Government of Carthago sounds unstable

[Gryphon Templar]

After the description of the Government buildings the carthago empire sounds more like a confederation of independent city-states and colonys. Can not imagine that a theoretically large Carthage Empire would be very stable.

[Razor]

I guess that's an eye-opener for you?

[Ultra123]

EBII allows you to learn new things you may not have come accross in your daily walks of life unless you are interested heavily in history. EBII modders have historical teams that know their stuff inside out and provide evidence for it. It was stated in one of the previews for example theres a thread (this is correct?) for every unit discussing its historical value and proof in archaeological records and so forth.

It would indeed be a challenge to hold together a state such as carthage who is essentially an alliance of colonies and city states, water would have to be tread very carefully in the political scenes for sure so to speak.

[Moros]

EBII allows you to learn new things you may not have come accross in your daily walks of life unless you are interested heavily in history. EBII modders have historical teams that know their stuff inside out and provide evidence for it. It was stated in one of the previews for example theres a thread (this is correct?) for every unit discussing its historical value and proof in archaeological records and so forth.

Yes. When concepting a unit we need to post historical and archaeological evidence to support the design decisions and to make it clear to the unit artists what we want. Of course certain units have better and or more numerous sources than others.

[ipwnu678]

let us not forget that just after the 1st punic war there was an uprising in the carthaginian north african colonies. this is how carthage lost corsica and the other island (ive forgotten it) - the romans saw the opportunity to take rebel settlements and took it.

but also carthage was heavily dependant on trade. it wasnt a militaristic faction and only fought if they were under threat so i guess it would have all worked out some how

[Lindorn]

let us not forget that just after the 1st punic war there was an uprising in the carthaginian north african colonies. this is how carthage lost corsica and the other island (ive forgotten it) - the romans saw the opportunity to take rebel settlements and took it.

but also carthage was heavily dependant on trade. it wasnt a militaristic faction and only fought if they were under threat so i guess it would have all worked out some how

Also note that the assumption that a confederated alliance of city states would not have formed a strong empire is questionable. Most states, including Rome would fit that description to the T. Carthage still had a strong central bureaucracy, but it was primarily focused on enriching the upper classes moreso than military dominance.

[Revan The Great]

This shouldn't be too surprising, Rome was in a very similar situation at this point in its history. It was one main city, with numerous colonies spread throughout Italy, but overwhelmingly the cities and populations of Italy were 'friends', 'allies', and more or less subjugated peoples that paid tribute to Rome and were bound by treaties to help her.

This is part of why Hannibal in Italy was so frightening. It wasn't like he was in the middle of a hostile country, cut off and surrounded, like you may have thought. Instead, he was eroding Rome's powerbase and cutting those ties that made the Roman Republic pwerful - at this time, Rome really was still a 'city-state', in a lot of ways. It was as much, or even more so, a confederation of different peoples and nations than Carthage was itself. So it's wrong to think of 'Rome' as a centralized country with geographical control over the whole of the Italian peninsula. That sort of consolidation over even just Italy didn't really start to exist until the time of Sulla and Marius, who came around one hundred years after Hannibal.

[Iguanaonastick]

This is part of why Hannibal in Italy was so frightening. It wasn't like he was in the middle of a hostile country, cut off and surrounded, like you may have thought. Instead, he was eroding Rome's powerbase and cutting those ties that made the Roman Republic pwerful - at this time, Rome really was still a 'city-state', in a lot of ways. It was as much, or even more so, a confederation of different peoples and nations than Carthage was itself. So it's wrong to think of 'Rome' as a centralized country with geographical control over the whole of the Italian peninsula. That sort of consolidation over even just Italy didn't really start to exist until the time of Sulla and Marius, who came around one hundred years after Hannibal.

Indeed, I've read several historians who argue that the sole reason Rome survived Hannibal's invasion is that most Italian cities did -not- defect, despite ostensibly having strong incentives to do so.

The oft-repeated claim that Hannibal knew how to gain a victory, but not how to use it, can also be revised when seen in this light: after Cannae, he didn't march on Rome — not because of indecision on his part, but because marching on Rome was never part of his strategy. He was trying to get Rome's allies/subordinates to secede, and would quite reasonably have assumed that his great victory would inspire them to do so. If they had, the history of the Mediterranean would have gone very differently.

[Ciciro]

Indeed, I've read several historians who argue that the sole reason Rome survived Hannibal's invasion is that most Italian cities did -not- defect, despite ostensibly having strong incentives to do so.

The oft-repeated claim that Hannibal knew how to gain a victory, but not how to use it, can also be revised when seen in this light: after Cannae, he didn't march on Rome — not because of indecision on his part, but because marching on Rome was never part of his strategy. He was trying to get Rome's allies/subordinates to secede, and would quite reasonably have assumed that his great victory would inspire them to do so. If they had, the history of the Mediterranean would have gone very differently.

Celts would rules the world. Also Super-Lithuania.
(Points if you get the reference.)