Battle of Chaeronea (86 BC)

Last updated
Battle of Chaeronea
Part of the First Mithridatic War
Date86 BC
Location
Chaeronea, Boeotia (modern Greece)
38°30′04″N22°51′50″E / 38.501°N 22.864°E / 38.501; 22.864
Result Roman victory
Belligerents
Roman Republic Kingdom of Pontus
Commanders and leaders
 Archelaus
Taxiles  (POW)
Strength
c. 30,000 men [1] [2] 60,000 men
90 scythed chariots
Casualties and losses
12 killed, according to Sulla (greatly disputed) All but 10,000, according to Plutarch [3] (disputed)
Greece relief location map.jpg
Red pog.svg
class=notpageimage|
Location within Greece

The Battle of Chaeronea was fought by the Roman forces of Lucius Cornelius Sulla and Mithridates' general, Archelaus, near Chaeronea, in Boeotia, in 86 BC during the First Mithridatic War. The battle ended with a complete rout of the Pontic army and a decisive victory for the Romans.

Contents

Forces

King Mithridates VI Coin of Mithradates VI Eupator (cropped).jpg
King Mithridates VI

Pontic troops

One of Mithridates generals, Taxiles, and a large force were sent to join up with Archelaus and his forces in the Elatean plains. [4] [5] Baker cites a Roman army of less than 17,000 thousand, excluding allied troops, and the enemy Pontic army outnumbering those troops 5 to 1, or around 85,000 troops. [6] Delbruck presents both a "supposed" figure of 120,000 troops and a reduced figure of a "more modest" 60,000 Asiatics. [1] Delbruck further makes comments on the available primary sources and specifically refers to "vague and boastful" memoirs of Sulla which were the primary source that other historians of the time used, such as Plutarch. [1] Hammond preferred the figure of 60,000 soldiers, which is supplied by Memnon of Heraclea. [7] The Pontic forces are also said to have had 90 scythed chariots. [8]

Mithridates' armies were a compound make-up of Greek and Oriental elements, the infantry was made up of Macedonian style phalanxes, with Pontic phalangists for missile units, and the cavalry a combination of horse and scythe-wheeled chariots. [9]

Sulla's troops

Sulla's forces are approximated to have been around 30,000 men, [1] [2] with Baker commenting that of these less than 17,000 were Romans and the rest were composed of Macedonian and Greek allies. [10] Baker, however, doesn't give a concrete value for the number of Macedonian and Greek soldiers involved in the battle, merely noting a disparity of "over three to one" between the Roman and Pontic troops once the allies are accounted for. [10] The Roman forces were composed of veteran Roman legions and some cavalry. [2] [11]

Geography

Sulla advanced his army from Athens and into Boeotia, where he met up with Hortensius, who had advanced southward from Thessaly, at Philoboetus. [4] [5] Hortensius himself had moved through the mountains with a guide, intent on avoiding an ambush. [4] [5] Baker remarks that this movement put Sulla in a favourable position, his supplies were secure, wood and water were plentiful, the roads into Thessaly could be watched and guarded with ease, and the hills provided an advantage. [4] [5] Baker describes this position as "commanding the Elatean plain and the valley of Cephisus." [4] Sulla was determined to dictate the time and place of the battle. [10]

Taxiles and his large force had to go north through a defile, before turning into the narrower valley, between Orchomenos and Chaeronea to meet up with Archelaus and his forces. [4] [5] The consequence of this was that once Taxiles and his forces arrived, it became impossible for the forces to retreat and instead had to stand and fight. [4] This force was encamped in the valley in a position which allowed the commanders to watch the Roman army. [10] Archelaus intended to pursue a war of attrition, Taxiles with his far larger force, however, was determined to defeat the Romans in battle and insisted on an engagement and, given the circumstances, Archelaus was in no position to refuse. [12]

Prelude

The Pontic forces, encamped in the valley, sent out numerous foraging parties which plundered and burned the countryside. [4] [5] Sulla was unable to defend the region with his far smaller force and instead was forced to stay camped up on the hill. [4] [5] Instead of remaining idle, Sulla ordered his men to dig entrenchments on the flanks to protect against possible envelopment by cavalry and also ordered the construction of palisades in the front to defend against the chariots. [13] The exercise was twofold in intention, first Sulla sought to ensure the discipline of his soldiers and second, he hoped to tire the soldiers out so that they were more willing to battle. [9] [14] When his troops came to him requesting battle, Sulla challenged the men, citing that their new found will to fight was a response to inherent laziness to work, to occupy the hill of Parapotamii. [14] The men agreed to this task, Archelaus had already marked the position for his own men and it became a race between Archelaus' and Sulla's men to occupy the position first. [14] Baker describes this position as "almost impregnable", the occupier had no choice but to turn eastward towards Chaeronea to advance and if action took place here, one army or the other would be fighting at an angle. [14]

Order of battle

For Rome, Sulla was in command of the right flank of the Roman army, the legate Murena on the left, Hortensius and Galba commanded the reserve cohorts in the rear with Hortensius on the left and Galba on the right. [5] [11] Finally, Gabinius and one full legion were sent to occupy the town of Chaeronea itself. [11] For Mithridates, Archelaus was in command. [11]

Battle

Sulla opened the engagement with an apparent retreat, leaving one unit under Gabinius to occupy and defend the town of Chaeronea and having Murena retreat back onto Mount Thurium, while he himself marched alongside the right bank of the river Cephisus. [11] Archelaus in response marched forth to occupy a position facing Chaeronea and extended a flanking force to occupy Murena's troops at Thurium. [11] Sulla linked up with Chaeronea and extended the Roman line across the valley. [11] Murena's position was the weakest, possibly untenable, so to strengthen it Gabinius recruited some of the locals to help deal with the danger, a proposition which Sulla approved. [11] By this point, Sulla had taken up his position on the right and the battle began. [15]

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Sullahead.jpg
Lucius Cornelius Sulla

Murena, assisted by the force of natives from Chaeronea, cautiously launched an attack against the right flank, which, being attacked from above, was forced down the hill with disastrous consequences and possibly up to 3,000 casualties. [5] [16] In exchange, the Pontic chariots charged forth against Gabinius in the centre, who withdrew his troops behind the defensive stakes he had prepared, which stymied the chariots. [16] The barrage of Roman javelins and arrows then brought down many of the chariots and caused the rest to retreat in panic. Many of the survivors crashed into the phalanx advancing behind them, leaving it vulnerable to attack. [13]

The Roman legions then came out of their entrenchment to face the Pontic phalanx of freed slaves, who were prevented from coming to a full charge by the field fortifications the Romans had in place. [17] The legionaries, indignant at having to fight against slaves instead of free men, fought with a terrible fury. They parried the enemy's long pikes with their short swords and shields and in some cases simply grappled them away with their bare hands. [17] In the end the barrage of stones and bolts from the Roman catapults so disordered the phalanx that the Roman swordsmen were able to infiltrate the hedge of pikes and rout it. [18]

In the meantime, Archelaus continued extending his line rightward to outflank Murena on the Roman left wing. [19] [20] Hortensius, with the reserve cohorts under his command, came to Murena's rescue, but Archelaus, with 2,000 cavalry, promptly wheeled and pushed him back to the foothills, whence Hortensius's force stood isolated and in danger of being annihilated. [19] [21] Seeing this, Sulla raced across the field with his cavalry from the Roman right which was not yet engaged, forcing Archelaus to withdraw. [19] [21] The Pontic commander now took the opportunity to ride against the weakened Roman right, left vulnerable by Sulla's absence, and at the same time left Taxiles with the bronze-shields to continue the attack on Murena, who was now exposed due to the retreat of Hortensius. [19]

Sending Hortensius with 4 cohorts to reinforce Murena, Sulla quickly returned to the right with his cavalry, bringing also one cohort from Hortensius' force and another two from (presumably) the other reserve under Galba. [19] The Romans there were resisting well, and when Sulla arrived they broke through the Pontic line and pursued them towards the Cephissus river and Mount Akontion. [21] [22] The centre began advancing forward being led by Gabinius who was slaughtering the enemy troops. [18] Seeing that Murena on the opposite wing was also successful, Sulla ordered a general advance. The entire Pontic army routed, and the commander Taxiles fell into Roman hands, while Archelaus escaped with what remained of his force to Chalcis. [21] It was said that only 10,000 Pontic soldiers were able to save themselves, and although this is probably an exaggeration, their losses were nonetheless substantial. [23] Sulla reported that 100,000 of Archelaus' troops were killed, that 14 of his own were missing at the end of the battle and that two of those made it back by the next day. [9] These figures are, however, called into question as being wholly unconvincing. [1] [9] Despite the odds, however, the Romans had emerged victorious. [24]

Aftermath

Silver denarius issued by Sulla. Obverse: Head of Venus; at right, Cupid holding palm. Right: Capis and lituus between two trophies, which might be the two trophies erected by Sulla after the Battle of Chaeronea. Sulla Coin.jpg
Silver denarius issued by Sulla. Obverse: Head of Venus; at right, Cupid holding palm. Right: Capis and lituus between two trophies, which might be the two trophies erected by Sulla after the Battle of Chaeronea.

In the immediate aftermath of the battle Sulla erected two trophies: one on the plain near the Molos, where Archelaus' forces had been routed, and the other on Mount Thurium to commemorate Homoloichus and Anaxidamus' dislodgement of the Pontic garrison there. These trophies are mentioned by Plutarch and Pausanias, [26] [27] and seem to be depicted on coinage issued by Sulla after the battle. [25] Several fragments from the Thurium trophy were uncovered on Isoma Hill by archaeologists in 1990. It was a square base of whitish-gray marble with a double rebate at the bottom and a torus moulding on top, which supported an unfluted column, which would probably have culminated in a stone sculpture of a panoply (this was not found, but is indicated by parallels, depictions of a pair of trophies on Athenian coinage minted after the battle, and one has been found from this period at Orchomenus). An irregularly-spaced inscription on the front of the base reads:

Plutarch, who came from Chaeronea, reports that the trophy was also inscribed with Sulla's name and the names of the gods Ares, Nike, and Aphrodite (= Mars, Victoria, and Venus), but this inscription does not survive. [29]

After the battle, Archelaeus fled to the island of Euboea and immediately started using the fleet stationed there to harass his opponents naval traffic and sending raids against the Romans and their allies. [30] When Sulla arrived at Thebes he held victory games, during which he may have been made aware of the approach of Lucius Valerius Flaccus who had recently landed in Epirus. [5] [24] Flaccus and Sulla met at Melitaea in Thessaly, though neither army made a move, both armies set up camp and waited for the other to attack. [31] No attack came, and after some time Flaccus' soldiers began to desert in favour of Sulla, at first slowly but with time in increasing numbers, eventually Flaccus had to break camp or lose his entire army. [31] Meanwhile, Archelaeus, who had wintered on the Island of Euboea, was reinforced by 80,000 men brought over from Asia Minor by Dorylaeus, another of Mithridates' generals. The Mithridatic army then embarked and sailed to Chalcis from where they marched back into Boeotia. [5] [9] [31] Both Sulla and Flaccus were aware of these developments, so, rather than waste Roman troops to fight each other, Flaccus took his soldiers and headed for Asia Minor while Sulla turned back to face Archelaus once again. [32] Sulla moved his army a few miles to the east of Chaeronea and into position near Orchomenos, a place he chose for its natural entrenchment. [32] Here, Sulla once more, and once again outnumbered, faced off against Archelaus at the Battle of Orchomenus. [13]

Citations

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Delbruck, Hans (1990). Warfare in Antiquity. University of Nebraska Press. p. 438. ISBN   0-8032-9199-X.
  2. 1 2 3 Eggenberger, David (2012). An Encyclopaedia of Battles: Accounts of Over 1,560 Battles from 1479 BC to the Present. Courier Corporation. p. 85. ISBN   978-0-486-14201-2.
  3. ↑ Plutarch Life of Sulla 19.4
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 198. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Venning, Timothy (2011). A Chronology of the Roman Empire. A&C Black. p. 207. ISBN   978-1-4411-5478-1.
  6. ↑ Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. pp. 199–200. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  7. ↑ Hammond, p. 199.
  8. ↑ Plutarch Life of Sulla 15
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 Warry, John (2015). Warfare in the Classical World: War and the Ancient Civilizations of Greece and Rome. Pavilion Books. ISBN   978-1-84994-315-4.[ permanent dead link ]
  10. 1 2 3 4 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 199. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. pp. 200–201. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  12. ↑ Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. pp. 198–199. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  13. 1 2 3 Tucker, Spencer (2009). A Global Chronology of Conflict: From the Ancient World to the Modern Middle East. ABC-CLIO. p. 113. ISBN   978-1-85109-672-5.
  14. 1 2 3 4 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 200. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  15. ↑ Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. pp. 201–202. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  16. 1 2 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 202. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  17. 1 2 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. pp. 202–203. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  18. 1 2 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 203. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  19. 1 2 3 4 5 Hammond, p. 194.
  20. ↑ Keaveney, p. 78.
  21. 1 2 3 4 Keaveney, p. 80.
  22. ↑ Hammond, pp. 194–195.
  23. ↑ Hammond, p. 195.
  24. 1 2 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 204. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  25. 1 2 Camp, John; Ierardi, Michael; McInerney, Jeremy; Morgan, Kathryn; Umholtz, Gretchen (1992). "A Trophy from the Battle of Chaironeia of 86 B. C." American Journal of Archaeology. 96 (3): 449=450. doi:10.2307/506067. ISSN   0002-9114.
  26. ↑ Plutarch, Life of Sulla 19.9-10; Pausanias 9.40.7
  27. ↑ Camp, John; Ierardi, Michael; McInerney, Jeremy; Morgan, Kathryn; Umholtz, Gretchen (1992). "A Trophy from the Battle of Chaironeia of 86 B. C." American Journal of Archaeology. 96 (3): 443. doi:10.2307/506067. ISSN   0002-9114.
  28. ↑ Camp, John; Ierardi, Michael; McInerney, Jeremy; Morgan, Kathryn; Umholtz, Gretchen (1992). "A Trophy from the Battle of Chaironeia of 86 B. C." American Journal of Archaeology. 96 (3): 445. doi:10.2307/506067. ISSN   0002-9114.
  29. ↑ Camp, John; Ierardi, Michael; McInerney, Jeremy; Morgan, Kathryn; Umholtz, Gretchen (1992). "A Trophy from the Battle of Chaironeia of 86 B. C." American Journal of Archaeology. 96 (3): 444–449. doi:10.2307/506067. ISSN   0002-9114.
  30. ↑ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great: Rome's Indomitable Enemy, p. 77.
  31. 1 2 3 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 218. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.
  32. 1 2 Baker, George (2001). Sulla the Fortunate: Roman General and Dictator. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 219. ISBN   1-4617-4168-8.

Related Research Articles

80s BC is the time period from 89 BC – 80 BC.

Year 86 BC was a year of the pre-Julian Roman calendar. At the time it was known as the Year of the Consulship of Cinna and Marius/Flaccus. The denomination 86 BC for this year has been used since the early medieval period, when the Anno Domini calendar era became the prevalent method in Europe for naming years.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sulla</span> Roman general and dictator (138–78 BC)

Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix, commonly known as Sulla, was a Roman general and statesman. He won the first major civil war in Roman history and became the first man of the Republic to seize power through force.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lucullus</span> Roman politician and general (118–57/56 BC)

Lucius Licinius Lucullus was a Roman general and statesman, closely connected with Lucius Cornelius Sulla. In culmination of over 20 years of almost continuous military and government service, he conquered the eastern kingdoms in the course of the Third Mithridatic War, exhibiting extraordinary generalship in diverse situations, most famously during the Siege of Cyzicus in 73–72 BC, and at the Battle of Tigranocerta in Armenian Arzanene in 69 BC. His command style received unusually favourable attention from ancient military experts, and his campaigns appear to have been studied as examples of skilful generalship.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Second Mithridatic War</span> War between Rome and Mithridates, 83–81 BC

The Second Mithridatic War was one of three wars fought between Pontus and the Roman Republic. This war was fought between King Mithridates VI of Pontus and the Roman general Lucius Licinius Murena.

Gaius Antonius Hybrida was a politician of the Roman Republic. He was the second son of Marcus Antonius and brother of Marcus Antonius Creticus; his mother is unknown. He was also the uncle of the famed triumvir Mark Antony. He had two children, Antonia Hybrida Major and Antonia Hybrida Minor.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mithridatic Wars</span> Conflicts between Rome and Pontus (88–63 BCE)

The Mithridatic Wars were three conflicts fought by the Roman Republic against the Kingdom of Pontus and its allies between 88 and 63 BCE. They are named after Mithridates VI, the King of Pontus during the course of the wars, who initiated the hostilities with Rome. Mithridates led the Pontic forces in every war. The Romans were led by various generals and consuls throughout the wars, namely Lucius Cornelius Sulla, Lucius Licinius Lucullus, and Gnaeus Pompey Magnus.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First Mithridatic War</span> 1st-century BC military conflict between the Roman Republic and the Kingdom of Pontus

The First Mithridatic War was a war challenging the Roman Republic's expanding empire and rule over the Greek world. In this conflict, the Kingdom of Pontus and many Greek cities rebelling against Roman rule were led by Mithridates VI of Pontus against Rome and the allied Kingdom of Bithynia. The war lasted five years and ended in a Roman victory, which forced Mithridates to abandon all of his conquests and return to Pontus. The conflict with Mithridates VI later resumed in two further Mithridatic Wars.

Lucius Licinius Murena was a Roman soldier and politician. He was notable for playing an important role in the Roman victory against the forces of Mithridates VI of Pontus at the Battle of Chaeronea in 86 BC during the First Mithridatic War and for starting another war, the Second Mithridatic War, against Mithridates in Asia Minor without the authorisation of the Roman senate.

Archelaus was a prominent Greek general who served under King Mithridates VI of Pontus in northern Anatolia and was also his favorite general.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battle of Orchomenus</span> Battle between the Roman Republic and the Kingdom of Pontus

The Battle of Orchomenus was fought in 85 BC between Rome and the forces of Mithridates VI of Pontus. The Roman army was led by Lucius Cornelius Sulla, while Mithridates' army was led by Archelaus. The Roman force was victorious, and Archelaus later defected to Rome. The battle ended the Mithridatic invasion of Europe. Information on the battle is included in Plutarch's Life of Sulla, chapters 20–21.

Taxiles was a general in the service of Mithridates VI of Pontus, and one of those in whom he reposed the highest confidence. He is first mentioned in 86 BC, when he was sent by Mithridates, with an army of not less than 110,000 men, to make his way through Thrace and Macedonia to provide support to Archelaus in Greece. This task he successfully accomplished. He reduced Amphipolis, which had at first defied his arms, and having thus struck terror into the Macedonians, advanced, without further opposition, through that country and Thessaly into Phocis. Here he at first laid siege to Elateia, but was foiled in his attacks, and relinquished the enterprise, in order to meet up with Archelaus in Boeotia. The two Pontic generals now found themselves at the head of a formidable host, but their combined forces were defeated in 86 BC by Sulla near Chaeronea, with great slaughter.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kingdom of Pontus</span> 281 BC–62 AD kingdom in northern Anatolia

Pontus was a Hellenistic kingdom centered in the historical region of Pontus in modern-day Turkey, and ruled by the Mithridatic dynasty of Persian origin, which may have been directly related to Darius the Great of the Achaemenid dynasty. The kingdom was proclaimed by Mithridates I in 281 BC and lasted until its conquest by the Roman Republic in 63 BC. The Kingdom of Pontus reached its largest extent under Mithridates VI the Great, who conquered Colchis, Cappadocia, Bithynia, the Greek colonies of the Tauric Chersonesos, and for a brief time the Roman province of Asia. After a long struggle with Rome in the Mithridatic Wars, Pontus was defeated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mithridates VI Eupator</span> King of Pontus from 120 to 63 BC

Mithridates or Mithradates VI Eupator was the ruler of the Kingdom of Pontus in northern Anatolia from 120 to 63 BC, and one of the Roman Republic's most formidable and determined opponents. He was an effective, ambitious, and ruthless ruler who sought to dominate Asia Minor and the Black Sea region, waging several hard-fought but ultimately unsuccessful wars to break Roman dominion over Asia and the Hellenic world. He has been called the greatest ruler of the Kingdom of Pontus. He cultivated an immunity to poisons by regularly ingesting sub-lethal doses; this practice, now called mithridatism, is named after him. After his death, he became known as Mithridates the Great.

Neoptolemus was a distinguished general of King Mithridates VI of Pontus. He was the brother of Archelaus, another general of Mithridates VI and the paternal uncle of Archelaus’ sons: Archelaus and Diogenes.

Archelaus I was a high priest of the temple-state of Comana in Cappadocia and Egyptian royal consort.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Siege of Athens and Piraeus (87–86 BC)</span> Siege in athens

The siege of Athens and Piraeus was a siege of the First Mithridatic War that took place from autumn of 87 BC to the spring of 86 BC. The battle was fought between the forces of the Roman Republic, commanded by Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix on the one hand, and the forces of the Kingdom of Pontus and the Athenian City-State on the other. The Greek Pontian forces were commanded by Aristion and Archelaus.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battle of Histria</span> Battle between the Scythian Bastarnae and Romans led by Gaius Antonius Hybrida

The Battle of Histria, c. 62–61 BC, was fought between the Bastarnae peoples of Scythia Minor and the Roman Consul Gaius Antonius Hybrida. The Bastarnae emerged victorious from the battle after successfully launching a surprise attack on the Roman troops; Hybrida escaped alongside his cavalry forces leaving behind the infantry to be massacred by the Bastarnian-Scythian attackers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quintus Bruttius Sura</span> Roman army officer

Quintus Bruttius Sura was a Roman commander who fought in the First Mithridatic War. He was the first Roman commander to successfully resist Mithridates' advance.

The Fimbrian or Valerian legions were two Roman legions which served and fought in all three wars against King Mithridates of Pontus, one of the Roman Republic's chief adversaries during the 80s, 70s and 60s BC. They became a body of long serving legionaries known for their fierce fighting reputation and also, more infamously, for mutiny and abandoning their commander. The legions take their name from the consul Lucius Valerius Flaccus, who first recruited them in 86 BC, and from his subordinate, Gaius Flavius Fimbria, who took command of the legions after inciting a mutiny and murdering Flaccus.

References

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.