On the Estate of Menecles

Isaeus

Isaeus. Forster, Edward Seymour, translator. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1927 (1962 printing).

All other men, whether Greek or barbarians, regard this law about adoption as a good one and therefore all make use of it; but my uncle here is not ashamed to deprive his own brother of this right to adopt a son, the enjoyment of which no one has ever grudged even those who were no relatives at all.

I think that my opponent, if anyone were to ask him what he would have done in the same circumstances as Menecles, would have nothing to say except that he would have adopted someone who was likely to look after him while he lived and bury him when he died; and it is obvious that the adoption would have been carried out under the same law as mine was. He himself, then, if he had been childless, would have adopted a son; but when Menecles acts in the same manner, he declares that he was insane and under the influence of a woman when he adopted me.

Is it not clear that he is talking in an abominable manner? I am of opinion that it is much rather my opponent who is insane by reason of the line of argument which he employs and the things which he does. For he is clearly arguing the contrary of the laws and of justice and of what he himself would have done, and is not ashamed of making the law about adoption valid for himself, while he seeks to render this same law of no effect for his brother.

Next, it is right, gentlemen, that you should hear what cause of quarrel my opponent has that he seeks to make his own brother childless. For if he has any quarrel with me about my name, and repudiates the suggestion that I am to be called Menecles' son, is he not the victim of mean jealousy? But if it is a question of money with him, let him point out to you what land or building or house Menecles left behind of which I am now in possession. But if he left no such property, but my opponent took from him in his lifetime all that remained after he had paid off the money due to the orphan, is he not clearly convicted of shameless conduct?

I will put the facts of the case before you. When it became necessary to pay back the money to the orphan, and Menecles did not possess the requisite sum, and interest had accumulated against him over a long period, he was for selling the land. My opponent, seizing the opportunity and being desirous to pick a quarrel with him because he had adopted me, tried to prevent the land from being sold, in order that it might be held as a pledge, and that Menecles might be obliged to cede the possession of it to the orphan. My opponent, therefore, claimed a part of the property from Menecles, though he had never previously made any such claim, and tried to prevent the purchasers from completing the purchase.

Menecles was annoyed, as I can well imagine, and was obliged to reserve the portion which my opponent claimed; the rest he sold to Philippus of Pithos for seventy minae and thus paid off the orphan, giving him one talent and seven minae out of the price of the property; and he brought an action against his brother for restraining the sale. After long discussion had taken place and much bad feeling been aroused, we thought it best, in order that no one might say that I was avaricious and that I was setting these men, who were brothers, against one another, to submit the matter to the arbitration of my opponent's brother-in-law and our friends.

The latter told us that, if we were to entrust them to decide the rights of the case, they would refuse to act as arbitrators, for they did not wish to quarrel with either party; if, however, we would allow them to decide what was in the interest of all, they consented to act. So we, in order, as we thought, to get rid of the matter, entrusted the decision to them on these terms.

They, after having sworn an oath to us at the altar of Aphrodite at Cephale[*](This sanctuary is mentioned on an inscription found near the E. coast of Attica about 12 miles N. of Sunium.) that they would decide what was to our common interest, gave as their verdict that we should give up what my opponent claimed and hand it over to him as a free gift; for they declared that the only way of settling the matter was that my opponent should receive a share of Menecles' property.