in Greece rested on the leading part taken by them in resisting
the inroad of the Gauls in 280-279, and on their opposition to
the encroachments of the royal house of Macedon. Polybius
gives the Achaean view of them as a band of robbers. And it
is probably true that they were somewhat informal and rough.
But they had a policy of their own.

183. The Achaean League was a revival and extension of
an ancient local union of the small cities of Achaia in the north
of Peloponnesus. Its great statesman, Aratus of Sicyon, to whom
its extension was mainly due, was a typical subtle Greek. Old
city-states, Sicyon Argos Corinth and others, were brought into
the League, until it included a large part of the Peloponnese.
But Aratus was a poor soldier, and the revival of Sparta in the
middle of the third century B.C. was a blow to the Achaeans.
Aratus was no match for the warrior-king Cleomenes III, and
only saved the League by calling in Macedonian aid. The price
of this was the surrender of the Corinthian citadel (Acrocorinthus)
to Antigonus. Henceforth the king of Macedon held the key of
Peloponnesus, and the Achaean League, though free, was in
foreign policy obliged to consult his wishes. The war begun
in 214, owing to the alliance of Philip with Hannibal, dragged on
till general exhaustion led to a general peace in 205. Aratus died
in 213. The army of the League was inefficient, but a few years
later it was reformed by a good soldier, Philopoemen, who became
President or General (a yearly office) for the first time in 208.
Under him the League prospered. But the outbreak of war in
200 between Rome and Macedon placed the Achaeans in a
difficult position, as we shall see.

184. The Achaean League was a more highly-organized
union than the Aetolian, partly because it was made up of cities
(each with its territory) rather than rural cantons. The central
power was effective. Its assemblies, held at the small city of
Aegium, were in general orderly and cautious, led by the federal
magistrates. The vote of each city counted as one. The franchise
was democratic, but the wealthier citizens could more easily attend
meetings away from home, and thus their assemblies, held at rare
intervals, usually consisted of men who had something to lose.
The relations of the Leagues to Rome in the period before us
(and later) are painfully interesting. Roman statesmen could not
or would not understand a Federation. The Greek Leagues,

-157-