XXVIII. ISAEUS
1. Pseudoplut. Vit. X 慰r. 839 f.: 魏伪蟿伪位苇位慰喂蟺蔚 未峤 (Isaeus)鈥 魏伪峤 峒拔次毕 蟿苇蠂谓伪蟼, 蟺蟻峥断勎肯 未峤 魏伪峤 蟽蠂畏渭伪蟿委味蔚喂谓 峒は佄疚毕勎 魏伪峤 蟿蟻苇蟺蔚喂谓 峒愊峤 蟿峤 蟺慰位喂蟿喂魏峤肝 蟿峤次 未喂维谓慰喂伪谓 (sic). Ibid. supra: 魏伪胃畏纬萎蟽伪蟿慰 未峤 螖畏渭慰蟽胃苇谓慰蠀蟼, 峒蟺慰蟽蟿峤跋 蟿峥喯 蟽蠂慰位峥喯. Cf. Dionysii Hal. ad Ammaeum p. 259, 5 sq., ubi inter 蟺伪蟻伪纬纬蔚位渭维蟿蠅谓 蟿蔚蠂谓喂魏峥段 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁蔚峥栂 Isaeus nominatur. Ipsas vero orationes intellegit Pytheas, Demostheni obiciens 峤呄勎 蟿峤肝 峒赶兾贬繓慰谓 峤呂晃课 魏伪峤 蟿峤跋 蟿峥段 位蠈纬蠅谓 峒愇何滴轿肯 蟿苇蠂谓伪蟼 蟽蔚蟽委蟿喂蟽蟿伪喂 (fr. 3 S. apud Dionysium Hal. I p. 96, 22 Us.-R.). Vide etiam Isaei 4, 12: 峒愇 渭蠈谓伪喂蟼 未峤 蟿伪峥栂 蟿峥段 魏位萎蟻蠅谓 蔚峒跋兾蔽诚壩澄贬繓蟼 未慰魏蔚峥 渭慰喂 蟺蟻慰蟽萎魏蔚喂谓 蟿蔚魏渭畏蟻委慰喂蟼 渭峋段晃晃课 峒 渭维蟻蟿蠀蟽喂谓 蟺喂蟽蟿蔚蠉蔚喂谓. 蟺蔚蟻峤 渭峤参 纬峤跋 蟿峥段 峒勎晃幌壩 蟽蠀渭尾慰位伪委蠅谓 慰峤 蟺维谓蠀 蠂伪位蔚蟺峤肝 蟿慰峤合 蟿峤 蠄蔚蠀未峥 渭伪蟻蟿蠀蟻慰峥ξ较勎毕 峒愇晃诚囄滴刮, 味峥段较勎肯 纬峤跋 魏伪峤 蟺伪蟻蠈谓蟿慰蟼 蟿慰峥 蟺蟻维尉伪谓蟿慰蟼 魏伪蟿伪渭伪蟻蟿蠀蟻慰峥ο兾. 蟺蔚蟻峤 未峤 未喂伪胃畏魏峥段 蟺峥断 峒勎 蟿喂蟼 纬谓慰委畏 蟿慰峤合 渭峤 蟿峒位畏胃峥 位苇纬慰谓蟿伪蟼 鈥 蔚峒 渭峤 蟺维谓蠀 渭蔚纬维位伪 蟿峤 未喂伪蠁苇蟻慰谓蟿伪 蔚峒次 鈥, 伪峤愊勎酷喀 渭峤参 魏伪胃始 慰峤 渭伪蟻蟿蠀蟻慰峥ο兾 蟿蔚胃谓蔚峥断勎肯, 蟿峥段 未峤 蟽蠀纬纬蔚谓峥段 渭畏未峤参 蟿峥段 蟺蔚蟺蟻伪纬渭苇谓蠅谓 蔚峒拔聪屜勏壩, 蟿慰峥 未峤 峒愇晃诚囄肯 渭畏未伪渭峥断 峒魏蟻喂尾慰峥ο 纬喂纬谓慰渭苇谓慰蠀;
Isaei 7, 1: 峋の嘉肺 渭苇谓, 峤 峒勎轿聪佄迪, 蟺蟻慰蟽萎魏蔚喂谓 慰峤 蟿峤跋 蟿慰喂伪蠉蟿伪蟼 峒渭蠁喂蟽尾畏蟿蔚峥栂兾肝蔽 蟺慰喂萎蟽蔚喂蟼, 蔚峒 蟿喂蟼 伪峤愊勧礁蟼 味峥段 魏伪峤 蔚峤 蠁蟻慰谓峥段 峒愊慰喂萎蟽伪蟿慰 魏伪峤 峒愊峤 蟿峤 峒蔽迪佱桨 峒纬伪纬峤嘉 蔚峒跋 蟿慰峤合 蟽蠀纬纬蔚谓蔚峥栂 峒蟺苇未蔚喂尉蔚 魏伪峤 蔚峒跋 蟿峤 魏慰喂谓峤 纬蟻伪渭渭伪蟿蔚峥栁 峒愇轿诚佄毕埼滴, 峒呄伪谓胃始 峤呄兾 蟺蟻o蟽峥單何滴 伪峤愊勧礁蟼 蟺慰喂萎蟽伪蟼, 峒位位始 蔚峒 蟿喂蟼 蟿蔚位蔚蠀蟿萎蟽蔚喂谓 渭苇位位蠅谓 未喂苇胃蔚蟿慰, 蔚峒 蟿喂 蟺维胃慰喂, 蟿峤次 慰峤愊兾蔽 峒懴勎佱砍, 魏伪峤 蟿伪峥ο勈 峒愇 纬蟻维渭渭伪蟽喂 魏伪蟿苇胃蔚蟿慰 蟺伪蟻维 蟿喂蟽喂 蟽畏渭畏谓维渭蔚谓慰蟼. 峒愇何滇繓谓慰谓 渭峤参 纬峤跋 蟿峤肝 蟿蟻蠈蟺慰谓 蟺慰喂畏蟽维渭蔚谓慰蟼 蠁伪谓蔚蟻峤跋 魏伪蟿苇蟽蟿畏蟽蔚 蟿峤跋 伪峤懴勎酷喀 尾慰蠀位萎蟽蔚喂蟼, 峤呂晃课 蟿峤 蟺蟻峋段澄嘉 峒愊喂魏蠀蟻蠋蟽伪蟼, 未蠈谓蟿蠅谓 伪峤愊勧糠 蟿峥段 谓蠈渭蠅谓. 峤 未始 峒愇 未喂伪胃萎魏伪喂蟼 蟽畏渭畏谓维渭蔚谓慰蟼 峒未萎位慰蠀蟼 峒愊慰委畏蟽蔚.
Isaei 4, 22: 峒斘晃滴诚囄课 (sc. 蔚峒跋冡蕉) 蟺蔚蟻峤 峒蠁伪谓峥段.
Isaei 8, 28: 蟺蠈胃蔚谓 蠂蟻峤 蟺喂蟽蟿蔚蠉蔚蟽胃伪喂 蟿峤 蔚峒跋佄肺嘉轿; 慰峤愇 峒愇 蟿峥段 渭伪蟻蟿蠀蟻喂峥段; 慰峒段嘉蔽 纬蔚. 蟺蠈胃蔚谓 未峤 蟿慰峤合 渭维蟻蟿蠀蟻伪蟼; 慰峤愇 峒愇 蟿峥段 尾伪蟽维谓蠅谓; 蔚峒拔合屜 纬蔚. 蟺蠈胃蔚谓 未始 峒蟺喂蟽蟿蔚峥栁 蟿慰峥栂 蟿慰蠉蟿蠅谓 位蠈纬慰喂蟼; 慰峤愇 峒愇 蟿慰峥 蠁蔚蠉纬蔚喂谓 蟿慰峤合 峒愇晃诚囄肯呄; 峒谓维纬魏畏 渭蔚纬维位畏. Haec perpaucis verbis mutatis repetuntur in fragmento Isaei apud Dionysium Hal. p. 108 Us.-R. servat慰 (fr. X 2 S. fr. II Bn.) Cf. Caecili Calactini fr. 164 Ofenl.
Isaei 4, 18: 蔚峒 渭峤参 慰峒 魏伪蟿峤 蟿峤跋 未喂伪胃萎魏伪蟼 峒渭蠁喂蟽尾畏蟿慰峥ξ较勎迪 峤佄嘉课晃课澄肯呂嘉较壪 螡喂魏慰蟽蟿蟻维蟿峥 峒愊喂蟿萎未蔚喂慰喂 峤勎较勎迪 峒愊勏嵨诚囄蔽轿课, 蟿峤 渭峤参 峒魏蟻喂尾峤蚕 慰峤愇词 峒偽 慰峤曄勏壪, 峤呂枷壪 渭苇谓蟿慰喂 渭峋段晃晃课 蔚峒拔横礁蟼 峒ξ 峒位畏胃蔚峥栂 蔚峒段轿蔽 未蠈尉蔚喂谓 蟿峤跋 未喂伪胃萎魏伪蟼.
Isaei 4, 22: 蟺慰位峤 蟿峤 未喂伪蠁苇蟻慰谓 魏伪蟿峤 纬苇谓慰蟼 峒 魏伪蟿峤 未蠈蟽喂谓 峒渭蠁喂蟽尾畏蟿蔚峥栁.
|
XVIII. Isaeus
1. Pseudo-Plutarch, Lives of the Ten Orators: [Isaeus] too has left behind his own treatises. He was the first to use figures and to turn people鈥檚 attention to politics. Ibid. above: 鈥楬e was the teacher of Demosthenes after abandoning the school.鈥 Cf. Dionysius Hal. To Ammaeus p. 259, 5 f., where Isaeus is named among 鈥榯he writers of teaching treatises.鈥 Pytheas, however, understands the speeches themselves, objecting to Demosthenes 鈥榯hat he has eaten up the entire Isaeus and his rhetorical devices (frag. 3 S. in Dionysius Hal. I p. 96, 22 Us.-R.). See also Isaeus 4.12: 鈥極nly in lawsuits about inheritance does it seem appropriate to me to trust evidence more than witnesses. For as regards all other interactions, it is not at all difficult to refute those who lie, as they testify while the person that did something is alive and present. In the case of testaments, on the other hand, how can we recognize when someone is lying (unless the discrepancies in the evidence are very large), since the person they are testifying about is dead, none of the relatives know anything about what happened, and the proof cannot in any way be brought with any certainty? Isaeus 7.1: 鈥業 thought, gentlemen, that one ought to dispute not those adoptions that somebody who is still alive and with a clear head has made himself, where he has led his adoptive son to the altars and revealed him to the family, and has written him into the public registers, doing himself all that he had to do; but rather those ones where someone who was about to die has bequeathed his property to another in the case of his death and he has put this decision in writing, sealed it up and deposited it with someone. For if he has adopted in the former way, he has made clear what he wants, giving legitimacy to the entire affair in the manner granted him by the law; the one who uses sealed testaments, on the other hand, has made it unclear.鈥 Isaeus 4.22: 鈥楢rguments are about unseen things.鈥 Isaeus 8.28: 鈥楤ased on what must one trust what has been said? The testimonies? I think so. And based on what must one trust the witnesses? Torture? Likely. Based on what, then, must one distrust these people鈥檚 words? Not based on their eschewing such tests? Yes we must!鈥 The same statement, except for a few different words, is repeated in the fragment of Iseaus conserved in Dionysius Hal. p. 108 Us.-R. (frag. X 2 S.; frag. II Bn.). Cf. Caecilius Calactinus frag. 164 Ofenl. Isaeus 4.18: 鈥業f those who base their argument on the testament were admittedly friends of Nicostratus, we would not attain full certainty in this way either, but the testament would nonetheless have a greater chance of being seen as authentic.鈥 Isaeus 4.22: 鈥楾here is a big difference whether you base your case on descendance or on a gift.鈥 |