Some peoples, too, were attached to their native rulers and better left to them. And where the Greek
cities were concerned, Rome discovered that 'liberation' was the best policy-perhaps already in Sicily
and on the Adriatic coast, certainly when Flamininus, after defeating Philip of Macedon, declared
Greece free at the Isthmian Games of 196, to frantic enthusiasm, and evacuated it completely. Some
Greek cities had treaties with Rome (how many is disputed), which left them internal autonomy but
bound them to give help in war (only treaties not described as equal bound them to respect the maiestas
of the Roman People in all ways). Others were simply declared free unilaterally by Rome, a status
which, it was in time discovered, she was ready unilaterally to revoke. The desire of Rhodes for a formal
alliance in 167 shows this -was felt to be some kind of safeguard; but in the end Rome refused to be
shackled even by her treaties.
The policy of freedom for Greeks was not inspired by sentimental philhellenism, though Rome had more
respect for Greek public opinion than she did for barbarian tribes, against whom her record was
undoubtedly "worse; rather its purpose was to reduce the power of Macedon and Syria. Rome did not
apply it when it did not suit her: for example, she handed over various cities to her friends Pergamum
and Rhodes. Under the Roman moral system, by which every beneficium had to be repaid by officium
(act or sense of duty), the 'free' states were expected to conform to Rome's wishes. They did not always
grasp this, a fact which contributed to the souring of Rome's relations with the various squabbling Greek
states in the first half of the second century, until some of her generals began to behave to the Greeks,
shortly before the war with Perseus, with brutality and contempt; this noua sapientia, as Livy called it, or
new wisdom, was disapproved of by some prominent Romans, in vain.
The Protection of the Propertied Classes
In fact, even where the 'stipendiary' or tribute-paying inhabitants of a province were concerned, much
responsibility was left to local communities, especially Greek cities. The Roman governor's duties were
chiefly defence (hence the first of the great Roman roads outside Italy) and the administration of justice
to Roman citizens; he could take cases between natives, but clearly not all of these, and Cicero says his
(not unique) proclamation that he would take none was popular. The Romans made no attempt to impose
uniformity; in some provinces a magistrate, the quaestor, was responsible for the collection of direct
taxes, but probably only by overseeing local officials. In others both direct and indirect taxes were
collected by tax-farmers, sometimes not even Roman, and these might have large staffs; even so, in
some cases the cities did the basic work. These cities carried on their political life largely unhampered;
when Pompey wanted to annex part of Pontus, he felt it best to found a group of Greek-style cities, if
with larger territories than usual. As a result of this system the Romans, in spite of severe friction at
times, developed a partnership with the upper classes who did much of the administration for them, and
whom they defended against the cry of the poor for the division of land and abolition of debts that was
sometimes heard.
Flamininus had left the cities of Greece in the hands of the well-off. Perseus appealed to the poor,
though not only to them, for support; and anti-Roman feeling was often based on hostility to the rich-
though it would be voiced by well-off leaders, jealous of whatever pro-Roman clique was in power, or
genuinely idealistic or nationalistic. It is uncertain how far Rome intervened to make constitutions more