Volume 1

A dictionary of Greek and Roman geography / by various writers ; edited by William Smith.

Date:
1873
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A dictionary of Greek and Roman geography / by various writers ; edited by William Smith. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    88/1140 (page 66)
    fi.*(leracy at least as early as the time of Philip, the father of Alexander the Great, from an inscription on the statue of Aetolus at Thermum, quoted by Ephorus (Strab. p. 463: AirwAby t6p8* avedrjKav AtVcoAol (T<peT€pas aperrjs iaopav'), and from the cession of Naupactus, which was made to them by Philip. (Strab. p. 427: eVrt 5e vvv Alrw\u>v, irpocTKp'ivavTOS, quoted by Thirlwall, Hist, of Greece, vol. viii. p. 207.) But it was not till after the death of Alexander the Great that the league appears to have come into full acti\dty; and it was probably the invasion of their countiy by Antipater and Craterus, and the consequent necessity of con- certing measures for their common defence, that brought the Aetolians into a closer political associa- tion. The constitution of the league was democra- tical, hke that of the Aetolian to'wns and tribes. The great council of the nation, called the Pan- aetolicon (Liv. xxxi. 9), in which it is probable that every freeman above the age of thirty had the right of voting, met eveiy autumn at Thermum, for the election of magistrates, general legislation, and the decision of all questions respecting peace and war \rtth foreign nations. There was also another deliberative body, called Apocleti (’ATro/cATjrot), which appears to have been a kind of permanent committee. (Pol. xx. 1; Liv. xxxvi. 28.) The chief magistrate bore the title of Strategus (f.rpaTr] ■ 70 y). He was elected annually, presided in the as- semblies, and had the command of the troops in war. The officers next in rank were the Hipparchus (iTTTrapxoy), or commander of the cavalry, and the chief Secretary (rpa.u/xareas), both of whom were elected annually. (For further details respecting the constitution of the league, see Did. of Antiq. art. Aetolicum Foedus.') After the expulsion of the Gauls from Greece, the Aetolians began to extend their dominions over the neighbouring nations. They still retained the rude and barbarous habits which had characterised them in the time of Thucydides, and were still accus- tomed to live to a great extent by robbery and piracy. Their love of rapine was their great incentive to war, and in their marauding expeditions they spared neither friends nor foes, neither things sacred nor profane. Such is the character given to them by Polybius (e. g. ii. 45, 46, iv. 67, ix. 38), and his account is confiiTned in the leading outlines by the testimony of other writers; though justice requires us to add that the enmity of the Aetolians to the Achaeans has probably led the historian to exagge- rate rather than underrate the vices of the Aetolian people. At the time of their gi’eatest power, they were masters of the whole of western Acamania, of the south of Epirus and Thessaly, and of Locris, Phocis, and Boeotia. They likewise assumed the entire control of the Delphic oracle and of the Amphictyonic assembly. (Plut. Demetr. 40; Pol. iv. 25; Thirlwall, vol. viii. p. 210.) Their league also embraced several towns in the heart of Pel<j- ponnesus, the island of Cephallenia, and even cities in Thrace and Asia Minor, such as Lysimachia on the Hellespont, and Cios on the Propontis. The relation of these distant places to the league is a matter of uncertainty. They could not have taken any part in the management of the business of the confederacy; and the towns in Asia l\Tinor and Thrace probably joined it in order to protect themselves against the attacks of the Aetolian privateers. The Aetolians were at the height of their power in B. c. 220, when their unprovoked invasion of Messenia engaged them in a war with the Achaeans usually called the Social War. The Achaeans were supported by the youthful monarch of Macedonia, Philip V., who inflicted a severe blow upon the Aetolians in b. c. 218 by an unexpected march into the interior of their country, where he surprised the capital city of Thennum, in which all the wealth and treasures of the Aetolian leaders were deposited. The whole of these fell into the hands of the king, and were either earned off or destroyed; and before quitting the place, Philip set fire to the sacred buildings, to reta- liate for the destruction of Dium and Dodona by the Aetolians. (Pol. v.2—9,13,14; for the details of Philip’s march, see Thermum.) The Social warwas brought to a close by a treaty of peace concluded in B. c. 217. Six years afterwards (b. c. 211) the Aetolians again declared war against Philip, in con- sequence of having formed an offensive and defensive alliance with the Eomans, who were then engaged in hostilities with Pliihp. The attention of the Romans was too much occupied by the war against Hannibal in Italy to enable them to afford much assistance to the Aetolians, upon whom, therefore, the burden of the war chiefly fell. In the course of this war Philip again took Thex-mum (Pol. xi. 4), and the Aetolians became so disheartened that they concluded peace with him in b. c. 205. This peace was followed almost immediately by one between Philip and the Romans. On the renewal of the war between Philip and the Romans in b. c. 200, the Aetohans at first i-e- solved to remain neutral; but the success of the consul Galba induced them to change their determi- nation, and before the end of the first campaign they declared war against Philip. They fought at the battle of Cynoscephalae in b. c. 197, when their cavalry conti-ibuted materially to the success of the day. (Liv. xxxiii. 7.) The settlement of the affairs of Greece by Flamininus after this victoiy caused great disappointment to the Aetolians; and as soon as Flamininus returned to Italy, they invited Antiochus to invade Greece, and shortly afterwards declared war against the Romans, (b. c. 192.) The defeat of Antiochus at Thermopylae (b. c. 191) drove the monarch back to Asia, and left the Aeto- lians exposed to the full vengeance of the Romans. They obtained a short respite by a tnxce which they solicited from the Romans; but having subsequently resumed hostihties on rumours of some success of Antiochus in Asia, the Roman consul M. Fulvius Nobilior crossed over into Greece, and commenced operations by laying siege to Ambracia (b. c. 189), which was then one of the strongest towns belonging to the league. Meantime news had arrived of the total defeat of Antiochus at the battle of Magnesia, and the Aetolians resolved to purchase peace at any price. It was granted to them by the Romans, but on terms which destroyed for ever their independ- ence, and rendered them only the vassals of Rome. (Pol. xxii. 15; Liv. xxxviii. 11.) After the con- quest of Perseus (b. c. 167), the Roman party in! Aetolia, assisted by a body of Roman soldiers, massacred 550 of the leading patriots. All the sui- vivors, who were suspected of opposition to the Roman policy, were carried off as prisoners to Italy. 1 It w'as at this time that the league was formally ■ dissolved. (Liv. xlv. 28, 31; Justin, xxxiii. Prol. and 2.) Aetolia subsequently formed part of the I province of Achaia; though it is doubtful whether] it formed part of this province as it w’as at fii'stl constituted. [Achaia.] The inhabitants of several 1