Questions on the Death of Eratosthenes
Assignment #1
Eratosthenes
1. Discuss the degree of verisimilitude in the account of events
Verisimilitude in short, is the appearance of truth. The more truthful that something seems, the closer it is to the actual truth. Euphiletos was on trial for conspiracy to commit murder. Given the facts from this case I would have to say that he is innocent. If we are to just go by the facts and testimony, Euphiletos was justified for the murder of Eratosthenes because Athenian law allowed him such justice. On the other hand the part that makes me feel that he was guilty is the fact that he was “prepared” to find his wife in bed with another man. Regardless of how he obtained that information, he was in a way expecting that. We will see in the arguments that even though in Euphiletos’ mind he was expecting to walk in on his wife committing adultery, his argument will support the fact that there is doubt it was completely pre meditated. Its all a matter of painting the right picture, regardless of what you believe and don’t believe.
2. Summarize the arguments that Euphiletos was not guilty of conspiracy. Are these arguments probable? Comment on each
In Paragraph 23 Euphiletos talks about how he went around to gather different neighbors from around his home. Some were home and some were not and some were out of town. He gathered the biggest crowd he could. It didn’t matter if he knew them or not. If this were a conspiracy to commit murder then he would’ve only gathered people he knew. In paragraph 41 Euphiletos says that he went to his friend Harmodios’s house to find that he was abroad. If this were pre-meditated he would’ve only called upon his friends who lived close by as opposed to running around town at night in search of anyone he could find. These are the best arguments to show that Euphiletos didn’t conspire to commit murder.
The real issue to me seems to be what the law is to be interpreted as. It seems that if we follow
Eratosthenes
1. Discuss the degree of verisimilitude in the account of events
Verisimilitude in short, is the appearance of truth. The more truthful that something seems, the closer it is to the actual truth. Euphiletos was on trial for conspiracy to commit murder. Given the facts from this case I would have to say that he is innocent. If we are to just go by the facts and testimony, Euphiletos was justified for the murder of Eratosthenes because Athenian law allowed him such justice. On the other hand the part that makes me feel that he was guilty is the fact that he was “prepared” to find his wife in bed with another man. Regardless of how he obtained that information, he was in a way expecting that. We will see in the arguments that even though in Euphiletos’ mind he was expecting to walk in on his wife committing adultery, his argument will support the fact that there is doubt it was completely pre meditated. Its all a matter of painting the right picture, regardless of what you believe and don’t believe.
2. Summarize the arguments that Euphiletos was not guilty of conspiracy. Are these arguments probable? Comment on each
In Paragraph 23 Euphiletos talks about how he went around to gather different neighbors from around his home. Some were home and some were not and some were out of town. He gathered the biggest crowd he could. It didn’t matter if he knew them or not. If this were a conspiracy to commit murder then he would’ve only gathered people he knew. In paragraph 41 Euphiletos says that he went to his friend Harmodios’s house to find that he was abroad. If this were pre-meditated he would’ve only called upon his friends who lived close by as opposed to running around town at night in search of anyone he could find. These are the best arguments to show that Euphiletos didn’t conspire to commit murder.
The real issue to me seems to be what the law is to be interpreted as. It seems that if we follow