Aeschines

2. ON THE EMBASSY

Name /T1076/T1076_CH02 03/29/00 05:03AM Plate # 0-Composite pg 88 # 1 2. ON THE EMBASSY introduction Context With the exception of Demosthenes, those who negotiated the Peace of Philocrates had high hopes of its potential benefits. In the event, their expectations were disappointed. The peace released Athens from a war of which the population was tired, but it brought no tangible benefits. The vague promises hinted at by Philip and conveyed to Athens by at least some of its envoys failed to materialize. On the other hand, the settlement of the Third Sacred War caused profound resentment at Athens. Its effect was to eradicate Phocis as a political and military force, depriving Athens of an important ally against Thebes. In contrast, the advantages of the peace to Philip were all too obvious. He had been left with a free hand to deal with Phocis, and his settlement of the Sacred War had enhanced his prestige and influence in central Greece. He had emerged as the arbiter of interstate disputes in Greece and the protector of the temple at Delphi. The exclusion of the Thracian king Cersobleptes from the peace enabled him to reduce Cersobleptes to the status of vassal, depriving Athens of a potentially useful ally against Macedonia in the north. From the very beginning Athenian public opinion was suspicious of Philip. When invited in the immediate aftermath of the peace to join Philip in bringing Phocis to heel, the Athenians, under the influence of speakers like Demosthenes, had declined. In the years following the peace there were further sources of friction between Athens and Philip. In this context, the opponents of the peace began the task of painstakingly weakening or destroying its supporters. In 343 its most Name /T1076/T1076_CH02 03/29/00 05:03AM Plate # 0-Composite pg 89 # 2 visible supporter, Philocrates, was impeached by Hyperides. Philocrates fled the city, presumably aware that his chances of survival in the prevailing climate were slim. In the summer of the same year, Demosthenes’ charge of ambassadorial misconduct, which he had originally brought at Aeschines’ final audit (euthyna) in 346, came to trial. Ancient tradition reports that Aeschines was acquitted by a narrow margin, a mere thirty votes, from a judicial panel that had at least 500 (and more probably over 1,000) members. This was a technical victory only. Aeschines had arrayed some of the biggest names in Athenian politics in his defense.1 In coming close to defeating thisconsortium , Demosthenes had begun his own inexorable rise to dominance in the Assembly and had demonstrated that popular dissatisfaction with the peace was approaching critical mass. Victory was not necessary. Aeschines, in contrast, though technically the winner, was substantially weakened as a political force. The Case This is one of the rare cases for which we have the speeches for both sides. Demosthenes (19) charges Aeschines with betraying Athenian interests for money from Philip. Aeschines makes clear, and Demosthenes does not deny, that there was no accusation from Demosthenes after the first embassy. Demosthenes’ charge is that Aeschines was corrupted (or first gave signs of being corrupted) after this. He is not specific about the date Aeschines allegedly came under Philip’s influence. The essence of his case is that during the debate on the peace after the first embassy, Aeschines both forced the pace of deliberation , preventing a more general peace that would have included other Greek states beyond Athens and its allies, and ensured that the Phocians and Cersobleptes were excluded from the treaty. He then delayed setting out on the second embassy to swear Philip and his allies to the treaty, enabling Philip to finish dealing with Cersobleptes. On his return from the second embassy he gave a false account of Philip’s intentions, with the result that the Athenians made no attempt to prevent Philip from gaining entry to central Greece (as they 2. on the embassy 89 1 See 2.184. Name /T1076/T1076_CH02 03/29/00 05:03AM Plate # 0-Composite pg 90 # 3 had in 352) and declared a readiness to take to the field against Phocis if the temple at Delphi was not surrendered to Philip. The recognition that Athens would not support them led the Phocians to surrender to Philip, which resulted in the destruction of the Phocian cities. In presenting Aeschines as the collaborator of Philocrates, Demosthenes systematically suppresses his own very substantial contribution to...