Who won the Battle of Cape Ecnomus?
Rome won. In 256 BC the consuls Marcus Atilius Regulus and Lucius Manlius Vulso, sailing to invade Africa, beat the Carthaginian fleet of Hamilcar and Hanno off the south coast of Sicily. Polybius counts 24 Roman ships sunk against more than 30 Carthaginian sunk and 64 captured.1
In 256 BC Rome tried something no Roman army had done before: to carry the war with Carthage across the sea to Africa. A huge fleet sailed along the south coast of Sicily with an invasion army on board, and off the headland the Greeks called Ecnomus it met the Carthaginian navy sent to stop it. By Polybius' count about 290,000 men took part. This is the story of why both sides staked so much on one day, how the Roman wedge and the Carthaginian trap worked, what the numbers are worth, and how the victory opened the road to Africa. It belongs to our account of the Punic Wars and of Rome against Carthage.2
Why was the Battle of Cape Ecnomus fought?
Four years after Rome's first naval victory at Mylae in 260 BC, the war at sea was still undecided. After a sharp fight off Tyndaris, Polybius says, both sides believed they were now evenly matched and threw themselves into building fleets. Rome then chose to escalate: its plan, in Polybius' words, was to sail to Libya and deflect the war there, so that Carthage would have to fight for its own territory rather than for Sicily.3
Carthage read the same map from the other side. Polybius says its leaders knew Africa was easy to reach and that its people would be easily subdued by any invader, and that before the battle the commanders told their crews that a victory meant fighting on for Sicily while a defeat meant fighting for their homes. Walter Ameling explains why the fear was real: in 310 Agathocles of Syracuse had been the first enemy general to land an army in Africa, an idea later taken up by Regulus and Scipio, because the Carthaginian homeland was weakly defended and its Libyan subjects were restless.4
The Carthaginians also knew the Romans were coming, and roughly by which road. Boris Rankov points out that the only practicable route for an invasion fleet ran from Messana down the east coast of Sicily, round Cape Pachynus and west along the south coast, and that the raids of the consul Gaius Atilius Regulus on Lipara and Malta in 257 had probably been meant to make that route safe. Orosius also records that Atilius ravaged the two islands. Carthage therefore stationed its fleet at Heraclea Minoa, on the same coast, where it could intercept.5
In Rome the venture was the work of the Senate and of two consuls who were both sent with the fleet. Marcus Atilius Regulus, consul for the second time, was a replacement: he was elected after Quintus Caedicius died early in his year of office. Bruno Bleckmann suggests that the influence of the Atilian family may help explain why all resources were concentrated on the African plan and why both consuls shared the command of a fleet unprecedented in size; his colleague was Lucius Manlius Vulso.6
How many ships and men fought at Ecnomus?
Polybius says the Romans, having prepared for the coming summer, put to sea with 330 decked warships, called at Messana, rounded Cape Pachynus and came to Ecnomus, where their land army happened to be; William Smith's classical dictionary adds that they took the legions on board there. The Carthaginians, with 350 decked ships, touched at Lilybaeum and then anchored off Heraclea Minoa. Orosius repeats the Roman figure of 330 ships, the Italian national encyclopedia repeats the 350, and Diodorus' modern editor dates the battle to the summer of 256.7
The manpower figures are what make Ecnomus famous. Polybius reckons that about 140,000 men sailed with the Roman fleet, each ship carrying 300 rowers and 120 marines, and that the Carthaginians, counted by the number of their ships, had more than 150,000. Adrian Goldsworthy notes that the Carthaginian total presumably assumes crews of the Roman size, and Jona Lendering argues that the totals deserve some confidence because they are worked out from crew numbers rather than guessed.8
Not everyone accepts them. In 1907 W. W. Tarn called the figures impossible for the populations of the time and proposed about 230 Roman and 200 Carthaginian warships: the 330, he thought, came from counting some 80 transports as warships, and the 350 from the Roman historian Fabius, who as a good patriot made the enemy a little stronger. In 1932 the Italian historian Gaetano De Sanctis, writing in the Italian national encyclopedia, likewise suggested 230 and 250 battleships, not all of them quinqueremes, and 100,000 to 150,000 men.9
Others take Polybius at his word. Goldsworthy observes that Tarn and Thiel cut each fleet by about 100 ships but we cannot know the true figures, he concludes, and do best to assume they are broadly right. Christa Steinby notes that G. K. Tipps, in a 1985 study of the battle, accepted the figures as they stand. Rankov, following John Lazenby, writes that Ecnomus may have involved more combatants than any other naval battle in history.10
How was the Roman fleet drawn up?
The Romans divided the force into four corps, each called both a legion and a squadron, and named the fourth the triarii after the rear line of a Roman army on land. The Carthaginian fleet, Steinby notes, was likewise divided into four sections.11
At the head sailed the two consuls in their six-banked flagships, side by side. Behind each flagship the ships of the first and second squadrons trailed back in echelon, so that together they formed a wedge with its point toward the enemy. The third squadron closed the base of the triangle in a single line, towing the horse transports behind it, and the fourth, the triarii, formed a longer line still at the rear that overlapped the others at both ends. Polybius praises the result as compact, practical and hard to break up.12
Why such a formation? Polybius says the Romans were crossing open sea against an enemy with faster ships. Steinby suggests the gap in speed may simply reflect the loads: the Roman ships carried everything an army needed in Africa, while the Carthaginians had stripped theirs for battle.13
What was the Carthaginian plan?
Seeing the Roman order, Polybius says, the Carthaginian commanders adapted theirs. Three quarters of the fleet formed a single long line facing the Romans, with its right wing stretched out to sea to encircle them; the remaining quarter formed a left wing angled toward the shore. The right was led by Hanno, the general who had failed to relieve Agrigentum, with the fastest quinqueremes for the outflanking move. Hamilcar, the admiral beaten off Tyndaris, commanded in the center.14
Both men carried the weight of earlier failures. During the Roman siege of Agrigentum, Zonaras says, Hanno had advanced from Heraclea to relieve the city, been beaten and fled back to Heraclea; Diodorus adds that Carthage then stripped him of his civic rights, fined him 6,000 gold pieces and sent a Hamilcar to Sicily in his place. Both men went into the battle with something to prove.15
Goldsworthy reads the plan as an attempt to break up the compact Roman formation so that the battle would split into smaller fights, in which skilled Carthaginian crews could use their rams and avoid head-on collisions with the boarding bridges of the Roman ships; he finds more elaborate reconstructions unconvincing. Tarn drew a different lesson from the same tactic: a fleet that tries to envelop its enemy and fails because its center is too weak, he argued, was probably the smaller fleet.16
A second, independent tradition survives in the epitome of Cassius Dio by Zonaras. It says that the Carthaginians did not wait for the Romans to sail but hurried toward Sicily, that the two fleets met near Heraclea, and that the contest was for a long time evenly balanced before the Romans prevailed. Rankov notes that Dio evidently followed a source separate from Polybius here.17
How was the Battle of Ecnomus fought?
The Romans opened the battle. Seeing that the Carthaginian center was thin, the consuls drove at it with the first and second squadrons. Hamilcar's ships had orders to fall back at once, and as they retreated the Romans pursued, pulling away from the third squadron with its transports and from the triarii. At a signal from Hamilcar's ship the whole center turned and attacked. The Carthaginians used their speed to slip round the Roman flanks; the Romans grappled each ship that came close with their boarding bridges, called ravens, while both consuls fought in the thick of it.18
At the same moment Hanno's right wing swept across the open sea and fell on the triarii, and the Carthaginian left, near the shore, swung into line and attacked the third squadron. Its ships cast off the tow ropes of the horse transports and turned to fight. As Polybius puts it, the battle now consisted of three separate sea fights at a wide distance from each other. The Italian encyclopedia describes the same Carthaginian attempt to outflank the Romans by stretching their line.19
The fight in the center was decided first: Hamilcar's ships broke and fled. Manlius stayed to take the captured ships in tow, while Regulus gathered the undamaged ships of the second squadron and went to help the triarii. Attacked from front and rear, Hanno's squadron gave way and headed out to sea, the course the Italian encyclopedia describes as the Carthaginian right saving itself by flight. That left the third squadron, pinned against the coast by the Carthaginian left wing. It survived, Polybius says, only because the Carthaginians feared the ravens and hemmed the Roman ships in instead of charging them. Both consuls now came up and surrounded the attackers, capturing 50 ships with their crews; only a few slipped away along the shore.20
How many ships were lost at Ecnomus?
Polybius gives the final tally in ships, not men: the Romans lost 24 ships sunk, the Carthaginians more than 30 sunk and 64 captured with their crews, and not a single Roman ship fell into enemy hands. Boris Rankov and William Smith's classical dictionary of 1890 give the same figures of 24, 30 and 64.21
The later Roman summaries keep the Carthaginian figure but differ in detail. Eutropius writes that the Carthaginians lost 64 ships and the Romans 22, and Orosius that the defeated Carthaginians lost 64 ships. Both depend on the same Roman tradition, so they count as one voice rather than two. No ancient writer gives a trustworthy figure for the men killed or drowned.22
Goldsworthy's verdict is that the largest clash of the war, and possibly the biggest naval battle in history, ended in a clear Roman victory: Carthage's greatest fleet performed poorly, its commanders lost control once the first clash was over, and there is no evidence that a single Roman ship was boarded and taken. Diodorus, writing of the months after the battle, remarks that no one is so shattered in spirit by defeat as the Carthaginians.23
Why did Rome win at Ecnomus?
Goldsworthy gives several reasons. Roman crews had improved since 260, while the rapid growth of the Carthaginian fleet must have lowered the average quality of its crews. In such a crush of ships it was hard to ram and escape without running into another enemy. Above all, following Lazenby, he stresses that the Carthaginians had found no answer to the raven, and he praises the speed with which both consuls regrouped to rescue the rest of their fleet. Rankov likewise credits the boarding bridges with each squadron's defeat.24
Steinby warns against crediting the device alone. Polybius mentions the boarding bridge only at Mylae and Ecnomus, and she finds no real difference between those battles and the Roman victories where he does not mention it: the Romans won with good commanders and good rowers. Tarn's numbers point the same way, since in his reconstruction Rome simply had more warships.25
What happened after the battle?
The Romans did not sail straight on. They rested the crews, repaired the captured ships and laid in supplies, and Bleckmann places the refit at Messana. According to Dio and Zonaras, Hamilcar meanwhile sent Hanno to the consuls with peace proposals that were really meant to gain time.26
Then the fleet crossed. Polybius says the advanced ships made land at the Hermaean promontory, which juts out toward Sicily at the mouth of the Gulf of Carthage, and the whole fleet then sailed down the coast to Aspis, where the Romans beached their ships behind a ditch and palisade and besieged the town; Zonaras says its people slipped away and the Romans took it without a blow. Diodorus thought the Carthaginians lost a chance here: they could have destroyed the 30 Roman ships that came in to land scattered by the wind, but did not even try.27
Aspis, Clupea or Clipea to the Romans, is modern Kelibia on Cape Bon in Tunisia. Both names mean shield. Tunisia's heritage agency describes the citadel on its rocky headland, founded by Sicilian Greeks at the end of the fourth century BC and soon taken over by Carthage, with a Punic core still inside it; Eutropius calls Clypea the first African city to surrender to the consuls.28
From Aspis the army plundered the countryside. As winter approached, the Senate ordered one consul to stay: Regulus remained in Africa with half the army, while Manlius sailed home with the fleet. Eutropius and Orosius both say he brought 27,000 captives back to Rome.29
Regulus won at Adys, offered peace terms so harsh that Carthage refused them, and in 255 was defeated and captured by a Carthaginian army led by the Spartan mercenary Xanthippus, the story we tell in our account of the Battle of Tunis. The summary of Livy's lost book 18 already treats his fall as an example of fortune's two faces.30
Where was the Battle of Ecnomus fought?
Ecnomus was a hill on the south coast of Sicily, today the Poggio or Monte Sant'Angelo above the town of Licata, on the right bank of the Salso, the ancient southern Himera. Lendering notes that a city stood there in the early third century BC, founded by refugees from Gela, and the Sicilian regional government describes Phintias on Monte Sant'Angelo as the last Greek city founded in Sicily, in 282 BC.31
Whether the battle was fought there is another matter. Rankov points out that Polybius names Ecnomus only as the place where the Roman army was waiting to embark, not as the battlefield; that no fleet would have sailed in battle order towing horse transports if the enemy had been close by; and that the only other ancient account, Zonaras, puts the clash near Heraclea. He therefore places it farther west along the coast, toward Heraclea Minoa.32
Who won the Battle of Ecnomus, and why did it matter?
Rome won, and the victory did what it was meant to do: the Carthaginian fleet went home to guard the capital, and the sea road to Africa lay open. The Italian encyclopedia sums it up as the battle that gave Rome command of the sea and allowed the first Roman landing in Africa, and Smith's dictionary notes that the Carthaginian fleet hastened home to defend Carthage.33
The success did not last. After Regulus' defeat in 255 a rescue fleet won again off the Hermaean promontory, but on the way home it was wrecked by a storm off Camarina, and Polybius says only 80 of 364 ships survived. The summary of Livy notes that the Roman successes of these years were spoiled by shipwreck. Rome needed another fourteen years and another victory at sea, off the Aegates Islands in 241, to end the war.34
Ecnomus still stands out. Tarn could compare its scale only with Naulochus and Actium, the great fleets of Octavian's civil wars, and Steinby counts it, with Mylae, as one of the two battles where Polybius saw the raven at work. That is why it holds its place in our list of the greatest naval battles in history.35
.jpg){kind=link}