Rome: The Weaknesses Of Carthage And Rome
Carthage and Rome were both very powerful nations for the time. Carthage started as a seaport town at the northern point of Africa, just below Sicily and south of Rome. Eventually their nation grew and expanded from Africa into the western side of Sicily in hopes of conquest, but the King of Syracuse there resisted them until Rome sided with some traitorous mercenaries that broke ranks from his military and decided to rebel[ CITATION Mor01 \l 1033 ]. Those mercenaries took over a city to the east and held it hostage in protest to the king. When the king began attacking them, they asked for the help of Rome. Rome reluctantly chose to help these mercenaries and this made the King mad. This king of Syracuse, Sicily resorted to siding with
…show more content…
Both had an abundance of resources; Rome had a massive military, with better training and they had greater territory under their dominion, along with more allies. Carnage had vast wealth and was better at sea with its navy, at least before Rome started improving their own. Although both of their political systems were very similar, Rome’s was much more organized and advanced than Carthage, but Carthage had better leaders that were geniuses in strategy warfare, so they knew how to take a lesser grade of military to knock down better-trained troops. As far as people go, Rome’s citizens were more loyal and proud, and Carthage’s people were more success-driven as wealth and trade were everything to them; their leaders were always made up of wealthy aristocrats. Rome understood how to control their people and knew that in order to become powerful they would need to not just take over more territory, but to incorporate and reward their citizens, giving them a sense of ownership by being part of the Roman Empire[ CITATION Mor01 \l 1033 ]. This made it very tough for Carthage to take a strong foothold in Italy, when they finally attacked Rome later, only to find that much of Latium and other territories were completely loyal to the Roman Empire. Without that loyalty, Hannibal, one of the greatest Carthage generals to have lived, might have conquered Rome, but many of the territories resisted and would not turn[ CITATION Mor01 \l 1033 ]. In conclusion, Carnage, in the second Punic War, came very close to taking Italy, which leads many historians to believe them to have been as powerful as Rome, as it came very close to becoming a repeat of the catastrophe seen when the Gauls tore apart the Roman cities in a much earlier
Both had an abundance of resources; Rome had a massive military, with better training and they had greater territory under their dominion, along with more allies. Carnage had vast wealth and was better at sea with its navy, at least before Rome started improving their own. Although both of their political systems were very similar, Rome’s was much more organized and advanced than Carthage, but Carthage had better leaders that were geniuses in strategy warfare, so they knew how to take a lesser grade of military to knock down better-trained troops. As far as people go, Rome’s citizens were more loyal and proud, and Carthage’s people were more success-driven as wealth and trade were everything to them; their leaders were always made up of wealthy aristocrats. Rome understood how to control their people and knew that in order to become powerful they would need to not just take over more territory, but to incorporate and reward their citizens, giving them a sense of ownership by being part of the Roman Empire[ CITATION Mor01 \l 1033 ]. This made it very tough for Carthage to take a strong foothold in Italy, when they finally attacked Rome later, only to find that much of Latium and other territories were completely loyal to the Roman Empire. Without that loyalty, Hannibal, one of the greatest Carthage generals to have lived, might have conquered Rome, but many of the territories resisted and would not turn[ CITATION Mor01 \l 1033 ]. In conclusion, Carnage, in the second Punic War, came very close to taking Italy, which leads many historians to believe them to have been as powerful as Rome, as it came very close to becoming a repeat of the catastrophe seen when the Gauls tore apart the Roman cities in a much earlier