ABSTRACT
In his digression on the treatment of kings in historiographical works, Polybiuswrites (8.9.1): ‘At the beginning of his work on Philip, Theopompus says that he was stimulated to the work for this reason, that Europe had never produced before a man altogether like Philip son of Amyntas.’ Though Theopompus’ remark has been seen, perhaps rightly, as deliberately ambiguous and something of a backhanded compliment,1 Polybius undoubtedly believed it to be eulogistic, and, taken at face value, it is evidence for how Philip was seen by at least one great writer of antiquity. Even his chief adversary Demosthenes was struck (1.14) by his restless activity (polypragmosyne), his insatiable ambition (2.18), his skill in seizing opportunities (1.3), and at 2.15 comes as close as he ever does to a favourable comment when he declares: ‘In action he has elected to suffer whatever may befall him, putting before a life of safety the distinction of achieving what no other king of Macedon ever achieved’. Clearly, whether Philip was liked or loathed by his contemporaries, he could not be ignored, and made a forcible impression, favourable or otherwise, on every Greek whose path he crossed. In this chapter, I hope to select for detailed treatment a few of the many reasons that could be adduced for Philip’s success, including his interest in military reform, his cultivation of influential Greeks by means of lavish hospitality and the creation of a widespread network of guestfriendships, and finally his diplomatic skills, which enabled him to fascinate and manipulate so many of his contemporaries both individually and collectively.
