thoughts partially forgotten, causing past events to glow as if they had happened but yesterday, and could ennoble common thoughts and subjects so that they seemed worth dying for. Professor Shepard, while reviewing the orations of Demosthenes against Philip, has well put the case: "Upon the arrogant, deceiving, all-grasping Philip, and the uncaring, supine Athenians did the mind of the orator fasten and glow and blaze," until the people thought of but one thing - Philip the enemy of Athens. It is not surprising that when Philip heard the report of one of these speeches, he said, "Had I been there he would have persuaded me to take up arms against myself."

It was probably this earnestness that led to Æschines' comment at Rhodes upon Demosthenes. Æschines had gained such high reputation in speaking and debate that the people expressed surprise that he should have been so completely vanquished by Demosthenes; whereupon Æschines replied: "Had you heard that wild beast you would no longer be at a loss in that matter."

CHAPTER III.

ORATION ON THE CROWN.

WE have thus far spoken of the early life and certain prominent characteristics of Demosthenes. In the chapter now before us we are to be more specific, fixing attention especially upon his rhetoric. and oratoric methods and style as seen in his masterpiece, the Oration on the Crown, "the greatest speech of the greatest orator of the world."

The general facts that called forth this oration are the following: Not long after the battle of Charonea (B. C. 338), Ctesiphon, a friend of Demosthenes, introduced a bill to the Council of Five Hundred, proposing to reward Demosthenes for his gifts of money to the public, and for his strict integrity and patriotic conduct as a statesman. It is not unlikely that the principal object of the measure was to silence the attacks upon Demosthenes, and to give him an opportunity, in case it should be opposed, of justifying the whole course of his political life. Doubtless with that view was inserted the clause eulogizing his character as a statesman. The Macedonian party, properly enough, regarded this clause as a reflection upon themselves, and a virtual condemnation of the policy which they had for so many

years espoused. They therefore felt themselves compelled to oppose the measure. Hence they resolved upon a course, which was open to them according to Athenian law, of indicting Ctesiphon as the author of an illegal measure. Æschines, the rival of Demosthenes, commenced a prosecution against Ctesiphon for making the proposition, basing the indictment upon certain legal technicalities. Demosthenes took up the defence of Ctesiphon. The interest excited as the trial drew near was intense, not only in Athens but throughout Greece. Before a dense and almost breathless audience, made up both of citizens and strangers, the pleadings began. Æschines, with marked ability, opened the case, and upon strict legal grounds seemingly ought to have received the verdict. Demosthenes began his argument with a modest exordium, and for some time afterwards seemed to be working principally for the good feeling of the jurors.

The oration viewed as a whole is, first of all, an illustration of the thorough preparation Demosthenes was wont to give his public efforts. During the eight years intervening between the indictment and trial the orator was steadily collecting, massing, and mastering his materials. His preparations had been such, that, when he rose to reply, he held perfectly and vividly in mind the entire narrative of facts, extending through a period of twenty of the most eventful years of Athenian history.

Mr. Webster, speaking of his own reply to Hayne, says: "All that I had ever read, or thought, or acted

in literature, in history, in law, in politics, seemed to unroll before me in glowing panorama, and then it was easy, if I wanted a thunderbolt, to reach out and take it as it went smoking by."

Thus it appears to have been with Demosthenes in his reply to schines. Decree after decree, letter after letter, statute after statute, were perfectly at command, together with the precise dates of a multitude of different transactions; indeed, he had "a torrent of facts," and they were all under perfect control. Not one item could show itself until the orator called for it; but when wanted, then, seemingly, every fact that had ever entered into his consciousness leaped forward to serve him.

The skill, too, with which he made selections from his accumulated materials discloses one of the prime arts of a great orator. In his choice of subjectmatter he appears to have been governed by four general principles.

First, to use what was most important. With rare skill he seized upon the strongest points and the weightiest facts of the case, resolutely dismissing everything impertinent and trivial. He gave no time nor heed to the second-rate. In the struggle, he never allowed the weaker to slay the stronger. He admitted into his argument nothing merely technical. His plea is a clear and massive narration of important matters. And these important matters he rendered still more important in two ways: (1) By skilful repetition. (2) By intense earnestness.

Second. Demosthenes selected and shaped his

materials upon the basis of a common interest between himself and his hearers. He therefore chose those thoughts lying nearest the popular heart and within the range of the popular comprehension; they were consequently interesting to the masses; and through such facts he could make his most effective appeals. In all that had been done, he

sought to involve his auditors with himself.

He freely acknowledged that his administration had not resulted as he had hoped; but he then showed that all his measures were as the people would have them-opposed to the aggressions of Philip; that no entreaty, no money, no compliments of Philip did or could move him; and therefore, as Philip was the acknowledged enemy of Athens, he (Demosthenes) was her friend and defender.

But more than this: whatever objection had been urged against his administration, he was not alone under condemnation: whoever condemned his administration condemned all true Athenians, for they had heartily approved his measures and policy. He and the people were one. He did nothing without their sanction; therefore if he was a traitor, all were traitors; if he was unwise, all were unwise. conclusion, therefore, was: The man who charges evil upon me does not charge it upon me, but upon the most devoted and patriotic citizens of Athens.

His

This working upon the basis of a common interest is found to modify, either instinctively or artistically, the entire construction of the oration before us. It led Demosthenes constantly to be mindful of his