previous next


APOGRAPHE´ (ἀπογραφή) is literally “a list, or register;” but in the language of the Attic courts, the terms ἀπογράφειν and ἀπογράφεσθαι had three separate applications:--1. Ἀπογραφή was used in reference to an accusation in public matters, more particularly when there were several defendants; the denunciation, the bill of indictment, and enumeration of the accused would in this case be termed apographé, and differ but little, if at all, from the ordinary graphé. (Andoc. de Myst. 13, 15, 17, &c.; Antiph. de Choreut. § 35 ff.; Hesych. sub voce ἀπογραφή) 2. It implied the making of a solemn protest or assertion before a magistrate, to the intent that it might be preserved by him, till it was required to be given in evidence. (Isae. Philoctem. § 44; Dem. c. Phaenipp. pp. 1043.16, 1046.24, &c.; c. Macart. p. 1068.54.) 3. It was a specification of property, said to belong to the state, but actually in the possession of a private person; which specification was made with a view to the confiscation of such property to the state. (Lys. pro Milite ; de bonis Aristoph.; c. Philocr.

The last case only requires a more extended illustration. There would be two occasions upon which it would occur: first, when a person held public property without purchase, as an intruder; and secondly, when the substance of an individual was liable to confiscation in consequence of a judicial award, as in the case of a declared state debtor. If no opposition were offered, the apographé would attain its object, under the care of the magistrate to whose office it was brought; otherwise, a public action arose, which is also designated by the same title.

In a cause of the first kind, which is said in some cases to have also borne the name πόθεν ἔχει τὰ χρήματα καὶ πόσα ταῦτα ἔη, the claimant against the state had merely to prove his title to the property, as in the case de bonis Aristophanis; and with this we must class the case of a person who impugned the apographé, whereby the substance of another was, or was proposed to be, confiscated, on the ground that he had a loan by way of mortgage or other recognised security upon a portion of it; or that the part in question did not in any way belong to the state debtor, or person so mulcted. This kind of opposition to the apographé is illustrated in the speech of Demosthenes against Nicostratus, in which we learn that Apollodorus had instituted an apographé against Arethusius, for nonpayment of a penalty incurred in a former action. Upon this, Nicostratus attacks the description of the property, and maintains that three slaves were wrongly set down in it as belonging to Arethusius, for they were in fact his own.

In the second case, the defence could of course only proceed upon the alleged illegality of the former penalty; and of this we have an instance in the speech of Lysias, for the soldier. There Polyaenus had been condemned by the generals to pay a fine for a breach of discipline; and, as he did not pay it within the appointed time, an apographé to the amount of the fine was directed against him, which he opposes, on the ground that the fine was illegal. The apographé might be instituted by an Athenian citizen; but if there were no private prosecutor, it became the duty of the demarchi to proceed with it officially. Sometimes, however, extraordinary commissioners, as the συλλογεῖς and ζητηταί, were appointed for the purpose. The suits instituted against the apographé belonged to the jurisdiction of the Eleven, and for a while, after the expulsion of the Thirty, to that of the Syndici. (Πρὸς τοῖς συνδίκοις ἀπογραφὰς ἀπογράφων, Lycurg. quoted by Harpocration.) The further conduct of these causes would, of course, in a great measure depend upon the claimant being, or not being, in possession of the proscribed property. In the first case the ἀπογράφων, in the second the claimant, would appear in the character of a plaintiff. In a case like that of Nicostratus above cited, the claimant would be obliged to deposit a certain sum, which he forfeited if he lost his cause (παρακαταβολή); in all, he would probably be obliged to pay the costs or court fees (πρυτανεῖα) upon the same contingency.

A private citizen, who prosecuted an individual by means of ἀπογραφή, forfeited a thousand drachmas, if he failed to obtain the votes of one-fifth of the dicasts, and reimbursed the defendant his prytaneia upon acquittal. In the former case, too, he would probably incur a modified atimia, i. e. a restriction from bringing such actions for the future.

[J.S.M] [W.W]

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: