Epirus

[Uros]

Macedonians to the eyes of southern greeks are like semi-barcabaric...also Epirotes are considerate barbarian?

[DecimusCaesar]

Yes, the Epirotes were considered to be semi-barbarians who had adopted much of the Greek ways (language, culture, technology). They were considered only to be half Greek by those who lived in the more 'cultured' city states of the south, especially Athens- although I can't see how the Spartans could have been considered cultured.

 

Both Macedonia and Epirus were seen as half Greek by the city states of the south (even though they had many things in common with them.) That is why Pyrrhus of Epirus had such trouble subduing Greece. He believed that his 'Greekness' gave him the right to rule the south, although people like the Athenians saw him as semi-civilized. The same could be said about Philip, Alexander's father, and the speeches made by Demosthenes, the Athenian orator, who derided him for being 'no true Greek'. Pyrrhus was of the the same stock as the Macedonians and so were many of the other Epirotes and as such this view extended to him.

[Moonlapse]

The Epirotes consisted of the Chaones in the north, the Molossi in the center, and the Thesproti in the south. There were Greek colonies on the coast, but the terrain inland was typically too mountainous for the growth of much grain and so the tribes were more pastoral.

[Uros]

But in Epiros lies the famous Dodoma oracle, how is possoble that an orcale lies in semibarbarous land?

Perhapes the Molossi and Thesproti were consideretae much moch more than other Epirotes people ?

[Andrew Dalby]

But in Epiros lies the famous Dodoma oracle, how is possoble that an orcale lies in semibarbarous land?

Perhapes the Molossi and Thesproti were consideretae much moch more than other Epirotes people ?

 

It's a very interesting point. Did the Epirots themselves worship Zeus and the rest of the Olympians? To what extent did divine worship, oracles, etc., correspond with ethnic or linguistic boundaries? This reminds me that Lydian kings consulted the Delphic oracle; other non-Greeks did also.

[Pantagathus]

It has always been my understanding that at a very early time (Bronze Age to ~ Archaic Age) Epirus was considered one of the major centers of the Pelasgians and that the Oracle at Dodona was a very ancient Pelasgian insitution.

 

It was at a 'later' period that the Illyrians flooded into the area and barbarized it.

[Favonius Cornelius]

Was Pyrrhus the pinnicle of Epirote history? Was it all downhill after his invasion of Italy?

[Primus Pilus]

Was Pyrrhus the pinnicle of Epirote history? Was it all downhill after his invasion of Italy?

 

Yes from a large scale perspective Epirus was only a minor player after the death of Pyrrhus, but the Epirotes maintained some independent regional signifance until the Macedonian Wars. Though Pyrrhus was not 'defeated' after his invasion of Italy. He still spent some time trying to expand Epirote authority on the 'Greek Peninsula'. Had he not been killed, seemingly by a fluke, in Sparta, who knows what may have happened.

[WotWotius]

Was Pyrrhus the pinnicle of Epirote history? Was it all downhill after his invasion of Italy?

 

Yes from a large scale perspective Epirus was only a minor player after the death of Pyrrhus, but the Epirotes maintained some independent regional signifance until the Macedonian Wars. Though Pyrrhus was not 'defeated' after his invasion of Italy. He still spent some time trying to expand Epirote authority on the 'Greek Peninsula'. Had he not been killed, seemingly by a fluke, in Sparta, who knows what may have happened.

 

What I find strange is that Hannibal (if we are to believe the story about the tired general meeting Scipio) viewed Pyrrhus' military strategies in high regard. Though there is some military merit affiliated with Pyrrhus, the man was not exactly a conjurer of victory. I vaguely remember reading that Pyrrhus may well have had great logistical abilities, but was just very unlucky; I am not sure if this is the case as my knowledge of pre-Punic war Rome is scant at best. What are everybody's thoughts?

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

 

 

Had he not been killed, seemingly by a fluke, in Sparta, who knows what may have happened.

 

I think he was actually killed in Argos, he was knocked out by a tile thrown by an old woman who was watching the battle from her roof, and while unconcious he was killed by the enemy soldiers, or so the story goes?

[Pantagathus]

Ultimately Pyrrhus bit off more than he could chew by transfering to Sicily at the Sicilian Greek invitation to come and drive out the Carthaginians (after having initially spanked the Romans).

 

He did some masterful things at the outset of that campaign but made some bad political decisions in both his terms with the Carthaginians & his later behavior towards the Greeks who asked him to help. By the time he made a mess for himself in Sicily and went back to Italy, the Romans had revitalized their forces to the point where he was finally outclassed.

 

It seems Pyrrhus can be summed up by saying he was a brilliant military commander but was deficient in political savvy and focus.

[DecimusCaesar]

Pyrrhus was certainly unlucky. He attempted to use the same hammer and anvil tactics that Alexander had used against the Persians, but due to bad timing he would always outflank the Romans a little to late, meaning that his infantry had already taken heavy damage.

[Primus Pilus]

Had he not been killed, seemingly by a fluke, in Sparta, who knows what may have happened.

 

I think he was actually killed in Argos, he was knocked out by a tile thrown by an old woman who was watching the battle from her roof, and while unconcious he was killed by the enemy soldiers, or so the story goes?

 

Yes indeed, my bad. After he defeated the Spartans he continued on to Argos.

[Uros]

Pyrrhus had not the power, nor the prestige to beat Rome.

He should try invading grece or defeating Syracuse(also attacking Chartage will be suicidal for him).

He was surely an able general but was lacking of the Hannibal gensius and Alexander's Charisma

[Krackalackin]

Pyrrhus had not the power, nor the prestige to beat Rome.

He should try invading grece or defeating Syracuse(also attacking Chartage will be suicidal for him).

He was surely an able general but was lacking of the Hannibal gensius and Alexander's Charisma

 

I'm no expert of Pyrus of Epirus but from what I've read of him, it seems that he could've defeated the Romans and conquered Italy. I mean this by the amount of force he had. I think he didn't however because he was just wasn't a great General plain and simple. Also, there was no real reason to hate the Romans at the time and no reason to fight them. He was just an ALexander-obsessed maniac that wanted to conquer something. The Romans were still using their three line formations before the Roman army was totally redeveloped. You had your hastati in the front with the principes and then the triarii. It's a good tactic and works well but I wouldn't choose it to use against the Macedonian Army, that's for damn sure. The Romans were at this time not very civilized, this being attributed to their profound conservatism, which was their greatest weapon and greatest weakness. They did have a well trained army, though. Not much else, worth-while. Their armies were not that up to conquest yet, and they were still rather ignorant of the rest of the world besides ofcourse Greece and Carthage. I will never be persuaded to think that the Hellens couldn't have conquered the Romans at this time because it's simply not true. The Greeks could have but for some reason they didn't. I don't know why. But it's an interesting topic, if many agree with the path of reasoning.