LCL 318: 164-165
ἄξιον εἶναι πλείονος. τί γὰρ βουλόμενος δισχιλίων προσωρίσω τὴν οἰκίαν, ὅτε τὰς ὀγδοήκοντα μνᾶς ἐνεκάλεις, εἴ γε τὸ χωρίον ἄξιον ἦν πλείονος, ἀλλ᾿ 7οὐκ ἐπὶ τούτῳ καὶ τὰς δισχιλίας ἐτίθεις; ἢ ὅταν μέν σοι δοκῇ πάντα τὰ Ἀφόβου διασῴζειν, τό τε χωρίον ἔσται ταλάντου μόνον ἄξιον, καὶ τὴν οἰκίαν ἐν δισχιλίαις προσέξεις, ἥ τε προὶξ ὀγδοήκοντα μναῖ γενήσονται, καὶ ἀξιώσεις ἔχειν ἀμφότερα· ὅταν δέ σοι μὴ συμφέρῃ, τἀναντία πάλιν ἡ μὲν οἰκία ταλάντου, διότι νῦν ἐγὼ ταύτην ἔχω, τοῦ δὲ χωρίου τὸ περιὸν οὐκ ἐλάττονος ἢ δυοῖν ἄξιον, ἵν᾿ ἐγὼ δοκῶ 8βλάπτειν τοῦτον, οὐκ ἀποστερεῖσθαι; ὁρᾷς ὡς ὑποκρίνῃ μὲν δεδωκέναι τὴν προῖκα, φαίνῃ δὲ κατ᾿ οὐδ᾿ ὁντινοῦν τρόπον δεδωκώς; τὰ γὰρ ἀληθῆ καὶ μὴ κακουργούμενα τῶν πραγμάτων ἁπλῶς, οἷ᾿ ἂν ἐξ ἀρχῆς πραχθῇ, τοιαῦτ᾿ ἐστί· σὺ δὲ τοὐναντίον ἐξελέγχῃ πράξας εἰς τὴν καθ᾿ ἡμῶν ὑπηρεσίαν.
9Ἄξιον τοίνυν καὶ τὸν ὅρκον, ὁποῖόν τιν᾿ ἂν ὤμοσεν, εἴ τις ἔδωκεν, ἐκ τούτων ἰδεῖν. ὃς γὰρ ὀγδοήκοντα μνᾶς ἔφη τὴν προῖκ᾿ εἶναι, εἰ τότ᾿ αὐτῷ τις ἔδωκεν, ὀμόσαντι ταῦτ᾿ ἀληθῆ λέγειν, κομίσασθαι, τί ἐποίησεν ἄν; ἢ δῆλον ὅτι ὤμοσε· τί γὰρ καὶ λέγων οὐ φήσει τότ᾿ ἂν ὀμόσαι, νῦν γε τοῦτ᾿
as nothing more. With what end in view, Onetor, did you fix your pillars on the house for the two thousand extra drachmae, when you were demanding eighty minae, if the land was really worth more, instead of securing the two thousand drachmae also by a mortgage on the land? Or, when it suits7 your purpose to save all of the property of Aphobus, is the land to be worth a talent only, and are you to hold the house on a mortgage of two thousand drachmae more; and the marriage-portion being eighty minae, will you claim the right to hold both the land and the house; or again, when this is not to your interest, is all to be different: the house is to be worth a talent, because now it is I that hold it, and what is left of the farm is to be worth not less than two talents, in order that it may seem that I am wronging Aphobus, not myself being robbed? Do you see that, while you pretend to have8 paid the dowry, you are shown not to have paid it in any way whatsoever? For that line of conduct is sincere and free from guile, which remains throughout such as it was at the first, but you are proven to have followed the contrary course, so as to fulfil your service as an underling to my detriment.
It is worth while to consider in the light of these9 facts what sort of an oath he would have sworn, if an oath had been tendered him. For, when he declared that the dowry was eighty minae, if one had granted that he should recover that sum on condition of his swearing that this statement of his was true, what would he have done? Is it not plain that he would have taken the oath? What can he say to deny that he would have sworn it under those circumstances, when he demands the right to do so now? Well