She was definitely unprepared to disclose any information which would exonerate him or redound to his honour, since she deemed his disinterest in her advances a damage done to her self-worth and confidence.
She sided with Diogenes’ view that not every degree of silence is the equivalent of concealment, and she reckoned that since she wasn’t obliged to confer, let alone be unbiased on principle, she’d not attest or speak on the strength of his character – even if it meant his reputation was to a degree dependent on it.
Consequently, she chose a hurtful and shady silence, even though the voice of her conscience was loud and clear – being quite certain he was innocent. In all, it was proof that laws, as Cicero accurately expressed, ‘have power to compel or restrain man.’ Even the law of unrequited attraction.
It is true then that the suffering of an adversary remedies that of one with an insulted spirit and as Plutarch put it ‘satisfaction is a sweet medicine to a troubled mind.’
© Heath Muchena, 2016