previous next

Flaccus was not so fortunate, his attempt to reach the fortified posts on Tichius and Rhoduntia was a failure. [2] The Macedonians and the other troops in the king's camp could at first only make out a moving mass of men in the distance, and were under the impression that the Aetolians had seen the fighting from afar and were coming to their assistance. [3] When, however, they recognised the approaching standards and arms and discovered their mistake, they were so panic-struck that they flung away their weapons and fled. [4] The pursuit was impeded by the entrenchments of the camp and the confined space through which the pursuers had to pass, but the elephants were the greatest hindrance, for it was difficult for the infantry to get past them, and impossible for the cavalry; the frightened horses created more confusion than in the actual battle. The plunder of the camp still further delayed the pursuit. [5] However, they followed up the enemy as far as Scarphea, after which they returned to camp. [6] Large numbers of men and horses had been either killed or captured on the way, and even the elephants, which they were unable to secure, had been killed. [7] While the battle was going on the Aetolians who had been holding Heraclea made an attempt on the Roman camp, but they gained nothing from their enterprise, which was certainly not lacking in audacity. [8] At the third watch of the following night the consul sent the cavalry to continue the pursuit, and at daybreak he put the legions in motion. The king had gained a considerable start, as he did not stop in his headlong ride till he reached Elatia. [9] Here he collected what was left of his army out of the battle and the flight and retreated with a very small body of half-armed soldiers to Chalcis. [10] The Roman cavalry did not succeed in overtaking the king himself at Elatia, but they cut off a large part of his army, who were unable to go any further through sheer fatigue, or else had lost their way in an unknown country, with none to guide them. [11] Out of the whole army not a single man escaped beyond the 500 who formed the king's bodyguard, an insignificant number even if we accept Polybius' statement which I have mentioned above that the force the king brought with him out of Asia did not exceed 10,000 men. [12] What proportion would it be if we are to believe Valerius Antias, that there were 60,000 men in the king's army, of whom 40,000 fell and over 5000 made prisoners, and 230 standards captured? In the battle itself the Roman losses amounted to 150, and in the defence of the camp against the Aetolians not more than 50 were killed.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

load focus Notes (W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1873)
load focus Notes (W. Weissenborn, 1873)
load focus Summary (English, Evan T. Sage, PhD professor of latin and head of the department of classics in the University of Pittsburgh, 1935)
load focus Summary (Latin, W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1911)
load focus Summary (Latin, Evan T. Sage, PhD professor of latin and head of the department of classics in the University of Pittsburgh, 1935)
load focus Latin (W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1911)
load focus Latin (Evan T. Sage, PhD professor of latin and head of the department of classics in the University of Pittsburgh, 1935)
load focus English (Evan T. Sage, PhD professor of latin and head of the department of classics in the University of Pittsburgh, 1935)
load focus English (Cyrus Evans, 1850)
load focus Latin (W. Weissenborn, 1873)
hide References (31 total)
  • Commentary references to this page (14):
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 33.10
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 33.15
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 33.3
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 35.34
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 35.43
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 35.46
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 37.20
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 37.34
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 39-40, commentary, 40.40
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 39-40, commentary, 40.58
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 41-42, commentary, 42.30
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 43-44, commentary, 44.39
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, book 45, commentary, 45.24
    • Sir Richard C. Jebb, Commentary on Sophocles: Ajax, 1160
  • Cross-references to this page (9):
  • Cross-references in notes to this page (1):
  • Cross-references in general dictionaries to this page (7):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: