Humanitext Reader

Antiphon of Rhamnus · Second Tetralogy §3.8-3.12

Argument on Divine Pollution and the Father's Demand for Conviction

Passage 4 of 5 · Greek

Summary

The prosecutor (father of the deceased boy) rejects the defense's claim of misfortune, arguing that the divine pollution demands a guilty verdict. He points out that the opponent's logic paradoxically supports the prosecution's case, and strongly urges the jury to fulfill both their religious piety and legal responsibilities.

§3.8οὐ δίκαιος δὲ ἀποφυγεῖν ἐστι διὰ τὴν ἀτυχίαν τῆς ἁμαρτίας.
He is not just to escape because of the misfortune of the error.
εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὑπὸ μηδεμιᾶς ἐπιμελείας τοῦ θεοῦ ἡ ἀτυχία γίγνεται, ἁμάρτημα οὖσα τῷ ἁμαρτόντι συμφορὰ δικαία γενέσθαι ἐστίν· εἰ δὲ αὖ θεία κηλὶς τῷ δράσαντι προσπίπτει ἀσεβοῦντι, οὐ δίκαιον τὰς θείας προσβολὰς διακωλύειν γίγνεσθαι.
For if the misfortune occurs under no care of God, being an error, it is just for it to become a misfortune for the one who erred; and if, on the other hand, a divine pollution falls upon the doer because he is impious, it is not just to prevent the divine visitations from happening.
§3.9ἔλεξαν δὲ καὶ ὡς οὐ πρέπει χρηστὰ ἐπιτηδεύοντας αὐτοὺς κακῶν ἀξιοῦσθαι·
They said also that it is not fitting for them, who practice good things, to be deemed worthy of evils.
ἡμεῖς δὲ πῶς ἂν πρέποντα πάσχοιμεν, εἰ μηδὲν ὑποδεέστερα τούτων μελετῶντες θανάτῳ ζημιούμεθα;
But how would we suffer fitting things, if we, practicing things in no way inferior to these, are punished with death?
φάσκων δὲ ἀναμάρτητος εἶναι, καὶ ἀξιῶν τὰς συμφορὰς τῶν ἁμαρτόντων εἶναι καὶ μὴ εἰς τοὺς ἀναμαρτήτους ἐκτρέπεσθαι, ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν λέγει.
And saying that he is without error, and claiming that misfortunes belong to those who err and should not turn aside to those who are without error, he speaks on our behalf.
ὅ τε γὰρ παῖς μου εἰς οὐδένα οὐδὲν ἁμαρτών, ὑπὸ τούτου τοῦ μειρακίου ἀποθανών, ἀδικοῖτʼ ἂν ἀτιμώρητος γενόμενος· ἐγώ τε τοῦδε μᾶλλον ἀναμάρτητος ὢν δεινὰ πείσομαι, ἃ ὁ νόμος ἀποδίδωσί μοι μὴ τυχὼν παρʼ ὑμῶν.
For both my boy, who erred in nothing against anyone, having died by this youth, would be wronged if he should go unavenged; and I, being more free from error than this man, will suffer terrible things if I do not obtain from you what the law awards me.
§3.10ὡς δὲ οὐδὲ τῆς ἁμαρτίας οὐδὲ τοῦ ἀκουσίως ἀποκτεῖναι, ἐξ ὧν αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν, ἀπολύεται, ἀλλὰ κοινὰ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα ἀμφοῖν αὐτοῖν ἐστι, δηλώσω.
But that he is released neither from the error nor from the killing unintentionally, from what they themselves say, but both of these are common to both of them, I will show.
εἴπερ ὁ παῖς διὰ τὸ ὑπὸ τὴν φορὰν τοῦ ἀκοντίου ὑπελθεῖν καὶ μὴ ἀτρέμας ἑστάναι φονεὺς αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ δίκαιος εἶναί ἐστιν, οὐδὲ τὸ μειράκιον καθαρὸν τῆς αἰτίας ἐστίν, ἀλλʼ εἴπερ τούτου μὴ ἀκοντίζοντος ἀλλʼ ἀτρέμα ἑστῶτος ἀπέθανεν ὁ παῖς.
If indeed the boy, because of running under the flight of the javelin and not standing still, is just to be his own killer, neither is the youth clean of blame, except if indeed the boy died while this one was not throwing but standing still.
ἐξ ἀμφοῖν δὲ τοῦ φόνου γενομένου, ὁ μὲν παῖς εἰς αὑτὸν ἁμαρτὼν μᾶλλον ἢ κατὰ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἑαυτὸν τετιμώρηται, τέθνηκε γάρ, ὁ δὲ συλλήπτωρ καὶ κοινωνὸς εἰς τοὺς οὐ προσήκοντας τῆς ἁμαρτίας γενόμενος πῶς δίκαιος ἀζήμιος ἀποφυγεῖν ἐστιν;
But the killing having come from both, the boy, having erred against himself, has punished himself more than according to the error, for he is dead; but how is the accomplice and partner, who became a sharer of the error against those who did not deserve it, just to escape unpunished?
§3.11ἐκ δὲ τῆς αὐτῶν τῶν ἀπολογουμένων ἀπολογίας μετόχου τοῦ μειρακίου τοῦ φόνου ὄντος, οὐκ ἂν δικαίως οὐδὲ ὁσίως ἀπολύοιτε αὐτόν.
And since from the defense of the defenders themselves the youth is a partner in the killing, you would not justly nor piously acquit him.
οὔτε γὰρ ἡμεῖς, οἱ διὰ τὴν τούτων ἁμαρτίαν διαφθαρέντες, αὐθένται καταγνωσθέντες ὅσια ἀλλʼ ἀνόσιʼ ἂν πάθοιμεν ὑφʼ ὑμῶν· οὔθʼ οἱ θανατώσαντες ἡμᾶς μὴ εἰργόμενοι τῶν προσηκόντων †εὐσεβοῖντʼ ἂν† ὑπὸ τῶν ἀπολυσάντων τοὺς ἀνοσίους.
For neither would we, who have been destroyed through the error of these men, suffer pious but rather impious things from you if we are condemned as the killers; nor would those who killed us, if they are not barred from what is prescribed, be piously dealt with by those who acquit the impious.
πάσης δʼ ὑπὲρ πάντων τῆς κηλῖδος εἰς ὑμᾶς ἀναφερομένης, πολλὴ εὐλάβεια ὑμῖν τούτων ποιητέα ἐστί· καταλαβόντες μὲν γὰρ αὐτὸν καὶ εἴρξαντες ὧν ὁ νόμος εἴργει καθαροὶ τῶν ἐγκλημάτων ἔσεσθε, ἀπολύσαντες δὲ ὑπαίτιοι καθίστασθε.
And since the whole pollution on behalf of everyone is referred to you, you must exercise great caution concerning these things; for if you convict him and exclude him from those things from which the law excludes him, you will be clean of the accusations, but if you acquit him, you make yourselves liable.
§3.12τῆς οὖν ὑμετέρας εὐσεβείας ἕνεκα καὶ τῶν νόμων ἀπάγοντες τιμωρεῖσθε αὐτόν, καὶ αὐτοί τε μὴ μεταλάβητε τῆς τούτου μιαρίας, ἡμῖν τε τοῖς γονεῦσιν, οἳ ζῶντες κατορωρύγμεθα ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ, δόξῃ γοῦν ἐλαφροτέραν τὴν συμφορὰν καταστήσατε.
Therefore, for the sake of your own piety and of the laws, condemn and punish him, and do not themselves partake of his pollution, and make the misfortune lighter, at least in appearance, for us the parents who, though living, have been buried by him.

Notes

  1. §3.8οὐ δίκαιος δὲ ἀποφυγεῖν ἐστι — This is a personal construction using the adjective δίκαιος with an infinitive, equivalent to the impersonal οὐ δίκαιόν ἐστιν αὐτὸν ἀποφυγεῖν ('it is not just for him to escape'). In Greek, adjectives of evaluation often agree with the subject of the infinitive in a personal structure.
  2. §3.9ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν λέγει — The preposition ὑπέρ with genitive means 'on behalf of' or 'to the advantage of'. The speaker highlights a rhetorical paradox: by arguing that misfortunes should fall only upon those who err, the opponent is unwittingly speaking in favor of the prosecutors, who are entirely without error.
  3. §3.10εἴπερ τούτου μὴ ἀκοντίζοντος ἀλλʼ ἀτρέμα ἑστῶτος ἀπέθανεν ὁ παῖς — The conditional clause starting with εἴπερ contains a genitive absolute: `τούτου μὴ ἀκοντίζοντος ἀλλʼ ἀτρέμα ἑστῶτος` ('while this youth was not throwing but standing still'). This highlights the causality by presenting an absurd counterfactual: the youth can only be blameless if the boy had died without any active throwing by the youth.
  4. §3.11†εὐσεβοῖντʼ ἂν† — A locus corruptus (marked by obelisks). The passive form of the intransitive verb εὐσεβέω is highly unusual; here it is understood as 'be treated piously' or 'have piety observed toward them'. It relates to Antiphon's distinct religious-legal doctrine that acquitting a polluted person spreads the impurity to those who acquit them.

Cite this passage

Antiphon of Rhamnus, Second Tetralogy §3.8-3.12. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0028.tlg003.humanitext-grc2:3.8-3.12

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.