Historical Background

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Historical Background Historical background Carthage and Rome were both emerging superpowers of the Mediterranean. Rome built its power upon the infantry and conscription system. No matter how many defeats the Romans suffered, they were always able to overcome the enemy by recruiting new troops. Carthage’s wealth came from trade and the strength of its navy. Both superpowers had been allies fighting against their common enemy - the mighty Pyrrhus, King of Epir. But it took them only 12 years to be turned into enemies. The casus belli was the Carthaginian attempt to gain control over Sicily. Rome considered this a major threat towards its control over the entire Italian peninsula. he First Punic War lasted 23 years. In 264 BC, the Romans laid laid siege to Saguntum, the Romans objected, making it another ca- T siege to Syracuse and forced this small kingdom to break its al- sus belli. In 218 BC Hannibal raised an army and crossed the Alps, liance with Carthage and become yet another ally of Rome. The Car- defeating Publius Scipio at the Ticinus River. Right after, Hannibal thaginians thought that they could overcome the Romans just as they invaded Italy, achieving his most significant victory in the Battle of did Pyrrhus – by fortifying important cities and keeping their naval Cannae in 216 BC annihilating entire Roman army in the process. superiority. Rome had no navy, thus it was supposed to lose the war in However, Hannibal refrained from besieging the Rome itself and in- the long term anyway. stead decided to cut off the Romans from their allies, who – just as However, in 262 BC the Romans successfully besieged the fortress Capua and Tarentum – begun to switch sides. The Roman Republic of Agrigentum. The relieving force led by Hanno was defeated, a clear was in real danger, and appointed the dictator Fabius Maximus (‘the proof or Roman dominance in land combat! Shield of Rome’). Carthage lost its naval superiority in 260 BC. Despite the early Hannibal defeated the Roman generals in Italy one by one, but he victory in the naval battle near the Lipari Islands, the Roman corvus wasn’t able to be everywhere. In Spain, the Scipio family was a pain turned out to be a key to destruction of the Carthaginian fleet near in the neck of Hasdrubal, Hannibal’s brother. In Sicily, Marcellus (‘the Mylae. Sardinia and Corsica were now open for the Romans to invade. Sword of Rome’) managed to capture Syracuse defended with the help So was Africa, where in 265 BC Marcus Atillius Regulus landed of famous Archimedes. In 210 BC the tides of war begun to change. with an expeditionary army. Carthage asked for peace, but the terms A sudden strike allowed Scipio to capture New Carthage and finally dictated by Rome were so harsh that instead Greek mercenaries led force Hasdrubal to leave Spain. He embarked on a yet another bold by Xanthippus were hired. In 264 BC, he helped reorganise the entire march to Italy. In 207 BC Rome was endangered again – by Hasdrub- Carthaginian Army and won the Battle of Tunis, crushing the Roman al from the north and Hannibal from the south. This time however, the army and taking Regulus a prisoner. Roman consuls combined their forces against Hasdrubal, defeating Carthage now safe employed Hamilcar Barca to regain her posi- him near the Metaurus River. Hasdrubal was killed and so were the tions in Sicily. However, with further naval battles lost, Carthage asked Carthaginian hopes for winning the war. Hannibal was undefeated in Rome for terms, and as a result lost all Sicily to victorious Rome. field, however he lost the cities of Capua and Tarentum. The last stage of the war took place in Africa. Scipio Africanus The Carthaginians rebuilt their strength in Spain. Having no naval raised an army of survivors from Cannae, who had no better chance to superiority, Hamilcar Barca made a desert march through all Numidia regain their honor than to defeat the enemy in its homeland. At Zama, and Mauretania. Operating from New Carthage, he managed to gain Hannibal lost a battle for the very first time in his life. But this costed new territories for Carthage. But when Hannibal (son of Hamilcar) Carthage the war. Rome was victorious again! 2 Dear Player, We want you to enjoy this from the very beginning. Thus, you don’t need to study the Rulebook and Scenario Book to begin playing. Unless you know the previous editions of Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage, you should read this Playbook and complete the tutorials. The first three tutorials are solitaire, all others require two players. Then, we recommend to start with the Campaigns. Finally, you will be familiar with all the important rules and theatres of operations and be able to fight an epic struggle of the Punic Wars Scenarios. Game Objective This game allows you to assume the roles of the leaders of the most epic EXAMPLE: Gallia conflict in the ancient world. Its outcome has shaped our very civilization Cisalpina is controlled itself. The game offers an abundance of possibilities – both political and by Carthage. Etruria, military – to tip the scales in your favor. Latium and Samnium The Provinces crucial to achieve victory have been emphasized – their are controlled by Rome. borders are marked with colors. Regions such as Africa, Iberia, and Italia Liguria is neutral. have been emphasized in particular. Provinces of less importance (that don’t The winner is usu- influence victory) have a neutral color. ally declared after a full game (the number of Turns depends on the scenario). The players check to see which one of them has gained control over the majority of Provinces surrounding the Mediterranean Sea. Having said that, the players have multiple possibilities to end the game earlier. For example, a successful Siege of the enemy’s capital results in a Sudden Death Victory. Carthage also wins if, at the end of the Victory Check Phase, it controls all Italian Provinces (excluding Latium – which would mean a conquest of the Eternal City). Depending on the scenario, the game setup includes circular Political Example of Control markers (hereinafter PCs), square Walled Cities, and oval Tribe mark- a total control of ers (gray ones are neutral, blue ones favor Carthage). Overall, the color blue Carthage over all stands for Carthage and red for Rome. Italian provinces. 3 Both political and military means are to be used during the game. An adept use of military power results in winning he Land Battles and The political dominance manifests itself in the number of Provinces con- conquering enemy Walled Cities. The political consequences of Land and trolled at the end of each turn. Naval Battles (they are described in detail further below) are definitely un- pleasant for the losing side. The losing player must remove from the board not only the retreating Combat Units and defeated Generals, but also the appropriate number of PCs. Example of the Political Control track with the dominance of one side. Of course, there could be a situation in which a player forced to remove To reflect the loss of PC would become out of markers! This would mean his immediate defeat. political influence, the That player must sue for peace. player who controls less provinces must re- In summary, a player may win the Punic Wars: move PCs equal to the difference between the l At the end of the game if: number of provinces – a player controls more key provinces than his opponent; in the he controls and that of case of a tie, the rules of the scenario being played are decisive. his opponent. l During the game if: Example of a re- – a player conquers his opponent’s capital; moval of 3 Carthag- – the Carthaginian player gains control over all provinces Italian re- inian PCs. The choice gion (excluding Roman Latium); is made by the player – a player is not able to remove sufficient number of PCs, and is who loses the markers. thereby forced to sue for peace. Turn Sequence A full turn is played according to the consecutive phases. the entire Strategy Deck along with the discard pile (excluding cards that have Playing Strategy Cards is crucial to the game, as their number increases been permanently removed from play) before any cards are dealt. as the game progresses. Each scenario indicates which player goes first. 3. Strategy Phase In each turn players must use (play or discard) all of their Strategy Cards. Players play Strategy Cards alternatively, deciding whether they use the Event or the Operation Points. The details of the Reinforcement and Strategy Card phases may depend Some cards played as Events must be discarded after use. on the particular scenario. This phase ends when both players exhaust their Strategy Card hands. A card may be discarded without using its Event. 1. Reinforcement Phase Note that one player may use all of his Strategy Cards before his oppo- l Players may recruit new Combat Units (hereinafter CUs). nent (as Reaction Cards, i.e. #60 Strategy Card: Storms at Sea or during l Carthage may return previously displaced Generals to the game. battle, i.e. #6 Strategy Card: Maharbal’s Cavalry). In this case, the other player l Rome appoints Proconsul and randomly draws new Consuls. plays his remaining cards in succession. 2. Strategy Card Phase 4. Winter Attrition Phase Players are dealt a number of Strategy Cards depending on the current Players check for casualties of their CUs that occupy spaces with enemy turn. If there are not enough Strategy Cards in the Strategy Deck, reshuffle PCs or Hostile Tribes.
Recommended publications
  • Symbolic Victory Signaling Strength Through Battlefield Choice (Paper in Progress)
    Symbolic Victory Signaling Strength through Battlefield Choice (Paper in Progress) Richard Jordan August 7, 2014 Abstract Strong states can fight riskier battles in order to signal their strength and con- clude wars. I open with the broad question, why do some battles end wars, while others do not? I argue that Clausewitz' conception of decisive victory does not describe the majority of war-deciding engagements. The larger literature on bar- gaining and war proves equally unhelpful: while it predicts war termination should correlate with its duration (since fighting causes beliefs to converge), empirical tests have failed to corroborate this hypothesis. Focusing on the game theoretic litera- ture, I suggest this failing results from the assumption that generals cannot choose their battlefields. I argue that where and how a general fights conveys information: stronger states can (and will) fight on more difficult ground and for more difficult objectives than weak states. This decision conveys information to an enemy; this additional information increases our ability to predict war termination. In short, strategic risk is a costly signal in war. After developing this logic informally, I develop it further in a formal, game theoretic model of symbolic victory. Finally, I briefly illustrate the model with cases from the Second World War and the Second Punic War. 1 In 1800 Daniel Steibelt, a pianist of some renown, challenged the young Ludwig van Beethoven to an improvisational duel. Confident in his abilities, Steibelt played a quintet of his own composition and then|in an unmistakable insult|improvised on one of Beethoven's own themes. Furious, Beethoven strode to the piano, on his way snatching the cello part of Steibelt's quintet.
    [Show full text]
  • Command & Colors: Ancients SCENARIOS
    Command & Colors: Ancients 1 Command & Colors: Ancients SCENARIOS THE BATTLE OF AKRAGAS – 406 BC 2nd BATTLE OF BENEVENTUM - 214 BC crimissos river – 341 BC CASTULO – 211 BC bagradas – 253 BC BAECULA – 208 BC TICINUS river – 218 BC METAURUS - 207 BC Trebbia – 218 BC ILIPA – 206 BC LAKE TRASIMENUS – 217 BC Great plains – 203 BC CANNAE – 216 BC DERTOSA – 215 BC ZAMA – 202 BC Game Design by Richard Borg GMT Games, LLC P.O. Box 1308, Hanford, CA 93232-1308 • www.GMTGames.com © 2006 GMT Games, LLC 2 Command & Colors: Ancients THE BATTLE OF AKRAGAS – 406 BC CARTHAGINIAN Mago Himilco MA HM A AA LC CH LB L CH LB LB L LC A H H H H A A MC Daphnaeus Dionysius SYRACUSAN Historical Background War Council It is a time of violent competition between the Syracusan Ty- Carthagian Army rants (military dictators) and Carthage for control of Sicily. The • Leader: Himilco Carthaginians under Himilco have besieged Akragas, a city al- • 5 Command Cards lied with Syracuse, prompting Daphnaeus and his army to march to its aid. The Carthaginians split their army into an observation Syracusan Army force in front of Akragas, and a blocking force sent to oppose • Use Roman blocks Daphnaeus. The Carthaginian army was almost totally merce- • Leader: Daphnaeus nary, while Daphnaeus’s contained veteran heavy infantry that • 6 Command Cards proved invincible when committed to the battle. The survivor’s • Move First of Himilco’s badly beaten army fled to the coastal fort shelter- Victory ing Mago’s observation force. There was no pursuit and no fur- 5 Banners ther battle.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reappraisal of Hannibal's Use of Elephants
    0DJLVWHU(OHSKDQWRUXP$5HDSSUDLVDORI+DQQLEDO V 8VHRI(OHSKDQWV 0LFKDHO%&KDUOHV3HWHU5KRGDQ Classical World, Volume 100, Number 4, Summer 2007, pp. 363-389 (Article) 3XEOLVKHGE\-RKQV+RSNLQV8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV DOI: 10.1353/clw.2007.0054 For additional information about this article http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/clw/summary/v100/100.4charles.html Access provided by University of Queensland (17 Sep 2015 03:29 GMT) 363 MAGISTER ELEPHANTORVM: A REAPPRAISAL OF HANNIBAL’S USE OF ELEPHANTS ABSTRACT: This article, which examines all the available evidence for Hannibal’s use of elephants in the Second Punic War, refutes the conten- tion that Hannibal was especially innovative in his tactical use of the beasts. In addition, greater reliance on elephants in Italy, particularly after his success at the Trebia, would have hindered Hannibal in his lengthy cam- paign against Rome. The article also contends that Hannibal’s use of massed elephants at Zama highlights the degree to which he was accustomed to take chances in the field, especially given his demonstrable familiarity with the fickle nature of elephants when used for military purposes. Over the years, much has been written about the Carthaginian general Hannibal and his use of elephants during the Second Punic War. 1 Outwardly, it might appear as if the topic were a closed one and that there is little new to add. Despite this, a recent article by Jacob Edwards has added something new—and indeed controversial— by arguing that Hannibal might have achieved much more success in Italy than he did if a greater number of his elephants had sur- vived the arduous trek across the Alps.2 Edwards also suggests that “Hannibal’s use of elephants is one of thwarted genius,”3 the impli- cation being that Hannibal had developed an almost unique grasp of the manner in which elephants could be used in warfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Play History the Metropolis
    Colony of Caisto PLAY HISTORY The Metropolis INTRODUCTION Callisto is a play-by-email roleplaying game, with the twist that the players themselves determine most of the refereeing, by making statements that fall under their narrative authority. This document is the record of one of those games, set in a newly-settled iron-age Mediterranean colony. The emails on the following pages were sent by real players and turned into news posts by the moderator. You can read along and watch how the innocious details spread across the entire colony, how a misunderstanding about a draft lead to a shortage of beer, where giant carnivorous birds come from, and what happens when your philosopher uses the wrong stimulants. You can find out more about Callisto at these links: VSCA Callisto site: http://www.vsca.ca/Callisto/ Callisto Google Plus Group: https://plus.google.com/u/0/ communities/113468506996874767262 Colony of Callisto community: https://plus.google.com/u/0/ communities/101267880206923063919 Dionne Elissa: the Soldier Will Zeno: the Traveller John Mago: the Noble Thorsten Xanthippus: the General Alexander Juba: the Youth Christopher Maharbal: the Fisher Manta Massinissa: the Metalcrafter Feegle Hanno: the Hunter William Boodes: the Artesian Castor Himilco: the Carpenter Marc Gisgo: the Laborer Bob Mathos: the Philsopher Sarah Solaris: the Queen Shawn Sirom: the Blacksmith Jake Hamilcar: the SergeantBrad Salicar: the Brewer Nick Barca: the Governor Nathan Carthalo: the Farmer CONTENTS Cycle 1 14 Cycle 2 120 Cycle 3 218 Cycle 4 274 Cycle 5 348 Cycle 6 404 Cycle 7 452 Cycle 8 492 Cycle 9 542 Cycle 10 584 SENT MESSAGES PER CYCLE RECEIVED MESSAGES PER CYCLE CAST OF CHARACTERS You represent Wisdom.
    [Show full text]
  • The Italians in the Second Punic War: Local Conditions and the Failure of the Hannibalic Strategy in Italy
    THE ITALIANS IN THE SECOND PUNIC WAR: LOCAL CONDITIONS AND THE FAILURE OF THE HANNIBALIC STRATEGY IN ITALY DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Michael P. Fronda, M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2003 Dissertation Committee: Approved By Dr. Nathan Rosenstein, Adviser Dr. Timothy Gregory ____________________________ Adviser Dr. Barry Strauss Department of History ABSTRACT Rome’s victory in the Second Punic War paved the way for its conquest of the Mediterranean. Yet that victory is bound up with Hannibal's failure in Italy, even though he brought Rome to its knees in the early stages of the war. Previous explanations for the failure of Hannibal's strategy have tended to stress either the hopelessness of this strategy, because of the loyalty of Rome's Italian allies and their willingness to be integrated into the Roman system, or the success of Rome's counter-strategy of attrition, aimed at limiting allied revolts while wearing down Hannibal's forces. Previous scholarship, however, neglects an important dimension of the question of the failure of Hannibal’s strategy; that is, Hannibal’s failure as a diplomat to win over large numbers of Rome’s Italian allies and thus overcome Rome’s long-term strategic advantages. This dissertation looks at the Second Punic War from the perspective of the Italian states in order to explain why Hannibal did not gain more Italian allies. The dissertation is divided into four regional case studies and brings to bear literary, archaeological, numismatic, epigraphic, and topographic evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Rome Threatens Sardinia in the First Punic
    First Punic War. Rome finally won the long war with a naval victory at the Aegates Islands in 241. In the Peace of Lutatius that ended the war Carthage lost Sicily and had to pay an enormous indemnity, but retained control of Sardinia and Corsica. The Rape of Sardinia The end of the First Punic War brought no relief to Carthage. Hard on the heels of this war came the revolt of the mercenaries, the Truceless War, 240-238 (featured in C3i Nr. 7). While this brutal war raged in Africa, the contagion of rebellion spread to Carthage's mercenary garrison on Sardinia in 239. These soldiers of fortune rose up, and slew their Carthaginian commander Bostar and his officers. In response, Carthage sent an expedition under (another) Hanno to punish the rebels, but his troops deserted and joined the mutineers. The rebels crucified Hanno, then ran rampant over the island, slaying all the Carthaginian settlers. Once the Rome Threatens Sardinia against Corsica and Sardinia .He had euphoria of the initial uprising had in the First Punic War some success against the garrisons, worn off, these mercenaries began to 'The First Punic War began in 264 as a before being driven off by a reinforc - dread retribution from Carthage. So contest between Rome, Syracuse and ing fleet Under H annibal, son of they sent an offer to Rome to surren- Carthage for control of eastern Sicily. Gisgo. In the following year, the der Sardinia to them. Rome defeated Syracuse early on, consul Gaius Sulpicious Palerculus and the war expanded as a clash campaigned with a Roman fleet in The Roman Senate refused the offer.
    [Show full text]
  • Revision and Reconstruction of the Battles of Cannae (216 Bce) and Zama (202 Bce)
    1 REVISION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE BATTLES OF CANNAE (216 BCE) AND ZAMA (202 BCE) Yozan D. Mosig and Imene Belhassen University of Nebraska at Kearney 2 Revision and Reconstruction in the Punic Wars: Cannae Revisited. Yozan D. Mosig and Imene Belhassen University of Nebraska-Kearney 2006 [Publication data: Mosig, Y., & Belhassen, I. (2006). Revision and reconstruction in the Punic Wars: Cannae revisited. The International Journal of the Humanities, 4(2), 103-110.] 3 Abstract The history of the wars between Carthage and Rome was rewritten by two pro-Roman historians, Polybius and Titus Livius. The former, while usually more reliable, revised facts that would have shown his employers, the Scipionic/Aemilian family, in an unfavorable light, while the latter, a clear Roman patriotic propagandist, embellished history to suit his purposes. Accounts of the wars by Carthaginian historians seem to have been lost or been conveniently destroyed. Nevertheless, gaps and contradictions in the Roman accounts, together with a modern understanding of human motivation and environmental circumstances, allow for the reconstruction of the original events. A case in point is the battle of Cannae, in 216 BCE, where a modern analysis reveals the real reasons for Hannibal’s victory, the true strengths of the armies of Romans and Carthaginians, the identity of the actual commander of the Roman forces, the correct casualty figures, and the likely reasons for Hannibal’s refusal to march on Rome following his great victory. 4 The battle of Cannae, between the multi-ethnic forces of the Carthaginian general Hannibal Barca and the much larger Roman army under the command of consuls Lucius Aemilius Paulus and Gaius Terentius Varro, in 216 BCE, was without a doubt one of the most significant battles in history.
    [Show full text]
  • Hannibal and the Second Punic War, 218-201 BC
    Qualification Accredited GCSE (9–1) Candidate style answers ANCIENT HISTORY J198 For first assessment in 2019 J198/02: Hannibal and the Second Punic War, 218–201 BC Version 1 www.ocr.org.uk/classics GCSE (9–1) Ancient History Candidate style answers Contents Introduction 3 Question 6 4 Question 7 6 Question 8 8 Question 9 10 Question 10 12 2 © OCR 2019 GCSE (9–1) Ancient History Candidate style answers Introduction OCR has produced this resource to support teachers in interpreting the assessment criteria for the new GCSE (9–1) Ancient History specification and to bridge the gap between new specification’s release and the availability of exemplar candidate work following first examination in summer 2019. The questions in this resource have been taken from Section B of the J198/02 Rome and its neighbours specimen question paper, which is available on the OCR website. The answers in this resource are a mixture of candidate responses and responses written by an senior examiner. They are supported by an examiner commentary. Please note that this resource is provided for advice and guidance only and does not in any way constitute an indication of grade boundaries or endorsed answers. Whilst a senior examiner has provided a possible level for each response, when marking these answers in a live series the mark a response would get depends on the whole process of standardisation, which considers the big picture of the year’s scripts. Therefore the levels awarded here should be considered to be only an estimation of what would be awarded. How levels and marks correspond to grade boundaries depends on the Awarding process that happens after all/most of the scripts are marked and depends on a number of factors, including candidate performance across the board.
    [Show full text]
  • The Greatest Generals of the Second Punic War
    The Greatest Generals of the Second Punic War A fair comparison between Hannibal Barcas & Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus Hannibal Scipio Björn Flapper Studentnumber 0613479 Master Thesis ~ Oude Geschiedenis Dhr. H. W. Singor Wednesday 18th of July 2012 Contents: Introduction 2 Chapter 1 Culture and Education 4 - Heir of the Carthaginian General 4 - Survivor of Chaos 10 - Wealth of Experience 16 Chapter 2 The Plans of Men and States 19 - Scourge of Rome 19 - Road to Carthage 25 - In the Shadow of Cities 32 Chapter 3 Blessed by Victory 35 - The Armies 35 - Carthaginian Lighting 37 - Roman Wave 45 - Face to Face 51 - Master and Apprentice? 55 Conclusion 58 Primary Sources & Literature 61 The picture on the cover and in the conclusion come from the Japanese Manga Drifers by Kitou Hirano. The story focuses on historical characters in an alternative world. Hannibal and Scipio are depicted as two old men who constantly fight over who is the greatest. Hannibal claims that he is the mastermind behind a double envelopment, like at Cannae, while Scipio claims that the winner takes it all. Despite this, both have a deep respect for each other. "A million men could not make Rome tremble in fear, yet the Rome trembled whenever she heard the name of Hannibal" - Scipio Africanus in Drifers page15, volume 1, chapter 8, translation from Japanese. 1 Introduction No war has cost Italy more than the Second Punic War. The Carthaginian general, Hannibal Barcas, led his army from the Iberian peninsula, across the alps into Roman lands. There he wreaked havoc upon the Romans and their allies.
    [Show full text]
  • Agrigentum - 262 Bc
    1 Commands & Colors: Ancients - Punic Wars AGRIGENTUM - 262 BC Historical Background legions. After more hard fighting, the Punic army broke. The The First Punic War began when Rome decided to invade largest battle of the First Punic War had ended in a decisive Sicily in 264. Chartage, unprepared, scrambled to raise an Roman victory, but ironically Hannibal’s army was able to army under Hannibal Gisgo. By 262 Hannibal arrived with an escape. Roman losses in the battle and the siege were so heavy advance force at Agrigentum, but the Roman consuls Lucius that Megellus and Vitulus were denied a triumph, despite their Postumius Megellus and Quintus Mamilius Vitulus made a victory.The stage is set. The battle lines are drawn and you are preemptive strike and placed him under siege. Months later, in command. Can you change history? Carthage dispatched a relief army of 30,000 foot and 4,500 War Council horse and 60 elephants under Hanno the Elder. Megellus and Carthaginian Army Vitulus detached about a quarter of their army to guard Leader: Hanno the Elder Hannibal, and brought the remaining 35,000 foot and 3,000 5 Command Cards horse onto the field. Hanno organized his army with his Move First mercenaries in the van, his elephants in a second lines and his African levies in a third. As the armies clashed the Roman Army Leader: Megellus, Vitulus mercenaries fought fiercely at first, but eventually buckled. As 5 Command Cards they routed in the line of elephants, all hell broke loose. The elephants were caught in the pandemonium, and began to Victory rampage in all directions.
    [Show full text]
  • Hamilcar Barca [3A] Inf Pop Tra Mil Ora Exp Loy 5 4 1 07
    HANNIBAL MAGO [2A] HIMILCO [4A] Himilco INF 4 Ignores INF 3 MIL 4 Loyalty: 0 MIL 3 Sicilian War ORA 3 ORA 2 D/S. POP 0 Mago family POP 0 EXP 1 EXP 2 Loyalty: 0 5th C. BC - 396 BC LOY 09 TRA 0 LOY 08 TRA 0 DECK 1 DECK 1 MAGO THE EXPLORER [2B] HIMILCO / NAVIGATOR [20A] Ignores INF 5 Ignores INF 4 MIL 2 Trans-Sahara MIL 2 Atlantic Exploration ORA 5 ORA 3 Exploration Disaster. POP 0 Disaster. POP 0 EXP 4 One free EXP 5 5th C. BC Public Outcry 5th C. BC LOY 08 LOY 07 per turn. TRA 0 TRA 0 DECK 1 DECK 1 HANNO / NAVIGATOR [7A] HAMILCAR BARCA [3A] Ignores INF 4 Ignores INF 3 MIL 1 West Africa MIL 5 Mercenary ORA 2 Exploration ORA 4 and Spanish Disaster. POP 0 Revolt D/S. POP 0 EXP 5 EXP 1 Hanno the 5th C. BC - 229 BC LOY 06 LOY 07 Great TRA 0 Loyalty: 0 TRA 0 DECK 1 DECK 2 HANNIBAL BARCA [3B] HANNO THE GREAT II [12A] Ignores INF 3 Ignores INF 5 MIL 7 Roman War MIL 5 Numidian D/S. Makes 2 ORA 4 ORA 3 War D/S. veterans in POP 0 Barca family POP 0 EXP 1 victory. EXP 2 Loyalty: 0 Hanno the 247-183 BC 3rd C. BC LOY 09 Great loyalty: 0 TRA 0 LOY 08 TRA 0 DECK 2 DECK 2 HASDRUBAL THE HANDSOME [19A] HIMILCO PHAMEAS [24A] One free INF 6 Military is INF 3 MIL 3 Public MIL 2 4 when ORA 5 Outcry ORA 1 acting as per turn.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategies of the Second Punic War
    STRATEGIES OF THE SECOND PUNIC WAR Lieutenant-Colonel Daniel R. Stepaniuk JCSP 40 PCEMI 40 Master of Defence Studies Maîtrise en études de la défense Disclaimer Avertissement Opinions expressed remain those of the author and do Les opinons exprimées n’engagent que leurs auteurs et not represent Department of National Defence or ne reflètent aucunement des politiques du Ministère de Canadian Forces policy. This paper may not be used la Défense nationale ou des Forces canadiennes. Ce without written permission. papier ne peut être reproduit sans autorisation écrite. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the © Sa Majesté la Reine du Chef du Canada, représentée par le Minister of National Defence, 2014 ministre de la Défense nationale, 2014 Strategies of the Second Punic War Daniel R. Stepaniuk, CD Lieutenant-Colonel Master of Defence Studies Angelo N. Caravaggio OMM, CD, Ph.D July 1, 2014 1 Table of Contents Introduction…………………………………………………………………………..….. 2 Political and Economic Strategy………………………………………………..……….. 22 Military Strategy………………………………………………………………..……….. 43 Conclusion…………………………….…………………………………………..….…. 84 Selected Bibliography……………………………………………………………..…….. 89 2 Part 1 Introduction 3 Introduction The Second Punic War between Carthage and Rome has captured the interest of historians and military leaders alike for centuries. The boldness and suddenness of the Carthaginian invasion shocked the Roman world in the third century B.C.1 and was quickly followed up by an unprecedented series of Carthaginian victories,
    [Show full text]