Pyrrhus and Trouble in the South

       
             Notwithstanding their success, Rome was still regarded as a rube upstart with no culture and full of people who had no appreciation of philosophy. However, when danger loomed, the sophisticated cities of the south called Rome for help. Of course, this is not the same as when the sophisticated Europeans embroiled the whole world in two wars and then looked to the unsophisticated and non cultured US for help...           

Area Sacra Largo di Torre Argentina - area of 4 temples some from 3rd century BC

Trouble in the South


            At the beginning of the 3^rd century BC, the most powerful Greek city-state in the heel of Italy was Tarentum. Tarentum had a treaty with Rome since 302 BC, which denied Romans access to the Bay of Tarentum, where resided the most powerful navy of Italy. It was OK with the Romans, because a) they were not fond of naval warfare and b) any of their naval activity was limited around central Italy.

            In the southeast of Italy also resided Lucanians, Osco-Sabellic people, who were not fond of the Greek city-states. Lucanians had one overwhelming problem, that is, they usually allied themselves with the losing sides in the Italic peoples’ wars with Rome, like with the Etruscans. Therefore they turned their military aggression against the Greeks in southern Italy, to the cities like Locri, Rhegium, Croton and Thurii. Those cities sent a collective SOS to Rome for help against the Lucanians.

            Romans decided that for once they should send the army by the sea, a more comfortable and faster transport than by land. A Roman garrison was sent by sea to Thurii to help out. Tarentum, though its dear Greek speaking friends called for Roman help, considered it a breach of treaty, when Romans disembarked their troops in the Bay of Tarentum – did not stay there, went to Thurii –and Tarentinian knee jerk reaction was to sink the Roman fleet and to expel the garrison from Thurii AND sack the town of Thurii. They were annoyed because the Thurians wanted help from Rome and not from Tarentum, their allies. Perhaps Thurians believed that Rome is stronger and more reliable, as well as less dangerous than Tarentum, and they might have had something there as the sack of their town by the Tarentines proved.

            The Senate sent an embassy to Tarentum, led by L. Postumius Megellus,  to discuss the matter, and to ask for compensation for the fleet. However, the Roman ambassadors were publicly insulted, and ridiculed because of their lousy Greek language and denied audience. It was one of those unfortunate historical mistakes. Some of the Tarentines realised that this incident means trouble and cast their eyes to their motherland, the mainland Greece, where the successors of Alexander the Great were carving out their niches. One of them was king Pyrrhus of Epirus in northwestern Greece. He was an adventurer, who had delusions of being another Alexander the Great. Pyrrhus accepted the invitation from Tarentum with alacrity, because he thought that this was the first step on the road to an empire, which he craved.

            In 280 BC Pyrrhus landed in Italy and besides 25 thousand mercenaries, he sported 20 war elephants. Romans had never seen anything like that and even though they were successful against the Greek phalanx, the elephants created real havoc and the Romans lost about 7 thousand men. However, Pyrrhus did not destroy the Roman army, and won just on points. He lost at least 4 thousand of his mercenaries, and they could not be replaced. His main problem was a wounded elephant, which went on rampage among his own troops. 

Pyrrhus

          Some of the Samnite tribes, which after their defeat received only a status of “Friend and Ally’ and not the coveted citizenship, encouraged Pyrrhus to attack Rome itself. Pyrrhus was convinced that the Latins would join him (preferably with flower throwing and rejoicing at being freed from the callous Romans). Though by that time, the Latins could not really remember the time before they enjoyed Roman citizenship and were members of the Res Publica. They joined together not against Rome, but against Pyrrhus, and stopped him about 60 km from Rome. Not to mention, that his attitude ‘I am a king and you are dirt’ somewhat alienated his Tarentine allies.

Pyrrhus's movements in Italy

          Another year, another battle. In 279 BC a huge engagement was fought in Apulia. It lasted two days, the first one a draw. Next day, the only thing that saved Pyrrhus were his elephants, and Romans had to withdraw. After surveying his substantially thinned ranks, Pyrrhus declared ‘Another such victory and I am lost”. Since no Roman allies were eager to break their treaty with Rome and join him, Pyrrhus had no way of replenishing his troops. Feeling magnanimous, he offered peace terms to Rome.  When the Senate debated this offer, and the opinion seemed to swing in favour of accepting it, the old and blind Appius Claudius Caecus ordered his sons to lead him into the Senate where he held a long speech, the topic being: “You fools, whose idiotic idea was it to accept any offers from Pyrrhus?” In 1^st century BC this speech was still extant and Cicero admired it for its succinctness and inventiveness in the field of insults.  This speech put an effective end to peace offerings, proposals and negotiating and left Pyrrhus high and dry. Because – what to do? He could not decisively defeat the Romans, he could not get support and he could not replace the experienced mercenaries.

           Pyrrhus was deserted by ideas of what to do with Rome. Basically sulking, he left with his army for Sicily. The Greeks there called him to defend them from the Carthaginians, who were on the verge of conquering the whole island. Initially, he had some successes against the Carthaginians and captured from them two cities, Panormus and Eryx. However, his Greek allies deserted him and he was forced to return to Italy, where the Romans were pressing hard against Tarentum, the original cause of war, disturbance, plundering, and general mayhem.

            In 275 BC Pyrrhus faced the Roman army at the town of Malventum in southern Italy. This time, even a “Pyrrhic victory” was elusive. Romans learned to deal with the elephants by stabbing them with spears into the sides, and Pyrrhus returned to Epirus without most of his army, without his elephants and quite subdued. Eventually he mixed himself up in other adventures and was killed by a woman who threw a roof tile on his head.

           The Romans renamed the town of Malventum to Beneventum (good omen), and offered the usual lenient peace agreement to the defeated foes. The city of Tarentum was allowed self-rule, received Latin rights, and other Greek city-states and the remaining Italian tribes surrendered under similar conditions.

            The victory over Pyrrhus confirmed Rome as master of Italian mainland, and in the same time confirmed that Appius Claudius had a lot of common sense. Of course, this mastery of the mainland put the Romans in direct neighbourhood of a western Mediterranean superpower, Carthage.

           Many historians and scholars cannot get their mind around the fact of Roman success, and try to find combination of reasons why Rome was so successful in the first centuries of the Republic, especially considering the number of external enemies and the internal bickering between various classes of citizens. The said bickering was considerably lessened by the reforms of 367 BC that provided debt relief, instituted land distribution to poor citizens and provided plebeians with access to the highest offices of the state.

         The statesmanlike quality of Rome’s leaders was another part of the equation, with building of strategic alliances and punctiliously fulfilling their treaty obligations. Rome’s treatment of her neighbours in Latium secured their loyalty in the long run, not to mention that various Italian communities found Samnites in the south and Gauls in the north with their thieving and pillaging ways far less palatable and much bigger threat to their security than Rome.

        Some historians just throw hands in the air and declare that Rome just had good luck. Considering how long the history of Rome was, this was one long run of good luck! And since nothing succeeds like success, Rome attracted immigrants from far and wide. By the year 300 BC Rome's urban population doubled to 60 thousand from 30 thousand and by 275 BC probably surpassed 90 thousand and growing.  Growing population meant more housing, more food and especially more water were needed and Aqua Appia, hailed as such a marvel in 312 BC did not cut it any more and another aqueduct, Anio, was added and 272 BC.

Plan of ancient Rome with the course of Anio Vetus Aqueduct

            Romans had literacy from early age, having adapted Greek script to Latin. However, they regarded writing with great pragmatism like anything else. Writing was good to record laws, keep account books and note important events on the chief priest’s ‘white tablets’. Literature was something imported from the Greeks in southern Italy, but that entailed learning Greek. Too much trouble. However, the upper classes appreciated the Greek learning and literature. Especially, since the Greeks perfected the art of oratory and persuasive rhetoric.  The rising politicians found it useful when trolling for votes, speaking in the Senate, or at trials.

           One of the first teachers of Greek ways was Lucius Livius Andronicus.  A slave from southern, Greek, Italy, he was freed, and added the name of his master, Lucius Livius,  to his own. He became not only a teacher of Greek and Latin to teenage boys bent on politics or law career, but also a translator and adaptor of Greek literature. Thus began Roman literature – as was usual with the Romans, they imported a useful skill and developed it.