Essay on Evaluation of Hannibal as a General

In both ancient and modern interpretations and perceptions, Hannibal is infamous for leading the Carthaginian army and a squadron of elephants athwart the Southern European region and the Alps Mountains against the Roman Empire, who were manifested as the most powerful army, in the Second Punic War. Hannibal is overly expressed and given light to throughout his career and conquest in Italy by prominently well-renowned historians, including: Titus Livy, who was considered as the least reliable source as he was tremendously reliant on other eyewitness accounts of contingency, and was greatly one-sided toward the Romans. Polybius, who was ultimately much more detached, and perceived sources objectively with balance. And modern historians,

Many of the states of Italy that Rome had conquered a century before now joined Hannibal. This was a threat to Rome, so the Roman general Publius Cornelius Scipio took a Roman army to north Africa and then Hannibal went back to defend Carthage. In the battle at Zama, near Carthage, in 202 BC the Romans finally defeated Hannibal.

"Let Nero be ever before your eyes, swollen with the pride of a long line of Caesars… an Emperor condemned by his own people… Nero will always be regretted"

Hannibal was very successful in the numerous battles but he knew he would not take Rome. Hannibal turned to politics to gain the support of Rome's allies, but he did not receive enough. While Hannibal was moving through Italy Rome was preoccupied on another front. They had enter their Macedonian wars and were spread thin. For several years the two empire engaged in open battles, raids, and skirmishes. By 202 B.C., Hannibal's resources were depleted and he had no choice but to return and hold a defensive position against Rome. Rome regained a large amount of land through the peace treaty and Carthage lost the advantages they once

Hannibal was born in 247BCE, he was the son of a Carthaginian general named Hamilcar Barcareerred, who rallied his North African nation-state from defeat in the First Punic War (264–241 BC) to conquer much of Iberia. Hannibal grew up in military service, and following the 221 BC assassination of his brother-in-law Hasdrubal, who had replaced Hamilcar, Hannibal took charge of the Carthaginian army. He soon proved a brilliant field commander who applied his intellect and martial skills to the singular end of winning battles. Hannibal, a sworn enemy of all things Roman, declared war against them and this was the start of the Second Punic War (218–201 BC). Victory in Italy was Hannibal’s sole objective. To achieve it, he marched the bulk of his army in Iberia across southern Gaul and over the Alps into the Roman heartland. Hannibal’s strategy was to attack Rome. Although his tactics for battle were superior he had strategic failures which would eventually lead to his campaign in failure.

One trait every army must have to be successful is the willingness and drive to dominate. The Roman army took these traits to a whole different level. The Romans were very extreme in battle as well. They often enjoyed humiliating other city-states by burning them to the ground. In 264 B.C.E. a battle between other Greek city-states forced Rome and Carthage, who dominated the western part of the Mediterranean, into conflict. The First Punic War was for the control of Sicily.4 This battle lasted twenty-three years.4 The Romans were losing a lot of men, but they continued to battle on.4 Finally, the persistence paid off.4 The Romans learned how to fight by sea and cut off the Carthaginian supply line into

In Rome’s later years they were quite powerful and they knew how to fight so they could gain more land and power. As Rome gained this power they started taking over everyone near them such as Carthage and everything they were in control of such as the Greeks (Document C). This battle took a while, but Rome eventually got the land and power that they were hoping for. Another big battle they engaged in to gain more power was with the Huns and this was very intense because the Huns were very savaged people (Document C and D). They were taught from an early age how to endure freezing cold weather and be starved (Document D).

Which made Rome more vulnerable to

Finally on the 15th day, after a journey of five months from Cartagena, with 20,000 infantry, 6,000 cavalry, and only a few of the original 38 elephants, Hannibal descended into Italy, having surmounted the difficulties of climate and terrain, the guerrilla tactics of inaccessible tribes, and the major difficulty of commanding a body of men diverse in race and language under conditions to which they were ill fitted (wsu.edu).      Hannibal's forces were now totally inadequate to match the army of Scipio, who had rushed to the Po River to protect the recently founded Roman colonies of Placentia (modern Piacenza) and Cremona. The first action between the two armies took place on the plains west of the Ticino River, and Hannibal's Numidian cavalry prevailed. Scipio was severely wounded, and the Romans withdrew to Placentia. After manoeuvres failed to lead to a second engagement, the combined armies of Sempronius Longus and Scipio met Hannibal on the left bank of the Trebia River south of Placentia and were soundly defeated (December 218). This victory brought both Gauls and Ligurians to Hannibal's side, and his army was considerably augmented by Celtic recruits. After a severe winter (in which he contracted an eye infection), he was able to advance in the spring of 217 as far as the Arno River (wsu.edu). Although two Roman armies were now in the field against him, he was able to outmanoeuvre that of Gaius Flaminius

"Okay." Will sighed, burying his hands back into the jacket. It would be cold down in the subway, and though it would be a relief from the wind, he knew it'd be warmer in Hannibal's car. "I live in Brooklyn." he added, another warning, but Hannibal only nodded, clearly pleased he'd accepted the offer.

The treatment of Saguntum by Hannibal and the treatment of New Carthage and the slave girl were very different, yet there were a few similarities. Scipio treated New Carthage and the slave girl with respect, kindness, and decency after he capture them. After Hannibal captured Saguntum, Hannibal was barbaric and cruel to its inhabitants. Scipio and Hannibal would have been shocked at each other’s actions and would not have understood why they acted in that way.

Hannibal of Carthage: "The Father of Strategy" Through out history there have been many great military leaders, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Generals Washington, Grant and Charles Lewis Puller. The one however that sticks out the most is General Hannibal of Carthage. Often called the "Father of Strategy" his march over the Alps is one of the most famous attacks in military history. Hannibal beat the Roman Army time and time again before in suicide in 183 BC. Hannibal was born 247 BC, the son of Hamilcar Barca, the current General of the Carthaginian Army. Hannibal's training as a military leader began at the age of nine when he went to Spain to be with his father. At Hamilcar's request Hannibal pledged an oath

Emperor Nero, infamously known as one of the most malevolent, oppressive, and tyrannical leader throughout history, was the last ruler of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty. He was born outside Rome in Antium and his mother married his great uncle, Emperor Claudius, in order for her son to be the next Emperor of Rome. It wasn’t apparent that her son was to become one of the most feared and cruel leaders in Roman history from 54 CE to 68 CE. By examining his achievements and failures as an emperor, his influences and changes over the entire economic, political and social spectrum are revealed.

Rome and Rome came to aid. The fear of a powerful neighbor was only one out

Everyone knows that Napoleon was a great leader and commander but it is not as cut and dry as popular history makes it out to be. His great victory at Austerlitz cemented him as one of the greatest commanders in history. This battle is was a tactical masterpiece up there with Gaugamela and Cannae. However, there is more to analyze here than just the battle itself. Many aspects of war include mobilization, supply, training, moral, army structure etc. and all play a part in Napoleon’s victories and the creation of the French Empire. Another variable to consider is the quality of the armies led by Tsar Alexander I of Russia and the Holy Roman Emperor, Francis II of Austria. The focus here is to look at how these aspects played a role in