Total War Rome: Destroy Carthage

I knew I was in trouble when I read the dramatis personae of this book and found that Scipio Aemilianus was married to a fictional person named Claudia Pulchra (or Pulchradina, as the author puts it.) It is well known that Scipio Aemilianus was married to Sempronia Graccha, the daughter of Cornelia the Mother of the Gracchi, and her husband Tiberius Gracchus, and granddaughter of Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus. What other surprises awaited me when I read this book? There were just a multitude of things that were either inaccurate or distorted. This book is closer to fantasy than to historical fiction.The Greek historian Polybius is a main character in the book but the writer gets a lot of things wrong. For one thing he has Polybius as a prisoner in Rome before the battle of Pydna, and working as a teacher in a fictional military school for patrician boys that was established by Scipio Africanus. At the time of the battle of Pydna, Polybius was hipparch of the Achaean league and had offered his services, along with 1500 cavalrymen to Aemilius Paullus. This is where Polybius met Scipio Aemilianus, then about seventeen years old. Polybius did not come to Rome as a hostage until the following year when Rome decided to clamp down on Greek independence. Polybius made the best of a bad situation, becoming tutor to Aemilius Paullus' two sons Quintus Fabius Maximus and Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus.I could go on and on about the historical inaccuracies in this book, but that would get tedious. My main problem was the author's assertion that the destruction of Carthage was necessary because Carthage was rearming and becoming a military threat to Rome. His only real argument for this notion is that Carthage built two internal harbors that were capable of housing war ships. This is likely true, having been gleaned from archeology, but it is not known that these harbors were actually used for war ships, and, if they were, whether the war ships might not have had a benign purpose such as defending merchant ships from pirates. The author asserts that Carthage was the aggressor in the war with Masinissa, when ancient writings say that Masinissa periodically encroached upon Carthaginian territory. The Carthaginians would send delegations to Rome to complain and Rome would almost always side with Masinissa. The author also asserts that Carthage was recruiting mercenaries. After their defeat in the Second Punic War, Carthage could no longer recruit mercenaries from their traditional sources such as Numidia, the Balearic Islands, and Spain, so where would they have been recruiting from? Gaul, the author asserts. Sounds like a bit of a stretch.Scipio Aemilianus (the real Scipio Aemilianus, not Gibbon's caricature) personally witnessed the devastating defeat of the Carthaginian army by Masinissa's tribesmen in 150 B.C., so how could he, or anyone else, have considered Carthage a credible military threat to Rome? The fact is, the last thing the Carthaginians wanted was another military confrontation with Rome and they were persuaded to do all kind of humiliating things to forestall such a confrontation, including totally disarming and sending 300 high born youngsters to Rome as hostages. It was only when the Romans insisted that they abandon their city and move at least ten miles inland that they were driven to resist.If you're looking for some interesting discussions of ancient military strategy and tactics, and a lot of battlefield blood and gore, this book is for you. If you're looking for an accurate portrayal of the events and personalities involved in the Third Punic War, this book is not for you.

Something I like about the way the author writes the book, is that he doesn't restrict it to the Total War series. Indeed, if it were not for the title, you'd forget that connection outright which works to the book's benefit. The book is very well rooted in historic fact, bringing in several fictional characters and putting forth a semi-fictional, semi-historical storyline. In this, it achieves a kind of historic plausibility, there the events described could potentially have happened.There are some minor pet peeves about the book some may have, but this may be different depending upon your background. As an avid Roman History buff (particularly the Roman Republican era in which this book is set), there are some things I felt the book could have done differently.One is the occasional major suspension of disbelief. It is clear that there are parts where the author is influenced by future events, such as a character describing guns and cannon after a demonstration of a very real and historically accurate device. Luckily, these only ever take away from certain scenes and not the overall book itself. Another thing that would be much appreciated is this book could benefit greatly from footnotes. It is difficult to tell sometimes what is factual and what is fiction. It is unclear if many of the opinions and political stances taken by historic individuals in this book are accurate or invented to drive the story. Footnotes would clear this up very effectively.Overall, these are just minor things. The story overall is an excellent read, especially if you are a fan of this era of history. If you are expecting this to be a book that is (somehow) a rehash of the game, it is not. The most you'll find that is tied in to the game is some word choice, and some unit names which themselves are already historically relevant to the time period. (Cretian archers and Balearic slingers are famed types of soldiers that actually existed, for instance). The battles are suitably detailed and vivid, as they should be. Seeing how this book is only the first of four, I'm very excited to see what the next three will have.

My first David Gibbins book, and I thoroughly enjoyed this over a few days on my recent vacation. Well developed characters, with a great backdrop of the famous fall of Carthage. I didn't realise this until I read the author's notes that he was such an authority on Roman history - particularly the conflict with Carthage. Definitely look past the videogame fiction tieup.I must confess I am an avid fan of the SEGA TOTAL WAR franchise, and love TOTAL WAR Rome on PC - which was what first interested me in the title, so was only expecting a light superficial read - however was pleasantly surprised by the level of historic detail. I could see that there was an effort to integrate it with the name of the units in Total War - however Sega's editorial license was quite limited (gratefully!).I'm actually going to try his other titles now - give it a read, particularly if you're a fan of the PC games.

The book was very slow and not very exciting. Compared to books like Spartacus, the novel failed to capture the essence of the old Roman Empire. Conn Iggulden's series on ancient Rome was a lot more descriptive and exciting.

Gibbins allows much of the novel to devolve into violent torture-porn and Scipio is almost unbelievably reflective at all times, but it is as solid a novel as you can find considering how little source material exists about Scipio's life. The long breaks in the story are frustrating, but they are better than pure speculation, and serve to arrange the book nicely. Perhaps the greatest part is that the story is not told from Scipio's point of view, which keeps the reader more aware of the important role of Scipio's supporting cast in determining the fate of Carthage.

As said in the title I loved the Total War series of games centred around Rome. So to have a book based on this was beyond my expectations. Written well and it gives you an insight into Scipio as he grows into the renowned commander we know him to be.

Great book love this author

Present for book lover

brilliant thank you

good read well written book of its type