Section 2 consists of the universe of terms, persons and events that may appear on the class final (04/12/01). The actual final will consist of a much smaller  list of terms you must identify and or explain, drawn from the list in section 2.

Section 3 consists of a group of possible essay questions I will choose from for your second essay questions.

 I urge you to prepare for this exam by working in groups and sharing the workload.

Question: [Rebecca Carvalho, David Baker, George Livadas, Reto Morosani]
 Athenian philosophers criticized the rule of Athens.  Plato and Aristotle challenge the use of rule of judgment over rule of law.  Assess the effectiveness and shortcomings of this form of governing.

Answer:
 A good answer would first define the difference between the rule of judgment and the rule of law.  The effectiveness of ruling by judgment means that decisions carry the mandate of the community.  Using examples from speeches, show how judgment keeps the wealthy Athenians working for the people.  It also upholds the community standards.  Ruling by judgment also enables the community to change its interpretation of the standards.  When addressing the shortcomings of a rule by judgment, you should use Aristotle and Platoís views to show the dangers of placing judgment over law.  Right and wrong are not clearly defined when ruling by judgment the way they are by law.
 

Question: [Mike Carrigan, Bennett Himes, Andrew Coombs, Mark Ribeiro]

There are three strands of argument used to construct a formulation of desert. Explain all three.

Answer:
An "A" answer would include: Listing sections B 1,2,3 of the outline [week 10, class 2 lecture outline] for p. 147-167.
1. Discussing the use of private anger to play on the juries emotions
2. Explanation of a sycophant and why it would be a bad thing to appear as one (why is it better to appear as thought you are acting with ìhot bloodî)
3. Explain why it was a requirement of the prosecutors to show an honest interest in and to rouse public anger for the act committed.
 

Question: [Lauren Sterk, finney Walter, Christian Galligher, Bart Fromuth]

Describe the male and female accepted outlits for anger.  How did these structrues infleunce punishment?

Answer:

See [week 10, class 2 lecture outline] for  p. 134 - 146

 
Question:  [Jared Devine, Dara Kidder, Josh Levin]
Discuss the difference between social memory and law (legislation).

Answer:
Litigants strive to invoke a social memory and ignite the anger and emotions of the jury.
When using this strategy consistently, orators could effectively secure judicial procedure on
the accused.  However, a juror had the choice and could vote contrary to the law and "if law
was nonexistent," was also taken into consideration.  Social memory was triggered by the
power of memory to rouse the juryís anger in order to try and generate final and
authoritative judgments in the oratorís favor.  Law was upheld when orators used
supporting evidence of past occurrences as a form of informative but nonbonding precedent,
and created the framework of equivalencies for dispensing anger.  Written law, in fact, help
set up the public economy of anger.  Law was evidence or proof analogous to a witnessesí
testimony.  Athenians as persuasive and a non-binding force within an Athenian court
interpreted Law.

Question:  [p. 232-242: Geoff Jones, Frank Tate, Nick Kuppins]
How do these punishments promote a sense of "wholeness" in the Athenian community?

Answer:
Executions:
 

-Nonviolent

-Protected the human rights of victims. No unnecessarily painful deaths.

-Murderers were not necessarily executed, this could be because Athenians did not want to
introduce personal problems into society. They did not want to taint society and government which
was supposed to remain pure.

Death by hemlock was equated with dying nobly. Therefore it conferred a sense of honor onto the person dying.

Amnesty:
 

-Also non-violent

 -Attempted to welcome back citizens in order to allow for the of Democratic society after civil upheavals like the thirty tyrants.
 -Also attempted to rid the city of popular and powerful citizens who could plunge the city into violence
-Some amnesties required forgetting about bad actions that the state had committed or that people had committed in the absence of a state.
-In essence putting the state ahead of personal desires. Putting the community above the individual

Question: [Dan Driscoll, Eric Klose, Mike Jenson, Eric Wei]
How did Athenians use punishment to create desired social memories physically and symbolically?

Answer :
- By remembering and forgetting event to reconstruct the polis
- Remembering by 1) inscription 2) presence of wrongdoers 3) place of
punishment
Forgetting
- Atimia and exile  removed person from polis physically or functionally

Symbolism
- Containment and consumption or physical acts of power forced citizens
back into polis
- Exile removed those who could not be reformed  undesired reminders of
polises lack of power

Religious
- Symbolically cleansed society of wrongdoing
- Removed oxuthumia or anger
- At the moment of punishment, society is purified and cleansed

Overall effect is to generate the memory of a powerful and pure polis
 

Question: [Steven Imig, Mike Sim, Chris Conte]

What were the differences in the goals of the punishments laid down in public
vs. private cases (dike vs. graphe)?

Answer -
Make the distinction between private cases goals - immediate  reperation for wrongdoings and public cases where reperations to society were sought, but a great benefit to society was realized.  A lasting effect on social memory was sought through public postings of decisions.  A change in social consciousness was sought.
 

Essay Q:
What are the three ways of disposing of the body in Athenian culture and
what was the significance of each?
 

Model Answer:
1)ataphia, throwing out the body unburied
2)burial w/out memorialization
3)burial w/ memorialization

1a) ataphia = ultimate loss of honor

2a) body is taken care of, but the soul is forgotten

3a) body and soul are honored

All three methdods are centered on honor, recognition and pollution.

Question: How do these punishments promote a sense of "wholeness" in the Athenian
community?

Executions:

-Nonviolent

-Protected the human rights of victims. No unnecessarily painful deaths.

-Murderers were not necessarily executed, this could be because Athenians did not want to
introduce personal problems into society. They did not want to taint society and government
which was supposed to remain pure.

                                                                                Death by hemlock was equated with dying nobly.
                                                                                Therefore it conferred a sense of honor onto the person
                                                                                dying.

                                        Amnesty:

                                        -Also non-violent

                                        -Attempted to welcome back citizens in order to allow for the of Democratic
                                        society after civil upheavals like the thirty tyrants.

                                        -Also attempted to rid the city of popular and powerful citizens who could
                                        plunge the city into violence

                                        -Some amnesties required forgetting about bad actions that the state had
                                        committed or that people had committed in the absence of a state.

                                        -In essence putting the state ahead of personal desires. Putting the
                                        community above the individual

Consider the following speeches: Against Meidias, Against Conon, On the Murder of Eratosthenes.  Consider the analytical models offered by Cohen, Johnstone, Ober and Allen for Athenian litigation.  Pick two speeches and explain them in terms of the model offered by two of these scholars.

How do Aristophanes and Aeschylus both construct and problemetize the role of litigation in Athenian democracy?  What perspectives do their representations of litigation offer us that the speeches do not?

Describe the relationship between litigation and democracy in Athens and the United States.  What do the differences between these two relationships tell us about the differneces in the democratic ideology of Ancient Athens and the Modern US.

How did legal rhetoric construct the Athenian ideology of citizenship?