Just a nitpick. Iberian was not a language but a family of languages, similar to the example that you gave to the Berbers. There were even some theories that the two could be related as they could be related with the Ancient Basque.The native languages of the regions, examples being Iberian in Spain and various berber languages in north Africa.
The Phoenician, even with some local differences, should be talked in the Phoenician colonies around the Mediterranean. Many of these Phoenician cities felt to the Carthaginian empire. If my memory doesn’t fail me epigraphy was found in Phoenician in some Phoenician colonies well after the 3rd Punic War, often this is called neo-Punic, already with some Latin influences.BTW, was Phoenician spoken anywhere in the Carthaginian Empire?
Something in the line of what DiocletianIsBetterThanYou said, I get the idea that they were the same language (similar to Hebrew), but different dialects due to the evolution of the Phoenician out of Phoenicia.Punic is a Phoenician language.
Interesting perspective, and very interesting previous post. I'm pretty skeptical on Carthage having a chance to beat Rome longterm though. Maybe they'd win the 2nd Punic War - even if they did, I believe it is not entirely unlikely Rome might return.I have edited part of that most recent post to include the following information, but for those who have already read my post I put it here as well. From 241 to 237 Carthage lost their control over Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica, and they lost their naval dominance. This created the possibility of a new approach to empire, and Hamilcar and his sons seized this opportunity.
Our sources are Roman for this, so we have always more gaps than we want. And Hasdrubal may not have crossed the Tagus, but Hannibal did, according to Polybius 3.14:... in 226 the accord probably seemed quite reasonable, since Hasdrubal's forces had not, as far as we can tell, crossed north of the Tagus