Why did Hannibal Barca tell Scipio Africanus he thought Pyrrhus of Epirus was almost as good as Alexander the Great and better than even himself despite Pyrrhus's infamy for sustaining catastrophic losses?
The conversation was probably entirely fiction penned by some unknown
hagiographer, nonetheless there might be some truth to its praise of Pyrrhus.
1- Pyrrhus was unlucky enough not only to born during a period of Greek decline-Demographic collapse, Economic flux, Endemic Warfare etc- but also in what was probably the shittiest backwater in the area. And even there, his family were none too popular; they were exiled when he was a kid- and when he did return as King, they shanked him again. He spent most of his life wandering from one declining city to another, trying to make its quarrelsome oligarchs see sense in their various petty conflicts- to limited success, and piecing together whatever dregs he found into a working army.
2- Even so- Pyrrhus was arguably the finest exponent of combined arms tactics in Greek history- and possibly even better than Alexander the Great in this matter, despite lacking the formidably trained and massively experienced professional Makedonian infantry and cavalry. Especially since the Phillippian Military model was extremely demanding in terms of resources and professional troopssonething contemporary Greece was ill-equipped to furnish Pyrrhus with. Furthermore- unlike Alexander, Pyrrhus was a scholar as well a soldier, and left behind multiple commentaries on the nature and practice of War in the Classical Mediterranean (unfortunately lost to us today).
3- Lastly, everything we know of Pyrrhus comes from the pens of his foes. His fellow Greeks hated and feared him as much as they loved and respected him, and no account of his career in Italy would be complete without a recounting of the follies of the cities of Magna Graecia. His allies sabotaged, when they didn't plot against, him. He was forced into battle against Lilybaeum, forced to operate under severe logistical duress, and a state of almost constant Civil war at home. Doubtless, the Romans annalists played their part in dismissing his achievements as well, since Pyrrhus left Italy at the head of his own army, aiming to stamp out the brewing wars in Greece and in far better shape than his “victorious” Roman and Carthaginian foes.
Also- note that the prelude to the Punic Wars- and the one who'd sown its seeds and even predicted it- was undoubtedly Pyrrhus himself. It wouldn't have been surprising that the commanders of the Second Punic War held him in such high regard.
1- Pyrrhus was unlucky enough not only to born during a period of Greek decline-Demographic collapse, Economic flux, Endemic Warfare etc- but also in what was probably the shittiest backwater in the area. And even there, his family were none too popular; they were exiled when he was a kid- and when he did return as King, they shanked him again. He spent most of his life wandering from one declining city to another, trying to make its quarrelsome oligarchs see sense in their various petty conflicts- to limited success, and piecing together whatever dregs he found into a working army.
2- Even so- Pyrrhus was arguably the finest exponent of combined arms tactics in Greek history- and possibly even better than Alexander the Great in this matter, despite lacking the formidably trained and massively experienced professional Makedonian infantry and cavalry. Especially since the Phillippian Military model was extremely demanding in terms of resources and professional troopssonething contemporary Greece was ill-equipped to furnish Pyrrhus with. Furthermore- unlike Alexander, Pyrrhus was a scholar as well a soldier, and left behind multiple commentaries on the nature and practice of War in the Classical Mediterranean (unfortunately lost to us today).
3- Lastly, everything we know of Pyrrhus comes from the pens of his foes. His fellow Greeks hated and feared him as much as they loved and respected him, and no account of his career in Italy would be complete without a recounting of the follies of the cities of Magna Graecia. His allies sabotaged, when they didn't plot against, him. He was forced into battle against Lilybaeum, forced to operate under severe logistical duress, and a state of almost constant Civil war at home. Doubtless, the Romans annalists played their part in dismissing his achievements as well, since Pyrrhus left Italy at the head of his own army, aiming to stamp out the brewing wars in Greece and in far better shape than his “victorious” Roman and Carthaginian foes.
Also- note that the prelude to the Punic Wars- and the one who'd sown its seeds and even predicted it- was undoubtedly Pyrrhus himself. It wouldn't have been surprising that the commanders of the Second Punic War held him in such high regard.
Comments
Post a Comment