Originalveroffentlichung in: Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 33, 1992, 69-73 Watching a Lawsuit: A N e w Curse Tablet from Southern Russia D Angelos Chaniotis AVID R. JORDAN has recently published w i t h ample commentary a curse tablet said to have been found in "southern Russia." 1 In relation to a lawsuit an u n k n o w n person curses his opponents, as well as those w h o "are their supporting speakers/advocates" (oooi a w n y o p o u o i avcotcj and those w h o " o b s e r v e " ( n a p a x n p o u a i ) . T h e defixio probably dates to the late fourth or early third century B.C. T h e expres­ sion o o m Ttaparnpovat is unique in curse tablets mentioning lawsuits 2 and is moreover u n k n o w n in legal documents. T h e editor is cautious and rightly points out that a 7tapatnpr|xf|<; " w a s someone w h o s e presence, like that of the opponent's o"ovf|Yopo<;, in a p o s s i b l y fourth- or early third-century lawcourt north of the Black Sea w a s thought to be w o r t h cursing." This paper, drawing on some parallels for the role of the public at trials, aims to show that the JiccpaTT|pr|TCU were persons brought b y the litigant to the court in order to influence the judges with their reactions or merely with their presence. T h e w o r d jcaparnpr|Tr|<; is not attested as a legal terminus technicus, n o r does it occur in court orations o r legal documents to describe an institution, a magistrate, or the ordinary participants in a t r i a l (i.e., uapxupei;, auvfiyopoi, ouStKot, evopicoi, 8iKacrc(xt, KctTTiyopot, etc.). In the A t t i c orators TtocpaTTipeiv preserves its literal meaning, i.e., "watch, observe, look o n " (sc. a lawsuit), without judicial implications. 3 Aeschines, for instance, in the only attestation of the w o r d in a 1 2 Mnemosyne SER.4 40 (1987) 162-66; SEG 37.681; Bull, epigr. 1988, 250. T h e verb jtctpotTnpeiv has been restored b y B. Bravo (Poikilia. Etudes offertes a Jean-Pierre Vernant [Paris 1987] 215 n.29) in an Attic defixio; a daemon is called t o " g u a r d " (jiapaxtipEi) a person. This defixio does not concern a lawsuit and the restoration is quite uncertain. 3 A e s c h i n . 1.193 ( ' w a t c h carefully"); D e m . 16.10 ( ' t a k e care"), 18.161 ("watch for"); Isoc. Antid. 132 ("consider"). 69 70 W A T C H I N G A LAWSUIT legal oration (1.193), urges the j u r y to watch carefully the o p ponent's preparations and advocates (icod XTJV jrapao-K£UT|v KOCL xouc, a w n y o p o i x ; oruxcbv Jtapaxnpeixe). O b v i o u s l y this m o r a l l y positive and impartial sense o f jtaparnpetv cannot apply in the n e w curse tablet, unless w e suppose that the litigant w a s cursing the j u r y for doing its j o b conscientiously and cautiously or the audience for watching the lawsuit carefully. T h e exact meaning o f J t a p a x n p e i v is approached in this context o n l y if w e consider (a) the ancient judicial practice, especially the the role of 'onlookers' in lawsuits, and (b) that the actions o f auvnyopeiv and J t a p a i n p e w , occurring close together in the n e w defixio, actually describe t w o different kinds o f support offered to the opponent. A s JtocpaxnpE'iv has no direct o b j e c t , this o b j e c t e v i d e n t l y must be the lawsuit. I n d e e d , ancient courts, like m o d e r n ones, w e r e often frequented b y persons n o t directly i n v o l v e d in the lawsuit, e.g. relatives, interested neighbors, or simply old men w i t h nothing better to do. Demosthenes, for example, often refers to " p e o p l e standing a r o u nd" and listening to the litigants (7cept£axnK6x£<;).4 But could the audience, or parts thereof (the ' o n l o o k e r s ' of our inscription) influence a lawsuit, thus p r o v o k i n g the anger of one of the litigants? A n d if so, h o w was this done? A t t i c legal orations and c o m e d y p r o v i d e ample evidence that accused persons b r o u g h t their w e e p i n g children, w i v e s and mothers to court in order to w i n the s y m p a t h y of judges and to achieve a mild verdict. 5 But the presence of certain persons among the audience could be manipulated b y a skillful orator as a silent testimony supporting his case, just as Aeschines pointed out (ouxool uev eoxi u o i ) his 9 4 - y e a r - o l d father a m o n g the public, thus reminding the judges of his family's history and contribution to d e m o c r a c y (2.147, cf. 149). Socrates's trial, as presented b y Plato, offers an interesting example of h o w such 'silent witnesses' could endorse a litigant's arguments just b y their physical presence (Pi. Ap. 33C-34A). Socrates argued that if Meletos' accusations of his misleading the Athenian y o u t h w e r e true, his victims or their relatives, n o w watching the trial, w o u l d have s t o o d up to s u p p o r t the accusor or w o u l d have been called b y Meletos to testify; there f o l l o w s a long list of persons 4 Dem. 20.165, 54.41; see also D . M. MacDowell, The Law in Classical Athens (London 1978) 248, 251. 5 MacDowell (supra n.4) 251. ANGELOS CHANIOTIS p r e s e n t at the trial, w h o v e r i f y Socrates' a r g u m e n t just b y remaining still and not raising their voices. A discussion o f the audience's influence o n the judges and j u r y s h o u l d also consider that the G r e e k s w e r e (and still are) a rather impetuous and passionate people. A n ancient trial did not m e r e l y i n c l u d e t w o speeches and a f e w w i t n e s s e s , b u t also applause and protest, cries and laughter. W e need n o t r e m i n d the reader of t u m u l t u o u s scenes in m o d e r n courts or to recall the v i v i d participation of a l o u d m o b in Jesus' trial in order to s h o w that the presence and reactions of bystanders w a t c h i n g a trial c o u l d be an important factor in ancient jurisdiction. A n Hellenistic inscription concerning the arbritation of Patrae in a territorial dispute b e t w e e n T h u r i a and M e g a l o p o l i s (ca 182-167 B.C.)6 clearly presents the litigant's efforts to bring his o w n claque to a trial, to have as m a n y 'observers' o n his side as he c o u l d , and to influence the j u r y w i t h their s u p p o r t . T h i s decree o f T h u r i a includes measures f o r her representation in the trial: If the Patraeans accept their assignation to arbitrators, our advocates as well as all members of the council, except for those belonging to the tribe Oupisia and those chosen (to remain in Thuria for all eventualities), shall go to Patrae. A l o n g with them shall go all w h o wish it. In Patrae the secretary of the council shall make a list of these volunteers. A n d if w e win the case, he shall write on a stone stele in the shrine of the Syrian goddess all the names and patronymics of the advocates and of the persons that went with them (to Patrae). > T h u r i a e v i d e n t l y w o n the trial and the stele w a s written w i t h the names of the advocates, the officials, and the volunteers. A l t h o u g h the list is o n l y partially preserved, it still includes 111 n a m e s ! N o t u n l i k e m o d e r n f o o t b a l l fans m a n y T h u r i a n s r e s p o n d e d p r o m p t l y to this decree and u n d e r t o o k the l o n g j o u r n e y to Patrae as ' o n l o o k e r s ' , hence 7tapaxr|pT|Tai, of this 6 L. M . Moretti, Iscrizioni storiche ellenisticbe I (Florence 1967) 128f no. 51: E8O^E TOII; croveSpoii; nopeveaOai tic, Ildxpai; EJU xa<; Kpiaeii;, S v wtioefjcovxai oi riaxpeu; xo tcpi^a, iox>c, xe ODVSIKOIX; KOX xoi>s auveSpoug JtdvxaQ jtXav x&v xfji; Ooniavai; KCU XWV eniKptSevxtov jiopeveaxcoaav 8e Kal xwv aXXcov oi 8EX,OVXE<;- xoix; 8E iXQ6vxa<; avaypayaoQm 6 ypanH-axeoi; xwv ODveSpov en Ilaxpai^, Kal a v vitcaaconec;, d v a y p a y d x o ) ev xwi xtpSn ton; Xupiac; EI<; o x d X a v XiOivav xovq xe O-VV8(KOTX; itdvxai; j t a x p u m , o^oicai; Se KOU zovq eXOovxai;. 71 72 W A T C H I N G A LAWSUIT important trial. H o w vital their support was, is clearly s h o w n b y the measures taken b y their city to secure a large participation in this delegation. Interestingly enough the names of the volunteer 7t<xp(XTT|p,n.Tai w e r e to be written o n l y in case of success; the council was apparently convinced that any success in this trial depended not o n l y on the oratorial talents of the o v v S t K O i but also to a great part on the lively support of the public. T h e decree of Tnuria is not isolated in ancient Greek arbitration. W h e n Magnesia on the the Maeander arbitrated between the Cretan cities Itanos and Hierapytna (ca 112 B.C.), the official delegations of advocates (8ia6iKoc£6uxvoi) of each city w e r e supported b y representatives of allied cities w h o accompanied them to Magnesia (ouvrtocpovxec,). 7 T h u s these Hellenistic international arbitrations offer an interesting parallel to the n e w curse tablet, w h i c h can n o w be evaluated as an important n e w evidence for ancient Greek jurisdiction. T h e tablet, once belonging to Franz C u m o n t , is said to come f r o m "southern Russia." Its provenance might be accurately defined t h r o u g h onomastics. T h e names of the litigants (Menestratos, Kallippos, Herakleides, Leodamas, and H e r o d o tos) are not unusual and are w i d e l y distributed in ancient Greece. A l l five, however, occur, as far as I k n o w , in o n l y one city north of the Black Sea, namely at O l b i a 8 — a l s o the origin of other defixiones, at least t w o of them concerning lawsuits. 9 T h e O l b i a n Leodamas, the son of H e r o d o t u s (IOSPE I 2 201), w h o died in the late fifth or early fourth century B.C., might be an older relative of the Herakleitos and Leodamas mentioned in our curse tablet. This conjecture can be supported b y the wellk n o w n practice of using the same names in a f a m i l y for generations. It is also probable that the five litigants w e r e members of one family. 7 ICr. III.4 9.27f: itap6vT<ov TUV te SiaSixa^ouevajv d<j>' Exaxepa^ noXeax; KOU xibv auvnapovTcov a-oxoii;; cf. line 111: [ro]pfuvia>v 8e auvjiapovxcov ainok, Cf. L. Robert, BCH 59 (1935) 492f, w h o regarded the ouujiapovxec, as citizens of Itanos and Hierapytna. ' See the indices of the Inscriptiones Antiquae Orae Septentrionalis Ponti Euxini Graecae et Latinae (St Petersburg 1885-1916), Corpus Inscriptionttm Regni Bosporani (Moscow 1965), and Inscriptiones Olbiae (Leningrad 1968). In southern Russia the name Leodamas is attested only at Olbia. ' D . R. Jordan, GRBS 26 (1985) 195f nos. 171-75. ANGELOS CHANIOTIS T h e coexistence of all five names o n l y at O l b i a is naturally o n l y an indication and not certain evidence. There is, h o w e v e r , o n e m o r e p o i n t . In another O l b i a n defixio c o n c e r n i n g a lawsuit, 10 w e find the unique formula m l i d s avx&i a v v i o v x a s navxaq, w h i c h recalls the expression used in our curse tablet: a litigant curses his opponent and "all w h o go w i t h h i m , " i.e., all his supporters. T h e precise meaning of a u v i e v a i in this context is not clear; it might be supposed that support of any k i n d (testimonies in court, supporting speeches, etc.) was intended. T h e author of this text, h o w e v e r , did not use a legal term, but instead a vague expression like the JcapatTipetv in our defixio. " T h o s e w h o go w i t h " the litigant might have been persons engaged b y him to attend the trial and, b y their reactions or simply their presence, influence the judges. A l t h o u g h the participation of the audience at trials is not an O l b i a n peculiarity, the analogies between these t w o defixiones are striking. It remains to h o p e that further epigraphic evidence will t h r o w n e w light on the practice sketched here and increase our k n o w l e d g e of l a w and jurisdiction in classical Olbia. 1 1 UNIVERSITAT HEIDELBERG December, 1992 10 11 V. P. Yailenko, VDI 153 (1980) 86f (=Jordan [supra n.9] 195 no. 171). I would like to express my thanks to Professors J. Nicols, M. G . Peachin, and the anonymous reader for GRBS for improving this paper. 73