Orators -- Greece; Oratory, Ancient; Speeches, addresses, etc., Greek -- History and criticism
_Against Aristocrates_, 352 B.C., is an important authority for the
Athenian law of homicide. Aristocrates had carried a resolution making
the person of Charidemus inviolable. This man, an Euboean by birth,
was a mercenary leader, who having helped to lose Amphipolis, was now
proposing to recover it. He was at present commanding the forces of the
Thracian chief Cersobleptes. Demosthenes wrote this speech for Euthycles,
who impeached the proposal. It contains an unusually careful arrangement
in three divisions: (1) The proposal is illegal, (2) it is against our
interest, (3) Charidemus is an unworthy person. Demosthenes is seen at
his best in his appeal to legislative principle, his use of historical
argument, and his description of the conditions of mercenary service and
the politics of the barbarian fringe. The case against Charidemus is
strong; he has been in the service of Athens, Olynthus, Asia, and Thrace,
and has played fast and loose with all.
_Against Midias_, 347 B.C. A fine speech on a trivial subject, which all
the eloquence of Demosthenes cannot dignify. Strong emotion is evident
all through, the tone is exalted, there are pathetic and humorous
passages, and all about a box on the ear!
Midias, who had a long-standing personal grudge against Demosthenes,
was also his political opponent. When Demosthenes undertook to furnish
the chorus for his tribe at the greater Dionysia in 348 B.C., Midias
did all that he could to ruin the performance. On the day itself he
slapped Demosthenes in the face in the presence of the whole people in
the theatre.[385] Demosthenes laid a complaint, and Midias was declared
guilty of ‘contempt’ in a religious sense (ἀδικεῖν περὶ τὴν ἑορτήν). This
preliminary vote involved no penalty, and Demosthenes was determined
to push the case to extremes. Midias, having assaulted an official in
discharge of his duty, and, further, committed sacrilege in so doing,
might be condemned to death or confiscation of property. In the end,
however, as we learn from Aeschines,[386] a compromise was made, and
Demosthenes accepted half a talent as compensation for his injuries.
This sum was quite inadequate, but there is good reason to believe that
Demosthenes gave way for political reasons, since at the end of this year
we find there is an understanding between him and the party of Eubulus,
to which Midias belonged.
_On the Embassy (de Falsa Legatione)_, 344 B.C.
We come now to the two great speeches arising out of the political
hostility of Demosthenes and Aeschines, the speeches _On the Embassy_,
344 B.C., and _On the Crown_, 330 B.C. The history of the quarrel has
been given in earlier chapters, and the speeches themselves to some
extent described, since an account of the lives of the two orators
must have been very incomplete without a full reference to their
antagonism.[387] A few supplementary remarks may, however, be in place
here.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account