pothos.org

Ive been studying and reading what may have been said in the Alexander journals and the possible aims to take Carthage.

I think it was well within his scope and ambitions, But just how difficult would Alexander have found Carthage. I dont know a lot about Carthage power but I realise that following Alexander Carthage became the dominant power in the Mediteranian, Even above the Romans at that time till the Romans found a Phonecian Ship took it to bits and learned to build them for them selves. Although Carthage maust have been regionaly powerful, with probably the the Best Ancient Fleets and navies ever. Would that have been enough to stop or hold of the Macedonian military genius, With all his aquired wealth resources and power.

I guess Alexander got a taste of Phonecian tenacity and naval power at Tyre, But gradually towards the end Phonecian forces gradually turned over to Alexander realising I guess that Tyre was on borrowed time.

I guess if Alexander was to go aginst Carthage tyre would have to rely on holding and using its Naval power to work on Alexanders sea links etc. But by that time would it be worth Cutting Alexanders supply train to Greece and Macedonia, I doubt it, By then I feel Alexander had the money capital etc to get on quite nicely without rienforcements or supplies from Greece.

All in all I would say Carthage would become beaten in any battles outside the City and the City would become sieged. Up to then I read little of Carthaginian Land forces or any real succeses on the battlefield.

Kenny

Carthage was a naval power. Hannibal's successes were due to traitorous Romans, surprise attacks and outstanding generalship but he did not have the skills or the army of Alexander and he was the best of the Carthaginians (and he eventually lost to the Romans). In Alexander's day, Carthage was a power but a far inferior one to the empires in Asia.

Go to the Naval thread on this forum for some good discussion on Alexander and his navy.

1000 ships he ordered...

Panktra Hail

Indeed your point is correct Carthage was inferior to anything in Asia. But it also gives a good account and reasoning why Alexander would have taken the Romans. Maybe Carthage was a regional power inferior to the Persians yet at that time in history it was a bigger powere player than the Romans. Gives support to my arguement that indeed had Alexander gone for Rome in his hey day it would be game set and match to Alexander

Kenny

I guess Carthage was only a regional power based solely on its supreme naval forces. As demonstrated soon as the Romans learned to build those ships Carthage was doomed.

I would say the Roman Empire owes a lot to the Carthaginians. Hannibal taught them to improve on tactics and the Naval lessons gave Rome control of the Sea . Alexandere would have been comming at Carthage from land and would have basically Neutralized its fleet through blockade and mopping up its land bases.

I once remember a guy rightly pointing out the importance of a maritime fleet but once you cut it off from land it becomes pretty useless. Alexander realised this very early opn when he decided to cut the Persian Fleet off from land. That fleet I would guess was PHonecian. A lot of Phonecian ships were in and aroung Tyre so Alexander did demonstrate he could take the fleet and beat it.

Kenny