On the False Embassy

Take next the period of our loitering at Pella, and compare the employments which we severally chose for ourselves. Mine was to seek out and rescue the captives, spending money of my own, and asking Philip to apply to their ransom the money he was spending on hospitable gifts for us. But what Aeschines constantly tried to effect, you shall hear in a moment. What then was it? It was that Philip should give us a lump sum as a collective present.

You must know that Philip was already sounding us all in this way: he sent private messages to each of us in turn, with the offer, men of Athens, of a really large sum in gold. Having failed in some case or other,—in what case let the result disclose; it is not for me to name myself,—he conceived that a collective present might be accepted by all of us without misgiving; and that there would be security for those who had individually sold themselves, if we all shared even to a trifling extent in the general acceptance. Accordingly it was offered,—nominally, as a form of hospitality.

I stopped that manoeuvre; and then these men divided that money also among themselves. When I asked Philip to spend it on the captives, he could not with decency either inform against them by replying, It is in so-and-so’s pockets, or escape the outlay; so he made me the promise, but evaded performance by saying that he would send the men home in time for the Panathenaic Festival. Read the deposition of Apollophanes, and then those of the other persons who were there.

(The Deposition is read)

Let me now tell you how many of the captives I ransomed myself. For while we were staying at Pella, before Philip’s arrival, some of the prisoners,—all in fact who were out on bail,—having, I suppose, no confidence that they would afterwards be able to induce Philip to move, told me that they were willing to provide for their own ransom without putting themselves under obligation to Philip, and offered to borrow their ransom-money, three minas, five minas, or as the case might be.

So when Philip agreed to get the release of the rest, I called together these men, to whom I had lent the money as a friendly loan, reminded them of the transaction, and made them a free gift of their ransom-money, lest they should seem to have been put into a worse position by their impetuosity, or to have been ransomed, though poor men, at their own expense, while the rest were expecting deliverance from Philip. To prove the truth of my statement, read these depositions also.

(The Depositions are read)

Well, these sums of money I gave away as a free gift to my fellow-citizens in distress. If Aeschines in addressing you should say presently: Demosthenes, if you really inferred from my speech in support of Philocrates that our conduct was thoroughly corrupt, why did you join us on the subsequent embassy to receive the oaths, instead of excusing yourself? you must remember that I had promised the prisoners whom I delivered that I would bring the ransom-money and do my utmost for their rescue.

It would therefore have been too bad to break my word and abandon fellow-creatures and fellow-citizens in misfortune. Had I declined on oath, a private excursion to Macedonia would have been neither decent nor safe. Except for my strong desire to liberate those men, may I die miserably before my time[*](The Greek phrase, which occurs also at the end of the De corona, suggests by its jingle the formula of some curse, but cannot be well reproduced in English.) if any reward would have induced me to accept an embassy with these men as my colleagues. I proved that by twice excusing myself when you twice appointed me to the third embassy, and also by my constant opposition to them on this journey.

So the business which I controlled by myself on the embassy turned out in this fashion to your advantage, although, where the majority prevailed, everything went to ruin. Indeed, if my advice had been taken, all our transactions might have had an equally fortunate issue; for I was not so foolish and stupid as to lose money, while others were making money, out of sheer public spirit, and then object to a course of action that would have cost no expense, and that offered far greater advantages to the whole commonwealth. Yes, men of Athens, the issue might have been fortunate indeed; only these men had their way.

And now I ask you to look at the acts of Aeschines and those of Philocrates, in comparison with mine; for the contrast will help to expose them. First, in violation both of the decree and of assurances given to you, they excluded the Halians, the Phocians, and Cersobleptes, from the benefits of the treaty. Then they attempted to tamper with and repeal the decree from which our own authority was derived. Next they entered the Cardians as allies of Philip, and refused by a definite vote to send a dispatch written by me, but themselves composed and sent one that did not contain an honest word.

Then, because I objected to their acts, not only thinking them dishonorable but fearing that I might share the ruin they were bringing on themselves, our chivalrous friend accused me of promising to Philip that I would overthrow the Athenian democracy, while all the time he was himself constantly holding private communications with Philip. I need only mention that not I but Dercylus, with the help of this servant of mine, watched him by night at Pherae, caught him emerging from Philip’s tent, and told the servant to let me know, and not to forget it himself; and that in the end this impudent blackguard stayed with Philip for a day and a night on our departure.

To prove the truth of these statements, in the first place I will give evidence myself, having duly written down my deposition and incurred legal responsibility[*](It should be remembered that all evidence in the Athenian courts was deposited in writing before the trial. There was no verbal evidence and no cross-examination. By attesting under oath the truth of his deposition, the witness of course made himself answerable to a charge of perjury.); and I will then call the other ambassadors in turn, and compel them either to testify, or to take oath that they are unable to testify. If they take the oath, I shall easily convict them of perjury.

(The Deposition of Demosthenes is read)

You have seen how I was harassed by troubles and annoyance throughout the expedition. You can imagine how they behaved there, with their paymaster next door, when their conduct here, under the eyes of the people, who hold the power to reward and to chastise, is what we know it to be.

Now I wish to recapitulate the charges I have brought home, and to show that I have fulfilled the undertaking I gave at the outset of my speech. I have proved, not by words but by the testimony of facts, that there was no word of truth in the report of Aeschines, but that he successfully deceived you.

I have proved that he is to blame for your refusal to hear the truth from me, captivated as you then were by his promises and assurances; that his counsels were exactly opposed to right policy; that he spoke against the terms of peace proposed by our allies, and in favor of the proposals of Philocrates; that he purposely wasted your time to debar you from going to the aid of the Phocians if you should so desire; that throughout his journey abroad his sins were many and grievous; that he has betrayed everything, sold everything, taken bribes, and stopped short of no iniquity. That, then, is what I undertook to prove; and that is what I have proved.

Now mark what follows; for the argument I now put before you is plain and straightforward. You have sworn to give a verdict according to the laws, and to the decrees of the people and of the Council of Five Hundred; the conduct of the defendant when holding the office of ambassador has manifestly violated those laws, those decrees, and the principles of justice; therefore he must be convicted by an intelligent jury. If he had committed no other crime, two only of his transgressions are sufficient to put him to death, for he has betrayed Thrace as well as the Phocians to Philip.

Yet no man could point out two places in the whole world of more importance to the commonwealth than Thermopylae by land and the Hellespont by sea; and both of them these men have infamously sold and delivered into the hands of Philip. What an enormous offence, apart from all the rest, is the surrender of Thrace and the Thracian outposts, I could show by a thousand reasons; and it would be easy to point to many men who for such betrayals have been sentenced to death or mulcted in large sums of money in this court,—Ergophilus, Cephisodotus, Timomachus, and, in old times, Ergocles, Dionysius, and others, of whom I may say that all of them together had inflicted fewer injuries upon the commonwealth than the defendant.

But in those days, men of Athens, you were still careful to be on your guard against perils, and not sparing of precaution; now you overlook anything that at any given moment does not disturb you or cause immediate annoyance. And then you come here and pass random resolutions,—that Philip shall swear fidelity to Cersobleptes,—that he shall have no share in Amphictyonic business,—that he shall revise the terms of peace. Yet all your resolutions would have been unnecessary, if only the defendant had chosen to travel by sea and to do his duty. What might have been saved by sailing, he has lost by insisting on travel by land; and what might have been saved by telling the truth, he has lost by telling lies.

He will presently, as I am informed, make it a grievance that he, and he alone of all our debaters, is to be called to account for his speeches. I will spare him the retort that any man who takes money for his speeches might reasonably be brought to justice; but there is one point on which I do insist. If Aeschines talked like an idiot and made blunders as an unofficial person, do not be hypercritical, leave him alone, make allowances. But if he has purposely deceived you for money while holding office as ambassador, do not let him off, do not listen to the suggestion that he is not to be put on his trial for mere words.

For what are we to bring any ambassador to justice, if not for his words? Ambassadors have control, not over war-ships, and military positions, and troops, and citadels,—these are never entrusted to them,—but over words and opportunities. If an ambassador has not wasted the opportunities of the state, he is no wrongdoer; if he has wasted them, he has done wrong. If the words of his reports are true and profitable words, let him be acquitted; if they are false, venal, and noxious, let him be convicted.

A man can do no greater wrong than by telling lies to a popular assembly; for, where the political system is based upon speeches, how can it be safely administered if the speeches are false? If he actually takes bribes and speaks in the interest of our enemies, will not you be imperilled? Again, to filch your opportunities is not an offence equivalent to filching those of an oligarchy or a monarchy, but far greater.

For in those polities, I take it, everything is done promptly at the word of command; but with you, first the Council must be informed, and must adopt a provisional resolution,—and even that not at any time, but only after written notice given to marshals and embassies; then the Council must convene an Assembly, but only on a statutory date. Then the most honest debaters have to make good their advantage and argue down an ignorant or dishonest opposition;