On Halonnesus

His language was pretty much that of Philip’s present letter. For while accusing those of us who misrepresent Philip, he at the same time blamed you because, though Philip is eager to benefit you and prefers your friendship to that of any other state, you constantly thwart him, lending an ear to false accusers, who both beg money of him and slander him; for tales of that sort, when he is told that he was traduced and that you believed what was said, make him change his mind, since he finds himself distrusted by the very people whom it has been his aim to benefit.

Pytho therefore urged public speakers not to attack the peace, because it was not good policy to rescind it, but to amend any unsatisfactory clause, on the understanding that Philip was prepared to fall in with your suggestions. If, however, the speakers confined themselves to abusing Philip without drafting any proposals which, while preserving the terms of peace, might clear Philip of suspicion, he asked you to pay no attention to such fellows.

And you approved these arguments and said that Pytho was right, as indeed he was. He made these statements, however, not in order that all those advantages that Philip had paid so much money to secure might be struck out of the treaty, but because he had been so instructed by his schoolmasters here in Athens, who did not imagine that anyone would propose to annul the decree of Philocrates, which lost us Amphipolis.

As for me, men of Athens, I did not venture to propose anything that was unconstitutional, but it was not so to propose the direct contrary of Philocrates’ decree, as I can prove to you. For the decree of Philocrates, through which you lost Amphipolis, was itself contrary to the earlier decrees by which you claimed possession of that territory.

So it was this decree of Philocrates that was unconstitutional, nor would it have been possible to draft a constitutional proposal in conformity with his unconstitutional decree. By drafting mine to agree with the earlier decrees, which were constitutional and which also kept your territory intact, I both kept within the constitution and was able to convict Philip of trying to deceive you and of wishing, not to amend the peace, but to bring discredit on those who were pleading your cause.

You are all aware that, after conceding the right to amend the peace, he now denies it. He says that Amphipolis is his, because your decree that he should keep what he held confirmed his right. It is true that you passed that decree, but you never admitted his right to Amphipolis, for it is possible to hold what belongs to another, and it is not all holders who hold what is their own, but many are in possession of what is really another’s. So his clever quibble is merely foolish.

Moreover he remembers the decree of Philocrates, but he has quite forgotten the letter sent to you when he was besieging Amphipolis, in which he admitted that Amphipolis was yours; for he said that when he had taken it he would restore it to you, implying that it was your property, and not that of the holders.

Apparently those who inhabited Amphipolis, before Philip took it, were holding Athenian territory; but when he has taken it, it is no longer our territory, but his own, that he holds; and in the same way at Olynthus and Apollonia and Pallene he is in possession of his own property, not that of others.

Do you not see that his letter to you is all carefully calculated, so that his words and his actions may appear to conform to the universal standard of justice, while he has really shown supreme contempt for it in claiming for himself and denying to you territory which is yours by common consent and decree of the Greeks and of the King of Persia?[*](This refers to the amended rescript obtained by the Athenians from the king in 366. See Dem. 19.137.)

As for the other amendment which you propose to introduce, that all the Greeks who are not parties to the peace should remain free and independent, and that if they are attacked, the signatories should unite to defend them,

you considered it both fair and generous that the peace should not be confined to Athens and her allies on the one side and Philip and his allies on the other, while those who are allies of neither are exposed to ruin at the hands of their stronger neighbors, but rather that your peace should extend its protection to them also, and that we should disarm and observe a real peace.

But Philip, although, as you have heard from his letter, he admits the justice of this amendment and consents to accept it, has robbed the Pheraeans of their city, placing a garrison in their citadel, in order, I suppose, to ensure their independence; he is even now engaged in an expedition against Ambracia, and as for the three Elean colonies in Cassopia[*](A district of Epirus, just north of the Ambracian Gulf.)—Pandosia, Bucheta, and Elatea—he has wasted their land with fire, stormed their cities, and handed them over to be the slaves of his own kinsman, Alexander. How zealous he is for the freedom and independence of the Greeks, you may judge from his acts.

With regard to his repeated promises to you of substantial benefits, he complains that I am slandering and defaming him in the ears of the Greeks, for he says that he has never made you any promises at all. Such is the shamelessness of the man who stated in his letter, which is still to be seen in the Council House, that if peace was made he would confer such benefits on you as would stop the mouths of us, his opponents, benefits which he said he would put down in writing, if he were sure that the peace would be made. The inference was that all the good things that we were to enjoy on the conclusion of peace were ready for immediate delivery.

Peace has been concluded, but all the good things that we were to enjoy are still to seek, and upon the Greeks has come such ruin as you well know. Yet he promises in the present letter that if you will only trust his friends and advocates and will punish the wicked men who traduce him to you, he will confer substantial benefits. His benefits, however, will amount to this:

he will not restore your possessions, for he claims them as his own, and his rewards will not be delivered in this part of the world, for fear his motive should be misrepresented to the Greeks[*](As if unduly favoring the Athenians.); some other country, it seems, some new quarter will be assigned for the bestowal of your rewards.

As for the places held by you which he took in time of peace, violating the terms and breaking his engagements, since he has not a word to say but is clearly convicted of injustice, he expresses his willingness to refer the question to a fair and impartial court. But this is the only question that needs no such reference; the calendar is sufficient to decide it.

For we all know in what month and on what day the peace was made, and as surely also do we know in what month and on what day Fort Serreum and Ergisce and the Sacred Mount[*](Three small places on the Thracian Coast of the Aegean, taken by Philip from Cersobleptes, after the Athenians had accepted the peace of Philocrates (346), but before Philip had taken the oath.) were captured. Surely these things were not done in a corner; they need no judicial inquiry; everyone can find out which came first, the month in which the peace was made or that in which the places were taken.

Again, he says that he has restored all the prisoners that were taken in the war. Yet the man of Carystus,[*](A town in the south of Euboea.) the agent of our city, for whose recovery you sent three embassies—Philip was so anxious to oblige you that he killed him and did not even allow you to recover his corpse for burial.

With regard to the Chersonese, it is important to examine the terms of his dispatch to you and also to know what he is actually doing in the matter. For the whole of the land north of Agora, as being his own property and no concern of yours, he has handed over as a private estate to Apollonides of Cardia. Yet the boundary of the Chersonese is not Agora, but the altar of Zeus of the Marches, half way between Pteleum and the White Strand, where there was going to be a canal across the peninsula.

This is proved by the inscription on the altar of Zeus, which runs thus:

1. The dwellers here have set this boundary-stone
2. Midway `twixt Pteleum and the Silver Strand,
3. And raised this altar fair, that men may own
4. That Zeus is Warden of our No Mans Land.[*](If the reading is correct,ἀμμοπίηwill be the marches, which belong to no one and are therefore put under the protection of Zeus. Blass reads μοίρης σημέϊον ἀμμορίης τε᾽which leaves the last line rather in the air.)