Dictionary of Greek and Roman antiquities. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

SYNEGORUS. SYNEGORUS. 1085
paid no attention to these, were unable to compete an equal interest with his father in preserving the
with more experienced opponents. To consult a inheritance, and therefore he would be considered
friend before bringing an action, or about the best in the light of a party. The law which promeans of preparing a defence, were obvious expe- hibited the advocate from taking fees, under peril
dients. It was but another step to have a speech of a ypaoPe before the Thesmothetae (Demosth.
prepared by such friend out of court, to be delivered c. Step/h. 1137), made no provision (and perhaps it
by the party himself when the cause was brought was impossible to make. an effective provision)
to trial. A class of persons thus sprang up, some- against an influence of a more pernicious kind, viz.
what in the nature of chamber counsel, who re- that of political association, which induced men-to
ceived money for writing speeches and giving legal support the members of their club or party without
advice to those who consulted them. Of this class the least regard for the right or justice of the case.
Antiphon was the first who acquired any celebrity. Hence the frequent allusions by the orators to the
Lysias, Isaeus, and Isocrates obtained considerable Ep'yai'T4pia orvto])a'YT~v, ioX8O7pi, &OGpc67reu, o'vvincomes by speech-writing. Demosthenes followed eUo'nT77oCo,, 7rapaecev&s Xhy6Yo, juapr6pwov, UMvothe same profession for some time, until his engage- /o0TCo, all which expressions have reference to that
ments in public business forced him to relinquish system of confederation at Athens, by which indiit. (Dein. c. Zenothl. 890.) These persons were viduals endeavoured to influence and control the
called not -vv?-yopot, but hoyoypapot, a name ap- courts of justice. (See ERANI; SYCOPHANTES;
plied to Demosthenes reproachfully by his rival, Reiske, Index in Orat. Att. s. v.'Ep-yaorrpLov and
who accuses him also of betraying his clients by 7rapaa-&evt.) That friends were often requested to
showing the speeches which he had written to the plead, not on account of any incapacity in the
adversary. (Aesch. c. Ctesiph. 78, c. Tincarcch. 13, party, but in order that by their presence they
ed. Steph.) [LoGOGRAPHI.] Still, whatever as- might exert an influence on the bench, is evident
sistance the party might have received out of from an attentive perusal of the orators. In some
court, the law which compelled him to appear in cases this might be a perfectly legitimate course, as
person at the trial, remained in force; although where a defendant charged with some serious crime
the prohibition to speak by counsel was so far re- called a man of high reputation to speak in his belaxed, that if the party was labouring under illness, half, and pledge himself thereby that he believed
or through any physical or mental debility was un- the charge was groundless. With such view Aesable to conduct his own cause without manifest chines, on his trial for misconlduct in the embassy,
disadvantage, he might (by permission of the court) prayed the aid of Eubulus and Phocion, the latter
procure a relation or friend to speak for him. of whom he had previously called as a witness.
Thus, when Miltiades was impeached for treason, (Aesch. de Fals. Leg. 51, 52, ed. Steph.)
and by reason of a gangrene in his hip was unable On criminal trials the practice with respect to
to plead his own cause, he was brought on a litter advocates was much the same as in civil actions;
into court, and his brother Tisagoras addressed the only that it seems to have been more common to
people on his behalf. So, when Isocrates was ill, have several speakers on the part of the prosecuhis son Aphareus spoke for him in the cause about tion; and in causes of importance, wherein the
the aYTrl'oors. And in the speech of Demosthenes state was materially interested, more especially in
against Leochares we see (p. 1081) that the son those which were brought before the court upon an
conducts his father's cause. As a general rule, the eZ'acyyeALia, it was usual to appoint public advoparty was expected to address the court himself; cates (called ovr/Myopoi, vmAsLoK, or tcam7yopoL) to
for the judges liked to form an opinion of him manage the prosecution. Thus, Pericles was apfrom his voice, look, and demeanour; and therefore pointed, not at his own desire, to assist in the imif a man distrusted his own ability, he would open peachment of Cimon. (Plut. Pericl. 10.) Public
the case himself by a short speech, and then ask prosecutors were chosen by the people to bring to
permission for his friend to come forward. (De- trial Demosthenes, Aristogiton, and others charged
mosth. c. Phlorn. 922. c. Neaer. 1349_) This was with having received bribes from Harpalus. (Diseldom refused; and in the time of the orators the narch. c. Demosthi. 90, 96, ed. Steph.) In ordinary
practice was so well established, that the principal cases however the accuser or prosecutor (car77-yopos)
speeches in the cause were not unfrequently made was a distinct personl from the aurvyopos, who actby the advocate. The defences by Demosthenes ed only as auxiliary to him. It might be, indeed,
of Ctesiphon against Aeschines, and of Phanus that the omvvyopos performed the most important
against Aphobus, may be cited as examples. In part at the trial, as Anytus and Lycon are said to
both of these it will be seen that Demosthenes have done on the trial of Socrates, wherein Melitins
was as much interested as the defendants them- was prosecutor; or it might be that he performed
selves; and it is further to be observed, that the a subordinate part, making only a short speech in
advocate was looked upon with more favour on this support of the prosecution, like those of Lysias
very account; for as no fees were allowed to be against Epicrates, Ergocles, and Philocrates, which
taken, a speaker was regarded with suspicion who are called E7r1'Xooi. But however this might be;
had no apparent motive for undertaking the cause he was in point of law an auxiliary only, and was
of another person. Hence we find in most of the neither entitled to a share of the reward (if any)
avv'ryoptcoi A&yot, that the speaker avows what given by the law to a successful accuser, nor liable,
his motives are; as for instance, that he is con- on the other hand, to a penalty of a thousand
nected by blood or friendship with the one party, drachms, or the rmTdia consequent upon a failure
or at enmity with the other, or that he has a stake to get a fifth part of the votes. Here we must disin the matter at issue between them. (See the tinguish between an advocate and a joint prosecuopening of the speeches of Isaeus, de Nicost. her. tor. The latter stood precisely in the same situaand de Philoct. her.; Isocrates c. Etzthyn. and De- tion as his colleague, just as a co-plaintiff in a civil
mosthenes e. Androt.) In the cause against Leo- action. The names of both would appear in the
chares above cited it is evident that the son had bill (?yKAflXu a), both would attend the iavadcpmts