Demosthenes, Speeches 27-38

29. Against Aphobus for Phanus

29. AGAINST APHOBUS FOR PHANUS 1 The standard work on this subject, in German, is Thür 1977. For more recent discussion in English, see Gagarin 1996; Mirhady 1996, 2000b. introduction After Aphobus was condemned to pay Demosthenes the huge sum of 10 talents, he tried to avoid the payment by bringing a case for false witness (dikē pseudomartyriōn) against one of Demosthenes’ witnesses. This witness, named Phanus, had given testimony concerning Milyas, the foreman of the workshop of slaves manufacturing knives which formed part of Demosthenes’ estate. One of Demosthenes’ accusations against Aphobus had been that he failed to report and hand over two years’ profit from the manufacture of knives, and Aphobus had said that Milyas was the man who would know what had happened to it (cf. 27.18–22). But the testimony of a slave was not admitted in an Athenian court; only if a slave was subjected to interrogation under torture (basanos) was a report of his answers considered acceptable, and that could be done only if the slave’s owner agreed to hand him over to the opposing litigant for that purpose.1 Aphobus had accordingly demanded that Demosthenes should hand over Milyas for interrogation under torture; but Demosthenes had refused to do so on the ground that Milyas was no longer a slave, having been given his freedom by Demosthenes senior shortly before his death. When Aphobus denied that, Demosthenes called three witnesses, Phanus, Philippus, and Aphobus’ own brother Aesius, to testify not only that Milyas was a free man but that Aphobus himself had admitted as 29. against aphobus for phanus 49 2 That occasion seems to have been one of the sessions of the public arbitration for Demosthenes’ prosecution of Demophon; see 29.20n. 3 It may have been among the testimonies presented at the end of 27.22. 4 Aphobus initiated a prosecution of Philippus too, but evidently the prosecution of Phanus was the one that went ahead first. Aesius, on the other hand, afterwards denied his testimony and was presumably not prosecuted (29.15). 5 See Todd 1994: 125–129. 6 A reference in 29.3 shows that by this time Demosthenes had initiated his prosecution of Onetor but not necessarily that the trial of Onetor had yet been held. much on an earlier occasion,2 so that his demand to interrogate Milyas under torture was hypocritical. That testimony was presented at the trial of Aphobus.3 Hence Aphobus’ complaint that Phanus’ testimony was false and caused him to lose the case.4 The text we have is Demosthenes’ supporting speech for Phanus, defending him against that accusation. It would have been preceded at the trial by Aphobus’ speech of accusation and also by Phanus’ own speech in his defense (which could have been quite short). Consequently Demosthenes does not find it necessary to explain all the facts, many of which he assumes will already be clear to the jury from Aphobus’ and Phanus’ speeches. This makes it harder for us, lacking those other speeches, to understand the details of the case. But it seems clear that no decisive evidence was available to prove whether Milyas had really been set free by Demosthenes senior or not—which has the interesting implication that manumission of a slave in Athens was not necessarily an action carried out in a formal manner in front of witnesses and publicly recorded.5 It is possible that Milyas, though undoubtedly a slave originally, had for so long been treated as a trusted member of the household that his precise legal status had been more or less forgotten. It is clear that Demosthenes had not wanted him to testify, but it is hardly possible to say whether that was because he feared that the testimony would be unfavorable or simply because he did not want an old and faithful servant to be subjected to torture. It appears from the text that some time has already passed since the trial of Aphobus; the date may be 362/1 bc.6 Yet a good deal of the speech goes over old ground again, insisting that Aphobus did defraud Demosthenes and was justly condemned to pay him 10 talents. 50 demosthenes 7 MacDowell 1989. See also Calhoun 1934; Thür 1972. Surely Demosthenes was right to maintain that Aphobus’ main purpose in prosecuting Phanus was not to punish Phanus but to avoid making that heavy...