WI: Carthage Accepts Regulus’s Terms

According to Cassius Dio:
The Carthaginians, fearing capture, first made overtures to the consul, in the hope that they might by some satisfactory arrangement secure his withdrawal and so escape the danger of the moment. But since they refused to retire from all Sicily and from Sardinia, to release the Roman captives free of cost and to ransom their own, to make good all the expenses incurred by the Romans for the war and also to pay more as tribute each year, they accomplished nothing. Indeed, in addition to those just mentioned, there were the following demands which displeased them: they were to make neither war nor peace without the consent of the Romans, were to keep for their own use not more than one warship, yet come to the aid of the Romans with fifty triremes as often as notice should be sent them, and were not to be on an equal footing in some other respects. In view, then, of these demands, they decided that the truce would mean their utter subjugation, and they chose rather to fight with the Romans.

And handily, someone has compiled a nice overview of the historiagraphy of Regulus’s dealings with the Carthaginians:
https://www.uvm.edu/~bsaylor/rome/regulus.html

Anyway, lets assume that a treay is worked out. Maybe Regulus manages to win over the Numidians. Maybe he adjusts his demands down just a little, or is at least willing to negotiate on some of the points. In particular, it would make sense for the Romans to give a little on the ship limit if they expected the Carthaginians to accept it, since these terms also expect the Carthaginians to supply ships to Rome.

These terms, while unbearably harsh to Carthage, would likely save it a lot of grief in the long term. Not nearly as much acrimony between Carthage and Rome, and Carthage could likely get back to its mercantile endeavors and leave the costly business of war to the Romans. They did, after all, manage to prosper after the Second Punic War. Either way, Carthage isn’t destroyed in this scenario.
 
Doubt that the Barcids would go down for that, I think a civil war is likely between Hamilcar and his clan and the Oligarchy, one side promoting reform and a more aggressive foreign policy, the other defending Carthage’s current system of government and inclining to a more peaceful relationship with Rome.
 
Doubt that the Barcids would go down for that, I think a civil war is likely between Hamilcar and his clan and the Oligarchy, one side promoting reform and a more aggressive foreign policy, the other defending Carthage’s current system of government and inclining to a more peaceful relationship with Rome.

Thats an interesting outcome, except that it would give Rome even more of an opening to dominate Carthage’s politics.
 
Thats an interesting outcome, except that it would give Rome even more of an opening to dominate Carthage’s politics.

Indeed, that’s how Rome proceeded with all her subjected smaller powers, favoring the dominant aristocracy against the more popularistic elements.
 
Carthage becomes the Mars to Rome's Terra? An empire-within-an-empire?

I don't see that as particularly likely. The Romans were able to channel almost all internal politics through Rome, and, even at this time, were less of a city state, when considered from a demographic perspective - yes, legally, there was a difference between Roman and Latin and Italian, but lets not forget that, in a generation, most of Italy stayed loyal to Rome when Hannibal came marching down the peninsula. In short, Rome just has more resources than Carthage, and is already snowballing - with Carthage on-side rather than an implacable rival, I expect Rome to snowball even more.

That said, the idea of an empire-within-an-empire does bring up Barcid Spain, as Hamilcar's family basically ruled much of the peninsula as their own kingdom, only paying lip service to Carthage. They were broadly self-sufficient, with their own army, paid from the mines they conquered, and it really seems that they didn't need Carthage much for anything. In this version of events, I could see Hamilcar being ousted from Carthage and taking an army to do pretty much what he did historically - just without claiming it was done under the auspices of the Carthaginians. He could set up his own Ibero-Punic kingdom in Spain. It would be quite interesting.

However, we shouldn't necessarily assume Hamilcar Barca will do anything of the sort - he was only 20 at the time of the Battle of Adys, the point at which Regulus was negotiating with Carthage (its easy to forget just how stupidly long the First Punic War was). If there was an anti-Roman general after the peace treaty, it isn't necessarily likely to be him. On the other hand, he had to rise to power somehow, so it could be that he'd still be prominent.
 
The more I think about it, the more I'm fascinated by the idea of an independent ‘Barcid’ Spain (or whomever you imagine leading such an expedition). A culturally syncretic state, with a capital in Carthsgo Nova, I could see it pacifying the peninsula relatively easily - not easily in absolute terms, but compared to how much trouble Rome had. Perhaps the Barcids would follow a pattern of assimilation similar to what Sertorius did later on in history, estsblishing a Senate incorporating the Hispanian aristocracy.
 
To add a consideration to this: Would a client-state Carthage be able to continue some of its bolder mercantile expeditions, such as those along the African Coast? I’m inclined to think so, since they’ll be unburdened by most of the cost of Empire. Consider how, even after the ruinous Second Punic War, the Carthaginian Republic was able to afford repaying the Romans five times as quickly as they were expected to - not the same as saying their economy quintupled, but they sure as hell rebounded much quicker than wad expected.
 
Top