Pyrrhus of Epirus is mostly known for his war against the Romans and the eponymous Pyrrhic victory stratagem. He was a great general, and was praised and glorified in the years following his demise, from both the Greeks and the Romans. His character was of such insatiable ambition and military genius that he was continuously compared to Alexander the Great. In antiquity it was said that Pyrrhus was only second to Alexander in generalship, and Pyrrhus apparently emulated Alexander on the battlefield. Though, how alike are these two great commanders? They seem to be of similar dispositions, yet there are some aspects of Alexander that outweigh what has been detailed about Pyrrhus.
Both Alexander and Pyrrhus were renowned Greek kings famed for their conquests, though both of their tales exhibit differing virtues and sins. Alexander’s empire fractured only after his death, whereas Pyrrhus died with nothing to show for his accomplishments. While foreigners to the Romans, they nevertheless praised them for their military achievements and genius, but were also used as cautionary examples of cupiditas gloriae (“over-desire for glory”). Those a just a few noticeable aspects of these two acclaimed kings, but their characters were frequently paired that one must wonder why Pyrrhus is not as remembered as Alexander is.
Now, let’s look at the life and personality of Pyrrhus.
“The other kings, they said, represented Alexander with their purple robes, their body-guards, the inclination of their necks, and their louder tone in conversation; but Pyrrhus, and Pyrrhus alone, in arms and action.”
– Life of Pyrrhus, Plutarch
Bust of Pyrrhus of Epirus
Pyrrhus was born nearly five years after Alexander’s death, yet Pyrrhus found himself embroiled in the affairs created by Alexander’s demise, participating in the Wars of the Diadochi on behalf of Antigonus I Monophthalmus (“the One-Eye”) and his son Demetrius Poliorcetes (“the Besieger”). Pyrrhus was immensely popular amongst his soldiers, as on the battlefield he displayed dashing bravery and extreme capability. Even the opposing Greek armies found admiration for Pyrrhus, likening him to Alexander. When asked of who was the greatest general among his contemporaries, Antigonus replied “Pyrrhus, if he lives to be old.”
After the Battle of Ipsus (301 BCE), Pyrrhus was sent to Ptolemy I Soter (“the Savior”), Pharaoh of Egypt, as a hostage in accordance to the peace agreement between Demetrius and Ptolemy. The soldier-king once again proved to be popular while at Ptolemy’s court, as his martial prowess impressed Ptolemy and his courteous behavior won him the favor of Berenice I, Ptolemy’s queen. Pyrrhus was so popular that he won the betrothal of Berenice’s daughter, Antigone, making him Ptolemy’s stepson. Pyrrhus would eventually have a son with Antigone named Ptolemy in honor of his caretaker.
When war broke out between Pyrrhus and Demetrius, who was now the King of Macedon, the Macedonian soldiers regretted having to fight Pyrrhus for they held him in high regard. Plutarch writes “This fight did not so much exasperate the Macedonians with anger for their loss, or with hatred to Pyrrhus, as it caused esteem, and admiration of his valor…” The Macedonians came to believe Pyrrhus was Alexander come again, and in the end they deserted Demetrius. The Epirots called him “Eagle” for his courage and skill, and Pyrrhus acknowledged this by saying “By you, I am an eagle; for how should I not be such, while I have your arms as wings to sustain me?”
The war which Pyrrhus is noted for is his campaign against the Romans, where the Battle of Asculum (279 BCE) gave us the term Pyrrhic victory. For it was the fatal strategy of Pyrrhus to achieve victory despite heavy losses. When congratulated on this victory, Pyrrhus relied “If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined.”
Pyrrhus would eventually be forced to flee back to Epirus on account of his behavior and demands towards the Sicilian Greeks. In Greece, he waged more war on Macedon, seeking to usurp the throne from Antigonus II Gonatas (“From Gonnoi” or “Knock-Knees”), the son of Demetrius. Pyrrhus insatiable hunger for war and glory proved to be his downfall, as he made no progress in Greece but only bloodshed. He was killed during his assault on Argos against the army of Antigonus II, paralyzed from a falling roof tile.
While praised for his valor, kindness, and ambition, Pyrrhus proved to be an impulsive glory-hound. He constantly plotted for possible campaigns as he found idle peace nauseating. After all his wars, all the bloodshed and death, Pyrrhus had nothing to show for his achievements at the end of his life.
“To his men he was not only their king but their comrade in arms […] He never asked his men to do what he would not do himself […] Incidents such as these bound his men to him with invisible and unbreakable moral ties. They endowed them with particles of his invincible will, and, under his leadership, they obliterated dangers, smoothed away adversities, and enabled him to lead them to what for them appeared to be the ends of the world.”
– The Generalship of Alexander the Great, J.F.C. Fuller
Bust of Alexander the Great
Both Alexander and Pyrrhus were commended for their personal bravery, military genius, compassion and generosity, and grand ambition. However, they both fell to the same criticisms of their passions for glory and ruthlessness. Yet, it is in their conquests where we see the difference. While campaigning for glory and legacy, Alexander fundamentally wished to unite the various peoples under his rule, and as king of Greece and Persia he intended to create unity between the east and west. Whereas Pyrrhus simply waged war for glory’s sake. Alexander had an empire, where Pyrrhus had nothing but the whims of his victories.
Plutarch notes that Pyrrhus had a dream where Alexander called to him, sick on his deathbed. Alexander claimed to assist Pyrrhus in his conquests, where then Pyrrhus boldly asked “How, Sir, can you, being sick, assist me?” and Alexander answered “With my name.” It is the emulation of Alexander that won Pyrrhus his fame and respect.
Jacob Abbot conclusively summarizes Pyrrhus’ personality and legacy:
“That Pyrrhus was a man of great native power of mind, and of extraordinary capacity as a military leader, no one can deny. His capacity and genius were in fact so great, as to make him, perhaps, the most conspicuous example that the world has produced of the manner in which the highest power and the noblest opportunities may be wasted and thrown away. He accomplished nothing. He had no plan, no aim, no object, but obeyed every momentary impulse, and entered, without thought and without calculation, into any scheme that chance, or the ambitious designs of others, might lay before him. He succeeded in creating a vast deal of turmoil and war, in killing an immense number of men, and in conquering, though temporarily and to no purpose, a great many kingdoms. It was mischief, and only mischief, that he did; and though the scale on which he perpetrated mischief was great, his fickleness and vacillation deprived it altogether of the dignity of greatness […] Still, he seems never really to have wished mankind ill.”
And like what Plutarch wrote before, Pyrrhus represented Alexander in arms and action alone, this gaining him the acclaim and regard of both his soldiers and enemies. Pyrrhus’ military genius was comparable to Alexander’s own, yet this is ultimately where the comparison ends. Pyrrhus is essentially a failed Alexander, with all the potential, achievement, and glory, yet without result.
Recommended reading:
Parallel Lives, Plutarch
Pyrrhus, Jacob Abbot
The Generalship of Alexander the Great, J.F.C. Fuller
Alexander the Great: King, Commander and Statesman, N.G.L. Hammond
Michael's Desk 