This text is part of:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
5. It is also frequently necessary to speak
against documents, for it is common knowledge that
they are often not merely rebutted, but even
attacked as forgeries. But as this implies either
fraud or ignorance on the part of the signatories, it
is safer and easier to make the charge one of ignorance, because by so doing we reduce the number
of the persons accused.
[2]
But our proceedings as a
whole will draw their arguments from the circumstances of the case at issue. For example, it may be
incredible that an incident occurred as stated in the
documents, or, as more often happens, the evidence
of the documents may be overthrown by other proofs
which are likewise of an inartificial nature; if, for
example, it is alleged that the person, whose interests are prejudiced by the document, or one of
the signatories was absent when the document was
signed, or deceased before its signature, or if the
dates disagree, or events preceding or following the
writing of the document are inconsistent with it.
Even a simple inspection of a document is often
sufficient for the detection of forgery.
Quintilian. With An English Translation. Harold Edgeworth Butler. Cambridge. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann, Ltd. 1921.
The Annenberg CPB/Project provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.