Περὶ τοῦ Πύρρου κλήρου

Sections

– 1 2 – 4 5 – 7 7 – 9 10 – 13 13 – 16 16 – 18 19 – 21 22 – 23 24 – 26 27 – 28 29 – 31 32 – 34 35 – 36 37 – 39 39 – 40 41 – 44 44 – 46 47 – 48 49 – 50 51 – 54 54 – 57 57 – 59 60 – 61 62 – 63 64 – 65 66 – 68 69 – 71 72 – 73 74 – 77 77 – 78 79 – 80

İngilizce Yunanca

35 As for Nicodemus's evidence it is not difficult to decide from the actual text of the laws that he has obviously committed perjury. For seeing that, if a man gives with a woman a sum not duly assessed in a contract, and if the wife leaves her husband or the hushand puts away his wife, the man who gave the money cannot, as far as the law is concerned, demand back what he gave but did not assess in a contract—the defendant when he states that he gave his sister in marriage without any contract regarding a dowry, is obviously proved to be making an impudent assertion.

36 For what was likely to be the good to him of the marriage, if the husband could dismiss the wife whenever he wished? And this he certainly could do, if he had made no stipulation that he should receive a dowry with her. Would Nicodemus have married his sister to our uncle on these terms, and this, though he knew all the time that in the past she had produced no offspring, and though the dowry, if it had been assessed in a contract, was coming to him, if anything happened to her before she bore any children?