Greek Texts & Translations

29.4Regarding the rapacity and vile character of the plaintiff I purpose to speak at length before you later on, though what you have even now heard gives you a fair idea of it. But I shall now undertake to show you, that the testimony which has been given, about which you are going to cast your votes, is true. But one request I make of you, men of the jury, and it is a reasonable one—that you will give us both a fair hearing. This is as much in your interest as in mine, for the more accurate your knowledge of the facts, the more just and in harmony with your oaths will be the vote you will cast regarding them. 29.5I shall show that Aphobus has not only acknowledged Milyas to be a freeman, but has even proved it by his actions; that, furthermore, about this matter he has declined the absolutely sure test by torture, ^note and does not wish to have the truth brought to light that on the contrary he has recourse to trickery, brings forward false witnesses, and by his own words distorts the truth regarding what has taken place. So strong and so plain is the evidence by which I shall prove these statements that you will all see clearly that it is I who am speaking the truth, and that he has uttered not a word worthy of credence. I shall begin at a point which will make it easiest for you to learn the facts, and for me to instruct you regarding them in the briefest time.

29.6I instituted suit, men of the jury, against Demophon, Therippides and the plaintiff for breach of trust in their guardianship, for I had been defrauded by them of all my inheritance. When my suit against Aphobus in the first instance came up for trial, I proved clearly to the jury, as I shall prove to you, that he, in conjunction with the others, had robbed me of all the property that had been left me; and I relied upon no false testimony. 29.7Here is a clear proof of this. A host of depositions was read at the trial, some of the deponents declaring that they had given to the plaintiff property of mine, others that he had received such property in their presence, still others that they had purchased goods from him, and paid him the price; yet he has charged not a single one of these with bearing false testimony. He has dared to attack this one piece of testimony, and it alone, although in it he cannot show that there was mention even of one single drachma. 29.8And yet for the computation of the sums of which I had been robbed, I relied not so much on this man's testimony, for there was no mention of money in it, but on the several statements of the others, against whom the plaintiff has made no charges. Therefore the jurymen who at that time heard my plea, not only found him guilty, but fixed the damages at the full amount stated in my complaint. Why was it, then, that he passed over the other witnesses and sued the defendant alone? I will tell you. 29.9In regard to all the witnesses who testified that he had received the money, he knew that the more discussion there should be over each separate point, the more convincingly would he be convicted of possessing it, and this was bound to be the case in a trial for false witness; for the accusations which I then made along with all the others in a small part of the time allotted me, I should now discuss severally and in detail in the time of an entire speech; 29.10whereas, if he attacked an answer given, he thought that as he had made an admission before, so now it would be in his power to make a denial. ^note That is the reason why he attacks the testimony of this witness, the truth of whose testimony I mean to prove conclusively to you all, not on the basis of probabilities, or of arguments made up to fit the occasion, but by reasoning which, I am sure, will approve itself to you all as just and fair. Listen, and judge.