This, in a certain sense, was his position through life; alone, or supported only by a few, to move the masses of the people according to his own views.

In his eighteenth year, and scarcely enrolled among the citizens of Athens, he gave evidence of his courage by instituting a process against his guardians for their breach of trust; a process which continued three or four years, but which the young Athenian gained, yet without obtaining his entire inheritance.

Plato is said to have been his teacher in philosophy, Isaeus instructed him in rhetoric, and Thucydides was his model in style. At first devoted to eloquence in court, he was afterwards attracted to the arena of political life, especially by an oration of Callistratus. He now ventured to appear before an assembly of the people; but with all his carefully turned periods, his antitheses and enthymemes, he failed, was hissed and obliged to leave the stage. He spoke with short breath, a bad pronunciation, and with an absence of all the grace of external eloquence. But this only increased his zeal and redoubled his efforts. We see him speaking with pebbles in his mouth, reciting long periods while ascending a hill, declaiming on the shore of the stormy sea, and, in the quiet and stillness of a subterranean apartment, exercising himself in gesture and attitude. A drawn sword hanging from the ceiling must cure the shrug of his shoulders. Nor was the result less incredible than his efforts. He became as renowned for delivery and gesture as for other and more important qualities as an orator. In undertaking the profession of an orator, he undertook also most zealously to strive for all which belongs to that profession. He certainly therefore considered eloquence as something, which must be acquired, and which one may acquire by a will perseveringly directed to that end. A view quite different from that now prevalent, which regards eloquence as a beautiful native gift, which scarcely needs to be cultivated. Which view is correct, may be seen in the fruits which they bear. In Demosthenes, eloquence appears in its highest living power.

In his thirtieth year he appeared in his oration against the law of Leptines, which must be regarded as a finished masterpiece. According to this law none but the descendants of Harmodius and Aristogiton were to be free from the public burdens; the people were to confer this privilege upon none in the future; and whoever should make a proposition to that effect, should be punished. One year had passed, since the reception of the law; and Demosthenes now appears as counsel for the plaintiffs; one of whom was Ctesippus, son of Chabrias, whose object was to retain the immunity granted to his father.

1849.]

Oration against Leptines.

5

Although Demosthenes shows, that the advantage of discontinuing the immunities is not so great as might appear, yet this were not a sufficient reason for abrogating the law. A stronger motive is necessary; and that Demosthenes finds in magnanimity and fidelity towards those who, by their actions, have merited well of the State, as Conon and Chabrias; an honor to the orator; as it was also to the Athenians, that they felt the force of the motive, and, according to historical accounts, abrogated the law of Leptines. On account of this predominance of the moral motives, this oration was especially esteemed by the stoic philosopher Panaetius.

The statute of Leptines was also open to attack, when considered in relation to the Attic law; as it did not stand in the best harmony with other laws. With much acuteness the orator makes use of these judicial reasons; and he himself proposes a law, by which abuse in granting immunities may be prevented without violating honor or fidelity. In objecting further to the law, the orator asks whether, while it allows immunities to the descendants of Harmodius and Aristogiton, it shall not be allowed in future to confer the same upon those who should resemble them? We cannot know what circumstances may arise in the future.

We find in this oration no overflowing fulness, no violent ebullitions, no splendid but disproportionate development of individual thoughts; as might perhaps have been expected from the youth of the orator. The style is intermediate, as is suitable upon a subject which demands quiet reflection, rather than the awakening of violent emotions. It has the neatness and elegance of the best writers of the age of Louis XIV. The periods, although simple, are carefully elaborated and rounded; antecedent and conclusion are commonly used to render prominent the contrast between what is done and what ought to be done. All objects and persons, including his opponent, are treated with Attic delicacy and grace; whence Dionysius calls this the most graceful of all orations, χαριέστατος ἁπάντων λόγων. We should scarcely have looked for this quality in a man, who, as appears from his history, had adopted many habits, which then appeared eccentric, and had lived less in social intercourse with his fellow men, than his contemporaries. But this example proves that the charm and gracefulness of speech are not so much formed from without, as flowing from the inner source of a moral disposition.

If any fault is to be found with this oration, it is, perhaps, a certain moderateness, combined with its simple elegance; which becomes especially striking when we compare it with the Olynthian and Philippic orations; and especially with that for the Crown, in which the

orator reaches the summit of his magnificent style; and which also, in point of time, is the last that we have from him. So also in the pictures of Raphael, in his earliest period, there is a certain moderateness and coldness. But in his last work, the Transfiguration, his genius unfolds itself in its greatest fulness and power. With the pulpit orator also the power and fulness of thought and richness of feeling, instead of diminishing, will increase with time; but only, it is true, under the condition that he never suffer the deeper fountain, from which they flow, to dry up within. In his political oration "de Symmoriis," occasioned by a report that Artaxerxes Ochus, king of Persia, intended to wage war against Greece, Demosthenes dissuades the excited Athenians from war. This his political position is grounded upon two very sound reasons. If the Athenians commenced the war, they would have to carry it on alone; but if they should wait until the other States were attacked, these would become their most faithful allies and, secondly, the requisite moneys could be better raised, when actual danger threatened. Nevertheless be advises a new and improved arrangement of the symmoriae, and enters very minutely and profoundly into this branch of military administration. These discussions may appear dry to us, but it is an honor to the orator, that he preferred these to an idle splendor.

We here see how Demosthenes despised the glory which he might have reaped from a brilliant declamation, for which a most favorable opportunity was here afforded; how he endeavored solely to gain a right apprehension of the subject, and correctly to judge of its relations; how truth was to him the highest, to which he sacrificed all else. This is found in all his orations. Here lies his greatness and his sterling worth. In this path he has obtained true glory, which can be acquired only by despising false glory. He is a pattern that well merits to be placed before Christian orators. They too, should strive to say, not what is brilliant and gains applause, but what is salutary and useful. They should place their honor in fathoming as deeply as possible the subject which they treat, and then placing it before their hearers as they themselves behold it. They should seek, not the applause of men but their salvation and edification. Thereby they will probably in the end gain honor with men; but if not, they would still have honor with God, the only honor for which the Christian orator should strive.

Before we consider Demosthenes in his struggle against Philip, we must notice an oration relating to a personal affair, that against Midias. Demosthenes had been chosen by his class chorus-leader (xogayós) at the festival of Bacchus, that is, he had the duty to clothe

1849.]

Oration against Midias-Philippic Orations.

7

way, but had struck him Demosthenes here shows hitherto he had not had

and exercise a chorus for the festival. Midias, a rich and haughty man, had not only placed hindrances in his in the face, as he appeared with his chorus. the irresistible power of the orator, which occasion to exhibit in the same measure.

In this oration, from the personal offence, he constantly rises to the general idea of right and wrong. He represents the crime not only as an offence against the individual, but against the laws in general, as against Bacchus, whose festival was celebrated; and he adduces also many cases of injustice from the life of Midias, thus connecting the idea of virtue with that of right; and thereby showing that Midias had not only violated the laws in a single case, but was, in general, an odious character. The oration was never delivered, but only written; Demosthenes is said to have been induced, by a considerable sum of money from Midias, to keep silent and drop the complaint. But Isidorus of Pelusium maintains, that we must not accuse the magnanimous man of so disgraceful a love of gain.1

This oration is admirable on account of the unabated emotion which, notwithstanding its length, pervades it from beginning to end; which expresses itself in every sentence, we might say, in every word; a cold and weak passage is not to be found in it. The thoughts are not drawn from without, but from the subject itself, which is fathomed in all its depths.

We have now to regard Demosthenes awake to the dangers that were threatening Greece from the north, from the Macedonian king; and we see him struggling not only against Philip, but against the supineness, the carelessness and the levity of the Athenians, long degenerated from their ancient greatness. But, though zealous against their faults, he ever shows them his confidence, that they will rise to a better disposition, and resolve upon glorious action. His example teaches us, that the confidence which we show to men, is one of the most efficient means of inspiring them for that which is great and noble. The Athenians not only bore the censure of Demosthenes, but, in many respects, at least, fulfilled his expectations. It had indeed been decreed by Providence, which, through Christianity, prepared a reconstruction of society, that Athens should sink from its height; the bloom of heathen States could only be of transient duration. But Athens has to thank Demosthenes that she fell with honor; and that the period which preceded her loss of independence, belonged to the brightest in her history.

· Οὐ γὰρ δέχεται τὴν αἰτίαν τῆς αἰσχροκερδείας μεγαλοψυχία τοῦ ῥήτορος.

The consideration of the orations of Demosthenes, in his struggle with Philip, is peculiarly adapted to confirm the view, that eloquence is action, and, in order to be effective, must be subject to the same laws as action, namely to moral laws. The orations of Demosthenes in this period are his acts, and the orator must not be separated from the statesman. What gives their power to his orations, is, to be sure, in part, the political wisdom unfolded in them; but even this, as it was gained through the incitement of his love of country, is to be regarded as a moral quality. The irresistible effect, however, of his orations is to be ascribed to the grandeur of sentiment, which reigns in them, and to the security and confidence, which can spring only from the consciousness of thoroughly upright intentions. Had these qualities been wanting to Demosthenes, all the strenuous efforts of his youth would not have made him a great orator.

In his thirty-third year he delivered the first oration against Philip, which has come down to us, in which he urges the Athenians to form some definite plan against the king, with whom at that time they were in a state neither of peace or war. He was in league with Thessaly against the Phocians, and the Athenians, perceiving the danger that threatened them if he should enter Greece, had sent a fleet to prevent him from passing Thermopylae. Demosthenes demands that the Athenians should send out a fleet to watch the coasts in the possession of Philip, and hinder him in any hostile undertakings. This subject occupies the middle of the oration, which he begins and closes with the most powerful motives, drawn from the ideas of honor and public welfare. He reproaches the Athenians for their supineness, but, in referring to their former history, he would show them also, that nothing need be formidable to them.

It is not probable that this oration led to any definite determination on the part of the people. External, visible effects are not to be looked for from every address which the orator may pronounce. Sufficient, if his whole life leaves a trace behind it. But Demosthenes had, at least, opened the contest, and shown that he had all the requisite qualities in himself for carrying it on with honor: a deep penetration into all the relations of Athens and Greece; courage to say disagreeable truth to his fellow citizens; capacity to treat a subject with power, and at the same time, with the moderation of a man of moral elevation and Attic culture; glowing hatred to the ambition of Philip; and an equal hostility to the degeneracy of his fellow citizens. Thus through this oration, as through worthy Propylaea, we are led to the remaining immortal monuments of his political career.