of Demosthenes shows a strong theatrical tendency, even as he is said to have named [Greek: hypokrisis] (the art of delivery) as the essence of eloquence. It is in this connection that Holm justly finds fault with the modern critics, who reject indeed the ribaldry of Æschines as mendacious, but set down that of Demosthenes as a source of sober history. The scandalous accusations made by all these orators against their opponents have one distinct parallel in earlier history--the sallies of the Old Comedy. This kind of political play died out with the rise of dramatic oratory, which was fully as libellous. Holm's remark is also worth repeating in this connection, that the dialectical discussions of the later tragedy were appropriated by the philosophers, whose dialogues satisfied the strong taste of the Athenians for this kind of intellectual exercise. FOOTNOTES: [132:1] He says indeed in one place (_Panegyr._ p. 51) that Hellenedom is rather a matter of common culture, than of common race. But nowhere does he ever acknowledge that foreign races as such can attain this culture, and he shows the respect of every old-fashioned Hellene for the Spartans, who belonged to the race, but were devoid of this culture. [132:2] The texts are all cited in my _History of Greek Literature_, ii. 215, when treating of Isocrates. [134:1] Cf. the texts in my _Greek Lit._ ii. 2, pp. 87, 105. [135:1] As it did Niebuhr, who was brought up in the great struggle of Germany with Napoleon. [136:1] This absurd feeling has gone so far as to lead Demosthenes' admirers to blacken the character of all those who opposed him, not only of Philip of Macedon, but of Eubulus and other Attic politicians. Holm has very well defended Eubulus (G. G. iii. 252 _sq._), and has also vindicated Philip from the usual accusations of treachery, cruelty, and tyranny (_ibid._ 327).