[118]
The force of this argument resides
in the fact that it is not based on any external
support, but holds good in itself. Proceeding to
the third line of argument we may note that the
first portion of it is of a more ordinary type, namely
that the right to repayment is not based on the
actual document, a plea which can be supported
by many arguments. Doubt may also be thrown on
Alexander's purpose: did he intend to honour them
or to trick them? Another argument peculiar to
the subject (indeed it practically introduces a new
discussion) is that the Thebans may be regarded as
having in virtue of their restoration recovered the
right even though it be admitted that they had lost
it. Again Cassander's purpose may be discussed,
but, as the case is being pleaded before the Amphictyonic council, we shall find that the most powerful
plea that can be urged is that of equity.
Quintilian. With An English Translation. Harold Edgeworth Butler. Cambridge. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann, Ltd. 1921.
The Annenberg CPB/Project provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.