Papers by Vasileios Adamidis
Athens Journal of Humanities & Arts 2024, 11: 1-11, 2024
This paper explores Socrates' rhetoric in Plato's Apology using Social Identity Theory and Burke'... more This paper explores Socrates' rhetoric in Plato's Apology using Social Identity Theory and Burke's concept of identification. While rhetoric often relies on connecting with the audience through shared identity, Socrates took a different approach. Instead of conforming to the popular norms and beliefs of the Athenian court, he stayed true to his own values, principles, and divine mission. As a nonconformist, Socrates stood apart from the majority, criticising the Athenian courts in the process, but still established himself as the ideal philosopher, promoting a lasting, virtue-based identity that has inspired followers for generations.
RHETORICAL TRADITIONS & CONTEMPORARY LAW, Brian N. Larson & Elizabeth C. Britt, eds., Cambridge University Press, (2025) Forthcoming. 45-74, 2025
Integrating tradition in legal arguments remains an effective persuasive strategy, serving as a s... more Integrating tradition in legal arguments remains an effective persuasive strategy, serving as a source of legitimacy and appeal, fostering the establishment of a shared identity between the speaker and the audience, and cultivating a sense of belonging to a distinct group with defined notions of its identity.
This chapter examines the strategic utilization of the concept of tradition in forensic rhetoric. It investigates how communicators shape and influence discourse within forensic settings by leveraging enduring cultural norms, purported intentions and beliefs of esteemed historical figures, and narratives concerning a people's historical trajectory.
By examining cases from the popular courts of classical Athens and drawing parallels in contemporary American legal arguments, the chapter identifies instances where tradition serves both as a stabilizing force and a catalyst for innovation, and sheds light on the importance of tradition as a cornerstone of the rhetorical strategies of advocates on all sides of an issue, including those challenging the status quo.
Consequently, the chapter contributes to a deeper understanding of the rhetorical functioning of tradition, offering insights into the intricate interplay between the construction of persuasive narratives grounded in tradition and legal concepts such as precedent, original intent, and legal interpretation.
Rhetorica 42.1 (1-30), 2024
This paper highlights the importance of an audience-centric approach in the study of Athenian for... more This paper highlights the importance of an audience-centric approach in the study of Athenian forensic rhetoric and leverages insights from Social Identity Theory and Burke’s concept of ‘identification’ to examine courtroom speeches.
Litigants, perceiving the Athenian dikastai as a distinct group marked by a salient social identity, rhetorically employed the group’s prototypes, norms, and interests to establish their identification—and underscore the opponent’s division—with the audience.
This prominent role of social identity and the potential for jury bias affecting the large audiences of dikastai prompt a reconsideration of the nature of Athenian trials and suggest that, in addition to upholding the law, Athenian courts functioned as platforms for the imposition of social and legal conformity.
Journal of Ancient Civilizations, 2022
The ideology of Athenian Democracy
The function and the nature of the Athenian dēmokratia hav... more The ideology of Athenian Democracy
The function and the nature of the Athenian dēmokratia have been much
contested issues over the centuries. This study aims to offer an original and cross-disciplinary examination of this system. By reference to the latest trends in modern political theory concerning the salient phenomenon of populism, the paper demonstrates the suitability of this concept for close analysis of the Athenian political structures and practices, revealing that it is time for the Athenian dēmokratia and its ideology to be critically reconsidered. The danger of anachronism notwithstanding, the dēmokratia of late 5th century BC Athens exhibits characteristics that could classify it as a prototype populist regime.
Populism, 2021
What is the impact of populism on liberal democratic legal systems? How can we measure this impac... more What is the impact of populism on liberal democratic legal systems? How can we measure this impact?
By reference to Hart's legal positivism, the paper argues that populism challenges and aims to reconstruct the rule of recognition of liberal democracies. In particular, populism exploits the ambiguities in the nature of this social rule, by advocating the extension of the group whose consensus determines the criteria of legal validity from the restricted sphere of judges and officials, to the people at large. Populism instrumentalises the functions of the rule of recognition, aiming to provoke uncertainty in the system in order to accomplish a shift and, thus, alter the content of the rule. Infiltrating concepts with meanings that suit its ends and reordering the criteria of legal validity, populism prioritises an absolute form of popular sovereignty over a thin, dubious version of the rule of law. Nevertheless, the latter’s ambiguity allows populism to claim that the rule of law still forms part of its rule of recognition.
Politics SAGE, 2021
Popular sovereignty plays a central role in both the democratic and the populist ideology. While ... more Popular sovereignty plays a central role in both the democratic and the populist ideology. While democracy's version of qualified sovereignty is accepted as mutually constitutive with the rule of law, populism's version of absolute sovereignty is seen as incompatible with this ideal. The article reconsiders this oversimplifying approach. By examining the interaction of these concepts with a nuanced account of the rule of law, it argues for the compatibility of both democracy and populism with different versions of this ideal. While this remains a key distinguishing factor between democracy and populism, the ambiguity of the rule of law still allows populism to claim that it complies with a thin version of this concept.
Populism 4 (1): 1-24, 2021
By reference to the impact of populism on the foundational rules of democratic legal systems, the... more By reference to the impact of populism on the foundational rules of democratic legal systems, the paper explores the interconnectedness of two "essentially contested concepts", 1 democracy 2 and populism, 3 and their relationship with another ambiguous concept, the rule of law. 4 The main argument is that populism aims to amend the democratic rule of recognition, the most important 'rule about rules' upon which a legal system is founded. This has not been rigorously studied so far, despite its significance for a holistic conceptualisation of populism and for the analysis of its relationship with democracy. For, the rule of recognition provides a relatively stable point of reference for measuring the effect of populism on democracy. Based on Hart's theory of legal positivism, 5 the paper argues that while democracy and populism purportedly apply similar criteria to determine the validity of laws, populism promotes a different hierarchy and understanding of these concepts and, as a result, undermines
Athens Journal of History, 7 (1) 21-40., 2021
The elusive populist phenomenon has been the focus of numerous studies in recent years, with the ... more The elusive populist phenomenon has been the focus of numerous studies in recent years, with the reliance of populism on divisive and aggressive rhetoric being acknowledged. The paper aims to apply these findings to the Athenian forensic rhetoric and identify manifestations of populist rhetoric in the antagonistic arena of Athenian courts. By reference to the most 'political' of public trials, namely the indictments against inexpedient laws and illegal decrees, it is argued that the rhetorical strategies employed by the Athenian litigants who sought to persuade mass audiences in a zero-sum process, have much in common with modern populist discourse. Aiming to secure the good will of the dicasts, speakers competed over their level of adherence to the shared traditional values and norms of Athenian society, making the audience the nodal point of their rhetoric. Artfully interpellating the audience into a fictitiously pure and homogeneous group, litigants sought to establish concord with the dicasts while alienating the opponent. The division between the pure demos and the corrupt establishment, allowed the speakers to use a divisive and aggressive rhetoric, through which the adversary was presented as an outsider, representative of the out-group of corrupt political elite who undermined the political and moral principles upon which the Athenian identity was based.
D.A. FRENKEL and N. VARGA, eds., New studies in law and history. Athens: Athens Institute for Education and Research, pp. 11-28. , 2019
In this chapter, by reference to modern research on populism, the manifestations of this phenomen... more In this chapter, by reference to modern research on populism, the manifestations of this phenomenon in fifth century Athens are analysed, while pointing to some legal responses to counter it. Despite the rigorous and comprehensive study of Athenian democracy, surprisingly enough no systematic application of the concept of populism (as defined by modern political theory) to classical Athens has taken place; this chapter aims to fill this gap. My conclusion is that modern political theory on populism can be legitimately applied to contexts other than Western liberal democracies, being particularly suitable for a closer analysis of ancient Athens, while in return, Athenian legal and extra-legal responses to populism could provide valuable guidance on how to tame this phenomenon.
Rhetorica, Vol. XXXVII, Issue 1, pp. 16–34., 2019
The Greek interpretive model of human action sheds light on the
rhetorical strategies and tactics... more The Greek interpretive model of human action sheds light on the
rhetorical strategies and tactics of Athenian orators. In the light of this,
the recurring, highly sophisticated and nuanced invocation ofβάσανος
by Athenian litigants demonstrates that, although in theory it was an
inefficient (and cruel to modern eyes) procedure for the discovery of
truth, in practice it was an artful rhetorical device for the introduction
of – at times, questionable – evidence.
The focus of this paper is on Solon's attitude towards wealth as can be extracted by his legislat... more The focus of this paper is on Solon's attitude towards wealth as can be extracted by his legislation and poems. The argument is that part of the rationale of Solon's legislation aimed at the regulation and check of the influence of wealth in the Athenian administration of justice and the emerging legal system of the polis. In this era of spreading monetisation, there was a conscious effort on the part of the Athenian lawgiver to place limits on the use of wealth and to make economic resources a positive feature, at the service of law and community, rather than the opposite. In the Solonian reforms we find traces of subsequent dominant characteristics of the Athenian legal system (such as amateurism and egalitarianism) which might offer new insights on the modern manifestations of inequality before the law.
What was the function of classical Athenian courts? Did they intend to enforce the rule of law? T... more What was the function of classical Athenian courts? Did they intend to enforce the rule of law? The greatest obstacle to accepting an affirmative answer is the wide use of, at first sight and from a modern (sometimes anachronistic) perspective, remotely relevant argumentation by litigants. In this paper, by reference to Greek ideas of personality, I analyse and demonstrate the legal relevance of extra-legal argumentation in classical Athenian courts, using as a case study the widely criticised invocation of liturgies (public services) by litigants. In particular, by applying a model of human action and ethical motivation which is more appropriate to the Greeks (rather that the unsuitable for the ancient context Cartesian / Kantian), a better understanding of forensic rhetoric and argumentation is achieved. Therefore, in accordance with Greek psychology, the admittedly liberal approach to legal relevance of the Athenian courts was a calculated step towards the attainment of legal justice and the rule of law as the Athenians perceived it.
Books by Vasileios Adamidis
Uploads
Papers by Vasileios Adamidis
This chapter examines the strategic utilization of the concept of tradition in forensic rhetoric. It investigates how communicators shape and influence discourse within forensic settings by leveraging enduring cultural norms, purported intentions and beliefs of esteemed historical figures, and narratives concerning a people's historical trajectory.
By examining cases from the popular courts of classical Athens and drawing parallels in contemporary American legal arguments, the chapter identifies instances where tradition serves both as a stabilizing force and a catalyst for innovation, and sheds light on the importance of tradition as a cornerstone of the rhetorical strategies of advocates on all sides of an issue, including those challenging the status quo.
Consequently, the chapter contributes to a deeper understanding of the rhetorical functioning of tradition, offering insights into the intricate interplay between the construction of persuasive narratives grounded in tradition and legal concepts such as precedent, original intent, and legal interpretation.
Litigants, perceiving the Athenian dikastai as a distinct group marked by a salient social identity, rhetorically employed the group’s prototypes, norms, and interests to establish their identification—and underscore the opponent’s division—with the audience.
This prominent role of social identity and the potential for jury bias affecting the large audiences of dikastai prompt a reconsideration of the nature of Athenian trials and suggest that, in addition to upholding the law, Athenian courts functioned as platforms for the imposition of social and legal conformity.
The function and the nature of the Athenian dēmokratia have been much
contested issues over the centuries. This study aims to offer an original and cross-disciplinary examination of this system. By reference to the latest trends in modern political theory concerning the salient phenomenon of populism, the paper demonstrates the suitability of this concept for close analysis of the Athenian political structures and practices, revealing that it is time for the Athenian dēmokratia and its ideology to be critically reconsidered. The danger of anachronism notwithstanding, the dēmokratia of late 5th century BC Athens exhibits characteristics that could classify it as a prototype populist regime.
By reference to Hart's legal positivism, the paper argues that populism challenges and aims to reconstruct the rule of recognition of liberal democracies. In particular, populism exploits the ambiguities in the nature of this social rule, by advocating the extension of the group whose consensus determines the criteria of legal validity from the restricted sphere of judges and officials, to the people at large. Populism instrumentalises the functions of the rule of recognition, aiming to provoke uncertainty in the system in order to accomplish a shift and, thus, alter the content of the rule. Infiltrating concepts with meanings that suit its ends and reordering the criteria of legal validity, populism prioritises an absolute form of popular sovereignty over a thin, dubious version of the rule of law. Nevertheless, the latter’s ambiguity allows populism to claim that the rule of law still forms part of its rule of recognition.
rhetorical strategies and tactics of Athenian orators. In the light of this,
the recurring, highly sophisticated and nuanced invocation ofβάσανος
by Athenian litigants demonstrates that, although in theory it was an
inefficient (and cruel to modern eyes) procedure for the discovery of
truth, in practice it was an artful rhetorical device for the introduction
of – at times, questionable – evidence.
Books by Vasileios Adamidis
This chapter examines the strategic utilization of the concept of tradition in forensic rhetoric. It investigates how communicators shape and influence discourse within forensic settings by leveraging enduring cultural norms, purported intentions and beliefs of esteemed historical figures, and narratives concerning a people's historical trajectory.
By examining cases from the popular courts of classical Athens and drawing parallels in contemporary American legal arguments, the chapter identifies instances where tradition serves both as a stabilizing force and a catalyst for innovation, and sheds light on the importance of tradition as a cornerstone of the rhetorical strategies of advocates on all sides of an issue, including those challenging the status quo.
Consequently, the chapter contributes to a deeper understanding of the rhetorical functioning of tradition, offering insights into the intricate interplay between the construction of persuasive narratives grounded in tradition and legal concepts such as precedent, original intent, and legal interpretation.
Litigants, perceiving the Athenian dikastai as a distinct group marked by a salient social identity, rhetorically employed the group’s prototypes, norms, and interests to establish their identification—and underscore the opponent’s division—with the audience.
This prominent role of social identity and the potential for jury bias affecting the large audiences of dikastai prompt a reconsideration of the nature of Athenian trials and suggest that, in addition to upholding the law, Athenian courts functioned as platforms for the imposition of social and legal conformity.
The function and the nature of the Athenian dēmokratia have been much
contested issues over the centuries. This study aims to offer an original and cross-disciplinary examination of this system. By reference to the latest trends in modern political theory concerning the salient phenomenon of populism, the paper demonstrates the suitability of this concept for close analysis of the Athenian political structures and practices, revealing that it is time for the Athenian dēmokratia and its ideology to be critically reconsidered. The danger of anachronism notwithstanding, the dēmokratia of late 5th century BC Athens exhibits characteristics that could classify it as a prototype populist regime.
By reference to Hart's legal positivism, the paper argues that populism challenges and aims to reconstruct the rule of recognition of liberal democracies. In particular, populism exploits the ambiguities in the nature of this social rule, by advocating the extension of the group whose consensus determines the criteria of legal validity from the restricted sphere of judges and officials, to the people at large. Populism instrumentalises the functions of the rule of recognition, aiming to provoke uncertainty in the system in order to accomplish a shift and, thus, alter the content of the rule. Infiltrating concepts with meanings that suit its ends and reordering the criteria of legal validity, populism prioritises an absolute form of popular sovereignty over a thin, dubious version of the rule of law. Nevertheless, the latter’s ambiguity allows populism to claim that the rule of law still forms part of its rule of recognition.
rhetorical strategies and tactics of Athenian orators. In the light of this,
the recurring, highly sophisticated and nuanced invocation ofβάσανος
by Athenian litigants demonstrates that, although in theory it was an
inefficient (and cruel to modern eyes) procedure for the discovery of
truth, in practice it was an artful rhetorical device for the introduction
of – at times, questionable – evidence.