deposed his colleague from the tribuneship, and afterwards sought a
second tribuneship for himself. As for the murder of Antyllius, Caius
Gracchus was most falsely and unjustly accused of it, for he did not
wish him to die, and was grieved at his death. Again Kleomenes, not to
speak of his massacre of the Ephors, set all the slaves at liberty, and
practically made himself despot of the kingdom, although for form's sake
he associated his brother with him, who was of the same family. And
when Archidamus, who was the next heir to the throne of the other royal
house, was persuaded by him to return from Messene to Sparta, as
Kleomenes did not avenge his death, he caused men to suspect that he
himself had some share in it. Yet Lykurgus, whom he affected to imitate,
abdicated the throne of his own free will in favour of his nephew
Charilaus, and fearing that if the child died by any mischance he might
be thought guilty of having caused its death, he travelled abroad for a
long time and did not return until Charilaus had begotten a son to
succeed him. However, no Greek can bear comparison with Lykurgus; yet we
have proved that Kleomenes effected greater reforms, and showed less
respect to the laws than any of the others. Both the Greeks have been
blamed for having from the very outset aimed at being nothing more than
warlike despots; while the worst enemies of the Romans only charge them
with an immoderate ambition, and admit that they became so excited by
the contest with their political opponents that the natural heat of
their temper drove them in spite of themselves like a baleful gust of
wind to advocate extreme measures. What indeed can be more just or
honourable than the objects with which they started; for their troubles
were brought upon them by the opposition which the rich offered to their
laws, so that the one was forced to fight to save his own life, while
the other endeavoured to avenge his brother, who was slain without law
or justice? From what has been said the reader can himself form an
opinion about their respective merits, but if I must say what I think of
each, I should give the highest place in respect of virtue to Tiberius
Gracchus; I think that the young Agis committed the fewest crimes; while
in daring and action Caius fell far short of Kleomenes.
LIFE OF DEMOSTHENES.
I. The writer of the Ode to Alkibiades on the occasion of his winning
the chariot-race at Olympia, whether he was Euripides, as is commonly
supposed, or some other poet, my friend Sossius tells us that the first
thing necessary for a perfectly happy man is that he should be born a
citizen of some famous city. But for my own part I believe that for the
enjoyment of true happiness, which depends chiefly upon a man's
character and disposition, it makes no difference whether he be born in
an obscure state or of an ill-favoured mother, or not. It would indeed
be absurd if one were to suppose that the town of Iulis, which is only a
small part of the little island of Keos or Ægina, which some Athenian
bade his countrymen clear away because it was an eyesore to Peiræus,
should be able to produce good actors and poets, and yet be unable to
bring forth a just, virtuous, sensible and high-minded man. We may
reasonably expect that those arts by which men gain glory or profit
should be neglected and fall into decay in small and obscure towns; but
virtue, like a hardy plant, can take root in any country where it meets
with noble natures and industrious disposition. I myself therefore must
lay the blame of my intellectual and moral shortcomings, not upon the
insignificance of my native city, but upon myself.
II. However, when a man is engaged in compiling a history from materials
which are not ready to his hand, but for the most part are to be found
scattered through other foreign towns, it becomes really of the first
importance that he should live in some famous, cultivated, and populous
city, where he can have unlimited access to books of all kinds, and
where he can also personally collect and inquire into the truth of
those stories which, though not reduced to writing, are all the more
likely to be true because they rest upon universal popular tradition.
The work of a historian who is deprived of these advantages must
necessarily be defective in many essential particulars. Now I, who
belong to a small city, and who love to live in it lest it should become
even smaller, when I was at Rome, and during my travels in Italy, found
my time so taken up with political business and with the care of my
pupils in philosophy, that I had no leisure to learn the Roman language,
and have only applied myself to Latin literature at a very advanced
period of life. In this reading of Latin books, singular as it may
appear, I did not find that the words assisted me to discover the
meaning, but rather that my knowledge of the history enabled me to find
out the meaning of the words. I think that to speak the Latin language
with elegance, to understand it readily, and to use its various idioms
and phrases correctly, is for a literary man both useful and
interesting; but the amount of study and practice which it requires is
considerable and should only be undertaken by those who are younger than
myself, and who have more leisure time to devote to the acquisition of
such accomplishments.
III. In consequence of these considerations, in this my fifth book of
Parallel Lives, which deals with the lives of Demosthenes and Cicero, I
intend to describe their several characters, and to compare them with
one another by means of their political acts, but I do not mean to
examine minutely into their respective speeches, or to decide which of
the two was the more pleasing or the more able orator. Were I to attempt
such a task, I should be forgetting Ion's proverb about a "fish out of
water," like the all-accomplished Cæcilius, who has boldly taken upon
himself to write a comparison of Demosthenes with Cicero. Perhaps,
however, we might begin to doubt the divine origin of the commandment
"know thyself," if we found men always ready to apply it. Indeed Heaven
appears to have originally intended to form the characters of
Demosthenes and Cicero on the same model, and in some instances to have
implanted in them precisely the same qualities, such as great personal
ambition, love of freedom, and want of courage in the wars, yet to have
left much to chance. I think it would be difficult to find an instance
of any two other orators who both rose from a humble station to great
power and influence, who both opposed absolute monarchs, both lost
favourite daughters, were both exiled and brought back with honour, who
both when flying from their country a second time fell into the hands of
their enemies, and with whose deaths the liberties of their countrymen
were finally extinguished; so that it is hard to say whether their
resemblance is due more to nature, which originally moulded their
characters alike, or to fortune, which placed then in exactly similar
circumstances. First, then, I will relate the life of the elder of the
two.
IV. The father of Demosthenes was also named Demosthenes, and belonged,
according to Theopompus, to the best class of Athenian citizens. He was
commonly called "the sword cutler," because he possessed a large
workshop and many slaves skilled in cutlery. As for the accusation which
the orator Æschines brings against his mother, that she was the daughter
of one Gylon, who was banished for treason, by a foreign woman, we
cannot tell whether it is true or only a calumnious imputation.
Demosthenes was left an orphan at the age of seven years, and was the
heir to considerable property, amounting in all to no less than fifteen
talents. He was scandalously ill-used by his guardians, who appropriated
much of his income, and neglected the rest so much that he was unable to
pay his teachers. He grew up ignorant of much that a boy of good birth
is expected to learn, partly for this reason, and partly on account of
his weak health, which caused his mother to keep him away from school.
He was a sickly child, and it is said that the opprobrious nickname of
Batalus was bestowed upon him by his school-fellows because of his
bodily weakness. Batalus, according to some writers, was an effeminate
flute-player, whose habits were satirized in a comic drama written by
Antiphanes. Others assert that Batalus was a poet who wrote in a drunken
licentious style; and there seems also some foundation for the belief
that this word was used for a certain part of the human body by the
Athenians of that time. The other nickname of Demosthenes, Argas,
either alludes to his savage and harsh temper, for some poets use the
word to mean a snake; or else it refers to his speeches, as wearying
those who heard them; for Argas was the name of a poet whose verses were
bad and tiresome. And, as Plato says, so much for this.
V. We are told that he was first led to turn his attention, to oratory
by the following incident. When Kallistratus was going to make a speech
in court about the affair of Oropus[125] great interest was taken in the
trial because of the ability of the orator, who at that time was at the
height of his reputation, and also because of the important character of
the law suit. Demosthenes, hearing his teachers and attendants making
arrangement to be present at the trial, persuaded his own servant by
great entreaties to take him to hear the speeches. The man, who was
intimate with the doorkeepers of the court, managed to obtain a place
for Demosthenes, in which the boy could sit unseen by the public and
hear all that was said. Kallisthenes spoke very brilliantly and was much
admired. He excited the envy of Demosthenes by the honours which he
received, as he was escorted home by a long train of friends who
congratulated him upon his success; but the boy was even more impressed
by the power of his eloquence, which enabled him to deal with everything
just as he pleased. In consequence of this Demosthenes neglected all
other branches of learning, neglected all the sports of childhood, and
laboriously practised and exercised himself in the art of oratory,
meaning some day to become an orator himself. He studied rhetoric under
Isaeus, although Isokrates was giving lessons at the same time, either,
according to some writers, because, being an orphan, he was unable to
raise the sum of ten minæ which Isokrates demanded as a fee, or because
he thought that the vigorous invective of Isaeus was more what he
required to learn. Hermippus informs us that he read in some anonymous
work that Demosthenes was a scholar of Plato, and learned much of the
art of speaking from him, while he mentions having heard from Ktesibius
that Demosthenes had been lent the works of Isokrates and Alkidamas by
one Kallias, a Syracusan, and some others, and that he used to read and
practise himself in them in secret.
VI. When he came of age he at once brought a series of actions against
his guardians for malversation of his property, while they resorted to
every species of legal subtlety and chicanery to avoid making
restitution. By publicly pleading his cause, as Thucydides says, "he
learned his trade by dangers," and succeeded in recovering some of his
paternal estate, though but a small part of that to which he was
entitled. He gained, however, confidence and practice as a public
speaker, and the fascinating excitement and sense of power which he
experienced in these contests emboldened him to become a professional
orator and to deal with political matters. We are told that Laomedon of
Orchomenus, by the advice of his physicians, used to run long distances
as a remedy for a disease of the spleen from which he suffered, until he
not only overcame his disorder, but was able to enter for races at the
games, and became one of the best long-distance runners of his time.
Even so Demosthenes, who was forced by his private misfortunes to make
his first appearance as a speaker, gained such skill and power by his
success in the law-courts that he soon took the lead among the speakers
in the public assembly. Yet when he first addressed the people he was
violently coughed down, interrupted and ridiculed, because his speech
was found dull and tiresome, being confused in style and strained and
artificial in argument. It is said that his voice was weak, and his
pronunciation indistinct, and that, as he was frequently obliged to
pause for want of breath, it was difficult to follow the meaning of his
sentences. At last he left the public assembly and wandered about
Peiræus in despair. Here he was met by an old man named Eunomus of
Thriasia,[126] who reproved him and told him that he did himself great
wrong, because, having a manner of speech extremely like that of
Perikles, he permitted himself to be disheartened by failure, and did
not face the clamour of the rabble boldly, and did not train his body to
be strong enough to support the strain of such contests, but allowed
himself to fall into a weakly and effeminate condition.
VII. After a second failure, as he was going home overwhelmed with shame
hiding his face in his cloak, Satyrus the actor is said to have followed
him and joined him. Demosthenes told him with tears in his eyes that
although he had taken more pains than any other speaker, and had devoted
all his energes to the study of eloquence, yet he could not gain the ear
of the people, but that ignorant drunken sailors were listened to when
they mounted the tribune, while he was treated with scorn. On hearing
this Satyrus answered, "Demosthenes, what you say is very true, but I
will soon apply a remedy, if you will recite to me one of the long
speeches from the plays of Sophokles or Euripides." After Demosthenes
had recited a speech, Satyrus recited the same speech in turn, and so
altered it and gave it so much more grace, by throwing into it the
expression which the verses required, that it appeared to Demosthenes to
be quite different. Having thus learned how much a speech gains by a
really artistic delivery, Demosthenes perceived that it was of but
little use for him to study the matter of a speech, unless he also paid
attention to the form in which it was to be presented to his audience.
He now built for himself an underground study, which remained entire
down to the present day, where he daily practised himself in gesture and
declamation, and exercised his voice, and where he sometimes spent two
or three months at a time with half of his head shaved, so that even if
he wished he could not go out of doors.
VIII. He took, however, his themes and subjects for declamation from the
various topics of the day, which he learned from those who came to visit
him. As soon as they left him he used to return to his study, and
repeated aloud in the form of a speech all the news which he had heard,
and made comments upon it. He also used to work up any conversations
which he heard, into sentences and periods for his orations, and would
alter, correct and paraphrase both his own remarks and those of his
friends. This gave rise to the opinion that he was not really a man of
ability, but that his power and skill as an orator was obtained by
laborious study. A great proof of this was thought to be that
Demosthenes seldom spoke on the spur of the moment, but often when he
was present in the assembly and was called upon by the people to speak,
he would remain silent unless he had prepared and meditated over his
speech. Many of the other orators ridiculed him for this, and Pytheas in
derision said that his arguments smelt of the lamp. To this Demosthenes
made the bitter retort, "My lamp, Pytheas, sees very different work from
yours." In conversation with others, however, he did not altogether deny
the practice, but said that although he never spoke without having made
notes, yet that he often spoke without having written down everything
that he was going to say. He used to say that this careful preparation
of his speeches showed that he was a true lover of the people, and felt
a due reverence for them; while, on the contrary, to speak without
caring how the people take one's words proves a man to be of an
overbearing oligarchical disposition, who would use force rather than
persuasion. Many writers allege, as a proof that Demosthenes dared not
speak on the spur of the moment, that when he attacked Demades he was
always immediately answered by him, but that he never so answered
Demades.
IX. How then, one might ask, was it that Æschines in his orations speaks
of Demosthenes as a man of unbounded impudence? or how was it that when
Python of Byzantium was pouring forth a flood of invective against
Athens, Demosthenes alone rose and answered him? Moreover, when Lamachus
of Mytilene, who had written an encomium upon the Kings of Macedon,
Philip and Alexander, which was full of abuse of the Thebans and
Olynthians, read his composition in public at the Olympic festival,
Demosthenes came up to him and in a fine speech proved from history how
great things the Thebans and inhabitants of Chalkidike had done for
Greece, and what evils had arisen from the baseness of those who
flattered the Macedonians, till the audience were so much wrought upon
by his eloquence that Lamachus was forced to flee for his life. The
answer to this appears to be that Demosthenes, although he did not copy
Perikles in all respects, imitated his reserve and dignity of manner,
and his reluctance to speak upon every trivial occasion; and that he was
not so much attracted by the credit which he might gain by engaging in
these encounters, as he was unwilling rashly to place his power and
reputation at the mercy of fortune. Indeed, his spoken orations had more
fire and daring than the written ones, if we may trust Eratosthenes,
Demetrius of Phalerum, and the comic poets. Eratosthenes tells us that
in his speeches he used to rave like a Bacchanal, while Demetrius says
that once, as if inspired, he recited the metrical oath:
"By earth, by fountains, and by waterfloods."
One of the comic poets also calls him "the random talker," while another
mocks at his fondness for antithesis in the following verses:
"_1st Citizen._ He got it as he got it back.
_2nd Citizen._ Demosthenes would willingly have spoken words like
these."
Unless indeed Antiphanes meant by this to allude to the oration on
Halonesus, in which Demosthenes advised the Athenians not to take that
island, but to take it back from Philip.
X. Yet all admitted that Demades, by his own natural wit, without art,
was invincible; and that he often, speaking on the spur of the moment,
would demolish the carefully studied orations of Demosthenes. Ariston of
Chios has preserved the opinion of Theophrastus about these two orators.
Theophrastus, when asked what kind of orator he thought Demosthenes to
be, replied, "an orator worthy of Athens." When again asked his opinion
of Demades, he replied that he thought him "Too great for Athens." The
same philosopher relates that Polyeuktus of Sphettus, one of the chief
Athenian statesmen of the time, used to declare that Demosthenes was the
best orator, but that Phokion was the most powerful speaker, because his
speeches contained the greatest possible amount of meaning in the fewest
words. Demosthenes himself, whenever Phokion rose to answer him, was
wont to whisper to his friends, "Here comes the cleaver of my
harangues." It is not clear whether by this Demosthenes alluded to
Phokion's oratorical skill, or to his blameless life and high
reputation, meaning that the slightest sign given by a man in whom the
people felt such confidence carried more weight than the longest oration
by anyone else.
XI. Demetrius of Phalerum has recorded the devices by which Demosthenes
overcame his bodily defects, which he says he heard from Demosthenes's
own lips when he was an old man. He corrected the indistinctness of his
articulation and his tendency to lisp by declaiming long speeches with
pebbles in his mouth, while he strengthened his voice by running or
walking up hill, talking the while, and repeating orations or verses. He
also had a large mirror in his house, and used to stand before it and
study oratorical gestures. We are told that once a man called upon him
and asked him to act as his counsel in a lawsuit against a man by whom
he had been beaten. "But," said Demosthenes, "you have not suffered any
of this ill-treatment which you complain of." At this the man raised his
voice and excitedly exclaimed, "Do you say, Demosthenes, that I have not
been ill-treated?" "Yes," answered he, "now I hear the voice of one who
has really been ill-used." So important did he think the action and the
tone of voice of a speaker to be in carrying conviction to the minds of
his hearers. His manner in speaking marvellously pleased the common
people, though men of taste, such as Demetrius of Phalerum, thought it
vulgar and affected. Hermippus informs us that Æsion,[127] when asked
to give his opinion about the orators of former times and those of his
own day, said that the ancient orators used to address the people in a
surprisingly decorous and dignified manner, but that the speeches of
Demosthenes when read aloud, appeared to him to be much more carefully
constructed and more forcible. It is indeed unnecessary to say that the
written speeches of Demosthenes are bitter and angry compositions; but
in his impromptu repartees, he often was genuinely witty and pleasant.
As for example, when Demades exclaimed, "Demosthenes teach me! Will a
sow teach Athena?" Demosthenes answered, "This Athena was caught in
adultery in Kollytus[128] the other day." And when the thief who was
surnamed Chalkus, that is, Brazen-face, attempted to sneer at him for
sitting up late at night writing, Demosthenes answered, "I know that my
habit of burning a lamp at night must disconcert you. But, men of
Athens, need we wonder at the thefts which take place, when we see that
our thieves are brazen, and our walls are only made of clay." However,
although I could relate several more anecdotes of this kind, I must now
stop, as we ought to discover what remains of the disposition and
character of Demosthenes from a survey of his political acts.
XII. He first began to take an active part in public affairs during the
Phokian war, as we learn from his own words, and as we may also gather
from his Philippic orations, some of which were pronounced after that
war was ended, while the earlier ones touch on those matters most nearly
connected with it. It is evident that when he prepared the oration
against Meidias he was thirty-two years of age, and had not as yet
acquired any fame or reputation. This appears to me to be the chief
reason for his having made up his quarrel with Meidias for a sum of
money, for he was far from being a "mild-mannered" man, but keen and
savage in avenging the injuries which he received. It must have been
because he saw, that to ruin a man who was so rich, so able a speaker,
and so well-befriended as Meidias, was too difficult a task for a man of
his political power, and so yielded to the entreaties of those who
begged him to let the action drop; for I do not believe that the bribe
of three thousand drachmae which he received would by itself have caused
Demosthenes to lay aside the rancorous hatred which he bore to Meidias,
if he had entertained any hopes of obtaining a verdict against him.
In the defence of the liberties of Greece against the encroachments of
Philip, Demosthenes found a noble theme for political oratory, which he
treated in a manner worthy of the subject, and soon acquired such renown
by his able and fearless speeches, that he was courted by the king of
Persia himself, and was more talked about in the court of Philip than
any of the other statesmen of the time, while even his bitterest
antagonists admitted that they had to deal with no mean adversary; for
both Æschines and Hypereides own as much in their invectives against
him.
XIII. I cannot, therefore, understand what Theopompus meant by saying
that he was of an inconstant disposition, and not able to remain long
associated with any party or any line of policy. It appears rather that
he remained throughout the consistent advocate of the same principles,
and a member of the same political party to which he originally
belonged, and that he not only never changed his politics in his life,
but even lost his life because he would not change them. He was not like
Demades, who to excuse himself for changing sides pleaded that he had
oftentimes gone against his own words, but never against the interests
of the state. Still less can he be compared with Melanopus, the
political opponent of Kallistratus, who was often bribed by him to allow
some measure to pass, and on these occasions would say to the people,
"The man is my personal enemy, but I postpone my personal feelings to
the good of my country." Nikodemus of Messene, who first took up with
Kassander, and afterwards became the advocate of Demetrius, used to
declare that he never was inconsistent, because it was always best to
obey the strongest party. But in the case of Demosthenes, unlike these
men, we can say that he never deviated either in word or deed from the
one direct line of policy which he unswervingly pursued to the end. The
philosopher Panætius declares that in most of his orations, as in that
about the Crown, that against Aristokrates, that on behalf of the
persons exempted from taxation (against Leptines), and in the
Philippics, we can trace the principle that honour ought to be pursued
for its own sake; for in all these he urges his countrymen not to adopt
the most pleasant, the most easy, or the most profitable line of policy,
but often thinks that caution and even safety should be regarded as of
less importance than honourable conduct; so that if to his noble
principles and high-minded eloquence he had joined warlike courage and
clean hands from bribery, he would have been worthy to rank, not with
Moerokles, Polyeuktus, and Hypereides, but with Kimon, Thucydides,
Perikles, and other great men of old.