text:against_leocrates
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| text:against_leocrates [2013/08/18 22:17] – created fredmond | text:against_leocrates [2020/11/27 22:21] (current) – old revision restored (2014/01/15 11:55) 35.239.58.193 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Lycurgus. Minor Attic Orators in two volumes, 2, with an English translation by J. O. Burtt, M.A. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1962. | Lycurgus. Minor Attic Orators in two volumes, 2, with an English translation by J. O. Burtt, M.A. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1962. | ||
| - | ====== Lycurgus ====== | + | ====== Lycurgus: Against Leocrates |
| - | ===== Against Leocrates ===== | ||
| [hypothesis] After the disaster of Chaeronea the Athenian people passed a decree forbidding persons to leave the city or to remove their wives or children. Now a certain Leocrates left the city and, after going to Rhodes and later Megara, returned to Athens. He made no secret of his story and so was accused of treason by Lycurgus. The case must be classified as an instance of contradictory definition, since Leocrates admits that he left the city but denies that he betrayed it. Others class it as an instance of conjecture as to intention, since it is admitted that the accused left the city, while his purpose in leaving it is doubtful: did he wish to be a traitor or only to trade? Others think it an instance of counterplea, | [hypothesis] After the disaster of Chaeronea the Athenian people passed a decree forbidding persons to leave the city or to remove their wives or children. Now a certain Leocrates left the city and, after going to Rhodes and later Megara, returned to Athens. He made no secret of his story and so was accused of treason by Lycurgus. The case must be classified as an instance of contradictory definition, since Leocrates admits that he left the city but denies that he betrayed it. Others class it as an instance of conjecture as to intention, since it is admitted that the accused left the city, while his purpose in leaving it is doubtful: did he wish to be a traitor or only to trade? Others think it an instance of counterplea, | ||
text/against_leocrates.1376882243.txt.gz · Last modified: 2014/01/15 11:09 (external edit)