NOTES TO THE TEXT
I THE HEIGHTS OF HEIRCTE AND ERYX
1 Hamilcar at Heircte (or âHercteâ): Pol. 1.56â7. Properly speaking it was the fort in the pass that had this name (Thiel (1954) 254 note 618) but the mountainâs ancient name is not known. Earlier Roman attack on fort âHercteâ, supposedly with 40,000 foot and 1,000 horse: Diod. 23.20 (in 252/251?). The First Punic Warâs eighteenth year began in midsummer 247:Walbank, 1.119â20.
2 For the theory that the Romans originally meant to fight not Carthage but Syracuse see A. Heuss, Der erste punische Krieg und das Problem des rĂśmischen Imperialismus, 3rd edn (Darmstadt 1970); J. Molthagen, âDer Weg in den ersten punischen Kriegâ, Chiron 5 (1975) 89â127; more fully Hoyos (1998) 47â99.
3 Naval losses from 255 to 249: Pol. 1.37.1â2, 39.6, 51.11â12, 54.8; Diod. 24.1.7â9; Thiel (1954) 236, 251, 279â89. Readable short accounts of the war are Caven (1980) 18â66; Scullard (1989a) 537â69; a full history in Lazenby (1996); while the naval side is thoroughly and interestingly studied by Thiel, 61â338. Census figures: Livy, Epit. 16 and 19 (292,200 and 241,700); Brunt (1971) chapter III.
4 Negotiations with Regulus: Lazenby (1996) 101â2; Hoyos (1998) 116â18.
5 Carthaloâs raid: Zon. 8.16 (Carthalo scared off by the praetor urbanus, who was based in the City; note too the new citizen-colonies of Alsium and Fregenae founded on the south Etruscan coast in 247). Economic strains: cf. Picard (1967) 57â9; Hoyos (1994) 265â6. Ptolemy declined to lend: Appian, Sic. 1.1â2. Fleet neglected after 249, and overloaded, undermanned and poorly trained in 241: Pol. 1.61.4â5; Zon. 8.17; Thiel (1954) 306â11; Lazenby (1996) 144â5, 150â5. Privateering Roman raids: Zon. 8.16; cf. Thiel, 299 note 768; Lazenby, 146â7.
6 HecatompylusâThevesteâTebessa: Pol. 1.73.1; Diod. 24.10.1â2, cf. 4.18.1; de Sanctis, 3.1.176 note 79. On motives for expansion in the 240s cf. Hoffmann (1962) 14â15. On the fertile Tebessa uplands see Fentress (1979) 32â3, unnecessarily doubting that Hecatompylus was Theveste. âThinking that they had rational groundsâ, Pol. 1.72.1; Hanno involved, ibid. 3.
7 Zon. 8.16 (mutiny repressed, episode at Drepana); Pol. 1.56.2â3 (raid and move to heights). Frontinusâ tale of a supposed ruse by âBarcaâ to enter Lilybaeum despite Roman warships (Strat. 3.10.9) is not about him at all (despite de Sanctis, 3.1.238; L. Pareti, Storia di Roma 2 (Turin 1952) 166â7) but was performed by another general, Hannibal son of Hamilcar, in 250 (Pol. 1.44; Thiel (1954) 266â9) and Frontinus or his source got confused.
8 See Hoyos (2001c).
9 Kromayer estimated Hamilcarâs army at 15,000â20,000 (in Kromayer and Veith, AS 3.1.10), as do Walbank (1.121) and Scullard ((1989a) 564), but Thiel (1954) 299 note 766 rightly disbelieves this. Perhaps 30,000 at battle of Panormus in 250: Lazenby (1996) 121. Twenty thousand mercenaries from Sicily in 241: Pol. 1.67.13. Lilybaeum was garrisoned by 7,700 in 250, soon reinforced to over 20,000 (Diod. 24.1.1â2; Pol. 1.44.2, 45.8; Thiel, 263â4). Hamilcarâs cavalry: 200 are mentioned at Eryx in 243 (below) but the Heircte heights had much more room and resources. Roman force was âevenly matchedâ with his: Pol. 1.57.6; de Sanctis improbably supposes an entire consular army (3.1.179), meaning some 20,000 men. Kromayer, 23, places the Roman camp south of M. Castellaccio on Cuzzo Gibelliforni, as good a guess as any (Hoyos (2001c) 494).
10 Operations from the Heircte heights: Pol. 1.56.9â57.8, cf. 1.74.9. Lancel (1992) 388 thinks raids on Italy continued from 247 through to 241. Italium: Diod. 24.6. Like de Sanctis (3.1.178 note 83), Manni takes Longon to be an unknown river near Catana ((1981) 114, 193). Lazenby (1996) 148 sees it as a raid into Catanaâs territory perhaps to put pressure on Hiero of Syracuse nearby. But Longane near Mylae, attested on coins and an inscription (Manni, 197), is called âLongoneâ by Stephanus of Byzantium (s.v., citing the fourth-century Syracusan historian Philistus), so âLongonâ is not an impossible variant; ÎÎąĎá˝ąÎ˝ÎˇĎ ĎĎοὝĎΚον could be a copyistâs error for ÎÎľĎá˝ľÎ˝ÎˇĎ Ď. (compare the probable error of ÎὡýξĎĎÎą replacing áşşĎέĎΝιν at Diod. 23.3, and the definite one ÎὡýόĎΚνοĎ, meaning ÎĎ
ĎόĎΚοĎ, at 24.11.1). PanormusâAgrigentum road: attested by a milestone probably of 252 or 248 set up by the consul C. Aurelius Cotta (ILLRP 1,227; Verbrugghe (1976) 19â22).
11 Hamilcarâs family: chapter II. Seibert supposes winter visits to Carthage (Hann. 9 note 14) but winter sailing was very dangerous. On brq/baraq see Gsell, HAAN 2.252 note 7 (noting that it might instead mean â[Baâal] has blessedâ, from the verb brkâthough he might have added that this seems less suitable for the military Hamilcar); Picard (1967) 19; Sznycer (1978) 552â3. The claim that Hamilcarâs family had come from Barce, a Greek city near Cyrene (R. G. Austin, P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber IV (Oxford 1955) 43), is an unfounded guess. Numidian princeâs admiration: Pol. 1.78.1â8 (Naravas).
12 Move to Eryx: Pol. 1.58.2; Diod. 24.8. Kromayer, in Kromayer and Veith, AS 3.1.32â5, with his Map 2; Thiel (1954) 301. Temple of Venus Erycina: de Sanctis, 3.1.173 note 73; Walbank, 1.118â19. Eryx townsfolk transferred to Drepana in 259: Diod. 23.9.4; Zon. 8.11. A surviving line from Naeviusâ late third-century epic poem on the war, âsuperbiter contemtim conterit legionesâ (âhaughtily, scornfully he wears down the legionsâ) may refer to Hamilcar, on Eryx or earlier at Heircte: cf. Warmington (1936) 64, frg. 38. Hamilcar, âVodostorâ and Fundanius: Diod. 24.9. Circa 1 May for consuls entering office: Morgan (1977) 90â1. The Gallic deserters: Pol. 1.77.4, 2.7.7â10.
13 New Roman fleet and battle of the Aegates islands: Pol. 1.59â61; Diod. 24.11; Zon. 8.17 (with Hannoâs fate); Florus 1.18 [2.2] 33â6; Eutrop. 2.27.3, with the date convincingly defended by Morgan (1977) 109â12; other sources at Broughton, MRR 1.218; Thiel (1954) 302â16; Walbank, 1.124â6; Lazenby (1996) 150â7. Attack on Eryx, 2,000 Punic troops slain: Oros. 4.10.8. Peace-talks and terms: Pol. 1.62.1â63.3; 3.27.1â6; Diod. 24.13 (mentions Gisco); Nepos, Hamil. 1.5; Appian, Sic. 2.1â4 (a confused blend of first and final drafts); Zon. 8.17; de Sanctis, 3.1.184â9; Walbank, 1.126â7, 355; Schmitt, SVA 3.173â81; Huss (1985) 249â51; Scardigli (1991) 205â43; Hoyos (1998) 118â23, 130â1. The 1,000 talent down-payment possibly represented about one yearâs Punic state revenues: chapter II §III. Hamilcarâs promises to the troops: Pol. 1.67.12; Appian, Iber. 4.15.
14 Hamilcarâs final actions in Sicily: Pol. 1.66.1, 68.12; Zon. 8.17. Punic generalship indefinite in duration: Gsell, HAAN 2.420â1; Huss (1985) 478. Official scrutiny: Gsell, 2.188, 205â7; Picard and Picard, LDC 128, 142â6; Huss, 464, 478.
15 Politics at Carthage in mid-century: chapter II. Hanno undermined war-effort in Sicily: Thiel (1954) 294â7, 306; Picard (1967) 60â1; Picard and Picard, LDC 198; Huss (1985) 246 note 232; Scullard (1989a) 563. Seibert severely criticizes Hamilcarâs leadership at both Heircte and Eryx for stubbornness and failure to exploit advantages like Punic naval superiority before 242 (FzH 89â94; Hann. 8â11).
II CARTHAGE
1 Descent from Belus and Barca, Silius 1.71â6, 15.745â8. Baâlu king of Tyre in early seventh century: Nina Jidejian, Tyre through the Ages (Beirut (1969)) 46â9, 246; W. RĂśllig, Kl P 4.1028 s.v. âTyrosâ. Tyre did have other kings with similar names, for instance Ithobaal in the first half of the ninth century (Jidejian, 39â41, 246), Baal in the sixth (ibid. 56, 246â7). Punic names: Sznycer (1978) 550â1âover 500 known from inscriptions. The two Hamilcars: see next note.
2 Hamilcar âadmodum adulescentulusâ, Nepos, Hamil. 1.1. Adulescentulus and adulescens can be very elasticâfor instance Cicero retrospectively terms himself âadulescensâ as consul aged 43 (Philippics 2.46.118) and to Sallust a 37-year-old Caesar is âadulescentulusâ (Catilina 49.2; cf. Lewis and Shortâs Latin Dictionary, s.v. âadulescensâ). Hamilcar about 30 in 247: similarly Picard (1967) 64, puts his birth around 280â75. T. Lenschau, RE 7.2302â3, wants him born by 285 so as to identify him as the Hamilcar prominent in the war from 260, but Nepos is emphatic: Barcaâs first command was in the âtemporibus extremisâ of the war. See also Walbank, 1.80; Huss (1985) 228 note 74. Hanno son of Bomilcar, Pol. 3.42.6; Bomilcar called âthe kingâ (i.e. sufete?), Appian, Hann. 20.90; Huss (1983) 25â32, (1991) 118â23.
Hannibalâs birth-year: in early 237 he was nine (Pol. 2.1.6 and 3.11.5; Livy 21.1.4), at the end of 202 âmore than 45â (Pol. 15.19.3; cf. Livy 30.37.9); see Lenschau, RE 7.2323 s.v. âHamilkar (7)â; Seibert, Hann. 7 note 2, 9 note 12. Mago in 218, Pol. 3.71.8 (âyoungâ), etc.; born in 242, surmises Picard (1967) 65. On Hamilcarâs daughters and other family questions, see Appendix §1.
3 Byzacium estates: Livy 33.48.1; the inference of wealth is Picardâs (1967) 20â1. Birth and wealth required: Aristotle, Pol. 2.11.8â9, 1,273a, âthey believe that magistrates should be chosen on the basis not only of birth but also of wealth; for it is impossible for a poor man to govern well and to have the timeâ. Bribery, 2.11.10â12; still prevalent and public in later times, Pol. 6.56.1â4. Ameling (1993) 171â5 seeks to temper these verdicts.
4 Hannoâs sobriquet: Appian, Iber. 4.16, Lib. 34.145, 49.213; Zon. 8.22; Huss (1979) 230 note 40, and (1985) 464, sees it as rendering Punic rb (rab), âgreat oneâ or âchief â, and meaning not age or eminence but the head of the state finances (cf. chapter XV §III). But that this office could be held by Hanno for decades during the Barcid supremacyâand that only he, and a couple of other Hannos in other eras, were remembered for it by having it as their sobriquetâis not convincing. His alleged enmity towards Hamilcar during the 240s: cf. chapter I with note 15. Not hereditary (contra for instance Gsell, HAAN 2.253; Hoyos (1994) 270 tentatively)â Livy limits it to Hamilcar and his sons (21.3.2, 10.11 âpaternas inimicitiasâ, 23.13.6 âsimultas cum familia Barcinaâ) and Silius, writing about Hannoâs âodiis gentilibusâ towards Hamilcarâs son (Pun. 2.277), may have no more than that in mind; in any case this is a poet who affirms that Regulus had been crucified in public (2.343â4). Loreto similarly sees the decisive break between Hanno and Hamilcar coming as late as 237 ((1995) 205, 207â8, cf. 138, 161).
5 The ports, especially the circular one, have been extensively studied as part of the âSave Carthageâ project: see for instance Picard (1983) 34â7; Huss (1985) 47â8; L. E. Stager and H. Hurst in Ennabli (1992) 75â8 and 79â94; Lancel (1992) 192â211 = English tr. 172â92). See Appendix §2.
6 On Carthaginian history and culture see, e.g., Lancel (1992); Huss (1985); Picard (1968); Picard and Picard (1983); Warmington (1964). On the archaeological remains, Ennabli (1992); Niemeyer et al. (1996). Timaeus on the foundation-date: FrGH 566 F60. Extent of city: Strabo 17.3.15, C833; Appian, Lib. 95.448â96.455, 117.555, 128.610â13; Gsell, HAAN 2, chapter I; Tlatli (1978) chapters IIIâIV; Huss (1985) chapter IV; Scullard (1989a) 499â503; Lancel (1992) chapter V. The Numidians: Gsell, 2.99â100, 306â8. On the Carthaginian empire, Whittaker (1978). The Pyrgi tablets: e.g. J. Ferron, in Aufstieg und Niedergang der RĂśmischen Welt, 1.1, ed. H. Temporini (Berlin and New York 1972) 189â216; Tusa (1974) 88â9; Lancel (1992) 101â2. Treaties with Rome: Pol. 3.22â4; cf. Walbank, 1.339â49; Scardigli (1991) 47â127; Cornell (1996) 210â14, 388.
7 King Hamilcarâs mother: Herodotus 7.165. Hamilcar Barca and Naravas: Pol. 1.78. Later granddaughterâs royal marriages, and Sophonibaâs: chapter XIII note 2. Background of Punic agents Hippocrates and Epicydes: Livy 24.6.2. On intermarriage cf. Picard (1961) 82â3.
8 Carthaginians jealously guarding their western trade monopoly: Strabo 3.5.11, 175C, 17.1.19, 802C; but see Whittaker (1978) 61, 80â1. On Carthaginian Sicily see especially Hans (1983). For the one, dubious clash between Carthaginians and Massiliots, a supposed âbattle of Artemisiumâ, see Sosylus, FrGH 176, F1, with Jacobyâs commentary (Kommentar vol. BD, 605); Huss (1985) 67. Punic adoption of Greek usages: e.g. Picard (1964) 96â118, 194â5; Picard and Picard (1983) 55â9; Hahn (1974); Lancel (1992) 360â7. Coinage: Jenkins and Lewis (1963); Huss (1983) 489â93.
9 Punic religion is well discussed by Huss (1985) chapter XXXVI; Lancel (1992) chapter VI. On child sacrifice: L. E. Stager in Pedley (1980) 1â11; Lancel, 268â76; Fantar (1995) 74â7 is sceptical. The molk of 310: Diod. 20.14.4â7 (emphasizing that it was exceptional). Silius Italicus has a story about Hannibal being ordered by the priests to hand over his son for sacrifice, and refusing (4.763â829), but this is obviously a fancy (though Seibert, Hann. 20 note 60, thinks there may be something to it and also (19â20) that a molk may have taken place during the African revolt of 241â237, despite the lack of evidence. Neither idea persuades, cf. Appendix §1).
10 âLepcisâ on the âora minoris Syrtisâ: Livy 34.62.3 (Leptis in some MSS). The Emporia region stretched from the Lesser to the Greater Syrtes (gulf of Gabès to gulf of Sirte): Gsell, HAAN 2.127â8; Lancel (1992) 111, 278, 430; cf. Mattingly (1994) xiii, 1, 50â2, 218. The daily talent is disbelieved by Kahrstedt (1913) 134â5, and Walbank, 3.491; but Gsell, 2.319, and de Sanctis, 3.1.32 note 88, judge it as revenue from Lepcis plus its surroundings. See Appendix §3.
11 Roman republicâs estimated income from 200 to 157: T. Frank, An Economic History of Rome, vol. 1: The Republic (Baltimore 1933) 126â41; Nicolet (1978) 1.255â7. Rhodian customs-duties: Pol. 30.31.7â12;Walbank, 3.458â60. Rhodian customsduties before 167: Pol. 30.31.7â12; Walbank, 3.458â60. Punic war-indemnities in 241, 237 and 201: chapter I §V, chapter IV §I, chapter XV §I (that of 241 was perhaps suspended during the Mercenariesâ War, Hoyos (1998) 125). Revenues of Athens at the start of the Peloponnesian War, reportedly 1,000 talents: Xenophon, Anabasis 7.1.27, cf. Thucydides 1.99.3; R. Meiggs, The Athenian Empire (Oxford 1972, repr. 1987) 258â9. Syracusan indemnity: Pol. 1.16.9â10, 17.3; Diod. 23.4.1; Zon. 8.9.11 (Eutropius, 2.19.1, improba...