[320] de Cor., §§ 169-170.
[321] Philip seems to have had a genuine admiration for Athens, and always treated her with extraordinary consideration. For a full appreciation of this attitude see Hogarth, Philip and Alexander.
[322] Plut., Dem., ch. xxiii.
[324] Hyp., Against Dem., fr. 3, col. xiii.
[325] Dinarchus, Against Dem., § 1.
[326] Butcher, Dem., pp. 124-127.
[327] This account is taken from Plutarch (Dem., ch. xxix.).
[328] Lucian, Dem. Enc., § 50.
[329] de Sublimi, ch. xxxiv.
[330] § 36, οἷον ἐκ μανδραγόρου καθεύδοντας.
[331] Aesch., Ctes., §§ 72, 166; de Leg., § 21; Ctes., §§ 84, 209.
[332] Plut., Dem., ch. ix., παράβακχον.
[333] ἐνθουιῶντα. Cf. Aristophanes, Clouds, 194:
[334] Notably the caricatures of Aeschines’ private life and family history in the de Corona, §§ 129-130, 260. Mr. Pickard-Cambridge makes it clear that the habitual members of the law-courts would be of a lower average socially than the ecclesia. The pay in either case was not enough to attract any but the unemployed, but whereas members of the leisured classes would have sufficient motives for attending the ecclesia, and well-to-do business-men might sacrifice valuable time unselfishly for the good of the State, there would be little inducement to such people to endure the wearisome routine of the law-courts (see Demosthenes, ch. iii.).
[335] E.g. Conon, § 4.
[336] de Cor., § 263.
[337] de Falsa Leg., § 148.
[338] Midias, § 91.
[339] Ibid., § 105.
[340] On the other hand he often apologizes for metaphors by ὣσπερ or οἷον—ἦν τοῦθ’ ὣσπερ ἐμπόδισμά τι τῷ Φιλίππῳ—though ἐμπόδισμα is probably as natural a form of expression as our ‘obstacle.’
[341] de Falsa Leg., § 275.
[342] I Phil., § 45; cf. τεθνάναι τῷ φόβῳ Θηβαίους, de Falsa Leg., § 81.
[343] de Cor., § 296.
[344] de Cor., § 169.
[345] de Cor., § 208.
[346] de Thucyd., ch. 53.
[347] Against Conon, §§ 3-5.
[348] Against Conon, §§ 8-9.
[349] de Demos., ch. xv.
[350] Demos., ch. xxii.
[351] Demos., chs. liii., liv. So Aeschines, after reading aloud some extracts from Demosthenes, and observing their effect on his hearers, exclaimed, ‘But what if you had heard the brute himself?’
[352] de Chersoneso, §§ 69-71, gives an example of a sentence of about twenty-seven lines in the Teubner edition.
[353] Timocrates, § 217, οὐδ’ ὁτιοῦν ἂν ὄφελοσ εἴη is a case in point—(⏑⏑⏑⏑––); in this instance no other arrangement of the words was possible; οὐδ’ ὁτιοῦν ἂν εἴη ὄφελος would give a harsh hiatus. Cf. also First Olynthiac, § 27, ἡλίκα γ’ ἐστὶ τὰ διάφορ’ ἐνθάδ’ ἢ ’κεῖ πολεμεῖν, where five shorts appear in sequence.
[354] E.g. de Falsa Leg., § 11, διεξιὼν ἡλίκα τὴν Ἕλλαδα πᾶσαν, οὐχὶ τὰς ἰδίας ἀδικοῦσι μόνον πατρίδας οἱ δωροδοκοῦντες. The position of ἀδικοῦσι is peculiar, but the sentence already contains a preponderance of short syllables, and any other arrangement would give more of them together: e.g. the more natural orders τὰς ἰδίας μόνον πατρίδας ἀδικοῦσι (⏒⏑⏑⏑⏑–⏑) or ἰδίας μόνον ἀδικοῦσι πατρίδας (⏑⏑–⏑⏑⏑⏑–⏑⏒⏑⏑).
[355] Arist., Rhet., iii. 8. 4.
[356] Super alta vectus Attis celeri rate maria, etc. The ending with five short syllables gives an impression of headlong speed.
[357] Cf. the ‘spondaic’ hymn, Ζεῦ πάντων ἀρχά, πάντων ἅγητορ, Ζεῦ σοὶ σπένδω ταύταν ὕμνων ἀρχάν.
[358] Croiset, Hist. de la Litt. Gr., tome iv., pp. 552-553.
[359] See ad hoc, Croiset, iv. 553. 1.
[360] de Symmor., §§ 24-26.
[361] Third Olynthiac, §§ 10-11.
[364] First Olynthiac, §§ 25-26.
[365] Chersonese, §§ 61-67. The recital of the present condition of Phocis is a simple but impressive piece of argument by description: ‘It was a terrible sight, Gentlemen, and a sad one; when we were lately on our way to Delphi we were compelled to see it all, houses in ruins, walls demolished, the country empty of men of military age; only a few poor women and little children and old men in pitiable state—words cannot describe the depth of the misery in which they are now sunk’ (de Falsa Leg., § 65).
[366] Cf. Third Olynthiac, §§ 24-26.
[367] Viz., on every meeting of the ecclesia at which legislation was possible.
[368] Timocrates, §§ 139 sqq.
[370] de Corona, §§ 261-262.
[372] οὐ γάρ πως ἅμα πάντα θεοὶ δόσαν ἀνθρώποισι.
[373] de Sublimi, ch. xxxiv.
[374] de Falsa Leg., §§ 112-113, with Weil’s note.
[375] § 90.
[376] §§ 9, 196. Weil remarks truly, ‘Les orateurs ne se piquent pas d’être exacts: ils usent largement de l’hyperbole mensongère.’
[377] Mr. Pickard-Cambridge (Demos., p. 80) observes: ‘Men who are assembled in a crowd do not think.... The orator has often to use arguments which no logic can defend, and to employ methods of persuasion upon a crowd which he would be ashamed to use if he were dealing with a personal friend.’ This is partly true, but should be accepted with reservations. The arguments in the harangues of Demosthenes will generally bear the light, and the public speeches by distinguished statesmen of this country on the causes of the Great War have frequently appealed to the higher nature of their audiences.
[378] There is a pseudo-epilogue, §§ 126-159, devoted chiefly to the birth and life of Aeschines. Here the speech might have ended, but the orator reverts in § 160 to an examination and defence of his own political life. The real epilogue is contained in §§ 252-324. The disorder is undoubtedly due in part to the peculiar facts of the case, namely, that the issues of the trial were much wider than might have appeared. Demosthenes is not so much concerned to prove the legality of Ctesiphon’s decree as to offer an apologia of his own political conduct during many years.
[380] A plausible answer. In Greece at the present day water-courses are used as roads, and the same is true of the south of Spain. At Malaga, a few years ago, the tram-line actually crossed the river-bed.
[382] § 136.
[383] § 167.
[384] §§ 210 sqq. ‘A State’s character is reflected in its laws’ (νόμους ... ὑπείληφασι ... τρόπους τῆς πόλεως.).
[386] Ctes., § 52.
[389] We know from Dinarchus, Aristogiton, § 13, that this trial shortly preceded the affair of Harpalus.
[390] de Cor., § 313, τραγικὸς Θεοκρίνης.
[392] This Hegesippus, an orator of secondary importance, was an ardent supporter of the patriotic party. In 357 B.C. he had brought an accusation against one Callippus in connexion with the affairs of Cardia (de Halon., § 43, and the hypothesis to the speech). In 343 B.C. he was one of an embassy sent to Philip (Demos., de Falsa Leg., § 331). He was still alive in 325 B.C. (Croiset, vol. iv. p. 621). The extant speech consists of a clear and straightforward discussion of the various points in Philip’s proposal; the style is easy, but without distinction, and Dionysius, who did not doubt that it was the work of Demosthenes, remarks that the orator has reverted to the style of Lysias (de Demos., ch. ix.). Hiatus is frequent and there are some monotonous repetitions. Critics were somewhat shocked by the concluding phrase of § 45—‘If you carry your brains in your heads, and not in your heels so as to walk on them.’ Aeschines calls the orator κρώβυλος, from his affected way of wearing his hair in a ‘bun’ on the top of his head.
[393] Dinarchus, Demos., § 104, ὁμολογῶν λαμβάνειν καὶ λήψεσθαι.
[394] Plut., Moralia, 820 F, κατεχώνευσαν εἰς ἀμίδας.
[395] Demetrius, de Elocutione, §§ 282, 284.
[396] Ibid., § 286.
[397] For this and other judgments, see Plut., Demos., chs. viii.-x.
[398] Ibid., ch. viii.
[399] Dionysius, Isaeus, ch. iv.
[400] Hypothesis to Demos., Against Aristogiton.
[401] In some MSS. of Demosthenes (Phil., iii., § 72) his name occurs as a member of an embassy which made a tour of the Peloponnese in 343 B.C. to rouse opposition against Philip.
[402] See (Aristotle) Ἀθηναίων πολιτεία, ch. 43, with Sandys’ notes. He must have been either ταμίας τῶν στρατιωτικῶν or president of οἱ ἐπὶ τὸ θεωρικόν, or perhaps he held both these appointments, as the scope of his work seems to imply. Ps.-Plutarch says πίστευσάμενος τὴν διοίκησιν τῶν χρημάτων.
[403] Ptolemy Philadelphus borrowed it in order to have it copied. He deposited a large sum as security, but in the end he sacrificed the deposit, kept the original, and presented Athens with his new copy.
[404] He wore the same clothes in summer and winter, and shoes only in very severe weather (Ps.-Plut.).
[405] See his condemnation of the advocates of Leocrates, § 135.
[406] οὐ μέλανί ἀλλὰ θανάτῳ χρίοντα τὸν κάλαμον κατὰ τῶν πονηρῶν (Ps.-Plut.).
[407] Suidas.
[408] Assuming (with Blass) the authenticity of the third letter of Demosthenes, which is doubtful.
[409] This list is taken from Suidas. The list compiled by Blass, from various sources, is different in some details.
[410] §§ 149-150.
[411] E.g. cf. § 3, ἐβουλόμην δ’ ἄν, ὥσπερ ὀυφέλιμόν ἐστι, etc., with Isocr. viii. (de Pace), § 36, ἠβουλόμην δ’ ἄν, ὥσπερ προσῆκόν ἐστιν, etc. also § 7 with Isocr. vii. (Areopagiticus), § 43, etc.
[413] This circumlocution may have been employed originally for the avoidance of hiatus, as in the example quoted, and in § 111, τὰ καλὰ τῶν ἔργων; it is, however, also used in cases where no such consideration enters, e.g. § 48, τοὺς ποιητοὺς τῶν πατέρων.
[414] E.g. § 7, οὐ μικρόν τι μέρος συνέχει τῶν τῆς πόλεως, οὐδ’ ἐπ’ ὀλιγὸν χρόνον, where συνέχει | οὐδ’ is deliberately avoided.
[415] E.g. §§ 71-73.
[416] E.g. § 143, καὶ αὐτίκα μάλ’ ὑμᾶς ἀξιώσει ἀκούειν αὐτοῦ ἀπολογουμένου. § 20, πολλοὶ ἐπείσθησαν τῶν μαρτύρων ἢ ἀμνημονεῖν ἢ μὴ ἐλθεῖν ἢ ἑτέραν πρόφασιν εὑρεῖν.
[418] φυγόντα, καὶ ... ἀκούσαντα ..., ἀφικόμενον καὶ ... καταφυγόντα, καὶ οὐδὲν ἣττον ... ἀποθανόντα.
[419] §§ 49-50.
[420] § 51.
[421] § 104.
[422] § 95.
[423] §§ 3, 10; cf. also § 79.
[424] § 150, cf. also § 43. ‘He contributed nothing to the nation’s safety, at a time when the country was contributing her trees, the dead their sepulchres, and the temples their arms.’ And § 17, οὔτε τοὺς λιμένας τῆς πόλεως ἐλεῶν; § 61, πόλεώς ἐστι θάνατος ἀνάστατον γενέσθαι. Hyperides has a similarly bold expression, ‘Condemning the city to death.’
[425] § 11.
[426] § 149.
[427] § 5.
[428] Leocrates was acquitted by one vote only.
[429] § 12. ‘It is so far superior to other courts that even those who are convicted before it do not question its justice. You should take it as your model.’
[430] §§ 11-12.
[431] §§ 1-2.
[432] §§ 92-94.
[433] Against Lysicles, fr. 75.
[434] He could not afford to be particular as to the kind of cases which he took up; the affair of Athenogenes is far from respectable on either side, and several of his speeches were in connexion with hetairai of the less reputable sort. His defence of the famous Phryne was his masterpiece.
[435] He mentions these three among the most famous cases in which he has been concerned (For Euxenippus, § 28).
[436] Demos., de Cor., §§ 134-135.
[437] Fr. 28.
[439] The agreement of Blass and Kenyon on this point may be taken as conclusive. Small fragments of another speech For Lycophron have been recently published (Pap. Oxyrh., vol. xiii.).
[440] ἀρχαίων κρίσις, v. 6.
[441] ὀβολοστατεῖν was used by Lysias also (fr. 41).
[442] Demetrius, περὶ ἑρμηνείας, § 302.
[443] Leoc., § 40.
[444] Fr. 80.
[445] Epitaphios, § 5.
[446] Cf. de Demos., col. xi, ἐν τῷ δήμῳ ἑπτακόσια φήσας εἶναι τάλαντα, νῦν τὰ ἡμίση ἀναφέρεις, καὶ οὐδ’ ἐλογίσω ὅτι τοῦ πάντα ἀνενεχθῆναι ὀρθῶς, κ.τ.λ. Ibid., col. xiii., καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι φίλοι αὐτοῦ ἔλεγον ὅτι ἀναγκάσουσι, κ.τ.λ. Euxenippus, § 19, etc.
[447] §§ 1-3, although a full stop occurs in the second line of § 3, are all really one sentence, but in spite of its length it is perfectly lucid.
[448] A good example of a story told by a succession of short sentences joined by καὶ is to be found in Athenogenes, § 5.
[449] Frr. 27-28.
[450] Euxenippus, §§ 5, 6.
[451] Fr. 173.
[452] Euxenippus, §§ 1-3.
[453] Against Demos., fr. v., col. xv. 15. The tide in the Euripus, which ebbed and flowed nine times a day, was, of course, proverbial.
[454] Euxenippus, col. xxxiv., § 22.
[455] Against Demos., col. xii.
[456] Fr. 76.
[457] Athenogenes, col. 2, ἄνθρωπον λογόγραφόν τε καὶ ἀγοραῖον.
[458] Lycurgus, Leocr., § 11; cf. § 149.
[459] Col. xxxix., the last two fragments of the speech in Blass’ edition.
[460] Demos., v., §§ 20-21.
[461] de Dinarcho, ch. 6.
[462] περὶ ὕψους, ch. 34.
[463] Ps.-Plut., § 15.
[467] Date 336-5 B.C.
[468] 322 B.C.
[469] Epitaphios, § 10.
[470] Epitaphios, §§ 41-43.