if you missed the first part click here
3rd Century BC Pyrrhus and Hannibal
Pyrrhus was one of antiquity’s more curious characters whose life reads as if it was constructed from Homeric off-cuts. Born a king of Epirus he was deposed twice and found fame fighting as a mercenary captain, seemingly a man with itchy feet the idea of sedentary rule didn’t grasp him. Part Odysseus in his wanderings and Achilles in his fighting he was unfortunate to borrow from Agamemnon when it came to politics. When one of his sons asked him to whom he would leave his kingdom he was said to have replied “to whoever has the sharpest sword”. Family meals at the Pyrrhic house must have been quite tense affairs.
Pyrrhus’ arrival in the the Italian peninsula owed itself to an invite from the Tarentines and other Greek cities in southern Italy. Rome was still in its infancy but the Greek cities had correctly deduced that their neighbor to the north wasn’t going to be a peaceful one.
3rd century BC dish from Campania depicting a war elephant and calf
In 280 BC a Roman army had its first taste of Pyrrhus and his elephants at the Battle of Heraclea. With a reasonably well trained army (around 30,000) he could only field 20 elephants and this underpins a vital point concerning them. The Wars of the Successors had been fought within a region where elephants could be more easily recruited as it was a real logistical feat to source Asian elephants when campaigning in the heartland of Europe. Still the 20 elephants made a huge impression, the Roman cavalry bolted at the sight of them and Pyrrhus was able to take the initiative, the day was won.
The Romans, as many other Europeans were to discover at their cost, were an ingenious bunch. Quick to adapt and improvise and more often ‘borrow’ ideas the Battle of Asculum a year later in 279 was to include some quite curious anti-elephant devices.
Both armies numbered around 40,000 and it seems Pyrrhus was able to use his full complement of 20 elephants, except he didn’t, well not straight away. This is quite unusual, in fact apart from the Battle of Ipsos (in which he participated on the losing side) elephants were normally a shock unit leading from the front.
The first day of battle saw little action involving elephants and apart from a couple of cavalry advances the troops returned to their respective positions. On the second day this was all to change, the Romans were denied the high ground (which had facilitated the stalemate of the previous day)and the two armies collided. It was at this point that the elephants were sent in to break the Roman line.
The Romans were prepared for this and used some sort of anti-elephant chariots. Exactly what these were is described in more detail by Dionysus of Halicarnassus “wagons with upright beams which had poles which could be swung around. At the end of the poles were tridents or grapnels which had been daubed in pitch and set alight when the elephants came near” (XX.1.7). There were around 300 of these chariots which stood on four wheels and were pulled by an ox which gives the impression of quite solid and heavy contraptions. I think ‘chariots’ is perhaps the wrong word to use for them, these were not nimble vehicles.
Though effective early on they were soon overrun by the light troops supporting the elephants. These beasts now tore through the Roman lines whose main contingent (hastati and principles) were not kitted out with spears (the exception, the triarii were usually held in reserve). With nothing but a short sword and javelin the principles and hastati must have felt impotent against these huge animals with towers mounted on them. The highly experienced troops of Alexander who held long spears found the animals very hard to contain when they fought them in the Battle of Hyspades. In contrast the amateur soldiers with much shorter weapons faced an near impossible task. Pyrrhus was victorious and again it was use of the elephants which turned the battle.
hastati and elephants, the original bad day at the office
There are three remaining battles left which involve Pyrrhus and are worthy of mention. In 275 BC he faced the Romans at Beneventum, this time the tables were turned. The Romans took an element they had used at Asculum, fire, and adapted it into their arsenal via the use of fire-arrows. Aelian offers a more original solution to the problem of elephants; according to him it was the squeal of pigs which the Romans used to panic the elephants which then began trampling their own troops. The battle ended a stalemate but the Romans had effectively won the war.
Epirus returned to the Greek mainland and two sieges in 272 BC were the last for Pyrrhus to use what elephants he had left. At the Siege of Sparta the famous wall-less city was defended by a ditch and upturned carts. It’s likely that the upturned wheels and perhaps other anti-elephant devices (this was not new, caltrops were used in the Battle of Gaza in 312 BC) prevented success when the city held out long enough for a relieving army to dissuade Pyrrhus from continuing.
Later that year Pyrrhus found himself besieging another city, this time Argos. In contrast to the failure at Sparta a more subversive tactic was employed - taking the city by stealth. This was a popular tactic and far easier in terms of time and expense than an all out siege. It was high risk but often worth it.
‘Stealthy’ is not an adjective found anywhere near an elephant so the idea of sneaking these in after the gates had been opened invites mild bemusement. In near comic form the elephants were unable to enter the city, the towers on them being too high to get under the gate. Unsurprisingly the city quickly noticed an elephant being de-towered and the alarm was raised. Soon fighting filled the streets, the confined spaces of a city fight did not suit the elephants who soon routed and fell onto their own troops. Among them was Pyrrhus, not killed by an elephant but by a roof tile thrown from the roof of a building. The story goes that the thrower was the mother of the soldier he was fighting, whether true or not it knocked him unconscious, he was then taken away and killed.
Pyrrhus: must have spent a fortune on postcards home
In stark contrast to the early successes with elephants Pyrrhus final battle borrows more from Aristophanes than it does Homer. The impact he had cannot be denied though, he brought Asian elephants to the Mediterranean and bested the Romans. It wasn’t just the Romans who Pyrrhus and his elephants fought, between 278-276 BC the itchy-footed general had fought in Sicily on behalf of the Greek cities on the island.
Doubtless the Carthaginians, who had been soundly beaten by Pyrrhus, had taken note of both him and his tactics. The elephants would have been a part of this and Carthage, with its extensive trade networks, may have considered importing them straight from Asia. Instead they didn’t, and perhaps this was due to both costs and logistics involved.
The Carthaginians decided to utilize the local variant the North African Forest Elephant, now extinct they were much smaller than their Asian cousins, perhaps measuring 2.5 metres (8.2 feet) at the shoulders. The towers which were the signature of the Asian elephant were rarely, if ever, utilised by the Forest variety (it’s more likely that the depictions of towered elephants are of Asian elephants). As with the Asian elephants a single driver (mahout) drove the animal and though initially recruited from India these were later more locally trained experts.
black glaze pourer (askos) from Vulci 4th-3rd century BC
We can see a line of the elephant being used,from Alexander’s first encounter at Hydaspes, through the Wars of the Successors, onto Pyrrhus and finally ending in Sicily. Except it didn’t really end there, one Carthaginian in particular became famous for his escapades with elephants and we’ll deal with him in the next chapter.