We do not know upon what foundation of fact (if upon any) these allegations were advanced by a contemporary orator. But they are curious, as illustrating the view taken of Aristotle by his enemies. They must have been delivered as parts of one of the accusatory speeches on Aristotle's trial _par contumace_: for this was the earliest occasion on which Aristotle's enemies had the opportunity of publicly proclaiming their antipathy against him, and they would hardly omit to avail themselves of it. The Hierophant, the principal accuser, would be supported by other speakers following him; just as Melêtus, the accuser of Sokrates, was supported by Anytus and Lykon. The [Greek: i(stori/ai] of Demochares were not composed until seventeen years after this epoch--certainly not earlier than 306 B.C.--sixteen years after the death of Aristotle, when his character was not prominently before the public. Nevertheless Demochares may possibly have included these accusatory allegations against the philosopher in his [Greek: i(stori/ai], as well as in his published speech. His invectives against Antipater, and the friends of Antipater, were numerous and bitter:--Polybius. xii. 13, 9; Cicero, Brutus, 83; compare Democharis Fragmenta, in Didot's Fragm. Historicorum Græcorum, vol. ii. p. 448. Philôn, who indicted Sophokles (under the [Greek: graphê\ parano/môn]) for the law which the latter had proposed in 306 B.C. against the philosophers at Athens, had been a friend of Aristotle, [Greek: A)ristote/lous gnô/rimos]. Athenæus, xiii. 610.] [Footnote 33: We may apply here the same remark that Dionysius makes about Deinarchus as a speech-maker; when Deinarchus retired to Chalkis, no one would send to Chalkis for a speech: [Greek: Ou) ga\r ei)s Chalki/da a)/n tines e)/pleon lo/gôn cha/rin, ê)\ i)di/ôn, ê)\ dêmosi/ôn; ou) ga\r te/leon ê)po/roun ou(/tô lo/gôn.] Dionys. Halic. Dinar. p. 639.]