330 BC THE ORATION ON THE CROWN Demosthenes translated by Thomas Leland, D.D. Notes and Introduction by Thomas Leland, D.D. Demosthenes (383-322 BC) - Athenian statesman and the most famous of Greek orators. He was leader of a patriotic party opposing Philip of Macedon. The Oration on the Crown (330 BC) - An oration in defense of Ctesiphon, an Athenian citizen who proposed that Demosthenes should receive a crown for his extraordinary merit. Aeschines, Demosthenes’ political rival, attacked Demosthenes in his “Oration against Ctesiphon.” “The Oration on the Crown,” Demosthenes’ response, is regarded as the finest work of ancient eloquence. INTRODUCTION To the Oration on the Crown THE Oration on the Crown is justly considered the greatest speech ever made by Demosthenes, and if Demosthenes is the first of orators, it is the greatest speech ever delivered by man. It certainly is the most interesting of the extant orations of the Athenian statesman. First of all, it was the last speech he made at Athens, and he spoke at a time when the liberties of Greece had been irreparably lost by the defeat on the field of Chaeronea. The effect of it was to prove that the patriotic spirit of independence still survived in the hearts of the Athenians, and that the glory of Demosthenes, amid the downfall of Athenian ascendancy, remained undimmed by the aspersions of the orator’s enemies. It is moreover most interesting because of its autobiographical character. When great and good men speak of their own lives and their own motives they always find attentive readers. Hence the apology of Socrates, the letters of Cicero, the Confessions of Augustine, the Vita Nuova of Dante, even the highly colored pages of Rousseau, and the Essays of Montaigne, not to speak of Pepys’s Diary, possess a special fascination, because they reveal the intimate thoughts and character of exceptional men, and admit the reader to the closest personal acquaintance with the writers. The egotism of Demosthenes in this famous speech is quite unreserved, but it is equally excusable, in that it is dictated by the necessity of self-vindication, and while it adds a vivid charm to his arguments, it at once claims the sympathy of the modern reader. The circumstances under which this oration was delivered are as follows. The battle of Chaeronea was in some sense the result of the policy of Demosthenes. Philip of Macedon in his invasion of Greece had partisans at Thebes, as well as at Athens, and when Thebes seemed to waver in its opposition to the invader after the capture of Elataea by Philip, Demosthenes proposed an embassy to Thebes to secure the coalition of Theban and Athenian forces in giving battle to the invader. The embassy, led by Demosthenes, was successful. The united armies marched to meet Philip, and a battle was fought and lost by the Greeks at Chaeronea in 338 B.C. A little time afterwards Ctesiphon (who appears for the first and last time in history on this occasion) proposed in the council that a crown of gold, i.e., of olive leaves entwined in gold, the usual decoration given to political or military merit at Athens, should be offered to Demosthenes as an acknowledgment of his patriotic services to the republic. His services had not been merely those of an orator whose speeches had for years alternately warned and encouraged the people against the wiles and machinations of Philip of Macedon. For instance, when the news of Chaeronea reached Athens wild consternation spread over Attica. It was rumored that the conqueror was preparing to march upon Athens and every preparation was made to resist him. To Demosthenes was intrusted the repairs of the fortifications, and upon this work he expended three talents of his private fortune, in addition to the grant made from the public treasury. Although Philip spared the territory of the Athenians, restored their prisoners without ransom, buried their dead on the field, and sent their bones to Athens, this was merely through reverence for that city as “the eye of Greece,” the home of letters and arts. His acts anticipated the profession made by his son, Alexander the Great, that he would prove himself the “Shield of Hellas.” The credit and influence of Demosthenes seemed, however, to have crumbled into the dust, and the motion of Ctesiphon was doubtless intended to put the confidence of the people to the test, and give the orator, if necessary, an opportunity of self-vindication. Events proved that the proceeding of Ctesiphon was a wise one. The Macedonian party in Athens had now collected all their forces to overthrow the statesman who had counselled that alliance with Thebes, which had been proved illusory by the disaster at Chaeronea, and had terrified his fellow-countrymen with prophecies of Philip’s vengeance on Athens, prophecies which the moderation of the victorious king had proved false. The Athenian assembly took a nobler view of the matter, and awarded the crown, but immediately afterwards Aeschines, the rival of Demosthenes, a man charged by this latter with receiving bribes from Philip, opened the attack by indicting Ctesiphon as the author of an illegal measure. Ctesiphon’s measure, passed in the shape of a decree by the council, or upper legislative body, and the assembly ordered, “that Demosthenes should be presented with a golden crown, and that a proclamation should be made in the theatre, at the great Dionysian festival, at the performance of the new tragedies, announcing that Demosthenes was rewarded by the people with a golden crown for his integrity, for the goodness which he had invariably displayed towards all the Greeks and towards the people of Athens, and also for his magnanimity, and because he had ever, both by word and deed, promoted the interests of the people, and been zealous to do all the good in his power.” Aeschines, the orator who challenged this decree, was at that period considered the second orator in Greece. He was the leader of the Macedonian party, and the deadly enemy of Demosthenes. He was moved against his rival by bitter feelings of jealousy and revenge. The indictment was formally drawn up against Ctesiphon, but no one doubted that the real object of the attack was Demosthenes. Ctesiphon was accordingly accused of having violated Athenian law in three points by the wording of his decree. First, because it was unlawful to make false allegations in such a state document as the decree. Secondly, because it was unlawful to confer a crown to a state official who had not yet rendered a report of his term of office; and Demosthenes was both guardian of the walls, and a treasurer of the theoric fund, the public contributions to civic and national spectacles. Thirdly, because it was unlawful to proclaim the honor of a crown at the Dionysian festival, at the performance of the new tragedies; the law being, that if the council gave a crown, it should be published in the bouleterion or council hall, if the people, in the Pnyx, at the popular assembly. It will be seen that the gist of the indictment lies in the first of these points, viz.: in the inquiry, whether the high character and public services credited by Ctesiphon to Demosthenes were matter of fact or no. The indictment was preferred just before the Dionysian festival, of 338 B.C., at which the crown was to have been conferred, and had the effect of arresting the award. But the proceedings were, in legal parlance, “continued” i.e., suspended, for some seven years; and it was not until the end of that period that Aeschines uttered his speech against Ctesiphon, and maintained, with considerable force and ingenuity, the points made in his indictment of the decree. In the mean time events in the conflict with Macedonia had passed into a new phase. Two years after the battle of Chaeronea “fatal to liberty,” the death of Philip by the hand of an assassin had raised high the hopes of Greece that deliverance was come. But his successor, Alexander, took up with untiring vigor the campaign against the independence of Greece. He utterly destroyed the city of Thebes, characteristically sparing the house of Pindar. Thebes had rebelled upon his succession to the throne, and Athens, suspected of assisting the rebels, only escaped the wrath of the conqueror by abject submission. As Alexander knew that the chief menace to his authority lay in the power of oratory at Athens to rouse the patriotic passions of the people, he demanded the surrender of the orators and chiefly of Demosthenes; even the just and clement Phocian urged upon his countrymen to make this sacrifice for the tranquillity of the city, but the people dissented. In 334 B.C. Alexander passed over into Asia, where it was expected he would perish before the countless hosts that Darius sent to meet him. The battle of Issus proved these expectations to be groundless. Yet in 330 Agis, King of Sparta, made another and final struggle to fling off the Macedonian yoke, and while Athens kept a strict neutrality, was defeated in battle and slain by Antipater, whom Alexander had left as his viceroy in Greece. Sparta was now occupied by a Macedonian garrison, Phocion corresponded in a friendly manner with Alexander, and Persian spoils were accepted from the latter and set up in the Acropolis. Cowed and subdued by the overwhelming sense of Alexander’s successes and feeling that resistance to Macedonian ascendancy was hopeless, the Athenians seemed to be sunk into a lethargy, from which not even the voice of Demosthenes was raised to awaken them.