What do you think?
Rate this book
Pyrrhus of Epirus
Pyrrhus was born into the royal house of Epirus, northwest Greece, but his mother was forced to flee into exile to protect his life when he was a mere infant. Yet he prospered in troubled times and rose from a refugee to a king. Always an adventurer he was deeply involved in the cut-and-thrust campaigning, coups and subterfuges of the Successor kingdoms. At various times he was king of Epirus (twice), Macedon (twice) and Sicily, as well as overlord of much of southern Italy.
In 281 BC he was invited by the southern Italian states to defend them against the aggressive expansion of the Rome. His early victories at Heraclea and Asculum were so hard-fought that a 'Pyrrhic victory' still means one gained at crippling cost. These were the first fascinating duels between the developing Roman legions and the hitherto-dominant Hellenistic way of war with its pike phalanxes and elephants.
Pyrrhus ultimately failed in Italy and Sicily but went on to further military adventures in Greece, eventually being killed while storming the city of Argos.
In 281 BC he was invited by the southern Italian states to defend them against the aggressive expansion of the Rome. His early victories at Heraclea and Asculum were so hard-fought that a 'Pyrrhic victory' still means one gained at crippling cost. These were the first fascinating duels between the developing Roman legions and the hitherto-dominant Hellenistic way of war with its pike phalanxes and elephants.
Pyrrhus ultimately failed in Italy and Sicily but went on to further military adventures in Greece, eventually being killed while storming the city of Argos.
156 pages, Paperback
First published July 16, 2009
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
July 9, 2022
Pyrrhus is an interesting character. But like many other great people of antiquity, his story is riddled with holes in which we have no idea what exactly happened due to the complete or partial loss of primary sources. This leads us to guess and to make assumptions about why Pyrrhus did certain things or how some aspects of his campaigns went. I find this very frustrating, especially the loss of Pyrrhus’ own memoirs is sad. This, mixed with the fact that several of the later sources used contradict each other, makes it difficult to create a complete biography of him. Champion however, does a good job in creating an interesting story with the little sources available to us.
It is Hannibal Barca himself that supposedly said that Pyrrhus is one of the greatest generals of all time, second only to Alexander the Great. Being very similar to Alexander in the size of his ambitions and the strong attention to military affairs, he could not stay inactive for long periods. Leading campaigns in Macedonia, Italy, Sicily and Greece, Pyrrhus suffered from his own ambitions. He ultimately did not achieve his goals and the eponymous term ‘Pyrrhic victory’ is still one of the things most known about him.
The book is very readable and gives plenty of background information. I therefore believe that anyone can read this without any prior knowledge on the period. It is however more interesting when you’ve read some books on the Wars of the Diadochi, as those are very relevant to Pyrrhus’ story. This is a very nice book full of entertaining anecdotes and useful explanations by Champion.
It is Hannibal Barca himself that supposedly said that Pyrrhus is one of the greatest generals of all time, second only to Alexander the Great. Being very similar to Alexander in the size of his ambitions and the strong attention to military affairs, he could not stay inactive for long periods. Leading campaigns in Macedonia, Italy, Sicily and Greece, Pyrrhus suffered from his own ambitions. He ultimately did not achieve his goals and the eponymous term ‘Pyrrhic victory’ is still one of the things most known about him.
The book is very readable and gives plenty of background information. I therefore believe that anyone can read this without any prior knowledge on the period. It is however more interesting when you’ve read some books on the Wars of the Diadochi, as those are very relevant to Pyrrhus’ story. This is a very nice book full of entertaining anecdotes and useful explanations by Champion.
August 24, 2013
It seems that only in military history is it possible to read an academic work that isn't as dry as dust and feels like it was written by a Dalek. This is an example of one such book, Jeff Champion's 'Pyrrhus of Epirus' is a very good telling of one of the lesser known, famous figures of antiquity.
If you ever wondered where the phrase: 'Pyrrhic victory' comes from, it's this man right here.
Pyrrhus was born in a small, backwater of the Greek world known as Epirus, in a tumultuous career he started as being an exile in another Greek Kingdom, to taking control of Epirus, conquering (briefly) Macedonia, making a name for himself as a true Successor King of Alexander (who he could claim as a relative through Alexander's mother Olympia-if I'm not mistaken), enlarged Epirus, almost conquered Sicily, besieged Sparta and fought the Romans in three horribly bloody battles. It is his war with Rome, in support of the Greek city state of Tarentum in southern Italy that made him famous. He defeated the Romans twice and fought them to a bloody draw once, but his losses were so severe, despite having the same military system as Alexandr's Macedonians, that he was never able to turn any tactical advantage into a lasting strategic or even operational one.
Though the Roman's did not yet have a professional army at this time (270's BC), they still had the overall more successful military system when compared to the Greeks. Pyrrhus also learned something that Hannibal would learn to his misfortune some sixty years later: The Romans don't negotiate terms. Period. Knock the Romans down and they just keep coming back until they have you on the ground...and the you're pretty much guaranteed to die.
Pyrrhus was so bloodied by fighting the Romans to a strategic draw after the battles of Heraclea and Asculum that he turned to assisting the Greek city states in Sicily, though this was more for a chance for glory than any love of the Greek people. Pyrrhus took quite a few Carthaginian strongholds and cities by storm, something that Alexander couldn't even always do against other city's, and after abandoning the siege of Llybeaum (I know I misspelled that, sorry), due to the situation behind him amongst the Greeks blowing up in his face, a common occurrence in Pyrrhus' life, he also defeated the Carthaginians in a couple of battles that the sources say were bloody. However the Carthaginian navy trounced Pyrrhus' fleet as he tried to, once again, take his army and come to the rescue of Tarentum against the Romans, also in the process abandoning Sicily with his tail between his legs in essence.
He fought one more battle with Rome at Maleventum and he barely succeeded in fighting them to a draw before withdrawing from Italy entirely. The Romans, proud of having fought off a Greek King, and a famous one at that, renamed Maleventum as Beneventum which means good event.
Pyrrhus, desperately needing cash to pay for his wars in Italy and Sicily, invaded Macedonia and stripped the countryside, causing the Macedonians to abandon his cause. Ever the one to seek for glory, Pyrrhus then marched south, ignoring his loss of Macedonia entirely, and took up the dubious cause of assisting the Pelloponessus cities against Antigonus who was encroaching upon them. Pyrrhus, however, stabbed Sparta in the back and placed it under siege. Pyrrhus was, however, clearly beaten here and forced to retire where he then, very unwisely, marched on Argos where he would fall in battle after an initial night assault on the city.
His story is one that would make a hell of a Hollywood blockbuster (if it had the right director, ahem) and is a shame that it is not very well known. Jeff Champion has written a very good book on a sadly neglected figure of history.
If you ever wondered where the phrase: 'Pyrrhic victory' comes from, it's this man right here.
Pyrrhus was born in a small, backwater of the Greek world known as Epirus, in a tumultuous career he started as being an exile in another Greek Kingdom, to taking control of Epirus, conquering (briefly) Macedonia, making a name for himself as a true Successor King of Alexander (who he could claim as a relative through Alexander's mother Olympia-if I'm not mistaken), enlarged Epirus, almost conquered Sicily, besieged Sparta and fought the Romans in three horribly bloody battles. It is his war with Rome, in support of the Greek city state of Tarentum in southern Italy that made him famous. He defeated the Romans twice and fought them to a bloody draw once, but his losses were so severe, despite having the same military system as Alexandr's Macedonians, that he was never able to turn any tactical advantage into a lasting strategic or even operational one.
Though the Roman's did not yet have a professional army at this time (270's BC), they still had the overall more successful military system when compared to the Greeks. Pyrrhus also learned something that Hannibal would learn to his misfortune some sixty years later: The Romans don't negotiate terms. Period. Knock the Romans down and they just keep coming back until they have you on the ground...and the you're pretty much guaranteed to die.
Pyrrhus was so bloodied by fighting the Romans to a strategic draw after the battles of Heraclea and Asculum that he turned to assisting the Greek city states in Sicily, though this was more for a chance for glory than any love of the Greek people. Pyrrhus took quite a few Carthaginian strongholds and cities by storm, something that Alexander couldn't even always do against other city's, and after abandoning the siege of Llybeaum (I know I misspelled that, sorry), due to the situation behind him amongst the Greeks blowing up in his face, a common occurrence in Pyrrhus' life, he also defeated the Carthaginians in a couple of battles that the sources say were bloody. However the Carthaginian navy trounced Pyrrhus' fleet as he tried to, once again, take his army and come to the rescue of Tarentum against the Romans, also in the process abandoning Sicily with his tail between his legs in essence.
He fought one more battle with Rome at Maleventum and he barely succeeded in fighting them to a draw before withdrawing from Italy entirely. The Romans, proud of having fought off a Greek King, and a famous one at that, renamed Maleventum as Beneventum which means good event.
Pyrrhus, desperately needing cash to pay for his wars in Italy and Sicily, invaded Macedonia and stripped the countryside, causing the Macedonians to abandon his cause. Ever the one to seek for glory, Pyrrhus then marched south, ignoring his loss of Macedonia entirely, and took up the dubious cause of assisting the Pelloponessus cities against Antigonus who was encroaching upon them. Pyrrhus, however, stabbed Sparta in the back and placed it under siege. Pyrrhus was, however, clearly beaten here and forced to retire where he then, very unwisely, marched on Argos where he would fall in battle after an initial night assault on the city.
His story is one that would make a hell of a Hollywood blockbuster (if it had the right director, ahem) and is a shame that it is not very well known. Jeff Champion has written a very good book on a sadly neglected figure of history.
January 15, 2016
Quite a nicely written book with lots of maps
As a wargamer i really like this one
Not that much known about pyrrhus though hannibal rated him as one the greats apparently
I think the author did a good job with what he had to hand
Well done
As a wargamer i really like this one
Not that much known about pyrrhus though hannibal rated him as one the greats apparently
I think the author did a good job with what he had to hand
Well done
August 16, 2023
Jeff Champion really showed his writing skills with this title. A biography about a man who’s ambitions were unlimited. The first and only Hellenistic king to defeat Rome in battle (multiple times). His ambition also is part of his downfall.
Overall a really good read.
Overall a really good read.
June 30, 2022
Interesting.
October 1, 2016
This biography does better service to Pyrrhus then he did to himself on the battlefield.
As the giver of his own name to a pithy phrase describing a worthless or counter-productive victory, but also someone renown for bravery in the face of adversity. Why ancient generals looked up to him has always been beyond me, but he was and is a very interesting figure.
Also, in a world where the most likely future leader of the worlds most powerful country is someone with lots of experience in foreign affairs but consistently delivering mediocre to negative results before jumping into the next quagmire, Pyrrhus's career offers both parallels and understanding.
As the giver of his own name to a pithy phrase describing a worthless or counter-productive victory, but also someone renown for bravery in the face of adversity. Why ancient generals looked up to him has always been beyond me, but he was and is a very interesting figure.
Also, in a world where the most likely future leader of the worlds most powerful country is someone with lots of experience in foreign affairs but consistently delivering mediocre to negative results before jumping into the next quagmire, Pyrrhus's career offers both parallels and understanding.
October 27, 2019
Pyrrhus of Epirus profiles the Epirote king whom we know today for lending his name to the term “Pyrrhic Victory”. The ancients, however, ranked Pyrrhus with Alexander and Hannibal as among the greatest generals who ever lived, and revered him as the author of the premier texts on the strategy of warfare.
Pyrrhus lived in tumultuous times, and created quite a lot of tumult himself. Born into the royal family of Epirus, his early years were spent as a pawn and protégé of the successors of Alexander. Exiled as a child, he eventually wiggled his way back into the kingship. After being expelled again by Macedonian King Cassander, he fought for the Antigonids, befriended Ptolemy I, and with Ptolemy’s help, regained his own kingdom. He then conquered half of Macedonia, but quickly lost it to Thracian King Lysimachus.
As his renown as a general spread, the Greek cities in Italy invited him to counterbalance the Roman Republic’s aggressiveness. He defeated the Romans twice by aweing them with his Greek phalanxes and Indian elephants, which shocked their sensibilities. But his victories were hollow; as a ruler of a small state fighting a much larger state, every casualty placed him at a disadvantage in the long-run (thus, his “Pyrrhic Victories”). Before stabilizing the Italian Greek cities, he headed to Sicily, where he conquered most of the island, but failed to timely expel the Carthaginians, leaving chaos behind in his wake.
On returning to Epirus, he once again surged into battle, defeating the Antigonid king, and claiming the Macedonian throne. But after intervening unsuccessfully in Sparta, he died unbecomingly during a battle in Argos when a soldier’s mother dropped a tile on his head. On his death, Epirus faded into obscurity, the Greek cities fell to Rome, Sicily returned to its former state of conflict, and the Antigonids regained Macedonia.
The picture that emerges of Pyrrhus is that of a perpetually restless ruler, competent in war, but incompetent in statesmanship. Though he fought with shockingly heroic bravery and strength, and used his resources in battle well, he never consolidated his gains nor built the alliances and relationships that could have solidified his victories. Every win fostered his desire for more victories, and every loss steeled him for another fight.
Jeff Champion’s biography takes us through Pyrrhus’s eventful life in a thoughtful narrative. Champion uses the sources well, and places Pyrrhus’ life in the context of his times. We understand Pyrrhus’s strengths and his many weaknesses, and learn about the politics of the Greek city-states and the Roman Republic. Though a bit more scattered and unedited than Champion’s excellent Antigonus the One-Eyed, it’s still an eminently readable history.
Pyrrhus lived in tumultuous times, and created quite a lot of tumult himself. Born into the royal family of Epirus, his early years were spent as a pawn and protégé of the successors of Alexander. Exiled as a child, he eventually wiggled his way back into the kingship. After being expelled again by Macedonian King Cassander, he fought for the Antigonids, befriended Ptolemy I, and with Ptolemy’s help, regained his own kingdom. He then conquered half of Macedonia, but quickly lost it to Thracian King Lysimachus.
As his renown as a general spread, the Greek cities in Italy invited him to counterbalance the Roman Republic’s aggressiveness. He defeated the Romans twice by aweing them with his Greek phalanxes and Indian elephants, which shocked their sensibilities. But his victories were hollow; as a ruler of a small state fighting a much larger state, every casualty placed him at a disadvantage in the long-run (thus, his “Pyrrhic Victories”). Before stabilizing the Italian Greek cities, he headed to Sicily, where he conquered most of the island, but failed to timely expel the Carthaginians, leaving chaos behind in his wake.
On returning to Epirus, he once again surged into battle, defeating the Antigonid king, and claiming the Macedonian throne. But after intervening unsuccessfully in Sparta, he died unbecomingly during a battle in Argos when a soldier’s mother dropped a tile on his head. On his death, Epirus faded into obscurity, the Greek cities fell to Rome, Sicily returned to its former state of conflict, and the Antigonids regained Macedonia.
The picture that emerges of Pyrrhus is that of a perpetually restless ruler, competent in war, but incompetent in statesmanship. Though he fought with shockingly heroic bravery and strength, and used his resources in battle well, he never consolidated his gains nor built the alliances and relationships that could have solidified his victories. Every win fostered his desire for more victories, and every loss steeled him for another fight.
Jeff Champion’s biography takes us through Pyrrhus’s eventful life in a thoughtful narrative. Champion uses the sources well, and places Pyrrhus’ life in the context of his times. We understand Pyrrhus’s strengths and his many weaknesses, and learn about the politics of the Greek city-states and the Roman Republic. Though a bit more scattered and unedited than Champion’s excellent Antigonus the One-Eyed, it’s still an eminently readable history.
October 3, 2013
‘Pyrrhus of Epirus’ by Jeff Champion is infinitely readable, and is the first book I have read by this particular author.
Pyrrhus is certainly one of the better known characters of antiquity, known as one of the first eastern potentates to clash with Rome (to mixed result). Hence, the continued use in the modern day of the term ‘Pyrrhic’ to denote a victory that was too costly.
Therefore, I was a trifle surprised to learn, in the author’s preface, that this is only the second biography to be attempted of Pyrrhus’ life and achievements (written in English). This is largely due to a dearth of primary source material. However, Champion use what has been bequeathed to us by posterity to good effect. The result is a good, if at time imaginative, re-telling of the formative events of Pyrrhus’ career that shaped his development as a general.
The author, in his preface, states that the biography was not intended to be an academic treatise and was written with a broader audience in mind. On this level, I think the book delivers. It is laid out in chronological order, written in accessible language, and is furnished with good maps to help orientate the reader.
The first chapter gives contextual information regarding Epirus’ geography, socio-political composition and her relationship with her neighbours. The second chapter outlines Pyrrhus’ formative years in exile and how the experiences he gained while at the courts of the Diadochi or Successors help him develop as a general. The remaining chapters outline his wars in Macedonia, Magna Graecia, Sicily and the Peloponnesus.
Overall, an enthralling read and well worth picking up for anyone interested in military history in the age of the Diadochi.
Happy Reading,
Gavin
Pyrrhus is certainly one of the better known characters of antiquity, known as one of the first eastern potentates to clash with Rome (to mixed result). Hence, the continued use in the modern day of the term ‘Pyrrhic’ to denote a victory that was too costly.
Therefore, I was a trifle surprised to learn, in the author’s preface, that this is only the second biography to be attempted of Pyrrhus’ life and achievements (written in English). This is largely due to a dearth of primary source material. However, Champion use what has been bequeathed to us by posterity to good effect. The result is a good, if at time imaginative, re-telling of the formative events of Pyrrhus’ career that shaped his development as a general.
The author, in his preface, states that the biography was not intended to be an academic treatise and was written with a broader audience in mind. On this level, I think the book delivers. It is laid out in chronological order, written in accessible language, and is furnished with good maps to help orientate the reader.
The first chapter gives contextual information regarding Epirus’ geography, socio-political composition and her relationship with her neighbours. The second chapter outlines Pyrrhus’ formative years in exile and how the experiences he gained while at the courts of the Diadochi or Successors help him develop as a general. The remaining chapters outline his wars in Macedonia, Magna Graecia, Sicily and the Peloponnesus.
Overall, an enthralling read and well worth picking up for anyone interested in military history in the age of the Diadochi.
Happy Reading,
Gavin
December 14, 2014
I found the book very readable and enjoyable. Jeff Champion appears to cover the topic reasonably well to my limited knowledge. I would recommend this book.
August 27, 2017
Pyrrhus of Epirus - he of the adjectival victory won at too great a cost ('One more such victory and we are lost' or alternative translation of your choice) - is one of the more fascinating figures of antiquity. Indeed, he was uniquely positioned to go to war for or against most of the great and emerging Mediterranean powers of his day, including Rome, Carthage, Macedonia, Sparta, the Galatians and the Successor kingdoms.
Thus, whilst it's pleasing to see an attempt at an accessible modern text about his life, I can't say I found Jeff Champion's book to be entirely successful. Adequate to the purpose perhaps, but a long way short of excellent. And that is despite my pleasant surprise to find a local connection to myself, as the author studied at the University of Western Australia.
Champion sets the tone in his introduction, wherein he explains his intention to write a popular rather than academic history. That's all well and good, though I'm not convinced he has a firm grasp on the clarity and readability required for a popular audience, at least not at this point in his career. His later works are also on subjects of interest so I hope he may have shown improvement.
For example, I would go as far as to say Chapter II - 'Exile' is a mess. After a brief discussion of Pyrrhus' exile in the court of Ptolemy, we then spend large parts of the chapter on discussing the unreliability of Plutarch's Lives as a source (yet he leans on it heavily and quotes from it frequently throughout, doubtless due to the paucity of other sources), then we make a chronological and geographical leap backwards to a discourse about Philip II's reforms of the army of Macedonia. It doesn't flow at all and is badly in need of a diligent editor to ask that he take a step back and re-think how to structure the work.
The not infrequent copy editing errors - at least in the ebook edition - such as 'ensued' instead of 'ensured' (multiple times), 'Macedonian' instead of 'Macedonia' (and vice versa), and omissions of apostrophes and prepositions are not encouraging but I can live with them. The language is functional but on occasion grammatically or syntactically awkward, and sometimes Champion repeats himself within a few pages. Consider these quotes, for example:
One gets the gist of it but the absence of editing here is stark. Nonetheless, the book is sufficient for obtaining a broad overview of the military and political machinations of a great tactician and mediocre strategist of the ancient world.
Thus, whilst it's pleasing to see an attempt at an accessible modern text about his life, I can't say I found Jeff Champion's book to be entirely successful. Adequate to the purpose perhaps, but a long way short of excellent. And that is despite my pleasant surprise to find a local connection to myself, as the author studied at the University of Western Australia.
Champion sets the tone in his introduction, wherein he explains his intention to write a popular rather than academic history. That's all well and good, though I'm not convinced he has a firm grasp on the clarity and readability required for a popular audience, at least not at this point in his career. His later works are also on subjects of interest so I hope he may have shown improvement.
For example, I would go as far as to say Chapter II - 'Exile' is a mess. After a brief discussion of Pyrrhus' exile in the court of Ptolemy, we then spend large parts of the chapter on discussing the unreliability of Plutarch's Lives as a source (yet he leans on it heavily and quotes from it frequently throughout, doubtless due to the paucity of other sources), then we make a chronological and geographical leap backwards to a discourse about Philip II's reforms of the army of Macedonia. It doesn't flow at all and is badly in need of a diligent editor to ask that he take a step back and re-think how to structure the work.
The not infrequent copy editing errors - at least in the ebook edition - such as 'ensued' instead of 'ensured' (multiple times), 'Macedonian' instead of 'Macedonia' (and vice versa), and omissions of apostrophes and prepositions are not encouraging but I can live with them. The language is functional but on occasion grammatically or syntactically awkward, and sometimes Champion repeats himself within a few pages. Consider these quotes, for example:
As usual the Romans won this battle after a hard fight. In an open battle, such as Pyrrhus was about fight (sic), they were generally swept away by the more heavily equipped Romans.
~
Pyrrhus did not panic but instead 'decided to keep the rest of his forces in the plain and not to recall or disturb the phalanx, but sent the elephants and the boldest of the horse, carefully selected, as reinforcements for the camp.' He reinforced the cavalry force he had just collected with a force of elephants.
~
This force was now ordered to attack the Apulians but they arrived too late to prevent the sack and firing of the camp... (one sentence later) Pyrrhus' soldiers arrived too late to save the camp.
One gets the gist of it but the absence of editing here is stark. Nonetheless, the book is sufficient for obtaining a broad overview of the military and political machinations of a great tactician and mediocre strategist of the ancient world.
July 10, 2025
Pyrrhus of Epirus is a must read for any military historian. Supposedly Hannibal himself named Pyrrhus as the second best commander of the ancient world only coming in second behind Alexander the Great. It’s a shame we don’t have much source material to go off of for Pyrrhus, for instance, Plutarch’s bibliography of him is only about 30 pages. Pyrrhus believed a king only had one duty and that was to study and make war. He was at war from early age to the end of his life and I wish in particular there was more source material on his campaign in Sicily against Carthage. Pyrrhus had great ambitions like many of the kings of the Hellenistic Period did, but as this books explains we learn where the term Pyrrhic victory comes from. Pyrrhus could win great battles but he never had the intuition or patience to follow them up with a strategic victories. But Pyrrhus also never let defeat get him down as he always sought out other wars to make up for his loss. By the end of his life Pyrrhus had made Epirus known all over the ancient world. Overall, I loved this book and recommend it to anybody who’s a fan of this period of History. I do think it’s beneficial to have some knowledge of the environment that the ancient world was in after the death of Alexander the Great before reading this book. Ghost on the Throne and The Last Kings of Macedonia are great books for that.
May 7, 2025
Not much has been written about Pyrrhus of Epirus, either in source material or more modern books. Nonetheless, Champion has put together a compelling and exciting history of a man who lived for battle and can be ranked as one of the best generals of all time. He effectively fought against the armies of Rome, Carthage and others during the Successor Wars which followed the death of Alexander the Great. Very worthwhile read.
July 18, 2023
An interesting read about a military giant I didn’t know a whole lot about (apart from the obvious). It was hard trying to keep straight the endless fratricidal politics and dizzying flip-flopping of conquest though. But that’s the nature of that time in history.
March 7, 2022
Good
I enjoyed this and thought the author did a good job of going over what he didn't know and what he was guessing about. Highly recommend. Pyrrhus was a interesting character.
I enjoyed this and thought the author did a good job of going over what he didn't know and what he was guessing about. Highly recommend. Pyrrhus was a interesting character.
August 15, 2024
My favourite ancient king! A man with too much ambition for his small, hellenic kingdom. Hence the phrase 'Pyrrhic victory'.
October 16, 2024
Much needed book on Pyrrhus. Excellent coverage !
March 2, 2017
This is a good book for those readers who enjoy anything to do with ancient history. Champion provides a quick yet detailed look into the life of one of the Hellenistic Periods standout figures, Pyrrhus of Epirus. This narrative provides an account of the wars and battles that Pyrrhus participated in as well as the context of the settings in an attempt to provide the perspective of this larger-than-life individual and explain why he did what he did, making for an all the more interesting read.
Granted, there are a couple of problems with the book (so I will just get them out of the way). Firstly, this is a book predominantly about war and battle, little is explained of Pyrrhus' personal life and about his rule as king. Though, considering the materials available from the period, which are fragmentary and tend to focus on the glorious achievements of war anyway, it is understandable why this has occurred. Secondly, Champion has a distinct problem with deciding how much context to place for certain events. In a chapter detailing Pyrrhus' Sicilian conquest, pages are dedicated to the Phoenicians and Carthaginians when a couple of paragraphs would have sufficed.
However, these are of minimal concern and I believe that overall Champion has produced a fantastic little book that highlights a figure that is so often ignored within the field of ancient history. I heartily recommend this book for those looking for a quick read about the Hellenistic period and for those who enjoy history in general.
Granted, there are a couple of problems with the book (so I will just get them out of the way). Firstly, this is a book predominantly about war and battle, little is explained of Pyrrhus' personal life and about his rule as king. Though, considering the materials available from the period, which are fragmentary and tend to focus on the glorious achievements of war anyway, it is understandable why this has occurred. Secondly, Champion has a distinct problem with deciding how much context to place for certain events. In a chapter detailing Pyrrhus' Sicilian conquest, pages are dedicated to the Phoenicians and Carthaginians when a couple of paragraphs would have sufficed.
However, these are of minimal concern and I believe that overall Champion has produced a fantastic little book that highlights a figure that is so often ignored within the field of ancient history. I heartily recommend this book for those looking for a quick read about the Hellenistic period and for those who enjoy history in general.
Read
November 24, 2014Even in my present state of Hellenistic obsession, I found this book turgid. This is only partly because Champion's interest is mostly in military matters. The real flaw is the way the book is written so that it's both slow and bombastic. I'd been looking forward to it, and then I had to force myself through it.
Champion has also written a book on Antigonos, which is a pity, as I'd love to read a good book about Antigonos and it's unlikely that somebody else will write me one any time soon with Champion's sitting there.
Champion has also written a book on Antigonos, which is a pity, as I'd love to read a good book about Antigonos and it's unlikely that somebody else will write me one any time soon with Champion's sitting there.
August 9, 2015
iv liked all this authors books on ancient history hopefully he continues writing them,
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews