A brief mention of the struggle between Rome and Carthage on a TV program brought this question to mind–it’s one that pops into my brain every now and then, but which I haven’t the knowledge to speculate upon. Hopefully, the Dope will come to my rescue!
As everyone knows, Western civilization bears the stamp of Roman influence to this day in laws, architecture, art, and a variety of other fields. This is because, for a very long time, Rome was the dominant power not just in the Mediterrenean, but through most of Europe and parts of the Near East.
At the time of the Punic wars, though, Rome was not yet the hegemonic power it would become. It was more or less balanced (or so I recall from my Roman history class, ages ago) with Carthage; the two were more or less the two superpowers of the time and region. As it happens, Rome fought and won three wars against Carthage, and in the end did a pretty thorough job of wiping out the city; from there, Rome went on to dominate the ancient world.
My (purely speculative) question is this: What if it had went the other way? What if, say, Hannibal and his elephants had emerged victorious in the second Punic War, and Rome had been reduced to a minor power instead of Carthage? What would society look like today? I don’t know the first thing about Carthage–my education has been fairly Rome-centric, and Carthage is just mentioned as place the Romans got unusually angry about (for some unmentioned reason–as a side question, why DID Rome hate Carthage so flippin’ much?) and salted the earth of.
It’s possible that either a) some part of my premises are wrong, or b) we just don’t know enough about Carthage to speculate, because the Romans were so thorough in destroying it; if either is the case, please let me know.
The Romans were really good at destroying cities. Until recently, the question as to if they sacrificed children to Moloch was still up in the air, many people believing it was a blood libel.
Recently, actual sacrifices were found, and the frequency does seem related to the prosperity of the city. Well, inversely related.
This is what we have on Carthage. At least, according to wikipedia. It’s a good summation, I think.
Most evidence we have is from authors from cultures opposing the nation, so it’s not very trustworthy. (Alas, Alexandria burned)
There are a number of queens noted, which implies some amount of equality, and it was a naval power and merchant country, which implies even more potential social mobility.
The same reason Pepsi and Coke hate each other: as you mentioned, they were their only viable competitor.
Carthage had Sicily and Sardinia, so Rome wasn’t going to be able to expand south or west while they were there.
It didn’t help matters much when Hannibal invaded Italy and tried to bring Rome down. He didn’t have official Cathaginian approval to do that, but the Romans weren’t to know that and probably wouldn’t have believed it if they had.
How long until the PepsiCo armies lay siege to the Coke strongholds in Atlanta, and finally throw down their factories and sow the coca fields with salt?
We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in Atlanta, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Cola, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender!
Interesting idea… Surely there is a good chance that if Carthage had ended up the dominant power we would end up with a more African-centric world ? One of the primary reasons for the dominance of western European countries is their proximity to Rome (and the cultural left-overs they were given as a result). If Carthage replaces Rome then surely the Algeria, Niger, Egypt, etc. Would replace France, Britain, Germany, et.
Assuming of course Carthage would have ended up as sophisticated as the Romans at the height of their power. I’m assuming there is no reason for this not to be case, they were just as literate and heavily influenced by the ancient Greeks ?
Yes, notice that all of Carthage’s colonies were in Europe, not Africa. They themselves were a Phoenecian colony. In a lot of ways the North Africa coast is more naturally a part of Europe than of Africa south of the Sahara.
Carthage itself is in Tunisa, I’ve been there, there is not much to see although the main museum (in Tunis) is pretty interesting. They also had colonies in the Middle East.
Also, Rome effectively hopped over to the Middle East, leaving Europe to rot.
I reckon that European dominance came from a combination of things, a colder and less easy climate, the presence of coal and iron and the need to be adept at seafaring … which is interesting as the Phoenicians were also good at that.