Chapter 3 Christ as the ruler of "ancient" Carthage (Andronicus-Christ in the history of Carthage = Tsar-Grad, erroneously attributed to the "deepest

The history of the Punic wars had its sad but logical conclusion. The ideas of international parity were still very far away, and the stronger enemy sought to simply destroy, wipe out the weaker one. This is what happened to Carthage.

Peace conditions 201 BC e., which ended the Second Punic War, were extremely difficult for Carthage. Carthage lost all its overseas territories, had to disband the army and navy, a huge indemnity was imposed on the city, which had to be paid within fifty years. In addition, Carthage could no longer independently determine foreign policy, the Romans also exercised special control so that the Punes, God forbid, would not modernize weapons. Of course, there were still enough people in Carthage who dreamed of restoring their former power. However, after Hannibal fled from the city, their voice was weak. In general, the Carthaginians were loyal to their overlords. But this did not save Carthage.

At the head of one of the commissions that were sent from Rome to Africa in order to resolve controversial issues regarding Carthage, a principled and incorruptible senator, a consistent supporter of the anti-Punic policy, Mark Porcius Cato, was placed. Arriving back, this senator reported that he was worried about the speed with which Carthage restored its material well-being. He declared that until Carthage was destroyed, the Romans could not feel at ease. Cato the Elder ended each of his speeches on any issue with the catchphrase now: “Besides, I believe that Carthage must be destroyed!” The adoption of such a radical decision was in the hands of many Roman merchants and business executives. In the end, Cato's opinion won out. Now the destruction of a wealthy city was only a matter of time and opportunity. He introduced himself soon after.

Carthage was subjected to constant raids by the Numidians of King Masinissa, who felt his impunity due to the restrictions imposed on the city by the Romans. In the end, the Punians began to arm themselves in order to repulse the brazen attacks of the Numidians. However, they did not wait for the official permission of Rome. In response, the Romans began to prepare for war. In Carthage, they tried to hush up the conflict: the leaders of the anti-Roman party were condemned to death, an embassy went to Rome to ask for peace. The Senate set them conditions that the ambassadors themselves could not accept. While they traveled to Africa for unlimited powers, an army had already sailed from Rome. The following conditions were set for the new embassy: the Carthaginians must hand over 300 noble hostages and fulfill all the requirements of the Roman commander-in-chief, who had already been given the appropriate instructions.

The hostages were handed over, and the conversation with the commander took place already in Africa. Here the Romans demanded the surrender of all weapons and elephants. The Carthaginians agreed to this. After that, the last demand of the Romans was made: the city of Carthage should be demolished, and a new settlement founded away from the sea. This event, which happened in 149 BC. e. (Carthage had just finished paying its half-century indemnity), and served as the beginning of the Third Punic War.

The Carthaginians understood that it was about the very existence of their state (and it was hard not to understand this). They asked for a thirty-day reprieve to appeal to the Senate for mercy. The Romans were sure that the Punians could no longer resist without weapons, and this time they showed mercy. The reprieve was given. In Carthage, secretly from the Roman garrison (which is surprising in itself), general hard work began in preparation for a long struggle. According to the stories of ancient historians, women cut off their hair to make bowstrings out of them, men forged weapons day and night, supplies were delivered by sea and land from all over the Carthaginian region, city residents dismantled the walls of public and private buildings to strengthen the city walls.

After a month, the Romans found that Carthage was fully prepared to repel attacks, and its defenders were well armed. The very first assault showed that the war could drag on. The Roman army had to stand under the walls of the enemy city for about two years. The command of the siege was entrusted to the most capable Roman commander Scipio Aemilianus, who skillfully took advantage of the fame gained here by his grandfather, the famous Scipio Africanus. The new commander restored discipline in the Roman army and began to act more energetically. The Carthaginians lost the outer wall of the city, a blockade of Carthage was established from the sea and land. The Romans built a dam that blocked the entrance to the city harbor. The Punians managed at first to deal with this problem by digging a canal that allowed their ships to reach the open sea. But they did not manage to use the results of this activity. The moment for the attack of the Roman fleet, which did not expect the appearance of the Carthaginian ships, was for some reason missed, and soon the Roman soldiers, at the direction of Scipio, filled up the canal and blocked the isthmus, building a long wall.

Winter 147/146 BC e. became the last for the famine-stricken defenders of Carthage. In the spring, the Romans stormed the city, but for another six days a fierce struggle was waged on its streets for every house. Most of the Punians took refuge in the citadel in the middle of the city. Scipio ordered to burn everything around to make it possible to attack from different sides. Only then did the besieged surrender. Less than a tenth of the number of inhabitants who inhabited Carthage at the beginning of the Third Punic War came out of the citadel. Elsewhere, Hasdrubal, the chief of defense, was taken prisoner (according to legend, he cowardly asked for mercy, while his closest associates and his wife and children set themselves on fire in one of the city's temples).

The Senate insistently ordered Scipio to liquidate Carthage. The huge city was set on fire and burned for seventeen days. Then a furrow was drawn through the city - a symbol of destruction. The land on which Carthage stood was forever cursed and covered with salt, so that for many years not a single blade of grass could grow here. The former possessions of Carthage became the Roman province of Africa. Only in 29 BC. e. Julius Caesar ordered to arrange a colonial city on the site of Carthage. In 439, already n. e. the vandals made it the capital of their state. A hundred years later, he passed to the Byzantines and vegetated in provincial silence, until the Arabs in 698 again swept him off the face of the earth.

By the way, from a legal point of view, we can assume that the Third Punic War continued until recent days. The Romans did not conclude a peace treaty with Carthage! The historical “oversight” was corrected on February 2, 1985, when the mayor of Rome and the mayor of the Tunisian city of Carthage, which had revived after many years of desolation, signed an agreement on peace and cooperation.

Each of us from the school bench knows the Latin phrase "Carthage must be destroyed!". It was said by an ancient senator, urging other nobles to put an end to the rivalry between the Eternal City and an amazingly beautiful village in Africa. With this phrase, the politician always ended his speeches and, in the end, achieved what he wanted.

Why and who destroyed Carthage, it becomes clear when you take a short excursion into the past. In the world of that era, there were two great and powerful states that were complete opposites. In the Apennines, the Romans had a well-developed agricultural sector, economy, legal system, and army. In Carthage, trade flourished, everything was decided by money and status, and mercenaries made up military power. If Rome based its power on land, then the African city was a sea power. On the Apennine Peninsula, a pantheon of indulgent gods was worshiped, and on the other side of the Mediterranean Sea, numerous human sacrifices were made to the bloodthirsty Moloch. These two superpowers, sooner or later, had to collide foreheads, which resulted in a whole series of

Before answering the question of who destroyed Carthage, it should be said that the rivalry between the two civilizations lasted more than a hundred years. It was not profitable for any state to destroy the enemy, since their territorial interests did not touch. Rome fought to expand its borders at the expense of a weaker enemy, while the Carthaginians supplied their goods to all corners of the empire and needed a stream of slaves.

Guild Carthage led actions against with varying degrees of success. Such campaigns always ended in a truce. But the African side was the first to violate all agreements, which could not please the proud Eternal City. Violation of the treaty for Rome was an insult, so wars unfolded again. In the end, the senate made a decision and chose the one who destroyed Carthage to the ground.

When the legions approached the walls of Carthage, they were sure of a peaceful end to the war. The Romans knew that the death sentence had already been passed. The Roman commander, who destroyed Carthage, patiently and gradually announced all the requirements of the Senate. The townspeople obediently performed them in the hope that the illustrious army would soon leave. The inhabitants of the legendary African city were allowed to take their wealth with them and leave their homes. After that, they razed it to the ground, plowed it with a heavy plow and sowed it with salt, cursing these places forever. The main reason for these measures, the one who destroyed Carthage, called the lack of negotiability. After all, when they made promises, they obviously knew that they would not fulfill them.

By the way, the inhabitants of Carthage realized late, but no longer believed them. History has captured the heroic siege of the African pearl before its complete destruction. The onslaught of Scipio in 146 put an end to the history of this beautiful city on the Mediterranean coast and a great state. Despite the Roman rites, life returned to these parts after some time. the mild climate and favorable geographical position attracted new colonizers. But the city never reached its former glory.

The Roman senator Mark Porcius Cato the Elder (234 - 149 BC), who lived in the era of the Punic Wars, ended each of his speeches, regardless of the subject matter, with the phrase: "Besides, I think that Carthage must be destroyed." As you know, in 146 BC. his dream came true, Rome destroyed its most dangerous rival, clearing the way for the creation of the greatest empire of antiquity. Cato himself did not live for three years before the fall of Carthage, but his idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe complete destruction of the rival city was successfully implemented by the Roman soldiers: to destroy everything, leave no stone unturned, so that the defeated enemy would never be reborn, would not gather strength, and would not warm up again center of resistance.

Many centuries have passed, but the principle: “Carthage must be destroyed” still exists as one of the basic principles of world politics. And there is the main conductor of this principle on a global scale - the United States, a state that has turned from a "republic of freedom" into an "empire of money", for the second century in a row following the path to world domination and eliminating states and peoples that interfere with the execution of the will of financial tycoons from Wall Street .

We, the Russian people and Russians in general, who live today in modern Russia, are lucky and unlucky at the same time.

We are lucky that we are a great nation with a glorious and unique history that has made a huge cultural, scientific and technical contribution to the treasury of world civilization. It is also fortunate that we, as a nation, have the best opportunities in the world of various kinds for the development of the state and human potential.

Unlucky only in one thing, that there were always enough vicious and envious enemies, hungry for our good. Seven hundred years, out of the last thousand, our ancestors spent in defensive wars, and three hundred years of them plowed their land holding a sword on their belt.

The Russian people were able to fight off all the enemies, until the turn of the last one came, for which we became a kind of "Carthage", and which for more than a century has been pursuing a targeted policy to destroy our state and destroy the Russian people, as a force preventing its world hegemony. Russia does not suit, and will never suit the United States, in any form: neither in the form of an absolute or constitutional monarchy, nor in the form of a bourgeois-democratic republic, nor in the form of the Republic of Soviets, nor in the form of the USSR, much less "PRC No. 2 ".

Sixty-three years ago, on August 18, 1948, the US National Security Council passed Directive 20/1, "US Aims in the War against Russia." This date is usually considered the beginning of the US information war against the USSR. Directive 20/1 was first published in the United States in 1978 in the collection Deterrence. Documents on American Policy and Strategy 1945 - 1950.

The document is interesting, the full text is on 33 pages, so I only quote excerpts, all, from A to Z, is permeated with the spirit of Cato the Elder: “Carthage (Russia) must be destroyed!”. There he is.

“The government is forced, in the interests of the political war that is now unfolding, to outline more definite and militant goals in relation to Russia already now, in peacetime, than was necessary in relation to Germany and Japan even before the start of hostilities with them ... In state planning now, before the emergence war, we should determine our goals, achievable both in time of peace and in time of war, reducing to a minimum the gap between them.

“Our main goals with regard to Russia, in essence, come down to just two:

A) Minimize the power and influence of Moscow;

B) To carry out fundamental changes in the theory and practice of foreign policy, which the government in power in Russia adheres to.

For the peaceful period, the directive of the National Security Council 20/1 provided for the surrender of the USSR under pressure from outside.

“Our efforts to get Moscow to accept our concepts are tantamount to a statement: our goal is the overthrow of Soviet power. Starting from this point of view, it can be proved that these goals are unattainable without war, and, therefore, we thereby recognize that our ultimate goal in relation to the Soviet Union is war and the overthrow of Soviet power by force. It would be a mistake to adhere to such a point of reasoning.

First, we are not bound by a fixed time frame to achieve our goals in peacetime. We do not have a strict alternation of periods of war and peace, that would prompt us to declare: we must achieve our goals in peacetime by such and such a date, or "we will resort to other means."

Secondly, we should justifiably feel absolutely no guilt in seeking to abolish concepts incompatible with international peace and stability and replace them with concepts of tolerance and international cooperation. It is not our business to ponder the internal consequences that the adoption of such concepts in another country may lead to, nor should we think that we bear any responsibility for these events ... If the Soviet leaders consider that the growing importance of more enlightened concepts of international relations are incompatible with the preservation of their power in Russia, then this is their business, not ours. Our business is to work and ensure that internal events take place there ... As a government, we are not responsible for internal conditions in Russia.”

In NSS directive 20/1, subversive work against the Soviet Union is recognized as state policy.

“Our goal in time of peace is not the overthrow of the Soviet government. Of course, we strive to create such circumstances and conditions that the current Soviet leaders will not be able to put up with and which will not please them. It is possible that once they find themselves in such a situation, they will not be able to keep their place in Russia. However, it should be emphasized with all force - it is their business, not ours ...

If the situation to which we are directing our efforts in peacetime really arises, and if it proves unbearable for the maintenance of the internal system of government in the USSR, which causes the Soviet government to disappear from the scene, we should not regret what has happened, but we will not take upon ourselves responsibility for having achieved or carried it out.”

"It is primarily a question of making and keeping the Soviet Union weak politically, militarily and psychologically in comparison with external forces beyond its control."

“We must, first of all, proceed from the fact that it will not be profitable or practically feasible for us to completely occupy the entire territory of the Soviet Union, installing our administration on it. This is impossible both in view of the vastness of the territory and the size of the population ... In other words, we should not hope to achieve a false realization of our will on Russian territory, as we tried to do in Germany and Japan. We must understand that the final settlement must be political.”

And here are the ways of such a “settlement”, depending on the outcome of hostilities:

“If we take the worst case, that is, the preservation of Soviet power over all or almost all of the present Soviet territory, then we must demand:

A) fulfillment of purely military conditions (surrender of weapons, evacuation of key areas, etc.), in order to ensure military helplessness for a long time

B) the fulfillment of conditions in order to ensure significant economic dependence on the outside world.

“All conditions must be harsh and clearly humiliating for this communist regime. They may roughly resemble the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1918, which deserves the most careful study in this regard.

“We must accept as an absolute premise that we will not conclude a peace treaty and will not resume normal diplomatic relations with any regime in Russia dominated by any of the current Soviet leaders or persons who share their way of thinking.”

“So what goals should we look for in relation to any non-communist power that may arise on part or all of Russian territory as a result of the events of the war? It must be strongly emphasized that regardless of the ideological basis of any such non-communist regime, and regardless of the extent to which it will be ready to pay lip service to democracy and liberalism, we must achieve our goals arising from the requirements already mentioned. In other words, we must create automatic guarantees to ensure that even a non-communist and nominally friendly regime:

A) did not have great military power;

B) economically heavily dependent on the outside world;

C) did not have serious power over the main national minorities and

D) did not install anything resembling an iron curtain.

In the event that such a regime expresses hostility towards the Communists and friendship towards us, we must take care that these conditions are not imposed in an insulting or humiliating manner. But we are obliged not to impose them by washing and skating in order to protect our interests.

“At present, there are a number of interesting and strong emigrant groups ... any of them is suitable, from our point of view, as the rulers of Russia.

We must expect that various groups will make strenuous efforts to induce us to take such measures in the internal affairs of Russia as will bind us and give rise to political groups in Russia to continue to beg for our help. Therefore, we need to take drastic measures to avoid responsibility for deciding who exactly will rule Russia after the collapse of the Soviet regime. The best way out for us is to allow all emigre elements to return to Russia as quickly as possible and to see to what extent it depends on us, so that they receive approximately equal opportunities in bids for power ... Armed struggle will probably break out between various groups. Even in this case, we should not interfere, unless this fight affects our military interests.

“In any territory liberated from the rule of the Soviets, we will face the problem of the human remnants of the Soviet apparatus of power. In the event of an orderly withdrawal of Soviet troops from what is now Soviet territory, the local apparatus of the Communist Party is likely to go underground, as happened in areas occupied by the Germans in the recent war. Then he will reassert himself in the form of guerrilla bands. In this regard, the problem of how to deal with it is relatively simple: it will be enough for us to distribute weapons and give support to any non-communist authorities in control of the area, and allow us to crack down on the communist gangs to the end by the traditional methods of the Russian civil war. A much more difficult problem will be created by rank and file members of the Communist Party or workers (of the Soviet apparatus) who will be discovered or arrested or who will be at the mercy of our troops or any Russian authorities. And in this case, we should not take responsibility for the massacre of these people or give direct orders to local authorities how to deal with them. This is the business of any Russian government that will replace the communist regime. We can be sure that such a power will be much better able to judge the danger of former communists to the security of the new regime and deal with them so that they do no harm in the future ... We must always remember: repression at the hands of foreigners inevitably creates local martyrs. .

So, we should not make it our goal to carry out a broad program of decommunization by our troops in the territory liberated from communism and, in general, we should leave this to the lot of any local authorities that will replace Soviet power.

As you know, there were three Punic wars.

In the first war, Rome acted as a contender for dominance in the Mediterranean and, as a result of a protracted twenty-three-year war, was able to significantly strengthen its geopolitical positions.

In the second war, which lasted seventeen years, the Carthaginians under the command of Hannibal tried to take revenge on the territory of the enemy, at first successfully, but, in the end, they were forced to leave Italy, and were finished off in Africa by the troops of Scipio.

The third war lasted only three years. It was provoked by Rome itself. Disarmed Carthage did not need war. Despite the fact that the Carthaginians executed all supporters of the anti-Roman party and were ready to pay off, nevertheless, Rome started the war. After a long siege, Carthage was taken, plundered and razed to the ground, 55,000 inhabitants were enslaved. The place where the fortress stood was plowed and covered with salt.

Rome won because it was firmly guided by one goal: “Carthage must be destroyed”, for this purpose Rome fought, deceived, bribed and made its agents influential, interfered with trade, set everyone on Carthage who was possible, did not spare either itself or enemies.

Carthage lost because it believed in the peaceful coexistence of the “great powers”, and wanted to trade more than fight, and when it became obvious that war could not be avoided, it tried to wage war with the hands of mercenaries and, as a result, was beaten and disappeared from the historical stage forever .

Why am I writing this. These days it is 20 years since the State Committee for the State of Emergency was established. What was it? An attempt to save "Carthage-Russia" from defeat in the "cold war" and plunder by the victors? Or Gorbachev's "set-up" in order to break the back of the Soviet Union on the wave of popular hatred for "Uncle Misha" and fulfill the requirements of the directive of the National Security Council 20/1?

Today it doesn't matter. Something else is important. Let's remember ourselves twenty years ago, or rather, let's remember our leaders of the Party and the state. Which of us, or of them, like Cato the Elder, ended his every speech with the words: “Capitalism must be destroyed!”? Probably only Fidel Castro and Kim Il Sung, so in Cuba and North Korea, despite the brutal trade embargo by the United States and its puppets, socialism is still alive and well.

And at that time we had solid: "detente", "disarmament", "peaceful coexistence", "strategic partnership" and other defeatist-peace-loving rubbish against the backdrop of furious Philippic Reagan, Thatcher and the like, against the "Evil Empire", t .e. against our country.

One could go into every bookstore in the USSR and find there exactly a dozen books warning you and me about the aggressive plans of world imperialism and subversive activities against our state.

Alas, the word of truth by that time had ceased to be a commodity of prime necessity.

We, the inhabitants of the freest and most advanced state in the world, somewhere within ourselves agreed that our "Carthage" is bad and "needs to be destroyed."

It was you and I who rushed to video salons (opened, as a rule, by Komsomol functionaries with the permission of the party apparatus) to watch films like “good Americans”, killing and maiming countless, saving the world from communists and “bad Russians”.

It was you and I who lined up behind newspapers and magazines that poisoned us with streams of slander and disinformation.

It was we who did not take to the streets and did not support the State Emergency Committee in their declared desire to preserve the USSR and socialism.

For this, we are paying.

Now it is obvious that the historical lesson of Russia did not go to the future. Our "Carthage" has lost vast territories, it is disarmed and subordinated to the will of the winner, but it is still potentially dangerous. At any moment we can be reborn and some people will have a hard time.

Therefore, soon, in the nearest historical perspective, we will be leveled to the ground.

Regardless of our groveling and servility to the overseas "Rome".

Otherwise, death.

P.S. Interestingly, having executed the “enemies of Rome and the Senate”, the absolutely pacifist-minded Carthaginian oligarchs sent an embassy to Rome with this joyful message for Rome, however, the Roman army had already sailed to Africa by that time. The Romans demanded that the Carthaginians hand over all weapons and 300 noble citizens as hostages. After fulfilling these requirements, the consul Lucius Censorinus announced the main condition - the city of Carthage must be destroyed, and a new settlement founded no less than 10 miles from the sea.

In Carthage, this demand was met with horror and absolutely uncompromisingly - the citizens tore the messengers to pieces and were determined to die, but not to accept this condition.

Having asked the Romans for a month's delay in fulfilling the demand, while maintaining complete secrecy, the Carthaginians began belated preparations for defense.

The whole city worked - not a single traitor turned out to be in more than half a million people. Carthage was an excellent fortress, in a month the citizens brought its defenses to the highest possible level, and when the Roman army appeared under the walls of the city, the consuls were surprised to see the enemy ready for battle in front of them.

Disarmed, but already ready to die defending, withstanding the siege and repulsing the assaults, Carthage held out for another two years. This time it was not possible to pay off, because the enemy came to take everything and did it.

21. Third Punic War. Destruction of Carthage.

(149 ... 146 BC)

Until now, Rome has tried to cover up its lawless seizures and its insatiable lust for power with some semblance of justice and imaginary disinterestedness, the insignificance of which shone through, however, very clearly. But now, in the system of Roman politics, undisguised impudence was revealed. The first victim of such a dishonorable and soulless policy was Carthage.

The 50-year period of continuous, heavy dependence of Carthage was expiring. It goes without saying that the Roman senators must have been preoccupied with the question of what should be done in relation to this still very strong power. They believed that it was necessary not only to leave Carthage in this dependence, but to find a plausible pretext to further strengthen this dependence. Some senators desired the complete annihilation of Carthage. The aged Cato also belonged to them. He constantly argued that as long as Carthage existed, Rome was in great danger. One day, Cato showed early-ripened figs in the senate. When the senators admired their size and beauty, Cato said to them: “Do you know that these figs were plucked in Carthage only three days ago? So close is the enemy from our walls. From that time on, Cato ended every speech in the Senate, no matter what the matter was, with the words: “And in conclusion I repeat to you that, in my opinion, Carthage must be destroyed.” Cato's opponent was Publius Cornelius Scipio Nazica. He argued how useful it was in the interests of Rome itself to keep a dangerous enemy, who, by forcing Rome to constant vigilance, would thereby protect her from a pernicious sense of false security. But the majority shared the opinion of Cato.

The pretext for the resumption of hostilities was given by the 80-year-old Masinissa. Counting on the support of the Romans, he continuously attacked the Carthaginian territory and took one region after another from the Carthaginians. In vain did the Carthaginians appeal to the Romans with complaints against Masinissa. Although representatives from Rome were sent from time to time, they were more concerned with collecting information about the state of the military forces of Carthage than with their disputes with the Numidians. The Carthaginians resorted to their own defense. In 52 they marched against Masinissa, but were defeated. Immediately after this, through ambassadors sent to Rome, they apologized for the forced campaign, but the Romans accepted this explanation with great coldness.

At the same time that the Romans were considering how best to take advantage of this opportunity, the ambassadors of the city of Utica, allied to the Carthaginians, appeared and announced the unconditional subordination of this city to Rome. This circumstance led the Romans to the decision to destroy Carthage, since Utica, located nearby, could serve as a convenient gathering place. The pretext for war was the hostile actions of Carthage against the Roman ally Masinissa. Both the consuls of 149, Marcius Censorinus and Manlius Manilius, were ordered to cross with 80,000 infantry and 4,000 horsemen to Africa and not end the wars until Carthage was destroyed.

The departure of the Roman fleet from Italy caused general embarrassment in Carthage. To avert a terrible blow, while there was still time, the Carthaginian ambassadors hurried to Rome with an offer of unquestioning obedience of Carthage to Rome. This was followed by the following answer: “The Senate promises the Carthaginians to preserve their freedom, the inviolability of their rights, land and property, on the condition that 300 hostages from the noblest families be sent to Rome within 30 days and that they fulfill everything that the consuls order them.” The latter condition raised new concerns. Meanwhile, the demanded hostages, despite the desperate sobs of their parents, were hastily sent to Rome. In the Sicilian city of Lily Bay, the consuls announced to the ambassadors that further instructions from the senate would be announced to them at Utica.

With increasing anxiety, the Carthaginians awaited the arrival of the Roman fleet. Carthaginian ambassadors came to the Roman camp to hear the orders of the consuls. Consul Censorin demanded the release of all weapons and all military supplies. Thousands of chariots loaded with weapons and war machines arrived at the Roman camp. Then the consul announced to the ambassadors: “I must praise you for the readiness with which you carried out the order of the senate. His last demand is that you leave Carthage and settle somewhere else in the interior of the country, at your discretion, but not closer than 80 stadia from the sea, for the proximity of the sea, due to the ease of acquisition, only gives rise to injustices. Therefore, Carthage must be destroyed."

This demand drove the Carthaginians to despair. Everyone cursed the Romans and called on the gods to avenge such a shameful deceit. Vengeance has now become their slogan; they were animated by one deed: to resist to the last drop of blood. Although the Carthaginians had just been disarmed, they decided to exert all their strength to protect their ancient glorious city and the expensive graves of their ancestors. The insulting demand was unanimously rejected, the gates of the city were closed up, the entrance to the harbor was blocked by a chain stretched across it, and the population with firm determination awaited the siege.

Soon the huge city, where there were 70,000 inhabitants, turned into one general weapons workshop. There was no shortage of iron, wood, and leather. Old and young, day and night, were busy making defense weapons. The houses were demolished and their beams were used to build ships. All the metal that was in the city was collected in one place, and weapons were forged from it. In houses, on the streets, even in temples, they only did what they forged, melted, and planed. The women gave their hair to make bowstrings. Every day 100 shields, 300 swords, 500 darts, many bows and catapults were made. It seemed that the genius of the ancient Phoenicians was revived in their descendants with a vengeance. To increase the number of those able to bear arms, slaves were called, who now received freedom. The city was ruled by Hasdrubal, the grandson of Masinissa. Outside the city, another Hasdrubal gathered an army of 20,000 people.

The Roman generals believed that they had nothing to rush to attack the defenseless, in their opinion, city. When they finally set out from Utica, they saw that they were deceived in their expectations: the city appeared before them fully armed. The Romans soon became convinced of the futility of their attempt to take the city by storm. They had to start a siege. For a whole year they stood under the city and did not achieve success. Several of their attacks were repulsed, and in the open field the excellent commander of the cavalry, Hamilton, with his bold attacks, inflicted very significant damage on them. In view of such circumstances, the Romans were forced to resort to the help of the Numidians, from which they, in the proud consciousness of their victorious happiness, had so far refused. To renew friendly relations with Numidia, the Senate elected the skillful Scipio Aemilianus. He arranged things in such a way that the Numidian king Masinissa, who had just died in the 90th year of his life, before his death authorized Scipio to establish the succession to the throne at his own discretion. Scipio ordered that all three sons of Masinissa were to rule together: Mitsipsa received royal dignity and internal administration, Gulussa led the army, and Mastanabal was engaged in legal proceedings. Gulussa immediately set out with his horsemen on a campaign against Carthage. In addition, Scipio managed to lure Hamilcon, the leader of the Carthaginian cavalry, to the side of the Romans. However, even in 148, Carthage was not taken. In 147, Scipio began to seek the consular rank. The rumor of his courage, the influence of his family, the auspicious omen associated with his name, led to the fact that in the eyes of the people he was a person who had a full right to such a title. Even the fact that he was only 37 years old and had not reached the age of 43 established for this position was not taken into account. He was elected consul and given the main command of the troops in Africa.

In the spring of 147, Scipio landed at Utica. His first order was the removal of incapable military leaders. Then discipline was restored: the camp was cleansed of all the rabble that had gathered in it in the hope of rich booty, and the strictest discipline was introduced in it. Then, by a skillfully executed false attack, he pushed Hasdrubal out of the suburbs into the city itself. Then Scipio built a double line of fortifications on the isthmus that connected Carthage with the mainland, and from that time on, food supply to the city became possible only from the sea. It was necessary to block this path as well. To this end, Scipio ordered the construction of a huge dam in front of the entrance to the harbor. But the Carthaginians secretly dug another entrance to the harbor, and the Carthaginian sailors managed to lead their transport ships to the city itself. At the same time, a fleet was launched into the water, consisting of 50 three-tiered galleys and many small ships, which instilled great fear in the Roman sailors. The Roman fleet did not dare to attack, but the Carthaginians also felt too weak for a naval battle, so they retreated to the harbor. At the entrance to it, because of the many small ships crowded there, the warships could not pass and were forced to stand on the outside of the dam, between the old and new passages into it. In such an unfavorable position, the Carthaginian ships were attacked by the Romans, and many of them were destroyed.

Scipio firmly established himself on the dam. Here he set up wall-beating machines to make a breach in the walls of the city. During the night, the Carthaginians burned these machines, so they had to start all over again. Winter was coming. The remaining time the Romans used to strengthen their position from the attack of the Carthaginians. In winter, they managed to capture an important fortification in the vicinity of Carthage, Nefer, through which food was brought to the city. The Romans now dominated both by land and by sea, and could starve the city into surrender. Terrible scenes took place in the ill-fated city. Bloody strife arose between citizens over the question of whether to resist or surrender. The resistance party, led by Hasdrubal, prevailed. He retired with the army to the old city, to the fortified castle of Birs. A few days later, hunger and disease began to rage in the ranks of the heroic defenders. This weakened the courage of the defenders, but there was no question of surrender. The Romans went on the attack. First they took the trading harbor. Then the Roman detachment under the command of Gaius Lelia managed to climb the walls of the military harbor, and from there penetrate into the old city. A bloody battle ensued in the narrow streets. Every house had to be taken by storm; fought on flat roofs; the Romans threw beams and boards from one roof to another and walked along them, fighting with the enemy. On the seventh day of the assault, 50,000 Carthaginians surrendered, men, women and children who had taken refuge in the castle. They were released through the gates and taken away as prisoners. Only one detachment, consisting of 900 Roman defectors, who were fully aware that death awaited them, still held out in the temple of Aesculapius. Among them was Gazdrubal with his wife and children. Seeing that any further resistance was useless, he ran to the conqueror and, throwing himself at his feet, begged for mercy. His wife, standing on the roof of the temple, cursed him and threw her children into the flames, and then she threw herself into it. After that, the city was given over to all the horrors of fire, robbery and destruction. The fire raged for 17 whole days; Scipio himself felt compassion as he gazed from the height of the hill at the crimson glow rising to the sky above the crumbling city, which for 700 years dominated the sea, and was now reduced to ashes. With a look as if penetrating into the future fate of his native city, Scipio uttered the verses of Homer:

There will be a day when high Troy perishes,

Ancient Priam will perish and the people of the spearman Priam.

The most implacable enemy of Carthage, Cato, did not live to see its fall. He died as early as 149 BC. The news of the final victory aroused extreme joy in Rome. Only now Rome sighed freely, as if throwing down a heavy mountain, getting rid of eternal fear and no longer tormented by the envy that devoured him. Several days were devoted to thanksgiving festivities in honor of the gods. Scipio celebrated a magnificent triumph. He, like his ancestor, who won at Zama, was given the honorary title of African and, unlike the first, was called the Younger.

The place occupied by Carthage was razed to the ground, cursed by the priests and doomed to remain an eternal desert. The land surrounding Carthage, together with all the cities remaining in it, was included in the Roman province of Africa, and Utica was proclaimed its capital.

CHAPTER ONE The First Punic War (264-241 BC). - The uprising of the Carthaginian mercenaries; Istrian and Gallic wars. - Second Punic War (218–201 BC)

The First Punic War (264-241 BC) The beginning of the war This struggle of peoples over a beautiful island, which lay just in the middle between their states, lasted 24 years. As soon as the Romans decided to intervene in Sicilian affairs, immediately the new Syracusan ruler

Second Punic War (218-201 BC) Hannibal's campaign in Italy Hannibal had a great advantage in relation to his opponents: the power in his hands is monarchical, the plan of action has long been considered, as if ready for the army already in action. In Italy he had an ally,

CHAPTER THREE General state of affairs: Gnaeus Pompey. - War in Spain. - Slave warfare. - War with sea robbers. - War in the East. - The third war with Mithridates. - Conspiracy of Catiline. - The return of Pompey and the first triumvirate. (78-60 BC) General