Against Stephanus II

This law, then, ordains that we should live as citizens under the same laws and not one under one law, another under another. But my father died during the archonship of Dysnicetus,[*](That is, in 371-370 B.C.) and Phormio became an Athenian citizen during the archonship of Nicophemus,[*](That is, in 361-360 B.C.) in the tenth year after my father died. How, then, could my father, not knowing that Phormio was to become an Athenian citizen, have given him in marriage his own wife, and thus have outraged us, shown his contempt of the gift of citizenship which he had received from you, and disregarded your laws? And which was the more honorable course for him—to do this during his lifetime, supposing he wished to do it, or to leave behind him at his death a will which he had no legal right to make?

And verily, when you have heard the laws themselves you will see clearly that Pasio had no right to make a will.

(To the clerk.) Read the law.

The Law

Any citizen, with the exception of those who had been adopted when Solon entered upon his office, and had thereby become unable either to renounce or to claim an inheritance,[*](The precise meaning of this phrase is disputed. See the authorities cited in the next note.) shall have the right to dispose of his own property by will as he shall see fit, if he have no male children lawfully born, unless his mind be impaired by one of these things, lunacy or old age or drugs or disease, or unless he be under the influence of a woman, or under constraint or deprived of his liberty.[*](On this law consult Hermann-Thalheim, Rechtsalterthüfmer, pp. 68 ff., with the authorities there cited. It is quoted, in part, also in Dem. 44.68, and is frequently referred to by Isaeus. See Wyse’s note on Isaeus 2.13, and Savage, The Athenian Family, p. 119. Observe that, while the law has to do with those adopted into the family, our pleader makes it refer to those adopted as citizens.)

You have heard the law, then, which does not permit a man to dispose of his property by will, if he have male children lawfully born. But these men declare that my father made this will, yet they cannot prove that they were present at the time. Another thing also deserves to be borne in mind, that it is to those who had not been adopted, but were lawfully born, that the law gives the right, in case of their being childless, to dispose of their property by will. Now my father had been adopted as a citizen by the people, so that on this account also he had not the right to make a will, especially in regard to his wife, of whom he was not even the legal guardian; and besides he had children.

Note further, that even if a man be childless, he has not the right to dispose of his property by will, unless he be of sound mind; but if he be impaired by disease or the effect of drugs, or be under the influence of a woman, or be the victim of old age or madness, or be under constraint, the laws ordain that he be incompetent. Now consider whether the will, which these men say my father made, seems to you to be the will of a man of sound mind.

Taking the lease, and nothing else, as an example, tell me whether it seems to you consistent that my father should refuse Phormio permission to carry on his business except in association with us, and yet that he should give him his wife in marriage, and thus make him a partner in his own fatherhood? And do not be surprised that, while they were arranging all else in regard to the lease so cleverly, they overlooked this. For perhaps they paid no heed to anything else, save to rob me of my money and to set my father down as a debtor to the bank; and then they did not suppose that I should be clever enough to look into these matters closely.

Now, then, consider the laws, and see from whom they ordain that betrothals should be made, that you may come to know from them also, that this fellow Stephanus has proved himself to be a false witness to a forged will.

The Law

If a woman be betrothed for lawful marriage by her father or by a brother begotten of the same father or by her grandfather on her father’s side, her children shall be legitimate. In case there be none of these relatives, if the woman be an heiress, her guardian shall take her to wife, and if she be not, that man shall be her guardian to whom she may entrust herself.

You have heard what persons this law has appointed to be guardians; and that my mother had none of these my opponents have themselves borne witness. For if there had been such, they would have produced them. Or do you suppose they would have produced false witnesses and a non-existent will, but would not have produced a brother or a grandfather or a father, if they could have done it for money? Since, then, it is plain that no one of these was living, it follows necessarily that my mother was an heiress. Now see whom the law ordains to be guardians of an heiress.

(To the clerk.) Read the law.

The Law

If one be born the son of an heiress, two years after he has reached the age of manhood[*](That is at the age of eighteen years (see note b on p. 9 of vol. 1.).) he shall assume control of the estate, and he shall make due provision for his mother’s maintenance.

The law, then, appoints that sons who have reached the age of manhood shall be guardians of their mother and shall make due provision for their mother’s maintenance. But it is clear that I was on a military expedition and in command of a trireme in your service,[*](Hence he had obviously come to manhood.) when this man married my mother.