Best Tactical Commander

[Guest Scanderbeg]

Hannibal stayed in Italy because Roman generals were too scared to confront him. He wasnt always on top there. After Cannae he took a deep dive down. Hannibal's years in Italy were marked with many mess ups(In his first siege of Capua he was driven off). The Roman's simply did not want to lose anymore men so they just let him wonder. He did do a lot of damage. But overall it was nothing the Romans couldnt recover from. One thing they could not recover from was lives. They feared that if they fought Hannibal they would lose too many. So they just did not fight him. With the Exception of Marcellus and Nero.

 

Hannibal knew if he left the war would be over. If he stayed he had a chance of meeting up with his brother's reinforcement from Spain. Something that never happened. By the end Hannibal had lost too many men to be of any big worry to the Roman's. He had come with barely an army of 20k left. He was cornered in Southern Italy by Nero. He had no options but to stay. The Roman's were trying to hard, by then, to rid of him. Their main want was to eliminate any possible reinforcement's.

[roman wargamer]

for clarification of definition only for clearer limit

"same" terrain, "same" army size, "same" equipment,

 

Boy that's an understatement. The Cannae is still to this day a classified military manuever that all generals dream of executing. It is very rare for it to actually take place. Hannibal was the first and might I say still the greatest to do so. My only problem with Hannibal was not his tactical brilliance, but his stategic thinking. He did so great things, but the fact is Carthage disbanded a huge chunk of their navy and it lead to their downfall. I don't know how much Hannibal had to do with it, but it was decisive. Otherwise this site would be dedicated to Carthaginian History. It would be like a major power today disbanding a large chunk of its Air Force.

 

--------------------

Markus Regulus -- The Republic Never Dies

 

you misplaced limit!!!

 

the Cannae have an Unequal Force and Advantage.

 

Rome have the arms,shields,equipment and numbers.

 

But Hannibal control the choice and higher grounds.

 

To be Direct, Hannibal is next to Julius Caesar.

[Guest Scanderbeg]

It's a good tactic yes. But if an enemy is led by a proper general an army wont fall for it. The legion had 70,000 soldiers. But it nothing to put those numbers into use. All they did was add more ranks, met with the Carthagenian superior cavalry on even ground which made things unfavorable, they did not support their cavalry with infantry, nothing. The Romans simply decided to rush into the Carthagenian line and overpower them. Hannibal is strong general not because of this tactic but how he was able to exploit this huge weakness the Romans had. The fact that the field was led by arsitocrats, not properly trained generals. Paullus and Varro dug their own hole. They, like I said above, did absolutely nothing with their numbers. Also, does three good battles make a general a genius anyway? What exactly did Hannibal do after Cannae that is anything worth mentioning? He proved himself rather incompetent when sieges were the issue, remember how long it took him to capture Saguntum? He also suffered many casualties by an early rush when the walls were not yet properly broken in. His sieges in Italy were nothing too impressive either and his tactics after Cannae were nothing worth mentioning either. He did not try to perform any special kind of manuever's anymore. Lets face it, after Cannae hannibal knew his war with Rome was going nowhere. He completely underestimated Roman will.

[Hamilcar Barca]

Those are valid points but Hannibal's decline after Cannae wasn't his fault. He took every opportunity he was given and performed to the best that any one could have dreamed of. His ultimate failure came about on behalf of the incompetence of the Carthaginian senate and Hanno who did not offer any real aid to the Barca's. Hannibal could have been reinforced easilly, but the three Carthaginian armies in Spain sat idle for ages and never co-operated or acted in union until it was too late. The fact was, while Hannibal only ever won or drew in Italy, the Romans won all their battles in Spain with the exception of the Upper Baetis in 211BC when both the Scipio's were killed.

 

As for naval superiority, the only naval battle worth mentioning from the Second Punic war was the battle of the Ebro Mouth in 217BC where Cnaeus Scipio ambushed the dis-organised Carthaginian fleet under Himilcon, capturing 27 ships and sinking 4 for no losses. This effectively enabled him to have free reign on the Spanish Coastline. The Carthaginians did make plans to deploy a new much larger fleet after this. But the Romans had already done this and the Carthaginian admirals lost their nerve and never challenged them again.

 

Back on topic my favourite tactical commander rests in a toss-up between Gaius Marius and Sulla.