Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The classic clash between the Romans and Carthaginians. Lots of history took place here, lots of memorable figures from Hannibal to Scipio.

This all took place during 3 separate conflicts. Most people feel the last one was completely unnecessary and the result was way too extreme on the part of the Romans.

So what are your feelings on this? Does this war interest you? Why or why not? Etc...

Originally posted by RZA
The classic clash between the Romans and Carthaginians. Lots of history took place here, lots of memorable figures from Hannibal to Scipio.

This all took place during 3 separate conflicts. Most people feel the last one was completely unnecessary and the result was way too extreme on the part of the Romans.

So what are your feelings on this? Does this war interest you? Why or why not? Etc...

I dont know enough about the small details, but I think what the Romans did in the end was far from neccessary. It seems they had an inferority complex.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I dont know enough about the small details, but I think what the Romans did in the end was far from neccessary. It seems they had an inferority complex. In the words of Cato; "Carthago delenda est"....In order for Rome to prosper the Poenici had to be destroyed.

So in my opinion, Sieging Carthage was the best option they had...As for taking the Poenici as slaves, although a bit unethical, they were forced to; Rome was hated by them and would have been attacked again....By today's standards though I think it was terrible...But then again, hindsight is 20/20.

Great for studying the rise of Imperialism.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
In the words of Cato; "Carthago delenda est"....In order for Rome to prosper the Poenici had to be destroyed.

So in my opinion, Sieging Carthage was the best option they had...As for taking the Poenici as slaves, although a bit unethical, they were forced to; Rome was hated by them and would have been attacked again....By today's standards though I think it was terrible...But then again, hindsight is 20/20.

Yes but didnt the Romans try to not only destroy Carthage but the fact that it even existed?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Yes but didnt the Romans try to not only destroy Carthage but the fact that it even existed?

Not really...Carthage was a great empire, and Rome would have flaunted it's destruction....Carthage's land was precious as well....Utica took over it's trade and commerce for a while, until a new Carthage was made.

I watched a TV programme last night on the BBC about Ancient Rome - excellent series - and they focussed on Tiberius Graccus who evidently fought at the fall of Cathage. I remember the programme saying something about mixing the ground with salt so nothing grew there as a monument to Carthage. I might have got the wrong end of the stick, especially as the programme dealt more with the aftermath of the fall of Carthage and how a mix of the removal of Carthage as 'bogeymen' and Graccus's push for social reform led to the rise of mob rule and ultimately the collapse of the Republic and turn to an Emperor system of rule.

Rome salting the land is a myth...Salt was way to expensive (around the price of Gold) to be able to realistically do that....And plus, like I said, Carthage's land was perfect for trade and commerce...They wouldn't ruin it, right before they took it over.

IIRC, Julius Caesar rebuilt the city.

^
Actually I believe it was Augustus who rebuilt it.

My thoughts, I believe the first two were justified but the last one wasn't and the result was too extreme.

Yes, Cato kept convincing the Senate to go to war on the false premise of Carthage still being a threat to Roman civilization when it was clear by many historians that after their 2nd defeat Carthage posed no threat whatsoever. Sound familiar? Modern day similarities perhaps?

The Third Punic was was the birthing pains of the Roman Empire.

Carthage wa not a threat after the Second Punic war. I find the destruction of Corinth MUCH more fascinating historically. 146 BCE, in my opinon, marks the doom of the Roman Republic.

I loved the strategy of Hannibal, using the elephants to his advantage. What he lacked in men he made up in size. The Romans were definitely not expecting that. Speaking of Hannibal, BET next year is coming out with animated series of him.

Originally posted by heru
I loved the strategy of Hannibal, using the elephants to his advantage. What he lacked in men he made up in size. The Romans were definitely not expecting that. Speaking of Hannibal, BET next year is coming out with animated series of him.

Elephants? Right...When Hannibal got to Rome there was only one elephant left...Theoretically, his idea was good; but practically it was dumb.

Originally posted by Alliance
The Third Punic was was the birthing pains of the Roman Empire.

Carthage wa not a threat after the Second Punic war. I find the destruction of Corinth MUCH more fascinating historically. 146 BCE, in my opinon, marks the doom of the Roman Republic. Your right, if I can remember correctly Carthage went to war with there neighbors, the Numidians. Carthage Using up to 25,000 soldiers, leaving them vunerable to Romans conquest.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
Elephants? Right...When Hannibal got to Rome there was only one elephant left...Theoretically, his idea was good; but practically it was dumb. You are intitled to your own opinoin. According to historians, he had 30 elephants when he left, upon his arrival he had half of that. Which would make it 15 elephants not one.

Originally posted by heru
You are intitled to your own opinoin. According to historians, he had 30 elephants when he left, upon his arrival he had half of that. Which would make it 15 elephants not one.

I don't know where you got those numbers, but they're wrong....The elephants died not only crossing the alps, but when they arrived in Italy during the winter. And I was wrong before, I thought it was one elephant, but it was three.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
I don't know where you got those numbers, but they're wrong....The elephants died not only crossing the alps, but when they arrived in Italy during the winter. And I was wrong before, I thought it was one elephant, but it was three. Can you please tell me where you got your information from, so I can look into it. If I am wrong than I'll apologize.

Originally posted by heru
Can you please tell me where you got your information from, so I can look into it. If I am wrong than I'll apologize.

Well, I have the book "The Punic Wars" by Nigel Bagnell (which is a great read if anyone's interested)....but this is a pretty good site: http://www.seattleluxury.com/encyclopedia/entry/Second_Punic_War

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
Well, I have the book "The Punic Wars" by Nigel Bagnell (which is a great read if anyone's interested)....but this is a pretty good site: http://www.seattleluxury.com/encyclopedia/entry/Second_Punic_War Thanks for the info, it helped out a lot. I do owe you a apology (sorry) I must get a hold of that book you spoke about. The web site you put on display was interesting as well.