Bibliography

1. M.C. Alexander, Forensic Advocacy in the Late Roman Republic. Unpublished diss., Toronto, 1977.

2. M.C. Alexander, �Praemia in the Quaestiones of the late Republic’, CPh 80 (1985), 20-32.

3. F. Antoine, â€?Les avocats à Rome sous l’Empire’, MĂ©moires de l’AcadĂ©mie des sciences, inscriptions et belles lettres de Toulouse, X^e SĂ©r. II (1902), 217ff.

4. Μ. Avon, Les avocats du fisc dans le droit romain, Thèse Aix-en-Provence (Publications du centre d’histoire institutionnelle et Ă©conomique de l’antiquitĂ© romaine, Sèrie MĂ©moires et Travaux, no. 2), 1972.

5. R.J. Bagnall, �Memorandum and notes for an advocate’, American Studies in Papyrology 20 (1979), 165-72.

6. R. Barthes, �L’ancienne rhétorique; aide-mémoire’, Commu­nications (Ecole pratique des hautes etudes: Centre d’études de communications en masse) 16 (1971), 172-223.

7. R.A. Bauman, Impietas in Principem (Münchener Beitr. 67), Munich, 1974.

8. R.A. Bauman, Lawyers and Politics in the Early Roman Empire (Münchener Beitr. 82), Munich, 1989.

9. J. Behm, art. Parakletos in G. Kittel, ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. V, ed. G. Friedrich, fransi. G.W. Bromiley, Grand Rapids, 1967, 800-14.

10. O. Behrends, �Die causae coniectio der Zwölftafeln und die Tatbestandsdisposition der Gerichtsrhetorik’, ZSS 92 (1975), 162-85.

11. J. Bentham, see 69 Dumont, below.

12. J.L. Bernard, R. Cohen and Μ. Lupfer, â€?The influence of jurors’ level of moral reasoning and the nature of closing arguments in determining the verdict in a civil case’, Law and Psychology Review 9 (1985), 93-102.

13. L.F. Bitzer and E. Black, The Prospect of Rhetoric: Report of the National Development Project: essays by various persons, including H.W. Johnstone, jr., W.C. Booth and C.

14. E. Black, Rhetorical Criticism: A Study in Method, Madison, 1978.

15. M. Bloch, ed., Political Language and Oratory in Traditional Society, London, 1975.

16. R.J. Bonner, Lawyers and Litigants in Ancient Athens: The Genesis of the Legal Profession, N.Y. 1927, repr. 1969.

17. S.F. Bonner, Roman Declamation in the Late Republic and Early Empire, Liverpool, 1949.

18. S.F. Bonner, Education in Ancient Rome, London, 1977.

19. W.C. Booth, �The scope of rhetoric today: a polemical excursion’, in 13 Bitzer and Black, above.

20. W.C. Booth, Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent, Notre Dame/London, 1974.

21. G. Boulvert, �Advocatus fisci’ (Rapporti: Francia: Dissertazioni), Index 3(1972), 22-43.

22. G. Boulvert, �L’autonomie du droit fiscal: le cas des ventes’ ANRWII14 (1982), 816-49.

23. G. Bowersock, Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire, Oxford, 1969.

24. E.L. Bowie, �The importance of the sophists’, YCIS 27 (1982), 29-59.

25. A. Braet, �The classical doctrine of status and the rhetorical theory of argumentation’, Philosophy and Rhetoric 20 (1987), 79-93.

26. C(laude) B(remond), �Avant-propos’, Communications (Ecole pratique des hautes etudes: Centre d’etudes de communications en masse) 16 (1971).

27. T.C. Brickhouse and N.D. Smith, Socrates on Trial, Oxford, 1989.

27a. C.O. Brink, �Quintilian’s De causis corruptae eloquentiae and Tacitus’ Dialogus de oratoribus’, CQ 39 (1989), 472-503.

27b. C.O. Brink, �History in the Dialogus de oratoribus and Tacitus the historian’, Hermes 121 (1993), 335-49.

28. G. Broggini, �La prova nel processo romano arcaico’, Jus 11 (1960), 348-85 (and see under Feenstra, below).

29. A.E. Brooke, The Johannine Epistles, Edinburgh, 1912.

30. T.R.S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, I-II, N.Y., 1951-2; III, Atlanta, 1986.

31. J. Caille, Organisation judiciaire et procedure Marocaines, Paris, 1948.

32. G.M. Calhoun, �Oral and written pleading in Athenian courts’, TAPhA 50 (1919), 177-93.

33.A. Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire {Sather Lectures vol. 55), Berkeley/Los Angeles/Oxford, 1991.

34. G. Camodeca, �Per una riedizione dell’archivio puteolano dei Sulpicii IV, I document! vadimoniali’, Puteoli VII-VIII (1983-4), 26-69.

35. A. Caracaterra, �Le operazioni dell’ “awocato” ’, SDHI52 (1986), 73-104.

36. A.M. Carr-Saunders and P.A. Wilson, The Professions, Oxford, 1933.

37.F. Casavola, Lex Cincia: Contributo alia storia delie origini della donazione romana (Pubbl. Fac. Giurid. Univ, di Napoli 44), Jovene, Naples, 1960.

38. P. Cerami, �Contrahere cum fisco’, Annali del seminario giuridico della Univ, di Palermo 34 (1973), 277-396.

39. G. Chalon, L’edit de Tiberius Julius Alexander, Olten/Lausanne, 1964.

40. E. Champlin, �Pegasus’, ZPE 32 (1978), 269-78.

41. E. Champlin, Fronto and Antonine Rome, Harvard, 1980.

42. M.L. Clarke, Rhetoric at Rome: A Historical Survey, London,

1953..

43. C.J. Classen, �Cicero, the Laws and the Law Courts’, Latomus 37 (1978), 597-619.

44. C.J. Classen, â€?Ciceros Kunst der Überredung’, Entretiens Hardt 28 (1981), â€?Eloquence et Rhetorique chez Ciceron’, 149-92.

45.C.J. Classen, Recht Rhetorik Politik. Untersuchungen zu Ciceros rhetorischer Strategie, Darmstadt, 1985.

46. J.D. Cloud, see under Crook and Cloud, below.

46a. D. Cohen, �Classical rhetoric and modern theories of discourse’, in 216a Persuasion, below, 69-83.

47. T. Cole, The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece, Baltimore/ London, 1991.

48.R.A. Coles, �Reports of Proceedings in Papyri’, Papyrologica Bruxellensia, 4,1966.

49. P. Collinet, Histoire de I’Ecole de Droit de Beyrouth, Paris, 1925.

50. P. Collinet, �Le role des juges dans la formation du droit romain classique’, Recueil d’etudes sur les sources du droit en I’honneur de Franqois Geny I, Paris, 1934, 23-31.

50a. E.P.J. Corbett, Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student, 3rd ed., New York/Oxford, 1990.

51. J. Cousin, Etudes sur Quintilien I, Paris, 1936.

52. J.W. Crawford, Μ. Tullius Cicero: The Lost and Unpublished Orations (Hypomnemata 80), Göttingen, 1984.

53.J.A. Crook, Consilium Principis, Cambridge, 1955.

54.J.A. Crook, Law and Life of Rome, London/Southampton, 1967.

55. J.A. Crook, �Once again the controuersiae and Roman law’, Multarum Artium Scientia, Prudentia Suppl. 1993,68-76.

56. J.A. Crook and J.D. Cloud, �Cicero, pro Vareno: an exposition and a riposte’, Tria Lustra (Liverpool Classical Papers 3), ed. H.D. Jocelyn with H. Hurt, Liverpool, 1993,169-80.

57. Μ. Dallmann, â€?Die Vielfalt der Beweisverfahren in ihrem Bezug auf Wirklichkeits- und Wahrheitsgehalt’, Proceedings of the Xlth International Congress of Philosophy V 72-111, â€?Theorie de la Preuve’, Brussels, 1953, 82-90.

58. J.-M. David, â€?Promotion civique et droit ä la parole: L. Licinius Crassus, les accusateurs et les rheteurs latins’, MEFRA 91 (1979), 135-81.

59. J.-M. David, â€?Les orateurs des municipes ä Rome: integration, reticences et snobismes’, Les â€?bourgeoisies’ municipales italiennes aux Ile et ler siecles av. J.-C. (Colloque Internat. CNRS no. 609, 1981), Paris/Naples 1983, 309-23.

60. J.-M. David, �Scenes de composition oratoire’, REA 92 (1990), 259-64.

61. J.-M. David, Le patronat judiciaire au dernier siecle de la republique romaine, Rome, 1992.

62. J.P. Dawson, The Oracles of the Law (University of Michigan Law School, Thomas Μ. Cooley Lectures), Ann Arbor, 1968.

63.A. Deissmann, Licht vom Osten, Tübingen, 1908.

64. E. de Ruggiero, arts. Advocatus, Advocatus fisci, Advocatus publicus, in DE.

65. G. Dietze, �The limited rationality of law’, in 225 Rational Decision, 67-88.

66. H.E. Dirksen, â€?Über die, durch griechische und lateinische Rhetoren angewendete, Methode der Auswahl und Benutzung von Beispielen römisch-rechtlichen Inhalts’, 1847, repr.

67. A.E. Douglas, �The intellectual background of Cicero’s Rhetorica. A study in method’, ANRWI3 (1973), 95-138.

68. K.J. Dover, Lysias and the Corpus Lysiacum (Sather Lectures vol. 39), Berkeley/Los Angeles, 1966.

69. Μ. Dumont, A Treatise on Judicial Evidence extracted from the Manuscripts of Jeremy Bentham, London, 1825 (a translation, by whom not stated, of Dumont, Traite des preuves judiciaires, Paris, 1823).

70. E. Egger, �Si les Atheniens ont connu la profession d’avocat’, Essay XIV of Memoires de litterature ancienne, Paris, 1862, 355-86.

71. C.F. Eilers, �Cn. Domitius and Samos: a new extortion trial (IGR IV, 968)’, ZPE 89 (1991), 167-78.

72. W. Eisenhut, Einführung in die antike Rhetorik und ihre Ges­chichte, Darmstadt, 1974.

73. P. Elliott, The Sociology of the Professions, London, 1972.

74.Eloquence et rhetorique chez Ciceron, ed. W. Ludwig, Entretiens Hardt XXVIII, Geneva, 1982, essays by various persons.

75. W. Epstein, �The classical tradition of dialectics and American legal education’, Journal of Legal Education 31 (1981), 399-423.

76. J. Esser, Juristisches Argumentieren im Wandel des Rechtsfin­dungskonzepts unseres Jahrhunderts {Sitzungsberichte der Heidel­berger Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse, 1979, 1), Heidelberg, 1979.

77. J. Fairweather, Seneca the Elder, Cambridge, 1981.

78. J. Fairweather, �The Elder Seneca and Declamation’, ANRW1132 (1984), 514-56.

79. E. Fantham, �Imitation and decline: rhetorical theory and practice in the first century after Christ’, CPh 73 (1978), 102-16.

80. R. Feenstra, �La preuve dans la civilisation romaine, rapport de synthese’, Recueils Jean Bodin XVI, Part 1, �La preuve (antiquite)’; Brussels, 1964, 635-61, and see 221, below.

81. G. Feifer, Justice in Moscow, London, 1964.

82. J. Ferguson, A Prosopography to the Poems of Juvenal, Brussels, 1987.

83. W. Forsyth, Hortensius: or the Advocate, London, 1849.

84. C. de Fouchier, Regies de la profession d’avocat a Rome et dans I’ancienne legislation frangaise jusqu’d la loi des 2-11 sept. 1790, Paris, 1895.

85. P. France, Rhetoric and Truth in France: Descartes to Diderot, Oxford, 1972.

86. Tenney Frank, An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, Baltimore, 1933-40.

87.P.A. Freund, �Rationality in judicial decisions’, in 225 Rational Decision, 109-25.

88. L. Friedlaender, Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Roms in der Zeit von Augustus bis zum Ausgang der Antonine, 10th ed., by G. Wissowa, Leipzig, 1922.

89. C.J. Friedrich, ed., see 225 Rational Decision, below.

90. B.W. Frier, Landlords and Tenants in Imperial Rome, Princeton, 1980.

91. B.W. Frier, The Rise of the Roman Jurists, Princeton, 1985.

92. C. Fries, �L’origine de la rhetorique antique’, Revue de Philologie

14(1940), 43-50.

93. H. Frisk, Bankakten aus dem Faijum, nebst anderen Berliner Papyri, Goteborg, 1931.

94. J.F. Gardner, Being a Roman Citizen, London/New York, 1993.

95. P. Garnsey, Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire, Oxford, 1970.

96. P. Garnsey, �Taxatio and pollicitatio in Roman Africa’, JRS 61 (1971), 116-29.

97. L. Gernet, Introduction to the Bude edition of Plato’s Laws (1968).

98. K. Gerth, art. �Die zweite oder neue Sophistik’, RE Supple­mentband VIII (1956), 719-82.

99. A. Giuliani, �Il concetto classico di prova: la prova come “argumentum” ’, Jus II (1960), 425-44 (and see 221, below).

100. A. Giuliani, �The influence of rhetoric on the law of evidence and pleading’, Juridical Review 1962, 216ff.

101. A. Giuliani, La controversia, contributo alia logica giuridica, 1966.

102.M.S. Gould, �Oral argument losing its appeal’, The National Law Journal, 23 March 1981,13-15; 32-5.

103. A.H.J. Greenidge, The Legal Procedure of Cicero’s Time, London, 1901, repr. New York, 1971.

104. M. Grellet-Dumazeau, Le Barreau Romain², Paris, 1858, repr. Rome, 1972.

105. G. Gualandi, Legislazione imperiale e giurisprudenza, Milan, 1963.

106. A. Guarino, Storia del diritto romano⁹, Naples, 1993.

107. R. Haensch, �Das Statthalterarchiv’, ZSS 109 (1992), 209-317.

108. M.H. Hansen, The Athenian Democracy, Oxford, 1991.

109. A.E. Hanson, �Memorandum and speech of an advocate’, ZPE 8 (1971), 15-27.

110. R. Hariman, �Performing the laws: popular trials and social knowledge’, in 219 Popular Trials, below.

111. G.A. Harrer, �The profession of law in Rome’, CJ 17 (1921-2), 305-15.

112. P. Hastings, Cases in Court, London, 1949, repr. 1953.

113.K. Heldmann, Antike Theorien uber Entwicklung und Verfall derRedekunst (Zetemata T7), Munich, 1982.

114. E. Henriot, Les poetes juristes (5^e Partie: Du Barreau), Paris, 1858.

115.U. Heyd, Studies in Old Ottoman Criminal Law, ed. V.L. Menage, Oxford, 1973.

116. G. Highet, The Speeches in Virgil’s Aeneid, ch. VI, “Vergilius orator an poeta?’, Princeton, 1972.

117.H.F. Hitzig, Die Assessoren der römischen Magistrate und Richter, Munich, 1893.

118. W.S. Holdsworth, A History of English Law, London, 1903-9 and many subsequent edns.

119.O.W. Holmes (the Younger), �The path of the law’, address delivered in 1897, Harvard Law Review 10, 457, repr. in Collected Legal Papers, London, 1920,167-202.

120.A.M. Honoré, Gaius. A Biography, Oxford, 1962.

121.Tony (= A.M.) Honoré, Tribonian, London, 1978.

122.Tony (=A.M.) Honoré, Emperors and Lawyers, London, 1981.

123.Tony (=A.M.) Honoré, Ulpian, Oxford, 1982.

124.F. Horak, Rationes decidendi: Entscheidungsbegründungen bei den älteren römischen Juristen bis Labeo I, Aalen, 1969.

125. F. Horak, â€?Die rhetorische Statuslehre und der moderne Aufbau des Verbrechensbegriffs’, F. Horak and W. Waldstein, eds., Festgabe für Arnold Herdlitcka, Munich/Salzburg, 1972,121-42.

126. C.I. Hovland et al., The Order of Presentation in Persuasion, New Haven, 1957.

127.L.L. Howe, The Pretorian Prefect from Commodus to Diocletian (AD 180-305), Chicago, 1942.

128.W.S. Howell, �John Locke and the New Rhetoric’, The Quarterly Journal of Speech 53 (1967), 319-33.

129.G. Humbert, art. advocatio in DS.

130. J. Humbert, Les plaidoyers ecrits et les plaidoiries reelles de Ciceron, Paris, 1925.

131.Jackson’s Machinery of Justice (8th ed., revised, of R.M. Jackson, Machinery of Justice in England), ed. J.R. Spencer, Cambridge, 1989.

132.H.W. Johnstone, jr., �Some trends in rhetorical theory’, in 13 Bitzer and Black, above.

133.H.F. Jolowicz, �Case law in Roman Egypt’, Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law, 1937,1-15.

134. H.F. Jolowicz, Historical Introduction to the Study of Roman Law, 3rd ed., by B. Nicholas, Cambridge, 1972.

135. A.H.M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire 284-602, Oxford, 1964.

136. A.H.M. Jones, The Criminal Courts of the Roman Republic and Principate, Oxford, 1972.

137. Die juristische Argumentation, Vorträge des Weltkongresses für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, Brussels, 1971 (=Archiv für Rechts­und Sozialphilosophie, Beih. n.F. 7,1972).

138. V. Kahn, �Rhetoric and the Law’, Dialectics 19,2 (1989), 21-34.

139. Μ. Kalman, A Guide to Critical Legal Studies, Harvard, 1987.

140. Μ. Kaser, Das römische Zivilprozessrecht, Munich, 1966.

141. Μ. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht², Munich, 1971.

142.R. Katzoff, �Precedents in the courts of Roman Egypt’, ZSS 89 (1972), 256-82.

143. R. Katzoff, �Sources of law in Roman Egypt: the role of the Prefect’, ANRWII13 (1980), 808-44.

144. J.Μ. Kelly, Roman Litigation, Oxford, 1956.

145. J.Μ. Kelly, Studies in the Civil Judicature of the Roman Republic, Oxford, 1976.

146. G. Kennedy, The Art of Persuasion in Greece, Princeton, 1963.

147. G. Kennedy, �The rhetoric of advocacy in Greece and Rome’, AJPh 89 (1968), 419-36.

148. G. Kennedy, Quintilian, New York, 1969.

148a. G. Kennedy, Aristotle, On Rhetoric. A Theory of Civic Discourse, Oxford, 1991.

149. J.T. Kirby, The Rhetoric of Cicero’s pro Cluentio, Amsterdam, 1990.

150.M.H. Kramer, Legal Theory, Political Theory, and Deconstruc­tion; against Rhadamanthus, Indiana U.P., 1991.

151. J.W. Kubitschek, arts, advocatus, advocatus fisci, causidicus in RE.

152. W. Kunkel, Herkunft und soziale Stellung der römischen Juristen, Weimar, 1952, 2nd ed. Graz/Vienna/Cologne, 1967.

153. W. Kunkel, �Der Prozess der Goharenier vor Caracalla’, Fest­schrift Hans Lewald, Basel, 1953, 81-91 (=Kleine Schriften, Weimar, 1974, 254-66).

154.J. Ladd, �The place of practical reasoning in judicial decision’, in 225 Rational Decision, 126-44.

155.F. Lämmli, Das attische Prozessverfahren in seiner Wirkung auf die Gerichtsrede, Paderborn, 1938.

156. F. Lanfranchi, Il diritto nei retori romani, Milan, 1938.

157. K. Latte, art. synegoros (part) in RE.

158. Μ. Lavency, Aspects de la logographie judiciaire attique, Louvain, 1964.

159. C. Lecrivain, art. patronus, in DS.

160.P. Leuregans, Les contrats administratifs en droit romain, These, 2 vols., Faculte de droit et des sciences economiques, Paris, 1964.

161.P. Leuregans, �L’origine administrative du terme “locatio” dans la “locatio-conductio” romaine’, Eos 65 (1977), 303-22.

162.J.P. Levy, �La formation de la theorie romaine des preuves’, Studi Solazzi, Naples, 1948, 418-38 (repr. in Autour de la Preuve dans les Droits de l’Antiquite (Antiqua 63), Naples, 1992).

163. J.P. Levy, �Ciceron et la preuve judiciaire’, Droits de I’antiquite et sociologie juridique, Melanges Henri L4vy-Bruhl, Paris, 1959, 187-97 (repr. in Autour de la Preuve dans les Droits de I’Antiquite (Antiqua 63), Naples, 1992).

164. N. Lewis, �Greco-Roman Egypt. Fact or fiction?’, Proceedings of the Xllth International Congress of Papyrology (= American Studies in Papyrology 7 (1970), 3-14.

165. N. Lewis,â€?The symbol“ IfJ ”in P.RainerCent. vol. Đ“,Festschrift zum 100-jährigen Bestehen der Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek, Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer (P.Rainer Cent.), vol. I, Textband, 1983,121-6.

166. N. Lewis and A. Arthur Schiller, �Another “Narratio” document’, A. Watson, ed., Daube Noster, Edinburgh, 1974,187-97.

167. S. Lieberman, �Roman legal institutions in early rabbinics and in the Acta Martyrum’, Jewish Quarterly Review, NS 35 (1944-5), 1-58.

168. D. Liebs, â€?Nichtliterarische römische Juristen der Kaiserzeit’, Đš. Luig and D. Liebs, eds., Das Profil des Juristen in der europäischen Tradition, Symposion aus Anlass des 70. Geburtstages von Franz Wieacker, Ebelsbach, 1980,123-98.

169. D. Liebs, Die Jurisprudenz im spätantiken Italien (260-640 n.Chr.) (Freiburger rechtsgeschichtliche Abhandlungen n.F. 8), Berlin, 1987.

170. D. Liebs, �Römische Jurisprudenz in Afrika’, ZSS 160 (1989), 210-47.

171. A. Lintott, Judicial Reform and Land Reform in the Roman Republic, Cambridge, 1992.

172. U. von Lübtow, â€?Cicero und die Methode der römischen Jurisprudenz’, Festschrift Wenger (= Münchener Beitr. 34,1), 224-35.

173. H.P. Macmillan, �The ethics of advocacy’, Law and Other Things, 1937, repr. in Jurisprudence in Action, A Pleader’s Anthology, New York, 1953.

174. R. MacMullen, �Roman bureaucratese’, Traditio 18 (1962), 364-78.

175. A. Manfredini, �L’editto “de coercendis rhetoribus latinis” del 92 a.C.’, SDHI42 (1976), 99-148.

176. D. Matthes, �Hermagoras von Temnos’, Lustrum 3 (1958), 58-214.

177. J.M. May, �The rhetoric of advocacy and patron-client identifi­cation: variation on a theme’, AJPh 102 (1981), 308-15.

178. T. Mayer-Maly, art. advocatus in Der kleine Pauly I (1979).

179. R.E. Megarry, Lawyer and Litigant in England (Hamlyn Lectures, 14th ser.), London, 1962.

180. K.Z. Méhész, Advocatus Romanus, Buenos Aires, 1971.

181. Μ. Merleau-Ponty, La prose du monde (texte Ă©tabli et prĂ©sentĂ© par Claude Lefort), Paris, 1969 (= The Prose of the World, ed. C. Lefort, trans, by J. O’Neill, London, 1974).

182. H.J. Mette, �Der junge Zivilanwalt Cicero’, Gymnasium 72 (1965), 10-27.

183. F.G.B. Millar, �The fiscus in the first 2 centuries’, JRS 53 (1963), 29-42, esp. 31-4, �The fiscus in litigation’.

184. Fergus (= F.G.B.) Millar, The Emperor in the Roman World (31 BC-AD 337), London, 1977.

185. D.C. Mirhady, �Aristotle on the rhetoric of law’, GRBS 31 (1990), 393-410.

186. L. Mitteis, Die Lehre von der Stellvertretung, nach römischem Recht,Vienna, 1885.

187. L. Mitteis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht in den östlichen Provinzen des römischen Kaisserreichs, Leipzig, 1891, repr. 1935.

188. J. Modrzejewski, â€?La règie de droit dans l’Egypte romaine’, Proceedings of the Xllth International Congress of Papyrology (= American Studies in Papyrology 17 (1970)), 317-77.

189. H.W. Montague, �Advocacy and politics: the paradox of Cicero’s pro Ligario’, AJPh 113 (1992), 559-74.

190. S.F. Moore, Law as Process. An Anthropological Approach, London, 1978.

191. W.E. Moore, The Professions: Roles and Rules, New York, 1970.

192. L. Nader and H.F. Todd, ed., The Disputing Process - Law in Ten Societies, New York, 1978.

193. W. Neuhauser, Patronus und Orator (Commentationes Aenipontanae XIV), 1958.

194. C. Neumeister, Grundsätze der forensischen Rhetorik, gezeigt an Gerichtsreden Ciceros, Diss. Heidelberg, 1962 (= Langue et parole III, 1964).

195. D. Nörr, Imperium und Polis in der hohen Prinzipatszeit (Münchener Beitr. 50), Munich, 1966.

196. D. Nörr, art. pragmaticus, in RE.

197. D. Nörr, â€?C. Cassius Longinus: der Jurist als Rhetor (Bemerkungen zu Tacitus, Ann. 14.42-45)’, Historia Einzelschrift 40 (= H. Heinen, ed., Althistorische Studien Hermann Bengtson zum 70. Geburtstag dargebracht von Kollegen und Schülern), Wiesbaden, 1983, 187-222.

198. J.H. Oliver, The Ruling Power. A Study of the Roman Empire in the Second Century after Christ through the Roman Oration of Aelius Aristides, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, N.S. 43, Part 4, Philadelphia, 1953 (especially sections VI and VII, �Common laws for all’).

199. J.H. Oliver, �Civic constitutions for Macedonian communities’, CPh 58 (1963), 164-5.

200. J.H. Oliver, The Civilizing Power. A Study of the Panathenaic Discourse ofAelius Aristides against the Background of Literature and Culture Conflict, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, N.S. 58, Part 1, Philadelphia, 1968.

201. J.H. Oliver, Marcus Aurelius, Aspects of Civic and Cultural Policy in the East, Hesperia, Suppl. 13, Princeton, 1970.

202. J.H. Oliver, �Hadrian’s reform of the appeal procedure in Greece’, Hesperia 39 (1970), 332-6.

203. J.H. Oliver, â€?The Helladarch’, Rivista storica dell’ antichità 8 (1978), 1-6.

204. J.H. Oliver, �Greek applications for Roman trials’, AJPh 100 (1979), 543-58.

205. M. Pani, �La remunerazione dell’oratoria giudiziaria nell’alto principato: una laboriosa accettazione sociale’, Decima Miscellanea greco-romana (Studi Barbieri), Studi pubblicati dall’istituto italiano per la storia antica 36 (1986), 315-460.

206. D. Pannick, Advocates, Oxford, 1993.

207. E.P. Parks, The Roman Rhetorical Schools as a Preparation for. the Courts under the Early Empire (Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science Ser. LXIII, no. 2), 1945.

208. F.S. Pedersen, �On professional qualifications for public posts in late antiquity’, C&M 31 (1970), 161-213.

209. C. Perelman, The Idea of Justice and the Problem of Argument, 1963 — a translation by J. Petrie of Justice et Raison, Brussels, 1963.

210. C. Perelman, Le champ de I’argumentation, Brussels, 1970.

211. C. Perelman, �The New Rhetoric’, in 13 Bitzer and Black, above.

212. C. Perelman, �Le raisonnement juridique’, in 137 Die iuristische Argumentation, above.

213. C. Perelman, The Realm of Rhetoric, 1982 - a translation by W. Klubeck of L’empire rhétorique, Paris, 1977.

214. C. Perelman, The New Rhetoric and the Humanities: Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications, Dordrecht, 1979.

215. C. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, La nouvelle rhétorique, traité de I’argumentation, Presses Universitaires de France, 1958, transl. by J. Wilkinson and P. Weaver as The New Rhetoric, a Treatise on Argumentation, Notre Dame, 1969.

216. G. Perrot, art. synégoros, in DS.

216a. Persuasion: Greek Rhetoric in Action, ed. I. Worthington, London/New York, 1994, essays by various persons.

217. P. Petit, Libanius et la vie municipale à Antioche au LV^e siècle après J.-C. {Institut frangais d’archĂ©ologie de Beyrouth, Bibliothèque archĂ©logique et historique, Tome LXII), Paris, 1955.

218. A. Pierantoni, Gli avvocati di Roma antica, Bologna, 1900.

219. Popular Trials. Rhetoric, Mass Media, and the Law, ed. R. Hariman, Tuscaloosa/London, 1990.

220. R. Pound, �What is a profession? The rise of the legal profession in antiquity’, Notre Dame Lawyer 19 (1944), 203-28.

221. La preuve (antiquité), Recueils Jean Bodin XVI (= Jus 11 (I960)), essays by various persons.

222. G. Proverà, La vindicatio caducorum {Università di Torino, Memorie dellTstituto Giuridico, Ser. II, no. 112), Turin, 1964.

223. G. Pugliese, �La prova nel processo romano classico’, Jus 11 (1960), 386-424 (and see 221, above).

224. G. Pugliese, �Cicerone tra diritto e retorica’, Raccolta di scritti in onore di Arturo Carlo Jemolo IV, Milan, 1963, 561-87.

225. Rational Decision, ed. C.J. Friedrich (= Nomos, Yearbook of the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy, 7, New York, 1964); essays by various persons.

226. E. Rawson, Cicero, London, 1975.

227. W.H. Rehnquist, �Oral advocacy’, South Texas Law Review 27 (1986), 289-303.

227a. Rethinking the History of Rhetoric, ed. T. Poulakos, Boulder/San Francisco/Oxford, 1993, essays by various persons.

228. LA. Richards, The Philosophy of Rhetoric, New York/London, 1936.

229. L. Robert: for his studies on nomikoi and pragmatikoi see Hellenica I 60-5; II 148; V 29-31; X 248; XI/XII 414-29; Bull. Ep. 1953, no. 30; Gnomon 31 (1959), 667.

230. D.A. Russell, Greek Declamation, Cambridge, 1983.

231. D.A. Russell, �Arts and sciences in ancient education’, Greece and Rome 36 ( 1989), 210-25.

232. H.E. Russell, Advancement in Rank under the Roman Republic as a Reward for the Soldier and the Public Prosecutor, Diss. Bryn Mawr, Ann Arbor, ?1950.

233. C. Sasse, Die Constitutio Antoniniana, Wiesbaden, 1958.

234. G.F. Sawer, Law in Society, Oxford, 1965.

235. R. Scalais, �Cicéron avocat’, Les études classiques 19 (1951), 190-208.

236. J. Schacht, �Zur soziologischen Betrachtung des islamischen Rechts’, Der Islam 22 (1935), 207-38.

237. S. Schama, Citizens: A Chronicle of the French Revolution, Harmondsworth, 1989.

238. A. Arthur Schiller, �The courts are no more’, Studi in onore di Edoardo Volterra I, Milan, 1969,469-502.

239. H. Schmidt, Der Einfluss der Rhetorik auf das Recht der Papyri Ägyptens, Diss. Erlangen, n.d. (but 1949).

240. H. Schmidt, �Einfluss der Rhetorik auf die Gestaltung der richterlichen Entscheidungen in den Papyri’, Journal of Juristic Papyrology 4 (1950), 165-77.

241. G. Schnebelt, Reskripten der Soldatenkaiser. Ein Beitrag zur römischen Rechtsgeschichte des dritten nachchristlichen Jahrhunderts (Freiburger Rechts- und Staatswissenschaftliche Abhandlungen 39), Karlsruhe, 1974.

242. F. Schulz, Principles of Roman Law, Oxford, 1936.

243. F. Schulz, History of Roman Legal Science, Oxford, 1946.

244. M.L. Schwartz, �The separation of legal and moral decisions’, in 225 Rational Decision, above, 89-97.

245. E. Seidl, art. synegoros (part) in RE.

246. E. Seidl, â€?Prolegomena zu einer Methodenlehre der Römer’, Aktuelle Fragen aus modernem Recht und Rechtsgeschichte, Gedächtnisschrift für Rudolf Schmidt, ed. E. Seidl, Berlin, 1966, 359-78.

247. G. Semeka, Ptolemäisches Prozessrecht I, Munich, 1913.

248. F. Serrao, �Appunti sui “Patroni” e sulla legittimazione attiva all’accusa nei processi “repetundarum” ’, Studi in onore di Pietro de Francisci II, Milan, 1956, 471-511.

249. P.J. Sijpesteijn and K.A. Worp, �A sixth “narratio” document’, BASP 15 (1978), Studies presented to Naphtali Lewis, 115-23.

250. D. Simon, Untersuchungen zum justinianischen Zivilprozess (Münchener Beitr. 54), 1969.

251. Adam Smith, Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres in vol. IV of the Works and Correspondence, ed. J.C. Bryce, Oxford, 1983, Lectures 29-30.

252. R.W. Smith, The Art of Rhetoric in Alexandria. Its Theory and Practice in the Ancient World, The Hague, 1974.

253. F. Solmsen, Intellectual Experiments of the Greek Enlighten­ment, Princeton, 1975.

254. A. Soubie, �Les preuves dans les plaidoyers des orateurs attiques’, RIDA 20 (1973), 171-253 and 21 (1974), 77-134.

255. W. Steidle, â€?Einflüsse römischen Lebens und Denkens auf Ciceros Schrift de oratore’, Museum Helveticum 9 (1952), 10-41.

256. P. Stein, �The two schools of jurists in the early Roman principate’, Cambridge Law Journal 31 (1972), 8-31.

257. A. Steinwenter, �Rhetorik und römischer Zivilprozess’, ZSS 64 (1947), 69-120.

258 D.M. Stenton, English Justice between the Norman Con­quest and the Great Charter, 1066-1215, Appendix V, Philadelphia,

1964.

259. J. Stone, Legal Systems and Lawyers’ Reasonings, London/ Sydney, 1964.

260. J. Stone, Social Dimensions of Law and Justice, London, 1966.

261.R. Stone (de Montpensier), �Ratiocination not rationalization’, Mind 74, no. 296 (1965), 463-82, esp. 480-2.

262. W. Stroh, Taxis und Taktik: Ciceros Gerichtsreden, Stuttgart, 1975.

263. J. Stroux, �Summum ius summa iniuria’, 1926, repr. in his Römische Rechtswissenschaft und Rhetorik, 1949.

264. G.V. Sumner, The Orators in Cicero’s Brutus, Toronto, 1973.

265. R. Syme, �A great orator mislaid’, CQ 31 (1981), 421-7 (= Roman Papers III, 1415-22).

266. Theorie de la Preuve, Proceedings of the Xlth International Congress of Philosophy, Brussels, 1953, vol. V.

267. S.E. Toulmin, The Uses of Argument, Cambridge, 1958.

268. H. Tränkle, â€?Zu zwei missdeuteten Cicerostellen’, Museum Helveticum 49 (1992), 33-40.

269. S. Treggiari, Roman Freedmen during the late Republic, Oxford, 1969.

270.W. Turpin, �The purpose of the Roman law codes’, ZSS 104 (1987), 620-30.

271. W. Turpin, �Imperial subscriptions and the administration of justice’, JRS 81 (1991), 101-18.

272.S. Van der Sprenkel, Legal Institutions in Manchu China, A sociological Analysis, London, 1962.

273. G. Verdalle, â€?Le barreau dans 1’antiquite romaine’ (Discours prononce le 18janvier 1873...ä l’ouverture des conferences du barreau de Bordeaux), 1873.

274. D.W.T.C. Vessey, �Challenge and response’, ch. 24 of The Cambridge History of Classical Literature II, Latin Literature, ed. E.J. Kenney, Cambridge, 1982,499-500.

275. B. Vickers, In Defence of Rhetoric, Oxford, 1988.

276.T. Viehweg, Topik und Jurisprudenz. Ein Beitrag zur rechtwissenschaftlichen Grundlagenforschung. Munich, 1953, 3rd ed.

1965.

277.Μ. Villey, â€?Liminaire: donnees historiques’, preface to â€?La logique du droit’, Archives de Philosophie du Droit II (1966), vii-xvi.

278. Μ. Villey, â€?Le raisonnement juridique dans l’histoire: I. Droit romain et moyen-age’, in 137 Die juristische Argumentation, 43-61.

279. K. Visky, �Retribuzioni per il lavoro giuridico nelle fonti del diritto romano’, lura 15 (1964), 1-31.

280. B. Vonglis, La lettre et I’esprit de la loi dans la jurisprudence classique et la rhetorique, Paris, 1968.

281. K.R. Wallace, Francis Bacon on Communication and Rhetoric, Chapel Hill, 1943.

282. S.L. Wasby, �Oral argument in the Ninth Circuit: the view from Bench and Bar’, Golden Gate University Law Review 11 (1981), 21-79.

283. A. Watson, �Private law in the rescripts of Carus, Carinus and Numerianus’, Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 41 (1973), 19-34.

284. A. Watson, �The rescripts of the emperor Probus (276-282 A.D.)’, Tulane Law Review 48 (1974), 1122-8.

285. A. Watson, Law Making in the Later Roman Republic, Oxford, 1974.

286. E. Weiss, �Recitatio und Responsum im römischen Provinzial­prozess, ein Beitrag zur Gerichtsgebrauch’, ZSS 33 (1912), 212-39.

287. L. Wenger, Die Stellvertretung im Rechte der Papyri, Leipzig, 1906.

288. U. Wesel, Rhetorische Statuslehre und Gesetzesauslegung der römischen Juristen, Cologne, 1967.

289. U. Wesel, �Zur Deutung und Bedeutung des status scriptum et sententia’, Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 38 (1970), 343-66.

290. J.B. White, Heracles’ Bow: Essays on the Rhetoric and Politics of the Law, Wisconsin, 1985.

291. J.B. White, Justice as Translation. An Essay in Cultural and Legal Criticism, Chicago, 1990.

292. J.L. White, The Formal Structure of the Official Petition, a Study in Greek Epistolography (Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 5), Missoula, 1972.

293. J.E.G. Whitehorne, �The elder Seneca: a review of past work’, Prudentia 1 (1969), 14-27.

294. F. Wieacker, Vulgarismus und Klassizismus im Recht der Spätantike (Sitzungsberichte der heidelberger Akademie der Wissen­schaften, phil.- hist. Klasse 1955, no. 3), Heidelberg, 1955.

295. F. Wieacker, Cicero als Advokat (Schriftenreihe der juristi­schen Gesellschaft 20), Berlin, 1965.

296. F. Wieacker, â€?Über das Verhältnis der römischen Fachjuris­prudenz zur griechisch-hellenistischen Theorie’, lura 20 (1960), 448-77.

297. F. Wieacker, â€?Le droit romain de la mort d’Alexandre Severe ä l’avenement de Diocletien (238-284 ap. J.-C.)’, RD 49 (1971), 201ff.

298. F. Wieacker, â€?Zur Rolle des Arguments in der römischen Jurisprudenz’, D. Medicus and H.H. Seiler, ed., Festschrift für Max Kaser zum 70. Geburtstag, Munich, 1976, 3-27.

299. F. Wieacker, “Vom Umgang des Romanisten mit den Nachbardisziplinen der Altertumswissenschaft. Notwendigkeit, Anwendungsbedingungen und Grenzen’, Index 22 {Omaggio a Peter Stein), 1994, 3-30.

300. W(ynne) Williams, �Caracalla and the Rethoricians’ (sic), Latomus 33 (1974), 663-7.

301. В. Winter, �The importance of the captatio benevolentiae in the speeches of Tertullus and Paul in Acts 24:1-21’, Journal of Theological Studies 42 (1991), 505-31.

302.W.R. Winterowd, Rhetoric. A Synthesis, New York, 1968.

303.J.G. Wolf, �Das sogenannte Ladungsvadimonium’, J.A. Ankum,

J.E. Spruit, F.J. Wubbe, ed., Satura Robert Feenstra... oblata, Fribourg, 1985, 59-69..

304. J.G. Wolf. â€?Zur legis actio sacramento in rem’, O. Behrends, Μ. Diesselhorst, W.E. Voss, ed., Römisches Recht in der europäischen Tradition, Symposion aus Anlass des 75. Geburtstages von Franz Wieacker, Ebelsbach, 1985,1-39.

305. H. J. Wolff, Written and Unwritten Marriages in Hellenistic and Postclassical Roman Law, American Philosophical Association Philological Monographs IX, Haverford, 1939.

306. H.J. Wolff, Demosthenes als Advokat, Funktionen und Methoden des Prozesspraktikers im klassischen Athen, Berlin, 1968.

307. H.J. Wolff, â€?Methodische Grundfragen der rechtsgeschicht­lichen Verwendung attischer Gerichtsreden’, Atti del II. Congresso Internazionale della Società italiana di Storia del Diritto, Venezia 1967, Florence, 1969, 1-13 (= Opuscula Dispersa, Amsterdam, 1974, 29-39).

308. H.J. Wolff, �Rechtsexperten in der griechischen Antike’, Festschrift zum 45. deutschen Juristentag, Karlsruhe, 1964, 1-22 (= Opuscula Dispersa, Amsterdam, 1974, 81-102.

309. D.K. Woodward, �The argument for oral argument’, Oklahoma Bar Journal 52 (?1981), 1767-71.