Potter, John; Anthon, Charles [Editor]: Archaeologia Graeca or the antiquities of Greece (New York, 1825)

OF THE CIVIL GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS.

which they called esr/ p,ig&Z tfunjy^sjv, to plead for a fee (1). And lest by
the length of their orations they should weary the judges' patience, and
hinder them from proceeding to other business, they were limited to a
certain time, called ^teeas^s-r^rjfisvri jj'^oc (2), which was measured by a
Kks-^vS'^x, or hour-glass, differing from ours in this, that instead of sand,
they made use of water ; and to prevent all fraud and deceit, there was
an officer appointed to distribute the water equally to both sides, whom,
from his business, they called E<puJȣ or E<p* vPvg. When the glass was
run out, they were permitted to speak no farther, and therefore we find
them very careful not to lose or mispend one drop of their water : and
whilst the laws quoted by them were reciting, or if any other business
happened to intervene, they gave order that the glass should be stop-
ped (3). Yet if any person had made an end of speaking before the time
allotted him was expired, he was permitted to resign the remaining part
of bis water to any other that had occasion ; and this is meant by the ora-
tor, when he saith, raj ifSxri rt2 fy& Xxhe'tru, let him speak till what remains
of my zeater be run out.

When both parties had made an end of speaking, the public crier, by
the command of the magistrate that presided iu the court, ordered the
judges to bring in their verdict; and in such cases, as the laws had made
provision, and appointed penalties for, (which were called Ayuveg «*t/fjt^-
toi,) a single verdict, whereby the person was declared guilty, or not
guilty, was sufficient ; but in those cases that the laws were silent in,
(which they called AyZvst riftyro!,) a second sentence was required, if the
accused person was brought in guilty, to determine what punishment was
.due to his offence (4). And here, before they proceeded to give sen-
tence, the condemned person was asked what damage he thought his ad-
versary had received from him, and what recompense he ought injustice
to make him ? And the plaintiff's account, which, together with the in-
dictment he had delivered in before, was taken into consideration ; and
then the circumstances on both sides being duly weighed, the decretory
sentence was given. Sometimes the judges limited the punishment in
criminal, as well as civil causes, where the laws were silent. This hap-
pened in the case of Socrates, ' who, to apply the words of Cicero (5),
was not only condemned by the first sentence of the judges, which deter-
mined whether the criminal should be condemned or acquitted, but by
that also which the laws obliged them to pronounce afterwards. For at
Athens, when the crime was not capital, the judges were empowered to
value the offence : and it was inquired of the criminal, to what value he
thought his offence amounted. Which question being proposed to So-
crates, he replied, that he had merited very great honours and rewards,
and to have a daily maintenance in the Prytaneum ; which the Grecians
accounted one of the highest honours. By which answer the judges were
incensed to such a degree, that they condemned that most innocent man
to death.'

The most ancient way of giving sentence was by black and white sea
shells, called Xeigi'ia*; or pebbles, called "frsj^oi. Ovid has taken notice
of this custom ;

Jilos erat antiquis, niveis atrisque Lapillis,
His damnare reos, illis absolvere culpa (6).

(1) Clemen9 Alexandria (4) Harpocration.

(2) Harpocration. (5) De Oratore, lib. i.
i?) Demosthen. C6) Metam. lib. xv.