), in its most
general acceptation, comprehends all state trials and criminal prosecutions
whatever in the Attic courts (it is used in this sense but rarely in the
classic writers, [Dem.] c. Steph.
ii. p. 1131.9; Xenoph.
3, 2; an εἰσαγγελία
is called γραφή,
§ § 28, 31, 35, [Dem.]
p. 1332.32); but in its more limited sense,
those only which were not distinguished as the εὔθυναι, ἔνδειξις, εἰσαγγελία,
etc. by a special name
and a peculiar conduct of the proceedings (cf. Dem. c. Boeot.
i. p. 998.14, γραφαὶ φάσεις ἐνδείξεις
; Lys. c. Agorat.
§ 12, etc.), The principal
characteristic differences between public and private actions are enumerated
and the peculiar forms
of public prosecutions, such as those above mentioned, are separately
noticed. Of these forms, together with that of the Graphe,
properly so called, it frequently happened that two or more were applicable
to the same course or action (e. g. Dem. c. Mid.
p. 601.27); and the discretion of the
prosecutor in selecting the most advantageous of his available remedies was
attended by results of great importance to himself and to the accused. If
the prosecutor's speech (κατηγορία
the evidence adduced by him, were insufficient to establish the aggravated
character of the wrong in question, as indicated by the form of action he
had chosen, his ill-judged rigour might be alleged in mitigation of the
punishment by the defendant in his reply (ἀπολογία
), or upon the assessment of the penalty after judgment
given; and if the case were one of those in which the dicasts had no power
of assessing (ἀτίμητος γραφή
) it might
cause a total failure of justice, and even render the prosecutor liable to a
fine or other punishment.
The courts before which public causes could be tried were very various; and
besides the ordinary Heliastic bodies under the control of the nine archons,
or the Eleven, or the logistae, or the generals, the council, and even the
popular assembly of the people, occasionally became judicial bodies for that
purpose, as in the case of the Dokimasiae of the archons (Dem. c.
p. 484.90; cf. Pollux, 8.92), and sometimes in that of
Eisangeliae (Att. Process,
ed. Lipsius, p. 140 f. and p.
325). The proper court in which to bring a particular action was for the
most part determined by the subject-matter of the accusation. In the trial
of state offences it was in general requisite that the ostensible prosecutor
should be an Athenian citizen in the full possession of his franchise
(ὁ βουλόμενος Ἀθηναίων οἷς
); but on some particular occasions even slaves and
resident aliens were invited to come forward and lay informations (μηνύειν ἀδεῶς τὸν βουλόμενον καὶ ἀστῶν καὶ ξένων
; cf. Andoc. de Myst.
§ § 13, 15 ff. μήνυσις
--slaves inform against their master, a resident alien,
Lys. pro Call.
§ 5; cf. Antiph. de caed.
§ 34, Lys. pro sacr. olea
§ 16, for the rewards of the μηνυταί
: if the information proved to be false, they were
put to death, Andoc. de Myst.
§ 20). Sometimes in
Eisangeliae and other special proceedings the prosecution and conduct of the
cause in court was carried on by advocates chosen for the occasion (συνήγοροι,
[Plut.] Vitt. X.
p. 833 E; κατήγοροι,
Dinarch. c. Demosth.
§ 51; c.
§ 6; Plut. Per.
); but with the exception [p. 1.923]
temporary appointments the protection of purely state interests seems to
have been left to volunteer accusers.
In criminal causes the prosecution was conducted by the κύριος
in behalf of the aggrieved woman or minor; his
probably gave some assistance
to the resident alien in the commencement of the proceedings, though the
accusation was in the name of the person aggrieved, who also made his
appearance at the trial without the intervention of the patron (Att.
ed. Lipsius, p. 753 f.: cf. Hermes,
1887, xxii. p. 223 ff.). The ἰσοτελεῖς
enjoyed the same privileges as the citizens
(C. I. A.
ii. No. 121, 1. 26; cf. Schubert, de
p. 55 f.); and a complete foreigner would upon this
occasion require protection from the proxenus of his country. With the
exception of cases in which the Apagoge, Ephegesis, Endeixis, or Eisangelia
were adopted, in which the accused had to find bail or go to prison (in
certain Eisangeliae he was not allowed to be set free on bail), and of
accusations at the Euthynae and Dokimasiae, when the accused was or was
supposed by the law to be present, a public action against a citizen
commenced like an ordinary lawsuit, with a summons to appear before the
proper magistrate on a fixed day (Plat. Euthyphr.
anacrisis then followed [ANACRISIS]; but the bill
of accusation was called a γραφή
is also used generally for bills in private actions, cf. Dem. c.
i. p. 817.12; Lys. de Aristoph. bon.
§ 55; Att. Process,
ed. Lipsius, p. 232) or εἰσαγγελία
as the case might be, rarely ἔγκλημα
([Dem.] c. Aristog.
i. p. 787.58;
cf. Hyperid. pro Lycophr.
col. 14) or λῆξις
(Dem. c. Boeot.
i. p. 999.17) as in
private actions; a public prosecution could not be referred to an arbitrator
], and if it
were compromised, this would render the accuser ipso
(without the action καθυφέσεως,
ed. Lipsius, p. 450) liable to a fine of a
thousand drachmas ([Dem.] c. Theocr.
p. 1323.6). The same sum
was also forfeited when the prosecutor failed to obtain the votes of a fifth
of the dicasts in all cases except those brought before the archon that had
reference to injury (κάκωσις
) done to women
and orphans, in a trial for uprooting a moria (Lys. pro
sacr. olea exsc.
§ 37), and up to a certain time in
Eisangeliae for political offences, likewise in a Probole (Att.
ed. Lipsius, p. 344), and probably also in such cases
were chosen by the popular
assembly (after an ἀπόφασις
Areiopagitic council) to prosecute before a court (for we learn from
Dinarch. c. Dem.
§ 54, that sometimes they did not
obtain as many as one-fifth of the votes). Besides this penalty, a modified
disfranchisement, as, for instance, an incapacity to bring a similar
accusation, was incurred upon several occasions. Upon the conviction of the
accused, if the sentence were death (on the mode of execution see
Journ. of Philol.
viii. p. 1 ff.) or prison, the
presiding magistrate of the court delivered over the prisoner, who remained
in the custody of the Scythae during the trial, to the Eleven (παραδοῦναι τοῖς ἕνδεκα
). If the punishment
was confiscation of property, the demarch, as a rule, made an inventory of
the effects of the criminal (τὼ δὲ δημάρχω
ἀποφῆναι τὴν οὐσίαν αὐτοῖν,
i. e. of Archeptolemus of
Agryle and Antiphon of Rhamnus, [Plut.] Vitt. X. Oratt.
834 A: cf. Harpocr. s. v. δήμαρχος
304, 4, συλλογεῖς
), which was read in the assembly of the people, and
delivered to the poletae, that they might hold a sale of the goods, and pay
in the proceeds to the public treasury. If the accused was condemned to pay
a fine, the presiding magistrate had to give notice of the amount to the
: and if the fine or any part
of it was to go to a temple, the like notice was to be sent to the ταμίας
of the god or goddess to whom the temple
belonged ([Dem.] c. Macart.
p. 1074.71; c.
i. p. 778.28). (Att. Process,
p. 956 ff.)