By the mid-4th century BC, the Roman Empire had expanded its influence across southern Italy. In 343 BC, the Romans encountered resistance from the Samnites, who were unable to fend off the Roman incursion into their territory. When Roman forces threatened Apulia, the Greek cities of southern Italy sought help from Pyrrhus, a renowned mercenary general who ruled the kingdom of Epirus in northwestern Greece.
Responding to the plea of his fellow Greeks, Pyrrhus landed in southern Italy in early spring of that year with an impressive force of 20,000 infantrymen, 3,000 cavalry, 2,500 skirmishers, and 20 elephants. Although a storm during the Ionian Sea crossing had scattered some of his transport vessels, reducing his numbers slightly, Pyrrhus remained undeterred. With his celebrated military reputation and the high expectations of the southern Italian cities, he prepared his troops for what he anticipated to be another victorious campaign.
Pyrrhus’s Hellenistic Army
Pyrrhus commanded a typical Hellenistic army, with heavily armored phalangists forming its core. The phalanx, a Greek battle formation that had evolved since the 7th century BC, saw its most recent adaptation under Philip of Macedon in the mid-4th century BC. Philip increased the depth of the phalanx from eight to twelve men and equipped his infantry with longer spears, enhancing the formation’s staying power in battle. The purpose of this heavier phalanx was to engage and hold enemy lines, serving as the anvil in the battlefield strategy.
The hammer, on the other hand, was provided by the heavy Macedonian cavalry, which would strike when the enemy showed signs of weakening. Alexander the Great perfected this tactic, and Pyrrhus employed a similar strategy with his own cavalry. His elite horsemen, the agema, made up his personal guard and were crucial in battle. Pyrrhus positioned himself at the forefront of his agema, mirroring Alexander’s leadership style. In addition to the heavy infantry and cavalry, Pyrrhus’s army included lightly armed skirmishers—archers, slingers, and javelin throwers—who proved effective against Roman formations.
Another significant component of Pyrrhus’s army was his 20 war elephants, a tactical enhancement inspired by Alexander’s campaigns in the East. These exotic animals were used to great effect against the Romans. Pyrrhus’s forces also included various mercenary units, drawing from the diverse and experienced pool of soldiers dispersed after the dissolution of Alexander’s empire. These mercenaries, which included Greeks, Italians, and Gallic tribesmen, brought advanced tactics and professionalism to Pyrrhus’s army.
Facing the Reformed Roman Army
In southern Italy, Pyrrhus faced a reformed and dynamic Roman army. Throughout the 4th century BC, the Roman legions underwent significant organizational changes. By the time Pyrrhus arrived to support the southern Italian cities, the Romans had developed a unique military structure. Early Roman armies used the phalanx formation, similar to other Mediterranean forces, and it served them well during their conquests in northern Italy. However, conflict with the Samnites, who inhabited the mountainous region of Samnium, exposed the limitations of the phalanx on uneven terrain. The most notable Roman defeat came in 321 BC at the Battle of the Caudine Forks, where a Roman army was ambushed and forced to surrender to the Samnites.
In response, the Roman Senate initiated several reforms, including the extension of the Via Appia for better troop movement and communication. The most significant military reform was the development of the manipular legion. This new formation, named after its basic unit, the maniple, consisted of two centuries of varying sizes. Unlike later Roman legions, which were organized into larger cohorts, the manipular legion deployed in three lines: the hastati (young and inexperienced soldiers) in the front, the principes (battle-hardened men in their late 20s or early 30s) in the middle, and the triarii (veteran soldiers) in the rear. This structure allowed for flexible and supportive maneuvers during battle.
Despite their citizen status and property responsibilities, Roman soldiers willingly served in the army, revealing a unique characteristic of the Roman psyche: a collective dedication to warfare and a refusal to submit even in defeat. This mindset bewildered Pyrrhus, who faced not only the Roman legions but also additional troops from Rome’s Italian allies. Each manipular legion typically comprised around 4,500 men, with cavalry playing a lesser but still significant role. Although Roman horsemen were often unreliable in battle, the overall structure and resilience of the Roman army were yet to be tested by a sophisticated force like Pyrrhus’s.
Pyrrhus’s arrival in Italy and the subsequent battles against Rome were pivotal moments in the history of both civilizations. His use of Hellenistic tactics and diverse forces, including the formidable war elephants, marked a significant challenge for the reformed Roman legions, setting the stage for legendary encounters that would resonate through history.
The Battle of Heraclea: A Pyrrhic Victory
Shortly after Pyrrhus arrived in Tarentum, the Roman Senate dispatched Consul Publius Valerius Laevinus with two legions into the Lucania region. As the Roman force approached, several southern Italian cities contributed additional troops to Pyrrhus’s army, though the Tarentines themselves were reluctant to personally engage the Romans. To address this, Pyrrhus imposed martial law in Tarentum, banning public gatherings, conscripting all military-aged men, and implementing military training programs for the local youth. This brought Pyrrhus’s force to approximately 30,000 men, which included thousands of cavalry, Greek and Italian allies, and 20 elephants. Despite his preference to wait for further reinforcements from other southern Italian cities, the advancing Roman army under Laevinus forced Pyrrhus to confront them near the Siris River, close to Heraclea.
Initially, Pyrrhus had positioned an advance cavalry unit along the river, but they were soon overwhelmed as the Romans crossed in force. Pyrrhus swiftly ordered his entire army to prepare for battle and led 3,000 cavalry to the river to delay the Roman crossing. Once the Romans were across, the main battle commenced with fierce clashes between the Roman and Greek infantry, the tide of battle shifting multiple times. The decisive moment came when Pyrrhus deployed his war elephants, causing panic among the Roman soldiers who had never encountered such creatures before.
The elephants particularly disoriented the Roman cavalry, allowing Pyrrhus to unleash his Thessalian cavalry to exploit the chaos and drive the Romans from the field. According to the historian Dionysius, the battle resulted in 15,000 Roman casualties and 13,000 for Pyrrhus, though the Greek historian Hieronymus reported significantly lower figures of 7,000 Romans and 4,000 Greeks. Regardless of the exact numbers, Pyrrhus’s remark, “Another such victory and we are lost,” immortalized the term “pyrrhic victory” in history.
A Season of Negotiation and Resistance
Following his victory at Heraclea, Pyrrhus advanced north, setting up camp just 37 miles from Rome. Seeking peace, he proposed terms to the Romans, hoping his strategic position would compel them to negotiate. Pyrrhus sent his trusted diplomat, Cineas, to Rome with the peace offering. Cineas, adept at persuasion, acquainted himself with influential Romans and eloquently presented Pyrrhus’s proposal in the Senate. Many senators appeared swayed until the elderly Appius Claudius intervened.
Appius chastised his fellow senators for contemplating submission to Pyrrhus after a single defeat, emphasizing the importance of preserving the lands conquered by their ancestors. Consequently, the Senate rejected Pyrrhus’s peace terms and declared they would not negotiate while his army remained in Italy.
Although Laevinus faced severe criticism for the defeat at Heraclea, he retained his position as consul. The Senate swiftly raised new troops to reinforce his legions. Cineas, witnessing the influx of recruits, likened the Romans to a hydra, noting that as one head was cut off, many more appeared. In addition to recruiting new soldiers, the Romans renewed their alliance with Carthage, as Pyrrhus now posed a threat to Carthaginian interests in Sicily.
Denied a settlement and lacking the resources to besiege Rome, Pyrrhus turned to plundering the region of Apulia and ravaged Bruttium as well. During this period, many Samnites, Lucanians, Bruttians, and other southern Italian groups joined his cause. Despite his frustration with their earlier reluctance, Pyrrhus welcomed these much-needed reinforcements. During the winter of 280-279 BC, he entertained a Roman delegation seeking the release of prisoners taken at Heraclea.
Negotiations failed, including an attempt by Pyrrhus to bribe a prominent Roman emissary. However, he soon paroled his Roman prisoners to attend a festival in Rome, hoping they would advocate for peace upon their return. The Senate remained resolute, refusing to negotiate, and the prisoners were sent back to Pyrrhus. Undeterred, Pyrrhus divided his rejuvenated forces and spent the winter in Apulia and Campania, preparing for the ongoing conflict with Rome.
The Battle at Asculum
In the spring of 279 BC, both Roman and Greek forces began to maneuver in southern Italy, setting the stage for another confrontation between Pyrrhus and the Romans. This time, the Roman army was led by both consuls and marched into Apulia, where Pyrrhus had camped near Asculum with approximately 40,000 infantry, 8,000 cavalry, and 19 elephants. Only a quarter of his forces were the original Greek soldiers who had journeyed with him to Italy; the rest were southern Italian allies who had joined his cause.
The Roman force, led by Consuls Caius Fabricius and Quintus Aemilius, also numbered around 40,000 foot soldiers and 8,000 cavalry, with additional allied contingents. Pyrrhus was taken aback by the size of the Roman army, indicating a failure or absence of his intelligence network in the region. Unlike their previous shortcomings in scouting, the Romans successfully engaged Pyrrhus on equal footing and on terrain that favored them. The battlefield around Asculum was heavily wooded and featured a small tributary (possibly a branch of the modern Carapelle River), which hindered Pyrrhus’s phalanx and cavalry, as well as his elephants.
Pyrrhus arranged his forces with his less reliable allies—the Bruttians, Lucanians, and Tarentines—at the center. On the left flank, he placed the Samnite phalanx, and on the right, the powerful Macedonian phalanx. Cavalry units protected both wings, and reserve skirmishers and elephants were positioned behind the lines on a slight incline. Pyrrhus himself stayed with his 2,000-strong agema, ready to ride to any critical point on the battlefield. The Romans, meanwhile, deployed their legions in three lines with skirmishers and 300 specially designed wagons at the front. These wagons, equipped with spikes, grappling hooks, and fire throwers, were meant to counter Pyrrhus’s elephants.
The battle commenced with the cavalry skirmishing before the infantry lines engaged. Roman cavalry crossed the river and clashed with the Greeks, allowing the legions time to deploy. The Greek cavalry attempted to maneuver around the Roman horsemen, but the Romans opted for a direct charge. When the Greek cavalry pressed hard, the Romans retreated behind their infantry lines, initiating the main engagement. The Macedonian phalanx eventually routed the I Legion, while the II Legion made significant progress against Pyrrhus’s center. At this critical juncture, Pyrrhus deployed his elephants, causing chaos among the Roman ranks.
The Tide Turns
The elephants, despite the confined terrain and Roman wagons, managed to push back the Roman forces. The Romans operating the wagons abandoned them, causing further disruption. The infantry battle continued intermittently throughout the day, with brief clashes lasting 10 to 15 minutes due to the exhausting nature of such combat. Late in the afternoon, the Bruttian and Lucanian allies in Pyrrhus’s line fled, causing the Tarentines to withdraw as well. Pyrrhus quickly filled the gap with a timely cavalry charge.
As evening approached, the arrival of a 4,500-strong Daunian force, allied with Rome, complicated the situation for Pyrrhus. The Daunians, unable to distinguish between the two armies in the melee, attacked Pyrrhus’s camp instead. With few soldiers left to guard it, Pyrrhus realized the threat and dispatched cavalry and elephants to defend the camp. However, his main battle line was left vulnerable to Roman flank attacks.
The Daunians overran the camp, setting it ablaze. The reinforcements sent by Pyrrhus redirected their attack towards the III and IV Legions, which had advanced far beyond the initial Roman lines. These legions retreated to a wooded hill, using their position to launch javelins and arrows at Pyrrhus’s forces. Faced with a growing threat to his flanks, Pyrrhus pulled additional infantry from the main line to counter the Romans. The consuls responded by deploying more cavalry to exploit the Roman gains.
The battle gradually shifted to the area around Pyrrhus’s camp, intensifying as both sides fought with renewed determination. As darkness fell, the fighting subsided, and the armies separated. The Romans retreated across the river to their camp, while Pyrrhus’s men spent the night in the open, their camp destroyed.
Despite the strategic difficulties and high casualties, Pyrrhus’s forces held their ground, showcasing their resilience. However, the battle at Asculum proved to be another costly victory for Pyrrhus, reinforcing the notion of a “Pyrrhic victory.”
More Affairs:
A Second Chance at Victory
With the loss of most of his food and supplies, Pyrrhus and his men found themselves in a desperate situation. Many of his wounded soldiers perished overnight due to the lack of medical care, including several of his finest troops and officers. Pyrrhus himself was wounded in the arm by a Roman javelin, adding to his already substantial list of injuries and highlighting his lead-from-the-front approach. Meanwhile, the Romans rested in their camp, also having sustained significant casualties.
Despite the dire circumstances, Pyrrhus decided against retreating or allowing the Romans to maintain their momentum. He repositioned his battered army on an open plain—a grueling task completed in the darkness, which showcased the discipline of his troops. When dawn broke, the Romans were surprised to find themselves in a vulnerable position and had to choose between retreating or facing Pyrrhus on ground of his choosing. The consuls chose to fight.
As the battle commenced on the open plain, it mirrored the previous day’s engagement. The cavalries skirmished first, followed by the infantry lines clashing. This time, the infantry battle favored Pyrrhus’s men. The Roman legions, unable to break the Greek lines, began to falter. Seeing his opportunity, Pyrrhus unleashed his elephants. The sight of these massive creatures charging caused panic among the Roman infantry, who soon fled. Pyrrhus’s cavalry pursued the retreating Romans, inflicting heavy casualties. Historian Hieronymus, using Pyrrhus’s own accounts, claimed that the Romans lost 6,000 men while Pyrrhus lost 3,505.
An Interlude in Sicily
Despite his victory, Pyrrhus had suffered severe losses and needed time to recuperate. Both armies withdrew to recover, and neither sought to engage again during the 279 BC campaign season. During this lull, Pyrrhus received a summons from several Sicilian cities, including Syracuse, to help resist Carthaginian expansion. Believing his position in southern Italy was secure, Pyrrhus crossed to Sicily. This decision disappointed his southern Italian allies, who felt abandoned, but Pyrrhus left his trusted officer Milo and a garrison in Tarentum to maintain control.
In Sicily, Pyrrhus initially succeeded in capturing Carthaginian-controlled territories, except for the major port of Lilybaeum. His siege of the city failed, and he was eventually pushed out of western Sicily. As the campaign stalemated, Pyrrhus alienated his Sicilian allies, much as he had with the Tarentines. After two years, he received news that the Romans were besieging Tarentum and punishing the cities that had allied with him. This prompted his return to Italy in 276 BC.
Return to Italy and Defeat at Beneventum
Upon returning, Pyrrhus found his former territories in disarray and his southern Italian allies disillusioned with his leadership. He could muster only 20,000 infantry and 3,000 cavalry due to losses during the return voyage, harassment by a Carthaginian fleet, and resistance from a mercenary force allied with Rome. Desperately needing a victory to regain the confidence of his troops and allies, Pyrrhus prepared for another campaign.
In the spring of 275 BC, the Roman Senate sent two consuls to confront Pyrrhus. One army marched into Lucania, while the other, under Consul Manius Curius Dentatus, moved into Samnium. Pyrrhus ambushed Curius’s army near Beneventum, but the plan unraveled when his soldiers got lost in the dark, and Roman sentries detected the lead elements of his force. A Roman cavalry charge occupied Pyrrhus’s troops long enough for the legions to form for battle.
The main engagement saw Curius’s legions routing several Greek units. Learning from previous battles, Curius had camped near wooded terrain, neutralizing the Greek phalanx’s effectiveness. Pyrrhus’s elephants charged, but the Romans, armed with javelins and arrows, caused the elephants to panic and rampage through Pyrrhus’s own lines. Curius’s legions seized the opportunity, surging forward and driving the Greeks from the field.
The Aftermath
Pyrrhus’s defeat at Beneventum marked a turning point. He lost a significant portion of his army and the confidence of his allies. With no new recruits or supplies forthcoming, Pyrrhus abandoned his campaigns in the western Mediterranean and returned to Greece. He continued to seek military glory for three more years until he was killed in a street fight in Argos in 272 BC.
Pyrrhus’s defeat shocked the Greek world, which had little knowledge of Roman civilization before his intervention in Italy. The unexpected Roman success inspired Greek historians like Hieronymous and Timaeus to document Rome’s history and culture. Pyrrhus’s invasion motivated the Romans to prevent any future enemy from setting foot on Italian soil, leading to conflict with Carthage, their former ally against Pyrrhus, just a decade later.
Pyrrhus’s legacy is often overshadowed by the high cost of his victories, giving rise to the term “pyrrhic victory.” Nevertheless, his accomplishments rival those of any general from the post-Alexander era until the late 3rd century BC. He managed a vast kingdom under constant threat and held two emerging powers in check. His tactical prowess was evident at Asculum, where he executed a daring nighttime maneuver to seize control of the battle. Despite his setbacks, Pyrrhus remains a notable figure in military history.
