Defense Against a Charge of Subverting the Democracy

Lysias

Lysias. Lamb, W.R.M., translator. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1930.

I can find full excuse for you, gentlemen of the jury, if on hearing such statements and remembering past events you are equally incensed against all those who remained in the city. But I am surprised at my accusers: they neglect their own concerns to attend to those of others, and now, though they know for certain who are guilty of nothing and who have committed many offences, they seek to persuade you into holding this same opinion about us all.

Now, if they conceive that they have charged me with everything that the city has suffered at the hands of the Thirty, I consider them to be speakers of no ability; for they have not mentioned so much as a small fraction of what has been perpetrated by those men. But if their statements imply that I had any connection with those things, I shall prove that their words are nothing but lies, and that on my part I behaved as the best citizen in the Peiraeus would have done, if he had remained in the city.

I beg you, gentlemen, not to share the views of the slander-mongers. Their business is to inculpate even those who have committed no offence, —for it is out of them especially that they would make money,[*](An inoffensive, peaceable man would usually prefer paying an informer blackmail to undergoing the trouble and risk of a legal action. Cf. Xen. Mem. 2.9.1.)—while yours is to allow an equal enjoyment of civic rights to those who have done no wrong; for in this way you will secure to the established constitution the greatest number of allies.

And I claim, gentlemen, if I am found to have been the cause of none of our disasters, but rather to have performed many services to the State with both my person and my purse, that at any rate I should have that support from you which is the just desert, not merely of those who have served you well, but also of those who have done you no wrong.

Now, I consider that I have a strong justification in the fact that, if my accusers were able to convict me of wrongdoing in private life, they would not charge me with the misdeeds of the Thirty: they would not see occasion to traduce others on the score of what those persons have perpetrated, but only to requite the actual wrongdoers. But in fact they conceive that your resentment against those men is sufficient to involve in their ruin those who have done no harm at all.

I, however, hold that, just as it would be unfair, when some men have been the source of many benefits to the city, to let others carry off the reward of your honors or your thanks, so it is unreasonable, when some have continually done you harm, that their acts should bring reproach and slander upon those who have done no wrong. The city has enough enemies already existing, who count it a great gain to have people brought up on slanderous charges.

I will now try to explain to you who of the citizens are inclined, in my view, to court oligarchy, and who democracy. This will serve as a basis both for your decision and for the defence that I shall offer for myself; for I shall make it evident that neither under the democracy nor under the oligarchy has my conduct suggested any inclination to be disloyal to your people.

Now, first of all, you should reflect that no human being is naturally either an oligarch or a democrat: whatever constitution a man finds advantageous to himself, he is eager to see that one established; so it largely depends on you whether the present system finds an abundance of supporters. That this is the truth, you will have no difficulty in deducing from the events of the past.

For consider, gentlemen of the jury, how many times the leaders of both governments[*](The oligarchy of the Four Hundred and the despotism of the Thirty.) changed sides. Did not Phrynichus, Peisander and their fellow demagogues, when they had committed many offences against you, proceed, in fear of the requital that they deserved, to establish the first oligarchy? And did not many of the Four Hundred, again, join in the return of the Peiraeus party, while some, on the other hand, who had helped in the expulsion of the Four Hundred, actually appeared among the Thirty? Some, too, of those who had enlisted for Eleusis marched out with you to besiege their own comrades!

There is thus no difficulty in concluding, gentlemen, that the questions dividing men are concerned, not with politics, but with their personal advantage. You should therefore apply this test in the probation of your citizens: examine their use of the citizenship under the democracy, and inquire whether they stood to benefit by a change in the government. In this way you will most justly form your decision upon them.

Now, in my opinion, all those who had been disfranchised under the democracy, or deprived of their property, or subjected to any other misfortune of the sort, were bound to desire a different system, in the hope that the change would be some benefit to themselves. But in the case of those who have done the people many good services, and never a single hurt, and who deserve your grateful favors instead of punishment for what they have achieved, it is not fair to harbor the slanders aimed at them, not even if all who have charge of public affairs allege that they favor oligarchy.

Now I, gentlemen of the jury, never suffered any misfortune during that time,[*](The six years between the restoration of the democracy in 410 B.C. and the tyranny of the Thirty in 404 B.C.) either private or public, which could lead me, through eagerness to be relieved of present ills, to court a change in our system. I have equipped a warship five times, fought in four sea-battles, contributed to many war levies, and performed my other public services as amply as any citizen.

But my purpose in spending more than was enjoined upon me by the city was to raise myself the higher in your opinion, so that if any misfortune should chance to befall me I might defend myself on better terms. Of all this credit I was deprived under the oligarchy; for instead of regarding those who had bestowed some benefit on the people as worthy recipients of their favors, they placed in positions of honor the men who had done you most harm, as though this were a pledge by which they held us bound. You ought all to reflect on those facts and refuse to believe the statements of these men: you should rather judge each person by the record of his actions.

For I, gentlemen, was not one of the Four Hundred: I challenge anyone who wishes amongst my accusers to come forward and convict me of this. Neither, again, will anyone prove that, when the Thirty were established, I sat on the Council or held any office. Surely, if I chose not to hold office when I could have done so, I deserve to be honored by you today. If, on their part, the men who were in power at that time preferred not to give me a place in the government, could I find a more signal proof than this of the falsehood of my accusers?

Furthermore, gentlemen of the jury, you ought also to take account of the rest of my conduct. For amid the misfortunes of the city my behavior was such that, if everyone had been of one mind with me, not one of you would have experience of a single misfortune. I had no hand during the oligarchy, you will find, either in the arrest of anybody, or in taking vengeance upon any of my enemies, or in conferring a favor on any of my friends,

—and in that there is nothing to wonder at, for at that time it was difficult to confer favors, though an act of mischief was easy for anyone who wished. Again, you will find that I did not place the name of a single Athenian on the black list,[*](The Thirty drew up a list of citizens, other than the privileged 3000, who were suspected of opposing or disapproving the violent measures of the cabal.) or obtain a decree of arbitration against anyone, or enrich myself by means of your misfortunes. Yet surely, if you are incensed against the authors of your past troubles, it is reasonable that those who have done no mischief should stand the higher in your opinion.

And indeed, gentlemen of the jury, I consider that I have given the democracy the strongest pledge of my attachment. For if I did no mischief at that time, when ample licence for it was allowed, surely I shall now make every effort to be a good citizen in the full knowledge that, if I am guilty of wrong, I shall incur immediate punishment. But in fact I have continually held to this resolve, —under an oligarchy, not to covet the property of others, and under a democracy, to spend my own upon you with zeal.

I consider, gentlemen, that you would not be justified in hating those who have suffered nothing under the oligarchy, when you can indulge your wrath against those who have done your people mischief; or in regarding as enemies those who did not go into exile instead of those who expelled you, or those who were anxious to save their own property instead of those who stripped others of theirs, or those who stayed in the city with a view to their own safety instead of those who took part in the government for the purpose of destroying others. If you think it your duty to destroy the men whom they passed over, not one of the citizens will be left to us.

You ought also to take account of this further point, gentlemen of the jury: you are all aware that under the previous democracy there were many in the ministry who robbed the Treasury; while some accepted bribes at your expense, and others by malicious informations estranged your allies.[*](For this kind of mischief-making cf. Isoc. 15.318.) Now, if the Thirty had kept their punishments for these cases, you would have held them yourselves to be honest men: but when in fact you found them deliberately oppressing the people because of the offences of those persons, you were indignant; for you considered it monstrous that the crimes of the few should be spread over the whole city.

It is not right, therefore, that you should resort to those offences which you saw them committing, or regard those deeds, which you deemed unjust when done to you, as just when you do them to others. No: let your feeling towards us after your restoration be the same as you had towards yourselves in your exile; for by this means you will produce the utmost harmony amongst us, the power of the city will be at its highest, and you will vote for what will be most distressing to your enemies.