5.
See Casson (1971) pp. 84-5; Polybius 1. 20. 15.
6.
J. S. Morrison (& J. F. Coates) Greek and Roman Oared Warships (Oxbow, 1996), pp. 259-60, 270-72, and attempted reconstruction, pp. 312-17; for the perceived weakness of the outrigger, Lazenby (1996), p. 65.
7.
The Athlit ram, Casson, pp. 74, 90-91; the Marsala wreck, see L. Basch & H. Frost, 'Another Punic wreck in Sicily: its ram', International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 4 (1976), pp. 201-28 & H. Frost et alii, Lilybaeum (Marsala) - The Punic Ship: Final Excavation Report. Notizie Degli Scavi di Antichita Supplemento al vol. 30,1976 (Rome, 1981), pp. 267-70.
8.
The dogfight analogy, e.g. Lazenby (1996), p. 95, Shaw (1993), p. 99; for the diekplus, Shaw (1993), pp. 99-104.
1.
Innate conservatism of Romans, see Thiel (1954), pp. 66-7; 'five' as shorthand for 'warship' noted by W. W. Tarn, 'The Fleets of the First Punic War', Journal of Hellenic Studies 27 (1907), pp. 48-60, esp. pp. 59-60. F. Walbank, A Historical Commentary on Polybius 1 (Oxford, 1970), p. 74; Punic warship captured and used as model, Polybius 1. 20. 15; construction completed in sixty days, Pliny Natural History 16. 192, cf. Florus 1. 18. 7, Orosius 4. 7. 8.
2.
H. Frost, 'The prefabricated Punic Warship' in H. Deviyner & E. Lipinski, Studia Phoenica X: Punic Wars (Leuven, 1989), pp. 127-135, esp. pp. 132-4; 'fives' never built in Italy before, Polybius 1. 20. 10.
3.
For a discussion see Thiel (1954), pp. 73-8, Lazenby (1996), p. 65. For the census figures see P. Brunt, Italian Manpower 225 BC-AD 14 (Oxford, 1971), p. 13, 32; for the Samnites see Zonaras 8. 11.
4.
Treachery, Zonaras 8. 10; Asina, Pliny, NH 8. 169.
1.
Polybius 1. 21. 9-11; garbled account of Mylae see Lazenby (1996), p. 67, Tarn (1907), p.51, Thiel (1954), pp.122-7.
2.
Polybius 1. 22. 3-11; H. T. Wallinga, The Boarding-Bridge of the Romans (Gravenhage, 1956). See also Thiel (1954), pp. 101-28.
3.
DS23. 10. 1.
4.
Polybius 1. 23. 1-10, Rogers (1964), pp. 276-7; the corvi, 1. 23. 9-10, Thiel (1954), p. 115.
5.
Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum 12. 2. 25, the commentary including Mommsen's reconstruction of the text.
6.
Livy Per. 17.
7.
Hannibal, Polybius 1. 24. 5-7; the Lipari Islands, Polybius 1. 25. 1-4, Zonaras 8. 12.
8.
Polybius 1. 26. 7.
9.
See Tarn (1907), pp. 46, 53; Thiel (1954), pp. 83-96, esp. 94.
10.
As for instance in Thiel (1954), pp. 119-20, criticized by Lazenby (1996), pp. 87-8.
11.
E.g. G. K. Tipps, The battle of Ecnomus', Historia 34 (1985).
12.
Line 'thinner', Polybius 1. 27. 7.
13.
Lazenby (1996), pp. 95-6.
14.
Polybius 1. 26. 10-28. 14, Rogers (1964), pp. 278-91.
15.
Polybius 1. 29. 1, see Thiel (1954), p. 117.
16.
Zonaras 8. 14, Polybius 1. 36. 11.
17.
Numbers, DS 23. 18. 1, Orosius 4. 9. 8, Eutropius 22. 3. For doubts about the numbers see Tarn (1907), p. 53, Thiel (1954), p. 94. On the corvus see Thiel (1954), pp. 235-6, Lazenby (1996), p. 112. Roman reliance on biay Polybius 1. 37. 7-10.
18.
Polybius 1. 38. 5-10.
19.
Polybius 1. 39. 6.
20.
Polybius 1. 39. 8,15; Lilybaeum, 1. 41. 3-i; Hannibal, 1. 44. 1-7, 46. 1-3.
21.
Polybius 1.46. 4-47. 3.
22.
Polybius 1. 47. 3-10.
23.
Livy, Per. 19, Cicero, de natura deorum 2. 7, Florus 1. 19. 29, Suetonius Tiberius 2.
24.
Drepana, Polybius 1. 49. 3-51. 12, Rogers (1964), pp. 296-9; the trial see N. Rosenstein, Imperatores Victi (Berkeley, 1990), pp. 35-6, 43, 79-80, 84-5,184-5.
25.
Polybius 1. 52. 4-54. 8, Zonaras 8. 15; the lemboi, Polybius 1. 53. 9.
26.
Raiding of Africa, Zonaras 8. 16; census figures Brunt (1971), pp. 26-33; for 265-264 Eutropius 2. 18, 252-251 Livy Per. 18, 247-246 Livy Per. 19; Claudia see Livy Per. 19, Suetonius, Tiberius 2.3, Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae 10. 6.
27.
Polybius 1. 59. 7-8.
28.
Inability of smaller ships to damage a 'five' Polybius 15. 1. 3-2. 15, Livy 30. 25. 1-10; Morrison & Coates (1996), pp. 271-2, 285-91.
29.
Livy Per. 19.
30.
See Lazenby (1996), pp. 153-4.
31.
Aegates Islands, Polybius 1. 59. 8-61. 8; losses DS 24. 11. 1-2, and Rogers (1964), pp. 301-3.
1.
See Frost (1989), p. 128; dispute between Roman commanders, Valerius Maximus 2. 8. 2.
2.
Polybius 1. 62. 1-2.
1.
Note Polybius' comments on the higher quality of Roman marines out-balancing the Carthaginians' superior skills of seamanship, 6. 52. 8-9.
Chapter 5
1.
Diodorus Siculus24. 13. 1. Livy 21. 41. 6-7 implies that even so Hamilcar's soldiers were ransomed at 18 denarii a head.
2.
T. Cornell, The Beginnings of Rome (London, 1995), pp. 188-9.
3.
Polybius 1. 62. 1-9, 3. 27. 2-6. For a slightly different version see Zonaras 8. 17.
4.
See J. Rich, 'The Origins of the Second Punic War', in T. Cornell, B. Rankov & P. Sabin, The Second Punic War: A Reappraisal (London, 1996), pp. 1-37, esp. pp. 23-4 with further references.
5.
See G. Rickman, The Corn Supply of Ancient Rome (Oxford, 1980), pp. 12-13, 32-3, 37.
6.
See J. Lazenby, The First Punic War (London, 1996), pp. 168-170 on the passivity of the Carthaginians during the war.
7.
Zonaras 8. 16.
8.
For office holding in the period see T. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic (New York, 1951). In the two decades from 284 to 265, eleven of the consuls elected were holding the office for the second time. In 241-222 only seven men held office for a second time. On Caiatanus see Livy Per. 19, see also Lazenby (1996), pp. 137, 141.
9.
G. Picard & C. Picard, Carthage (London, 1987), p. 194.
1.
See N. Rosenstein, Imperatores Victi (Berkeley, 1990), pp. 35-6, 43, 79-80, 184-5, and Lazenby (1996), pp. 136-7.
2.
Polybius' account of the Mercenary War, 1. 66.1-88. 7.
3.
Polybius 1. 77. 5, 2. 7.6-11.
4.
Polybius 1. 83. 5-11; Appian The Punic WarsS.
5.
Polybius 1. 83. 2-4.
6.
Polybius 1. 83. 11.
7.
S. Dyson, The Creation of the Roman Frontier (Princeton, 1985), p. 246.
8.
Polybius 1. 88. 8-12, 3. 28. 1-4.
9.
See Dyson (1985), pp. 239-51.
10.
Zonaras 8. 18.
11.
DS25. 10. 4, 19. 1.
12.
Polybius 3. 13. 3-5.
13.
See Picard & Picard (1987), pp. 202-203, 222-229.
14.
Polybius criticizes Fabius Pictor for representing the Barcids as opposed by the majority of Carthage's elite, 3. 8. 1-11. Livy represents Hanno as leader of the faction opposed to the Barcids, e.g. 21. 3. 1-4. 1, 10. 1-11. 2. Zonaras 8. 17 claims Hamilcar went to Spain contrary to the wishes of the Punic leaders. DS 25. 8. 1 says Hamilcar won support of people by demagoguery and was voted an unlimited command in Spain. See also Nepos, Hamilcar 3.
15.
Appian, The Wars in Spain. 5.
1.
This seems to be the implication of Polybius' brief account, 2. 1. 5.
1.
Contrast Picard & Picard (1987), pp. 209-29, with S. Lancel, Carthage (Oxford, 1995), pp. 376-80.
2.
Embassy to Hamilcar, Dio 12. 48; Hasdrubal, Polybius 2. 13. 3-7, 3. 27. 9-10. For the presence of Roman traders see Dyson (1985), p. 180.
3.
For an account of the campaigns in Cisalpine Gaul see Dyson (1985), pp. 26-34. Polybius' account of the Gallic Wars, 2. 14. 1-35. 10; Telamon, 2. 26. 1-31. 7; Flaminius' land bill, 2. 21. 7-9, his campaign 32. 1-33. 9.
29 Plutarch, Marcellus 6-8.
Chapter 6
1.
Trade between Rome and Carthage, see R. Palmer, Rome and Carthage at Peace (1997), pp. 15-52. Guest friendship, Livy 27. 16. 5, 33. 45. 6.
2.
Physical boundaries were imposed on both sides in the earlier treaties between Rome and Carthage, Polybius 3. 22. 4-7, 24. 4,11; between Rome and Tarentum, Appian Samnite History 7, 79, between Carthage and Cyrene, Sallust Bellum Jugurthinum 2-10.
3.
Treaty with Saguntum, Polybius 3. 30. 1-2; arbitration in Saguntum's internal dispute, 3. 15. 7.
4.
Polybius 3.15.1-13,17.1-11, Livy 21. 6.1-9. 2,12.1-15. 2; Hannibal's wound, 21.7. 10.
5.
The embassy, Polybius 3. 20. 6-21. 8, 33. 1-4, Livy 21. 18. 1-19. 5. On Fabius Buteo see Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic no. 116. F. Walbank, A Historical Commentary on Polybius 1 (Oxford, 1970), p. 334 on the probability of a conditional vote for war before the ambassadors left Rome. The brusqueness of Roman diplomacy, e.g. with Queen Teuta in 229, Pdlybius 2. 8. 6-13, with Antiochus IV in 168, Livy 45. 12.
6.
Polybius 3. 9. 6-12. 7.
7.
Polybius 3.11.5-8.
8.
Polybius 3. 11. 5-8, Livy 21. 1. 4-5, Nepos, Hannibal 1. 2-6.
9.
The best and most thorough recent discussion of the causes of the war is J. Rich, 'The origins of the Second Punic War', in T. Cornell, B. Rankov & P. Sabin (edd.), The Second Punic War: A Reappraisal (London, 1996), pp. 1-37. Rich cites around thirty major contributions on the subject.
1.
See Rich (1996), pp. 14-18, esp. p. 17. Hamilcar's recruitment of captured enemy warriors, Diodorus Siculus 25. 10. 1; his response to the Roman envoys, Dio 12. 48.
2.
On Hannibal's ambition see Livy 21. 5. 1-2.
3.
See Rich (1996), p. 30.
4.
On the Senate's plans and dispositions for 218, see Polybius 3. 40. 1-2,41. 2, Livy 21. 17. 1-9.
5.
Polybius 3. 40. 3-13, Livy 21. 25. 1-14.
6.
Polybius 3. 40. 14, 41. 1-3, Livy 21. 26. 1-2.
7.
For an incisive discussion of the naval situation see B. Rankov, 'The Second Punic War at Sea', in Cornell, Rankov and Sabin (1996), pp. 49-57, esp. pp. S2-A.
8.
Polybius 3. 33. 17-18.
9.
Polybius 3. 35. 1; the elephants, Appian, The Hannibalic War 1. 4.
1.
A. D. Domingucz-Monedero, 'La campana de Anibal contra los Vacceos, sus objectivos y su relaci6n con el initio de la segunda guerra punka', Latomus 45 (1986), pp. 241-58.
2.
Livy 21. 21. 9.
3.
Livy 22. 58. 3.
4.
For the view that Hannibal's strategy was to break up Rome's confederation of allies, see J. Lazenby, 'Was Maharbal right?', in Cornell, Rankov & Sabin (1996), pp. 39-48, and J. Lazenby, Hannibal's War (Warminster, 1978), pp. 29-32, 85-6, 88-9.
5.
Livy records the tradition that Hasdrubal had the young Hannibal summoned to Spain, implying that he had returned to Carthage at some earlier time. He implies that there were similar rumours about an unnatural relationship between Hannibal and Hasdrubal to the ones that had circulated concerning the latter and Hamilcar, Livy 21. 3. 1-6, cf. Nepos, Hamilcar 3. 1-2.
6.
Polybius 3. 69. 12-13, 9. 22. 1-26, Livy 21. 4. 1-8.
7.
Hannibal Monomachus, Polybius 9. 24. 4-8; Hannibal Barca's avarice, 9. 25. 1-26. 11.
8.
Livy 21. 38. 6-9. For studies of the route see P. Connolly, Greece and Rome at War (London, 1981), pp. 153-66, Lazenby (1978), pp. 34-48, 275-7, S. Lancel, Hannibal (Oxford, 1998), pp. 57-80, and D. Proctor, Hannibal's March in History (Oxford, 1971) as a small sample of the existing literature.
9.
Polybius 3. 35. 1-8, Livy 21. 22. 5-24. 1; distance to the Ebro, Polybius 3. 39. 6; crossing the Ebro in three columns, Livy 21. 23. 1.
10.
Caven (1980), pp. 98-101.
11.
Polybius 3. 35. 6-8, Livy 21. 23. 1-6; the Carpetani, Livy 21. 23. 4.
12.
Polybius 3. 42. 1-4, Livy 21. 24. 2-5, 26. 6-27. 1. Importance of boundaries in tribal warfare, see Caesar, Bellum Gallicum 2. 17, 6. 23.
13.
Polybius 3. 42. S-43. 12, Iivy 21. 27. 2-28. 4.
14.
Polybius 3. 44. 4,45. 6-12, livy 21. 28. 5-12, also mentions an alternative version.
15.
Polybius 3. 44. 3-13, Livy 21. 29. 1, 30. 1-31. 1.
16.
Polybius 3. 41. 4-9, Livy 21. 26. 3-5.
17.
Polybius 3. 45. 1-5, Livy 21. 29. 1-7.
18.
See M. Austin and B. Rankov, Exploratio (London, 1995), esp. pp. 12-86 .
19.
Polybius 3. 45. 5, 47. 1-5, Iivy 21. 30. 1-31. 5.
20.
Polybius 3. 49. 5-13, Livy 21. 31. 1-12.
21.
Polybius 3. 50. 1-51. 13, Livy 21. 32. 6-33. 11.
22.
Polybius 3. 52. 1-53. 10, Livy 21. 34. 1-35. 1.
23.
Polybius 3. 54. 5-55. 9, Livy 21. 36. 1-37. 6; the story of the vinegar, 21. 37. 2-3; importance of wide-ranging knowledge for a commander, Polybius 9. 12. 1-20. 10; examples of ingenuity by other generals, e.g. Josephus, Bellum Judaicum 3. 271-81.
24.
Times for the journey, Polybius 3. 56. 3. Earlier he mentions that it took nine days to reach the summit of the first pass, 3. 53. 9. Fifteen days certainly seems inadequate considering the number of days' rest Polybius mentions.
Chapter 7
1 Polybius 3. 56. 4, 3. 60. 5 for the army sizes. For the idea of leaving garrisons in southern France see J. Lazenby, Hannibal's War (Warminster, 1978), p. 34, m. 9, citing G. Picard
& C. Picard The Life and Death of Carthage (1968, rev. ed. 1987), pp. 248, 250. Hasdrubal's attempt to march to Italy in 215, Livy 23. 27. 9. In 1812 Napoleon's army suffered huge attritional losses during the initial stages of the invasion of Russia, see D. Chandler, The Campaigns of Napoleon (London, 1966), pp. 780, 816.
1.
Polybius 3. 60. 8-10. For a discussion of Hannibal's supply problems see J. Shean, 'Hannibal's mules: the logistical limitations of Hannibal's army and the battle of Cannae, 216 BC', Historian (1996), pp. 159-187.
2.
Polybius 3. 61. 1-12, Livy 21. 39. 3-10.
3.
On the speeches and gladiatorial fight see Polybius 3., Livy 21. 40. 1-44. 9; the promise of citizenship 21. 45. 5-6. For a discussion of the single combats see L. Rawlings, 'Warriors in a soldier's war', in Cornell, Rankov 8c Sabin (1996), pp. 81-95, esp. p. 89.
4.
Fluidity of cavalry combat, see Dio 56. 32, Tacitus Annals 6. 35. On the four-horned saddle see P. Connolly, 'The Roman Saddle', in M. Dawson (ed.), Roman Military Equipment: The Accoutrements of War, BAR 336 (Oxford, 1987), pp. 7-27.
5.
Accounts of Ticinus see Polybius 3. 64. 1-65. 11 8c 10. 3. 3-6, Livy 21. 45. 1^16. 10.
6.
Polybius 3. 66. 1-8, Livy 21. 47. 1-8.
7.
Polybius 3. 66. 9-68. 8, Livy 21. 48. 1-8.
8.
Polybius 3. 68
. 9-15, Livy 21. 51. 5-7. For a discussion see Lazenby (1978), pp. 55-6.
1.
Polybius 3. 69. 1-14; his praise of Hannibal's decision not to fight, 69. 12-13; Livy 21. 48. 9-10, 52. 1-11.
2.
Polybius 3. 70. 1-12, Livy 21. 53. 1-11.
3.
C. Duffy, Austerlitz (London, 1977), p. 72.
4.
Accounts of Trebia, see Polybius 3. 71. 1-74. 11; numbers 72. 2, 7-8,11-13; elephants 72. 9, 74. 2. Livy 21. 54. 1-56. 8; numbers 55. 2-4; elephants 55. 2, 7-56. 1. Polybius 3. 74. 1 implies that Mago's troops were mainly Numidians. For a discussion see Lazenby (1978), pp. 55-58, P. Connolly, Greece and Rome at War (London, 1981), pp. 168-171, J. Kromayer & G. Veith, Antike Schlachtfelder in Italien undAfrika (Berlin, 1912), III. 1, pp. 47-99, and H. Delbriick (trans. W. Renfroe), History of the Art of War. Volume 1: Warfare in Antiquity (Nebraska, 1975), pp. 333-4.
5.
This was the number of horsemen commanded by Gaius Centenius, Polybius 3. 86. 3, Livy 22. 8. 1.
6.
The probably fictitious battle, livy 21. 59. 1-9; Hannibal's disguises, Polybius 3. 78. 1-4, Livy 22. 1. 3.
7.
Dispositions for the year, Polybius 3. 80. 1, 86. 1, Livy 22. 2. 1,4.
8.
On Flaminius' character, see Polybius 3. 80. 3-82. 8, Livy 21. 63. 1-15, 22. 3. 3-14.
9.
Livy 21. 63. 5.
10.
N. Rosenstein, Imperatores Victi (Berkeley, 1990), pp. 54-91.
11.
Polybius 3. 78. 5-79. 12, Livy 22. 2. 1-3. 1. For the Porretta Pass see Lazenby (1978), pp. 60-61, fh. 20; for the Colline Pass see B. Caven, The Punic Wars (London, 1980), p. 119. Cato claimed that the bravest elephant in Hannibal's army was called the Syrian (Surus), Pliny Natural History 8. 5. 11.
12.
The problem of supply, see Shean (1996), pp. 159-87, esp. 175-85.
13.
Polybius 3. 80. 1-2, 82. 1-8, Livy 22. 3. 7-14.
14.
On the possible battle sites see Lazenby (1978), pp. Connolly (1981), pp. 172-5, and Kromayer 8c Veith (1912), pp. 148-93.
1.
Livy 35. 4 mentions that in 193, the consul Merula took the precaution of sending out scouts even though he was marching in daylight, which implies that the practice was not normal.
2.
Accounts of Trasimene, see Polybius 3. 9-85. 5, Livy 22. 4. 1-7. 5. Ovid mentions the date of the battle as dies nefas, Fasti 6. 767-8. Silius Italicus says that Flaminius wore a crine Suevo - Suebic scalp, clearly intended to mean Gallic, although the Suebi were a German people - as a crest, Silius Italicus, Punica 5. 132. For a discussion of the different versions of Flaminius' death see Rosenstein (1990), pp. 115-17.
The Fall of Carthage Page 50
