Escipión el africano

The Carthage Trilogy #2

by Ross Leckie

In the sequel to his historical novel Hannibal, Ross Leckie tells the epic story of Scipio Africanus. Spanning six decades and three continents, Scipio Africanus: The Man Who Defeated Hannibal is a riveting fictional memoir that charts the life of the great Roman leader. As Scipio awaits the verdict on charges of impeachment, he dictates his story to his secretary Bostar. What develops is a fascinating dual narrative that juxtaposes Scipio's memories with Bostar's own version of what occurred. Both of their lives seem inextricably linked to the life of Hannibal Barca. Scipio recounts how he has reached this point - a fallen leader, facing execution by the state he has served, the empire he has created.

Genres: Historical Fiction, Fiction, Historical, Roman History, Ancient History, Ancient, War

416 pages, Hardcover

First published February 25, 1998

About the author

Since reading Classics at Oxford, Ross Leckie has worked variously as a farm labourer, roughneck, schoolmaster, and insurance broker. He is best known for his Carthage trilogy.

He is now a full time writer living in Edinburgh.

Reviews

[Olethros · Rating 4 out of 5]

-Suponiendo razones y narrando eventos.-

Género. Novela histórica.

Lo que nos cuenta. Publio Cornelio Escipión y su hermano Lucio afrontan las acusaciones del Senado de Roma. La gloria que trajo Escipión a la Antigua Roma parece olvidada y, con Catón a la cabeza, muchos buscan ahora terminar con el liderazgo de El Africano y hasta borrar la leyenda de sus éxitos tiñéndolos de sospecha siempre y delito cuando se puede. Escipión echa la vista atrás y dicta a su secretario Bostar, que tan bien conoció a Aníbal, sus recuerdos de juventud comenzando por los momentos que iniciaron la forja de su figura legendaria, cuando las hostilidades de la Segunda Guerra Púnica se desarrollan de forma muy desfavorable a Roma y Aníbal acababa con un ejército romano tras otro. Pero Bostar también tiene cosas que contar, tanto propias como de su amo, en incluso sobre la vida en la propia Roma. Segundo libro de la Trilogía de Cartago, pero totalmente independiente del primero.

¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:

http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...

[Duncan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Waste of time. Not at all what I expected. Leckie spends about 300 pages on Scipio's imaginary youth and then speeds through the most interesting parts of his life (War with Hannibal) in 60 pages. At one point, he goes through 2 years of campaigns in Spain in less than two lines.
He bizarrely incorporate the voice of Bosta, a kind of slave, in the first half of the book for not good reason at all. Bosta's story is totally unrelated to Scipio and with no purpose at all... it just peter's out halfway.

It seems to me that Leckie set out to write a huge book, but by the time he got to the battle of Cannae (300 pages in), he realized he had only 2 weeks to finish and thus wrapped it up (horrendously) in 60 pages.

Besides that, the first 300 pages are just terribly written. Full of pointless, meandering asides, empty philosophizing, and inartful attempts to educate us about Roman everyday life.

Throw this book away.

[வானதி வானதி · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked up "Scipio" in a used book shop. I couldn't resist the fact that the book is about the period when the Republic was at its zenith and that it is the story of that irresistible military genius Scipio Africanus. There is just not enough books about him.

The book is a fictional account of the life of Scipio from about the time Hannibal starts his invasion of Italy till he is beaten decisively by Scipio at the Battle of Zama. However, the book focuses more on Scipio - the man than the famed Scipio Africanus.

The tomb of Scipio's is something I've read about and have always wondered about the family which called itself the 'Staff of Rome' and the role they had in the continuance of the Republic. Scipio Africanus - hailing from that family which has served Rome already for more than 300 years and the most famous of Scipio's - juxtaposes his life with the other most famous general of his age - Hannibal Barca.

The book is part of a trilogy but the book can be read independently without worrying about the backstory. While the book covers a lot of history - from the times of Scipio A's father - it also glosses over a lot of details and misses out on a lot of personal narrative of Scipio.

The book feels incomplete because of this - there is no reference to the marriage of Scipio for example. How can such a thing be completely skipped over is beyond me. In fact, Scipio marries the daughter of Paullus who dies at the Cannae. While the lost battle - Hannibal's biggest victory in Italy - is described in some detail, the aftermath is covered with haste.

That is not what makes the book bad though. It is the fact that it does not do justice to Scipio - either as a history or as a fictional account - is what does it. I kept waiting for something interesting to happen - till the book ended. A lot of war and atrocities happen and explained in detail as well but there is a lack of substance in all that which stops you from caring for anyone in the story - including Scipio.

Cato comes out as a bad villain and has no role to play other than showing up in letters and as some bad guy whose intentions remain unclear till the end. While the history explains it for those interested in it, there is no clarity for those reading it as fiction.

When I started, I was thinking of reading the trilogy in complete but am not sure now. I might still read the first one 'Hannibal' - just because of the fact that he has always fascinated me. However, I am more inclined to read the real history and be done with it.

[Allie · Rating 5 out of 5]

I find the prospect of summing up this book difficult. It was absolutely excellent. The only thing I will add to that is that the Latin and Greek made me happy to see, especially Scipio's difficulty with the Greek verb titheimi - I don't think that I will ever get the hang of that one! The great thing about Leckie's inclusions of Greek and Latin words and sentences is that he always offers a translation which meshes well with the narrative, so those who do not speak the languages don't miss out on any information, and get to learn a little bit of the classical tongues, too!

Oh, and that Leckie is Scottish due to his usage of certain very prevalent Scottish words - if his name didn't already give the fact away - words like 'pluke', 'poofter', and the phrase 'bursting for a pee', to note but a few examples, are indubitably British, and more accurately Scottish things to say, and as a Scot, it amused me to see Leckie include them in his Roman narrative.

I have no complaints, and will definitely check out his other books in the series!

[Sıla J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved it! I hadn't read the first book of the trilogy when I started reading Scipio Africanus, but that didn't prevent me from getting into the story.
I quite liked it when Scipio just couldn't see how his dear Gaius Laelius was jealous of him. Scipio is a smart, obsessed - with - details character but even this man with a sharp intellect was deceived by the show of slightest affection from a friend. That was the humane side of him. I hate it when they write protagonists as flawless heroes, and I thought for a second that Scipio was going to be one of them, but his relationship with Laelius saved him from being an irksome, annoying character.

[Brighton Hugg · Rating 4 out of 5]

It took me a while to get into it, but once I dug my heals in I couldn't stop reading.
I love Rome and its history, and I believe the author captured what it was really like to be in that period. A lot of the time I couldn't tell whether certain aspects were history or fiction, but the two aspects combined quite well to make lovable characters and an enthralling plot.
If I come across Hannibal by the same author, I wouldn't hesitate to give it a read.

[ERIC PECHINOT · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mark my words: Scipio is cursed!

To put matters in historical perspective I daresay it is surely no stretch of fancy to compare the knock-on effects of the disaster of Cannae (-216) to those of the Battle of Verdun in WWI in terms of casualties and sense of dread and tragedy. Scipio's victory at Zama (-202) after a drawn-out sixteen years of fierce and unrelenting war must have come as news as good as November 11th, 1918. I know what you're about to object: times were different and so the comparison is far-fetched. You may be right, but human nature has always been, is, and will always be the same. If there is only one lesson to learn from History, this is the one.

Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus is by far one of Rome's most gifted generals as well as a figurehead of a politician. Yet he is hardly given the fair recognition he deserves in our books. More than that, as a matter of fact, he is cursed.
Doubly cursed.
By a two-pronged bias.

First things first, if you are looking for good books on him, then you're in for much of a disappointment. You shall come across a glut of titles on his archenemy, Hannibal, in the shadow of whose Scipio is always kept. And not only are books on Scipio scarce, they are pretty bad. In English the latest to come out was Richard A. Gabriel's a few years ago. It is a messy job where with the benefit of hindsight Gabriel keeps on dwelling on a miscellany of what- ifs, claiming that Scipio should be deemed the very best ever, even better than Cesar or, Napoleon, as if the French Emperor had his soldiers fight with pila and slingshots! Apples and oranges, in other words.
On this side of the Channel, we have Luc Mary's contribution. But Mary is a joke, an expert in everything! The pundit is alawys taking to pointless fantasy in his too many and too fast written books: what if Napoleon had won at Waterloo? What if Kennedy hadn't been done in? Rubbish: you can't undo what has been done, can you? I took pity on Mary when I was inflicting on myself the reading of his "Varrus, rends-moi mes légions!". Well, if this bloke is a historian, then I want to know what a windbag is.

The other prong of the curse? Scipio's policy and achievements after Zama when he was at the peak of his career and his popularity second-best to no one else's! Not a word about it in today's books.

So I picked up Ross Leckie's novel as a last resort, for want of anything better. Wasn't the blurb promising a gripping span on the whole of the great man's life? Indeed, Leckie takes us from Rome to Spain and Africa and then back to Rome where we follow Scipio through the course of his lifetime. We are told about his deeds of derring do when a mere teenager he leads survivors of Cannae on their painful and long way back to Rome, talking them out of rallying the gods know what foreign king somewhere far -flung overseas, and setting himself as an example not to give in to despair.
Leckie is very good at explaining how Scipio is always clever enough to learn from the mistakes he witnesses, his father's included, and how once given a prominent military command in spite of his youth, he sets up the reshaping of the legions and their tactical procedures, thus sowing the seeds from which Marius will later be reaping.
Unfortunately, Leckie's broad brushstrokes in the second half of the story are coming short of painting a portrait of his hero as the outstanding figure he cuts in Rome's political landscape. Just imagine! Back from Africa, Scipio is cheered by large crowds wearing their hearts on their sleeves, calling on him to become consul for life, even dictator if he so wishes! This is a landmark moment in Rome's history. The City owes him so much, its survival, two provinces in Spain and victory over Carthage. We are at a watershed time, two and a half centuries before Cesar's heyday, for crying out loud! But Leckie skips it all and gets sloppy. For instance, to enhance his drama, he writes that later the downtrodden and old Scipio hears from his younger brother Lucius's suicide, but actually the sources tell us that Lucius oulived his elder brother! Worse, Leckie has the Scipio brothers lead the legions on the battlefield to beat Philip V of Macedon at Cynocephalae! Has he ever heard of Flamininus or what? What a bungle! How can an author so well versed in Greco-Latin culture have it so awfully wrong all of a sudden?
Leckie then touches on the war against Antiochos III of Syria, with yet another big slip-up. I must say to set the record straight that the Senate wouldn't trust Lucius ( better known for his heavy drinking and philandering than his soldiering) with a key military position. So it was only providing that Scipio was sent in as a legate and adviser to Lucius that the latter was eventually entrusted with waging war on the Seleucids. That probably got Lucius huffy on his elder brother... Nevertheless the job was done: mission accomplished! The Apamae peace treaty secured Rome's position in the East. Lucius was awarded a triumph and the title Asiaticus ( let's split hairs: I should say Asiagenus!).

There are other flaws strewn across the book, small things that can't pass muster under the sharp eye of a stickler for historical accuracy. I'll drop the annoying mention of the week for fear of sounding like a cracked record. And there was no such thing as a chimney in houses of ancient times, for instance.

Still those shortcomings never put me off. All in all, Leckie's novel is in fact the one and only book I should recommend on the matter. It gives you a good reenactment of life as it must have been then. The rendition of Rome's predicament after Cannae is convincing. The reader is treated to a good dollop of well researched details and quotations.

I will however definitely shun Leckie's other book, "Hannibal".

Vale!

[Dio Moore · Rating 4 out of 5]

Despite it taking a weirdly long time for me to finish I genuinely enjoyed this book. I kept with my bizarre trend of reading this series out of order, having recently finished Carthage, and found that while it takes place before the events of that book its not imperative to stick to the intended reading order.
It's a great book, really love Leckie's writing style, and it's easy to pick up and read a few paragraphs,though I think my reading experience would have been improved by chapters! Again, I'm not 100% on some of the historical accuracy, but the characters do feel real and the account is believable. If you have a passing interest in this era then I'd say it's worth a read, but do your own research and don't take it as definite fact :)

[Edwin · Rating 3 out of 5]

As I start another year teaching Latin, the Punic wars as described by Livy are on the menu for my students who are finishing high school. Reading this fictional autobiography of the life of Roman general Scipio seemed like a fun preparation and at times it certainly was. The politics and the Roman hierarchy that breaks down under the pressure put on Rome by Hannibal are well described. The dialogues and the explanations less so. The dialogues felt sometimes strained, sometimes anachronistic and the explanations of Roman life were strange in what was supposed to be an account written by a Roman for a Roman public. Still worth my time though, as Livy is not always as clear or fun either and my students and I will have to follow his account the coming months.

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not bad.

This series is a little too woke for me, but it's not bad. The first book is Hannibal's wife, who changed the army, and in the 2nd book, Scipio is a closeted gay man. None of that was necessary, but you can't have a book about a strong man nowadays without making the woman even more important. You can't have a book about a strong man unless you make him gay. Overall, it's not too bad, though.

[maddi · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really good historical fiction with an unreliable narrator - the style it was written highlighted this. Scipio himself was very emotionally stunted because Romans expected him to be strong and so I wonder how different this book would be if emotions were considered more. But my god I enjoyed this book, I stayed up until 2am to finish it

[Barry Brown · Rating 5 out of 5]

Okay this was so much better than the first book - Hannibal. This was well written and kept you turning the pages. Not as gory and a story that included characters that were more or less believable and not a much time spent on battle scenes.

[Borja Pino Jambrina · Rating 5 out of 5]

Relato adictivo y sensacional, capaz de teletransportarte a ese pasado remoto, y de zambullirte en el terremoto de emociones ligadas a las espantosas derrotas y a las gloriosas victorias de un imperio aún en ciernes. Aun sin ser la más precisa en cuanto a precisión histórica... ¡Imprescindible!

[Bill Freil · Rating 1 out of 5]

I read the first 39 pages of this book. Its historic fixtion but i couldnt tell who the speaker was. It was constantly changing. Written from first person perspective.

[Chris]

In library

[Mike Sanders · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting to an extreme, but the plot feels incomplete. The pacing is a bit circumspect, but the device used to justify it makes up for it.

[Rupert Wolfe-Murray · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hannibal's nemesis.

[Simon Cleveland · Rating 3 out of 5]

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Hmm, well, aah, it's an okay read for resting the mind, March 30, 2006


"Scipio Africanus: The Man Who Defeated Hannibal" by Ross Leckie is an interesting account of what may have happened with the Roman leader before and after he defeated Hannibal. If you like the show "Rome", you'd definitely like this book. The descriptions of the roman legions, the senate, the Latin, the ancient lusts for gold, glory and power, it's all well packaged and would make you reminisce about those ancient times and what it might have been like... In the beginning of the book parallel narratives of both Scipio and Bostar (his servant) amuse and hasten the pace of the story. Then slowly the book sinks into one of those `I did this, he said that, we attacked him, they got killed...' type of an account and interest meanders a bit. However, the narrative is easy enough and does captures the attention, at times even excites the imagination. But after all, like most sequels, this one doesn't live up to the glory of `Hannibal'. If you are a fan of good ancient action novels, pick up a copy of "Hannibal". If you've already read it and just feel like figuring out what went on with Scipio pre/post Hannibal's defeat, then this novel can be an 'okay' continuation of your trip.

[Jeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

Scipio is the second installment of a trilogy by Ross Leckie.The first Hannibal was an outstanding,and revealing story of a tactition and soldier whose ideas were used by Generals such as George Patton in WW11.Scipio Africanus was the FIRST to see the genius of Hannibal and utilise and manipulate Hannibal's tactics for his own strategy,eventually being the one to finally stop Hannibal.This book,although very much a continuation from another point of view,is not quite as vigorous and 'page-turning' as the first.The main problem is the staggered narrative,as Scipio and Bosto,his 'biographer'(servant/slave)have almost equal time for most of the book,resulting ,(for me)in a somewhat stilted read.Having said that the end result is very satisfactory,and in hindsight it leaves the reader with a feeling of having shared a personal diary from an ancient time that shows us that Human feelings and goals for life and family are exactly the same today.The brutality of war and everyday life are jarring,and these were 'civilised' societies,and things haven't changed to a great degree in 2 thousand years. Yes,it is no surprise,though writers like Leckie are invaluable in reminding us of this important and sombre lesson.

[Jason · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a bit of a letdown after Leckie's magnificent Hannibal. In Scipio, the amanuensis plot gets in the way of the "real" plot, an annoying device that, for unknown reasons, gets used over and over again in this genre. More than that, though, what weakens this volume is a near-lethal dose of what I call "epochism": the kind of historical fiction in which the more modern-seeming characters are the obvious heroes, imbuing the entire work with a naive sense of "progress." In this case, epochism rears its ugly head in the form of a clear bias toward Rome over Carthage and Scipio over Cato (the more severe "Old Roman"). Like most authors, Leckie is better at portraying foreignness and barbarity than examining the inner life of characters he sees as being like himself.

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a good historical novel of the fascinating struggle between Rome and Carthage in the third century BCE, and each power's respective favorite sons, Hannibal and Scipio Africanus. However, as so often happens, the elements imagined by the author are only an entree to the much more compelling true history. Leckie makes some very strange choices where he chooses to deviate from history - for example eliminating Scipio's actual wife and children entirely. Mostly good, though.

One caution: this story takes place concurrently with the previous book in the trilogy, Hannibal. I suppose they could be read in either order, but each one seems to be intended to be only half the story. (Not sure yet how the third book fits in.)

[Rupert Matthews · Rating 3 out of 5]

A bit odd. On the whole I liked it, but there were some problems. It started telling two stories - one of Scipio the soldier and one of Bostar the teacher. A few pages of one story, then a few pages of the other. I assumed that by the end the two stories would have meshed and interracted. But the Bostar story just fizzled out about 2/3 way through the book and it became just about Scipio. Then near the end Bostar pops up and the two meet.

Also a couple of historical innaccuracies. At one point the writer specifically says Scipio had no children. But he did have children, one of whom went on to become famous and his grandchildren doubly so. Can't think why this error was made.

Like I say. A bit odd. But an enjoyable read.

[Poli · Rating 3 out of 5]

First, the only reason why I don't give this book the same 4* I gave to Hannibal (the 1st book of the trilogy) is because I felt frustrated with the parallel stories written in between each other. I felt like when I was getting into one there came the other to break the narrative.
Fortunately it doesn't happen throughout the whole book.
Either than that, Scipio Africanus was as interesting as Hannibal.
To me one is the mirror's reflection of the other, both brilliant leaders and strategists, though I still have a soft spot for Hannibal.

[Masen Production]

“The Man who beat Hannibal & saved Rome. This is his story... the story of the person that inspired greats like Ceaser & Alexzander.... This is a fictional autobiography, the facts have been very well blended in within the book to make it seem that this would or could have been the way it was. A superb sequel to the Book on Hannibal. A must read for any Historical buff... (read in the Jungles of Malaysia) In the Jungles working & reading”

[Gordon Howard · Rating 3 out of 5]

A middling good book of historical fiction. I read the companion book about Hannibal a couple of years ago. The author writes in a quite brutal fashion, which is natural for books about warfare, strife, and generalship in a brutal age. I noted some continuity errors in the timing of events vs. the age of some of the characters, most notably Scipio's little brother, which I found quite annoying.

[Raymond Walker · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am thoroughly impressed. You have handled the authortarian might of scipio just as well as you handled rough arsed hannibal. Lets see much more of the same quality from you. I truely love your writing. Raymond walker. Author of "cornelius" and "A river of tears"

[Tim Dunn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Another very good book, although not quite as good as Hannibal.

[Valencia Cain · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this after reading Hannibal, and the story line is new but completely up for war. It was brilliant, a fantastic outline of the history of the world :)

[Liesl de Swardt · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very philosophical account by Scipio himself of this fascinating period of history. I loved the style and the rhythm of the book. Very reminiscent of the work of Robert Harris.

[Liesl de Swardt · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very philosophical account by Scipio himself of this fascinating period of history. I loved the style and the rhythm of the book. Very reminiscent of the work of Robert Harris.