On the Olive Stump

Heretofore, gentlemen of the Council, I thought it possible for a person who so desired to avoid both law-suits and anxieties by leading a quiet life; but now I find myself so unexpectedly embarrassed with accusations and with nefarious slanderers that, if such a thing could be, I conceive that even those who are yet unborn ought now be feeling alarmed for what is in store for them, since the conduct of these men brings as great a share of danger upon those who have done no wrong as upon those who are guilty of many offences.

And this trial has been made especially perplexing for me, because at first I was indicted for clearing away an olive tree from my land, and they went and made an inquiry of the men who had brought the produce of the State olives; but having failed by this method to find that I have done anything wrong, they now say it is an olive-stump that I cleared away, judging that for me this is a most difficult accusation to refute, while to them it allows more freedom to make any statement that they please.

So I am obliged, on a charge which this man has carefully planned against me before coming here, and which I have only heard at the same moment as you who are to decide on the case, to defend myself against the loss of my native land and my possessions. Nevertheless I will try to explain the affair to you from the beginning.

This plot of ground belonged to Peisander; but when his property was confiscated, Apollodorus of Megara had it as a gift from the people[*](Peisander was a leader in the revolution of the Four Hundred (411 B.C.) and his property was fortified on the counter-revolution of the Five Thousand in the same year; Apollodorus was rewarded for taking part in the assassination of Phrynichus, another of the Four Hundred.) and cultivated it for some time, until, shortly before the Thirty,[*](404 B.C.) Anticles bought it from him and let it out. I bought it from Anticles when peace had been made.[*](After the fall of the Thirty and on the intervention of Sparta, 403 B.C.)

So I consider, gentlemen, that my business is to show that, when I acquired the plot, there was neither olive-tree nor stump upon it. For I conceive that in respect of the previous time, even had there been sacred olives of old upon it, I could not with justice be penalized; since if we have had no hand in their clearance, there is no relevance in our being charged as guilty of the offences of others.

For you are all aware that, among the numerous troubles that have been caused by the war, the outlying districts were ravaged by the Lacedaemonians,[*](During the Peloponnesian War Pericles kept the people inside Athens, and allowed the Lacedaemonians to devastate Attica, as he knew that the strength of Athens was on the sea, not on the land. Our friendsmay refer to Boeotian and Thessalian troops which aided the Athenians in occasional attacks on the invaders. Cf. Thuc. 2.14,19,22, etc.) while the nearer were plundered by our friends; so how can it be just that I should be punished now for the disasters that then befell the city?

And in particular, this plot of land, as having been confiscated during the war, was unsold for over three years: it is not surprising if they uprooted the sacred olives at a time in which we were unable to safeguard even our personal property. You are aware, gentlemen—especially those of you who have the supervision of such matters,—that many plots at that time were thick with private and sacred olive-trees which have now for the most part been uprooted, so that the land has become bare; and although the same people have owned these plots in the peace as in the war, you do not think fit to punish them for the up-rooting done by others.

And yet, if you exculpate those who have cultivated the land throughout the whole period, surely those who bought it in the time of the peace ought to leave your court unpunished.

Well now, gentlemen, although I might speak at length on what had previously occurred, I think these remarks will suffice: but when I took over the plot, after an interval of five days I let it out to Callistratus, in the archonship of Pythodorus: [*](404-403 B.C.)

he cultivated it for two years, and had taken over no olive-tree, either private or sacred, nor any olive-stump. In the third year it was worked by Demetrius here for a twelvemonth; in the fourth I let it to Alcias, a freedman of Antisthenes, who is dead. After that Proteas too hired it in the same state during three years. Now, please step this way, witnesses.

WitnessesWell now, since the termination of that time I have cultivated it myself. My accuser says that in the archonship of Souniades[*](397-396 B.C.) an olive-stump was uprooted by me. And the previous cultivators, who rented it from me for a number of years, have testified to you that there was no stump on the plot. I ask you, how could one convict the accuser more patently of lying? For it is not possible that the cultivator who came after cleared away what was not there before.

Now formerly, gentlemen, whenever people declared me to be a shrewd, exact man who would do nothing at random or without calculation, I would take it hard, feeling that these terms were wide of my true character; but now I should be glad if you all held this opinion of me, so that you should expect me, if I did set about such an act as this, to consider what profit I stood to get by clearing away the stump, and what loss by preserving it, what I should have achieved if I went undetected, and what I should suffer at your hands if I were exposed.

For in every case such acts are done, not for mere mischief, but for profit; and that is the proper direction for your inquiry, and the prosecution should make that the basis of their accusation, by showing what benefit accrued to the wrongdoers.

Yet this man is quite unable to show either that I was compelled by poverty to venture on such an act, or that the plot was declining in value to me while the stump existed, or that it was obstructing vines or close to a building, or that I was unapprised of the dangers awaiting me in your court.

And if I had attempted anything of the kind, I should be openly exposed as having incurred many severe penalties for in the first place, it was daylight when I uprooted the stump,—as though I had not to do it unseen by all, but must let all the Athenians know! If the act had been merely disgraceful, one might perhaps have disregarded the passers-by; but the case was one of my risking, not disgrace, but the severest penalty.

And surely I must have been the most wretched of human creatures if my own servants were to be no longer my slaves, but my masters for the rest of my life, since they would be privy to that act of mine; so that, however great might be their offences against me, I should have been unable to get them punished. For I should have been fully aware that it was in their power at once to be avenged on me and to win their own freedom by informing against me.[*](Cf. Lys. 5.5, For Callias: Defense of a Charge of Sacrilege.)

Furthermore, supposing I had been of a mind to be heedless of my domestics, how should I have dared, when so many persons had rented the plot, and all were acquainted with the facts, to clear away the stump for the sake of a petty profit, while there was no statute of limitations[*](In non-religious cases, a limit of time might be prescribed by law beyond which a crime was not chargeable to anyone. Dem. 18.269.) to protect them, so that all who had worked the plot were alike concerned in the preservation of the stump, and hence they would be able, if anyone accused them, to transfer the blame to their successor? But as it is, they have manifestly absolved me,[*](By not accusing me for their own exculpation.) and have thus taken upon themselves a share of the charge in case they are lying.

Again, if I had settled this matter by arrangement, how could I have prevailed on all the passers-by, or the neighbors who not only know of each other what is open for all to see, but even get information of what we try to keep hidden from the knowledge of anyone? Now, some of those people are my friends, but others are at feud with me about my property:

these persons he ought to have produced as witnesses, instead of merely bringing these hazardous accusations; for he says I stood by while my domestics hewed down the stems and the wagoner loaded up the wood and took it right away.

But surely, Nicomachus, you ought, at the time, both to have called up those who were present as witnesses, and to have exposed the affair: you would then have left me without any defence, while on your own part, if I was your enemy, you would have achieved by this means your vengeance upon me while if you were acting in the interest of the State, you would in this way have convicted me without being regarded as a slanderer. If you were looking for profit, you would have made the largest then;