What do you think?
Rate this book
Hannibal
One of the greatest commanders of the ancient world brought vividly to life: Hannibal, the brilliant general who successfully crossed the Alps with his war elephants and brought Rome to its knees.
Hannibal Barca of Carthage, born 247 BC, was one of the great generals of the ancient world. His father, Hamilcar, was also a great strategist and master tactician who imposed Carthaginian rule over much of present-day Spain. After Hamilcar led the Carthaginian forces against Rome in the First Punic War, Hannibal followed in his father’s footsteps, leading Carthage in the Second Punic War.
From the time he was a teenager, Hannibal fought against Rome. He is famed for leading Carthage’s army across north Africa, into Spain, along the Mediterranean coast, and then crossing the Alps with his army and war elephants. Hannibal won victories in northern Italy by outmaneuvering his Roman adversaries and defeated a larger Roman army at the battle of Cannae in 216 BC. Unable to force Rome to capitulate, he was eventually forced to leave Italy and return to Carthage when a savvy Roman general named Scipio invaded north Africa. Hannibal and Scipio fought an epic battle at Zama, which Hannibal lost. The terms of surrender were harsh and many Carthaginians blamed Hannibal, eventually forcing him into exile until his death.
To this day Hannibal is still regarded as a military genius. Napoleon, George Patton, and Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. are only some of the generals who studied and admired him. His strategy and tactics are still taught in military academies. He is one of the figures of the ancient world whose life and exploits never fail to impress. Historian Patrick N. Hunt has led archeological expeditions in the Alps and elsewhere to study Hannibal’s exploits. Now he brings Hannibal’s incredible story to life in this riveting and dramatic book.
Hannibal Barca of Carthage, born 247 BC, was one of the great generals of the ancient world. His father, Hamilcar, was also a great strategist and master tactician who imposed Carthaginian rule over much of present-day Spain. After Hamilcar led the Carthaginian forces against Rome in the First Punic War, Hannibal followed in his father’s footsteps, leading Carthage in the Second Punic War.
From the time he was a teenager, Hannibal fought against Rome. He is famed for leading Carthage’s army across north Africa, into Spain, along the Mediterranean coast, and then crossing the Alps with his army and war elephants. Hannibal won victories in northern Italy by outmaneuvering his Roman adversaries and defeated a larger Roman army at the battle of Cannae in 216 BC. Unable to force Rome to capitulate, he was eventually forced to leave Italy and return to Carthage when a savvy Roman general named Scipio invaded north Africa. Hannibal and Scipio fought an epic battle at Zama, which Hannibal lost. The terms of surrender were harsh and many Carthaginians blamed Hannibal, eventually forcing him into exile until his death.
To this day Hannibal is still regarded as a military genius. Napoleon, George Patton, and Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. are only some of the generals who studied and admired him. His strategy and tactics are still taught in military academies. He is one of the figures of the ancient world whose life and exploits never fail to impress. Historian Patrick N. Hunt has led archeological expeditions in the Alps and elsewhere to study Hannibal’s exploits. Now he brings Hannibal’s incredible story to life in this riveting and dramatic book.
362 pages, Hardcover
First published July 11, 2017
407 people are currently reading
2594 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 119 reviews
Read
June 8, 2017The thing about biographies of people in ancient times is that unless it's a translation (thus second-hand) anything we read now is going to be third, maybe fourth-hand, if the ancient source is relying on other sources. With that as a given, I still think it worthwhile to read books such as Hunt's since I don't know Greek or Latin.
It's especially worthwhile when the author, as Hunt does, tries to find all the sources, comparing and contrasting them, and also travels to the various sites to give a first-hand account of the terrain.
So here's Hannibal Barca, who is still a somewhat mysterious figure, as he left no writings behind. From an early age, it appears he was meant to be a soldier. His father was involved in government, and took Hannibal along when he was sent to Iberia (Spain) to manage Carthage's silver mines in order to send the heavy tribute Rome required at the end of the First Punic War.
Hunt scrupulously (though cumulatively it can get tiresome) casts pretty much everything about Hannibal's early life in the conditional. "He might have observed . . ." "He would have seen . . ."
But once Hannibal's life catches up with his two main biographers (both Roman), Polybius and Livy, Hunt shifts into reportage mode.
The book is highly readable, as Hunt does his best to present the figures in Hannibal's life with as much individual characteristic as can be gleaned from ancient sources. He paints in terrain, seasons, and the difficulties of supply and logistics.
The brief outline of Hannibal's life is fairly well known: he was a Carthaginian who marched from Spain over the Alps with war elephants (the heavy tank of the time) into Italy to take on Rome, and not just won but utterly smashed the powerful Romans in battle on their own turf. After ten years he went back home when Rome attacked behind Hannibal. He lost, lived for a while as a politician organizing Carthage so as to pay the new stiff tribute Rome demanded, and finally had to leave Carthage altogether when he became too unpopular. Betrayed by a supposedly friendly king, he took the poison he always carried with him and died rather than be marched in manacles to Rome.
Hunt does a good job with the parallels with Scipio Africanus, who defeated him, after surviving the slaughter at Cannae. The two commanders met twice, and seem to have respected one another. Before that last battle at Zama, Scipio let Hannibal's spies come and inspect his preparations, and both commanders knew that Hannibal was unlikely to win.
Ironically, Scipio used his influence to get Rome to leave Hannibal alone toward the end of the latter's life, as he was strong enough to keep Carthage stable (and sending that tribute) but after Scipio himself found himself on the outs with Rome, he no longer could keep Rome from going after Hannibal. The two great commanders lost influence around the same time, and died the same year.
Hannibal's "legacy" is difficult to evaluate, as Hunt shows. The man was a brilliant leader, who inspired great loyalty as he led his men himself, slept on the ground with them, and of course put together winning battle plans--but at horrible cost, not just to their enemies, but to themselves.
The famous Alp crossing killed over half of Hannibal's army. Another swamp crossing in Italy killed a lot more. The Roman death toll at the battle at Cannae, according to Hunt, accounted for 20% of all Roman males between the ages of fifteen and fifty. And for what? Hannibal kept on the move the entire time he was in Italy, so these battles ended up gaining nothing; the Romans learned to turn his tactics against him, and instituted a successful war of attrition as they chased him around and around, avoiding confrontation.
And yet his strategic and especially his tactical innovation has inspired war leaders for centuries. I guess it's safe to say as long as humans insist on having wars, Hannibal will be an important figure. He did inspire loyalty, and his original motivation was to strike back at Rome for the misery and slaughter perpetrated on Carthage after the First Punic War, but he contributed nothing to beauty or to our long, difficult road toward civilization. The material legacy is uncountable bones of men who died far from home.
Copy courtesy of NetGalley
It's especially worthwhile when the author, as Hunt does, tries to find all the sources, comparing and contrasting them, and also travels to the various sites to give a first-hand account of the terrain.
So here's Hannibal Barca, who is still a somewhat mysterious figure, as he left no writings behind. From an early age, it appears he was meant to be a soldier. His father was involved in government, and took Hannibal along when he was sent to Iberia (Spain) to manage Carthage's silver mines in order to send the heavy tribute Rome required at the end of the First Punic War.
Hunt scrupulously (though cumulatively it can get tiresome) casts pretty much everything about Hannibal's early life in the conditional. "He might have observed . . ." "He would have seen . . ."
But once Hannibal's life catches up with his two main biographers (both Roman), Polybius and Livy, Hunt shifts into reportage mode.
The book is highly readable, as Hunt does his best to present the figures in Hannibal's life with as much individual characteristic as can be gleaned from ancient sources. He paints in terrain, seasons, and the difficulties of supply and logistics.
The brief outline of Hannibal's life is fairly well known: he was a Carthaginian who marched from Spain over the Alps with war elephants (the heavy tank of the time) into Italy to take on Rome, and not just won but utterly smashed the powerful Romans in battle on their own turf. After ten years he went back home when Rome attacked behind Hannibal. He lost, lived for a while as a politician organizing Carthage so as to pay the new stiff tribute Rome demanded, and finally had to leave Carthage altogether when he became too unpopular. Betrayed by a supposedly friendly king, he took the poison he always carried with him and died rather than be marched in manacles to Rome.
Hunt does a good job with the parallels with Scipio Africanus, who defeated him, after surviving the slaughter at Cannae. The two commanders met twice, and seem to have respected one another. Before that last battle at Zama, Scipio let Hannibal's spies come and inspect his preparations, and both commanders knew that Hannibal was unlikely to win.
Ironically, Scipio used his influence to get Rome to leave Hannibal alone toward the end of the latter's life, as he was strong enough to keep Carthage stable (and sending that tribute) but after Scipio himself found himself on the outs with Rome, he no longer could keep Rome from going after Hannibal. The two great commanders lost influence around the same time, and died the same year.
Hannibal's "legacy" is difficult to evaluate, as Hunt shows. The man was a brilliant leader, who inspired great loyalty as he led his men himself, slept on the ground with them, and of course put together winning battle plans--but at horrible cost, not just to their enemies, but to themselves.
The famous Alp crossing killed over half of Hannibal's army. Another swamp crossing in Italy killed a lot more. The Roman death toll at the battle at Cannae, according to Hunt, accounted for 20% of all Roman males between the ages of fifteen and fifty. And for what? Hannibal kept on the move the entire time he was in Italy, so these battles ended up gaining nothing; the Romans learned to turn his tactics against him, and instituted a successful war of attrition as they chased him around and around, avoiding confrontation.
And yet his strategic and especially his tactical innovation has inspired war leaders for centuries. I guess it's safe to say as long as humans insist on having wars, Hannibal will be an important figure. He did inspire loyalty, and his original motivation was to strike back at Rome for the misery and slaughter perpetrated on Carthage after the First Punic War, but he contributed nothing to beauty or to our long, difficult road toward civilization. The material legacy is uncountable bones of men who died far from home.
Copy courtesy of NetGalley
October 12, 2018
Hannibal by Patrick N. Hunt, is an account of the Second Punic War from the perspective of Hannibal, as well as a brief biography of the great General's early life. Hannibal was born in the Barca family, a clan of Carthaginian military individuals who had experience in the First Punic War. The family was unhappy with losses in the First Punic War, where Carthage was required to relinquish their claims over Sicily, and Rome subsequently aggressively annexed Corsica and Sardinia - both within the Carthaginian trading sphere. In response, Carthage landed an expeditionary force in Spain, under Hannibal's father Hamilcar. His brothers Hasdrubal and Magos were also successful generals that would fight with him in the coming Punic War. In Spain, Hannibal arrived as a young boy in his early teens/ late adolescents and worked closely with his father. The Carthaginian forces in the region settled Punic colonies, subdued and allied with local Iberian tribes, and built up port, silver mining, and trade infrastructure in the region. A treaty with Rome, signed to end the Punic Wars, set a boundary at the Ebro River. However, Rome considered a local City-state south of the Ebro, Saguntum, to be a tributary, and felt this was not in violation of the treaty. Hannibal disagreed, and sparked the Second Punic War by besieging this City.
After its fall, he marched across France and the Alps, subduing allied or hostile Celtic tribes, and allying with Celts opposed to Rome. Although he lost a good chunk of his forces during the crossing, both to hostile action, and to desertion and the elements, he still arrived in Italy with tens of thousands of hardened veteran soldiers, mercenaries, and allied Celts. As the war began, everything was coming up Hannibal. He successfully dodged a Roman Army in Gaul, and crossed the Alps with relatively few casualties (for the time). He arrived in Northern Italy in style - with tribes like the Boii providing his tired forces with food, rest, and reinforcement. He fought three major battles with the Roman's, breaking their aura of invincibility in Italy and shaking the foundations of the Roman system. Multiple military tribunes were defeated in battle, initiating political crisis in Rome, and ushering in an era of military dictatorship (constitutionally). Hannibal's big encounters were at the Trebia, Lake Trasimene, and Cannae as he marched south toward Rome, defeating legion after legion sent against him. All three encounters were incredibly costly to the Roman's in terms of lives and prestige.
Hannibal used innovative tactics at the time to ensure his early successes. He maneuvered tactically, often out running pursuing Roman armies, escaping entrapment, and avoiding costly encounters. Hannibal picked the engagements, or forced his enemy to come to him, and rarely was forced into a direct encounter against his will. He utilized the environment to both gain favourable battleground, surprise enemy armies on the march, and to compliment his battle order. He used trickery to mask the size of his army, or hide various contingents to ensure engagements were favourable, and he had a trump card up his sleeve. His intelligence gathering skills also seemed to be immense, as his armies had an intricate knowledge of Celtic alliance systems and characteristics, as well as the character and temperament of opposing commanders. He was also keenly aware of troop movements, alliance systems, and potential leverage points between alliances. These he used to alter the political landscape of Italy for a decade, as Greek City-states in the south, and allies in Numedia and Macedonia looked to counter Roman dominance by allying with the Carthaginians.
However, Hannibal was not invincible, and he was just one army among many. The Roman's initially were on the back foot, but fought back by cutting off the silver supply in Spain through direct invasion, controlling the naval front, and eventually threatening and destroying Carthage itself. Hannibal was forced for a decade to survive off the land after the silver mines of Spain and the reinforcements of North Africa were cut off from him. This was costly, as he soon began to lose allies and support, and eventually was forced to retreat from the peninsula to protect home waters.
Hannibal's days ended in defeat, as he lost political support in Carthage, and eventually lost his life on the run after Carthage's defeat and ruin by the Romans. His exact cause of death is unknown - perhaps he was poisoned, or perhaps he died of a fever from a small wound. Even so, a death in exile for such a magnificent General was unfortunate.
Hannibal was a military genius - akin to Alexander the Great, or Julius Caesar. He conquered large swathes of Italy and Spain for a time, and was close to changing the outcome of history - a victory over Rome, which at times looked very possible, would have changed the course of world history. His tactical and logistical genius is also apparent, as he conquered previously difficult terrain, and engaged in maneuvers and movements that were surprising and innovative at the time. His use of alliances and his ability to leverage himself between allies was also an immense boon to his campaign. And the fact that he fought on for many years after the end seemed nigh showed his resilience in the face of defeat. Regardless, this was an interesting read from an interesting perspective. Much is written on the Punic Wars, but mostly from a Roman perspective. It is refreshing to read new scholarly work from the perspective of Hannibal. Easily recommended for history fans, although there is not much new in this text. If you are intimately familiar with the Punic Wars, you may not find too much refreshing here.
After its fall, he marched across France and the Alps, subduing allied or hostile Celtic tribes, and allying with Celts opposed to Rome. Although he lost a good chunk of his forces during the crossing, both to hostile action, and to desertion and the elements, he still arrived in Italy with tens of thousands of hardened veteran soldiers, mercenaries, and allied Celts. As the war began, everything was coming up Hannibal. He successfully dodged a Roman Army in Gaul, and crossed the Alps with relatively few casualties (for the time). He arrived in Northern Italy in style - with tribes like the Boii providing his tired forces with food, rest, and reinforcement. He fought three major battles with the Roman's, breaking their aura of invincibility in Italy and shaking the foundations of the Roman system. Multiple military tribunes were defeated in battle, initiating political crisis in Rome, and ushering in an era of military dictatorship (constitutionally). Hannibal's big encounters were at the Trebia, Lake Trasimene, and Cannae as he marched south toward Rome, defeating legion after legion sent against him. All three encounters were incredibly costly to the Roman's in terms of lives and prestige.
Hannibal used innovative tactics at the time to ensure his early successes. He maneuvered tactically, often out running pursuing Roman armies, escaping entrapment, and avoiding costly encounters. Hannibal picked the engagements, or forced his enemy to come to him, and rarely was forced into a direct encounter against his will. He utilized the environment to both gain favourable battleground, surprise enemy armies on the march, and to compliment his battle order. He used trickery to mask the size of his army, or hide various contingents to ensure engagements were favourable, and he had a trump card up his sleeve. His intelligence gathering skills also seemed to be immense, as his armies had an intricate knowledge of Celtic alliance systems and characteristics, as well as the character and temperament of opposing commanders. He was also keenly aware of troop movements, alliance systems, and potential leverage points between alliances. These he used to alter the political landscape of Italy for a decade, as Greek City-states in the south, and allies in Numedia and Macedonia looked to counter Roman dominance by allying with the Carthaginians.
However, Hannibal was not invincible, and he was just one army among many. The Roman's initially were on the back foot, but fought back by cutting off the silver supply in Spain through direct invasion, controlling the naval front, and eventually threatening and destroying Carthage itself. Hannibal was forced for a decade to survive off the land after the silver mines of Spain and the reinforcements of North Africa were cut off from him. This was costly, as he soon began to lose allies and support, and eventually was forced to retreat from the peninsula to protect home waters.
Hannibal's days ended in defeat, as he lost political support in Carthage, and eventually lost his life on the run after Carthage's defeat and ruin by the Romans. His exact cause of death is unknown - perhaps he was poisoned, or perhaps he died of a fever from a small wound. Even so, a death in exile for such a magnificent General was unfortunate.
Hannibal was a military genius - akin to Alexander the Great, or Julius Caesar. He conquered large swathes of Italy and Spain for a time, and was close to changing the outcome of history - a victory over Rome, which at times looked very possible, would have changed the course of world history. His tactical and logistical genius is also apparent, as he conquered previously difficult terrain, and engaged in maneuvers and movements that were surprising and innovative at the time. His use of alliances and his ability to leverage himself between allies was also an immense boon to his campaign. And the fact that he fought on for many years after the end seemed nigh showed his resilience in the face of defeat. Regardless, this was an interesting read from an interesting perspective. Much is written on the Punic Wars, but mostly from a Roman perspective. It is refreshing to read new scholarly work from the perspective of Hannibal. Easily recommended for history fans, although there is not much new in this text. If you are intimately familiar with the Punic Wars, you may not find too much refreshing here.
September 26, 2017
If you want to know about Hannibal Barca, this is a good place to start. Patrick Hunt tells the story in accessible prose. As an archeologist, he is able to fill in some blanks of a scant paper trail from his visits to the landmark sites.
Hunt gives a sketch, and perhaps that is all that can be gathered. Hannibal was raised in the military life with his father Hamilcar, Carthage’s leading general. He experienced loss when his father drowned in battle. At age 26, when his brother (in-law) lost his life in warfare Hannibal took the reins of Carthage’s army.
Hannibal used clever techniques such as stampeding cattle with wreaths of tinder fires in their horns and neutralizing the Italian peninsula by not making soldiers of the defeated armies prisoners but sending them home to tell everyone that his battle was with Rome and not with them. He wisely used the gold he has extracted from Spain.
The question of how Hannibal got over (and down) the Alps with (maybe 30) elephants, was not answered. Instead, two new questions emerged. One is that Hunt says elephants need 100 pounds of food a day and my impression is that the trek would have many days above the timber line where there would be scant grazing. Another is that Hannibal is carrying a lot of silver. Are the elephants hauling this load? If so, there is a greater need to keep the elephants on an unnatural (for them) course and the logistics of marching the elephants had to dominate the trek. (The elephants are not much mentioned and are almost forgotten until they emerge in the Battle of Metarus where they are uncontrollable and do damage to both sides.)
With war there is politics. There is the backdrop of politics of the Genrousia, Carthage’s ruling body which is mercantile in orientation and gives both Hamilcar and Hannibal lukewarm support. There is an interesting twist of history in the diplomatic missions of Rome and Carthage to Syphax, King of the Massaesylians which includes the sad fate of Soponisba, whom the Romans considered a spoil of war.
As I finished the book, I reflected, “Did Hunt mention a wife?” There was a mention of a mistress when his military situation became constrained. Maybe he mentioned a wife… somewhere, maybe children? The one personal thing you learn about Hannibal is his promise to his father, made in a solemn vow, to always hate Rome.
From this it is clear that Hannibal, despite losing a war, was a great tactician. You can see why his leadership has been studied and respected by generals even into the modern age.
Hunt lays out the basic themes and questions regarding Carthage’s loss: Why didn’t Hannibal take on Rome when he was at his strongest? How much responsibility for Hannibal’s failure should be placed on the Genrousia? What if Hannibal never acted on his youthful oath and never crossed the Alps?
This is a good introduction to this phase of the Punic Wars.
Hunt gives a sketch, and perhaps that is all that can be gathered. Hannibal was raised in the military life with his father Hamilcar, Carthage’s leading general. He experienced loss when his father drowned in battle. At age 26, when his brother (in-law) lost his life in warfare Hannibal took the reins of Carthage’s army.
Hannibal used clever techniques such as stampeding cattle with wreaths of tinder fires in their horns and neutralizing the Italian peninsula by not making soldiers of the defeated armies prisoners but sending them home to tell everyone that his battle was with Rome and not with them. He wisely used the gold he has extracted from Spain.
The question of how Hannibal got over (and down) the Alps with (maybe 30) elephants, was not answered. Instead, two new questions emerged. One is that Hunt says elephants need 100 pounds of food a day and my impression is that the trek would have many days above the timber line where there would be scant grazing. Another is that Hannibal is carrying a lot of silver. Are the elephants hauling this load? If so, there is a greater need to keep the elephants on an unnatural (for them) course and the logistics of marching the elephants had to dominate the trek. (The elephants are not much mentioned and are almost forgotten until they emerge in the Battle of Metarus where they are uncontrollable and do damage to both sides.)
With war there is politics. There is the backdrop of politics of the Genrousia, Carthage’s ruling body which is mercantile in orientation and gives both Hamilcar and Hannibal lukewarm support. There is an interesting twist of history in the diplomatic missions of Rome and Carthage to Syphax, King of the Massaesylians which includes the sad fate of Soponisba, whom the Romans considered a spoil of war.
As I finished the book, I reflected, “Did Hunt mention a wife?” There was a mention of a mistress when his military situation became constrained. Maybe he mentioned a wife… somewhere, maybe children? The one personal thing you learn about Hannibal is his promise to his father, made in a solemn vow, to always hate Rome.
From this it is clear that Hannibal, despite losing a war, was a great tactician. You can see why his leadership has been studied and respected by generals even into the modern age.
Hunt lays out the basic themes and questions regarding Carthage’s loss: Why didn’t Hannibal take on Rome when he was at his strongest? How much responsibility for Hannibal’s failure should be placed on the Genrousia? What if Hannibal never acted on his youthful oath and never crossed the Alps?
This is a good introduction to this phase of the Punic Wars.
January 29, 2018
A solid, but unspectacular entry into the literature that documents Hannibal's life. The prose is good, and Hunt has some skill as a storyteller who can engage. There's just nothing really outstanding or original here that recommends this over any other book on Hannibal, and you're probably going to get more out of less specific books (Like O'Connell's Ghosts of Cannae), that cover the same subject matter.
The book's main failing is that it purports to be a *biography* of Hannibal, and it just plain isn't. Instead, it's a military-political history of the 2nd Punic War (and one that gets details wrong. Hunt has a line in there claiming that Hastati are light infantry who throw "hastae" spears). This is because the primary source material simply doesn't exist to support a real, in-depth biography of Hannibal, but rather than reckon with that, authors keep trying, I guess because HANNIBAL on the cover sells books, and publishers like to sell books.
It's worth your time, but if you're like me, it'll leave you feeling no better off than you were before. If you only have time for one book, read the O'Connell instead.
The book's main failing is that it purports to be a *biography* of Hannibal, and it just plain isn't. Instead, it's a military-political history of the 2nd Punic War (and one that gets details wrong. Hunt has a line in there claiming that Hastati are light infantry who throw "hastae" spears). This is because the primary source material simply doesn't exist to support a real, in-depth biography of Hannibal, but rather than reckon with that, authors keep trying, I guess because HANNIBAL on the cover sells books, and publishers like to sell books.
It's worth your time, but if you're like me, it'll leave you feeling no better off than you were before. If you only have time for one book, read the O'Connell instead.
July 28, 2017
A fantastic read for anyone interested in history, Hannibal, and the Punic Wars. I particularly enjoyed the attention to detail regarding topography, the numbers and background of the troops involved in various campaigns, and the overarching social history as Punic and Roman civilizations clashed throughout the narrative. This book does an excellent job of peeling back some of the hidden layers on Hannibal himself, a truly enigmatic character who would’ve stood out as an extraordinary individual in any era. The author’s use of sources such as Polybius and Livy is particularly fascinating when used in conjunction with known facts from the actual battle sites, such as the terrain and climate conditions. I would strongly recommend this book to anyone interested in ancient history or someone who simply loves a good factual story that is well told.
March 2, 2018
RTC what a great book ! I really need to catch up on my reviews ;)
September 16, 2022
Ne yazık ki çeviri çok kötüydü. Yazım hataları da cabası...
Kitaplığımda aynı yayınevi, aynı mütercime ait; okuma listemde olan 4 kitap daha var ve açıkçası ne yapacağımı bilmez bir haldeyim.
Kronik Kitap'a 4 gün önce mail attım. Mailime bir geri dönüş de alamadım.
Kronik Kitap ile ilgili çok olumlu düşüncelerim vardı. Maalesef ciddi bir hayâl kırıklığı oldu benim için Kronik Kitap...
İlgi çekici konular, önemli yazarlar; iyi bir Türkçe yayın için yeterli olmuyor ne yazık ki.
Alınan teliflerin süreleri nedeniyle, kitapların hak ettiği bir şekilde yayınlandığını ne zaman görürüz; o da meçhul...
Gördüğünüz üzere ne Hannibal'dan bahsetmeye, ne de yazarı Patrick N. Hunt'ın üslûbu üzerine konuşmaya mecal dahi kalmıyor.
Ekleme: Kronik Kitap'tan bugün mailime cevap geldi. Mesajımı editörlerine ilettiklerini belirttiler.
Kitaplığımda aynı yayınevi, aynı mütercime ait; okuma listemde olan 4 kitap daha var ve açıkçası ne yapacağımı bilmez bir haldeyim.
Kronik Kitap'a 4 gün önce mail attım. Mailime bir geri dönüş de alamadım.
Kronik Kitap ile ilgili çok olumlu düşüncelerim vardı. Maalesef ciddi bir hayâl kırıklığı oldu benim için Kronik Kitap...
İlgi çekici konular, önemli yazarlar; iyi bir Türkçe yayın için yeterli olmuyor ne yazık ki.
Alınan teliflerin süreleri nedeniyle, kitapların hak ettiği bir şekilde yayınlandığını ne zaman görürüz; o da meçhul...
Gördüğünüz üzere ne Hannibal'dan bahsetmeye, ne de yazarı Patrick N. Hunt'ın üslûbu üzerine konuşmaya mecal dahi kalmıyor.
Ekleme: Kronik Kitap'tan bugün mailime cevap geldi. Mesajımı editörlerine ilettiklerini belirttiler.
June 22, 2017
Hannibal was the first general to defeat the forces of Rome, and Hunt is the man qualified to tell us about it. I read my copy free and early thanks to Net Galley and Simon and Schuster. This book becomes available to the public July 11, 2017.
Early history has never been my area of concentration, but since retirement, I push myself out of my usual comfort zone, often to excellent result. This time it proved to be a mixed blessing. On the one hand, Hunt is unquestionably qualified to discuss this topic. He is an historian of renown and has dedicated years to the study of Hannibal, even embarking on an expedition across the Alps in order to see what Hannibal experienced—or the closest proximity to it in modern times. On the other hand, I confess I was in it for two things: military strategy and history, which does interest me, and of course, the elephants.
Imagine riding into battle on the back of an elephant. Not only is an elephant massive, it is also impervious to most of the weaponry available at this time. Spears and javelins would just bounce off its hide. War elephants had their tusks sharpened, and being charged by such a force had to be terrifying. And in reading this history it occurred to me that Hannibal’s men would have been bemused indeed if they had known that elephants would be regarded by many of us, in future days, with great sentimentality. They would never have believed the elephant might become endangered. Who could kill elephants? But these are my musings, not Hunt’s.
Hunt is meticulous in demonstrating what Hannibal did and why he did it. He starts with his family background, in particular that he was the son of the great general Hamilcar, who took him to a temple, made him stand at the altar where the live sacrifice had been made, and swear lifelong hatred of Rome, whose government and military made war against Carthage and caused a lot of suffering. Hunt carefully separates what actually happened, from what probably happened, from what maybe happened, but the speculative language—may have, would have, almost certainly—slows me down, because each time the narrative picks up and I immerse myself in the text, I see the modifiers and draw back. I go back and reread in order to find out what is actually known, mentally removing all of the guesses and educated guesses, and then I am left with what is known. And although I appreciate that there are not vast treasure-troves of primary documents sitting around for Hunt to access, given the antiquity of the subject, I wish there were some way to read only the known facts. At the 70% mark I became frustrated and bailed.
Hunt quotes often from Livy and Polybius, both of whom I read many years ago as an undergraduate, and which still grace my shelves. My initial impression was that it might be more useful to go dig up those books, reread them, and give this one a miss. However, what Hunt does is sift through their information and provide an analysis that is deeper and more objective than theirs. Livy was, after all, a Roman; he is renowned as a scholar, but not necessarily objective.
And so those that have a serious interest in the history of Northern Africa and/or Southern Europe, or an interest in military history, can count this as a strong title to add to their historical libraries. To put it another way, what it lacks in terms of easy flowing narrative, it makes up for in accuracy and analysis.
Recommended to those that have a serious interest in world history or military history.
Early history has never been my area of concentration, but since retirement, I push myself out of my usual comfort zone, often to excellent result. This time it proved to be a mixed blessing. On the one hand, Hunt is unquestionably qualified to discuss this topic. He is an historian of renown and has dedicated years to the study of Hannibal, even embarking on an expedition across the Alps in order to see what Hannibal experienced—or the closest proximity to it in modern times. On the other hand, I confess I was in it for two things: military strategy and history, which does interest me, and of course, the elephants.
Imagine riding into battle on the back of an elephant. Not only is an elephant massive, it is also impervious to most of the weaponry available at this time. Spears and javelins would just bounce off its hide. War elephants had their tusks sharpened, and being charged by such a force had to be terrifying. And in reading this history it occurred to me that Hannibal’s men would have been bemused indeed if they had known that elephants would be regarded by many of us, in future days, with great sentimentality. They would never have believed the elephant might become endangered. Who could kill elephants? But these are my musings, not Hunt’s.
Hunt is meticulous in demonstrating what Hannibal did and why he did it. He starts with his family background, in particular that he was the son of the great general Hamilcar, who took him to a temple, made him stand at the altar where the live sacrifice had been made, and swear lifelong hatred of Rome, whose government and military made war against Carthage and caused a lot of suffering. Hunt carefully separates what actually happened, from what probably happened, from what maybe happened, but the speculative language—may have, would have, almost certainly—slows me down, because each time the narrative picks up and I immerse myself in the text, I see the modifiers and draw back. I go back and reread in order to find out what is actually known, mentally removing all of the guesses and educated guesses, and then I am left with what is known. And although I appreciate that there are not vast treasure-troves of primary documents sitting around for Hunt to access, given the antiquity of the subject, I wish there were some way to read only the known facts. At the 70% mark I became frustrated and bailed.
Hunt quotes often from Livy and Polybius, both of whom I read many years ago as an undergraduate, and which still grace my shelves. My initial impression was that it might be more useful to go dig up those books, reread them, and give this one a miss. However, what Hunt does is sift through their information and provide an analysis that is deeper and more objective than theirs. Livy was, after all, a Roman; he is renowned as a scholar, but not necessarily objective.
And so those that have a serious interest in the history of Northern Africa and/or Southern Europe, or an interest in military history, can count this as a strong title to add to their historical libraries. To put it another way, what it lacks in terms of easy flowing narrative, it makes up for in accuracy and analysis.
Recommended to those that have a serious interest in world history or military history.
July 3, 2022
Hannibal Barca is without a doubt one of my favourite characters in history. While being passionate about everything Roman, I also have a profound interest in Carthaginian culture and history. The Punic Wars are some of the most decisive conflicts of history, and the Second Punic War in which Hannibal fought might have ended the Roman Republic in its cradle. Hannibal is a fascinating character, a military genius and a cunning tactician. His use of the environment and the gathering of intelligence made him superior to any army that faced him. He knew his enemies' weaknesses and how to exploit them on the battlefield. Hunt does an amazing job of bringing these battles to life, his way of writing keeps the reader engaged and the maps for battles like the one of Cannae are really useful. I also really enjoyed his description of one of Hannibal's greatest feats, the crossing of the Alps. Hunt clearly knows a lot about Hannibal, referring to many great sources and making it clear when these contradict each other. However, as with all of ancient history, especially Carthaginian history, most of the sources have been lost to us and we must make do with what we have. This leads to the use of several Roman sources, that are mostly very hostile against Hannibal. Luckily we still have some of the works of Polybius, but still many questions remain about Hannibal's life, especially from his youth and his exile.
I definitely recommend this book to anyone that wants to know more about one of the greatest commanders of history, even to those who might not know that much about the Punic Wars. I found myself repeatedly getting fascinated at the genius that is Hannibal and Hunt did a great job in this book of illuminating it. Five stars!
I definitely recommend this book to anyone that wants to know more about one of the greatest commanders of history, even to those who might not know that much about the Punic Wars. I found myself repeatedly getting fascinated at the genius that is Hannibal and Hunt did a great job in this book of illuminating it. Five stars!
July 15, 2017
This is a good history for people who don't know a lot about the topic already. I feel I can say this from a position of authority because, when I started this book, my knowledge began and ended with the fact that this was that guy who brought elephants with this army over the Alps in the far distant past. I couldn't even have made a decent guess about when Hannibal lived.
Now I know that he arrived at a time when, in retrospect, Carthage's decline seemed irreversible. Although Hannibal had shaky support from short-sighted politicians, he managed to go off to Carthage's colonies in today's Spain as a very young man and – after the early death of his father – raise, organize, and lead a ragtag army (and elephants) to the Italian peninsula. There, he spooked the hell out of Rome for a long time before he fell victim to Rome's ability to learn from its own mistakes. Rome tried attacking him head on and got whipped. A Roman leader named Fabius said, “Hey, let's try not attacking him head on – let's avoid contact and weaken his supply lines.” Hannibal stomped around rural Italy for more than a decade, trying to provoke the Romans into a conventional attack. He failed. His allies, denied plunder, abandoned him. He hung on for a long time as things got worse, but eventually abandoned the effort and headed home, where Rome smashed his homeland. Hannibal had an especially interesting post-Roman life as a high-profile refugee/outlaw. That's a lot of knowledge to get out of a book.
This book gets a solid B+ for using language which does not drive the non-expert to the Kindle dictionary function. Still, there were occasions when terminology could have used some explaining, specifically, montane (Kindle location 517), missif (l. 865), debouch (l. 959), quinquiremes (l. 1373), equites (l. 2406), suffete (used first at l. 2407 but not explained until l. 3962), berms (l. 2617), impertum (l. 2657, no adequate definition available online for this usage), and grisaille (l. 3470).
When those nice publishers send me and others like me a free electronic copy of books, they often tell us NOT to mention errors of spelling, punctuation, and so forth. The publishers say they will be dealt with before publication. OK, but please indulge me when I point out that the author, who has written a good book and also seems to lead a completely cool and enviable life (try Googling him), has twice (l. 1200 and 1221), in a portion of the book sub-headed “A Grim Object Lesson”, referred to “abject lessons”, which is just wrong. This may be a “damn-you-autocorrect” sort of mistake, but it's also not a mistake an electronic spell-checker will catch. You need a human being. Do you have one? If so, my apologies for hectoring you needlessly.
Thanks to Netgalley and Simon and Schuster for a free electronic advance review copy of this book.
Now I know that he arrived at a time when, in retrospect, Carthage's decline seemed irreversible. Although Hannibal had shaky support from short-sighted politicians, he managed to go off to Carthage's colonies in today's Spain as a very young man and – after the early death of his father – raise, organize, and lead a ragtag army (and elephants) to the Italian peninsula. There, he spooked the hell out of Rome for a long time before he fell victim to Rome's ability to learn from its own mistakes. Rome tried attacking him head on and got whipped. A Roman leader named Fabius said, “Hey, let's try not attacking him head on – let's avoid contact and weaken his supply lines.” Hannibal stomped around rural Italy for more than a decade, trying to provoke the Romans into a conventional attack. He failed. His allies, denied plunder, abandoned him. He hung on for a long time as things got worse, but eventually abandoned the effort and headed home, where Rome smashed his homeland. Hannibal had an especially interesting post-Roman life as a high-profile refugee/outlaw. That's a lot of knowledge to get out of a book.
This book gets a solid B+ for using language which does not drive the non-expert to the Kindle dictionary function. Still, there were occasions when terminology could have used some explaining, specifically, montane (Kindle location 517), missif (l. 865), debouch (l. 959), quinquiremes (l. 1373), equites (l. 2406), suffete (used first at l. 2407 but not explained until l. 3962), berms (l. 2617), impertum (l. 2657, no adequate definition available online for this usage), and grisaille (l. 3470).
When those nice publishers send me and others like me a free electronic copy of books, they often tell us NOT to mention errors of spelling, punctuation, and so forth. The publishers say they will be dealt with before publication. OK, but please indulge me when I point out that the author, who has written a good book and also seems to lead a completely cool and enviable life (try Googling him), has twice (l. 1200 and 1221), in a portion of the book sub-headed “A Grim Object Lesson”, referred to “abject lessons”, which is just wrong. This may be a “damn-you-autocorrect” sort of mistake, but it's also not a mistake an electronic spell-checker will catch. You need a human being. Do you have one? If so, my apologies for hectoring you needlessly.
Thanks to Netgalley and Simon and Schuster for a free electronic advance review copy of this book.
November 6, 2025
Yes, I’ll admit it — I have an ancient Roman history problem. I simply can’t stop reading about it, and lately I’ve fallen deep into the Punic Wars rabbit hole. Hannibal by Patrick Hunt was exactly the kind of book that keeps that obsession alive in the best way.
This biography is impeccably researched, well-written, and highly engaging. Hunt has that rare talent for weaving scholarship with storytelling, giving Hannibal both his towering strategic genius and the tragic arc of a man who came incredibly close, yet ultimately fell short. The narrative never gets bogged down, yet it never skimps on historical nuance either. It’s a precise, confident, and intellectually satisfying portrait.
One of the unexpected joys for me was Hunt’s treatment of my favorite figure from the era: Scipio Africanus. The student becomes the master, indeed. Hunt captures the dynamic between Hannibal and Scipio beautifully—their mirrored lives, their evolving strategies, their ultimate showdown. It gave me an even deeper appreciation of how Scipio shaped Rome just as Hannibal nearly unmade it.
And somehow, all of this was a free borrow on Amazon Prime. Sometimes the right book arrives at exactly the right time.
Onward to Cannae, Zama, and whatever book comes next! Watch out for the war elephants 🐘
This biography is impeccably researched, well-written, and highly engaging. Hunt has that rare talent for weaving scholarship with storytelling, giving Hannibal both his towering strategic genius and the tragic arc of a man who came incredibly close, yet ultimately fell short. The narrative never gets bogged down, yet it never skimps on historical nuance either. It’s a precise, confident, and intellectually satisfying portrait.
One of the unexpected joys for me was Hunt’s treatment of my favorite figure from the era: Scipio Africanus. The student becomes the master, indeed. Hunt captures the dynamic between Hannibal and Scipio beautifully—their mirrored lives, their evolving strategies, their ultimate showdown. It gave me an even deeper appreciation of how Scipio shaped Rome just as Hannibal nearly unmade it.
And somehow, all of this was a free borrow on Amazon Prime. Sometimes the right book arrives at exactly the right time.
Onward to Cannae, Zama, and whatever book comes next! Watch out for the war elephants 🐘
May 8, 2021
Jag brukar sällan fascineras av generaler eller deras biografier, men Barca-släkten är ett gigantiskt undantag. Denna biografi av Hannibal är kortfattad, fokuserar på relevanta detaljer, och om dess militära fokus är dominerande (föga förvånande givet personen) är den också skicklig på att beskriva logistisk och underrättelseverksamhet relaterad till fälttågen. Personporträttet som tecknas är mer nyanserat än romarna gjorde, men verkar välunderbyggt.
Jag rekommenderar den till historie- och militarianördar.
Jag rekommenderar den till historie- och militarianördar.
July 14, 2017
Hannibal Barca is regarded as one of the great military commanders of the Western world, a status which is a little surprising considering that he never actually defeated his great opponent Rome in a war. Part of this honor is undoubtedly due to his success in battle, as in a succession of victories his outnumbered forces defeated the Roman legions sent out to destroy them. Yet Patrick Hunt's new biography of the Carthaginian general points to another reason why he holds such an exalted status, as his success ironically helped the Romans to become the dominant empire we remember it as today.
This, of course, was not Hannibal's goal when he set out to destroy Rome in 218. The son of a Carthaginian statesman who led his country's forces in the First Punic War, Hannibal made revenge the main focus of his life. His achievements in this regard were nothing short of remarkable, as he led his men on a grueling march through the Alps into often hostile territory, where through brilliant generalship and a shrewd exploitation of Celtic grievances he repeatedly bested the troops sent by Rome to defeat them. Yet rather than surrender, Rome adapted by adjusting their leadership structure and adopting a strategy of attrition, trapping Hannibal in a war he couldn't bring to a resolution, The culmination came in the battle of Zama in 202, when Hannibal found the situation neatly reversed, as his untrained army was defeated by the better-managed legions of Scipio Africanus, who used some of Hannibal's own tactics against him in order to win.
Hunt's book offers a knowledgeable overview of Hannibal's life and times. This is no small achievement considering the paucity of sources and their bias -- the only historical sources on Hannibal are Roman ones, with all of the problems that this entails. Often this has the effect of turning his book into more of a history of the Second Punic War than a biography, but the advantage of this is that it highlights what is Hannibal's greatest contribution to history. For while he may not have succeeded in defeating Rome, he became its greatest teacher of the military arts and helped to make them into the empire that would endure for seven centuries and more. This alone makes Hannibal well worth reading about.
This, of course, was not Hannibal's goal when he set out to destroy Rome in 218. The son of a Carthaginian statesman who led his country's forces in the First Punic War, Hannibal made revenge the main focus of his life. His achievements in this regard were nothing short of remarkable, as he led his men on a grueling march through the Alps into often hostile territory, where through brilliant generalship and a shrewd exploitation of Celtic grievances he repeatedly bested the troops sent by Rome to defeat them. Yet rather than surrender, Rome adapted by adjusting their leadership structure and adopting a strategy of attrition, trapping Hannibal in a war he couldn't bring to a resolution, The culmination came in the battle of Zama in 202, when Hannibal found the situation neatly reversed, as his untrained army was defeated by the better-managed legions of Scipio Africanus, who used some of Hannibal's own tactics against him in order to win.
Hunt's book offers a knowledgeable overview of Hannibal's life and times. This is no small achievement considering the paucity of sources and their bias -- the only historical sources on Hannibal are Roman ones, with all of the problems that this entails. Often this has the effect of turning his book into more of a history of the Second Punic War than a biography, but the advantage of this is that it highlights what is Hannibal's greatest contribution to history. For while he may not have succeeded in defeating Rome, he became its greatest teacher of the military arts and helped to make them into the empire that would endure for seven centuries and more. This alone makes Hannibal well worth reading about.
June 13, 2017
Patrick N. Hunt’s recounting of the life and campaigns of Hannibal is the most comprehensive I’ve read to date. Hunt does well with consolidating various accounts into one main through-line of narrative, without sacrificing accuracy or detail. Hannibal is one of the ancient world’s most compelling figures, easily in the same class as figures like Alexander, Caesar, and his opponent Scipio. However, most tellings of the story of Hannibal view him strictly as a force of nature against which Rome was pitted.
In Hannibal, Hunt attempts to portray the events of Hannibal’s life from Hannibal’s own viewpoint, though it can be hard as all the history relating to the man was written by Romans. Still, it is an admirable effort to try and understand the great general’s actions through the Carthaginian lens, rather than the Roman.
If I had one major gripe with Hannibal, it would come in the author’s insistence that ancient place names be provided their modern counterparts for reference. I know this probably works for some people, but I dislike the practice, as these places were likely very different from what they are today - so different as to be misleading if you refer to them by their modern name. It’s a small complaint, absolutely, but it really stuck out to me.
Otherwise, Hannibal appears to be a competent and thorough telling of Hannibal’s story that I’m sure both casual observers and the more invested amateur historians out there will get something out of.
In Hannibal, Hunt attempts to portray the events of Hannibal’s life from Hannibal’s own viewpoint, though it can be hard as all the history relating to the man was written by Romans. Still, it is an admirable effort to try and understand the great general’s actions through the Carthaginian lens, rather than the Roman.
If I had one major gripe with Hannibal, it would come in the author’s insistence that ancient place names be provided their modern counterparts for reference. I know this probably works for some people, but I dislike the practice, as these places were likely very different from what they are today - so different as to be misleading if you refer to them by their modern name. It’s a small complaint, absolutely, but it really stuck out to me.
Otherwise, Hannibal appears to be a competent and thorough telling of Hannibal’s story that I’m sure both casual observers and the more invested amateur historians out there will get something out of.
August 4, 2017
I have read many biographies dealing with the ancients, and Patrick Hunt’s study of Hannibal rates with the best of them. It is informative and entertaining but more importantly, it is thought provoking.
Hunt covers the basics of Hannibal’s life, weaving in the information found in various ancient sources with his own quite intelligent speculation about Hannibal’s character and motivation. Hunt’s discussions of the major battles are especially illuminating, covering not only troop movements but Hannibal’s use of geography, weather, and environment as well. Hannibal’s use of these factors was ingenious, and Hunt’s coverage on this point is wonderful.
After reading this book, you will understand exactly why Hannibal is considered one of the great generals in history. You will also understand a great deal about his administrative and logistical skills. And, most thought provoking of all, you will see why he is such an enigma to historians. For all his genius, Hannibal failed in his mission to defeat Rome—at the moment when it seemed to the Romans that he would likely do so. He was ultimately defeated both by the Romans and, ironically, by his own tactics which the Romans had finally learned to use against him. In the end, Hannibal stopped being Hannibal. An enigma indeed.
This is an immensely readable volume. I found it suspenseful even though I was already familiar with much of the story. I recommend this book highly.
Hunt covers the basics of Hannibal’s life, weaving in the information found in various ancient sources with his own quite intelligent speculation about Hannibal’s character and motivation. Hunt’s discussions of the major battles are especially illuminating, covering not only troop movements but Hannibal’s use of geography, weather, and environment as well. Hannibal’s use of these factors was ingenious, and Hunt’s coverage on this point is wonderful.
After reading this book, you will understand exactly why Hannibal is considered one of the great generals in history. You will also understand a great deal about his administrative and logistical skills. And, most thought provoking of all, you will see why he is such an enigma to historians. For all his genius, Hannibal failed in his mission to defeat Rome—at the moment when it seemed to the Romans that he would likely do so. He was ultimately defeated both by the Romans and, ironically, by his own tactics which the Romans had finally learned to use against him. In the end, Hannibal stopped being Hannibal. An enigma indeed.
This is an immensely readable volume. I found it suspenseful even though I was already familiar with much of the story. I recommend this book highly.
July 23, 2018
Patrick Hunt goes into a through history of the life and military history of the famous Carthage leader Hannibal. He begins with his father and how he was taught military tactics, and also take care of the people that his family was in charge of. He then leads you through some of his father’s battles up to his death and when Hannibal takes over. He would then lead Carthage in what would be called the second Punic War. The author takes you through his journey through the Alps with elephants and then after resting his defeating of the Roman Army in Cannae in 216 BC. This would just be the first of many defeats by his army over a much larger force that being the Romans. He would use different strategies in defeating the legions that were sent out to destroy him. What he never did was attack Rome itself. The author goes into that plus the one Roman General who was able to force him to leave the battle field and then leave Italy. He would then go into North Africa and a few other places. What really makes this book is the amount of research that the author has done and also that Hannibal and his strategies to this day are still taught. He is still considered as one of the best military leaders. Overall a very good book. I received this book from Netgalley.com I gave it 4 stars. Follow us at www.1rad-readerreviews.com
April 15, 2019
This biography of Hannibal is almost entirely about his military campaigns, those being the events for which there are accounts. These accounts are Roman. One might therefore entitle it 'Hannibal as Military Commander', so little do we know about his personal life.
Author Hunt details the campaigns, the marches and battles, well enough, supplementing available accounts with learned speculation. What he doesn't do is provide much background about the tactics and exigencies of ancient warfare. Someone less than expert on these matters, such as myself, may find his descriptions two-dimensional as a result, leading to an attitude of 'oh, hum, another battle...yawn.' A more interesting book would have gone into such matters as potable water for vast armies, the seating of various cavalry on their mounts, the efficacy of slings, the weight of various troops' equipment, the science of siegecraft etc.
A military enthusiast with a better background than mine might appreciate this book for the author's speculations and interpretations of motives. I found it rather boring.
Author Hunt details the campaigns, the marches and battles, well enough, supplementing available accounts with learned speculation. What he doesn't do is provide much background about the tactics and exigencies of ancient warfare. Someone less than expert on these matters, such as myself, may find his descriptions two-dimensional as a result, leading to an attitude of 'oh, hum, another battle...yawn.' A more interesting book would have gone into such matters as potable water for vast armies, the seating of various cavalry on their mounts, the efficacy of slings, the weight of various troops' equipment, the science of siegecraft etc.
A military enthusiast with a better background than mine might appreciate this book for the author's speculations and interpretations of motives. I found it rather boring.
January 29, 2022
Hanibalas, gyvenęs 247 – 183 m. pr. m. e. žinomas savo žygiu per Alpes į šiaurės Italiją. Jis garsus Kartaginos karvedys, kuris iki šių dienų žinomas kaip puikus karvedys, strategas, gudrus politikas ir savo šalies- nebeegistuojančios valstybės Kartaginos patriotas. Knygos viršelį puošia žinomas jo posakis: "Arba surasiu kelią, arba jį pasidarysiu". Daug naujų istorinių žinių suteikusi knyga.
October 19, 2025
Hannibal was one of the greatest strategists in history and the most feared enemy Rome ever faced, bringing the Republic to its knees several times. He will always be remembered for the 'what-ifs' of his campaign, as he had the chance to change the course of history. Yet, with his brilliant war strategies and his ability to use the landscape and weather to his advantage, he and his outnumbered army dramatically changed warfare.
It is always a great pleasure to read the biographies of ancient people, especially when they are as well-written as this book.
It is always a great pleasure to read the biographies of ancient people, especially when they are as well-written as this book.
March 10, 2018
Labai patraukliai parašyta ir nuo istorinių šaltinių nenutolstanti knyga, kurioje Hanibalas pasirodo ne tik kaip puikus karvedys, bet tarsi Odisėjiška figūra (ar sakoma taip?), pilna drąsos ir gudrybių:
"Krekenos uoste Hanibalas finikiečių pirkliams ir jūreiviams iškėlė karališką puotą ir nugirdė visus vyrus vynu, išskyrus tuos, kurie padėjo jam pabėgti. Tuo metu buvo vidurvasaris, tad Hanibalas paprašė aplinkinių jūros prekeivių paskolinti jam bures, kad galėtų pridengti lėbaujančius jūreivius ir jų kapitonus nuo karštos saulės. Kai stojo naktis ir triukšmaujantys jūreiviai buvo pernelyg apgirtę, kad ką nors pastebėtų, Hanibalas sėdo į iš anksto paruoštą laivą ir leidosi į kelių savaičių kelionę į Tyrą. Jis buvo tikras, kad niekas jo nesivys, nes buvo pasiėmęs visas bures."
Įvadas skaitosi kiek sunkiau, nes daugiau spekuliacijų, o autorius, matyt, nenorėdamas aukoti nei vaizdingumo, nei istorinės tiesos, rašo vartodamas tokį tarsi 'galimąjį laiką', pvz: "Galbūt jaunasis Hanibalas žiūrėdamas į laivu svajodavo, kaip užaugęs išplauks su vienu iš šių laivų į jūros mūšį, apie kuriuos buvo daug girdėjęs".
Laimė, toliau šaltinių atsiranda daugiau ir autorius labai patogiai juos sužymi: nuorodomis puslapio apačioje. Tikrai puiki mintis - pasakojimas neapsunkinamas, o šaltinius gali tuoj pat patikrinti. Jei kuris pasakojimas apie Hanibalą atrodo menkiau tikėtinas, galbūt vėliau sugalvota graži legenda, taip ir pasakoma.
Tiesa, juntama, kad autoriui tai patinka Hanibalas, jis nelabai pasitiki karvedį šmeižiančiais romėnų autoriais ir nuoširdžiai žavisi ne tik Hanibalo karine taktika, bet ir asmenybe - nors kalba lieka faktiška ir nepuolama į liaupses. Skaitant irgi vis labiau pamėgsti Hanibalą, man net sunku buvo skaityti tuos skyrius, kur nuo jo jau ėmė nusigręžti sėkmė, nors jaunasis Scipionas, aišku, irgi puikus.
Šie lygūs priešininkai bent kelissyk buvo susitikę ir, panašu, visai maloniai bendravo. Štai ištrauka:
"Kai susidomėjęs pokalbiu apie karvedžius Scipionas paklausė, kokie, Hanibalo manymu, buvo geriausi visų laikų karvedžiai, Hanibalas atsakė: "Aleksandras, Pyras ir aš." Kiek nustebęs Scipionas, veikiausiai galantiškai, paklausė: "O ką pasakytum, jei nebūčiau tavęs nukariavęs?" "Tuomet, - atsakė Hanibalas, - manyčiau, kad esu pats geriausias visų laikų karvedys, o ne trečias.""
Dar patiko detalūs mūšių aprašymai, pasiutę keltai, kurie vos gavę progą nukerta priešininkui galvą ir jau kur nors nešasi ("du tūkstančiai Placencijos keltų ir du šimtai raitininkų su savo šiurpiu trofėjumi - nukirstomis romėnų galvomis, jų išdavystės įrodymu, - patraukė į Hanibalo stovyklą. Hanibalas pasveikino savo naujuosius sąjungininkus, pagyrė juos už drąsą, bet išsiuntė juos namo su jų dovanomis, paprašęs tik vieno: kad sugrįžę papasakotų gentainiams apie savo žygdarbį romėnų stovykloje" - arba - "Po mūšio Hanibalas norėjo tinkamai palaidoti Flaminijų, tačiau jam nepavyko rasti jo kūno mūšio lauke. Tikėtina, kad be šarvų ir regalijų, galbūt ir be galvos, kurią galėjo nusinešti keltai, Flaminijaus kūno buvo neįmanoma atpažinti."), skyrelių pavadinimai, kurie priminė senovinius pasakojimus ar kokį Gargantiua ir Pantagriuelį ("Per upę perkeliami drambliai", "Pelkėse Hanibalas apanka viena akimi", "Atsargi Fabijaus politika kariaujant su Hanibalu duoda vaisių").
Žodžiu, puiki knyga, po kurios nori nenori pamėgsti Hanibalą ir pradedi turėti nuomonę apie tai, kur geriau padėti raitininkus savo kariuomenės rikiuotėje.
"Krekenos uoste Hanibalas finikiečių pirkliams ir jūreiviams iškėlė karališką puotą ir nugirdė visus vyrus vynu, išskyrus tuos, kurie padėjo jam pabėgti. Tuo metu buvo vidurvasaris, tad Hanibalas paprašė aplinkinių jūros prekeivių paskolinti jam bures, kad galėtų pridengti lėbaujančius jūreivius ir jų kapitonus nuo karštos saulės. Kai stojo naktis ir triukšmaujantys jūreiviai buvo pernelyg apgirtę, kad ką nors pastebėtų, Hanibalas sėdo į iš anksto paruoštą laivą ir leidosi į kelių savaičių kelionę į Tyrą. Jis buvo tikras, kad niekas jo nesivys, nes buvo pasiėmęs visas bures."
Įvadas skaitosi kiek sunkiau, nes daugiau spekuliacijų, o autorius, matyt, nenorėdamas aukoti nei vaizdingumo, nei istorinės tiesos, rašo vartodamas tokį tarsi 'galimąjį laiką', pvz: "Galbūt jaunasis Hanibalas žiūrėdamas į laivu svajodavo, kaip užaugęs išplauks su vienu iš šių laivų į jūros mūšį, apie kuriuos buvo daug girdėjęs".
Laimė, toliau šaltinių atsiranda daugiau ir autorius labai patogiai juos sužymi: nuorodomis puslapio apačioje. Tikrai puiki mintis - pasakojimas neapsunkinamas, o šaltinius gali tuoj pat patikrinti. Jei kuris pasakojimas apie Hanibalą atrodo menkiau tikėtinas, galbūt vėliau sugalvota graži legenda, taip ir pasakoma.
Tiesa, juntama, kad autoriui tai patinka Hanibalas, jis nelabai pasitiki karvedį šmeižiančiais romėnų autoriais ir nuoširdžiai žavisi ne tik Hanibalo karine taktika, bet ir asmenybe - nors kalba lieka faktiška ir nepuolama į liaupses. Skaitant irgi vis labiau pamėgsti Hanibalą, man net sunku buvo skaityti tuos skyrius, kur nuo jo jau ėmė nusigręžti sėkmė, nors jaunasis Scipionas, aišku, irgi puikus.
Šie lygūs priešininkai bent kelissyk buvo susitikę ir, panašu, visai maloniai bendravo. Štai ištrauka:
"Kai susidomėjęs pokalbiu apie karvedžius Scipionas paklausė, kokie, Hanibalo manymu, buvo geriausi visų laikų karvedžiai, Hanibalas atsakė: "Aleksandras, Pyras ir aš." Kiek nustebęs Scipionas, veikiausiai galantiškai, paklausė: "O ką pasakytum, jei nebūčiau tavęs nukariavęs?" "Tuomet, - atsakė Hanibalas, - manyčiau, kad esu pats geriausias visų laikų karvedys, o ne trečias.""
Dar patiko detalūs mūšių aprašymai, pasiutę keltai, kurie vos gavę progą nukerta priešininkui galvą ir jau kur nors nešasi ("du tūkstančiai Placencijos keltų ir du šimtai raitininkų su savo šiurpiu trofėjumi - nukirstomis romėnų galvomis, jų išdavystės įrodymu, - patraukė į Hanibalo stovyklą. Hanibalas pasveikino savo naujuosius sąjungininkus, pagyrė juos už drąsą, bet išsiuntė juos namo su jų dovanomis, paprašęs tik vieno: kad sugrįžę papasakotų gentainiams apie savo žygdarbį romėnų stovykloje" - arba - "Po mūšio Hanibalas norėjo tinkamai palaidoti Flaminijų, tačiau jam nepavyko rasti jo kūno mūšio lauke. Tikėtina, kad be šarvų ir regalijų, galbūt ir be galvos, kurią galėjo nusinešti keltai, Flaminijaus kūno buvo neįmanoma atpažinti."), skyrelių pavadinimai, kurie priminė senovinius pasakojimus ar kokį Gargantiua ir Pantagriuelį ("Per upę perkeliami drambliai", "Pelkėse Hanibalas apanka viena akimi", "Atsargi Fabijaus politika kariaujant su Hanibalu duoda vaisių").
Žodžiu, puiki knyga, po kurios nori nenori pamėgsti Hanibalą ir pradedi turėti nuomonę apie tai, kur geriau padėti raitininkus savo kariuomenės rikiuotėje.
October 16, 2025
I think other reviewers said this may not be the definitive history on Hannibal but I will say it was exactly what I was looking for. Chronological, concise and exciting, and well paced to top it off. Since I rarely return to ancient history, it was nice to dip back in for a change.
December 29, 2024
Until now, the dearth of books that objectively discussed the history of Hannibal, Carthage, Scorpio, and Rome has been reflective of Western historians’ failings to capture all of history in the broadest contexts. Patrick Hunt took on this challenge and succeeded, for my part. Hunt’s professionalism and attention to detail is the perspective on Hannibal that we have sorely needed.
I was introduced to Hannibal in 9th grade by my World History teacher. Thankfully, our teacher did not whitewash history and gave us intriguing insights into the conflict between Rome and Carthage. He taught us about the animosity running so deep that Rome had tried to erase the idea of Carthage from history. Myself, being African, I had to know who was the champion of Carthage that drove the Romans mad with seething enmity.
Hunt maintains the same candidness in his year-by-year accounting of Hannibal’s exploits. This is not a flat and simple retelling of events. Hunt dispels the negative accounts of Hannibal, including the inaccuracy of his infamous moniker. More importantly, Hunt teases out important themes and lessons from the great general’s journey. The most important thread being how Hannibal changed Rome forever with his ingenuity, strategy, and resilience.
Other coverage on the impact of religion on military campaigns. The complexities of forming armies under weak and fragile alliances. The duplicitous and crippling demands of navigating internal politics. Along with the bitter realities of war on the ground for the troops during this time. All of these themes Hunt teases out to show how history has treated Hannibal and Carthage unfairly while glorifying Scorpio and Rome for many of the same reasons.
Ultimately, Hunt asks us to consider what could have been for Carthage, Hannibal, and the arc of world history if a few events had panned out differently. A compelling read that I wish would replace the silly, if limited portrayals Hannibal and Carthage receive in most media and history textbooks today. Very hard to put down once you start. Hunt’s style and pacing make this one of the fastest page-turners that fall under the history genre.
I was introduced to Hannibal in 9th grade by my World History teacher. Thankfully, our teacher did not whitewash history and gave us intriguing insights into the conflict between Rome and Carthage. He taught us about the animosity running so deep that Rome had tried to erase the idea of Carthage from history. Myself, being African, I had to know who was the champion of Carthage that drove the Romans mad with seething enmity.
Hunt maintains the same candidness in his year-by-year accounting of Hannibal’s exploits. This is not a flat and simple retelling of events. Hunt dispels the negative accounts of Hannibal, including the inaccuracy of his infamous moniker. More importantly, Hunt teases out important themes and lessons from the great general’s journey. The most important thread being how Hannibal changed Rome forever with his ingenuity, strategy, and resilience.
Other coverage on the impact of religion on military campaigns. The complexities of forming armies under weak and fragile alliances. The duplicitous and crippling demands of navigating internal politics. Along with the bitter realities of war on the ground for the troops during this time. All of these themes Hunt teases out to show how history has treated Hannibal and Carthage unfairly while glorifying Scorpio and Rome for many of the same reasons.
Ultimately, Hunt asks us to consider what could have been for Carthage, Hannibal, and the arc of world history if a few events had panned out differently. A compelling read that I wish would replace the silly, if limited portrayals Hannibal and Carthage receive in most media and history textbooks today. Very hard to put down once you start. Hunt’s style and pacing make this one of the fastest page-turners that fall under the history genre.
December 25, 2018
If you are not an academic (as I am not), this is a good biography of Hannibal to pick up. It's very short and to the point. But even at its short length, there seems to be a lot that can't be determined based upon the apparently spotty historical/archaeological record. Thankfully, Hunt is pretty open about where he is speculating, and he acknowledges throughout when he has his concerns about the reliability or veracity of some of the early sources (in particular, he prefers Polybius over Livy). Although I find historiography a little bit more boring than history, I suppose it's good for me to eat my intellectual spinach from time to time and understand the scholarly debate.
Overall, I enjoyed it, but I found myself drawing negative comparisons between it and Napoleon: A Life by Andrew Roberts (which I found to be fantastic). I think the biggest difference is the extraordinary abundance of primary sources, especially correspondence, in the latter case (which makes sense given that Napoleon was a 19th century AD figure and Hannibal was a 3rd century BC figure). But all the same, it helped to bring Napoleon alive in a way that Hannibal wasn't in this book.
Overall, I enjoyed it, but I found myself drawing negative comparisons between it and Napoleon: A Life by Andrew Roberts (which I found to be fantastic). I think the biggest difference is the extraordinary abundance of primary sources, especially correspondence, in the latter case (which makes sense given that Napoleon was a 19th century AD figure and Hannibal was a 3rd century BC figure). But all the same, it helped to bring Napoleon alive in a way that Hannibal wasn't in this book.
February 26, 2018
A insightful look at possibly one of histories greatest generals. Hannibal quite possibly shaped the Roman tactics and the battle strategies that shaped a future empire!
June 20, 2025
And when you're gone, who remembers your name?
Who keeps your flame? Who tells your story?
Well balanced book, without any explicit glorification and degradation of the one of them best military generals of all time.
High key sad after cannae :( but a what a man what a life.
Who keeps your flame? Who tells your story?
Well balanced book, without any explicit glorification and degradation of the one of them best military generals of all time.
High key sad after cannae :( but a what a man what a life.
June 20, 2019
One-eyed guy from Carthage riding elephants through the Alps attacking Romans- why don't more people talk about Hannibal Barca?
May 4, 2017
I received an ARC of this book from Netgalley for free in exchange for an honest review.
I wanted to love this book. Instead, I liked it. Patrick N. Hunt is extremely knowledgeable and his expertise shines through. There were moments that were brilliant, particularly early on in the chapters about Hannibal's youth and crossing the Alps. He also did an excellent job illustrating the scope of the violence between Hannibal and the Romans.
Where I had a more difficult time was with the long period of time after his initial victory. The narrative flow was not as intense. The book picked up again for me once Hannibal was called back to Carthage.
The breadth of sources that Patrick N. Hunt used were well documented in the end notes and bibliography. I appreciate that there was no skimping on source documentation in a book that is geared for the general public.
I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in learning more about Ancient history.
I wanted to love this book. Instead, I liked it. Patrick N. Hunt is extremely knowledgeable and his expertise shines through. There were moments that were brilliant, particularly early on in the chapters about Hannibal's youth and crossing the Alps. He also did an excellent job illustrating the scope of the violence between Hannibal and the Romans.
Where I had a more difficult time was with the long period of time after his initial victory. The narrative flow was not as intense. The book picked up again for me once Hannibal was called back to Carthage.
The breadth of sources that Patrick N. Hunt used were well documented in the end notes and bibliography. I appreciate that there was no skimping on source documentation in a book that is geared for the general public.
I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in learning more about Ancient history.
July 13, 2020
Romanın en büyük düşmanı olan hannibal’ın hayatını nelerden ilham aldığını ve nelere öncülük ettiğini çok güzel anlatmış patrick hunt. 2. Kartaca savaşının hareketliliğinin de etkisiyle çok zevkle okunuyor. Ayrıca Arno nehrinin veya alplerin geçilişi gibi ikonik anlatın betimlemesi de çok güzel yapılmış.
May 17, 2020
Kartaca ve Roma arasında geçen savaş betimlemeleri, Hannibal Barca' nın ünlü savaş stratejileri ustaca kaleme alınmış. Yazarın, Alp dağları dahil, Hannibal' ın Gebze' de biten yolculuğunu yerinde gözlemlemesinin kitabın etkisini arttırdığını düşünüyorum. Titizlikle hazırlanmış bir çalışma.
March 3, 2021
Hunt Hoca'nin, Hannibal Barca'nin pesinde bir iz surucu gibi isledigi ve arkeolojik verilere dayali akademik calismasi, Kronik Kitap'in tecrubesiz ve klasik arkeoloji ya da eskicag tarihi konusunda zayif bir cevirmene teslim etmesiyle arastirma resmen heba edilmis.
Hunt Hoca 5/5
Kronik Kitap 1/5
Hunt Hoca 5/5
Kronik Kitap 1/5
Displaying 1 - 30 of 119 reviews