The Struggle For Sicily: The Beginning (Crucible of Empire - Book II 2)

---

They needed to be better given the opposition!

Before Julius Caesar took up his command in the province of Nearer Gaul and Illyria, he had never commanded an army. The Republican system, with its part-time farmer soldiers, sufficed just while Rome was essentially a central Italian power, able to maintain its status by short military campaigns against relatively small opponents. Under such circumstances, poor or uninspired generalship usually allowed the Romans to come out winning.

Under Marius and Sulla — and then Caesar — the Republican system collapsed! The demands imposed upon Rome to maintain territories outside central Italy brought about the end of the part-time soldier. As the military demands grew, men like Marius came to realise that professional paid full-time soldiers were needed. The civil wars that followed the murder of Caesar then gave birth to the Empire! Some maintain that Darius had to fight Alexander — or be deposed by his officers. Accordingly, he chose to fight on ground that favoured his army — at Gaugamela.

However, he was an unstable, unpredictable drunk cf. He committed as many atrocities as Julius Caesar! It is highly likely that if Darius had thwarted his attempt to conquer the Persian Empire, then it is those facets of his character which would be remembered.

I expect he was. After Heracleia and Asculum, it is understandable that the Romans needed time to recover and to work out how to deal with an army using elephants. Some people have likened this with the appearance of the first tanks on the western front in To gain time, the Romans had therefore gone onto the defensive. Pyrrhus needed a decisive victory! If he could not induce the Romans to give him another opportunity to inflict defeat upon them, then clearly — if he did nothing — he could expect the Romans to grow stronger, while he became weaker.

They are certainly the options that he and his officers are likely to have pondered. The election of hot-headed militarily incompetent consuls was always a possibility! To have sought battle by an aggressive move into Roman territory was probably the least attractive option open to Pyrrhus. A temporary withdrawal to Epirus to rebuild his strength: Moreover, it might have stimulated other enemies, such as the Macedonians, to confront him. To Pyrrhus, the option to retire temporarily to Epirus was not an attractive option.

The recruitment of allies in Greek Sicily on the other hand certainly had merit! Pyrrhus wanted to lead the Greek world. He viewed himself as the heir to Alexander. He would not have relished the prospect of an aggressive alliance developing between Rome and Carthage. It is probable that he was. Whether or not the argument attributed to him in this chapter is historically accurate or not is speculative.

However, it is the sort of argument that an Epicurean Greek would reasonably have advanced. Probably some such characters did exist. However, such people were part of Greek city life like Demosthenes. For a fee, they would champion any cause. Note, Hieron has been promoted. The object of the chapter is to document the background of Pyrrhus and to show how he could be made to appear attractive to a Greek audience.

It is noteworthy that Pyrrhus was son-in-law to the reviled Agathocles. That a coalition of Greek cities led by Syracuse did join an anti-Carthaginian alliance headed by Pyrrhus is historically true. No doubt, the Syracusans would have been pleased to see the Mamertines humbled.

The attack by Pyrrhus on the Mamertines would certainly have put at risk any Carthaginian forces operating in the north-east. However, the background to the narrative is historically accurate. It would have come as a shock to the Carthaginians that their plans to annex the Greek cities had now brought Pyrrhus to Sicily, thereby threatening them with a major and costly war.

Whereas the collapse of the Carthaginian threat in north-east Sicily is accurate, Himalgo is of course fictitious. Barca is older than Omas. Barca has arterial disease. The exertion of climbing stairs is provoking pain in his legs claudication and the pain of angina in his chest.

Will you miss them? Do you have any sympathy for them? Presumably these chapters are simply advancing the narrative and developing the characters? Phalanx warfare, as exemplified by wars between the Greek city-states, was a bit like a rugby match only with forwards. Such battles were essentially battles of attrition, trials of brute force. Both sides had to turn up at about the same time, both sides had to agree on a suitable flat piece of land of the correct dimensions, both sides had to agree to play by the same rules, and both sides had to believe they could win.

He appreciated that both decisive engagements had been won by rapid cavalry manoeuvre with fast-moving light infantry maintaining contact between the cavalry and the relatively static heavy infantry of the phalanx. He had appreciated that these battles had not been trials of brute force. So Creon is correct in predicting the demise of phalanx warfare as exemplified by the Greek city-states? He has realised the weakness of the phalanx. The phalanx needs flat space in which to operate, with mobile troops able to deploy to protect its vulnerable sides and rear; and an enemy that will fight in the same way.

Creon has come to believe that an integrated army capable of fast manoeuvre in the turmoil of battle can be victorious against a phalanx. He would have been fully aware of the changes introduced by the Romans in the 3 rd Samnite war. Forced to operate in mountainous areas where there was little unbroken ground, the Romans had introduced the flexible, fast-moving maniple as its tactical unit. Each maniple comprised up to men and it could manoeuvre independently over any type of terrain — and yet remain part of the legion.

These fast-moving, self-contained units were intended to break the static front line of the opposing forces. They proved highly successful. However, by this stage of war, the German Army was too exhausted to exploit their successes. Would Creon have appreciated the significance of the Battle of Leuctra? He would have been aware of this earth-shattering engagement, as would any military man of his day.

The rise and fall of Carthage

At Leuctra, they faced a Theban phalanx of equal number on flat ground. The Thebans switched troops such that they increased the depth of their phalanx on their left wing to fifty men. The Spartans followed their habitual tactics — they simply stood their ground, fought and were overwhelmed on their right. They were comprehensively defeated. Their rigidity and failure to adapt their battlefield tactics resulted in their collapse as a military superpower in Greece. The myth of their invincibility was destroyed. However, the Carthaginians were not displaced from the Liparean Islands.

There are no reliable historical records. There is no doubt that there was such an army. Such revolts were not uncommon in Sicily — nor indeed in Roman Italy. Again, what is certain is that this threat also dissipated with the arrival of the Epirot forces in Sicily. The end result was certainly the destruction or the dispersal of the slave army; we hear no more of it. From the perspective of the evolution of military tactics, the ideas being propounded by Creon are highly relevant.

The Battle of Leuctra would have been sufficiently fresh for people like Creon to ponder the lessons to be learned. The battle had been a landmark in military history. It marked the end of the myth of Spartan invincibility. They learnt that the Spartans had become ossified in their approach to military tactics and that they were therefore vulnerable. Then, they were suddenly faced by an army that employed a relatively minor tactical variation — and they were defeated.

The essence of this battle is the same as at Leuctra. The only difference is that Hieron supplements his assault on his left with a disciplined cavalry action Alexander style! An essentially similar manoeuvre will be employed by a later Roman general! They were as complacent as the British admirals who insisted that battleships could defend themselves adequately against aeroplanes — until the Japanese destroyed the British naval power in the Far East in a matter of hours by sinking the two capital ships constituting that power.

Their failure to adapt socially was also a major factor. And, faced with an inability to maintain their battlefield manpower, they refused to relax their impossible standards for example, their intolerance of even a suggestion of apprehension in battle , or to contemplate taking into their ranks people other than Spartans. Instead, they saw their armies steadily decrease in size until they could no longer retain their pre-eminence.

They knew very little.

The Struggle for Sicily: The Beginning (Book II)

They knew that redness around a wound signified trouble what we would now call infection , that red streaks extending from a wound often heralded a temperature and sweating in the wounded man, and that shivering was often followed by delirium, coma and death. Prayers, incantations and magic rituals were habitually resorted to. It is worth remembering that even in London in the s and s little more was known about wound infection than in the 3 rd century BC. It should be remembered that they probably never saw a wound heal without infection.

They saw one of two outcomes following a surgically infected wound:. Even in the early 19 th century, bacteria were undiscovered. The role of the lymphatic system discovered by John Hunter in the spread of infection was still in the future. Mussels are a delicacy enjoyed by many — particularly when boiled in a broth.

They can contain bacteria known as salmonella.

The Struggle for Sicily: End of the Beginning | Crucible of Empire

Ingested, these bacteria can cause anything from a mild but unpleasant painful belly with diarrhoea to a rapidly fatal illness owing to gut perforation fortunately, nowadays only rarely encountered in the UK; other parts of the world are not so fortunate. Educated slaves could become valuable to their owner. Such slaves were typically male — since, in the Greek world of antiquity, women were not educated.

Taxides was such a person.

Such educated slaves were usually involved in financial affairs or education of young members of the household. Freedmen were permitted to engage in commerce in their own right — and some became phenomenally rich. They might even find themselves inheriting fortunes from their grateful masters.

Upward mobility of slaves in the Roman world became common. Overlapping fields of fire were as well known to archers — as they were later to machine-gunners. It is worth stressing that in the 3 rd century BC, a well-fortified city rarely fell to direct assault. Starvation and treachery, often in combination, were usually necessary to force a city to seek terms. However, such problems could also affect the besiegers! Henry V ultimately died prematurely from some form of chronic dysentery contracted when he was campaigning in France — after his victory at Agincourt. Yes, but with historically accurate background.

Hieron was indeed lucky here. Now as then the rule is: Not so the young Prince Hal teenaged Henry V who was struck in the face by an arrow at the Battle of Shrewsbury; the arrow penetrated to his skull, but was successfully removed. He fought much of the battle with the arrow remnant in his head, the arrowhead touching the skull! Omas has clearly been influenced by the adverse events in Sicily. He is, like a good businessman, intent on diversifying.

He is going to expand inland until the external environment improves in his favour. This dichotomy will be a disturbing distraction as Carthage is forced to defend its empire. There is certainly some comparison here between the choices that faced the British at the inception of the European Common Market. There were many in Britain who would have preferred to forego joining Europe in favour of strengthening ties with the Empire. With hindsight, it is interesting to ask who was right.

Long before the genetic basis for inheritance was postulated, animal breeders had grasped the essentials. Stallions bred for speed, mated with mares similarly endowed, usually produced foals that won races. Inbreeding sheep that produce twins or triplets could be highly effective in increasing the size of herds. Selective breeding was employed to produce large, heavily-muscled horses, strong enough to carry armoured warriors. This was practised in the ancient kingdom of Parthia.

Oxen were bred for colour, for example white oxen were bred specially for the sacrificial purposes in the Roman republic. The genetic understanding is now known. Omas is clearly well versed in such matters: Why is there little in the way of ruins of pre-Roman Carthaginian villas in Africa? The reason is thought to relate to the building of subterranean quarters — as a means of escaping the heat. There would therefore be relatively less above ground and more below ground. This may not be the entire explanation. They were a perpetual danger in ancient cities — particularly as the urban poor increased in number.

The streets of ancient cities were narrow and largely unlit at night. If one wanted to travel at night, it was advisable to have a bodyguard and a torch bearer. The absence of street lighting is worth noting. In the USA, it has been shown that civic disorder inevitably rises if there is an unexpected disruption in the electricity supply! That such areas existed in ancient Rome is well documented. Such areas must have existed in Carthage and in Syracuse.

Temples with concealed passages were not uncommon. He has succumbed to the trap of over-extended supply lines. In hostile territory, where his army cannot live off the land, he has suddenly been deprived of his ability to supply his army — because he has lost his fleet. This is a pitfall that has destroyed many intended conquerors.

Napoleon reached Moscow, only to find no food for his starving army, no fodder for his horses and a city in flames, burnt by the people of Moscow. The German Army at Stalingrad were in a comparable position. Pyrrhus now faced a similar problem. Omas is probably right. In their rise to power, the Romans were not overly constrained by treaty obligations with enemies.

The Roman reaction to the threat to Saguntum demonstrates a measure of their respect for their oath of protection to an ally. The recovery of Mamertine strength — and its alliance with Rhegium — is this true or false? These events eventually resulted in utterly unforeseen and catastrophic consequences! However, this was as far as he got.

The need for him to return to Italy was also likely becoming clear. Like other would-be conquerors, his prestige was important. The parallels are interesting: Both would be conquerors grossly underestimated the resilience of the Russians, such that both had assumed that they would not have to fight a winter war.

It seemed a shame not to include this marvellous historical data. This material has been taken from an Etruscan source. The ritual described is an authentic account of what would have gone on during the process of divination. The account of this engagement is pieced together from authentic Roman sources. There can be little doubt that the Romans would have been careful to secure their rear before challenging Pyrrhus again.

The Gauls could generally be relied upon to take advantage of any difficulties the Romans might encounter; at this stage, the north of Italy the Padus Valley was solidly the territory of the Gauls. Moreover, Etruria a disorganised nation of separate, competing city-states was far from a stable part of the Roman confederacy. At this stage in its evolution, Rome could rely on only its own Latin colonies — and its own military forces. Historical writings seem to indicate that the withdrawal of Pyrrhus from Eryx was the catalyst for serious disaffection in the Greek cities of the east, including Syracuse.

Sedition was habitual in the Greek cities of Sicily. Although the details of this suppression — as set out in this chapter — are fictitious, they are the sorts of measures usually resorted to at this period in history. Moreover, Pyrrhus was quick to realise that these hostile predatory cities threatened his communications with Sicily. Is there historical evidence that a disaffected mercenary force was treacherously destroyed in Sicily at this time?

Classical literature suggests there was. Hieron was assumed to have been responsible for the planning of the fateful expedition that resulted in the destruction of the rebellious mercenaries. The removal of the mutinous mercenaries served to control the sedition threating to engulf Syracuse. The details of the expedition are fictional; but the result is factual. Mutinous mercenaries would be unlikely to attract sympathy. The contractual and religious nature of their employment with their paymasters has been stressed previously.

Mercenaries who had died honourably in the service of their paymaster would have been highly regarded. A paymaster who had deliberately caused the death of his loyal mercenaries would be at risk of serious reprisal. Yes but it is believable. It would have been important that Hieron and his officers were not stigmatised with having engineered the deaths of the mutinous mercenaries. Far better to blame others for the sedition in Syracuse and suppress the part played by the mercenaries; this would have been a safer strategy.

Shifting of blame is common in a historical context. One of the most outrageous examples was the burning of the Reichstag after the Nazis came to power in The fire is generally believed to have been the work of the Nazis. However, a communist was blamed and executed. The episode enabled the Nazis to claim that there was a plot to subvert the regime and as a result, Hitler took dictatorial power.

The cutting blade would have penetrated the neck, severing the nerves to the arm and puncturing the lung; major blood vessels would also have been severed. This could develop very quickly from puncturing the lung apex in the neck; death from suffocation could rapidly follow. The Roman Emperor Tiberius is credited with having said that: He too believed in fear as an instrument of rule: Likewise, Caligula revelled in creating terror to enforce his absolutism. Interestingly, Cesare Borgia, Tiberius and Caligula all died violent deaths.

In the subsequent history of the period, the place is named Beneventum.

• Unterrichtseinstiege (German Edition)
• Sternzeichengedichte - Steinbock (German Edition)
• Little Knowledge: A Simplified Book About Modern-Day Life and a Guide to Life and How to Live It..
• Health Insurance Plans and Prices for Delaware Women (Delaware Health Care Book 1)
• Would I Lie To You?