Page:History of Greece Vol XI.djvu/420

 394 HISTORY OF GREECE. mately negatived by the assembly. 1 That ^Eschines supported tha same motion entire, and in a still more unqualified manner, we may infer from his remarkable admission in the oration against Timarchus 2 (delivered in the year after the peace, and three years before his own trial), wherein he acknowledges himself as joint author of the peace along with Philokrates, and avows his hearty approbation of the conduct and language of Philip, even after the ruin of the Phokians. Eubulus, the friend and partisan of JEs- chines, told the Athenians 3 the plain alternative : " You must either march forthwith to Peiraeus, serve on shipboard, pay direct taxes, and convert the Theoric Fund to military purposes, or else you must vote the terms of peace moved by Philokrates." Our inference respecting the conduct of JEschines is strengthened by what is here affirmed respecting Eubulus. Demosthenes had been vainly urging upon his countrymen, for the last five years, at a time when Philip was less formidable, the real adoption of these energetic measures ; Eubulus, his opponent, now holds them out in terrorem, as an irksome and intolerable necessity, constraining the people to vote for the terms of peace proposed. And however painful it might be to acquiesce in the statu quo, which recognized 1 Demosth. Fals. Leg. p. 391430. JEschines affirms strongly, in his later oration against Ktcsiphon (p. 63), that Demosthenes warmly advoca- ted the motion of Philokrates for alliance as well as peace with Philip. He professes to give the precise phrase used by Demosthenes which he censures as an inelegant phrase ov dclv uiroppi^ai r/)f elpf/vrif rrjv avfj.fj.a- t'tav, etc. Ke adds that Demosthenes called up the Macedonian ambassa- lor Antipater to the rostrum, put a question to him, and obtained an an- swer concerted beforehand. How much of this is true, I cannot say. The version given by JEschincs in his later speech, is, as usual, different from that in his earlier. The accusation against Demosthenes, of corrupt collusion with Antipa- ter, is incredible and absurd. ruf Ipuf dqjiijyopiaf, Kal ij> eyuv rftv Etp^vrfv rfyv 6? iftov ical i/U7r- nov c5e vvv (J.EV Sia. ryv ruv Xoyuv v(j>rmiav eTraivu, etc. &dv f/dt) Kal xptjfiaT' 1 tlafyepeiv ical rti -&eupiK<i arpariuTLKu. iroieiv 5 XCtporovetv u. avvfint ftev OVTOC (^schines) eypai//c ff 6 flfiehvpbf Q'J.O "If
 * ,/Eschines. adv. Timarch. p. 24, 25. c. 34. 7rape^/?d/l/luv (Demosthenes)
 * Demosth. Fals. Leg. p. 434. ^crac (Eubulus) KaraftaivEiv e/c Heipaia