Sections Twelve to Fourteen

Grammar

Nearly all the most important accidence has occurred by now (aorist and future passives, all perfect tenses, and all subjunctives are still to come in Sections 12-14).

Syntax now begins to be amplified and explained. It is worth asking students to make a separate section of notes devoted to essential, basic syntax, such as may be required for GCSE or advanced classes in Greek authors. This can be completed as different constructions are met. A ‘basic syntax’ might be as follows:

Syntax summary Indirect statement

GE references

(a) oti + indicative (may be optative after historic Ch. i and later main verb - GE 265)

(b) infinitive (change of subject in accusative) GE 235

(c) participle (change of subject in accusative) GE 247

Rule of thumb: (a) speech (except ^npO; (b) thought (+ ^npO; (c) knowledge. This is for guidance only, not a rule. NB: tenses throughout are those of direct speech.

Indirect command

Infinitive as English, negative p^ as in direct commands.

Indirect questions

Question word + indicative (may be optative after an historic main verb). The tense is that of the direct question.

Verbs of fearing

(a)



GE293 GE293 GE 293; 400


infinitive where English uses an infinitive

(b) past/present fear: p^ + indicative

(c) future fear: p^ + subjunctive/optative (after a primary/historic main verb).

Indefinite clauses

av + subjunctive in primary time; optative in GE 282; 300; 398 (ii) historic time.

Temporal clauses

Present/past - indicative; future = an indefinite GE 398 (i), (ii) clause.

NB npvv = before: infinitive (change of subject in GE 252; 398 (i) accusative); until: use the temporal construction.


Purpose clauses

(a) future participle; GE 251; 391

(b) vva/ra;/onra; + subjunctive/optative (according to GE 298-9, 399 sequence).

Result clauses

(a) infinitive (negative pn) GE 314-7, 396

(b) indicative (negative ov) - if occurrence of the result is stressed.

Conditional clauses

ev + optative/imperfect indicative/aorist indicative; GE 241-2; 254-6 av in main clause, with optative/imperfect indicative/ aorist indicative. See grid in Section 12g.

This is a suitable moment to point students towards the Reference Grammar and Language Surveys in GE. Particularly useful for accidence is Reference Grammar 353-90, and for syntax 392-406. Language Surveys 420-2 are relevant to the current work on subjunctives and optatives.

This may also be a good point to move over to morphology charts if they have not yet been used. Students can encourage themselves by filling in what they know, and this acts as good revision of basic accidence before the syntactical complexities of the rest of the Course.

Section Twelve A

Background

Lawcourts 6.39-58; 4.18-20; 1.17-18; law v. lawless 8.18; courts and holidays 3.42

On Apollodoros’ history 5.70, and cf. 6.45-6; 7.42 Decrees etc. in ayopa, 2.35

Grammar

Aorist passive varnpi, Ka0varnpi

Discussion

The Neaira prosecution was a complicated case; it is here considerably simplified. Further detail is most easily found in C. Carey, Apollodoros Against Neaira [Demosthenes] 59 (Oxbow Books/Aris and Phillips, 1992).





At the end of Section 11, ask students to read the introduction carefully (138­43); this is a complicated case needing some thorough preliminary work in order to get the most out of it.

Note: it is possible to cut this section further, if time presses. The main sections to cut (cut = translation or summary by the teacher) are those with the dialogue between dikasts, since (with one exception) no new accidence, syntax or facts of the case are introduced. However, the dikast dialogues very effectively reinforce accidence etc., and in this complicated case they are very helpful. Thus Section 12a, b and e may be ‘cut’ (Section 12e contains the first indirect statement using the infinitive, but this occurs frequently later); 12h may be also ‘cut’. Section 13g must not be cut (it introduces the perfect middle and passive); 13c, d, h, i and 14c, d and f may all be cut, if necessary.

Commentary

p. 144 line

I KeAeuovro; rov K^puKo;: if explanation of the genitive absolute has been postponed from Section 11, it should be given here.

K^puKo;: cf. the way in which citizens were summoned into the Assembly in Section 11. The dikasts have clearly already been selected when this scene opens.

aAAo; aAAov: translate ‘different’ or ‘one ... another’ when more than one aAAos occurs in a phrase.

2 ypa^v: generally anything written; here specifically ‘indictment’, cf. writ (in English used now only in a legal context). It used to be a past participle, until at least the last century. Cf. Fitzgerald’s Omar Khayyam: ‘The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on.’

3 £repo; ... £repov: if aAAoc; aAAov has been grasped, this should pose no problems.

7 5/Ao;: cf. ochlocracy.

7 £vTev^ao0ai: students should guess the meaning if they are guided towards the stem xu%-; hence ‘happen on’, ‘meet’.

8laTp^povTl: see on p. 129.46.

8 aneipo;: the opposite of Eprceipoc;.

II £^£orai: this will probably be taken as e^eaxi. Revise the future of eipv here; it does not occur in the text very often.

11 xp^a: lit. ‘what a (thing of a) crowd’, i.e. xp^pa is otiose in English.

Section Twelve B

Background

Meddling 6.54 Persuasion 5.44; 8.17-20

Commentary

p. 145 line

1 5iKn: a case was referred to either as a ypa^n (usually containing charges that threatened the state), or as a SvKn (usually a more personal case) - cf. our criminal and civil actions. Note that even a charge of high treason would still be brought by a private citizen; the state had no officials whose duty it was to bring such cases, collect the evidence and conduct the prosecution. Sfcn is used here as a general word for a trial.

2 rcoAurcpdy^wv: deduce this from the constituent parts. Apollodoros, son of a wealthy banker Pasion, was a prominent litigant. He appears in several surviving cases, including two by Demosthenes (perhaps the reason why this speech was preserved in the Demosthenic corpus).

3 8ia9£p€i: cf. Latin differo, whence ‘differ’.

4 koivoc;: the Koine was the common version of Greek used throughout the Greek-speaking world after the conquests of Alexander; it is the language used in the Septuagint and the New Testament; evvoia - ev + vovc;; ayravvZopai - as for ayrav, p. 27.27.

5 opKoc: cf. exorcism.

drc£8o^v: should be deduced from the stem -So-.

6 £U€py€T€iv: ev + epyov; Kvpioc; - see on p. 91.25.

p. 146 line

13 trc^p^a (cf. line 17 apxopevoi) is worth analysing closely here. It will recur, and acts as a good test of whether students can work back to the lexicon form (see note on p. 146.5).

13- 15 Note that vengeance was a permissible reason for starting legal action. Cf. the reaction a modern lawyer would receive if he tried opening a case like that! Note also that all three possible openings for Apollodoros quote personal motives.

19 5rcw<; + future indicative needs to be mentioned here as ‘make sure that’ (it is explained in the grammar for Section 12g).

20 npoot^i^ tov vovv: deduce the meaning from the three ideas: ‘hold - mind - towards’. Revise e%®, E^ra/axnara, ea%ov (ax-).

Note the apparent informality - jurors pushing, shoving, chattering - as a contrast with the solemnity of modern procedure.

Section Twelve C

Background

Revenge 4.1-4; friends and enemies 4.14-16 Poverty 4.21; aTipva 4.12, 6.55-8

Commentary p. 146 line

1 ypa^v: note the prominence given to this word, underlining the fact that this is a ‘criminal’ case.

2 ^8iK^0nv: elicit the past tense (augment), and ask what the corresponding form of navra would be. Revise augmentation here if necessary (adding e-, lengthening vowels etc.).

3 £ox&tou<;: cf. eschatology.

KaT€OTnv: varnpi is dealt with in this section. The basic, all-purpose hint is to say that if varnpi has an object, it means ‘place, set up’; if not, it means ‘stand, be set up, set myself up'. This summary table may be useful:



Transitive

Intransitive


Pres. act. lorrijii, ‘I set up’

Pres. mid. lorajiai, ‘I am standing up (= setting myself)’


Fut. act. axr\ou>, ‘I will set up’

Fut. mid. azf[oo)iai, ‘I will stand up’


Imperf. act. icrnyv, ‘I was setting up’

Imperf. mid. iatapriv, ‘I was standing up’


Wk. aor. act. eaxr\aa, ‘I set up’*

Str. aor. act. eatryv, ‘I stood up’


Wk. aor. mid. eariqaaiir|v, ‘I set X up for myself

Wk. aor. mid. turns strong

<--- transitive -«--------- drives out -«-----

weak




Similarly:





KaSiorripi els, ‘I put someone into a state’ KaGuxtoqxai eis, ‘I get into a state’

*Given the commonness of the aorist emphasize the stem-difference between earriaa (atria-) and £otr|v {<sxa-/axx\-) and make this the starting-point for discussion.

There is nothing terribly difficult here; two further points should be made: (a) there is vowel shortening in the plural (as on Section 10a, ad init.(2), SvSrapi), and (b) the aorist paradigm Earnv shares endings with ‘root’-aorist EPnv (GE 209). The future and weak aorist are absolutely regular. It pays to rehearse conjugations and to establish that the third person plural of the strong and weak aorist are identical (Earnaav).

4 0uyaT€p€^: Why were daughters and wife at risk? Largely since one of the greatest causes of shame to an Athenian citizen father was to have daughters unmarried because he could not find an adequate dowry.

5 trc^p^a may be found difficult to recognize: establish vn- as a prefix to be ignored while finding the lexicon form; then point to -aa = weak aorist; deaug­ment to apxra. This prepares for l.l l.

8 aTi^a<;: if unable to pay a fine, Athenian citizens could lose their civil rights. This meant that they had no legal protection at all against assault, theft etc.: only the injured party could bring a Sfan, and he must be a citizen.

12-13 Note that it was laudable to harm one’s enemies (Text p. 258.184-5); contrast this with Christianity. The same sentiment occurs later in a Homer extract.

Section Twelve D

Background

aTipia 4.12; 6.55-8 yn^iapa 6.42-5 Kupioc; of a family 5.11 rcpoi^ 5.16

Family and women in general 5.9-31 State and religion 3.56-7 Marriage and property 5.3, 16

Discussion

P. 148: explain the words in the English introduction: ‘an illegal change in the law’. Note the ‘catch-22’ situation here: any change to existing laws must contra­dict existing laws and thus be illegal. Hence very many charges of ypa^n napavoprav are recorded. Anyone proposing a change in the law more or less put his head on the block (cf. Dikaiopolis literally doing so in Akharnians, and the unseen or sight passage, from Demosthenes (Test Exercise 14) on the Lokrian method of changing law).

Commentary

p. 148 line

1 Apollodoros had proposed that the EKKAnaia should decide by a free vote whether the budget surplus should be devoted entirely to prosecuting the war against Philip, or split between that and state functions. This was accepted by the PouA^ and due to be ratified by the EKKAnaia when Stephanos charged him with illegality. His ‘false witnesses’ (1ine 3) claimed that Apollodoros owed money to the Treasury and (in common fashion) made many other irrelevant charges against him. Whether true or false, they were enough to blacken Apollodoros’ name and secure a conviction.

3 rcapaoxo^Evo;: ax- as the aorist stem of exra often causes trouble. Revision of the principal parts, with a clear distinction between evxov imperfect, and eaxov aorist, pays dividends here.

The size of fine (xipnpa) was fixed for certain offences; for others, e.g. the ypa^n napavoprav, it would vary according to the alleged seriousness of the offence. In this case, prosecutor proposed one penalty, defence another, and a straight vote decided the penalty imposed. The most celebrated instance of this was Socrates’ trial: after conviction, Meletos demanded the death penalty,





Socrates (after first suggesting that the appropriate ‘penalty’ was that he should be maintained at state expense as being invaluable to the community) suggested 30 pvat on securities of friends, Plato among them.

7 The explicit reason for fearing nevvav is given here.

p. 149 line

14 Note the -avSp- contrasted with av0prarcrav (see on p. 10.19).

16 KaTa9pov€i: elicit from KaTa (down) and ^povera.

17 napa vo^ou^KaTa vo^ou^: it is worth making a special note of these, as students regularly confuse them. The ypa^ napavoprav should help fix the meanings.

18 9&okm: use the ^a- stem from ^npv to fix the meaning (cf. GE 397, note on tenses). Students may need help with the accusative and infinitives here (to be learnt in Section 12e). Encourage a literal translation first (‘I allege Stephanos to be -ing’), then make it more idiomatic. Alert students to the need for the English ‘that’, which does not occur in the Greek. They have, of course, been used to oti.

19 Children were introduced at an early age to the ‘phratries’ (groups of families, a subdivision within the deme) and, at eighteen, to the demes, to be enrolled as full citizens. This was the only way in which a check was kept upon those who held full citizenship, and upon the fathers who had introduced them to the ‘phratries’ in the first place.

22 Note the ‘inverted’ oti clause: this inversion (noun clause before main verb) is very common in oratory. It stresses an important fact/claim, and is frequent in Neaira.

23 £rci8€i^ai: from the root SevKvupi comes the noun Setypa cf. paradigm.

Section Twelve E

Grammar

Accusative (nominative) and infinitive

If time is short, this section can be translated for the students, though indirect statement constructions with the infinitive must be highlighted while doing so (lines 3-4 contain a good example of the juxtaposition of an accusative + infinitive and a nominative + infinitive). If students are translating, insist that their trans­lations are in the form ‘... that...’.

Commentary

p. 150 line

6 £W:x0n: this is usually deduced, but point out how Aey- becomes Aex- before a 0.

8 €K8ovvai: the usual word for giving in marriage; note here because it recurs.

9 Wherein lies the irreverence towards the gods (as in p. 149.21)? (a) in falsely claiming the paternity of Neaira’s children, probably under oath, thus offending Zeus Horkios; (b) in the later incident with Theogenes (13e-f); (c) in the betrayal of one’s heritage: the land is given by its tutelary gods into the protection of its ‘true’ inhabitants (citizens), to be passed on to future citizens.

12 If EKSovvai has been carefully noted above, av-eK-Sorouc; will fall into place.

15- 17 The genitive absolute here may still need explanation - not many exam­ples have been met so far.

Section Twelve F

Background

auvoiKevv 5.19

Lysias 1.82; 2.24

Mysteries 3.50-2

Witnesses and evidence 6.47-8

Greek alphabet and writing 8.2-3, 16-17

Grammar

T(0npi

Discussion

The law quoted on p. 151 needs some comment. ‘If a ^evoc; lives with an aarn in any way at all... ’: this does not mean that a ^evoc; could not even be the lover of an aarn, or later that an aaroc; could not have a ^evn mistress (Pericles’ Aspasia was a Milesian). ‘Live with’ = ‘live as husband/wife’, and the ‘in any way at all’ means ‘in any way trying to pass off the relationship as a legitimate marriage’. That one third of the man’s property should go to the person securing the conviction was a clear incentive to sniff out any alien husband; but one third of an alien wife’s property would not (probably) amount to much, hence the fine in addition, since otherwise the aaToc had little to lose (his wife enslaved, her property forfeit) in comparison with the ^evoc; (whose wife’s property would legally be accounted his, so he would be enslaved and their joint property forfeit).

Laws were read out by a court official as the speaker requested them. There was no judge to guide the dikasts on whether the law was relevant (or even whether it existed!), though the relevance and genuineness here cannot be doubted. Speakers had a time limit for their speeches, but this excluded time used in reading laws, depositions or other evidence. Speakers thus had to ‘clock-watch’, as Apollodoros does a little later in the original speech, saying ‘if there is enough water left in the clock’ (this does not, however, appear in our text).

Commentary

p. 152 line

4 Nikarete was a freed woman and high-class ‘madame’; Neaira was one of a batch of seven girls bought and trained by her, then subsequently sold.

7 £0nK€v: elicit the -0n- stem (several examples were used in Section 9); ri0npi is dealt with in this section.

8 £8o^v: ‘seem good’ is a meaning often neglected, and needed here.

^u^oai: note Lysias’ motive: when hiring Metaneira and paying for his session

with her, he benefited her little, but Nikarete much. If he could get Metaneira to Athens for the Mysteries, his expenditure upon her could be personal remuner­ation for her.

9 pouAo^£vro: insist that this is assigned to its proper noun.

10 £ft€io0n: this may cause trouble (some confuse it with etceiS'h). It is valuable to work this back into its lexicon form.

13 fioxw€To: since he would have ‘shamed his wife’, who, within the house, was, if not supreme, highly influential (cf. Section 17).

14 Note again the care for the old: his mother was living in the same house. 15-16 No precise indication is given of the age of Neaira at the time (nor have we any idea at what age prostitutes started work), but note how Apollodoros (a) conveys coarsely and bluntly that Neaira was already a prostitute and (b) uses the unqualified comparative veraTepa, ‘rather young’, with the implication that she was too young to be on the streets. Apollodoros gives no reason for her presence in Athens - she merely came along with them, perhaps as a friend of Metaneira (she could have acted as a slave of Metaneira for the duration of the trip), perhaps to secure a portion of Metaneira’s payment from Lysias in order to return it to Nikarete, their owner.

11 Evidence: this was merely read out in court by an official. There was no opportunity to cross-question those testifying, or any possibility of assessing whether it was all a pack of lies: the only constraint upon those giving evidence was the oath which they had to swear - and this was regarded as solemn and binding. Yet numerous cases cite ‘false witnesses’ - as indeed Apollodoros has already done - and while this citation may itself be false, instances must have occurred for the suggestion to carry any weight at all.

Section Twelve G

Background

Solon 1.20; 6.23 Hippias 5.48 Sophists 5.43-9; 8.22-3 Evidence 8.31

Grammar

Future remote unfulfilled condition Wishes for future orcrac; + future indicative Optative of evpi, evpi, ovSa

This is one piece of dikast dialogue that must be read: conditionals are exercised here. Establish firmly the different usages of the optative:

(1) plain optative - a wish

(2) optative + av ‘potential’ = ‘would, should, could, may, will’

(3) optative + av conditional (can be spotted by a preceding ev + optative)

(4) indicative + av conditional (spotted by a preceding ev + indicative).

Work towards a full conditional grid as follows:





Open/fulfilled



Remote/unfulfilled




referring to

el + indic.

‘If I am

el + imperf.

‘IfI were


present time



now ...

•>

now ...’




indic.

‘I am ...’

imperf. + av

‘ I would










be ...’


past time

el + indic.

‘If I did..

. ’ el + aor.

‘If I had -ed’




indic.

‘I did...’

aor.+ av (not until

‘ I would








section 13C)

have ...’


future time

(not until

‘If I

el + opt.

‘If I were




section 14)

shall..

•>

to ...’






‘I shall...

’ opt.+ av

‘I would ... ’




It is perhaps interesting to add that Xenokleides the poet could not give evidence at the trial of Neaira because Xenokleides had been exiled - prosecutor, Stephanos!

Commentary

p. 154 line

1 KaAvnrra is new to students; it is synonymous with Kpvnrra.

7 €10€: best given in the dated idiom ‘would that’, ‘if only’ or the modern form ‘I wish I could ... ’

9 ^: as conditions occur in this chapter, reinforce the fact that a participle may stand for a protasis, retaining the negative (see on p. 116.24).

13 Hippias of Elis, celebrated in two dialogues by Plato, was famous as a mathematician, sophist and polymath; he collected the sayings of other philoso­phers, thereby laying claim to being called the father of doxography. Also credited with calculating Olympiads from 776 bc onwards.





15 Solon was archon in 594 and the date of this trial was 340. Hence the two sentences do not refer to the same thing - there would have been c. one hundred and sixty-four archons since Solon!

p. 155 line

30 onrac + future indicative should be learnt here.

Section Twelve H

Background

Wives and parties 5.25, 30-1 Metics and ^evoi 5.67-71

Grammar

Accusative and participle Future passive

Discussion

Neaira is ‘our only example (of a woman who) collected an epavoc; - a loan raised by contributions collected from a group of friends of the debtor and lent to meet some extraordinary expense - from her former lovers in order to buy her freedom’ (D. M. Schapps, Economic Rights of Women in Ancient Greece (Edinburgh University Press, 1979), p. 66).

Phrynion was a son of Demon of Paiania who was a cousin of Demosthenes. This fact has been used to demonstrate (a) that the speech was by Demosthenes, because of the family interest, (b) that the speech was not by Demosthenes, because Phrynion is shown to be a pretty unpleasant piece of work.

Commentary

p. 156 line

2-3 Note that a man never took his wife to banquets. If he took any woman, she would be a ETavpa (cf. geisha girl: certainly not a street-touting prostitute in a ‘high-society’ symposium of the sort described in Neaira).

1 ^Kro^a^E: Apollodoros also claims that not only did Phrynion have inter­course with Neaira in full view of the others, but, when Phrynion was under the table, so did others -including even the slaves.

7- 8 At this point in the original text a definite date is given: 373-2 (NB: some thirty years before the date of the trial). Megara: on the way back to Corinth, from which Neaira was excluded under the terms of her sale by Eukrates and Timanoridas.

7 Megara was involved in the war between Athens and Sparta at this time: besides, the speaker adds, ‘the Megarians were tight-fisted’, so business was poor.

14 rcpofaTaTai: ‘set (him) up in front of’ her, i.e. adopted him as her protector. A convenient point to refer back to fornpi, underlining the transitive and intransitive usages; add Ka0^aTnpl as before - it occurs in the first line of p. 158.

Section Twelve I

Background

Phratries 3.53-54; 5.13-14 Sycophants 6.54 Polemarch 6.23-24 Arbitration 6.49

Commentary p. 158 line

2 ay€O0ai: in this place, if not before, the point can be made that the infinitive in indirect speech can have a temporal sense. It is obvious with future infinitives and it is also useful here because the future passive occurs in this section - the first example is a future infinitive passive in the next line.

3 If students are alerted to the fact that ayea0ai and E^eiv (2 and 3) are future, then evaa%0'naea0ai will probably be correctly translated.

4 Three children: nothing is said in the speech about the two sons, nor is there any indication at what stage (or from whom!) Neaira acquired these. On illegiti­macy: there is little evidence of social stigma, although of course children could never be full citizens. Pericles’ son by Aspasia is exceptional. After the death of his two legitimate sons, Pericles Jr was specially legitimated, and he was ‘exces­sively afraid of the (slur) “son of a prostitute”’ (Eupolis fr. 98).

7 Note how difficult it was to give a precise description of where one lived in both Greece and Rome, without the aid of street names and numbers.

8 ... £^wv: purpose, to be learnt in Section 13a.

10 ouKo^arriav: as there was no official force to act for the state in maintaining law and order, litigious individuals tried to make a living by collecting as much evidence as they could against a person, then bringing him to trial in hopes of getting one third of his property. Such individuals needed every scrap of information they could get (Apollodoros certainly would have needed a great deal), and lesser fry could pick up an ancillary income by selling damaging information. Eupolis, Demes 65ff. (PCG v fr. 99.78ff.) has an amusing scene with a sycophant threatening a man who has barleycorns in his beard because he had been drinking the Sacred Soup of the Eleusinian Mysteries (in this case the man paid up to avoid being exposed: the sycophant stood to gain either way if he had some information - blackmail, if the offender paid up, or payment from his enemy). See also Aristophanes’ Ploutos 898-950.

13 a^aipou^vou: a difficult expression - ‘with Stephanos taking her away to legal freedom’, meaning ‘asserting her freedom according to the law’. When Phrynion had last seen Neaira, it was as a slave whom he had bought.

14 Kaxnyyvno£v: ‘compelled Neaira to give securities before the rcoAepapxoc;’ - similar in theory to the modern system of bail, but simpler in practice as the person ‘on bail’ had to present the ‘bail’ to the rcoAepapxoc; there and then, recovering it later if the case against him/her was not proven. Phrynion clearly intended taking Stephanos to court over the ownership of Neaira, and was not risking her running off again as she had done previously!

Arbitration: another practice very similar to today’s, when, for instance, pay negotiations are submitted to the arbitration of three individuals, one representing either side and the third a mutually agreed ‘neutral’.

Agreement: an extraordinary arrangement altogether. Note that (a) Neaira now becomes one of the very few women known to us who were not subject to the nearest male as her Kupioc;; (b) what had to be returned was property belonging to the ovkoc; of Phrynion, excluding personal gifts to Neaira; (c) a slight variation exists between Apollodoros’ reporting of the terms (as translated on pp. 159-60) and the terms as read in court (not included here). In the latter, Neaira is to spend an equal number of days per month with both men. Requirements (d) and (e) would apparently have worked well for some while - evidence is adduced from three men who frequently dined with Phrynion, Stephanos and Neaira, all seeming on the best of terms.

What happens to Phrynion after this is unknown: he simply vanishes from the case!

GE gives many useful exercises on various points of syntax and accidence here. Test Exercise

This is very difficult; some of the following points may help:

(1) Read the introduction to the beginning of the passage in GE p. 268, stressing that all four were homosexuals.

(2) Mention again the ‘oratorical inversion’ (as on p. 149.22), adding that it is not confined to ori clauses.

(3) Further help might include the possible meanings of participle phrases (including conditional) and a revision of relatives.

This is one Test Exercise which should be read carefully before it is set to try to anticipate likely difficulties.

Section Thirteen A

Background

Divorce and dowry 5.19

Grammar

Aorist infinitive passive Future participle + future participle npv + infinitive

Commentary p. 162 line

7 Phano ... Strybele: why change the name? Did the former sound more Athenian? No reason is offered by Apollodoros - see note at the end of 14 f p. 181 for a hypothetical answer.

8 npw ... €^0Eiv: the usage of nptv + infinitive (‘nptv + infin.’ makes a memorable jingle) is picked up here. Note that where English often uses a participle (‘before coming to Athens’), Greek always uses the infinitive. Stress the change of subject in the accusative, and link this with the accusative and infinitive of indirect statements.

10 Andocides, Against Alcibiades 14 tells how Alcibiades beat the system by sheer force. After obtaining an enormous dowry with his wife, he spent it on hiring prostitutes, who came to their house in crowds. When his wife expressed her dissatisfaction by going to the archon to petition for divorce, Alcibiades and friends swooped and forcibly carried her back home. The problem of enforcing the law - even express decrees of courts - was the responsibility of the individual. The theme is central to Euergos (Sections 16-17).

11 Note that because Neaira was a prostitute, Phano had learnt that kind of ^umc;.

12 Yet another shade of meaning for Koapfoc; - orderly conduct. Cf. on p. 28.9 (Koapoc).

13 Apollodoros remains scrupulously vague about how Phrastor discovered Phano was not Stephanos’ daughter; her paternity is completely unknown. The original text adds that, at the time of his betrothal, Phrastor thought Phano was the daughter of Stephanos by his previous wife.

14 The aorist infinitive passive is new here. There should be no problem if -vai is remembered as an infinitive ending (p. 74.8), and cf. eiSevai next line.

20 Aayxavra: here in the legal sense of bringing a lawsuit against someone. For eAa%ov, cf. etu%ov, epa0ov etc.

21 Note that while Stephanos ’ action is a Sfan, Phrastor can bring a ypa^ on the grounds that Stephanos’ offence was against the whole community.

p. 163 line

14 Why the reconciliation? If Phrastor was sure of his evidence, why did he not continue with the prosecution - he stood to gain one third of Stephanos’ property if successful? Certainty of evidence, however, would not necessarily be sufficient to secure conviction. One point that must repeatedly be stressed in these sections is that the verdict would depend not exclusively upon the facts, but upon what sort of impression the prosecutor could make upon the jury, by whatever means, however foul.

Section Thirteen B

Background

Women’s role 5.25ff.

Commentary p. 164 line

2 8i€T£0n: revise the basic parts of u0npi - future, aorist and aorist passive stems.

7 Note ra; + future part, expressing purpose.

9-10 Patronizing chauvinist piggery? Or merely pragmatic?!

15 Even this would not ensure Phano’s son as heir. If objections were made about Phano's status, then the child (as non-Athenian) could not be an heir - and Phrastor would incur heavy penalties in addition.

Section Thirteen C

Background

Citizenship 5.1-8 xvpio; 5.ll-l2 Phratry 5.12-14; 3.53-4 Legitimacy 5.15-16 Oaths 3.2l; 3.27

Grammar

Past unfulfilled conditions (see on 12g)

Emphasize av + optative - ‘would’, ‘should’, ‘could’ (potential or conditional) av + indicative - either as above, or ‘would have’ (conditional).

This should clear the way for av + subjunctive, still to come.

Commentary p. 165 line

3 Phrastor takes a citizen wife without (it seems) re-divorcing Phano. This would have been quite in order if Phano were a proven alien, since his previous ‘ marriage' to her would have been immediately invalidated.

4 5: note the accent, showing that it is a relative pronoun.

5 to + infinitive is actually to be learnt in Section 1 3d, but it can equally well be noted here. Stress the accusative (marking a change of subject) + infinitive. Cf. rcpvv.

p. 166 line

15 Swearing by solemn oaths: note that the greater the sanctity of the objects by which one swore, the more solemn and binding the oath. Compare the story that Duke William of Normandy, after delivering Harold, Earl of Wessex, from captivity, tempted him to promise support for William as next king of England, having secretly filled the shrine at which the oath was taken with all the bones of all the saints of Normandy. Harold blenched visibly when he later saw them ...

^ ^v: also emphasize the solemnity of the oath: ‘Yea verily’. Six members of the Brutid yevoc; submitted evidence that this refusal to take the oath actually occurred; we may thus conclude that there was some doubt about the paternity of Phano. Yet in England until the Compulsory Registration Act (1836) proof was always very difficult - and absolute proof of paternity a very recent phenomenon. Phrastor’s reluctance to swear a solemn oath need therefore reflect little more than unwillingness to assert his absolute certainty.

Section Thirteen D

Grammar

This section summarizes what has gone before; no new grammar is introduced (to + infinitive is to be noted here, but it has occurred previously). Rehearsal of the accusative and infinitive is very useful; insist on ‘that’ as the marker before every accusative + infinitive clause and insist on a clear distinction between indirect statement and to + infinitive in this passage.

Discussion

Phano continued to bring in income for Stephanos: an extraordinary episode (not in the text) ensued. A former lover of Neaira, coming to Athens, went to see her; he found instead Phano, and became her lover. This man, Epainetos, was caught in bed with Phano by Stephanos, who immediately charged him with adultery. Instead of court action, they resorted to arbitration: the result was that Epainetos paid 1,000 drachmas elc; ekSooiv (a contribution to her dowry!), but Stephanos was to make her available to Epainetos whenever he was in town!

This episode immediately precedes that with Theogenes, making the latter yet more heinous.

Section Thirteen E

Background

PaaiAevc ap%rav 6.30; 3.50 Gods in general 3.1-6

Offices of state 6.23-8 Purity of family 5.12-14 Piety and city 3.57 Marriage to Dionysos 3.47 Danger of defiance of gods 3.56

Grammar

Perfect indicative active Perfect tenses

First, revise oiSa in all its forms (since it is a perfect of the non-extant d'Sra, of which EtSov is the true aorist!). Then establish a grid revising the present and aorist active, middle and passive, and fill in the perfect, thus:



Pres. act.

Aor. act.

Perf. act.

Pres. mid.

Aor. mid.

Perf. mid.


naura etc.

enauoa etc.

nenauKa etc.

nauopai etc.

enauoapnv

etc.

nenaupai etc.





Pres. pass.

Aor. pass.

Perf. pass.


nauopai etc.

enau0nv etc.

nenaupai etc.




Reduplication of consonants must be stressed, and special note must be taken of reduplication by lengthening where a verb begins with a vowel, and redu­plication by the addition of e- in certain other cases. These are important when it comes to participles and infinitives (since it shows that they cannot be aorist indicative forms; aorists never have an augment in their participle, infinitive etc. forms).

Actually, little about the perfect is wholly new.

Consider:

(i) reduplication in the stems of SiSo-, So-

(ii) infinitives in -vai with e.g. EvSevai

(iii) participles in -rac with EvSrac

(iv) participles in -pevoc; with e.g. present and aorist middle (but NB accent - a ‘giveaway’ for the perfect if final syllable short)

(v) that the middle endings are just like the present

(vi) that the active endings are virtually the same as the aorist active.

As for meaning, emphasize that the ‘true’ perfect = a present state arising from a past action. Then the fact that Phano/Stephanos ‘has done ... has despised ... has sacrificed’ stresses not just the impiety of the past action, but the inevitable miasma still tainting the city.

Commentary

p. 168 line

1 ava^8^la: the concept of aiSra; becomes important later; it is worth mention­ing the ‘shame’ concept here.

2 gla/2: with the exception of the posts of the ten aTpaTnYo^ and those of the ‘Ellnvorapvai (for which there was voting), all posts in the democracy were filled by lot.

paoil£u^ (sc. ap/rav): one of the three senior apxovre;. His duties, as chief religious official in the state, included superintending the Mysteries, the Lenaia festival and the torch race. As a legal official, he was responsible for the trial of all offences involving religion, and of homicide.

€vy€v^^: cf. eugenics. Noble birth still conveyed some advantage, if no privilege. n£vn<;: Stephanos and Neaira were probably fairly affluent by this stage (if we may believe Apollodoros) and so could be quite useful to Theogenes.

6 rcap€8po<; (rcapa + eSpa, cf. ‘cathedral’): it is uncertain whether this was an official post, or simply refers to a personal aide.

3 £0^: cf. ethics; but the Greek word E0o; was wide-ranging in meaning, including habit, custom, manners, i.e. general character.

4 app^Ta: a-privative + (p^rrap) will give the meaning.

5 ^£vfl: the rites of the Mysteries could not be witnessed even by Athenian women - that a stranger should see them was sacrilege. Note that the wife of the Paailev; also had various religious duties (including administering the oath to various priestesses). Note further that, as the office of Paailev;, like most other priesthoods, was allotted annually, the ‘secret’ rites would have been known to (at least) several people. For the Anthesteria, see Text p. 169.

15 At this point a digression has been omitted: Apollodoros described the origin of the festival, stressing (a) that the wife of the king had to be a citizen, and a pure virgin at her wedding to the king; (b) that she administered the oath of chastity to the priestesses. Hence it was doubly sacrilegious for a prostitute's daughter to celebrate these mysteries.



Section Thirteen F

Background

Areopagus 6.38ff.

Grammar

Aorist optative passive Optative in indirect speech Future optative

These should all be handled with the minimum of fuss.

Commentary p. 170 line

3 The Council of the Areopagus (not to be confused with the ordinary PouAn, which met in the PouAeurnpiov) consisted of ex-archons. Originally it had large powers, but, as a result of the activities of Ephialtes and subsequently Pericles, its powers became very restricted. Its prestige, however, remained: apart from trying cases of homicide, it also dealt with any crime deemed to be a grave offence against the state.

3 Note the very common Greek practice of making the subject of an indirect question the object of the main verb (e.g. Mark 1:24, ‘I know thee, who thou art’; King Lear ‘I know you what you are’ King Lear i.1.272).

10 : a suitable point to revise the optative of ovSa - it neatly paves the way for the aorist optative passive.

11 €^anaTn0£in: revise the range of optative uses here: (i) plain = wish; (ii) + av = either potential or conditional (with optative or indicative in the latter case, el being the clue); (iii) as here, in indirect speech.

11 SioiKera: for the oik- stem, refer to the English derivative ‘economies’ = laws of the ovkoc.

12 K^Sevra: ‘ally oneself by marriage’. Cf. the dramatic irony of Oedipus calling Creon K^Seupa (Oedipus Tyrannus 85).

13 x^v ... av0pwrcov: derogatory (see on p. 10.19), ‘the female creature’.

16 £A^oaoa: cf. eleemosynary. ‘The stout little milk girl dispensed one pint of milk into Anna’s jug, and spilt an eleemosynary supply on the step for the cat’ (Arnold Bennett, Anna of the Five Towns, ch. 2).

Section Thirteen G

Background

Liturgies 6.62-3 Choruses 8.45-6 Competitions 4.1-4, 18

Grammar

Perfect indicative middle/passive Perfect infinitive participle Irregular perfects

See notes on perfect at 13e. Infinitive in -vai and participles in -rac; -ma -oc; and -pev -oc -n -ov have been met before, as have middle passive endings in -pai -aai - rai etc. Utter a warning that reduplications stay in infinitives and participles (they do not augment; the perfect is not a past tense).





Commentary

p. 172 line

3 Kaxan€9povnK£vai will be read as an infinitive with no problem (cf. -vai ending). Stress the retention of reduplication in all moods of the perfect.

8 n€no^iT£u^ai: perfect middle/passive - note (a) reduplication, (b) -pai -aai -Tai endings, as for a present tense. Mention briefly the perfect participle + Evm(v) as an alternative to the third person plural.

10 teiToup'^ai;: cf. liturgy = a service of public worship. The AElTOupY^al were public duties performed by citizens, and included equipping/commanding a trireme, or paying for the training of a chorus to perform at one of the great dramatic festivals. Attitudes towards the spirit in which these duties were performed have changed during the twentieth century: for A. E. Zimmern, The Greek Commonwealth (Oxford University Press, 1911) 290, they were done from nobility of intention; for V. Ehrenberg, The Greek State (Blackwell, 1960), ch. 4(d), they were a duty which later became a compulsory tax. Perhaps the motivation was a combination of Greek pride in the city (cf. on p. 6.8ff.), and the fact that such service could be used as evidence of good character (as suggested here) in any litigation (as such, it could mean the difference between life or death!).

11 8iaft€rcpax0ai: easily recognized as an infinitive; stress again the retention of the duplication and ask what the infinitive ending is. That leaves the stem rcpa%-. Ask what influence the 0 could have had on the preceding consonant, and so back to rcpay-, ercpa^a, rcpaaara.

6 arco^aivrooi: the subjunctive will be met in the next section. Don’t mention it here unless questioned.

rcpoyovwv: note the apparent concept of ‘inherited civic worth’, as though one might ^vaEi be a good citizen. The opposite concept was held equally strongly: if you could dig up any mud to throw at an opponent’s parents or family, the muck would adhere also to descendants.

7 T€TpinpapxnKOTa: elicit the fact that this is a perfect participle; note that it has the same endings as EvSrac;. Mention again the retention of reduplication in all forms and stress once more the present state resulting from a past action (‘having served as trierarch’ = ‘being a good citizen now’).



Section Thirteen H

Commentary

This may be translated by the teacher, if necessary: there is not much new accidence, and the material is a restatement of the evidence so far. Irregularities in the perfect are introduced: these are all in GE.

p. 173 line

9 €icny^£voi: apparently unreduplicated, but stress that the lengthened vowel = reduplication. Add a note on the accent -pevo; to prepare for the tricky vPpiapevo; to come.

12 €ipnxai: the ep- stem of ep® may be identified.

8 TO^VKaoi: ‘Yet man is born unto trouble as the sparks fly upward’ (Job 5:7); cf. ra; ep^uro; pev naaiv av0pranoi; xaxn (Euripides, Bellerophon fr. 297.1).

Section Thirteen I

Commentary

p. 173 line

1 ^o€pnKuiav: the lengthened vowel = reduplication. Note that it is retained in the participle, giving a clear indication of a perfect. Give a reminder that the aorist drops the augment in such forms.

2 tppio^£voi: the most difficult of perfects to spot - the long u and the accent may be worth mentioning.

Note especially the irregular perfects in GE 272-3 (yeyova, Te0vnxa and PePl^xa may be added), as these alone are common enough to pose problems when they are met, particularly eZnrnxa, where the added e- may be confused with the augment of eZntnaa.

Test Exercise

The first future optative occurs here (0epanevaoi, line 2). It causes no problems (even if notes 265-6 in GE pp. 286-7 have been ignored), but may be mentioned here to be entered (in the form navaoi) on the morphology chart.



Section Fourteen A

Background

Creating citizens 5.3-4, 70 Citizen solidarity l.37; 2.l; 5.83

Discussion

An ‘appeal to the heart’ (English note): as will be seen, there is equally an appeal to the prejudices of the jurymen as well as the suggestion that they will have ‘the wife’ to contend with if they should acquit Neaira! ‘... no judge to warn the dikasts against such appeals’, yet the impassioned plea is a permissible peroration, and ‘Is this [sc. Lady Chatterley’s Lover] a book that you would give your wife or servant to read?’ is not so very far a cry from Apollodoros’ appeal to the dikasts’ consciences.

Grammar

Subjunctive Indefinite with av

Subjunctives: all one needs is a grid comparing the present active and middle indicative with the subjunctive, and to stress the lengthened vowel (add that the aorist passive has the active subjunctive endings).

Indefinites: usually they are taught so that students are encouraged to translate them with the word ‘ ever’. This is misleading: it is better to teach students to translate indefinites as indicatives, and then to add subconsciously ‘whenever that may be, it may never happen at all, but if/when it does, then ... ’ For example, ‘If (e&v) it rains tomorrow (whenever that may be; it may not, but if it does), I shall not go out.’

CD

Section 14a-b is recorded on CD 2, tracks 40-1.

Commentary

p. 176 line

2 ^v ... rcoAmv: may need careful sorting out.

3 Citizenship could be granted by popular vote to those whose contribution to the state was regarded as outstanding, but (as the original text emphasized) it was a rare occurrence, and had to be confirmed by over 6,000 citizens voting by secret ballot. The newly created citizen could not hold any priesthood or the office of archon, but provided he had legitimate offspring by a citizen woman, his heirs and successors held full citizen rights.

4ff. Here (and to a greater extent later) Apollodoros stresses Neaira’s notoriety as a prostitute. Was prostitution really regarded with as much contempt as he seeks to apply? Most other writers seem to accept it as a way of life; some of Euripides’ characters have harsh words to say about it (Elektra in Elektra 1060ff., Pasiphai in Cretans fr. 472e.6-8); but Apollodoros is whipping up passions, and by under­lining her notoriety (and note the use of the perfect here: ‘she has prostituted herself, and the results of those past actions are still felt’) he is seeking to make her Athenian activities yet more heinous.

5- 7 Literally, ‘And what fine thing will you claim to have done, to those asking, voting [i.e. if you vote] like this?’ This causes trouble!

8- 11 Note the force of the argument: ‘it was a private matter, but now I’ve done my duty in exposing it, you will be accounted by the gods as accessories after the fact if you don’t punish the offenders’.



Section Fourteen B

Background

Protection of women 5.25-9; their dangerous habits 3.12, 4.22 Impiety a danger to the state 3.56 Tragedy and family chaos 8.54

Commentary

p. 177

The whole of this section from lines 1 -8 is a marvellous extended rhetorical question, reaching a superb climax in the incredulous ‘we acquitted her! ’

p. 177 line

1 Note the contrast in appearance between the tcoAvtic; and the nopvn in the illustration on p. 175 before starting 14b.

2 Subjunctives appear from here on; usually students translate them correctly, often without noticing any difference! Pause at some stage to fill in the subjunctive on the morphology charts, stressing that the subjunctive = the present indicative endings with the vowel lengthened.

9 avo^Toi;: is Apollodoros convincing here or not? Was Neaira avonToc?



Section Fourteen C

p. 178 line

1 cuv€naiv€i;: the text envisages some cheers from jurors - such of course were common enough at trials, the dikasts feeling free to heckle as much as they liked. NB the frequency of p^ 0opu^EVTE etc.

9-11 Would the acquittal of Neaira make it possible for prostitutes to marry as they pleased? In modern English law, it would certainly set a precedent to be cited by learned counsel in a subsequent trial. Would such precedent-setting have applied to ancient Athens? Apollodoros claims that it would.

12- 14 Perhaps ‘powerless’ and ‘empowered’ could be used to translate aKupoc;/ Kvpioc here (see on 91.25).

15ff. pe^Ei occurs several times. Revise Sev and e^eoti at the same time.



Section Fourteen D

Background

Importance of oiKoc 5.9ff. Jealousy of citizenship 5.3

Commentary

p. 179 line

1 arcopn0fi: here in sense of poverty. NB the active subjunctive endings on the aorist passive stem.

2 npoiKa: metaphorical - the law safeguarding citizenship gives women an invaluable gift.

8 Strymodoros' interjection (invalid anyway - the possession of citizenship was a bonus on top of the dowry, regardless of physical appearance) is from the original: it is somewhat reminiscent of Herodotus i.196 describing the Babylonian wife-market, where the beauties were paid for by their future husbands, and the money thus collected used for dowries for the uglies (cf. WoA 9.3).

16ff. For prostitution to gain a dowry, see Herodotus i.94 (in Lydia); i.196 (in Babylon).

19-20 Note the close connection between citizenship, status and ritual.



Section Fourteen E

Background

Danger of female sexuality 4.21-4 Being ara^prav 4.18-20

CD

Section 14e is recorded on CD 2 track 42.

Commentary

p. 180 line

3 Tp£9€T€: cf. the high regard in which wives were held in Aristophanes’ Lysistrata.

4 (here and line 8) + genitive is difficult to translate: ‘at’ in the sense of concentrating upon or listening to.

9- 10 N£aipa owa: ‘if it is the woman who is Neaira who ...’: i.e. ‘just look at her, and make up your mind’- cf. Philokleon accusing the dog, p. l l2.l l.

Section Fourteen F

Background

State pay 6.4l




Commentary

p. 181 line

3 The imperative may need revision (cf. Kupie eAenaov).

5 Jurors’ pay had been introduced by Pericles and increased by Kleon.

5 Small coins were often kept in the mouth.

The English note on Text p. 181 should be read carefully. Encourage some attempts to suggest what Stephanos might have replied. Two almost certain suggestions are given in the note, viz. that Neaira was his mistress, and that Phano was his daughter by an earlier (legitimate) wife. The second, indeed, is hinted at in the speech (though not in our extract); Phrastor, before divorcing Phano for the first time, mentioned it as his assumption (see on p. 162.15). What then of the name Strybele? Stephanos’ reply would clearly have had to account for the daughter Neaira (appears to have) had in Megara: the easiest reply is that Neaira did indeed have a daughter of that name, but she had disappeared and the idea that Phano was Strybele is a simple case of mistaken identity.

In fact, no conclusion can now be reached - nor could it have been in 340 bc. The crucial point in the indictment is the parentage of Phano. Apollodoros adduces evidence of several who thought she was Neaira’s daughter. Doubtless Stephanos produced quite as many who thought her to be Stephanos’ legitimate daughter. Without modern scientific evidence (which alone could determine whether any offence had been committed), the question could not be settled.



Finally, stress that ‘proof’ in the modern sense is not what mattered. The verdict would be most likely to go in favour of the man who had most successfully appealed to the jurors’ prejudices. Note that vengeance is still the main motiva­tion; contrast the revolutionary attitude of Christianity: ‘Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you ... whosoever shall smite thee on the right check, turn to him the other also ’ (Matthew 5:38-9).