3. M.AtiliusRegulus, M. F. L. N., was consul for the first time in B. C. 267, with L. Julius Libo, conquered the Sallentini, took the town
of Brundusium, and obtained in consequence the honour of a triumph. (Eutrop. 2.17; Flor. 1.20 ; Zonar.
8.7; comp. Liv. Epit. 15.) Eleven years afterwards,
B. C. 256, he was consul a second time with L. Manlius Vulso
Longus, and was elected in the place of Q. Caedicius, who had died soon after he came into
office. This was the ninth year of the first Punic war. The Romans had resolved to make a
strenuous effort to bring the contest to a conclusion, and had accordingly determined to
invade Africa with a great force. The two consuls set sail with 330 ships, took the legions on
board in Sicily, and then put out to sea from Ecnomus in order to cross over to Africa. The
Carthaginian fleet, however, was waiting for them under the command of Hamilcar and Hanno at
Heraclea Minoa, and immediately sailed out to meet them. In the battle which followed, the
Romans were victorious ; they lost only twenty-four ships, while they destroyed thirty of the
enemy's vessels, and took sixty-four with all their crews. The passage to Africa was now
clear; and the Carthaginian fleet hastened home to defend the capital. The Romans, however,
did not sail straight to Carthage, but landed their forces near the town of Clypea or Aspis,
which they took, and there established their head quarters. From thence they devastated the
Carthaginian territory with fire and sword, and collected an immense booty from the
defenceless country. On the approach of winter, Manlius, one of the consuls, returned to Rome
with half of the army, by order of the senate ; while Regulus remained with the other half to
prosecute the war. He carried on operations with the utmost vigour, and was greatly assisted
by the incompetency of the Carthaginian generals. The enemy had collected a considerable
force, which they intrusted to three commanders, Hasdrubal, Bostar, and Hamilcar; but these
generals avoided the plains, where their cavalry and elephants would have given them an
advantage over the Roman army, and withdrew into the mountains. There they were attacked by
Regulus, and utterly defeated with great loss; 15,000 men are said to have been killed in
battle, and 5000 men with eighteen elephants to have been taken. The Carthaginian troops
retired within the walls of the city, and Regulus now overran the country without opposition.
Numerous towns fell into the power of the Romans, and among others Tunis, at the distance of
only 20 miles from the capital. To add to the distress of the Carthaginians, the Numidians
took the opportunity of recovering their independence, and their roving bands completed the
devastation of the country. The Carthaginians in despair sent a herald to Regulus to solicit
peace. But the Roman general, who was intoxicated with success, would only grant it on such
intolerable terms that the Carthaginians resolved to continue the war, and hold out to the
last. In the midst of their distress and alarm, success came to them from an unexpected
quarter. Among the Greek mercenaries who had lately arrived at Carthage, was a Lacedaemonian
of the name of Xanthippus, who appears to have already acquired no small military reputation,
though his name is not mentioned previously. He pointed out to the Carthaginians that their
defeat was owing to the incompetency of their generals, and not to the superiority of the
Roman arms; and he inspired such confidence in the people, that he was forthwith placed at the
head of their troops. Relying on his 4000 cavalry and 100 elephants, Xanthippus boldly marched
into the open country to meet the enemy, though his forces were very inferior in number to the
Romans. Regulus was neither able nor willing to refuse the battle thus offered; but it ended
in his total overthrow. Thirty thousand of his men were slain; scarcely two thousand escaped
to Clypea; and Regulus himself was taken prisoner with five hundred more. This was in the year
B. C. 255. (Plb. 1.26-34; Liv. Epit. 17, 18; Eutrop. 2.21, 22 ; Oros. 4.8; Zonar. 8.12, 13; Aurel. Vict. de Vir.
Ill. 40.)
Regulus remained in captivity for the next five years, till B. C.
250, when the Carthaginians, after their defeat by the proconsul Metellus, sent an
embassy to Rome to solicit peace, or at least an exchange of prisoners. They allowed Regulus
to accompany the ambassadors on the promise that he would return to Rome if their proposals
were declined, thinking that he would persuade his countrymen to agree to an exchange of
prisoners in order to obtain his own liberty. This embassy of Regulus is one of the most
celebrated stories in Roman history. The orators and poets related how Regulus at first
refused to enter the city as a slave of the Carthaginians; how afterwards he would not give
his opinion in the senate, as he had ceased by his captivity to be a member of that
illustrious body : how, at length, when he was allowed by his countrymen to speak, he
endeavoured to dissuade the senate from assenting to a peace, or even to an exchange of
prisoners, and when he saw them wavering, from their desire of redeeming him from captivity,
how he told them that the Carthaginians had given him a slow poison, which would soon
terminate his life; and how, finally, when the senate through his influence refused the offers
of the Carthaginians, he firmly resisted all the persuasions of his friends to remain in Rome,
and returned to Carthage, where a martyr's death awaited him. On his arrival at Carthage he is
said to have been put to death with the most excruciating tortures. It was related that he was
placed in a chest covered over in the inside with iron nails, and thus perished; and other
writers stated in addition, that after his eyelids had been cut off, he was first thrown into
a dark dungeon, and then suddenly exposed to the full rays of a burning sun.
When the news of the barbarous death of Regulus reached Rome, the senate is said to have given
Hamilcar and Bostar, two of the noblest Carthaginian prisoners, to the family of Regulus, who
revenged themselves by putting them to death with cruel torments. (Liv. Epit. 18 ; Gel. 6.4; Diod. xxiv. p. 566, ed. Wesseling
; Appian, App. Sic. 2, Pun. 4; Dio Cass. Fragm. p. 62, ed. Reimarus, p. 541. ed. Maii; Zonar.
8.15; V. Max. 1.1.14, 9.2. ext. 1; Aurel. Vict. de Vir. Ill. 40; Flor. 2.2; Cic. de Off. 3.26, pro Sext. 59,
Cat. 20, in Pison. 19, de Fin.
5.27, 29, et alibi ; Hor. Carm. 3.5; Sil. Ital. 6.299, &c.)
This celebrated tale, however, has not been allowed to pass without question in modern
times. Even as early as the sixteenth century Palmerins declared it to be a fable, and
supposed that it was invented in order to excuse the cruelties perpetrated by the family of
Regulus on the Carthaginian prisoners committed to their custody. (See the remarks of
Palmerius, in Schweighäuser's Appian, vol. iii. p. 394.) This opinion has been adopted by
many modern writers; but their chief argument is the silence of Polybius respecting it.
Niebuhr believes (Hist. of Rome, vol. iii. p. 599) that Regulus died a
natural death; but since all the ancient authorities agree in stating that he was put to death
by the Carthaginians, we see no reason for disbelieving this fact, though the account of his
barbarous treatment is probably only one of those calumnies which the Romans constantly
indulged in against their hated rivals. The pride and arrogance with which he treated the
Carthaginians in the hour of his success must have deeply exasperated the people against him;
and it is therefore not surprising that he fell a victim to their vengeance when nothing was
any longer to be gained from his life. The question of the death of Regulus is discussed at
length by Halthaus (Geschichte Roms im Zeitalter der Punischen Kriege,
Leipzig, 1846, pp. 356-369), who maintains the truth of the common account.
Regulus was one of the favourite characters of early Roman story. Not only was he celebrated
on account of his heroism in giving the senate advice which secured him a martyr's death, but
also on account of his frugality and simplicity of life. Like Fabricius and Curius he lived on
his hereditary farm which he cultivated with his own hands ; and subsequent ages loved to tell
how he petitioned the senate for his recall from Africa when he was in the full career of
victory, as his farm was going to ruin in his absence, and his family was suffering from want.
(Comp. Liv. Epit. 18; V. Max.
4.4.6.)