) was often used in
a general sense to denote any kind of information (Pollux, 8.47, κοινῶς δὲ φ. ἐκαλοῦντο πᾶσαι αἱ μηνύσεις τῶν
), but technically it was one of the
various methods by which public offenders at Athens might be prosecuted
(Andoc. do Myst.
§ 88, ἢ
γραφαὶ ἢ φάσεις ἢ ἐνδείξεις ἢ ἀπαγωγαί
: cf. [Dem.]
i. p. 793.78, etc.). The charge, as in the
was made in writing (also called
), with the names of the
prosecutor and defendant, the proposed penalty (τίμημα
), and the names of the, κλητῆρες
affixed (Pollux, l.c.;
[Dem.] c. Theocr.
p. 1323.5 ff.). The peculiarity by which
was distinguished from other
methods of prosecution seems to have been that, if the prosecution was one
of a purely public nature, i. e. where the offence immediately affected the
state, the prosecutor received half the penalty (τὰ
ἡμίση τῶν φανθέντων,
[Dem.] c. Theocr.
1325.13;--C. L. A.
ii. No. 203 b; cf. No. 17, 1. 41 ff.;
No. 546, 11. 18, 28;--Plat. Legg.
v. p. 745 A). According to
), it might be brought against five
classes of offenders: viz. 1st, against those who committed offences against
the mining laws,--e. g. those who encroached in their mining operations on
the district reserved by the state as its own (ὀντὸς
Hyper. pro Eux.
ed. Lipsius, p. 1020 f.), those working
unregistered mines (ἀναπόγραφα μέταλλα,
100.43; Heffter, Athen.
p. 188); cf. Photius, s. v.; Lex. Rhet.
p. 676, 23, emended by Meier, etc.;--2nd, against those
who committed offences against the laws and customs,--e. g. those who
conveyed corn anywhere but to Athens, or lent money for any other mart but
Athens ([Dem.] c. Lacr.
p. 940.50 f.; Dem. c.
p. 918, 37; Lyc. c. Leocr.
§ 27; Dem.
p. 1284.6, cf. Platner, Proc.
[p. 2.384]u. Klag.
ii. p. 358 ff.), or who
contravened the regulations of import and export (C. I. A.
i. No. 31, i. A; ii. No. 546) by importing goods from hostile countries
(Aristoph. Ach. 819
f., 908 f.;
§ 42), or exporting arms and
shipbuilding material to the enemy (Dem. F. L.
Aristoph. Kn. 278
362) or by defrauding the customs (Aristoph. Kn. 300
);--3rd, against those who
appropriated state property sine justo titulo
(Isocr. c. Callim.
§ 6; Lex. Rhet.
p. 676, 23. Harpocration's definition is too narrow,
ὅταν τις ἀποφαίνῃ τῶν δημοσίων ἔχοντα μὴ
: see also Bekk. Anecd.
κατὰ τῶν ἀδικούντων χωρίον ἢ οἰκίαν ἤ
τι τῶν δημοσίων
);--4th, against συκοφάνται
--i. e. those who brought false accusations
against others, not in general, but for the offences enumerated above
(Schömann, de Com.
p. 178, n.
19):--5th, against guardians who wronged their wards (Dem. c. Naus.
p. 991.23; Harpocr. s. v.). Pollux (l.c.
) goes on to say, ἐφαίνοντο δὲ πρὸς
: here as in the following paragraphs ἄρχων
is used in a more general sense, denoting
any magistrate to whom a jurisdiction belonged. Before the archon only a
against guardians might be
preferred; but the σύνδικοι
presiding magistrates in all cases of appropriation of public property
sine justo titulo
[SYNDIKOI, 2], and the ἐπιμεληταὶ τοῦ
in all cases of offences against the import and
export laws, whilst offences relating to the mines and customs and cases of
false accusations came before the thesmothetae. All (φάσεις
In prosecutions against fraudulent guardians the
went to the wards (Pollux, l.c.
τὸ τιμηθὲν ἐγίγνετο τῶν ἀδικουμένων εἰ καί
τις ἄλλος ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν φήνειεν
Antiq. Jur. Publ.
p. 271, n. 4, the prosecutor probably
receiving a share of it); in other cases it was shared by the state and the
prosecutor; sometimes a severer punishment than a fine was inflicted (Dem.
p. 918.37, τὰ ἔσχατα
: cf. Lyc. c. Leocr.
and the cargoes and ships of those contravening the export and import laws
were confiscated (Boeckh, Seeurk.
p. 230; cf. Dem. c.
p. 558.133). The prosecutor was probably liable to the
payment of πρυτανεῖα,
inasmuch as he might
reap advantage from the result; if he failed to obtain a fifth part of the
votes, he was subject to the fine of a thousand drachmas and partial
disfranchisement (Dem. c. Theocr.
p. 1326.6; Lex.
p. 677, 10). Pollux (l.c.
), it is true, says that in that case he was liable to the
but he very probably
confounds the two fines. We have no speech left us by the Orators on the
subject of a (φάσις,
but only mention of a
lost speech of Lysias, πρὸς τὴν φάσιν τοῦ
(Harpocr. s. v. =
The proceedings taken against those who cut down more olive-trees than the
law permitted resembled much those of the φάσις
: the offender had to pay for each tree a fine of a hundred
drachmas to the state, and a like sum τῷ ἰδιώτῃ
and the prosecutor had to pay πρυτανεῖα τοῦ αὑτοῦ μέρους
p. 1074.71, lex
ed. Lipsius, pp. 294-302, 812).