66 AETOLIA. §ed.ency at least as earljr as the time of Philip, the fiither of Alexander the Great, from an inscriptian on the statue of Aetolos at Thermnm, quoted by Ephorus (Strab. p. 463: Alruf^w r6t^ hv^KOP A<T»Ao2 ar^trtfms lunjfjL iipenis iffop^)^ and from the cession of Naupoctus, which was made to them bj Philip. (Strab. p. 427: iarl tk vw AlrwX£v, ^iKiinew vpoa-Kphnunos, quoted by Thirlwall, Eist, of Greece, vol. viiL p. 207.) But it was not till after the death of Alexander Uie Great that the league appears to hare come into full acdTity ; and it was probably the invasion of their country 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, like that of the Aetolian towns and tribes. The great council of the nation, called the Pan- netolicon (Liv. xxxi. 9), in which it is probable that every freeman above the age of thirty had the right of voting, met every autumn at Thermum, for the election of magistrates, general legislatioD, and the decision of all questioais respecting peace and war with foreign nations. There was also another deliberative body, called Apocleti ('Aw^rXirrot), which appears to have been a kind of permanent committee. (Pol. xz. 1 ; Liv. xxxvi. 28.) The chief magistrate bore the title of Strategus (Srpetn; • ^(Jr). 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 (*Iinrapxos), or commander of the cavalry, and the chief Secretary (rpa^/iorcvs), both of whom were elected annually. (For fiir^r details respecting the constitution of Uie league, see Diet, of Antiq. art. Aetolicum FoedutJ) After the expulsion of the Gauk 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 confirmed 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 greatest power, they were masters of the whole of western Acamania, of the south of Epirus and Thessaly, and of Locris, Phocis, and Doeotia. They likewise asstuned the entire control of the Delphic oracle and of the Amphictyonic assembly. (Plut. Demetr. 40; Pol. iv. 25; Thirlwall, vol. viii. p. 210.) Theh* league also embraced several towns in the heart of Pelo- ponnesus, the island of Cephallenia, and even cities ill 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 Minor 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 then: unprovoked invasion of AETOLIA. Messenia engaged them in a wv with the Achaeais, usually called the Social War. The Achaeans wera supported by the youthful mooarch of Macedonia, Philip v., who inflicted a severe bbw upon the Aetolians in b. c. 218 by an unexpected march into the interior of theur country, where he surprised the capital city of Thermum, in which all the wealth and treasures of the Aetolian leaden were deposited. The whole of these fell into the hands of the king, and were either carried offer destroyed ; and before quitting the place, Philip set fire to tile sacred buildingB, to reta- liate for the destruction oS Dium and Dodona by the Aetolians. (Pol. v.2>-9, 13, 14; for the details of Philip' s march, see Thermum.) The Social war was 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 fonned an (tensive and defeubive alliance with the Romans, who were then engaged in hostilities with Philip. 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 ooune ci this war Philip again took Thcnnum (PoL xi. 4), and the Aetolians became so disheartened that th^ 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 Aetolians at firat re- 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 contributed materially to the success of the day. (Liv. xxxiii. 7.) The settlement of the affairs of Greece by Flamininus after this victoxy caused great disappointment to the Aetolians; snd 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 truce which they solicited from the Romans; but having subsequently resumed hostilities on rumours of some suooess €ii Antiochus in Asia, the Roman consul M. Fnlvios Nobilior crossed over into Greece, and commenced operations by laying siege to Ambrada (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 resolv^ 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. xxxviiL 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 sur- vivors, who were suspected of opposition to the Roman policy, were carried off as prisoners to Ital j. It was at this time that the league was jforznally dissolved. (Liv. xlv. 28, 31 ; Justin, xxxiii. Prol. and 2.) Aetolia subsequently formed part of the province of Achaia; though it is doubtful whether it formed part of this province as it was at fir^t constituted. [Achaia.] The inhalatants of several
