2 comments about War with Hannibal: Authentic Latin Prose for the Beginning Student.

1. WAR WITH HANNIBAL by BRIAN BEYER is a thorough and diligent commentary of Book III, cap. vii to the end, of Breviarium ab urbe condita by Eutropius, which covers the Second Punic War. The text is the authentic, unabridged Latin as written by Eutropius, historian for the Roman emperor Valens.
   
   And it was written -- quite successfully in my experience -- as a bridge text between textbook and original Latin.
   
   As I see it, two things make this book so excellent. First, Eutropius wrote in a simple and clear style that's perfect for those of us who aren't yet ready for Cicero. In fact, for centuries the Breviarium was often the first original Latin students would study.
   
   Secondly, there's the diligent care, thought, and preparation put into this work by the author, Brian Beyer. Here's a summary of what the book contains:
   
   * Notes on grammar and syntax on each page for the text covered on that page
   * Detailed and crystal clear explanations of same, and where you can find discussions of each and every point in various textbooks such as Ecce Romani, Wheelock, et al. in a separate Commentary section
   * Full and thorough vocabulary
   * Macrons provided throughout
   * Historical background, including a timeline, maps, battle plans, translated excerpts from works of other authors relevant to subject matter
   * A second appearance of the text, unannotated (Brilliant! I could mark up the first and still have a clean text to read.)
   * Appendix describing the roles of various Roman magistracies
   * Clear and visually pleasing layout and spacing
   * Good quality paper; highlighting doesn't bleed through
   
   In short, WWH contains all the material needed not only to acquire a complete and thorough understanding of the Latin, but also to learn about this important period in Roman history.
   
   I strongly recommend WAR WITH HANNIBAL as a first Latin text.



2. "War with Hannibal: Authentic Latin Prose for the Beginning Student," is just what the title suggests: an edition featuring an original Roman author who writes Latin prose accessible to second-year Latin students. The notes are helpful, and the selections are short enough not to intimidate the student with "real Roman" Latin. This is the point where a lot of students give up hope: They've been reading short made-up Latin selections in their textbooks, and when they first encounter a genuine selection written by a native speaker, the experience is unpleasant. Native speakers of any language use words not on the elementary word lists, and often employ them in fresh and unexpected ways. This book helps get around that problem with its notes and the direct style of the author. I'd like to see more books like "War with Hannibal" that can help Latin students cross the bridge to "real Roman" Latin.

5 comments about The Beginnings of Rome: Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c.1000264 BC) (The Routledge History of the Ancient World).

1. A book that was much needed in the field. Scholarly but not overly pedantic and certainly not impenetrable.
   The author relies much archeology and offers no easy solutions to theoretical problems.
   The conclusions offered are in various shades of gray depending on the reliability and amount of evidence. However the reader should be aware that certain theories are being pushed here with which many might disagree.
   Rome certainly did not come from a monolithic source and the author provides a survey of the many cultures that inhabited that peninsula as well as the outside civilizations that colonized it. However the book is not without certain controversies.
   One of the author's great strengths in this book is his knowledge of current archaeological discoveries Etruria and in Latium as well as period of orientalization and early Iron Age. Thus, the book's greatest strength is its careful synthesis of historical and archaeological data for the period preceding the republic; and it is likewise excellent concerning Roman external affairs and conquest of Italy. Perhaps the books biggest weakness is its insufficiently critical treatment of the ancient literary sources .
   The book's 15 chapters are methodically presented and are augmented with very helpful illustrations and tables. A brief overview of human culture in Italy from the Bronze Age to the early Iron Age. The author's treatment of the importance of ascribing cultural difference between inhumation and cremation I personally found somewhat controversial.
   In this reviewers opinion he rightly dismisses some of the value of the written tradition of the formation of Rome.
   Further controversy is raised in chapter four with the authors contention that the clan did not proceed the city-state and heroic graves but were enmeshed together. It does give one something to think about.
   Yet another controversy offered in this book which personally I take issue with is the minimization of the influence of the Etruscans on Roman culture.
   Actually there is quite a bit to chew on here yet I do not what to dissuade the reader form picking it up. Just be aware that there is a lot of theory in this book some of which many academics might take issue.
   One thing the book successfully establishes is that by the beginning of the early third century B.C. Rome had acquired the political structure which laid the foundations for its later greatness.
   
   One would hope the reader after being inspired by this volume would look into authors that offer equally compelling alternative theories.
   Highly recommended.



2. This is one of the best books I have ever read. And I do not mean just books about ancient Rome or history books. I have read it three times and just for the kick of it. I am neuroscientist and not a classical scholar but I love history and this is history writing at its best: scholarly, fair, witty, and elegantly written (sometimes donwright dazzling). Cornell lets the readers into his secret cabinet and shows them the raw materials the professional historian works with. Amazingly, this does not detract from the magic of the "story" but makes it all the more enthralling. Don't walk run and buy this book!



3. An informative and thorough discussion of the history of early Rome. "The Early History of Rome" provides an intense discussion of archaeological and legendary evidence and attempts, with great success, to separate actual history from the legends. A must have book for any student of Rome and of things Roman. A standing ovation to T.J. Cornell for an excellent study.



4. This volume of the Routledge History of the Ancient World by Cornell is simply brillant. I read it three times and I will surely read it again. It provides a fascinating comparison between the myths and legends of archaic Rome and the reality that lies behind it. One of the most beautiful examples is the part when Cornell analyses the historic bases of a figure like the Roman king Servius Tullus. He cites a stunning piece of scholarship of the emperor Claudius where he explains to his fellow Romans that Servius Tullus was called by the Estruscan Macstarna (which may mean in Latin "Magister" signifying that he was the right hand of the king serving as a magister equitus at that time of his career), information that lets you "feel history" when Cornell then makes you look at a drawing of an Estruscan wall painting showing possibly this Macstarna involved in some action of killing enemies. Everytime when I read this passage of the book I get a chicken skin...to my mind the author really understands to tell a story out of some facts that may themselves be rather dry.



5. The other reviewers have touched on the qualities of this book. I think you can guess my feelings from my title. As far as that goes, I will only say that Cornell is a graceful and lucid writer and an exemplar of how to weigh and present evidence.
   What I want to do is to tell you a little more about some of the themes of the book which the other reviewers only touch upon.
   Cornell's book was published in 1995. He was the first writer (that I know of) to try to sum up the results of contemporary archeological work and to lay out how that changed our understanding of the history of early Rome.
   Our traditional understanding of that history comes from literary sources; above all Livy, but other historians such as Polybius, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Cicero, Plutarch and Fabius Pictor (whose writings we only know through summaries of his work in other writers). We also have the antiquarians such as Varro, the Fasti (the list of the consuls) and whatever other documents might exist. All present problems- not least that the purposes of historical writings at the time were far different from our times.
   Against that traditional history, Cornell presents what we can glean from the archeological record.
   He is extremely careful about this. He frequently asserts that the archeological record can only be understood on the basis of what we know from the traditional history. One of the pleasures, indeed one of the main values of the book for the non-historian (me! me! me!), is to read him weighing the evidence, arguing his point of view against other scholars and trying to understand the evidence in all its inherent ambiguity (polysemy?).
   I want to emphasize that he is presenting some controversial ideas here. This book obviously challenged many of the orthodoxies of his field at the time. One of the other reviewers mentions Cornell's dismissing of the influence on the Etruscans on the Romans. It seems to still be a common interpretation of the evidence about the earliest period of Roman history that it culturally was heavily influenced by Etruscan culture and that the early kings were Etruscans.
   Cornell is instead arguing for a Hellenistic "koine" (e.g., p. 163 or p. 167). He is suggesting that both the Romans and the Etruscans were influenced in that period by a dominant Greek culture that had begun to be felt in Italy at the time. This is probably the most controversial part of the book. I would love to read someone argue the other point of view. All I will say is that at times in this part of the book (Chapter 6 is central), Cornell's arguments seemed at his weakest. For example, on p. 169, Cornell asserts that "Formal dress, magisterial symbols, ceremonial trappings, ritual technicalities and architectural forms- these amount to little more than outward tokens". To which I can only say, "If you say so".
   There is much else in the book that is utterly convincing. It is difficult to read Livy (or any one else on Roman history) for very long and not become discombobulated by the whole patrician/plebeian thing. Cornell sorts that out very lucidly. His basic argument is that the war of the orders was between two different elites. One was a traditional family based elite (the patricians), the other was formed by men of ambition and skill who sought leadership by channeling the dissatisfaction of the lower classes. Cornell argues that the Licinio-Sextian Laws were the turning point at which the two elites came to a working agreement and thereby created a new nobility which successfully ruled Rome for the next several hundred years (p. 340). I find this part of his argument conclusive.
   Cornell is also somewhat controversial in his attitude toward traditional sources like Livy. Livy's is by far the most complete and detailed we have of this early phase of Roman history. I find Cornell's (generally positive) assessment of Livy's trustworthiness to be very convincing. But I should mention that Gary Forsythe, who has written another very well received history of this period of Roman history is much more skeptical of Livy (or so I understand, I have not read Forsythe yet). Cornell's book offers plenty of examples of places where he reads Livy with a skeptical eye (see, e.g., picked at random from my notes, p. 334).
   In many ways, this is the perfect scholarly book. I don't care if you are an amateur historian or someone whose life has been devoted to early Rome (a noble fellow, you)this is a book you should know and read. You may not agree with Cornell but you will want to listen to, to discuss and to argue with him.
   The one problem I have with the book is its age. Much of the archeological work that he references was unpublished at the time. It would be nice to have an updated bibliography. It would be nice to read how the work of the last 15 years has effected his opinions. Ergo, a new updated edition is needed.
   Since I am a nervy guy, I wrote Prof. Cornell and asked about that possibility. He said that a new edition was being talked about but that he had to finish a current project on Roman historians. He also stated that he believes he would probably have to rewrite the whole thing.
   So my suggestion is to read this version, write the publisher or Prof. Cornell if you would like to see an update and then read that when it comes out. That's what I plan to do.

4 comments about Armies of the Carthaginian Wars 265-146 BC (Men at Arms Series, 121).

1. I found this book to be an informative and a highly readable study of the armies of the Carthaginian Wars. It provided useful information on the organisation, weapons, tactics and uniforms of both the Roman and Carthaginian armies. The colour plates, maps, photographs and illustrations were excellent and supplemented the main body of text very well. I would have no hesitation in recommending this book to anyone who is interested in this period of Ancient History. The more serious student of the Carthaginian Wars would probably want to do further study beyond this book, but overall I would say this book is excellent.



2. This title is somewhat dated, originally published in 1982; however it provides a decent overview of the Carthaginian and Roman forces that engaged one another in the Punic wars. Terence Wise' text is organized, informative, and reads well.
   
   Richard Hook's plates are superbly rendered: crisp, colorful, and well proportioned. The depictions include Roman, Numidian, Carthaginian/Liby-Phoenician, Iberian, Celtic, and various Italian allied forces. The faces and eyes are some of the most realistic among Osprey's ancient warfare titles. One quibble is that the skin-tone/hair color of too many of the plates are perhaps too Anglo-Saxon rather than Mediterranean in appearance.
   (To better understand the forces available to Hannibal one should consider augmenting this work with Osprey's "Rome's Enemies 4: Spanish Armies" by Martinez/McBride. It has some more accurate representations of Iberian forces.)
   
   In summary, I recommend this book as a fine starting point for anyone studying the Punic Wars.



3. When I puirchased this Item, I hope that book clear my ideas about the most caracteristical element in the punic army: The Elephants. In this book the autor wrote about this magnificents warbeasts but he not includes drawings or images about the original concept of the carthaginian war elephant. Nevertheless, the autor, in the description of the carthaginian army elements, clarify the formations, armor and weapons used by the africans, included the elephants tactics and the concept of the carthaginian war elephant.
   This book also deal with the republican roman army and the formation of the "republican legion", included the percentage of auxiliary troop and the evolution during the war.



4. This book first examines the origins, society, and army organization of Carthage, and then goes on to profile her armies and those of her allies, Spaniards, Gauls, Italians, Africans, and Greco-Macedonians. The second half of the book tells of the contemporary Roman armies, which finally succeeded in destroying Carthage in 146 BC. Fine artwork portraying a Roman horseman fighting a Numidian, a number of Celtic warriors, Spaniards, non-Roman Italians, Roman infantry, and Roman commanders.

5 comments about Roman Military Equipment: From The Punic Wars To The Fall Of Rome.

1. I have both the first and the current editions of this utterly invaluable book. It is undoubtedly the best and most detailed discussion of Roman military equipment available and it is a "must read" for anyone interested in the subject, be he or she an historian, re-enactor, artist or whatever. I would give this book six stars, but there are only five available.



2. My brother is a big history and punic wars buff, and he really enjoyed it. From what I looked at the illustrations were amazing and the book seemed well written.



3. I am a Roman era re-enactor and I absolutely loved this book! Not only did in inform me with details I didn't know, but also informed me with what was wrong with my impression.
   
   This is a must have for any Roman era enthusiast!!



4. I've purchased a dozen military novels and resource manuals on both the ancient Roman and Greek militaries and I have to say that this book has been the best one in my library.
   
   If you're a historian buff, school student, reenactor, or just out to learn more about the Roman's armor, weapons, shields, etc... this is THE book for you.
   
   The layout starts by discussing the different evidence found and then jumps into the various periods of the Roman civilization. You get to see the advancement of the weapons, armor, structure as it morphed over centuries. Each point added is backed up by actual evidence found in digs throughout Europe and the Middle East. You get to see the items as they were when they were taken out of the ground in all their glory and learn all the necessary characteristics about them.
   
   I can't begin to explain how great of a reference this is. I had never read the original printing (my copy is the re-print) but it came highly recommended to me as I want to get into Roman reenacting. If asked by anyone else, this would be the book that should be at the top of anyones list.
   
   While I think each individual section could have been longer with more examples... I still think it's one of the best out there. Don't let the pricetag push you away from purchasing it. It should be on the shelf of anyone interested in the Roman civilization.



5. This is a very thorough, if somewhat technical account, of Roman military weapons and equipment. The illustrations are clear and detailed. The research it took to produce the information contained in the book must have been exhaustive. I am an amateur and a novice on the subject of Roman martial equipment, but by comparison with the other books I have read on the subject, ROMAN MILITARY EQUIPMENT is the most comprehensive. My only criticism is that I wish the book was a little more user friendly. It is not by any means inaccessible to the layman, however, and any student or enthusiast of Ancient Rome and its military might will find a wealth of useful information here about the equipment used by the legionnaires from the time of the Punic Wars (264 to 146 BC) to the fall of Rome. I recommend ROMAN MILITARY EQUIPMENT to all modern day legionnaires and miles gloriosus wannabes.

5 comments about Hannibal: Enemy Of Rome.

1. While reading this book I'm thinking, is this really necessary? We all know that Hannibal was a great guy and what he did was incredible but in this book the narrator just makes you want to never hear the word Hannibal again! Though he did put in a lot of great information and he really made it seem like you were in the battles. Everything was boring until they were in the mountains and the Gaul's started to attack that is when it really gets good. Then he would talk about some other thing or himself and it was like were did my thrilling book go? He would talk about his journey and how it related to Hannibal. Well, we really don't care about what he thought we just want to read it and try to understand all of those big words that we don't know yet. This book was definitely made for college students that majored in history, not a ninth grader. But then again there would be another battle and you could understand why he did this and what his strategy was. During this I thought that maybe there was some hope for this book, but you know us if we had a choice in reading this or another we would choose the other book.



2. Hannibal Enemy of Rome is kind of a so-so book. At one perspective, it is an extremely boring book. The information is presented closely to that of a history textbook. It can be very dull and hard to get into, and it takes a while of reading it to get to the exciting things like battles. Hannibal can be a little hard for some to follow because it sort of skips around alot. It will be telling you about Hannibal's battle plans and you will be almost getting into it, and then the book will switch you to a long quote from some Roman guy that will completely destroy the intrest you just had.
   On the other hand, some parts of the book are pretty good. The battles, for example, can catch your interest pretty quickly. You would be amazed at how much information this book contains on Hannibal and his strategies. You will also learn about how he used elephants in battle, which is truly amazing, though the book doesnt go into a heck of a lot of detail on them. Hannibal's journey is long and hard, with a few catching points, but overall, I would only recommend this book to someone who really wants to read about Hannibal or his journey. For someone craving action, this book isnt terrible, but you can get better.



3. This is a good book if you want a reader's digest of Hannibal without sacrificing any details. The book spans Hannibals entier life and talks about his family history. It is a quick and entertaining read. One of the positives of the book is that the author actually tried to travel Hannibal's route over the Alps. The author was able to throw in details that any other author would not be able to discuss about the terrain and certain land marks (even adding pictures). One of the small drawbacks is that he told information about his family trip. I think those digressions distracted from the book and I guess they were enough to make me take off an extra star. To end on a good note I would like to add that the battle scenes are very graphic. He talked about what would be going on in the soldiers mind during a massacre such as Cannae. For the most part the book jumped from battle to battle and left out some of the more `boring' topics that tend to drag a book out. I recommend this book to anyone who wants an incite to the battles of Hannibal.



4. I very much liked this book. I had loaned it out to a co-worker who never returned it. So I bought another copy. Yes, it is that engaging. I found the book very easy to follow and the descriptions of places and battles were excellent. It is an excellent work.



5. The author, during WW2, read an account of Hannibal, and became extremely excited by the story, pledging to one day return to Europe and retrace his steps. His excitement is contagious, and only the most cold-hearted of individuals might resist his imaginative recreation of the events that took place so long ago.
   
   This book, and the negative reviews about it, is emblematic with what is wrong with history education today. History is really about the story of humanity, and the amazing tales of drama and sacrifice that have played out over such a vast scope over so many years. The things Hannibal did were incredible - one stratagem after another! - each of which is a tale that could be told to a classroom of kids to get their imagination and passion for history fired up. It's amazing to me that we don't have more movies that actually cover these very interesting, very human, and often tragic or hilarious events (Hannibal escaped once from the Romans by tying torches to cows and sending them up into the mountains above the Roman camp).
   
   Instead, people criticize it because it is light on detail. While I disagree (Cottrell quotes details in it that you can't find in other sources, not even on the wikipedia page on Hannibal), I think Cottrell went right after the heart of the matter in history - what was the conflict? What motivated the people involved? Where is the story? As a journalist, he ends up doing a history book better than historians that end up focusing so much on the details that they miss the drama and sweep of the bigger story.
   
   Hannibal's story is amazing, and Cottrell does it the best justice of any book I've read on the subject.

5 comments about Pride of Carthage.

1. For over two thousand years the tale of the great Carthaginian general Hannibal Barca has fascinated generations. From his daring late season crossing of the snow-capped Alps into Italy with his war elephants, to his string of victory after victory against the mighty Roman Empire: The cavalry skirmish at the Ticinus River, the icy slaughter at the Trebia River, the mist-shrouded ambush at Lake Trasimene, and above all, the massacre at Cannae, where he annihilated an entire Roman army in the most lopsided battle in the history of warfare, Hannibal has transcended time. But for all his monumental achievements, we know next to nothing about the man himself. We can read histories about his battles, but we can't know what he was thinking or what it was like to be there by reading factual accounts. All this creates a situation that is ripe for historical fiction. And into this void steps a writer of enormous talent, David Anthony Durham. In richly detailed prose, Durham not only takes us through all these victories and battles, he also shows us what kind of a man Hannibal may have been. Durham's Hannibal is not only brilliant, but he is also noble. He does not fight for malice or hatred or glory, but to protect the Carthaginian Empire from the growing power of Rome. We see him weep at the death of one his brothers at the hands of the Romans, and we see him beg his wife for forgiveness when he finally loses to the Roman general Scipio at Zama. We see the overview of the battles from the point of view of the general, but also from the perspective of a soldier in the ranks, Imco Vara. There are several other subplots, most involving the rest of the Barcid clan and their myriad sacrifices for their beloved Carthage, which in the end were all in vain. This is a magnificent book. I hope to see more works like this in the future from Durham, whose writing skills help illuminate history for all readers.



2. David Anthony Durham's 'Pride of Carthage' sits on par with many other historical novels that I have read in terms of research, historical basis, and characterization. Where many similar authors fail, in my mind, is when they forget to 'humanize' their protagonists, regardless of how many battles they wage, how many towns and cities they sack and burn, and how long a trail of blood and carnage they leave behind them.
   
   Hannibal, like so many others of his time, was indeed a warrior.....some called him murderer, some tyrant, some barbarian....but he was still a man, a father, a husband, a brother, and a son. David Anthony Durham takes great pains to show Hannibal's motivation and passion for his attempted conquest of Rome, as well as his love and duty to his family, and his passion for his wife and son. Hannibal felt a duty to honor his father and his family, as well as provide for his own family, and further the pursuits of a land he loved. The final 100 pages alone, when Hannibal questions his loyalty to his land, in response to their lack-lustre support of his efforts (despite ordering him to wage battle) and ultimately returns to his home, still marvelling at it's splendor, illustrates the depth of his commitment to his homeland, and family, and his belief in what he had done.
   
   What amounted to the decimation of hundreds of thousands of soldiers, women, children, and the elderly along the way is told in fine detail, though never becoming too bloody or too graphic to continue reading. The battle sequences included in this novel illustrate the atrocity of war that existed at the time (and in ways still does today), when entire cities were ravaged, and all citizens either enslaved or simply killed to prevent a future uprising for revenge. But this still does not overshadow the rest of the story that is told, with Hannibal and his brothers pressing on for the greater glory of Carthage. Hannibal most of all continually motivates his men, and his brothers, as they face a long, difficult journey across he Pyranees and the Alps to march into Northern Italy.
   
   The one main 'complaint' I can make about the book, and it is a minor one, is that in the opening it appears as though Imco Vaca (a character who appears throughout the novel) will be the 'narrator' of the tale...and it will be told from the perspective of one who fought alongside Hannibal. This was not the case, and as the book moved from character to character, telling their portion of the tale, it was a bit confusing at times with multiple characters having the same name (Hasdrubal is an example of this) to determine who you were reading about. However, this did not deter from overall enjoyment of the story.
   
   The author himself admits to 'rearranging' certain sequences of historical events, as well as 'embellishing' on certain facts, and requests that the novel be read purely as a work of historical fiction. In this he exonorates himself from straying (albeit only slightly) from pure historical fact. At times the dialogue seemed a bit too 'modern' to be a recreation of historical conversation, but that can be forgiven in an effort to make this story more appealing to modern day audiences.
   
   An intriguing, meticulously detailed, and well-embraced telling of Hannibal's crossing of the Alps and so much more....any lover of historical fiction centered on this character, time period, or event will find much to interest them in the pages of this book.
   
   Well written and definitely worth the read.



3. I was captivated in the first few pages by the writing: at times it feels like it flows like water. I found myself rereading some paragraphs just to savour the writing, but it never gets in the way of the story.
   The description of the battle of Cannae is chilling in the way it depicts the mindless obedience of the simple foot soldier as he moves as a cog in the machine of war, and then the absolute unrelenting horror of mortal combat. He out writes Stephen Pressfield in his battlefield descriptions, and that is saying something.
   The characters are believable and fascinating.
   But with all of that, it is the quality of the writing that will make me seek out anything and everything Durham has written.



4. Hannibal Barca (c248 - c182 BC) is considered to be one of the greatest military tacticians and strategists in history. Alongside Alexander the Great, and Julius Caesar he stands as one of the greatest generals in ancient times. At this distance, legend and fact blend together and while this is a serious issue for historians it need not be for readers of historical fiction.
   
   When I picked up this novel, Hannibal and the Carthaginian Empire came to life. I know something of the history of the Second Punic War, and I was interested in reading a novel about the man who posed such a significant threat to the Roman Empire. The sweeping panorama of this story: the politics of Carthage and of Rome, Hannibal's march against Rome (involving the elephants of course), the tribal politics and loyalties - the sheer logistics of the feat. This feat of daring was not achieved without a huge cost to Hannibal himself and the many thousands of soldiers and civilians who died.
   
   This novel is about the many aspects of Hannibal: the man, the husband, son and brother and the brilliant leader. His separation from his wife and son, the political intrigue that ultimately destroyed the Carthaginian Empire are all part of the story.
   
   I enjoyed this novel. Mr Durham created a life of Hannibal and his times that seems to be generally consistent with history. In this novel, Hannibal again strides across the ancient world larger than life and it is easy to see how his army threatened Rome.
   
   `We are all dust eventually. Nations should have memories.'
   
   Jennifer Cameron-Smith



5. First off the caveats - I haven't finished the book - normally I would never write a review of a book I haven't finished, but I'm not sure I'll finish this one (except for finding and skimming my favorite parts from history).
   
   Now I'm a total Hannibal fan, having ready Livy, Polybius and even a bunch of the military historians, so for me to not want to finish this says something. Moreover, I've been wanting to read a good, accurate historical fiction of Hannibal for a while. I can't attest to this books accuracy (nothing seemed terribly amiss, but I didn't get too far), but I can say that the author has a very peculiar writing style which involves summarizing events instead of actually portraying them. For instance, often character's dialogue will be summarized instead of spoken (i.e. "Mago doubted that the man's plow had stood untouched in the fields and said so" instead of "'Surely his plow did not remain untouched?' asked Mago in disbelief"). The rationale for this makes little sense as some characters involved ina conversation will speak while others just get a summary. The result is its hard to get a feel for characters and this book actually becomes less lively than the histories (compare Livy's recounting of Fabius' appearance before the Carthaginian Senate which consists of lines and lines of impassioned speeches against DAD's which has two lines of dialogue and a bunch of impersonal prose). My other major critique of the writing is that there's no central character or point of view from which the story is told. It's constantly shifting and just plain confusing; the result is that the book seems very fractured. It's sad because the author clearly has a good vision of how he wants to portray the forces that shape Hannibal, and he has clearly invested considerable effort into fleshing out Hannibal's family - but unfortunately his writing can't bring that vision to fruition.

No comments about Hannibal: Rome's Worst Nightmare (Wicked History).

5 comments about The Fall of Carthage: The Punic Wars 265-146BC (Cassell Military Paperbacks).

1. As in all of Goldsworthy's titles, this is a solid book about the beginning and end of the great city of Carthage. The main part of the book deals with the second Punic war. Goldsworthy's books as always are well researched and written. This is an easy read and student of this time will find out a lot of information about the first and third war with Rome in which not much is written. A definite recommendation to anyone interested in this period of history



2. This book should be titled the Rise of Rome. Goldsworthy spends much more time detailing and analyzing the factors that led to Rome's rise in power during the decades in which it was at war with Carthage. The final fall of Carthage is portrayed as having more do to with Rome's collective psyche and ambitions than with events happening in Carthage. All-in-all an interesting read (though at times repetitive and therefore tedious) of ancient history. However, I didn't get as much insight into the Fall of Carthage as I had hoped.



3. This book was originally published under the title "The Punic Wars", which I think better describes the book than the "Fall of Carthage" because the book is about all three of the Punic Wars. Most books on the Punic Wars deal only with the second one - the one with Hannibal and the elephants crossing the Alps. As the author points out, we know much more about the second war, so it is not surprising that this one gets much more attention. However, the first and third wars are important and should not be ignored. The first explains why the second occurred and the third finishes the story of the conflict. This book is very interesting and I learned a lot more than just about the battles of the Punic Wars. I learned about the Roman army of the period, about the Roman political system and politics of the time, and why these wars were fought and their consequences.
   
   The fact that this is a republication of a book is important, because this version has been shrunk down in physical size (but not page length). The original is, according to the Amazon description, 9.2x6.3 inches, whereas this book is only 7.7x5 inches. To achieve this smaller size, the size of the print has been reduced, as have the margins. The inner margin is only 3/8 inch from the spine of the book, compared to a more typical 5/8 inch. Why do I mention this? Well, the smaller print makes the book harder to read and more importantly I had to break the spine of the book to be able to see the material at the inner margin. Thus, it is doubtful that the book can stand up to a second reading. This is OK for a novel that one might throw away after reading, but it is not for a book that one might want to keep for reference.
   
   As noted in the title of this review, this is an academic treatment. Most non-academic treatments provide a straightforward narrative based on the author's view of the history. Professor Goldsworthy presents all interpretations of the history. Thus, much of the book contains sentences of the sort - A believes ..., whereas C believes..., and D believes..., and I believe that ... is closest to the truth because... This approach interrupts the narrative, but it is a fairer approach in that it makes it clear that there is a great difference of opinion about many aspects of the Punic wars (as is the case for all of the history of antiquity). This is what I mean by the book being an academic treatment. Some readers will like this approach; others will feel that what they were expecting to be an exciting story of battles becomes dry history.
   
   Also as noted in the title of this review, this is a military history, as opposed to one that focuses on political, social, or religious aspects of the period being covered. This is not to say that these aspects are not considered, only that they are discussed in the context of the military conflict. (A great deal of information is provided about the political system and the politics of this period - information that is essential for understanding the military aspects of the war.) There are very good appendices that contains a description of the political system of the republic, the organization of a Roman Consular Army of the period, and a detailed chronology of events.
   
   While this is a military history it does not focus entirely on the fighting involved with the pivotal battles, such as Cannae. There is a 24-page chapter on Cannae, but it is devoted to much more than the battle itself. It covers the military and political events leading up to it and the extremely important consequences of the battle, but the battle itself is covered in only seven pages. There is one map that concerns Cannae, with a very small insert showing the initial disposition of forces. (There are a total of 16 clearly drawn maps in the book, but no photographs of ancient ruins, or artifacts. Likewise, there are also no drawings of soldiers in battle dress or alike.) You will learn much more that just about the fighting, but the treatment is less exciting that one that focuses on the battle itself.
   
   While the author makes pains to state that he is interested in the Punic Wars in their own right, as opposed to any contrast with modern conflicts, the last few pages of the book briefly compare these wars to WWI and WWII. The comparisons are striking, as are the lessons to be learned; pointing up the need to understand the lessons of history. I recommend this book to those who want to learn the lesson that these wars teach. However, it is not as exciting as some books about this period, but this in more than made up for with the wealth of information that is provided. I liked the honest admission of where the historical sources are lacking or contradictory. There is a clear analysis of the factors that brought on the wars, the factors that led to one side or the other being victorious in a given battle and why the Romans ultimately won, in spite of suffering horrendous losses.
   
   I would have given the book five stars were it not for its shrunk down size. I would have gladly paid a few dollars more to get a book that would last for a second or third reading.



4. From some of the reviews I read on Amazon, it seems that there are those who are unhappy with any kind of history unless it's an exhaustive treatise filled with hair-splitting `nuance.' Indeed, I think some of these reviewers take themselves far too seriously - writing absurdly complex reviews in an apparent attempt to impress others with their own latent literary talent and/or intellectual capacity.
   
   History can and should be accessible and entertaining for people. Why would you intentionally set out to write, much less purchase something that's a struggle to read? Personally, I enjoy histories that are both informative and fun to read - histories that give you a sense of what the individuals involved felt, who they were, how they lived, what they thought, what motivated them, the magnitude of the challenges that faced them, the consequences of their actions, etc. Regrettably some of that information is often illusive, particularly in the ancient world, but a clever writer can leave you feeling immersed in the story and connected to the figures involved.
   
   Goldsworthy's book doesn't quite do that, but neither is it a total drag. The story itself is so fascinating that the mere narrative is entertaining enough to keep you interested, and while there are plenty of names (including plenty of duplicates), dates and antiquated place names, it is fairly easy to stay engaged and follow the story - particularly in the latter half of the book.
   
   Where the book fell short of my expectations was in the actual fall of the city of Carthage, which underwent a brutal and heroic multi-year siege; the city being reduced from some 500,000 inhabitants to a mere 55,000 at its capitulation. Goldsworthy fails to cover this in much detail, but given the book's focus on campaigning and tactics, it is perhaps less important to him.
   
   All in all I would say this is a strong history with good information, sound reasoning, and based on an inherently entertaining and interesting subject that thankfully keeps readers engaged even if the writing is perhaps slightly dry at times. I would purchase a Goldworthy book again, and would recommend this book for someone interested in the nuts and bolts of the Punic Wars, but not someone wishing to be regaled by stories of Hannibalic heroism.



5. Fantastic book. Well written and easy to follow. This book will stay as my reference for Punic wars.
   Though i liked more the previous title "The punic Wars". ;)

5 comments about Hannibal Crosses the Alps: The Invasion of Italy and the Second Punic War.

1. In "Hannibal Crosses the Alps" John Prevas focuses on what the title suggests, which is the actual crossing of the Alps by Hannibal and his mercenary army. Three of the seven chapters deal with the crossing of the Alps, while the other chapters cover the prior history between Rome and Carthage, Hannibal's rise to power, the ancient sources from which we know this history, and the rest of Hannibal's campaign in Italy after his crossing. There is also an Epilogue in which he discusses what happened to Hannibal, and what happened between Rome and Carthage through the Third Punic War.
   
   John Prevas traveled repeatedly through the Alps seeing for himself the terrain of the many possible routes that Hannibal may have taken in his search for the correct route. The route he pieces together he supports with as much evidence as he can, using the ancient sources as well as the visual information that he was able to gather on his trips. While his case is strong and very persuasive, he does temper his argument with the acknowledgement that as of yet there isn't any physical evidence in the form of remains as of yet to turn conjecture into fact.
   
   While overall I enjoyed this book, there are definitely some weaknesses which could have easily been addressed but sadly were not. First of all, for a work which focuses so much on the routes traveled, there are surprisingly few maps to help the reader visualize things. You may want to arm yourself with an atlas of the ancient world, or even perhaps other books about Hannibal which do contain more maps to help compensate for this lack. In addition, while I do like his writing style, there are places where he repeats himself as well as contradict himself.
   
   In an example of repetition and contradiction, he says more than once that none of the elephants perished on the march through the Alps, but he also says more than once that the finding of elephant remains would help determine the route. Clearly there cannot be remains if no elephants were lost. He also contradicts himself with regards to the climate where he first states that there is no significant difference in the snow levels in the Alps from Hannibal's time to ours (this is in support of his argument that the pass which Hannibal took must have been at a higher elevation than those usually selected by historians), and then later he talks about the receding ice and thawing out of areas which may help find supporting evidence.
   
   I enjoyed reading this book; however, I don't think this would be the first book I would read on Hannibal or the Punic Wars. With some minor updates and rewrites this book could easily be four stars, but for now I can only give it three.



2. I came upon this book while reading Brad Thor's action thriller "Blowback" where it was prominently featured as a reference. I was so impressed by the story of Brad Thor's book that I ordered this one even before I finished reading "Blowback." It was worth it as it complemented the action thriller quite nicely. Though I agree with some of the critics regarding the seemingly annoying repetitions in this book, I also can see its advantages as a tool of learning and memorizing. After all, John Prevas is a professor, isn't he? I also wished Prof. Prevas used more and better maps to illustrate Hannibal's route than he did but for me the satellite images from Google Earth helped to fill that void even though those images, unfortunately, seemed to be stitched together from different shots just at the critical Col de la Traversette area. All in all, John Prevas has my kudos for his research and enjoyable book.



3. John Prevas has revived the interest in the Traversette Pass as a potential Hannibal alpine route in this excellent book. Very readable and with a lively narrative, the ability of Prevas to tell the dramatic story of what led to Hannibal's intrepid crossing in 218 BCE and what followed in Italy is evident. Though not all will agree about the exact route, this book makes a good case for the importance of Hannibal's battles and the daunting circumstances Hannibal's army faced from terrain and enemies as well as bad weather and the length of the march. Having used it in teaching university classes, I know this well-written book by Prevas is a must for Hannibal studies.



4. Quite frankly, this book is one of the best detailed overviews of the Second Punic War. Like any other good history book, you need to know the surrounding factors behind an event in history such as the Second Punic War and Hannibal's invasion of the Italian peninsula. Prevas does just that.
   
   As the book opens, Prevas gives a brief over view of the events leading up to the Second Punic War, including basic histories and legendary origins of Rome and Carthage, the Hamilcar and the First Punic War, a detailed account of Hannibal's invasion of Rome, and also brings the book to a close by giving a brief overview of the Third Punic War and also the death of Hannibal.
   
   The only place Prevas lacks is more maps and diagrams. Not that it has to do with crossing the Alps, but a rough diagram of the Battle of Cannae and other battles would have been an added bonus. Thats just my opinion. If you want more detailed books about the Punic Wars I suggest the "Punic Wars" by Adrian Goldsworthy.
   
   Overall, Prevas does a remarkable job by getting the points across while sticking close to historical records and descriptions of the Second Punic War just over 200 pages. Great great read.



5. After two different decisive battlefield victories, Hannibal was in a position to move on a panicked, and practically defenseless Rome and destroy it. He decided to wait. When he finally did decide to attack the capital city of the Roman Empire, he found the city so well defended that he turned away within sight of the gates and returned to plundering the Italian Countryside. Even years after Hannibal was dead, the mothers in Rome would whisper to their naughty children that they had better behave because "Hannibal was at the gates." This terrifying thought cowed even the most impish, mischievous child. The same idea had terrified the Romans of all ages two times before when they thought Hannibal was indeed on the way to rape, plunder and murder everyone in the city.
   Hannibal was a great leader by anyone's measurement. In fact I only became aware of this book from reading and reviewing Steve Forbes and John Prevas's excellent new book, "Power, Ambition Glory," which is a book about some of the greatest leaders in Western History. It was so readable and interesting that I ordered this book and I certainly wasn't disappointed. The book starts out with an introduction to Carthage and it's civilization, which was at its zenith when Rome was still organizing within the boot of Italy. Carthage was located just across the Mediterranean Sea from Sicily, the toe of the boot to be more exact. It was situated on the North African coast near what we now call Tunis at a place where the channel connecting the Mediterranean is less than 300 miles wide. All shipping from the west end of the sea to the east end had to pass between the toe of Sicily, which Carthage also controlled and Carthage itself. It built a navy that could control all of the ancient Mediterranean and the ancient city became incredibly wealthy.
   For those people who don't care much for Roman History, if the Romans had not won the 100-year Punic War, the world today would indeed be much different and the Carthaginians were in many ways more brutal than the Romans. The Romans didn't crucify their own Generals and Admiral's, all of whom were elected to office by the senate and were fellow aristocrats, because they lost a single battle. The Romans did not sacrifice infant children to "the lord of the furnaces" the God Baal, which is the God Hannibal was named after. Infanticide consumed thousands of live infants in the burning furnaces of Baal.
   After introducing the reader to the basic historical facts of the rise and fall of Carthage, the author concentrates on Hannibal's career. His father successfully transferred his own hate of the Romans to his sons, especially Hannibal The most exciting part of the Hannibal's life was his daring crossing of the Alps from Spain where he surprised, defeated and plundered the Romans for 12 years. After losing some of the biggest battles in Ancient History including one where Hannibal killed 50,000 legionnaires while only losing about 1,200 of his own men, the Romans decided to shadow Hannibal and his army of mercenaries but not to engage him in battle.
   Hannibal's crossing of the Alps was not as easy or successful as it should have been because he didn't have trustworthy guides to show him the way. He was ambushed twice in narrow gorges where the locals had purposely led him. His troops had to transverse narrow ledges above deep canyons while savage Celtic tribesmen rained boulders and arrows down of his helpless troops and their terrified pack animals. Half his army died on the trek, but miraculously, all his war elephants survived the journey. Not long ago I read and reviewed "The Indifferent Stars Above: The Harrowing Saga of a Donner Party Bride" by Daniel James Brown. There were many similar experiences to the two books. In both cases the parties were misdirected and ended up missing the easier passes through the mountains and ending up having to travel the most difficult and costly routes in bitter weather. The chief difference was that much of the Donner Party was children and they didn't have enemies dropping rocks on their heads as they crawled and climbed through the mazes of sheer canyons in the snow and ice. John Prevas makes Hannibal's historic feat come alive for the reader. If you like reading about history in the making, this tale will amaze you. The descriptions of the battles are as if the reader is hovering in an invisible time capsule above the raging battlefield reading the thoughts of the generals and their soldiers below.
   In addition, the author spent several summer's hiking through the various routes that Hannibal and his army might have taken. Comparing his own observations and photographs to the historical texts, he concludes which route had to indeed be the one Hannibal and his army transversed. None of the others matched the historical data.
   Hannibal lived to be an old soldier of 64, which in itself is amazing since he was always in the heart of one battle or another and was often wounded. What happened to Hannibal and Carthage is also related. There is a surprise ending to the story in the last couple of sentences of the book. It's something that most people aren't aware of and something that illustrates the superior instincts of one of Rome's own great generals, Julius Caesar. This is a page-turner once the reader gets through the book's necessary introduction and into the personal story of Hannibal. This reviewer loved it.

5 comments about The Rise of the Roman Empire (Penguin Classics).

1. The overwhelming majority of this book is about the Second Punic War, although it does describe the other two Punic Wars at the beginning and end. But basically, unless you're looking for an account of the Hannibalic War, there's little else to be found here. I found the history of the Celts from the Sack of Rome in 390 BCE to the Battle of Telamon in 225 BCE and their use in Hannibal's army thereafter to be particularly useful, but it seems as though everything else was cut out of this book. At least some of this was done deliberately by Penguin and the translator, as he leaves footnotes saying "These debates have been omitted." This is unacceptable in its own, but I think the lack of other information is also due either to the omission of these things by Polybius himself, or by the transcribers that have carried his works into our own times. Whatever the case is, this book is wholly unhelpful for a historian outside of researching Hannibal.



2. Get the Loeb edition instead. Penguin is not selling the entire work of Polybius here, but rather the sections that pertain to their "Rise of the Roman Empire" theme. If you're looking for any information on the Macedonian successor states of Alexander, look elsewhere, because Penguin cut it out of this edition.
   
   The only thing that saves this book from the abyss of the single star is that it is very readable, which is a major compliment for Polybius, who is one of antiquity's drier historians. It also has good appendices and a better index than some other Penguin books. (Tacitus, I'm looking at you.)



3. For a basic history student, this is a great edition of Polybius's work. The translation is quite readable, and the material seems reasonably well selected. The work is also generally important for the study of ancient Rome.
   
   Of course folks should be aware that this is an abridged version, and that Polybius's works have survived only in part. However, unless you need an unabridged edition, this is worth getting and reading.



4. No need to wade into an already rich reviewers' debate on the quality of this abstract from Polybius. What this selection does contain:
   
   · The account of the First Punic War, in full.
   · Roman expansion in Illyria and Cisalpine Gaul between the first two Punic Wars.
   · The Hannibalic campaign of the Second Punic War.
   · Scipio's campaign in Africa marking the end of the Second Punic War.
   · Polybius' famous piece on the Roman constitution.
   · Selected background on the Greek leagues and Greek strife leading to the Second Macedonian War.
   · The supposed treaty between Hannibal and Philip V of Macedon.
   · Extracts on the diplomacy leading to the Second Macedonian War.
   · Considerations on the chronicler Timaeus.
   · Various short extracts on the 200-146BC period of Roman expansion.
   
   What this does not include:
   
   · The story of the mercenary revolt at Carthage.
   · Most of the (admittedly repetitive) Greek background of warfare and diplomacy between the leagues and with Macedon.
   · Most of the Roman campaign in Spain of the Second Punic War.
   · The harangues by Hannibal and the Roman generals before Cannae.
   · The context in the Greek East and the triangular fight between the Hellenistic monarchs Philip V, Antiochus and Ptolemy.
   · Polybius' explanation of his historical method.
   · The end of Second Macedonian War and the key battle of Cynoscephalae.
   · The account of the wars with Perseus of Macedon and with Antiochus, by which Rome came to dominate the Greek East.
   · The account of the Third Punic War and the fall of Carthage.
   · The account of the taking of Corinth (note that Polybius was supposedly present at both these last two events).
   
   Altogether, this is a rather incomplete abstract, then, of Polybius' account of Rome's rise to supremacy in the Mediterranean world. Polybius is widely regarded as one of the most rigorous, well informed, and credible ancient historians of the period.



5. Several reviewers have commented on the fragmentary nature of this assuming it to be the result of the loss of much of Polybius' work. But the main "loser" of this work is Penguin itself, which has hacked this edition to death.
   The real reason for how fragmentary this book is because Penguin removes signifigant amounts of "less relevant material." Considerable background on Carthage is missing, in particular the mercenary war and much of the Sicilian action in the Punic Wars. This particular edition leaves out large chunks of the extant Polybius, in favor of the high lights with Hannibal, and for some reason the Aetolian League being considered more important than Carthage.
   
   Even worse is that nowhere in the book is it made clear what is missing, it is treated as a seamless narrative even when gaping holes are left. At various points Polybius discusses the plan of the book, mentioning whole sections that have been cut out, this is the only indication if this volume was all you saw that these things were left out by the editors.
   
   I know it is much pricier and less convenient, but if you are actually interested in details you would be much better off getting the Loeb editions, even with their very dry and stiff translations.