Philip II and Alexander the Great: Father and Son ... - Historia Antigua

THE SYMPOSIA OF PHILIP II AND ALEXANDER III OF MACEDON 57
Diodorus gives a very similar account of Philip’s behavior after
Chaeronea, but transfers the scene of his insulting and drunken kōmos
to the Athenian captives, rather than the ambassadors (16.87.1):
Some say that during the drinking, after he had consumed large
quantities of unmixed wine and had led a kōmos with his
friends, he strolled though the midst of the captives, exulting at
the misfortune of the luckless men.
There are two things to note in the Diodorus passage, however. First
of all, Diodorus explictly disclaims authority for Philip’s drunken
kōmos, attributing it to unnamed authorities (it is tempting to suggest
that Theopompus was one of them). 8 Second, its sequel in Diodorus
is the rebuke of Philip made by the Athenian orator Demades (who
was one of the captives) for his inappropiate exultation in his victory,
which is followed by Philip’s complete change of attitude, resulting
in his immediate cessation from reveling and entrance into diplomatic
negotiations with the Athenians. In Diodorus’ account, when
all is told, Philip stands at least somewhat redeemed (in strict contrast
to his inebriated lack of diplomacy in Theopompus’ version).
Plutarch offers a similar portrayal of Philip’s drunken kōmos after
Chaeronea, although he too transfers it to a different venue ( Dem.
20.3):
Immediately afterwards Philp was hubristic in the joy arising
from his victory, and after going on a drunken kōmos to the
corpses, recited the beginning of the decree made by Demosthenes,
putting it into metre and marking off the rhythm.
Interestingly, however, in the sequel, the hero of the episode who
forces Philip to change his hubristic attitude is Demosthenes himself
(through the power of his oratory, at least), rather than Demades
(hence also the change to Philip’s reveling in the presence of the
corpses, rather than the captives). Plutarch tells us that when Philip
became sober after his mocking of Demosthenes, he understood the
magnitude of the agōn in which he had been involved and shuddered
to think of the power and skill of the orator who had forced him to
risk both his hegemony and his life in the space of a single day.
Clearly, the anecdote of Philip’s drunken kōmos had become a topos
by the time of Diodorus and Plutarch, the precise details of which
could be changed to suit the purpose at hand.
The formulaic nature of this episode by Plutarch’s day is shown by
his discussion of the question of whether or not intoxication clouds