How Hannibal could win the Second Punic War.

[Ummon]

Using phalanxes was not the only possible sign of hellenization. Constitution, use of mercenaries, presence of storiography, etc.

[MoROmeTe]

Use of mercenaries was not a hellenic thing par excellence. All of the East used mercenaries massively and then everybody who could afford used mercenaries...

Practically, a Constitution was not mainly a hellenic issue. The Romans had one...

I do not know about storiography...

[HannibalB]

Hannibal could have marched against Rome right after Cannae. He did march on Rome at a later date, in an attempt to take it by surprise while the main Roman army was besieging Capua. Most likely Maharbal was right criticising him.

Take Rome by surprise? That's really not possible, not since it had a strong garrison and several legions in Italy that would have been able to chase Hannibal away the moment he started setting up for a siege. That was not his goal - his goal was to make the Romans besieging Capua to break the siege and follow him - they however did not, because it was a bluff - Hannibal posed no threat to Rome and they knew it.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Epic.

[hellheaven1987]

Well, the record suggests the time of last post is:

July 30, 2005, 11:10 PM

That is even older than the day I joined TWC (I am already an acient).

[HannibalB]

Thought I'd bring it back to the fore. It needed to be said, I'm suprised it took 5 years for someone to say, hehe.

[4th Regiment]

Marching on Rome just after Cane. Rome had only one legion to defend it. Old, argument against this was – he did not have siege equipment. Answer – he did not needed to siege – just surround and starve the city of that size would be relatively easy, since no force Romans could muster to break the blockade. Also, much more non Roman Italians would join Hannibal when seeing Rome is on the knees (just a prospect of huge booty would attract thousands in Hannibal’s army)

[HannibalB]

According to Dodge (Hannibal, pp.387) Rome could count on Two urban legions = 10,600 men
At least among the old soldiers over age = 10,000 men
slaves and freedmen = 12,000 men
With Marcellus at Ostia, two legions = 10,600 men
Total = 43,200 men to defend Rome at that time.

That's more men than Hannibal had... starving it wasn't an option - it would take a while to starve them out considering supplies could be brought down the river!

[4th Regiment]

I was talking abut real army, Romans could trow against Haniball after Canne. Just as your said, those were slaves, freed men, old men...Those could only men the walls of th Rome, not open filed confrontation against Haniball (not to tell those thousands would join Haniball if he made this move, just as i explaiend)

Tibar is small river, not a Amazon, and would be easily to block for ships to pass. It was even congested by mud and unsuitable for sailing during Roman collapse in late empire (due to bad maintainance) So, how much time would take for 200+ k city to starve with no food?

[HansDuet]

Necroposting.

High five!

[HannibalB]

Supplies could be blocked by a fleet, but it was clear that Rome's navy had the upper hand in the naval engagements... Hannibal didn't have enough men to entirely surround Rome and guard the many miles of circumvallation that would require. It would have been very hard to starve it out then while enemies would be massing to drive him off. So he could not lay siege or starve it. Besides, winning over the allies through politics or force was a far more mobile method to get the same results.

Real army? Perhaps the old wouldn't count as proper soldiers, but an army of freed slaves 18,000 strong destroyed Hannibal's reinforcements at the battle of Beneventum in 214 B.C. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...m_%28214_BC%29 I wouldn't pass them off as completely useless in open battle.

[SigniferOne]

Yeah colossal necro-post.

[HannibalB]

The poster who's post I commented on is still active in the community, and I'm new, so why not

[S.P.Q.R.]

I open up the email and look whta I've found...a post alert on this tread...refreshed after 5 years!!!! I kinda want to cry as back then I was quite into these forums togehter with lots of friends (Siblez, Rapax, Iron Duke...) back then Rome:TW was huge and we had a section only for Historical discussions that were quite infromative and alive thanks to ppl who really read some books and some ppl who were just fanatics. Memorable!

Back to the tread (being off topic back then was a real black spot on your reputation) You guys should really read Scipio Africanus - better than Napoleon by B.H. Liddell Hart. It's obviously by the side of the general, I might include, the genius of the general who learned form Hannibal and defeat him. there is nothing more Epic than the 2nd Punic war...there absolutly nothing similar in history, correct me if I'm wrong. Scipio was truely somwhat touched by divine intervention.

We will never know why Hannibal after Cannae or even before the aftermaths of the Battle of Trasimeno did not punch straight to rome. We should know by now that Rome was very well proteceted and wit still 5 legions in Italy and some more around the Mediterrean. Several times was mentioned that Carthageneas were not able to practice efficently Siege warfare. I second that. Siege warfare was paramouth in central Italy. The romans had quite a strife during the earlier Samnite wars (epic stuff)

So, sorry to all Hannibal's worshippers out there but he came unprepared in Italy, only driven by vegance and rage. It can be combined with exeptional warfare talents, as he had...but emotions are the matter of practical failure. Pardon my stoicism

[HannibalB]

I actually look upon that supposed hatred as a myth created by the Romans - it's easy to think your actions are just(especially considering what they did to Carthage in 146 B.C) to prey on something like this to alleviate some guilt.

But then, that's only my opinion, he may well have hated their guts!

The more and more I study this war the more I believe Hannibal was actually a competent besieger - if you think of the whole picture and not just the immediate goal. Yes, he was turned away from some places, but he could build siege equipment and knew exactly what needed to be done to break into places - mostly he relied on the populace letting him in - otherwise he'd spend a short time trying to break in - testing the places that weren't willing to switch sides before moving onto another one if they proved resilient. He often had to go to the rescue of other towns too, so nestling down for a protracted siege was not beneficial unless it was a town of key importance (say a port).

He assaulted quite a few places successfully, and Saguntum was no easy nut to crack. Granted, he wasn't as talented as other ancient generals with the art, but he was not incompetent.

Scipio's capture of New Carthage. It was only caught because of an unexpected squall and an undefended wall(which I have no doubt Hannibal would have also noticed and took advantage of) and the lack of an army to defend it. Evertime we see Hannibal besieging some place and builds towers or tries to mine, the defenders are always on the case, either building towers to increase the height of the walls and tower over Hannibal's tower, or counter-mines!

Setting up camp across the isthmus, Scipio isolated the town on the landward side, and with the Roman fleet (commanded by Gaius Laelius) blockading the town from the sea, the town was isolated from outside help. After beating back an attack from the towns defenders, Scipio then attacked over the isthmus, while the fleet attacked from the southern side. The first attack was a failure, however Scipio renewed the attack later in the day, with the addition of a party attacking through the lagoon on the northern side. Aided by an unexpected squall (which drained some of the lagoon into the Mediterranean, reducing the depth of the lagoon), the party managed to scale the undefended northern wall and attacked the rear of the defenders defending the isthmus. At the same time, the naval forces managed to penetrate the town from the south. (source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...a_%28209_BC%29)

We saw what happened later in Africa when there was an army to come to the aid of Utica and chased Scipio away (much like some of Hannibal's attempts in Italy)

Scipio's job in Spain was far easier than Hannibal's in Italy - the Spanish tribes had yet to really benefit from Carthaginian rule, and switched sides a lot quicker whereas the Italic allies had clear benefits with sticking by the Romans and were harder to swing to his side.

[spanish_emperor]

maybe he should have fixed his homeland, making it capable for enduring a long war, provide reinforcements and challenge rome at sea before setting off in his expedition which i don't think was even devised by himself but by his father and other relatives.

[Pyrrhus the Molossian]

I open up the email and look whta I've found...a post alert on this tread...refreshed after 5 years!!!! I kinda want to cry as back then I was quite into these forums togehter with lots of friends (Siblez, Rapax, Iron Duke...) back then Rome:TW was huge and we had a section only for Historical discussions that were quite infromative and alive thanks to ppl who really read some books and some ppl who were just fanatics. Memorable!

Back to the tread (being off topic back then was a real black spot on your reputation) You guys should really read Scipio Africanus - better than Napoleon by B.H. Liddell Hart. It's obviously by the side of the general, I might include, the genius of the general who learned form Hannibal and defeat him. there is nothing more Epic than the 2nd Punic war...there absolutly nothing similar in history, correct me if I'm wrong. Scipio was truely somwhat touched by divine intervention.

We will never know why Hannibal after Cannae or even before the aftermaths of the Battle of Trasimeno did not punch straight to rome. We should know by now that Rome was very well proteceted and wit still 5 legions in Italy and some more around the Mediterrean. Several times was mentioned that Carthageneas were not able to practice efficently Siege warfare. I second that. Siege warfare was paramouth in central Italy. The romans had quite a strife during the earlier Samnite wars (epic stuff)

So, sorry to all Hannibal's worshippers out there but he came unprepared in Italy, only driven by vegance and rage. It can be combined with exeptional warfare talents, as he had...but emotions are the matter of practical failure. Pardon my stoicism

Hannibal was not it seems driven by emotion but practicality. That quote you based your assumption off is properly translated that Hannibal would never be a friend of Rome synonymous with vassal. I don't see how any decision he made was tinged with emotion.

[Pyrrhus the Molossian]

maybe he should have fixed his homeland, making it capable for enduring a long war, provide reinforcements and challenge rome at sea before setting off in his expedition which i don't think was even devised by himself but by his father and other relatives.

First of all please know that Hannibal was a general/governor of Spain not the king of Carthage. Do you have any evidence the plan was not his own? He seems to have planned it quite well himself.