Antidosis

If the discourse which is now about to be read[*](Cf. Isoc. 5.1.) had been like the speeches which are produced either for the law-courts[*](See General Introd. p. xxxi.) or for oratorical display,[*](Like the Encomium on Helen See General Introd. p. xxxi, and Burgess, Epideictic Literature.) I should not, I suppose, have prefaced it by any explanation. Since, however, it is novel and different in character, it is necessary to begin by setting forth the reasons why I chose to write a discourse so unlike any other; for if I neglected to make this clear, my speech would, no doubt, impress many as curious and strange.

The fact is that, although I have known that some of the sophists[*](The term “sophist” is used loosely throughout the discourse, sometimes as the equivalent of wise man, but more often, as here, of a professional teacher of philosophy and oratory. See General Introd. p. xii, note a .) traduce my occupation, saying that it has to do with writing speeches for the courts,[*](See General Introd. p. xx, and note c .) very much as one might have the effrontery to call Pheidias, who wrought our statue of Athena,[*](The “gold and ivory” statue of Athena which stood in the Parthenon.) a doll-maker, or say that Zeuxis and Parrhasius[*](Zeuxis and Parrhasius sojourned in Athens about 400 B.C.) practiced the same art as the sign-painters,[*](Literally, painters of votive tablets set up in temples as thank-offerings for deliverance from sickness or from dangers on the sea. Cf. Tibullus 1.3.27-28: nunc, dea, nunc succurre mihi, nam posse mederi/picta docet templis multa tabella tuis.) nevertheless I have never deigned to defend myself against their attempts to belittle me,

because I considered that their foolish babble had no influence whatever and that I had, myself, made it manifest to all that I had elected to speak and write, not on petty disputes, but on subjects so important and so elevated[*](The kind of oratory to which Isocrates devoted himself. See General Introd. p. xxiv.) that no one would attempt them except those who had studied with me, and their would-be imitators.

Indeed, I had always thought, until well on in years, that, owing to this choice and to my retired life in general,[*](See General Introd. p. xviii.) I stood fairly well in the opinion of all the lay public. Then when my career was near its close, having been challenged to an exchange of property on the question of a trierarchy, and subjected to a trial on that issue, I came to realize that even outside of my profession there were those who were not disposed towards me as I had thought; nay, that some had been absolutely misled as to my pursuits and were inclined to listen to my detractors, while others, who were well aware of the nature of my work, were envious, feeling the same towards me as do the sophists, and rejoiced to see people hold false opinions of my character.

They betrayed their sentiments at the trial; for, although my opponent made no argument whatever on the merits of the case, and did nothing but decry my “cleverness” of speech[*](It was a favorite device in the Athenian Courts to warn the jury against the adversary as DEINO\S LE/GEIN. Cf. Plat. Apol. 17b.) and indulge in extravagant nonsense about my wealth and the number of my pupils, they imposed the trierarchy upon me. Now, I bore that expense in such a manner as is becoming to those who are neither too much upset by such things nor altogether reckless or even careless about money.

But when my eyes were opened, as I have said, to the fact that a greater number than I supposed had mistaken ideas about me, I began to ponder how I could show to them and to posterity the truth about my character, my life, and the education to which I am devoted, and not suffer myself to be condemned on these issues without a trial nor to remain, as I had just been, at the mercy of my habitual calumniators.

And as I kept thinking upon it, I came ever to the same conclusion, namely, that the only way in which I could accomplish this was to compose a discourse which would be, as it were, a true image of my thought and of my whole life; for I hoped that this would serve both as the best means of making known the truth about me and, at the same time, as a monument, after my death, more noble than statues of bronze.[*](Cf. Horace Odes 3.30.1: monumentum aere perennius. Cf. Isoc. 9.73 ff. A bronze statue was erected to Isocrates by his pupil Timotheus. See General Introd. p. xxix.)

I saw, however, that if I were to attempt a eulogy of myself, I should not be able to cover all the points which I proposed to discuss, nor should I succeed in treating them without arousing the displeasure or even the envy of my hearers. But it occurred to me that if I were to adopt the fiction of a trial and of a suit brought against me—if I were to suppose that a sycophant[*](For the sycophants see Isoc. 8.128, note.) had brought an indictment and was threatening me with trouble[*](“To make trouble ”— PRA/GMATA PARE/XEIN—was the common phrase for the persecution of the sycophants. Cf. 15.) and that he was using the calumnies which had been urged against me in the suit about the exchange of property, while I, for my part, cast my speech in the form of a defense in court—in this way it would be possible to discuss to the best advantage all the points which I wanted to make.

With these thoughts in mind I set myself to write this discourse—I who am no longer in the prime of youth but in my eighty-second year. Wherefore, you may well forgive me if my speech appears to be less vigorous[*](For this apology cf. Isoc. 5.149; Isoc. 12.4; Isoc. Letter 6.6.) than those which I have published in the past.

For, I assure you, it has not been an easy nor a simple task, but one of great difficulty; for while some things in my discourse are appropriate to be spoken in a court-room, others are out of place amid such controversies, being frank discussions about philosophy and expositions of its power. There is in it, also, matter which it would be well for young men to hear before they set out to gain knowledge and an education; and there is much, besides, of what I have written in the past, inserted in the present discussion, not without reason nor without fitness, but with due appropriateness to the subject in hand.

Now to view as a whole so great an extent of subject matter, to harmonize and bring together so many diverse varieties of discourse, to connect smoothly what follows with what goes before, and to make all parts consonant one with another, was by no means an easy undertaking. Yet I did not desist, in spite of my age, until I had accomplished it, such as it is. It is, at any rate, written with devotion to the truth; its other qualities I leave to the judgement of my hearers.

But I urge all who intend to acquaint themselves with my speech, first, to make allowance, as they listen to it, for the fact that it is a mixed discourse, composed with an eye to all these subjects; next, to fix their attention even more on what is about to be said than on what has been said before; and, lastly, not to seek to run through the whole of it at the first sitting, but only so much of it as will not fatigue the audience.[*](Cf. Isoc. 12.Isocrates, through writing for a reading public, habitually uses the language of a discourse to be delivered. See General Introd. p. xxx.) For if you comply with this advice, you will be better able to determine whether I speak in a manner worthy of my reputation.

These, then, are the things which it was necessary for me to say by way of introduction. I beg you now to listen to my defense, which purports to have been written for a trial, but whose real purpose is to show the truth about myself, to make those who are ignorant about me know the sort of man I am and those who are afflicted with envy suffer a still more painful attack of this malady; for a greater revenge upon them than this I could not hope to obtain.

I consider that in all the world there are none so depraved and so deserving of the severest punishment as those who have the audacity to charge others with the offenses of which they themselves are guilty. And this is the very thing that Lysimachus has done. For this informer, himself delivering a composed speech, has said more in complaint of my compositions than upon all other points; it is as if one were to charge another with breaking into a temple, while showing in his own hands plunder stolen from the gods.

I would give much if he really thought that I am as “clever” as he has made me out to be to you, for then he would never have tried to trouble me. But now, although he alleges that I am able to make the weaker cause appear the stronger,[*](The stock charge against rhetoric and oratory from Corax and Tisias down. Cf. Plat. Apol. 19b; Aristoph. Cl. 874 ff.) he has, in fact, so low an opinion of my powers that he is confident that he with his lies will win against me and the truth.

And so maliciously has everything conspired against me, that while others may depend on their power of speech to make an end of calumnies, it is, in my case, just this power of speech which Lysimachus has most calumniated, in order that if I shall appear to speak well, I may show that I am subject to the charges which he has made about my cleverness; while if it turns out that I speak less ably than he has led you to expect, you may think that mine is the weaker cause.

I beg you, then, neither to credit nor to discredit what has been said to you until you have heard to the end what I also have to say, bearing it in mind that there would have been no need of granting to the accused the right of making a defense, had it been possible to reach a just verdict from the arguments of the accuser. At this stage of the case no one here present is in any doubt whether the accuser has spoken well or badly, but it is not yet easy for the jury to decide from what the first speaker has said whether he has based his arguments on the truth; nay, they will be fortunate if they are able to draw a just conclusion from the arguments of both sides.

I do not wonder that men spend more time in denouncing those who attempt to deceive the jury than upon their own defense, nor that they complain that calumny is our greatest bane. What, indeed, could work greater mischief? It causes liars to be looked on with respect, innocent men to be regarded as criminals, and judges to violate their oaths; in a word, it smothers truth, and pouring false ideas into our ears, it leaves no man among our citizens secure from an unjust death.

You must be on your guard against this and take care that nothing of the sort happens in this case and that you are not yourselves seen to fall into the very faults which you find reprehensible in others. I think you know well enough that time and again in the past Athens has so deeply repented[*](The outstanding instance is the decree passed by the General Assembly, condemning to death without due process of law, the Athenian generals who were in command at the battle of Arginusae. After the execution of the sentence, the people repented of their haste and called to account the leading instigators of this irregular procedure. See Xen. Hell. 1.7.35; Plat. Apol. 32; Grote, History vol. vii. pp. 446-447.) the judgements which have been pronounced in passion and without proof that not long after the events she has become eager to punish her deceivers, and would gladly have seen the victims of calumny in happier circumstances than before.

You should remember this and not trust too hastily the assertions of the accuser nor hear the defendant in uproar and anger.[*](Athenian juries not infrequently made noisy demonstrations of their prejudices. See Plat. Apol. 30c; Aristoph. Wasps 624.) Ours is a shameful state of inconsistency; for while it is acknowledged that in our life in general we are the most merciful[*](The Athenians appear to have worshipped *)/eleos, Goddess of Pity. See Schol. to Soph. OC 261.) and gentle of all the Hellenes, yet in the conduct of our trials here we manifestly give the lie to this reputation.