Note 475 — Chapter LXVI · FROM THE RESTORATION OF THE DEMOCRACY TO THE DEATH OF ALKIBIADES.

The Orat. xviii, of Isokratês, Paragraphê cont. Kallimachum, informs us on these points, especially sections 1-4.

Kallimachus had entered an action against the client of Isokratês for ten thousand drachmæ (sects. 15-17), charging him as an accomplice of Patroklês,—the king-archon under the Ten, who immediately succeeded the Thirty, prior to the return of the exiles,—in seizing and confiscating a sum of money belonging to Kallimachus. The latter, in commencing this action, was under the necessity of paying the fees called prytaneia; a sum proportional to what was claimed, and amounting to thirty drachmæ, when the sum claimed was between one thousand and ten thousand drachmæ. Suppose that action had gone to trial directly, Kallimachus, if he lost his cause, would have to forfeit his prytaneia, but he would forfeit no more. Now according to the paragraphê permitted by the law of Archinus, the defendant is allowed to make oath that the action against him is founded upon a fact prior to the archonship of Eukleidês; and a cause is then tried first, upon that special issue, upon which the defendant is allowed to speak first, before the plaintiff. If the verdict, on this special issue, is given in favor of the defendant, the plaintiff is not only disabled from proceeding further with his action, but is condemned besides to pay to the defendant the forfeit called epobely: that is, one-sixth part of the sum claimed. But if, on the contrary, the verdict on the special issue be in favor of the plaintiff, he is held entitled to proceed farther with his original action, and to receive besides at once, from the defendant, the like forfeit or epobely. Information on these regulations of procedure in the Attic dikasteries may be found in Meier and Schömann, Attischer Prozess, p. 647; Platner, Prozess und Klagen, vol. i, pp. 156-162.