[1061] Demosth. De Coronâ, p. 298.
[1062] Plutarch, Demosth. c. 18. Daochus and Thrasylaus are named by Demosthenes as Thessalian partisans of Philip (Demosth. De Coronâ, p. 324).
[1063] Demosth. De Coronâ, p. 298, 299. Aristot. Rhetoric. ii. 23; Dionys. Hal. ad Ammæum, p. 744; Diodor. xvi. 85.
[1064] Demosth. De Coronâ, p. 304-307. εἰ μὲν οὖν μὴ μετέγνωσαν εὐθέως, ὡς ταῦτ᾽ εἶδον, οἱ Θηβαῖοι, καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν ἐγένοντο, etc.
[1065] Theopompus, Frag. 239, ed. Didot; Plutarch, Demosth. c. 18.
[1066] We may here trust the more fully the boasts made by Demosthenes of his own statesmanship and oratory, since we possess the comments of Æschines, and therefore know the worst that can be said by an unfriendly critic. Æschines (adv. Ktesiph. p. 73, 74) says that the Thebans were induced to join Athens, not by the oratory of Demosthenes, but by the fear of Philip’s near approach, and by their displeasure in consequence of having Nikæa taken from them. Demosthenes says in fact the same. Doubtless the ablest orator must be furnished with some suitable points to work up in his pleadings. But the orators on the other side would find in the history of the past a far more copious collection of matters, capable of being appealed to as causes of antipathy against Athens, and of favour to Philip; and against this superior case Demosthenes had to contend.
[1067] Demosthen. De Coronâ, p. 299, 300.
[1068] Æschines adv. Ktesiph. p. 74.
[1069] Philochorus Frag. 135, ed. Didot; Dionys. Hal. ad Ammæum, p. 742.
[1070] Æschines adv. Ktesiph. p. 73. Æschines remarks the fact—but perverts the inferences deducible from it.