Scipio Africanus: A Historical Figure Greater than Napoleon

Ilan: I was looking for books on Strategy after reading Szun Tzu's Art of War. Many google searches later I decided to read this book. Without wasting your time, let me say what you should know.
-You will be able to learn many lessons from Scipio's life. For one, I found his benevolent attitude towards the defeated side to be humane and one that will benefit his country in the future.
-I found the English a little bit hard to understand. But this is entirely my opinion.
So go for it. If you strategy interests you.

India on Dec 01, 2021

Lindsay Holmes: I give it 4.5 stars. Excellent insight into the life of Scipio. A leader with great perception, and a commanding presence, at such a young age. Sentence structure is a little unwieldy (hence the 4.5 and not 5 star) at times, but I think that is because of the time period it was written, 1926. Still an exciting history, filled with battles, political intrigue and like today’s world, lots of back room deals, and back stabbing. Informative and exciting.

Canada on Aug 24, 2021

R. Young: I have read other modern biographies of Scipio Africanus and enjoyed them despite knowing that all modern biographies of Scipio have to rely entirely upon the same, limited ancient sources and whatever may be revealed by archaeology.

To be worthy of notice a modern biographer of Scipio must bring something of value in himself to the story. B.H. Liddel Hart brings his military experience. Drawing upon that experience Hart was able to provide informed analysis of tactics, strategy and grand strategy to the account that was not missing in other biographies but was anemic by comparison to Hart's analysis
.
Hart fought in WWI and was at the battle of the Somme. He had very personal reasons for turning his intellectual talents to the study of war. This book was published in 1926 when the exposed errors in the Versailles Treaty were already leading some to fear another great war and Hart was one of those who predicted that modern trends and modern weapons would lead to mass casualties not only among the military but also among the civilian population.

The story of Scipio's life is riveting. When Rome had been brought to its nadir by Hannibal it could not find someone...

United States on Sep 19, 2019

Ryan Peoples: After reading this book I definitely have a new found respect for Africanus and agree that he should be talked about in the same breath as the great generals of the ancient world. However the author does try to downplay the achievements of other greats stating that Caesar only beat useless tribes in Gaul and even hints that his victory over Pompey was nothing but dumb luck. The author even goes to say that all of his achievements were because of him building upon his uncle Marius victories. In a political sense Caesar did use this to gain votes but ever roman statesman used the achievements of their families to further their careers Africanus probably did the same at one point in his career. Alexander is also mentioned as beating opponents who could never really pose a threat to his army in battle. The author has convinced me of Scipio Africanus's greatness however everyone should read up on the other greats from other sources.

United Kingdom on Jul 16, 2015

Ally Johnsen: Perhaps my use of the word(s) 'modest' a tad too much, but it is still fair, in my opinion. I've read this book more times than I care to count, and continue to enjoy it on each occasion. There is little that I can fault it for, and so that is what I will do.

While it is a smooth and enjoyable read, even for laymen, the good Captain's language can come across as pretentious, and it is sometimes unfortunate that he makes no effort to cover this up. However, such occurrences are few throughout the course of this, albeit short book, and largely confined to the political phases of the biography, I suppose to downplay his distaste for Cato. And his comparisons with Frederick II, Napoleon and other later commanders, while they may be true, are for the most part unnecessary, as the skill of an individual need not be judged by comparison, particularly in the case of someone so talented in the various facets of war (moral, political, logistical, grand strategic, strategic, operational and tactical... a point of which Liddell Hart makes that I feel too few authors do about the skills of other generals they so loudly trumpet) to the extent that you need only look to his achievements...

United Kingdom on Apr 28, 2012

Christopher C. Eckman: First off, this book has a bias.

Hart is making a case that Scipio Africanus is, perhaps, the greatest general in history. He states this up front and makes no apologies for it. His reason for this is that (modern) history up until now has been considerably biased towards Hannibal (and that there was no current book about Scipio at all). Where Hart deviates from standard history or tries to explain the motivation for his point of view he gives a reason for his difference and explains the consensus point of view.

If you read Dodge (biography about Hannibal) or many of the other sources (such as Wikipedia pages on Hannibal, Scipio or the battle of Zama), you would wonder how Scipio was able to get out of his own way to win the battle. Basically, they are biased and pose as neutral.

For instance, you hear often how the forces were nearly equal (in strength) in the battle of Zama or how Scipio had the advantage as he had better cavalry. Scipio was considerably outnumbered in infantry in all the history books (Livy and Polybius) AND you never heard the cavalry excuse used in every other battle where Hannibal had the vast advantage in that. They discount the value...

United States on Oct 25, 2007

Gisli Jokull Gislason: In their decling years Scipio met with Hannibal who he had vanquished and asked who in Hannibal's mind was the greatest general.
"Alexander" did Hannibal reply
"And second best?"
"Pyrrus"
"And the third?"
"Myself"
"And if you had beaten me?"
"Then I would have counted myself first" did Hannibal reply.
Scipio is without doubt one of the greatest military geniuses of antiquity and should deserve a better place in history. Liddle Hart presents a strong case in his favor but that is rather a weakness than a strength in this book.
For the most part the book reads like a good fictional novel, its text is smooth and you feel that you get to know Scipio quite well and his brilliance shines without Liddle Hart attempting his comparisons to other generals of old. I found his comparisons unneccessary and sometimes a bit too much, regardless of their truth. But the book is good enough that this is only a minor annoyance ans for the most part I found it quite good. I read it after reading Hannibal by Ernle Bradford and I found that they complemented each other very well. Easily 4 stars and for the low price it is well worth the buy.

United Kingdom on Apr 29, 2005