Scanned text contains errors.

DEMOSTHENES.

(Ep. ad Amm. i. 4) makes the second the first, and the third the second in the series ; and this order has been defended by R. Rauchenstein, de Orat. Olyntli. ordine, Leipz. 1821, which is re­printed in. vol. i. of Schaefer's Apparatus. The other order is defended by Becker, in his German translation of the Philippics, i. p. 103, &c., and by Westermann, St'iive, Ziemann, Petrenz, and Bruck­ner, in separate dissertations. There is a good edition of the Olynthiac orations, with notes, by C. H. Frotscher and C. H. Funkhanel, Leipzig, 1834, 8vo.

5. The oration on the Peace, delivered in b. c. 346. Respecting the question as to whether this oration was actually delivered or not, see Becker, Philippische Reden, i. p. 222, &c., and Vomel,' Prolegom. ad Orat. de Pace, p. 240, &c.

6. The second Philippic, delivered in B. c. 344. •See Vomel, Integram esse Demosth. Philip. II. ap-paret ex dispositions, Frankf. 1828, whose opinion is opposed by Rauchenstein in Jahn's Jalirb. vol. xi. 2, p. 144, &c.

7. On Halonesus, b. c. 343, was suspected by the ancients themselves, and ascribed to Hegesippus. (Liban. Argum. p. 75 ; Harpocrat. and Etym. M. s. v. ; Phot. Bibl. p. 491.) Weiske endeavoured to vindicate the oration for Demosthenes in Dis-sertatio super Orat. de Halon.^ Lubben. 1808, but he is opposed by Becker in Seebode^s Archiv. for 1825, i. p. 84, &c., Philippische Reden, ii. p. 301, &c., and by Vomel in Ostenditztr ttegesippi esse ora-tionem de Haloneso, Frankf. 1830, who published a separate edition of this oration under the name of Hegesippus in 1833.

8. Tlepl t£v h Xeppovrifffy, delivered in B. c. 342.

9. The third Philippic, delivered in b. c. 342. See Vomel, Demosthenis Philip. III. habitam esse ante Chersonesiticam, Frankf. 1837 ; L. Spengel, Ueber die dritte Philip. Rede des Dem., Munich, 1839.

10. The fourth Philippic, belongs to b. c. 341, but is thought by nearly all critics to be spurious. See Becker, Philip. Reden, ii. p. 491, &c. ; W. H. Veersteg, Orat. Philip. IV. Demosth. abjudicatur, Groningae, 1818.

11. Tlpos vyy 'ETTiorToXrjv rr)V <£iAnr7rou, refers to the year b. c. 340, but is a spurious oration. Becker, Philip. Reden, ii. p. 516, &c.

B. Other Political Orations.

12. Tlepl ^vvrd^ecDS, refers to b. c. 353, but is acknowledged on all hands to be spurious. F. A. Wolf, Proleg. adLeptin. p. 124 ; Schaefer, Apparat. Grit. i. p. 686.

13. Tlepl ^vuuopiwv, was delivered in b. c. 354. See Amersfoordt, Introduct. in Orat. de Symmor. Lugdun. Bat. 1821, reprinted in Schaefer 's Appar. Crit, vol. i. ; Parreidt, Disputat. de Instit. eo Athen. cujus ordinal, et correct, in orat. Tlepl inscripta suadet Demosth.) Magdeburg, 1836.

14. 'Tirep Meya\oTroAir£^ b. c. 353.

15. Tlepl ttjs *Po<JiW eAeufleptas, b. c. 351.

16. Tiepl t&v 7rpos'AAe£ai'<5poj> avvQf\KoJv^ refers to b. c. 325, and was recognized as spurious by the ancients themselves. (Dionys. de Admir. vi die. Dzm. 57 ; Liban. Argum. p. 211.)

II. judicial or private orations.

17. Tlepl Sre^awi', or on the Crown, was de­livered in b. c. 330. There are numerous separate editions of this famous oration j the best are by I.

DEMOSTHENES.

Bekker with scholia, Halle, 1815, and Berlin, 1825. by Bremi (Gotha, 1834), and by Dissen (Gbt-tingen, 1837). Comp. F. Winiewski, Comment. Historica et Chronolog. in Demosth. Orat. de Coron., Monasterii, 1829. The genuineness of the docu­ments quoted in this oration has of late been the subject of much discussion, and the most important among the treatises on this question are those of Droysen ( Ueber die Aechtheit der Urkund. in De­mosth. Rede vom Kranz, in the Zeitschrift fur die Altei'thumsw. for 1839, and reprinted separately at Berlin, 1839), and F. W. Newman (Classical Museum, vol. i. pp. 141-—169), both of whom deny the genuineness, while Vbmel in a series of programs (commenced in 1841) endeavours to prove their authenticity. Comp. A. F. Wolper, de Forma hodierna Orat. Demosth. de Coron. Leipzig, 1825 ; L. C. A. Briegleb, Comment, de Demosth. Orat. pro Ctesiph. praestantia, Isenac. 1832.

18. Tlepl rijs Tlapairpeargdas, delivered in B. c. 342.

19. Tlepl rijs dre\etas Trpos AeTrrtvriVy was spoken in b. c. 355, and it has been edited separately by F. A. Wolf, Halle, 1789, which edition was reprinted at Zurich, 1831.

20. Kara MeiStoy vrept rov Kovdvhov, was com­posed in b. c. 355. There are separate editions by Buttmann (Berlin, 1823 and 1833), Blume (Sund. 1828), and Meier (Halle, 1832). Com­pare Bb'ckh, Ueber die Zeitverh'dltnisse der Midiana in the AbhcmdL der Berlin. Akadem. for 1820, p. 60, &c.

21. Kara 'Az/SpOTiWos irapav6iJ.(av, belongs to b. c. 355, and has been edited separately by Fun-khanel, Leipzig, 1832.

22. Kara 'ApLffroKpdrovs, b. c. 352. See Rumpf, De Charidcmo Orita, Giessen, 1815.

23. Kara TiuoKpdrovs, b. c. 353. See Blume, Prolegom. in Demosth. Orat. c. Timocrat., Berlin, 1823.

24 and 25. The two orations against Aristo-geiton belong to the time after b. c. 338. The genuineness of these two orations, especially of the first, was strongly doubted by the ancients them­selves (Dionys. de Admir. vi die. Dem. 57 ; Har-pocrat. s. vv. ©ewpis and vea\^s ; Pollux, x. 155), though some believed them to be the productions of Demosthenes. (Liban. Argum. p. 769 ; Phot, Bibl. p. 491.) Modern critics think the first spurious, others the second, and others again both. See Schmidt, in the Excursus to his edition of Deinarchus, p. 106, &c.; Westermann, Quaest, Demosth. iii. p. 96, &e.

26 and 27. The two orations against Aphobus were delivered in b. c. 364.

28. Tlpds"A(po€ov tyevSofAaprvpiooV) is suspected of being spurious by Westermann, Quaest. Dem. iii. p. 11, &c. Comp. Schbmann, de Jure Publ, Grace, p. 274.

29 and 30. The two orations against Onetor. See Schmeisser, de Re Tutelari ap. Athen., &c., Freiburg, 1829. The genuineness of these ora­tions is suspected \>j Bb'ckh, Publ. Econ. of Athens^ Index, s. v. Demosthenes.

31. Tlapaypafpri Trpos Z^z/ofle/u*', falls after the year b. c. 355.

32. ripos 'ATrarovptov irapaypatyri, is of uncertain date.

33. Tlpos ftopijiiuiva irepl Sam'ou, was spoken in b. c. 332. See Baumstark, Prolegom. in Oral, Demosth. adv. Phorm.^ Heidelberg, 1826.