no personal knowledge of the affair. Numbers of books have been
written as to the identity of the passes traversed by Hannibal.
The whole of these have been discussed and summarized by Mr. W. J.
Law, and as it appears to me that his arguments are quite conclusive
I have adopted the line which he lays down as that followed by
Hannibal.

In regard to the general history of the expedition, and of
the manners, customs, religion, and politics of Carthage, I have
followed M. Hennebert in his most exhaustive and important work on
the subject. I think that when you have read to the end you will
perceive that although our sympathies may remain with Hannibal and
the Carthaginians, it was nevertheless for the good of the world
that Rome was the conqueror in the great struggle for empire. At
the time the war began Carthage was already corrupt to the core,
and although she might have enslaved many nations she would never
have civilized them. Rome gave free institutions to the people
she conquered, she subdued but she never enslaved them, but rather
strove to plant her civilization among them and to raise them to
her own level. Carthage, on the contrary, was from the first a
cruel mistress to the people she conquered. Consequently while all
the peoples of Italy rallied round Rome in the days of her distress,
the tribes subject to Carthage rose in insurrection against her as
soon as the presence of a Roman army gave them a hope of escape
from their bondage.

Had Carthage conquered Rome in the struggle she could never have
extended her power over the known world as Rome afterwards did,
but would have fallen to pieces again from the weakness of her
institutions and the corruption of her people. Thus then, although