Hypereides 3 and the Athenian Law of Contracts

This article examines the Athenian law of contracts as illuminated by the particular case of Hypereides 3, Against Athenogenes, in which the prosecutor, Epicrates, seeks to void a contract of sale on the grounds that the defendant, Athenogenes, has employed fraud in its formation. Part 1 compares and analyzes the attested variants on the general contract law cited at Hypereides 3.13 and concludes that Hypereides' version is most likely to be correct. Part 2 discusses modifications of the right to contract created by additional legislation and addresses the value and significance of Epicrates' arguments from analogy. Part 3 offers an explanation of the strategy behind Epicrates' attribution of particular laws to Solon.