The Philippics by Demosthenes

First transcribed:Philippicae, 351-341 b.c.e. (English translation, 1852)

Type of work: Essays

The Work:

Occasionally in history, genius and a crisis in human affairs unite to produce a person whose name rings down through the ages long after the particular events have faded into the dimness of antiquity. Such a person was Demosthenes. Almost every educated person has heard of him and knows that he was a famous Greek orator. The events and the crisis in ancient Greece that helped make him famous, however, are unknown except to students of ancient history.

As an Athenian lawyer and orator, Demosthenes might have won little fame had it not been for Philip of Macedon, whose ambition was to conquer and rule as much of the world as he could. When the danger to Athens became great, Demosthenes did all he could to arouse his fellow Athenians to the defense of their city-state. Such crises have recurred in various forms throughout history. On one hand was Philip of Macedon, a tyrant who sought control of many lands and peoples; on the other was Demosthenes, a believer in democracy and local sovereignty who did all that one person could to arouse his contemporaries to fight against Philip and, later, Philip’s son, Alexander the Great. In this conflict between democracy and tyranny there is no doubt of Demosthenes’ sincerity; it rings out from his orations almost as clearly today as it must have more than two thousand years ago.

By common consent of his contemporaries and later generations, Demosthenes was the greatest of the Greek orators, in a culture that produced a great many with ability in rhetoric and oratory. Scholars of all periods have praised his speeches, and the number of manuscripts found in Egypt containing fragments of his speeches has been second only to papyri containing fragments of the Homeric epics. In modern times it is difficult to appreciate the greatness of the speeches from the standpoint of formal rhetoric as the ancient Greeks knew and used it. What Cicero praised in the orations is now to be found only by the serious student of Greek language and culture.

Modern readers, however, may find in the speeches what Demosthenes’ admirers in the ancient world seem to have overlooked or ignored. Readers can see that Demosthenes was an able and sincere statesman laboring for democratic ideals at a time when his fellow citizens in Athens were inclined to do little to oppose the forces of tyranny led by Philip of Macedon. Demosthenes knew human nature as he knew his art, and he employed his knowledge of both to speak out forcefully for what he believed in. He spoke out not for the sake of his rhetoric but for the sake of Athens; he spoke not to a select group, to no aristocracy, but to all Athenians. He wished to persuade them to rise to the defense of their city and the way of life and government that it represented. There is little flamboyance in the orations, at least as they are translated. Demosthenes spoke plainly and sincerely; his art was like all great art, hiding beneath the cloak of apparent simplicity, reflecting great care and preparation. Demosthenes’ tone is serious, befitting his topic.

As in the case of so many ancient authors, the authenticity of work supposedly done by Demosthenes is open to question. More than sixty orations, as well as some letters and poems, have been attributed to him. Scholars currently accept only about forty of the speeches as authentic. Many of the orations accepted as his are nonpolitical, having been composed for delivery in cases at law. These orations furnish much material about Greek culture. Demosthenes’ true fame rests on the speeches called The Philippics. These were not the only orations on political subjects that he made, nor were they the only speeches he gave that had to do with the threat of Philip to Athens. Quite a number of his other orations, such as the Olunthiakos (349-348 b.c.e.; Olynthiacs, 1570), deal with Philip’s depredations in the Greek peninsula and other portions of the eastern Mediterranean world.

The first Philippic was delivered in 351 b.c.e. At that time Philip, stopped at Thermopylae, had sent his armies into Thrace, dispatched a fleet to attack the islands of Lemnos and Imbrus, and interfered with the commerce of Athens by attacking shipping. Demosthenes said that the Athenians might be made aware of the danger and should take steps to defend themselves. The orator obviously felt that Athens in 351 b.c.e. had more to fear from the Macedonian king than from its traditional enemy, Thebes, or from a combination of other unfriendly city-states. It was not as an alarmist that Demosthenes spoke; he spoke, rather, to awaken his fellow Athenians to an awareness of the need for watchfulness and preparedness. In this first Philippic he encouraged his city to meet the danger, pointing out its advantages and strengths. In practical fashion, he suggested ways in which the city could economically take steps to meet the danger, which at that time was not as great as it would become in passing years.

It was not enough, as Demosthenes knew, merely to hope that Philip had died, as rumor had it. Demosthenes realized that failure to provide for defense through inaction sets up circumstances that are an invitation to strong-arm tyranny. Later history has shown that leaders have often failed to realize this truism of politics. Demosthenes realized, as leaders sometimes have failed to do, that free people do not have a choice between action and inaction. To oppose Philip, to warn him that Athens was prepared to defend itself, the orator suggested a military force of moderate size, with good officers to lead it. He recommended that at least 25 percent of the personnel be Athenians, the rest mercenaries. Knowing that to equip, pay, and keep in the field a large force was beyond the economic power of the city, he urged the establishment of a small but efficient military force. The answer to the problem, he said, lay in making the best use of what could be afforded, not in hitting blindly only at places here Philip had already struck.

The Athenians did nothing. In 344 b.c.e., seven years later, Demosthenes again spoke pointedly in the second Philippic. By that time Philip, allied with the Messenians, had become a more powerful threat to Athens. Demosthenes himself had headed an embassy to Messene and Argos to warn those cities against the oppressor, to no avail. Philip, in turn, had sent an emissary to Athens to complain about Demosthenes’ charges and to vindicate his own conduct. Demosthenes spoke to explain carefully what Philip was doing and what the pro-Macedonian group in Athens was doing to endanger the city. He ended by pointing out that Philip’s conduct now made the Athenians’ problem one of defending their city and homes, not merely of looking after claims and interests abroad. Philip’s benevolence was shown to be double-edged.

In the third of the Philippics, delivered in 341 b.c.e., Demosthenes cried out that Athenians had to learn that a state of war existed, even though Philip talked of peace. Philip aimed at the Chersonese, which controlled the route of grain ships between Athens and the Euxine. Demosthenes urged that the Chersonese be protected as a means of protecting Athens. He was right in his predictions: Philip attacked the Propontine cities in the following year. The Athenians, to their credit and Demosthenes’, played their part in resisting the tyrant.

The fourth and last of the Philippics was also delivered in 341 b.c.e., just before Philip laid siege to the Propontine cities. In this oration, as he had in the third Philippic, Demosthenes urged resistance, even advocating an alliance with Persia. Although the fourth Philippic is generally accepted as authentic, some scholars have viewed it with suspicion, claiming for several reasons that it is spurious and not really a product of Demosthenes’ own hand.

Bibliography

Bury, J. B., and Russell Meiggs. “Rise of Macedonia.” In A History of Greece to the Death of Alexander the Great. 4th ed. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1975. Includes discussion of The Philippics within an account of the conflict between Athens and Philip II of Macedonia. The account is favorable to Philip at Demosthenes’ expense but offers a good historical introduction.

Gibson, Craig A. Interpreting a Classic: Demosthenes and His Ancient Commentators. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. Gibson has translated the commentaries of a group of ancient scholars who interpreted Demosthenes’ works. He describes the source of these ancient writings and how they were transmitted through successive generations.

Jaeger, Werner. “Demosthenes.” In Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture. Translated by Gilbert Highet. 2d ed. 3 vols. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986. Provides an excellent short introduction to Demosthenes’ political orations, including The Philippics, within the context of a cultural history of Greece.

‗‗‗‗‗‗‗. Demosthenes: The Origin and Growth of His Policy. Translated by Edward S. Robinson. 1963. Reprint. New York: Octagon Books, 1977. Presents an investigation of Demosthenes’ orations for the purpose of promoting understanding of his political thought. Includes ample discussion of the speeches opposing Philip.

Pickard-Cambridge, A. W. Demosthenes and the Last Days of Greek Freedom: 384-322 B.C. 1914. Reprint. Piscataway, N.J.: Giorgias Press, 2002. Clear and concise summaries, with translations of key passages, of the speeches against Philip are worked into a detailed history of Demosthenes’ times.

Wooten, Cecil W. A Commentary on Demosthenes’ “Philippic” I: With Rhetorical Analyses of “Philippics” II and III. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. Provides the first substantive commentary on the first Philippic published since 1907, analyzing the work’s rhetorical and stylistic techniques, placing it within its historical context, and pointing out its grammatical problems. Also describes how the second and third Philippics differ from the first.

‗‗‗‗‗‗‗. “Style and Argumentation in the Speeches of Demosthenes.” In Cicero’s “Philippics” and Their Demosthenic Model. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1983. Offers a good description of the basic feature of Demosthenes’ oratorical style. Useful for readers with little prior knowledge of Demosthenes.

Worthington, Ian, ed. Demosthenes: Statesman and Orator. New York: Routledge, 2000. Collection of essays addresses such topics as how views of Demosthenes have changed over time, Demosthenes’ inactivity during the reign of Alexander the Great, and his public speeches. Includes discussion of The Philippics.