Talk:Second Hundred Years' War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Stub

This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of the history of Europe. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-class on the quality scale.

[edit] Carthage and Rome

This comparison doesn't make any sense. If one looks at the Second Punic War, the mother of the Punic Wars, it is the Carthaginians who have terrestrial supremacy on land with Hannibal winning many battles whilst the Roman fleet in the Mediterranean ensures that Hannibal is isolated in Italy.

Therefore, it is Britain that is Rome and Carthage that is France. This comparison is strengthened by the fact that the British won (Romans won) and the British won the colonies in India and America from France (just as Rome took Sicily and Spain). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tourskin (talk • contribs) 22:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Carthage was originally a naval power. In the First Punic War the Romans built a fleet and conquered Sicily, Sardinia etc. Carthaginian Empire in Spain came later, and in Second Punic War Hannibal was isolated in Italy as a result of Roman campaigns in Spain, defeat of Hasdrubal at Metaurus etc. Contemporary comparison (ie. by the French before they had lost) is as described in article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.192.0.10 (talk) 10:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)