VII. 2. For Kallias, Or. V
2. For Kallias.
[Or. V.]—The shortness of this speech does not necessarily prove it to be a fragment. It opens with an express statement that the case for the defence had already been fully argued by others; and it ends with a completed idea. Since, however, two pages of the Palatine MS. have been lost just at this place, comprising the first part of the speech Against Andokides, that For Kallias has probably suffered also1
. As it now stands, it gives no direct clue to the special nature of the case. The traditional title, ‘Defence on a Charge of Sacrilege,’ must therefore have been taken from the part now lost. The accused is a resident alien (§ 2), an elderly man (§ 3), against whom his own slaves, in hope of being rewarded with liberty, have informed.
In the view of sacrilege taken by Attic law, its
Sacrilege —how viewed by Attic law.
aspect as a robbery seems to have been more prominent than its aspect as an impiety. Thus it is mentioned in the same category with ordinary theft, housebreaking, kidnapping and like offences2
this instance it appears from the address, ἄνδρες δικασταί
(§ 1), that the trial was not before the Areiopagos. The cause must have been heard by an ordinary heliastic court, under the presidency either of the Thesmothetae or of the Eleven3
The speaker says that, were it not a case of life or death, he would have forborne to come forward, considering the defence to be already complete; as it is, he desires to give a public proof of friendship for Kallias (§§ 1, 2). He then refers very briefly, first, to the high character of the accused; secondly, to the worthless nature of the informations. It is the hope of winning freedom which has prompted the calumny of the slaves. If they are believed, servants who desire liberty will henceforth think, not how they are to oblige their masters, but what lie they can tell against them (§§ 3—5).
Conjecture suggested by § 4.
The phrase used by the speaker in reference to Kallias—‘those who bring themselves into danger by lending their services to the Treasury’ (τῷ δημοσίῳ βοηθοῦντες
§ 4)—is noticeable. It suggests that the ‘sacrilege’ of which the title speaks may have been connected with the sacred treasury on the Acropolis. Kallias may have had some employment under the Stewards of the sacred fund (ταμίαι τῆς θεοῦ, τῶν ἱερῶν χρημάτων
) which gave him access to the inner
) of the Parthenon; and may have been accused of profiting by that opportunity to commit a theft.