Greek Orators 1: Antiphon & Lysias 0856682462, 9780856682469

Citation preview

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