A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

986 DEMOSTHENES.
neia, and that the funeral feast was celebrated in
his house. (Den. de Coron. p. 320, &c.) But the,
fury of the Macedonian party and of his personal
enemies gave full vent to itself; they made all
possible efforts to humble or annihilate the man
who had brought about the alliance with Thebes,
and Athens to the verge of destruction. Accusations were brought against him day after day, and
at first the most notorious sycophants, such as
Sosicles, Diondas, Melanthus, Aristogeiton, and
others, were employed by his enemies to crush
him (Dem. de Coron. p. 310); but the more notorious they were, the easier was it for Demosthenes
to unmask them before the people. But matters
'soon began to assume a more dangerious aspect
when Aeschines, the head of the Macedonian party,
and the most implacable opponent of Demosthenes,
came forward against him. An opportunity offered
soon after the battle of Chaeroneia, when Ctesiphon
proposed to reward Demosthenes with a golden
crown for the conduct he had shewn during his
public career, and more especially for the patriotic
disinterestedness with which he had acted during
the preparations which the Athenians made after
the battle of Chaeroneia, when Philip was expected
at the gates. (Dem. de Coron. p. 266.) Aeschines
attacked Ctesiphon for the proposal, and tried to
shew that it was not only made in an illegal form,
but that the conduct of Demosthenes did not give
him any claim to the public gratitude and such a
distinction. This attack, however, was not aimed
at Ctesiphon, who was too insignificant a person, but
at Demosthenes, and the latter took up the gauntlet with the greater readiness, as he now shad an
opportunity of justifying his whole political conduct
before his countrymen. Reasons which are unknown to us delayed the decision of the question
for a number of years, and it was not till i. c. 330
(Plut. Demn. 24) that the trial was proceeded with.
Demosthenes on that occasion delivered his oration
on the crown (mr pI r07Espvov). Aeschines did not
obtain the fifth part of the votes, and was obliged
to quit Athens and spend the remainder of his life
abroad. All Greece had been looking forward
with the most intense interest to the issue of this
contest, though few can have entertained any doubt
as to which would carry the victory. The oration
on the crown was, in all probability, like that of
Aeschines against Ctesiphon, revised and altered
at a later period.
Greece had in the mean time been shaken by
new storms. The death of Philip, in B. c. 336,
had revived among the Greeks the hope of shaking
off the Macedonian yoke. All Greece rose, and
especially Athens, where Demosthenes, although
weighed down by domestic grief, was the first
joyfully to proclaim the tidings of the king's death,
to call upon the Greeks to unite their strength
against Macedonia, and to form new connexions in
Asia. (Plut. Dem. 23; Aeschin. c. Ctesijsh. ~ 161;
Diod. xvii. 3.) Bat the sudden appearance of
young Alexander with an army ready to fight,
damped the enthusiasm, and Athens sent an embassy to him to sue for peace. Demosthenes was
one of the ambassadors, but his feelings against
the Macedonians were so strong, that he would
rather expose himself to the ridicule of his enemies
by returning after having gone half way, than act
the part of a suppliant before the youthful king.
(Plot. Des. 23; Aeschin. c. P lesipsh. ~ 161.) But
no sooner had Alexander set out for the north to

DEMOSTIHENES.
chastise the rebellious neighbours of Macedoeub,
than a false report of his death called forth another
insurrection of the Greeks. Thebes, which hid
suffered most severely, was foremost; but the insurrection spread over Arcadia, Argos, Elis, and
Athens. However, with the exception of Thebes,
there was no energy anywhere. Demosthenes
carried indeed a decree that succours should be
sent to Thebes, but no efforts were made, and Demosthenes alone, and at his own expense, sent a
supply of arms. (Diod. xvii. 8.) The second sudden arrival of Alexander, and his destruction of
Thebes, inl B.c. 335, put an end to all further
attempts of the Greeks. Athens submitted to necessity, and sent Demades to the king as mediator.
Alexander demanded that the leaders of the popular party, and among them Demosthenes, should
be delivered up to him; but he yielded to the intreaties of the Athenians, and did not persist in
his demand.
Alexander's departure for Asia is the beginning
of a period of gloomy tranquillity for Greece; but
party hatred continued in secret, and it required
only some spark from without to make it blaze
forth again in undiminished fury. This spark
came from Harpalus, who bad been left by Alexander at Babylon, while the king proceeded to
India. When Alexander had reached the easternmost point of his expedition, Harpalus with the
treasures entrusted to his care, and with 6000
mercenaries, fled from Babylon and came to.Greece.
In B. c. 3'25 he arrived at Athens, and purchased
the protection of the city by distributing his gold
among the most influential demagogues. The
reception of such an open rebel could not be viewed
by the Macedonian party otherwise than as aim act
of hostility towards Macedonia itself; and it was
probably at the instigation of that party, that
Antipater, the regent of Macedonia, and Olympias
called upon the Athenians to deliver up the rebel
and the money they had received of him, and to
put to trial those who had accepted his bribes.
Harpalus was allowed to escape, but the investigation concerning those who had been bribed by himn
was instituted, and Demosthenes was among the
persons suspected of the crime. The accounts
of his conduct during the presence of Harpalus at
Athens are so confused, that it is almost impossible
to arrive at a certain conclusion. Theopompus
(ap. Pist. Dem. 25, comp. Vil. X Orat. p. 846)
and Deinaichues in his oration against Demosthenes
state, that Demosthenes did accept the bribes of
Harpaluss; but Pausanias (ii. 33. ~ 4) expressly
acquits him of the crime. The authority of his
accusers, however, is very questionable, for in the
first place they do not agree in the detail of their
statements, and secondly, if we consider the conduct of Demosthenes throughout the disputes about
Harpalus, if we remember that he opposed the reception of the rebel, and that he voluntarily offered himself to be tried, we must own that it is
at least highly improbable that he should have
been guilty of common bribery, and that it was
not his guilt which caused his condemnation, but
the implacable hatred of the Macedonian party,
which eagerly seized this favourable opportunity
to rid itself of its most formidable opponent, who
was at that time abandoned by his own friends
from sheer timidity. Demosthenes defended himself in an oration which Athenaeus (xiii. p.592) calls
irsepi 'red ypuaovo, and which is probably the same