by Demosthenes
[53] This very thing is the strongest proof of the falsehood of the affidavit — that it is not the same person who makes the claim about the same matter. And this is not strange for, I fancy, when Leostratus here made his deposit in the inheritance suit against us, the one who has now sworn the affidavit had not yet registered himself as a member of the deme. We should therefore be most cruelly treated if you should believe an affidavit made after the suit was begun.
[54] ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ πρεσβύτερά γε αὑτοῦ διαμεμαρτύρηκεν. ὁ γὰρ μήπω ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ τῷ Ἀρχιάδου ὤν, ὅθ᾽ ἡ λῆξις αὕτη τοῦ κλήρου ἐγένετο, πῶς ἂν εἰδείη τι τούτων; ἔπειτ᾽ εἰ μὲν αὑτὸν διεμεμαρτυρήκει, εἶχεν ἂν λόγον αὐτῷ τὸ πρᾶγμα: ἀδίκως μὲν ἂν ἔγραφεν, οὐδὲν δ᾽ ἧττον ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατὰ τὴν ἡλικίαν γ᾽ ὄντος. νῦν δὲ γνησίους υἱοὺς γέγραφεν τῷ Ἀρχιάδῃ ἐκείνῳ εἶναι, τόν τε αὑτοῦ πατέρα δῆλον ὅτι καὶ τὸν κατὰ τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ποίησιν, οὐκ ἐπιλογισάμενος ὅτι ἐπανεληλυθότες ἦσαν. οὐκοῦν ἀνάγκη πρεσβυτέρας πράξεις αὐτὸν καὶ μὴ τὰς ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ γεγενημένας διαμεμαρτυρηκέναι. εἶθ᾽ ὑμεῖς τῷ τοῦτο τετολμηκότι πιστεύσετε ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγοντι;
[54] Nay more, Leochares has in the affidavit sworn to facts actually older than himself. For how could a person who was not yet a member of the house of Archiades when this suit for the inheritance was instituted, know anything about these matters? Moreover, if he had sworn it of himself alone, there would have been some sense in his action; he would have written what was false, but nevertheless his statement would have concerned one of an age to know. But as it is, he has written that the aforesaid Archiades had lawfully born sons, meaning, of course, his own father and the one made such by the original adoption, not taking cognizance of the fact that they had returned to their original family. It follows, then, of necessity that he has sworn to events older than himself, and not to things which have happened in his own day. Are you, then, to credit one who has dared a thing like that, as though he were speaking the truth?
[55] νὴ Δί᾽, ἀλλ᾽ ἀκηκοὼς τοῦ αὑτοῦ πατρὸς διαμεμαρτύρηκεν. ὁ δέ γε νόμος ἀκοὴν τῶν τετελευτηκότων κελεύει διαμαρτυρεῖν, οὐ ζῶντος τοῦ πατρὸς τὰ ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνου πραχθέντα. ἐπεὶ κἀκεῖνο: διὰ τί ποτε Λεώστρατος οὑτοσὶ οὐχ αὑτόν, ἀλλὰ τοῦτον ἐπεγράψατο τῇ διαμαρτυρίᾳ; τὰ γὰρ πρεσβύτερα τῶν πραγμάτων τὸν πρεσβύτερον ἔδει διαμαρτυρεῖν. ὅτι νὴ Δί᾽, ἂν εἴποι, τοῦτον γὰρ εἰσπεποίηκα υἱὸν τῷ Ἀρχιάδῃ.
[55] Ah, but he will say that he has heard from his father the facts to which he has sworn. But the law does not admit hearsay evidence, save in the case of deceased persons; whereas this fellow has dared to swear to acts done by his father, while that father is still alive. Then again, why did Leostratus here inscribe on the affidavit the name, not of himself, but of the defendant? For the older facts should have been sworn to by the older man. It was, he might say, because I have had this youth adopted as son to Archiades.
[56] οὐκοῦν σὲ τὸν εἰσποιοῦντα καὶ κατασκευάζοντα τὰ πράγματα καὶ λόγον ἔδει διδόναι, γενόμενον ὑπεύθυνον ὧν πεποίηκας: πολλή γε ἀνάγκη. ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν ἔφυγες, τῇ διαμαρτυρίᾳ δὲ τοῦτον οὐδὲν εἰδότ᾽ ἐπεγράψω. ὥστε φανερὸν ὑμῖν ἐστιν, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, τὰ διαμαρτυρούμενα μὴ εἶναι ἀληθῆ, καὶ παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς γε τούτοις ὁμολογεῖται. καὶ μὴν κἀκεῖνο δίκαιόν ἐστιν, μὴ λέγοντος αὐτίκα μάλ᾽ ἀκούειν Λεωστράτου τουτουί, ὑπὲρ ὧν γε διαμαρτυρῆσαι οὐκ ἐτόλμησεν.
[56] Well then, you who had him adopted and concocted the whole affair ought to have rendered an account of it, and made yourself responsible for what you have done. You ought absolutely to have done so. But you evaded this, and wrote over the affidavit the name of your son here, who knew nothing of the matter. You see, then, men of the jury, that the statements in the affidavit are false, and they are admitted by these men themselves to be so. Why, it would even be right for you to refuse to listen to this man Leostratus, when he presently undertakes to make statements to which he did not venture to swear in the affidavit.
[57] ὡς δὲ καὶ τῶν ἀγώνων ἀδικώτατοι καὶ πλείστης ὀργῆς ἄξιοι τοῖς ἀγωνιζομένοις αἱ διαμαρτυρίαι εἰσίν, μάλιστ᾽ ἄν τις ἐκεῖθεν καταμάθοι. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἀναγκαίως ἔχουσιν, ὥσπερ οἱ ἄλλοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ προαιρέσεως καὶ βουλήσεως τῆς τοῦ διαμαρτυροῦντος γίγνονται. εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὑπὲρ τῶν διαμφισβητουμένων μὴ ἔστιν ἄλλον τρόπον δίκην λαβεῖν ἢ διαμαρτυρήσαντα, ἴσως ἀναγκαῖον τὸ διαμαρτυρεῖν:
[57] Furthermore, that affidavits of objection are of all forms of trial the most unjust, and that those having recourse to them are most deserving of your resentment, one can see very clearly from the following facts. In the first place, they are not necessary as the other forms of procedure are, but they are instituted by the will and desire of the one swearing to them. If in the matter of disputed claims there is no other way of getting a judgement than by such an affidavit, it is perhaps necessary to make one.
[58] εἰ δὲ καὶ ἄνευ διαμαρτυρίας πρὸς ἅπασι τοῖς συνεδρίοις ἔνεστι λόγου μὴ ἀποστερηθῆναι, πῶς οὐ προπετείας καὶ τῆς μεγίστης ἀπονοίας σημεῖον τὸ διαμαρτυρεῖν ἐστιν; οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ νομοθέτης ἀναγκαῖον αὐτὸ ἐποίησεν τοῖς ἀντιδίκοις, ἀλλ᾽ ἂν βούλωνται διαμαρτυρεῖν, ἔδωκεν, ὥσπερ διάπειραν ποιούμενος τῶν τρόπων ἑνὸς ἑκάστου ἡμῶν, πῶς ποτ᾽ ἔχοιμεν πρὸς τὸ προπετῶς τι πράττειν.
[58] But, if it is possible without an affidavit of objections to obtain a hearing before all tribunals, is not the use of one a mark of recklessness and utter desperation? For the lawgiver did not make it obligatory on the contending parties, but granted them the privilege of putting in such an affidavit, if they chose, as though he were testing the character of each one of us, to see how we stand with reference to a reckless procedure.
[59] ἔτι τοίνυν ἐπὶ τὸ τῶν διαμαρτυρούντων μέρος οὔτε δικαστήρια ἦν ἂν οὔτε ἀγῶνες ἐγίγνοντο: κωλύει γὰρ πάντα ταῦτα τὸ τῶν διαμαρτυριῶν γένος καὶ ἀποκλείει εἰσαγωγῆς ἕκαστα τῆς εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον, κατά γε τὴν τοῦ διαμαρτυροῦντος βούλησιν. διόπερ οἶμαι δεῖν κοινοὺς ἐχθροὺς τοὺς τοιούτους ἀνθρώπους ὑπολαμβάνειν πᾶσιν εἶναι, καὶ μηδέποτε τυγχάνειν αὐτοὺς συγγνώμης ἀγωνιζομένους παρ᾽ ὑμῖν: προελόμενος γὰρ ἕκαστος αὐτῶν τὸν ἐκ τοῦ διαμαρτυρῆσαι κίνδυνον, οὐκ ἀ�
�αγκασθεὶς εἰσέρχεται.
[59] Further, if it rested with those who file these affidavits, there would be neither courts of justice nor trials; for the nature of affidavits of objections is to bIock all these things and to prevent all cases from being brought into the court-room — at least so far as the will of the one swearing the affidavit goes. Therefore I think we should regard such people as the common enemies of all men, and that they should never receive any indulgence when they are on trial before you; for each one of them comes into court, not under compulsion, but having chosen to incur the risk of the oath.
[60] ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἡ διαμαρτυρία ψευδής ἐστιν, καὶ ἐκ τῶν γεγραμμένων καὶ ἐκ τῶν εἰρημένων λόγων σχεδὸν ἀκριβῶς μεμαθήκατε. ὅτι δὲ καὶ οἱ νόμοι, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ἡμῖν τὴν κληρονομίαν ἀποδιδόασι, τοῦθ᾽ ὑμᾶς διὰ βραχέων βούλομαι διδάξαι, οὐχ ὡς οὐ μεμαθηκότας καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἐν ἀρχῇ εἰρημένοις, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα μᾶλλον πρὸς τὴν τούτων ψευδολογίαν τὰ δίκαια μνημονεύητε.
[60] Well then, that the affidavit is false, you have learned pretty definitely from the statements contained in it and from the arguments which you have heard. But that the laws also give us this inheritance as our right, men of the jury, I wish to prove in a few words — not as though this had not been made clear to you in what I said at the outset, but that you may the better bear in mind the justice of our case, and so meet the false statements of our opponents.
[61] τὸ μὲν γὰρ σύνολον, ὄντες Ἀρχιάδῃ, οὗ ἐστιν ὁ κλῆρος οὑτοσί, πρὸς ἀνδρῶν κατὰ γένος ἐγγυτάτω, καὶ τῆς ποιήσεως, ἣν ἐκεῖνος ἐποιήσατο, τῶν μὲν ἐπανεληλυθότων εἰς τὸν πατρῷον οἶκον, τοῦ δ᾽ ἐγκαταλειφθέντος ἄπαιδος τετελευτηκότος, τούτων δ᾽ οὕτως ἐχόντων ἀξιοῦμεν κληρονομεῖν,
[61] To sum up the matter briefly, we, since we are the nearest of kin in the male line to Archiades, to whom this estate belonged, and since of the persons whom he adopted some have gone back to the family of their fathers, and the one last left had died without issue, — in these circumstances, we, I say, claim to inherit.
[62] οὐδεμίαν οὐσίαν Λεωστράτου ἀφελόμενοι （οὗτοι μὲν γὰρ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ἔχουσιν）, τῆς ὑπ᾽ Ἀρχιάδου δὲ καταλειφθείσης καὶ οὔσης ἐκ τῶν νόμων ἡμετέρας. ὁ γὰρ νόμος, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, κελεύει κρατεῖν τοὺς ἄρρενας καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τῶν ἀρρένων: οὗτοι δ᾽ ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν. οὐκ ἦσαν τοίνυν παῖδες ἐκείνῳ: οἱ δ᾽ * * ὄντες ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν.
[62] We are not depriving Leostratus of any property （ for these men hold what is their own） , but we claim the estate left by Archiades, which is ours according to the laws. For the law, men of the jury, ordains that males and the sons of males should have precedence; and such we are. Archiades had no children, and we are the ones nearest of kin to him.
[63] ἔπειτα οὐ δίκαιον δήπου τὸν ποιητὸν υἱὸν ποιητοὺς ἑτέρους εἰσάγειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐγκαταλείπειν μὲν γιγνομένους, ὅταν δὲ τοῦτ᾽ ἐπιλίπῃ, τοῖς γένεσιν ἀποδιδόναι τὰς κληρονομίας: ταῦτα γὰρ οἱ νόμοι κελεύουσιν. ἐπεὶ πῶς οὐκ ἐκκλείεται εἷς ἕκαστος ὑμῶν τῆς κατὰ γένος ἀγχιστείας, ὅταν τοῖς ποιητοῖς ἡ ἄδεια αὕτη δοθῇ; ὁρᾶτε γὰρ ὅτι ταῖς κολακείαις οἱ πλεῖστοι ψυχαγωγούμενοι καὶ ταῖς πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους διαφοραῖς πολλάκις φιλονικοῦντες ποιητοὺς υἱεῖς ποιοῦνται: εἰ δ᾽ ἔσται τῷ εἰσποιηθέντι παρὰ τὸν νόμον εἰσποιεῖν ὃν ἂν βούληται, οὐδέποτε τοῖς γένεσιν αἱ κληρονομίαι δοθήσονται.
[63] Further, it is surely not just that an adopted son should bring other sons into a family by adoption; he may leave in it children born to him, but in default of these he must restore the inheritance to those related by blood. That is what the laws ordain.
For is it not plain that each one of you is excluded from the right of inheritance by direct descent, if this licence be granted to children by adoption? For you see that most people who adopt children do so through being cajoled by flattery and often in a spirit of contentiousness caused by family quarrels. But if an adopted son is to be permitted in defiance of the law to adopt whomsoever he pleases, inheritances will never be given to blood-relations.
[64] ἃ καὶ προνοηθεὶς ὁ νομοθέτης ἀπεῖπεν τῷ ποιητῷ αὐτῷ ὄντι ποιητὸν υἱὸν μὴ ποιεῖσθαι, τίνα τρόπον διορίσας περὶ τούτων; ὅταν εἴπῃ ‘υἱὸν γνήσιον ἐγκαταλιπόντα ἐπανιέναι’, δηλοῖ δήπου φανερῶς ὅτι οὐ δεῖ ποιεῖσθαι: ἀδύνατον γάρ ἐστιν υἱὸν γνήσιον ἐγκαταλιπεῖν, ἐὰν μὴ γόνῳ γεγονὼς ᾖ τινι. σὺ τοίνυν, ὦ Λεώστρατε, ἀξιοῖς τῷ τετελευτηκότι εἰσποιητῷ εἰς τὸ ἡμέτερον γένος ὄντι ποιητὸν ἐπὶ τὸν κλῆρον εἰσαγαγεῖν, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τὰ σαυτοῦ κτήματα καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὰ κατὰ νόμον τῷ προσήκοντι δοθησόμενα βαδίζων.
[64] It was to guard against this that the lawgiver forbade a person who was himself adopted to create a son by adoption. In what manner did he declare his view regarding this? When he says “ a man may return to his own family, leaving behind him a lawfully born son” he makes it plain, I take it, that it is not lawful for him to adopt; for it is impossible for a man to leave behind him a lawfully born son, unless he have a son born of his body. But you, Leostratus, claim the right to bring an adopted son into the inheritance of the dead man, who had himself been adopted into our family, just as though you were taking possession of your own property, and not that which the law declares shall be given to the nearest of kin.
[65] ἡμεῖς δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, εἰ μὲν ὁ τετελευτηκὼς ἐποιήσατό τινα, καίπερ οὐ διδόντος τοῦ νόμου συνεχωροῦμεν ἂν αὐτῷ, ἢ εἰ διαθήκας κατελελοίπει, καὶ ταύταις ἂν ἐνεμείναμεν, ἐπεὶ καὶ τὸ ἐξ ἀρχῆς τοιοῦτοι ὄντες διετελοῦμεν, οὐκ ἐναντιούμενοι τούτοις ἔχουσι τὴν οὐσίαν καὶ ἐπανιοῦσιν ἄνω, καθ᾽ ὃν δήποτε τρόπον ἐβούλοντο.
[65] For ourselves, men of the jury, if the deceased had adopted anyone, even though the law does not allow it, we should have submitted; or, if he had left a will, we should also have been ready to abide by that; for from the beginning this has been our position; we made no objection to their holding the property and returning to their original family in whatever manner they pleased.
[66] ἐπεὶ δὲ νυνί ποτε ὑπὸ τούτων αὐτῶν καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν νόμων τὸ πρᾶγμ᾽ ἐξελήλεγκται, οἰόμεθα δεῖν κληρονομεῖν τῶν Ἀρχιάδου, καὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῶν εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν τὸν εἰσποιούμενον τῶν μὴ πεποιημένων πρότερον, μὴ παρὰ τούτων. δικαίως γὰρ ὁ νομοθέτης, οἶμαι, ὥσπερ κ
αὶ τὰς ἀτυχίας τῶν οἰκείων καὶ τὰς ἐκδόσεις τῶν γυναικῶν τοῖς ἐγγύτατα γένους προσέταττε ποιεῖσθαι, οὕτως καὶ τὰς κληρονομίας καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀγαθῶν μετουσίαν τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἀποδέδωκεν.
[66] Now, however, that the affair has at length been exposed both by these men themselves and by the laws, we hold that it is right for us to inherit the estate of Archiades, and that the son to be adopted should come from us who have not been adopted before, and not from them. For it was just, in my opinion, that the lawgiver, as he laid upon the nearest of kin the duty of relieving the misfortunes of their relatives, and of giving in marriage their women-folk, so also has given to these same people as their due the right of inheriting and of sharing in the good things.
[67] τὸ δὲ πάντων μέγιστον καὶ γνωριμώτατον ὑμῖν: ὁ γὰρ τοῦ Σόλωνος νόμος οὐδὲ διαθέσθαι τὸν ποιητὸν ἐᾷ τὰ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ, οἷ ἂν ποιηθῇ. εἰκότως, οἶμαι: τῷ γὰρ κατὰ νόμον εἰσποιηθέντι ἐπὶ τὰ ἑτέρου οὐχ οὕτως ὡς περὶ τῶν ἰδίων κτημάτων βουλευτέον ἐστίν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς νόμοις ἀκολούθως, περὶ ἑκάστου τῶν γεγραμμένων ὡς ὁ νόμος λέγει.