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

The Spartans followed their habitual tactics — they simply stood their ground, fought and were overwhelmed on their right. They were comprehensively defeated.

The Struggle for Sicily: The Beginning | Book 2 Crucible of Empire Series

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 rise and fall of Carthage

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. 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. 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. In the days of the Roman Empire, slaves of the emperor could wield enormous power.

Yes — albeit a biased picture. It most certainly was; and a convicted counterfeiter could expect very severe punishment, such as mutilation or death. In the ancient world, there were many currencies being traded at any one time. This could have serious drawbacks for the investor as Taxides gleefully recalls. The structure of a shield is accurately described.

• The Complete Guide to Building Your Own Home and Saving Thousands on Your New House?
• The Struggle for Sicily: End of the Beginning | Crucible of Empire.
• Crucible of Empire Series by D. A. Aubrey.
• .
• Holiday Fear.
• The Struggle for Sicily: The End of the Beginning (Book III).

To keep the weight manageable, light wood and leather were used as a framework for the bronze. Carthage was notoriously slow in deciding to mobilise its forces for war. They were unwilling to spend more than they had to — with the result that their military were often allocated insufficient resources for the task in hand. A lot of diverse people needed to be convinced before Carthage would sanction major military expenditure. The commercial guilds were strong. These trade-linked organisations had little enthusiasm for engaging in warfare from which they had little to gain.

Moreover, lacking a standing army, the oligarchs of Carthage were reluctant to impose heavy burdens upon the citizens of the city; major expenditure on mercenaries had to be paid for! There seems little doubt that many would have been opposed to huge military expenditure when Pyrrhus seemed content to stay in the east of Sicily. Moreover, there was always the chance he would find himself obliged to return to Italy. Some believe that this lay behind his later desire to unite the various nations he had conquered by treating them as equals to his Macedonians.

This was not popular with his Macedonians. There was at the time of his death speculation as to the cause of his death. He had survived many serious wounds. However, only his medical attendants would have been able to get near enough to him; and only from them would he have taken anything.

They have suggested that he might have died from cerebral malaria. However — at different times — it allied itself with the Greek or Carthaginian cause depending on which side seemed likely to emerge victorious. The mythical one-eyed monster encountered by Odysseus in his homeward journey after the sack of Troy.

• The Sound of Music Songbook.
• !
• Origine du nom de famille CHEVAL (Oeuvres courtes) (French Edition).

As the name indicates, it was a table the surface of which was not smooth; rather, it had a series of horizontal ribs — such that coins would not easily roll about and fall off the table. It was a table specifically used by moneylenders and money changers. Even if one looks at the remains of the Porta Triumphalis in Rome and even more so the main gates of hilltop towns of the Middle Ages, such as San Giminiano they are by modern standards impossibly narrow.

Is the strategic plan attributed to Pyrrhus historically accurate? The strategy outlined is eminently believable and accords with events. Pyrrhus did not know for how long the Romans would remain on the defensive, refusing to engage in a decisive clash of arms. A diversionary campaign designed to recruit allies in Sicily would certainly have seemed preferable to wasting time in Italy. Pyrrhus certainly did transfer his army to Sicily; and he did campaign with the Sicilian Greeks to evict the Carthaginians by assaulting their garrisons and their cities which were all near the sea.

Hence, although this strategy may have been forced upon Pyrrhus by Roman inertia, it seems — under the circumstances — to have been a reasonably sound strategic plan.

Hitler found himself in a comparable situation when, his air force having failed to destroy the British fighter command, he was forced to abandon his plan to invade the British Isles. Operation Barbarossa was intended to destroy Russia in six weeks, after which he promised to return to destroy Britain!

And Appius Claudius the Blind? Are you being fair in your criticism of Roman generalship? Was this true throughout the period of the Punic Wars? For how long did this situation exist? Was he the first? So what caused the Republic to collapse? Sulla followed, then Caesar. However, the historical references are totally factual.

Are the references to Alexander justifiable? Was Pyrrhus faced with the strategic dilemma you suggest? Is Cineas a true character? Thoenon and Sosistratus — who are they? I presume the events described are fictional? Presumably we have now seen the end of Himalgo and Calisto? Chapters 6 and 7 Q: Is Creon talking military sense?

What had he realised about phalanx warfare? How had he come to realise this? What made this battle so significant? And the slave army? Why have you gone into such detail with respect to a battle that is fictitious? What were the lessons to be learned? What did Creon and others like him learn from the battle, then? What did the doctors of the 3 rd century BC know about infected wounds? They saw one of two outcomes following a surgically infected wound: Either the wound became red and red streaks appeared, spreading from the wound. Or the wound became red and then pus developed in the wound.

The pus having been released, the wound would heal and the patient would survive. The death of Tanos: Was it common for slaves to become so influential as Taxides? Is Taxides giving us a true picture of ancient finance? Was counterfeiting common in the ancient world? Were priests involved in finance in the ancient world? Gold was not the common metal for coinage, then? Chapters 12 and 13 Q: 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.

If the story is true, then this would have been an excellent piece of propaganda by the Romans. Tactically, it was probably pretty even. The losses on both sides appear to have been very large. Pyrrhus may well have lost no more than the Romans — and he was able to retreat in good order to Taras. Nevertheless, history seems to agree that he lost half his effective strength. Moreover, whereas the Romans could, given time, restore their numbers, Pyrrhus was less able to do so.

If the Carthaginian Navy had been able to blockade Syracuse and Taras, and so maroon Pyrrhus in Italy, then the Epirots would have been in dire straits. The Romans had no real hope of taking Taras by storm — and they were wise not to try. This was an incredible stroke of good fortune for Pyrrhus.

Pyrrhus was indeed assured of support. For if he could gain the Macedonian throne, then he would be able to return to the west with an appreciably larger force. With the discontent gripping Syracuse, Hieron must have realised that without Epirot forces to bolster him, his position could become perilous. Hieron had come to be regarded with suspicion that he might be as ruthless as Creon. Nevertheless, there was no proof that Hieron had had a hand in the destruction of the rogue mercenaries.

Is this a historically genuine assessment of events in Sicily consequent upon Pyrrhus having taken most of his army to Italy? With Pyrrhus having taken most of his forces to Italy, the residual Epirot-Syracusan forces had no option but to entrench in their occupied cities. Pyrrhus had not sanctioned abandonment of his Sicilian positions. Such intelligence would have been highly indicative of Carthaginian intensions — provided the intelligence was true.

Deliberate misinformation was practiced as widely then as in all wars. Two magnificent exercises in misinformation, both from World War Two, spring readily to mind in this context:. The question then became could the city be held without naval support. Plague is recorded as having erupted in the Carthaginian forces besieging the city.

Were there different plagues? No but there were variants of the same terrible disease. The two types of bubonic plague are accurately described. We know that the two types described are simply variants of the same disease. The condition was spread by rat fleas. When the condition extended to the lungs of the infected person, it did cause coughing and bleeding into the lungs.

This form of the disease could pass from human to human without the intervention of fleas. That these were variants of the same disease could not have been known in the 3 rd century BC. Plague not infrequently decimated ancient armies, the besieged and besiegers. The fear engendered could cause ancient armies to disband. Sporadic, less virulent, outbreaks of the plague were occurring even in Victorian times in the UK.

Is the description of the indigenous Sicilian population Sicels accurately depicted? Yes — the description of their attitude to the various invaders certainly accords with later Roman texts. Mussolini attempted to destroy the Sicilian mafia. Mussolini never forgave the mafia — and the mafia never forgave Mussolini.

Did the Carthaginians attempt to retake their Sicilian cities by force?

Crucible of Empire Series

Presumably piracy was a serious threat to solitary traders in the Mediterranean? It certainly was — and it persisted into Roman Imperial time. Yes — from what little we know of the facts. As so often with elephants, they could be dangerous to both sides. According to Livy, there can be little doubt that after a bloody engagement, the Romans probably came off best.

However, Livy is notoriously biased and frequently unsound in military matters. The thoughts of Hieron would appear to be a realistic assessment of the character of Pyrrhus and the potential consequences of his decision to contend the throne of Macedonia. It was the decision taken by Carthage. Many years later, Fabius Maximus would support a comparable decision.

The scene depicted is presumably fictitious? The management of an embedded arrow was: There was a risk of sepsis infection. Was selective breeding known in antiquity? Is the demi-god Bes a genuine ancient deity? Why has the situation changed so dramatically for Pyrrhus?