[11,34] Ὁ δὲ τῆς κόρης πατὴρ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ συγγενεῖς ἀπελογοῦντο περὶ τῆς ὑποβολῆς πολλὰ καὶ δίκαια καὶ ἀληθῆ λέγοντες, ὡς οὔτ´ αἰτίαν οὐδεμίαν εἶχεν ὑποβολῆς εὔλογον. ἡ Νομιτωρίου μὲν ἀδελφή, Οὐεργινίου δὲ γυνή, παρθένος γαμηθεῖσα νέῳ ἀνδρὶ καὶ οὐ μετὰ πολλοὺς τοῦ γάμου τεκοῦσα χρόνους· οὔτ´ εἰ τὰ μάλιστα ἐβούλετο γένος ἀλλότριον εἰς τὸν ἴδιον οἶκον εἰσαγαγεῖν, δούλης ἀλλοτρίας ἂν ἐλάμβανε παιδίον μᾶλλον ἢ οὐ γυναικὸς ἐλευθέρας κατὰ γένος ἢ φιλίαν αὐτῇ προσηκούσης, παρ´ ἧς πιστῶς τε ἅμα καὶ βεβαίως ἕξει τὸ ληφθέν. ἐξουσίαν τε ἔχουσαν ὁποῖον ἐβούλετο λαβεῖν, ἄρρεν ἂν ἑλέσθαι παιδίον μᾶλλον ἢ θῆλυ. τεκοῦσαν μὲν γὰρ ἀνάγκην τῶν τέκνων δεομένην στέργειν καὶ τρέφειν, ὅ τι ἂν ἡ φύσις ἐξενέγκῃ, ὑποβαλλομένην δὲ τὸ κρεῖττον ἀντὶ τοῦ χείρονος εἰκὸς εἶναι λαβεῖν. πρός τε τὸν μηνυτὴν καὶ τοὺς μάρτυρας, οὓς ὁ Κλαύδιος ἔφη πολλοὺς καὶ ἀξιοχρέους παρέξεσθαι, τὸν ἐκ τῶν εἰκότων παρείχοντο λόγον, ὡς οὐκ ἄν ποτε ἡ Νομιτωρία πρᾶγμα σιγῆς δεόμενον καὶ δι´ ἑνὸς ὑπηρετηθῆναι προσώπου δυνάμενον, φανερῶς ἔπραττε καὶ μετὰ μαρτύρων ἐλευθέρων, ἵν´ ἐκτραφεῖσαν τὴν κόρην ὑπὸ τῶν κυρίων τῆς μητρὸς ἀφαιρεθείη. τόν τε χρόνον οὐ μικρὸν ἔλεγον εἶναι τεκμήριον τοῦ μηδὲν ὑγιὲς λέγειν τὸν κατήγορον· οὔτε γὰρ ἂν τὸν μηνυτὴν οὔτε τοὺς μάρτυρας κατασχεῖν ἐν πεντεκαίδεκα ἔτεσιν ἀπόρρητον τὴν ὑποβολήν, ἀλλ´ ἔτι πρότερον εἰπεῖν. διαβάλλοντες δὲ τὰς τῶν κατηγόρων πίστεις οὔτ´ ἀληθεῖς οὔτε πιθανὰς ἀντιπαρεξετάζειν ταύταις ἠξίουν τὰς ἑαυτῶν, πολλὰς καὶ οὐκ ἀσήμους γυναῖκας ὀνομάζοντες, ἃς ἔφασαν εἰδέναι Νομιτωρίαν ἐγκύμονα γενομένην ἐκ τοῦ περὶ τὴν γαστέρα ὄγκου. χωρὶς δὲ τούτων τὰς ἐπὶ τοῦ τόκου καὶ τῆς λοχείας παραγενομένας διὰ τὸ συγγενὲς καὶ τικτόμενον τὸ παιδίον ἰδούσας ἐπεδείκνυντο καὶ ἀνακρίνειν ἠξίουν. ὃ δὲ πάντων τεκμήριον ἦν περιφανέστατον ἔκ τε τῶν ἀνδρῶν πολλῶν καὶ γυναικῶν μαρτυρούμενον οὐ μόνον ἐλευθέρων, ἀλλὰ καὶ δούλων, τοῦτ´ ἔλεγον τελευτῶντες, ὅτι τῷ γάλακτι τῆς μητρὸς ἐτράφη τὸ παιδίον· ἀμήχανον δ´ εἶναι γάλακτος πληρωθῆναι μαστοὺς γυναικὶ μὴ τεκούσῃ.

[11,34] The father of the girl and her other relations made a defence with many just and truthful arguments against the charge that she had been substituted for a still-born child, namely, that the sister of Numitorius, wife of Verginius, had had no reasonable ground for a substitution, since she, a virgin, married to a young man, had borne a child no very considerable time after her marriage; and again, if she had desired ever so much to introduce the offspring of another woman into her own family, she would not have taken the child of someone else's slave rather than that of a free woman united to her by consanguinity or friendship, one from whom she would take it in the confidence and indeed certainty that she could keep what she had received.And when she had it in her power to take a child of whichever sex she wished, she would have chosen a male child rather than a female. For a mother, if she wants children, must of necessity be contented with and rear whatever offspring nature produces, whereas a woman who substitutes a child will in all probability choose the better sex instead of the inferior. As against the informer and the witnesses whom Claudius said he would produce in great numbers, and all of them trustworthy, they offered the argument from probability, that Numitoria would never have done openly and in conjunction with witnesses of free condition a deed that required secrecy and could have been performed for her by one person, when as a result she (p115) might see the girl she had reared taken away from her by the owners of the girl's mother. Also the lapse of time, they said, was no slight evidence that there was nothing sound in what the plaintiff alleged; for neither the informer nor the witnesses would have kept the substitution a secret during fifteen years, but would have told of it before this. While discrediting the plaintiff's proofs as neither true nor probable, they asked that their own proofs might be weighed against them, and named many women, and those of no mean note, who they said had known when Numitoria came with child by the size of her abdomen. Besides these they produced women who because of their kinship had been present at her labour and delivery and had seen the child brought into the world, and asked that these be questioned.But the clearest proof of all, which was attested by both men in large numbers and women, freemen and slaves as well, they brought in at the last, stating that the child had been suckled by her mother and that it was impossible for a woman to have her breasts full of milk if she had not borne a child.