[31,70] καὶ μὴν δύο ταῦτα ὁμοίως τῆς μεγίστης φυλακῆς ἐν τοῖς νόμοις ἠξίωται καὶ ἀρᾶς καὶ ἐπιτιμίων τῶν ἐσχάτων, ἐάν τις εἰσάγῃ χρεῶν ἀποκοπὰς ἢ ὡς τὴν γῆν ἀναδάσασθαι προσήκει. τούτων τοίνυν τὸ μὲν παρ´ ὑμῖν οὐ γέγονε· τὸ δὲ λοιπόν, ὃ μηδ´ ὅλως ἴσμεν εἴ ποτε συνέβη, σκέψασθε παραθέντες τῷ νῦν ἐξεταζομένῳ πράγματι. τῆς μέν γε χώρας ἄνωθεν διαιρουμένης τοῦτο ἂν εἴη δεινότατον, τὸ ἐξ ἴσου γίγνεσθαι τὸν ἔχοντα πρότερον τῷ μὴ κεκτημένῳ· τῆς δὲ εἰκόνος ἑτέρῳ δοθείσης οὐδαμῶς ἴσος ἐστὶν ὁ ἀφαιρεθεὶς τῷ λαβόντι. ὁ μὲν γὰρ τέτευχεν, εἴπερ ἄρα, τῆς τιμῆς, τῷ δὲ οὐθὲν περίεστι. (31,71) φέρε τοίνυν, εἴ τις ἔροιτο τὸν στρατηγὸν ὑμῶν ἐφεστῶτα καὶ κελεύοντα ἐκχαράττειν τὴν ἐπιγραφήν, ἕτερον δ´ ἐγγράφειν, τί ἐστι τὸ γιγνόμενον; ἦ νὴ Δία πέφηνέ τι δεινὸν εἰργασμένος τὴν πόλιν τοσούτοις ἔτεσιν ὕστερον οὗτος ἁνήρ; πρὸς τοῦ Διὸς οὐκ ἂν ὑμῖν δοκεῖ διατραπῆναι, καὶ ταῦτα ἐὰν ᾖ μέτριος; ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οἶμαι καὶ τὸν τεχνίτην ἐρυθριάσειν. εἰ δὲ δὴ παῖδες ἢ συγγενεῖς τινες παρατύχοιεν τἀνδρὸς ἐκείνου, πόσα οἴεσθε ἀφήσειν αὐτοὺς δάκρυα, ἐπειδὰν ἄρξηταί τις ἀφανίζειν τὸ ὄνομα; οὐμενοῦν· (31,72) ἀλλὰ ἐνστήσονται πάντες εἰς ὑμᾶς παριόντες, εἰς τὸν δῆμον βοῶντες. ἆρ´ οὖν, οὐδ´ ἂν τοιοῦτον συμβῇ, κωλύσετε οὐδὲ ἐπιστραφήσεσθε; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐδὲν ἂν τοιοῦτον περὶ ὑμῶν ὑπολάβοιμι, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ νῦν φημι λανθάνειν αὐτὸ γιγνόμενον, ἀλλ´ οὐκ ἐάσετε γνόντες· οὐκοῦν νῦν γε ἐπίστασθε δήπουθεν τὸ πρᾶγμα ὅλον, ὥστε καθάπαξ κωλῦσαι προσήκει. νὴ Δία, ἀλλ´ οὐχ ὅμοιόν ἐστι, πολλῶν ὄντων οἷς μηδεὶς προσήκει καὶ τοῦ πράγματος συμβαίνοντος ἐπ´ οὐδενὶ τῶν γνωρίμων. (31,73) ἐγὼ δ´ ὅτι μὲν οὐκ εἴ τινες ἀγνοοῦσι προσήκοντας ἑαυτοῖς ἐνίους τούτων, ὅπερ εἰκός, διὰ τοῦτο ἔλαττον ἀδικοῦνται τῶν προγόνων ἀτιμαζομένων, ἀφίημι· χαλεπώτερον δὲ ἄλλως εἶναί μοι δοκεῖ τὸ γιγνόμενον εἰς ἐκείνους, οἷς μηδὲ ἔστιν οἰκεῖος μηδὲ εἷς ἔτι. καὶ γὰρ τῶν ζώντων δοκεῖ δεινότερον εἶναι τούτους ἀδικεῖν οἷς μηδὲ εἷς ἔστιν ὁ βοηθῶν ἔτι. ἐπεὶ κατά γε τοῦτο λεγέτωσαν μηδὲν εἶναι χαλεπὸν μηδὲ τὸ τοὺς ὀρφανοὺς βλάπτειν τοὺς παντάπασιν ἐρήμους, οἳ μήτε ἑαυτοῖς ἀμύνειν δύνανται μήτε ἄλλον ἔχουσι τὸν κηδόμενον. ἀλλὰ ὑμεῖς τοὐναντίον καὶ μᾶλλον ἐπὶ τούτοις ἀγανακτεῖτε καὶ δημοσίᾳ καθίστασθε ἐπιτρόπους, ὅπως μηδὲν ἀδικῶνται. (31,74) καθόλου δὲ πάντων ὧν μέλλουσιν ἐρεῖν λόγων οὐδενὸς ἔχοντος ἐπιεικὲς οὐδέν, ὁ τοιοῦτός ἐστιν ἀτοπώτατος, ὡς ἄρα οὐδενὸς ἅπτονται τῶν γνωρίμων ἀνδριάντων οὐδὲ οὓς ἐπίσταταί τις ὧν εἰσιν, ἀλλὰ ἀσήμοις τισὶ καὶ σφόδρα παλαιοῖς καταχρῶνται. καθάπερ εἴ τις λέγοι μηδένα τῶν ἐπιφανῶν ἀδικεῖν πολιτῶν, ἀλλὰ τοὺς δημοτικοὺς καὶ οὓς μηδεὶς οἶδεν. καίτοι μὰ τὸν Δία οὐχ ὅμοιον. ἐν μὲν γὰρ τοῖς ζῶσι καὶ δι´ εὐγένειαν καὶ δι´ ἀρετὴν ἄλλος ἄλλου φανερώτερός ἐστι, καὶ διὰ πλοῦτον τοῦτο συμβαίνει καὶ δι´ ἑτέρας προφάσεις ἀξιολόγους· ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν εἰκόνων μὴ τοὐναντίον λέγοι τις ἂν ὥς εἰσιν αὗται βελτιόνων ἀνδρῶν. οὐ γὰρ δι´ ἀγένειαν ἢ κακίαν τινὰ οὐκ ἐπιστάμεθα αὐτούς, οἵ γε τῶν αὐτῶν τοῖς λαμπροτάτοις τετεύχασιν, ἀλλὰ διὰ μῆκος χρόνου τοῦτο γέγονεν. (31,75) ὅσῳ τοίνυν τοὺς πρότερον ἀεὶ τῶν ἐπιγιγνομένων πάντες ἡγοῦνται φύσει κρείττους, καὶ πάλαι τὸ τυχεῖν τινας τούτου σπανιώτερον ὑπῆρχε, τοσούτῳ περὶ ἀμείνους ἄνδρας καὶ μειζόνων ἀγαθῶν αἰτίους ὁμολογοῦσιν ἁμαρτάνειν. ὅτι δ´ ἀληθῆ ταῦτα ἀμφότερα δῆλον. τούς τε γὰρ σφόδρα ἀρχαίους ἡμιθέους ὄντας ἐπιστάμεθα καὶ τοὺς μετ´ αὐτοὺς οὐ πολὺ ἐκείνων χείρονας· ἔπειτα τοὺς ἐφεξῆς ἐλάττονας ἀεὶ κατὰ τὸν χρόνον, καὶ τέλος τοὺς νῦν ὁποίους ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς οἴδαμεν. καὶ πρότερον μὲν οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀποθνῄσκουσι πᾶσιν ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως ἦν ἑστάναι χαλκοῖς, ἀλλ´ εἰ μή τις ὑπερφυᾶ καὶ θαυμαστὰ πράξειε· νῦν δὲ τοὺς καταπλέοντας τιμῶμεν, ὥστ´, εἴπερ ἄρα, τοὺς ὕστερον μᾶλλον καὶ τοὺς ἔγγιστα νῦν ἀνακειμένους μεταποιητέον. (31,76) οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐκεῖνο ἀγνοεῖτε δήπουθεν ὅτι πάντες οἱ νοῦν ἔχοντες τοὺς παλαιοὺς τῶν φίλων μᾶλλον ἀγαπῶσι καὶ περὶ πλείονος ποιοῦνται τῶν δι´ ὀλίγου γεγονότων, καὶ τούς γε πατρικοὺς τῷ παντὶ πλέον ἢ τοὺς ὑφ´ αὑτῶν ἐγνωσμένους. οἱ μὲν γὰρ τὰ πρὸς τούτους παραβαίνοντες μόνους αὐτοὺς ἀδικοῦσιν· οἱ δὲ τῶν πρὸς ἐκείνους τι λύοντες καὶ τῶν κτησαμένων αὐτοὺς ὀλιγωροῦσιν. (31,77) καθόλου δέ, ὥσπερ ὅταν τῶν ζώντων τις ἐξετάζηται παρ´ ὑμῖν, ὃν αὐτοὶ μὴ σφόδρα οἴδατε ἢ παντάπασιν ἀγνοεῖτε, τοῖς ἐπισταμένοις αὐτοὺς προσέχετε καὶ τίθεσθε τὴν ψῆφον κατὰ τοὺς μάρτυρας, ἄλλως τε ἂν ὦσιν οὗτοι μὴ πονηροί, ταὐτὸ καὶ νῦν ποιήσατε· ἐπεὶ καὶ περὶ ἀνδρῶν ὁ λόγος ἐστίν, οὕς φασι μηδένα εἰδέναι τῶν ζώντων· παρὰ τῶν ἐγνωκότων αὐτοὺς μάθετε. οἱ τοίνυν τότε ὄντες καὶ σαφέστατα ἐκείνους εἰδότες εὐεργέτας ἡγοῦντο τῆς πόλεως καὶ τῶν μεγίστων ἠξίουν. οἷς οὐ θεμιτὸν ὑμᾶς ἀπιστεῖν, ὑμετέροις γε οὖσι προγόνοις, οὐδὲ φῆσαι πονηρούς. (31,78) οὐ τοίνυν οὐδὲ τοιοῦτον οὐδὲν ἔστιν εἰπεῖν, ὡς κατὰ πολὺν χρόνον ἐσχήκασι τὰς τιμάς· οὐ γὰρ ἔσθ´ ὅπως δείξουσι πλείονα ἐκείνους χρόνον τιμωμένους ὑπὸ τῆς πόλεως ἢ τὴν πόλιν ὑπ´ αὐτῶν εὖ πεπονθυῖαν. ὥσπερ οὖν ὁ χρέος πάλαι μὲν ὀφείλων, πάλαι δὲ ἀποδούς, οὐθὲν πλέον τι πεποίηκε τοῦ νῦν ἀποδιδόντος ὅ,τι εἴληφεν, ὁμοίως οὐδ´ εἴ τις πάνυ πρὸ πολλοῦ τινα ἠμείψατο τότε εὖ παθών. (31,79) ἄλλως τε εἰ μὲν ἀτέλειαν ἢ χρήματα ἢ γῆν ἢ τοιοῦτόν τι δεδωκότες ἀφῃρεῖσθε, μᾶλλον ἂν ἴσως ἠδικοῦντο οἱ μετὰ ταῦτα εἰληφότες· ὁ γὰρ χρόνον τινὰ κατασχὼν τὰ τοιαῦτα ὠφέληταί τι καὶ προείληφεν· ἐπὶ δὲ τῆς τιμῆς οὐδέν ἐστι τοιοῦτον. οἱ μὲν γάρ εἰσιν εὐπορώτεροι καὶ τὸν ἄλλον χρόνον· ἃ γὰρ ἐκτήσαντο ἀπὸ τούτων ἔχουσιν· τοῖς δὲ τοὐναντίον ἀτιμοτέροις ὑπάρχει γεγονέναι. ὅπου μὲν γὰρ ἐλάττων ἡ ζημία τοῖς πολὺν χρόνον καρπωσαμένοις, ὅπου δὲ ἡ ἀτιμία μείζων τοῖς σφόδρα παλαιᾶς τιμῆς ἀφαιρουμένοις.

[31,70] (p77) Furthermore, the following two practices have alike been considered worthy of being most carefully guarded against in our laws and as deserving of execration and the most extreme penalties, namely, a proposal that debts be cancelled, or that the land ought to be redistributed. Well, of these two measures, the former has never been adopted in your city; the latter, however, of which we have not the slightest knowledge that it ever has been taken, please consider by comparing it with the practice under examination. If the land were being parcelled out anew, the very worst consequence would be that the original holder should be put on an equality with the man who possessed no land at all; but where a man's statue has been given to another, the one who has been robbed is by no means on an equality with the man who received it. For the latter has gained the honour, if you can really call it such, whereas the other has nothing left. 71 Come, then, if any one were to question the magistrate who is set over you, who commands that the inscription be erased and another man's name engraved in its place, asking: "What does this mean? Ye gods, has this man been found guilty of having done the city some terrible wrong so many years after the deed?" In heaven's name, do you not think that he would be deterred, surely if he is a man of common decency? For my part I think that even the mason will blush for shame. And then if children or kinsmen of the great man should happen to appear, what floods of tears do you think they will shed when some one begins to obliterate the name? 72 No, not they merely, but everybody will protest, coming before you, in your assembly, creating (p79) an uproar. Let me ask you, then: Even if such a demonstration does occur, will you refrain from trying to prevent the deed, and take no notice at all? I for my part cannot conceive of your taking such a course, but rather maintain that even now you do not know that this is going on, but that you will not permit it, now that you have learned of it; anyhow you know it all now at any rate, I imagine, so that it is your duty to put a stop to the practice once for all. "Oh! but assuredly your illustration is not apposite," someone may object, "since many of them are persons who have no surviving relative and the practice is not followed in the case of any person who is well known." 73 Well, for my part, I will pass over the point that even if some are unaware, as is likely, that some of these honoured men are related to them, yet none the less on this account they suffer an injustice if their ancestors are dishonoured. But far more grievous at all events, it seems to me, is the wrong done to those honoured men who have not one single surviving relative. For in the case of the living it seems a greater indignity to wrong those who have not even one person left to help them. For on that principle you might as well say that it is not cruel to injure orphans either, children utterly alone in the world, who cannot protect themselves and have no one else to care for them. But you, on the contrary, look upon such conduct with even greater displeasure, and through the state appoint guardians to protect them from any possible wrong. 74 But, speaking in general terms, while none of the pleas that these people intend to urge has any (p81) equitable basis whatever, the most absurd plea of all is to say that after all they are not molesting any of the statues of well-known persons, nor those whose owners any one knows, but that they take liberties with sundry insignificant and very ancient ones. It is as if a person should say that he did not wrong any prominent citizen, but only those of the common crowd, persons whom nobody knows! And yet, by heavens, I maintain that the two cases are not alike. For in the case of the living one person is more prominent than another owing to his good birth or his good character, and it may also be on account of his wealth or for other good reasons; but in the case of the statues, on the contrary, one cannot point to one group and say 'These are statues of better men.' For it is not due to their humble birth or any baseness that we do not know them, seeing that they have received the same honours as the most famous men, but our ignorance has come about through lapse of time. 75 Moreover, insofar as the men of the past were, as all believe, always superior by nature to those of the succeeding generations, and as in ancient times it was a rarer thing for any men to receive this honour, just in so far were those better men and the authors of greater blessings against whom it is acknowledged wee are sinning. And that both these statements are true is clear, for we know that the exceedingly ancient men were demi-gods and that those who followed them were not much inferior to them; in (p83) the second place, we understand that their successors steadily deteriorated in the course of time, and finally, we know that the men of to-day are no better than ourselves. Indeed formerly even those who gave their lives for the state were not set up in bronze, but only the occasional man who performed extraordinary and wonderful exploits; but now we honour those that land at our ports, so that we should transfer to new owners, if transfer we must, rather the later statues and those which have been set up nearest the present time. 76 For you are not unaware, I presume, that all persons of good sense love their old friends more and esteem them more highly than those who have become their friends but recently, and that they honour their ancestral family friends altogether more than they do those whose acquaintance they themselves have made. For any who transgress the rights of these letter wrong them alone, but those who annul any of the rights of the former must also despise the men who accept their friendship. 77 And, to state a general principle, just as when any man now living whom you do not know very well personally or not at all is being subjected to a judicial examination in your courts, you listen to those who do know him and cast your vote according to what the witnesses say, especially if they are not knaves; so do the same thing now also. Since we too are speaking concerning men whom they say that no one now alive knows anything about, learn from those who did know them. Well then, those who lived in their time, who knew them perfectly, regarded them as benefactors of the city and considered them worthy (p85) of the highest honours. These are witnesses whom you have no right to disbelieve, being indeed your own forefathers — nor yet to declare that they were knaves. 78 Furthermore, you cannot advance any such argument, either, as to say that those who were honoured long ago have held their honours for a long time. For it will not be possible for you to prove that those men have been honoured for a longer time by the city than the city has been the recipient of their benefactions. Hence, just as a man who incurred a debt long ago and long ago repaid it has done not a whit more than the man who pays back now what he has just received, so does a similar statement apply if it was very long ago indeed that a man requited another for a benefit received from him at that time. 79 But the case would be different if you had given exemption from taxes, money, land, or some other such thing and were now taking it away — then perhaps those who would have received such an exemption afterwards would indeed suffer a greater wrong; for the man who has held such things for any length of time has received benefit and advantage therefrom already. But in the case of an honour conferred there is nothing like this. For whereas the former are better off for the future as well, since what they acquired then is the source of wealth which they enjoy now; the others, on the contrary, find that they have suffered an actual diminution of their honours. For in the one case the loss is less because the men have enjoyed the usufruct for a long time, but in the other case the dishonour is greater, since the victims are being deprived of a very ancient honour.