The Rhetoric of the Graphē Paranomōn in the Trial on the Crown

This chapter re-examines the legal bases of the trial of Ctesiphon on the crown – the formal terms of Ctesiphon’s proposal and of Aeschines’ indictment – and their rhetorical deployment by Aeschines and Demosthenes. It shows that the critical element of the case that enables both orators to sustain a close relationship between legal and rhetorical concerns is their common assumption that one of Aeschines’ accusations is the most important: that Demosthenes does not deserve the crown. It was therefore in both orators’ interests to adopt an understanding of relevance which would best allow them to contest the truth or falsehood of this claim, while still adhering to the terms of Ctesiphon’s proposal and Aeschines’ plaint. Aeschines’ framing of his plaint and mediation of it in his prosecution permitted this, but this chapter shows that Demosthenes was the main beneficiary, as it enabled him to establish the relevance of a discussion of his own career. Accordingly, we see him continually linking his defence to the terms of Aeschines’ prosecution, demonstrating superior standards of relevance by sustained attention to the specifics of the legal charges and reclaiming the salient terms of Ctesiphon’s proposal for his own use

CONTEST · Element (criminal law) · Framing (construction) · Indictment · Relevance (law) · Rhetoric · Rhetorical question · Salient · Classical Antiquity Studies