Guest spartacus Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 Most of the regular users to this site now know I like to post my Hypothetical posts such as Rome Carthage Pact so staying in the same vein I would like to introduce another ! After the battle of Zama, Hannibal did not flee but was caught and returned to Rome by a triumphant Scipio Africanus to stand trial! What charges would Rome bring against him? Would Scipio help his former enemy? Would Hannibal have gotten a fair trial? Would Rome have handed down the Death Penalty? The "ifs and "maybes" are endless! So what do you think would happen at the trial of Rome v Hannibal Barca ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scanderbeg Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 Umm. Hannibal did not flee after Zama. He offered to accept whatever treaty Rome though of in the name of Carthage. Scipio fought to get Hannibal to go back to his people. Hannibal then returned to Carthage and became its ruler. However he had many enemies in the currupt system. They went to Rome and started alarm the Romans by saying that he is planning another attack on Rome. Rome then told Carthage to hand him over. Romans sent troops for him. THEN he fled. What charges would Rome bring against him? Rome would bring, false, charges of conspiracy against the Roman and put him up to trial for the past war so he would be incriminated no matter what. The Romans moved the court system the way they pleased and if they wanted to incriminate you, THEY WILL INCRIMINATE YOU. Would Scipio help his former enemy? Scipio already showed that he was for Hannibal. he pushed for Rome to leave them alone and wanted to make peace with Hannibal. The only real reason I see that the went for the battle of Zama, even though Hannibal was pushing for peace, was to leave Carthage totally vulnerable and they would have no choice but to accept whatever the Romans wanted out of them. It could have also been for glory of having defeated Hannibal but considering how little he defended his name when Cato attacked him later on makes me think that he did not have much care for pride. Would Hannibal have gotten a fair trial? I say no way in hell. The Romans despised Hannibal. They villified him. Even Cato called Phyrrus "honorable" and Hannibal as "cruel"(even though he was not so. When he killed a general in battle he did funeral services in his honor and returned the body to his family. Where as Nero cut off hasdubrals head, his brother, and threw it in Hannibals camp.). The senate would be vicious. Scipio, I believe, would try his best to aid him but ultimately the Senates word was law and they definately would have given him a most vicious execution. One of the biggest reasons I love the second punic war era is mainly becuase hwere you have these two completely opposite men. These two giants of the era coming together. You would assume that they completely hated and dispised each other. But it wasn't completely so. They had respect for each other. As it is shown when Scipio defends Hannibal and Carthage when it was this was that caused him to lose a father and father in law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spartacus Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 Skenderbeg I would definately agree Scipio would try his best to help Hannibal, Scipio was an honourable man, also I would agree Rome would take its revenge and execute Hannibal As I said at the start of my post the events were HYPOTHETICAL ! So I said Hannibal was caught after Zama, I know this was not what happened it was just another way to start the post, put a "twist" on things thats all ! But thanks for retelling the actual events! Following on, do you think there may have been any sort of repercussions from killing Hannibal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scanderbeg Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 He would likely be martyred by some Carthagenians. But in general I don't think much would change. In the end Romans did finally capture Hannibal...even if was just his body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spartacus Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 Skenderbeg With respect I think there is a big difference between finding his body and actually killing him! I think that IF the Romans had executed him it may have sent a shockwave around the empire, for instance those tribes in Spain that swung their loyalties between Carthage and Rome, may just be tilted by the brutality of his death and joined the Cartheginian cause which in turn may have caused unrest, not to mention the reaction of Romes other allies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 Killing Hannibal would've ended any hope/fear of his return to power. It may have actually helped to unify more quickly than actually happened. Perhaps Antiochus III may not have been so emboldened to risk war with Rome had Hannibal already been dead. (Though all evidence suggests he really wasn't much more than afterthought to the Seleucids). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scanderbeg Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 War with Antiochus, IMO, was going to happen no matter what. He showed he had little care for Hannibal as he made him just a mere Admiral. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spartacus Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 umm, interesting replies! Thanks guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.