Cannae Anniversary

[P.Clodius]

August 2, 216 BC UNRV is linked at the bottom of the page too

[Antiochus of Seleucia]

May those gallant Roman souls rest in peace.

 

That is really cool that unrv is represented there!

Edited August 2, 2006 by Antiochus of Seleucia

[Gaius Octavius]

I think that Paullus was not in command that day and did not want to fight. I thought that he committed suicide.

[P.Clodius]

May those gallant Roman souls rest in piece.

Cannae was a necessary school for Rome. It showed its true character immediately after the battle and, succesfully adapted its political and millitary system to persevere. Without Cannae there'd be no Rome as we know it.

 

I think that Paullus was not in command that day and did not want to fight. I thought that he committed suicide.

No he was KIA, last seen sitting on a rock bleeding profusely. A horse was offered to him but he refused.

Edited August 2, 2006 by P.Clodius

[M. Porcius Cato]

Cannae was a necessary school for Rome. It showed its true character immediately after the battle and, succesfully adapted its political and millitary system to persevere. Without Cannae there'd be no Rome as we know it.

 

I agree, but I'd not make Cannae the agent of the change, only the proof that change was needed. The change was made by Romans operating within the republican system, not by the defeat itself.

 

The 'true character' of the Romans was displayed, first, by the Senate that never betrayed their fides to the republic; second, by innovative military figures, such as Scipio, who knew how to marry overall strategy to mere tactics; and third, by the people of Rome, who did not punish their conquered commanders with exile or death.

 

What a contrast to the Athenians--who exiled and punished their commanders for losing (no matter the circumstances nor their prospects for future victories), or to the future Romans of the Imperial regime--who bribed barbarians into retreating from Roman lands, or hid behind walls, or merely wept for their lost eagles, or turned the external threat into an opportunity for treasonous advancement, or (worst of all) executed successful generals out of fear that they would march on Rome.

 

Yes, Cannae was a necessary school for Rome; but it was only the Romans of the republic that had the brains to learn from such a lesson.

Edited August 2, 2006 by M. Porcius Cato

[Virgil61]

May those gallant Roman souls rest in piece.

Cannae was a necessary school for Rome. It showed its true character immediately after the battle and, succesfully adapted its political and millitary system to persevere. Without Cannae there'd be no Rome as we know it.

 

I think there's an argument that it wasn't quite such a necessary school for Rome but just a poor tactical decision and reinforced what a few Romans already knew was a better strategy against Hannibal. Cannae occured in 216 BC, the war continued for the next 14 years and Zama wasn't until 202 BC. At Cannae Hannibal had only been in Italy two years or so and still destined to spend the next 13 years tearing up the place.

 

Fabian Paullus and Minucius (the hard way) understood Hannibal's tactical expertise on the battlefield and the necessity of not fighting him on his own terms due to his defeats of Roman armies before Cannae. After Cannae for more than a decade Rome re-adopted the Fabian strategy in Italy with a vengeance rarely ventured out to give Hannibal the pitched battles he probably wanted.

 

If anything, Cannae was the proverbial 2x4 needed to smack the stubborn Roman donkey upside the head and let them know this guy was no walkover to be dealt with by glory seeking politicians in a consular role. You're probably right in that it forced the Republic to adapt to this new threat and dig deeply into that well of civic virtue. I'd put a wager down that Scipio's rise which started with giving him command of the Spanish theater was as much an act of desperation as anything else. For what it's worth I remember hearing Prof Rufus Fears give this lecture on him basically stating that no one else wanted the friggin job.

 

I think Cannae's legacy and influence lies as a textbook example of the double envelopment as much as a milestone in Roman history. Even Norman Schwartzkoff described it as an influential model during the Gulf War.

 

Edited to add that I agree only the Republic had the fortitude, institutions and civic virtue that could have dealt with such a defeat or series of defeats.

Edited August 2, 2006 by Virgil61

[WotWotius]

For what it's worth I remember hearing Prof Rufus Fears give this lecture on him basically stating that no one else wanted the friggin job.

 

Giving Scipio proconsular imperium for his Spanish campaign was both creative and dramatic. It was creative because the name Scipio was well known and respected in Spain, so receiving the loyalty of the local tribes would be an easier task for him. The drama came from the fact that Scipio was also campaigning to avenge the deaths of his father and his uncle, whose forces were defeated and they themselves killed by Handrubal and Mago during an earlier Spanish campaign (212 BC).

 

Additionally the move could be considered unique; it was very rare for a senator to obtain proconsular imperium before holding the position of consul.

[Gaius Octavius]

Scipio's victories in Spain cut off Hannibal's supplies, replacements and the head of his brother, which the Romans kindly air-mailed to Hannibal in Italy. The Carthagenian senate was not of much help to him. This was the personal war of Hannibal. It cost his nation its freedom. At least one historian dates The Fall to this war.

 

EDIT:

Please see Antiochus of Seleucia's correction below. Hasdrubal was killed in Italy and not in Spain as above.

 

N.B.

When I err, PLEASE correct me (civilly), as I am to a large extent relying on a faulty memory that goes back to before many of you were born.

Edited August 3, 2006 by Gaius Octavius

[Antiochus of Seleucia]

First, I'd like to point out I spelled peace, piece and would like everyone not to notice that.

 

Second, G.Octav, Hannibal's brother, Hasdrubal was killed in Italy at the Metaurus River by Gaius Claudius Nero and Marcus Livius Salinator.

 

Hannibal paid his own price for Trasemine, Trebia and Cannae, he was literally chased around the world by Roman expansion. I've also heard there were always Roman messengers bringing him notes calling him hopeless, always finding out his new hiding places, representing ghosts of those he killed. He was always shadowed until the day of his suicide.

[P.Clodius]

May those gallant Roman souls rest in piece.

Cannae was a necessary school for Rome. It showed its true character immediately after the battle and, succesfully adapted its political and millitary system to persevere. Without Cannae there'd be no Rome as we know it.

I think there's an argument that it wasn't quite such a necessary school for Rome but just a poor tactical decision and reinforced what a few Romans already knew was a better strategy against Hannibal.

You are of course right. Fabius' tactics were working fine in confining Hannibal, his freedom of movement was severely restricted. The 'Bomb the Bastards' lobby were the cause of Cannae, and the Fabian method was reverted to afterwards, along with a balance of Marcellan pitbull tactics.

Cannae occured in 216 BC, the war continued for the next 14 years and Zama wasn't until 202 BC. At Cannae Hannibal had only been in Italy two years or so and still destined to spend the next 13 years tearing up the place.

Not really, he spent the 13 years relatively bottled up, and suffered atleast as many defeats as victories, a testament to his skill that none of his defeats was decisive, also, a testament to roman skill at not letting any of his victories be decisive. When the situation was reversed and a roman army was on Carthaginian soil, oh how quickly they folded! Hannibal's failure was not taking in the lesson Pyrrus had learned, rome doesn't fold now matter how bad it is beaten. This was a fundemental strategic blunder on Hannibal's part, had he prepared for it he'd have had steady reinforcements.

 

sry for the messed up quotes

//Cleaned them up - Moon

Edited August 3, 2006 by Moonlapse

[Virgil61]

May those gallant Roman souls rest in piece.

Cannae was a necessary school for Rome. It showed its true character immediately after the battle and, succesfully adapted its political and millitary system to persevere. Without Cannae there'd be no Rome as we know it.

I think there's an argument that it wasn't quite such a necessary school for Rome but just a poor tactical decision and reinforced what a few Romans already knew was a better strategy against Hannibal.

You are of course right. Fabius' tactics were working fine in confining Hannibal, his freedom of movement was severely restricted. The 'Bomb the Bastards' lobby were the cause of Cannae, and the Fabian method was reverted to afterwards, along with a balance of Marcellan pitbull tactics.

Cannae occured in 216 BC, the war continued for the next 14 years and Zama wasn't until 202 BC. At Cannae Hannibal had only been in Italy two years or so and still destined to spend the next 13 years tearing up the place.

Not really, he spent the 13 years relatively bottled up, and suffered atleast as many defeats as victories, a testament to his skill that none of his defeats was decisive, also, a testament to roman skill at not letting any of his victories be decisive...

 

 

Bottled up is fine I guess possibly more descriptive, but my main point was that Cannae occurred very early on in Hannibal's Italian campaign and it's result was for Rome to revert back to the already well-known and previously unpopular Fabian strategy.

[Dominus Rex]

Poor Hannibal. He could have made Cannae decisive by marching on Rome, but instead he made the blunder and didn't. Thirteen or however many years later, when he left Italy, he must have been really sad. Victory was so close, but he hadn't taken it. I almost pity him. But then I don't.

 

 

On a side note, the war might also have been won by Hannibal had Carthage sent reinforcements after Cannae. They were to elated by victory and acted much to slowly.

[Gaius Octavius]

Poor Hannibal. He could have made Cannae decisive by marching on Rome, but instead he made the blunder and didn't. Thirteen or however many years later, when he left Italy, he must have been really sad. Victory was so close, but he hadn't taken it. I almost pity him. But then I don't.

 

 

On a side note, the war might also have been won by Hannibal had Carthage sent reinforcements after Cannae. They were to elated by victory and acted much to slowly.

Hannibal probably did the right thing. It is reported somewhere that the Romans were trading the land under his feet. Not a good omen. But then, if the rabbit didn't stop to....

[P.Clodius]

Hannibal's strength was in cavalry, he had no siege equipment and was not predisposed to seiges anyway. Sieges require logistics and therefore local support would have been necessary, Rome was in the middle of Latium and the locals were decidedly hostile!

[Rameses the Great]

This will be the battle that showed Rome was not the only power. At the zenith of power they were stopped, not in the Middle East, not in Gaul, but in Italy.

 

I think that if it had not been for Hannibal, Carthage would not even be a famous ancient power. Carthage was blessed by the great military mind of Hannibal. Then again when you go against Rome, I don't care who you are, the chances of winning are basically none.

 

ROMA INVECTA!