Bret Devereaux

...he allotted part of it to the Argives, part to the Tegeans and Megalopolitans and part to the Messenians" So it seems there was no battle, but just a lot of raiding and then Philip reached some settlement in which significant territory was lost to Sparta. 16/25

Plb returns in an aside on treachery (Plb. 18.14.1-15) that the Arcadians joined Philip and "by inducing Philip to enter the Peloponnesus and humbling the Lacedaemonians...allowed all of the inhabitants of the Peloponnesus to breathe freely...recovering the territory.. 17/25

...and cities of which the Lacedaemonians (=Spartans) in their prosperity had deprived the Messenians, Megalopolitans, Tegeans and Argives." This is an easy passage for the unfamiliar to mess up, because Polybius has more than one Philip to deal with. 18/25

Immediately before this digression on treachery, Polybius is talking about Philip V (r. 221-179), but what makes it clear that here he means Philip II (r. 359-336) is that he poses this thought in answer to an accusation of treachery *by Demosthenes* 19/25

And while there is more than one Demosthenes, in this case it is clear that the Athenian orator and politician (384-322) is meant, meaning that the Philip in the passage must be Philip II, not V. 20/25

That Polybius isn't just blowing smoke seems confirmed by Tacitus, who notes that this very land seizure came up as a legal issue before the Roman Emperor Tiberius (Tac. Ann. 43). 21/25

Tacitus notes a dispute "upon the legal ownership of the Temple of Diana Limnatis" which "had been wrested from [the Spartans], however, by the Macedonian arms during their war with Philip and had been returned later by the decision of Julius Caesar and Mark Antony." 22/25

Once again, that the Philip meant is Philip II is made clear by Tacitus' brief legal history of the case, which notes judgements in favor of the Messenians by Antigonus Doson (r. 229-221) and the Roman L. Mummius (cos 146), so the Philip must be II, not V. 23/25