Was Hannibal Barca ABANDONED by Carthage?
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 07. 2024
- Cheers Everyone!
Welcome to Episode 1 of the YOUR HISTORY: QUESTIONS series. In this episode we look at why Hannibal Barca was not reinforced despite major victories against the Romans during the Second Punic War and having the Italian peninsula in his grasp in 218BCE.
SOURCES:
MUSIC/SOUND:
Eyes of Glory - Aakash Gandhi - CZcams Free Audio
Clenched Teeth - The Descent by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution licence (creativecommons.org/licenses/...)
Source: incompetech.com/music/royalty-...
Artist: incompetech.com/
Epic Battle Speech - Wayne Jones - CZcams Free Audio
Warrior Strife - Jingle Punks - CZcams Free Audio
For the Fallen by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution licence (creativecommons.org/licenses/...)
Source: incompetech.com/music/royalty-...
Artist: incompetech.com/
Hannibal's Oath clip from "Hannibal" 2006
SOURCE MATERIAL:
SPQR - A History of Ancient Rome - Mary Beard
GREECE AND ROME AT WAR - Peter Connolly
Hannibal had too much back pain from carrying his team.
From carrying his whole empire
@@taher9358 then being stabbed as a return gift
@@brightlight7538 sad scam game man
He also started the 2nd punic war, and bit more than he could chew. If hannibal wasn’t as hot headed, carthage may have stayed alive.
Its not hannibal fault it was sugundese who raided spain 1st and also why roman even have allies in spain this is clearly violations of treaty between Carthage and rome
I wish Hannibal could see how much people still learn about how great he was how military academies still study his strategies.
Agreed :)
He does
Honestly I think he'd be amazed at how well we know him. It was far more usual for cultures before Rome to under play, put down and change the truth to hide such defeats etc. The reason why we know him so well is that in his case Rome did the opposite. Over playing him, building him up and carefully recording his genius to try to show why the might Rome lost to him like they did. They wanted to say "yes he beat us for a bit, he was a brilliant general and very much the exception etc. But we found a way to beat this great man anyway and a even greater general and army of our own. Even the greatest general will eventually fall to the might of Rome as we never give in and will raise more armies."
They study his tactics The Romans had the superior strategy and matched their tactics to eventually win the war. Hannibal's first few years in Italy were brilliant but then he mostly wasted a decade. He failed to force Rome to divert troops into Italy. He failed to put real pressure on the city of Rome or its navy. He killed a lot of Romans but he completely misjudged the will of Rome to endure.
Since he commited suicide, he can not.
Lake Trasimene is still to this day the largest and most successful ambush in military history. Hannibal was a genius, if anyone deserved to conquer Rome it was him.
Yep no question :)
He somewhat did. He gave Rome nightmares.
Alaric was nothing compared to him but he is the one who did it
@@artoruvidal2793 I see your point Alaric was lucky in his time to hold Rone hostage like that because Rone was on the decline. In Hannibal's time Rome was rising.
Mithradates gave Rome huge problems too, although he wasn't trying to conquer Rome, just fighting for freedom.
Cannae was not a battle it was a massacre...
no it was a battle. massacre would mean there was no fight.
Last Word there was almost no battle they just died like pigs its so scary
@@yapzormiracle1402 there has to be a difference between a very one sided battle and massacre.
Last Word everybattle even in 1 sided battle some some piece of army survive got away but in cannea no one survived they killed massucre them from all side even great number csnt stand
Last Word romans so much hated carthage for this reason they killed dostroyed everything even throw sallt in their farmland make it cant produce anything
Hannibal earned the title Nemesis of the Republic in my eyes.
Same for Scipio, he earned the title Africanus
two heroes betrayed by his own
how was Scipio betrayed by the Roman senate.
I would like to know more about this
@@stefancristian4324 they feared his power just like carthage feared hannibal but rome were smarter they used him because they needed him while carthage just refused hannibal
Hands down, Hannibal was not only a mastermind in warfare but a wise man his entire nation depended on him!
Hannibal got stabbed
in the back by the other
yellow faction in the
Bursa of 104.
These were doves the usual
despicable moneybags fr.
Carthage to Biden :
Offal,too dumb too
yellow too indolent
2 understand that
this was a war of
"to be or not to be"
THE war of The
"No retreat NO
surrender".
not ever .
their own doves
cost them their
whole existence.
Carthage lost the first war because they're carelessly
dumb nuf to let their Soo
mortal enemy in Rome
have a warship .
The w a r s h I p.
...with her parts soo
fully equipped w.the
assembly line code
extensively 'nd fully
numbered a code at
each single part .
hull to mast all in
all hook,line&sinker.
As was their won't.
The Romans who at
the time had no idea
how to build a Coracle
leave alone a trireme
must have thought
"e stronzi stupidy -
hank you very eva
so much ..har.. har.."
They built some 200 +
warships in 20 years .
Nd kicked Carthaginian
butt in the first Punic war
Carthage never recovered.
The rest is history.
Carthage died due to
the yellow Doves fully
prouncing the Hawks
w.their last last best
hope to survive .
Ever.
They got all exterminated
in the end. Extinction IS
Forever .
And yes it still matters to me.
I know reincarnation as a fact.
he was good tactician, Yes, one of best. But he was terrible strategist... he had no chance defeating Romans, especially the way he tried to do it... he allied himself with Gauls, which alienated him from most of Roman Italic Allies, who stood with Rome no matter what... and despite defeats, Rome kept fighting, tougher with every defeat, until they got a general who was as good as Hannibal, but much better at grand strategy... his first move was to capture Carthago Nova, Barcid capital in Iberia.. which cut them off of the rich Iberian silver mines, and practically ensured Hannibal will be not reinforced anymore... and he continued with invasion of Africa, but instead of direct siege of Carthage, he lured their armies and destroyed them in the field, until they had to recall Hannibal....
It is sad that Hannibal failed to sack Rome and end its farse but it's also quite a testament to the Roman's determination, to still fight to the bitter end after facing disgraceful defeat after disgraceful defeat.
Found this gem after 2 years.
Same here!
Same
Same
Same
What is gem?
Juz makes me appreciate Caesar handling roman politics so well. He could hv ended up like Hannibal if he didn't hv those political skills
I think he did end up like Hannibal... Pompeii had more influence in Rome. Caesar won the civil war however. I agree that Caesar's political skills and influence were his greatest asset and advantage vs Hannibal. Caesar had his 10th legion grizzled veterans to count on during battle. Hannibal had his Numidian Calvary. Until Scipio used them against him at Zama
Caesar was more advanced in every way.
Well he ended up far worse. Hannibal was exiled. Caesar was brutally assassinated.
Hannibal had such potential that if he could get the support, he could've drive the Romans into extinction.
Agreed.
If.
Might of.
@@Floki_631 might of? Whats does that mean?
Imagine if carthage had destroyed Roman Republic
There would be no Caesar
@@taher9358 one thing I've learned about Caesar is to never underestimate him. If he did exist and was simply born into a family living in an Italy that is under Carthaginian rule, he'd still probably find a way to fuck shit up
@@sporkafife Hahah nice comment. But can you imagine seeing another Hannibal in Carthage? Its a shame Carthage didnt help Hannibal and left him to deal with Roman all on his own. He had the Romans on their knees, the unpredictability and high level of IQ he possessed was unbelievable. He’d have probably brought down the Romans if Carthage sent him some support.
@@taher9358 *Caesar
@@TheSoleGOAT right
What I learned from this video.
War is equal parts politics, economy, strategy. Thank you for posting. I've learned more from this format than all the idiotic classes I've ever taken.
Save you the 10 minutes... The Virgin Oligarchy feared the ChadHannibal.
Ironically Scipio career ended very similar to Hannibal as well... Irrelevancy and unappreciated.
Aye but still watch it peeps ;)
How the mighty fall caused by the vulgar and the mediocre.
This is a myth to glorify Hannibal's achievemets even further. Carthage tried to support Hannibal in every way but failed to do so, because main Roman strategy was to prevent that very thing. If you can't defeat a general, you try to confine it which was the successful thing Romans did.
@@ThalesMML there is jealousy in every empire and corruption very often bring Demise to every civilization, Carthage is one example., They were sparse and jealous of each other.
“Ungrateful country, you shall not even have my bones.”
I remember in school they told us Hannibal was bad. But I guess that's what you get when you finish school in the South. Rome got lucky
But Hannibal was bad
@@torinjones3221 good joke
Oh come on, Rome prevailed ;) Roma invicta!
Hannibal was like the Robert E. Lee of the Second Punic War: he ha d a lot of victories in the east (i.e. Italian peninsula) but ultimately lost the war despite his victories.
"WHY was Hannibal Barca abandoned by Carthage?"
That is a rhetorical question.
the trade faction was so stupid. they opposed the war with Rome even after they were already at war with them. How would losing to Rome help them expand their trade?
fireson23 there would be more wars if they won. Nonetheless, it was obviously short sighted even without hindsight. I think there was a bigger problem that like hannibal, they believed they could win by forcing the romans to the negotiating table after beating them in battle.
You would be amazed at how often war happens between two enemies who are actually huge trading partners. See WW2
@@prplhze2000 if they won the war, they could dictate the trade terms. Theyd have almost a monopoly in the mediterranean.
money men. corrupt
Maybe because those trade faction had some back dealings with rome.
this was a great recup !
Great show brother, That is the purpose of life to learn and to grow. Looking for to many many shows
Thanks GSL! ;)
Great first video Epyx 👍. Looking forward to the next 100 😜
Thanks Crash!
Nice vid ,this deserves to be made into a epic mini series
A gem of a video! I love the angle you took in this, I hope you dig into this angle of Carthaginian history more some day, fascinating!
Tremendous first episode! Really liked the format, not too long, excellent presentation, with clear and enthusiastic narration. I can see a lot of effort was put into producing this. Well done!
Thanks John! Next video will be from the main series which im really excited about, not that this one wasn't fun but its more of a supplemental style video compared to the mainstay series! Thanks!
Great video! I love that history passage too. Have you read the Scipio Africanus trilogy? Wrote by history teacher in Valencia, (Spain) Santiago Posteguillo. Valencia, very close to where it all began, the city of Saguntum. Talks about the rivaltry between Scipio and Hannibal, from the beggining to the end.
Keep up the good work with the history channel!!
Thanks and yes I have, im a HUGE history geek and just love historical fiction...even read the dry to most people Masters of Rome series from Colleen McCullough lol!
I just read this today this news and I figured you'd like it....
www.theguardian.com/film/2018/feb/11/martin-scorsese-romans-tv-series-caesars-british-writer-michael-hirst
The carthaginian Senate did not support Hannibal not because there was a parliamentary group that hated war. When hannibal was in italy, the Senate was sending reinforcements to spain to protect the silver mines, but never helped Hannibal. Greed of politicians and prioritising short term gains rather then thinking on the long term killed Carthage. This is very common with politicians. We can see it in our era: trying to maximize short term economic growth, and killing the planet in the long term.
The famous wellfair state
Rome’s will to survive and fight to the last is what separates Rome from Carthage in the Annuals of great empires 👍🏻
Awesome video!
They did not abandon him persay. Hannibal sold his services to the Diadochi. He and Scorpio even attended a party together sometime after the last battle
Thanks great comment and yes agreed. Was an old video and I went for a title that I *thought* would lure people into a debate...it did nothing of the sort and kind of just gathered cobwebs...lessons learned that I have applied to videos of last 6 months :)
If memory serves, the Romans demanded that Carthage hand over Hannibal. That is why he went into exile to the Seleucids.
@@Michael-kd1ho I believe that after Hannibal left, and later offered services to someone at war with Rome.
This is really good work Epyx. Well constructed and edited.
Thanks Dub_yooo!
Main series video is up now too, let me know what you think!
Another good history channel to subscribe to :) Can't wait to see Yore History become a "giant" like Kings and Generals and Bazbattles.
Thanks Chronicler! I am releasing another video today and the move back to west part of the country is complete so hope to release a lot more videos moving forward!
Damn you Epyx, you're going to make me reload Total War: Rome II LOL. Good to hear from you again, great subject matter. Just started Talos Principle VR, love the ancient Roman / Greek type atmosphere. Can't wait for the next video.
Awesome and thanks for watching Bruce! Your guys support at this infancy stage of a channel is super appreciated. LOVED TOtal War...the first game but wasnt a huge fan of II but everyone tells me the patches and mods have fixed the game so need to try it again!
I agree totally, I too have and loved the first TW Rome. Like you said after several updates TW Rome II is worth a revisiting, I always loved a good Carthage epic battle. TW adding naval battles just adds another dimension to the battle. What's great about any of the total war series w/ exception to the 2 latest, is you are in control to act out history however you want.
It saddens me so that Hannibal, and his great rival Scipio, both genius generals, were only to be ruined by politics of their own peers and countrymen, even both dying at around the same year (181-183 BC). At the very least, the redeeming event that happened between them is that they were able to move on and talk after the war, casting aside their enmity. After all, they only cherished to bring glory not only for themselves, but also to their respective states.
Scipio’s gravestone even read “Ungrateful country, you shall not even possess my bones.”
Nice presentation. Thanks
Thanks for watching Scott!
Sagunto is not current Valencia as you say in the video. It's Sagunto, very close to Valencia, but not the same city.
Alleged Roman naval superiority didn't stop Hannibal from fleeing from italy. If he can flee, they can send reinforcements. It's the same route.
Nice start and work, Gordo.
Ending needs some outro branding vs cutting off cold but I’m lovin’ the Conan voice comin’ through during quotes!
Ah GOOD POINT on the outro! THAT was absolutely missing thanks MUCH for that feedback!
Good to see Hannibal depicted in an accurate way
One of the best stratège and tacticien forever !!!! La trahison l’a fait perdre.
Liked how you concisely kept to The Question. Sometimes, we forget that a "complicated situation" can be dissected into simple bite sized views of what happened, and their impact.
Looking forward to the point of view of a legionnaire in the machine that was Rome's army.
Thanks Chris, ya me either really enjoying the "making" of that one...Britain after all for the Romans was a place of mystery and myth and through the eyes of a recruit? Should be fun... :)
Definitely - Misty Thule with its dark deep forests and "mystic" natives would have been very anxiety inducing. That with the Romans' own view of the world and their gods and their innate "arrogant" ignorance would have been the main drive for their need to suppress the "strange/alien" (barbaric) as fast as possible
Aye lol a fellow history buff i see ;) But ya exactly and the fact there was a near mutiny before the invasion even started all leads to something I hope I can capture the drama of. Thanks again for watching!
Late to the party, but where did you get that dialogue of Hamcilar and Young Hannibal in 1:13? Is that a movie?
It's actually Sagunto nowadays, Valencia is close, but it was not the settlement where modern Valencia was built
Hey Epyx,
I'm migrating from your other channel. Great vid!
Thanks Knut, appreciate you dropping by!
Feelings were too Deep to live in peace.....and the old saying....No room for the two of us"
Yes, title could have been "Was Hannibal abandoned?". I agree with all of your points, and the irony of the Roman navy being blueprinted from the Carthaginian fleet. They did send a relief force, but it went to Spain instead. This seems like a no win. Either they capture Italy and lose Spain, or support Spain and lose Italy. In the end, they lost both. The Iberians thought the Romans would put an end to the wars, and there is no way Italy would have surrendered, so just like Napoleon Vs Moscow, there was no way to fight an enemy who will not surrender.
Thanks lifeschool...was my first ever video on the channel and if it were not for the recent surge in popularity I had thought seriously about unlisting it for the reasons you pointed out and more...edits I missed...the title I will change once the views cool down as changing a title delists it from the algorithm. Thanks for watching though! The more recent content is imo MUCH better :)
@@YoreHistory - It was a great show, dont let comments put you off. Would love to see more of these What If? vids. Carthage must NOT be destroyed!
@@lifeschool Thanks! Appreciate the feedback!
Great, that really helped
Sorry forgot to get back to you with link:
czcams.com/video/xtscVJISNaM/video.html
The part is a few mins in you will see it.
Yore History thanks, my guy.
There were 3 kingdoms (Roi de Numidie occidentale 1) and (Roi Numidia 2) and (Carthage 3)
Maharbal meets Hannibal during the conquest of Spain, before 220 BC. J.-C ..
The Numidian horsemen were one of the pillars of Carthage's army during the First and Second Punic Wars and were essential to Hannibal's strategy. Together with the Libyan infantry, they form the most powerful contingent of its army.
After the Battle of Lake Trasimeno and the Battle of Cannes, Maharbal insists that Hannibal head to Rome to take the city, but Hannibal does not follow his advice.
Cavalerie Numide who had eyes and shade that made Hannibal invincible in the territories of Roma
(Roi de Numidie occidentale 1)
215 _ 203 av. J.-C.king Syphax
203- 202 av. J.-C. king
Vermina
245 - 207 av. J.-C. Maharbal.général Cavalerie Numide
239 - 207 av. J.-C. Naravas.leader Cavalerie Numide
Cavalerie Numide who had eyes and shade that made Scipion Africano invincible in the territories of Carthage
(Roi Numidia 2)
230 _ 207 av. J.-C. king Gaïa
202 - 148 av. J.-C. king Massinissa Cavalerie Numide
At Zama Hannibal relayed a little too much on his elephants. And Rome itself was able to effectively counter it. Nice job with the video.
It’s because he was outnumbered
@@The_Dodge_Meister---He also should've thought more on what strategy he could've used instead of the overreliance on the elephants.
the first elephants didnt even charge the enemy or get killed by the enemy they frenzied and lashed out at the right wing of hannibals army ( the cavalry ) scipio then seeing this sent his cavalry to charge and they easily routed the right wing and thats what caused the cavalry of scipio then to encircle hannibals centre after they routed his cavalry .
FOR THOSE NEW TO THE CHANNEL!
This was the first video, there are several newer videos with better animation and narration.
History is amazing and something we all share as humans. Despite attempts to alter history the evidence of the past should be taken for what it is...sometimes there are lessons in the past, or the full range of human experience. We should not attempt to rewrite it.
The Phoenicians were a Semetic people who came from what is now Lebanon and colonized large parts of the Mediterranean. For a moment in time they experienced Empire and then a long conflict with Rome would end in their decline. However, history hasn't forgotten them :)
As Tunisian , Hannibal is defintly our pride 💪.
Does anyone know of some primary sources on the topic of Hannibal?
QUESTION: Scripting for the main series first episode is all done as is the research. Only one question remains and I throw this out to you if you happen to be reading it...
There are two ways the main series unfolds...through first person narrative description and educational inserts that take elements of the story and expand on them.
For those educational inserts...would it work better with me off camera or on camera ala say the CZcamsr "Metatron"?
czcams.com/video/hYuWjl2k_w4/video.html
THANKS IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR REPLY BELOW!
Epyx here. The next video will be the main series on the channel the first person historical fiction one called simply: Your History. First episode is part of a multi part series dealing with you taking on the role of a legionnaire in Rome's mighty army at the even of Claudius' invasion of Britain in 43CE.
I should have it ready within the next few days but want to ensure its exactly as I envisioned it!
Thanks for watching and hope you enjoyed, the plan is for these as the two main series plus some historical battles thrown in as misc videos!
Off camera please. Also I feel the audio camera isn't as clear as I'm used to compared to the other history channels. Why do you think Carthage lost naval superiority so easily to Rome? Sure Rome did learn how to build ships quickly but Carthage had decades if not centuries of naval experience over Rome.
@@user-uy1rg8td1v Hiyas...this is an *old* video and the issues with audio and quality have been addressed. I would like to think the latest videos rival other popular history channels with some content no one is doing! :) Thanks for watching!
Hannibal cross the alps when i cant even a mini hill
I mean to cross
We would mostly die from mosquito bites before crossing any mountain LOL
The biggest reason why Rome won is very simple: They were humbled. They acknowledge Hannibal's greatness as both a powerful enemy who must be killed and worthy genius who left a mark on their history. Rome went as far as doing something that was considered cowardly and beneath them but started Fabian tactics which revolutionized war. They also made a poor prototype of a ship and had never had a need for a strong navy until they poofed one after many trial and errors. So they shamelessly got a carthaginaian ship and plagiarizer it until they were successful after many failures and soldiers dying in sea. Rome stayed strong because they learned to acknowledge their weakness, learned from it and became even better than before. They acknowledged their young protege Scipio and stuck with him throughout the whole war. Meanwhile, not a single damn was given by the short minded and greedy merchant rulers of Carthage. They instead threw their last hero under their sandal and abandoned him while indulging in their pride. Because of that, they were utterly humiliated and destroyed by the toxic karma they compiled and ignored for so long until it ruined them forever.
I still don't understand because a small number shy of what Hannibal truly wanted was sent to him. So although Rome had a naval blockade I still think something is missing somewhere....
he should have at least laid siege outsite the Rome's Walls on a open field, never attack just siege and then ask for peace terms that will protect Carthage in the future.
Damn 2 years after I find this
Guys The Battle of the Metaurus was in 207 B.C.E., not 209. I also should point out it wasn't just a War Party versus a Peace Party in Carthage but disputes over how the war was to be fought. It appears that the many in the Carthaginian government thought the main focus of the war was in Spain and other threatres of war not Italy and thought Hannibal in Italy mainly has a distraction for Rome not the main front and so provided minimal support to him. This was probably an error, given the actual disparity in military power between Rome and Carthage, Carthage could lose the war outside of Italy but only win it in Italy by breaking up the Roman Confederacy.
Regarding Scipio. It is useful to remember that the accounts we have of Hannibal are from his enemies basically. Even Polybius was pro-Roman. And some of these historians, (Livy for example.), even invented victories over Hannibal that never happened. Scipio became in historical memory a great hero for the Romans and much of the accounts we have of Scipio's accomplishments come not just from pro-Romans but apparently from the Scipio family. Polybius was sent, while young, to Rome has a hostage where he got to know, very well, the Scipio who destroyed Carthage. It is from Polybius we have the account of Scipio Africanus' achievements. Scipio was a very capable commander but I don't entirely trust the Roman accounts that have come down to us of Scipio's achievements. The best example of this is the account in both Polybius and Livy's account of the battle of Zama. It is to put it bluntly extremely unsatisfactory. In other words it makes little sense to me. I think something was left out.
It's kind of a tragedy story in a way. That someone so successful and seems to do the impossible time and time again still ends up getting the L. That he, and maybe you, could be the most skilled around and still end up failing. Alexander through his min/maxed stats wins himself the world, and doesn't live long enough to do more with it. Pyrrhus eats victory for breakfast, and still doesn't make his Empire. Achilles, best warrior of his day can't save his friend.
I'm not smart enough to say what he should have done, in that moment or with 2,000 years of hindsight, but it's still saddening
7:22 the publius scipio at the battle of dertosa 215bc was the father of scipio africanus who won at zama not scipio aemilianus who razed carthage in 146bc. Good video nevertheless.
Carthage has 75 naval vessels outside Rome. But Lack of supplies and depletion of troops could not help Hannibal take a walled city like Rome.
The thumbnail really looked like Arthur Morgan to me for like 2 seconds
Epyx, you hit it out of the park buddy! Great job!! =D
Thanks Steve, appreciate the support and hope the next video from the main series is even better. Cheers and thanks for stopping by!
Let me know if you get a chance to watch the latest video I posted today. Curious what your thoughts are on it! Cheers Steve!
Sure did! I'll leave a comment over there =D
Good video, many people have this idea that if only Carthage would have sent some more reinforcements Rome would be gone, not realizing all the other problems. But lets say Hannibal did got an extra 20k recruits. What will he do with them? What can they change?
Hannibals was on the penninsula for 13 years with an superior army that could defeat any Roman army, yet he failed to do anything. He didnt manage to turn Romes allies against them, he didnt know how to seige, he was in way over his head and more recruits would'nt have solved any of his major problems which led to his failure. Carthage was 100% right to not reinforce him, instead focusing on defending Hispania.
Why he didn't used ships?
2 yrs and 5000 view!!!! Ouch!!! Great video thou!!!
Haha aye I had hoped it would do better could be the thumbnail but not a priority video at the moment. My 2nd person series the Dutch sailing one was at just under 4000 views for almost 2 years then within space of 8 weeks hit 205k...so that means...no idea it's CZcams ;)
@@YoreHistory Im really glad I found this video. I wish I could've found it earlier
Hannible didn't march on Rome because he couldn't breach it's defenses, after crossing the Alp's all his war elephants were gone, he could fight an out in the open field battle, but didn't have sufficient siege equipment and the reason Carthage abandoned him was that he lost the big battle of Carthage to Scipio. He had a massive army, with war elephants. War elephants only run in a straight line, Scipio open up his ranks and the elephants ran right through the lines to the rear and was pick off by the light cav units. Rome learned it's lessons and was able to adapt and Hannibal couldn't have pick a worse time to drop the ball. Carthage really didn't abandon him because there was no Carthage left, Hannibal fled for his life to what is modern day Turkey, were he was about to be given up by his protectors before he committed suicide.
By the battle of Carthage do you mean the battle of Zama? By that point Hannibal had already been recalled to defend Carthage with the tattered remains of his army which had been in Italy for nearly 20 years. He didn't "drop the ball", he was a genius and not a magician, and by this point the war was already lost. Even if he won at Zama Rome would have sent army after army to Carthage anyway. This video is about Carthage's blatant refusal to send him reinforcements early in his time in Italy (i.e. right after Cannae) when he could have used the momentum to crush Rome.
@@Azgalon Carthage had an army there, Hannibal in Italy didn't have the main Carthaginian battle force. When Hannibal returned to Carthage there was an army waiting for him and what elements he could extract from Italy, plus he had a large number of war elephants waiting for him too. He may have been a genius, but even genius can screw up and have a bad day, that day Scipio was the better man and this time the Roman's knew how to deal with war elephants. When elephants charge, they charge in a straight line, all the Romans did was signaled formation to open ranks and the elephants went straight through and were dealt with by light infantry and light cav with flaming arrows short into the elephants rear ends. Take nothing away from Scipio, he was every bit the general and leader Hannibal was, Rome did produce some highly talented generals and they had their share of burr heads too.
@@oveidasinclair982 Absolutely, Hannibal lost fair and square but the blame of losing the war would have to be placed on the Carthaginian senate and the politicians' refusal to back him up with all the might of Carthage. Remember that the army waiting for him at Zama was newly recruited (I read somewhere that all the elephants were also young and hastily trained) while Scipio had an army which was consistently reinforced and had experience from Spain. Nevertheless, had Hannibal won at Zama Carthage still would not have won the war, they lost their chance by not attacking after Cannae or Trasimene. Scipio was a genius in his own right, but Hannibal was betrayed by the peace party's attempts to undermine him when their support would have meant victory by 215 BC.
@Wet Mustard While it wasn't as fortified as imperial Rome, it was definitely not easy to capture, especially with up to 500,000 inhabitants. Hannibal knew that laying siege without reinforcements or a dedicated engineering corps could lead to disaster, as he didn't know what other armies in Italy could pop up and sandwich them between an army and Rome's walls. He needed support from Carthage, but it never came
The loss at the battle of zama was more because of the lack of cavalry units that scipio had plenty of, the numidian king chose to side with rome at that time giving up the carthaginians, if you take a look at how the battle of zama played out, you would see that they played a key role in defeating hannibal, although hannibal did the best he could, it was said that in this battle, some carthaginians troops reached scipio himself, which was quite the feat,
Concerning the war elephants I wouldn't say that hannibal depended on them that much as it is proven that hannibal most conquests in Italy were done without the elephants as most of them died crossing the alps save one of them which hannibal was mounting.
I am curious that with no navy how did Hannibal get those war elephants across Morocco into Spain?
He had ships to carry him across...they then returned and even as mentioned in the video split off to attack elsewhere.
No navy? Wrong. The Carthaginians were indeed Phoenician/ Hebrew people. They had probably the largest number of ships in that time. They were experts ship builders and sailors.
When you've worked your ass off all year for the company and when the holiday season sets in and you're due your end of the year bonus! Only to have it taken away for no reason at all other than GREED!
Hannibal ought have had his political rivals killed before leaving on campaign, guaranteeing support from Carthage. What a shame, he still managed without it. What an amazing General
I didn’t know Hannibal was a young English boy when he took that oath.
You would be correct. He was of Phoenician decent, a semetic people. They would have looked *roughly* like today's longterm Lebanese population. They were a Mediterranean people like Italians/Greeks etc. The English as we know them didn't exist yet, they were still a Celtic people.
Hannibal was a genious in all aspects. His father with him and his brothers did very good job in Iberia, yes Iberia, they conquered and transform the country in 10 years: gold, silver mines, good warriors, prosperity, cities, roads, ports, loyal local tribes with marriaged, new colonies( new Carthage), war experience, they send to Carthage a lot of money, built ships, etc, etc, etc. Barca's faction has much power. The council of Carthage don't like this.....
💪💪 But Hannibal was loyal to Carthage 💪💪 and for that he lost..
The old council members traicioned him. Bastards. 😌
There are two Saguntums (or should I say Sagunta) on the map. The wrong one should be Massilia, present-day Marseilles. Great video though.
Yes addressed that in the errata :) Was a mistake in editing...I copy and paste city titles and re-type them...for that one I forgot.
It seems a negotiation for a fair division of the Mediterranean might have given Hannibal a better goal for victory. Unfortunately total destruction seems to have been the name of the game at that time. Could have been interesting?
Agree.
Saguntum is not Valencia. Saguntum still exist under same name (Sagunt or Sagunto)
I feel that it is a continues war going on forever
I suspect political intrigues and logistics from navel assets restricted Hannibal's campaigns in Italy.
Cause Carthage was afraid and Knew that Rome would destroy Raze Carthage to the ground cause Hannibal created and started the War which ultimately failed but Romes ultimate power was knowledge man power and resources and they learn from there enemies just like after the ultimate defeat at cannie which rome learned and didn't give Hannibal battle but ignored and outlasted him which in time Hannibles army broke apart but what really terrified carthage is that Rome would raise another army and attack Carthage for its defection and disobedience and Everyone knew of Romes Power and they Never forgot bout the Humiliation destruction they received from Hannibal during the 3rd Punic War but Romes Famous Words ((Rise against Rome and you'll Pay in blood death and Destruction but Sadly Carthage met her end and fall by Scipios Grandson Scipio the Younger in 146 B.C during the 3rd Pubic War to pay for the atrocity and the Humiliation Destruction during the 2nd punic war against Hannibal
Need to get a pop filter for your mic and mix the audio, but good video. Just hard to listen to.
Was my first video. Resolved in later...had one just didnt angle voice.
Dude carried all of Carthage
Scipio Africanus did not raze Carthage to the ground... that was done by Scipio Aemilianus...
No Carthage did the same thing to Hannibal's father failed to reinforce him too because they didn't want to spend money on war but why didn't Macedonian King Philip V unite with Hannibal since they too was at war with Rome?
It's all about storytelling, music is more of distraction, why not remove it. My opinion
It was literally my first video on the channel and the early videos were too loud music wise. If you watch the recent ones that has been addressed :)
Not bad not bad
There's speculation from many historians that both Carthage and Hannibal didn't understand the culture of Rome and the fact that they wouldn't give up even when Hannibal had destroyed their lands and had total security of Italy other than the city. At that time the powers would usually sue for peace after the destruction of Hannibal and ask for terms. They couldn't understand the willingness to keep fighting or destruction. I mean just look how fast Carthage itself capitulated when a Roman army turned up...
Very nicely done, Epyx! This is as well done as anything that was on the history channel back when it was still about history. It also reminded me of another retelling of a part of this story, which always gives me a chuckle😀 so I wanted to share it with you
czcams.com/video/NI8UZubOJlo/video.html
Haha thanks and checking the link now ;)
AH LOL the Eddie Izzard piece YEP, have seen it, brilliant LOL
A huge mistake in this doc. It was not Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, the son of Publius Cornelius Scipio, who raised Carthage. He defeated Hannibal but did not destroy Carthage. It was Scipio Africanus Minor, son of Aemilius Paullus, the adopted son of the eldest son Scipio Major that raised Carthage.
Correct this was mentioned...was first video and missed it in editing. New videos have been upped in terms of quality.
If only those consul bastards weren't so indecisive... if Carthage was still standing our country most likely would've greatly flourished by now instead it became a perpetually sinking ship with no light at the end of the tunnel.
As a descendant of the Carthaginians this deeply saddens me each time I revisit this part of history, I think we need a time machine..
Rome and Carthage had different perspectives on this war, and the latter had a really ill-fated understanding of the war. Of course I can surmise this opinion with a bit of hindsight because I am not a contemporary of any factions afformentioned, so we cannot blame neitherside for having limited perspectives hithertho.
Carthage's understanding of the war is borne as consequence to the 1st one and is therefore in their rationale, only one of necessary conflicts to fight and struggle with Rome. I also speculate that the Carthaginian Senate did not wish to really destroy Rome as they were an enterprising people, thriving on Trade and not war, always prefering subjugation rather than extermination. It should also be noted that Carthaginians were more likely to absorb Romans into their fold had things gone a little different, say they won the 2nd Punic War, the most surmizable discrepancy on Carthaginian and Roman perspective on citizenship, the latter of which is very restrictive.
The Roman perspective however, was set on a more definite and decisive view. It wasn't just expansion, or glory or winning, a perspective upon which I speculate to have developed due to Hannibal and Carthage's expansion in the Iberian Peninsula. No, it was about existing in total. Rome wasn't just beginning to realize its imperial dreams, Rome was to embrace it as a matter of existence.
Therefore the war with Carthage in Rome's eyes, should be fought with the undying spirit and will, a struggle against extinction, which the Romans, superstitious as they were, could hardly think or realize otherwise, which should be clearly obvious as to how they treat almost all their enemies in the series of momentous wars they fought after the 2nd Punic War.
Carthage's mistake was therefore not embracing Hannibal's judgement, and failing to recognize what Rome was fighting for. When Hannibal was recalled, it was him who convinced the Carthaginian Senate to succumb to Rome's terms.
Dude be carrying whole empire lol,sad the ruler was so petty and jealous of him
hannibal is so great that he not only faced the greatest empire of that time and one the greatest in history but his own countries senate that wanted him to loose like hanno the second , basicaly it was hannibal vs rome not carthage vs rome almost we see that almost all the other armies of carthage didnt do jackshit they lost at ibera they lost at sardinia they lost everywhere they lost at theyr homesoil ,hannibal was carrying his team single handedly ....
Great and informative video HOWEVER what was the purpose of adding the loud, repetitive, bombastic soundtrack? It's extremely distracting.
No purpose and not on purpose...it was one of my first videos and I didn't understand putting background music 25 to 35db lower than narration. I corrected this in later videos. I'm Human :(
How could Hannibal get back to Carthage if Roman had Naval Superiority?
They did by 202 with Scipios destruction of their navy but they could have mounted a rescue operation with greek allies the years preceding it imo...but hey that is the fun of speculation. I will redo the video at some point...was my first and its hard to view now for me :) Thansk for watching though!
He got some help from Greek allies
Dude turn down the music a bit! You also have Saguntum in southern Gaul.
Was my first video...music has been normalized since video 7 and am at 42 now :)
@@YoreHistory Oh ok thanks for the prompt reply!
@@TheLoyalOfficer Feedback is feedback and not everyone knows it was the first video so thanks ;)
@@YoreHistory Well it was a great video for sure. Well done!
Because Carthage was ruled by craven merchants.
Rome simply is a stonger nation. With more fertile land and population. Even after 3 complete defeat, rome can still recruit for fresh troops. While Carthage cant afford even one major defeat. That's the difference in power. And while Rome wanted Carthage to be destroy, Cathage only wanted peace. It like the enemy wanted u to beheaded, while u just wanted to stay safe and quit. Their determination is totally different.
The deep well of manpower provided by the more populous Italy to Rome's legions, strengthened by the bonds of citizenship extended to them, guaranteed Rome's eventual victory over a less numerous enemy that relied almost exclusively on dubiously loyal mercenaries (e.g. the Numidians).
Hannibal's at the gate!
Lol you are everywhere. Cheers man appreciate the views!
With or without reinforcements Hannibal should of marched on Rome. It was a suicide mission from the beginning so you might was go all the way and die with honor on the battlefield. Also just because an army is outmanned and out gunned does not equal total defeat, history has shown this countless times.
you cant siege a city with big walls without x2 the number please and Rome was well very well full of food it could've taken years to take Rome.
@@parabelluminvicta8380 I it has been done countless times and Rome had its army in Africa attacking Carthage so that was a perfect opportunity for Hannibal to lay siege to Rome and burn it to the ground. Rome at the time was not fortified with anything that Hannibal was not able to topple any.
@@jopiaspieder1184 you cant deny if you don't have the logistic to lay a siege and to feel ansia to be attacked from behind while you are attacking is not a wise choice. Actualy Rome was well fortified and well defended dont say otherwise.
Look the siege of capua is the same lol
@@parabelluminvicta8380 Like I said idiot from the beginning it was a suicide mission any so you might was well of gone the distance and finish the job. Rome was in fear of Hannibal as he decimated their forces thrown at him up until that point. You want to talk logistics well Hannibal was in good position to cut of Rome from the rest of the world had he chosen to encircle the city, lay hit and run sieges before delivery of the final blow so girl go elsewhere with your opinion.
Good video but this gets it fundamentally wrong.
The Barcids were part of the "reformist" faction within Carthage, which was also the 'war' faction.
Jealousy of the Carthiginian senate for sure
Bruh Carthage did him dirty