discussions of athenian notions of law and the role of the courts in Athenian society have so far focused on speeches delivered in the popular courts. As we have seen, in the popular courts the laws were largely undefined and the litigants observed no rule of relevance. But there were also special homicide courts – highly respected, seldom used, and largely omitted from modern discussions of the aims of the law courts. These courts – which almost certainly developed earlier than the popular courts – reportedly employed a rule prohibiting irrelevant statements. Additionally, they applied laws that exhibited greater legal definition and substantive content than those used in the popular courts. The unusual composition and procedures of the homicide courts made these courts (at least in theory) far more congenial than the popular courts to legal argument, and so less vulnerable to influences based on the character and social standing of the litigants. This chapter explores these differences, their place in the Athenian concept of justice, and the possible reasons for the different treatment of homicide and related offenses. The homicide procedures reveal that the Athenians could conceive of a system that encouraged the regular application of abstract rules without regard to the broader social context of the dispute, but rejected this model in favor of a more discretionary approach in the popular courts.

THE FIVE HOMICIDE COURTS

In the classical period, five special courts shared jurisdiction over most cases involving homicide.