FOOTNOTES
[1] Iliad, ix. 443.
[2] Ibid., ix. 502 sqq.
[3] Herod., viii. 83.
[4] Thuc., i. 138.
[5] § 42.
[6] Brutus, § 28.
[7] Themistocles, ch. ii.
[8] Ibid., ch. xi.
[9] Ch. xxix.
[10] Plato, Republic, i. 330 A.
[11] Plato, Alcibiades, 1., 118 C.
[12] Plut., Pericles, ch. iv., who quotes Plato (comicus): σὺ γάρ, ὤς φασι, Χείρων ἐξέθρεψας Περικλέα.
[13] p. 270 A, Jowett’s translation.
[14] Antiphon, Tetral. ii.
[15] 1. 2. 40.
[16] Plato, l.c.
[17] Bothe, Comic Frag., i. 162. See also Aristophanes, Acharn. 530.
‘Then Pericles the Olympian in his wrath
Lightened and thundered and confounded Greece.’
[18] Thuc., ii. 65.
[19] Plut., Pericles, ch. vii.
[20] Arist., Rhet., iii. 10. 7 D.
[21] Thuc., i. 115-117; Arist., Rhet., iii. 4. 3.
[22] Arist., ibid.
[23] Herod., vii. 162; Arist., Rhet., i. 7. 34. In a later age the orator Demades borrowed it. (Athenaeus, iii. 99 D.)
[24] Plato, Protag., 317 C.
[25] Plato, Protag., 337 A-C, where Plato parodies his style.
[26] Cicero, Brutus, § 46.
[27] Arist., Rhet., ii. 24. 11.
[28] Soph. Elench., 183 p. 28 sqq.
[30] Quoted by Plato, Phaedrus, 273 B.C.
[31] Schol. on Hermogenes; also Sext. Empir. adv. Mathem., ii. 96.
[32] κακοῦ Κόρακος κακὰ ὠά.
[33] Soph. Elench., 184 a. 1.
[34] Cf. Plato, Gorgias, 453 A; Phaedr., 259 E.
[35] Isocr., Antid., § 155.
[36] If it is true, as Philostratus, Ep. ix. says, that Aspasia ‘sharpened the tongue of Pericles’ in Gorgian style, he must have visited Athens in a private capacity at an earlier date, unless his Olympiac and other speeches were widely circulated and read.
[37] Πολλαχοῦ τῶν ἰάμβων γοργιάζει, Philost., Lives of the Sophists, ix. 493.
[38] Plato, Meno, 70 B; Philost., Epist. ix. 364.
[39] περὶ φύσεως ἢ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος, Sext. Emp., vii. 65. Cicero (Brut., § 46) mentions also a collection of communes loci made for instructional purposes.
[40] Arist., Rhet., iii. 14. 12.
[41] Symposium, 194 E, sqq., 197 D; the latter contains some excellent examples: πραύτητα μὲν πορίζων, ἀγριότητα δ’ ἐξορίζων· φιλόδωρος εὐμενείας, ἄδωρος δυσμενείας, etc.
[42] Introduction to the Teubner edition of Antiphon (1908), p. xxviii.
[43] Ps.-Plut., Lives of the Orators, Antiphon, § 9.
[44] Thuc., viii. 68.
[45] Eth. Eudem., iii. 1232 b. 7.
[46] The Sophistical element is very prominent, especially in the tetralogies. Like Tisias he makes great use of arguments from probability.
[47] De comp. verborum, ch. 22.
[48] Such words are, for instance, ἀνατροπεύς; μήνιμα and ἀλιτήριος, separately, as μήνιμα ἀκέσασθαι, δεινοὺς ἀλιτηρίους ἕξομεν, or together, μήνιμα τῶν ἀλιτηρίων προστρίψομαι; θεία κηλίς, γεγωνεῖν, ὀπτήρ, ἀείμνηστος.
[49] Rare but not poetical words are, e.g. ὑπῆρκτο, χωροφιλεῖν, καταδοχθείς, ἐπίδοξος, and, from lost Speeches, μοιρολογχεῖν, τριβωνεύεσθαι, ἀστοργία, and many others quoted by lexicographers for their peculiarity.
[50] E.g. οἴδαμεν, ᾔδεις, and the remarkable εἰκότερον.
[51] Vide supra, p. [16]. A striking example of the verbal periphrasis is in Antiphon, Herodes, § 94: νῦν μὲν οὖν γνωρισταὶ γίνεσθε τῆς δίκης, τότε δὲ δικασταὶ τῶν μαρτύρων· νῦν μέν δοξασταί, τότε δὲ κριταὶ τῶν ἀληθῶν.
[52] Rhet., iii. 9. 1-2.
[53] Rhet., iii. 9. 3: λέξιν ἔχουσαν ἀρχὴν καὶ τελευτὴν αὐτὴν καθ’ αὐτὴν καὶ μέγεθος εὐσύνοπτον. Ibid., 5: εὐανάπνευστος.
[54] Herod., i. 16-17.
[55] Id., iii. 80-81.
[56] Arist., Rhet., iii. 9. 3.
[57] Dion., de Lysia, 6; ἡ συστρέφουσα τὰ νοήματα καὶ στρογγύλως ἐκφέρουσα λέξις.
[58] See Verrall, Rhyme and Reason, in The Bacchants of Euripides.
[60] Arist., Rhet., i.
[61] E.g., on the laws, Herodes, § 14, and Choreutes, § 2, where the same passage of about eight lines occurs with only the alteration of two or three unimportant words.
[62] Jebb (Attic Orators, vol. i. pp. 40-41) insists that the prominence given to this kind of argument points to a deep religious feeling in the orator’s heart. However, we meet with the same type of argument in Aeschines, to whom no such depth of feeling is usually imputed.
[63] Cf. the Demosthenic collection of προοίμια.
[64] προκατασκευή.
[65] διήγησις.
[66] πίστεις.
[67] ἐπίλογος.
[68] This is another characteristic of the earlier rhetoricians; vide supra, p. [12].
[69] Herodes, § 26.
[70] The Introduction amounts to one-fifth of the whole speech.
[71] Ps.-Plut., Lives of the Ten Orators.
[72] Attische Beredsamkeit, vol. i. pp. 104-105.
[73] In the similar case discussed by Pericles and Protagoras, the third possibility was considered—the guilt of the javelin. (Plut., Pericles, ch. 36.)
[74] ἕνδειξις κακουργίας.
[76] Soph. Elench., 183 b. 32.
[77] 267 C.
[78] x. 416 A.
[79] Rhet., iii. 1. 7.
[80] The word seems to mean powerful or convincing; whether τόποι (commonplaces or passages) or λόγοι (arguments) is the word to be supplied, we cannot even conjecture.
[81] de Isaeo, ch. xx.
[82] de Demosthene, ch. iii.
[83] Phaedrus, 267 C (Jowett).
[84] Book I., 336B.
[85] Rhet., iii. 8. 4; iii. 1. 7. The paeon = –⏑⏑⏑ or ⏑⏑⏑–.
[86] Cf. Aristoph., Frogs, 866: ἐβουλόμην μὲν οὐκ ἐρίζειν ἐνθάδε.
[87] Aesch. in Ctes., § 2.
[88] The reference by Arist., Rhet., ii. 23. 28 to ἡ πρότερον Θεοδώρου τέχνη—the earlier treatise of T.—implies others.
[89] Cf. Arist., Rhet., iii. 13. 4: διήγησις, ἐπιδιήγησις, προδιήγησις; ἔλεγχος, ἐπεξέλεγχος.
[90] Phaedrus, 266 C, λογοδαίδαλος.
[91] Aristoph., Clouds, 109.
[92] Thuc., vi. 60.
[93] de Myst., §§ 61 sqq.
[94] Ibid., § 4.
[95] Dion., de Lysia, ch. 2.
[96] Quint., xii. 10, 21.
[97] Philostratus, vita Her. Att., ii. 1, § 14.
[98] Hermogenes, περὶ ἰδεῶν, ch. xi. p. 416. Spengel (Rhetores Graeci).
[99] Ps.-Plut., Lives of the Ten Orators.
[100] The following is a list of some of the poetical or unusual words and phrases occurring in the speeches—de Myst.: § 29 ταῦτα τὰ δεινὰ καὶ φρικώδη ἀνωρθίαζον. § 67 πίστιν ... ἀπιστοτάτην. § 68 ὁρῶσι τοῦ ἡλίου τὸ φῶς. § 99 ἐπίτριπτον κίναδος. § 130 κληδών. § 146 (γένος) οἴχεται πᾶν πρόρριζον.
de Pace: § 7 τὸν δῆμον ... ὑψηλόν ἦρε. § 8 and in three other passages κατηργάσατο (secure, bring about, cf. Eur. Her., 646 πόλει σωτηρίαν κατεργάσασθαι). § 18 κρατιστεύειν. § 31 ἐκτεῖναι τὸν θυμὸν, ἀρχὴν πολλῶν κακῶν.
The de Pace is noticeable for the recurrence of two grammatical forms which do not occur in the other speeches, the use of τοῦτο μὲν, τοῦτο δέ after the manner of Herodotus for the simple μέν and δέ; and the repetition of δέ with a resumptive force, as, e.g., § 27 ἃ δὲ πρὸς τούτους μόνους ἐκεῖνοι συνέθεντο, ταῦτα δ’ οὐδεπώποτ’ αὐτούς φασί παραβῆναι.
The illogical use of the plural of οὐδείς in the same sense as the singular (de Myst., § 23 οὐδένας, § 147 οὐδένα) is perhaps colloquial. There are many instances of the use of this plural in the later orators, a point which Liddell and Scott did not observe, or, at any rate, failed to make clear. Another phrase which may be colloquial is τῇ γνώμῃ καὶ ταῖν χεροῖν ταῖν ἐμαυτοῦ (de Myst., § 144).
[101] de Myst., §§ 48-50.
[102] de Myst., §§ 37-39.
[103] de Myst., §§ 1-3 and 8.
[104] Ibid., § 150.
[105] de Myst., §§ 4, 5.
[106] de Myst., § 57.
[107] de Myst., § 126.
[108] Ibid., § 95.
[109] ὧ συκόφαντα καὶ ἐπίτριπτον κίναδος, κ.τ.λ., de Myst., § 99.
[110] Ibid., § 93.
[112] § 8.
[113] de Myst., § 112.
[114] E.g., the poetical ὑψηλὸν ἧρε. Andoc., § 7; Aesch., § 174. Cf. Euripides, Supp., 555, and Her. 323.
[115] de Pace, §§ 24-26.
[116] Frag. 5 (Blass).
[117] Two lost speeches for Iphicrates, 371 B.C. and 354 B.C., were pronounced spurious by Dionysius; but, as he accepted the date of Lysias’ birth as 459 B.C., he was bound to conclude that these speeches were not by him.
[118] Against Eratosthenes, §§ 5-17.
[119] Dion., de Lysia, ch. 2: τῆς Ἀττικῆς γλώττης ἄριστος κανών.
[120] καταστρατηγεῖ.
[121] E.g. δεινὸν δέ μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι εἰ νῦν μὲν ... τότε δέ, etc., and ἄξιον δ’ ἐνθυμηθῆναι ὅτι ...
[122] Examples are numerous: e.g. the speech of Polyaenus (For the Soldier, §§ 4-5) shows a simplicity in narrative which Herodotus could not have surpassed.
[123] Ch. ii. pp. 26-7.
[124] For the Cripple, § 7.
[125] For Mantitheus, §§ 18-21.
[126] For the Cripple, §§ 1-3.
[127] For the Cripple, parts of §§ 10-12.
[128] Ibid., §§ 19-20.
[129] de Caede Eratosthenis, §§ 11-14.
[132] Agoratus, §§ 39-40.
[133] Vide infra, p. [92], on the question of authenticity.
[135] Lysias, Nicomachus, § 27; Andocides, de Myst., § 93, quoted infra, p. [96].
[136] Ps.-Plut., Lives of the Ten Orators; Dion., de Lys., ch. 17, διακοσίων οὐκ ἐλάσσους δικανικοὺς γράψας λόγους.
[137] However, Socrates, in Plato’s Menexenus, 236 B, suggests that Pericles’ famous Funeral Speech was composed for him by Aspasia.
[138] Epit., §§ 79-81.
[139] The reference to the Amazons and the general vagueness of the historical setting are closely paralleled by the Funeral Speech in Plato’s Menexenus, which is generally regarded as a parody.
[140] Rhet., III. 10. 7.
[141] de Lys., ch. 32.
[146] Andoc., de Myst., § 90.
[148] § 3.
[151] The second speech with the same title is only an epitome of the first.
[153] Dion., de Isaeo, ch. 1.
[154] Jebb, vol. ii. p. 265.
[155] de Isaeo, ch. 1.
[156] He is by far the most important; in some cases we can supplement him from Demosthenes, but other authorities are negligible.
[157] §§ 1-11.
[158] § 12. I have translated this section, though not relevant to the matter under discussion, because it gives a good indication of Athenian feeling on the subject of the torture of slaves.
[159] Jebb, Attic Orators, vol. ii. p. 277³.
[160] Cleisthenes (Herod., vi. 129), in a moment of extreme excitement, remarked to Hippoclides ἀπωρχήσαο τὸν γάμον—‘You have danced away your chances of marriage.’
[161] Cf., too, the use of ὑπωπτιάζω in the New Testament.
[162] E.g. γρῦξαι.
[163] It has been already remarked that the speech-writers are, as a rule, ridiculously unsuccessful in their attempt to make their clients speak in the way that is natural to them (vide supra, p. [37]).
[164] E.g. Or. v. 23, ἡγούμενοι οὐκ ἂν αὐτὸν βεβαιώσειν, κ.τ.λ. Or. v. 31. ὡμολογήσαμεν ἐμμενεῖν οἷς ἂν γνοῖεν. Or. v. 43, δαπανηθείς (in middle sense).
[165] E.g. καθιστάνειν, ψηφίσεσθε, ἄξαντες.
[166] The Estate of Apollodorus (Or. vii.), § 5.
[167] Ciron (Or. viii.), § 28.
[168] Nicostratus (Or. iv.), §§ 7-10.
[169] de Isaeo, ch. 3.
[170] de Isaeo, ch. 4.
[171] Ibid., ch. 5.
[172] Lysias, fr. 46.
[173] Isaeus, fr. 15.
[174] Cf. de Isaeo, ch. 14.
[175] de Isaeo, ch. 16.
[176] Ibid., ch. 3.
[178] E.g. Orr. 2, 3, 7, 8, 9.
[179] Or. 8 (Ciron), § 46.
[180] de Isaeo, ch. 16.
[181] Antid., § 161.
[182] Phaedr., pp. 278-9.
[183] καὶ ἀρχὰς δὲ [και] (τὰς?) περὶ τὴν Χίον κατέστησε καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν τῇ πατρίδι πολίτειαν. Ps.-Plut., 837 B.
[184] However, if we pressed this passage, we must regard the journey with Timotheus as unhistorical. All the evidence is to be found in Blass, Att. Ber., vol. ii. pp. 16-17.
[185] Antid., §§ 159 sqq.
[186] de Comp. Verb., ch. xxiii.
[187] de Comp. Verb., ch. xxiii. He quotes Areop., §§ 1-5.
[188] Isocrates allows elisions of certain short vowels, but he is more sparing than most poets in the use of it. In the epideictic speeches the commonest elision is of enclitics or semi-enclitics (τε, δέ, etc.) and of personal pronouns. Crasis, except of καὶ ἄν is rare. In the forensic speeches (his early work) elision is much less restricted.
[189] Maxim. Planud. ad Hermog., v. 469.
[190] Vol. ii. p. 144.
[191] Rhet., Book III. 8. 4.
[192] Ibid.
[193] θαυμάζειν καὶ ζηλοῦν, ἐπαινεῖν καὶ τιμᾶν, etc.
[194] E.g. Paneg. § 5, ὅταν ἢ τὰ πράγματα λάβῃ τέλος ... ἢ τὸν λόγον ἴδῃ τις ἔχοντα πέρας, where τέλος and πέρας, two words for end or completion, are not really distinguishable, or, at any rate, the distinction is very slight. So in Evagoras, § 11, εὐλογεῖν and ἐγκωμιάζειν are used antithetically (to praise—to eulogise).
[195] E.g. Evagoras, § 10, αὐταῖς ταῖς εὐρυθμίαις καὶ ταῖς συμμετρίαις ψυχαγωγοῦσι τοὺς ἀκούοντας. Elsewhere we find μετριότητες, λαμπρότητες, αὐθάδειαι, ἀργίαι, etc.
[196] Aristoph., Clouds, passim.
[197] Cf. Isocrates’ reference to this passage in Antid., § 193.
[198] Hel. (Or. x.), § 1, οἱ δὲ διεξιόντες ὡς ἀνδρία καὶ σοφία καὶ δικαιοσύνη ταὐτόν ἐστι.
[199] §§ 9 sqq.
[200] Antid., §§ 187-189.
[201] §§ 19 sqq.
[202] Rhet., i. 1. 10.
[203] τὸ τολμᾶν, § 192.
[205] Or astrology?
[206] Antid., Summary of §§ 181-303.
[207] Antid., § 11, ἰδέαι.
[208] Ep. 1, § 87. This letter is referred to in Philippus, § 81; the text of the letter remaining to us is incomplete.
[209] Philippus, 346 B.C.
[210] Ibid. (Or. v.), §§ 14-17.
[211] Isocrates is said to have spent ten years over the composition of the Panegyricus; it was probably published in 380 B.C.
[212] I.e. the victory of the 10,000 at Cunaxa.
[213] The truth of this maxim is illustrated by our records of the impromptu performances of Demosthenes, vide infra, p. [190].
[214] de Isaeo, ch. xix., παχύτερον ὄντα τὴν λέξιν καὶ κοινότερον.
[215] Rhet., iii. 3. 3.
[216] Arist., Rhet., iii. 3. 4.
[217] Busiris, §§ 5-6. He endeavoured to make Socrates responsible for the misdeeds of Alcibiades.
[218] de Isaeo, ch. xx.
[219] Dion., de Isocrate, ch. xviii.: τὴν ἀπολογίαν τὴν πάνυ θαυμαστὴν ἐν ταῖς πρὸς Ἀριστοτέλη ἀντιγραφαῖς ἐποιήσατο.
[220] See Timarchus, § 49, where Aeschines states, in 346 B.C., that he is rather over forty-five years old.
[221] Aesch., de Leg., § 147. Dem. (de Cor., 129 sqq.) asserts that he was originally a slave named Tromes (Coward), but changed his name to Atrometus (Dauntless).
[222] Dem., de Cor., §§ 258-259. See further infra, p. [249].
[223] However, his elder brother, Philocrates, was elected general three times in succession, and his younger brother, Aphobetus, was sent as an ambassador to the Great King.—Aesch., de Leg., § 149.
[224] de Cor., § 262, vide infra, p. [249].
[225] de Leg., § 79; vide infra, p. [168].
[226] See de Pace (passim) delivered in the same year.
[227] Aesch., Ctes., §§ 222-225.
[228] Dem., ch. 24, περὶ Ῥόδον καὶ Ἰωνίαν σοφιστεύων κατεβίωσεν.
[229] de Leg., § 16, τοῖς γὰρ καιροῖς ἀνάγκη συμπεριφέρεσθαι πρὸς τὸ κράτιστον καὶ τὸν ἄνδρα καὶ τὴν πόλιν.
[230] Ibid., § 157, ὁ τῆς μεγίστης σύμβουλος πόλεως.
[231] Hyper., adv. Dem., xxiv.
[232] de Leg., § 79.
[233] Dem., de Falsa Leg., §§ 145, 166-177; de Cor., § 41.
[234] Timarchus, § 174; Ctes., § 58.
[236] de Leg., § 163.
[238] ἐπῆλθέ μοι, Aesch., Ctes., § 118, where A. complacently relates the whole incident.
[239] de Cor., §§ 129, 262, etc. Further, de Falsa Leg., § 246. A tritagonist would ordinarily have to play the parts of kings and tyrants, who must as a rule be majestic characters (cf. ὁ Κρέων Αὶσχίνης, de Falsa Leg., § 247).
[240] Timarch., § 25.
[241] Dem., de Falsa Leg., § 252.
[242] Dem., de Falsa Leg., § 255, σεμνολογεἳ ... φωνασκήσας, etc.; de Cor., § 133, σεμνολόγου; and numerous references to τριταγωνίστης.
[243] Aesch., de Leg., § 41, τὴν φύσιν μου μακαρίζων, etc. (of the behaviour of Demosthenes during the first embassy).
[244] Ctes., §§ 228-229, ἐξ ὀνομάτων συγκείμενος, etc.
[246] Dem., de Cor., § 128.
[247] References to himself as πεπαιδευμένος, to his adversaries as ἀπαίδευτοι, to their ἀπαιδευσία, τό ἀμαθές, etc., are very common in the speeches against Timarchus and on the embassy.
[248] Infra, pp. [184], [187].
[249] Timarch., § 26. Aeschines adds a characteristically Greek touch—‘his body was so horribly out of condition through his drunkenness and other excesses that decent people covered their eyes.’ It was the neglect of the body, rather than the exposure of the arms and legs, which is exaggerated into ‘nakedness,’ that really shocked the spectators, in addition to the ‘rough-and-tumble’ gestures of the orator.
[250] Timarch., §§ 37-38.
[251] Timarch., § 39. Ἄκυρος is used in a double sense; the early actions of Timarchus are unratified in the sense of not proved; the actions of the Thirty are not ratified by the succeeding governments. It is a looseness of expression which does not spoil the general sense, and there is, perhaps, an implied reference to the Amnesty, declared after the expulsion of the Thirty. Similarly Aeschines declares an amnesty for all the offences of Timarchus before a certain date.
[252] Ibid., § 55. In § 70 there is a further apology. Cf. also § 76.
[253] Timarch., § 53.
[255] Timarch., § 48.
[256] Dem., de Falsa Leg., §§ 2, 257.
[257] ξενία, expressing the mutual relations of host and guest, cannot be adequately translated into English.
[258] de Cor., § 51.
[259] Ibid., § 284.
[260] Aesch., de Leg., §§ 25-33.
[261] Ibid., §§ 75-78.
[262] Ibid., § 79.
[263] Ctes., §§ 119-121.
[264] Aesch., de Leg., § 153.
[265] E.g., de Leg., § 147. His esteem for his mother is expressed, ibid., § 148.
[266] de Leg., § 152.
[267] p. 178.
[268] Ctes., § 218.
[269] Cf. the frequent use of δεινός and δεινῶς—δεινὴ ἀπαιδευσία, ἀναισχυντία; δεινῶς σχετλιάζειν, ἀσχημονεῖν, ἀγνοεῖν, etc., and compounds such as ὑπεραγανακτῶ, ὑπεραισχύνομαι.
[270] E.g. the fine passage about Thebes, infra, p. [186].
[271] The speech of Lysias against Eratosthenes, for instance, contains many complicated sentences which are unnecessarily obscure.
[272] ὁρώντων φρονούντων βλεπόντων ὑμῶν. Ctes., § 94.
[273] Cf. his frequent references to his speeches, supra, p. [177].
[274] E.g. de Leg., § 183, τοὺς εἰς τὸν μέλλοντ’ αὐτῷ χρόνον ἀντεροῦντας. Blass, vol. iii. pt. 2, p. 232, notes that there is more consistent care on this point in the de Legatione than in the other two speeches.
[275] Ctes., § 99.
[276] Ibid., § 78.
[277] de Leg., § 81.
[278] Cf. Ctes., § 198, ὅστις μὲν οὖν ἐν τῇ τιμήσει τὴν ψῆφον αἰτεῖ, τὴν ὀργὴν τὴν ὑμετέραν παραιτεῖται, ὅστις δ’ ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ λόγῳ τὴν ψῆφον αἰτεῖ ὅρκον αἰτεῖ, νόμον αἰτεῖ, δημοκρατίαν αἰτεῖ, ὧν οὔτε αἰτῆσαι οὐδὲν ὅσιον οὔτ’ αἰτηθέντα ἑτέρῳ δοῦναι.
[279] E.g. iambics, Ctes., § 239, ἃ σωφρονῶν ὁ δῆμος οὐκ ἐδέξατο; and de Leg., § 66, μίαν δὲ νύκτα διαλιπὼν συνηγόρουν, etc.; anapaestic effect, ibid., 223, ἀεὶ τὸ παρὸν λυμαινόμενος, τὸ δὲ μέλλον κατεπαγγελλόμενος; and a curious combination, ibid., 91, ἁπάντων μετασχὼν τῶν πόνων τῇ πόλει, ⏑––|⏑––|–⏑–|–⏑–.
[280] Ctes., § 135.
[281] de Leg., §§ 110, 21.
[282] Ctes., §§ 192-193.
[283] Ctes., §§ 133-136.
[284] Ctes., §§ 99-100.
[285] Dem., de Cor., §§ 129, 259.
[286] Ctes., §§ 172-173.
[287] de Leg., §§ 106-107.
[288] de Leg., §§ 34-35.
[289] Ctes., § 212, οὐ κεφαλὴν ἀλλὰ πρόσοδον κέκτηται. The play upon words is not easy to reproduce: κεφαλή, of course, suggests κεφάλαιον, ‘principal,’ or ‘capital,’ while πρόσοδος is ‘income’ or ‘revenue.’
[290] de Falsa Leg., § 339.
[291] Aesch., de Leg., § 1.
[292] La Litt. Grecque, iv. 643, with reference particularly to Ctes., § 133 (quoted above, p. [186]) and §§ 152 sqq.
[293] E.g. on Demosthenes, quoted supra, pp. [187-188].
[294] de Sublim., ch. xxiv., οὐ γέλωτα κινεῖ μᾶλλον ἢ καταγελᾶται.
[295] Mommsen (Book v., ch. xii. pp. 609-610, Eng. ed. of 1887) could write of Cicero: ‘Cicero had no conviction and no passion; he was nothing but an advocate, and not a good one.’ ... ‘If there is anything wonderful in the case, it is in truth not the orations but the admiration which they excited.’
[296] E.g., in particular, §§ 171-176, partly quoted supra, p. [188].
[298] Frogs, 892, αἰθήρ, ἐμὸν βόσκημα, καὶ γλώττης στροφίγξ, καὶ ξύνεσι, etc.
[299] Aesch. (Ctes., § 171) says only ἀφικνεῖται εἰς Βόσπορον, which is ambiguous, as there were several Βόσποροι. The fact that he calls the woman Σκυθίς seems to prove that he meant the Crimea.
[300] Pytheas, quoted by Dionysius.
[301] The last private speeches of which the genuineness is undoubted are dated about 346 and 345 B.C., but others, e.g. Against Phormio, of which the authenticity was not questioned in ancient times, go down to 326 B.C. or even later. The genuineness of the Phormio is at least probable.
[302] Aesch. (in 345 B.C.) in the Timarchus, §§ 117, 170-175, refers to him as a teacher. In the Embassy (343 B.C.) there is no reference to this profession.
[303] Against Callicles.
[304] Against Conon.
[305] The speeches Against Zenothemis, Lacritus, Dionysodorus, and Phormio.
[306] E.g. Against Boeotus.
[307] § 61. ‘Pydna and Potidaea, which are subject to Philip and hostile to you.’ Also § 63.
[308] ἐπιστολιμαίους δυνάμεις, § 19.
[309] § 19, δύναμιν ... ἢ συνεχῶς πολεμήσει....
[310] § 21, χρόνον τακτὸν στρατευομένους, μὴ μακρὸν τοῦτον, ἀλλ’ ὅσον ἂν δοκῇ καλῶς ἔχειν, ἐκ διαδοχῆς ἀλλήλοις.
[311] § 23, οὐ τοίνυν ὑπέρογκον αυτήν (οὐ γὰρ ἔστι μισθὸς οὐδὲ τροφή), οὐδὲ παντελῶς ταπεινὴν εἶναι δεῖ.
[312] I have assumed the traditional order of the Olynthiac speeches to be the correct one. The question is much disputed, and is lucidly discussed by M. Weil in his introductions to the speeches (Les Harangues de Démosthène).
[313] Isocr., Philippus, § 73-74.
[314] Chers., §§ 24-26.
[315] § 77.
[316] § 19.
[317] § 20.
[318] §§ 26-27.
[319] The subject is admirably discussed by M. Weil (Les Harangues de Démosthène (2me éd.), pp. 312-316). His arguments should be carefully read by those interested in the subject. I quote only his conclusions: ‘Nous avons déjà vu que plusieurs passages, qui manquent dans S et L, ne pouvaient guère émaner que de Démosthène lui-même’ (p. 314). ‘Le résultat de cet examen, c’est que nous nous trouvons en présence de deux textes également autorisés, et que les additions et les modifications qui distinguent l’un de l’autre doivent être attribuées a l’orateur lui-même....’ (p. 315). These conclusions are adopted by Blass (Att. Bered., 1893) and Sandys (1900), who, however, considers that the shorter version was the orator’s first draft. Butcher (Demosthenes, 3rd ed., 1911) considers that the shorter text represents ‘the maturer correction of the orator.’
[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.
[323] See also infra, p. [253], note [1], and p. [254].
[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:
μὰ γῆν, μὰ παγίδας, μὰ νεφέλας, μὰ δίκτυα.
[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.
[369] In particular de Corona, §§ 129-130, 258-262. Cf. supra, p. [164].
[370] de Corona, §§ 261-262.
[371] Vide supra, pp. [170], [177].
[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.
[387] Vide supra, pp. [168], [194], [223].
[389] We know from Dinarchus, Aristogiton, § 13, that this trial shortly preceded the affair of Harpalus.
[390] de Cor., § 313, τραγικὸς Θεοκρίνης.
[391] Vide supra, pp. [244-245].
[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.
[417] See the translation on p. [278].
[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.
[464] Supra, pp. [18], [294-296].
[467] Date 336-5 B.C.
[468] 322 B.C.
[469] Epitaphios, § 10.
[470] Epitaphios, §§ 41-43.
[471] Date between 328 and 323 B.C.
[472] Dion. (de Dinarcho, ch. iv., ad fin.) believed that he wrote no speeches during this time, for nobody would take the trouble to go to Chalcis for a speech either in a private or public action—οὐ γὰρ τέλεον ἠπόρουν οὕτω λόγων. Dionysius consequently rejected as spurious all speeches attributed to Dinarchus which were dated between 307 and 292 B.C.
[473] Suidas says that he was appointed Commissioner of the Peloponnese (ἐπιμελητὴς Πελοποννήσου) by Antipater, but this was another Dinarchus. Demetrius Magnes, quoted by Dionysius (Din., ch. 1), mentions four men of this name.
[474] In Dionysius, de Din., ch. 1.
[475] The curious may collect the titles from Dionysius (de Din. chs. x.-xiii.).
[476] Dion., Din., ch. 2.
[477] Demos., § 58.
[478] Ibid., § 35.
[479] Ibid., § 83.
[480] Demos., §§ 48-63.
[481] Phil., § 19.
[482] In such extravagances as ἡ τῶν ἐκ προνοίας φόνων ἀξιόπιστος οὖσα βουλὴ τὸ δίκαιον καὶ τἀληθὲς εὑρεῖν (Demos., § 6). Cf. also §§ 12, 23, 59, 110, and elsewhere.
[483] Demos., § 28; cf. §§ 10, 27, 46, 76, etc.
[484] Demos., §§ 18-21 (thirty-six lines without a real stop); Philocles, §§ 1-3 (twenty-three lines).
[485] θηρίον, μιαρός, μιαρὸν θήριον, κάθαρμα, γόης, κατάρατος, κλέπτης, προδότης, ἐπιωρκηκώς, δωρόδοκος, μισθωτός, καταπτυστός are culled without any special diligence from his elegant repertory.
[486] Aristog., §§ 1, 2, 9-10.
[487] Demos., § 24, description of Thebes, from Aeschines. See Weil, les Harangues de Démosthène, p. 338, note on Philippic, iii., § 41, and Din., Aristog., § 24, which is borrowed from it: ‘Il est à son modèle ce que la bière est au vin.’ (This barley-beer was a barbarian drink.)
[488] E.g. the passage about Conon’s son, Demos., § 14, used again in Phil., § 17.
[489] Dion., de Din., ch. viii.; Hermogenes, περὶ ἰδεῶν, B, p. 384, iv.
[490] The general decline of taste reacted on literary style, cf. infra pp. [309-10].
[491] Arist., Eth. Nic., x. 5. 4, οἱ τραγηματίζοντες. Demos., de Cor., cf. supra, p. [249].
[492] E.g. many of the private speeches of Demosthenes refer to maritime speculations; many of these cases, under Macedon, would be settled in local courts instead of being brought to Athens, and the diminution of Athenian commerce would still further reduce their number.
[493] Arist., Rhet., 1. i., ad init.
[494] Diog. Laert., v. 75.
[495] Ibid., v. 80-81.
[496] Cicero, Brutus, § 37; Orator, § 92; de Oratore, ii. § 95; Quint., x. 1, 80; Diog. L., v. 82.
[497] Cicero, Brutus, § 286.
[498] He was over-fond of the ditrochaeus (–⏑–⏑) at the end of the sentence, vide Cicero, Brutus, § 286; Orator, §§ 226, 230; Dion., de Comp. Verb., ch. xviii.