The Spartans, Macedonians and others would come to discover that the Illyrians were, in fact, far more than a match for the hoplites, especially under the leadership of arguably the most famous name in Illyrian history, King Bardyllis of the Dardanians. In 393 BC, the large and powerful Dardanian tribe actually conquered Macedon, forcing King Amyntas III to flee his kingdom, taking as many refugees as he could with him, and seek asylum in the neighbouring Greek state of Thessaly. For a year, the Illyrians controlled Macedon, ruling through a puppet king named Argaeus. However, the deposed Amyntas rallied support in Thessaly, kicked the Illyrian invaders out and regained control of his realm. To cement the peace, he married Eurydice, the sister of the Illyrian general who had conquered his kingdom the previous year, who would bear him four children. Even so, in later years, the Macedonians would be forced to pay a regular tribute to their Illyrian foes to ward off their armies. In 359 BC, the Macedonians lost another battle with the Illyrians, which resulted in 4,000 Macedonians being killed, including King Perdiccas III; it is said that Bardyllis personally slew Perdiccas in single combat on the battlefield. Afterwards, the Illyrians seized control of the western half of Macedon. Diodorus Siculus records that the Macedonians had ‘become exceedingly afraid of the Illyrian armies and had lost heart for continuing the war’.5 However, Perdiccas’ younger brother Philip, now King Philip II, Alexander the Great’s father, forced the Illyrians to withdraw, killing Bardyllis in battle. In 337 BC, Philip just barely escaped being killed himself by the Illyrians in battle.6 After three centuries of fighting, the Greeks had made relatively no progress against their traditional western foe. Perhaps a new power rising to dominance on the Italian Peninsula would have better luck.
Rome and Illyria: First Contact
The city of Rome was founded in the year 793 BC by the divine twins Romulus and Remus. For the next 200 or so years, the tiny western Italian city-state was ruled by a series of kings. It slowly expanded its dominion in Italy by conquering and assimilating neighbouring tribes and city-states. In the year 509 BC, Rome expelled the monarchy and proclaimed the creation of the Republic. The civil war between the monarchists and republicans would last for ten years. In the end, the republicans won, the monarchy was abolished, and the Roman Republic was officially created in 499 BC.
It is unknown when Rome first became aware of the Illyrians’ existence. The Greek poet Callimachus reports that not long after the Republic was founded, the city of Rome came under attack by an Illyrian tribe called the Peucetians, who had settled in southern Italy, but they were driven off. Callimachus’ story is probably a work of fiction, since no other ancient account mentions this event, and the only foreign attack upon the city during this time was by the Etruscans led by Lars Porsenna. Moreover, Callimachus lived two centuries after the events in question supposedly happened. However, it should be stated that the Celtic assault on the city, which occurred in the early 300s BC, was a much more recent event and a fairly famous one, and would have been well-known. Perhaps Callimachus substituted the Peucetians in place of Brennus’ Gallic warriors. In Callimachus’ story, a Roman man named Gaius attacks and kills the Peucetian commander, but he is wounded in the thigh in the process. He complained about his limp, but was scolded by his mother to stop whining, and he did. Stories such as this are meant to portray exempla, models of correct behaviour that other people should emulate. In this case, the lesson is not to complain or whine about personal injuries and not to indulge in self-pity.
Okay, so we can rule out Callimachus’ story, so where does that leave us? It’s almost certain that the Romans first came into contact with the Illyrians when they were expanding in the Italian Peninsula, conquering and assimilating other tribes into their domain. The questions are when, where and who?
Sometime in the first millenium BC, a group of Illyrians crossed the Adriatic from their homeland in the Balkans and settled in southern Italy. This group of Illyrian tribes collectively called themselves the Iapygians, and may have formed a distinct cultural group separate from other Illyrians. According to the geographer and historian Strabo, they were named after Iapyx, the son of Daedalus.7 The Iapygians were divided into three tribes: the Daunians, the Peucetians and the Messapians. It’s not clear exactly from where these people came, but one idea is that they were from southern Illyria, possibly from what is now Albania. The trip from here to Italy’s boot would be short, and considering that Illyrians were known to be good sailors, the journey must have been rather easy.
The date of the arrival of the Iapygians is open to academic speculation. Some claim that they arrived between 1000–900 BC, long before Rome was even established. Others claim that the migration was a bit more recent, say about 500 BC or thereabouts. The exact date doesn’t really matter. Furthermore, it was almost assuredly not a single massive event but a gradual migration of people across the Adriatic that occurred in small batches over a prolonged period of time.8
When the Iapygian colonists landed on the Italian coast, they quickly realized that they were not alone. The landscape of southern Italy was already inhabited by numerous Italic tribes. Also by this time, the Greeks had established a sizable colony in southern Italy, stretching from Naples southwards. The name Naples is, in fact, of Greek origin: Neopolis, the ‘new city’. Although I have not found any record of it, I imagine that when the Iapygians landed on Italy’s south-eastern coast, there was considerable conflict between themselves and both the Italic natives and the Greek colonists. I have two reasons for proposing this. First, it has been established both in archaeology and in historical records that the area now known as Apulia was originally home to numerous Italic tribes. Strabo comments that while the Greeks of southern Italy referred to this area by the Iapygian territorial names, the Italic natives persistently referred to the landscape using the original native names. Strabo further comments that the native people of southern Apulia were squeezed into a tiny area around the city of Tarentum between the lands of the Peucetians to the north and the Messapians to the south. In order for this to have happened, the native Salentini and Calabri tribes would have to have been driven off their lands and forced to relocate into this small pocket of territory, under the protection of the Tarentine city-state. Second, the Iapygians are not described as being under the overlordship of the Greek and southern Italic city-states but were three independent powers. Consistently, the Greeks seem to regard the Iapygians as the people ‘over there’, implying that Iapygian territory was considered foreign and therefore not included within the broader region of Magna Graecia. The Iapygians were never able to take over all of southern Italy, but restricted themselves to Italy’s heel and a thin strip of land immediately north of it along the peninsula’s eastern coast. This largely corresponds to the modern-day region of Apulia.9
In the northern part of the Iapygians’ newly-claimed territory were the Daunians. Since they were the furthest north, and as such were the furthest away from the Greek colonies in the south, the Daunians were not as Hellenized as their neighbours. The Daunians were known for their pottery and for their funerary monuments, many of which are kept within the museum in the town of Siponto. Siponto may, in fact, have been their main settlement.10
South of the Daunians were the Peucetians. According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, they named themselves after a heroic ancestor, Peucetis. In the legend that he reports, Peucetis was one of many sons of Lycaon of Arcadia. Lycaon had already divided up his land among his other sons, so Peucetis was forced to go elsewhere to seek his fortune, and thus he and a troupe of followers came to Italy. According to the Greco-Roman historian Strabo, the Peucetians lived where the city of Bari stands today, and extended as far south as Brundisium (Brentesion in Greek; modern-day Brindisi).11
The southernmost of the Iapygian Illyrian tribes was called the Messapians. Strabo says that the border of Messapian territory stretched between the cities of Brundisium and Taras, later known as Tarentum (modern-day Taranto).12 By 500 BC, the Messapians had become str
ong, so strong that they were regarded as rivals for power by some of the existing Greek and Italian city-states in the region, especially the Greek city-state of Tarentum. Wars between Tarentum and the Messapian tribe would continue on and off for the better part of a century. In fact, Strabo states that on one occasion, when the Messapians and the Tarentines were fighting over control of Heracleia, the Daunians and Peucetians actually joined Tarentum’s side. This shows firstly that the Iapygians were not united, and secondly that there was competition and even hostility between them.13
Strabo hints that the Iapygian tribes were long gone by the time that he was writing his Geography, and that these regional names of Daunia, Peucetia and Messapia had fallen out of usage. By the late third century BC, the Messapians had disappeared and their territory was taken over by the city-state of Tarentum. The Tarentines became such a powerful force in southern Italy that they were a major enemy of the expanding Roman Republic. However, even into the first century AD, the tip of Italy’s heel was referred to as the ‘Iapygian Cape’. Moreover, while the Iapygian Illyrians had faded into the past, their successors known as the Apuli spoke the Iapygian language and practised Iapygian culture.14
In addition to the dominant Illyrian populations in the south-eastern territory of Apulia, there is also evidence that small pocket populations of Illyrians inhabited lands all along the eastern coast of Italy. The Liburnians, especially, seemed to be fairly aggressive colonizers. Florus states that they were spread throughout the whole Mediterranean, including establishing settlements in Italy.15 Theopompus states that the Liburnians established the settlement of Adria in Italy; the name may be related to ‘Adriatic’.16 According to Pliny the Elder, the Liburnians had a few outposts established along Italy’s Adriatic coast, until they were eventually expelled. In time, the Umbrians of central Italy drove the Liburnians out of their last Italian stronghold: the port of Truentus.17In addition to written historical evidence, we also have archaeological evidence for Illyrian populations in central Italy. The Iguvium Tablets, dated to the fifth to fourth centuries BC, state that the Japuzkum numen (‘those named the Japodes’) were banned from attending religious rites.18
Figure 7: Map of the Iapygian Illyrian tribes of south-eastern Italy, circa 500 BC. Note the area claimed by the city-state of Tarentum. (Illustration by the author)
The First Roman-Illyrian War: 229-228 BC
The Romans may indeed have come into conflict with the Iapygian Illyrians who lived in south-eastern Italy, and it is possible that they had small conflicts with Liburnian outposts on Italy’s coast, but when did the Romans become militarily involved in Illyria proper? Thankfully, that question is easy to answer, unlike a lot of others in ancient studies, because several ancient Greek and Roman historians relate how hostilities between the Illyrians and Romans began. One writer who deserves special attention is Polybius, whose account is lengthy and detailed, and comments that the First Roman-Illyrian War was an important event that should be very carefully studied.19 Other historians who write about this conflict include Appianus, Publius Annius Florus and Cassius Dio. It is important to take note of the fact that none of the ancient authors who wrote about this war were contemporaries of this conflict, or even shortly removed from it. Polybius likely began writing his monumental work, Histories, sometime after 167 BC, when the Romans conquered Greece. By then, the First Roman-Illyrian War was sixty years in the past. Both Florus and Appianus wrote during the time of Emperor Hadrian in the early second century AD. Cassius Dio was the latest one of the whole lot, writing in the early third century AD. As such, each account written by these authors is often dramatically different from the others.
Because the focus of this book centres upon one particular war during the reign of Caesar Augustus and is not meant to be a complete military history of ancient Illyria, I will not go into great and exhausting detail regarding the various wars fought between the Illyrians and Romans – that could be the subject of an entire book in itself – nor will I go into protracted length comparing and contrasting the various ancient sources who write about these conflicts. Instead, I will provide a summarized account with a few side notes here and there concerning the various Roman-Illyrian wars.
The first time that blood between the Illyrians and the Romans was shed upon Illyrian soil was in 229 BC. The ancient sources provide some background information to this conflict as follows. During the mid-third century BC, the kingdom of Macedon was at war with a confederacy of Greek city-states known as the Aetolian League. The Macedonians were losing the war and, in desperation, King Demetrius II of Macedon appealed to his neighbours, some of them being former enemies, for help. One of them was a nearby Illyrian tribe, the Ardiaei, ruled by a rough-and-tumble man named Agron. He saw Demetrius’ entreaty as an opportunity to expand his power into Greece and he agreed to fight alongside the Macedonians. Shortly, 5,000 Illyrian warriors in 100 ships landed on the coast, scored a great victory against the Greeks and helped to turn the tide in King Demetrius’ favour. However, once the war was over, the Illyrians refused to leave, and they continued attacking other Greek city-states while Illyrian pirates ravaged the Greek coastline.20
The Romans largely ignored these events, but the Illyrian pirates were also threatening maritime shipping. Now, not only Greek ships but Roman ships were coming under attack. The Roman Senate decided to send some diplomats to the Illyrian court to gather information about what was happening and to bring an end to the pirate attacks. By now, King Agron was dead, and his wife Queen Teuta was in control. The meeting between the two sides went badly. Afterwards, the Roman envoys were assassinated on Queen Teuta’s orders. The public outcry in Rome was immense. Rome could never allow such an offence to go unpunished. Almost immediately, they began preparing for war.21
Meanwhile, the Illyrians were still attacking and seizing control of various Greek ports. The Greek city-states agreed to ally together to fight a common foe, but things went poorly for them. At the Battle of Paxi Island, the Greek fleet was thoroughly destroyed and the Illyrian fleet was hardly damaged. This crushing naval victory marked the high point of the war from the Illyrian perspective. At this time, the Roman army, numbering about 20,000 men, finally got under way after lengthy preparation and set sail from the port of Brundisium. With the help of an Illyrian traitor named Demetrius of Pharos, the Romans began gaining the upper hand, driving out the Illyrians from some of the Greek territories that they had seized earlier, although the Romans did claim some of the ‘liberated’ territory for themselves. After this was accomplished, the Romans took the next step and attacked several of the Illyrian tribes on their home turf, who either surrendered or were slaughtered. Knowing that the war was lost, Queen Teuta retreated to the fortified town of Rhizon and in 228 BC, just one year after the war began, she sent word that she was willing to negotiate. Rome’s terms were humiliating: an excessively large tribute would be paid to the Roman treasury; several large islands on the Balkan side of the Adriatic, some originally Greek and some originally Illyrian, became Roman territory, and all the people dwelling upon those islands were now Roman subjects; almost all of the southern Illyrian tribes would be placed under Roman control as a massive collection of semi-independent vassal states; Illyrian ships of any sort were restricted to operating only within the Adriatic Sea; Queen Teuta would be forced to abdicate and place her young son on the throne as Rome’s puppet ruler. In response to all of this and with no other choice, Queen Teuta agreed to all of the conditions. As a final act of power, Rome had all the enemy commanders who had been taken prisoner executed.22
After the treaty was concluded, the Romans sent messengers to the Achaean and Aetolian Leagues, who explained the causes and conduct of the war, and recited the terms of the treaty. Now that the threat of Illyrian piracy had been greatly reduced, the Romans and the Greeks drew closer together. However, Macedon was angered that the Romans muscled in and began to view the Romans as a new threat in the region.23 As a reward for his treachery in handing
over his territories to Roman control, notably the island of Corcyra, Demetrius of Pharos was given some estates and also became the guardian of the young Illyrian prince, thereby ruling much of southern Illyria as a royal regent. Yet the Romans suspected that this man was not to be trusted and their suspicions were well-founded.24
The Second Roman-Illyrian War, 220–219 BC
Several years later in 225 BC, the Romans were busy fighting the Gauls in the Po River Valley, and Rome’s old enemy Carthage, now under the leadership of a rising star named Hannibal, was once again causing trouble. Meanwhile in Illyria, Demetrius of Pharos had become disillusioned with Rome, believing that the Republic was not as strong as it claimed. Growing increasingly contemptuous of Rome and with ambitions of ruling over southern Illyria as something much more than a regional vassal lord, he decided to make a power-play for dominance in the region, supported by his new ally, the kingdom of Macedon. Although Macedon was far weaker than it had been during the glory days of Philip and Alexander, it was still strong enough to act as a prominent regional power, and Demetrius wanted to have as many cards to play as possible. So he allied himself with Macedon to counteract any designs that Rome would have that could interfere with his future ambitions. Believing that the Romans were distracted with affairs elsewhere, Demetrius began sponsoring widespread piracy throughout the Adriatic Sea. He used fifty ships and his own private army to attack cities in Illyria that were loyal to Rome, causing havoc throughout the Adriatic and even penetrating as far east as the Cycladic Islands in the middle of the Aegean Sea. He brought the Istrians into his scheme and had the pro-Roman Atintani tribe placed under his rule.25
Figure 8: Roman mosaic floor from the ancient Illyrian city of Rhizon (modern-day Risan, Montenegro). When this city came under Roman control, it was re-named ‘Risinium’. At its height during the late first century and early second century AD, Risinium had a population of approximately 10,000 people, far larger than the population of the town today. (Photo by Julo, 30 July 2006. Public domain image. Wikimedia Commons)
The Great Illyrian Revolt Page 10