Technically this speech is only against Stephanos.

This is a good introduction. The first sentence lets the reader know the topic of the essay. The last sentence poses the answer to a why question. The last sentence is the thesis that the body of the paper will go on to prove.

My recommendation to the author was that she should include the fact that the purpose of the speech was not to "address," describe" or "illustrate," but to persuade the audience. How does the motivation of the speech writer influence our interpretation of the speech?

The argument is supported by use of specific evidence and the source of that evidence is cited in the parentheses. Please note that in the paper long quotes were, as long quotes should be, indented.

The author clarifies the meaning of the quote and its sepcific implications for Neaira and Stephanos.

The author analyzes the specific evidence, and by doing so, makes a clear and persuasive argument.

I recommended that this sentence be moved to the next paragraph, since this is really proven in the next paragraph and not by the quote that is being analyzed here.

The word, "verified," turns the perspective around a little. This either requires more explanation, or a different word should be used.

The author puts the case of Neaira in the context of Athenian society, though citing the source of this information would make this observation even better.

The case brought against Neaira and Stephanos* by [Demosthenes] and Apollodoros, addresses the issues of citizenship and marriage in ancient Athens. It describes the concerns of Athenian citizens regarding marriage and the legitimacy of children. It illustrates that marriage in this society acts primarily as an institution to ensure the legitimacy of children born to Athenian citizens.*

Neaira, an alien, is accused of living in marriage with Stephanos, an Athenian citizen. The law prohibiting this states:

If an alien lives in marriage with an Athenian woman by any manner or means, any Athenian at will who possesses the right is to indict him before the Thesmothetai. If he is convicted, both he and his property are to be sold, and one-third is to go to the successful prosecutor. The same is to apply if an alien woman lives in marriage with an Athenian man, and the man who lives in marriage with the alien woman so convicted is to be fined one thousand drachmas (185).*

This law exists to ensure the creation of legitimate Athenian offspring. The prosecution sought to indict both Stephanos and Neaira, in which case Neaira would be sold and Stephanos fined as illustrated above.*

The intentions of the prosecution in the case against Neaira are chiefly to affirm her status as an alien, and confirm that she is living in marriage with Stephanos. The law regarding citizenship cited above only applies to marriage. This law places an emphasis on marriage because legitimate children can only be born through a genuine marriage. Therefore, Athenian citizens can only marry other citizens in order to ensure the citizenship of the children will be valid.* Apollodoros stresses the importance of the legitimacy of Neaira's children in this case, because Stephanos was introducing them into Athenian society as citizens. Apollodoros argues, "this man is living in marriage with an alien woman contrary to the law, that he introduced another's children into his phratry and deme, that he gives the daughters of courtesans in marriage as though they were his own"* (184). If Apollodoros can invalidate their citizenship by proving they are truly the offspring of an alien, then he can prove Stephanos guilty of another law which states:

If anyone gives an alien woman in marriage to an Athenian man,
representing her as related to him, he is to be disfranchised, his
property is to be confiscated, and one-third is to go to the successful
prosecutor. Those who posses the right may bring an indictment before the Thesmothetai, as for non-citizenship (193).*

Therefore, this case demonstrates the significance of marriage as an institution which serves as the primary determination of the legitimacy of children.*

In order to indict Stephanos and Neaira the prosecution must demonstrate that they are in fact living in marriage. A legal marriage is principally verified* in the bearing of children and their introduction into Athenian society as citizens. Apollodoros argues, "For this is what living in marriage means: when a man sires children and introduces the sons to phratry and deme and gives the daughters to their husbands as his own" (209).* Therefore, a marriage exists to legitimate children and children in turn legitimate a marriage. A marriage may also be indicated by betrothal, but if children are not introduced into the society, then the marriage has not fulfilled its primary purpose. Apollodoros states, "Marriage was formally signaled not only by betrothal but also by the acknowledgement granted to the offspring, and if Stephanos has been treating Neaira's children as his legitimate issue, the relationship is a simulated marriage" (211).* Consequently, major aspects of marriage depend on the bearing of children.

This case against Neaira illustrates the role of marriage in Athenian society. Marriage predominantly existed as an institution ensuring the legitimacy of children. Married women were protected in isolation to secure a lack of opportunity for producing illegitimate progeny.** Men took wives for this singular purpose. As Apollodoros states, "For we have courtesans for pleasure, and concubines for the daily service of our bodies, but wives for the production of legitimate offspring and to have a reliable guardian of our household property" (209).* Marriage in this society exists less as an emotional attachment and more as a social and legal agreement.