By Mohammad Ali
We have discussed in CVSP last week, the Republic of Plato, which was since the mid-nineteenth century, Plato’s most famous and widely read dialogue. The main character of Plato’s republic has been “Socrates” as always. In Plato’s early dialogues, Socrates was always refuting the opinion of his interlocutors where the discussion was always ending with no satisfactory answer to the matter investigated. In the Republic however, we encounter Socrates developing a position on justice and its relation to eudaimonia (happiness). He provides a long and complicated, but unified argument, in defense of the just life and its necessary connection to the happy life. Plato’s Republic is presented in the form of a dialogue between Socrates and 3 different interlocutors’. These four men have discussed the different notions that can make our community perfect and his individual ideal. They raised several questions in their conservation: What is goodness? , what is justice? , how can we achieve justice in our state (Kallipolis)? Which one is better being a just man or unjust? What is the relation between “Happiness” and” Justice”? .So we can simply understand Plato’s Philosophical concern in the dialogue is ethical and has a praised aim , which is “Democracy”. We have discussed in class last week the definition of goodness , where according to Glaucon there are 3 kinds of good :First kind of good he has discussed is that when we want to have this kind of good not because of its consequences , but because it is better for its own sake, which is in this case the feeling of enjoyment and pleasure .The second kind , is what we desire , both the being good for itself and the consequences of being good , and the third kind of goodness , that includes all things that we do for others and , considered painful , but beneficial . After Glaucon has introduced these three types of goodness , he gave his personal opinion that we should follow what brings us happiness , which is in this case is the type of goodness that is beneficial , and gives us a good reputation . On page 41 , we can see this clearly where Glaucon has said that “It is normally put into the painful category , of goods which we pursue for the rewards they bring and in the hope of a good reputation , but which in themselves are to be avoided as unpleasant .” After Glaucon has finished his argument about goodness, he talked about the origins of justice, where he proclaimed that a just man , are always aware of the consequences of being unjust , and that they shouldn’t follow , but in reality we are unjust , because being unjust is more beneficial for the one than being just , but yet he has to be submitted to his own society , by being and seeming just. So Glaucon simply thinks that we are going to do the wrong thing always when we have the chance of doing it . So he set a picture of a just man and the unjust man, then he said that we would see then which one is better, being just or unjust. But Glaucon agree that Justice is being just, so a just man is better than the unjust man, so he agrees with Adeimantus that justice is only beneficial if one seems to be just, but in reality he do unjust thing, because the injustice is that what brings us a good reputation, and a good life, and the just man is a simple man, who does not get any benefits from injustice. Adeimantus believes that no one wants to be just only because he wants to , so he only wants to be just because it would pay him back in the afterlife, So if we were unjust in this life, you would be punished in the underworld. But yet people are still respecting the word “Bad” and they think that if you are bad, then you can live a happy life . so the best life is to seem just and be unjust in this life time , and wait till the last possible moment to be good, and just I order to guarantee this life and the afterlife. He also blames the generations of the past, because they did not taught their kids that, justice is the best thing that one could ever achieved, because if people have been taught that every one of them would mind his own things .He ends his discussion, by asking Socrates to give an unbiased definition of the word “Justice” and introduce some evidences about his definition.. Socrates was not agree at first , when he started his discussion started to talk about justice .He begins his talk this time , but not at the individualistic level, where he started to talk about it in the large scale , which is the community , so in his opinion justice is both an individual behavior and a society one .He talked about the division of the state , which might have an effect in the division of the soul , so as we see we do different things in the society , where there is leaders, soldiers, producers, teachers, farmers ,and as a result of this division , people would have different natures and skills , so a leader would have the most acknowledged and wisdom part n he soul .Socrates wanted to build first the ideal state , which should have justice would present , so if the state is ideal it would emit justice. Then Socrates has talked about the importance of specialization, which is everyone do his own task. Specialization is very efficient in a sense that it is more efficient if one does a thing that he is quick and good at , then a punch of people who has no idea about it and by doing so people would benefit from each other by exchanging it through trade , thus strengthen society bonds and make it more just . He talked about the human nature of loving their luxuries, which will lead to a fighting over lands, in order to make our empire much bigger, so people would attack us so we need someone to protect us (The Guardian class) (In Greek it is Phulakis) . We have discussed the concept of guard dog, in which the guardians class has been described earlier in the republic (page 64-66) as a guard dog , who hates everything that doesn’t know , so just as the guard dog they would attack foreigners , but not their masters , so eventually a guardians must have a knowledge , like a Philosopher king. Also we have talked about what did Socrates and his interlocutors did after they build their perfect state , that is formed of three classes :The philosopher class(rulers),Auxiliaries(Soldiers) and the producer(workers), in which the minor superior class(best) is the philosophers and the majority inferior class(worst) is the producers .Then the great philosopher , Socrates, has said that there are four important qualities(on page 131) “I think we shall probably find what we want as follows. If we have found it properly, our state is presumably perfect, and then it will obviously have the qualities of wisdom, courage, self-discipline and justice.” They first went to find where is wisdom stand, so they built first an opinion that if our state is wise, then it might have a good judging on things, and if we are good at judging then we are acknowledged. Then Socrates said that we have many different kinds of knowledge in our city, so we can’t say that a carpenter is wise, because he has knowledge of making furniture; he is just good or wise, so Socrates sum up his argument about wisdom by saying that “the state founded on natural principles is wise as a whole in virtue of the knowledge inherent in its smallest constituent part class , which exercise authority over the rest” (page 132), thus wisdom belongs to the upper class . Then they went to seek courage , that make them call their city brave, so Socrates said that courage should lie in a class , In which they are coward about some things and brave in the others, thus basically they should know how to protect their state from any foreign attack , and they all approved Socrates opinion that courage is a quality of being brave and protect the city , and they all agree that it should lie in the auxiliaries class , because of their knowledge in war field and their brave . Then Socrates went to define what is self-discipline , so he started his argument , by simply saying that self-discipline is a kind of order , that controls over our desires , so mainly” being a master of oneself”, but the concept of master of yourself is mainly a struggle in one’s personality , that leads to the control of the worse element over the better one , so we must get rid of this concept .Then Socrates said that we know that the greatest number of desires is mainly present in woman ,slaves and child ,while the moderate desires is present in the superior minority , so we can see that the desires of less respected class is controlled by wisdom and desires of the minority class . Socrates sum up everything by saying that self-discipline is being the master of your desires and the master of your own wisdom and this quality lies in the upper and lower class , where there is a harmony between these classes in order to achieve self-discipline By achieving these qualities in our state, we can simply find the leftover in our state, which is justice that need a harmony between all these qualities in order to reach, because if we are wise, then we can reach self-discipline and being disciplined we will achieve justice in our state and if we were courage, then we would not allow injustice in our state.
0 Comments
By Jad Hallal
The Republic was the subject discussed in class this week. Different aspects and principles were presented in the text. The case of justice was deeply investigated in the text in the first part of the reading, and it continued to be the main subject of discussion throughout the text. In the second part, Socrates and the other individuals investigating with him the case of justice tried to point out the main factors that are necessary to build a society. This society is a healthy society because it satisfies the needs of its individuals. The other individuals involved in the discussion are Glaucon and Adeimantus. One main aspect of the book to keep in mind which we discussed is that Plato does not give answers immediately, but he keeps asking questions and debating. Glaucon gives his view on the case of justice and injustice. As mentioned in the book, Glaucon argues that justice, or morality, is merely a matter of convenience. Glaucon believes that there are three kinds of good which are:
Adeimantus supports the argument of Glaucon. He believes people support justice not for its sake but for its benefits. He states the common situation in which people respect the bad man and call him happy while they despise the poor and powerless even if this poor man is better. The debate focused on injustice as an origin of justice. After Adeimantus, Socrates presents an easier way to study things. He believes that it is easier to study things on a large scale than on a small, and he therefore suggests studying justice in the community and then applying the conclusions to the individual. Socrates first states the two principles of any society. The first principle is mutual need because people need each other. The second principle is the difference in aptitude between people. Each individual can excel in one skill and does what he naturally fits to do. This principle is related to the specialization in jobs. Socrates then states the five main economic classes to build a simple economic structure of a society. These five classes are:
The three main needs of people are food, shelter, and clothing. This shows that a simple society must consist of four or five individuals, a farmer, a builder, a weaver, and a shoemaker. However, the principle of specialization and the focus on quantity and quality require having more individuals. These include smiths, craftsmen, cowherds, and shepherds among others. Another important aspect is the need for imports. Therefore, there must be an increase in the number of farmers and other workers to produce enough for the society and other states. The need for exports and imports also requires agents and merchants. This expanded economy will require a market and a currency. Overall, the city will expand, and it will need doctors and artists. Doctors will be needed because of the luxuries the city needs since Glaucon said that the city will need luxuries. An additional class is needed for the society civilized society. This class is the class of guardians which are the soldiers and protectors of the city. The guardians must have several characteristics that are present in a watch dog. Socrates said,” Don’t you think that the natural qualities needed in a well bred watch dog have a certain similarity to those which a good young man needs for Guardian duty?” These characteristics are keen perceptions, speed in pursuit of their quarries, strength to fight, courage, and high spirits. In addition to these characteristics, the guardians need the disposition of a philosopher. This quality is found in watch dogs. It represents the love for knowledge. Watch dogs are annoyed by strangers even if they do no harm, but they welcome anyone they know even if this person does not do anything kind for the dog. This was the model for a civilized society built by Socrates.
The play starts with Oedipus (married to Jocasta) sending Creon, his brother-in-law, to Delphi – Apollo the Prophet’s oracle – to seek help and obtain advice about how the plague that hit Thebes can be stopped. Creon comes back and informs Oedipus that in order for the plague to vanish, the murderer of their former leader, Laius, has to be caught and punished. Thebes relies heavily on Oedipus, their new king, as he, himself, shows great conviction and determinism to help his people once again (first time is when he solved the riddle and freed them from the sphinx). Oedipus, king, we bend to you, you power– Oedipus is shown to be this righteous king who suffers not solely for himself but for the miserable crowd in front of him as well. He promises to defend the city and find the killer of Laius and thus satisfy Apollo. But is this the case really? In fact Oedipus fears (huge theme in the play) for his safety since the murderer still runs freely in the cities. So his incentives are not entirely selfless. Oedipus curses the murderer (i.e. himself, but he doesn’t know this yet) for what he has done to Thebes. So I will fight for him as if he were my father, There’s a great deal of irony here: (if only he knew that Laius IS indeed his father and well… no need to search the world, Oedipus, the murderer is just CLOSER to you than you think he is…). And now begins Oedipus’ quest for the truth about the murder. First he resorts to Tiresias, the blind prophet, master of the mysteries of life, who refuses to talk or reveal the grim and dire truth, not wanting to inflict pain, letting Oedipus learn the truth later by himself. This causes Oedipus to be enraged (in fact he seems to be angered all the time throughout the play). Oedipus then, fury winning his words, accuses Tiresias along with Creon, of taking part in Laius’ murder (Oedipus thinks everyone has bad motives but him), which leads Tiresias to his outrage: he says to Oedipus that he is the curse and the corruption, that HE is the murderer, and that he’s the only one responsible of his downfall. Oedipus gets even angrier hearing this nonsense; he CANNOT accept being accused, and commands Tiresias to be taken away. Revealed at last, brother and father both Here, we see this direct reference to sexuality, as in other places in the text as well. One important thing to note is the many interferences done by the chorus (thought to be the voice of the Theban mass) over and over again. The chorus brings different views of things and shows the actual reflection of the characters. For example: Zeus and Apollo know, they know, the great masters Creon hears of Oedipus’ hasty accusations and comes to defend himself as he claims that he has no interest in being king in Thebes, and he proceeds with this rational and reasonable calm argument, unlike Oedipus’ brutality and harsh threats (we talked in class about how Oedipus seems less rational than all other characters, he cannot control himself. Even his intelligence must be questioned: solving the riddle and passing was simply fated on him as well). Once again, we witness Oedipus’ constant rage that is easily triggered, and his stubbornness. Creon tells him that he already is praised without being king, he’s not looking after glory or pride, and that he’d much prefer to sleep in peace than live in anxiety as a leader. But Oedipus now refers to him as his mortal enemy, refusing to believe his words. Then comes Jocasta, to ease the tension a bit, blaming the two for their useless quarrels in a land so sick. Then she addresses Oedipus, with the chorus, both urging him to believe Creon and let go of his suspicions. She also tells him not to worry about ANY of the prophet’s sayings (about how he might be the murderer in particular) because she simply believes that no force, not gods not oracles, can predict the future (major anti-religious character) and she gives an example as proof: She and Laius were told that their son would kill his father and marry his mother and yet Laius was killed by strangers at a crossroad so the prophecy failed to become true. But a question must be asked: didn’t SHE herself try to MAKE SURE the prophecy doesn’t come true by sending off her son at birth to be killed? The fact that she wanted to kill Oedipus proves that she shouldn’t have in the first place because, well, prophecies must be wrong –the thing she vehemently argues about! But hearing this story, Oedipus’ thoughts raced back and forth and he asked Jocasta to give more details about the killing of her former husband as well as his physical description. She does and, at this point of the play, Oedipus is linking the story to his own, he is anxious, worried and tortured… He orders that the shepherd (lone survivor of the accident) be brought to the palace for further questioning. He tells Jocasta about the reason that pushed him to leave Corinth: Some man there told him one day that he is not the son of Polybus, king of Corinth. Oedipus went immediately to Polybus and Merope, Polybus’ wife, to get clear answers. They comforted him and kept his adoption a secret, but still he had to be reassured so he went to Apollo in Delphi who, instead, told him about the terror and pain that a prophecy holds for him in the future. You are fated to couple with you mother, you will bring Then, Oedipus, fearing that this might happen, ran and left Corinth behind. But by running away, Oedipus was only getting closer and closer to achieving the ugly prophecy, by reaching the triple crossroad. He killed Laius and his men with cruelty (though they did him no true harm). He claims to be guilty (yet still not knowing it’s his father). Jocasta tells Oedipus not to make any conclusions and have hope while waiting for the shepherd’s arrival. This concludes the first part of the reading (Wednesday 11th March). The second part of the reading (Friday 13th March) is the most interesting part. It reflects the importance of the role of fate and how it can never be changed. As we mentioned above, anything Oedipus tried to do to avoid it would only bring upon him the same fate, it was his own undoing. As we saw, he was sent away at birth by his real parents to avoid the prophecy of him killing his father and marrying his mother, but it came true anyway. When Oedipus learns from the messenger that his father, Polybus, has died from sickness (and he’s told he can be king in Corinth but he refuses to stay away from his parents), he was relieved and so was Jocasta. Since it was prophesized that Oedipus would kill his father, this event proved that prophecies aren’t always right. However, Oedipus was still afraid of the other part of the prophecy concerning his sleeping with his mother. While Jocasta tried to sooth him, Oedipus remained in fear. And as for the marriage with your mother– Next, we talked about lineage. Oedipus discovers that Polybus and Merope weren’t his real parents. He was given to the messenger with his ankles pinned together (meaning of his name: pain), and he set him free and gave him to Polybus. Jocasta then realizes the truth and tries to call off the search since her pain was enough, but Oedipus thinks she wants it off because of her pride. He thinks she’s ashamed by this discovery. The shepherd who gave Oedipus to the messenger is then brought to the palace for questioning. Violence takes place when the herdsman resists to tell his story; however, he cracks in the end and says he brought him from the house of Laius. Oedipus then realizes the whole truth and starts crying and shouting (see description: bottom of p.232). We also talked about the pessimistic views that were possessed by the people (through chorus’ passages). They believed that if Oedipus’ fate was doomed, then they have nothing but misery to expect. This showed the faith they had in Oedipus; they trusted him and saw him as the man who has no similar. We then hear what happened through the messenger (violent scenes probably skipped for esthetic purposes). Jocasta was found dead; she hung herself by the bridal bed. Oedipus then enters the room sobbing, and stabs his eyes with her brooches. A visual description (spurting blood…) is given which reminds us of the Cyclops’ scene in The Odyssey of Homer. He believed that his crime is too great for immediate death, and he should suffer, better yet, MAKE himself suffer. With his eyes gone, he won’t see what he’s done, he won’t see the world since nothing would bring him joy anymore and after dying, he won’t see his parents in the underworld. He was too ashamed of his unforgivable doings.
Oedipus then, in deep agony, asks Creon to send him away and exile him out of the land; Creon needs to ask the god before doing that. Then, Oedipus requests to touch his daughters, Ismene and Antigone, for the last time. This was his last wish. He was afraid that their fate would be of suffering because of him; he asks Creon to take care of them. In this part, we see that women suffer more than men; for men can take care of themselves wherever they go. However, women are taunted by their families’ past; Oedipus was worried that his daughters won’t be allowed to be women since no probably no man would agree to be with them. Having Oedipus as their father would bring them shame and disgrace; thus, they need someone to take care of them. The story ends with the chorus’ final view on Oedipus’ fate: only death will free him from his huge pain.
To sum the whole thing up, Oedipus’ power and greatness are worthless now. There is no chance to escape fate no matter what. Moreover, a man carries what he’s done for eternity even if his actions weren’t intended. Oedipus didn’t mean to be a murderer and an incestuous son, yet still holds responsibility. Our hero had a no-win situation in his life. He was at first blind to what a person he TRULY is. Men are blind to what runs beyond their knowledge in the cosmos. We can never know all things, but we have reason, and we might as well use it to know what we CAN know. And one thing for sure: the more you know your capacity and limitations (i.e. can’t change fate), the more your balance in human nature (words inspired from the lecture given by Dr. P. Shebay’a, Tuesday 10th March). By Patrick Hatem Wednesday in class, we started our discussion with questions on the exam that was going to be on Friday, then Dr. Fugate gave the answers to the small quiz about the Odyssey. Now, about the History of the Peloponnesian war: Last time, we went over the speech of Pericles at the Funeral. Now we’re going to look at the Plague. The plague is a disease; Athens was the first to get hit by it. At first the Athenians thought that it was the Peloponnesians who were responsible of that disease because the Athenians thought that they poisoned the water. But when they saw the other towns around Athens getting hit by the plague they started to think what would be the cause of the plague. Nobody knew what the cause was. This passage describes the consequences of the disease. It is said that everyone wanted to live, they all tried to do everything to survive. They were dead bodies everywhere on the street. Nobody abided by the law and they didn’t care about honor anymore because they knew that they might die. And then they started talking about the prophecy, they thought it was coming true. Thucydides thought about the prophecy that it is a dearth, a lack of food. People become superstitious and they rely on oracles and they interpret it the way they want to. It didn’t hit the Peloponnesian , only the Athenians were hit., because it hits mostly ports. The people that were the most helpful (doctors) were hit the most. “virtue doesn’t pay”. The plague tells us lots of things. We see that under stress the Athenians infact don’t abide by laws. Maybe human nature is such that as wonderful people can be and lawful they can be when it comes down to them suffering, no one follows the law. After the Plague, the Athenians were losing the war and they were against Pericles. Pericles had a whole speech to boost their moral again. He discussed the greatness of Athens(it was his main argument). Pericles speaks about the people’s interest. Why should we fight for the common good? Because only through the common good can an individual get the optimal good. We then read page 158 of the book: “My own opinion is that when the whole state is on the right course it is a better thing for each separate individual than when private interests are satisfied but the state as a whole is going downhill. However well off a man may be in his private life, he will still be involved in the general ruin if his country is destroyed; whereas, so long as the state itself is secure, individuals have a much greater chance of recovering from their private misfortunes. Therefore, since a state can support individuals in their suffering, but no one person by himself can bear the load that rests upon the state, is it not right for us all to rally to her defense? Is it not wrong to act as you are doing now? For you have been so dismayed by disaster in your homes that you are losing your grip on the common safety; you are attacking me for having spoken in favor of war and yourselves for having voted for it ” People started to doubt if the common good was the best to choose. It is actually right to go through the common good because individuals will profit more in the long term. It is wrong because you misunderstood, you think you will profit more in the short term overall by protecting your stuff. We then read a passage on page 159. So one thing you need as a leader is someone who has absolutely no material interest. Then we talked about another passage. Dr. Fugate said that this power of ships is better than the power of houses and beautiful things. Ships are completely different, they are very particular kind of possessions because it is on this kind of possession that all your possession depends and if you lose all your other possessions, the ships can get you back all your other possessions. Pericles is in power, he’s leading, people argue against him. Thucydides tells us what is great about Pericles, why he can lead, is his opinions and his intelligence and his integrity; he can respect the liberty of the people. This is a special feature of a leader. Leaders have to respect their own people, and should have the power enough to rule their own people. To be a leader you should be a Tyrant, but a good Tyrant. Pericles was a good tyrant. Another theme of the book is the issue of intelligence. In the Mytilenian debate, the Athenians wanted to kill the entire male population of Mytilenia, they wanted to slave all the women and the children. The problem is that people thought it was too extreme of a choice because they had to kill off so much people, and most of them are innocent, only prisoners are not. Dr.Fugate in the end added that no one ever commits a crime thinking they’re going to get caught. So law cannot prevent crime. He was one of the first historians to write the story of the war, and he wrote it in a way that it would be an epic that would span the years to come and immortalize himself alongside the war with it. He was also one of the first historians who wrote his story with a sense of reason in realism instead of rationality. Unlike the writer of The Odyssey, Homer, he doesn’t exaggerate, and he keeps things to a more realistic level. He also explains that Nature follows the laws that it sets for itself, and that the gods do not have any sort of influence on these rules. He also goes to explain that the gods are unable to stop fate. Indeed, this book shows the human causes behind all these situations and fights that occurred during the war, and did not mention that the gods have any form of influence in this war. The book teaches readers about the general rules that govern things through history, and how we learn more about human nature, such as how the Greeks are very materialistic and always want to keep their stuff. This lead to the Greeks having to face a lot of piracy, which would harass them for a long time. As well, in the introduction, he talks about the history of Greece, and how it came to so much power, as well as the history of Athens. The idea is immortality is important in this book because Thucydides remarks on how people want to be remembered in history and not just die away like they did nothing in their life. This seems similar to The Odyssey because Calypso promised Odysseus immortality if he stayed with her, which, according to her, is what all men want in life. Immortality is also found in Gilgamesh, who the main character Gilgamesh wanted immortality after his closest friend and brother in arms died, and was in fear of death. One example in the book is that there was a soldier by the name of Agamemnon died in shame, and because of this, no one would remember him, which is what he doesn’t want. The war started because Athens and Sparta were at the height of their power, and the war would end up being very large. The Growth of Athens, and the growing fear in Sparta would later on trigger the war to break out. Athens and Sparta were different in forms of facing problems. While Athens was open, innovative, and a Risk-Taker, Sparta was usually careful and closed off. Greece were separated into different states, and thus was not a unified country. In terms of Military Strength, Athens had a more superior navy and sea strength, while the Spartans had more superior soldiers, and land strength. Minos played a role in increasing the strength of Athens navy, and this connects to The Odyssey because Minos is also included in the story. Athens had a different form of fighting ethic; they would fight for Athens, and not for their king that are governing them, this early form of nationalism strengthens their resolve to fight against Sparta and protect Athens. The smaller states in Greece were protected by the larger states that they were allied with. Before the war would be triggered, Sparta would be reminded by Athens about the Persian War, and how it was thanks to Athens and its superior sea power, that they could push back the Persians, and that there are worst people in this world than the Athenians (also referencing Persia). As well, Athens did not charm Sparta, it would show its military superiority to intimidate Sparta to not attack it. And finally, Athens would remind Sparta about how wars are costly, and that they don’t need that bearing down on them. Despite all the tries to keep the peace, Sparta attacked nevertheless because of the fear of the growing strength of Athens. Whenever a speech would be delivered to the people, Thucydides would write the gist of the speech, and what they symbolically represent. However, there could be a hint of bias because he was Athenian, and so could hide some negatives that Athens had. The story was a recollection of the war, and thus did not have any form of Romance. One negative consequence of Athens that was discussed in speech was that Athens was very big on increasing materialistic wealth, which would have negative consequences during warfare. The Athenians had to get rid of some of their material wealth to focus on the war.
On p.45, they discuss what happened to Greece after the Persians (Ancient Iran) were successfully repelled during the Persian War. The Allies split apart, with some following Athens, while others followed Sparta. They held back their rivalry until one of the states became too powerful to be held under control, and action would be taken to ensure peace in Greece. On p.75, in Sparta, conscription existed to increase military strength. Boys as young as 6 or 7 would be drafted into the army, and sent to the war later on once training was finished. Sparta was known to be a war-based country, and had a lot of powerful and strange methods of training. For example, they would sneak out of the Barracks and go meet women in certain part of the city. This was encouraged by the army to test their cunning, and if they were, they would undergo punishment. On p.143, we are introduced to a character by the name of Pericles, who would make very convincing speeches for the people, as well as strong speeches to send of the dead. In a way, he is similar to Odysseus because they both possess silver tongues that would be used to convince lots of people to be on their side. Some of his speeches included things such as how the traditions and inheritance of the city is very important, and worth fighting for, as well as praises to the city, and the dead, and how people should fight for them. |
AuthorThis is created by the Students of CVSP 201 Archives
May 2015
Categories |