Titus Livius (Livy), The History of Rome, Book 36
Evan T. Sage, PhD professor of latin and head of the department of classics in the University of Pittsburgh, Ed.

25. At the same time that the Romans were attacking Heraclea, Philip by agreement was besieging Lamia, having met the consul near Thermopylae when he returned from Boeotia, to congratulate him and the Roman people upon his victory and to apologize because as a result [2??] of illness he had not been present at the battle. [3] Then they separated to attack the two cities at the same time. They are about seven miles apart, and because Lamia both lies on a hill and commands a view especially over the region of Oeta, the distance seems exceedingly¹ short and everything is in sight. [4] While the Romans and the Macedonians, as if competing for a prize, were strenuously engaged day and night either on the siege-works or in fighting, the task of the Macedonians was the more difficult because the Romans were fighting with a terrace and mantlets and all their works above ground, the Macedonians [p. 235]with tunnels underground, and in the rough spots² flint, almost unworkable with iron, met them. [5] And since they were making little progress, the king, through conferences with their chiefs, tried to induce the townspeople to surrender the city, not doubting that [6??] if Heraclea were captured first they would submit to the Romans in preference to him and that the consul would take the credit to himself in raising the siege. [7] Nor was he deceived in this opinion; for immediately after the taking of Heraclea the message came that he should abandon the siege: it was fairer that the Roman soldiers, who had fought in the battle-line with the Aetolians, should enjoy the rewards of victory.³ [8] So he retired from Lamia and, after the misfortune of a neighbouring city, the people escaped suffering a similar fate.⁴