>>Carthage was the aggressor, Carthage invaded Italy, Carthage lied and cheated
Posted on 07/26/2005 1:20:19 AM PDT by onja
Fascinating era of history!
Livy is the best I've read on Rome 700BC til about 150.
Like the Romans, the Carthaginians built alliances, and had enemies. Rome had been sacked by the Gauls long before Hannibal's time, and Julius Caesar eventually eliminated that threat, which, like the invasion by Hannibal, hung over Rome. It is understandable that the Romans didn't want the threat to recur, and wanted an ally (an ally which approached Rome about alliance) in an area then being colonized by Carthage.
More links in the following topic, but some of them are pulled.
Quest for the Phoenicians (National Geographic special)
PBS | Oct 20 2004 | National Geographic
Posted on 10/17/2004 7:53:23 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1247854/posts
read it. really good. Thank you.
What does that have to do with this thread?
"What does that have to do with this thread?"
I don't know, but I don't care. ;')
Agreed :)
By the way anyone have any good book suggestions for the Punic Wars?
Thanks in advance.
The article begins near ancient Tyre in Lebanon, where the fishermen are hauling back their nets, chanting "el-leee-sah". One of the sources interviewed by the author of that story is quoted as saying, "If you ask them why they do it, they can't tell you. They don't know... Elissa, Princess of Tyre..."
She must've been quite a babe to be remembered for over $2,000 years. There's a preserved 'tall ship' named Elissa at Galveston.
Makes you wonder if 2,000 years from now, people will be chanting: Jay...Lo. Somehow I doubt it.
Lost in this nice little piece about Spain is the fact that the people of Spain were neither Carthaginian nor Latin.
It is all very well for the Romans and Carthaginians to come in, declare some sort of river the boundary, and then cheat on treaties. But the tribes of Spain had a different idea as to whose land it was, and who belonged there.
So, when Spaniards revolted and then relied on one or the other to get help in turning the other out, it hardly seems that the Carthaginian or the Roman side was really in "the right", at least not if we're going to try to give the Carthaginians the "moral high ground" because the Romans aided a Spanish revolt.
If one's going to play the game of "rights", then the Spaniards had the right to kill Romans AND Carthaginians, and they both were bad invaders, and if the Romans sided with revolting Spaniards against Carthaginians, well, that's a bit like, say, the French siding with revolting Indians against English colonists back in the day.
It should be noted that the Carthaginians were pretty brutal, as all ancient peoples (and most moderns are, when push comes to shove) were.
Well, not exactly...
The Phoenicians in Spain:
An Archaeological Review
of the Eighth-Sixth Centuries B.C.E.:
A Collection of Articles
Translated from Spanish
ed by Marilyn Bierling
assoc editor Seymour GitinPhoenicians and the West:
Politics, Colonies and Trade
by Maria Eugenia Aubet
tr by Mary Turton
That's me! CARTAGO DELENDA EST! [And it was]
:')
That comes under AVE, IMPERATORUM! Morituri te Salutamus! [In the sense that that's worth dying for]
General Patton - "Through a Glass, Darkly"
The Patton Society | General George S. Patton, Jr.
Posted on 10/09/2001 12:22:10 AM PDT by StoneColdGOP
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/543355/posts
Maybe the Spanish did have a right to fight. But in aiding them the romans broke their treaty. Just like the French. But the French were wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
