Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Ancient Greek History and Contemporary Social Science$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Mirko Canevaro, Andrew Erskine, Benjamin Gray, and Josiah Ober

Print publication date: 2018

Print ISBN-13: 9781474421775

Published to Edinburgh Scholarship Online: January 2019

DOI: 10.3366/edinburgh/9781474421775.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM EDINBURGH SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.edinburgh.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Edinburgh University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in ESO for personal use.date: 29 March 2020

Rethinking Mass and Elite: Decision-Making in the Athenian Law-Courts

Rethinking Mass and Elite: Decision-Making in the Athenian Law-Courts

Chapter:
(p.157) 5 Rethinking Mass and Elite: Decision-Making in the Athenian Law-Courts
Source:
Ancient Greek History and Contemporary Social Science
Author(s):

Federica Carugati

Barry R. Weingast

Publisher:
Edinburgh University Press
DOI:10.3366/edinburgh/9781474421775.003.0006

This chapter puts pressure on the ‘mass and elite model’ of Athenian litigation introduced by Ober. According to this framework, litigation is a game played by elite litigants and mass audiences; the ‘masses’ constitute a monolithic body with identical preferences; the ‘elites’ are thoroughly aware of, and willingly play by, the rules set by the masses. Moving from a different interpretation of Athenian political sociology, this chapter builds a new model of Athenian litigation that modifies Ober’s in three important respects: first, the jurors’ preferences are not the product of a monolithic and static ‘mass’ ideology; second, litigants (not only elites) can reasonably predict the location of the median juror; and third, litigants’ arguments are the product of a cost‐benefit analysis that depends a) on the relative expected position of their opponent; b) on the expected position of the median juror; and c) on the policy/legal agenda they are pursuing. The model proposed here suggests that repeated interactions in the law‐courts allowed diverse interests to be advanced and negotiated, which helped the Athenians collectively define the boundaries of their social relations while responding to the new challenges that a post‐imperial, highly fragmented Greek ecology posed to Athens’ stability and prosperity.

Keywords:   Athenian litigation, mass and elite, ideology

Edinburgh Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.