Speeches from Athenian Law

DEMOSTHENES 29. AGAINST NEAERA

DEMOSTHENES . AGAINST NEAERA introduction The author of this speech is almost certainly Apollodorus, fatherin -law (also brother-in-law) of the man who delivers the first sixteen sections. The style of Against Neaera is repetitious and sprawling and shows other signs that the speech is not by Demosthenes himself. Yet Against Neaera holds exceptional interest for its picture of aspects of Athenian life seldom touched on with such detail in other texts. We see in particular how hetairai, deluxe prostitutes, played a part in the erotic and public lives of many Athenians, some of them very prominent. Prostitution itself was not a crime in Athens, and men were at no risk of prosecution for employing prostitutes. Moreover, just beneath the surface of the speakers’ contempt for prostitutes and their righteous denunciations of Neaera’s alleged offenses against the city of Athens and her gods, we can see the possibility that some element of genuine affection and concern might have coexisted with the inherent brutality of paid sex with slave women and with manumitted women at risk of losing their freedom. Lysias was eager to bestow on his favorite the benefits of initiation into the Mysteries (21). Phrastor, when an invalid, felt closer to Neaera and her daughter than to his own relatives , despite the trick the women played on him (55–56). Epainetus, once Neaera’s lover, though blackmailed and humiliated, was willing to contribute to a dowry for her daughter (69–70). In addition, in the often-quoted passage distinguishing wives from what we might call “kept” women (122), the speaker assigns the latter group the domains of “pleasure” and “tending,” leaving wives only the role of mothering legitimate children and serving as “guardians” of the household. against neaera 145 The legal issue, then, is not prostitution and dissolute living but the integrity of Athenian citizenship. The prosecution has brought a graphē xenias against Neaera, a public action charging the fraudulent exercise of rights belonging exclusively to Athenian citizens. Athenian citizenship was highly valued by the Athenians for both its practical and symbolic advantages. Pericles’ citizenship law (Introduction, IVB) restricted citizenship to those born to an Athenian father and mother. After the Peloponnesian War, when the law was neglected because of a shortage of manpower, the Athenians not only reinstated the Periclean law but went on to introduce further restrictions, as can be seen in the law quoted at 16. The procedures for enfranchising a foreigner, known mostly from this speech, were remarkably complex—“as if the aim is to restrict eligibility at all costs” (Todd 1993: 176)—and the prosecution’s appeal to a sense of outrage at the alleged offense against citizen rights was certainly a plausible strategy. But it is quite apparent—in fact, all but explicit in the opening sections—that the prosecution’s real motive is revenge against Stephanus, the man with whom Neaera was living. In 348, some five to eight years before the trial for which this speech was written, Stephanus had successfully charged Apollodorus with proposing an illegal decree (graphē paranomōn), though the jury opted for a fine far smaller than Stephanus had proposed (3–8). Later, Stephanus tried, without success, to have him convicted of homicide (9–10). Considering the damage they would have suffered if Stephanus fully succeeded in these court actions, it is hardly surprising that Apollodorus and his family were eager to strike back in the same forum. The prosecution, then, was really aiming at Stephanus, though its legal action was formally lodged against Neaera. If she was convicted , Stephanus would have been fined one thousand drachmas, a large but not crushing sum, and his children’s status as Athenians might have been challenged; Neaera would have returned to slavery and lost all her property (16).  For the graphē paranomōn (“indictment for illegality”), see the Introduction , VA; cf. 59.90–91.  Stephanus retreated from a greater risk to his property when threatened by Phrastor with prosecution for marrying off Neaera’s daughter to him as if she were a citizen (52). 146 demosthenes 59 There is only one other surviving example of a speech written for a trial in which a woman was the defendant: Antiphon 1 Against the Stepmother. A few other such trials are mentioned in the course of Demosthenes’ speeches (25.57, 57.8). But if our surviving speeches are at all representative of litigation...