Speeches · 演说： On The Estate of Cleonymus On the Estate of Menecles On The Estate Of Pyrrhus On the Estate of Nicostratus On the Estate of Dicaeogenes On the Estate of Philoctemon On The Estate of Apollodorus On The Estate of Ciron On the Estate of Astyphilus On The Estate of Aristarchus On the Estate of Hagnias On Behalf of Euphiletus
On The Estate of Cleonymus · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg001 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Κλεωνύμου κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg001.perseus-grc2 · English: On The Estate of Cleonymus — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg001.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις ἀδελφιδοῖ Κλεωνύμου τελευτήσαντος ἐπὶ τὸν κλῆρον ἔρχονται κατὰ γένος, τὰς διαθήκας, ἃς παρέχονται εἰς αὑτοὺς οἱ περὶ Φερένικον καὶ Σίμωνα καὶ Ποσείδιππον, γράψαι, ὡς ἀληθὲς ἦν, καὶ θεῖναι παρὰ τοῖς ἄρχουσιν ὁμολογοῦντες Κλεώνυμον κατὰ τὴν πρὸς Δεινίαν τὸν ἐπίτροπον αὐτῶν ὀργήν, ὕστερον δὲ ἐπιχειρήσαντα λῦσαι καὶ μεταπεμψάμενον τὸν ἀστυνόμον ἐξαίφνης 〈ἀποθανεῖν〉 · καὶ Πολύαρχον δὲ τὸν πάππον αὐτῶν, Κλεωνύμου δὲ πατέρα, προστάξαι, εἴ τι πάσχοι Κλεώνυμος, δοῦναι αὐτοῖς τὰ ὑπάρχοντα. ἡ στάσις ὅρος διπλοῦς κατὰ ἀμφισβήτησιν· οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἄλλοι ταῖς γενομέναις ἐξ ἀρχῆς διαθήκαις διισχυρίζονται, οἱ δέ, λέγοντες. [φησὶν] ὅτι μετεκαλέσατο τὸν ἄρχοντα, ἵνα λύσῃ αὐτάς, τοῖς τελευταῖον παρὰ τοῦ Κλεωνύμου γενομένοις.
Argument Cleonymus having died, his nephews claim his estate as the natural heirs. They admit that the will in favor of Pherenicus, Simon, and Poseidippus, and produced by these persons, was the genuine will of Cleonymus, and was deposited by Cleonymus with the magistrates at a time when he was angry with their guardian Deinias; they allege, however, that he subsequently tried to annul the will, and after having sent for the police-magistrate, died suddenly. They further allege that Polyarchus, their grandfather and Cleonymus's father, instructed the latter, if anything should happen to him, to leave his property to them. The question at issue is a decision between the conflicting claims of the two parties, one basing their claim on the original will, the other relying on the last acts of Cleonymus, and alleging that he sent for the magistrate in order to annul the will.
§ 1
πολλὴ μὲν ἡ μεταβολή μοι γέγονεν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τελευτήσαντος Κλεωνύμου. ἐκεῖνος γὰρ ζῶν μὲν ἡμῖν κατέλιπε τὴν οὐσίαν, ἀποθανὼν δὲ κινδυνεύειν περὶ αὐτῆς πεποίηκε. καὶ τότε μὲν οὕτως ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ σωφρόνως ἐπαιδευόμεθα, ὥστʼ οὐδʼ ἀκροασόμενοι οὐδέποτʼ ἤλθομεν ἐπὶ δικαστήριον, νῦν δὲ ἀγωνιούμενοι περὶ πάντων ἥκομεν τῶν ὑπαρχόντων· οὐ γὰρ τῶν Κλεωνύμου μόνον ἀμφισβητοῦσιν ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν πατρῴων, ὀφείλειν ἐπὶ τούτοις 〈ἡμᾶς〉 ἐκείνῳ φάσκοντες ἀργύριον.
Great indeed, gentlemen, is the change which the death of Cleonymus has brought upon me. In his lifetime he devised his property to us; his death has exposed us to the danger of losing it. While he lived, we were so discreetly brought up by him that we never entered a law court even as listeners; now we have come here to fight for all that we possess; for our opponents claim not only Cleonymus's property, but also our patrimony, alleging that we owe his estate money as well.
§ 2
καὶ οἱ μὲν οἰκεῖοι καὶ οἱ προσήκοντες [ἐπὶ τούτοις] οἱ τούτων ἀξιοῦσιν ἡμᾶς καὶ τῶν ὁμολογουμένων, ὧν Κλεώνυμος κατέλιπεν, αὐτοῖς τούτων ἰσομοιρῆσαι· οὗτοι δὲ εἰς τοῦτο ἥκουσιν ἀναισχυντίας, ὥστε καὶ τὰ πατρῷα προσαφελέσθαι ζητοῦσιν ἡμᾶς, οὐκ ἀγνοοῦντες, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὸ δίκαιον, ἀλλὰ πολλὴν ἡμῶν ἐρημίαν καταγνόντες.
Their own friends and relatives concede our right to an equal share with them in the undisputed property which Cleonymus left behind him; but our opponents have become so impudent that they are seeking to deprive us even of our patrimony—not because they are ignorant, gentlemen, of what is just, but because they are convinced of our utter helplessness.
§ 3
σκέψασθε γὰρ οἷς ἑκάτεροι πιστεύοντες ὡς ὑμᾶς εἰσεληλύθαμεν· οὗτοι μὲν διαθήκαις ἰσχυριζόμενοι τοιαύταις, ἃς ἐκεῖνος διέθετο μὲν οὐχ ἡμῖν ἐγκαλῶν ἀλλʼ ὀργισθεὶς τῶν οἰκείων τινὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων, ἔλυσε δὲ πρὸ τοῦ θανάτου, πέμψας Ποσείδιππον ἐπὶ τὴν ἀρχήν·
For consider the grounds on which the respective parties rely in coming before you. Our opponents insist upon a will which our uncle drew up, not because he had any ground of complaint against us, but through anger against one of our relatives, and which he annulled before his death, sending Poseidippus to the magistrate's office for the purpose.
§ 4
ἡμεῖς δὲ γένει μὲν ἐγγυτάτω προσήκοντες, χρώμενοι δὲ ἐκείνῳ πάντων οἰκειότατα, δεδωκότων δʼ ἡμῖν καὶ τῶν νόμων κατὰ τὴν ἀγχιστείαν καὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Κλεωνύμου διὰ τὴν φιλίαν τὴν ὑπάρχουσαν αὐτῷ, ἔτι δὲ Πολυάρχου, τοῦ πατρὸς 〈τοῦ〉 Κλεωνύμου, πάππου δʼ ἡμετέρου, προστάξαντος, εἴ τι πάθοι Κλεώνυμος ἄπαις, ἡμῖν δοῦναι τὰ αὑτοῦ.
We were Cleonymus's nearest relatives, and lived on terms of greater intimacy with him than anyone else; and the laws have given us the right of succession as next of kin, as also did Cleonymus himself, owing to the affection which subsisted between us. And, further, Polyarchus, Cleonymus's father and our grandfather, gave instructions that, if Cleonymus should die without issue, he was to leave his property to us.
§ 5
τοσούτων τοίνυν ἡμῖν ὑπαρχόντων οὗτοι, καὶ συγγενεῖς ὄντες καὶ οὐδὲν δίκαιον εἰπεῖν ἔχοντες, οὐκ αἰσχύνονται καταστήσαντες ἡμᾶς εἰς ἀγῶνα περὶ τούτων, περὶ ὧν αἰσχρὸν ἦν ἀμφισβητῆσαι καὶ τοῖς μηδὲν προσήκουσιν.
Though we have all these claims, our opponents, though they are our relatives and have no justice to urge, are not ashamed to bring us into court in a matter about which it would be disgraceful even for those who are no relatives at all to dispute.
§ 6
οὐχ ὁμοίως δέ μοι δοκοῦμεν, ὦ ἄνδρες, διακεῖσθαι πρὸς ἀλλήλους. ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οὐχ ὅτι ἀδίκως κινδυνεύω, τοῦθʼ ἡγοῦμαι μέγιστον εἶναι τῶν παρόντων κακῶν, ἀλλʼ ὅτι ἀγωνίζομαι πρὸς οἰκείους, οὓς οὐδʼ ἀμύνεσθαι καλῶς ἔχει· οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἐλάττω συμφορὰν ἡγησαίμην κακῶς ποιεῖν τούτους ἀμυνόμενος, οἰκείους ὄντας, ἢ κακῶς παθεῖν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑπὸ τούτων.
But I think, gentlemen, that we and our opponents have not the same feelings towards one another; for I regard it as the worst feature of my present troubles, not that I am being unjustly placed in peril, but that I am at law with kinsmen, against whom even to defend oneself is not creditable; for I should not regard it as a less misfortune to injure them, my relatives, in my own defence than to have been originally injured by them.
§ 7
οὗτοι δʼ οὐ τοιαύτην ἔχουσι τὴν γνώμην, ἀλλʼ ἥκουσιν ἐφʼ ἡμᾶς καὶ τοὺς φίλους παρακαλέσαντες καὶ ῥήτορας παρασκευασάμενοι καὶ οὐδὲν ἀπολείποντες τῆς αὑτῶν δυνάμεως, ὥσπερ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἐχθροὺς τιμωρησόμενοι, καὶ οὐκ ἀναγκαίους καὶ συγγενεῖς κακῶς ποιήσοντες.
They have no such sentiments, but have come against us after calling all their friends to their aid, and procuring orators and mustering all their forces, as though, gentlemen, they were going to punish foes, and not to harm kinsmen and relatives.
§ 8
τὴν μὲν οὖν τούτων ἀναισχυντίαν καὶ τὴν αἰσχροκέρδειαν ἔτι μᾶλλον γνώσεσθε, ἐπειδὰν πάντων ἀκούσητε· ὅθεν δʼ οἶμαι τάχιστʼ ἂν ὑμᾶς μαθεῖν περὶ ὧν ἀμφισβητοῦμεν, ἐντεῦθεν ἄρξομαι διδάσκειν.
You will understand their shamelessness and greed better when you have heard the whole story. I will begin my narrative at a point which will, I think, enable you most readily to understand the matters in dispute.
§ 9
Δεινίας γὰρ ὁ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀδελφὸς ἐπετρόπευσεν ἡμᾶς, θεῖος ὢν ὀρφανοὺς ὄντας. Κλεωνύμῳ δʼ οὗτος, ὦ ἄνδρες, διάφορος ὢν ἔτυχεν. ὁπότερος μὲν οὖν αὐτῶν ἦν τῆς διαφορᾶς αἴτιος, ἴσως οὐκ ἐμὸν ἔργον ἐστὶ κατηγορεῖν· πλὴν τοσοῦτόν γε ἂν δικαίως αὐτοῖς ἀμφοτέροις μεμψαίμην, ὅτι καὶ φίλοι τέως ὄντες καὶ προφάσεως οὐδεμιᾶς γενομένης ἐκ λόγων τινῶν οὕτως εἰκῇ πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἔχθραν ἀνείλοντο.
We were orphans, and our uncle Deinias, our father's brother, assumed the guardianship of us. Now it so happened that he was at variance with Cleonymus; which of the two was to blame for this, it is not perhaps my business to determine, but I might justly find fault with both of them alike, inasmuch as, having previously been friends, without any real pretext, as the result of certain words which were spoken, they became so hastily at enmity with one another.
§ 10
τότε γοῦν ἐκ ταύτης τῆς ὀργῆς Κλεώνυμος ταύτας ποιεῖται τὰς διαθήκας, οὐχ ἡμῖν ἐγκαλῶν, ὡς ὕστερον †ἐσώθη† ἔλεγεν, ὁρῶν δὲ ἡμᾶς ἐπιτροπευομένους ὑπὸ Δεινίου, καὶ δεδιὼς μὴ τελευτήσειεν αὐτὸς ἔτι παῖδας ἡμᾶς καταλιπὼν καὶ τῆς οὐσίας ἡμετέρας οὔσης γένοιτο κύριος Δεινίας· ἡγεῖτο γὰρ δεινὸν εἶναι τὸν ἔχθιστον τῶν οἰκείων ἐπίτροπον καὶ κύριον τῶν αὑτοῦ καταλιπεῖν, καὶ ποιεῖν αὑτῷ τὰ νομιζόμενα τοῦτον, ἕως ἡμεῖς ἡβήσαιμεν, ᾧ ζῶν διάφορος ἦν·
It was at this time, under the influence of this anger, that Cleonymus made this will: not because he had any complaint against us, as he subsequently stated, but because he saw that we were under the guardianship of Deinias, and was afraid that he might himself die while we were minors, and that Deinias might obtain control of the property, if it became ours; for he could not bear to think of leaving his bitterest enemy as the guardian of his relatives and in control of his property, and of the customary rites being performed over him, until we grew up, by one with whom he had been at variance in his lifetime.
§ 11
ταῦτα διανοηθεὶς ἐκεῖνος, εἴτʼ ὀρθῶς εἴτε μή, τὰς διαθήκας ταύτας διέθετο. καὶ εὐθὺς ἐρωτῶντος τοῦ Δεινίου παραχρῆμα εἴ τι ἡμῖν ἢ τῷ πατρὶ ἐγκαλεῖ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ, ἀπεκρίνατο πάντων τῶν πολιτῶν ἐναντίον ὅτι οὐδὲν πονηρὸν ἐγκαλεῖ, καὶ ἐμαρτύρησεν ὡς ὀργιζόμενος ἐκείνῳ καὶ οὐκ ὀρθῶς βουλευόμενος ταῦτα διέθετο. πῶς γὰρ ἂν εὖ φρονῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες, κακῶς ποιεῖν ἡμᾶς ἐβουλήθη, τοὺς μηδὲν αὐτὸν ἠδικηκότας;
Such were the sentiments under which, whether rightly or wrongly, he made this will; and when Deinias immediately asked him at the time whether he had any grievance against us or our father, he replied in the hearing of all that he had no fault to find with us, and so testified that it was his anger against Deinias and not his calm judgement which decided him to make this will. For surely, gentlemen, if he had been in his right senses, he would never have wished to injure us, who had never wronged him.
§ 12
ὕστερον δὲ τούτων, ὃ μέγιστον ἡμῖν τεκμήριον ὅτι οὐδὲ ταῦτα ἔπραξεν ἡμᾶς βλάπτειν βουλόμενος· τελευτήσαντος γὰρ Δεινίου καὶ τῶν πραγμάτων ἡμῖν πονηρῶς ἐχόντων οὐδὲ περιεῖδεν ἡμᾶς οὐδενὸς ἐνδεεῖς ὄντας, ἀλλʼ αὐτοὺς μὲν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν τὴν αὑτοῦ κομισάμενος ἐπαίδευε, τὴν δʼ οὐσίαν ἀφελέσθαι τῶν χρήστων ἐπιβουλευσάντων ἔσωσεν ἡμῖν, ἐπεμελεῖτό τε ὁμοίως τῶν ἡμετέρων ὥσπερ τῶν αὑτοῦ πραγμάτων.
His subsequent conduct is the strongest proof in support of our contention, that even in acting thus he did not intend to injure us. For after Deinias's death, when things were going badly with us, he would not allow us to lack anything, but took us into his own house and brought us up, and saved our property when our creditors were scheming against it, and looked after our interests as though they were his own.
§ 13
καίτοι χρὴ θεωρεῖν αὐτοῦ τὴν ἔννοιαν ἐκ τούτων τῶν ἔργων μᾶλλον ἢ ἐκ τῶν διαθηκῶν, καὶ τεκμηρίοις χρῆσθαι μὴ τοῖς μετʼ ὀργῆς πραχθεῖσιν, ἐν οἷς ἅπαντες πεφύκαμεν ἁμαρτάνειν, ἀλλʼ ἀφʼ ὧν ὕστερον φανερὰν τὴν αὑτοῦ ἔννοιαν ἐποίησεν. ἔτι γὰρ μᾶλλον ἐν τοῖς τελευταίοις ἐδήλωσεν ὡς εἶχε πρὸς ἡμᾶς.
It is from these acts rather than from the will that his intentions must be discerned, and inferences must be drawn not from what he did under the influence of anger—through which we are all liable to err—but from his subsequent acts, whereby he made his attitude quite clear. In his last hours he showed still more plainly his feelings toward us.
§ 14
ἤδη γὰρ ἀσθενῶν ταύτην τὴν νόσον ἐξ ἧς ἐτελεύτησεν, ἐβουλήθη ταύτας τὰς διαθήκας ἀνελεῖν καὶ προσέταξε Ποσειδίππῳ τὴν ἀρχὴν εἰσαγαγεῖν. ὁ δὲ οὐ μόνον οὐκ εἰσήγαγεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν ἐλθόντα τῶν ἀρχόντων ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν ἀπέπεμψεν. ὀργισθεὶς δὲ τούτῳ Κλεώνυμος πάλιν ἐς τὴν ὑστεραίαν Διοκλεῖ καλέσαι τοὺς ἄρχοντας προσέταζε, καὶ οὐχ οὕτως ὡς ἀσθενῶν διακείμενος· ἀλλʼ ἔτι πολλῶν οὐσῶν ἐλπίδων, ἐξαπίνης τῆς νυκτὸς ταύτης ἀπέθανεν.
For, when he was suffering from the illness of which he died, he wished to revoke this will, and directed Poseidippus to fetch the magistrate. Not only did he fail to do so, but he even sent away one of the magistrates who had come to the door. Cleonymus was enraged at this, and again gave instructions, this time to Diocles, to summon the magistrates for the following day, though he was in no fit state to transact business owing to his illness; but, although there was still good hope of his recovery, he died suddenly that night.
§ 15
πρῶτον μὲν οὖν ὑμῖν παρέξομαι μάρτυρας ὡς οὐχ ἡμῖν ἐγκαλῶν ἀλλὰ Δεινίᾳ πολεμῶν ταύτας τὰς διαθήκας διέθετο, ἔπειτα ὡς ἐκείνου τελευτήσαντος ἐπεμελεῖτο τε τῶν ἡμετέρων ἁπάντων, καὶ αὐτοὺς ἐπαίδευεν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν τὴν αὑτοῦ κομισάμενος, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ὡς Ποσείδιππον ἔπεμψεν ἐπὶ τὸν ἀστυνόμον, οὗτος δʼ οὐ μόνον αὐτὸς οὐκ εἰσεκάλεσεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐλθόντα ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν [ἀρχονίδην] ἀπέπεμψεν.
I will now produce witnesses to prove, first, that the motive of Cleonymus in making this will was not any grievance against us, but his enmity towards Deinias; secondly, that after Deinias's death he looked after all our interests, and took us to his own house and brought us up; and, thirdly, that he sent Poseidippus for the magistrate, but not only did he himself fail to summon him, but also sent him away when he came to the door.
§ 16
ὡς οὖν ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μοι τοὺς μάρτυρας. Μάρτυρες ἔτι τοίνυν ὡς οἱ τούτων φίλοι καὶ Κηφίσανδρος ἠξίουν νείμασθαι τὴν οὐσίαν καὶ τὸ τρίτον μέρος ἡμᾶς ἔχειν ἁπάντων τῶν Κλεωνύμου, καὶ τούτων μοι κάλει μάρτυρας.
To prove the truth of my statements, please call the witnesses. Witnesses Next call witnesses to testify that the friends of our opponents, including Cephisander, were of opinion that the parties should share the estate, and that we should have one third of all that Cleonymus possessed.
§ 17
Μάρτυρες ἡγοῦμαι μὲν τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες, πᾶσι τοῖς τῶν κλήρων ἀμφισβητοῦσιν, ὅταν ἀποφήνωσι σφᾶς αὐτοὺς ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς καὶ τῷ γένει προτέρους ὄντας καὶ τῇ φιλίᾳ τῇ πρὸς τὸν τετελευτηκότα, περίεργον εἶναι τοὺς ἄλλους λόγους λέγειν· ἐπειδὴ δὲ τούτων οὐδέτερον ἔχοντες οὗτοι τολμῶσι τῶν οὐ προσηκόντων ἀμφισβητεῖν καὶ ψευδεῖς παρασκευάζονται λόγους, βούλομαι βραχέα καὶ περὶ τούτων αὐτῶν εἰπεῖν.
Witnesses I think, gentlemen, that in any dispute about an inheritance, if the claimants can prove, as we can, that they are nearer both in affinity and in affection to the deceased, all other arguments are superfluous. But, since my opponents, though they can urge either of these titles, have the impudence to claim what does not belong to them, and are trumping up false arguments, I should like to say a few words on these very points.
§ 18
ἰσχυρίζονται γὰρ ταῖς διαθήκαις, λέγοντες ὡς Κλεώνυμος μετεπέμπετο τὴν ἀρχὴν οὐ λῦσαι βουλόμενος αὐτὰς ἀλλʼ ἐπανορθῶσαι καὶ βεβαιῶσαι σφίσιν αὐτοῖς τὴν δωρεάν. ὑμεῖς δὲ σκοπεῖσθε τὰς διαθήκας τὰς μετʼ ὀργῆς γενομένας πότερα εἰκός ἐστι βουληθῆναι Κλεώνυμον ἀνελεῖν, ἐπειδὴ πρὸς ἡμᾶς οἰκείως ἔσχεν, ἢ σκοπεῖν ὅπως ἔτι βεβαιότερον ἡμᾶς ἀποστερήσει τῶν αὑτοῦ.
They insist upon the will, declaring that Cleonymus sent for the magistrate because he wished, not to revoke it, but to correct it and to confirm the bequest in their favor. Now consider which is the more likely, that Cleonymus, now that he had become friendly towards us, wished to cancel the will which he had made in anger, or that he was seeking a still surer means to deprive us of his property.
§ 19
τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ἄλλοις κἀκείνων ὧν ἂν ὀργισθέντες τοὺς οἰκείους ἀδικήσωσιν ὕστερον μεταμέλει· οὗτοι δὲ ἐκεῖνον ἀποφαίνουσιν, ἐν ᾧ πρὸς ἡμᾶς οἰκειότατα διέκειτο, μᾶλλον βεβαιοῦν τὴν διαθήκην βουλόμενον, ἣν ὀργιζόμενος ἐποιήσατο. ὥστʼ εἰ καὶ ἡμεῖς ὁμολογήσαιμεν ταῦτα καὶ ὑμεῖς αὐτοὶ πιστεύσαιτε, ἐνθυμεῖσθε ὅτι παράνοιαν αὐτοῦ τὴν μεγίστην οὗτοι κατηγοροῦσι.
All other men afterwards repent of wrongs which they have done to their relatives in moments of anger; Cleonymus is represented by my opponents as desirous, when he was on terms of the closest affection with us, still further to confirm the will which he made in anger. So, even if we were to admit that he did so and you yourselves were to believe it, my opponents, you must observe, are accusing Cleonymus of utter madness.
§ 20
τίς γὰρ ἂν γένοιτο ταύτης μανία μείζων, ἢ τότε μὲν ὅτε Δεινίᾳ διάφορος ὢν ἔτυχεν, ἡμᾶς κακῶς ποιεῖν τε καὶ διατίθεσθαι τοιαύτας διαθήκας, ἐξ ὧν οὐκ ἐκεῖνον ἐτιμωρεῖτο ἀλλὰ τοὺς οἰκειοτάτους ἠδίκει· νυνὶ δὲ χρώμενος ἡμῖν καὶ περὶ πλείστου ποιούμενος ἁπάντων, μόνους ἐβουλήθη τοὺς ἀδελφιδοῦς, ὡς οὗτοί φασιν, ἀκλήρους ποιῆσαι τῶν ἑαυτοῦ. καὶ τίς ἂν εὖ φρονῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τοιαῦτα περὶ τῶν αὑτοῦ βουλεύσαιτο;
For what greater act of insanity could be committed than that Cleonymus, when he was at variance with Deinias, should wrong us and make a will whereby he did not punish Deinias but wronged his nearest and dearest, whereas now, when he was on terms of the closest friendship with us and held us in higher esteem than anyone else, he should have wished, as my opponents allege, to leave his nephews alone without any share in his property? Who, gentlemen, in his right mind would determine so to dispose of his estate?
§ 21
ὥστʼ ἐκ τούτων τῶν λόγων ῥᾳδίαν ὑμῖν τὴν διάγνωσιν πεποιήκασι περὶ αὑτῶν. εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἀνελεῖν τὰς διαθήκας βουλόμενος μετεπέμπετο τὴν ἀρχήν, ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς φαμεν, οὐδεὶς ἔνεστι τούτοις λόγος· εἰ δʼ οὕτω παραφρονῶν ἔτυχεν ὥσθʼ ἡμᾶς ἀεὶ περὶ ἐλαχίστου ποιεῖσθαι, τοὺς γένει πρωτεύοντας καὶ χρωμένους αὐτῷ πάντων οἰκειότατα, δικαίως ἂν δήπου τὰς τοιαύτας διαθήκας ἀκύρους ποιήσαιτε.
By these arguments they have made it easy for you to decide their case. If it was to revoke the will, as we assert, that Cleonymus sent for the magistrate, they have no possible plea to urge; if he was so mad as always to have the least regard for us, his nearest kinsmen and most intimate friends, you would be justified, I presume, in declaring such a will invalid.
§ 22
ἔτι τοίνυν ἐνθυμεῖσθε ὅτι φάσκοντες καλεῖν τὴν ἀρχὴν Κλεώνυμον, ἵνα βεβαιώσῃ τὴν αὑτῶν δωρεάν, προσταχθὲν αὐτοῖς οὐκ ἐτόλμησαν εἰσαγαγεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν ἐλθόντα τῶν ἀρχόντων ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν ἀπέπεμψαν. καὶ δυοῖν τοῖν ἐναντιωτάτοιν θάτερα μέλλοντες, ἢ τὴν οὐσίαν ἕξειν βεβαιοτέραν ἢ ἐκείνῳ μὴ ποιήσαντες ἀπεχθήσεσθαι, τὴν ἀπέχθειαν εἵλοντο μᾶλλον ταύτης τῆς δωρεᾶς. καίτοι πῶς ἂν ἕτερα τούτων γένοιτο ἀπιστότερα;
Next remark, that, though they allege that Cleonymus asked for the magistrate to be summoned in order to confirm the bequest to themselves, yet, when they were ordered to do so, they dared not bring him in, and also sent away one of the magistrates who came to the door. Two alternatives lay before them, either to have the inheritance confirmed to them or else to offend Cleonymus by not doing what he asked; they preferred to incur his enmity rather than to secure this bequest!
§ 23
τοὺς μὲν τηλικαῦτα μέλλοντας ἐκ τοῦ πράγματος κερδαίνειν, ὥσπερ ζημιωθησομένους, φυλάξασθαι τὴν διακονίαν, Κλεώνυμον δʼ ὑπὲρ τῆς τούτων ὠφελείας τοσαύτην ποιήσασθαι σπουδὴν ὥστε Ποσειδίππῳ μέν, ὅτι κατημέλησεν, ὀργισθῆναι, Διοκλέους δὲ ταὐτὰ πάλιν ἐς τὴν ὑστεραίαν δεηθῆναι;
Could anything be more incredible than this? Those who had so much to gain by doing what he asked, avoided rendering this service, as though they were going to lose by it, while Cleonymus showed so much zeal for their advantage that he was angry with Poseidippus for neglecting his wishes, and repeated the request to Diocles for the following day!
§ 24
εἰ γὰρ δή, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὡς οὗτοί φασιν, ἐν ταῖς νῦν γεγραμμέναις διαθήκαις ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς τὴν οὐσίαν, καὶ τοῦτʼ ἄξιον εἶναί μοι δοκεῖ θαυμάζειν, ὅ τί ποτε ἐπανορθώσας κυριωτέρας αὐτὰς ἡγεῖτʼ ἂν ποιῆσαι· τοῖς γὰρ ἄλλοις οὗτος ὅρος ἐστίν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τῶν δωρεῶν.
If, gentlemen, Cleonymus, as my opponents allege, bequeathed the estate to them by the will in its present form, I cannot help wondering by what alteration he thought he could make it more valid; for in the eyes of every one else such a will is the most complete form of bequest.
§ 25
ἔτι δὲ καὶ εἴ τι προσγράψαι τούτοις ἐβούλετο, διὰ τί οὐκ ἐν ἑτέρῳ γράψας αὐτὰ γραμματείῳ κατέλιπεν, ἐπειδὴ τὰ γράμματα παρὰ τῶν ἀρχόντων οὐκ ἐδυνήθη λαβεῖν; ἀνελεῖν μὲν γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐχ οἷός τʼ ἦν ἄλλο γραμματεῖον ἢ τὸ παρὰ τῇ ἀρχῇ κείμενον· γράψαι δʼ ἐξῆν εἰς ἕτερον εἴ τι ἐβούλετο, καὶ μηδὲ τοῦθʼ ἡμῖν ἀμφισβητήσιμον ἐᾶν.
Furthermore, if he wished to add anything to these dispositions, why did he not record and leave behind him his wishes in a codicil, when he found himself unable to procure the original will from the officials? For he could not annul any other document except that which was deposited at the magistrate's office; but he was at liberty to record anything he liked in a codicil, and thus avoid leaving this matter in dispute between us.
§ 26
εἰ τοίνυν καὶ τοῦτο συγχωρήσαιμεν, ὡς ἐκεῖνος ἐπανορθῶσαι τὰς διαθήκας ἐβούλετο, πᾶσι δήπου φανερὸν ὑμῖν ἐστιν ὅτι οὐκ ὀρθῶς αὐτὰς ἔχειν ἡγεῖτο. καίτοι σκοπεῖτε καὶ ἐντεῦθεν τὴν ἀναισχυντίαν αὐτῶν, οἵτινες ταύτας τὰς διαθήκας ἀξιοῦσιν εἶναι κυρίας, ἃς ὁμολογοῦσι μηδʼ αὐτὸν τὸν διαθέμενον [ταῦτα] ὀρθῶς ἔχειν ἡγεῖσθαι, καὶ πείθουσιν ὑμᾶς ἐναντία καὶ τοῖς νόμοις καὶ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ τῇ τοῦ τετελευτηκότος γνώμῃ ψηφίσασθαι.
If we concede also that Cleonymus wished to alter his will, it is, I think, obvious to you all that he was dissatisfied with it. Here, again, mark the impudence of our opponents, who claim that the will should be valid, though they admit that even the testator himself was dissatisfied with it, and are trying to persuade you to give a verdict which is contrary to the laws and to justice and to the intentions of the deceased.
§ 27
ἔτι τοίνυν τούτων ἁπάντων ἀναιδέστατος τῶν λόγων ἐστίν, ὅταν τολμῶσι λέγειν ὡς Κλεώνυμος οὐδὲν ἡμᾶς τῶν αὑτοῦ λαβεῖν ἐβούλετο. καίτοι, ὦ ἄνδρες, τίνας ἂν ἄλλους ταῦτα ἔχειν ἐβουλήθη μᾶλλον ἢ τούτους, οὓς καὶ ζῶν ἐκ τῶν αὑτοῦ πλεῖστα τῶν οἰκείων ὠφέλει;
Most impudent of all their statements is when they dare to say that Cleonymus did not wish us to have any of his property. Whom, gentlemen, could he have wished to have it rather than those to whom in his lifetime he gave more assistance out of his private means than to any other of his relatives?
§ 28
πάντων δʼ ἂν εἴη θαυμασιώτατον, εἰ Κηφίσανδρος μὲν ὁ τούτων οἰκεῖος δίκαιον ἡγεῖτο εἶναι μέρος ἕκαστον ἡμῶν ἔχειν τῆς οὐσίας, Κλεώνυμος δʼ ὃς ἦν ἡμῖν οἰκειότατος καὶ ἡμᾶς εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν τὴν αὑτοῦ λαβὼν ἐθεράπευε καὶ ἐπεμελεῖτο τῶν ἡμετέρων ὥσπερ τῶν αὑτοῦ πραγμάτων, οὗτος μόνος ἐβούλετο ἡμᾶς ἀκλήρους εἶναι τῶν αὑτοῦ.
It would be most extraordinary if, while Cephisander, the kinsman of our opponents, thought it fair that each of us should have a share of the property, yet Cleonymus, who was our nearest relative and received us into his house and cared for us and looked after our interests as though they were his own, was the only person who wished that we should receive no share of his estate.
§ 29
καὶ τίς ἂν ὑμῶν πιστεύσειεν εὐνουστέρους καὶ μετριωτέρους τοὺς ἀντιδίκους ἡμῖν εἶναι τῶν οἰκειοτάτων; κἀκεῖνον μέν, ᾧ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον εὖ ποιεῖν ἡμᾶς καὶ αἰσχρὸν ἡμῶν ἀμελῆσαι, μηδὲν τῶν αὑτοῦ ἡμῖν δοῦναι· τούτους δέ, οἷς οὔτʼ ἀνάγκη ἐστὶν οὔτʼ αἰσχύνην οὐδεμίαν φέρει, τῶν οὐ προσηκόντων, ὥς φασιν, ἡμῖν μεταδιδόναι; ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, πολλὴν ἀπιστίαν ἔχει.
Who of you could possibly believe that our opponents-at-law are kinder and more considerate towards us than our closest kindred; and that he, who was bound to treat us well and in whom it would have been disgraceful to neglect us, left us none of his property, whereas these men, who are under no obligation to us and whose disregard of us involves no disgrace, offered us a share of the property to which, as they say, we have no claim? These suppositions, gentlemen, are perfectly incredible.
§ 30
ἔπειτα, εἰ μὲν καὶ νῦν οὕτω πρὸς ἀμφοτέρους ἡμᾶς ἔχων ἐτελεύτησεν, ὥσπερ ὅτε τὰς διαθήκας ταύτας ἐποιήσατο, εἰκότως ἄν τις ὑμῶν πιστεύσειε τοῖς λόγοις τοῖς τουτωνί· νυνὶ δὲ πᾶν τοὐναντίον εὑρήσετε. τότε μὲν γὰρ ἔτυχε Δεινίᾳ, ὃς ἡμᾶς ἐπετρόπευε, διάφορος ὢν ἡμῖν τε οὔπω χρώμενος τούτοις τε ἅπασιν ἐπιτηδείως διακείμενος· νῦν δὲ τούτων μέν τισι διάφορος ἐγένετο, ἡμῖν δὲ πάντων ἐχρῆτο οἰκειότατα.
Again, if Cleonymus had entertained the same feelings towards both parties at the time of his death as when he made the will, some of you might reasonably believe my opponents' story; as it is, you will find that the exact contrary is true. Then he was at variance with Deinias, who was acting as our guardian, and was not yet on terms of close intimacy with us, and was kindly disposed towards all my opponents; at the time of his death he had become at variance with some of them, and was living on terms of closer intimacy with us than with anyone else.
§ 31
καὶ ἐξ ὧν μὲν αὐτῷ πρὸς τούτους ἐγένετο ἡ διαφορά, περίεργόν ἐστι λέγειν· σημεῖα δʼ ὑμῖν ἐρῶ μεγάλα, περὶ ὧν καὶ μάρτυρας ἕξω παρασχέσθαι. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ θύων τῷ Διονύσῳ, καὶ τοὺς οἰκείους ἅπαντας καλέσας καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πολιτῶν πολλούς, Φερένικον οὐδαμοῦ παρεστήσατο. ἔπειτα μικρὸν πρὶν τελευτῆσαι βαδίζων εἰς Πάνορμον μετὰ Σίμωνος, καὶ συντυχὼν αὐτῷ, προσειπεῖν οὐκ ἐτόλμησεν.
On the causes of the quarrel between my opponents and Cleonymus it is unnecessary for me to dwell; but I will mention some striking proofs of its existence, of which I shall be able also to produce witnesses. Firstly, when he was sacrificing to Dionysus, he invited all his relatives and many other citizens besides, but he offered no place to Pherenicus. Again, when, shortly before his death, he was journeying to Panormus with Simon and met Pherenicus, he could not bring himself to speak to him.
§ 32
ἔτι δὲ πρὸς τούτοις πυνθανομένου τὴν διαφορὰν τοῦ Σίμωνος τήν τʼ ἔχθραν διηγήσατο, καὶ προσηπείλησεν ὅτι δηλώσειέ ποτʼ ἂν τούτῳ ὡς διάκειται πρὸς αὐτόν. καὶ ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μάρτυρας.
Furthermore, when Simon asked him about the quarrel, he narrated the circumstances of their enmity, and threatened that some day he would show Pherenicus what were his feelings towards him. Now call witnesses to prove the truth of these statements.
§ 33
〈Μάρτυρες〉 οἴεσθε οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὸν οὑτωσὶ πρὸς ἑκατέρους ἡμᾶς διακείμενον ἡμῖν μέν, οἷς οἰκειότατα ἐχρῆτο, οὕτω ποιεῖν ὅπως μηδὲ λόγον ὑπολείψει, τούτοις δέ, ὧν τισι καὶ διάφορος ἦν, σκοπεῖν ὅπως ἅπασαν βεβαιώσει τὴν οὐσίαν; καὶ τούτους μὲν νῦν περὶ πλείονος ποιεῖσθαι ταύτης ὑπούσης τῆς ἔχθρας, ἡμᾶς δὲ τοσαύτης οἰκειότητος καὶ φιλίας γενομένης πειρᾶσθαι μᾶλλον κακῶς ποιεῖν;
Witnesses Do you imagine, gentlemen, that Cleonymus, being thus disposed towards both parties, acted thus towards us, with whom he lived on terms of the closest affection, in order to leave us without a word to say, while he sought means to confirm the bequest of his whole property to my opponents, with some of whom he was at variance? And that, although this enmity subsisted, he thought more highly of them, and, in spite of the intimacy and affection which had sprung up between us, tried rather to injure us?
§ 34
ἀλλʼ ἔγωγε, εἰ κατηγορεῖν ἐβούλοντο τῶν διαθηκῶν ἢ τοῦ τετελευτηκότος, οὐκ οἶδʼ ὅ τι ἂν ἄλλο πρὸς ὑμᾶς εἶπον, οἵ γε τὰς διαθήκας μὲν ἀποφαίνουσιν οὔτʼ ὀρθῶς ἐχούσας οὔτʼ ἀρεσκούσας τῷ διαθεμένῳ, τοῦ δὲ τοσαύτην μανίαν κατηγοροῦσιν, ὥστε φασὶν αὐτὸν περὶ πλείονος ποιεῖσθαι τοὺς αὑτῷ διαφερομένους ἢ τοὺς οἰκείως χρωμένους, καὶ οἷς μὲν ζῶν οὐδὲ διελέγετο ἅπασαν δοῦναι τὴν οὐσίαν, τοὺς δʼ οἰκειότατα κεχρημένους οὐδὲ πολλοστοῦ μέρους ἀξιῶσαι. ὥστε τίς ἂν ὑμῶν ταύτας εἶναι κυρίας τὰς διαθήκας ψηφίσαιτο,
For my part, if they wished to attack the will and the deceased, I do not know what else they could have said to you, since they represent the will as incorrect and disapproved by the testator, and accuse him of being so insane that, according to them, he set more store by those who were at variance with him than by those with whom he was living on terms of the closest affection, and left all his property to those with whom in his lifetime he was not on speaking terms, while he did not consider those, whom he had treated as his closest friends, as worthy of the smallest share of his estate. Who of you, then, could vote for the validity of this will,
§ 35
ἃς ὁ μὲν διαθέμενος ὡς οὐκ ὀρθῶς ἐχούσας ἀπεδοκίμασεν, οὗτοι δʼ ἔργῳ λύουσιν ἐθέλοντες ἡμῖν ἰσομοιρῆσαι τῆς οὐσίας, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἡμεῖς ὑμῖν ἀποφαίνομεν ἐναντίας οὔσας καὶ τῷ νόμῳ καὶ τοῖς δικαίοις καὶ τῇ τοῦ τετελευτηκότος διανοίᾳ;
which the testator rejected as being incorrect, and which our opponents are actually ready to set aside, since they expressed their willingness to share the estate with us, and which, moreover, we can show to be contrary both to law and to justice and to the intention of the deceased?
§ 36
οἶμαι δʼ ὑμᾶς τὸ περὶ ἡμῶν δίκαιον σαφέστατʼ ἂν παρʼ αὐτῶν τούτων πυνθάνεσθαι. εἰ γάρ τις αὐτοὺς ἔροιτο διὰ τί ἀξιοῦσι κληρονόμοι γενέσθαι τῶν Κλεωνύμου, τοῦτʼ ἂν εἰπεῖν ἔχοιεν, ὅτι καὶ γένει ποθὲν προσήκουσι καὶ ἐκεῖνος αὐτοῖς χρόνον τινὰ ἐπιτηδείως διέκειτο. οὐκ ἂν ἄρα ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν μᾶλλον ἢ ὑπὲρ σφῶν αὐτῶν εἶεν εἰρηκότες;
You can best learn, I think, the justice of our plea from the statements of our opponents themselves. If they were asked on what grounds they claimed to inherit the property of Cleonymus, they might reply that they are somehow related to him, and that for some time he was on terms of friendship with them. Would not this statement tell in our favor rather than in theirs?
§ 37
εἴ τε γὰρ διὰ τὴν τοῦ γένους ἀγχιστείαν δεῖ γενέσθαι τινὰς κληρονόμους, ἡμεῖς ἐγγυτέρω γένει προσήκομεν· εἴ τε διὰ τὴν φιλίαν τὴν ὑπάρχουσαν, ἴσασιν αὐτὸν ἅπαντες ἡμῖν οἰκειότερον διακείμενον. ὥστʼ οὐ χρὴ παρʼ ἡμῶν, ἀλλὰ [καὶ] παρʼ αὐτῶν τούτων πυνθάνεσθαι τὸ δίκαιον.
For if the right of succession is based on affinity, we are more closely related to him; if it is to be based on existing friendship, it is common knowledge that it was to us that he was more closely bound by affection. Thus it is from their lips rather than from ours that you must learn the justice of the case.
§ 38
πάντων δʼ ἂν εἴη δεινότατον, εἰ τοῖς μὲν ἄλλοις ψηφίζοισθε, ὅταν θάτερα τούτων ἀποφαίνωσι σφᾶς αὐτούς, ἢ γένει προτέρους ὄντας ἢ τῇ φιλίᾳ τῇ πρὸς τὸν τετελευτηκότα, ἡμᾶς δʼ οἷς ἐστιν ἀμφότερα ταῦτα παρὰ πάντων ὁμολογούμενα, ἀξιώσετε μόνους ἀκλήρους ποιῆσαι τῶν ἐκείνου.
Now it would be very strange if in all other cases you were to vote in favor of those who prove themselves nearer either in kinship or in friendship to the deceased, but decide that we, who are admitted to possess both these qualifications, alone are to be deprived of all share in his property.
§ 39
καὶ εἰ μὲν Πολύαρχος ὁ πατὴρ ὁ Κλεωνύμου, πάππος δʼ ἡμέτερος, ζῶν ἐτύγχανε καὶ τῶν ἐπιτηδείων ἐνδεὴς ὤν, ἢ Κλεώνυμος ἐτελεύτησε θυγατέρας ἀπορουμένας καταλιπών, ἡμεῖς ἂν διὰ τὴν ἀγχιστείαν καὶ τὸν πάππον γηροτροφεῖν ἠναγκαζόμεθα καὶ τὰς Κλεωνύμου θυγατέρας ἢ λαβεῖν αὐτοὶ γυναῖκας ἢ προῖκα ἐπιδιδόντες ἑτέροις ἐκδιδόναι, καὶ ταῦθʼ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἡ συγγένεια καὶ οἱ νόμοι καὶ ἡ παρʼ ὑμῶν αἰσχύνη ποιεῖν ἠνάγκαζεν ἄν, ἢ ταῖς μεγίσταις ζημίαις καὶ τοῖς ἐσχάτοις ὀνείδεσι περιπεσεῖν·
If Polyarchus, the father of Cleonymus and our grandfather, were alive and lacked the necessities of life, or if Cleonymus had died leaving daughters unprovided for, we should have been obliged on grounds of affinity to support our grandfather, and either ourselves marry Cleonymus's daughters or else provide dowries and find other husbands for them—the claims of kinship, the laws, and public opinion in Athens would have forced us to do this or else become liable to heavy punishment and extreme disgrace—
§ 40
εἰ δʼ οὐσία κατελείφθη, δίκαιον ἡγήσεσθʼ εἶναι ταύτης ἑτέρους ἡμῶν μᾶλλον κληρονομεῖν; οὐκ ἄρα δίκαια οὐδʼ ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς συμφέροντα οὐδὲ τοῖς νόμοις ὁμολογούμενα ψηφιεῖσθε, εἰ τῶν μὲν συμφορῶν τοὺς ἐγγυτάτω γένει κοινωνεῖν ἀναγκάσετε, χρημάτων δὲ καταλειφθέντων πάντας ἀνθρώπους κυριωτέρους ἢ τούτους ποιήσετε.
but now that property has been left, will you regard it as just that others, rather than we, should inherit it? Your verdict, then, will not be just or in your own interest or in harmony with the law, if you are going to force those who are next of kin to share in the misfortunes of their relatives, but, when money has been left, give anyone rather than them the right to its possession.
§ 41
χρὴ δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ διὰ τὴν συγγένειαν καὶ διὰ τὴν τοῦ πράγματος ἀλήθειαν, ὅπερ ποιεῖτε, τοῖς κατὰ γένος ψηφίζεσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ τοῖς κατὰ διαθήκην ἀμφισβητοῦσι. τὴν μὲν γὰρ τοῦ γένους οἰκειότητα πάντες ἐπιστάμενοι τυγχάνετε, καὶ οὐχ οἷόν τε τοῦτʼ ἔστι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ψεύσασθαι· διαθήκας δʼ ἤδη πολλοὶ ψευδεῖς ἀπέφηναν, καὶ οἱ μὲν τὸ παράπαν οὐ γενομένας, ἐνίων δʼ οὐκ ὀρθῶς βεβουλευμένων.
It is only right, gentlemen, that you should—as indeed you do—give your verdicts on grounds of affinity and the true facts of the case in favor of those who claim by right of kinship rather than of those who rely on a will. For you all know what a family relationship is, and it is impossible to misrepresent it to you; on the other hand, false wills have often to be produced—sometimes complete forgeries, sometimes executed under a misapprehension.
§ 42
καὶ νῦν ὑμεῖς τὴν μὲν συγγένειαν καὶ τὴν οἰκειότητα τὴν ἡμετέραν, οἷς ἡμεῖς ἀγωνιζόμεθα, ἅπαντες ἐπίστασθε· τὰς δὲ διαθήκας, αἷς οὗτοι πιστεύοντες ἡμᾶς συκοφαντοῦσιν, οὐδεὶς ὑμῶν οἶδε κυρίας γενομένας. ἔπειτα τὴν μὲν ἡμετέραν συγγένειαν εὑρήσετε καὶ παρʼ αὐτῶν τῶν ἀντιδίκων ὁμολογουμένην, τὰς δὲ διαθήκας ὑφʼ ἡμῶν ἀμφισβητουμένας· οὗτοι γὰρ τὸ ἀνελεῖν αὐτὰς ἐκείνου βουλομένου διεκώλυσαν.
In the present case you are all aware of our kinship and close relations with the deceased, which are the basis of our claim; but none of you has any knowledge that the will was valid, in reliance upon which our opponents are scheming against us. Further, you will find that our relationship to the deceased is admitted even by our adversaries, whereas the will is contested by us, for they prevented him from annulling it when he wished to do so.
§ 43
ὥσθʼ ὑμῖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, πολὺ κάλλιόν ἐστι ψηφίσασθαι κατὰ τὸ γένος τὸ παρʼ ἀμφοτέρων ἡμῶν ὁμολογούμενον μᾶλλον ἢ κατὰ τὰς διαθήκας τὰς οὐ δικαίως γεγενημένας. πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἐνθυμήθητε ὅτι αὐτὰς ἔλυσε μὲν Κλεώνυμος εὖ φρονῶν, διέθετο δὲ ὀργισθεὶς καὶ οὐκ ὀρθῶς βουλευόμενος· ὥστε πάντων ἂν εἴη δεινότατον, εἰ κυριωτέραν αὐτοῦ τὴν ὀργὴν ἢ τὴν διάνοιαν ποιήσετε.
So, gentlemen, it is much better that you should give your verdict on the ground of our affinity, which is admitted by both sides, rather than in accordance with the will which was not properly drawn up. Remember also that Cleonymus made the will in a misguided moment of passion, but was in his right mind when he revoked it; it would, therefore, be an extraordinary proceeding to let his momentary passion prevail rather than his reasoned intention.
§ 44
οἶμαι δʼ ὑμᾶς καὶ λαμβάνειν παρὰ τούτων ἀξιοῦν καὶ μὴ τυγχάνοντας ἀγανακτεῖν, οἷς ἂν ὑπάρχῃ καὶ παρʼ ὑμῶν τῶν αὐτῶν τυχεῖν. εἰ τοίνυν συνέβη Κλεωνύμῳ μὲν ζῆν, ἐξερημωθῆναι δὲ τὸν ἡμέτερον οἶκον ἢ τὸν τούτων, σκέψασθε ποτέρων ἐκεῖνος ἐγίγνετο κληρονόμος· δίκαιον γάρ ἐστι τούτους ἔχειν τὰ ἐκείνου, παρʼ ὧν ὠφείλετο καὶ λαβεῖν αὐτῷ.
I think that you yourselves consider it your right to inherit—and feel a grievance if you do not do so—from those who have a claim to inherit from you. Supposing, therefore, that Cleonymus were alive and that our family or that of our opponents had become extinct, consider to which family Cleonymus had the prospect of becoming heir; for it is only fair that those should possess his property from whom he had a right to inherit.
§ 45
εἰ μὲν τοίνυν Φερένικος ἢ τῶν ἀδελφῶν τις ἐτελεύτησεν, οἱ παῖδες οἱ τούτων, οὐκ ἐκεῖνος ἐγίγνετο κύριος τῶν καταλειφθέντων· ἡμῶν δὲ τοιαύτῃ τύχῃ χρησαμένων Κλεώνυμος ἁπάντων ἐγίγνετο κληρονόμος. οὔτε γὰρ παῖδες ἡμῖν ἦσαν οὔτʼ ἄλλοι συγγενεῖς, ἀλλʼ ἐκεῖνος καὶ γένει προσήκων ἐγγυτάτω καὶ τῇ χρείᾳ πάντων ἦν οἰκειότατος·
If Pherenicus or one of his brothers had died, their children, and not Cleonymus, had the prospect of becoming entitled to the property which they left behind. If, on the other hand, such a fate had befallen us, Cleonymus had the prospect of becoming heir to everything; for we had no children or other relatives, but he was a next-of-kin and most closely bound to us by ties of affection;
§ 46
ὥστε διὰ ταῦτα καὶ οἱ νόμοι δεδώκασιν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἡμεῖς οὐδένʼ 〈ἂν〉 ἄλλον ἠξιώσαμεν ταύτης τῆς δωρεᾶς. οὐ γὰρ δήπου ζῶντες μὲν οὕτως ἂν ἐνεχειρίσαμεν αὐτῷ τὴν οὐσίαν, ὥστε περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων κυριωτέραν εἶναι τὴν ἐκείνου διάνοιαν τῆς ἡμετέρας αὐτῶν, ἀποθνῄσκοντες δὲ ἄλλους κληρονόμους ἐβουλήθημεν 〈εἶναι〉 αὐτῶν μᾶλλον ἢ τὸν πάντων οἰκειότατον.
for which reasons the laws have given him the right of succession, and we should never have thought of making this bequest to anyone else. For we should never, I imagine, have in our lifetime placed our property in his hands in such a way that his wishes prevailed over our own in the matter of what belonged to us, and yet, at our death, have wished others to inherit it rather than our closest friend.
§ 47
ὥσθʼ ἡμᾶς μὲν ἐν ἀμφοτέροις, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἐν τῷ δοῦναι καὶ ἐν τῷ λαβεῖν οἰκείους ὄντας εὑρήσετε, τούτους δὲ νῦν μὲν ἀναισχυντοῦντας καὶ τὴν οἰκειότητα καὶ τὴν ἀγχιστείαν λέγοντας, ὅτι λήψεσθαί τι προσδοκῶσιν· ἐν δὲ τῷ δοῦναι πολλοὺς ἂν καὶ συγγενεῖς καὶ φίλους ἐκείνου προείλοντο οἰκειοτέρους.
Thus, gentlemen, you will find us bound to Cleonymus by the double tie of mutual bequest and inheritance, while you will find my opponents acting impudently and talking of close connection and affinity, because they expect to profit thereby. If it were a question of giving anything away, there are many kinsmen and friends whom they would have preferred as nearer and dearer than him.
§ 48
κεφάλαιον δὲ τῶν εἰρημένων, ᾧ πάντας ὑμᾶς προσέχειν δεῖ τὸν νοῦν· 〈ἐν〉 ὅσῳ γὰρ ἂν ταῦτα λέγοντες ἀποφαίνωσι καὶ πειρῶνται πείθειν ὑμᾶς ὡς ἐκεῖνος διέθετο ταύτας τὰς διαθήκας καὶ οὐδὲ πώποτε ὕστερον αὐτῷ μετεμέλησε, 〈ἀλλὰ〉 καὶ νῦν ἐβούλετο ἡμᾶς μὲν μηδὲν τῶν αὑτοῦ λαβεῖν, σφίσι δʼ αὐτοῖς βεβαιῶσαι τὴν δωρεάν,
I will now sum up what I have said, and I beg the close attention of you all. As long as my opponents try by these arguments to prove and attempt to persuade you that this will represents Cleonymus's intentions, and that he never subsequently regretted having made it, but still wished us to receive none of his estate and to confirm the bequest to them—
§ 49
καὶ ταῦτα πάντα λέγοντες καὶ διισχυριζόμενοι μηδέτερον ἀποφαίνωσι μήθʼ, ὡς ἐγγυτέρω τῷ γένει προσήκουσι μήθʼ ὡς οἰκειότερον ἡμῶν πρὸς Κλεώνυμον διέκειντο, ὑμεῖς ἐνθυμεῖσθε ὅτι ἐκείνου κατηγοροῦσιν, ἀλλʼ οὐχ ὡς δίκαιόν ἐστι τὸ πρᾶγμα διδάσκουσιν ὑμᾶς.
yet, while stating and insisting on all these points, they never really prove either that they are nearer of kin to Cleonymus or that they were on terms of closer intimacy with him than we were—remember that they are merely accusing him and are not demonstrating to you the justice of their cause.
§ 50
ὥσθʼ ὑμεῖς ὅταν μὲν τοῖς τούτων λόγοις πιστεύητε, οὐ τούτους προσήκει ποιῆσαι τῶν ἐκείνου κληρονόμους, ἀλλὰ παράνοιαν Κλεωνύμου καταγιγνώσκειν, ὅταν δὲ τοῖς ἡμετέροις, ἐκεῖνόν τε νομίζειν ὀρθῶς βεβουλεῦσθαι λῦσαι τὰς διαθήκας βουλόμενον, ἡμᾶς τε μὴ συκοφαντεῖν ἀλλὰ δικαίως τούτων ἀμφισβητεῖν.
If, therefore, you believe what they say, you ought not to declare them heirs to Cleonymus's estate but to pronounce Cleonymus insane. If, on the other hand, you believe what we say, you must consider that Cleonymus exercised his proper judgement when he wished to revoke the will, and that we are not bringing a vexatious suit but are making a just claim to the inheritance.
§ 51
ἔπειτα, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἐνθυμεῖσθε ὅτι οὐχ οἷόν τε ὑμῖν ἐστι κατὰ τοὺς τούτων λόγους γνῶναι περὶ αὐτῶν. πάντων γὰρ ἂν εἴη δεινότατον, εἰ τῶν ἀντιδίκων γιγνωσκόντων ἡμᾶς δίκαιον εἶναι τὸ μέρος αὐτῶν λαβεῖν, ὑμεῖς ἅπαντʼ αὐτοὺς ἔχειν ψηφιεῖσθε, καὶ τούτους μὲν ἡγήσεσθε χρῆναι πλείω λαβεῖν ὧν αὐτοὶ σφᾶς αὐτοὺς ἠξίωσαν, ἡμᾶς δὲ μηδὲ τούτων ἀξιώσετε ὧν οἱ ἀντίδικοι συγχωροῦσιν ἡμῖν.
Lastly, gentlemen, remember that it is impossible for you to decide the matter on the basis of their arguments; for it would be extraordinary, when our adversaries decide that we are entitled in justice to part of the estate, if your verdict is to give them the whole of it, and if you shall hold that they ought to receive more than the amount to which they considered themselves entitled, while you do not award us even as much as our adversaries conceded.
On the Estate of Menecles · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg002 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Μενεκλέους κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg002.perseus-grc2 · English: On the Estate of Menecles — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg002.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Μενεκλέους ποιησαμένου υἱὸν καὶ ἐπιβιώσαντος τῇ ποιήσει εἴκοσι τρία ἔτη, ἀδελφῶν ἀμφισβητησάντων τοῦ κλήρου ἐμαρτύρησέ τις Φιλωνίδης μὴ εἶναι τὸν κλῆρον ἐπίδικον, καταλείψαντος υἱὸν Μενεκλέους. τούτῳ ἐπέσκηψαν ψευδομαρτυρίας οἱ ἀδελφοί, καὶ πρὸς τούτους ὁ παῖς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τὴν ἀπολογίαν εἰσέρχεται. ἔστι δὲ ὁ λόγος οὗτος ἐναντίος τῷ περὶ τοῦ Κλεωνύμου κλήρου· ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ ὑπὲρ συγγενείας εἶπεν, ὧδε δὲ ὑπὲρ διαθήκης. ἡ στάσις ἀντίληψις κατὰ στοχασμόν· λέγει γὰρ ὅτι ἐξῆν αὐτῷ ποιεῖν ἑαυτῷ υἱόν. εἶτα τὸ στοχαστικόν, ὅτι οὐ πεισθεὶς γυναικὶ ἐποιήσατό με.
Argument Menecles adopted a son and lived for twenty-three years after the date of the adoption. When his brothers claimed his estate, a certain Philonides attested that the estate was not adjudicable, because Menecles had left a son. The brothers then brought an action for perjury against Philonides, and it is against them that the son undertakes the defence of Philonides. The speech, which is in defence of a will, is the counterpart of that delivered “On the Estate of Cleonymus,” which upholds the rights of kindred. The discussion concerns a point of law with a controversy on a point of fact; for the speaker affirms that the deceased had the right to adopt a son, and then deals with the point of fact, saying, “It was not under the influence of a woman that he adopted me.”
§ 1
ἡγούμην μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἴ τις καὶ ἄλλος ἐποιήθη ὑπό τινος κατὰ τοὺς νόμους, καὶ ἐγὼ ποιηθῆναι, καὶ οὐκ ἄν ποτε εἰπεῖν οὐδένα τολμῆσαι ὡς ἐποιήσατό με Μενεκλῆς παρανοῶν ἢ γυναικὶ πειθόμενος· ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὁ θεῖος οὐκ ὀρθῶς βουλευόμενος, ὡς ἐγώ φημι, πειρᾶται ἐξ ἅπαντος τρόπου τὸν ἀδελφὸν τὸν αὑτοῦ ἄπαιδα τεθνεῶτα καταστῆσαι, οὔτε τοὺς θεοὺς τοὺς πατρῴους οὔθʼ ὑμῶν αἰσχυνόμενος οὐδένα, ἐμοὶ ἀνάγκη ἐστὶ πολλὴ βοηθεῖν τῷ τε πατρὶ τῷ ποιησαμένῳ με καὶ ἐμαυτῷ.
I think, gentlemen, that, if any adoption was ever made in accordance with the laws, mine was, and no one could ever dare to say that Menecles adopted me in a moment of insanity or under the influence of a woman. But since my uncle, acting, as I assert, under a misapprehension, is trying by every means in his power to deprive his dead brother of descendants, showing no respect for the gods of his family or for any of you, I feel constrained to come to the aid of the father who adopted me, and to my own aid.
§ 2
διδάξω οὖν ὑμᾶς ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὡς προσηκόντως τε καὶ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἐγένετο ἡ ποίησις, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐπίδικος ὁ κλῆρος ὁ Μενεκλέους ὄντος ἐμοῦ ὑοῦ ἐκείνου, ἀλλʼ ὁ μάρτυς διεμαρτύρησε τἀληθῆ. δέομαι δʼ ὑμῶν ἁπάντων καὶ ἀντιβολῶ καὶ ἱκετεύω μετʼ εὐνοίας ἀποδέχεσθαί μου τοὺς λόγους.
I intend, therefore, first to show you that my adoption was appropriate and legal, and that there is no question of adjudicating the estate of Menecles, since he had a son, namely, myself, and that the evidence of the witness was true. I beg and entreat and beseech you all to listen with favor to what I have to say.
§ 3
ἐπώνυμος γὰρ ὁ Ἀχαρνεύς, ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἡμέτερος, ὦ ἄνδρες, φίλος ἦν καὶ ἐπιτήδειος Μενεκλεῖ, καὶ ἐχρῆτο οἰκείως · ἦμεν δὲ αὐτῷ παῖδες τέτταρες ἡμεῖς, δύο μὲν ὑεῖς, δύο δὲ θυγατέρες. τελευτήσαντος δὲ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκδίδομεν ἡμεῖς τὴν πρεσβυτέραν ἀδελφήν, ἐπειδὴ εἶχεν ὥραν, Λευκολόφῳ, προῖκα ἐπιδόντες εἴκοσι μνᾶς.
My father, gentlemen, Eponymus of Acharnae, was a friend and close acquaintance of Menecles and lived on terms of intimacy with him; there were four of us children, two sons and two daughters. After my father's death we married our elder sister, when she reached a suitable age, to Leucolophus, giving her a dowry of twenty minae.
§ 4
καὶ ἀπʼ ἐκείνου τοῦ χρόνου τετάρτῳ ἔτει ἢ πέμπτῳ ὕστερον ἥ τε ἀδελφὴ ἡμῖν ἡ νεωτέρα σχεδὸν ἡλικίαν εἶχεν ἀνδρὶ συνοικεῖν, καὶ τῷ Μενεκλεῖ ἡ γυνὴ τελευτᾷ ἣν εἶχε πρότερον. ἐπειδὴ οὖν ἐκείνῃ τὰ νομιζόμενα ἐποίησεν ὁ Μενεκλῆς, ᾔτει τὴν ἀδελφὴν ἡμᾶς, ὑπομιμνήσκων τήν τε φιλίαν τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ ὡς πρὸς ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς ἦν διακείμενος·
Four or five years later, when our younger sister was almost of marriageable age, Menecles lost his first wife. When he had carried out the customary rites over her, he asked for our sister in marriage, reminding us of the friendship which had existed between our father and himself and of his friendly disposition towards ourselves.
§ 5
καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰδότες ὅτι καὶ ὁ πατὴρ οὐδενὶ ἂν ἔδωκεν ἥδιον ἢ ἐκείνῳ, δίδομεν αὐτῷ, οὐκ ἄπροικον, ὡς οὗτος λέγει ἑκάστοτε, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἴσην προῖκα ἐπιδόντες ἥνπερ καὶ τῇ πρεσβυτέρᾳ ἀδελφῇ ἐπέδομεν· καὶ ἐκ τοῦ τρόπου τούτου, πρότερον ὄντες αὐτοῦ φίλοι, κατέστημεν οἰκεῖοι. καὶ ὡς ἔλαβεν εἴκοσι μνᾶς ὁ Μενεκλῆς ἐπὶ τῇ ἀδελφῇ προῖκα, τὴν μαρτυρίαν ταύτην πρῶτον βούλομαι παρασχέσθαι.
Knowing that our father would have given her to no one with greater pleasure, we gave her to him in marriage—not dowerless, as my opponent asserts on every possible occasion, but with the same portion as we gave to our elder sister. In this manner, having been formerly his friends, we became his kinsmen. I should like first to produce evidence that Menecles received a dowry of twenty minae with my sister.
§ 6
Μαρτυρία ἐκδόντες τοίνυν τὰς ἀδελφάς, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ὄντες αὐτοὶ ἐν ἡλικίᾳ ἐπὶ τὸ στρατεύεσθαι ἐτραπόμεθα, καὶ ἀπεδημήσαμεν μετὰ Ἰφικράτους εἰς Θρᾴκην· ἐκεῖ δὲ δόξαντές του εἶναι ἄξιοι περιποιησάμενοί τι κατεπλεύσαμεν δεῦρο, καὶ καταλαμβάνομεν τῇ πρεσβυτέρᾳ ἀδελφῇ ὄντα δύο παιδία, τὴν δὲ νεωτέραν, ἣν εἶχε Μενεκλῆς, ἄπαιδα.
Evidence Having thus settled our sisters, gentlemen, and, being ourselves of military age, we adopted the career of a soldier and went abroad with Iphicrates to Thrace. Having proved our worth there, we returned hither after saving a little money and we found that our elder sister had two children, but that the younger, the wife of Menecles, was childless.
§ 7
καὶ ἐκεῖνος δευτέρῳ μηνὶ ἢ τρίτῳ, πολλὰ ἐπαινέσας τὴν ἀδελφήν, λόγους ἐποιεῖτο πρὸς ἡμᾶς, καὶ ἔφη τήν τε ἡλικίαν ὑφορᾶσθαι τὴν ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τὴν ἀπαιδίαν· οὔκουν ἔφη δεῖν ἐκείνην τῆς χρηστότητος τῆς ἑαυτῆς τοῦτο ἀπολαῦσαι, ἄπαιδα καταστῆναι συγκαταγηράσασαν αὑτῷ· ἱκανὸς γὰρ ἔφη αὐτὸς ἀτυχῶν εἶναι.
Two or three months later Menecles, with many expressions of praise for our sister, approached us and said that he viewed with apprehension his increasing age and childlessness: she ought not, he said, to be rewarded for her virtues by having to grow old with him without bearing children;
§ 8
[καὶ ἐκ ταύτης τῆς λέξεως δῆλον ὅτι φιλῶν ἀπεβάλετο· οὐδεὶς γὰρ μισῶν τινα ἱκετεύει αὐτῷ.] ἐδεῖτο οὖν ἡμῶν δοῦναι χάριν ταύτην αὑτῷ, ἐκδοῦναι ἄλλῳ αὐτὴν μετὰ τῆς γνώμης τῆς ἑαυτοῦ. καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐκελεύομεν αὐτὸν πείθειν αὐτὴν περὶ τούτων· ὅ τι γὰρ 〈ἂν〉 ἐκείνη πεισθῇ, τοῦτʼ ἔφαμεν ποιήσειν.
it was enough that he himself was unfortunate. [His words clearly prove that he loved her when he put her away; for no one utters supplications for one whom he hates.] He, therefore, begged us to do him the favor of marrying her to someone else with his consent. We told him that it was for him to persuade her in the matter, for we would do whatever she agreed.
§ 9
κἀκείνη τὸ μὲν πρῶτον οὐδʼ ἠνέσχετʼ αὐτοῦ λέγοντος, προιόντος δὲ τοῦ χρόνου μόλις ἐπείσθη· καὶ οὕτως ἐκδίδομεν αὐτὴν Ἠλείῳ Σφηττίῳ, καὶ ὁ Μενεκλῆς τήν τε προῖκα ἐπιδίδωσιν αὐτῷ, μετασχὼν τοῦ οἴκου τῆς μισθώσεως τῶν παίδων τῶν Νικίου, καὶ τὰ ἱμάτια, ἃ ἦλθεν ἔχουσα παρʼ ἐκεῖνον, καὶ τὰ χρυσίδια, ἃ ἦν, δίδωσιν αὐτῇ.
At first she would not even listen to his suggestion, but in course of time she with difficulty consented. So we gave her in marriage to Elius of Sphettus, and Menecles handed over her dowry to him—for he had become part-lessee of the estate of the children of Nicias—and he gave her the garments which she had brought with her to his house and the jewelry which there was.
§ 10
μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα χρόνου διαγενομένου ἐσκόπει ὁ Μενεκλῆς ὅπως μὴ ἔσοιτο ἄπαις, ἀλλʼ ἔσοιτο αὐτῷ ὅς τις ζῶντά γηροτροφήσοι καὶ τελευτήσαντα θάψοι αὐτὸν καὶ εἰς τὸν ἔπειτα χρόνον τὰ νομιζόμενα αὐτῷ ποιήσοι. τούτῳ μὲν οὖν ἑώρα ἕνα μόνον ὑὸν ὄντα, ὥστε ἐδόκει αὐτῷ αἰσχρὸν εἶναι ἄπαιδα τοῦτον καθιστάντα ἀρρένων παίδων αὑτῷ κελεύειν δοῦναι τοῦτον εἰσποιήσασθαι.
Some time after this Menecles began to consider how he could put an end to his childless condition and have someone to tend his old age and bury him when he died and thereafter carry out the customary rites over him. He saw that my opponent had only one son; so he thought it wrong to ask him to give him his son to adopt and so deprive him of male offspring.
§ 11
εὕρισκεν οὖν οὐδένα ἄλλον οἰκειότερον ὄνθʼ ἡμῶν ἑαυτῷ. λόγους οὖν πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἐποιεῖτο, καὶ ἔφη δοκεῖν αὑτῷ καλῶς ἔχειν, ἐπειδὴ οὕτως αὐτῷ ἡ τύχη συνέβη ὥστε ἐκ τῆς ἀδελφῆς τῆς ἡμετέρας παῖδας αὐτῷ μὴ γενέσθαι, ἐκ ταύτης τῆς οἰκίας ὑὸν αὑτῷ ποιήσασθαι, ὅθεν καὶ φύσει παῖδας ἐβουλήθη ἂν αὑτῷ γενέσθαι· “ὑμῶν οὖν” ἔφη “βούλομαι τὸν ἕτερον ποιήσασθαι, ὁποτέρῳ ὑμῶν καλῶς ἔχει.”
Thus he could find no nearer relative than us; he, therefore, approached us and said that he thought it right, since fate had decreed that he should have no children by our sister, that he should adopt a son out of the family from which he would have wished to have a son of his own in the course of nature; “I should like, therefore,” he said,“to adopt one of you two, whichever is willing.”
§ 12
καὶ ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἀκούσας ταῦτα [ἐπειδὴ προετίμησεν αὐτοὺς πάντων], ἐπῄνεσέ τε τοὺς λόγους αὐτοῦ, καὶ εἶπεν ὅτι δέοιτο ἥ τε ἡλικία καὶ ἡ παροῦσα ἐρημία ἐκείνου τοῦ θεραπεύσοντος αὐτὸν καὶ ἐπιδημήσοντος· “ἐμοὶ μὲν οὖν” ἔφη “συμβαίνει ἀποδημία, ὡς σὺ οἶσθα· ὁ δὲ ἀδελφὸς οὑτοσί” ἐμὲ λέγων “τῶν τε σῶν ἐπιμελήσεται καὶ τῶν ἐμῶν, ἐὰν βούλῃ τοῦτον ποιήσασθαι.” καὶ ὁ Μενεκλῆς καλῶς ἔφη αὐτὸν λέγειν, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ τρόπου τούτου ποιεῖταί με.
My brother, on hearing this, expressed his approval of Menecles' proposal and agreed that his age and solitary condition required someone who would look after him, and remain at home; “I,” he said, “as you know, go abroad; but my brother here” (meaning me) “will look after your affairs as well as mine, if you wish to adopt him.” Menecles approved of his suggestion and thus adopted me.
§ 13
ὡς οὖν κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἐγένετο ἡ ποίησις, τοῦτο ὑμᾶς βούλομαι διδάξαι. καὶ μοι τὸν νόμον ἀνάγνωθι, ὃς κελεύει τὰ ἑαυτοῦ ἐξεῖναι διαθέσθαι ὅπως ἂν ἐθέλῃ, ἐὰν μὴ παῖδες ἄρρενες ὦσι· γνήσιοι. ὁ γὰρ νομοθέτης, ὦ ἄνδρες, διὰ τοῦτο τὸν νόμον ἔθηκεν οὕτως, ὁρῶν μόνην ταύτην καταφυγὴν οὖσαν τῆς ἐρημίας καὶ παραψυχὴν τοῦ βίου τοῖς ἄπαισι τῶν ἀνθρώπων, τὸ ἐξεῖναι ποιήσασθαι ὅν τινα ἂν βούλωνται.
I wish next to prove to you that the adoption was carried out in the proper legal manner. So please read me the law which ordains that a man can dispose as he likes of his own property, if he does not possess male issue of his own. The law-giver, gentlemen, legislated thus, because he saw that for childless persons the only refuge for their solitary condition, and the only possible comfort in life, lay in the possibility of adopting whomsoever they wished.
§ 14
διδόντων οὖν τῶν νόμων αὐτῷ ποιεῖσθαι διὰ τὸ εἶναι ἄπαιδα, ἐμὲ ποιεῖται, οὐκ ἐν διαθήκαις, ὦ ἄνδρες, γράψας, μέλλων ἀποθνήσκειν, ὥσπερ ἄλλοι τινὲς τῶν πολιτῶν, οὐδʼ ἀσθενῶν· ἀλλʼ ὑγιαίνων, εὖ φρονῶν, εὖ νοῶν, ποιησάμενος εἰσάγει με εἰς τοὺς φράτορας παρόντων τούτων, καὶ εἰς τοὺς δημότας με ἐγγράφει καὶ εἰς τοὺς ὀργεῶνας.
The law thus allowing Menecles, because he was childless, to adopt a son, he adopted me, not by a will made at the point of death, as other citizens have done, nor during illness; but when he was sound in body and mind, and fully aware of what he was doing, he adopted me and introduced me to his fellow-wardsmen in the presence of my opponents and enrolled me among the demesmen and the members of his confraternity.
§ 15
καὶ τότε μὲν οὐδὲν ἀντέλεγον αὐτῷ οὗτοι ὡς 〈οὐκ〉 εὖ φρονοῦντι· καίτοι πολὺ κάλλιον ἦν ζῶντα πείθειν ἐκεῖνον, εἴ τι βούλοιντο, μᾶλλον ἢ τελευτήσαντα ὑβρίζειν καὶ ἐξερημοῦν αὐτοῦ τὸν οἶκον. ἐπεβίω γὰρ ἐκεῖνος μετὰ τὴν ποίησιν οὐκ ἐνιαυτὸν ἕνα ἢ δύο, ἀλλὰ τρία καὶ εἴκοσιν ἔτη· καὶ ἐν τούτῳ τῷ χρόνῳ, τοσούτῳ ὄντι, οὐδὲν ἐκεῖνος μετέγνω τῶν πεπραγμένων ἑαυτῷ, διὰ τὸ παρὰ πάντων ὁμολογεῖσθαι ὅτι ἦν ὀρθῶς βεβουλευμένος.
At the time my opponents raised no objection to his action on the ground that he was not in his right mind, although it would have been much better to have tried to win him over to their point of view during his lifetime rather than insult him now that he is dead and try to desolate his house. For he lived on after the adoption, not one or two years, but twenty-three, and during all this period he never regretted what he had done, because it was universally acknowledged that he had been well advised in what he did.
§ 16
καὶ ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω ταῦτα, τῆς μὲν ποιήσεως ὑμῖν τοὺς φράτορας καὶ τοὺς ὀργεῶνας καὶ τοὺς δημότας παρέξομαι μάρτυρας, ὡς δʼ ἐξῆν ποιήσασθαι, τὸν νόμον αὐτὸν ὑμῖν ἀναγνώσεται, καθʼ ὃν ἡ ποίησις ἐγένετο. καί μοι τὰς μαρτυρίας ἀνάγνωθι ταύτας καὶ τὸν νόμον.
To prove the truth of these statements, I will produce before you, as witnesses, the wardsmen, the members of the confraternity, and the demesmen, and, to prove that Menecles was at liberty to adopt me, the clerk of the court shall read you the text of the law in accordance with which the adoption was made. Please read these depositions and the law.
§ 17
Μαρτυρίαι Νόμος ὡς μὲν τοίνυν ἐξῆν τῷ Μενεκλεῖ ποιήσασθαι ὑὸν αὑτῷ ὅν τινα ἐβούλετο, ὁ νόμος αὐτὸς δηλοῖ· ὡς δὲ ἐποιήσατο, οἵ τε φράτορες καὶ οἱ δημόται καὶ οἱ ὀργεῶνες ὑμῖν μεμαρτυρήκασιν· ὥστε περιφανῶς ἀποδέδεικται ἡμῖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὁ μάρτυς τἀληθῆ διαμεμαρτυρηκώς, καὶ οὗτοι πρός γε τὴν ποίησιν αὐτὴν λόγον οὐδʼ ὁντινοῦν δύναιντʼ ἂν ἀντειπεῖν.
Depositions. Laws. The law itself makes it clear that Menecles was free to adopt anyone he liked as his son; that he did adopt a son, the wardsmen, the demesmen, and the members of the confraternity have provided evidence. Thus we have clearly proved it, gentlemen, the witness has attested the truth of it, and my opponents cannot say a word against the actual fact of the adoption.
§ 18
πραχθέντων δὲ τούτων ἐσκόπει ὁ Μενεκλῆς γυναῖκά μοι, καὶ ἔφη με χρῆναι γῆμαι· καὶ ἐγὼ λαμβάνω τὴν τοῦ Φιλωνίδου θυγατέρα. κἀκεῖνός τε τὴν πρόνοιαν εἶχεν ὥσπερ εἰκός ἐστι πατέρα περὶ ὑέος ἔχειν, καὶ ἐγὼ τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ὥσπερ γόνῳ ὄντα πατέρα ἐμαυτοῦ ἐθεράπευόν τε καὶ ᾐσχυνόμην, καὶ ἐγὼ καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἡ ἐμή, ὥστε ἐκεῖνον πρὸς τοὺς δημότας ἐπαινεῖν ἅπαντας.
After this, Menecles began to look about for a wife for me, and said I ought to marry. So I married the daughter of Philonides. Menecles exercised the forethought on my behalf which a father would naturally exercise for his son, and I tended him and respected him as though he were my true father, as also did my wife, so that he praised us to all his fellow-demesmen.
§ 19
ὅτι δὲ οὐ παρανοῶν οὐδὲ γυναικὶ πειθόμενος ὁ Μενεκλῆς ἐποιήσατο, ἀλλʼ εὖ φρονῶν, ἐνθένδε ἐστὶν ὑμῖν ῥᾴδιον ἐπιγνῶναι. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ ἡ ἀδελφή, περὶ ἧς οὗτος τὸν πλεῖστον τοῦ λόγου πεποίηται, ὡς ἐκείνῃ πεισθεὶς ἐμὲ ἐποιήσατο, πολλῷ πρότερον ἦν ἐκδεδομένη ἢ τὴν ποίησιν γενέσθαι, ὥστʼ εἴ γʼ ἐκείνῃ πεισθεὶς τὸν ὑὸν ἐποιεῖτο, τῶν ἐκείνης παίδων τὸν ἕτερον ἐποιήσατʼ ἄν· δύο γάρ εἰσιν αὐτῇ.
That Menecles was not insane or under the influence of a woman but in his right mind when he adopted me, you can easily understand from the following facts. In the first place, my sister, with whom most of my opponent's argument has been concerned, and under whose influence he alleges that Menecles adopted me, had remarried long before the adoption took place, so that, if it had been under her influence that he was adopting his son, he would have adopted one of her boys; for she has two.
§ 20
ἀλλʼ, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐχ ὑπʼ ἐκείνης πεισθεὶς ἐμὲ ἐποιήσατο ὑόν, ἀλλὰ μάλιστα μὲν ὑπὸ τῆς ἐρημίας [ἐπείσθη], δεύτερον δὲ διὰ τὰς προειρημένας αἰτίας καὶ διὰ τὴν εὔνοιαν τὴν ὑπάρχουσαν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα τὸν ἐμόν, τρίτον δὲ διὰ τὸ μὴ εἶναι συγγενῆ μηδένʼ ἄλλον αὐτῷ, ὁπόθεν ἂν ἐποιήσατο ὑόν. ταῦτα τηνικαῦτα ἐνῆγεν ἐμὲ ποιήσασθαι· ὥστε οὐ παραφρονῶν φαίνεται οὐδὲ τῇ γυναικὶ πεισθείς, εἰ μὴ ἄρα τὴν ἐρημίαν αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν ἀπαιδίαν οὗτος βούλεται τὸ ὄνομα τοῦτο προσαγορεύειν.
But, gentlemen, it was not under her influence that he adopted me as his son; his chief motive was his loneliness, and, secondly, the other causes I have mentioned, and the goodwill which he felt towards my father, and, thirdly, because he had no other relative from whose family he might have adopted a son. These were the motives which at the time induced him to adopt me; so that it is quite clear that he was not insane or under the influence of a woman, unless, indeed, my opponent wishes to describe his loneliness and childlessness in these terms.
§ 21
ἡδέως δʼ ἄν μοι δοκῶ τούτου πυθέσθαι τοῦ φάσκοντος εὖ φρονεῖν, τίνα ποιήσασθαι ἐχρῆν [ἀπὸ] τῶν συγγενῶν; πότερα τὸν ὑὸν τὸν τούτου; ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἔδωκεν, ἄπαιδα αὑτὸν καθιστάς· οὐχ οὕτως οὗτός ἐστι φιλοχρήματος. ἀλλὰ τὸν τῆς ἀδελφῆς ἢ τὸν τῆς ἀνεψιᾶς ἢ τὸν τοῦ ἀνεψιοῦ; ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀρχὴν οὐκ ἐγένετο αὐτῷ οὐδεὶς τούτων τῶν συγγενῶν.
I feel that I should like my opponent, who thinks himself so wise, to tell me whom of his relatives Menecles ought to have adopted? Ought he to have adopted my opponent's son? But he would never have given him up and so rendered himself childless; he is not so avaricious as all that. Well then, the son of his sister or of his male or female cousin? But he had no such relative at all.
§ 22
οὐκοῦν ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἦν αὐτῷ ἄλλον τινὰ ποιήσασθαι μᾶλλον ἢ ἄπαιδα καταγηρᾶν, ὥσπερ οὗτος ἀξιοῖ νυνὶ αὐτόν. ἐγὼ τοίνυν πάντας [ἀνθρώπους] ἂν οἶμαι ὁμολογῆσαι ὑμᾶς ὡς οὐκ ἂν ποιησάμενος ἄλλον οἰκειότερον ἐμοῦ ἐποιήσατʼ ἄν. δειξάτω γὰρ οὗτος ὑμῖν. ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἄν ποτε δύναιτο· ἦν γὰρ οὐδεὶς ἄλλος συγγενὴς αὐτῷ πλὴν τούτων.
He was, therefore, obliged to adopt someone else, or, failing that, grow old in childlessness, as my opponent now thinks he ought to have done. I think, therefore, that you would all admit that, when he adopted a son, he could not have adopted anyone who was more closely connected with him than I was. Otherwise, let my opponent indicate such a person. He cannot possibly do so; for he had no other kinsman than those whom I have mentioned.
§ 23
ἀλλὰ νῦν οὗτος ἐπιτιμῶν αὐτῷ φαίνεται οὐχ ὅτι τὸν ὑὸν οὐκ ἐποιήσατο τὸν αὑτοῦ, ἀλλʼ ὅτι τὸ παράπαν ἐποιήσατο καὶ οὐκ ἐτελεύτησεν ἄπαις. τοῦτʼ ἔστιν ὃ ἐπιτιμᾷ, ἐπίφθονον πρᾶγμα καὶ οὐ δίκαιον ποιῶν· ὄντων γὰρ αὐτῷ παίδων ἐκείνῳ ὄντι ἄπαιδι καὶ ἀτυχοῦντι φαίνεται ἐπιτιμῶν.
But my opponent is now clearly blaming Menecles not for failing to adopt his own son but for adopting any son at all and not dying childless. It is for this that he blames him, a proceeding which is as spiteful as it is unjust; for while he has children of his own, he is obviously blaming Menecles for being childless and unfortunate.
§ 24
καὶ τοῖς μὲν ἄλλοις ἅπασιν ἀνθρώποις καὶ Ἕλλησι καὶ βαρβάροις δοκεῖ καλῶς οὗτος ὁ νόμος κεῖσθαι, ὁ περὶ τῆς ποιήσεως, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο χρῶνται πάντες αὐτῷ· ὁ δὲ θεῖος οὑτοσὶ οὐκ αἰσχύνεται τὸν αὑτοῦ ἀδελφὸν ταύτης τῆς ἐξουσίας ἀποστερῶν νῦν, τοῦ ποιήσασθαι, ἧς οὐδὲ τοῖς οὐ γένει προσήκουσιν οὐδεὶς πώποτε ἐφθόνησεν.
All other men, whether Greek or barbarians, regard this law about adoption as a good one and therefore all make use of it; but my uncle here is not ashamed to deprive his own brother of this right to adopt a son, the enjoyment of which no one has ever grudged even those who were no relatives at all.
§ 25
οἶμαι δὲ κἂν τοῦτον, εἴ τις ἐρωτήσειεν αὐτὸν τί δή ποτʼ ἂν ἐποίησεν εἰς τὴν αὐτὴν τύχην ἐκείνῳ καταστάς, οὐκ ἄλλʼ οὐδὲν εἰπεῖν ἢ ὅτι ἐποιήσατʼ ἂν ὅς τις αὐτὸν ἔμελλε ζῶντα θεραπεύσειν καὶ τελευτήσαντα θάψειν· καὶ δῆλον ὅτι κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν τοῦτον νόμον ἡ ποίησις ἐγένετʼ ἄν, καθʼ ὅν περ ἡ ἐμή. εἶτα αὐτὸς μὲν εἰ ἦν ἄπαις, ἐποιήσατʼ ἄν· τὸν δὲ Μενεκλέα ποιήσαντα ταὐτὰ τούτῳ παραφρονεῖν φησι καὶ γυναικὶ πειθόμενον ποιήσασθαι.
I think that my opponent, if anyone were to ask him what he would have done in the same circumstances as Menecles, would have nothing to say except that he would have adopted someone who was likely to look after him while he lived and bury him when he died; and it is obvious that the adoption would have been carried out under the same law as mine was. He himself, then, if he had been childless, would have adopted a son; but when Menecles acts in the same manner, he declares that he was insane and under the influence of a woman when he adopted me.
§ 26
πῶς οὖν οὐ σχέτλια λέγων φαίνεται; ἐγὼ γὰρ οἶμαι πολλῷ μᾶλλον τοῦτον παραφρονεῖν τῷ τε λόγῳ τούτῳ ᾧ νυνὶ λέγει, καὶ οἷς πολιεῖ. τοῖς τε γὰρ νόμοις καὶ 〈τοῖς〉 δικαίοις καὶ οἷς αὐτὸς ἐποίησεν ἂν τἀναντία λέγων φαίνεται, καὶ οὐκ αἰσχύνεται μὲν αὑτῷ τὸν νόμον τὸν περὶ τῆς ποιήσεως ποιῶν κύριον, τῷ δὲ ἀδελφῷ τὸν αὐτὸν τοῦτον ζητῶν ἄκυρον ποιῆσαι.
Is it not clear that he is talking in an abominable manner? I am of opinion that it is much rather my opponent who is insane by reason of the line of argument which he employs and the things which he does. For he is clearly arguing the contrary of the laws and of justice and of what he himself would have done, and is not ashamed of making the law about adoption valid for himself, while he seeks to render this same law of no effect for his brother.
§ 27
εἶτα νῦν διὰ τί διαφερόμενος ζητεῖ οὗτος τὸν ἀδελφὸν τὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἄπαιδα καταστῆσαι, ἄξιόν ἐστιν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἀκοῦσαι. εἰ μὲν γὰρ περὶ τοῦ ὀνόματός μοι διαφέρεται καὶ ἀναίνεται, εἰ ἐγὼ ἔσομαι ὑὸς Μενεκλέους, πῶς οὐ φθονερός ἐστιν; εἰ δὲ περὶ χρημάτων ἐστὶν ὁ λόγος αὐτῷ, ἐπιδειξάτω ὑμῖν ὁποῖον χωρίον ἢ συνοικίαν ἢ οἰκίαν κατέλιπεν ἐκεῖνος, ἃ ἐγὼ ἔχω νυνί. εἰ δὲ μηδὲν τούτων κατέλιπεν, ἃ δʼ ἦν αὐτῷ ὑπόλοιπα, ἐπειδὴ τῷ ὀρφανῷ τὸ ἀργύριον ἀπέδωκεν, οὗτος ἔλαβε ζῶντος ἐκείνου ἔτι, πῶς οὐ περιφανῶς ἐξελέγχεται ἀναιδὴς ὤν;
Next, it is right, gentlemen, that you should hear what cause of quarrel my opponent has that he seeks to make his own brother childless. For if he has any quarrel with me about my name, and repudiates the suggestion that I am to be called Menecles' son, is he not the victim of mean jealousy? But if it is a question of money with him, let him point out to you what land or building or house Menecles left behind of which I am now in possession. But if he left no such property, but my opponent took from him in his lifetime all that remained after he had paid off the money due to the orphan, is he not clearly convicted of shameless conduct?
§ 28
ὡς δὲ ἔχει, ἐγὼ ἐπιδείξω. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔδει τῷ ὀρφανῷ τὰ χρήματα ἀποδιδόναι, ὁ δʼ οὐκ εἶχεν ὁπόθεν ἀποδῷ, τόκοι δὲ πολλοῦ χρόνου συνερρυηκότες ἦσαν αὐτῷ τὸ χωρίον ἐπώλεί καὶ οὗτος καιροῦ λαβόμενος καὶ βουλόμενος αὐτῷ ἐπηρεάζειν, ὅτι ἐμὲ ἐποιήσατο, διεκώλυε τὸ χωρίον πραθῆναι, ἵνα κατοκώχιμον γένηται καὶ ἀναγκασθῇ τῷ ὀρφανῷ ἀποστῆναι. ἠμφισβήτει οὖν αὐτῷ μέρους τινὸς τοῦ χωρίου, πρότερον οὐδὲ πώποτε ἀμφισβητήσας, καὶ ἀπηγόρευε τοῖς ὠνουμένοις μὴ ὠνεῖσθαι.
I will put the facts of the case before you. When it became necessary to pay back the money to the orphan, and Menecles did not possess the requisite sum, and interest had accumulated against him over a long period, he was for selling the land. My opponent, seizing the opportunity and being desirous to pick a quarrel with him because he had adopted me, tried to prevent the land from being sold, in order that it might be held as a pledge, and that Menecles might be obliged to cede the possession of it to the orphan. My opponent, therefore, claimed a part of the property from Menecles, though he had never previously made any such claim, and tried to prevent the purchasers from completing the purchase.
§ 29
κἀκεῖνος ἠγανάκτει, οἶμαι, καὶ ἠναγκάζετο ὑπολείπεσθαι οὗ ἠμφισβήτησεν οὗτος. τὸ δὲ ἄλλο ἀποδίδοται Φιλίππῳ τῷ Πιθεῖ ἑβδομήκοντα μνῶν, καὶ οὕτω διαλύει τὸν ὀρφανόν, ἑπτὰ μνᾶς καὶ τάλαντον ἀποδοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ χωρίου· τούτῳ δὲ λαγχάνει δίκην τῆς ἀπορρήσεως. λόγων δὲ πολλῶν γενομένων καὶ ἔχθρας πολλῆς ἔδοξεν ἡμῖν χρῆναι, ἵνα μή ποτε εἴπῃ τις ἐμὲ φιλοχρηματεῖν καὶ ἐχθροὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὄντας αὐτοὺς καθιστάναι, ἐπιτρέψαι τῷ τε κηδεστῇ τῷ τούτου καὶ τοῖς φίλοις διαιτῆσαι.
Menecles was annoyed, as I can well imagine, and was obliged to reserve the portion which my opponent claimed; the rest he sold to Philippus of Pithos for seventy minae and thus paid off the orphan, giving him one talent and seven minae out of the price of the property; and he brought an action against his brother for restraining the sale. After long discussion had taken place and much bad feeling been aroused, we thought it best, in order that no one might say that I was avaricious and that I was setting these men, who were brothers, against one another, to submit the matter to the arbitration of my opponent's brother-in-law and our friends.
§ 30
ἐκεῖνοι δʼ εἶπον ἡμῖν, εἰ μὲν ἐπιτρέποιμεν αὐτοῖς ὥστε τὰ δίκαια δίκαια διαγνῶναι, οὐκ ἂν ἔφασαν διαιτῆσαι· οὐδὲν γὰρ δεῖσθαι ἀπέχθεσθαι οὐδετέροις ἡμῶν· εἰ δʼ ἐάσομεν αὐτοὺς γνῶναι τὰ συμφέροντα πᾶσιν, ἔφασαν διαιτήσειν. καὶ ἡμεῖς, ἵνα δὴ πραγμάτων ἀπαλλαγῶμεν, ὥς γε δὴ ᾠόμεθα,
The latter told us that, if we were to entrust them to decide the rights of the case, they would refuse to act as arbitrators, for they did not wish to quarrel with either party; if, however, we would allow them to decide what was in the interest of all, they consented to act. So we, in order, as we thought, to get rid of the matter, entrusted the decision to them on these terms.
§ 31
καὶ ἐκεῖνοι ὀμόσαντες ἡμῖν πρὸς τῷ βωμῷ τῷ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης τῆς Κεφαλῆσι τὰ συμφέροντα γνώσεσθαι, διῄτησαν ἡμᾶς ἀποστῆναι ὧν οὗτος ἠμφισβήτησε καὶ δοῦναι δωρεάν· οὐ γὰρ ἔφασαν εἶναι ἄλλην ἀπαλλαγὴν οὐδεμίαν, εἰ μὴ μεταλήψονται οὗτοι τῶν ἐκείνου.
They, after having sworn an oath to us at the altar of Aphrodite at Cephale that they would decide what was to our common interest, gave as their verdict that we should give up what my opponent claimed and hand it over to him as a free gift; for they declared that the only way of settling the matter was that my opponent should receive a share of Menecles' property.
§ 32
ἐκ δὲ τοῦ λοιποῦ χρόνου ἔγνωσαν ἡμᾶς εὖ ποιεῖν ἀλλήλους καὶ λόγῳ καὶ ἔργῳ, καὶ ταῦτα ὀμόσαι ἠνάγκασαν ἡμᾶς ἀμφοτέρους πρὸς τῷ βωμῷ ἦ μὴν ποιήσειν. καὶ ἡμεῖς ὠμόσαμεν εὖ ποιεῖν ἀλλήλους ἐκ τοῦ ἐπιλοίπου χρόνου, κατὰ δύναμιν εἶναι, καὶ λόγῳ καὶ ἔργῳ.
They decided that for the future we must behave in a proper manner towards one another, both in word and in deed, and they obliged both parties to swear at the altar that they would do so; so we swore that we would in future behave properly towards one another both in word and in deed, as far as lay within our power.
§ 33
καὶ ὡς ὅ τε ὅρκος ἐγένετο, καὶ ἔχουσιν οὗτοι ἃ ἐγνώσθη αὐτοῖς ὑπὸ τῶν οἰκείων τῶν τούτου, εἶτα νυνὶ ταυτὶ τὰ ἀγαθὰ ποιοῦσιν ἡμᾶς, τὸν μὲν τεθνεῶτα ἄπαιδα βουλόμενοι καταστῆσαι, ἐμὲ δʼ ἐκβάλλειν ὑβρίσαντες ἐκ τοῦ οἴκου, τοὺς γνόντας αὐτοὺς ὑμῖν παρέξομαι μάρτυρας, ἐὰν ἐθέλωσιν ἀναβαίνειν (εἰσὶ γὰρ τούτων οἰκεῖοι), εἰ δὲ μή, τοὺς παραγενομένους.
That the oath was sworn and that these men are in possession of the property which was awarded to them by my opponent's friends and that their notion of behaving well towards us is this, to try and make the deceased childless and drive me forth with insult from his family—of all this I will produce before you as witnesses the very men who gave the decision, if they are willing to appear (for they are my opponent's friends), but, if not, those who were present on the occasion.
§ 34
καί μοι τὰς μαρτυρίας ἀνάγνωθι ταυτασί· σὺ δʼ ἐπίλαβε τὸ ὕδωρ. Μαρτυρίαι λαβὲ δή μοι τὰς μαρτυρίας ἐκείνας, ὡς τό τε χωρίον ἑβδομήκοντα μνῶν ἐπράθη, καὶ ὡς ἀπέλαβεν ὁ ὀρφανὸς ἑπτὰ καὶ ἐξήκοντα μνᾶς πραθέντος τοῦ χωρίου.
Please read these depositions; and, you, turn off the water-clock. Evidence Now, please, take these depositions to the effect that the land was sold for seventy minae and that the orphan received sixty-seven minae from the proceeds.
§ 35
Μαρτυρίαι ὁ θεῖος τοίνυν οὑτοσί, ὦ ἄνδρες, κεκληρονομηκὼς τῶν ἐκείνου ἔργῳ καὶ οὐ λόγῳ ὥσπερ ἐγώ, καὶ ἔχων ἐμοῦ πολλῷ πλείονα· ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰς τριακοσίας δραχμὰς ἔλαβον τὰς περιλειφθείσας ἀπὸ τῆς τιμῆς τοῦ χωρίου, καὶ οἰκίδιον ὅ ἐστιν οὐκ ἄξιον τριῶν μνῶν· οὗτος δὲ πλεῖον ἢ δέκα μνῶν χωρίον ἔχων, εἶτα προσέτι νῦν ἥκει τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ ἐξερημώσων.
Evidence Thus it is my uncle here, gentlemen, who has inherited the property of Menecles—really and not merely nominally, as I have—and has a much larger share than I have; for I received only the three hundred drachmae which remained over out of the proceeds of the sale and a small house not worth three minae. My opponent, on the other hand, being in possession of land worth more than ten minae, has now, moreover, come into court with the object of rendering desolate the house of the deceased.
§ 36
καὶ ἐγὼ μὲν ὁ ποιητὸς ἐκεῖνόν τε ζῶντα ἐθεράπευον, καὶ αὐτὸς καὶ ἐμὴ γυνή, θυγάτηρ οὖσα τουτουὶ Φιλωνίδου, καὶ τῷ ἐμῷ παιδίῳ ἐθέμην τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ἐκείνου, ἵνα μὴ ἀνώνυμος ὁ οἶκος αὐτοῦ γένηται, καὶ τελευτήσαντα ἔθαψα ἀξίως ἐκείνου τε καὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, καὶ ἐπίθημα καλὸν ἐπέθηκα, καὶ τὰ ἔνατα καὶ τἆλλα πάντα ἐποίησα τὰ περὶ τὴν ταφὴν ὡς οἷόν τε κάλλιστα, ὥστε τοὺς δημότας ἐπαινεῖν ἅπαντας·
I, the adopted son, with the aid of my wife, the daughter of Philonides here, tended Menecles while he lived and gave his name to my little son, in order that his family might not lack a representative. On his death, I buried him in a manner befitting both him and myself, and I erected a fine monument to him and celebrated the commemorative ceremony on the ninth day and performed all the other rites at the tomb in the best manner possible, so that I won the praise of all the members of my deme.
§ 37
οὗτος δὲ ὁ συγγενής, ὁ ἐπιτιμῶν αὐτῷ ὅτι ὑὸν ἐποιήσατο, ζῶντος μὲν τὸ χωρίον τὸ περιλειφθὲν αὐτῷ περιείλετο, τελευτήσαντα δʼ αὐτὸν ἄπαιδα καὶ ἀνώνυμον βούλεται καταστῆσαι. τοιοῦτός ἐστιν οὗτος. καὶ ὡς ἔθαψά τʼ ἐγὼ αὐτὸν καὶ τὰ τρίτα καὶ τὰ ἔνατα ἐποίησα καὶ τἆλλα τὰ περὶ τὴν ταφήν, τὰς μαρτυρίας ὑμῖν τῶν εἰδότων ἀναγνώσεται.
But my opponent, his kinsman, who blames him for having adopted a son, during his lifetime deprived him of the landed property which remained to him, and, now that he is dead, wishes to render him childless and wipe out his very name; that is the kind of man he is. In proof that I buried Menecles and performed the ceremonies on the third and ninth days and all the other rites connected with the burial, the clerk shall read you the depositions of those who are acquainted with the facts.
§ 38
Μαρτυρίαι ὅτι τοίνυν ὁ Μενεκλῆς, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἐποιήσατό με οὐ παρανοῶν οὐδὲ γυναικὶ πειθόμενος, βούλομαι ὑμῖν καὶ αὐτοὺς τούτους μάρτυρας παρασχέσθαι, [καὶ] ἐμοὶ μαρτυροῦντας ἔργῳ καὶ οὐ λόγῳ, ἐξ ὧν ἔπραξαν αὐτοί, ὅτι ἐγὼ τἀληθῆ λέγω. τὰς γὰρ διαλύσεις φαίνονται πρὸς ἐμὲ ποιησάμενοι ἀμφότεροι οὗτοι, καὶ οὐ πρὸς τὸν Μενεκλέα, καὶ ὀμόσαντες ὅρκους 〈ἐμοὶ〉 καὶ ἐγὼ τούτοις.
Evidence In support of the truth of my assertion, gentlemen, that Menecles, when he adopted me, was not insane or under the influence of a woman, I wish to bring before you my opponents themselves as witnesses, not in word but in deed, by their own conduct. For it is notorious that both of them went through the process of reconciliation with me and not with Menecles, and swore an oath to me, as I did to them.
§ 39
καίτοι εἴ γε μὴ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἐγεγένητο ἡ ποίησις, μηδὲ κληρονόμος ἦν ἐγὼ τῶν Μενεκλέους ὑπʼ αὐτῶν τούτων δεδοκιμασμένος, τί ἔδει αὐτοὺς ὀμνύναι ἐμοὶ ἢ παρʼ ἐμοῦ λαμβάνειν ὅρκους; οὐδὲν δήπου. οὐκοῦν ὁπότε ἐποίησαν ταῦτα, φαίνονται αὐτοὶ οὗτοι ἐμοὶ μαρτυροῦντες ὅτι κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἐποιήθην [ἡ ποίησις] καὶ δικαίως εἰμὶ κληρονόμος τῶν Μενεκλέους.
Yet if the adoption had not been carried out in proper legal form and I had not been recognized as heir to Menecles' property by my opponents themselves, what need was there for them to swear to me and to receive an oath from me? Surely none. By so acting then they themselves clearly bear witness that I was legally adopted and am the rightful heir of Menecles.
§ 40
ἐγὼ δʼ οἶμαι καταφανὲς ὑμῖν ἅπασι τοῦτʼ εἶναι, ὡς καὶ παρὰ τούτων αὐτῶν ὁμολογούμενόν ἐστιν ὅτι Μενεκλῆς οὐ παρεφρόνει, ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον οὗτος νυνί, ὅς γε ποιησάμενος τῆς ἔχθρας διάλυσιν πρὸς ἡμᾶς καὶ ὀμόσας ὅρκους πάλιν νῦν ἥκει τὰ ὁμολογηθέντα καὶ ὀμοθέντα παραβάς, καὶ ἀφελέσθαι με ἀξιοῖ ταυτὶ τὰ λοιπά, οὕτως ὄντα μικρά.
It is clear, I think, to you all that it was acknowledged even by my opponents themselves that Menecles was not insane but that it is much rather my opponent who is insane now, seeing that, after having effected a settlement of his quarrel with us and having sworn oaths, he has now again come forward in violation of his acknowledgements and oaths, and demands that I shall be deprived of these poor remnants of the estate.
§ 41
ἐγὼ δὲ εἰ μὴ πάνυ τὸ πρᾶγμα αἰσχρὸν εἶναι ἐνόμιζον καὶ ἐπονείδιστον, προδοῦναι τὸν πατέρα οὗ εἶναι ὠνομάσθην καὶ ὃς ἐποιήσατό με, ταχὺ ἂν ἀπέστην αὐτῷ τῶν ἐκείνου· ἔστι γὰρ ὑπόλοιπον οὐδὲ ἕν, ὡς καὶ ὑμᾶς οἴομαι αἰσθάνεσθαι.
Were it not that I think it an altogether base and shameful act to betray him whose son was called and who adopted me, I would have readily abandoned the right of succession to his estate in favor of my opponent; for there is nothing at all left, as I think you realize.
§ 42
νυνὶ δὲ δεινὸν τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ αἰσχρὸν εἶναι τῇδε νομίζω, εἰ ἡνίκα μὲν ὁ Μενεκλῆς εἶχέ τι, τότε μὲν ἔδωκα ἐμαυτὸν ὑὸν αὐτῷ ποιήσασθαι, καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς οὐσίας τῆς ἐκείνου, πρὶν πραθῆναι τὸ χωρίον, ἐγυμνασιάρχουν ἐν τῷ δήμῳ καὶ ἐφιλοτιμήθην ὡς ὑὸς ὢν ἐκείνου, καὶ τὰς στρατείας, ὅσαι ἐγένοντο ἐν τῷ χρόνῳ τούτῳ, ἐστράτευμαι ἐν τῇ φυλῇ τῇ ἐκείνου καὶ ἐν τῷ δήμῳ·
But, in the circumstances, I consider it terrible and disgraceful that, when Menecles possessed property, I accepted adoption as his son and out of his property, before the land was sold, acted as gymnasiarch in his deme and won credit as his son, and served in his tribe and deme on all the campaigns which took place during that period;
§ 43
ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐκεῖνος ἐτελεύτησεν, εἰ προδώσω καὶ ἐξερημώσας αὐτοῦ τὸν οἶκον ἀπιὼν οἰχήσομαι, πῶς οὐκ ἂν δεινὸν τὸ πρᾶγμα εἶναι καὶ καταγέλαστον δοκοίη, καὶ τοῖς βουλομένοις περὶ ἐμοῦ βλασφημεῖν πολλὴν ἐξουσίαν παράσχοι ; καὶ οὐ μόνον ταῦτʼ ἐστὶ τὰ ποιοῦντά με ἀγωνίζεσθαι τὸν ἀγῶνα τοῦτον, ἀλλʼ εἰ οὕτω φαῦλος ἄνθρωπος δοκῶ εἶναι καὶ μηδενὸς ἄξιος, ὥστε ὑπὸ μὲν εὖ φρονοῦντος μηδʼ ὑφʼ ἑνὸς ἂν ποιηθῆναι τῶν φίλων, ὑπὸ δὲ παραφρονοῦντος, ταῦτʼ ἐστὶ τὰ λυποῦντά με.
and, now that he is dead, if I shall betray him and go off leaving his house desolate, would it not seem a strange and ridiculous proceeding, and give those who wish to do so a good occasion to speak evil of me? And these are not the only motives which induce me to fight this case; but what grieves me is the possibility of being thought so worthless and good-for-nothing as not to be able to find a friend in his right senses, but only a madman, to adopt me.
§ 44
ἐγὼ οὖν δέομαι ὑμῶν πάντων, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἀντιβολῶ καὶ ἱκετεύω ἐλεῆσαί με καὶ ἀποψηφίσασθαι τοῦ μάρτυρος τουτουί. ἀπέφηνα δʼ ὑμῖν πρῶτον μὲν ποιηθέντα ἐμαυτὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ Μενεκλέους ὡς ἄν τις δικαιότατα ποιηθείη, καὶ οὐ λόγῳ οὐδὲ διαθήκῃ τὴν ποίησιν γεγενημένην, ἀλλʼ ἔργῳ· καὶ τούτων ὑμῖν τούς τε φράτορας καὶ τοὺς δημότας καὶ τοὺς ὀργεῶνας παρεσχόμην μάρτυρας·
I beg you all therefore, gentlemen, and beseech and entreat you to pity me and to acquit the witness here. I have shown you that, in the first place, I was adopted by Menecles with the strictest possible legality, and that the form of adoption was not merely verbal or by will but by very act and deed; and of these things I produced before you the evidence of the wardsmen, the demesmen, and the members of the confraternity.
§ 45
καὶ ἐκεῖνον ἐπέδειξα τρία καὶ εἴκοσιν ἐπιβιόντα ἔτη. εἶτα τοὺς νόμους ἐπέδειξα ὑμῖν τοῖς ἄπαισι τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐξουσίαν διδόντας ὑεῖς ποιεῖσθαι. καὶ ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις ζῶντα τε φαίνομαι θεραπεύων αὐτὸν καὶ τελευτήσαντα θάψας.
I further showed that Menecles lived for twenty-three years after he had adopted me. Further, I placed before you the laws which permit those who are childless to adopt sons. In addition to this I am shown to have tended him in his lifetime and to have buried him when he died.
§ 46
οὗτος δὲ νυνὶ ἄκληρον μὲν ἐμὲ ποιεῖν τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ πατρῴου, εἴτε μείζων ἐστὶν οὗτος εἴτε ἐλάττων, ἄπαιδα δὲ τὸν τελευτήσαντα καὶ ἀνώνυμον βούλεται καταστῆσαι, ἵνα μήτε τὰ ἱερὰ τὰ πατρῷα ὑπὲρ ἐκείνου μηδεὶς τιμᾷ μήτʼ ἐναγίζῃ αὐτῷ καθʼ ἕκαστον ἐνιαυτόν, ἀλλὰ ἀφαιρῆται τὰς τιμὰς τὰς ἐκείνου· ἃ προνοηθεὶς ὁ Μενεκλῆς, κύριος ὢν τῶν ἑαυτοῦ, ἐποιήσατο ὑὸν ἑαυτῷ, ἵνα τούτων ἁπάντων τυγχάνῃ.
My opponent wishes now to deprive me of my father's estate, whether it be large or small, and to render the deceased childless and nameless, so that there may be no one to honor in his place the family cults and perform for him the annual rites, but that he may be robbed of all his due honors. It was to provide against this that Menecles, being master of his own property, adopted a son, so that he might secure all these advantages.
§ 47
μὴ οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, πεισθέντες ὑπὸ τούτων ἀφέλησθέ μου τὸ ὄνομα, τῆς κληρονομίας ὃ ἔτι μόνον λοιπόν ἐστιν, ἄκυρον δὲ τὴν ποίησιν αὐτοῦ καταστήσητε · ἀλλʼ ἐπειδὴ τὸ πρᾶγμα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἀφῖκται καὶ ὑμεῖς κύριοι γεγόνατε, βοηθήσατε καὶ ἡμῖν καὶ ἐκείνῳ τῷ ἐν Ἅιδου ὄντι, καὶ μὴ περιίδητε, πρὸς θεῶν καὶ δαιμόνων δέομαι ὑμῶν, προπηλακισθέντα αὐτὸν ὑπὸ τούτων, ἀλλὰ μεμνημένοι τοῦ νόμου καὶ τοῦ ὅρκου ὃν ὀμωμόκατε καὶ τῶν εἰρημένων ὑπὲρ τοῦ πράγματος, τὰ δίκαια καὶ τὰ εὔορκα κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ψηφίσασθε.
Do not therefore, gentlemen, listen to my opponents and deprive me of my name, the sole remnant of my inheritance, and annul Menecles' adoption of me; but since the matter has come before you for judgement and you have the sovereign right of decision, come to the aid both of us and of him who is in the other world, and do not allow Menecles, by the gods and deities I beseech you, to be insulted by my opponents, but mindful of the law and of the oath which you have sworn and of the arguments which have been used in support of my plea, pass in accordance with the laws the verdict which is just and in conformity with your oath.
On The Estate Of Pyrrhus · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg003 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Πύρρου κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg003.perseus-grc2 · English: On The Estate Of Pyrrhus — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg003.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Πύρρου τὸν ἕτερον 〈τῶν〉 τῆς ἀδελφῆς υἱῶν υἱοποιησαμένου Ἔνδιον, καὶ τούτου πλέον ἢ εἴκοσιν ἔτη τὸν κλῆρον κατασχόντος, εἶτα ἀποθανόντος, Ξενοκλῆς λαχὼν τῶν χρημάτων ὑπὲρ Φίλης, τῆς ἑαυτοῦ γυναικός, διεμαρτύρησεν εἶναι αὐτὴν γνησίαν Πύρρου θυγατέρα, ἀμφισβητούσης τοῦ κλήρου τῆς Ἐνδίου μητρός· καὶ ἑάλω ψευδομαρτυριῶν, Νικοδήμου καὶ αὐτοῦ μαρτυρήσαντος ἐγγυῆσαι Πύρρῳ τὴν ἀδελφὴν κατὰ τοὺς νόμους, ἐξ ἧς γεγονέναι τὴν Φίλην. ὁ Ἐνδίου δὲ ἀδελφὸς νόθην εἶναί φησιν, ἐξ ἑταίρας Πύρρῳ γενομένην, καὶ οὕτως ὑπὸ Ἐνδίου ἐκδοθῆναι Ξενοκλεῖ. ἡ στάσις στοχασμός, τὸ δὲ ἔγκλημα ψευδομαρτυριῶν κατὰ τοῦ Νικοδήμου.
Argument Pyrrhus had adopted one of his sister's two sons, Endius, who enjoyed the estate for more than twenty years and then died. Xenocles then sued for the property in the name of Phile, his wife, and declared upon oath that she was a legitimate daughter of Pyrrhus, the succession being claimed by Endius's mother. Xenocles was convicted of perjury. Nicodemus had also borne witness that he had given his daughter in legal marriage to Pyrrhus and that Phile was her child. The brother of Endius declares that while Phile is illegitimate, having been the child of Pyrrhus by a mistress, and that she was given as such in marriage to Xenocles. The question at issue is one of fact, and the action a charge of perjury against Nicodemus.
§ 1
ἄνδρες δικασταί, ὁ ἀδελφὸς τῆς μητρὸς τῆς ἐμῆς Πύρρος, ἄπαις ὢν γνησίων παίδων, ἐποιήσατο Ἔνδιον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τὸν ἐμὸν ὑὸν ἑαυτῷ· ὃς κληρονόμος ὢν τῶν ἐκείνου ἐπεβίω πλείω ἔτη ἢ εἴκοσι, καὶ ἐν χρόνῳ τοσούτῳ ἔχοντος ἐκείνου τὸν κλῆρον οὐδεὶς πώποτε προσεποιήσατο οὐδʼ ἠμφισβήτησε τῆς κληρονομίας ἐκείνῳ.
Judges, my mother's brother, Pyrrhus, having no legitimate issue, adopted my brother Endius as his son. The latter inherited his estate and survived him by more than twenty years; and during all this long period of possession no one claimed the estate or questioned his right of inheritance.
§ 2
τελευτήσαντος δὲ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ πέρυσιν, ὑπερβᾶσα τὸν τελευταῖον κληρονόμον, γνησία θυγάτηρ τοῦ ἡμετέρου θείου ἥκει φάσκουσα εἶναι Φίλη, καὶ κύριος Ξενοκλῆς Κόπρειος τοῦ Πύρρου κλήρου λαχεῖν τὴν λῆξιν ἠξίωσεν, ὃς τετελεύτηκε πλείω ἢ εἴκοσιν ἔτη, τρία τάλαντα τίμημα τῷ κλήρῳ ἐπιγραψάμενος.
My brother having died last year, Phile, ignoring the existence of the last tenant, came forward, claiming to be the legitimate daughter of our uncle, and Xenocles of Coprus, as her legal representative, demanded to be given possession of the estate of Pyrrhus, who had died more than twenty years before, having fixed the value of the estate at three talents.
§ 3
ἀμφισβητούσης δὲ τῆς μητρὸς τῆς ἡμετέρας, ἀδελφῆς δὲ τοῦ Πύρρου, ὁ κύριος τῆς εἰληχυίας τοῦ κλήρου γυναικὸς ἐτόλμησε διαμαρτυρῆσαι μὴ ἐπίδικον τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ μητρὶ τὸν τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ κλῆρον εἶναι, ὡς οὔσης γνησίας θυγατρὸς Πύρρῳ, οὗ ἦν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὁ κλῆρος. ἐπισκηψάμενοι δὲ ἡμεῖς, καὶ εἰς ὑμᾶς εἰσαγαγόντες τὸν διαμαρτυρῆσαι τολμήσαντα [κατὰ] ταῦτα,
When our mother, the sister of Pyrrhus, claimed the estate, the legal representative of the woman who was suing for the estate had the audacity to put in a protestation that the estate was not adjudicable to our mother, because Pyrrhus, to whom it originally belonged, had a legitimate daughter. We denounced his protestation and brought before you the man who had the audacity to make it;
§ 4
ἐκεῖνόν τε ἐξελέγξαντες περιφανῶς τὰ ψευδῆ μεμαρτυρηκότα τὴν τῶν ψευδομαρτυρίων δίκην εἵλομεν παρʼ ὑμῖν, καὶ τουτονὶ Νικόδημον παραχρῆμα ἐξηλέγξαμεν ἐν τοῖς αὐτοῖς δικασταῖς ἀναισχυντότατον τῇ μαρτυρίᾳ ὄντα ταύτῃ, ὅς γε ἐτόλμησε μαρτυρῆσαι ἐγγυῆσαι τῷ θείῳ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ τὴν ἀδελφὴν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα εἶναι κατὰ τοὺς νόμους.
and, having clearly convicted him of having given false evidence, we obtained from you a verdict for perjury against him. At the same time we convicted Nicodemus, the present defendant, before the same judges, of the most shameless lying in the evidence which he then gave, since he had the impudence to bear witness that he had given his sister in marriage to our uncle in the proper legal manner.
§ 5
ὅτι μὲν οὖν καὶ ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ δίκῃ ἡ τούτου μαρτυρία ψευδὴς ἔδοξεν εἶναι, ὁ τόθʼ ἑαλωκὼς μάρτυς σαφέστατα τοῦτον ἐξελέγχει. εἰ γὰρ μὴ ἐδόκει οὗτος τὰ ψευδῆ τότε μαρτυρῆσαι, δῆλον ὅτι ἐκεῖνός τʼ ἂν ἀποφυγὼν τὴν διαμαρτυρίαν ἀπῆλθε, καὶ κληρονόμος ἂν τῶν τοῦ θείου ἡ διαμαρτυρηθεῖσα γνησία θυγάτηρ εἶναι, ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἂν ἡ ἡμετέρα κατέστη μήτηρ.
That in the former trial Nicodemus's evidence was recognized as being false, the condemnation of the witness on that occasion most clearly proves. For if the present defendant had not been recognized as having given false evidence, the other witness would have been acquitted in the suit about the protestation, and the woman whom the protestation affirmed to be my uncle's legitimate daughter would have been established as his heiress instead of our mother.
§ 6
ἁλόντος δὲ τοῦ μάρτυρος καὶ ἀποστάσης τοῦ κλήρου τῆς ἀμφισβητούσης σβητούσης γνησίας θυγατρὸς Πύρρῳ εἶναι, μεγάλη ἀνάγκη ἅμα καὶ τὴν τούτου μαρτυρίαν ἑαλωκέναι· περὶ γὰρ αὐτοῦ τούτου διαμαρτυρήσας τὴν τῶν ψευδομαρτυρίων δίκην ἠγωνίζετο, πότερον ἐξ ἐγγυητῆς ἢ ἐξ ἑταίρας ἡ ἀμφισβητοῦσα τοῦ κλήρου τῷ θείῳ [γυναικὸς] εἴη· γνώσεσθε 〈δʼ〉 ἀκούσαντες καὶ ὑμεῖς τῆς τε ἀντωμοσίας τῆς ἡμετέρας καὶ τῆς τούτου μαρτυρίας καὶ τῆς ἁλούσης διαμαρτυρίας.
But since the witness was convicted and the woman who claimed to be Pyrrhus's legitimate daughter abandoned her pretensions to the estate, it follows by absolute necessity that Nicodemus's evidence has been also condemned; for, having solemnly sworn to the truth of the same proposition, he was a party to the action for perjury which was to decide whether the woman who claimed my uncle's estate was the issue of a legitimate wife or of a mistress. You, too, will realize that this is so when you have heard our affidavit, the evidence of Nicodemus, and the protestation which was overruled.
§ 7
ἀναγίγνωσκε λαβὼν τασδὶ αὐτοῖς. Ἀντωμοσία Μαρτυρία Διαμαρτυρία ὡς μὲν ἔδοξε παραχρῆμα εὐθὺς τότε 〈πᾶσι〉 τὰ ψευδῆ μαρτυρῆσαι Νικόδημος ἐπιδέδεικται [τότε πᾶσι]· προσήκει δὲ καὶ παρʼ ὑμῖν τοῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου τὴν δίκην μέλλουσι ψηφιεῖσθαι ἐξελεγχθῆναι τὴν τούτου μαρτυρίαν.
Please take and read these documents to the court. Affidavits Evidence Protestation It has now been shown that it was immediately apparent to all at the time that Nicodemus committed perjury; but it is proper that the falsity of his evidence should be proved before you also who are about to give your verdict on this very issue.
§ 8
ἐπιθυμῶ δὲ πρῶτον μὲν [περὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου] πυθέσθαι, ἥν τινά ποτε προῖκά φησιν ἐπιδοὺς ἐκδοῦναι τὴν ἀδελφὴν ὁ μεμαρτυρηκὼς τῷ τὸν τριτάλαντον οἶκον κεκτημένῳ, εἶτα πότερον ἡ ἐγγυητὴ γυνὴ ἀπέλιπε τὸν ἄνδρα ζῶντα ἢ τελευτήσαντος τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ, καὶ παρʼ ὅτου ἐκομίσατο τὴν τῆς ἀδελφῆς προῖκα οὗτος, ἐπειδὴ τετελευτηκὼς ἦν ᾧ μεμαρτύρηκεν οὗτος αὐτὴν ἐγγυῆσαι,
But I desire first to ask some questions. He has deposed that he married his sister to a man who possessed a fortune of three talents; what dowry does he allege that he gave with her? Next, did this wedded wife leave her husband during his lifetime or quit his house after his death? And from whom did the defendant recover his sister's dowry after the death of him to whom he has deposed that he gave her in marriage?
§ 9
ἢ εἰ μὴ ἐκομίζετο, ὁποίαν δίκην σίτου ἢ τῆς προικὸς αὐτῆς ἐν εἴκοσιν ἔτεσι τῷ ἔχοντι τὸν κλῆρον δικάσασθαι ἠξίωσεν, ἢ εἴ του ἀνθρώπων ἐναντίον προσῆλθεν ἐγκαλῶν τῷ κληρονόμῳ περὶ τῆς προικὸς τῆς ἀδελφῆς ἐν χρόνῳ τοσούτῳ. περί τε οὖν τούτων ἡδέως ἂν πυθοίμην, ὅ τι ποτʼ ἦν τὸ αἴτιον τοῦ μηδὲν τούτων γεγενῆσθαι περὶ τῆς ἐγγυητῆς (ὡς μεμαρτύρηκεν οὗτος) γυναικός,
Or, if he did not recover it, what action did he think fit to institute to obtain her maintenance or the restitution of her dowry against the man who was for twenty years the tenant of the estate? Or did he ever, during all that long period, go and make any claim upon the heir regarding his sister's dowry in the presence of any witness? I should be glad to learn what was the reason why none of these steps has been taken in favor of a woman, who, according to the defendant's evidence, was legally married.
§ 10
καὶ πρὸς τούτοις εἴ τις ἄλλος ἐγγυητὴν ἔσχε τὴν τούτου ἀδελφὴν γυναῖκα, ἢ τῶν πρότερον χρησαμένων πρὶν γνῶναι τὸν ἡμέτερον θεῖον αὐτήν, ἢ ὅσοι ἐκείνου γιγνώσκοντος ἐπλησίαζον αὐτῇ, ἢ ὅσοι ὕστερον ἐπλησίαζον τετελευτηκότος ἐκείνου· δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτὴν ἅπασι τοῖς πλησιάζουσιν ἐκδέδωκεν.
Furthermore, has anyone else taken this man's sister in legal marriage, either of those who had dealings with her before she knew our uncle, or of those who associated with her during his acquaintance with her, or of those who did so after his decease? For it is clear that her brother has given her in marriage on the same terms to all those associated with her.
§ 11
περὶ ὧν εἰ δεήσειε καθʼ ἕκαστον διελθεῖν, οὐκ ἂν πάνυ μικρὸν ἔργον γένοιτο. ἐὰν μὲν οὖν ὑμεῖς κελεύητε, περὶ ἐνίων μνησθείην ἂν αὐτῶν· εἰ δέ τισιν ὑμῶν ἀηδὲς ἀκούειν ἐστίν, ὥσπερ ἐμοὶ λέγειν τι περὶ τούτων, αὐτὰς τὰς μαρτυρίας ὑμῖν παρέξομαι τὰς μαρτυρηθείσας ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ δίκῃ, ὧν οὐδεμιᾷ ἐπισκήψασθαι ἠξίωσαν οὗτοι. καίτοι ὅπου κοινὴν αὐτοὶ ὡμολογήκασιν εἶναι τοῦ βουλομένου τὴν γυναῖκα, πῶς ἂν εἰκότως ἡ αὐτὴ γυνὴ ἐγγυητὴ δόξειεν εἶναι;
If it were necessary to enumerate all these persons one by one, it would amount to no small a task. If you bid me do so, I would mention some of them; but if it is as unpleasant to some of you to hear as it is to me to mention such matters, I will content myself with producing the actual depositions made at the previous trial, none of which they thought fit to contest. Yet when once they have themselves admitted that the woman was at the disposal of anyone who wished to take her, how can it be reasonably conceived that she was also a wedded wife?
§ 12
ἀλλὰ μὴν ὁπότε μὴ ἐπεσκημμένοι εἰσὶ ταῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου μαρτυρίαις, ὡμολογηκότες εἰσὶ ταῦτα. ἀκούσαντες δὲ καὶ ὑμεῖς αὐτῶν τῶν μαρτυριῶν, γνώσεσθε ὡς οὗτός τε περιφανῶς τὰ ψευδῆ μεμαρτύρηκε, καὶ ὀρθῶς καὶ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους οἱ δικάσαντες τὴν δίκην ἔγνωσαν τὴν κληρονομίαν μὴ προσήκειν τῇ μὴ ὀρθῶς γεγενημένῃ γυναικί. ἀναγίγνωσκε. σὺ δʼ ἐπίλαβε τὸ ὕδωρ.
And indeed, since they have never impeached the evidence on this very point, they have in fact admitted all this. You, too, when you have heard the actual depositions, will understand that the defendant has obviously borne false witness, and that those who judged the case gave a proper and a legal sentence when they decided that the estate could not pass to a woman of irregular birth. Read the depositions; and you, please stop the water-clock.
§ 13
Μαρτυρία〈ι〉 ὡς μὲν ἑταίρα ἦν τῷ βουλομένῳ καὶ οὐ γυνὴ τοῦ ἡμετέρου θείου, ἣν οὗτος ἐγγυῆσαι ἐκείνῳ μεμαρτύρηκεν, ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων οἰκείων καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν γειτόνων τῶν ἐκείνου μεμαρτύρηται πρὸς ὑμᾶς· οἳ μάχας καὶ κώμους καὶ ἀσέλγειαν πολλήν, ὁπότε ἡ τούτου ἀδελφὴ εἴη παρʼ αὐτῷ, μεμαρτυρήκασι γίγνεσθαι περὶ αὐτῆς.
Depositions That the woman, whom the defendant has deposed that he gave in legal marriage to our uncle, was a courtesan who gave herself to anyone and not his wife, has been testified to you by the other acquaintances and by the neighbors of Pyrrhus, who have given evidence of quarrels, serenades, and frequent scenes of disorder which the defendant's sister occasioned whenever she was at Pyrrhus's house.
§ 14
καίτοι οὐ δή πού γε ἐπὶ γαμετὰς γυναῖκας οὐδεὶς ἂν κωμάζειν τολμήσειεν· οὐδὲ αἱ γαμεταὶ γυναῖκες ἔρχονται μετὰ τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐπὶ τὰ δεῖπνα, οὐδὲ συνδειπνεῖν ἀξιοῦσι μετὰ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων, καὶ ταῦτα μετὰ τῶν ἐπιτυχόντων. ἀλλὰ μὴν τῶν γε μεμαρτυρηκότων οὐδενὶ ἐπισκήψασθαι οὗτοι ἠξίωσαν. καὶ ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, ἀναγίγνωσκε πάλιν αὐτοῖς τὴν μαρτυρίαν.
Yet no one, I presume, would dare to serenade a married woman, nor do married women accompany their husbands to banquets or think of feasting in the company of strangers, especially mere chance comers. Yet, our adversaries did not think fit to make any protest against the evidence of any of those who testified to these things. And to prove that what I say is true, read the deposition to them again.
§ 15
Μαρτυρία ἀνάγνωθι δὴ καὶ τὰς περὶ τῶν πλησιασάντων αὐτῇ μαρτυρίας, ἵνα εἰδῶσιν ὅτι ἑταίρα τε ἦν τοῦ βουλομένου, καὶ ὅτι οὐδʼ ἐξ ἑνὸς ἄλλου φαίνεται τεκοῦσα. ἀναγίγνωσκε αὐτοῖς.
Deposition Now read the depositions about those who associated with her, so that the judge may realize that she was a courtesan at anyone's disposal and that she certainly never bore a child to any other man.
§ 16
Μαρτυρία〈ι〉 ὡς μὲν τοίνυν ἦν κοινὴ τῷ βουλομένῳ, ἣν οὗτος ἐγγυῆσαι τῷ ἡμετέρῳ θείῳ μεμαρτύρηκε, μνημονεύειν χρὴ ὑφʼ ὅσων ὑμῖν μεμαρτύρηται, καὶ ὅτι οὐδενὶ ἄλλῳ ἐγγυηθεῖσα οὐδὲ συνοικήσασα φαίνεται· σκεψώμεθα δὲ καὶ ἐξ ὧν ἄν τις ὑπονοήσειεν ἐγγύην γενέσθαι τοιαύτης γυναικός, εἰ ἄρα καὶ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ θείῳ τοιοῦτόν τι συμβέβηκεν.
Depositions I beg you then to bear in mind the number of persons who have given evidence that this woman, whom the defendant has deposed that he gave in marriage to our uncle, was common to all who wished to associate with her, and that she obviously was never married to or lived permanently with anyone else. Let us next consider the circumstances in which it might be conceived that a marriage with such a woman might take place, supposing that such a thing really did happen to our uncle;
§ 17
ἤδη γάρ τινες νέοι ἄνθρωποι ἐπιθυμήσαντες τοιούτων γυναικῶν, καὶ ἀκρατῶς ἔχοντες αὑτῶν, ἐπείσθησαν ὑπʼ ἀνοίας εἰς αὑτοὺς τοιοῦτόν τι ἐξαμαρτεῖν. πόθεν οὖν ἄν τις σαφέστερον γνοίη περὶ τούτων, ἢ ἔκ τε τῶν μαρτυριῶν τῶν τούτοις μεμαρτυρημένων ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ δίκῃ καὶ ἐκ τῶν εἰκότων τῶν περὶ αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα σκεψάμενος;
for young men before now, having fallen in love with such women and, being unable to control their passion, have been induced by folly to ruin themselves in this way. How then can one obtain a clearer knowledge as to what happened than by a consideration of the evidence submitted in favor of our opponents in the former trial and the probabilities of the case itself?
§ 18
ἐνθυμεῖσθε δὲ τὴν ἀναίδειαν ὧν λέγουσιν. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἐγγυᾶν μέλλων εἰς τὸν τριτάλαντον οἶκον, ὥς φησι, τὴν ἀδελφήν, διαπραττόμενος τηλικαῦτα ἕνα μάρτυρα παρεῖναι αὑτῷ Πυρετίδην προσεποιήσατο, καὶ τούτου ἐκμαρτυρίαν ἐπʼ ἐκείνῃ τῇ δίκῃ παρέσχοντο οὗτοι· ἣν Πυρετίδης οὐκ ἀναδέδεκται αὐτοῖς, οὐδὲ ὁμολογεῖ μαρτυρῆσαι οὐδὲ εἰδέναι τούτων ἀληθὲς ὂν οὐδέν.
Now consider the impudence of their assertions. The man, who was, according to his own account, about to marry his sister to a man with a fortune of three talents, when he was arranging a matter of such importance, represents that only one witness was present on his behalf, namely, Pyretides, whose written deposition was produced by the other side in the previous trial. This deposition Pyretides has disavowed and refuses to admit that he made any deposition or has any knowledge of the truth of any of the facts which it contains.
§ 19
μέγα δὲ τεκμήριον ὡς περιφανῶς ψευδῆ τὴν μαρτυρίαν οὗτοι παρέσχοντο ταύτην· ἴστε γὰρ πάντες ὡς ὅταν μὲν ἐπὶ προδήλους πράξεις ἴωμεν, ἃς δεῖ μετὰ μαρτύρων γενέσθαι, τοὺς οἰκειοτάτους καὶ οἷς ἂν τυγχάνωμεν χρώμενοι μάλιστα, τούτους παραλαμβάνειν εἰώθαμεν ἐπὶ τὰς πράξεις τὰς τοιαύτας, τῶν δὲ ἀδήλων καὶ ἐξαίφνης γιγνομένων τοὺς προστυχόντας ἕκαστοι μάρτυρας ποιούμεθα.
We have here a striking indication that this deposition produced by our opponents is certainly forged. You all know that, when we are proceeding to a deliberate act which necessitates the presence of witnesses, we habitually take with us our closest acquaintances and most intimate friends as witnesses of such acts; but of unforeseen acts carried out on the spur of the moment, we always call in the testimony of any chance persons.
§ 20
καὶ ἐπὶ μὲν ταῖς μαρτυρίαις αὐταῖς τοῖς παραγενομένοις αὐτοῖς, ὁποῖοί τινες ἂν ὦσι, τούτοις μάρτυσι χρῆσθαι ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν ἡμῖν· παρὰ δὲ τῶν ἀσθενούντων ἢ τῶν ἀποδημεῖν μελλόντων ὅταν τις ἐκμαρτυρίαν ποιῆται, τοὺς ἐπιεικεστάτους τῶν πολιτῶν καὶ τοὺς ἡμῖν γνωριμωτάτους ἕκαστος ἡμῶν παρακαλεῖ μάλιστα,
When direct evidence has to be given in court, we are obliged to employ those who were actually present, whosoever they are, as witnesses; but when it is a question of obtaining a written deposition from a witness who is ill or about to go abroad, each of us summons by preference the most reputable among his fellow-citizens and those best known to us,
§ 21
καὶ οὐ μεθʼ ἑνὸς οὐδὲ μετὰ δυοῖν, ἀλλʼ ὡς ἂν μετὰ πλείστων δυνώμεθα τὰς ἐκμαρτυρίας πάντες ποιούμεθα, ἵνα τῷ τε ἐκμαρτυρήσαντι μὴ ἐξείη ὕστερον ἐξάρνῳ γενέσθαι τὴν μαρτυρίαν, ὑμεῖς τε πολλοῖς καὶ καλοῖς κἀγαθοῖς ταὐτὰ μαρτυροῦσι πιστεύοιτε μᾶλλον.
and we always have written depositions made in the presence not of one or two only but of as many witnesses as possible, in order to preclude the deponent from denying his deposition at some future date, and to give his evidence more weight in your eyes by the unanimous testimony of many honest men.
§ 22
Ξενοκλῆς τοίνυν Βήσαζε μὲν ἰὼν εἰς τὸ ἐργαστήριον τὸ ἡμέτερον εἰς τὰ ἔργα, οὐχ ἡγήσατο δεῖν τοῖς ἀπὸ τοῦ αὐτομάτου ἐκεῖ ἐντυχοῦσι μάρτυσι χρῆσθαι περὶ τῆς ἐξαγωγῆς, ἀλλʼ ἧκεν ἔχων ἐνθένδε Διόφαντον τὸν Σφήττιον μεθʼ ἑαυτοῦ, ὃς ἔλεγε τὴν δίκην ὑπὲρ τούτου, καὶ Δωρόθεον τὸν Ἐλευσίνιον καὶ τὸι ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ Φιλοχάρη καὶ ἄλλους πολλοὺς μάρτυρας, παρακεκληκὼς ἐνθένδε σταδίους ἐγγὺς τριακοσίους ἐκεῖσε·
Thus, when Xenocles went to our factory at the mines at Besa, he did not think it sufficient to rely on any chance person who happened to be there as witness regarding the eviction, but took with him from Athens Diophantus of Sphettus, who defended him in the former case, and Dorotheus of Eleusis, and his brother Philochares, and many other witnesses, having invited them to make a journey of nearly three hundred stades from here to there;
§ 23
περὶ δὲ τῆς ἐγγύης τῆς τήθης τῶν παίδων τῶν ἑαυτοῦ ἐν τῷ ἄστει ἐκμαρτυρίαν (ὥς φησι) ποιούμενος τῶν μὲν οἰκείων οὐδένα τῶν ἑαυτοῦ παρακεκληκὼς φαίνεται, Διονύσιον δὲ 〈τὸν〉 Ἐρχιέα καὶ [τὸν] Ἀριστόλοχον τὸν Αἰθαλίδην· μετὰ δυοῖν τούτοιν ἐν τῷ ἄστει αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐκμαρτυρίαν ποιήσασθαί φασιν οὗτοι, -- τοιαύτην μετὰ τούτων· οἷς οὐδʼ ἂν περὶ ὁτουοῦν πιστεύσειεν ἄλλος οὐδείς.
yet when, on the question of the marriage of the grandmother of his own children, he was obtaining, as he declares, a written deposition in Athens itself, he is shown to have summoned none of his own friends but Dionysius of Erchia and Aristolochus of Aethalidae. In the presence of these two men my opponents declare that they obtained the written deposition—a document of this nature in the presence of men whom no one else would trust in any matter whatsoever!
§ 24
ἴσως γὰρ ἦν νὴ Δία πάρεργον καὶ φαῦλον, περὶ οὗ τὴν ἐκμαρτυρίαν παρὰ τοῦ Πυρετίδου φασὶ ποιήσασθαι οὗτοι, ὥστε οὐδὲν θαυμαστὸν ὀλιγωρηθῆναι ἦν τὸ πρᾶγμα. καὶ πῶς; οἷς γε περὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου ὁ ἀγὼν ἦν ὁ τῶν ψευδομαρτυρίων, ὃν Ξενοκλῆς ἔφευγεν, ἢ ἐξ ἑταίρας ἢ ἐξ ἐγγυητῆς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα εἶναι. εἶτα ἐπὶ ταύτην ἂν τὴν μαρτυρίαν, εἰ ἦν ἀληθής, οὐκ ἂν ἅπαντας τοὺς οἰκείους τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ παρακαλεῖν ἐκεῖνος ἠξίωσεν;
Perhaps it will be urged that it was a trifling matter of secondary importance about which they say that they obtained the deposition from Pyretides, so that negligence in the affair was not surprising. How so, when the trial for perjury, in which Xenocles was defendant, turned upon this very point, as to whether his own wife was the child of a concubine or of a legitimate wife? To attest a deposition like this, if it were really true, would he not have thought fit to summon all his own friends?
§ 25
ναὶ μὰ Δία, ὡς ἔγωγε ᾤμην, εἴ γε ἦν ἀληθὲς τὸ πρᾶγμα. οὐ τοίνυν φαίνεται, ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν Ξενοκλῆς πρὸς τοὺς ἐπιτυχόντας δύο ἐκμαρτυρησάμενος τὴν μαρτυρίαν ταύτην, Νικόδημος δὲ οὑτοσὶ ἕνα μόνον μάρτυρα παρακαλέσας μεθʼ ἑαυτοῦ τῷ τὸν τριτάλαντον οἶκον κεκτημένῳ ἐγγυῆσαί φησι τὴν ἀδελφήν.
Most assuredly he would have done so, I should have thought, if the deposition had been genuine. We see then that he did not do so, but took this deposition before two chance witnesses; Nicodemus, however, the present defendant, says that, when he married his sister to a man with a fortune of three talents, he summoned only a single witness to accompany him!
§ 26
καὶ οὗτος μὲν τὸν Πυρετίδην μόνον, οὐχ ὁμολογοῦντα, προσεποιήσατο μεθʼ ἑαυτοῦ παραγενέσθαι· ὑπὸ δὲ τοῦ ἐγγυήσασθαι μέλλοντος τὴν τοιαύτην Λυσιμένης καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, Χαίρων καὶ Πυλάδης, φασὶ παρακληθέντες τῇ ἐγγύῃ παραγενέσθαι, καὶ ταῦτα θεῖοι ὄντες τῷ ἐγγυωμένῳ.
He pretends that the only person present with him was Pyretides, who denies his assertion; on the other hand, Lysimenes and his brothers, Chaeron and Pylades, declare that they were summoned by Pyrrhus when he was about to make this brilliant match and were present at the ceremony, in spite of the fact that they were uncles of the bridegroom.
§ 27
ὑμέτερον οὖν ἔργον σκέψασθαι νῦν, εἰ δοκεῖ πιστὸν εἶναι τὸ πρᾶγμα. ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ νομίζω, ἐκ τῶν εἰκότων σκοπούμενος, πολὺ ἂν μᾶλλον τὸν Πύρρον πάντας ἂν τοὺς οἰκείους βούλεσθαι λεληθέναι, εἴ τι παρεσκευάζετο ὁμολογεῖν ἢ πράττειν ἀνάξιον τῶν αὑτοῦ, ἢ παρακαλέσαι μάρτυρας τοὺς θείους τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ ἐπὶ ἁμάρτημα τηλικοῦτον.
It is a matter for you to consider now whether their story seems to be credible. It appears to me, judging from probabilities, that Pyrrhus would have been much more likely to wish to keep the matter secret from all his friends, if he was meditating the making of a contract or the commission of an act discreditable to his family, rather than summon his own uncles as witnesses of so outrageous an act of folly.
§ 28
ἔτι δὲ καὶ περὶ ἐκείνου θαυμάζω, εἰ μηδεμίαν προῖκα μήθʼ ὁ διδοὺς μήθʼ ὁ λαμβάνων διωμολογήσαντο ἕξειν ἐπὶ τῇ γυναικί. τοῦτο μὲν γὰρ εἴ τινα ἐδίδου, εἰκὸς ἦν καὶ τὴν δοθεῖσαν ὑπὸ τῶν παραγενέσθαι φασκόντων μαρτυρεῖσθαι· τοῦτο δʼ εἰ διʼ ἐπιθυμίαν τὴν ἐγγύην ὁ θεῖος ἡμῶν ἐποιεῖτο τῆς τοιαύτης γυναικός, δῆλον ὅτι κἂν ἀργύριον πολλῷ μᾶλλον [ἢ] ὁ ἐγγυῶν διωμολογήσατο ἔχειν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τῇ γυναικί, ἵνα μὴ ἐπʼ ἐκείνῳ γένοιτο ῥᾳδίως ἀπαλλάττεσθαι, ὁπότε βούλοιτο, τῆς γυναικός·
Another matter which surprises me is that there was no agreement about a dowry for the woman on the part either of him who gave her or of him who took her in marriage. For, on the one hand, if Nicodemus gave a dowry, it would have been only natural that the amount of the dowry should be mentioned in the evidence of those who allege that they were present; on the other hand, if our uncle, under the influence of his passion, contracted a marriage with a woman of this character, clearly he who gave her in marriage would have been all the more careful to procure an agreement from the other party stating that he received money with her, so that it might not be in the latter's power easily to get rid of the woman whenever he wished.
§ 29
καὶ μάρτυράς γε πολλῷ πλείους 〈εἰκὸς〉 ἦν τὸν ἐγγυῶντα παρακαλεῖν ἢ τὸν ἐγγυώμενον τὴν τοιαύτην· οὐδεὶς γὰρ ὑμῶν ἀγνοεῖ ὅτι ὀλίγα διαμένειν εἴωθε τῶν τοιούτων. ὁ μὲν τοίνυν ἐγγυῆσαι φάσκων μετὰ ἑνὸς μάρτυρος καὶ ἄνευ ὁμολογίας προικὸς εἰς τὸν τριτάλαντον οἶκον ἐγγυῆσαί φησι τὴν ἀδελφήν· οἱ δὲ θεῖοι τῷ ἀδελφιδῷ ἄπροικον τὴν τοιαύτην ἐγγυωμένῳ μεμαρτυρήκασι παραγενέσθαι.
Also, it is probable that he who gave her in marriage would have summoned many more witnesses than the man who was marrying such a woman; for you all know that such unions are very seldom permanent. The man, then, who alleges that he gave his sister in marriage, declares that he married her to a man with a fortune of three talents without any agreement about a dowry, and the uncles have given evidence that they were present as witnesses on behalf of their nephew when he married a woman of this character without a dowry.
§ 30
καὶ οἱ αὐτοὶ θεῖοι οὗτοι ἐν τῇ δεκάτῃ τῆς θυγατρὸς ἀποφανθείσης εἶναι ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀδελφιδοῦ κληθέντες μεμαρτυρήκασι παραγενέσθαι. ἐφʼ ᾧ δὴ καὶ δεινῶς ἀγανακτῶ, ὅτι ὁ μὲν ἀνὴρ λαγχάνων ὑπὲρ τῆς γυναικὸς τῆς αὑτοῦ τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ πατρῴου Φίλην ὄνομα εἶναι ἐπεγράψατο τῇ γυναικί, οἱ δὲ τοῦ Πύρρου θεῖοι ἐν τῇ δεκάτῃ φάσκοντες παραγενέσθαι τὸ τῆς τήθης ὄνομα Κλειταρέτην τὸν πατέρα ἐμαρτύρησαν θέσθαι αὐτῇ.
These same uncles have deposed that they were present by invitation of their nephew at the tenth-day ceremony in honor of the child who was declared to be his daughter. Here I note with the utmost indignation that the husband, in claiming her paternal inheritance on behalf of his wife, has put down her name as Phile, while Pyrrhus's uncles, alleging that they were present, deposed that her father called her Cleitarete, after her grandmother.
§ 31
θαυμάζω οὖν εἰ ὁ ἀνὴρ ὁ συνοικῶν πλείω ἢ ὀκτὼ ἔτη ἤδη μὴ ᾔδει τοὔνομα τῆς ἑαυτοῦ γυναικός. εἶτα οὐδὲ παρὰ τῶν αὑτοῦ μαρτύρων πρότερον ἐδυνήθη πυθέσθαι, οὐδʼ ἡ μήτηρ τῆς γυναικὸς τὸ τῆς θυγατρὸς ὄνομα τῆς αὑτῆς ἐν χρόνῳ τοσούτῳ ἔφρασεν αὐτῷ, οὐδʼ ὁ θεῖος αὐτός, Νικόδημος;
I am amazed that the man who had lived with her for more than eight years did not know the name of his own wife. Could he not have found it out before from his own witnesses? Did his wife's mother never in all that long period tell him her daughter's name? Did his uncle, Nicodemus himself, never do so?
§ 32
ἀλλʼ ἀντὶ τοῦ τῆς τήθης ὀνόματος, εἴ τις ᾔδει τοῦθʼ ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς κείμενον ταύτῃ, Φίλην ὁ ἀνὴρ ὄνομα ἐπεγράψατο εἶναι αὐτῇ, καὶ ταῦτα λαγχάνων αὐτῇ τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ πατρῴου. τίνος ἕνεκα; ἢ ἵνα καὶ τοῦ τῆς τήθης ὀνόματος τοῦ ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς τεθέντος ἄκληρον ὁ ἀνὴρ καταστήσειεν εἶναι τὴν αὑτοῦ γυναῖκα;
No, her husband, instead of giving her her grandmother's name—if it was really known that this name was given her by her father—inscribed her name as Phile, and this when he was claiming the paternal inheritance for her! What was his object? Did the husband wish to deprive his wife of any title to the name of her grandmother bestowed upon her by her father?
§ 33
ἆρά γε οὐχὶ δῆλον, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅτι ἃ πάλαι οὗτοι μαρτυροῦσι γενέσθαι, πολλῷ ὕστερον τῆς λήξεως τοῦ κλήρου 〈ἕνεκα〉 σύγκειται αὐτοῖς; οὐ γὰρ ἄν ποτε οἱ μὲν εἰς τὴν δεκάτην (ὥς φασι) κληθέντες τῆς τοῦ Πύρρου θυγατρός, ἀδελφιδῆς τούτου, ἐξ ἐκείνης τῆς ἡμέρας, ἥτις ἦν ποτε, ἀκριβῶς εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον ἧκον μεμνημένοι ὅτι Κλειταρέτην ὁ πατὴρ ἐν τῇ δεκάτῃ ὠνόμηνεν,
Is it not obvious, gentlemen, that the events which they deposed to have happened long ago were invented by them much later for the purpose of claiming the estate? For otherwise it would have been impossible that the uncles, who were summoned, according to their own account, to the tenth-day ceremony in honor of Pyrrhus's daughter, the defendant's niece, could ever have come into court with so accurate a recollection from that distant date, whenever it was, that her father at that ceremony named her Cleitarete,
§ 34
οἱ δʼ οἰκειότατοι τῶν ἁπάντων, ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ θεῖος καὶ ἡ μήτηρ οὐκ ἂν ᾔδει τὸ ὄνομα τῆς θυγατρός, ὥς φασι, τῆς αὐτοῦ. πολύ γε μάλιστʼ ἄν, εἰ ἦν ἀληθὲς τὸ πρᾶγμα. ἀλλὰ περὶ μὲν τούτων καὶ ὕστερον ἐγχωρήσει εἰπεῖν.
but that the nearer relatives, the father and the uncle and the mother should not know the name of the child whom they declare to be Pyrrhus's daughter. They would most certainly have known it, if the fact had been true. But I shall have occasion to return to these uncles later.
§ 35
περὶ δὲ τῆς τούτου μαρτυρίας οὐ χαλεπὸν καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν νόμων ἐστὶ γνῶναι ὅτι φαίνεται περιφανῶς τὰ ψευδῆ μεμαρτυρηκὼς οὗτος. ὅπου γάρ, ἐάν τίς τι ἀτίμητον δῷ, ἕνεκα τοῦ νόμου, ἐὰν ἀπολίπῃ ἡ γυνὴ τὸν ἄνδρα ἢ ἐὰν ὁ ἀνὴρ ἐκπέμψῃ τὴν γυναῖκα, οὐκ ἔξεστι πράξασθαι τῷ δόντι ὃ μὴ ἐν προικὶ τιμήσας ἔδωκεν, ἦ που ὅστις γέ φησιν ἄνευ ὁμολογίας προικὸς τὴν ἀδελφὴν ἐγγυῆσαι, περιφανῶς ἀναίσχυντος ὢν ἐλέγχεται.
As for Nicodemus's evidence it is not difficult to decide from the actual text of the laws that he has obviously committed perjury. For seeing that, if a man gives with a woman a sum not duly assessed in a contract, and if the wife leaves her husband or the hushand puts away his wife, the man who gave the money cannot, as far as the law is concerned, demand back what he gave but did not assess in a contract—the defendant when he states that he gave his sister in marriage without any contract regarding a dowry, is obviously proved to be making an impudent assertion.
§ 36
τί γὰρ ἔμελλεν ὄφελος εἶναι αὐτῷ τῆς ἐγγύης, εἰ ἐπὶ τῷ ἐγγυησαμένῳ ἐκπέμψαι ὁπότε βούλοιτο τὴν γυναῖκα ἦν; ἦν δʼ ἂν ἐπʼ ἐκείνῳ, ὦ ἄνδρες, δῆλον ὅτι, εἰ μηδεμίαν προῖκα διωμολογήσατο ἕξειν ἐπʼ αὐτῇ. εἶτʼ ἐπὶ τούτοις ἂν Νικόδημος ἠγγύησε τῷ ἡμετέρῳ θείῳ τὴν ἀδελφήν; καὶ ταῦτα εἰδὼς τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον ἄτοκον οὖσαν αὐτήν, καὶ τῆς ὁμολογηθείσης προικὸς ἐκ τῶν νόμων γιγνομένης εἰς αὐτόν, εἴ τι ἔπαθεν ἡ γυνὴ πρὶν γενέσθαι παῖδας αὐτῇ;
For what was likely to be the good to him of the marriage, if the husband could dismiss the wife whenever he wished? And this he certainly could do, if he had made no stipulation that he should receive a dowry with her. Would Nicodemus have married his sister to our uncle on these terms, and this, though he knew all the time that in the past she had produced no offspring, and though the dowry, if it had been assessed in a contract, was coming to him, if anything happened to her before she bore any children?
§ 37
ἆρʼ οὖν δοκεῖ τῳ ὑμῶν ὀλιγώρως οὕτως ἔχειν χρημάτων Νικόδημος, ὥστε παραλιπεῖν ἄν τι τῶν τοιούτων; ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οὐ νομίζω. εἶτα παρὰ τούτου ὁ ἡμέτερος θεῖος ἠξίωσεν ἂν ἐγγυήσασθαι τὴν ἀδελφήν, ὃς αὐτὸς ξενίας φεύγων ὑπὸ ἑνὸς τῶν φρατόρων ὧν φησιν αὑτοῦ εἶναι, παρὰ τέτταρας ψήφους μετέσχε τῆς πόλεως; καὶ ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, ἀναγίγνωσκε τὴν μαρτυρίαν.
Does any one of you really think that Nicodemus is so disinterested in money matters that he would neglect any of these considerations? For my part, I do not think it possible. Further, would our uncle have thought of marrying the sister of a man, who, when he was accused of usurping the rights of citizenship by a member of the ward to which he claimed to belong, obtained those rights by a majority of only four votes? And to prove the truth of what I say, read the deposition.
§ 38
Μαρτυρία οὗτος τοίνυν τῷ ἡμετέρῳ θείῳ ἄπροικον τὴν ἀδελφὴν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ μεμαρτύρηκεν ἐγγυῆσαι, καὶ ταῦτα τῆς προικὸς εἰς αὐτὸν γιγνομένης, εἴ τι ἔπαθεν ἡ γυνὴ πρὶν γενέσθαι παῖδας αὐτῇ. λαβὲ δὴ καὶ ἀνάγνωθι τοὺς νόμους τουσδὶ αὐτοῖς.
Deposition The defendant then has given evidence that he gave his sister in marriage to our uncle without a dowry in spite of the fact that such a dowry was to come to him if anything happened to the woman before she had borne any children. Now take and read these laws to the judges.
§ 39
Νόμοι δοκεῖ ἂν ὑμῖν οὕτως ὀλιγώρως ἔχειν χρημάτων Νικόδημος, ὥστε, εἰ ἦν ἀληθὲς τὸ πρᾶγμα, οὐκ ἂν σφόδρα διακριβώσασθαι περὶ τῶν ἑαυτῷ συμφερόντων; ναὶ μὰ Δία, ὡς ἔγωγʼ οἶμαι, ἐπεὶ καὶ οἱ ἐπὶ παλλακίᾳ διδόντες τὰς ἑαυτῶν πάντες πρότερον διομολογοῦνται περὶ τῶν δοθησομένων ταῖς παλλακαῖς· Νικόδημος δὲ ἐγγυᾶν μέλλων, 〈ὥς〉 φησι, τὴν ἀδελφὴν τὴν αὑτοῦ μόνον τὸ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἐγγυῆσαι διεπράξατο; ὃς ἐπʼ ὀλίγῳ ἀργυρίῳ, οὗ ἐπιθυμῶν λέγει πρὸς ὑμᾶς, σφόδρα βούλεται πονηρὸς εἶναι;
Laws Do you think that Nicodemus is so disinterested in money matters, that, if the fact which he alleges were true, he would not have provided for his own interests with scrupulous care? By heaven, I am sure he would have done so; for even those who give their womenkind to others as mistresses make stipulations in advance as to the benefits which such women are to enjoy. And was Nicodemus, when, according to his own account, he was going to give his sister in marriage, content with simply securing the requirements of a legal marriage—a man who shows himself only too anxious to be dishonest for a paltry sum which he hopes to receive for speaking in court?
§ 40
περὶ μὲν οὖν τῆς τούτου πονηρίας καὶ σιωπῶντος ἐμοῦ οἱ πολλοὶ γιγνώσκουσιν ὑμῶν, ὥστε οὐκ ἀπορῶ γε μαρτύρων, ὅταν τι λέγω περὶ αὐτοῦ· βούλομαι δὲ πρῶτον ἐκ τῶν τοιῶνδε ἐξελέγξαι τοῦτον ἀναισχυντότατον τῇ μαρτυρίᾳ ὄντα ταύτῃ. φέρε γάρ, ὦ Νικόδημε, εἰ ἦσθα ἠγγυηκὼς τῷ Πύρρῳ τὴν ἀδελφὴν καὶ εἰ ᾔδεις ἐξ αὐτῆς θυγατέρα γνησίαν καταλειπομένην,
As for his dishonesty, most of you know all about it without any words from me, so that at any rate I have abundant witnesses when I say anything about him. But I should like in the first place to convict him in the following manner of the most impudent lying in this evidence of his. Come, tell me this, Nicodemus: If you had given your sister in marriage to Pyrrhus and if you knew that Pyrrhus was leaving a legitimate daughter by her,
§ 41
πῶς ἐπέτρεψας τῷ ἡμετέρῳ ἀδελφῷ ἐπιδικάσασθαι τοῦ κλήρου ἄνευ τῆς γνησίας θυγατρός, ἣν φῂς τῷ ἡμετέρῳ θείῳ καταλειφθῆναι; ἢ οὐκ ᾔδεις ἐν τῇ ἐπιδικασίᾳ τοῦ κλήρου νόθην καθισταμένην τὴν ἀδελφιδῆν τὴν σαυτοῦ; ὁπότε γάρ [τις] ἐπεδικάζετο τοῦ κλήρου, νόθην τὴν θυγατέρα τοῦ καταλιπόντος τὸν κλῆρον καθίστη.
how is it that you allowed the inheritance to be adjudicated to our brother without the disposal of the legitimate daughter whom you say our uncle left behind him? Did you not know that by the demand that the estate should be adjudicated an attempt was being made to bastardize your niece? For, when he claimed to have the estate adjudicated to him, he thereby sought to bastardize the daughter of him who left the estate.
§ 42
ἔτι δὲ πρότερον ὁ Πύρρος ὁ ποιησάμενος τὸν ἀδελφὸν τὸν ἐμὸν ὑὸν αὑτῷ· οὔτε γὰρ διαθέσθαι οὔτε δοῦναι οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν ἔξεστι τῶν ἑαυτοῦ ἄνευ τῶν θυγατέρων, ἐάν τις καταλιπὼν γνησίας τελευτᾷ. γνώσεσθε δὲ αὐτῶν ἀκούσαντες τῶν νόμων ἀναγιγνωσκομένων. ἀναγίγνωσκε τούσδε αὐτοῖς.
To go still further back, the adoption of my brother by Pyrrhus had a similar effect; for no one has the right to devise or dispose of any of his property without also disposing of any legitimate daughters whom he may have left at his decease. You will understand this when you hear the text of the laws read out. Read these laws to the judges.
§ 43
Νόμοι δοκεῖ ἂν ὑμῖν ὁ μεμαρτυρηκὼς ἐγγυῆσαι ἐπιτρέψαι ἄν τι τούτων γίγνεσθαι, καὶ οὐκ ἂν ἐπὶ τοῦ κλήρου τῇ λήξει, ἣν ὁ Ἔνδιος λαχὼν ἐπεδικάζετο, ἀμφισβητῆσαι ἂν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀδελφιδῆς τῆς ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ οὐκ ἂν διαμαρτυρῆσαι μὴ ἐπίδικον τῷ Ἐνδίῳ τὸν ἐκείνης πατρῷον κλῆρον εἶναι; ἀλλὰ μὴν ὥς γε ἐπεδικάσατο ὁ ἡμέτερος ἀδελφὸς τοῦ κλήρου καὶ οὐκ ἠμφισβήτησεν οὐδεὶς ἐκείνῳ, ἀναγίγνωσκε τὴν μαρτυρίαν.
Laws Can you suppose that the man who has declared in evidence that he gave his sister in marriage would have allowed any of these things to be done, and, at the moment when Endius claimed to be given possession and applied to the court, would not have set up his niece's title and lodged a protestation that her paternal inheritance was not adjudicable to Endius? And yet that our brother claimed to have the estate adjudicated to him and that no one contested his claim, is proved by a deposition. Read it.
§ 44
Μαρτυρία γενομένης τοίνυν τῆς ἐπιδικασίας ταύτης οὐκ ἐτόλμησεν ἀμφισβητῆσαι τοῦ κλήρου Νικόδημος, οὐδὲ διαμαρτυρῆσαι τὴν ἀδελφιδῆν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γνησίαν θυγατέρα Πύρρῳ καταλειφθῆναι.
Deposition When this claim then for the adjudication of the estate was made, Nicodemus did not dare to contest the succession or put in a protestation that his niece was a legitimate daughter left by Pyrrhus.
§ 45
περὶ μὲν οὖν τῆς ἐπιδικασίας ἔχοι ἄν τις ψεῦδος προφασίσασθαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς· ἢ γὰρ λαθεῖν σφᾶς προσποιήσαιτʼ ἂν οὗτος, ἢ καὶ ψεύδεσθαι αἰτιῷτʼ ἂν ἡμᾶς. τοῦτο μὲν οὖν παρῶμεν· ἐπειδὴ δὲ τῷ Ξενοκλεῖ ἠγγύα ὁ Ἔνδιος τὴν ἀδελφιδῆν σου, ἐπέτρεψας, ὦ Νικόδημε, τὴν ἐκ τῆς ἐγγυητῆς τῷ Πύρρῳ γεγενημένην ὡς ἐξ ἑταίρας ἐκείνῳ οὖσαν ἐγγυᾶσθαι;
Regarding this claim some lying explanation may be offered to you: the defendant may either pretend that they knew nothing about it or else may accuse us of lying. Let us ignore the latter suggestion. As regards the former, when Endius gave your niece in marriage to Xenocles, did you, Nicodemus, allow the daughter borne to Pyrrhus by his legitimate wife to be married in the quality of the child of a mistress?
§ 46
καὶ οὐκ [ἂν] εἰσήγγειλας πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα κακοῦσθαι τὴν ἐπίκληρον ὑπὸ τοῦ εἰσποιήτου οὕτως ὑβριζομένην καὶ ἄκληρον τῶν ἑαυτῆς πατρῴων καθισταμένην, ἄλλως τε καὶ μόνων τούτων τῶν δικῶν ἀκινδύνων τοῖς διώκουσιν οὐσῶν καὶ ἐξὸν τῷ βουλομένῳ βοηθεῖν ταῖς ἐπικλήροις;
And did you fail to bring a denunciation in the archon's court for injury to the heiress thus maltreated by the adopted son and despoiled of her paternal inheritance, especially as this is the only class of public actions which involves no risk to the party who brings it, and anyone who wishes is allowed to defend the rights of heiresses?
§ 47
οὔτε γὰρ ἐπιτίμιον ταῖς πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα εἰσαγγελίαις ἔπεστιν, οὐδʼ ἐὰν μηδεμίαν τῶν ψήφων οἱ εἰσαγγείλαντες μεταλάβωσιν, οὔτε πρυτανεῖα οὔτε παράστασις οὐδεμίᾳ τίθεται τῶν εἰσαγγελιῶν· ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν διώκουσιν ἀκινδύνως εἰσαγγέλλειν ἔξεστι, [τῷ βουλομένῳ], τοῖς δʼ ἁλισκομένοις ἔσχαται τιμωρίαι ἐπὶ ταῖς εἰσαγγελίαις ἔπεισιν.
For no fine can be inflicted for denunciations made to the archon, even if the informants fail to receive a single vote, and there are no deposits or court fees paid in any impeachments; but while the prosecutors may bring an impeachment without running any risk, extreme penalties are inflicted on those who are convicted in such impeachments.
§ 48
ἔπειτα εἰ ἦν ἐξ ἐγγυητῆς ἡ τούτου ἀδελφιδῆ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ θείῳ γεγενημένη, ἐπέτρεψεν ἂν Νικόδημος ὡς ἐξ ἑταίρας οὖσαν αὐτὴν ἐγγυᾶσθαι; καὶ γενομένων αὐτῶν οὐκ ἂν εἰσήγγειλε πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα ὑβρίζεσθαι τὴν ἐπίκληρον ὑπὸ τοῦ οὕτως ἐγγυήσαντος αὐτήν; καὶ, εἰ ἦν ἀληθῆ ἃ νυνὶ τετόλμηκας μαρτυρῆσαι, παραχρῆμα εὐθὺς τότε ἐτιμωρήσω ἂν τὸν ἀδικοῦντα. ἢ καὶ ταῦτα λαθεῖν σεαυτὸν προσποιήσει;
If, then, the defendant's niece had been the child of our uncle by a legitimate wife, would Nicodemus have allowed her to be married in the quality of the child of a mistress? And, when this happened, would he not have lodged a denunciation before the archon that the heiress was being injured by him who thus gave her in marriage? If what you have now dared, Nicodemus, to depose, were true, you would have immediately have had punishment inflicted on him who was wronging her. Or will you pretend that you knew nothing of these circumstances either?
§ 49
ἔπειτʼ οὐδʼ ἐκ τῆς ἐπιδοθείσης αὐτῇ προικὸς ᾔσθου; ὥστε καὶ διʼ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἀγανακτήσαντι δήπου σοι εἰσαγγεῖλαι τὸν Ἔνδιον προσῆκεν, εἰ αὐτὸς μὲν τριτάλαντον οἶκον ἔχειν ἠξίου ὡς προσῆκον αὑτῷ, τῇ δὲ γνησίᾳ οὔσῃ 〈θυγατρὶ〉 [τρις]χιλίας δραχμὰς προῖκα ἐπιδοὺς ἐκδοῦναι ἠξίωσεν ἄλλῳ. εἶτʼ ἐπὶ τούτοις οὐκ ἀγανακτήσας εἰσήγγειλεν ἂν τὸν Ἔνδιον οὗτος; ναὶ μὰ Δία, εἴ γʼ ἦν ἀληθὲς τὸ πρᾶγμα.
Next, did not the dowry which was given with her awake your suspicion? This alone might well have aroused your indignation and induced you to denounce Endius, namely, that he himself was claiming as his right a fortune of three talents, but thought fit, when he was giving Pyrrhus's legitimate daughter in marriage to another man, to bestow with her a portion of only a thousand drachmas. Would not this have aroused the defendant's indignation and would he not have denounced Endius? By heavens he would, if his story were true.
§ 50
οἶμαι δὲ οὐδʼ ἂν τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐκεῖνον οὐδʼ ἄλλον γε τῶν εἰσποιήτων οὐδένα οὕτως εὐήθη οὐδʼ αὖ ὀλίγωρον τῶν νόμων τῶν κειμένων γίγνεσθαι, ὥσθʼ ὑπαρχούσης γνησίας θυγατρὸς τῷ τὸν κλῆρον καταλιπόντι ἑτέρῳ δοῦναι ταύτην ἀνθʼ ἑαυτοῦ. ἀκριβῶς γὰρ ᾔδει διότι τοῖς γε ἐκ τῆς γνησίας θυγατρὸς παισὶ γεγονόσιν ἁπάντων τῶν παππῴων κληρονομία προσήκει. εἶτα εἰδὼς ἄν τις ταῦτα ἑτέρῳ παραδοίη τὰ αὑτοῦ, καὶ ταῦτα τηλικαῦτα ὄντα ὅσων ἠμφισβήτησαν οὗτοι;
I cannot imagine it possible that Endius, or any other adopted son, could be so foolish, or so regardless of the existing laws, as to give the legitimate daughter of the man who left the estate in marriage to another instead of marrying her himself; for he knew perfectly well that the children of a legitimate daughter have a right to succeed to the whole of their grandfather's estate. Knowing this, would anyone hand over his own property to another man, especially if it were of the value that our opponents claim?
§ 51
δοκεῖ δʼ ἄν τις ὑμῖν οὕτως ἀναιδὴς ἢ τολμηρὸς εἰσποίητος γενέσθαι, ὥστε μηδὲ τὸ δέκατον μέρος ἐπιδοὺς ἐκδοῦναι τῇ γνησίᾳ θυγατρὶ τῶν πατρῴων; γενομένων δὲ τούτων δοκεῖ ἂν ὑμῖν ὁ θεῖος ἐπιτρέψαι, ὁ ἐγγυῆσαι μεμαρτυρηκὼς αὐτῆς τὴν μητέρα; ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οὐ νομίζω, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἠμφισβήτησεν ἂν τοῦ κλήρου καὶ διεμαρτύρησε καὶ εἰσήγγειλεν ἂν πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα, καὶ ἄλλο εἴ τι ἦν ἰσχυρότερον τούτων, ἅπαντʼ ἂν διεπράξατο.
Can you imagine an adopted son being so shameless and brazen-faced as to give the legitimate daughter in marriage with a dowry of not even a tenth of her father's fortune? And if he had done so, can you imagine that her uncle, who has borne witness that he gave her mother in marriage, would have allowed it? For my part I cannot believe it; rather would he have contested the estate and put in a protestation and denounced him to the archon and taken any stronger action if it were possible.
§ 52
ὁ μὲν τοίνυν Ἔνδιος ὡς ἐξ ἑταίρας οὖσαν ἠγγύησεν, ἥν φησιν ἀδελφιδῆν Νικόδημος εἶναι αὑτῷ· οὗτος δὲ οὔτε τῷ Ἐνδίῳ τοῦ Πύρρου κλήρου ἀμφισβητῆσαι ἠξίωσεν, οὔτʼ ἐγγυήσαντα τὴν ἀδελφιδῆν 〈ὡς〉 οὖσαν ἐξ ἑταίρας εἰσαγγεῖλαι πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα [ἠξίωσεν], οὔτʼ ἐπὶ τῇ δοθείσῃ προικὶ αὐτῇ ἠγανάκτησεν οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ πάντα ταῦτα εἴασε γενέσθαι. οἱ δὲ νόμοι περὶ ἁπάντων διορίζουσι τούτων.
Endius then gave this woman, whom Nicodemus alleges to be his niece, in marriage in the quality of the daughter of a mistress; and the defendant did not think fit to claim the estate of Pyrrhus from Endius, or, when Endius gave his niece in marriage in the quality of the daughter of a mistress, denounce him to the archon, nor did he express any indignation at the dowry which was bestowed upon her; no, he took no action at all in these matters. Yet the laws are precise on all these points.
§ 53
ἀναγνώσεται οὖν πρῶτον ὑμῖν τὴν περὶ τῆς ἐπιδικασίας τοῦ κλήρου μαρτυρίαν πάλιν, ἔπειτα τὴν περὶ τῆς ἐγγυήσεως τῆς γυναικός. ἀναγίγνωσκε αὐτοῖς. Μαρτυρία〈ι〉 ἀνάγνωθι δὴ καὶ τοὺς νόμους. Νόμοι λαβὲ δὴ καὶ τὴν τούτου μαρτυρίαν.
The clerk shall read to you first of all, for the second time, the deposition about the claim for the adjudication of the estate and then that concerning the marriage of the woman. Read them to the court. Depositions Now read the laws. Laws Now take Nicodemus's deposition.
§ 54
Μαρτυρία πῶς οὖν 〈ἄν〉 τις σαφέστερον ἐξελέγχοι ψευδομαρτυρίων διώκων ἢ ἔκ τε τῶν πεπραγμένων αὐτοῖς τούτοις ἐπιδεικνύων καὶ ἐκ τῶν νόμων ἁπάντων τῶν ἡμετέρων; περὶ μὲν οὖν τούτου σχεδὸν εἴρηται τὰ πολλά· σκέψασθε δὲ καὶ περὶ τοῦ ἔχοντος τὴν ἀδελφιδῆν τὴν τούτου γυναῖκα, ἐὰν ἄρα τι γένηται καὶ ἐκ τούτου τεκμήριον ὡς ἔστι ψευδῆ τὰ μεμαρτυρημένα Νικοδήμῳ.
Deposition How could an accuser establish a charge of perjury more clearly than by adducing proofs from the actual conduct of my adversaries themselves and from all the laws of our state? I have now said most of what I have to say about the defendant. Consider now whether the conduct of the niece's husband does not provide a convincing argument that Nicodemus's evidence is false.
§ 55
ὡς μὲν οὖν ἠγγυήσατο καὶ ἔλαβεν ὡς οὖσαν ἐξ ἑταίρας τὴν γυναῖκα, ἐπιδέδεικται καὶ μεμαρτύρηται· ὡς δʼ ἀληθὴς ἡ μαρτυρία ἐστὶν αὕτη, ὁ Ξενοκλῆς αὐτὸς ἔργῳ οὐκ ὀλίγον χρόνον ἤδη [ἀληθῆ ταῦτα] μεμαρτύρηκε. δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι εἰ μὴ ἠγγύητο παρὰ τοῦ Ἐνδίου ὡς ἐξ ἑταίρας οὖσαν τὴν γυναῖκα, ὄντων αὐτῷ παίδων ἤδη τηλικούτων ἐκ τῆς γυναικός, ζῶντι ἂν τῷ Ἐνδίῳ ἠμφισβήτησεν ὑπὲρ τῆς γνησίας θυγατρὸς τῶν πατρῴων,
That he married her and took her to be his wife as the daughter of a mistress, has been proved and attested and that this evidence is true, Xenocles himself has testified by his conduct over a long period. For it is evident that, if he had not received the woman in marriage from Endius as the daughter of a mistress, seeing that he had children by her who have already reached a certain age, he would have claimed her patrimony on behalf of the legitimate daughter from Endius during his lifetime,
§ 56
ἄλλως τε καὶ παρεσκευασμένος μὴ ὁμολογεῖν τὴν τοῦ Ἐνδίου ποίησιν τῷ Πύρρῳ γενέσθαι· ὡς δὲ οὐχ ὁμολογῶν [πῶς] ἐπεσκήπτετο τοῖς μεμαρτυρηκόσιν ἐπὶ τῇ διαθήκῃ τοῦ Πύρρου παραγενέσθαι. καὶ ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, ἀναγνώσεται ὑμῖν τὴν μαρτυρίαν τὴν μαρτυρηθεῖσαν. ἀναγίγνωσκε αὐτοῖς.
especially as he was prepared to deny that the adoption of Endius by Pyrrhus ever took place; and it was because he denied it that he denounced those who have deposed that they were present when Pyrrhus made his will. And to prove that I am speaking the truth, the clerk shall read you the deposition then made. Read it to the court.
§ 57
Μαρτυρία ἀλλὰ μὴν κἀκεῖνό γε δηλοῖ, ὡς οὐχ ὁμολογοῦσι τὴν τοῦ Ἐνδίου ποίησιν ὑπὸ τοῦ Πύρρου γενέσθαι. οὐ γὰρ ἂν ὑπερβάντες τὸν τελευταῖον τοῦ οἴκου γεγενημένον κληρονόμον ὑπὲρ τῆς γυναικὸς τοῦ Πύρρου κλήρου λαχεῖν τὴν λῆξιν ἠξίωσαν οὗτοι. ὁ μὲν γὰρ Πύρρος πλείω ἢ εἴκοσιν ἔτη τετελεύτηκεν ἤδη, ὁ δὲ Ἔνδιος τοῦ Μεταγειτνιῶνος μηνὸς πέρυσιν, ἐν ᾧ ἔλαχον τοῦ κλήρου τὴν λῆξιν τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ εὐθέως οὗτοι.
Deposition Here is another proof that they do not admit that the adoption of Endius by Pyrrhus ever took place, namely, that they would never otherwise have thought of demanding the award of the inheritance to this woman, ignoring the long tenancy of the last heir. For Pyrrhus has been dead for more than twenty years, whereas Endius died in the month of Metageitnion last year, in which month they promptly claimed the inheritance only two days after his death.
§ 58
ὁ δὲ νόμος πέντε ἐτῶν κελεύει δικάσασθαι τοῦ κλήρου, ἐπειδὰν τελευτήσῃ ὁ κληρονόμος. οὐκοῦν δυοῖν τὰ ἕτερα προσῆκε τῇ γυναικί, ἢ γυναικί ἢ ζῶντι τῷ Ἐνδίῳ ἀμφισβητῆσαι τῶν πατρῴων, ἢ ἐπειδὴ τετελευτηκὼς ἦν ὁ εἰσποίητος, τῶν τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ τὴν ἐπιδικασίαν ἀξιοῦν ποιεῖσθαι, ἄλλως τε καὶ εἰ, ὥς φασιν οὗτοι, ἠγγυήκει αὐτὴν τῷ Ξενοκλεῖ ὡς γνησίαν ἀδελφὴν οὖσαν αὑτοῦ.
Now the law ordains that a petition for the adjudication of an inheritance must be presented within five years of the death of the last heir. Two courses were, therefore, open to the woman, either to claim her paternal inheritance during Endius's lifetime, or else, when the adopted son had died to claim that her brother's estate should be adjudicated to her, especially if, as our opponents allege, he had given her in marriage to Xenocles as his legitimate sister.
§ 59
ἀκριβῶς γὰρ ἐπιστάμεθα πάντες ὅτι ἀδελφῶν μὲν κλήρων ἐπιδικασία πᾶσίν ἐστιν ἡμῖν, ὅτῳ δὲ γόνῳ γεγόνασι γνήσιοι παῖδες, οὐδενὶ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι τῶν πατρῴων προσήκει. καὶ περὶ τούτων οὐδένα λόγον λεχθῆναι δεῖ· ἅπαντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι πολῖται ἀνεπίδικα ἔχουσι τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστοι πατρῷα.
We all know perfectly well that every one of us has the right to claim the adjudication of a brother's estate, but that, if he has left legitimate children born of his body, no child need claim to have his patrimony adjudicated to him. It is quite unnecessary to labor this point, for all of you, and all other citizens as well, possess your patrimonies without any adjudication by the courts.
§ 60
οὗτοι τοίνυν εἰς τοῦτο τόλμης ἀφιγμένοι εἰσίν, ὥστε τῷ μὲν εἰσποιήτῳ οὐκ ἔφασαν ἐπιδικάσασθαι προσήκειν τῶν δοθέντων, τῇ δὲ Φίλῃ, ἥν φασι θυγατέρα γνησίαν τῷ Πύρρῳ καταλελεῖφθαι, λαχεῖν τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ πατρῴου τὴν λῆξιν ἠξίωσαν. καίτοι (ὅπερ εἶπον καὶ πρότερον) ὅσοι μὲν 〈ἂν〉 καταλίπωσι γνησίους παῖδας ἐξ αὑτῶν, οὐ προσήκει τοῖς παισὶν ἐπιδικάσασθαι τῶν πατρῴων· ὅσοι δὲ διαθήκαις αὑτοῖς εἰσποιοῦνται, τούτοις ἐπιδικάζεσθαι προσήκει τῶν δοθέντων.
Our opponents, then, have pushed their effrontery so far that, while they denied that the adopted son need obtain the adjudication of an estate which has been bequeathed to him, they thought fit to claim the adjudication of her father's estate to Phile, whom they allege to have been a legitimate daughter left by Pyrrhus. Yet, as I have already said, when testators leave legitimate issue, their children need not demand the adjudication of their patrimony; but, on the contrary, when testators adopt children by will, such children must obtain an adjudication of what is bequeathed to them.
§ 61
τοῖς μὲν γάρ, ὅτι γόνῳ γεγόνασιν, οὐδεὶς ἂν δήπου ἀμφισβητήσειε περὶ τῶν πατρῴων· πρὸς δὲ τοὺς εἰσποιήτους ἅπαντες οἱ κατὰ γένος προσήκοντες ἀμφισβητεῖν ἀξιοῦσιν. ἵνα οὖν μὴ παρὰ τοῦ ἐντυχόντος τῶν κλήρων αἱ λήξεις [τοῖς ἀμφισβητεῖν βουλομένοις] γίγνωνται, καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐρήμων τῶν κλήρων ἐπιδικάζεσθαί τινες τολμῶσι, τούτου ἕνεκα τὰς ἐπιδικασίας οἱ εἰσποίητοι πάντες ποιοῦνται.
Since the former are the issue of the deceased, no one, I suppose, could dispute their possession of their patrimony; but all blood-relations think they have the right to dispute a bequest to an adopted son. In order, therefore, that suits for such estates may not be brought by any chance claimant and that persons may not dare to demand the adjudication of them as vacant inheritances, adopted sons apply to the court for an adjudication.
§ 62
μηδεὶς οὖν ὑμῶν ἡγείσθω, εἰ ἐνόμιζε γνησίαν εἶναι τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα Ξενοκλῆς, λαχεῖν ἂν ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς τὴν λῆξιν τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ πατρῴου, ἀλλʼ ἐβάδιζεν ἂν ἡ γνησία εἰς τὰ ἑαυτῆς πατρῷα, καὶ εἴ τις αὐτὴν ἀφῃρεῖτο ἢ ἐβιάζετο, ἐξῆγεν ἂν ἐκ τῶν πατρῴων, καὶ οὐκ ἂν ἰδίας μόνον δίκας ἔφευγεν ὁ βιαζόμενος, ἀλλὰ καὶ δημοσίᾳ εἰσαγγελθεὶς πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα ἐκινδύνευεν ἂν περὶ τοῦ σώματος καὶ τῆς οὐσίας ἁπάσης τῆς ἑαυτοῦ.
Let none of you, therefore, imagine that, if Xenocles had believed his wife to be a legitimate child, he would have brought a suit claiming her patrimony; no, the legitimate daughter would have entered into possession of her father's estate, and, if anyone had tried to seize it or deprive her of it by violence, he would have been ousting her from her patrimony and would have been liable not only to a civil prosecution but also to a public denunciation to the archon and would have risked his person and all his possessions.
§ 63
ἔτι δʼ ἂν πρότερον τοῦ Ξενοκλέους οἱ τοῦ Πύρρου θεῖοι, εἰ ᾔδεσαν γνησίαν θυγατέρα τῷ ἑαυτῶν ἀδελφιδῷ καταλειπομένην καὶ ἡμῶν μηδένα λαμβάνειν ἐθέλοντα αὐτήν, οὐκ ἄν ποτε ἐπέτρεψαν Ξενοκλέα, τὸν μηδαμόθεν μηδὲν γένει προσήκοντα Πύρρῳ, λαβόντα ἔχειν τὴν κατὰ γένος προσήκουσαν αὑτοῖς γυναῖκα. ἢ δεινόν γʼ ἂν εἴη.
Even before any action on the part of Xenocles, Pyrrhus's uncles, if they had known that their nephew had left a legitimate daughter and that none of us was willing to take her in marriage, would never have allowed Xenocles, who was an entire stranger in blood to Pyrrhus, to take and marry one who belonged to them by right of kinship.
§ 64
τὰς μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν πατέρων ἐκδοθείσας καὶ συνοικούσας ἀνδράσι γυναῖκας (περὶ ὧν τίς ἂν ἄμεινον ἢ ὁ πατὴρ βουλεύσαιτο;) καὶ τὰς οὕτω δοθείσας, ἂν ὁ πατὴρ αὐτῶν τελευτήσῃ μὴ καταλιπὼν αὐταῖς γνησίους ἀδελφούς, τοῖς ἐγγύτατα γένους ἐπιδίκους ὁ νόμος εἶναι κελεύει, καὶ πολλοὶ συνοικοῦντες ἤδη ἀφῄρηνται τὰς ἑαυτῶν γυναῖκας.
Such a proceeding would have been extraordinary. The law ordains that daughters who have been given in marriage by their father and are living with their husbands—and who can judge better than a father what is to his daughter's interest?—in spite of the fact that they are thus married, shall, if their father dies without leaving them legitimate brothers, pass into the legal power of their next-of-kin; and indeed it has frequently happened that husbands have been thus deprived of their own wives.
§ 65
εἶτα τὰς μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν πατέρων ἐκδοθείσας διὰ τὸν νόμον ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἐπιδίκους εἶναι προσήκει· Ξενοκλεῖ δὲ ἄν τις τόδʼ ἐπέτρεψε τῶν τοῦ Πύρρου θείων, εἰ ἦν γνησία θυγάτηρ ἐκείνῳ καταλειπομένη, λαβόντα ἔχειν τὴν κατὰ γένος προσήκουσαν αὑτοῖς γυναῖκα, καὶ τοσαύτης οὐσίας τοῦτον καταστῆναι κληρονόμον ἀνθʼ ἑαυτῶν; μὴ νομίσητε ὑμεῖς, ὦ ἄνδρες·
While, then, the necessary consequence of this law is that women who have been given in marriage by their fathers are thus liable to be legally claimed, would any one of Pyrrhus's uncles, if Phile were a legitimate daughter left by him, have allowed Xenocles to take and marry a woman who belonged to them by right of kinship and thus make him heir to so large a fortune instead of themselves? Do not believe it, gentlemen;
§ 66
οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀνθρώπων μισεῖ τὸ λυσιτελοῦν, οὐδὲ περὶ πλείονος τοὺς ἀλλοτρίους ἑαυτοῦ ποιεῖται. ἐὰν οὖν προφασίζωνται διὰ τὴν τοῦ Ἐνδίου ποίησιν μὴ ἐπίδικον εἶναι τὴν γυναῖκα, καὶ διὰ ταῦτα μὴ φῶσιν ἀμφισβητῆσαι αὐτῆς, πρῶτον μὲν ἐκεῖνα αὐτοὺς ἐρέσθαι χρή, τί ὁμολογοῦντες τὴν τοῦ Ἐνδίου ποίησιν ὑπὸ τοῦ Πύρρου γενέσθαι ἐπεσκημμένοι εἰσὶ τοῖς μεμαρτυρηκόσι ταῦτα,
no man so hates his own advantage and prefers the interest of strangers to his own. If, therefore, they pretend that the adoption of Endius annulled their rights over this woman and allege that it is for this reason that they laid no claim to her, the following questions must be put to them: First, why have they attacked those who have borne witness to the adoption of Endius by Pyrrhus if they admit that it took place?
§ 67
εἶτα 〈τί〉 παρελθόντες τὸν τελευταῖον τοῦ οἴκου γεγενημένον κληρονόμον τοῦ Πύρρου κλήρου τὴν λῆξιν λαχεῖν ἠξίωσαν παρὰ τὸν νόμον. πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἐκεῖνο αὐτοὺς ἔρεσθε, εἴ τις τῶν γνησίων 〈τῶν〉 αὑτοῦ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι ἀξιοῖ. ταῦτα πρὸς τὴν ἀναίδειαν αὐτῶν πυνθάνεσθε. ὡς δʼ ἦν ἐπίδικος ἡ γυνή, εἴ περ γνησία κατελείφθη, ἐκ τῶν νόμων σαφέστατα μαθεῖν ἔστι τοῦτο.
And, secondly, why did they think fit to claim the succession to Pyrrhus's estate illegally, ignoring him who was its last tenant? Furthermore, you should ask them whether any legitimate child ever thinks of requesting the court to adjudicate to him what is his own. These are the questions with which you should oppose their impudence. That the woman could be legally claimed by her next-of-kin, if she was really a legitimate daughter of the deceased, appears most evidently from the laws.
§ 68
ὁ γὰρ νόμος διαρρήδην λέγει ἐξεῖναι διαθέσθαι ὅπως ἂν ἐθέλῃ τις τὰ αὑτοῦ, ἐὰν μὴ παῖδας γνησίους καταλίπῃ ἄρρενας· ἂν δὲ θηλείας καταλίπῃ, σὺν ταύταις. οὐκοῦν μετὰ τῶν θυγατέρων ἔστι δοῦναι καὶ διαθέσθαι τὰ αὑτοῦ· ἄνευ δὲ τῶν γνησίων θυγατέρων οὐχ οἷόν τε οὔτε ποιήσασθαι οὔτε δοῦναι οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν τῶν ἑαυτοῦ.
The law states explicitly that, in the absence of legitimate male issue, a man can dispose of his property as he pleases, but that, if he has daughters, the legatees must take them as well. Thus a man may bequeath and dispose of his property with his daughters, but he may not either adopt a son or leave any of his possessions to anyone without also disposing of his legitimate daughters.
§ 69
οὐκοῦν εἰ μὲν ἄνευ τῆς γνησίας θυγατρὸς τὸν Ἔνδιον Πύρρος ἐποιεῖτο ὑὸν αὑτῷ, ἄκυρος ἂν ἦν αὐτοῦ ἡ ποίησις κατὰ τὸν νόμον· εἰ δὲ τὴν θυγατέρα ἐδίδου καὶ ἐπὶ τούτῳ ποιησάμενος κατέλιπε, πῶς ἂν ὑμεῖς ἐπετρέψατε ἐπιδικάζεσθαι οἱ τοῦ Πύρρου θεῖοι τὸν Ἔνδιον τοῦ Πύρρου κλήρου ἄνευ τῆς γνησίας θυγατρός, εἰ ἦν ἐκείνῳ, ἄλλως τε εἰ καὶ ἐμαρτυρήσατε ὡς ἐπέσκηψεν ὑμῖν ὁ ἀδελφιδοῦς ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τούτου τοῦ παιδίου;
If, therefore, Pyrrhus adopted Endius as his son without also disposing of his legitimate daughter, the adoption would have been void in the eyes of the law; if, on the other hand, he intended to give him his daughter and after adopting him on these terms left her to him, how could you, the uncles of Pyrrhus, have allowed Endius to have the estate of Pyrrhus adjudicated to him without his taking also his legitimate daughter, if he had one, especially as you testified that your nephew solemnly charged you to look after this girl?
§ 70
ἀλλʼ ὦ ʼγαθοί, τοῦτο μὲν καὶ λαθεῖν φήσαιτʼ ἂν ὑμᾶς· ὅτε δʼ ἠγγύα καὶ ἐξεδίδου ὁ Ἔνδιος τὴν γυναῖκα, ἐπετρέπετε ὑμεῖς οἱ θεῖοι τὴν τοῦ ἀδελφιδοῦ τοῦ ὑμετέρου αὐτῶν ὡς ἐξ ἑταίρας οὖσαν ἐκείνῳ ἐγγυᾶσθαι, ἄλλως τε καὶ παραγενέσθαι φάσκοντες, ὅτε ὁ ἀδελφιδοῦς ὑμῶν ἠγγυᾶτο τὴν μητέρα τὴν ταύτης κατὰ 〈τοὺς〉 νόμους ἕξειν γυναῖκα, ἔτι δὲ καὶ ἐν τῇ δεκάτῃ τῇ ταύτης κληθέντες συνεστιᾶσθαι;
Can you say, my good friends, that this point escaped your notice? Yet when Endius betrothed the woman and gave her in marriage, did you, his uncles, allow your own nephew's daughter to be betrothed as his daughter by a mistress, though you declare that you were present when your nephew took her mother to be his wife in due legal form, and further, that you took part by invitation in the celebrations on the tenth day after her child's birth?
§ 71
πρὸς δὲ τούτοις (τουτὶ γὰρ τὸ δεινόν ἐστιν) ἐπισκῆψαι φάσκοντες ὑμῖν τὸν ἀδελφιδοῦν ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τούτου τοῦ παιδίου, οὕτως ἐπεμελήθητε ὥστʼ ἐᾶσαι ὡς ἐξ ἑταίρας οὖσαν αὐτὴν ἐγγυᾶσθαι, ἄλλως τε καὶ ἔχουσαν τοὔνομα τῆς ὑμετέρας αὐτῶν ἀδελφῆς, ὡς ἐμαρτυρεῖτε;
Furthermore—and this is the worst part of your conduct—though you declare that your nephew solemnly charged you to look after this girl, your mode of looking after her was to allow her to be married as the daughter of a mistress, although, as you testified, she bore the name of your own sister.
§ 72
ἐκ τοίνυν τούτων, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ πράγματος ῥᾴδιόν ἐστι γνῶναι ὅσον ἀναισχυντότατοι ἀνθρώπων εἰσὶν οὗτοι. τίνος γὰρ ἕνεκα, εἰ ἦν γνησία θυγάτηρ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ θείῳ καταλειπομένη, ποιησάμενος ὁ θεῖος κατέλιπε τὸν ἐμὸν ἀδελφὸν ὑὸν ἑαυτῷ; πότερον ὅτι προσήκοντες αὐτῷ ἐγγυτέρω γένους ἡμῶν ἦσαν ἄλλοι, οὓς βουλόμενος τὴν ἐπιδικασίαν τῆς θυγατρὸς ἀποστερῆσαι ἐποιεῖτο τὸν 〈ἐμὸν〉 ἀδελφὸν ὑὸν αὑτῷ; ἀλλʼ οὔτε ἐγένετο οὔτʼ ἔστι, μὴ γενομένων [δὲ] παίδων γνησίων ἐκείνῳ, ἐγγυτέρω ἡμῶν οὐδὲ εἷς· ἀδελφὸς μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἦν αὐτῷ οὐδʼ ἀδελφοῦ παῖδες, ἐκ δὲ τῆς ἀδελφῆς ἡμεῖς ἦμεν αὐτῷ.
From all this, gentlemen, and from what actually happened, it is easy to see that these men attain the limit of human impudence. For why did our uncle, if he had a legitimate daughter who survived him, adopt and leave behind my brother as his son? Had he nearer relatives than us whom he wished, by adopting my brother, to exclude from the right of claiming his daughter? In the absence of legitimate sons of his own, he neither has nor ever had a single relative nearer than us; for he had no brother or brother's sons, and we were the children of his sister.
§ 73
ἀλλὰ νὴ Δία ἄλλον τινὰ ποιησάμενος τῶν συγγενῶν ἔδωκεν ἂν ἔχειν τὸν κλῆρον καὶ τὴν θυγατέρα τὴν ἑαυτοῦ. καὶ τί αὐτὸν ἔδει καταφανῶς καὶ ὁτῳοῦν ἀπέχθεσθαι τῶν οἰκείων, ἐξόν, εἴπερ ἦν ἠγγυημένος τὴν ἀδελφὴν τὴν Νικοδήμου, τὴν θυγατέρα τὴν ἐκ ταύτης ἀποφανθεῖσαν εἶναι εἰς τοὺς φράτορας εἰσαγαγόντι ὡς οὖσαν γνησίαν ἑαυτῷ, ἐπὶ ἅπαντι τῷ κλήρῳ ἐπίδικον καταλιπεῖν αὐτήν, καὶ ἐπισκῆψαι τῶν γιγνομένων 〈ἐκ〉 τῆς θυγατρὸς παίδων εἰσαγαγεῖν ὑὸν ἑαυτῷ;
But, it may be urged, he might have adopted some other kinsman and given him the possession of his estate and his daughter. Yet what need had he openly to incur the enmity of any one of his relatives, when it was in his power, if he had really married the sister of Nicodemus, to introduce the child, who has been declared to be her offspring, to the members of his ward as his own legitimate child, and leave her sole heiress to all his estate and direct that one of her sons should be introduced as his adopted son?
§ 74
δῆλον [μὲν] γὰρ ὅτι ἐπίκληρον καταλιπὼν ἀκριβῶς ἂν ἤδει ὅτι δυοῖν θάτερον ἔμελλεν ὑπάρχειν αὐτῇ· ἢ γὰρ ἡμῶν τινα τῶν ἐγγύτατα γένους ἐπιδικασάμενον ἕξειν γυναῖκα, ἢ εἰ μηδεὶς ἡμῶν ἐβούλετο λαμβάνειν, τῶν θείων τινὰ τούτων τῶν μαρτυρούντων, εἰ δὲ μή, τῶν ἄλλων τινὰ συγγενῶν τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ οὐσίᾳ ἐπιδικασάμενον κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἕξειν ταύτην γυναῖκα.
For it is clear that, if he left her sole heiress, he would have been fully aware that one of two things was likely to happen to her: either one of us, the nearest relatives, would obtain an adjudication and take her as wife; or, if none of us wished to take her, one of these uncles who just now gave evidence, or, failing them, one of the other relatives, would, on the same principle, obtain an adjudication of her together with the whole estate and take her as his wife.
§ 75
οὐκοῦν ἐκ μὲν τοῦ τὴν θυγατέρα εἰς τοὺς φράτορας εἰσαγαγεῖν καὶ μὴ ποιήσασθαι τὸν ἐμὸν ἀδελφὸν ὑὸν αὑτῷ ταῦτʼ ἂν διεπράξατο· ἐκ δὲ τοῦ τοῦτον μὲν ποιήσασθαι τὴν δὲ μὴ εἰσαγαγεῖν τὴν μὲν νόθην, ὥσπερ αὐτῷ προσῆκε, καὶ ἄκληρον κατέστησε, τὸν δὲ κληρονόμον κατέλιπε τῶν ἑαυτοῦ.
By presenting, then, his daughter to the members of his ward without adopting my brother as his son, he might have obtained this result; whereas, by adopting my brother without introducing his daughter to the members of his ward, he made her illegitimate, as it was right that he should, and therefore incapable of succession, and left my brother heir to his estate.
§ 76
ἀλλὰ μὴν ὥς γε οὔτε γαμηλίαν εἰσήνεγκεν ὁ θεῖος ἡμῶν, οὔτε τὴν θυγατέρα, ἥν φασι γνησίαν αὐτῷ εἶναι οὗτοι, εἰσαγαγεῖν εἰς τοὺς φράτορας ἠξίωσε, καὶ ταῦτα νόμου ὄντος αὐτοῖς, ἀναγνώσεται [δὲ] ὑμῖν τὴν τῶν φρατόρων τῶν ἐκείνου μαρτυρίαν. ἀναγίγνωσκε· σὺ δʼ ἐπίλαβε τὸ ὕδωρ. Μαρτυρία λαβὲ δὲ καὶ ὡς ἐποιήσατο τὸν ἐμὸν ἀδελφὸν ὑὸν αὑτῷ.
Further, to prove to you that our uncle never gave a marriage-feast and never thought fit to introduce his daughter, whom our opponents declare to be his legitimate child, to the members of his ward, though their statutes demand that this should be done, the clerk shall read you the deposition of the members of Pyrrhus's ward. Read this; and you, stop the water-clock. Deposition Now take the deposition which shows that Pyrrhus adopted my brother.
§ 77
Μαρτυρία εἶτα ὑμεῖς τὴν Νικοδήμου μαρτυρίαν τῶν αὐτοῦ τοῦ θείου ἐκμαρτυριῶν πιστοτέραν ἡγήσεσθε εἶναι, καὶ τὴν οὕτω κοινὴν τοῖς βουλομένοις γεγενημένην, ταύτην ἐπιχειρήσει τις ὑμᾶς πείθειν ὅτι ἐγγυητὴν γυναῖκα ὁ ἡμέτερος θεῖος ἔσχεν; ἀλλʼ ὑμεῖς, ὡς ἔγωγʼ οἶμαι, οὐ πιστεύσετε, ἐὰν μὴ ἀποφαίνῃ ὑμῖν, ὅπερ ἀρχόμενος εἶπον τοῦ λόγου,
Deposition After this will you regard the testimony of Nicodemus as more worthy of credence than the evidence provided by our uncle's own acts? And will anyone attempt to persuade you that our uncle made a legal marriage with this woman who was a common courtezan? No, you will never, I am sure, believe it unless Nicodemus can explain the following points, which I mentioned at the beginning of my speech;
§ 78
πρῶτον μὲν ἐπὶ τίνι προικὶ οὗτος ἐγγυῆσαι τῷ Πύρρῳ φησὶ τὴν ἀδελφήν, ἔπειτα πρὸς ὁποῖον ἄρχοντα ἡ ἐγγυητὴ γυνὴ ἀπέλιπε τὸν ἄνδρα ἢ τὸν οἶκον [τὸν] αὐτοῦ, εἶτα παρʼ ὅτου ἐκομίσατο τὴν προῖκα αὐτῆς, ἐπειδὴ τετελευτηκὼς ἦν ᾧ φησιν αὐτὴν ἐγγυῆσαι· ἢ εἰ ἀπαιτῶν μὴ ἐδύνατο κομίσασθαι ἐν εἴκοσιν ἔτεσιν, ὁποίαν δίκην σίτου ἢ τῆς προικὸς αὐτῆς ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐγγυητῆς γυναικὸς ἐδικάσατο τῷ ἔχοντι τὸν Πύρρου κλῆρον οὗτος.
First, with what dowry does he say that he married his sister to Pyrrhus? Secondly, before what archon did this married woman give notice of having quitted her husband or his domicile? Next, from whom did Nicodemus recover her dowry, when the man had died to whom he says that he gave her in marriage? Or if, though he demanded it back, he was unable to recover in the course of twenty years, what action did he bring for alimony or for her dowry on behalf of this married woman against the tenant of Pyrrhus's estate?
§ 79
ἔτι δὲ πρὸς τούτοις ἐπιδειξάτω ὅτῳ πρότερον ἢ ὕστερον ἠγγύησεν οὗτος τὴν ἀδελφήν, ἢ εἰ ἐξ ἄλλου τινὸς γεγενημένοι εἰσὶ παῖδες αὐτῇ. ταῦτα οὖν ἀξιοῦτε πυνθάνεσθαι παρʼ αὐτοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῆς τοῖς φράτορσι γαμηλίας μὴ ἀμνημονεῖτε. οὐ γὰρ τῶν ἐλαχίστων πρὸς τὴν τούτου μαρτυρίαν τεκμήριόν ἐστι τοῦτο. δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι, εἰ ἐπείσθη ἐγγυήσασθαι, ἐπείσθη ἂν καὶ γαμηλίαν ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς τοῖς φράτερσιν εἰσενεγκεῖν καὶ εἰσαγαγεῖν τὴν ἐκ ταύτης ἀποφανθεῖσαν θυγατέρα ὡς γνησίαν οὖσαν αὑτῷ.
Furthermore, in addition to all this, let him explain to whom he married his sister at an earlier or later date and whether she had children by another man. These, then, are the questions which you must make him answer, and do not forget to interrogate him also about the marriage-feast to the members of his ward. This is among the proofs which are most damaging to his evidence; for it is obvious that if Pyrrhus was induced to marry this woman, he would also have been induced to give a marriage-feast for her to the members of his ward and to introduce to them the child, who has been declared to be this woman's daughter, as his legitimate offspring.
§ 80
καὶ ἔν τε τῷ δήμῳ κεκτημένος τὸν τριτάλαντον οἶκον, εἰ ἦν γεγαμηκώς, ἠναγκάζετο ἂν ὑπὲρ τῆς γαμετῆς γυναικὸς καὶ θεσμοφόρια ἑστιᾶν τὰς γυναῖκας, καὶ τἆλλα ὅσα προσῆκε λῃτουργεῖν ἐν τῷ δήμῳ ὑπὲρ τῆς γυναικὸς ἀπό γε οὐσίας τηλικαύτης. οὐ τοίνυν φανεῖται οὐδὲν τούτων γεγενημένον οὐδεπώποτε. οἱ μὲν οὖν φράτορες μεμαρτυρήκασιν ὑμῖν· λαβὲ δὲ καὶ τὴν τῶν δημοτῶν τῶν ἐκείνου μαρτυρίαν. 〈Μαρτυρία〉
Again in his deme, since he possessed the fortune of three talents, he would have been obliged on behalf of this wedded wife of his to entertain the wives of his fellow-demesmen at the Thesmophoria, and to perform for her the other offices which the possession of such a fortune entails. It shall therefore be made clear to you that nothing of the kind has ever been done. The members of his ward have already given you their evidence; take now and read the deposition of Pyrrhus's fellow-demesmen. Deposition
On the Estate of Nicostratus · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg004 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Νικοστράτου κλήρου (ἐπίλογος) — tlg0017.tlg004.perseus-grc2 · English: On the Estate of Nicostratus — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg004.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Νικοστράτου ἐν ὑπερορίᾳ τελευτήσαντος, Ἅγνων καὶ Ἁγνόθεος ὡς ὄντες ἀνεψιοὶ ἐκ πατραδέλφου ἀμφισβητοῦσι τοῦ κλήρου πρὸς Χαριάδην, φάσκοντα κληρονόμον αὐτοῦ εἶναι κατὰ δόσιν, ὃ ἔστι κατὰ διαθήκας. Ἰσαῖος οὖν ὁ ῥήτωρ, ὡς συγγενὴς ὢν τῶν περὶ τὸν Ἅγνωνα, λέγει συνηγορῶν αὐτοῖς. ἡ στάσις στοχασμός.
Argument Nicostratus having died in a foreign land, Hagnon and Hagnotheus, as being his first cousins (their father having been brother to Nicostratus's father), contend for the succession to his estate against Chariades, who claims to be heir by bequest, that is to say, by will. Isaeus, the orator, being a kinsman of Hagnon and his brother, speaks as their advocate. The question at issue is one of fact.
§ 1
ἐπιτήδειοί μοι τυγχάνουσιν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὄντες Ἅγνων τε οὑτοσὶ καὶ Ἁγνόθεος, καὶ ὁ πατὴρ αὐτῶν ἔτι πρότερον. εἰκὸς οὖν μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι, ὡς ἂν οἷός τε ὦ, συνειπεῖν αὐτοῖς. περὶ μὲν οὖν τῶν ἐν τῇ ὑπερορίᾳ πραχθέντων [ὡς] οὔτε μάρτυρας ἐξευρεῖν οἷόν τε, οὔτε τοὺς ἀντιδίκους, ἐάν τι ψεύδωνται, ἐλέγχειν ῥᾴδιον, διὰ τὸ μηδέτερον τούτων ἐκεῖσε ἀφῖχθαι· τὰ δὲ ἐνθάδε [μοι] συμβεβηκότα δοκεῖ μοι ὑμῖν ἱκανὰ γενέσθαι ἂν τεκμήρια, ὅτι ἅπαντες οἱ κατὰ τὴν δόσιν τῶν Νικοστράτου ἀμφισβητοῦντες ἐξαπατῆσαι ὑμᾶς βούλονται.
Hagnon here and Hagnotheus, gentlemen, are intimate friends of mine, as was their father before them. It seems, therefore, only natural to me to support their case to the best of my ability. For the events which happened in a foreign land it is not possible to find witnesses or easy to convict our adversaries of any lies which they may tell, because neither of my clients has ever been to the country in question; but the events which have occurred here in Athens seem to me to provide you with sufficient proof that all those who lay claim to Nicostratus's estate on the ground of bequest are desirous of deceiving you.
§ 2
πρῶτον μὲν οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, περὶ τῆς τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐπιγραφῆς ἄξιόν ἐστιν ἐξετάσαι, καὶ σκέψασθαι ὁπότεροι ἁπλούστερον καὶ κατὰ φύσιν μᾶλλον τὰς λήξεις ἐποιήσαντο. Ἅγνων μὲν γὰρ οὑτοσὶ καὶ Ἁγνόθεος Θρασυμάχου ἐπεγράψαντο τὸν Νικόστρατον, καὶ ἑαυτοὺς ἐκείνῳ ἀνεψιοὺς ἀποφαίνουσι, καὶ τούτων μάρτυρας παρέχονται·
In the first place, gentlemen, it is proper that you should consider the different names attributed to the deceased and determine which of the two parties has laid his claim in the more straightforward and natural manner. Hagnon here and Hagnotheus described Nicostratus in their claim as the son of Thrasymachus and declare that they are his first cousins and prove these statements by witnesses.
§ 3
Χαριάδης δὲ καὶ οἱ συνδικοῦντες αὐτῷ Σμίκρου μὲν πατρὸς εἶναί φασι τὸν Νικόστρατον, ἀμφισβητοῦσι δὲ τοῦ Θρασυμάχου ὑοῦ κλήρου. καὶ οἵδε μὲν οὐδὲν προσποιοῦνται ἐκείνου τοῦ ὀνόματος οὔτε γιγνώσκειν οὔτε προσήκειν αὑτοῖς· φασὶ μὲν οὖν εἶναι Θρασυμάχου Νικόστρατον, τούτου δὲ ὁμοίως τῆς οὐσίας ἀμφισβητοῦσι.
Chariades and his supporters, on the other hand, assert that Nicostratus was the son of Smicrus and yet claim the estate of the son of Thrasymachus. My clients make no pretence that they know anything of the name of Smicrus or that it has anything to do with them; they declare that Nicostratus was the son of Thrasymachus, and it is likewise his estate which they claim.
§ 4
καὶ εἰ μὲν τὸ ὄνομα πατρόθεν τὸ αὐτὸ ὡμολόγουν εἶναι τοῦ Νικοστράτου, περὶ δὲ τοῦ κλήρου μόνου διεφέροντο, οὐδὲν ἂν ἔδει ὑμᾶς σκέψασθαι ἀλλʼ 〈ἢ〉 εἴ τι διέθετο ἐκεῖνος ὁ Νικόστρατος, ὃν ἀμφότεροι ὡμολόγουν· νῦν δὲ πῶς οἷόν τε τῷ ἀνδρὶ δύο πατέρας ἐπιγράψασθαι; τοῦτο γὰρ Χαριάδης πεποίηκεν· αὐτός τε γὰρ ἔλαχε 〈τῶν〉 τοῦ Σμίκρου Νικοστράτου, τούτοις τε 〈τῶν〉 τοῦ Θρασυμάχου λαχοῦσι παρακατέβαλεν ὡς τὸν αὐτὸν ὄντα.
If the parties were in agreement as to the name of Nicostratus's father and were disputing only about the estate, you would only have to consider whether Nicostratus, on whose identity both were agreed, did or did not leave a will. But as it is, how is it possible to assign two fathers to the man? Yet this is what Chariades has done; he himself claimed the estate of Nicostratus the son of Smicrus, and paid the deposit for a suit against my clients when they claimed the estate of the son of Thrasymachus, just as though it were a question of one and the same person.
§ 5
ἔστι μὲν οὖν ἅπαντα ταῦτα ἐπήρεια καὶ παρασκευή. ἡγοῦνται γὰρ τούτους, ἁπλοῦ μὲν ὄντος τοῦ πράγματος καὶ μηδεμιᾶς αὐτοῖς ταραχῆς ἐγγιγνομένης, οὐ χαλεπῶς ἐπιδείξειν ὅτι οὐδὲν Νικόστρατος διέθετο· ἐὰν δὲ μὴ τὸν πατέρα τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι φῶσι, τοῦ δὲ κλήρου μηδὲν ἧττον ἀμφισβητῶσιν, ἀκριβῶς ἴσασιν ὅτι πλείονι λόγῳ εἰπεῖν τουτουσὶ δεήσει ὡς Νικόστρατος Θρασυμάχου ἦν ἢ ὡς οὐδὲν διέθετο.
It is all an insolent plot and conspiracy. They think that my clients, if the matter is simple and nothing is introduced to confuse the issue, will have no difficulty in proving that Nicostratus made no will; whereas, if they allege that the father is not the same and likewise claim the estate, they know full well that my clients will have to employ a longer argument to prove that Nicostratus was the son of Thrasymachus than to convince you that he left no will.
§ 6
ἔτι δὲ καὶ ὁμολογοῦντες Θρασυμάχου μὲν εἶναι τὸν Νικόστρατον οὐκ ἂν εἶχον ἐξελέγξαι τούσδε ὡς οὐκ εἰσὶν ἐκείνῳ ἀνεψιοί· ἄλλον δὲ πατέρα τῷ τεθνεῶτι κατασκευάζοντες οὐ μόνον περὶ τῶν διαθηκῶν ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ τοῦ γένους λόγον ἐμβεβλήκασιν.
Further, if they admitted that Nicostratus was the son of Thrasymachus, they would be unable to prove that my clients are not his cousins; but, by inventing another father for the deceased, they have introduced a discussion about his parentage as well as about the will.
§ 7
οὐκ ἐκ τούτων δὲ μόνον γνοίητʼ ἂν ὅτι ἀλλότριοί τινες εἰσιν οἱ ταῦτα ἐπὶ τουτουσὶ ἐπάγοντες, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ τῶν κατʼ ἀρχὰς γεγενημένων. τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἀπεκείρατο, ἐπειδὴ τὼ δύο ταλάντω ἐξ Ἀκῆς ἠλθέτην; ἢ τίς οὐ μέλαν ἱμάτιον ἐφόρησεν, ὡς διὰ τὸ πένθος κληρονομήσων τῆς οὐσίας; ἢ πόσοι συγγενεῖς καὶ ὑεῖς κατὰ δόσιν προσεποιήσαντο τῶν Νικοστράτου;
But it is not only from these proceedings but from all that has happened from the beginning that you can be sure that those who are thus plotting against my clients are strangers to the family. For who did not cut the hair when the two talents arrived from Ace? Who did not wear black, hoping by mourning to inherit the estate? What was the number of would-be kinsmen and adopted sons who claimed Nicostratus's property?
§ 8
Δημοσθένης μέν γε ἀδελφιδοῦς ἔφη αὐτῷ εἶναι, ἐπειδὴ δʼ ἐξηλέγχθη ὑπὸ τούτων, ἀπέστη· Τήλεφος δὲ δοῦναι αὑτῷ Νικόστρατον ἅπαντα τὰ ἑαυτοῦ. καὶ οὗτος οὐ πολλῷ ὕστερον ἐπαύσατο. Ἀμεινιάδης δὲ ὑὸν αὐτῷ πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα ἧκεν ἄγων οὐδὲ τριετῆ γεγονότα, καὶ ταῦτʼ οὐκ ἐπιδεδημηκότος τοῦ Νικοστράτου ἕνδεκα ἐτῶν Ἀθήνησι.
Demosthenes declared himself to be his nephew, but renounced his claim when he was unmasked by my clients. Telephus asserted that Nicostratus had made him a gift of all his property; he too soon desisted. Ameiniades appeared before the archon and produced as Nicostratus's son a child not yet three years old, although it was eleven years since Nicostratus had been in Athens.
§ 9
Πύρρος δὲ ὁ Λαμπτρεὺς τῇ μὲν Ἀθηνᾷ ἔφη τὰ χρήματα ὑπὸ Νικοστράτου καθιερῶσθαι, αὐτῷ δʼ ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ ἐκείνου δεδόσθαι. Κτησίας δʼ ὁ Βησαιεὺς καὶ Κραναὸς τὸ μὲν πρῶτον δίκην ἔφασαν τοῦ Νικοστράτου ταλάντου καταδεδικάσθαι, ἐπειδὴ δʼ οὐκ εἶχον τοῦτο ἀποδεῖξαι, ἀπελεύθερον αὐτὸν ἑαυτῶν προσεποιήσαντο εἶναι· καὶ οὐδʼ οὗτοι ἃ ἔλεγον ἀπέδειξαν.
Pyrrhus of Lamptra declared that the property had been consecrated by Nicostratus to Athena but that it had been given him by Nicostratus himself. Ctesias of Besa and Cranaus at first asserted that Nicostratus had been condemned to pay them a talent; when they could not prove this, they pretended that he was their freedman; they were no better able to prove their statement.
§ 10
καὶ οἱ μὲν εὐθὺς κατὰ τὰ πρῶτα ἐπὶ τὰ Νικοστράτου ᾁξαντες οὗτοί εἰσι· Χαριάδης δὲ τότε μὲν οὐδαμοῦ ἠμφισβήτησεν, ὕστερον δὲ οὐ μόνον αὐτὸς 〈αὑτὸν〉 ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ ἐκ τῆς ἑταίρας παιδίον εἰσποιῶν ἦλθε. ταὐτὸ δʼ ἦν αὐτῷ ὡς ἢ τῶν χρημάτων κληρονομήσοντι ἢ τὸ παιδίον ἀστὸν ποιήσοντι. αἰσθόμενος δὲ καὶ οὗτος ὅτι περὶ τοῦ γένους ἐλεγχθήσοιτο, τὴν μὲν τοῦ παιδίου ἀμφισβήτησιν παρέλυσεν, ἑαυτῷ δὲ κατὰ δόσιν παρακατέβαλεν.
These were the men who at the very beginning swooped down upon the estate of Nicostratus. Chariades at that time made no claim, but came forward later, foisting in not only himself but also his child by his mistress. It was all the same to him whether he was going to inherit the estate or have his son recognized as a citizen. He, too, perceiving that he would be defeated on the question of the child's birth, jettisoned the child's claim and paid a deposit to bring an action asserting his own right under a will.
§ 11
ἐχρῆν μὲν οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅστις κατὰ δόσιν χρημάτων ἀμφισβητῶν ἡττηθείη, μὴ κατὰ τὸ τέλος ζημιοῦσθαι, ἀλλʼ ἐφʼ ὅσα περ ληψόμενος ᾔει, τοσαῦτα τῇ πόλει ἀποτίνειν· οὕτω γὰρ 〈ἂν〉 οὔθʼ οἱ νόμοι κατεφρονοῦντο οὔτε τὰ γένη ὑβρίζετο, πρὸ δὲ τούτων οὐδʼ ἂν τῶν τεθνεώτων οὐδεὶς κατεψεύδετο. ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἅπασι καὶ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων ἁπάντων, καθʼ ὅ τι ἄν τις βούληται, ἀμφισβητεῖν ἔξεστιν, ὑμᾶς χρὴ περὶ αὐτῶν ὡς οἷόν τʼ ἀκριβέστατα ἐξετάζειν καὶ μηδὲν εἰς ὅσον δύνασθε παραλείπειν.
It would be a good thing, gentlemen, that any claimant to an inheritance under a will, if he fails, should not be fined at the usual rate but be made to pay into the treasury the full amount of the fortune which he set out to obtain; thus the laws would not be despised nor would the relatives be insulted, and above all, no fictions would be invented against the dead. But, since full liberty is given to anyone according to his fancy to claim anyone else's estate, it behoves you to sift their claims with every possible care and to omit no possible precaution.
§ 12
ἐν μόναις δὲ ταῖς τῶν κλήρων εἰσαγωγαῖς δοκεῖ μοι προσήκειν τεκμηρίοις μᾶλλον ἢ μάρτυσι πιστεύειν. περὶ μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἄλλων συμβολαίων οὐ πάνυ χαλεπὸν τοὺς τὰ ψευδῆ μαρτυροῦντας ἐλέγχειν· ζῶντος γὰρ καὶ παρόντος τοῦ πράξαντος καταμαρτυροῦσι· περὶ δὲ τῶν διαθηκῶν πῶς ἄν τις γνοίη τοὺς μὴ τἀληθῆ λέγοντας, εἰ μὴ πάνυ μεγάλα τὰ διαφέροντα εἴη, αὐτοῦ μὲν καθʼ οὗ μαρτυροῦσι τεθνεῶτος, τῶν δὲ συγγενῶν μηδὲν τῶν πεπραγμένων εἰδότων, τοῦ δὲ ἐλέγχου μηδαμῶς ἀκριβοῦς γιγνομένου;
It seems to me that in suits concerning inheritances, and in these alone, more credit ought to be given to circumstantial proof than to the statements of witnesses. When other legal instruments are the subject of litigation, it is not very difficult to convict those who give false evidence, for they give their evidence to the prejudice of the supposed party to the deed alive and present; but when a will is in question, how can one recognize those who are not telling the truth, unless the divergences in the evidence are great, since the party against whom they bear witness is dead, the relatives know nothing of the facts, and the method of refuting the evidence is by no means clear?
§ 13
ἔτι δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ τῶν διατιθεμένων οἱ πολλοὶ οὐδὲ λέγουσι τοῖς παραγιγνομένοις ὅ τι διατίθενται, ἀλλʼ αὐτοῦ μόνου, τοῦ καταλιπεῖν διαθήκας, μάρτυρας παρίστανται, τοῦ δὲ συμβαίνοντός ἐστι καὶ γραμματεῖον ἀλλαγῆναι καὶ τἀναντία ταῖς τοῦ τεθνεῶτος διαθήκαις μεταγραφῆναι· οὐδὲν γὰρ μᾶλλον οἱ μάρτυρες εἴσονται, εἰ ἐφʼ αἷς ἐκλήθησαν διαθήκαις, αὗται ἀποφαίνονται.
Further, gentlemen, most of those who make wills do not even mention to those who are present the purport of their will, but only invite them to attest the fact that they have made a will, and it is within the range of possibility that a will has been substituted or alterations made in a sense directly opposed to the wishes of the deceased; for the witnesses will have no more knowledge than anyone else whether the will produced is that which they were summoned to attest.
§ 14
ὁπότε δὲ καὶ τοὺς ὁμολογουμένως παραγενομένους οἷόν τʼ ἐστὶν ἐξαπατῆσαι, πῶς οὐκ ἂν ὑμᾶς γε τοὺς μηδὲν τοῦ πράγματος εἰδότας πολὺ [μᾶλλον] ἑτοιμότερόν τις παρακρούσασθαι ἐγχειρήσειεν; ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ ὁ νόμος, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐκ ἐάν τις διαθῆται μόνον, κυρίας εἶναι κελεύει τὰς διαθήκας, ἀλλὰ ἐὰν εὖ φρονῶν. σκεπτέον δὴ ὑμῖν πρῶτον μὲν εἰ ἐποιήσατο τὰς διαθήκας, ἔπειτα εἰ μὴ παρανοῶν διέθετο.
Since, then, it is possible to deceive those who were admittedly present when the will was made, how much more easily might an attempt be made to impose upon you who know nothing of the matter? Again, gentlemen, the law ordains that a will in order to be valid must not merely be executed but executed by a man in his right senses. You ought, therefore, to examine, first, whether the deceased made a will and, secondly, whether he was in his right mind at the time.
§ 15
ἀντιλεγόντων δʼ ἡμῶν μηδὲ τὸ παράπαν γενέσθαι τὰς διαθήκας, ἐκ τίνος ἂν τρόπου, εἴ τις παρανοῶν διέθετο, γνοίητε, πρὶν περὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ διαθέσθαι πιστεῦσαι; τοὺς μὲν οὖν κατὰ τὴν δόσιν ἀμφισβητοῦντας ὁρᾶτε ὅσον ἔργον ἐστὶν αἰσθέσθαι εἰ ἀληθῆ λέγουσι, τοὺς δὲ κατὰ τὸ γένος πρῶτον μὲν οὐδὲν δεῖ μάρτυρας παρασχέσθαι ὡς αὑτῶν ἐστιν ὁ κλῆρος (παρὰ πάντων γὰρ ὡμολόγηται τοῖς ἐγγυτάτω γένους τὰ τοῦ τελευτήσαντος γίγνεσθαι),
Since, however, we deny that a will was made at all, how can you decide whether that a man was insane when he made a will, until you are convinced that actually he made a will? Observe, then, how difficult it is to discover whether those who claim under a will are telling the truth; those, on the other hand, who claim by right of kinship, in the first place, need not produce witnesses to prove that the inheritance is theirs—for it is universally admitted that the property of a deceased person devolves on his next-of-kin—
§ 16
ἔπειτα οἱ νόμοι οὐ μόνον οἱ περὶ τῶν γενῶν ἀλλὰ καὶ οἱ περὶ τῶν δόσεων τοῖς συγγενέσι βοηθοῦσι. δοῦναι μὲν γὰρ ὁ νόμος οὐδενὶ ἐᾷ τὰ ἑαυτοῦ, ἐὰν ὑπὸ γήρως ἢ ὑπὸ νόσου ἢ ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἃ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἴστε παρανοήσῃ· κατὰ δὲ τὸ γένος καὶ τὰ τοῦ ὁπωσοῦν διακειμένου ὁ ἐγγύτατα γένους ἀναμφισβητήτως λαμβάνει.
and, secondly, the laws, not only those which deal with consanguinity but also those which treat of testamentary disposition, are in favor of kinsmen. For the law allows no one to dispose of his own property if his reason is impaired by old age or disease or the other causes with which you are familiar; but by right of relationship the next-of-kin has an undisputed title to the property of a deceased person, whatever was the state of the latter's faculties.
§ 17
χωρὶς δὲ τούτων ταῖς μὲν διαθήκαις διὰ μαρτύρων ὑμᾶς δεῖ πιστεῦσαι, ὑφʼ ὧν ἔνι καὶ ἐξαπατηθῆναι (οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἦσαν ψευδομαρτυρίων ἐπισκήψεις), τῇ δʼ ἀγχιστείᾳ διʼ ὑμῶν αὐτῶν· κατὰ γὰρ τοὺς νόμους οἱ συγγενεῖς ἀμφισβητοῦσιν, οὓς ὑμεῖς ἔθεσθε.
Beside this, in order to believe in a will, you are obliged to rely on witnesses, by whom it is possible to be deceived—if this were not so, there would be no prosecutions for perjury—but when the claim is based on kinship, you act on your own authority, for the next-of-kin assert their right in accordance with the laws which you have laid down.
§ 18
πρὸς δὲ τούτοις, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἰ μὲν οἱ κατὰ τὰς διαθήκας ἀμφισβητοῦντες ὁμολογουμένως Νικοστράτῳ ἐπιτήδειοι ὄντες ἐτύγχανον, τὸ μὲν ἀκριβὲς οὐδʼ ἂν οὕτως, ὅμως μέντοι μᾶλλον εἰκὸς ἦν ἀληθεῖς εἶναι δόξειν τὰς διαθήκας· ἤδη γάρ τινες οὐκ εὖ διακείμενοι τοῖς συγγενέσιν ὀθνείους φίλους τῶν πάνυ σφόδρα προσηκόντων περὶ πλείονος ἐποιήσαντο· νῦν δὲ οὔτε συσσίτους οὔτε φίλους οὔτʼ ἐν τάξει τῇ αὐτῇ τούτων δʼ ὑμῖν μάρτυρας ἁπάντων παρεσχήμεθα.
In addition to this, gentlemen, if those who claim under the will were admittedly close friends of Nicostratus, even then the conclusive proof would be lacking, though there would be a greater probability that the will could be regarded as genuine; for before now testators, being ill-disposed towards their kinsmen, have preferred strangers who were their friends to their nearest relatives by blood. But in the present case Nicostratus and Chariades were neither members of the same mess nor friends nor members of the same company, and on all these points we have produced witnesses before you.
§ 19
ὃ δὲ μέγιστον, καὶ μάλιστα τῆς Χαριάδου ἀναιδείας καταμαρτυρεῖ, τοῦτο σκέψασθε. ὅπου γὰρ τὸν αὑτὸν ποιησάμενον οὔτʼ ἀποθανόντα ἀνείλετο οὔτʼ ἔκαυσεν οὔτε ὠστολόγησεν, ἀλλὰ πάντα τοῖς μηδὲν προσήκουσι παρῆκε ποιῆσαι, πῶς οὐκ 〈ἂν〉 ἀνοσιώτατος εἴη, ὃς τῷ τεθνεῶτι μηδὲν τῶν νομιζομένων ποιήσας τῶν χρημάτων αὐτοῦ κληρονομεῖν ἀξιοῖ;
And consider this further point, which is of great importance and is the clearest possible proof of Chariades' impudence. Whereas he neither took up the body of his adopted father nor committed it to the flames nor collected the bones, but left all these duties to be done by complete strangers, should he not be regarded as most impious in claiming to inherit the property of the deceased, though he never performed any of the customary rites over him?
§ 20
ἀλλὰ νὴ Δία ἐπειδὴ τούτων οὐδὲν ἐποίησε, τὴν οὐσίαν τοῦ Νικοστράτου διεχείρισεν; ἀλλὰ καὶ ταῦτα μεμαρτύρηται ὑμῖν, καὶ τὰ πλεῖστα οὐδʼ αὐτὸς ἀρνεῖται. προφάσεις δὲ οἴομαι ἀναγκαίας ἐφʼ ἑκάστας τῶν πράξεων εὑρῆσθαι· τί γὰρ ὑπολείπεται τῷ διαρρήδην ὁμολογοῦντι;
Shall I be told that, after having performed none of these duties, he administered Nicostratus's property? Evidence of these facts, too, has been given you, and even he himself does not deny most of them. Makeshift excuses have, of course, been found to explain all his acts; for what other resource remains to one who expressly admits the facts?
§ 21
σαφῶς μὲν οὖν ἴστε, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅτι οὗτοι οὐ δικαίως τῶν Νικοστράτου ἐφίενται, ἀλλὰ βούλονται μὲν ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατῆσαι, τουτουσὶ δὲ συγγενεῖς ὄντας ἐκείνου, ἃ οἱ νόμοι ἔδοσαν αὐτοῖς, ἀποστερῆσαι. οὐ μόνος δὲ Χαριάδης τοῦτο πεποίηκεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἄλλοι πολλοὶ ἤδη τῶν ἐν τῇ ὑπερορίᾳ ἀποθνῃσκόντων οὐδὲ γιγνώσκοντες ἐνίους τῆς οὐσίας ἠμφισβήτησαν·
You must now be well aware, gentlemen, that these persons have no legal right to the property of Nicostratus, but wish to deceive you and to deprive my clients, who are his kinsmen, of an inheritance which lawfully belongs to them. Chariades is not the only person who has acted thus; many other claimants to the property of men who have died abroad have arisen, sometimes even without having been acquainted with them.
§ 22
ἐνθυμοῦνται γὰρ ὅτι κατορθώσασι μὲν 〈ἔσται〉 τὰ ἀλλότρια ἔχειν, διαμαρτοῦσι δὲ μικρὸς ὁ κίνδυνος· μαρτυρεῖν δὲ καὶ τὰ ψευδῆ τινες ἐθέλουσιν, οἱ δʼ ἔλεγχοι περὶ ἀφανῶν. συνελόντι πολὺ τὸ διαφέρον κατὰ γένος ἢ κατὰ δόσιν ἀμφισβητεῖν. ἀλλʼ ὑμᾶς χρή, ὦ ἄνδρες, πρῶτον μὲν τὰς διαθήκας σκοπεῖν, εἰ δοκοῦσι γενέσθαι· τοῦτο γὰρ οἵ τε νόμοι 〈ὑφ〉ηγοῦνται καὶ δικαιότατόν ἐστι.
For they consider that, if they are successful, it will be possible for them to enjoy the property of others, while, if they fail, the risk is inconsiderable; there are always men who are willing to perjure themselves, and the attempted refutations of their evidence are dealing with the unknown. In a word, there is a vast difference between claiming by right of kinship and claiming under a will. But your duty, gentlemen, is first of all to examine the will and decide whether you think that it is genuine; for this is what the laws enjoin and is the justest course.
§ 23
μὴ σαφῶς δὲ μήτʼ αὐτοὺς τὴν ἀλήθειαν εἰδότας, μήτε τῶν μαρτύρων τοῦ τελευτήσαντος ἐπιτηδείων ὄντων, ἀλλὰ Χαριάδου τοῦ τἀλλότρια βουλομένου λαβεῖν, τί ἂν εἴη δικαιότερον ἢ τοῖς συγγενέσι τὰ τοῦ συγγενοῦς ψηφίζεσθαι; καὶ γὰρ εἴ τι οἵδε ἔπαθον, οὐδενὶ ἂν ἄλλῳ ἢ Νικοστράτῳ τὰ τούτων ἐγένετο · κατὰ γὰρ τὸ αὐτὸ γένος ἂν ἠμφισβήτει, ἀνεψιὸς ὢν αὐτοῖς ἐκ πατραδέλφων.
But since you have no certain personal knowledge of the truth, and since the witnesses to the will were friends not of the deceased but of Chariades, who wishes to seize property which does not belong to him, what could be juster than by your verdict to award the property of a kinsmen to his kinsmen? For, indeed, if anything had happened to my clients, their property would have passed to none other than Nicostratus; for he would have claimed it by the same right of kinship, being their first cousin, the son of their father's own brother.
§ 24
μὰ Δίʼ ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ Ἅγνων οὐδʼ ὁ Ἁγνόθεος τοῦ Νικοστράτου συγγενής, ὡς οἱ ἀντίδικοί φασιν, ἀλλʼ ἕτεροι. ἔπειτα τῷ μὲν κατὰ τὴν δόσιν τοῦ κλήρου λαχόντι μαρτυροῦσιν, αὐτοὶ δὲ κατὰ τὸ γένος οὐκ ἀμφισβητήσουσιν; οὐ γὰρ εἰς τοῦτό γε ἀνοίας ἥκουσιν ὥστε πιστεύσαντες ταῖς διαθήκαις οὕτω ῥᾳδίως τοσούτων χρημάτων ἀφίστανται. ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ ἐξ ὧν αὐτοὶ οὗτοι λέγουσι, τούσδε τοῖς συγγενέσιν αὐτοῖς ἐπιδικάσασθαι συμφέρει τῶν Νικοστράτου μᾶλλον ἢ Χαριάδην.
But, by Heaven, I am forgetting; Hagnon and Hagnotheus are not kinsmen of Nicostratus according to the allegation of our adversaries, but his kinsmen are quite different people. Are these kinsmen then bearing witness in favor of the claimant under the will rather than themselves contesting the property by right of kinship? Surely they are not so insane as to believe so easily in the will and renounce their claim to so much money! Nay, to judge from what these men themselves say, it is to the advantage of these supposed kinsmen themselves that my clients, rather than Chariades, should have the estate of Nicostratus adjudicated to them.
§ 25
εἰς γὰρ τὸν λοιπὸν χρόνον, εἰ μὲν οἵδε κατὰ τὸ γένος ἀμφισβητοῦντες λήψονται τὸν κλῆρον, ἐξέσται καὶ τούτοις, ὁπόταν βούλωνται, κατὰ τὸ γένος λαχοῦσιν ἐπιδεῖξαι ὑμῖν ὡς αὐτοὶ ἐγγυτέρω ἦσαν τοῦ Νικοστράτου, καὶ ὡς Σμίκρου ἦν καὶ οὐ Θρασυμάχου· ἐὰν δὲ Χαριάδης αὐτῶν κληρονομήσῃ, οὐκ ἔσται οὐδενὶ συγγενεῖ ἐπὶ τὰ Νικοστράτου ἐλθεῖν. κατὰ δόσιν γὰρ ἔχοντος τοῦ ἐπιδεδικασμένου, τί φανοῦνται λέγοντες οἱ κατὰ [τὸ] γένος λαγχάνοντες;
For, if my clients, who claim by right of kinship, receive the estate, it will be always open to the supposed kinsmen whenever they like at any future date to claim the estate on the grounds of relationship, and prove to you that they are themselves more nearly related to Nicostratus, and that he was the son of Smicrus and not of Thrasymachus. On the other hand, if Chariades inherits the estate, it will never be possible for any relative to bring an action for the property of Nicostratus; for when once the property is in possession of one to whom it has been adjudicated in virtue of a will, what will those who claim by right of kinship be able reasonably to allege?
§ 26
ὅπερ ἂν οὖν καὶ ὑμῶν ἕκαστος ἀξιώσειε, τοῦτο καὶ τουτοισὶ τοῖς νεανίσκοις βεβαιώσατε. παρέσχοντο δʼ ὑμῖν μάρτυρας πρῶτον μὲν ὡς ἀνεψιοί εἰσιν ἐκ πατραδέλφων Νικοστράτου, ἔπειτα δὲ ὡς οὐδεπώποτε ἐκείνῳ διάφοροι ἦσαν, ἔτι δὲ καὶ ὡς ἔθαψαν Νικόστρατον, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ὡς Χαριάδης οὑτοσὶ οὐδαμῶς οὔτʼ ἐνθάδε οὔτʼ ἐπὶ στρατεύματι ἐχρῆτο Νικοστράτῳ, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν κοινωνίαν, ᾗ μάλισθʼ οὗτος ἰσχυρίζεται, ψευδῆ οὖσαν.
Whatever each of you would consider just on his own behalf, let that be your determination in favor of these young men. They have produced before you witnesses to prove, first, that they and Nicostratus are first cousins, the sons of own brothers; secondly, that they never had any quarrel with him; thirdly, that they carried out his burial; and further that Chariades was never a friend of Nicostratus either here in Athens or in the army, and, lastly, that the supposed business association between them, on which Chariades most relies, is a fiction.
§ 27
καὶ ἄνευ τούτων, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἄξιον ὑμῖν ἐξετάσαι ἑκατέρους αὐτῶν οἷοί εἰσι. Θράσιππος μὲν γὰρ ὁ Ἅγνωνος καὶ Ἁγνοθέου πατὴρ ἤδη τι καὶ ἐλῃτούργησεν ὑμῖν καὶ εἰσήνεγκε, καὶ ἄλλως σπουδαῖος ἦν πολίτης· αὐτοὶ δὲ οὗτοι οὔτε ἀποδεδημήκασιν οὐδαμοῖ πώποτε, ὅποι ἂν μὴ ὑμεῖς προστάξητε, οὔτʼ ἐνθάδε μένοντες ἄχρηστοί εἰσι τῇ πόλει, ἀλλὰ καὶ στρατεύονται καὶ εἰσφέρουσι καὶ τἆλλα πάντα ποιοῦσι τὰ προσταττόμενα καὶ αὑτούς (ὡς πάντες ἴσασι) κοσμίους παρέχουσιν,
Apart from this, gentlemen, it is only right that you should examine the characters of the respective claimants. Thrasippus, the father of Hagnon and Hagnotheus, has before now supported public burdens and paid contributions and otherwise proved himself a worthy citizen. My clients themselves have never quitted this country unless they have been sent somewhere by your orders, and at home they are not unserviceable to the state; they serve in the army, they make contributions and in every other respect perform what is required of them, and, as everyone knows, they behave as law-abiding citizens;
§ 28
ὥστε πολὺ μᾶλλον τούτους προσήκει κατὰ δόσιν τῶν χρημάτων τῶν Νικοστράτου ἢ Χαριάδην ἀμφισβητεῖν. οὗτος γάρ, ὅτʼ ἐπεδήμει ἐνθάδε, πρῶτον μὲν εἰς τὸ δεσμωτήριον ὡς κλέπτης ὢν ἐπʼ αὐτοφώρῳ ἀπήχθη, τότε δὲ ἀφεθεὶς μεθʼ ἑτέρων τινῶν ὑπὸ τῶν ἕνδεκα, οὓς δημοσίᾳ ἅπαντας ὑμεῖς ἀπεκτείνατε, πάλιν ἀπογραφεὶς εἰς τὴν βουλὴν κακουργῶν, ὑποχωρῶν ᾤχετο καὶ οὐχ ὑπήκουσεν,
so that it is much more fitting that they should claim to receive the estate by gift than Chariades. The latter, when he resided here, was first caught in the act of theft and thrown into prison; he was subsequently released with certain other criminals by the Eleven, all of whom you publicly condemned to death, and, having been again denounced to the Council as a malefactor, he absconded and did not appear to answer the charge,
§ 29
ἀλλʼ ἀπʼ ἐκείνου ἑπτακαίδεκα ἐτῶν Ἀθήναζε οὐκ ἀφίκετο, πλὴν ἐπειδὴ Νικόστρατος ἀπέθανε. καὶ ὑπὲρ μὲν ὑμῶν οὔτε στρατείαν οὐδεμίαν ἐστράτευται οὔτε εἰσφορὰν οὐδεμίαν εἰσενήνοχε, πλὴν εἴ τι ἄρα ἐξ ὅτου τῶν Νικοστράτου ἠμφισβήτησεν, οὔτʼ ἄλλʼ οὐδὲν ὑμῖν λελῃτούργηκεν. ἔπειτα τοιοῦτος ὢν οὐκ ἀγαπᾷ εἰ μὴ τῶν ἡμαρτημένων δίκην δώσει, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων ἀμφισβητεῖ.
and for seventeen years after this he never came near Athens, and only returned on the death of Nicostratus. He has never once served the state as a soldier nor made any contribution, except perhaps since he claimed Nicostratus's estate, nor has he performed any other public service. And now, though such is his character, so far from being content if he avoids punishment for his misdeeds, he actually claims the property of others!
§ 30
εἰ μὲν οὖν οἵδε φιλοπράγμονες ἢ ἄλλοις ὅμοιοι πολίταις ἦσαν, ἴσως ἂν οὐ περὶ τῶν Νικοστράτου χρημάτων ἠμφισβήτει, ἀλλʼ ὑπὲρ τοῦ σώματος ἠγωνίζετο· νῦν δʼ, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, τοῦτον μὲν ἄλλος, ἐάν τις βούληται, τιμωρήσεται,
If my clients were fond of quarrelling or resembled so many of their fellow-citizens, he would not perhaps be claiming Nicostratus's estate but would be on trial for his life. But, as it is, gentlemen, it shall be left to someone else, if he wishes, to punish him;
§ 31
τουτοισὶ δʼ ὑμεῖς βοηθήσατε, καὶ μὴ περὶ πλείονος ποιήσησθε τοὺς ἀδίκως τἀλλότρια ἔχειν βουλομένους ἢ τοὺς γένει τῷ τεθνεῶτι προσήκοντας καὶ χωρὶς τούτων ἤδη τι ἐκεῖνον εὐεργετηκότας, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν νόμων ἀναμνησθέντες καὶ τῶν ὅρκων οὓς ὠμόσατε, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις καὶ τῶν μαρτυριῶν ἃς ἡμεῖς παρεσχήμεθα, τὰ δίκαια ψηφίσασθε.
your care let it be to assist my clients, and not to show favor to those who wish unjustly to possess the property of others rather than to the next-of-kin of the deceased, who have besides already rendered him service. Remember the laws and the oaths which you swore and also the evidence which we have placed before you, and give your verdict in conformity with justice.
On the Estate of Dicaeogenes · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg005 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Δικαιογένους κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg005.perseus-grc2 · English: On the Estate of Dicaeogenes — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg005.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Δικαιογένους τελευτήσαντος ἄπαιδος ἐπὶ τέσσαρσιν ἀδελφαῖς Πρόξενος ἧκεν διαθήκην ἔχων, ἐν ᾗ Δικαιογένης ὁ τελευτήσας τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ, τοῦ Προξένου, Δικαιογένην υἱὸν θετὸν ἐποιήσατο ἐπὶ τῷ τρίτῳ μέρει τῆς οὐσίας. τοῦτον δὲ τὸν τρόπον διανειμαμένων αὐτῶν τὴν ὅλην οὐσίαν, τελευταῖον ἦλθεν ὁ υἱὸς Προξένου Δικαιογένης φάσκων ἐπὶ ὅλῃ τῇ οὐσίᾳ γεγονέναι υἱός, καὶ νικήσας ἀνέλαβε καὶ τὰ δύο μέρη τῶν ἀδελφῶν τοῦ τελευτήσαντος. ὕστερον πάλιν οἱ παῖδες τῶν ἀδελφῶν δικασάμενοι πρὸς Δικαιογένην ἐνίκησαν, καὶ συνέθετο Δικαιογένης ἀποδοῦναι πάλιν τὰ δύο μέρη αὐτοῖς καθαρὰ καὶ ἀνέπαφα, ἐγγυησαμένου ταῦτα Λεωχάρους. νῦν δὲ ἀρνουμένων τὰ δόξαντα τῶν περὶ Δικαιογένην καὶ Λεωχάρην, ἐγκαλοῦσιν οἱ παῖδες τῶν ἀδελφῶν περὶ τῶν δύο μερῶν τῷ μὲν ὡς συνθεμένῳ, τῷ δὲ ὡς ἐγγυητῇ. ἡ στάσις στοχασμός· ἀρνοῦνται γάρ.
Argument On the death of Dicaeogenes (II.), who had no children but left four sisters behind him, Proxenus came forward and produced a will by which the deceased Dicaeogenes (II.) adopted his (Proxenus's) son Dicaeogenes (III.) and left him a third of his estate. After they had distributed the whole property on this basis, Dicaeogenes (III.), the son of Proxenus, eventually came and alleged that he had been adopted as heir to the whole property; he won his case and took possession, in addition to his own share, of the two-thirds which had been held by the sisters of the deceased. At a still later date the sons of the sisters brought a successful action against Dicaeogenes (III.), and he agreed to hand back to them the two-thirds clear and free of all charges, Leochares acting as surety for the performance of this promise. In the present suit, as Dicaeogenes (III.) and Leochares repudiate their agreement, the sons of the sisters claim the two-thirds from Dicaeogenes (III.), as having agreed to restore the property, and from Leochares as surety. The discussion turns on a question of fact; for the adversaries deny their engagement.
§ 1
ὠιόμεθα μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, περὶ ὧν διεφερόμεθα πρὸς Δικαιογένην, τὰ ὡμολογημένα ἐπὶ τοῦ δικαστηρίου κύρια ἡμῖν ἔσεσθαι· ἀποστάντος γὰρ Δικαιογένους τοῖν δυοῖν μεροῖν τοῦ κλήρου, καὶ ἐγγυητὰς καταστήσαντος ἦ μὴν παραδώσειν ἡμῖν ταῦτα τὰ μέρη ἀναμφισβήτητα, ἀφήκαμεν ἀλλήλους τῶν ἐγκλημάτων· ἐπειδὴ δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐ ποιεῖ Δικαιογένης ἃ ὡμολόγησε, δικαζόμεθα Λεωχάρει ἐγγυητῇ γενομένῳ Δικαιογένους, ὥσπερ ἀντωμόσαμεν.
We thought, gentlemen, that in the matter of our dispute with Dicaeogenes (III.) the agreement arrived at in court would be conclusive; for when Dicaeogenes (III.) gave up the two-thirds of the estate and furnished sureties that he would hand over that portion to us without dispute, we reciprocally abandoned our claims. But, gentlemen, since Dicaeogenes (III.) does not perform his agreement, we are bringing an action against Leochares, his surety, in accordance with our affidavit.
§ 2
καί μοι ἀνάγνωθι τὴν ἀντωμοσίαν. Ἀντωμοσία ὡς τοίνυν ἀληθῆ ἀντωμόσαμεν, Κηφισόδοτος οὑτοσὶ οἶδε, καὶ μάρτυρας ὑμῖν παρεξόμεθα πρῶτον μὲν ὡς ἀπέστη Δικαιογένης ἡμῖν τοῖν δυοῖν μεροῖν τοῦ κλήρου, εἶτα ὡς ἠγγυήσατο Λεωχάρης. καί μοι ἀνάγνωθι τὴν μαρτυρίαν.
Please read the affidavit. Affidavit That the facts which we stated in the affidavit are true, Cephisodotus here is well aware and we will now produce witnesses before you to prove, first, that Dicaeogenes (III.) gave up to us the two-thirds of the estate, and, secondly, that Leochares became his surety. Please read the deposition.
§ 3
Μαρτυρία τῶν μὲν μαρτύρων ἀκηκόατε, καὶ ὡς οὐ τἀληθῆ μεμαρτυρήκασιν, οὐδʼ ἂν αὐτὸν οἶμαι Λεωχάρην εἰπεῖν· ἴσως δὲ ἐπʼ ἐκεῖνον τρέψεται τὸν λόγον, ὡς Δικαιογένης τε ἃ ἡμῖν ὡμολόγησεν ἅπαντα πεποίηκε, καὶ αὐτὸς τὴν ἐξεγγύην ὅτι ἀπέδωκεν. εἰ οὖν ταῦτʼ ἐρεῖ, ψεύσεται καὶ ῥᾳδίως ἐλεγχθήσεται. ἀναγνώσεται γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅσα κατέλιπε Δικαιογένης ὁ Μενεξένου ἐν τῷ κλήρῳ καὶ τὰ χρήματα ἃ ἔλαβεν.
Deposition You have heard what the witnesses say, and I do not believe that even Leochares himself would declare that their evidence has not been true. He will, however, perhaps have recourse to the argument that Dicaeogenes (III.) has performed all that he agreed to do and that he himself has fulfilled his duties as surety. If he says this, he will be lying and will easily be convicted of doing so; for the clerk shall read you the inventory of all the property which formed the estate left by Dicaeogenes (II.) the son of Menexenus, and of the property received by Dicaeogenes (III.).
§ 4
〈Ἀπογραφή〉 ταῦτα εἰ μὲν μή φασι Δικαιογένην τὸν ἡμέτερον θεῖον ζῶντα κεκτῆσθαι καὶ ἀποθνήσκοντα ἡμῖν δοῦναι, ἀποδειξάτωσαν· εἰ δὲ καὶ ἐκεῖνον καταλιπεῖν καὶ ἡμᾶς κεκομίσθαι, μαρτυρησάτω τις αὐτοῖς. ὅτι μὲν γὰρ Δικαιογένης ὡμολόγει παραδώσειν ἡμῖν ὧν κατέλιπεν ὁ Μενεξένου τὰ δύο μέρη, ἡμεῖς μάρτυρας παρεχόμεθα, καὶ ὅτι Λεωχάρης ἠγγυήσατο αὐτὸν ταῦτα ποιήσειν· καὶ γὰρ δικαζόμεθα διὰ τοῦτο, καὶ ταῦτα ἀντωμόσαμεν. καί μοι ἀνάγνωθι τὴν ἀντωμοσίαν.
Inventory If they affirm that Dicaeogenes (II.), our uncle, did not possess this property when he was alive and did not bequeath it to us at his death, let them prove it; if they declare that he left it and that we have recovered it, let them produce a witness to support their statement. We are producing witnesses to prove that Dicaeogenes (III.) agreed to hand over to us the two-thirds of the property which the son of Menexenus left, and that Leochares acted as surety for his doing so; for this is the basis of our present action and the subject of our affidavit. Please read me the affidavit.
§ 5
Ἀντωμοσία εἰ μὲν τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες, περὶ τούτων ἔμελλον ἀπολογήσεσθαι μόνον Λεωχάρης ἢ Δικαιογένης, ἤρκει ἄν μοι τὰ εἰρημένα· ἐπειδὴ δὲ παρεσκευασμένοι εἰσὶν ἐξ ἀρχῆς περὶ 〈τοῦ〉 κλήρου λέγειν, βούλομαι ὑμᾶς καὶ παρʼ ἐμοῦ τὰ πραχθέντα πυθέσθαι, ἵνα εἰδότες τἀληθῆ, ὅ τι ἂν δοκῇ ὑμῖν, ψηφίσησθε, ἀλλὰ μὴ ἐξηπατημένοι. Μενεξένῳ γὰρ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ πάππῳ ἐγένετο ὑὸς μὲν εἷς, Δικαιογένης, θυγατέρες δὲ τέτταρες, ὧν ἔλαβε μίαν μὲν Πολυάρατος ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἐμός, ἄλλην δὲ Δημοκλῆς ὁ Φρεάρριος, τὴν δὲ Κηφισοφῶν ὁ Παιανιεύς· ἡ δὲ 〈τετάρτη〉 Θεοπόμπῳ ἐγήματο τῷ Κηφισοδότου πατρί.
Affidavit If then, gentlemen, these were the only points with which Leochares or Dicaeogenes (III.) were going to deal in their defence, what I have already said would suffice; but since they are prepared to treat of the question of the inheritance from the beginning, I should like you to hear the facts from my side also, that, knowing the truth instead of being misled, you may give an unbiased verdict. Our grandfather, Menexenus (I.) had an only son, Dicaeogenes (II.), and four daughters, one of whom was married to my father, Polyaratus, another to Democles of Phrearrhi, the third to Cephisophon of Paeania, while the fourth was the wife of Theopompus, the father of Cephisodotus.
§ 6
καὶ ὁ μὲν Δικαιογένης, τριήραρχος ἐκπλεύσας τῆς Παράλου, ἐτελεύτησε μαχόμενος ἐν Κνίδῳ· ἀποθανόντος δʼ αὐτοῦ ἄπαιδος διαθήκην ἀπέφηνε Πρόξενος ὁ Δικαιογένους 〈τουδὶ〉 πατήρ, ᾗ πιστεύσαντες οἱ ἡμέτεροι πατέρες ἐνείμαντο τὸν κλῆρον. καὶ ἐπὶ μὲν τῷ τρίτῳ μέρει τοῦ κλήρου Δικαιογένης ὅδε τῷ Μενεξένου Δικαιογένει, ἡμετέρῳ δὲ θείῳ, ὑὸς ἐγίγνετο ποιητός· τῶν δὲ λοιπῶν ἑκάστη τὸ μέρος ἐπεδικάσατο τῶν Μενεξένου θυγατέρων. ὧν ἐγὼ τοὺς τότε παρόντας ὑμῖν μάρτυρας παρέξομαι.
Dicaeogenes, having sailed out as commander of the Paralus, was killed in action at Cnidus. He died without issue, and Proxenus, the father of Dicaeogenes (III.) here, produced a will, in reliance on which our fathers distributed his estate. Under the will Dicaeogenes (III.) here was to be recognized as the adopted son of Dicaeogenes (II.), the son of Menexenus (I.) and our uncle, and heir to a third of his estate of the remainder an equal share was adjudicated to each of the daughters of Menexenus (I.). Of these facts I will produce before you as witnesses those who were present on that occasion.
§ 7
〈Μάρτυρες〉 ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐνείμαντο τὸν κλῆρον, ὀμόσαντες μὴ παραβήσεσθαι τὰ ὡμολογημένα, ἐκέκτητο ἕκαστος δώδεκα ἔτη ἃ ἔλαχε· καὶ ἐν τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ οὐσῶν δικῶν οὐδεὶς αὐτῶν ἠξίωσε τὰ πεπραγμένα εἰπεῖν ἀδίκως πεπρᾶχθαι, πρὶν δυστυχησάσης τῆς πόλεως καὶ στάσεως γενομένης Δικαιογένης οὑτοσὶ πεισθεὶς ὑπὸ Μέλανος τοῦ Αἰγυπτίου, ᾧ περ καὶ τἆλλα ἐπείθετο, ἠμφισβήτει ἡμῖν ἅπαντος τοῦ κλήρου, φάσκων ἐφʼ ὅλῃ ποιηθῆναι ὑὸς ὑπὸ τοῦ θείου τοῦ ἡμετέρου.
Witnesses When they had thus divided up the inheritance, having sworn not to transgress the terms agreed upon, each remained in possession of the share which he had received for twelve years. During all this period, though the courts sat, no one of them thought of claiming that there was any injustice in what had been done, until, when the city suffered misfortune and strife arose, Dicaeogenes (III.) here, acting at the instigation of Melas the Egyptian, whose advice he followed in everything, claimed from us the whole estate, alleging that he had been adopted as sole heir by our uncle.
§ 8
ἡμεῖς μὲν οὖν μαίνεσθαι αὐτὸν ἡγούμεθα τῇ λήξει, οὐκ ἄν ποτε οἰόμενοι τὸν αὐτὸν ἄνδρα τοτὲ μὲν φάσκοντα ἐπὶ τῷ τρίτῳ μέρει ποιηθῆναι τοτὲ δʼ ἐφʼ ἅπαντι τῷ κλήρῳ δόξαι τἀληθὲς λέγειν ὑμῖν· εἰς δὲ τὸ δικαστήριον εἰσελθόντες καὶ πολλῷ πλείω καὶ δικαιότερα λέγοντες ἠδικήθημεν, οὐχ ὑπὸ τῶν δικαστῶν ἀλλʼ ὑπὸ Μέλανος τοῦ Αἰγυπτίου καὶ τῶν ἐκείνου φίλων, οἳ διὰ τὰς τῆς πόλεως συμφορὰς ἐξουσίαν σφίσιν αὐτοῖς ἡγοῦντο εἶναι κεκτῆσθαί τε τἀλλότρια καὶ τὰ ψευδῆ ἀλλήλοις μαρτυρεῖν· ὑπὸ δὲ τῶν τὰ τοιαῦτα ποιούντων ἐξηπατήθησαν οἱ δικασταί.
We thought him mad in bringing the action; for we could never imagine that the same man could at one time state that he had been adopted as heir to one-third and at another time that he had been adopted as sole heir, and be believed by you to be speaking the truth. However, on coming into court, though we had by far the better case, we were cheated of our rights, not by the judges but by Melas the Egyptian and his friends, who thought that the misfortunes of the city gave them liberty to possess themselves of other people's property and to bear false witness in support of one another, and by their acting in this manner the judges were misled.
§ 9
καὶ ἡμεῖς μὲν καταψευδομαρτυρηθέντες ἀπωλέσαμεν τὰ ὄντα· καὶ γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ οὐ πολλῷ χρόνῳ ὕστερον μετὰ τὴν δίκην ἐτελεύτησε, πρὶν ἐπεξελθεῖν οἷς ἐπεσκήψατο τῶν μαρτύρων· Δικαιογένης δὲ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὡς ἐβούλετο ἀγωνισάμενος τῇ αὐτῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐξήλασε μὲν τὴν Κηφισοφῶντος τοῦ Παιανιέως θυγατέρα ἐκ τοῦ μέρους, ἀδελφιδῆν οὖσαν Δικαιογένους τοῦ καταλιπόντος τὰ χρήματα, ἀφείλετο δὲ τὴν Δημοκλέους γενομένην γυναῖκα, ἃ Δικαιογένης ἀδελφὸς ὢν ἔδωκεν, ἀφείλετο 〈δὲ〉 καὶ τὴν Κηφισοδότου μητέρα καὶ αὐτὸν τοῦτον ἅπαντα.
Thus we, the victims of perjury, lost our property; for our father died not long after the case was tried and before he could prosecute those of the witnesses whom he had indicted. Dicaeogenes (III.), on obtaining against us the verdict which he desired, that very same day forcibly deprived of her share the daughter of Cephisophon of Paeania, the niece of Dicaeogenes (II.) who left the money; robbed the former wife of Democles of what Dicaeogenes (II.) had left her; and robbed the mother of Cephisodotus and Cephisodotus himself of all they possessed.
§ 10
καὶ γὰρ τούτων [τε] ἅμα καὶ ἐπίτροπος καὶ κύριος καὶ ἀντίδικος ἦν, καὶ οὐδὲ κατὰ τὸ ἐλάχιστον μέρος τῆς οἰκειότητος ἐλέου παρʼ αὐτοῦ ἔτυχον, ἀλλʼ ὀρφανοὶ καὶ ἔρημοι καὶ πένητες γενόμενοι πάντων καὶ τῶν καθʼ ἡμέραν ἐπιτηδείων ἦσαν ἐνδεεῖς. οὕτως αὐτοὺς Δικαιογένης οὑτοσὶ ἐγγυτάτω ὢν γένους ἐπετρόπευεν· ὅς γε, ἃ μὲν ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῖς Θεόπομπος κατέλιπε, τοῖς τούτων ἐχθροῖς παρέδωκεν, ἃ δὲ ὁ πρὸς μητρὸς θεῖος καὶ ὁ πάππος αὐτοῖς ἔδωκεν, αὐτὸς ἀφείλετο πρὸ δίκης.
For of these persons he was at the same time the guardian and legal representative and the legal adversary; yet they did not meet with the slightest degree of pity from him on account of their relationship, but, orphans and unprotected and penniless, they even lacked all the necessities of life. This is how Dicaeogenes here, their nearest kinsman, carried out his duties as their guardian; what their father Theopompus left them he handed over to their enemies, and what their maternal uncle and their grandfather gave them he himself appropriated before any judgement had been given.
§ 11
καὶ ὃ πάντων δεινότατον, τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτῶν τὴν πατρῴαν, παίδων ὄντων τούτων, πριάμενος καὶ κατασκάψας [τὸν] κῆπον ἐποιήσατο πρὸς τῇ αὑτοῦ οἰκίᾳ τῇ ἐν ἄστει. καὶ λαμβάνων μίσθωσιν ὀγδοήκοντα μνᾶς ἐκ τῶν Δικαιογένους τοῦ ἡμετέρου θείου χρημάτων, τὸν ἐκείνου ἀδελφιδοῦν Κηφισόδοτον τῷ ἑαυτοῦ ἀδελφῷ Ἁρμοδίῳ συνέπεμψεν εἰς Κόρινθον ἀντʼ ἀκολούθου· εἰς τοῦτο ὕβρεως καὶ μιαρίας ἀφίκετο. καὶ πρὸς τοῖς ἄλλοις κακοῖς ὀνειδίζει καὶ ἐγκαλεῖ αὐτῷ ὅτι ἐμβάδας καὶ τρίβωνα φορεῖ, ὥσπερ ἀδικούμενός τι εἰ ἐμβάδας Κηφισόδοτος φορεῖ, ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἀδικῶν ὅτι ἀφελόμενος αὐτὸν τὰ ὄντα πένητα πεποίηκεν.
What was worst of all, while they were minors, he bought the house which they had inherited from their father and demolished it and used the site to make a garden adjoining his town-house. Also, though he was receiving an income of seventy minae from the property of our uncle Dicaeogenes (II.), he sent the latter's nephew Cephisodotus with his own brother Harmodius to Corinth as a body servant; such was his insolence and rascality. Nay, he added insult to injury by reviling and upbraiding him for wearing heavy shoes and a coarse cloak, as though it was Cephisodotus who was wronging him by wearing such shoes, and not he who was wronging Cephisodotus by having reduced him to poverty by robbing him of his property.
§ 12
ἀλλὰ περὶ μὲν τούτων τοσαῦτά μοι εἰρήσθω· πάλιν δʼ ἐπάνειμι ὅθεν ἀπέλιπον. Μενέξενος γὰρ ὁ Κηφισοφῶντος ὑός, ἀνεψιὸς ὢν Κηφισοδότῳ τουτῳὶ καὶ ἐμοί, καὶ προσῆκον αὐτῷ τοῦ κλήρου μέρος ὅσον περ ἐμοί, ἐπεξῄει τοῖς καταμαρτυρήσασιν ἡμῶν καὶ ἐκείνου τὰ ψευδῆ, καὶ Λύκωνα, ὅν περ εἰσήγαγε πρῶτον εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον, τοῦτον εἷλεν· ὃς ἐμαρτύρησε Δικαιογένην ποιηθῆναι τὸν νῦν ὄντα ὑπὸ τοῦ θείου τοῦ ἡμετέρου ὑὸν ἐπὶ παντὶ τῷ κλήρῳ.
So much must suffice on these topics; I will now return to the point from which I digressed. Menexenus (II.), the son of Cephisophon and cousin to Cephisodotus here, and to me, who had a right to the same share of the estate as I had, proceeded to prosecute those who had borne false witness against us and him, and obtained a conviction against Lycon, the first man whom he brought into court. His evidence had been that Dicaeogenes (III.) had been adopted as sole heir by our uncle;
§ 13
μαρτυρήσας δὲ ταῦτα ἑάλω ψευδομαρτυρίων. ἐπειδὴ δὲ Δικαιογένης, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐκέτι ὑμᾶς δύναται ἐξαπατᾶν, πείθει Μενέξενον τὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν τε καὶ ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ πράττοντα, ἃ ἐγὼ αἰσχυνόμενος ἀναγκάζομαι διὰ τὴν ἐκείνου πονηρίαν λέγειν, -- τί ποιῆσαι; κομισάμενον αὐτὸν μέρος ἐκ τοῦ κλήρου ὅ τι ἐγίγνετο, ἡμᾶς μὲν ὑπὲρ ὧν ἔπραττε προδοῦναι, τοὺς δὲ μήπω ἑαλωκότας τῶν μαρτύρων ἀφεῖναι. καὶ ἡμεῖς μὲν ταῦτα ὑπὸ τῶν φίλων καὶ τῶν ἐχθρῶν παθόντες εἴχομεν ἡσυχίαν. τούτων δʼ ὑμῖν μάρτυρας παρέξομαι.
he was convicted of perjury for giving evidence to this effect. When Dicaeogenes (III.), gentlemen, found that he could no longer deceive you, he advised Menexenus (II.), who was acting for us as well as for himself (I am ashamed to be obliged by his rascality to mention it), to do—what do you think?—himself to take the share of the estate which was due to him and to throw over us, on whose behalf he was acting, and let off those of the witnesses who had not yet been convicted! And we, thus treated by our friends and our enemies, kept quiet. On these points I will now produce witnesses before you.
§ 14
Μάρτυρες ὁ μὲν τοίνυν Μενέξενος παθὼν ἄξια τῶν ἑαυτοῦ τρόπων ἠπατήθη ὑπὸ τοῦ Δικαιογένους· ἀφεὶς γὰρ τοὺς μάρτυρας καὶ ἡμᾶς προδούς, ὧν ἕνεκα ταῦτʼ ἔπραξεν οὐκ ἐκομίσατο. ἀδικηθεὶς δὲ ὑπὸ Δικαιογένους μεθʼ ἡμῶν πάλιν ἔπραττεν. ἡμεῖς δὲ καθηγούμενοι οὐκέτι προσήκειν Δικαιογένει ἔχειν τῶν ἐκ τοῦ κλήρου μέρος οὐδέν, ἐπειδὴ οἱ μάρτυρες ἑάλωσαν, ἀμφισβητοῦμεν αὐτῷ ἅπαντος τοῦ οἴκου κατʼ ἀγχιστείαν. καὶ ὅτι ἡμεῖς τε ὀρθῶς ἐγνώκαμεν καὶ οὐδὲν ἔτι προσήκει Δικαιογένει τοῦ κλήρου, ῥᾳδίως διδάξω.
Witnesses Menexenus (II.) was paid out as he deserved for his evil conduct, being deceived by Dicaeogenes (III.); he let off the accused witnesses and threw us over, but he received no reward for his services. Having been thus wronged by Dicaeogenes (III.), he made common cause with us again; and we, judging that Dicaeogenes (III.) had no longer any right to any part of the property forming the estate, since the witnesses had been convicted, claimed from him the whole estate on the ground of affinity. That our decision to act thus has been a right one and that Dicaeogenes (III.) has no longer any right to a share in the estate, I shall easily prove to you.
§ 15
δύο γὰρ διαθῆκαι 〈ἀπ〉εφάνησαν, ἡ μὲν πάλαι, ἡ δὲ πολλῷ ὕστερον· καὶ κατὰ μὲν τὴν παλαιάν, ἣν ἀπέφηνε Πρόξενος ὁ Δικαιογένους τουτουὶ πατήρ, ἐπὶ τῷ τρίτῳ μέρει τοῦ κλήρου ἐγίγνετο τῷ θείῳ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ ὑὸς ποιητός, καθʼ ἣν δʼ αὐτὸς ἀπέφηνε Δικαιογένης, ἐπὶ παντὶ τῷ οἴκῳ. τούτοιν δὲ τοῖν διαθήκαιν ἣν μὲν Πρόξενος ἀπέφηνε, Δικαιογένης ἔπεισε τοὺς δικαστὰς ὡς οὐκ ἀληθὴς εἴη· ἣν δὲ Δικαιογένης ἀπέφηνεν, οἱ μαρτυρήσαντες αὐτὴν τὸν θεῖον τὸν ἡμέτερον διαθέσθαι ἑάλωσαν ψευδομαρτυρίων.
Two wills were produced, one made long ago, the other much more recent. Under the old will, which Proxenus, the father of Dicaeogenes (III.) here, produced, the latter was to be heir by adoption to one-third of our uncle's estate; according to the will which Dicaeogenes (III.) himself produced, he was to be heir to the whole estate. Of these two wills Dicaeogenes (III.) persuaded the judges that the one, namely that produced by Proxenus, was not genuine; those who bore witness that the other, namely that which Dicaeogenes (III.) produced, was our uncle's genuine will, were convicted of perjury.
§ 16
ἀμφοῖν δὲ τοῖν διαθήκαιν ἀκύροιν γιγνομέναιν, καὶ ἑτέρας μηδεμιᾶς ὁμολογουμένης εἶναι, κατὰ δόσιν μὲν οὐδενὶ προσῆκε τοῦ κλήρου, κατʼ ἀγχιστείαν δὲ ταῖς Δικαιογένους τοῦ ἀποθανόντος ἀδελφαῖς, ὧν εἰσιν αἱ ἡμέτεραι μητέρες. διὰ δὲ ταῦτα ἔδοξέ τε ἡμῖν λαχεῖν τοῦ κλήρου κατʼ ἀγχιστείαν, καὶ ἐλάχομεν τοῦ μέρους ἕκαστος. μελλόντων δʼ ἡμῶν ἀντόμνυσθαι διεμαρτύρησε Λεωχάρης οὑτοσὶ μὴ ἐπίδικον εἶναι τὸν κλῆρον ἡμῖν.
Both wills being thus invalidated and it being admitted that no other will existed, no one had any claim to the estate under testamentary disposition, but it could be claimed on grounds of affinity by the sisters of the deceased Dicaeogenes (II.), among whom were our mothers. We therefore resolved to claim the estate on grounds of affinity, and we each claimed our share. When we were on the point of making our affidavit, Leochares here put in a protestation that the estate was not adjudicable to us.
§ 17
ἐπισκηψαμένων δʼ ἡμῶν ἡ μὲν λῆξις τοῦ κλήρου διεγράφη, ἡ δὲ τῶν ψευδομαρτυρίων δίκη εἰσῄει. ἐν δὲ τῷ δικαστηρίῳ πάντα μὲν ἡμῶν εἰπόντων ἅ περ νυνί, πολλὰ δὲ Λεωχάρους ἀνταπολογησαμένου, ἔγνωσαν τὰ ψευδῆ μαρτυρῆσαι Λεωχάρην οἱ δικασταί. ἐπειδὴ δὲ τοῦτο φανερὸν ἐγένετο ἐξαιρεθεισῶν τῶν ψήφων, ἃ μὲν τῶν δικαστῶν καὶ ἡμῶν ἐδεήθη Λεωχάρης ἢ ὅσα ἡμῖν ἐξεγένετο διαπράξασθαι τότε, οὐκ οἶδʼ ὅ τι δεῖ λέγειν, ἃ δὲ ὡμολογήθη ἡμῖν, ταῦτα ἀκούσατε.
We then indicted Leochares, with the result that the suit claiming the estate was struck off the list, and the action for perjury came on. In court, after we had brought forward all the arguments which we are presenting on the present occasion, and Leochares had made a lengthy defence, the judges decided that Leochares had committed perjury. When this result became evident after the votes had been taken out of the urns, I do not think I need dwell upon the appeals which Leochares made to the judges and to us or the penalties which we were entitled to exact on that occasion; but I will tell you the compromise to which we came.
§ 18
συγχωρούντων γὰρ ἡμῶν τῷ ἄρχοντι μὴ συναριθμεῖν ἀλλὰ συγχέαι τὰς ψήφους, ἀφίστατο μὲν Δικαιογένης τοῖν δυοῖν μεροῖν τοῦ κλήρου ταῖς Δικαιογένους ἀδελφαῖς, καὶ ὡμολόγει ἀναμφισβήτητα παραδώσειν ἡμῖν ταῦτα τὰ μέρη· καὶ ταῦτα ἠγγυᾶτο αὐτὸν Λεωχάρης οὑτοσὶ ἃ ὡμολόγει ποιήσειν, οὐ μόνος ἀλλὰ καὶ Μνησιπτόλεμος ὁ Πλωθειεύς. καὶ τούτων ὑμῖν τοὺς μάρτυρας παρέξομαι.
On our agreeing with the archon not to count the votes but to mix them together, Dicaeogenes (III.) gave up two-thirds of the estate in favor of the sisters of Dicaeogenes (II.) and agreed to hand over these shares without further discussion, and Leochares here undertook to be surety that he would carry out his promise. He was not the only surety, for Mnesiptolemus of Plotheia gave a similar undertaking. Of these facts I will now produce witnesses before you.
§ 19
Μάρτυρες ἡμεῖς τοίνυν ταῦτα παθόντες ὑπὸ Λεωχάρους, καὶ ἐγγενόμενον ἡμῖν αὐτὸν ἐπειδὴ εἵλομεν τῶν ψευδομαρτυρίων ἀτιμῶσαι, οὐκ ἐβουλήθημεν, ἀλλʼ ἐξήρκεσε τὰ ἡμέτερα ἡμῖν κομισαμένοις ἀπηλλάχθαι. τοιοῦτοι δὲ γενόμενοι περὶ Λεωχάρην καὶ Δικαιογένην ἐξηπατήθημεν ὑπʼ αὐτῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες· οὔτε γὰρ Δικαιογένης τὰ δύο μέρη ἡμῖν τοῦ κλήρου παρέδωκεν, ὁμολογήσας ἐπὶ τοῦ δικαστηρίου, οὔτε Λεωχάρης ὁμολογεῖ ἐγγυήσασθαι αὐτὸν τότε.
Witnesses Having been thus treated by Leochares, though it was possible for us to have him deprived of civil rights since we had obtained a verdict for perjury against him, we did not wish to do so, but were satisfied to recover what belonged to us and be quit of him. Having behaved thus towards Leochares and Dicaeogenes (III.) we were deceived by them, gentlemen; for Dicaeogenes (III) did not hand over the two-thirds of the estate, though he had agreed in court to do so, and Leochares refuses to admit that he undertook to be surety on that occasion.
§ 20
καίτοι εἰ μὴ ἐναντίον μὲν τῶν δικαστῶν, πεντακοσίων ὄντων, ἐναντίον δὲ τῶν περιεστηκότων ἠγγυᾶτο, οὐκ οἶδʼ ὅ τι ἂν ἐποίησεν. ὡς μὲν τοίνυν περιφανῶς ψεύδονται, μάρτυρας ὑμῖν παρεχόμεθα τοὺς παρόντας, ὅτε Δικαιογένης μὲν ἀφίστατο τοῖν δυοῖν μεροῖν τοῦ κλήρου καὶ ὡμολόγει ἀναμφισβήτητα παραδώσειν ταῖς Δικαιογένους ἀδελφαῖς, Λεωχάρης δὲ ἠγγυᾶτο αὐτὸν ἃ ὡμολόγησε καὶ ποιήσειν. δεόμεθα δὲ καὶ ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἴ τις ἐτύγχανε παρὼν τότε, ἀναμνησθῆναι εἰ λέγομεν ἀληθῆ καὶ βοηθῆσαι ἡμῖν·
Yet if he had not given surety in the presence of the judges, five hundred in number, and of those who were present in court, I don't know what he could have done. To prove, therefore, that they are obviously lying, we are producing as witnesses those who were present when Dicaeogenes (III.) gave up two-thirds of the estate and promised to hand it over without further dispute to Dicaeogenes' (II.) sisters, and Leochares undertook to be surety that he would actually perform what he promised. And we beseech you, gentlemen, if any of you were present on that occasion, to recollect whether we are speaking the truth and to aid us.
§ 21
ἐπεί, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἰ Δικαιογένης ἀληθῆ λέγει, τί ἡμεῖς ὠφελούμεθα νικήσαντες, ἢ τί οὗτος ἐζημιώθη ἡττηθείς; εἰ γὰρ ἀπέστη μόνον (ὥς φησι) τοῖν δυοῖν μεροῖν τοῦ κλήρου, ἀναμφισβήτητα δὲ μὴ ὡμολόγει παραδώσειν, τί ἐζημιοῦτο ἀφιστάμενος ὧν τιμὴν εἶχεν; οὐδὲ γὰρ πρὶν ἡττηθῆναι τὴν δίκην εἶχεν ὧν ἡμεῖς δικαζόμεθα, ἀλλʼ οἱ παρὰ τούτου πριάμενοι καὶ θέμενοι, οἷς ἔδει αὐτὸν ἀποδόντα τὴν τιμὴν ἡμῖν τὰ μέρη ἀποδοῦναι.
For, gentlemen, if Dicaeogenes (III.) is speaking the truth, what advantage was it to us to have won our case, and what disadvantage was it to my opponent to be defeated? For if he simply renounced, as he alleges, his claim to the two-thirds of the estate but did not agree to hand it over without further dispute, what did he lose by renouncing property, the value of which he was still holding? For even before he lost his case, the property which we are claiming was not in his possession but in the hands of those who bought it from him or held it on mortgage, whom he ought to have paid off and then given us our share.
§ 22
διὰ ταῦτα γὰρ καὶ τοὺς ἐγγυητὰς παρʼ αὐτοῦ ἐλάβομεν, οὐ πιστεύοντες αὐτῷ ἃ ὡμολόγησε ποιήσειν. πλὴν γὰρ δυοῖν οἰκιδίοιν ἔξω τείχους καὶ ἐν Πεδίῳ ἑξήκοντα πλέθρων οὐδὲν κεκομίσμεθα, ἀλλʼ οἱ παρὰ τούτου θέμενοι καὶ πριάμενοι. ἡμεῖς δʼ οὐκ ἐξάγομεν· δέδιμεν γὰρ μὴ ὄφλωμεν δίκας. καὶ γὰρ Μικίωνα, κελεύοντος Δικαιογένους καὶ φάσκοντος 〈οὐ〉 βεβαιώσειν, ἐξάγοντες ἐκ τοῦ βαλανείου ὤφλομεν τετταράκοντα μνᾶς διὰ Δικαιογένην, ὦ ἄνδρες.
That is why we insisted on his providing sureties, because we had no confidence that he would carry out his agreement. Indeed except two small buildings outside the walls and sixty plethra of land in the Plain we have recovered nothing: the rest is in the possession of those to whom he sold or mortgaged it. We are making no attempt to eject them, because we are afraid of losing suits against them; for when we tried to eject Micion from the bath-house at the suggestion of Dicaeogenes (III.), who said that he would not confirm his title, we were fined forty minae, all through Dicaeogenes, gentlemen.
§ 23
ἡγούμενοι γὰρ οὐκ ἂν αὐτὸν βεβαιώσαι οὐδὲν ὧν ἡμῖν ἀπέστη ἐν τῷ δικαστηρίῳ, διισχυριζόμεθα πρὸς Μικίωνα ἐναντίον τῶν δικαστῶν, ἐθέλοντες ὁτιοῦν πάσχειν, εἰ βεβαιώσειεν αὐτῷ Δικαιογένης τὸ βαλανεῖον, οὐκ ἄν ποτε οἰόμενοι αὐτὸν ἐναντία οἷς ὡμολόγησε πρᾶξαι, οὐ διʼ ἄλλʼ οὐδὲν ἢ διὰ τοὺς ἐγγυητάς, ὅτι καθειστήκεσαν ἡμῖν.
For thinking that he would not confirm any title to any of the property to which he renounced his claim in our favor in the court, we vigorously attacked Micion before the judges, being willing to run any risk of Dicaeogenes (III.) confirming Micion's title to the bath-house, and never imagining that he would do the very opposite of what he had agreed to do, our sole reason for so acting being that the sureties had been given.
§ 24
ἀποστὰς δὲ Δικαιογένης ταῦτα τὰ μέρη ὧν καὶ νῦν ὁμολογεῖ ἀφεστάναι ἡμῖν, ἐβεβαίωσε Μικίωνι τὸ βαλανεῖον. καὶ ἐγὼ μὲν ὁ ἄθλιος οὐχ ὅπως τι ἐκ τοῦ κλήρου εἰληφώς, ἀλλὰ προσαπολωλεκὼς τετταράκοντα μνᾶς, ἀπῄειν ὑβρισμένος ὑπὸ τοῦ Δικαιογένους. καὶ τούτων ὑμῖν μάρτυρας παρέξομαι.
Dicaeogenes (III.), however, having renounced the portion of the property which he still admits that he renounced in our favor, confirmed Micion's title to the bath-house. Thus I was in the unfortunate position of not only having received nothing from the estate but of having also lost forty minae, and left the court having been fooled by Dicaeogenes (III.). Of these things I will now produce witnesses before you.
§ 25
Μάρτυρες ταῦτα μὲν πεπόνθαμεν ὑπὸ Δικαιογένους,ὦ ἄνδρες· ὁ δʼ ἐγγυησάμενος αὐτὸν Λεωχάρης καὶ τῶν πάντων ἡμῖν κακῶν αἴτιος οὔ φησιν ἐγγυήσασθαι ἃ καταμαρτυρεῖται αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἐν τῷ γραμματείῳ τῷ ἐπὶ τοῦ δικαστηρίου γραφέντι οὐκ ἔνεστι ταῦτα. ἡμεῖς δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, τότʼ ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος σπεύδοντες τὰ μὲν ἐγράψαμεν, τῶν δὲ μάρτυρας ἐποιησάμεθα· οὗτοι δέ, ἃ μὲν αὐτοῖς συμφέρει τῶν ὁμολογηθέντων τότε, κύριά φασιν εἶναι, εἰ καὶ μὴ γέγραπται, ἃ δʼ οὐ συμφέρει, οὐ κύρια, εἰ μὴ γέγραπται.
Witnesses Such is the treatment, gentlemen, which we have received from Dicaeogenes (III.). Leochares, who became his surety and is the cause of all our troubles, says that he never undertook to act as surety to the extent stated in the evidence against him, on the ground that it is not implied in the document drawn up before the tribunal. We, gentlemen, being hurried at the time in court, wrote down some of the points and obtained witnesses in support of others; but our opponents affirm the validity of those parts of the agreement then made which are to their own advantage, even if they are not in writing, while they deny the validity of what is contrary to their interests unless it exists in writing.
§ 26
ἐγὼ δʼ, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐ θαυμάζω ὅτι ἔξαρνοί εἰσι τὰ ὡμολογημένα· οὐδὲ γὰρ τὰ γραφέντα ἐθέλουσι ποιεῖν. ἡμεῖς δʼ ὡς λέγομεν ἀληθῆ, καὶ ἄλλο τι τεκμήριον παρεξόμεθα. Πρωταρχίδῃ γὰρ τῷ Ποταμίῳ ἔδωκε Δικαιογένης τὴν ἀδελφὴν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἐπὶ τετταράκοντα μναῖς, ἀντὶ δὲ τῆς προικὸς τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτῷ τὴν ἐν Κεραμεικῷ παρέδωκε. ταύτῃ δὲ τῇ γυναικί, ἣν ὁ Πρωταρχίδης ἔχει, προσήκει τοῦ κλήρου μέρος ὅσον περ τῇ μητρὶ τῇ ἐμῇ.
For myself, gentlemen, I am not surprised that they repudiate their verbal agreements, for they are unwilling to execute the written conditions. We will furnish another proof of our veracity. Dicaeogenes (II.) gave his sister in marriage to Protarchides of Potamos with a dowry of forty minae, but instead of paying the dowry to her in cash he made over to Protarchides the house which he possessed in the Cerameicus. Now this woman, the wife of Protarchides, has a right to just the same share of the estate as my mother.
§ 27
ἐπεὶ δʼ οὖν ἀπέστη Δικαιογένης ταῖς γυναιξὶ τοῖν δυοῖν μεροῖν τοῦ κλήρου, ἠξίου ὁ Λεωχάρης τὸν Πρωταρχίδην παραδιδόναι αὑτῷ τὴν συνοικίαν ἣν εἶχεν ἀντὶ τῆς προικός, ὡς ὄντι ἐγγυητῇ αὑτῷ, τὸ δὲ μέρος ὑπὲρ τῆς γυναικὸς τοῦ κλήρου παρʼ αὑτοῦ κομίζεσθαι. παραλαβὼν δὲ τὴν συνοικίαν τὸ μέρος οὐ παρέδωκε. καὶ τούτων ὑμῖν μάρτυρα τὸν Πρωταρχίδην παρέξομαι.
Now when Dicaeogenes (III.) renounced the two-thirds of the estate in favor of the women, Leochares suggested that Protarchides should hand over to him the building which he possessed in lieu of the dowry, on the ground that he was surety, and receive from him on his wife's behalf the share of the estate which accrued to her. He took over the building, but never paid over the share of the estate. And of these facts I will now produce Protarchides as witness.
§ 28
Μάρτυς περὶ δὲ ἐπισκευῆς τοῦ βαλανείου καὶ οἰκοδομίας καὶ πρότερον εἴρηκε Δικαιογένης καὶ νῦν ἴσως ἐρεῖ, ὡς ὁμολογήσαντες αὐτῷ αὐτῷ ἀποδώσειν τὰ ἀνηλωμένα οὐκ ἀπεδώκαμεν, καὶ ὅτι διὰ τοῦτο οὐ δύναται ἀπαλλάσσειν τοὺς χρήστας, οὐδὲ ἡμῖν παραδοῦναι ἃ δεῖ αὐτόν.
Witness Regarding the repairs to the bath-house and the cost of building, Dicaeogenes (III.) has declared on a former occasion, and will now perhaps again declare, that we agreed to re-imburse him his expenses but failed to do so, and that he therefore cannot get rid of the creditors and restore what he ought to us.
§ 29
ἡμεῖς δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἐπὶ τοῦ δικαστηρίου, ὅτε ἠναγκάζομεν αὐτὸν ἀφίστασθαι τούτων, ἀντὶ τῶν λῃτουργιῶν καὶ τῶν εἰς τὰ οἰκοδομήματα ἀνηλωμένων ἀφεῖμεν αὐτῷ τοὺς καρπούς, οὕτω τῶν δικαστῶν γιγνωσκόντων· ὕστερον δʼ οὐκ ἀναγκαζόμενοι ἀλλʼ ἑκόντες ἔδομεν αὐτῷ τὴν ἐν ἄστει οἰκίαν ἐξαίρετον προσθέντες τῷ τρίτῳ μέρει τοῦ κλήρου ἔχειν ἀντὶ τῶν ἐπεσκευασμένων, ἣν οὗτος ἀντὶ πεντακισχιλίων δραχμῶν παρέδωκε Φιλονείκῳ.
Now, gentlemen, we in court, when we obliged him to renounce this property, let him off the payment of the revenue he had received from it in consideration of the public services which he had performed and the expenses which he had incurred on the buildings, in accordance with the decision of the judges and subsequently, under no compulsion but of our own free will, in consideration of the repairs which he had carried out, gave him as a special gift, in addition to his third share of the estate, the town-house which he sold to Philonicus for 5000 drachmae.
§ 30
ἔδομεν δὲ οὐ διὰ τὴν τοῦ Δικαιογένους χρηστότητα, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἀλλʼ ἐπιδεικνύμενοι ὅτι οὐ περὶ πλείονος χρήματα ποιούμεθα τῶν οἰκείων, οὐδʼ ἂν πάνυ πονηροὶ ὦσι. καὶ γὰρ πρότερον ὅτʼ ἐφʼ ἡμῖν ἐγένετο Δικαιογένην τιμωρήσασθαι καὶ ἀφελέσθαι ἃ εἶχεν, οὐκ ἐβουλήθημεν τῶν τούτου κτήσασθαι οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ τὰ ἡμέτερα μόνον κομίσασθαι ἐξήρκει ἡμῖν. οὗτος δʼ ὅτʼ ἐκράτησεν ἡμῶν, ἀπεσύλησεν ἃ ἐδύνατο, καὶ ὡς ἐχθροὺς ἀλλʼ οὐ προσήκοντας ἀπόλλυσι.
We made Dicaeogenes (III.) this present not because of his honesty, but as a proof that we have more regard for our relatives, even though they may be thorough rascals, than for money. For, indeed, on an earlier occasion, when it was in our power to punish Dicaeogenes (III.) and deprive him of his property, we did not wish to possess ourselves of anything which belonged to him but were satisfied with merely obtaining what was our own. He, on the other hand, when he had us in his power, robbed us of all he could and tried to ruin us, as though we were his foes and not his relatives.
§ 31
τεκμήριον δὲ καὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων τρόπων καὶ τῆς τούτου ἀδικίας μέγα παρεξόμεθα. μελλούσης γὰρ τῆς πρὸς Λεωχάρην δίκης εἰσιέναι, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἐν τῶ Μαιμακτηριῶνι μηνί, ἠξίου Λεωχάρης καὶ Δικαιογένης δίαιταν ἡμᾶς ἐπιτρέπειν τὴν δίκην ἀναβαλλομένους. καὶ ἡμεῖς ὥσπερ μικρὰ ἀδικούμενοι συνεχωρήσαμεν, καὶ ἐπετρέψαμεν διαιτηταῖς τέτταρσιν, ὧν τοὺς μὲν δύο ἡμεῖς ἠγάγομεν, τοὺς δὲ δύο ἐκεῖνοι. καὶ ἐναντίον τούτων ὡμολογήσαμεν ἐμμενεῖν οἷς ἂν οὗτοι γνοῖεν, καὶ ὠμόσαμεν.
We will now furnish a strong proof of our own forbearance and the injustice of Dicaeogenes. When the action against Leochares was coming on, gentlemen, in the month of Maemacterion, Leochares and Dicaeogenes (III.) asked us to postpone the action and submit the matter to arbitration. We, just as though we had suffered only slight injuries, agreed to this and submitted the matter to four arbitrators, two of whom were nominated by us and two by our opponents. In their presence we agreed to abide by their decision and swore an oath to this effect.
§ 32
καὶ οἱ διαιτηταὶ ἔφασαν, εἰ μὲν ἀνώμοτοι δύναιντʼ [ἂν] ἡμᾶς διαλλάξαι, οὕτω ποιήσειν, εἰ δὲ μή, καὶ αὐτοὶ ὀμόσαντες ἀποφανεῖσθαι ἃ δίκαια ἡγοῦνται εἶναι. ἀνακρίναντες δὲ ἡμᾶς πολλάκις καὶ πυθόμενοι τὰ πραχθέντα οἱ διαιτηταί, οἱ μὲν δύο οὓς ἐγὼ προὐβαλόμην, Διότιμος καὶ Μελάνωπος, ἤθελον καὶ ἀνώμοτοι καὶ ὀμόσαντες ἀποφήνασθαι ἃ ἐγίγνωσκον ἀληθέστατα ἐκ τῶν λεγομένων, οὓς δὲ Λεωχάρης προὐβάλετο, οὐκ ἔφασαν ἀποφανεῖσθαι.
The arbitrators said, that if they could effect a compromise without putting themselves under an oath, they would do so; otherwise they would themselves also take an oath and declare what they regarded as just. The arbitrators interrogated us many times and learnt the facts. The two whom I had proposed, Diotimus and Melanopus, expressed their readiness, with or without an oath, to declare what they regarded as the truth in the statements; but the arbitrators whom Leochares had proposed refused to do so.
§ 33
καίτοι Διοπείθης ὁ ἕτερος τῶν διαιτητῶν Λεωχάρει μὲν ἦν τουτῳὶ κηδεστής, ἐμὸς δʼ ἐχθρὸς καὶ ἀντίδικος ἐξ ἑτέρων συμβολαίων· Δημάρατος δὲ ὁ μετʼ αὐτοῦ Μνησιπτολέμῳ τῷ ἐγγυησαμένῳ Δικαιογένην μετὰ Λεωχάρους ἦν ἀδελφός. οὗτοι μέντοι οὐκ ἠθέλησαν ἀποφήνασθαι, ὁρκώσαντες ἡμᾶς ἦ μὴν ἐμμενεῖν οἷς [ἂν] αὐτοὶ γνοῖεν. καὶ τούτων ὑμῖν μάρτυρας παρέξομαι.
Yet Diopeithes, one of the two arbitrators, was brother-in-law of Leochares here and a personal enemy of mine, and had been my opponent in other actions regarding contracts, while Demaratus, his colleague, was a brother of Mnesiptolemus, who acted with Leochares as surety for Dicaeogenes (III.). These men, however, refused to pronounce their opinion, although they had made us swear that we would abide by whatever they themselves decided. Of these facts I will now produce witnesses before you.
§ 34
Μάρτυρες οὔκουν δεινὸν εἰ δεήσεται ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες, Λεωχάρης ἀποψηφίσασθαι ἃ Διοπείθης κηδεστὴς ὢν αὐτοῦ κατεψηφίσατο; ἢ ὑμῖν πῶς καλὸν ἀπογνῶναι Λεωχάρους ἅ γε οὐδʼ οἱ προσήκοντες αὐτοῦ ἀπέγνωσαν; δέομαι οὖν ὑμῶν καταψηφίσασθαι Λεωχάρους, ἵνʼ ἃ ἡμῖν οἱ πρόγονοι κατέλιπον κομισώμεθα, καὶ μὴ μόνον τὰ ὀνόματα αὐτῶν ἔχωμεν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ χρήματα. τῶν δὲ Λεωχάρους ἰδίων οὐκ ἐπιθυμοῦμεν.
Witnesses Is it not extraordinary, gentlemen, that Leochares should ask you to absolve him where Diopeithes his brother-in-law condemned him? Or how can it be right for you to acquit Leochares when even his relatives did not acquit him? I beseech you, therefore, to condemn Leochares, in order that we may recover what our forefathers left to us and possess not merely their names but their property also. The personal property of Leochares we do not covet.
§ 35
Δικαιογενην γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὔτʼ ἐλεεῖν ἐστε δίκαιοι 〈ὡς〉 κακῶς πράττοντα καὶ πενόμενον, οὔτʼ εὖ ποιεῖν ὡς ἀγαθόν τι εἰργασμένον τὴν πόλιν· οὐδέτερα γὰρ αὐτῷ τούτων ὑπάρχει, ὡς ἐγὼ ἀποφανῶ, ὦ ἄνδρες. ἅμα δὲ καὶ πλούσιον καὶ πονηρότατον αὐτὸν ὄντα ἀνθρώπων ἀποδείξω καὶ εἰς τὴν πόλιν καὶ εἰς τοὺς προσήκοντας καὶ εἰς τοὺς φίλους. οὗτος γὰρ παραλαβὼν τὸν κλῆρον παρʼ ὑμῶν φέροντα μίσθωσιν τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ὀγδοήκοντα μνᾶς, καρπωσάμενος αὐτὸν δέκα ἔτη οὔτε ἀργύριον ὁμολογεῖ κεκτῆσθαι οὔτε ὅποι ἀνήλωσεν ἔχοι ἂν ἐπιδεῖξαι, ὦ ἄνδρες.
Dicaeogenes (III.), gentlemen, has no claim to your pity for misfortune or poverty, nor does he deserve any kindness for having done any good service to the city; he has no title to your consideration on either of these grounds, as I will prove to you, gentlemen. I will show you that he is at once rich and the meanest of men in his relations both to the city and to his kinsmen and to his friends. Having received by your verdict the property which brought in a yearly revenue of eighty minae, and having enjoyed it for ten years, he refuses to admit that he has saved money out of it nor can he show how he expended it, gentlemen.
§ 36
ἄξιον δὲ καὶ ὑμῖν λογίσασθαι. οὗτος γὰρ τῇ μὲν φυλῇ εἰς Διονύσια χορηγήσας τέταρτος ἐγένετο, τραγῳδοῖς δὲ καὶ πυρριχισταῖς ὕστατος· ταύτας δὲ μόνας ἀναγκασθεὶς 〈τὰς〉 λῃτουργίας λειτουργῆσαι ἀπὸ τοσαύτης προσόδου οὕτω καλῶς ἐχορήγησεν. ἀλλὰ μὴν τριηράρχων τοσούτων κατασταθέντων οὔτʼ αὐτὸς ἐτριηράρχησεν οὔθʼ ἑτέρῳ συμβέβληται ἐν τοιούτοις καιροῖς, ἀλλʼ ἕτεροι μὲν οὐσίαν κεκτημένοι ἐλάττω ἢ οὗτος μίσθωσιν λαμβάνει τριηραρχοῦσι.
It is well worth your while to look into the matter. He acted as choregus for his tribe at the Dionysia and was fourth; as choregus in the tragic contest and Pyrrhic dances he was last. These were the only public services which he undertook and then only under compulsion, and this was the fine show he made as choregus in spite of his great wealth! Moreover, though so many trierarchs were appointed, he never acted in this capacity by himself nor has he ever been associated in it with another in all those years of crisis; yet others possessing less capital than he has income, act as trierarchs.
§ 37
καίτοι, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐχ ὁ πατὴρ αὐτῷ τὴν πολλὴν οὐσίαν κατέλιπεν, ἀλλʼ ὑμεῖς ἔδοτε τῇ ψήφῳ· ὥστε εἰ καὶ μὴ πολίτης ἦν, διά γε τοῦτο δίκαιος ἦν τὴν πόλιν εὖ ποιεῖν. εἰσφορῶν τοίνυν τοσούτων γεγενημένων πᾶσι τοῖς πολίταις εἰς τὸν πόλεμον καὶ τὴν σωτηρίαν τῆς πόλεως Δικαιογένης οὐκ ἔστιν ἥντινα εἰσενήνοχε· πλὴν ὅτε Λέχαιον ἑάλω, κληθεὶς ὑπὸ ἑτέρου ἐπέδωκεν ἐν τῷ δήμῳ τριακοσίας δραχμάς, ἔλαττον ἢ Κλεώνυμος ὁ Κρής·
Yet, gentlemen, his large fortune was not bequeathed to him by his father but given to him by your verdict; so that, even if he were not an Athenian citizen, he was in duty bound for this reason alone to do the city good service. Though so many extraordinary contributions for the cost of the war and the safety of the city have been made by all the citizens, Dicaeogenes (III.) has never contributed anything, except that after the capture of Lechaeum, at the request of another citizen, he promised in the public assembly a subscription of 300 drachmas, a smaller sum than Cleonymus the Cretan.
§ 38
καὶ τοῦτο ἐπέδωκεν, οὐκ εἰσήνεγκεν, ἀλλʼ ἐπʼ αἰσχίστῳ ἐπιγράμματι ἐξετέθη αὐτοῦ τοὔνομα ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἐπωνύμων, ὅτι οἵδε εἰς σωτηρίαν τῆς πόλεως ὑποσχόμενοι τῷ δήμῳ εἰσοίσειν χρήματα ἐθελονταὶ οὐκ εἰσήνεγκαν. καίτοι τοι πῶς ἄξιον θαυμάζειν, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἰ ἐμὲ ἐξηπάτησεν ἕνα ὄντα, ὃς ὑμᾶς ἅπαντας ἅμα συνειλεγμένους ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοιαῦτα ἐποίησε; καὶ τούτων ὑμῖν τοὺς μάρτυρας παρέξομαι. Μάρτυρες εἰς μὲν τὴν πόλιν οὕτω καὶ τοσαῦτα λελῃτούργηκε Δικαιογένης ἀπὸ τοσούτων χρημάτων·
This sum he promised but did not pay, and his name was posted on a list of defaulters in front of the statues of the Eponymous Heroes, which was headed: “These are they who voluntarily promised the people to contribute money for the salvation of the city and failed to pay the amounts promised.” Indeed, gentlemen, what ground is there for astonishment that he deceived me, a single citizen, when he acted in this manner towards all of you united in assembly? Of these facts I will now produce witnesses before you. Witnesses Such are the manner and extent of the public services which Dicaeogenes has rendered to the city out of so large a fortune.
§ 39
περὶ δὲ τοὺς προσήκοντας τοιοῦτός ἐστιν οἷον ὁρᾶτε, ὥστε τοὺς μὲν ἡμῶν ἀφείλετο τὴν οὐσίαν, ὅτι μεῖζον ἐδυνήθη, τοὺς δὲ περιεώρα εἰς τοὺς μισθωτοὺς ἰόντας διʼ ἔνδειαν τῶν ἐπιτηδείων. τὴν δὲ μητέρα [τὴν] αὐτοῦ καθημένην ἐν τῷ τῆς Εἰλειθυίας ἱερῷ πάντες ἑώρων, καὶ τούτῳ ἐγκαλοῦσαν ἃ ἐγὼ αἰσχύνομαι λέγειν, οὗτος δὲ ποιῶν οὐκ ᾐσχύνετο.
Towards his relatives he is the sort of man that you see; some of us he robbed of our property because he was stronger than we were, others he allowed to resort to paid employment through lack of the necessities of life. Everyone saw his mother seated in the shrine of Eileithyia and calling down upon him reproaches which I am ashamed to mention but which he was not ashamed to justify.
§ 40
τῶν δʼ ἐπιτηδείων Μέλανα μὲν τὸν Αἰγύπτιον, ᾧ ἐκ μειρακίου φίλος ἦν, ὅπερ ἔλαβε παρʼ αὐτοῦ ἀργύριον ἀποστερήσας, ἔχθιστός ἐστι· τῶν δὲ ἄλλων αὐτοῦ φίλων οἱ μὲν οὐκ ἀπέλαβον ἃ ἐδάνεισαν, οἱ δʼ ἐξηπατήθησαν, καὶ οὐκ ἔλαβον ἃ ὑπέσετο αὐτοῖς, εἰ ἐπιδικάσαιτο τοῦ κλήρου, δώσειν.
Amongst his intimates he deprived Melas the Egyptian, who had been his friend from youth upwards, of money which he had received from him, and is now his bitterest enemy; of his other friends some have never received back money which they lent him, others were deceived by him and did not receive what he had promised to give them if he should have the estate adjudicated to him.
§ 41
καίτοι, ὦ ἄνδρες, οἱ ἡμέτεροι πρόγονοι οἱ ταῦτα κτησάμενοι καὶ καταλιπόντες πάσας μὲν χορηγίας ἐχορήγησαν, εἰσήνεγκαν δὲ εἰς τὸν πόλεμον χρήματα πολλὰ ὑμῖν, καὶ τριηραρχοῦντες οὐδένα χρόνον διέλιπον. καὶ τούτων μαρτύρια ἐν τοῖς ἱεροῖς ἀναθήματα ἐκεῖνοι ἐκ τῶν περιόντων, μνημεῖα τῆς αὑτῶν ἀρετῆς, ἀνέθεσαν, τοῦτο μὲν ἐν Διονύσου τρίποδας, οὓς χορηγοῦντες καὶ νικῶντες ἔλαβον, τοῦτο δʼ ἐν Πυθίου·
And yet, gentlemen, our forefathers, who acquired and bequeathed this property, performed every kind of choregic office, contributed large sums for your expenses in war, and never ceased acting as trierarchs. As evidence of all these services they set up in the temples out of the remainder of their property, as memorials of their civic worth, dedications, such as tripods which they had received as prizes for choregic victories in the temple of Dionysus, or in the shrine of Pythian Apollo.
§ 42
ἔτι δʼ ἐν ἀκροπόλει ἀπαρχὰς τῶν ὄντων ἀναθέντες πολλοῖς, ὡς ἀπὸ ἰδίας κτήσεως, ἀγάλμασι χαλκοῖς καὶ λιθίνοις κεκοσμήκασι τὸ ἱερόν. αὐτοὶ δʼ ὑπὲρ τῆς πατρίδος πολεμοῦντες ἀπέθανον, Δικαιογένης μὲν ὁ Μενεξένου τοῦ ἐμοῦ πάππου πατὴρ στρατηγῶν ὅτε ἡ ἐν Ἐλευσῖνι μάχη ἐγένετο, Μενέξενος δʼ ὁ ἐκείνου ὑὸς φυλαρχῶν τῆς Ὀλυνθίας ἐν Σπαρτώλῳ, Δικαιογένης δὲ ὁ Μενεξένου τριηραρχῶν τῆς Παράλου ἐν Κνίδῳ.
Furthermore, by dedicating on the Acropolis the first-fruits of their wealth, they have adorned the shrine with bronze and marble statues, numerous, indeed, to have been provided out of a private fortune. They themselves died fighting for their country; Dicaeogenes (I.), the son of Menexenus, the father of my grandfather Menexenus (I.), while acting as general when the battle took place at Eleusis; Menexenus (I.), his son, in command of the cavalry at Spartolus in the territory of Olynthus; Dicaeogenes (II.), the son of Menexenus (I.), while in command of the Paralus at Cnidus.
§ 43
τὸν μὲν τούτων οἶκον σύ, ὦ Δικαιόγενες, παραλαβὼν κακῶς καὶ αἰσχρῶς διολώλεκας, καὶ ἐξαργυρισάμενος πενίαν ὀδύρῃ, ποῖ ἀναλώσας; οὔτε γὰρ εἰς τὴν πόλιν οὔτε εἰς τοὺς φίλους φανερὸς εἶ δαπανηθεὶς οὐδέν. ἀλλὰ μὴν οὔτε καθιπποτρόφηκας· οὐ γὰρ πώποτε ἐκτήσω ἵππον πλείονος ἄξιον ἢ τριῶν μνῶν· οὔτε κατεζευγοτρόφηκας, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲ ζεῦγος ἐκτήσω ὀρικὸν οὐδεπώποτε ἐπὶ τοσούτοις ἀγροῖς καὶ κτήμασιν. ἀλλʼ οὐδʼ ἐκ τῶν πολεμίων ἐλύσω οὐδένα.
It is the property of these men, Dicaeogenes, that you inherited and have wickedly and disgracefully squandered, and having converted it into money you now plead poverty. On what did you spend it? For you have obviously not expended anything on the city or your friends. You have certainly not ruined yourself by keeping horses—for you have never possessed a horse worth more than three minae—, nor by keeping racing teams—for you never owned even a pair of mules in spite of possessing so many farms and estates. Nor again did you ever ransom a prisoner of war.
§ 44
ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ τὰ ἀναθήματα, ἃ Μενέξενος τριῶν ταλάντων ποιησάμενος ἀπέθανε πρὶν ἀναθεῖναι, εἰς πόλιν κεκόμικας, ἀλλʼ ἐν τοῖς λιθουργείοις ἔτι καλινδεῖται, καὶ αὐτὸς μὲν ἠξίους κεκτῆσθαι ἅ σοι οὐδὲν προσῆκε χρήματα, τοῖς δὲ θεοῖς οὐκ ἀπέδωκας ἃ ἐκείνων ἐγίγνετο ἀγάλματα.
You have never even transported to the Acropolis the dedications upon which Menexenus (I.) expended three talents and which his death prevented him from setting up, but they are still knocking about in the sculptor's workshop; and thus, while you yourself claimed the possession of money to which you had no title, you never rendered up to the gods statues which were theirs by right.
§ 45
διὰ τί οὖν ἀξιώσεις σου τοὺς δικαστὰς ἀποψηφίσασθαι, ὦ Δικαιόγενες; πότερον ὅτι πολλὰς λῃτουργίας λελῃτούργηκας τῇ πόλει, καὶ πολλὰ χρήματα δαπανήσας σεμνοτέραν τὴν πόλιν τούτοις ἐποίησας; ἢ ὡς τριηραρχῶν πολλὰ κακὰ τοὺς πολεμίους εἰργάσω, καὶ εἰσφορὰς δεομένῃ τῇ πατρίδι εἰς τὸν πόλεμον εἰσενεγκὼν μεγάλα ὠφέληκας; ἀλλʼ οὐδέν σοι τούτων πέπρακται.
What possible reason will you give, Dicaeogenes, that the judges should acquit you? Will you allege that you have performed many public services for the city and added to the dignity of the city by lavish expenditure? Will you say that as trierarch you have inflicted heavy losses upon the enemy, or bestowed great benefits upon your country in her hour of need by contributing to the expenses of the war? No, you have done none of these things.
§ 46
ἀλλʼ ὡς στρατιώτης ἀγαθός; ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἐστράτευσαι τοσούτου καὶ τοιούτου γενομένου πολέμου, εἰς ὃν Ὀλύνθιοι μὲν καὶ νησιῶται ὑπὲρ τῆσδε τῆς γῆς ἀποθνῄσκουσι μαχόμενοι τοῖς πολεμίοις, σὺ δέ, ὦ Δικαιόγενες, πολίτης ὢν οὐδʼ ἐστράτευσαι. ἀλλʼ ἴσως διὰ τοὺς προγόνους ἀξιώσεις μου πλέον ἔχειν, ὅτι τὸν τύραννον ἀπέκτειναν. ἐγὼ δʼ ἐκείνους μὲν ἐπαινῶ, σοὶ δὲ οὐδὲν ἡγοῦμαι τῆς ἐκείνων ἀρετῆς μετεῖναι.
Do you claim acquital on the ground that you have proved yourself a good soldier? But you never served at all in the whole course of the long and critical war, during which the Olynthians and the islanders are dying fighting against the foe in the defence of our land, but you, Dicaeogenes, though you were an Athenian citizen, have never served at all. Perhaps you will claim an advantage over me for the sake of your forefathers, because they slew the tyrant? I pay them all due homage, but I do not think that you have any share of their valor.
§ 47
πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ εἵλου ἀντὶ τῆς ἐκείνων δόξης τὴν ἡμετέραν οὐσίαν κτήσασθαι, καὶ ἐβουλήθης μᾶλλον Δικαιογένους καλεῖσθαι ὑὸς ἢ Ἁρμοδίου, ὑπεριδὼν μὲν τὴν ἐν Πρυτανείῳ σίτησιν, καταφρονήσας δὲ προεδριῶν καὶ ἀτελειῶν, ἃ τοῖς ἐξ ἐκείνων γεγονόσι δέδοται. ἔτι δὲ ὁ Ἀριστογείτων ἐκεῖνος καὶ Ἁρμόδιος οὐ διὰ τὸ γένος ἐτιμήθησαν ἀλλὰ διὰ τὴν ἀνδραγαθίαν, ἧς σοι οὐδὲν μέτεστιν, ὦ Δικαιόγενες.
In the first place, you preferred to possess our property rather than their glory, and wished to be called son of Dicaeogenes rather than of Harmodius, despising the right of dining in the town hall and disdaining the seats of honor and the immunities granted to the descendants of those heroes. Further, the great Aristogeiton and Harmodius were honored, not because of their birth but because of their bravery, of which you, Dicaeogenes, have no share.
On the Estate of Philoctemon · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg006 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Φιλοκτήμονος κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg006.perseus-grc2 · English: On the Estate of Philoctemon — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg006.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις εὐκτήμονος υἱὸς Φιλοκτήμων τὸν τῆς ἑτέρας τῶν ἀδελφῶν καὶ Φανοστράτου υἱὸν Χαιρέστρατον ποιησάμενος κατὰ διαθήκας τεθείσας παρὰ Χαιρέᾳ τῷ τῆς ἑτέρας ἀδελφῆς ἀνδρί, ἐτελεύτησε ζῶντος ἔτι τοῦ πατρός ὕστερον δὲ κἀκείνου ἀποθανόντος ἔλαχεν ὁ Χαιρέστρατος τοῦ κλήρου κατὰ τὸν νόμον. διαμαρτυρήσαντος δὲ Ἀνδροκλέους μὴ εἶναι ἐπίδικον ὄντος Ἀντιδώρου γνησίου παιδὸς Εὐκτήμονι, οἱ περὶ Χαιρέστρατον ἐπεσκήψαντο τῇ διαμαρτυρίᾳ, καὶ τοῦτον καὶ τὴν ἀδελφὴν αὐτοῦ νόθους γεγονέναι φάσκοντες, τὸν δὲ νόμον διαγορεύειν νόθῳ καὶ νόθῃ μὴ εἶναι ἀγχιστείαν. ἡ στάσις στοχασμός· ἄδηλον γὰρ εἰ ἐποίησε Φιλοκτήμων Χαιρέστρατον υἱὸν ἑαυτῷ, καὶ πάλιν ἄδηλον εἰ γνήσιοί εἰσιν οἱ περὶ Ἀντίδωρον.
Argument Philoctemon, a son of Euctemon, adopted Chaerestratus, the son of one of his two sisters and of Phanostratus, in a will which was deposited with Chaereas, the husband of the other sister, and died during his father's lifetime. When the latter also died, Chaerestratus claimed possession in accordance with the law. When Androcles lodged a protestation that the estate was not adjudicable because Euctemon had a legitimate son, namely, Antidorus, Chaerestratus and his supporters impugned the protestation, declaring that both Antidorus and his sister were illegitimate and that the law ordains that an illegitimate son or daughter cannot inherit as next-of-kin. The discussion turns on questions of fact; for it is uncertain whether Philoctemon adopted Chaerestratus as his son, and further, whether Antidorus and the other child are legitimate.
§ 1
ὅτι μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, πάντων οἰκειότατα 〈τυγχάνω〉 χρώμενος Φανοστράτῳ τε καὶ Χαιρεστράτῳ τουτῳί, τοὺς πολλοὺς οἶμαι ὑμῶν εἰδέναι, τοῖς δὲ μὴ εἰδόσιν ἱκανὸν ἐρῶ τεκμήριον· ὅτε γὰρ εἰς Σικελίαν ἐξέπλει τριηραρχῶν Χαιρέστρατος, διὰ τὸ πρότερον αὐτὸς ἐκπεπλευκέναι προῄδειν πάντας τοὺς ἐσομένους κινδύνους, ὅμως δὲ δεομένων τούτων καὶ συνεξέπλευσα καὶ συνεδυστύχησα καὶ ἑάλωμεν εἰς τοὺς πολεμίους.
That I am on terms of very close friendship with Phanostratus and with Chaerestratus here, I think most of you, gentlemen, are aware, but to those who are not aware of it I will give a convincing proof. When Chaerestratus set sail for Sicily in command of a trireme, although, having sailed thither myself before, I knew well all the dangers which I should encounter, yet, at the request of these friends of mine, I sailed with him and shared his misfortune, and we were both made prisoners of war.
§ 2
ἄτοπον δὴ εἰ ἐκεῖνα μὲν προδήλων ὄντων τῶν κινδύνων ὅμως διὰ τὸ χρῆσθαι τούτοις καὶ φίλους νομίζειν ὑπέμενον, νῦν δὲ οὐ πειρῴμην συνειπεῖν ἐξ ὧν ὑμεῖς τε τὰ εὔορκα ψηφιεῖσθε καὶ τούτοις τὰ δίκαια γενήσεται. δέομαι οὖν ὑμῶν συγγνώμην τε ἔχειν καὶ μετʼ εὐνοίας ἀκροάσασθαι· ὁ γὰρ ἀγὼν οὐ μικρὸς αὐτοῖς, ἀλλὰ περὶ τῶν μεγίστων.
It would be strange if I endured all this in the face of evident danger because of my friendship and affection for them, and yet were not now to attempt so to plead their cause that you shall pass a sentence in accordance with your oath and that justice shall be done to my clients. I entreat you, therefore, to grant me indulgence and to listen to me with goodwill; for the suit is of no slight importance to them, but their most vital interests are at stake.
§ 3
Φιλοκτήμων γὰρ ὁ Κηφισιεὺς φίλος ἦν Χαιρεστράτῳ τουτῳὶ δοὺς δὲ τὰ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ ὑὸν αὐτὸν ποιησάμενος ἐτελεύτησε. λαχόντος δὲ τοῦ Χαιρεστράτου κατὰ τὸν νόμον τοῦ κλήρου, ἐξὸν ἀμφισβητῆσαι Ἀθηναίων τῷ βουλομένῳ καὶ εὐθυδικίᾳ εἰσελθόντι εἰς ὑμᾶς, εἰ φαίνοιτο δικαιότερα λέγων, ἔχειν τὸν κλῆρον,
Philoctemon of Cephisia was a friend of Chaerestratus here, and died, having bequeathed to him his property and having adopted him as his son. Chaerestratus in accordance with the law claimed the estate. But, since it is lawful for any Athenian who wishes to do so to dispute an inheritance by bringing a direct action before you, and if he can establish a better claim, to obtain possession of the estate,
§ 4
διεμαρτύρησεν Ἀνδροκλῆς οὑτοσὶ μὴ ἐπίδικον εἶναι τὸν κλῆρον, ἀποστερῶν τοῦτον τῆς ἀμφισβητήσεως καὶ ὑμᾶς τοῦ κυρίους γενέσθαι ὅντινα δεῖ κληρονόμον καταστήσασθαι τῶν Φιλοκτήμονος· καὶ ἐν μιᾷ ψήφῳ καὶ ἑνὶ ἀγῶνι οἴεται ἀδελφοὺς καταστήσειν ἐκείνῳ τοὺς οὐδὲν προσήκοντας, καὶ τὸν κλῆρον ἀνεπίδικον ἕξειν αὐτός, καὶ τῆς ἀδελφῆς τῆς ἐκείνου κύριος γενήσεσθαι, καὶ τὴν διαθήκην ἄκυρον ποιήσειν.
Androcles here put in a protestation declaring that the succession was not adjudicable, thus depriving my client of his right to claim the estate and you of your right to decide who ought to be declared heir to Philoctemon's property. He thus thinks by a single verdict and by a single suit to establish as brothers of the deceased men who have no sort of connection with him, to place himself in possession of the estate without further legal procedure, to, become legal representative of the sister of the deceased, and to annul the will.
§ 5
πολλῶν δὲ καὶ δεινῶν ὄντων ἃ διαμεμαρτύρηκεν Ἀνδροκλῆς, τοῦτʼ αὐτὸ πρῶτον ἐπιδείξω ὑμῖν, ὡς διέθετο καὶ ἐποιήσατο ὑὸν τουτονὶ Χαιρέστρατον. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ τῷ Φιλοκτήμονι ἐκ μὲν τῆς γυναικὸς ᾗ συνῴκει οὐκ ἦν παιδίον οὐδέν, πολέμου δʼ ὄντος ἐκινδύνευε καὶ ἱππεὺς στρατευόμενος καὶ τριήραρχος πολλάκις ἐκπλέων, ἔδοξεν αὐτῷ διαθέσθαι τὰ αὑτοῦ, μὴ ἔρημον καταλίπῃ τὸν οἶκον, εἴ τι πάθοι.
Androcles has made a number of extraordinary allegations in his protestation; I will take one point first and prove that Philoctemon made a will and adopted Chaerestratus here as his son. Seeing that Philoctemon had no issue by the woman to whom he was married, and since, as it was war-time, he was running considerable risks, serving in the cavalry and often sailing as trierarch, he resolved to dispose of his property by will, so that he might not leave his house desolate if anything happened to him.
§ 6
τὼ μὲν οὖν ἀδελφὼ αὐτῷ, ὥπερ ἐγενέσθην, ἄμφω ἄπαιδε ἐτελευτησάτην· τοῖν δὲ ἀδελφαῖν τῇ μὲν ἑτέρᾳ, ᾗ ὁ Χαιρέας συνῴκει, οὐκ ἦν ἄρρεν παιδίον οὐδὲ ἐγένετο πολλὰ ἔτη συνοικούσῃ, ἐκ δὲ τῆς ἑτέρας, ᾗ συνῴκει Φανόστρατος οὑτοσί, ἤστην ὑὼ δύο. τούτων τὸν πρεσβύτερον τουτονὶ Χαιρέστρατον ἐποιήσατο ὑόν·
He had had two brothers, both of whom died without issue: of his two sisters one, who was the wife of Chaereas, had no son and had never had one, though she had been married for many years; the other, who was wife of Phanostratus here, had two sons. It was the elder of these, Chaerestratus here, whom Philoctemon adopted as his son.
§ 7
καὶ ἔγραψεν οὕτως ἐν διαθήκῃ, εἰ μὴ γένοιτο αὑτῷ παιδίον ἐκ τῆς γυναικός, τοῦτον κληρονομεῖν τῶν ἑαυτοῦ. καὶ τὴν διαθήκην κατέθετο παρὰ τῷ κηδεστῇ Χαιρέᾳ, τῷ τὴν ἑτέραν αὐτοῦ ἀδελφὴν ἔχοντι. καὶ ὑμῖν ἥ τε διαθήκη αὕτη ἀναγνωσθήσεται καὶ οἱ παραγενόμενοι μαρτυρήσουσι. καί μοι ἀνάγνωθι.
Under the terms of his will, if he had no child by his wife, Chaerestratus inherited his estate. He deposited his will with Chaereas, his brother-in-law, the husband of his other sister. This will shall now be read to you, and those who were present at its execution shall give evidence. Please read it.
§ 8
Διαθήκη 〈Μάρτυρες〉 ὡς μὲν διέθετο καὶ ἐφʼ οἷς ἐποιήσατο ὑὸν τοῦτον, ἀκηκόατε· ὡς δʼ ἐξὸν αὐτῷ ταῦτʼ ἔπραξεν, ὅθεν δικαιότατα ἡγοῦμαι τὰ τοιαῦτʼ εἶναι μανθάνειν, τοῦτον ὑμῖν αὐτὸν παρέξομαι τὸν νόμον. καί μοι ἀνάγνωθι.
Will. Witnesses You have now heard that Philoctemon made a will, and on what conditions he adopted Chaerestratus as his son. To prove that he had a right to do so, I will produce the text of the law which is in my opinion the best source of information in such matters. Please read it.
§ 9
Νόμος οὑτοσὶ ὁ νόμος, ὦ ἄνδρες, κοινὸς ἅπασι κεῖται, ἐξεῖναι τὰ ἑαυτοῦ διαθέσθαι, ἐὰν μὴ παῖδες ὦσι γνήσιοι ἄρρενες, ἐὰν μὴ ἄρα μανεὶς ἢ ὑπὸ γήρως ἢ διʼ ἄλλο τι τῶν ἐν τῷ νόμῳ παρανοῶν διαθῆται. ὅτι δʼ οὐδενὶ τούτων ἔνοχος ἦν Φιλοκτήμων, βραχέα εἰπὼν δηλώσω ὑμῖν. ὅστις γὰρ καὶ ἕως ἔζη τοιοῦτον πολίτην ἑαυτὸν παρεῖχεν, ὥστε διὰ τὸ ὑφʼ ὑμῶν τιμᾶσθαι ἄρχειν ἀξιοῦσθαι, καὶ ἐτελεύτησε μαχόμενος τοῖς πολεμίοις, πῶς ἄν τις τοῦτον τολμήσειεν εἰπεῖν ὡς οὐκ εὖ ἐφρόνει;
Law This law, gentlemen, holds good for all men alike, permitting anyone to dispose of his property in default of male issue, providing that, at the time of doing so, he is not insane or mentally incapacitated by old age or any other of the causes mentioned in the law. That Philoctemon did not fall under any of these exceptions, I will prove to you in a few words. For how could anyone dare to say that a man was not in full possession of his faculties, who all his life showed himself so good a citizen, that, owing to your esteem for him, he was considered worthy to hold command, and who died fighting against the enemy?
§ 10
ὅτι μὲν οὖν διέθετο καὶ ἐποιήσατο εὖ φρονῶν, ἐξὸν αὐτῷ, ἀποδέδεικται ὑμῖν, ὥστε κατὰ μὲν τοῦτο ψευδῆ μεμαρτυρηκὼς Ἀνδροκλῆς ἀποδέδεικται· ἐπειδὴ δὲ προσδιαμεμαρτύρηκεν [ὡς] ὑὸν εἶναι γνήσιον Εὐκτήμονος τοῦτον, καὶ ταῦτʼ ἀποδείξω ψευδῆ ὄντα. Εὐκτήμονι γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες, τῷ Φιλοκτήμονος πατρί, τοὺς μὲν ὄντως γενομένους παῖδας, Φιλοκτήμονα καὶ Ἐργαμένην καὶ Ἡγήμονα καὶ δύο θυγατέρας, καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτῶν, ἣν ἔγημεν ὁ Εὐκτήμων, Μειξιάδου Κηφισιῶς θυγατέρα, πάντες οἱ προσήκοντες ἴσασι καὶ οἱ φράτορες καὶ τῶν δημοτῶν οἱ πολλοί, καὶ μαρτυρήσουσιν ὑμῖν·
That he made a will and adopted a son when he was in full possession of his faculties, as he was entitled to do, has been proved to you; it follows from this that Androcles has been proved to have committed perjury. But since he has further stated in his protestation that my opponent is a legitimate son of Euctemon, I will prove this also to be false. The real sons of Euctemon, the father of Philoctemon, namely, Philoctemon himself, Ergamenes, and Hegemon, and his two daughters and their mother, Euctemon's wife, the daughter of Meixiades of Cephisia, are well known to all their relatives and to the members of the ward and to most of the demesmen, and they shall testify to you;
§ 11
ὅτι δʼ [οὐδʼ] ἄλλην τινὰ ἔγημε γυναῖκα, ἐξ ἧς τινος οἵδε αὐτῷ ἐγένοντο, οὐδεὶς τὸ παράπαν οἶδεν οὐδʼ ἤκουσε πώποτε ζῶντος Εὐκτήμονος. καίτοι τούτους εἰκὸς πιστοτάτους εἶναι νομίζειν μάρτυρας· τοὺς γὰρ οἰκείους εἰδέναι προσήκει τὰ τοιαῦτα. καί μοι τούτους κάλει πρῶτον, καὶ τὰς μαρτυρίας ἀνάγνωθι.
but no one is aware or ever heard a word during Euctemon's lifetime of his having married any other wife who became mother by him of our opponents. Yet it is only natural that these should be most trustworthy witnesses; for relatives ought to know about such matters. Please call them first and read the depositions.
§ 12
Μαρτυρίαι ἔτι τοίνυν καὶ τοὺς ἀντιδίκους ἐπιδείξω ἔργῳ ὑμῖν ταῦτα μεμαρτυρηκότας. ὅτε γὰρ αἱ ἀνακρίσεις ἦσαν πρὸς τῷ ἄρχοντι καὶ οὗτοι παρακατέβαλον ὡς ὑπὲρ γνησίων τῶνδʼ Εὐκτήμονος ὄντων, ἐρωτώμενοι ὑφʼ ἡμῶν τίς εἴη αὐτῶν μήτηρ καὶ ὅτου θυγάτηρ οὐκ εἶχον ἀποδεῖξαι, διαμαρτυρομένων ἡμῶν καὶ τοῦ ἄρχοντος κελεύοντος ἀποκρίνασθαι κατὰ τὸν νόμον. 〈καίτοι ἄτοπον〉 , ὦ ἄνδρες, ἀμφισβητεῖν μὲν ὡς ὑπὲρ γνησίων καὶ διαμαρτυρεῖν, μητέρα δὲ ἥτις ἦν μὴ ἔχειν ἀποδεῖξαι, μηδὲ προσήκοντα αὐτοῖς μηδένα.
Depositions Further, I will prove that our adversaries have actually given evidence in support of these facts. When the interrogations took place before the archon, and my opponents paid money into court in support of their claim that these young men were the legitimate sons of Euctemon, on being asked by us who, and whose daughter, their mother was, they could not supply the information, although we protested and the archon ordered them to reply in accordance with the law. It was surely a strange proceeding, gentlemen, to make a claim on their behalf as legitimate and to lodge a protestation, and yet not be able to state who was their mother or name any of their relatives.
§ 13
ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν Λημνίαν σκηψάμενοι ταύτην ἀναβολὴν ἐποιήσαντο· τὸ δʼ ὕστερον ἥκοντες εἰς τὴν ἀνάκρισιν, πρὶν καί τινα ἐρέσθαι, εὐθὺς ἔλεγον ὅτι Καλλίππη μήτηρ, αὕτη δʼ εἴη Πιστοξένου θυγάτηρ, ὡς ἐξαρκέσον εἰ ὄνομα μόνον πορίσαιντο τὸν Πιστόξενον. ἐρομένων δʼ ἡμῶν ὅστις εἴη καὶ εἰ ζῇ ἢ μή, ἐν Σικελίᾳ ἔφασαν ἀποθανεῖν στρατευόμενον, καταλιπόντα ταύτην θυγατέρα παρὰ τῷ Εὐκτήμονι, ἐξ ἐπιτροπευομένης δὲ τούτῳ γενέσθαι, πρᾶγμα πλάττοντες ἀναιδείᾳ ὑπερβάλλον καὶ οὐδὲ γενόμενον, ὡς ἐγὼ ὑμῖν ἀποφανῶ ἐκ τούτων πρῶτον ὧν αὐτοὶ ἀπεκρίναντο.
At the time they alleged that she was a Lemnian and so secured a delay; subsequently, when they appeared at the interrogation, without giving time for anyone to ask a question, they immediately declared that the mother was Callippe and that she was the daughter of Pistoxenus, as though it was enough for them merely to produce the name of Pistoxenus. When we asked who he was and whether he was alive or not, they said that he had died on military service in Sicily, leaving a daughter, this Callippe, in the house of Euctemon, and that these two sons were born to her while she was under his guardianship, thus inventing a story surpassing the limits of impudence and quite untrue, as I will prove to you first of all from the answers which they themselves gave.
§ 14
τῇ μὲν γὰρ στρατιᾷ, ἀφʼ οὗ ἐξέπλευσεν εἰς Σικελίαν, ἤδη ἐστὶ δύο καὶ πεντήκοντα ἔτη, ἀπὸ Ἀριμνήστου ἄρχοντος, τῷ δὲ πρεσβυτέρῳ τούτων, ὧν φασιν ἐκ τῆς Καλλίππης καὶ τοῦ Εὐκτήμονος εἶναι, οὔπω ὑπὲρ εἴκοσιν ἔτη. ἀφελόντι οὖν ταῦτα ἀπὸ τῶν ἐν Σικελίᾳ ὑπολείπεται πλείω ἢ τριάκοντα ἔτη· ὥστʼ οὔτʼ ἐπιτροπεύεσθαι προσῆκε τὴν Καλλίππην ἔτι, τριακοντοῦτίν γε οὖσαν, οὔτε ἀνέκδοτον καὶ ἄπαιδα εἶναι, ἀλλὰ πάνυ πάλαι συνοικεῖν, ἢ ἐγγυηθεῖσαν κατὰ νόμον ἢ ἐπιδικασθεῖσαν.
Fifty-two years have passed since the Sicilian expedition, reckoning from the date of its departure in the archonship of Arimnestus; yet the elder of these two alleged sons of Callippe and Euctemon has not yet passed his twentieth year. If these years are deducted, more than thirty years still remain since the Sicilian expedition; so that Callippe, if she were thirty years of age, ought to have been no longer under a guardian, nor unmarried and childless, but long ago married, given in marriage either by her guardian, according to the law, or else by an adjudication of the court.
§ 15
ἔτι δὲ καὶ γιγνώσκεσθαι αὐτὴν ὑπὸ τῶν Εὐκτήμονος οἰκείων ἀναγκαῖον ἦν καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν οἰκετῶν, εἴ πέρ γε συνῴκησεν ἐκείνῳ ἢ διῃτήθη τοσοῦτον χρόνον ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ. τὰ γὰρ τοιαῦτα οὐκ εἰς τὴν ἀνάκρισιν μόνον δεῖ πορίζεσθαι [ὀνόματα] ἀλλὰ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ γεγονότα φαίνεσθαι καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν προσηκόντων καταμαρτυρεῖσθαι.
Furthermore, she must necessarily have been known to the relatives and to the slaves of Euctemon if she had really been married to him and lived so long in the house. It is not enough merely to produce such statements at the interrogations, but it must be proved that the alleged events really took place and they must be supported by the testimony of the relatives.
§ 16
ἀποδεῖξαι τοίνυν ἡμῶν κελευόντων ὅστις οἶδε τῶν Εὐκτήμονος οἰκείων ἢ συνοικήσασαν ἐκείνῳ τινὰ [ἢ τὴν] Καλλίππην 〈ἢ〉 ἐπιτροπευομένην, καὶ παρὰ τῶν ὄντων 〈ἡμῖν〉 θεραπόντων τὸν ἔλεγχον ποιεῖσθαι, ἢ εἴ τις τῶν παρʼ αὐτοῖς οἰκετῶν φάσκει ταῦτα εἰδέναι, ἡμῖν παραδοῦναι, οὔτε λαβεῖν ἠθέλησαν οὔθʼ ἡμῖν παραδοῦναι. καί μοι λαβὲ τήν τʼ ἀπόκρισιν αὐτῶν καὶ τὰς ἡμετέρας μαρτυρίας καὶ προκλήσεις.
When we insisted that they should indicate one of Euctemon's family who knew of anyone of the name of Callippe as having been either married to him or under his guardianship, and that they should make an inquiry from our slaves, or hand over to us for examination any of their slaves who said they had knowledge of these facts, they refused to take any of our slaves for examination or to hand over any of their own to us. Now please read their answer to the interrogation and our depositions and challenges.
§ 17
Ἀπόκρισις Μαρτυρίαι Προκλήσεις οὗτοι μὲν τοίνυν τοιοῦτο πρᾶγμα ἔφυγον· ἐγὼ δʼ ὑμῖν ἐπιδείξω καὶ ὅθεν εἰσὶ καὶ οἵτινες, οὓς γνησίους διεμαρτύρησαν εἶναι καὶ κληρονόμους ζητοῦσι καταστῆσαι τῶν Εὐκτήμονος. ἴσως μέν ἐστιν ἀηδὲς Φανοστράτῳ, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὰς Εὐκτήμονος συμφορὰς φανερὰς καθεστάναι· ὀλίγα δʼ ἀναγκαῖον ῥηθῆναι, ἵνʼ ὑμεῖς τὴν ἀλήθειαν εἰδότες ῥᾷον τὰ δίκαια ψηφίσησθε.
Answer to Interrogation, Depositions, Challenges My opponents, then, avoided a mode of proof so vital to their case; but I will show you the origin and position of these men whom my opponents testified to be legitimate and are seeking to establish as heirs of Euctemon's property. It is perhaps painful, gentlemen, to Phanostratus to bring to light the misfortunes of Euctemon; but it is essential that a few facts should be given, so that, knowing the truth, you may more easily give your verdict aright.
§ 18
Εὐκτήμων μὲν γὰρ ἐβίω ἔτη ἓξ καὶ ἐνενήκοντα, τούτου δὲ τοῦ χρόνου τὸν μὲν πλεῖστον ἐδόκει εὐδαίμων εἶναι (καὶ γὰρ οὐσία ἦν οὐκ ὀλίγη αὐτῷ καὶ παῖδες καὶ γυνή, καὶ τἆλλʼ ἐπιεικῶς εὐτύχει), ἐπὶ γήρως δὲ αὐτῷ συμφορὰ ἐγένετο οὐ μικρά, ἣ ἐκείνου πᾶσαν τὴν οἰκίαν ἐλυμήνατο καὶ χρήματα πολλὰ διώλεσε καὶ αὐτὸν τοῖς οἰκειοτάτοις εἰς διαφορὰν κατέστησεν.
Euctemon lived for ninety-six years, and for most of this period had the reputation of being a fortunate man; he possessed considerable property and had children and a wife, and in all other respects enjoyed a reasonable degree of prosperity. In his old age, however, a serious misfortune befell him, which brought ruin to his house, caused him great financial loss, and set him at variance with his nearest relatives.
§ 19
ὅθεν δὲ καὶ ὅπως ταῦτʼ ἐγένετο, ὡς ἂν δύνωμαι διὰ βραχυτάτων δηλώσω. ἀπελευθέρα ἦν αὐτοῦ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἣ ἐναυκλήρει συνοικίαν ἐν Πειραιεῖ αὐτοῦ καὶ παιδίσκας ἔτρεφε. τούτων μίαν ἐκτήσατο ᾗ ὄνομα ἦν Ἀλκή, ἣν καὶ ὑμῶν οἶμαι πολλοὺς εἰδέναι. αὕτη δὲ ἡ Ἀλκὴ ὠνηθεῖσα πολλὰ μὲν ἔτη καθῆστο ἐν οἰκήματι, ἤδη δὲ πρεσβυτέρα οὖσα ἀπὸ μὲν τοῦ οἰκήματος ἀνίσταται.
The cause and manner of it I will set forth in the fewest possible words. He had a freed-woman, gentlemen, who managed a tenement-house of his at the Peiraeus and kept prostitutes. As one of these she acquired a woman of the name of Alce, whom I think many of you know. This Alce, after her purchase, lived the life of a prostitute for many years but gave it up when she became too old.
§ 20
διαιτωμένῃ δὲ αὐτῇ ἐν τῇ συνοικίᾳ συνῆν ἄνθρωπος ἀπελεύθερος, Δίων ὄνομα αὐτῷ, ἐξ οὗ ἔφη ἐκείνη τούτους γεγονέναι· καὶ ἔθρεψεν αὐτοὺς ὁ Δίων ὡς ὄντας ἑαυτοῦ. χρόνῳ δὲ ὕστερον ὁ μὲν Δίων ζημίαν εἰργασμένος καὶ δείσας ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ ὑπεχώρησεν εἰς Σικυῶνα· τὴν δʼ ἄνθρωπον ταύτην, τὴν Ἀλκήν, καθίστησιν Εὐκτήμων ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τὴν ἐν Κεραμεικῷ συνοικίας, τῆς παρὰ τὴν πυλίδα, οὗ ὁ οἶνος ὤνιος.
While she was still living in the tenement-house, she had relations with a freedman whose name was Dion, whom she declared to be the father of these young men; and Dion did, in fact, bring them up as his own children. Some time later Dion, having committed a misdemeanor and being afraid of the consequences, withdrew to Sicyon. The woman Alce was then installed by Euctemon to look after his tenement-house in the Cerameicus, near the postern gate, where wine is sold.
§ 21
κατοικισθεῖσα δʼ ἐνταυθοῖ πολλῶν καὶ κακῶν ἦρξεν, ὦ ἄνδρες. φοιτῶν γὰρ ὁ Εὐκτήμων ἐπὶ τὸ ἐνοίκιον ἑκάστοτε τὰ πολλὰ διέτριβεν ἐν τῇ συνοικίᾳ, ἐνίοτε δὲ καὶ ἐσιτεῖτο μετὰ τῆς ἀνθρώπου, καταλιπὼν καὶ τὴν γυναῖκα καὶ τοὺς παῖδας καὶ τὴν οἰκίαν ἣν ᾤκει. χαλεπῶς δὲ φερούσης τῆς γυναικὸς καὶ τῶν ὑέων οὐχ ὅπως ἐπαύσατο, ἀλλὰ τελευτῶν παντελῶς διῃτᾶτο ἐκεῖ, καὶ οὕτω διετέθη εἴθʼ ὑπὸ φαρμάκων εἴθʼ ὑπὸ νόσου εἴθʼ ὑπʼ ἄλλου τινός, ὥστε ἐπείσθη ὑπʼ αὐτῆς τὸν πρεσβύτερον τοῖν παίδοιν εἰσαγαγεῖν εἰς τοὺς φράτορας ἐπὶ τῷ αὑτοῦ ὀνόματι.
Her establishment there, gentlemen, had many evil consequences. Euctemon, going there constantly to collect the rent, used to spend most of his time in the tenement-house, and sometimes took his meals with the woman, leaving his wife and children and his own home. In spite of the protests of his wife and sons, not only did he not cease to go there but eventually lived there entirely, and was reduced to such a condition by drugs or disease or some other cause, that he was persuaded by the woman to introduce the elder of the two boys to the members of his ward under his name.
§ 22
ἐπειδὴ δὲ οὔθʼ ὁ ὑὸς αὐτῷ Φιλοκτήμων συνεχώρει οὔθʼ οἱ φράτορες εἰσεδέξαντο, ἀλλʼ ἀπηνέχθη τὸ κούρειον, ὀργιζόμενος ὁ Εὐκτήμων τῷ ὑεῖ καὶ ἐπηρεάζειν βουλόμενος ἐγγυᾶται γυναῖκα Δημοκράτους τοῦ Ἀφιδναίου ἀδελφήν, ὡς ἐκ ταύτης παῖδας ἀποφανῶν καὶ εἰσποιήσων εἰς τὸν οἶκον, εἰ μὴ συγχωροίη τοῦτον ἐᾶν εἰσαχθῆναι.
When, however, his son Philoctemon refused to agree to this, and the members of the ward would not admit the boy, and the victim for the sacrifice of admission was removed from the altar, Euctemon, being enraged against his son and wishing to pay him out, announced his intention of marrying a sister of Democrates of Aphidna and recognizing any children who should be born to her and bringing them into the family, unless he consented to allow Alce's son to be introduced.
§ 23
εἰδότες δʼ οἱ ἀναγκαῖοι ὅτι ἐξ ἐκείνου μὲν οὐκ ἂν ἔτι γένοιντο παῖδες ταύτην τὴν ἡλικίαν ἔχοντος, φανήσοιντο δʼ ἄλλῳ τινὶ τρόπῳ, καὶ ἐκ τούτων ἔσοιντο ἔτι μείζους διαφοραί, ἔπειθον, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὸν Φιλοκτήμονα ἐᾶσαι εἰσαγαγεῖν τοῦτον τὸν παῖδα ἐφʼ οἷς ἐζήτει ὁ Εὐκτήμων, χωρίον ἓν δόντα.
His relatives, knowing that no more children would be born to him at his time of life but that they would be forthcoming in some other manner, and that, as a result, still more serious quarrels would arise, advised Philoctemon, gentlemen, to allow him to introduce this child on the conditions which he demanded, giving him a single farm.
§ 24
καὶ ὁ Φιλοκτήμων αἰσχυνόμενος μὲν ἐπὶ τῇ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀνοίᾳ, ἀπορῶν δʼ ὅ τι χρήσαιτο τῷ παρόντι κακῷ, οὐκ ἀντέλεγεν οὐδέν. ὁμολογηθέντων δὲ τούτων, καὶ εἰσαχθέντος τοῦ παιδὸς ἐπὶ τούτοις, ἀπηλλάγη τῆς γυναικὸς ὁ Εὐκτήμων, καὶ ἐπεδείξατο ὅτι οὐ παίδων ἕνεκα ἐγάμει, ἀλλʼ ἵνα τοῦτον εἰσαγάγοι.
And Philoctemon, ashamed at his fathers folly but at a loss how to deal with the embarrassment of the moment, made no objection. An agreement having been thus concluded, and the child having been introduced on these terms, Euctemon gave up his project of marriage, proving thereby that the object of his threatened marriage was not to procure children but to obtain the introduction of this child into the ward.
§ 25
τί γὰρ ἔδει αὐτὸν γαμεῖν, ὦ Ἀνδρόκλεις, εἴ περ οἵδε ἦσαν ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ γυναικὸς ἀστῆς, ὡς σὺ μεμαρτύρηκας; τίς γὰρ ἂν γνησίους ὄντας οἷός τε ἦν κωλῦσαι εἰσαγαγεῖν; ἢ διὰ τί ἐπὶ ῥητοῖς αὐτὸν εἰσήγαγε, τοῦ νόμου κελεύοντος ἅπαντας τοὺς γνησίους ἰσομοίρους εἶναι τῶν πατρῴων;
For what need had he to marry, Androcles, if these children had been born to him from a marriage with an Athenian citizen, as you have affirmed them to have been in your evidence? If they were legitimate, who could prevent him from introducing them? And why did he introduce them on special terms, when the law ordains that all the legitimate sons have an equal right to share in their father's property?
§ 26
ἢ διὰ τί τὸν μὲν πρεσβύτερον τοῖν παίδοιν ἐπὶ ῥητοῖς εἰσήγαγε, τοῦ δὲ νεωτέρου ἤδη γεγονότος οὐδὲ λόγον ἐποιεῖτο ζῶντος Φιλοκτήμονος οὔτε πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐκεῖνον οὔτε πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους; οὓς σὺ νῦν διαρρήδην μεμαρτύρηκας γνησίους εἶναι καὶ κληρονόμους τῶν Εὐκτήμονος. ταῦτα τοίνυν ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, ἀναγίγνωσκε τὰς μαρτυρίας.
And why did he introduce the elder child on special terms, but said not a word about the younger child during the lifetime of Philoctemon either to Philoctemon or to his other relatives? Yet you have explicitly borne witness that they are legitimate and heirs to the property of Euctemon. In proof of the truth of these assertions, read the depositions.
§ 27
Μαρτυρίαι μετὰ ταῦτα τοίνυν ὁ Φιλοκτήμων τριηραρχῶν περὶ Χίον ἀποθνήσκει ὑπὸ τῶν πολεμίων· ὁ δʼ Εὐκτήμων ὕστερον χρόνῳ πρὸς τοὺς κηδεστὰς εἶπεν ὅτι βούλοιτο τὰ πρὸς τὸν ὑόν οἱ πεπραγμένα γράψας καταθέσθαι. καὶ ὁ μὲν Φανόστρατος ἐκπλεῖν ἔμελλε τριηραρχῶν μετὰ Τιμοθέου, καὶ ἡ ναῦς αὐτῷ ἐξώρμει Μουνυχίασι, καὶ ὁ κηδεστὴς Χαιρέας παρὼν συναπέστελλεν αὐτόν· ὁ δʼ Εὐκτήμων παραλαβών τινας ἧκεν οὗ ἐξώρμει ἡ ναῦς, καὶ γράψας διαθήκην, ἐφʼ οἷς εἰσήγαγε τὸν παῖδα, κατατίθεται μετὰ τούτων παρὰ Πυθοδώρῳ Κηφισιεῖ, προσήκοντι αὑτῷ.
Depositions It was after this, then, that Philoctemon died by the enemy's hands while commanding a trireme off Chios. Some time later Euctemon informed his sons-in-law that he wished to make a written record of his arrangement with his son and place it in safe place. Phanostratus was on the point of setting out with Timotheus in command of a trireme, and his ship lying at anchor at Munychia, and his brother-in-law Chaereas was there bidding him farewell. Euctemon, taking certain persons with him, came to where the ship was anchored, and having drawn up a document detailing the conditions under which he introduced the child, deposited it in the presence of those men with his relative Pythodorus of Cephisia.
§ 28
καὶ ὅτι μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐχ ὡς περὶ γνησίων ἔπραττεν Εὐκτήμων, ὃ Ἀνδροκλῆς μεμαρτύρηκε, καὶ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἱκανὸν τεκμήριον· τοῖς γὰρ φύσει ὑέσιν αὑτοῦ οὐδεὶς οὐδενὸς ἐν διαθήκῃ γράφει δόσιν οὐδεμίαν, διότι ὁ νόμος αὐτὸς ἀποδίδωσι τῷ ὑεῖ τὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ οὐδὲ διαθέσθαι ἐᾷ ὅτῳ ἂν ὦσι παῖδες γνήσιοι.
The very fact that he acted thus is sufficient proof, gentlemen, that Euctemon was not dealing with them as legitimate children, as Androcles has declared in his evidence; for no one ever makes a gift by will of anything to the sons of his own body, because the law of itself gives his father's estate to the son and does not even allow anyone who has legitimate children to dispose of his property.
§ 29
κειμένου δὲ τοῦ γραμματείου σχεδὸν δύʼ ἔτη καὶ τοῦ Χαιρέου τετελευτηκότος, ὑποπεπτωκότες οἵδε τῇ ἀνθρώπῳ, καὶ ὁρῶντες ἀπολλύμενον τὸν οἶκον καὶ τὸ γῆρας καὶ τὴν ἄνοιαν τοῦ Εὐκτήμονος, ὅτι εἴη αὐτοῖς ἱκανὴ ἀφορμή, συνεπιτίθενται.
When the document had remained deposited for almost two years and Chaereas had died, my opponents, having come under the influence of Alce and seeing that the property was going to ruin and that the old age and imbecility of Euctemon gave them an excellent opportunity, made a combined plan of attack.
§ 30
καὶ πρῶτον μὲν πείθουσι τὸν Εὐκτήμονα τὴν μὲν διαθήκην ἀνελεῖν ὡς οὐ χρησίμην οὖσαν τοῖς παισί· τῆς γὰρ φανερᾶς οὐσίας οὐδένα κύριον ἔσεσθαι τελευτήσαντος Εὐκτήμονος ἄλλον ἢ τὰς θυγατέρας καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τούτων γεγονότας· εἰ δὲ ἀποδόμενός τι τῶν ὄντων ἀργύριον καταλίποι, τοῦτο βεβαίως ἕξειν αὐτούς.
They first urged Euctemon to cancel the will on the ground that it was not to the boys advantage; for no one would have any claim to the real estate on Euctemon's death except the daughters and their issue; whereas, if he sold part of the property and left it in cash, they would get secure possession of it.
§ 31
ἀκούσας δʼ ὁ Εὐκτήμων εὐθὺς ἀπῄτει τὸν Πυθόδωρον τὸ γραμματεῖον, καὶ προσεκαλέσατο εἰς ἐμφανῶν κατάστασιν. καταστάντος δὲ ἐκείνου πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα, ἔλεγεν ὅτι βούλοιτʼ ἀνελέσθαι τὴν διαθήκην.
Euctemon listened to them and immediately demanded the document back from Pythodorus and served upon him a summons to produce it. When Pythodorus appeared before the archon, Euctemon stated that he wished to annul the will.
§ 32
ἐπειδὴ δʼ ὁ Πυθόδωρος ἐκείνῳ μὲν καὶ τῷ Φανοστράτῳ παρόντι ὡμολόγει ἀναιρεῖν, τοῦ δὲ Χαιρέου τοῦ συγκαταθεμένου θυγάτηρ ἦν μία, ἧς ἐπειδὴ κύριος κατασταίη, τότε ἠξίου ἀνελεῖν, καὶ ὁ ἄρχων οὕτως ἐγίγνωσκε, διομολογησάμενος ὁ Εὐκτήμων ἐναντίον τοῦ ἄρχοντος καὶ τῶν παρέδρων καὶ ποιησάμενος πολλοὺς μάρτυρας ὡς οὐκέτʼ αὐτῷ κέοιτο ἡ διαθήκη, ᾤχετο ἀπιών.
Pythodorus was prepared to agree with Euctemon and Phanostratus, who was present, that the document should be destroyed; but, as Chaereas, who had been a party to its deposition, had left an only daughter, he suggested that it should be destroyed only in the presence of her legal representative, and the archon decided in favor of this course. Euctemon, after agreeing to this in the presence of the archon and his assessors, called many persons to witness that the will deposited by him no longer existed and then went his way.
§ 33
καὶ ἐν πάνυ ὀλίγῳ χρόνῳ, οὗπερ ἕνεκα οὗτοι λῦσαι αὐτὸν ἔπεισαν, ἀποδίδοται ἀγρὸν μὲν Ἀθμονοῖ πέντε καὶ ἑβδομήκοντα μνῶν Ἀντιφάνει, τὸ δʼ ἐν Σηραγγίῳ βαλανεῖον τρισχιλίων Ἀριστολόχῳ· οἰκίαν δὲ ἐν ἄστει τεττάρων καὶ τεσσαράκοντα μνῶν ὑποκειμένην ἀπέλυσε τῷ ἱεροφάντῃ. ἔτι δὲ αἶγας ἀπέδοτο σὺν τῷ αἰπόλῳ τριῶν καὶ δέκα μνῶν, καὶ ζεύγη δύο ὀρικά, τὸ μὲν ὀκτὼ μνῶν τὸ δὲ πεντήκοντα καὶ πεντακοσίων δραχμῶν, καὶ δημιουργοὺς ὅσοι ἦσαν αὐτῷ.
In a very short time—and this was the object of their advice to Euctemon to annul the will—he sold a farm at Athmonon to Antiphanes for seventy-five minas and the bath-house at Serangion to Aristolochus for 3000 drachmas; and he realized a mortgage of forty-five minas on a house in Athens from the hierophant. Further, he sold some goats with their goat-herd for thirteen minas and two pairs of mules, one for eight minas and the other for five hundred and fifty drachmas, and all the slaves he had that were craftsmen.
§ 34
σύμπαντα δὲ πλείονος ἢ τριῶν ταλάντων, ἃ ἐπράθη διὰ ταχέων πάνυ τελευτήσαντος Φιλοκτήμονος. καὶ ταῦθʼ ὅτι ἀληθῆ λέγω, καθʼ ἕκαστον ὑμῖν τῶν εἰρημένων πρῶτον καλῶ τοὺς μάρτυρας.
In all, the value of the property which he hurriedly sold after Philoctemon's death, was more than three talents. And to prove that I am speaking the truth, I will first call witnesses in support of each of my statements.
§ 35
〈Μάρτυρες〉 ταῦτα μὲν δὴ τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον εἶχε· περὶ δὲ τῶν ὑπολοίπων εὐθὺς ἐπεβούλευον, καὶ πάντων δεινότατον πρᾶγμα κατεσκεύασαν, ᾧ ἄξιόν ἐστι προσέχειν τὸν νοῦν. ὁρῶντες γὰρ τὸν Εὐκτήμονα κομιδῇ ἀπειρηκότα ὑπὸ γήρως καὶ οὐδʼ 〈ἐκ〉 τῆς κλίνης ἀνίστασθαι δυνάμενον, ἐσκόπουν ὅπως καὶ τελευτήσαντος ἐκείνου διʼ αὑτῶν ἔσοιτο ἡ οὐσία.
Witnesses So much for these transactions. They then immediately began scheming to obtain the rest of the property and planned the most outrageous plot of all, which merits your careful attention. Seeing that Euctemon was completely incapacitated by old age and could not even leave his bed, they began to look about for a means whereby all his property should be under their control after his death. And what did they do?
§ 36
καὶ τί ποιοῦσιν; ἀπογράφουσι τὼ παῖδε τούτω πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα ὡς εἰσποιήτω τοῖς τοῦ Εὐκτήμονος ὑέσι τοῖς τετελευτηκόσιν, ἐπιγράψαντες σφᾶς αὐτοὺς ἐπιτρόπους, καὶ μισθοῦν ἐκέλευον τὸν ἄρχοντα τοὺς οἴκους ὡς ὀρφανῶν ὄντων, ὅπως ἐπὶ τοῖς τούτων ὀνόμασι τὰ μὲν μισθωθείη τῆς οὐσίας, τὰ δὲ ἀποτιμήματα κατασταθείη καὶ ὅροι τεθεῖεν ζῶντος ἔτι τοῦ Εὐκτήμονος, μισθωταὶ δὲ αὐτοὶ γενόμενοι τὰς προσόδους λαμβάνοιεν.
They inscribed these two boys before the archon as adopted children of the sons of Euctemon who had died, inscribing themselves as guardians, and requested the archon to grant a lease of the house-property as being the property of orphans, in order that part of the property might be leased and part might be used as a security, and mortgage notices adfixed to it in the children's names during the lifetime of Euctemon, and they themselves might become lessees and receive the income.
§ 37
καὶ ἐπειδὴ πρῶτον τὰ δικαστήρια ἐπληρώθη, ὁ μὲν ἄρχων προεκήρυττεν, οἱ δʼ ἐμισθοῦντο. παραγενόμενοι δέ τινες ἐξαγγέλλουσι τοῖς οἰκείοις τὴν ἐπιβουλήν, καὶ ἐλθόντες ἐδήλωσαν τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῖς δικασταῖς, καὶ οὕτως ἀπεχειροτόνησαν οἱ δικασταὶ μὴ μισθοῦν τοὺς οἴκους· εἰ δʼ ἔλαθεν, ἀπωλώλει ἂν ἅπασα ἡ οὐσία. καί μοι κάλει τοὺς παραγενομένους μάρτυρας.
On the first day that the courts met, the archon put the lease up for auction and they offered to lease the property. Certain persons, however, who were present, denounced the plot to the relatives, and they came and informed the judges of the real state of affairs. The result was that the judges voted against allowing the houses to be leased. If the plot had not been detected, the whole property would have been lost. Please call as witnesses those who were present.
§ 38
Μάρτυρες πρὶν μὲν τοίνυν τούτους γνωρίσαι τὴν ἄνθρωπον καὶ μετʼ ἐκείνης ἐπιβουλεῦσαι Εὐκτήμονι, οὕτω πολλὴν οὐσίαν ἐκέκτητο Εὐκτήμων μετὰ τοῦ ὑέος Φιλοκτήμονος, ὥστε ἅμα τά τε μέγιστα ὑμῖν λῃτουργεῖν ἀμφοτέρους τῶν τε ἀρχαίων μηδὲν πραθῆναι τῶν τε προσόδων περιποιεῖν, ὥστε ἀεί τι προσκτᾶσθαι· ἐπειδὴ δʼ ἐτελεύτησε Φιλοκτήμων, οὕτω διετέθη ἡ οὐσία, ὥστε τῶν ἀρχαίων μηδὲ τὰ ἡμίσεα εἶναι λοιπὰ καὶ τὰς προσόδους ἁπάσας ἠφανίσθαι.
Witnesses Before my opponents had made the woman's acquaintance and plotted with her against Euctemon, he and his son Philoctemon possessed so large a fortune that both of them were able to undertake the most costly public offices without realizing any of their capital, and at the same time to save out of their income, so that they continually grew richer. After the death of Philoctemon, on the other hand, the property was reduced to such a condition that less than half the capital remains and all the revenues have disappeared.
§ 39
καὶ οὐδὲ ταῦτα ἐξήρκεσεν αὐτοῖς διαφορῆσαι, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἀλλʼ ἐπειδὴ καὶ ἐτελεύτησεν ὁ Εὐκτήμων, εἰς τοῦτο ἦλθον τόλμης ὥστʼ ἐκείνου κειμένου ἔνδον τοὺς μὲν οἰκέτας ἐφύλαττον, ὅπως μηδεὶς ἐξαγγείλειε μήτε τοῖν θυγατέροιν μήτε τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ μήτε τῶν οἰκείων μηδενί, τὰ δὲ χρήματα ἔνδοθεν ἐξεφορήσαντο μετὰ τῆς ἀνθρώπου εἰς τὴν ὁμότοιχον οἰκίαν, ἣν ᾤκει μεμισθωμένος εἷς τούτων, Ἀντίδωρος ἐκεῖνος.
And they were not even content, gentlemen, with this misappropriation; but, when Euctemon died, they had the impudence, while he was lying dead in the house, to shut up the slaves, so that none of them might take the news to his two daughters or to his wife or to any of his relatives. Meanwhile, with the aid of the woman they conveyed the furniture from within to the adjoining house, which was leased and occupied by one of their gang, the infamous Antidorus.
§ 40
καὶ οὐδʼ ἐπειδὴ ἑτέρων πυθόμεναι ἦλθον αἱ θυγατέρες αὐτοῦ καὶ ἡ γυνή, οὐδὲ τότε εἴων εἰσιέναι, ἀλλʼ ἀπέκλεισαν τῇ θύρᾳ, φάσκοντες οὐ προσήκειν αὐταῖς θάπτειν Εὐκτήμονα· καὶ οὐδʼ εἰσελθεῖν ἐδύναντο, εἰ μὴ μόλις καὶ περὶ ἡλίου δυσμάς.
When Euctemon's daughters and wife arrived, having learnt the news from others, even then they refused them admittance and shut the door in their faces, declaring that it was not their business to bury Euctemon. They only obtained admittance with difficulty about sunset.
§ 41
εἰσελθοῦσαι δὲ κατέλαβον ἐκεῖνον μὲν ἔνδον ἔνδον κείμενον δευτεραῖον, ὡς ἔφασαν οἱ οἰκέται, τὰ δʼ ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας ἅπαντα ἐκπεφορημένα ὑπὸ τούτων. αἱ μὲν οὖν γυναῖκες, οἷον εἰκός, περὶ τὸν τετελευτηκότα ἦσαν· οὗτοι δὲ τοῖς ἀκολουθήσασι παραχρῆμα ἐπεδείκνυσαν τὰ ἔνδον ὡς εἶχε, καὶ τοὺς οἰκέτας πρῶτον ἠρώτων ἐναντίον τούτων ὅποι τετραμμένα εἴη τὰ χρήματα.
When they entered, they found that he had been dead in the house for two days, as the slaves declared, and that everything in the house had been carried off by these people. While the women, as was right, were attending to the deceased, my clients here immediately called the attention of those who had accompanied them to the state of affairs in the house, and began by asking the slaves in their presence to what place the furniture had been removed.
§ 42
λεγόντων δὲ ἐκείνων ὅτι οὗτοι ἐξενηνοχότες εἶεν εἰς τὴν πλησίον οἰκίαν, καὶ ἀξιούντων παραχρῆμα τῶνδε φωρᾶν κατὰ τὸν νόμον καὶ τοὺς οἰκέτας ἐξαιτούντων τοὺς ἐκφορήσαντας, οὐκ ἠθέλησαν τῶν δικαίων οὐδὲν ποιῆσαι. καὶ ὅτι ἀληθῆ λέγω, λαβὲ ταυτὶ καὶ ἀνάγνωθι.
When they replied that our opponents had conveyed it away to the next house, and my clients immediately claimed the right to search the house in the proper legal manner, and requested that the slaves who had removed it should be produced, our opponents refused to accede to any of their just demands. And to prove that I am speaking the truth, take and read these documents.
§ 43
〈Μαρτυρίαι〉 τοσαῦτα μὲν τοίνυν χρήματα ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας ἐκφορήσαντες, τοσαύτης δʼ οὐσίας πεπραμένης τὴν τιμὴν ἔχοντες, ἔτι δὲ τὰς προσόδους τὰς ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ χρόνῳ γενομένας διαφορήσαντες, οἴονται καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν κύριοι γενήσεσθαι· καὶ εἰς τοῦτο ἀναιδείας ἥκουσιν, ὥστʼ εὐθυδικίᾳ μὲν οὐκ ἐτόλμησαν εἰσελθεῖν, ἀλλὰ διεμαρτύρουν ὡς ὑπὲρ γνησίων ἅμα μὲν τὰ ψευδῆ ἅμα δὲ τἀναντία οἷς αὐτοὶ ἔπραξαν·
Depositions Having removed all this furniture from the house, and sold so much property and kept the proceeds, and having further made away with the revenue which accrued during that period, they yet expect to obtain possession of what remains; and their impudence is such that, not daring to bring a direct action, they lodged a protestation—as though it were a question of legitimate children—which is at once false and in contradiction to their own previous action.
§ 44
οἵτινες πρὸς μὲν τὸν ἄρχοντα ἀπέγραψαν αὐτοὺς ὡς ὄντας τὸν μὲν Φιλοκτήμονος τὸν δʼ Ἐργαμένους, νῦν δὲ διαμεμαρτυρήκασιν Εὐκτήμονος εἶναι. καίτοι οὐδʼ εἰ γνήσιοι ἦσαν, εἰσποίητοι δέ, ὡς οὗτοι ἔφασαν, οὐδʼ οὕτω προσήκει αὐτοὺς Εὐκτήμονος εἶναι· ὁ γὰρ νόμος οὐκ ἐᾷ ἐπανιέναι, ἐὰν μὴ ὑὸν καταλίπῃ γνήσιον. ὥστε καὶ ἐξ ὧν αὐτοὶ ἔπραξαν ἀνάγκη τὴν μαρτυρίαν ψευδῆ εἶναι.
For, whereas they had inscribed the children before the archon, one as the son of Philoctemon and the other as the son of Ergamenes, they have now stated in their protestation that they are the sons of Euctemon. Yet if they were Euctemon's legitimate sons and had afterwards been adopted, as our opponent states, even so they cannot be described as the sons of Euctemon: for the law does not allow the return of an adopted son to his original family, unless he leaves a legitimate son in the family which he quits. So that in the light of their own acts their evidence is necessarily untrue.
§ 45
καὶ εἰ μὲν τότε διεπράξαντο μισθωθῆναι τοὺς οἴκους, οὐκ ἂν ἔτι ἦν τοῖσδε ἀμφισβητῆσαι· νῦν δὲ ἀποχειροτονησάντων τῶν δικαστῶν ὡς οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς προσῆκον, οὐδὲ ἀμφισβητῆσαι τετολμήκασιν, ἀλλὰ πρὸς ὑπερβολὴν ἀναισχυντίας προσμεμαρτυρήκασι τούτους εἶναι κληρονόμους, οὓς ὑμεῖς ἀπεχειροτονήσατε.
If our opponents had then so contrived that the houses were leased, my clients would no longer have been able to claim them; but, as it is, since the judges decided against them as having no right, they have not dared to put in a claim, but, to put the finishing touch to their impudence, they have submitted additional evidence to the effect that these young men, whom you excluded by your verdict, are heirs.
§ 46
ἔτι δὲ καὶ τοῦ μάρτυρος αὐτοῦ σκέψασθε τὴν τόλμαν καὶ ἀναίδειαν, ὅστις εἴληχε μὲν αὑτῷ τῆς θυγατρὸς τῆς Εὐκτήμονος ὡς οὔσης ἐπικλήρου, καὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ Εὐκτήμονος πέμπτου μέρους ὡς ἐπιδίκου ὄντος, μεμαρτύρηκε δʼ Εὐκτήμονος ὑὸν εἶναι γνήσιον. καίτοι πῶς οὗτος οὐ σαφῶς ἐξελέγχει αὐτὸς αὑτὸν τὰ ψευδῆ μεμαρτυρηκότα; οὐ γὰρ δήπου γνησίου ὄντος ὑέος Εὐκτήμονι ἐπίκληρος ἂν ἦν ἡ θυγάτηρ αὐτοῦ, οὐδὲ ὁ κλῆρος ἐπίδικος. ὡς τοίνυν ἔλαχε ταύτας τὰς λήξεις, ἀναγνώσεται ὑμῖν τὰς μαρτυρίας.
Further, mark the effrontery and impudence of the witness himself, who has claimed for himself Euctemon's daughter as being an heiress and a fifth part of Euctemon's estate as being adjudicable, while he has given evidence that Euctemon has a legitimate son. In doing so does he not clearly convict himself of having given false evidence? For obviously, if Euctemon had a legitimate son, his daughter could not be heiress or the estate adjudicable. To prove, then, that he made these claims, the clerk shall read you the depositions.
§ 47
〈Μαρτυρίαι〉 τοὐναντίον τοίνυν συμβέβηκεν ἢ ὡς ὁ νόμος γέγραπται· ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ ἐστι νόθῳ μηδὲ νόθῃ 〈μὴ〉 εἶναι ἀγχιστείαν μήθʼ ἱερῶν μήθʼ ὁσίων ἀπʼ Εὐκλείδου ἄρχοντος, Ἀνδροκλῆς δὲ καὶ Ἀντίδωρος οἴονται δεῖν, ἀφελόμενοι τὰς Εὐκτήμονος θυγατέρας τὰς γνησίας καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τούτων γεγονότας, τόν τε Εὐκτήμονος οἶκον καὶ τὸν Φιλοκτήμονος ἔχειν.
Depositions Thus the contrary has been done of that which the law has prescribed; for according to the law no male or female bastard has any right, based on kinship, to participate in the cults or property of a family since the archonship of Eucleides; yet Androcles and Antidorus consider themselves entitled to rob the legitimate daughters of Euctemon and their issue, and to possess the property both of Euctemon and of Philoctemon.
§ 48
καὶ ἡ διαφθείρασα τὴν Εὐκτήμονος γνώμην καὶ πολλῶν ἐγκρατὴς γενομένη οὕτως ὑβρίζει σφόδρα πιστεύουσα τούτοις, ὥστε οὐ μόνον τῶν Εὐκτήμονος οἰκείων καταφρονεῖ, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς πόλεως ἁπάσης. ἀκούσαντες δὲ ἓν μόνον σημεῖον ῥᾳδίως γνώσεσθε τὴν ἐκείνης παρανομίαν. καὶ μοι λαβὲ τοῦτον τὸν νόμον.
And the woman who destroyed Euctemon's reason and laid hold of so much property is so insolent, that relying on the help of our opponents, she shows her contempt not only for the members of Euctemon's family but for the whole city. When you have heard a single instance, you will easily realize the lawlessness of her conduct. Please take and read this law.
§ 49
〈Νόμος〉 ταυτὶ τὰ γράμματα, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὑμεῖς, οὕτω σεμνὰ καὶ εὐσεβῆ ἐνομοθετήσατε, περὶ πολλοῦ ποιούμενοι καὶ πρὸς ταύτας καὶ πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους θεοὺς εὐσεβεῖν· ἡ δὲ τούτων μήτηρ, οὕτως ὁμολογουμένως οὖσα δούλη καὶ ἅπαντα τὸν χρόνον αἰσχρῶς βιοῦσα,
Law Such are the solemn and pious terms in which you gave legal expression to the importance which you attach to piety towards these goddesses and all the other deities. Yet the mother of these young men, being admittedly a slave, and having always lived a scandalous life,
§ 50
ἣν οὔτε παρελθεῖν εἴσω τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἔδει οὔτʼ ἰδεῖν τῶν ἔνδον οὐδέν, οὔσης τῆς θυσίας ταύταις ταῖς θεαῖς ἐτόλμησε συμπέμψαι τὴν πομπὴν καὶ εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν καὶ ἰδεῖν ἃ οὐκ ἐξῆν αὐτῇ. ὡς δὲ ἀληθῆ λέγω, ἐκ τῶν ψηφισμάτων γνώσεσθε ἃ ἐψηφίσατο ἡ βουλὴ περὶ αὐτῆς. λαβὲ τὸ ψήφισμα.
who ought never to have entered the temple and seen any of the rites performed there, had the effrontery to join in the procession when a sacrifice was being made in honor of these goddesses and to enter the temple and see what she had no right to see. That I am speaking the truth you will learn from the decrees which the Council passed concerning her. Take this decree.
§ 51
Ψήφισμα ἐνθυμεῖσθαι τοίνυν χρή, ὦ ἄνδρες, πότερον δεῖ τὸν ἐκ ταύτης τῶν Φιλοκτήμονος εἶναι κληρονόμον καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ μνήματα ἰέναι χεόμενον καὶ ἐναγιοῦντα, ἢ τὸν ἐκ τῆς ἀδελφῆς τοῦτον, ὃν ὑὸν αὐτὸς ἐποιήσατο· καὶ πότερον δεῖ τὴν ἀδελφὴν Φιλοκτήμονος, ἣ Χαιρέᾳ συνῴκησε, νῦν δὲ χηρεύει, ἐπὶ τούτοις γενέσθαι ἢ ἐκδοῦναι ὅτῳ βούλονται ἢ ἐᾶν καταγηράσκειν, ἢ γνησίαν οὖσαν ὑφʼ ὑμῶν ἐπιδικασθεῖσαν συνοικεῖν ὅτῳ ἂν ὑμῖν δοκῇ.
Decree You have, therefore, gentlemen, to consider whether this woman's son ought to he heir to Philoctemon's property and go to the family tombs to offer libations and sacrifices, or my client, Philoctemon's sister's son, whom he himself adopted; and whether Philoctemon's sister, formerly the wife of Chaereas and now a widow, ought to pass into the power of our opponents and be married to anyone they choose or else be allowed to grow old in widowhood, or whether, as a legitimate daughter, she ought to be subject to your decision as to whom she ought to marry.
§ 52
ἡ γὰρ ψῆφός ἐστι περὶ τούτων νυνί. τουτὶ γὰρ αὐτοῖς ἡ διαμαρτυρία δύναται, ἵνʼ ὁ κίνδυνος τοῖσδε μὲν ᾖ περὶ πάντων, οὗτοι δὲ κἂν νῦν διαμάρτωσι τοῦ ἀγῶνος, δόξῃ δὲ ὁ κλῆρος ἐπίδικος εἶναι, ἀντιγραψάμενοι δὶς περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν ἀγωνίζωνται, καίτοι εἰ μὲν διέθετο Φιλοκτήμων μὴ ἐξὸν αὐτῷ, τοῦτʼ αὐτὸ ἐχρῆν διαμαρτυρεῖν, ὡς οὐ κύριος ἦν ὑὸν τόνδε ποιήσασθαι· εἰ δʼ ἔξεστι μὲν διαθέσθαι, ἀμφισβητεῖ δὲ ὡς οὐ δόντος οὐδὲ διαθεμένου, μὴ διαμαρτυρίᾳ κωλύειν ἀλλʼ εὐθυδικίᾳ εἰσιέναι.
These are the points which you have now to decide by your verdict; for the purpose of their protestation is to throw all the risk upon my clients, and that our opponents, even if they lose their case on this occasion and the estate is held to be adjudicable, may, by bringing forward a competing claim, fight a second action about the same property. Yet if Philoctemon disposed of his property by will when he was not entitled to do so, the point against which they ought to have protested is that he was not legally capable of adopting my client as his son; but if is lawful to make a will, and our opponent claims on the ground that Philoctemon made no donation or will, he ought not to have hindered proceedings by a protestation, but to have proceeded by means of a direct action.
§ 53
νῦν δὲ πῶς ἄν [τις] περιφανέστερον ἐξελεγχθείη τὰ ψευδῆ μεμαρτυρηκὼς ἢ εἴ τις αὐτὸν ἔροιτο “Ἀνδρόκλεις, πῶς οἶσθα Φιλοκτήμονʼ ὅτι οὔτε διέθετο οὔτε ὑὸν Χαιρέστρατον ἐποιήσατο;” οἷς μὲν γάρ τις παρεγένετο, δίκαιον, ὦ ἄνδρες, μαρτυρεῖν, οἷς δὲ μὴ παρεγένετο ἀλλʼ ἤκουσέ τινος, ἀκοὴν μαρτυρεῖν·
As it is, what clearer method is there of convicting him of perjury than by putting the following question to him: “How do you know, Androcles, that Philoctemon neither made a will nor adopted Chaerestratus as his son?” For when a man has been present, gentlemen, it is just that he should give evidence of what he has seen, and when he has not been present but has heard someone else describe what happened, he can give evidence by hearsay;
§ 54
σὺ δʼ οὐ παραγενόμενος διαρρήδην μεμαρτύρηκας ὡς οὐ διέθετο Φιλοκτήμων, ἀλλʼ ἄπαις ἐτελεύτησε. καίτοι πῶς οἷόν τε εἰδέναι, ὦ ἄνδρες; ὅμοιον γὰρ ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ φαίη εἰδέναι, καὶ μὴ παραγενόμενος, ὅσα ὑμεῖς πάντες πράττετε. οὐ γὰρ δὴ τοῦτό γε ἐρεῖ, καίπερ ἀναίσχυντος ὤν, ὡς ἅπασι παρεγένετο καὶ πάντʼ οἶδεν ὅσα Φιλοκτήμων ἐν τῷ βίῳ διεπράξατο.
but you, though you were not present, have given explicit evidence that Philoctemon made no will and died childless. How, gentlemen, can he possibly know this? It is as though he were to say, not having been present, that he knows about all the acts of you all. Impudent as he is, he will scarcely assert that he was present at and is acquainted with all the acts of Philoctemon's life;
§ 55
πάντων γὰρ αὐτὸν ἐκεῖνος ἔχθιστον ἐνόμιζε διά 〈τε〉 τὴν ἄλλην πονηρίαν, καὶ διότι τῶν συγγενῶν μόνος μετὰ τῆς Ἀλκῆς ἐκείνης τούτῳ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις συνεπιβουλεύσας τοῖς τοῦ Εὐκτήμονος χρήμασι τοιαῦτα διεπράξατο, οἷά περ ὑμῖν ἀπέδειξα.
for Philoctemon regarded him as his bitterest enemy, both because of his general bad character, and because he was the only one of his kinsmen who, in league with the infamous Alce, plotted with this friend of his and his other accomplices against the property of Euctemon, and committed the acts which I have described to you.
§ 56
πάντων δὲ μάλιστα ἀγανακτῆσαί ἐστιν ἄξιον, ὅταν οὗτοι καταχρῶνται τῷ Εὐκτήμονος ὀνόματι τοῦ τουδὶ πάππου. εἰ γάρ, ὡς οὗτοι λέγουσι, τῷ μὲν Φιλοκτήμονι μὴ ἐξῆν διαθέσθαι, τοῦ δʼ Εὐκτήμονός ἐστιν ὁ κλῆρος, πότερον δικαιότερον τῶν Εὐκτήμονος κληρονομεῖν τὰς ἐκείνου θυγατέρας, ὁμολογουμένως οὔσας γνησίας, καὶ ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἐκ τούτων γεγονότας, ἢ τοὺς οὐδὲν προσήκοντας, οἳ οὐ μόνον ὑφʼ ἡμῶν ἐλέγχονται,
But what calls for the greatest indignation is the wicked use which our opponents make of the name of Euctemon, my client's grandfather. For if, as they assert, Philoctemon had no right to make a will, and the estate was Euctemon's, who have a better right to inherit Euctemon's property? His daughters, who are admittedly legitimate, and we who are their sons?
§ 57
ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐξ ὧν αὐτοὶ ἐπίτροποι διαπεπραγμένοι εἰσί; τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῶν δέομαι καὶ ἱκετεύω σφόδρα μεμνῆσθαι, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅπερ ὀλίγῳ πρότερον ἀπέδειξα ὑμῖν, ὅτι Ἀνδροκλῆς οὑτοσὶ φησὶ μὲν εἶναι ἐπίτροπος αὐτῶν ὡς ὄντων γνησίων Εὐκτήμονος, εἴληχε δʼ αὐτὸς [ἐφʼ] ἑαυτῷ τοῦ Εὐκτήμονος κλήρου καὶ τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ ὡς οὔσης ἐπικλήρου· καὶ ταῦτα μεμαρτύρηται ὑμῖν.
Or men who bear no relation to him, and whose claims are refuted not only by you but also by the acts which they have themselves committed as guardians? For I beg and earnestly beseech you, gentlemen, to remember the point which I put before you a short while ago, that Androcles here declares that he is guardian of my clients as being the legitimate sons of Euctemon, and has also himself claimed for himself the estate of Euctemon and his daughter as heiress; and evidence of this has been placed before you.
§ 58
καίτοι πῶς οὐ δεινόν, ὦ ἄνδρες, πρὸς θεῶν Ὀλυμπίων, εἰ μὲν οἱ παῖδές εἰσι γνήσιοι, τὸν ἐπίτροπον ἑαυτῷ λαγχάνειν τοῦ Εὐκτήμονος κλήρου καὶ τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ ὡς οὔσης ἐπιδίκου, εἰ δὲ μή εἰσι γνήσιοι, νῦν διαμεμαρτυρηκέναι ὡς εἰσὶ γνήσιοι; ταῦτα γὰρ αὐτὰ ἑαυτοῖς ἐναντία ἐστίν. ὥστʼ οὐ μόνον ὑφʼ ἡμῶν ἐλέγχεται τὰ ψευδῆ διαμεμαρτυρηκώς, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐξ ὧν αὐτὸς πράττει.
By the gods of Olympus, is it not extraordinary, gentlemen, that, if the children are legitimate, their guardian should claim for himself the estate of Euctemon and his daughter as an heiress, and, if they are not legitimate, that he should have given evidence now in support of their legitimacy? For these acts are the very contrary of one another; so that he is convicted of perjury not only by us but by his own acts.
§ 59
καὶ τούτῳ μὲν οὐδεὶς διαμαρτυρεῖ μὴ ἐπίδικον εἶναι τὸν κλῆρον, ἀλλʼ εὐθυδικίᾳ εἰσιέναι 〈ἐξῆν〉, οὗτος δʼ ἅπαντας ἀποστερεῖ τῆς ἀμφισβητήσεως. καὶ διαρρήδην μαρτυρήσας γνησίους τοὺς παῖδας εἶναι, οἴεται ἐξαρκέσειν ὑμῖν παρεκβάσεις, ἐὰν δὲ τοῦτο μὲν μηδʼ ἐγχειρήσῃ ἐπιδεικνύναι ἢ καὶ κατὰ μικρόν τι ἐπιμνησθῇ, ἡμῖν δὲ λοιδορήσηται μεγάλῃ τῇ φωνῇ καὶ λέγῃ ὡς εἰσὶν οἵδε μὲν πλούσιοι αὐτὸς δὲ πένης, διὰ δὲ ταῦτα δόξειν τοὺς παῖδας εἶναι γνησίους.
No one is putting in a protestation that the estate is not adjudicable, and Androcles was at liberty to proceed by means of a direct action; now he is depriving everyone else of their right to claim. Having explicitly stated in his evidence that the children are legitimate, he thinks that you will be satisfied with rhetorical digressions, and that if he does not attempt to prove his point or dwells only very lightly upon it, but rails against us in a loud voice and says that my clients are rich, while he is poor—all this will make it appear that the children are legitimate.
§ 60
τῆς δὲ τούτων οὐσίας, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἰς τὴν πόλιν πλείω ἀναλίσκεται ἢ εἰς αὐτοὺς τούτους. καὶ Φανόστρατος μὲν τετριηράρχηκεν ἑπτάκις ἤδη, τὰς δὲ λῃτουργίας ἁπάσας λελῃτούργηκε καὶ τὰς πλείστας νίκας νενίκηκεν· οὑτοσὶ δὲ Χαιρέστρατος τηλικοῦτος ὢν τετριηράρχηκε, κεχορήγηκε δὲ τραγῳδοῖς, γεγυμνασιάρχηκε δὲ λαμπάδι· καὶ τὰς εἰσφορὰς εἰσενηνόχασιν ἀμφότεροι πάσας ἐν τοῖς τριακοσίοις. καὶ τέως μὲν δύʼ ὄντες, νῦν δὲ καὶ ὁ νεώτερος οὑτοσὶ χορηγεῖ μὲν τραγῳδοῖς, εἰς δὲ τοὺς τριακοσίους ἐγγέγραπται καὶ εἰσφέρει τὰς εἰσφοράς.
Now the family fortune, gentlemen, is being spent rather upon the city than upon the members of the family themselves. Phanostratus has already been trierarch seven times, and he has performed all the public services and has generally been victorious. Chaerestratus here, young as he is, has been trierarch; he has been choregus in the tragic competitions; he has been gymnasiarch at the torch-races. Both of them have paid all the special war-taxes, being numbered among the three hundred. Formerly only these two members of the family contributed, but now the younger son here is choregus in the tragic competitions and has been enrolled among the three hundred and pays the war-tax.
§ 61
ὥστʼ οὐ φθονεῖσθαί εἰσιν ἄξιοι, ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον νὴ Δία καὶ τὸν Ἀπόλλω οὗτοι, εἰ λήψονται ἃ μὴ προσήκει αὐτοῖς. τοῦ γὰρ Φιλοκτήμονος κλήρου ἂν μὲν ἐπιδικάσηται ὅδε, ὑμῖν αὐτὸν ταμιεύσει, τὰ προσταττόμενα λῃτουργῶν ὥσπερ καὶ νῦν καὶ ἔτι μᾶλλον· ἐὰν δʼ οὗτοι λάβωσι, διαφορήσαντες ἑτέροις ἐπιβουλεύσουσι.
No grudge ought, therefore, to be felt against them, but rather, by Zeus and Apollo, against our opponents, if they obtain what does not belong to them. If the estate of Philoctemon is adjudicated to my client, he will hold it in trust for you, performing all the public services which you lay upon him, as he has done hitherto, and with even greater generosity. If, on the other hand, our opponents receive it, they will squander it and then seek other victims.
§ 62
δέομαι οὖν ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἵνα μὴ ἐξαπατηθῆτε, τῇ διαμαρτυρίᾳ τὸν νοῦν προσέχειν περὶ ἧς τὴν ψῆφον οἴσετε· καὶ πρὸς ταύτην αὐτὸν κελεύετε τὴν ἀπολογίαν ποιεῖσθαι, ὥσπερ καὶ ἡμεῖς κατηγορήσαμεν. γέγραπται ὡς οὐκ ἔδωκεν οὐδὲ διέθετο Φιλοκτήμων· τοῦτο ἐπιδέδεικται ψεῦδος ὄν· καὶ γὰρ [ὁ δοὺς καὶ ὁ διαθέμενος καὶ] μαρτυροῦσιν οἱ παραγενόμενοι.
I beseech you, therefore, gentlemen, in order that you may not be misled, to give your careful attention to the protestation about which you are going to give your verdict. Instruct him to make that the subject of his defence, just as it has been the subject of our accusation. The text of the protestation has stated that Philoctemon made no gift of property or will; this has been proved to be false, for those who were present are witnesses that he did so.
§ 63
τί ἔτι; τελευτῆσαι ἄπαιδα Φιλοκτήμονα. πῶς οὖν ἄπαις ἦν ὅστις τὸν ἑαυτοῦ ἀδελφιδοῦν ὑὸν ποιησάμενος κατέλιπεν, ᾧ ὁμοίως ὁ νόμος τὴν κληρονομίαν ἀποδίδωσι καὶ τοῖς ἐξ αὐτοῦ γενομένοις; καὶ διαρρήδην ἐν τῷ νόμῳ γέγραπται, ἐὰν ποιησαμένῳ παῖδες ἐπιγένωνται, τὸ μέρος ἑκάτερον ἔχειν τῆς οὐσίας καὶ κληρονομεῖν ὁμοίως ἀμφοτέρους.
What further do they say? That Philoctemon died childless. How could he be childless, when he adopted and was survived by his own nephew, to whom the law gives the right of inheritance just as much as to children of his own body? Indeed, it is expressly stated in the law that, if children are born subsequently to one who has adopted a son, each child takes his share of the estate and both classes of children alike inherit.
§ 64
ὡς οὖν εἰσὶ γνήσιοι οἱ παῖδες οἵδε, τοῦτʼ αὐτὸ ἐπιδεικνύτω, ὥσπερ ἂν ὑμῶν ἕκαστος. οὐ γὰρ ἂν εἴπῃ μητρὸς ὄνομα, γνήσιοί εἰσιν, ἀλλʼ ἐὰν ἐπιδεικνύῃ ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγει, τοὺς συγγενεῖς παρεχόμενος τοὺς εἰδότας συνοικοῦσαν τῷ Εὐκτήμονι 〈καὶ〉 τοὺς δημότας καὶ τοὺς φράτορας, εἴ τι ἀκηκόασι πώποτε ἢ ἴσασιν ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς Εὐκτήμονα λῃτουργήσαντα, ἔτι δὲ ποῦ τέθαπται, ἐν ποίοις μνήμασι,
Let Androcles, therefore, prove that the children are legitimate, as any one of you would have to do in similar circumstances. His mere mention of a mother's name does not suffice to make them legitimate, but he must prove that he is speaking the truth by producing the relatives who know that she was married to Euctemon, and the members of the deme and of the ward, if they have ever heard or have any knowledge that Euctemon performed any public services on her behalf.
§ 65
〈καὶ〉 τίς εἶδε τὰ νομιζόμενα ποιοῦντα Εὐκτήμονα· ποῖ δʼ ἔτʼ ἰόντες οἱ παῖδες ἐναγίζουσι καὶ χέονται, καὶ τίς εἶδε ταῦτα τῶν πολιτῶν ἢ τῶν οἰκετῶν 〈τῶν〉 Εὐκτήμονος. ταῦτα γάρ ἐστιν ἔλεγχος ἅπαντα, καὶ οὐ λοιδορία. καὶ ἐὰν περὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου κελεύητε ἐπιδεικνύναι ὥσπερ καὶ διεμαρτύρησεν, ὑμεῖς τε τὴν ψῆφον ὁσίαν καὶ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους θήσεσθε, τοῖσδέ τε τὰ δίκαια γενήσεται.
We must know where she is buried and in what sort of tomb, and who has ever seen Euctemon performing the customary rights over her, and whither her sons still go to offer sacrifices and libations, and who of the citizens or of the slaves of Euctemon has ever seen these rites being performed. It is all these details, and not mere invective, which constitute a proof. If you bid him prove the actual contention which is the subject of his protestation, youwill give a verdict which accords with your oath and with the laws, and justice will be done to my clients.
On The Estate of Apollodorus · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg007 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Απολλοδώρου κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg007.perseus-grc2 · English: On The Estate of Apollodorus — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg007.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Εὔπολις καὶ Θράσυλλος καὶ Μνήσων ἀδελφοὶ γεγόνασι. τούτων ὁ μὲν Μνήσων ἄπαις ἐτελεύτησεν, ὁ δὲ Θράσυλλος παῖδα καταλιπὼν Ἀπολλόδωρον· μόνος δʼ Εὔπολις καταλειφθεὶς πολλὰ τὸν Ἀπολλόδωρον ἠδίκησεν. ὅθεν Ἀρχέδαμος, πάππος τοῦ λέγοντος τὸν λόγον, τῇ τοῦ Ἀπολλοδώρου μητρὶ συνοικῶν μετὰ τὸν Θρασύλλου τοῦ ἀνδρὸς αὐτῆς θάνατον, καὶ τὸν Ἀπολλόδωρον ὡς ὀρφανὸν ἐλεῶν, πολλὰ τὸν Εὔπολιν ἀπῄτησε χρήματα ὑπὲρ ὧν Ἀπολλόδωρον ἠδίκησε. τούτων μεμνημένος Ἀπολλόδωρος εἰσήγαγεν εἰς τοὺς φράτορας θετὸν υἱὸν ἑαυτῷ Θράσυλλον τοῦτον, υἱὸν ὄντα τῆς [τε] ὁμομητρίας αὐτοῦ ἀδελφῆς καὶ 〈θυγατριδοῦν〉 Ἀρχεδάμου. τοῦ δὲ Θρασύλλου ἤδη μὲν εἰς τοὺς γεννήτας καὶ φράτορας ἐγγεγραμμένου, οὔπω δʼ εἰς τὸ ληξιαρχικὸν γραμματεῖον, ἐτελεύτησεν Ἀπολλόδωρος. καὶ μετὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ τελευτὴν ἐγγέγραπται μὲν ὁ Θράσυλλος εἰς τὸ ληξιαρχικὸν γραμματεῖον, οὐδὲν δʼ ἧττον Εὐπόλιδος θυγάτηρ, τοῦ θείου Ἀπολλοδώρου, ἀμφισβητεῖ πρὸς Θράσυλλον, λέγουσα μηδʼ ὅλως ἐγγεγράφθαι τὸν Θράσυλλον εἰς τοὺς φράτορας καὶ γεννήτας κατὰ γνώμην τοῦ Ἀππολλοδώρου, ἀλλὰ πεπλασμένην εἶναι τὴν ποίησιν. καὶ ἡ μὲν ὑπόθεσις αὕτη, ἡ δὲ στάσις στοχασμός· διὸ καλῶς πάνυ καὶ τεχνικῶς τὸν λόγον οἰκονομῶν τὴν ἔχθραν διεξέρχεται τὴν Ἀπολλοδώρου πρὸς Εὔπολιν, ὅπερ μέγα σημεῖον γίγνεται τοῦ μὴ θέλειν αὐτὴν ὑπὸ τῆς Εὐπόλιδος θυγατρὸς κληρονομηθῆναι.
Argument Eupolis, Thrasyllus (I.), and Mneson were brothers. Mneson died without issue; Thrasyllus (I.) died leaving a son, Apollodorus; Eupolis, the sole survivor of the three, acted with great injustice towards Apollodorus. Archedamus, therefore, the grandfather of the man who makes the speech, being married to Apollodorus's mother after her first husband's death, pitying Apollodorus because he was an orphan, claimed a large sum of money from Eupolis on account of the wrongs committed by the latter against Apollodorus. Mindful of this kindness Apollodorus introduced Thrasyllus, the son of his half-sister and grandson of Archedamus, to his fellow-wardsmen as his adopted son. Thrasyllus (II.) had already been inscribed among the members of the families and of the ward, but had not yet been placed on the official register of the deme, when Apollodorus died. After Apollodorus's death Thrasyllus (II.) was inscribed on the register; nevertheless the daughter of Eupolis, the uncle of Apollodorus contested the succession against Thrasyllus (II.), alleging that it was not by any means in accordance with the wishes of Apollodorus that Thrasyllus had been inscribed among the wardsmen and kindred, and that the adoption was fictitious. Such is the subject of the trial; the discussion turns on a question of fact, and so, with great skill and ingenuity, the speaker explains the enmity of Apollodorus towards Eupolis, which supplies a strong presumption that he did not wish that his property should be inherited by Eupolis's daughter.
§ 1
ὤιμην μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, προσήκειν οὐ τὰς τοιαύτας ἀμφισβητεῖσθαι ποιήσεις, εἴ τις αὐτὸς ζῶν καὶ εὖ φρονῶν ἐποιήσατο καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ ἱερὰ ἀγαγὼν εἰς τοὺς συγγενεῖς ἀπέδειξε καὶ εἰς τὰ κοινὰ γραμματεῖα ἐνέγραψεν, ἅπανθʼ ὅσα προσῆκεν αὐτὸς ποιήσας, ἀλλʼ εἴ τις τελευτήσειν μέλλων διέθετο, εἴ τι πάθοι, τὴν οὐσίαν ἑτέρῳ, καὶ ταῦτʼ ἐν γράμμασι κατέθετο παρά τισι σημηνάμενος.
I should have thought, gentlemen, that there was one class of adoptions which could not be disputed, namely, those which are made by the adopter personally in his lifetime and in full possession of his faculties, after he has led his adopted son to the domestic shrines and presented him to his kindred and inscribed him in the official registers, and himself carried out all the proper formalities.
§ 2
ἐκεῖνον μὲν γὰρ τὸν τρόπον ποιησάμενος φανερὰς κατέστησε τὰς αὑτοῦ βουλήσεις, ὅλον τὸ πρᾶγμα ἐπικυρώσας, δόντων αὐτῷ τῶν νόμων· ὁ δʼ ἐν διαθήκαις σημηνάμενος ἀδήλους ἐποίησε, διὸ πολλοὶ πεπλάσθαι φάσκοντες αὐτὰς ἀμφισβητεῖν ἀξιοῦσι πρὸς τοὺς ποιηθέντας. ἔοικε δʼ οὐδὲν προὔργου τοῦτο εἶναι· καὶ γὰρ οὕτως αὐτῶν φανερῶς πεπραγμένων ὅμως ὑπὲρ τῆς θυγατρὸς τῆς Εὐπόλιδος ἥκουσι περὶ τῶν Ἀπολλοδώρου χρημάτων πρὸς ἐμὲ ἀμφισβητήσοντες.
On the other hand, a dispute might well arise when a man, feeling that his end is near, has disposed of his property in favor of another, if anything should happen to him, and putting his wishes in a written document has sealed it up and deposited it in the custody of others. By the former method the adopter sets forth his wishes with perfect clearness, making the whole transaction valid in the manner permitted by the laws; whereas the man who commits his wishes to a sealed-up will makes them secret, with the result that claimants often think fit to contest the succession against adopted sons, alleging that the will is a forgery. It appears, however, that this distinction is of little practical value; for though my adoption was quite openly carried out, yet representatives of Eupolis's daughter have come forward to contest my right to Apollodorus's estate.
§ 3
ἐγὼ δʼ εἰ μὲν ἑώρων ὑμᾶς μᾶλλον ἀποδεχομένους τὰς διαμαρτυρίας ἢ τὰς εὐθυδικίας, κἂν μάρτυρας προὐβαλόμην μὴ ἐπίδικον εἶναι τὸν κλῆρον ὡς ποιησαμένου με ὑὸν Ἀπολλοδώρου κατὰ τοὺς νόμους. ἐπειδὴ δʼ οὐ διαφεύγει τὰ δίκαια μὴ οὐ κατὰ τοῦτον γιγνώσκεσθαι τὸν τρόπον [καὶ] παρʼ ὑμῖν, αὐτὸς ἥκω διαλεξόμενος περὶ τῶν πεπραγμένων, ἵνα μηδεμίαν ἡμῖν αἰτίαν περὶ τοῦ μὴ βούλεσθαι δοῦναι δίκην τοιαύτην ἐπιφέρωσιν.
If I observed that you prefer a protestation to a direct action, I should have brought forward witnesses to show that the estate is not liable to adjudication, seeing that Apollodorus adopted me in the proper legal form; but since I am sensible that by the former method the rights of the case cannot fully be made known to you, I have myself come forward to explain the facts so that they may bring no charge against us of being unwilling to submit to such a trial.
§ 4
ἀποδείξω δὲ ὡς οὐ μόνον ἐπὶ τοῖς ἐγγυτάτω γένους τὸν κλῆρον Ἀπολλόδωρος οὐ καταλέλοιπε, πολλὰ καὶ δεινὰ ὑπὸ τούτων ἀδικηθείς, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὡς ἐμὲ ἐποιήσατο δικαίως, ὄντα ἀδελφιδοῦν, καὶ μεγάλα εὐεργετημένος ὑφʼ ἡμῶν. δέομαι δὲ ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες, πάντων ὁμοίως εὔνοιάν τέ μοι παρασχεῖν, κἂν ἐπὶ τὸν κλῆρον ἀναιδῶς αὐτοὺς ἰόντας ἐξελέγχω, βοηθεῖν μοι τὰ δίκαια. ποιήσομαι δʼ ὡς ἂν κἀγὼ δύνωμαι διὰ βραχυτάτων τοὺς λόγους, ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὡς ἔχει τὰ γενόμενα διδάσκων ὑμᾶς.
I shall prove to you, not only that Apollodorus was prevented from leaving his estate to his nearest relatives by the many injuries which he had sustained at their hands, but also that he legally adopted me, his nephew, after having received great benefits from my family. I beg you all, gentlemen, to accord me your goodwill, and, if I can prove that my opponents are laying impudent claim to the estate, to help me to obtain my just rights. I will speak as briefly as I can, relating to you all that has happened from the beginning.
§ 5
Εὔπολις γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ Θράσυλλος καὶ Μνήσων ἀδελφοὶ ἦσαν ὁμομήτριοι καὶ ὁμοπάτριοι. τούτοις οὐσίαν ὁ πατὴρ κατέλιπε πολλήν, ὥστε καὶ λῃτουργεῖν ἕκαστον ἀξιοῦσθαι παρʼ ὑμῖν. ταύτην ἐκεῖνοι τρεῖς ὄντες ἐνείμαντο πρὸς ἀλλήλους. τούτων τὼ δύο ἐτελευτησάτην περὶ τὸν αὐτὸν χρόνον, ὁ μὲν Μνήσων ἐνθάδε ἄγαμος καὶ ἄπαις, ὁ δὲ Θράσυλλος τῶν ἐν Σικελίᾳ καταλεγεὶς τριηράρχων, καταλιπὼν ὑὸν Ἀπολλόδωρον τὸν ἐμὲ νῦν ποιησάμενον.
Eupolis, Thrasyllus, and Mneson were brothers, children of the same father and mother. Their father left them a large property, so that each of them was considered able to perform public offices in the city. This fortune the three brothers divided amongst themselves. Two of them died about the same time, Mneson here in Athens, unmarried and without issue, Thrasyllus in Sicily, having been chosen as one of the trierarchs, leaving a son Apollodorus, who afterwards adopted me.
§ 6
Εὔπολις οὖν μόνος αὐτῶν λειφθεὶς οὐ μικρὰ ἀπολαῦσαι τῶν χρημάτων ἠξίωσεν, ἀλλὰ τὸν μὲν Μνήσονος κλῆρον, οὗ καὶ Ἀπολλοδώρῳ προσῆκε τὸ ἡμικλήριον, πάντα εἰς αὑτὸν περιεποίησε, φάσκων αὑτῷ δοῦναι τὸν ἀδελφόν, αὐτὸν δʼ ἐκεῖνον οὕτω διῴκησεν ἐπιτροπεύων ὥστε τριῶν αὐτῷ ταλάντων δίκην ὀφλεῖν.
Eupolis, the sole survivor of the three brothers, was not content to enjoy only a part of the family fortune, but seized for himself the whole of Mneson's estate, half of which belonged to Apollodorus, alleging that his brother had given it to him, and, as guardian, so administered the affairs of Apollodorus that he was condemned to restore three talents to him.
§ 7
Ἀρχέδαμος γὰρ ὁ πάππος οὑμός, ἐξ οὗ τὴν μητέρα ἔσχε τὴν Ἀπολλοδώρου, τήθην δὲ ἐμήν, ὁρῶν αὐτὸν πάντων ἀποστερούμενον τῶν χρημάτων, ἔτρεφέ τε αὐτὸν παῖδα ὄνθʼ, ὡς ἑαυτὸν καὶ τὴν μητέρα κομισάμενος, ἀνδρί τε γενομένῳ συνηγωνίσατο καὶ εἰσέπραξε τὸ ἡμικλήριον ὧν Μνήσων κατέλιπεν ὅσα τε ἐκ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς ἀπεστέρησε, δίκας δύο ἑλών, καὶ τὴν οὐσίαν ἐποίησε κομίσασθαι τὴν αὑτοῦ πᾶσαν.
For my grandfather Archedamus, from the time that he married Apollodorus's mother, my grandmother, seeing that he was deprived of all his fortune, took him to his own house and to his mother and brought him up while he was a boy, and, when he came to man's estate, assisted him to bring an action and secured the restitution of the half-share of the estate left by Mneson and all that Eupolis embezzled in his capacity as guardian, winning two law-suits, and so enabled Apollodorus to recover all his fortune.
§ 8
καὶ διὰ ταῦτα Εὔπολις μὲν καὶ Ἀπολλόδωρος ἐχθρῶς ἔχοντες τὸν πάντα χρόνον διετέλεσαν πρὸς ἀλλήλους, ὁ δὲ πάππος οὑμὸς καὶ Ἀπολλόδωρος φιλικῶς, ὥσπερ προσῆκε. τοῖς δʼ ἔργοις ἄν τις τεκμήραιτο μάλιστα ὅτι Ἀπολλόδωρος πέπονθεν ὃ ἀντευποιεῖν ἠξίου τοὺς ἑαυτὸν εὐεργετήσαντας. συμφορᾷ γὰρ τοῦ πάππου χρησαμένου καὶ ληφθέντος εἰς τοὺς πολεμίους, καὶ χρήματα εἰσενεγκεῖν εἰς λύτρα καὶ ὁμηρεῦσαι ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ ἠθέλησεν, ἕως [οὗ] εὐπορήσειεν ἐκεῖνος τἀργύριον.
As a result Eupolis and Apollodorus were always at enmity with one another, while my grandfather and Apollodorus were naturally close friends. The acts of Apollodorus supply the best evidence that he has received kind treatment for which he thought fit to make return to his benefactors. For, when my grandfather met with misfortune and was taken a prisoner of war, Apollodorus consented to contribute money for his ransom and act as a hostage for him until he could raise the necessary sum of money.
§ 9
ἐξ εὐπόρου τε ἀπορωτέρῳ γεγενημένῳ συνδιῴκει τὰ ἐκείνου, μεταδιδοὺς ὧν εἶχεν. εἰς Κόρινθόν τε στρατεύεσθαι μέλλων, εἴ τι πάθοι, διέθετο τὴν οὐσίαν καὶ ἔδωκε τῇ ἐκείνου μὲν θυγατρί, ἐμῇ δὲ μητρί, αὑτοῦ δὲ ἀδελφῇ, διδοὺς αὐτὴν Λακρατίδῃ τῷ νῦν ἱεροφάντῃ γεγενημένῳ. τοιοῦτος ἦν ἐκεῖνος περὶ ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἐξ ἀρχῆς αὐτὸν σώσαντας.
When Archedamus had been reduced from affluence to embarrassment, Apollodorus helped him to look after his affairs, sharing his own money with him. Again, when he was on the point of starting for Corinth on military service, he made a will in case anything happened to him and devised his property to Archedamus's daughter, his own sister and my mother, providing for her marriage with Lacratides, who has now become hierophant. Such was his conduct towards us who had originally saved him from ruin.
§ 10
ὡς δʼ ἀληθῆ λέγω, καὶ δίκας εἷλεν Εὔπολιν δύο, τὴν μὲν ἐπιτροπῆς τὴν δὲ ἡμικληρίου, τοῦ πάππου συνηγωνισμένου καὶ λέγοντος, τά τε χρήματα ἐκομίσατο διʼ ἡμᾶς καὶ ταύτας τὰς χάριτας ἡμῖν ἀνταπέδωκε, τούτων πρῶτον βούλομαι παρασχέσθαι τοὺς μάρτυρας. καί μοι κάλει δεῦρο αὐτούς.
To prove the truth of my statements that Apollodorus won two actions against Eupolis, one in respect of his guardianship and the other concerning the half-share of Mneson's estate, my grandfather having supported his case and speaking on his behalf, and that it was thanks to us that he recovered his fortune, and that he requited these good services of ours—on all these points I wish first to produce the witnesses. Please summon them hither.
§ 11
Μάρτυρες αἱ μὲν οὖν παρʼ ἡμῶν εὐεργεσίαι τοιαῦται καὶ τηλικαῦται τὸ μέγεθός εἰσιν· αἱ δὲ πρὸς ἐκεῖνον ἔχθραι περὶ τοσούτων χρημάτων ἦσαν, ἃς οὐχ οἷόν τʼ εἰπεῖν ὡς διελύσαντο καὶ φίλοι ἐγένοντο. μεγάλα γὰρ τεκμήρια αὐτῶν ἐστιν· Εὔπολις γὰρ αὐτῷ δυοῖν θυγατέρων οὐσῶν καὶ ἐκ τῶν αὐτῶν αὐτῷ γεγονὼς καὶ χρήμαθʼ ὁρῶν κεκτημένον, οὐδετέραν αὐτῷ τούτων ἔδωκε.
Witnesses Such is the nature and importance of the benefits which Apollodorus received from us; on the other hand, his feelings of enmity towards Eupolis had their origin in disputes about such large sums of money that it is impossible to pretend that they could ever make up their quarrel and become friends. A convincing proof of their enmity is the fact that, though Eupolis had two daughters and was descended from the same ancestors and saw that Apollodorus was possessed of money, yet he gave neither of them to him in marriage.
§ 12
καίτοι δοκοῦσιν ἐπιγαμίαι καὶ μὴ συγγενεῖς ἄνδρας ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς τυχόντας ἀπαλλάττειν μεγάλης διαφορᾶς, ὅταν ἃ περὶ πλείστου ποιοῦνται, ταῦτʼ ἀλλήλοις ἐγχειρίζωσιν. εἴτʼ οὖν Εὔπολις γεγένηται αἴτιος 〈δοῦναι〉 μὴ βουληθείς, εἴτʼ Ἀπολλόδωρος λαβεῖν μὴ ἐθελήσας, τὰς ἔχθρας, ὅτι διέμειναν, τὸ ἔργον δεδήλωκε.
Yet it is generally held that marriages reconcile serious animosities not only between relatives but also between ordinary acquaintances, when they entrust one another with what they value most. Whether Eupolis has been to blame in not wishing to give his daughter or Apollodorus in being unwilling to accept her, the fact has proved that their enmity continued.
§ 13
καὶ περὶ μὲν τῆς ἐκείνων διαφορᾶς ἱκανοὺς εἶναι νομίζω καὶ τοὺς εἰρημένους λόγους· οἶδα γὰρ ὅτι καὶ ὑμῶν ὅσοι πρεσβύτεροι μνημονεύουσιν ὅτι ἐγένοντο ἀντίδικοι· τό τε γὰρ μέγεθος τῶν δικῶν, καὶ διότι πολὺ αὐτὸν Ἀρχέδαμος εἷλεν, ἐπιφάνειάν τινα ἐποίησεν. ὡς δὲ ἐμὲ ἐποιήσατο ὑὸν ζῶν αὐτὸς καὶ κύριον τῶν αὑτοῦ κατέστησε καὶ εἰς τοὺς γεννήτας καὶ εἰς τοὺς φράτορας ἐνέγραψε, τούτοις ἤδη μοι τὸν νοῦν προσέχετε, ὦ ἄνδρες.
What has been said about their quarrel is, I think, sufficient; for I know that the older men among you remember that they were opponents in the law-courts, for the importance of the cases and the fact that heavy damages were obtained by Archidamus gave publicity to their quarrel. I must now ask you, gentlemen, to give your kind attention to the proofs, that Apollodorus himself adopted me during his lifetime and gave me power over his property and inscribed me in the registers of the members of the families and of the ward.
§ 14
Ἀπολλοδώρῳ γὰρ ἦν ὑός, ὃν ἐκεῖνος καὶ ἤσκει καὶ διʼ ἐπιμελείας εἶχεν, ὥσπερ καὶ προσῆκον ἦν. ἕως μὲν οὖν ἐκεῖνος ἔζη, διάδοχον τῆς οὐσίας ἤλπιζεν αὐτὸν καταστήσειν τῆς ἑαυτοῦ· ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐτελεύτησε νοσήσας τοῦ ἐξελθόντος ἐνιαυτοῦ μηνὸς Μαιμακτηριῶνος, ἐπὶ τοῖς παροῦσιν ἀθυμήσας καὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ καταμεμψάμενος οὐκ ἐπελάθετο ὑφʼ ὧν καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς εὖ πεπονθὼς ἦν, ἀλλʼ ἐλθὼν ὡς τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα ἑαυτοῦ δὲ ἀδελφήν, ἣν περὶ πλείστου πάντων ἐποιεῖτο, λαβεῖν ἠξίωσέ με ὑὸν καὶ ᾔτησε καὶ ἔτυχεν.
Now Apollodorus had a son whom he brought up and dearly cherished, as indeed was only natural. As long as this child lived, he hoped to make him heir to his property; but when he fell ill and died in the month of Maemacterion of last year, Apollodorus, depressed by his misfortunes and viewing his advanced age with regret, did not fail to bethink him of the family at whose hands he had in earlier years received kindness; so he came to my mother, his own sister, for whom he had a greater regard than for anyone else, and expressed a wish to adopt me and asked her permission, which was granted.
§ 15
οὕτω δʼ ἐπείσθη ταῦτα ποιῆσαι διὰ ταχέων, ὥστʼ εὐθέως με λαβὼν ᾤχετʼ ἔχων πρὸς αὑτὸν καὶ πάντα τὰ αὑτοῦ διοικεῖν παρέδωκεν, ὡς αὐτὸς μὲν οὐδὲν ἂν ἔτι πρᾶξαι τούτων δυνηθείς, ἐμοῦ δὲ ταῦτα πάντα οἵου τε ἐσομένου ποιεῖν. καὶ ἐπειδὴ Θαργήλια ἦν, ἤγαγέ με ἐπὶ τοὺς βωμοὺς εἰς τοὺς γεννήτας τε καὶ φράτορας.
He was so determined to act with all possible haste that he straightway took me to his own house and entrusted me with the direction of all his affairs, regarding himself as no longer capable of managing anything himself, and thinking that I should be able to do everything. When the Thargelia came round, he conducted me to the altars and to the members of the families and ward.
§ 16
ἔστι δʼ αὐτοῖς νόμος ὁ αὐτός, ἐάν τέ τινα φύσει γεγονότα εἰσάγῃ τις ἐάν τε ποιητόν, ἐπιτιθέναι πίστιν κατὰ τῶν ἱερῶν ἦ μὴν ἐξ ἀστῆς εἰσάγειν καὶ γεγονότα ὀρθῶς καὶ τὸν ὑπάρχοντα φύσει καὶ τὸν ποιητόν· ποιήσαντος δὲ τοῦ εἰσάγοντος ταῦτα μηδὲν ἧττον διαψηφίζεσθαι καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους, κἂν δόξῃ, τότʼ εἰς τὸ κοινὸν γραμματεῖον ἐγγράφειν, πρότερον δὲ μή· τοιαύτας ἀκριβείας ἔχει τὰ δίκαια τὰ παρʼ αὐτοῖς.
Now these bodies have a uniform rule, that when a man introduces his own son or an adopted son, he must swear with his hand upon the victims that the child whom he is introducing, whether his own or an adopted son, is the offspring of an Athenian mother and born in wedlock; and, even after the introducer has done this, the other members still have to pass a vote, and, if their vote is favorable, they then, and not till then, inscribe him on the official register; such is the exactitude with which their formalities are carried out.
§ 17
τοῦ νόμου δὴ οὕτως ἔχοντος, καὶ τῶν φρατόρων τε καὶ γεννητῶν ἐκείνῳ οὐκ ἀπιστούντων ἐμέ τε οὐκ ἀγνοούντων, ὅτι ἦν ἐξ ἀδελφῆς αὐτῷ γεγονώς, ἐγγράφουσί με εἰς τὸ κοινὸν γραμματεῖον ψηφισάμενοι πάντες, ἐπιθέντος ἐκείνου τὴν πίστιν καθʼ ἱερῶν. καὶ οὕτω μὲν ὑπὸ ζῶντος ἐποιήθην, καὶ εἰς τὸ κοινὸν γραμματεῖον ἐνεγράφην Θράσυλλος Ἀπολλοδώρου, ποιησαμένου με ἐκείνου τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον, τῶν νόμων αὐτῷ δεδωκότων. ὡς δʼ ἀληθῆ λέγω, λαβέ μοι τὰς μαρτυρίας.
Such being the rule, the members of the families and of the ward having full confidence in Apollodorus and being well aware that I was his sister's son, passed an unanimous vote and inscribed my name in the public register, after Apollodorus had sworn with his hand upon the victims. Thus I was adopted by him in his lifetime and my name inscribed in the public register as Thrasyllus the son of Apollodorus, after he had adopted me in this manner, as the laws have given him the power to do. To prove that I am speaking the truth, please take the depositions.
§ 18
Μαρτυρίαι οἶμαι τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες, μᾶλλον ἂν ὑμᾶς τοῖς μεμαρτυρηκόσι πιστεύειν, εἰ καὶ τινες τῶν ὁμοίως προσηκόντων ἔργοις φανερῶς μεμαρτυρήκασιν ὡς ἐκεῖνος ταῦτα ὀρθῶς καὶ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἔπραξε. κατέλιπε γὰρ Εὔπολις θυγατέρας δύο, ταύτην τε ἣ νῦν ἀμφισβητεῖ καὶ Προνάπει συνοικεῖ, καὶ ἄλλην ἣν ἔσχεν Αἰσχίνης ὁ Λουσιεύς, ἣ τετελεύτηκεν ὑὸν ἄνδρα ἤδη καταλιποῦσα, Θρασύβουλον.
Depositions I imagine, gentlemen, that you would more readily believe those who have given evidence, if certain of the relatives of the same degree as my opponent have obviously attested by their conduct that Apollodorus carried out the adoption in a correct and legal manner. Now Eupolis left two daughters, one who is the present claimant and the wife of Pronapes, and another whom Aeschines of Lusia married and who is dead, but left a son Thrasybulus, who is now of full age.
§ 19
ἔστι δὲ νόμος 〈ὅς〉, ἐὰν ἀδελφὸς ὁμοπάτωρ ἄπαις τελευτήσῃ καὶ μὴ διαθέμενος, τήν τε ἀδελφὴν ὁμοίως, κἂν ἐξ ἑτέρας ἀδελφιδοῦς ᾖ γεγονώς, ἰσομοίρους τῶν χρημάτων καθίστησι. καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀγνοούμενόν ἐστιν οὐδὲ παρʼ αὐτοῖς τούτοις. ἔργῳ γὰρ οὗτοι φανερὸν τοῦτο πεποιήκασι· τοῦ γὰρ Εὐπόλιδος ὑέος ἄπαιδος Ἀπολλοδώρου τελευτήσαντος τὰ ἡμίσεα Θρασύβουλος εἴληφεν, οὐσίας καὶ πεντεταλάντου καταλειφθείσης ῥᾳδίως.
There is a law which provides that, if a brother by the same father dies without issue and intestate, his property shall be divided equally between his surviving sister and any nephew who has been born from another sister. My opponents themselves are well aware of this, as their actual conduct has proved; for, Eupolis's son, Apollodorus (II.), having died without issue, Thrasybulus has received half his estate, which may fairly be estimated at five talents.
§ 20
πατρῴων μὲν οὖν καὶ ἀδελφοῦ χρημάτων τὸ ἴσον αὐτοῖς ὁ νόμος μετασχεῖν δίδωσιν· ἀνεψιοῦ δέ, καὶ εἴ τις ἔξω ταύτης τῆς συγγενείας ἐστίν, οὐκ ἴσον, ἀλλὰ προτέροις τοῖς ἄρρεσι τῶν θηλειῶν τὴν ἀγχιστείαν πεποίηκε. λέγει γάρ “κρατεῖν δὲ τοὺς ἄρρενας καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τῶν ἀρρένων, οἳ ἂν ἐκ τῶν αὐτῶν ὦσι, κἂν γένει ἀπωτέρω τυγχάνωσιν ὄντες.” ταύτῃ μὲν οὖν οὐδὲ μέρους λαχεῖν προσῆκε, Θρασυβούλῳ δὲ ἁπάντων, εἰ μὴ κυρίαν ἡγεῖτο εἶναι τὴν ἐμὴν εἰσποίησιν.
Thus the law gives the sister and the sister's son an equal share of their father's and their brother's estate; but when a first cousin, or any other kinsman in a remoter degree, dies, it no longer grants such equality, but gives the male relatives the right of succession as next-of-kin in preference to the female. For it declares that “the males and the issue of the males, who are descended from the same stock, shall be preferred, even though their relationship to the deceased is more remote.” The wife of Pronapes, therefore, had no right to claim a share at all, and Thrasybulus ought to have claimed the whole if he regarded my adoption as invalid.
§ 21
ἐκεῖνος τοίνυν οὔτε ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἠμφισβήτηκε πρὸς ἐμὲ οὐδὲν οὔτε νῦν δίκην εἴληχε περὶ αὐτῶν, ἀλλὰ ταῦτα πάντα καλῶς ἔχειν ὡμολόγηκεν· οἱ δʼ ὑπὲρ ταύτης πάντων ἀμφισβητεῖν τετολμήκασιν· εἰς τοῦτο ἀναιδείας ἐληλύθασι. λαβὲ δὴ αὐτοῖς τοὺς νόμους, παρʼ οὓς ταῦτα πεποιήκασι, καὶ ἀνάγνωθι.
Yet from the first he has never disputed my title nor has he now made any claim at law to the estate, but has admitted that everything is in order. On the other hand, those who are acting for this woman have dared—such is their impudence—to claim the whole estate. Take the clauses of the law which they have violated and read them to the court.
§ 22
Νόμος ἐνταῦθα μὲν ὁμοίως καὶ ἀδελφὴ καὶ ἀδελφιδοῦς ἰσόμοιροι κατὰ τὸν νόμον εἰσί. λαβὲ δὴ καὶ τοῦτον, καὶ ἀναγίγνωσκε αὐτοῖς. 〈Νόμος〉 ἐὰν μὴ ὦσιν ἀνεψιοὶ μηδὲ ἀνεψιῶν παῖδες, μηδὲ τοῦ πρὸς πατρὸς γένους ᾖ προσήκων μηδείς, τότε ἀπέδωκε τοῖς πρὸς μητρός, διορίσας οὓς δεῖ κρατεῖν. λαβὲ δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ τοῦτον τὸν νόμον καὶ ἀνάγνωθι.
Clause of the Law Under this clause the sister and the nephew share and share alike. Now take this clause and read it to the court. Clause of the Law If there are no first cousins or their children or other relatives on the father's side, then the law gives the right of inheritance to the relatives on the mother's side, specifying the order of succession. Now take this clause and read it to the court.
§ 23
Νόμος ταῦτα τῶν νόμων κελευόντων ὁ μὲν ἀνὴρ ὢν οὐδὲ μέρους εἴληχεν, οἱ δʼ ὑπὲρ ταύτης, τῆς γυναικός, ἁπάντων· οὕτω τὴν ἀναίδειαν οὐδεμίαν ζημίαν εἶναι νομίζουσι. καὶ ὑπὲρ τούτων τολμήσουσι καὶ τοῖς λόγοις χρῆσθαι τοιούτοις, ὡς αὐτοῖς ὅλου τοῦ κλήρου ληκτέον, ὅτι Θρασύβουλος ἐκποίητος εἰς τὸν οἶκον τὸν Ἱππολοχίδου γέγονε, λέγοντες τοῦτο μὲν ἀληθές, ἐκεῖνο δʼ οὐ προσῆκον·
Clause of the Law Such being the provisions of the law, Thrasybulus, a male relative, has not claimed even a portion of the estate, but those who are acting for this woman, a female relative, have claimed the whole of it; so persuaded are they that loss of honor is no loss. With this object, to prove that the whole estate ought to be awarded to them, they will have the impudence to use the argument that Thrasybulus has been adopted out of his own family into that of Hippolochides. While the fact is true, the conclusion drawn from it does not apply.
§ 24
τί γὰρ ἧττον αὐτῷ τῆς συγγενείας ταύτης προσῆκεν; οὐ γὰρ κατὰ τὸν πατέρα ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὴν μητέρα καὶ τῶν Ἀπολλοδώρου τοῦ Εὐπόλιδος ὑέος τὸ μέρος εἴληφε· καὶ τῶνδε ἐξῆν αὐτῷ κατὰ ταύτην τὴν συγγένειαν λαγχάνειν, ὄντι προτέρῳ ταύτης, εἴπερ τὰ πεπραγμένα μὴ κυρίως ἔχειν ἐνόμιζεν. ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἔστιν ἀναίσχυντος.
For what detriment was caused by this adoption to the bond of kinship which is in question? For it was not in the right of his father but in that of his mother that he has received half the estate of Apollodorus (II.), the son of Eupolis; and by this right of kinship he might have claimed the estate now in dispute, since he has a claim prior to that of this woman, if he thought that the act of adoption was not valid;
§ 25
μητρὸς δʼ οὐδείς ἐστιν ἐκποίητος, ἀλλʼ ὁμοίως ὑπάρχει τὴν αὐτὴν εἶναι μητέρα, κἂν ἐν τῷ πατρῴῳ μένῃ τις οἴκῳ κἂν ἐκποιηθῇ. διὸ τῶν Ἀπολλοδώρου χρημάτων οὐκ ἀπεστερήθη τοῦ μέρους, ἀλλὰ μετειλήφει τὸ ἡμικλήριον, πρὸς ταύτην νειμάμενος. ὡς δʼ ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μοι τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
he is not, however, so devoid of honor. Now the act of adoption into another family does not detach a son from his mother; she is his mother just the same, whether he remains in his father's house or is adopted out of it. That is why Thrasybulus was not deprived of his share of the fortune of Apollodorus (II.), but has received half of it, sharing it with this woman. And to prove that I am speaking the truth, please call the witnesses to these facts.
§ 26
Μάρτυρες οὕτω μὲν οὐχ οἱ γεννῆται μόνον καὶ φράτορες γεγόνασι μάρτυρες τῆς ἐμῆς ποιήσεως, ἀλλὰ καὶ Θρασύβουλος οὐκ ἀμφισβητῶν αὐτὸς ἔργῳ δεδήλωκεν ὅτι τὰ πεπραγμένα Ἀπολλοδώρῳ κυρίως ἔχειν νομίζει καὶ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους· οὐ γὰρ ἄν ποτε τοσούτων χρημάτων οὐκ ἐλάγχανε. γεγόνασι δὲ ὅμως καὶ ἄλλοι μάρτυρες αὐτῶν.
Witnesses Thus not only have the members of the families and of the ward borne testimony to my adoption, but also Thrasybulus has made it clear, by his conduct in not himself claiming the estate, that he considers the acts of Apollodorus to be valid and in conformity with the laws; for otherwise he would not fail now to claim so large a fortune. But there have been other witnesses to these facts.
§ 27
πρὶν γὰρ ἐμὲ ἥκειν ἐκ τῆς Πυθαίδος, ἔλεγε πρὸς τοὺς δημότας Ἀπολλόδωρος ὅτι πεποιημένος εἴη με ὑὸν καὶ ἐγγεγραφὼς εἰς τοὺς συγγενεῖς καὶ φράτορας, καὶ παραδεδώκοι τὴν οὐσίαν, καὶ διεκελεύεθʼ ὅπως, ἄν τι πάθῃ πρότερον, ἐγγράψουσί με εἰς τὸ ληξιαρχικὸν γραμματεῖον Θράσυλλον Ἀπολλοδώρου καὶ μὴ ὡς ἄλλως ποιήσουσι.
For before my return from the Pythaid festival, Apollodorus informed his fellow demesmen that he had adopted me as his son and had registered me with the members of the families and of the ward and had committed his property to my care, and he begged them, if anything should happen to him before my return, to enroll me on the public register as Thrasyllus the son of Apollodorus and not to fail him in the matter.
§ 28
κἀκεῖνοι ταῦτα ἀκούσαντες, τούτων ἐν ἀρχαιρεσίαις κατηγορούντων καὶ λεγόντων ὡς οὐκ ἐποιήσατό με ὑόν, καὶ ἐξ ὧν ἤκουσαν καὶ ἐξ ὧν ᾔδεσαν, ὀμόσαντες καθʼ ἱερῶν ἐνέγραψάν με, καθάπερ ἐκεῖνος ἐκέλευε· τοσαύτη περιφάνεια τῆς ἐμῆς ποιήσεως ἐγένετο παρʼ αὐτοῖς. ὡς δʼ ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μοι τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
Having heard this expression of his wishes, although our opponents complained at the electoral meeting of the deme and declared that Apollodorus had not adopted me, the members, as a result of what they had heard and from their own knowledge of the facts, took the oath over the victims and registered my name in accordance with Apollodorus's injunctions; so notorious among them was the fact of my adoption. And to prove the truth of my statements, please call the witnesses to these facts.
§ 29
Μάρτυρες ἐπὶ μὲν τοσούτων μαρτύρων, ὦ ἄνδρες, γέγονεν ἡ ποίησις, ἔχθρας μὲν παλαιᾶς αὐτῷ πρὸς τούτους οὔσης, φιλίας δὲ πρὸς ἡμᾶς καὶ συγγενείας οὐ μικρᾶς ὑπαρχούσης. ὡς δʼ οὐδʼ εἰ μηδέτερον τούτων ὑπῆρχε, μήτε ἔχθρα πρὸς τούτους μήτε φιλία πρὸς ἡμᾶς, οὐκ ἄν ποτε Ἀπολλόδωρος ἐπὶ τούτοις τὸν κλῆρον τοῦτον κατέλιπεν, οἶμαι καὶ ταῦθʼ ὑμῖν ῥᾳδίως ἐπιδείξειν.
Witnesses It was before all these witnesses, gentlemen, that my adoption took place, at a time when an inveterate enmity existed between Apollodorus and my opponent, and a close friendship as well as kinship between Apollodorus and us. But it is, I think, quite easy to prove to you, that, even if he had had neither of these sentiments—enmity towards my opponents and affection towards us—Apollodorus would never have left his estate to them.
§ 30
πάντες γὰρ οἱ τελευτήσειν μέλλοντες πρόνοιαν ποιοῦνται σφῶν αὐτῶν, ὅπως μὴ ἐξερημώσουσι τοὺς σφετέρους αὐτῶν οἴκους, ἀλλʼ ἔσται τις [καὶ] ὁ ἐναγιῶν καὶ πάντα τὰ νομιζόμενα αὐτοῖς ποιήσων· διὸ κἂν ἄπαιδες τελευτήσωσιν, ἀλλʼ οὖν ποιησάμενοι καταλείπουσι. καὶ οὐ μόνον ἰδίᾳ ταῦτα γιγνώσκουσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ δημοσίᾳ τὸ κοινὸν τῆς πόλεως οὕτω ταῦτʼ ἔγνωκε· νόμῳ γὰρ τῷ ἄρχοντι τῶν οἴκων, ὅπως ἂν μὴ ἐξερημῶνται, προστάττει τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν.
All men, when they are near their end, take measures of precaution on their own behalf to prevent their families from becoming extinct and to secure that there shall be someone to perform sacrifices and carry out the customary rites over them. And so, even if they die without issue, they at any rate adopt children and leave them behind. And there is not merely a personal feeling in favor of this course, but the state has taken public measures to secure that it shall be followed, since by law it entrusts the archon with the duty of preventing families from being extinguished.
§ 31
ἐκείνῳ δὲ πρόδηλον ἦν ὅτι εἰ καταλείψει τὸν κλῆρον ἐπὶ τούτοις, ἔρημον ποιήσει τὸν οἶκον, τί προορῶντι; ταύτας τὰς ἀδελφὰς τὸν μὲν Ἀπολλοδώρου τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ κλῆρον ἐχούσας, ἐκείνῳ δʼ οὐκ εἰσποιούσας ὄντων αὐταῖς παίδων, καὶ τοὺς μὲν ἄνδρας αὐτῶν τὴν γῆν, ἣν ἐκεῖνος κατέλιπε, καὶ τὰ κτήματα πέντε ταλάντων πεπρακότας καὶ τὸ ἀργύριον διανειμαμένους, τὸν δὲ οἶκον αἰσχρῶς οὕτω καὶ δεινῶς ἐξηρημωμένον.
Now it was quite clear to Apollodorus that, if he left his estate in the hands of my opponents, he would be securing the extinction of his house. For what did he see before his eyes? He saw that these sisters of Apollodorus (II.) inherited their brother's estate, but never gave him a son by adoption, though they had sons of their own, and that their husbands had sold the landed property which he left behind him and his possessions for five talents and divided up the proceeds, but that his house had been left shamefully and deplorably desolate. Knowing that their brother had been treated thus, could he himself have ever expected, even if there had been friendship between him and them, to receive the customary rites from them, being only their cousin and not their brother?
§ 32
ὃς δὴ ταῦτʼ ᾔδει τὸν τούτων ἀδελφὸν πεπονθότα, πῶς ἂν προσεδόκησεν αὐτός, εἰ καὶ φίλος ἦν, τυχεῖν τῶν νομιζομένων ὑπʼ αὐτῶν, ἀνεψιὸς ὢν ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἀδελφὸς αὐταῖς; οὐκ ἐνῆν ἐλπίσαι δήπουθεν. ἀλλὰ μὴν ὅτι ἄπαιδα ἐκεῖνον περιεωράκασι καὶ τὰ χρήματα ἔχουσι καὶ οἶκον ἐκ τοῦ φανεροῦ τριηραρχοῦντα ἀνῃρήκασι, κάλει μοι καὶ τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
Surely he could have no such expectation. And now please summon the witnesses to show that my opponents have viewed with indifference their brother's childlessness, and are in possession of his fortune, and have allowed a family to die out which was obviously capable of supporting the expense of a trierarchy.
§ 33
Μάρτυρες εἰ τοίνυν καὶ τοιοῦτοι τὰς φύσεις περὶ ἀλλήλους εἰσὶ καὶ ἔχθραι πρὸς Ἀπολλόδωρον τὸν ἐμὲ ποιησάμενον ὑπῆρχον αὐτοῖς τηλικαῦται τὸ μέγεθος, τί βέλτιον ἂν ἔπραξεν ἢ ταῦτα βουλευσάμενος ἅπερ ἐποίησεν; εἰ νὴ Δία παιδίον ἐποιήσατο λαβὼν παρά του τῶν φίλων ὄντων, καὶ τούτῳ τὴν οὐσίαν ἔδωκεν; ἀλλὰ [καὶ] τοῦτʼ ἦν ἄδηλον καὶ τοῖς γεννήσασιν, εἴτε σπουδαῖον εἴτε μηδενὸς ἄξιον ἔμελλεν ἔσεσθαι, διὰ τὴν ἡλικίαν.
Witnesses Since such was the disposition of the cousins towards one another and so grave the resentment towards Apollodorus who adopted me, how could he have done better than follow the course which he did? Would he, in Heaven's name, have done better if he had chosen a child from the family of one of his friends and adopted him and given him his property? But even such a child's own parents would not have known, owing to his youth, whether he would turn out a good man or worthless.
§ 34
ἐμοῦ δὲ πεῖραν εἰλήφει, δοκιμασίαν ἱκανὴν λαβών. εἴς τε γὰρ τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα οἷος ἦν ἀκριβῶς ᾔδει, τῶν τʼ οἰκείων ἐπιμελῆ καὶ τἀμαυτοῦ πράττειν ἐπιστάμενον· ἐν ἀρχῇ τε, θεσμοθετήσας, ὡς ἐγενόμην οὐκ ἄδικος οὐδὲ πλεονέκτης, ἠπίστατο σαφῶς. ὥστʼ οὐκ ἀγνοῶν ἀλλὰ σαφῶς εἰδὼς ἐποίει με τῶν αὑτοῦ κύριον.
On the other hand, he had had experience of me, having sufficiently tested me; he well knew what had been my behavior towards my father and mother, my care for my relatives and my capacity for managing my own affairs. He was well aware that in my official capacity as thesmothete I have been neither unjust nor rapacious. It was then not in ignorance, but with full knowledge, that he was making me master of his property.
§ 35
καὶ μὴν οὐδὲ ἀλλότριον ἀλλʼ ὄντα ἀδελφιδοῦν, οὐδʼ αὖ μικρὰ πεπονθὼς ἀλλὰ μεγάλα ἀγαθὰ ὑφʼ ἡμῶν, οὐδʼ αὖ ἀφιλότιμον, ὃς τὰ ὄντα ἀφανιεῖν ἔμελλον ὥσπερ οὗτοι τὰ τοῦ κλήρου πεποιήκασιν, ἀλλὰ βουλησόμενον καὶ τριηραρχεῖν καὶ πολεμεῖν καὶ χορηγεῖν καὶ πάνθʼ ὑμῖν τὰ προσταττόμενα ποιεῖν, ὥσπερ κἀκεῖνος.
Further, I was no stranger but his own nephew; the services which I had rendered him were not unimportant but very considerable; he knew that I was not a man devoid of public spirit, who would be likely to squander his possessions, as my opponents have squandered the property which composes the estate, but that I should be anxious to act as a trierarch and go on service and act as choregus and do everything else that the state requires, as he himself had done.
§ 36
καίτοι εἰ καὶ συγγενὴς καὶ φίλος καὶ εὐεργέτης καὶ φιλότιμος καὶ δεδοκιμασμένος ὑπῆρχον τοιοῦτος εἶναι, τίς 〈ἂν〉 ἀμφισβητήσειε μὴ οὐκ ἀνδρὸς εὖ φρονοῦντος εἶναι ταύτην τὴν ποίησιν; ἐγὼ τοίνυν ἕν γε τῶν ὑπʼ ἐκείνου δοκιμασθέντων ἤδη πεποίηκα· γεγυμνασιάρχηκα γὰρ εἰς Προμήθεια τοῦδε τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ φιλοτίμως, ὡς οἱ φυλέται πάντες ἴσασιν. ὡς δʼ ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μοι τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
Since I was his kinsman, his friend, his benefactor, and a man of public spirit, and had been approved as such, who could maintain that my adoption was not the act of a man of sound judgement? Indeed, I have already performed one of those acts, the promise of which had won his approval; for I have acted as gymnasiarch at the festival of Prometheus in the present year with a liberality which all my fellow-tribesmen acknowledge. Please call the witnesses to prove that these statements are true.
§ 37
Μάρτυρες τὰ μὲν ἡμέτερα δίκαια, καθʼ ἃ προσηκόντως ἔχειν φαμὲν τὸν κλῆρον, ταῦτʼ ἐστίν, ὦ ἄνδρες· δεόμεθα δʼ ὑμῶν βοηθεῖν ἡμῖν καὶ ἕνεκα Ἀπολλοδώρου καὶ ἕνεκα τοῦ ἐκείνου πατρός· οὐ γὰρ ἀχρήστους αὐτοὺς εὑρήσετε πολίτας, ἀλλʼ ὡς οἷόν τʼ εἰς τὰ ὑμέτερα προθυμοτάτους.
Witnesses These, gentlemen, are the just grounds on which we claim that we are entitled to keep the estate; and we beseech you to help us for the sake of Apollodorus and his father, for you will find that they were useful citizens and as zealous as possible for your interests.
§ 38
ὁ μὲν γὰρ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ τάς τε ἄλλας ἁπάσας λῃτουργίας λελῃτούργηκε, καὶ τριηραρχῶν τὸν πάντα χρόνον διετέλεσεν, οὐκ ἐκ συμμορίας [τὴν ναῦν ποιησάμενος] ὥσπερ οἱ νῦν, ἀλλʼ ἐκ τῶν αὑτοῦ δαπανῶν, οὐδὲ δεύτερος αὐτὸς ὢν ἀλλὰ κατὰ μόνας, οὐδὲ δύο ἔτη διαλιπὼν ἀλλὰ συνεχῶς, οὐδʼ ἀφοσιούμενος ἀλλʼ ὡς οἷόν τʼ ἄριστα παρασκευαζόμενος. ἀνθʼ ὧν ὑμεῖς κἀκεῖνον ἐτιμᾶτε, μεμνημένοι τούτων τῶν ἔργων, καὶ τὸν ὑὸν αὐτοῦ τῶν χρημάτων ἀποστερούμενον ἐσώσατε, τοὺς ἔχοντας ἀποδοῦναι τὰ ὄντʼ αὐτῷ καταναγκάσαντες.
His father not only performed all the other state services but also acted continuously as a trierarch, not contributing jointly with several others, as is the practice nowadays, but bearing the expenses out of his own fortune, and not jointly with one other but by himself alone; nor did he intermit his duties for two years but served continuously, not performing his duties in a perfunctory manner but providing the most perfect equipment. Wherefore, mindful of these services you honored him and saved his son when he was being robbed of his fortune, forcing those who were in possession of his property to restore it.
§ 39
καὶ μὴν καὶ αὐτὸς Ἀπολλόδωρος οὐχ ὥσπερ Προνάπης ἀπεγράψατο μὲν τίμημα μικρόν, ὡς ἱππάδα δὲ τελῶν ἄρχειν ἠξίου τὰς ἀρχάς, οὐδὲ βίᾳ μὲν ἐζήτει τὰ ἀλλότριʼ ἔχειν, ὑμᾶς δʼ ᾤετο δεῖν μηδὲν ὠφελεῖν, ἀλλὰ φανερὰ τὰ ὄντα καταστήσας ὑμῖν, ὅσα προστάττοιτε, πάνθʼ ὑπηρέτει [φιλοτίμως] οὐδέν τʼ ἀδικῶν ἐκ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ φιλοτίμως ἐπειρᾶτο ζῆν, εἰς αὑτὸν μὲν τὰ μέτρια ἀναλίσκειν οἰόμενος δεῖν, τὰ δʼ ἄλλα τῇ πόλει περιποιεῖν, ἵνα ἐξαρκοίη πρὸς τὰς δαπάνας.
Again, Apollodorus himself did not, like Pronapes, assess his property below its value, but, paying taxes as a knight, aspired to hold the offices open to that rank, nor did he seek to possess himself by violence of the property of others and think that you ought to have no advantage from his wealth, but he openly declared the amount of his fortune and met whatever demands for service you made upon him, and wronging no man he tried to live honorably on his own fortune, considering that he ought to be moderate in his personal expenditure and dedicate the surplus to the service of the state, so that it might meet its expenses.
§ 40
κἀκ τούτων τίνα λῃτουργίαν οὐκ ἐξελῃτούργησεν; ἢ τίνα εἰσφορὰν οὐκ ἐν πρώτοις εἰσήνεγκεν; ἢ τί παραλέλοιπεν ὧν προσῆκεν; ὅς γε καὶ παιδικῷ χορῷ χορηγῶν ἐνίκησεν, ὧν μνημεῖα τῆς ἐκείνου φιλοτιμίας ὁ τρίπους ἐκεῖνος ἕστηκε. καίτοι τί χρὴ τὸν μέτριον πολίτην; οὐχ οὗ μὲν ἕτεροι τὰ μὴ προσήκοντʼ ἐβιάζοντο λαμβάνειν, τούτων μηδὲν ποιεῖν, τὰ δʼ ἑαυτοῦ πειρᾶσθαι σώζειν; οὗ δʼ ἡ πόλις δεῖται χρημάτων, ἐν πρώτοις εἰσφέρειν καὶ μηδὲν ἀποκρύπτεσθαι τῶν ὄντων;
As a result of these principles, what public service did he fail perfectly to discharge? To what war-tax was he not among the first to contribute? What duty has he ever failed to perform? When he undertook the provision of a choir of boys, he was victorious in the competition, and the well-known tripod still stands as a memorial of his honorable ambition. And what is the duty of a respectable citizen? Was it not his duty, while others were trying to take by force what did not belong to him, to do no such thing himself but to try and preserve what was his own? Is it not his duty, when the state needs money, to be among the first to contribute and not to conceal any part of his fortune?
§ 41
ἐκεῖνος τοίνυν τοιοῦτος ἦν· ἀνθʼ ὧν δικαίως ἂν αὐτῷ ταύτην τὴν χάριν ἀποδοίητε, τὴν ἐκείνου γνώμην περὶ τῶν αὑτοῦ κυρίαν εἶναι ποιήσαντες. καὶ μὴν καὶ ἐμέ γε, ὅσα κατὰ τὴν ἐμὴν ἡλικίαν, εὑρήσετε οὐ κακὸν οὐδὲ ἄχρηστον. ἐστράτευμαι τὰς στρατείας τῇ πόλει, τὰ προσταττόμενα ποιῶ· τοῦτο γὰρ τῶν τηλικούτων ἔργον ἐστί.
Such then was Apollodorus; and you would make a just return for his services if you ratified his intentions as to the disposal of his own property. As for myself, you will find me, as far as my youth allows, neither a bad nor a useless citizen. I have served on your military expeditions, I perform all the duties which are laid upon me; for this is the function of men of my age.
§ 42
καὶ ἐκείνων οὖν ἕνεκα καὶ ἡμῶν εἰκότως ἂν ποιήσαισθε πρόνοιαν, ἄλλως τε καὶ τούτων τριηραρχοῦντα οἶκον πεντετάλαντον ἀνῃρηκότων καὶ πεπρακότων καὶ ἔρημον πεποιηκότων, ἡμῶν δὲ καὶ λελῃτουργηκότων ἤδη καὶ λῃτουργησόντων, ἂν ὑμεῖς ἐπικυρώσητε τὴν Ἀπολλοδώρου γνώμην ἀποδόντες ἡμῖν τοῦτον τὸν κλῆρον.
For the sake, then, of Apollodorus and his father and for the sake of me and my family you would be justified in considering our case with benevolence, especially since our adversaries have made away with and sold an estate that supported the trierarchy and reduced it to desolation, whereas we have already supported public burdens and will continue to do so in the future, if you ratify the intentions of Apollodorus by restoring to us this estate.
§ 43
ἵνα δὲ μὴ δοκῶ διατρίβειν περὶ ταῦτα ποιούμενος τοὺς λόγους, βούλομαι διὰ βραχέων ὑμᾶς ὑπομνήσας οὕτω καταβαίνειν, τί ἑκάτερος ἡμῶν ἀξιοῖ, δηλώσας. ἐγὼ μὲν ἀδελφῆς οὔσης τῆς ἐμῆς μητρὸς Ἀπολλοδώρῳ, φιλίας αὐτοῖς πολλῆς ὑπαρχούσης, ἔχθρας δʼ οὐδεμιᾶς πώποτε γενομένης, ἀδελφιδοῦς ὢν καὶ ποιηθεὶς ὑὸς ὑπʼ ἐκείνου ζῶντος καὶ εὖ φρονοῦντος, καὶ εἰς τοὺς γεννήτας καὶ φράτορας ἐγγραφείς, ἔχειν τὰ δοθέντα, καὶ μὴ ἐπὶ τούτοις 〈εἶναι〉 ἐξερημῶσαι τὸν οἶκον τὸν ἐκείνου· Προνάπης δὲ τί ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀμφισβητούσης;
But, in order that I may not seem tedious by dwelling any longer on these facts, I should like, before I step down, to lay before you, by way of brief reminder, the points on which each party bases its claim. My mother was Apollodorus's sister, and a close affection, never interrupted by any quarrel, existed between them; being his nephew and having been adopted by him as his son during his lifetime and when he was in full possession of his faculties, and having been registered with the members of the families and of the ward, I claim to possess the estate which he gave me and demand that my opponents should not be in a position to make his house desolate. What does Pronapes claim on behalf of the plaintiff?
§ 44
ἔχειν μὲν τοῦ τῆς γυναικὸς ἀδελφοῦ τιμὴν τοῦ ἡμικληρίου πένθʼ ἡμιτάλαντα, λαβεῖν δὲ καὶ τόνδε τὸν κλῆρον ἑτέρων ταῖς ἀγχιστείαις προτέρων αὐτοῦ τῆς γυναικὸς ὄντων, οὔτʼ ἐκείνῳ παῖδα εἰσπεποιηκὼς ἀλλὰ τὸν οἶκον ἐξηρημωκώς, οὔτε τούτῳ ἂν εἰσποιήσας, ἀλλʼ ὁμοίως ἂν καὶ τοῦτον ἐξερημώσας, καὶ ἔχθρας μὲν τηλικαύτης ὑπαρχούσης αὐτοῖς, διαλλαγῆς δὲ οὐδεμιᾶς πώποτε ὕστερον γενομένης.
He claims to keep half of the estate of his wife's brother, valued at two-and-a-half talents, and also to receive this estate, although there are others more nearly related to the deceased than his wife; yet he has not given him a son by posthumous adoption but has left his house desolate, and he would similarly fail to give Apollodorus a son by adoption and would leave his house likewise desolate; and he makes this claim although such enmity existed between them and no subsequent reconciliation took place.
§ 45
ταῦτα χρὴ σκοπεῖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, κἀκεῖνο ἐνθυμεῖσθαι, ὅτι ἐγὼ μὲν ἀδελφιδοῦς αὐτῷ, ἡ δὲ ἀνεψιὰ τοῦ τελευτήσαντος, καὶ ὅτι ἡ μὲν δύʼ ἔχειν ἀξιοῖ κλήρους, ἐγὼ δὲ τοῦτον μόνον εἰς ὅνπερ εἰσεποιήθην, καὶ ὅτι αὕτη μὲν οὐκ εὔνους τῷ καταλιπόντι τὸν κλῆρον, ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ ὁ ἐμὸς πάππος εὐεργέται γεγόναμεν αὐτοῦ. ταῦτα πάντα σκεψάμενοι καὶ διαλογιζόμενοι πρὸς ὑμᾶς αὐτοὺς τίθεσθε τὴν ψῆφον ᾗ δίκαιόν ἐστι. οὐκ οἶδʼ ὅτι δεῖ πλείω λέγειν· οἶμαι γὰρ ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ἀγνοεῖν τῶν εἰρημένων.
You must take these facts into consideration, gentlemen, and remember that I am the nephew of the deceased, while the plaintiff is only his cousin; that she claims two estates, I claim only one, to which I have a right by adoption; that she was not on good terms with him who left the property, whereas I and my grandfather have been his benefactors. Having considered all these points and weighing them in your own minds, give your verdict in accordance with justice. I do not know of anything more that I need say; for I think that no part of my argument has escaped your attention.
On The Estate of Ciron · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg008 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Κίρωνος κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg008.perseus-grc2 · English: On The Estate of Ciron — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg008.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Κίρωνος ἄπαιδος γνησίων τελευτήσαντος παίδων ἀδελφιδοῦς τις αὐτοῦ κατὰ πατέρα ἀντιποιηθεὶς τοῦ κλήρου παρέλαβε τὴν οὐσίαν αὐτοῦ παρὰ τῆς γυναικός· καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ὁ λέγων τὸν λόγον γράφεται τὸν ἀδελφιδοῦν, φάσκων θυγατριδοῦς εἶναι Κίρωνος, καὶ ὅτι ἡ γυνὴ τοῦ τετελευτηκότος ἑκοῦσα προέδωκε τὸν κλῆρον τῷ ἀδελφιδῷ, ἵνα μέρος δοῦσα αὐτῷ τὰ λοιπὰ κερδάνῃ. καὶ ἡ μὲν ὑπόθεσις αὕτη, ἡ στάσις δὲ στοχασμός· ζητεῖται γὰρ εἴτε θυγατριδοῦς ἐστιν οὗτος τοῦ Κίρωνος γνήσιος εἴτε οὔ. ἐπιπλέκεται δʼ αὐτῷ καὶ ἡ κατὰ ποιότητα ζήτησις. ὁ γὰρ ἀδελφιδοῦς ἠγωνίζετο, λέγων ὅτι εἰ καὶ δῶμεν ἐκείνην γνησίαν εἶναι θυγατέρα Κίρωνος, ἐπειδὴ ἐτελεύτησεν ἐκείνη, ὁ δʼ υἱὸς αὐτῆς ἀμφισβητεῖ νῦν, προτιμητέος ἐστὶν ὁ κατὰ πατέρα ἀδελφιδοῦς τοῦ ἀπὸ θυγατρὸς ἐκγόνου, κατὰ τὸν νόμον ἐκεῖνον, τὸν κελεύοντα προτιμᾶσθαι τοὺς ἀπὸ τῶν ἀρρένων τῶν ἀπὸ τῶν θηλειῶν. οὗτος γὰρ τεχνικώτατα πάνυ σιωπήσας τοῦτον τὸν νόμον, ἐκ τῆς τῶν τεκόντων διαφορᾶς ἀγωνίζεται, δεικνὺς ὅτι ὅσον θυγάτηρ ἀδελφοῦ οἰκειοτέρα τοῖς τελευτῶσι, τοσοῦτον ἔκγονος ἀδελφιδοῦ διαφέρει. ἔρρωται οὖν ἐνταῦθα τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ ἀσθενεῖ τῷ νομίμῳ· τὴν δὲ ἐργασίαν τῶν κεφαλαίων κατὰ τὴν οἰκείαν πάλιν ἐργάζεται δύναμιν.
Argument Ciron having died without legitimate offspring, his nephew, the son of his brother, claimed his estate and took over the property from the widow. After this the speaker of the present oration indicts the nephew, alleging that he himself is a son of Ciron's daughter and that the wife of the deceased designedly handed over the estate to the nephew with the intention of giving him a part and appropriating the remainder. Such is the subject; the discussion turns on a question of fact, the point at issue being whether the claimant is a legitimate grandson of Ciron or not. A further question is also involved, namely, one of qualification: for the nephew argued that, even if we grant that his opponent's mother is a legitimate daughter of Ciron, since she is dead and it is her son who now claims, the nephew, the son of a brother, ought to have preference over a daughter's issue under the law which ordains that the descendants of males have precedence over those of females. The speaker with great skill completely ignores this law and bases his case upon the different qualifications of the parents, showing that, in as much as a daughter is nearer in kin to the deceased than a brother, so her son has a stronger claim than a brother's son. It is a strong case in equity but a weak case in law. The working out of the various topics is carried out with Isaeus's usual skill.
§ 1
ἐπὶ τοῖς τοιούτοις, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἀνάγκη ἐστὶ χαλεπῶς φέρειν, ὅταν τινὲς μὴ μόνον τῶν ἀλλοτρίων ἀμφισβητεῖν τολμῶσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἐκ τῶν νόμων δίκαια τοῖς σφετέροις αὐτῶν λόγοις ἀφανιεῖν ἐλπίζωσιν· ὅπερ καὶ νῦν οὗτοι ποιεῖν ἐγχειροῦσι. τοῦ γὰρ ἡμετέρου πάππου Κίρωνος οὐκ ἄπαιδος τελευτήσαντος, ἀλλʼ ἡμᾶς ἐκ θυγατρὸς αὑτοῦ γνησίας παῖδας αὑτῷ καταλελοιπότος, οὗτοί τοῦ τε κλήρου λαγχάνουσιν ὡς ἐγγυτάτω γένους ὄντες, ἡμᾶς τε ὑβρίζουσιν ὡς οὐκ ἐξ ἐκείνου θυγατρὸς ὄντας, οὐδὲ γενομένης αὐτῷ πώποτε τὸ παράπαν.
It is impossible, gentlemen, not to feel indignation against men who not only have the impudence to claim the property of others but also hope by their arguments to abolish the rights which the laws confer; and this is what our opponents are now trying to do. For, though our grandfather Ciron did not die childless but has left us behind him, the sons of his legitimate daughter, yet our opponents claim the estate as next-of-kin and insult us by alleging that we are not the issue of his daughter, and indeed that he never had a daughter at all.
§ 2
αἴτιον δὲ τοῦ ταῦτα ποιεῖν αὐτούς ἐστιν ἡ τούτων πλεονεξία 〈καὶ〉 τὸ πλῆθος τῶν χρημάτων ὧν Κίρων μὲν καταλέλοιπεν, οὗτοι δʼ ἔχουσι βιασάμενοι καὶ κρατοῦσι· καὶ τολμῶσιν ἅμα μὲν λέγειν ὡς οὐδὲν καταλέλοιπεν ἐκεῖνος, ἅμα δὲ ποιεῖσθαι τοῦ κλήρου τὴν ἀμφισβήτησιν.
The reason of their acting thus is their avarice, and the high value of the estate which he has left behind him and which they have taken by force and still hold; and they have the impudence both to assert that he has left nothing and at the same time to lay claim to the estate.
§ 3
τὴν μὲν οὖν κρίσιν οὐ δεῖ μοι νομίζειν εἶναι ταύτην πρὸς τὸν εἰληχότα τοῦ κλήρου τὴν δίκην, ἀλλὰ πρὸς Διοκλέα τὸν Φλυέα, τὸν Ὀρέστην ἐπικαλούμενον· οὗτος γάρ ἐστιν ὁ τοῦτον παρασκευάσας πράγμαθʼ ἡμῖν παρέχειν, ἀποστερῶν τὰ χρήματα ἃ Κίρων ὁ πάππος ἀποθνῄσκων κατέλιπεν, ἡμῖν δὲ τούτους τοὺς κινδύνους ἐπάγων, ἵνα μηδὲν ἀποδιδῷ τούτων, ἐὰν ὑμεῖς ἐξαπατηθῆτε πεισθέντες ὑπὸ τῶν τούτου λόγων.
Now you must not imagine that my real opponent in this case is the man who has brought the suit claiming the estate; no, it is Diocles of Phlya, surnamed Orestes. He it is who has suborned our opponent to cause us trouble by trying to deprive us of the fortune which our grandfather left us at his death and exposing us to these dangers, in order that he may not have to give back any of it, if you listen to him and are misled by his words.
§ 4
δεῖ δὴ τούτων τοιαῦτα μηχανωμένων πάνθʼ ὑμᾶς τὰ πεπραγμένα μαθεῖν, ἵνα μηδὲν ἀγνοήσαντες τῶν γεγενημένων ἀλλὰ σαφῶς εἰδότες περὶ αὐτῶν, οὕτως ἐνέγκητε τὴν ψῆφον. εἴ τινι οὖν καὶ ἄλλῃ πώποτε δίκῃ προσέσχετε ἀκριβῶς τὸν νοῦν, δέομαι ὑμῶν καὶ ταύτῃ προσέχειν ὁμοίως, ὥσπερ καὶ τὸ δίκαιόν ἐστι. πολλῶν δὲ δικῶν ἐν τῇ πόλει γενομένων, οὐδένες ἀναιδέστερον τούτων οὐδὲ καταφανέστερον ἀντιποιησάμενοι φανήσονται τῶν ἀλλοτρίων.
Such being their machinations, you must be informed of all the facts, in order that, being well aware of all that has happened, you may give your verdict with perfect knowledge of them. If, therefore, you have ever listened with scrupulous attention to any other case, I beg you to give like attention to this case, as indeed justice demands. Though lawsuits abound in our city, yet it will be shown that no parties have ever claimed the property of others with greater impudence and effrontery than my opponents.
§ 5
ἔστι μὲν οὖν χαλεπόν, ὦ ἄνδρες, πρὸς παρασκευὰς λόγων καὶ μάρτυρας οὐ τἀληθῆ μαρτυροῦντας εἰς ἀγῶνα καθίστασθαι περὶ τηλικούτων, παντάπασιν ἀπείρως ἔχοντα δικαστηρίων· οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ πολλὰς ἐλπίδας ἔχω καὶ παρʼ ὑμῶν τεύξεσθαι τῶν δικαίων καὶ μέχρι γε τοῦ τὰ δίκαια εἰπεῖν καὶ αὐτὸς ἀρκούντως ἐρεῖν, ἂν μή τι συμβῇ τοιοῦτον ὃ νῦν ὑπʼ ἐμοῦ τυγχάνει προσδοκώμενον. δέομαι οὖν ὑμῶν, ὦ ἄνδρες, μετʼ εὐνοίας τέ μου ἀκοῦσαι, κἂν ἠδικῆσθαι δοκῶ, βοηθῆσαί μοι τὰ δίκαια.
It is a difficult task therefore, gentlemen, for one who is wholly without experience of litigation, when such important interests are at stake, to contend against fabricated stories and witnesses whose evidence is false; yet I have great hopes that I shall obtain my rights from you, and that I shall myself speak sufficiently well at least to state what those rights are, unless some such chance should befall me as it is now my lot to anticipate. I beg you, therefore, gentlemen, to listen to me with goodwill, and, if I seem to have been wronged, to aid me to obtain my rights.
§ 6
πρῶτον μὲν οὖν, ὡς ἦν ἡ μήτηρ ἡ ʼμὴ Κίρωνος θυγάτηρ γνησία, ἐπιδείξω τοῦτο ὑμῖν, τὰ μὲν πάλαι γεγενημένα λόγων ἀκοῇ καὶ μαρτύρων, τὰ δʼ ὥστε καὶ μνημονεύεσθαι, τοῖς εἰδόσι χρώμενος μάρτυσιν, ἔτι δὲ τεκμηρίοις ἃ κρείττω τῶν μαρτυριῶν ἐστιν· ἐπειδὰν δὲ ταῦτα φανερὰ καταστήσω, τόθʼ ὡς καὶ κληρονομεῖν μᾶλλον ἡμῖν ἢ τούτοις προσήκει τῶν Κίρωνος χρημάτων. ὅθεν οὖν ἤρξαντο περὶ αὐτῶν, ἐντεῦθεν ὑμᾶς κἀγὼ πειράσομαι διδάσκειν.
First, then, I shall prove to you that my mother was Ciron's legitimate daughter; for events which have happened long ago I shall rely on report and statements which have been heard by witnesses, while for events within living memory I shall employ witnesses who know the facts, and proofs which are better than any evidence. When I have established this, I shall then show that we have a better claim to Ciron's estate than our opponents. Starting, therefore, from the point at which they began their narrative of the events, I, too, shall try and put my version before you.
§ 7
ὁ γὰρ πάππος ὁ ἐμός, ὦ ἄνδρες, Κίρων ἔγημε τὴν ἐμὴν τήθην οὖσαν ἀνεψιάν, ἐξ ἀδελφῆς τῆς αὑτοῦ μητρὸς αὐτὴν γεγενημένην. ἐκείνη μὲν οὖν συνοικήσασα οὐ πολὺν χρόνον, τεκοῦσα αὐτῷ τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα, μετὰ ἐνιαυτοὺς τέτταρας τὸν βίον ἐτελεύτησεν· ὁ δὲ πάππος μιᾶς μόνης οὔσης αὐτῷ θυγατρὸς λαμβάνει πάλιν τὴν Διοκλέους ἀδελφήν, ἐξ ἧς αὐτῷ ἐγιγνέσθην ὑεῖς δύο. καὶ ἐκείνην τε ἔτρεφε παρὰ τῇ γυναικὶ καὶ μετὰ τῶν ἐξ ἐκείνης παίδων,
My grandfather Ciron, gentlemen, married my grandmother, his first cousin, herself the daughter of his own mother's sister. She did not live long with him; she bore my mother, and died after four years. My grandfather, being left with an only daughter, married the sister of DiocIes as his second wife, who bore him two sons. He brought up his daughter in the house with his wife and her children,
§ 8
ἐκείνων τε ἔτι ζώντων, ἐπεὶ συνοικεῖν εἶχεν ἡλικίαν, ἐκδίδωσιν αὐτὴν Ναυσιμένει Χολαργεῖ, σὺν ἱματίοις καὶ χρυσίοις πέντε καὶ εἴκοσι μνᾶς ἐπιδούς. κἀκεῖνος μὲν τρισὶν ἢ τέτταρσιν ἔτεσι μετὰ ταῦτα καμὼν ἀποθνῄσκει, πρὶν αὐτῷ γενέσθαι παῖδας ἐκ τῆς ἡμετέρας μητρός· ὁ δὲ πάππος κομισάμενος αὐτήν, καὶ τὴν προῖκα οὐκ ἀπολαβὼν ὅσην ἔδωκε διὰ τὴν Ναυσιμένους ἀπορίαν τῶν πραγμάτων, πάλιν ἐκδίδωσι τῷ ἐμῷ πατρὶ καὶ χιλίας δραχμὰς προῖκʼ ἐπιδίδωσι.
and while the latter were still alive, he gave her in marriage, when she reached the proper age, to Nausimenes of Cholargus, giving her a dowry of twenty-five minae including raiment and jewelry. Three or four years later Nausimenes fell ill and died without leaving any issue by our mother. My grandfather received her back again—without, however, recovering the dowry which he had given, owing to the embarrassed condition of Nausimenes' affairs—and gave her in a second marriage to my father with a dowry of one thousand drachmae.
§ 9
ταυτὶ δὴ πάντα πρὸς τὰς αἰτίας, ἃς νῦν οὗτοι λέγουσι, πῶς ἄν τις δείξειε γεγενημένα φανερῶς; ἐγὼ ζητῶν ἐξεῦρον. ἀνάγκη τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα, εἴτε θυγάτηρ ἦν Κίρωνος εἴτε μή, καὶ εἰ παρʼ ἐκείνῳ διῃτᾶτο ἢ οὔ, καὶ γάμους εἰ διττοὺς ὑπὲρ ταύτης εἱστίασεν ἢ μή, καὶ προῖκα ἥντινα ἑκάτερος ἐπʼ αὐτῇ τῶν γημάντων ἔλαβε, πάντα ταῦτα εἰδέναι τοὺς οἰκέτας καὶ τὰς θεραπαίνας ἃς ἐκεῖνος ἐκέκτητο.
How is one to prove clearly that all these events occurred in face of the imputations which our opponents are now uttering? I sought and discovered a way. Whether my mother was or was not the daughter of Ciron, whether she lived in his house or not, whether he did or did not on two occasions give a feast in honor of her marriage, and what dowry each of her husbands received with her—all these things must necessarily be known to the male and female slaves who belonged to Ciron.
§ 10
βουλόμενος οὖν πρὸς τοῖς ὑπάρχουσι μάρτυσιν ἔλεγχον ἐκ βασάνων ποιήσασθαι περὶ αὐτῶν, ἵνα μᾶλλον αὐτοῖς πιστεύητε μὴ μέλλουσι δώσειν ἔλεγχον ἀλλʼ ἤδη δεδωκόσι περὶ ὧν μαρτυροῦσι, τούτους ἠξίουν ἐκδοῦναι τὰς θεραπαίνας καὶ τοὺς οἰκέτας περί τε τούτων καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ὅσα τυγχάνουσι συνειδότες.
Wishing, therefore, in addition to the witnesses which I already had, to obtain proof of these facts by evidence given under torture—in order that the veracity of my witnesses might be tested before, and not after, they gave their evidence, and so your belief in them might be confirmed—I demanded that our opponents should surrender the male and female slaves to be put to the question on these points and any others of which they had cognizance.
§ 11
οὗτος δʼ ὁ νῦν ὑμᾶς ἀξιώσων τοῖς αὑτοῦ μάρτυσι πιστεύειν ἔφυγε τὴν βάσανον. καίτοι εἰ φανήσεται ταῦτα ποιῆσαι μὴ θελήσας, τί ὑπολείπεται τοῖς ἐκείνου μάρτυσιν ἢ δοκεῖν νυνὶ τὰ ψευδῆ μαρτυρεῖν, τούτου τηλικοῦτον ἔλεγχον πεφευγότος; ἐγὼ μὲν οἶμαι οὐδέν. ἀλλὰ μὴν ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, λαβέ μοι πρῶτον ταύτην τὴν μαρτυρίαν καὶ ἀνάγνωθι.
My adversary, however, who will presently demand that you shall believe his witnesses, refused the examination under torture. Yet, if he shall be shown to have refused my request, what remains to be thought of his witnesses except that they are giving false evidence, since he has refused so decisive a method of testing them? In my opinion no other conclusion is possible. But to prove that what am saying is true, please first take and read this deposition.
§ 12
Μαρτυρία ὑμεῖς μὲν τοίνυν καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ δημοσίᾳ βάσανον ἀκριβέστατον ἔλεγχον νομίζετε· καὶ ὁπόταν δοῦλοι καὶ ἐλεύθεροι παραγένωνται καὶ δέῃ εὑρεθῆναί τι τῶν ζητουμένων, οὐ χρῆσθε ταῖς τῶν ἐλευθέρων μαρτυρίαις, ἀλλὰ τοὺς δούλους βασανίζοντες, οὕτω ζητεῖτε εὑρεῖν τὴν ἀλήθειαν τῶν γεγενημένων. εἰκότως, ὦ ἄνδρες· σύνιστε γὰρ ὅτι τῶν μὲν μαρτυρησάντων ἤδη τινὲς ἔδοξαν οὐ τἀληθῆ μαρτυρῆσαι, τῶν δὲ βασανισθέντων οὐδένες πώποτε ἐξηλέγχθησαν ὡς οὐκ ἀληθῆ ἐκ τῶν βασάνων εἰπόντες.
Deposition You Athenians hold the opinion that both in public and in private matters examination under torture is the most searching test; and so, when you have slaves and free men before you and it is necessary that some contested point should be cleared up, you do not employ the evidence of free men but seek to establish the truth about the facts by putting the slaves to torture. This is a perfectly reasonable course; for you are well aware that before now witnesses have appeared not to be giving true evidence, whereas no one who has been examined under torture has ever been convicted of giving false evidence as the result of being tortured.
§ 13
οὗτος δʼ ὁ πάντων ἀναισχυντότατος ἀνθρώπων λόγοις πεπλασμένοις καὶ μάρτυσιν οὐ τἀληθῆ μαρτυροῦσιν ἀξιώσει πιστεύειν ὑμᾶς, φεύγων οὕτως ἀκριβεῖς ἐλέγχους; ἀλλʼ οὐχ ἡμεῖς, ἀλλὰ πρότερον ὑπὲρ τῶν μαρτυρηθήσεσθαι μελλόντων ἀξιώσαντες εἰς βασάνους ἐλθεῖν, τούτου δὲ φεύγοντος, οὕτως οἰησόμεθα δεῖν ὑμᾶς τοῖς ἡμετέροις μάρτυσι πιστεύειν. λαβὲ οὖν αὐτοῖς ταυτασὶ τὰς μαρτυρίας καὶ ἀνάγνωθι.
And will my opponent, the most impudent of men, demand that you shall believe his fictitious stories and lying witnesses, while he thus declines so sure a method of proof? Our conduct has been quite different. Seeing that we first demanded that recourse should be had to examination under torture on the points about which evidence was to be given, and my opponent refuses to allow this, under these conditions we shall consider that you ought to believe our witnesses. Take, therefore, these depositions and read them to the court.
§ 14
Μαρτυρίαι τίνας εἰκὸς εἰδέναι τὰ παλαιά; δῆλον ὅτι τοὺς χρωμένους τῷ πάππῳ. μεμαρτυρήκασι τοίνυν ἀκοὴν οὗτοι. τίνας εἰδέναι τὰ περὶ τὴν ἔκδοσιν τῆς μητρὸς ἀνάγκη; τοὺς ἐγγυησαμένους καὶ τοὺς ἐκείνοις παρόντας ὅτε ἠγγυῶντο. μεμαρτυρήκασι τοίνυν οἵ τε Ναυσιμένους προσήκοντες καὶ οἱ τοῦ ἐμοῦ πατρός. τίνες δὲ οἱ τρεφομένην ἔνδον καὶ θυγατέρα οὖσαν εἰδότες γνησίαν Κίρωνος; οἱ νῦν ἀμφισβητοῦντες ἔργῳ φανερῶς μαρτυροῦσιν ὅτι ταῦτʼ ἐστὶν ἀληθῆ, φεύγοντες τὴν βάσανον. ὥστε οὐ δήπου τοῖς ἡμετέροις ἂν ἀπιστήσαιτε εἰκότως, ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον τοῖς τούτων μάρτυσιν.
Depositions Who are likely to be best acquainted with the events of the distant past? Obviously those who were intimate with my grandfather; they, then, have given evidence of what was told them. Who must necessarily know the facts about the giving of my mother in marriage? Those who betrothed her and those who were present when they betrothed her; the relatives, then, of Nausimenes and of my father have given their evidence. Who know best that my mother was brought up in Ciron's house and was his legitimate daughter? The present claimants clearly give evidence of the truth of these facts by their action in declining to put the slaves to torture. Thus, I think, you have much better reason for disbelieving their witnesses than mine.
§ 15
ἡμεῖς τοίνυν καὶ ἄλλα τεκμήρια πρὸς τούτοις ἔχομεν εἰπεῖν, [ἵνα γνώσεσθε] ὅτι ἐκ θυγατρὸς ἡμεῖς Κίρωνός ἐσμεν. οἷα γὰρ εἰκὸς παίδων ὄντων ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ θυγατρός, οὐδεπώποτε θυσίαν ἄνευ ἡμῶν οὐδεμίαν ἐποίησεν, ἀλλʼ εἴ τε μικρὰ εἴ τε μεγάλα θύοι, πανταχοῦ παρῆμεν ἡμεῖς καὶ συνεθύομεν. καὶ οὐ μόνον εἰς τὰ τοιαῦτα παρεκαλούμεθα, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἰς Διονύσια εἰς ἀγρὸν ἦγεν ἀεὶ ἡμᾶς,
Now there are other proofs which we can bring forward to show that we are the children of Ciron's daughter. For, as was natural, seeing that we were the sons of his own daughter, Ciron never offered a sacrifice without our presence; whether he was performing a great or small sacrifice, we were always there and took part in the ceremony. And not only were we invited to such rites but he also always took us into the country for the Dionysia,
§ 16
καὶ μετʼ ἐκείνου τε ἐθεωροῦμεν καθήμενοι παρʼ αὐτόν, καὶ τὰς ἑορτὰς ἤγομεν παρʼ ἐκεῖνον πάσας· τῷ Διί τε θύων τῷ Κτησίῳ, περὶ ἣν μάλιστʼ ἐκεῖνος θυσίαν ἐσπούδαζε καὶ οὔτε δούλους προσῆγεν οὔτε ἐλευθέρους ὀθνείους, ἀλλʼ αὐτὸς διʼ ἑαυτοῦ πάντʼ ἐποίει, ταύτης ἡμεῖς ἐκοινωνοῦμεν καὶ τὰ ἱερὰ συνεχειρουργοῦμεν καὶ συνεπετίθεμεν καὶ τἆλλα συνεποιοῦμεν, καὶ ηὔχετο ἡμῖν ὑγίειαν διδόναι καὶ κτῆσιν ἀγαθήν, ὥσπερ εἰκὸς ὄντα πάππον.
and we always went with him to public spectacles and sat at his side, and we went to his house to keep all the festivals; and when he sacrificed to Zeus Ctesius—a festival to which he attached a special importance, to which he admitted neither slaves nor free men outside his own family, at which he personally performed all the rites—we participated in this celebration and laid our hands with his upon the victims and placed our offerings side by side with his, and took part in all the other rites, and he prayed for our health and wealth, as he naturally would, being our grandfather.
§ 17
καίτοι εἰ μὴ θυγατριδοῦς ἡμᾶς ἐνόμιζεν εἶναι καὶ μόνους ἐκγόνους ἑώρα λοιποὺς καταλελειμμένους αὑτῷ, οὐκ ἄν ποτε ἐποίει τούτων οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ τόνδʼ ἂν αὑτῷ παρίστατο, ὃς ἀδελφιδοῦς αὐτοῦ νῦν εἶναι φησί. καὶ ταῦθʼ ὅτι ἀληθῆ πάντʼ ἐστίν, ἀκριβέστατα μὲν οἱ τοῦ πάππου θεράποντες ἴσασιν, οὓς οὗτος παραδοῦναι εἰς βάσανον οὐκ ἠθέλησεν, ἴσασι δὲ περιφανέστατα καὶ τῶν ἐκείνῳ χρωμένων τινές, οὓς παρέξομαι μάρτυρας. καί μοι λαβὲ τὰς μαρτυρίας καὶ ἀνάγνωθι.
Yet if he had not regarded us as his daughter's children and seen in us his only surviving lineal descendants, he would have done none of these things but would have placed at his side my opponent, who now claims to be his nephew. And that I am telling the truth on all these points is well known to my grandfather's attendants, whom my opponent refused to give up to be questioned; the same facts are perfectly well known to some of his intimate friends also, whose evidence I will produce. Please take and read the depositions.
§ 18
Μαρτυρίαι οὐ τοίνυν ἐκ τούτων δῆλόν ἐστι μόνον ὅτι ἦν ἡμῶν ἡ μήτηρ θυγάτηρ γνησία Κίρωνος, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν ἔπραξε καὶ ἐξ ὧν αἱ γυναῖκες αἱ τῶν δημοτῶν περὶ αὐτῆς ἐγίγνωσκον. ὅτε γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ αὐτὴν ἐλάμβανε, γάμους εἱστίασε καὶ ἐκάλεσε τρεῖς αὑτοῦ φίλους μετὰ τῶν αὑτοῦ προσηκόντων, τοῖς τε φράτορσι γαμηλίαν εἰσήνεγκε κατὰ τοὺς ἐκείνων νόμους.
Depositions But it is not only from these proofs that our mother is clearly shown to be the legitimate daughter of Ciron; but there is also the evidence of our father's conduct and the attitude adopted by the wives of his fellow-demesmen towards her. When our father took her in marriage, he gave a wedding-feast and invited three of his friends as well as his relatives, and he gave a marriage-banquet to the members of his ward according to their statutes.
§ 19
αἵ τε γυναῖκες αἱ τῶν δημοτῶν μετὰ ταῦτα προὔκριναν αὐτὴν μετὰ τῆς Διοκλέους γυναικὸς τοῦ Πιθέως ἄρχειν εἰς τὰ Θεσμοφόρια καὶ ποιεῖν τὰ νομιζόμενα μετʼ ἐκείνης. ὅ τε πατὴρ ἡμῶν, ἐπειδὴ ἐγενόμεθα, εἰς τοὺς φράτορας ἡμᾶς εἰσήγαγεν, ὀμόσας κατὰ τοὺς νόμους τοὺς κειμένους ἦ μὴν ἐξ ἀστῆς καὶ ἐγγυητῆς γυναικὸς εἰσάγειν· τῶν δὲ φρατόρων οὐδεὶς ἀντεῖπεν οὐδʼ ἠμφισβήτησε μὴ οὐκ ἀληθῆ ταῦτʼ εἶναι, πολλῶν ὄντων καὶ ἀκριβῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα σκοπουμένων.
Also the wives of the demesmen afterwards chose our mother, together with the wife of Diocles of Pithus, to preside at the Thesmophoria and to carry out the ceremonies jointly with her. Again, our father at our birth introduced us to the members of his ward, having declared on oath, in accordance with the established laws, that he was introducing the children of an Athenian mother duly married; and none of the wardsmen made any objection or disputed the truth of his statements, though they were present in large numbers and always look carefully into such matters.
§ 20
καίτοι μὴ οἴεσθʼ ἄν, εἰ τοιαύτη τις ἦν ἡ μήτηρ ἡμῶν οἵαν οὗτοί φασι, μήτʼ ἂν τὸν πατέρα ἡμῶν γάμους ἑστιᾶν καὶ γαμηλίαν εἰσενεγκεῖν, ἀλλὰ ἀποκρύψασθαι ταῦτα πάντα, μήτε τὰς τῶν ἄλλων δημοτῶν γυναῖκας αἱρεῖσθαι ἂν αὐτὴν συνιεροποιεῖν τῇ Διοκλέους γυναικὶ καὶ κυρίαν ποιεῖν ἱερῶν, ἀλλʼ ἑτέρᾳ ἄν τινι περὶ τούτων ἐπιτρέπειν, μήτε τοὺς φράτορας εἰσδέχεσθαι ἡμᾶς, ἀλλὰ κατηγορεῖν καὶ ἐξελέγχειν, εἰ μὴ πάντοθεν ἦν ὁμολογούμενον τὴν μητέρα ἡμῶν εἶναι θυγατέρα γνησίαν Κίρωνος. νῦν δὲ τῇ περιφανείᾳ τοῦ πράγματος καὶ τῷ συνειδέναι ταῦτα πολλοὺς οὐδαμόθεν ἠμφισβητήθη τοιοῦτον οὐδέν. καὶ ταῦθʼ ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
Yet do not for a moment suppose, that, if our mother had been such as our opponents allege, our father would have either given a wedding-feast or provided a marriage-banquet and not rather hushed up the whole matter; or that the wives of the other demesmen would have chosen her to celebrate the festival with the wife of Diocles and given the sacred objects into her hands and not rather entrusted this office to some other woman; or that the wardsmen would have admitted us and not rather objected and justified their objection, if it had not been universally admitted that our mother was a legitimate daughter of Ciron. As it was, owing to the notoriety of the fact and its recognition by so many persons, no such question was raised from any quarter. Now call the witnesses to prove the truth of these statements.
§ 21
Μάρτυρες ἔτι τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ Διοκλῆς ἔπραξεν ὅτε ἡμῶν ὁ πάππος ἐτελεύτησε, γνῶναι ῥᾴδιον ὅτι ὡμολογούμεθα εἶναι θυγατριδοῖ Κίρωνος. ἧκον γὰρ ἐγὼ κομιούμενος αὐτὸν ὡς θάψων ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας τῆς ἐμαυτοῦ, τῶν ἐμαυτοῦ οἰκείων τινὰ ἔχων, ἀνεψιὸν τοῦ πατρός· καὶ Διοκλέα μὲν οὐ κατέλαβον ἔνδον, εἰσελθὼν δὲ εἴσω κομίζειν οἷος ἦν, ἔχων τοὺς οἴσοντας.
Witnesses Furthermore, gentlemen, the conduct of Diocles on the occasion of our grandfather's death clearly shows that we were acknowledged as the grandchildren of Ciron. I presented myself, accompanied by one of my relatives, a cousin of my father, to convey away the body with the intention of conducting the funeral from my own house. I did not find Diocles in the house, and I entered and was prepared to remove the body, having bearers with me for this purpose.
§ 22
δεομένης δὲ τῆς τοῦ πάππου γυναικὸς ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας αὐτὸν ἐκείνης θάπτειν, καὶ λεγούσης ὅτι βούλοιτʼ ἂν αὐτὴ τὸ σῶμα τὸ ἐκείνου συμμεταχειρίζεσθαι μεθʼ ἡμῶν καὶ κοσμῆσαι, καὶ ταῦτα ἱκετευούσης καὶ κλαιούσης, ἐπείσθην, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ τούτῳ προσελθὼν μαρτύρων ἐναντίον εἶπον ὅτι ἐντεῦθεν ποιήσομαι τὴν ταφήν· δεδεημένη γὰρ εἴη ταῦτα ποιεῖν ἡ τούτου ἀδελφή.
When, however, my grandfather's widow requested that the funeral should take place from that house, and declared that she would like herself to help us to lay out and deck the corpse, and entreated me and wept, I acceded to her request and went to my opponent and told him in the presence of witnesses that I would conduct the funeral from the house of the deceased, since Diocles' sister had begged me to do so.
§ 23
καὶ ταῦτα Διοκλῆς ἀκούσας οὐδὲν ἀντεῖπεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐωνῆσθαί τι τῶν εἰς τὴν ταφήν, τῶν δὲ ἀρραβῶνα δεδωκέναι αὐτὸς φάσκων, ταῦτα ἠξίου παρʼ ἐμοῦ λαβεῖν, καὶ διωμολογήσατο τῶν μὲν ἠγορασμένων τιμὴν ἀπολαβεῖν, ὧν δὲ ἀρραβῶνα ἔφασκε δεδωκέναι, συστῆσαι τοὺς λαβόντας. εὐθὺς οὖν τοῦτο παρεφθέγγετο, ὡς οὐδʼ ὁτιοῦν εἴη Κίρων καταλελοιπώς, οὐδένα λόγον ἐμοῦ πω ποιουμένου περὶ τῶν ἐκείνου χρημάτων.
Diocles, on hearing this, made no objection, but asserting that he had actually bought some of the requisites for the funeral and had himself paid a deposit for the rest, demanded that I should pay him for these, and arranged to recover from me the cost of the objects which he had purchased and to produce those who had received the deposit for the objects for which he alleged that he had paid a deposit. Immediately afterwards he casually remarked that Ciron had left nothing at all, although I had not said a single word about his money.
§ 24
καίτοι εἰ μὴ ἦν θυγατριδοῦς Κίρωνος, οὐκ ἂν ταῦτα διωμολογεῖτο, ἀλλʼ ἐκείνους ἂν τοὺς λόγους ἔλεγε “σὺ δὲ τίς εἶ; σοὶ δὲ τί προσήκει θάπτειν; οὐ γιγνώσκω σε· οὐ μὴ εἴσει εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν.” ταῦτʼ εἰπεῖν προσῆκεν, ἅ περ νῦν ἑτέρους πέπεικε λέγειν. νῦν δὲ τοιοῦτον μὲν οὐδὲν εἶπεν, εἰς ἕω δὲ τἀργύριον ἐκέλευεν εἰσενεγκεῖν. καὶ ταῦτα ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μοι τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
Yet had I not been Ciron's grandson, he would never have made these arrangements with me, but would rather have said, “Who are you? What right have you to carry out the burial? I do not know you: you shall not set foot in the house.” This is what he ought to have said, and what he has now instigated others to say. As it was, he said nothing of the kind, but only told me to bring the money next morning. And to prove the truth of these statements, please summon the witnesses.
§ 25
Μάρτυρες οὐ τοίνυν ἐκεῖνος μόνος, ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ ὁ νῦν ἀμφισβητῶν τοῦ κλήρου τοιοῦτον εἶπεν οὐδέν, ἀλλʼ ὑπὸ τούτου παρασκευασθεὶς ἀμφισβητεῖ. κἀκείνου τὸ μὲν παρʼ ἐμοῦ κομισθὲν ἀργύριον οὐκ ἐθελήσαντος ἀπολαβεῖν, παρὰ τούτου δʼ ἀπειληφέναι τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ φάσκοντος, οὐκ ἐκωλυόμην συνθάπτειν ἀλλὰ πάντα συνεποίουν· οὐχ ὅπως τοῦδε ἀναλίσκοντος οὐδὲ Διοκλέους, ἀλλʼ ἐξ ὧν ἐκεῖνος κατέλιπε γιγνομένων τῶν εἰς αὐτὸν ἀναλωμάτων.
Witnesses Diocles was not the only person who made no such objections at the time; the present claimant to the estate was also silent and is now making his claim because he has been suborned by Diocles. Though Diocles refused to accept the money which I brought and alleged next day that he had received payment from my opponent, yet I was not prevented from attending the burial but joined in all the ceremonies, the expenses of the funeral, so far from being paid by my opponent or Diocles, being defrayed from the property left by the deceased.
§ 26
καίτοι καὶ τούτῳ προσῆκεν, εἰ μὴ πάππος ἦν μοι Κίρων, ὠθεῖν 〈καὶ〉 ἐκβάλλειν καὶ κωλύειν συνθάπτειν. οὐδὲν γὰρ ὅμοιον ἦν μοι πρὸς τοῦτον· ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ εἴων αὐτὸν ἀδελφιδοῦν ὄντα τοῦ πάππου ταῦτα πάντα συμποιεῖν, τούτῳ δʼ ἔμʼ οὐ προσῆκεν ἐᾶν, εἴπερ ἀληθῆ ταῦτα ἦν ἅπερ νῦν λέγειν τολμῶσιν.
Yet if Ciron had not really been my grandfather, it was the duty of my opponent to repulse me and reject me and prevent me from taking part in the burial. My position with regard to him was quite a different one: for I allowed him, as my grandfather's nephew, to share in all the rites, but he ought never to have allowed me to do so, if what they now have the audacity to say were true.
§ 27
ἀλλʼ οὕτω τῇ τοῦ πράγματος ἀληθείᾳ κατεπέπληκτο, ὥστʼ οὐδʼ ἐπὶ τοῦ σήματος ἐμοῦ ποιουμένου λόγους, καὶ κατηγοροῦντος Διοκλέους ὅτι τὰ χρήματα ἀποστερῶν τοῦτόν μοι πέπεικεν ἀμφισβητεῖν, οὐκ ἐτόλμησε γρῦξαι τὸ παράπαν οὐδὲν οὐδʼ εἰπεῖν ἃ νῦν τολμᾷ λέγειν. καὶ ταῦθʼ ὅτι ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μοι τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
But he was so overawed by his knowledge of the true facts, that at the tomb, when I spoke and accused Diocles of detaining the property and of having suborned him to dispute the inheritance, he did not venture to utter a sound or say a word of what he now has the impudence to assert. And to prove that I am telling the truth, please call the witnesses to these events.
§ 28
Μάρτυρες πόθεν χρὴ πιστεύεσθαι τὰ εἰρημένα; οὐκ ἐκ τῶν μαρτυριῶν; οἶμαί γε. πόθεν δὲ τοὺς μάρτυρας; οὐκ ἐκ τῶν βασάνων; εἰκός γε. πόθεν δʼ ἀπιστεῖν τοῖς τούτων λόγοις; οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ φεύγειν τοὺς ἐλέγχους; ἀνάγκη μεγάλη. πῶς οὖν ἄν τις σαφέστερον ἐπιδείξειε γνησίαν οὖσαν θυγατέρα Κίρωνος τὴν μητέρα τὴν ἐμήν ἢ τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον ἐπιδεικνύς;
Witnesses What ought to induce you to believe the statements which you have heard? Ought not the evidence of witnesses to induce you to do so? I certainly think so. But what entitles you to believe the witnesses? Is it not the confirmation of their evidence under torture? It seems only reasonable. But what entitles you to disbelieve the statements of my opponents? Is it not their refusal to put the matter to the test? This is an absolutely necessary conclusion. How then could anyone prove that my mother is a legitimate daughter of Ciron more clearly than by the method which I am adopting?
§ 29
τῶν μὲν παλαιῶν ἀκοὴν μαρτυρούντων παρεχόμενος, τῶν δὲ ἔτι ζώντων τοὺς εἰδότας ἕκαστα τούτων, οἳ συνῄδεσαν παρʼ ἐκείνῳ τρεφομένην, θυγατέρα νομιζομένην, δὶς ἐκδοθεῖσαν, δὶς ἐγγυηθεῖσαν, ἔτι δὲ περὶ πάντων τούτους βάσανον ἐξ οἰκετῶν πεφευγότας, οἳ ταῦτα πάντα ᾔδεσαν. ἔγωγε μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς τοὺς Ὀλυμπίους οὐκ ἂν ἔχοιμι πίστεις μείζους τούτων εἰπεῖν, ἀλλʼ ἱκανὰς εἶναι νομίζω τὰς εἰρημένας.
For events in the distant past I furnished hearsay evidence vouched for by witnesses; where living witnesses are available, I produced those who are familiar with the facts, who knew perfectly well that my mother was brought up in Ciron's house, that she was regarded as his daughter, and that she was twice betrothed and twice married; I further showed that on all these points my opponents have refused to allow the evidence of slaves under torture, who knew all the facts. By the gods of Olympus, I could not possibly give stronger proofs than these, and I think that those which I have produced are sufficient.
§ 30
φέρε δή, καὶ ὡς προσήκει ἐμοὶ μᾶλλον ἢ τούτῳ τῶν Κίρωνος χρημάτων, νῦν ἤδη τοῦτο ἐπιδείξω. καὶ νομίζω μὲν ἁπλῶς καὶ ὑμῖν ἤδη εἶναι φανερὸν ὅτι οὐκ ἐγγυτέρω ταῖς ἀγχιστείαις εἰσὶν οἱ μετʼ ἐκείνου φύντες ἢ οἱ ἐξ ἐκείνου γεγονότες (πῶς γάρ; οἱ μὲν γὰρ ὀνομάζονται συγγενεῖς, οἱ δʼ ἔκγονοι τοῦ τελευτήσαντος)· οὐ μὴν ἀλλʼ ἐπειδὴ καὶ οὕτως ἐχόντων τολμῶσιν ἀμφισβητεῖν, καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν νόμων ἀκριβέστερον διδάξομεν.
But to continue; let me next prove to you that I have a better right than my opponent to Ciron's fortune. I suppose that you admit in principle as a self-evident fact that those who are descended from the same stock as Ciron are not nearer in right of succession than those who are descended from him. (How, indeed, could they be, since the former are called collateral kinsmen, the latter lineal descendants of the deceased?) Since, however, even though this is so, they have the impudence to dispute my right, we will explain the point in greater detail from the actual laws.
§ 31
εἰ γὰρ ἔζη μὲν ἡ ἐμὴ μήτηρ, θυγάτηρ δὲ Κίρωνος, μηδὲν δὲ ἐκεῖνος διαθέμενος ἐτελεύτησεν, ἦν δὲ ἀδελφὸς οὗτος αὐτῷ, μὴ ἀδελφιδοῦς, συνοικῆσαι μὲν ἂν τῇ γυναικὶ κύριος ἦν, τῶν δὲ χρημάτων οὐκ ἄν, ἀλλʼ οἱ γενόμενοι παῖδες ἐκ τούτου καὶ ἐξ ἐκείνης, ὁπότε ἐπὶ διετὲς ἥβησαν· οὕτω γὰρ οἱ νόμοι κελεύουσιν. εἰ τοίνυν καὶ ζώσης κύριος αὐτὸς μὴ ἐγένετο τῶν τῆς γυναικός, ἀλλʼ οἱ παῖδες, δῆλον ὅτι καὶ τετελευτηκυίας, ἐπεὶ παῖδας ἡμᾶς καταλέλοιπεν, οὐ τούτοις ἀλλʼ ἡμῖν προσήκει κληρονομεῖν τῶν χρημάτων.
Supposing that my mother, Ciron's daughter, were still alive and that her father had died intestate and that my opponent were his brother and not his nephew, he would have the right to claim the daughter in marriage, but he could not claim the estate, which would go to the children born of their marriage when they had completed two years after puberty; for this is what the laws ordain. Since, then, the children, and not my opponent himself, would have become masters of her property if she were alive, it is obvious, since she is dead and has left children, namely, my brother and myself, that we, and not our opponents, have the right to succeed to the estate.
§ 32
οὐ τοίνυν ἐκ τούτου μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ τοῦ περὶ τῆς κακώσεως νόμου δῆλόν ἐστιν. εἰ γὰρ ἔζη μὲν ὁ πάππος, ἐνδεὴς δὲ ἦν τῶν ἐπιτηδείων, οὐκ ἂν οὗτος ὑπόδικος ἦν τῆς κακώσεως ἀλλʼ ἡμεῖς. κελεύει γὰρ τρέφειν τοὺς γονέας· γονεῖς δʼ εἰσὶ μήτηρ καὶ πατὴρ καὶ πάππος καὶ τήθη καὶ τούτων μήτηρ καὶ πατήρ, ἐὰν ἔτι ζῶσιν· ἐκεῖνοι γὰρ ἀρχὴ τοῦ γένους εἰσί, καὶ τὰ ἐκείνων παραδίδοται τοῖς ἐκγόνοις · διόπερ ἀνάγκη τρέφειν αὐτούς ἐστι, κἂν μηδὲν καταλίπωσι. πῶς οὖν δίκαιόν ἐστιν, ἐὰν μὲν μηδὲν καταλίπωσιν, ἡμᾶς ὑποδίκους εἶναι τῆς κακώσεως, ἢν μὴ τρέφωμεν, εἰ δέ τι καταλελοίπασι, τόνδʼ εἶναι κληρονόμον ἀλλὰ μὴ ἡμᾶς; οὐδαμῶς δήπουθεν.
This is the clear intention not only of this law but also of that dealing with the neglect of parents. For if my grandfather were alive and in want of the necessities of life, we, and not our opponent, would be liable to prosecution for neglect. For the law enjoins us to support our parents, meaning by “parents” father, mother, grandfather, and grandmother, and their father and mother, if they are still alive; for they are the source of the family, and their property is transmitted to their descendants, and so the latter are bound to support them even if they have nothing to bequeath to them. How then can it be right that, if they have nothing to leave, we should be liable to prosecution for neglecting them, yet that, if they have something to leave, our opponent should be the heir and not we? Surely it cannot be right.
§ 33
πρὸς ἕνα δὲ τὸν πρῶτον τῶν συγγενῶν προσάξω, καὶ τοῦ γένους καθʼ ἕκαστον ὑμᾶς ἐρωτήσω· ῥᾷστα γὰρ οὕτω μάθοιτʼ ἄν. Κίρωνος πότερον θυγάτηρ ἢ ἀδελφὸς ἐγγυτέρω τοῦ γένους ἐστί· δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι θυγάτηρ· ἡ μὲν γὰρ ἐξ ἐκείνου γέγονεν, ὁ δὲ μετʼ ἐκείνου. θυγατρὸς δὲ παῖδες ἢ ἀδελφός; παῖδες δήπουθεν· γένος γὰρ ἀλλʼ οὐχὶ συγγένεια τοῦτʼ ἐστίν. εἰ δὴ προέχομεν ἀδελφοῦ τοσοῦτον, ἦ που τοῦδέ γʼ ὄντος ἀδελφιδοῦ πάμπολυ πρότεροί ἐσμεν.
I will now institute a comparison with the nearest collateral relative and question you on the various degrees of relationship; for this is the easier way of making the matter clear to you. Is Ciron's daughter or his brother the nearer of kin to him? Clearly his daughter; for she is his issue, while the brother is only born of the same stock. Next, is the brother nearer of kin or the daughter's children? Certainly the daughter's children; for they are lineal descendants and not mere collaterals. If then our rights are so far superior to those of a brother, a fortiori we are still more to be preferred to our opponent, who is only a nephew.
§ 34
δέδοικα δὲ μὴ λίαν ὁμολογούμενα λέγων ἐνοχλεῖν ὑμῖν δόξω· πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς τῶν πατρῴων, τῶν παππῴων, τῶν ἔτι περαιτέρω κληρονομεῖτε ἐκ γένους παρειληφότες τὴν ἀγχιστείαν ἀνεπίδικον, καὶ οὐκ οἶδʼ εἴ τινι πρὸ τοῦ πώποτε τοιοῦτος ἀγὼν συμβέβηκεν. ἀναγνοὺς οὖν τὸν τῆς κακώσεως νόμον, ὧν ἕνεκα πάντα γίγνεται, καὶ ταῦτʼ ἤδη πειράσομαι διδάσκειν.
But I am afraid of seeming tiresome in repeating truths so universally recognized; for you all inherit the property of your fathers, grandfathers, and remoter ancestors by the incontrovertible title of lineal descent, and I do not know that such a case as the present has ever been brought against anyone before. I shall therefore read the law about the neglect of parents and then try and show you the motives which led to the whole affair.
§ 35
Νόμος Κίρων γὰρ ἐκέκτητο οὐσίαν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἀγρὸν μὲν Φλυῆσι, καὶ ταλάντου ῥᾳδίως ἄξιον, οἰκίας δʼ ἐν ἄστει δύο, τὴν μὲν μίαν μισθοφοροῦσαν, παρὰ τὸ ἐν Λίμναις Διονύσιον, δισχιλίας εὑρίσκουσαν, τὴν δʼ ἑτέραν, ἐν ᾗ αὐτὸς ᾤκει, τριῶν καὶ δέκα μνῶν· ἔτι δὲ ἀνδράποδα μισθοφοροῦντα καὶ δύο θεραπαίνας καὶ παιδίσκην, καὶ ἔπιπλα διʼ ὧν ᾤκει τὴν οἰκίαν, σχεδὸν σὺν τοῖς ἀνδραπόδοις ἄξια τριῶν καὶ δέκα μνῶν· σύμπαντα δὲ ὅσα φανερὰ ἦν, πλέον ἢ ἐνενήκοντα μνῶν· χωρὶς δὲ τούτων δανείσματα οὐκ ὀλίγα, ἀφʼ ὧν ἐκεῖνος τόκους ἐλάμβανε.
Law The property of Ciron, gentlemen, consisted of an estate at Phlya, easily worth a talent, two houses in the city, one near the sanctuary of Dionysus in the Marshes, let to a tenant and worth 2000 drachmae, the other, in which he himself used to live, worth thirteen minae; he also had slaves earning wages, two female slaves and a young girl, and the fittings of his private residence, worth, including the slaves, about thirteen minae. The total value of his real property was thus more than ninety minae; but besides this he had considerable sums lent out, of which he received the interest.
§ 36
τούτοις Διοκλῆς μετὰ τῆς ἀδελφῆς πάλαι ἐπεβούλευεν, ἐπειδὴ τάχιστα οἱ παῖδες οἱ Κίρωνος ἐτελεύτησαν. ἐκείνην μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἐξεδίδου δυναμένην ἔτι τεκεῖν παῖδας ἐξ ἑτέρου ἀνδρός, ἵνα μὴ χωρισθείσης περὶ τῶν αὑτοῦ βουλεύσαιτο καθάπερ προσῆκεν, ἔπειθε δὲ μένειν φάσκουσαν ἐξ αὐτοῦ κυεῖν οἴεσθαι, προσποιουμένην δὲ διαφθείρειν ἄκουσαν, ἵνʼ ἐλπίζων ἀεὶ γενήσεσθαι παῖδας αὑτῷ μηδέτερον ἡμῶν εἰσποιήσαιτο ὑόν· καὶ τὸν πατέρα διέβαλλεν ἀεί, φάσκων αὐτὸν ἐπιβουλεύειν τοῖς ἐκείνου.
It was to obtain this property that Diocles, together with his sister, carried on his plots for a long time, ever since the death of Ciron's sons. For he did not try to find another husband for her, although she was still capable of bearing children to another man; for he feared that, if she were separated from Ciron, the latter would resolve to dispose of his estate in the proper manner; but he kept on urging her to remain with him, and to allege that she thought she was with child by him and then pretend that she had an accidental miscarriage, in order that he might be always hoping that a child would be born to him, and might not, therefore, adopt myself or my brother. Diocles also continually calumniated my father, alleging that he was intriguing against Ciron's property.
§ 37
τά τε οὖν χρέα πάντα, ὅσα ὠφείλετο αὐτῷ, καὶ 〈τοὺς〉 τόκους ἔπειθε 〈πράξασθαι〉 τά τε φανερὰ διʼ αὑτοῦ ποιεῖσθαι, παράγων ἄνδρα πρεσβύτερον θεραπείαις καὶ κολακείαις, ἕως ἅπαντα τὰ ἐκείνου περιέλαβεν. εἰδὼς δὲ ὅτι πάντων ἐγὼ τούτων κατὰ τὸ προσῆκον εἶναι κύριος ζητήσω, ὁπότε ὁ πάππος τελευτήσειεν, εἰσιέναι μέν με καὶ θεραπεύειν ἐκεῖνον καὶ συνδιατρίβειν οὐκ ἐκώλυε, δεδιὼς μὴ τραχυνθεὶς εἰς ὀργὴν κατασταίη πρὸς αὑτόν, παρεσκεύαζε δέ μοι τὸν ἀμφισβητήσοντα τῆς οὐσίας, μέρος πολλοστὸν τούτῳ μεταδιδοὺς εἰ κατορθώσειεν, αὑτῷ δὲ ταῦτα πάντα περιποιῶν, καὶ οὐδὲ πρὸς τοῦτον ὁμολογῶν τὸν πάππον χρήματα καταλείπειν, ἀλλʼ εἶναι φάσκων οὐδέν.
So he gradually persuaded Ciron to let him handle all the sums owing to him, and the interest upon them, and to manage his real property, cajoling the old man by his attentions and flattery until he had all his estate in his grasp. But, although he knew that in accordance with my rights I should seek to be master of this property when my grandfather was dead, yet he did not try to prevent me from visiting him and paying him attentions and conversing with him (for he was afraid that Ciron might become exasperated and be angry with him); but he was all the time preparing a claimant to dispute my right to the property, promising him a small share, if he were successful, and securing the whole estate for himself, and not admitting even to his accomplice that my grandfather had any money to leave, but pretending that there was nothing.
§ 38
καὶ ἐπειδὴ τάχιστα ἐτελεύτησεν, ἐντάφια προπαρασκευασάμενος τὸ μὲν ἀργύριον ἐμὲ ἐκέλευεν ἐνεγκεῖν, ὡς τῶν μαρτύρων ἠκούσατε μαρτυρησάντων, ἀπειληφέναι δὲ παρὰ τοῦδε προσεποιεῖτο, παρʼ ἐμοῦ δὲ οὐκέτι ἤθελεν ἀπολαβεῖν, ὑποπαρωθῶν, ὅπως ἐκεῖνος δοκοίη θάπτειν ἀλλὰ μὴ ἐγὼ τὸν πάππον. ἀμφισβητοῦντος δὲ τούτου καὶ τῆς οἰκίας ταύτης καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ὧν ἐκεῖνος κατέλιπε, καὶ οὐδὲν φάσκοντος καταλελοιπέναι, βιάσασθαι μὲν καὶ τὸν πάππον μεταφέρειν ἐν ταῖς τοιαύταις ἀκαιρίαις οὐκ ᾤμην δεῖν, τῶν φίλων μοι ταῦτα συγγιγνωσκόντων, συνεποίουν δὲ καὶ συνέθαπτον, ἐξ ὧν ὁ πάππος κατέλιπε τῶν ἀναλωμάτων γιγνομένων.
Immediately after Ciron's death he lost no time in making preparations for the funeral, the expenses of which he required me to pay, as you have heard the witnesses testifying; but he afterwards pretended that he had received the money from my opponent and refused any longer to accept payment from me, stealthily thrusting me aside, in order that it might appear that my opponent, and not I, was burying my grandfather. And when my opponent claimed this house and everything else that Ciron left behind him, although he said that he had left nothing, I did not think (and my friends agreed with me) that in these painful circumstances I ought to use violence and carry off my grandfather's body, but I took part in the rites and was present at the burial, the expenses of which were defrayed out of my grandfather's estate.
§ 39
καὶ ταῦτα μὲν οὕτως ἀναγκασθεὶς ἔπραξα τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον· ὅπως δὲ μηδέν μου ταύτῃ πλεονεκτοῖεν, παρʼ ὑμῖν φάσκοντες οὐδέν με εἰς τὴν ταφὴν ἀνηλωκέναι, τὸν ἐξηγητὴν ἐρόμενος ἐκείνου κελεύσαντος ἀνήλωσα παρʼ ἐμαυτοῦ καὶ τὰ ἔνατα ἐπήνεγκα, ὡς οἷόν τε κάλλιστα παρασκευάσας, ἵνα αὐτῶν ἐκκόψαιμι ταύτην τὴν ἱεροσυλίαν, καὶ ἵνα μὴ δοκοῖεν οὗτοι μὲν ἀνηλωκέναι πάντα, ἐγὼ δὲ μηδέν, ἀλλʼ ὁμοίως κἀγώ.
Thus I acted in this manner under compulsion; but in order that they might gain no advantage over me by alleging to you that I bore no part of the funeral expenses, I consulted the interpreter of the sacred law and by his advice I paid for at my own expense and offered the ninth-day offerings in the most sumptuous manner possible, in order that I might confound their sacrilegious tricks, and that it might not seem that they had paid for everything and I for nothing, but that I might be thought to have done my share.
§ 40
καὶ τὰ μὲν γεγενημένα, καὶ διʼ ἃ τὰ πράγματα ταῦτʼ ἔχομεν, σχεδόν τι ταῦτʼ ἐστίν, ὦ ἄνδρες· εἰ δὲ εἰδείητε τὴν Διοκλέους ἀναισχυντίαν, καὶ περὶ τὰ ἄλλα οἷός ἐστιν, οὐκ ἂν ἀπιστήσαιτε τῶν εἰρημένων οὐδενί. οὗτος μὲν γὰρ ἔχει τὴν οὐσίαν, ἀφʼ ἧς νῦν ἐστι λαμπρός, ἀλλοτρίαν, ἀδελφῶν τριῶν ὁμομητρίων ἐπικλήρων καταλειφθεισῶν αὑτὸν τῷ πατρὶ αὐτῶν εἰσποιήσας, οὐδεμίαν ἐκείνου περὶ τούτων ποιησαμένου διαθήκην.
Such in substance, gentlemen, are the events which have occurred and the causes of all this trouble. If you understood the impudence of Diocles and his behavior on all other occasions, you would have no difficulty in believing anything in my story. For the fortune which he now possesses, and with which he makes such a brave show, is not really his; for when his three half-sisters, the children of his mother, were left heiresses, he represented himself as the adopted son of their father, though the latter left no will to this effect.
§ 41
τοῖν δʼ ἀδελφαῖν τοῖν δυοῖν ἐπειδὴ τὰ χρήματα εἰσεπράττετο ὑπὸ τῶν ἐκείναις συνοικούντων, τὸν μὲν τὴν πρεσβυτέραν ἔχοντα κατοικοδομήσας καὶ ἐπιβουλεύσας ἠτίμωσε, καὶ γραφὴν ὕβρεως γραφεὶς οὐδέπω τούτων δίκην δέδωκε, τῆς δὲ μετʼ ἐκείνην γενομένης τὸν ἄνδρα ἀποκτεῖναι κελεύσας οἰκέτην ἐκεῖνον μὲν ἐξέπεμψε, τὴν δʼ αἰτίαν εἰς τὴν ἀδελφὴν ἔτρεψε,
When the husbands of two of the sisters tried to obtain possession of their fortune, he imprisoned the husband of the eldest of them by walling him up and by a plot deprived him of his civic rights, and though he was indicted for outrage he has not yet been punished. As for the husband of the next sister, he ordered a slave to kill him and smuggled away the murderer, and then threw the guilt upon his sister,
§ 42
καταπλήξας δὲ ταῖς αὑτοῦ βδελυρίαις προσαφῄρηται τὸν ὑὸν αὐτῆς τὴν οὐσίαν ἐπιτροπεύσας, καὶ κατέχει τὸν ἀγρόν, φελλέα [χωρία ἄττα] δὲ ἐκείνῳ δέδωκε. καὶ ταῦτα ὅτι ἀληθῆ λέγω, δεδίασι μὲν αὐτόν, ἴσως δʼ ἄν μοι καὶ μαρτυρῆσαι ἐθελήσειαν· εἰ δὲ μή, τοὺς εἰδότας παρέξομαι μάρτυρας. καί μοι κάλει δεῦρο αὐτοὺς πρῶτον.
and having terrified her by his abominable conduct he has robbed her son, whose guardian he became, of his property, and is still in possession of his land and has only given him some stony ground. To prove that what I say is true, his victims, though they are afraid of him, yet may perhaps be willing to support me by their evidence; otherwise, I will produce as witnesses those who know the facts. Please call them first.
§ 43
Μάρτυρες οὕτω τοίνυν ἀσελγὴς ὢν καὶ βίαιος καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀδελφῶν οὐσίαν ἀπεστερηκὼς οὐκ ἀγαπᾷ τὰ ἐκείνων ἔχων, ἀλλʼ ὅτι δίκην οὐδεμίαν αὐτῶν δέδωκεν, ἥκει καὶ τὰ τοῦ πάππου χρήματα ἡμᾶς ἀποστερήσων, καὶ τούτῳ δύο μνᾶς (ὡς ἀκούομεν) μόνας δεδωκὼς οὐ μόνον περὶ χρημάτων ἡμᾶς ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ τῆς πατρίδος εἰς κινδύνους καθίστησιν. ἐὰν γὰρ ἐξαπατηθῆτε ὑμεῖς πεισθέντες ὡς ἡ μήτηρ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἦν πολῖτις, οὐδʼ ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν· μετʼ Εὐκλείδην γὰρ ἄρχοντα γεγόναμεν. ἆρα περὶ μικρῶν τινῶν ἡμῖν τὸν ἀγῶνα κατεσκεύακε; καὶ ζῶντος μὲν τοῦ πάππου καὶ τοῦ πατρὸς οὐδεμίαν αἰτίαν εἴχομεν, ἀλλʼ ἀναμφισβήτητοι τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον διετελέσαμεν·
Witnesses This man, then, having shown himself so brutal and violent and having robbed his sisters of their fortune, is not content with the possession of their property, but, since he has not been punished, has now come forward to rob us of our grandfather's fortune; and having given our opponent—so we are informed—the paltry sum of two minae is exposing us to the risk of losing not only our property but also our fatherland. For if you are misled into the belief that our mother was not an Athenian citizen, neither are we citizens; for we were born after the archonship of Eucleides. Can it be said, therefore, that the suit which he has trumped up against us is of only trifling importance? While our grandfather and our father were alive, no charge was ever brought against us and our rights were never impeached;
§ 44
ἐπειδὴ δʼ ἐκεῖνοι τετελευτήκασι, κἂν νῦν νικήσωμεν, ὄνειδος ἕξομεν, διότι ἠμφισβητήθημεν, διὰ τὸν Ὀρέστην τοῦτον τὸν κακῶς ἀπολούμενον, ὃς μοιχὸς ληφθεὶς καὶ παθὼν ὅ τι προσήκει τοὺς τὰ τοιαῦτα ποιοῦντας οὐδʼ ὣς ἀπαλλάττεται τοῦ πράγματος, ὡς οἱ συνειδότες καταμαρτυροῦσι. τοῦτον μὲν οὖν, οἷός ἐστι, καὶ νῦν ἀκούετε καὶ αὖθις ἀκριβέστερον πεύσεσθε, ὅταν κατʼ αὐτοῦ τὴν δίκην ἡμεῖς εἰσίωμεν·
but now that they are dead, even if we win our case, we shall always hear the stigma of having had our rights disputed, thanks to this accursed Orestes, who, taken in adultery and having suffered the treatment which befits such evil-doers, has not even so abandoned the practice, as those who know the facts can testify. You know now the character of this fellow, and you will learn about it in still greater detail, when our suit against him comes on.
§ 45
ὑμῶν δʼ ἐγὼ δέομαι καὶ ἱκετεύω, μή με περιίδητε περὶ τούτων ὑβρισθέντα τῶν χρημάτων ὧν ὁ πάππος κατέλιπε, μηδʼ ἀποστερηθέντα, ἀλλὰ βοηθήσατε καθʼ ὅσον ὑμῶν ἕκαστος τυγχάνει δυνάμενος. ἔχετε δὲ πίστεις ἱκανὰς ἐκ μαρτυριῶν, ἐκ βασάνων, ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν νόμων, ὅτι τʼ ἐσμὲν 〈ἐκ〉 θυγατρὸς γνησίας Κίρωνος, καὶ ὅτι προσήκει ἡμῖν μᾶλλον ἢ τούτοις κληρονομεῖν τῶν ἐκείνου χρημάτων, ἐκγόνοις οὖσι τοῦ πάππου.
But do not, I beg and implore you, allow me to be insulted and robbed in the matter of this money which my grandfather left, but help me as far as each of you is able. Ample proof is before you from depositions, evidence given under torture, and the laws themselves that we are the children of a legitimate daughter of Ciron and that we have a better right than our opponents to inherit our grandfather's property as his lineal descendants.
§ 46
μνησθέντες οὖν καὶ τῶν ὅρκων οὓς ὀμόσαντες δικάζετε, καὶ τῶν λόγων οὓς εἰρήκαμεν, καὶ τῶν νόμων, ᾗ δίκαιόν ἐστι, ταύτῃ τὴν ψῆφον τίθεσθε. οὐκ οἶδʼ ὅ τι δεῖ πλείω λέγειν· οἶμαι γὰρ ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ἀγνοεῖν τῶν εἰρημένων. λαβὲ δʼ αὐτοῖς τὴν μαρτυρίαν τὴν λοιπήν, ὡς ἐλήφθη μοιχός, καὶ ἀνάγνωθι. 〈Μαρτυρία〉
Remember, therefore, the oaths under which you sit in judgement, the arguments which we have presented, and the laws, and give your verdict as justice demands. I do not know of anything which I ought to add; for I think that nothing which I have said has escaped your attention. Now take the only remaining deposition, proving that Diocles was taken in adultery, and read it to the court. Deposition
On the Estate of Astyphilus · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg009 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Ἀστυφίλου κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg009.perseus-grc2 · English: On the Estate of Astyphilus — tlg0017.tlg009.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Ἀστύφιλος καὶ ὁ λέγων τὸν λόγον ἀδελφοὶ ὁμομήτριοι· τελευτήσαντος δὲ τοῦ Ἀστυφίλου διαθήκας προήνεγκε Κλέων τις, ἀνεψιὸς ὢν αὐτοῦ, φάσκων αὐτὰς γενέσθαι εἰς τὸν υἱὸν ἑαυτοῦ. ὁ δὲ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ Ἀστυφίλου κατηγορεῖ τῶν διαθηκῶν ὡς πλαστῶν. ἡ στάσις στοχασμός.
Argument Astyphilus and the speaker of this oration were half-brothers, children of the same mother. On the death of Astyphilus a certain Cleon, his first cousin, produced a will, alleging that it had been made in favor of his own son. The brother of Astyphilius attacks the will as being a forgery. The discussion turns on a question of fact.
§ 1
ἀδελφός μοι ἦν ὁμομήτριος, ὦ ἄνδρες, Ἀστύφιλος, οὗ ἐστιν ὁ κλῆρος· ἀποδημήσας οὖν μετὰ τῶν εἰς Μυτιλήνην στρατιωτῶν ἐτελεύτησε. πειράσομαι δʼ ὑμῖν ἐπιδεῖξαι ὅπερ ἀντώμοσα, ὡς οὔτε ἐποιήσατο ἐκεῖνος ὑὸν ἑαυτῷ, οὔτʼ ἔδωκε τὰ ἑαυτοῦ, οὔτε διαθήκας κατέλιπεν, οὔτε προσήκει ἔχειν τὰ Ἀστυφίλου οὐδενὶ ἄλλῳ ἢ ἐμοί.
Astyphilus, the owner of the estate, was my half-brother, gentlemen, the son of my mother. He went abroad with the force which sailed to Mytilene, and died there. I shall try and prove to you what I stated in my affidavit, namely, that the deceased did not adopt a son, that he did not bequeath his property, that he left no will, and that no one except myself has a right to the estate of Astyphilus.
§ 2
ἔστι γὰρ [ὁ] Κλέων οὑτοσὶ ἀνεψιὸς Ἀστυφίλῳ πρὸς πατρός, ὁ δὲ ὑὸς ὁ τούτου, ὃν εἰσποιεῖ ἐκείνῳ, ἀνεψιαδοῦς. εἰσποίητος δʼ ἦν ὁ πατὴρ ὁ Κλέωνος εἰς ἄλλον οἶκον, καὶ οὗτοι ἔτι εἰσὶν ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ οἴκῳ, ὥστε γένει μὲν διὰ τὸν νόμον οὐδὲν προσήκουσιν Ἀστυφίλῳ. ἐπειδὴ δὲ κατὰ ταῦτα οὐκ ἦν ἀμφισβήτησις, διαθήκας, ὦ ἄνδρες, ψευδεῖς (ὡς ἐγὼ οἶμαι ἐπιδείξειν) κατεσκεύασαν καὶ ζητοῦσιν ἀποστερῆσαί με τῶν τἀδελφοῦ·
Cleon, my adversary, is first cousin to Astyphilus on his father's side, and his son, whom he pretends that Astyphilus adopted, is his first cousin once removed. Cleon's father, however, passed by adoption into another family, and they still belong to that family, so that in law they have no sort of relationship with Astyphilus. Seeing that they had no claim on these grounds, gentlemen, they concocted a will, which, as I think I shall be able to prove, is a forgery, and are trying to deprive me of my brother's estate.
§ 3
καὶ οὕτω σφόδρα Κλέων οὑτοσὶ καὶ πρότερον καὶ νῦν οὐδένα ἄλλον τὸν κλῆρον ἡγεῖται ἕξειν ἢ αὑτόν, ὥστʼ ἐπειδὴ τάχιστα ἠγγέλθη Ἀστύφιλος τετελευτηκώς, τοῦ μὲν πατρὸς τοῦ ἐμοῦ ἀσθενοῦντος, ἐμοῦ δὲ οὐκ ἐπιδημοῦντος ἀλλὰ στρατευομένου, εἰς τὸ χωρίον ἐνεβάτευσε, καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο ἐκεῖνος κατέλιπεν, ἅπαντα ἔφη τοῦ ὑοῦ τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ εἶναι, πρίν τι ὑμᾶς ψηφίσασθαι.
So confident, indeed, has Cleon here always been, and still is, that no one but himself is to have the estate, that, as soon as the news of Astyphilus's death was reported—my father being ill at the time and I abroad on military service—he entered into possession of the landed estate and declared that anything else which Astyphilus left belonged to his own son, without ever giving you the opportunity to decide the matter.
§ 4
ἐπεὶ δʼ ἐκομίσθη τὰ ὀστᾶ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ, ὁ μὲν προσποιούμενος πάλαι ὑὸς εἰσπεποιῆσθαι οὐ προὔθετο οὐδʼ ἔθαψεν, οἱ δὲ φίλοι Ἀστυφίλου καὶ οἱ συστρατιῶται, ὁρῶντες τὸν πατέρα τὸν ἐμὸν ἀρρωστοῦντα, ἐμὲ δὲ οὐκ ἐπιδημοῦντα, αὐτοὶ καὶ προὔθεντο καὶ τἆλλα πάντα τὰ νομιζόμενα ἐποίησαν καὶ τὸν ἐμὸν πατέρα ἀσθενοῦντα ἐπὶ τὸ μνῆμα ἤγαγον, εὖ εἰδότες ὅτι ἀσπάζοιτο αὐτὸν Ἀστύφιλος. τούτου δʼ ὑμῖν αὐτοὺς τοὺς ἐπιτηδείους τοὺς ἐκείνου μάρτυρας παρέξομαι τῶν παρόντων.
When, however, my brother's remains were brought home, the person who claims to have been long ago adopted as his son did not lay them out or bury them, but Astyphilus's friends and companions-in-arms, seeing that my father was ill and I was abroad, themselves laid out the remains and carried out all the other customary rites, and conducted my father, ill though he was, to the tomb, well knowing the affection in which Astyphilus held him. I will produce before you the friends of the deceased, who were amongst those who were present, as witnesses of this.
§ 5
Μάρτυρες ὅτι μὲν οὐκ ἔθαψε Κλέων Ἀστύφιλον, οὐδʼ 〈ἂν〉 αὐτὸς ἔξαρνος γένοιτο μεμαρτύρηταί τε ὑμῖν· ἐπειδὴ δʼ ἐπεδήμησα ἐγὼ καὶ ᾐσθόμην καρπουμένους τούτους τὰ ἐκείνου, ὁ [δὲ] ὑὸς αὐτοῦ ποιηθείη ὑπὸ Ἀστυφίλου, καὶ τούτων διαθήκας καταλίποι παρὰ Ἱεροκλεῖ Ἰφιστιάδῃ. ἀκούσας δʼ ἐγὼ λέγοντος αὐτοῦ ταῦτα ἐπορευόμην παρὰ τὸν Ἱεροκλέα, εὖ μὲν εἰδὼς ὅτι ὡς οἷόν τε μάλιστα ἐπιτήδειος εἴη Κλέωνι,
Witnesses That Cleon did not bury Astyphilus, even he himself would not deny, and evidence of the fact has been given you. On my return home I found my opponents in enjoyment of the property of the deceased; [I, therefore, sought out Cleon, who informed me that] his son had been adopted by Astyphilus, and that the latter had left a will to this effect in the keeping of Hierocles of Iphistiadae. On hearing this from him I proceeded to the house of Hierocles, knowing full well that he was on terms of the closest possible intimacy with Cleon,
§ 6
οὐχ ἡγούμενος δʼ ἂν αὐτὸν τολμῆσαί τι ψεύσασθαι κατὰ Ἀστυφίλου τετελευτηκότος, καὶ ταῦτα θεῖον ὄντα καὶ ἐμοῦ καὶ ἐκείνου. ὅμως δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐδὲν τούτων ὑπολογισάμενος ὁ Ἱεροκλῆς ἐρωτώμενος ὑπʼ ἐμοῦ ἀπεκρίνατό μοι ὅτι ἔχοι τὰς διαθήκας· λαβεῖν δὲ ἔφη αὐτὰς παρὰ Ἀστυφίλου, ὅτε εἰς Μυτιλήνην ἔμελλεν ἐκεῖνος ἐκπλεῖν. ὡς δὲ ταῦτʼ ἔλεγεν, ἀνάγνωθί μοι ταύτην τὴν μαρτυρίαν [ὅτι Ἱεροκλῆς ἀπεκρίνατο].
though I never thought that he would dare to lie against the wishes of Astyphilus now that he was dead, especially as he was his uncle as well as mine. Nevertheless, gentlemen, regardless of these considerations, Hierocles in reply to my questions stated that the will was in his possession and said that he had received it from Astyphilus when he was on the point of sailing to Mytilene. And to prove that he made these statements, please read this deposition.
§ 7
Μαρτυρία ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὔτε παραγενόμενος οὐδεὶς ἔτυχε τῶν οἰκείων ὅτε ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἐτελεύτησεν, οὔτε ἐγὼ ἐπεδήμουν ὅτε τὰ ὀστᾶ αὐτοῦ δεῦρο ἐκομίσθη, ἀναγκαῖόν μοί ἐστιν ἐξ αὐτῶν ὧν οὗτοι λέγουσιν ἐλέγχειν ψευδεῖς οὔσας τὰς διαθήκας [ἃς ἐποιήσαντο]. εἰκὸς γὰρ ἐκεῖνον οὐ μόνον ἐπιθυμεῖν ὑὸν ποιησάμενον καταλιπεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ σκοπεῖσθαι ὅπως κυριώτατα ἔσται ἃ ἂν διαθῆται, καὶ τήν τε οὐσίαν, ὃν ἂν ἐκεῖνος εἰσποιήσηται, οὗτος ἕξει, καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς βωμοὺς τοὺς πατρῴους οὗτος βαδιεῖται, καὶ τελευτήσαντι αὐτῷ καὶ τοῖς ἐκείνου προγόνοις τὰ νομιζόμενα ποιήσει·
Deposition Since, then, gentlemen, no one of my brother's relatives was present when he died and I was abroad when his remains were brought hither, I am obliged to use the actual statements of my adversaries to prove that the will is a forgery. It is only reasonable to suppose that Astyphilus did not merely feel a desire to adopt a son, but also provided that whatever dispositions he made should be as effectual as possible, and that, whomsoever he adopted, that person should both possess his estate and have access to his ancestral altars and perform all the customary rites for himself after his death and for his forefathers.
§ 8
ἅπαντα δὲ ταῦτα μάλιστʼ ἂν εἰδέναι ὅτι γένοιτο, εἰ μὴ ἄνευ τῶν οἰκείων τῶν ἑαυτοῦ τὰς διαθήκας ποιοῖτο, ἀλλὰ πρῶτον μὲν συγγενεῖς παρακαλέσας, ἔπειτα δὲ φράτορας καὶ δημότας, ἔπειτα τῶν ἄλλων ἐπιτηδείων ὅσους δύναιτο πλείστους· οὕτω γὰρ εἴτε κατὰ γένος εἴτε κατὰ δόσιν ἀμφισβητοίη τις, ῥᾳδίως ἂν ἐλέγχοιτο ψευδόμενος.
He would be assured that all these intentions would be best effected, not if he made his will without the attestation of any of his friends, but if he summoned first his kinsmen, then the members of his ward and deme, and finally as many as possible of his other acquaintances; for then anyone who might claim the estate either as next-of-kin or as legatee could be easily convicted of false pretences.
§ 9
ὁ τοίνυν Ἀστύφιλος οὐδὲν φαίνεται τοιοῦτον ποιήσας, οὐδὲ παραστησάμενος οὐδένα τούτων ὅτε διέθετο ἃ οὗτοί φασιν, εἰ μή τις ἄρα ὑπὸ τούτων πέπεισται ὁμολογεῖν παρεῖναι. αὐτὸς δʼ ὑμῖν πάντας τούτους μαρτυροῦντας παρέξομαι.
Astyphilus is shown to have taken none of these precautions, and not to have summoned any of the persons whom I have mentioned when he made the will which my opponents allege that he made—unless, indeed, anyone has been suborned by them to state that he was present. I will myself produce all these persons before you as witnesses.
§ 10
Μάρτυρες ἴσως τοίνυν Κλέων οὑτοσὶ φήσει οὐκ εἰκὸς εἶναι τεκμηρίοις ὑμᾶς χρήσασθαι τούτοις τοῖς μάρτυσιν, ὅτι μαρτυροῦσι μὴ εἰδέναι Ἀστύφιλον ταῦτα διατιθέμενον. ἐγὼ δʼ οἶμαι, περί γε διαθηκῶν οὔσης τῆς ἀμφισβητήσεως καὶ περὶ τοῦ ποιηθῆναί τινα ὑὸν Ἀστυφίλῳ, ἡμῖν πολὺ βεβαιοτέραν εἶναι μαρτυρίαν ἣν οἱ ἀναγκαῖοι 〈οἱ〉 ἐκείνου περὶ τῶν μεγίστων μή φασι παραγενέσθαι, μᾶλλον ἢ ἣν οἱ μηδὲν προσήκοντες μαρτυροῦσι παρεῖναι.
Witnesses Cleon will perhaps contend that you ought not to draw any conclusions from the evidence of these witnesses, because they merely depose that they have no knowledge of the making of this will by Astyphilus. But in my opinion, since the controversy is about a will and about the adoption of a son by Astyphilus, more weight should be attached by you to the evidence of the intimate friends of the deceased, when they declare that they were not present on so important an occasion, than to the evidence of those who have no connection with him, to the effect that they were present.
§ 11
καὶ ἐχρῆν δʼ, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ αὐτὸν Κλέωνα, μὴ δοκοῦντα εἶναι ἠλίθιον, ὅτε τὸν ὑὸν τὸν τούτου ἐποιεῖτο Ἀστύφιλος καὶ τὰς διαθήκας κατέλειπε, παρακαλέσαι εἴ τέ τινα συγγενῆ ἐπιδημοῦντα ἐγίγνωσκε, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους, ὅτῳ περ ἔμβραχυ ᾔδει Ἀστύφιλον χρώμενον. κωλῦσαι μὲν γὰρ οὐδεὶς ἂν αὐτὸν ἐδύνατο, ὅτῳ ἐβούλετο, δοῦναι τὰ ἑαυτοῦ· τούτῳ δʼ ἂν μεγάλη μαρτυρία ἦν, ὅτι οὐ λάθρᾳ ταῦτα διέθετο.
Moreover, Cleon himself, being apparently no fool, when Astyphilus was adopting his son and making the will, ought to have summoned any relatives whom he knew to be in the city and practically any other person with whom he knew Astyphilus to be intimate. For no one could have prevented Astyphilus from devising his property to whomsoever he wished; but the fact that the will was not made in secret, would have been strong evidence in Cleon's favor.
§ 12
ἔτι δʼ, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἰ μὲν ὁ Ἀστύφιλος μηδένα ἐβούλετο εἰδέναι ὅτι τὸν Κλέωνος ὑὸν ἐποιεῖτο μηδʼ ὅτι διαθήκας καταλίποι, εἰκὸς ἦν μηδὲ ἄλλον μηδένα ἐγγεγράφθαι ἐν τῷ γραμματείῳ μάρτυρα· εἰ δʼ ἐναντίον μαρτύρων φαίνεται διαθέμενος, τούτων δὲ μὴ τῶν μάλιστα χρωμένων ἀλλὰ τῶν ἐντυχόντων, πῶς εἰκός ἐστιν ἀληθεῖς εἶναι τὰς διαθήκας;
Furthermore, gentlemen, if Astyphilus wished that no one should know that he was adopting Cleon's son or that he had left a will, no one else's name ought to have been inscribed in the document as witness; but if it appears that he made a will in the presence of witnesses, and those witnesses were not taken from among those who were most intimate with him but were chance persons, is there any probability that the will is genuine?
§ 13
οὐ γὰρ 〈ἂν〉 ἡγοῦμαι ἔγωγε οὐδένα, ὑὸν ἑαυτῷ ποιούμενον, τολμῆσαι ἄλλους τινὰς παρακαλέσαι ἢ τούτους, οἷς περ καὶ ἱερῶν καὶ ὁσίων κοινωνὸν ἀνθʼ αὑτοῦ εἰς τὸν ἔπειτα χρόνον ἔμελλε καταλιπεῖν. ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδʼ αἰσχυνθῆναι οὐδενὶ προσήκει ἐπὶ τοιαύταις διαθήκαις ὡς πλείστους μάρτυρας παρίστασθαι, νόμου γε ὄντος ἐξεῖναι ὅτῳ βούλοιτο δοῦναι τὰ ἑαυτοῦ.
For my part I cannot believe that anyone, when he was adopting a son, would have ventured to summon as witnesses any other persons except those with whom he was about to leave that son, to take his own place as an associate for the future in their religious and civic acts. Moreover, no one ought to be ashamed of summoning the largest possible number of witnesses to the execution of such a will, when there is a law which permits a man to bequeath his property to whomsoever he wishes.
§ 14
σκέψασθε δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ χρόνου ὃν οὗτοι λέγουσι περὶ τῶν διαθηκῶν. ὅτε γὰρ εἰς Μυτιλήνην ἐξέπλει στρατευόμενος, τότε φασὶν αὐτὸν ταῦτα διαθέσθαι· φαίνεται δὲ ὁ Ἀστύφιλος τῷ τούτων λόγῳ τὰ μέλλοντα ἅπαντα ἔσεσθαι προειδώς. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ ἐστρατεύσατο εἰς Κόρινθον, ἔπειτα εἰς Θετταλίαν, ἔτι δὲ τὸν Θηβαικὸν πόλεμον ἅπαντα, καὶ ἄλλοσε ὅπου περ αἰσθάνοιτο στράτευμα συλλεγόμενον, ἁπανταχοῖ ἀπεδήμει λοχαγῶν· καὶ οὐδʼ ἐν μιᾷ τούτων τῶν ἐξόδων διαθήκας κατέλιπεν. ἡ δὲ εἰς τὴν Μυτιλήνην στρατεία τελευταία αὐτῷ ἐγένετο, ἐν ᾗ καὶ ἀπέθανε.
Now consider the matter, gentlemen, from the point of view of the date which my opponents assign to the will. They say that he made these dispositions when he was sailing for Mytilene on military service; it is clear then from their account that he knew beforehand all that fate had in store for him! For he served first at Corinth, then in Thessaly and again throughout the Theban war, and wherever else he heard of an army being collected, he went abroad holding a command; yet never on his departure for any one of these campaigns did he leave a will behind him. The expedition to Mytilene was his last, for in it he perished.
§ 15
τῷ οὖν ἂν ὑμῶν φανείη πιστόν, πρότερον ἄλλας στρατείας τοῦ Ἀστυφίλου στρατευομένου καὶ εὖ εἰδότος ὅτι ἐν ἁπάσαις μέλλοι κινδυνεύειν, οὕτως ἀκριβῶς τὰ παρὰ τῆς τύχης συμβῆναι, ὥστʼ ἐν μὲν τῷ πρόσθεν χρόνῳ μηδὲ περὶ ἑνὸς αὐτὸν τῶν αὑτοῦ διαθέσθαι, ὅτε δὲ τὸ τελευταῖον ἔμελλε στρατεύεσθαι, ἐθελοντήν τε ἐκπλέοντα καὶ μάλιστα ἐκ ταύτης τῆς στρατείας ἐλπίζοντα σωθήσεσθαι (πῶς τοῦτον πιστὸν ἤδη ;) τὰς διαθήκας τότε καταλιπεῖν καὶ ἐκπλεύσαντα τελευτῆσαι;
Who among you can believe it possible that the decrees of fate should correspond so exactly with Astyphilus's conduct, that when he was preparing for other campaigns and was well aware that he was going to run risks on all of them, on no previous occasion did he make any disposition of his property, yet when he was about to set out on his last expedition, going out as a volunteer with every prospect of returning safe and sound from this campaign, on this occasion only did he make a will and then sail away and lose his life? How can you credit such a coincidence?
§ 16
χωρὶς δὲ τούτων, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ἔτι μείζω τεκμήρια παρέξομαι ὡς οὐδὲν ἀληθὲς λέγουσιν οὗτοι. ἐπιδείξω γὰρ ὑμῖν ἔχθιστον ἁπάντων ὄντα Ἀστύφιλον Κλέωνι, καὶ οὕτω σφόδρα καὶ δικαίως μισοῦντα τοῦτον, ὥστε πολὺ ἂν θᾶττον διαθέμενον μηδένα ποτὲ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ οἰκείων διαλεχθῆναι Κλέωνι, μᾶλλον ἢ τὸν τούτου ὑὸν ποιησάμενον.
But besides this, judges, I will produce still stronger indications that there is no truth in what my opponents say. I will prove to you that Astyphilus had no such bitter enemy as Cleon, and hated him so much and with such good cause, that he would have been much more likely to have arranged that no one of his family should ever speak to Cleon than to have adopted his son.
§ 17
Εὐθυκράτει γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες, τῷ πατρὶ τῷ Ἀστυφίλου αἴτιος γενέσθαι λέγεται τοῦ θανάτου Θούδιππος ὁ Κλέωνος τουτουὶ πατήρ, αἰκισάμενος ἐκεῖνον διαφορᾶς τινος αὐτοῖς γενομένης ἐν τῇ νεμήσει τοῦ χωρίου, καὶ οὕτως αὐτὸν διατεθῆναι, ὥστε ἐκ τῶν πληγῶν αὐτὸν ἀσθενήσαντα οὐ πολλαῖς ἡμέραις ὕστερον ἀποθανεῖν.
For the death of Euthycrates, the father of Astyphilus, is said to have been caused by an assault made upon him by Thudippus, the father of Cleon here, in the course of a quarrel which arose between them over the division of their land, and he is said to have received such treatment that he fell ill as a result of the blows and died not many days later.
§ 18
ὡς δὲ ταῦτʼ ἐστὶν ἀληθῆ, ἴσως μὲν καὶ Ἀραφηνίων καὶ πολλοὶ τῶν τότε συγγεωργούντων μαρτυρήσειαν ἄν μοι, διαρρήδην δὲ περὶ τηλικούτου πράγματος οὐκ ἂν ἔχοιμι ὅπως ὑμῖν παρασχοίμην. καὶ γὰρ αὐτὸν τυπτόμενον ἰδὼν Ἱεροκλῆς, ὁ τὸ γραμματεῖον φάσκων παρʼ ἑαυτῷ τεθῆναι, οἶδʼ ὅτι οὐκ ἂν ἐθελήσειε μαρτυρῆσαι ἐναντία ταῖς διαθήκαις αἷς αὐτὸς ἀποφαίνει. ὅμως μέντοι καὶ κάλει Ἱεροκλέα, ἵνα ἐναντίον τούτων μαρτυρήσῃ ἢ ἐξομόσηται.
That this story is true, many of the Araphenians, who were tilling their land at the time, would probably testify for me, but I could not find anyone to give positive evidence in so grave a matter. Hierocles, the man who alleges that the will was deposited in his custody, saw Euthycrates struck, but I am sure that he would not be willing to give evidence to the detriment of the will which he is himself producing. But for all that, summon Hierocles that he may give his evidence before the court or else swear to his ignorance of the fact.
§ 19
Ἐξωμοσία ἀκριβῶς μὲν ᾔδειν· τοῦ γὰρ αὐτοῦ ἀνδρός ἐστιν, ἃ μὲν οἶδεν, ἐξόμνυσθαι, τῶν δὲ μὴ γενομένων πίστιν ἐθέλειν ἐπιθεῖναι ἦ μὴν εἰδέναι γενόμενα· ὡς δέ, ὅτε ἀπέθνησκεν [ὁ] Εὐθυκράτης ὁ πατὴρ Ἀστυφίλου, ἐπέσκηψε τοῖς οἰκείοις μηδένα ποτὲ ἐᾶσαι ἐλθεῖν τῶν Θουδίππου ἐπὶ τὸ μνῆμα τὸ ἑαυτοῦ, τούτων ὑμῖν τὸν ἔχοντα τὴν τηθίδα τοῦ Ἀστυφίλου μάρτυρα παρέξομαι.
Oath of Ignorance I was quite sure he would say this; for it is quite in the same character for a man to swear that he is ignorant of facts which he really knows and to be willing to pledge his oath to the truth of what has never really happened. However, to prove that Euthycrates, the father of Astyphilus, on his death-bed charged his friends never to allow any of Thudippus's family to come near his tomb, I will produce as witness before you the husband of Astyphilus's aunt.
§ 20
Μαρτυρία ἀκούων τοίνυν ταῦτα ὁ Ἀστύφιλος καὶ τούτου καὶ τῶν ἄλλων προσηκόντων εὐθέως ἐκ παιδίου, ἐπειδὴ τάχιστα ἤρχετο φρονεῖν, οὐδὲ πώποτε διελέχθη Κλέωνι, ἀλλὰ πρότερον ἐτελεύτησεν, οὐχ ἡγούμενος ὅσιον εἶναι, τοιαύτην αἰτίαν ἔχοντος Θουδίππου περὶ τὸν αὑτοῦ πατέρα, τῷ ἐκείνου ὑεῖ διαλέγεσθαι. ὡς οὖν τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον διάφορος ἦν Κλέωνι, τούτων ὑμῖν τοὺς συνειδότας μάρτυρας παρέξομαι.
Evidence Astyphilus, then, hearing of this in childhood from his uncle and his other relatives, as soon as he reached the age of reason, would never speak to Cleon, and maintained this attitude up to his death, holding the opinion that it was impious to speak to the son of Thudippus, when the latter was charged with so grave a crime against his father. To prove that he remained throughout his life at variance with Cleon, I will produce as witnesses before you those who know the facts.
§ 21
Μάρτυρες εἰς τὰς θυσίας τοίνυν, ἐν αἷσπερ οἱ ἄλλοι Ἀθηναῖοι ἑστιῶνται, πρῶτον μὲν δημότην ὄντα, ἔπειτα ἀνεψιόν, ἔτι δὲ τὸν ὑὸν τούτου μέλλοντα ποιεῖσθαι, εἰκὸς δήπου ἦν, ὁπότε περ ἐπιδημοίη, μηδὲ μεθʼ ἑνὸς ἄλλου ἰέναι τὸν Ἀστύφιλον ἢ μετὰ Κλέωνος. ὡς τοίνυν οὐδέποτʼ ἦλθε μετʼ αὐτοῦ, ὑμῖν τῶν δημοτῶν μαρτυρίαν ἀναγνώσεται.
Witnesses It would have been only natural, I suppose, for Astyphilus, whenever he was at home, to attend the sacrifices, at which all the Athenians entertain one another, accompanied by Cleon rather than by anyone else, since he was of the same deme and his cousin and, moreover, intended to adopt his son. The clerk shall, therefore, read you the deposition of the demesmen to prove that on no occasion was he accompanied by him.
§ 22
Μαρτυρία οὕτως τοίνυν διακείμενος τῷ τετελευτηκότι Κλέων ἀξιοῖ τὸν ὑὸν τὸν ἑαυτοῦ τὰ ἐκείνου ἔχειν. καὶ τί δεῖ τοῦτον λέγειν; ἀλλʼ Ἱεροκλῆς, θεῖος ὢν καὶ 〈ἐκείνῳ καὶ〉 ἐμοί, οὕτως ἐστὶ τολμηρὸς ὥστε οὐ γενομένας διαθήκας ἥκει φέρων, καί φησι παρʼ ἑαυτῷ Ἀστύφιλον ταύτας καταλιπεῖν.
Deposition Such then being the relations between Cleon and the deceased, he now demands that his son should inherit his property. Yet why should I speak of Cleon? It is rather Hierocles, the uncle of the deceased and of me, who has had the audacity to come here with a forged will and declare that Astyphilus left it in his keeping.
§ 23
καίτοι, Ἱερόκλεις, πολλὰ κἀγαθὰ παθὼν ὑπὸ Θεοφράστου τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ ἐμοῦ, ὅτε χεῖρον ἔπραττες ἢ νυνί, καὶ ὑπὸ Ἀστυφίλου, οὐδετέρῳ αὐτοῖν τὴν ἀξίαν χάριν ἀποδίδως· ἐμὲ μὲν γὰρ ὑὸν ὄντα Θεοφράστου, σαυτῷ δὲ ἀδελφιδοῦν, ἀποστερεῖς ἅ μοι οἱ νόμοι ἔδοσαν, Ἀστυφίλου δὲ τεθνεῶτος καταψεύδῃ, καὶ τὸ κατὰ σαυτὸν μέρος τοὺς ἐχθίστους καθίστης τῶν ἐκείνου κληρονόμους.
And yet, Hierocles, though you received many kindnesses from my father Theophrastus, when you were less prosperous than you are now, and from Astyphilus, you are paying to neither of them the return which is their due; for you are robbing me, the son of Theophrastus and your own nephew, of property which the laws awarded to me, and you are slandering the memory of the dead Astyphilus and doing your best to put his bitterest enemies in possession of his property.
§ 24
καὶ πρὶν μὲν ληχθῆναι τοῦ κλήρου, ὦ ἄνδρες, εὖ εἰδὼς ὁ Ἱεροκλῆς ὅτι οὐδενὶ ἄλλῳ γίγνοιτο τὰ Ἀστυφίλου ἢ ἐμοί, ἐν μέρει ἑκάστῳ τῶν ἐκείνου ἐπιτηδείων προσῄει πωλῶν τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ τοὺς οὐδὲν προσήκοντας πείθων ἀμφισβητεῖν, λέγων ὅτι θεῖος εἴη Ἀστυφίλῳ καὶ ἀποφανοίη διαθήκας ἐκεῖνον καταλελοιπότα, εἴ τις αὑτῷ κοινώσοιτο· ἐπειδὴ δὲ πρὸς Κλέωνα διωμολογήσατο καὶ τῶν τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ ἐμερίσατο, νυνὶ ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγων ἀξιώσει πιστεύεσθαι. δοκεῖ δέ μοι κἂν ὀμόσαι ἄσμενος, εἴ τις αὐτῷ ὅρκον διδοίη.
Nay, before any formal claim was laid to the estate, Hierocles, well aware that the estate was coming by rights to me and to no one else, went round in turn to all the friends of the deceased, hawking his scheme and trying to persuade men who had no title to it to claim the estate, saying that he was Astyphilus's uncle and would show that he had left a will, if anyone would go shares with him; and now that he has made a bargain with Cleon and divided up my brother's property, he will demand to be believed on the ground that he is speaking the truth. He would, I believe, be delighted even to take an oath, if anyone were to propose it to him.
§ 25
καὶ ἐμοὶ μὲν συγγενὴς ὢν οὐδὲ τὰ γενόμενα ἐθέλει μαρτυρεῖν, ᾧ δʼ οὐδὲν προσήκει, τούτῳ τὰ ψευδῆ συλλαμβάνει καὶ τῶν οὐ πραχθέντων γραμματεῖον ἥκει φέρων· πολὺ γὰρ προὐργιαίτερον ἡγεῖται εἶναι τὸ χρηματίζεσθαι ἢ τὴν ἐμὴν συγγένειαν. ὡς δὲ ἐπηγγέλλετο περιιὼν διαθήκας ἀποφανεῖν, εἴ τις αὑτῷ κοινώσαιτο, αὐτοὺς ὑμῖν οἷς προσῆλθε μάρτυρας παρέξομαι.
For me, though he is my kinsman, he refuses to testify even to events which have actually happened, but with my opponent, who is no relative of his, he co-operates in telling lies and has brought a document in his favor to prove events which have never occurred; for he considers that to make money is much more important than his kinship with me. To prove that he went round and promised to produce a will in favor of anyone who would share the estate with him, I will produce as witnesses the actual persons to whom he addressed himself.
§ 26
Μάρτυρες τί οὖν χρή, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὄνομα θέσθαι τούτῳ τῷ ἀνδρί, ὅστις ἐθέλει οὕτω ῥᾳδίως διὰ τὸ ἑαυτοῦ κέρδος τῶν τεθνεώτων τινὸς καταψεύδεσθαι; ὡς δὲ οὐδὲ Κλέωνι προῖκα τὰς διαθήκας ἀποφαίνει, ἀλλὰ μισθὸν εἴληφεν, αὕτη ὑμῖν ἡ μαρτυρία οὐ μικρὸν τεκμήριον ἔσται. τοιαῦτα μέντοι κοινῇ ἐπʼ ἐμοὶ τεχνάζουσιν· ἡγεῖται γὰρ αὐτῶν ἑκάτερος εὕρημα ἔχειν ὅ τι ἂν τῶν Ἀστυφίλου λάβῃ.
Witnesses What name ought to be given, gentlemen, to this man, who is willing so lightly for his own profit to slander one who is dead? This evidence will furnish you with a strong presumption that he is not producing this will in favor of Cleon for nothing, but has received a recompense. Such, however, are the artifices which they are concerting against me; for each regards as clear gain anything that he can filch from the property of Astyphilus.
§ 27
ὡς μὲν οὖν οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀληθεῖς αἱ διαθῆκαι, ἀλλὰ Κλέων καὶ Ἱεροκλῆς βούλονται ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατῆσαι, καθʼ ὅσον ἐδυνάμην ἀπέδειξα· ὡς δʼ εἰ καὶ μηδὲν προσήκων ἔτυχον Ἀστυφίλῳ, δικαιότερός εἰμι ἔχειν τὰ ἐκείνου ἢ οὗτοι, διδάξω ὑμᾶς. ὅτε γὰρ ἐλάμβανε Θεόφραστος ὁ ἐμὸς πατὴρ τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα καὶ Ἀστυφίλου παρὰ Ἱεροκλέους, ἦλθε καὶ αὐτὸν ἐκεῖνον ἔχουσα μικρὸν ὄντα, καὶ διῃτᾶτο παρʼ ἡμῖν τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον ὁ Ἀστύφιλος, καὶ ἐπαιδεύθη ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ ἐμοῦ.
I have proved to you to the best of my ability that the will is not genuine, and that Cleon and Hierocles are seeking to mislead you; I will now proceed to show that, even if I had borne no relationship to Astyphilus, I have a better right to his property than my opponents. For when my father Theophrastus received my mother—who was also the mother of Astyphilus—in marriage from Hierocles, she brought with her Astyphilus, then a young child, and he lived continuously in our house, and was brought up by my father.
§ 28
καὶ ἐπειδὴ ἐγὼ ἐγενόμην καὶ ὥραν εἶχον παιδεύεσθαι, μετʼ ἐκείνου συνεπαιδευόμην. λαβὲ δέ μοι ταύτην τὴν μαρτυρίαν, εἶτα τῶν διδασκάλων ὅποι ἐφοιτῶμεν. Μαρτυρίαι τὸ τοίνυν χωρίον τὸ ἐκείνου πατρῷον, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἐμὸς ἐφύτευσε καὶ ἐγεώργει καὶ ἐποίει διπλασίου ἄξιον. ἀνάβητέ μοι καὶ τούτων μάρτυρες.
When I was born and was of an age to be instructed, I was educated with him. Please take this deposition, and after it that of the masters whose classes we attended. Depositions My father, gentlemen, planted the paternal estate of Astyphilus and continued to cultivate it and doubled its value. Let the witnesses of this also, please, come up.
§ 29
Μάρτυρες ἐπεὶ τοίνυν ἐδοκιμάσθη ὁ ἀδελφός, ἀπέλαβε πάντα ὀρθῶς καὶ δικαίως, ὥστε ἐκεῖνον μηδὲ πώποτε μηδὲν ἐγκαλέσαι τῷ ἐμῷ πατρί. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα τὴν ἀδελφὴν τὴν ἐκείνου ὁμοπατρίαν ἠγγύησεν ὁ ἐμὸς πατὴρ ὅτῳ ἐδόκει αὐτῷ, καὶ τἆλλα διῴκει, καὶ ταῦτα τῷ Ἀστυφίλῳ ἐξήρκει· ἱκανὴν γὰρ ἡγήσατο βάσανον εἰληφέναι ἀπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ ἐμοῦ τῆς εἰς αὑτὸν εὐνοίας, ἐκ μικροῦ παιδίου τεθραμμένος παρʼ αὐτῷ. μαρτυροῦσι δὲ ὑμῖν καὶ περὶ τῆς ἐγγύης οἱ εἰδότες.
Witnesses When my brother came of age, he received all his possessions in so correct and regular a manner that he never had any complaint to make against my father. After this my father gave Astyphilus's sister in marriage to a man of his choice and managed everything else to Astyphilus's complete satisfaction; for the latter thought that he had received an ample proof from my father of his goodwill towards him, in the fact that he had been brought up by him from early childhood. Those who know the facts are my witnesses before you about his sister's betrothal.
§ 30
Μάρτυρες εἰς τοίνυν τὰ ἱερὰ ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἐμὸς τὸν Ἀστύφιλον 〈ὄντα〉 παῖδα ἦγε μεθʼ ἑαυτοῦ ὥσπερ καὶ ἐμὲ πανταχῇ καὶ εἰς τοὺς θιάσους τοὺς Ἡρακλέους ἐκεῖνον [αὐτὸν] εἰσήγαγεν, ἵνα μετέχοι τῆς κοινωνίας. αὐτοὶ ὑμῖν οἱ θιασῶται μαρτυρήσουσιν. Μάρτυρες ἐγὼ δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὡς διεκείμην πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν, σκέψασθε. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ συνετράφην ἐκείνῳ ἐκ παιδίου, ἔπειτα οὐδέποτε διάφορος ἐγενόμην, ἀλλʼ ἠσπάζετό με, ὡς ἴσασιν οἱ οἰκεῖοι πάντες οἱ ἡμέτεροι καὶ οἱ φίλοι· οὓς βούλομαι ὑμῖν μάρτυρας ἀναβιβάσαι.
Witnesses My father took Astyphilus with him when he was a child, as also he took me, to the religious ceremonies on every occasion; he also introduced him to the confraternity of Heracles in order that he might become a member of this association. The other members will themselves bear witness to this. Witnesses Next consider, gentlemen, my own relations with my brother. In the first place, I was brought up with him from infancy; secondly, I never had a quarrel with him, but he had a great affection for me, as all the members of our family and our friends know. I should like them to come forward and testify to you.
§ 31
Μάρτυρες δοκεῖ ἂν οὖν ὑμῖν Ἀστύφιλος, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὕτω μὲν μισῶν Κλέωνα, τοσαῦτα δʼ ἀγαθὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ ἐμοῦ πεπονθώς, αὐτὸς τῶν ἐχθρῶν ἄν τινος ὑὸν ποιήσασθαι ἢ τὰ ἑαυτοῦ δοῦναι, τοὺς εὐεργέτας καὶ τοὺς συγγενεῖς ἀποστερήσας; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ ἂν οἴομαι, εἰ καὶ δεκάκις ὁ Ἱεροκλῆς διαθήκας ψευδεῖς ἀποδεικνύει, ἀλλὰ καὶ διὰ τὸ ἀδελφὸν εἶναι καὶ διὰ τὴν ἄλλην οἰκειότητα πολὺ μᾶλλον προσήκειν ἐμοὶ ἢ τῷ Κλέωνος ὑεῖ,
Witnesses Can you imagine, gentlemen, that Astyphilus, detesting Cleon so heartily and having experienced so many kindnesses at the hands of my father, would himself have adopted a son of one of his enemies or bequeathed his property to him, to the detriment of his benefactors and relatives? Personally, I regard it as impossible, even though Hierocles produces forged wills ten times over: no, I am convinced that, because I am his brother and we were bound together by every other tie, I have a much stronger claim than the son of Cleon;
§ 32
ἐπεὶ τούτοις γε οὐδὲ προσποιήσασθαι καλὸν ἦν τῶν Ἀστυφίλου, οἵτινες οὕτω διέκειντο πρὸς αὐτόν, τὰ δὲ ὀστᾶ οὐκ ἔθαψαν, ἀλλὰ πρότερον ἐπὶ τὴν οὐσίαν ἦλθον πρὶν ἐκείνῳ τὰ νομιζόμενα ποιῆσαι. ἔπειτα νῦν ἀξιώσουσι κληρονομεῖν τῶν Ἀστυφίλου οὐ μόνον τὰς διαθήκας λέγοντες, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ γένος παρατιθέντες, ὅτι ἀνεψιὸς ἦν Κλέων πρὸς πατρός.
for it was positively indecent in them to put forward pretensions to the estate of Astyphilus, when they were on the terms with him that I have described and never buried his remains, but entered into possession before performing the customary rites over him. Further, they intend now to demand the succession to Astyphilus's property not only because of the will which they allege to exist, but also by a comparison of their relationship and mine, on the ground that Cleon was a first cousin of the deceased on his father's side.
§ 33
ὑμᾶς δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐκ εἰκός ἐστι τῷ τοὔτου γένει προσέχειν τὸν νοῦν· οὐδεὶς γὰρ πώποτε ἐκποίητος γενόμενος ἐκληρονόμησε τοῦ οἴκου ὅθεν ἐξεποιήθη, ἐὰν μὴ ἐπανέλθῃ κατὰ τὸν νόμον.... οὗτοι μέντοι ἀκριβῶς εἰδότες ὅτι οὐκ ἐποιήσατο Ἀστύφιλος τὸν Κλέωνος ὑόν, πολλάκις ἐληλυθότι αὐτῷ οὐδεπώποτε κεκρεανομήκασι. λαβέ μοι καὶ ταύτην τὴν μαρτυρίαν.
There is little likelihood, however, gentlemen, of your paying any attention to his claim of kinship; for no one, after passing by adoption into another family, has ever inherited from the family out of which he was adopted, unless he re-entered it in the proper legal manner.These men, however, well knowing that Astyphilus never adopted Cleon's son, though he has often presented himself, have never given him any share in the victims. Please take this deposition also.
§ 34
Μαρτυρία ἑκατέρῳ οὖν ἡμῶν, ἐξ ὧν ἀντωμόσαμεν σκεψάμενοι, ψηφίσασθε. Κλέων μὲν γάρ φησι τὸν ὑὸν τὸν ἑαυτοῦ Ἀστυφίλῳ εἰσποιηθῆναι, καὶ ταῦτʼ ἐκεῖνον διαθέσθαι· ἐγὼ δʼ οὔ φημι, ἀλλʼ ἐμὰ εἶναι πάντα τὰ Ἀστυφίλου, ἀδελφὸς ὢν ἐκείνου, ὡς καὶ αὐτοὶ οὗτοι ἴσασι. μὴ τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἰσποιήσητε ὑὸν Ἀστυφίλῳ ὃν οὐδʼ αὐτὸς ζῶν ἐκεῖνος ἐποιήσατο, ἀλλὰ τοὺς νόμους οὓς ὑμεῖς ἔθεσθε βεβαιώσατέ μοι· κατὰ τούτους γὰρ ἀμφισβητῶ, ὁσιωτάτην δέησιν δεόμενος, ὦ ἄνδρες, τῆς τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ οὐσίας κληρονόμον με καταστῆσαι.
Deposition I call upon you, therefore, to decide between us after considering our declarations under oath. Cleon declares that his son was adopted by Astyphilus and that the latter made dispositions to this effect; this I deny and declare that all Astyphilus's possessions belong to me, because I am his brother, as my opponents are themselves well aware. Do not, therefore, gentlemen, give Astyphilus an adopted son whom he himself never in his life adopted, but confirm in my favor the laws which you yourselves enacted; for it is in conformity with them that I make my claim, addressing to you a most pious prayer, that you should establish me as heir of my brother's property.
§ 35
ἀπέδειξα δʼ ὑμῖν ὡς οὐδενὶ ἐκεῖνος δέδωκε τὰ ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ μάρτυρας ἁπάντων ὧν εἶπον παρεσχόμην. βοηθήσατε οὖν μοι, καὶ εἰ λέγειν ἐμοῦ δύναται Κλέων μᾶλλον, τοῦτο αὐτῷ ἄνευ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τοῦ δικαίου μηδὲν ἰσχυσάτω, ἀλλʼ ὑμᾶς αὐτοὺς βραβευτὰς ἁπάντων καταστήσατε. διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ συλλέγεσθε, ἵνα τοῖς μὲν ἀναισχυντοῦσι μηδὲν πλέον ᾖ, οἱ δὲ ἀδυνατώτεροι τολμῶσι περὶ τῶν δικαίων ἀμφισβητεῖν, εὖ εἰδότες ὅτι ὑμεῖς οὐδενὶ ἄλλῳ τὸν νοῦν προσέχετε.
I have shown that he never devised his estate to anyone, and I have produced witnesses in support of all my statements. Assist me, therefore, and, if Cleon is a more clever speaker than I am, let not his talent avail him unsupported by law and justice, but constitute yourselves arbitrators on the whole case. You are gathered here that the impudent may gain no advantage and the weaker may venture to assert their righteous claims, knowing full well that you are intent upon justice and upon nothing else. Take, therefore, my part, all of you, gentlemen;
§ 36
ἅπαντες οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, μετʼ ἐμοῦ γένεσθε· ὡς ἐάν τι ἄλλο ψηφίσησθε Κλέωνι πειθόμενοι, σκέψασθε ὁπόσων αἴτιοι γενήσεσθε. πρῶτον μὲν τοὺς ἐχθίστους Ἀστυφίλου ἐπί τε τὰ μνήματα ἰέναι καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ ἱερὰ 〈τὰ〉 ἐκείνου ποιήσετε· ἔπειτα τὰς Εὐθυκράτους ἐπισκήψεις, τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ Ἀστυφίλου, ἀκύρους ποιήσετε, ἃς αὐτὸς πρότερον ἀπέθανεν ἢ παραβῆναι· ἔπειτα τετελευτηκότα Ἀστύφιλον παρανοίας αἱρήσετε·
for if you allow yourselves, under the persuasion of Cleon, to give any other verdict, consider the responsibility which you will assume. First, you will send the bitterest enemies of Astyphilus to his tomb to celebrate the rites over him; secondly, you will make of none effect the injunctions of Euthycrates, the father of Astyphilus, which he himself never transgressed up to the end of his life; lastly, you will convict Astyphilus after his death of consummate folly.
§ 37
εἰ γὰρ τοῦτον ἐποιήσατο ὑὸν οὗ τῷ πατρὶ πολεμιώτατος ἦν, πῶς οὐ δόξει τοῖς ἀκούσασι παρανοεῖν ἢ ὑπὸ φαρμάκων διεφθάρθαι; ἔτι δʼ ἐμέ, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ἐκτραφέντα ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ καὶ συμπαιδευθέντα Ἀστυφίλῳ καὶ ἀδελφὸν ὄντα, περιόψεσθε ὑπὸ Κλέωνος ἀποστερηθέντα τῶν ἐκείνου. ἀντιβολῶ ὑμᾶς καὶ ἱκετεύω ἐκ παντὸς τρόπου ψηφίσασθαί μοι· οὕτω γὰρ ἂν μάλιστα Ἀστυφίλῳ τε χαρίσαισθε κἀμὲ οὐκ ἂν ἀδικήσαιτε.
For if he adopted this man as his son with whose father he was on terms of the bitterest enmity, will not those who hear of it imagine that he was mad or that his senses had been impaired by drugs? Further, judges, you will be allowing me, after having been brought up under the same roof and educated with Astyphilus, to be deprived of his estate by Cleon. I beg and beseech you by every means in my power to give your verdict in my favor; for then you would best gratify the wishes of Astyphilus and save me from injustice.
On The Estate of Aristarchus · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg010 · Greek: Πρὸς Ξεναίνετον περὶ τοῦ Ἀριστάρχου κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg010.perseus-grc2 · English: On The Estate of Aristarchus — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg010.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Ἀρίσταρχός τις τεσσάρων πατὴρ γενόμενος παίδων, Κυρωνίδου καὶ Δημοχάρους καὶ τῆς μητρὸς τοῦ λέγοντος τὸν λόγον καὶ ἄλλης κόρης, τούτων μὲν τὸν Κυρωνίδην ἔτι περίων εἰσεποίησεν εἰς τὸν Ξεναινέτου τοῦ κατὰ μητέρα πάππου κλῆρον, αὐτὸς δὲ κληρονόμους τοὺς λοιποὺς ἑαυτῷ κατέλειψε παῖδας. μετὰ ταῦτα τελευτᾷ μὲν Δημοχάρης ἄπαις, καὶ ἡ μία θυγάτηρ [αὐτοῦ] καὶ αὐτὴ ἄπαις, ὁ δὲ κλῆρος ὅλος ἔρχεται δικαίως εἰς τὴν μητέρα τοῦ λέγοντος τὸν λόγον. καὶ ταῦτα μὲν οὕτω· μετὰ δὲ τὴν τελευτὴν Ἀριστάρχου Ἀριστομένης ἀδελφὸς ὢν αὐτοῦ καὶ κατὰ νόμον ἐπίτροπος τῶν τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ γινόμενος παίδων, ἐκδέδωκε Κυρωνίδῃ τῷ ἐκποιήτῳ υἱῷ Ἀριστάρχου τὴν θυγατέρα ἑαυτοῦ, ἐπαγγειλάμενος περιποιῆσαι αὐτῷ τὸν Ἀριστάρχου κλῆρον. ὃ δὴ καὶ πεποίηκε· γενομένου γὰρ υἱοῦ τῷ Κυρωνίδῃ πρῶτον μὲν ὄνομα τῷ παιδὶ τὸ τοῦ πάππου δεδώκασιν, Ἀρίσταρχον ὀνομάσαντες, εἶτα εἰσεποίησαν αὐτὸν εἰς τὸν 〈τοῦ〉 πάππου οἶκον ὡς δὴ τοῦτο ἐκείνου προστάξαντος, καὶ παραδέδωκεν Ἀριστομένης αὐτῷ τὸν ὅλον τοῦ πάππου κλῆρον. ἔτι δὲ ἄπαις ὢν ἐκεῖνος [καὶ] τελευτῶν κληρονόμον κατὰ διαθήκας ἐνεστήσατο τὸν ἴδιον ἀδελφὸν Ξεναίνετον. τούτων οὕτω γενομένων, καὶ κρατοῦντος Ξεναινέτου τὴν Ἀριστάρχου τοῦ παλαιοῦ οὐσίαν, ἀμφισβητεῖ πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ υἱὸς τῆς θυγατρὸς Ἀριστάρχου τοῦ παλαιοῦ, λέγων ἑαυτὸν μόνον εἶναι κληρονόμον δικαίως τῶν Ἀριστάρχου τοῦ παλαιοῦ χρημάτων. ὁ μὲν γὰρ Κυρωνίδης (φησίν) ἐκποίητος ἐγένετο· ὁ δὲ πατὴρ υἱὸν ἔχων γνήσιον τὸν Δημοχάρην, οὐκ ἐδύνατο θετὸν ἑαυτῷ ποιῆσαι παῖδα· ὁ δὲ Δημοχάρης ἀτελὴς ὢν οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἐδύνατο εἰσποιῆσαι τῷ πατρὶ θετὸν υἱόν· ἀλλʼ οὐδʼ ἡ ἄλλη θυγάτηρ αὐτοῦ ἡ προτελευτήσασα. ὥστε οὐ κατὰ τὸν νόμον (φησί) τῆς εἰσποιήσεως γενομένης τοῦ μικροῦ Ἀριστάρχου, οὐκέτι συνίστατο ἡ διαθήκη αὐτοῦ, τοῦ νέου Ἀριστάρχου· ἃ γὰρ μὴ δικαίως ἐκτήσατο, πῶς ἄλλῳ παραπέμπειν ἐδύνατο; ἀναιρουμένης δὲ τῆς διαθήκης εἰκότως ὁ κλῆρος εἰς τὸν λέγοντα τὸν λόγον ἐφέρετο, υἱὸν ὄντα τῆς γνησίας θυγατρὸς Ἀριστάρχου τοῦ παλαιοῦ. καὶ ἡ μὲν ὑπόθεσις αὕτη, ἡ στάσις δὲ πραγματικὴ ἔγγραφος· ζητεῖ〈ται〉 γὰρ εἰ δεῖ τὰς τοιαύτας συνεστάναι διαθήκας, καὶ τίς δικαιότερα λέγει.
Argument A certain Aristarchus was the father of four children, Cyronides, Demochares, the mother of the speaker of this oration, and another daughter. During his lifetime he gave Cyronides in adoption to be heir of the estate of his maternal grandfather Xenaenetus, and left his other children as his own heirs. Subsequently Demochares died without issue, as also did one of the daughters, and the whole estate passed by law to the mother of the speaker. Such was the position of affairs; but, after the death of Aristarchus, Aristomenes, his brother and now the legal representative of his brother's children, gave his own daughter in marriage to Cyronides, the son of Aristarchus, who had been adopted out of the family, having promised to obtain for him the estate of Aristarchus. This he succeeded in doing; for, when a son was born to Cyronides, they first gave him his grandfather's name, calling him Aristarchus (II.), and then had him adopted into his grandfather's family, on the ground that the latter had given instructions to this effect, and Aristomenes handed over to him all his grandfather's estate. Aristarchus (II.), dying without issue, constituted his own brother Xenaenetus (II.) by will as his heir. This being so and Xenaenetus being in possession of the property of Aristarchus the elder, the son of the latter's daughter claims the estate from him, asserting that he is himself by law the sole heir to the fortune of Aristarchus the elder. For, he declares, Cyronides passed out of the family by adoption, and his father, having a legitimate son, namely, Demochares, could not adopt a child; nor were Demochares, being under age, and the other sister who predeceased him in a position to adopt a son into their father's family. Therefore, he argues, since the adoption of Aristarchus the younger was not good in law, his will could not stand either; for how could he pass on to another property which he acquired without right? The will being thus annulled, the estate ought naturally to pass to the speaker as son of the legitimate daughter of Aristarchus the elder. Such is the subject; the discussion is concerned with validity, namely, that of a written document; for the questions are whether such a will ought to stand and which party has the better claim.
§ 1
ἐβουλόμην 〈μέν〉, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὥσπερ Θεναίνετος οὑτοσὶ δύναται ψευδῆ λέγειν θαρραλέως, οὕτω κἀγὼ τἀληθῆ πρὸς ὑμᾶς περὶ ὧν ἀμφισβητοῦμεν εἰπεῖν δυνηθῆναι· οἶμαι γὰρ ἂν ὑμῖν εὐθέως δῆλον γενέσθαι εἴθʼ ἡμεῖς ἀδίκως ἐπὶ τὸν κλῆρον ἥκομεν, εἴθʼ οὗτοι μὴ προσηκόντως πάλαι τὰ χρήματα ταῦτα εἰλήφασι. νῦν δὲ οὐκ ἐξ ἴσου διακείμεθα, ὦ ἄνδρες. οἱ μὲν γὰρ καὶ λέγειν δεινοὶ καὶ παρασκευάσασθαι ἱκανοί, ὥστε καὶ ὑπὲρ ἑτέρων πολλάκις ἐν ὑμῖν ἠγωνίσθαι· ἐγὼ δὲ μὴ ὅτι ὑπὲρ ἄλλου ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ ὑπὲρ ἐμαυτοῦ πώποτε δίκην ἰδίαν εἴρηκα, ὥστε πολλῆς δεῖ με συγγνώμης τυχεῖν παρʼ ὑμῶν.
I could wish, gentlemen, that, as Xenaenetus here finds it easy to lie with boldness, so I with like confidence could speak the truth to you in presenting my claim; for then, I think, it would immediately become clear to you whether we have unjustly come forward to claim the inheritance and whether our opponents have been for a long time in wrongful possession of this fortune. But, as it is, we are not on equal terms; for they are both able speakers and clever plotters, so that they have often pleaded before you on behalf of others, whereas I, so far from speaking on behalf of another, have never before pleaded on my own behalf in a private suit, and therefore deserve great indulgence at your hands.
§ 2
ἠνάγκασμαι μὲν οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, διὰ τὸ μὴ δύνασθαι δίκην παρʼ αὐτῶν λαβεῖν, τὴν μητέρα τὴν ἐμὴν ἐν τῇ ἀνακρίσει Ἀριστάρχου εἶναι ἀδελφὴν προσγράψασθαι· οὐ μὴν διὰ τοῦτο ὑμῖν ἡ διάγνωσις ἧττον περὶ αὐτῶν εὐκρινὴς γενήσεται, [ἀλλʼ] ἐκ τῶν νόμων σκοποῦσιν εἰ τὰ ἑαυτοῦ δέδωκε τούτῳ Ἀρίσταρχος ἢ τὰ μηδὲν προσήκοντα. ἔστι δὲ δίκαιον τοῦτο, ὦ ἄνδρες· ὁ γὰρ νόμος κελεύει τὰ μὲν ἑαυτοῦ διαθέσθαι ὅτῳ ἂν ἐθέλῃ, τῶν δὲ ἀλλοτρίων οὐδένα κύριον πεποίηκε.
I was obliged, it is true, owing to the impossibility of obtaining justice against my opponents, to add to my petition at the preliminary inquiry that my mother was sister of Aristarchus (II.). This will not, however, make your decision any the less easy, if you ask yourselves the question in the light of the laws whether the estate which Aristarchus (II.) has bequeathed to my opponent was his own or whether it was property to which he had no right. This question is a perfectly legal one; for the law ordains that a man can dispose of what is his own to anyone he likes, but it has never given anyone power over the possessions of another.
§ 3
τοῦτο οὖν ὑμᾶς πειράσομαι πρῶτον διδάσκειν, ἐάν μου μετʼ εὐνοίας ἀκοῦσαι ἐθέλητε. εἴσεσθε γὰρ ὡς ὁ κλῆρος οὗτος οὐ τούτων ἦν ἐξ ἀρχῆς, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐμῆς μητρὸς πατρῷος, ἔπειτα καὶ ὡς Ἀρίσταρχος οὐδὲ καθʼ ἕνα νόμον αὐτὸν εἴληφεν, ἀλλὰ παρὰ πάντας τοὺς νόμους ἀδικεῖ μετὰ τῶν οἰκείων τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα. ὅθεν οὖν σαφέστατα μαθήσεσθε ὡς ἔχει ταῦτα, ἐντεῦθεν ὑμᾶς πρῶτον πειράσομαι διδάσκειν.
This, then, is the first point which I shall try to make clear to you, if you will give me your kind attention; for you will recognize that this estate belonged from the first, not to my opponents but to my mother, who inherited it from her father, and, secondly, that Aristarchus (II.) seized it without the sanction of any law, and that he and the members of his family are wronging my mother in violation of every law. I will try to put the matter before you, going back to a point which will enable you to form the clearest conception of the facts.
§ 4
Ἀρίσταρχος γὰρ ἦν, ὦ ἄνδρες, Συπαλήττιος. οὗτος ἔλαβε Ξεναινέτου Ἀχαρνέως θυγατέρα, ἐξ ἧς γίγνεται Κυρωνίδης καὶ Δημοχάρης καὶ ἡ μήτηρ ἡ ἐμὴ καὶ ἄλλη τούτων ἀδελφή. Κυρωνίδης μὲν οὖν ὁ τοῦδε πατὴρ καὶ θατέρου τοῦ τόνδε τὸν κλῆρον ἀδίκως ἔχοντος ἐξεποιήθη εἰς ἕτερον οἶκον, ὥστε αὐτῷ τῶν χρημάτων οὐδὲν ἔτι προσῆκεν· Ἀριστάρχου δὲ τοῦ πατρὸς 〈τοῦ〉 τούτων τελευτήσαντος Δημοχάρης 〈ὁ〉 ὑὸς κληρονόμος τῶν ἐκείνου κατέστη. τούτου δὲ παιδὸς ἀποθανόντος καὶ τῆς ἑτέρας ἀδελφῆς, ἡ μήτηρ ἡ ἐμὴ ἐπὶ παντὶ τῷ οἴκῳ ἐπίκληρος ἐγένετο.
Aristarchus (I.), gentlemen, belonged to the deme of Sypalettus. He married the daughter of Xenaenetus (I.) of Acharnae, by whom he had two sons, Cyronides and Demochares, and two daughters, one of whom was my mother. Cyronides, the father of my opponent and of the other party who illegally kept possession of this estate, was adopted into another family, so that he had no further claim to the property. On the death of Aristarchus (I.), the father of these two sons, Demochares his son became his heir; but, when he died in his minority and the other sister also died, my mother became heiress to the whole of the family estate.
§ 5
καὶ οὕτω μὲν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἅπαντα ταυτὶ τῆς ἐμῆς μητρὸς ἐγένετο· προσῆκον δʼ αὐτῇ μετὰ τῶν χρημάτων τῷ ἐγγύτατα γένους συνοικεῖν, πάσχει δεινότατα, ὦ ἄνδρες. Ἀριστομένης γὰρ ἀδελφὸς ὢν ἐκείνου τοῦ Ἀριστάρχου, ὄντος αὐτῷ ὑέος καὶ θυγατρός, ἀμελήσας ἢ αὐτὸς αὐτὴν ἔχειν ἢ τῷ ὑεῖ μετὰ τοῦ κλήρου ἐπιδικάσασθαι, τούτων μὲν οὐδὲν ἐποίησε, τὴν δὲ ἑαυτοῦ θυγατέρα ἐπὶ τοῖς τῆς ἐμῆς μητρὸς χρήμασι Κυρωνίδῃ ἐξέδωκεν, ἐξ ἧς ὁ Θεναίνετος οὗτος καὶ Ἀρίσταρχος ὁ τελευτήσας ἐγένετο.
Thus from the beginning all this fortune really belonged to my mother; but, although she ought to have passed by marriage, together with her fortune, into the hands of her nearest relative, she is being abominably treated. For Aristomenes, the brother of Aristarchus the elder, having a son and a daughter of his own, neglected to make her his own wife or to have her married to his own son by an adjudication of the court; refusing both these alternatives, he gave his own daughter in marriage to Cyronides, endowing her with the fortune which belonged to my mother. Xenaenetus here and Aristarchus (II.), now deceased, were the issue of this marriage.
§ 6
τὸ μὲν οὖν ἀδίκημα, καὶ ὃν τρόπον τῶν χρημάτων ἀπεστερήθη, τοῦτʼ ἐστίν, ὦ ἄνδρες· μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα ἐκδίδωσι τῷ ἐμῷ πατρί. Κυρωνίδου δὲ τελευτήσαντος τὸν τοῦ Θεναινέτου ἀδελφὸν εἰσάγουσιν Ἀριστάρχῳ ὑόν, οὐδὲ καθʼ ἕνα νόμον, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὡς ἐγὼ ἐκ πολλῶν τεκμηρίων ὑμῖν ἐπιδείξω.
This is the injury, this the manner, gentlemen, in which my mother was deprived of her fortune. Subsequently Aristomenes gave my mother in marriage to my father. On the death of Cyronides, they introduced Xenaenetus's brother as the adopted son of Aristarchus (I.), a proceeding which cannot be justified by any law, as I will demonstrate to you by many proofs.
§ 7
πρῶτον μὲν οὖν μάρτυρας ὑμῖν παρέξομαι ὡς Κυρωνίδης ἐκποίητος εἰς τὸν Θεναινέτου οἶκον ἐγένετο καὶ ἐν ἐκείνῳ ἐτελεύτησεν, ἔπειθʼ ὡς Ἀρισταρχος, οὗ ἦν οὗτος ὁ κλῆρος, πρότερος τοῦ ὑέος Δημοχάρους ἐτελεύτησε, Δημοχάρης δὲ παῖς ὢν ἀπέθανε καὶ ἡ ἑτέρα ἀδελφή, ὥστε τὸν κλῆρον ἐπὶ τῇ ἐμῇ μητρὶ γενέσθαι. καί μοι κάλει τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
I will produce witnesses to testify, in the first place, that Cyronides entered by adoption into the family of Xenaenetus (I.) and belonged to that family at the time of his death; secondly, that Aristarchus (I.), to whom this estate belonged, predeceased his son Demochares, and that Demochares died while yet a minor, as did also the other sister, with the result that the estate devolved on to my mother. Please summon the witnesses to these facts.
§ 8
〈Μάρτυρες〉 οὕτω μὲν ἐξ ἀρχῆς 〈τῆς μητρὸς τῆς ἐμῆς〉 ἦν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὁ κλῆρος, περὶ οὗ νῦν ὁ λόγος ἐστί, Κυρωνίδου μὲν ἐκποιήτου γενομένου εἰς τὸν Θεναινέτου οἶκον, τοῦ δὲ πατρὸς Ἀριστάρχου τῷ ὑεῖ Δημοχάρει καταλιπόντος, ἐκείνου δὲ τῇ ἀδελφῇ τῇ ἑαυτοῦ ταύτῃ, μητρὶ δὲ ἐμῇ. δεῖ δέ, ἐπειδὴ λίαν ἀναισχυντοῦσιν, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ τὰ χρήματα παρὰ τὸ δίκαιον ἔχειν ἀξιοῦσι, μαθεῖν ὑμᾶς ὡς οὐδὲ καθʼ ἕνα νόμον Ἀρίσταρχος εἰς τοὺς φράτορας τοὺς ἐκείνου εἰσῆκται· ἐὰν γὰρ τοῦτο μάθητε, σαφῶς εἴσεσθε ὅτι τῷ μὴ δικαίως ἔχοντι οὐδὲ διατίθεσθαι περὶ αὐτῶν προσῆκεν.
Witnesses Thus, gentlemen, the estate now in question belonged to my mother from the beginning, since Cyronides was adopted out of the family into that of Xenaenetus (I.), and his father, Aristarchus (I.), left his property to his son Demochares, who left it to his own sister, my mother. But since they are so exceedingly impudent and claim this fortune against all right, you must see, gentlemen, that no law whatever authorized the introduction of Aristarchus (the younger) into the ward of Aristarchus (the elder); if you see this, you will clearly apprehend that the illegal detainer of the property had no right to dispose of it either.
§ 9
οἶμαι τοίνυν πάντας ὑμᾶς εἰδέναι, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅτι κατὰ διαθήκας αἱ εἰσαγωγαὶ τῶν εἰσποιήτων γίγνονται, διδόντων τὰ ἑαυτῶν καὶ ὑεῖς ποιουμένων, ἄλλως δὲ οὐκ ἔξεστιν. εἴτε οὖν Ἀρίσταρχον φήσει τις αὐτὸν διαθέσθαι, οὐκ ἀληθῆ λέξει· γνησίου γὰρ ὄντος αὐτῷ Δημοχάρους ὑέος οὔτʼ ἂν ἐβούλετο ταῦτα [δια]πρᾶξαι, οὔτε ἐξῆν δοῦναι τὰ ἑαυτοῦ ἑτέρῳ· εἴτε Ἀριστάρχου τελευτήσαντος Δημοχάρην αὐτὸν ποιήσασθαι, καὶ ταῦτα ψεύσονται.
I think that you are all aware, gentlemen, that the introduction of adopted children is always carried out by a will, the testator simultaneously devising his estate and adopting the son, and that this is the only legal method. If, therefore, anyone shall assert that Aristarchus (I.) himself made a will, he will be saying what is not true; for, while he possessed a legitimate son, Demochares, he could not have wished to do so and he was not permitted to devise his property to anyone else. Again, if they declare that Demochares adopted Aristarchus (II.) after the death of Aristarchus (I.), they will likewise be lying.
§ 10
παιδὸς γὰρ οὐκ ἔξεστι διαθήκην γενέσθαι· ὁ γὰρ νόμος διαρρήδην κωλύει παιδὶ μὴ ἐξεῖναι συμβάλλειν μηδὲ γυναικὶ πέρα μεδίμνου κριθῶν. μεμαρτύρηται δὲ Ἀρίσταρχον μὲν πρότερον Δημοχάρους τοῦ ὑέος τελευτῆσαι, ἐκεῖνον δὲ ὕστερον τοῦ πατρός· ὥστε κατά γε διαθήκην ἐκείνων, οὐδʼ εἰ διέθεντο προσῆκεν αὐτῷ τούτων τῶν χρημάτων κληρονομῆσαι. ἀνάγνωθι δὴ καὶ τοὺς νόμους, καθʼ οὓς οὐδετέρῳ αὐτῶν ἐξῆν διαθήκας ποιήσασθαι.
For a minor is not allowed to make a will; for the law expressly forbids any child—or woman—to contract for the disposal of more than a bushel of barley. Now evidence has been given you that Aristarchus (I.) predeceased his son Demochares and that the latter died after his father; and so, even supposing they had made wills, Aristarchus (II.) could never have inherited this property under their wills. Now read the laws which show that neither of them had the right to make a will.
§ 11
Νόμοι οὐ τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐδὲ Κυρωνίδην οἷόν τε ἦν ὑὸν Ἀριστάρχῳ εἰσποιῆσαι, ἀλλʼ αὐτῷ μὲν ἐπανελθεῖν εἰς τὸν πατρῷον οἶκον ἐξῆν, ὑὸν ἐγκαταλιπόντα ἐν τῷ Θεναινέτου οἴκῳ, ἐξ αὑτοῦ δὲ ἀντεισαγαγεῖν οὐκ ἔστι νόμος· ἢ ἐὰν φῶσι, ψεύσονται. ὥστε οὐδʼ ἂν φάσκωσιν ὑπʼ ἐκείνου 〈εἰς〉ποιηθῆναι, νόμον ἕξουσι δεῖξαι καθʼ ὃν ἐξῆν αὐτῷ ταῦτα πρᾶξαι, ἀλλʼ ἐξ ὧν αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν ἔτι φανερώτερον ὑμῖν γενήσεται τοῦτο, ὅτι παρανόμως καὶ ἀσελγῶς ἔχουσι τὰ τῆς μητρὸς χρήματα.
Laws Nor again, gentlemen, could Cyronides give Aristarchus (I.) a son by adoption; he could, it is true, have returned to his father's family, if he had left a son in the family of Xenaenetus (I.), but there is no law which permits him to introduce a son of his own to take his place. If they assert the existence of such a law they will be lying. So, not even if they assert that the adoption was carried out by Cyronides, will they be able to point to any law which authorized him to do so; but from their own assertions it will become still more evident to you that they are illegally and impudently detaining my mother's property.
§ 12
καὶ μὲν δή, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐδὲ Ἀριστομένει γε οὐδὲ Ἀπολλοδώρῳ, οἷς προσῆκε τῆς ἐμῆς μητρὸς ἐπιδικάσασθαι, οὐδὲ τούτοις ἐξῆν. θαυμαστὸν γὰρ ἂν ἦν, εἰ τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα ἔχοντι Ἀπολλοδώρῳ ἢ Ἀριστομένει οὐκ ἂν οἷόν τε ἦν τῶν ἐκείνης κυρίῳ γενέσθαι, κατὰ τὸν νόμον ὃς οὐκ ἐᾷ τῶν τῆς ἐπικλήρου κύριον εἶναι, ἀλλʼ ἢ τοὺς παῖδας ἐπὶ δίετες ἡβήσαντας κρατεῖν τῶν χρημάτων, ἀλλʼ ἑτέρῳ αὐτὴν ἐκδόντι ἐξέσται εἰς τὰ ταύτης χρήματα ὑὸν εἰσποιῆσαι. δεινὰ μέντʼ ἂν γίγνοιτο.
Furthermore, gentlemen, though Aristomenes or Apollodorus might have had my mother adjudicated to them in marriage, yet they had no right to her estate. Seeing that neither Apollodorus nor Aristomenes, if either of them had married my mother, could possibly have had the disposal of her property—in accordance with the law which does not allow anyone to have the disposal of the property of an heiress except her sons, who obtain possession of it on reaching the second year after puberty—it would be strange if Aristarchus is going to be allowed, after giving her in marriage to another, to introduce a son to inherit her fortune.
§ 13
καὶ τῷ μὲν πατρὶ αὐτῆς, εἰ παῖδες ἄρρενες μὴ ἐγένοντο, οὐκ ἂν ἐξῆν ἄνευ ταύτης διαθέσθαι· κελεύει γὰρ ὁ νόμος σὺν ταύταις κύριον εἶναι δοῦναι, ἐάν τῳ βούληται, τὰ ἑαυτοῦ· τῷ δὲ μήτε λαβεῖν αὐτὴν ἀξιώσαντι μήτε πατρὶ ὄντι, ἀλλʼ ἀνεψιῷ, παρὰ πάντας τοὺς νόμους εἰσαγαγόντι ἔσται κυρίως ταῦτα πεπραγμένα; καὶ τίς ὑμῶν ταῦτα πεισθήσεται;
It would indeed be an extraordinary state of affairs. Again, her own father, in default of male heirs, could not have disposed of his estate without disposing of her with it; for the law ordains that he may dispose of his property to whomsoever he wishes, if he disposes of his daughters with it. But when one who has refused to take the heiress in marriage and is not her father but her cousin, introduces an heir to her fortune in violation of every law, is this to be recognized as a valid act? Who of you can possibly believe it to be so?
§ 14
ἐγὼ μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, σαφῶς ἐπίσταμαι ὅτι οὔτε Ξεναίνετος οὔτε ἄλλος οὐδεὶς ἀνθρώπων ἕξει ἀποδεῖξαι ὡς οὐ τῆς ἐμῆς μητρὸς οὗτος 〈ὁ〉 κλῆρός ἐστι, τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτῇ τοῦ Δημοχάρους καταλιπόντος· ἐὰν δʼ ἄρα τολμῶσι περὶ αὐτῶν λέγειν, νόμον κελεύετε δεῖξαι καθʼ ὃν γεγένηται ἡ εἰσποίησις Ἀριστάρχῳ, καὶ τίς ὁ εἰσποιήσας· τοῦτο γὰρ δίκαιόν ἐστιν. ἀλλʼ οἶδʼ ὅτι οὐχ ἕξουσιν ἐπιδεῖξαι.
For myself, gentlemen, I am perfectly certain that neither Xenaenetus nor anyone else can prove that this estate does not belong to my mother, having come to her through her brother Demochares. But, if, after all, they venture to deal with the question, order them to indicate the law under which the adoption has been carried out in favor of Aristarchus (II.) and to declare who carried it out. This is a perfectly just demand. But I know that they will not be able to indicate any such law.
§ 15
περὶ μὲν οὖν τοῦ τὸν κλῆρον εἶναι τῆς μητρὸς ἐξ ἀρχῆς καὶ ἀδίκως αὐτὴν ὑπὸ τούτων ἀπεστερῆσθαι, ἔκ τε τῶν εἰρημένων καὶ μεμαρτυρημένων καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν νόμων ἱκανῶς ἡγοῦμαι ἀποδεδεῖχθαι. οὕτω δὲ καὶ τούτοις φανερόν ἐστιν ὅτι οὐ προσηκόντως ἔχουσι ταῦτα τὰ χρήματα, ὥστε οὐκ ἐπὶ τῷ δικαίως Ἀρίσταρχον εἰσαχθῆναι εἰς τοὺς φράτορας τὸν λόγον ποιοῦνται μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δίκην φασὶν ὑπὲρ τούτων τῶν χρημάτων τὸν πατέρα τὸν ἑαυτῶν ἐκτετικέναι, ἵνα, ἂν μὴ κατʼ ἐκεῖνον δικαίως δοκῶσιν ἔχειν, κατά γε ταῦτα εἰκότως προσῆκον αὐτοῖς φαίνηται.
That the estate, then, belonged to my mother from the beginning and that she has been unjustly deprived of it by my opponents, has, I think, been sufficiently demonstrated by my arguments, by the evidence which has been produced, and by the citation of the actual laws. Indeed, these men are so perfectly well aware that they are wrongfully in possession of this fortune that they do not rest their argument solely upon the legality of the introduction of Aristarchus (II.) to the members of the ward, but also allege that Xenaenetus's father has paid a judgement-debt on behalf of the estate in order that, if their claim on the former ground should not seem just, it may appear that they have a good claim to the estate on the second ground.
§ 16
ἐγὼ δʼ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅτι οὐκ ἀληθῆ λέγουσι, μεγάλοις ὑμᾶς τεκμηρίοις διδάξω. εἰ γὰρ ἦν, ὡς οὗτοι λέγουσιν, ὑπόχρεως οὗτος ὁ κλῆρος, οὔτʼ ἂν χρήματα οὗτοι ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἐξέτινον (οὐ γὰρ προσῆκεν αὐτοῖς, ἀλλʼ οἷς ἐγένετο ἡ ἐμὴ μήτηρ ἐπίδικος, τούτοις ἀναγκαῖον ἦν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν βουλεύσασθαι), οὔτε ἂν εἰσεποίουν εἰς τοῦτον τὸν κλῆρον ὑὸν Ἀριστάρχῳ, μέλλοντες ὠφεληθήσεσθαι μὲν μηδέν, ζημιωθήσεσθαι δὲ μεγάλα.
I shall show you, gentlemen, by convincing proofs that there is no truth in what they say. For if, as they allege, this estate had been insolvent, they would never have expended any money upon it—for it was not their business to do so, but those who had the right to claim my mother's hand ought to have concerned themselves with the matter—nor would they have introduced a son as the adopted child of Aristarchus (I.) to inherit his estate, if they were not going to get any advantage but only suffer considerable loss.
§ 17
ἢ ἕτεροι μέν, ὅταν περὶ χρημάτων δυστυχῶσι, τοὺς σφετέρους αὐτῶν παῖδας εἰς ἑτέρους οἴκους εἰσποιοῦσιν, ἵνα μὴ μετάσχωσι τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς ἀτιμίας· οὗτοι δὲ ἄρα εἰς ὑπόχρεων οὐσίαν καὶ οἶκον εἰσεποίουν σφᾶς αὐτούς, ἵνα καὶ τὰ ὑπάρχοντα προσαπολέσειαν; οὐκ ἔστι ταῦτα, ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν κλῆρος ἐλεύθερος ἦν καὶ τῆς ἐμῆς μητρὸς ἐγένετο, οὗτοι δὲ φιλοχρηματοῦντες καὶ ἐκείνην ἀποστεροῦντες ταῦτα πάντα ἐμηχανήσαντο.
Other people indeed, when they have had monetary losses, introduce their children into other families in order that they may not share in their parents' loss of civic rights; and did my opponents adopt themselves into a succession and family which was insolvent, in order that they might lose in addition what they already possessed? Nay, it is impossible the estate was unencumbered and descended to my mother, and these men, in their greed for money and their anxiety to rob her, devised all this story.
§ 18
ἴσως οὖν 〈ἄν〉 τις, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὸν χρόνον ὑμῶν θαυμάσειε, πῶς ποτε πολὺν οὕτως εἰάσαμεν καὶ ἀποστερούμενοι οὐκ ᾖμεν ἐπʼ αὐτά, ἀλλὰ νυνὶ περὶ αὐτῶν τοὺς λόγους ποιούμεθα. ἐγὼ δὲ οἶμαι μὲν οὐ δίκαιον εἶναι διὰ τοῦτο ἔλαττον ἔχειν, εἴ τις μὴ ἐδυνήθη ἢ κατημέλησεν (οὐ γὰρ τοῦτό ἐστι σκεπτέον, ἀλλὰ τὸ πρᾶγμα εἰ δίκαιον ἢ μή)· ὅμως μέντοι καὶ περὶ τούτων αἴτιον εἰπεῖν ἔχομεν, ὦ ἄνδρες.
Some among you, gentlemen, may be surprised at the delay, and ask how it is that we allowed so long an interval to elapse, and, being defrauded, took no steps in the matter, and are only now putting in our claim. Now, although I think it unjust that anyone should have less than his due rights through inability or neglect to assert them—for such a consideration should not be taken into account, but only the justice or injustice of his plea—yet even for this delay, gentlemen, we can furnish an explanation.
§ 19
ὁ γὰρ πατὴρ οὑμὸς ἐπὶ προικὶ ἐγγυησάμενος τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα συνῴκει, τὸν δὲ κλῆρον τούτων καρπουμένων οὐκ εἶχεν ὅπως εἰσπράξαιτο· ὅτε γὰρ περὶ αὐτοῦ λόγους ἐποιήσατο τῆς μητρὸς κελευούσης, οὗτοι ταῦτα αὐτῷ ἠπείλησαν, αὐτοὶ ἐπιδικασάμενοι αὐτὴν ἕξειν, εἰ μὴ βούλοιτο αὐτὸς ἐπὶ προικὶ ἔχειν. ὁ δὲ πατήρ, ὥστε τῆς μητρὸς μὴ στερηθῆναι, καὶ δὶς τοσαῦτα χρήματα εἴασεν ἂν αὐτοὺς καρποῦσθαι.
My father received a dowry when he engaged himself to my mother and married her, but, while these men were enjoying the estate, he had no means of obtaining its restitution; for when, at my mother's instance, he raised the question, they threatened that they themselves would obtain the adjudication of her hand and marry her, if he were not satisfied to keep her with only a dowry. Now my father would have allowed them to enjoy an estate of even double the value so as not to be deprived of her.
§ 20
καὶ τοῦ μὲν τὸν πατέρα μὴ ἐπεξελθεῖν ὑπὲρ τούτων τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ αἴτιον· μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ὁ Κορινθιακὸς πόλεμος ἐγένετο, ἐν ᾧ ἐγὼ κἀκεῖνος στρατεύεσθαι ἠναγκαζόμεθα, ὥστε οὐδετέρῳ ἂν ἡμῶν δίκην ἐξεγένετο λαβεῖν. εἰρήνης τʼ αὖ γενομένης ἐμοί τι ἀτύχημα πρὸς τὸ δημόσιον συνέβη, ὥστε μὴ ῥᾴδιον εἶναι πρὸς τούτους διαφέρεσθαι. ὥστε οὐ μικρὰς ἔχομεν αἰτίας περὶ τοῦ πράγματος.
That is why my father never brought a suit for the estate. Then came the Corinthian war, in which my father and I were obliged to serve, so that neither of us could have obtained justice. When peace was restored, I had unfortunate difficulties with the public treasury, so that it was not easy for me to contend with my opponents. Thus we have good reasons for our conduct in the matter.
§ 21
ἀλλὰ νυνὶ δίκαιον εἰπεῖν ἐστιν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τίνος δόντος [ἔχει] τὸν κλῆρον, κατὰ ποίους νόμους εἰς τοὺς φράτορας εἰσῆκται, καὶ πῶς οὐκ ἐπίκληρος ἦν ἐπὶ τούτοις τοῖς χρήμασιν ἡ ἐμὴ μήτηρ. ταῦτα γάρ ἐστι περὶ ὧν ὑμᾶς δεῖ τὴν ψῆφον ἐνεγκεῖν, οὐκ εἰ χρόνῳ τι ὕστερον ἡμεῖς τῶν ἡμετέρων εἰσπραττόμεθα. μὴ δυνηθέντων δὲ ἐπιδεῖξαι, δικαίως ἂν ἐμὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι ψηφίσαισθε.
But the time has now come when it is only right that my opponent should declare who it was that gave him the estate, and what laws justify his introduction in the ward, and why it is that my mother was not heiress to this fortune. These are the points on which you must give your verdict, not as to whether we are late in demanding what is our own. If they cannot explain these points, you would be justified in deciding that the estate is mine.
§ 22
τοῦτο μὲν οἶδʼ ὅτι ποιεῖν οὐχ οἷοί τʼ ἔσονται· χαλεπὸν γὰρ πρὸς νόμους καὶ δίκαιον πρᾶγμα ἀντιλέγειν ἐστί· περὶ δὲ τοῦ τεθνεῶτος λέξουσιν, ἐλεοῦντες ὡς ἀνὴρ ὢν ἀγαθὸς ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ τέθνηκε, καὶ ὅτι οὐ δίκαιόν ἐστι τὰς ἐκείνου διαθήκας ἀκύρους καθιστάναι. ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ αὐτός, ὦ ἄνδρες, οἶμαι δεῖν κυρίας εἶναι τὰς διαθήκας, ἃς 〈ἂν〉 ἕκαστος διαθῆται περὶ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ, περὶ μέντοι τῶν ἀλλοτρίων οὐ κυρίας εἶναι τὰς διαθήκας, ὥσπερ ἃς ἂν ἕκαστος περὶ τῶν αὑτοῦ διαθῆται.
I am sure they will not be able to do so; for it is difficult to argue against law and justice. But they will talk about the deceased, saying how sad it is that so brave a man has fallen in battle and declaring that it is unjust to set aside his will. I myself, gentlemen, am of opinion that any will which a man may make about his own property ought to be valid, but that wills which concern other people's property ought not to have the same validity as those in which a man disposes of what is his own. Now this property is clearly not theirs but ours;
§ 23
ταῦτα δὲ οὐ τούτων ὄντα ἀλλʼ ἡμέτερα φαίνεται. ὥστε ἂν ἐπὶ τοῦτον τὸν λόγον καταφεύγῃ καὶ μάρτυρας παρέχηται ὡς διέθετο ἐκεῖνος, ἐπιδεικνύναι κελεύετε καὶ ὡς τὰ ἑαυτοῦ. τοῦτο γὰρ δίκαιόν ἐστι. δεινότατα γὰρ 〈ἂν〉 πάντων γένοιτο, εἰ Κυρωνίδης μὲν καὶ οὗτοι, ὄντες ἐξ ἐκείνου, μὴ μόνον τὸν Ξεναινέτου οἶκον πλέον ἢ τεττάρων ταλάντων ἕξουσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τόνδε προσλήψονται, ἐγὼ δὲ τῆς μητρὸς οὔσης κυρίας καὶ ἐκ τῶν αὐτῶν Κυρωνίδῃ γεγενημένος εἰ μηδὲ τὸν τῆς μητρὸς κλῆρον λήψομαι, καὶ ταῦτα μηδὲ ἐχόντων τούτων ἐπενεγκεῖν παρʼ ὅτου ποτʼ εἰλήφασι.
and so, if he takes refuge in this argument and produces witnesses to testify that Aristarchus (I.) made a will, you must order him to prove also that what he devised was his own. This is only just, for it would be a most terrible state of affairs if Cyronides and my opponents, his children, are not only to possess the fortune of Xenaenetus (I.) of the value of more than four talents, but are also to receive this estate, while I, though my mother was the rightful owner and I am descended from the same ancestors as Cyronides, am not to receive even my mother's estate, especially as these men cannot indicate the person through whom it has been transmitted to them.
§ 24
καίτοι δίκαιον, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὥσπερ τῶν ἀμφισβητησίμων χωρίων δεῖ τὸν ἔχοντα ἢ θέτην ἢ πρατῆρα παρέχεσθαι ἢ καταδεδικασμένον φαίνεσθαι, οὕτω καὶ τούτους καθʼ ἕν τι τούτων ἀποφήναντας αὐτοῦ ἀξιοῦν ἐπιδικάζεσθαι, μὴ πρὸ δίκης τὴν Ἀριστάρχου θυγατέρα, ἐμὴν δὲ μητέρα, ἐκ τῶν πατρῴων ἐκβάλλειν.
Yet in all justice, just as the holder of a disputed piece of land must produce the mortgagee or vendor, or else prove that he has had it adjudicated to him by the court, so ought these men to set forth their titles in detail and claim to have the estate adjudicated to them, instead of ejecting my mother, the daughter of Aristarchus (I.), from her paternal inheritance before any suit has been heard.
§ 25
ἀλλὰ γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐχ ἱκανόν ἐστι Ξεναινέτῳ τὸν Ἀριστομένους οἶκον καταπεπαιδεραστηκέναι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦτον οἴεται δεῖν τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον διαθεῖναι. ἐγὼ δʼ, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, βραχείας οὐσίας ὑπαρξάσης ἀδελφὰς μὲν ἐξέδωκα, ὅσα ἐδυνάμην ἐπιδούς, κόσμιον δʼ ἐμαυτὸν παρέχων καὶ ποιῶν τὰ προσταττόμενα καὶ τὰς στρατείας στρατευόμενος ἀξιῶ τῶν τῆς μητρὸς πατρῴων μὴ ἀποστερηθῆναι.
But no doubt, gentlemen, it is not enough for Xenaenetus (II.) to have dissipated the fortune of Aristomenes in unnatural debauchery; he thinks that he ought to dispose of this estate also in like manner. I, on the other hand, gentlemen, though my means are slender, bestowed my sisters in marriage, giving them what dowry I could; and as one who leads an orderly life and performs the duties assigned to him and serves in the army, I demand not to be deprived of my mother's paternal estate.
§ 26
ἀπέδειξα δʼ ὑμῖν Κυρωνίδην μὲν τὸν τούτων πατέρα ἐκποίητον γενόμενον καὶ οὐκ ἐπανελθόντα εἰς τὸν πατρῷον οἶκον, τὸν δὲ πατέρα τὸν Κυρωνίδου καὶ τῆς ἐμῆς μητρὸς Δημοχάρει τῷ ὑῷ τοῦτον τὸν κλῆρον καταλιπόντα, ἐκεῖνον δὲ παῖδα ὄντα τελευτήσαντα καὶ εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν μητέρα τοῦτον τὸν κλῆρον ἐπιγιγνόμενον.
I have proved to you that Cyronides, the father of my opponents, was adopted into another family and did not return to his father's house; that the father of Cyronides and of my mother left this estate to Demochares; that Demochares died in his minority, and that it was upon my mother that this estate then devolved.
On the Estate of Hagnias · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg011 · Greek: Περὶ τοῦ Ἁγνίου κλήρου — tlg0017.tlg011.perseus-grc2 · English: On the Estate of Hagnias — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg011.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις Ἁγνίας τις εἶχεν ἀνεψιοὺς πολλούς, Θεόπομπον καὶ τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ Στρατοκλέα καὶ Στρατίον καὶ Εὐβουλίδην. οὗτος μέλλων τελευτᾶν ἐποιήσατο θετὴν ἑαυτῷ θυγατέρα, κελεύσας ἐν ταῖς διαθήκαις, εἴ τι πάθοι ἡ θυγάτηρ, ἔρχεσθαι τὸν κλῆρον εἰς Γλαύκωνα, ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ τυγχάνοντα ὁμομήτριον. ἐπὶ τούτοις αὐτοῦ τελευτήσαντος ἡ θυγάτηρ λαβοῦσα τὸν κλῆρον ἐτελεύτησεν. ἀποθανόντος δὲ καὶ Εὐβουλίδου ἡ θυγάτηρ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ Εὐβουλίδου, δικασαμένη πρὸς Γλαύκωνα ἔλαβε τὴν οὐσίαν. μετὰ ταῦτα τελευτησάντων καὶ τῶν περὶ τὸν Στρατοκλέα καὶ Στρατίον Θεόπομπος μόνος ἐδικάσατο πρὸς αὐτήν, καὶ ἔλαβε τὸν κλῆρον. πρὸς τοῦτον ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ, Στρατοκλέους, δικάζεται [πρὸς αὐτὸν] διʼ ἐπιτρόπου τινὸς [υἱός], φάσκων ἐξ ἴσου τὰ τῆς κληρονομίας ἁρμόζειν τῷ τε Θεοπόμπῳ καὶ τῷ παιδὶ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ. ἡ στάσις πραγματική.
Argument A certain Hagnias had several cousins, namely, Theopompus, his brother Stratocles, Stratius, and Eubulides. When he was at the point of death he adopted a daughter, stipulating in his will that, if anything should happen to her, the estate should pass to Glaucon, who was his half-brother, his mother's son. After making these arrangements he died; and the daughter received the inheritance and then herself died. Eubulides having also died, his daughter brought an action against Glaucon and was awarded the estate. After this, Stratocles and Stratius having died, Theopompus, acting alone, brought a suit against her and was awarded the estate. It is against him that the son of his brother Stratocles brings an action through a guardian, alleged that the inheritance belongs in equal shares to Theopompus and to his brother's son. The discussion turns on a point of fact.
§ 1
〈Νόμοι〉 διὰ ταῦθʼ ὑμῖν ἀνέγνων τοὺς νόμους, ὅτι κατὰ τὸν πρῶτον αὐτῶν ἰσχυρίζεται τῷ παιδὶ τοῦ ἡμικληρίου προσήκειν, οὐκ ἀληθῆ λέγων. οὐ γὰρ ἦν ἡμῖν Ἁγνίας ἀδελφός, ὁ δὲ νόμος περὶ ἀδελφοῦ χρημάτων πρῶτον ἀδελφοῖς τε καὶ ἀδελφιδοῖς πεποίηκε τὴν κληρονομίαν, ἂν ὦσιν ὁμοπάτορες· τοῦτο γὰρ ἐγγυτάτω τοῦ τελευτήσαντος 〈τὸ〉 γένος ἐστίν.
Laws I have read you the laws because my opponent bases on the first of them the claim of the child to half the estate—a claim which is false. Hagnias, it is true, was not our brother; but in the matter of a brother's property the law has given the right of inheritance first to brothers and nephews provided they are on the father's side; for they are related to the deceased in the nearest degree.
§ 2
ἐὰν δʼ οὗτοι μὴ ὦσι, δεύτερον ἀδελφὰς ὁμοπατρίας καλεῖ καὶ παῖδας τοὺς ἐκ τούτων. ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ὦσι, τρίτῳ γένει δίδωσι τὴν ἀγχιστείαν, ἀνεψιοῖς πρὸς πατρὸς μέχρι ἀνεψιῶν παίδων. ἐὰν δὲ καὶ τοῦτʼ ἐκλείπῃ [εἰς] τὸ γένος, πάλιν ἐπανέρχεται καὶ ποιεῖ τοὺς πρὸς μητρὸς τοῦ τελευτήσαντος κυρίους αὐτῶν, κατὰ ταὐτὰ καθάπερ τοῖς πρὸς πατρὸς ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐδίδου τὴν κληρονομίαν.
In default of these, the law next names sisters by the same father and their issue. If these fail, it gives the right of succession as next-of-kin to the third degree, namely, first cousins on the father's side including their children. If this degree is also lacking, the law goes back and gives the succession to the relatives of the deceased on his mother's side on the same principles as originally regulated the rights of inheritance by the relatives on the father's side.
§ 3
ταύτας ποιεῖ τὰς ἀγχιστείας ὁ νομοθέτης μόνας, συντομωτέρως τοῖς ῥήμασιν ἢ ἐγὼ φράζω· τὴν μέντοι διάνοιαν ὧν βούλεται ταύτῃ δείκνυσιν. ὁ δὲ παῖς οὗτος οὐδὲ καθʼ ἓν τούτων τῶν ὀνομάτων Ἁγνίᾳ προσήκει τῇ ἀγχιστείᾳ, ἀλλʼ ἔξω τῆς συγγενείας ἐστίν. ἵνα δʼ ἀκριβῶς μάθητε περὶ ὧν ψηφιεῖσθε, τοὺς πολλοὺς λόγους ἐάσας οὗτος εἰπάτω ὅ τι ὁ παῖς προσήκει τουτωνὶ τῶν εἰρημένων τῷ τὸν κλῆρον καταλιπόντι· κἂν φανῇ κατά τι προσήκων, ἑκὼν ἐγὼ συγχωρῶ τὸ ἡμικλήριον εἶναι τοῦ παιδός.
These are the only rights of next-of-kin which the framer of the law recognizes; the wording which he employs is briefer than my paraphrase, but he shows his intention quite clearly in the text of the law. This child does not possess a single one of these titles as next-of-kin to Hagnias, but is outside all relationship. In order that you may know exactly upon what points you are going to give your verdict, I challenge my opponent to state, without superfluous words, in which of the above-mentioned degrees of relationship this child stands to the former tenant of the estate. If he can be shown to be in any way related, I willingly concede that half the estate is his.
§ 4
εἰ δέ τοι μηδὲν τούτων ἕξει εἰπεῖν, πῶς οὐκ ἐλεγχθήσεται φανερῶς ἐμὲ μὲν συκοφαντῶν, ὑμᾶς δʼ ἐξαπατῆσαι παρὰ τοὺς νόμους ζητῶν; ἀναβιβασάμενος οὖν αὐτὸν ἐναντίον ὑμῶν ἐρωτήσω τὰ ἐν τοῖς νόμοις ὑπαναγιγνώσκων· οὕτω γὰρ εἴσεσθε εἰ προσήκει τῷ παιδὶ τῶν Ἁγνίου χρημάτων ἢ μή. λαβὲ οὖν αὐτοῖς τοὺς νόμους· σὺ δʼ ἀνάβηθι δεῦρο, ἐπειδὴ δεινὸς εἶ διαβάλλειν καὶ τοὺς νόμους διαστρέφειν. σὺ δʼ ἀναγίγνωσκε.
If, on the other hand, he cannot prove the existence of any such relationship, surely he will be clearly convicted of bringing a vexatious suit against me and of trying to deceive you in contravention of the laws. I intend, therefore, to make him stand up before you and to interrogate him, reading out the text of the law. You will thus learn whether, or no, the child has any right to the fortune of Hagnias. (To the Clerk) Please take these laws; and (to his opponent) you, come up here, since you are so clever at misrepresentation and at distorting the laws. Read on.
§ 5
Νόμοι ἐπίσχες. ἐρωτήσω σέ. ἀδελφός ἐσθʼ ὁ παῖς Ἁγνίου 〈ἢ〉 ἀδελφιδοῦς ἐξ ἀδελφοῦ ἢ ἐξ ἀδελφῆς γεγονώς, ἢ ἀνεψιός, ἢ ἐξ ἀνεψιοῦ πρὸς μητρὸς ἢ πρὸς πατρός; τί τούτων τῶν ὀνομάτων, οἷς ὁ νόμος τὴν ἀγχιστείαν δίδωσι; καὶ ὅπως μὴ ἐκεῖνο ἐρεῖς, ὅτι ἐμὸς ἀδελφιδοῦς. οὐ γὰρ περὶ τοῦ ἐμοῦ κλήρου νῦν ὁ λόγος ἐστί· ζῶ γάρ. εἰ δʼ ἦν ἄπαις ἐγὼ τετελευτηκὼς καὶ ἠμφισβήτει τῶν ἐμῶν, τοῦτο ἂν προσῆκεν ἀποκρίνασθαι ἐρωτωμένῳ. νῦν δὲ φῂς τῶν Ἁγνίου χρημάτων τὸ ἡμικλήριον εἶναι τοῦ παιδός· δεῖ δή σε τῆς ἀγχιστείας, ὅ τι ὁ παῖς Ἁγνίᾳ προσήκει, τὸ γένος εἰπεῖν. φράσον οὖν τουτοισί.
Laws Stop. I wish to question you. Is the child a brother of Hagnias, or a nephew, the son of a brother or sister, or a first cousin, or the child of a first cousin on his mother's or his father's side? Which of these titles, which are regarded by the law as constituting kinship, does he possess? And beware of saying that he is my nephew; for it is not a question now of my estate, for I am still alive. If I had died without issue and he were claiming my property, it would be quite fitting that he should give this reply to one who interrogated him. On the present occasion, however, it is the half of Hagnias's estate that you say belongs to the child; you must, therefore, define the degree of relationship which unites him to Hagnias. Tell these gentlemen, therefore, what it is.
§ 6
αἰσθάνεσθε ὅτι οὐκ ἔχει τὴν συγγένειαν εἰπεῖν, ἀλλʼ ἀποκρίνεται πάντα μᾶλλον ἢ ὃ δεῖ μαθεῖν ὑμᾶς. καίτοι τόν γε πράττοντά τι δίκαιον οὐ προσῆκεν ἀπορεῖν ἀλλʼ εὐθὺς λέγειν, καὶ μὴ μόνον τοῦτο ποιεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ διόμνυσθαι καὶ τοῦ γένους παρέχεσθαι μάρτυρας, ἵνα μᾶλλον [ἂν] ἐπιστεύετο ὑφʼ ὑμῶν. νῦν δʼ ἐφʼ οἷς ἀπόκρισιν οὐ δέδωκεν, οὐ μάρτυρας παρέσχετο, οὐχ ὅρκον ὤμοσεν, οὐ νόμον ἀνέγνωκεν, οἴεται δεῖν ὑμᾶς, ὀμωμοκότας ψηφιεῖσθαι κατὰ τοὺς νόμους, αὐτῷ πειθομένους ἐμοῦ καταγνῶναι ταύτην τὴν εἰσαγγελίαν παρὰ τοὺς νόμους· οὕτω σχέτλιος καὶ ἀναιδὴς ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν.
You observe that he cannot define the relationship, but gives any sort of answer rather than the information which you require. Yet one who is acting in good faith ought not to be embarrassed, but ought to be able to answer immediately, and not only so but also swear an oath and produce witnesses about the degree of relationship, so that you might have attached greater credence to what he said. As it is, regarding matters about which he has given no answer, produced no witnesses, sworn no oath and quoted no law, he thinks that you, who have sworn to give your verdict according to the laws, ought to believe him and illegally condemn me in this criminal suit. This is the wicked and shameless sort of scoundrel that he is.
§ 7
ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἐγὼ ποιήσω τούτων οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ γένος ἐρῶ τοὐμὸν καὶ ὅθεν μοι προσήκει τῆς κληρονομίας, καὶ τὸν παῖδα ἐπιδείξω καὶ τοὺς πρότερον ἀμφισβητήσαντας ἐμοὶ τοῦ κλήρου πάντας ἔξω τῆς ἀγχιστείας ὄντας, ὥσθʼ ὑμᾶς ὁμολογεῖν. ἀνάγκη δʼ ἐστὶν ἐξ ἀρχῆς τὰ συμβεβηκότα εἰπεῖν· ἐκ τούτων γὰρ γνώσεσθε τήν τε ἐμὴν ἀγχιστείαν καὶ ὅτι τούτοις οὐδὲν προσήκει τῆς κληρονομίας.
I have no intention of following his example; instead, I shall state my degree of relationship and the basis of my claim to the estate, and I shall prove, in such a manner as to win your assent, that the child and the former claimants against me for the estate are all outside the limits of kinship. I must state the facts from the beginning; for you will thus recognize my claim as next-of-kin and see that my opponent has no title to the succession.
§ 8
ἐγὼ γὰρ καὶ Ἁγνίας, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ Εὐβουλίδης καὶ Στρατοκλῆς καὶ Στρατίος ὁ τῆς Ἁγνίου μητρὸς ἀδελφὸς ἐξ ἀνεψιῶν ἐσμεν γεγονότες· καὶ γὰρ οἱ πατέρες ἡμῶν ἦσαν ἀνεψιοὶ ἐκ πατραδέλφων. Ἁγνίας οὖν, ὅτε ἐκπλεῖν παρεσκευάζετο πρεσβεύσων ἐπὶ ταύτας τὰς πράξεις αἳ τῇ πόλει συμφερόντως εἶχον, οὐκ ἐφʼ ἡμῖν τοῖς ἐγγύτατα γένους, εἴ τι πάθοι, τὰ ὄντα κατέλιπεν, ἀλλʼ ἐποιήσατο θυγατέρα αὑτοῦ ἀδελφιδῆν· εἰ δέ τι καὶ αὐτὴ πάθοι, Γλαύκωνι τὰ ὄντα ἐδίδου, ἀδελφῷ ὄντι ὁμομητρίῳ· καὶ ταῦτʼ ἐν διαθήκαις ἐνέγραψε.
Hagnias, Eubulides, Stratocles, Stratius, the brother of Hagnias's mother, and I, gentlemen, are all the children of cousins, our fathers having been cousins, the children of brothers by the same father. When Hagnias was preparing to set out as ambassador on that mission which had such favorable results for the city, he did not leave his possessions, in case anything happened to him, to us, his nearest relatives, but adopted a niece; and if anything happened to her, he devised his property to Glaucon, his half- brother on his mother's side. These dispositions he embodied in a will.
§ 9
χρόνων δὲ διαγενομένων μετὰ ταῦτα τελευτᾷ μὲν Εὐβουλίδης, τελευτᾷ δʼ ἡ θυγάτηρ ἣν ἐποιήσατο Ἁγνίας, λαμβάνει δὲ τὸν κλῆρον Γλαύκων κατὰ τὴν διαθήκην. ἡμεῖς δʼ οὐ πώποτʼ ἠξιώσαμεν ἀμφισβητῆσαι πρὸς τὰς ἐκείνου διαθήκας, ἀλλʼ ὠόμεθα δεῖν περὶ τῶν αὑτοῦ τὴν ἐκείνου γνώμην εἶναι κυρίαν, καὶ τούτοις ἐνεμένομεν. ἡ δʼ Εὐβουλίδου θυγάτηρ μετὰ τῶν αὐτῇ συμπραττόντων λαγχάνει τοῦ κλήρου καὶ λαμβάνει νικήσασα τοὺς κατὰ τὴν διαθήκην ἀμφισβητήσαντας, ἔξω μὲν οὖσα τῆς ἀγχιστείας, ἐλπίσασα δʼ (ὡς ἔοικεν) ἡμᾶς πρὸς αὐτὴν οὐκ ἀντιδικήσειν, ὅτι οὐδὲ πρὸς τὰς διαθήκας ἠμφισβητήσαμεν.
After some interval of time Eubulides died. The daughter whom Hagnias had adopted also died, and Glaucon received the estate in accordance with the will. We never for a moment thought of contesting Hagnias's will, but considered that his intentions regarding his own property ought to be carried into effect, and by these we abode. But the daughter of Eubulides, with the assistance of her confederates, laid claim to the estate and obtained it, having gained an action against those who based their rights on the will. She was outside the prescribed degree of kinship, but hoped, it seems, that we should not bring an action against her, because we had not contested the will either.
§ 10
ἡμεῖς δέ, ἐγὼ καὶ Στρατίος καὶ Στρατοκλῆς, ἐπειδὴ τοῖς ἐγγύτατα γένους ἐγεγένητο ἐπίδικος ὁ κλῆρος, παρεσκευαζόμεθα ἅπαντες λαγχάνειν· πρὶν δὲ γενέσθαι τὰς λήξεις τῶν δικῶν ἡμῖν τελευτᾷ μὲν ὁ Στρατίος, τελευτᾷ δʼ ὁ Στρατοκλῆς, λείπομαι δʼ ἐγὼ μόνος τῶν πρὸς πατρὸς ὢν ἀνεψιοῦ παῖς, ᾧ μόνῳ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἐγίγνετο ἡ κληρονομία, πάντων ἤδη τῶν ἄλλων ἐκλελοιπότων, οἳ ταὐτὸν ἐμοὶ τῇ συγγενείᾳ προσήκοντες ἐτύγχανον.
But we—that is to say, Stratius, Stratocles, and myself—since the estate had now become adjudicable to the next-of-kin, all prepared to bring a suit. However, before the hearing of the case, Stratius and Stratocles both died; and thus I am the only surviving relative on the father's side, being the son of a cousin and the only person to whom, according to the law, the estate could pass, all the other relatives having died who possessed the same degree of kinship as myself.
§ 11
τῷ δὲ γνώσεσθε τοῦθʼ, ὅτι ἐμοὶ μὲν ἀγχιστεύειν, τοῖς δʼ ἐξ ἐκείνων γεγονόσιν οὐκ ἦν, ἐν οἷς οὗτος ὁ παῖς ἦν; αὐτὸς ὁ νόμος δηλώσει. τὸ μὲν γὰρ εἶναι τὴν ἀγχιστείαν ἀνεψιοῖς πρὸς πατρὸς μέχρι ἀνεψιῶν παίδων ὁμολογεῖται παρὰ πάντων. εἰ δὲ μεθʼ ἡμᾶς δίδωσι τοῖς ἡμετέροις παισί, τοῦτʼ ἤδη σκεπτέον ἐστί. λαβὲ οὖν αὐτοῖς τὸν νόμον καὶ ἀναγίγνωσκε. Νόμος ἐὰν δὲ μηδεὶς ᾖ πρὸς πατρὸς μέχρι ἀνεψιῶν παίδων, τοὺς πρὸς μητρὸς κυρίους εἶναι κατὰ τὰ αὐτά.
But, it may be asked, how are you to know that I possess the rights of a next-of-kin, while the children of the other cousins, including this child, did not possess them? The law itself will make this clear. It is universally admitted that the rights as next-of-kin belong to cousins on the father's side, including their children, but the point which we have now to examine whether the law grants these rights to our children also. Take, therefore, the law and read it to the court. Law [If there is no relative on the father's side as far as the degree of the children of cousins, then the right of inheritance passes to the mother's side in the same order of succession.]
§ 12
ἀκούετε, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅτι ὁ νομοθέτης οὐκ εἶπεν, ἐὰν μηδεὶς ᾖ πρὸς πατρὸς μέχρι ἀνεψιῶν παίδων, τοὺς τῶν ἀνεψιαδῶν εἶναι κυρίους, ἀλλὰ ἀπέδωκε τοῖς πρὸς μητρὸς τοῦ τελευτήσαντος, ἂν ἡμεῖς μὴ ὦμεν, τὴν κληρονομίαν ἤδη, ἀδελφοῖς καὶ ἀδελφαῖς καὶ παισὶ τοῖς τούτων καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις, κατὰ ταὐτὰ καθάπερ καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἦν ὑπειρημένον· τοὺς δὲ ἡμετέρους παῖδας ἔξω τῆς ἀγχιστείας ἐποίησεν. οἷς δὲ μηδʼ ἐὰν τετελευτηκὼς ἦν ἐγώ, δίδωσιν ὁ νόμος τὴν Ἁγνίου κληρονομίαν, πῶς ἐμοῦ τε ζῶντος καὶ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἔχοντος οἴονται αὑτοῖς εἶναι τὴν ἀγχιστείαν; οὐδαμῶς δήπουθεν.
Mark you, gentlemen, the legislator did not say that, in default of heirs on the father's side up to the degree of cousin's children, the rights descend to the latter's children; no, in default of us, he gives the inheritance to the relatives of the deceased on his mother's side, namely, to brothers and sisters and their children, and so on, in the same order as was laid down before. But he has placed our children outside the right of succession. How, then, can those to whom, even if I were dead, the law does not award Hagnias's estate, imagine that, while I am alive and have a legal right to the property, they themselves can have any title as next-of-kin? Their claim is quite preposterous.
§ 13
ἀλλὰ μὴν εἰ τούτοις μὴ μέτεστιν, ὧν οἱ πατέρες ταὐτὸν ἐμοὶ προσῆκον, οὐδὲ τούτῳ τῷ παιδὶ γίγνεται· καὶ γὰρ ὁ τούτου πατὴρ ὁμοίως ἦν ἐκείνοις συγγενής. οὔκουν δεινὸν ἐμοὶ μὲν διαρρήδην οὕτω τῶν νόμων δεδωκότων τὴν κληρονομίαν, τούτους δʼ ἔξω τῆς ἀγχιστείας πεποιηκότων, τολμᾶν τουτονὶ συκοφαντεῖν, καὶ διαγωνίσασθαι μέν, ἡνίκʼ ἐγὼ τοῦ κλήρου τὴν δίκην ἐλάγχανον, μὴ οἴεσθαι δεῖν, μηδὲ παρακαταβάλλειν, οὗ περὶ τῶν τοιούτων εἴ τι δίκαιον εἶχεν εἰπεῖν διαγνωσθῆναι προσῆκεν, ἐπὶ δὲ 〈τῷ〉 τοῦ παιδὸς ὀνόματι πράγματʼ ἐμοὶ παρέχειν καὶ περὶ τῶν μεγίστων εἰς κίνδυνον καθιστάναι;
Indeed, if the right of succession is not possessed by those whose fathers stood in the same degree of relationship as myself, neither is it possessed by this child; for his father stood in the same degree as they. Is it not, therefore, outrageous, that, whereas the laws have thus explicitly given me the right of inheritance and have placed my opponents outside the requisite degree of kinship, this fellow should dare to play these pettifogging tricks and, at the moment when I was laying claim to the estate, should think fit, not to bring an action against me and pay the necessary deposit—this being the proper moment to have the question settled, if his claims were well-founded—but to annoy me in the name of this child and make me run the most serious risks?
§ 14
καὶ περὶ μὲν τῶν ὁμολογουμένων εἶναι τοῦ παιδὸς χρημάτων μηδʼ αἰτιᾶσθαί με, μηδʼ ὥς τι εἴληφα ἔχειν εἰπεῖν (ἐφʼ οἷς, εἴ τι αὐτῶν κακῶς διῴκουν ὥσπερ οὗτος, κρίνεσθαι μοι προσῆκεν), ἃ δʼ ὑμεῖς ἐμὰ εἶναι ἐψηφίσασθε, τῷ βουλομένῳ δόντες ἐξουσίαν ἀμφισβητεῖν αὐτῶν, ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐμοὶ τοιούτους ἀγῶνας παρασκευάζειν καὶ εἰς τοῦτο ἀναισχυντίας ἥκειν;
His charge is not concerned with money which admittedly belongs to the child, nor can he say that I have received any such money—if I had administered any property in the manner in which he has done, I should deserve to be prosecuted; no, in bringing this kind of suit he has designs upon property which you, after permitting anyone who wished to dispute my claim to it, assigned by your verdict to me. Such is the extent of his impudence.
§ 15
οἴομαι μὲν οὖν καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἤδη εἰρημένων γιγνώσκεσθαι ὑμῖν ὅτι οὔτʼ ἀδικῶ τὸν παῖδα οὐδὲν οὔτʼ ἔνοχός εἰμι ταύταις ταῖς αἰτίαις οὐδὲ κατὰ μικρόν· ἔτι δὲ ἀκριβέστερον ἡγοῦμαι καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἄλλων ὑμᾶς μαθήσεσθαι, καὶ τὴν ἐμὴν ἐπιδικασίαν, ὡς γέγονεν, ἀκούσαντας περὶ αὐτῶν. ἐμοὶ γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες, λαχόντι τοῦ κλήρου τὴν δίκην οὔτε οὗτος ὁ νῦν ἐμὲ εἰσαγγέλλων ὠήθη δεῖν παρακαταβάλλειν ὑπὲρ τοῦ παιδός, οὔτε οἱ Στρατίου παῖδες οἱ ταὐτὸ τῷ παιδὶ προσήκοντες ... οὔτε διʼ ἄλλο οὐδὲν αὑτοῖς ἐνόμιζον προσήκειν τούτων τῶν χρημάτων·
From what I have already said I think that you fully recognize that I am doing no wrong to the child and that I am not in the least degree guilty of these charges; but you will, I think, understand this still more exactly from the rest of my story, and, in particular, when you have heard how the adjudication to me of the inheritance took place. When I brought the action claiming the inheritance, neither did my opponent, who is now bringing an impeachment against me, think fit to make the necessary deposit on behalf of the child, nor did the sons of Stratius, who stand in the same relationship as the child, <either for this> or for any other reason think that they had any right to the money;
§ 16
ἐπεὶ οὐδʼ ἂν οὗτος νῦν ἐμοὶ πράγματα παρεῖχεν, εἰ τὰ τοῦ παιδὸς εἴων ἁρπάζειν καὶ μὴ ἠναντιούμην αὐτῷ. οὗτοι μὲν οὖν, ὥσπερ εἶπον, εἰδότες ὅτι ἔξω ἦσαν τῆς ἀγχιστείας, οὐκ ἠμφισβήτουν ἀλλʼ ἡσυχίαν εἶχον· οἱ δʼ ὑπὲρ τῆς Εὐβουλίδου θυγατρὸς πράττοντες, τῆς τὸ αὐτὸ τῷ παιδὶ καὶ τοῖς Στρατίου παισὶ προσηκούσης, καὶ οἱ κύριοι τῆς Ἁγνίου μητρὸς ἦσαν οἷοί [τε] πρὸς ἐμὲ ἀντιδικεῖν.
for my opponent would not be troubling me now, if I had allowed him to dissipate the child's property and had not opposed him. These men, then, as I have said, knowing that they were outside the requisite degree of relationship, kept quiet; but those who were acting on behalf of the daughter of Eubulides, who stands in the same degree of relationship as the child and the sons of Stratius, and the legal representatives of Hagnias's mother, were disposed to contest my claim.
§ 17
εἰς τοσαύτας δʼ ἀπορίας κατέστησαν ὅ τι ἀντιγράψωνται περὶ τῆς ἀγχιστείας, ὥστε ἡ μὲν τὸν κλῆρον ἔχουσα καὶ οἱ λέγοντες τὸ περὶ αὐτῆς γένος, ἐπειδὴ κατεψεύσαντο, ῥᾳδίως ὑπʼ ἐμοῦ τότε ἐξηλέγχθησαν οὐκ ἀληθές τι γράψαι τολμήσαντες, οἱ δʼ ὑπὲρ τῆς Ἁγνίου μητρὸς γένει μὲν ἐμοὶ ταὐτὸ προσηκούσης (ἀδελφὴ γὰρ ἦν τοῦ Στρατίου) νόμῳ δὲ ἀποκλειομένης, ὃς κελεύει κρατεῖν τοὺς ἄρρενας, τοῦτο μὲν εἴασαν, οἰόμενοι δʼ ἐμοῦ πλεονεκτήσειν μητέρα εἶναι τοῦ τελευτήσαντος ἔγραψαν· ὃ συγγενέστατον μὲν ἦν τῇ φύσει πάντων, ἐν δὲ ταῖς ἀγχιστείαις ὁμολογουμένως οὐκ ἔστιν.
They found it so difficult to know what to say in their written counter-claim about the degree of relationship, that the woman who was in possession of the estate and those who were seeking to explain her kinship, when they lied, were easily convicted by me of daring to put in writing what was not true; and those who were supporting Hagnias's mother, who stands in the same degree of relationship as I do (being sister of Stratius) but who is excluded by the law which ordains that the males shall have the preference, omitted all reference to this point, and, thinking to gain an advantage over me, described her as the mother of the deceased—the nearest possible relationship by blood, but admittedly conferring no rights as next-of-kin.
§ 18
εἶτα γράψας ἀνεψιοῦ παῖς εἶναι κἀκείνας ἐξελέγξας οὐκ οὔσας ἐν ταῖς ἀγχιστείαις, οὕτως ἐπεδικασάμην παρʼ ὑμῖν, καὶ αὐτῶν οὐκ ἴσχυσέ τι οὔτε τῇ τὸν κλῆρον ἐχούσῃ τὸ προνενικηκέναι τοὺς κατὰ διαθήκην ἀμφισβητήσαντας, οὔτε τῇ ἑτέρᾳ τὸ μητέρα εἶναι τοῦ τὸν κλῆρον καταλιπόντος, ἀλλʼ οὕτως οἱ τότε δικάζοντες καὶ τὸ δίκαιον καὶ τοὺς ὅρκους περὶ πολλοῦ ἐποιήσαντο, ὥστʼ ἐμοὶ τῷ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ἀμφισβητοῦντι τὴν ψῆφον ἤνεγκαν.
Having thus described myself as the son of a cousin and having proved that these women were not within the requisite degree of kinship, I thus had the estate adjudicated to me by you; and her former success against those who claimed on the basis of the will was of no avail to the woman who was in possession of the inheritance, nor did it avail the other woman that she was mother of the deceased who left the estate, but those who were trying the case attached so much importance to justice and their oaths that they gave their verdict in favor of me, whose claim was in conformity with the law.
§ 19
καίτοι εἰ τὰς μὲν νενίκηκα τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον, ἐπιδείξας μηδὲν Ἁγνίᾳ κατʼ ἀγχιστείαν προσηκούσας, οὗτος δὲ μὴ ἐτόλμησεν ἀντιδικῆσαι τῷ παιδὶ τοῦ ἡμικληρίου πρὸς ἡμᾶς, οἱ δὲ Στρατίου παῖδες οἱ ταὐτὸν τούτῳ προσήκοντες μηδὲ νῦν ἀξιοῦσιν ἀντιδικῆσαι πρὸς ἐμὲ περὶ αὐτῶν, ἔχω δʼ ἐγὼ τὸν κλῆρον ἐπιδικασάμενος παρʼ ὑμῖν, ἐξελέγχω δὲ τοῦτον μηδέπω καὶ τήμερον ἔχοντʼ εἰπεῖν ὅ τι ὁ παῖς Ἁγνίᾳ προσήκει κατʼ ἀγχιστείαν, τί ἔτι δεῖ μαθεῖν ὑμᾶς ἢ 〈τί〉 ποθεῖτε ἀκοῦσαι περὶ τούτων; ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ ὡς εὖ φρονοῦσιν ὑμῖν ἱκανὰ τὰ εἰρημένα νομίζω.
Yet since I thus triumphed over these women by proving that they were not within the requisite degree of kinship to Hagnias; and since my present opponent did not venture to go to law with me, claiming half the estate for the child; and since the sons of Stratius, who stand in the same degree of kinship as this child, do not even now think of bringing a suit against me for the estate; and since I am in possession of the estate by your adjudication; and since I can prove that my opponent even at the present time cannot state what relationship the child possesses which confers rights as next-of-kin to Hagnias—what further information do you require, and what more do you wish to hear on the subject? Since I regard you as men of good sense, I think that what I have said is sufficient.
§ 20
οὗτος τοίνυν ῥᾳδίως ὅ τι ἂν τύχῃ ψευδόμενος, καὶ τὴν αὑτοῦ πονηρίαν οὐδεμίαν ζημίαν εἶναι νομίζων, τολμᾷ με διαβάλλειν ἄλλα τε πολλά, περὶ ὧν ποιήσομαι τοὺς λόγους τάχα, καὶ νυνὶ λέγει ὡς ἐκοινωσάμεθα ἐγώ τε καὶ Στρατοκλῆς, τὸν ἀγῶνα εἰσιέναι περὶ τοῦ κλήρου μέλλοντες. ὃ μόνοις ἡμῖν τῶν ἀμφισβητεῖν παρεσκευασμένων οὐκ ἐνῆν, διομολογήσασθαι πρὸς ἀλλήλους.
My opponent, thinking nothing of telling any lie whatever and considering that his own rascality does him no harm, dares to utter many calumnies against me, with which I will deal presently. In particular, he now alleges that Stratocles and I made a compact, when we were about to engage in the suit about the inheritance, though of those who had prepared to put in a claim we were the only persons for whom such a mutual agreement was impossible.
§ 21
τῇ μὲν γὰρ Εὐβουλίδου θυγατρὶ καὶ τῇ Ἁγνίου μητρὶ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀγωνιζομέναις, μὴ κατὰ ταὐτὸ ἀμφισβητούσαις, ἐνῆν ποιήσασθαι συνθήκας, ἂν ἡ ἑτέρα νικᾷ, μετεῖναί τι καὶ τῇ ἡττηθείσῃ· καδίσκος γὰρ ἔμελλεν ἑκατέρᾳ τεθήσεσθαι. τὸ δʼ ἡμέτερον οὐ τοιοῦτον ἦν, ἀλλʼ ἓν τὸ γένος, δύο δὲ λήξεις, ἡμικληρίου ἑκατέρῳ· τοῖς δὲ κατὰ ταὐτὰ ἀμφισβητοῦσιν εἷς τίθεται καδίσκος, οὗ οὐκ ἂν ἦν τὸν μὲν ἡττᾶσθαι τὸν δὲ νικᾶν, ἀλλʼ ὁμοίως ἀμφοτέροις ἦν ὁ αὐτὸς κίνδυνος, ὥστʼ οὐκ ἐνῆν κοινωνίαν οὐδὲ διομολογίαν ποιήσασθαι περὶ αὐτῶν.
The daughter of Eubulides and the mother of Hagnias, in an action against me, since they were not claiming on the same grounds, might have made an agreement, that if one of them were successful, she should give a share to the defeated claimant; for the votes accorded to each of them would be placed in different urns. But with us it was quite otherwise; we stood in the same relationship and were making two separate claims, each to have half the estate; and when two claimants found their claims on the same grounds, only one voting urn is employed, so that it would be impossible for one to be unsuccessful and the other successful, but we both ran the same risk, so we could not possibly have made any compact or agreement about the inheritance.
§ 22
ἀλλʼ οὗτος, ἐπειδὴ Στρατοκλῆς ἐτελεύτησε πρὶν γενέσθαι τοῦ ἡμικληρίου τὰς λήξεις ἡμῶν ἑκατέρῳ, καὶ οὐκέτʼ ἦν μετουσία τῷ Στρατοκλεῖ τούτων οὐδὲ τῷ παιδὶ τῷδε διὰ τὸν νόμον, ἀλλʼ ἐγίγνετο εἰς ἐμὲ ἡ κληρονομία κατʼ ἀγχιστείαν πάντων, εἰ νικήσαιμι τοὺς ἔχοντας, τότʼ ἤδη πλάττει ταῦτα καὶ μηχανᾶται, προσδοκῶν τούτοις τοῖς λόγοις ῥᾳδίως ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατῆσαι. ὅτι δʼ οὐχ οἷόν τʼ ἦν τούτων γίγνεσθαι οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ διείρηται καθʼ ἕκαστον περὶ αὐτῶν, ἐκ τοῦ νόμου γνῶναι ῥᾴδιον. λαβὲ δʼ αὐτοῖς καὶ ἀναγίγνωσκε.
But when Stratocles died before the actions claiming half the estate, which we were each bringing, could come on, and so there was no further question of his participating in the estate, nor had this child of his any title owing to the law, but the whole inheritance devolved upon me as next-of-kin, if I could defeat those who are now in possession, then and not till then does my opponent devise and invent these fictions, expecting easily to mislead you by these stories. That no such compact was possible but that all the details of procedure are already provided for, can easily be seen from the law. Please take and read it to the court.
§ 23
Νόμος ἆρʼ ὑμῖν ὁ νόμος δοκεῖ ποιεῖν ἐξουσίαν κοινωνίας, ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἄντικρυς οὑτωσὶ πᾶν τοὐναντίον, εἰ καὶ τὸ πρότερον ὑπῆρχε κοινωνία, προστάττει, διαρρήδην κελεύων τοῦ μέρους ἕκαστον λαγχάνειν καὶ τοῖς κατὰ ταὐτὸ ἀμφισβητοῦσι τιθεὶς ἕνα καδίσκον καὶ τὰς ἐπιδικασίας τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον ποιῶν; ὁ δέ, ταῦτα τῶν νόμων λεγόντων καὶ οὐκ ἐνούσης γενέσθαι διομολογίας, οὕτως ἀλόγως πρᾶγμα τηλικοῦτον ψεύσασθαι τετόλμηκεν.
Law Does it appear to you that the law gives any liberty for a concerted arrangement? Or are not its provisions in an exactly contrary sense, since, even if a previous arrangement existed, it expressly ordains that each party shall bring an action for his own share, and prescribes a single voting-urn, when the two parties base their claims on the same ground, and makes this the system of adjudication? But my opponent, in spite of these legal provisions and the impossibility of a preconcerted arrangement, has had the impudence to invent this lie against all common sense.
§ 24
οὐ μόνον δὲ τοῦτο πεποίηκεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ πάντων ἐναντιώτατον πρᾶγμα εἴρηκεν, ᾧ προσέχετε τὸν νοῦν, ὦ ἄνδρες. φησὶ γὰρ ὁμολογῆσαί με τοῦ κλήρου τῷ παιδὶ τὸ ἡμικλήριον μεταδώσειν, εἰ νικήσαιμι τοὺς ἔχοντας αὐτόν. καίτοι εἰ μέν τι καὶ αὐτῷ μετῆν κατὰ τὸ γένος, ὡς οὗτος λέγει, τί ἔδει γενέσθαι ταύτην αὐτοῖς παρʼ ἐμοῦ τὴν ὁμολογίαν; ἦν γὰρ ὁμοίως καὶ τούτοις ἐπίδικον τὸ ἡμικλήριον, εἴ περ ἀληθῆ λέγουσιν.
But he has not stopped there; he has also invented the most inconsistent story possible, to which, gentlemen, please give your close attention. He declares that I agreed, if I won my case against the present possessors of the estate, to give the child a half-share of the inheritance. Yet if the child had any right to a share in virtue of his relationship, as my opponent declares, what need was there for this agreement between me and them? For the half of the estate was adjudicable to them just as much as to me, if what they say is true.
§ 25
εἰ δὲ μὴ προσῆκεν αὐτοῖς τῆς ἀγχιστείας μηδέν, διὰ τί ἂν μεταδώσειν ὡμολόγουν, τῶν νόμων ἐμοὶ πάντων αὐτῶν δεδωκότων τὴν κληρονομίαν; πότερα δʼ οὐκ ἦν μοι λαχεῖν, εἰ μὴ πείσαιμι τούτους; ἀλλʼ ὁ νόμος τῷ βουλομένῳ δίδωσι τὴν ἐξουσίαν, ὥστε τοῦτο οὐκ ἦν αὐτοῖς εἰπεῖν. ἀλλʼ εἶχόν τινά μοι μαρτυρίαν τοῦ πράγματος, ἣν εἰ μὴ ἐμαρτύρουν, οὐκ ἔμελλον ἐπιδικάσασθαι τούτων; ἀλλὰ κατὰ γένος ἠμφισβήτουν, οὐ κατὰ δόσιν, ὥστʼ οὐδὲν ἔδει μαρτύρων.
If, on the other hand, they had no claim by right of kinship, why should I have agreed to give them a share, when the laws have given me the right of succession to the whole estate? Was it then impossible for me to make my claim without their consent? But the law gives full liberty to anyone who likes to make a claim, so that they could not possibly make this allegation. Did I then require some evidence from them material to my case, in default of which I was unlikely to secure the adjudication of the estate? No, I was claiming by right of kinship, not of testamentary disposition, so that I had no need of witnesses.
§ 26
ἀλλὰ μὴν εἰ μήτε κοινώσασθαι τὸ πρᾶγμα ἐνῆν, ὅτʼ ἔζη Στρατοκλῆς, μήτε ὁ πατὴρ αὐτῷ κατέλιπεν ἐπιδικασάμενος τούτων μηδέν, μήτε εἰκὸς ἦν μεταδώσειν ἐμὲ τὸ ἡμικλήριον ὁμολογῆσαι αὐτῷ, ἀπέδοτε 〈δʼ〉 ὑμεῖς ἐπιδικάσαντές μοι τοῦτον τὸν κλῆρον, οἱ δὲ μήτε ἔλαχον τότε αὐτῶν μήτʼ ἀμφισβητῆσαι πώποτʼ ἠξίωσαν, πῶς χρὴ πιστοὺς εἶναι νομίζειν τοὺς τούτων λόγους; ἐγὼ μὲν οἴομαι οὐδαμῶς.
And indeed, if it was impossible for me to have made an arrangement with Stratocles in his lifetime; if his father did not bequeath the estate to him, since he never had any of it adjudicated to him; if it was unlikely that I should have agreed to give the child half the inheritance; and since you awarded me the estate by your adjudication and my opponents brought no action at the time and have never yet thought of disputing the estate—how can you believe their allegations to be true? In my opinion you cannot possibly do so.
§ 27
προσποιεῖται τοίνυν οὗτος (ἐπειδὴ τοῦτʼ εἰκότως ἂν θαυμάζοιτε, ὅτι τοῦ ἡμικληρίου τότε τὴν δίκην οὐκ ἐλάγχανον) τοῦ μὲν μὴ λαχεῖν πρὸς ἐκείνους ἐμὲ εἶναι αἴτιον ὡς ὁμολογήσαντα μεταδώσειν, ὥστε διὰ τοῦτʼ οὐ παρακαταβάλλειν αὐτούς, τῆς δὲ πρὸς ἐμὲ λήξεως ἐμποδὼν εἶναι τοὺς νόμους (οὐ γὰρ εἶναι τοῖς ὀρφανοῖς κατὰ τῶν ἐπιτρόπων), οὐδέτερʼ ἀληθῆ λέγων.
Seeing that you might reasonably be astonished that they did not at the time bring a suit claiming half the estate, my opponent pretends that I was the cause of their not bringing a suit against the other parties, because I had agreed to give them a share and so they did not make the necessary deposit, while they allege that the laws forbade them to bring a suit against me on the ground that orphans may not bring actions against their guardians. Both these statements are untrue.
§ 28
οὔτε γὰρ ἂν νόμον δείξειεν ὃς κωλύει τοῦτον ὑπὲρ τοῦ παιδὸς δίκην παρʼ ἐμοῦ λαμβάνειν· οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἐναντιούμενος οὐδείς, ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ καὶ γραφὰς κατʼ ἐμοῦ δέδωκεν, οὕτω καὶ δίκας ἐμοὶ εἶναι καὶ τῷ παιδὶ πεποίηκεν· οὔτʼ αὖ διὰ ταῦτα ἐκείνοις τοῖς ἔχουσι τοῦ κλήρου οὐκ ἐλάγχανον, ὡς ἐμοῦ μεταδώσειν ὁμολογήσαντος, ἀλλʼ ὅτι οὐδʼ ὁτιοῦν αὐτοῖς τούτων τῶν χρημάτων προσῆκεν.
For my opponent could not point to any law which forbids him to bring a private action against me on behalf of the child; for no law exists which is opposed to such a proceeding, but, just as the law has granted the right to bring a public indictment against me, so it has created the opportunity either for me or the child to bring a private suit. Again, it was not because I agreed to give them a share that they failed to bring an action against the other parties who were in possession of the estate, but because they had absolutely no right to this money.
§ 29
εὖ δʼ οἶδʼ ὅτι 〈οὐδʼ〉 εἰ συνεχώρουν τῷ παιδὶ λαβεῖν ἐπιδικασαμένῳ παρʼ ἐμοῦ τὸ ἡμικλήριον, οὐκ ἄν ποτε ταῦτʼ ἐποίησαν οὐδʼ ἐπεχείρησαν, εἰδότες 〈ὅτι〉, ὁπότʼ ἐν τῇ ἀγχιστείᾳ μὴ ὄντες εἶχόν τι τῶν μὴ προσηκόντων, τοῦτʼ ἂν ὑπὸ τῶν ἐγγύτατα γένους ῥᾳδίως ἀφῃρέθησαν. ὅπερ γὰρ καὶ πρότερον εἶπον, οὐ δίδωσι μεθʼ ἡμᾶς τοῖς ἡμετέροις παισὶ τὸ παράπαν τὴν ἀγχιστείαν ὁ νόμος, ἀλλὰ τοῖς πρὸς μητρὸς τοῦ τελευτήσαντος.
I am convinced that even had I agreed to let the child receive from me by the adjudication of the court a half of the inheritance, they would never have carried out this bargain or attempted to do so; they know perfectly well, that if, being outside the requisite degree of kinship, they had been in possession of anything which did not belong to them, they would have been easily deprived of it by the next-of-kin. For, as I said before, the law does not give any rights at all as next-of-kin to our children after us, but transfers them to the relatives of the deceased on his mother's side.
§ 30
ἧκεν ἂν οὖν ἐπʼ αὐτὰ τοῦτο μὲν ὁ Γλαύκων ὁ τοῦ Ἁγνίου ἀδελφός, πρὸς ὃν μὴ ὅτι γένος εἶχον ἄμεινον εἰπεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔξω τῆς ἀγχιστείας ἐφαίνοντʼ ἂν ὄντες, τοῦτο δʼ, εἰ μὴ ἐβούλετο οὗτος, ἡ Ἁγνίου κἀκείνου μήτηρ, προσῆκον καὶ αὐτῇ τῆς ἀγχιστείας τοῦ αὑτῆς ὑέος, ὥσθʼ ὁπότʼ ἠγωνίζετο πρὸς τοὺς μηδὲν γένει προσήκοντας, φανερῶς ἂν ἔλαβε τὸ ἡμικλήριον παρʼ ὑμῶν, τοῦτο τοῦ δικαίου καὶ τῶν νόμων αὐτῇ δεδωκότων.
In the first place, then, Glaucon, the brother of Hagnias, would have come forward, against whom they could not urge a claim of closer relationship; on the contrary, they would have been clearly shown to be outside the requisite degree of kinship. Next, if Glaucon had been unwilling to come forward, the mother of Hagnias and Glaucon would have done so, since she possessed a claim of kinship to her son, and so, if she had engaged in a suit against those who possessed no title as next-of-kin, she would clearly have been awarded half the estate by you, since justice and the laws have given her a right to it.
§ 31
οὐκοῦν διὰ ταῦτʼ οὐκ ἐλάγχανεν, οὐχ ὡς διʼ ἐμὲ ἢ τοὺς νόμους κωλυόμενος, ἀλλὰ ταύτας [τὰς] προφάσεις ποιούμενος ἐπὶ ταύτας τὰς συκοφαντίας ἐλήλυθεν, ἐξ ὧν γραφὴν γραψάμενος καὶ ἐμὲ διαβάλλων ἐλπίζει χρήματα λήψεσθαι καὶ ἐμὲ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς ἀπαλλάξειν. καὶ οἴεται δεινοῦ τινος ἀνδρὸς ἔργον διαπράττεσθαι ταύταις ταῖς παρασκευαῖς, ὅτι μὴ κατορθώσας μὲν οὐδὲν ἀπολεῖ τῶν αὑτοῦ, διαπραξάμενος δʼ ἃ βούλεται καὶ τὰ τοῦ παιδὸς ἀδεῶς ἤδη διαφορήσει.
These, then, are the reasons why he did not bring an action, and it was not because he was prevented from doing so by me or by the laws; and these are the pretexts which he has invented for resorting to these vexatious proceedings against me, and it is upon the basis of them, that having brought a public indictment against me and slandering me, he hopes to obtain money and to deprive me of my guardianship. He thinks that he is managing very cleverly in employing these devices, because, if he is unsuccessful, he will lose nothing of his own, whereas, if he can carry out his wishes, he will henceforward be able to squander the child's property as well with impunity.
§ 32
οὐκοῦν οὐ δεῖ προσέχειν ὑμᾶς τοῖς τούτου λόγοις τὸν νοῦν, οὐδʼ ἐπιτρέπειν, οὐδʼ ἐθίζειν εἶναι γραφὰς περὶ ὧν ἰδίας δίκας οἱ νόμοι πεποιήκασιν. ἁπλᾶ γὰρ τὰ δίκαια παντάπασίν ἐστι καὶ γνώριμα μαθεῖν· ἃ ἐγὼ διὰ βραχέων εἰπὼν καὶ παρακαταθέμενος ὑμῖν μνημονεύειν, ἐπὶ τὴν ἄλλην ἀπολογίαν ἤδη τρέψομαι τῶν κατηγορηθέντων.
You must, therefore, not listen to his arguments nor tolerate his utterance of them, nor allow the custom to grow up of bringing public actions about matters for which the laws have prescribed private suits. For the rights of the case are perfectly simple and easy to understand. After dealing briefly with them and leaving them stored in your memory, I will then turn to the rest of my defence against the charges brought against me.
§ 33
τί οὖν ἔστι ταῦτα, καὶ τί διορίζομαι; εἰ μὲν κατʼ ἀγχιστείαν τῶν Ἁγνίου μετεῖναί φησι τῷ παιδί, τοῦ ἡμικληρίου λαχέτω πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα, κἂν ὑμεῖς ψηφίσησθε, λαβέτω· ταῦτα γὰρ οἱ νόμοι κελεύουσιν. εἰ δὲ μὴ κατὰ τοῦτο ἀμφισβητεῖ, φησὶ δὲ ὁμολογῆσαί με τῷ παιδὶ μεταδώσειν, φάσκοντος ἐμοῦ τούτων εἶναι μηδέν, δικασάσθω, κἂν ἐξελέγξῃ με ὡς ὡμολόγησα, τότʼ ἤδη πραξάσθω· δίκαιον γὰρ οὕτως ἐστίν.
What then are the rights of the case and how do I define them? If my opponent declares that part of Hagnias's estate belongs to the child by right of kinship, let him bring an action before the archon claiming the half, and, if you decide in his favor, let him take it; for thus the laws ordain. But if he does not claim on these grounds but alleges that I agreed to give the child a share—though I declare that there is not a word of truth in his allegation—let him bring an action, and, if he can prove that I made such an agreement, let him secure the execution of it; for that is only right.
§ 34
εἰ δὲ μήτε πρὸς ἐμὲ μήτε κατʼ ἐμοῦ δίκην εἶναί φησι τῷ παιδί, τὸν κωλύοντα νόμον εἰπάτω, κἂν ἔχῃ δεῖξαι, λαβέτω καὶ οὕτω τὸ μέρος τῶν χρημάτων. εἰ δʼ αὖ αὖ μήτʼ ἐπιδικάσασθαί φησι δεῖν τοῦ ἡμικληρίου μήτʼ ἐμοὶ δικάσασθαι, ἀλλʼ ἤδη εἶναι ταῦτα τοῦ παιδός, ἀπογραψάσθω πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα εἰς τὴν μίσθωσιν τῶν ἐκείνου χρημάτων, ἣν ὁ μισθωσάμενος εἰσπράξει με ταῦτα ὡς ὄντα τοῦ παιδός.
But if he declares that the child cannot either claim a share from me at law or sue me for breach of contract, let him name the law which prohibits this, and, if he can indicate it, let the child in these circumstances, too, receive the share of the estate. If, again, he contends that there is no need to have the half-share adjudicated or to go to law with me at all, but that this share already belongs to the child, let him make an application to the archon for its inclusion in the lease of the orphan's estate and let the lessee exact from me this portion as belonging to the child.
§ 35
ταῦτα μεγάλα δίκαιά ἐστι. ταῦτα καὶ οἱ νόμοι κελεύουσιν, οὐ μὰ Δία οὐ γραφὰς ἐμὲ φεύγειν περὶ ὧν δίκας ἰδίας εἶναι πεποιήκασιν, οὐδὲ κινδυνεύειν περὶ τοῦ σώματος, ὅτι οὐ μεταδίδωμι τῷ παιδὶ τούτων, ἃ ψήφῳ κρατήσας ἐγὼ τοὺς ἔχοντας οὕτω παρʼ ὑμῶν ἔλαβον· ἀλλʼ εἴ τι τῶν ὁμολογουμένων εἶναι τοῦ παιδὸς εἶχον καὶ κακῶς διέθηκα ὥστʼ ἐκεῖνον κακοῦσθαι, τότε ἄν μοι κατὰ ταύτην προσῆκε κρίνεσθαι τὴν γραφήν, οὐ μὰ Δίʼ οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς.
Such are the essential rights of the case, and such the provisions of the laws, which do not, thank heaven, oblige me to submit to criminal trials in matters about which they have instituted private suits nor to run any personal risk because I refuse to share with the child this estate, which I received by your verdict when I won my case against those who were in possession. If I were holding any property which admittedly belonged to the child and had maladministered it to his detriment, then he would be justified in bringing this criminal charge against me, but not, by heaven, when it is a question of my own property.
§ 36
ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὔτε περὶ τούτων οὐδὲν δίκαιον πεποίηκεν οὔτε περὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἀληθὲς οὐδὲν εἴρηκεν, ἅπαντα δὲ δεινῶς πλεονεξίᾳ μεμηχάνηται διαβάλλων καὶ τοὺς νόμους παράγων καὶ ὑμῶν καὶ ἐμοῦ παρὰ τὸ δίκαιον περιγενέσθαι ζητῶν, οἶμαι μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς οὐδʼ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν ἀλλʼ ὁμοίως εἰδέναι πάντας, ὥστʼ οὐκ οἶδʼ ὅ τι δεῖ πλείω περὶ τούτων λέγειν.
That my adversary has in this matter acted entirely unjustly, and that otherwise he has never spoken a word of truth, but has cleverly devised the whole plot from motives of self-interest, uttering calumnies, misinterpreting the laws and seeking to get the better both of you and of me contrary to justice—of all this, by heaven, you are, I think, well aware and all alike understand; and so I do not know what more I need say.
§ 37
ὁρῶ δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὴν πλείστην διατριβὴν τῶν λόγων ποιούμενον περὶ τὴν τοῦ παιδὸς οὐσίαν καὶ περὶ τὴν ἐμήν, καὶ τὰ μὲν ἐκείνου παντάπασιν ὡς ἄπορα διεξιόντα, περὶ δʼ ἐμὲ πλοῦτόν τινα τῷ λόγῳ κατασκευάσαντα, καί τινα κακίαν κατηγοροῦντα ὡς ἐγὼ τεττάρων οὐσῶν Στρατοκλέους θυγατέρων οὐδεμιᾷ τολμῶ συνευπορῆσαι προικός, καὶ ταῦτʼ ἔχων (ὡς οὗτός φησι) τὰ τοῦ παιδίου.
I notice, gentlemen, that most of his speech is taken up with a discussion of my fortune and of that of the child; he represents the circumstances of the child as embarrassed, while he attributes to me a position of wealth and accuses me of baseness on the ground that I cannot bring myself to provide any of the four daughters of Stratocles with a dowry, although, according to his account, I am in possession of the child's property.
§ 38
βούλομαι δὴ καὶ περὶ τούτων εἰπεῖν· ἐλπίζει γὰρ διὰ τῶν λόγων ἐμοὶ μὲν τινα φθόνον γενήσεσθαι παρʼ ὑμῶν περὶ τῶν προσγεγενημένων χρημάτων, τοῖς δὲ παισὶν ἔλεον, ἂν ἄποροι παρʼ ὑμῖν εἶναι δόξωσιν. οὔκουν ἀγνοῆσαι δεῖ περὶ αὐτῶν ὑμᾶς οὐδέν, ἀλλʼ ἀκριβῶς καὶ ταῦτα μαθεῖν, ἵνʼ εἰδῆθʼ ὅτι ψεύδεται, ὥσπερ καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων. ἐγὼ γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες, πάντων 〈ἂν〉 ὁμολογήσαιμι εἶναι κάκιστος, εἰ Στρατοκλέους ἄπορα τὰ πράγματα καταλιπόντος αὐτὸς εὔπορος ὢν [καὶ] μηδεμίαν ἐπιμέλειαν ποιούμενος φαινοίμην τῶν ἐκείνου παίδων.
I should like to deal with this point; for he hopes by his arguments to arouse in your minds a prejudice against me regarding the fortune which has accrued to me, and a feeling of pity in favor of the children, if they can be represented to you as reduced to poverty. You must not, therefore, be left in any ignorance on these points but must have an exact idea of them, so that you may understand that here, too, my opponent is lying, as he has lied about everything else. For, gentlemen, I would admit myself to be the basest of all men, if it could be shown that the affairs of Stratocles were left in a state of embarrassment at his death and that I, being myself in easy circumstances, gave not a thought to his children.
§ 39
εἰ δὲ πλείονα κατέλιπεν αὐτοῖς τὰ ὄντα τῶν ἐμῶν καὶ βεβαιότερα, καὶ ταῦτα τοσαῦτʼ ἐστὶν ὥστε καὶ τὰς θυγατέρας ἐξ αὐτῶν διαθεῖναι καλῶς καὶ τὸν παῖδα ἐκ τῶν λοιπῶν μηδὲν ἧττον εἶναι πλούσιον, ἐπιμελοῦμαί τε τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον αὐτῶν ὥστε καὶ πολλῷ πλείω γενέσθαι τὴν οὐσίαν, εἰκότως μὲν οὐκ ἂν ἔχοιμι μέμψιν, εἰ μὴ τἀμαυτοῦ προστίθημι τούτοις, σώζων δὲ τὰ τούτων καὶ πλείω ποιῶν δικαίως ἂν ἐπαινοίμην. ὅτι δὲ ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχει, ῥᾳδίως ἐπιδείξω.
But if he left them a fortune more considerable and better secured than my own and sufficient to endow his daughters fittingly without sensibly diminishing his son's wealth, and if I am so managing the property as greatly to increase it, surely I cannot reasonably be blamed for not giving them my own money as well; I rather deserve to be praised for preserving and increasing their fortune. That these statements are true, I shall easily prove to you.
§ 40
πρῶτον μὲν οὖν τὰ τῆς οὐσίας διέξειμι, μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ὡς καὶ διοικεῖν ἀξιῶ τὰ τοῦ παιδός. Στρατοκλεῖ γὰρ κἀμοὶ τὰ μὲν ὑπάρξαντα πατρῷα τοσαῦτα ἦν, ὥστε εἶναι μὲν [οὐχ] ἱκανά, λῃτουργεῖν δὲ μὴ ἄξια. τεκμήριον δέ· εἴκοσι μνᾶς ἑκάτερος ἡμῶν ἐπὶ τῇ γυναικὶ προῖκα ἔλαβε, τοσαύτη δὲ προὶξ οὐκ ἂν εἰς πολλήν τινα οὐσίαν δοθείη.
First, therefore, I will give you details about the property, and after that state the principles on which I think fit to administer the children's affairs. Stratocles and I had a patrimony sufficient to supply our needs but not large enough to defray the cost of public services. An indication of this is that each of us received a dowry of only 20 minae with his wife, and so small a dowry would not be given to a husband with a large fortune.
§ 41
συνέβη δὲ Στρατοκλεῖ πρὸς τοῖς ὑπάρχουσι πλέον ἢ πένθʼ ἡμιταλάντων οὐσίαν λαβεῖν· Θεοφῶν γὰρ ὁ τῆς γυναικὸς αὐτοῦ ἀδελφὸς ἀποθνῄσκων ἐποιήσατο τῶν θυγατέρων αὐτοῦ μίαν, καὶ τὰ ὄνθʼ αὑτοῦ ἔδωκεν, ἀγρὸν τὸν Ἐλευσῖνι δυοῖν ταλάντοιν, πρόβατα ἑξήκοντα, αἶγας ἑκατόν, ἔπιπλα, ἵππον λαμπρὸν ἐφʼ οὗ ἐφυλάρχησε, καὶ τὴν ἄλλην κατασκευὴν ἅπασαν,
Stratocles, however, happened to receive an addition of more than two and a half talents to his fortune; for Theophon, his wife's brother, at his death adopted one of his daughters and left her his property, consisting of land at Eleusis worth two talents, 60 sheep, 100 goats, furniture, a fine horse which he rode when he was a cavalry commander, and all the rest of his goods and chattels.
§ 42
ἧς κύριος ἐκεῖνος γενόμενος ἐννέα ἔτη ὅλα κατέλιπε πέντε ταλάντων οὐσίαν καὶ τρισχιλίων δραχμῶν σὺν τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ πατρῴοις, χωρὶς ἐκείνης ἧς Θεοφῶν τῇ θυγατρὶ αὐτοῦ ἔδωκεν, ἀγρὸν μὲν Θριᾶσι πένθʼ ἡμιτάλαντα εὑρίσκοντα, οἰκίαν δὲ Μελίτῃ τρισχιλίων ἐωνημένην, ἄλλην δὲ Ἐλευσῖνι πεντακοσίων. ἐδάφη μὲν ταῦτα, ἀφʼ ὧν ἡ μίσθωσις τοῦ μὲν ἀγροῦ δώδεκα μναῖ, τῶν δὲ οἰκιῶν τρεῖς, αἳ πεντεκαίδεκα μναῖ συναμφότερα γίγνονται· χρέα δʼ ἐπὶ τόκοις ὀφειλόμενα περὶ τετρακισχιλίας, ὧν τὸ ἔργον ἐπʼ ἐννέα ὀβολοῖς ἑπτακόσιαι καὶ εἴκοσι δραχμαὶ γίγνονται τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἑκάστου.
Having had complete control of this property for nine whole years, he left a fortune of 5 talents 3000 drachmae, including his patrimony but excluding the fortune left to his daughter by Theophon. His property comprised land at Thria worth two and a half talents, a house at Melite which cost 3000 drachmae, and another at Eleusis which cost 500 drachmae. These made up his real property, the land being let at 12 minae and the houses at 3, a total of 15 minae; but he had also about 4000 drachmae lent out at interest, the yearly income of which, at a monthly rate of 9 obols, amounts to 720 drachmae.
§ 43
πρόσοδος μὲν αὕτη δύο καὶ εἴκοσι μναῖ καὶ πρός· χωρὶς δὲ τούτων κατέλιπεν ἔπιπλα, πρόβατα, κριθάς, οἶνον, ὀπώρας, ἐξ ὧν ἐνεπόλησαν τετρακισχιλίας ἐννακοσίας· ἔτι δὲ ἔνδον ἐννακοσίας δραχμάς. πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἐξ ἐράνων ὀφλήματα εἰσπεπραγμένα, μικροῦ δεούσας χιλίας δραχμάς, μαρτύρων ἐναντίον ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ παιδός, ἀπεγράψατο. καὶ οὔπω λέγω περὶ τῶν ἄλλων, ἃ κατελείφθη μὲν οὗτοι δʼ οὐκ ἀποφαίνουσιν, ἀλλὰ τὰ φανερὰ καὶ τὰ ὑπὸ τούτων ὁμολογούμενα. κάλει δέ μοι τῶν εἰρημένων τοὺς μάρτυρας.
He thus had a total income of rather more than 20 minae. Besides this he left furniture, sheep, barley, wine, and fruits, the sale of which brought in 4900 drachmae; also 900 drachmae were found in the house. In addition his—that is the child's—mother included in the inventory made in the presence of witnesses sums lent without interest, which were recovered, amounting to nearly 1000 drachmae. I make no mention now of the other property which was left, but which my opponents refuse to disclose; I only include what was declared and admitted by them. Please call the witnesses in support of the above statements.
§ 44
Μάρτυρες ἡ μὲν τοίνυν Στρατοκλέους οὐσία καὶ πλείων ταύτης ἐστίν· ἀλλʼ ὕστερον περὶ τῶν παρακλεπτομένων ὑπὸ τούτων ποιήσομαι τοὺς λόγους· ἡ δʼ ἐμὴ πόση τις; χωρίον ἐν Οἰνόῃ πεντακισχιλίων καὶ Προσπαλτοῖ τρισχιλίων, καὶ οἰκία ἐν ἄστει δισχιλίων, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις 〈ὁ〉 κλῆρος ὃν Ἁγνίας κατέλιπε, περὶ δύο τάλαντα· οὐ γὰρ ἂν οἶδʼ ὅτι πλέον εὕροι τούτου. ταῦτʼ ἐστὶ τρία τάλαντα καὶ τετρακισχίλιαι μόνον, δέκα καὶ ἑκατὸν μναῖς ἐλάττω τῶν τοῦ παιδός.
Witnesses Stratocles' fortune amounts to even more than this; but I will deal later with my opponents embezzlements. Now to what does my fortune amount? I have a property at Oenoe worth 5000 drachmae and another at Prospalta worth 3000 drachmae and a house in Athens worth 2000 drachmae; to this must be added the estate left by Hagnias, worth about two talents; for I am sure that it would not fetch more than this. This gives a total of only three talents 4000 drachmae—110 minae less than the fortune of the child.
§ 45
κἀγὼ μὲν ἐγκαταλογίζομαι καὶ τὰ τοῦ ὑέος τοῦ ἐκποιηθέντος εἰς ταῦτα, τοῖς τοῦ παιδὸς δὲ οὐ προσέθηκα τὴν Θεοφῶντος οὐσίαν, πένθʼ ἡμιταλάντων οὖσαν, ἐφʼ ᾗ ἐποιήσατο τὴν ἀδελφὴν αὐτοῦ· ῥᾳδίως γὰρ ἂν εὑρεθείη καὶ ὀκτὼ ταλάντων ὁ τούτων οἶκος· ἀλλʼ ἐκεῖνα ἀφῄρηται χωρίς. κἀμοὶ μὲν ὁ κλῆρος ὃν Ἁγνίας κατέλιπεν, οὗτος οὔπω βέβαιός ἐστι·
I include in the reckoning the fortune of my son, who was adopted into another family, while I excluded from the child's fortune the property of Theophon, two and a half talents, which he left to his sister when he adopted her; for their family property could be easily reckoned at eight talents, but the money which came from Theophon has been reckoned separately. On my side, the estate left by Hagnias is not yet secured to me; for trials for perjury are still pending,
§ 46
δίκαι γὰρ ἐνεστήκασι ψευδομαρτυρίων, κελεύει δʼ ὁ νόμος, ἐὰν ἁλῷ τις τῶν ψευδομαρτυρίων, πάλιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἶναι περὶ αὐτῶν τὰς λήξεις· τὰ δὲ τοῦ παιδὸς ὡμολογημένα καὶ ἀναμφισβήτητα καταλέλοιπε Στρατοκλῆς. ὅτι δὲ τοσαῦτά ἐστι τἀμὰ σὺν τοῖς τοῦ ἐκποιήτου ὑέος, καὶ ψευδομαρτυριῶν ἐνεστᾶσι δίκαι περὶ τῶν Ἁγνίου, λαβὲ τὰς μαρτυρίας καὶ ἀνάγνωθι.
and the law ordains that, if there is any conviction for perjury, the action claiming an estate must be heard over again. On the other hand, the child's fortune bequeathed to him by Stratocles is admitted and not contested. To prove that this is the amount of my property, including that of my son who has been adopted into another family, and that suits for perjury in connection with Hagnias's estate are still pending, take and read the depositions.
§ 47
Μαρτυρίαι ἆρα μικρὰ τὰ διάφορα ἑκατέροις τῆς οὐσίας ἡμῶν ἐστιν, ἀλλʼ οὐ τηλικαῦτα ὥστε 〈ἐμοὶ〉 μηδεμίαν γενέσθαι παρὰ τοὺς Στρατοκλέους παῖδας; 〈οὐκοῦν〉 οὐκ ἄξιον τοῖς τούτου λόγοις πιστεύειν, ὃς τοσαύτης οὐσίας καταλελειμμένης ἐτόλμησεν ἐπὶ διαβολῇ ψεύσασθαι κατʼ ἐμοῦ τηλικαῦτα τὸ μέγεθος. καταλογίζεται τοίνυν ὡς ἐγὼ τρεῖς κλήρους εἰληφὼς καὶ πολλῶν χρημάτων εὐπορῶν ἀφανίζω τὴν οὐσίαν, ἵνʼ ὡς ἐλάχισθʼ ὑμεῖς αὐτῶν ἀπολαύητε. τοῖς γὰρ μηδὲν δίκαιον ἔχουσι περὶ τῶν πραγμάτων λέγειν ἀνάγκη πορίζεσθαι τοιούτους λόγους, ἐξ ὧν [ἂν] διαβάλλοντες πλέον ἔχειν δυνήσονται τῶν ἀντιδίκων.
Depositions Is the difference, then, trifling between our respective fortunes? Or rather, is it not so great that mine is nothing in comparison with that of the children of Stratocles? No credence must therefore be attached to the statements of my opponent, who, though so large a fortune has been left to the children, has dared to utter such lies with the object of discrediting me. According to his reckoning I have received three inheritances and am in enjoyment of a large fortune, but I hide my wealth in order that you may derive as little advantage from it as possible. Those who have no just claims to urge on the facts are obliged to bring forward such arguments as will give them an advantage over their adversaries by calumniating them.
§ 48
ἐμοὶ δὲ μάρτυρές ἐστε πάντες ὅτι οἱ τῆς ἐμῆς γυναικὸς ἀδελφοί, Χαιρέλεως καὶ Μακάρτατος, οὐ τῶν λῃτουργούντων ἦσαν ἀλλὰ τῶν βραχεῖαν κεκτημένων οὐσίαν. Μακάρτατον γὰρ ἴστε ὅτι τὸ χωρίον ἀποδόμενος καὶ τριήρη πριάμενος καὶ ταύτην πληρωσάμενος εἰς Κρήτην ἐξέπλευσεν· οὐ γὰρ τὸ ἔργον ἀφανὲς ἐγένετο, ἀλλὰ καὶ λόγον ἐν τῷ δήμῳ παρέσχε, μὴ πόλεμον ἡμῖν ἀντʼ εἰρήνης ἐκεῖνος πρὸς Λακεδαιμονίους ποιήσειε.
But you all are my witnesses that my wife's brothers, Chaereleos and Macartatus, were not among those who supported public burdens but among those who possessed only slender fortunes. You know that Macartatus sold his land and bought a trireme which he manned and sailed away in it to Crete. The affair was no secret but even gave rise to a discussion in the Assembly, since it was feared that he might bring about a state of war instead of peace between us and the Lacedaemonians.
§ 49
Χαιρέλεως δὲ τὸ Προσπαλτοῖ χωρίον κατέλιπεν, ὃ πλέον οὐκ ἂν εὕροι τριάκοντα μνῶν. συνέβη δὲ τὸν μὲν ταῦτα καταλιπόντα τελευτῆσαι πρότερον ἢ Μακάρτατον, ἐκεῖνον δὲ μετὰ ταύτης τῆς οὐσίας, ἣν ἔχων ἐξέπλευσεν· ἅπαντα γὰρ καὶ τὴν τριήρη καὶ αὑτὸν κατὰ τὸν πόλεμον ἀπώλεσε. καταλειφθέντος δὲ τοῦ Προσπαλτοῖ χωρίου καὶ γιγνομένου τῆς ἐκείνων ἀδελφῆς, ἐμῆς δὲ γυναικός, ἐπείσθην ὑπʼ ἐκείνης εἰσποιῆσαι Μακαρτάτῳ τὸν ἕτερον τῶν παίδων· οὐχ ἵνα 〈μὴ〉 λῃτουργοίην, εἰ προσγένοιτό μοι τοῦτο τὸ χωρίον.
Chaereleos left the estate at Prospalta, which would not fetch more than 30 minae. The brother who left this estate happened to die before Macartatus, who in his turn perished with all the property which he took with him when he sailed away; for he lost the trireme and everything else in the war as well as his own life. The estate at Prospalta was left and passed to their sister, who is my wife, and I was persuaded by her to allow one of our two sons to be adopted into the family of Macartatus. My object was not to avoid the performance of public services which the addition of this estate would involve;
§ 50
ὁμοίως γὰρ καὶ [μὴ] εἰσποιήσαντος τοῦτό γʼ ὑπῆρχεν· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐλῃτούργουν διὰ τοῦτό γʼ ἧττον οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν εἰσφερόντων ἦν καὶ τῶν τὰ προσταττόμενα ὑμῖν ἅπαντα ποιούντων. ὁ δὲ ὡς περὶ ἀχρήστου μὲν πλουσίου δὲ ἐπὶ διαβολῇ ποιεῖται τούτους τοὺς λόγους. ἐγὼ δʼ ἓν κεφάλαιον ἐρῶ πάντων μέγιστον, ὃ καὶ ὑμῖν οἶδʼ ὅτι δόξει δίκαιον. κοινώσασθαι γὰρ ἐθέλω τὴν οὐσίαν τὴν ἐμὴν τῇ τοῦ παιδός, καὶ εἴτε πολλὰ εἴτʼ ὀλίγα ἐστίν, ἐν κοινῷ γενομένης λάβωμεν τὰ ἡμίσεα ἑκάτερος, ἵνα μηδὲν πλέον ἔχῃ ἅτερος τοῦ ἑτέρου τοῦ προσήκοντος· ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἐθελήσει. Λείπει
for my having allowed my son to be adopted made no difference, for indeed I performed public services no less than before, but was among those who paid war contributions and carried out all the duties imposed by the state. My opponent, however, in representing me as a wealthy but unprofitable citizen is using these terms to calumniate me. As the strongest argument of all, I will sum the matter up in a single proposal, which, I am sure, will appear to you to be just. I am willing to bring my whole estate into hotchpotch with that of the child, and let us each take half of the aggregate amount, whether it be large or small, so that neither party may have more than is fitting; but my opponent will never consent to this.
On Behalf of Euphiletus · urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0017.tlg012 · Greek: Υπὲρ Εὐφιλήτου — tlg0017.tlg012.perseus-grc2 · English: On Behalf of Euphiletus — trans. Edward Seymour Forster — tlg0017.tlg012.perseus-eng2
§ 0
Ὑπόθεσις τὸν Ἐρχίεων δῆμον εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον προσκαλεῖταί τις τῶν ἀποψηφισθέντων ὡς ἀδίκως τῆς πολιτείας ἀπελαυνόμενος. ἐγράφη γὰρ δή τις ὑπὸ τῶν Ἀθηναίων νόμος, ἐξέτασιν γενέσθαι τῶν πολιτῶν κατὰ δήμους, τὸν δὲ ἀποψηφισθέντα ὑπὸ τῶν δημοτῶν τῆς πολιτείας μὴ μετέχειν, τοῖς δὲ ἀδίκως ἀποψηφισθεῖσιν ἔφεσιν εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον εἶναι προσκαλεσαμένοις τοὺς δημότας, καὶ ἐὰν τὸ δεύτερον ἐξελεγχθῶσι, πεπρᾶσθαι αὐτοὺς καὶ τὰ χρήματα εἶναι δημόσια. κατὰ τοῦτον τὸν νόμον ὁ Εὐφίλητος, προσκαλεσάμενος τοὺς Ἐρχιέας ὡς ἀδίκως καταψηφισαμένους αὑτοῦ, τὸν ἀγῶνα τόνδε διατίθεται. προείρηται μὲν δὴ τὰ πράγματα ταῦτʼ ἀκριβῶς καὶ πεπίστωται διὰ τῶν μαρτύρων· οἷς δὲ βεβαίως βούλεται ποιῆσαι τὰς μαρτυρίας, τάδʼ ἐστίν, ὡς μὲν ἐγὼ δόξης ἔχω, πάντʼ ἀκριβῶς ἐξειργασμένα, κρινέτω δὲ ὁ βουλόμενος εἰ τὰ προσήκοντα ἔγνωκα περὶ αὐτῶν.
Argument (By Dionysius of Halicarnassus) The Deme of Erchia is summoned before the court by one of its members who has been rejected by its vote and who pleads that he is being unjustly disfranchised. A law had been passed by the Athenians ordering that a revision should be made of the lists of citizens according to demes, and that anyone who was rejected by the votes of his fellow-demesmen should no longer enjoy the rights of citizenship; those, however, who were unjustly rejected had the right to appeal to the court by summoning the members of the deme, and, if they were again excluded, they were to be sold as slaves and their property confiscated. It is under this law that Euphiletus, having summoned the demesmen of Erchia on the ground that they had unjustly rejected him, instituted the present case. The facts have been already skilfully set forth and confirmed by witnesses. The following passage, in which the orator seeks to confirm the evidence, is composed, in my opinion, with consummate skill, but the reader must decide for himself whether my judgement of it is correct.
§ 1
ὅτι μὲν τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ἀδελφὸς ἡμῖν ἐστιν οὑτοσὶ Εὐφίλητος, οὐ μόνον ἡμῶν ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν συγγενῶν ἁπάντων ἀκηκόατε μαρτυρούντων. σκέψασθε δὲ πρῶτον τὸν πατέρα ἡμῶν, τίνος ἕνεκεν ἂν ψεύδοιτο καὶ τοῦτον μὴ ὄντα αὐτοῦ ὑὸν εἰσεποιεῖτο.
Gentlemen, you have heard not only us but also all our kinsmen give evidence that Euphiletus here is our brother. Next consider, in the first place, what motive our father could have for lying and for having adopted Euphiletus as his son, if he were not really so.
§ 2
πάντας γὰρ εὑρήσετε τοὺς τὰ τοιαῦτα πράττοντας ἢ οὐκ ὄντων αὑτοῖς γνησίων παίδων ἢ διὰ πενίαν ἀναγκαζομένους ξένους ἀνθρώπους εἰσποιεῖσθαι, ὅπως ὠφελῶνταί τι ἀπʼ αὐτῶν διʼ αὑτοὺς Ἀθηναίων γεγονότων. τῷ τοίνυν πατρὶ τούτων οὐδέτερον ὑπάρχει· γνήσιοι μὲν γὰρ αὐτῷ ἡμεῖς δύο ὑεῖς ἐσμεν, ὥστε οὐκ ἄν γε διʼ ἐρημίαν τοῦτον εἰσεποιεῖτο.
You will find that all those who do such things either have no legitimate children of their own or else are constrained by poverty to adopt aliens in order that they might receive some assistance from them, because they are indebted to them for their Athenian citizenship. Our father had neither of these motives, for in us he has two legitimate sons, so that he would never have adopted Euphiletus because he lacked an heir.
§ 3
ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδὲ τροφῆς τε καὶ εὐπορίας τῆς παρὰ τούτου δεόμενος· ἔστι γὰρ αὐτῷ 〈βίος〉 ἱκανός, καὶ χωρὶς τούτου μεμαρτύρηται ὑμῖν τοῦτον ἐκ παιδίου τρέφων καὶ ἀσκῶν καὶ εἰς 〈τοὺς〉 φράτορας εἰσάγων, καὶ ταῦτα οὐ μικρὰ δαπανήματά ἐστιν. ὥστε τόν γε πατέρα ἡμῶν οὐκ εἰκός ἐστιν, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, μηδὲν ὠφελούμενον οὕτως ἀδίκῳ πράγματι ἐπιχειρῆσαι.
Nor again is he in need of any material support or comfort which Euphiletus could give him; for he is possessed of sufficient resources, and further evidence has been given you that he brought up Euphiletus and educated him from childhood and introduced him to the members of his ward—all of which represents a considerable outlay. So that it is unlikely, judges, that my father committed so wicked a crime from which he derived no advantage.
§ 4
ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδʼ ἐμέ γε οὐδεὶς ἀνθρώπων οὕτω τελέως ἂν ἄφρονα ὑπολάβοι, ὥστε τούτῳ μαρτυρεῖν τὰ ψευδῆ, ὅπως τὰ πατρῷα διὰ πλειόνων διανείμωμαι. καὶ γὰρ οὐδʼ ἀμφισβητῆσαί μοι ἐξουσία γένοιτʼ ἂν ὕστερον ὡς οὐκ ἔστιν ἀδελφὸς οὗτος ἐμοῦ· οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἂν ὑμῶν τὴν 〈ἐμὴν〉 φωνὴν ἀνάσχοιτʼ ἂν ἀκούων, 〈εἰ〉 νῦν μὲν ὑπόδικον ἐμαυτὸν καθιστὰς μαρτυρῶ ὡς ἔστιν ἀδελφὸς ἡμέτερος, ὕστερον δὲ φαινοίμην τούτοις ἀντιλέγων.
Again, as for myself, no one could imagine me to be so completely insane as to bear false witness in favor of Euphiletus with the result that I should have to share my patrimony with a larger number of heirs. For I should never hereafter be at liberty to plead that Euphiletus is not my brother; for none of you would listen to me for a moment, if, after now bearing witness that he is my brother and making myself liable to the penalties of the law, I should hereafter openly contradict this assertion.
§ 5
οὐ μόνον τοίνυν ἡμᾶς, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, εἰκός ἐστι τἀληθῆ μεμαρτυρηκέναι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους συγγενεῖς. ἐνθυμήθητε γὰρ πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι οἱ τὰς ἀδελφὰς ἡμῶν ἔχοντες οὐκ ἄν ποτε ἐμαρτύρουν περὶ τούτου τὰ ψευδῆ· μητρυιὰ γὰρ ἡ τούτου μήτηρ ἐγεγένητο ταῖς ἡμετέραις ἀδελφαῖς, εἰώθασι δέ πως ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ διαφέρεσθαι ἀλλήλαις αἵ τε μητρυιαὶ καὶ αἱ πρόγονοι· ὥστε εἰ οὗτος ἐξ ἄλλου τινὸς ἀνδρὸς ἦν τῇ μητρυιᾷ καὶ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ ἡμετέρου πατρός, οὐκ ἄν ποτε, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, τοὺς ἑαυτῶν ἄνδρας αἱ ἀδελφαὶ μαρτυρεῖν [εἴασαν καὶ] ἐπέτρεψαν.
Thus, gentlemen, the probabilities are in favor of my having given true evidence, and the same is true of the other relatives. For observe, in the first place, that the husbands of our sisters would never have given false evidence in favor of Euphiletus; for his mother had become stepmother to our sisters, and it is customary for differences to exist between stepmothers and the daughters of a former marriage; so that, if their stepmother had borne Euphiletus to any man other than our father, our sisters would never have allowed their husbands to give evidence in his favor.
§ 6
καὶ μὴν οὐδʼ ἂν ὁ θεῖος πρὸς μητρὸς ἡμῖν ὤν, τούτῳ δὲ οὐδὲν προσήκων δήπου τῇ τούτου μητρὶ ἠθέλησεν ἄν, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, μαρτυρῆσαι ψευδῆ μαρτυρίαν, διʼ ἣν ἡμῖν γίγνεται βλάβη περιφανής, εἴ περ ξένον ὄντα τοῦτον εἰσποιοῦμεν ἀδελφὸν ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς. ἔτι τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, πρὸς τούτοις 〈πῶς〉 ἄν τις ὑμῶν καταγνοίη ψευδομαρτυρίων Δημαράτου τουτουὶ καὶ Ἡγήμονος καὶ Νικοστράτου, οἳ πρῶτον μὲν οὐδὲν αἰσχρὸν οὐδέποτε φανήσονται ἐπιτηδεύσαντες, εἶτα δʼ οἰκεῖοι ὄντες ἡμῖν καὶ εἰδότες ἡμᾶς ἅπαντας μεμαρτυρήκασιν Εὐφιλήτῳ τουτῳὶ τὴν αὑτοῦ συγγένειαν ἕκαστος;
Again, our uncle, a relative on our mother's side and no kinsman of Euphiletus, would never have consented, judges, to give in favor of Euphiletus's mother evidence which was manifestly against our interests, if Euphiletus were an alien whom we are attempting to introduce into the family as our own brother. Furthermore, judges, how could any of you convict of perjury Demaratus here and Hegemon and Nicostratus, who, in the first place, will never be shown to have lent themselves to any base action, and who, secondly, being our kinsmen and knowing us all, have each borne witness to his own relationship to Euphiletus?
§ 7
ὥστε ἡδέως κἂν τῶν ἀντιδικούντων ἡμῖν τοῦ σεμνοτάτου πυθοίμην, εἰ ἄλλοθέν ποθεν ἔχοι ἂν ἐπιδεῖξαι αὑτὸν Ἀθηναῖον ἢ ἐκ τούτων ὧν καὶ ἡμεῖς Εὐφίλητον ἐπιδείκνυμεν. ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οὐκ οἶμαι ἄλλο τι ἂν αὐτὸν 〈εἰπεῖν〉 ἢ ὅτι ἡ μήτηρ ἀστή τέ ἐστι καὶ 〈γαμετὴ καὶ ἀστὸς〉 ὁ πατήρ, καὶ ὡς ταῦτʼ ἀληθῆ λέγει, παρέχοιτʼ ἂν αὐτῷ τοὺς συγγενεῖς μάρτυρας.
I should like, then, to hear from the most respectable of our opponents, whether he can produce any other sources of evidence to prove his own Athenian citizenship than those which we are employing in support of Euphiletus. I do not think he could urge any plea except that his mother was a citizen and a married woman and his father a citizen, and he would produce his kinsmen to bear witness that he was speaking the truth.
§ 8
εἶτα, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, εἰ μὲν οὗτοι ἐκινδύνευον, ἠξίουν ἂν τοῖς αὑτῶν οἰκείοις ὑμᾶς πιστεύειν μαρτυροῦσι μᾶλλον ἢ τοῖς κατηγόροις· νυνὶ δὲ ἡμῶν πάντα ταῦτα παρεχομένων ἀξιώσουσιν ὑμᾶς τοῖς αὑτῶν πείθεσθαι λόγοις μᾶλλον ἢ τῷ πατρὶ τῷ Εὐφιλήτου καὶ ἐμοὶ καὶ τῷ ἀδελφῷ καὶ τοῖς φράτορσι καὶ πάσῃ τῇ ἡμετέρα συγγενείᾳ; καὶ μὴν οὗτοι μὲν οὐδʼ ἐν ἑνὶ κινδυνεύοντες ἰδίας ἔχθρας ἕνεκα ποιοῦσιν, ἡμεῖς δὲ πάντας ὑποδίκους ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς καθιστάντες μαρτυροῦμεν.
Next, judges, if it were our opponents who were on their trial, they would demand that you should believe the evidence of their kinsmen rather than their accusers; and now, when we produce all these proofs, are they going to demand that you should believe what they say, rather than Euphiletus's father and me and my brother and the members of the ward and all our kindred? Furthermore, our opponents are acting out of personal spite without exposing themselves to any risk, while we are all rendering ourselves liable to the penalties of the law in giving evidence.
§ 9
καὶ πρὸς ταῖς μαρτυρίαις, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, πρῶτον μὲν ἡ τοῦ Εὐφιλήτου μήτηρ, ἣν οὗτοι ὁμολογοῦσιν ἀστὴν εἶναι, ὅρκον ὀμόσαι ἐπὶ τοῦ διαιτητοῦ ἐβούλετο ἐπὶ Δελφινίῳ ἦ μὴν τουτονὶ Εὐφίλητον εἶναι ἐξ αὑτῆς καὶ τοῦ ἡμετέρου πατρός. καίτοι τίνα προσῆκε μᾶλλον αὐτῆς ἐκείνης τοῦτο εἰδέναι; ἔπειτα, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἡμέτερος, ὃν εἰκός ἐστι μετὰ τὴν τούτου μητέρα ἄριστα τὸν αὑτοῦ ὑὸν γιγνώσκειν, οὗτος καὶ τότε καὶ νυνὶ βούλεται ὀμόσαι ἦ μὴν Εὐφίλητον τουτονὶ ὑὸν εἶναι αὑτοῦ ἐξ ἀστῆς καὶ γαμετῆς γυναικός.
And in addition to the depositions, judges, in the first place, the mother of Euphiletus, who is admitted by our opponents to be a citizen, expressed before the arbitrators her willingness to swear an oath in the sanctuary of Delphinian Apollo that Euphiletus here was the issue of herself and our father; and who had better means of knowing than she? Secondly, judges, our father, who naturally is better able to recognize his own son than anyone else except his mother, was ready on the former occasion, and is ready now, to swear that Euphiletus here is his son by a mother who is a citizen and legally married.
§ 10
πρὸς τούτοις τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ἐγὼ ἐτύγχανον μὲν τρισκαιδεκαέτης ὤν, ὥσπερ καὶ πρότερον εἶπον, ὅτε οὗτος ἐγένετο, ἕτοιμος δʼ εἰμὶ ὀμόσαι ἦ μὴν Εὐφίλητον τουτονὶ ἀδελφὸν εἶναι ἐμαυτοῦ ὁμοπάτριον. ὥστε, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, δικαίως ἂν καὶ τοὺς ἡμετέρους ὅρκους πιστοτέρους νομίζοιτε ἢ τοὺς τούτων λόγους· ἡμεῖς μὲν γὰρ ἀκριβῶς εἰδότες ὀμόσαι περὶ αὐτοῦ θέλομεν, οὗτοι δὲ ταῦτα ἀκηκοότες παρὰ τῶν τούτου διαφόρων ἢ αὐτοὶ πλάττοντες λέγουσι.
In addition to this, judges, I was thirteen years old, as I have already said, when he was born, and I am ready to swear that Euphiletus here is my brother by the same father. You would be justified then, judges, in regarding our oaths as more worthy of credence than the statements of our opponents; for we, knowing all the facts, are willing to swear oaths concerning him, while they are repeating statements which they have heard from his enemies or uttering their own fabrications.
§ 11
πρὸς δὲ τούτοις, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ἡμεῖς μὲν τοὺς συγγενεῖς μάρτυρας καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν διαιτητῶν καὶ ἐφʼ ὑμῶν παρεχόμεθα, οἷς οὐκ ἄξιον ἀπιστεῖν· οὗτοι δέ, ἐπειδὴ ἔλαχεν ὁ Εὐφίλητος τὴν δίκην τὴν προτέραν τῷ κοινῷ τῶν δημοτῶν καὶ τῷ τότε δημαρχοῦντι, ὃς νῦν τετελεύτηκε, δύο ἔτη τοῦ διαιτητοῦ τὴν δίαιταν ἔχοντος οὐκ ἐδυνήθησαν οὐδεμίαν μαρτυρίαν εὑρεῖν ὡς οὑτοσὶ ἄλλου τινὸς πατρός ἐστιν ἢ τοῦ ἡμετέρου. τοῖς δὲ διαιτῶσι μέγιστα 〈ταῦτα〉 σημεῖα ἦν τοῦ ψεύδεσθαι τούτους, καὶ κατεδιῄτησαν αὐτῶν ἀμφότεροι. καί μοι λαβὲ τῆς προτέρας διαίτης τὴν μαρτυρίαν.
Furthermore, judges, we are producing before you our kinsmen, as we produced them before the arbitrators, as witnesses whom there is no reason for you to disbelieve; whereas our opponents, when Euphiletus brought his former case against the community of the deme and the demarch then in office, who has since died, though the case was before the arbitrator for two years, could never find a single piece of evidence to show that Euphiletus was the son of any father other than our father. In the opinion of the arbitrators this was the strongest indication that our opponents were lying, and they both gave their award against them. Please take the deposition about the former arbitration.
§ 12
Μαρτυρία ὡς μὲν τοίνυν καὶ τότε ὦφλον τὴν δίαιταν, ἀκηκόατε. ἀξιῶ δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ὥσπερ οὗτοι μέγα τοῦτʼ ἂν ἔφησαν εἶναι σημεῖον ὡς οὐκ ἔστιν Ἡγησίππου, εἰ οἱ διαιτηταὶ αὐτῶν ἀπεδιῄτησαν, οὕτω τὸ νῦν ἡμῖν τοὐναντίον εἶναι μαρτύριον, ὅτι ἀληθῆ λέγομεν, ἐπεὶ ἔδοξαν αὐτοῖς ἀδικεῖν τοῦτον Ἀθηναῖον ὄντα καὶ κυρίως πρῶτον ἐγγραφέντα ὕστερον ἐξαλείψαντες. ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἀδελφὸς ἡμῶν ἐστιν οὑτοσὶ Εὐφίλητος καὶ πολίτης ὑμέτερος, καὶ ἀδίκως ὑβρίσθη ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν τῷ δήμῳ συστάντων, ἱκανῶς οἴομαι ὑμᾶς, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ἀκηκοέναι.
Deposition You have now heard that my opponents lost their case before the arbitrators. I claim, judges, that, just as they would have declared, if the arbitrators had decided in their favor, that this was a strong proof that Euphiletus is not the son of Hegesippus, so now you should regard as equally strong evidence of the truth of our contention the fact that they were considered by the arbitrators to be doing Euphiletus an injury in having subsequently deleted his name, though he was a citizen and had before been legally enrolled. You have, I think, now heard enough, judges, to convince you that Euphiletus here is our brother and your fellow-citizen, and that he has been unjustly insulted by those who have conspired against him in the deme.
© 2026 Wu Ching-Yuan 吴靖远 · magalia.wiki (籬廬). Generated 2026-06-14 from isaeus-orations.html. Greek text & public-domain translations from their stated Perseus editions; metadata CC BY 4.0.