Download Course Syllabus

Sunoikisis Greek 294/394: 4th Century Prose
Syllabus, Fall 2005
Faculty Consultants: Susan Lape, University of Southern California
Course Director:
This work by the Sunoikisis consortium is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. To view a
copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/.
Syllabus Authors:
• Christopher Blackwell (Furman) (attended workshop and taught class)
• Keyne Cheshire (Davidson) (attended workshop and taught class)
• Hal Haskell (Southwestern) (did not attend workshop, taught class)
• Peter Krentz (Davidson) (did not attend workshop, taught class)
• Kenny Morrell (Rhodes) (attended workshop and taught class)
• Jim Morrison (Centre) (attended workshop and taught class)
• Katherine Panagakos (Rhodes) (attended workshop and taught class)
• Brian Warren (Rhodes) (attended workshop and taught class)
Included in this syllabus: a course overview, a schedule of assignments,
and study questions.
COURSE OVERVIEW
[Course Delivery System]
Documentation about the Course Delivery System (CDS) and Live Sessions
 Help: Using the Course Delivery System in the ICC's -- information for
both students and faculty members about using the CDS.

Posting Study Questions and Lectures to the CDS (mostly for faculty,
but mechanics of posting may also be of interest to students)

Broadcasting live audio (mostly of use to lecturers who will be
broadcasting)
Description
This course, making extensive use of resources available via the internet,
focuses on the early years of the 4th century BCE, covering prose texts in
Greek from the orator Lysias and the historian Xenophon. The common
sessions and secondary readings will explore how these readings expose the
social and political world of Athens in the period after the Peloponnesian War,
during the brief reign of the Thirty Tyrants, and after the restoration of the
democracy.
Course Components
Lectures: Beginning September 12, students and faculty members will "meet"
for common sessions, each one guided by a professor teaching the course or by
an invited guest. These common sessions will combine elements of lecture on,
and discussion of, the assigned readings for the week, and may introduce other
materials to provide context. While each common session will have its own
topic, each will refer back to material already covered and will anticipate topics
and readings yet to come.
Response Papers: Students will submit and critique response papers that will
address study questions for each week of the course. This aspect of the course
will take place during the week (Thursday and Friday) when students will
submit their work and comment on the views of their peers. This will take place
on the Course Delivery System (CDS). (Click "New User" to create your
login.)
Tutorial: Finally, students will meet by arrangement with the participating
faculty members on their campuses for one or more tutorials each week.
Objectives
The objectives for this course are (a) for students to gain familiarity with the
grammar and vocabulary of Greek prose from the early 4th century, through
reading two forensic orations by Lysias and sections of Xenophon's Hellenika,
and (b) for students to explore the political and social world of Athens during a
complex and important period of its history.
Course Requirements
Preparation:
All students will be expected to work through the assigned reading for each lecture, set of
response topics, and tutorial. This course is intended for advanced, mature students, who
can effectively and conscientiously work through the materials and fulfill the assignments
with minimal supervision. The participating faculty members presuppose that students
will come to each event prepared to participate actively. Students should take advantage
of every resource to ensure that they thoroughly understand the readings and have a
command of the interpretive issues that will form the basis of the lectures, response
papers, and tutorials. This course is designed to accommodate advanced students at
varying levels of experience and fluency. In general, students with five or more semesters
of ancient Greek should enroll in ICAGR 394, and those with less than five, in ICAGR
294. Depending on the needs of students at individual campuses, the amount of assigned
reading may vary from that posted on this syllabus. The tutor at each institution will work
with students to determine appropriate assignments.
The questions and topics for the
response papers are based on the reading assignments for 294. Students working at the
394 level will have additional reading assignments. To ensure that the class works
together as a whole regardless of the varying abilities of individual students, these
additional assignments may come from passages before or after the section assigned for a
particular week.
Lectures
The lectures will originate at one of the participating institutions and be available as a
RealAudio webcast to all of the participants in the course. (Depending on the nature of
each institution's facilities, the computing infrastructure where the lecture originates, and
the capacity of the network at the time of the lecture, the event may include digital video
as well.) Shortly before the lecture begins, students will log into a chat room, which will
allow the director of the course to monitor the reception of the lecture, ensure that
students receive credit for attending, and permit students and faculty members to direct
questions to the lecturer. Because the lectures will be available over the internet both
during the live webcast and as archived files, which participants can subsequently access
from the website for the course, there will be no excuse for missing a lecture, and students
can expect to encounter questions on the examinations based the content of the lectures
and the lecturers' responses to questions from the participants.
Response Papers
Students will be expected to share their views of the readings and lectures with their peers
through the CDS. A set of topics will accompany each reading assignment. Students will
post responses to these questions by no later than 5:00 p.m. each Friday as noted on the
schedule below. The questions are designed to evoke a sustained, synthetic engagement
with the readings. At the conclusion of the course, the weekly contributions of each
student to the discussion list should represent a significant body of interpretative work.
Consequently, the response to each question should be considerably more than a sentence
or two and each set of responses should represent a focused, reflective engagement with
the readings after the texts have been thoroughly read and studied. The director of the
course will review the responses and post them to the discussion list by 10:00 p.m. each
Friday. Please note that the director of the course will return to the student any posting to
the CDS that does not meet minimal standards of engagement with the material. After the
responses to the study questions appear on the CDS, students will then be responsible for
carefully reading and commenting on at least one other set of responses. Depending on
the nature of the questions and responses, the director of the course may assign students to
comment on the responses of specific students. Students must post their comments by
Sunday afternoon at 5:00 p.m. (local time). The grade for this element of the course will
consist of two components. The first, which accounts for fifteen percent of the students'
final grades, will depend on the students' adequate and timely responding to the study
questions and providing thoughtful commentary on the responses of at least one of their
peers. Students will receive full credit for posting their response papers and their
commentaries on the remarks of other students by the scheduled deadlines. The director
of the course may single out particularly excellent papers and comments and award bonus
credit. The second component, twenty or twenty-five percent of the final grade, will
reflect the quality of the contributions. The on-campus tutors will award this grade.
(Please note that the on-campus tutors, or "mentors" as they will be designated in the
following materials, may require additional work on this component of the course to
reflect the time spent in the course before or after the period of collaborative activities.
This work may take various forms such as an introduction, epilogue, critical review, or
expansion on one or more of the topics.) These two components will account for thirtyfive or forty percent of the students' final grades.
Tutorials:Students will meet every week with a mentor at her or his home institution. The times and
locations of these meetings will be determined on each campus. Students are responsible
for contacting their faculty mentors and finalizing the details of their weekly meetings.
The quality of these meetings, as measured by students' preparation, attendance, and
engagement with the readings, will account for twenty percent of their final grades.
Examinations:
There will be two examinations, a midterm and final over the content, cultural context,
and interpretation of the literature. These will be based on the readings, response papers,
and lectures. Individual campuses may choose to conduct additional examinations that
pertain more specifically to the language of the orations. Here are some additional points
to bear in mind with regard to this aspect of the course:
1. Design of the examinations
The mentors from each campus will collaborate on the design of these
examinations to ensure that they reflect the common experience of the students
in the course. During this design process, the mentors also establish the
evaluative guidelines they will follow when grading the examinations.
2. The grading process
The tutors will grade the midterm examination collaboratively. When students
submit their responses to the questions on the midterm, the course director will
remove any biographical information from the exams and distribute the
responses to the mentors who will evaluate the students' work without
knowledge of the students' identity. This anonymous procedure ensures that
students from different institutions will receive an impartial evaluation of their
work. When the mentors return the exams to the director, she or he will match
the exam with the biographical data and return the graded work to the students
and their faculty mentors. As is true of all courses at the collegiate level, only the
student and her or his faculty mentor will receive the grades. The faculty mentors
will grade the final examinations of the students at their home institutions.
Questions about the grading should be refered to the director of the course.
Evaluation
(394):For students in ICAGR 394, grades will be based on the following components:
Class preparation and work in tutorial:
20%
Response papers: 40%
Midterm:
20%
Final: 20%
Evaluation
(294):For students in ICAGR 294, grades will be based on the following components:
Class preparation and work in tutorial:
40%
Response papers: 30%
Midterm:
15%
Final: 15%
Primary Readings
In Greek:
In translation:
Xenophon
Hellenica
Lysias
Orationes
Aeschines
Orationes
Apollodorus
Orationes
Demosthenes
Orationes
Aristotle
Athenaion Politeia
SCHEDULE OF ASSIGNMENTS
Week 1 (9/12-16)
Reading
(394):
Readings in Greek Lysias 1 1-14 (759 words) (to be read before Wednesday).
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Lysias 1 1-10 (556 words) (to be read before Wednesday).
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: Webcast
Lecture(1)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
"Foundation of democratic institutions," Christopher Blackwell
(FurmanUniversity)
1. Read G. Herman, "Tribal and Civic Codes of Behavior in Lysias
1", CQ 43.2 (1993) 406-419. (Available in Course Documents).
2. If you haven't already, read all of Lysias 1 in translation.
3. Write responses to the "Study Questions" for Week 1 (see link in the
menu above). Complete these by Friday at 5:00.
Week 2 (9/19-23)
Reading
(394):
Readings in Greek Lysias 1. 15-28 (921 words), Readings in English [Dem.]
59.
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Lysias 1. 15-23 (622 words), Readings in English [Dem.]
59.
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: Webcast
Lecture(2)
"The Social Context of Lysias 1: TV-14 or TV-MA" Kenny Morrell (Rhodes
College)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
Please see "Week 2 Study Questions" in the "Study Questions" section of the
CDS.
Week 3 (9/26-30)
Reading
(394):
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Lysias 1. 29-50 (1325 words), Readings in English
Readings in Greek Lysias 1. 37-50 (781 words), Readings in English
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: Webcast
Lecture(3)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
Week 4 (10/3-7)
Reading
(394):
Reading
(294):
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
"Law & Order: Ancient Athens" Kenny Morrell (Rhodes College)
See "Week 3 Study Questions" in the "Study Questions" section of the CDS.
Readings in Greek Lysias 3.1-24 (1081 words), Readings in
English Aeschines 1.
Readings in Greek Lysias 3.1-14 (672 words), Readings in English Aeschines
1.
Wednesday: On-line
Lecture(4)
"Regulation of Morals ," Susan Lape (University of California-Irvine)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
Week 5 (10/10-14)
Reading
(394):
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Lysias 3.25-48 (1153 words), Readings in English Dem.
54
Readings in Greek Lysias 3.35-48 (690 words), Readings in English Dem. 54
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: On-line
Lecture(5)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
"Social Background (Sexuality, Violence, Hubris) ," Katherine Panagakos
(Rhodes College)
A selection of readings, from which student choose one (?).
Week 6 (10/17-21) [Southwestern is on fall break]
Reading
Readings in Greek: Xenophon Hellenica 2.3.1-2.3.23 (1023 words).
(394):
Recommended readings in English
Aristophanes' Clouds,Xenophon's Hellenica 1.7, and Plato's Apology
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek: Xenophon Hellenica 2.3.16-2.3.23 (372 words).
Recommended readings in English
Aristophanes' Clouds,Xenophon's Hellenica 1.7, and Plato's Apology
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: Webcast
Lecture(6)
"Looking Back to the Peloponnesian War, the Stasis in Athens, and the
Figure of Socrates " Jim Morrison (Centre College)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
Week 7 (10/24-28)
Reading
(394):
Readings in Greek Hellenica 2.3.24-2.3.34 (649 words), Readings in English:
Hansen, Chapter 3, pp. 27-43 (in the Readings part of the Course Materials).
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Hellenica 2.3.24-2.3.34 (649 words), Readings in English
Hansen, Chapter 3, pp. 27-43 (in the Readings part of the Course Materials).
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: Webcast
Lecture(7)
"Chronology and Uses ff Oratory as a Historical Source," Hal Haskell
(Southwestern University)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
Week 8 (10/31-11/4)
Reading
(394):
Readings in Greek Hellenica 2.3.35-2.3.56 (1283 words)
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Hellenica 2.3.35-2.3.50 (881 words).
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: Webcast
Lecture(8)
"Speeches: from event to print," Keyne Cheshire (Davidson College)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
Week 9 (11/7-11)
Reading
(394):
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Lysias 12.1-24 (1500 words), Reading in English Lysias
18.
Readings in Greek Lysias 12.1-16 (900 words), Reading in English Lysias 18.
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: Webcast
Lecture(9)
"Memory and Civil War ," Brian Warren (Rhodes College)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
Week 10 (11/14-18)
Reading
(394):
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Lysias 12.25-49 (1700 words), Readings in English:
Xenophon, Hellenica 2.4.
Readings in Greek Lysias 12.25-34 (700 words), Readings in English:
Xenophon, Hellenica 2.4.
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: Webcast
Lecture(10)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
"IG II(2). 10: Rewards for Thrasyboulos's Supporters," Peter Krentz
(Davidson College)
�
Week 11 (11/21-25) [Thanksgiving Week; Furman is out for entire week.]
Reading
No additional reading this week because of Thanksgiving.
(394):
Reading
(294):
No additional reading this week because of Thanksgiving.
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: On-line
Lecture(1)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
Week 12 (11/28-12/2)
Reading
(394):
No lecture this week because of Thanksgiving.
No new response papers this week because of Thanksgiving. [If you are
interested in extra credit, you may go back to any two responses you have
written this semester and revise them in light of subsequent thinking, reading,
discussions. Submit your revisions in the "Study Questions" section of the
CDS. The course director will award up to ten points of extra credit on an
examination score for your efforts. You may have until 5:00 p.m. on Friday,
December 3 to submit your revisions.]
Readings in Greek Lysias 12.50-78 (1900 words)
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Lysias 12.53-64 (800 words)
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: On-line
Lecture(11)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
"Tekhne Rhetorike: Teachers, Textbooks, and Their Influence," Keyne
Cheshire (Davidson College)
There will be no responses due this week to allow students to review and
prepare for the final examination.
Week 13 (12/5-9)
Reading
(394):
Readings in Greek Lysias 12.79-100 (1700 words), Readings in English
Reading
(294):
Readings in Greek Lysias 12.79-86, 95-100 (1100 words), Readings in
English
Monday- Tutorial
Tuesday:
Wednesday: On-line
Lecture(11)
"Epilogos," Christopher Blackwell (Furman University)
Thursday- Response
Friday: Papers
STUDY QUESTIONS
Week 1:
Purpose: These questions and assignments are intended to help you begin to engage
Athenian oratory in its cultural context, both as a highly refined body of rhetoric and as
product of, and influence on, the Athenian democracy. Here at the outset of our class,
they will focus on encouraging you to indentify and consider similar issues in other
literary genres and in American politics, and on encouraging a close reading of G.
Herman's article on Lysias 1.
1. What is the difference between "punishment" and "revenge"? You can answer in
terms of American law, literary examples, or Herman's discussion in the article.
2. Think of an American political institution. Put on a political hat and spend one
paragraph asserting that this institution has not changed in any fundamental way,
but is still functioning today as the Founders set it up; then, put on a different
political hat and argue that this same institution has evolved far from its original
composition, charter, purpose or authority. Argue both cases with equal ferver,
pretending you are an apolitical logographos, hired by two different clients to
write two different arguments, both aimed at persuading the same audience.
Responses in which both paragraphs are equally persuasive will be marked more
highly than ones in which one argument clearly beats the other.
3. Herman claims that "Euphiletus did not commit the ancient equivalent of the
modern felony of redressing a grievance by force; he 'helped himself', so to speak,
without taking the law into his own hands" (p. 411). How can Herman possibly
claim this, when he has already said that, "[Euphiletus] casts himself in the role of
an impartial agent of civic justice..." (p.408)?Be sure, in your responses, that you
indicate which question you are responding to.
Week 2:
Study the use of two of the following words that appear in Lysias 1. Select one word
from the first set, which Lysias uses to describe his wife and friend or his relationships
with them; and one word from the second set which Lysias uses in references to the
offenses Eratosthenes committed. To carry out these studies, click on the link for the
word, which will take you to the Perseus Lookup Tool. You should survey at least ten
instances of each word and write a brief paragraph about the range of meanings the word
conveys and comment on how the range of possible meanings influences your reading of
the passage in Lysias 1.
Set 1:
sophronoikeiotes [Note, Lysias uses this word only once. This study will involve the use
of the word in the other orators.]
epitedeios
Set 2:
hamartema
ekshamartano
hybrizo
Consider the question of your own spatial mobility particularly with regard to gender and
discuss some of the places where you are not allowed to go either by law or convention
and explain why these prohibitions exist. Then discuss some of the places where you are
permitted to go, i.e., where there are no legal or conventional barriers, but where you
would prefer not to go and why. Finally discuss some of the places where you are
permitted to go but would only visit in the company of others. Imagine that you and
Lysias are competing logographoi. Euphiletos is shopping for the best legal and rhetorical
counsel he can obtain and has come to you. He gives you a copy of the narrative
(ekshegesis) Lysias has composed for him, which you have now read, wants to know how
you would handle his defence differently. What would you recommend? Try to be as
specific as possible with regard to how you think the prosecution will frame the case and
how you think Euphiletos should respond.
Week 3:
Justice Athenian Style Below are links to stories about five murder cases. Pretend you
are the logographos to whom the families of these victims and defendents come for
guidance. Building on your work last week in examining Lysias 1. Against Eratosthenes
for its rhetorical aspects and the information we discussed yesterday in lecture (including
the links to information in the notes), outline the procedural steps you would take to bring
this case to trial and briefly summarize the points you would make in the two speeches
you would compose for your client, including who you could call as witnesses and what
you expect them to contribute to your case. You are to follow the rules for homicide
cases in Athens as reflected in the sources we have discussed. Remember that material
evidence played no role in the cases. So, for example, DNA tests, ballistic analyses,
fingerprints, video, wiretaps, etc. are inadmissible. Because this assignment will involve a
degree of collaboration and interaction, there will not be a second round of responses.
There will be, however, a prize for the most ably presented case. If you have questions,
feel free to email me ([email protected]). I will serve as the archon basileus for this
exercise. Your cases will be due by 5:00 p.m. on Sunday. For each one of the cases
below, there will two sides, and in some cases multiple clients. So, here are the rules
concerning how you should go about deciding who takes what case and who represents
which side in the case: The students in each institution should view themselves as the
equivalent of an ancient firm of logographoi. Your firm should handle as many cases as
possible (more revenues! bigger bonuses!). Each student is responsible for preparing one
case for one client. So, taking the first case below as an example, one student at your
"firm" will prepare a case defending Marie Sullivan and another student will prepare the
prosecution on behalf of the family of Daniel Stone. As noted above, that entails an
outline of the procedural steps, including the court that will hear the case, summaries of
two speeches, and notes on any witnesses you call (who they are and what you expect
them to contribute) and laws you wish to have read for the jury. It is permissible and
encouraged for your firm to represent both sides. In fact, representing both sides will help
each side prepare and present their cases more effectively. Remember that there were no
surprises. It was all about convincing a majority of the jurors. The arguments and roles of
the witnesses for both sides would have been presented in the preliminary hearings. If
there are not enough clients for all of the members of your firm to represent individually,
you are free to double up. The cases: "Woman charged in death of passenger in car crash"
"Convict's plea for help is answered" "Justice for 'Death of Neglect'" "Families at Odds
Over Slaying of 2" "Boxer Dies From Injury" Have fun!
Week 4:
These questions will remain open through Sunday. There will, again, be only one
"round" of responses. I will, on Sunday and Monday, add my own reactions to your
postings. – CWB
1.
For starters, pick one of your colleagues responses from last week, and
critique it. Think in terms of the original assignment, the original responses' fidelity to
the forms of an ancient speech. Be critical, but colleagial (as always), mixing praise
and blame in equal measures.
2.
Professor Lape's lecture focused on this thesis: that in the absence of a
specifically applicable law, Aeschines resorted to "moral philosophy" to make his
case against Timarchus, arguing that personal morality, personal appearance, and
status as a valid, productive citizen are inextricably intertwined, and that failure in
any one area is reflected, and may indeed prosuppose, failure in the others..Do you
see evidence of this in either of the two Lysianic orations we have encountered? This
is an open question, which I would like you to address. You can treat both Lysias 1
and Lysias 3, or focus on only one of the speeches, as you see fit. If you answer is
"yes", explain in detail what you see. If your answer is "no", then explain in detail
how Lysias' oratory is different (and it must be fundamentally different) from what
Prof. Lape sees in Aeschines 1.
Week 6:
1.
What are the political factions seeking power inAthens after the end of the
war in 404?
2.
How does Socrates (in Plato's Apology) describe his own political
involvement in Athens over the course of his life? (I'm using "political" in the original
sense of anything connected to the polis or community of Athens--remember,
Aristophanes' plays were political and discussed politics and war, but also education
and literature--since these affected the polis).
3.
Are there sections of Plato's Apology which you believe are very close (if
not verbatim) to what Socrates actually said in 399? Which ones? Why do you find
these as likely recollections of his actual words? Are there sections which you may be
inclined to attribute to Plato's invention? Which ones? Wny?
Week 7:
1.
Consider the invocation of the patrios politeia by factions in late 5th cent.
Athens. Why did this concept seem to have so much political coinage? In answering
this question, you might take note of contemporary analogies, but keep the focus on
antiquity.
2.
Was Theramenes a traitor to both the democratic and oligarchic causes, or
not? Week 8 Please respond to the following two questions by 5pm Friday.Please
respond briefly to one of your colleaguesí answers to only one of the questions by
5pm Sunday.1. Based on our web-cast discussion and your reading of Xenophon and
Lysias, would you tend to place more faith in the historical accuracy of Lysiasí ìlegalî
speeches or Xenophonís ìhistoricalî speeches? To what extent, for example, are we
able or not to trust Lysiasí representation of Euphiletusí speech over Xenophonís
account of Theramenesí speech. I donít mean to force an ultimatum upon you.
Answer with as much nuance as you like. I only want to get a sense of which
direction you are beginning to find yourself inclined with regard to these speeches
and their content. 2. Consider the suggestion mentioned during the web-cast
discussion that we may accept as accurate in a speech only obiter dicta, i.e., the things
said in passing that do not help the case of the speaker. This was proposed as a
method for examining Lysias, but I would like you to apply it to Xenophonís speech
by Theramenes. Assuming that Xenophon offers an accurate representation of the
speech (a grand assumption, I know), please list a few items that you believe may
qualify as such obiter dicta. How limiting or difficult do you find this sort of approach
to seeking factual accuracy in a speech? Finally, to assuage my curiosity, do you find
that some types of information seem to come more naturally than others from such an
approach?
Week 9:
1.
If you were an Athenian democrat living under the Amnesty, what do you
think your opinion of the Amnesty would have been? What sorts of pros and cons
would have mattered to you? What if you were an Athenian who had supported the
Thirty?
2.
Imagine yourself to be a member of the jury who heard Lysias 18. How do
you think the Amnesty would have influenced your reaction to Lysiasí speech? You
may want to consider how your reactions might be different depending on your
experience in during the most recent outbreak of Civil War?
3.
Imagine yourself to be a member of the jury who heard Lysias 12. How do
you think the Amnesty would have influenced your reaction to Lysiasí speech? You
may want to consider how your reactions might be different depending on your
experience in during the most recent outbreak of Civil War?