Against Philon, On his Scrutiny

She demurred to committing herself to his care after her death, but as she had confidence in Antiphanes, who was no connection of hers, she gave him three minae of silver for her burial, ignoring this man, who was her own son. Obviously, of course, she was convinced that he would not perform the last duties even on the ground of his relationship.

Now I ask you, if a mother,—who is naturally most willing to tolerate even an injury at the hands of her own children, and who counts little benefits as great gains because she assesses their behavior by affection rather than logic,—believed that this man would seek his profit from her even in death, what should be your feeling about him?

For when a man commits such offences in regard to his own relations, what would he do in regard to strangers? To prove that these also are true facts, hear the statement of the actual person who received the money and buried her.

TestimonyWhat inducement, then, could you have for approving this man? Because he has committed no offence ? But he is guilty of the gravest crimes against his country. Or do you think he will reform? Then, I say, let him reform first in his bearing towards the city, and claim a seat on the Council later, when he has done her a service as signal as the wrong that he did her before. The saner course is to recompense everyone for his services after they have been performed; for I consider it monstrous that for the offences which he has already committed he is never to pay the penalty, but for the benefits which he intends to confer he is to be already possessed of honor.

Or is it to make the citizens better when they see all men honored alike,—is this why he is to be approved? But the danger is that good men, when they observe that they and the bad are honored alike, will desist from their good behavior, expecting that the same persons who honor the wicked may well be forgetful of the virtuous.

And this further point is worthy of your attention,—that whereas anyone who had betrayed a fort or a ship or an army which happened to have in it some part of our people, would be visited with the extreme penalty, this man, who has betrayed the whole city, is planning not merely to escape requital but even to obtain honor! But surely anyone who has betrayed liberty in the flagrant manner of this man deserves to be faced with a judgement awarding him, not a seat on the Council, but slavery and the heaviest punishment.

He argues, so I am told, that, if it was a crime to absent himself at that crisis, we should have had a law expressly dealing with it, as in the case of all other crimes. He does not expect you to perceive that the gravity of the crime was the reason why no law was proposed to deal with it. For what orator would ever have conceived, or lawgiver have anticipated, that any of the citizens would be guilty of so grave an offence?

So, I suppose, if one should desert one’s post when the city itself was not in danger, but was rather endangering another people,[*](i.e., we are to suppose, forsooth, that desertion is a crime only when the city is so far from being in danger as to be at war with another city.) a law would have been made condemning that as a grievous crime; but if one deserted the city itself when the city itself was in danger, we should have had no law against this! Certainly we should, if there had been a thought that any of the citizens would ever commit such a crime.

Not a man but would have reason to rebuke you, gentlemen, if, after honoring in a manner worthy of the city our resident aliens for having supported the democracy beyond the requirements of their duty, you are not going to inflict on this man, for having betrayed the city in violation of his duty, if not some heavier punishment of another kind, at least the dishonor which you hold over him today.

Recall to your minds what reason you can have for honoring those who have proved themselves good servants of the State and for dishonoring those who serve her ill. In either case the distinction has been made not so much for the sake of those who have come into the world, as of those who are yet to come, in order that they may strive to become worthy by studious effort, and in no single direction may attempt to be base.

Reflect, moreover, on this: what kind of oaths do you think he would regard, when by his act he has betrayed his ancestral gods? Or how could he give good counsel on our State affairs, when he did not even desire to liberate his country? Or what secrets would he keep, when he did not even choose to obey public orders? How can it be suitable that this man, who was not even the last to come at the call of danger, should be placed in front of those who achieved our success to receive this honor today? It would be deplorable if he, who accounted the whole body of our citizens as nothing, should not in his single person be disqualified by you.

I see certain persons who are preparing today to support him and to plead with you, since they were not able to seduce me; but in those days of your dangers and sorest struggles, when the constitution itself was at stake and you had to contend not merely for seats on the Council but for freedom itself, they did not plead with him then to support both you and the commonwealth, and to betray neither his country nor the Council, to which he now demands admission without any right, since our success was achieved by others.

He alone, gentlemen of the Council, will have no fair cause for complaint if he is not admitted: for it is not you who are debarring him from honor today; it is he who deprived himself of it, at the time when he declined to come, with a zeal such as brings him now for the drawing of the lots, to take his stand with you then as a champion of the Council.

I believe that what I have said is sufficient; and yet there are many things that I have omitted. But I am confident that even without these you will make for yourselves the decision that is best for the city. To judge of those who are worthy to sit on the Council you need no other test than yourselves and the civic character which enabled you to pass your own scrutiny. For this man’s conduct sets up a standard that is novel and foreign to all democracy.