Letters

Consequently, if you are going to be so minded that those who have conceived some grudge against those who espouse the cause of the people will not be reconciled even with dead men, but will persist in maintaining their enmity against the children, and if the people, in whose cause every friend of democracy labours, shall remember their gratitude only so long as they can use a man in the flesh and thereafter shall feel no concern, then nothing will be more miserable than to choose the post of champion of the people.

If Moerocles[*](Moerocles was archon in 324 B.C. His surrender had been demanded by Alexander in 335 B.C., which indicates his importance.) replies that this view is too subtle for his understanding, and that, to prevent them from running away, he put them in chains upon his own responsibility, demand of him why in the world he did not see the justice of this proceeding when Taureas, Pataecus, Aristogeiton and himself,[*](Nothing specific is known about these imprisonments, but it need not be assumed that all four men were under sentence at a single time. See next note. Taureas and Pataecus are unknown. For Aristogeiton see the two speeches against him.) though they had been committed to prison, were not only not in chains but would even address the Assembly.

If, on the other hand, he shall say that he was not then archon, he had no right to speak, at any rate according to the laws.[*](If Moerocles ordered the two sons of Lycurgus to be imprisoned but left Taureas, Pataecus and Aristogeiton at liberty, the charge against him is criminal partiality. If he denies that he was archon at the time and so lacked the authority to order these men to be detained in prison, then the minor charge still stands against him of addressing the Assembly while technically a prisoner himself. As a prisoner he would be subject to partial ἀτιμία or diminution of his rights as a citizen.) Accordingly, how can it be equal justice when some men are in office who have no right even to speak and others are in fetters whose father was useful to you in numerous ways?

I certainly cannot figure it out unless you mean to demonstrate this fact officially—that blackguardism, shamelessness and deliberate villainy are strong in the State and enjoy a better prospect of coming off safely, and that, if such men happen to get into a tight place, a way out is discovered, but to elect to live in honesty of principle, sobriety of life and devotion to the people will be hazardous and, if some false step is made, the consequences will be inescapable.

Furthermore, the fact that it is unjust to entertain concerning Lycurgus the opposite opinion to the one you held while he lived, and that justice demands that you should have more regard for the dead than for the living, and all such considerations I shall pass over, for I assume them to be universally agreed upon. Of the children of others, however, whom you recompensed for their fathers’ good services I would gladly see you reminded; for instance, the descendants of Aristeides, Thrasybulus, Archinus and many others.[*](At times the Athenian Assembly bestowed extravagant gifts upon the children of famous men, as may be learned from Plut. Arist. 27. At other times it acted heartlessly, if we may believe Dem. 19.280 ff. Archinus was one of the restorers of democracy in 403 B.C., but the greater share of the credit went to Thrasybulus.)

Not by way of censure have I cited these examples, for so far am I from censuring as to declare it my belief that such repayments are in the highest degree in the interest of the State, because you challenge all men by such conduct to be champions of the people, when they observe that, even if during their own lives envy shall stand in the way of their receiving merited honors, yet their children, at any rate, will be sure to receive their due rewards at your hands.

Is it not absurd, therefore, or rather even disgraceful, toward certain other men to keep alive the goodwill justly due them, in spite of the fact that the times of their usefulness are long past and after this interval you learn of their good deeds by hearsay and have not assumed them from things of which you have been eye-witnesses, but toward Lycurgus, whose political career and death are so recent,

you do not show yourselves so ready to display even pity and kindness as you were at all other times toward men whom you never knew and by whom you used to be wronged, and, worse still, your vengeance is visited upon his children, whom even an enemy, if only he were fair-minded and capable of reason, would pity?

Moreover, I am amazed if any one of you is ignorant of this fact also, that it is not to the interest of our political life, either, for this to become public knowledge, that those who have established friendship in a certain other quarter[*](That is, with the Macedonian court.) are sure to prosper in all things and fare better and, if some mishap occurs, the ways of escape are easier, but those who have attached themselves to the cause of the people will not only fare worse in other respects but for them alone of all men calamities will remain irremediable. Yet it is easy to demonstrate the truth of this,

for who of you does not know the incident of Laches[*](Laches is known from an inscription as a syndic of the deme Aexonê (I.G. 2. 1197, p. 560, 13 f.).) the son of Melanopus, whose lot it was to be convicted in a court of law precisely as the sons of Lycurgus in the present instance, but his entire fine was remitted when Alexander requested it by letter? And again, that it happened to Mnesibulus[*](Mnesibulus is not otherwise known.) of Acharnae to be similarly convicted, the court condemning him just as it has the sons of Lycurgus, and to have the fine remitted, and rightly too, for the man was deserving?

And none of those who are now making such an outcry declared that by these actions the laws were being nullified. Quite rightly so, for they were not being nullified, if it be true that all our laws are enacted for the sake of just men and for the preservation of honest men, and that it is expedient neither to render the calamities of the unfortunate perpetual nor for men to show themselves void of gratitude.

And furthermore, if it is expedient for these principles to hold true, as we would declare, not only were you not nullifying the laws where you released those men, but you were preserving the lifework of those men who enacted the laws, first, by releasing Laches in compliance with the request of Alexander and, secondly, by restoring Mnesibulus to his rights because of the sobriety of his life.

Beware of demonstrating, therefore, that to acquire some outside friendship[*](Of the Macedonians.) is more profitable than to give one’s self in trust to the people and that it is better to remain in the ranks of the unknown than to become known as a man who in public life consults the interests of you, the majority. For although it is impossible for one who recommends policies and administers the commonwealth to please everyone, yet if a man, actuated by loyalty, has at heart the same interests as the people, he has a right to security of person. Otherwise you will teach everyone to serve the interests of others rather than those of the people and to shun recognition for doing any of those things that are to your advantage.

In short, it is a reproach common to all citizens, men of Athens, and a misfortune of the State as a whole, that envy should be thought to be stronger among you than the grace of gratitude for services performed, and the more so because envy is a disease but the Graces[*](A verbal play on χάριτες, feelings of gratitude or Graces.) have been assigned a place among the gods.

Furthermore, I am not going to omit the case of Pytheas[*](Pytheas was a presumptuous politician of no formal education; he accused Demosthenes of receiving twenty talents from Harpalus; after Alexander’s death he joined Antipater during the siege of Lamia, 322 B.C.) either, who was a friend of the people down to his entrance into public life but after that was ready to do anything to injure you. For who does not know that this man, when, under the obligation to serve you, he was entering upon public life, was being hounded as a slave and was under indictment as an alien usurping the rights of a citizen and came near being sold by these men whose servant he now is and for whom he used to write the speeches against me,

but since he is himself now practising what he then accused others of doing, is in such easy circumstances as to keep two mistresses, who have escorted him—and kind it is of them—on the way to death by consumption,[*](The Greek word φθόη was peculiar enough to prick the interest of Harpocration, who cites this passage.) and to be able to discharge a debt of five talents more easily than he could have produced five drachmas previously, and besides all this, with the permission of you, the people, not only participates in the government, which is a common reproach to all, but also performs on your behalf the ancestral[*](The point is that Pytheas himself lacked ancestors of note.) sacrifices at Delphi?

So, when it is possible for all to behold object-lessons of such a kind and on such a scale, from which everyone would conclude that it does not pay to espouse the cause of the people, I begin to fear that some day you may become destitute of men who will speak on your behalf, especially when of the friends of the people some are being taken away by man’s natural destiny,[*](That is, death by disease.) by accident, and by the lapse of time, such as Nausicles, Chares, Diotimus, Menestheus, and Eudoxus,[*](Nausicles and Diotimus are mentioned in the Dem. 18.114; both are known from inscriptions to have held important commands. The surrender of Diotimus was demanded by Alexander in 335 B.C. Chares held important commands between 367 and 335 B.C. Menestheus was given command of one hundred galleys in 335 B.C., 17. 20. Eudoxus seems to be otherwise unknown.) and also Euthydicus, Ephialtes and Lycurgus,[*](Din. 1.33 names Euthydicus as one whom Demosthenes claimed as a friend. Ephialtes was one of the ten whose surrender was demanded by Alexander in 335 B.C. He died in 334 while fighting on the side of the Persians against the Macedonians. For Lycurgus see above sect. 2 note.) and others you citizens have cast forth, such as Charidemus, Philocles[*](For Charidemus, leader of mercenaries, see Dem. 23, Introduction. There is extant a speech of Deinarchus Against Philocles (Din. Phil.). The latter was associated with Demosthenes in admitting Harpalus to Athens with his illicit treasure. His exile was brief.) and myself,

men to whom not even you yourselves believe others to be superior in loyalty, though if you think certain others are equally loyal I feel no jealousy,[*](This is one of several similar colloquialisms signifying I don’t mind.) and it would be my desire, provided only that you will deal fairly with them and that they shall not meet with the treatment accorded us, that their number may be legion. When however, you give the public such object-lessons as the present, who is there who will be willing to give himself to this line of duty with sincere intentions toward you?

Yet surely you will find no dearth of those who will at least pretend to do so, for in the past there has been none. Heaven forbid that I should live to see them unmasked like those men, who, though now openly pursuing policies they then repudiated, feel before none of you either fear or shame! You should ponder these facts, men of Athens, and not treat loyal men with disdain nor be persuaded by those who are leading the country on the way to bitter hatreds and cruelty.

For our present difficulties require goodwill and humanity far more than dissension and malice, an excess of which certain persons turn to their advantage, pursuing their business[*](Antiatticista cites this passage under ἐργολάβος Bekker’s Anecdota 1. p. 94. 3-4.) to your detriment with the expectation of returns, of which I pray that their calculations may cheat them. If any one of you ridicules these warnings he must be filled with a profound simplicity. For if, observing that things have happened which no one could have expected, he imagines things could not happen now which have happened already before now, when the people were set at variance with those who spoke in their behalf by men suborned for the purpose, has he not taken leave of his senses?