Andocides, On the Mysteries

Greek Learning Greek
1

On Hylander’s recommendation, I’ve started Andocides, “On the Mysteries,” using the MacDowell commentary. I picked up the first edition, as it was cheap to find in hardback, and from what I could tell on the internet, the second edition involved no substantial revision (perhaps no revision?). I’ve read all of the introductory material, but none of the appendices. I read the first pages on the train this morning.

You’ll notice that I’m mostly using digressive rather than temporal English “now” for μὲν in the following. “Now football fans are so-and-so, but basketball fans are…”

Andoc 1.1-3

Now the preparation, O men, and the eagerness of my enemies, so as to work evil against me in every way, both just and unjust, since as soon as I came to this city, nearly all of you know, and there is no need of making long speeches about these things. But I, O men, request justice of you, both easy for you to grant, and happens to be of very great worth to me coming from you. And now first, I request you consider that I have come before you with no one forcing me to be present, nor having posted any bonds [lit. set up guarantors, see MacDowell’s discussion], nor being brought before you in chains, having believed rather in the justice [of my cause], and also having believed in you, I request that you deliver a just judgement and not overlook the unjust persecution of me by my enemies, but much more I request you to justly save me both according to your laws and to your oaths, which you swore to carry out when you cast your votes. However, it’s likely, O men, that you might have the same opinion about those willingly casting themselves into danger, which surely they themselves have about themselves. Now for whoever that would have not been willing to remain, having judged themselves to be evildoers, I should say that likely also you believe the same sort of things about them as what they surely knew about their own selves. But whoever would have believed themselves not to be evildoers remained to be judged, and you being just hold the same opinion about them as they surely held about themselves, and do not prejudge them to be guilty.

I had some trouble understanding the aorist constructions starting from ὁπόσοι μὲν γὰρ μὴ ἠθέλησαν…

2

τὴν μὲν παρασκευήν – how about “the machinations”?

ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐπειδὴ τάχιστα ἀφικόμην εἰς τὴν πόλιν ταυτηνί – “from the beginning, as soon as I arrived in this city”

καὶ οὐδὲν δεῖ περὶ τούτων πολλοὺς λόγους ποιεῖσθαι: – “no need to speak at length”

τὴν μὲν παρασκευήν . . . is answered by ἐγὼ δέ . . .

δίκαια καὶ ὑμῖν τε ῥᾴδια χαρίζεσθαι καὶ ἐμοὶ ἄξια πολλοῦ τυχεῖν παρ᾽ ὑμῶν. – "justice is ok for δίκαια, but really he has framed this in the neuter plural, and it’s difficult to translate what follows if δίκαια is translated by an abstract singular noun: “just things, which are easy for you to grant and worth great value for me to obtain from you”.

δεήσομαι is of course future.

οὐδεμιᾶς μοι ἀνάγκης οὔσης – “under no constraint to stick around”: he could have fled into exile.

πιστεύσας – “having trusted”, “relying”

πιστεύσας δὲ μάλιστα . . . γνώσεσθαι τὰ δίκαια καὶ μὴ περιόψεσθαί με ἀδίκως ὑπὸ τῶν ἐχθρῶν τῶν ἐμῶν διαφθαρέντα, ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον σώσειν – “[trusting] that you will deliver a just judgment and will not overlook . . .”

σώσειν – I think this has a specific technical meaning here: “not convict me of a capital offence”, though I don’t find this is LSJ.

τοὺς ὅρκους οὓς ὑμεῖς ὀμόσαντες μέλλετε τὴν ψῆφον οἴσειν – “the oaths, having sworn which you are going to cast your vote”. Idiomatic Greek, but awkward English.

κίνδυνος – here, I think “trial” or maybe “trial for a capital offense”. See LSJ.

εἰκότως δ᾽ ἄν, ὦ ἄνδρες, τὴν αὐτὴν γνώμην ἔχοιτε περὶ τῶν ἐθελοντῶν εἰς τοὺς κινδύνους καθισταμένων, ἥνπερ αὐτοὶ περὶ αὑτῶν ἔχουσιν. “You would reasonably [εἰκότως] hold the same opinion about those who voluntarily subject themselves to trial as they hold about themselves”, i.e., "it would be reasonable for you to hold . . . "

ὁπόσοι μὲν γὰρ μὴ ἠθέλησαν ὑπομεῖναι καταγνόντες αὑτῶν ἀδικίαν, εἰκότως τοι καὶ ὑμεῖς τοιαῦτα περὶ αὐτῶν γιγνώσκετε οἷά περ καὶ αὐτοὶ περὶ σφῶν αὐτῶν ἔγνωσαν: “for those who were not willing to stick around [in Athens for trial; ὑπο- conveys the idea of waiting around for trial], recognizing that their own guilt, it is reasonable for you also to reach the same opinion about them as they too recognized about themselves”

ὁπόσοι δὲ πιστεύσαντες μηδὲν ἀδικεῖν ὑπέμειναν, δίκαιοί ἐστε καὶ ὑμεῖς περὶ τούτων τοιαύτην ἔχειν τὴν γνώμην οἵαν περ καὶ αὐτοὶ περὶ αὑτῶν ἔσχον, καὶ μὴ προκαταγιγνώσκειν ἀδικεῖν. – “but those who, confident of their innocence [πιστεύσαντες μηδὲν ἀδικεῖν], stayed around, you too are just in holding the same opinion that they too have about themselves, and in not prejudicially judging them to be guilty.”

The argument is that those who flee into exile before being tried for a capital crime are likely to be conscious of their guilt, while those who – as Andocides has – stay around to stand trial are likely confident of their innocence and shouldn’t be prejudged guilty. Not an extraordinary compelling argument from a strictly logical point of view, but typical of the kinds of arguments found in ancient rhetoric.

3

Andoc. 1 4-6

αὐτίκα ἐγὼ πολλῶν μοι ἀπαγγελλόντων ὅτι λέγοιεν οἱ ἐχθροὶ ὡς ἄρα ἐγὼ οὔτ᾽ ἂν ὑπομείναιμι οἰχήσομαί τε φεύγων, — “τί γὰρ ἂν καὶ βουλόμενος Ἀνδοκίδης ἀγῶνα τοσοῦτον ὑπομείνειεν, ᾧ ἔξεστι μὲν ἀπελθόντι ἐντεῦθεν ἔχειν πάντα τὰ ἐπιτήδεια, ἔστι δὲ πλεύσαντι εἰς Κύπρον, ὅθεν περ ἥκει, γῆ πολλὴ καὶ ἀγαθὴ διδομένη καὶ δωρεὰ ὑπάρχουσα; οὗτος ἄρα βουλήσεται περὶ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ κινδυνεῦσαι; εἰς τί ἀποβλέψας; οὐχ ὁρᾷ τὴν πόλιν ἡμῶν ὡς διάκειται;” ἐγὼ δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, πολὺ τὴν ἐναντίαν τούτοις γνώμην ἔχω. ἄλλοθί τε γὰρ ὢν πάντα τὰ ἀγαθὰ ἔχειν στερόμενος τῆς πατρίδος οὐκ ἂν δεξαίμην, τῆς πόλεως οὕτω διακειμένης ὥσπερ αὐτοὶ οἱ ἐχθροὶ λέγουσι, πολύ δ᾽ ἂν αὐτῆς μᾶλλον ἐγὼ πολίτης δεξαίμην εἶναι ἢ ἑτέρων πόλεων, αἳ ἴσως πάνυ μοι δοκοῦσιν ἐν τῷ παρόντι εὐτυχεῖν. ἅπερ γιγνώσκων ἐπέτρεψα διαγνῶναι ὑμῖν περὶ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ ἐμαυτοῦ.

αἰτοῦμαι οὖν ὑμᾶς, ὦ ἄνδρες, εὔνοιαν πλείω παρασχέσθαι ἐμοὶ τῷ ἀπολογουμένῳ ἢ τοῖς κατηγόροις, εἰδότας ὅτι κἂν ἐξ ἴσου ἀκροᾶσθε, ἀνάγκη τὸν ἀπολογούμενον ἔλαττον ἔχειν. οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἐκ πολλοῦ χρόνου ἐπιβουλεύσαντες καὶ συνθέντες, αὐτοὶ ἄνευ κινδύνων ὄντες, τὴν κατηγορίαν ἐποιήσαντο· ἐγὼ δὲ μετὰ δέους καὶ κινδύνου καὶ διαβολῆς τῆς μεγίστης τὴν ἀπολογίαν ποιοῦμαι. εἰκὸς οὖν ὑμᾶς ἐστιν εὔνοιαν πλείω παρασχέσθαι ἐμοὶ ἢ τοῖς κατηγόροις.

First off I, with many reporting to me that my enemies were insinuating that I would not stand my ground, but in fact would depart to flee prosecution — “for why should Andocides desire to undergo this sort of trial, when it is an option for him leave here having all his necessities, that is, sailing to Cyprus, from where he comes, where he has been offered much good land and has a gift of money? Will he desire to risk his own neck? What does he see here? Does he not see the way our city is?” But I, O men, have much the opposite opinion from these ones. For I would not accept having all the good things, being somewhere else and deprived of my home country, with the city the way that these my enemies say it is, much rather would I have myself to be a citizen of ours than of other cities, which appear to me in my present circumstances to be fortunate. Thinking just these things I have entrusted judgement concerning my very life to you.

So I request you, O men, to present to me more favor giving my defense than to my accusers, knowing that even if you listen to us equally, the defense would necessarily have the worst of it. For these ones plotting and conspiring for a long time, while being in no danger themselves, readied the accusation: but I in the midst of fear and danger and the worst slander*** prepared my defense. So it seems best for you to present to me more favor than to my accusers.

*** MacDowell suggests “prejudice.” I feel like that is something that a modern would say, and the more concrete usage is better. I could be wrong.

EDIT: Re-reading I notice that I dropped ἴσως πάνυ

4

Your translation generally follows the syntax of the Greek well. I will have some suggestions about a few details shortly.

5

Andoc. 1 7-9

ἔτι δὲ καὶ τόδε ἐνθυμητέον, ὅτι πολλοὶ ἤδη πολλὰ καὶ δεινὰ κατηγορήσαντες παραχρῆμα ἐξηλέγχθησαν ψευδόμενοι οὕτω φανερῶς ὥστε ὑμᾶς πολὺ ἂν ἥδιον δίκην λαβεῖν παρὰ τῶν κατηγόρων ἢ παρὰ τῶν κατηγορουμένων· οἱ δὲ αὖ, μαρτυρήσαντες τὰ ψευδῆ ἀδίκως ἀνθρώπους ἀπολέσαντες, ἑάλωσαν παρ᾽ ὑμῖν ψευδομαρτυριῶν, ἡνίκ᾽ οὐδὲν ἦν ἔτι πλέον τοῖς πεπονθόσιν. ὁπότ᾽ οὖν ἤδη πολλὰ τοιαῦτα γεγένηται, εἰκὸς ὑμᾶς ἐστι μήπω τοὺς τῶν κατηγόρων λόγους πιστοὺς ἡγεῖσθαι. εἰ μὲν γὰρ δεινὰ κατηγόρηται ἢ μή, οἷόν τε γνῶναι ἐκ τῶν τοῦ κατηγόρου λόγων· εἰ δὲ ἀληθῆ ταῦτά ἐστιν ἢ ψευδῆ, οὐχ οἷόν τε ὑμᾶς πρότερον εἰδέναι πρὶν ἂν καὶ ἐμοῦ ἀκούσητε ἀπολογουμένου.

Σκοπῶ μὲν οὖν ἔγωγε, ὦ ἄνδρες, πόθεν χρὴ ἄρξασθαι τῆς ἀπολογίας, πότερον ἐκ τῶν τελευταίων λόγων, ὡς παρανόμως με ἐνέδειξαν, ἢ περὶ τοῦ ψηφίσματος τοῦ Ἰσοτιμίδου, ὡς ἄκυρόν ἐστιν, ἢ περὶ τῶν νόμων καὶ τῶν ὅρκων τῶν γεγενημένων, εἴτε καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑμᾶς διδάξω τὰ γεγενημένα. ὃ δέ με ποιεῖ μάλιστ᾽ ἀπορεῖν, ἐγὼ ὑμῖν ἐρῶ, ὅτι οὐ πάντες ἴσως ἐπὶ πᾶσι τοῖς κατηγορουμένοις ὁμοίως ὀργίζεσθε, ἀλλ᾽ ἕκαστός τι ὑμῶν ἔχει πρὸς ὃ βούλοιτο ἄν με πρῶτον ἀπολογεῖσθαι· ἅμα δὲ περὶ πάντων εἰπεῖν ἀδύνατον. κράτιστον οὖν μοι εἶναι δοκεῖ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑμᾶς διδάσκειν πάντα τὰ γενόμενα καὶ παραλείπειν μηδέν. ἂν γὰρ ὀρθῶς μάθητε τὰ πραχθέντα, ῥᾳδίως γνώσεσθ᾽ ἅ μου κατεψεύσαντο οἱ κατήγοροι. τὰ μὲν οὖν δίκαια γιγνώσκειν ὑμᾶς ἡγοῦμαι καὶ αὐτοὺς παρεσκευάσθαι, οἷσπερ ἐγὼ πιστεύσας ὑπέμεινα, ὁρῶν ὑμᾶς καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις καὶ ἐν τοῖς δημοσίοις περὶ πλείστου τοῦτο ποιουμένους, ψηφίζεσθαι κατὰ τοὺς ὅρκους (ὅπερ καὶ συνέχει μόνον τὴν πόλιν, ἀκόντων τῶν οὐ βουλομένων ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχειν)· τάδε δὲ ὑμῶν δέομαι, μετ᾽ εὐνοίας μου τὴν ἀκρόασιν τῆς ἀπολογίας ποιήσασθαι, καὶ μήτε μοι ἀντιδίκους καταστῆναι μήτε ὑπονοεῖν τὰ λεγόμενα μήτε ῥήματα θηρεύειν, ἀκροασαμένους δὲ διὰ τέλους τῆς ἀπολογίας τότε ἤδη ψηφίζεσθαι τοῦτο ὅ τι ἂν ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς ἄριστον καὶ εὐορκότατον νομίζητε εἶναι.

This is left to be considered, that many people have made many and clever accusations, and are now exposed in their lying, and once this is manifest, that you are much happier to take justice upon these accusers than from those they accused. And others also, having testified what is false and unjustly destroyed men, have been convicted by you of false testimony, when there was nothing more that could be done for their victims. Indeed, since this sort of thing has already come about often, it is reasonable for you to not yet consider the words of my accusers to be reliable. That he should have accused skillfully or not – this can be known from the speeches of the accuser. But if the facts are true or are false, you cannot know which before you should hear my defense.

Now I myself have considered, O men, from what point of the defense I should begin, either starting from the last speeches***, that they have made this demonstration illegally, or about the decree of Isotimides, that it is without authority, or on the laws and oaths that have been made, whether I should instruct you even from the beginning. But what makes me most unsure, I shall tell you, that not everyone is equally upset at all of the accusers alike, but that each of you have some point that you wish I would first refute first. To say all of them together is impossible. The most powerful way seems to me to be to start from the beginning and instruct you in everything that has occurred, leaving out nothing. For should you correctly learn what has happened, it will be easy for you to judge what things my accusers have told falsely about me. I think that you are yourselves prepared to judge correctly, you being so I have believed and stayed for trial, seeing you both in private and in public making most of this thing, to vote in accordance with your oaths (this very thing is all that holds the city together, in the face of these who do not wish for it to be so). This I ask of you, to conduct the hearing of my defense with goodwill towards me, to not set yourselves as opponents to me, nor to suspect what is said, nor to search out faults in my words, having heard my defense until the end, only then to vote that which you think to be the best and most blameless to yourselves.

*** “matters” suggests MacDowell

MacDowell’s notes refer to a quote from Euripides

συνέχει τὴν πόλιν> : cf. E. Sup. 312-13:

x _ τὸ γάρ τοι συνέχον ἀνθρώπων πόλεις
τοῦτ’ ἔσθ’, ὅταν τις τοὺς νόμους σῴζῃ καλῶς

My translation

For the thing indeed holding together the cities of men
is this: whenever someone well respects the laws

Also from MacDowell

οὐδὲν ἦν ἔτι πλέον τοῖς πεπονθόσιν: > ‘it was no longer of any advantage to their victims’. (The same words are repeated in Lys. 19. 4, and the same point is made in Ant. 5. 95.) Why And. says this is not clear. ἑάλωσαν παρ’ ὑμῖν must surely refer to conviction by a jury, not just discovery long afterwards, and a δίκη ψευδομαρτυριῶν had to be initiated before the jury voted in the case in which the allegedly false evidence had been given (Ath. Pol. 68. 4). If the witness was convicted, the original case was retried (Is. 11. 45-46). Why should this be no longer of advantage? Makkink suggests that in 400 the rule mentioned in Ath. Pol. 68. 4 had not yet been introduced, so that conviction for giving false evidence might occur long after the trial in which the evidence was given. Lämmli takes the view that retrial was permitted only in a certain few types of case, and that the normal result of a successful δίκη ψευδομαρτυριῶν was the punishment of the false witness, but not annulment of the verdict in the original case. It is also possible that the verdict in the original case might be executed before the hearing of the δίκη ψευδομαρτυριῶν; D. 47. 49 shows that this happened in one case at least (though admittedly this was not a case involving the death penalty).

I assume that Andocides had in mind witnesses being convicted of false testimony in some later case, bringing previous testimony for other cases under suspicion, but Athenian law having no method of recompense. See MacDowell’s note on ψευδομαρτυριῶν for evidence that serial perjury was a problem.

6

I’ll start with this:

ἔτι δὲ καὶ τόδε ἐνθυμητέον, ὅτι πολλοὶ ἤδη πολλὰ καὶ δεινὰ κατηγορήσαντες παραχρῆμα ἐξηλέγχθησαν ψευδόμενοι οὕτω φανερῶς ὥστε ὑμᾶς πολὺ ἂν ἥδιον δίκην λαβεῖν παρὰ τῶν κατηγόρων ἢ παρὰ τῶν κατηγορουμένων·

ἔτι δὲ καὶ τόδε ἐνθυμητέον – “And [δὲ] besides [ἔτι], this too [καὶ τόδε] needs to be considered”

πολλὰ καὶ δεινὰ κατηγορήσαντες – In English, “having made many horrible/serious accusations” but in Greek καὶ is always necessary to connect πολλοι/πολλαι/πολλὰ with another adjective.

δεινὰ – here “horrible” or “serious/grave” accusations; I think δεινός in the sense of “clever” or “very skillful” is only used of people, not things. Here, the idea is clearly “accusations of serious crimes.”

παραχρῆμα – “immediately,” “right away” (an adverb)

ἐξηλέγχθησαν – aorist, not perfect: having made accusations, they were immediately exposed as liars, but ἤδη suggests he is looking at past events from the perspective of the present. Difficult to capture this in translation.

οὕτω φανερῶς ὥστε – they were exposed as liars "so clearly that . . . " What follows is a so-called “natural result” clause, with infinitive: “you would much more willingly exact a penalty from the accusers than from the accused.”

More to follow.

7

οἱ δὲ αὖ – there’s no οι μεν. This is not οι μεν . . . οι δε, “some . . . others”, but rather just “They, however”.

It seems to me a little odd that there’s no connective between the two participles μαρτυρήσαντες and ἀπολέσαντες. Perhaps a comma should follow τὰ ψευδῆ.

εἰκὸς – I would translate “you should not”

μήπω – here, probably a stronger form of μη; see LSJ ουπω.

δεινὰ κατηγόρηται – this is perfect passive. The subject is neut. pl. δεινὰ, and the verb is of course singular. You could translate “Whether or not serious accusations have been made can be determined from the words of the accuser”.

εἰ δὲ ἀληθῆ ταῦτά ἐστιν ἢ ψευδῆ, οὐχ οἷόν τε ὑμᾶς πρότερον εἰδέναι πρὶν ἂν καὶ ἐμοῦ ἀκούσητε ἀπολογουμένου – “but whether [better than “if” here] these things [not “the facts”, which would imply truth] are true or false, you can’t know before you also hear my response.”

πρὶν ἂν + subjunctive – just “before” in contemporary English, no need for “should”. This is a “prospective temporal clause”, which takes subj. + ἂν (optative without ἂν in secondary sequence), like a future more vivid conditional. See Dickey pp. 152-4.

Interesting contrast between γνῶναι and εἰδέναι.

8

A small follow-up to Hylander, who’s covered the main points.

οὕτω φανερῶς ὥστε ὑμᾶς πολὺ ἂν ἥδιον δίκην λαβεῖν παρὰ τῶν κατηγόρων ἢ παρὰ τῶν κατηγορουμένων·
αν …λαβειν will represent not αν λαβοιτε in direct speech (“you would more happily punish”) but αν ελαβετε (“you would more happily have punished”).

οἱ δὲ αὖ, μαρτυρήσαντες τὰ ψευδῆ ἀδίκως ἀνθρώπους ἀπολέσαντες, ἑάλωσαν παρ᾽ ὑμῖν ψευδομαρτυριῶν, ἡνίκ᾽ οὐδὲν ἦν ἔτι πλέον τοῖς πεπονθόσιν.
οι δ’ αυ “Others again”, “Others in turn.” This doesn’t need a μεν in the prior clause.

μαρτυρήσαντες τὰ ψευδῆ ἀδίκως ἀνθρώπους ἀπολέσαντες, The first participle is subordinate to the second: “after unjustly destroying people by testifying falsehoods”

“when it was no longer of any advantage (πλεον) to those who have suffered” How so?, asks MacDowell, appealing to Aristotle on legal procedure. Surely because they’d already been “destroyed,” just as the text says, i.e. convicted and punished and still suffering the consequences (πεπονθασιν perfect)—or so Andocides would have the jury believe. The false-witness prosecution of the accusers must have been subsequent, or at least that’s the implication.

εἰκὸς ὑμᾶς ἐστι μήπω τοὺς τῶν κατηγόρων λόγους πιστοὺς ἡγεῖσθαι. More than “you should not.” It’s an appeal to the εικος criterion (see e.g. Aristotle’s Poetics). “It’s only reasonable that you withhold judgment on their trustworthiness …”
μηπω more than just μη. They shouldn’t “yet” think they’re trustworthy, jumping to that conclusion in advance of the defense’s counter-arguments.

εἰ μὲν γὰρ δεινὰ κατηγόρηται ἢ μή, οἷόν τε γνῶναι ἐκ τῶν τοῦ κατηγόρου λόγων· εἰ δὲ ἀληθῆ ταῦτά ἐστιν ἢ ψευδῆ, οὐχ οἷόν τε ὑμᾶς πρότερον εἰδέναι πρὶν ἂν καὶ ἐμοῦ ἀκούσητε ἀπολογουμένου.
“The seriousness of the charges can be gauged from the prosecution speech, but the truth (or falsity) of them can’t be known until you listen also to my defense.”
δεινα and αληθη fronted, secondary contrast between γνωναι and ειδεναι.
(πριν αν + subj. is just a regular indefinite clause.)

9

Andoc. 1 10-12

ὥσπερ δὲ καὶ προεῖπον ὑμῖν, ὦ ἄνδρες, ἐξ ἀρχῆς περὶ πάντων ποιήσομαι τὴν ἀπολογίαν, πρῶτον μὲν περὶ αὐτῆς τῆς αἰτίας ὅθεν περ ἡ ἔνδειξις ἐγένετο, διόπερ εἰς τὸν ἀγῶνα τόνδε κατέστην, περὶ τῶν μυστηρίων ὡς οὔτ᾽ ἐμοὶ ἠσέβηται οὐδὲν οὔτε μεμήνυται οὔθ᾽ ὡμολόγηται, οὔτ’ οἶδα τοὺς μηνύσαντας ὑμῖν περὶ αὐτῶν οὔτ᾽ εἰ ψευδῆ οὔτ᾽ εἰ ἀληθῆ ἐμήνυσαν· ταῦθ᾽ ὑμᾶς διδάξω.

Ἦν μὲν γὰρ ἐκκλησία τοῖς στρατηγοῖς τοῖς εἰς Σικελίαν, Νικίᾳ καὶ Λαμάχῳ καὶ Ἀλκιβιάδῃ, καὶ τριήρης ἡ στρατηγὶς ἤδη ἐξώρμει ἡ Λαμάχου· ἀναστὰς δὲ Πυθόνικος ἐν τῷ δήμῳ εἶπεν· “῏Ω Ἀθηναῖοι, ὑμεῖς μὲν στρατιὰν ἐκπέμπετε καὶ παρασκευὴν τοσαύτην, καὶ κίνδυνον ἀρεῖσθαι μέλλετε· Ἀλκιβιάδην δὲ τὸν στρατηγὸν ἀποδείξω ὑμῖν τὰ μυστήρια ποιοῦντα ἐν οἰκίᾳ μεθ᾽ ἑτέρων, καὶ ἐὰν ψηφίσησθε ἄδειαν <ᾧ> ἐγὼ κελεύω, θεράπων ὑμῖν ἑνὸς τῶν ἐνθάδε ἀνδρῶν ἀμύητος ὢν ἐρεῖ τὰ μυστήρια· εἰ δὲ μή, χρῆσθε ἐμοὶ ὅ τι ἂν ὑμῖν δοκῇ, ἐὰν μὴ τἀληθῆ λέγω.” ἀντιλέγοντος δὲ Ἀλκιβιάδου πολλὰ καὶ ἐξάρνου ὄντος, ἔδοξε τοῖς πρυτάνεσι τοὺς μὲν ἀμυήτους μεταστήσασθαι, αὐτοὺς δ᾽ ἰέναι ἐπὶ τὸ μειράκιον ὃ ὁ Πυθόνικος ἐκέλευε. καὶ ᾤχοντο, καὶ ἤγαγον θεράποντα Ἀλκιβιάδου [πολεμάρχον]· Ἀνδρόμαχος αὐτῷ ὄνομα ἦν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐψηφίσαντο αὐτῷ τὴν ἄδειαν, ἔλεγεν ὅτι ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τῇ Πουλυτίωνος γίγνοιτο μυστήρια· Ἀλκιβιάδην μὲν οὖν καὶ Νικιάδην καὶ Μέλητον, τούτους μὲν αὐτοὺς εἶναι τοὺς ποιοῦντας, συμπαρεῖναι δὲ καὶ ὁρᾶν τὰ γιγνόμενα καὶ ἄλλους, παρεῖναι δὲ καὶ δούλους, ἑαυτόν τε καὶ τὸν ἀδελφὸν καὶ Ἱκέσιον τὸν αὐλητὴν καὶ τὸν Μελήτου δοῦλον.

As I have said to you I would, O men, I shall make my defense from the beginning concerning everything, first concerning the very reason from which the case came about, because of which I have been placed in this law-contest, concerning the mysteries profaned neither by me (as opposed to others), nor anything of them disclosed by me, nor anything concerning them agreed to by me, nor do I know the disclosers to you about them, nor whether they disclosed lies or truth. This I will show you.

Now there was a gathering of the generals against Sicily, Nicios and Lamachos and Alcibiades, and the lead ship of Lamachos had already launched, but Pythonikos having stood up in the assembly said: “O Athenians, now you are sending out an expedition made such a preparation, and you are running a risk that you shall be cursed. I will show you the general Alcibiades performing the mysteries with others (historical present), and should you vote immunity on the one I ask you to, an uninitiated slave of one of the men there shall communicate to you the mysteries. If it should not be so, do to me what seems best to you should I not be saying the truth.” With Alcibiades speaking much against this and speaking denials, it seemed best to the Prytaneis for the uninitiated to stand apart while they would come to the young man whom Pythonikos called forth. And while the uninitiated were going out, they fetched the servant of Alcibiades. His name was Andromachos. After they voted him immunity, he said that in the house of Poulytion the mysteries had been conducted. That indeed Alcibiades and Niciades and Meletus themselves being present were the celebrants, together with them and watching what went on were others, slaves being present, myself, and my brother, and Icesios the aulos-player, and the slave of Meletus.

10

Back to 8.

πόθεν χρὴ ἄρξασθαι τῆς ἀπολογίας – αρχω/αρχομαι takes a genitive complement, so this is not “from what point of the defense I should begin” but rather “from what point I should begin the defense.”

ἐκ τῶν τελευταίων λόγων – see MacDowell’s note.

ἐνέδειξαν – this is a technical term meaning something like “file a criminal complaint”. See MacDowell p. 13.

ἄκυρόν – because of amnesties.

εἴτε καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑμᾶς διδάξω τὰ γεγενημένα – something like “or should I just lay out the facts for you from the beginning”. Not parallel to the previous alternatives introduced by πότερον . . . ἢ . . . ἢ.

ἕκαστός τι ὑμῶν ἔχει πρὸς ὃ βούλοιτο ἄν με πρῶτον ἀπολογεῖσθα – “each of you has some point to which he would like me to address my defense first.”

εὐορκότατον – “most consistent with your oath” (the “heliastic” oath that jurors took before hearing a case).

11

ἐκκλησία τοῖς στρατηγοῖς τοῖς εἰς Σικελίαν – a session of the Assembly/Ekklesia for the generals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecclesia_(ancient_Athens)

στρατιὰν ἐκπέμπετε καὶ παρασκευὴν τοσαύτην – “you are sending out an expedition and such a large armed force”

κίνδυνον ἀρεῖσθαι μέλλετε – “you are going to raise a danger for yourselves/undergo danger”

μελλω + fut. inf. “be about/going to”

See LSJ: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aalphabetic+letter%3D*m%3Aentry+group%3D36%3Aentry%3Dme%2Fllw1

ἀρεῖσθαι – from αιρω.

Ἀλκιβιάδην δὲ τὸν στρατηγὸν ἀποδείξω ὑμῖν τὰ μυστήρια ποιοῦντα ἐν οἰκίᾳ μεθ᾽ ἑτέρων, – I will demonstrate to you that Alcibiades performed (performs?) . . . "

καὶ ἐὰν ψηφίσησθε ἄδειαν <ᾧ> ἐγὼ κελεύω, – “and if you vote immunity for the person I tell you to”

τῶν ἐνθάδε ἀνδρῶν – “of one of the men here”

ἔδοξε τοῖς πρυτάνεσι τοὺς μὲν ἀμυήτους μεταστήσασθαι, αὐτοὺς δ᾽ ἰέναι ἐπὶ τὸ μειράκιον ὃ ὁ Πυθόνικος ἐκέλευε – “the members of the Prytany decided that the uninitiated should stand apart, and they themselves should go after the slave (the “boy,” Lat. puer, not necessarily a young man) Pythonicus told them [to go after].”

καὶ ᾤχοντο, καὶ ἤγαγον θεράποντα Ἀλκιβιάδου – “and they [the members of the Prytany] left and brought the slave of Alcibiades”

τούτους μὲν αὐτοὺς εἶναι τοὺς ποιοῦντας, συμπαρεῖναι δὲ καὶ ὁρᾶν τὰ γιγνόμενα καὶ ἄλλους, παρεῖναι δὲ καὶ δούλους, ἑαυτόν τε καὶ τὸν ἀδελφὸν καὶ Ἱκέσιον τὸν αὐλητὴν καὶ τὸν Μελήτου δοῦλον. – “these themselves were the celebrants, but others were also together with them and watched the proceedings, he himself and his brother and Ikesios the oboist and the slave of Meletos.”

12

Back to sec. 10.

ἡ ἔνδειξις – could be translated “criminal charge” or “indictment”; see MacDowell’s note. The endeixis apparently initiated the proceeding.

πρῶτον μὲν περὶ αὐτῆς τῆς αἰτίας ὅθεν περ ἡ ἔνδειξις ἐγένετο, – “the accusation/cause from which the indictment arose”? αἰτία could mean the “cause” or the “accusation”, or perhaps both.

κατέστην – intransitive 2d aorist (not passive), something like “I came before this court” or “I got into this case”. I think the word combines both the physical act of standing or going up (on a platform?) in the court and the legal consequence of becoming the target of a criminal prosecution.

οὔθ᾽ ὡμολόγηται – “I never admitted/confessed to the accusation”.

13

I’ve interleaved the translation with the text. I hope it makes it easier to read. If not, let me know.

Andoc. 1. 13

πρῶτος μὲν οὗτος ταῦτα ἐμήνυσε, καὶ ἀπέγραψε τούτους· ὧν Πολύστρατος μὲν συνελήφθη καὶ ἀπέθανεν, οἱ δὲ ἄλλοι φεύγοντες ᾤχοντο, καὶ αὐτῶν ὑμεῖς θάνατον κατέγνωτε.

Now first Andromachus informed against these concerning this, and Pythonicus filed charges against the same, of whom Polystratus was captured and put to death, but the others had departed in exile, and you condemned them to death.

καί μοι λαβὲ καὶ ἀνάγνωθι αὐτῶν τὰ ὀνόματα.

ONOMATA. Tούσδε Ἀνδρόμαχος ἐμήνυσεν· Ἀλκιβιάδην, Νικίδην, Μέλητον, Ἀρχεβιάδην, Ἄρχιππον, Διογένην, Πολύστρατον, Ἀριστομένη, Οἰωνίαν, Παναίτιον.

And bring for me the names and read them. NAMES. Andromachus accused the following: Alcibiades, Nicides, Meletus, Archebiades, Archippus, Diogenes, Polystratus, Aristomenes, Eonias, Panaetius.

Andoc. 1. 14

Πρώτη μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες, μήνυσις ἐγένετο αὕτη ὑπὸ Ἀνδρομάχου κατὰ τούτων τῶν ἀνδρῶν.

Now a first act of informing, O men, came about, this one from Andromachus against these men.

καὶ μοι κάλει Διόγνητον. ἦσθα ζητητής, ὦ Διόγνητε, ὅτε Πυθόνικος εἰσήγγειλεν ἐν τῷ δήμῳ περὶ Ἀλκιβιάδου;

Ἧν.

And call Diognesus for me. "You were on the commission of inquiry, O Diognesus, when Pythonicus impeached Alcibiades in the assembly?

I was.

Οἶσθα οὖν μηνύσαντα Ἀνδρόμαχον τὰ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τῇ Πουλυτίωνος γιγνόμενα;

Οἶδα.

Indeed, you are aware that Andromachus had informed about the things that occurred in the house of Pulytion?

Yes.

Τὰ ὀνόματα οὖν τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐστι ταῦτα, καθ᾽ ὧν ἐκεῖνος ἐμήνυσεν;

Ἔστι ταῦτα.

Indeed, these are the names of the men, against whom he informed?

They are.

Andoc. 1. 15

Δευτέρα τοίνυν μήνυσις ἐγένετο.

So a second act of informing took place.

Τεῦκρος ἦν ἐνθάδε μέτοικος, ὃς ᾤχετο Μέγαράδε ὑπεξελθών, ἐκεῖθεν δὲ ἐπαγγέλλεται τῇ βουλῇ, εἴ οἱ ἄδειαν δοῖεν, μηνύσειν περὶ τῶν μυστηρίων, συνεργὸς ὤν, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους τοὺς ποιοῦντας μεθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῶν Ἑρμῶν τῆς περικοπῆς ἃ ᾔδει.

Teucrus was a metic [undocumented Athenian] to Athens, who had departed, quietly emigrating to Megara, and from there he messaged the Council, asking if they would give him immunity to inform concerning the mysteries, having celebrated them with others, both against the others who conducted them with him, and what he knew concerning the mutilation of the Herms.

ψηφισαμένης δὲ τῆς βουλῆς (ἦν γὰρ αὐτοκράτωρ) ᾤχοντο ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν Μέγαράδε· καὶ κομισθείς, ἄδειαν εὑρόμενος, ἀπογράφει τοὺς μεθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ.

The Council having passed the resolution (for it was independent), they went to Megara after him, and having been conducted back, having received immunity, he brought charges against those with him.

καὶ οὗτοι κατὰ τὴν Τεύκρου μήνυσιν ᾤχοντο φεύγοντες.

And these informed against by Teucrus departed as exiles.

καί μοι λαβὲ καὶ ἀνάγνωθι τὰ ὀνόματα αὐτῶν.

ΟΝΟΜΑΤΑ. Τούσδε Τεῦκρος ἐμήνυσε· Φαῖδρον, Γνιφωνίδην, Ἰσόνομον, Ἡφαιστόδωρον, Κηφισόδωρον, ἑαυτόν, Διόγνητον, Σμινδυρίδην, Φιλοκράτην, Ἀντιφῶντα, Τείσαρχον, Παντακλέα.

And bring for me their names and read them.

NAMES. Those that Teucrus informed on. Phaedrus, Gniphonides, Isonomus, Hephaestodorus, Cephisodorus, himself, Diognetus, Smindurides, Philocrates, Antiphon, Tesarchus, Pantaclea.

Μέμνησθε δέ, ὦ ἄνδρες, ὅτι καὶ ταῦθ᾽ ὑμῖν προσομολογεῖται ἅπαντα.

And take note, O men, that also all of this is also conceded to you [by my opponents].

14

πρῶτος μὲν οὗτος ταῦτα ἐμήνυσε, καὶ ἀπέγραψε τούτους· …
Now first Andromachus informed against these concerning this, and Pythonicus filed charges against the same

Rather “This man was the first to lay this information, and these are the men he listed.”
Note use of πρωτος. Here ταυτα (internal accusative) looks back, τουτους forward.

λαβε take not bring (φερε).

Πρώτη μέν: Your “Now” may sometimes work for μεν, but not here. It repeats the previous μεν. It’s eventually picked up not by δευτερα δε but by δευτερα τοιινυν.

ὦ Διόγνητε Not “O Diognesus” but “Diognetus” (w/o O)

Οἶσθα οὖν: Not “Indeed.” “So” or “then.”
I’ve noticed you have a bad habit of translating δη too by “indeed.” That’s rarely if ever a good translation.

τὰ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τῇ Πουλυτίωνος γιγνόμενα. Capture the tense. E.g. “the things that were going on” or “what was taking place”

Metics were not undocumented. They were registered and had rights. They were much more like resident aliens (green card holders) in the US. The orator Lysias was one.

ἐκεῖθεν δὲ ἐπαγγέλλεται τῇ βουλῇ, εἴ οἱ ἄδειαν δοῖεν, μηνύσειν περὶ τῶν μυστηρίων,
Not “from there he messaged the Council, asking if they would give him immunity to inform …”.
μηνυσειν is directly dependent on επαγγελλεται. “he messaged that if they granted him immunity he would lay information …”
(επαγγελλεται historic present, hence δοιεν opt. not αν+subj.)

μηνύσειν περὶ τῶν μυστηρίων, συνεργὸς ὤν, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους τοὺς ποιοῦντας μεθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῶν Ἑρμῶν τῆς περικοπῆς ἃ ᾔδει.
Not “inform concerning the mysteries, having celebrated them with others, both against the others who conducted them with him, and what he knew concerning the mutilation of the Herms.”
The first και is not “both.” He’d inform against the-others-who-acted-along-with-him too (having already implicated himself with συνεργος ων).
All this is easier to understand in Greek than to translate into English. The 2nd και simply links the two περι phrases. He’ll give information (i) about the mysteries and (ii) about the herms. ἁ ηδει in the latter balances τους αλλους in the former, they’re both governed by μηνυσειν.

Τούσδε Τεῦκρος ἐμήνυσε: τουσδε “the following.”

Παντακλέα. Not Pantaclea!! –cles. (3rd decl.)

15

Andoc. 1. 16

Τρίτη μήνυσις ἐγένετο. ἡ γυνὴ Ἀλκμεωνίδου, γενομένη δὲ καὶ Δάμωνος (Ἀγαρίστη ὄνομα αὐτῇ), αὕτη ἐμήνυσεν ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τῇ Χαρμίδου τῇ παρὰ τὸ Ὀλύμπιεῖον μυστήρια ποιεῖν Ἀλκιβιάδην καὶ Ἀξίοχον καὶ Ἀδείμαντον· καὶ ἔφυγον οὗτοι πάντες ἐπὶ ταύτῇ τῇ μηνύσει.

A third accusation occurred. The wife of Alcmeonidus, who had also been Damon’s wife (her name was Agariste), this woman reported that in the house of Charmidus next to the Olympieon, Alcibiades and Axiochus and Adeimantus celebrated mysteries. And these all fled upon that accusation.

Andoc. 1. 17

Ἔτι μήνυσις ἐγένετο μία. Λυδὸς ὁ Φερεκλέους τοῦ Θημακέως ἐμήνυσε μυστήρια γίγνεσθαι ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ Φερεκλέους τοῦ δεσπότου τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ, ἐν Θημακῷ· καὶ ἀπογράφει τούς τε ἄλλους, καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔφη τὸν ἐμὸν παρεῖναι μέν, καθεύδειν δὲ ἐγκεκαλυμμένον. Σπεύσιππος δὲ βουλεύων παραδίδωσιν αὐτοὺς τῷ δικαστηρίῳ. κἄπειτα ὁ πατὴρ καταστήσας ἐγγυητὰς ἐγράψατο τὸν Σπεύσιππον παρανόμων, καὶ ἠγωνίσατο ἐν ἑξακισχιλίοις Ἀθηναίων, καὶ μετέλαβε δικαστῶν τοσούτων οὐδὲ διακοσίας ψήφους ὁ Σπεύσιππος. ὁ δὲ πείσας καὶ δεόμενος μεῖναι τὸν πατέρα ἐγὼ ἦν μάλιστα, εἶτα δὲ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι συγγενεῖς.

Still one more accusation occurred. Lydus of Pherecles of Themacos reported that mysteries are celebrated in the house of Pherecles his master, the house in Themacos. And he charges others and he said that my own father was present, though he slept having covered his face. So Speusippus of the council gives them over to the court. And then, my father having stood surety, sued Speusippus for going outside the law, and went against before six thousand Athenians. And Speusippus received from so many justices not even two hundred votes. He having persuaded me and entreating me, I especially stood by my father, and after me also our other relations.

Andoc. 1. 18

καί μοι κάλει Καλλίαν καὶ Στέφανον. κάλει δὲ καὶ Φίλιππον καὶ Ἀλέξιππον· οὗτοι γάρ εἰσιν Ἀκουμενοῦ καὶ Αὐτοκράτορος συγγενεῖς, οἳ ἔφυγον ἐπὶ τῇ Λυδοῦ μηνύσει· τοῦ μὲν ἀδελφιδοῦς ἐστιν Αὐτοκράτωρ, τοῦ δὲ θεῖος Ἀκουμενός· οἷς προσήκει μισεῖν μὲν τὸν ἐξελάσαντα ἐκείνους, εἰδέναι δὲ μάλιστα δι᾽ ὅντινα ἔφυγον. βλέπετε εἰς τούτους, καὶ μαρτυρεῖτε εἰ ἀληθῆ λέγω.

And call for me Callias and Stephanus. And also call Philippus and Alexippus, for these are family of Acumenus and Autocrator, who fled upon Lydus’ report. The one is the nephew of Autocrator, and the other the uncle of Acumenus, to whom it is proper to hate the one driving them out, knowing that especially because of him they fled. Face the jury, and witness to them if I speak truth.

Why εἰδέναι infinitive?

16

ἐμήνυσε μυστήρια γίγνεσθαι – “reported that mysteries were performed”. Present infinitive here represents imperfect in direct speech.

κἄπειτα ὁ πατὴρ καταστήσας ἐγγυητὰς ἐγράψατο τὸν Σπεύσιππον παρανόμων, – “and then, my father, having furnished bondsmen [bondsmen are the ones who ‘stand surety’ for the appearance in court of a party; his father provided men willing to stand surety for him], filed a criminal complaint against Speusippos for illegal conduct”. There was no official prosecutor in Athens. Private citizens filed criminal complaints.

δικαστῶν – better “jurors”.

ὁ δὲ πείσας καὶ δεόμενος μεῖναι τὸν πατέρα ἐγὼ ἦν μάλιστα, – “the man who persuaded and begged my father to stay (in Athens and prosecute Speusippos, instead of going into exile) was I most of all”, i.e., “it was I who most of all persuaded and begged my father to stay”. πείσας καὶ δεόμενος agree with ἐγὼ

τοῦ μὲν ἀδελφιδοῦς ἐστιν Αὐτοκράτωρ, τοῦ δὲ θεῖος Ἀκουμενός· – “Autokrator is the nephew of the one; Akumenos is the uncle of the other.” (i.e, of Philip and Alexippos).

οἷς προσήκει μισεῖν μὲν τὸν ἐξελάσαντα ἐκείνους, εἰδέναι δὲ μάλιστα δι᾽ ὅντινα ἔφυγον – “it is proper/likely that these men (Philip and Alexippos) should both hate the man who drove them (Akumenos and Autokrator) into exile, and that they (P&A) should know most/best of all on account of whose efforts they (A&A) went into exile.”

εἰδέναι δὲ is parallel to μισεῖν μὲν; both are complementary to οἷς προσήκει.

17

Andoc. 1. 19.

ΜΑΡΤΥΡΕΣ

Τὰ μὲν γενόμενα ἠκούσατε, ὦ ἄνδρες, καὶ ὑμῖν οἱ μάρτυρες μεμαρτυρήκασιν· ἃ δὲ οἱ κατήγοροι ἐτόλμησαν εἰπεῖν, ἀναμνήσθητε. οὕτω γὰρ καὶ δίκαιον ἀπολογεῖσθαι, ἀναμιμνῄσκοντα τοὺς τῶν κατηγόρων λόγους ἐξελέγχειν. ἔλεξαν γὰρ ὡς ἐγὼ μηνύσαιμι περὶ τῶν μυστηρίων, ἀπογράψαιμί τε τὸν πατέρα τὸν ἐμαυτοῦ παρόντα, καὶ γενοίμην μηνυτὴς κατὰ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ ἐμαυτοῦ, λόγον οἶμαι πάντων δεινότατόν τε καὶ ἀνοσιώτατον λέγοντες. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἀπογράψας αὐτὸν Λυδὸς ἦν ὁ Φερεκλέους, ὁ δὲ πείσας ὑπομεῖναι καὶ μὴ οἴχεσθαι φεύγοντα ἐγώ, πολλὰ ἱκετεύσας καὶ λαμβανόμενος τῶν γονάτων.

You have heard the things that occurred, men, and the witnesses have confirmed them to you, but also what my accusers have braved to say, you recalled. This being so, it is definitely right for me to speak a defense, reminding you of my accuser’s speeches to refute them. For they have said that I had given information about the mysteries and had both accused my own father of being present and had become a testifier against my own father, a statement that I think of everything they are saying the most terrible and most blasphemous. For the one that accused him was Lydus the son of Phereclus, but the one who persuaded him to remain and not depart as a fugitive, was I, having pleaded much and taking hold of his knees.

18

ἀναμνήσθητε – this is aor. passive imperative. In the active this verb means “remind”; in passive, it is usually translated “remember.” If it were indicative, it would have augment, ἀνεμνήσθητε.

ἐτόλμησαν – “braved”? Hmm. Maybe better to translate “have made bold to say”–or why not just “have dared to say”? But it carries the connotation of effrontery and insolence. Maybe the best translation would be “have had the effrontery to say”.

μεμαρτυρήκασιν – “the witnesses have testified”

οὕτω γὰρ καὶ δίκαιον ἀπολογεῖσθαι, ἀναμιμνῄσκοντα . . . “It is also right for me to reply this way, to remind you [lit., having reminded you] of my accusers’ words and refute them”

μηνύσαιμι – I think this means “disclose” or “reveal” information about the Mysteries, in violation of the sacred obligation of secrecy. But μηνυτὴς κατὰ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ ἐμαυτοῦ probably means “an informer/delator against my own father” with the connotation of betrayal.

ἀπογράψαιμί/ἀπογράψας – should be translated consistently as a legal term: “file a charge”, “indict”.

ἀπογράψαιμί τε . . . καὶ γενοίμην – “both . . . and” is too strong here, I think. τε . . . καὶ simply link the accusations (against Andocides) relating to his father and set them apart from the accusation that he revealed the Mysteries.

ἱκετεύσας καὶ λαμβανόμενος – interesting contrast between aor. and pres. participles.

19

1.29

ὅπερ ἐμοὶ περὶ πλείστου ἐστὶν ὑμᾶς πεῖσαι. καὶ γὰρ οἱ λόγοι τῶν κατηγόρων—ταῦτα τὰ δεινὰ καὶ φρικώδη ἀνωρθίαζον, καὶ λόγους εἶπον ὡς πρότερον ἑτέρων ἁμαρτόντων καὶ ἀσεβησάντων περὶ τὼ θεώ, οἷα ἕκαστος αὐτῶν ἔπαθε καὶ ἐτιμωρήθη—τούτων οὖν ἐμοὶ τῶν λόγων ἢ τῶν ἔργων τί προσήκει;

Which things concerning me are such for the most part to persuade you. As for the speeches of my accusers—they have bewailed these wicked and terrible things, and spoken words about others previously sinning and committing sacrilege against the two gods, and what each suffered and how they were dishonored—how then do these words or deeds apply to me?

  • I’m wobbly on the tenses first sentence.

  • Who are τὼ θεώ? Hermes and Eleusis?

  • Also, is “ταῦτα τὰ δεινὰ καὶ φρικώδη ἀνωρθίαζον” supposed to be mock-tragic language? It doesn’t scan.

20

τὼ θεώ - Demeter and her daughter Persephone/Kore – the goddesses of the Eleusinian mysteries.

ὅπερ – singular

περὶ πλείστου – “of the highest importance” – “it is of the highest importance for me to persuade you”

φρικώδη – better “horrible”, i.e., causing you to shudder/bristle, which is the original meaning of Latin horribilis (although perhaps φρικώδη had not lost its connection with φρίσσω, unlike horrible/horreo).

ἐτιμωρήθη – avenge, i.e., punish for sacrilege

τί – better “why?”

εἶπον ὡς πρότερον ἑτέρων ἁμαρτόντων καὶ ἀσεβησάντων περὶ τὼ θεώ, οἷα ἕκαστος αὐτῶν ἔπαθε καὶ ἐτιμωρήθη : literally: “told stories how other men having previously/in the past had offended and committed sacrilege with respect to/concerning the two goddesses, what each of them suffered and what vengeance was taken on each of them”. Obviously needs to be reworked in English. Aorist participles ἑτέρων ἁμαρτόντων καὶ ἀσεβησάντων (genitive absolute) indicate tense, not aspect: pluperfect in English.

“sin” is too Judaeo-Christian.

ἀνωρθίαζον is imperfect: more “vivid,” here more sarcastic than aorist – connotes going on and on.

εἶπον is aorist, of course, but could be treated as imperfect, too.