αυτη. καὶ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκείνου οἰκίας ἐξεληλύθει πεφαρμακεῦσθαι λέ[γω]ν καὶ ἀπ[ὸ] μὲν τῆς Ἑρμιόνης οἰκίας ἐξιὼν οὔτʼ ἔφη πρός τινα αἰσθέσθαι οὐδενὸς οὐδʼ ὅλως ὑπόνοιαν οὐδεμίαν ἔσχεν, ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ τε καὶ τοῦ κληρονομεῖν μέλλοντος υἱοῦ προῆλθε πεφαρμακεῦσθαι λέγων. εἶχεν μὲν οὖν αἰτίας τοῦ καὶ αὐτὸς ἑ[αυ]τῷ προσενενκεῖν φάρμακον ἃς καὶ ἄλλοι πολλοὶ τὸν θάνατον τοῦ ζῆν προκρείναντες, καὶ γὰρ ὑπὸ δανειστῶν ὤλλυτο καὶ ἠπόρει. εἰ δʼ ἄρα τις καὶ ἐπεβούλευσεν αὐτῷ ὁ υἱὸς ἐπιτηδειότατος. διὰ τί δ̣ʼ ἐπήνενκεν τὸ ἔνκλημα ταύτῃ δῆλον. δύναται μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἄλ̣λ̣α τινὰ λελοιπῆσθαι παρὰ τὸν τῆς προνοίας χρόνον, διαδίκνυσι δὲ τὸ πρᾶγμα ὅτι καὶ ἐζηλοτύπει αὐτὴν μὴ ἐπισταμένην καὶ ἄνδρα μὲν αὐτῆς ἑαυτὸν ἐκάλει, οὐκ ἀξιούμενος δὲ ταύτης τῆς προσηγορίας ὑπʼ αὐτῆς καὶ ἐρωτικῶς ἤλγει καὶ ἐπιζῆν ἑαυτῷ ταύτην οὐκ ἤθελεν. ἐὰν λέγωσιν δοῦλον Σμάραγδον ἀνεύρετον γεγ[γ]ονέν̣αι αὐτὸν αἰτίαν ἔχοντα τοῦ τὴν πίστιν κεκλοφέναι, φη[σ]ὶ̣ν̣ δʼ οὖν καὶ πίστιν γεγονέναι ἵνα κλεπῇ, οὐ δύναται γὰρ κεκλέφθαι τὸ μηδʼ ἀρχὴν γενόμενον μὴ δυνατὸν δʼ εἶναι μηδὲ πίστιν γεγρ[ά]φθαι. οὔτε γὰρ ἡ ἀγορασα γράμματα ᾔδει οὔτε ἡ νῦν ἐνκαλουμένη Ἑρμιόνη, οὔτε ξένος οὐδεὶς ἄλλης καταγραφείσης πίστ[ι]ν πα̣[ρʼ ἑ]αυτοῦ δίδωσι. ὥστε καὶ παρὰ τίνος ἂν εἴποι τὴν πίστιν ἐσχηκέναι; παρὰ παντὸς γὰρ ἄκυρος ἦν. εἰ δὲ ἀπέδρα δοῦλος οὐδὲν δύναται τοῦτο κατὰ δεσπότου. ἔτι μέντοι περὶ τοῦ μηδὲ πίστιν εἶναι καὶ ἡ νομὴ συνβάλλεται. τῶν γὰρ ἐν πίστει καταγραφέ̣ντων τὸ ὄνομα μ[ό]νον εἰς τοὺς χρηματισμοὺς παρε[θ]έν̣τ̣ων, οὐκετι δʼ ἀντιποιουμένων ὧν κατεγράφησαν ἡ μὲν ἀγορασα φανερ̣ά̣ ἐσ[τι]ν̣ καὶ ἀντιπεποιημένη καὶ ἀφʼ οὗπερ ἠγόρα[σ]ε [κ]αρπουμένη, ὁ δʼ ἀφʼ οὗπερ πέπρακε οὐκέτι ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν τῆς μητρὸς τὴν [οἰ]κονομίαν ὡς προνοητὴς ποιούμενος τοῦτο̣ι̣[ς δʼ οὐκ ἐνχ[ει]ρῶν. ἐὰν κοινόν ὁμολόγημα λέγωσι γεγο- νέναι τῆς θυγατρὸς πρὸς τὴν Ἑρμιόνην ἑκατὸν πεντήκοντα κεραμίω[ν] καὶ ἀπὸ τούτων ὧν ἠγόρασεν κτημάτων φαμὲν τοῦτο [πᾶ]ν μηδὲν εἶναι πρὸς τὸν κατήγορον. οὐ γὰρ εἴ τι ἔπραξε θυγάτηρ πρὸς τὴν μητέρα τοῦτο αὐτοῖς εἰς συκοφαντίαν εὕρημα, ὅμως δὲ οὔτε τῶν αὐτῶν χρόνων οὐδὲ τοῦτο ἀλλὰ μετʼ ἐνι- αυτὸ[ν] ἐνγὺς δὴ οὔτε ἑκ[ατὸ]ν πεντήκοντα κεραμίων χορηγία πρὸς πίστ[ι]ν τεσσάρων ταλάντων οὐδὲν ἐστι, ταῦτα γὰρ μόνον̣ ἑνὸς ἐστιν τόκος. ἀλλὰ μὴ̣ν̣ υτ̣ω̣ν πίστεως περὶ τούτων οὔσης παρὰ τῷ δοκοῦντι πεπρακέναι ἑτέρῳ ἂν ἑαυτὴν̣ γράμ- ματι ἡ θ[υγ]άτηρ κατηνγύα τ̣ῷ̣ δημοσίῳ μελλήσουσα ἀφαιρε- θήσε[σθαι ὁ]πότε ἐκείνῳ ἐδόκει; ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ τῆς [χορ]ηγίας τοιοῦτον ἦν· [τῇ γὰρ Ἑρμι]όνῃ τρεῖς παῖδες ἦσαν, Ἀφ̣ρο[δ]ν, Διονυσία, τ[
(No Latin text was found in the provided document.)
This text discusses a situation involving a woman who has left her home and is contemplating the use of drugs, possibly due to distress from creditors. It mentions her son and the implications of his actions. The text also touches on issues of trust and legal matters regarding debts and property, indicating that there are disputes over the legitimacy of claims made against her. The narrative suggests that there are various parties involved, including a daughter and her mother, and it raises questions about the validity of certain agreements and the nature of familial relationships in the context of financial transactions.
αὕτη. καὶ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκείνου οἰκίας ἐξεληλύθει πεφαρμακεῦσθαι λέ[γω]ν καὶ ἀπ[ὸ] μὲν τῆς Ἑρμιόνης οἰκίας ἐξιὼν οὔτʼ ἔφη πρός τινα αἰσθέσθαι οὐδενὸς οὐδʼ ὅλως ὑπόνοιαν οὐδεμίαν ἔσχεν, ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ τε καὶ τοῦ κληρονομεῖν μέλλοντος υἱοῦ προῆλθε πεφαρμακεῦσθαι λέγων. εἶχεν μὲν οὖν αἰτίας τοῦ καὶ αὐτὸς ἑαυτῷ προσενεγκεῖν φάρμακον ἃς καὶ ἄλλοι πολλοὶ τὸν θάνατον τοῦ ζῆν προκρίναντες, καὶ γὰρ ὑπὸ δανειστῶν ὤλλυτο καὶ ἠπόρει. εἰ δʼ ἄρα τις καὶ ἐπεβούλευσεν αὐτῷ ὁ υἱὸς ἐπιτηδειότατος. διὰ τί δʼ ἐπήνεγκεν τὸ ἔνκλημα ταύτῃ δῆλον. δύναται μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἄλλα τινὰ λελυπῆσθαι παρὰ τὸν τῆς προνοίας χρόνον, διαδείκνυσι δὲ τὸ πρᾶγμα ὅτι καὶ ἐζηλοτύπει αὐτὴν μὴ ἐπισταμένην καὶ ἄνδρα μὲν αὐτῆς ἑαυτὸν ἐκάλει, οὐκ ἀξιούμενος δὲ ταύτης τῆς προσηγορίας ὑπʼ αὐτῆς καὶ ἐρωτικῶς ἤλγει καὶ ἐπιζῆν ἑαυτῷ ταύτην οὐκ ἤθελεν.
ἐὰν λέγωσιν δοῦλον Σμάραγδον ἀνεύρετον γεγονέναι αὐτὸν αἰτίαν ἔχοντα τοῦ τὴν πίστιν κεκλοφέναι, φησὶν δʼ οὖν καὶ πίστιν γεγονέναι ἵνα κλεπῇ, οὐ δύναται γὰρ κεκλέφθαι τὸ μηδʼ ἀρχὴν γενόμενον μὴ δυνατὸν δʼ εἶναι μηδὲ πίστιν γεγράφθαι. οὔτε γὰρ ἡ ἀγοράσασα γράμματα ᾔδει οὔτε ἡ νῦν ἐνκαλουμένη Ἑρμιόνη, οὔτε ξένος οὐδεὶς ἄλλης καταγραφείσης πίστιν παρʼ ἑαυτοῦ δίδωσι. ὥστε καὶ παρὰ τίνος ἂν εἴποι τὴν πίστιν ἐσχηκέναι; παρὰ παντὸς γὰρ ἄκυρος ἦν. εἰ δὲ ἀπέδρα δοῦλος οὐδὲν δύναται τοῦτο κατὰ δεσπότου.
ἔτι μέντοι περὶ τοῦ μηδὲ πίστιν εἶναι καὶ ἡ νομὴ συνβάλλεται. τῶν γὰρ ἐν πίστει καταγραφέντων τὸ ὄνομα μόνον εἰς τοὺς χρηματισμοὺς παρεθέντων, οὔπω δʼ ἀντιποιουμένων ὧν κατεγράφησαν ἡ μὲν ἀγοράσασα φανερά ἐστιν καὶ ἀντιπεποιημένη καὶ ἀφʼ οὗπερ ἠγόρασε καρπουμένη, ὁ δʼ ἀφʼ οὗπερ πέπρακε οὐκέτι ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν τῆς μητρὸς τὴν οἰκονομίαν ὡς προνοητὴς ποιούμενος τούτοις δʼ οὐκ ἐνχειρῶν.
This woman. For indeed he had left that man's house claiming to have been poisoned, and when leaving Hermione's house he said he had perceived nothing suspicious from anyone nor had any suspicion at all, but from his own house and from his son who was about to inherit, he came forth claiming to have been poisoned. Indeed, he had reasons to administer poison to himself, as many others have done, preferring death to life, for he was being destroyed by creditors and was in distress. But if indeed someone plotted against him, his son was the most suitable suspect. Why he brought the accusation in this way is clear. For it is possible that other things also troubled him beyond the time of his foresight, and the matter shows clearly that he was jealous of her without her knowing, and he called himself her husband, but not being considered worthy of this title by her, he suffered emotionally and did not wish to survive her.
If they say that the slave Smaragdos became untraceable, having the accusation of stealing the pledge, he says indeed that a pledge existed in order to be stolen, but it cannot be stolen if it never existed in the first place, nor is it possible that a pledge was even written. For neither the woman who bought knew letters, nor Hermione who is now accused, nor would any stranger give a pledge from himself when another was recorded. Thus, from whom could he claim to have received the pledge? For it was invalid from everyone. And if a slave ran away, this cannot be held against the master.
Moreover, concerning the fact that there was no pledge, the possession itself confirms this. For of those recorded as pledged, only the name was entered into the accounts, and those who were recorded no longer claimed ownership. The woman who bought is clearly in possession, openly claiming ownership and enjoying the fruits from the time she bought it, while the seller no longer does so, but rather manages his mother's affairs as a guardian, not interfering with these matters.