Hannibal: A History of the Art of War Among the Carthaginians and Romans Down to the Battle of Pydna, 168 B.C., With a Detailed Account of the Second Punic War

The author was an officer for the Union Army in the Civil War and brings the eye of a soldier to the campaigns of Hannibal.With his copies of ancient books in hand, Polybius and Livy, he has visited the principal sites and routes and was able to settle many questions.Even today one can find disputes about which route Hannibal took over the Alps. The author shares his reasoning. Hannibal had made allies of some of the Gauls in Italy but remained on hostile terms with others. It would make sense that he would choose a route that would allow his tired army to arrive among friends rather than enemies. That narrows the choices. Polybius knew some of the men who fought Hannibal and had himself traveled the route Hannibal took over the Alps and though he was sparse with names, he described prominent landmarks seen by Hannibal's army. In particular there was a giant white rock or cliff. That cliff is still easily visible on the Little St. Bernard Pass and that pass arrives in Italy where Hannibal had allied Gauls. That is the pass Hannibal took, and the author provides much other convincing detail in his account.The Battle of Lake Trasimene is of particular interest to me because I have visited that site. None of the Italian locals living there seemed to be aware that an entire Roman army had been destroyed by Hannibal on the ground where they lived. A German hotel manager was able to help me with several useful maps. This account based on the author's visit to the battlefield accords with what I recall and adds a good bit more.The Battle of Cannae is remarkable because with a smaller army Hannibal destroyed two consular armies and killed about 50,000 legionaries in a single day. Again, I have visited the site, as the author has done, and found that the ruins of the town still exist but nothing points to the actual site of the battle. The location is disputed but the author surveys the field with his military eye and, I think, points to the likely location of the actual battle giving his reasons for doing so. Amusingly, he slights one armchair historian who claimed that the army was in a bend of the river. Doubtless the course has changed in two millennia but the bend may still be in place. The author, who in our Civil War has seen tens of thousands of soldiers in the field declares that there is no possibility that 50,000 men were in the area claimed by the armchair historian. It would be putting Gargantua's foot into Cinderella's slipper. His military experience adds a great deal to this account.Where I was less pleased with the account was when the author tended to diminish Scipio as a brilliant but second tier general. He reserves the first class for Marcellus and Nero [no, not that Nero], both of whom were superb but neither of whom was willing to confront Hannibal in open field. Scipio did that and Scipio won. Perhaps that's the reason Scipio gets fewer stars; he defeated the author's idol.That aside, this is an essential addition to any library that includes histories of the Punic Wars.

The books look like a child put them together. The print was so tiny it only took up half the page. These books were miss printed but they sold them anyways

This is a copy of the original book. You can even see the watermarks copied. Do not buy - the font is tiny and some pages are completely illegible.

This book is literally a scan of the original book and comes out as TINY on my Kindle. I have 15/20 vision and I can barely read this rubbish. A total scam.

The author fought in the civil war and was a career army officer. He personally visited all the sites about which he writes and provides a clear and exciting read of the entire history of Hanibal's campaigns in Italy up to and including the final battle outside Carthage. Given that he personnaly understood pre-industrial war first hand and there was little infrastructure in Italy when he visited and wrote the book in the late 19th century, his battlefield and logistical descriptions are particularly valid.He is unabashedly a fan of Hanibal and provides fascinating insights into his character. He covers the Roman strategy and tactics very well also and provides a valid explanation for why Hanibal did not immediately attack Rome after the battle of Cannae, why he never suffered open rebellion within his own ranks and how he was able to hang on for so long in the boot of Italy when outright conquest of Rome was clearly impossible. Highly recommended.