Philippus furibundus?

Abstract

The paper deals with the question of Philip’s deceitful behavior and brutality during the eastern campaign 202-200 BC. The assumption concerning his state of mind after the peace of Phoinike is not ques-tioned. However the main issue is whether his behavior should, or even could, be explained only on the lines of his bitterness and frustration. The first part deals with his most notorious acts, namely the destruction of Kios and Myrleia, as well as the ravaging of the pergamene territory and Attika; and the second with the reactions of both enemies and allies. The conclusion is that though his bitterness and resentment might have played a certain role, in 202 he was more probably following a policy of terror; while his behavior at Pergamon and in Attika, as extreme and disproportionate it might have been, was not entirely gratuitous. As for the reaction of the various communities, it is maintained that though his behavior caused various degrees of shock, disgust and fear, in the end it had relatively minor impact on their policies, which were ultimately based on practical considerations.