|
What I read is that he could have plausibly conquered Rome if he had made it his goal to smash the Roman state, rather than force surrender and tribute.
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Hannibal did repeatedly consider attacking Rome directly but didn't find convincing reason to actually do it. One has to assume he understood the limitations of his forces, I don't think it was that he had the wrong strategic goal but that he didn't feel he could do what he needed to do to beat Rome. It's not entirely clear what exactly he felt he was lacking, but he definitely made every effort to draw allies into the conflict and he did try pretty hard to get reinforcements from Carthaginian Spain which suggests he didn't feel he had enough men to force the issue. Those were never going to be forthcoming though because the whole point of the war was to defend the possessions in Spain against Roman influence -- even when Hasdrubal showed up at the Metaurus it was only because he'd been kicked right out of Iberia. Yeah historians tell us Maharbal accused Hannibal of not knowing how to exploit his victory, but I see no reason to trust Maharbal's judgment over his commander's. Rome was evidently not about to surrender, it had walls and men willing to defend them, and Hannibal and his not-especially-large army were stuck in the enemy's heartland with no supplies, no reinforcements, no siege equipment and not a lot of friends. He had a lot to lose and may have been entirely justified in choosing not to besiege Rome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
The thing to remember about the second Punic war is that while Hannibal was kicking rear end in Italy, Rome was winning everywhere else. I don't think there's any way he conquers Rome, even at their lowest point in the immediate aftermath of Cannae. I mean this is all obviously conjecture, but to get there quickly would have meant abandoning his own wounded and prisoners of war and leaving his power base in southern Italy. Rome was still defended and there were legions stationed in Sardinia and Sicily which would have been recalled as soon as it was obvious Hannibal was moving against Rome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 02:17
|
|
|
I also think it's worth remembering that the Second Punic War wasn't a war of annihilation unlike the Third. In light of the Third, some Romans and latter day pro-Romans liked to frame the Second as being an existential struggle for Romes very being when this was never the case. It was a war about who would be the dominant power in Spain, Hannibal tried to stretch this to become dominant power in Italy also and once that failed Scipio bid to make Rome the dominant power in Africa. Neither city-state set out to smash the other, just to curtail its colonial/imperial ambitions and subjugate the other to the extent that it was able. It's far from clear that Roman defeat in Second Punic War would have meant the destruction of Rome itself and it certainly wasn't necessarily the case that Carthaginian defeat in Second Punic War meant the destruction of Carthage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
skasion posted:I also think it's worth remembering that the Second Punic War wasn't a war of annihilation unlike the Third. In light of the Third, some Romans and latter day pro-Romans liked to frame the Second as being an existential struggle for Romes very being when this was never the case. It was a war about who would be the dominant power in Spain, Hannibal tried to stretch this to become dominant power in Italy also and once that failed Scipio bid to make Rome the dominant power in Africa. Neither city-state set out to smash the other, just to curtail its colonial/imperial ambitions and subjugate the other to the extent that it was able. It's far from clear that Roman defeat in Second Punic War would have meant the destruction of Rome itself and it certainly wasn't necessarily the case that Carthaginian defeat in Second Punic War meant the destruction of Carthage. Cato the elder's speeches probably gave them a pretty good idea on how this would end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
I forget which cities exactly, but Hannibal did turn Italian cities to his side, were there ever any consequences for those that did after he was gone?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
Dalael posted:Cato the elder's speeches probably gave them a pretty good idea on how this would end. Cato being a snot-nosed military tribune at the time, it's highly unlikely anyone cared what he thought. His famous refrain about what his opinion, moreover, was didn't start until he visited Carthage in 157 (so 40 years after the end of the Second War) and realized that the city was doing just fine, and might conceivably someday again endanger Rome. The mere fact that he spent a number of years loudly reiterating this opinion implies both that the Roman victory in the Second War didn't and wasn't intended to permanently destroy Carthage, and that there was a good deal of political inertia against doing so despite the fact that it would be and was easy to accomplish.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:I forget which cities exactly, but Hannibal did turn Italian cities to his side, were there ever any consequences for those that did after he was gone? If I recall correctly, punishment was much lesser for cities that resubmitted to the Romans ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
I know that Capua was punished by the surrender of a bunch of gold, the execution of almost all of the city's Senate, the stripping of the city's political rights, establishment of Roman appointed magistrates, and all of Capuan farm land being declared ager publica While it wasn't an Italian city, Syracuse was looted and stripped of pretty much everything valuable (and Archimedes was killed, but that was more of an incidental thing.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
I knew about Syracuse and Archimedes but didn't know that was in direct response to the second Punic war. drat timelines
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
Making a big example of Capua reduced the need to punish the other cities, I'd imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 11:14
|
|
|
Capua had also been where Hannibal had had winter quarters, so the Capuans hadn't just allied with him, but sheltered him and his men. That probably contributed to the Romans being a little miffed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 11:43
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:Capua had also been where Hannibal had had winter quarters, so the Capuans hadn't just allied with him, but sheltered him and his men. That probably contributed to the Romans being a little miffed. Did he winter there before or after Cannae? I can't imagine a city being in any position to say no after Cannae. If it was before tho, Capua derserved what it got... 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
A large percentage of Italian cities defected to Hannibal after Cannae but not all of them; not even a majority of them, iirc. Hannibal spent a ton of time trying to conquer or ally with various key cities, probably most notably Tarentum. Capua did, though, and that was huge both metaphorically and literally, because it was the second largest city in Italy at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Capua was almost as old and powerful as Rome itself, and had a history of playing both sides in the various wars for dominance of Italy even after nominally joining the Roman coalition as well as demanding influence over the government of the republic. The Romans were tired of Capua before Hannibal even showed up; siding with him was just the last straw.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
This is the first time I hear of Capua's importance. I guess it isn't preserved well since people don't go there much for ruins..?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:This is the first time I hear of Capua's importance. I guess it isn't preserved well since people don't go there much for ruins..? Actually, a quick google search shows some pretty nice ruins, so i'd be surprised if it doesn't have its fair share of visitors. Here's a nice site regarding ancient capua, if you're interested. http://www.ancientcapua.com/
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
Dalael posted:Did he winter there before or after Cannae? I can't imagine a city being in any position to say no after Cannae. It was after. According to Livy, after Cannae, the Capuans sent an embassy to Rome, who courted their support, but then, on the way back, one of the Capuan ambassadors, a senator named Vibius Virrius, convinced the rest of them that Carthage was going to win, and, once they did, if Capua backed them, it could become the dominant city of Italy, so they negotiated a treaty with Hannibal that said that, first, no Capuan would ever be put under Carthaginian command, second, no Campanian would be drafted into the Carthaginian military, third, Capua would stay independent, and fourth, Carthage would give them 300 Roman prisoners of war so they could exchange them for the 300 Capuans who were currently fighting with the Roman army in Sicily. Livy also says that the Capuan demand to stay a Roman ally was that one of the two Consuls of Rome always be a Capuan, but that he doesn't believe the story.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:This is the first time I hear of Capua's importance. I guess it isn't preserved well since people don't go there much for ruins..? Capua has some excellent ruins. It has one of the best preserved amphitheaters, which is a more or less exact copy of the Colosseum. Outside you can see some of the marks from the building, there are carved patterns in the ground where they cut arch blocks to size. It's also the only arena where we are 100% certain naumachia were held, as there's a system to flood and drain the arena that's reasonably well preserved. It's not crowded and you can go anywhere you want inside, so it's cooler than the Colosseum. And the region is full of stuff. I imagine most people who go to Campania interested in ruins just go to Pompeii, maybe also Herculaneum. Capua and Cumae are both neat and mostly devoid of visitors.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 02:07
|
|
|
On the subject Of the Spanish campaign what can be said of the government/society in Iberia? Everything I read tends to gloss over Spain as if it's just a land grab between Carthage and Rome. I know a lot of Spanish mercenaries joined hannibal and a lot of them resisted. Same is true of Rome. Was it just a matter of Spaniards seeing both as two sides of a conquering coin
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:On the subject Iberia was, for the time period we're talking about, made up of a bunch of Celtic and pre-Celtic tribes, with a bunch of Greek, Phoenecian, and Carthaginian cities and trading colonies along the coast. There had also been, probably, a pre-Celtic city called Tartessos near the Gulf of Cadiz. After the Carthaginians lost the First Punic War, a Carthaginian General named Hamilcar Barca swore revenge on Rome. Carthage had lost a lot of its territory to Rome, and Hamilcar decided he was going to create a new empire for Carthage by taking over Iberia. He invaded it, and took over most of southern and southeastern Iberia (including the silver mines there), conquering the various tribes and basically setting up his own personal empire, until he died in battle. Hannibal was one of Hamilcar's sons. The Second Punic War actually started in Iberia. Rome and Carthage had made a treaty that fixed the Carthaginian border in Iberia at the river Ebro. As part of the treaty, Carthage agreed not to expand north of the river. Carthage assumed the Romans would stay north of the river themselves. South of the Ebro, there was an independent city named Saguntum (it's original name, no lie, was Arse), which Rome entered into a friendship treaty with. At the same time, Rome also took sides in a civil war in the city between a pro-Roman and a pro-Carthaginian faction. Hannibal got concerned with the idea of a pro-Roman city south of the Ebro, and started making threatening moves to it. So, Saguntum sent people to Rome asking for their help. Rome ignored them for a while, and finally sent a message to Hannibal saying, "Hey, leave Saguntum alone, or else." Hannibal then attacked the city, and the Romans shrugged their shoulders and said, "Hey, we tried", and went on to invade Illyria. Hannibal took over the city, and the Romans, who had pretty much ignored Saguntum's cries for help, were outraged! They went to the Carthaginian Senate, and said, "Hannibal broke the treaty between us by attacking Saguntum! We demand you had him over to us for punishment!" The Carthaginian Senate said, "First off, Hannibal's in Spain with a big army, and he doesn't really listen to us anyway, so we can't do anything about him. Second, the treaty says we can't expand north of the Ebro. Saguntum is south of the Ebro." The Roman ambassador thought, and said, "Err....yes! Yes, it is! But Hannibal moved his troops NORTH of the Ebro to attack Saguntum. He crossed the Ebro and then turned around and attacked the city! We demand justice!" The Carthaginian senate said, "Hold on a second. You're claiming that Hannibal moved his troops out of the city of New Carthage, which is south of Saguntum, and then instead of marching his troops there, he marched past Saguntum, marched 100 miles north of Saguntum, to the Ebro River, crossed it, then crossed it again, marched 100 miles back south, and attacked Saguntum?" "Errr....yes? Justice!", the Roman ambassador declared as he was shown out of the Carthaginian Senate. And then the Romans declared war, for justice!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
Watch Publius Cornelius start a loving war 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 11:13
|
|
|
*Hoists 'Mission Accomplished' banner onto trireme*
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
That was a pretty good deal the Capuans had with Hannibal, I never knew it was so favorable to them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:*Hoists 'Mission Accomplished' banner onto trireme* quinquereme 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:If digital records for the whole of SA do survive centuries into the future, I wonder how future scholars will deal with the absurd amount of words to parse through, what individual threads will be chosen out of the pile to actually read in earnest rather than just running algorithmic analysis with computers. In the year 2200, the "Something Awful Archive" at the Library of Congress will receive approximately 2 visitors a year, one of whom will be writing a History of Goatse. I don't think anyone will seriously be caring about our posts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
skasion posted:they were not originally possessed of a monotheistic religion. I think that's an unfair criticism of the Bible, given that the latter half of the Old Testament is the prophets, clearly in the minority, raving that the Israelites aren't monotheists like they damned well should be and disaster will befall them unless they get on board with the program. I highly doubt the author of Isaiah or Jeremiah was intending for an instant for you to think that the Israelites were monotheists at the time, merely that they should be monotheists and if they don't get on board with monotheism horrible, horrible poo poo will happen to them (followed by Jeremiah, especially, doing a smug "I told you so" after said terrible stuff does happen).
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:I think that's an unfair criticism of the Bible, given that the latter half of the Old Testament is the prophets, clearly in the minority, raving that the Israelites aren't monotheists like they damned well should be and disaster will befall them unless they get on board with the program. I highly doubt the author of Isaiah or Jeremiah was intending for an instant for you to think that the Israelites were monotheists at the time, merely that they should be monotheists and if they don't get on board with monotheism horrible, horrible poo poo will happen to them (followed by Jeremiah, especially, doing a smug "I told you so" after said terrible stuff does happen). Yeah, but the problem is that the Bible explicitly frames monolatrous worship of YHVH as the true and original Hebrew religion from, the ancient covenant with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from which sinful contemporaries have fallen into polytheistic error. This is essentially the opposite of reality: said covenant and the long history of monolatry it supposes are as mythical as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob themselves, and exclusive worship of YHVH was obviously not a widespread article of faith until late in the history of Israel and Judah.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:In the year 2200, the "Something Awful Archive" at the Library of Congress will receive approximately 2 visitors a year, one of whom will be writing a History of Goatse. I don't think anyone will seriously be caring about our posts. The other one will be writing their dissertation on metaposting (posting about posting) as a form of community participation and asserting authority in internet culture.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
For what it's worth I know people who have used online forums as sources for dissertations on how public memory of conflicts is created and how the communities involved police those memories. One really good one that I"m thinking of looked at French message boards that grew up around communities of Algerians who fought for the French and moved to France after poo poo went south for them. We can joke about SA all the time but I have zero loving doubt that mining online commentary - whether SA, Reddit, Youtube comments, Facebook, etc - will be a big thing for historians a century from now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
I want to read the serious dissertation on what early 21st century shitposts can tell 25th century historians about our civilization
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:I want to read the serious dissertation on what early 21st century shitposts can tell 25th century historians about our civilization You realize that ancient historians today consider a garbage pile to be one of the greatest treasure troves they can stumble upon, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:You realize that ancient historians today consider a garbage pile to be one of the greatest treasure troves they can stumble upon, right? gently caress YOU FUTURE EGGHEADS !!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Just think of it as the future equivalent of when archaeologists recorded all the "Quintus has a huge dick" off the walls of Pompeii.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
I just hope open secrets like the prevalence of abuse of American Phlebjotum that invisibly pervades our society at every level isn't lost.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
To all future historians: click the link in my profile's home page section.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I just hope open secrets like the prevalence of abuse of American Phlebjotum that invisibly pervades our society at every level isn't lost. It should be obvious enough that all this Phlebjotum is for "ritual use".
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
I would have killed for a 17th-century equivalent of D&D for my dissertation. In fact, that was largely what my work was trying to reconstruct.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
My grandest lottery $$ scheme is to spend millions on fabricated sources telling the story of my ascent to world wide dominance all sealed inside an enormous pyramid full of jewels and crowns designed to last 8,000 years. ...It came to me late at night while thinking about the res gestae
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:You realize that ancient historians today consider a garbage pile to be one of the greatest treasure troves they can stumble upon, right? I wasn't being ironic, I legitimately want to read it
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:52
|
|