The Ancient Library

Scanned text contains errors.


ment of the assembly, the parties proceeded to trial in the usual manner. The court before whom they appeared, however influenced they might be by the praejudicium of the people, were under no legal compulsion to abide by their decision ; and on the other hand it is not improbable {hat if the people refused to give judgment in favour of the complainant, he might still proceed against his ad­versary by a 7pa<£r), or a private action, according to the nature of the case. (Platner, Proc. und KL vol. i. p. 382.) .

The cases to which, the TrpogoA?} was applied were complaints against magistrates for official mis­conduct or oppression ; against those public in­formers and mischief-makers who were called crvico-<pdvrai ; against those who outraged public decency at the religious festivals ; and against all such as by evil practices exhibited disaffection to the state. (Harpoc. and Suidas, 5. v. KaraxsipOTOvia ; Pollux, viii. 46 ; Aesch. de Fals. Leg. 47 ; Isocr. Trepl (WiS. 344, ed. Steph.)

With respect to magistrates, Schomann (de Comit. p. 231) thinks that the irpogoAcu could only be brought against them at those e-nixeiporoviai which were held at the first Kvpia e/ocA^o-ia in every Pry-taneia, when the people inquired into the conduct of magistrates, with a view to continue them in office or depose them, according to their deserts. An example of magistrates being so deposed occurs in Demosth. c. Tkeocr. 1330. The people (says Scho­mann) could not proceed to the eVt^eipoTOt'ta ex­cept on the complaint (TrpoSoArj) of some individual; the deposed magistrate was afterwards brought to trial, if the accuser thought proper to prosecute the matter further. There appears, however, to be no authority for ^limiting the irpo€o\ai against magi­strates to these particular occasions ; and other writers have not agreed with Schomann on this point. (Platner, Proc. und Kl. vol. i. p. 385 ; Meier, Att. Proc. p. 273.)

An example of a Trpo§o\r} against Sycophants is that which the people, discovering too late their error in putting to death the generals who gained the battle of Arginusae, directed to be brought against their accusers. (Xen. Hell. i. 7. § 39.) Another occurs in Lysias (c. Agorat. 135, ed, Steph.), where the words (rv\\-f]€Sr)v a-jrai'res Kal

eV T&J S^MCfJ Kal €V Tip 5lKa,(TT7]plti> (TVICO^aVTiaS

KaTfyvcare, describe the course of proceeding in this method of prosecution. (Schomann, de Com. p. 234.)

Those who worked the public mines clandes­tinely, and those who were guilty of peculation or embezzlement of the public money, were liable to a TrpogoA-^. A case of embezzlement is referred to by Demosthenes c. Mid. 584. (Schomann, /. c. ; Platner, Proc. und Kl. vol. i. p. 381.)

But the irpo€o\'f] which has become most cele­brated, owing to the speech of Demosthenes against Meidias, is that which was brought for misbeha­viour at public festivals. We learn from the laws cited in that speech (517, 518,571) that irpo€o\ai were enjoined against any persons who, at the Dionysian, Thargelian, or Eleusinian festival (and the same enactment was probably extended to other festivals), had been guilty of such an offence as would fail within the description of acreGeia trepi eopT'fjv. A riot or disturbance during the ceremony, an assault, or other gross insult or out­rage, committed upon any of the performers or spectators of the games, whether-citizen or foreigner,



and even upon a slave, much more upon a magistrate or officer engaged in superintending the performance; an attempt to imprison by legal process, and even a levying of execution upon the goods of a debtor, during the continuance of the festival, was held to be a profanation of its sanctity, and to subject the offender to the penalties of these statutes. For any such offence complaint was to be made to the Prytanes (i. e. the Proedri), who were to bring for­ward the charge at an assembly to be held soon after the festival in the theatre of Dionysus. The defendant was to be produced before the assembly. Both parties were heard, and then the people pro­ceeded to vote by show of hands. Those who voted in favour of the prosecution were said /cara-thosc who were against it airoxeipo-The complainant was said Trpo€d\\ea9ai and the people, if they condemned him, TrpoKarayfovvai. (Demosth. c. Mid. 578, 583, 586.)

Some difficulty has arisen in explaining the fol­lowing words in the law above referred to: — ras TrpogoAas TrapaSjoMraxrcw offat av / eKTsrKT/j.evai ucriv. Platner (Proc. mid Kl. vol. i. p. 384) and Schomann (de Com. p. 238) suppose that by these words the Prytanes are commanded to bring before the people those complaints, for which satisfaction has not been made by the offender to the prose­cutor • and, to show that a compromise would be legal, Platner refers to Demosthenes, c. Mid. 563, 583 ; to whicli we may add the circumstance that Demosthenes is said to have compromised his charge against Meidias for a sum of money. Meier (Att. Proc. p. 275) explains it thus : that the Pry tan ea" (or rather Proedri) were to bring before the people all the irpo§o\al9 except those of a trifling cha­racter, for which they were themselves empowered to impose a fine. (As to the power of fining see Att. Proc. p. 34.) If we suppose the complaint to take the name of TrpogoAT? upon its being presented to the Proedri, the expression e/CTe-ntrjuei/rj Trpo€o\-{] will cause no difficulty • for as St/C7]i/ rivtiv signifies to pay the damages awarded in an action, so irpo-£oA.V riveiv may signify, to pay the fine imposed by the magistrates before whom the charge was brought ; and Trpo€o\7]v is not used improperly for e7n€o\fyv, any more than §i/CT]i/ is for Tt'/^/xa in the other case. Perhaps there is more force in another objection urged by Platner, viz., that (according to this interpretation) the not bringing the case before the assembly is made to depend on the non-pay­ment., and not (as might have been expected) on the imposition of the fine.

The people having given their sentence for the prosecution, the case was to be brought into the court of Heliaea. In certain cases of a serious nature the defendant might be required to give bail for his appearance, or (in default thereof) go to prison. (Meier, Att. Proc. p. 276.) The persons on whom devolved the yyeuovia SiKa&Tiqpiov were, according to Pollux (viii. 87), the Thesmothetae. Meier (/. c.) thinks tin's would depend on the nature of the cause, and that upon a charge for the profanation of a festival, the cognizance would be< long to such of the three superior archons as had the superintendence thereof. This would (no doubt) follow from the ordinary principles of Athe­nian jurisprudence ; but it may be conceived that the extraordinary nature of the complaint by Trpo-£oA?v? might take it out of the common course of practice, (Pktner, p-. 385.) The dicasts had to.pra?

About | First | English Index | Classified Index | Latin Index | Greek Index



page #  
Search this site
All non-public domain material, including introductions, markup, and OCR © 2005 Tim Spalding.
Ancient Library was developed and hosted by Tim Spalding of