El dilema de Gelio en <em>Noctes Atticae</em> XIV 2: enfoques legales y éticos en los procesos judiciales

Benjamin Adam  Jerue

doi:10.3989/emerita.2020.14.2011

Authors

Benjamin Adam Jerue Universidad San Jorge https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6385-4922

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/emerita.2020.14.2011

Keywords:

Aulus Gelius, Favorinus, Cato the Elder, ethics, character, court, evidence

Abstract

At Noctes Atticae XIV 2, Aulus Gellius describes a case over which he presided and in which he was unable to reach a final verdict. His indecision revolves around the mismatch between the moral characters of the litigants and the state of evidence (or lack thereof). This paper takes a close look at the role of Favorinus, who quotes Cato the Elder in an attempt to help Gellius make a decision. Linking the anecdote to larger debates about character-based argumentation in the court, the present paper argues that Gellius is not exactly confused by a contradiction in the evidence, but rather that he cannot decide between two different evaluative frameworks that could be used for resolving the problem: ethics and the law.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alexander, M. C. 1982: «Repetition of Prosecution and the Scope of Prosecution in the Standing Criminal Courts of the Late Republic», Classical Antiquity 1 (2), pp. 141-166. https://doi.org/10.2307/25010768

Ceaicovschi, K. 2009: «Cato the Elder in Aulus Gellius», Illinois Classical Studies 33-34, pp. 25-39.

Crook, J. 1976: «Sponsione Provocare: Its Place in Roman Litigation», Journal of Roman Studies 66, pp. 132-138. https://doi.org/10.2307/299784

Doris, J. 2002: Lack of Character, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139878364

Dover, K. 1994. Greek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle, Indianapolis.

Evans, R. J. and Kleijwegt, M. 1992: «Did the Romans Like Young Men? A Study of the Lex Villia annalis: Causes and Effects», Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 92, pp. 181-195.

Francisci, P. de 1961: «La prova giudiziale: A proposito di Gellio, N.A. 14,2», Helikon 1 (4), pp. 591-604.

Frier, B. 1985: The Rise of the Roman Jurist: Studies in Cicero's Pro Caecina, Princeton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400854905

Gröschler, P. 1997: Die tabellae-Urkunden aus den pompejanischen und herkulanensischen Urkundenfunden, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-48921-3

Gunderson, E. 2009: Nox Philologiae: Aulus Gellius and the Fantasy of the Roman Library, Madison.

Harries, J. 2007: Law and Crime in the Roman World, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620317

Holford-Strevens, L. 2003: Aulus Gellius: An Antonine Scholar and his Achievement, Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199263196.001.0001

Jerue, B. A. 2016: «A Credible Way of Doing Things Like in Comedy: Popular Culture in Roman Rhetoric and Oratory», doctoral dissertation, Yale University.

Jones, E. E. 1990: Interpersonal Perception, New York.

Jones, E. E. and Nisbett, R. E. 1971: «The Actor and the Observer: Divergent Perceptions of the Causes of Behavior», in Jones, E. E. (ed.), Attribution: Perceiving the Cause of Behavior, Morristown (NJ), pp. 79-94.

Kaser, M. and Hackl, K. 1996: Das römische Zivilprozessrecht, Munich.

Keulen, W. 2009: Gellius the Satirist: Roman Cultural Authority in Attic Nights, Leiden-Boston. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004169869.i-364

Lanni, A. 2006: Law and Justice in the Courts of Classical Athens, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511497865 PMCid:PMC1326038

May, J. 1989: Trials of Character: The Eloquence of Ciceronian Ethos, Chapel Hill (NC). https://doi.org/10.5149/northcarolina/9781469616322.001.0001

McGinn, T. A. J. 2010: «Communication and the Capability Problem in Roman Law: Aulus Gellius as Iudex and the Jurists on Child-Custody», Revue internationale des droits de l'Antiquité 57 (3e série), pp. 265-298.

Merritt, M. W., Doris, M. J. and Harman, G. 2010: «Character», in Doris, J. M. (ed.), The Moral Psychology Handbook, Oxford, pp. 355-401. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199582143.003.0012

Meyer, E. 2004: Legitimacy and Law in the Roman World: Tabulae in Roman Belief and Practice, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511482861

Nörr, D. 1995: «L'esperienza giuridica di Gellio (Noctes Atticae XIV 2)», Atti dei Convegni Lincei-Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei 125, pp. 33-56.

Paricio, J. 1988: «Iurare sibi non liquere», Atti del III Seminario Romanistico (Gardesano, 22-25 Ottobre 1985), pp. 413-422.

Prinz, J. 2009. «The Normativity Challenge: Cultural Psychology Provides the Real Threat to Virtue Ethics», Journal of Ethics 13 (2-3), pp. 117-144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-009-9053-3

Pugliese, G. 1964: «La preuve dans le procès romain de l'époque classique», Recueils de la société Jean Bodin pour l'histoire comparative des institutions. La Preuve, première partie, Antiquité 16, pp. 277-348.

Riggsby, A. M. 2004: «The Rhetoric of Character in the Roman Courts», in Powell, J. F. G. and Paterson, J. (eds.), Cicero the Advocate, Oxford, pp. 165-185. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198152804.003.0007

Rolfe, J. C. 1927: Gellius: Attic Nights, Volume I, Books 1-5, Cambridge (MA).

Scafuro, A. C. 1997: The Forensic Stage: Settling Disputes in Graeco-Roman New Comedy, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511583001 PMid:9055353

Scevola, R. 2004: La responsabilità del iudex privatus, Milan.

Winterbottom, M. 1964: «Quintilian and the vir bonus», Journal of Roman Studies 54, pp. 90-97. https://doi.org/10.2307/298654