[60]
species. Let us therefore assume that the father
was recalled by someone else. This will give rise
[p. 43]
to a question of the ratiocinative or syllogistic type,1
namely whether recall from exile cancels the sentence of the court and is tantamount to the trial
never having taken place at all. The uneducated
son will therefore attempt to argue that, being
entitled to not more than one reward, there was no
means by which he could have secured the recall of
his kin save by the restoration of his father on the
same terms as if he had never been accused, and
that this fact carries with it the cancellation of the
penalty incurred by his advocate, as though he had
never defended his father at all.2
Quintilian. With An English Translation. Harold Edgeworth Butler. Cambridge. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann, Ltd. 1922.
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.