Hannibal's failure in Italy & Zama

University Degree Historical and Philosophical studies

Describe Hannibal in Italy his failure to isolate and defeat Rome and the Zama campaign

Background

The Punic Wars were a series of three wars which was driven by the thrist to become the the most dominant civilization In the western mediteranian sea. This growing concern from both Rome and Carthage, led to many clashes of interest creating a need for war.

Hannibal as a general

The general Hannibal (247-182 BCE) was one of the greatest military leaders in history. He was the oldest son of the Carthaginian general of whom the Romans believed that Hannibal's father forced his son to promise eternal hatred against the Romans.

“As soon as he took up his command it became clear from the measures which he put in hand that his purpose was to declare war on Rome.” Polybius

“Speed was the essence of his plan.” Livy

Although he can never be sure of Hannibal’s long term goals, self-motivations or reasons

For his attitude against the Romans due to no primary written sources from Hannibal himself Livy’s quote is supported by Hannibal’s drastic and bold actions in the colossal feat of crossing the Pyrenees with an army of approximately 50,000 infantry, 9,000 cavalry and 37 elephants; next, he crossed the river Rhone

Battles to come

River Ticinus (Gauls begin to volunteer)
Trebia ( Tactical skills defeating Roman army)
Trasimene lake. (Ambush between the hills Consul Flaminius killed)
Cannae Hannibal's convex, crescent shaped lines slowly encircled and finally destroyed the Army)
River Metaurus (Hasdrubal, Hannibal’s Brother with reinforcements & siege equipment defeated)

It can be seen from Hannibal’s great military feats that he was a gifted commander and military genius however, although Hannibal had Rome on its heel the underestimating of the loyalty of the central Italian allies of Rome and the lack of other plans to end the war would see Hannibal to loose his homeland, Carthage.

Characteristics and Reasons for his failure in Italy

“The proper arts of a general are judgment and prudence”, Tacitus.

There is no doubt that Hannibal’s judgment in battle was supreme and that he was one of the greatest military geniuses of all time. However Prudence, coming from the Latin word Providentia meaning foresight, is that lacking quality which lead to Hannibal’s failure.

Allies/Rome’s Manpower resurce

Hannibal’s poor judgment of the loyalty of Rome’s central Italian allies was a major reason for his failure in Italy. After the ambush at Trasimene Lake Hannibal attempted through diplomatic means to win over Rome’s allies. Although he secured an alliance with King Philip V of Macedonia the failure to win over the Italian allies would ensure that Rome’s resource of Manpower would remain supreme and consistent.

The strength of the roman network of alliances was demonstrated at this time of the crisis, the Latin communities proving especially staunch. Although eventually much of ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Allies/Rome’s Manpower resurce

The strength of the roman network of alliances was demonstrated at this time of the crisis, the Latin communities proving especially staunch. Although eventually much of southern Italy defected to, or was captured by, Hannibal, the bulk of Rome’s allies remained loyal. In this part this may have been due to fear. For much of the war the Romans maintained a strong army in Eturia, and the Senate responded very quickly to reports of discontent and potential rebellion at Arretium.

According to Livy during these years the minimum property qualification for service in the Roman legions was reduced, adding to the already large pool of citizen manpower, which was to prove Rome’s abundance of resources. By spring 215 there was probably fourteen legions in service and eighteen in 214. In 212-211, at the peak of roman mobilisation, there were 25 legions.

“Their union is adequate to all emergencies, so that it is impossible to find a better political system than this…” V. On the Roman Constitution at its Prime– Polybius

It can be again seen in this written primary source that the support of Italian allies would lead to the ultimate defeat of Carthage. The growing ‘Italian Nationalism’ created by Rome created an atmosphere where it was a struggle for their country and their families. This resource of seemingly everlasting manpower would see to Hannibal’s failure in Italy. This was the major dilemma for Hannibal not having the full support of regional areas and resulted in a stalemate for both sides even after many major victories for Hannibal in Italy over the Romans

Oligopoly vs. Senate

We believe the Prime reason for Hannibal’s failure in Italy is the poor organization of the Carthaginian government against the Senate. Although Aristotle stated in 334 BC that the Carthaginians have an excellent form of government, praising their institutions and loyalty to the constitution, we believe Polybius is a more reliable source being closer to the Punic Wars than Aristotle.

“The Carthaginian constitution had degenerated, and that of Rome was better… the Roman decisions on public affairs were superior, so that although they met with complete disaster, they were finally by the wisdom of their counsels victorious over the Carthaginians in the war.” VII. The Roman Republic compared with others – Polybius

The Roman constitution of the Senate aloud the flexibility for its generals and strength of its allies to overcome any enemy. It can be seen that the power given to the Roman consuls in power was a major advantage compared to Carthage.

The consul, when he leaves with his army invested with the powers I mentioned, appears indeed to have absolute authority in all matters necessary for carrying out his purpose V. On the Roman Constitution at its Prime – Polybius

While the Roman generals had this ability Hannibal did not benefit from such a system as it is seen with the lack of military support and eventual late reinforcements which did not change the course of the war. It can also be seen that Hannibal did not have the full support of his government as he felt necessary to send his brother Mago Barca to Carthage to announce victory by pouring out hundreds of golden rings taken from the bodies of the Romans killed in action at the entrance of the Carthaginian Senate building.

This is again evidence that Hannibal had to convince his government to follow in support, while the Roman consuls were given the support of the senate. Although we see Rome’s trust in their consuls lacking at times such as the case with Quintus Fabius Maximus ,'the dawdler', if Rome was on their back heel the power given to a general such as the great Publius Cornelius Scipio Rome was sure an advantage, over Hannibal.

Nationalism

The Nationalism created by the Roman senate between Rome and its allies would also be a reason for Hannibal’s failure.

“For the Romans, fighting as they are for their country and their children, never can abate their fury but continue to throw their whole hearts into the struggle until they get the better of their enemies.” VII. The Roman Republic compared with others – Polybius

This Nationalism led many Romans to contribute money to the senate as well as many soldiers fighting for free. While the Carthaginian army was made up of mercenaries and an army of people from many different cultures. Hannibal’s usage of Numidian, Spanish and Gallic soldiers shows the leadership skills Hannibal possessed. However it is clears that a nationalistic drive in battle would be lacking. Carthage itself was home to many different cultures as a merchant city, therefore lacking a clear cut identity among its people unlike the Romans. The Carthaginians were a association of cities which were based on the wealth of trade and allegiances. Polotical Unity only existed as far as economic interests intended. Phoenician settlements, such as Utica, were not loyal to Carthage supporting past rebellions and even the Romans in 146 BC.

Rome on the other hand was a society which demanded total loyalty. Roman ruins show a domination of public spaces, with a forum at the heart of any town. While in Carthaginian culture we see an emphasized private society, as seen with archaeological remains of many apartments. This is displayed at a site named Kerkouane, which contains many private bathrooms etc. This, in comparison to Rome’s public bathhouses shows the difference in cultural identity which would lead to nationalistic drive on the battle field.

Therefore evidently manpower would be greater ad well as will to win the war. This lack of nationalistic drive would prove to be decisive in Italy and later in the battle of Zama.

In 203 Hannibal was instructed by Carthage to evacuate Italy and return to the defence of his homeland. He embraked his army at Croton and sailed back to Africa. Hannibal had won many battles but had lost they war, in Italy.

Zama campaign

"Carthago delenda est!" ="Carthage must be destroyed!" Marcus Cato, a respected senator

By the end of 201 BC Carthage no longer had her empire, but she was still a shrewd trading nation. By the middle of the second century Carthage was again prospering, which was drastically hurting the trade of those Romans who had investments in North Africa.

The battle of Zama in the summer of 202 BC would be on a scale such as Cannae. The “two most famous generals and two mightiest armies of the two wealthiest nations in the world advanced to battle…” Livy. Both armies numbered 35,000 to 40,000 men. Hannibal possessed a strengthened elephant corps with him, but had a lesser quality infantry. While Scipio had the advantage of the alliance with Masinissa providing a strong Numidia force.

The battle occurred in 4 stages, first the armies met. The Romans drew their forces in three lines, with the maniples separate in formation allowing velites ( skirmishers) to fill the gaps. The Roman left wing possessed Italian allied Calvary, while the right wing contained Numidian Calvary. Hannibal also aligned his troops in three lines with the mercenaries at the front, second the Carthaginian forces and lastly the Veterans from the campaign in Italy. At the front were his elephants, while the wings were made from Carthaginian and Numidian Calvary.

The battle soon began with a charge from the war elephants, however the gaps with roman skirmishes aloud the elephants to pass without causing much trouble. Scipio also ordered all trumpeters to blow at the same time, causing the elephants to flee had come in contact with their own Calvary.

Immediately after the elephant failure the Roman Calvary attacked destroying the Carthaginian Calvary which began to flee. Then the Roman infantry charged, and soon Roman discipline began to win over forcing back the Carthaginian lines, with mercenaries fleeing.

The Roman Calvary returned and attacked the rear Carthaginian lines. This decided the battle, and the Carthaginian army was collapsing to its destruction.

Many state that these tactics by Scipio were ironically that of Hannibal at Cannae, however Scipio won due to his superior Calvary numbers in the battle. This even more ironically was due to the Scipio’s success in alliance with Masinissa, while Hannibal failed to ally the Italian allies of Rome.

Conclusion

Hannibals poor judement of Rome and his own allies, as well as the lack of reinforcement lead to the decline of one the most powerful and wealthiest nations in histroy.

Bibliography

Websites