Page:History of Greece Vol XII.djvu/371

 POLYSPERCHfJN AND KASSANDEE. 339 in the immediate presence and even embrace of the father — and then slew the father himself, with bitter invective against his in- gratitude.* All the accounts which we read depict Demades, in general terms, as a prodigal spendthrift and a venal and corrupt politician. We have no ground for questioning this statement : at the same time, we have no specific facts to prove it. Antipater bj his last directions appointed Polysperchon, one of Alexander's veteran officers, to be chief administrator, with full powers on behalf of the imperial dynasty; Avhile he assigned to his OAvn son Kassander only the second place, as Chiliarch, or general of the body-guard." He thought that this disposition of power would be more generally acceptable throughout the em- pire, as Polysperchon was older and of longer military service than any other among Alexander's generals. Moreover, Anti- pater was especially afraid of letting dominion fall into the hands of the princesses ; 3 all of whom — Olympias, Kleopatra, and Eurydike — were energetic characters; and the first of the three (who had retired to Epirus from enmity towards Antipater) furious and implacable. But the views of Antipater were disappointed from the be- ginning, because Kassander would not submit to the second place, nor tolerate Polysperchon as his superior. Immediately after the death of Antipater, but before it became publicly known, Kassander despatched Nikanor with pretended orders from Anti- pater to supersede Menyllus in the government of Munychia. To this order Blenyllus yielded. But when after a few days the Athenian public came to learn the real truth, they were displeased with Phokion for having permitted the change to be made — assuming that he knew the real state of the facts, ' Plutarch, Phokion, 30 ; Diodor. xviii. 48 ; Plutarch, Demosth. 31, Arrian, De Reb. post Alex. vi. ap. Photiam, Cod. 92. In the life of Phokion, Plutarch has written inadvertently Antigonus in- stead of Perdikkas. It is not easy to see, however, how Deinarchus can have been the accuser of Demades on such a matter — as Arrian and Plutarch state. Arrian seems to put the death of Demades too early, from his anxiety to bring iJ into immediate juxtaposition with the death of Demosthenes, whose con demnation Demades had proposed in the Athenian assembly. ' Diod. xviii. 48. ^ Diod. xix. 1 1.