View article

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.