Get Pyrrhic Victory essential facts below. View Videos or join the Pyrrhic Victory discussion. Add Pyrrhic Victory to your PopFlock.com topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
A Pyrrhic victory ( PIRR-ik) is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Winning a Pyrrhic victory takes a heavy toll that negates any true sense of achievement or damages long-term progress.
The phrase originates from a quote from Pyrrhus of Epirus, whose triumph against the Romans in the Battle of Asculum in 279 BC destroyed much of his forces and--while a tactical victory--forced the end of his campaign.
The armies separated; and, it is said, Pyrrhus replied to one that gave him joy of his victory that one other such victory would utterly undo him. For he had lost a great part of the forces he brought with him, and almost all his particular friends and principal commanders; there were no others there to make recruits, and he found the confederates in Italy backward. On the other hand, as from a fountain continually flowing out of the city, the Roman camp was quickly and plentifully filled up with fresh men, not at all abating in courage for the loss they sustained, but even from their very anger gaining new force and resolution to go on with the war.
In both Epirote victories, the Romans suffered greater casualties but they had a much larger pool of replacements, so the casualties had less impact on the Roman war effort than the losses of King Pyrrhus.
The report is often quoted as
Ne ego si iterum eodem modo uicero, sine ullo milite Epirum reuertar.
Another such victory and I come back to Epirus alone.
The term entered the English vernacular due to popular misconceptions of the magnitude of Pyrrhus's losses: beginning before the 1800s, Latin history teaching books said that Pyrrhus suffered losses in the tens of thousands.[original research?]
This list comprises examples of battles that ended in a Pyrrhic victory. It is not intended to be complete but to illustrate the concept.
The ruined streets of Vukovar ten days after its surrender
Battle of Asculum (279 BC),Pyrrhus of Epirus and Italian allies against the Romans: the Romans, though suffering twice as many casualties, could easily replenish their ranks. Pyrrhus lost most of his commanders and a great part of the forces he had brought to Italy, and he withdrew to Sicily.
Battle of Avarayr (451),Vardan Mamikonian and Christian Armenian rebels against the Sassanid Empire: the Persians were victorious but the battle proved to be a strategic victory for Armenians, as Avarayr paved the way to the Nvarsak Treaty (484 AD), which assured Armenian autonomy and religious freedom.
Siege of Szigetvár (1566),Ottoman-Habsburg wars: although the Ottomans won the siege, it can be seen as a Pyrrhic victory because of the heavy Ottoman casualties, the death of Sultan Suleiman, and the resulting delay to the Ottoman push for Vienna that year which suspended Ottoman expansion in Europe.
Siege of Ostend (1601-04),Eighty Years' War: for three years the Spanish attempted to capture this port from Dutch and English defenders, even as the Dutch expanded their territory further east - including capturing the port of Sluis to replace Ostend before surrendering. The vast cost and casualties of the siege were compounded by Spain's subsequent campaign to recapture the Dutch gains, which achieved little, and by 1607 Spain was bankrupt. The resultant Twelve Years' Truce effectively made the Dutch Republic an independent state.
Battle of Malplaquet (1709),War of the Spanish Succession: the battle was an Allied victory because Marlborough's army kept possession of the battlefield, but it had suffered double the French casualties and could not pursue. The French army withdrew in good order and relatively intact, and it remained a potent threat to further Allied operations.
Battle of Bunker Hill (1775),American Revolutionary War: after mounting three assaults on the colonial forces, the British won control of the Boston peninsula in the early stages of the war, but the engagement cost them many more casualties than the Americans had incurred (including a large number of officers) and led them to adopt more cautious methods, which helped American rebel forces; the political repercussions increased colonial support for independence.
Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands (1942),World War II, Solomon Islands Campaign: Japanese and Allied naval forces met during the struggle for Guadalcanal and nearby islands. After an exchange of carrier air attacks, U.S. surface ships retreated with one carrier sunk and another severely damaged. The Japanese carrier forces achieved a tactical victory, as none of their ships were sunk, but the heavy loss of irreplaceable veteran aircrews was to the strategic advantage of the Allies.
Battle of Chosin Reservoir (1950),Korean War: the Chinese army attempted to encircle and destroy the UN forces but in a 17-day battle in freezing weather, the UN forces inflicted crippling losses on the Chinese while making a fighting withdrawal. The Chinese occupied northeast Korea but they did not recover until the spring, and the UN maintained a foothold in Korea.
The term is used as an analogy in business, politics and sport to describe struggles that end up ruining the victor. TheologianReinhold Niebuhr commented on the necessity of coercion in preserving the course of justice by warning,
Moral reason must learn how to make coercion its ally without running the risk of a Pyrrhic victory in which the ally exploits and negates the triumph.
A related expression is "winning the battle but losing the war". This describes a poor strategy that wins a lesser objective, but overlooks and loses the larger objective. In less militaristic terms, this phrase is applied to situations where a small victory may be achieved but the "overarching goal" is lost. Examples include:
An employee pushes his idea to the point that his boss finally acknowledges its merits but fires the employee for arguing.
Homestead strike, 1892: a pivotal event in US labor history, when a union of iron and steel workers clashed with the owner and the manager of a major Pittsburgh-area steel mill over a new collective bargaining agreement. The union called a strike; management responded with a lockout; and events escalated to a violent clash involving strikers, their families, workers from nearby mills, and Pinkerton agents hired to break the picket line. The Pinkertons surrendered and left town, so the strikers could claim victory in the "battle". However, the mill reopened using newly hired non-union workers under the protection of state militia, and the strikers were forced to accept the owner's working terms. The union collapsed because of its failure to secure a favorable contract and because of public horror at the violence. In the long-term "war", the labor movement lost: over the next decade, every steel mill in the Midwest became de-unionized and essentially remained that way until the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933.
Friends or couples may concentrate on winning disagreements or on being more important than the other, to the detriment of their relationship.
A "hollow victory" or "empty victory" is one in which the victor gains little or nothing. Examples include:
^Hewsen, Robert H. (August 17, 2011). "AVARAYR". Encyclopædia Iranica. So spirited was the Armenian defense, however, that the Persians suffered enormous losses as well. Their victory was pyrrhic and the king, faced with troubles elsewhere, was forced, at least for the time being, to allow the Armenians to worship as they chose.
^Susan Paul Pattie (1997). Faith in History: Armenians Rebuilding Community. Smithsonian Institution Press. p. 40. ISBN1560986298. The Armenian defeat in the Battle of Avarayr in 451 proved a pyrrhic victory for the Persians. Though the Armenians lost their commander, Vartan Mamikonian, and most of their soldiers, Persian losses were proportionately heavy, and Armenia was allowed to remain Christian.
^Kohn, George C., ed. (2006). Dictionary of Wars (Third ed.). Infobase Publishing. p. 47. ISBN978-0-8160-6577-6.
^Lázár, István; Tezla, Albert (1999). An Illustrated History of Hungary (6th ed.). Budapest: Corvina Books. p. 70. ISBN978-963-13-4887-3.
^Maland, David (1980). Europe at war 1600-1650. Rowman and Littlefield. ISBN9780847662135. it was in many ways a Pyrrhic victory, because Maurice in 1604 led his troops against Sluys. What began as a diversionary raid to lure Spain from Ostend developed into a properly conducted siege and since neither side would take risk of interfering with the others siege works the fall of Ostend was balanced by the fall of Sluys - which it could be argued was more useful to the United Provinces.
^Delbrück, Hans (1985). History of the Art of War, Volume IV: The Dawn of Modern Warfare. Translated by Renfroe, Walter J. Eastport, Conn.: Praeger. p. 370. ISBN0-8032-6586-7. Malplaquet was what has been termed with the age-old expression a "Pyrrhic victory"...
^In a letter to Louis XIV, the French general Villars wrote: "Si Dieu nous fait la grâce de perdre encore une pareille bataille, Votre Majesté peut compter que tous ses ennemis seront détruits." ["If God gives us the grace of losing such a battle again, Your Majesty may expect that all his enemies will be destroyed."]; Anquetil, Louis-Pierre, Histoire de France depuis les Gaulois jusqu'à la mort de Louis XVI (1819), Paris: Chez Janet et Cotelle, p. 241.
^"Battle of Bunker Hill". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. December 8, 2016. Retrieved 2016. Although the British eventually won the battle, it was a Pyrrhic victory that lent considerable encouragement to the revolutionary cause.
^McGrath, Nick. "Battle of Guilford Courthouse". George Washington's Mount Vernon: Digital Encyclopedia. Mount Vernon Ladies' Association. Retrieved 2017. In three hours, Cornwallis's army took possession of the field, but it was a Pyrrhic victory... Cornwallis could not afford the casualties his army sustained, and withdrew to Wilmington. By doing so, Cornwallis ceded control of the countryside to the Continentals.
^Levine, Alan J. (1995). The Pacific War: Japan Versus the Allies. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger. p. 104. ISBN0-275-95102-2. Retrieved 2017. This battle of the Santa Cruz Islands was clearly a Japanese victory; the sole Japanese victory in a carrier battle during the war. But it was a Pyrrhic victory, which the Japanese were in no condition to exploit. The damage to their carriers was serious, and their plane losses very heavy. Moreover, the land-based air force at Rabaul was exhausted; many of its best pilots were dead. In late October, the Japanese air effort fell off steeply. Because of its heavy losses and inadequate pilot training program, the Japanese naval air force had already slipped into a qualitative decline from which it never recovered.
^Pike, Francis (2015). "Guadalcanal: Henderson Field and the Santa Cruz Islands (September 1942 - January 1943)". Hirohito's War: The Pacific War, 1941-1945. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. p. 509. ISBN978-1-4725-9670-3. Retrieved 2017. Vice-Admiral Nagumo, who was transferred to shore duty after the battle, reported to the Combined Fleet with greater than usual insight and honesty, "This battle was a tactical win, but a shattering strategic loss for Japan. Considering the great superiority of our enemy's industrial capacity, we must win every battle overwhelmingly to win this war. This last one, although a victory, unfortunately, was not an overwhelming victory." Naval victories are usually counted in ships lost but given the destruction of the cream of the Japanese Navy's aircrews, it could even be argued that, in the case of the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands, the Japanese came off worst. Reporting several weeks after the battle, Nimitz too correctly calibrated the result of the battle: "This battle cost us the lives of many gallant men, many planes and two ships that could ill be spared... We nevertheless turned back the Japanese again in their offensive to regain Guadalcanal and shattered their carrier air strength on the eve on the critical days of mid-November. It was indeed a pyrrhic victory."
^Toll, Ian W. (2015). The Conquering Tide: War in the Pacific Islands, 1942-1944. Pacific War Trilogy. II. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN978-0393080643. Retrieved 2017. As at Coral Sea, the contest would go into the books as a tactical victory for the Japanese but a strategic victory for the Americans... The Japanese press reported another triumph, and the rank and file cheered another fantastic victory. But the senior commanders of the navy privately acknowledged that the result had been, at best, a pyrrhic victory.
^Xu, Yan () (1990), : [First Confrontation: Reviews and Reflections on the History of War to Resist America and Aid Korea] (in Chinese), Beijing: Chinese Radio and Television Publishing House, p. 59, ISBN978-7-5043-0542-8
^Roe, Patrick C. (2000), The Dragon Strikes: China and the Korean War, June-December 1950, Novato, California: Presidio, p. 412, ISBN978-0-89141-703-3
^Central Intelligence Agency Office of Russian and European Analysis (2000). Balkan Battlegrounds: A Military History of the Yugoslav Conflict, 1990-1995: Volume 1. Washington, D.C.: Central Intelligence Agency. p. 99. ISBN978-0-16-066472-4.
^McEvoy, J.P.; Harris, Becky (June 15, 2016). "Humor, The 1930s: Being Fired - Dad remains unmoved by his son's firing. It's the war not the battle that counts most, he says, especially if you make a habit of shooting yourself in the foot". The Saturday Evening Post. Retrieved 2020. Suppose your ideas are good. Suppose they are an improvement over the way things are being done. Suppose you have the interest of the business at heart and really want to do something constructive. What then? Then you go in for strategy. You plan your campaign. What you want to do is put over your idea, not win an argument. You have just won an argument with your boss, but you lost your job. You would be in a much better position now to put over your ideas if you had lost the argument, but held on to the job. Inside the gate you have a chance to do something. Outside, all you can do is read the notices saying: "No help wanted.".... When you get your next job, you will know better than to spend your time and energy in trying to win arguments with the boss. Be satisfied to lose all the battles, so long as you win the war.
^Sabin, Burritt (February 8, 2004). "The War's Leagacy: Dawn of a tragic era". Japan Times. Retrieved 2005. The Pearl Harbor attack was a brilliant tactic, but part of a strategy based on the belief that a spirit as firm as iron and as beautiful as cherry blossoms could overcome the materially wealthy United States. That strategy was flawed, and Japan's total defeat would follow.
^Janda, Michael (14 March 2013). "Bankers winning the battle, losing the war". ABC News. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 2020. However, he warns that in trying so hard to win the battle against an economic downturn at the moment, central banks could be consigning themselves to defeat in the war against another global financial and economic meltdown. "Winning the battle isn't winning the war. If central bankers do win this round, the next downturn could be, in my view, an omnishambles," he wrote in the note.
^Copeland, Dave (July 6, 2002). "Battle of Homestead helped labor movement". Trib Live / Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Trib Total Media, LLC. Retrieved 2020. The strikers may have won the battle, but they lost the war, said Russ Gibbons, a former member of United Steelworkers and a board member of the non-profit Battle of Homestead Foundation. "Frick effectively broke the union," Gibbons said. "The unions were destroyed, and they didn't come back until 1936."
^Lieder, Yaakov (n.d.). "Winning the Battle but Losing the War". Chabad.org. Chabad-Lubavitch Media Center. Retrieved 2020. "I got my way in the end," a friend of mine announced proudly after emerging the victor in a long ongoing dispute he was having with a mutual friend of ours. "He'll never start with me again," he added. "Aren't you happy for me?" Because this was the first time I had heard about this issue, I asked for more details. It became apparent to me that while my friend may have won the battle, he had lost the war. In his case, he has won the dispute but lost a friend. I shared with him the following saying: "It is our anger that gets us into a fight and it is our ego that keeps us there." People tend to go on fighting about issues even when they are no longer relevant or when their original importance has diminished. They do this for the sake of proving a point and to demonstrate that they are the winners and, more importantly, that the other person is the loser. But often the one who loses the most in the long run is the "victor" himself.
^"Idiom: Hollow victory". UsingEnglish.com. UsingEnglish.com. Retrieved 2017. A hollow victory is where someone wins something in name, but are seen not to have gained anything by winning.
^Shapiro, Emily (January 10, 2017). "Charleston Victim's Brother Calls Dylann Roof's Sentence a 'Hollow Victory'". abcNEWS.go.com. ABC News Internet Ventures. Retrieved 2017. The brother of one of convicted Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof's nine victims calls the 22-year-old's death sentence a "hollow victory". Melvin Graham, brother of victim Cynthia Hurd, said after Roof's sentence was read this afternoon, "Today we had justice for my sister." But he called Roof's sentence a "very hollow victory because my sister's still gone."
^Gartrell, Nate (January 25, 2017). "Oakley woman found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in boyfriend's death". East Bay Times. Martinez, California: Digital First Media. Retrieved 2017. Shellie Farnham, 47, was convicted Wednesday of involuntary manslaughter and dependent endangerment causing the death of Rodney Lee Moss, 43.... Moss's mother, Pam Bellanca, said hearing the jury's verdict was a relief. "It's always a hollow victory, because we can't bring Rodney back," prosecutor Jill Henderson said. "All we can do is seek justice."
^Adams, Scarritt (Captain, U.S.N.) (February 1960). "The Cask of Rum That Drowned a Thousand Men". The Skipper. Annapolis, Maryland, USA: The Skipper Publishing Company. p. 32. Retrieved 2017. Yet the ensuing court-martial found the captain not guilty - a hollow victory with his son at the bottom of Portsmouth Harbor.
^Byrne, Ciar (24 October 2002). "Grobbelaar's hollow victory earns him just £1 in damages". The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Limited. Retrieved 2017. Ex-football star Bruce Grobbelaar today won his appeal, but failed to restore his damaged reputation, when the House of Lords ordered the Sun newspaper to pay him just £1 in libel damages for accusing him of match-fixing... "By recovering the sum of only £1, he has effectively lost his action to clear his name and may face legal costs of over £1m."
^Dodd, Gwilym (October 2015). "Agincourt: Henry's Hollow Victory". History Today. History Today Ltd. 65 (10). Agincourt was a hollow victory because it engendered unrealistic expectations and, in particular, it blinded Henry and his advisers to the strategic impossibility that England could ever subdue its neighbour across the Channel.... The victory at Agincourt gave Henry the initiative, but in the end he became a prisoner of his own ambitions and in the process of trying to realise them he subjected both England and France to one of the most intensive periods of fighting seen in the war.
^Nolan, Cathal J. (2002). "Crimean War". The Greenwood Encyclopedia of International Relations, Volume 1, A - E. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing. p. 373. ISBN0-313-30741-5. Retrieved 2017. The impact on Britain of its hollow victory was rather less: it recommenced its military complacency, blithely unaware of what was quietly happening in Prussia (military reform and moderization) while frittering away resources on a futile and distant war.
^Carpenter, Ted Galen, ed. (2000). NATO's Empty Victory: A Postmortem on the Balkan War. Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute. p. frontispiece. ISBN1-882577-85-X. The United States and other NATO members loudly proclaim that the alliance achieved a great victory in the war against Yugoslavia. According to the conventional wisdom, NATO waged a successful campaign to prevent genocide; enhanced its credibility as an effective institution for preserving peace, stability, and justice in post-Cold War Europe; and intimidated would-be aggressors around the world. Such claims already ring hollow.