CHARACTER OF PHILIP. 521 warm admirer of Philip's genius, stigmatizes not only the perfidy, of his public dealings, but also the drunkenness, gambling, and excesses of all kinds in which he indulged encouraging the like in those around him. His Macedonian and Grecian body-guard, eight hundred in number, was a troop in which no decent man could live ; distinguished indeed for military bravery and aptitude, but sated with plunder, and stained with such shameless treachery, sanguinary rapacity, and unbridled lust, as befitted only Centaurs and Lojstrygons. 1 The number of Philip's mistresses and wives was almost on an Oriental scale; 2 and the dissensions thus intro- duced into his court through his offspring by different mothers, were fraught with mischievous consequences. In appreciating the genius of Philip, we have to appreciate also the parties to whom he stood opposed. Plis good fortune was no- where more conspicuous than in the fact, that he fell upon those days of disunion and backwardness in Greece (indicated in the last sentence of Xenophon's Hellenica) when there was neither leading city prepared to keep watch, nor leading general to take command, nor citizen-soldiers willing and ready to endure the hardships of steady service. Philip combated no opponents like Epaminondas, or Agesilaus, or Iphikrates. How different might 1 Theopomp. Frag. 249. 'ATrAwf (5' Elirelv .... rjyovfiai Toiavra -Qripia yeyove sai, Kal TOIOVTOV Tponov Toijf 4>t'/lovf /cat Toi>f iralpovf QMnirov npooayopEv- tfevraf, OIOVQ ovre Toi>f Kevravpovf roi)f TO ttf/Aiov Karaaxovraf, OVTE Toiif aiaTpv~y6vaf Toi)f keovrlvov TreJtov oiKr/ffavTat;, cwr' d/lAovf oi>(5' cnroiovf. Compare Athence. iv. p. 166, 167; vi. p.260, 261. Demosthen. Olynth. ii p. 23. Polybius (viii. 11) censures Theopompus for self-contradiction, in ascrib- ing to Philip both unprincipled means and intemperate habits, and yet ex- tolling his ability and energy as a king. But I see no contradiction be- tween the two. The love of enjoyment was not suffered to stand in the way of Philip's military and political schemes, either in himself or his offi- cers. The master-passion overpowered all appetites ; but when that pas- sion did not require effort, intemperance was the habitual relaxation. Poly- bius neither produces any sufficient facts, nor cites any contemporary au- thority, to refute Theopompus. It is to be observed that the statements of Theopompns, respecting both Ihe public and private conduct of Philip, are as disparaging as anything in Demosthenes. 2 Satyrus ap. Athcnae. xiii. p. 557. 'O (5e fohnrnos uu na^u itofcpai, iyiifici, etc. 44*
