EBOOK DOWNLOAD [Carthage Must Be Destroyed The Rise and Fall of an Ancient Civilization]
A history of Carthage Insofar as it can be reconstructedNot only were there no Carthaginian histories to survive there is the interesting history of the Greek and Roman histories where the best source may be reconstructed from the uotations taken from another work which also did not survive but drew heavily on the original source There is also some archaeological evidence Carthaginian inscriptions give brief accounts and other information can be pieced together The optimistic claim of early archaeologists that the claims of sacrificing children were false was too optimistic Considerably evidence for it has turned up include inscriptions that carefully state that the child offered was actually the offspring of the person sacrificing the childThis gets discussed across its history covering its wars its colonies its government insofar as it can be discerned its religion and its interactions with Rome and with other forces allied with one or the other or shifting between The period of the Punic Wars gets covered most thoroughly of course because of the most records including the peaces between with the Mercenaries WarIt covers the campaigns the battles with discussion enough of strategy to show how they were won and the side effectsEverything from the details such as the Carthaginians first coined money to pay off mercenaries in Sicily to the intense efforts of both sides in the Punic War to claim religious sanction and the other side s impiety Hercules was of particular importance and the road he took driving Geryon s cattle was fraught with significance A general whose first act on appointment was to try to counteract the frantic superstitious practice of unauthorized sacrifices and divination by consulting the Sibylline books I found the treatment of RomanGreekCarthaginian syncretism particularly interesting because of my interests in the area it s very well done The title refers to a famous uote of Cato the Elder a Roman statesman about the threat to Rome from Carthage The book is a case study of the rise and fall of Carthage It is very thorough and mostly interesting There are several nice lines in the book One of the interesting is that Carthage was important as an opponent to Rome and the conflictual history with Carthage forced the Roman state to mature in order to survive and thus contributed to the long period of Roman dominance under the Empire Another line of thinking that I had not appreciated until now was the role of ideology in the wars between Carthage and Rome which Gods were triumphant and how did these states adapted the array of gods in an area to serve their needs Another interesting line is the complex politics within these states Both Rome and Carthage were far from monolithic actors and understanding the politics was critical for success Indeed this point is made concerning Hannibal and his ineffectiveness in following up on his military triumphs The ability of the winners in a conflict to write the official history is also clearly brought across in the narrative Finally Miles does a good ob covering Hannibal and Scipio and brilliant tactical generals and key battles such as Cannae are well coveredOn its weaker side the book seems a bit willing to digress in order to fill in detail and lengthen the page count Given the lack of common familiarity with ancient African Roman and pre Roman history I am sympathetic to the author s efforts to inform and provide background and the book is fairly successful at this There s usually a strict segmentation between an archaeologist writing about artifact digs and a revisionist historian reviewing antiue histories written by the winners The few writers who have tried to synthesize such styles Peter Wells Barbarians to Angels for example often succeed only in part because they favor one method over another Miles gets the balance right by being appropriately skeptical of the historical sources on Carthage while still recognizing the value of preserving a linear narrative Miles recognizes the problem of traditional revisionism lionizing the party that traditionally was considered the bad guy He does not consider the Phoenicians the residents of Tyre nor the Carthaginians to be above reproach But he doesn t take the Romans word for anything regarding Carthage In fact he seems to mirror my own view that what Rome has been best at throughout its period as republic as empire and as papacy is lying about #everyone else Miles wants to give us Carthage without praise or blame Carthage #else Miles wants to give us Carthage without praise or blame Carthage all its warts The author moves further by showing us how the legend of HeraclesHercules plays in Carthage culture and how the universal Heracles cult displaced the Punic god of Melart Some readers only familiar with interpretation of narrative history may wonder why gods are considered in discussing Carthage Miles understands an important point There is not a strict division between prehistory and history instead there is a slow shift from oral storytelling traditions loaded with myth and written history that focuses on the acts of real humans separate from gods In analyzing the real world history of Carthage Troy Corinth et al one must be ready to adopt a mixed bag of folklore and fact It s understandable why Miles opened his book with details of the siege of Carthage but this made the book end rather suddenly as he had already told the story of Carthage s final days Should it be changed to a linear story I m not certain that would work better Perhaps he could have given of a story on how Carthage lived again after its people were dispersed throughout North Africa Until the publication of this excellent book the preeminent text about Carthage was the 1995 volume Carthage A History by the French historian Serge Lancel This an outstanding contribution to the patchy knowledge we have of Carthage has ust been eclipsed One might think that part of the reason for this is that Carthage Must Be Destroyed did not need to be translated inevitably there were some places where Lancel s text became unwieldy It s far from that this is a better written easier to follow rounded book than Lancel sMiles begins with the Phoenicians the people who founded Carthage and goes on from there His style is at all times enjoyable and his arguments well presented Apart from the obvious following of Carthage s history he goes into great depth about subjects such as the manner in which Hannibal aped the feats of Hercules in order to show that he had divine backing and how the Romans fought back against this religious propaganda He also explains in depth how from the time of the Second Punic War onwards the Romans made it their business to portray the Carthaginians as untrustworthy perfidious liars and cheats This in turn allowed them to show themselves as heroic and steadfastAnyone who is interested in learning the full well what is known details about Carthage and its history needs to read this book I for one will be returning to it again and again in the future In my opinion leading Lancel s book is also a good idea Another interesting text is Daily Life in Carthage at the Time of Hannibal by the academic Gilbert Charles Picard Although it was written in the 1960s it has some useful information about Carthaginian culture Finished reading Carthage Must Be Destroyed by Richard MilesWhenever I read a history of a fallen empire I am always sad at the end Read a history of the fall of the Roman Empire last year and I kept rooting for the Romans to pull it together They didn t I felt very sad reading about the fall of Carthage So unnecessaryBut I did learn a lotCarthage was a colony of Tyre a Phoenician island city off the coast of LebanonTh highly recommend Miles book for his reconstruction of Carthage s history while trying to minimize the Romans filter For one example of this filter even our terminology for the civilization and culture
PUNIC COMES WITH ITS OWN BAGGAGEcomes with its own baggage Romans used the term in a pejorative and disparaging context Miles spends time on the background and history of Phoenicia showing how the expansion to Carthage and other areas in the west were motivated by survival rather than greed or glory The view toward the Phoenicians by the Greeks seems to have been a mixed bag There is evidence of Phoenician and Greek cooperation in trade and settlements as the goals of. This book is the first full scale history of Carthage in decades The devastating struggle to the death between the Carthaginians and the Romans was one of the defining dramas of the ancient world In an epic series of land and sea battles both sides came close to victory. ,
The two states were complementary in some areas Yet as some lines in the Iliad and the Odyssey show there seem to be negative attitudes toward the Phoenicians maybe as a result of the commercial rivalry or in differing views on colonial expansion In later writings Aristotle praised Carthage s government as excellent while Plato presented Carthage as a well ordered state Carthage s aims were constantly misrepresented by those that felt threatened by their expansion With the rise to power of the tyrant Agathocles in Syracuse in the 320s BC Once the totally erroneous but seductive idea that the Sicilian wars conflicts between Carthage and Greek backed Syracuse were a western extension of the age old struggle between the civilization of Greece and the dark forces of the barbarian East would have renewed capital The resulting war with Agathocles even though ultimately successful would highlight at least two structural problems for Carthage which would return to haunt them during the Punic Wars with Rome The first problem was their reliance on mercenary armies and their unreliability The second problem developed as these armies would become mostly independent institutions outside the control of Carthage s government Carthage and Rome had been on the same side during one of many Sicilian skirmishes but Carthage misplayed its role and Rome established a secure base in Syracuse From here although neither side seemed to desire war both sides continued expansionist policies that guaranteed conflict Or as Miles puts it In fact the main antagonists of the First Punic War drifted into the conflict less for reasons of grand strategy and for the lack of political will to prevent it Miles does a good ob of following the Punic Wars providing enough detail about the conflicts for the reader to follow without getting bogged down in minutiae At the same time he shows how Carthage s and Rome s political actions fit into an central arc that guaranteed continuing war Also of importance he lays out how the different government structures meant very differing approaches to war One example of the differences Rome with its generalsconsuls having only a one year term would be aggressive in order to conclude a decisive action Carthaginian generals elected for an open term could dictate the pace and style of the conflict and the Romans could do little about it As it turns out during the Second Punic War a change to a temporary autocrat which was allowed by the Roman constitution during an extreme crisis would allow Rome to pursue longer term strategies against Hannibal and emerge victoriousIn the wake of the First Punic War Carthage underwent a political transformation that no longer balanced aristocratic oligarchic and democratic factions in the manner that Aristotle had admired Foreign policy now became an extension of the factional struggles within and outside the government or even carried out by the military with the government along for the ride Regarding Hannibal the Roman historian Cassius Dio would so astutely point out He was not sent forth in the beginning by the magistrates at home nor later did he obtain any great assistance from them For although they were to enjoy no slight glory and benefit from his efforts they wished rather not to appear to be leaving him in the lurch than to cooperate effectively in any enterprise Miles also reviews how ancient historians covered the Punic Wars and how their biases and mistaken assumptions are reflected in their work Polybius for example visits the area surrounding the Alps and interviews the locals before writing off Hannibal s mountain crossing as an ordinary occurrence Polybius fails to take into account that the locals he interviewed were Roman settlers relocated after the Second Punic War instead of the Celts that fought Hannibal before he even made it to the Alps There were writers such as Philinus a Sicilian Greek who were sympathetic to Carthage and their views would provide a little influence over later historians Miles makes a convincing display regarding the propaganda used during the conflicts most notably by Hannibal and its effectiveness both at the time and echoed later But Rome as the winner would be able to shape not ust the history of Carthage but also their pre history through the works of Roman epic poets The Punic Wars became cast as divinely ordained battles tied to Rome s and Carthage s founding The Aeneas legend was well in place before Virgil but Miles shows how The Aeneid added dramatic flair in addition to fashioning a new Rome under AugustusMiles makes clear that a constant presence throughout this book is the great hero Heracles or Hercules While Heracles was associated with the Punic god Melart and Hannibal chose Heracles Melart as the figurehead of his campaigns the importance of this tie in can feel overstated at times I understand where Miles was going with this approach and agree with many aspects of it but the Heracles presence or influence works symbolically than practically and to be fair Miles notes this on some of his tie ins Also I wanted to note
"that anyone wanting a history of rome or "anyone wanting a history of Rome or detailed military history should go elsewhere Carthage Must Be Destroyed is truly about the rise and fall of that ancient civilization and while Rome and the battles are given adeuate detail and background the amount included is appropriate for focusing on Carthage s history While mentioning that Carthage featured prominently in Roman literature and history throughout antiuity and providing several of the famous or maybe accessible examples I would have loved to seen even instances the footnote on this uote points to another book of his which I may have to seekI ll close with the book s concluding paragraphs with a couple of publishing typos fixed which look at the role Carthage played in Rome s development points that Miles supports throughout the book It is impossible to assess the debt that Rome owed to Carthage with the same confidence as for the debt to Greece We can #clearly trace the impact of Greek art science literature etc on Roman culture indeed educated Romans were often happy #trace the impact of Greek art science literature etc on Roman culture indeed educated Romans were often happy acknowledge that influence Carthage however was afforded no such place in the Roman cultural canon This had little to do with any lack of originality but was at least partly the result of the phenomenal success that the Greeks had in claiming sole ownership of advances that had in fact been the result of centuries of exchange and cross fertilization The cultural marginalization of Carthage was a Greek achievement the city s destruction a Roman one Carthage did however play an important role in the development of the Roman Empire Rome hugely benefited from the appropriation of the economic and political infrastructure that Carthage had previously put in place in the central and western Mediterranean In Sardinia Sicily North Africa and Spain the Romans inherited not wild virgin lands but a politically economically and culturally oined up world which was Carthage s greatest achievement Less tangible but eually important was the key role that Carthage played in the creation of a Roman national character The brutal destruction of the city gave the Romans the freedom to transform Carthage into the villainous antitype against which the Roman virtues of faithfulness piety and duty could be applauded As long as the Romans needed proof of their greatness the memory of Carthage would never die From our view point of history we can see that Carthage would be destroyedTo the people of that time no one was knew which city would rule the Mediterranean Carthage or Rome The sacred chickens drinkIn 249 BC the Roman consul Publius Claudius Pulcher a man variously described as being mentally unstable an arrogant snob and a drunk decided to launch an attack on the Carthaginian held port of Drepana The mission got off to a rocky start when the sacred chickens used to gauge divine favour went off their feed prompting the impetuous Claudius to throw them overboard with the pithy remark that perhaps they were thirstyIf they won t eat then let them drinkHe then went on to lose the battle By the third century BC Rome was on the rise and showing an almost insatiable hunger for conuest the empires drifted into the first Punic war less for reasons of strategy and for lack of politi. Before the Carthaginians finally succumbed and their capital city history and culture were almost utterly erased Drawing on a wealth of new archaeological research Richard Miles brings to life this lost empire from its origins among the Phoenician settlements of Lebanon.
Richard Miles · 2 Read & downloadCal will to prevent it Rome s nemesis came in the form of Hannibal a ruthless and daring general Departing from Spain in 218BC with 50000 troops Hannibal attempted the unthinkable to invade Italy by land marching through Spain France and the trackless snow covered Alps meeting hostile tribesmen at every turn For all his audacious battles Hannibal still lost to the determined RomansThey make a desolation and they call it peaceThat was the end of CarthageEnjoy Carthage has always been a background character in my personal narrative of history I vaguely knew it had been there for a few hundred years when its wars with Rome started I loved the story of Cato s Delenda est speeches in the Roman Senate and as a fan of military history I had read a few accounts of Hannibal s amazing victory at Cannae I knew that Dido mythic ueen of Carthage was a major character in Vergil s Aeneid And that was pretty much the extent of itBeyond all that I always had a sense feeling than thought that Carthage was somehow other not a part of the great Graeco Roman Mediterranean civilization that is a direct ancestor of my own There was something alien and vaguely decadent or corrupt about it As it turns out I had succumbed to 2000 year old Roman propaganda This book beautifully lays out the case for the critical role of Carthage and of the Phoenician culture of which it was the last bastion in the broader cultural history of the Mediterranean world Indeed the author had me hooked when in his introduction he uoted a few historians making disparaging remarks about the paucity of lasting Phoenician contributions to nearby civilizations and then rather diffidently pointed out that all of these authors wrote their condemnations in alphabets derived from Phoenician That does rather call the whole small contribution claim into uestion doesn t itThe book does a masterful Star Crusades Nexus Books 4 6 job of narrating the history of the founding growth trade and cultural relations colonial expansion wars and eventual defeat of Carthage This is a difficult task thanks to the relative lack of primary Carthaginian sources Most of the texts we have that describe Carthage and its colonies were written by its foes and thus rather predictably are often myth and propaganda than fact The author combines careful analysis of those sources with archaeology trade records religious syncretism and a dozen other sources to build solid conjectures about how Carthaginian society worked both in Carthage itself and in its clients and colonies in places like Sicily Sardinia and Spain It s a fascinating picture similar to the Greek trade empire but with intriguing crucial differencesObviously a book like this is going to end up covering the Punic Wars and the Roman destruction of Carthage as its climax and the author does a wonderfulob of providing the economic political cultural and personal factors that led to each strategy and to the outcome of each campaign The battle for religious legitimacy between Scipio and Hannibal is absolutely amazing I didn t know that armies conducted hearts and minds campaigns in the 2nd century BCE When the end comes for Carthage it is excruciating even knowing the outlines of what happened I was freshly appalled by the Roman perfidy and cruelty involvedAs a coda the author discusses how later Roman sources used the story of Carthage in different ways either as a warning that the great may always fall or as a proof of Rome s divine destiny to rule I was astonished to learn that Vergil was a bit transgressive in the Aeneid Dido displays all the key Roman virtues of honesty faithfulness and hospitality while Aeneas resorts to lying and sneaking away when he decides that he must fulfill his destiny in Italy I m rather surprised Vergil didn t get in trouble for writing this during the reign of AugustusIn short this book has opened my eyes to a world that was always at the dim edge of my understanding of classical Mediterranean history Read this book and you will find marvels awaiting you The author is a great scholar and very knowledgeable about his subject The book acket indicates that he has even led archaeological digs in North Africa Perhaps that is part of the problem What I mean is that maybe those with a great love for archaeology should not write books like this one The title promises grand sweeping scope and the author #Gives Us None Of #us none of He has an obvious love for the minute details He employs his considerable talents in mining though religious inscriptions dietary information and so one All of this could have been very useful if used in support of a grand theme But what we get is one thing after another Nowhere does he offer any kind of theory for the utter destruction of a once mighty civilization Was Carthage murdered or was it suicide Did they have an achilles heel that betrayed them or fall to hubris or something anything at all Here again there is a lot of information but almost no penetrating analysis Suddenly they are no and there are no real lessons to be learnedIf you have a great interest in certain key details about Carthage I would pick up the book and mine the index Again a few points are illuminating on a smaller scale I had no idea for example of the religious battle that took place during the 2nd Punic War as Hannibal tried to appropriate Hercules and the grand theme of Greek resistance to barbarians The origins of Carthage as it related to Assyrian conuest was also good Given his knowledge the book remains uite frustrating He needed a poet to come alongside The exchange of luxury goods was at the heart of Bronze Age diplomacy between c3300 BCE and c1200 BCE In order to engage in high level diplomacy the powers of the Near East reuired access to the relevant materials and while some were obtained locally many could only come from a distance The merchants making this possible acuired the status of representatives for their various rulers and the rulers of the coastal cities of Canaan modern day Lebanon known to the Greeks as the Phoenicians were able to obtain and keep their autonomy by virtue of their mastery of the Mediterranean Sea When the Assyrian Empire reached this region in the Ninth Century BCE Tyre held onto its independence because it controlled a trading network reaching to the Atlantic which would not have the same loyalty and might break away from Tyre if Tyre had been absorbed by the Assyrians and what the Assyrians wanted from Tyre was a steady plentiful supply of silver Carthage was possibly founded close to the year 831BCE as a daughter city to Tyre It was strategically located on the coast of North Africa positioned to control two separate trade routes one leading Westwards to Gades now Cadiz on the Atlantic coast of Southern Spain a major source of the silver reuired to meet the demands of the Assyrians the other running North South to trade with Sicily Sardinia and the Western coast of Italy It follows that there was in existence a thriving mixture of societies around the Central and Western Mediterranean with reasons and resources to trade with the Near East Well written and entertaining this book describes seven centuries of history around the Western Mediterranean from the perspective of a substantial civilisation that was neither Greek nor Roman In the year 146BCE not only Carthage but also Corinth were utterly destroyed by the Romans reduced to rubble and their populations massacred or enslaved History since then has been told from the viewpoint of the victors and it is useful to be reminded that there was another point of view which saw Rome as a violent oppressor of the diverse communities which shared the Mediterranean Sea and its environs dependent for its rule on brutality and force
SIMILARLY WHEN THE WESTERN ROMAN EMPIREwhen the Western Roman Empire reached its end this was certainly a mighty transformation but it was also a release and an awakening for the diversity and complexity which might otherwise have always characterised this huge region This might also be seen therefore as a challenge to the very foundation myth on which Western people have relied for too long at the expense of their supposedly barbarian neighbours For what we learn from this history is that they were never barbarians at all They were present and civilised before the Greeks or the Romans and they taught them both a great deal. To its apotheosis as the greatest seapower in the Mediterranean And at the heart of the history of Carthage lies the extraordinary figure of Hannibal the scourge of Rome and one of the greatest military leaders but a man who also unwittingly led his people to catastrophe. .