Interpreting a Classic: Demosthenes and His Ancient Commentators

Introduction

1 1. The genuineness of some of these is doubtful; see Sealey, Demosthenes, 222– 40. On the authenticity of the letters, see Goldstein. For ancient papyri containing texts of Demosthenes, see most recently Clarysse. See Drerup on the manuscript tradition. Modern editions of Demosthenes are based on four main manuscripts: the tenth-century Marcianus 416 (called F), the tenth- or eleventh-century Monacensis 485 (A), the tenth- or eleventh-century Parisinus 2935 (Y), and the ninth- or tenth-century Parisinus 2934 (S). 2. On the canon of the ten Attic orators, see Douglas, “Canon of Ten Attic Orators”; Smith. The other nine were Lysias, Isaeus, Hyperides, Isocrates, Dinarchus, Aeschines, Antiphon , Lycurgus, and Andocides. Introduction The Athenian statesman and orator Demosthenes (384–322 b.c.) was one of the most influential authors of Greek and Roman antiquity. The writings passed down under his name in the manuscript tradition include sixteen speeches delivered before the Athenian Assembly, nine others from important public trials, thirty-three from private law cases, six letters , a funeral oration, an essay on love, and a large collection of generalized introductions (prooemia).1 Of these writings, the speeches delivered in the Assembly and in public trials were generally considered to be his best. Demosthenes was also one of the orators included in the canon of ten Attic orators, a list of recommended authors that probably reached its final form in the second century c.e.2 Demosthenes was read more than any other ancient orator; only his Roman admirer Cicero offered any real competition. For hundreds of years he was studied by schoolboys eager to embark upon careers as pub- 2 Introduction 3. See Didymus’s comments in Berol. 9780, cols. 7.7–8.2. 4. Ober, 178–79. On the Attic orators’ use of history, see also Pearson, “Historical Allusions; S. Perlman, “Historical Example”; Nouhaud. lic speakers, politicians, and patriarchs. Writers of all periods studied and imitated Demosthenes’ style. Literary critics tried to describe the effects of his style on the reader or listener, and to explain how such effects were achieved. Biographers supplied their hungry reading publics with extensive discussions of Demosthenes’ political career, his speeches, and even his personal quirks and sense of humor. Commentaries and dictionaries provided generations of readers with valuable discussions of the finer points of classical Athenian history and definitions of unusual or archaic words. Just as Homer was “the poet” of Greek and Roman antiquity, Demosthenes was “the orator.” Postclassical readers of Demosthenes faced a number of challenges, not the least of which was their distance from the world of classical Athens . In his speeches Demosthenes addresses the Athenians of his own day in terms calculated to advise, inform, and move them. There was no particular reason for him to assume that his published speeches would still be read hundreds of years later. There was no way to predict that a proper name or other word in those speeches would be unfamiliar to a reader six hundred years in the future, and no real reason to concern himself with that fact. Likewise there was no reason to provide footnotes to current events and well-known episodes from Athenian history. When Demosthenes refers in his tenth oration to the Persian king’s previous restoration of the city’s affairs (10.34), his original audience presumably knew what that meant. They did not need to be told that he was referring, as one ancient scholar argues, to a Persian-sponsored Athenian defeat of the Spartans in a naval battle at Cnidus in the 390s b.c.3 Even if Demosthenes wanted to give his audience such details, it is also possible that he could not. As J. Ober has argued, for political reasons an ancient orator had to “avoid taking on the appearance of a welleducated man giving lessons in culture to the ignorant masses.”4 Demosthenes had to portray himself as knowledgeable (and therefore trustworthy ), but at the same time he had to avoid giving the impression that he believed that he was better than anyone in his audience (and therefore untrustworthy). For these reasons Demosthenes’ speeches did not and perhaps could not provide the philological and historical explanations that later readers might need. Nevertheless, Demosthenes was a “classic” Introduction 3 5. This title is intended to reflect the content and agenda of the commentaries, which include analyses of individual words and discussions of historical topics...