On the Estate of Dicaeogenes

Yet if he had not given surety in the presence of the judges, five hundred in number, and of those who were present in court, I don't know what he could have done.[*](i.e., his becoming surety for the restoration of the property was the only way in which he could hope to escape punishment for his perjury.) To prove, therefore, that they are obviously lying, we are producing as witnesses those who were present when Dicaeogenes (III.) gave up two-thirds of the estate and promised to hand it over without further dispute to Dicaeogenes' (II.) sisters, and Leochares undertook to be surety that he would actually perform what he promised. And we beseech you, gentlemen, if any of you were present on that occasion, to recollect whether we are speaking the truth and to aid us.

For, gentlemen, if Dicaeogenes (III.) is speaking the truth, what advantage was it to us to have won our case, and what disadvantage was it to my opponent to be defeated? For if he simply renounced, as he alleges, his claim to the two-thirds of the estate but did not agree to hand it over without further dispute, what did he lose by renouncing property, the value of which he was still holding? For even before he lost his case, the property which we are claiming was not in his possession but in the hands of those who bought it from him or held it on mortgage, whom he ought to have paid off and then given us our share.

That is why we insisted on his providing sureties, because we had no confidence that he would carry out his agreement. Indeed except two small buildings outside the walls and sixty plethra[*](About 13 acres.) of land in the Plain[*](The upper valley of the river Cephissus.) we have recovered nothing: the rest is in the possession of those to whom he sold or mortgaged it. We are making no attempt to eject them, because we are afraid of losing suits against them; for when we tried to eject Micion from the bath-house at the suggestion of Dicaeogenes (III.), who said that he would not confirm his title,[*](Under Athenian law the vendor undertook to guarantee the title of any property which he sold and assumed an obligation if any attempt was made to evict the purchaser.) we were fined forty minae, all through Dicaeogenes, gentlemen.

For thinking that he would not confirm any title to any of the property to which he renounced his claim in our favor in the court, we vigorously attacked Micion before the judges, being willing to run any risk of Dicaeogenes (III.) confirming Micion's title to the bath-house, and never imagining that he would do the very opposite of what he had agreed to do, our sole reason for so acting being that the sureties had been given.

Dicaeogenes (III.), however, having renounced the portion of the property which he still admits that he renounced in our favor, confirmed Micion's title to the bath-house. Thus I was in the unfortunate position of not only having received nothing from the estate but of having also lost forty minae, and left the court having been fooled by Dicaeogenes (III.). Of these things I will now produce witnesses before you.

Witnesses

Such is the treatment, gentlemen, which we have received from Dicaeogenes (III.). Leochares, who became his surety and is the cause of all our troubles, says that he never undertook to act as surety to the extent stated in the evidence against him, on the ground that it is not implied in the document drawn up before the tribunal. We, gentlemen, being hurried at the time in court, wrote down some of the points and obtained witnesses in support of others; but our opponents affirm the validity of those parts of the agreement then made which are to their own advantage, even if they are not in writing, while they deny the validity of what is contrary to their interests unless it exists in writing.

For myself, gentlemen, I am not surprised that they repudiate their verbal agreements, for they are unwilling to execute the written conditions. We will furnish another proof of our veracity. Dicaeogenes (II.) gave his sister[*](If the manuscript reading is retained, the reference must be to the giving in marriage of one of his sisters by Dicaeogenes II., since a sister of Dicaeogenes III. would have no claim to a share in the estate. The sister in question must, therefore, be the widow or divorced wife of Democles (Isaeus 5.5-9 τὴν Δημοκέος γενεμένην γυναῖκα).) in marriage to Protarchides of Potamos with a dowry of forty minae, but instead of paying the dowry to her in cash he made over to Protarchides the house which he possessed in the Cerameicus. Now this woman, the wife of Protarchides, has a right to just the same share of the estate as my mother.

Now when Dicaeogenes (III.) renounced the two-thirds of the estate in favor of the women, Leochares suggested that Protarchides should hand over to him the building which he possessed in lieu of the dowry, on the ground that he was surety, and receive from him on his wife's behalf the share of the estate which accrued to her.[*](If the interpretation suggested in the last note is correct, the meaning here can only be that the dowry of the sister of Dicaeogenes II., having originally come from him, had to return into hotchpotch before his estate could be re-divided.) He took over the building, but never paid over the share of the estate. And of these facts I will now produce Protarchides as witness.

Witness

Regarding the repairs to the bath-house and the cost of building, Dicaeogenes (III.) has declared on a former occasion, and will now perhaps again declare, that we agreed to re-imburse him his expenses but failed to do so, and that he therefore cannot get rid of the creditors and restore what he ought to us.

Now, gentlemen, we in court, when we obliged him to renounce this property, let him off the payment of the revenue he had received from it in consideration of the public services which he had performed[*](Apparently during the period when Dicaeogenes III. held the whole estate, his fortune was such that he was obliged to undertake public burdens to which he otherwise would not have been liable.) and the expenses which he had incurred on the buildings, in accordance with the decision of the judges and subsequently, under no compulsion but of our own free will, in consideration of the repairs which he had carried out, gave him as a special gift, in addition to his third share of the estate, the town-house which he sold to Philonicus for 5000 drachmae.

We made Dicaeogenes (III.) this present not because of his honesty, but as a proof that we have more regard for our relatives, even though they may be thorough rascals, than for money. For, indeed, on an earlier occasion, when it was in our power to punish Dicaeogenes (III.) and deprive him of his property, we did not wish to possess ourselves of anything which belonged to him but were satisfied with merely obtaining what was our own. He, on the other hand, when he had us in his power, robbed us of all he could and tried to ruin us, as though we were his foes and not his relatives.

We will now furnish a strong proof of our own forbearance and the injustice of Dicaeogenes. When the action against Leochares was coming on, gentlemen, in the month of Maemacterion,[*](The fifth month of the Attic calendar, October to November.) Leochares and Dicaeogenes (III.) asked us to postpone the action and submit the matter to arbitration. We, just as though we had suffered only slight injuries, agreed to this and submitted the matter to four arbitrators, two of whom were nominated by us and two by our opponents. In their presence we agreed to abide by their decision and swore an oath to this effect.

The arbitrators said, that if they could effect a compromise without putting themselves under an oath, they would do so; otherwise they would themselves also take an oath and declare what they regarded as just. The arbitrators interrogated us many times and learnt the facts. The two whom I had proposed, Diotimus and Melanopus, expressed their readiness, with or without an oath, to declare what they regarded as the truth in the statements; but the arbitrators whom Leochares had proposed refused to do so.

Yet Diopeithes, one of the two arbitrators,[*](i.e., as the context shows, one of the two arbitrators nominated by the speaker's opponents.) was brother-in-law of Leochares here and a personal enemy of mine, and had been my opponent in other actions regarding contracts, while Demaratus, his colleague, was a brother of Mnesiptolemus, who acted with Leochares as surety for Dicaeogenes (III.). These men, however, refused to pronounce their opinion, although they had made us swear that we would abide by whatever they themselves decided. Of these facts I will now produce witnesses before you.

Witnesses

Is it not extraordinary, gentlemen, that Leochares should ask you to absolve him where Diopeithes his brother-in-law condemned him? Or how can it be right for you to acquit Leochares when even his relatives did not acquit him?[*](i.e., by refusing to give an opinion in his favor.) I beseech you, therefore, to condemn Leochares, in order that we may recover what our forefathers left to us and possess not merely their names but their property also. The personal property of Leochares we do not covet.

Dicaeogenes (III.), gentlemen, has no claim to your pity for misfortune or poverty, nor does he deserve any kindness for having done any good service to the city; he has no title to your consideration on either of these grounds, as I will prove to you, gentlemen. I will show you that he is at once rich and the meanest of men in his relations both to the city and to his kinsmen and to his friends. Having received by your verdict the property which brought in a yearly revenue of eighty minae, and having enjoyed it for ten years, he refuses to admit that he has saved money out of it nor can he show how he expended it, gentlemen.

It is well worth your while to look into the matter. He acted as choregus for his tribe at the Dionysia and was fourth; as choregus in the tragic contest and Pyrrhic dances he was last.[*](In the dithyrambic contests the competition was by tribes, thus the chorus of which Dicaeogenes was choregus was placed fourth out of ten competing choruses. The tragic competition was between three choruses, not organized on a tribal basis. The Pyrrhic or Warrior Dance was executed at the Panathenaic festival; there is no evidence as to the number of competing choruses.) These were the only public services which he undertook and then only under compulsion, and this was the fine show he made as choregus in spite of his great wealth! Moreover, though so many trierarchs were appointed, he never acted in this capacity by himself nor has he ever been associated in it with another[*](After the battle of Aegospotami (405 B.C.) two citizens might jointly equip a vessel of war.) in all those years of crisis; yet others possessing less capital than he has income, act as trierarchs.

Yet, gentlemen, his large fortune was not bequeathed to him by his father but given to him by your verdict; so that, even if he were not an Athenian citizen, he was in duty bound for this reason alone to do the city good service. Though so many extraordinary contributions for the cost of the war and the safety of the city have been made by all the citizens, Dicaeogenes (III.) has never contributed anything, except that after the capture of Lechaeum,[*](One of the harbors of Corinth which was captured by the Spartans in 392 B.C.) at the request of another citizen, he promised in the public assembly a subscription of 300 drachmas, a smaller sum than Cleonymus the Cretan.[*](i.e., one who was not even an Athenian citizen.)

This sum he promised but did not pay, and his name was posted on a list of defaulters in front of the statues of the Eponymous Heroes,[*](The statues of the heroes who gave their names to the ten tribes stood below the north side of the Areopagus and above the Metroum and the Council Chamber (Paus. 1.5.1).) which was headed: “These are they who voluntarily promised the people to contribute money for the salvation of the city and failed to pay the amounts promised.” Indeed, gentlemen, what ground is there for astonishment that he deceived me, a single citizen, when he acted in this manner towards all of you united in assembly? Of these facts I will now produce witnesses before you.

Witnesses

Such are the manner and extent of the public services which Dicaeogenes has rendered to the city out of so large a fortune.

Towards his relatives he is the sort of man that you see; some of us he robbed of our property because he was stronger than we were, others he allowed to resort to paid employment through lack of the necessities of life. Everyone saw his mother seated in the shrine of Eileithyia[*](The goddess of childbirth. In his edition, Reiske (Leipzig, 1773) conjectures that the speaker is insinuating that Dicaeogenes committed incest with his own mother.) and calling down upon him reproaches which I am ashamed to mention but which he was not ashamed to justify.