Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Argumentation in Context
Vol. 10:3 (2021) ► pp.315–348

Demosthenes’ strategic maneuvering in the First Olynthiac

Balancing effectiveness and reasonableness of argumentation in the context of the Athenian Assembly of the People

 | University of Hradec Králové
The article focuses on the analysis of Demosthenes’ strategic maneuvering in the First Olynthiac delivered in the Athenian Assembly of the People in 349 BC. It is a case study of the famous § 24 in which Demosthenes calls for the attack on Philip of Macedonia, based on a hypothetical reciprocal scenario: Philip would attack Athens in a similar situation. The first part of the paper offers an argumentative characterisation of the Assembly of the People. Subsequently, the historical and situational circumstances of the speech are described, and an argumentative reconstruction of Demosthenes’ speech is presented. The evaluation of the speech’s context serves as a reference point for the analysis of strategic maneuvering by putting forward the argument in § 24. The argument is analysed in terms of three strategic maneuvering aspects: choice of topical potential, adaptation to audience demands, and presentational devices.
Keywords: Assembly of the People, Demosthenes, communicative activity type, First Olynthiac , pragma-dialectics, strategic maneuvering
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • 1.Macro-context: The course of the Assembly of the People
    • 1.1Argumentative characterisation of the Assembly of the People
      • 1.1.1Initial situation
      • 1.1.2Procedural and material starting points
      • 1.1.3Argumentative means and criticism
      • 1.1.4Outcome of discussion
  • 2.Meso-context: Historical circumstances of Demosthenes’ First Olynthiac
    • 2.1Historical context
    • 2.2Circumstances of Demosthenes’ speech
  • 3.Micro-context: Reconstructing the argumentation in the First Olynthiac speech
  • 4.Strategic maneuvering with argument in § 24
    • 4.1Adaptation to audience demands
      • 4.1.1The strategy of including the hypothetical scenario among the material points of the audience of Athenians
      • 4.1.2The strategy of including the principle of legitimacy among the material points of the audience of Athenians
    • 4.2Choice from the topical potential
      • 4.2.1Choice of the scheme with respect to the anticipated demands of the audience
      • 4.2.2The assessment of alternative choices in relation to the starting points of the audience
      • 4.2.3Strategic choice of argument
    • 4.3Presentational devices
      • 4.3.1Presentational device used to strengthen the acceptability of the hypothetical scenario
      • 4.3.2Presentational devices used to strengthen the acceptability of the principle of legitimacy
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 December 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.20013.sva
References (41)
References
Andone, Corina. 2013. Argumentation in political interviews: Analyzing and evaluating responses to accusations of inconsistency. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Delimiting the burden of proof in political interviews.” Journal of Argumentation in Context 5 (1): 74–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, Mark. 2018. “Athenian Democracy.” In Ancient History Encyclopedia. Available at: [URL]
Demosthenes. 1930a. “First Olynthiac.” In Demosthenes with an English translation by J. H. Vince, M.A., Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, London: William Heinemann Ltd., available at: [URL]
. 1930b. “Third Philippic.” In Demosthenes with an English translation by J. H. Vince, M.A., Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, London: William Heinemann Ltd., available at: [URL]
van Eemeren, Frans H. 2010. Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016. “Identifying argumentative patterns: A vital step in the development of pragma-dialectics.” Argumentation 30 (1): 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., and Bart Garssen. 2009. “In varietate concordia – united in diversity: European Parliamentary debate as an argumentative activity type.” In OSSA conference archive, available at: [URL]
. 2015. “Exploiting the Room for Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse Dealing with Audience Demand in the European Parliament.” In Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse, ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren, 861–874. Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij, and Jean H. M. Wagemans. 2014. Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., and Rob Grootendorst. 1992. Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale/New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., and Peter Houtlosser. 2000. “Rhetorical analysis within a pragma-dialectical framework. The case of R. J. Reynolds.” Argumentation 14 (3): 293–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “Strategic maneuvering: A synthetic recapitulation.” Argumentation 20 (4): 381–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., Peter Houtlosser, and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans. 2007. Argumentative indicators: A pragma-dialectical study. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garssen, Bart. 2016. “Problem-solving argumentative patterns in plenary debates of the European Parliament.” Argumentation 30 (1): 25–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Strategic maneuvering in European Parliamentary Debate.” Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (1): 33–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “The role of the argument by example in legislative debates of the European Parliament.” Journal of Argumentation in Context 6 (1): 27–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997. Argumentatieschema’s in PragmaDialectisch Perspectief. Een Theoretisch en Empirisch Onderzoek. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Dordrecht: ICG Printing b.v.
Gerring, John. 2007. Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hansen, Morgens H. 1999. The Athenian democracy in the age of Demosthenes: Structure, principles, and ideology. University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Hogg, Michael A. 2003. “Social Identity.” In Handbook of self and identity, ed. by Mark R. Leary, and June P. Tangney, 462–479. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Hunt, Peter. 2010. War, peace, and alliance in Demosthenes’ Athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred. 2013. “Strategic maneuvering in the political rhetoric of Barack Obama.” Journal of Language and Politics 12 (3): 357–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leland, Thomas. 1853. “The first Olynthiac oration. Introduction.” In The orations of Demosthenes: Pronounced to excite the Athenians against Philip, king of Macedon, and on occasions of public deliberation, 121. London: Henry G. Bohn.Google Scholar
MacDowell, Douglas M. 2009. Demosthenes the Orator. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McGraw-Hill Dictionary. 2002. “Two can play this game”. In McGraw-Hill Dictionary, available at: [URL]
Mohammed, Dima. 2008. “Institutional insights for analysing strategic manoeuvring in the British Prime Minister’s Question Time.” Argumentation 22 (3): 377–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. ‘The honourable gentleman should make up his mind’: Strategic Manoeuvring with Accusations of Inconsistency in Prime Minister’s Question Time. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Available at: [URL]
. 2015. “Pursuing multiple goals in European Parliamentary Debates: EU immigration policies as a case in point.” In Argumentation in Political Deliberation, ed. by Marcin Lewiński, Dima Mohammed, 47–74. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. Argumentation in Prime Minister’s Question Time: Accusation of inconsistency in response to criticism. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osborne, Robin. 2010. Athens and Athenian Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Perelman, Chaïm, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1969. The New Rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Plug, H. José. 2017. “The strategic use of argumentation from example in plenary debates in the European Parliament.” In Contextualizing Pragma-dialectics, ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren and Wu Peng, 159–176. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plutarch. 1919. “Demosthenes.” In Plutarch’s Lives. With an English translation by Bernadotte Perrin. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press. London. William Heinemann Ltd., available at: [URL]
van Poppel, Lotte. 2013. Getting the vaccine now will protect you in the future! A pragma-dialectical analysis of strategic maneuvering with pragmatic argumentation in health brochures. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Available at: [URL]
Ryder, T. T. B. 2000. “Demosthenes and Philip II.” In Demosthenes: Statesman and orator, ed. by Ian Worthington, 45–89. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Scott, Elizabeth M. 1991. A critical analysis of the Scholia Demosthenica on the First Olynthiac. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Glasgow. Available at: [URL]
Sealey, Raphael. 1993. Demosthenes and his time: A study in defeat. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, R. K. 1991. Democracy and participation in Athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Worthington, Ian. 2000. “Introduction: Demosthenes, then and now.” In Demosthenes: Statesman and orator, ed. by Ian Worthington, 1–8. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2013. Demosthenes of Athens and the fall of classical Greece. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar