24.
By these means the anger of the king against the Romans was temporarily assuaged. Never, however, did he relax his attention to the assembling in time of peace of strength which, whenever the chance should be given, he could use in time of war.1
[2]
He not only increased the revenues of his kingdom from the farm crops and the harbour duties, but also reopened old mines long [p. 289]disused and began operations on new ones in many2 places.
[3]
But that he might restore the ancient population, which had been lost in the calamities of war, he did not merely look to the natural increase of the people, by requiring all to beget and rear children, but
[4??]
he had transferred a great number of Thracians to Macedonia as well, being for some time free from wars and devoting all his thought to increasing the resources of his kingdom.
[5]
Then causes recurred which aroused anew his anger against the Romans. The complaints of the Thessalians and the Perrhaebians with regard to their
[6??]
cities which were in his hands and those of the envoys of King Eumenes with regard to his violent occupation of the Thracian towns and the transfer of the population to Macedonia had been so received that it was plainly evident that they would not be ignored.3
[7]
The senate had been especially moved by the fact that they had heard that he now coveted the possession of Aenus and Maronea; they were less concerned about the Thessalians.
[8]
Athamanian ambassadors had also arrived, complaining, not of the occupation of part of their kingdom or of the loss of territory, but that all Athamania had come under the sovereignty and sway of the king;4 exiles of the Maroneans had also come, expelled because they had defended the cause of liberty against the king's garrison: they brought the news that not only Maronea but also Aenus was in the [p. 291]power of
[10]
Philip.5 Ambassadors too from Philip had6 come to clear him on these counts, and they asserted that he had done nothing except with the consent of the Roman
[11]
generals:7 the cities of the Thessalians and Perrhaebians and Magnesians and the people of the Athamanians, including Amynander, had been in the same situation as the
[12]
Aetolians; after the defeat of King Antiochus the consul, kept busy with besieging the Aetolian cities, had sent Philip to recover the above-mentioned places; subdued by arms, they now obeyed
[13]
him. The senate, in order not to reach any decision in the absence of the king, sent as commissioners to settle these disputes Quintus Caecilius Metellus, Marcus Baebius Tamphilus, Tiberius
[14]
Sempronius.8 On their arrival at Thessalian Tempe all the states which had matters of dispute with the king were summoned to a council.
1 The true story of the alienation of Philip after the reconciliation during the war with Antiochus would be interesting and revealing. We cannot, however, expect to find it in Livy, and the narrative of Polybius is too fragmentary to be very helpful.
2 B.C. 185
3 The dangers attending Rome's policy in the east are here manifest. The adversity of one eastern power inevitably meant the prosperity of another, and constant vigilance on Rome's part was necessary to ensure the maintenance of any equilibrium. The fact that there was now no considerable Greek power made the “liberation” of the Greeks more and more a farce and prevented the Romans from developing a Greek state which could check Philip in Europe as Eumenes checked Antiochus in Asia.
4 This embassy must have antedated the recovery of Athamania by Amynander (XXXVIII. i. l [9] —iii. 2), unless Philip had again expelled him, and of this there is no record.
5 The various events which inspired these complaints had extended over a considerable period of time, but may have been forced upon Rome's attention simultaneously. One can picture the bewilderment of the senate, forced to listen to contradictory arguments and decide claims on the basis of justice plus diplomatic policy, and being, probably, none too familiar with the Greek language.
6 B.C. 185
7 The negotiations between the Roman commanders Baebius and Acilius and the king had been conducted in haste, under the pressure of war-time conditions, and had probably never been given definiteness by statement in written form. It is by no means impossible that a liberal interpretation justified Philip in keeping what he had gained and that the Roman problem at this time was how to take away, while avoiding making Philip an enemy, what their generals had so generously and thoughtlessly given.
8 Metellus is probably the consul of 206 B.C., Baebius the praetor of 192 B.C. who had co-operated with Philip in the early campaigns against Antiochus, Sempronius probably the tribune of 187 B.C.
Livy. Books XXXVIII-XXXIX with an English Translation. Cambridge. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann, Ltd. 1936: published without copyright notice.
The Annenberg CPB/Project provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.