thessalian histories
his Aitolian allies. To encourage eager Macedonian participation in the
conict, Rome had informally promised Philip V that he could retain any
territory which he captured from Aitolia during the war.
119
When Philip
was on the verge of taking Lamia by siege in winter , Glabrio ordered
the Macedonian king to withdraw.
120
Glabrio subsequently took the city
in . e city was not returned to Aitolia under the terms of the
treaty between Aitolia and Rome, and by /, the city of Lamia was
dating its decrees by the generals of the essalian League.
121
A second phase of essalian expansion most likely took place in
the s. A series of manumissions from Pythion in Perrhaibia is dated
by generals of the essalians. e earliest of these inscriptions most
likely dates to ca. –/, a fact which suggests that Pythion, and by
extension Perrhaibia as a whole, was then under essalian control.
122
Although no sources explicitly discuss the date of this development,
Kramolisch has cogently argued for , following the Achaian War.
123
Motives are uncertain. Good precedent for such expansion existed in
the cases of Malis and Achaia Phthiotis, both of which had previously
been incorporated into the essalian League. e essalian League had
moreover proved itself a steady, if not particularly ecient, ally of Rome
in the years since the Flamininan refoundation and thus was a suitable
119
Cf. Gruen , p. .
120
Liv. ..–...
121
Polyb. ..; Liv. .., ... For discussion of the peace, see Grainger ,
pp. –. For the / decree, see IG ., . e fragmentary prescript of the decree
reads ‘When Leontomenes of Pherai was general of the essalians and [—] were the
archons in Lamia …’. For the date of Leontomenes, see Kramolisch , p. . He may
also be the eponymous general in another Lamian decree, IG ., .
122
Ed. pr. Arvanitopoulos , p. , no. A (McDevitt , p. , no. ).
For the date, see Kramolisch , pp. –, .
123
For , see Babacos , pp. –, and Kramolisch . Martin , pp. –
, argued for , following the ird Macedonian War, but this is unlikely as Kramo-
lisch has since made a good case that a decree from Perrhaibian Oloosson (Arvanitopou-
los –, pp. –, no. (McDevitt , p. , no. )), dated by a gen-
eral of the Perrhaibian League whose name is partially preserved, was published ca.
(Kramolisch , pp. –; cf. SEG , , BullÉp , no. ). Earlier scholarship
dated the incorporation much later to the era of Augustus (for references, see Kramolisch
, p. , with n. ), but Daux and Coste-Messelière , pp. –, and Stählin
had already recognized that some Perrhaibian documents were dated by demon-
strably earlier generals of the essalian League. Helly , vol. , p. , also argues for
on the basis of Paus. ..–, a passage which claims that, as part of Mummius’ set-
tlement following the Achaian War, all (mainland) Greek Leagues were disbanded. e
Phokians, Boiotians, and Achaians were specically mentioned by Pausanias. Soon there-
aer, the Romans relented and allowed many of these koina to reform; Helly maintains
that the Perrhaibian League was not among them.