Humanitext Reader

Antiphon of Rhamnus · Third Tetralogy §4.1-4.11

Second Defense: Friends Plead for the Exiled Defendant

Passage 4 of 4 · Greek

Summary

Following the defendant's flight, his friends deliver a defense speech on his behalf. They argue for his innocence based on the deceased having initiated the violence and the role of medical treatment in his death, warning of the spiritual pollution that an unjust conviction would bring.

§4.1ὁ μὲν ἀνήρ, καταγνοὺς αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ, ἀλλὰ τὴν σπουδὴν τῶν κατηγόρων φοβηθείς, ὑπαπέστη· ἡμῖν δὲ τοῖς φίλοις ζῶντι ἢ ἀποθανόντι εὐσεβέστερον ἀμύνειν αὐτῷ.
The man, not because he condemned himself but because he feared the zeal of his prosecutors, secretly withdrew; but for us, his friends, it is more pious to defend him, whether he is alive or dead.
ἄριστα μὲν οὖν αὐτὸς ἂν ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ ἀπελογεῖτο· ἐπεὶ δὲ τάδε ἀκινδυνότερα ἔδοξεν εἶναι, ἡμῖν, οἷς μέγιστον ἂν πένθος γένοιτο στερηθεῖσιν αὐτοῦ, ἀπολογητέον. §4.2δοκεῖ δέ μοι περὶ τὸν ἄρξαντα τῆς πληγῆς τὸ ἀδίκημα εἶναι.
Indeed, he himself would have defended himself best; but since this course seemed to be safer, we, to whom the greatest grief would come if we were deprived of him, must make the defense. It seems to me that the injustice lies with the one who started the blows.
ὁ μὲν οὖν διώκων οὐκ εἰκόσι τεκμηρίοις χρώμενος τοῦτον τὸν ἄρξαντά φησιν εἶναι.
Now the prosecutor, using improbable proofs, claims that this man was the one who started them.
εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὥσπερ βλέπειν μὲν τοῖν ὀφθαλμοῖν, ἀκούειν δὲ τοῖς ὠσίν, οὕτω κατὰ φύσιν ἦν ὑβρίζειν μὲν τοὺς νέους, σωφρονεῖν δὲ τοὺς γέροντας, οὐδὲν ἂν τῆς ὑμετέρας κρίσεως ἔδει· αὐτὴ γὰρ ἂν ἡ ἡλικία τῶν νέων κατέκρινε·
For if, just as seeing with the eyes and hearing with the ears is natural, so it were natural for the young to act insolently and the old to be self-controlled, there would be no need for your judgment; for youth itself would have condemned them.
νῦν δὲ πολλοὶ μὲν νέοι σωφρονοῦντες, πολλοὶ δὲ πρεσβῦται παροινοῦντες, οὐδὲν μᾶλλον τῷ διώκοντι ἢ τῷ φεύγοντι τεκμήριον γίγνονται. §4.3κοινοῦ δὲ τοῦ τεκμηρίου ἡμῖν ὄντος καὶ τούτῳ, τῷ παντὶ προέχομεν· οἱ γὰρ μάρτυρες τοῦτόν φασιν ἄρξαι τῆς πληγῆς.
But as it is, many young men are self-controlled, and many old men act in a drunken rage, so these facts are no more a proof for the prosecutor than for the defendant. Although this proof is common to us and to him, we excel in every way; for the witnesses say that this man started the blows.
ἄρξαντος δὲ τούτου, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων τῶν κατηγορουμένων ἀπολύεται τῆς αἰτίας.
And since he started them, the defendant is acquitted of the blame for all the other charges.
εἴπερ γὰρ ὁ πατάξας, διὰ τὴν πληγὴν βιασάμενος ὑμᾶς ἐπιτρεφθῆναι ἰατρῷ, μᾶλλον τοῦ ἀποκτείναντος φονεύς ἐστιν, ὁ ἄρξας τῆς πληγῆς φονεὺς γίγνεται.
For if the one who struck—by forcing you, because of the blow, to entrust him to a doctor—is more of a murderer than the one who killed, then the one who started the blows becomes the murderer.
οὗτος γὰρ ἠνάγκασε τόν τε ἀμυνόμενον ἀντιτύπτειν τόν τε πληγέντα ἐπὶ τὸν ἰατρὸν ἐλθεῖν.
For it was he who forced the defender to strike back and the one who was struck to go to the doctor.
ἀνόσια γὰρ ἂν ὁ διωκόμενος πάθοι, εἰ μήτε ἀποκτείνας ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀποκτείναντος μήτε ἄρξας ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἄρξαντος φονεὺς ἔσται. §4.4ἔστι δὲ οὐδὲ ὁ ἐπιβουλεύσας οὐδὲν μᾶλλον ὁ διωκόμενος τοῦ διώκοντος.
For the defendant would suffer unholy things if, having neither killed nor started the blows, he is to be the murderer in place of the killer and the starter. And the planner is not the defendant any more than the prosecutor.
εἰ γὰρ ὁ μὲν ἄρξας τῆς πληγῆς τύπτειν καὶ μὴ ἀποκτείνειν διενοήθη, ὁ δὲ ἀμυνόμενος ἀποκτεῖναι, οὗτος ἂν ὁ ἐπιβουλεύσας εἴη.
For if the one who started the blows intended to strike and not to kill, but the defender intended to kill, the latter would be the planner.
νῦν δὲ καὶ ὁ ἀμυνόμενος τύπτειν καὶ οὐκ ἀποκτεῖναι διανοηθεὶς ἥμαρτεν, εἰς ἃ οὐκ ἐβούλετο πατάξας. §4.5τῆς μὲν οὖν πληγῆς βουλευτὴς ἐγένετο, τὸν δὲ θάνατον πῶς ἂν ἐπεβούλευσεν, ὅς γε ἀκουσίως ἐπάταξεν;
But as it is, the defender also, intending to strike and not to kill, made an error, having struck in a way he did not wish. Thus he became the planner of the blow, but how could he have planned the death, since he struck involuntarily?
οἰκεῖον δὲ καὶ τὸ ἁμάρτημα τῷ ἄρξαντι μᾶλλον ἢ τῷ ἀμυνομένῳ ἐστίν.
And the error is more proper to the one who started it than to the defender.
ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἃ ἔπασχεν ἀντιδρᾶν ζητῶν, ὑπʼ ἐκείνου βιαζόμενος ἐξήμαρτεν· ὁ δὲ διὰ τὴν αὑτοῦ ἀκολασίαν πάντα δρῶν καὶ πάσχων, καὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῆς ἐκείνου ἁμαρτίας αἴτιος ὢν δίκαιος φονεὺς εἶναί ἐστιν. §4.6ὡς δὲ οὐδὲ κρεισσόνως ἀλλὰ πολὺ ὑποδεεστέρως ὧν ἔπασχεν ἠμύνετο, διδάξω.
For the one, seeking to react to what he was suffering, made an error because he was forced by him; whereas the other, doing and suffering everything because of his own licentiousness, being the cause of both his own error and that of the other, is justly the murderer. And I will show that he did not defend himself in a superior manner, but in a manner far inferior to what he was suffering.
ὁ μὲν ὑβρίζων καὶ παροινῶν πάντʼ ἔδρα καὶ οὐδὲν ἠμύνατο· ὁ δὲ μὴ πάσχειν ἀλλὰ ἀπωθεῖσθαι ζητῶν, ἅ τε ἔπασχεν ἀκουσίως ἔπασχεν, ἅ τʼ ἔδρασε τὰ παθήματα βουλόμενος διαφυγεῖν ἐλασσόνως ἢ κατʼ ἀξίαν τὸν ἄρξαντα ἠμύνετο, καὶ οὐκ ἔδρα. §4.7εἰ δὲ κρείσσων ὢν τὰς χεῖρας κρεισσόνως ἠμύνετο ἢ ἔπασχεν, οὐδʼ οὕτω δίκαιος ὑφʼ ὑμῶν καταλαμβάνεσθαί ἐστι.
The one, acting with insolence and drunken rage, did everything and did not defend himself at all; while the other, seeking not to suffer but to push him off, suffered involuntarily what he suffered, and in what he did, wishing to escape his sufferings, defended himself against the one who started it in a lesser degree than was deserved, and did not act aggressively. But if, being stronger in his hands, he defended himself more strongly than he suffered, not even so is he justly to be condemned by you.
τῷ μὲν γὰρ ἄρξαντι πανταχοῦ μεγάλα ἐπιτίμια ἐπίκειται, τῷ δὲ ἀμυνομένῳ οὐδαμοῦ οὐδὲν ἐπιτίμιον γέγραπται. §4.8πρὸς δὲ τὸ μήτε δικαίως μήτε ἀδίκως ἀποκτείνειν ἀποκέκριται· οὐ γὰρ ὑπὸ τῶν πληγῶν ἀλλʼ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἰατροῦ ὁ ἀνὴρ ἀπέθανεν, ὡς οἱ μάρτυρες μαρτυροῦσιν.
For upon the one who starts, great penalties are imposed everywhere, but for the one who defends himself, no penalty is written anywhere. And as to his having killed, an answer has been given; for the man died not from the blows but because of the doctor, as the witnesses testify.
ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἡ τύχη τοῦ ἄρξαντος καὶ οὐ τοῦ ἀμυνομένου.
And the fortune also belongs to the one who started, and not to the defender.
ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἀκουσίως πάντα δράσας καὶ παθὼν ἀλλοτρίᾳ τύχῃ κέχρηται· ὁ δὲ ἑκουσίως πάντα πράξας, ἐκ τῶν αὑτοῦ ἔργων τὴν τύχην προσαγόμενος, τῇ αὑτοῦ ἀτυχίᾳ ἥμαρτεν. §4.9ὡς μὲν οὖν οὐδενὶ ἔνοχος τῶν κατηγορημένων ὁ διωκόμενός ἐστιν, ἀποδέδεικται.
For the one who did and suffered everything involuntarily has experienced a fortune not his own; whereas the one who did everything voluntarily, bringing fortune upon himself from his own deeds, made an error through his own misfortune. Thus it has been demonstrated that the defendant is not liable for any of the accusations.
εἰ δέ τις κοινὴν μὲν τὴν πρᾶξιν, κοινὴν δὲ τὴν ἀτυχίαν αὐτῶν ἡγούμενος εἶναι, μηδὲν ἀπολύσιμον μᾶλλον ἢ καταλήψιμον ἐκ τῶν λεγομένων γιγνώσκει αὐτὸν ὄντα, καὶ οὕτως ἀπολύειν μᾶλλον ἢ καταλαμβάνειν δίκαιός ἐστι.
But if anyone, considering their action to be common and their misfortune to be common, judges from what has been said that he is no more to be acquitted than to be condemned, even so it is just to acquit rather than to condemn him.
τόν τε γὰρ διώκοντα οὐ δίκαιον καταλαμβάνειν, μὴ σαφῶς διδάξαντα ὅτι ἀδικεῖται· τόν τε φεύγοντα ἀνόσιον ἁλῶναι, μὴ φανερῶς ἐλεγχθέντα ἃ ἐπικαλεῖται. §4.10οὑτωσὶ δὲ ἐκ παντὸς τρόπου τῶν ἐγκλημάτων ἀπολυομένου τοῦ ἀνδρός, ἡμεῖς ὁσιώτερον ὑμῖν ἐπισκήπτομεν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ, μὴ τὸν φονέα ζητοῦντας κολάζειν τὸν καθαρὸν ἀποκτείνειν.
For it is not just to condemn for the prosecutor, since he has not clearly shown that he is wronged; nor is it holy for the defendant to be convicted, when he has not been clearly proven guilty of the charges. Since the man is thus acquitted of the charges in every way, we demand of you on his behalf with greater piety, that you do not, while seeking to punish the murderer, kill the innocent.
ὅ τε γὰρ †ἀποκτείνας τοῦ ἀποθανόντος† οὐδὲν ἧσσον τοῖς αἰτίοις προστρόπαιος ἔσται, οὗτός τε ἀνοσίως διαφθαρεὶς διπλάσιον καθίστησι τὸ μίασμα τῶν ἀλιτηρίων τοῖς ἀποκτείνασιν αὐτόν. §4.11ταῦτα οὖν δεδιότες, τὸν μὲν καθαρὸν ὑμέτερον ἡγεῖσθε εἶναι ἀπολύειν τῆς αἰτίας, τὸν δὲ μιαρὸν τῷ χρόνῳ ἀποδόντες φῆναι τοῖς ἔγγιστα τιμωρεῖσθαι ὑπολείπετε· οὕτω γὰρ ἂν δικαιότατα καὶ ὁσιώτατα πράξαιτʼ ἄν.
For the one who †killed [the deceased]† will be no less a source of pollution to those responsible, and this man, being unholily destroyed, will bring a double pollution of the avenging spirits upon those who kill him. Fearing these things, therefore, consider it your duty to acquit the innocent of the blame, and leave the polluted one, committing him to time, to be revealed for punishment by his next of kin; for in this way you would act most justly and most piously.

Notes

  1. §4.1καταγνοὺς αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ — This active aorist participle construction literally means 'having condemned himself.' The defense is countering the prosecution's argument that the defendant's flight (ὑπαπέστη) was an admission of guilt, explaining instead that he fled not because of self-condemnation, but out of fear of the prosecutors' relentless zeal (σπουδή).
  2. §4.2εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὥσπερ βλέπειν μὲν τοῖν ὀφθαλμοῖν... οὐδὲν ἂν τῆς ὑμετέρας κρίσεως ἔδει — A counterfactual conditional construction, with εἰ + imperfect indicative (ἦν) in the protasis, and ἄν + imperfect indicative (ἔδει) in the apodosis, representing a situation contrary to present reality. It posits the impossible scenario where moral behavior (young acting with hubris, old being self-controlled) is a biological necessity determined by nature (κατὰ φύσιν), just like seeing with eyes or hearing with ears.
  3. §4.3εἴπερ γὰρ ὁ πατάξας, διὰ τὴν πληγὴν βιασάμενος ὑμᾶς ἐπιτρεφθῆναι ἰατρῷ, μᾶλλον τοῦ ἀποκτείναντος φονεύς ἐστιν, ὁ ἄρξας τῆς πληγῆς φονεὺς γίγνεται — A complex conditional chain that turns the prosecution's own argument (from §3.5, that the striker is the murderer because he forced the recourse to a doctor) against them. Within the conditional εἴπερ clause, the participle βιασάμενος functions causally; the sentence argues that if the prosecution's logic holds, then the one who initiated the entire sequence of violence (ὁ ἄρξας) must be the ultimate compeller and therefore the true murderer.
  4. §4.10†ἀποκτείνας τοῦ ἀποθανόντος† — This passage transmitted in the manuscripts is grammatically and contextually difficult and is marked as a textual crux. It is hard to explain why 'the one who killed the deceased' would be a source of pollution 'to those responsible' (τοῖς αἰτίοις). While editors often propose emendations such as 'if the one responsible for the death escapes' (ἀποφυγὼν ὁ αἴτιος τοῦ ἀποθανόντος), the translation here attempts to make sense of the manuscript reading, implying that the actual killer remains a source of pollution regardless of the trial's outcome.

Cite this passage

Antiphon of Rhamnus, Third Tetralogy §4.1-4.11. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0028.tlg004.humanitext-grc2:4.1-4.11

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.