Aggelos Kapellos – författare

Lysias’ 21st speech “On a charge of taking bribes” is an important example of Attic oratory that sheds significant light on Classical history and society. Delivered after the restoration of democracy in 402 B.C.E., this speech provides information that is critical for our understanding of the relationship between the Athenian demos and aristocrats, Athenian civic institutions (e.g., taxation, liturgies and conscription), religious beliefs, moral values, political behavior, and, in particular, of the legal and rhetorical treatment of embezzlement and bribery. It also supplies unique information about the military engagement of the Athenians at Aegospotami and the role of Alcibiades in the political life of Athens. Despite its importance, however, Lysias’ speech has never been the subject of an extensive study in its own right. This volume seeks to fill that gap by presenting the first systematic commentary on this speech. The author puts much emphasis on its structure, strategy, and argumentation, focusing especially on the tension between the actual practices of the anonymous client of the logographer and civic ideals invoked in the present case. The book is intended to be of interest to classicists, ancient historians and political theorists, but also to the general reader.

The advances in Xenophontic studies of the last generation have still not resulted in a definitive literary treatment of the Hellenica 1-2, so Xenophon’s description of the Peloponnesian War deserves closer examination. This book aims to show that Xenophon has crafted his narrative in such a way as to reinforce the opinion of Thucydides, whose work he continued, that the development of the Peloponnesian War depended to a great extent on Persian money, but the factors that ultimately determined its outcome were the moral virtues and the skills of the military leaders of Athens and Sparta. Regarding Athens, Xenophon wants to show that despite Persia’s support of Sparta, Athens lost the war because of its troubled relationship with Alcibiades; the moral disintegration of the Athenians who condemned illegally the Arginousai generals and the appointment of generals who were greatly inferior. Concerning Sparta, Xenophon leads his readers to believe that in spite of- not because of- the interference of Persia in the Peloponnesian War the moral and military qualities of Lysander and Callicratidas were what turned the course of the war either in favor of or against Sparta in each phase of the war.

This volume examines the issue of violence in Xenophon’s works, who lived in circumstances of war for many years. All the papers address issues of violence from different aspects. The exclusive focus on this issue is justified, since no previous detailed study exists on the subject. Most of the chapters focus on the Hellenica, because this work records more aspects of violence than the rest of his works. The volume is more concerned with examining violence in practice rather than the theory of violence, and violent practices are more frequently recorded in the Hellenica, which is the main historical work of Xenophon.This volume attempts to provide a comprehensive study of the subject of violence in Xenophon’s works and to demonstrate the coherence and consistency of his thought on it. This work aspires to be a contribution to classical scholarship since it attempts to: (1) shed further light on the literary character of Xenophon’s oeuvre; (2) offer new interpretation of passages and themes; and (3) put emphasis on passages that scholars have not pointed out and which offer important insights to the thought of Xenophon.

This volume examines the issue of violence in Xenophon’s works, who lived in circumstances of war for many years. All the papers address issues of violence from different aspects. The exclusive focus on this issue is justified, since no previous detailed study exists on the subject. Most of the chapters focus on the Hellenica, because this work records more aspects of violence than the rest of his works. The volume is more concerned with examining violence in practice rather than the theory of violence, and violent practices are more frequently recorded in the Hellenica, which is the main historical work of Xenophon.This volume attempts to provide a comprehensive study of the subject of violence in Xenophon’s works and to demonstrate the coherence and consistency of his thought on it. This work aspires to be a contribution to classical scholarship since it attempts to: (1) shed further light on the literary character of Xenophon’s oeuvre; (2) offer new interpretation of passages and themes; and (3) put emphasis on passages that scholars have not pointed out and which offer important insights to the thought of Xenophon.

This volume focuses on the representation of the recent past in classical Athenian oratory and investigates the ability of the orators to interpret it according to their interests; the inability of the Athenians to make an objective assessment of it; and the unwillingness of the citizens to hear the truth, make self-criticism and take responsibility for bad results. Twenty-eight scholars have written chapters to this end, dealing with a wide range of themes, in terms both of contents and of chronology, from the fifth to the fourth century B.C. Each contributor has written a chapter that analyzes one or more historical events mentioned or alluded in the corpus of the Attic orators and covers the three species of Attic oratory. Chapters that treat other issues collectively are also included. The common feature of each contribution is an outline of the recent events that took place and influenced the citizens and/or the city of Athens and its juxtaposition with their rhetorical treatment by the orators either by comparing the rhetorical texts with the historical sources and/or by examining the rhetorical means through which the speakers model the recent past. This book aims at advanced students and professional scholars. This volume focuses on the representation of the recent past in classical Athenian oratory and investigates: the ability of the orators to interpret it according to their interests; the inability of the Athenians to make an objective assessment of persons and events of the recent past and their unwillingness to hear the truth, make self-criticism and take responsibility for bad results.