Aeschines: Against Timarchus

This forum is a copy of a site that contained Alexander source material compiled, and in some cases translated, by pothos members. The original site has now disappeared but the material is reproduced here to preserve it.
Post Reply
Alexias
Strategos (general)
Posts: 1133
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:16 am

Aeschines: Against Timarchus

Post by Alexias »

Aeschines: Against Timarchus (extract)

Aeschines. Aeschines with an English translation by Charles Darwin Adams, Ph.D. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1919.

1.165 Now let me tell you how it happens that it has become the prevailing custom to say, that persons have in the past become prostitutes “under written contract.” One of our citizens (I will not name him, for I have no desire to make myself hated), foreseeing none of the consequences which I have just described to you, is said to have served as prostitute according to a contract deposited with Anticles. Now, since he was not a private citizen, but active in politics and subject to scurrilous attack, he caused the city to become accustomed to this expression, and that is the reason why some men ask whether in a given case the practice has been “by written contract.” But the lawgiver did not care how the thing was brought about; on the contrary, if there is a letting for hire in any way whatsoever, the man who does the deed is condemned by him to disgrace.

1.166 But nevertheless, although all this is so plainly defined, many irrelevant arguments will be invented by Demosthenes. Possibly, when he sticks to his subject, we might be less indignant with him for the animosity he shows; but when, to the injury of our national rights, he foists in matters that do not belong to the case, then one may well be angry. Philip will be largely in evidence, and the name of Philip's son Alexander is going to be mixed up in it. For in addition to all the rest that is bad in him, this Demosthenes is an ill-mannered and boorish sort of person.

1.167 His offensive talk against Philip is foolish and out of place, but not so serious a mistake as that which I am about to mention. For confessedly he will be making his slanderous charges against a man—he who is himself no man. But when he insinuates shameful suspicions against the boy, by deliberately applying to him words of double meaning, he makes our city ridiculous.

1.168 For, under the impression that he is hurting me with reference to the accounting which I am about to render for my service on the embassy,1 he says that when the other day he himself was describing the boy Alexander, telling how at a certain banquet of ours he played the cithara, reciting certain passages in which there were thrusts at another boy, and when he reported to the senate what he himself happened to know about the incident, I got angry at his jests at the expense of the boy,2 as though I were not merely a member of the embassy, but one of the boy's own family.

1 See the Introduction to Aeschin. 2.

2 The words of double meaning that Aeschines says Demosthenes applied to the boy Alexander would be connected with the story of this “playing” and “reciting.”

1.169 Now I naturally have had no conversation with Alexander, because of his youth, but Philip I do praise now because of his auspicious words, and if in what he does toward us in the future he shall fulfil the promise of what he now says, he will make praise of him a safe and easy thing. I did, indeed, rebuke Demosthenes in the senate-chamber, not because I was counting the favor of the boy, but because I felt that if you should listen to such words as his, the city would show itself as ill-behaved as the speaker.

1.170 But, fellow citizens, I beg you not to accept their irrelevant pleas at all, in the first place for the sake of the oaths which you have sworn, in the second place that you may not be misled by a fellow who makes a trade of the manipulation of words. ....
Post Reply