Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 2 (of 3) — John Shaqi
Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 2 (of 3)Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
History
Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 2 (of 3)
Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
Rome -- History
4. From the destruction of the army of Regulus to the victory of
L. Cæcilius Metellus near Panormus. Fortune is nearly equally
balanced; the Romans lose two fleets by storms, the Carthaginians
have the upperhand in Sicily: nevertheless the Romans are
victorious at last.
5. From the beginning of the year 502 to 511; from the contest
for Lilibæum and Drepana, to the victory near the Ægatian
isles. The ten years’ struggle is confined to an exceedingly
narrow space, being important rather in a military than in an
historical point of view. The diversion of Hamilcar Barcas, of
which, unfortunately, we know so little, is, owing to the taking
of Hercta and Eryx, one of the most remarkable in the military
history of any age; it shows a great man, who creates new
resources for himself, and avails himself of them. Yet for the
history of nations this period is not so important.
The Carthaginian system of warfare is quite unknown to us; we can only
say, that, where the Carthaginians themselves were in arms, they were
drawn up in a phalanx just like the Greeks. The Spaniards very likely
stood in _catervæ_, and fought with small swords, and _in cetris_, that
is to say, linen coats of mail. The Gauls, no doubt, fought in great
masses.
In the year 490, the third of the war, the Romans undertook to besiege
Agrigentum with two armies. This town was of great extent; yet, as a
city it was but a mere shadow of what it had been a hundred and forty
years earlier, before its first destruction by the Carthaginians.
Within its high and strong walls, a considerable army of the enemy had
now thrown itself. The name of the Punic general was Hannibal. The
Carthaginians were called by their first-names only, and one might be
easily led to think that they were all related to each other, as there
were so few of these names, Hannibal, Hanno, Hamilcar, and some others.
These correspond to our christian names, to the Roman _prænomina_,
as Gaius, &c. They certainly had, all of them, family names also,
which, however, at that time were not yet made use of to designate
individuals: they had even bye-names, but these have been partly lost
to us. The generals who bear the name of Hannibal, are in the whole of
Carthaginian history so insignificant, when set beside that great man
who gave the name its renown, that little mention only is made of them.
Hannibal had posted himself with fifty thousand men within the wide
and waste precincts of Agrigentum; the two consular armies advanced on
the south against the town, entrenched themselves in two camps, and
constructed two lines against the city, and against any one who might
attempt to relieve it. The Carthaginian generals were very bad in the
beginning of the war; they either made no use at all of the elephants,
or only a limited one, and they were very loth to give battle to the
Romans. Hannibal had now imprudently allowed himself to be thus hemmed
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account