Will you then listen to others as witnesses on those points, respecting which you yourselves
 ought rather to bear witness to others? And what witnesses are they? In the first place, I will
 say that they are Greeks, (that is the case of them all.) Not that I, for my own part, would be
 more inclined than others to refuse credit to that nation; for if ever there was any one of our
 countrymen not averse to that race of men, and proving himself so by zeal and good-will, I think
 that I am that man, and that I was so even more when I had more leisure; but there are in that
 body many virtuous, many learned, many modest men, and they have not been brought hither to this
 trial. There are also many impudent, illiterate, worthless persons, and those I see here,
 impelled by various motives. But I say this of the whole race of Greeks; I allow them learning,
 I allow them a knowledge of many arts; I do not deny them wit in conversation, acuteness of
 talents, and fluency in speaking; even if they claim praise for other sorts of ability, I will
 not make any objection; but a scrupulous regard to truth in giving their evidence is not a
 virtue that that nation has ever cultivated; they are utterly ignorant what is the meaning of
 that quality, they know nothing of its authority or of its weight. Where does that expression, “Give evidence for me, and I will
 give evidence for you,” come from? is it supposed to be a phrase of the Gauls, or of the
 Spaniards? It belongs wholly to the Greeks; so that even those who do not understand Greek know
 what form of expression is used by the Greeks for this. Therefore, when they give their
 evidence, remark with what a countenance, with what confidence they give it; and then you will
 become aware how scrupulous they are as to what evidence they give. They never reply precisely
 to a question. They always answer an accuser more than he asks them. They never feel any anxiety
 to make what they say seem probable to any one; but are solicitous only how to get out what they
 have got to say. Marcus Lurco gave evidence against Flaccus, being angry (as he said himself)
 because his freedman had been condemned by a decision of his involving infamy. He said nothing
 which could injure him, though he was eager to do so; for his conscientious regard to his oath
 prevented him. And yet with what modesty, with what trembling
 and paleness did he say what he did!