The Punic Wars

Rating:
Summary: Excellent History
Review: "DELENDA EST CARTHAGO"

"Carthage Must be Destroyed" those most famous words were spoken by Marcus Porcius Cato in the 2nd Century BC. In this new book on the Punic Wars by Adrian Goldsworthy we are taken back into this most fascinating period of history. We follow in the steps of Hannibal, Hasdrubal, Hamilcar, Scipio Africanus and many more famous and infamous commanders and leaders as the Roman Legions and the soldiers and sailors of Carthage clash in this gigantic struggle of the Ancient World.

Each of the three wars are described in as much detail as possible bearing in mind the lack of primary sources for some periods. We follow the stalemate in Sicily during the First Punic War (264-241 BC). Then the more famous struggle in Spain and Italy during the Second Punic War (218-202 BC), followed by the final Roman victory in the Third Punic War (149-146 BC).

The author provides details of all the famous battles, Trebia, Lake Trasimene, Cannae and of course Zama. He also follows the lesser-known campaigns in Spain, Macedonia and Sicily. I found the author to be very fair in his assessment of the commanders and their decisions and offers comments on the sources used in his book and others.

I would compare this book favourably with Nigel Bagnall's 'Punic Wars' and both books sit proudly in my library. The author took the time to explain the military traditions, training and tactics of the two opponents, which assisted greatly when it came to follow the battles. 16 maps are provided to assist in the narrative and all where of a decent standard however, no illustrations were to be found in the book.

The book was easy to read and the narrative flowed along faultlessly. Overall this is a very decent one-volume account of the Punic Wars and I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys decent history or who has a love for this period.

Rating:
Summary: Complete and informative
Review: Between 265 and 146 BC, the world has seen some of the greatest conflicts in history, rarely matched and probably unsurpassed until the 20th century. The three Punic wars took place in Italy, Spain, Greece, Sicily, Sardinia and Africa. They saw wide scales battles on land, huge clashes of fleets, sieges and treacheries. And they have left to the world the legacy of one of the legendary war heroes. Hannibal, with his daring passage through the Alps and his remarkable victories in Italy, belongs now to the ages, holding the romantic fascination which belongs only to a few generals who reached the brightest glory but have finally failed (like Robert E. Lee, Rommel and Napoleon).

For those, like me, who come to this book innocent of the late Roman Republic, Adrian Goldsworthy's account explains the background, politics and world of the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE, and gives as much light as possible to figures whose life is shadowed by the lack of historical records.

With risk of oversimplification, the first Punic War was the almost inevitable clash between two growing empires, whose spheres of influence overlapped. Carthage and Rome first fought over Sicily, with the fighting spreading to Africa and to the Mediterranean. After several defeats, The Carthaginians agreed to a peace agreement, which put them in a clearly subordinate position to Rome. With fresh insult in the form of the Roman annexation of Sardinia in 238, Hannibal Barca started the war in Spain in 218, and then marched to Italy, to wage war in the enemy territory. Hannibal, and Carthage, failed, and the war ended with a treaty that put Carthage in a clearly subordinate position to Rome.

The last Punic war, and the destruction of Carthage, came from the paranoia of the Romans, immortalized by Cato's famous saying "Delenda Carthago". Carthage must be destroyed, and so it was.

`The Punic Wars' (or `The Fall of Carthage', in the British edition) is a military history, detailing both specific battles and the general strategy of the three Punic Wars. For the most part, Goldsworthy does a good job summarizing and explaining the battles and movements of forces, as well as the disagreements between scholars about the exact locations of battles, and so on. However, some of the maps are clearly insufficient, especially as Goldsworthy never gives more then one map to any one battle, even the complicated ones, such as the confrontation between Hannibal and Scipio Africanus in Zama in 2002. Furthermore, there is a lot of discussion of various forms of ships, without a single diagram of them.

The overall theme of Goldsworthy's book is that the Punic wars were more then just clashes between Empires. They saw clashes between two different philosophies of war, or, if you will, cultures. The Carthaginians, as was customary at the time, fought in order to establish the power balance between the sides. A war was supposed to end with an agreement that will reflect this balance. The Romans, on the other hand, could not see different countries of city states as independent. The Romans fought total wars, which ended in either the subjugation of the destruction of the enemy. For the Carthaginians, loss was unfortunate, for the Romans it was inconceivable.

Only at one point during the Punic wars, there was a real chance of Roman defeat. After his remarkable victory in Canne in 216 BC, Hannibal chose not to go for Rome. "It is probably correct that Hannibal would have been unable to capture Rome if the defenders had put up any sort of resistance", Goldsworthy writes (p. 216). Still, "Hannibal now posted a greater threat to the Roman Republic then any other foreign power would ever do throughout its entire history". Would the Romans have withstood Hannibal at the peak of his power, or would they have agreed to sign a peace agreement? Had the Carthaginians won the Punic Wars, history would have been very different - but we will never know how close they were.

Rating:
Summary: The Clash of Civilizations
Review: Between 265 and 146 BC, the world has seen some of the greatest conflicts in history, rarely matched and probably unsurpassed until the 20th century. The three Punic wars took place in Italy, Spain, Greece, Sicily, Sardinia and Africa. They saw wide scales battles on land, huge clashes of fleets, sieges and treacheries. And they have left to the world the legacy of one of the legendary war heroes. Hannibal, with his daring passage through the Alps and his remarkable victories in Italy, belongs now to the ages, holding the romantic fascination which belongs only to a few generals who reached the brightest glory but have finally failed (like Robert E. Lee, Rommel and Napoleon).

For those, like me, who come to this book innocent of the late Roman Republic, Adrian Goldsworthy's account explains the background, politics and world of the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE, and gives as much light as possible to figures whose life is shadowed by the lack of historical records.

With risk of oversimplification, the first Punic War was the almost inevitable clash between two growing empires, whose spheres of influence overlapped. Carthage and Rome first fought over Sicily, with the fighting spreading to Africa and to the Mediterranean. After several defeats, The Carthaginians agreed to a peace agreement, which put them in a clearly subordinate position to Rome. With fresh insult in the form of the Roman annexation of Sardinia in 238, Hannibal Barca started the war in Spain in 218, and then marched to Italy, to wage war in the enemy territory. Hannibal, and Carthage, failed, and the war ended with a treaty that put Carthage in a clearly subordinate position to Rome.

The last Punic war, and the destruction of Carthage, came from the paranoia of the Romans, immortalized by Cato's famous saying "Delenda Carthago". Carthage must be destroyed, and so it was.

'The Punic Wars' (or 'The Fall of Carthage', in the British edition) is a military history, detailing both specific battles and the general strategy of the three Punic Wars. For the most part, Goldsworthy does a good job summarizing and explaining the battles and movements of forces, as well as the disagreements between scholars about the exact locations of battles, and so on. However, some of the maps are clearly insufficient, especially as Goldsworthy never gives more then one map to any one battle, even the complicated ones, such as the confrontation between Hannibal and Scipio Africanus in Zama in 2002. Furthermore, there is a lot of discussion of various forms of ships, without a single diagram of them.

The overall theme of Goldsworthy's book is that the Punic wars were more then just clashes between Empires. They saw clashes between two different philosophies of war, or, if you will, cultures. The Carthaginians, as was customary at the time, fought in order to establish the power balance between the sides. A war was supposed to end with an agreement that will reflect this balance. The Romans, on the other hand, could not see different countries of city states as independent. The Romans fought total wars, which ended in either the subjugation of the destruction of the enemy. For the Carthaginians, loss was unfortunate, for the Romans it was inconceivable.

Only at one point during the Punic wars, there was a real chance of Roman defeat. After his remarkable victory in Canne in 216 BC, Hannibal chose not to go for Rome. "It is probably correct that Hannibal would have been unable to capture Rome if the defenders had put up any sort of resistance", Goldsworthy writes (p. 216). Still, "Hannibal now posted a greater threat to the Roman Republic then any other foreign power would ever do throughout its entire history". Would the Romans have withstood Hannibal at the peak of his power, or would they have agreed to sign a peace agreement? Had the Carthaginians won the Punic Wars, history would have been very different - but we will never know how close they were.

Rating:
Summary: Rome reaches out
Review: Great combination of analysis of tactical detail of Roman and Carthaginian land and naval tactics combined with an impressive command of the strategic landscape across the 3 Punic Wars covering over 200 years. This was the time Rome expanded from its status as a a powerful city state to begin its empire. The individual battles are finely detailed, yet the overall picture isn't lost. This is especially important since these events took place on land and sea with dozens of armies contending in some of the largest battles in the ancient world.

Rating:
Summary: Great Book
Review: I decided to read this book in order to help refresh my memory of the events and personalities during the Punic Wars that I remembered studying in a college class I took a few years back. I must say this was a great read. Many of the battles during the First Punic War like Ecnomus and Drepana came back to life as well as the many other battles and personalities throughout the remaining conflicts between Rome and Carthage.

The author of this book does a good job in being objective. He also points out to the reader that this book does not cover more of the social aspects of ancient Rome and Carthage; he is focused on the military and some of the political history which is obviously necessary in explaining the Punic Wars. Goldsworthy is consistently good at pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the ancient sources, as well as the lack of information on certain topics. He does rely heavily on Polybius and Livy for example.

He sticks to his basic thesis in explaining warfare from the Roman and Carthaginian perspectives and how their mentalities shaped the resulting wars and the eventual and complete victory of Rome. It is an interesting analysis of how Rome was able to endure major losses and still push on until their opponent was utterly defeated or destroyed as in the case with Carthage by 146 BC.

The battles are well detailed, the reasons for war aptly explained and many of the major military and political figures of this time very ably discussed. The two that always stick in my mind are Hannibal and Scipio Africanus. Both best represented each side's most effective commander in the Second Punic War which was the one war in which Rome was most threatned.

These were massive wars and resulted in very heavy casualties. As with most wars, horrible atrocities were committed and should be discussed in order to show that war isn't always as glorious and romantic as it can sometimes be portrayed. Anyway, Adrian Goldsworthy's book is a work of professionalism.

Rating:
Summary: Comprehensive, enlightening and enjoyable
Review: I think Adrian has done a remarkable job of piecing together the little we know about the Punic Wars (particularly the first) and bringing it together in one book. Even though he does not profess to be an expert on military history, he brings a clear description of the major battles and the tactics that were used. This is a very good read

Rating:
Summary: Accessible, useful, great
Review: One of the most confusing dramas throughout human history is the Second Punic War; the nature of the First and Third, although more easily understood, simply add to this confusion. Adrian Goldsworthy has put together a narrative history that easily solves this problem. The story he presents is clear, concise, and devoid of an overemphasis on unfamiliar names.

This single-volume history of all three conflicts is clearly the best out there. Goldsworthy does an excellent job of neutrally explaining the cuases of all three (difficult to do, as all the sources are Roman). The conflict is expertly explained without getting bogged down in the details of too many individual battles. Strategy and tactics are explained as resulting from the technology and culture of the time in a way that is both informative and interesting.

One of the best aspects of this book is that it is filled with maps, and that they are placed in the book at the precise moment when you need to consult one. This is so rare in contemporary writing that praise for this should be counted doubly.

The one detractor of the book is that it is lacking in illustrations. Naval and siege technologies are described in some detail, yet very few complimentary illustrations or diagrams are offered. However, I'll (and I assume you will too) take the maps over the illustrations any day.

Essentially, this is the finest book on the subject, and is highly recommended for readers of all historical interests...

Rating:
Summary: Bringing the Ancient World to Life
Review: Over two thousand years ago, the Ancient World was thrust into three major conflicts that not only changed the course of antiquity, but the course of the world as we know it today. The three wars fought between Rome and Carthage between 264 and 146 BC gave rise to the Roman Empire, and Rome's subsequent influence on World History. Despite its importance, however, the Punic Wars are not well-known to those outside the insular world of the Classics. Adrian Goldsworthy has provided a great service by making these world wars of antiquity accesible to the modern reader and the general public. Doing so is no easy task, considering the incomplete record that one has to cope with whenever writing about the ancient world. Goldsworthy manages to put together his history based partially on the primary works of the ancient writers Polybius, Livy, and Appian (while noting each one's shortcomings) and partially on the more recent excavations of the battle sites. The result is a fluid narrative, albeit one that a reader used to accounts of more recent history might find frustrating, since a good deal of information is still uncertain.

Of the three Punic Wars, the Second (Hannibalic) is covered in the greatest detail. While nearly everyone knows that Hannibal crossed the Alps with his elephants, few know how he managed to do so. And the losses that his armies suffered en route are even less well-known. Once it Italy, Hannibal won victory after victory, culminating in the massacre at Cannae in 216, still regarded as the most one-sided battle ever. Despite this, the Romans fought on, with a stubborness and determinedness that eventually won them all three wars. How they did so remains one of the most fascinating and instructive historical tales of all time. The implications of the wars of antiquity are many. For a historian, the importance of these wars in shaping the ancient and modern worlds should be examined. For the military strategist, it is worth comparing the strategies of ancient generals to glean information of the conduct and theory of war. And the political scientist, forever complaining about the lack of "qualitative" data (eg, historical examples), should began incorporating the wars of the ancient world, as well as those of the modern, into their theories of state behavior.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting Trip Back in Time
Review: The Punic Wars by Adrian Goldsworthy is a wonderful trip back into time. It is difficult to translate wars and battles that took place over 2000 years ago and make them relevant to modern times. Goldsworthy does a fine job but fails in the latter.

His strength is in describing what happened in the three Punic Wars. The book is not just a military history of the era, but also a political one as well. He spends considerable time analyzing the political climate that led to almost 50 years of war between Carthage and Rome. The strength is in the First Punic War that led the groundwork for the other two. After reading the book one does understand why the wars were fought.

As a military history, the book is limited by a absence of primary sources describing the battles. The one exception are the battles fought by and against Hannibal. His description of the battle of Caenne, with a marvelous narrative of how Hannibal was able to destroy a numerically superior Roman force. He describes the battle in sufficient detail so as to allow the reader to understand the basics of Hannibal's successful tactics.

Where Goldsworthy does not excel is in his attempt to make the Wars relevant to the present. While there are parallels between the Wars and the First and Second World Wars they are unlimited and overplayed. In addition, while he is correct that Carthage did not understand the Roman for pension for "playing for keeps" rather than to obtain a favorable negotiated treaty, that lesson also had limited applicability.

The Punic Wars is interesting reading because of the effect that the Wars had on our history. That is reason enough to read the book. The fact that it is so well written just adds to the allure.

Rating:
Summary: Their finest hour....
Review: The Romans fought three Punic Wars with Carthage between 265-146 BCE. The best historical sources about this series of wars include Polybius a Greek attached to Scipio Africanus the Roman hero of the second Punic War, and Livy a Roman historian who wrote in the late first century CE. Sources depicting the Carthaginian perspective disappeared long ago. Adrian Goldsworthy relies on the writings of Polybius and Livy, Roman Senate records, other extant material such as Cato's writing on agriculture, as well as archeological findings from various excavations to describe the hundred years' war that ended with the destruction of Carthage.

The first war between Rome and Carthage was fought over and about Sicily and ended with a Roman victory and possession of Sicily. The second Punic War was dominated by the Carthaginian Hannibal who conquered Italy with elephants and dominated the peninsula for a very long time. Unfortunately for Carthage, the Romans never acknowledged Hannibal's conquest. As Goldsworthy puts it, comparing the Romans to the Brits in WWII, "He who conquers is not the victor unless the loser considers himself beaten." Although Hannibal beat the Romans to a standstill, they regrouped and attacked-not Hannibal-but Spain. Then Scipio Africanus conquered large areas in Africa. Finally, when his home town was threatened, Hannibal left Italy, went home to Carthage, engaged the Romans in battle and lost.

The third Punic war was a disgrace. Rome had defeated Carthage in the second Punic War, and it appears not to have posed a `real' threat to Rome. However, day after day Cato harangued on the Senate floor that the Carthaginians were building weapons of mass destruction and should be invaded and destroyed. Finally, he persuaded his fellow Senators who declared war. Rome attacked Carthage and destroyed it. In the end, the civilization founded by the Phoenicians was in ruins and Rome had become an Imperial tyrant.

The legacy of the Punic wars may have been the end of the Roman Republic. In the beginning, the Roman military was composed of yeomen farmers who volunteered for service along with members of the other classes. The upper classes taxed themselves to support the first and second Punic wars. By the third Punic war, yeomen farmers had been replaced with large agricultural farms held by wealthy men like Cato. Roman citizenry from the upper classes disdained military service and the army was largely composed of mercenary forces made up of the dispossessed. This professional army eventually dominated the country though Gaius Marius, Sula, and the Caesars.