On the Estate of Philoctemon

Argument

Philoctemon, a son of Euctemon, adopted Chaerestratus, the son of one of his two sisters and of Phanostratus, in a will which was deposited with Chaereas, the husband of the other sister, and died during his father's lifetime. When the latter also died, Chaerestratus claimed possession in accordance with the law. When Androcles lodged a protestation that the estate was not adjudicable because Euctemon had a legitimate son, namely, Antidorus,[*](This is a mistake. Antidorus was the name of one of the guardians (Isaeus 6.39, Isaeus 6.47). The names of the two alleged sons are not stated anywhere in the speech.) Chaerestratus and his supporters impugned the protestation, declaring that both Antidorus and his sister[*](Another mistake. No sister is mentioned in the speech.) were illegitimate and that the law ordains that an illegitimate son or daughter cannot inherit as next-of-kin. The discussion turns on questions of fact; for it is uncertain whether Philoctemon adopted Chaerestratus as his son, and further, whether Antidorus and the other child are legitimate.

That I am on terms of very close friendship with Phanostratus and with Chaerestratus here, I think most of you, gentlemen, are aware, but to those who are not aware of it I will give a convincing proof. When Chaerestratus[*](If the reading here is correct, Chaerestratus, who is still a young man at the date of this speech (Isaeus 6.60) and therefore cannot have taken part in the famous Sicilian expedition of 415-413 B.C., must have sailed to Sicily on some occasion of which we have no historical record. The emendation Φανόστρατος adopted by most editors, is precluded by the wordsδεομένων τούτων, which can only refer to Phanostratus and Chaerestratus; although Phanostratus might have taken part in the Sicilian Expedition, Chaerestratus could not have been then alive and therefore would not have requested the speaker to accompany his father to Sicily.) set sail for Sicily in command of a trireme, although, having sailed thither myself before, I knew well all the dangers which I should encounter, yet, at the request of these friends of mine, I sailed with him and shared his misfortune, and we were both made prisoners of war.

It would be strange if I endured all this in the face of evident danger because of my friendship and affection for them, and yet were not now to attempt so to plead their cause that you shall pass a sentence in accordance with your oath and that justice shall be done to my clients. I entreat you, therefore, to grant me indulgence and to listen to me with goodwill; for the suit is of no slight importance to them, but their most vital interests are at stake.

Philoctemon of Cephisia was a friend of Chaerestratus here, and died, having bequeathed to him his property and having adopted him as his son. Chaerestratus in accordance with the law[*](Being adopted posthumously he had to obtain a legal adjudication before he could take possession. This formality was not necessary for a son adopted in the lifetime of the testator.) claimed the estate. But, since it is lawful for any Athenian who wishes to do so to dispute an inheritance by bringing a direct action before you, and if he can establish a better claim, to obtain possession of the estate,

Androcles here put in a protestation declaring that the succession was not adjudicable, thus depriving my client of his right to claim the estate and you of your right to decide who ought to be declared heir to Philoctemon's property. He thus thinks by a single verdict and by a single suit to establish as brothers of the deceased men who have no sort of connection with him, to place himself in possession of the estate without further legal procedure, to, become legal representative of the sister of the deceased, and to annul the will.

Androcles has made a number of extraordinary allegations in his protestation; I will take one point first and prove that Philoctemon made a will and adopted Chaerestratus here as his son. Seeing that Philoctemon had no issue by the woman to whom he was married, and since, as it was war-time, he was running considerable risks, serving in the cavalry and often sailing as trierarch, he resolved to dispose of his property by will, so that he might not leave his house desolate if anything happened to him.