ARBITRATION IN THE GREEK WORLD. 



281 



statesmanship, willing to take pains in the investigation of the 

 facts, anxious for the success of their efforts to heal the feuds 

 and discords which were weakening the forces and destroying 

 the cohesion of their Empires, possessing sufBcient power and 

 prestige to secure obedience and effectiveness for their awards, 

 and at the same time likely to act fairly and impartially. For 

 the disputes of which we hear centered very largely round 

 contested frontier-lines, and the adjustment of these would 

 increase neither the power nor the revenue of the monarch who 

 was suzerain lord of both communities alike. The utility of 

 arbitration became more and more widely recognized during 

 these years, and the principle was adopted by the Greek Leagues, 

 which figure so largely in the later days of Hellenic history, 

 and was enforced by them on their component states. 



During the early years of the second century B.C. Eome 

 became the dominant political factor in the eastern, as she had 

 already made herself in the western Mediterranean. The close 

 of the second Punic War was followed immediately by the 

 Eoman attack on Philip V. of Macedon, who was conquered at 

 Cynoscephalae in 197, and on Antiochus III. of Syria, who was 

 defeated at Magnesia in 190, and was compelled to evacuate a 

 great part of Asia Minor, which was assigned to Eoman allies, 

 Pergamum and Ehodes. A further Macedonian rising under 

 Perseus was crushed in 1 68, at the battle of Pydna, and gradu- 

 ally the whole of the Greek world passed under Eoman rule. 

 Eome had at this time no monarch ; the government was 

 practically in the hands of the Senate, which, amongst its various 

 functions, exercised an almost unquestioned control over foreign 

 policy. Tt is no wonder, then, that the Greek states frequently 

 submitted their disputes to the arbitration of that august body 

 which had superseded the Kings of Macedon and Syria and had 

 made a deep impress upon the minds and imaginations of Eome's 

 oriental subjects. In such cases the Senate might adopt any 

 one of three courses, for its political interests would hardly allow 

 it to refuse outright the position of arbitrator. Occasionally it 

 played the part of an arbitral court, listened to the advocates 

 of the two contending states, and passed a seiiatm consultum 

 embodying its award. But more frequently it delegated its 

 powers to an envoy or body of envoys, whom it despatched to 

 the scene of the dispute to enquire into the circumstances on 

 the spot and to arrive at a decision which was practically binding, 

 although in theory it required senatorial ratification to make 

 it valid. Sometimes, as w^e learn from several interesting 

 inscriptions, a tliird course was followed. The Senate, realizing 



