And it was my character and my affection for the two brothers that moved me to do all this and not any expectation of this trial; for I did not think that both would come to such an unhappy end that by dying without children they were going to oblige us to prove how each one of us had felt and acted toward them.

How this woman and myself conducted ourselves toward Thrasylochus and Sopolis you have, in the main heard; but perhaps they will have recourse to the one argument which remains to them—that Thrasyllus, the father of this woman, will feel that he is being dishonored (if the dead have any perception of happenings in this world)A frequent sentiment in Greek literature; cf. Isoc. 14.61 and Isoc. 9.2. when he sees his daughter being deprived of her fortune and me becoming the heir of what he had acquired.This passage is interesting as an example of an orator’s anticipation( anticipatio or προκατάληψις) of an opponent’s argument.

But I am of opinion that it is proper for us to speak here, not concerning those who died long ago, but of those who recently left their heritage. As to Thrasyllus, he left as possessors of his estate the persons of his choice; and it is only just, then, that to Thrasylochus also the same privilege should be granted by you, and that not this woman, but those whom he designated in his will, should become the successors to the inheritance. However, I do not believe that I need evade the judgement of Thrasyllus.

He would be, I think, the most harsh judge of all for her, if he knows how she has treated his children. If you should vote in accordance with the laws, he would be far from taking offense, but he would be far more incensed if he should see the testaments of his children annulled. If, for instance, Thrasylochus had given property to my family, they would have had reason to lay that up against him; as it is, he adopted into his own family, so that the plaintiffs have not received less than they gave.i.e., all the property has been kept in the family since the continuity of the family had been assured by the adoption of the speaker.

Apart from this, it is reasonable to suppose that Thrasyllus, more than anyone else, was friendly toward those whose claims are based upon a testamentary gift. For he himself learned his art from Polemaenetus the soothsayer, and received his fortune, not through family relationship but through merit; surely, therefore, he would not complain if a man who had acted honorably toward his children should be regarded as deserving of the same reward as himself.