^~A-' -ti \o DEMOSTHENES AGAINST ANDROTION AND AGAINST TIMOCRATES. • • • • * • • itonDon : C. J. CLAY and SONS, CAMBEIDGE UNIVERSITY PEESS WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE. CAMBRIDGE : DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. LEIPZIG : F. A. BROCKHAUS. NEW YORK: MACMILLAN AND CO. 1 A • « « • • • * DEMOSTHENES AGAINST ANDEOTION AND AGAINST TIMOCEATES WITH INTRODUCTIONS AND ENGLISH NOTES BY WILLIAM WAYTE, M.A. F0K3IEKLT FELLOW OF KING's COLLEGE, CAMBBIDGE, JOINT EDITOR OF THE "DICTIONAEY OF GREEK AND ROMAN ANTIQUITIES." EDITED FOR THE SYNDICS OF THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. SECOND EDITION. CAMBRIDGE: AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 181)3 [All lliijlits reserved,] Camtirtligc : PRINTKl) BY C. J. CLAY, M.A., AND SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. / n CO td I PREFACE. <: oOf the two Speeches included in this volume, the shorter, (n Against Androtion, has never yet been separately edited "^ia England. The only separate edition of it appeared ^just fifty years ago in Germany, that of C. H. Funkhaenel, ^with Latin notes, Leipzig, 1832. The other and longer cvjspeech. Against Timocrates, has not been separately edited gat all; though its composite character, and the uncertainty how far in its extant form it corresponds with the speech actually delivered, have given it a prominent place in ecent critical discussions. A tolerably clear field is thus pen, it has been thought, for an edition with an English ommentary ; and the close connexion of the two speeches y^jboth in subject-matter and treatment, extending even to jthe repetition of whole passages with only slight altera- '^tions, has suggested the dual arrangement here adopted. A further inducement to the selection of these speeches has been the desire to familiarise the English student with their many rich illustrations of the principles and practice of Attic Law. This is a subject to wliicii the Kditor has been led to devote special attention in con- w. I). h ii78943 vi PREFACE. iK'xiou with the new edition, now preparing, of Dr William Smith's Dictionary of Antiquities. Had the available English aids to this study been more recent than they are, they could not compete in freshness and interest with the exploration of the original sources in writings which are not only perfect models of Attic style and forensic acumen, but examples, taken from real life, of causes that have actually been fought out in Attic law-courts \ The Editor is not without hope that this book may fall into the hands of men who, while they have become trained lawyers, have not lost all their interest in their early studies, especially on kindred sub- jects. To such men it is possible that some of the analogies (whether by way of comparison or contrast) with English law, here ventured on by one who has only studied that law as a citizen, may appear fanciful or over- strained. From such men he will thankfully accept cor- rection. At the suggestion of the Syndics of the University Press the same general plan has been adopted, with some modifications, as in the Select Private Orations of Messrs Paley and Sandys. This has involved the selection of Dindorf's text in the Teubuer series, taken from his third and latest edition (1855). Those teachers who may wish to place the text only in the hands of their class Avill thus be enabled to do so at a trifling cost^ The editions of 1 ' It is not from mere dictionaries of antiquities, nor from lexicons, however good, that such questions and practices of the Attic law can be fully understood.' Paley and Sandys, Pref. to Select Private Orations, pt. I. 2 The Teubner text of Demosthenes and the other orators may be PREFACE. Vll which the various readings are given, are (1) the Zurich edition of Baiter and Sauppe, 1850, (2) Bekker's last or stereotype edition, 1854, and (3) that of Benseler, 1861. Within the limits of these texts the true reading, it is believed, will (except in the few corrupt passages where the MSS. fail us) generally be found. Benseler himself gives in his foot-notes a collation of the Zurich text (for which his symbol is BS = Baiter and Sauppe, in this edition Z), Bekker's Berlin edition of 1824 (B), his stereo- typed text of 1854 (b), and Dindorf (D). These foot- notes have proved of material aid in the preparation of the list of various readings here given, but have not been implicitly followed : the Zurich text, which also notes its own variations from Bekker's Berlin edition, has been collated independently. It has not been thought neces- sary to go thirty years further back, and give the readings of either of Bekker's early editions, Oxford, 1822, and Berlin, 1824. As a textual critic, Bekker deserves espe- cially to be judged by his latest and best work. Those who are familiar with his text of Plato, which he never revised, will know how much he left to be done by later editors in the way of selections from his own vast appa- ratus of various readings, and discriminating deference to the best MSS. : other authors, such as Thucydides and Demosthenes, he went on polishing and improving until he had arrived at his final results, and then stereotyped them. It is not denied that Bekker, in the text as here exhibited, is too often carried away by excessive admira- obtained in parts as well as volumes. The Androtion is in Vol. ii. pt. i., the Timocrates in part ii. of the same volume. viii PREFACE. tion for the Parisian MS. S (or S) ; several instances are pointed out in the notes ; but he is at least more inde- pendent than the Zurich editors ; and the best corrective of the occasional vagaries of both texts is, in my opinion, the judgment of Dindorf, more robust and self-reliant still '. Apart, therefore, from the convenience of the Teubner series for general use, Dindorf 's edition, though not, as Messrs Paley and Sandys point out, claiming the authority of a textus receptus, is perhaps the nearest approach to it". Benseler's text is a curiosity, but it has nevertheless been thought worth preserving. After the humorous protest of Shilleto's jsreface to the de Falsa Legatione, it might be thought that the Zurich editors could hardly be outdone in devotion to MS. 2 : but Benseler has accomplished this feat. Of his few notes, no small proportion is occupied in finding reasons, more or less ingenious, for following 2 when it leads him like an ignis fatuus into a quagmire ^ In two passages there has seemed to be sufficient reason for departing from Dindorf's text. One of these is in T. S 59, where Dindorf has omitted the concluding words of the "law" which, like other recent scholars, he brackets 1 Instances of Dindorf's happy audacity occur T. 31, where he alone retains adetav tov /xtj tl Tradetv in place of the tasteless rod tl nadeiv : T. 141 TrXeiv : T. 152 raiJTri : T. 156 Stj for dV. In one or two places regard for Attic usage has compelled me to protest against the reading of all four editors: e.g. aV^o-xec^e A. 68 for the -nviaxecrde of old edd., including the Oxford Bekker, and all MSS. except Z:. 2 The new edition by H. Weil unfortunately stops, at present, just short of these speeches : the two volumes published extend as far as Or. XXI. 3 Examples of this occur A. 70, 78, T. 9, 110. PREFACE. ix as an interpolation. The more closely I examine these inserted documents, the less reason I see either to correct their Greek or to bring their statements into harmony ^vith what we learn from other sources. It may be doubted whether some Germans have not sone too far in acknowledging even a partial admixture of genuine material independently of the speech itself. It seems best, therefore, to let the text stand for what it is worth, as it appears in the MSS. and all other editions. The other passage, T. § 195, is one of thirteen in which Dindorf has followed S, sometimes with the support of other MSS., in reading ala')(^poKephiav for ala-^poKepheiav. It is of course possible that Demosthenes may have used, for reasons known to himself, a form so contrary to analogy, and that S may here represent a genuine tradition : but the editors most devoted to S have shrunk from this conclusion, and Dindorf again stands alone. In the Notes my object, like that of my predecessors, has been to afford full help Avithout unduly encouraging " the less industrious sort." With this view some pains have been taken in so arranging the matter that the commentary may be read through and not merely referred to. The intention, at least, has been to give an explana- tion of every real difficulty, in one way or another but not always in the same way, to those who will be at the trouble of looking for it. The abstracts at the beginning of each paragraph have, as in the Select Private Orations, been utili.sed for this purpo.se : and a hint thus conveyed has often been substituted for more literal renderings in the notes. There is still, I believe, in some quarters a X PREFACE. prejudice against full explanatory notes, under the idea that the student should be left as much as possible to quarry his own materials. The Germans, who cannot be suspected of wishing to encourage slovenly methods of study, have lately in their school and college editions set us the example of liberal help in the vernacular^ : while both the English Universities have of late given full sanction to this treatment of ancient authors. The chief and, I hold, amply sufficient reason for thus facilitating the acquirement of scholarship is the immense pressure of modern subjects and consequent limitation of the time which can be devoted to classics. In the days of a narrower curriculum, lads of the right sort might safely be encouraoed to bestow long hours on the Latin writings of the great critics, or on notes so framed as merely to excite curiosity without satisfying it. If the amount of quartz to be crushed was large in proportion to the gold to be extracted, the exercise itself was healthy and bracing. Such studies are now unavoidably relegated to the time — if that time ever arrives — when the work of the specialist has succeeded that of general education. For the same reason, the old prejudice against the use of translations has become considerably modified of late, especially in the case of authors read only by the more advanced students. It has been assumed, therefore, that the excellent translation of the late Charles Rann Kennedy will be in the hands of many, if not most, of the readers of this book : and it has been thought possible occasionally to improve upon his renderings. His version 1 As e.g. Stein"s Herodotus and Classen's Tlmcy elides. PREFACE. xi is indeed nearly perfect of its kind, as Mr Sandys has called it : but it is the work of a most consummate scholar, as well as of a very able lawyer, produced under great pressure of time and consequent liability to over- sights*. It has been compared throughout with Benseler's translation, to which some of the corrections are due. The German version is naturally the more leisurely per- formance : it is the work of a man whose whole life was given (as Mr Kennedy's was not) to philological studies. Yet the comparison is not, on the whole, to the disadvan- tage of our countryman, whose judgment often strikes me as superior to Benseler's in the choice of conflicting interpretations. I can scarcely venture to criticise German style ; but apart from its great accuracy Benseler's trans- lation appears to me to be both picturesque and sugges- tive, and I have sometimes quoted from it. The Orators have been specially reperused for the purposes of this volume and of kindred studies ; and it is hoped that something appreciable in amount has been added to the illustrative quotations which, like the edicta translaticia of the Roman praetors, have been handed on as common material from one Variorum edition to another. This will be found to be more particularly the case with the Tinwcrates, the industry of Funkhaeuel having alreatly done so much for the Androtion. The aim has been to illustrate Demosthenes as much as possible from himself; ' BesidcB the valuable appendixes to Mr Kennedy's complete trans- lation in five vols., his earlier volume of Select Speeches (the five (iiiardiaii Speeches), 1841, contains an important series of notes on Attic law, not reprinted in tho collective edition, and dating from a finie when &\(\h to this study were almost non-existent in England. xii PREFACE. his self-laudations are checked by the invectives of Aeschines, Deinarchus, and Hypereides ; among the other orators Andocides, Lysias, and Isaeus are especially valu- able as sources of Attic law ; and he sometimes pays Isocrates the compliment of imitating him. The Orators are quoted uniformly from the editions in the Teubner series. To the sections (§§) of this series, which are those of Bekker's Berlin edition, have been added, in the case of Demosthenes, the usually cited pages (Reiske's). In referring to the less voluminous orators, or to the two speeches contained in this book, the pages are omitted ^ The Dramatists are cited from the fifth edition of Dindorfs Poetae Scenici, 1869 ; Grote's History from the eight- volume edition of 1862 (earlier and later are in twelve). Other editions do not require to be specified, or are in- cluded in the Select List of Books appended to this Preface. The grammatical references are mostly to Madvig's Syntax, translated by Browne, and to Prof W. W. Good- win's Moods and Tenses, both works remarkable for their common-sense treatment of syntactical questions^: some- times to the larger materials of Jelf, after Kiihner. 1 The sections of the Beiiin edition are now invariably used in foreign books of reference, e.g. Pauly, or Daremberg and Saglio, and latterly in this country as well, e.g. by Paley and Sandys. English scholars of the last generation, such as Thirlwall and G-rote in their histories, Shilleto in his de Falsa Legatione, followed the more minute subdivisions of the Oxford Bekker: and as Shilleto's book is in the hands of most students of Demosthenes, I have usually given the double reference in quoting from that speech, e.g. F. L. p. 413 § 230 = 255. In these cases the higher number is Shilleto's ( = Oxford), the lower Teubner s ( = Berlin). - No one, it is to be hoped, now believes that d aov arepTjOui Soph. PREFACE. xiii I am indebted to the kindness of my friend Mr Sandys, Public Orator in the University, for the loan of some valuable tracts on Greek Law and the knowledge of others. W. W. 6 Onslow Square, S.W. October, 1882. In revisiucr the book for a second edition I have made full use of the criticisms of my always friendly reviewers. I would name especially Prof Mahaffy in the Academy, Herr Sorgel in the Pldlologische RundscJiaii, and a notice of Weil's Deuxihne Serie, which includes these two speeches, by Prof Butcher in the Classical Revieiv, i. 218 — 221. Of M. Weil's own labours it would be difficult to speak too highly. To a minute knowledge of 2 and the other Parisian MSS. he adds a critical faculty of rare delicacy ; and his notes are expressed with a clearness and terseness scarcely to be found, in modern languages, outside the French. Suggestions from various correspondents, one or two being anonymous, have been weighed to the best of my judgment. Dr. Sandys' standard edition of Aristotle's Athenian Constitution, and the Attic portion of Thumser's Staatsalterthunie)- (vol. i. jjt. 2, in the Hermann-Bllimner series), fortunately appeared Just in time to l)e available. Of;(]. Col. lli:^ occupicH a 'category of modality' between tl (TTtprjOdrjv and Tjv cTtpriOQ} : see note on T. § 39. xiv PREFACE. To print from the Teubner text while occasionally expressing a preference for another reading, as was done in the former edition, seems no longer expedient. Now that the comparatively conservative text of Dindorf has been succeeded, in the Teubner classics, by the sweeping changes of Blass, it is no disparagement to the latter distinguished scholar to say that his revision cannot be unreservedly placed in the hands of students. An editor must therefore use his own judgment in framing his text. In Demosthenic rhythm, the rules may be regarded as established that (1) hiatus is avoided except after a pause in the sense, and (2) three short syllables seldom occur together. This, however, does not account for such changes as ovK ear ov8e fjuia for ovk 'iartv ovBe txia, eSo^' elvai, for eSo^ev elvai, and the like. There is now a general agree- ment in favour of the spellings reiaai and compounds, Scopeui, e'lvsKa, for rlaat hwpea eveKa (to mention only words found in these speeches), on the evidence of con- temporary inscriptions as against the MSS. But to write eKTeKra for eKTlai<;, or reOrjica for redeiKa, is to take a long step beyond this ; and where the grammar of inscriptions is still in an experimental stage, some caution may be thought justifiable. As it is, Blass's text has been taken as the basis, and has only been departed from where it seemed capricious or arbitrary. Some afterthoughts which, when the first edition was printed, unavoidably found their way into the introduc- tions, have now been transferred to their rightful places in the commentary ; but in other respects these introduc- tions are little altered. While pains have been taken to PREFACE. XV render the notes more accurate, and illustrations from inscriptions and archaeological discoveries more freely in- troduced, some compression has been found practicable, especially as to matters included in the Dictionary of Antiquities. A mere reference to the new edition some- times takes the place of a long note which had been required for the correction of the unrevised Dictionary. W. W. 6 Onslow Sqdabe, S.W. February, 1893. SELECT LIST OF EDITIONS, DISSERTATIONS AND BOOKS OF REFERENCE On the two Speeches included in this Volume. TEXTS. (1) J. G. BAITER and H. SAUPPE. Oratores Attic i ; in one volume -Ito, Zurich, 1850. (2) IMM. BEKKER. Demotstlienis Orationes; stereotyped edition, 8vo. Leipzig, 1854. [Earlier editions, not here referred to, Oxford, 1822, and BerUn, 1824]. (3) W. DINDORF. Demosthetiis Orationes, edit to tertia c.orrect'wr ; (Teubner) Leipzig, 1855 [Ed. quarta, revised bv Blass, Teubner, 1890. Earlier editions, not here referred to, Leipzig," 1825, Oxford, 1846]. (4) G. E. BENSELER. Demosthenes' Werke. Griechisch und Deutsch, mit kritischen und erklarenden Anmerkungen, lOter Theil, Reden gegen Androtion und Timokrates, Leipzig, 1861. [His acknowledged work, though without his name in the title-page.] (5) H. WEIL. Les Plaidoyers Politiques de DemostMne, 2me S6rie, Paris, Hachette, 1886. COMMENTARIES. I. General. (1) G. H. SCHAEFER. Apparatus criticus ad Demosthenem; London, 1821-7. [After Reiske. This is the "variorum" edition usually to be met with in this country. There is another by G. S. Dobson, London, 1828, XVI. vols.] (2) ir. DINDORF. Demosthenes e.c recensione Gulielmi Dindorfii ; Oxford (1849), Vol. vi. Annotationes interpretum ad Or. 20 — 26. (3) WHISTON, R. Demosthenes, with an English Commentary [in Long and Macleane's Bihliothxa Classica. Unfinished ; vol. ii. (1868) contains Or. xix — xxvi.]. (4) //. WEIL, commentary, as above. II. Special. C. II. FUNKHAENEL, Demosthenis Oratio in Androtionem; Leipzig, 1832. LEXICOGRAPHY AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. (1) HARPOCRATION. Xi^eis tQv oiKa p-qTbpwv, ed. W. Dindorf; Oxford, 1853. (2) T. MITCHELL (after Reiske). Indices Graecitatis in Oratores Alticos ; 2 vols. Oxford, 1828. [Uniform with the Oxford edition of Bekker's Oratores Attici^ Index Graecitatis Isacraticae ; Oxford, 1828. [Uniform with the above]. (3) P. P. DOB REE. Adver- saria; cura Hchoh'fidd; Cambridge, 1833 (ed. Wagner, Leipzig, 1H75). (4) C. G. CO BET. {a) Variae Lectiones. Editio secunda auctior, Leyden, 1873. (b) Novae Lectiones; Leydou, 18.58. (c) Miscellanea Critira ; Leydon, 1876. (5) .7. .V. MADl'IG. Adversaria Critica ; vol. i. In Scriptores Gruecos ; Copenhagen, 1871. xviii SELECT LIST OF EDITIONS, d-c. DEMOSTHENIC LITERATURE. General. (1) ARNOLD SCHAEFER. Demosthenes und seine Zeit. 3 vols., esp. vol. I. ch. 3, pp. 308 — 353 and vol. in. part 2, Beilagen, pp. 63 — 65, Leipzig, 1856 — 58. (2) F. BLASS. Die Attische Beredsamkeit, 3te Abtheilung, Iter Abschnitt. Demosthenes, esp. pp. 226 — 231, 244 — 251, Leipzig, 1877. (3) R. C. JEBB. The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaens, 2 vols., London, 1876. [Demosthenes only incidentally]. (4) S. H. BUTCHER. Demosthenes [in Classical Writers, ed. by J. R. Green], London, 1881. (5) J. P. MAHAFFY. {a) History of Classical Greek Literature, London, 1880. Vol. ii. (Prose Authors), esp. ch. 11 (Demosthenes) and 12 (Contemporary Orators). (b) Social Life in Greece, ed. 3, Loudon, 1877. [Drawn largely from the Private Orations]. II. Special. (1) C. L. BLUME. Prolegom. ad Dem. orationevi Timocrateam tria capita priora, Berlin, 1823, pp. 48. [An inaugural dissertation on the Panathenaea of g 26 ; now out of print. Some others of the following tracts I have been unable to get a sight of, but think it best to make the list as complete as possible. All the periodicals here mentioned have been consulted]. (2) C. H. FUNKHAENEL. Symholae criticae in Devwsthen. iv. in Orat. c. Timocratem. In Zeitschrift fiir die Alter- thumsw. 1842, pp. 311—316. [Superseded by later editions]. (3) T. H. DYER. On a passage inDem.'s Oration against Timocrates. In Classical Museum, ii. 119—121, London, 1845. [Proposes a transposition of § 5, placing it before §§ 3 and 4. But this will not remove the difficulties of the first 16 §§ : see Introd.] (4) A. WESTERMANN. (a) Unter- suchungen iiher die in die Attische Redner eingelegten Urkunden, pp. 136, Leipzig, 1850. (b) Commentatio de iurisiuraiidi iudicum Atheniensium formula quae exstat in Demosthenis oratione in Timocratevi. Pars i. pp. 20, II. pp. 16, III. pp. 14, Leipzig, 1858 — 9. [Three Academical Pro- grammes. Westermann's criticism led the way to the total rejection of the authenticity of the " inserted documents "]. (5) F. K. HERTLEIN. Coniecturen zu Griech. Prosaikern. Wertheim, 1862. [Programme of a Lyceum. Among the passages are Androt. § 37 and Timocr. § 16]. (6) RUD. DAHMS. (a) Stadia Demosthenica (zur Rede gegen Timo- krates), pp. 40, Berlin, 1866. [Programme], (b) Emendationes Demo- sthenicae. In the Jahrbiicher fiir classische Philologie, vol. 93, pp. 674 — 8, Leipzig (Teubner), 1866. [The following are the conjectures best worth notice : Androt. § 33, ravTa BtKaia (for ravra), Timocr. § 206 Trdires ol' ay TTov (for oTav ttov). The last is a decided improvement]. (7) J. B. TELFY. Das wpo(TKaTd^\T]/j.a (Timocr. §§ 96—98). In Philologus 1860, vol. XVI. pp. 365 — 368. [An improbable suggestion that 7rpo(T\-arrj Trapavofjiwv Or indictment for an unconstitutional pro- posal foiined a meeting-point between law and politics ; the elastic state of the law favoured the decision of legal questions on party grounds; and, as at various periods of English history, political differences found their natural arena in the law-courts. Into this arena Demosthenes now descended as a trained combatant. According to the mo.st probable date of his birth ' X670S 5tKayiK6s. '■' Sriixbaio^. ' ffvfj.pov\€VTtK6i. VV. D. c xxii INTRODUCTION. he would now be just twenty-nine years of age'. His entrance into public life (marked by A. Schaefer and Blass as the second period of his career) coincides Avith the disastrous close of the Social War. The revived naval supremacy had been again lost; the orators of the peace party were discredited; and Dfemosthenes came forward as the advocate of an imperial policy. His position was already apart from that of all the rest'. Eubulus the leading orator of this party, and Phocion who lent it respectability^, had their opponents among the other orators : and Demosthenes was ready to avail himself of help from any quarter against the predominant majority. But his quarrel was with the entire system, not merely with indi- vidual politicians; all were alike responsible for the abuses of the Theoric fund^, for the fatal stimulus given to the pleasure- loving, home-keeping instincts of the Athenian people, and to their dislike of personal service; all alike, in his view, fattened on the public plunder \ Demosthenes had to educate, not his party, but his countrymen. Hence his repeated allusions to the glories of the past; to the days when "the public service was the only holiday"" to the Athenians whose degenerate descendants would now neither fight themselves nor pay others 1 His birth is fixed with tolerable certainty at b.c. 384, i.e. either in the last months of 01. 98, 4, the archonship of Dexitheus, or the first of 01. 99, 1, the archonship of Diotrephes. The Androtionea belongs to the early part of 01. 106, 2, the archonship of Callistratus (not the orator, see § 66 n.), i.e. July or August 355. Androtion's motion to crown the senate was at the close of the old year, the trial at the beginning of the new. It is important to remember that the Athenian year began at the first new moon after the summer solstice, or, speaking roughly, about July. 2 § .37 n. a Grote, ch. 87, vih. 32. * Timocr. § 134. 5 Androt. §§ 65—68. 6 Thucyd. I. 70, § 9, ix-ryrt kopry]v dXKo ti rjyelcrdai ^^ to to. deovra irpa^ai. IXTRODUCTIOX. xxiii to fight for them '. He does not, like many opposition speakers, confine himself to negative criticism. In this speech, and in others of the same group "against bad legislation," the Leptines, the Timocrates, he is the exponent of a formed policy. "Even when he is writing for others, himself remaining behind the scenes, the voice is still that of Demosthenes. His strong personality, his sincerity of conviction, breaks through dramatic disguises ^" Androtion, the defendant on this occasion, had been a prominent politician for thirty years^. That he must have been advanced in life is clear not merely from this circum- stance, but from what we ai'e told of his associates Glauketes and Melanopus'' and of his father Andron. The latter is certainly to be identified with the Andron, son of Androtion, who is named among the aocfiol assembled in the house of Callias, Plat. Protag. 315 c (comp. Gorg. 487 b), and who must have been already a grown man at the breaking-out of the Peloponnesian war*. The political example set by Andron to his son was not edifying. Having himself taken part in the government of the Four Hundred, B.C. ill, he came forward as the accuser of Antiphon and Archeptolemus, who were made scapegoats for the rest, and actually moved the decree by which they were executed as traitors'^. According to Demosthenes, he was imprisoned for debts to the State and passed TroXXas TrcvreTT^pt'Sas in prison"; he broke his prison, not returning when let out on parole for a festival"; and, 1 §§ 12—16, 76—78. - Prof. Butcher, p. 31. 3 § 66. •» T. § 125 ff. » " The Protagoras points to the 87th Olympiad, n.c. 432—429 : " Prof. Brandis, quoted in my note on Protag. 327 d. * Vit. X. Orat. p. 833 e. Harpocrat. s. v. 'XvSpwv. " T. § 125, where see note on the qualification with which this state- ment must be accepted. 8 A. §§ 56, 68. c2 xxiv INTRODUCTION. havinif failed to discharge liis obligations at his death, left an inheritance of Atimia to his son, from which Androtion had never purged himself. But this charge, as well as another presently to be noticed, is supported by no evidence: it is even ridiculous to see Demosthenes attempting to throw the burden of proof upon the defendant". Androtion had been trained in the school of Isocrates, and became an accomplished public speaker^. Demosthenes himself, though he adopts a sneering tone, is a witness to his oratorical ability*. He took an active part in matters of finance, and acquired the confidence of the people, though in his case the arts of the demagogue appear to have been combined with no small amount of the personal insolence of a born oligarch. In the bad times of the Social War he brought forward a scheme of his own for x-eplenishing the exhausted treasury^: he induced the people to appoint an extraordinary commission of ten members, none of them regular officers of tlie revenue, to collect all outstanding arrears of the property- taxes {ela-cf)opai) voted since the archonship of Nausinicus (B.C. 378—7)*^. He put himself at the head of this commission, Timocrates being his most active subordinate: and the pro- ceedings of this pair of worthies furnish several lively passages common to the two speeches'. Their extraordinary powers lasted for a year; the services of other authorities were placed 1 A. §§ 33, 34. 2 § 34. ^ Suidas s. v. : 'AvSporiuv "Avhpwvos 'Adr]vdios, priroip koI drj/xayuyds, fiadTjTrjs 'IcroKpcLTovs : a scholium on § 4 of the speech ^cti yap ouros riDf 'IcroKpoLTovs fxadrjTwv 67riVi?;Uos : Zosimus in his life of Isocrates, p. 257 ed. Westerm. : and several passages of the rhetorician Hermogenes, all quoted by A. Schaefer i. 316 n. and Westermann ap. Pauly. ■* A. § 4, ^aTL yap, c5 dv8pes 'A6r]valoi, Tex'''T7;s roO XiyeLv, Kal iravTa rbv ^lov ecrxoXa/cei' ivl tovtuj, compared with T. § 158. •' 5td. rbv Kaipbv 6s rjv t6t€, § 49 n. ® A. Schaefer i. 317 makes them the arrears of Nausinicus' year only : the reasons for preferring Grote's view are given in the note on § 44. 7 A. §§ 47 ff. T. §§ 160 ff. IXTRODUCTION. xxv at their disposal, so that the Eleven imprisoned at their bidding, the Apodectae exacted payment, and tlie public slaves kept the accounts'. Of fourteen talents of property -tax in arrear, seven were recovered (A. § 44), or only five according to the later version (T. § 162); and this at the cost of an enormous amount of friction and unpopularity". Androtion, however, retained his influence with the people, tolerant as usual of irregularities and even of oppression when the interests of an empty exchequer were at stake; and not long afterwards, being probably ra/iitas -riys deov or one of the treasurers of the Acropolis and all its contents, he procured a decree which gave him extraordinary powers for dealing with the sacred treasures. The o-re^avot, golden crowns presented to Athens by grateful allies, and now hanging in the Acropolis, were then thrown into the melting-pot, on the plea that they were "coming to pieces^," and recast as (fudXai or paterae: the whole operation was left in Androtion's hands, without check or audit of accounts^. We next find Androtion as a (SovXevr^s or member of the Senate of Five Hundred; and it was in this capacity that he proposed the complimentary vote to the Senate which gave rise to the present prosecution. At the close of the Athenian year it was usual for the people to vote an honorary crown to the outgoing senators as an acknowledgement that they had discharged the duties of their office honourably and efficiently \ The "crown" must have been of altogether insignificant value, apart from the fact that there were 500 claimants: but, like a modern "vote of thanks," it was taken as a matter of course, and the omission of it would be a marked slight. This year, however, ' TOf Sr]fj.6avTia : see § 3, note on afivvto'dai. xxviii INTRODUCTION. trary is suggested'. A third excuse will be, that the senate did not ask for their reward, but the people decreed it to them unasked. In answer to this it is urged that putting the question to the vote by the Proedri and Epistates, i.e. by men who were necessarily members of the senate, was in itself an act of asking; and further, that the unofficial members had gone about canvassing for votes and complaining of the hardship of depriving them of the usual compliment (§§ 8 — 11). He next insists on the paramount impoi'tance of naval supremacy to Athens, as a reason why the senate should be held to the letter of its duties in the matter of the triremes (§§ 12 — 16). If it is alleged that the frauds of the treasurer could not fairly be visited upon the senate, the answer is, that the public interest requires that no excuses, good or bad, be admitted" : and further, that in this case the senate really was responsible for the acts of its own subordinate (§§ 17 — 20). Next follows the question as to the defendant's immoral life. He may urge in reply that the question ought to have been raised directly by way of impeachment, with the usual securities against malicious prosecution, and not by innuendo as a mere collateral issue. The rejoinder to this is, as has already been noticed, one of the weak points of the speech (§§ 21 — 24). In other matters the Athenian law allows the prosecution a wide choice as to modes of procedure. It is for the accused to ])rove his innocence, not to dictate the particular remedy to be set in motion against him (§§ 25 — 29). The ground of the law of Hetairesis is next explained: men of infamous life cannot be well affected to democracy, and must attempt either to corrupt or to deceive the people (§§ 30 — 32). With regard to the other disqualihcation of Atimia 1 iyw 5' ol/J.ai iJiiv ov-xj. X^yeiv aiirbv oKrjdetav (1. dX-qdrj), fiaXKov 8^ olda aaj^ 56 — 58); the amount of offence given is contrasted with the paltriness of the results, and shown, by ' liTitiKy)%, § 40 n. - i w fxiyiarov ({ipovu, ttjv tuiv x(irrifj.ciTu}v e{(nrpa^tv, § 47. Tliis second part of the wpeech is repeated almoHt exactly in t}ie Timocrfitea, §§ lOO — ln6, and its presence there forms one of the critical ilifficulties of that speech : see the next Introduction. XXX INTRODUCTION. the example of Satyrus, not to be inseparable from the dis- charge of these unpopular duties (§§ 59 — -64). So far from being a patriot and reformer, lie has been, during his thirty years of public life, identified with the existing system and all its abuses (§§ 65 — 68). The concluding paragraph (§§ 69 — 78) deals with an exploit of Androtion's which he claimed as one of his services to tlie state, his melting down of the votive golden crowns and recasting them as jDaterae or bowls ; this is shown up in its true colours as an act of gross fraud, from the want of proper supervision in carrying it out, and of extreme bad taste, since the treasures were nothing in themselves, everything in the associations connected with them. This last thought leads up to a short pei'oration of singular beauty and force, in which it is urged that Athens has always preferred glory to gold, though Androtion is ignorant of the fact ; and that the handling of sacred things by a man who has led such a life as his is in itself an outrage against the traditions of old Athenian piety (§§ 76 — 78). The Androtionea in a moderate compass aflfords a good specimen of the varied excellences of the orator ; and it is further interesting as the earliest work of his maturity. It exhibits in large measure the " rhetoric fused with logic in the white heat of passion " to which later critics gave the name of ScivoVr/s, and which they regarded as characteristic of Demo- sthenes beyond all other speakers. It has likewise a full share of his faults, which are those of Greek oratory in general, unfairness in argument and virulence in abuse. In scurrility, indeed, this speech and the Timocratea are left far behind by the two great speeches against Aeschines. Demosthenes did not, unfortunately, acquire self-respect on this point, or what would now be called the feelings of a gentleman, as he grew older ; though his later speeches seem to show a growth in that intellectual self-respect which restrains a man from utter- ing the most transparent nonsense for an immediate object'. 1 See note pp. 155-G, and T. § 80 n.. § S8 n. INTRODUCTION. xxxi The least attractive feature in the present speech is the per- petual straining of unfair points against the accused. Andro- tion was no doubt a corrupt and greedy politician, and his acquittal may have proved nothing more than that his influence with the people was undiminished, that the clique of profes- sional orators' stood hy one of their own order, and that the friends of the outgoing senators mustered strong upon the jury. But, more probably, he was acquitted on the merits of his case. The principal charge, that relating to the ships, was, as has been shown, most likely exaggerated ; the senate's previous consent to a vote of compliment to itself was a mere matter of form, and in practice had almost certainly been omitted ; while the two charges, one of them of a peculiarly odious nature, on which it was sought to prove Androtion disqualified from speaking in public, would have been relevant only if backed up by legal decisions. In these last, and in the equally irrelevant abuse which forms the staple of the speech from § 47 onward, we may well believe that the orator overshot his mark. It would, however, be a great mistake to see in Demo- sthenes only the hired speech-writer, the unsuccessful abettor of Diodorus' schemes of private vengeance, the unscrupulous verdict-f'etter "abusing; the other side" in the consciousness of a Vjad case. The politician is here inseparable from the advo- cate ; and politics have not yet ceased to be a war in which almost everything is accounted fair that promises to damage the enemy. A strongly intrenched system of abuses has to be assailed ; threatened interests are banded together for mutual support. Demosthenes is already a refoi'mer aiming at definite objects, with a definite ideal before him of what Athens ought to 1)6. In striking at Androtion he is striking at " the system : " and he does not scruple to use for his purposes the aid of oV)jectionable people who liappeneil for the moment to share xxxii INTROD UC TION. his likes and dislikes ; to screen himself behind vindictive prosecutors like Diodorus and (as it would seem on at least one occasion) Apollodorus the son of Pasion' ; and to play on the weaknesses of Athenian juries. This commingling of legal and political issues was greatly assisted by the fact that, while every full Athenian citizen was a legislator, an immense proportion of the whole number were also Dicasts, i.e. jurymen and something more, deter- mining questions of law as well as of fact". It was, therefore, an everyday occurrence for an Athenian to combine in his own person the functions of a member of Parliament, a judge and a juror. The extreme elasticity (already hinted at) of the ypacprj Trapavd/Acuv was the expression of this fact. Whatever displeased him, a component unit in the Sovereign Demos, in any of his three capacities, might be brought under the provi- sions of this law. As a legislator he expected to be relieved from the consequences of his own hasty acts : if on reflection lie discovered that he had been led astray, the proposer of the law must be punished. Demos himself was irresponsil^le. As an interpreter of the law, he required it to be intelligible to plain men ; to be without ambiguities or contradictions. To guard against repugnant laws, it was not enough to repeal the old law by an enacting clause inserted in the new : the ground must first be cleared by the total repeal of the former, a pro- 1 The evidence for the genuineness of the First Speech against Stephanus is too strong to be resisted : and by far the most probable explanation of Demosthenes' conduct in turning against Phormio, a client whom he had formerly defended, and exposing himself to the taunt of Aeschines (de F. L. § 165) is that which ascribes it to a strong political motive (Blass, p. 32, who is followed by Sandys, Introd. to Select Private Orations, pt. ii. p. xlv, and by Mahaffy, Gr. Lit. ii. 337). - It is not certain whether any system of rotation was combined with the K\rjpos or lot, so as to make every citizen a dicast in his turn : if it were so, the turn would come about once in three years, allowing for the many public officers who were ineligible, and for other causes of exclu- sion. On the number of Athenian citizens, see A. § 35 n. IXTRODUCTION. xxxiii ceeding which no doubt made it easier for legislators, acting without the guidance of trained lawyers, to judge of proposed amendments in the law. Lastly, as a dicast he gave his verdict on the proposer of a law, and thus implicitly on the law itself, for which in another capacity lie might himself have voted. We have not yet exhausted the curious aspects of the ypa^j; ■irapav6ix(iiv\ Like other despotic sovereigns, the Athenian people claimed a "dispensing power" of overriding the law upon occasion : and their advisers, the professional statesmen or orators, were as such the "keepers of tlie royal conscience," and liable to severe punishment if their master's conscience subsequently reproached him with what he had done at their bidding. Thus the Athenians no sooner repented of their judicial murder of the six generals after Arginusae, than they directed a prosecution of those who had advised it-. From another point of view, the sovereignty of Demos was so far constitutional that his ministers were liable to be turned out by a " vote of want of confidence." The dominant clique of orators might be discredited if one of their laws were over- thrown ; still more, if one of their number were punished ; and the capital sentence was usually demanded I Thus attacks ostensibly directed against measures were really aimed at men ; the dicastery with its immense numbers was swayed l)y the passions of the assembly ; and verdicts were openly demanded upon political grounds. No law was beyond the reach of this mode of indictment. However carefully all constitutional forms had been observed, it might be assailed on the vague charge of "inexpediency*;" though after the time limit* of a year the author of the law could not be punished. The ypa4>r/ ' On the ypa(f>r] irapav6/xuv as having taken the place of ostracism (disused after 417 n.c), see Prof. Mahnffy in Hermathena, vii. 86 fif. ^ i\pr)(pi(javTo...Trpofio\a^ avrCiv dvai, Xen. Hellen. i. vii. 35. ' Sucli phrases as rpis oi'x ana.^ nOvavai a^ios occur with unpleasant frequency in these two speeches. * firi iirirriSeiov, T. § 38. '"' irpodarula, sc. ■i}ij.ipa.. xxxiv INTRODUCTION. Trapavo/xwv lay, therefore, not merely against unconstitutional but against bad legislation in general ; and any law might be pronounced " bad " against which a majority, however small, could be obtained in a court where the last thing expected of the jurors was to leave their politics behind them'. The motives of Demosthenes in undertaking these prosecutions thus stand in a clear light". The speech against Androtion has provoked none of the destructive criticism which plays so lai'ge a part in Demosthenic literature. Neither its genuineness, nor, with quite insignifi- cant exceptions, its substantial integrity, have ever been dis- puted. The only doubtful passages are in § 20, where the suspicion that some words have dropt out is as old as Harpo- cration, but the lacuna need not be, as Cobet thinks, an extensive one ; in § 67, where there is a probable interpolation (but only of a few words) from the parallel passage in the Timocratea ; and in § 74, where an entire section has almost certainly been interpolated from the same source^. 1 We thus get the point of Aristophon's boast (see T. § 11 u.) that he had been impeached wapavd/xuv 75 times and invariably acquitted. He neither gloried in breaking the law with impunity, nor denounced the prosecutions as uniformly frivolous and vexatious ; his meaning is, that he had always been on the winning side in politics. - It is in such passages as the following that we see most clearly the real Demosthenes behind the mask of advocacy, and already in marked opposition to the other orators : A. § 37, el Se yev-qcreTai tovto Kai tuv i]da.Bwv Kol avvecTTTjKdTUiv p-qrbpuv dTraWayrjaecrde, oipeade, w auSpes 'Adrjvaioi, navd^ a wpoariKeL yiyvofieva, ui(TT^ el fx-qhevhs dWov eveKa, dia ravra Karaip-q- (pKXTiov. T. § 123, " X^Lov Toivhv Koi TovT^ elwelv, ocrov ii/xeis 5LaLaL<; in the archonship of Archias, 01. 108, 3, B.C. 346—5^. If he died before Chaeroneia he may be pro- nounced ye/za; opportunitate mortis. ^ For it are A. Schaefer i. 351, who replies to the objections of C. Miiller and others, the German writers generally (see Schaefer's references), Whiston, and most positively Westermann /. c. Dass der Ge-ichichtschrciher A. von dem Rediier und Staatsmann verschieden sei... ist achicerlich richtig, says the latter. Against it Ruhnken, Diudorf in his introductory notes to the Audrotionea, C. Miiller, Pref. to Fragm. Hist. Grace . i. p. Ixxxiii., and Siebelis, whose argument from style is controverted by Miiller himself. - Whiston after Donaldson, Gr. Lit. i. 229. ^ Harpocration s. v. oiayprjtpia-Ls: printed by Miiller as fr. 133 of Philochorus. The fragments of the 'Ar^is are in Miiller i. p. 371 — 377. I have read these fragments, and must demur to the inference drawn from two of them by Mr Whiston as to the untrustworthiness of An- drotion as a writer. In Pausan. vi. 7, the words el 5e rbv ovra direv 'Afdporiwv \6yoi' must mean "if he is right in this particular instance," and convey no imputation upon his general character. The other case is more palpable. Aelian V. H. viii. 6 says : TaOra 'AvSporluv \^y(i, et Tifi iriOTOj [ynkp rrji aypa/ifiaTias Kal dwaidevcrias Hpq-Kun/ TeK/xrjpiuxrai]. The meaning of course is, "if he is suflicient authority to prove the illiterateness of the Thracians:" Mr Whiston's quotation stops short of the words in brackets. To none would the unqualified phrase tt Tifj TTiffTo^ be more applicable than to Aelian himself. That the Thracians were unable to read and wTite he evidently thought a statement so startling as to require special attestation; im opinion more creditable to the general dififu-sion of "elementary education" in the Graeco-Kuniau world of his time than to his own good sense. xlviii INTRODUCTION. It remains to say a few words as to the view taken, in the Introduction and Notes, of the Athenian character and, in particular, of that of Demosthenes. A close examination of the workings of Athenian law-courts cannot fail to bring into relief some of the weak points of the national character: and when I find Demosthenes descending to arts of which even the less respectable lawyers of the present day would be ashamed, I cannot suppress the fact. But I should be sorry to be thought wanting in generous appreciation either of Athens or of Demosthenes. If it were not that men's minds, in judging of Greek democracy, are under the influence of modern political prejudices, no one who had studied the con- dition of mankind at different periods of history could doubt that the Athenian community was, on the whole, the happiest that ever rested upon a basis of slavery. That the free joyous old Greek life attained its climax among the fully enfranchised citizens, with their round of varied political and intellectual excitements, even the least favourable critics admit. That the unenfranchised aliens, whether ^kvoi or /xeroiKot, were better treated than elsewhere, is shown by the marked preference which they displayed for Athens, above all Greek cities, as a place of residence and of business. And Athenian slavery, with its inevital)le dark side, will compare favoui-ably with the same institution at Rome, or as practised by Christian nations in the New World. While we study, in the Orators, the mingled legal and political issues fought out in Athenian courts, we do well to remember the very late growth of the spirit of justice and humanity in modern pro- cedure. The rage of faction, and the judicial murders in which it sometimes expended itself, were, more excusably, no worse at Athens than in the England of 200 years ago. The Athenians were to our notions strangely indifferent to human life; but their capital punishments were far less revolting than those of Europe generally one hundred years ago. Their INTRODUCTION. xlix ideas in matters of political economy were scarcely more rudimentary than some that crop up even in that oasis in a protectionist desert, the England of to-day'. I am even more unwilling to be suspected of injustice towards Demosthenes, as I am not carried away by the current of recent opinion which in this country has turned against him, and has been supj^orted with remarkable literary ability. The view w-hich commended itself to minds at once so robust and so dispassionate as those of Thirlwall and Grote may yet prevail over the depreciatory criticism of the Messrs Simcox and Prof. Mahaffy. In the former more especially we seem to recognise a readiness to accept any evidence when a great reputation is to be ruined, and something too much of triumphant iconoclasm'. Because Niebuhr injudiciously pro- 1 Some comparisons on these and similar points will be found in the notes: e.g. T, 76, 125, 127, 136, 140, 212. " Prof. Mahaffy, it is some comfort to observe, does not countenance the charges against Demosthenes' private morals, and indeed gives weighty reasons against doing so : p. 3.51 n. The Professor, I venture to think, seems to hold and certainly suggests to his readers a more favourable estimate in the bulk of his chapter on Demosthenes than in the sentence or two in which he declares his adhesion to the views of Messrs Simcox. Having had occasion to differ in opinion with Prof. Mahaffy on this one point, I gladly express my concurrence with his views on two other questions, on both of w^hich he has had to encounter much adverse criticism, (i) While fully sharing his admiration for the great works of A. Schaefer and Blass, I rejoice that he has raised his protest against the scepticism which the former writer carried to an extreme, and from which the latter shows only a slight reaction. Schaefer had reduced the number of genuine speeches to twenty-nine: Blass raises it to thirty-three. I agree with Prof. Mahaffy in thinking that ultimately a much larger number will be acknowledged. If speed les can be proved on internal grounds to be earlier than Demosthenes, like the Callippiw, or later, like the Dionynodorun (a doubtful instance after all), well and good: but I hold with Prof. Maliaffy that we arc not en- titled to reject, on grounds of style, and still less of dishonesty in the argument, works which commended themselves to the fastidious critical 1 INTRODUCTION. nouaced him "almost a saint," we are not justified in denying him the possession of common honesty. Demosthenes un- doubtedly amassed great wealth, but by methods which the morality of his day sanctioned. In an age when selfishness was not yet sufficiently recognised as a vice, he lived simply and gave away largely. If he took the money of Harpalus, a charge which after the recent strengthening of the case against him' we would by no means deny, so pure a patriot as Algernon Sidney accepted a pension from Louis XIV. Had the motives of Demosthenes throughout his career not been pure in the main, he could have had no inducement to place himself in marked opposition to the other orators : he would have hunted with the pack, and this notoriously he did not do. When the day of trial came, his unpopularity and isolation served to point the malice of his enemies. taste of Dionysius. (ii) In his Social Life in Greece Prof. Mahaffy, as is well known, places the Greeks on a lower level, especially as regards honesty, truthfulness, and public spirit, than is claimed for them by more thoroughp;oing admirers. Here also it appears to me that he is right. At the last moment while these sheets are passing through the press, I observe in the Academy, Oct. 21, 1882, a review of Herr Schmidt's work on the Ethics of the Ancient Greeks. The reviewer thinks this last and most learned German investigator strongly opposed to Prof. Mahaffy's views: but he makes the following admissions. (1) That the Greeks were "wanting in appreciation of the duty of man to man, as such, and were disposed to consider the rules of war applicable to the relations of individuals of different families:" (2) that they were not remarkable for family affection : (3) he would be glad to hear (Herr Schmidt apparently having said nothing) what the Greeks thought of commercial dishonesty: (4) Aristotle testifies in his Politics to the difficulty in getting magistrates who would face odium by enforcing sentences against their fellow-citizens: (5) Greek practice in morals fell a good deal short of Greek theory. I think Prof. Mahaffy here gets all that he wants in the way of concession. No one has denied that Plato and Aristotle erected on their several bases sufficiently high systems of morality. But a stiU higher system may coexist with grave faults in a national character. 1 By the discovery of the Hypereides papyri : see Mahaffy ii. 373 f. INTRODUCTION. li As an advocate he was, we have seen, in no respect in advance of his time. The courts and assemblies of Athens were no schools of stainless honour, of gentlemanlike feeling, of scrupulousness in argument, of decent reticence in language. On a wide historic retrospect, we may place Demosthenes on a level with the noblest patriots of all times. We may believe, without credulity, that the author of the Speech on the Crown was as incapable of selling his country as Chatham or Peel. But when we turn to the forensic side of Attic oratory, we feel how much has been gained by modern culture and by Christian morality. The true "glory of Themis" has unquestionably risen higher among the countrymen of a Cockburn and a Coleridge, or of a Berryer and a Dufaure, than among the countrymen of Themistocles. KATA ANAP0TIQN02 HAPANOMQN. AIBANIOT TnOBESIS. Avo rjo-av ev 'Ad7]vai Srjfio) ■\ln]ai ev rip 5^mV for els TOV drjfxov, all savour of grammarians' Greek. And much of the information, when closely examined, turns out to be in- correct: e.g. the account of the Prytany and its subdivisions in p. 590. ARGUMENT.] nAPANOMfiN. 3 Bjj/jlov yivofievat, &)? ai twv aTpaTrjywv, aiperal Be al Kara a'lpeaiv, w? al twv x^pvy^^- "tovtcov fiia r]v Tcov KXrjpcoToiiv rj ^ovXrj tcov irevraKOcncov. rcov irev- raKoaloov Se eiiro/iev 77/309 avTihiaardXi-jv Tr}(cf./lH//^. an inscription of n.c. 410). s.v. Bould', p. 311 a. When the Aristotelian treatise 6 KATA ANAPOTinNOS [argument. TrpoeSpoi, 6 Se el? €7rcaraTrjdovq6fi Dind. , Blass. motion should be opposed:' a exceptions. late sense of this verb found in Trpay/xaTiKrju irpos dfTivo/xlaf] Dion. Hal. The alteration to The distinction here drawn is 5tav, eXafiev diro rod At] /Moa$evov<; tov irapovTa Xoyov. Kai eart SevrepoXoyla, e^et he d TrapeXnrev 6 EiVKT7]fM(OV. Oirep FiVKTrificov, « dvhpeovs ro fir) davdrip '^rnxiQaai: Timocr. § 138 iJLLKpou p-ev dweKreivare, XpT/^drcjt' 5^ TToWdSi' avToO avri- rLp.wiJ.ivov Trap oXiyas yprjcpovs iTip.ria-are ('accepted the de- fendant's dvririiJiyjins or counter proposal,' a better reading than ■r}ripi.wovs dTrievyet 7rp6<; Vfid<; ovaav airoXoylav, ovk dv iiroiov- fXTjv irepl ai'T?/?'' p.veiav ovSe/xiav. vvv 8' niSa cra(^ct5? OTi ovTOv fjieyas, Aesch. Agam. 1284. Buttheuntrustworthiness of MSS. is demonstrated by the circumstance that as soon as the support of metre is with- drawn, the sigma appears — e5 vuv t65' tcrre, Zeus 6/j.iI}pi.oaTai warrip [Eurip.] Rhes. 816. In Demosth. 505. 29 [Lept. § 159] it is only the best manuscript (Paris S) which has retained the primitive hand ii> y yiypa- irrai. Kal 6iJ.wp.oTai..' Rutherford, New Pltnjnichus, p. 97. So dXijXefiivos, eXTjXa/i^cos are well attested. Cf. Timoer. § 175. ^XV(^' vTroXapL^dveiv] Not 'that you may know what to think,' p. 594.] nAPANOMP.N. 1 •> 5 "EcTTi 7a/3 el? fJiev ov oterac Te;^ft«(w? e-)(€iv avro) Xoyo'i irepl tov airpo^ovKevTov. vofjLO'i iarl, (fiTjaiv, iav a^tft)? rj /SovXtj Sokjj ^ovXevcrai Scopeta?, SiSovac TOV 87]fu,ov rrjv Scopeoav avrfj. ravr iirrjpeTO, (^rjaiv, ovTricTTaTrj^;, SL€')(€tpoToi'T)aev 6 Bq/xo^;, eSo^ev. ovSev 8el, (f>j]ai, 7rpol3ov\€VfMaToy}6vyoLVTos i^eivai] The expression savours of tautology, but is justified Ity Funkhaenel from c. Neaer. p. 13H1 (5 IdO KUi VCTTepOV OVK i^ (6 prjTWfl) yiyvecrOai ' AOijuo.cov t^tivai, and ]). 1381 § 113 ai' aSeiaf Xdjiwji. ToD i^eivai. Add ii. Stcpli. 16 KATA ANAPOTiriNOS [i 9— H- i^elvai fj-r) TToirjaa/jievr] rfj ^ovXr} ra? rpirjpec^ alrrjaai rrjv Scopeiav, a^Lov eartv uKOvaai r-qv atroXo^iav rjv iroujaeraL, kuI dewprjaai rrjv dvalBeLau rov rpoirov Bt c5i/ e7%etp6t Xe7eti^. 6 v6/j,o<;, (f>7]aiv,ovK ea rrjv ^ovXr^v alTrjcrai rrjv Swpecav, idv firj TTOLrjarjrat rd-i Tpiripei^' ofioXwyw. Sovvat Se^y ovBafjiov,(f)r]aL,K(a\vei rov BrjfMov. iyw 8' ei° fiev eSwK alrovar], irapa rov vojxov etprjKa' el Se firj 7re7rol7]p,ai fxveiav irepl tmv vewv ev oXw rw yfrrjcjiLa/MaTi, aXX erep arra Xeyco Si a ttjv /3ovXr]v 9 are^avw, ttw? irapd rov vofxav €ipi]Ka ; earc 8?)'' Trpo? 596 ravT ov ')(^aX€7rdv rd SiKata vfilv avTeiiretv, on Trpoi- rov jjiev 01 irpoeSpevovTe'i rr;? /SovXi]'^ kul ravT i'7riylrr](J3i,^a)v iir ktt drr)'; rjpwrwv Koi Siaxetporoviav eSiSoaav, orw SoKet Bcopeid Sijfxw yevop^eva. ilaaff orav fiev firj f} Trjv /3ovXi]u alrelv, ravd' viro- Xafi/3dveT€' on Se ouSe rov Srjfxov id ScSovai firj 7rotT](Tap,€voc'i^ ra? vav^ 6 v6p,oa.v\ov 5e to p-eya and jDroceeds to show that this distinction is not always maintained, since (pXaupos is used of serious as well as of trifling evils. Comp. Aristocr. p. 651 § 92, Timocr. §§ 127, 158. Here K. rightly translates 'that I may avoid words of evil omen.' § 13. TTMiv fxaXicTT' aKodffai yvuipLpLa] ' Familiar to all ears. ' Comp. de Symmor. p. 189 § 40 (licTTe Kai yvuspLfia Kal incrTd avri^ t(jov awayyeXXovTtiJv aKoveiv ^arai. See also Timocr. § 68 Tracrt yvui pi 1X011. d ^ovXeade'] 'to take this ex- ample,' G. H. Schaefer. The phrase el 5k ^ovXei is common in Plato in a sense approaching the present, but with easily dis- tinguishable shades of meaning : see the Editor's note on Protag. 320 a. ol TO, irpoiri/Xaia Kal Tbv wap- Oevujva oiKoSo/xricravTes] The two great ornaments of Periclean Athens, here ascribed to the men of Salamis, are in reality later by at least a generation. The J'arthcnon was finished n.c. 438 : tlie Projiylaca wen; then immediately begun, and comj)leted in five years, ending 2—2 20 KATA ANAPOTinNOS [§§ 14, 15. 8o/jiy]. As he observes, the phrase used is ovSeis xp^'^os referring to fu- ture time [oiySeis xp^i/os e|aXei^et etc.], oi)5' 6 xp^vos of the past. § 14. dpxcuo. Kat TraXatd] 7ra- Xoios follows dpxalos in a more or less contemptuous sense, 'trite' or 'timeworn.' But in Lys. c. Andoc. § 51 Kara to v6- fxi/j-ov t6 iraXaLov Kai dpxaiov seems to mean 'the good or tima-honoured old custom. ' dXX' a wdvTes eopaKar', icrd ' Sti] Cobet, Nov. Led. p. 228, writes ' repone dXXd iravres et eopaKare excidit,'an emendation which carries with it more pro- bability than many of the critic's ingenious conjectures. The construction thus comes out more simply and neatly. Re- turning to the jioiut in Misc. Grit. p. 521, he adds that eopa- Kare does not fit well with Kai Orjl^aiovi vTTOcnrovdovs direwlp.- p. 597.] nAPANOMON. 21 ri^epwv rptwv e^orjOi^aare Koi ^ij/Baiovi vTTOcnrov- Bovi direirefJi-^aTe. dp' ovv ravr iirpd^ar dv oI'tco? o^eo)?, el /uLTJ vav/v yap rcov oXcov acoTTjpLav TrpiijTOV V7rdp')(^etv Bet irapeaKevaa/xevrjv T&J By)pw. ovrov dyadQu Kai Kav6ves, 'tests p-v-qa KtcO ai, 'what advances and standards of everything he has made in his power of good,' de Cor. p. 3'24 § 2%. A recollection.' slightly different sense in Mid. /3e/3oi'Xei'Aiw'aj] as in §§ 5, 9, p. .54H § 105 'iva 6pov Oip.tvo^ ' discharged its functions.' iravrl TpbTru) pie dveXflv. 'having §§ 17 — 20. Anticipation of but one object in view,'=T^Xos. the defence that the senate was t4s TpiTipeis X^yui] Cobet again not responsible for the d<>falca- brackets, Mixr. (Jrit.p. r/Il. He tions of its Huhordinuti! ollici'i. will not hear of statyovixriv epu rd^i TOiavTa<; dopiadai Ti,fj,d<;' eireira" KaKelv 18 ert ^ovXo/xaL (f)p(taai 7rpc<; vfiaolv'] Andro- tion is made to plead at once ' no excuse needed ' (because the law has not been broken) and ' a good excuse ' (because the senate in their collective capacity were not to blame). The prosecution contends that he must take his clioice between the two lines of defence. In English law it is no uncommon thing to see a claim for dei)t resisted by i)leas both of ' paj'- ment ' and ' never indebted.' 26 RATA ANAPOTIONOS [§§ 19, 20. ovK etT]pi]/jLevoi rr/v Bcopeidv on rdq vavs iiridei^w. The other ex- planation adopts the reading avry, for which there is good MS. authority, and separates TOVTOV from TOV vopLov. Ben- seler, partly following some of the older commentators, trans- lates thus: 'The senate (council), which made the law null and void, chose this man (the trea- surer) for itself. ' In other words, 'I will prove to you the respon- sibility of the senate : for this very senate which acted thus illegally had (previously) chosen the defaulter for its treasurer (and so was liable for his mal- versation).' This at least pre- serves the usual meaning of XeipoToveTv, and is certainl}- pre- ferable to the alternative ren- dering, though not, I think, free fromdifficult}- : the proper Greek for 'Der liath, der das Gesetz null und niehtig niachte' (Beu- seler's version), would be 17 ^ov\r]i] a.v€\ov<7a t6v vo/xov. The Scholiast and .Jerome Wolf ex- plained TOVTOV ex(i-poT6vr]'2 c \pi\Qs ttcos X^yo- /xfv, ovK ?x<"''''fs 'iKava TrapaSdy- /xara, where Thompson gives otlier meanings of ^iXds X670S in Plato, e.g. Theiiet. 165 a \I/l- \u)v X6>w;'=: abstract dialectics, but in Laws 11. 069 i> \6yoi \f/i\oi are ' prose,' as distin- guished from metrical compo- sition. irlaTiv d}v 'Keyei] iriaTLv is here any sort of proof or evi- dence, including T€Kfj.r\pia, eiKb- ra, iJ.apTvpa%, and distinct from TO TTiaTov below = • credibility.' Demosthenes' Te/v^r;ptoi', 'circum- stantial evidence,' is of course quite different from Aristotle's 'certain or necessary sign' (Rhet. I. 2 § 1(5, with Cope's Introduc- tion, p. Itjl). For eiKOTa, com- pare Cic. de luv. i. 29 (4(5) : Prubabile autem est id, quod fere solet fieri, aut quod in opi- nione positum est, aut quod habet in se ad haec ciuiindani similitudinem, sive id falsum est sive verum. aiirdvTas ecrri /caracTTTjo-ai] This is certainly one of the places where MS. li alone out- weighs the authority of all the rest. To say that iri some cases the jury could not be nmdo eye-witnesses is little better tlmn nonsense: theniean- ing of coiirso is, tliat in some cases (lie might have said ttoX- 30 KATA ANAPOTIONOS [% 23—25. iKavov vofil^eT e\ev e;^etf uyu-et? elK6ro)6/jlov<; 6r]aeL, jxer aheiwi eaeaOao iroWovi nrovqpov^i rjyelro, el 8' fo)9 Tol<; Opaaeai koX Suvarol'i Xejeiv, tovi? lSicoTa), here of course the man unversed in public speaking, opposed to dwaroos Xeyeiv, cf. Protag. 31'2b, Thomp- son on Grorg. 455 b. § 26. A locus classicus on Attic procedure in case of felony (KaKovpyLa), deserving a careful comparison with the vofxoi k\o- TTTJs K.T.X. in Timocr. § 105, and the orator's account in the same speech, §§ 113, 114. It is to be observed, however, that the first -named passage as an 'inserted document' is greatly inferior in authority to the words of Demosthenes himself in the two latter §§. Compare Diet. Aiitiq. s.v. Clopes Dike. The democratic spirit of Athenian legislation aimed at effecting a real equality of rich and poor before the law, by the variety of remedies it jirovided against the wrong-doer ; and further, as we learn from the present passage, sought to neu- tralise the advantages of bodily strength, pugnacity and readi- ness of speech. We find here (1) aTrayujyri, (2) ecpriyriais, (3) ypacpr} or pub- lic indictment, (4) diKt) or a private suit for restitution of the stolen goods with compen- sation. To these might have been added evSet^ty which, though properly an 'informa- tion' against one who, being drip.os, obtained an office or usurped a right from which he was disqualified, was likewise used in a more general sense (cf. Schoemanu, Assemblies, p. 177). For fuller details the stu- dent is necessarily referred to Diet. Antiq. s. vv. : we may here indicate the main distinc- tions between these several pro- cesses. In dwayuyri the com- p. 601.] HAPANOMnN. 33 rov 8iKT]<; TV)(elv, 6i? 6o2 OVK acre/3?;?, i} n hr^iror etrj 3' o KplvoLro, Bid ravra S' eK(f)ev'y6LV d^ioirj, el /uuev d7rrjeadai XPV^> ^^ ' Z Bekk. [ovB^repov jSoi^Xe: tovtwv ; yparjyov] cum Ubris. " Ita Bl. e coni. Weilii : p6.^eiv cett. de Myst. § 8 and passivi), wpo- fioXr) (Libaii. AiKum. Mid. p. 509), or eiaayyeXia (Andoc. de Myst. § 43). Of the latter class was the indictment of Alcibi- ades, preserved by Plutarch Al- cib. 22 (ela-TTryfi-^ei') : compare Grote ch. 58 (v. 183). The two other courses, biKa^eadaL -rrphs Ei5- fMoXnidas and (ppd'^eiv ivpbs tov ^aaiXea, are mentioned only in the present passage. It may safely be assumed that the latter was a device, like those just referred to in the case of K\oTrri, for the protection of the diffident accuser: by denounc- ing an act of impiety to the king-archon, he might escape responsibility for himself, and leave it to that magistrate to take up the charge or not. Funkhaenel {Prolefjo)ii. p. 27) seems right in explaining (ppd- i'eivus a fit'Z((f/o merely, not, with Meier, as anactio: the correction is accepted by Lipsius, p. 3i9, but there does not appear to be any other example of (ppa^eLv, ^pdaa in the legal sense of (palveiv, (pdcns : and Weil's cor- rection (based on a hint in the Schol.) is undoubtedly right. It is clear also that diKd^ecrOai irpbs ^vfioXviSas applied to the profanation of the Eleusinian mysteries, of which the family of the Eumolpidae were here- ditaiy guardians. Caillemer further conjectures that the action of the Eumolpidae was confined to ' spiritual censures ' (des peines religieuses, telles que I'exclusion des myst^res ou la privation du titre d'initie, sans influer sur I'etat civil et politique du coupable) ; and that the other sacred family, the Kerykes, possessed the same authority (ap. Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. Asebeias Graphs ). That the two processes might become practically identical appears from a scholium quoted by Dindorf : 6 yap jSaaLXevs ewep.e\eLTO tu>v iepwv Trpay/j-drwu Kai eTrrjye rds t^s d(76/3ei'as ypas Ey/xoX7ri5as. An im- portant passage on the Eumol- pidae is Lys. c. Andoc. § 10 : the laws, of which they were the €^T)yr)Tal or expounders, were unwritten, and of immemorial antiquity. § 28. Trpos SiaLTriTr]v — Xaxeii'] sc. SiKrjv, expressed in Neaer. p. 1378 § 98 oi IlXaratets Xay- Xdvovcri dlKrjv rois AaKeSaifiovLois p. 602.1 nAPANOMnX. 35 8k 7rpo9 BiatTrjTfj (t)€V'yoi, otl XP^^ ^' aTrdyeiv, Xv eKivSvveve^ irepi ^tXtcoy, v yeypa- 0a? Ti TOLOVToq wv' OV ydp e^eari, aoi. el 8e ere p-rj 7rdvTa(u(i] § 21, note. rdv '/( /j.rjSiv 7re TroiiyKAra] Indefi- nitely, ''(/(/' wlio has done no- thing' wrong : and ho = 'thede- fendant, if he be innocent.' § 29. el ypdcpeis r]TaiprjKu)s'\ ' if you move decrees {-ipy^cpia ixara) after having committed infa- mous crime,' K. The distinction between ypanpiiv and ypa., Kal ypd-^(i} Si ' and what is more.' I do not think, how- ever, that this is the case here : and 5^ is rightly expunged by Blass. § 34. uxpXev] Not merely 'owed money' (oi^etXe;') but ' had a decree out against him, p. 604.] nAPANOMON. 39 TOVT iTrlSei^ov, rj &>? ovk aTroSpch e^rfkOev eic rov he- (Tfxwrripiov, aXKa tcl 'y^prjixaTa iKTeiaa^. el Be fJbi] ravd' e^et-? heiKvvvai, ovk e^ov yeypa(f)a\i(TKa.- vuu, d(p\ilv dlK-qv. The distinc- tion is ri!j;htly noted by G. H. Sehaefer on Timocr. § 50. deiKvijvat.] Most MSS. includ- ing 2 read 5f iKi/veiv, retained by the Zurich editors and Benseler and possibly written by De- mosth. for the sake of variety. Diudorf leaves SeiKfveiv un- altered, Timocr. §g 35, 66, 68. Cobet, however, lays down the rule against such forms, Var. Lect. p. 317 : ^dfiKvdeiv, deiKuvw, d/JLvvd) et similia sequiora sunt et sub Menandri aetatem pro- puUularuut.' K\ripov6iJ.ov Tri% (XTt/xtas] iJict. Aittiq. s. V. Atiraia, and Boeckh, P. K. p. ■6Q0 = SthhJ i. 461. Atimia was not usually inlierited except by the children of public debtors, among whom Cimon the son of Miltiades is a well-known instance. The harsh- ness with which the law might be enforced is vividly depicted in the opening of the speech agaiust Neaera, p. 13i7 §§ 5 — 8. Tlie law of Timocrates, against wliichtlieTimocrateaisdirected, was expressly designed to miti- gate the rigour with which pub- lic debtors were treated, and will afford an opportunity for the fuller discussion of this question. See Timocr. §§ 45, 50, 54. Trape-ypa\pa.ixfda\ ' which we have cited against him,' K. who adds in a note: ' the laws which Androtion violated by his decree, which we have copied out and exhibited in court in juxta-posi- tion with his decree.' So in de Cor. p. 263 § 111 tQiv irapa- yeypafj./j.^vwi' voixoiv of the laws hung up on a table (crai/tStov) by the side of Ctesiphon's decree for the judges to compare. From this i^rimary sense of Trapaypdcpeiv, to write as it were in parallel columns, we get the technical usage of ■nrapaypaivaKl^iiv Kal irapdyeiv : there is none of till' dilliculty which was 40 RATA ANAPOTinNOS [§§35,36. 35 EtVt Se Kal Trepl toov aWoiv avTO) Xoyot tt/so? to (pevaKiS^eLv v/xd'i ev /xe/j.rj'x^avTjfjievoi, Trepl (hv ^eknov ufid^- TTpoaKovcraL. ean yap el? avTM tolovto^, fjurj irevraicoaiov'i v/jLcov avTwv cK^eXea-Oat rrjv Soopeiav fJitjS' 6v€L8et 7repi/3a\etv' eKeivcov ayoov, ovk eyu.0'9. £70) S' el fiev e/xeWer dcfjacpTjaeadai rovTowi fjuovov, dWo Se /XTjSep M^eXi^aeiv ti)v ttoXiv, ou8ev civ u/xa? (T(f)6Spa airovSd^eiv ij^louv' el 8e tw tovto Troiijaat noticed on § -i irXaTTuiv Kal Trapdyui'. ^evaKl^eiv tlvo. is the usual construction, as in the next §; ^evaK. tl and (pevaK. Tiva TL are rarer, but occur de F. L. p. 362 § 6(5 = 74 tU 6 ravra (pevaKicxas ; and p. 363 § 72 = 81 (Sv Tre(p€vdKiK€ rrju v6\lv. See Shilleto's Annot. Grit, on the former passage. §§ 3.5—37. But, it icill be uryed, if you condemn Androtion yon ivill put a stipnia iqwn the whole senate by depriving them of the customary compliment. To this I answer (1) that, even if it were so, the disappointment of 500 men at missiny a reioard, ivhich after all they have not deserved, ought not to xveiyh against the interests of the state, and the opportunity of reading a useful lesson to the citizens at large. But further (2) I am prepared to maintain that the discredit does not attach to the senate as a body or to its 'silent members,' hut only to Androtion and the other mischief-inaking orators who manage the senate as they please. And even grant- ing for the sake of argument that the whole body is not upon its trial, it is (3) much more your interest to convict than to acquit. If you acquit, the senate will he still, as it is noxo, ruled by the professioiud speakers : but if you condemn, the ordinary members icill no longer leave everything to these self-elected leaders, ivliose misconduct has cost the senate its crown: they icill take the trouble to think for themselves, and advise for the best. It is sufficient reason to justify a conviction, if it only enables you to get rid of the Orators ! § 35. d€Ki(TdaL...T!-epi^a\eiv'\ The reading a.(pe\y](jde...irepL^a.- XTjre {yp. S) no doubt arose out of the return to the direct con- struction in iKiivuv 6 dyuv ovk epLos: 'They are upon their trial,' says Androtion, 'and not I.' But the blending of the two constructions in one sen- tence is not unusual. Dindorf compares, after Funkhaenel, Xen. Cyrop. i. iv. 28 evro.vda 5rj rbv K-vpov yeXdcrai re €k tGiv Trpbof)ev SaKpvoiv Kal elireiv avrt^ aiTLOvra Oappelv, oti irdpeaTai avToh 6\lyov xpovov uxxre bpdu aoi i^earai Kav ISovXrj daKapSap-VKTi : where however L. Dindorf reads bpdv 'i^earai. Kav ^ovXrjrai. There are several instances in the Greek of the N. T. e.g. Acts i. 4 irepLpAvuv ttjv iwayyeXiav rod Trarpbs rjv rjKotjaaTe juiov. fl ixkv (/neXXere dv eKK\7)(nai;6vTwv). A passage from a genuine work of Plato (Symp. 175 e) has been cited in favour of the larger estimate ; what it really proves is that the Diony- siac theatre held (approximate- ly) 30,000 spectators. See Prof. Jebb's art. Theatrum, Diet. Antiq. ii. 818 b. ToaovTOvs irapaffKevdffai XPV- aTovs] XP'7<'"''<'W i^ attributive : 'to make so many persons ho- nest,' not ' so many honest men.' The sense approaches that of ffuxppovi^eiv, to bring a person to a sense of his situation, read him a useful lesson. § 3G. Ttvuii' oiTrep ei el ddi.Krj(7a(n fji,€ydXa doLKi'-j/xaTa. (From Jelf, Synt., § 691, who however is not hap- py in his explanation.) In this class of phrases the participle is more forcible than the infini- tive : as Stein well puts it in his note on the passage in He- rodotus, it expresses the reflex action (Boppelwlrkung) of the deed when done : in the present instance, not merely, 'it is your p. 605.] nAPANOMON. 43 creaOe, eVl toi<; Xeyovai to ^ovXevTTjpiov earat, iav Be KarayvcoT , iirl to2<; IStcoTaL^' eopaKorefi yap ol ttoX- \ol hia Ttjv rwv XeyovTOiv TTOvrjpiav T-qvh^ d(f)r)pTj- fjbivyjv rr]v ^ovXrjv tov (rretpavov, ov'yl Trpoyjaoi'Tai 605 TOVTOi^ ra^ 7rpd^ti<;, aXXd rd ^eXriar'^ ipovaiv av- Toi. el 8e yeutjcreTUL tovto kuI rwv i]dahoiv Kal avv- ea-rrjKorcoi''^ prjTopcov diraXXayi^aeaOe, 6^eo6\ 00 dv8pe ouSet? ovSefilav firj 8S' Tt9 yap er dv KaTayjrTjipiaaiT CKelvcov, rrjv /BovXrjv vfioov icTTecfia- vcoKOTCov, 179 ovroi irpoearacrav ; idv 8e Karayvwre, irpcorov fiev rd evopic eaeaO iyp'7](l)L(T/jL6vot, eir eiri TaU evOvvai^ eKacrrov rourcov XajJL^dvovre^, 0? fikv dv v/jLlv dhiKelv BoKJj, KokdaeTe, oiKr)s, c. riiorni. p. 013 § '22, p. 020 § 4.5, Anecd. Bekk. p. 183, 24 : ' Kiroyr/vwdKuv ' a(pu- vai rCiv iyKhripxiTwv. (coXcuTtre] The active form, as always in the Orators: KoXa- aop-ai XenoplKjn, Plato: contr. KoXw/Mi, apparently only in Aristophanes. " Theciuotations of fut. act. will show that Hem- sterhuis and Porson were quite wrong in asserting that 'the Attics use only the mid. fut. of this verb,' and that Butt- mann, Passow, and even Poppo are scarcely right in calling the mid. fut. 'usitatior.'" Veitch, 8. V. Kal Twf Tro\\i2v] Of course to be joined with inr^p ttjs j3ov\tjs: et populi, as Jerome Wolf and Kennedy; rather than iiKi.rimae partis senatus, as Jurinus, Funkhaenel, Dindorf. §§ 40, 41. Archian also, a member of last year's senate ivlto poses as an honest man, will jjrnhahlij intercede for A ndrotiou. But ijou can ask him a few per- tinent questions. If he justifies the conduct of the senate, wluit becomes of his character for ho- nesty? if his itdvice uas not lis- tened to, what can he say for his 46 KATA ANAPOTinNOS [§§40—43. 40 "Ert roivvv ^ A.pj^lav olfxat rov \o\apyea {Kai yap ovTO8l irco'i aKOveiv 'Ap^^tou, epcordv avrov ravra, a KaTrjyoprjrat, Tr}^' Kav fiev (pf] KoXdo^;, p^r^Ken tov vovv co? eirieiicei 606 7rpoae')(eiv, liv he KaKco'i, tl 87) ravr eia (paaKcov 41 eVtei/c?)? elvat, ttoXlv avTOv ipwrare. Kav /mev *dvTL- Xeyeiv (f)fj, p,riheva S' avrw ireiOeadai, utottov Srjirov vvv \eyeiv virkp rf]'; rd /SeXricrT oy^t Trei,dopbevrivo rjpyoXd^ec Kal TToWd Tcov v/jLeT6pa)v KeKXocpe, Tov€i\ovTas supply rds dcrpas] ' putting in a clause that the Eleven should accomjjany him ' implied a coercion bill of a very stringent character : ' ut qui non solveret, statim in vincula daretur,' Funk- haenel. Cf. Diet. Aiitiq. s. v. Henduca. §§ 51 — 55. From the case of Euctemon the orator passes to the general character of An- drotion's exactions, expanding tlie brief statement in {5 47 that his conduct was unworthy of a democratic statesman. On the contriirij it recalls the days of the Thirty, the worst in Athenian history: or rather A. surpassed them in l/rulality, and treated free citizens icorse than slaves. 54 KATA ANAPOTIIINOS [§§50—53. ov^ev el-^^ev eXej')(^6iv irepl rovrtov, vixd<; 8 elcre- irparrev, wairep ov Bia rijv ¥,vkt7]/xovo<; e^dpav eirt, 51 TavT i\d(ov, dWa Sia rr]V vfMerepav. Kal /XT/Set? vTroXafi^avero) fie \eyetv cb? ov XPV^ ela-rrpdrreiv T0U9 6(f)ei\ovTatXt7r7ros XRV'''^-'-- Mid. p. 521 individual who might happen to § 19 rd /J.ev ovv els e/xe Kal toi>s be interested,' R. W. Benseler Tfi 6i rat olKlas ifidoi^of km i/xi fUf ^4i>oos iartuiVTo. KaHXapov : cf. c. Agorat. §§ 35—38. In reality, the Thirty selected for their victims not merely the prominent democratic leaders, but any whose wealth tempted their rapacity. The constitu- tional maxim that ' an English- man's house is his castle ' was perhaps more strongly asserted in days when the real liberties of the people were less secure than now-. I am not aware of any other passage in the Orators where the same asser- tion is made as to the Athenian law. ToaoLVTr}v virep^oXrjv — /SSeXu- pias] The sense of this is plain : = TOeL\eL, to. KTrj^aTa (^rjaeiev av, etirep aXrjOfj Xiyeiv ^ovKolto' diro hecrpLWTTjplw, pbrjTe dirohovTa ravra /xrjTe Kpideur (iirohpavai, rwv S' aWcov ttoXi- T(t)v TOV fjbr) Svvdfxevov rd iavrov delvai o'lKoOev etV TO Sea/xcoT7]piop eXKeadai. elr eVt rovroi^, &)? oriovv e^ov kavTM TToietv, 'Sivcotttju irpoa-qve-^^v pa^e koI ^a- ' df/crws Blass. below § 62 rds t'Sias avh dopdv ravrrji/, 17 tov 6i2 fiev avTciJv, on Trnvrwv aKOVOVTWV V[xwv iu rai hrjfxuf SovXov e(j)T] Kal eK SovXcov eivat Kal irpoariKeLv avrm TO €KTOv fi€por ; ert roivvv eK tov8' dxpc/Secrrepov yvuxreade ore p,iaei tovtov €/7rov. The duty of the iTTiixeXtjral in relation to the ffKeur), 'tackling' or 'naval stores' generally, is well brouglit out in [Demosth.] c. Everg. et Mnesib. p. 114.5 §§ 20—22 espe- cially 6d6via Kal arvTrirfia Kal crxot'na, oh KaTaaKtvdi'fTai rpi- VPV^- 64 KATA ANAPOTinNOS [§§ 63—65. iK€tvo<; Slci Tavra ovSeva e')(dpov avrm (prjcrlv elvai, ovT€ Twv ela7rpa')(^devro)v oiJSel? e«etV&) irokefjbel. elKOTO)!;' 6 fiev dv8p€<; ^Adrjvaiot, irpoa- rjKet, Kal ixLaeiv tou^ o'lovairep'^ outo?. (W9 eKelvo '' Kal or] Z Bekk. Bens, cum 20. ••■ oloa-rrep Bekk. Dind., v. not. ^eXrlovs Kal eK peXridvuv] 'of aui^eii'] ' sui^port, protect, better character and better fa- countenance:' here opposed to mily.' So in Herod, ii. 143 § 5 /juae'Lv, more usually to diroWij- HipcofiLv iK Ilipw/Mos is 'a man vac. 'The form with i (ti^'^o}, and the son of a man,' as op- thoroughly discussed by Usener posed to god or hero. Aiistoph. in Fleckeisen's Jahrh. 1865, p. Eq. 185 — 6 iJ.C>v e/c Ka\Q>v el kcl- 238 f. , is established by the yaOdv; AA. fia, rovs deovs \ ei Heraclean Tables (Kareaip^afxe^ fj.ri^KTrourjpQi' y' : where I observe Stud. iv. 428), by Attic inscrip- that Dindorf omits to credit tions of a very early date and Elmsley with the correction el by grammarians. Of course fjii) \ for eiju' e'/c of the MSS. crLp'^nv can only have come frpm § 64. dvaicrdrjaias Kal ttovt}- (tcj'i^u}.' Curtius, Gk. Verb, p. pias] 'take upon themselves 523, E. T. In other words, (make themselves responsible ffv^i^ is formed from adj. awos for) the acts of your callousness (in the best Attic aQs, Timocr. and dishonesty:' dvaiadrjcriasre- § 106 n.) like Kadapigoj from Ka- ferring to his insults, Trovrjpias dapbs, (joxppovi'^o} from ailxppwv. to his unjust exactions. K. Blass is the first editor who has somewhat loosely translates restored the t in Demosth. 'wickedness and brutality.' The rovs olovcrirep ovtos] The best reading dvaLcrx^'VTi-as has not MSS., 2FT, rightly followed by foundfavourwiththeeditors,but the Zurich editors, Benseler, is preferred on internal groimds and Cobet, Var. Led. p. 551, by Cobet, Misc. Crit. p. 526. Misc. Crit. p. 526, preserve the p. 613.] nAPANOMnN. 65 eiooaL /j,ev 'Lcr(o/jLaTa Kal Xeirovpylai; erepat; iXXeXot- ^ /jidX' rjfuv orjXop Bens. attraction of o'iov(nr€p = ToiotJTovs oUa-n-ep. Compare § 77 oi/S' ol'- oiawip crv xpt^MfO' cru///3oiy\ots, with the parallel passage of the Timoerates § 18.5. In the last instance the case is even strong- er: all MSS. exhibit oioi(nrep, which Bekker (followed by Din- dorf ) corrected as though it were a solecism. G. H. Schaefer, who had defended this attrac- tion in his notes on Bos' El- lipses, writes here ' Nondum poenitet ilia scripsisse, etsi meum mecum Dindorfium dis- sensisse vidi.' §§ 6.5—78. The remainder of the speech, with the exception of a paragraph or two, is repeated in Timocr. § 172—186. §§ 65—68. His pretence of public spirit is easily exposed: for while levyinr/ arrears of taxes on men for tvlione shortcomimis there was often the excuse of in- ability to pay, he has done no- thing, in a long political career, for the repression of much more serious offences. The public treasury has been robbed of much larger sunm, the contributions of our allies and of those who pay their taxes readily. Many ge- nerals and orators have been brought to justice for these pecu- lations: you, Androtion, never took your place as the accuser of any of these, never expressed in- dignation at the way the state was being fleeced. The fact is (here the speaker again turns to the jury) that Androtion, and men like him, are accomplices 7oith such offenders and share largely in their illicit gains. He is one of that class of delin- quents himself: he has treated you with contempt, in fact worse than slaves. Now is your op- portunity to make an example of him. § 65. aifTiKa dr] fidXa] The strengthening of avrlKo. either by 5i7 or /xaKa is common both in Plato and the Orators. The doubly emphatic avrlKa 677 fiaXa occurs also Timocr. SS i'^^ 172, 208, I. Aristog. p. 778 § 29: aud it appears from Shilleto's Annot. Crit. on de Fals. Leg. p. 346 § 18 that there is good MS. au- thority for the phrase in at least two or three other passages where it has not yet found its way into the printed texts. Cf. on Timocr. § 111. W. D. 6Q KATA ANAPOXmNOS [§§65—67. TTore? elacpopdv, rj o! ra rwv ideXijaavTcov elaeveyKeiv ')(^p7]/j,aTa KoX TO. irapa tmv crv ix^ia-)(Oiv KKeTTTOvre'^ koI d'TroWvvre TToWwv fiev crTpaTTjycov rjhiKTjicoTOiv rrjv TToXiv, ttoXXcov Se prjTopoiv, ot irapd tovtolgI ' Stjttou ToX/xTis Z Bekk. Illud 2. ot ra Tu>v iBekyjaavTuv ...KKiir- TOVTes Kat a.TroWvvTes] K.'s ren- dering, 'those who jjlunder your allies and destroy the means of people willing to pay the tax,' contains several inaccuracies. It should rather be 'those who plunder and waste the money of people who have readilypaid their property-tax, and that which comes from the allies.' There is, I think, no reference to the levying of requisitions or other ways of forcible extortion: the money embezzled is that which has already come into the trea- sury, not that which is ' fructi- fying in the iDockets ' of the people : and it comes from two main sources, the property-tax {ela(popa) paid by the citizens and the tribute {(popos) paid by the allies. tQv IdeKrjadvTwv eicr- eve-yKelv means simply those who are not in arrear, opposed to eXXeXotTTores. § 66. TToXXtDf fxeu (TTparriyQv . ..TToWQv d^ pTjTdpwv] The most conspicuous example of an ora- tor so prosecuted during the 30 years ending b. c. 35.5 is that of Callistratus, whose execution had taken place the year before, 356. He had been capitally condemned in 361 for his share in the loss of Oropus (366) : had gone into exile, but had ventured to return. The prosecutions of Timotheus (acquitted 373, con- victed and went into exile 358) and of Iphicrates (acquitted 358, but not afterwards employed) had deprived Athens of her best generals: at the close of the Social War (356 — 5) the com- mand was entrusted to the brave but incapable and profligate Chares. In commenting on one of these transactions Grote is rather too indulgent to 'the terrible diiiiculties which the Grecian generals now experience in procuring money from Athens (or from other cities in whose service they are acting) for pay- ment of their troops ... and which wiU be found yet more painfully felt as we advance forward in the history' (ch. 77, VII. 132). The truth is more plainly stated by a writer in Diet. Biogr. s. v. Chares, who speaks of ' the miserable system then prevail- ing, when the citizens of Athens would neither fight their own battles nor pay the men who fought them, and her command- ers had to support their mer- cenaries as best they could.' It is, in fact, 'making war pay for p. 614.] nAPANOAinN. 67 KeKpcvraL, wv ol fiev Tedvdaiv e^' oluv e^-qra^d/xriv to. oeovd' virep vfjiwv, 'proved.found on inquiry:' ib. p. 294 § 197 toDto ireiroiriKics iirl Tois ffufipdfftv i^rjTaffai. Other usages of i^trd^uv are discussed by Dr Sandys on i. Steph. p. 1124 §70. ird(TX(i-] MSS. 7rdy , et y 6 TraTrjp 6 ao<; w^j^er' avTodep avTal<; irehaa e^op'^Tjad- Tu)v fxfv oUep] From here to the end of § 68 is not repeated in II Timocr., which begins again at 'AXXa vi] Am. § 68. ihjj.o\oyeiTe...riv^axfO'&i . ..8j3pi.l;ev] Each of these tenses has its significance. 'If you (now) acknowledged. . .you would not have endured (in the jDast) the insults he (repeatedly) oii'er- ed.' Writing dv^axeade with a single augment is certainly de- ferring too much to the sole authority of MS. 2: all the others retain the usual Attic form Tjviaxecde. du)v] Cobet names this pas- sage {Noi\ Led. pp. 528 — 9) as one of many where he corrects SQv &c. In Misc. Grit. p. 526 he repeats the correction with the remark ' Dicam de his formis alio loco,' apparently forgetting what he had said before. His rule could not be put more neatly than it is by Bhilleto on Thucyd. i. 6, S dvaSoij/j.fi'oi: '5^w (bind) and compounds invariably are contracted. Thus rb doSy (literal) is distinguished from t6 S^oj* (metaphorical).' In Plat. Crat. 419 a we have diov Kal ihcpiXijxov Kal XvaireXouv Kal Ksp- SaX^ov contrasted with TO de 'iaxov Kal dovv \pey6ixivov. lb. 421 c rd ibv Kal rb piov Kal to 8ovv. In Protag. 321 B the restoration of vTroSQiv for inrb irodwv has greatly improved the sense of the pas- sage. Karacpairjv dv 'iyw-ye] 'Yes, I should say it was, when your father went dancing off with his fetters [rather, as R. W., 'fetters and all'] at the jarocession of the Dionysia,' K. who adds in a note (from the scholiast Ul- pian) that 'at this time the prisoners were let out of gaol to enjoy themselves, and that An- drotion's father availed himself of the privilege to escape.' In- stead of dirodpas, e^opxV'^^IJ-^v'^^ is humorously substituted, in allusion to the dancing at the festival (G. H. Schaefer). p. 615.] nAPANOMDN. 69 fievo^ ^Lovvaicov rf] tto/xtt^. aWa S' oa vjBptKev ov8 av €)^oi Tf9 elirelv' roaavra to v\rjd6). In his blindness he fails to per- ceive that the Athenian people have always preferred glory to riches ; their splendour is dis- played in their temples and arse7ials, not by the gold in their vaults. Their imperishable treasures are the remembrance of their great deeds, a fume that will never die (76, 77). How completely you, the Athenians of to-day, have degenerated from your ancestors, is sufficiently proven by the fact that Androtion, of all people in the irorld, has been chosen for a sacred function as re- pairer of the Panathenaic vessels (78). § 69. 'AXXd ^t; Ala] Demo- sthenes' favourite phrase in in- troducing a bit of irony. In Plato sometimes dWa or), Lat. at enim or simply at. toi.ovt6^ icTLv] toioOtoi ycydpa- ffiv II Timocr. and so throughout with the change to plural forms. The general m( aning of this opening sentence, with its ravra fiiv opposed to dWa 5i, is well brought out in K.'s free trans- lation: 'But perhaps, notw'ith- standing these political faults, there are other things which he has managed creditably. Nay, on the contrary (dXXd)...' oiJTu} TTpoatXrfKvde irdvTa irpbi vfids] irpo(j^pxofj.ai is not here = irpocT. H. Schaefer, Dindorf, Kennedy), but, as Sliilleto points out on Fals. Leg. § 2, is eiiuivnleiit to TTfiroXlTevTaL in tlie jireceding 70 KATA ANAPOTinNOS [% 69—71. CTT ev olTi'ypa(f)ev<; efteWef eaeaOat rcov eiaevejKovToyv ' eVt toI<; aT€(f>d- voLX^os, ra/xias, dv- Tiypa»'eijeiv. § 71. P-Tj Trpov ffTetpavovvTcov eveKa crvfj.- parents of Aeschiues, de Cor. p. (pepovros if rf Oedrpu) yiyverai 270 § 129 xo'^"''L\oTifx.las iv Noftf) vai/juaxt'as, the battle in Trepiaipeirai. ttjs iroXewy. p. 616.] nAPANOMnN. 73 aaB' vyJlv o iropvo^ ovto^^, " ^ AvSporlojvo'i iirifjieXov- fievov eTTonjOTjaav^" eTriyiypaTrraf kol ov to acofxa rjraipTjKOTO'i ovK ioiaiv ol vopuot [eti\nnrov) Kplcrtv dXrjtpl- that this § is wrongly inserted von: and de Symmor. p. 178 here from i Timocr. It is brack- § 1 tov doKuv ev X^yav S6^av eted by Bekker in his later ^(f^^poirat (where however Dind. edition, Saupj)e, Benseler, and now reads tov SvfaaOai X^yeiv Blass: rejected by Cobet Mine. with MS. 2). Crit. p. .^28— .30. The latter 74 KATA ANAPOTmNOS [§§74—76. waff" 6 fxeu olerai hi eKelvov vcf)' vfMMV awdi'^aecrdat, 6 he irapaKadr^Tai Kal ov Karahverai rol^i ireTrpajfie- 75 t'Oi?.] ovTQ} h' ov fxovov et9 y^pi'jixaT dvaihy) TrXrjdet, ttXovtou Tcva 6 jxiv oterai bC iKeivov'\ i.e. Androtion thinks that he will be acquitted by you, owing to the influence of Timocrates, while T. calmly sits by and does not sink into the earth for shame at his performances. Aneccl. Bekk. p. 151, 22 : Kara- 5vo/j,ai. dvTi ToO ai(Txi"'otJ.a.Ly 5o- Tt/ci;: i.e. followed by a dative, as here Toh ir ew pay /xe vols. I agree with Benseler and Cobet that this is making too much of Timocrates, a 'mere subor- dinate' {ein blosser Gehillfe) of A. In II Timocr. the positions are reversed: Timocrates is on his trial (6 neu), and Androtion (who by this time has already been acquitted on the present charge, and is perhaps more insolent than ever) is his power- ful supporter: and the passage is thus in its right place. § 75. (T/caids] See the quo- tation from de Cor. § 120 in § 73 71. : 'stupid,' K. ; ' narrow- minded' (bornirt), Benseler. dv fj.ev virepjidWri Tip TrX-^^ft] There are two ways in which this and the corresponding clause edv 5' eTrt /ntKpoh tls aeiu.- vtJvrjTaL may be taken. G. H. Schaefer, Funkhaenel, Dindorf, and Benseler seem to agree in thinking that both clauses refer to 'gold plate' only, of which 'drinking-cups' and 'censers' are taken as common types. These, if of a certain massive- ness, ttXovtov riva 56^av irpoae- Tpl\pa.TO rots KeKTT]/j.ivois (trans- lated below) : but if a man prides himself upon small ones, so far from obtaining any credit on that account, he is thought to be dTretp6Ka\os, wanting in taste. Thus TrXrj9€L=^/j.€y^dei, as Schaefer observes, a point on which there need be no diffi- culty. But surely this is not the notion which a cultivated Athenian would have formed of aTreipoKaXia. To him the dTret- poKaXos was the man devoid of a true feeling for art, the ' Phi- listine, 'the man who could not 'live up to' the works of Phi- dias and Ictinus. He would have applied the name to the vulgar rich man with his heavy gold plate as readily as to the silly man who aped wealth upon a small scale. The Greeks were singularly free from that wor- ship of gold and jewels for their own sake, and apart from ar- tistic merit or other associa- tions (such as those of the crowns which Androtion had broken up), which has marked the Oriental mind from the earliest dawn of its literature. The preferable explanation is, with K. and R. W., to under- stand fjLLKpois of ' small matters.' p. G17.] nAPANOMnN. 75 Bo^av irpoaerpiylraro toI<; K€KTi]/jL€voi)v ttoXlv et? o/xovotav d -wv Bens. Blass cum libris. § 78. evrjdeias Kal pq.6viiiias] Stmnpfsinn und Sorglosigkeit, ' stupidity and carelessness.' This bit of plain speaking waSj it will be remembered, to be uttered by Diodorus, not by the young author of the speech. iroftTreluv eTrKTKeuaffrrjs] § 69 n. 'AvdpoTiUjv, (i yjj Kai dfoi] For the stinging repetition (Epana- diplosis, Blass p. 153) of the man's name, comp. Aristocr. p. 690 § 210 Kai XapiSrifMov ei XPV (ppovpeiv povXfveTaL ; Xap/- dri/xov ; oi/jLoi. ' Often quoted,' says Prof. Mahaffy Gr. Lit. ii. 347 n. Kai TOVT iiji^Tiixa !\aTTov tLvo^ riyelffde ;] Sic resolvendum : TovTO tIvos dfffprifj.aTos IXaTTOv a(Ti§r)ixa i)yeiiavKpariTai<^ dvOpcuiroi^; e/jL7r6poi<;, d(f>et\ovTO avrojv rd •^prj/xara. eiO' oi NavKparlrai /mev iXdov- Arguvient. Kavravda] As well yvw/jLTjs, 'the intention of its as against Androtion. Did these proposer. ' two speeches stand together in wpoOeafiias^ Diet. Antiq. s.v. Libanius' copies ? Prothesmia. TTJi alrias] 'the motive' of the Trpeo-jSei/rat] See § 12 of the law, nearly ^^T'^s toD ytypa(p6T0i speech. ARGUMENT.] KATA TIMOKPATOTS. 79 re? 'Adijva^e tov hrjfiov iKerevov, o Se 8r]fM0<; eyvco irokefiia elvat ra ■)(^priiiaTa, koI ^r) helv dirohoOrfvai Toi<; efnr6poi<;. tovtcov Se ovtco 'yevo/u.evcov W.p^€/3io<; Koi AvaiOeLSr}^ ol TpLrjpap')(Oi Trj<; ve(o<;, e(/)' ^9 eirXeov 01 Trepl TOV 'AvSpoTicova, elaeirpc'iTrovTo ra 'y^pjjfiara. fU9 Se eKeivoi fiev ovk ecpdvqcrav e^oi^re? aird, ol 695 irpetj^evral hk wfxoXoyovv e^ety avTa, koL eBet, irdv ')(^p7]fxa Kara^dWeLv ij T0L'?crt, Koi davfK^opov Tol^ KOLvol<; eTnBecKvva-iv. ETEPA TnOQESlS. UoXe/xov Tuy)(^dvovTO<; W.drjvaloi'i Trpof /SacrtXia, KUTO, TOVTOV TOV ^P*^^^^ eypd(f)rj -ylr/jcfyia/jLa avXa irXoicov TToXeixiwv elvai Kal ylveadai Ta Tifiij/xaTa OVK €Tioi> occasion, and the destruction of ...ari irapavhij.wv ; (2) a of command of the language. violent subversion of established (tCXo ttXo/wc] 'thattheeuemy'a 80 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [argument. roov kKottoov Srjfjboaia. Mavaco\o KaKw^ eiroUi rov^ "EWrjva'i. ovtoi vrjt irepi- TvxovT€^ 'NavKpaTiTtKi/ AljvTrTta ixo^o-T] (j)opTia (SceKOfiL^ov 8e tovtov^ Tov Kac tw ot- irXaaitp. a7ravi6Tr}TO<; 8e xPVf^'^'^'^^ KaTaaxovaT]^ TOV hrjpLOV, 'ApiaTO(f)MV rt? hr)p,ayevofj.€V7)<; Tot9 irpea^ecn irpo^ Tov Secr/ioS Kal ol 7rpeal3et w Kal 8e6rivai, Tovq 7rpecr/3€L<; i'^prjv, ejpayfre Ti/ji0KpdT7)<; VOflOV TOLOVTOV, €1 TlVt Toov 6(f>ec\6vT(ov TU> 8rifio(n,q) 8ecr/xov TrpoaTeTL/xrjTat KaTa vopiov i) KaTu -^^-qc^taiMa Kal TO XoLTTov TTpoarifMrjOfj, i^elvat avTU) KUTaaTTJaavTt T/jei? iyyvr]Td<; 77 firju eKTicretv, 01)9 di> 6 8rj/j.o<; -)(^eipo- 697 Tovrjcrr), ddileaOai tov 8eap,ov' idv Se f^rj iKTia-rj avTO^; T) 01 eyyvTjTai, tov fxev i^eyyvrjdevTa 8€8eadai, twv 8e iyyvrjTcov 8r)/jLoaLav eivai Trjv ovcriav. tovtou tov vo/jiov ypa<^i)v dirrjveyKavTO AidSwpo? Kal Euktjj/ikov 0)9 Trapavofxov Kal d8LK0v Kal davfji(f)6pov. \\v8poTLcov Be Kal rXavKiTT)'t]v, KaTa^dXXovatv ivvea TaXavra Kal TpidKOVTa fxvd^, taa)<^ p,kv ovk dv KaTa- /3aXovTe1 E. T. The point will actual hiw with the proposal of be further discussed in the nott^s Tiraocrates, 1'. K. p. H40 n. 1.59 to the Speech (see §§ '2, 3'.) f., 50). W. D. G 82 KATA TIM0KPAT0T2. [argument. Kal AioScupo?, (f)daKovT€^ fxev Bid tov^ Trpetr/Set? ^e- jpdipdat TOP vofiov' el Be Kal e^eriaav ev tm fiera^v ')^p6vw, BeBofiivrj^; tt}? 'ypa(f>rj(; tovto eTTOtrjaav, ware Tr)v Trpoaipecrtv tov vo/xoOerov inrairlav elvat. ovBev Be rjTTOv e^erd^et tov vofiov 6 pijrcop &)? Kal Kar dWoi/ TpoTTOV €')(^ovTa KaKWTi\r)\l/(i] 'objection.' very comijlctclj',' because it is Koraffrdact] 'statement of tlie the strong' point: the otlicr and case.' weaker pleas are iiurjjosuly juin- t6 niu f6txi/xov KftpaXaiov] The bled together. lu the Crown, most sensible remark which this on the contrary, the question 6—2 84 KATA TIMOKPATOTS. [% 1, 2, eipyacTTac, to Se hiKaiov koI to avfi(}>epov Kol to 8v- vaTov aWi'fkoL'i avfiTrXeKeTai. koI to fiev (Tv/j,6p(p Ke)(pr)TaL, BeLKvv