中的控诉人会乞求获得怜悯。(Isae.11.38)Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    7 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    8阿波罗多罗斯(在Dem.45和46中)一定在某种程度上扩展延伸了该诉请。即使在他的父亲去世之时,他已经是一个具有完全民事行为能力的成年人。在这些演说词发表的二十年后,他已经成为了一名卓越的和富有的雅典公民,这可以通过他的公共服务记录获得证明(Trevett 1992,14)。他看起来在他败诉的一起早期案件中,已经采取了一种相似的自我描述策略,因为他的对手波尔米欧(Phormio)辩护的演说人警告陪审团阿波罗多罗斯将会哭泣,好像他是个穷人,但实际上,他非常富裕(Dem.36.36)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    1 Dem.27.66-68.参见Dem.45.85. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 118.
    3 Todd 1993, 133-135. Harrison 1971, 80-82.描述了哪些案件是属于哪种类型。这种程序类似于职业体育比赛中的仲裁形式:有关每一方当事人只能提出一次建议,而仲裁人必须在两者中选择其一(而不是他们想法的妥协折衷)的要求目的是为了鼓励当事人提出真诚的建议。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 119.
    4有关证据可以在Aesch.1.113;3.197-198; Dem.30.31-32; 47.42-43; 53.17-18; 54.21; 58.19; 58.70; 59.6; Isae.5.17-18.所有这些都提到了更早的案件。参见Dem.24.50-53; 59.81; Lys.1.25-26.柏拉图在《申辩》一书中对刑罚听证会小说化的记述只有对说明性的目的是有用的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 119.
    5 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 119.
    1在宣判有罪之后,控诉人不能推迟刑罚评估进程,但是他依然能够建议和提倡一个轻微适度的刑罚。在一起案件中,控诉人和被告人在判定是否有罪的投票程序正在进行计票时达成了和解,因此他们终止了该投票进程(Isae.5.17-18)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 119.
    2 Dem.58.70. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 119.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 119.
    4 Dem.47.42-43; 53.17-18; Isae.5.17-18.在这些例证中,关于终止纠纷的妥协方案的失败,并没有对那些精确地做到这一点的其他案件进行说明,在纠纷被成功地解决之后,恰好因为它已经被终结了,所以不会有关于司法演说词的证据记录留存下来。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 119.
    5 Dem.58.1-2;70; 59.6. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 119.
    6 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens,Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 120.
    1 Dem.59.6. Theomnestos的观点是斯忒芬诺斯(Stephanos)所提议的罚金数额是如此巨大(十五塔兰特需要数辈子才能积攒出来),以致于阿波罗多罗斯(Apollodors)根本无力支付罚款,并以为不履行刑罚而被剥夺公民权。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 120.
    2 Dem.58.70. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 120.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 120.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 122-123.
    2 Gould 1973,88. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    3 Aesch.1.99; Isae.8.22; Lys.32.11. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    4在伊索克拉底的《修辞学》一书中,这种看法是普遍的:例如Isoc.4.57,67; 6.75; 9.14; 14.1,6,56; 12.169.参见Aesch.3.157; Lys.2.11,39. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    5 Gould 1973,89. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    6 Plato, Apol.392; Symp.183a. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    7雅典男人特别渴望将独立、自由的公民群体与那些下等的团体区分开来(Halperin 1990, 98-99)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    8例如,德摩斯梯尼认为在听说发生在城邦内的不幸事件时,哭泣是正确的反应(Dem.18.291),而伊索克拉底则认为当密友分别时,哭泣时不恰当的(Isoc.15.88)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    9 Alexiou 1974,105,和Loraux 1986,45.这也是Dem.ep.Ⅱ.25中的假定不得不克服的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    10 Dem.21.186. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    11 Plato, Apol.39a; Symp.183a. Dem.21.186. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    1 Plato, Apol.34c.色诺芬也记载了苏格拉底拒绝“向陪审员们提出哀求,并且奉承、阿谀他们,乞求怜悯违犯法律之事”。Dem.21.186. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    2 Apol.35a. Apol.35b.在《法律篇》(949b)一书的理想状态中,柏拉图认为被告使用不得体的哀求或女人化的恸哭是不合法的。Dem.21.186. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    3例如Isoc.16.48. Dover 1974,197,对这一论断进行了评论。Dem.21.186. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 123.
    4 Gould 1973,94. Dem.21.186. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 124.
    5阿里斯托芬:《马蜂》571,参见882。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 124.
    6阿里斯托芬:《马蜂》547-575,阿里斯托芬:《阿里斯托芬戏剧六种》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2004年版。转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第65—66页。
    1 Isoc.4.57.上下文提及哀求者来到雅典城市。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 124.
    2蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第66页。
    3 [古希腊]色诺芬:《回忆苏格拉底》,吴永泉译,商务印书馆1984年版,第189页。有关苏格拉底审判的具体细节,可参见黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期;[古希腊]柏拉图:《苏格拉底的申辩》,严群译,商务印书馆1983年版;[古希腊]色诺芬:《回忆苏格拉底》,吴永泉译,商务印书馆1984年版。
    4柏拉图:《申辩》,《苏格拉底的最后日了——柏拉图对话集》,第57页。转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第66页。
    5色诺芬:《回忆苏格拉底》,IV. 4.4。转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第66页。
    1黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期;梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第169页。
    2赵小君:《苏格拉底之死》,载《家庭与家教》2002年第11期。
    3梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第168页;黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期。
    4梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第169页;黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期。
    5黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期。
    1梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第174页。
    2 [古希腊]柏拉图:《苏格拉底的申辩》,严群译,商务印书馆1983年版,第52页。
    3梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第175页。
    4 [古希腊]柏拉图:《苏格拉底的申辩》,严群译,商务印书馆1983年版,第72页。
    1黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期。
    2黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期。
    3胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文,第34页。
    4黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期。
    5 [古希腊]柏拉图:《苏格拉底的申辩》,严群译,商务印书馆1983年版,第77页。
    6梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第175页。
    7蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第61页。
    8 Lysias 25. 12-13.转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第60页。
    1 Lysias 21. 25.转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第61页。
    2 Demosthenes 54. 44.转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第60页。
    3这篇演说词大概写作于公元前399年。我们不能肯定演说人是在什么程序(或者什么指控)下为自己辩护的,但目前学界普遍认为是在“dokimasia”程序中。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 93.
    4虽然雅典人面临的这种状况是相当普遍的,Adkins 1960, 202认为这里“不幸”一词意谓“在一起司法案件中,作为被告出庭受审”。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 93.
    5 Lys. 25. 12-13. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 93.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 94.
    2在二十五起案件中,有十三起案件的被告引用了过去他们承担公益捐赠纪录:Ant. 5. 77; Dem. 18. 267; 52. 26; Isae. 2. 42; 11. 50; Isoc. 16. 35; Lys. 3. 47; 7. 31-32; 18. 7, 21; 19. 56-63; 20. 23; 21. 1-10; 25. 12-13.控诉人则在五十五起案件中,有十一起提及了他们的公益捐赠状况:Dem. 19. 230; 21. 151-174; 23. 5; 45. 78, 85; 47. 23, 54; 50(激情); 54. 44; 58. 66-68; Isae. 6. 60-61; Isoc. 17. 57-58; Lys. 12. 20.在这些控诉案件中,有三起案件是就由于特定公益捐赠行为引发的冲突而提起诉讼的;在统计中去掉这三起案件,引用公益捐赠的被告与控诉人的人数比例大概是3.5:1(52%对15%)。我们还可以注意到被告在公诉和私诉案件中提及自己公益捐赠的比例差不多一致。在那些诉讼当事人提及自己对手的公益捐赠状况的案件中,确定的或可能的,控诉人这样做了十二次(占所有案件的22%),而被告只有一次(占所有案件的4%),这与有更多被告在申辩中提及自己公益捐赠状况的一般预期相吻合。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 94.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 94.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 94.
    2 Ant. 2.2.12(参见Ant. 2.3.8); 5.75-77; Dem. 34.39-40; 52.26; Hyp. 1.14-18; Isoc. 18.58-65; Lys. 7.30-33; 19.56-63; 20.23; 21.19, 21-22; 25.13.参见Bennet and Feldman 1981, 107-114. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 95.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 95.
    2 Lys. 19.56. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 96.
    3 Lys. 19.60-61.参见Isoc. 18.58. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 96.
    4蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第61页。
    1欧贝尔对此评论道:“埃斯基涅斯的陈述无非是提醒陪审员注意,和苏格拉底一样,德摩斯梯尼也是智者,这样会激起陪审员对德摩斯梯尼的愤怒。既然德摩斯梯尼本人收取学生,陪审员将会推断他在教授苏格拉底教授给克里提阿斯的同样的东西,因此德摩斯梯尼应该得到同样的命运。相反,如果德摩斯梯尼是清白无辜的,那么苏格拉底也是无辜的,因此眼前的陪审团将会陷于不公正的判决中。”(参见Josiah Ober, Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens: Rhetoric, Ideology, and the Power of the People, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989, p. 172.)转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第61—62页。
    2 Demosthenes 19.246-250.转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第61页。
    3 John Buckler,“Demosthenes and Aeschines”, in Ian Worthington (ed.), Demosthenes: Statesman and Orator, London&New York: Routledge, 2000, p. 114.转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第62页。
    4 David Cohen, Law, Violence, and Community in Classical Athens, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, p. 61.转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第63页。
    1 Dem. 21.167.参见Dem. 18.215-16; 20.76. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Pearson 1941; North 1952; Perlman 1961; 1964; Nouhaud 1982; Ober and Strauss 1990, 250-55; Hesk 2000, 227-31. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Ober 1989, 147-50. For the debate over Athens as a face-to-face community, see Osborne 1985, 64-65; Finley 1988, 16-18; Ober 1989, 31-33; Cohen 1997. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4关于证人在雅典法律中的角色,参见Humphreys 1985; Todd 1990b; Carey 1994, 183-84. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1例如,在Demosthenes 40里,曼蒂修斯(Mantitheus)告诉陪审团不要相信对方当事人关于案件的特定真相已经众所周知的陈述。假如他们不知道它是真实的,他们就会想当然地认为其他陪审员也不清楚真相(53-54)。在对“你们都知道”这一修辞学上的习惯用语表示质疑之外,曼蒂修斯又再次重申了它(contra: Hesk 2000, 228-29)。Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 D. Cohen 1995, 106-112,诉讼当事人举例证明他们品质的声明,因为雅典陪审法庭所使用的审判程序,使得要想搞清楚案件的真实情况几乎是不可能完成的任务。虽然诉讼当事人自己正确地做出了声明主张,但是作为对诉讼当事人的分析它是不够的,因为诉讼当事人以同样的方式,通过修辞学的方法,将他们的个人品质都描绘成事实。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 96.
    3参见Dem. 19.216. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 96.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 96-97.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 97.
    3 Lys. 19.61-62.参见SS 9-10.演说人在Lys. 18.20-21和Dem. 36.58-59中也做出了相似的申辩。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 97-98.
    1 Lys. 14.43-45.参见Andoc. 1.146-150. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 98.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 98.
    3 Dem. 43.75-76; Isae. 7.30. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 98.
    4有关公益捐赠比较的详细内容参见:Dem. 36.55-56, 58-59; Isae. 4.27-29; 5.41-42; 7.35;参见Isae. 10.25. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 98.
    5有关财产案件的正式判决是通过“diadikasia”程序做出的,在这类程序中,既没有原告,也没有被告。这类案件中的一部分(例如Isae.5和6)产生于与继承纠纷有关的私诉案件;在这些案件中,虽然控诉人与被告的角色是独特、清楚与重要的,相互竞争的财产申请者的隐含逻辑是他们也依然拥有财产。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 98.
    1 Isae. 6.61.(参见Isae. 4.27-29; 5.36-42; 7.32, 35-42.)演说人这样表述的部分理由是消除陪审员们对他委托人财富的仇视,这是他的对手努力想引发的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 98.
    2 Dem. 27.64. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 99.
    3 Dem. 28.24. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 99.
    4斯蒂文?约翰斯通指出,阿波罗多罗斯(Apollodoros)在Dem.45中努力将自己描绘成一个被欺骗的孤儿。虽然他不能明确地将自己的公益捐赠记录(SS78,85)与保存自己的家族联系起来。这种具象注意策略也许部分回答了为什么他作为一名控诉人也要引用自己的公益捐赠记录。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 99.
    1 Fisher 1990,126. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 99.
    2在所有的司法案件中,只有关于主张展开形式的考虑因素揭露了这一点。孤立地对案件进行阅读的策略(Dem.21是学者特别喜爱的文献记载)要冒将例外情况变为常态的风险。例如,科恩(D.Cohen)更多引用了Dem.21和54。它们是他关于控诉人的个人品质与被告一样,都是案件争论的焦点这一论断(p.186)的唯一例证。虽然,它们是重要的证据,然而,它们并不具有典型代表意义。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 100.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 100.
    4 Lys.21.25.整篇Lys.21文献中记载的演说词,它的结论一定是一段长得多的辩词,都用来支持演说人曾经履行公益捐赠义务的论断。尽管(或者也许因为)由于它特殊的性质,它在关于这个话题的学术报告中的位置非常显著。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 100.
    1 Herman 1987; Blundell 1989. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 100.
    2 Finley 1979; Kurke 1991; Millett 1991; Ober 1989. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 100-101.
    3 Davis 1981, 92-105. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    4然而,在这些要求获得感激回报的声明中,普遍的社会价值侵入了法庭的司法领域。Finley 1973,152; Ober 1989, 226-230; Kurke 1991, 174-175; Millett 1991,26,123-124. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    5 Isae.7.38-41; Isoc.16.35; 18.58-67; Lys.21.25. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    1 Aesch.2.171; Lys.21.25.参见Dem.20.75-83; Isae.10.25. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    2 Andoc.1.141-150. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    3 Aesch.2.4. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    4 Isae.7.41.参见Isoc.18.58. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    5 Lys.18.23,26,27. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    6 Andoc.1.141-150. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    7被告经常同时采用这两种策略,但是根据分析,这两种策略是截然不同的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes andDemocracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    8 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    9 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 102.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 102.
    2被告明确请求感恩之心的回报:Aesch.2.171; Andoc.1.146-150; Isoc.16.15,35,38; Lys.18.23,26,27; 20.30-31,33; 21.17-19,25; 25.11.控诉人请求感恩之心的回报:Dem.21.28; 23.93; 45.85.在“diadikasia”程序(Isae.7.41)与“paragraphe”程序(Isoc.18.58-67)中,各有一位演说人这么做。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 102.
    3当然,这种集体行动是通过个体陪审员的行为居间促成的,有些行动可能是有感情激动的精神状态促成的,但是影响陪审团做出判决的感情化的前提条件的重要性当然比不上认识论要素,说具体点,即个人对于团体及其利益的认同。感恩之心是由这种认同感和行为引发的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 102.
    4 Isae.7.41这里的阿波罗多罗斯明显不是本书其他引用案例中提及的那个阿波罗多罗斯。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 102.
    5例如Dem.18.112-113; 20.46; 21.172. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 103.
    6 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 102-103.
    1 Dem.21.67-69; Lyc.1.139-140. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 103.
    2 Dem.19.238(虽然这是担任公职,而不是履行公益捐赠记录)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 103.
    3虽然这个集体是虚构的,但是它依然使真实的。与Loraux 1986,336一样,“在‘虚构’的术语下,社会能理解任何人的身份。”利益只有当人们将其想像为是自己的时候,才会变得真实。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 103.
    4 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 103.
    5 Ant. 6.9-10(在那里,被告使原告的请求变得清晰明了); Dem. 21.28; 23.93;参见Ant. 5.61(在那里被告猜想不特定种类的假想指控会激发陪审员的感激之情)。这里有三到四例控诉人请求获得陪审团的感激或被告进行否认的异常记录。在关于请求获得感恩之心回报的样本记录中,一位控诉人(阿波罗多罗斯),在Dem.45.85中,引用了他自己的公益捐赠记录,但是明确否认这么做会引起陪审团对其的感激之情。(然而,本文将其也包含了进去,因为这样的否认看上去和直接主张的意图一样明显。斯蒂文?约翰斯通认为,当这与认为控诉人不会请求感恩之心的观点相冲突时,将其包含进来是一项稳健谨慎的决定。)Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 103.
    1 Ant.6.9-10. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 103-104.
    2 Dem.21.28. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 104.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 104.
    4控诉人对被告希望得到感恩之心回报的请求的回应是多变的。另一方面,他们经常承认感恩之心是陪审团对公益捐赠的正确回应(Dem.21.148-169,160; 25.76-78; 38.25-26; 42.24-25; Din.1.17; Isae.5.35-38,43-46; Lyc.1.139-140; Lys.6.36,46-47;12.38-40; 30.1, 26-27),虽然,令人生疑的是,在控诉人做出这种承认的案件中,被告都不能证明自己为城邦提供过公益捐赠,所以这种承认不应该被当成是对事实真相进行客观描述的方法。另一方面,他们看上去好像因为多种理由并不愿意进行否认被告的支持者应该获得感恩之心的回报(Dem.19.238; 21.211; Lyc.1.139-140; Lys.14.22; 27.13-14)。当然,控诉人主张陪审团完全不应该简单地表现出感恩之心的情况也不少见。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 104.
    5德摩斯梯尼在这里并没有暗指那些承担了公益捐赠和其他公共服务的公民,但是政治家的行为,尤其是他自己和埃斯基涅斯都试图获得和维护城邦或者他们自身的利益。他认为雅典公民的个人动机使他们不能分清谁是好政治家,谁是坏政客。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 104.
    6 Dem.19.227-229. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in AncientAthens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 104.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 104.
    2 Dem.19.239-240. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 105.
    3 Aesch.3.233; Lys.6.53; 15.10. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 105.
    4 Lys.10.15是例外。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 105.
    5 Lys.6.53. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 105.
    1 Aesch.3.233.虽然这句话是含蓄的,但是通过段落其他部分的阅读,陪审员明显被异乎寻常地考虑。
    2亚里士多德在《政治学》一书67中对他那个时代陪审法庭的秘密投票制度进行了记载。每位陪审员(dikast)有两块石子,一块代表支持控诉人(上面有洞),另一块代表支持被告(上面无洞)他们将这两块石子分别放入两个陶罐,一个计数,另一个不计数。Boegehold 1995记载了不同历史时期陪审法庭的多种投票机制。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 105.
    3阿里斯托芬:《马蜂》560-561。这种请求一般在审判前面对面进行。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 106.
    4 Xen.,Symp.5.8. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 169.
    5 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 105-106.
    6 Lys.13.37;参见Lys.12.91. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 169.
    7 Isoc.15.142-143.这些话通过伙伴之口说出,但是在之后的15.154得到了明确的认可。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 169.
    8柏拉图:《法律篇》,876b. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 169.
    9柏拉图:《法律篇》,855d. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 169.
    10 Aesch.1.35; Andoc.1.87.Dem,.24.45,59; 47.42; 59.90.至少一些类群在“enthynai”选举类群官员时使用秘密投票制(IGII283,18[在公元前340年之后])。Rodes 1981a,127. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 106.
    1 Wyse 1904, 423-425,认为Isae 5.17(ca.389)表明较晚的投票体制(亚里斯多德记载的那种)不是从公元前五世纪晚期了解的那种(Rodes 1981a,127)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 106.
    2这事实上是伊索克拉底在Areopagitikos中的整体规划,它是一条反民主的政治道路(Johnstone 1989)。Millett 1989也指明贫穷公民通过获得城邦的公共服务报酬(例如担任陪审员),也能获得经济上的独立性,这也削弱了精英阶层赞助城邦所造成的影响。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 106.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 106.
    4蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第60页。
    5 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 101.
    1 548 ff. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Contra Aristocratem 206. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 On Style 128. Cf. 262. Roberts' translation. Cf. Blass, Att. Bereds., I, 632; Jebb, Attic Orators, I, 180. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4引文来自于吕西阿斯的著作,阿里斯托芬与德摩斯梯尼都是有利害关系的证人,因为诉讼的目的就是要进行夸张的描述,在我们对德米特里厄斯(Demetrius)的法庭证词的价值作出评判之前,最好要记得他曾把色诺芬当成一位幽默作家,并引用了他的作品。Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Scholiast on the Wasps 191. Cf. Rogers' note. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Plutarch, Life of Demosthenes. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 De Corona 255. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Fragment 1. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr.,1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Diogenes Laert. ii. 62. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Iv. 18. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 i. 36.另一个例证可参见Demos. Iv. 4; Lysias vii. 1, 14; xvi. 15. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 xxiv. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2参见Socrates' examination of Meletus in the Apology. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922),Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1德摩斯梯尼用“严重”( )来形容它们,但这主要是一种言辞上的夸张。Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Aristoph. Acharnians 687. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Aristoph. Wasps 579 ff. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No.
    2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Choreutes 21 ff. Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Robert J. Bonner , Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2对感恩之心提出的请求以类似的方式进行运作。当诉讼当事人就感恩之心向陪审员们祈求时,他们几乎一成不变地将陪审团作为一个整体向其发表演说。而另一方面,对方当事人则通过指控他们的对手奉承谄媚个别陪审员,来引起陪审团对这类请求的质疑。参见Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 100-106. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3参见Loraux 1991, 39. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4有关诡辩与奉承的指控,见Harvey 1990; Osborne 1990; Christ 1998; Hesk 2000, 209-15. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Dem. 18.88. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1参见Donlan 1970; Raaflaub 1983; Ober 1998, 17, 331-32. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Dem 19.140. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 E.g., Aes. 2.58; 3.141; Dem. 20.31; 23.107, 152, 180; Din. 1.24. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 E.g., Dem. 34.3, 42; 35.47, 50. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    6参见Cloché1915, 476; Kühn 1967; Krentz 1982, 109-24; Loening 1987, 147-49. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003),Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1只有一个例外,参见Lys. 12.92-94. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 And. 1.81; Isoc. 16.13, 50; 18.2, 48-49; Lys. 10.4; 12.57-58; 13.47-48; 14.33; 16.6; 18.18; 24.25; 25.18, 20-22, 27; 26.2; 34.2; P. Oxy. 1606 11. 34-38, 115-24. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Wolpert 2002, 91-95. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 Loraux 1991, 33-51;也可参见Loraux 1997, esp. 41-84, 146-72;见Finley 1988, 44-46. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Aes. Eum. 984-87.对希腊悲剧中友谊的进一步讨论,参见Blundell 1989。Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Aes. 3.172: (见Davies 1971, 121);参见Aes. 3.89, 194. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Aes. 2.164. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2参见Thomas 1989, 69-70. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Dem. 19.277.关于法典颁布的时间,参见MacDowell 2000,322-23. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 MacDowell, 2000, 322. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 Dem. 18.96. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Yunis, 2001, 162. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4参见Golden 2000,他对认为诉讼当事人依靠自己论断陈述的合理性来说服陪审员的常见推测提出了质疑。有时,诉讼当事人的表述方式比他事实上说了什么,对诉讼结果更有影响。Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5恢复后的民主制:Dem. 20.54-55; 40.32,46-47.伯罗奔尼撒战争:Dem. 20.59; 58.67 (参见Thomas1989,133-36); 59.104 (参见Kapparis 1999). Pentecontaetia: Dem. 23.209.波斯战争:Aes. 3.181;参见Dem. 18.204:。哈尔摩狄奥斯(Harmodius)和阿里斯托革顿(Aristogeiton): Dem. 21.170.我们不能够找到在公元前四世纪早期雅典的法庭演说词中第二人称代词的类似用法,因为民主制恢复后,雅典人相信他们能够在三十僭主攫取政权之前中断的地方继续向前,他们更关注最近。这不是说他们希望和古代保持联系,而宁可说是在内战和战败之前的一个雅典公民减损了她的伟大(参见Wolpert 2002,119-36)。Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Dem. 20.71. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2参见18.96; 19.277. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3以类似的方式,雅典人通过将最近的立法活动描绘成古代或当代试图重回城邦初创时宪政体制的司法改革,来减少法案通过的时间。有关古代宪政的讨论,参见Fuks 1953; Ruschenbusch 1958; Finley 1975, 34-59; Levy 1976, 193-97; Walters 1976; Harding 1978; Moss6 1978; Hansen 1989b. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Hansen 1983, 146-47,这样的冲突在目录中只列出了五种情况:Dem. 19.297; 24.55, 80; 59.91; Din. 3.15-16. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2 E.g., Dem. 21.214-16; Din. 3.14; Lyc. 1.54. See Ober 1996, 117. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3参见Dem. 59.91. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4 E.g., And. 1.69 (see Hesk 2000,230); Ant. 5.71; Dem. 20.68; Din. 1.75; Lyc. 1.93. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    5 Todd 1993, 60-61.对司法程序的进一步讨论可以参见Carey and Reid 1985, 10-11. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2其他关于当代和过去的比较包括:And. 1.106-9, 141-43; Aes. 2.171-78; Dem. 22.13-16; 24.162-64; Din. 1.37-40,74-77,109-10; 2.16; Lyc. 1.68-74,82,105-6, 110, 115. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2亚理士多德:《修辞学》1377 bb。转引自蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文,第59页。
    3 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4参见Bonner 46-54 and G.M. Calhoun, 'Oral and written pleading in Athenian courts', TAPA i (1919) 177-93;参见F. Pringsheim, 'The transition from witnessed to written transactions in Athens', in Festg. Simonius (1955) 287-97 and Gesammelte Abhandlungen (Heidelberg 1961) 2.401-9, and Thür 89-90. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1参见R.J. Bonner, 'The institution of Athenian arbitrators', CP xi (1916) 191-5, and H.C. Harrell, Public arbitration in Athenian law (Columbia, MO 1936) 27-8. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2参见德摩斯梯尼xlv 44-5. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4参见D. Mirhady, 'Non-technical pisteis in Aristotle and Anaximenes', AJP cxii (1991) 5-28. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 D. Mirhady, 'Non-technical pisteis in Aristotle and Anaximenes', AJP cxii (1991) 5-28. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2《雅典政制》53.3.对于顺序不应给予特定的重视。在53.2中,“法律”和“证人证言”的位置被颠倒了一下。参见Harpocration, s.v. and SIG3 953.20-3. Thür 132-48反对将挑战程序视为同一层面上的“atechnos pistis”,并对此进行了详细的论证,因为它的真实性一定得到了证词(marturiai)的支持,它的证据力对于证词来说是可缩减的。然而,正确的是不是做出了这种区别,因为修辞学家所做的替换将使得我们给刑讯和誓言两次贴上“atechnoi pisteis”的标签,亚里士多德对通过证词达成协议的真实性给予了支持,但是承认它们是“atechnoi pisteis”(1376b2-5)。D. Mirhady, 'Non-technical pisteis in Aristotle and Anaximenes', AJP cxii (1991) 5-28. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Aristotle, Rhet. i 15 1376b31: Anaximenes, Rhet. Alex. 16.1:参见Rhet. Alex. 36-18和31. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3参见Thür 210以及Todd (n. 4) 27-31.也可参见G.R. Morrow, Plato's law of slavery in its relation to Greek law (Urbana 1939) 82 n. 48, on Laws 11.937b:“柏拉图使用了单词……在它的精确司法意义上……从严格意义上讲,单词的含义既不是指奴隶告密者,也不是指接受刑讯拷问的奴隶,它可以被称作”。参见[Ant.], Tetr. 1. 2. 7, 1.3.4 and 1. 4. 7, Lys., vii 37, Isoc., xxi 4, Dem., xxx 36, and Hyperides, fr. 5 Jensen. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Aristotle, Rhet. i 15 1376b31: Anaximenes, Rhet. Alex. 16.1:参见Rhet. Alex. 36-18和31. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3参见Thür 210以及Todd (n. 4) 27-31.也可参见G.R. Morrow, Plato's law of slavery in its relation to Greek law (Urbana 1939) 82 n. 48, on Laws 11.937b:“柏拉图使用了单词……在它的精确司法意义上……从严格意义上讲,单词的含义既不是指奴隶告密者,也不是指接受刑讯拷问的奴隶,它可以被称作”。参见[Ant.], Tetr. 1. 2. 7, 1.3.4 and 1. 4. 7, Lys., vii 37, Isoc., xxi 4, Dem., xxx 36, and Hyperides, fr. 5 Jensen. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Isoc., Trap. xvii 54. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 Arist., Rhet. i 15 1376b30-31; Anax., Rhet.Alex. 16.1.参见Lyc. 1.29. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3参见Plut. Dem. 5.5 and Mirhady, 'Pisteis' (n. 63) 6-7. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 [Dem.], Ev. xlvii 8. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1参见xlvii 40. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 [Dem.] lix 122. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3有关证人证言(marturia)的隐喻含义参见Is. viii 14. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 126.
    2 Moore 1973主张社会领域是具有半独立性特征的,并分析了法律对社会影响的程度。但是假如“完全独立和完全控制是极为罕见的,如果在今天,它们是根本存在的,各种种类和程度的半独立性就是一种普通状况”(P. 742),然而,诉讼在其自身与更广阔维度的社会关系方面就是具有半独立性特征的领域。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 177.
    3 Bourdieu 1987, Luhmann 1982, ch. 6,和Teubner 1983为我们提供了三种非常有趣,但截然不同的研究路径。虽然Lempert 1988对卢曼(Luhmann)的研究视角做了相应的评论。然而,它也有助于解释一些难懂的概念。Wolfe 1992同样是带有评论性的,但是对于我们的研究来说是有益的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 177.
    4 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 126.
    5假如“法律”意味着现代司法体系的特定制度性特征使得法律的独立性成为可能,然而,几乎通过定义,我们很难在雅典法律中找到任何独立性特征。但是,在古典时期的雅典,我们应该将“法律”理解为本质上是带有修辞色彩的,换句话说,它相当于诉讼。Luhmann 1982, 135. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 177.
    1 Luhmann 1982, 135. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 127.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 127.
    3 Dem. 54. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 127.
    4 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 127.
    1许多控诉人并不只采用这样的司法叙述方式,但是所有的控诉人都讲述了一个法律故事。Dem. 10. 70-74. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 178.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 129-130.
    1 Christ 1998为我们提供了有关雅典人对诉讼及司法程序矛盾态度的详细说明。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 178.
    2 Dem. 38. 17-18, 27. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 130.
    3 Lys. 10. 84.参见Isae. 10. 18-21和Dem. 43. 67。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 130.
    4 Lys. 13.88-89.这一声辩也表明,假如被告只是简单地暗中破坏控诉人的陈述,而不是提供自己的申辩的话,他们是易受攻击、脆弱的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 130, p. 178.
    5 Dem. 36. 26-27. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 130-131.
    1 Dem. 33. 27.参见Ant. 5. 8. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 131.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 131.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 120-121.
    4 De Sousa 1987认为感情并不阻碍说服(例如,就像亚里士多德认为的那样[Rhet.1254a25]),然而,但是离开感情,要说服自己是完全不可能的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 121.
    1高尔吉亚(Gorgias),一位公元前五世纪的诡辩家,宣称演说术像魔法、毒品或暴力绑架一样征服了听众(Encomium of Helen 8-14)。这个模式不仅要取消审计员程序或代理机构的任何可能性(这是高尔吉亚的意图。因为他试图为海伦与帕里斯的私奔开脱,寻找借口。),它并没能成功说明陪审法庭上演说词之间的激烈竞争。在阿里斯托芬的戏剧《马蜂》中,有有关审判场景的描述,一位被告要求获得怜悯的祈求深深感动了菲洛克勒翁(Philokleon),但是他却无论如何投票判决其有罪(967-989)。E. P. Thompson 1993指明,即使在十八世纪的英格兰发生的“事物骚乱”中,有组织,有策略地参与行动的一般群众,很大程度上是基于道德观。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 121.
    2例如,Humphreys 1983; Ober 1989. Hansen 1990, 350,表达了对于这种比较的保留意见。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 121.
    3然而,亚里士多德关于不该承受的不幸促成了怜悯之心看法的声明(Poetics 1453a)与陪审法庭上许多请求相符合,这种观点是正确的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 121.
    4这并不是说雅典人以一种完全的“感情”方式对戏剧作出反应,而是指司法演说词与戏剧的同化模糊了前者自身的关键重要程度,并为对实质性争论进行判断构建了平台。虽然在戏剧中存在着竞争(agone),但是对于哪部剧本应该获得奖金,以及在决定这个时什么理由是正确恰当的,并不存在争论。(阿里斯托芬的戏剧《青蛙》对这样一种讨论进行了戏剧化的描述,但是对于为什么与竞争对手相比,这部剧本应该赢得奖金这个问题,它并没有给出答案。)Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences ofLitigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 121.
    1表演者与观众之间的关系和诉讼当事人与陪审团之间的关系是非常不同的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 122.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 122.
    3 Dover 1974, 195-196. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 122.
    4 Lys.19.53.也可参见Ant.2.2.13; 5.73; Dem.25.76; Lyc.1.148; Lys.6.3; 10.22; 29.8. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 122.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 122.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 124.
    3参见Connerton 1989,58-59. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 124.
    4 Aesch.2.152. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 125.
    1 Din.1.192.Ⅲ.参见Dem.21.204.莱库勾斯(Lycurgos)将希望获得怜悯的含泪请求的欺骗性与拷问奴隶的确定性进行比较(Lyc.1.33)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 125.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 125.
    3 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 125.
    4例如,参见Adkins 1960,193-214; Davies 1981; Ober 1989; Kurke 1991,171-182. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 106.
    1 Giddens 1984, 185-193,对这个概念进行了讨论。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 107.
    2 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 107.
    3这并不是案件的普遍情况,在一些案件中(例如Dem. 21, 50,以及更窄范围内的54),控诉人选择将“罪行”定义为不恰当的荣誉或耻辱,他可以像被告通常所做的那样,唤起大家对其社会地位的关注。当德摩斯梯尼说,虽然他是以控诉人的身份出席庭审,但是他更应该表现得像个被告,并获得被告的待遇之时(Dem. 21. 5-7),他实际上是在说明两方诉讼当事人之间的正常结构化差异。控诉人宣称被告的诉讼地位角色是优越的,但是我们通过留存至今的案例记载的归纳分析,可以得出这样的结论,这一观点是带有误导性的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 177.
    1普鲁塔克曾经指出,在古典时期的雅典,人身攻击时法庭演说词的一个显著特征:Moralia 810c-d (Praecepta reipublicae gerendae)。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 177.
    2 Dem. 10. 70-74. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 177.
    3 Ober 1989, 147. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 128.
    4 Ober 1989, 126. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 128.
    5虽然在公诉案件与私诉案件之间存在差异,尤其是有关控诉人的可用资源。Dem. 10. 70-74. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 178.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 128-129.
    2 Millett 1989对这一论题进行了详细的讨论,阐明了这次改革的目的与影响。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 107.
    3 Whitehead 1983. Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 107.
    4关于在亚里士多德《雅典政制》一书中历史原理的最大问题之一是,公元前四世纪雅典的每一项民主特质,都被认为是一位早期立法者有意识创立的。Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, p. 108.
    1 Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999, pp. 107-108.
    2参见Wills 1992, 38-39, 145-47. Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3 Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1李长健、曹俊:《基于法经济学视角的民间非诉讼机制研究》,载《天津市政法管理干部学院学报》2008年第2期。
    2范愉:《非诉讼纠纷解决机制研究》,中国人民大学出版社2000年版,第9—10页。转引自李长健、曹俊:《基于法经济学视角的民间非诉讼机制研究》,载《天津市政法管理干部学院学报》2008年第2期。
    3陈小曼:《“无讼”与非讼解决争议方式》,载《皖西学院学报》2002年4月第18卷第2期。
    1 G. Thür, 'Zum bei Homer', ZSStRom 87 (1970), 426-44以及'Zum im Urteil aus Mantineia', Symposion 1985 (1989), 55-69,很有说服力地认为墨涅拉奥斯(Menelaus)以通过要求安提罗科斯(Antilochus)宣誓的方式,扮演了法官的角色,并提出了一项解决纠纷的方案建议。David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    3 Rhet. 1.15 1377a19-21. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1也可参见Theognis 1.199-203 and 1139-43, Sophocles, Ant. 264 and Antiphon the Sophist, DK6 F44 col. 5.8-13. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2参见D. M. MacDowell, Athenian Homicide Law in the Age of the Orators (Manchester, 1963), pp. 90-100. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    3 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    4有关例证可参见Dem. 50.31中提及的非正式挑战。David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    5 J. Lipsius, Das attische Recht und Rechtsverfahren (Leipzig, 1905-15), pp. 895-900, and A. R. W. Harrison, The Law in Athens, ii (Oxford, 1972), pp. 150-3. Cp. R. J. Bonner, Evidence in Athenian Courts (Chicago, 1905), pp. 67-9 and 74-9,他已经提出了一些本文将要表达的观点。G. Glotz的讨论是有益的,在Dar.-Saglio, s.v. proklésis. Cp.现在也可见M. Gagarin, 'The Nature of Proofs in Antiphon', CP 85 (1990), 22-32. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2 J. W. Headlam,‘On the’CR 7 (1893), 1-5 and 8 (1894), 136-7. C. V. Thompson, 'Slave Torture in Athens', CR 8 (1894), 136 and Bonner, op. cit., p. 72,拒绝接受赫德兰姆(Headlam)论文的观点。David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    3 G. Thür, Beweisführung vor den Schwurgerichtsh?fen Athens. Die proklesis zur basanos (Vienna, 1977), pp. 205-7. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    4 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2但是参见J. Plescia, The Oath and Perjury in Classical Greece (Talahassee, 1970), pp. 43-7 and now D. Mirhady, 'Non-technical pisteis in Aristotle and Anaximenes', AJP 112 (1991), 5-28,他们对文献进行了更加具体的讨论。David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    3 1.15 1377a8-bll. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    4 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2 Thür, op. cit., see note 1. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    3在德摩斯梯尼著作的其他地方,虽然挑战指的是对于奴隶的讯问,但是词组是一样的:德摩斯梯尼说“我邀请他担任自己案件的法官”(30.2, 30, 36f.)。也可参见Antiphon 1.12 and G. Thür, op. cit., note 5, pp. 265-6.有趣的是,德摩斯梯尼也使用了亚里士多德建议的修辞学上的惯用语句(1377a14),根据由法官审理案件时所面临的危险( )会更大(30.2)。David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    4 1377a26-7. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41,No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2在荷马史诗中,动词的使用,尤其是在《伊利亚特》的第三卷和第七卷中,部分反映了相似的要求,当时,挑战者让其他战士休息,与对手进行一对一的较量。David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    3 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    4 Harrison, op. cit., p. 152. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2 C. Cary and R. A. Reid, Demosthenes. Select Private Speeches (Cambridge, 1985), p. 102. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    3 Thür, op. cit., note 5, pp. 74-82. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    4 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    5 Thür, ibid., pp. 61-62,指出在刑讯挑战的背景下,“准备就绪”与“自动自发”的表达是具有象征意义的挑战。David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1具体例证参见Dem. 29.26, 49.42和55.35. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2 E. Leisi, Der Zeuge im Attischen Recht (Frauenfeld, 1907), pp. 12-20.也可参见R. Just, Women in Athenian Law and Life (London, 1990), pp. 33-9. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.另可参见Robert J. Bonner, Did Women Testify in Homicide Cases at Athens, Classical Philology, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Apr., 1906), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    4 Harrison, op. cit., p. 150. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    5 1377a28-9. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    1 Dem. 54.40. David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    2 David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    3 J.W. Headlam, 'On the in Attic law', CR vii (1893) 1-5. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4参见C.V. Thompson, 'Slave torture in Athens', CR viii (1894) 136 and Headlam 136-7. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1具体例证可参见R.J. Bonner, Evidence in Athenian courts (Chicago 1905) 72, J. Lipsius, Das attische Recht und Rechtsverfahren (Leipzig 1905-15) 889 n. 91, A.R.W. Harrison, The law of Athens ii (Oxford 1971) 147-50.
    2 G. Thür, Beweisführung vor den Schwurgerichtsh?fen Athens. Die Proklesis zur Basanos (Vienna 1977). Thür的结论也可参见最近M. Gagarin, 'The nature of proofs in Antiphon', CP lxxxv (1990) 22-32,以及S. Todd, 'The purpose of evidence in Athenian courts', in Nomos. Essays in Athenian law, politics and society, P. Cartledge, P. Millet & S. Todd, eds. (Cambridge 1990) 19-40, esp. 34-5.社会学家V. Hunter在Policing Athens. Social control in the Attic lawsuits 420-320 BC (Princeton 1994) 70-95中赞同Headlam以及在这儿得到阐述的那些观点。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 Thür 181认为刑讯拷问的功能是对挑战中阐明的声明的肯定或否认。刑讯者将不会间接探听新信息。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 Headlam 1. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Pollux vii 62. The Suda, s.v也提及了私人仲裁,参见Dem. xlv 15-16. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2参见Dem. xxxvii 41. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3参见最近D.C. Mirhady, 'The Oath-Challenge in Athens', CQ xli (1991) 78-83. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 Thür 211-14. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    6 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    7 Isoc., Trap. xvii 55. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Lyc., Leocr. i 32. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 [Dem.], Ev. xlvii 5. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 [Ant.], Tetr. i 4.8. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 Dem., Pant. xxxvii 40. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5该项挑战是如此清楚明确,因为,从形式上说,根据“graphê”程序提出的指控不应该私下解决。[Dem]., Neaera lix 121. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Lys., Olive-Stump vii 37. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 Aesch., Emb. ii 127.这是一种模拟挑战,就像Tetr. i 4.8一样,因为刑讯挑战不能在陪审团面前提起。见Dem. xlv 16.参见Harrison 149 n. 4. Thür 190-2倾向于接受司法程序,假如不存在在私人争议中在陪审法庭上适用刑讯拷问(basanos)程序的实际可能性。然而,在公共纠纷中,一整天都被分配用来进行争辩,他认为埃斯基涅斯提出的挑战实际上可能已经完成。大卫?赫拉?默哈迪更是被德摩斯梯尼在xlv 16中对可能性的简单否认所说服。他认为,埃斯基涅斯所提挑战的带修辞色彩的虚饰并不会因为它的实现意味着司法程序的不可能这一事实而减少。Andocides i 25-6和35中也作出了类似的模拟挑战。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 Dem. Aph. 3 xxix 11.也可参见xxix 38,51-3和xxx 35. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 Thür 211-13. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    6 Thür 152-8. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    7 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1参见Mirhady (n. 8) and Thür 205-6. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2刑讯挑战程序在这个时代没有得到运用的假说由Thür提出,他在第六章中作出了这样的假设。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3我们确实听说在德摩斯梯尼xxxix-xl中有一个案例,较少见地提及誓言挑战程序被用来解决争议。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4具体例证参见Lys. i 16, 18- 19以及德摩斯梯尼xlviii 16-18。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    6 Headlam 5. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Thür 111-31确认了有关奴隶的动词的整体面貌。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2在阿提卡的文学作品中有数段文献资料,在这些文献中,演说人表达了为了表达真诚善意,自愿承受磨难的意愿:Soph. Ant. 265-6, Xen., Symp. 4.16, Ar., Lys. 133以及Dem., Conon liv 40.但是在这些情况下,承受痛苦并不意味着探出任何信息或者进行测试。因此,他们似乎也阐明了一些不同于中世纪试罪法的特性。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 Lys., Olive-Stump vii 37. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 vii 36:“相反的论断”(hypothetische Rollentausch)是普遍的;Solmsen, Antiphonstudien (Berlin 1929) 10-14以及Thür 269-71都对其进行了讨论。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 Isoc., Trap. xvii 54:见Thür 294-6. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 [Dem.], Ev. xlvii 35. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 Dem., On. I xxx 27.参见Dem. xlv 62. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1对于这种部分承认,以及他们程序上的结果,见Thür 152-8。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 [Dem.], Tim. xlix 57. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 Thür 208 n. 12. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 [Dem.], Neaera lix 120. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    6 [Dern.], Neaera lix 125. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    7 Lye., Leocr. i 28.这儿表示法官们知道的动词是,因为他们对被拒绝的挑战已经有了直接的了解,它可以被从证据罐中取出,并大声朗读。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    8 i 29.参见i 35-6和Thür 268-9. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Lys., iv 11. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 iv 14. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 Thür 209;参见178-81. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol.116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 Is., Ciron viii 10. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Dem., Aph. 3 xxxix 21也描述了这种状况,但是该论点稍微有点区别。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 Dem., Steph. I xlv 59. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 [Dem.], Call. lii 22. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 Thür在212中提及刑讯拷问(basanos)方法具有通过稳定的载体保存证据的功能(Beweisfunktion),以另外三段文献为基础,Isoc. xvii 54, Is. viii 10 and Dem. xxx 37.在所有这些以任何方式对赫德兰姆的论文产生影响的文献中,没有一篇涉及这一点。在Dem. xxix 25 ff.中刑讯挑战与誓言挑战程序相同的使用方法强调两种挑战程序的功能是一样的,是提议一项可选择的解决方案。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5 Dem., On I xxx 35: David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Ant., Stepmother i 7. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 ibid: ... Thür在其他地方数次完整引用了这段文献。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3这段文献提出了一个有趣的新出现的问题。有不止一个奴隶的事实,以及用于指代奴隶在刑讯拷问过程中所做陈述的动词是“赞同”( ),既允许奴隶们作为一个团体控诉人的陈述,也允许他们不互相同意。虽然在这起案件中,最初的可选择方案只是一种可能性,而第二个可选择方案则展现了关于刑讯逼供方法的雅典观点的困难之处。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 Thür 210也提及了三段文献,在这些文献中,他所了解的在marturia程序与basanos程序之间,与专门名词或术语有关的区别是模糊不清的。这三篇文献分别是[Dem.] xlvii 8, liii 22以及lix 122。第二段文献是没有疑问的:在liii 22中,marturia程序与basanos程序被视为一体。我将在第三章中对另外两篇文献进行讨论(nn. 75-6)。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 [Dem.], Nicostr. liii 24: David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 Dem., Conon liv 27. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1在[Dem.] xlvii 13-15中,演说人利用这点作为证据对他的对手的真诚与善意提出质疑,尽管依其申述他已经提供了他的奴隶接受刑讯,但是他并没有立刻将她移交。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    2 Thür对于刑讯挑战程序的策略性使用的很多分析并不受赫德兰姆论文正确性的影响。然而,他关于在每起案件中挑战只是一种把戏,以及我们所占有的演说词包含了大量不具有代表性的刑讯挑战的假设对于我来说是不必要的。David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 Ant., Her. v 47. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    4 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    5参见Thür 294-5. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 Dem., Aph. I xxvii 1. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.参见Dem. xlviii 40和lv 35.有关私人仲裁者角色作用的论述,参见Thür 33 n. 36和228-31.
    2 Thür 294收集了相关的文献:Ant. vi 18, [Ant.], Tetr. i 4.8, Lys. vii 43, Isoc. xvii 54, Dem. xxx 35, Lycurgus i 28-9. David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    3 David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    1 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版,第55—56页。
    2 Pischinger, De Arbitris Atheniensium Publicis (1893), pp. 45 ff.; Lipsius, op. cit., p. 220. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 i. 88.这篇文章的观点证明在三十僭主统治之前,公共仲裁人就已经存在了。Caillemer(Daremburg and Saglio, Dictionnaire des Antiquites, s.v. "Diaitêtai")问道:"Mais l'argument tiréde ce texte est-il bien probant?" Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4值得注意的是,阿里斯托芬对诉讼谈论了很多,但并没有提及仲裁制度。Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Plutarch Aristides vii. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No.
    2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Lysias, frg. XIX (Thalheim). Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Die Verfassungsgeschichte Athens, pp. 44 ff. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4在这些案件中,无疑四十人委员会试图说明双方当事人达成协议,解决纠纷,然而,在实践中,却给予了他们寻求仲裁的救济途径。Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Lysias xxxii. 2. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Aristotle Constitution of Athens 16. 4. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Pisistratus, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.一篇名为《雅典仲裁员的裁判权》("The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators," Class. Phil., II (1907), 407 ff.)的论文指出,只要雅典公民感到忧虑,只有那些四十人委员会有裁判权的案件才会接受仲裁。因此,不论是执政官还是主法者(thesmothetae)都不能将案件提交给仲裁员。利普西斯(Lipsius),Das attische Recht (1905), p. 228,得出了这样的结论,认为只有涉及财产权的案件才能免于仲裁,每月诉讼( ),由进行裁判。在Nachtr?ge und Berichtigungen (1915), p. 981,他就而言接受了罗伯特?保诺(Robert J. Bonner)的观点,即在古典时期的雅典,最重要的案件是由执政官进行审理。从三十僭主时期的农村法官演进到四十人委员会,从这一过程中总结出的原因充分证明了罗伯特?保诺理论的正确性。Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Demosthenes xxi. 94.该项立法的综合部分对公共仲裁和私人仲裁都有论及。Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University ofChicago Press.
    1 Lysias xxxii. 18; Demosthenes xliv. 14: . Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3罗伯特?保诺(Robert J. Bonner)认为仲裁和伪证罪都是可能的理由(具体证据参见Athenian Courts [1905], p. 47)。雷斯(Leisi),Der Zeuge im Attischen Recht (1908), p. 87,没有为这项改革给出特定的理由,但是他认为这项转变是由诉讼当事人引入的:"Allm?hlich mochte es sich für die Parteien als praktisch erweisen, den Worlaut der Zeugnisse schriftlich zu fixieren, um das Pl?doyer ganz genau auf sie einrichten zu k?nnen und vor nachteiligenāuszerungen besser geschützt zu sein .... ob zuerst noch beide Modalit?ten nebeneinander bestanden, oder ob das schriftliche Verfahren sogleich gesetzlich vorgeschrieben wurde, ist nicht zu entscheiden." Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Demosthenes xlv. 44. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No.
    2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Bonner, "Evidence in the Areopagus," Class. Phil., VII (1912), 450; cf. Lipsius, Das attische Recht (1915), p. 883. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6例外情况可参见Evidence in Athenian Courts, p. 55. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7 Const. of Athens 53. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No.
    2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    8 Leisi, op. cit., pp. 85 ff.; Lipsius, op. cit., p. 883; "Evidence in the Areopagus," Class. Phil., VII (1912), 450, n.l. Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916),Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Lipsius op. cit., p. 57;参见Sandys对于Arist. Ath. Const. 53. 1的注释。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 De arbitris Atheniensium (1893), p. 39. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Attisches Recht (1905), p. 227. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Ath. Const. 53. 1. ff.:(——在上诉案件中). Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Ibid. 56. 6. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1参见Lipsius Attisches Recht, p. 227, n. 30. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 op. cit., p. 34, n. 3: "hanc totam materiam Aristoteles minore cura aut scientia tractavit." Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Dem. 48. 31,参见Dem. 43. 7-8. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Dem. 48. 23. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press..
    2 Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Pischinger op. cit., p. 34: " non enim pagorum iudices soli, sed etiam alii magis-tratus arbitris causas instruendas tradebant, id quod ex orationibus Demosthenis satis intellegitur." Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Hubert op. cit., p. 38. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No.
    4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Isaeus 8. 42, Isaeus 9. 18. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Isaeus 10. 23;参见9. 9. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4有关数个普通例外情况的讨论看参见罗伯特?保诺写作的Evidence in Athenian Courts (1905), p. 55.然而,它们并不包括进行讨论的案件中所提交的证据种类。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Kennedy in Dic. of Antiq. s. " martyria." Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Dem. 49. 19. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Evidence in Athenian Courts, pp. 48 ff.; Thalheim (Berl. phil. Woch. XXV [1905], col. 1575),关于这一点,对罗伯特?保诺的几个小论点提出了反对意见,但是,当他建议扩展的范围,使其包括地方法官的活动之时,实际上已经承认了罗伯特?保诺的论点,因为根据假设,它甚至将包括他在审判日当天存放的文件。而对方当事人对于这些将可能毫无了解。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Dem. 43. 31. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Pischinger op. cit., p. 35; Hubert op. cit., p. 38. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Dem. 43. 4 ff. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Dem. 43. 31. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Blass认为应用替换。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7 Pischinger op. cit., p. 35. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Lysias 32; Dem. 27; 28; 29; 30; 31.有关完整的目录参见Schultess Vormundschaft nach attischem Recht (1886), pp. 244 ff.在所有这些诉讼中并没有提及执政官。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Dem. 29, 30 ff. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3参见Theopompus et al. v. Phylomache; Eubulides v. Macarfatus; Dem. 43. 8, 15; Leochares v. Aristodemws, Dem. 44. 1: Callistratus v. Olympiodorus, Dem. 48. 23, 31; The Nephews of Dicaeogenes v. Leochares, and Chaerestus v. Androcles, Isaeus5.18; 6.12. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Dem. 30. 15. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Attische Process, p. 58, n. 46. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Dem.30. 6.参见Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Histoire du droit privédes Athéniens II, p. 273. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Aphobus被处以了十塔兰特的罚金(Dem. 29. 60)。这种有关寡妇所有的亡夫财产的保管以及没有能成功出租房屋的违法乱纪之事一定可以得到矫正。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Dem.30. 6. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Demosthenes und seine Zeit I, p. 270. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Beauchet op. cit. II, p. 280. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol.
    2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2该证据可以很方便地在桑德斯(Sandys)版本的《雅典政制》第206页找到。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press. 3《雅典政制》56. 6. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Beauchet op. cit. II, p. 303. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Dem. 40. 9 ff. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Isaeus 12. 11. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 On Isaeus, p. 478. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3亚里士多德:《雅典政制》, 59. 4. Lipsius Attisches Recht, p. 70,没能对这篇文献的重要意义作出正确的评论,依然坚持Sch?mann的观点。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 On Isaeus (Or. 12), p. 716. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol.
    2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Dem. 57. 14. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7 Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Dem. 59. 60. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Dem. 59. 16, 52, 66. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No.
    4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3亚里士多德:《雅典政制》, 59. 4.演说人阿波罗多罗斯粗心地使用了替代,这种情况是不太可能的,因为我们被告知,在法律,他被很好地用诗加以表现。Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Dem. 22. 27, 28. Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Att. Process, p. 453: "Die Beh?rde, vor welche diese Klage geh?rt, war bei der Dike und Graphe warscheinlich das Collegium der Thesmotheten, bei den andern Klagformen aber gewiss die Elfm?inner." Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators, Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1转引自陈小曼:《“无讼”与非讼解决争议方式》,载《皖西学院学报》2002年4月第18卷第2期。
    2陈小曼:《“无讼”与非讼解决争议方式》,载《皖西学院学报》2002年4月第18卷第2期。
    1又译为黑劳士。黑劳士是被斯巴达人征服而遭受奴役的人群,在斯巴达人有九千家的时候,黑劳士大概有二十多万人,分别定居在斯巴达家主的份地上。他们要为家主耕作,交纳大麦、油、酒等食物,每家交纳的数额约为其生产的一半,平均每七个黑劳士家庭供养一个斯巴达家庭。此外,黑劳士还要为斯巴达人服劳役,战时随军运输给养,修筑道路、桥梁及各种工事,担当一切苦役。引自孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第47页。另斯特累波在其《地理学》一书中认为,在罗马人征服拉哥尼亚以前整个时期所存在过的希洛人制度是斯巴达国王亚基斯及其同僚所建立的,斯巴达人将希洛人看作是奴隶,并单独的规定一定的职业(主要是农业)。他这样写道:“一切附近的居民都隶属于斯巴达人的统治,尽管他们与斯巴达人享有公众的法典权、参加管理公共事务,并且担任职务(他们被称为希洛人)。然而,耶夫里斯芬(赫邱利的后裔,神话中的斯巴达的国王。根据他的名字的两个同时在斯巴达实行統治的王朝之一被称为阿宇吉亚德王朝。)的儿子亚基斯剥夺了他们的平等地位,强迫他们向斯巴达纳贡。一切庶民都是被统治的,一些占据赫罗斯城的赫列人掀起了起义,他们在战争中获得了胜利,但他们被宣布为受某些限制的奴隶:以便限制统治者不释放这种奴隶,不致把他出卖给拉哥尼亚境外。这个战争被称为是反对希洛人的战争。”斯特累波,地理学,Ⅷ,5。转引自《古代希腊史参考资料(译草)》,吉林师范大学1960年版,第5-19页。
    2缪鸿孺、金萍:《雅典和斯巴达城邦的政体及启示》,载《江西教育学院学报(综合)》第27卷第6期;杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第36页;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第42页。
    3缪鸿孺、金萍:《雅典和斯巴达城邦的政体及启示》,载《江西教育学院学报(综合)》第27卷第6期;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第43—44页。波桑尼阿在其著作《希腊记述》中对“希洛人”名称的由来做了以下记载:“临海有一小城赫罗斯(欧罗特河东部的拉哥尼亚中的一座小城。)——荷马在提到拉西底梦(伊利亚特,Ⅱ.584)时,在自己的‘战船录’(战船录(‘伊里亚特’Ⅱ)是在特洛耶附近被各个古希腊部落所派遣出的战船和部队的名单,这被认为是完后的增添部分。)中曾提到它:‘关于生活在阿米克利(阿米克利——是拉哥尼亚的重要古城。)和沿海城市赫罗斯的居民’。这座城市是别尔塞(别尔塞——阿尔高斯的神话英雄。宙斯和达纳亚的儿子。他打死了怪物米都札,并把爱菲欧比亚女王安德罗米达从海怪那里能救出来。)最小的儿子赫利建立的;后来多利安人以围攻占领了这座城市。这个城市的居民就是拉西底梦的第一批的社会奴隶(希洛人属于整个斯巴达的公社所有,而不属于个别的斯巴达人。),并首次被称为希洛人,即‘被俘的人’,事实上他们就是被俘的人。后来希洛人的名字在以后被俘的奴隶中间传播起来。譬如,至少美塞尼亚人曾是多利安人……”。波桑尼阿,希腊记述,Ⅲ,20,⑥。转引自《古代希腊史参考资料(译草)》,吉林师范大学1960年版,第5-18-19页。
    1缪鸿孺、金萍:《雅典和斯巴达城邦的政体及启示》,载《江西教育学院学报(综合)》第27卷第6期。
    2斯巴达将土地分给斯巴达公民使用,早年斯巴达公民有九千户,每户分得的土地数量相等,由希洛人代为耕种,但是份地和希洛人属于国家财产,公民个人只拥有使用权,不得转让、买卖或分割,但是其后裔可以自然继承。莱库古改革时,为了消除贫富分化,又重对份地进行了分配。因此,与其他希腊城邦相比,斯巴达城邦内部的贫富差距并不严重。而斯巴达城邦本身也采取各种措施来限制产生不平等的温床,为此,国家禁止公民经营工商业,禁止其持有金银等贵重金属,铸造笨重的象征性的大铁钱等。孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第46页;[美]威尔·杜兰:《世界文明史·希腊人的生活》,东方出版社1998年版,第59页;[古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第95—96页;杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第40—41页。
    3斯巴达历史上最伟大的立法者莱库古在受贵族之邀回国主政途中,曾先到德尔斐神庙请示阿波罗神谕。皮提亚告诉他,他将得到神佑,神将赐予美好的法律“瑞特拉”(Rhetra),作为斯巴达立国的神圣准则,此即“瑞特拉”神谕。神谕是这样的:“当你为宙斯和雅典娜建起了一座神庙,并把人们分成‘费拉伊’、分成‘奥巴伊’,再创立起包括‘亚卡格塔伊’在内的三十人的元老院之后,你们就得经常在巴彼卡和克那基翁3之间‘阿佩拉曾’,并在那儿提出或废除提案;但是人民必须有表决权和权力。”在这里,“费拉伊”和“奥巴伊”是指人们被划分与分配到其中的家族和宗族,或兄弟会;“亚卡格塔伊”是用以称呼国王的;“阿佩拉曾”的意思是召集人民,这个字同德尔菲的神明阿波罗有点关联,阿波罗正是国家政体的创始人和缔造者。如今巴彼卡叫做克马罗斯,克那基翁则叫做奥努斯;但是亚里士多德说克那基翁是一条河,巴彼卡是一座桥梁。孙道天先生认为“瑞特拉”神谕的主要内容有:建立献给宙斯和献给雅典娜的圣所,民众分属于部落和奥巴,任命包括两国王在内的三十人成立的元老院(Gerousia,葛罗西亚);在巴布卡和克纳基昂(应是伯罗奔尼撒半岛上的两条河流)间常举行阿波罗庆节(届时可能举行民众大会,提出或废除某类问题);民众集会亦享有最后的权力:(按普鲁塔克的补正)如民众有所曲解,元老院和国王有作为“搁置者”(Settersaside)之权(此“搁置者”似不等于废止者,或有搁置不论即不予认可之意)。普鲁塔克《莱库古传》所列内容亦相似,但表示,如民众意欲采纳歪曲议案时,“元老院和国王有权休会……或解散会议”。有关“瑞特拉”神谕的详细讨论可见孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第45页;[古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第93—94页。
    4孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第47页。
    5杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第40页。
    6双王制是古代史上稀有的现象。有学者认为,双王并存可能是两个部落相联合的结果,而每一个部落都保留了自己的领袖。引自杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第43页。
    1孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第47—48页;杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第43—44页。
    2其程序为:“公民大会已经召集了的时候,被选定的一些人就被关在会场附近的一间屋里,使他们既不能看见人又不能被人看见,只能听到会议中的呼声,因为就像对其他事件一样,这里也是要用会议的呼声来在竞选者中进行抉择的。竞选者们并非同时一起出场,而是每人按照抽签所定的次序被分别引导入内,并且默无一言地经过会场,于是被隔绝了的裁判者们就在他们所带的书板上记下每次呼声高低的情况,他们也不知道哪一个呼声是给哪一个人的,只知道某个是第一个被引进来的,或第二个被引进来的,或第三个等等。谁受到最高呼声的欢迎,他们就宣布他是当选者。”(普鲁塔克:《吕库古传》,XXⅥ.1-4。转引自杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第42页。)
    3几乎所有拟向公民大会提出的议案,均需元老院预先加以讨论。而公民大会无权讨论和批评,只能倾听元老们对提案的解释,最后以呼喊的方式通过元老院的提案。见杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第42页;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第47—48页。
    4普鲁塔克语,转引自孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第48页。
    5莱库古认为厅堂建筑对于会议不会产生好的效果,相反,倒会损害会议的效能;当参加会议的人只顾注视塑像和绘画,或者欣赏绘有情景的装饰,或者顾盼大厅装饰奢华的屋顶时,宗旨严肃的大会就可能让空虚的念头搅得愚蠢可笑和一事无成。[古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第93页。
    1有关斯巴达公民大会的专门研究,可见祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期;杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第43页。
    2色诺芬在其著作《希腊志》中这样写道:“大约在公元前400年,一位名为基那冬(Cinadon)的斯巴达下层公民密谋推翻斯巴达城邦,但他被出卖了。在听到这个消息之后,监察官们相信告密者向他们讲述的这个精心策划的阴谋是真实的,并感到非常震惊。由于事发突然和情况紧急,他们甚至来不及召集小公民大会,只能和那些被单独挑选出来的元老们商议对策。”Xenophon, Hellenica,Ⅲ. iii. 8. P.J.Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, PP85 .
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德著,吴寿彭译:《政治学》,商务印书馆1965年版,第89—90页。
    4 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press..
    5对应于公历为四至五月之间。
    6对应于公历为三至四月之间。
    7 Xenophon, Agesilaus, i. 36, Thucydides, V. 19. i. P.J.Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, PP85.
    8祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    1 [古希腊]亚里士多德著,吴寿彭译,《政治学》,商务印书馆1997年版,第89—90页。
    2祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第48页。
    3莱库古是斯巴达历史上颇有争议的人物,不少人对他及其所领导的改革的历史真实性持怀疑态度,例如普鲁塔克就曾说过:“有关立法者吕库古的事迹,真是没有一件是没有争议的。他的出身、游历、去世的情况,尤其是作为立法者和政治家的所作所为,都存在着截然不同的叙述。至于有关他在世的年代,历史学家之间的见解则是更无相似之处。”提迈奥斯则推测在斯巴达有两个莱库古,他们各自生活在不同的时代。由于莱库古名声过于显赫,人们就将两个人的所作所为及其取得的成就都归于其中一个人。他还认为两人中的前者距荷马在世的年代不远,甚至有人宣称这前一个莱库古曾亲眼见过荷马。但目前学界普遍把莱库古改革作为斯巴达国家产生时期的一系列社会剧变的象征,并将其时间定位在公元前9世纪末。祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期;[古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第86—87页。
    4 Herodotus, I, 65, A. D. Godley (trans.), The Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Re-printed, 1981. 见[古希腊]希罗多德:《历史》,王嘉隽译,商务印书馆1959年版,第197页,王嘉隽将“监察官”译作“五长官”;[古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第296页。
    5 Xenophon,Constitution of the Lacedaemonians, VIII, 3, E. C. Marchant & G. W. Bowersock(trans.), The Loeb Classical Library, 1984—1998.见祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期;[古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第296页。
    6 Plutarch, Lycurgus, 7. i[-ii]. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, PP87.色奥彭普斯是公元前8世纪末至7世纪初的斯巴达国王,于公元前720—前670年间在位。祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第48页。
    1 Plutarch’s Lives, Cleomenes, 10.转引自祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    2希腊各邦行两王制者,除斯巴达而外尚有卡杜斯人,见普鲁塔克:《阿尔泰磋克西》(Artax.)24。韦兹:《德意志宪政史》(Waitz,Dontz. Verfassungsgeschichte)Ⅰ283、300,说欧洲旧族如阿拉曼尼人、布艮第人、东哥特人、图林根人、法兰克人(Alamani,Burgundians,Ostrogoths,Thuringians,Franks)都曾有二王分权并存的制度。[古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第296页。
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第296页。
    4 [古希腊]柏拉图:《法律篇》,张智仁、何勤华译,上海人民出版社2001年版,第91—92页。
    5祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。祝宏俊老师指出,关于监察官产生的时间还有基隆说:据拉尔修记述,基隆生活在公元前6世纪前半叶,其在第55届奥林匹亚运动会期间当选为监察官,也是欧叙德谟执政期间第一个担任监察官的人,同时,他调整了监察官的职权,他是第一个使监察官成为与国王平起平坐的人。拉尔修还记述了当时人对此的不同看法,如帕费拉说基隆是在第56届奥林匹亚运动会期间任监察官的,撒提罗斯认为第一个监察官设置于莱库古时期。(参见Diogenes Laertius, Livesof Eminent Philosophers, I, 68; R. D. Hicks (trans.), The Loeb Classical Li-brary, Reprinted, 1972;另参见[古罗马]第欧根尼·拉尔修:《名哲言行录》,马永翔等译,吉林人民出版社,2003年版,第43页。)对这则史料后人有不同的理解,罗易卜本认为这则史料不可信,C.D.荣格则理解为“基隆首次使监察官成为国王的辅助者”;(参见C. D. Yonge (trans.), Life of Chilon, fromthe Lives and Opinions of the Eminent Philosophers,London, Henry G. Bohn, 1853.)牛津古典辞书理解为“使监察官成为与国王并立的人”。(参见Simon Hornblower & Antony Spawforth, The Oxford Classical Dictionary, p. 322.)如果我们把监察官理解为拥有独立政治地位、具有较高政治权力的官职,那么这也不妨作为一种说法。见祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    6祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期;[古希腊]柏拉图:《法律篇》,张智仁、何勤华译,上海人民出版社2001年版,第91—92页。
    1 [古希腊]柏拉图:《法律篇》,张智仁、何勤华译,上海人民出版社2001年版,第91—92页。
    2祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    3 Pavel Oliva, Sparta and her Social Problems, Prague, 1971, p. 125.转引自祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    4 Plato, Epistle, 8, 354. Bury W. R. M. Lamb (trans.), The Loeb Classical Library, 1999.具体内容请参见祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    5 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第296页。亚里士多德从如何维持政体稳定的角度来分析对王权的限制,提出凡采取温和谦恭政策的君王往往能够维持他们的名位,王权范围越小,王位维持的时间越长,因为这样君王就不致妄自尊大,推行专制,就能与他人保持平等,也不会招致他人的嫉妒。他认为斯巴达政体之所以长久,根本原因就在于它的政体精神合乎这样的原则,它的政体自始就设置两位国王,提奥彭浦斯更是彻底奉行谦恭政策,设置监察官。这种政体精神、这种谦恭政策实际上也是对王权的一种限制,但这种限制是国王出于对维持王权的需要和限制王权而采取的自觉行动。见祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    6 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第297页。
    1 Plutarch, Agis, 12. i-iv. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.88.
    2祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    3有关阿基斯改革和克里奥孟尼斯改革的具体内容可见杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第51—53页;Plutarch, Cleomenes, 10.i-iv. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.88-89.
    4 Plutarch, Cleomenes, 10. i-iv. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.88-91.祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    1 Diogenes Laertius,Ⅰ.68. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.87-88.
    2祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    3杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第44页。
    4 [古希腊]希罗多德:《历史》,王嘉隽译,商务印书馆1959年版,第388页。
    5 Plutarch’s Lives, Agislaus,Ⅳ.转引自祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    6 Xenophon, Spartan Constitution, xv. 6-7. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.90.另可参见杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第44页。
    1祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    2可能是公元前555年至554年任职的基隆监察官。Herodotus,Ⅴ. 39-40. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.89-90.
    3他的新任妻子,根据Her.Ⅴ. 41. iii和Ⅵ. 65. ii的记载,与基隆有亲戚关系,她生育了CleomenesⅠ,后者在公元前520年继承了阿那克桑德里戴斯的王位,阿那克桑德里戴斯的第一任妻子后来为其生育了三个儿子。Herodotus,Ⅴ. 39-40. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.89-90.
    4 Plutarch, Agis, 11. ii-vi. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.91.另可参见杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第44页。
    1 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    3祝宏俊《:斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期; P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.92.
    4 Isocrates,Ⅻ. Panathenaic,181. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.92.
    5 Plutarch, Moralia, 773—774.转引自祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    6祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    1 Herodotus vi. 82.关于克里奥门尼斯国王击败阿尔哥斯人的时间,参见Larsen, CP, XXVII (1932), 139, n. 3. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 v. 16. 3. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Busolt, Griechische Geschichte, III, 1, 428. Cf. Busolt and Swoboda, op. cit., p. 661, n. 6. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Thucydides,Ⅰ. 131. i-132.i. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.90.
    2 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第88—89页。
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第88—89页。
    4 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第89页。
    5 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第90页。
    1 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Strategemata ii. 14. 1; Grote (Hist., IX, 350)接受了这一观点。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4确实,如果让基那东与他的同谋者继续生存在这个世界上,对斯巴达城邦来说是非常危险的。Loc. cit. Cf. Grote, op. cit., IX, 351. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1转引自[美]威廉·弗格森:《希腊帝国主义》,晏绍祥译,上海三联出版社2005年版,第49—50页。
    2 Isocrates, XII, 181. George Norlin, Ph. D., LL. D. (trans.), The Loeb Classical Library, 1954.转引自祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    3 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第88页。
    4 [古希腊]色诺芬:《拉凯戴梦人政制》,IV, 2—6.转引自祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    1杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第44页;孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版,第48页。
    2晏绍祥先生认为,在早期斯巴达的历史中,主持会议的可能是国王或元老院。可以相信,虽然“瑞特拉”神谕确立了公民大会定期集会的制度,但由于从会议的召开到讨论的议题都受到国王和贵族的控制,此时的斯巴达公民大会,性质上更接近荷马时代的人民大会,不过是个贵族与国王试探公众舆论和取向的场合。将公民大会的主持权力转移到由民选产生的监察官手中,部分削弱了国王和贵族的影响,是斯巴达政治民主特征的重要表现。监察官主持公民大会,可能在公元前6世纪中期或更早时已经成为斯巴达定制。见晏绍祥:《古典斯巴达政治制度中的民主因素》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期;晏绍祥:《荷马社会研究》,上海三联书店2006年版,第204—216页。
    3 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》,V. 2. 11。转引自祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    4晏绍祥:《古典斯巴达政治制度中的民主因素》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    5祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    6 [古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版,第93—94页。
    1 [古希腊]修昔底德:《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》, I. 87、88、126。转引自祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    2 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》,V. 4. 23-26。转引自祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    3其主要内容是:废除一切债务,补充公民人数和重新分配土地;将斯巴达本土的土地划为4500份,将本土之外的土地划分为15000份,前者分给土生的斯巴达人,后者在那些能作为重装兵服役的边民中分配。但土生的斯巴达人数没有那么多,因此将由边民和受自由人正当抚养、年富力强、能服兵役的外邦人来补足。这些人应组成15个公餐集团,每团400人或200人,并且应实行古代斯巴达人所遵循的生活方式。见杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第51—52页。
    4杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第51—52页。
    5祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期; Diodorus Siculus,ⅩⅢ. 106. viii-ix. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.92.
    6对于斯巴达Agoge教育的内容和形式,普鲁塔克留下了这样的记载:“吕库古是不愿意将斯巴达的孩子交给买来的或雇来的家庭教师去管教的,法律也不准许父亲随心所欲地抚养或训练自己的儿子。孩子一长
    1 [古希腊]修昔底德:《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》, I. 87、88、126。转引自祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    2 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》,V. 4. 23-26。转引自祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    3其主要内容是:废除一切债务,补充公民人数和重新分配土地;将斯巴达本土的土地划为4500份,将本土之外的土地划分为15000份,前者分给土生的斯巴达人,后者在那些能作为重装兵服役的边民中分配。但土生的斯巴达人数没有那么多,因此将由边民和受自由人正当抚养、年富力强、能服兵役的外邦人来补足。这些人应组成15个公餐集团,每团400人或200人,并且应实行古代斯巴达人所遵循的生活方式。见杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第51—52页。
    4杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版,第51—52页。
    5祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期; Diodorus Siculus,ⅩⅢ. 106. viii-ix. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.92.
    6对于斯巴达Agoge教育的内容和形式,普鲁塔克留下了这样的记载:“吕库古是不愿意将斯巴达的孩子交给买来的或雇来的家庭教师去管教的,法律也不准许父亲随心所欲地抚养或训练自己的儿子。孩子一长
    1 Agatharchides of Cnidus, 86 F 10. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.73.
    2 Plutarch’s Lives, Agislaus, X, p. 27.转引自祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.89.
    3晏绍祥:《古典斯巴达政治制度中的民主因素》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    4 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》, II. 1. 29- II. 2. 23。转引自晏绍祥:《古典斯巴达政治制度中的民主因素》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    5 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》, III, ii, 23; V, iv, 13, 47; VI, iv, 17. Carleton L. Brownson (trans.), The LoebClassical Library, 1984—1998.转引自祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    6 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》, IV. 6. 3。转引自祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    7该段内容是以拉丁文在纸莎草上记载的,中间有缺项。时间大致在公元前550年代,这与驱逐埃斯基涅斯(Aeschines)的时间相一致。但希皮亚斯(Hippias)的被驱逐,时间稍晚一点,大致在公元前511年至510年之间。Rylands Papyri, 18, ii, 5-13.P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.89.
    1祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    2祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    3祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    4 Paul Cartledge,Sparta Reflections, p. 36.转引自祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    5 Rylands Papyri, 18, ii, 5-13.P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.89.
    6 [古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第89页。
    7 G. E. M.德圣克罗阿:《伯罗奔尼撒战争的起源》(G. E. M. de Ste. Croix,TheOrigins of the PeloponnesianWar),伦敦1972年版,第124—131页;保罗·卡特里奇:《亚偈西劳与斯巴达的危机》,第126—127页。转引自晏绍祥:《古典斯巴达政治制度中的民主因素》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    1 Plutarch, Agis, 5. i, iii-iv. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, PP98-99. 另参见祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    2 P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.96.
    3根据Her.Ⅸ. 28. ii的记载,在公元前479年,斯巴达的军队由同等数量的斯巴达士兵和非斯巴达士兵(例如庇里阿西人,perioikoi)组成;Thuc.Ⅹ. 38. v则指出,到公元前420年代,这一比例已变为4:6。但公元前371年,情况依然没有改善,反而变得更糟:总共有一千三百名斯巴达士兵参加了留克特拉(Leuctra)之战,该部队斯巴达士兵与非斯巴达士兵的比例大概是1:9.在所有一千三百人当中,有四百人阵亡于此次战斗。古希腊的官员们看到,总共有大约一千名斯巴达士兵阵亡,其中真正的斯巴达人,大概有七百人参战,大概四百人战死……因此,斯巴达监察官宣布动员保存下来的两个莫莱(morai),包括在最小年龄之上四十岁的男性,也在动员之列;而且他们把同样条件的,现在海外的男性公民也动员起来(因为之前在最小年龄三十五岁以上的男性已经参加了福基斯(Phocis)之战)。他们也命令在后方从事文职工作的男性公民也参加这次军事远征。亚里士多德也说,斯巴达全境原本可以维持一千五百骑兵和三万重步兵的兵力,但现在,斯巴达的服役人数只有一千人。Xenophon, Hellenica,Ⅵ. iv. 15, 17, Aristotle, Politics,Ⅱ. 1270A29—31. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.96-97.
    1 Plutarch, Agis, 5. vi. P.J.Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.97.另见祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。斯巴达公民人数的减少,除了低出生率和高死亡率的原因外,公民无力支付公餐费用所导致的公民权利丧失可能也是其中的一个重要因素:可能这些“下等级公民”(inferiors,hypomeiones)与我们发现的那些“平权公民”(equals,homoioi)恰好相反。[古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版,第92页。
    2 [古希腊]色诺芬:《希腊史》, V. 2. 24;V. 2. 32; V. 4. 15;V. 2. 32;V. 4. 26。转引自祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    1有关雅典司法审判体制的讨论,见Bonner and Smith, The Administration of Justice from Homer to Aristotle, I, 84 ff., 279 if. For a description of the Spartan constitution cf. Gilbert, Handbuch der grie- chischen Staatsalterthimer, I, 46 ff.; Busolt and Swoboda, Griechische Staatskunde, pp. 671 ff.
    2 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6有关保萨尼阿斯审判的相关内容可以参见Thucydides i. 95, 128-29.对于的含义,学界存在着多种不同观点。史密斯("Classical Library")试图保持一词在阿提卡法律中的技术含义,将其翻译为“被追究责任”。此外,还有许多其他翻译,如“被纠正的”(Morris),“被谴责的”(Dale),"wurde zur Strafe gezogen" (Classen),以及“被惩罚的”(Jowett Benjamin, 1817-1893,柏拉图著作翻译家,英国研究希腊学术的学者)。根据一块留存至今的公元前446年的雅典石碑的记载,一词的含义无疑是指“刑罚”。这段碑文证明了乔伊特翻译的正确合理。在这个案例中,最终适用的刑罚只是罚款。根据阿提卡的程序法,诉讼被归为。并不在阿提卡的通常意义上被运用。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith,Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3该内容可以参见A. T. Olmstead in "A Persian Letter in Thucydides" (Anerican Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature, XLIX [1933], 155 ff.)该信件及回复来源于真实的波斯宫廷文档。修昔底德直接来源则是一篇爱奥尼亚语的翻译。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2(Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1参见Thucydides i. 132-34.在斯巴达的司法实践中,频繁的求助于宗教使斯巴达的司法管理体制比雅典表现得更原始。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Aristotle, Politics,Ⅲ. 1275 B 8-11. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.80.
    3 Herodotus ix. 76; Xenophon Hell. ii. 4. 36; and Laked. Pol. 13. 5. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4这些判断是根据已知的事实作出的,并通过投票的方式,以少数服从多数原则来决定(Gilbert, op. cit., p. 57, n. 3)。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Herodotus vi. 72. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 vi. 85. For the chronology cf. CAH, IV, 259 ff. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Herodotus vi. 73. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Thucydides v. 63. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Cf. supra, p. 117. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Xenophon, Spartan Constitution, viii. 4. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, pp.91-92.
    2 Plutarch Pelopidas 6. Cf. Diodorus Siculus xv. 20. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Xenophon Hell. v. 2. 32. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Ibid. 4. 41. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Diodorus Siculus xv. 25 ff.; Plutarch Pelopidas 12. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Hell. v. 4. 13. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 xv. 27; Plutarch Pelopidas 13. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2狄奥多罗斯的记载比色诺芬的更为可信。例如Meyer (op. cit., V, 376),就使用了狄奥多罗斯的记载。帕克(H. W. Parke)在他的的论文"Herippidas, Harmost at Thebes" (Classical Quarterly, XXI [1927], 159-65)已经对这个问题进行了充分的讨论。他的结论如下:“对存在三位被派驻在底比斯地区的军事统治者的一个可能的解释是,第一位军事统治者(Lysanoridas)是指挥斯巴达守备部队的正规指挥官,而第二位军事统治者赫里庇达斯(Herippidas)则负责指挥卡德梅亚当地的地方保安部队,关于第三位军事统治者阿西塞斯(Arcissus)我们没有掌握更多的信息。可能他是卡德梅亚地方保安部队的另外一名指挥官,但更大的可能是,他在Lysanoridas缺席的情况下担任代理军事统治者。”Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Hell. v. 4. 20. Plutarch (Pelopidas 14, and Agesilaus 24)对此事作了相似的记载,但并没有对斯福德里阿斯(Sphodrias)的动机提出怀疑。狄奥多罗斯则认为克列欧姆布洛托斯是此次行动的真正煽动者。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Op. cit., V, 376 ff. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Op. cit., III, 1, 146-47. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7 Op. cit., IX, 315. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    8 Agesilaus 24. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Hell. v. 4. 22 ff. Cf. Glotz and Cohen, Histoire grecque, III, 117,有一些关于斯福德里阿斯(Sphodrias)被无罪开释原因的讨论。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Cf. supra, p. 114. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Cf. trial of Cinadon, supra, p. 118. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 PausaniasⅢ. 5. ii. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.84.
    1 PausaniasⅢ. 5. ii. P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007, p.84. Pausanias iii. 5. 2, translated by Frazer. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2布洛赫(Beloch)(Griechische Geschichte, III, 1, 15)认为保萨尼阿斯被判无罪,因为投票结果是均等的。该事实,像苏格兰式判决(在无证据时不判“无罪”而暂判“未证实”)一样,并没有得到证实。这个非同寻常观点的事实基础是,布洛赫通过史料的梳理发现,有三位监察官赞成保萨尼阿斯的行为。因此,他推断说,有两位监察官认为保萨尼阿斯有罪。但这种观点并没有得到学界的赞同。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Ath. Pol. 38. 4. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Hell. ii. 4. 38. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Cf. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums, V, 44 ff., and Busolt and Swoboda, op. cit., p. 681, n. 6. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Thucydides i. 131. 2; cf. Xenophon Laked. Pol. 8. 4. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7 Pausanias iii. 5. 2. Cf. supra the trial of Pausanias,普拉提亚(Plataea)之战的胜利者之孙。在雅典,负责审判的地方法官或法庭(board)无权对裁决进行投票表决。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 vi. 82. Cf. supra, p. 115. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Laconica apophthegmata, Alexandridas, 6, in Plutarch, Moralia (Didot ed.) I, 265.“res judicata”和“autre fois acquit”盛行于雅典(Demosth. xx. 147; Plato Crito 50B)。根据柏拉图(Apology 37A)的记载,苏格拉底曾说过,雅典对可能判处死刑案件的审判应该像其他地方一样,花上几天的时间。在这里,他无疑指的是斯巴达的司法实践。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Cf. supra, p. 119. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Pausanias iv. 18. 4-5. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Thucydides i. 134. 4. Cf. supra, p. 115.在雅典,“凯阿达斯(Kaiadas)”方式与“地坑(Barathron)”方式几乎同时并行采用(cf. Bonner and Smith, op. cit., II, 278 ff.)。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith,Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Plutarch Agis 19. 6. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Ibid. 20. 4. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Herodotus iv. 146. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology,Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Xenophon Hell. iii. 3. 11; cf. Gilbert, op. cit., p. 90, n. 1. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Herodotus vi. 69. Cf. Plutarch Agesilaus 3 and Lysander 22对阿里斯顿国王转变心意有完全不同的解释。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Herodotus vi. 62-69. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Thucydides vi. 61. 4; 88. 9-10. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Plutarch Alcibiades 23 and Agesilaus 3. Beloch (op. cit., I, 2, 188)对这个非常荒诞的故事表示了质疑,认为这只是一个无聊的猜测( )。Cf. Marchant and Underhill, notes on Xenophon Hell. iii. 3. 1. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Xenophon, loc. cit. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Xenophon Hell. iii. 3. 1-3.色诺芬对起诉人的发言进行了语言学分析,并介绍了一些多利安词汇。(cf. Bonner, "The Mutual Intelligibility of Greek Dialects," Classical Journal, IV, 360 ff.)Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 iii . 62. Gilbert (op. cit., p. 57)对于斯巴达公民大会(Apella)在阿格西劳斯(Agesilaus)诉李奥特齐达斯(Leotychidas) (Xenophon Hell. iii. 3)和李奥特齐达斯(Leotychidas)诉戴玛拉托斯(Demaratus) (Herodotus vi. 65-66)这两起王位继承案件中的作用作了详细的说明。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Staatskunde, p. 673. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Note on Herodotus v. 40. 1. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Panathenaicus 181.这个记载现在为学界所接受,但布索尔特(Busolt)和斯沃波达(Swoboda)对该记载的真实性表示了怀疑(op. cit., p. 664, 2)。Gilbert(op. cit., p. 64, 3)则在自己的文章中引用了该段记载,并说自己可以冒昧地质疑这段材料。Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press. 但斯巴达人与希洛人之间的关系确实非常紧张,东罗马帝国的著名的诡辩家利巴尼(公元314年——393年)在自己的一篇演讲词中对此有过一段精彩的描述:拉西底梦人有杀死希洛人的完全自由,关于他们的情况克立替阿斯讲到:“在拉西底梦有一部分人是完全被奴役的和另一部分人是完全自由的。”克立替阿斯说:“要知道,斯巴达人不是由于对这些希洛人的不信任才剥夺了他们的盾牌,而是由于什么呢?要知道,斯巴达人在战争中并不这样作,因为在战争中必须经常地成为一个有高度机敏的人。他经常地手持长矛巡游,以表示比希洛人雄壮有力,假如希洛人掀起骚乱,他也只不过是一个盾牌的武裝。他们甚至发明了门闩,他门想藉此之助来防止希洛人的暗算活动”。这种情形与某人住在一起是没有区别的(利巴尼批评克立替阿斯),因为恐惧他,并且由于防备突如其来的袭击而不敢喘息。然而那些在早餐时、在睡眠中、在履行其他某种义务时,而饱尝恐惧奴隶的人们怎能——象这样的人怎能……享受真正的自由呢?……恰如他们的国王绝不是自由的一样,因为监察委员有捆绑和处死国王的权利,正象所有的斯巴达人由于生活在为奴隶所仇恨的环境中而失去了自己的自由一样。利巴尼(演讲词?26?68),转引自《古代希腊史参考资料(译草)》,吉林师范大学1960年版,第5-20页。
    5 Op. cit., II, 488. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Isocrates op. cit. 66. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, RealencyclopLdie, XIX, 820, s.v. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Thucydides iii. 92; Diodorus xii. 59. 5. Cf. Beloch, op. cit., II, 1, 325; Kahrstedt, Griechisches Staatsrecht, I, 23, n. 6; Grote, op. cit., IX, 396. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 xiv. 38. 4. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Strategemata ii. 21. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7 Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Geschichte des Altertums, V, 54. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    2 Cf. Aristotle Politics 1275b. 10; 1270b. 28. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    3 Xenophon Laked. Pol. 8. 3-4; Busolt and Swoboda, op. cit., pp. 689 f.; cf. Bonner and Smith, op. cit., I, 279. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    4 Aristotle Politics 1271a. 7; Xenophon, Laked. Pol. 8. 4. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    5 Laconica apophthegmata, Eurycratidas, Son of Anaxandridos, in Plutarch Moralia (Didot ed.), I, 271. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    6 Xenophon Laked. Pol. 8. 4. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    7公元五世纪或六世纪希腊文法学家。
    8 Hesychius, s.v. .Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    9 Ibid., s.v. .Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    10 Xenophon Hell. iii. 3. 8. Cf. supra, p. 118. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    11 Thucydides iv. 53. Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, ClassicalPhilology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Laconica apophthegmata, Archidamus, Son of Zeuxidamus, 6, in Plutarch, Moralia (Didot ed.), I, 267. Robert J.Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    1 Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    1 [美]萨拜因:《政治学说史》,盛葵阳、崔妙因译,商务印书馆1986年版,第29页。
    2李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    1祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期;[古希腊]柏拉图:《法律篇》,张智仁、何勤华译,上海人民出版社2001年版,第91—92页。
    2祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    1顾准:《顾准文稿》,中国青年出版社2002年版,第464页。
    1 Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    1、Alan L. Boegehold, John Mck. Camp II, Margaret Crosby, Mabel Lang, David R. Jordan, Rhys F. Townsend, The Lawcourts at Athens Sites, Buildings, Equipment, Procedure, and Testimonia, The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, New Jersey, 1995.
    2、A. H. M. Jones, Athenian Democracy, The Camelot Press, 1977.
    3、Clogg Richard, A concise history of Greece, Cambridge University Press, 2002.
    4、Charles Oman, A history of Greece: from the earliest times to the death of Alexander the Great, Longmans, 1898.
    5、Demosthenes, Demosthenes III, The Loeb Classical Library, 1953.
    6、D. M. MacDowell, The Law in Classical Athens, New York: Cornell University Press,1978.
    7、de N. G. L. Hammond, A history of Greece to 322 B.C, Clarendon Press, 1986, reprinted 1987.
    8、G. Glotz, The Greek City, Columbia University Press, 2005.
    9、Graham Speake, Encyclopedia of Greece and the Hellenic tradition, Fitzroy Dearborn, 2000.
    10、H. D. Rankin, Sophists, Socratics And Cynics, Barnes And Noble Books, 1983.
    11、Josine H. Blok, AndréP. M. H. Lardinois, Solon Of Athens New Historical And Philological Approaches, Brill Leiden, 2006.
    12、J. W. Roberts, City Of Sokrates An introduction to Classical Athens, Routledge And Kegan Paul, 1984.
    13、John Lewis, Solon The Thinker, Political Thought in Archaic Athens, Duckworth, 2006.
    14、M. H. Hansen, Eisangelia: the Sovereignty of the People’s Court in Athens in the Fourth Century B. C. and the Impeachment of Generals and Politicians, Odense University Press, 1975.
    15、Mogens Herman Hansen, The Athenian Assembly In the Age of Demosthenes, T. J. Press(Padstow)Ltd, 1987.
    16、Mason Hammond, City-State and World State in Greek and Roman Political Theory until Augustus Notes, New York,1966,
    17、M. I. Finley, Democracy Ancient and Modern, London: The Hogarth Press, 1985.
    18、Matthew R. Christ, The Litigious Athenian, London: The John Hopkins University Press, 1998.
    19、Nigel Guy Wilson, Encyclopedia of ancient Greece, Routledge, 2006.
    20、P. J. Rhodes, The Greek City States, Cambridge University Press 1986, 2007.
    21、Pavel Oliva, Sparta and her Social Problems, Prague, 1971.
    22、Plato, Epistle, 8, 354. Bury W. R. M. Lamb (trans.), The Loeb Classical Library, 1999.
    23、R. F. Willetts, M. A, Ancient Crete A Social History From Early Times until the Roman Occupation, University of Toronto, 1965.
    24、Steven Johnstone, Disputes and Democracy: The Consequences of Litigation in Ancient Athens, Austin:University of Texas Press, 1999.
    25、Simon Goldhill, Robin Osborne, Rethinking Revolutions Through Ancient Greece, Cambridge University Press, 2006.
    26、Thomas G. West, Plato’s Apology of Socrates An Interpretion, With A New Translation, Cornell University Press, 1979.
    27、Virginia Hunter, Jonathan Edmondson, Law and social status in classical Athens, Oxford University Press, 2000.
    28、Wilson, Nigel Guy, Encyclopedia of ancient Greece, Routledge, 2006.
    29、Woodhouse, William John, The tutorial history of Greece, to 323 B. C. University Tutorial Press, 1958.
    30、William W. Goodwin, Demosthenes on the Crown, Cambridge, 1901.
    31、Xenophon, History of My Times(Hellenica), translated with an introduction by rex warner, Penguin Books 1966.
    1、Andrew Oxman Wolpert, Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 124, No. 4 (Winter, 2003), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    2、Alfred Paul Dorjahn, Anticipation of Arguments in Athenian Courts, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 66 (1935), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    3、Alfred Paul Dorjahn, Intimidation in Athenian Courts, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 66 (1935), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    4、Albert Billheimer, Amendments in Athenian Decrees, American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 42, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1938), Published by Archaeological Institute of America.
    5、A. J. L. Blanshard, Depicting Democracy An Exploration of Art and Text in the Law of Eukrates, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 124, (2004), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    6、A. R. W. Harrison, Law-Making at Athens at the End of the Fifth Century B. C., The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 75, (1955), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    7、Alan L. Boegehold, Philokleon's Court, Hesperia, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 1967), Published by American School of Classical Studies at Athens.
    8、Adrian Lanni, Precedent and Legal Reasoning in Classical AthenianCourts A Noble Lie, The American Journal of Legal History, Vol. 43, No. 1 (Jan., 1999), Published by Temple University.
    9、Adriaan M. Lanni, Spectator Sport or Serious Politicsο?περιεστηκ?τε? and the Athenian Lawcourts, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 117, (1997), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    10、A. H. M. Jones, The Economic Basis of the Athenian Democracy, Past & Present, No. 1 (Feb., 1952), Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society.
    11、Christopher Carey, The Shape of Athenian Laws, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 48, No. 1 (1998), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    12、Christopher Carey, Legal Space in Classical Athens, Greece & Rome, Second Series, Vol. 41, No. 2 (Oct., 1994), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    13、Christopher A. Faraone, An Accusation of Magic in Classical Athens (Ar. Wasps 946-48), Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-), Vol. 119, (1989), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    14、C. Carey, Rape and Adultery in Athenian Law, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 45, No. 2 (1995), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    15、David Cyrus Mirhady, The Oath-Challenge in Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    16、David C. Mirhady, Torture and Rhetoric in Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116, (1996), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic.
    17、Douglas MacDowell,“Hybris in Athens”, Greece & Rome, 2nd Set.,Vol. 23, No. I (Apr., 1976).
    18、Douglas L. Cairns,“Hubris, Dishonour, and Thinking Big”, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 116(1996).
    19、Danielle Allen, Imprisonment in Classical Athens, The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 47, No. 1 (1997), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    20、E. Poste, Attic Judicature, The Classical Review, Vol. 10, No. 3 (Apr., 1896), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    21、E. Poste, Juror-Panels at Athens, The Classical Review, Vol. 7, No. 5 (May, 1893), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    22、Edwin Carawan, The Athenian Amnesty and the 'Scrutiny of the Laws', The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 122, (2002), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    23、Edwin Carawan, The Tetralogies and Athenian Homicide Trials, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 114, No. 2 (Summer, 1993), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    24、Gorham Phillips Stevens, The Periclean Entrance Court of the Acropolis of Athens, Hesperia, Vol. 5, No. 4 (1936), Published by American School of Classical Studies at Athens.
    25、Gertrude Smith, The Jurisdiction of the Areopagus, Classical Philology, Vol. 22, No. 1 (Jan., 1927), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    26、Gertrude Smith, Dicasts in the Ephetic Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    27、George Miller Calhoun, Documentary Frauds in Litigation at Athens, Classical Philology, Vol. 9, No. 2 (Apr., 1914), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    28、Gregory Vlastos, Solonian Justice, Classical Philology, Vol. 41, No. 2 (Apr., 1946), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    29、Glenn R. Morrow, The Murder of Slaves in Attic Law, Classical Philology, Vol. 32, No. 3 (Jul., 1937), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    30、Irving Barkan, Imprisonment as a Penalty in Ancient Athens, Classical Philology, Vol. 31, No. 4 (Oct., 1936), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    31、J. W. Headlam, Attic Law, The Classical Review, Vol. 7, No. 12 (Feb., 1893), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    32、John J. Bateman, Lysias and the Law, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 89, (1958), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    33、John Scenters-Zapico, The Case for the Sophists, Rhetoric Review, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Spring, 1993), Published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (Taylor & Francis Group).
    34、Kurt von Fritz, The Composition of Aristotle's Constitution of Athens and the So-Called Dracontian Constitution, Classical Philology, Vol. 49, No. 2 (Apr., 1954), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    35、Melissa Schwartzberg, Athenian Democracy and Legal Change, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 98, No. 2 (May, 2004), Published by American Political Science Association.
    36、Matthew R. Christ, Legal Self-Help on Private Property in Classical Athens, The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 119, No. 4 (Winter, 1998), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    37、Michael Gagarin, The Nature of Proofs in Antiphon, Classical Philology, Vol. 85, No. 1 (Jan., 1990), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    38、Michael Gagarin, The Torture of Slaves in Athenian Law, Classical Philology, Vol. 91, No. 1 (Jan., 1996), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    39、N. R. E. Fisher,“Hybris and dishonour: I”, Greece & Rome, 2nd Ser., Vol. 23, No.2 (Oct., 1976).
    40、N. R. E. Fisher,“Hybris and dishonour:Ⅱ”, Greece & Rome, 2nd Ser., Vol. 26, No. 1 (Apr., 1979).
    41、Noel Robertson, The Laws of Athens, 410-399 BC The Evidence for Review and Publication, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 110, (1990), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    42、N. L. Ingle, The Original Function of the Boule at Athens, The Classical Review, Vol. 25, No. 8 (Dec., 1911), Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association.
    43、Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Boeotia, Classical Philology, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Jan., 1945), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    44、Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in Rural Attica, Classical Philology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Jan., 1928), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    45、Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in Sparta, Classical Philology, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    46、Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in the Age of Hesiod, Classical Philology, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Jan., 1912), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    47、Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice in the Age of Homer, Classical Philology, Vol. 6, No. 1 (Jan., 1911), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    48、Robert J. Bonner and Gertrude Smith, Administration of Justice in the Delphic Amphictyony, Classical Philology, Vol. 38, No. 1 (Jan.,1943), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    49、Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Athenian Oligarchies, Classical Philology, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Jul., 1926), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    50、Robert J. Bonner, Administration of Justice under Pisistratus, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Oct., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    51、Robert J. Bonner, Did Women Testify in Homicide Cases at Athens Classical Philology, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Apr., 1906), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    52、Robert J. Bonner, Wit and Humor in Athenian Courts, Classical Philology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Apr., 1922), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    53、Robert J. Bonner, The Jurisdiction of Athenian Arbitrators Classical Philology, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1907), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    54、Robert J. Bonner, The Institution of Athenian Arbitrators Classical Philology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1916), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    55、Robert J. Bonner, Evidence in the Areopagus Classical Philology, Vol. 7, No. 4 (Oct., 1912), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    56、Robert J. Bonner, Note on Aristotle Constitution of Athens xxxix. 5, Classical Philology, Vol. 19, No. 2 (Apr., 1924), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    57、Robert J. Bonner, The Legal Setting of Isocrates' Antidosis, Classical Philology, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Apr., 1920), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    58、Robert J. Bonner, The Legal Setting of Plato's Apology, Classical Philology, Vol. 3, No. 2 (Apr., 1908), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    59、Robert J. Bonner, The Megarian Decrees, Classical Philology, Vol. 16, No. 3 (Jul., 1921), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    60、Ronald S. Stroud, Three Attic Decrees, California Studies in Classical Antiquity, Vol. 7, (1974), Published by University of California Press.
    61、Robin Osborne, Law in Action in Classical Athens, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 105, (1985), Published by The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies.
    62、Raphael Sealey, Constitutional Changes in Athens in 410 B.C., California Studies in Classical Antiquity, Vol. 8, (1975), Published by University of California Press.
    63、Raphael Sealey, The Athenian Courts for Homicide, Classical Philology, Vol. 78, No. 4 (Oct., 1983), Published by The University of Chicago Press.
    64、Stanley Barney Smith, The Establishment of the Public Courts at Athens, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 56, (1925), Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    65、Sara Forsdyke, Exile, Ostracism and the Athenian, Democracy Classical Antiquity, Vol. 19, No. 2 (Oct., 2000), Published by University of California Press.
    66、S. C. Humphreys, The Discourse of Law in Archaic and Classical Greece, Law and History Review, Vol. 6, No. 2 (Autumn, 1988), Published by University of Illinois Press for the American Society for Legal History.
    67、Vincent J. Rosivach, Execution by Stoning in Athens Classical Antiquity, Vol. 6, No. 2 (Oct., 1987), Published by University of California Press.
    1、黄洋、晏绍祥:《希腊史研究入门》,北京大学出版社2009年版。
    2、顾准:《顾准文稿》,中国青年出版社2002年版。
    3、孙道天:《古希腊历史遗产》,上海辞书出版社2004年版。
    4、杜平:《古希腊政体与官制史》,湖南师范大学出版社2001年版。
    5、王敦书:《贻书堂史集》,中华书局2003年版。
    6、应复克等著:《西方民主史》,中国社会科学出版社1997年版。
    7、解光云:《古典时期的雅典城市研究》,中国社会科学出版社2006年版。
    8、崔丽娜:《古典时期雅典的投票选举制度》,首都师范大学出版社2007年版。
    9、晏绍祥:《荷马社会研究》,上海三联书店2006年版。
    10、范愉:《非诉讼纠纷解决机制研究》,中国人民大学出版社2000年版。
    11、任礼:《古希腊:青铜时代的乐与忧》,世界知识出版社2003年版。
    12、梁治平:《法辩:中国法的过去、现在与未来》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版。
    13、《古代希腊史参考资料(译草)》,吉林师范大学1960年版。
    14、[美]斯东:《苏格拉底的审判》,董乐山译,三联书店1998年版。
    15、[古希腊]亚里士多德:《雅典政制》,日知、力野译,商务印书馆1959年版。
    16、[古希腊]亚里士多德:《政治学》,吴寿彭译,商务印书馆1997年版。
    17、[古希腊]亚里士多德:《尼各马可伦理学》,廖申白译,商务印书馆2003年版。
    18、[古罗马]普鲁塔克:《希腊罗马名人传》上册,陆永庭、吴彭鹏等译,商务印书馆1999年版。
    19、[古希腊]希罗多德:《历史》,王嘉隽译,商务印书馆1959年版。
    20、[古希腊]修昔底德:《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》,谢德风译,商务印书馆1978年版。
    21、[古希腊]柏拉图:《法律篇》,张智仁、何勤华译,上海人民出版社2001年版。
    22、[古希腊]柏拉图:《苏格拉底的申辩》,严群译,商务印书馆1983年版。
    23、[古希腊]柏拉图:《苏格拉底的最后日子——柏拉图对话集》,余灵灵、罗林平译,三联书店上海分店1988年版。
    24、[古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿里斯托芬戏剧二种》,罗念生译,湖南人民出版社1981年版。
    25、[古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿里斯多芬戏剧集》,罗念生等译,人民出版社1954年版。
    26、[古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《阿卡奈人骑士》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版。
    27、[古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《云马蜂》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版。
    28、[古希腊]阿里斯托芬:《地母节妇女蛙》,罗念生译,上海人民出版社2006年版。
    29、[古希腊]埃斯库罗斯等:《古希腊戏剧选》,人民文学出版社2008年版。
    30、[古希腊]色诺芬:《回忆苏格拉底》,吴永泉译,商务印书馆1984年版。
    31、[英]A. E.泰勒,[奥]Th.龚珀茨:《苏格拉底传》,赵继铨,李真译,商务印书馆1999年版。
    32、[英]奥斯温?默里:《早期希腊》,晏绍祥译,上海人民出版社2008年版。
    33、[英]约翰?索利:《雅典的民主》,王琼淑译,上海译文出版社2001年版。
    34、[英]基托:《希腊人》,徐卫翔、黄韬译,上海人民出版社1998年版。
    35、[英]亨利?梅因:《古代法》,沈景一译,商务印书馆1959年版。
    36、[英]赫?乔?韦尔斯:《世界史纲》,吴文藻、谢冰心、费孝通等译,人民出版社1982年版。
    37、[英]恩格斯:《家庭、私有制和国家的起源》,载《马克思思格斯选集》第4卷,人民出版社1972年版。
    38、[英]狄金森:《希腊的生活观》,彭基相译,华东师范大学出版社2006年版。
    39、[美]威格摩尔:《世界法系概览(上)》,何勤华等译,上海人民出版社2004年版。40、[美]萨拜因:《政治学说史》,盛葵阳、崔妙因译,商务印书馆1986年版。41、[美]威廉?弗格森:《希腊帝国主义》,晏绍祥译,上海三联出版社2005年版。42、[美]路易斯·亨利·摩尔根:《古代社会》(上册),杨东莼、马雍、马巨译,商务印书馆1997年版。43、[美]约翰?赞恩:《法律的故事》,刘昕、胡凝译,江苏人民出版社1998年版。44、[美]斯科特?戈登:《控制国家》,应奇译,江苏人民出版社2001年版。45、[美]依迪丝?汉密尔顿:《希腊精神:西方文明的源泉》,葛海滨译,辽宁教育出版社2003年版。46、[美]依迪丝?汉密尔顿:《希腊的回声》,曹博译,华夏出版社2008年版。47、[法]克洛德?德尔玛:《欧洲文明》,郑鹿年译,上海人民出版社1988年版。48、[法]皮埃尔?布吕莱:《古希腊人和他们的世界》,王美华译,译林出版社2006年版。49、[法]克琳娜?库蕾:《古希腊的交流》,邓丽丹译,广西师范大学出版社2005年版。50、[德]尼采:《希腊悲剧时代的哲学》,李超杰译,商务印书馆2006年版。51、[意]朱塞佩?格罗索:《罗马法史》,黄风译,中国政法大学出版社1994年版。1、蒋保:《演说术与雅典民主政治》,复旦大学2005年博士学位论文。2、胡骏:《雅典司法制度初探》,华东政法大学2006年硕士学位论文。3、张帆:《古希腊陪审制度初探》,西南政法大学2005年硕士学位论文。4、古纯玉:《斯巴达的兴衰与色诺芬的政治思想——<拉栖代梦人的政制>综合研究》,西南大学2006年硕士学位论文。5、祝宏俊:《斯巴达的“监察官”》,载《历史研究》2005年第5期。
    6、祝宏俊:《古代斯巴达的公民大会》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    7、祝宏俊:《斯巴达元老院研究》,载《史学集刊》2007年9月第5期。
    8、刘小荣:《莱库古政制改革辨析》,载《南开学报》2002年第2期
    9、晏绍祥:《古典斯巴达政治制度中的民主因素》,载《世界历史》2008年第1期。
    10、缪鸿孺、金萍:《雅典和斯巴达城邦的政体及启示》,载《江西教育学院学报(综合)》第27卷第6期。
    11、毕会成:《谁能代表希腊文明——斯巴达?雅典?》,载《辽宁师范大学学报(社会科学版)》第29卷第1期。
    12、刘文泰:《试论平贵斗争在斯巴达城邦形成中的作用》,载《南都学坛(哲学社会科学版)》第15卷1995年第5期。
    13、傅利华:《关于征服与斯巴达国家》,载《内蒙古民族师院学报(哲社版)》1999年第3期。
    14、黄洋:《希腊城邦的公共空间与政治文化》,载《历史研究》2001年第5期。
    15、孙运德:《古代希腊的民主形式》,载《郑州航空工业管理学院学报(社会科学版)》第25卷第6期。
    16、赵世环:《古希腊民主政治成因探析》,载《华中科技大学学报·社会科学版》第15卷第4期。
    17、丁社教、师迎祥:《希腊民主与公共性原则探究》,载《西北大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》第37卷第6期。
    18、李涛:《希腊僭主政治浅析》,载《阴山学刊》第20卷第1期。
    19、张维:《希腊城邦制度浅析》,载《四川师范学院学报(哲学社会科学版)》2001年1月第1期。
    20、胡骏:《公元前5世纪雅典陶片放逐法考略》,载《法学》2005年第6期。
    21、刘文泰:《关于实行贝壳放逐法的票数问题》,载《南都学坛》1996年第4期。
    22、蔡连增:《论陶片放逐法的内容和起源》,载《东北师范大学学报》1994年第2期。
    23、徐琳:《苏格拉底之死与雅典民主政治》,载《历史教学》1998年第10期。
    24、吴爱孙、胡志刚:《苏格拉底悲剧成因探析》,载《哈尔滨学院学报》第27卷第10期。
    25、黄鸣鹤:《苏格拉底审判之谜》,载《中国审判新闻月刊》2006年第4期。
    26、曾裕华:《哲学与政治:论苏格拉底的审判》,载《贵州大学学报(社会科学版)》第24卷第2期。
    27、贾薇:《对雅典民主政治的批判与反思》,载《青海社会科学》2003年第3期。
    28、高红清:《程序民主的完美典范:雅典陪审法庭》,载《邢台职业技术学院学报》第23卷第4期。
    29、李桂英、蔡连增:《古代雅典的陪审法庭与民主政治》,载《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》第17卷第3期。
    30、靳艳:《雅典城邦法治论》,载《兰州大学学报》2001年第2期。
    31、蔡连增:《论公元前四世纪雅典陪审法庭的政治权力》,载《厦门大学学报》1997年第1期。
    32、李琼、段海霞:《浅析古代雅典的民主政治》,载《怀化学院学报》第26卷第12期。
    33、魏凤莲、郭小凌:《对近年来国外雅典民主制研究的思考》,载《史学理论研究》2007年第4期。
    34、廖学盛:《试析古代雅典民主产生的条件》,载《世界历史》1997年第2期。
    35、张晶:《希腊早期僭主政治的历史作用》,载《安庆师范学院学报(社会科学版)》第22卷第2期。
    36、宋慧娟:《雅典民主政治衰落因素探析》,载《长春师范学院学报》第20卷第3期。
    37、李长健、曹俊:《基于法经济学视角的民间非诉讼机制研究》,载《天津市政法管理干部学院学报》2008年第2期。
    38、陈小曼:《“无讼”与非讼解决争议方式》,载《皖西学院学报》2002年4月第18卷第2期。
    39、梁治平:《从苏格拉底之死看希腊法的悲剧》,载《读书》1987年第8期。
    1、辞海编辑委员会编:《辞海》,上海辞书出版社1980年版。
    2、何勤华主编:《外国法制史》,法律出版社2001年版。
    3、何勤华主编:《西方法律思想史》,复旦大学出版社2005年版。
    4、徐大同主编:《西方政治思想史》,天津教育出版社2001年版。
    5、严存生主编:《西方法律思想史》,法律出版社2004年版。
    6、张宏生、谷春德主编:《西方法律思想史》,北京大学出版社2000年版。
    7、由嵘主编:《外国法制史》,北京大学出版社2003年版。
    1、于洪君:《希腊文明古国的现代忧思》,载中国民族报2002年12月13日第4版。
    1、百度百科刑事诉讼词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/424857.htm。
    2、百度百科古希腊词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/540990.htm。
    3、百度百科德摩斯梯尼词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/81688.htm?fr=ala0_1。
    4、维基百科雅典词条:http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9B%85%E5%85%B8。
    5、百度百科阿里斯托芬词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/37067.htm。
    6、百度百科德拉克马词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/180375.htm?fr=ala0_1_1。
    7、刘伟译:《现代宪政的起源》,http://www.chinalawedu.com/news/2004_6/4/0849412019.htm。
    8、百度百科名年执政官词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/985473.htm?fr=ala0_1。
    9、百度百科菲迪亚斯词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/83357.htm。
    10、百度百科阿那克萨哥拉词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/241662.htm?fr=ala0_1_1。
    11、百度百科第欧根尼?拉尔修词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/1429544.html。
    12、百度百科普罗塔哥拉词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/1189702.htm。
    13、百度百科吕西阿斯词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/2058255.htm。
    14、百度百科客籍民词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/1621634.htm。
    15、军事网吕山德词条:http://www.unitedcn.com/04WGMJ/09Greece/new_page_3453.htm。
    16、新华网:《西方文明的摇篮——雅典》:http://news.xinhuanet.com/ziliao/2002-05/17/content_397640.htm。
    17、《现代宪政:共和主义、民主、自由、法治四维一体(前言)》,http://catcher.blogcn.com/diary,100914482.shtml。
    18、百度百科克里斯梯尼词条:http://baike.baidu.com/view/765090.htm。