Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [alternate-history] Hannibal vs. Rome

Expand Messages
  • Josiah Armes
    ... 1) What if Hannibal s passage across the ALps was much easier, or he arrives w/ a very large army (maybe 50000 men, 10000+ calvary, and more than 37
    Message 1 of 15 , Apr 8, 2001
      >Could he have supplied a much larger force on the march to Cisalpina?
      >He would have to have sent a second force which gets back to his problem of
      >lack of competant subordinate commanders.

      1) What if Hannibal's passage across the ALps was much easier, or he
      arrives w/ a very large army (maybe 50000 men, 10000+ calvary, and more
      than 37 elephants), and then splits it into two parts, teams up with the
      barbarians, and leaves part of his army with Hasdrubal in northern Italy
      after his victories at Piacenza, Trebbia, and Trasimene.

      2) Hannibal in his early years is also trained in naval warfare and
      manages to obtain naval support.

      3) Hannibal marches on Rome after his victory at the Lake of Trasimene.

      4) Carthage supports Hannibal in his endeavour. Navy regains control of
      Meditteranean. Result is that Carthage can mobilize as many men as needed.

      5) Terentius Varro is not the consul but instead of him, a general of some
      ability is present at Cannae. THough anybody who dared to face Hannibal in
      a straight fight is not very smart, what would have happened if
      Varro/somebody else realized the trap Hannibal set up by placing his center
      forward.

      Just some thoughts.

      Josiah



      > >
      > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
      > >
      > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force, and
      > > joins Hannibal?
      >
      >Evades is the better bet. Or Hannibal doesn't get tricked and follows the
      >Romans North.
      > >
      > > Josiah
      > >
      >
      >Basically the strategic problem is probably unbreakable. Rome could simply
      >mobilize too many legions relative to Carthage's abilities.
      >
      >Scott
      > > At 08:17 PM 3/27/01, you wrote:
      > > >I often go on about how the Confedarcy had basically one day's worth of
      > > >daylight starting at noon on July 2nd 1863 to win its independence. The
      > > >basic nugget is that for the South to win it needs to not merely win a
      > > >battle but rather drive the Army of the Potomac away from DC long enough
      > > >to take DC, Baltimore, bring Maryland into the Confederacy, and basically
      > > >destroy Lincoln's political coalition for the continuation of the war.
      >An
      > > >endless series of Chancellorsvilles don't cut it. Lee runs out of men
      > > >before the North does on those.
      > > >
      > > >Was going over this with a store owner at the GAMA trade show in Vegas
      > > >last week who ponted out that I missed one other window. The day after
      > > >Second Bull Run the Union Army was streaming towards DC trailed by one of
      > > >the very few effective pursuits in the USCW. At Chantilly near DC the
      > > >Union rear guard under Kearny made a stand. They lost. Kearny
      > > >died. They held just long enough for the rest of the Army to reach the
      >DC
      > > >forts and safety. Kearny was a fighing general who ignored the politics
      > > >swirling around the Army that summer. If one of the other corps
      > > >commanders was given the rear guard, the backbiting between the McClellan
      > > >men and the Pope radicals might have resulted in Lee bagging the whole
      > > >army and riding into DC while the fort guns were masked by Union
      > > >fugitives...This is the month before Antietam and there as of yet no
      > > >Emancipation Proclamation to make British intervention difficult.
      >Lincoln
      > > >was holding the proclamation aside till he had a victory to hang it
      > > >on. So imagine that Lincoln is in Philly with a rump Congress. The
      > > >Eastern armies are lost. He has nothing but militia in the field in the
      > > >East. Grant is stopped in NW Mississippi. Sherman is stalled before
      > > >Vicksburg. Bragg and Price are moving north to invade Kentucky pursued
      > > >frantically by Buell. Does Dixie achieve independence?
      > > >
      > > >Scott
      > > >
      > > >Yahoo! Groups
      > >
      > >Sponsor<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=170602.1361328.2950093.2/D=egroupmail/S=17007
      >37312:N/A=551014/?http://www.debticated.com>
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
      > > ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Thomas P Roche
      ... Best scenario here. The Carths had their navy pasted by the Romans in the I Punic War, and after that Rome prevented Carth from rebuilding it to any
      Message 2 of 15 , Apr 8, 2001
        On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Josiah Armes wrote:

        >
        > >Could he have supplied a much larger force on the march to Cisalpina?
        > >He would have to have sent a second force which gets back to his problem of
        > >lack of competant subordinate commanders.
        >
        > 1) What if Hannibal's passage across the ALps was much easier, or he
        > arrives w/ a very large army (maybe 50000 men, 10000+ calvary, and more
        > than 37 elephants), and then splits it into two parts, teams up with the
        > barbarians, and leaves part of his army with Hasdrubal in northern Italy
        > after his victories at Piacenza, Trebbia, and Trasimene.
        >
        > 2) Hannibal in his early years is also trained in naval warfare and
        > manages to obtain naval support.

        Best scenario here. The Carths had their navy pasted by the Romans in the
        I Punic War, and after that Rome prevented Carth from rebuilding it to any
        degree that would challenge Rome directly in the western Med, but Rome
        couldn't have done would have been to prevent Carth from forming a naval
        alliance with Macedon and Seleucia, and theoretically also Ptolemaic
        Egypt, all of which were still strong naval powers and independent of Rome
        (as well as certain smaller Greek sea powers such as Rhodes).
        Historically, Rome defeated Carth first and then proceded to take on the
        Hellenistic powers one by one over the following 150 years, until Rome
        conquered the whole Med donut. But if the Carths had gotten even one
        Hellenistic state to ally with them against Rome and send a large navy,
        Rome's naval supremacy would have been mitigated and the Carths would have
        been able to reinforce their supplies and manpower in Italy, allowing a
        likely far different outcome, most likely Rome suing for peace and
        allowing its southern Italian/ sicilian vassals to become independent
        city-states in the Carth sphere. Think what would have happened had the
        UK relieved the Yankee naval blockade during the War of the Southern
        Rebellion.
        >
        > 3) Hannibal marches on Rome after his victory at the Lake of Trasimene.

        He does not have the tech to storm Rome's walls of the era. No one did.
        >
        > 4) Carthage supports Hannibal in his endeavour. Navy regains control of
        > Meditteranean. Result is that Carthage can mobilize as many men as needed.

        Alone against the RN the CN was worthless in the Hannibalic War. If the
        Carths had been smarter, they would have waited another 10 years, rebuilt
        their navy as much as possible, and made an Hellenistic naval alliance
        such as above. Remember, my MA thesis, "The Development of the Roman
        Navy".
        >
        > 5) Terentius Varro is not the consul but instead of him, a general of some
        > ability is present at Cannae. THough anybody who dared to face Hannibal in
        > a straight fight is not very smart, what would have happened if
        > Varro/somebody else realized the trap Hannibal set up by placing his center
        > forward.

        If he realized in time to pull out of trap before slaughter Hannibal
        likely has to depart Italy soon but can do so with most all his forces
        intact. Retreats to Carthaginian Spain and Rome and Carth conclude uneasy
        peace. Fighting again within 20 years, Hannibal still in charge. Who
        would know what would have changed in that interim?

        Hornblower

        > > Just some
        thoughts. > > Josiah
        >
        >
        >
        > > >
        > > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
        > > >
        > > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force, and
        > > > joins Hannibal?
        > >
        > >Evades is the better bet. Or Hannibal doesn't get tricked and follows the
        > >Romans North.
        > > >
        > > > Josiah
        > > >
        > >
        > >Basically the strategic problem is probably unbreakable. Rome could simply
        > >mobilize too many legions relative to Carthage's abilities.
        > >
        > >Scott
        > > > At 08:17 PM 3/27/01, you wrote:
        > > > >I often go on about how the Confedarcy had basically one day's worth of
        > > > >daylight starting at noon on July 2nd 1863 to win its independence. The
        > > > >basic nugget is that for the South to win it needs to not merely win a
        > > > >battle but rather drive the Army of the Potomac away from DC long enough
        > > > >to take DC, Baltimore, bring Maryland into the Confederacy, and basically
        > > > >destroy Lincoln's political coalition for the continuation of the war.
        > >An
        > > > >endless series of Chancellorsvilles don't cut it. Lee runs out of men
        > > > >before the North does on those.
        > > > >
        > > > >Was going over this with a store owner at the GAMA trade show in Vegas
        > > > >last week who ponted out that I missed one other window. The day after
        > > > >Second Bull Run the Union Army was streaming towards DC trailed by one of
        > > > >the very few effective pursuits in the USCW. At Chantilly near DC the
        > > > >Union rear guard under Kearny made a stand. They lost. Kearny
        > > > >died. They held just long enough for the rest of the Army to reach the
        > >DC
        > > > >forts and safety. Kearny was a fighing general who ignored the politics
        > > > >swirling around the Army that summer. If one of the other corps
        > > > >commanders was given the rear guard, the backbiting between the McClellan
        > > > >men and the Pope radicals might have resulted in Lee bagging the whole
        > > > >army and riding into DC while the fort guns were masked by Union
        > > > >fugitives...This is the month before Antietam and there as of yet no
        > > > >Emancipation Proclamation to make British intervention difficult.
        > >Lincoln
        > > > >was holding the proclamation aside till he had a victory to hang it
        > > > >on. So imagine that Lincoln is in Philly with a rump Congress. The
        > > > >Eastern armies are lost. He has nothing but militia in the field in the
        > > > >East. Grant is stopped in NW Mississippi. Sherman is stalled before
        > > > >Vicksburg. Bragg and Price are moving north to invade Kentucky pursued
        > > > >frantically by Buell. Does Dixie achieve independence?
        > > > >
        > > > >Scott
        > > > >
        > > > >Yahoo! Groups
        > > >
        > > >Sponsor<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=170602.1361328.2950093.2/D=egroupmail/S=17007
        > >37312:N/A=551014/?http://www.debticated.com>
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
        > > > ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
        >
      • Victorian Cow
        Actually they were allied to Philip V of Macedon. Alliance nevr went anywhere beyond some Illyrian skirmishing IIRC. Hellenistic monarchies simply didn t
        Message 3 of 15 , Apr 9, 2001
          Actually they were allied to Philip V of Macedon. Alliance nevr went
          anywhere beyond some Illyrian skirmishing IIRC. Hellenistic monarchies
          simply didn't take entire Western Basin of Med seriously IMO. To me
          Hannibal was tactical operational genius trapped in a hopeless strategic
          position. The one possible break was when Syracuse went over and then for
          whatever reason he failed to adaquately support the Syracusians. With
          Sicily back, South Italy becomes marginally more tenable. With a better LOC
          to South Italy there's always the chance of enough resources at any one time
          to include a viable seige train, if not for Rome then for Naples or the
          lesser cities.

          Scott

          P.S. Can one purchase copies of your thesis?
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Thomas P Roche" <troche@...>
          To: <alternate-history@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 2:35 PM
          Subject: Re: [alternate-history] Hannibal vs. Rome


          >
          > On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Josiah Armes wrote:
          >
          > >
          > > >Could he have supplied a much larger force on the march to Cisalpina?
          > > >He would have to have sent a second force which gets back to his
          problem of
          > > >lack of competant subordinate commanders.
          > >
          > > 1) What if Hannibal's passage across the ALps was much easier, or he
          > > arrives w/ a very large army (maybe 50000 men, 10000+ calvary, and more
          > > than 37 elephants), and then splits it into two parts, teams up with the
          > > barbarians, and leaves part of his army with Hasdrubal in northern Italy
          > > after his victories at Piacenza, Trebbia, and Trasimene.
          > >
          > > 2) Hannibal in his early years is also trained in naval warfare and
          > > manages to obtain naval support.
          >
          > Best scenario here. The Carths had their navy pasted by the Romans in the
          > I Punic War, and after that Rome prevented Carth from rebuilding it to any
          > degree that would challenge Rome directly in the western Med, but Rome
          > couldn't have done would have been to prevent Carth from forming a naval
          > alliance with Macedon and Seleucia, and theoretically also Ptolemaic
          > Egypt, all of which were still strong naval powers and independent of Rome
          > (as well as certain smaller Greek sea powers such as Rhodes).
          > Historically, Rome defeated Carth first and then proceded to take on the
          > Hellenistic powers one by one over the following 150 years, until Rome
          > conquered the whole Med donut. But if the Carths had gotten even one
          > Hellenistic state to ally with them against Rome and send a large navy,
          > Rome's naval supremacy would have been mitigated and the Carths would have
          > been able to reinforce their supplies and manpower in Italy, allowing a
          > likely far different outcome, most likely Rome suing for peace and
          > allowing its southern Italian/ sicilian vassals to become independent
          > city-states in the Carth sphere. Think what would have happened had the
          > UK relieved the Yankee naval blockade during the War of the Southern
          > Rebellion.
          > >
          > > 3) Hannibal marches on Rome after his victory at the Lake of Trasimene.
          >
          > He does not have the tech to storm Rome's walls of the era. No one did.
          > >
          > > 4) Carthage supports Hannibal in his endeavour. Navy regains control
          of
          > > Meditteranean. Result is that Carthage can mobilize as many men as
          needed.
          >
          > Alone against the RN the CN was worthless in the Hannibalic War. If the
          > Carths had been smarter, they would have waited another 10 years, rebuilt
          > their navy as much as possible, and made an Hellenistic naval alliance
          > such as above. Remember, my MA thesis, "The Development of the Roman
          > Navy".
          > >
          > > 5) Terentius Varro is not the consul but instead of him, a general of
          some
          > > ability is present at Cannae. THough anybody who dared to face Hannibal
          in
          > > a straight fight is not very smart, what would have happened if
          > > Varro/somebody else realized the trap Hannibal set up by placing his
          center
          > > forward.
          >
          > If he realized in time to pull out of trap before slaughter Hannibal
          > likely has to depart Italy soon but can do so with most all his forces
          > intact. Retreats to Carthaginian Spain and Rome and Carth conclude uneasy
          > peace. Fighting again within 20 years, Hannibal still in charge. Who
          > would know what would have changed in that interim?
          >
          > Hornblower
          >
          > > > Just some
          > thoughts. > > Josiah
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > > >
          > > > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
          > > > >
          > > > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force,
          and
          > > > > joins Hannibal?
          > > >
          > > >Evades is the better bet. Or Hannibal doesn't get tricked and follows
          the
          > > >Romans North.
          > > > >
          > > > > Josiah
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > >Basically the strategic problem is probably unbreakable. Rome could
          simply
          > > >mobilize too many legions relative to Carthage's abilities.
          > > >
          > > >Scott
          > > > > At 08:17 PM 3/27/01, you wrote:
          > > > > >I often go on about how the Confedarcy had basically one day's
          worth of
          > > > > >daylight starting at noon on July 2nd 1863 to win its independence.
          The
          > > > > >basic nugget is that for the South to win it needs to not merely
          win a
          > > > > >battle but rather drive the Army of the Potomac away from DC long
          enough
          > > > > >to take DC, Baltimore, bring Maryland into the Confederacy, and
          basically
          > > > > >destroy Lincoln's political coalition for the continuation of the
          war.
          > > >An
          > > > > >endless series of Chancellorsvilles don't cut it. Lee runs out of
          men
          > > > > >before the North does on those.
          > > > > >
          > > > > >Was going over this with a store owner at the GAMA trade show in
          Vegas
          > > > > >last week who ponted out that I missed one other window. The day
          after
          > > > > >Second Bull Run the Union Army was streaming towards DC trailed by
          one of
          > > > > >the very few effective pursuits in the USCW. At Chantilly near DC
          the
          > > > > >Union rear guard under Kearny made a stand. They lost. Kearny
          > > > > >died. They held just long enough for the rest of the Army to reach
          the
          > > >DC
          > > > > >forts and safety. Kearny was a fighing general who ignored the
          politics
          > > > > >swirling around the Army that summer. If one of the other corps
          > > > > >commanders was given the rear guard, the backbiting between the
          McClellan
          > > > > >men and the Pope radicals might have resulted in Lee bagging the
          whole
          > > > > >army and riding into DC while the fort guns were masked by Union
          > > > > >fugitives...This is the month before Antietam and there as of yet
          no
          > > > > >Emancipation Proclamation to make British intervention difficult.
          > > >Lincoln
          > > > > >was holding the proclamation aside till he had a victory to hang it
          > > > > >on. So imagine that Lincoln is in Philly with a rump Congress.
          The
          > > > > >Eastern armies are lost. He has nothing but militia in the field
          in the
          > > > > >East. Grant is stopped in NW Mississippi. Sherman is stalled
          before
          > > > > >Vicksburg. Bragg and Price are moving north to invade Kentucky
          pursued
          > > > > >frantically by Buell. Does Dixie achieve independence?
          > > > > >
          > > > > >Scott
          > > > > >
          > > > > >Yahoo! Groups
          > > > >
          > > >
          >Sponsor<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=170602.1361328.2950093.2/D=egroupmail/S=17007
          > > >37312:N/A=551014/?http://www.debticated.com>
          > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
          > > > > ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
          >
        • Josiah Armes
          ... No doubt Hannibal would not have had to cross the Alps. Nevertheless, under different circumstances, he might not have won the great victories that he
          Message 4 of 15 , Apr 9, 2001
            At 05:35 PM 4/8/01, you wrote:

            >On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Josiah Armes wrote:
            >
            > >
            > > >Could he have supplied a much larger force on the march to Cisalpina?
            > > >He would have to have sent a second force which gets back to his
            > problem of
            > > >lack of competant subordinate commanders.
            > >
            > > 1) What if Hannibal's passage across the ALps was much easier, or he
            > > arrives w/ a very large army (maybe 50000 men, 10000+ calvary, and more
            > > than 37 elephants), and then splits it into two parts, teams up with the
            > > barbarians, and leaves part of his army with Hasdrubal in northern Italy
            > > after his victories at Piacenza, Trebbia, and Trasimene.
            > >
            > > 2) Hannibal in his early years is also trained in naval warfare and
            > > manages to obtain naval support.
            >
            >Best scenario here. The Carths had their navy pasted by the Romans in the
            >I Punic War, and after that Rome prevented Carth from rebuilding it to any
            >degree that would challenge Rome directly in the western Med, but Rome
            >couldn't have done would have been to prevent Carth from forming a naval
            >alliance with Macedon and Seleucia, and theoretically also Ptolemaic
            >Egypt, all of which were still strong naval powers and independent of Rome
            >(as well as certain smaller Greek sea powers such as Rhodes).
            >Historically, Rome defeated Carth first and then proceded to take on the
            >Hellenistic powers one by one over the following 150 years, until Rome
            >conquered the whole Med donut. But if the Carths had gotten even one
            >Hellenistic state to ally with them against Rome and send a large navy,
            >Rome's naval supremacy would have been mitigated and the Carths would have
            >been able to reinforce their supplies and manpower in Italy, allowing a
            >likely far different outcome, most likely Rome suing for peace and
            >allowing its southern Italian/ sicilian vassals to become independent
            >city-states in the Carth sphere. Think what would have happened had the
            >UK relieved the Yankee naval blockade during the War of the Southern
            >Rebellion.

            No doubt Hannibal would not have had to cross the Alps. Nevertheless,
            under different circumstances, he might not have won the great victories
            that he did. Though his passage across the ALps cost him 25000 men, it
            gave him the element at surprise. Similarly, at Cannae, though outnumbered
            2-1 by a Roman force of 90000 men, he took advantage of his small numbers
            by placing his wings on a major river, and used it to surround Varro's army
            more effectively. Had Hannibal had a force of similar size, the outcome,
            no doubt, would have been much different, and it is doubtful the Romans
            would have lost 75000 men.


            > >
            > > 3) Hannibal marches on Rome after his victory at the Lake of Trasimene.
            >
            >He does not have the tech to storm Rome's walls of the era. No one did.

            What if the Italian allies capitulate?


            > >
            > > 4) Carthage supports Hannibal in his endeavour. Navy regains control of
            > > Meditteranean. Result is that Carthage can mobilize as many men as needed.
            >
            >Alone against the RN the CN was worthless in the Hannibalic War. If the
            >Carths had been smarter, they would have waited another 10 years, rebuilt
            >their navy as much as possible, and made an Hellenistic naval alliance
            >such as above. Remember, my MA thesis, "The Development of the Roman
            >Navy".

            I have not heard of this. Please tell me more.


            > >
            > > 5) Terentius Varro is not the consul but instead of him, a general of
            > some
            > > ability is present at Cannae. THough anybody who dared to face
            > Hannibal in
            > > a straight fight is not very smart, what would have happened if
            > > Varro/somebody else realized the trap Hannibal set up by placing his
            > center
            > > forward.
            >
            >If he realized in time to pull out of trap before slaughter Hannibal
            >likely has to depart Italy soon but can do so with most all his forces
            >intact. Retreats to Carthaginian Spain and Rome and Carth conclude uneasy
            >peace. Fighting again within 20 years, Hannibal still in charge. Who
            >would know what would have changed in that interim?

            Hannibal's spies infiltrated the Romans to a great extent. Hannibal knew
            Varro to be a VERY quick-tempered and impatient men, like his predecessor
            Sempronius, whose temper cost them the Trebbia. No doubt if a smarter man
            were in charge, Hannibal would not have provoked a battle. He would have
            probably had to leave Italy sooner due to F. Maximus Cunctator's delaying
            tactics.

            Sincerely,t
            Josiah



            >Hornblower
            >
            > > > Just some
            >thoughts. > > Josiah
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > > >
            > > > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
            > > > >
            > > > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force, and
            > > > > joins Hannibal?
            > > >
            > > >Evades is the better bet. Or Hannibal doesn't get tricked and follows the
            > > >Romans North.
            > > > >
            > > > > Josiah
            > > > >
            > > >
            > > >Basically the strategic problem is probably unbreakable. Rome could
            > simply
            > > >mobilize too many legions relative to Carthage's abilities.
            > > >
            > > >Scott
            > > > > At 08:17 PM 3/27/01, you wrote:
            > > > > >I often go on about how the Confedarcy had basically one day's
            > worth of
            > > > > >daylight starting at noon on July 2nd 1863 to win its
            > independence. The
            > > > > >basic nugget is that for the South to win it needs to not merely win a
            > > > > >battle but rather drive the Army of the Potomac away from DC long
            > enough
            > > > > >to take DC, Baltimore, bring Maryland into the Confederacy, and
            > basically
            > > > > >destroy Lincoln's political coalition for the continuation of the war.
            > > >An
            > > > > >endless series of Chancellorsvilles don't cut it. Lee runs out of men
            > > > > >before the North does on those.
            > > > > >
            > > > > >Was going over this with a store owner at the GAMA trade show in Vegas
            > > > > >last week who ponted out that I missed one other window. The day
            > after
            > > > > >Second Bull Run the Union Army was streaming towards DC trailed by
            > one of
            > > > > >the very few effective pursuits in the USCW. At Chantilly near DC the
            > > > > >Union rear guard under Kearny made a stand. They lost. Kearny
            > > > > >died. They held just long enough for the rest of the Army to
            > reach the
            > > >DC
            > > > > >forts and safety. Kearny was a fighing general who ignored the
            > politics
            > > > > >swirling around the Army that summer. If one of the other corps
            > > > > >commanders was given the rear guard, the backbiting between the
            > McClellan
            > > > > >men and the Pope radicals might have resulted in Lee bagging the whole
            > > > > >army and riding into DC while the fort guns were masked by Union
            > > > > >fugitives...This is the month before Antietam and there as of yet no
            > > > > >Emancipation Proclamation to make British intervention difficult.
            > > >Lincoln
            > > > > >was holding the proclamation aside till he had a victory to hang it
            > > > > >on. So imagine that Lincoln is in Philly with a rump Congress. The
            > > > > >Eastern armies are lost. He has nothing but militia in the field
            > in the
            > > > > >East. Grant is stopped in NW Mississippi. Sherman is stalled before
            > > > > >Vicksburg. Bragg and Price are moving north to invade Kentucky
            > pursued
            > > > > >frantically by Buell. Does Dixie achieve independence?
            > > > > >
            > > > > >Scott
            > > > > >
            > > > > >Yahoo! Groups
            > > > >
            > > > >Sponsor<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=170602.1361328.2950093.2/D=egroupmail/S
            > =17007> >37312:N/A=551014/?http://www.debticated.com>
            > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
            > > > > ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
          • Thomas P Roche
            ... If they had been encircled they still would have. ... Makes no difference. Siege engine tech was not developed enough to take Rome walls unless a traitor
            Message 5 of 15 , Apr 13, 2001
              On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Josiah Armes wrote:

              > At 05:35 PM 4/8/01, you wrote:
              >
              > >On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, Josiah Armes wrote:
              > >
              > > >
              > > > >Could he have supplied a much larger force on the march to Cisalpina?
              > > > >He would have to have sent a second force which gets back to his
              > > problem of
              > > > >lack of competant subordinate commanders.
              > > >
              > > > 1) What if Hannibal's passage across the ALps was much easier, or he
              > > > arrives w/ a very large army (maybe 50000 men, 10000+ calvary, and more
              > > > than 37 elephants), and then splits it into two parts, teams up with the
              > > > barbarians, and leaves part of his army with Hasdrubal in northern Italy
              > > > after his victories at Piacenza, Trebbia, and Trasimene.
              > > >
              > > > 2) Hannibal in his early years is also trained in naval warfare and
              > > > manages to obtain naval support.
              > >
              > >Best scenario here. The Carths had their navy pasted by the Romans in the
              > >I Punic War, and after that Rome prevented Carth from rebuilding it to any
              > >degree that would challenge Rome directly in the western Med, but Rome
              > >couldn't have done would have been to prevent Carth from forming a naval
              > >alliance with Macedon and Seleucia, and theoretically also Ptolemaic
              > >Egypt, all of which were still strong naval powers and independent of Rome
              > >(as well as certain smaller Greek sea powers such as Rhodes).
              > >Historically, Rome defeated Carth first and then proceded to take on the
              > >Hellenistic powers one by one over the following 150 years, until Rome
              > >conquered the whole Med donut. But if the Carths had gotten even one
              > >Hellenistic state to ally with them against Rome and send a large navy,
              > >Rome's naval supremacy would have been mitigated and the Carths would have
              > >been able to reinforce their supplies and manpower in Italy, allowing a
              > >likely far different outcome, most likely Rome suing for peace and
              > >allowing its southern Italian/ sicilian vassals to become independent
              > >city-states in the Carth sphere. Think what would have happened had the
              > >UK relieved the Yankee naval blockade during the War of the Southern
              > >Rebellion.
              >
              > No doubt Hannibal would not have had to cross the Alps. Nevertheless,
              > under different circumstances, he might not have won the great victories
              > that he did. Though his passage across the ALps cost him 25000 men, it
              > gave him the element at surprise. Similarly, at Cannae, though outnumbered
              > 2-1 by a Roman force of 90000 men, he took advantage of his small numbers
              > by placing his wings on a major river, and used it to surround Varro's army
              > more effectively. Had Hannibal had a force of similar size, the outcome,
              > no doubt, would have been much different, and it is doubtful the Romans
              > would have lost 75000 men.

              If they had been encircled they still would have.
              >
              >
              > > >
              > > > 3) Hannibal marches on Rome after his victory at the Lake of Trasimene.
              > >
              > >He does not have the tech to storm Rome's walls of the era. No one did.
              >
              > What if the Italian allies capitulate?
              >
              Makes no difference. Siege engine tech was not developed enough to take
              Rome walls unless a traitor successfully opened them. Think nuke bombs
              without a star wars defense-- if I shoot em at you you are dead, only in
              reverse here. Rome could be endlessly resupplied with food and materiel
              from sea. Now if the sea supplies get cut off, you could starve em out
              eventually if you can keep siege up.

              > > > >
              > > > 4) Carthage supports Hannibal in his endeavour. Navy regains control of
              > > > Meditteranean. Result is that Carthage can mobilize as many men as needed.
              > >
              > >Alone against the RN the CN was worthless in the Hannibalic War. If the
              > >Carths had been smarter, they would have waited another 10 years, rebuilt
              > >their navy as much as possible, and made an Hellenistic naval alliance
              > >such as above. Remember, my MA thesis, "The Development of the Roman
              > >Navy".
              >
              > I have not heard of this. Please tell me more.

              Univ. Of VT Classics Dept., MA 1991.
              >
              >
              > > >
              > > > 5) Terentius Varro is not the consul but instead of him, a general of
              > > some
              > > > ability is present at Cannae. THough anybody who dared to face
              > > Hannibal in
              > > > a straight fight is not very smart, what would have happened if
              > > > Varro/somebody else realized the trap Hannibal set up by placing his
              > > center
              > > > forward.
              > >
              > >If he realized in time to pull out of trap before slaughter Hannibal
              > >likely has to depart Italy soon but can do so with most all his forces
              > >intact. Retreats to Carthaginian Spain and Rome and Carth conclude uneasy
              > >peace. Fighting again within 20 years, Hannibal still in charge. Who
              > >would know what would have changed in that interim?
              >
              > Hannibal's spies infiltrated the Romans to a great extent. Hannibal knew
              > Varro to be a VERY quick-tempered and impatient men, like his predecessor
              > Sempronius, whose temper cost them the Trebbia. No doubt if a smarter man
              > were in charge, Hannibal would not have provoked a battle. He would have
              > probably had to leave Italy sooner due to F. Maximus Cunctator's delaying
              > tactics.

              Yes, which only advances the quicker peace scenario I outlined above,
              creating rematch conditions likely sooner rather than later.
              >
              > Sincerely,t
              > Josiah
              >
              >
              >
              > >Hornblower
              > >
              > > > > Just some
              > >thoughts. > > Josiah
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force, and
              > > > > > joins Hannibal?
              > > > >
              > > > >Evades is the better bet. Or Hannibal doesn't get tricked and follows the
              > > > >Romans North.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Josiah
              > > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >Basically the strategic problem is probably unbreakable. Rome could
              > > simply
              > > > >mobilize too many legions relative to Carthage's abilities.
              > > > >
              > > > >Scott
              > > > > > At 08:17 PM 3/27/01, you wrote:
              > > > > > >I often go on about how the Confedarcy had basically one day's
              > > worth of
              > > > > > >daylight starting at noon on July 2nd 1863 to win its
              > > independence. The
              > > > > > >basic nugget is that for the South to win it needs to not merely win a
              > > > > > >battle but rather drive the Army of the Potomac away from DC long
              > > enough
              > > > > > >to take DC, Baltimore, bring Maryland into the Confederacy, and
              > > basically
              > > > > > >destroy Lincoln's political coalition for the continuation of the war.
              > > > >An
              > > > > > >endless series of Chancellorsvilles don't cut it. Lee runs out of men
              > > > > > >before the North does on those.
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >Was going over this with a store owner at the GAMA trade show in Vegas
              > > > > > >last week who ponted out that I missed one other window. The day
              > > after
              > > > > > >Second Bull Run the Union Army was streaming towards DC trailed by
              > > one of
              > > > > > >the very few effective pursuits in the USCW. At Chantilly near DC the
              > > > > > >Union rear guard under Kearny made a stand. They lost. Kearny
              > > > > > >died. They held just long enough for the rest of the Army to
              > > reach the
              > > > >DC
              > > > > > >forts and safety. Kearny was a fighing general who ignored the
              > > politics
              > > > > > >swirling around the Army that summer. If one of the other corps
              > > > > > >commanders was given the rear guard, the backbiting between the
              > > McClellan
              > > > > > >men and the Pope radicals might have resulted in Lee bagging the whole
              > > > > > >army and riding into DC while the fort guns were masked by Union
              > > > > > >fugitives...This is the month before Antietam and there as of yet no
              > > > > > >Emancipation Proclamation to make British intervention difficult.
              > > > >Lincoln
              > > > > > >was holding the proclamation aside till he had a victory to hang it
              > > > > > >on. So imagine that Lincoln is in Philly with a rump Congress. The
              > > > > > >Eastern armies are lost. He has nothing but militia in the field
              > > in the
              > > > > > >East. Grant is stopped in NW Mississippi. Sherman is stalled before
              > > > > > >Vicksburg. Bragg and Price are moving north to invade Kentucky
              > > pursued
              > > > > > >frantically by Buell. Does Dixie achieve independence?
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >Scott
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >Yahoo! Groups
              > > > > >
              > > > > >Sponsor<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=170602.1361328.2950093.2/D=egroupmail/S
              > > =17007> >37312:N/A=551014/?http://www.debticated.com>
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
              > > > > > ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
              >
            • Josiah Armes
              ... However, if Hannibal had more men, the battle would have been set up very differently; when Hannibal surrounded the Romans they would not have been
              Message 6 of 15 , Apr 15, 2001
                At 01:09 AM 4/14/01, you wrote:

                > > No doubt Hannibal would not have had to cross the Alps. Nevertheless,
                > > under different circumstances, he might not have won the great victories
                > > that he did. Though his passage across the ALps cost him 25000 men, it
                > > gave him the element at surprise. Similarly, at Cannae, though
                > outnumbered
                > > 2-1 by a Roman force of 90000 men, he took advantage of his small numbers
                > > by placing his wings on a major river, and used it to surround Varro's
                > army
                > > more effectively. Had Hannibal had a force of similar size, the outcome,
                > > no doubt, would have been much different, and it is doubtful the Romans
                > > would have lost 75000 men.
                >
                >If they had been encircled they still would have.

                However, if Hannibal had more men, the battle would have been set up very
                differently; when Hannibal surrounded the Romans they would not have been
                squeezed into a tight space like they actually were (as can be expected
                when you are completely encircled by an army half the size of your own) and
                would have been able to fight more effectively, though not by much. You
                are right though, their losses would probably be about the same.

                Josiah
              • Jim Scribner
                During the later periods of Rome, a Roman General defecting with his soldiers might have possible, but during the Second Punic War that would have been
                Message 7 of 15 , May 30, 2001
                  During the later periods of Rome, a Roman General defecting with his soldiers might have possible, but during the Second Punic War that would have been unlikely. The Roman Legions at this time were not the more mercenary and multi-national professionals of the Empire but native Roman farm boys defending their Republic and their own farms. If any general defected his soldiers would have been more likely to kill him than follow him. This was the time of Rome's greatest sense of "virtus" and honor.
                  They didn't even have many slaves.

                  Had the brilliant young Roman Grecophile Scipio Africanus died early in the Second Punic War, that would have very possibly changed its outcome. His risky strategy of leaving Rome less well defended by invading North Africa to "take the War to the enemy" would not have forced the Carthaginians to recall Hannibal from Italy ending all chance of Carthaginian victory. Scipio
                  in fact is the only Roman General, I believe, who ever actually defeated Hannibal in battle. Fabius Maximus avoided Hannibal and only took his rear garrison elemnents in what were basically partisan guerilla raids against Hannibal's supply lines.

                  It isn't too far fetched to think that the Carthaginians might have been able to catch Scipio's Romans at sea on ther way to Carthage. The Carthaginians did have a better navy than the Romans during the first Punic War and possibly the Second as well. Perhaps if the overly greedy and cost conscious Carthaginians had increased the size of their navy with a bit more funding, they would have had enough ships in the right place at the right time to pull it off.

                  They might have been able to do it even with their given assets if not for the fact that the brilliant young Carthaginian who was to invent the hot air balloon was sacrificed to Baal as a boy as the historical Carthiginian practice of human sacrifice allowed. Hot air balloons on Carthaginian ships could have been used for long range observation and spotted the Roman fleet at sea in time to gather enough forces to sink it.

                  Or perhaps the Roman fleet might have been destroyed by a storm attributed among the superstitious to a prayer by a Hebrew slave, a cousin of that Hebrew Priest Simeon whose grandson Matthias is mentioned in the First Book of Maccabbees. Unfortunately that cousin of Simeon's was killed by a Carthaginian slave trader for blaspheming the great god Baal and merely by coincidence there was no storm to destroy the Roman fleet.

                  In any case, had Scipio and his army been destroyed at sea, Hannibal could have concentrated his tactical genious on figuring out how to to destroy Rome without any of that historical distraction by Scipio, and given enough time, perhaps he could have been successfull.

                  Jim in Texas



                  --- In alternate-history@y..., lord_of_change2001@y... wrote:
                  > Carthage missed its change , by not defending Syracuse when it had
                  > the chance ! If it had done this then it would have become a rallying
                  > point for all anti-Roman resistance and would have had hundreds of
                  > thousands of rebel warriors from across the empire at its back when
                  > Hannibal attacked !
                  > As it was local support for Hannibal was fairly minimal . The
                  > Carthiginians had a brutal reputation , and people would have been
                  > foolish to risk their lives to put themselves under the grip of a
                  > worse tyranny than the one they were already under !
                  > Only way I can see Hannibal getting to Rome is by launching a
                  > seabourne invasion of southern Italy . In order to do this Carthage
                  > has to vastly improve and increase its navy , destroy the Roman Navy
                  > and then march straight on Rome from its landing sight . Thus its
                  > armies are relatively fresh , not having had to fight running battles
                  > all the was from Spain . If this is done in relative secrecy has a
                  > chance of sucess . The other way is by persuading several of the
                  > Roman Legions to turn Stag and join with his attacking land armies .
                  > Could be possible with an ambitious general , and promises of an
                  > Italian Kingdom for him afterwards ! Maybe !
                  >
                  > Lord of Change
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > > Similarly, Hannibal could not have defeated Rome with his army.
                  > The Romans
                  > > had too many resources. Any comments? I find the history and
                  > battles of
                  > > Hannibal quite interesting. What would have happened if:
                  > >
                  > > 1) He realizes the loyalty of Italian tribes to Rome and takes a
                  > much
                  > > larger force?
                  > >
                  > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
                  > >
                  > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force,
                  > and
                  > > joins Hannibal?
                  > >
                  > > Josiah
                  > >
                • Josiah Paul Armes
                  ... This is true; however, the Roman army of Caesar, when composed of Romans, was better than it s predecessor. It had more flexibilty. ... You are correct:
                  Message 8 of 15 , May 31, 2001
                    At 06:57 PM 5/30/2001, you wrote:
                    >During the later periods of Rome, a Roman General defecting with his
                    >soldiers might have possible, but during the Second Punic War that would
                    >have been unlikely. The Roman Legions at this time were not the more
                    >mercenary and multi-national professionals of the Empire but native Roman
                    >farm boys defending their Republic and their own farms. If any general
                    >defected his soldiers would have been more likely to kill him than follow
                    >him. This was the time of Rome's greatest sense of "virtus" and honor.

                    This is true; however, the Roman army of Caesar, when composed of Romans,
                    was better than it's predecessor. It had more flexibilty.

                    >They didn't even have many slaves.
                    >
                    >Had the brilliant young Roman Grecophile Scipio Africanus died early in
                    >the Second Punic War, that would have very possibly changed its outcome.
                    >His risky strategy of leaving Rome less well defended by invading North
                    >Africa to "take the War to the enemy" would not have forced the
                    >Carthaginians to recall Hannibal from Italy ending all chance of
                    >Carthaginian victory. Scipio
                    >in fact is the only Roman General, I believe, who ever actually defeated
                    >Hannibal in battle. Fabius Maximus avoided Hannibal and only took his rear
                    >garrison elemnents in what were basically partisan

                    You are correct: The battle of Zama, was, in fact, Hannibal's only defeat
                    in the Punic Wars. Scipio Africanus used Hannibal's own tactics: his
                    calvary, commanded by Massinissa, took Hannibals rear; while not able to
                    envelop Hannibals army, Scipio did gain the victory.

                    >guerilla raids against Hannibal's supply lines.
                    >
                    >It isn't too far fetched to think that the Carthaginians might have been
                    >able to catch Scipio's Romans at sea on ther way to Carthage. The
                    >Carthaginians did have a better navy than the Romans during the first
                    >Punic War and possibly the Second as well. Perhaps if the overly greedy
                    >and cost conscious Carthaginians had increased the size of their navy with
                    >a bit more funding, they would have had enough
                    >ships in the right place at the right time to pull it off.

                    Hannibal would have needed at least 50000 men to pull it off in the long
                    run; he also would have needed enough naval support to keep him
                    supplied. He had this many man at Piacenza and Cannae, but in many other
                    battles he had well under 30000 men, and no naval support. After Cannae, a
                    second army could come into southern Italy; presume this army is commanded
                    by Mago, commander of the Numidians at Trebbia. Mago, with 40000 men and a
                    fairly brilliant mind, which he no doubt inherited from his older brother
                    Hannibal, defeats an equal Roman force at Sicily and leaves some men to
                    keep the island. He then marches into Italy and manages to divert some
                    pressure from hannibal's lines. Hannibal breaks the stalemate with Fabius,
                    traps another larger army somehow somewhere.... perhaps a minature version
                    of Trebbia. He then joins Mago; now he has about 55000 men (maybe 20% of
                    that is calvary). He now solidifies control of Italy by enlisting the aid
                    of King Philip. The next 15 years are spent reducing the isolated pockets
                    of resistance to ruins, considering the limited means Carthage has at its
                    disposal. Hannibal then marches home with 30000 men, and takes control of
                    Carthage. A military dictatorship is set up but it is not all that
                    oppressive with Hannibal's love of justice and so on. Hanno the Great and
                    his henchmen are put to death. Hannibal spends rest of life as King of
                    Carthage, restoring justice to the country. He sets up an army and
                    rigorously trains it; now the whole empire has perhaps 200,000 troops as
                    opposed to about 70,000 in OTL. Italy rebels, Hannibal is faced with major
                    problem; he sends army to Italy and defeats it in much the same way that he
                    did the first time, only much less bothersome, costly, and much faster.

                    Hannibal copies some of the Roman fighting systems and develops a virtually
                    unbeatable army that is composed of a large percentage of
                    Carthaginians. Hannibal trains able men in the art of strategy. He puts
                    his brother Hasdrubal in command of the Carthaginian army assigned to
                    offensive wars (conquests, etc.), and Mago to the defensive army. Hannibal
                    dies in his 70's, leaving Carthage safe for about 50 years. Italy's spirit
                    is finally broken, and the Carthaginian and Greek Empires become the main
                    powers instead of one Roman Empire.

                    Sometime after Hannibal's death, a rivalry develops between Carthage and
                    Greece. Carthage controls Spain, Africa, and Italy; control of Illyria is
                    disputed. Greece controls Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, Ptolemy controls
                    Egypt, and Seleucid controls middle east. The disputes between Ptolemy and
                    Seleucid cause these two powers to disintegrate. A war develops between
                    Carthage and Greece over illyria and Egypt.

                    Greece, with it's phalanxes, chariots, and cataphract calvary, has a much
                    better army than Greece, but Carthage has better generals. The cataphract
                    calvary proves a tough match and the Greek army is hard to
                    outflank. Hasdrubal's best bet is to place his heavy calvary in the center
                    and give it the job of cracking the phalanxes.

                    Any comments?



                    >They might have been able to do it even with their given assets if not for
                    >the fact that the brilliant young Carthaginian who was to invent the hot
                    >air balloon was sacrificed to Baal as a boy as the historical Carthiginian
                    >practice of human sacrifice allowed. Hot air balloons on Carthaginian
                    >ships could have been used for long range observation and spotted the
                    >Roman fleet at sea in time to gather enough forces to sink it.



                    ?????????

                    Josiah

                    >
                    >Or perhaps the Roman fleet might have been destroyed by a storm attributed
                    >among the superstitious to a prayer by a Hebrew slave, a cousin of that
                    >Hebrew Priest Simeon whose grandson Matthias is mentioned in the First
                    >Book of Maccabbees. Unfortunately that cousin of Simeon's was killed by a
                    >Carthaginian slave trader for blaspheming the great god Baal and merely by
                    >coincidence there was no storm to destroy the Roman fleet.
                    >
                    >In any case, had Scipio and his army been destroyed at sea, Hannibal could
                    >have concentrated his tactical genious on figuring out how to to destroy
                    >Rome without any of that historical distraction by Scipio, and given
                    >enough time, perhaps he could have been successfull.
                    >
                    >Jim in Texas
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >--- In alternate-history@y..., lord_of_change2001@y... wrote:
                    > > Carthage missed its change , by not defending Syracuse when it had
                    > > the chance ! If it had done this then it would have become a rallying
                    > > point for all anti-Roman resistance and would have had hundreds of
                    > > thousands of rebel warriors from across the empire at its back when
                    > > Hannibal attacked !
                    > > As it was local support for Hannibal was fairly minimal . The
                    > > Carthiginians had a brutal reputation , and people would have been
                    > > foolish to risk their lives to put themselves under the grip of a
                    > > worse tyranny than the one they were already under !
                    > > Only way I can see Hannibal getting to Rome is by launching a
                    > > seabourne invasion of southern Italy . In order to do this Carthage
                    > > has to vastly improve and increase its navy , destroy the Roman Navy
                    > > and then march straight on Rome from its landing sight . Thus its
                    > > armies are relatively fresh , not having had to fight running battles
                    > > all the was from Spain . If this is done in relative secrecy has a
                    > > chance of sucess . The other way is by persuading several of the
                    > > Roman Legions to turn Stag and join with his attacking land armies .
                    > > Could be possible with an ambitious general , and promises of an
                    > > Italian Kingdom for him afterwards ! Maybe !
                    > >
                    > > Lord of Change
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > > Similarly, Hannibal could not have defeated Rome with his army.
                    > > The Romans
                    > > > had too many resources. Any comments? I find the history and
                    > > battles of
                    > > > Hannibal quite interesting. What would have happened if:
                    > > >
                    > > > 1) He realizes the loyalty of Italian tribes to Rome and takes a
                    > > much
                    > > > larger force?
                    > > >
                    > > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
                    > > >
                    > > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force,
                    > > and
                    > > > joins Hannibal?
                    > > >
                    > > > Josiah
                    > > >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  • Victorian Cow
                    ... From: Josiah Paul Armes To: Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 1:30 PM Subject:
                    Message 9 of 15 , May 31, 2001
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Josiah Paul Armes" <SoliDeoGloria@...>
                      To: <alternate-history@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 1:30 PM
                      Subject: [alternate-history] Extended ATL: Hannibal beats Rome


                      > At 06:57 PM 5/30/2001, you wrote:
                      > >During the later periods of Rome, a Roman General defecting with his
                      > >soldiers might have possible, but during the Second Punic War that would
                      > >have been unlikely. The Roman Legions at this time were not the more
                      > >mercenary and multi-national professionals of the Empire but native Roman
                      > >farm boys defending their Republic and their own farms. If any general
                      > >defected his soldiers would have been more likely to kill him than follow
                      > >him. This was the time of Rome's greatest sense of "virtus" and honor.
                      >
                      > This is true; however, the Roman army of Caesar, when composed of Romans,
                      > was better than it's predecessor. It had more flexibilty.
                      >
                      > >They didn't even have many slaves.
                      > >
                      > >Had the brilliant young Roman Grecophile Scipio Africanus died early in
                      > >the Second Punic War, that would have very possibly changed its outcome.
                      > >His risky strategy of leaving Rome less well defended by invading North
                      > >Africa to "take the War to the enemy" would not have forced the
                      > >Carthaginians to recall Hannibal from Italy ending all chance of
                      > >Carthaginian victory. Scipio
                      > >in fact is the only Roman General, I believe, who ever actually defeated
                      > >Hannibal in battle. Fabius Maximus avoided Hannibal and only took his
                      rear
                      > >garrison elemnents in what were basically partisan
                      >
                      > You are correct: The battle of Zama, was, in fact, Hannibal's only defeat
                      > in the Punic Wars. Scipio Africanus used Hannibal's own tactics: his
                      > calvary, commanded by Massinissa, took Hannibals rear; while not able to
                      > envelop Hannibals army, Scipio did gain the victory.
                      >
                      > >guerilla raids against Hannibal's supply lines.
                      > >
                      > >It isn't too far fetched to think that the Carthaginians might have been
                      > >able to catch Scipio's Romans at sea on ther way to Carthage. The
                      > >Carthaginians did have a better navy than the Romans during the first
                      > >Punic War and possibly the Second as well. Perhaps if the overly greedy
                      > >and cost conscious Carthaginians had increased the size of their navy
                      with
                      > >a bit more funding, they would have had enough
                      > >ships in the right place at the right time to pull it off.
                      >
                      > Hannibal would have needed at least 50000 men to pull it off in the long
                      > run; he also would have needed enough naval support to keep him
                      > supplied. He had this many man at Piacenza and Cannae, but in many other
                      > battles he had well under 30000 men, and no naval support. After Cannae,
                      a
                      > second army could come into southern Italy; presume this army is commanded
                      > by Mago, commander of the Numidians at Trebbia. Mago, with 40000 men and
                      a
                      > fairly brilliant mind, which he no doubt inherited from his older brother
                      > Hannibal, defeats an equal Roman force at Sicily and leaves some men to
                      > keep the island. He then marches into Italy and manages to divert some
                      > pressure from hannibal's lines. Hannibal breaks the stalemate with
                      Fabius,
                      > traps another larger army somehow somewhere.... perhaps a minature version
                      > of Trebbia. He then joins Mago; now he has about 55000 men (maybe 20% of
                      > that is calvary). He now solidifies control of Italy by enlisting the aid
                      > of King Philip. The next 15 years are spent reducing the isolated pockets
                      > of resistance to ruins, considering the limited means Carthage has at its
                      > disposal. Hannibal then marches home with 30000 men, and takes control of
                      > Carthage. A military dictatorship is set up but it is not all that
                      > oppressive with Hannibal's love of justice and so on. Hanno the Great and
                      > his henchmen are put to death. Hannibal spends rest of life as King of
                      > Carthage, restoring justice to the country. He sets up an army and
                      > rigorously trains it; now the whole empire has perhaps 200,000 troops as
                      > opposed to about 70,000 in OTL. Italy rebels, Hannibal is faced with
                      major
                      > problem; he sends army to Italy and defeats it in much the same way that
                      he
                      > did the first time, only much less bothersome, costly, and much faster.
                      >
                      > Hannibal copies some of the Roman fighting systems and develops a
                      virtually
                      > unbeatable army that is composed of a large percentage of
                      > Carthaginians. Hannibal trains able men in the art of strategy. He puts
                      > his brother Hasdrubal in command of the Carthaginian army assigned to
                      > offensive wars (conquests, etc.), and Mago to the defensive army.
                      Hannibal
                      > dies in his 70's, leaving Carthage safe for about 50 years. Italy's
                      spirit
                      > is finally broken, and the Carthaginian and Greek Empires become the main
                      > powers instead of one Roman Empire.
                      >
                      > Sometime after Hannibal's death, a rivalry develops between Carthage and
                      > Greece. Carthage controls Spain, Africa, and Italy; control of Illyria is
                      > disputed. Greece controls Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, Ptolemy controls
                      > Egypt, and Seleucid controls middle east. The disputes between Ptolemy
                      and
                      > Seleucid cause these two powers to disintegrate. A war develops between
                      > Carthage and Greece over illyria and Egypt.
                      >
                      > Greece, with it's phalanxes, chariots, and cataphract calvary, has a much
                      > better army than Greece, but Carthage has better generals. The cataphract
                      > calvary proves a tough match and the Greek army is hard to
                      > outflank. Hasdrubal's best bet is to place his heavy calvary in the
                      center
                      > and give it the job of cracking the phalanxes.
                      >
                      > Any comments?
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > >They might have been able to do it even with their given assets if not
                      for
                      > >the fact that the brilliant young Carthaginian who was to invent the hot
                      > >air balloon was sacrificed to Baal as a boy as the historical
                      Carthiginian
                      > >practice of human sacrifice allowed. Hot air balloons on Carthaginian
                      > >ships could have been used for long range observation and spotted the
                      > >Roman fleet at sea in time to gather enough forces to sink it.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > ?????????
                      >
                      > Josiah
                      >
                      > >
                      > >Or perhaps the Roman fleet might have been destroyed by a storm
                      attributed
                      > >among the superstitious to a prayer by a Hebrew slave, a cousin of that
                      > >Hebrew Priest Simeon whose grandson Matthias is mentioned in the First
                      > >Book of Maccabbees. Unfortunately that cousin of Simeon's was killed by a
                      > >Carthaginian slave trader for blaspheming the great god Baal and merely
                      by
                      > >coincidence there was no storm to destroy the Roman fleet.
                      > >
                      > >In any case, had Scipio and his army been destroyed at sea, Hannibal
                      could
                      > >have concentrated his tactical genious on figuring out how to to destroy
                      > >Rome without any of that historical distraction by Scipio, and given
                      > >enough time, perhaps he could have been successfull.
                      > >
                      > >Jim in Texas
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >--- In alternate-history@y..., lord_of_change2001@y... wrote:
                      > > > Carthage missed its change , by not defending Syracuse when it had
                      > > > the chance ! If it had done this then it would have become a rallying
                      > > > point for all anti-Roman resistance and would have had hundreds of
                      > > > thousands of rebel warriors from across the empire at its back when
                      > > > Hannibal attacked !
                      > > > As it was local support for Hannibal was fairly minimal . The
                      > > > Carthiginians had a brutal reputation , and people would have been
                      > > > foolish to risk their lives to put themselves under the grip of a
                      > > > worse tyranny than the one they were already under !
                      > > > Only way I can see Hannibal getting to Rome is by launching a
                      > > > seabourne invasion of southern Italy . In order to do this Carthage
                      > > > has to vastly improve and increase its navy , destroy the Roman Navy
                      > > > and then march straight on Rome from its landing sight . Thus its
                      > > > armies are relatively fresh , not having had to fight running battles
                      > > > all the was from Spain . If this is done in relative secrecy has a
                      > > > chance of sucess . The other way is by persuading several of the
                      > > > Roman Legions to turn Stag and join with his attacking land armies .
                      > > > Could be possible with an ambitious general , and promises of an
                      > > > Italian Kingdom for him afterwards ! Maybe !
                      > > >
                      > > > Lord of Change
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > > Similarly, Hannibal could not have defeated Rome with his army.
                      > > > The Romans
                      > > > > had too many resources. Any comments? I find the history and
                      > > > battles of
                      > > > > Hannibal quite interesting. What would have happened if:
                      > > > >
                      > > > > 1) He realizes the loyalty of Italian tribes to Rome and takes a
                      > > > much
                      > > > > larger force?
                      > > > >
                      > > > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
                      > > > >
                      > > > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force,
                      > > > and
                      > > > > joins Hannibal?
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Josiah
                      > > > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • Victorian Cow
                      The army evolved under two seperate rythms. 1. It became tactically more flexible until the middle of the third century AD. the Empire survived the crisis of
                      Message 10 of 15 , May 31, 2001
                        The army evolved under two seperate rythms.

                        1. It became tactically more flexible until the middle of the third century
                        AD. the Empire survived the crisis of the 3rd century. The old army did
                        not. It became a progressively more brittle weapon therefater until it
                        basically came apart in the West in the mid and late fifth century.

                        2. The Army of the Republic was converted into a personal instrument of its
                        commander by Marius. from Augustu onwards attempts were made to transfer
                        that allegience from general to dynasty or state. Some strides were made.
                        None were successful enough for long enough to keep the army from ultimately
                        killing the Roman state.

                        Scott
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: "Josiah Paul Armes" <SoliDeoGloria@...>
                        To: <alternate-history@yahoogroups.com>
                        Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 1:30 PM
                        Subject: [alternate-history] Extended ATL: Hannibal beats Rome


                        > At 06:57 PM 5/30/2001, you wrote:
                        > >During the later periods of Rome, a Roman General defecting with his
                        > >soldiers might have possible, but during the Second Punic War that would
                        > >have been unlikely. The Roman Legions at this time were not the more
                        > >mercenary and multi-national professionals of the Empire but native Roman
                        > >farm boys defending their Republic and their own farms. If any general
                        > >defected his soldiers would have been more likely to kill him than follow
                        > >him. This was the time of Rome's greatest sense of "virtus" and honor.
                        >
                        > This is true; however, the Roman army of Caesar, when composed of Romans,
                        > was better than it's predecessor. It had more flexibilty.
                        >
                        > >They didn't even have many slaves.
                        > >
                        > >Had the brilliant young Roman Grecophile Scipio Africanus died early in
                        > >the Second Punic War, that would have very possibly changed its outcome.
                        > >His risky strategy of leaving Rome less well defended by invading North
                        > >Africa to "take the War to the enemy" would not have forced the
                        > >Carthaginians to recall Hannibal from Italy ending all chance of
                        > >Carthaginian victory. Scipio
                        > >in fact is the only Roman General, I believe, who ever actually defeated
                        > >Hannibal in battle. Fabius Maximus avoided Hannibal and only took his
                        rear
                        > >garrison elemnents in what were basically partisan
                        >
                        > You are correct: The battle of Zama, was, in fact, Hannibal's only defeat
                        > in the Punic Wars. Scipio Africanus used Hannibal's own tactics: his
                        > calvary, commanded by Massinissa, took Hannibals rear; while not able to
                        > envelop Hannibals army, Scipio did gain the victory.
                        >
                        > >guerilla raids against Hannibal's supply lines.
                        > >
                        > >It isn't too far fetched to think that the Carthaginians might have been
                        > >able to catch Scipio's Romans at sea on ther way to Carthage. The
                        > >Carthaginians did have a better navy than the Romans during the first
                        > >Punic War and possibly the Second as well. Perhaps if the overly greedy
                        > >and cost conscious Carthaginians had increased the size of their navy
                        with
                        > >a bit more funding, they would have had enough
                        > >ships in the right place at the right time to pull it off.
                        >
                        > Hannibal would have needed at least 50000 men to pull it off in the long
                        > run; he also would have needed enough naval support to keep him
                        > supplied. He had this many man at Piacenza and Cannae, but in many other
                        > battles he had well under 30000 men, and no naval support. After Cannae,
                        a
                        > second army could come into southern Italy; presume this army is commanded
                        > by Mago, commander of the Numidians at Trebbia. Mago, with 40000 men and
                        a
                        > fairly brilliant mind, which he no doubt inherited from his older brother
                        > Hannibal, defeats an equal Roman force at Sicily and leaves some men to
                        > keep the island. He then marches into Italy and manages to divert some
                        > pressure from hannibal's lines. Hannibal breaks the stalemate with
                        Fabius,
                        > traps another larger army somehow somewhere.... perhaps a minature version
                        > of Trebbia. He then joins Mago; now he has about 55000 men (maybe 20% of
                        > that is calvary). He now solidifies control of Italy by enlisting the aid
                        > of King Philip. The next 15 years are spent reducing the isolated pockets
                        > of resistance to ruins, considering the limited means Carthage has at its
                        > disposal. Hannibal then marches home with 30000 men, and takes control of
                        > Carthage. A military dictatorship is set up but it is not all that
                        > oppressive with Hannibal's love of justice and so on. Hanno the Great and
                        > his henchmen are put to death. Hannibal spends rest of life as King of
                        > Carthage, restoring justice to the country. He sets up an army and
                        > rigorously trains it; now the whole empire has perhaps 200,000 troops as
                        > opposed to about 70,000 in OTL. Italy rebels, Hannibal is faced with
                        major
                        > problem; he sends army to Italy and defeats it in much the same way that
                        he
                        > did the first time, only much less bothersome, costly, and much faster.
                        >
                        > Hannibal copies some of the Roman fighting systems and develops a
                        virtually
                        > unbeatable army that is composed of a large percentage of
                        > Carthaginians. Hannibal trains able men in the art of strategy. He puts
                        > his brother Hasdrubal in command of the Carthaginian army assigned to
                        > offensive wars (conquests, etc.), and Mago to the defensive army.
                        Hannibal
                        > dies in his 70's, leaving Carthage safe for about 50 years. Italy's
                        spirit
                        > is finally broken, and the Carthaginian and Greek Empires become the main
                        > powers instead of one Roman Empire.
                        >
                        > Sometime after Hannibal's death, a rivalry develops between Carthage and
                        > Greece. Carthage controls Spain, Africa, and Italy; control of Illyria is
                        > disputed. Greece controls Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, Ptolemy controls
                        > Egypt, and Seleucid controls middle east. The disputes between Ptolemy
                        and
                        > Seleucid cause these two powers to disintegrate. A war develops between
                        > Carthage and Greece over illyria and Egypt.
                        >
                        > Greece, with it's phalanxes, chariots, and cataphract calvary, has a much
                        > better army than Greece, but Carthage has better generals. The cataphract
                        > calvary proves a tough match and the Greek army is hard to
                        > outflank. Hasdrubal's best bet is to place his heavy calvary in the
                        center
                        > and give it the job of cracking the phalanxes.
                        >
                        > Any comments?
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > >They might have been able to do it even with their given assets if not
                        for
                        > >the fact that the brilliant young Carthaginian who was to invent the hot
                        > >air balloon was sacrificed to Baal as a boy as the historical
                        Carthiginian
                        > >practice of human sacrifice allowed. Hot air balloons on Carthaginian
                        > >ships could have been used for long range observation and spotted the
                        > >Roman fleet at sea in time to gather enough forces to sink it.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ?????????
                        >
                        > Josiah
                        >
                        > >
                        > >Or perhaps the Roman fleet might have been destroyed by a storm
                        attributed
                        > >among the superstitious to a prayer by a Hebrew slave, a cousin of that
                        > >Hebrew Priest Simeon whose grandson Matthias is mentioned in the First
                        > >Book of Maccabbees. Unfortunately that cousin of Simeon's was killed by a
                        > >Carthaginian slave trader for blaspheming the great god Baal and merely
                        by
                        > >coincidence there was no storm to destroy the Roman fleet.
                        > >
                        > >In any case, had Scipio and his army been destroyed at sea, Hannibal
                        could
                        > >have concentrated his tactical genious on figuring out how to to destroy
                        > >Rome without any of that historical distraction by Scipio, and given
                        > >enough time, perhaps he could have been successfull.
                        > >
                        > >Jim in Texas
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >--- In alternate-history@y..., lord_of_change2001@y... wrote:
                        > > > Carthage missed its change , by not defending Syracuse when it had
                        > > > the chance ! If it had done this then it would have become a rallying
                        > > > point for all anti-Roman resistance and would have had hundreds of
                        > > > thousands of rebel warriors from across the empire at its back when
                        > > > Hannibal attacked !
                        > > > As it was local support for Hannibal was fairly minimal . The
                        > > > Carthiginians had a brutal reputation , and people would have been
                        > > > foolish to risk their lives to put themselves under the grip of a
                        > > > worse tyranny than the one they were already under !
                        > > > Only way I can see Hannibal getting to Rome is by launching a
                        > > > seabourne invasion of southern Italy . In order to do this Carthage
                        > > > has to vastly improve and increase its navy , destroy the Roman Navy
                        > > > and then march straight on Rome from its landing sight . Thus its
                        > > > armies are relatively fresh , not having had to fight running battles
                        > > > all the was from Spain . If this is done in relative secrecy has a
                        > > > chance of sucess . The other way is by persuading several of the
                        > > > Roman Legions to turn Stag and join with his attacking land armies .
                        > > > Could be possible with an ambitious general , and promises of an
                        > > > Italian Kingdom for him afterwards ! Maybe !
                        > > >
                        > > > Lord of Change
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > > Similarly, Hannibal could not have defeated Rome with his army.
                        > > > The Romans
                        > > > > had too many resources. Any comments? I find the history and
                        > > > battles of
                        > > > > Hannibal quite interesting. What would have happened if:
                        > > > >
                        > > > > 1) He realizes the loyalty of Italian tribes to Rome and takes a
                        > > > much
                        > > > > larger force?
                        > > > >
                        > > > > 2) Carthaginians under Hanno the Great support him?
                        > > > >
                        > > > > 3) Hasdrubal is victorious at Metaurus, or evades C. Nero's force,
                        > > > and
                        > > > > joins Hannibal?
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Josiah
                        > > > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.