<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0014.tlg007.perseus-eng2:23-28</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0014.tlg007.perseus-eng2:23-28</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0014.tlg007.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="23"><p>And you approved these arguments and said that Pytho was right, as indeed he was. He made these statements, however, not in order that all those advantages that Philip had paid so much money to secure might be struck out of the treaty, but because he had been so instructed by his schoolmasters here in <placeName key="perseus,Athens">Athens</placeName>, who did not imagine that anyone would propose to annul the decree of Philocrates, which lost us <placeName key="perseus,Amphipolis">Amphipolis</placeName>.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="24"><p rend="indent">As for me, men of <placeName key="perseus,Athens">Athens</placeName>, I did not venture to propose anything that was unconstitutional, but it was not so to propose the direct contrary of Philocrates’ decree, as I can prove to you. For the decree of Philocrates, through which you lost <placeName key="perseus,Amphipolis">Amphipolis</placeName>, was itself contrary to the earlier decrees by which you claimed possession of that territory.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="25"><p>So it was this decree of Philocrates that was unconstitutional, nor would it have been possible to draft a constitutional proposal in conformity with his unconstitutional decree. By drafting mine to agree with the earlier decrees, which were constitutional and which also kept your territory intact, I both kept within the constitution and was able to convict Philip of trying to deceive you and of wishing, not to amend the peace, but to bring discredit on those who were pleading your cause.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="26"><p>You are all aware that, after conceding the right to amend the peace, he now denies it. He says that <placeName key="perseus,Amphipolis">Amphipolis</placeName> is his, because your decree that he should keep what he held confirmed his right. It is true that you passed that decree, but you never admitted his right to <placeName key="perseus,Amphipolis">Amphipolis</placeName>, for it is possible to <q type="emph">hold</q> what belongs to another, and it is not all <q type="emph">holders</q> who hold what is their own, but many are in possession of what is really another’s. So his clever quibble is merely foolish.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="27"><p>Moreover he remembers the decree of Philocrates, but he has quite forgotten the letter sent to you when he was besieging <placeName key="perseus,Amphipolis">Amphipolis</placeName>, in which he admitted that <placeName key="perseus,Amphipolis">Amphipolis</placeName> was yours; for he said that when he had taken it he would <q type="emph">restore</q> it to you, implying that it was your property, and not that of the holders.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="28"><p>Apparently those who inhabited <placeName key="perseus,Amphipolis">Amphipolis</placeName>, before Philip took it, were holding Athenian territory; but when he has taken it, it is no longer our territory, but his own, that he holds; and in the same way at <placeName key="perseus,Olynthus">Olynthus</placeName> and <placeName key="perseus,Apollonia">Apollonia</placeName> and <placeName key="perseus,Pallene">Pallene</placeName> he is in possession of his own property, not that of others.</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>