A Commentary on Lysias, Speeches 1-11
S. C. Todd
Lysias used to be the best Athenian speech-writer of the new release (403-380 BC) following the Peloponnesian conflict, and his speeches shape a number one resource for all facets of the historical past of Athenian society in this interval. The speeches are extensively learn at the present time, no longer least as a result of their simplicity of linguistic variety. This simplicity is usually misleading, notwithstanding, and one of many goals of this statement is to assist the reader check the rhetorical innovations of every of the speeches and the usually hugely tendentious manipulation of argument. This quantity comprises the textual content itself (reproduced from Carey's OCT and equipment criticus), with a dealing with translation. each one speech gets an in depth advent, overlaying basic questions of interpretation. within the lemmatic part of the statement, person words are tested intimately, delivering a detailed interpreting of the Greek textual content. to maximise accessibility, the Greek lemmata are followed through translation, and person Greek phrases are generally transliterated. this can be the 1st a part of a projected multi-volume observation at the speeches and fragments, with a purpose to be the 1st complete statement on Lysias in sleek times.
Be real (cf. p. eight n. 28 above): the variety of speeches that Ps.-Plutarch attributes to others one of the Ten Orators by no means exceeds 75.68 the excellence drawn within the past paragraph among fragments and speeches isn't really qualitatively absolute, on account that in basic terms Lys. 1–31 continue to exist within the mediaeval manuscripts of Lysias (in teams, as we will see). Of the others, the socalled Lys. 35 derives from Plato’s Phaedrus, while Lys. 32–34 are prolonged quotations from in a different way misplaced speeches that have.
initially were constrained to intercourse with a married lady. 18 Prostitutes can have been a statutory exception, cf. Lys. 10.19n. 19 hence e.g. Dover (1974: 209). The context of Demosthenes’ dialogue is a longer survey of Athenian murder legislation; for the textual content, see §30n. H. J. Wolff (1952.i: 23 = 1968: 642), as famous via D. Cohen (1984: 149 n. 6), even refers to this as ‘Drakon’s adultery legislation (Ehebruchsgesetz)’, although in different places H. J. Wolff (1944: seventy three) speaks rather than ‘Draco’s well-known provision.
Albeit now not generally from father to son,60 numerous students (e.g. Davies 1971: no. 5035, p. 185) have advised that the adulterer can be a shut relative: for example a nephew or certainly most likely a grandson of the tyrant, within the male line and as a result sharing an analogous deme and tribe. fifty seven the single attainable parallel is the speaker in Lys. 24, yet there's cause to think that he's concealing the dimensions of his resources. fifty eight Euphiletos in contrast looks sixty one occasions, Sostratos 171 instances, and Harmodius.
Asks Eratosthenes why he has ε σι ν, §25; and Eratosthenes had had no weapon with which to safeguard himself opposed to το ε σελθ ντα , §27). All this serves to emphasize the horror of Eratosthenes’ offence: within the phrases of Euphiletos himself in the midst of the series, Eratosthenes has devoted hubris via moving into my oikia (§25). the idea of Paoli, that its fifty three Of a slightly diversified style are these at Xen. Symp. 1.4, and at Plato, Symp. 174a9–b1 (the latter from a fellow-guest instead of from.
evidently if pointed out as early as §23. §24. δᾷδας λαβόντες (‘picked up torches’). With outlets doubling as inner most homes, it's might be anachronistic to talk of ‘opening hours’. Scodel (1986: eight) certainly means that the kape¯leion here's a tavern delivering torches for the beneﬁt of under the influence of alcohol buyers. the alternative of aspect is signiﬁcant: Euphiletos the following tells us whatever that we don't really want to grasp, yet which serves to make the narrative extra bright. He doesn't let us know whatever which we.