Diritto e retorica nella democrazia ateniese

This paper focuses on the role of rhetoric in the democratic polis, with particular regard to legal procedures; it considers features and limits of Athenian lawcourt speeches as sources for Athenian law; finally, it tries to evaluate the problems arising from the complex relation between rhetoric and law

Xenophon on the Athenian Embassy to Susa (367 BC)

Our information on the negotiations of the year 367 derives mostly from Xenophon (Hellenica VII, 1, 33-38) and Plutarch (Pelop., 30-31, 1; Artax. 22, 8-12).Xenophon’s account shows an anti-Theban bias; his information is of Athenian origin and could derive from the Athenian ambassador Leon. On the contrary, Plutarch’s account in the Life of Pelopidas shows a sharp pro-Theban bias.Xenophon’s information, although biased, appears to be of better quality. He offers a detailed account, with a strictly political statement; his account identifies the main lines of Theban hegemonic policy. Furthermore, Xenophon is the only source which provides us detailed information on the behaviour of the Athenian ambassadors. The historian sets up the traitor Timagoras against Leon, member of the anti-Theban party, probably a supporter of the alliance between Athens and Sparta, as also Xenophon was (cf. Suda s.v. Timagoras).Le nostre informazioni sulle trattative del 367 derivano per lo più da Senofonte (Elleniche VII, 1, 33-38) e da Plutarco (Pelop., 30-31, 1; Artax. 22, 8-12).La ricostruzione di Senofonte si segnala per la sua tendenza antitebana; l’informazione, che rivela una prospettiva ateniese, potrebbe provenire dall’ambasciatore ateniese Leone. La ricostruzione di Plutarco nella Vita di Pelopida è invece di tendenza decisamente filotebana. La qualità dell’informazione di Senofonte, nonostante la sua tendenziosità, appare complessivamente superiore. Egli offre un racconto particolareggiato, impostato sull’aspetto politico; la sua ricostruzione coglie alcune linee portanti della politica egemonica tebana. Inoltre, Senofonte è l’unico a fornirci notizie dettagliate sul comportamento degli ambasciatori ateniesi. Lo storico contrappone il traditore Timagora a Leone, esponente del partito antitebano, probabilmente sostenitore dell’accordo Sparta/Atene caro anche allo stesso Senofonte (cfr. Suda s.v. Timagoras).  Xenophon on the Athenian Embassy to Susa (367 BC

Ancora sulle Eumenidi di Eschilo e la riforma di Efialte (in margine ad una pagina di Chr. Meier)

Chr. Meier’s theory, according to which Aeschylus counted among the oppositors to the democratic reform of the Areopagus, does not stand up to a critical evaluation of the evidence

L’impero del mare come egemonia subalterna nel IV secolo (Diodoro, libri XIV-XV)

In two passages of book XIV Diodorus emphasizes the recognized hegemony exercised by Sparta both on land and sea after the Peloponnesian War (XIV 10 and 13). We have to put these places side to side with others: XIV 84 and 97, XV 23, XV 60, XV 78-79, from which comes out a judgment of failure of the maritime hegemony as such: it takes its full value only if it is combined with that on earth.Unlike Xenophon, who still believed in the dual hegemony and in the division of spheres of influence between Sparta and Athens, Diodorus reflects a perspective which is not Athenian and which reopens the debate on the conditions for the exercise of Panhellenic hegemony. Diodorus probably draws this topic from an historiographical tradition interested in Boeotian hegemony

La Sicilia isola «sacra a Demetra e a Kore» (Diod. 16.66.4-5)

Forthcoming

Demodamante di Mileto e l'identità ionica

This paper reconsiders our evidence on Demodamas of Miletus, his relations with the temple and the cult of Apollo in Didyma and with the Seleucid dynasty, highlighting his promotion of the Ionian identity and ethnicity in the Hellenistic oriental world

L’amour de la cité (to philopoli) entre Thucydide et Pollux

Le vocabulaire de l’amour pour la cité (adj. philopolis, philopolitès, également utilisé sous forme substantivée, to philopoli) est présent dans la littérature grecque depuis Eschyle et Pindare. Il s’agit d’un vocabulaire rare au ve s. et qui, chose encore plus importante, fait alors l’objet de discussions sur sa définition et ses contenus ; au ive s., il semble au contraire de plus en plus commun et est utilisé pour définir le bon gouvernant et le bon citoyen (souvent associé à des termes te..

Sparta agli inizi del IV secolo: un “sistema riformabile?”

Forthcomin