What do you think?
A History of the Pyrrhic War
A History of the Pyrrhic War explores the multi-polar nature of a conflict that involved the Romans, peoples of Italy, western Greeks, and Carthaginians during Pyrrhus' western campaign in the early third century BCE.
The war occurred nearly a century before the first historical writings in Rome, resulting in a malleable narrative that emphasized the moral virtues of the Romans, transformed Pyrrhus into a figure that resembled Alexander the Great, disparaged the degeneracy of the Greeks, and demonstrated the malicious intent of the Carthaginians. Kent demonstrates the way events were shaped by later Roman generations to transform the complex geopolitical realities of the Pyrrhic War into a one-dimensional duel between themselves and Pyrrhus that anticipated their rise to greatness. This book analyses the Pyrrhic War through consideration of geopolitical context as well as how later Roman writers remembered the conflict. The focus of the war is taken off Pyrrhus as an individual and shifted towards evaluating the multifaceted interactions of the peoples of Italy and Sicily.
A History of the Pyrrhic War is a fundamental resource for academic and learned general readers who have an interest in the interaction of developing imperial powers with their neighbors and how those events shaped the perceptions of later generations. It will be of interest not only to students of Roman history, but also to anyone working on historiography in any period.
The war occurred nearly a century before the first historical writings in Rome, resulting in a malleable narrative that emphasized the moral virtues of the Romans, transformed Pyrrhus into a figure that resembled Alexander the Great, disparaged the degeneracy of the Greeks, and demonstrated the malicious intent of the Carthaginians. Kent demonstrates the way events were shaped by later Roman generations to transform the complex geopolitical realities of the Pyrrhic War into a one-dimensional duel between themselves and Pyrrhus that anticipated their rise to greatness. This book analyses the Pyrrhic War through consideration of geopolitical context as well as how later Roman writers remembered the conflict. The focus of the war is taken off Pyrrhus as an individual and shifted towards evaluating the multifaceted interactions of the peoples of Italy and Sicily.
A History of the Pyrrhic War is a fundamental resource for academic and learned general readers who have an interest in the interaction of developing imperial powers with their neighbors and how those events shaped the perceptions of later generations. It will be of interest not only to students of Roman history, but also to anyone working on historiography in any period.
152 pages, Hardcover
Published September 19, 2019
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
January 20, 2026
This book provides a history of the Pyrrhic War (sorry for spoilers). Absolutely does what it says on the tin. Solid read.
October 5, 2021
Kent's book on the war between the ancient Romans and those Graeco-Italian states that came together under the leadership of the Hellenistic king Pyrrhus is probably a definitive study of the subject. The reason why I add the caveat of probably is because I do not have any other text to contrast or compare it with. Also, whilst I am a qualified postgraduate in ancient Roman history, the period and historical processes that Kent discusses are generally outside my area of expertise. Hence my hesitance as to the status of this book as the book about the Pyrrhic War.
There is no doubt as to the complexity and depth of Kent's work in discussing and analysing the war. He has developed a nuanced construct of what supposedly transpired during this early Third Century BCE conflict, with plenty of details as to what he thinks happened, when and how. The continual source criticism helps inform his history, and he has produced a heavily research and footnoted text. One might challenge him on the quality of his sourcework and the conclusions he draws, but it would be hard to fault him on the scope of his research.
Where Kent's book falls down somewhat is his prose narrative. The complexity of the different parties involved as well as their geographic locations is hard to follow, and one does become confused as to who is who and why they are doing what they are doing. The geopolitical history that Kent tries to unravel is written of rather obtusely and readers will need to take their time to carefully unpick and understand the elements of the history of Pyrrhus's war.
On the other hand Kent is extremely successful in deconstructing those issues relevant to the nature of ancient historiography and the narrative of Roman 'nationalism' as represented in the primary sources that recount the Pyrrhic War. He identifies the echoes of similar ancient stories about Alexander the Great as posited in literary sources about Pyrrhus. Kent notes the problems with the sources as to each relevant point in the historical narrative, trying to weave his account from a combination of what he considers feasible from the accounts of Livy, Plutarch, Dionysus of Halicarnassus, Dio Cassius, Orosius, Zonarus etc. There is a recognition that the accounts of the war against Pyrrhus and his Italiote allies are not dissimilar to the stories produced about the Punic Wars, most notably the similarities between Pyrrhus and Hannibal. Finally Kent hits a bullseye with his continual reference to the ancient historical texts presenting the Pyrrhic War as a moral narrative. The ancient literary sources are not definitively concerned with facts; they are more interested in the relative 'good' or 'evil' of each player in the conflict.
In summary 'A History of the Pyrrhic War' is a dense and complex mongraph that will be most accessible for those with a pre-existing knowledge of the subject. Kent's prose narrative is problematic however he makes some extremely good observations as to the nature of ancient Roman literary texts. This is a specialists' book that will be worthy of the attention of those scholars interested in Pyrrhus, the Third Century BCE and the development of ancient Rome as a political and imperial power.
There is no doubt as to the complexity and depth of Kent's work in discussing and analysing the war. He has developed a nuanced construct of what supposedly transpired during this early Third Century BCE conflict, with plenty of details as to what he thinks happened, when and how. The continual source criticism helps inform his history, and he has produced a heavily research and footnoted text. One might challenge him on the quality of his sourcework and the conclusions he draws, but it would be hard to fault him on the scope of his research.
Where Kent's book falls down somewhat is his prose narrative. The complexity of the different parties involved as well as their geographic locations is hard to follow, and one does become confused as to who is who and why they are doing what they are doing. The geopolitical history that Kent tries to unravel is written of rather obtusely and readers will need to take their time to carefully unpick and understand the elements of the history of Pyrrhus's war.
On the other hand Kent is extremely successful in deconstructing those issues relevant to the nature of ancient historiography and the narrative of Roman 'nationalism' as represented in the primary sources that recount the Pyrrhic War. He identifies the echoes of similar ancient stories about Alexander the Great as posited in literary sources about Pyrrhus. Kent notes the problems with the sources as to each relevant point in the historical narrative, trying to weave his account from a combination of what he considers feasible from the accounts of Livy, Plutarch, Dionysus of Halicarnassus, Dio Cassius, Orosius, Zonarus etc. There is a recognition that the accounts of the war against Pyrrhus and his Italiote allies are not dissimilar to the stories produced about the Punic Wars, most notably the similarities between Pyrrhus and Hannibal. Finally Kent hits a bullseye with his continual reference to the ancient historical texts presenting the Pyrrhic War as a moral narrative. The ancient literary sources are not definitively concerned with facts; they are more interested in the relative 'good' or 'evil' of each player in the conflict.
In summary 'A History of the Pyrrhic War' is a dense and complex mongraph that will be most accessible for those with a pre-existing knowledge of the subject. Kent's prose narrative is problematic however he makes some extremely good observations as to the nature of ancient Roman literary texts. This is a specialists' book that will be worthy of the attention of those scholars interested in Pyrrhus, the Third Century BCE and the development of ancient Rome as a political and imperial power.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews