The Art of Persuasion: Characterisation and Narrative in Lysias’ Forensic Oratory

In his first century BC essay On Lysias, Dionysius of Halicarnassus praises the logographer for his understanding of human nature, and for his skill at communicating with audiences through narrative (de Bakker, 2017: 409; Edwards, 2004: 333). At first glance, character creation (ēthopoiia) and the use of narrative (diēgēsis) seem like they would only be used by authors looking to create literature with the aim to entertain audiences or evoke emotions. However, this essay argues that Lysias employs these techniques for a more practical purpose, that of creating legal speeches. Rather than using these devices to create literary texts, Lysias uses them to persuade a jury of the innocence of his clients and the guilt of their enemies, thus demonstrating that these texts have a specific function, so should be understood within the legal context that they were written for.

Through characterisation, Lysias communicates the innocence of his clients to a jury of Athenian elites, often presenting the speaker in a polarising way to their opponent. De Bakker (2017: 411) suggests that the characterisation of Lysias' speakers and their opponents is a common theme throughout many of Lysias' forensic speeches, as the audience of jurors is likely to recognise the qualities shared between defendants and vote favourably because of this. This 'characterisation by contrast' allows the speaker to embody favourable characteristics, such as lawfulness and civic mindedness, whilst demonstrating the opponent as unlawful and violent (de Bakker, 2017: 416).

A prime example of this is how Lysias uses contrasting characteristics to present the speaker and Simon in Lysias 3. Throughout the speech, Lysias presents the speaker as someone who only acts to defend himself, contrasting Simon, who is prone to drunken fits of violence and reckless destruction of property (Lys. 3.8; Lys. 3.6; de Bakker, 2017: 420). The impact of these contrasting characters enhances the sympathy of the jury for the law-abiding, Athens-loving speaker whilst also increasing anger towards Simon. The impact of this is exemplified later in the speech at §45 when the speaker reminds the jury of the battle of Coronea. Here, Lysias further characterises Simon as rash, telling the jury that he was 'the only Athenian' who was banned from the fight by a herald (Lys. 3.45). Through this potentially hyperbolic image, a stark contrast is made between the loyal Athenian army versus its only insubordinate soldier, Simon. Lysias skilfully uses this anecdote to create vivid contrast, persuading the jury to further dislike Simon, who they now know does not have the greater good of Athens in mind when at war. Here, the outcome of 'characterisation through contrast' is not to create characters that audiences can relate to and empathise with, as the author of a literary text may have done. Instead, this method allows Lysias to achieve the functional goal of writing a legal speech to successfully persuade juries to the guilt of an opponent.

Whereas characterisation by contrast may help Lysias to fulfil his purpose as a logographer, it is important that we acknowledge the fact that he creates memorable and relatable characters due to his firm understanding of human nature. In §7 of On Lysias, Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Dion. Hal. Lys. 7) writes that 'there is no better orator' at understanding human nature and using the human experience to evoke precise emotions from the jury. This conveys a different sort of skill in characterisation, separate to the functional characterisation by contrast discussed earlier. We see the versatility in Lysias as an orator as he creates these literary figures who are as 'timeless' as the Homeric heroes of epic poetry, but as realistically 'human' as the people who spoke the speeches and were impacted by these crimes. Lysias bridges the gap between functional texts and literature here, creating literary characters within the context of legal speeches. Creation of literature-esque characters does not mean that Lysias' speeches are literature, however, but that Lysias uses literary devices to ensure that the responses to his speeches are evoking the correct emotions within a jury.

In Lysias, narrative is the main method of communication between the speaker and the jury. Through diēgēsis and formulaic metanarratives, Lysias masterfully creates vivid backstories which provide the basis for the defendant's innocence or the guilt of the prosecuted (Edwards, 2004: 333). Formulaic phrases such as 'I shall try to inform', or the promise to 'set forth [a] story from the beginning' frame the start of narrative backgrounds, communicating the events that precede these trials (Lys. 12.5; Lys. 1.5). Characterisation does not work alone in establishing how the jury should respond to speakers, as diēgēsis is essential for conveying the contrast between characters. Therefore, through examining the relationship between characterisation and narrative through backstory, we see how narrative is effective in helping these speeches to succeed in their legal function.

Finally, not only is the use of metanarratives helpful in creating a persuasive account of the innocence of the speakers, but the formulaic nature of these phrases is also useful when understanding these texts as one-off speeches written for a specific purpose, relating to individual clients and contexts (Dover, 1968: 154). Though we can identify common themes in characterisation and narrative, it is ultimately important that we recognise that any similarities between speeches are the product of formulas and speak more to the orality of these texts than to seeing these speeches as part of one larger anthology of literary works. Regarding the orality of these texts, we know that juries would often respond to the speeches as they were being delivered, meaning that speakers would have to speak in response to comments from the jury (de Bakker, 2017: 411). Whilst most pieces of Greek literature would have been performed in public, authors would not have been familiar with their audiences in the same way that Lysias was. It is this familiarity that allows Lysias to create formulaic metanarratives and typical characters that he knows will evoke the desired response from juries, therefore demonstrating that Lysias' speeches are not literary texts, but practical speeches aimed at a target audience.