[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.