by Demosthenes
This, then, was what took place at that time. But when this boy was born, and it seemed a fitting time, I, being in no way incensed at what had happened, but considering that the former jurymen had met with a very natural experience, introduced this boy here to the clansmen of Hagnias in the interest of Eubulides, seeing that the boy was the son of his daughter, in order that the family might not become extinct. [12] For the elder Eubulides, men of the jury, who was next of kin to Hagnias, prayed to the gods above all else that a son might be born to him as a daughter had been, the mother of this boy; but since he failed of this hope and not a single male child was born to him, his next dearest wish was that a son of his daughter should be adopted into his own family and that of Hagnias and should be introduced to the members of his clan; for he thought, men of the jury, that of his surviving relatives this boy was nearest to him, and that in this way their house would best be preserved and kept from extinction. [13] And I was the one to render him this service, since I was husband to the daughter of Eubulides, she having been adjudged to me as being the nearest of kin, and I introduced this boy to the clansmen of Hagnias and Eubulides, to which fellowship Theopompus, the father of Macartatus here, belonged during his lifetime, and to which Macartatus now belongs. [14] And the fellow-clansmen of Macartatus here, who knew better than any others the pedigree of the family, seeing that he himself did not choose to risk a contest and did not remove the victim from the altar, as he should have done had the introduction of this boy not been legitimate, but demanded that they commit perjury,6 took the ballot while the victims were still burning, and carried it from the altar of Zeus Phatrius in the presence of the defendant Macartatus, and gave a just verdict, men of the jury — that this boy was duly and rightfully introduced as the adopted son of Eubulides into the family of Hagnias. [15] But when the fellow-clansmen of the defendant Macartatus had passed this vote, this boy, as the son of Eubulides, cited the defendant Macartatus for an adjudication of claims for the estate of Hagnias, and had a day appointed by the archon for the hearing, inscribing his brother’s name as his guardian; for it was no longer open to me, men of the jury, to stand inscribed as guardian, since I had got the boy adopted into the family of Eubulides. And the citation was made by this boy according to the same laws in accordance with which these men had cited his mother, who had won the former suit in court, and was in possession of the estate of Hagnias. [16]
Please read the law which ordains that citation shall be made of the person possessing the inheritance.”Law
If any person shall claim the inheritance or the heiress after adjudication has been made, let him cite before the archon the person who has obtained the adjudication just as in other suits, and a deposit to cover costs shall be made by the claimant. And if he wins an adjudication without citation, the adjudication of the estate shall be of no effect. And if the person who has had the estate adjudged to him be not living, let the claimant cite in like manner the successor, provided that the period covered by the statute of limitations has not expired. And the claim upon the possessor shall be that he shall show on what terms the person whose property he holds had it adjudged to him.” [17]
You have heard the law, and it is a reasonable request I make of you, men of the jury. If I shall prove to you that this boy Eubulides here and Phylomachê, who is the mother of the boy and the daughter of Eubulides, are nearer of kin to Hagnias than Theopompus, the father of Macartatus, and not only that they are nearest of kin, but that there is absolutely no human being belonging to the house of Hagnias except the mother of this boy and the boy himself, — if I shall prove this, I beg of you, men of the jury, to give your aid to us. [18]
At the first, men of the jury, it was my intention to write on a board all the kinsfolk of Hagnias, and thus to exhibit them to you one by one; but when I saw plainly that not all the jurymen would have an equally good view, but that those sitting at a distance would be at a disadvantage, it is perhaps necessary to instruct you by word of mouth, for thus all will be on the same footing. I, on my part, will endeavor to the best of my ability to inform you regarding the family of Hagnias in the fewest words possible. [19]
Buselus, men of the jury, was a member of the deme Oeon, and to him were born five sons, Hagnias and Eubulides and Stratius and Habron and Cleocritus. And all these sons of Buselus grew up to manhood, and their father Buselus divided his property among them all fairly and equitably, as was fitting. And when they had divided the property among themselves, each of them married a wife according to your laws, and sons and grandsons were born to them all, and there sprang up five households from the single one of Buselus; and they dwelt apart, each one having his own home and begetting his descendants. [20] Now with regard to three of the brothers, sons of Buselus, and the descendants born to them, why should I trouble you, men of the jury, or myself by going into particulars about each one? For although they are in the same degree of relationship as Theopompus, and are as near of kin to Hagnias, whose estate is in question, not one of them has ever troubled us either at an earlier time or now, nor has made any claim to the estate of Hagnias or to the woman who is the heiress, who was assigned in marriage to me; for they considered that they had no claim whatever to anything belonging to Hagnias. [21] It seems to me therefore that it would be entirely superfluous to say anything about them save only what I cannot help mentioning. Of Theopompus, however, the father of Macartatus, and of Macartatus the defendant himself, it is necessary for me to speak. Yet the story, men of the jury, is a short one. As you have just heard, Buselus had five sons. One of these was Stratius, the ancestor of Macartatus, and another was Hagnias, the ancestor of this boy. [22] To Hagnias was born a son, Polemon, and a daughter, Phylomachê, sister of Polemon by the same father and the same mother; and to Stratius, the brother of Hagnias, there were born Phanostratus and Charidemus, the grandfather of the defendant Macartatus. Now I ask you, men of the jury, which is nearer of kin and more closely related to Hagnias, his son Polemon and his daughter Phylomachê, or Charidemus, the son of Stratius, and nephew of Hagnias? For my part I think that to every one of us his son and daughter are more nearly related than his nephew; and not only with us does this hold good, but also among all other people whether Greeks or barbarians. [23] Since, then, this is admitted, you will now easily follow the rest of the argument men of the jury, and you will see how arbitrary and how reckless these men are. To Polemon, son of Hagnias, was born a son, Hagnias, having the name of his grandfather Hagnias, and this second Hagnias died without issue. [24] But from Phylomachê, the sister of Polemon, and Philagrus, to whom her brother Polemon had given her in marriage, he being his first cousin （for Philagrus was the son of Eubulides, the brother of Hagnias） — from Philagrus, I say, the cousin of Polemon, and Phylomachê the sister of Polemon, there was born Eubulides the father of this boy’s mother. These sons, then, were born to Polemon and to Polemon’s sister Phylomachê. But to Charidemus, the son of Stratius, there was born a son Theopompus, the father of the defendant Macartatus. [25] Again, then, I ask you, men of the jury, which is nearer of kin and more closely related to the first Hagnias, Hagnias, the son of Polemon, and Eubulides, the son of Phylomachê and Philagrus, or Theopompus, the son of Charidemus and grandson of Stratius? I am of the opinion, men of the jury, that if the son and the daughter are the nearest of kin, so, too, the son’s son and the daughter’s son are more nearly related than the son of a nephew and one who is a member of another branch of the family. [26] Well, to Theopompus was born a son, Macartatus, the defendant, and to Eubulides, the son of Phylomachê, and cousin of Hagnias on his father’s side; this boy, who is to Hagnias the son of a first cousin on the father’s side; since Phylomachê, the mother of Eubulides and Polemon, the father of Hagnias, were brother and sister, born of the same father and the same mother. But to Macartatus here, the son of Theopompus, there has been no issue which is both in the family of Hagnias and in that of Stratius. [27] Such being the facts, this boy here has one of the titles mentioned in the law, a
nd up to which the law ordains that the right of succession should extend; for he is the child of the first cousin of Hagnias, since his father Eubulides was cousin to Hagnias, whose inheritance is in question. Theopompus, on the contrary, the father of the defendant Macartatus, could not have appropriated to himself any one of the titles mentioned in the law, for he belonged to another branch of the family, that of Stratius. [28] But it is not fitting, men of the jury, that any man whatsoever should possess the estate of Hagnias, one who belongs to another branch, so long as there is left any one of those born of the branch of Hagnias; no, nor is it right to expel such person by violence, as these men are trying to do, while they are themselves more distantly related, and not of the same branch of the family. For this, men of the jury, is the point upon which Theopompus, the father of the defendant Macartatus, misled the jury. [29] Who, then, are those still surviving in the branch of Hagnias? Phylomachê, my wife, who is the daughter of Eubulides, the cousin of Hagnias, and this boy, who has been adopted into the family of Eubulides and Hagnias. Theopompus, however, the father of the defendant Macartatus, not being himself of the branch of Hagnias, told the jurymen a monstrous lie regarding Phylomachê, the sister of Polemon and the aunt of Hagnias, alleging that she was not the sister of Polemon, the son of Hagnias, by the same father and mother, and another in pretending that he himself was of the same family as Hagnias, whereas he had never belonged to it. [30] All these assertions Theopompus made fearlessly, not producing any witness who would have been responsible to us, but having only his associates to corroborate what he said; for they were leagued with one another and did everything in concert, in order to rob the lady, the mother of this boy here, of the inheritance which you by your votes had decided to be hers. [31] I wish now, men of the jury, to produce witnesses in support of the statements which I have made to you — first, to prove that Phylomachê, the daughter of Eubulides, won judgement for the estate of Hagnias as being the nearest of kin, and then to establish the rest of the facts.
Read the deposition.”Deposition
The deponents state that they were present before the arbitrator in the archonship of Nicophemus, when Phylomachê, the daughter of Eubulides, won judgement for the estate of Hagnias against all who disputed her title.” [32]
That Phylomachê, the daughter of Eubulides, won judgement for the estate of Hagnias, you have heard, men of the jury. And she won it, not by wrongful trickery or conspiracy, but in the fairest manner possible, since we proved that she was nearest of kin to Hagnias, whose estate is in question, being the daughter of his cousin on his father’s side, and being of the same branch as Hagnias. [33] When, therefore, Macartatus says that his father Theopompus won judgement for this estate, make answer to him on your part, men of the jury, that the lady also won judgement before Theopompus, the defendant’s father, and that the lady won her case fairly, since she was of the same branch as Hagnias, being the daughter of Eubulides, the cousin of Hagnias, but that Theopompus did not win the suit, but prevailed by trickery, being himself in no sense whatever of the branch of Hagnias. [34] Make this reply to him yourselves, men of the jury, and also state that against this boy Eubulides, son of Eubulides, son of the first cousin on his father’s side of Hagnias, whose estate is in question, neither Theopompus, the father of Macartatus, nor any other man ever at any time won a judgement. At the present time the contest and the trial to adjudge the estate of Hagnias are between this son of Eubulides and the defendant Macartatus, the son of Theopompus; and whichever of these two shall in your judgement speak most in harmony with justice and the laws, to him, it is plain, you jurymen will give your votes. [35]
Read the remaining depositions; first, those proving that Phylomachê, the aunt of Hagnias, was sister by the same father and the same mother to Polemon, the father of Hagnias; after that he shall read all the other depositions which have to do with the pedigree.”Depositions
The deponents testify that they are fellow-demesmen of Philagrus, the father of Eubulides, and Polemon, the father of Hagnias, and that they know that Phylomachê, the mother of Eubulides, was considered to be the sister of Polemon, the father of Hagnias, by the same father and the same mother, and that they never heard from anyone that Polemon, the son of Hagnias, had a brother.” [36] “Another
The deponents testify that Oenanthê, the mother of their grandfather Stratonides, was first cousin to Polemon, the father of Hagnias, their fathers having been brothers, and that they heard from their own father that Polemon, the father of Hagnias, never had any brother, but had a sister, born of the same father and the same mother, namely Phylomachê, the mother of Eubulides, the father of Phylomachê, wife of Sositheus.”“Another
The deponent testifies that he is a relative and fellow-clansman and fellow-demesman of Hagnias and Eubulides, and that he heard from his own father and other relatives that Polemon, the father of Hagnias, never had any brother, but had a sister, born of the same father and the same mother, namely Phylomachê, the mother of Eubulides, the father of Phylomachê, wife of Sositheus.” [37] “Another
The deponent testifies that Archimachus was his grandfather and adopted him as his son, and that he was a relative of Polemon, the father of Hagnias, and that he heard from Archimachus and his other relatives that Polemon, the father of Hagnias, never had any brother, but had a sister, born of the same father and the same mother, namely Phylomachê, the mother of Eubulides, the father of Phylomachê, wife of Sositheus.”“Another
The deponent testifies that his wife’s father Callistratus was first cousin to Polemon, the father of Hagnias, and to Charidemus, the father of Theopompus, their fathers having been brothers, and that his mother was daughter of a first cousin to Polemon, and that their mother often said to them that Phylomachê, the mother of Eubulides, was sister of Polemon, the father of Hagnias, born of the same father and the same mother, and that Polemon, the father of Hagnias, never had any brother.” [38]
In the former trial, men of the jury, when these men formed their conspiracy with one another and acted in concert, the whole group of them, in their contest against the lady, we, on our part, men of the jury, neither prepared depositions regarding facts that were admitted, nor summoned witnesses, but thought that in these matters at least we were perfectly safe; whereas our opponents had equipped themselves with all manner of shameless artifices for the trial, and had their minds set upon this thing alone — to deceive the jurymen for the moment. [39] They had the audacity to assert that Polemon, the father of Hagnias, had no sister at all born of the same father and the same mother; so abominably impudent were they, seeking to mislead the jurymen in a matter of such importance and so well-known, and they spent all their efforts and strove beyond all else to establish this. We have, however, on this present occasion produced this host of witnesses regarding the sister of Polemon and aunt of Hagnias. [40] On the defendant’s side let whoever will give evidence either that Polemon and Phylomachê were not brother and sister, born of the same father and the same mother, or that Polemon was not the son, and Phylomachê not the daughter, of Hagnias, the son of Buselus; or that Polemon was not the father of Hagnias, [41] whose estate is in question, and Phylomachê, the sister of Polemon, not his aunt; or that Eubulides was not the son of Phylomachê, or of Philagrus, the cousin of Hagnias; or this, that the still-living Phylomachê is not the daughter of Eubulides, the cousin of Hagnias, and this boy not his son, adopted according to your laws into the family of Eubulides or that Theopompus, the father of the defendant, Macartatus, belonged to the branch of Hagnias. Let anyone give testimony in his favor on whatever one of these points he chooses. But I know well that no mortal man will be so daring or so senseless. [42]
However, that it may be the more clear to you, men of the jury, that in the former trial they got the upper hand through their shameless audacity, and that they advanced no just arguments, read all the depositions that remain.”Depositions
The deponent testifies that he is a relative of Polemon, the father of Hagnias, and t
hat he heard from his father that Philagrus, the father of Eubulides, and Phanostratus, the father of Stratius, and Callistratus, the father of the wife of Sosias, and Euctemon, who was king, and Charidemus, the father of Theopompus and Stratocles, were first cousins to Polemon, their fathers all having been brothers, and that Eubulides, with reference to his father Philagrus, stood in the same degree of relationship as the sons of these men and Hagnias, while with reference to his mother Phylomachê, he was recognized as the first cousin of Hagnias on his father’s side, since he was the son of the paternal aunt of Hagnias.” [43] “Another