In military affairs, victory in one battle is not always decisive. Military history has witnessed such triumphs that came at too high a price. Their name is Pyrrhic victories.
Origin of the term "Pyrrhic victory"
In the art of warfare, this term refers to a victory that is equal to defeat or even surpasses it in the number of losses. The name of the term comes from the name of the Greek commander Pyrrhus, who coveted the laurels of Alexander the Great and won one of the most devastating victories in the history of military affairs. However, Pyrrhus was not the only one who made the classic mistake of a commander - having won the battle, he lost the war.
Before the crushing triumph of Pyrrhus, the expression "Cadmean victory" was common.
Battles of Heraclea and Ausculum
The devastating victory of the same name came at a high cost to the leader of the army of Epirus, the ambitious commander Pyrrhus, who decided to conquer Rome. He first invaded Italy in 280 BC. e., having entered into an alliance with the Greek-speaking city of Tarentum. He led an army of 25 thousand soldiers and 20 war elephants, which the Roman opponents saw for the first time. Elephants had a decisive influence on the victory at Heraclea.
Enraged, Pyrrhus continued to capture the Roman Republic and a year later reached Ausculum. This time the Romans were better prepared and, despite their defeat, inflicted great damage on Pyrrhus' army. According to Plutarch, after the victory at Ausculum, Pyrrhus declared that one more such victory over the Romans would leave him with no army at all. After further defeats, the Greek conqueror stopped the military campaign against Rome and in 275 BC. e. went back to Greece.
Battle of Malplac
After the King of Spain, Charles II of Habsburg, died without leaving an heir, a military conflict broke out between France and the allied Anglo-Danish-Austrian troops for the empty throne. It lasted 14 years and was called the War of the Spanish Succession. The conflict came to a head in 1709 at Malplac, when a 100,000-strong allied army met up to 90,000 French soldiers. The commander-in-chief of the allied army, the Duke of Marlborough, was impatient to crush the French, and on September 11 he launched a large-scale offensive with infantry and cavalry. The French used a number of shelters and obstacles, but despite this, the duke's troops, after seven hours of bloody battle, broke the enemy's resistance. The Habsburg army was so tired and thinned that it allowed the French to retreat with minimal losses.
The Battle of Malplaque was the largest military operation of the 18th century. The losses of the French army amounted to 12 thousand people, while the allied troops lost twice as many, which at that time amounted to a quarter of the entire Habsburg army. The French commander-in-chief, the Duke de Villars, in a report to King Louis XIV, repeated the words of Pyrrhus, stating that if God deigns to give the opponents another such victory, there will be no trace of their army. The bloodshed at Malplac sowed discord in the ranks of the allied marshals, and by 1712 the agreement began to lose its force.
Battle of Bunker Hill
In 1775, the first blood began to be shed in the war for independence from the British crown. On June 17, a 1,000-strong militia force attempted to resist the capture of several heights near Boston. At Bunker Hill they encountered trained and armed soldiers of the Imperial army, outnumbering the militia by two to one. The Americans successfully fired back and managed to throw back two attempts to attack the red caftans. On the third attempt, the militias had no ammunition left, and they were forced to retreat.
The victory cost the British too dearly, they lost half of the detachment and were forced to take another height. The militias, on the other hand, perceived their defeat as a moral victory over the enemy - they coped with a professional military detachment, which also had a numerical advantage.
Battle of Borodino
Lermontov's famous poem begins with the question: "Tell me, uncle, it's not without reason ..." And it's not without reason ... The Battle of Borodino became the bloodiest day in Napoleon's military campaign. In 1812, Bonaparte was closer than ever to Moscow. Prior to this, the Russian commanders happily pretended to be retreating, but on the outskirts of the city, Kutuzov deployed his army to face the enemy. The French did not waste time and rushed into a direct attack on the fortifications of the Russian army. The battle was bloody and long, only in the evening the French managed to break the enemy. Napoleon took pity on his elite warriors and allowed Kutuzov to withdraw the army with minimal losses.
Napoleon remained the king of the battlefield, which was littered with the bodies of dead Frenchmen. His army lost 30 thousand soldiers - half the size of the Russian army. Thirty thousand turned out to be too many, especially when conducting military operations on unfriendly Russian soil. The capture of Moscow did not bring relief, since the city lay in ruins - the inhabitants set fire to it immediately after the arrival of the French. Faced with Russian reluctance to surrender, severe cold and famine, Napoleon lost 400,000 of his soldiers.
Battle of Chancellorsville
The second largest battle of the American Civil War demonstrates the unique tactical approach of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Despite being outnumbered twice by Joseph Hooker's Army of the Potomac, Lee managed to turn the tide of battle in his favor. Taking great risks and ignoring doctrine, General Li divided his troops and twice attacked the better prepared positions of the enemy. Unexpected Confederate maneuvers prevented Hooker from encircling General Lee's army, and a few days later the Unionists were forced to retreat in disgrace.
Although the battle of Chancellorsville is considered a work of military art and elevates General Lee's tactical intelligence to new heights, the victory was not easy for the Confederates. In the shootout, the closest adviser to the commander-in-chief, General Jackson "Stonewall", was killed, and the total losses of the Virginia army amounted to 13 thousand people. While Hooker's army was able to replenish the ranks of soldiers from among the new recruits, the Confederate victory at Chancellorsville brought only historical glory.
Excursion into history
In 280 BC, King Pyrrhus landed in Italy with his large army. On the side of Pyrrhus were the recalcitrant Samnites. The army included war elephants, which was a big surprise for the Romans. The first battle ended in a decisive victory for Pyrrhus's army, even though the Romans were vastly outnumbered. A year later, in 279, the Romans sent a new army to crush Pyrrhus. After a long battle, Pyrrhus again managed to defeat the Romans, but, counting the losses, the king cried out: "Another such victory and I will be left without an army!" The Romans fought courageously, and the losses were equivalent - 15 thousand people.
Achievements of Pyrrhus
The king of Epirus is famous not only for the phrase “Pyrrhic victory”, but also for some achievements that enriched the military affairs of that time. It was he who first began to enclose the battle camp with a moat and rampart for defense. After the battle with the Romans, the expression "Pyrrhic victory" became widespread. Basically, it is pronounced when success had to be paid very dearly. Such victories include the Battle of Malplac, the War of the Spanish Succession (1709). Then the British, after defeating the French, discovered that a third of their troops had died. The Battle of Maloyaroslavets (1812) is also a Pyrrhic victory. The French then still managed to take the city, but, as you know, the Napoleonic army did not receive anything worthwhile from such an acquisition.
Contemporaries often compared Pyrrhus to a dice player whose every throw is successful, but who does not know how to use his luck. As a result, this feature of Pyrrhus became the cause of his death. In addition, it was the war elephants, his secret "wonder weapon", that played a decisive role in his death.
Battle of Argos
When the army of Pyrrhus besieged Argos, his soldiers found an opportunity to quietly penetrate the sleeping city, but the king decided to bring war elephants into the city. But since they did not pass through the gate, this caused a noise, and the Argives grabbed their weapons. The battle in the narrow streets led to general confusion, no one heard the orders, it was impossible to determine where anyone was. As a result, Argos became a huge trap for the Epirus army. Trying to get out of the city, Pyrrhus sent a messenger to his son with an order to break the walls so that his army could leave the “captured city”. But his order was misunderstood, and the son of Pyrrhus went to the city to save his father. At the gate, two streams - retreating and those who hurried to their rescue - collided. In this pandemonium, Pyrrhus died at the hands of the mother of the warrior Argos, with whom he fought. The woman decided to help her son and threw a tile at Pyrrhus, hitting him right in the neck, not protected by armor.
"Pyrrhic victory": meaning
So, a Pyrrhic victory is called a victory for which a very high price had to be paid. This is a success that can be equated with defeat. In St. Petersburg, in the very center of the city, there is the Admiralty Tower. Four seated warriors can be seen against the background of the sky at the corners of the tower. Few people know who they are, but these are the four most famous commanders of ancient times: Caesar, Achilles, Pyrrhus and Alexander.
Pyrrhic victory Pyrrhic victoryAccording to the ancient Greek historian Plutarch, the king of Epirus Pyrrhus in 279 BC. e., after his victory over the Romans at Asculum, he exclaimed: "Another such victory, and we are lost." Another version of the same phrase is known: "One more such victory, and I will be left without an army."
In this battle, Pyrrhus won thanks to the presence in his army of war elephants, against which at that time the Romans did not yet know how to fight and therefore were powerless in front of them, “as if before rising water or a destructive earthquake,” as the same Plutarch wrote. The Romans then had to leave the battlefield and retreat to
their camp, which, according to the customs of those times, meant a complete victory for Pyrrhus. But the Romans fought courageously, so the winner that day lost as many soldiers as the defeated - 15 thousand people. Hence this bitter confession of Pyrrhus.
Contemporaries compared Pyrrhus to a dice player who always makes a good throw, but does not know how to use this luck. As a result, this feature of Pyrrhus killed him. Moreover, an ominous role in his death was played by his own “miracle weapon” - war elephants.
When Pyrrhus's army besieged the Greek city of Argos, his warriors found a way to infiltrate the sleeping city. They would have captured it completely bloodlessly, if not for the decision of Pyrrhus to bring war elephants into the city. They did not pass through the gates - the battle towers installed on them interfered. They began to take them off, then put them on the animals again, which caused a noise. The Argives grabbed their weapons, fighting began in the narrow city streets. There was general confusion: no one heard orders, no one knew who was where, what was happening on the next street. Argos has become a huge trap for the Epirus army.
Pyrrhus tried to get out of the "captured" city as soon as possible. He sent a messenger to his son, who was standing near the city with a detachment, with an order to urgently break part of the wall so that the Epirus warriors would quickly leave the city. But the messenger misunderstood the order, and the son of Pyrrhus moved to the city to help his father. So two oncoming streams collided at the gate - those retreating from the city and those who hurried to their aid. To top it all off, the elephants rebelled: one lay down right at the gate, not wanting to move at all, the other, the most powerful, nicknamed Nikon, having lost his wounded driver friend, began to look for him, rush about and trample both his own and other people's soldiers. Finally, he found his friend, grabbed him with his trunk, put him on his tusks and rushed out of the city, crushing everyone he met.
In this turmoil, Pyrrhus himself died. He fought a young Argos-sktsm warrior whose mother, like all the women of the city, stood on the roof of her house. Being near the place of the fight, she saw her son and decided to help him. Having broken the tiles from the roof, she threw them at Pyrrhus and hit him in the neck, which was not protected by armor. The commander fell and was finished off on the ground.
But, besides this "sad-born" phrase, Pyrrhus is also known for some achievements that enriched the military affairs of that time. So. he was the first to enclose the military camp with a defensive rampart and a moat. Before him, the Romans surrounded their camp with wagons, so its arrangement usually ended.
Allegorically: a victory that came at a very high price; success equal to defeat (iron.).
Encyclopedic Dictionary of winged words and expressions. - M .: "Lokid-Press". Vadim Serov. 2003.
Pyrrhic victory Epirus king Pyrrhus in 279 BC defeated the Romans at the Battle of Ausculum. But this victory, as Plutarch (in the biography of Pyrrhus) and other ancient historians tell, cost Pyrrhus such great losses in the army that he exclaimed: "Another such victory, and we are lost!" Indeed, in the following year, 278, the Romans defeated Pyrrhus. Hence the expression "Pyrrhic victory" in the meaning: a dubious victory that does not justify the sacrifices incurred for it.
Dictionary of winged words. Plutex. 2004.
What does "pyrrhic victory" mean?
Maxim Maksimovich
There is a region of Epirus in Greece. Epirus king Pyrrhus in 280 BC. e. waged a long and brutal war with Rome. Twice he managed to win victories; in his army there were war elephants, and the Romans did not know how to fight with them. Nevertheless, the second victory was given to Pyrrhus at the cost of such sacrifices that, according to legend, he exclaimed after the battle: “Another such victory - and I will be left without an army!”
The war ended in defeat and the retreat of Pyrrhus from Italy. The words “Pyrrhic victory” have long since become a designation of success, bought at such a high price that, perhaps, a defeat would have been no less profitable: “The victories of the fascist troops near Yelnya and Smolensk in 1941 turned out to be Pyrrhic victories.
~ Fish ~
Ausculum, a city in the North. Puglia (Italy), near which in 279 BC. e. there was a battle between the troops of the Epirus king Pyrrhus and the Roman troops during the wars of Rome for the conquest of South. Italy. The Epirus army broke the resistance of the Romans within two days, but its losses were so great that Pyrrhus said: "one more such victory and I will have no more warriors." Hence the expression "Pyrrhic victory".
The expression "Pyrrhic victory" has also become winged. How did it come about? What does it mean?
Roma Subbotin
Pyrrhic victory
There is a region of Epirus in Greece. Epirus king Pyrrhus in 280 BC. e. waged a long and brutal war with Rome. Twice he managed to win victories; in his army there were war elephants, and the Romans did not know how to fight with them. Nevertheless, the second victory was given to Pyrrhus at the cost of such sacrifices that, according to legend, he exclaimed after the battle: "Another such victory - and I will be left without an army!" The war ended with the defeat and retreat of Pyrrhus from Italy. The words “Pyrrhic victory” have long since become a designation of success, bought at such a high price that, perhaps, a defeat would have been no less profitable: “The victories of the fascist troops near Yelnya and Smolensk in 1941 turned out to be Pyrrhic victories.
Bulat haliullin
The Roman Republic was at war with Greece in 200-300 BC. e.
The king of a small Greek state (Epirus) was Pyrrhus
In one of the campaigns, his army defeated the army of Rome, but suffered monstrous losses.
As a result, he lost the next battle, and then he himself was killed by a piece of a tiled roof during street fighting.
Kikoghost
When Pyrrhus in 279 BC e. won another victory over the Roman army, examining it, he saw that more than half of the soldiers died. Astonished, he exclaimed: "Another such victory, and I will lose the whole army." The expression means victory equal to defeat, or victory for which too much has been paid.
Nadezhda sushitskaya
A victory that came at too high a cost. Too many losses.
The origin of this expression is due to the battle of Ascullus in 279 BC. e. Then the Epirus army of King Pyrrhus for two days attacked the Roman troops and broke their resistance, but the losses were so great that Pyrrhus remarked: “One more such victory, and I will be left without an army”
The king who won at too high a cost. What answer?
Athanasius44
Pyrrhic victory- an expression that entered all the dictionaries of the world and appeared more than 2 thousand years ago, when the king of Epirus Pyrrhus was able to defeat the Romans at the town of Ausculum during his raid on the Apennine Peninsula. In a two-day battle, his army lost about three and a half thousand soldiers, and only the successful actions of 20 war elephants helped him break the Romans.
King Pyrrhus, by the way, was a relative of Alexander of Mecedon, was his second cousin, so he had someone to learn from. Although in the end he lost the war with the Romans, he returned to his place. And after 7 years, during an attack on Macedonia, he was killed in the city of Argos, when a woman from the defenders of the city threw tiles at him from the roof of a house.
Vafa Aliyeva
Pyrrhic victory - this expression owes its origin to the battle of Ausculum in 279 BC. e. Then the Epirus army of King Pyrrhus for two days attacked the Roman troops and broke their resistance, but the losses were so great that Pyrrhus remarked: “One more such victory, and I will be left without an army.”
Tamil123
We are talking about the king of Epirus and Macedonia - King Pyrrhus. He fought with Ancient Rome. King Pyrrhus suffered heavy losses, which is why that war became the idiom "Pyrrhic victory" - a victory on the way to which there were so many losses that the taste of victory is not felt.
Valery146
The Greek king Pyrrhus won the battle with the enemy, losing more than half of his troops and realized that one more such victory and he would have no soldiers left.
Thus, the expression Pyrrhic victory appeared, that is, a victory given at a very large, usually unacceptable price!
Probably it was PYRRHUS. Since then, this victory bears his name and is called the Pyrrhic victory, that is, the sacrifices made for this victory do not in any way correspond to the victory itself, but are equated with defeat. This is how I understand this expression.
Philologist, candidate of philological sciences, poet, member of the Writers' Union of Russia.
Publication date: 04/01/2019
Many catchphrases penetrate our speech, making their way through the granite slabs of millennia. Indeed, they are as old as the world.
The most mysterious seem to modern native speakers of those phraseological units, the roots of which must be sought deep in the past. Such artifacts include the expression "Pyrrhic victory". Let's try to understand its history!
The meaning of phraseology
When we hear the phrase "Pyrrhic victory" we should not think that we are talking about a magnificent feast in honor of the winners. This phraseological unit comes from the name of the ancient Greek king Pyrrhus, which we will talk about later.
But the meaning of the idiom is this: “Pyrrhic victory” is a victory bought at too high a price. Such a triumph does not bring joy and is more like a defeat.
The most striking historical example of such a victory is the capture of Moscow by Napoleon in 1812. We all remember how the dream of conquering the Russian capital turned out for the French emperor.
Formally, the enemy got what he wanted, but in fact it was a trap, thanks to which our compatriots managed to completely change the course of the war and put the French to flight.
The expression is applicable in everyday situations. It can be used when talking about a person who has received a new appointment, having gone over the heads of colleagues, losing their friendship and respect.
The origin of phraseology
The legendary battle that gave rise to our phraseological unit took place in the 3rd century BC. at the town of Auskul on the Apennine Peninsula.
As Plutarch testifies, the war between the Epirus king Pyrrhus and the Roman legions went on with varying success, until the first went on an active offensive. For two days of a fierce attack, the Epirotians managed to force the Roman troops to retreat.
After some time, the Roman army was replenished with fresh troops and managed to recover, while Pyrrhus' resources were completely depleted: the best warriors were thrown into the attack.
In the historical literature, Pyrrhus is criticized for shortsightedness. In the excitement of the duel, the commander was not always able to predict what step would be next.
Because of this quality of the famous military leader, victory followed by failure came to be called Pyrrhic. However, the king of Epirus had not only shortcomings. It is known that it was he who reformed some of the nuances of combat.
For example, he began to enclose the territory of the military camp with a moat and a palisade, whereas earlier it was simply furnished around the perimeter with traveling carts.
The king also became famous for involving giant elephants in the course of the battle, which terrified the enemy. Sweeping away everything in their path, the animals opened battles, overwhelming with their greatness.
As you can see, Pyrrhus loved triumphs, but not everyone brought him glory.
Synonymous expressions
It is curious that before the Pyrrhic failures there was a saying "Cadmean victory" with a similar meaning.
Plato and Pausanias describe the protracted war started by Cadmus, the king of Thebes, ending the story with the following conclusion: “and for the inhabitants of Thebes, this was not without major losses, because the victory, disastrous for the winners, is called Cadmeian.”
A similar, but not synonymous meaning is the idiom "Trojan horse", associated with the capture of Troy. This idiom is related to the “Pyrrhic victory” by the semantics of a trap, a trap, something that becomes in time not what it seemed.
Here are a few more Russian-language and borrowed synonyms:
- it is not worth it;
- the game is not worth the candle;
- rejoice early.
So that the victory does not turn out to be pyrrhic, think about the price of success: maybe in some battles it will be more worthy to lose?
King Pyrrhus. Source: commons.wikimedia.org
A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that was won at too high a price, the result of which did not justify the effort and money invested.
Origin of expression
The origin of the expression is associated with the battle of Ausculum (in 279 BC). Then the Epirusian army of King Pyrrhus for two days attacked the Roman troops and broke their resistance, but the losses were so great that Pyrrhus remarked: “One more such victory, and I will be left without an army.” Another version of the same phrase is known: "Another such victory, and we were lost."
The Secret of War Elephants
In this battle, Pyrrhus won thanks to the presence in his army of war elephants, against which at that time the Romans did not yet know how to fight and therefore were powerless in front of them, “as if before rising water or a destructive earthquake,” as he wrote. Plutarch. The Romans then had to leave the battlefield and retreat to their camp, which, according to the customs of those times, meant a complete victory for Pyrrhus. But the Romans fought courageously, so the winner that day lost as many soldiers as the vanquished - 15 thousand people.
Expression predecessors
Before Pyrrhus, the expression "Cadmeian victory" was in use, based on the ancient Greek epic "Seven against Thebes" and found in Plato in his "Laws". The interpretation of this concept can be found in the ancient Greek writer Pausanias: telling about the campaign of the Argives against Thebes and the victory of the Thebans, he reports:
"... but for the Thebans themselves, this case was not without great losses, and therefore the victory, which turned out to be disastrous for the winners, is called Cadmeian." (c) "Description of Hellas", book. IX.
Epirus is a geographical and historical region in southeastern Europe between present-day Greece and Albania. Epirus was part of ancient Hellas with the Acheron and Kokytos rivers and the Illyrian population. To the north of Epirus was Illyria, to the northeast - Macedonia, to the east - Thessaly.
To the south were the regions of Ambracia, Amphilochia, Acarnania, Aetolia.
