RECENZE 363 Ñbedeutungsgleichì ñ ß 184? can we talk about ìnatural genderî in case of names of cities, islands and countries ì ñ ß 64? All these individual questions surely arise from my own misunderstanding and discussing them with the author would clear them. The problem is that ñ and here I am getting back to the beginning ñ students (highschool students that is!) are the target readers here, and they will not be armed for any such (inner) discussion with the author. Touratierís phrasing is uncomplicated and apt, his text is innovative, original, it raises questions, provokes discussion ñ all this is very positive. We do need to extricate ourselves from hundreds-of-years old traditions and from using the same, obsolete methods again and again. The problem I see is the target reader ñ in my opinion, the book can work as a studentsí guidebook only with extreme difficulties. Lucie Pultrov· (Prague) IAN WORTHINGTON, Demosthenes of Athens and the Fall of Classical Greece. Oxford, Oxford University Press 2013, xxviii + 382 pp. ISBN 978-0-19-993195-8. Ian Worthington is perhaps best known for numerous books on Greek rhetoric he edited, but his admirable bibliography also includes a commentary on and translations of Greek orators of Demosthenesí time and biographies of Philip II and Alexander the Great. The book about Demosthenes is thus a logical sequel, offering a point of intersection to the authorís expertise on Greek oratory and the history of the 4th century BCE. After a Preface which briefly outlines Demosthenesí career and the most important modern bibliography (pp. viiñx), and a Preamble (pp. 1ñ8), which turns from battle of Chaeronea to a brief review ancient sources on the life of the orator, the author begins in a conventional manner: place of Demosthenesí birth, his ancestors, his date of birth, and the death of his father. The second chapter (pp. 9ñ41), which skilfully blends biography with general introduction, is filled with stories about Demosthenesí youth, his complicated disputes with his guardians once he came of age, a general introduction to what logographers did, Demosthenesí sexual life, marriage and children, Athenian democracy and the stories about Demosthenesí overcoming of physical disabilities. The third chapter (pp. 42ñ70) briefly describes a 4th-century history of Greece and in more detail the geography and history of Macedonia and the identity and habits of its people. There follows a biography of Philip II up to the year 354, mixed with an overview of his reform of the Macedonian army, of the social war and of Athenian war against Philip. Worthington then (pp. 71ñ97) returns to Demosthenes and comments on his speeches against Androtion and Leptines and on the symmories. The end of the chapter introduces the reader to Eubulusí policy, Philipís actions in Thrace and Thessaly 364 LISTY FILOLOGICK… CXXXVII, 2014, 3ñ4 and the beginnings of the Third Sacred War. The chapter five (pp. 98ñ128) deals with the remaining years of the 350s. Analyses of Demosthenesí speeches for the Megalopolitans, against Timocrates, against Aristocrates, the first Philippic and on the freedom of the Rhodians are intertwined with descriptions of Philipís impressive military activity during those years. The sixth chapter (pp. 129ñ154) begins with Demosthenesí speech on organisation of navy, but its main core lies in Philipís campaign against Olynthus and Demosthenesí three Olynthian speeches. Appended is Meidiasí incident with Demosthenes on the Dionysia 348 and beginnings of Athenian peace talks with Philip. The next chapter (pp. 155ñ182), after describing the trial of Meidias, concentrates on the negotiations that led to the peace of Philocrates in 346. It ends gloomily with the devastation of Phocis by Philip, ending the Third Sacred War. Worthington then (pp. 183ñ209) describes the troubled Athenian relationship with Philip from 346 to 343, analysing its impact on Athenian inner politics and commenting on Demosthenesí speech on the Peace and his second Philippic. The chapter culminates with the false embassy trial of Aeschines. The following chapter (pp. 210ñ236) guides the reader through the contentious issues between Athens and Philip that were occurring throughout the years 343 to 340, eventually leading to another war. It analyses Demosthenesí speech on the Chersonese, his third and fourth Philippic and his response to Philipís letter. The chapter ten (pp. 237ñ254) then describes the events of 339 and 338, culminating at the battle of Chaeronea. Chapter eleven (pp. 255ñ274) is devoted to Philipís treatment of Athens after the battle, Demosthenesí funeral oration, the establishment of the common peace and the League of Corinth and Philipís seventh marriage and death. There follows a chapter on Alexanderís reign from his ascension to throne through the revolt of Thebes and his brilliant successes in Asia up to the revolt of Agis (pp. 275ñ293). Demosthenes, it seems, (was) kept away from politics in those years, so that more is said about the king than about the orator here. The opposite is naturally true in the following chapter (pp. 294ñ309) devoted to the crown trial, with a short summary of Aeschinesí speech against Ctesiphon and extensive citations from Demosthenesí speech on the crown. This brilliant success of Demosthenes was followed by more backwater years until 324. There followed the Harpalus affair and Demosthenesí condemnation (despite his innocence, as Worthington tells the story) and going to exile, described in the chapter 14 (pp. 310ñ325). Not long afterwards, Alexander the Great died and the Lamian war began, which allowed Demosthenes to return to Athens. Yet the Greeks lost the war, Demosthenes was condemned to death and committed suicide on the islet of Calauria. All this, a brief judgement on Demosthenes and a few notes on his afterlife occupy the last, fifteenth chapter (pp. 326ñ344). The book does not aspire to bring forth new interpretations of disputed details, so that it is perhaps not very fair to criticise the author because of these, but minor slips are more frequent than could have been wished and more dangerous in a book targeted on a general readership. Thus it would be hard to argue persuasively that Demosthenes was a teetotaller, as Worthington claims (p. 17, see n. 46 for references), RECENZE 365 though he would certainly drink less wine than was usual. On p. 41 read ìlamp oilî, not ìlamp waxî. Pausanias the Periegete lived in the second, not third century AD, as is erroneously claimed (p. 234, n. 108). Platoís Menexenus, we are told (p. 260, n. 31), ìmay simply be a rhetorical set pieceî; surely it was not meant to be delivered as a true funeral oration, but it is much more than just rhetoric ñ not least a parody thereof. I do not understand Worthingtonís claim (p. 277) that Alexander, when disposing of rival pretenders, took no action against his half-brother Arrhidaeus îbecause of the blood tie between themî. Was there no blood tie between Alexander and his cousin Amyntas IV? More importantly, one could wish that Worthington would present more arguments against Harrisí thesis (see p. 156, n. 6) that the speech against Meidias was to be delivered during a graphe hybreos. Worryingly, Worthington claims (p. 157) that Demosthenes would not have written the speech against Meidias if he did not intend to pronounce it; but what about the second Verrine oration? On a more general level, Worthington is all too ready to accept some stories in Plutarchís lives as historical: Demosthenesí ways of overcoming his stammering (pp. 38ñ39), Alexander leaving Aristotleís copy of Homer under his pillow (p. 214), Demades rebuking Philip after Chaeronia (p. 256), all details of Alexanderís argument with Attalus at Philipís wedding (p. 266), or the story about Olympiasí having poisoned Arrhidaeus, which resulted in his madness (pp. 269ñ70). Usually, the author took care not to present something debatable as a given fact, duly warning his readers about the relevant controversies, for instance concerning authorship of some disputed speeches (e. g., the reply to Philipís letter or the funeral speech) or of Philip IIís (?) tomb (pp. 275ñ277). Whenever Worthington comes to some Demosthenesí speech, he first introduces the situation and then gives a summary of the speech interspersed with quotations from the most recent English translations, which strongly improves the bookís authenticity. The book is also very well equipped with maps and illustrations and photographs of all sorts. I especially liked the illustration of a Macedonian phalanx (p. 59). What I have found most interesting in the book is Worthingtonís story of Demosthenesí evolution from a self-serving and self-promoting politician to an altruist patriot, the turning point being in or around his second Philippic (e. g., pp. 199 and 340ñ341). This may be a valuable contribution to the debate about the Ancient Greek politiciansí capability to distinguish between their own interests and those of their cities. To sum up, the book has a good many strong points, but it cannot be recommended unconditionally. Pavel N˝vlt (Prague)