Rational persuasion and appeal to an audience's emotions are elements of most literature, but they are found in the
262 50 5MB
English Pages 284 [287] Year 1985
GREEK
ORATORS - I
Antiphon TRANSLATED
M.
WITH
&
COMMENTARY
Edwards
ἃ
Lysias AND
5.
NOTES
BY
Usher
GREEK
ORATORS - I
Antiphon
TRANSLATED
M.
WITH
& Lysias
COMMENTARY
Edwards
ἃ
AND
NOTES
BY
959. Usher
© M.Edwards ὃ 5. Usher 1985. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means without the prior written permission of the publishers.
U.K.
ISBN ISBN
0 85668 0 85668
246 2 cloth 247 0 limp
U.S.A.
ISBN ISBN
0 86516 0 86516
088 0 cloth 063 5 /imp
Published
in
Wiltshire,
Published
in
England
by
ARIS
&
PHILLIPS
LTD,
Warminster,
England.
the
U.S.A.
Chicago, Illinois, Printed in England by Wiltshire, England.
by
BOLCHAZY-CARDUCCI
ARIS
&
PHILLIPS
LTD,
PUBLISHERS, Warminster,
CONTENTS
Preface Abbreviations General Introduction
Select The
Bibliography Antiphon Lysias
Texts:
Antiphon
Introduction On the Murder
of Herodes
Commentary Lysias
Introduction The Killing of Eratosthenes Against Theomnestus Against Eratosthenes For Mantitheus Against the Corn-dealers For the Invalid Defence Against a Charge of Subverting the Democracy Commentary
Index
PREFACE
This contribution to the expanding series of Aris & Phillips Classical Texts follows the general lines of earlier volumes. The Antiphontean part of the book is the work of Michael Edwards, while Stephen Usher wrote the Lysianic part and the General Introduction. We wish to thank the proprietors of Teubner Verlag, Stuttgart and of the Clarendon Press, Oxford for permission to use their texts of Antiphon and Lysias (respectively) as the bases for ours. Thanks are also due to Professor Douglas MacDowell, from whose published work and private discussion and correspondence we have benefited greatly; and to Professor Malcolm Willcock, whose idea this volume was.
ABBREVIATIONS (1)
Ancient
Aes.
Authors Aeschines
Aeschyl.
Aeschylus
Ammian. Marc.
Ammianus Andocides
And. Ant.
Ar.
Marcellinus
Antiphon Aristophanes
Arist.
Aristotle
Apollod,
Apollodorus
Callim,
Callimachus Cicero Democritus Demosthenes Dinarchus Diodorus Siculus
Cic, Democr. Dem.
Dinarch. Diod.
Gorg.
Diogenes Laertius Dionysius of Halicarnassus Epicharmus Eupolis Euripides Gorgias
Hermog,.
Hermogenes
Hat.
Herodotus
Diog.Laert, D.H, Epicharm.
Eupol. Eur.
Hes. Hesych. Hippoc. Hom. Hor. Is. Isoc. Lyc.
Lys. Pi. Pl.
Hesiod
Hesychius Hippocrates Homer Horace Isaeus Isocrates Lycurgus Lysias
Pindar Plato
Soph. Steph.Byz. Theog.
Plutarch Quintilian Sextus Empiricus Sophocles Stephanus Byzantinus Theognis
Theophrast.
Theophrastus
Thuc. Xen.
Thucydides Xenophon
Plut. Quint.
Sext.Emp.
(2)
Periodicals American Journal of Philology Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa Classical Bulletin Classical Philology Classical Quarterly Greek, Roman and Byzantine Revue des Etudes Grecques
Studies
Rheinisches Museum für Philologie Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association For other abbreviations
see
Bibliography
GENERAL ORATORY
BEFORE
The
reader
INTRODUCTION
RHETORIC of
Homer
soon
becomes
aware
of
the
importance
of
the spoken word in his story. Many of his heroes are accomplished orators, who earn as much respect for their eloquence as for their martial prowess; and their speeches often mark turning-points in the action. Observing the brilliance of Nestor, Odysseus and Agamemnon and its effect upon their audiences, later critics of systematic rhetoric disparaged the pioneering pretensions of its exponents by evolved and refined in that had been that its techniques claiming Iliad and in the speakers best the so that age, heroic distant of qualities finest the all form, pristine in exhibited, Odyssey and for instruction? evidence is even There persuasive oratory.’ competition’ in eloquence in Homeric society. But it must be doubted included have could teaching people, semi-literate among whether, beyond extended or indeed study, close required which material precepts of the simplest kind. Homeric oratory appears as general intellectual
subtlety
as
spur
of
the
on
deploy
stock topics in it material: teaching with
aid
the
without
utterance,
spontaneous
of
the the
suggests perhaps formulae.?
regular
speaker moment.
and
plan The
However
of
this
may
formulae
to and
part of the their craft
formed learned be,
such
expected
been
presence
that these may have like poets, orators,
only
showing
have
might
speeches
the
themselves are less notable for their rational and dialectical content than for their appeal to the emotions, particularly those of anger and leaders since as autocratic surprise, no cause should This fear. not were Agamemnon and their primary when argument
Odysseus reasoned
mentally purpose
conditioned simply was
use to to make
their decisions known to their subjects and call upon them to carry them out. Their oratory was not so much deliberative as hortatory. But the existence of some kind of forensic oratory is attested in the description Achilles
of In
a scene depicting a trial for homicide on have parties contending the after this,
the Shield of their stated
his delivers of elders of a panel member each view, of points judgment of the case, and the one whose judgment seems the best is interesting many raises scene The of gold. talents two awarded questions about the administration of justice in early Greek society, but
the
question
which
concerns
the
present
discussion
is
that
of
whether the elders who spoke had received any training in oratory of born wisdom likely) more seems (as whether or law, and/or experience was all that they needed in order to arrive at judgments which could satisfy their younger fellow-citizens.
A search for vestiges of formal rhetoric in Hesiod is even less rewarding, in spite of the tone and general purpose of his didactic poetry. His description of oratory as a gift of the Muses (Theogony 80-93) which enables kings to control their people contains a suggestion of divinely-inspired, effortless fluency rather than training. In the Works and Days the nearest approach to an oratorical manner is found in the passages addressed directly to his brother Perses (213ff,286ff), but even here the tone is in the direct style of the Homeric speeches. Later literature provides two trial scenes.
to Hermes, belongs perhaps to the sixth dispute between Apollo and Hermes in argument
from
probability
and
is
also
hortatory, The
very
much
the
Hymn
first,
century, and describes a which the latter employs
accused
of
bribing
a
witness.
But the speeches show no clear partition. The second is the trial scene in Aeschylus Eumenides, which is late enough to have come under the influence of early rhetorical teaching, and does not therefore properly belong to a survey of oratory before that teaching became
available.
RHETORIC
IN THE
FIFTH
CENTURY
It was not until political conditions were favourable that rhetoric flourished at all levels of society. Neither monarchy nor oligarchy afforded these conditions. It was only when all citizens enjoyed sovereign power to decide on political and judicial issues that the art of persuasion was called upon to marshal all its resources. Leaders in a democracy were, by definition, obliged to persuade the people to adopt their policies. In Athens, democracy entered the most positive phase of its development early in the fifth century, at the time of the Persian Wars (491-479 B.C.) During this time some crucial decisions were made by the Popular Assembly, and the man who guided them in these decisions was Themistocles. He persuaded the Athenians to enlarge their fleet before Xerxes' great invasion,” and so prepared them for the naval victory at Salamis. It is of interest to learn from biographical sources that Themistocles' powers of mass persuasion were not acquired without instruction, He is said to have received this from an otherwise unknown teacher named Mnesiphilus, who is described as a student of sophia (wisdom applied to practical matters).2 In the accounts of Herodotus and Plutarch he appears as Themistocles' mentor in all aspects of his political career, which must have included what he said as well as what he did? Plutarch also describes Mnesiphilus as a forerunner of the sophists,” who differed from him only in their greater professionalism and more formalised teaching, which undoubtedly included the techniques of public speaking. Finally, in his speech to the wavering Greeks on the eve of Salamis, Themistocles is reported by Herodotus to have contrasted the better with the worse in man's nature, and urged the Greeks to
choose the better.” Unless Herodotus is guilty of literary anachronism, this speech is an early example of the antithetical style which dominated Athenian oratory for many years. Progress towards more general availability of instruction in public speaking depended upon the publication of rhetorical handbooks. Ancient authorities are unanimous in tracing the first of these to Sicily.? There is no good reason to reject this tradition, but it needs qualification. Corax and Tisias were respectively master and pupil, but since they are usually mentioned together as the first writers of individual
rhetorical handbooks, it contributions. However,
is impossible to distinguish the fact that Corax came
their into
prominence at the time of the expulsion of the tyrants from Sicily (c.467 B.C.) is probably significant. Having previously acted in some he was sort of advisory capacity to the tyrants Hieron and Gelon, well placed to enter the political arena as a deliberative speaker on popular a of characteristics the Recognising departure.” their these exploited which of oratory form a devised he audience, characteristics. He saw that a large assembly must be initially settled and factual with presented then receptive, made and down an and a summary be given finally and material, argumentative in the its judgment in order to carry ending charged emotionally
by
desired
direction
the
speaker.”
is
This
the
clearly
first
proposition of the tripartite division of a speech on which subsequent subdivisions were based. Corax was also interested in various forms in the use of work pioneering have done may and of argument,
probability.
from
argument
But
from
extremely
tenuous,
and
perhaps
is
it
this
point
this
it becomes
onwards
that from on rhetoric
his contribution wrote anything
to distinguish difficult increasingly that Corax actually Evidence Tisias.
that
difference
of is
separates
the two. Just as no written teaching can safely be ascribed to Corax, so no separate and original theory can safely be ascribed to Tisias. His contribution probably lay in committing Corax's teaching, together with the fruits of their joint experience and thinking, to publishable It may have been his elaboration of earlier work that produced form. (prooemium, division fourfold the he and speech,” Attic classical
proof, narrative, begun a have may
of the epilogue) classification of
It was in his hands also that probability (eikos) argument topics. assumed greater sophistication and was adapted for wider use. This and elaboration of earlier teaching established Tisias as broadening according to the biographical tradition, of the the main forerunner, first generation of Attic orators.
POLITICAL It
must
AND be
FORENSIC emphasised
any distinction between artificial. Not only did
ORATORY that,
political political
throughout
its
early
development,
and forensic (or judicial) oratory subject-matter figure prominently
is in
delivered in the courts, but also the commonplace topics, speeches and methods of arousing emotion were the same. argument of types This is not surprising, since the Popular Assembly (Ecclesia) and the Popular Courts (Dikasteria) comprised the same citizens, often in the same numbers. The differences arose later through the circumstances more to the obsession of even and perhaps of their development, In the fifth century interest centres with classification.” theorists chiefly upon political oratory and the rise of the rhetor, or political of the products important most of the one was which speaker, emergent Athenian democracy.*° Although a degree of self-assurance might be expected of a man who embarked on a career in public life, it was a new and unfamiliar environment for many parvenu politicians. Such men found assistance from the teaching of the sophists, whose claims to be able to impart skill in a wide range of subjects included politics: indeed, it was upon their ability to train politicians that they
intelligent
more
subjects
ethical
and
contributed Protagoras
against
also
Sophists
life.”
on
political,
legal
Of
the
sophists
who
in rhetoric of taught He first.
the his
other
with
and
pupils
sophists
interest.“
perennial
of
development the to the was of Abdera
for and
argue
real
which
or mythical used of argument which
lectures,” own their through techniques which aimed at the same effects as a live held discussions on a philosophical level with
rhetorical illustrated passages incorporating oration.” Finally, they their
in
situations
similar
to
applied
be
could
discourses and types
These topics
discourses,
rhetorical
set
of
use
heart? by to illustrate
learned subjects
experience of their The afford to pay.
and the ability individuals could
the
involved
method
standard
the pupil imaginary
sophists
the
of
methods
teaching
The
store.’
greatest
the
laid
to according varied probably pupils and to the fees which
the same case?’ at length and
century, fifth to how pupils
in brief;”® and
he
More loci.” communes or application, of general topics treated interestingly, he was concerned with grammar and the correct use of studied also who Prodicus of Ceos;’ by shared words,” a study made
and
including
means,
Leontini
realised,
the
beyond
Finally,
refinement,
of
bounds
the
by
emotion
arousing
rhythm.’
of
use
the
study,
this
developed
for
medium
potent
more
a
prose
stylistic
of Calchedon
Thrasymachus
appeal?
emotional
Gorgias
of
of
the
powers
word in a style which incorporated balanced clauses, assonance and poetic vocabulary to such excess that he found few imitators, though the
principles
which
style of Isocrates4
were
applied
he
influential,
upon
especially
the
Taught by these sophists and their various methods, aspirants to political fame faced a further challenge when they mounted the rostrum. Their audience expected them to speak without a text. Part of
the
apparent
magnetism
of
spontaneity
oral masterpieces very few were circumstances.®
the
of
most
popular
thought,
survived only published, Nevertheless,
speakers
emotion
and
came
utterance?>
from
their
But
their
in the memory of their audiences, for and those mostly under unusual the
best
of
these
oratorical
virtuosi
certainly influenced the style of deliberative oratory. For example, Pericles developed a penchant for striking imagery - Aegina was "the stye in the eye of the Piraeus"*’ ; with the death of the young men of Athens in a battle "the spring had gone out of the year'’® and the Boeotians,
down
riven
by
knocking
became
a
by
civil
feature
Demosthenes“?
war,
against of
can
the
have
were
one
"like
holm-oaks
another". style
been
no
of
That
the
accident,
that
this
greatest since
he
are
kind
beaten
of imagery
Greek
orator,
regarded
Pericles
as his guiding model,” and by following his example acknowledged that the political orator owed his audience the obligation of expressing himself memorably, since they looked to him for edification as well as on
depended
policies
his
promoting
in
success
his
Moreover,
advice.
their. recollection of his main arguments, and there could be no better them with by highlighting recollection than this of assisting way images of the kind illustrated above. Again, a speaker who wished to appear spontaneous could have only limited recourse to the handbooks of rhetoric, and when he found it necessary to develop arguments on possibility of justice, expediency, deliberative themes the standard and
his
impress
must
he
opportunity,
them.
upon
stamp
personal
own
Hence the art of political oratory was peculiarly difficult to learn?’ Isocrates was only being honest and realistic when he said that and
he could teach it only to pupils with special gifts2° were litigant in the law-courts the by faced conditions The Although the law required less demanding. different and somewhat the availability of professional in person, his case him to present if
ordeal,
his
alleviated
speechwriters
services.
their
afford
could
he
Next, although it was probably normal for the litigant to memorise the it is unlikely that inability to do so could cause him to lose speech; the speechwriter was judged by the his case.” On the other hand, same professional standards as the political orator. Although lawsuits tended
and
handbooks, was
lost
distinction
and
was
to
than
little
be
the
those
forgotten
doubt
that
perceived
the secured courtroom These speeches Lysias.
the and
in success of Antiphon
commonplaces,
relative the one case to the law in client or his trial. These
narrative, of prooemium, lengths the requirements, technical these
relative the met Having
can
there
and
extended,
fully
were
more
common
judqment on a higher aesthetic plane. There was a public for forensic, as for ceremonial (epideictic)
speechwriter faced discerning reading as much speeches
skills
in evaluating difficult cases, more the factors which might vary considerably from the state of of the charge, seriousness the extent of popular prejudice against his and the political climate at the time of the
decided also factors epilogue. and proof
oratory,
his
handbooks,
the
by
provided
topics
in especially importance of - the another regard to it, alleged crime,
the
utilise
to
him
afforded
which
counterparts
political
his
than
situations
recurrent
many
involve
to
opportunities
application
mechanical
of the soon
of a peculiar
many it
after
kind,
at
was
least
of
their
written.
as
But
conceived
their
by
as
the the and
rules
whose
speechwriters
hack
merit
literary
of survival owed less to
work
literary
critics.
In
the fourth century Alcidamas, while arguing in his pamphlet Against the Sophists for the superiority of impromptu over written oratory, said that the most effective forensic speeches are those which imitate opposed who Isocrates, speakers.“ extemporising of style the Alcidamas' main thesis and classed forensic oratory, on the basis of current practice, as "written" composition, nevertheless describes its gives
which
"that
as
style
recommended
the
been
having
of
impression
spoken in a simple manner and without embellishment"*” and does not with this view. The idea of art concealing art which this disagree suggests, and which the critic Dionysius of Halicarnassus later echoes in his Essay on Lysias (8), appears to be a point in which Isocrates to forensic in regard agreement in substantial are Alcidamas and in view of their disagreement on almost all other matters, it oratory. is reasonable to believe that the appearance of artless simplicity was a characteristic which those who read forensic speeches generally looked satisfying as it did both the literary the between no conflict was There
fourth century, client. potential
the early the and
for in reader
deliver naturally, time narrating the and arousing the of the former, a
The latter wanted a speech which he could two. without speaking out of character but at the same facts and presenting the arguments convincingly, In the eyes emotions of the jury in his favour. which
speech
met
criteria
these
seemed
to
no
deserve
than
praise
less
a fine poem or a piece of display oratory δὼ This view of the nature of Attic Oratory expressed or implied by contemporaries provides a point of reference from which to approach They are the published texts of speeches, the orations themselves. most of which were made in actual trials. The speechwriter had the opportunity of hearing the evidence and some of the main arguments of his opponents on after time had also
He the trial!” But revision.
as many as three occasions before some the trial for reflection and
any include not did and superficial probably was revision such substantial alteration in the presentation of material,” except possibly his the
In by way of abbreviation in some instances?’ publication for speech the of version final
preparation of the was speechwriter
subject to a tension between the need to set his own authentic stamp (both in order to confound imitators and to establish his own upon it his adaptability to different to demonstrate and the need credit), of
types
features speeches,
reader's received
and
individual
As
main rules
commonplaces,
hampered
their
to
is
that
arrangement
and
digressions,
how and the needs by
the
mixture
this
treatment
is in the interest the of division,
appeal, emotional with corresponds extent
It
client.
case
and
fact
of
informs
authorial
common
the
construction,
modern
the
application of the speechwriter's to devotes he of space amount on
attacks
personal
in
all
but
a
few
and
opponents
these all of proportion the Our judgment is of the case. that,
Attic
best
instances,
factors to some we
do
not have the speeches delivered by the opposition, and in most cases misfortunes minor these are But the outcome. know not do we compared with the opportunity the speeches give us to enjoy the only Greek
equal study
literature
which
serves
both
artistic
and
measure, and which affords a fresh and of Greek history, law, society and morals.
practical
vital
purposes
medium
for
in
the
NOTES 1.
TO
GENERAL
Philodemus
INTRODUCTION
Rhetorica
Fr.21
(Vol.2,
111
Sudhaus)
appears
to
be
the earliest clear reference to this controversy. See also Quint.10.1.46. Critics liked to trace the characteristics of the Three Styles back to Homeric speakers (Quint.12.10.64). Other refs.: Sopatros in Hermog. W V 6,3: Plut. De Vita et Poesi
Homeri
92ff.;
Ancient
Radermacher,
Dispute
over
AS,
Rhetoric
9-10;
in
G.
Kennedy,
Homer’,
AJP
23-35,
Hom. //,9.442-3. Hom. //. 15.284; For discussions Kennedy, APG, Homer
and
plan
rhétorique
So Kennedy, speeches may
Hom.
//,
'The
(1957)
Quint.2.17.8. of the characteristics of Homeric oratory, see 35-39; F. Solmsen, 'The Gift of Speech in
Hesiod',
Démosthéne
78
TAPA
85
(1954)
1-15;
M.
Delaunois,
Le
grecque
d'Homere
ἃ
APG, 36. But the presence of formulae in be merely an extension of the poet's technique.
the
dans
7-16.
1959)
(Brussels,
18.497-508.
l'&loquence
For
a
recent
discussion,
see
MacDowell,
LCA, 18-21, and his n.11 for bibliography. Hdt. 7.144; Plut. Them. 4.1. Plut. Them. 2.4. Hdt. 8.57-8.. R.J. Lenardon, The Saga of Themistocles (London, 1978) 22-23, regards Mnesiphilus as an important formative influence on Themistocles' political career. loc.cit. (n.8). 8.83. Plato
Phaedr.
267a,
273
a-d;
Arist.
Soph.EI.
33(183b
Inv. 2.2.6-7, Brutus 12.46; Quint.3.1.8; Sopatros WV 6, 14, For other ancient refs. see Radermacher, review of the evidence, for a modern and Earliest Rhetorical Handbooks', A/P 80( 1959) 13.
Syll. in Proleg. Troilus examined by 5. Wilcox, (1943)
the
and
1-23,
source
of
the
he
52. The whole 'Corax and the
concludes
tradition
that
the
gave
which
29);
Cic.
in Hermog. AS, 11-27;
G. Kennedy, 169-178.
'The
tradition is carefully 64 Prolegomena'AJP , historian
primacy
Timaeus
was
to deliberative
oratory. 14. 15.
Anonym,
in Proleg,
Syil,
24.
16. 17.
Arist.Rhet.2.24.11; D.A.G. Hinks, 'Tisias, Corax and Invention of Rhetoric', CQ 34 (1940) 63, So Radermacher, AS,31, following Susemihl. the evidence is confused, the four partes orationis Though
18.
66-69) are more likely to be see Hinks, op.cit.(n.15) which the work of Tisias than anyone else, reflecting his interest in Kennedy, See oratory. deliberative than rather forensic op.cit.(n.12) 177-178, See Suss 2ff.
11
the
(on
. Aristotle distinguished three kinds of oratory: deliberative, forensic and epideictic (Rhet.1.3). But before him this division is never clearly defined. It does not appear in Plato Phaedrus, and
Isocrates,
while
expressing
disdain
for
'speeches
made
about private cases' (4 Paneg.11), does not indicate whether he considers his own discourses to be 'deliberative' or 'epideictic', and of course avoids referring to the speeches which he himself composed for the lawcourts. After a very thorough examination
of
the
evidence,
S.Wilcox
concluded
that
instruction in the fifth century included both deliberative and forensic oratory ('The Scope of Early Rhetorical Instruction’, HSCP 53(1942) 121-155). This seems to confirm the uncertainty of the distinction. 20. 21. 22. 23.
28. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29, 30. 31, 32. 33,
See W. Pilz, Der Rhetor im attischen Staat (Weida, 1934). Plato Meno 716, 9la-b. G.B. Kerferd, The Sophistic Movement (Cambridge, 1981) 17ff. Arist. Soph.EI. 1830 36.
Surviving examples include Gorgias Helen (which may be humourous in intent) and Palamedes (which has a more practical forensic tone); Antisthenes Ajax and Odysseus; and Isocrates Helen and Busiris. They liked to give their public appearances the trappings dramatic performance. See Kerferd, op.cit.(n.21) 28-9. Arist.Rhet.3.14.9. Kerferd, op.cit. (n.21) 30.
Seneca Plato
Epist.88.43;
Steph.Byz.
s.v.
of
a
Abdera.
Protag. 334e.
Cic.Brutus Plato
12.46;
Quint.3.1.12.
Phaedr.267c,
Crat.391b;
. Arist.Rhet.3.5.5;
Suidas
s.v.
Protagoras; Quint.3.4.9; Diog.Laert.9.52. Plato Euthyd,277e, Protag. 337a-c. Arist.Top. 112b 21; Quint.3.1.12. Arist.Rhet.3.1.7;3.8.4; Cic.Orat.52.175.
tradition
which
credits
Thrasymachus
There
influence in the development of prose style D.H. Isaeus 3,20; G.M.A. Grube, Theophrastus and Dionysius of Halicarnassus',
251-267 attacks this tradition. For a problems, see H. Gotoff, ‘Thrasymachus Ciceronian Style', CP 75 (1980) 297-301. 34,
See Radermacher, MacDowell, Gorgias:
35.
On
the
effectiveness
Sophistis,
esp.9-10.
is
with
also
a
fundamental
generally. See 'Thrasymachus, AJP 73 (1952)
discussion of of Calchedon
the and
AS, 42-66; and for further bibliography Encomium of Helen (Bristol, 1982) 7-8,
of
extempore
H.J.
Milne,
speaking Alcidamas
see and
Alcidamas, his
Relation
De to
Contemporary Sophistic (Diss.Bryn Mawr, 1924) argues that this pamphlet is earlier than Plato Phaedrus and Isoc. Ag.Soph. On the importance of extempore speaking for political oratory,
see
Hudson-Williams
12
68-73,
36.
See Plato Phaedr.257d. may be Andocides, On
37. 38. 39. 40.
Arist.Rhet. 3.10.7.
composed id.
when
1.7.34;
3.10.7.
id. 3.4.3,
See
ὦ.
he
Ronnet,
was
Hermoa.
/d.2.9
Aristotle
argues
difficult
than
concerns
the
in exile.
See
Kennedy,
APG,
sur
(Paris,
le
Style
de
Démosthéne
more 49.
edified
Paneg.11;88; (1) When the
(Rhet.3.17)
future,
(2) (3)
that
political
oratory
not
the
because
oratory
its
who
would,
discourse
15 Panath.271). case was submitted
See
Harrison,
LA
Lavency, ALJA, 190. Many speeches are shorter allotted
to them
in the
actual
more
past.
readers
studying
is
subject-matter
of
to an
in
the
oratory is due to his opinion, be
kind
arbitrator
he
wrote
2,64-66,
than
the
trial.
94-104,
time
See
13
(4
(diaitätes).
At the preliminary hearing (anakrisis). On the entry of a special plea (paragraphé)
defendant. 50. 51.
among
by
les
(Sp.2.392). forensic
popularity
dans
1951).
43, 13 Ag.Soph.10, 14-15; 14 Antid.189,191. 44, Ar.Knights, 347-350, 45. See Usher (1976) 36-37. 46. 13. 47, Panath. 1-2. 48. Isocrates' frequent disparagement of forensic its
204.
, Etude
Discours Politiques 41. 42.
The earliest extant deliberative speech the Peace with Sparta. It was probably
by
the
105-131.
that
Lavency,
would
have
ALJA,
191.
been
Select
Bibliography
Oratory and Rhetoric F. Blass, Die attische Beredsamkeit
1887-98,repr.
(Leipzig,
1962)
(= Blass,AB). |. Bruns, Das literarische Portrét der Griechen (Berlin, 1896). D.L. Clark, Rhetoric in Graeco-Roman Education (New York,1957). J.F. Dobson, The Greek Orators (London, 1919).
H. Gomperz, Sophistik und Rhetorik (Leipzig,1912). P. Hamberger, Die rednerische Disposition in der alten “Pntopıxt (Paderborn, 1914). H.L.
Hudson-Williams, ‘Political (1951) 68-73.
R.C.
Jebb,
Speeches
in Athens',
The Attic Orators from Antiphon repr.1962) (= Jebb, AO). Art
of Persuasion
in
CQ
to Isaeus
G.
Kennedy,
H. M,
Kennedy ,APC). Kroll, Rhetorik, in Pauly RE Suppl.7 (1940). Lavency, Aspects de la logographie judiciaire attique
J.
The
Téxvn
1964)(= Lavency,ALJA). Antike Rhetorik: Technik
Martin,
Essai sur la rhetorique
Greece
und
(London,
(Princeton,
Methode
grecque
N.S.1
1963)
1893 (=
(Louvain,
(Munich, 1974).
O.
Navarre,
avant Aristote
W. L.
1900). Pilz, Der Rhetor im attischen Staat (Weida, 1934). Radermacher, Artium Scriptores (Vienna, 1951) (= Radermacher,
(Paris,
R.
Volkmann,
AS). W. Wyse, Antiphon
U.
Albini,
U.
Albini,
Rhetorik
and
der
Griechen
of Isaeus
und
Römer
(Leipzig,1885).
(Cambridge, 1904).
Lysias
'Antifonte
logografo',
Maia
10( 1958)
38-65.
'Rassegna di studi Lisiani', Atene e Roma 14-16 (1954) 56-67. Albini, 'Lisia narratore', Maia 5 (1952) 182-190. Albini, 'L'orazione lisiana per l'invalido', Rh.Mus.95 (1952) 328-338.
U, U.
J.J. J.J. F.
Die
The Speeches
Bateman, Bateman,
'Lysias and the Law', TAPA 89 (1958) 276-285. 'Some Aspects of Lysias' Argumentation', Phoenix
16
(1962) 157-177.
Berbig,
P.S.
Uber 1871).
Breuning,
das
'On
Genus
the
Dicendi
Tenue
Date of Antiphon's
des
Redners
Lysias
Fifth Oration',
CQ
(Kustrin,
31
(1937
67-70.
O.
Buchler,
Die Unterscheidung
(Heidelberg,
C.
Cucuel,
der redenden
Personen
bei Lysias
1936).
Essai sur la fangue 1886). 14
et le style
de l'orateur Antiphon
(Paris,
W.L. A.
Devries,
Dihle,
A.P.
Ethopotia,
Dorjahn, 66
A.P.
A Rhetorical
in the Orations of Lysias Studien zur griechischen
Dorjahn
‘Anticipation (1935)
of the
Types
of Character
of Arguments
in Athenian
Courts',
TAPA
274-295.
ὃ W.D.
(1973)
Study
(Baltimore, 1892). Biographie (Göttingen, 1956).
Fairchild,
'Antiphon
and
Improvisation',
CB
50
29-31.
Κ...
Dover, 'The Chronology of Antiphon's Speeches', CQ 44 (1950) 44-60 (= Dover, CAS). K.J. Dover, Lysias and the Corpus Lysiacum (Berkeley, 1968) (= Dover, LCL). B. Due, Antiphon, A Study in Argumentation (Copenhagen,1980). H. Erbse, 'Antiphons Rede über die Ermordung des Herodes', Rh. Mus. H. F. Ὁ.
120 (1977) 209-227, 'Lysias-Interpretationen', (Festschrift Ernst Kapp (Hamburg, 1958)). Ferckel, Lysias und Athen (Würzburg, 1937). Ferrante, Antifonte, Peri tou Höröidou phonou (Naples, 1972). Erbse,
C.W.
Francken,
V.
Fumarola, 10
P.
Grau,
Commentationes
Lysiacae
'Il problema storico, (1965) 49-65.
Prooemiengestaltung
civile
(Utrecht, 1865). e litterario
bei Lysias
Holmes, Index Lysiacus (Bonn, 1895). Lateiner, Lysias and Athenian Politics
T.C.
Loening,
Autobiographical
Lisia',
Atene
e Roma
(Diss. Erlangen, 1971).
D.H. D.G.
'The
di
(Diss. Stanford, 1971).
Speeches
of Lysias
and
the
Biographical Tradition', Hermes 109 (1981) 280-294. W. Motschmann, Die Charaktere bei Lysias (Munich, 1905). F.A. Müller, De Elocutione Lysiae (Diss.Halle, 1887). A.C. Palau, 'lpotesi per un "giallo" antico', Helikon 17 (1977)
193-209.
F.
Rh. Mus.
Scheidweiler,
'Antiphons
109( 1966)
Rede
über
den
Mord
an
Herodes',
319-338.
U,
Schindel,
U.
110(1967) 32-52. Schindel, 'Der Mordfall
"Untersuchungen
zur
Biographie
K.
Göttingen 8 (1979) 1-41. | Schön, Die Scheinargumente bei Lysias
Herodes',
Nachr.der
des
Redners
Akad.der
Lysias', Wiss.
Rh. Mus.
in
(Paderborn, 1918).
F. S.
Solmsen, Antiphonstudien (Berlin, 1931). Usher, 'Individual Characterisation in Lysias', Eranos 63 (1965) 99-119. S. Usher, 'Lysias and his Clients', GRBS 17 (1976) 31-40. S. Usher, 'A Statistical Study of Authorship in the Corpus Lysiacum', Computers and the Humanities 16 (1982) 85-105 (with D.Najock). F.L.van Cleef, Index Antiphonteus (Cornell,1895). W. Voegelin, Die Diabole bei Lysias (Basel, 1943).
3.
Language and Style P. Chantraine, La stylistique
grecque
J.D.
Style
Denniston,
Greek
Prose
(Paris,1951).
(Oxford,1952). 15
J.D. K.J.
Denniston, The Greek Particles (Oxford,1954). Dover, Greek Word Order (Cambridge, 1960).
H. Frisk, Studien zur griechischen Wortstellung (Géteborg,1933). W.W. Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb (repr.London,1966) (= GMT), W.W.
Goodwin,
ΒΕ. Kühner
A
& B.
Greek
Sprache
E, E.
Grammar
Gerth,
(repr.London,
Ausführliche
Grammatik
1976).
der griechischen
(Hannover, 1955).
Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa (Leipzig,1898). Schwyzer & A. Delbrunner, Griechische Grammatik
(Munich,
1939-1953). History,
A.
Law
Böckh,
R.J. R.J. R.J.
and
Society
Die Staatshaushaltung
der Athener
(Berlin, 1886).
Bonner, Evidence in Athenian Courts (Chicago, 1905}. Bonner, Lawyers and Litigants in Ancient Athens (New York, 1969) (=Bonner, LL). Bonner & G. Smith, The Administration of Justice from Homer to Aristotle (repr.New York, 1968) (= Bonner ὃ Smith,
AJHA). E.W.
Investigations’,
S.
e le rinnovate
P.
Bushala, 'Torture of Non-Citizens in Homicide CRBS 9 (1968) 61-68, Cataldi, 'La restituzione della terra ai Mitilenensi
xumbolai tra Atene e Mitilene', ASNP 6(1976) 15-33, Cloché, La Restauration démocratique ἃ Athénes en 403 av.J.C. (Paris, 1915) (= Cloché,RDA).
J.K.
Davies, Athenian Propertied Families 600-300B.C. (Oxford, 1971) (= Davies,APF). G.E.M. De Ste Croix, 'Notes on Jurisdiction in the Athenian Empire!, CQ
N.S.11
(1961)
94-112,
268-280.
A.P, Dorjahn, Political Forgiveness in Old Athens (Evanston, 1946). K.J. Dover, Greek Popular Morality (Oxford, 1974) (= Dover,GPM). M. Gagarin, "The Prosecution of Homicide in Athens', GRBS 20 (1979)
M. P.
301-323,
Gagarin, Drakon and Gauthier, 'Les XENO/
Early dans
Athenian Homicide Law les textes athéniens de
(Yale, 1981). la seconde
moitié du V° siöcle av. J.-C.', REG 84 (1971) 43-79.
P. Gauthier, Symbola (Nancy, 1972). G.Glotz, La solidarité de la famille dans le droit criminel en Gréce (Paris,1904). A.W. Gomme, A, Andrewes & K.J. Dover, A Historical Commentary on Thucydides, 5 vols. (Oxford,1945-81) (= Gomme,HCT).
M.H, M.H.
Hansen, Hansen,
Eisangelia (Odense, 1975). Apagoge, Endeixis and Ephegesis
Atimoi
M.H.
and
Pheugontes
(Odense,
Hansen, 'The Prosecution of Homicide GRBS 22 (1981) 11-30.
A.R.W.
Harrison, The (= Harrison,
C.Hignett,
Law of Athens, LA).
1976)
against (=
in Athens:
2 vols.
Kakourgoi,
Hansen,
(Oxford
AEE).
A Reply', 1968,1971)
A History of the Athenian Constitution to the End of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford, 1952) (= Hignett, HAC).
W.K.
Lacey,
The
Family
in
Classical
FCG), F.
Lammli,
Greece
(London,
Das attische Prozessverfahren in Gerichtsrede (Paderborn, 1938).
seiner
1968)
(=
Wirkung
auf die
J.W.
Lipsius, Das attische Recht und Rechtsverfahren mit Benutzung des attischen Prozesses, 4 vols. (Leipzig,
J.O.
Lofberg,
D.M. D.M.
MacDowell, MacDowell,
D.M.
MacDowell, The Law in Classical (= MacDowell, LCA).
1905-1915)
(=
AR).
Lipsius,
Sycophancy
in Athens
(Chicago,1917).
Andocides: On the Mysteries (Oxford, 1962). Athenian Homicide Law (Manchester, 1963).
(= MacDowell,
AHL). Athens
(London,
R. Meiggs, The Athenian Empire (Oxford,1972). B.D. Merritt, ‘Athenian Covenant with Mytilene',
AJP
1978)
75 (1954)
U.E.
359-368, Morrow, 'The Murder of Slaves in Attic Law’, CP 32 (1937) 210-227. Paoli, "Π᾿ reato di adulterio in diritto attico', Studia et
P.J.
Rhodes,
P,J.
Rhodes, A Commentary on the Aristotelian (= Rhodes, CAAP). (Oxford, 1981)
G.R.
Documenta The
Historiae et luris
Athenian
'Dicasts
in
the
Boule
Ephetic
G,
Smith,
W. G.
Süss, Ethos (Leipzig,1910). Thur, Beweisführung vor den (Die
G.E. U.von
Underhill,
Lacey,
Proklesis
zur
Courts',
A Commentary
on
CP
(=
Rhodes,
Athenaion 19
(1924)
Schwurgerichtshöfen
Basanos)
(Oxford,1900). Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, 1893).
123-182.
16 (1950)
(Oxford,1972)
AB).
Politeia
353-358.
Athens
(Vienna, 1977).
the Hellenica of Xenophon
Aristoteles
17
und
Athen
(Berlin,
The
Text
which
(Antiphon)
The text of Antiphon are independent and
(Brit.
Mus.
Burneianus
is of
95)
derived from two manuscripts only, equal authority: A, the Crippsianus
of
the
thirteenth
century,
and
N,
the
somewhat younger Oxoniensis (Bodl. Misc. 208). It has long been agreed that the other surviving MSS. are all dependent on A. N was revised by its copyist (N. corr.1) and at least one corrector (N corr.2;
these
corrected 84
(A
by
alterations
its
were
copyist
corr.2,
in
a
(A
mere
corr.1)
different
conjectures);
and
by
colour
ink;
corrections is completely uncertain). The works most commonly referred to after the earliest editions of Aldus (1513, Stephanus
J.G.
(1575),
Baiter and
H.
a
while
second the
A
was
hand
as
source
of
also
far
as
these
in the apparatus criticus, the editio princeps) and
are:
Sauppe,
I.
Bekker,
Oratores
F.
Blass,
Antiphontis
attici,
Oratores vol.1
orationes
attici (Zürich,
(Oxford,
1839).
1822).
et fragmenta
(Leipzig,
1881).
P.P. Dobree, Adversaria ad Antiphontem (Berlin, 1875). C. Fuhr, Animadversiones in oratores atticos (Bonn, 1877); 'Excurse zu den attischen Rednern', Rh. Mus. 33 (1878) 565-599. L. Gernet, Antiphon, Discours (Paris, 1923).
G.A.
Hirschig, 'Selectae emendationes Philologus 9 (1854) 728-739.
R.C.
Jebb,
Selections
from
the
Attic
et observationes
Orators
(London,
in Antiphonte', 1888),
V. Jernstedt, Antiphontis orationes (Petersburg, 1880). E. Matzner, Antiphontis orationes XV (Berlin, 1838). F. Pahle, Antiphontis orationes critica ratione (Jever, 1874). J.J. Reiske, Oratorum graecorum vol, VII (Leipzig, 1773). H. Sauppe, Quaestiones Antiphonteae (Göttingen, 1861). T. Thalheim, Antiphontis orationes et fragmenta (Leipzig, 1914). Further on the text, and with a fuller bibliography, Thalheim.
18
see
The
Text
(Lysias)
The text of Lysias in this edition is based on that of Hude (Oxford, 1912), but a number of changes necessitated by later work has been made, The parent manuscript is Palatinus Heidelbergensis 88 (12th Century) (X). original scribe
It contains corrections (X), some in (ΧΕ (1)}; other corrections by a later
the hand of the hand (x), and
alternative readings (X°). Marcianus 422 (15th Century) (H) is derived from the same archetype, but contains only Sp. 1 from the Lysianic Corpus. This manuscript was preferred to X by H. Schenkl (Wiener Studien 3 (1881) 81-5), but he was not followed by Hude. Of the
remaining
important
is
manuscripts,
Laurentianus
all
57
derived
(15th
from
X
Century)(C),
or
H,
which
the
most
Bekker
used
as the chief manuscript for his edition (Oxford, 1822; Berlin, 1823). Others used by Hude include Vaticanus Palatinus 117 (15th Century) (P), and to a lesser extent Vaticanus 66 (15th Century) (M),
Vaticanus (0).
1366
As
in
Manutius important In
the
(15th text
Century) of
(N)
Antiphon,
and the
Urbinas
Leiden
117
editio
(15th
(1513) and the edition of Stephanus (1575), readings, perhaps from lost manuscripts. the
apparatus
of
both
texts,
absence
of
a
of
Aldus
supply
some
source
signifies a reading of the principal manuscripts. The following works are referred to in the apparatus A. Auger, Lysiae Opera Omnia (1783), J. Bake, Scholica Hypomnemata Vol.II,111 (Mnem.7.8). T.
Century)
princeps
reference
criticus:
Bergk,
'Epistola ad Schillerum in Schilleri Andocide', Philofogus 14 (1859). F. Blass, Notes in Rhein,Mus. 21 (1866) and Bursian's Jahresbericht 1,2,9,21,30 (1873-1883). C.G. Cobet, Oratio de Arte Interpretandi (Leiden, 1847). A. Contius, (Antoine Leconte, 1517-86), Emendationes. A. Coraes, Mnem.2,3,9 (1853-70). A. Emperius, Observationes Brunsvigae (1833); Adversaria in
Opusculis
p.313.
C. Francken, Commentationes Lysiacae (1865). J. Franz, Diss. de Locis Quibusdam Lysiacis (Munich, 1830). 1867); Adversariorum (Rostock, Emendationum Lys.p.1 Fritzsche, F.V. p.x (Rostock, 1873). H. Frohberger, Philol. 15,19,29; Phil, Ang. ff. (Leipzig, G. Gebauer, De Praeteritionis Formis apud Oratores Atticos
1874); De Hypotacticis et Paratacticis Argumenti Formis apud Oratores Atticos (Zwicau, 1877).
H.G.
Hamaker,
Quaestiones
Nonnullis
Lys.Orat, 19
(Leiden,
ex
Contrario
1843).
L.F. Herbst, Supp!. Jahr.KI.Phil. 1857. F.C. Hertlein, Konjecturen zu Griech.Prosaikern. Prog.Wertheim 1862. H.van Herwerden, Analecta Critica ad Lysiam. Traiect.ad Rhen. 1868. R.B. Hirschig, Miscellanea Philologica et Paedagogica, Fasc.1 (Amsterdam,
J. Markland,
Lusiou
1850);
Mnem.25.
ta perigenomena,..at@cedunt
J.Mark...conjecturae
(1739).
P.J. P.R.
Maussac, Harpocrationis Dictionarium in Decem Rhetores (1614). Müller, De Emendandis Aliquot Locis Lysiae. Prog.Rossleb. 1858; Beitrage zur Kritik des Lysias. Prog.Merseburg 1862, 1866,1873.
G.G. Pluygers, 'Ad Lysiae Orationes', Mnem.11. 1,0. Sluiter, Emendationum Lys.Fascic.Prog.(Neostrelitz, 1852). J. Taylor, Lusiou ta perigenomena....interpretatione,...donavit A.
A.
J,
Taylor (1739). Weidner, Jahrb.f.Phil.87.
Westermann, Commentationes (1853-6); Quaestionum
in Script. Graec. 4-6 (Leipzig, Lysiacarum 1-3 (Leipzig, 1859-65).
Editions:
Stephanus
(1575)
(Marginalia
by
Brulart
de
Sillery
(1756));
Bekker
(1822-3); Dobson (1828): Foertsch (1829); Franz (1831); Baiter-Sauppe (Zürich, 1839, hence 'Turicenses'); Scheibe (2nd.ed. 1852); Westermann (1854); Cobet (1863); Thalheim (1901); Gernet-Bizos (1924-26); Lamb (1930). Select Orations: Bremer (1845); Rauchenstein-Fuhr (1848-99); Herwerden (1863); Frohberger-Gebauer-Thalheim (1866-95); Shuckburgh (1882); Weidner (1888); Morgan (1895); Jebb (1899); Adams (1905).
20
Antiphon Most of the details of Antiphon's life before his emergence among the leaders of the oligarchic revolution in 411 are obscure. Our main sources are Thucydides 8.68 and the Life of Antiphon wrongly ascribed
genos
to
Plutarch,
from
Antiphöntos
Photius,
cod.259)
Caecilius
of Caleacte,
Unfortunately,
which
found seem
the
in
to
the
our
the
derive
and
originator
later
sources
other
authorities
MSS.; whose
of
(the
Philostratus,
the
confuse
author
canon the
in
of ten
orator
anonymous
Lives
1.15;
turn
drew
Attic
orators.
with
at
Jeast
on two
different Antiphons, the one executed by the Thirty (Xen. Hell. Dionysius put to death by the tyrant tragedian the and 2.3.40)
Proc.
"Antiphon',
Morrison,
J.S.
see
chesinut
old
this
on
Further
arise as to the orator.
doubts 1.6) Mem. the same person as
Xen. was
Antiphon
an
mentions
[Plutarch]
when
so
and
2.6.27),
Rhet.
(Arist.
(cf. with Socrates conversing whether this 'sophist' Antiphon
‘One Antiphon or H.C. Avery, 49-58; 187 (1961) Phil. Soc. Cam. view the against argue (who 145-158 (1982) 110 Hermes νοῦ), did as two, the distinguish should we that scholars adopted by most Didymus,
ap.
Hermog.
peri
id.
Walz).
of deme the father Sophilus an
been
have
would
Sophilus
since
untenable,
2.385-6
in his
born was Antiphon [Plutarch]'s statement that
c.480. in Rhamnus was a sophist seems old
before
man
the
(and a confusion of became prominent at Athens sophistic movement grandfather Antiphon's have arisen). easily could Sophilus/sophist and his Thalheim) frg.1 Ant. (cf. Peisistratids the was a partisan of would have been influential in forming Antiphon's family background But while Antiphon favoured the old-style own oligarchic tendencies. by the new culture of also shaped were his thoughts government sophist the be seen in
if we reject the equation of orator and even of the Sicilian rhetoric can clearly Antiphon
and Athens, on influence
Firstly in the field of theory, where Antiphon is credited two ways. with writing a three-volumed rhetorical handbook (lechne; cf. frgg. 71-76
authenticity
its
Th;
was
by
denied
Plato,
Thucydides!
art,
Avery,
236a;
Menex.
an
(perhaps
teacher
Pollux
6.143,
frg.
=
74)
and
heading n.). (see the proem, opened a school in Athens (cf.
a collection of proems and epilogues More doubtful is the tradition that he
cit.,
inference
and
n.39)
156,
with
from
Thucydides!
praise
was
of
in the practical application of the new Secondly the orator in 8.68). regarded as the first fogographos, generally was Antiphon rhetoric, Marc. Ammian. 832c; [Plut.] (as money for of speeches writer or
30.4.5;
Quint.
Avery,
art.
a
direct
3.1.11;
cit.,
result
on
his
152-153).
of the
subtle
accompanying
The
need
for
argumentation 21
reputation
such
and
for
avarice
speechwriters
polished
style
arose
that
see as
the
Sicilians taught, and there was none better at the time than Antiphon. But a consequence of Antiphon's ability was that he gained a reputation for cleverness (deinotés), which made him suspect to the people and prevented him from enjoying a successful political career. His sharp intellect, which supposedty earned him the nickname 'Nestor'
([Plut.]
8326),
is
shown
by
the
Tetralogies,
in
which
both
sides of a case are argued (always assuming these are authentic works of Antiphon; see recently on this much disputed question Avery, art. cit., 155-156, who favours Antiphon's authorship). Antiphon therefore sought to gain influence by his speechwriting and put his skills to practical use in the cause of Athens' oppressed allies. This is indicated both in the Herodes speech (composed for a Mytilenean) and in the fragments (as the speeches for the Lindians and
Samothracians
on
the
matter
of
their
tribute,
frgg.25-33,
49-56
Th). Antiphon may well have been acting here as a member of one of the oligarchic clubs (hetaireiai) which were working behind the scenes against the democracy (cf. Ar. Wasps 1269-70, 1301-02; Avery, art. cit., n.34; additionally, Antiphon attacks the corruption of democratic officials in speech 6, perhaps written for an oligarchic sympathiser, and
he
reviles
Alcibiades
in
a
polemical
pamphlet,
Alcib. 3); and he probably played a crucial clubs together in 411. But Antiphon's triumph new
Council
of
400
divided
into
two
frg.
66,
=
Plut.
role in bringing these was short-lived, as the
factions,
the
extreme
oligarchs
(including Antiphon himself, Peisander and Phrynichus) and the moderates (led by Theramenes and Aristocrates). Antiphon and Phrynichus were forced to go to Sparta for help, an embassy which outraged popular feeling at Athens. On their return Phrynichus was assassinated and the 400 were deposed. Most of the leading extremists fled to Decelea, but Antiphon, Archeptolemus and Onomacles stayed behind
to
face
trial
for
treason
(though
have fled). Antiphon delivered greatest defence speech by a man entitled
On
the
Revolution
was
nevertheless
was
refused,
descendants Erat.
65-67,
his
were with
(peri
condemned. house
was
disgraced.
tés
After
metastaseds,
his
razed
See
Onomacles
too
seems
later
to
what Thucydides regarded as the on a capital charge up to that time,
to
further
frg.
execution the
on
ground
the
1
burial and
Th),
of he
revolution
but
his
he
body
and
Lys.
his
12
notes.
In the Augustan age sixty speeches ascribed to Antiphon were extant, of which twenty-five were pronounced spurious by Caecilius. Fifteen survive today (including the three Tetralogies of four speeches each), as well as a number of fragments. All the remaining speeches relate to cases of homicide, but the titles of the fragments show that this is merely a quirk of fate (though Antiphon perhaps excelled in this field). Our speech is the fifth one in the MSS. The other two complete surviving speeches are Against a Stepmother (1) and On the Choreutes (6).
22
Style
Dionysius (Comp. representative of what (austéra harmonia). A
Verb. 22-24) took Antiphon as a he called the 'austere' or 'rugged' style feature of this style is its dignity and
grandeur, relying on the weight of individual, pointed words and pregnant phrases (as in 94). The vocabulary is often rare or poetical (as optér 27; aeimnéstos 79; see 10, a murderer shall pay with his life in requital); and there is frequent periphrasis, both substantival
(definite
article
with
neuter
abstract
nouns)
and
verbal
participle
with
i.e.
synonyms
auxiliary,
as
in
(lexis the
in
is
speech
the
in
for 94).
periodic
mainly
is
narrative
brief
the
though
katestrammené),
adjective,
noun
sentence-structure
Antiphon's
or
(verbal
more natural form of the running style (lexis eiromené). But these periods are by no means carefully balanced (except in the proem and epilogue; n.b. the opening sections of the speech in particular, which contain several well-balanced, corresponding clauses), they are rather noticeable for their antithesis, a figure commonly brought out by the use
of
the
(schémata
sections, epilogue irony and rhetorical
The
Murder
(schémata
of thought figures questions) are rare.
of
figures
language
and
proem
worked-up
the
in
especially
occur,
many
while
But
de.
and
men
particles
lexeös)
as
such
dianoias,
of Herodes
Introduction Antiphon
composed
by
recognised
was
which
speech,
this
ancient
for a 833d), [Plut.] in Caecilius (cf. of his best as one criticism wealthy young Mytilenean defendant in a trial for homicide at Athens.
Euxitheus'
Athenian
an
and
(perhaps
Herodes
named
one
the
of
were among sent out to Lesbos after the revolt of 428-427) cleruchs to Aenus Lesbos in Mytilene from the passengers on a vessel sailing storm to a by forced were they Lesbos rounding Before in Thrace. undecked their from transferred they where Methymna, in near put drinking. began and Mytilene for bound vessel a decked to ship seen again. During the evening Herodes left the vessel and was never
After a search Euxitheus continued his second vessel went on to Mytilene, where also They relatives. Euxitheus. incriminated
second certain
the
of
search Lycinus,
two tortured Additionally,
vessel
informing
him
men, note
the
whom, of discovered
one was
purported
which of
a
voyage to Aenus, while the it was searched by Herodes'
murder.
to
be
a
Herodes'
slave, ἃ during a
message relatives
to
a
then
lodging executed the slave and began proceedings against Euxitheus, Euxitheus Athens. at Eleven the with (endeixis) a writ of endictment imprisoned was a panel before (For unknown.
who
tends
to
on of a
his arrival there until his trial, which took place The result is heliasts in the court of the Eleven. 29-41, MH, Schindel, see discussion recent good
believe
Euxitheus'
but
alibi 23
rightly
draws
attention
to
the historical and political, as well as juridical, reasons defence speech that has come down to us was necessary.)
why
the
long
Date
The Blass,
date
AB
I,
developed
of 126
than
the and
that
417-413,
with
c.
Calendar
in
the
speech Jebb,
of
412
the for
Fifth
is
AO
also I,
Choreutes the is
(speech
latter.
Century
contended that speech 6 419-418, but Dover, CAS,
uncertain.
to 44-53
Scholars
62. considered B.D.
(Harvard,
its
such
style
6)
and
Meritt,
to
guessed The
1928)
be
as less
at
Athenian
121-122
then
be dated on internal evidence to maintained the old dating of the
Herodes by arguing that on points of style 5 is actually later than 6. Dover, however, is by no means fully convincing (e.g. the presence of poetic vocabulary in 5 and its absence in 6 is hardly an indication of stylistic development; similarly the archaic formula touto men...touto
de...
occurs
several
times
in
5 but
not
in
6).
Breuning
67-70 tried to find internal indications in the Herodes, taking 78 as referring to Lesbian exiles and traitors in Antandrus in the summer of 424 (cf. Thuc. 4.52.2). The common argument against such an early dating is that Euxitheus was still a child in 428 (cf. 75) and some time must therefore have passed before the trial, but Breuning rightly pointed out that when Euxitheus compares his age with that of his father (74, 75, 79) he does so in a rhetorical fashion, giving no indication as to what the ages actually were. So Euxitheus may have
been about thirteen in 428, and this would not rule out the possibility that the trial took place in the late twenties. Nevertheless, Breuning's 424 does seem a little too early and 'your enemies' in 78, upon which he based his theory, need not necessarily refer to the exiles in Antandrus.’ But if 78 reflects recent troubles in the area after
speech
the
revolt,
to c.
as
befits
the
context
of
76-78,
we
may
still
date
the
420.
The Prokataskeué (8-19) The major difficulty presented by the Herodes, and the question which makes it so interesting and important in legal terms, is to what extent the objections Euxitheus raises in the prokataskeué to the method of procedure adopted against him are valid. For he was tried under an endeixis kakourgias* (indictment for wrongdoing; cf. 9, kakourgos endedeigmenos) rather than the dik@ phonou regular in homicide trials and this, he argues, was illegal. There has been much scholarly debate over the use of endeixis and the closely related σρασδοξ in homicide trials and arguments such as whether there are any parallels to our case, e.g. Lysias 13, Against Agoratus, continue to rage (see Hansen, (1981) 21-30). The
AEE, 103-107; Gagarin (1979) 313-322; main considerations with regard to our
Hansen speech
are as follows: i)
did
same tried
an
alien
rights as a
accused
of
the
murder
of
as a citizen defendant (i.e. murderer, phoneus, before 24
an
Athenian
citizen
should Euxitheus the court of the
have
the
have been Areopagus
rather
than
Maidment,
as
a
MAO
wrongdoer,
1
151-152
kakourgos,
argued
that
before
the
diké
a
heliastic
phonou
was
court) ? parochial
in operation, being tied up with the concept of pollution of the community by one of its members with blood-guilt, and therefore it could not be applied to foreigners, for whom apagdgé was the regular procedure. But it is unwise to assume that a pollution doctrine was fundamental in the establishment of Athenian homicide law (see MacDowell,
AHL,
of
position Athenian
141-150)
citizens
state
which
state
had
and
(though
had
a legal
no
legal
there
is
we
might
Athens,
evidence
between
and
sumbola,
that
of
citizens
of
those
whose
a
Indeed,
11).
MH,
the
that
from
different
Schindel,
see
relations;
other
any
distinguish
with
treaty
no
was
respect
this
in
foreigners
Euxitheus repeatedly argues that he was the first to suffer such not his it was this new application of endeixis, treatment: harsh nationality, that caused his loss of rights.’ it} did homicide in any case fall within the range of crimes covered by the law on wrongdoers (nomos ton kakourgön)? Kakourgémata were and if thieves (k/eptai), footpads mainly offences against property (löpodutai) and also kidnappers (andrapodistai) were mentioned in the law,
murderers
clearly
that
shows
10
9;
(cf.
not
were
prosecution
the
had to justify their calling homicide a kakourgéma)? Perhaps, then, the prosecution were taking advantage of the loose wording of the by act of oppression another as this saw Antiphon while law, Athenians against a member of an allied state. Euxitheus should have been tried under a dik& phonou before the Areopagus® and he twice alludes present
16 he fears in to such a trial: will demand trial the prosecution
(although a retrial requests on the principle of ne bis in
he actually (85-96) out of the question,
epilogue probably
Bonner 147; 20 Lept. Dem, 119-120). to This is, of course,
that on his acquittal a second hearing and
&
AJHA
Smith,
take
an
2,
256;
Chalcis
Decree
(ML
52;
c.
446-445)
as
meaning
the the
this was idem; cf.
Harrison, stance.
anti-prosecution
taking in fact merely were they that possible Most scholars would interpret legislation. recent
in in
It
LA is
2, also
advantage of some lines 74-75 of the
voluntary
reference
to
271-272; Athens in the second instance by appeal; see De Ste Croix probably decree This 226-227. LCA, MacDowell, 224-226; Meiggs in the early days of the empire practice Athenian reflects general the But between penalties. major involving to trials regard with compulsorily were trials such Herodes the and Decree Chalcis it is not 'when 47, by both as is indicated to Athens, transferred on penalty death the to inflict state allied an to even permitted people’, and by [Xen.] of the Athenian the consent without anyone
Ath,
Pol.
1.16
(c.
424).
Perhaps
the
beginning
of
the
Archidamian
with the revolt of Mytilene, had hardened Athens' attitude. War, case was then an attempt to stop in Euxitheus' use of endeixis
was and (below), his right in a dik@ phonou defaulting, a more to find call a test case would we what even alternative to the regular procedure. 25
The him
possibly practical
was iii) complains
before imprisonment Euxitheus' bitterly that no alien who had
the been
required
sureties
refused
bail
been
ever
had
In 17 he trial legal? willing to furnish the that
and
relevant
the
law applied to the Eleven as well as to other magistrates. Hansen, 13-17 countered that in truth it was up to the prosecution in an AEE, endeixis whether they wished to follow up the denunciation with an Another suspect. right of bail for an
their imprison or bail grant then that of Gauthier (1971) 53-55, that the
and arrest is argument
alien such as Euxitheus must have been granted by the judicial treaty between Athens and Mytilene (all foreigners would not simply have been allowed this privilege) and now that cases involving the death penalty
existed.
had
been
Either
transferred
way,
one
to
Athens
wonders
this
right
whether
the
probably
Eleven
imprisoned Euxitheus if this was clearly illegal and protest may be seen as another reflection of Athenian laws: it was the regular practice to grant
not in fact a legal requirement. As a result of his imprisonment Euxitheus could exile after his
common
neither default before first defence speech
assumption
of
modern
and
no
longer
would
have
Euxitheus' strong the ambiguity of bail, but this was
the
use
of
endeixis
the trial nor go into voluntary in a dik&ö phonou (13). The
scholars
has
been
that
the
a
penalty judicial
not only would the existence of a defendant certain rights, but also
to many aliens. However, treaty have given an alien
Euxitheus was whither he had case Euxitheus
defend Mytilene held
in
Mytilene
In
addition,
exile
as
well
Athens
by
a
the same rights as Athens was hardly
not imprisoned, it seems, until he reached gone of his own accord (13, cf. 93): if this enjoyed similar rights to a citizen until he
himself.
self-imposed
foreigner exile from
again
Athenians would not have allowed citizen, especially since voluntary
have
from
Athens,
as as
we
would a
matter
Mytilenean.’
of
should led
expect
to
in
that
course
Indeed,
although
the
in
that
Euxitheus' crime
62
defaulting
the
trial
still
Euxitheus
iv)
was
the
suit
Euxitheus'
"estimable"
(an
statement
in
agon 10
that
timétos) the
was
contrasts
or
or from
now
committed
would have happened to himself and his alleged Athenian Lycinus if their plotting was discovered: Lycinus would deprived of all his rights, Euxitheus of his country. (atimétos)?
Athens, was the came to
debarment
was
a a
in
what
accomplice have been
"inestimable"
prosecution
had
made
a timésis is perhaps the most difficult to deal with: the penalty for the deliberate murder of an Athenian citizen was death and normally the penalty in an endeixis Kakourgias was also death (as Euxitheus envisages elsewhere, in 16, 59, 71, 90-92, 94-95); see Harrison, LA 2, 225-226, 231; Hansen, AEE, 21. Euxitheus' statement here, however, suggests that we have an estimable suit. If, as several scholars have been inclined to believe, the suit was in reality inestimable we probably have to read into this remark a deliberate attempt to confuse the jury. The novelty of the use of this procedure in a homicide case may have led to a certain amount of confusion and to a proposal of the death penalty by the prosecution, a slip with which Euxitheus is now making play. The Eleven would already have 26
rejected
their
Euxitheus
proposal
at
the
anakrisis
(preliminary
hearing),
but we
think
however,
scholars,
Other
it.
to
refer
still
could
must take Euxitheus' words at face value. In that case, it is unclear any been have should homicide for kakourgias endeixis an why But the main kakourgias. of endeixis types other from different was and for this there are two is what the timésis then question options, the death penalty or some less severe punishment such as a fine. Euxitheus seems to imply the former in his speech, despite what
the
or
procedure
correct
to
according
either
penalty,
death
should killed Herodes, they probably proposed
that Euxitheus argued merely a fine. Rather,
having prosecution, then have proposed
Hansen) proposed the that
and as Maidment (such a monetary penalty was unthinkable almost is
scholars some but 10, in says he have assumed from this passage that it However, prosecution.2 the by
a
by
technical error, and this provided Euxitheus with a ready opportunity to reproach them (since if, on his condemnation, his proposal for a his less severe penalty was accepted Herodes would not be receiving lawful
ton
due,
keimenön).
tdi nomöi
en
In sum, Euxitheus does seem to have been the recipient of harsh we should whether it is doubtful though in this case, treatment But Antiphon had to use every means at believe all his contentions. of chance any to have was client Mytilenean if his disposal his of the mindful still heliasts, Athenian of panel a before success Euxitheus' nationality was his greatest in 428-427. Lesbos on events
problem. 1.
The
name
is
given
by
Sopatros (ap.
Walz,
Rhet.
316), a source whose value has been doubted see Blass, AB |, 645; Schindel, MH, 4.
2.
E.g. Gomme, HCT Persian Hellespont could
were 3,
well
have
Graec.
more
than
IV, once;
2, 331 n. 2 put the emigrants of 78 in the satrapy and, pace Breuning, the 'enemies'
been
the
Persians,
even
at
a
time
when
they
not actually at war with Athens.
Not under an apagöge asserted. Hansen, AEE,
kakourgias, as many 9-24 has brought out
scholars have the differences
between endeixis (denunciation), which was often followed by arrest (opagöge, as in our case; cf. 9), and simple apagdgé (summary arrest). One relevant here is that endeixis, contrary to
the
traditional
definition,
(prosklesis): for practical arrested until he came to summoned to appear there Aenus.
See
We that
the
have
trial
murder
further
may
at
been
made
involved with
Paragraphe
13,
this
even
point to
(Weimar,
when
also
show
something
robbery;
did
see,
1966)
not
preclude
reasons Euxitheus Athens and so he on his return to
summons
summoned,
dismiss
that,
more
the
since
than
H.J.
112-119.
All
several
apagöge
just
e.g.,
27
a
could not be was probably Mytilene from attempts was
homicide, Wolff,
these
Die
used,
such
as
attische
theories
have
serious defects, not least that throughout his speech Euxitheus treats his trial solely as one for homicide. . Although his nationality was probably the reason behind the use of endeixis and was a prominent factor in the case. As Hansen, who then drew five parallels to support his view that homicide could nevertheless be classed as a kakourgéma (AEE, 10 3-107}; contra, MacDowell, AHL, 135; Gagarin (1979) 320 n. 60; restated in Hansen (1981) 21-30.
. Of
the
five
connected
homicide with
courts
only
foreigners
the
([Arist.]
Palladium Ath.
was
Pol.
specifically
57.3),
hence
Smith 358 thought that Euxitheus asks for a retrial there. But the Ath. Pol. only deals with the status of the victim and we
should
before
expect
the
the
killer
Areopagus
of
a
citizen
regardless
to
have
of
his
been
tried
nationality.
Additionally, in 16 and 96 Euxitheus assumes that in a retrial he would be facing the death penalty, which was not imposed by the Palladium (see Schindel, MH, 10). Euxitheus never actually mentions the Areopagus by name, but he had to be
careful not to give the impression that he thought he would receive a fairer hearing there than before a panel of heliasts. . And if a Mytilenean was found guilty of unintentional homicide, for which the penalty was exile, the Athenians would not have let him simply return to Mytilene, lusitelountos
necessarily
('for
imply
their
own
financial
gain:
benefit')
Antiphon
does
may
not,
be
however,
using
word to heighten the effect of the ou...alla... antithesis. It also doubtful whether the prosecution would have had such motive, as some scholars have inferred, since the fine in
public
suit such as this went
28
to the state.
the is a a
ANTIPHON
ΠΕΡῚ TOY HPNIAOY
ΦΟΝΟΥ
᾿Εβουλόμην μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ λέγειν καὶ τὴν ἐμπευρίαν τῶν πραγμάτων ἐξ loou μου καϑεστάναι τῇ τε συμφορᾷ καὶ tots κακοῦς τοῦς γεγενημένους" νῦν δὲ τοῦ μὲν πεπεύραμαι πέρᾳ τοῦ μᾶλλον τοῦ συμφέροντος.
σώματι
μετὰ
δέν
ὠφέλησεν
με
τῆς
προσήκοντος» τοῦ δὲ ἐνδεής εὖμι οὗ μὲν γάρ με ἔδει κακοπαϑεῦν τῷ
αὐτύας ἡ
τῆς
οὐ
ἐμπειρία"
προσηκούσης,
οὗ
δέ
με
δεῦ
Evrausat σωθῆναι
οὐ-
μετὰ
τῆς ἀληθείας εὐπόντα τὰ γενόμενα, ἐν τούτῳ με βλάπτευ ἡ τοῦ λέγευν ἀδυνασία. πολλοὺ μὲν γὰρ ἤδη τῶν οὐ δυναμένων λέγειν, ἄπιστοι γενόμενου τοῦς ἀληϑέσιν, αὐτοῖς τούτοις ἀπώλοντο. οὐ δυνάμενοι δηλῶσαι αὐτά" πολλοὺ δὲ τῶν «δυνομένων;»
λέγευν,
πυστοὺ
γενόμενοι
τῷ
φεύδεσθαυ,
τούτῳ
ἐσώϑησαν, διότι ἐψεύσαντο. ἀνάγκη οὖν, ὅταν τις ἄπειρος A τοῦ ἀγωνύζεσθαυ, Ent tots τῶν κατηγόρων λόγους εὖναν μᾶλλον ἢ ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῦς τοῦς ἔργους καὺ τῇ ἀληϑείᾳ τῶν πραγμάτων. ἐγὼ οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, αὐτήσομαι, ὑμᾶς οὐχ ἅπερ οὐ πολλοὺ τῶν ἀγωνυξομένων ἀκροᾶσϑαν σφῶν αὐτῶν αὐτοῦνταυ, σφίσι
μὲν
ἄδικόν αὐτήσεως
ol
αὐτοῦς τὴν
διώκοντες
τοῦτο
ἀπιστοῦντες,
τι -- εὐκὸς μὲν
ἐάν
γὰρ
ἀκρόασιν
ἔτυχον τι
τῇ
ὑμῶν
ἐν ἀνδράσι ὑπάρχειν
ἄνευ
nat ἡγεῦσθϑαυι ἀπειρίᾳ
nal
φεύγουσιν,
-- τάδε
ἁμάρτω,
αὐτὸ μᾶλλον
προκατεγνωκότες
ἀγαϑοῦς
tots
αὐτήσεως"
γλώσσῃ
δὲ
γε
δὲ
τῆς Hal
δέομαι
συγγνώμην
ἢ ἀδικίᾳ
ἄνευ οὗπερ
EXELV
ὑμῶν, μους
ἡμαρτῆσθαυ,
τοῦτο δὲ ἐάν τι ὀρϑῶς εὔπω, ἀληϑείᾳ μᾶλλον ἢ δευνότητι εὐρῆσϑαυ.οὐ γὰρ δίκαιον οὔτ᾽ ἔργῳ ἁμαρτόντα διὰ ῥήματα σωθϑῆναυ., οὔτ᾽ ἔργῳ ὀρϑῶς πράξαντα διὰ ῥήματα ἀπολέσθαι," τὸ μὲν γὰρ ῥῆμα τῆς γλώσσης ἁμάρτημά ἐστυ, τὸ δ᾽ ἔργον τῆς γνώμης. ἀνάγκη δὲ κυνδυνεύοντα περὺ αὐτῷ καί πού τι nat ἐξαμαρτεῦν. οὐ γὰρ μόνον τῶν «λεγομένων ἀνάγκη ἐνθυHetodau,
ἀλλὰ
er’
ὄντα
ἐπὺ
οὖν
ἔκπληξυν
ὁρῶ
γὰρ
2
ἀδυνασία
3
τῶν «δυναμένων» λέγευν Jernstedt: δυναμένων om. Apr. N, repos. A corr. 2 post λέγειν post αἰτήσομαν add. δὲ N Jernstedt (qui — signum post
4
5
ἔγωγε
nat
τῇ
τῶν
τύχῃ
πολλὴν
nal
ἐσομένων"
μᾶλλον
παρέχευν ἀνάγκη
τοὺς
Sauppe
ἅπαντα
ἀνάκευταν
πάνυ
coll.
ἐμπεύρους
Bekker
an.
γὰρ
τὰ
ἢ τῇ ἐστὺ
ἐν
ἀδήλῳ
προνοίᾳ.
τῷ
ταῦτ᾽
κινδυνεύοντι.
τοῦ
ἀγωνίζεσθαι
1.345:
ἀδυναμία
ἄνδρες ponit), in A erasum δὲ post τάδε om. N Apr., add. corr. 2 συγγνώμην ἔχευν μου in libris ante τοῦτο μὲν tradita transp. Baiter
οὐ
ölnaLov
46.65 30
.
.
.
γνώμης
affert
Stobaeus
flor.
Antiphon:
On the Murder
of Herodes
I could have wished, gentlemen, that my powers of speech and my experience of affairs were as great as the misfortune and the severities which have befallen me. But as it is, 1 have experienced far more of the last two than I should have and am more wanting in the first than is good for me, For when | had to submit to the physical suffering that accompanied this unwarranted charge | had no experience to help me; and now, when | have to win my-safety by giving a truthful account of what happened, my cause is being damaged by my inability to speak. Many men poor at speaking have before now been disbelieved because they told the truth, and the truth itself ruined them because they could not establish it; while many able at speaking have been believed because they told lies and have been saved by this very fact, that they lied. Therefore it is inevitable that the fate of a man who is inexperienced in litigation depends more on his accusers' words than on the actual facts and the true account of the events. | shall therefore ask you, gentlemen, not for a hearing, as do the majority of those on trial, lacking confidence in themselves and prejudging you to be biased; for it is reasonable to assume that with an honest jury the same hearing will be granted to the defence even without its asking which the prosecution also received
without
asking.
Rather,
I
request
this
of
you,
that
if,
on
the one hand, | make some mistake in speaking, you will pardon me and attribute the error to inexperience and not to dishonesty; and if, on the other hand, | express something well, you will attribute this to truthfulness and not to skill. For it is not just either that a man who has transgressed in deed should be saved by words or that a man who has acted innocently should is to blame for a word, the will for
be undone by words: the tongue an act. Moreover, it is inevitable
that a man in personal danger will make some mistake: he must think not only of his argument but also of his fate, since anything which is still in doubt depends more on chance than foresight. Hence considerations such as these are bound to cause much consternation | notice that even speakers with in the mind of a man in danger.
31
πολλῷ
χεῖρον
ὅταν
δ᾽
ἑαυτῶν
ἄνευ
λέγοντας,
χυνδύνων
τι
ὅταν
ἔν
TLVL
διαπράσσωνται,
κυνδύνῳ
μᾶλλον
ὦσυν:"
ὀρϑουμέ-
vous. ἡ μὲν ἔχουσα, καὺ
οὖν αἴτησις. ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ νομύμως καὺ ἐν τῷ ὑμετέρῳ δυκαύίῳ οὐχ ἧσσον ἢ ἐν τῷ
περὺ
κατηγορημένων
δὲ
τῶν
ἀπολογήσομαι
καϑ᾽
ὁσίως ἐμῷ"
ἕκαστον.
πρῶτον μὲν οὖν. ὡς παρανομώτατα nat βιαυότατα ets τόνδε τὸν ἀγῶνα καϑέστπηπα» τοῦτο ὑμᾶς διδάξω, οὐ τῷ φεύ-
γεῦν
ἂν
τὸ
HOU
μὴ
τοῦ
ἐμοῦ
μηδὲν
πλῆϑος
κατὰ
τὸ
νόμον
ὑμέτερον,
μηδένα
διαψηφύσασϑαυ,
ἐξπμαρτῆσϑαι
τὰ δύκανα, ἀλλ᾽ μάτων [nat] τῶν πρῶτον
μὲν
φεύγω,
ὃ οὐδεὺς
γὰρ
ἕνεκά
ets
ὕνα εἰς
ἐπεὺ
κἂν
ἐπιτρέφψαυμι τόδε
ye
τὸ
ἀνωμότοις
περὺ
τοῦ
τοῦ
πιστεύειν
πρᾶγμα
ual
ὑμῦν
σώματος
ἐμοί
ὑμᾶς
τε
γνώσεσθαι
ἦ τεκμήρια ὑμῖν nal τῶν ἄλλων πραγἐμὲ ἡ τούτων βιαυότης καὺ παρανομία.
κακοῦργος
πώποτ᾽
ἐνδεδειγμένος
ἔπαϑε
φόνου
δύκην
τῶν ἐν τῇ γῇ ταύτῃ.
Hal ὡς
μὲν οὐ κακοῦργός εὖμι οὐδ᾽ ἔνοχος τῷ τῶν κακούργων νόμῳ, αὐτοὺ οὗτοι τούτου γε μάρτυρες γεγένηνται. TEPL γὰρ τῶν κλεπτῶν nat λωποδυτῶν ὁ νόμος κεῦταν, ὧν οὐδὲν ἐμοὺ προσὸν ἀπέδειξαν. οὕτως els γε ταύτην τὴν ἀπαγωγὴν νομυμωτάτην
Hal
δικαιοτάτην
πεποιήκασιν
ὑμῦν
τὴν
ἀποφψήφισίύν
μου. gaot δὲ αὖ τό τε dwoutetverv μέγα κακούργημα elvar, nal ἐγὼ ὁμολογῶ μέγιστόν ye, καὺ τὸ ἱεροσυλεῦν nal τὸ προδιδόναι
νόμου
τὴν
πόλιν
μκεῦνται.
γεσϑαι
ἀλλὰ
δὲ
προαγορεύουσι
ἐνταυϑοῖ μησύν
ἐμοὺ
τοῦς
πεποιήκασι
μου
τὴν
ἐποίησαν,
ANONTELVAVTA, σφύσυν αὐτοῦς
τῷ τεϑνηκότυ
χωρὺς
πρῶτον
περὺ
μέν,
τοῦ
φόνου
xptorv,
tots
ἑκάστου
τῇ
τοῦ
εἴρ-
τὰς
ἀγορᾷ νόμου
ot
ἄλλοις
φεύγουσυ
ἐν
ἀνταποθανεῦν
αὐτῶν
οὗ
δίκας,
Exeuta
TÜ-
μευμένου
τὸν
οὐ τοῦ ἐμοὺ συμφέροντος ἕνεκα, ἀλλὰ τοῦ λυσυτελοῦντος, καὺ ἐνταῦϑα ἔλασσον ἔνευμαν
τῶν
ἐν τῷ νόμῳ κευμένων᾽
οὗ δ᾽
ἕνεκα,
γνώ-
σεσϑε προϊόντος τοῦ λόγου. ἔπειτα δέ. 6 πάντας οὖμαι ὑμᾶς ἐπίστασθαι, ἅπαντα τὰ δικαστήρια Ev ὑπαύϑρῳ δικάζει tas δύκας τοῦ φόνου, οὐδενὸς ἄλλου ἕνεκα ἢ Uva τοῦτο μὲν οὐ δυκασταὺ μὴ Cwouv ELS τὸ αὐτὸ tots μὴ καϑαροῦς τὰς χεῖρας,
τοῦτο
ὁμωρόφιος τοῦτον
δὲ
ὁ
διώμων
γύγνηται
τὸν
νόμον
τὴν
δύχκην
τῷ αὐθϑέντῃ. τοὐναντίον
σὺ
tots
δὲ δέον σε διομόσασϑαι ὅρκον ἐξώλειαν σαυτῷ καὺ γένει καὶ
τοῦ
δὲ
φόνου
τοῦτο
ἄλλοις
tva
μὲν
μὴ
παρελϑὼν
πεποίηκας
τοῦτο
τὸν μέγιστον ual ὑσχυρότατον. οὐχκύᾳ τῇ σῇ ἐπαρώμενον, ἦ μὴν
T-ER
μὴ ἄλλα κατηγορήσευν ἐμοῦ nels αὐτὸν τὸν φόνον. ὡς «ἔκτευνα, ἐν οὔτ᾽ dv κακὰ πολλὰ Εὐργασμένος ἡλισχόμην ἄλλῳ ἢ αὐτῷ τῷ πράγματι, οὔτ᾽ ἂν πολλὰ ἀγαϑὰ εὐργασμένος τού-
tous
ἂν
ἐσῳζόμην del.
tots
8
Hat
10
αὖ τό γε ἄν N, dv spiritus
vocis
11
σαυτῶ
αὐτῶ
12
σὺ
N,
dyaSots'
ἃ
σὺ
παρελθών,
αὐτὸς
Sauppe
Sauppe ἔνειμαν
παρελθὼν
A:
μέγα Aldus: μὲ dv Apr., in quo ἄν ἔνευμαν
a
corr.
A συμπαρελθῶν 32
N
2
ἔνευμαν) ἔνειμαν utrumque erasum,
restitutus
est
considerable experience of litigation are far from being at their best when in any danger; they are more successful when seeking to effect some
object
without
dangers.
This,
then,
is
my
request,
gentlemen,
one made according to human and divine law and taking into account your duty no less than my right. As for the charges, I shall answer them one by one. Firstly, | shall prove to you that | stand on trial here through highly illegal and violent methods. Not on the chance of eluding the judgment of even if you
your were
having confidence your verdict. My behaviour
the
of
the
court, since not on oath
in my innocence object, rather, prosecution
rest of their case
against
First,
an
malefactor happened
although
|
am
being
before
| would commit my life to your decision and there were no law on the matter,
to
may
of this charge and the justice of is that the violent and_ illegal indicate
information
tried
anyone
to
me. for in
has
been
murder,
this
you
a
country.
also
laid
the
nature
against
thing
which
Indeeed,
the
me
of
as
has
a
never
prosecution
themselves have borne witness to the fact that | am not a malefactor nor liable to the law against malefactors. For this law is concerned with thieves and footpads and they have not shown me deserving of either title. Thus, as far as this arrest of have made my acquittal your most lawful and
mine just
is concerned, they course. They argue
10
that murder is a grave malefaction - and | agree, a very grave one laws which apply to indeed - as are sacrilege and treason: but the each of them differ, In my case the prosecution have firstly caused the trial to be held in the very place from which others charged with and secondly, Agora; the proclamation, by are debarred murder although the law decrees that a murderer shall pay with his life in of out not me against assessment an made they requital but for their own benefit - and by so doing consideration for me, assigned to the dead man less than his lawful due. Their motives for this you will learn in the course of my speech. Secondly,
as
of
course
you
all
know,
all
the
courts
judge
murder
cases in the open air, for no other reason than that on the one hand the jurors may avoid entering the same building as those whose hands are unclean, and that on the other hand the one conducting the prosecution for murderer. But the opposite to
murder may avoid being under the same roof as the you on the one hand have evaded this law and done the rest; and on the other, although you should have
sworn the greatest and most binding oath known, on destruction on yourself, your kin and your house, accuse
me
only
in
connection
with
the
murder
itself,
pain of bringing that you would to
the
effect
that
| committed it - whereby however many crimes | had carried out | could not have been condemned except for this one thing, and however many good deeds | had carried out | could not have been saved by these good deeds - this requirement you have evaded, You have invented laws to suit yourself, you are prosecuting me unsworn
33
11
σεαυτῷ
νόμους
ἐξευρών,
ἀνώμοτος
μὲν
αὐτὸς
ἐμοῦ
κατηγος
ρεῦς, ἀνώμοτοι δὲ οὐ μάρτυρες καταμαρτυροῦσι,. δέον αὐτοὺς τὸν αὐτὸν ὅρκον σοὺ διομοσαμένους Hal ἁπτομένους τῶν σφαγίων καταμαρτυρεῦν ἐμοῦ. ἔπευτα κελεύευς τοὺς δικαστὰς ἀνωμότοις πιστεύσαντας τοῦς μαρτυροῦσι φόνου δίκην καταγνῶναυ» ats σὺ αὐτὸς ἀπίστους βατέστησας παρελϑὼν τοὺς
κευμένους 13
μύαν ἄν
νόμους,
Ἀρεύσσω
“ab
ἡγῇ
γενέσθαι,
παρέμεινα
et
χρῆναι
αὐτῶν
ἐλελύμην,
τῶν
ἀλλ᾽
αὐτοῦς
τὴν
σὴν
νόμων. „Aeyeıs ῳχόμην
ἂν
παρανο-
δὲ
ἀπιών,
ὡς
οὐκ
ὡσπερεὺ
ἄκοντά με ἀναγκάσας εὐσελϑεῦν εἰς τὴν γῆν ταύτην. καίτοι ἐμοὺ el μηδὲν διέφερε στέρεσϑαι τῆσδε τῆς πόλεως. Loov ἦν μου uat προσχληϑέντιυ μὴ ἐλθεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐρήμην ὀφλεῦν τὴν
δύκην,
τοῦτο
ἐξελϑεῦν᾽ ἄλλοις
14
ἅπασι
Ἕλλησι
στερεῦν, κάλλυστα
τοῦτο
τῶν
νόμον
ἁπάντων
15
δέ, με
ual
ἂν
ὃ
τοῦς
μόνον
κούτου
πάντας
εἶναι
σὺ
ζητεῦς
ϑέμενος.
κεῦσϑαυ
προτέραν. ἐξεῦναι
ἐστι.
ὑδύᾳ
τοιούτων,
γε αὐτοῦς ἀρχανοτάτοις
τὴν
κουνόν
ἐστυν,
σαυτῷ
tept
νόμων
ἀπολογησαμένῳ,
κοινόν
αὐτὸς
οὗ κεῦνται
δὲ
γὰρ
τούς
otpau
ὁσιώτατα.
ἀπο-
γε
νόμους
ὁμολογῆσαυ ὑπάρχεν
ἐν τῇ γῇ ταύτῃ,
ἔπευτα
μέν
τοὺς
αὐτοὺς det περὺ τῶν αὐτῶν, ὅπερ μέγυστόν ἐστι onpetov νόμων μαλῶς κευμένων᾽ ὁ γὰρ χρόνος uat ἡ ἐμπευρία τὰ μὴ καλῶς ἔχοντα ἐκδιδάσκει, τοὺς ἀνθρώπους. ὥστε οὐ del ὑμᾶς ἐκ τῶν τοῦ κατηγόρου λόγων τοὺς νόμους καταμανϑάνευν, EL καλῶς ὑμῦν κεῦνται ἢ un, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῶν νόμων τοὺς τοῦ κατηγόρου λόγους, εὖ ὀρθῶς nal vonluus ὑμᾶς διδάσκουσι τὸ πρᾶγμα ἢ οὔ, Οὕτως of γε νόμοι κάλλιστα κεῦνται ol περὺ φόνου, οὗς. οὐδεὺς πώποτε ἐτόλμησε κινῆσαι σὺ δὲ μόνος δὴ τετόλμημκας γενέσθαι νομοϑέτης ént τὰ πονηρότερα, καὶ
ταῦτα παρελθὼν ζητεῖς pe ἀδίκως ἀπολέσαι. ἁ δὲ νομεῦς, αὐτὰ ταῦτά μου μέγυστα μαρτύριά ἐστιν"
ἤδεις 16
ὅτι οὐδεὺς ἂν ἦν σοι ὃς ἐκεῦνον
σάμενος
ἐμοῦ
κατεμαρτύρησεν.
Ἔπειτα
σὺ παραεὖ γὰρ
τὸν ὅρκον δὲ
οὐχ
ὡς
διομοπιστεύων
τῷ πράγματι, ἀναμφισβητήτως ἕνα τὸν ἀγῶνα περὺ τοῦ npdyματος ἐποιήσω, ἀλλὰ ἀμφισβήτησιν nal λόγον ὑπελύπου ὡς Hal τότε τοῦς δικασταῖς ἀπιστήσων. ὥστε μηδέν uot ἐνθάδε [μηδὲ] πλέον etvar μηδ᾽ ἀποφυγόντι. ἀλλ᾽ ἐξεῦναί σοι λέγευν ὅτι κακοῦργος ἀπέφυγον, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τοῦ φόνου τὴν δίκην" Eddv δ᾽ αὖ ἀξιώσεις με ἀποχτεῦναι ὡς τοῦ φόνου 12
ἐξευρὼν Ἀ: εὑρὼν ἡγεῦ Dryander et
13
τὴν
14
ὑμᾶς
(post
ovot
A,
δύκην
om.
det)
διδάξει
Ν P.
A:
ἡγῇ
Blass:
εἴ
ye
A,
fi ye
ἡμᾶς
N
δυδάσκουσι
Reiske:
δυδάξ-
N
15
πονηρότερα
16
(neylotn corr. 2 N) τότε τοῦς Denniston:
N:
Müller,
Ν
πονηρότατα
τοῦσδε τοῦς Pahle Bekker: ἂν ἀξυώσης ἀξιώσαις Sauppe
τοῦς
μηδὲ NApr., 34
A
μαρτύρια τότε
AN,
Ἀ:
tots
del. Reiske dv ἀξιώσεις
μαρτυρία
ἐνθάδε
Ν
vel
αὖ ἀξιώσεις A corr. 2, dv
N
and your witnesses are giving evidence against me unsworn, although they should have given this evidence having sworn the same oath as you, with hand laid upon the sacrifice. Moreover, you bid the jurors believe your witnesses though unsworn and pass sentence for murder, witnesses whom you yourself have made untrustworthy by your evasion of the laws of the land - and you imagine that in the eyes of the jurors your illegal behaviour should have greater authority than the laws themselves, You reply that | would not have stayed to face trial if | had been left at liberty but would have run away, as if you had forced me to come to this country against my will. Yet if it did not
matter
to
me
to
be
debarred
from
this
equally open to me not to come even case by default, or alternatively to leaving the country after making my open to everyone. deprive me, and me
framing Yet
But you, alone, of
city
when avail first
it
would
for personal reasons, are privilege accorded to every
a
a law to suit yourself. everyone
would
|
agree,
the
that
think,
have
been
summoned, but lose the myself of the right of defence speech: this is
laws
which
trying Greek
to by with
deal
such cases as this are the finest and most hallowed of all laws. They have the distinction of being the oldest in this country and also have remained the same concerning the same matters; and this is always
14
experience show since time and made, well sign of laws the surest not use the speech for must you Hence is imperfect. what mankind
the prosecution to discover whether your laws are good or bad, but you must use the laws to discover whether or not the speech for the prosecution is giving you a correct and lawful interpretation of the case. are excellent and no one has ever homicide laws on the Thus before dared to change them, You alone have dared to turn legislator and make changes for the worse, and by this arbitrary behaviour you are
to
seeking
me
destroy
is itself very weighty you would find no one preliminary oath. of
instead
Thirdly,
But
unjustly.
your
for me, evidence to testify against like
acting
a
infringement
the
of
in
confident
his
law
that that
because you well knew me once he had sworn
man
case
and
you left room for arranging that it be tried once and indisputably you were from the outset even as though argument, and dispute going to distrust the jurors, Hence | am no better off even if I am a as acquitted I was that say can you but today, acquitted malefactor,
win
you
not
will
on
claim
the
my
charge
life
as
of
murder.
found
being
35
On
the
other
guilty
on
hand,
the
15
if
charge
you
of
16
17
τὴν δύκην ὠφληκότα. καύτοι πῶς ἂν ein τούτων δευνότερα μηχανήματα, εὖ ὑμῦν μὲν ἅπαξ τουτουσὺ πεύσασι κατεύργασται ἃ βούλεσϑε, ἐμοὺ 6’ ἅπαξ ἀποφυγόντι, ὁ αὐτὸς κύνδυνος ὑπολείπεται; Ἔτι δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐδέϑην, ὦ ἄνδρες. παρανομώτατα ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων. ἐθέλοντος γάρ, μου ἐγγυητὰς tpets καϑυστάναυ κατὰ τὸν νόμον, οὕτως οὗτοι διεπράξαντο τοῦτο ὥστε μὴ ἐγγενέσθαι pot ποιῆσαν. τῶν δὲ ἄλλων ξένων ὅστις πώποτε ἠθέλησε καταστῆσαι ἐγγυητάς, οὐδεὺς πώποτ᾽ ἐδέθη. καύτοι οὐ ἐπυμεληταὺ τῶν κακούργων τῷ αὐτῷ χρῶνταν νόμῳ
τούτῳ. 18
μόνῳ
dote
Hal οὗτος
ἐπέλιπε
πρῶτον
μὲν
αὐτὸν
20
τοῦς ἄλλους
τούτους
γὰρ
γενέσθαι
τἀμαυτοῦ
ἦν pe,
πράγματα,
πᾶσιν
ὧν ἐμοὺ
τοῦτο μὴ
ἔπειτα
συμφέρον,
δυνάμενον
δια-
κακοπαϑεῖν
τῷ
τούς te φύλους προθυμοτέρους ἔχευν τοὺς ἐμαυτοῦ τὰ ψευδῆ μαρτυρεῖν ἢ ἐμοὺ τἀληϑῆ λέγειν, διὰ τὴν
τοῦ σώματος 19
κοινὸς
ὠφελῆσαι,
ἀπαρασκευότατον
πράσσεσϑαι
σώματι, ἰούτοις
μὴ
κακοπάϑειαν.
ὄνευδός
τε αὐτῷ τε ἐμοὺ
περυ-
ἔϑεσαν καὶ τοῦς ἐμοῦς προσήκουσιν εἰς τὸν βίον ἅπαντα. Οὐτωσὺ μὲν δὴ πολλοῦς ἐλασσωϑεῦς τῶν νόμων τῶν ὑμετέρων Hal τοῦ δικαίου καϑέστηκα εἰς τὸν ἀγῶνα ὅμως μέντου ye nat ἐκ τούτων πευράσομαι ἐμαυτὸν ἀναύτιον ἐπιδεῖξαι, καύτου χαλεπόν γε τὰ ἐκ πολλοῦ κατεφψευσμένα καὺ ἐπυβεβουλευμένα, ταῦτα παραχρῆμα ἀπελέγχειν᾽ ἃ γάρ τις μὴ προσεδόκησεν, οὐδὲ φυλάξασϑαι ἐγχωρεῦ. ᾿Εγὼ δὲ τὸν μὲν πλοῦν ἐποιησάμην ἐκ τῆς Μυτιλήνης. ὦ
ἄνδρες,
ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ
πλέων ᾧ Ἡρῴδης
οὗτος,
ὅν φασιν
ὑπ᾽
ἐμοῦ Anodavetv' ἐπλέομεν δὲ els τὴν Atvov, ἐγὼ μὲν ὡς τὸν πατέρα -- ἐτύγχανε γὰρ ἐκεῦ ὧν τότε —, ὁ δ᾽ Ἡρῴδης ἀνδράποδα θρᾳξὺν ἀνθρώποις ἀπολύσων. συνέπλεν δὲ τά τε ἀνδράποδα ἃ ἔδει αὐτὸν ἀπολῦσαι, nal οὐ θρᾷκες οἱ λυσόμενου. τούτων δ᾽ ὑμῦν τοὺς μάρτυρας παρέξομαι. ΜΑΡΤΎΡΕΣ
21
22
Ἢ μὲν πρόφασυς ἑκατέρῳ τοῦ πλοῦ αὕτη ἐτύχομεν δὲ χευμῶνι τινι χρησάμενοι, ὑφ᾽ οὗ ἠναγκάσϑημεν κατασχεῦν ets τῆς Μηϑυμναίας tu χωρίον, od τὸ πλοῖον ὥρμει τοῦτο els ὃ μετεκβάντα φασὺν ἀποϑανεῦν αὐτὸν τὸν Ἡρῴδην. Hal
πρῶτον μὲν αὐτὰ
ταῦτα
μᾶλλον ἐγίγνετο μοῦ ἀπελέγχομαι
ἢ τύχῃ. οὔτε σύμπλουν μοι
αὑτὸν
πεποιημένος
17
τὸν
μοι
πλοῦν
A:
pe
N
σμοπεῦτε,
ὅστις
Stu
«οὐ τῇ ἐν»μῇ προνοίᾳ
γὰρ πείσας τὸν Ὑενέσϑαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἕνεκα
πώποτε
A:
πραγμάτων ὀστίς
ποτε
ἄνδρα αὐτὸς
οὐδαnad’
ὑδίων-: N
οὔτ ὑπέλειπε
Apr., ἐπέλειπε NA corr. 1, tertium ε in A erasum μὴ ὠφελῆσαι Gernet: ὠφελῆσαι τοῦδε κόσμου N Apr., ὠφελῆσθαι τοῦδε τοῦ νόμου corr. 2
18
αὐτὸν Bekker:
19
édacow8ets
Erdos
μετεχκβάντα
A
N:
ἐρμῇ
dtu μὴ AN,
libr. 21
ἐμαυτὸν
N Apr.,
αὐτῷ
te Reiske:
owSels
A corr.,
αὐτῷ ye ἕλος
σωθϑεὺς
deter.
Jebb:
Stephanus:
corr.
κατ᾽
αὐτὸν 36
μεταβάντα
Stu
Apr.
οὐ Mätzner
ὅτι
καϑ᾽
«οὐ
τῇ
αὑτὸν
murder, Could anything more unfair be contrived, if you achieve your purpose by once convincing these jurors, while I am left facing the same peril after one acquittal ? Then again, gentlemen, I was imprisoned by an act of unparalleled illegality. | was ready to furnish three sureties according to
the
law,
do
so.
Yet
ever
but
no
been
the
prosecution
other
alien
imprisoned;
who
and
took
ever
the
steps
was
to
ensure
willing
custodians
of
that
to furnish
malefactors
1 could
not
sureties
has
abide
by
this
same law. Hence this law by which everyone benefits failed to be of help in my case, and in mine alone, The reason was that it was to the prosecution's advantage firstly that | should be quite unprepared for my trial, being unable to look after my interests in person; and secondly that I should undergo bodily suffering, and by reason of that bodily suffering find my friends readier to tell lies as witnesses for the prosecution than speak the truth on my behalf. Additionally, they have brought lifelong disgrace on me and my family. Such,
then,
are
the
manifold
ways
in
which
|
suffered
loss
in
respect of your laws and justice before coming to trial. However, despite this | shall try to prove my innocence, although it is indeed difficult to refute offhand false charges so carefully framed: one cannot prepare oneself against the unexpected. | sailed from Mytilene, gentlemen, as a passenger on the same boat as this Herodes whom they say I murdered. We were bound for Aenus, | to visit my father, who happened to be there at the time, and
Herodes
to
ransom
some
slaves
to
certain
Thracians.
The
17
18
19
20
slaves
whom he was to release were also passengers, so too the Thracians who were to pay the ransom. 1 will produce witnesses to prove these statements to you. WITNESSES Such
were
the
respective
purposes
of
our
voyage.
happened to meet with a storm which forced us the territory of Methymna, where there lay at transhipped and on which the Herodes which met his end. Now firstly consider these circumstances in were due to chance, not to any design on my been
shown
rather, private
that
|
persuaded
to
Herodes
it has been shown that business. Nor again, as
come
However,
we
on
themselves, that they part. It has nowhere the
voyage
with
me:
| made the voyage independently on is clear, was | making the voyage to
37
21
to put in at a place in anchor the boat on to prosecution allege he
22
αὖ
ἐγὼ
ἄνευ
προφάσεως
Lnavfis
φαύνομαι
τὸν
πλοῦν
nounod-
μενος els τὴν Alvov, οὔτε κατασχόντες εἰς τὸ χωρίον τοῦτο ἀπὸ παρασκευῆς οὐδεμιᾶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀνάγκῃ χρησάμενοι" οὔτ᾽ αὖ ἐπειδὴ ὡρμισάμεϑα, ἡ μετέκβασυς ἐγένετο εἰς τὸ ἕτερον πλοῖον οὐδενὺ μηχανήματι οὐδ᾽ ἀπάτῃ, ἀλλ᾽ ἀνάγκῃ καὶ τοῦτο ἐγύγνετο. ἐν ᾧ μὲν γὰρ ἐπλέομεν, ἀστέγαστον ἦν τὸ πλοῖον. εἰς ὃ δὲ μετεςξρέβημεν, ἐστεγασμένον᾽ τοῦ δὲ ὑετοῦ ἕνεκα ταῦτ᾽ ἦν. τούτων δ᾽ ὑμῦν μάρτυρας παρέξομαι. ΜΑΡΤΥΡΕΣ
23
2}
᾿Επειδὴ δὲ μετεξέβημεν ets τὸ ἕτερον πλοῦον. ἐπύνομεν. καὶ ὁ μέν ἐστι φανερὸς ἐκβὰς ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου ual οὐκ εὐσβὰς πάλιν᾽ ἐγὼ δὲ τὸ παράπαν οὐκ ἐξέβην ἐκ τοῦ πλούου τῆς νυκτὸς ἐκεύνης. τῇ δ᾽ ὑστεραύῳ, ἐπευδὴ ἀφανὴς ἦν ὁ ἀνήρ, etntetto οὐδέν τι, μᾶλλον ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἢ ual ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ nal εἴ τῳ τῶν ἄλλων ἐδόκει δεινὸν εἶναι, καὶ ἐμοὺ ὁμοίως. καὶ els te τὴν Μυτιλήνην ἐγὼ αὔτυος A πεμφϑῆναι ἄγγελον, καὺ τῇ ἐμῇ γνώμῃ ἐπέμπετο" καὺ ἄλλου οὐδενὸς
ἐθέλοντος τῷ Ἡρῴδῃ neLv
βαδίζειν, οὔτε τῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ πλοίου οὔτε τῶν αὐτῷ συμπλεόντων, ἐγὼ τὸν ἀκόλουϑον τὸν ἐμαυτοῦ πέμ-
ἕτοιμος
ἔπεμπον
A’
καύτοι
εὐδώς.
ἐπευδὴ
οὐ
δήπου
γε
δὲ ὁ ἀνὴρ
κατ᾽
οὔτε
ἐμαυτοῦ
μηνυτὴν
ἐν τῇ Μυτιλήνῃ
ἐφαίνετο ζητούμενος οὔτ᾽ ἄλλοθι οὐδαμοῦ, πλοῦς τε ἡμῦν ἐγίγνετο, καὺ τἄλλ᾽ ἀνήγετο πλοῖα ἅπαντα. φχόμην κἀγὼ πλέων. τούτων δ᾽ ὑμῦν τοὺς μάρτυρας παρασχήσομαι. ΜΑΡΤΥΡΕΣ
25
Τὰ μὲν γενόμενα ταῦτ᾽ ἐστίν᾽ ἐκ δὲ τούτων ἤδη σκοπεῦτε τὰ εὐκότα. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ πρὺν avdyecSal pe ets τὴν Abvov, ὅτε ἦν ἀφανὴς ὁ ἀνήρ, οὐδεὺς ἠτιάσατό με ἀνθρώπων, ἤδη πεκυσμένων τούτων τὴν ἀγγελίαν οὐ γὰρ ἄν ποτε φχόμην πλέων. ἀλλ᾽ εὐς μὲν τὸ παραχρῆμα Ἀρεῦσσον ἦν τὸ ἀληϑὲς nal τὸ γεγενημένον τῆς τούτων αὐτιάσεως. ual ἅμα
26
ἐγὼ
ἔτι
ἐπεδήμουν"
ἐπειδὴ
δὲ
ἐγώ
τε
φχόμην
πλέων
καὶ
οὗτου ἐξ ἐπιβουλῆς συνέϑεσαν ταῦτα Hal ἐμηχανήσαντο ματ᾽ ἐμοῦ, τότε ἠτιάσαντο. Λέγουσυ δὲ ὡς ἐν μὲν τῇ γῇ ἀπέϑανεν ὁ ἀνήρ, κἀγὼ Aldov αὐτῷ ἐνέβαλον els τὴν κεφαλήν, ὃς οὐκ ἐξέβην τὸ παράπαν ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου. καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἀκριβῶς
οὕτου
ὕσασυν᾽
ὅπως
δ᾽ ἠφανύσθη
ὁ ἀνήρ,
οὐδενὺ
λόγῳ
εὐκότι
δύνανται ἀποφαίνειν. δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι ἐγγύς που τοῦ λιμένος εἰκὸς ἦν τοῦτο γίγνεσθαι, τοῦτο μὲν μεθύοντος τοῦ ἀνδρός, τοῦτο 22
23
26
δὲ
νύκτωρ
ἐκβάντος
μετέκβασυις A corr. Pahle: μετέβημεν pho): μαρτυρίας
μετεξέβημεν
A:
post
ἐξέβην
om. A
item
24,
Ν
τοῦ
πλοίου"
οὔτε
γὰρ
αὑτοῦ
N: μετάβασις Apr. μετ«εξ»έβημεν μάρτυρας Reiske (sic semper Anti-
μετέβημεν
A
N
En post
(post αὔτυος)
éuBds
om.
Jernstedt:
N,
ἐκ
ἦν,
29
αὐτῷ ἐνέβαλον αὐτὸ
ἐκ
N:
αὑτοῦ
ἐνέβαλον Taylor: 38
αὐτῷ A αὐτοῦ
τοῦτο
(post ἦν)
A:
Aenus
without
good
prearrangement;
reason,
we
were
nor
did
forced
we
to
do
put so.
in
at
Nor
this
place
by
any
again,
when
we
had
anchored, did the transhipment take place through any plan or ruse, but this too followed of necessity. For the boat on which we were sailing had no deck, whereas that onto which we transhipped had a deck; and the rain was witnesses to prove these
the reason for this statements to you.
exchange.
I
will
produce
WITNESSES After clear
crossing
that
to
Herodes
the
left
other
the
boat
boat and
we did
began not
drinking.
board
it
again,
not leave the boat at all that night. Next day, when missing, | joined in the search just as anxiously as anyone thought it was a serious matter I did. Not responsible
for
decided
send
to
a
messenger
one
on
being
my
sent
suggestion,
to
Mytilene,
but
also,
Now
jit
but
| did
is
23
Herodes was any, and if only was |
that
is,
when
no
it
one
was
else
24
was willing to go, neither one of the passengers nor one of Herodes' companions, I offered to send my own attendant; and I hardly think | was deliberately proposing to send someone who would inform against
me. When finally either in Mytilene and
the
rest
departure. you.
the search or anywhere
of
the
| will
boats
bring
failed else,
began
forward
to reveal any trace of Herodes and fair sailing-weather returned putting
witnesses
out
to
sea,
to prove
|
these
too
took
statements
my
to
WITNESSES Those before
|
are put
the to
facts;
from
for
Aenus,
sea
them
consider
when
Herodes
the
probabilities.
was
missing,
First,
nobody
25
at
all accused me, although the prosecution had already heard the news; otherwise | should never have taken my departure. For the moment the true facts of the matter were more powerful than any accusation they could make | had taken my
and, besides, departure and
| was still on the island. It was when the prosecution had conspired to form
this
plot against me that they made their accusation. They allege that Herodes died on shore and |, who did not leave the boat at all, hit him on the head with a stone, Of this they have detailed information, but they cannot give any plausible account of how Herodes came to disappear. Clearly, the probabilities suggest that the
the one
that
he
crime was committed somewhere near the harbour, hand Herodes was drunk, and on the other it was
left
the
boat.
He
would
probably
39
have
been
in
no
since on at night
condition
to
26
27
xpatety Cows ἂν ὁδὸν ἡ πρόφασις
ἐδύνατο, οὔτε τῷ ἀπάγοντυ νύκτωρ μακρὰν ἂν εὐκότως Eyiyvero' ζητουμένου δὲ τοῦ
ἀνδρὸς δύο ἡμέρας Hal ἐν τῷ λυμένυ καὺ νος, οὔτε ὀπτὴρ οὐδεὺς ἐφάνη ots’ αἷμα
οὐδέν. τοὺς
ὡς 28
ng’
ἐγὼ
μάρτυρας
μάλιστα
συγχωρῶ
ws
οὐκ
ἐξέβην
τῷ
τούτων
ἐξέβην
ἐκ
τοῦ
éx
ἄπωϑεν τοῦ λιμέοὔτ᾽ ἄλλο σημεῖον
λόγῳ.
τοῦ
πλοίου,
παρεχόμενος
πλοίου"
οὐδενὺ
εἰ
δὲ
τρόπῳ
μὲν
nat
εὐκὸς
ἦν
ἀφανισθϑέντα λαϑεῦν τὸν ἄνϑρωπον, εὔπερ γε μὴ πάνυ πόρρω ἀπῆλθεν ἀπὸ τῆς θαλάσσης. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ὡς κατεποντώϑη λέγουσιν. ἐν tive πλοίῳ: δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ λυμένος ἦν τὸ πλοῦον. πῶς ἂν οὖν οὐκ ἐξηυρέϑη:; καὺ μὴν εὐκός γε ἦν uat onpetdév
τι
yeveosar
ἐκβαλλομένου ἐξ
οὗ
EEEBaLvEV,
avtot
μὴ
ἐν
νύκτωρ.
τῷ
πλοίῳ
νῦν
ἐν
δὲ
τούτῳ
ὁμολογοῦσυν
ἀνδρὸς
ἐν ᾧ μὲν
φασὺν
εὑρεῦν
ἀποϑανεῦν
ποντώϑη. οὐχ ηὗρον οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸ τούτων δ᾽ ὑμῦν τοὺς μάρτυρας
τὸν
τεϑνεῶτος
ἔπινε
καὺ
πλούῳ
σημεῖα,
ἄνδρα-
ἐν
τὸ πλοῖον οὔτε TapaoxrioopaL.
ᾧ
καὺ
ἐν
ᾧ
δὲ
κατε-
σημεῦον
οὐδέν,
MAPTYPEE
᾿Επειδὴ
29
δὲ πλοῦον
30
ἐπύνομεν, ἐπειδὴ τὸ ἐπειδὴ δὲ προβάτων λαβόντες παραχρῆμα φλαῦρον τες παρὰ πευσϑεὺς δὲ τούτων
δὲ
ἐγὼ
ἧκεν
μὲν
φροῦδος
ἦ πλέων
εἰς τὴν Μυτυλήνην
ets
τὴν
Alvov,
ἐν ᾧ ἐγὼ nal
τὸ
ὁ Ἡρῴδης
πρῶτον μὲν εὐσβάντες els τὸ πλοῖον ἠρεύνων, καὶ αἶμα ηὗρον, ἐνταῦϑα ἔφασαν τεϑνάναι τὸν ἄνδρα" αὐτοῦς τοῦτο οὐκ ἐνεχώρει, ἀλλ᾽ Eyalvero τῶν ὃν αὗμα. ἀποτραπόμενοι, τούτου τοῦ λόγου συλἐβασάνυζον τοὺς ἀνθρώπους. καὶ ὃν μὲν τότε ἐβασάνυσαν, οὗτος μὲν οὐδὲν εἶπε περὴὺ ἐμοῦ dv δ᾽ ἡμέραυς ὕστερον πολλαῦς ἐβασάνυσαν, ἔχονσφύσιν αὐτοῦς τὸν πρόσϑεν χρόνον, οὗτος ἦν ὁ ὑπὸ τούτων nal καταψευσάμενος ἐμοῦ. παρέξομαι τοὺς μάρτυρας. ΜΑΡΤΥΡΕΣ
31
Ὡς
μὲν
ὕστερον
τούτῳ
τῷ
χρόνῳ
ὁ ἀνὴρ
ἐβασανίσϑη,
μεμαρτύρηταυ ὑμῦν: προσέχετε δὲ τὸν νοῦν αὐτῇ τῇ βασάνῳ, οἵα γεγένηταυ. ὁ μὲν γὰρ δοῦλος. ᾧ Cows οὗτοι τοῦτο μὲν ἐλευϑερίαν ὑπέσχοντο, τοῦτο δ᾽ ént τούτους ἦν πταύσασϑαι, κακούμενον 32
αὐτόν,
Cows
ὑπ᾽
ἀμφοῦν
πευισϑεὺς
κατεφεύσατό
μου, τὴν μὲν ἐλευϑερίαν ἐλπίσας οὔσεσϑαι, τῆς δὲ βασάνου els τὸ παραχρῆμα βουλόμενος ἀπηλλάχϑαι. οὖμαι δ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἐπύστασϑαι τοῦτο, ὅτυ ἐφ᾽ ots ἄν τὸ πλεῦστον μέρος τῆς βασάνου, πρὸς τούτων εὐἰσὺν of βασανυξόμενοι λέγειν ὅσ᾽ av ἐχεύνους μέλλωσι χαρυεῦσϑαι " ἐν τούτοις γὰρ αὐτοῖς ἐστιν ἄν
ἡ
ὠφέλεια,
καταφεύδωνται,..
27
ual
28
δὲ
ἐν
ἐν
N:
el
τε μὲν
ἐν
ᾧ μὲν
παρασχήσομαυ
29 32
ἄλλως
ye
A corr. Bekker:
κἂν γὰρ om.
2:
μὴ
παρόντες
τυγχάνωσυν
ἐγὼ
ἐκέλευον
αὐτὸν
στρεβλοῦν
ὧν
δὲ
μὲν
A
δὲ
μὲν
ὦ Apr.,
ἐν
GN
παραστήσομαι,
dom. A Enlvonev Weil: ἐπλέομεν 60’ dv Thalheim: ὅταν el μὲν γὰρ ἐγὼ γὰρ ἐγὼ μὲν N Apr., in quo μὲν erasum
Gebauer:
cl
control his movements, nor could anyone long way away by night have found any so.
Yet
in
spite
of
two
days'
search,
who wished to take plausible excuse for
both
in
the
harbour
him a doing
and
at
a
27
distance from it, no eyewitness, no bloodstain and no clue of any other kind was found. Nevertheless, I will accept the prosecution's story, although 1 can produce witnesses to the fact that 1 did not leave
the
the
boat.
But
it
in
boat,
is
suppose
no
as
way
much
likely
as
that
you
the
please
man
that
should
I
did
have
leave
remained
undiscovered after his disappearance if he did not go very far from the sea. But they allege that he was thrown into the sea. From what boat? Clearly, the boat came from the harbour itself. In that case, how could it have not been identified? Indeed, it was probable that at
least
some
clue
should
thrown overboard in found traces, in the
-
the
boat
on
have
been
found
in
the
boat
of
the dark. Now the prosecution do boat on which he was drinking and
which
they
themselves
agree
a dead
28
man
claim to have which he left
Herodes
was
murdered, But the boat from which he was thrown into the have not discovered, neither the boat itself nor any trace of bring forward witnesses to prove these statements to you.
not
sea they it. I will
WITNESSES
After I had departed on my voyage to Aenus and the boat on which Herodes and | had been drinking had reached Mytilene, the prosecution firstly went on board and conducted a search. On finding the bloodstains they claimed that this was where Herodes killed. But when this did not turn out well for them,
turning
out
to
be
that
of
seizing the men, examined tortured there and then,
the them said
had the
been blood
line
and,
under torture. The first, whom nothing compromising about me.
they The
sheep,
they
abandoned
this
29
30
second they tortured severa! days later, after keeping him under their own control throughout the interval, and it was he who was induced by them falsely to incriminate me. | will produce witnesses to confirm these statements. WITNESSES
You
have
heard
the
evidence
that
the
after
tortured
was
man
this
nature of the examination itself. the notice now length of time; the slave promised doubtless had prosecution the hand the one
freedom, on the other could look for release induced
against was to
by
both
hand from
it was to the prosecution Probably, his sufferings.
considerations
these
to
he hoped to gain his freedom me: be released from the torture, | think
his
make
and you
alone that he the slave was false
charges
his immediate desire know that those who
under torture are biased in favour of those who being examined are so that they say anything with which they torturing, the of do most in these alone, rests salvation Their them. aratify to likely are
especially Ι
had
when
myself
the
victims
of
their
lies
happen
him
to
be
racked
for
ordered
not
not
to
31
On his
be
telling
present. the
If
truth,
32
ὄσως ἄν ἐν αὐτῷ λέγοντα. τἀληϑῆ καταφεύδεσθαι " νῦν δὲ αὐτοὺ
οὐ
ὡς
ἐμοῦ
κατ᾽
τῶν
ἐπιτιμηταὺ
σφύσιν
τούτῳ ἦσαν
ἀπετρέπετο μηδὲν βασανυσταῦ
xual
συμφερόντων.
αὐτοῦς
μὲν
ἕως
οὖν
33
nal
34
ἐγύγνωσκέ μου καταφευσάμενος, τῆς ἐλπύδος μετὰ χρηστῆς ἀποἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐγύγνωσχεν δυυσχυρύξετο «τῷ λόγῳ" τούτῳ nal ἔλεγεν ἐχρῆτο, ἤδη τῇ ἀληϑείᾳ ἐνταῦθ᾽ ϑανούμενος, διαπειραϑέντα ἐμοῦ καταφψεύδεσθαυ. ὅτι πεισϑείη ὑπὸ τούτων
τὰ φευδῆ λέγευν, ὕστερον δὲ τἀληϑῇ λέγοντα. ὠφέλησεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπέκτειναν ἄγοντες τὸν ἄνδρα,
δ᾽ αὐτὸν οὐδέτερα ἢ
ἥσαντες
τοῦς
tats
35
ἄλλοι
οὐ
of
ἄνϑρωποι.
ἐλευϑέρους
μὲν
δυώχκουσυ»
ἐμὲ
πιστεύοντες
ᾧ
μηνυτήν,
τὸν
γὰρ
μὲν
δυδόασυ,
χρήματα
TOL-
τοὐναντίον ἄλλου
τοῦς
μηνυ-
δὲ
δούλους
τοὺς
ἐλευϑεροῦσιν᾽ οὗτοι δὲ Sdvatov τῷ μηνυτῇ τὴν δωρεὰν ἀπέSocav, ἀπαγορευόντων τῶν gUAwy τῶν ἐμῶν μὴ ἀποκτείνευν τὸν ἄνδρα πρὺν [ἄν] ἐγὼ ἔλθουμι. δῆλον οὖν ὅτι οὐ τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ χρεία ἦν αὐτοῦς, ἀλλὰ τῶν λόγων ζῶν μὲν γὰρ ὁ ἀνὴρ διὰ τῆς αὐτῆς βασάνου tdv ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ κατήγορος ἂν ἐγύγνετο τῆς τούτων ἐπυβουλῆς, τεϑνεῶς δὲ τὸν μὲν ἔλεγχον τῆς ἀληϑείας ἀπεστέρευ δυ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ σώματος ἀπολλυμένου, τοῦς δὲ λόγους tots ἐψευσμένους ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνου ὡς ἀληϑέσιν οὖσιν ἐγὼ ἀπόλλυμαι. τούτων δὲ μάρτυράς pou κάλει.
᾿Εχρῆν
36
ἔχοντας
37
γὰρ
αὐτούς.
τὸν μηνυτὴν
αὐτὸν
ws
ἐγὼ
νομύζω,
ἀπελέγχευν
ἐμέ.
ἐνθάδε
παρ-
nal αὐτῷ τούτῳ
χρῆσϑαι ἀγωνίσματι., ἐμφανῆ παρέχοντας τὸν ἄνδρα καὺ μελεύοντας βασανίζευν, ἀλλὰ μὴ ἀποκτεῦνανι. φέρε γὰρ δὴ ποτέρῳ νῦν χρήσονται τῶν λόγων; πότερα ᾧ πρῶτον εἶπεν ἢ ᾧ ὕστερον: nal πότερ᾽ ἀληθῆ ἐστιν, ὅτ᾽ ἔφη με elpydosar τὸ ἔργον ἢ ὅτ᾽ οὐκ ἔφη: ef μὲν γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ εὐκότος ἐξετασϑῆναι δεῦ τὸ πρᾶγμα, of ὕστερου λόγοι ἀληϑέστεροι φαύνονταν, ἐψεύδετο μὲν γὰρ ἐπ᾽ ὠφελείᾳ τῇ ἑαυτοῦ, ἐπειδὴ δὲ τῷ φεύδεσθϑαι ἀπώλλυτο, ἡγήσατο τἀληϑῆ κατειπὼν διὰ τοῦτο σωθῆναι ἄν. τῆς μὲν οὖν ἀληϑείας οὐκ ἦν αὐτῷ τιμωρὸς ὀὐδεύς οὐ γὰρ παρὼν ἐγὼ ἐτύγχανον, rep σύμμαχος ἦν ἡ
38
μὲν
ἀλήϑεια
τῶν
ὑστέρων
λόγων"
τοὺς
δὲ
προτέρους
λόγους
τοὺς κατεφψευσμένους ἦσαν οὐ ἀφανιοῦντες, ὥστε μηδέποτε els τὸ ἀληϑὲς καταστῆναι. καὺ of μὲν GAAoL, nad’ ὧν ἂν μηνύῃ
TUS,
οὗτοι
Ἀλέπτουσι
τοῦς
μηνύοντας
κἀτ'
dpave-
ξουσυν" αὐτοὺ δὲ οὗτου ot ἀπάγοντες nal ζητοῦντες τὸ πρᾶγμα τὸν κατ᾽ ἐμοῦ μηνυτὴν ἠφάνυσαν. καὶ εὖ μὲν ἐγὼ τὸν ἄνδρα ἠφάνισα ἢ μὴ ἤϑελον ἐκδοῦναι, τούτοις ἢ ἄλλον
34
33.
ὠφέλησεν
χρηστῆς
τῆς
35
titulum
add.
36
μὲν
N
37 38
τῷ A corr. 2: τὸ N Apr., «διὰ» ὧν ἂν unvin N: ὧν μηνύη dv A Reiske: αὐτοὺ
om.
A:
Reiske:
χρηστῆς
N
ὠφέλησαν
ἂν del.
Dobree
Reiske
42
τὸ Jernstedt οὗτοι (ante
κλέπτουσι)
doubtless falsely
he
would
accusing
assessors Now
of what as
have
me.
been
As
it
concerned
long
as
he
dissuaded was,
their own
believed
by
they
this
were
very
both
action
from
torturers
and
interests.
he
had
something
to
hope
for
by
falsely incriminating me he persisted in his statement; but when he found he was doomed he at once reverted to the truth and admitted that he had been induced by the prosecution to lie about me. However, neither his persistent attempts at telling lies nor his subsequent telling of the truth helped him. They took the man, the informer on whose evidence they rely to prosecute me, and put him to death, doing the exact opposite of what other men do. For other men reward informers with money if they are free and with freedom if they are slaves. The prosecution repaid their informer with the gift of death, in spite of a protest by my friends that they should not put the man to death until my return. Clearly, it was not his person they
alive
and
been tortured by me in the same way he would have denounced prosecution's plot; but once he was dead not only did he, by the of his person, deprive me of my chance of proving the truth,
the loss but
also
required
|
am
be true.
being
but
his
ruined
evidence:
by
Call me witnesses
his
if
false
to confirm
the
man
had
statements,
remained
which
are
assumed
33
34
35
to
these statements.
In my opinion, they should have produced the informer himself here to prove me guilty and should have used this very action as the
36
basis of their case, producing the man openly and challenging me to examine him under torture. They should not have put him to death. As it is, which of his statements will they use, may I ask? His first or his second? Which is true, the statement that 1 did the deed or
the one that I did not? If we are to judge from probability the second he was lying for his own benefit, statement is evidently the truer: but when he was in danger of being ruined by his lies he thought he be would up stand defended,
were that
no one to he had However, the truth. telling by saved for the truth, as |, whom the truth of his second statement there were those who while not to be present, happened
ready to hide away the slave it could never be corrected.
information
37
quietly
seize
and
make
after his first, Others against away
with
the
false whom
informer;
statement so anyone lays but
in
this
who arrested the slave to discover the case it is the very persons truth who have made away with their informer against me. If | had made away with the man or were refusing to surrender him to the
43
38
39
τυνὰ ἔφευγον ἔλεγχον, αὐτοῦς dv τούτοις ἰσχυροτάτοις εἰς τὰ πράγματα ἐχρῶντο, καὺ ἦν ταῦτα αὐτοῦς μέγυστα τεχμήpla uat’ ἐμοῦ νῦν δέ. ὁπότε αὐτοὺ οὗτοι προκαλουμένων τῶν φύλων τῶν ἐμῶν ταῦτ᾽ ἔφυγον, ἐμοὺ δήπου κατὰ τούτων εἶναι, χρὴ ταὐτὰ ταῦτα τεκμήρια, ὡς οὐκ ἀληθῆ τὴν αὐτίαν ἐπέφερον ἦν Arußvro. . Ἔτι, δὲ nal τάδε λέγουσιν, ὡς ὡμολόγει ὁ ἄνθρωπος βασανιζόμενος συναποκτεῦναυ τὸν ἄνδρα. ἐγὼ δέ φημι ταῦτα
μὲν
40
41
42
οὐ λέγειν
αὐτόν,
ὅτι
δὲ ἐξαγάγου
ἐμὲ nat
τὸν ἄνδρα
ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου, Kal StL ἤδη τεϑνεῶτα αὐτὸν ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ συνανελῶν Hal ἐνθεὺς ele τὸ πλοῖον καταποντώσειε. καύτου σκέψασϑε ὅτι πρῶτον μέν, πρὺν ἐπὺ τὸν τροχὸν ἀναβῆναν, ὁ ἀνὴρ μέχρυ τῆς ἐσχάτης ἀνάγκης τῇ ἀληϑείᾳ ἐχρῆτο καὶ ἀπέλυέξ με τῆς αὐτίας ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐπὺ τὸν τροχὸν ἀνέβη. τῇ ἀνάγκῃ χρώμενος ἤδη κατεψεύδετό pou, βουλόμενος ἀπηλλάχϑαυ Ths βασάνου᾽ ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐπαύσατο βασανιζόμενος, οὐκέτι ἔφη με τούτων εὐργάσϑαυ οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ τὸ τελευταῦον ἀπῴμωξεν ἐμέ te nal αὐτὸν ὡς ddtuws ἀπολλυμένους. οὐ χάριτι, τῇ ἐμῇ -- πῶς γάρ; ὅς γε κατεψεύσατο —, ἀλλ᾽ ἀναγκαζόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀληϑοῦς καὺ βεβαιῶν τοὺς πρώτους λόγους ὡς ἀληSets εὐρημένους. ἔπευτα δὲ ὁ ἕτερος ἄνθρωπος, ὁ ἐν τῷ
αὐτῷ
πλοίῳ
πλέων
ual tapdv
διὰ τέλους
ual συνών
pou,
τῇ
αὐτῇ βασάνῳ βασανυζόμενος τοῦς μὲν πρώτους nal τοῦς tor τερον λόγοις τοῦς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου συνεφέρετο ὡς ἀληϑέσιν οὖσυ, διὰ τέλους γάρ με ἀπέλυε, τοῦς δ᾽ Ext τοῦ τροχοῦ
λεγομένους;
43
{πη
οὕς ἐκεῖνος
ἀνάγκῃ
μᾶλλον
ἢ ἀληϑείᾳ
ἔλεγε,
τούτους δὲ διεφέρετο. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἐκβάντα μ᾽ ἔφη ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου ἀποκτεῦναι τὸν ἄνδρα, nat αὐτὸς ἤδη τεϑνεῶτα συνανελεῦν wor’ ὁ δὲ τὸ παράπαν ἔφη οὐκ ἐκβῆναί ne ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου. Καίτοι τὸ εὐκὸς σύμμαχόν pot ἐστιν. οὐ γὰρ δήπου οὕτω κακοδαύμων ἐγώ. ὥστε τὸ μὲν ἀποκτεῦναι τὸν ἄνδρα προὐνοησάμην μόνος, Eva μου μηδεὺς συνευδείη, ἐν ᾧ μοι ὁ πᾶς κύνδυνος ἦν. ἤδη δὲ πεπραγμένου pou τοῦ ἔργου μάρtupas Hab συμβούλους ἐπουούμην. nal ἀπέϑανε μὲν ὁ ἀνὴρ οὑτωσὺ ἐγγὺς τὴς ϑαλάσσης nal τῶν πλοίων, ὡς ὁ τούτων λόγος ἐστύν" ὑπὸ δὲ ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς ἀποθνήσκων οὔτε Avenpa-
γεν
οὔτ᾽
αὔσϑησιν
38
αὐτοῦς
39
ὡμολόγευ A: ὁμολογεῦ Ν Apr., ἐξάγοι ras. corr.
6.27:
συνελὼν
Al
ἀδίύκως
42
ὁ Ν ὁ
Spengel:
ταῦτα nal
A:
(ante ἐν)
vid.
44
dv
οὐδεμίαν τὰ
N,
om.
Thalheim),
αὐτοὺ
ἠτιῶντο
om.
Kölnous
ἐποίησεν δὴ
Dobree:
οὔτε
τοῦς
ταὐτὰ
ταῦτα
ᾧοντο
ἐν τῇ γῇ Fuhr
coll.
ἐξαγάγοι Baiter: ἐξάγει guvaveAöv καὺ Mätzner:
N
A
N
A
οὖσυ A corr.
elpnuevoLs
ἔφη οὐκ ἐχβῆναζ (ante ἀνὴρ) om. A
ΠῚ
N
1,
...ou Apr.
συνανελεῦν
A:
pe A: οὐδ᾽ ἐκβῆναι μ᾽ ἔφη ovtwot Blass: odtoot
(ὦσι συνελεῦν
N
prosecution
that very strongest
or
were
evading
any
other
enquiry
fact as most significant in the evidence against me. But as
they
would
be
treating
case, and this would be their it is, since they themselves
evaded an enquiry, in spite of a challenge being that same fact should be evidence for me against
made them
by my friends, that the charge
which they were bringing against me was a false one. They further allege that the slave admitted under torture to being my accomplice in the murder. | maintain that he did not say this, but that
had
he
conducted
murdered
Herodes
him
he
and
helped
myself
me
pick
off
him
the
up
boat,
and
that
put
him
in the
and
after
39 |
boat,
and then he threw him into the sea. Yet consider that at first, before being placed on the wheel and until extreme pressure was brought to bear, the man adhered to the truth and declared me innocent. It was
only
when
falsely
When
he
was
placed
incriminated
the
the he
no
to
and be
longer
was
driven
released
that
he
torture.
same
boat,
When
tortured in the same way statements of the slave, for the statement made on the compulsion, not because it said that | left the boat and
and
had
been
that
it
the
any
throughout
affirmed
to
from
and how was first
present
over
wheel
order
done
been
was
on in
of this, but in the end bemoaned the injustice with which both | he were being killed: not that he was trying to do me a favour could he, when he had falsely incriminated me? - rather, he being compelled by the truth and was confirming as true the statement he had made. Then there was the second man, who had travelled on the
had
torture
me,
my
| had
companion.
privy to it - wherein lay my whole danger - and then, with the crime committed, proceed to furnish myself with witnesses and confederates. Furthermore, Herodes was murdered very close to the sea and the boats, according to the story of the prosecution. Was a man who was
being
murdered attention
of
by
but
those
one on
41
42
he confirmed as true the first and last he declared me innocent throughout. But wheel, which the slave had made under was true, he contradicted. For the one killed Herodes, and that he himself had
helped me remove the body after the murder, while the other maintained that I did not leave the boat at all. And indeed, probability supports me. | would hardly have been so crazy as to plan the murder of Herodes on my own to ensure that no one was
the
40
assailant shore
or
not on
45
going
board?
to shout
out
Moreover,
it
or is
attract possible
43
44
οὗτε
45
τοῦς
ἐν
τῷ
πλοίῳ:
καὺ
οὗτε ἐν τῷ TAOLY, νύμτωρ τυϑεμένου els τὸ πλοῦον.
Sav
46
μὴν
τολλῇ
««ἐπὺ»
πλέον
ye
ἀκού-
eLv ἔστι νύκτωρ ἢ mes’ ἡμέραν, ἐπ KTHS ὃ κατὰ πόλιν" καὺ μὴν ἔτι ἐγρηγορότων φασὺν ἐκβῆναι, τὸν ἄνδρα ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου. ἔπευτα ἐν τῇ γῇ μὲν ἀποθανόντος, ἐντυϑεμένου δὲ eis τὸ πλοῦον, οὔτε ἐν τῇ γῇ σημεῖον οὐδὲ αἷμα ἐφάνη
ἐν τουούτῳ
μὲν ἀναυρεϑέντος 7 νύκτωρ ἢ δοκεῖ ἂν ὑμῦν ἄνϑρωπος
πράγματι,
ὧν τά τ᾽
δ᾽ ἐνδύνασ-
ἐν τῇ γῇ ὄντα ἀναξύσαν
nat τὰ ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ droonoyylcau, ἃ οὐδὲ ned’ ἡμέραν «ἄν» tus οἷός τε ἐγένετο, ἔνδον dv αὑτοῦ nal μὴ πεφοβημένος, τὸ παράπαν ἀφανίσαι; ταῦτα, ὦ ἄνδρες, πῶς eludta ἐστίν; Ὃ δὲ «δεῖ» καὺ μάλυστα ἐνθυμεῦσθαν — nat μή μου ἄχθεσθε, ἂν ὑμᾶς noAAdaus ταὐτὰ διδάξω μέγας γὰρ ὁ κύώνδυνός ἐστι, nos’ ὅ τι δ᾽ ἂν ὑμεῦς ὀρϑῶς γνῶτες κατὰ τοῦτο σῴζομαυ.
nad’
ὅ
τι
δ᾽
ἀν
ψευσθῆτε
τἀληϑοῦς.,
— μὴ οὖν ἐξέληται τοῦτο ὑμῶν ἀπέκτειναν, Hal διετείναντο μηδ᾽ ἐμοὺ ἐγγενέσθαι παρόντι 47
cat
αὐτόν
καύτοι
πρὸς
κατὰ
τοῦτο
ἀπόλλυμαι
μηδεύς, ὅτι τὸν μηνυτὴν αὐτὸν μὴ εὐσελθεῦν els ὑμᾶς, ἄξαι τὸν ἄνδρα nal Bacave-
τούτων
ἦν
τοῦτο.
νῦν
δὲ
πριάμενοι
τὸν ἄνδρα, Létqa Ent σφῶν αὐτῶν ἀπέκτειναν. τὸν μηνυτήν, οὔτε τῆς πόλεως ψηφυσαμένης, οὔτε αὐτόχειρα ὄντα τοῦ ἀνδρός. ὃν ἐχρῆν δεδεμένον αὐτοὺς φυλάσσευν, ἢ tots φύλους
τοῦς
καταγνόντες
τὸν ϑάνατον
nal
ἔξεστιν, τῶν
μὲν
ψῆφον ἄνευ
ἄλλων
ἢ
περὺ
᾿Αϑηναίων
λόγων
τῶν
οὗτοι
ὑμετέρους
οὐδ᾽
οὐδένα
εὔπερ
Savdty
ἀποθνήσκουσιν γὰρ
αὐτοὺς ual
ὑμετέρους
δὲ
αὐτοὺ
6 οὐδὲ
ζημιῶσαυ,
τουτουσὺ
αὐτοὺ δικασταὺ ἀποκτείναντες,
παραδιδόασυν
πατρίους.
τοῦς
νῦν
ἀπεκτείνατε"
ἐκεύνου
φώρῳ
ἀλλὰ
ἄρχουσι,
γενέσθϑαν.
τοῦ ἀνδρὸς
δὲ ἔργων δεσπότας
ληφϑῶσυν,
tots
αὐτοῦ
ὥσατε γενέσθαι, τῶν καύτοι οὐδὲ of τοὺς προσηκόντων,
49
ἐξεγγυῆσαι,
καὶ
πόλευ 48
ἐμοῦς
παραδοῦναι,
κριτὰς
NEL-
γύγνεσθϑε. ἐὰν ἐπ᾽ αὐτο-
ὑπ᾽
αὐτῶν
τῇ ἀρχῇ
μαρτυρεῦν
κατὰ ἔξεστι,
τῶν
νόμους δούλῳ
κατὰ τοῦ ἐλευϑέρου τὸν φόνον, ual τῷ δεσπότῃ, ἄν δοκῇ, ἐπεξελθεῦν ὑπὲρ τοῦ δούλου. καὶ ἡ φῆφος Loov EVvutar τῷ δοῦλον ἀποχλτεύναντι Hal τῷ ἐλεύϑερον, εὐκός tou nal ψῆφον γενέσϑαν περὺ αὐτοῦ Av, καὶ μὴ ἄκριτον ἀποϑανεῦν αὐτὸν ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν. ὥστε πολλῷ dv ὑμεῖς ξυκαυότεοον χρύνουσθε ἢ ἐγὼ νῦν φεύγω ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν ἀδίκως. Σχοπεῦτο δή, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ἐκ τοῦν Aéyouw τοῦν ἀνδροῦν ἑκατέροιν τοῖν βασανισθέντοιν τὸ δίκαιον καὶ τὸ etude. ὁ 44 45 46
«πὸ» πλέον ἀποσπογγίσαι
γε A:
δεῦ
Thalheim,
hic
add.
ἀκούειν Schömann: ἀνασπογγίσαι N post
rnArau yr ὠγνογῦν ay add. Baiter
μάλιστα
add.
A
corr.
2
ἐνθυμεῦσϑαι Apr. (supra al erasum εὐ, ὑνθυμεῦσϑε N ταὐτὰ Reiske: ταῦτα ἐξέληται A corr. 2: ἐξελεῖται Apr.
48
ἀποθνήσκουσιν τὸν ὑμεῖς
ἐλεύϑερον N
N: θνήσκουσιν burt:
Ἀρύνουσ,
46
A
τῷ ἐλεύδιοον
δικαιότερον vulg.:
uptvedde
A:
Reiske:
διμαιότερον
N
to
hear
over
a
far
greater
distance
by
night
than
by
day,
on
a
beach
than in a city. Moreover, they admit that the passengers were still awake when Herodes left the boat. Again, although he was murdered on shore and placed in the boat no trace or bloodstain was found either on shore or in the boat, despite the fact that it was at night that he was placed in the
night boat.
that he Do you
was picked up think that any
and man
45
at in
such circumstances would have been able to smooth out the traces on shore and wipe away the marks in the boat, clues which a calm and collected man could not have completely removed even by day? How probable is this, gentlemen? i
thing
one
you
will
right
the
which
forgive is
danger
my
For
to
is
There
hope
great
to to
the
to
prevent
him
informer, murderer,
and
put
him
my
I my
repeatedly
consider
tell
you
above
the
safety
depends
on
how
ruin
depends
on
how
cause you to then, let no one, informer to death and that they
coming
to
and
you
to make
him under torture me to do to allow
him and examine take advantage their own
slave
and
while
decision,
of the truth detrauded put the prosecution the
effort
if
indeed
must
you
me
to
death
although the state they should What
entirely
on
did not decree have done was
far
-
all
same
you
are
forget that used every
for me
it impossible
on my return. Yet it was so, Instead, they bought
their it to
own
46
come
you
far
and
thing.
initiative,
47
their
he the man's nor was him in custody, keep
or to surrender him to my friends on security, or to hand him over to your magistrates, so that his fate might be decided by a court. As it was, you sentenced the slave to death on your own authority and it is not permitted even to an allied state to when him, executed of the the consent without anyone on penalty death the inflict. fit to let the present court be judges You thought people. Athenian but you pass judgment on his acts yourselves. Yet of his statements, in caught been and masters their murdered have slaves who even they are the act are not put to death by the victim's own relatives:
handed over If country.
to the authorities according permissible to it is indeed
to the ancient give evidence
laws for
of your a slave
if he for a master, and murdered, being of his a free man ayainst for the murder of his slave, and for a fit, to seek vengeance thinks the murderer of a slave as effectively as it can the court to sentence this slave that reasonable surely it was man, of a free murderer had a public trial instead of being put to death by you have should to be standing trial far more deserve you Thus a hearing. without than I, who am now being prosecuted by you so unjustly. from the statements of the two men who gentlemen, Consider also, The probability. by justice and is supported which tortured, were
47
48
49
μὲν γὰρ περὺ 50
51
52
δύο
λόγω
ἔλεγε"
δὲ
οὐκ
ἔφη"
ὁ
ἐμοῦ
οὗτος
ἠπίστατο.
εὔπου
τὰ
οὐδέν,
OL
τῷ
τοτὲ
μὲν
ὅτι
τούτοις διὰ
τῇ
αὐτῇ
τὸ
εἴρηκε
νῦν
οὐδέπω
βασάνῳ
τότε
παύσοιτο
δοκοῦντα. ποτέρῳ
τέλους
φάσκοντι
Bacavızönevos.
τὸν
αὐτὸν
τοτὲ
δ᾽
ἀεὺ
ot;
στρεβλούμενος-
ὁπότε
οὖν
πιστεῦ-
εὐκός
λόγον
ἀλλὰ
ἐστι
AEYoVTL,
καὺ
ἄνευ
ἢ
τῷ
βασάνου
του-
αὐτῆς of τοὺς αὐτοὺς atet περὺ τῶν αὐτῶν λόγους λέγοντες πιστότεροί Etat τῶν διαφερομένων σφύσιν αὐτοῦς. ἔπευτα δὲ ual ἐκ τῶν λόγων τῶν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου μερὺς ἑκατέρῳ Can ἐστί, τούτοις μὲν τὸ φάσκειν, ἐμοὺ δὲ τὸ μὴ φάσκειν" [ἔκ τε ἀμφοῦν τοῦν ἀνδροῦν τοῦν BaoavLosevroLv’ ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἔφησεν, ὁ δὲ διὰ τέλους ἔξαρνος ἦν. ual μὲν δὴ τὰ ἐξ ὔσου γενόμενα τοῦ φεύγοντός ἐστυ μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ διώκοντος, εὔπερ ye nal τῶν φήφων ὁ ἀριϑμὸς ἐξ ὕσου γενόμενος τὸν φεύγοντα μᾶλλον ὠφελεῖ ἢ τὸν διώκοντα. Ἢ μὲν βάσανος, ὦ ἄνδρες, τοναύτη γεγένηται, ἧ οὗτοι πιστεύοντες εὖ εὐδέναι φασὺν ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἀποθανόντα τὸν
καύτοι
τὸ παράπαν
ἔγωγ᾽
dv εἴ tu συνήδη
ἐμαυτῷ
wat εὖ TÜ μοι τοιοῦτον elpyacto, ἠφάνισ᾽ ἄν ta ἀνθρώπω, ὅτε ἐπ᾿ ἐμοὺ ἦν τοῦτο μὲν εἰς τὴν Alvov ἀπάγειν ἅμα ἐμοί, τοῦτο δὲ els τὴν ἤπευρον διαβιβάσαι, καὶ μὴ ὑπολεύπεσθαι μηνυτὰς κατ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ τοὺς συνειδότας. φασὺ δὲ γραμματεύ-
διον
εὑρεῖν
Ἀτεύναυμι
55
φλαῦρον
εὐργάσϑαν
ἔφη με
μὲν
τοτὲ
ἐλεύϑερος
δὲ
τοῦτο μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἦν αὐτῷ ελευϑερίαν προτεύναντας ὥσπερ τὸν ἕτερον πεῦσαυ τοῦτο δὲ μετὰ τοῦ ἀληϑοῦς ἐβούλετο μυνδυνεύων πάσχειν ὃ TL δέοι. énet τό γε συμφέρον nat
ἄνδρα.
53
δοῦλος τοτὲ
ἔργον,
ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ, τὸν
ἄνδρα.
ὃ ἔπεμπον
καύτοι
TU
ἔδει
ἐγὼ Avatvy, μὲ
ὡς ἀπο-
γραμματείύδιον
πέμπειν, αὐτοῦ συνευδότος τοῦ τὸ γραμματεύδιον φέροντος; ὥστε τοῦτο μὲν σαφέστερον αὐτὸς ἔμελλεν ἐρεῦν ὁ εὐργασμένος. τοῦτο δὲ οὐδὲν ἔδει κρύπτειν αὐτόν᾽ ἃ γὰρ μὴ οἷόν τε εὐδέναι τὸν φέροντα. ταῦτ᾽ ἄν τις μάλιστα συγγράψας πέμψευεν. ἔπειτα δὲ ὃ τι μὲν μακρὸν etn πρᾶγμα, τοῦτο 49 50
δύο Ν: δύω ἃ προτεύναντας Reiske: παύσαυτο
51
Con ἐστὺ A corr. 2: Uso. (ν vel Coov εὖ N, ton ἂν ein Thalheim corr. 2: τοῦτον μέντοι N Apr. Hirschig
52
53
προτεύίνοντας
γενόμενος
A:
o)
Madvig:
εὖ. (ἢ vel σὴ) Apr., τούτοις μὲν TO A ἔκ te... ἦν del.
γιγνόμενος
N
γεγένηται N: ἐγένετο A συνήδη Jernstedt: συνήδευν εἴ τί μοι] el τ᾽ ἐμοὺ N Apr., el τι ἐμοὺ corr. 2 ἀπάγειν A corr. 2: ἀπάγων N Apr. γραμματεύδυιον
Bekker:
post
in
φέροντος
γραμματύδυον
libris
insunt:
- . . ἐμοὺ κἀκεύνῳ; quae verba Aldus αὐτὸς Reiske: adtots αὐτόν Aldus: αὐτά 54
παύσουτο
τοῦτο
(ante
μὲν)
A
corr.
48
2:
Libri
τύνος
γε
(57 init.) ἐρεῦν A:
τούτου
N Apr.
ubique δὴ
ἕνεκα
transp. edpetv N
slave gave two accounts: another that | did not. anything torture. freedom,
at one time he said But the free man
that | did the has not even
deed, at yet said
compromising about me, though he was subject ed to the same For on the one hand he could not be influenced by offers of like the other one, and on the other hand he was willing,
50
with truth on his side, to risk suffering whatever he must. Yet he too knew what was advantageous to him, that he would put an end to his torture just as soon as he said what the prosecu tion wanted.
Which
of
firmly
adhered
one
the
moment
two,
to
made
then,
the a
have
same
we
reason
statement
statement
and
to
believe,
throughout,
at
the
next
or
the
the
denied
one
one
it?
who
who
Why,
at
even
without such torture, those who consistently keep to one statement about one set of facts are more to be trusted than those who contradict themselves. Then again, of the slave's statements half are in
favour
‘ support
of
the
one
side,
half
prosecution,
in
his
favour
denials
of
the
support
me.
combined statements of both men tortured: other consistently denied. ] And, of course,
the
advantage
of
the
the
fact
an
equal
that
defence
rather
division
of
than the
other:
his
(Similarly
the one an equal
the
of
a
with
the
affirmed, the division is to
prosecution,
votes
jury
in view benefits
of the
defence rather than the prosecution. Such was the examination under torture, gentlemen, relying on which the prosecution say they are convinced that | murdered Herodes, Yet if I had had anything at all on my conscience, if I had committed such a crime, | would have got rid of the two men when it was in my power either to take them with me to Aenus or to ship
them
to
the
mainland,
instead
facts to inform against me, The prosecution also allege I
was
aoing
to
send
to
of
that
leaving
they
behind
found
Lycinus,
stating
generally
messages
men
on
that
|
who
board had
51
affirmations
knew
a note
killed
52
the
which
53
Herodes.
But why did I need to send a note when the bearer was himself my accomplice? Not only was the man who did the deed likely to tell the story more clearly himself, but also there was no need to conceal the message
to
the
from
him,
It
bearer
that
are
sent
down
a
compelled
to
write
is
in long
writing. message,
49
which
Then as
cannot
again, its
length
be
a man would
disclosed
would
be
prevent
54
μὲν dv τις ἀναγκασϑεύη γράφαι τῷ μὴ διαμνημονεύειν τὸν ἀπαγγέλλοντα ὑπὸ πλήϑους. τοῦτο δὲ βραχὺ Av ἀπαγγεῦλαυ, ὅτι τέϑνηκεν ὁ ἀνήρ. ἔπευτα ἐνθυμεῖσϑε ὅτι διάφορον ἦν τὸ γραμματείύδιον τῷ βασανιυσϑέντυ» διάφορος δ᾽ ὁ ἄνϑρωπος τῷ
55
γραμματευδύῳ᾽
κατ᾽
ἐμοῦ,
τότε
ἵνα
ταύτην
δυον; 56
ὁ
μὲν
γὰρ
βασανυξόμενος
αὐτὸς
ἔφη
ἀπο-
Ἀτεῦναυ, τὸ δὲ γραμματεύδυον ἀνουχϑὲν ἐμὲ τὸν ἀποκτεύναντα ἐμήνυεν. καύτου ποτέρῳ χρὴ πιστεῦσαι; τὸ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτον οὐχ ηὗρον ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ ζητοῦντες τὸ γραμματεύδιον, ὕστερον δέ. τότε μὲν γὰρ οὔπω οὕτως ἐμεμηχάνητο αὐτοῖς" ἐπευδὴ δὲ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὁ πρότερος βασανυσϑεὺς οὐδὲν ἔλεγε ἐπευδὴ δὲ νυζόμενος
ἦν
ἔχουεν
ἐμοὺ
els
τὸ
τὴν
αὐτίαν
πλοῦον
τὰ ἀναγνωσθέντα.
εἰ
γὰρ
τὸ
Ὑραμματεύ-
ἐπιφέρευν᾽
ἀνεγνώσθη τὸ γραμματεύδιον ual οὐ συνεφέρετο τῷ γραμματευδίῳ;
ἀφανύσαι
πείσειν νήσαντο κάλευ.
εὐσβάλλουσυν
ὁ ὕστερος βασαοὐκέτι οἷόν τ᾽
ἡγήσαντο
τὸν “ἄνδρα
ἀπὸ πρώτης μκαταψεύδεσθαζ μου, οὐκ ἄν ποτ᾽ ἐμηχατὰ ἐν τῷ γραμματευδίῳ. καί pou μάρτυρας τούτων MAPTYPEE
57
58
59
Τίνος γε δὴ Evena τὸν ἄνδρα ἔκτεινα; οὐδὲ γὰρ ἔχϑρα οὐδεμία ἦν ἐμοὺ κἀκεύνῳ. λέγευν δὲ τολμῶσιν ὡς ἐγὼ χάρυτυ τὸν ἄνδρα dnduterva. καὺ τίς πώποτε χαριζόμενος ἑτέρῳ τοῦτο εὐργάσατο; olyau μὲν γὰρ οὐδένα, ἀλλὰ Let μεγόλην τὴν ἔχϑραν ὑπάρχειν τῷ τοῦτο μέλλοντι ποιήσειν, καὶ τὴν πρόνοιαν ἐκ πολλῶν εἶναι φανερὰν ἐπυβουλευομένην. ἐμοὺ δὲ κἀκείνῳ οὐκ ἦν ἔχϑρα οὐδεμία. εἶεν, ἀλλὰ δείσας wept ἐμαυτοῦ μὴ αὐτὸς map’ ἐκεύνου τοῦτο πάϑοιμι : καὶ γὰρ ἂν τῶν τοιούτων ἕνεκα tus ἀναγκασϑείη τοῦτο ἐργάσασϑαι. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδέν μου τουοῦτον ὑπῆρκτο els αὐτόν. ἀλλὰ χοήματα Eperλον λήψεσθαυ ἀποκτεύνας αὐτόν; ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἦν αὐτῷ. ἀλλὰ σοὺ μᾶλλον ἐγὼ τὴν πρόφασιν ταύτην ἔχουμ᾽ ἂν εὐκότως μετὰ τῆς ἀληϑείας ἀναθεῦναυι, StL χρημάτων Eveua Intels ἐμὲ ἀποκτεῦναυι, μᾶλλον ἢ σὺ ἐμοὺ ἐκεῦνον᾽ καὶ πολὺ ἄν δυκαυότερον GAOUNS «σὺ» τοῦ φόνου ἐμὲ ἀποκτείνας ὑπὸ τῶν ἐμοὺ προσηκόντων, ἢ ἐγὼ ὑπὸ σοῦ nal τῶν ἐκ ώνου dvaynalwv. ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ σοῦ φανερὰν τὴν πρόνοιαν εἰς ἐμὲ ἐπὸδεύκνυμυ, σὺ δ᾽ ἐμὲ ἐν ἀφανεῖ λόγῳ ζητεῖς ἀπολέσαι. 54
μὲν (ante ἄν) om. A τῷ διάφορον Reiske: διαφέρον γραμματείω
55
N:
57 58
πρότερον
γραμματίωῳ
A
εὖρον
γραμματίξιον
οὔπω
A:
οὕτω
N
N,
γραμμά-
πρότερος
A
TUvog . . . κἀκεώνῳ) cf. εἶναι φανερὰν A: φανερὰν ἀλλὰ χρήματα. . . αὐτῷ, leguntur,
59
N,
τιον A ηὖρον Jernstedt:
μὴ A corr. 2: τοῦ μὴ N Apr. γραμματυδίῳ Reiske:
huc
transp.
Dobree
σὺ évot A corr.: σὺν ἐμοὺ σοῦ (post yap) Blass: σοι 50
ad 53 οὐδὲ Aldus: cite εἶναι N quae in libris ante εἶεν N Apr. δ᾽ ἐμὲ
σὺ add. Aldus Blass: δέ με
the
bearer
remembering
"The man the slave
under
torture
that
when
opened
declared
believe? The first search, this scheme. nothing
have
and the
had
been
slave
he
But
had
this
one
me
was
brief enough
to
|
was
the
murder
the
murderer.
to deliver: contradicted slave stated
himself,
but
Which
the
are
note we
to
did not find the note on board during the a later one - they had not yet then devised until the man who was tortured first said
that
charge
committed
that
prosecution but during It was not
against
this
read with
it.
is dead". Moreover, bear in mind that the note who was tortured, and the slave the note. The
they
bring
dropped
against
the
me.
note
But
on
board,
when
the
in
note
order
had
to
been
the second witness, under torture, persisted in disagreeing note, it was no longer possible to suppress the message that
read
to
lie
the message
in
it.
about
If they
me
in the
had
from
note.
the
thought
first
that
they
Call me witnesses
they
would
would
never
to confirm
induce
have
these
55
56
the
devised
facts.
WITNESSES
Now even
what
any
was
bad
audacity
to
suggest
ever
done
this
must from
exist many
in
Herodes
that
|
well
be
motive
to
that
driven
to
|
oblige
myself
afraid
in murdering
between
the man indications
and
was
my
feeling
him
and
murdered
another?
No
Herodes?
me.
him
The
as
one,
I
For
there
prosecution
a
favour.
But
am
sure.
Bitter
was
not
have
the
who
has
who intends to do this and it must that the design is growing. But
there
of
being
do
this
was
no
bad
murdered for
such
feeling.
by
him
a motive.
Very
myself? No,
|
well. had
feeling
be clear between
Then
For no
was
it
a man
might
such
fears
with regard to him. Then was | going to enrich myself by murdering him? No, he had no money. Indeed, | could more reasonably and with truth assign this motive to you, that you are attempting to secure my death for money, than you could assign it to me in murdering Herodes. You might much more justly be convicted of murder by my relatives for killing me than | by you and the family of Herodes. For | can show clear proof of your scheme against me, whereas you are seeking to make an end of me by a tale which cannot be proved.
51
57
58
59
60
ταῦτα μὲν ὑμῦν λέγω, ὡς αὐτῷ μου πρόφασιν οὐδεμίαν εἶχεν ἀποκτεύναι τὸν ἄνδρα' δεῦ δέ με καὺ ὑπὲρ Λυκύνου ἀπολογήσασϑαι» ὡς ἔουκεν. ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ μόνον, ὡς οὐδ᾽ ἐκεῦνον εὐκότως αὐτυῶνταυ. «λέγω, τούνυν ὑμῦν ὅτι ταὐτὰ ὑπῆρχεν αὐτῷ εἰς ἐκεῦνον ἅπερ ἐμοί" οὔτε γὰρ χρήLata
61
ἦν
αὐτῷ
ὁπόϑεν
κύνδυνος
αὐτῷ
ἐκείώνου.
τελμήρυον
ἀπολέσαι
ἐξὸν
ἦλθεν
ἐπὶ
ἔλαβεν
ἀποκτείνας
οὐδεὺς
δὲ
γὰρ
ὅντινα
μέγυστον
αὐτῷ
στήσαντι μετὰ τῶν εὔπερ προωφεύλετο διαπράξασθαυ εὖ ἐπέδειξεν
dv
ὑπῆρχεν
ἐν
ὡς
ἀγῶνι,
ἐκεῦνον,
δυέφευγεν οὐκ
nal
οὔτε
ἀποθανόντος
ἐβούλετο
κυνδύνῳ
αὐτὸν
μεγάλῳ
νόμων τῶν ὑμετέρων ἀπολέσαι αὐτῷ κακόν, καὶ τό τε ἴδιον
κατα-
ἐκεῖνον, τὸ αὑτοῦ
nat τῇ πόλευ τῇ ὑμετέρᾳ χάρυν χαταϑέσϑας, ἀδικοῦντα ἐκεῖνον, οὐκ ἠξίωσεν. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽
τοῦτον.
καύτοι
καλλίων
γε
ἦν
ὁ κύνδυνος
αὐτῷ...
ΜΑΡΤΥΡΕΣ
᾿Αλλὰ γὰρ δυνεύευν
αὐτὸν
ἐπεβούλευεν,
63
ἐνταῦϑα περί
μὲν ἀφῆχεν τε αὐτοῦ
ἐν ᾧ γνωσθεὺς
attév:
καὺ
οὗ δὲ Edel
mept
κιν-
ἐμοῦ,
ἐνταῦϑα
μὲν
ἐμὲ τῆς
dv ἀπεστέρει
[4
62
δ᾽
πατρίδος, ἀπεστέρει δὲ αὐτὸν ὑἑερῶν καὶ ὁσίων xual τῶν ἄλλων ἄπερ μέγυστα nal περὺ πλείστου ἐστὺν ἀνθρώποις. Ἔπειτα δ᾽ εὐ καὺ ὡς μάλυστα ἐβούλετο αὐτὸν ὁ Λυκῦνος τεϑνάναι, — εἶμι. γὰρ nal Ent τὸν τῶν κατηγόρων λόγον —, οὗ αὐτὸς οὐκ ἠξίου αὐτόχευρ γενέσθαι, τοῦτο τὸ ἔργον ἐγώ ποτ᾽ dv ἐπεύσϑην ἀντ᾽ ἐκείνου ποιῆσαι; πότερα ὡς ἐγὼ μὲν A τῷ σώματι ἐπιτήδειος διακυνδυνεύειν, ἐκεῦνος δὲ χρήμασι τὸν ἐμὸν κύνδυνον ἐκπρίασθαυ; οὐ δῆτα᾽ τῷ μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἦν
χρήματα,
ἐμοὺ
δὲ ἦν᾽
ἀλλ᾽
αὐτὸ
τούτου
τὸ ἐναντίον
ἐκεῦνος
τοῦτο θᾶσσον ἂν ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἐπεύσϑη κατά γε τὸ elude ἢ ἐγὼ ὑπὸ τούτου, ἐπεὺ ἐκεῦνός γ᾽ ἑαυτὸν οὐδ᾽ ὑπερήμερον γενόμενον ἑπτὰ μνῶν δυνατὸς ἦν λύσασϑαι, ἀλλ᾽ of φύλοι αὐτὸν ἐλύσαντο.
nat
μὲν
δὴ
nal
τῆς
χρείας
τῆς
ἐμῆς
xual
τῆς
Auxtvov τοῦτο ὑμῦν μέγυστον τεκμήριόν ἐστιν, ὅτι οὐ σφόδρα ἐχρώμην ἐγὼ λυκύνῳ φύλῳ, ὡς πάντα ποιῆσαι dv τὰ ἐκείνῳ δοκοῦντα οὐ γὰρ δήπου ἑπτὰ μὲν μνᾶς οὐκ ἀπέτευσα ὑπὲρ. αὐτοῦ δεδεμένου nat λυμαυνομένου, κύώνδυνον δὲ τοσottoy ἀράμενος ἄνδρα ἀπέκτεινα δι᾽ ἐκεῖνον, 60
εὖχεν ἀποχλτεῦναι scripsi: ἔχει ἀποκτεῦναι τἀποκτεῦναυ Kayser δὲ om. N
61
post
ὁ κύνδυνος
deesse
ft.
παρέξομαι
plura
δὲ
desunt
62
οὗ
63
4 Jernstedt:
Blass:
οὐδὲ
ἦν
αὐτῷ de
lacunam ind. τούτων
τοὺς
Blass, μάρτυρας
AN,
εἶχε
cum putaret vel
simile;
(Thalheim)
N,
οὐ
αὐτὸ
γὰρ
A
τούτου
mept
(ante
τὸ ἐναντίον
ἐμοῦ)
om.
scripsi
(ef. Lys. 6.36): αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐναντίον N Apr., αὐτὸ τὸ ἐναντίον corr. 2 ἀπέτευισα Blass: ἀπέτισα A, ἐπέτισα Ν ὑπὲρ Meier: περὺ
52
A
This | can assure you, | personally can have had no motive for murdering Herodes. But | must also, it seems, clear Lycinus as well as myself, by showing that in his case too their charge is unreasonable. | assure you, then, that his position with regard to
60
Herodes was the same as mine. Neither had he any means of enriching himself by murdering Herodes, nor was there any danger threatening him from which he hoped to escape by Herodes' death. But here is
the
greatest
though
it
proof
was
that
he
possible
did
for
not
desire
Lycinus
to
to make put
an
end
Herodes
61
of Herodes:
on
trial
and
in
great danger, and with the help of your laws make an end of the man, had redress for some injury been owing to him, thereby obtaining his own revenge and winning favour with your city by proving him a criminal, this he did not wish to do. He did not even take legal proceedings against him, even though he was running a more honourable risk &y bringing Herodes into court than by engaging me to murder him. Call me witnesses to confirm these facts.> WITNESSES So alone,
we
himself he
| am
to in
he
even
now
understand the
matter
plotted and if
me
all
paying
capable for
the
of
of
risks
on
this
he
was
Herodes,
was
hold
as
count bound
even
country
men
adopting
most
eager
as
I
ran?
all No,
risks
the
sacred could
|
had
to probability this crime than
when release his own obtain even procured friends his minae: seven
and money
left
be
of
62
both
if discovered of
and for
all
divine
precious. Herodes
to
-
prosecution
behalf this deed of | was it that Was
he and
he would | by him,
the
Herodes
endanger
himself
standpoint
the
he to
though
and
persuaded to do on his to be the perpetrator?
running
according the contrary, induced by me to commit
that which my
that
Lycinus
actually
| ever have been refused himself he
physically
in
against
deprived
rights
again,
-
should which of
me have
human
Then
die
and
would
and
are
whereas
financially he
had
capable none.
On
sooner have been since he could not
for arrears imprisoned In fact, release. his
of debt of this is the
indication for you of the relationship between Lycinus and clearest myself, that my friendship with him was hardly close enough to make For surely | did not refuse to pay he wanted. me do everything seven minae for him when he was suffering hardships in prison, and then run so great a risk and kill a man to oblige him.
53
63
"INS μὲν οὖν οὐκ αὐτὸς
64
65
altuds
etuL
τοῦ πράγματος
οὐδὲ
ἐκεῦνος, ἀποδέδεικται καϑ᾽ ὅσον ἐγὼ δύναμαι μάλυστα. τούτῳ δὲ χρῶνται πλείστῳ «τῷ» λόγῳ οὗ κατήγορου, ὅτυ ἀφανής ἐστιν ὁ ἀνήρ, Hal ὑμεῦς Cows περὺ τούτου αὐτοῦ ποϑεῦτε ἀκοῦσαι. el μὲν οὖν τοῦτο εὐκάζειν με Set, ἐξ ὕσου τοῦτό ἐστι καὶ ὑμῦν nal ἐμοί" οὔτε γὰρ buets αὔτιοι τοῦ ἔργου ἐστὲ οὔτε ἐγώ" el δὲ δεῖ τοῦς ἀληϑέσι χρῆσϑαυ, τῶν εὐργασμένων τινὰ ἐρωτώντων" ἐκείνου γὰρ ἄριστ᾽ dv πύϑοιντο. ἐμοὺ μὲν γὰρ τῷ μὴ εὐργασμένῳ τοσοῦτον τὸ μακρότατον τῆς ἀποκρίσεώς ἐστιν, ὅτι οὐκ εὔργασμαι " τῷ δὲ πουήσαντιυ ῥᾳδία ἐστὺν ἡ ἀπόδειξις, καὶ μὴ ἀποδεύξαντι εὖ εὐκάσαι. ol
μὲν
γὰρ
πανουργοῦντες
ἅμα
τε
πανουργοῦσι
καὺ
πρόφασυν
εὑρίσκουσι τοῦ ἀδικήματος" τῷ δὲ μὴ εἰργασμένῳ χαλεπὸν nept τῶν ἀφανῶν εὐκάζειν. οἶμαι 6’ dv nal ὑμῶν ἕκαστον, εἴ τύς τινα ἔροιτο 6 τι μὴ τύχοι elds, τοσοῦτον ἄν eit‘ety, ὅτι οὐκ οὔδεν᾽ ef δέ TUS περαυτέρω τι κελεύου λέγευν, 66
ἐν πολλῇ ἂν ἔχεσθαι
ὑμᾶς ἀπορίᾳ
δοκῶ.
μὴ τούνυν
ὁποὺ
νεύμητε τὸ ἄπορον τοῦτο, ἐν ᾧ μηδ᾽ av αὐτοὺ εὐποροῦτε᾽ μηδὲ ἐὰν εὖ εὐκάζω, ἐν τούτῳ pou ἀξιοῦτε τὴν ἀπόφευξιν elvar, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξαρκεύτω μου ἐμαυτὸν ἀναίτιον ἀποδεῖξαι τοῦ
πράγματος. 67
68
εὐκάζειν
69
ἐν τούτῳ
οὖν ἀναύτιός
εὐμυ,
οὐκ
ἐὰν
[μὴ]
ἐξ-
evew ὅτῳ τρόπῳ ἀφανής ἐστιν ἢ ἀπόλωλεν ἁνήρ, ἀλλ᾽ eb μὴ προσήκει μου μηδὲν ὥστ᾽ ἀποκτεῦναι αὐτόν. “Hon δ᾽ ἔγωγε καὺ πρότερον ἀκοῇ ἐπύσταμαυ γεγονός, τοῦτο μὲν τοὺς ἀποθανόντας, τοῦτο δὲ τοὺς ἀποκτεύναντας οὐχ εὑρεϑέντας" οὔκουν ἂν καλῶς ἔχου, el τούτων δέοι τὰς αἰτίας ὑποσχεῦν τοὺς συγγενομένους. πολλοὺ δέ γ᾽ ἤδη σχόντες ἑτέρων πμαγμάτων attdas, πρὺν τὸ σαφὲς οὐτῶν γνωσθῆναι. προαπώλοντο. αὐτύκα ᾿Εφιάλτην τὸν ὑμέτερον πολύτην οὐδέπω νῦν ηὕρηνται οὗ ἀποκτεύναντες" et οὖν τις HEVov τοὺς συνόντας ἐκεύνῳ
οὕτινες
ἦσαν
of ἀποκτείναντες
᾿Εφιάλτην,
cl δὲ
μή, ἐνόχους εὖναυ τῷ φόνῳ, οὐκ ἂν καλῶς εὖχε τοῖς συνοὔσυν. ἔπευτα οὗ ye ᾿Εφιάλτην ἀποκτείναντες οὐκ ἐξήτησαν τὸν νεκρὸν ἀφανίσαι, οὐδ᾽ ἐν τούτῳ κυνδυνεύειν μηνῦσαι τὸ πρᾶγμα, ὥσπερ olde φασὺῦν ἐμὲ τῆς μὲν ἐπιβουλῆς οὐδένα μουνωνὸν πουήσασϑαυ τοῦ ϑανάτου, τῆς δ᾽ ἀναιρέσεως. τοῦτο 6’ ἐντὸς οὐ πολλοῦ χρόνου mats ἐζήτησεν οὐδὲ δώdena ἔτη γεγονὼς τὸν δεσπότην ἀποκτεῖναι καὶ εὐ μὴ 64 65
τῷ add. Frohberger με δεῦ N: δεῦ pe A ἄρυστ᾽ Av Hirschig: ἄριστα μαμρότατον N: μακρότερον A εἰργασμένῳ (ante χαλεπὸν) A: ἐργασαμένῳ N elnelv A corr. 2: εἶπεν N Apr. τι
(ante
ἔχεσθαι
μελεύοι)
ὑμᾶς A:
N:
om.
ὑμᾶς
εὐπορῆτε
A
κελεύοι
ἔχεσϑαι
66
εὐποροῦτε
67 68
Sauppe: ἀνὴρ προσήκει A: προσήσκεν οὔκουν A corr. 2: οὐκοῦν N Apr. ηὕρηνται, Jernstedt: εὕρηνται
5}
Ν
μὴ
Reiske:
κελεύει
A del.
Reiske
N
ἁνὴρ
I
have
proved,
then,
to the
best
of my
ability
that
both
Lycinus
and | are innocent. However, the prosecution rely very heavily on this argument that Herodes has disappeared and doubtless you are desirous of hearing an explanation of this very point. Now if I must conjecture about this your guess is as good as mine, for neither are you guilty of the crime nor am I. But if it is necessary to get at the truth let the prosecution ask one of the criminals, for they would learn it best from him. The utmost that I who am not guilty can reply is that 1 am not quilty; whereas a full revelation of the facts is easy
for
the
criminal,
Criminals it;
but
it
or
no
sooner
is
difficult
if
not
a
commit for
a
an
he
did
not
know.
find
with
this
difficulty
well
and
do
guess.
if you
Let
a
which
not
make
my
be
enough
it
murdering
in
on met
to
conjecture
man
for
were
then
serious
not
acquittal
me
to
this point, his end. but
not on
told you
good
guess.
explanation about
of
unknown
So
more do
yourselves on
my
| think
not
my
you
present
would
come
making
a
innocence
on my discovering my having no motive
of the
me
from
report
it
others
and
the
already
unfair if those who had heen in for their murder. Many, again,
of
sometimes
has
would be the blame
crimes
victim,
that
the
good
crime,
how Herodes whatever for
have
happened
murderer,
lost
their have
their
has
in
not
the
past
been
company had already been
lives
before
that
found;
of the
body.
a more, Once master, his murder
old, years twelve not slave, cried out, his master If, when
55
recently he had
67
it
to bear accused
the
truth
For example, the murderers of one of your them became known. about never to this day been discovered, and have Ephialtes, citizens, own had if anyone unfair to his companions been have therefore it would pain of under were his assassins who conjecture to them required the murderers held guilty of the murder themselves, Moreover, being for fear of the to get rid of the body, no attempt of Ephialtes made no one my they say | made whereas risk of pubiicity, accompanying the in so did but Herodes, of death the planning in accomplice
disposing
66
off
him.
know
the
to say
depend
prove
a
an
65
of you also, if asked would say as much, that
difficulty.
even
least
invent
sometimes
of
at
they
that each one happen to know,
in
which depends disappeared or Ι
But
yourselves
revelation than
innocent
circumstances. | am sure something which he did not would
full crime
64
to tried not been
68
69
φοβηϑείς,
ὡς ἀνεβόησεν,
σφαγῇ ἔἤχετο ἔνδον ποτε
ἅπαντες τοῦτο’
αὐτοῦ. οὖσαν,
τὸ
ἑνὸς
τούτου
δὲ
72
ὄνομά
αὐτὸς
μάχαυραν
Ev
ἀπώλοντ᾽
τῇ
ἂν ot
παῦδα
τολμῆσαί
ὕστερον
ματεῦπεν
δήμου
τοῦ
τὰ
φασιν
ἐτέϑνασαν
nat
αὔτιοι
γνώμῃ.
εὖναυ
καὶ ἤδη
ὄντες.
πλὴν
τοῦ
δ᾽
-- κατέγνωστο
ἐν τούτῳ
ὁ ἀνὴρ
παραδεδομένος
οὐδὲν
ἢ
ἐγένετο.
αὐτῷ
δὲ οὔπω"
χρήματα.
ὑμετέρου
μᾶλλον
καταφανὲς
Eredvrineu
τοῦ
ἐδηλώθη
ἀπελύϑη τοῦς
ταῦϑ᾽
ὑπὸ
ἕνδεκα;
ὑμῶν
οὐ
αὐτῶν
ἐγὼ οὔμαυ μεμνῆσϑαι τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους, τοὺς δὲ νεωτέρους πυνϑάνεσϑαι ὥσπερ ἐμέ. οὕτως ἀγαθόν ἐστι μετὰ τοῦ χρόνου βασανίζειν τὰ πράγματα. καὺ τοῦτ᾽ Cows dv φανερὸν γένουτ᾽ ἂν ὕστερον, ὅτῳ τρόπῳ τέϑνηκεν ὁ ἄνθρωπος. μὴ οὖν ὕστερον τοῦτο γνῶτε, ἀναύτιόν με ὄντα ἀπολέσαντες, ἀλλὰ πρότερόν γ᾽ εὖ βουλεύσασϑε, Hal μὴ μετ᾽ ὀργῆς nal διαβολῆς, ὡς τούτων οὐκ ἄν γένοιντο ἕτερου πονηρότεροι σύμβουλου. οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ὅ τι dv ὀργυζόμενος ἄνθρωπος εὖ γνοίη" αὐτὸ ᾧ
μέγα ἐξ
74
BETO τὸν
ἀπέϑανον. ὀργῇ
— Σωσίαν
ἀπωλώλει
γὰρ
73
dv
ὕστερον
τρόπῳ ἄλλοι
γὰρ
πρᾶγμά
ὅτῳ δ᾽
μεῦναυ,
συλληφϑεὺς
ἅπαντες
δὲ
μὲν ἤδη ϑάνατος, 71
τὴν
ἐτόλμησε
δὲ περὺ χρημάτων αὐτίαν ποτὲ σχόντες οὐκ ἐγὼ νῦν, οὐ ᾿Ἑλληνοταμύαι οὐ SHETEPOL,
μὲν
ἑνός,
ἐγκαταλυπῶν
ἀλλ᾽
οὐδεὺς
νῦν
τοῦτο ὥσπερ
ἐκεῦνου
70
φεύγων.
βουλεύεταυ.
του ὀργῆς
ἡμέρα
τὴν
παρ᾽
γνώμην
ἡμέραν
μεταστῆσαι
καὺ
δυαφϑεύρευ
γυγνομένη
τὴν
τοῦ
ἀνθρώπου.
γνώμην.
ἀλήϑειαν
εὑρεῦν
ὦ ἄνδρες, τῶν
γεγενη-
μένων. Εὖ δὲ ὕστε ὅτι ἐλεηϑῆναι ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν ἀξιός εὖμι μᾶλλον ἢ δίκην SoBvar’ δύκην μὲν γὰρ einds ἐστι διδόναι τοὺς ἀδικοῦντας, ἐλεεῦσϑαι δὲ τοὺς ἀδίύκως κινδυνεύοντας. Ἠρεῦσσον δὲ χρὴ γύγνεσθαυ del τὸ ὑμέτερον δυνάμενον ἐμὲ δικαίως σῴζειν ἢ τὸ τῶν ἐχϑρῶν βουλόμενον ἀδύώκως HE ἀπολλύναι. ἐν μὲν γὰρ τῷ ἐπυσχεῦν ἔστι nal τὰ δεινὰ ταῦτα πουῆσαι & οὗτοι κελεύουσιν ἐν δὲ τῷ παραχρῆμα οὐκ ἔστιν ἀρχὴν ὀρϑῶς βουλεύεσθαι, Act δέ με nal ὑπὲρ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀπολογήσασϑαι. καύτοι 69
70
ἐν
om.
A ποτε
ἀπεέϑανον
A corr.
ὅτῳ Hirschig: Kayser
71 72
ἔνδον
τολμῆσαί
ἂν
(cf.
(post
ἅπαντες
τοῦτο
N:
2:
ἀπωλώλει
Poll.
ἔνδον τοῦτο
ἀποθανόντες
τῷ
Cows)
A:
ποτε
8.68):
om. N
ὄντες
N
A
N Apr.
A: ἀπολώλευ
ἀπήχϑη
ἅπαντες
τολμῆσαι
ΝᾺ,
ὅτῳ τρόπῳ N:
N
ἀπήγχϑη
καὶ
ἀπελύϑη Apr.
ὅτῳ τρόπῳ A
μὴ pet’ vulg.: μήτε pet’ ob γὰρ. . . ἀνθρώπου affert Stobaeus flor. 20.44 ἂν add. Stobaeus, om. AN εὖ Stobaeus: dy ᾧ] ὃ Stobaeus του N: τι A ἡμέρα Stephanus: ἡμέραν γυγνομένη Stephanus: γυγνομένην μεταστῆσαι Stephanus: μεταστήσειν
73
δὲ χρὴ Ar ἀρχὴν
δὴ χρὴ Ν
Aldus:
ἀρχὴ
γύγνεσθαυ ἡ
56
del N: del γώγνεσθαι
A
afraid and taken to his heels, leaving the knife in the wound, but had had the courage to stay where he was, the entire household would have perished - for no one would ever have thought him
capable
of
such
audacity.
confessed his own guilt. Then again, your embezzlement,
Through one,
and
said
to
had had
a
anger
rather
later
have
charge the
been
not yet been been lost and
it
was,
he
Hellenotamiae as
than
true
As
facts
Sosias,
had
as
they
became
the
once one
were
known.
already
caught
were
groundless
reason
was
all
put one,
to
me
to
of
today.
death
whose
sentenced
executed. Meanwhile it was Sosias was rescued by your
later
accused
against
This
been
and
save
name
death
is
shown how the money people from the very
hands of the Eleven - while the rest had died entirely innocent. | expect the older ones among you remember this yourselves and the younger ones have heard of it like myself. Thus
it
is
wise
to
test
the
truth
of
a
70
but
matter
with
the
help
71
of
time. Perhaps the circumstances of Herodes' death will similarly come to light hereafter. So do not discover when it is too late that you have
put
me
to
death
though
innocent,
but
come
to
the
right
decision
while there is still time, without anger and without prejudice, For there could not be any worse counsellors than these. It is impossible for an angry man to make a right decision, as anger destroys his one instrument of decision, his judgment. Day succeeding day is a great force, gentlemen, for turning aside judgment from anger and bringing the truth of events to light. Be assured that 1 deserve pity from you, not punishment. Wrongdoers should be punished, those wrongfully imperilled should be pitied. Your ability to save my life justly ought always to be more powerful than my enemies’ desire to destroy my unjustly. By delaying it is still possible for you to do those terrible things which the prosecution bid you, by immediate action it is impossible to deliberate fairly at all. I
must
also
defend
my
father,
although,
57
as
my
father,
it would
72
73
74
εὐκὸς ἦν ἐκεῦνον ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ ἀπολογήσασϑαυ» γε πολλῷ μᾶλλον πατέρα ὄντα ὁ μὲν γὰρ πολλῷ πρεσβύτερός ἐστι τῶν ἐμῶν τῶν ἐκεύνῳ πεπραγμένων. ἐγὼ δὲ πολλῷ νεώτερος πραγμάτων,
καὺ
εὐ
σαφῶς
75
μὲν
τούτου
ἀκοῇ
δὲ
ἀγωνυξζομένου
ἠπυστάμην,
ἐμοῦ" νῦν δὲ ἀναγκάζων νεώτερός εὖὐμι καὺ λόγῳ γάσϑαι.
πατέρα 76
ἐγὼ
ἤδη,
ὅμως
μέντου
καμκῶς
κατεμαρτύρουν
δευνὰ
ἀν
ἔφη
ὰ μὴ,
πάσχευν
ὑπ᾽
ἐμὲ ἀπολογεῦσθαν ὧν ἐγὼ πολλῷ οἶδα, ταῦτα οὐ δευνὰ ἡγεῦται εὐρ-
καϑ᾽
ὅσον
ἐγὼ
ἐν
ὑμῦν
ἀδύκως.
ἀκούοντα
οὖἦδα,
οὐ
προδώσω
καύτου
τάχ᾽
τὸν
ἂν
σφαλείην, ἃ ἐκεῦνος ὀρϑῶς ἔργῳ ἔπραξε, ταῦτ᾽ ἐγὼ λόγῳ μὴ ὀρθῶς εὐπών᾽ ὅμως δ᾽ οὖν κεκυνδυνεύσεταν. Πρὺν μὲν γὰρ τὴν ἀπόστασιν τὴν Μυτιληναίων γενέσϑαυ, ἔργῳ τὴν εὔνουαν ἐδεώμηνυε τὴν εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐπευδὴ δὲ ἡ πόλις ὅλη κακῶς ἐβουλεύσατο ἀποστᾶσα καὺ ἥμαρτε τῆς ὑμετέρας γνώμης, μετὰ τῆς
πόλεως
ὅλης
ἠναγκάσθη
συνεξαμαρτεῦν.
τὴν
μὲν
οὖν
γνώμην ἔτι κμαὺ ἐν ἐκεύνοις ὅμοιος ἦν εἰς ὑμᾶς, τὴν δ᾽ εὔνουαν οὐκέτι ἦν ἐπ᾽ ἐκεύνῳ τὴν αὐτὴν εἰς ὑμᾶς παρέχειν. οὔτε γὰρ ἐκλυπεῦν τὴν πόλιν εὐρόπως εἶχεν αὐτῷ ἱκανὰ γὰρ ἦν τὰ ἐνέχυρα ἃ εἴχετο αὐτοῦ, οἵ τε καῦδες καὶ τὰ χρήματα
77
τοῦτο
δ᾽
ἄλλους
Μυτυληναύους οὐκ οὐδ᾽
ἔστιν ὅ
λῃτουργίας
79
μένοντι
αὐτῶν, τρί,
78
αὖ
πρὸς
τὴν
πόλιν
εἶχεν ἰσχυρίζεσθαυ. ἐπεὺ δ᾽ ὑμεῦς ἐκολάσατε, ἐν οὗς οὐκ ἐφαύνετο ὧν
τὺ
ἡ
ὅ οὐ
ἄδειαν τι
πεποίηται
πόλις
ἐδώκατε
ὕστερον
ἐνδεὴς
αὐτῷ τῶν
αὐτῷ
ἀδυνάτως
τοὺς αὐτύους τούτων ὁ ἐμὸς πατήρ, τοῦς δ᾽
οὐκεῦν
δεόντων,
γεγένηταν,
τὴν
ἡμάρτηται
σφετέραν τῷ
ἐμῷ
οὐδ᾽
ἧς
ἡ
ὑμετέρα
οὔτε
πα-
τινος
οὔτε
ἡ Μυτιληναίων, ἀλλὰ καὺ χορηγίας χορηγεῖ καὺ τέλη κατατύϑησιν. εὖ δ᾽ ἐν Αὔνῳ χωροφυλεῦ, τοῦτο «ποιεῦ» οὐκ ἀποστερῶν γε τῶν εἰς τὴν πόλιν ἑαυτὸν οὐδενὸς οὐδ᾽ ἑτέρας πόλεως πολίτης γεγενημένος, ὥσπερ ἑτέρους ὁρῶ. τοὺς μὲν εἰς τὴν ἤπειρον ἐόντας καὺ οἰκοῦντας ἐν τοῦς πολεμίοις τοῦς ὑμετέρους καὺ δύκας ἀπὸ ξυμβόλων ὑμῦν δικμαζομένους, οὐδὲ φεύγων τὸ πλῆθος τὸ ὑμέτερον, τοὺς δ᾽ οἵους ὑμεῦς μυσῶν συκοφάντας. ἃ μὲν μᾶλλον ἢ γνώμῃ ἔπραξεν,
οὖν μετὰ τῆς πόλεως ὅλης ἀνάγκῃ τούτων οὐ δίκαιός ἐστιν ὁ ἐμὸς
πατὴρ ὑδίᾳ δύκην δυδόναν. ἅπασι γὰρ Μυτυληναίους ἀεύμνῆστος ἡ τότε ἁμαρτία γεγένηται " ἠλλάξαντο μὲν γὰρ πολλῆς ἑαυτῶν
εὐδαυμονύας πολλὴν κχακοδαυμονίαν, ἐπεῦδον δὲ πατρύδα ἀνάστατον γενομένην. ἃ δὲ ὑδίᾳ οὗτου βάλλουσι τὸν ἐμὸν πατέρα, μὴ πεύίϑεσθε᾽ χρημάτων γὰρ
ἡ
πᾶσα
παρασκευὴ
γεγένηται
σεοχηβῖθαῦ:
ἐπ᾽
74
ἤοη
75
κμεκινδυνεύσεται
76
τὴν "υτυληναζων Β185βϑ: τῶν σοΥσ. 2: εὗρ’ ὅπως Ν ἌργΥ.
77
λῃτουργίας
ΒΙ859:
8
ἐχορήγει ποιεῖ δᾶᾶ.
ματατύϑησιν κοῖθκο
79
ἐπ᾽
ἐμοὺ
Δ:
ὑπ᾽
ἐμοὺ
μἀκεύνῳ.
πολλὰ
τῆν διαἕνεκα
δ᾽
ἤἥδευν Ὁ
σοχΥ.
2:
μαὺ
λειτουργίας
ἐμοὺ 58
Ν
Ν:
κυνδυνεύσεταιν
Μιτυληναίων χορηγεῦ
κατετύϑει
Ν Ἀρχ.
εὐρόπως
Ὁ
Β1δ858βΒ:
ἃ
have
been
far
older than and do not
I
more
and know
fitting
for
him
to
be
defending
me,
He
is
far
knows my affairs, whereas | am far younger than he his past activities. If my accuser were on trial and |
were giving evidence against him which I did not know for certain but had gathered from hearsay, he would protest that he was being treated terribly by me. But as it is, he sees nothing terrible in forcing me to explain events which | am far too young to know of except from hearsay, Nevertheless, I will use what knowledge I have and not betray my father, whom you have heard being subjected to unwarranted abuse. Possibly, indeed, I may fail, explaining faultily his
faultless
conduct.
Before
the
Still,
Mytilenean
this
risk
revolt
will
my
be
run.
father
proved
his
devotion
to
your interests by his actions. But when the whole city ill-advisedly revolted and failed in what you expected of it he was forced to join the whole city in that failure. His feelings towards you even then remained the same, but he could no longer display the same devotion
towards which
you.
bound
It
was
him,
not
his
easy
for
children
him
and
to
his
leave
the
property,
city, were
as
the
strong
other
Mytileneans
an
amnesty
allowing
them
to
live
on
ties
their
another mean
city,
your he
like
those
enemies
desires
to
others
and avoid
|
see,
litigating your
crossing
with
courts.
you It
to
the
under means
mainland,
treaty; he
nor
shares
77
own
land, my father has not been guilty of a single fault or of a single lapse from duty. He has failed neither your city nor that of the Mytileneans in any public service, but he furnishes choruses and pays his taxes. If his favourite haunt is Aenus this does not mean he is evading any of his public obligations or has become the citizen of among
76
ones;
on the other hand he could not set himself against the city while he remained there, But since the time when you punished the authors of the revolt, of whom my father was not found to be one, and aranted the
75
78
living
does
your
it
own
hatred
of informers. It is not just, then, individually for the act which
that my he joined
father should his whole city
be in
punished committing,
under compulsion and not from choice. The mistake made then has become an everlasting memory for every Mytilenean. They exchanged great prosperity for qreat misery and saw their country ruined. Nor must you be influenced by the prosecution's slanderous attack on my father's individual conduct: this whole intrigue against my father and
myself
has
been
fabricated
for
the
sake
59
of money.
Many,
indeed,
are
79
80
ἐστὶ τὰ συμβαλλόμενα τοῖς βουλομένους τῶν ἀλλοτρύων ἐφύεσϑαυ. γέρων «μὲν ἐμεῦνος ὥστ᾽ ἐμοὺ Bondetv, νεώτερος δ᾽ ἐγὼ πολλῷ ἢ wote δύνασϑαν ἐμαυτῷ τυμωρεῦν ὑκανῶς. ἀλλ᾽ ὑμεῦς βοηϑήσατέ pou, καὺ μὴ διδάσκετε τοὺς συκοφάντας μεῦζον ὑμῶν αὐτῶν δύνασθαι. ἐὰν μὲν γὰρ εὐσιόντες εἰς
ὑμᾶς
ἃ
βούλονται
πείϑειν,
πράσσωσι,
τὸ δ᾽ ὑμέτερον
δεδειγμένον
πλῆϑος
ἔσται
φεύγευν᾽
τούτους
μὲν
ἐὰν δὲ εὐσιόντες
els ὑμᾶς πονηροὺ μὲν αὐτοῦ δοκῶσιν εἶναι, πλέον δ᾽ αὐτοῦς μηδὲν γένηται, ὑμετέρα ἡ τυμὴ καὺ ἡ δύναμυς ἔσται, ὥσπερ not τὸ δύκαιον ἔχει. ὑμεῦς οὖν ἐμοί τε βοηϑεῦτε ual τῷ δικαίῳ. 81
82
83
“Ὅσα μὲν οὖν ἐκ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων texunptwv καὺ μαρτυριῶν οἷά te Av ἀποδευχϑῆναν, ἀκηκόατε᾽ χρὴ δὲ nal τοῦς ἀπὸ τῶν Sev σημείοις γενομένοις els τὰ τοιαῦτα οὐχ ἥκυστα τεκμηραμένους φηφύζεσθαυ. καὺ γὰρ τὰ τῆς πόλεως κουνὰ
τούτους
τοῦτο
μὲν
τὰ
μάλιστα
εἰς
πυστεύοντες
τοὺς
κινδύνους
ἀσφαλῶς
ἥκοντα,
διαπράσσεσϑε.,
τοῦτο
δὲ
[εἰς]
τὰ ἔξω τῶν κινδύνων. χρὴ δὲ nal els τὰ δια ταῦτα μέγυστα καὺ πυστότατα ἡγεῦσϑαι.. οὗὖμαυ γὰρ ὑμᾶς ἐπύστασθαν ὅτι πολλοὺ ἤδη ἄνϑρωπου μὴ καϑαροὺ «τὰς» χεῦρας ἢ ἄλλο τι μίασμα ἔχοντες συνευσβάντες els τὸ πλοῖον συναπώλεσαν μετὰ τῆς αὑτῶν ψυχῆς τοὺς ὁσίως διακειμένους τὰ πρὸς τοὺς ϑεούς᾽ τοῦτο δὲ ἤδη ἑτέρους ἀπολομένους μὲν ot, χινδυνεύσαντας δὲ τοὺς ἐσχάτους κινδύνους διὰ τοὺς τοιούτους ἀνϑρώπους τοῦτο δὲ tepots παραστάντες πολλοὺ ἤδη καταφαvets ἐγένοντο οὐχ ὅσιοι ὄντες. [nal] διακωλύοντες τὰ ὑερὰ μὴ γύγνεσϑαι τὰ νομιζόμενα. ἐμοὺ τούνυν ἐν πᾶσι τούτοις τὰ ἐναντία ἐγένετο. τοῦτο μὲν γὰρ ὅσοις συνέπλευσα, καλλίστοις ἐχρήσαντο πλοῦς τοῦτο δὲ ὅπου ὑεροῦς παρέστην, οὐκ ἔστυν ὅπου οὐχὺ κάλλιστα τὰ Cepd ἐγένετο. ἃ ἐγὼ ἀξιῶ μεγάλα μοι τεκμήρια εὖναι τῆς αὐτίας, ὅτι οὐκ ἀληϑῆ μου οὗτοι
κατηγοροῦσι.
«παρέξομαι
6& >
τούτων
μάρτυρας.
ΜΑΡΤΥΡΕΣ
84
᾿Επύσταμαι, δὲ nat τάδε, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ὅτι ev μὲν ἐμοῦ κατεμαρτύρουν ot μάρτυρες, ὥς τι ἀνόσιον γεγένηται, ἐμοῦ παρόντος ἐν thot ἢ ἐν Lepols, αὐτοῦς γε τούτους ὑσχυροτάτους ἂν ἐχρῶντο, wal πύστιν τῆς αὐτίας ταύτην σαφεστάτην ἀπέφαινον, τὰ σημεῖα τὰ ἀπὸ τῶν ϑεῶν᾽ νῦν δὲ 79
dot’
81
ets
ἐμοὺ
82
τὰς add. Fuhr μὲν ot, κυνδυνεύσαντας A corr. 2: μὲν. οὐ κυνδυνεύσαντας N Apr. τοῦτο δὲ (ante ὑεροῦς) A: τοῦ δὲ Ν ἤδη (ante καταφανεῦς) Ignatius: δὴ nat del. Sauppe
83
παρέξομαυ
del.
Bekker:
ὥστε
μοι
Bekker
δὲ
τούτων
60
μάρτυρας
scripsi:
τούτων
μάρτυρες
the
circumstances
the
goods
of
too me,
young then,
to and
yourselves.
which
others.
favour
My
father
those is
seeking
too
old
to
to
lay
help
their
me,
hands
while
|
be able to avenge myself as | should. You must refuse to teach informers to become more powerful
If
when
they
come
to
you
they
achieve
their
on
am
far
help than
purpose
80
it
will be shown that one compromises with them and avoids your court. But if when they come to you they achieve no more than being shown up as scoundrels you will enjoy the honour and the power which it is right that you should. So give me and qive justice your support. You have heard all that can be shown my human proof and evidence. But in cases of this kind you should also be influenced in your
verdict
not
least
by
depend chiefly on these those involving danger
the
for and
signs
furnished
by
heaven.
For
your safe conduct of state affairs, those that do not. So you should
81
you
both also
82
consider them most important and trustworthy in private affairs. | am sure you know that in the past many men with unclean hands or some other form of defilement have embarked on ship with the righteous and involved them in their own destruction. Others have escaped death but risked extreme danger through such men. Many, too, have been proved to be defiled while standing beside sacrifices, because
they
prevented
opposite
has
the
proper
performance
in
case.
happened
every
of
Not
the
only
rites. have
With
those
me
with
the
83
whom
| have sailed enjoyed the calmest of voyages, but whenever | have attended a sacrifice that sacrifice has never been anything but successful, These facts, | claim, are strong proof for me that the charge the prosecution are bringing is unfounded. I will produce witnesses
to confirm
these
statements.
WITNESSES I were
also
know
testifying
this, against
gentlemen me
that
of
the
with
jury,
my
that
presence
if the on
sacrifice some unholy manifestation had occurred, the would be treating that as highly significant and would that
here
was
the
clearest
confirmation
61
of
their
charge,
ship
witnesses or
at
prosecution be showing in
the
signs
84 a
τῶν
85
86
te
σημείων
χρόνῳ,
ped’
ζητοῦντες τουούτων.
κατὰ μέντοι 87
τοῦς
τούτων
λόγους
γυγνομένων.
οὗ
ὀρϑότατα
εὑρίσκουσιν
ot
τῶν πραγμάτων. ἠξίουν μὲν ὦ ἄνδρες. εἶναι τὴν δίκην
τὸ δίκαιον
τὴν
ἀκρύβειαν
γὰρ ἔγωγε κατὰ τοὺς
ὡς πλευστάκις
περὺ τῶν νόμους,
ἐλέγχεσθαι.
τοσούτῳ
γὰρ ἄμευνον dv ἐγιγνώσκετο' οἱ γὰρ πολλοὺ ἀγῶνες τῇ μὲν ἀληϑείᾳ σύμμαχοί εὖσι. τῇ δὲ διαβολῇ πολεμυώτατον. φόνου γὰρ nal
δίκη nal μὴ τοῦ ἀληθοῦς
dnpionode,
τῇ δύκῃ δύκην
nal
καὺ τὴν
νυκᾶσϑαι
ὀρθῶς γνωσθεῦσα ἐσχυρότερον τοῦ δικαίου ἐστιν᾽ ἀνάγκη γάρ, ἐὰν duets μου κατα-
μὴ
ὄντα
τῷ νόμῳ΄
φονέα
Hal
δεδυκασμένην
οὐὖκ ἔνοχός εὐργασμένῳ 88
ἐναντίων
τῶν te μαρτύρων ἃ μὲν ἐγὼ λέγω μαρτυρούντων ἀληϑῇ εὖναι, ἃ δ᾽ οὗτοι κατηγοροῦσι φψευδῆ, τοῦς μὲν μαρτυροῦσυν ἀπυσretv ὑμᾶς κελεύουσι, τοῦς δὲ λόγους os αὐτοῦ λέγουσυ πιστεύειν ὑμᾶς φασι, χρῆναν, nal,οὗ μὲν ἄλλοι ἄνϑρωποι τοῦς ἔργους τοὺς λόγους ἐλέγχουσιν, οὗτου δὲ τοῦς λόγους τὰ ἔργα ζητοῦσιν ἄπυστα καϑυστάναν. Ὅσα μὲν οὖν ἐκ τῶν κατηγορηϑέντων μέμνημαν, ὦ ἄνδpes, ἀπολελόγημαι οὖμαυ δὲ καὶ «πρὸς» ὑμῶν mei pronoiai for the MSS. mé pronoiai. This is perhaps preferable to the simple alteration of m& to ou, with the explanation of the error as deriving from the common such use of mé
in
late
Greek
(see
H.
Richards,
'Notes
on
Greek
Orators
|,
Antiphon', CR 20 (1906) 152). The crux of 21 and 22 is that no design (pronoia) can be imputed to Euxitheus in his encountering Herodes. Antiphon may have thought that the prosecution would attempt to prove premeditation on Euxitheus' part and so he i) emphasises the role of
chance
(tuché)
in
these
events
(see
further
6,
depends
more
on _chance than foresight); ii) gives the passage. an extemporaneous character with ‘it has nowhere been shown' (see 13, You_reply). But it may be significant that Euxitheus does not deny that he knew Herodes before the voyage either here or in 22
57-59. we were
forced
to
do
the repetition below chiastic word-order. the transhipment: form; cf. Adam,
so:
emphasis
on
of
anagkéi,
both
the
compulsion
times
joined
is
gained
with
alla
by
in
the substantival is even rarer than the verbal Vent. 32 (= Rose, An, Graec. 32, line 12); 10,
a murderer shall pay with his fife in requital. Antiphon here places emphasis on the act of transhipment, by means of periphrasis and the use of the aorist (egeneto; the crossing as a 82
consequence of anagké is then given in the imperfect egigneto). had no_deck: more rare vocabulary in astegaston; cf. Thuc. 7.87.1; Kühn);
had
schol. Soph, Phil. 1327; Apollod. Poliorc. 185.10.
a deck:
Chor.
6),
on 90,
(as 2 First I, 38 η.3.
the 1
participle
Stepmother
Tetralogy
a9,
in
Galen
vol.
periphrasis
11
and
17
with in
Tetralogy
153
einai cf.
frequently
3 Second
(2),
the
d5);
(ed,
88
(=
Tetralogies
Kühner-Gerth
witnesses: the MSS. have marturias ('evidence'), not marturas 'witnesses'), but evidence was given orally at this time (and MARTURES follows in the MSS.); see Bonner, EAC, 46-47. Reiske
23
long ago made the correction. we began drinking: a dangerous assertion in view of Euxitheus’ age and the Greek attitude to young men and drinking as expressed in Ant. 4 Third Tetralogy c2. The imperfect tense of epinomen is ingressive and does not in itself indicate a heavy drinking-bout, though Herodes at least was
drunk
(26).
Nevertheless,
suspicion
is
raised
by
this
statement that the influence of drink may have been a direct factor in Herodes' disappearance, Thus A. Reuter, 'Beobachtungen zur Technik des Antiphon I', Hermes 38 (1903) 495 suggested that Euxitheus led the drunk Herodes to a place in
the
harbour
Herodes wine.
was
and
threw
him
accidentally
However,
into
the
drowned
Scheidweiler
sea;
under
323-324
Breuning,
the
influence
attacked
68n.
6
of too
Reuter's
that
much
theory,
questioning whether there was a suitable place in the harbour from which to throw Herodes into the sea without the risk of the body reappearing on the surface (it could, of course, have been weighted, though Palau 200 notes that the waters in this region the with clash theories such Additionally, clear). are (39), that slave from the tortured wrung story, prosecution's Herodes
into
thrown
was
sea
the
boat
a
from
see
45);
(28,
28,
Reuter complained they allege that he was thrown into the sea. that Euxitheus only considers this possibility and does not put disappearance. any alternative explanation of Herodes' forward no need to had Euxitheus that saw rightly Scheidweiler But conjecture, as he says himself in 64-66, for conjectures expressly contradicting the prosecution's story, which was well thought out and backed by the slave's evidence, would not have seemed very the
undermine
to
rather,
needed,
Euxitheus
credible.
who 46-47, Due further See reconstruction. prosecution's that Euxitheus' attitude was juridically quite correct. concludes But if drink was not a direct factor we may at least feel that Herodes' murderers would have found their task the easier as a result of his condition. | did
not
leave
the
boat
at
all
that
night:
26,
sim.
should have expected Euxitheus to make much Hence we wonder how many witnesses he could support
this
claim
at
the
end
of 83
24
(and
27,
42,
but
we
more of this alibi. in fact produce to
note
‘I
can
produce
6
witnesses’ in 27). Thus Thür while Maidment, MAO 1, 178
merely other
alluding hand
to
could have said existed, though produced
the
Schindel,
is
free
thinks there a suspects
man
who
exonerated
37-39
(v.
Thur)
were none at all, that Euxitheus is
him
(42).
On
the
doubts
that
Euxitheus
'l can produce witnesses' if no his attempt to prove that the
such free
witnesses man was
even
yet
not
MH,
50 n.
conclusive
(see
49,
has
not
said
anything compromising about me). Nevertheless, it does seem difficult to reject this alibi out of hand as mere rhetoric and we do not know how many passengers there were on the decked vessel that night. Euxitheus' brevity in this matter is perhaps to be seen in the light of the tendency towards ‘artificial proofs' (entechnoi pisteis, pisteis) during the 44-47) and as due
as opposed to 'non-artificial proofs', atechnoi second half of the fifth century (see Solmsen to the prejudice the Athenian court probably
felt against him. He must prove conclusively that he did not kill Herodes, but it was not enough simply to bring forward witnesses for an alibi whose evidence the jurors might well disbelieve. He must question the likelihood of the prosecution's story and examine their evidence by employing argument from probability, the entechnos pistis which plays a great part in Antiphon's argumentation {see 25, consider the probabilities). Similarly with the favourable evidence of the free man who was tortured (see 30, The first): Euxitheus uses this in antithetical argumentation with the slave's evidence (42, 49) rather than as the basis of his
defence. | joined in the search just as anxiously as part in the search and readiness to help (thus suggesting his innocence) is brought passive ezéteito with hup'emou and below ego, téi emei gnoméi (with repetition of the in
25
24
a
tricolon
25
failure
of
the
search,
the
return
of
fair
weather and the departure of the other boats) emphasises how Euxitheus' departure from Methymna followed a perfectly innocent chain of events. nor one of Herodes' companions: we are only informed about the slaves and Thracians,
25-84
(the
any: Euxitheus' keen in any way he could out by the use of the by Καὶ emoi homoiös, verb pempein). Then
the 'who
Thracians, were to pay
and the
it is understandable ransom' (20), should
why the decline to
volunteer. my own attendant: see 29, the men. | was...proposing to send: the imperfect of attempted action, commonly employed with edidoun and epeithon; cf. 53; GMT, 36. When finally the search failed: it lasted for two days (27). PROOFS (pisteis): Euxitheus turns now to his proofs, beginning in 25-28 with a refutation of his opponents’ version of the murder on the basis of probability. consider the probabilities: this entechnos pistis, the argument from probability (to eikos), formed the basis of the rhetorical handbook
(techneé)
of
Corax, 84
according
to
Arist.
Rhet.
2.24.11
(but Aristotle probability to
273a-c).
It
attributed Corax as
features
the same example of the argument from Plato had done to Tisias, in Phaedr.
prominently
in the
early
oratory
of Antiphon,
especially in the Herodes (as 37, 43, 45, 49-50, 63) and the Tetralogies. Bonner, LL, 227-228 suggests that Antiphon's use of
this
argument
cleverness
8.68.1). before I
was
which
put
Antiphon’s charge was
to
one
of
earned
sea:
the
reasons
him
the
distrust
Albini
142
simply
for
his
reputation
of
the
people
remarks
that,
sixth speech, little is made of the delay brought. Closer consideration is required.
for
(Thuc.
unlike
in
before the Firstly, we
must remember that Herodes' relatives were informed of his disappearance at Mytilene. Thus the messenger would have taken about a day to reach Mytilene from the harbour and probably would not have returned until the second day of the search - and Euxitheus and the others possibly left on the next day, after the search was completed. So Herodes' relatives hardly had time to come
any
to
the
case
harbour,
we
after the rhetorical revealed.
are
make
told
a
search
that
they
and
charge
conducted
Euxitheus,
their
and
in
investigations
second, decked boat had reached Mytilene (29). The nature of the argumentation here, then, stands But there is more to it than this, for Euxitheus'
contention that the time-lapse (which seems outwardly from his account to be longer than it probably was) reveals the plotting of the prosecution is the first instance of a recurrent theme in the speech. Thus the slave and the free man were tortured only after no traces of the murder could be found (29); and the slave was tortured several days after the free man (30) and in Euxitheus' so
absence,
that
prosecution
the
were
able
to
him
induce
to
lie
about Euxitheus. He also changed his story, which again allegedly reveals the plot and includes the temporal theme - first the slave said Euxitheus was innocent, then that he was guilty and finally once
that
more
during refused
he
was
innocent.
Further,
the
note
was
found
the second search of the boat, after the free man had to incriminate Euxitheus and before the slave was induced
and the evidence of the note and of the slave was to lie (55-56), it was forged by the prosecution in case the Hence contradictory. a was prosecution whole the So cooperate. not would slave
carefully
devised
important
part.
plot
against
Euxitheus
in
which
time
played
an
For the moment...they could make: but once the charge was made the verdict of the jurors was final, even if against the true facts (87). ‘Accusation’ in the Greek is uiliasis, another rare word (see 10, a murderer shall pay with his life in requital) recurring in 89 Pollux 52.26.5; Dio Cass. 18.3; Poct. Arist. 6); (= 6 Chor. the also Note Müller). (ed. 317 Metoch. Theodor, 3.138; the of facts true (‘the to aléthes Καὶ lo gegenemenon hendiadys matter’)
and
contrast
72,
tén
aletheian,..ton 85
gegenémenon.
26
hit
him
on
the
head
with
a
stone:
the
core
of
the
prosecution's
reconstruction and presumably part of the slave's evidence (n.b. ‘of this they have detailed information'). Euxitheus himself may have known the details of the slave's confession through the existence of minutes of the torture, but he speaks here and in 28 in extemporaneous fashion (see 13, You reply). Even in the unlikely event of the stone being found it would not have been produced in court as 'real' evidence; see Bonner, EAC, 81; 153-154.
and
further
on
'real'
evidence
Of this Further
they have detailed information, instances of irony are found
figures
of
thought
are
rare
in
his
ability
to
do
something
Kühner-Gerth I, 212-213. have found any plausible
to
find
is not 27
an
excuse
sober?
For
to
at
that
excuse:
persuade
'excuse'
see
according
would probably have been in no expresses Herodes' state at the
LA
2,
to
Blass,
AB
|,
this
was
in
44
condition: the imperfect with time in question, not merely
time is
a
Harrison,
but...: slightly ironical. in 45 and 47, but such
Antiphon;
146-147; Jebb, AO J, 28-29. Clearly, the probabilities suggest: fact what the prosecution alleged. He an
see
it
(the not,
person
(prophasis)
aorist); in
truth,
to do
see
21,
see
further
often
something
easier
when
he
purposes.
two days’ search: the diligence of the search is reflected in the Greek by correspondence (kai...kai..., oute,,.outh',..out'...), antithesis (en/apdthen) and a tricolon (optér - haima - allo semeion). eyewitness: optér is a poetic word (cf. Hom. Od. 14.261; Aeschyl. Supp. 185; Soph. Aj. 29, Ich. 77), but is also used in this sense by Xenophon (Cyr. 4.5.17); see also Pollux 2.57; Hesych. s.v.; Suidas, s.v. optéras. no _ bloodstain: expanded in 45. On bloodstains as a clue cf. Anon. Seg. 153 (in Spengel-Hammer I?. 379). clue: here and in 28 and 45 sémeion is a physical ‘clue' or
trace', is
and
similar
to
in
81
and
84 a 'sign'
from
('proof',
which
tekmérion
the gods. occurs
Finally, in
8,
38
in
14 it
bis,
61,
63, 81 ‘human proof' as apposed to 'the signs furnished by heaven', 83), and this reflects the frequent difficulty encountered in distinguishing between the two terms. Antiphon's own definition, that 'what has happened is confirmed by signs, what will happen by presumptions’ (frg. 72 Th), is hardly observed by him in practice, nor was Aristotle's distinction (Rhet. 1.2.16-18) between the conclusive tekmérion and the fallible sémeion clearly drawn by earlier authors. See further Lys. 25 Def.Sub.Dem. 5 with comm, I will accept the prosecution's story: this figure of thought, whereby
an
62 (also with with comm,
opponent's
οἱ
kai
argument
hos
is allowed
malista);
86
cf.
(consensio),
further
Lys.
12
recurs
in
Erat.
34
|
can
produce
witnesses:
see
23,
I
did
not
leave
the
boat
at
all
that
28
night. For the change from participial to finite construction (parechomenos men...ei de...eikos En) see Denniston (1954) 369 n. 1. they allege that he was thrown into the sea: a further part of the
opponents'
reconstruction,
based
on
the
confession
of
the
slave.
It seems probable that the slave would have given details of the alleged sinking of the body and that these would have been recorded in the minutes made of the torture. Hence it is doubtful whether Euxitheus here deliberately misrepresents the meaning of katapontö,
as
Due
36
contends
(i.e.
‘drowned from the shore'). We may briefly consider
at
would
the
have
been
thrown
into
this
'sunk
from
a
point
how
and
sea.
Some
boat'
instead
of
when
Herodes
have
thought
scholars
that one of the large boats which took shelter in the harbour would have been used, and that the body was firstly hidden and then disposed of either during the crossing to Aenus or on the voyage to Mytilene. But we should remember both that one of these boats was undecked (22) and that a search was made (24). So it is more likely that a smaller boat would have been employed (and this is what Euxitheus questions) and it is perhaps not too surprising that this craft remained undiscovered. This assumes, of course, that there was some basis of truth in the slave's confession and it could be that Herodes was in fact done away
with somewhere on the land. of a dead man thrown overboard: lit. 'of a man dead overboard'. Some scholars have needlessly suspected (e.g.
Blass,
who
added
entithemenou
after
tethnedtos,
and the
thrown phrase
i.e.
'of
a
dead man placed in the boat and thrown overboard"). the prosecution do claim to have found traces: referring to the bloodstains mentioned in 29, which the prosecution at first took as traces of the murder. on_which they themselves agree Herodes was not murdered: note the word-order (me going with apothancin), the hyperbaton helping 29
to
stress
the
negative;
sim.
hopös epeisi (both passages have been | had departed on my voyage: a Greek, with the poetic phroudos ὃ öichomen. Indeed, phroudos is not prose (sim, apöimöxen in 41). had been drinking: reading epinomen been sailing’) et 49', Rev,
with de
way
to
for
H. Weil, 'Antiphon, Phil. 4 (1880), 150.
crossed to the decked Herodes' disappearance one
Thuc.
Aenus
on
the
its
voyage
original,
undecked
to Mytilene.
87
alla
kai
me
the
MSS.
epleomen
("had
Meurtre d'Hérode, 29, 5, Euxitheus and Herodes
boat on the night Euxitheus would
completed
6.18.2,
suspected by editors). noticeable expression in the replacing the more regular found elsewhere in classical
of the storm and after have continued on his vessel,
while
the
decked
the — sacrifice in involved presumably those the bloodstains: confirmed that these were sheep's blood, though Erbse (1977) 210 ἢ. 2 still has his doubts. The stains were probably mentioned in the evidence given after 28 and so there is no need to alter the MSS, to
bloodstains'),
("some
haima
ti
to
haima
Similarly
Aldus.
did
as
and below with 'the sheep' (the article. was deleted by Reiske) also 'the men', who would already have been referred to by the prosecution. Note the chronological argument again here; see 25, before I put to sea. the men: these were two in number, one a slave, the other a free man (49). Maidment's statement, MAO |, 180 n. c, that the latter cannot have been a Greek, as he was tortured, has been challenged by Bushala 61-63. Bushala notes that Antiphon clearly
states this person was a free man and that no objection in the speech to his being tortured, and he therefore that
homicide
general
investigations
rule.
Theodotus
He
in
may
supports
Lys.
3
Sim.
have
this 33
with
(in
a
been
the
case
of
an
is raised contends
exception
torture
of
wounding
the with
to
the
Plataean intent
to
kill, dike traumatos ek pronoias), arguing against the assumption of most scholars that Theodotus was a slave. His view was rejected by Thur 22 n. 43, but Thur's own theory that the torturing of the free man was justified because it was part of a public, not the normal private, investigation is very doubtful (see Schindel,
MH,
32
n.
172).
C.
Lacombrade,
'Un
probléme
de
droit
attique', Pallas 20 (1973) 19-23 rather differently considers that the free man of Antiphon 5 was Euxitheus' attendant (24; see below) and the Plataean of Lysias 3 was virtually a prostitute: since,
therefore,
torture
it
neither
must
have
Antiphon
taken
nor
place
Lysias
denounces
according
to
a
the
customary
practice and was due to the almost servile status of the two men. They were 'déclassés', under a kind of moral dishonour tacitly
admitted by
the
by
all:
use
of
an
interesting
anthröpos
in
theory
which
connection
is perhaps
with
the
free
supported
man
(see
39,
the slave). But the free man's status is most uncertain. Other difficulties involved with these two men are who they were exactly and on which vessel each was travelling. Maidment, loc. cit., detected an inconsistency within the speech over the free man. passenger
It on,
has been assumed from 29 and 52 that or a member of the crew of, the vessel
he was a bound for
Mytilene,
or
even
But
that
he
was
the
inferences contradict Euxitheus' words second man, who had travelled on
present throughout and suggests at first sight Aenus,
the
but
since
alliteration
exaggeration,
were
well
we
and designed
acquainted
had been that the
know
he
tricolon to
and
show
that
88
owner.
my companion'. free man went
was
in
boat's
tortured
the that
these
in 42, 'then there was the the same boat, had been
we
Greek Euxitheus
Euxitheus
had
This statement all the way to may
assume
indicate and
an
the
alibi.
that
rhetorical free
In
man
other
words,
‘throughout!
to
night
the
of
Nevertheless,
the
perhaps
telous) does
travelling theorising
being
the
only
in
fact
disappearance
statement
two men were inconsistency by pay,
(dia
Herodes'
seem
refers
or
to
to
be
to
an
attendant
of
24,
the
facts in dangerous
a
and
time
night
assertion
companions. Maidment that the free man was
been intentionally misrepresenting his alibi. But he was playing
the
the
up
itself. that
the
explains the in Euxitheus'
Euxitheus
42 for game
must
have
the sake of in actually
emphasising that the free man was travelling with him and it may seem preferable to accept his words in 42. But if so, why should the free man have started out for Aenus, reached Methymna and
then returned to Mytilene? Or why, was sent to Mytilene, should he not
that Herodes Euxitheus to
was nowhere to Aenus? If Herodes'
if he was the have returned
attendant and with the news
be found and continued relatives detained him we
with might
have expected Euxitheus to complain about this before leaving the island. However, we should note that in 24 Euxitheus does not actually say that he did send his attendant to Mytilene, only that he was ready to do so, and so the identification of the free man as Euxitheus' attendant must be doubtful. The third limb of the tricolon
in
42,
'had
been
my
companion',
is
in
the
Greek
sunön
mot, which need not mean anything more than that the free man was an independent voyager who was in Euxitheus’ company. So it is possible that the free man was originally Herodes' companion on the trip (as was suggested by Palau 202), which both fits with
42
was
seized
and
situation
provides
for
is
a
torture
obscure,
as,
that at some stage he therefore he was neither he
was
a
member
on arrival torture him examined
the
by
indeed,
the
crew
But
under
why
he
Herodes' is
of
torture:
the
that
of
the
on
Lesbos
But
his
slave.
and
whole
We
know
by the prosecution (47), Euxitheus' slave. Perhaps decked
why
did
the
main
(torture)-argumentation
remained
relatives.
was bought Herodes' nor
in Mytilene. in particular? them
busunos
of
reason
boat
the
and
was
prosecution
section
(29-52),
of
the
which
seized
wish speech
to is
questions
both the results of the torture and the methods used to obtain them. Both the slave and the free man were tortured, but only the former incriminated Euxitheus. The core of his confession, as
far as we can glean it from the speech, is i) Euxitheus left the boat and murdered Herodes; ii) the slave was his accomplice in the crime, though to what degree (whether he helped in the actual killing or merely in the disposal of the body) is unclear. Euxitheus counters by a) disputing the legality of the prosecution's actions in gaining this confession (which leads to value of basanos evidence).
Euxitheus he
had
contends a
chance
that to
commonplace Also, and
their
putting
question
him 89
arguments over the very importantly,
to death himself
of the
both
was
slave
before
illegal
and
showed how the slave was not trusted even by the prosecution to give consistent and true evidence (34-35; 47-48); b) emphasising the alleged contradictory nature of the slave's evidence, saying he changed his story for personal advantages (as 37) and under the compulsion of truth (41). In addition, the slave's confession was itself contradicted by the testimony of the free
man,
who
consistently
exonerated
Euxitheus
(30,
42).
We must briefly consider two legal points arising in connection with the torturing of a slave which are relevant to our speech. Firstly, a slave's evidence could normally only be produced in court if it had been given under torture, since it was strongly believed that a slave would only speak the truth under
torture;
that
such
man;
cf.
Is.
Stepmother 29;
see
Harrison,
evidence
Dem.
8
10, 47
was Cir.
6
12;
Chor.
Euerg.
LA
more
8;
!,
170.
reliable Dem.
25;
30
Isoc.
2,
37;
a
by
also
54;
147.
argument, that slaves would lie in order to and so evidence given under torture was
was
given
i
Trapez.
id.
there
that
Onetor
17
Harrison,
Hence
than
Lyc.
But
free
Ant.
1
the
topos
a
opposite
escape further suspect, was
pain also
employed, as by Antiphon below (31-35); cf. [Arist.] Rhet. Alex. 16.2; Arist. Rhet. 1.15.26; Harrison, ibid. So among Athenians themselves the value of this atechnos pistis was
doubt from
and it
much
for
of
entechnoi
its
real
worth
pisteis.
To
lay be
in
the
possibilities
mentioned
in
this
1
Leocr.
ad the in
arising
context
is
the question of the challenge (proklösis). A slave's evidence had to be given with the consent of both parties to be valid and so litigants would issue challenges to their opponents either to hand over or to accept a slave for torture; see 36, challenging me to examine him under torture. The refusal of a challenge could then be
used
against
an
opponent,
as
happens
in
a
slightly
unusual
way
(since the slave was put to death) in 36-38. Secondly, the vexed question as to whether a slave could appear in court in homicide trials as a witness for the prosecution. Two passages adduced as evidence, the possibility. In 36 Euxitheus
from our speech (36, 48) have been former against, the latter for the says that the prosecution should have
produced the slave for him to torture. Now if his words reflect the procedure in a dik@ phonou they show almost conclusively that slaves could not appear - for why does Euxitheus not argue simply that the prosecution should have produced the slave in court? See Bonner MacDowell, AHL, 103
endeixis,
not
a
ὃ Smith, notes that
diké
phonou,
AJHA 2, our speech
and
contends
227-228, However, was delivered in an
that
this
passage
therefore cannot be used as evidence. 48, on the other hand, is the main passage brought forward in support of the theory that slaves could appear. The crucial clause is eiper gar kai marturein
exesti doulöi kata tou eleutherou ton phonon, traditionally translated ‘if it is permissible for a slave to give evidence against a
free
man
about
a
killing'. 90
But
MacDowell,
id.,
103-104
translates ‘if it is permissible to give evidence for a slave against a free man of his being killed', and this is preferable. As he points out, Euxitheus is talking about the killing of a slave, arguing that it was illegal, and evidence given by a slave against a
free
man
is
irrelevant.
Further,
the
sentence
from
eiper
builds
up to a climax through a tricolon with correspondence. The whole effect of this is ruined if the first limb refers to a different situation from the other two; and the juxtaposing of doulöi with kata tou eleutherou is much more effective on MacDowell's rendering. MacDowell also dismisses other passages cited in connection with this matter and comes to the conclusion that we simply do not have the evidence to settle the question one way or the other. This approach, though not without its drawbacks (for example,
as
MacDowell
is
well
aware,
Euxitheus
earlier
in
our
speech argues that the procedure for a regular homicide trial ought to have been followed in his case and so he may likewise be thinking of this in 36), is perhap to be adopted. 30
The
first:
the
throughout Euxitheus
(42, to
free
49).
make
man,
As
who
with
more
of
declared
the
the
alibi,
free
we
man's
Euxitheus
might
to
produce
the
free
man
at
the
trial;
expected
favourable
though his approach is again understandable; leave the boat at all that night. Additionally, unable
innocent
have
see
see he
evidence,
23, was
49,
I did not probably
has
not
even
yet said anything compromising about me. The second they tortured several days later: we should have expected the torturings of the witnesses to have been conducted one after the other, their vessel having been thoroughly searched beforehand so that no evidence could be removed or the boat leave before examination. Therefore the interval between the torturings, during which the boat was searched for a second time (55), may arouse suspicions of foul play with regard to both the slave and the discovery of fresh 'evidence', the note (53-56). Scheidweiler 321 notes that the scene is Lesbos (although we should not perhaps place too much significance in this: Lesbian laws and procedure would probably have reflected Athenian practice, especially after the quelling of the revolt and setting up of the cleruchy) and suggests that the delay was made in order to soften up the slave after the free man had refused to incriminate
Euxitheus.
Against
this
is
Erbse
(1977)
211-212,
asking why Euxitheus did not himself make this suggestion and pointing out that i) the purchasing of the slave (47) may have taken a certain amount of time; and ii) since the slave was allegedly involved in the crime the prosecution would naturally want to make thorough investigations before they tortured him, to have some other form of proof with which to check his assertions. But this does not fully deal with Scheidweiler's
buying
of
contention.
the
slave
We
to
should
have
not,
taken 91
for
too
instance,
much
expect
time,
the
though
Euxitheus ‘several bought
had
may
be
exaggerating
the
days later' (see further the slave). Then we must
conducted
a
search
before
length
of
the
delay
with
on this transaction 47, they remember that the prosecution
they
tortured
the
free
man
(29)
-
so while we may agree with Erbse that the prosecution desired some back-up evidence before they examined the slave it may still seem suspicious that they decided to make a second search when
they had already suffered two setbacks (the unproductive first search and torture of the free man). Thus arguments can be adduced for either view and the delay can be interpreted in two ways. But whatever the truth is here Euxitheus has cleverly achieved
a
double
attack
on
the
prosecution.
He
has
to
before an Athenian jury over making allegations and this opportunity of impugning the prosecution's implication.
He
omits
to
mention
the
second
be
careful
so he takes actions by
search,
which,
whether undertaken from good or bad motives, is the immediate reason for the delay, and concentrates on the delay itself, with another temporal argument (see 25, before | put to sea). It is only in connection with the note, where the burdening weight of the document compels him to make an allegation, that Euxitheus tells 31
You
us
of the
have
second
heard
expressions witnesses;
are see
precede, as (hence read
search
the i) the Wyse
explicitly
character
([Simonid.]
175.1,
itself.
'torture!
doubtless: Euxitheus'
34,
other
ed.
Tetralogy b7); 52 and cf. 64, of
the
sentence;
Bergk),
then
See further
isos indicates that part, recalling the
men
reward
in
foul
such
play.
summarising
a connecting particle is found when πὸ
the examination: basanos developed in (Theog. 1.417; Harpoc. s.v.), to the testing’ (Pi, Pyth. 10.67) and so to the
suspects
regular
absence of 295 (oun
64, 4 Third gegenétai in
extemporaneous
and
evidence:
Thur
ii) 81, see
the 85). 13,
perfect tense Note also the
You
reply.
meaning from 'touch-stone' touch-stone as a ‘means of 'test' or 'trial' in general 'trial
by
torture’
and
finally
13-15.
the offer of freedom common practice with
informers...).
after the witnesses
If such
an
is a guess on informers (see
offer
was
actually
made we might have expected Euxitheus' friends who were present at the torture (34) to have known this and informed him, and it is in any case unlikely that the prosecution would have promised freedom to a slave who was himself implicated in the murder (except to trick him into a confession). The point of this remark (and of the one concerning release from sufferings) is that it
32
serves as the basis of Euxitheus' basanos-evidence in 31-35, If t had myself ordered...As it argumentation
had be
made taken
by
away as
‘hypothetical
with...But
indicating
that
as
92
was...:
it is.... tortures
against a
inversion',
two
199-200.
argument on
This were
the
value
shortened
form
which
38,
see
statement regular:
of of If
should not see
Thur
|
to be racked: on tortures cf. Ar. testibus tormenta
the use of the rack Frogs 618-621; R.
in Atheniensium judiciis cruciatis (Wroclaw, 1963)
torturers: it has torture resulting an 40, in
strongly
possession
saec. 78-80.
V
et
IV
a.
and other De servis
Chr.
n.
per
generally been accepted that in private suits the from a challenge was directed by a third party,
official basanistös; 42; Harrison, LA
argued
or wheel (40) Turasiewicz,
that of
cf. 2,
Isoc. 148.
one
the
17 Trapez. 15-17; Thür 160-173 has
of the
slave)
parties
in
fact
involved
Dem. more
(i.e.
regulated
37 Pant. recently
the
the
one
not
proceedings,
although it is dangerous to press 32 (‘if | had myself ordered him to be racked'), 35 (‘been tortured by me in the same way'), 36 (‘challenging me to examine him under torture') and 46 ('to make it impossible for me to take him and examine him under torture’) for this
meaning.
assessors: word; cf. Prom.
77;
Supp.
255;
frg.
82
as 38
epitimetés, especially in this sense, is another rare IG i2.75, ii?.1176; and with other meanings Aeschyl. Soph.frg.
Plato,
Sa).
it is...)
end the
533
Phaedr.
The
36,
38,
Pearson,
=
Harpoc.
s.v.
periphrasis
helps
make 46,
(see
1,
I
occurs
47,
52,
several also
Pollux have
in
mönuein
been
as
produced
'in
in
court').
reference
to
court
The the
(36,
use
of
reward
46,
the
of
translating
word
the
freedom
enthade
here
in
for
slave
with
which to
speech
twice
Bonner, EAC, 71 takes its frequency as indicating was properly an informer, in which capacity alone
Eur.
(= Lys.
wished...But
comment
times
24;
9.140);
epitimétas
could
this a hard-hitting
the section, informer: ménutés
below,
(ed.
240a;
in
(cf.
38)
and
that the slave could he have in
the
conjunction
former
with
informers
the
(see
n.
below) could be seen to support this view. So too the employment of the slave's testimony as evidence by the prosecution though no challenge had been made to Euxitheus to torture him (and slave informers may have been tortured; see n. below). But could a slave give such voluntary information in a case of homicide (rather than in its regular cases of treason, sacrilege and theft of public money, Harrison, LA I, 171}? The idea that this was possible stems from the interpretation of marturein in 48 as equal to ménuein, which is of doubtful validity (see Bonner & Smith,
AJHA
2,
preferable and
46
225-226;
29,
examined
interpretation
correctly
(see
of
36,
them
48).
Nor
here),
and
under
does we
torture,
Bonner
should
for
interpret
remember
a
36
that
in
36 Euxitheus argues that the slave should have been produced and a challenge made - which suggests that in his eyes at least the slave was a witness rather than an informer. So Antiphon may be
using
menutes
in
a
contemptuous
be indulging in a clever analogy, put_him to death: see 47 n, doing the contrasts
exact opposite the opponents’
one
manner
which
and
at
the
is continued
same
time
in 46.
of what other men do: Antiphon similarly behaviour with what normally happened 93
in 38, 84 (= 6 Chor. 47), 6 Chor. 45. other men reward informers...: these rewards 1 Myst. 27-28; Lys. 5 Call. mentioned; cf. And.
are 3-5,
16; Gorg. Pal. 11; Thuc. Bonner, EAC, 39; Harrison,
11.914a, 932d; First Tetralogy
6.27.2; LA I,
Plato, Laws 171. Ant. 2
frequently 7 Sac, Ol,
c4 (if reflecting normal Attic procedure) suggests that the slave informer would not be tortured and this was accepted by Bonner for cases in which the information was freely given. But the opposite view, that a slave informer would be freed only if he kept to his story under torture, was taken by Thür 56 ἢ. 33. Finally,
35
36
MacDowell,
LCA,
181
thinks
the
reward
of
freedom
was
not a legal requirement but a customary act (which would be supported by the killing of the slave by Herodes' relatives if he was an informer). in spite of a protest by my friends: the brevity of the narrative leaves us in the dark over the identity of these friends and how they came to be present at the torture. For their request, and Euxitheus' employment of its refusal by the prosecution as an argument against them, see 36, challenging me to examine him under torture. proving the truth...assumed to be true: in the Greek the verb apollumai (‘be ruined') stands at the end of parallel clauses (antistrophe), which helps emphasise how the loss of the slave's life was causing the loss of Euxitheus'. A similar effect has been attempted in the translation with truth/true. here:
most
obviously
to
make this whether a
sentence challenge
evidence could be
trial
itself
72-73
and
should torture
we of
(for
Thür
be
rendered
contrasting
190-193,
v.
take enthade the slave took
that Herodes' relatives charge with the Eleven is clearly possible and
'in
court',
for the delivered views
on
Harrison,
which
should
disputed question even at the start which
LA
2,
so literally? If we place in Euxitheus'
see
149
Bonner,
n.
4).
then
as to of the EAC,
However,
remember that the absence and assume
had then gone to Athens to register the (perhaps soon after Euxitheus' return) it logical for Euxitheus to argue that they
should have produced the slave after his own arrival in Athens (even though we might rather have expected him to say that the
slave should have been produced in Mytilene). So enthade may be in Athens'. Alternatively (and preferably), this may be little more than a rhetorical statement by Euxitheus, the point being that
Herodes'
relatives
ought
not
to
have
put
the
slave
to
death
but should have produced him for Euxitheus to examine, regardless of location (similarly, in Aesch. 2 Fals. Leg. 126 the offer made in court to hand over slaves for torture may be mere rhetoric; see Harrison, ibid.). For there appears to be no suggestion that the slave should have been produced in court either as a witness or as an informer - the emphasis lies rather on the idea that the slave should have been presented to Euxitheus and a challenge made. Therefore when Euxitheus says
94
38
in 46 that the prosecution put their informer to death and used every effort to prevent him from 'coming to you' and himself from torturing him he may simply be continuing the analogy with informers,
who
would
come
forward
with
their
information
to
the
Assembly or Council, and be reiterating his point here. challenging me to examine him under torture: referring to the proklésis made by a litigant to his opponent; for the procedure see
Bonner,
EAC,
67-69;
Harrison,
LA
2,
148-149;
Thur
at
time
passim
(62-64 for keleuein in challenges). From this and from the statements in 34 and 38 that Euxitheus' friends made a vain challenge at the slave's torture it is clear that the prosecution themselves made no challenge to Euxitheus to torture their slave (nor,
indeed,
was
torture).
Thus,
confession
in
if
court
Euxitheus
the (and
on
Lesbos
prosecution to
seem
they
the
actually
used
the
slave's case
their
based
have
of
the
on
this and on the note) and if the slave was not an informer his since a prosecutor strictly invalid as evidence, was statement could only use the evidence of his slave if his opponent had slave the accepted justifiable grievance
seems Euxitheus So torture. for 150 n. id., (see also Harrison,
a have he and
to 2)
turns the prosecution's refusal to make him a challenge to his own advantage in 38. see 47 ἢ. They should not have put him to death: If we are to judge from probability: for similar weighing of the alternatives
with
probability
Solmsen
49-51;
42-45,
cf.
37-38.
when he was in danger of being ruined: the imperfect (apölluto) denotes likelihood, intention or danger, as in 60 (diepheugen); see GMT 38. whom to lit. whom the truth of his second statement defended: the truth...was an ally’. Metaphor with summachos recurs in 43 the opposite while 93, in sunagönizesthai with and 86 and metaphor with polemios appears in 86 and 93, For other instances of metaphor in the speech cf. 71, 91 and 94, while
there
were
those...corrected:
the
Greek
is
difficult
here,
in
hardly fits with ‘those hiding away') (lit, that hoi aphaniountes tous proterous logous ('the first statement') since the prosecution would not have wanted to hide away the words of the slave that were
favourable
to
them.
Hence
editors
have
understood
the
participle in the sense of 'distort' or ‘obscure’, but obscuring the slave's words would not have made it impossible for them to have lit. been corrected later (höste médepote eis to aléthes katasténai, Rather, the slave's to restore them to the truth’). 'so as never
removal against being
have this effect would just this in 38. So 'the used
periphrastically
and first ‘the
for
Antiphon statement slave,
goes on (of the uttering
to argue slave)' is his
first
statement’. Others...but in this case: for this line of argument see 34, doing is seize’ 'Quietly do. men other of what opposite exact the Troad. kleptousi, a usage of the simple verb paralleled in Eur. 958. 95
the very be taken the
persons who as referring
initiation
of
the
arrested the slave: hoi apagontes is not to the use of apagöge against Euxitheus suit,
which
would
be
a
thought quite out of context here. If I had made away with...But as it is...: sentence takes the form of a ‘hypothetical coined 74-75,
by 84,
Solmsen 10); 1 Stepmother
sim. 11,
32 12,
sudden
change
the argument inversion’ (a
(a much 6 Chor.
to in of
of this phrase
shortened version), 27, 28, 29; And. 1
Myst. 24; Lys. 7 Sac,O/, 36. Like the form the thought is commonplace (cf. especially Ant. 1 Stepmother 11, 6 Chor. 27; further Lys. 4 Wound 12, 7 Sac.Ol. 36; Isoc. 17 Trapez. 27-28; Is. 8 Cir. 11; Dem. 49 Timoth. 58), and note the rhetoric employed here, including a tricolon (&phanisa/éthelon /epheugon), alliteration (tauta tauta tekméria) and amplification with et. fig. (aitian epepheron hén E@itiönto): Antiphon makes gain out of the prosecution's refusal to accept or offer the slave for torture. in spite of a challenge being made by my friends: reiterating 34. The use of prokaloumenon makes it clear that a proklösis was being made; see Thur 61, 39
the slave: anthropos is used with a demeaning tone both of the slave (also 42, 51, 54) and of the free man (42, 55; the two together in 29, 52). This does not, against Gernet 122 n. 4,
imply low
that
social
the
latter
standing
was
(on
in
which
fact see
a
slave,
29,
the
but
it
may
reflect
his
men).
my accomplice in the murder: Euxitheus here argues that the slave admitted not to being an accomplice in the murder but to helping him remove the body. But in 54 he contradicts himself; see the slave stated...he had committed the murder himself, sunapokteinai
is
another
rare
word,
occurring
also
in
Aesch.
2 Fals, Leg. 148; Dio Cassius frg. 11.18. but that he conducted: in the Greek hoti de exagagoi, a remarkable change from the regular infinitive (/egein) after phémi to hoti with the optative; compare possibly Plato, Gorg. 487d (with
Dodds'
note);
Philippic 48; Xen, 356. A vivid effect the construction may helped me pick him with’, in contrast further
42,
further
Lys.
7
Sac.Ol.
19;
Dem.
4
First
Anab, 7.1.5; GMT, 753,2; Kühner-Gerth 2, is produced, highlighting the antithesis, and be intended to reflect the slave's words. up: sunanelön simply means 'take up together with sunapokteinai, 'kill together with! (cf.
anairethentos
in
45
and
anaireseds
in
68).
But
the
active of anairein normally carries the sense of 'destroying', the middle form being used for ‘taking up’, and Antiphon may be playing on a double-meaning of sunanairein, which was in the minutes and which the prosecution understood as = sunapokteinai. threw him into the sea: see 28 n. 40
the wheel: trochistheisa;
in order of
to be
for torture Bekk. An. |,
released
on 306,
from
31. 96
the
the lines
wheel cf. Suidas, 28-30; 32 to be racked.
torture:
s.v.
reiterating the thought
41
42
bemoaned: like phroudos in 29 apdimdxen is a poetic word no found elsewhere in classical prose. ° P \ compelled by the truth: completing a circle of sophistic argumentation in 40-41 (truth - necessity - truth). Probably the slave altered his story when he realised he was about to be put to death, but equally his confession under torture may have been made under the compulsion of necessity - and we can understand why the prosecution may have been anxious to execute the unreliable slave. the second man: the free man. On the difficulties involved with this sentence see 29, the he confirmed: the free
43
men, man,
of
course,
was
actually
tortured
before the slave, but his favourable evidence is rightly considered afterwards (see 30, The first). I did not leave the boat at all: repeating the alibi of 23; seen. there. probability supports me: more metaphor, recalling that of 37 (see whom the truth of his second statement defended). I would hardly have been...witnesses and confederates: for the commonplace thought that murderers plan and commit their crimes in secret cf. Ant. 1 Stepmother 28, 2 First Tetralogy a2, c8; Lys. 1 Caed.Erat. 46. Secrecy naturally makes the solving of the crime
more
other
topical
difficult;
cf.
Ant.
themes
are
discernible
6
Chor.
18;
Aesch.
here,
both
1
Tim.
forms
91.
Two
of a fortiori
argument:
i) Theodorus' ‘topos from errors committed' hamartethenton; cf. Arist. Rhet. 2.23.28), the Euxitheus had done one thing he would not have of doing
ii) the Arist. himself have
another;
sim.
told
anyone
after
lit.
of
noticeable
physical 105, once
61,
62;
'topos of the more and less' (topos tou mallon kai hétton, id. 2.23.4-5) - if Euxitheus planned the murder by because of the danger so much the more would he not
crazy: the
53-54,
'possessed
suffering)
he
had
by
an
compounds
and
is
committed
evil in
very
it;
sim.
genius', Antiphon
common
(see
in
61-62.
kakodaimön 2,
is
another
submit
Aristophanes
to
(as
the
Ach.
Knights 7, Clouds 104, Plutus 386). The adjective is found in Demosthenes (19 Fals.Leg. 115), who also uses the
substantival
(2
Second
Olynthiac
20,
(8 Chers. 16; cf. also Isoc. 7 Areop. Lysias has kakodaimonistés ('member frg. 53.2 Scheibe). to plan: on prounoésamén see 13, even ay
(topos ek ton argument that if made the mistake
pr.
24.3)
and
verbal
73; Din, 1 Dem. of a 'Satanist' when
91); club'
forms while LSJ,
summoned.
Was a man...on board?: a fully unconvincing argument since a swift blow from behind could have prevented any such cries. It was also a stormy night and the passengers were drinking. by night...in a city: for arguments based on time and place cf. Ant. 2 First Tetralogy a4, 6 Chor. 45; Lys. 7 Sac.Ol. 15, 28; Gorg. Pal. 10. The text is corrupt here: Wyse 311 rejected the 97
combination pollai pleon and agnoein ('not to hear') gives the opposite sense to that which is required. It is easiest, with Schömann, to add epi and simply alter agnoein to akouein (or gegönein,
(but
with
against
Cobet).
his
See
further
interpretation
358).
45
kai
mén
MAO
see
I,
190
Denniston
n.
a
(1954)
᾿
The technique see
Maidment,
of
argument recurring
Due
39.
here resumes and expands that of 27, ἃ in 46-48 (after 33-35) and 49-51 (after 42);
As
there,
the
structure
is
well-balanced:
n.b. the chiastically arranged en ἐδὶ g&éi men apothanontos X entithemenou de eis to ploion and the parallel ta t'en téi gei.,.ta en ἰδὶ ploiöi (with homoeoteleuton). This careful structure helps to bring out the difficulties involved in murdering a person without leaving clues, especially at night; and the possibility that these
traces
were
removed
is
mentioned
in
question
form,
which
contrasts with the statement that there were no traces and adds a certain amount of irony. icked up: anaireihentos could be 'killed' but compare anaireseös in 68 and sunanelön in 39 (see n. there). ‘Picking up’ is also a regular meaning of the verb in connection with bodies, as Thuc. 3.24.3;
Eur.
Or.
second nuktör antithesis above
404.
However,
it
is
to
phrase entithemenou is - and anaircthentos may be
be
noted
repeated a simple
that
in
the
from the variation on
apothanontos.
smooth
out...wipe
away:
cf. Arist. HA 6.15, latter (the reading
46
more
8.20; of A)
rare
Plut. Mor. cf. schol.
vocabulary. 637f, Hom.
For
the
former
Public. 15.4; for the Od. 8.88; schol. Ar.
Frogs 490; Antyli. ap. Orib. 6.9.1. N has anaspoggisai, also rare but used by Hippocrates (Ulc. 4; Nat. Mul, 32, 74). | hope you will forgive me...: Antiphon apologises for his argumentation technique of repetition of a point. Speakers, as might be expected, often plead for the jurors' forgiveness over certain
contentions
and
lines
of
argument;
cf.
And.
3
Peace
21;
Lys. 21 Brib. Def. 16; Lyc. I Leocr. 128; Dem. 10 Fourth Philippic 54 (sim, 19 Fals. Leg. 227; Plato, Ap. 316), 21 Meid. 58. For their part, the jurors in the popular courts would freely vent their disapproval; see Lofberg 12. to prevent him coming to you: see 36, here. In the analogy with informers the judges (humas) represent the people; see 90, you will be my judges in the other court too. to take him: uxai is a very rare form of the aorist and has been suspected more than once. A parallel would be proséxan in Thuc. 2.97.3 if that reading too were not doubtful (see Gomme's note). it was to their own advantage: since, if he was telling the truth, the slave would keep to his story when tortured by Euxitheus and the prosecution would be able to make play with this in court (as Maidment, MAO 1, 192 n. a). but the prosecution probably feared that the pain of the torture would make the slave change his
story,
whether
or
not
it was 98
true.
47
they bought the slave: this sentence suggests that the buying took place after the torture, which goes against Erbse's contention that the length of time involved was a factor in the delay before the questioning (see 30, The second they tortured several days later). In 47-48 Euxitheus tries to show the illegality of killing one's slave,.so he makes it clear from the outset that the slave put to death in Mytilene belonged to the prosecution. His implication, then, is that the prosecution bought the slave for the very purpose of executing him (which may indeed have been the case, whether from good or bad motives), but this does not rule out the possibility that the transaction was in fact made before the have been
put_him to master and
scholars (as Bonner, EAC, 71) that the buying would have
the regular
this was
(though
the torturing
preceded of
torture. However, some too ready to assume
death: Harrison is emphatic slave in this respect - there
putting
one's
slave
(MacDowell,
AHL,
21-22,
doubt is Morrow functions of the
to
death
LCA,
80
was is
illegal;
more
(cf. [Arist.] Ath,Pol, 57.3). However, should we Euxitheus with prosecution
must slave
a
murder,
so
whatever
prosecution,
the
was
it
whether
law
the
LA
I,
Also
171
in
little
it was one of the of killing a slave
before we condemn Morrow's remember
the own
legal between made confessed his part in
be had their
have
could
motives,
what was in their view his proper The scene was Lesbos and we may
said they were carrying out Was this illegal? punishment. wonder
see
cautious).
211-212 and we may note that Palladium to try those accused
distinction that comment valid principles and legal remedies. The
practice).
on the position between is no doubt that the act
or
general
that
practice
slave
a
who admitted his part in a murder in any corner of the Empire is This for trial. Athens to brought be should whatsoever may well, as he 271 and Antiphon by De Ste Croix doubted advantage
taken
have
suggests,
of
general
an
in
wording
3, 122 n, Gernet it to a slave. decree and applied Athenian was ἃ argument felt Antiphon's 15, 52 n. Thür by followed sophism but Erbse (1977) 213-214 goes further and contends that the killing
was
present Philoneus'
at
-
and
torture.
He
justified
the
pallaké
in
Ant.
an 1
authority
Athenian
adduces
as
Stepmother
a 20,
parallel but
probably
was
killing
the this
is
a
of
much
disputed question; and he is perhaps too dogmatic in saying that of an punishment was the regular the slave to death putting But he has indicated that this was not simply unfree murderer. the killing of a slave - it was his punishment for a crime. of the slave was illegal how killing if the Nevertheless, should the slayer have been prosecuted? The law laid down that a to justice by a dike phonou be brought should killer slave's passage cited above), (cf. the Ath.Pol. the Palladium before 47 Euerg. Dem. 48; (cf. prosecution the conducting master But what happened when the master 20-21). AHL, MacDowell, himself the killer, as in our case? The slave's relatives, if he 99
his 70; was had
any, would most likely be servile too and prosecute. MacDowell admits the possibility prosecute,
but
the
whole
concept
of
without competence to that any citizen could
such
a
graphé
phonou
remains doubtful. Perhaps a preferable view is that of Gagarin (1979) 306-313 (esp. 312-313), who concludes that there was no explicit statement in the law that no one other than the relatives of the victim or the master of a slave could prosecute, and a prosecution by an outsider might be allowed in the absence of relatives
may
(but
indicate
see
Hansen
that
Harrison, LA MacDowell, id., their informer:
the
1, 20. see
(1981)
master
172),
11-13).
need
but
only
against
Finally,
undergo this
see
Ant.
was
he
the
Chor.
4
(see
Morrow
222;
34n.
the state did not decree it: referring to a court pséphos is used below and in 48 of a judicial procedure. nor
6
purification
man's
murderer:
see
54,
the
slave
at
Athens.
stated...he
had
committed the murder himself. Even if the slave admitted only to being an accomplice this would have seemed sufficient reason to the prosecution for putting him to death. surrender him to my friends on security: exegguésai is only found here in this sense. It more regularly bears the meaning ‘release on payment of bail', as Dem. 24 Timocr. 73, hand him over to your magistrates: to whom? There are two main alternatives: i) Athenian overseas officials in Mytilene; ii) officials in Athens (i.e. the Eleven, who were in charge of the city prison). (That they would not have been local officials seems to be indicated 251-252.)
by
tois
humeterois,
and
see
Bonner
&
Smith,
AJHA
2,
i} would seem the more likely, perhaps referring to Athenian officials who conducted a preliminary hearing of the case. The presence of such officials in Mytilene after the 'friendly' decree {on which see 77, granted the other Mytileneans an amnesty) would hardly have been an infringement of the Lesbians’ new autonomy (as 5. Cataldi, reviewing W. Schuller, Die Herrschaft der
Athener,
in
ASNP
5
(1975)
1593)
and
an
Athenian
official
may have been involved in the primary stages of trials which were transferred to Athens. when it was not permitted...Athenian people: reflecting Athenian interference in allied jurisdiction, on which see P, 25. judges...pass judgment: Krités is a judge in general, an arbiter, dikastés more specifically one who judges in court. Hence there is a certain amount of irony here, the roles being reversed by Euxitheus. statements...acts:
words.,.the
actual
on
the
antithesis
facts.
100
see
3,
his
accusers'
48
caught AEE,
in
the
act:
on
arrest
they are handed over to argues that a slave should The
slave
in
flagrante
see
Hansen,
reference
in
here,
custody
then,
until
the authorities: in 47-48 Euxitheus stand trial if suspected of murder. is
his
to
the
Eleven,
trial.
But
it
slave caught red-handed in a homicide who confessed to such a crime would
privilege, truth,
delicto
48-53.
the
especially laws
if the
may
murder
have
was
ordained
is
who
hard
would
to
or one, as have been
committed that
the
keep
believe
that
the
a
in our case, granted this
abroad. slave
So,
in
caught
in
flagrante should be handed over to the Eleven not for confinement but for execution - and that private citizens should not perform the task. according to the ancient laws of your country: i.e. those of Draco; see 14, the oldest in this country. If it is indeed permissible...of his being murdered: see 29, examined them under torture. for a court to sentence...of a free man: it appears that there was no fixed penalty for killing a slave but that it would have been less than MacDowell,
rhetorical punishment
49
50
that AHL,
for killing a 126-127. So
exaggeration, of
slaves
but and
free
citizen; see Morrow this statement seems
Antiphon
may
non-citizens.
be
213-214; to be a
comparing
the
Alternatively,
the
clause may refer to the availability of legal procedure and ps€phos in the next clause bears the idea more of ‘judicial proceeding’ than ‘vote’. you deserve to be standing trial...: a forceful conclusion to 46-48 (n.b. the et. fig. in dikaioteron/adikös, the latter in emphatic position), with the accused becoming accuser, as in 59, 2 First Tetralogy bil, 4 Third Tetralogy b7; Lys. 3 Sim. 44, 21 Brib, Def. 16. In 49-51 we see a third example of Antiphon's technique of repeating and expanding upon arguments. the free man: the only explicit statement in the speech as to the Status of the first person tortured. has not even yet said anything compromising about me: why, then, did Euxitheus not produce him as a witness? Possibly because he had left Lesbos and Euxitheus could not now find him or could not get him to come to Athens. Schindel, MH, 38-39 thinks that this sentence shows the free man was produced, taking oudepö nun as ‘even now still not'. However, this may simply be rhetorical exaggeration, since it was no lie to say the free man had not to that day denounced Euxitheus if he had disappeared. like the other one: i.e., presumably, 'as they could have persuaded the other one', rather than ‘as they persuaded', since the offer was Euxitheus' assumption (see 31, doubtless). he was willing...: his loyalty would be the easier to understand
101
if
he
was
Euxitheus'
attendant,
but
this
is
doubtful;
men.
those who consistently keep to one statement...: witnesses effective materially;
51
the
see
29,
credibility
is rarely attacked convincingly by the orators, method was to show that their accounts’ see
Bonner,
EAC,
the
of
but an varied
86-88.
[Similarly...denied]: the brackets were inserted by Thalheim after G.A. Hirschig, 'Selectae emendationes et observationes in Antiphonte', Philologus 9 (1854) 737. As Maidment notes, MAO I, 197 n. a, the syntax is harsh and the reasoning unsound: the slave
altered
his
story,
as
has
just
been
said,
and
so
he
cannot
be set against the free man in this way. an equal division...: an interesting, sophistic analogy, though Gernet 123 n. 1 sees it as perhaps retaining the unconscious recollection of an ancient procedure based on the counting of the witnesses. For the idea of in dubio pro reo cf. Aesch. 3 Ctes. 252; iArist.] Ath.Pol. 69.1, Rhet. ad 29.13, 15; Aeschyl. Eum. 741, 752-753; 52
Alex. 18.7; Arist. Prob. Harrison, LA 2, 47 (with
n. 3). Note the antistrophe here (didkontos/didkonta). | would have got rid of the two men: a surprisingly statement
by
Euxitheus,
perhaps
reflecting
the
real
bald
contemporary
attitude to a problem such as an embarrassing slave; see Due 39. In this sentence Antiphon puts ‘having something on one's conscience' before ‘committing a crime! instead of in its correct temporal position after - the figure hysteron-proteron. to the mainland: i.e. to Asia Minor. to inform: ménutas is here used in a general sense, with no legal 53
connotations as Euxitheus
possibly elsewhere; see 34, the informer. now turns to the second atechnos pistis,
the
note
which was found during the second search of the decked boat in Mytilene. This note must have formed the basis of the prosecution along with the slave's evidence since, if genuine, it was conclusive (and provided the motive for the murder), But genuine or
not,
such
evidence
was
hard
to
refute
without
the
aid
of
forensic science; and the burdening weight of the note is to some extent reflected by the much briefer treatment it receives from Antiphon in comparison with the basanos (though the opportunities for eikos-argument were greater with the latter). Euxitheus argues that i)
a note
was
unnecessary;
ii) the contents slave's statement; iii) the note was a To secure this temporal/plot
of the note were different from those of the and therefore forgery. last point he once more in 55-56 employs a
theme
(see
25,
before
| put
to
sea),
that
the
note
was only discovered during the second search of the vessel - i.e. after the free man had refused to incriminate Euxitheus the prosecution decided to forge the note in case the slave was similarly obstinate. Thus Euxitheus is concerned not only with the 102
contents
of
the
basanos
and
the
note,
but
also
with
the
way
in
which the evidence was obtained. In addition, the argumentation over the note is delayed until after that over the basanos, since it is easier to believe in the forgery when the prosecution's behaviour with regard to the torture has been vilified. Finally, the argument in 53-54 has a topical nature; see 43, | would hardly have been...witnesses and confederates. a_note: was the note forged? There was, we remember, a delay before it was found; and the forging of such a brief note would have presented few problems and could hardly have been proved. But,
on
the
other
hand,
boat
by
the
slave
and
forced
him
to
confess;
hiding-place of the no need for the
the
when or
note
the the
may
have
prosecution slave
may
been
hidden
on
discovered have
the
it they
revealed
note. Again, while it does seem that there note, the alleged contradiction between
the
was its
contents and the slave's statement does not in fact exist; see 54, the slave stated...he had committed the murder himself. Clearly,
the note was a great obstacle for Euxitheus to overcome. Lycinus: the most mysterious figure in the case. On the basis of 61 (‘though it was possible...this he did not wish to do') and especially 62 (see even though if discovered...sacred and precious) he is generally considered to have been, like Herodes, an At enian living at Mytilene; see Blass, AB I, 175 ἢ. 3; Jebb, AO O |, 56 with n, 2; Gernet 123 n. 2. His poor financial condition (63) suggests that he was also a cleruch. If so, Lycinus probably knew Herodes, and he seems to have been an acquaintance of Euxitheus {n.b. 63, 'my friendship with him was hardly close enough'). The fact that he was implicated in the murder perhaps suggests either a closer friendship with Euxitheus than the defendant admits to in 63, or that Lycinus had some quarrel with Herodes or Herodes' relatives for which the latter were now trying to gain revenge. If, further, the prosecution even arqued that Lycinus was behind the whole affair (as may be implied in 60, ‘in his case too their charge is unreasonable', and by the defence
58
of
Lycinus
in
60-63)
we
might
well
wonder
whether
he
was proceeded against too. There seems to have been more to all this than meets the eye. the note contradicted the slave...the slave the note: for the antimetabole see T4, Hence you must not...interpretation of the case. the slave stated...he had committed the murder himself: this contradicts Euxitheus’ words in 39, which are reiterated in 42 and implied
in
47
('nor
was
he
the
man's
murderer'),
and
a
close
consideration of 39, 42, 54 and also 68 reveals a high degree of ingenuity in Antiphon's argumentation. To begin with 39 and 42, where the crucial word is sunanairein. This word was presumably found in the minutes of the torture and represents the slave's confession of complicity in the murder. But Antiphon saw here a possibility of disputing 103
what the slave was supposed to have said, upon a different interpretation of the wording of the minutes. He could then minimise the slave's alleged part in the crime and complain that Euxitheus was not afforded the opportunity of examining this witness personally, while protesting against the illegal killing of a man who had not been party to the deed itself. Now when it came to the note, Antiphon realised that this burdening piece of evidence could also be best dealt with by disputing its actual contents - but he could only do this by emphasising an apparent contrast between the note and the slave's evidence (the one saying that Euxitheus had performed the deed, the other that the slave
had
not
helped).
enough
order
to
and
show
The
slave's
Euxitheus
that
the
mere
has
whole
complicity
to
insist
business
is,
upon
with
in
a
the
this
instance,
discrepancy note
was
part
in of
the prosecution's plot against him. So he contradicts his previous statement and says that the slave confessed to the murder. Although Antiphon's clever manipulation of the evidence may be
apparent
to
the
moment
the
So
55
it
not
leisurely
reader
contradiction
too
surprising
of
could when,
the
easily in
68,
speech,
have
in
the
escaped
Euxitheus
heat
of
detection.
reverts
to
his
first version of the slave's evidence, but attributes it to the prosecution themselves. Again, this is an argument for the moment, necessary to complete the comparison with the Ephialtes affair, and Antiphon was taking a calculated risk that the jurors would not detect this further inconsistency. but during a later one: on Antiphon's arguments from the delay see 53, heading n. Note also the simple joining of opposites here (not during the first search, but during a later one), a method Antiphon frequently employs in the Tetralogies (as 2 First Tetralogy b5 bis, c6, 3 Second Tetralogy a2, 4 Third Tetralogy d6)
56 57
is
the
and
one
familiar
from
Herodotus
(as
3.25.2,
4.161.1).
from the first: to apo protes supply arches (sim. Thuc. 1.77.3). Euxitheus now changes from refutative to confirmative arguments, beginning with his motive for killing Herodes (57-59), In 60-61 Lycinus' motive is dealt with and in 62-63 Euxitheus discusses his relationship with Lycinus, to dispense with the idea that he was acting on his behalf. The different possible motives (not
all
of
which
favour
(57).
would
have
been
adduced
by
the
prosecution)
are: i}
a
This
is
combined
with
the
motive
of
personal
enmity, in that one will not simply kill as a favour, but must also have bad feelings towards the victim; ii) a preventive measure (58); iii) financial gain (58-59). This last motive prepares the way for a counter-charge against the prosecution's motive in bringing the case (59). These motives, ii) and iii) being repeated in 60 for Lycinus, are naturally commonplace ones; cf. Ant. 2 First Tetralogy a5-6,
104
c8,
d9,
Ap.
revolution); 221-223
Col.
Lys.
(motives
I-Il
1 for
(Antiphon's
Caed. a
Erat.
motives
for
Dem.
19
43-46;
prosecution),
29
Aphobus
iii
killed
as
a
for
desiring
Fals.
22-24
a
Leg.
(motives
for false testimony); Gorg. Pal, 13-19, there was not even any bad feeling between him and me: the repetition in the Greek of the negative, and later of the whole sentence, helps disguise that we have no proof of this lack of enmity. In addition, it is noticeable that Euxitheus only considers motives applicable to a premeditated murder and so he does not deal with the possibility that enmity could have arisen as a result of, say, the drinking-bout. as a favour: Euxitheus only asserts in a general manner that he cannot have murdered Herodes for a favour since there was no enmity between them. Then, in 58, he contends that there was no financial reward to be gained from the killing since Herodes was poor. Finally, in 62-63 he denies that he could have been hired by Lycinus to perform the murder since Lycinus was also poor. Thus he does not specifically mention what the prosecution may have
claimed,
that
he
this
possibility
is
only
Whether
58
or
not
this
is
Herodes
indirectly
refuted
significant
we
favour
by
the
cannot,
Lycinus,
argument
of course,
and
of
be
57.
sure;
but it is, perhaps, an example of the way in which Antiphon would enfeeble the prosecution's arguments, especially the ones most difficult to deal with, by separating them into different parts. it_must_be clear...that the design is growing: recalling the contention of 21-22 that no design could be attributed to Euxitheus in his meeting Herodes. Noticeable here is the hypophora in the questions, with repeated
alla;
for
other
examples
of
this
figure,
in
Panath.
23;
which
suggestions are made and rejected in succession, cf. 63, Ap. Col. 1.15-11.14; And. 1 Myst. 148, 3 Peace 14-15; Lys. 10 Theomn. 23,:
24
Inv.
24-25,
30
Nicom.
26-27;
Isoc.
12
tn
truth,
Is.
5
Dic. 45-46; Dem. 14 Navy Boards 27; Gorg. Pal. 7-12. I had no such fears with regard to him: lit. 'nothing of the kind had been begun by me with regard to him'. For a similar use of the passive hupérkto cf. Thuc. 1.93.3 (where it is impersonal). was | going to enrich myself by murdering him?: some scholars, indeed,
have
seen
the
trial
as
being,
one
for
murder
with robbery; contra see P, 27 n. 3, he had no money: suggesting that Herodes was a cleruch (see 20 n.). But note that he was travelling with some Thracian slaves in order to ransom them (20), and if these belonged to him he would have
been
wealthier
than
Euxitheus
makes
out
(at
least,
after
the
money or possession of the The ransom completed). was deal to kill for Euxitheus a motive been have then could slaves Herodes. The possibility that the financial gain came in the form in is discussed Lycinus) (i.e. from a third person of money 62-63. 59
motive:
on
prophasis
here
and
in
60 see 105
21,
purposes.
that you are attempting to secure my death for money: an accusation repeated in 79. Erbse (1977) 219-220 detects a double function.in the invective: i} to suspect the prosecution's whole behaviour in the case. Neither Herodes (58) nor Lycinus (63) was wealthy, but Euxitheus was (ibid.), so he should have been the one murdered for his money; ii) to fulfil the promise of 10 (‘their motives for this you will
learn in the course of my speech’) over the timésis. But it has elsewhere been argued that money would not have been the object of the prosecution, unless Herodes' relatives made a mistake in thinking that by employing endeixis they would be able to propose a monetary penalty (see P. 27 with n. 8); and Erbse (1977) 225 is himself doubful over this. Another line of approach is to suspect the prosecution either of being bribed to bring the suit (of which we have no other indication) or of having demanded blood-money not to bring it (as Gernet
125
ἢ.
1;
it
is
hardly
relevant
in
the
context
of
the
pre-trial scene of Lesbos whether this was legal or not). This would fit in with Euxitheus' defence of his father (74-80) and especially with ‘this whole intrigue against my father and myself has been fabricated for the sake of money' (79): the wealthy Mytilenean, whose political stance was open to question, may have seemed an easy target, his son having travelled with Herodes. But deeper considerations of this kind may appear too speculative and there is, besides, another much simpler explanation of Euxitheus' invective, a development of i} above. For it became a commonplace method of argumentation in the orators, with the rise
of sycophancy with just such
in Athens, to attempt to embarrass a charge of sycophantic intent; cf.
one's opponent Lys. 7 Sac.O/.
1, 38-40; Aesch. 1 Tim. 1; Dem. 36 For Phormion 54; Lofberg 22; Bonner & Smith, AJHA 2, 46 (hence the denial of such intent, as Dem. 53 Nicostr. 1; Ar. Peace 191). The possibilities of this
argument were, however, already evident to Antiphon First Tetralogy b13) and, indeed, in 80 Euxitheus actually at length of sycophants in a veiled but sure reference prosecution.
Further,
in
78
Euxitheus
asserts
that
his
(cf. 2 speaks to the father
went to Aenus to escape the sycophants, perhaps implying that he himself had fallen victim to them. So it may be significant that in 59 the hoti clause follows a potential optative, which, like the subsequent Καὶ polu an dikaioteron haloiés..., suggests a rhetorical statement. The attack in 79 is made in a positive form, but after 59 this may be taken equally rhetorically. Further on sycophants cf. Lys. 21 Brib.Def. 1. You might much more justly be convicted: the accused becomes the accuser once more; see 48, you deserve to be standing trial...; for the thought cf. 2 First Tetralogy bit. Euxitheus does not, of course, imply that an actual trial of the prosecution could have followed upon his wrongful condemnation he 106
maintains the justice of such a trial. by you and the family of Herodes: Hansen, AEE, 124 n, 7 infers from this that the prosecution speech was delivered by an advocate (sunégoros). But sunégoroi were normally supporting speakers, the main speech usually being delivered by the litigant himself;
see
Bonner,
AJHA 2, 7-15; be the relative 60
61
I must
also,
82-84,
it seems,
clear
LL,
200-209;
2, 158-159. Hence made the speech.
Lycinus:
Euxitheus
Bonner
sou
&
Smith,
may
simply
considers
similar
motives for Lycinus as for himself, but with 'redress for an injury' replacing 'favour'. In 61-62 Antiphon employs two iopo/; see 43, 1 would hardly have been...witnesses and confederates. winning favour with your city: it was a topos in the orators that a prosecution might help the city (cf. Ant. 6 Chor. 9; Lys, 7 Sac.Ol. 20; Aesch, 1 Tim. 2; Lyc. 1 Leocr. 3) and prosecutors customarily would make out that their actions were for the city's see
benefit;
:
witness-formula
62
EAC,
Harrison, LA who actually
before
Blass the
saw
rubric
the
need
MARTU
for
RES,
the
insertion
of a
while
Thalheim
and
Maidment perhaps Maidment's note ad the translation).
rightly suspected a larger loc., whose suggested addition
on
Herodes
this
count
he
left
alone:
of
course,
lacuna (see is followed in
Lycinus'
grievance
need not have been actionable but may still have been serious enough for him to wish to kill Herodes. even though if discovered...sacred and precious: this sentence has caused much difficulty and was bracketed by Gernet 107, on the ground that exile or exclusion from sacred and public places were too mild to be penalties for homicide (and there is no evidence for the latter as a separate penalty). But i) the rhetoric being employed here must be recognised. Euxitheus wishes to bring home to the jury how ridiculous the idea was that Lycinus should not have taken any legal action against Herodes but would then have dared to murder him. So he puts extra emphasis on what Lycinus had to lose by means of a highly rhetorical (n.b. the anaphora, apesterei men...apesterei
de...,
and
the
tricolon
in
the
latter
clause)
and
false
antithesis:
both Euxitheus and Lycinus would have been deprived of their but see how much more Lycinus would have lost (this country, also suggests that Lycinus' nationality was different from scholars not as strongly as many perhaps though Euxitheus', have assumed); if happened have would what is talking about ii) Euxitheus death Herodes' plotting whilst discovered been had Lycinus (epebouleuen, en δὶ gnöstheis) - this is then, in fact, evidence for
MacDowell's
reference
type
to a penalty
E
of
bouleusis
for actual
of
homicide.
107
homicide,
AHL,
61,
not
a
63
Ι am now actually adopting the standpoint of the prosecution: for the second time (cf. 27 and n.). Was it that...: more hypophora, on which see 58, heading n. Lycinus was presumably imprisoned as a since he could not...: State debtor if 242-244),
matter
of
(for this form of laws were Lesbian
imprisonment.
payment’,
see
Harrison,
On id.
imprisonment see Harrison, similar to those of Athens
huperémeros, I,
lit.
‘over
LA 2, in the
the
day
for
282.
seven minae: paying for Lycinus' release would have been a true mark of friendship. Euxitheus minimises the size of the debt to prove his point and, below, to make a contrast with the serious crime of homicide. But seven minae was not a negligible sum. was hardly close enough: this seems to imply at least some acquaintance with Lycinus; see 53 n. 64-73 In 64-66 Euxitheus argues that it is not up to him to explain Herodes' disappearance and in 67-71 he adduces three historical parallels to show the difficulties involved in doing so. The first two deal with the difficulty in discovering a murderer, while the third
64
adds
refutation
65
theme,
that
care
should
be
taken
in
This prepares the way for commonplace argumentation and anger in 71-73. conjecture...: Euxitheus refuses to make simple which may well have seemed banal after his lengthy of
the
prosecution's
version
of
events;
see
23,
we
began drinking. But such argument also smacks of a topos and the defendant in the First Tetralogy takes a similar stance (2d3) but feels he has to go further and reveal the true culprits (b2, 4). As Blass noted, AB |, 185, Euxitheus' refusal to conjecture has a slightly ironical tone. Criminals no sooner commit a crime...: i.e. the one who commits a crime is the first to suggest that another is to blame. The effect of this remark is enhanced by the pi alliteration and the repetition
67
another
judgments. over haste if | must conjectures
of
the
forceful
compound
panourgein;
while
the
effect
of ‘but if you were then told...' below is again increased by the pi sounds, this time with hyperbaton (en polléi...aporiai). I know from report...: Antiphon now adduces his three historical parallels (a commonplace form of argumentation; cf. And. 1 Myst. 106-109;
Lys.
19
Arist.
45-52;
Isoc.
15
Ant.
155-156;
Dem.
Meid. 58-65; Arist. Rhet. 2.20.2-4) in order to show that a) homicides might remain unexplained and it is therefore simply to hold those in the victim's company responsible they can explain the crime; b) the known
truth about a crime might, at a later date, when it is
on too
the late
other hand, to save the
wrongly condemned for it. Hence the judges at should not be over-hasty in condemning him, a) is paralleled in the cases of Ephialtes, whose never
discovered,
and
of
the
108
slave-boy,
who
was
21
unfair unless become person
Euxitheus'
trial
murderers
were
indeed
caught
but only by chance - had he not slaves would have suffered for Hellenotamiae parallels b), only one whole board had been wrongly embezzlement. No doubt this example the judges of what happened after years
previously,
entire adult children had Note, finally, was 68
the
hasty
decision
to
put
to
death
the
population and to enslave the women and reversed when anger had subsided a little. there is no example of a case where the victim Herodes.
with
as
found,
not
how
male been that
been, a whole household of his act. The case of the of whom was saved after the condemned to death for was also intended to remind the Mytilenean revolt a few
Ephialtes: this radical democrat alienated the oligarchic faction at Athens by his attack on the Areopagus and his democratic reforms in 462; and after the oligarchic leader Cimon was ostracised in 461 he was assassinated. According to Antiphon and Diodorus
(11.77.6)
[Arist.] crime
the
Ath.Pol.
was
assassins
(25.4;
committed
by
therefore
contends
that
oligarchic
stance,
cf.
were
Plut.
Aristodicus
of
Antiphon
because
the
solved
requirements
must
be
doubted,
to
when
many
but
states
that
Tanagra.
Gernet
127
revealing
his
own
But
this
here
murderer
here
discovered,
10.8)
is
would have been dangerous before Equally, Maidment's suggestion, MAO Antiphon's
never
Per.
was
a I,
well-known.
jury full 208 ἢ. a
assume
the
of the
2
of democrats. that it suited
mystery
jurors
the n.
was
could
never
well
have
known the name of the murderer. Rather, it is the version in the Ath,Pol, that is to be suspected, one which was perhaps not (and arose later from a confusion with in Antiphon's day current
another Ὁ.
murder?). Stockton at
murdered
See further Rhodes ad loc. has recently argued that in
bed
all,
but
died
more
the
prosecution's
not
heart-attack;
see
a
say,
of,
(pp.321-322). Ephialtes was
'The Death of Ephialtes', CQ N.S. 32 (1982) 227-228. However, while it is easy to see why the story that he was murdered should have been invented it is hardly ‘clear enough' that Ephialtes was found dead in his bed; none of the above-mentioned sources indicates where he was found. whereas they say |...: a further purpose of this parallel is to once
attack
slave's
the
of
interpretation
Euxitheus attributes his own version to his opponents statement. and then compares Ephialtes' murderers, who did not try to get rid of the body, with himself, who allegedly committed the murder alone 69
and
afterwards
sought
help
of slaves. the entire household: your Hellenotamiae: the Athenian until And.
in
the
removal
financial
corpse.
of the
officials,
ten
in number
cf. administered the funds of the Delian League; who 411, 30.2; Meiggs [Arist.] Ath.Pol. 1.96.2; Thuc. 38; 3 Peace
234-235.
Nothing
more
is
known
an by accused possibly were (though see Hansen (1975) 67 n.
of this
incident,
eisangelia 7).
109
before
but the
the
officials Assembly
Through orge and
anger rather gnome, which
than reason: on recurs in 72_and
in Thuc. 2.22.1, see P. Huart, contemporains (Paris, 1973) 46-49. 70
GNOME
chez
Thucydide
et
ses
Sosias was rescued...from the very hands of the Eleven: Sosias and the others had been placed in the custody of the Eleven until their execution by the same (for this role of the Eleven cf. Lys. 22 Corn. 2; Aesch. 1 Tim. 16). ecclesia see Bonner & Smith, AJHA
71
the antithesis between in a similar expression
On 2,
the pardoning 253-254.
power
I expect the older ones...like myself: for similar judges’ memories and experiences cf. Ant. 6 Chor, 10 Theomn. 1; Isoc. 16 Choriot 4; Dem. 19 Fals. Meid.
1-2,
24
Tim.
further, with this 8 Peace 12; Lyc. 1 test the truth cf whom the truth of with the help of
14,
time
and
128,
49
Timoth.
13;
Bonner,
of
the
calls on the 36, 41; Lys. Leg. 19, 21
EAC,
84-85;
and
antithesis between old and young jurors, Isoc. Leocr. 93; Thuc. 1.42.1. a matter: on metaphor in the speech see 37, his second statement defended. time: for commonplace arguments over time see
experience
show
mankind
what_is
imperfect.
Taking
one's time helps avoid judicial error; cf. 86, 91 (with you must exercise the greatest caution), 94. without anger and without prejudice: anger and prejudice (or rather ‘false accusation’) reappear in 91. On a par with them is haste (as in 73, 94), and Diodotus warns against haste and anger in the Mytilenean Debate (Thuc. 3.42.1). He also uses diabalon (id. 42.2) and this passage of Thucydides may have been influenced by Antiphon. However, such ideas must have been abundant in this sophistic age and Aristophanes had already attacked the Athenians' reckless decisions in the Acharnians (tachuboulois
630,
metaboulous
632:
to the Mytilenean affair, which this play was produced, but comedy,
205
as
Kock).
Athenian
Clouds
587-588,
Thucydides,
deliberation
he
may
well
be
referring
had taken place two similar attacks were
Ecc.
for
797-798;
his
(2.40.2-3,
Eupol.
part,
1,
314,
additionally
Pericles'
speech),
as
Spartan slowness (1.84.1-2, through Archidamus); arguments over haste and delay in 73 and 94 have been with Ant. Soph. frg. 58 (Diels); see E. Bignone, oratore Phoen.
e Antifonte sofista (Urbino, 452-453; Plato, Laws 6.766e.
Like alluding
Aristophanes to
the
in
the
Mytilenean
1974)
Acharnians affair
in
55-56;
cf.
Antiphon
71-72
or,
here
years before frequent in well
as
and the compared Antifonte
further
appears at
frg.
praises
least,
Eur.
to be this
passage would have pricked the memories of many of the jurors, the more so since it was delivered by a Mytilenean. [15 insertion in the speech might therefore seem something of a gamble on Antiphon's part, in that the jurors may not have taken kindly to being reminded of these events by the young defendant. But Antiphon may have counted on raising sympathy for his client among jurors who recalled their part in a near-atrocity and have 110
hoped
72 73
thereby
to
avert
the
very
real
danger
that
the
heliastic
court would condemn the Mytilenean without giving him a fair hearing. as anger destroys...his judgment: for the orge/gnomé antithesis see 69, Through anger rather than reason. Be assured that | deserve pity: the appeal for pity here is unique in the speech and is itself only made indirectly. Elsewhere Euxitheus adopts a very practical attitude, pathos is rare and in the epilogos, where we might expect appeals for pity, he rather reasserts his contention that he was being tried under the wrong process.
Euxitheus
makes
no
concessions
to
this
stance
and
form
one
the
Antiphon may have felt that appeals for pity by a Mytilenean were wasted on an Athenian jury; see further 85-96, heading n. Nevertheless,
71-73
are
full
of
rhetoric
and
of
high-points of the speech, preparing us for the emotional subject of Euxitheus' father. Wrongdoers should be punished...pitied: naturally the argument that the innocent deserve pity, the guilty punishment, is a commonplace one; cf. Ant. 1 Stepmother 25; [Lys.] 6 Andoc. 55, 22 Corn. 21, 27 Epicr. 12; Dem. 27 Aphobus i 68, 45 Stephanus i
Din.
43;
Con.
54
88,
as his innocence is what justly...destroy life
antithesis;
cf.
immediate
a
circular
54.
19 Arist.
Lys.
without
71,
see
action...:
G.
father,
Studien
dissertation
doctoral
unpublished
2;
is
Euxitheus is trying to prove. topical another unjustly: me
Euxitheus’
of
defence
The
74-80
1 Myst.
And.
By delaying...by without prejudice.
it
Equally,
109.
Dem.
1
argument, my save
anger
and
in
his
Vollmer,
zum
Beweis
109-111, argues that this 1958) Reden (Hamburg, antiphontischer section has the character of an excursus, composed in case of an In this attack on Euxitheus' father and otherwise easily omitted.
Vollmer
is
supported
both
by
81
could
simply
have
been
subject-matter
the
is For the section arrangement. (74-75; proem a into divided proofs (76-77), narrative style),
itself and
by
its
be may and like a mini-speech antithetical polished, the n.b. (78-79) and epilogue (80). Then
joined
to
73
if
the
defence
was
not
As to the subject-matter, two themes are apparent, the required. revolt and the father's absences from Mytilene; and the immediate in spite of his is to show the father's loyalty to Athens purpose in the latter. former and regular indulgence in the participation
for topic a delicate been have must activities father's His Euxitheus to raise before an Athenian jury and it does seem that if the prosecution had made no reference to his family background this Equally, silent as well. better for him to remain it was to seemed have must background and Euxitheus attacking of means angry emotions against him too good were the origins of one's adversary
Demosthenes’
attack
on
Aeschines 111
obvious an prosecution the raising for opportunity an to miss (and such attacks on n.b. especially commonplace;
in
18
Cor.
126-131).
So
Antiphon probably had no difficulty and the line of defence he adopts before the trial. Vollmer's theory is The theory also accords well presented his clients with complete view expressed by Usher in his composite
authorship
in
Lysias'
in anticipating such an attack could well have been composed most attractive. with the idea that Antiphon speeches ready for delivery, a attack on Dover's theory of
speeches;
see
Usher
(1976)
32
v.
Dover, LCL, ch. VIII. Euxitheus was a young Mytilenean and may have been inexperienced in litigation and forensic speaking just as he maintains in the proem (though this was a commonplace opening). As a foreigner (and a Mytilenean at that) addressing an Athenian court he needed extra help which Antiphon was willing
(cf.
to
provide,
his
matter
being
speeches
of
their
for
concerned
the
tribute).
with
Lindians
It
is
not
the
and
treatment
of
Samothracians
unreasonable,
then,
allies
in
to
the
assume
that Antiphon composed a whole speech for the young alien to learn, removing from his shoulders the double burden of finding out what were the right further Due 74. Hence
speech
74
my
bound 77
(see
13,
father:
him,
('
he
own
wealthy
his
children
furnishes
certainly
Mytilenean and
his
Perhaps
second
also
the
and
Though would
wealthy,
who
led
without
doubt
revolt
have
the prosecution argued untrustworthy Mytilenean
(as
('as
were
Aenus
because
of
the
(78)
possibly father
was
Euxitheus
him
his
of the
prosecution
and
his
more
that
source
that who
he was at least
not
says
life.
of
one
in
the
of of
77),
Presumably,
nevertheless joined in the
his those
for
this
however, a typical, revolt (76)
anger. Euxitheus he himself) was revolt, He stayed
sycophants,
wished to avoid the Athenian courts counter attacks and reiterates his charge bottom
and
over
reveal
the
which
mercantile interests, as Aenus at the mouth of the Hebrus.
cost
activities
ties
see the
ones')
tele (77)
and this could well have raised the jurors' replies that his father (and by implication actually pro-Athenian, despite his part in the in
the
strong statement
of
Aenus
was
Euxitheus'
the
76
Euxitheus'
in
this
income. But he may also have had was in an important trading position oligarchs
cf.
payment
residence
landed,
-
property,
choruses'),
(63).
his
was
to say and how to say them; is no true extemporisation in
reply).
a
wealth
father
You
things there
not
because
he
(78), Euxitheus then that money was at the
(79).
Hz is far older than |: on the comparison of the ages of father and son (repeated in 79; see also ‘forcing me to explain events which | am far too young to know of' in 75) as a factor in the dating
of the
speech
Noticeable the
balanced,
homoeoteleuton
in
see
the
P.
antithetical
and
24,
introduction style,
metabole
pepragmenön,.
112
in
to the here
fon
defence
with
emön
of the
father
is
etymological
figure,
pragmatön/ton
ekeinöi
If my accuser were on trial...But as it is (75)...: another ‘hypothetical inversion’; see 38, If I had made away with...But as it is.... —
from hearsay: hearsay Bonner, EAC, 20.
75
76
evidence
was
forbidden
by
‚
see
explaining faultily his faultless conduct: in the Greek we have another instance of the logos/ergon antithesis; see 3, his accusers' words,..the actual facts. ~~ Before the Mytilenean revolt: in 428. my father proved his devotion...by his actions: the argument from past services to the state is commonplace; cf. Ant. 2 First Tetralogy b12, 6 Chor. 11; And. 4 Alc. 41; Lys. 7 Sac.Ol, 30-31, 12 Frat. 20, 18 Nicias' Brother 21, 19 Arist. 57, 21
Brib.Def.
23,
Phormion
41
against
25
sim.
what
choruses
Def.Sub.Dem,
(where
him;
specify
Is.
his
in
77
the 5
refers
notes that in this describe the revolt hamartia 79, alse
delicate the
matter
for
prosecution
But we further antithesis
12;
Dem.
opponent's Dic.
45).
father's
consisted of little more 77). failed in what you
to
Mytilenean
(the
payment it:
easy:
36
is
Euxitheus
were
of
257-267,
services
festivals)
regular
expected
Cor.
of
However,
‘actions’
than
18
lack
and
of
Due
For
used
does
not
furnishing
of
they
taxes 48
perhaps
(again
cf.
perceptively
section of the speech Euxitheus is careful to as an 'error' (cf. hémarte, sunexamartein 76, ouk estin,..hemartetai 77), as this was a
him
to
handle
described
the
in
an
Athenian
revolt
in
court.
rather
No
doubt
stronger
terms.
may expand on Due's observation and note that there is a idea of joint error (cf. hé polis holé 76 bis, 79 in with
idiai;
sun-examartein),
emphasising
father could in no way be represented as a leading revolt, but had by necessity moved with the crowd.
77
law
europös
is
elsewhere
found
in
Anth.
how
Pal.
Euxitheus'
figure
in the
9.543,5
and
compare palirropon gonu in Eur. EI, 492, the ties: enechura are 'ties' rather than 'pledges', the only meaning given by LSJ. you punished the authors of the revolt: for the punishment cf.
Thuc. 3.50.1-3; Diod. 12.55.10; Cataldi 23-25: the leaders were executed, the walls of Mytilene rased, her fleet confiscated and the whole island, except for the territory of Methymna, divided
into lots which were assigned to Athenian cleruchs. granted the other Mytileneans an amnesty: it has as
by
Meritt
363-364
and
Cataldi,
that
both
been
Antiphon
argued, (in
tois
d’allois...autön) and Thucydides (in 3.50.2) condense their narratives and confuse the pruvisions of the decree punishing the rebels with those of a subsequent treaty restoring the cleruchs' lots to their previous owners (IG i?.60, = Hicks & 63; ATL ii. D22; Lactor 1 (3rd. ed., 1984) 169). On
the
cleruchs
worked
the
at
first
land
as
took
over
lessees,
their
then 113
the
lots
and
land
the was
Hill 61; Tod this theory,
previous restored
owners by
this
'friendly' decree to the the cleruchs a rent of Thucydides as part of remained
on
additionally Gomme,
have
the
island
received
HCT
been
original owners, who subsequently paid two minae p.a. (the sum recorded by the original settlement). The cleruchs
2,
330)
divided
as
a
garrison
compensation or
both
land
for
for
(Meritt
the
(Cataldi
the
364;
lots
27-28)
lots of either
and
how
after
the
the
and
money land
‘as
would
restoration
is
another question; see Gomme, id., 328; Cataldi 24). The theory is, indeed, attractive, but it is not without its difficulties. For
instance, the two minae rent is only recorded for certain in Thucydides, the text of lines 13-15 of the decree (where Cataldi follows Tod in reading duo mnas) being very fragmentary. So we do not know for sure that this was the rent paid to the cleruchs after
the
restoration.
Nor
does
spheteran
(‘their
own!)
in
Antiphon necessarily indicate, with Cataldi, that the Mytileneans were living on land which they owned (i.e. which had been restored) - rather, it may simply mean that they were not moved to other land. So while Antiphon almost certainly omits to mention the restoration decree when he says that Euxitheus' father ‘furnishes choruses and pays his taxes' - for this implies normal, free conditions in the state - it is not so sure that we should take adeian as referring to this decree. Either way, Antiphon can hardly be censured for historical inaccuracy in this brief reflection on events in a legal speech. It is open to question whether edökaie is an acceptable form of
the
aorist
(regularly
edote)
see Wyse 447-448, my father: the repetition defensible;
see
21,
in
an
(δ᾽ emöi
on
which
orator
patri
the
has
as
early
been
prosecution
as
Antiphon;
suspected allege
he
but
is
met
his
end.
He
has
failed...pays
his taxes:
for the
use
of
one's
public
services in argumentation see 76, my father proved devotion...by his actions: and on these services in general Bonner,
LL,
101-102;
MacDowell,
LCA,
161-164.
The
his see
furnishing
of choruses was one of the main liturgies at Athens and provides the background to Antiphon's sixth speech. Here local choruses in Mytilene are meant and so Antiphon is indulging in zeugma when he says that Euxitheus' father had performed services for Athens (humetera), i.e. by paying the te/é (n.b. the chiastic arrangement
tax,
of
although
Breuning
68
thought).
it n.
is 2
This
unclear
saw
them
payment
what as
the
but this had by now been restored. as rent on the restored land, while that
the
MAO
1,
impost,
efkosté
214
n.
indeed,
of
b; did
Thuc.
7.28.4
Maidment not
himself
replace
the
was
these rent
on
not
te/é the
a
service
were
but
a
precisely.
confiscated
land,
Hence Meritt 367 takes them rejecting Wade-Gery's theory may
be
suggests tribute
meant
(see
Maidment,
harbour-dues). until
413,
not
This only
a
late date for the speech, but also contrary to the implication here of continuous payments since the revolt. Finally, Cataldi 26 n. 114
78
39 suggests the te/é are either taxation after the restoration or the supposed two minae rent. With the omission of the article before choregias and telé perhaps a general range of payments is to be understood rather than specific taxes, including rent to the cleruchs (though te/é need not necessarily refer to this rent at all); but te/é would seem to imply that the father was landed. if his favourite haunt is Aenus: chörophilei indicates an extended residence, so 'who happened to be there at the time’ in 20 may well be an understatement, From Euxitheus' words in this section we can also infer that his father's residence in Aenus was possibly caused by actual or feared sycophantic attacks on him. He
may,
however,
have
had
business
interests
there
(see
74,
my
The prosecution were presumably expected to assail the father). father for his absences from Mytilene, as revealing an anti-Athenian stance. Verb. 6; Diog. On chörophilei cf. Pollux 9.13; D.H. Comp. apud chörophilein voce 'De Breuning, P.S. 1.44; Laert. & Natalicium Schrijnen (Nijmegen Donum oratorem', Antiphontem suffering. to the physical submit 2, 656-659; 1929) Utrecht, lit. ‘withdrawing himself any of his public obligations: evading from any of the things towards the city'; for similar constructions 13 Organisation 22; Thuc. 1.40.2; Soph. OT 1381. polin cf. Dem. is ambiguous but perhaps refers to Mytilene rather than Athens. most scholars have felt like those others | see...under treaty: the need for textual emendation here, on the grounds that i) tous men requires a corresponding tous de; ii) sumbola (inter-state judicial agreements) cannot have existed between enemy states. thus dikas, kai before de tous inserted ago long Reiske contrasting those Lesbians who resisted passively by settling on with those who remained on the island and coast Asiatic the His addition has found the resisted by these lawsuits. actively by
adopted
was
and
Maidment
Thalheim,
most
favour
215 n.
d) and Gauthier (1972) 165-166. Three objections may be raised. On
the
linguistic
(see
MAO
side,
I,
H.G.
noted 368-369 19 (1924) CP v.78', Antiphon de (cf. no following with of men Antiphon 4 Third Tetralogy al, 2 First Tetralogy d4,
'Note on Robertson, from examples other 9, 37, 1 Stepmother
6 Chor. 14). Secondly, a reference to those remaining on Lesbos the citizen of become ‘or has from follow logically not does which the three upon I see', like those others city, another participles depend (unless they moved to Methymna). This is not but
conclusive,
does
it
lead
one
to
consider
whether
the
text
as
it stands is defensible and is thus a most forceful tricolon. So to the third objection, that the passage does not, in fact, have to be taken as referring to suits between members of enemy states, which would indeed seem out of the question. For Antiphon might well
states
label
on
as
hostile
the
(with
Asia
some
Minor
rhetorical
continent 115
exaggeration)
which
had
a
a
state
or
strong
anti-Athenian party but which were still, or once again, within the Athenian alliance. These states would be ones in which Lesbian exiles had settled after the revolt and which had perhaps rebelled themselves, as Antandrus (cf. Thuc. 4.52). After the fall
of
Antandrus
struggle lawsuits. words
armed
resistance
may
have
against Athens was continued Hence no emendation is necessary.
as
reflecting
events
in
424
ceased,
by means (Breuning
before
the
fall
but
of took
the
these these
of Antandrus,
but this is probably too early a date for the speech; see P. 24,) nor does it mean...informers: completing the tricolon ouk,.,oud".,.oude. We might have expected the positive clause to have been connected with alia, not de, 4.86.1; Kühner-Gerth 2, 262. On pléthos see 8, Not on the chance
but
see
sim.
of
eluding
5;
the
Thuc.
judgment
of your court. The father's avoidance of the sycophants by extended absence from Mytilene was by no means unique; see Lofberg 23-24, 70-71; Bonner & Smith, AJHA 2, 247 n. 3. It is thus conceivable that, with the chance of attacking the father gone, the sycophants directed their assault on the son, and this statement may be seen as a variation on the commonplace charge of sycophantic intent in one's adversary (see 59, that you are
attempting to secure my death for money).
79
u
the act which he joined his whole cityin committing: on this and on 'the mistake’ below see 76, failed in what you expected of it. They exchanged great prosperity for great misery: the et. fig. and emotive vocabulary in the Greek help achieve pathos, on which see 18, heading ἢ. For aeimnéstos, eudaimonias and kakodaimonian
saw
their
And.
1
see
2,
country
Myst.
108;
submit
ruined: Hdt.
to the
physical
compare 7.220.3;
suffering.
similar Thuc.
uses
of
8.24.3.
anastatos
Taken
in
literally
this is something of an exaggeration, since only the walls of Mytilene were in fact pulled down (Thuc. 3.50.1); see Gomme, HCT 2, 328. this whole intrigue...for the sake of money; see 59, that you are attempting to secure my death for money. The attack is heightened by the pi alliteration and the use of paraskeué, on which see Wyse 375, Many,
80
indeed,
are
the
circumstances...:
a
general
remark,
but
perhaps reflecting how speculators may have laid their hands on the property of the executed and exiled Mytilenean oligarchs. My father is too old...1 am far too young: for the comparison of ages see 74, He is far older than |. You must help me...: for the commonplace principle of collective advantage for litigants and judges in the decisions of the latter cf.
The your your
85,
96,
6
reference court:
see
Chor.
3;
And.
to informers 8,
Not
on
Myst.
105;
is no doubt
aimed
the
court.
116
1
chance
of
Lys.
14
Alc.
A.
12.
at the prosecution.
eluding
the
judgment
of
scoundrels: sycophants, Fals,
ponéros as in
Leg.
99;
Dem.
frequently 7 Sac.Ol.
Aristog.
i
used 1; 12
45,
58
sycophant's
the
in connection with Erat. 5; Aesch. 2
Theoc.
27.
chances
of
A
reputation
see
success;
(miasma)
pollution
that
idea
The
heaven'.
from
‘signs
The
25
lessen
for losing would Lofberg 94, 81-84
is Lys.
reveals itself in voyages and religious ceremonies, and affects not person but also those around him, is a topos only the defiled Seven Aeschyl. especially {see tragedy from familiar very 236-243; Eur. Ef. 1355, HF OT Soph. 397-398; 597-614, also Ag. (cf. literature ancient throughout common but 1294-98), 1225,
Hymn
6.116-117;
Hor.
Od.
Old
the
in
Jonah
Antiphon innocence
2-5. AHL, Euxitheus'
MacDowell, 228-231; see Glotz topos as an atechnos pistis for
Testament); employs the
3.37;
Deorum
Nat.
de
of
story
the
and
,
Οἷς.
1.86;
Laert.
Diog.
3.2.26-"
Xen. 158; 25; Callim.
2 Fals.Leg. Aesch. Theophrast. Charact,
al0; Tetralogy 2 First Ant. Cyr.8.1.25; Plato, Laws 9.866a;
137-139 (cf. 1 Myst. in And. a similar argument occurs and were signs supernatural although But 19). 6 Andoc. [Lys.] this 81) (as affairs state in important highly as regarded particular presumptive argument of divine favour must have been well-worn by Antiphon's day (and it does not appear in fourth In this respect it is perhaps significant that century speeches). neither Antiphon nor Andocides includes it in the main body of the proof - it seems the very last argument Antiphon can raise in in
the
of
quarter
last
the
it
Nevertheless,
Euxitheus.
of
support
is
still
along
shows Hermae, the of mutilation the over agitation (as rationalist no was time at this Athenian average notes, MAO I, 218 n. a; cf. also Lys. 12 Erat. 59).
deep
with
the
the that Maidment
finally, whether this argument reveals any it is doubtful, religious feeling on the part of Antiphon himself, as Jebb |,
AO
sensed,
Tetralogy The
court
in
used
being
which,
century,
fifth
c8
39-43
and
Aeschylean
tone
2
(comparing
especially of
the
82-83
First
Tetralogy
of
opening well,
may
the with
al0,
Third
3
Second
Tetralogy). indicate
Jebb,
his
sympathies for the old democracy. But the religious scepticism of whom with 2.54), (as Thucydides in reflected is time the Antiphon was closely connected (in the tradition as his teacher; So did Antiphon hold similar views to the historian see Ρ. 21). over the old religion? These would not have prevented him from a for speech, the in argument religious a such including to hear wanted jury the he thought what wrote logographer rather than what he believed himself; see further Dobson 33-34;
Erbse
81
(1977)
218.
of state safe conduct for your these on chiefly depend you words these of a Mytilenean mouth the from coming affairs: probably indicate that the Sicilian disaster and lonian revolt had not
yet
occurred
(as
Blass,
provide a terminus ante quem
AB
1,
178
for the speech. 117
with
n,
3)
and
hence
both those involving danger and those bellicae and res civiles respectively. 82
have
embarked
on
Aeschyl. Seven poetic psuché.
Others
84
have
ship...in
602-604
escaped
their
own
(Aeschylus
death:
the
that
do
not:
destruction: has
in
Latin
reminiscent
xuneisbas),
anacolouthon
res
of
with
the
in this clause,
with
heterous and the participles depending on the idea of knowing to be supplied from epistasthai above, may be seen as reflecting that this second example is only a variation on the first - when we come to the third, different example the original construction after hoti is resumed. because they prevented the proper performance of the rites: thus the pollution the Spartans incurred by their killing of Persian heralds prevented favourable sacrifices until the wrath of Talthybius had been appeased; cf. Hdt. 7.134. Most of 84 reappears, with alterations in part due to the context,
in
6
Chor.
28,
while
the
last
sentence
recurs
in
6.47.
The main topos takes the form of a ‘hypothetical inversion’, on which see 38, If | had made away with...But as it is.... the witnesses are testifying: helping to give the speech an extemporaneous character; see 13, You reply. Other men...by statements: another instance of the contrast between
usual
doing the form of a words;
behaviour
exact topos
cf.
Ant.
3
Second
Lys. 7 Sac.Ol. 30, logos/ergon antithesis facts. 85-96
85
Note
also
and
what
happened
in
this
opposite of what other men do), (that of the greater importance
the
Tetralogy
c3-4,
12 Erat. 33; Gorg. see 3, his accusers' antimetabole,
on
which
d9,
case
(see
34,
though in the of facts than 6
Chor.
28-32;
Pal. 34). For the words...the actual see
14,
Hence
you
must not...interpretation of the case. EPILOGUE (epilogos): The epilogue is remarkable both for its length (see 1-7, heading n.) and for its logical argument and lack of pathos (see 73, Be assured that | deserve pity). Due 49-50 makes the valid point that the argumentation of the epilogue presupposes that of the prokataskeué, and to the end Antiphon maintains the plea that the wrong process had been used and Euxitheus should therefore be found not guilty and retried. | have answered...: again the extemporaneous character (see 13, You reply). this same verdict...with your oath: for the idea of joint interest see 80, You must help me.... You have sworn...according to the laws: on the heliastic oath see 8, even if you were not on oath. the laws under which | was arrested: those concerning kakourgia, As with hoi apagontes in 38 apéchthén is not to be taken as signifying that the case was one of opagdgé; it rather refers to the
arrest
which
followed
the
endeixis
118
(see
9,
this
arrest).
can still be tried legally: on the question of a retrial (requested in 90, 94, 96) see 16, heading ἢ, impartial ministers of justice: a striking phrase, serving well as
a 86
captatio
benevolentiae
and
adapted
by
Thucydides
to
kritai
de
ontes apo tou isou (3.37.4). Give a chance to time also: for the temporal topos see 14, time and experience show mankind what is imperfect. In 86-90 Antiphon argues that the truth can only be discovered and the correct judgment can only be made if the jurors take their time. He begins by contrasting the law, which prescribes one final
trial, with his as Euxitheus',
own concept of justice, only be done if the
that it may, in such trial be repeated.
cases This
prepares the way for the topos in 87 over the diké phonou, the supreme example of the dangers of a single trial since the defendant's life is at stake: yet even in a dik&@ phonou the wrong decision might be made (though no one had ever proved this according to Dem, 23 Aristoc. 66). But at least the proceedings in the court of the Areopagus were carefully devised to minimise the margin of error (88) and this is the whole point of the inclusion of the topos: Euxitheus was being tried for homicide but without the safeguards of a regular homicide trial. Antiphon therefore the jurors to take
judge
Euxitheus As
to
asks their
for a retrial time in their
under
the proper
the
construction
(90), which would enable verdict, avoid error and
rules of the dik@ phonou. here
cf.
Hor,
Sat,
2.2.94,
das
aliquid famae. |
would
have
thought
it
right:
Exioun,
like
eboulomén
could have wished...But as it is.... the ally of the truth...: for the metaphor in this whom the truth of his second statement defended. 87
87-89
recur
in
6
Chor.
3-6
(after
the
in
1;
clause
topos
of
see
ΞΕ
see
37,
6.2,
=
5.14). The linguistic differences between the two passages seem to go against the idea of mere interpolation from one speech into the see
If
other and the topos is in any 86, Give a chance to time also.
you
under
condemn ἃ
dike
me:
authenticity of the topoi might not be Euxitheus may be asserting that he homicide trial.
to
disregard
voluntary
exile
Euxitheus
phonou,
the
(as
but
case
was this
well-suited
not, is
no
of
to
course,
reason
to
our
speech;
being
tried
suspect
the
passage: we merely have an example of how fully suited to every context. Alternatively, taken as assuming his acquittal now and will obey the judges’ verdict in a regular
sentence
passed
Maidment,
MAO
upon TI,
223
him: n.
not b)
by since
going this
into was
a
citizen's right and he would not have to 'dare' to disregard the sentence - on the contrary, if he felt he was going to be condemned this was precisely the course open to him. Rather, we should take this as referring to fleeing after the sentence had been passed (as Socrates' friends urged him to do). In the 119
Choreutes (where the homicide was akousios) the reference is to the refusal to go into exile as a punishment for unintentional homicide (on which see MacDowell, AHL, 117-125) and again the topos is more fitting there. The implication of the second oute clause,
brought
out
in
the
Choreuies,
is
that
a
guilty
man
would
also obey the law and admit his crime since not to do so would bring the wrath of the gods upon him. There an example is adduced, that of a master who has killed his slave and must purify himself even if the slave has no one to avenge him: kan mé
ho
timoréson
δἰ
is
perfectly
comprehensible,
therefore,
in
6.5,
but allös te kai...timöresön in 5.87 seems a somewhat sudden addition. He must submit to the verdict: for a similar expression cf. Isoc. 1 Dem. 26, but the use of the genitive with this verb is mainly poetical; see Kühner-Gerth add te (as in 6 Chor. 5,
88
I, not
392 n. 8. After tös most editors a fully convincing comparison in
view of the many differences between the two passages), but single te see 18, by reason of that bodily suffering.... the oaths: see 11, the greatest and most binding oath known. the sacrifices: lit. 'the cut-pieces' of the sacrifice, on which
for see
12, with hand laid upon the sacrifice.
the proclamations: on these prorréseis 23-27, LCA, 111-113; M. Piérart, ‘Note
droit attique', everything
L’Ant,
else:
Class.
42 (1973)
as
three
such
the
see sur
la
MacDowell, AHL, "prorrhesis" en
427-435, prodikasiai,
on
which
cf.
Ant.
6 Chor. 42; MacDowell, AH L, 34-37, are very different: thus the oath was ‘the greatest and most binding known' (11) and other cases would be preceded by an anakrisis rather than by prodikasiai, supreme
its
being
importance:
a
matter
we
might
remember,
the
the 2,
state the most heinous of crimes; see 207. Nevertheless, Antiphon heightens
the
of
the
handle
to
was not corisidered by Bonner & Smith, AJHA
and
to
due
family
te... kai...kai..,kai,..kui...
victim
that
the
importance
of
however,
for
homicide peri
laws
homicide with
plefstou.
vengeance: see 10, a murderer shall pay with his life in requital. a _ mistake and sinful error against the gods and the laws: cf. 91, 2 First Tetralogy bli, 4 Third Tetralogy b8. An accused will naturally try to impress upon the judges their responsibility for his wrongful condemnation (cf. 89). A prosecutor, on the other hand, will claim that the punishment for a wrongful condemnation will fall on him alone; cf. 2 First Tetralogy a3, 4 Third Tetralogy at. Note also that a wrongful acquittal is only a hamartéma, not an asebéma (91; but cf. 2 First Tetralogy Tetralogy cil); and that wrongful killing by
c10, hand
3 and
Second by vote
amount to the same thing (92). For i) the idea of killing as a joint error against the gods and human law cf. 3 Second letralogy c12, 4 Third Tetralogy a2; ii) the conjunction of the divine and human in general cf. 7 ΄ 1 120
Stepmother
25,
3
Second
Tetralogy
b7, d9, Every human law, indeed, gods' (Dem. 25 Aristog. i 16). Note,
89
finally,
the
neat
b12,
‘is an
chiasmus
4
Tetralogy
here,
and
hamartia
the laws, asebeia to the gods (sim. 1 Stepmother 25), Nor is it the same...a wrongful verdict: cf. Gorg. Pal, The charge...is not in itself effective: lit, 'does not for
this
use
of
telos
193;
Thuc.
4.118.10
Hes.
Works
669;
cf.
esp.
with
Gorg.
schol.;
Semonid,
1.1;
Pal.
and
Soph.
in OC
aitiasis see 25, For the moment. ‚.they could but depends on you and your judgment: Jurors
90
Third
invention
with
their
own
importance
customary
oath:
again
the
diömosia,
also
verse 422;
Or.
to
can
as also
in
Cor.
16.630; 1545,
On
impress
the
a
refer
to
end';
18
IH,
hence
you
36. have
Hom. Eur.
b2,
of the
referring
Dem.
make. serving
and
benevolentiae, there is no_higher authority to which similar construction cf. Eur. fon 253. the
36,
gift
cuptatio
this:
for
a
96.
you will be my judges in the other court too: in the dike phonou envisaged the jury would consist of ex-archons sitting in the court of the Areopagus, hence humeis means 'you Athenians! (sim. 87, 96). Of course, our this was in any case a common
as
representing
the
MacDowell); Lys. 43 Macart. 72, 47
MacDowell).
people;
13 Agor. Euerg. 73;
Compare
therefore, indicate before a heliastic more specifically,
91
whole the
speaker form of
cf.
was also a foreigner, but address to a heliastic jury
46;
And.
10; Is. 4 Nic. 17 also Ar, Wasps
use
of
plöthos
in
1 Myst.
7
(with Wyse); 917
8.
This
(with Dem. {with
does
not,
that the second trial jury (wrongly Hansen, before a heliastic jury
would have been held AEE, 124 n. 16) or, at the Palladium (as
adikös
dikaiös
Smith 357-358): the statement is rather designed to avoid giving the impression that Euxitheus felt he would receive a fairer hearing before the Areopagus than before a heliastic jury. to_acquit_me unjustly...contrary to justice: for this concept cf. 4 Third Tetralogy b8, d9. The sentence is remarkable for its paronomasia,
in
hamartéma /asebéma you
must
exercise
apolusai/
me
below. the greatest
caution:
the
opolesai
thought
that
and
judicial
error is avoided by pronoia is a variation on, and recalls that of 71-73 and 86, where the importance of taking one's time is emphasised, Such caution over an irreversible decision also helps avoid later regret should one change one's mind, and this second theme is resumed in 94 - an acquittal now enables future regret to
be
remedied,
but
a
condenmation
is
final.
See
further
on
regret 2 First Tetralogy di2; and with 91 and 2612 compare Gorg. Pal. 34, where anäkesta. akestdi, pronoésasi (pronoian Antiphon) and =metanoésasi all appear (n.b. also Democr. frg. 66 Diels). which is from medicine, is a metaphor anékeston irremediable: continued below by ukesior and unckeslois and resumed in 94 by 121
pharmakon
and
b13,
4
d12,
iasis,
Third
See
similar
Tetralogy
metaphor
c7;
in
Aeschyl.
2
Cho.
frgg. 73.6 (Mette, suppl.), 255.2-3 (Nauck); 636 (Nauck). Further on Antiphon's metaphor truth of his second statement defended. remediable:
poetic prose 28.4;
oakestos
(cf. Hom. - but cf. further
is
a
rare
word
which
First 699,
Hesych.
s.v.
akestai;
allusion to the Mytilenean massacre was carried and
Bekk.
or see
Dover,
An.
|,
through without
before
CAS,
202,
47
lists
as
elsewhere in Plut. Ages. line
18.
believing anger and
now...:
affair, in which then rescinded.
378,
Soph. frgg. 198, see 37, whom the
//. 13.115) and as not occurring Hippoc. Art. 58; Gorg. Pal, 34;
through giving way to anger accusation: again recalling 71; prejudice. Some of you have in fact repented
Tetralogy Prom.
a
seemingly
false without
another
Cleon's proposal of a If so, 'those who had
misled you' below may be directed against Cleon and his party (whether or not the speech was delivered before his death in 422), to whose policies the oligarch Antiphon was deeply opposed, especially with regard to the allies. On the other hand, Gernet 134 ἢ. 2 sees in this a reference to sycophants, who could be prosecuted under the procedure probolé (cf. [Arist.] Ath,Pol. 43.5). However, the earliest known example of this is the much later charge against Callixenus and the others who attacked the Arginousae generals (Xen. Hell. 1.7.35; Harrison, LA 2, 61) and
so Gernet is forced to conclude that this is perhaps a desideratum of Antiphon's. Speakers naturally often refer to and complain about juries' unjust verdicts induced by litigant's deceptions; cf. And. 2 Return 27; Is. 5 Dic. 8; Dem. 45 Steph. i Euxitheus is careful to emphasise that the
92
7, 46 Steph. jurors were
ü 9. misled
(exapatetheisi), thus avoiding any suspicion of prejudice against the heliastic court by comparison with the Areopagus, involuntary mistakes are excusable...: sim. 4 Third Tetralogy a6; Arist. EN 3.1; see also Ant. 1 Stepmother 27; Lys. 31 Phil. 10-11, In fine with this thought the penalty for unintentional homicide was less severe than that An involuntary mistake...choice:
for intentional killing. the Greek construction
recalis
that of 5. As we have seen, tuch& is elsewhere in the speech contrasted with pronoia (6, 21); and for the tuché/gndmé antithesis in the orators cf. And. 1 Myst. 140; Lys. 34 Subv. Const.
2;
Isoc.
2 Nic.
30,
3 Cypr.
47.
the wrongful taking of life by one's vote...: once impressing on the jurors the importance of their decision. 93
more
Be assured...on my conscience: sim. [Lys.] 20 Polystr, 22; and further on conscience cf. Ant. 6 Chor. 1; Gorg. Pal. 5. A
variation of the Zopos was that the dangerous to them and avoid trial, submit
Polystr.
to
a
trial
21; Aesch.
must
2
be
innocent;
Fals.Leg. 122
cf.
6.
guilty flee the places so those who willingly And.
But
the
1 Myst.
3;
opposite
[Lys.]
was
20
also
argued, that wrongdoers would dare anything (cf. Lys. 12 Erat, 84; further id. 26 Euand. 1); and Lycurgus demolishes the topos (1 Leocr. 90). Euxitheus, then, employs a commonplace argument here,
but
in
13
he
contends
from
a
practical/legal
point
of
view
that he came to Athens voluntarily and hence would not have defaulted if allowed his freedom before the trial. As it is...: the construction is interrupted by a long parenthesis beginning at en gar and is resumed by egö d’emautöi (recalling
the
anacolouthon
in
11-12);
reasonable to assume that....
further
on
parenthesis
see
4,
for
it
nn
is
to aid: for the metaphor in sunagonizesthai, also with polemion below, see 37, whom the truth of his second statement defended. The combination méden...mét'... is rare in Prose but is
defensible in Antiphon, whose style often has a poetical tinge (as in the personification of psuché below, for which cf. also 4 Third Tetralogy a7; Isoc. 15 Ant. 189; Dem. 18 Cor. 309).
come
to
its
aid:
sunexesösen
Soph. OC 566; Arrian, compound vocabulary, physical suffering) and 1.59; b11),
[Arist.] HA 9.7;
similarly used Isoc. 1 Dem. 94
is
a
rare
cf.
Rhet. ad Plut. Mor.
Alex. 789d,
30.6; 1078f;
Arist. Mete. Paus. 2.1.5).
1.14 (= 352 The latter is
intransitively in Plut. Mor. 558c (sim. apoleipei in 19). In contrast to this passage compare the jocular
Ar.
Birds
For and
on the one hand...: repeating the request for a retrial in 85 90, and resuming the thought and medical metaphor of 91.
For
1556-64
iasis
in
(with
proulipe).
connection
with
a
wrong
see
1,14,2. before γοιι will do lawfully...: the (nomimos /paranomös) is greatly enhanced This
is
not_a
matter
for
the thought of 71-73. learn the facts...form formed
by
haste...:
an
periphrasis
a
nouns
more in
Arist.
Rhet.
effect of the et. by the pi alliteration.
weighty
opinion:
with
also
-tés
antithesis,
striking (see
1,
fig.
recalling
antithesis, |
could
have
wished...But_ as it is...). gnöristai (cf. 4 Kings 23.24) Antisthenes, Ajax 8; Sext.
Note also the rare vocabulary in and doxastai (cf. Plato, Tht. 208e; Emp. adv. Dogmat. 1.157; Hesych.
s.v.;
242,
also
doxastés oaths 9.
double-compound;
Anab. 6.30.2. 93 is noticeable for its as tolaipörein (see 2, submit to the the rare proapoleipei (cf. Hippoc. Mul.
-
is see
Bekk.
An.
erroneously Harrison,
I,
given
LA
2,
99
lines
19-22,
to
certain
ἢ.
2);
see
officers further
where
the
concerned 10,
a
name
with
murderer
shall pay with his life in requital. It is easy...capital charge: but the procedure in a dik& phonou, with the evidence being given under a solemn oath, was designed to prevent just such false evidence. Therefore no reopening of the case on the ground of false evidence was allowed (dike anadikos;
that 'not him once
see
Harrison,
even his friends he is dead' would
LA
will not
2,
196)
and
Antiphon's
argument
still be willing to seek requital for legally apply in a regular homicide 123
trial. when
The false
redress available in other cases evidence was alleged would take
pseudomarturiön
(Harrison,
id.,
192-197).
to a man's friends the form of a dike
There
was,
however,
a
topos, reflected in 'and even if they are willing what good will it be to the dead man?', that in cases carrying the death penalty such redress was too late to be of help to the victim of false witness
96
(cf.
And.
1
Myst.
7;
Lys.
19
Arist.
4;
cf.
also
id.
12
Erat, 88); and Antiphon is attempting here (as throughout the epilogue) to impress upon the jurors the gravity of their position. and in the trial for murder: to the last Euxitheus maintains his request for acquittal in the present trial on the understanding that
he
will
readily
face
a
real attempt to arouse pity despite deomai below. you shall decide: see 90, court
regular
diké
even
at
the
you
will
phonou.
very
end
my
judges
be
So
there
of
the in
is
no
speech, the
other
too.
neither asking you...: it was in line with the judges’ duty towards the gods to acquit Euxitheus because in the heliastic oath they swore to judge according to the laws (85) - and this they were not, in his view, had a right to ask for
doing at acquittal
according to the law on homicide. see 80, You must help me....
124
present. because
On
the
Euxitheus for his part he was not being tried
theme
of
joint
interest
Lysias Contemporary sources, even the autobiographical speech Against Eratosthenes, furnish little information about Lysias' life. In that speech he says that his father Cephalus, who reappears as the aged
host in Plato's Republic, 'was persuaded by Pericles' to move to Athens, where he lived for thirty years (4). Later biographical sources state that Cephalus was a Syracusan, and that Lysias was born at Athens and went to Thurii in South Italy at the age of fifteen (0.Η. Lys.1; [Plut.] Vit.X.Or.835c-d). Stripped of the inferences to which they were prone, the accounts of the biographers yield only these bare facts; but they allow certain approximations to be deduced. If Dionysius’ statement koindnésdn tes apoikias (Lys.1) is taken to mean that Lysias was present at the founding of the colony of
Thurii
the
in
date
444/3
B.C.,
accepted
defended
in
the
by
recent
date
most times
of
his
birth
subsequent (See
is
fixed
at
authorities,
Schindel
1967).
459/8.
and But
it its
This
has
is
been
acceptance
entails serious difficulties when confronted with other evidence, Lysias would have written his last extant speech (26, probable date 382 B.C.) at the age of 76/77, and most of his speeches between the ages of 54 and 76. More serious difficulties are presented by the speech Against Neaira, which is in the Demosthenic corpus and was made c. 343-340 B.C. In it Lysias' mother is described as still alive in 380 (22), while Lysias himself is keeping a young mistress, Metaneira.
or
even
Imagination
two
of
may
these
perhaps
be
stretched
improbabilities,
but
to
it
is
accommodate
more
consider whether Lysias' birth. To
the solution to the problem lies in a later a historian like Dionysius, consideration of
of
history
Mediterranean
brought
his mind. Of such events pan-Hellenic colony was one
Lysias desire
around
living
in
474,
that Lysias or for some
sensitive
Much
later
of our information Cephalus had died
Athens
and
at this early suggested by a
events
it
is
stage Dover
for
thirty
difficult
to
time.
This this
would would
the
forefront
make draw
be due purely event in Lysias'
is made worse before this time.
years, see
he
must
Pericles
of his career. A (LCL,42) therefore
went to Thurii around reason connected with than
to
to
date for a period
of
surely the foundation of Thurii as a of the most important. His statement that
went there in its foundation-year may to attach a known year to this important
The confused state Vit.X.Or. 835c, that
after
certain
one
natural
as
have an
by If
[Plut.] he did,
arrived
effective
to a life. there
sponsor
later dating along the lines seems desirable. He suggests
430/29, either to avoid the plague the family's status as foreigners at
445 him 125
or
444
too
close
the
year to
the
of
his
birth
birth. year
of
(Plato,
Phaedr.278e
an
was
he
that
tradition
18
only
was
Isocrates
when
figure
literary
the
violating
thereby
(436),
Isocrates
established
- 2798).
Lysias may have returned to Athens at any time between about 422 and 412, after living in Thurii long enough to be instructed by the rhetorician Tisias, to come of age and acquire citizenand property-rights there (Vit.X.Or.835d). He also needed time to build up the family's shield-making business in the Piraeus to the impressive
so
the
size
earlier
it
of
had
reached
those
by
two
the
dates
end
is
of
the
perhaps
Peloponnesian
to
Dover ,LCL,43 for political reasons and because date of 418-416 for Plato Phaedrus). The most
be
War,
preferred
(so
it permits a dramatic important facts about
this stage of Lysias' career are that the family's shield factory made them wealthy enough to perform all their civic duties by 404 (Ag. Erat.20), that the family property was valued at 70 talents at this
time
(P.Oxy.13,1606,1.30),
and
that
this
caused
Lysias
to
be
described as 'the richest of the metics' (id. 1.153-4). It also caused the ruin of Lysias and the murder of his brother Polemarchus that followed the usurpation of power by the Thirty Tyrants. They needed money to pay for the regime, and rich metics because xenophobia was
Spartan garrison which propped up their (resident aliens) were their easiest victims rife in the defeated city. Lysias himself
describes
(Ag. Erat.6-20).
of
their
what
happened
property,
Polemarchus'
death,
including
Lysias
700
shields
The and
Thirty
120
confiscated
slaves.
On
most
hearing
of
fled to Megara.
When the democrats under Thrasybulus returned, Lysias aided them with a gift of 2000 drachmae, 200 shields and pay for 300 mercenaries (P.Oxy.13,1606,1.163-171). Grateful to him and to other foreigners who had supported the democratic cause, Thrasybulus proposed that they should be granted citizenship, and a decree to that effect was passed by the Assembly. But its revocation was secured by Archinus, a moderate politician whose motives were
probably constitutional political association with
rather than personal, Theramenes has caused
but much
whose apparent speculation (see
Cloche,RDA,. 319; Loening (1981); Lateiner (1971) 45ff). Lysias' disappointment may have been acute, but it was probably short-lived, since he decided to live out the rest of his life in Athens, earning his living as a writer of speeches for the law courts and, to a lesser extent, of other forms of oratory, in the process of which he acquired an enviable literary reputation. His political status during this period was one of equality with Athenian citizens except for the
vote
and
eligibility
He lived beyond calculation of his
estimate may be
for 380, age
state
office
of an age of 76 - 83 too high unless Lysias
last extant speech. The hazards of of Lysias have been
(isoteleia)
but since the at death on a
(See
Loening
ancient biographers birth year of 459 or
283-4). base 458,
their their
(D.H.Lys.12; [Plut.] Vit.X.Or. 836a) lived for some time after writing his
searching for political well demonstrated by
126
affinities in the speeches Dover (LCL, 47-56). His
family
background,
with Pericles and to provide clear
would
have
particularly
regarded
favourable
than
the
friendship
his own support for indications. It might
democratic
oligarchs
to
of
politicians
the
his
father
Cephalus
the restored democracy, seem further be supposed that he
extension
as
of
potentially
Athenian
more
citizenship,
which would benefit himself and his family. Fragments of two of his speeches opposing exclusive measures against foreigners after the restoration, Against Phormisius and Against Theozotides, appear to affirm his support for a liberal approach to the question of citizenship and rewards for aliens who supported the democracy. But all this is hardly surprising in view of his own circumstances. A genuine ideological
adherence
to
democracy
is
much
less
easy
to
isolate
and
identify in his speeches. In the first place, his choice of clients shows no bias in favour of those with democratic sympathies, and the fact that many of these were wealthy property-owners (see Lateiner 76) suggests that some, at least, were probably less than ardent supporters of popular government, whatever words Lysias has put
in
their
mouths.
For
the
speechwriter
the
only
ineligible
litigants
were those who were unable to pay and those whose known views were so extreme that they were impossible to characterise convincingly without losing the case. These considerations as well as his own views prevented close associates of the
democracy. speeches
The are
main
those
of
Lysias Thirty
from and
sentiments
accepting clients others who had
that
reconciliation
emerge
from
the
admission
and
from among injured the
the
more to
political
state
offices
of the ablest men, excepting only those of extreme views; and the abomination of all who make slanderous allegations against innocent men for personal gain. Clients in less political cases tend to lack strong political colouring, and Lysias did not actively propound democratic
ideas
independently
of
the
cases
he
was
pleading.
His
personal associations were with the wealthy and the moderately wealthy rather than with the poorer citizens who formed the backbone of the democratic electorate; and as a well-known literary figure he drew his readership mainly from the upper, literate classes. But as a foreigner in a city which had recently undergone traumatic upheavals, he served his own interests by continuing to support democracy,
while quietly counselling moderation. It is this position, praqmatic and rational, that is broadly reflected in his oratory. To it may be added the
intelligence
which
enabled
him
to
gauge
the
shifting
prejudices
of
jurors
and to play on them, The corpus of Lysianic speeches that has survived to modern times contains 35 speeches, of which only 23 are complete and several may be spurious (see Usher & Najock (1982): the strongest candidates
also the
-
are
shorter Bud&
marked
with
asterisks(*)
fragments
and
notices
Lysias,Vol.2).
deliberative,
forensic
represented, but present selection,
the the
All
and great most
three
of of
in
over the
epideictic
the
fifty
list
below).
other
Aristotelian
(display
or
There
speeches oratorical
ceremonial)
majority are forensic. Apart from important are as follows (Oxford
numbering): 127
are
(see forms
-
are the text
3. 7, 13. 14, 19. 21, 30. 31. 32. 34. The
Defence Defence Against Against On the Defence Against Against Against On the
against Simon. concerning the Sacred Olive. Agoratus. Alcibiades. Estate of Aristophanes. against a charge of taking bribes. Nicomachus. Philon. Diogeiton. Constitution.
titles of the remaining
speeches
are as follows:
2.
Funeral
4, 5, 6.
Defence against a charge For Callias. Against Andocides*.
8,
Reply
Speech*.
to Associates,
of malicious
following
9. 11.
For the Soldier. Against Theomnestus
15,
Against
17. 18.
On the Property of Eraton. For the Brother of Nicias.
Alcibiades
Slander*.
B (an epitomised
(relationship
20.
For
23. 26.
Against Against
Pancleon*. Euandros.
27. 28. 29. 33, 35.
Against Against Against Olympic Eroticus.
Epicrates. Ergocles. Philocrates. Oration.
oratory.
authenticity
as
Lysias'
But
works
literary
of
as
was
held
an
the
his
B.C.
Dionysius
name
of 10)*.
and
of
are important historical merit as an example of
evidence
is
both
in
his
own
against
time
to an even greater extent, Antiphon. He was regarded
in
reflected
under
weight
reputation
all-rounder was
version
14 uncertain).
their
Lysias.
Phaedrus, passim) and, was higher than that of
and
to
Polystratus*.
Of the second list of speeches, 2, 6 and 20 documents, and 2 is of considerable literary
epideictic
wounding.
the in
new the
genre, large
catalogued
and
by
Caecilius
and
number
librarians. of
Caleacte
(see
Plato
in later antiquity both as a pioneer
the
esteem
of
speeches
In
the
knew
in
which
first of
he
published
century 425,
but
pronounced only 233 genuine. He was widely read, quoted, plagiarised and imitated. In literary circles, after controversy over the virtues of style had polarised into the opposing factions of Atticism and Asianism, Lysias was made the mode! of Attic style. His admirers
called
achieved
by
the
attention
use
of
to
the
purity
and
not
poetic
current, 128
lucidity
of
vocabulary.
his
language,
They
found
his style vivid, persuasive charm (charis) (D.H.Lys.10). part in the critic's scheme: Style (the other two styles choice has had a not wholly which has too frequently judgment
Much
without
ancient
reference
criticism
was
found
to
was
imitation, and for this authors and generalised
Lysias
and invested with a certain indefinable These qualities fitted him for another they made him the model of the Plain being the Middle and the Grand). This salutary influence on modern criticism, been content to endorse the ancient
to
the
context
concerned
reason was opinions. As
be
plain
in
which
with
it
much given to a result of this
and
was
identifying
simple
when
reached.
models
for
comparison of preoccupation,
compared
with
Isocrates, who perfected the smooth, complex period, with its high concentration of parallelism, antithesis and subordination of clauses; and lacking in emotion when compared with the most colourful, stirring and brilliant of the Greek orators, Demosthenes. Such
comparisons do less than full justice to Lysias' versatility and range of expression. The speeches contain many elaborately constructed periods, and in certain speeches the average length of sentences is higher
than
the
concentrations speeches
(e.g.
hypostasis
in
been
rhetorical hyperbaton
3,16,30,
Lysias appears while in others
sought
current
Isocratean
of
3).
(kuria
in
24,
Gorgianic
to make passages
(e.g.
words
average
devices
(18,26,33,35).
in certain rhetorical
figures
in
a special effort may be found in
Even
the
onomata)
critic's
There
Passages question
13,31).
in
In
are
and
high
in certain
10,24,31,34,
some
speeches
to avoid hiatus (e.g. which rhythmic effects
16), have
claim
used
only
qualification
(see
(D.H.Lys.3)
that needs
Lysias
Blass, AB 1, 408-9), although in general it stands examination. Turning to subject-matter, it has been shown that Lysias' argumentation and his approach to legal problems can have great subtlety (Bateman 1958 and 1962), and it seems certain that Isaeus and his pupil Demosthenes could not have developed their techniques of argument if Lysias had not laid the foundations of these in his more difficult cases. Two qualities, one of style, the other of content, deserve special notice.
The
stylistic
quality
may
best
be
described
as
a
certain
looseness of structure which may leave antitheses uncompleted or logical or grammatical sequences interrupted. Müller counted examples
several
of
men
solitarium
passages
(men
containing
not
followed
unacolouthon
Blass also remarks on this characteristic occurs especially in narrative, and where
by
de),
imprecise
or
and
the 43
listed
antithesis.
noting that it 418), 1, (AB the orator becomes involved
It undoubtedly contributes to in direct argument with his opponent. the impression of natural artlessness. The other quality concerns Lysias' presentation of character, mainly of his clients but occasionally of their opponents. There is room for argument as to what ancient critics meant when they used the word Ethopoiia and whether it accurately describes what Lysias actually did (see Usher 1965). For the present it is sufficient to point out that characterisation in Lysias rises far above the general moral tone
which
satisfied
the
critics'
demands, 129
and
in
some
cases,
notably
those of Euphiletus in 1 and Mantitheus in 16, carries individualisation to the exent of admitting venial flaws of character which give the client a sympathetic human face and add to his credibility. In his handling of the different parts of the speech Lysias set the standards which later orators were to follow. The great variety of material in his introductions shows the care he took to prepare his juries in the precise manner that each case required. He is the first orator to realise the full potential of narrative as a persuasive medium through which to present evidence clearly, characterise his client or
opponent
and,
by
means
of
stylistic
techniques
historic tenses, to involve the jury in his with him, 'smuggling conviction unnoticed
story past
such and the
as
the
use
of
carry them along listener's senses'
{D.H.Lys.18). In his proofs, Lysias uses probability-arguments with great skill, often pressing them vehemently, and linking them closely to the facts to which he has given prominence in the narrative and reinforcing them with examples and generalisations about human behaviour. The end of the proof section often has a tone of high moral indignation or conviction. The conclusions of his speeches are mostly brief, quiet and dignified, and sometimes contain solemn adjurations to the jury couched in striking language. With the speeches of Lysias the pattern of classical Attic oratory is set.
SIGLA X
=
cod. Xl = XC =
X¢(1) ΧΕ XS vwozemnn
=
= =
cod.
Palatinus scriptura scriptura
=
88 ante correcturam factam correctura illata
scriptura
scriptura scriptura
correctura
correctura manu prima
Laurentianus
lvii,
primae
illata illata
4
=
I
cod. Marcianus 422 cod. 'Vaticanus 66 cod. Vaticanus 1366 = cod. Urbinas 117 = cod. Vaticanus Palatinus Aldus = editio Aldina
manus
manus recentioris suprascripta
marg. Turr.
117
ed. Ald. = marg. exempli Leidensis editionis = editores Turicenses (Baiter et Sauppe)
130
Aldinae
LYSIAS
YIEP
TOY
ἘΡΑΤΟΣΘΈΝΟΥΣ
ΦΟΝΟΥ͂
ATOAOTIA
Tept πολλοῦ ἄν ποιησαύμην, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὸ τοιούτους ὑμᾶς ἐμοὺ δικαστὰς περὺ τούτου τοῦ πράγματος γενέσθαι, olotnep ἂν ὑμῦν αὐτοῦς εἴητε τοιαῦτα πεπονθότες" εὖ γὰρ οἶδ᾽ ὅτυ, εὖ τὴν αὐτὴν γνώμην περὺ τῶν ἄλλων ἔχουτε, ἥνπερ περὺ ὑμῶν αὐτῶν. οὐκ ἄν etn ὅστις οὐκ ἐπὺ τοῦς γεγενημένοις ἀγανακχτοίη, ἀλλὰ πάντες dV περὺ τῶν τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐπιτηδευόντων τὰς cnutas μικρὰς ἡγοῦσϑε; nal ταῦτα οὐκ dv εὔη μόνον παρ᾽ ὑμῦν
οὕτως
ἐγνωσμένα,
ἀλλ᾽
ἐν ἁπάσῃ
τῇ
Ἑλλάδι"
περὺ
τούτου γὰρ
μόνου τοῦ ἀδικήματος καὶ ἐν δημοκρατίᾳ nal ὀλιγαρχίᾳ ἡ αὐτὴ τιμωρία τοῦς ἀσϑενεστάτοις πρὸς τοὺς τὰ μέγιστα δυναμένους ἀποδέδοται, ὥστε τὸν xetpLoTov τῶν αὐτῶν τυγχάνειν τῷ βελτύστῳ᾽ οὕτως, ὦ ἄνδρες, ταύτην τὴν ὕβρυν ἅπαντες ἄνθρωπον δευνοτάτην
ἡγοῦνταυ.
περὺ
μὲν
οὖν
τοῦ
μεγέϑους
τῆς
ζημίας
ἅπαντας ὑμᾶς νομύζω τὴν αὐτὴν διάνοιαν éxeuv, καὺ οὐδένα οὕτως ὀλυγώρως διακεῦσθαι, ὅστις οὔεται δεῦν συγγνώμης τυγχάνειν ἦ μικρᾶς ζημίας dElous ἡγεῦτοι τοὺς τῶν τοιούτων ἔργων αὐτίους" ἡγοῦμαι δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, τοῦτό με δεῦν ἐπιδεῦEat, ὡς ἐμούίχευεν ᾿Ερατοσθένης τὴν γυναῦκα τὴν ἐμὴν καὺ
ἐκείνην ἐμὲ
τε δυέφϑειρε
αὐτὸν
ὕβρυσεν
ἔχϑρα
ἐμοὺ
ἕνεκα
ἔπραξα
nal
ἄλλου
μέρδους
nal τοὺς
els
τὴν
ἐκεύίνῳ
ταῦτα,
οὐδεμία
Uva
οὐδενὸς
παῦδας
οὐκίαν
τὴν
ἦν
πλούσιος
πλὴν
τῆς
πλὴν
ἐκ ματὰ
τοὺς
ἐμοὺς ἤσχυνε
ἐμὴν
εὐσυών,
ταύτης,
πένητος τοὺς
Hal
nal οὔτε
οὔτε
χρημάτων
γένωμαι,
ote
νόμους
τιμωρίας.
ἐγὼ τούνυν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑμῦν ἅπαντα ἐπυδείξω τὰ ἐμαυτοῦ πρᾶγματα, οὐδὲν παραλεύπων, ἀλλὰ λέγων τἀληθῆ" ταύτην γὰρ ἐμαυτῷ μόνην ἡγοῦμαι σωτηρίαν, ἐὰν ὑμῦν εὐπεῦν ἅπαντα δυνηϑῶ τὰ πεπραγμένα.
votua
᾿Εγὼ γάρ, ὦ ᾿Αϑηναῦοι, ἐπευξὴ ἔδοξέ pou γῆμαι Hal γυἠγαγόμην ets τὴν οὐκίαν, τὸν μὲν ἄλλον χρόνον οὕτω
διεκεύμην
ὥστε
μήτε
λυπεῦν
μήτε
λίαν
ἐπ᾽
ἐκείνῃ
εἶναι
ὃ τι
ἄν ἐθέλῃ ποιεῖν, ἐφύλαττόν τε ὡς oliv te Av, καὺ προσεῦχον τὸν νοῦν ὥσπερ εὐκὸς ἦν’ ἐπειδὴ δέ pou παυδίον γύγνεταυ, ἐπύστευον ἤδη ual πάντο τὰ ἐμαυτοῦ ἐκείνῃ παρέδωκα, ἡγούμενος ταύτην οὐκευότητα μιγύστην εὖναν. ἐν μὲν οὖν τῷ πρώτῳ χρόνῳ, ὦ ᾿Αϑηναῖου, πασῶν ἦν βελτίστη, καὺ γὰρ οὐκονόμος δεινὴ χαὺ φειδωλὸς [ἀγαθὴ] nal ἀκρυβῶς πάντα διοικοῦσα"' ἐπευδὴ
δέ
θανοῦσα 1.
etnte μακρὰς
4. 7
μοι
αὐτία
ἡ μήτηρ
μοι
marg.
ed.
ἐτελεύτησε,
γεγύνηταυ. Ald.:
cl
CHPXL
οὔτε ex οὕτως corr. ἀγαϑὴ del. Dobree 132
ἐπ᾽
Xr
ἦτε
πάντων
τῶν
κακῶν
ἐκφορὰν
γὰρ
αὐτῇ
CHX
μυκρᾶς
ἀπο-
ἀκολου-
XC(1):
SPEECH I same
should
Τ
much
attitude
to
: THE
KILLING
appreciate
it,
me
as
jurymen
ΟΕ
ERATOSTHENES
gentlemen, in
this
if you
case
as
would
you
adopt
would
the
towards
yourselves if you had faced a similar experience; for | am sure that if you were to hold the same view about other people as you do about yourselves, not one of you could fail to feel indignation at what has happened, but all of you would regard as small the penalties imposed upon men who engage in such practices. And you would not be alone in this opinion: the whole of Greece would agree with you, since this is the one crime weakest citizens
for are
which, under both democracy accorded the same redress as
and oligarchy, the the most powerful,
so that the humblest receives the same treatment as the most eminent. Such is the feeling of outrage, gentlemen, that the whole human race has
of the
about
the
this
penalty
matter
actions
you
so
should
consider,
seduced
violation.
are
lightly
as
receive
wife
and
think, to
that
then,
that
same
mind,
think
pardon
gentlemen,
my
I
all of the
or
that
concerning
task
is
corrupted
her,
and
to
magnitude
of you
responsible
small show
aiso
the
none
those
deserve
my
and
regards for
penalties. that
brought
such
But
I
Eratosthenes
disgrace
upon
my children and insulted me by entering my house; that no enmity existed between him and me except over this; that I did not do it for money, to raise myself from rags to riches, nor for any gain except
the
riaht
you the
from whole
in
of punishment
accorded
the beginning all my truth, for I see that
by
the
actions, my sole
laws.
| shall
now
describe
to
omitting nothing but telling chance of a safe outcome lies
my
ability to give you a complete account of events. Now when | decided to marry, Athenians, and brought a wife into my house, during the whole of that time my attitude was that | should neither harass her nor leave her too free to do whatever she
wished. | to her as
came to that we
watched her as was reasonable.
trust her were now
far as possible, and paid as But when a child was born
and placed all my affairs in in the closest intimacy. And
her keeping, thinking indeed in the earliest
days, Athenians, she was the best wife in the world, thrifty housekeeper who managed everything to a nicety.
133
much attention to me, | then
an efficient, But when my
ϑήσασα ἡ ἐμὴ γυνὴ ὑπὸ τούτου τοῦ ἀνθρώπου dgSetoa, χρόνῳ δυαφϑεύίρεταυ᾽ ἐπιτηρῶν γὰρ τὴν ϑεράπαιναν τὴν els τὴν ἀγορὰν βαδίζουσαν καὺ λόγους προσφέρων ἀπώλεσεν αὐτήν. Πρῶτον μὲν οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, (δεῖ γὰρ καὶ ταῦϑ᾽ ὑμῦν SunyrioaoSar) οὐκύδιον ἔστι μοι διπλοῦν, Coa ἔχον τὰ ἄνω tots κάτω κατὰ τὴν γυναικωνῦτιν Hal κατὰ tiv dvdpwvttuv. ἐπευδὴ δὲ τὸ παυδίον ἐγένετο ἡμῦν, ἡ μήτηρ αὐτὸ ἐθήλαζεν᾽ ἕνα δὲ un, ὁπότε 10
λούεσϑαυ
vovoa,
ἐγὼ
δέου,
μὲν
ἄνω
χυνδυνεύῃ͵ κατὰ δυῃτώμην.
αὖ
δὲ
ἤδη συνευϑυσμένον Av, ὥστε πολλάκις καϑευδήσουσα ὡς τὸ παυδίον, Cva τὸν
12
τῷ παυδίῳ πρῶτον
τὸν τυτϑόν,
οὐκ
χρόνου"
ἡ γυνὴ τυτϑὸν
AOL
οὕτως
ἀπήει κάτω αὐτῷ δυδῷ nal
μὴ
δὲ
ἵνα παύσηταυ
ὡς ἀν ἀσμένη ἐγὼ
κλᾶον.
με
ὠργιζόμην
ἡ δὲ τὸ μὲν
ἑομακυῖα
ual
ἥκοντα
ἐκέλευον
αὐτὴν
δυὰ ATLEVAL,
nal
ἀπιοῦσα
προστύϑησι
τὴν
ϑύραν.
προσποιουμένη
παύζειν, nal τὴν κλεῦν ἐφέλκεται. κἀγὼ τούτων οὐδὲν ἐνθυμούμενος οὐδ᾽ ὑπονοῶν ἐκάϑευδον ἄσμενος, ἥκων ἐξ ἀγροῦ. ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἦν πρὸς ἡμέραν, ἧκεν ἐκεύνη καὶ tiv ϑύραν ἀνέῳξεν. ἐρομένου δέ μου τί αὐ ϑύραυ νύκτωρ ψοφοῖεν, ἔφασκε τὸν
λύχνον
ἀποσβεσθῆναν
nat
ἐμοῦ
HOU
Tus
τὸν
παρὰ
τῷ
ἐνάψασθαυ. ἐσιώπων ἐγὼ καὶ ἔδοξε δέ μους ὦ ἄνδρες, τὸ
τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ οὕτως οὐδὲν συωπῆ. Μετὰ
ἐκεῦνος 16
ἤϑελεν,
ἐπευδὴ
γευτόνων ἡγούμην.
15
καταβαύ-
κάτω.
"va σύ γε' ἔφη 'πευρᾷς ἐνταῦϑα τὴν παυδύσκην: καὺ πρότερον δὲ μεθύων elines αὐτήν. κἀγὼ μὲν ἐγέλων, ἐκεύνη δὲ ἀναστᾶσα
14
Ἀλύμακος
βοᾷ. ual ταῦτα πολὺν χρόνον οὕτως ἐγύγνετο, καὺ ἐγὼ οὐδέποτε ὑπώπτευσα, ἀλλ᾽ οὕτως ἠλυϑίως διεκείμην. ὥστε gunv τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ yuvatua πασῶν σωφρονεστάτην etval τῶν ἐν τῇ πόλει. Ipotdvtos δὲ τοῦ χρόνου, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἧκον μὲν ἀπροσδομήτως ἐξ ἀγροῦ, μετὰ δὲ τὸ δεῖπνον τὸ παιδίον ἐβόα καὺ ἐδυσκόλαινεν ὑπὸ τῆς ϑεραπαύνης ἐπύτηδες λυπούμενον. ἕνα ταῦτα mou’ ὁ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος ἔνδον Av’ ὕστερον γὰρ ἅπαντα ἐπυϑόμην. καὺ ἐγὼ τὴν γυναῖκα ἀπιέναι ἐκέλευον nal δοῦναι
11
13
τῆς
yuvatues
παυδίῳ,
elta
ἐκ
τῶν
ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχειν πρόσωπον ἐψυμυϑιῶσθϑαι,
τεϑνεῶτος οὔπω τριάκονθ᾽ ἡμέρας ὅμως δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ εὐπὼν περὺ τοῦ πράγματος ἐξελθὼν φχόμην ἔξω δὲ ταῦτα, ὦ ἄνδρες, χρόνου μεταξὺ διαγενομένου
πολὺ
ἀπολελευμμένου
πρεσβῦτυς
ἄνθρωπος,
ἐμούχευεν,
τῶν
ὑπὸ
ἐμαυτοῦ
γυναικὸς
ὡς ἐγὼ ὕστερον
κακῶν,
προσέρχεταί
ὑποπεμφϑεῖῦσα
ἤἥκουον᾽
αὕτη
ἣν
δὲ ὀργιυζο-
μένη nal ἀδικεύῦσθαυ νομύζουσα, Stu οὐκέτι ὁμοίως ἐφοίτα παρ᾽ αὐτήν, ἐφύλαττεν ἕως ἐξηῦρεν ὅ τι εἴη τὸ αὔτιον. προσελθοῦσα οὖν μοι ἐγγὺς ἡ ἄνθρωπος τῆς οὐκίας τῆς ἐμῆς ἐπιτηροῦσα, ᾿'᾿Εὐφύλητε' ἔφη 'μηδεμιυᾷ πολυπραγμοσύνῃ προσεληλυϑέναι,
με
καὺ
τὴν
σὴν
9
λούεσθαι)
10
ἐμαυτοῦ
νόμιζε
γυναῦκα AotoSaL
cx:
12
κἈλᾶον
15
ὑποπεμφϑεῦσα
πρὸς
NX:
ὧν
ὁ
Hude:
134
ἀνὴρ
ὁ
ὑβρύζων
τυγχάνει.
edv
ets
οὖν
Hude
NPXL Ἀλαῦον
ἐπυπεμφϑεῦσα
αὐτῇ
γὰρ
ἡμῦν
Thalheim,
ἑαυτοῦ
Thalheim,
σέ’
ἐχϑρὸς
CHPXS
αὕτη
Taylor:
σὲ
λάβῃς
mother
passed
for it was this man,
away,
when my and was
her
death
became
the
cause
wife attended her funeral eventually corrupted by
looking out for the servant-girl and passing on the proposals
who does by which
of
that him.
all
my
she He
troubles,
was did
seen this
our shopping in the he ruined her. Now
by by
market, firstly,
gentlemen (for 1 must tell you these details), my home is on two levels, the upper and lower floors being equal in area, with the women's quarters upstairs and the men's downstairs. When our child was born, its mother nursed it. To avoid the risk of a fall as she came downstairs when the child needed to be washed, | used to live become such a routine This had now below. and the women upstairs, that my wife would often go below to sleep with the child procedure
to
breast
it the
give
were
for
a
long
it
so
and
I
how
was
suspicion,
any
had
never
this
And
its crying.
prevent and
time,
things
was
but
10
so
naive as to think my wife the most virtuous in the city. Time passed, and one day | returned unexpectedly from the estate. After dinner, the child was crying and fretting. The servant-girl was deliberately annoying
that
it
would
do
this,
seducer
the
for
the
in
was
house: | found all this out later. | told my wife to go and give the At first she was stop crying. so that it would breast, child the such a time. after back me see to pleased were she if as unwilling, But when | became angry and told her to go, she said, "So that you can try your hand here with the little maid: once before, when you you made a grab at her." And I laughed, while she got were drunk, up and shut the door as she left, pretending it as a joke, and she turned the key. Now | thought nothing of this and had no suspicion, Towards day on the estate. my after readily to sleep went but doors the why asked | When door. the opened and came she daybreak had banged in the night, she told me that the lamp by the baby had I made no gone out, so she had got a light from the neighbours. and supposed her story to be true. But I noticed her face comment was
though
powdered,
her
brother
had
died
not
thirty
The
old
crone,
then,
waited
near
my
house,
came
up
to
me
do not think that it is from any meddlesome and said, "Euphiletus, you, for the man who is dishonouring approached motive that | have take both yourself and your wife happens to be our enemy. So if you
135
13
14
before.
days
Yet I said nothing about the matter in spite of this but left the house and went away in silence. After this, gentlemen, some time elapsed and | remained quite unaware of the wrongs being done to me, Then some old crone came up to me, covertly sent, as | heard later, by a that man was having an affair. This woman was with whom woman because his visits were mistreated being felt she was and angry, him until she found the on watch becoming less frequent, so she kept reason.
12
16
τὴν
17
θεράπαιναν
τὴν
εἰς
ἀγορὰν
βαδύζουσαν
nal
διακονοῦσαν
ὑμῦν καὺ βασανύσῃς. ἅπαντα πεύσει. ἔστυ δ᾽' ἔφη ""Epatoσϑένης ᾿᾽᾿Οἶϑεν ὁ ταῦτα πράττων, ὃς οὐ μόνον τὴν σὴν γυναῦκα διέφϑαρκεν ἀλλὰ nal ἄλλας πολλάς" ταύτην γὰρ [τὴν] τέχνην ἔχει.' ταῦτα εὐποῦσα, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἐκεύνη μὲν ἀπηλλάγη, ἐγὼ δ᾽ εὐθέως ἐταραττόμην, καὺ πάντα μου els τὴν γνώμην εὐσήει,
καὺ μεστὸς ἦ ὑποψίας, ἐνθυμούμενος μὲν ὡς ἀπεκλήσϑην ἐν τῷ δωματίῳ, ἀναμυμνῃσκόμενος δὲ ὅτι ἐν ἐκεύνῃ τῇ νυκτὺ ἐφόφει 18
ἡ μέταυλος ϑύρα nal ἡ αὔλειος, & οὐδέποτε ἐγένετο, ἔδοξέ τέ μου ἡ γυνὴ ἐψυμυϑιῶσθϑαυι. ταῦτά μου πάντα εἰς τὴν γνώμην εἰσήει, nal μεστὸς A ὑποψίας. ἐλθὼν δὲ οὔκαδε ἐκέλευον ἀκολουϑεῦν μοι τὴν ϑεράπαιναν εἰς τὴν ἀγοράν. ἀγαγὼν δ᾽ αὐτὴν ὡς τῶν ἐπυτηδείων τινὰ ἔλεγον ὅτι ἐγὼ πάντα εἴην πεπυσμένος τὰ γυγνόμενα ἐν τῇ οὐκίᾳ᾽ 'σοὺ οὖν' ἔφην 'ἔξεστι, “δυοῦν ὁπότερον βούλεν ἐλέσϑαι, ἢ μαστιγωθεῦσαν ets μύλωνα ἐμπεσεῦν
vnv,
καὺ
συγγνώμης 19
20
22
ἐμοῦ
κακοῦς
τἀληϑῆ
τυχεῦν
τῶν
μηδὲν
τοιούτους
παϑεῦν
ἡμαρτημένων.
συνεχομέ-
κακόν,
devon
δὲ
ἀλλὰ μηδέν.
πευσϑείη,
nal
τὰς εὐσόδους
οἷς
τρόποις
προσίουτο,
nat ὡς θεσμοφορίοις ἐμοῦ ἐν ἀγρῷ ὄντος ᾧχετο els τὸ Lepöv μετὰ τῆς μητρὸς τῆς ἐκεύνου" ual τἄλλα τὰ γενόμενα πάντα ἀκρυβῶς διηγήσατο. ἐπειδὴ δὲ πάντα εὔρητο αὐτῇ, εἶπον ἐγώ, "ὅπως τούνυν ταῦτα μηδεὺς ἀνθρώπων πεύσεται el δὲ μή, οὐδέν σου μύριον ἔσται τῶν πρὸς ἔμ᾽ ὡμολογημένων. ἀξιῶ δέ σε én’ αὐτοφώρῳ ταῦτά μοι ἐπιδεῦξαι" ἐγὼ γὰρ οὐδὲν δέομαι λόγων, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἔργον φανερὸν γενέσθαι, εἴπερ οὕτως ἔχει.' ὡμολόγευ ταῦτα πουιήσευν. καὺ μετὰ ταῦτα διεγένοντο ἡμέραν τέτταρες ἢ πέντε, . .. ὡς ἐγὼ μεγάλους ὑμῦν τεκμηρίοις ἐπιδείξω. πρῶτον δὲ διηγήσασθϑαυ βούλομαι τὰ πραχϑέντα τῇ
τελευταίᾳ
23
παρ᾽
παύσασϑαι
ἅπαντα
ἀλλὰ πάντο τἀληϑῆ λέγε.' κἀκεύνη τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ἔξαρνος ἦν, nal ποιεῦν ἐκέλευεν ὅ tu βούλομαν οὐδὲν γὰρ εὐδέναι ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐγὼ ἐμνήσϑην ᾿Ερατοσϑένους πρὸς αὐτήν. Hal εὖπον ὅτι οὗτος ὁ φουτῶν εὔη πρὸς τὴν γυναῦκα, ἐξεπλάγη ἡγησαμένη με πάντα ἀκρυβῶς ἐγνωκέναι. Hal τότε ἤδη πρὸς τὰ γόνατά μου πεσοῦσα, ual πίστιν παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ λαβοῦσα μηδὲν πείσεσϑαι, κακόν, κατηγόρει πρῶτον μὲν ὡς μετὰ τὴν ἐκφορὰν αὐτῇ προσύου. ἔπευτα ὡς αὐτὴ τελευτῶσα εὐσαγγεύλειε nal ὡς ἐκεύνη
τῷ χρόνῳ 21
μηδέποτε
Th κατευποῦσαν
ἡμέρᾳ.
Σώστρατος
ἦν μου
ἐπιτήδενος
nal
φίλος.
τούτῳ ἡλίου δεδυκότος ἐόντι ἐξ ἀγροῦ ἀπήντησα. εὐδὼς δ᾽ ἐγὼ StL τηνυκαῦτα ἀφιγμένος οὐδένα καταλήψοιτο οὔκοι τῶν ἐπιτηδείων, ἐκέλευον συνδειπνεῖν" ual ἐλθόντες οὔκαδε ὡς ἐμέ, ἀναβάντες ele τὸ ὑπερῷον ἐδειπνοῦμεν. ἐπειδὴ δὲ καλῶς αὐτῷ etyev, ἐκεῦνος μὲν ἀπιὼν ᾧχετο, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐκάϑευδον. ὁ 5’ ᾿Ερατοσϑένης, ὦ ἄνδρες, εἰσέρχεται, καὶ ἡ ϑεράπαινα 16
τὴν
19 20
ὁ φοιτῶν XC(1): σοι, φοι,ιτῶν npooloLto Kayser: προσίου
del.
Bekker
21
πεύσεται
22
οὐδένα
OPW:
Bekker:
πεύσηται
οὐδὲν 136
rell.
ἀν
HP
the servant girl who question her, you will said, "is Eratosthenes but
many
With into
others
does your shopping and housework, and find out everything. The man doing this," she of Oe, who has corrupted not only your wife
besides,
for
these words she was confusion, and every
suspicion
as
remembered
|
recalled
the
inner
of
suspicion.
to
the
ἰ
went
practises
I
had
been
doors
as
a
profession".
the
the
room,
during
and
that
servant-girl and
house
friend's
a
to
in
17
I
night,
my wife thought | had into my mind, and | was
ordered
her
| took
shut
banging
and before, came things
and
seduction
gentlemen; but | was at once thrown came into my mind, and | was full of
outer
home
where
market,
how
and
happened All these
never had which make-up. wearing
he
gone, detail
to
follow
told
her
was full
18
me that
[I had full knowledge of what was going on in the house. And | said either to be from two alternatives, choice can take your "So you and sent to the mill, where you will suffer the unrelieved whipped
|
denied
she
first
At
to do
me
told
it and
as
name to her and said that this was the man who was visiting my wife, she panicked, thinking that | knew everything in detail. So now she me a from and after obtaining knees, at my herself down threw of firstly, him, accused harm, no suffer would she that pledge
20
eventually
she
haw
described
and
funeral,
the
after
her
approaching
19
Eratosthenes'
mentioned
|
when
But
nothing.
knew
she
as
wished,
truth".
whole
the
tell
but
no suffer lie at all,
and truth whole your sins. Do not
the for
or to reveal work, from me indulgence
of that miseries but obtain harm,
carried his message and how my wife was in time persuaded. She told too of the arrangements they made to effect his entry, and how she went off to the temple with his mother to attend the Thesmophoria while | was at the farm; and she gave a detailed account of everything else that story, I said, "Now
had happened. When she had see to it that no other human
completed her being hears of
this: if they do, no valid, And | expect
part of the agreement you to show me their
with me as they
it,
for
the
deed,
|
five
days
evidence. day.
have
no
if it
use
is
passed
But
after
first
Sostratus
for
really
was
| a
mere
words,
happening". this...... as
want close
to
you have guilty act
but
She I
shall
of
a
prove
describe
friend
want
agreed what
mine.
|
clear
to
do
to
you
him
will be commit
exposure
this,
happened met
Four
with
on
after
21
of
or
22
strong
the sunset
last as
he was coming from the farm, Knowing that he would find none of his family at home when he arrived there at that time, | invited him to dine with me. And we came to my house, went upstairs and had dinner.
But
After
he
Eratosthenes
had
dined
entered,
well,
he
gentlemen,
went
and
137
away
the
and
I
went
servant -girl
to
sleep.
aroused
me
23
24
éneyetpaod με εὐθὺς φράζειν ὅτι ἔνδον ἐστί. κἀγὼ εὐπῶν ἐκεύνῃ ἐπυμελεῦσθϑαι τῆς ϑύρας, καταβὰς σιωπῇ ἐξέρχομαυ, nat ἀφικνοῦμαι ὡς τὸν nal τόν, καὺ τοὺς μὲν «οὐκ» ἔνδον κατέλαβον, τοὺς δὲ οὐδ᾽ ἐπυδημοῦντας ηὗρον. παραλαβὼν δ᾽ ὡς οἷόν te ἦν πλείστους ἐκ τῶν παρόντων ἐβάδιζον. nal δᾷδας λαβόντες ἐκ τοῦ ἐγγύτατα καπὴλεύίου εὐσερχόμεϑα, ἀνεῳγμένης τῆς ϑύρας nal ὑπὸ τῆς ἀνθρώπου παρεσκευασμένης. ὥσαντες δὲ τὴν
25
26
27
28
θύραν
τοῦ
δωματίου
οὐ
μὲν
πρῶτοι
eloudvtes
ἔτι
εὔδομεν
αὐτὸν κατακεύμενον παρὰ τῇ γυναικί, ol δ᾽ ὕστερον ἐν τῇ πλύνῃ γυμνὸν ἑστηκότα. ἐγὼ δ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες, πατάξας καταβάλλω αὐτόν, καὶ tH Xelpe περιαγαγὼν ets τοὔπυισϑεν Hal δήσας ἠρώτων διὰ τί ὑβρύζεν ets τὴν οὐκίαν τὴν ἐμὴν eloudv. xanelvos ἀδικεῦν μὲν ὡμολόγει. ἠντεβόλει δὲ ual ὑκέτευε μὴ ἀποκτεῦναυ ἀλλ᾽ ἀργύριον πράξασϑαν, ἐγὼ δ᾽ εἶπον ὅτι 'οὐκ ἐγώ σε ἀποκτενῶ, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ τῆς πόλεως νόμος. ὅν σὺ παραβαύνων περὺ ἐλάττονος τῶν ἡδονῶν ἐποιήσω, καὶ μᾶλλον εἵλου τουοὔτον ἁμάρτημα ἐξαμαρτάνειν els τὴν γυναῦκα τὴν ἐμὴν καὶ ets τοὺς παῦδας τοὺς ἐμοὺς ἦ τοῦς νόμοις πεύϑεσϑαι Hal κόσμιος εἶναι." οὕτως. ὦ ἄνδρες, ἐκεῦνος τούτων ἔτυχεν ὧνπερ of νόμοι κελεύουσι, τοὺς τὰ τοιαῦτα πράττοντας, οὐκ εὐσαρπασϑεὺς En τῆς 6500, οὐδ᾽ ἐπὺ τὴν ἑστίαν καταφυγών, ὥσπερ οὗτοι λέγουσι" πῶς γὰρ ἄν, ὅστις ἐν τῷ δωματίῳ πληγεὺς κατέπεσεν εὐθύς, περυέστρεψα δ᾽ αὐτοῦ τὼ χεῖρε, ἔνδον δὲ ἦσαν ἄνθρωποι τοσοῦτοι, οὖς διαφυγεῖν οὐκ ἐδύνατο, οὔτε σύδηρον οὔτε ξύλον οὔτε ἄλλο οὐδὲν ἔχων, ᾧ τοὺς εὐσελθϑόντας Av ἠμύνατο; ἀλλ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὖμαι καὶ ὑμᾶς εὐδέναι ὅτι ot μὴ τὰ δύκαια πράττοντες οὐχ ὁμολογοῦσι τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς λέγειν ἀληϑῆ. ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοὺ φευδόμενοι, Hal τὰ τοιαῦτα μηχανώμενοι ὀργὰς τοῦς ἀκούουσι κατὰ τῶν τὰ δίκαια πραττόντων σκευάζουσι. Πρῶτον μὲν οὖν ἀνάγνωθι, τὸν νόμον.
παρα-
ΝΌΜΟΣ
Οὐκ ἠμφεσβήτει,
29
ὅπως
μὲν
ἕτουμος
μὴ
ἀποθάνῃ
ἦν χρήματα.
ὦ ἄνδρες,
ἀλλ᾽
ὡμολόγει
ἠντεβόλει
καὶ
ὑκέτευεν,
ἐγὼ δὲ τῷ μὲν
ἐκεύνου
ἀδικεῦν,
nal
ἀποτύνειν
τυμήματι
δ᾽
οὐ συν-
ἐχώρουν, τὸν δὲ τῆς πόλεως νόμον ἠξίουν εὖναυ κυριώτερον. nat ταύτην ἔλαβον τὴν δύκην, fy ὑμεῦς δικαιοτάτην εἶναι, ἡγησάμενου τοῦς τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐπιτηδεύουσυν ἐτάξατε. Καί μοι ἀνάβητε τούτων μάρτυρες. ΜΑΡΤΥΡΕΣ 30
᾿Ανάγνωθυ add.
δέ pou Reiske
ual cf.
τοῦτον
οὐδ᾽
νόμον
«τὸν»
Reiske:
οὐκ
23
οὐκ
25 26 27 30
ἀποκτεῦναι Hertlein: αὐτὸν κτεῦναι ἐποιήσω Ρ: ἐποίησας rell. ξύλον. . . ἔχων] ὅπλον ἄλλο οὐδὲν τὸν add. Westermann
138
41
τὸν
ἔχων
ἐκ
Schenkl
τῆς
at
once
and
the
door,
the
houses
others
told
I
me
that
silently
of
not
several
even
circumstances,
in 1
he
went
was
the
house,
and
out
neighbours,
town.
made
in
downstairs
Taking
my
way
but
the
found
with
back.
Telling
of
me We
some
as
not
many
got
her
house.
as
torches
to |
at
watch
called
home
I could from
in
the
at
and
the
24
nearest
shop, and went in, the door having been kept open by the maid. Pushing the bedroom door open, those of us who entered first saw him still Iying beside my wife, and those following saw him standing naked on the bed. | and pulling his hands
struck behind
him his
and knocked him down, gentlemen, back, tied them and asked him why
he was committing the outrage of entering my house. And he admitted his crime, but begged and beseeched me not to kill him but to negotiate a monetary settlement. But 1 replied: "It is not | who shall be killing you, but the law of the city, which you are flouting: you thought
it
this
crime
and
behave
the
laws
street
men
less
important
against for
taken
allege.
bedroom and fell at there were so many
and
he
warded
had off
no the
iron
my
that
pleasures,
children man,
malefactors.
nor
how
your
and
Thus
such
in,
For
than
wife
decently".
enjoin
and
my
had
could
he
gentlemen,
He
taken
that
and
rather
was
met
neither
refuge
at
when
he
be,
chose
than the
was
to
obey the
fate
laws which
from
hearth,
26
commit
the
seized
25
as
struck
27
the these
in
the
once, and | tied his hands behind his back; and men in the house that he could not escape them,
or
incomers?
wooden But,
weapon
gentlemen,
with
which
| think
you
he
could
know
as
have well
as
28
{ that wrongdoers do not admit when their enemies are speaking the truth, but lie themselves and devise stories designed to arouse anger in their audience against those who are acting justly. Firstly, then, read the law. LAW He did not argue, gentlemen, but admitted his guilt, and begged and pleaded not to be killed; and he was ready to compensate me with But I would not agree to his valuation, and demanded that money. | exacted the penalty which the city's law should take precedence. prescribed it for those who you when just most the you considered engage in such practices, Now let the witnesses to this evidence come forward.
29
WITNESSES Please
read
out
also
that
law
from
the
139
pillar
on
the Areopagus.
30
στήλης
τῆς
ἐξ
᾿Αρείου
πάγου. NOMOE
Ἀκούετε, ὦ ἄνδρες, OTL αὐτῷ τῷ δυχκαστηρύίῳ τῷ εξ Ἀρείου πάγου, ᾧ καὺ πάτριόν ἐστι χαὺ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἀποδέδοταν τοῦ φόνου τὰς δύκας δικάζευν. διαρρήδην εὔρηταυ τούτου μὴ ’
,
᾽
Tv
La
-
5
~
~
,
,
καταγυγνώσκευν 31
He
φόνον,
~
ὅς ἀν Ent δάμαρτι
ra
΄
-“
ΕΣ
3
τῇ ἑαυτοῦ μοιχὸν ~
t
~
-
λαβὼν ταύτην τὴν τιμωρίαν ποιήσηται. καὺ οὕτω σφόδρα ὁ νομοϑέτης ἐπὺ tats yauetats γυναυξὺ δίκαια ταῦτα ἡγήσατο εἶναι, ὥστε καὺ ἐπὺ tats παλλακαῦς tats ἐλάττονος ἀξίαυς τὴν αὐτὴν δύκην ἐπέϑηκε. καύτου δῆλον ὅτι, εὖ τινα εἶχε ταύτης
μείζω
τυμωρίαν
δὲ οὐχ οἷός te ὦν τὴν αὐτὴν nal énb γνωϑυ
δέ
μὸν
καὺ
Ent
tats
γαμεταῖς.
ἐποίησεν
ἄν’
νῦν
ταύτης ὑσχυροτέραν ἐπ᾽ ἐκείναις ἐξευρεῦν, tats παλλακαῦς ἠξίωσε γύγνεσθαι. ᾿Ανάτοῦτον
τὸν
νόμον.
ΝΌΜΟΣ 32
33
᾿Δκούετε, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅτι κελεύευ, ἐάν τις ἄνϑρωπον ἐλεύϑερον Ti παῦδα αὐσχύνῃ βίᾳ, διπλῆν τὴν βλάβην ὀφείλειν" ἐὰν δὲ yuvatua, ἐφ᾽ αἷσπερ ἀποκτείνειν ἔξεστιν, ἐν τοῦς αὐτοῦς ἐνέχεσθαι" οὕτως, ὦ ἄνδρες, τοὺς βιαζομένους ἐλάτTovos ζημίας ἀξύους ἡγήσατο εἶναι ἡ τοὺς πεύίϑοντας 5᾿τῶν μὲν γὰρ ϑάνατον κατέγνω, τοῦς δὲ δυπλῆν ἐποίησε τὴν βλάβην, ἡγούμενος τοὺς μὲν διαπραττομένους βίᾳ ὑπὸ τῶν βιασϑέντων μυσεῦσϑαν, τοὺς δὲ πεύίσαντας οὕτως αὐτῶν τὰς φυχὰς διαφϑεύίρειν, ὥστ᾽ οἰκειοτέρας αὐτοῦς ποιεῖν τὰς ἀλλοτρίας γυναῦκας ἦ τοῦς ἀνδράσιν, ual πᾶσαν én’ ἐκείνοις τὴν οὐκίαν
γεγονέναι,
34
35
36
wat τοὺς παῦδας
ἀδήλους
εὖναυ
ὁποτέρων
τυγχά-
vovouv ὄντες, τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἡ τῶν μοιχῶν. avs’ ὧν ὁ τὸν νόμον τιϑεὺς ϑάνατον αὐτοῦς ἐποίησε τὴν ζημύαν. ᾿Εμοῦ Tolvuv, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐ μὲν νόμον οὐ μόνον ἀπεγνωκότες clot μὴ ἀδικεῖν, ἀλλὰ nal κεκελευκότες ταύτην τὴν δίκην λαμβάνειν ἐν ὑμῦν δ᾽ ἐστὺ πότερον χρὴ τούτους ὑσχυροὺς ἦ μηδενὸς ἀξίους εὖναυ. ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οὖμαι πάσας τὰς πόλεις διὰ τοῦτο τοὺς νόμους τύϑεσθαυ, Uva περὺ ὧν dv πραγμάτων ἀπορῶμεν. παρὰ τούτους ἐλθόντες σκεψώμεθα ὅ TU ἡμῦν ποιητέον ἐστίν, οὗτοι τούνυν περὺ τῶν τουούτων τοῦς ἀδικουμένοις τοιαύτην δίκην λαμβάνευν παρακελεύονται. οἷς ὑμᾶς ἀξιῶ τὴν αὐτὴν γνώμην ἔχειν" eb δὲ μή, τοιαύτην ἄδειαν tots μουιχοῖς ποιήσετε, ὥστε Hal τοὺς κλέπτας ἐπαρεῦτε φάσκευν μοιχοὺς elvar, εὖ εἰδότας ὅτι, ἐὰν ταύτην τὴν αὐτύίαν rept ἑαυτῶν λέγωσι καὶ
ἐπὺ τούτῳ
φάσκωσιν
els τὰς ἀλλοτρίας
οὐδεὺς αὐτῶν dberau. πάντες νόμους τῆς μουχείας χαύρειν ὑμετέραν δεδιέναι " αὕτη γάρ
οὐκίας
εὐσιέναι,
γὰρ εὔσονταν ὅτι τοὺς ἐᾶν det, τὴν δὲ ψῆφον ἐστι πάντων τῶν En τῇ
HUPLWTÄTN.
30
ἡμῶν Reiske: ὑμῶν τοῦτον μὴ κατ. φόνου
36
ὥστε
Turr.:
ὡς
140
τούτου.
.
„ φόνον
Reiske:
μὲν τὴν πόλει
LAW court
You to
hear it stated categorically which, both in our fathers'
by the Areopagus itself, the and our own time, cases of
homicide have been assigned, that any man who exacts this penalty when he has caught an adulterer in the act with his wife should not be convicted of murder. And so strongly did the lawgiver feel the justice of this punishment in the case of married women that he imposed
of
the
less
same
punishment
women, to
penalty
consideration, than
he
this
would
discover
a
be the same
had
have
more
in
the
And been one
for mistresses
it
of
mistresses,
who
is
clear
if
available
imposed
severe
case
yet it; in
also,
but
their
Please
to
him
that in
as
things
case,
he
read this
the
are
case
decided
law
worthy
any
were,
31
greater
of
married
being that
it
unable should
also.
LAW
You hear, aentlemen, how it prescribes double the anyone rapes a free adult or child, while if a woman is for whose seduction the penalty of death is allowed, he is the same scale of damages. Thus, gentlemen, the law found deserve less severe penalties than seducers: the latter it to
death,
but
for
the
victims], believing by those violated, their souls, and themselves under their
father
than to control,
is the
former
it
merely
that those who whereas those thereby make
husband
doubled
the
damages
the
[for
seducer.
For
these
reasons
the
legislator
of
punishment.
do
you
burglars
not, also
to
1
demand
that
you
immunity
the
allege
you
grant are
they
that
34
35
we should do. Now it is these in cases like this to exact this
difficult to settle, and inquire what parties laws that urge the wronged If
33
family comes the children's
made death the penalty for them. Therefore, gentlemen, the laws not only acquit me of any crime, but actually command me to exact this punishment. It is in your power to decide whether these laws are to carry force or to be worthless. For 1 think all cities make their laws find we in matters them consult may we that so reason: this for
kind
32
free
gain their ends by force are hated who have persuaded them corrupt others' wives more devoted to
their husbands. Thus the whole and it becomes uncertain whether
or
damages if the victim, subject to rapists to condemned
take
will
the
be
same
such
view
to
as
as they
because
adulterers,
they.
36
encourage will
know well that if they give this as their reason and allege that it is for this purpose that they are entering other men's houses, nobody For everyone will know that the laws on adultery will touch them. must
be
because
discounted,
this
has
and
supreme
that
it
power
is
your
in
141
all
vote
state
that
is
to
matters.
be
feared,
Consider,
37
Σκέψασθε
37
ϑεράπαυναν
38
δέ, ἐν
σχγον.
ἐγὼ
νιοῦν
τρόπῳ
ὦ ἄνδρες"
ἐκεύνῃ
δέ,
τῇ
ὦ ἄνδρες, τὸν
τὴν
κατηγοροῦσι
ἡμέρᾳ
δίκαιον
γυναῦκα
μὲν
τὴν
(el μὲν γὰρ λόγων εὐρημένων μετελθεῦν ἐκέλευον ἐκεῖνον,
γάρ
μετελθεῦν
dv
ἐμὴν
μου
ὡς
ἐκέλευσα
ποιεῦν
ἐγὼ τὸν
τὴν νεανύ-
ἡγούμην
διαφϑεύραντα
ᾧτυ-
λαμβάνων
ἔργου δὲ μηδενὸς γεγενημένου ἠδύκουν dv" εὐ δὲ ἤδη πάντων
διαπεπραγμένων nat πολλάκυς εὐσεληλυϑότος ELS τὴν οὐκύαν τὴν ἐμὴν ᾧτινιοῦν τρόπῳ ἐλάμβανον αὐτόν, σωφρονεῖν «ἂν;
39
ἐμαυτὸν ῥᾳδίως
ἡγούμην)" δὲ
πρότερον ἐπειδὴ
ὦν
ἀγροῦ
περὺ
εὖχεν
αὐτῷ,
ἐνθυμήϑητε "
ὅτι
[ὅτι
et
πότερον
οὐκείως καύτοι,
ἐκεύώνῃ
ἦν
φεύδονταν᾽"
ἄνδρες.
ὅπερ
μου
τῇ
καὶ
διακεύμενος
συνεδεύπνευ,
ᾧχετο. ἐν
ὦ
nal
δυσμὰς
ἀπιὼν
ταῦτα
γάρ».
Σώστρατος ἡλύου
᾿Ερατοσθϑένει,
καὶ
ἐμοὺ
καὺ
πρῶτον
νυκτὺ
Ἀρεῦττον
μέν,
ἐγὼ
αὐτῷ
ὦ
ἐπε-
ἑτέρωθϑυ
δευπνεῦν ἢ τὸν συνδευιπνήσοντά pou εὐσαγαγεῦν; οὕτω γὰρ ἂν ἧττον ἐτόλμησεν ἐκεῦνος εὐσελθεῦῖν eis τὴν οὐκίαν. εὖτα δοκῶ ὧν ὑμῦν τὸν συνδειπνοῦντα ἀφεὺς μόνος καταλευφϑῆναι καὶ ἔρημος γενέσϑαυν, ἢ κελεύειν ἐκεῖνον μεῖναι, Uva μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ τὸν μουχὸν ἐτιμωρεῖτο; ἔπειτα, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐκ dv Sou ὑμῦν τοῦς ἐπιτηδείοις wed’ ἡμέραν παραγγεῦλαυν, καὺ κελεῦσαν αὐτοὺς συλλεγῆναι εἰς οὐκύαν τῶν φύλων τὴν ἐγγυτάτω, μᾶλλον N ἐπειδὴ τάχυστα φσθόμην τῆς νυχτὸς περιτρέχευν, οὐκ εὐδὼς ὅὄὅντυνα olxoL καταλήψομαι nal ὅντινα ἔξω: nal ὡς ᾿Αρμόδιον
μὲν καὺ τὸν 42
φίλος
ἐξ
βούλευον
δὲ
γνώσεσθε.
καλῶς
ἄνδρες,
41
σμέψασϑε
τῶνδε
εἶπον,
ἀπαντήσας
40
ἐκ
δεῦνα ἦλθον
οὐκ
ἐπιδημοῦντας
(οὐ γὰρ
ἤδη),
ἑτέρους δὲ οὐκ ἔνδον ὄντας κατέλαβον, οὖς δ᾽ οἷός τε ἦ λαβὼν ἐβάδιζον. καύτου γε εὖ προΐδη, οὐκ Av δοκῶ ὑμῦν καὺ ϑεράποντας
παρασκευάσασθαι
ual
tats
φύλοις
napayyetaAar,
ἵν᾽ ὡς ἀσφαλέστατα μὲν αὐτὸς εὐσῇα (τί γὰρ κἀκεῖνος εὖχε συδήρυον:). ὡς μετὰ πλείστων τυμωρίαν ἐποιούμην; νῦν δ᾽ οὐδὲν εὐδῶς τῶν τῇ νυχτί, οὖς οἷός te A παρέλαβον. Kat pou
ἤδη εἴ τι δὲ μαρτύρων τὴν ἐσομένων Exetvy ἀνάβητε τούτων
μάρτυρες.
ΜΑΡΤΎΡΕΣ 43
{με
Τῶν
μὲν
μαρτύρων
ἀκηκόατε.
ὦ ἄνδρες
σλέψασθε
δὲ
παρ᾽
ὑμῦν αὐτοῦς οὕτως περὺ τούτου τοῦ πράγματος, ζητοῦντες εἴ tus ἐμοὺ καὺ ᾽᾿Ερατοσθένει ἔχϑρα πώποτε γεγένηται, πλὴν ταύτῆς. οὐδεμίαν γὰρ εὑρήσετε. οὔτε γὰρ συκοφαντῶν γραφάς με ἐγράψατο, οὔτε ἐκβάλλειν éu τῆς πόλεως ἐπεχεύρησεν, οὔτε Lälas δύκας ἐδικάζετο, οὔτε συνήδει κακὸν οὐδὲν ὁ ἐγὼ δεδιῶς μή Tus πκύϑηται ἐπεθύμουν αὐτὸν ἀπολέσαι. οὔτε et ταῦτα διαπραξαύμην,
τοιούτων
ἤλπυζόν
ποϑεν
χρήματα
λήψεσθαι " ἔνυοι
πραγμάτων
ἕνεκα
θάνατον
ἀλλήλοις
38 40
ἂν add. Taylor ὅτι del. Reiske
41
Cxe (1) τὴν Bergk:
44
δυιαπραξαίμην
tLV’
uetvat Weidner:
Lipsius:
142
Fuhr:
μὲν
γὰρ
ἐπιβουλεύουσι.
elval
HPX1:
μένειν
τῶν
διεπραξάμην
nodev
Emperius: μὲν
gentlemen, their allegation that | told the servant-girl to seek the fellow out on that day. Now I could have felt myself justified, gentlemen, in using any means in apprehending the man who had corrupted my wife, If I had told her to fetch him after we had merely exchanged words and no act had been committed, I should be in the
wrong; but entered my available, I
that
they
are
if, when once he had achieved all his objectives and house many times, | sought to catch him by any means should consider I was behaving reasonably. But notice
Iying
in this
matter
also,
as
you
will
easily
these facts. My close friend Sostratus met up with | said before, at sunset and had dinner with me,
dined
well
he
gentlemen:
it to my guest
if
own
home
dare to I would would
|
went
away.
was
setting
greater to
Now
advantage
dine?
For
you
a trap in
should
for
him
to
stay
so
that
he
this
somewhere
else
case
enter the house. Then again, let my guest go, leaving me ask
consider on
latter
that
In
fact
at
| went
to
even
in
not
home,
but
|
the
houses
town took
(for
man
point
first,
that
night,
was
or
to bring
my
was
less
likely
with
of me
help
Harmodius
not
those
40
to
does it seem likely to you that alone and unaided, or that |
could
I did
39
from
me
punish
the
seducer?
And finally, would 1 not have called upon my close friends by day and asked them to foregather in the house of my nearest neighbour, rather than running around at night as soon as | had made the discovery, not knowing whom | should find at home and whom away? were
38
me, gentlemen, as and after he had
Eratosthenes
to dine
the
realise
37
and
someone
know); that
I
and
else,
I found
could.
Yet
and
they
others
if I
41
had
not had
42
prior knowledge, does it not seem likely to you that | would have arranged for servants to be at hand, and passed the word to my friends, so that | should make my own entrance in the greatest possible
safety
(for
how
was
I
to
know
whether
he
too
had
some
weapon?) and take my revenge on him with as many witnesses present as possible? But as it was, knowing nothing of what was going to happen on that night, | took with me those 1 could. Let the witnesses to these facts come up. WITNESSES You
in
your
have
own
any enmity affair. You against me,
private
I
so
did
I
successful.
witnesses,
this
suits against
afraid
have
the
asking
gentlemen.
question,
Think
whether
about
there
has
this
ever
case
of
being
hopes Such
of are
me; found
nor did he know out
acquiring the
motives
that
money
from
from
which
143
of any
| desired
to
crime for which destroy
anywhere some
men
him;
if
43
been
between me and Eratosthenes except that arising from this will find none, for he had neither filed false charges nor had he tried to have me exiled, nor was he engaged
in any was
heard
minds
nor
I
was
plot
one
44
45
46 47
48
τοσούτου
φορὰ
πολὺ
ἑτέρους αὐτὰς
κάλλιον
ἢ λοιδορία
ὥστε
τοὺς
δὲ Setvar,
γυναῦμας
tats
μὲν
οὕτυνες
ζημίαυς
ἁμαρτάνειν
δικαιότερον
50
det
A παρουνία
οὐδὲ
ἑορακῶς
TH ἄλλη
TUS
δια-
ἦ τὸν ἄνθρωπον
πώποτε πλὴν ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ νυκτί. te ἀν οὖν βουλόμενος ἐγὼ τουοῦτον κίνδυνον ἐκινδύνευον, εὖ μὴ τὸ μέγυστον τῶν ἀδικημάτων A ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἠδικημένος; ἔπευτα παρακαλέσας αὐτὸς μάρτυρας ἠσέβουν, ἐξόν μου, εἴπερ ἀδύκως ἐπεϑύμουν αὐτὸν ἀπολέσαι, μηδένα μου τούτων συνειδέναι: ᾿Εγὼ μὲν οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, οὐκ ὑδίαν ὑπὲρ ἐμαυτοῦ νομίζω ταύτην γενέσϑαυ τὴν τιμωρίαν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως ἁπάσης" οὗ γὰρ τοιαῦτα πράττοντες, ὁρῶντες οἷα τὰ ἦϑλα πρόκειται τῶν τοιούτων ἁμαρτημάτων, ἧττον els τοὺς ἄλλους ἐξαμαρτήσονται, ἐὰν nal ὑμᾶς ὁρῶσι τὴν αὐτὴν γνώμην ἔχοντας. εὐ δὲ μή,
49
τοίνυν
ἡμῦν γεγονέναι,
τῶν
τοὺς
ἄδειαν
νόμων
νόμους
μὲν
ζημυώσουσι,
πολλὴν
ἢ ὑπὸ
κειμένους
τοῦς
δὲ
πουήσουσι.
τοὺς
ἐξαλεῦψαι.,
φυλάττοντας
πολύτας
TÄS
ἑαυτῶν
βουλομένοις
πολὺ
γὰρ
εἰς
οὕτω
ἐνεδρεύεσθαυν,
οὗ
κελεύουσι μέν. ἐάν tug μοιχὸν λάβῃ, 6 τι dv οὖν βούληται xpfiosur, οὐ δ᾽ ἀγῶνες δεινότερου τοῦς ἀδικουμένους καϑεστήκασυν N τοῦς παρὰ τοὺς νόμους τὰς ἀλλοτρίας καταυσχύνουσι γυναῦχας. ἐγὼ γὰρ νῦν ual περὺ τοῦ σώματος καὶ περὺ τῶν χρημάτων nat περὺ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων κινδυνεύω, ὅτι τοῦς τῆς πόλεως νόμους ἐπυϑόμην. 45
τοσούτου
M
50
ἐπιϑόμην
C:
corr.:
τοσοῦτον
ἐπειϑόμην
144
rell.
H:
τοσοῦτο
MAPXI
\
another's
drunken even
death.
Indeed,
exchanges
seen
the
fellow
far
from
between
us
before
that
there
or
any
night.
having
other So
what
been
any
quarrel, could
abusive
| have
had
or
been
my
aim in risking so great a danger if I had not suffered the most grievous wrong at his hands? And finally, would | have committed an impious act myself after calling witnesses when it was open to me, if | desired to destroy him unjustly, to have none of these sharing my knowledge? Therefore, gentlemen, I consider this punishment not to have been a private one exacted on my own behalf, but on behalf of the whole city. For men who commit such acts, when they see the kind of prizes
offered
for
such
crimes,
will
less
readily
sin
against
others
when these say him however he
that anyone who catches wishes, but the actual
47
48
49
an adulterer may deal trials are made more
hazardous for the wronged parties than for those who break the laws by dishonouring other men's wives, For | am now in danger of losing my life, my property and everything else because | obeyed the city's laws.
145
46
if
they see you also taking the same view. Otherwise it would be much better to erase the established laws and make others which impose penalties upon men who guard their wives and accord a high degree of immunity to those who wish to commit offences against them. This would be much fairer than to let the citizens be entrapped by the laws, with
45
never
50
KATA
@EOMNHETOY
Μαρτύρων μὲν οὐκ ἀπορίαν pou ἔσεσϑαι δοκῶ, ὦ ἄνδρες διμασταί" πολλοὺς γὰρ ὑμῶν ὁρῶ δικάζοντας τῶν τότε παρ-
ὄντων,
ὅτε λυσίϑεος
θεόμνηστον
εὐσήγγελλε
τὰ ὅπλα
ἀποβεβλη-
κότα; οὐκ ἐξὸν αὐτῷ, δημηγορεῦν᾽ ἐν EXEL YY γὰρ τῷ ἀγῶνυ τὸν πατέρα μ᾽ ἔφασκεν ἀπεχτονέναν τὸν ἐμαυτοῦ. ἐγὼ δ᾽, εὐ μὲν τὸν ἑαυτοῦ με ἀπεκτονέναι ἡτιᾶτο, συγγνώμην dv εὖχον αὐτῷ
τῶν
ἡγούμην)" ἐπεξῆλθον νομύζω
δοκεῦ
εὐρημένων
οὐδ᾽ αὐτῷ
κακηγορίας
nepL
ὑμῦν
nal
παρ᾽
ὑμῶν
τοῦ
τῇ
(φαῦλον
γὰρ
αὐτὸν
nal
οὐδενὸς
ἄξυον
ef τι ἄλλο τῶν ἀπορρήτων ἤκουσα, οὐκ ἄν (ἀνελεύϑερον γὰρ nal λίαν φυλόδυκον εἶναι δυκάζεσθαυ)"
πατρός,
πόλει.
εὐδέναι
μὴ
οὕτω
νυνὺ
πολλοῦ
τυμωρήσασϑαν
βούλομαι
πότερον
δὲ
αὐσχρόν
ἀξίου
τὸν
δώσει
μου
εἶναι
γεγενημένου
ταῦτ᾽
nal
ELpnAdTa,
δίκην,
Hal
N τούτῳ
μόνῳ τοὺς
᾿Αϑηναίων ἐξαύρετόν ἐστι καὶ πονεῖν ual λέγευν παρὰ νόμους ὅ τι ἂν βούληται. "Buot γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί ἔτη ἐστὶ «δύο καὶ» TpLdκοντα, ἐξ ὅτου «δ᾽» ὑμεῦς κατεληλύϑατε, εὐκοστὸν τουτί. φαύνομου οὖν τρυισκαυδεκέτης ὧν ὅτε ὁ πατὴρ ὑπὸ τῶν τρνάκον-
τὰ ἀπέϑνῃσκε. ταύτην ὀλιγαρχία ἠπυστάμην,
δὲ ἔχων τὴν ἡλυκίαν οὔτε τί ἐστιν οὔτε ἀν ἐκεύνῳ ἀδικουμένῳ ἐδυνάμην
βοηϑῆσαν. nal μὲν δὴ obu ὀρϑῶς τῶν χρημάτων ἕνεκα ἐπεβούλευσα «ἄν» αὐτῷ" ὁ γὰρ πρεσβύτερος ἀδελφὸς Πανταλέων ἅπαντα παρέλαβε, καὶ ἐπιτροπεύσας ἡμᾶς τῶν πατρῴων ἀπεστέρησεν, ὥστε πολλῶν ἕνεκα, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί. προσῆκέ μοι, αὐτὸν βούλεσθαι ζῆν. ἀνάγκη μὲν οὖν περὺ αὐτῶν μνησϑῆναιν, οὐδὲν δὲ δεῖ πολλῶν λόγων" σχεδὸν ἐπύστασϑε ἅπαντες ὅτι ἀληθῆ λέγω. ὅμως δὲ μάρτυρας αὐτῶν παρέξομαι. ΜΑΡΤΥΡῈΣ
Ἴσως τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, TEPL τούτων μὲν οὐδὲν ἀπολογήσεται, ἐρεῖ δὲ πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἅπερ ἐτόλμα λέγειν nal πρὸς τὸν διαυτητήν, ὡς οὐκ ἔστι τῶν ἀπορρήτων, ἐάν τις ein τὸν πατέρα ἀπεκτονέναι" τὸν γὰρ νόμον οὐ ταῦτ᾽ ἀπαγορεύειν.
ἀλλ᾽
ἀνδροφόνον
οὐκ
ἐᾶν λέγειν.
ἐγὼ δὲ οὖμαι ὑμᾶς,
ὦ ἄνδρες δυκασταί, οὐ περὺ τῶν ὀνομάτων διαφέρεσθαι ἀλλὰ τῆς τούτων διανοίας, wat πάντας εἰδέναι ÖTL, ὅσοι