Notes on Attic Tribes in the case of Neaira

Transcription - Page 4

4
Here we have [some - crossed out] an important and
interesting distinction. Stephanos offence
was twofold -against the Kin and against
the deme . The first was an offence against
the moral law, [Greek script].
The second was an offence against civil [rights - crossed out] law.
It deprived the Deme of its rights. One can
imagine how an Athenian jury must
have been stirred by this charge:-

“ So I am about to show [prove to - written above] you this fellow
cohabiting (in pretended matrimony) with
an alien woman contrary to the law
bringing for enrolment to the phratores and
to the demotai (demesmen)] children of
[alien- written above] foreign blood by which he has not only
done disrepute to the gods but has also
made his Deme [Greek script ] (void of authority )
as to the rights belonging to it;" i.e the
right of admitting members from without
& the profit thereof; for who will care to pay
for a privilege which can be obtained
on such easy terms by the child of a
prostitute.

This passage seems to be of special
importance as showing the clear
distinction between the phratores
and the ”Demesmen” together with
their coexistence.

The offence against the civil law is
that which the “Counsel for the prosecution”
argues most strongly. As to the offence
against the Gods they must care for
themselves. It is a matter for the