Armies of the Carthaginian Wars 265-146 BC (Men at Arms Series, 121) (Men-at-Arms, 121)

This title is somewhat dated, originally published in 1982; however it provides a decent overview of the Carthaginian and Roman forces that engaged one another in the Punic wars. Terence Wise' text is organized, informative, and reads well.Richard Hook's plates are superbly rendered: crisp, colorful, and well proportioned. The depictions include Roman, Numidian, Carthaginian/Liby-Phoenician, Iberian, Celtic, and various Italian allied forces. The faces and eyes are some of the most realistic among Osprey's ancient warfare titles. One quibble is that the skin-tone/hair color of too many of the plates are perhaps too Anglo-Saxon rather than Mediterranean in appearance.(To better understand the forces available to Hannibal one should consider augmenting this work with Osprey's "Rome's Enemies 4: Spanish Armies" by Martinez/McBride. It has some more accurate representations of Iberian forces.)In summary, I recommend this book as a fine starting point for anyone studying the Punic Wars.

Small book with very little information.

This book first examines the origins, society, and army organization of Carthage, and then goes on to profile her armies and those of her allies, Spaniards, Gauls, Italians, Africans, and Greco-Macedonians. The second half of the book tells of the contemporary Roman armies, which finally succeeded in destroying Carthage in 146 BC. Fine artwork portraying a Roman horseman fighting a Numidian, a number of Celtic warriors, Spaniards, non-Roman Italians, Roman infantry, and Roman commanders.

This book is decent and one of three that I recommend buying to obtain a decent overview of the Carthaginian Army during the Punic Wars. It is the best of the three at the concept of compilation of the Carthaginian Army, but for the most complete understanding, buy all three books.

I like the illustrations and the content with the exception of the amount of information that is stated. I wanted more of a novel type book. I still give it a 5 star for its beautiful illustrations.

Great information.

For readers interested in the three Punic wars, this is a great place to start. The other reviews lay out the details in this book, so I won't go into them all over again. Suffice it to say that the two sides, Carthaginian and Roman, are considered in turn, as are the various types of troops on each side. If the volume is short, it's almost definitely because of the scarcity of information from this period. Immensely frustrating, but there it is.Readers might be interested in a number of other Osprey volumes about the period. I would also recommend the brand new (Sept. 2010)  Carthaginian Warrior , the indispensable  Warfare in the Classical World  by Warry, and two wonderful volumes by Peter Connolly:  Greece and Rome at War  and the expensive  Hannibal and the Enemies of Rome . The last three might only be available secondhand, but they make great additions to any reader's library.Last of all, I would mention - because of its relationship to the changes made in the Second Punic War - the volume, shortly to be available in paperback,  The Cavalry of the Roman Republic , in which the author, Jeremiah McCall, posits the very believable theory that Roman citizen cavalry was NOT inferior to Rome's enemies, and was disbanded for an entirely different reason. All is not as it seems...Ben Kane, author of The Forgotten Legion.

This is an old Men-at-Arms title first printed in 1982 and not updated since. As such, the bibliography for further reading is obsolete, and so are some of the elements discussed in the text.These include the alleged presence of a pike-phalanx of some 4000 Macedonians fighting alongside Hannibal at Zama. Although mentioned in one of the less reliable and latter Roman sources, this is very unlikely and is currently dismissed by modern historians. At a time when Philip V of Macedon was busy fighting against just about all of his neighbours in addition to Rome, and with the later dominating the seas, it is rather difficult to see how he would have deprived himself of a whole phalanx and how it could have been shipped over to Carthage and avoided interception.Another problem is the author’s belief that Carthage adopted “Greek-style” heavy infantry tactics, meaning in fact a pike-phalanx, and that this was already the case during the First Punic War when the Spartan mercenary general Xantippus defeated the Roman army of Consul Regulus in 255BC. This is very probably a mistake because the Greeks only adopted Macedonian pike-style phalanxes towards the end of the third century, with the Sparta of King Cleomenes III using a pike-phalanx against the Macedonians of Antigonos Doson at the battle of Sellasia being the first (in 222 BC) followed by the Achean League during the next decade. Up to then, the “Geek-style” warfare was still the hoplite phalanx, although such a phalanx would be supplemented by various types of lighter and more flexible troops, such as peltasts and thureophoroi, just as was the case for the troops with which Hannibal had set of with to invade Italy.Apart from that, the book contains a number of other “glitches” and typos. Saguntum was NOT a Greek city, contrary to what is mentioned in the chronology. Carthage did NOT conquer “almost all of Sicily” when it first landed on its shores during the 6th century, founded its own colonies, and checked the colonisation of the Greeks. The inner Council and high Court of Carthage was called the Hundred and Four (and NOT the Hundred). Scipio the Elder landed at Ampurias in 218 BC, and NOT, of course, in 128 BC.The bits and pieces on the organisation of Roman armies and on the manpower at the disposal of the Romans are interesting and they definitely had to be mentioned in a work on the Punic Wars, but they are somewhat confusing. This is especially the case for the evolution of the Roman and allied legions where the various stages are not always clearly laid out.Having mentioned these limitations, this little title does still cover a lot of ground within a few pages. It is also still backed by a rather good series of plates but it is probably not worth more than two or two and a half stars anymore.

For readers interested in the three Punic wars, this is a great place to start. The first review, by D. Evans, which is excellent, lays out the details in this book, so I won't go into them all over again. Suffice it to say that the two sides, Carthaginian and Roman, are considered in turn, as are the various types of troops on each side. If the volume is short, it's almost definitely because of the scarcity of information from this period. Immensely frustrating, but there it is.The first reviewer also gives a number of other Osprey volumes to consider. I would add several more this list: the brand new (Sept. 2010)  Carthaginian Warrior , the indispensable  Warfare in the Classical World  by Warry, and two wonderful volumes by Peter Connolly:  Greece and Rome at War , and  Hannibal and the Enemies of Rome . The last three might only be available secondhand, but they make great additions to any reader's library.Last of all, I would mention - because of its relationship to the changes made in the Second Punic War - the volume  The Cavalry of the Roman Republic , in which the author, Jeremiah McCall, posits the very believable theory that Roman citizen cavalry was NOT inferior to Rome's enemies, and was disbanded for an entirely different reason. All is not as it seems...Ben Kane, author of Hannibal: Enemy of Rome. Carthaginian WarriorWarfare in the Classical WorldGreece and Rome at WarHannibal and the Enemies of RomeThe Cavalry of the Roman Republic

Again no complaints; great!

This book contains all the information you'll need when researching the various troops and tactics of the Punic Wars. As a wargamer I found this very helpful with painting my armies to suit the period. I recommend this product!