<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:py="http://codespeak.net/lxml/objectify/pytype" py:pytype="TREE"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0014.tlg035.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="31"><p>We, men of the jury, were indignant at these words, but we gained nothing by our indignation, for these men cared not a fig for it. Nevertheless we asked them in what way the goods had been lost. This man, Lacritus, said that the ship had been wrecked while sailing along the coast from Panticapaeum to Theodosia,<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">Panticapaeum is the modern Kertsch, and Theodosia the modern Kaffa in the Crimea.</note> and that in the wreck of the vessel the goods of his brothers which were at the time on board were lost; there was on board salt fish, Coan wine, and sundry other things; this, they said, had been put on board as a return cargo, and they had intended to bring it to Athens, had it not been lost in the ship.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="32"><p>That is what he said; but it is worth your while to learn the abominable wickedness of these men, and their mendacity. Concerning the vessel which was wrecked they had no contract,<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">The speaker’s contention is that even if the ship was wrecked, that fact does not release Lacritus from his obligation; for the loan made by Androcles was secured not by the ship, which appears to have been mortgaged to Antipater, but upon the cargo of Mendaean wine and the return cargo which was to have been brought from Pontus. The wares lost (by jettison when the ship was damaged) were not, the speaker holds, the return cargo. That the ship was not actually lost seems a necessary inference from <bibl n="Dem. 35.28">Dem. 35.28</bibl>, where it is stated that she returned to Athens.</note> but it was another man who had lent from Athens upon the freight to Pontus, and on the vessel itself. (Antipater was the lender’s name; he was a Citian<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">Citium is a port in Cyprus.</note> by birth.) The Coan wine (eighty jars of wine that had turned sour) and the salt fish were being transported in the vessel for a certain farmer from Panticapaeum to Theodosia for the use of the laborers on his farm. Why, then, do they keep alleging these excuses? It is in no wise fitting.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="33"><p rend="indent">Now please take the deposition first that of Apollonides, showing that it was Antipater who lent money upon the vessel, and that these men were in no wise affected by the shipwreck; and then that of Erasicles and that of Hippias, showing that only eighty jars were being transported in the vessel.</p><p rend="center"><label>The Depositions</label></p><p rend="indent"><quote type="deposition">Apollonides of Halicarnassus deposes that to his knowledge Antipater, a Citian by birth, lent money to Hyblesius for a voyage to Pontus on the ship of which Hyblesius was in command, and on the freight to Pontus, and that he was himself part-owner of the ship with Hyblesius; that slaves of his own were passengers on the ship; and that, when the ship was wrecked, his servants were present and reported the fact to him, and also the further fact that the ship, having no cargo,<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">No full cargo, that is; merely the salt fish and the Coan wine mentioned above.</note> was wrecked while sailing along the coast to Theodosia from Panticapaeum.</quote></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="34"><p><quote type="deposition" rend="merge">Erasicles deposes that he sailed with Hyblesius as pilot of the ship to Pontus, and when the ship was sailing along the coast to Theodosia from Panticapaeum he knows that the ship had no cargo; and that Apollodorus, the very man who is now defendant in this suit,<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">If this clause is not an interpolation, we must assume that Apollodorus was being sued as co-defendant with Lacritus. But this whole inserted document may well be spurious.</note> had no wine on board the vessel, but that about eighty jars of Coan wine were being conveyed for a certain man of Theodosia.</quote></p><p rend="indent"><quote type="deposition" rend="merge">Hippias, son of Athenippus, of Halicarnassus, deposes that he sailed with Hyblesius as supercargo of the ship, and that when the ship was sailing along the coast to Theodosia from Panticapaeum, Apollodorus put on board the ship one or two hampers of wool, eleven or twelve jars of salt fish, and goat-skins—two or three bundles—and nothing else.</quote></p><p rend="indent"><quote type="deposition" rend="merge">In addition to these, written affidavits<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">See note 17 above.</note> were submitted by Euphiletus, son of Damotimus, of Aphidnae, Hippias, son of Timoxenus, of Thymaetadae, Sostratus, son of Philip, of Histiaea, Archenomides, son of Strato, of Thria. and Philtiades, son of Ctesicles, of Xypetê.<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">Aphidnae was a deme of the tribe Acantis; Thymaetadae, a deme of the tribe Hippothontis; Thria, a deme of the tribe Oeneïs; and Xypetê, a deme of the tribe Cecropis.</note></quote></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="35"><p rend="indent">Such is the shamelessness of these men. Now, men of the jury, take thought in your own minds, whether you ever knew or heard of any people importing wine by way of trade from Pontus to Athens, and especially Coan wine. The very opposite is, of course, the case. Wine is carried to Pontus from places around us, from Peparethus, and Cos, and Thasos<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">Peparethus, Cos, and Thasos were all islands in the Aegean.</note> and Mendê, and from all sorts of other places; whereas the things imported here from Pontus are quite different.</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>