title: Inverness Caledonian Thistle F.C.

text: The following season did not start out successful, with 9 draws in their first 12 games, which also included failing to defend the Challenge Cup title after being defeated 2–1 by Dunfermline. However results soon picked up and by May, Inverness captured a play-off spot; they also enjoyed a strong cup run with a 6–1 win over Edinburgh City, a 4–0 win over East Kilbride, a 5–4 penalty win over Ross County and a 2–1 win over Dundee United before heading to Hampden where they were beaten 3–0 by Hearts in the semi-final. The play-offs started well, however after beating Ayr United 4–2 on aggregate hopes were shattered with a controversial 4–0 loss to Dundee United in the semi-final.


title: Inverness Caledonian Thistle F.C.

text: The 2019–20 season started off, again, with an early League Cup exit. Come March, the club were doing well in the Challenge Cup and league. However, the season was abruptly cut short due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This meant that the season of every league from the Championship down was to be abandoned with the league tables being recognised as the final positions, however, the play-offs would not take place, resulting in Inverness being set for a 4th consecutive season in the Championship, and Dundee United, being promoted to the Premiership. This was officially confirmed on 9 May 2020, after the SPFL announced there would be no league reconstruction as there was not enough support from Premiership sides. Inverness finished their season on 10 March with a 3–1 home win over Queen of the South. On 10 May, a strongly worded statement was released by the club, which agreed with multiple other clubs statements of the SPFL bullying clubs during the Season Ending Vote, and that officials were turning a blind eye to all reported cases.


title: Inverness Caledonian Thistle F.C.

text: In early 2021, John Robertson left on compassionate leave due to a death in his family, and was subsequently replaced by interim manager Neil McCann, who took Inverness out of the relegation playoff zone into the top half and competing for promotion playoffs.


title: Inverness Caledonian Thistle F.C.

text: In recent years, the club have embraced the trend of adopting an official mascot. These have included:


title: Inverness Caledonian Thistle F.C.

text: <nowiki>*</nowiki>During the COVID-19 pandemic, where fans were not permitted inside stadia, Inverness and Hearts fans virtually sold out the stadium for the match between the two on 26 February 2021, with the final count being 11,356. Though not an official attendance, it is the largest number of tickets sold for a home match involving the club.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: The Pyrrhic War (280–275 BC) was largely fought between the Roman Republic and Pyrrhus, the king of Epirus, who had been asked by the people of the Greek city of Tarentum in southern Italy to help them in their war against the Romans.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: A skilled commander, with a strong army fortified by war elephants (which the Romans were not experienced in facing), Pyrrhus enjoyed initial success against the Roman legions, but suffered heavy losses even in these victories. Plutarch wrote that Pyrrhus said after the second battle of the war, "If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined." He could not call up more men from home and his allies in Italy were becoming indifferent. The Romans, by contrast, had a very large pool of military manpower and could replenish their legions even if their forces were depleted in many battles. This has led to the expression "Pyrrhic victory", a term for a victory that inflicts losses the victor cannot afford in the long term.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Worn down by the battles against Rome, Pyrrhus moved his army to Sicily to war against the Carthaginians instead. After several years of campaigning there (278–275 BC), he returned to Italy in 275 BC, where the last battle of the war was fought, ending in Roman victory. Following this, Pyrrhus returned to Epirus, ending the war. Three years later, in 272 BC, the Romans captured Tarentum.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: The Pyrrhic War was the first time that Rome confronted the professional mercenary armies of the Hellenistic states of the eastern Mediterranean. Rome's victory drew the attention of these states to the emerging power of Rome. Ptolemy II, the king of Egypt, established diplomatic relations with Rome. After the war, Rome asserted its hegemony over southern Italy.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: By 290 BC, at the end of the three Samnite Wars, Rome had established her hegemony over parts of central and southern Italy, cemented through alliances with various Italic peoples in central Italy. To the south of the Roman sphere of influence there were a few city-states founded by Greek settlers from the 8th to the 6th century BC (primarily on the coasts of Calabria and Basilicata and in eastern and southern Sicily). Tarentum on the coast of Bruttium and Lucania was the largest and most powerful. The Tarentines attacked a Roman fleet off their coast. As a result, Rome declared war.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Different versions of the events which triggered the declaration of war exist. Appian, Cassius Dio and Zonaras appear to have blamed the war on the Tarentines. The part of the text of Dionysius of Halicarnassus regarding these events has been lost and Plutarch did not mention them.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: In Appian's version, in 282 BC ten Roman ships appeared close to Tarentum, in the north-eastern part of the Gulf of Taranto. Allegedly, Publius Cornelius Dolabella (one of the two consuls for 283 BC) was sailing along the coast of Magna Graecia, sight-seeing. A demagogue reminded the townsfolk about an old treaty in which Romans had bound themselves not to sail beyond the promontory of Lacinium, which was near Croton, on the opposite side of the gulf. He persuaded them to attack the ships: four were sunk and one was captured "with all on board". This would have happened in 282 BC, the year after Dolabella's consulship, because that year he was fighting in central Italy. Appian did not explain why the consul was sight-seeing with so many ships.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Neither Cassius Dio nor Zonaras whose version was based on those of Cassius Dio, mentioned any treaties between the Romans and the Tarentines. Zonaras wrote that the Tarentines had associated with the Etruscans, Gauls, and Samnites, and that the Romans defeated these peoples in various battles over years. However, the Tarentines had not participated in these battles. Zonaras also described Lucius Valerius as ‘the admiral’ sailing to a place he had been sent to. The location was not specified by Zonaras. He wanted to set anchor off Tarentum, the reason of which was not specified either. The Tarentines thought that Lucius Valerius had retaliated for their past actions, hence sank his ships, killed and captured some of the crews.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: In Cassius Dio's text, Lucius Valerius was sent on some errand. The Tarentines were intoxicated by wine during the Dionysiac festival celebration. When they saw his ships, they suspected Lucius Valerius' intention, attacking his ships "without any show force on his part or the slightest suspicion of any hostile act ..." The Romans were angry about this "but did not choose to take the field against Tarentum at once. However, they despatched envoys, in order not to appear to have passed over the affair in silence and in that way render them more arrogant." The Tarentines did not accept the proposal of the envoys and insulted them. As a result, the Romans declared war.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: In another fragment, Cassius Dio wrote that the Romans had learned that Tarentum was preparing for war against them and sent Gaius Fabricius Luscinus (one of the consuls for 282 BC) as an envoy to the cities allied with Rome to prevent a rebellion there. However, "these peoples" arrested him and sent men to the Etruscans, Umbrians, and Gauls, causing several of them to secede. He also wrote that the Tarentines had started the war but felt safe because the Romans pretended to be unaware of the Tarentines' plans because of their "temporary embarrassments." Cassius Dio did not clarify what the "temporary embarrassments" were. The Tarentines thought that they were not observed. They "behaved still more insolently and forced the Romans even against their will to make war upon them."


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Cassius Dio's statements are ambiguous. The statement that the Romans learnt that Tarentum was preparing for war obscures the fact that the known events indicate Tarentum did so only when Rome declared war on them. The statement that the Tarentines started the war but felt safe, because the Romans pretended to be unaware of this, is also ambiguous. The Romans sent their envoys soon after the attacks on their ships and declared war soon after their envoys were insulted. Thus, it is hard to see what the pretence was. This fragment claims that the Tarentines started the war, but in fact they just caused the events which led to it. As for Gaius Fabricius' being sent to the allies of Rome, this occurred in the year of the attack on the Roman ships, and it is likely that it was after this event. In that year there was also a rebellion by various Italic peoples, indicated by an entry for 282 BC in the annals of Livy's Periochae: "The Samnites revolted. In several battles, many commanders successfully fought against them and against the Lucanians, Bruttians, and Etruscans." It was probably prompted by the tensions between Rome and Tarentum.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Appian wrote that the Tarentines accused the Greek city of Thurii (on the eastern coast of Calabria) of preferring the Romans to themselves even though they were Greeks, "they held its citizens chiefly to blame for the Romans overpassing the limits [of the treaty]. Then they expelled the noblest citizens of Thurii, sacked the city, and dismissed the Roman garrison that was stationed there under a treaty." Livy's Periochae recorded that when the Romans were fighting the Lucani, they also decided to support the inhabitants of Thurii. The dating in this seems that it was in 286 or 285 BC. The plebeian tribune Gaius Aelius, who proposed to help this city, was honoured by its people with a statue in the Roman Forum. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, wrote that Gaius Fabricius Luscinus "conquered the Samnites, Lucanians and Bruttians in stubborn battles and had raised the siege of Thurii" when he served as consul in 282 BC.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Modern historical consensus gives the breach of the treaty mentioned by Appian and the raising of the siege of Thurii as the explanation for the attack on the Roman ships. Appian's claim of sight-seeing is deemed implausible. Tarentum was concerned about growing Roman influence in this area, which started with Thurii asking for Roman protection in 286 or 285 BC. This turning to Rome instead of Tarentum was taken as an acknowledgment of the emergence of Rome as the hegemonic power in Italy by the latter. This is probably why Appian wrote that the Tarentines blamed Thurii for overstepping the limits of the treaty, attacked the city and expelled the Roman garrison there. It has been speculated that the mentioned treaty might have been a peace treaty made by Alexander of Epirus with the Romans in 332 BC while campaigning in southern Italy to support Tarentum against the Lucani, or a treaty made with Cleonymus of Sparta in 303 BC for the same reason. There has also been speculation that when the Romans raised the siege of Thurii their troops might have been transported by a small fleet which turned up off Tarentum.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: After the attack on their ships, the Romans sent envoys to demand the return of their prisoners and the people of Thurii, restoration of their plundered property and the surrender of the perpetrators. The envoys were presented to the people, who had been revelling during the Dionysiac festival. They were mocked for the way they spoke Greek and their Roman togas. One man relieved himself and soiled the clothing of the chief envoy. The leaders of the town did not apologise for this and rejected the proposal.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote that when the envoys returned to Rome there was great indignation. Some argued that Rome should not sent an army against Tarentum until she had subdued the rebelling Lucanians, Bruttii, Samnites, and the Etruscans. Those who argued for waging war immediately won the day. Appian wrote that Lucius Aemilius Barbula (one of the consuls for 281 BC) was ordered to suspend his operations against the Samnites, and invade Tarentum. He was to offer terms first and, if the Tarentines disagreed, he was to wage war. Zonaras, instead, wrote that Lucius Aemilius offered favourable propositions, hoping that the Tarentines would choose peace. However, the opinions of the Tarentines were divided. The pro-war faction sent envoys to Pyrrhus to propose an alliance. Lucius Aemilius got wind of this and pillaged the countryside. The Tarentines made sorties, but these were routed. Lucius Aemilius freeing some of the more influential prisoners led to hope for reconciliation. However, there were disagreements. Agis, a friend of the Romans, was chosen as the general of the city. Plutarch, too, wrote that the elderly, whom he described as sensible, opposed a plan to call for the aid of Pyrrhus. However, they were "overborne by the clamour and violence of the war party, and others, seeing this, absented themselves from the assembly." Plutarch did not mention the election of Agis.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote that the Tarentines decided to ask Pyrrhus to help them and banished those who were opposed to it. Prior to this, a Tarentine, Meton, pretended to be drunk to demonstrate the free and leisurely lifestyle of the Tarentines, argued against allowing a king to garrison the city and claimed that this would bring many evils to a free and democratic city like Tarentum. He was listened to for a while, but then he was thrown out of the theatre where the assembly of the people had convened. Cassius Dio also related that Meton failed to persuade the Tarentines not to engage in war with the Romans and that he argued that Tarentum would lose its freedom under Pyrrhus. Plutarch wrote that his words "brought conviction to most of the Tarentines, and a murmur of applause ran through the assembly. But those who were afraid that if peace were made they would be given up to the Romans, reviled the people for tamely submitting to such shameless treatment from a drunken reveller, and banding together they cast Meton out." After that a decree to send envoys from Tarentum and other Greek cities in Italy to Pyrrhus was passed. They brought gifts and claimed if he went to Italy he would find a force of 50,000 infantry and 20,000 cavalry gathered from Tarentum, Messapia, Lucania and Samnium. This got Pyrrhus excited and made the Epirotes eager to fight in Italy.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Cassius Dio wrote that Pyrrhus "had a particularly high opinion of his powers because he was deemed by foreign nations a match for the Romans." He had for a long time coveted Sicily and considered how to overthrow Roman power, but he did not want to fight them "when no wrong had been done him." Both Cassius Dio and Plutarch wrote about Cineas, an important adviser of Pyrrhus. He was a man from Thessaly with a reputation for great wisdom who had been a pupil of Demosthenes the orator. Pyrrhus held him in high regard. Cineas saw the folly of an expedition to Italy. He tried to dissuade Pyrrhus and urged him to be satisfied with the possessions he already had, but Pyrrhus did not listen to him.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Pyrrhus asked Antiochus I (the king of the Seleucid Empire) for money and Antigonus II (the king of Macedon) to lend him ships to carry his army to Italy. Ptolemy II (the king of the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt) gave him 5,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry on condition that they would not serve him for more than two years. In exchange, since Pyrrhus would be taking the best of his army to Italy, he appointed Ptolemy as guardian of his kingdom while he was away.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Zonaras wrote that Pyrrhus, who saw the request for help as a lucky break for his aims in Italy, insisted on a clause in the treaty with the Tarentines which provided that he should not be detained in Italy longer than needed in order not to arouse suspicions. After that he detained most of the Tarentine envoys as hostages with the excuse that he needed them to help him to get his army ready. He sent a few of them ahead with Cineas who was given some troops. This came in the way of negotiations with the Romans. He arrived soon after the election of Agis and his arrival encouraged the Tarentines, who stopped their attempts at reconciliation with the Romans. They deposed Agis and elected one of the envoys as commander. Shortly after this Pyrrhus sent Milo, one of his lieutenants, ahead with another force. He took the acropolis to serve as headquarters for Pyrrhus and took over the guarding of the wall. The Tarentines were happy to be relieved from this task, gave food to the troops and sent money to Pyrrhus. Plutarch wrote that Cineas went to Tarentum with 3,000 soldiers.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Lucius Aemilius saw that the soldiers of Pyrrhus arrived and could not hold out because it was winter. He set off for Apulia. He was ambushed by the Tarentines at a narrow pass. However, he put some captives in front and they stopped the attack because they did not want to hurt their compatriots.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Zonaras wrote that Pyrrhus did not even wait for the spring to cross the sea to reach Italy (the Mediterranean Sea is stormy in the winter). He was caught in a storm. He lost many men and the rest was scattered by the sea. He reached Tarentum overland with difficulty. Plutarch wrote that after many ships were sent from Tarentum, 20,000 infantry, 2,000 archers, 500 slingers, 3,000 cavalry, and twenty elephants were embarked. When the fleet was caught in the storm some ships missed Italy and ended up in the seas of Sicily and Africa. Others were swept to other shores and were destroyed. Pyrrhus threw himself into the sea and managed to reach the coast. He was helped by the Messapii. Some of the ships survived the storm. Only 2,000 infantry, a few cavalry and two elephants reached Italy.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Pyrrhus did not do anything against the will of the Tarentines and did not impose anything on them until the surviving ships arrived and he assembled most of his forces. After that he put restrictions on the inhabitants because they were only interested in a leisurely lifestyle and would have let him do all the fighting. He closed all the gymnasia, banned festivals, banquets, revelry and drinking. He closed the theatre in case the people gathered there for a revolt. He feared that the people, feeling oppressed, might defect to the Romans. Therefore, he sent Tarentine men who could be able politicians to Epirus and assassinated some of them. He ordered that the citizens undergo severe military exercise or face a penalty and put the men of military age into military service alongside his soldiers, dividing them into two companies. Zonaras also wrote that Pyrrhus placed guards in people's houses so that they would not leave the city. The Tarentines felt that they found in Pyrrhus a master instead of an ally. Some people complained and left the ranks. Plutarch wrote: "Many therefore left the city, since they were not accustomed to being under orders, and called it servitude not to live as they pleased." Appian wrote that the penalty for not undergoing severe military exercises was death; the "king's officers [ ] quartered themselves upon the citizens by force, and openly abused their wives and children... [M]any people ... fled the city as though it were a foreign government and took refuge in the fields, ... [and] Pyrrhus ... closed the [city] gates and placed guards over them."


title: Pyrrhic War

text: The Greek city of Rhegium, in Calabria, on the Strait of Messina, asked the Romans for a garrison. The Romans sent a contingent of 4,000 men to the city. At first they honoured their duty. However, with the Romans being busy dealing with Tarentum and Pyrrhus, this contingent was not under strict discipline and, instigated by Decius, their commander, they coveted the riches of the city. They were inspired by the Mamertines, mercenaries who had been placed to garrison the city of Messana (in Sicily, on the other side of the narrow Strait of Messina) by Agathocles of Syracuse and seized the city, killing its male inhabitants, when he died in 289 BC. Decius presented letters which he claimed were written to Pyrrhus by some citizens who wanted to betray the city to him. He also got a man to announce that part of Pyrrhus’ fleet was anchored nearby. This provided a pretext for seizing the city. Many people were killed. Decius then ratified a friendship with the Mamertines. The Romans did not react immediately because they were busy dealing with Pyrrhus. They were reproached because they did not seem to give this matter great importance. During his second consulship in 278 BC, after Pyrrhus went to Sicily, Gaius Fabricius Luscinus was sent to Rhegium. He besieged the city and seized it. The surviving rebels were sent to Rome, where they were beaten with rods and executed for treason, their bodies cast away unburied. Decius committed suicide.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Prior to this time, Rome had never pitted its military strength against any of the Hellenistic states in the eastern Mediterranean.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Publius Valerius Laevinus, one of the two consuls for 280 BC, marched against Pyrrhus with a large army and plundered Lucania on his way. He wanted to fight as far away from Roman territory as possible and hoped that by marching on Pyrrhus he would frighten him. He seized a strong strategic point in Lucania to hinder those who wanted to aid Pyrrhus. Pyrrhus sent him a letter saying that he had come to the aid of the Tarentines and the Italic peoples and asking the Romans to leave him to settle their differences with the Tarentines, Lucanians and Samnites. He would arbitrate justly and redress any damage these peoples may have caused. He called on the Romans to offer sureties with respect to any charges against them and abide by his decisions. If Romans accepted this he would be their friend; if they did not, it would be war. The consul replied the Romans would not accept him as a judge for their disputes with other peoples. They did not fear him as a foe, and would fight and exact penalties they wished. Pyrrhus should think who he would offer as sureties for the payment of penalties. He also invited Pyrrhus to put his issues before the Senate. Laevinus captured some scouts and showed them his troops, telling them that he had many more men, and sent them back to Pyrrhus.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Pyrrhus had not yet been joined by his allies and took to the field with his forces. He set up his camp on the plain between the cities of Pandosia and Heracleia. He then went to see the Roman camp further along the River Siris. He decided to delay to wait for his allies and, hoping that the supplies of the Romans, who were in hostile territory, would fail, placed guards by the river. The Romans decided to move before his allies would arrive and forded the river. The guards withdrew. Pyrrhus, now worried, placed the infantry in battle line and advanced with the cavalry, hoping to catch the Romans while they were still crossing. Seeing the large Roman infantry and cavalry advancing towards him, Pyrrhus formed a close formation and attacked. The Roman cavalry began to give way and Pyrrhus called in his infantry. The battle remained undecided for a long time. The Romans were pushed back by the elephants and their horses were frightened of them. Pyrrhus then deployed the Thessalian cavalry. The Romans were thrown into confusion and were routed.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Zonaras wrote that all the Romans would have been killed had it not been for a wounded elephant trumpeting and throwing the rest of these animals into confusion. This "restrained Pyrrhus from pursuit and the Romans thus managed to cross the river and make their escape into an Apulian city." Cassius Dio wrote that "Pyrrhus became famous for his victory and acquired a great reputation from it, to such an extent that many who had been remaining neutral came over to his side and all the allies who had been watching the turn of events joined him. He did not openly display anger towards them nor did he entirely conceal his suspicions; he rebuked them somewhat for their delay, but otherwise received them kindly." Plutarch noted that Dionysius of Halicarnassus stated that nearly 15,000 Romans and 13,000 Greeks fell, but according to Hieronymus of Cardia 7,000 Romans and 4,000 Greeks fell. The text of Hieronymus of Cardia has been lost and the part of the text of Dionysius which mentions this is also lost. Plutarch wrote that Pyrrhus lost his best troops and his most trusted generals and friends. However, some of cities allied with the Romans went over to him. He marched to within, 60 kilometres from Rome, plundering the territories along the way. He was joined belatedly by many of the Lucanians and Samnites. Pyrrhus was glad that he had defeated the Romans with his own troops.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Cassius Dio wrote that Pyrrhus learnt that Gaius Fabricius Luscinus and other envoys were approaching to negotiate about his captives. He sent a guard for them as far as the border and then went to meet them. He escorted them into the city and entertained and honoured them, hoping for a truce. Fabricius said he had come to get back their captives and Pyrrhus was surprised they had not been commissioned to negotiate peace terms. Pyrrhus said that he wanted to make friends and a peace treaty and that he would release the prisoners without a ransom. The envoys refused to negotiate such terms. Pyrrhus handed over the prisoners and sent Cineas to Rome with them to negotiate with the Roman senate. Cineas lingered before seeking an audience with the senate to visit the leading men of Rome. He went to the senate after he had won over many of them. He offered friendship and an alliance. There was a long debate in the senate and many senators were inclined to make a truce.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Livy and Justin, like Cassius Dio, placed Gaius Fabricius and the other envoys going to see Pyrrhus before Cineas went to Rome. In Livy's Periochae, Fabricius negotiated the return of the prisoners and the mission of Cineas was about organising Pyrrhus' entrance into the city as well as negotiating a peace treaty. In Justin's account, Fabricius made a peace treaty with Pyrrhus and Cineas went to Rome to ratify the treaty. He also wrote that Cineas "found nobody's house open for their reception." Plutarch, instead, had this sequence the other way round. He placed the embassy led by Gaius Fabricius after Cineas' trip to Rome and wrote that Pyrrhus sought friendly terms because he was concerned about the Romans still being belligerent after their defeat and he considered the capture of Rome to be beyond the size of his force. Moreover, a friendly settlement after a victory would enhance his reputation. Cineas offered to free the Roman prisoners, promised to help the Romans with the subjugation of Italy and asked only friendship and immunity for Tarentum in return.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Many senators were inclined towards peace (in Plutarch's account) or a truce (in Cassius Dio's account) because the Romans would have to face a larger army as the Italic allies of Pyrrhus had joined him. However, Appius Claudius Caecus, who was old and blind and had been confined to his house, had himself carried to the senate house in a litter. He said that Pyrrhus was not to be trusted and that a truce (or peace) was not advantageous to the state. He called for Cineas to be dismissed from the city immediately and for Pyrrhus to be told to withdraw to his country and to make his proposals from there. The senate voted unanimously to send away Cineas that very day and to continue the war for so long as Pyrrhus was in Italy.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Appian wrote that the senate decreed to levy two new legions for the consul Publius Valerius Laevinus. He noted that some of the sources of his information reported that Cineas, who was still in Rome, saw the Roman people hastening to enroll and told Pyrrhus that he was fighting against a hydra (a mythological monster with many heads which grew two new heads when one head was cut off). Other sources said that Pyrrhus himself saw that the Roman army was now large because Tiberius Coruncanius, the other consul, "came from Etruria and joined his forces with those of Laevinus." Appian wrote that Cineas also said that Rome was a city of generals and that it seemed a city with many kings. Pyrrhus marched towards Rome plundering everything on the way. He reached Anagnia and decided to postpone the battle because he was heavily laden with the booty. He went to Campania and sent his army to winter camps. Florus wrote that Pyrrhus' march on Rome laid waste the banks of the River Liris and the Roman colony of Fregellae and reached Praeneste (today's Palestrina), which was only twenty miles from Rome and which he nearly seized. Plutarch wrote that Cineas assessed that the Romans now had twice as many soldiers as those who fought at the Battle of Heraclea and that "there were many times as many Romans still who were capable of bearing arms." Justin wrote that Cineas told Pyrrhus that the treaty "was broken off by Appius Claudius" and that Rome appeared to him a city of kings.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Cassius Dio gave a different account of Pyrrhus’ march towards Rome. In his version, it was a march in Tyrrhenian Italy. Publius Valerius Laevinus found out that Pyrrhus wanted to seize Capua (in Campania) and garrisoned it. Pyrrhus set out for the nearby Neapolis (Naples), but he did not accomplish anything and passed on through Etruria "with the object of winning the people there also to his cause." According to Zonaras, Pyrrhus saw that the Etruscans had made a treaty with the Romans, Tiberius Coruncanius, the other consul for 280 BC, was moving towards him and Laevinius was dogging his footsteps. He "became afraid of being cut off on all sides." He withdrew and got close to Campania. Laevinus confronted him with an army which was now larger and "he declared that the Roman legions when cut to pieces grew whole again, hydra-fashion." Pyrrhus declined to join a battle and went back to Tarentum. Because of the fragmentary nature of the surviving texts of Cassius Dio and Zonaras, the dating of these events is uncertain. It could be after Cineas’ trip to Rome. Cassius Dio wrote that the Romans sent another army to Laevinus, who, after seeing to the wounded, followed Pyrrhus and harassed him. They also recalled Tiberius Coruncanius from Etruria and assigned him to guard Rome.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: According to Justin, Rome sent some envoys to Ptolemy II, the king of the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Cassius Dio wrote that during the winter both sides prepared for the next battle. In the spring, Pyrrhus invaded Apulia. Many places were captured or capitulated. The Romans came upon him near Asculum and encamped opposite him. The two sides avoided each other for several days. There were rumours that Publius Decius Mus (one of the two consuls for 279 BC) was getting ready to devote himself like his father and grandfather. In a devotio a Roman commander sacrificed his life by suicidally launching himself into the enemy ranks as a vow to the gods in exchange for a victory when the Roman troops were overwhelmed. This galvanised the Roman soldiers. The rumour alarmed the Italic followers of Pyrrhus, who believed his death would ruin them. Pyrrhus endeavoured to reassure them and ordered to seize alive anyone who wore the garments the Decius family used for devoting themselves. He sent a man to tell Publius Decius that he would not succeed in his intent and after being taken alive he would die miserably. The Roman consuls replied that there was no need to resort to a devotio because the Romans would defeat him without it.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Three ancient historians wrote accounts of this battle: Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Plutarch and Cassius Dio. In the version of Plutarch, the battle took place over two days. In the other two versions it lasted one day. In Cassius Dio's version the Romans won. In Plutarch's version Pyrrhus won. Plutarch noted that Dionysius of Halicarnassus "made no mention two battles, nor of an admitted defeat of the Romans." In fact, Dionysius did not say who won the battle. Plutarch also wrote that Pyrrhus said to someone who was congratulating him: "If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined." This was because he lost a great part of the forces he had brought to Italy and most of his commanders. He could not call up more men from home and his allies in Italy were becoming indifferent. The Romans, instead, could quickly replenish their forces "as if from a fountain gushing forth indoors", and did not lose courage or determination in defeat.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Justin wrote that in 279 BC the Carthaginians were worried that Pyrrhus might get involved in Sicily, where they had possessions in the west of the island, to help the Greek cities in eastern and southern Sicily against them. There had been reports that the Sicilian Greeks had asked him for his assistance. Justin wrote that Mago, a Carthaginian commander was sent to the port of Rome with 120 ships and met the Roman senate to offer help. The senate declined the assistance. The Carthaginians, who were hoping that war with Rome would prevent Pyrrhus from going to Sicily, were worried about Pyrrhus putting the Romans in distress. A few days later Mago went to meet Pyrrhus privately, "as if to be a peace-maker from the people of Carthage, but in reality to discover the king's views with regard to Sicily, to which island it was reported that he was sent for." Justin placed these events before Gaius Fabricius' embassy to Pyrrhus and Cineas' trip to Rome (see above).


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Polybius discovered the documents of a series of treaties between Rome and Carthage in a library in Rome. One of them, the fourth one, was against Pyrrhus. It stipulated that: "If they make an alliance with Pyrrhus, both shall make it an express condition that they may go to the help of each other in whichever country is attacked. No matter which require help, the Carthaginians are to provide the ships for transport and hostilities, but each country shall provide the pay for its own men. The Carthaginians, if necessary, shall come to the help of the Romans by sea too, but no one shall compel the crews to land against their will." Livy's Periochae placed the conclusion of this treaty after the Battle of Asculum.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: The two parties collaborated in only one instance. There was no Roman assistance when Pyrrhus campaigned in Sicily and no Carthaginian assistance when Pyrrhus returned to Italy. Diodorus Siculus wrote that after making the alliance and before Pyrrhus' crossing from Italy to Sicily, the Carthaginians took 500 Roman legionaries on board their ships and sailed across to Rhegium (presumably from Sicily). They besieged the rebel Roman garrison which had seized the city (see above), but gave the siege up, but not before setting fire to some timber which had been gathered for shipbuilding. They remained and kept a watch on the narrow Strait of Messina between Italy and Sicily, looking out for any attempt by Pyrrhus to cross it. This must have been the first action against the rebel Roman garrison at Rhegium. The consul Gaius Fabricius Luscinus eventually defeated the garrison and restored the city to its people.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Pyrrhus went to Sicily and took the leadership of the Greek cities of eastern and southern Sicily in a war against the Carthaginians in western Sicily. There had been a history of conflict between the Greeks and the Carthaginians in Sicily (see Sicilian Wars). We have details about Pyrrhus' campaign against the Carthaginians from two fragments from the work of Diodorus Siculus. Plutarch gave only a very brief account, most of which was about the relationship between Pyrrhus and the Greek cities in Sicily. The fragments from the text of Dionysius of Halicarnassus are also about Pyrrhus and the Sicilian Greeks. The fragments from Appian deal mostly with events which occurred when Pyrrhus was leaving Sicily. We have minimal information from the fragments from the text of Cassius Dio.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: In Plutarch's account, Pyrrhus received two requests for help. Men from the Greek cities of Sicily "offered to put into his hands the cities of Agrigentum, Syracuse, and Leontini, and begged him to help them to drive out the Carthaginians and rid the island of its tyrants." The Macedonians asked him to accede to the throne of Macedon when their king, Ptolemy Keraunos, whose army was defeated in the Gallic invasion of Greece, was captured and beheaded by the Gauls. Pyrrhus decided that Sicily provided better opportunities for glory since Africa "was felt to be nearer" – Plutarch thought that Pyrrhus coveted the conquest of Carthage, which was in Africa. He sent Cineas to hold talks with the Greek cities in Sicily while he garrisoned Tarentum. The Tarentines were unhappy and demanded that he either continue the war with Rome or go away and leave Tarentum as he had found it. In other words, they wanted the end of his tyrannical rule of the city if he left. Pyrrhus left without giving a reply.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Appian wrote that Pyrrhus begun to be more concerned about Sicily than Italy because Agathocles, the tyrant of Syracuse and self-proclaimed king of Sicily, had just died and Pyrrhus had married his daughter Lanassa. However, Appian must have been confused. Agathocles died in 289 BC, nine years before Pyrrhus’ venture in Italy and eleven years before he went to Sicily. Moreover, Lanassa had left Pyrrhus in 291 BC. It's possible Appian was referring to Pyrrhus' hereditary claims following Agathocles' death, and this relatively recent event, Pyrrhus' claims, as well as Pyrrhus' proximity prompted the inhabitants of Syracuse in 279 BC to ask him for assistance against Carthage. According to Appian, Pyrrhus was reluctant to leave those in Italy who had asked for his help without a peace settlement. He sent Cineas to Rome to negotiate a peace once more. He received the same answer. The Romans returned the Tarentines and the Italic allies they held as prisoners. In Appian's account there was an armistice. Pyrrhus then set off for Sicily with 8,000 cavalry and his elephants. He promised his allies that he would return to Italy. Pyrrhus left Milo in Tarentum to garrison the city. According to Justin, he also left his son Alexander to garrison Locris.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Plutarch wrote that Thoenon and Sosistratus, the leading men in Syracuse, were the first to persuade Pyrrhus to go to Sicily. Diodorus Siculus wrote that "Thoenon controlled the island [of Syracuse], while Sosistratus ruled Syracuse. They had ten thousand soldiers [in Syracuse], and carried on war with each other. But both, becoming exhausted in the war, sent ambassadors to Pyrrhus." While Pyrrhus was preparing to set sail, the Carthaginians were besieging Syracuse. They blockaded her port with a fleet. They conducted operations near the city walls and pillaged the countryside with 50,000 men. The Syracusans pinned their hopes on Pyrrhus because he had married Lanassa. When Pyrrhus set sail from Tarentum, he stopped over at Locris.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: The Mamertine mercenaries who had seized the city of Messana (Messina) made an alliance with the Carthaginians and joined them in trying to prevent Pyrrhus from crossing the Strait of Messina. Therefore, Pyrrhus could not land at Messana or Syracuse. However, Tyndarion, the tyrant of Tauromenia (Taormina, south of Messana), sided with Pyrrhus and was willing to receive his forces in his city. Pyrrhus received soldiers from him and then landed at Catana, which was also between Messana and Syracuse. He was welcomed by its citizens and disembarked his infantry, which marched on Syracuse, flanked by the fleet. When he got close to Syracuse, a reduced Carthaginian fleet (thirty ships had gone on other missions) left.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Pyrrhus accepted delivery of the "[i]sland [of the city] from Thonon, and of the rest of the city from the citizens and Sosistratus." He added that, besides ruling Syracuse, "Sosistratus had made himself master of Agrigentum and of many other cities, and had an army of more than ten thousand men." Pyrrhus reconciled "Thoenon and Sosistratus and the Syracusans and restored harmony, thinking to gain great popularity by virtue of the peace." He took over the military equipment of the city and her 140 ships. Pyrrhus now had more than 200 ships. Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote that Sosistratus was the ruler of the city and Thonon was the commander of the garrison. They gave Pyrrhus money from the treasury and 200 warships. According to Diodorus Siculus, the ruler of the city of Leontini handed him over the city and its 4,000 infantry and 500 cavalry. Other cities did the same. The city of Enna had expelled the garrison the Carthaginians had placed there, and promised to hand itself over to Pyrrhus. Pyrrhus went to Agrigentum and took over the city, as well as 8,000 infantry and 800 cavalry who were picked men. He also took over thirty cities ruled by Sosistratus and brought over the siege engines and the missiles of Syracuse.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: According to Diodorus Siculus, Pyrrhus set off for the territories subject to the Carthaginians with 30,000 infantry and 1,500 cavalry. In Plutarch's account Pyrrhus had 30,000 infantry, 2,500 cavalry and 200 ships. Diodorus related that Pyrrhus defeated the Carthaginian garrison in Heraclea Minoa and seized Azones. Selinus, Halicyae, Segesta and other cities went over to him. He besieged Eryx, which had strong natural defensive features and a large Carthaginian garrison. The siege lasted a long time, but Pyrrhus managed to take the city by storm. He left a garrison there and attacked Iaetia, which was a powerful city in a good strategic position to attack Panormus, which had the best harbour in Sicily. Iaetia surrendered without a fight. Panormus was taken by storm. Pyrrhus was in control of all the Carthaginian dominions except for Lilybaeum. While he was besieging this city, the Carthaginians brought over a big army and large quantities of grain from Africa. They also strengthened the fortifications of the city. Plutarch, whose account of Pyrrhus’ campaign in the Carthaginian territories was brief, just wrote that Pyrrhus subdued the areas under Carthaginian control and that after seizing Eryx he moved against the Mamertine mercenaries who had seized Messana. They were a nuisance to the Greeks and even imposed a tribute on some of them. Pyrrhus captured their tribute collectors and executed them. He defeated the Mamertines in battle and destroyed many of their strongholds. Plutarch did not mention the siege of Lilybaeum and Diodorus Siculus did not mention the campaign against the Mamertines.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Both Plutarch and Diodorus Siculus wrote that the Carthaginians initiated negotiations. They offered a large sum of money. In Plutarch's account, they also offered ships. According to Diodorus Siculus, Pyrrhus refused to accept money and was persuaded to concede Lilybaeum to the Carthaginians. However, his friends and the delegates from the Greek cities urged him not to "grant [them] a stepping-stone for an attack on Sicily, but rather to drive the Phoenicians out of the entire island and to make the sea the boundary of his domain." Plutarch did not mention Pyrrhus being swayed by his friends and the delegates of the cities. In his version, Pyrrhus rejected the offer because he wanted "to pursue the ambitions for which he had left home in the beginning and set his heart on Libya." In other words, Pyrrhus wanted to conquer Carthage, which was in what the Greeks called Libya (Plutarch was Greek) and the Romans called Africa. In Diodorus Siculus’ account, the negotiations occurred during the siege of Lilybaeum. After this Pyrrhus engaged in skirmishes near the city walls. The Carthaginians resisted effectively because of the size of their forces and because they had so many catapults that there was not enough room for all of them on the city walls. Many of the men of Pyrrhus were killed and he was at a disadvantage. Pyrrhus set out to build war engines which were more powerful than those he brought from Syracuse. However, the Carthaginian resistance continued, favoured by the rocky terrain. After two months he gave up the siege. Pyrrhus then bent his efforts towards building a large fleet to transport his troops to Africa after he gained mastery of the sea.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Plutarch wrote that many of Pyrrhus' ships were undermanned and he began to collect oarsmen. He stopped dealing with the Greek cities fairly and treated them in a despotic manner, using compulsion and imposing fines. He was no longer a popular leader. He became a tyrant known for "ingratitude and faithlessness". At first the Sicilian Greeks put up with this. Things changed when Pyrrhus became suspicious of Sosistratus and Thoenon, the men who had invited him to Sicily and had been of great assistance to him. Sosistratus was afraid of the suspicions of Pyrrhus and kept a low profile. Pyrrhus accused Thoenon of complicity with Sosistratus and had him executed. Dionysius of Halicarnassus gave some details of the behaviour of Pyrrhus. He seized the estates of Agathocles of Syracuse from the relatives and friends who had inherited them and gave them to his friends. He gave the chief offices in the cities to his military men. He conducted some trials and some administrative tasks himself and assigned others to members of his court, who were interested only in personal gain and luxury. He established garrisons with the excuse that they were for protection against the Carthaginians. He arrested the cities’ most prominent men and had them executed on false treason charges, one of whom was Thoenon. Pyrrhus tried to arrest Sosistratus, but he escaped from the city.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: The actions of the king caused hatred in the Greek cities. According to Plutarch, some of them sided with the Carthaginians and some called in the Mamertine mercenaries. While Pyrrhus was facing opposition and rebellion, he received a letter from the Tarentines and Samnites. The Samnites had been pushed out from their rural areas and found it difficult to defend their cities and begged him to come to their assistance. This gave Pyrrhus an excuse to leave Sicily, where he had lost control, without appearing to be running away. Plutarch wrote that Pyrrhus said "My friends, what a wrestling ground for Carthaginians and Romans we are leaving behind us!" We do not know whether Pyrrhus actually said this because ancient historians often made speeches by historical characters up. Cassius Dio wrote what when the Carthaginians saw that Pyrrhus' forces were small and that he had lost the goodwill of the Sicilian Greeks, they "took up the war vigorously. They harboured the Syracusans who were exiled and harassed [Pyrrhus] so severely that he abandoned not only Syracuse but Sicily as well." Dionysius of Halicarnassus that wrote the Carthaginians sent an army to Sicily because the situation gave them an opportunity to regain the cities they had lost. After Pyrrhus left Sicily, the Carthaginians took control of their domains in the west again.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Plutarch wrote that the Carthaginian fleet confronted Pyrrhus when he was crossing the Strait of Messina to reach the mainland. He lost many ships in a naval battle. The Mamertine mercenaries, 10,000 of whom had crossed the strait, fought Pyrrhus in the mainland, threw his army into confusion and killed two elephants and many men in his rear-guard. Pyrrhus received a head wound, but managed to overcome the Mamertines. He arrived in Tarentum in the autumn of 276 BC with 20,000 men.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Dionysius of Halicarnassus did not mention a naval battle in the Strait of Messina. He wrote that the ships of Pyrrhus, who wanted to sail straight to Tarentum, met an unfavourable wind which lasted the whole night. Some ships were sunk. Some were swept to the Strait of Messina and others were driven ashore on the beaches of Locris. The crew of the ships beached near Locris died when they were submerged by the backwash of the waves. According to Dionysius, this happened because Pyrrhus, misled by one of his friends, Euegorus () son of Theodorus (), and pushed by lack of funds, plundered the sacred treasure of the temple of the goddess Persephone, thus committing sacrilege. Dionysius did not specify where this took place. However, his narrative suggests that it occurred in Syracuse prior to setting off for Italy. The ships which were driven to the shores of Locris were the ones which were carrying the offerings to the goddess. When the waves broke the ships up, the sacred monies of the treasure were cast on the shore closest to Locris. Pyrrhus got scared and restored them to the goddess.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Appian mentioned the naval battle with the Carthaginians in the strait of Messina, but not the battle with the Mamertines on the mainland. In his account Pyrrhus took possession of the treasure of Persephone in Locris, after crossing from Sicily to Italy. He wrote that Pyrrhus had been a burden to the Greek cities because of the lodging and supplying of his troops, the garrisons he established, and the tribute he imposed. These exactions enriched him. When he left Sicily he set sail for Rhegium with ten ships and many cargo and merchant ships. The Carthaginians attacked him and sunk seventy ships and disabled the rest, except for twelve ships. He managed to escape and took vengeance on the city of Locris, whose inhabitants had killed the commander of his garrison there. He did much killing and plundering and grabbed the treasure of Persephone. He set sail again and got caught in a storm, which sunk some of his ships. All the sacred objects were swept to the beach of Locris. Pyrrhus restored them to the goddess and tried perform sacrifices in her honour. However, the sacrificial victims were inauspicious and he got angry. He executed those who advised him to rob the temple, had taken part in it or assented to it.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Cassius Dio wrote that when Pyrrhus went to Sicily the Romans postponed their conflict with Tarentum. In 277 BC, the consuls Publius Cornelius Rufinus and Gaius Junius Bubulcus Brutus invaded and devastated Samnium. The Samnites took their most important treasures to the Cranita hills. The consuls tried to climb these hills, but they failed because they were overgrown with shrubbery, and so were defeated. Many of them died and many were taken prisoner. After this, the two consuls, blaming each other for the reverse, did not carry on the war together. Junius Bubulcus ravaged part of Samnium; Cornelius Rufinus attacked the Lucani and Bruttii and after this he took on Croton (which had revolted) at the invitation of some pro-Romans in the city. The anti-Roman faction asked Milo, the lieutenant Pyrrhus had left in Tarentum, for help. Milo sent Nicomachus who garrisoned the city. Unaware of this, Cornelius Rufinus approached the city walls carelessly and was defeated by a sortie. He sent two men to Nicomachus. They pretended to be deserters and claimed that the consul had given up on Croton and was advancing on Locris, which was being betrayed to him. Cornelius Rufinus pretended to be departing in haste. Nicomachus hurried towards Locris. Rufinus turned back undetected and seized Croton. Nicomachus went back to Tarentum, while Locris went over to the Romans. Like Appian, Cassius Dio wrote that Pyrrhus plundered the treasure of Persephone in Locris. However, according to him, he did so because his allies (presumably the allies in Italy) were unwilling to contribute anything to support him, whereas according to Appian, this was an act of revenge for the city going over to the Romans.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: When Pyrrhus returned to Italy in 275 BC, he fought the Battle of Beneventum against the Romans, which was to be the last battle of the war.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Plutarch gave the most detailed account of the battle. He wrote that during the three years Pyrrhus spent campaigning in Sicily the Samnites suffered many defeats at the hands of the Romans and lost a substantial part of their territory. This made them resentful towards Pyrrhus. Therefore, most of them did not join him when he returned to southern Italy. Cassius Dio wrote that the Samnites being hard-pressed by the Romans, caused Pyrrhus to set forth again to come to their assistance. In Plutarch's account, Pyrrhus engaged the Romans despite the lack of Samnite support. The two consuls for 275 BC, Lucius Cornelius Lentulus Caudinus and Manius Curius Dentatus, were fighting in Lucania and Samnium respectively.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Plutarch wrote that Pyrrhus divided his forces into two divisions. He sent one of them against Cornelius Lentulus and marched with the other force during the night against Manius Curius, who was encamped near Beneventum and was waiting for help from Cornelius Lentulus. Pyrrhus was in a hurry to engage Manius Curius in case his colleague showed up. However, his soldiers lost their way and fell behind because he went a long way round through woods and his lights did not hold out. Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote that Pyrrhus marched through "long trails that were not even used by people but were mere goat-paths through woods and crags, would keep no order and, even before the enemy came in sight, would be weakened in body by thirst and fatigue." This delayed Pyrrhus and at dawn he was in full view of the enemy as he advanced on them from the heights. Plutarch wrote that Manius Curius led his men out of the camp, attacked the enemy advance-guard and captured some elephants which were left behind. This success brought him to the plain, where he could engage Pyrrhus in battle on level ground. He routed some of the enemy lines, but an elephant charge drove him back to his camp. He called on the camp guards who were standing on the parapets of the rampart. They came down and threw javelins at the elephants, forcing them to turn round. They ran through the ranks of Pyrrhus, which were thrown into disarray, and, as a result, the Romans won the battle.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote only one sentence about the battle: "When Pyrrhus and those with him had ascended along with the elephants, and the Romans became aware of it, they wounded an elephant [calf], which caused great confusion and flight among the Greeks. The Romans killed two elephants, and hemming eight others in a place that had no outlet, took them alive when the Indian mahouts surrendered them; and they wrought great slaughter among the soldiers."


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Cassius Dio also related the story of the wounded calf. He wrote that Pyrrhus was put to flight because "a young elephant had been wounded, and shaking off its riders, wandered about in search of its mother, whereupon the latter became excited and the other elephants grew turbulent, so that everything was thrown into dire confusion. Finally, the Romans won the day, killing many men and capturing eight elephants, and they occupied the enemy's entrenchments."


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Back in Greece, Pyrrhus went to war with the kingdom of Macedon. He deposed its king, Antigonus II, and briefly ruled Macedon and Thessaly. In 272 BC he supported Cleonymus’ claim to the Spartan throne. He besieged Sparta and aimed to gain control of the Peloponnese by taking this city. However, he met fierce resistance and gave this up. He was then called to intervene in a dispute in Argos, but was killed in a street battle there.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: After the war, Rome asserted its hegemony in southern Italy. In 272 BC, the year Pyrrhus died, Rome captured Tarentum. Livy's Periochae recorded that in 272 BC a Carthaginian navy brought help to Tarentum and broke the treaty with Rome. However, Cassius Dio wrote that the Tarentines called in the Carthaginians to help them against Milo, the commander of the Epirot garrison, when they heard that Pyrrhus had died. They were angry with Milo because he mistreated them. They had attacked him, but they did not achieve anything and then occupied the fortress of the city and kept harassing Milo from there. The Roman consul Lucius Papirius Cursor besieged the city. Hemmed in by the Romans on land and by the Carthaginians on the sea, Milo surrendered the fortress (presumably he had regained it) to Lucius Papirius on the condition that he would be allowed to leave with his men and his money. The city was handed over to the Romans and the Carthaginian fleet left. The Tarentines agreed to pull down the city walls and pay tribute. Prior to taking on Tarentum, Lucius Papirius had defeated the Bruttii, while his colleague Spurius Carvilius Maximus fought the Samnites.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: The capture of Tarentum also gave the Romans control over the Messapii of central and part of southern Apulia, who, although they had fought against Tarentum earlier in history, had become closely tied with Tarentum since 304 BC. In 267 BC, the consuls Marcus Atilius Regulus and Lucius Julius Libo conquered the Salentini (who lived in southern Apulia) and captured the town of Brundisium. Cassius Dio wrote that the Romans used the excuse that they had sided with Pyrrhus and that they were now overrunning the territories of their allies, but in fact, they were after the fine harbor of Brundisium, which was the gateway for sailing to the eastern Mediterranean. They sent colonists to Brundisium and other towns. Livy's Periochae recorded that in that year the Umbrians were also defeated. Brundisium later became the port for sailing to the eastern Mediterranean.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Cassius Dio wrote that after the capture of Tarentum in 272 BC the Romans turned their attention to Rhegium, which had taken Croton by treachery, razed it to the ground, and killed the Romans who were there. They prevented intervention by the Mamertines (the mercenaries who had seized Messana, on the other side of the narrow Strait of Messina) whom Rhegium had expected to secure as allies, by making an agreement with them. The Romans besieged the city but suffered from a scarcity of food. Hiero II became the Tyrant of Syracuse after Pyrrhus left Italy. Since he was weary of the Carthaginians who were encroaching on Sicily, he favoured the Romans. He sent grain to the Roman troops which were besieging the city, thereby helping them to seize it. Rhegium was restored to its survivors and the rebel garrison was punished. We do not know when the siege started, but we do know that Hiero II assumed power in Syracuse in 270 BC.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: Dionysius of Halicarnassus wrote that in 270 BC there was a second rebellion by the Roman garrison in Rhegium (which included some Italic allies). The consul Gaius Genucius Clespina seized the city and restored it to its people. He took the rebels to Rome. They were sentenced to death by the Assembly of the Tribes. The 4,500 men, 300 at a time, were bound to stakes. They were scourged and then the back tendons of their necks were severed. They were not buried and their bodies were left to be torn by birds and dogs in the Roman Forum.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: An entry in Livy's Periochae suggests that the tensions between Rome and Tarentum encouraged rebellions. It recorded that in 282 BC "[t]he Samnites revolted. In several battles, many commanders successfully fought against them and against the Lucanians, Bruttians, and Etruscans." As noted above, Zonaras wrote that in 280 BC the consul Tiberius Coruncanius campaigned in Etruria and that the Etruscans concluded a peace treaty with Rome. After the war the Bruttians submitted willingly and gave up half of their Sila mountain district which was rich in timber (fir, black poplar, pitch and stone pine, beech, and oak). Cornell thinks that the rebellion of the Samnites and Lucani lasted a decade. We do not have much detail from the sources, but the annals of the Fasti Capitolini list ten triumphs over these peoples between 282 BC and 272 BC. Cornell writes that the final defeat of Samnium and Lucania was marked by the foundation of colonies at Paestum in 273 BC, Beneventum in 268 BC, and Aesernia in 263 BC."


title: Pyrrhic War

text: In 268 BC a rebellion by the Picentes in central Italy was suppressed and a colony was founded at Ariminum. A colony was also established at Cosa, on the coast of southern Etruria, in 273 BC.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: The Pyrrhic War was Rome's first confrontation with the professional armies and mercenaries of the Hellenistic kingdoms in the eastern Mediterranean. The Roman victory drew attention to the emerging Roman power among these states. Ptolemy II, the king of the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt, established diplomatic relations with Rome. He sent envoys to Rome and gave generous gifts to Roman envoys who went to Alexandria.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: [A] According to Appian, this fleet was led by the ex Roman consul Publius Cornelius Dolabella. According to Cassius Dio, it was led by the consul Gaius Fabricius Luscinus. According to Zonaras, it was led by Lucius Valerius, whom he described as ‘the admiral’.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: [B] According to Cassius Dio, Cineas was sent to Rome before the embassy of Fabricius. According to, Plutarch he was sent after this embassy.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: [C] this mission against the Mamertines was mentioned only by Plutarch. Diodorus Siculus, whose information is more detailed did not mention it.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: [E] According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Pyrrhus was caught in a storm while he was sailing to Italy. Some of his ships were sunk, some drifted to the Strait of Messana and some were swept to Locris. According to Appian, Pyrrhus was caught in a storm when he left Locris.


title: Pyrrhic War

text: [F] According to Appian and Cassius Dio, the treasure was plundered in Locris, according to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, it was seized in Syracuse.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Citizenship in ancient Rome (Latin: "civitas") was a privileged political and legal status afforded to free individuals with respect to laws, property, and governance. Citizenship in Ancient Rome was complex and based upon many different laws, traditions, and cultural practices. There existed several different types of citizenship, determined by one's gender, class, and political affiliations, and the exact duties or expectations of a citizen varied throughout the history of the Roman Empire.


title: Roman citizenship

text: The oldest document currently available that details the rights of citizenship is the Twelve Tables, ratified c. 449 BC. Much of the text of the Tables only exists in fragments, but during the time of Ancient Rome the Tables would be displayed in full in the Roman Forum for all to see. The Tables detail the rights of citizens in dealing with court proceedings, property, inheritance, death, and (in the case of women) public behavior. Under the Roman Republic, the government conducted a census every five years in Rome to keep a record of citizens and their households. As the Roman Empire spread so did the practice of conducting a census.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Roman citizens were expected to perform some duties ("munera publica") to the state in order to retain their rights as citizens. Failure to perform citizenship duties could result in the loss of privileges, as seen during the Second Punic War when men who refused military service lost their right to vote and were forced out of their voting tribes. Women were exempt from direct taxation and military service. Anyone living in any province of Rome was required to register with the census. The exact extent of civic duties varied throughout the centuries.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Much of Roman law involving the rights and functions of citizenship revolved around legal precedents. Documents from Roman writer Valerius Maximus indicate that Roman women were in later centuries able to mingle freely about the Forum and to bring in concerns on their own volition, providing they acted in a manner that was becoming of their family and station.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Much of our basis for understanding Roman law comes from the "Digest" of Emperor Justinian. The "Digest" contained court rulings by juries and their interpretations of Roman law and preserved the writings of Roman legal authors.


title: Roman citizenship

text: The Edict of Caracalla (officially the Constitutio Antoniniana in Latin: "Constitution [or Edict] of Antoninus") was an edict issued in AD 212 by the Roman Emperor Caracalla, which declared that all free men in the Roman Empire were to be given full Roman citizenship and all free women in the Empire were given the same rights as Roman women, with the exception of the "dediticii", people who had become subject to Rome through surrender in war, and freed slaves. Before 212, for the most part only inhabitants of Italia held full Roman citizenship. Roman colonies established in other provinces, Romans (or their descendants) living in provinces, the inhabitants of various cities throughout the Empire, and a few local nobles (such as kings of client countries) also held full citizenship. Provincials, on the other hand, were usually non-citizens, although some held the Latin rights.


title: Roman citizenship

text: The Bible's Book of Acts indicates that Paul the Apostle was a Roman citizen by birth – though not clearly specifying which class of citizenship – a fact which had considerable bearing on Paul's career and on the religion of Christianity.


title: Roman citizenship

text: However, by the century previous to Caracalla, Roman citizenship had already lost much of its exclusiveness and become more available.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Citizenship in Rome could be acquired through various means. To be born as a citizen required that both parents be free citizens of Rome. Another method was via the completion of a public service, such as serving in the non-Roman auxiliary forces. Cities could acquire citizenship through the implementation of the Latin law, wherein people of a provincial city of the empire could elect people to public office and therefore give the elected official citizenship.


title: Roman citizenship

text: The legal classes varied over time, however the following classes of legal status existed at various times within the Roman state:


title: Roman citizenship

text: The "cives Romani" were full Roman citizens, who enjoyed full legal protection under Roman law. "Cives Romani" were sub-divided into two classes:


title: Roman citizenship

text: The "Latini" were a class of citizens who held the Latin rights ("ius Latii"), or the rights of "ius commercii" and "ius migrationis" (the right to migrate), but not the "ius connubii". The term "Latini" originally referred to the Latins, citizens of the Latin League who came under Roman control at the close of the Latin War, but eventually became a legal description rather than a national or ethnic one. The Latin rights status could be assigned to different classes of citizens, such as freedmen, "cives Romani" convicted of crime, or colonial settlers.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Under Roman law, citizens of another state that was allied to Rome via treaty were assigned the status of "socii". "Socii" (also known as "foederati") could obtain certain legal rights of under Roman law in exchange for agreed upon levels of military service, i.e., the Roman magistrates had the right to levy soldier from such states into the Roman legions. However, "foederati" states that had at one time been conquered by Rome were exempt from payment of tribute to Rome due to their treaty status.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Growing dissatisfaction with the rights afforded to the "socii" and with the growing manpower demands of the legions (due to the protracted Jugurthine War and the Cimbrian War) led eventually to the Social War of 91–87 BC in which the Italian allies revolted against Rome.


title: Roman citizenship

text: The Lex Julia (in full the "Lex Iulia de Civitate Latinis Danda"), passed in 90 BC, granted the rights of the "cives Romani" to all "Latini" and "socii" states that had not participated in the Social War, or who were willing to cease hostilities immediately. This was extended to all the Italian "socii" states when the war ended (except for Gallia Cisalpina), effectively eliminating "socii" and "Latini" as legal and citizenship definitions.


title: Roman citizenship

text: "Provinciales" were those people who fell under Roman influence, or control, but who lacked even the rights of the "foederati", essentially having only the rights of the "ius gentium" (rules and laws common to nations under Rome's rule).


title: Roman citizenship

text: A "peregrinus" (plural "peregrini") was originally any person who was not a full Roman citizen, that is someone who was not a member of the "cives Romani". With the expansion of Roman law to include more gradations of legal status, this term became less used, but the term "peregrini" included those of the "Latini", "socii", and "provinciales", as well as those subjects of foreign states.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Roman citizens enjoyed a variety of specific privileges within Roman society. Male citizens had the rights to vote ("ius suffragi") and hold civic office ("ius honorum," only available to the aristocracy). They also possessed "ius vitae necisque," "the right of life and death." The male head of a Roman family ("pater familias") had the right to legally execute any of his children at any age, although it appears that this was mostly reserved in deciding to raise newborn children. Sources indicate that putting adult children to death was exceedingly rare.


title: Roman citizenship

text: More general rights included: the rights to property ("ius census"), to enter into contracts ("ius commercii"), "ius provocationis," the right to appeal court decisions, the right to sue and to be sued, to have a legal trial, and the right of immunity from some taxes and other legal obligations, especially local rules and regulations.


title: Roman citizenship

text: With regards to the Roman family, Roman citizens possessed the right of "ius conubii," defined as the right to a lawful marriage in which children from the union would also be Roman citizens. Earlier Roman sources indicate that Roman women could forfeit their individual rights as citizens when entering into a "manus" marriage. In a "manus" marriage, a woman would lose any properties or possessions she owned herself and they would be given to her husband, or his "pater familias". "Manus" marriages had largely stopped by the time of Augustus and women instead remained under the protection of their "pater familias." Upon his death, both the men and women under the protection of the "pater familias" would be considered "sui iuris" and be legally independent, able to inherit and own property without the approval of their "pater familias." Roman woman however would enter into a "tutela", or guardianship. A woman's tutor functioned similarly to a "pater familias", but he did not control the property or possessions of a woman and was generally only needed to give his permission when a woman wanted to perform certain legal actions, such as freeing her slaves.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Officially, one required Roman citizenship status to enrol in the Roman legions, but this requirement was sometimes overlooked and exceptions could be made. Citizen soldiers could be beaten by the centurions and senior officers for reasons related to discipline. Non-citizens joined the Auxilia and gained citizenship through service.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Following the early 2nd-century BC Porcian Laws, a Roman citizen could not be tortured or whipped and could commute sentences of death to voluntary exile, unless he was found guilty of treason. If accused of treason, a Roman citizen had the right to be tried in Rome, and even if sentenced to death, no Roman citizen could be sentenced to crucifixion.


title: Roman citizenship

text: "Ius gentium" was the legal recognition, developed in the 3rd century BC, of the growing international scope of Roman affairs, and the need for Roman law to deal with situations between Roman citizens and foreign persons. The "ius gentium" was therefore a Roman legal codification of the widely accepted international law of the time, and was based on the highly developed commercial law of the Greek city-states and of other maritime powers. The rights afforded by the "ius gentium" were considered to be held by all persons; it is thus a concept of human rights rather than rights attached to citizenship.


title: Roman citizenship

text: "Ius migrationis" was the right to preserve one's level of citizenship upon relocation to a polis of comparable status. For example, members of the "cives Romani" maintained their full "civitas" when they migrated to a Roman colony with full rights under the law: a "colonia civium Romanorum". "Latins" also had this right, and maintained their "ius Latii" if they relocated to a different Latin state or Latin colony ("Latina colonia"). This right did "not" preserve one's level of citizenship should one relocate to a colony of "lesser" legal status; full Roman citizens relocating to a "Latina colonia" were reduced to the level of the "ius Latii", and such a migration and reduction in status had to be a voluntary act.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Roman citizenship was also used as a tool of foreign policy and control. Colonies and political allies would be granted a "minor" form of Roman citizenship, there being several graduated levels of citizenship and legal rights (the Latin rights was one of them). The promise of improved status within the Roman "sphere of influence" and the rivalry with one's neighbours for status, kept the focus of many of Rome's neighbours and allies centered on the "status quo" of Roman culture, rather than trying to subvert or overthrow Rome's influence.


title: Roman citizenship

text: The granting of citizenship to allies and the conquered was a vital step in the process of Romanization. This step was one of the most effective political tools and (at that point in history) original political ideas.


title: Roman citizenship

text: Previously, Alexander the Great had tried to "mingle" his Greeks with the Persians, Egyptians, Syrians, etc. in order to assimilate the people of the conquered Persian Empire, but after his death this policy was largely ignored by his successors.


title: Roman citizenship

text: The idea was not to assimilate, but to turn a defeated and potentially rebellious enemy (or their sons) into Roman citizens. Instead of having to wait for the unavoidable revolt of a conquered people (a tribe or a city-state) like Sparta and the conquered Helots, Rome tried to make those under its rule feel that they had a stake in the system. The ability of non-Roman born individuals to gain Roman citizenship also provided increased stability for those under Roman rule, and the system of sub-division within the different types of citizenship allowed for Roman rulers to work cooperatively with local elites in the provinces.


title: Roman citizenship

text: With the settlement of Romanization and the passing of generations, a new unifying feeling began to emerge within Roman territory, the "Romanitas" or "Roman way of life", the once tribal feeling that had divided Europe began to disappear (although never completely) and blend in with the new wedge patriotism imported from Rome with which to be able to ascend at all levels.


title: Roman citizenship

text: The "Romanitas", "Romanity" or "Romanism" would last until the last years of unity of the "pars occidentalis", a moment in which the old tribalisms and the proto-feudalism of Celtic origins, until then dormant, would re-emerge, mixing with the new ethnic groups of Germanic origin. This being observed in the writings of Gregory of Tours, who does not use the dichotomy Gallo-Roman-Frankish, but uses the name of each of the gens of that time existing in Gaul (arverni, turoni, lemovici, turnacenses, bituriges, franci, etc.), considering himself a Arverni and not a Gallo-Roman; being the relations between the natives and the Franks seen not as Romans against barbarians, as is popularly believed, but as in the case of Gregory, a relationship of coexistence between Arverni and Franks (Franci) as equals.


title: Roman citizenship

text: It must also be remembered that Clovis I was born in Gaul, so according to the Edict of Caracalla that made him a Roman citizen by birth, in addition to being recognized by the emperor Anastasius I Dicorus as consul of Gaul, so his position of power was reinforced, in addition to being considered by his Gallo-Roman subjects as a legitimate viceroy of Rome; understanding that the "Romanitas" did not disappear in such an abrupt way, observed its effects centuries later with Charlemagne and the "Translatio imperii".


title: Command hierarchy

text: A command hierarchy is a group of people who carry out orders based on others' authority within the group. It can be viewed as part of a power structure, in which it is usually seen as the most vulnerable and also the most powerful part.


title: Command hierarchy

text: In a military context, the chain of command is the line of authority and responsibility along which orders are passed within a military unit and between different units. In simpler terms, the chain of command is the succession of leaders through which command is exercised and executed. Orders are transmitted down the chain of command, from a responsible superior, such as a commissioned officer, to lower-ranked subordinate(s) who either execute the order personally or transmit it down the chain as appropriate, until it is received by those expected to execute it. "Command is exercised by virtue of office and the special assignment of members of the Armed Forces holding military rank who are eligible to exercise command."


title: Command hierarchy

text: In general, military personnel give orders only to those directly below them in the chain of command and receive orders only from those directly above them. A service member who has difficulty executing a duty or order and appeals for relief directly to an officer above his immediate commander in the chain of command is likely to be disciplined for not respecting the chain of command. Similarly, an officer is usually expected to give orders only to his or her direct subordinate(s), even if only to pass an order down to another service member lower in the chain of command than said subordinate.


title: Command hierarchy

text: The concept of chain of command also implies that higher rank alone does not entitle a higher-ranking service member to give commands to anyone of lower rank. For example, an officer of unit "A" does not directly command lower-ranking members of unit "B", and is generally expected to approach an officer of unit "B" if he requires action by members of that unit. The chain of command means that individual members take orders from only one superior and only give orders to a defined group of people immediately below them.


title: Command hierarchy

text: If an officer of unit "A" does give orders directly to a lower-ranked member of unit "B", it would be considered highly unusual (a faux pas, or extraordinary circumstances, such as a lack of time or inability to confer with the officer in command of unit "B") as officer "A" would be seen as subverting the authority of the officer of unit "B". Depending on the situation or the standard procedure of the military organization, the lower-ranked member being ordered may choose to carry out the order anyway, or advise that it has to be cleared with his or her own chain of command first, which in this example would be with officer "B". Refusal to carry out an order is almost always considered insubordination; the only exception usually allowed is if the order itself is illegal (i.e., the person carrying out the order would be committing an illegal act). (See superior orders.)


title: Command hierarchy

text: In addition, within combat units, line officers are in the chain of command, but staff officers in specialist fields (such as medical, dental, legal, supply, and chaplain) are not, except within their own specialty. For example, a medical officer in an infantry battalion would be responsible for the combat medics in that unit but would not be eligible to command the battalion or any of its subordinate units.


title: Command hierarchy

text: The term is also used in a civilian management context describing comparable hierarchical structures of authority. Such structures are included in Fire Departments, Police Departments, and other organizations that have a paramilitary command or power structure.


title: Command hierarchy

text: In sociology, command hierarchy is seen as the most visible element of a "power network." In this model, social capital is viewed as being mobilized in response to orders that move through the hierarchy leading to the phrase "command and control".


title: Command hierarchy

text: Regardless of the degree of control or results achieved, and regardless of how the hierarchy is justified and rationalized, certain aspects of a command hierarchy tend to be similar:


title: Command hierarchy

text: However, people of such compatible views often have similar systemic biases because they are from the same culture. Such problems as groupthink or willingness to accept one standard of evidence internal to the group, but require drastically higher evidence from outside, are common.


title: Command hierarchy

text: In part to address these problems, much modern management science has focused on reducing reliance on command hierarchy especially for information flow, since the cost of communications is now low, and the cost of management mistakes is higher. It is also easier to replace managers, so they have a personal interest in more distributed responsibility and perhaps more consensus decision making.


title: Command hierarchy

text: Ubiquitous command and control posits for military organizations, a generalisation from hierarchies to networks that allows for the use of hierarchies when they are appropriate, and non-hierarchical networks when they are inappropriate. This includes the notion of "mission agreement", to support "edge in" as well as "top-down" flow of intent.


title: Chiquitita

text: "Chiquitita" (a Spanish term of endearment for a woman meaning "little one") is a song recorded by Swedish pop group ABBA. It was released in January 1979 as the first single from the group's sixth album, "Voulez-Vous" (1979). Agnetha Fältskog performs the lead vocals. Originally, the track "If It Wasn't for the Nights" was going to be the album's lead single, but after "Chiquitita" was completed those plans were abandoned, and it would remain an album track.


title: Chiquitita

text: Many preliminary versions of "Chiquitita" exist. It had working titles of "Kålsupare", "3 Wise Guys", "Chiquitita Angelina" and "In The Arms of Rosalita". A revised version, which had a sound that was influenced by the Peruvian song "El Condor Pasa (If I Could)" performed by Simon and Garfunkel, was recorded in December 1978 and released as a single in January 1979.


title: Chiquitita

text: With the success of the English version, ABBA also recorded "Chiquitita" in Spanish and it was one of the featured tracks on the Spanish-language release "Gracias Por La Música".


title: Chiquitita

text: "Chiquitita" proved to be one of ABBA's biggest hits. It was featured in a 1979 UNICEF charity event, the "Music for UNICEF Concert", broadcast worldwide from the United Nations General Assembly. As a direct result of this event, ABBA donated half of all royalties from the song to UNICEF. "Chiquitita" hit No. 1 in Belgium, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Switzerland, Mexico, South Africa and Rhodesia, and was a Top 5 hit in ABBA's native Sweden, the United Kingdom (peaking at No. 2 in both countries where Blondie's "Heart of Glass" was occupying the top spot), Australia, West Germany and Norway, making it the most successful single from the "Voulez-Vous" album in terms of global charts and one of the most famous charity songs ever. To this day, 50% of the proceeds from the song go to UNICEF in recognition of the "International Year of the Child" in 1979. In 2014, all ABBA members agreed on donating 100% of the royalties from the song to UNICEF. As of 2021, the song's royalties have raised $4.8 million for the charity.


title: Chiquitita

text: In the United Kingdom, "Chiquitita" debuted at No. 8 in the singles chart, making it the highest place début for any ABBA single release.


title: Chiquitita

text: In Argentina, sales figures up to the end of July 1979 on the single show 500,000 in the Spanish edition, and 25,000 in the original English language format.


title: Chiquitita

text: As of September 2021, it is ABBA's ninth-biggest song in the UK including both pure sales and digital streams.


title: Chiquitita

text: "Chiquitita" was one of the very few singles ABBA released without a custom-made video. Since then, on compilations of the group's videos, a contemporary TV performance of the song has been used, recorded in mid-February 1979, a month after the single's release. This clip was taped by the BBC during recording of the show "ABBA in Switzerland", broadcast across Europe at Easter 1979, although this clip did not feature in the broadcast, being intended for a Christmas programme. ABBA are seen performing the song on a mountainside, with a snowman in the background. Throughout the clip, the bad weather and bad light caused problems during filming, which affected Anni-Frid Lyngstad; her hair constantly flew in her face, and she was forced to keep moving it out of her eyes, so it was not used. During the location shoot in Leysin, the BBC recorded two further versions of the group lip-synching to the song. The group performed the song inside the BBC Big Top used to host 'ABBA in Switzerland' which was included in the final broadcast and a second video was shot of the group sitting around a table in a cafe, for the show "Christmas Snowtime Special" shown on BBC1 on 23 December 1979, hosted by Dame Edna Everage. The clip of the group filmed outside with the snowman was originally intended for this Christmas show, but producer/director Michael Hurll recorded the second clip as he was not happy with the first. In March 2022, a new lyric video was released featuring the mountainside footage.


title: Chiquitita

text: On May 8, 2020, American singer-actress Cher announced she had re-recorded Chiquitita in Spanish with all proceeds going to UNICEF, similar to how ABBA had done in 1979 with the release of the same song.


title: Chiquitita

text: Cher's Spanish version of "Chiquitita" became her first song to chart on a US Latin Chart ever. It charted at No. 6 on the US Latin Digital Song Sales (Billboard).


title: Chiquitita

text: An accompanying music video for "Chiquitita" was premiered on UNICEF's website on 9 May 2020, uploaded to Cher's official YouTube channel shortly afterwards. Cher shot her part at home, with the final cut of the video featuring children from around the world in it.


title: Chiquitita

text: A Spanish various version of Chiquitita were recorded by Puerto Rican boy band Menudo. One version was along singer Ednita Nazario.


title: Cheilitis

text: Cheilitis is a medical condition characterized by inflammation of the lips. The inflammation may include the perioral skin (the skin around the mouth), the vermilion border, or the labial mucosa. The skin and the vermilion border are more commonly involved, as the mucosa is less affected by inflammatory and allergic reactions.


title: Cheilitis

text: "Cheilitis" is a general term, and there are many recognized types and different causes. According to its onset and course, cheilitis can be either acute or chronic. Most cheilitis is caused by exogenous factors such as dryness (chapping) and acute sun exposure. Allergic tests may identify allergens that cause cheilitis.


title: Cheilitis

text: Chapped lips (also known as cheilitis simplex or common cheilitis) is characterized by the cracking, fissuring, and peeling of the skin of the lips, and is one of the most common types of cheilitis. While both lips may be affected, the lower lip is the most common site. There may also be burning or the formation of large, painful cracks when the lips are stretched. Chronic cheilitis simplex can progress to crusting and bleeding.


title: Cheilitis

text: Counterintuitively, constant licking of the lips causes drying and irritation, and eventually the mucosa splits or cracks. The lips have a greater tendency to dry out in cold, dry weather. Digestive enzymes present in the saliva may also irritate the lips, and the evaporation of the water in saliva saps moisture from them.


title: Cheilitis

text: Some children have a habit of sucking and chewing on the lower lip, producing a combination of cheilitis and a sharply demarcated perioral erythema.


title: Cheilitis

text: Treatment is usually successful with barrier lubricants, such as lip salve or Vaseline. Medical grade (USP) lanolin accelerates repair of the lips, and is used in some lip repair products.


title: Cheilitis

text: Sometimes the term "cheilitis simplex" is used interchangeably with cheilitis in general; however, exfoliative cheilitis is also sometimes stated to be the equivalent of chapped lips.


title: Cheilitis

text: Also termed "solar cheilosis", actinic cheilitis is the result of chronic over-exposure to ultraviolet radiation in sunlight. It usually occurs on the lower lip, which is dry, scaling, and wrinkled grey-white in appearance. It is especially common in people with light skin types who live in sunny climates (e.g., Australians of European ancestry), and in persons who spend a lot of time outdoors. There is a small risk that actinic cheilitis can develop into squamous cell carcinoma in the long term, but lip cancer is usually noticed early and hence has a good prognosis compared to oral cancer generally.


title: Cheilitis

text: Angular cheilitis (angular stomatitis, also known as cheilosis) is inflammation of one or both of the corners (angles) of the mouth. It is a fairly common condition, and often affects elderly people.


title: Cheilitis

text: There are many possible causes, including nutritional deficiencies (iron, B vitamins, folate), contact allergies, infections ("Candida albicans", "Staphylococcus aureus" or β-hemolytic streptococci) and edentulism (often with overclosure of the mouth and concomitant denture-related stomatitis), and others.


title: Cheilitis

text: Also termed "lip dermatitis", eczematous cheilitis is a diverse group of disorders which often have an unknown cause. Chronic eczematous reactions account for the majority of chronic cheilitis cases.


title: Cheilitis

text: It is divided into endogenous (due to an inherent characteristic of the individual), and exogenous (where it is caused by an external agent). The main cause of endogenous eczematous cheilitis is atopic cheilitis (atopic dermatitis), and the main causes of exogenous eczematous cheilitis is irritant contact cheilitis ("e.g.", caused by a lip-licking habit) and allergic contact cheilitis. The latter is characterized by a dryness, fissuring, edema, and crusting. It affects females more commonly than males, in a ratio of about 9:1.


title: Cheilitis

text: The most common causes of allergic contact cheilitis is lip cosmetics, including lipsticks and lip balm, followed by toothpastes. A lipstick allergy can be difficult to diagnose in some cases as it is possible that cheilitis can develop without the person even wearing lipstick. Instead, small exposure such as kissing someone who is wearing lipstick is enough to cause the condition.


title: Cheilitis

text: Allergy to Balsam of Peru can manifest as cheilitis. Allergies to metal, wood, or other components can cause cheilitis reactions in musicians, especially players of woodwind and brass instruments, "e.g.", the so-called "clarinetist's cheilitis", or "flutist's cheilitis". "Pigmented contact cheilitis" is one type of allergic cheilitis in which a brown-black discoloration of the lips develops. Patch testing is used to identify the substance triggering allergic contact cheilitis.


title: Cheilitis

text: Infectious cheilitis refers to cheilitis caused by infectious disease. The terms "Candidal cheilitis" and "bacterial cheilitis" are sometimes used, denoting the involvement of Candida organisms and bacterial species respectively. The term "cheilocandidiasis" describes exfoliative (flaking) lesions of the lips and the skin around the lips, and is caused by a superficial candidal infection due to chronic lip licking. Impetigo (caused by "Streptococcus pyogenes" and/or "Staphylococcus aureus"), can manifest as an exfoliative cheilitis-like appearance.


title: Cheilitis

text: Herpes labialis (cold sore) is a common cause of infectious cheilitis. A lesion caused by recurrence of a latent herpes simplex infection can occur in the corner of the mouth, and be mistaken for other causes of angular cheilitis. In fact this is herpes labialis, and is sometimes termed "angular herpes simplex".


title: Cheilitis

text: Orofacial granulomatosis is enlargement of lips due to the formation of non-caseating granulomatous inflammation, which obstruct lymphatic drainage of the orofacial soft tissues, causing lymphedema. Essentially, granulomatous cheilitis refers to the lip swelling that accompanies this condition. "Median cheilitis" may be seen, which is fissuring in the midline of the lips due to the enlargement of the lips. Angular cheilitis may also be associated with orofacial granulomatosis.


title: Cheilitis

text: A related condition is Melkersson–Rosenthal syndrome, a triad of facial palsy, chronic lip edema, and fissured tongue. "Miescher's cheilitis", and "granulomatous macrocheilitis", are synonyms of granulomatous cheilitis.


title: Cheilitis

text: Common causes of drug-related cheilitis include Etretinate, Indinavir, Protease inhibitors, Vitamin A and Isotretinoin (a retinoid drug). Uncommon causes include Atorvastatin, Busulphan, Clofazimine, Clomipramine, Cyancobalamin, Gold, Methyldopa, Psoralens, Streptomycin, Sulfasalazine and Tetracycline. A condition called "drug-induced ulcer of the lip" is described as being characterized by painful or tender, well-defined ulcerations of the lip without induration. It is the result of oral administration of drugs, and the condition resolves when the drugs are stopped.


title: Cheilitis

text: Also termed "cheilitis exfoliativa" or "tic de levres", is an uncommon inflammatory condition of the vermilion zone of the lips, which become painful and crusted. There is continuous production and desquamation (shedding) of thick, brown scales of keratin. The keratin layer of the epidermis of the lips experiences a faster growth and death rate than normal and desquamates. When these scales are removed, a lip of normal appearance is revealed beneath, although there may be associated erythema and edema. The condition has not yet been attributed to any particular cause. Rarely are infections to blame. In some individuals, there is an association with stress, anxiety, depression or personality disorders. In one report, 87% of individuals had some form of psychiatric disturbance, and 47% had thyroid dysfunction, which in turn can cause psychiatric conditions like depression.


title: Cheilitis

text: Some cases of exfoliative cheilitis are thought to represent factitious damage, termed "factitious cheilitis" or "artifactual cheilitis", and are related to repetitive lip picking or licking habits. This appears as crusting and ulceration caused by repetitive chewing and sucking of the lips. Some consider habitual lip licking or picking to be a form of nervous tic. This habit is sometimes termed "perlèche" (derived from the French word "pourlècher" meaning "to lick one's lips"). Factitious cheilitis is significantly more common in young females.


title: Cheilitis

text: Exfoliative cheilitis has also been linked to HIV/AIDS. Management consists mostly of keeping the lips moist and the application of topical corticosteroids ranging from hydrocortisone to clobetasol. There have also been reports of using topical tacrolimus ointment.


title: Cheilitis

text: Chelitis glandularis is a rare inflammatory condition of the minor salivary glands, usually in the lower lip, which appears swollen and everted. There may also be ulceration, crusting, abscesses, and sinus tracts. It is an acquired disorder, but the cause is uncertain. Suspected causes include sunlight, tobacco, syphilis, poor oral hygiene and genetic factors. The openings of the minor salivary gland ducts become inflamed and dilated, and there may be mucopurulent discharge from the ducts. A previous classification suggested dividing cheilitis into 3 types based on severity, with the later stages involving secondary infection with bacteria, and increased ulceration, suppuration and swelling: Type 1, Simple; Type 2, Superficial suppurative ("Baelz's disease"); and Type 3, Deep suppurative ("cheilitis glandularis epostemetosa"). Cheilitis glandularis usually occurs in middle-aged and elderly males, and it carries a risk of malignant transformation to squamous cell carcinoma (18% to 35%). Preventative treatment such as vermilionectomy ("lip shave") is therefore the treatment of choice.


title: Cheilitis

text: Plasma cell cheilitis is a very rare presentation of a condition which more usually occurs on the gingiva (termed "plasma cell gingivitis") or sometimes the tongue. Plasma cell cheilitis appears as well defined, infiltrated, dark red plaque with a superficial lacquer-like glazing. Plasma cell cheilitis usually involves the lower lip. The lips appear dry, atrophic and fissured. Angular cheilitis is sometimes also present.