Why do people glorify Hannibal if he was BTFO by Scipio in one battle on his home turf...

Because he managed to almost beat Rome, even though Carthagianians were a bunch of retards who couldn't send reinforcements when they should.

tbf Rome had the same problem on more than one occasion, they just didnt have to cross a sea to reach Hannibal.

Because Scipio only won due to Hannibals brother being full on retarded.

>hold promisse from childhood to hold onto his father`s resentment like an absolute madmen
>cross the alps like an absolute madman
>recruit foreign barbarians into your army and turn them into loyal soldiers like an absolute madmen
>rain chaos in the enemies backyard for 2 decades like an absolute madman
>encircle a bigger army than yours like an absolute madmen
>force the enemy to adopt a policy that contradicts their entire culture like an absolute madmen
>after defeat meet your enemy in a foreign kingdom and tell him to his face you are still the best general like an absolute madmen

im a huge romaboo but i still really like Hannibal

Huh? Rome never had a problem getting reinforcements.

Say that to my face, motherfucker.

>ywn be in HNNBl's army
>ywn fight alongside HNNB

>ywn hug him and cry on his shoulder because we lost the war

>ywn accompany him on his travel to asia

I was born in the wrong time :(

>Hack
No carthaginians were a bunch of child murdering Jews just like the rest of the pheonicians

maybe he mean attack in iberia while enduring hannibal's host though i dont know anything about the battles there

Actual archeological evidence points to natural child mortality. Over 80% were newborns and stillborns and only 2% were over a month old. This coupled with the fact children remains are not found in adult cemeteries points to tophets being burial grounds for children.

I don't remember reading Scipio had a problem getting units in Spain. I could be wrong though.

>why do people gush about someone who gave FUCKING ROME a bloody nose instead of a roman who eventually fucked him up?
gee dude no idea, let's ask those guys who won't shut the fuck up about Teutoburg Forest

Because he was a black man

Hannibal the Cannibal

Rome wasnt a superpower yet during Hannibals campaign

Hannibal wasn't glorified on the internet and popculture in general during his campaign

>Carthagianians were a bunch of retards who couldn't send reinforcements when they should
Yeah, because of course the retards are the one who can't breach utterly thick enemy lines to reinforce a lone general, not the fucking moron who buried himself in enemy territory while knowing that any other army wouldn't have been able to follow his own way in, because he himself was relying on surprise to succeed.
user, Hannibal's plan was a fucking hail mary. It relied on an unlikely event (a full blown italic uprising), and when it didn't happen, he was condemned to lose.

>Hannibal could not conquer Rome in his entire campaign.
That was never his plan you dingus.
Hannibal's goal was to reduce Rome back to its former status of one of a myriad italian city states.

Not to mention that he managed to survive with his army in italy for close to a decade and a half with little to no reinforcement.

>crossed the alps with elephantS
All of them died except for Hannibal's personal elephant, which was of a different species than the others.

Taking the elephants across the alps was dumb.

He failed miserably at that too, you know.

IIRC Hannibal did a good bit of local recruiting

Samnites and greeks took up arms against Rome. Certainly a small minority of the italic allies, but yeah it's silly to claim Hannibal only had his starting 50k throughout the 10 years campaign.

They had no problems getting troops there. In fact, IIRC, the romans dominated the naval aspect of the second punic war. It's one of the reasons why Hannibal went over the alps.
The warscene of Iberia was pretty much a disaster for Rome untill Scipio offered to take the command (which he only got by being the only one who wanted it). His amazing success there lead to the eventual roman victory of the whole conflict.

>>even though Carthagianians were a bunch of retards who couldn't send reinforcements when they should.
Gee, I wonder why. It's not as if the Romans now dominated the Mediterranean or something.

They didn't. They didn't even control the full Italian Peninsula at this time.

this desu

Rome having command of the sea at that point isn't really up for debate. The only real competition they faced after rekting Carthage in the first war was Rhodes, and the islanders chose to become clients rather than fight.

Years after the Second Punic War, Scipio, while in the East, happened to meet Hannibal. To make conversation, he asked Hannibal who the greatest general of all time was.

"Alexander"

"And second?" Scipio asked

"Pyrrhus"

"And third?"

"Myself!"

"How would that have changed if you had defeated me?" Scipio asked

"I would have put myself first"

The implication here being
>I think you're better than me but I'm wayyy too butthurt to admit it

Did Hannibal even use elephants in Italy? Whenever I read about either of the three big battles elephants are not even mentioned

See
Turns out Elephants don't mix well with high mountains

>beat both rome AND carthage in the exact same era.
>literally copied by BOTH hannibal and his daddy hamilcar.
>not even a footnote of history
Poor pyrrhus. If it weren't for plutarch you wouldn't even be the gravy stain on an old shirt of history.

Teutoburg was a war crime.

No shit sherlock. He underestimated the hold Rome had on the other cities. He thought that they would gladly abandon Rome after he'd wounded it and demonstrated its weakness but for some reason most of Italy decided to stay loyal. This forced Hannibal to basically spend years playing whack-a-mole in which he entered and 'freed' a city just for the roman army that followed him to put it back into the fold when he left.

Fuck off, Lloyd

They didn't all die, he still had at least some of them left that he used at trebia according to polybius IIRC

I was refering to outside reinforcement such as mercenaries, good cavalry and elephants.
Allthough I would appreciate it if someone had an estimate on how many percentages of Hannibal's army eventually consisted of non-ligurian, non-short hair gallic, italians.

The romans didn't dominate the mediterreanian untill after the second punic war and some change.

Meme answer: MUH ELEPHANTS!

Amateur military historian answer: the Battle of Cannae.

Actual military historian answer: Hannibal managed to wage a decade-long ground war against Rome on their own peninsula without reinforcements or resupply from Carthage and remained undefeated in the field during that time. A single military commander held virtually all of Italy hostage with nothing but his wits, charisma, and personal courage. There is no finer example of what what driven man can accomplish in war.

And tell me, user, in which wars did Hannibal participate and invaded Italy in?

It's not a complement to Scipio so much as commentary about the impossibility of his situation. If he were able to win free of that situation he would have essentially done the impossible.

The second, which obviously took place before the end of the second punic war.

>Pyrrhus
>wins two battles
>army is annihilated

Hannibal should have ranked himself second. He must have rated Pyrrhus highly because he was a fellow lover of elephants.

Except he spent years trapped in the heel of italy doing nothing.

and that is according to roman and greek historians, problably didnt even happen

>literally copied by BOTH hannibal and his daddy hamilcar.
source

t.Varus

That was only at the end of his italian excursion.

Hannibal's plan was basically "let's defeat Rome on the field a couple times, surely that's gonna be enough for the italics allies to lose faith and revolt".
AKA the exact same shit Pyrrhus tried 50 years earlier, with the exact same results. Hannibal's idea wasn't original and proven unsuccessful, yet he still tried.

>If it weren't for plutarch you wouldn't even be the gravy stain on an old shirt of history.

Yeah, but Plutarch's Life of Pyrrhus is arguablly Plutarch's most fun and action packed "Life". He makes Pyrrhus sound like the ultimated badass, especially during that siege in Sicily where Pyrrhus is leading an assault up the ladders then cuts a champion in half with his sword.

Plus him giving shit about Antigonus wearing the purple is dope.

>Gets killed by an old woman with a tile
Lolz way to go too.

You're actually the worst type of historian, and should expell yourself from the field.

Without fun anecdotes it's nearly impossible to sell history to people and IT'S ALOT LESS FUN!

m.youtube.com/watch?t=2s&v=aeaN8UBwg2M

don't get me wrong Scipio is the superior general and Rome was a good army

but until Scipio they just kept getting their ass kicked with barely any army no less

Nice source

That fag greek wanted to conquer, different from what HNB'L did

Why am i the worst?
Just because i said that problably didnt happen?

Why do you agree with sources on boring stuff, but not interesting stuff?

Because if you agree with Polybius/Livy's boring stuff why don't you agree with their interesting stuff.

Also, Scipio would have told that story to the end of the world if it happened.

>Also, Scipio would have told that story to the end of the world if it happened.
so im right that it didnt happen?

>Why do you agree with sources on boring stuff, but not interesting stuff?
im not like that, its just that

wasnt the entire reason hannibal lost at zama was because scipio had a very decisive cavalry advantage after the numidians were paid off by rome? the infantry was said to be evenly matched and scipio easily negated hannibal's elephants, though I don't really believe hannibal considered elephants to be a crucial necessity for battle strategy.

Scipio won the war because Carthage wasn't as bat shit insane as Rome. Carthage gave up like a normal nation after losing a few battles and did so to stop putting their citizens at risk. Rome didn't give a fuck, they just autistically fought until they won. The same thing happened with Pyrrhus. Rome was just a fucking anomaly in how much more they cared about winning than their own temporary wellbeing

He also gambler the battle on the likelyhood that the roman cavalry would not give up their chase of the carthaginian counterpart. When that happened and the roman cavalry returned to the field the battle was over.

*gambled the outcome of the battle

Zama was literally reverse Cannae. Cavalry advantage to the winner, infantry advantage for the loser.
Hannibal literally fell for his own ruse, the dumbass.

>Zama was literally reverse Cannae.
No it fucking wasn't.
>Hannibal literally fell for his own ruse, the dumbass.
No he fucking didn't.

What is it that pushed romans to the extreme in your opinion?

Because at Cannae a bunch of barbarians and mercenaries defeated a highly trained and well-armed Roman army.
And at Zama highly trained and well-equiped Roman army defeated a bunch of recruits from a nation without military tradition
Also Scipio basically copied Hannibal's tactics
tldr: Hannibal>Scipio

woa, first time I don't like a pepe image
please delete this it's wrong

Im with you

>Highly trained
Fuck off. After Trebia and Trasimene there were no experienced soldiers left.

Cannae and Zama weren't similar at all.

With his cavalry disadvantage and poorly trained infantry, he didn't have much of a choice.

not him but i'd say a mix of religious fervor and a warrior culture so thoroughly rooted in society it made Spartans look like weekend athletes.

Romans weren't just prodigious warriors, warfighting was literally THE only way of political and social leverage for 99% of the population, even the wealthiest, most prestigious man was only as good as his performance in battle, so even if being in war was absolutely harrowing, terrible and miserable, it was the way things were supposed to be, it was the mechanism of political representation, of social climbing and economical gain. Romans, for all their partying, trading and building, always came down to warfare as a civilization.

After Cannae where a massive chunk of the elite members of society died, Romans didn't think it was over, they thought "it's my time to rise". They had this nonchalant, ruthless ambition and downright suicidal need to validate themselves, fighting a war like that against them was always a lost cause in retrospect.

>greatest general of all time was black
whitebois btfo!!!!

>how to prove to all of humanity forever that good tactics don’t mean shit when you face superior strategic and logistical prowess, so much so that such a dominant tactical display could amount to so little strategic gain and such eternal disaster for his people.

So italians being lazy lost him the war.

Pasta la vista indeed.

Source? He did the exact same shit as Pyrrhus, won a few battles while trying to manipulate the city states and allies of Rome, the only difference is Pyrrhus was actually a good general, so when he realized Rome wouldn't surrender he found opportunity elsewhere and he took it like in sicily. Hannibal just spent years jacking off all over the countryside while having far more support from his host nation than pyrrhus did while simultaneously accomplishing absolutely nothing.

African /= black
He was Carthaginian. Which essentially means he was Phonecian. The most direct descendents of the Phonecians still alive today are the Lebanese.

Does this look black to you?

>greatest general of all time was brown
whitebois btfo!!!

Source
>The most direct descendents of the Phonecians still alive today are the Lebanese
Who the fuck apart from arabs believe this shit?

This people are all mixed, none of them are related to the ancient people that once lived in those lands

>m-muh genetic test s-say th...

Made up test that doesnt proof anything, i can make tests and say we are the same as tainos

I'm browner than them.

They were probably whiter.

Because when the greatest empire in recorded history points at somebody (Hannibal) and says "that guy was our greatest enemy," people pay attention to that.

Doubt that, semitic people werent known to have pale skin but im pretty sure they werent inbreed dirty fucks like most people that live in ME

Are you trying to imply that you're white?

>Made up test that doesnt proof anything, i can make tests and say we are the same as tainos
That's cool. Good for you. Tell me, would you Taino tests stand up to peer review? Because I am willing to bet that the Lebanese test has.

Because Hannibal's military strategies are still relevant in the modern military.

That's not accurate as far as I'm aware. First off, warfare for the romans at the time of the punic wars was pretty much exclusively a thing landowners did. The lower classes that couldn't afford their own gear did not take part in the army. When the roman state allowed a legion of slaves to be recruited at the height of the Hannibal crisis it resulted in a huge uproar amongst the 'fighting classes'.

The culture of the roman elite ran above all else on prestige and the habit of having ancestral rooms filled with your deceased ancestors deathmasks and notes of their accomplishments stretching back centuries certainly helped to brainwash each new generation into prioritizing their own legacy and that of their families as a whole.

Commanding positions, beyond the rank of centurion, was exclusive to the nobility. The nobles' primary goal of serving in the army was to increase their own political currency as commanding a victory was a huge political gain which ofcourse lead to some pretty stupid strategical prioritizations as alot of commanders focused their military activities on maximising their own political gains while minimising the gains their successor could achieve.
Military service was also a requirement for holding public office.

Well after all the most famous quote about Hannibal is 'He know how to gain a victory, but not how to use one.'

Again it doesnt proof anything

I trust geneticists over your baseless claims

so are flavian tactics, the tools used to corner hannibal in italy and contain him there until the other carthaginian forces lost and the state recalled hannibal after he got nothing done.

>geneticists
Why? They can fake everything they want, Why you are so dumb?
Realize that genetics tests cant be and wont be realiable sources, deal with it

History say it all, you may have some genes from canaanites but saying you are full canaanite is retarded considering greek, romans, arab, iranian migration after arabs, turkic, crusades and ottomans conquered those lands