Read the twenty-one _Orations_ and nine _Letters_ of Isocrates.[652]
His “deliberative”[653] speeches are those _To Demonicus_ and _To
Nicocles_, containing useful advice; a second to Nicocles, and one
_On the Peace_. The object of the _Panegyricus_ is the consideration
of the means of ensuring harmony amongst the Greeks themselves, and
of the best methods for carrying on war against the barbarians,
but by far the greater part is devoted to a glorification of the
Athenians. The _Areopagiticus_ is also one of the “deliberative”
speeches, inciting the Athenians to virtue by the praise of their
ancestors, and by censuring their descendants. The _Plataicus_ and
the _Archidamus_ are also “deliberative”; in the latter he urges
the Spartans to make war against the Thebans on the question of
the Messenians. In the oration _Against the Sophists_ he attacks
his political opponents. The next speech is an _Encomium of
Busiris_,[654] as the title indicates. The eleventh is an _Encomium
of Helen_. The twelfth, _Evagoras_,[655] is a eulogy of that king,
dedicated to his son Nicocles. The _Philippus_ is a “deliberative”
speech, recommending Philip to endeavour to promote harmony amongst
the Greeks and devote his attention to a united advance against
the barbarians in Asia. The _Panathenaicus_ is a eulogy of Athens
and the ancestors of the Athenians, which he says he began to
write when he was ninety-four years of age, but was prevented by a
three-years’ severe attack of illness from completing it until he was
ninety-seven. The speech called _Antidosis_ (exchange of properties)
appears to belong to the class of “forensic” speeches and contains
a defence against the slanders of one Lysimachus against him. This
speech, the longest of those of this class, was composed when he was
eighty-two years of age, and the matter is more mixed and varied than
that of the rest; he inserts extracts from his other speeches, in
order to show that he is not corrupting the young men, but promoting
the common welfare. The speech _Against Callimachus_, as also the
_Aegineticus_ (dealing with a claim to inheritance), the speech
_Against Euthynus_ on behalf of Nicias, the _Trapeziticus_ (an action
against a banker), and _Against Lochites_ (a claim for damages for
outrage and assault) are also “forensic.” These are the twenty-one
orations of Isocrates that we have read. Of his nine _Letters_,
one is addressed to Dionysius the tyrant of Sicily, another to
Archidamus, two to Philip, one to Alexander, one to Antipater, one to
Timotheus, and the ninth to the Archons of Mytilene.[656]
This writer preferred to give instruction in rhetoric rather than
take part in the management of public affairs, like the other nine
orators, of whom Demosthenes was one; although even before their
time he had a great reputation as a rhetorician, and, later, was in
no way considered their inferior. His chief characteristics, as at
once becomes obvious to the reader, are purity and distinctness, and
excessive care in the workmanship of his speeches, which frequently
degenerates into superfluous orderliness and over-elaboration. His
infinite capacity for taking pains generates want of taste rather
than of resourcefulness in argument. He lacks impressiveness,[657]
sincerity, and liveliness,[658] but in his political orations he
makes admirable use of dignity and perspicuity in equal proportions.
His style is feeble, and the use of evenly-balanced clauses _ad
nauseam_, as much as anything else, shows his excessive attention
to petty detail. But we acknowledge the general excellence of his
language, and only make these criticisms to point out where it has
gone astray and does not do justice to itself. For, in comparison
with some of those who undertake to compose speeches, even his faults
appear virtues.