Rome: The Punic Wars - The Second Punic War Rages On - Extra History - Part 3 

Sometimes the best offense is a good defense.

+1503nemanja Y'know, the Fabian Society pretty much rules the world right now. Strategy>Tactics

Very true, but it was a deeply unpopular tactic at the time. It would have been the modern equivalent of, say, George W. Bush deciding to engage Al Qaeda in a slow, methodical covert war that didn't involve sending massive amounts of troops/war machines to invade the Middle East. Can you imagine the post-911 US population abiding with those kinds of tactics? That's probably the level of unpopularity that Fabius saw back then, and the reason why Roman society was so willing to replace him and throw troops at Hannibal.

Fabius outsmarted Hannibal in strategy and besides when Hannibal faced worthy opponents he never crushed them or sometimes was forced to retreat or lost. He lost to Scipio at Zama , was forced to retreat 3 TIMES ! from Nola by Marcus Claudius Marcellus . Hannibal couldn't defeat Marcellus in Battle of Numistro , in Battle of Canusium Hannibal forces fell back with heavy losses - 8 000 out initial 16 000. Hannibal was outsmarted by Fabius in Tarentum campaign and Fabius saw through Hannibal's march on Rome , which tried to reveal Capua from siege , however Fabius didn't stop Capua's siege and called forces to defend Rome , which Hanninal wanted. Nero outmaneuvered Hannibal , which led to crushing Hasdrubal at Battle of Metaurus. And last , Hannibal lost to Scipio at Zama.

Today it's next level thinking and a very smart tactic but back then, military strength and charging head first into battle was how wars were won, or so they believed. Being passive and holding back wasn't a common thing and that's why Hannibal managed to push so far and kill devastate the Roman armies. You can have all the military might in the world but if your plan is just to run in and kill things that move, like the Romans did, you're not gonna win against someone who plans for that. If the Romans were less war mongering, they would have stopped Hannibal long before he got into Rome but they just assumed he would just sit and fight them because that's how they did war. Everything about warfare today pretty much stems from these great wars, after all, these people are the foundation on which the modern world rests.

Hannibal was great at reading his enemy. Stoking enmities between Roman if possible. Tempting enemy armies to go where he wanted them to go.

He wanted to make Fabius so unpopular with the Roman people that they'd just remove him from command. And apparently, he did.

Fabius countered this by selling his lands to ransom loads of roman prisioners. But not like the senate cares anyway :-D All cunning details of the Punic Wars at Flash Point History and HistoryMarche.

"Remember our 'secret deal'."

@@Kuronosa "Whelp ya gotta admit, he's a genius"

When u tell ur team rush b and u wait for every one to go and die

ziyad rush *mid, to fit the story. ;-)

You mean 12:01

Roman politicians' pride would get the Romans in trouble again at Arausio in 106 BC.

-leads his army into a battle with one of the most skilled generals in history, on open ground -loses badly -runs away from his men being slaughtered what a chad ladies and gentlemen

What do you mean, almost?

4000 years ago mate

That happens with the Cuban missile crisis for me.

@@_solaris_4057 no.

@@lowleypeasentmr.l8836 Dude yeah, the cold war is soo cool. You are constantly wondering what the other side might be thinking, and there is EVERYTHING to lose. Is wild to think all of that was just over half a century ago

They already did. He lost more than 2/3 of his army in the Alps.

Not if I'M playing him.

I would love to see Hannibal in the new Civilian game(though i have never played any of them because I'm poor)but he was a general and not President of Carthage(I know they were the old men of Carthage but you're getting on what I'm saying right?)so it's probably unlikely but they did add a viking so maybe?

Well, the Vikings are Scandinavian like Finnish or Norwegian sooooo........yeah they are basically those 2 that I said earlier.

He’s the BO2 Remington, no matter how much you nerf him he’s still Op

Yes, he was a great tactician, maybe the best of the Ancient World, and one of the greatest in history. But strategically, he wasn't so brilliant. He knew how to win battles, not the war, which is why in the end Rome won

He did not care about his troops...I can’t really respect that

Nikolay Milenkov Well to be fair most of them were mercenaries and were in for the loot, he was fighting for his nation and the oath he took to his father, so sacrifice few mercenaries for your nation's greater good is probably what he was thinking when he did those maneuvers. as harsh as it was those men would have probably died fighting the superior roman army and less would have survived. and he was doing the same things his men were doing he even lost an eye. ( i'm not a historian, im just a fan of him)

With odds like this, most generals would just surrender.He did unthinckable... twice

No one gives a shit about you're political views

Saw the battle of the bastards in GoT the other day? It's a modified version of Battle of Cannae.

what is your thumbnail, ian?

ShyanTheLegend It's a lighthouse.

+Rambard he was but John was smart enough to place his army right in front of a forest... There was absolutely no way he'd be encircled... Ramsay would have to fight head on

***** yeah but in such a case of the difference in numbers and disciplined forces, Jon needed every advantage he could get, even I it wasn't 100%

They were fighting Rome elsewhere... and losing. Hannibal was really the only thing keeping them in this war. Not to mention stupid politicians that would rather lose the war than see Hannibal succeed.

It was pretty much Hannibal vs Rome, while Carthage were too bussy counting their coins. That could be the ultimate teaching of the Punic Wars: no man, even a genius like Hannibal, can make the difference in a total war between two nations. The same for Napoleon.

Who knows maybe if he took rome it would have been a difference

Carthage sent some help actually. Yes, it wasn't 80 000 troops or so , but it wasn't really small either. After 1rst Punic War and Mercenarie's rebellion, majority of Carthage fleet was consisted of trade ships , not battle ones. Rome had superiority at the sea at that time , however some of Carthage troops were still able to make to Hannibal at some ports that he took , plus they expanding their territory on Spain. However, Hasdrubal Barca crossed Alps with huge forces to unite and help Hannibal in 207 BC , but was crushed by Nero at Battle of Metaurus, between , who previously outsmarted Hannibal himself.

They were deeply involved in Spain, that was the place from where the money to pay that war came (mind that the Cartaginean army was a mercenary one, so much more expensive than the Roman one). Much of the Second Punic war had been fought outside Italy. Mind too that, at that time, the Roman fleet was stronger than the Carthaginian one, so, the only way to bring reinforcements to Hannibal was to escape the Roman legions guarding the Pyrenees and cross the Alps with another army. Finally Hasdrubal managed to do it late in the war, after Spain had been lost for him, only to be slaughtered later.

GriffinPilgrim I clicked on your name and you seem to not have uploaded in 4 years why's that

GriffinPilgrim I know

Moral of the whole war? Don't send a Pettigrew (dumbass gryffindor) to fight a Slytherin (Hannibal.)

“To every man upon this earth. Death cometh soon or late. And how can man die better. Than facing fearful odds, For the ashes of his fathers, And the temples of his gods…”

Yeah I'm sure all of the Roman soldiers at Cannae felt so happy about "dying like badasses", whatever that means. Moron...

Ironically it doesn't work in TW:R2 either. Honestly. it is one of the best designed games I have ever played, even if its bugs killed the whole concept at launch.

Aboy5768 This battle inspired millions of strategist afterwards, which lead to many battles being able to glim with victory and suffering less losses on the victors side. However...part of me will always detest war... ...

Aboy5768 That actually works if you have like, a gazillion times more troops and resources than your enemy. Like say, the Soviet Union did against the Nazis. The Nazis could kill one million Russians, but what are they going to do about the 10 million Russians still alive and comming to kill them?

doesnt matter if your stronger, if your enemy is that much smarter

Aboy5768 Yes and no. It depends on what you call "strength" I could be a bodybuilder, but if I'm being attacked by 100 skinny neds at the same time, I'm going to lose. I had the individual strength, but they had the strength in numbers.

+Việt Trung Trần Look up Cincinnatus sometime, for one of the most iconic examples :)

Thank, look up for it right now.

+Brian_the_Fuzzy Good call. I think Cincinnatus should be one of the most famous people in all of history. I think everyone should know his name and what he did, and acknowledge that his sort of sense of honor and behavior is superior to being power-hungry. It was people like him who made that lasting memory so important to the Romans that for 500 years they did give up that power. Made it so even the most ambitious of men saw the honor in Cincinnatus' actions and personal character that they thought being remembered in some way like him was better than being remembered as even a king. Thanks for spreading his name.

Dictatorship has a very bad name in media today, which is not entirely fair. Funny enough, one of the best movies to touch that topic (if only very shortly) was Star Wars II, when Anakin argues with Padmé about this. The dictatorship has it's good sides, you instantly get rid of all the political stuff that slows down decisions and instead start getting shit done. Rome's idea of temporarily doing that was not so bad after all. To get back to Star Wars: This was, after all, the main plot of how Palpatine became the Imperator, but he lied when he said he would give back the powers once everything is fine again.

Stryke Yeah no. Star Wars II is not the best movie at doing anything, and that particular debate was far too on the nose to be intelligent. Most dictatorships (even modern ones) start with the idea that it's just temporary. Soldiers (the ones that generally throw these coups) are not interested in governing initially. But then they have all the power invested in them and they just don't give it back. BESIDES, Rome's version also failed. Remember Julius Caesar?

If you ever played Rome total war he is teaching you how to beat it on hardest setting. These tactics are legend, I learned them from history channel. It's both.

With your help, THEY CAN! :D /watch?v=SZPT-sCSFq0&list=UUCODtTcd5M1JavPCOr_Uydg

They are now going to be making more extra history and have a Patreon page!

MegaZeroX7 And they raised about 40% of their needed funds to make an episode each week. Soon, they will be partially a history channel. Can't wait for the first episode this Saturday!

Personally, I'd rather have a separate channel for that. Don't get me wrong, I love Extra History and Extra Credits, but I've had experiences in the past where I encountered a channel that made a lot of videos I liked, but also a whole bunch of other stuff I couldn't care less about which prevented me from subscribing for fear of cluttering up my feed with content I don't care about. I wish RU-vid would let us subscribe to playlists or subchannels or something...

It's a shame, isn't it? So much of history is SO AWESOME and make such great stories, but just reading about it out of a few pages of a textbook ruins how awesome it all is.

History in class seems to be more about politics and civics than warfare. Thats what makes it boring

Karan Trivedi That's true. One thing I always noticed in school is that the more history goes on, the more boring it gets.

And most history teachers in my experiance.. don't wanna be history teachers but got saddled with it. Also most don't really know their history well and are only teaching from the book rather than teaching from their knowledge this makes it sound very dull.

History teachers like Extra Credits would be sooooo awesome.

Hadrian's wall.... It's in Britannia though

it do seem like someone we know lol

Someone should tell Trump that he is ripping off someone else's wall.

@Faith Hernandez except justinian was a good leader and the eastern roman empire thrived under him

@@corvus2512 To be fair, no modern politician will ever be as great as Justinian.

same

+Adam Borison hannibul the derp king

It's weird how Fabius isn't generally considered the hero of Rome.

I do love hannibal. Ill take Fabius' head on a stick though.

Yes,yes,yes

+Tianming Zhao Well there used to be a show called Rome on HBO but after season 1 they drop it. The irony is that it paved the way for Game of Thrones

+Horacious Barelian There were 2 seasons of Rome, though initially they had planned 5. They cancelled it not because it was unpopular, but because the flamboyant settings and the huge armies necessary were too expensive.

MarcianusImperator Yeah i remember reading about it some where. The actor were all up but the cost were too much

Trump? Donald trump?

Ahmed Yassin Hannibal is a great example of 'Winning the Battle but Losing the War'. Its true, he was never actually defeated in open battle during his Italian campaign, but after Cannae, the Romans knew not to try and fight him in open battle. Instead, they started to dig in and fortify all their cities and towns, destroying crops, poisoning wells and generally denying Hannibal any chance to resupply himself, so his army weakenedover time without any more armies for them to actually fight. In the end, Rome beat him on the strategic level, even if they could never beat him on the tactical level.

weldonwin In addition, Scipio Africanus was Hannibal's equal, and arguably superior, in the art of war. He led a campaign in Spain to cut off the Carthaginians, and consequently Hannibal, from the wealth of their Spanish colonies. Eventually, he invaded north Africa forcing Hannibal to return to face him. and he defeated him. so its unfair to say Rome never beat Hannibal on a tactical level.

Ahmed Yassin Hannibal was excellent on the strategic level of war. He wasn't that good in the tactical level of war. The Romans were the opposite. WW2 showed the same thing. In North Africa, Montgomery was defeated by Rommel all the time on the strategic level, but Montgomery won at the end because he was better at the tactical level. Tactics always beat strategy. Always.

Kaiser Jones Yes, but at Zama Hannibal had to fight with unexperienced troops, and the Numidians (which were very important for Hannibals tactics) switched to the roman side. I think on the tactical level Hannibal did the only thing that could have won the war and destroy rome: Turn romes allied cities in italy against rome.

Omega0850 I'd agree. another is the Carthaginian government didn't really support Hannibal's efforts in Italy

Who the hell do you think he is? That is HANNIBAL! LEADER OF THE

+Master of Mundus UNSTOPPABLE CARTHAGINIAN ARMY!

Who the hell do you think I am? Strike at me, who strikes at you!

ROW ROW, FIGHT THE POWAH!

Yeah I know. I just thought Hannibal was so genius, it feels disappointing that he shouldn't get to win. But such is life.

subwayvesubscriber I hate Carthage with a fûcking passion. Why didn't they send more troops? It doesn't make any sense.

He could probably have burned Rome to the ground unopposed if he tried.

subwayvesubscriber he was defeted and killed himself at the end, Carthage is no more and the wall of Rome are still there

Wrong Wrong Wrong. He did not outwit Scipio Africanus, the person B H Liddell Hart called the GREATEST GENERAL, EVER. FYI, B H Liddell Hart is one the foremost military historians of the 20th Century. Read his book on Scipio. 1. Scipio NEVER lost a battle. Hannibal lost several after his initial run of success. 2. Scipio BEAT Hannibal, on Hannibal's home ground, AND while being outnumbered. 3. Hannibal LOST to several Roman generals in different battles. I am so sick of hearing how great he was, when a better general beat him in that war.

+Jonathan Johhny I get that no-one likes a pedantic person, but technically it's Sun Tzu

@@luckyaway9665 You're damn right

But I don't have imperium lvl 6

+Hardûn Rome.... You could find that in Rome....

+Hardûn Conscription at its best.

PEW i thought he Said 60

well, Rome was gigantic back then. They had half of europe, northern africa and the middle east under their control.

I don't think anyone WOULDN'T pay for it.

That's actually a great idea

Ha

Nah Hannibal was a way better militaty mind. And what i find odd about Robb stark is that people say that he never lost a battle. But tecnically seen he never really fought one.

Hannibal Bastian I haven't watched the show so I don't know if its different from the books, but in the books he fought and won multiple battles.

I read the Books aswell(i like the show better) but i couldnt recall any real battle(not counting the ambush) that he faught. Could you refresh y mind plz

First there was of course the ambush of Jaime's forces at the Whispering Wood, but then (I'm using the wiki for this because despite remembering there were more battles I didn't remember the specifics) he lifted the siege of riverrun, then won battles at Oxcross, Ashemark, and the Crag (where he met Jeyne after being injured). He didn't fight a ton of battles but he did win them all.

I have good news for you :)

Nick Tuskey It's all hannibal now.

SpyMonkey3D booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

2dank4me m8

*cough* maybe that Scipio Afrikanus guy finally gets listened to *cough*

The one done by Battles BC was a good representation imo.

Yup

me and i def see the similarities lol

yes😂

Fabian Waddington no, the strategy was named after you

oh damn

It's insane, I agree, such as rebuilding a fleet in a record-time of three weeks(!) instead of up to half a year's time. HIstory is full of wondrous, strange, exemplary events.

Matt Ryan You deem Hannibal to not be a military genius because he brought elephants....despite all that was just mentioned in the video and other historical records pertaining to him...right.

Matt Ryan And? He still decimated the Romans despite all of what you stated, I don't see why all of what you said doesn't make Hannibal a Military Genius. Hell yeah you said he relied on Super Weapons no? But he did Canae without elephants

Matt Ryan Oh, yeah, this dude relied on "super weapons". It doesn't matter that almost all 38 elephants died when they crossed the Alps. How in the world could Hannibal have survived without his precious elephants! Oh, he occupied most of Italy for 15 years? Won a battle where he the enemy had TWICE the men he had? That doesn't matter. He was stupid because he had to feed elephants, which BY THE WAY slowed him down. I mean, seriously, if he ditched those elephants he would've had a better chance.

+TheJCprogrammer Luna I don't see anything wrong with that logic. Hannibal DID end up losing, and at the end of his time in Rome it became a war of attrition. He never had enough men at any one time to march on Rome. Sure the man's a genius already, but it's very possible that had he not have brought the elephants along on the Alps march, he may have actually done even better in the long run. Who knows?

"Hannibal DID end up losing" - When he was recalled. " and at the end of his time in Rome it became a war of attrition." - Attrition plagued his forces alright, but it didn't decimate his army. "He never had enough men at any one time to march on Rome" - Nope. He did have enough men to march on Rome. "but it's very possible that had he not have brought the elephants along on the Alps march, he may have actually done even better in the long run." - Seriously? You know what? I'm not even gonna try anymore. Just do what gotta do.

SEGA. Not Ubisoft.

panthersnbraves Cannae reminds me of Marathon.

panthersnbraves I've completely forgot about Cowpens. That was a brilliant battle.

Well he might have if he had not been murdered. Sulla was dictaror for life and he gave up his power in the end voluntarily.

Erling A. Ø. Thommesen considering rome was a somewhat a republic, then yeah he is the senate

Well now you know

+The Learned Soldier It was a documentary by the BBC which basically is a movie of everything that happened in this video, it's online for free just google Hannibal BBC.

What?

What?

We can attribute that the the recent empires who take a totalitarian approach to ruling their peoples

Thanks for your answer. I really appreciate it.

moonturkey The above answer is correct in terms of the gauls, however as far as I know Hannibal never got any reinforcements directly from Carthage, at least before Cannae. However he did get plenty from Northern Italy and after Cannae from Capua and a few other Roman Cities who defected to him.

+moonturkey Hannibal recruited new troops mostly from among the local peasants in Gaul and Northern Italy, and then he trained them up himself, despite speaking entirely different languages. Hannibal's ability to amass and train such a diverse army that spoke many different languages, from across Europe and North Africa, was a major accomplishment unheard of at the time.

RovertNoteek Where? I must witness this.

pussy

Justice Hannibal traveled south through the marshes to evade Gaius's northward attack. He defeated Gaius's troops just north of Rome at Lake Trasimene. He continued southward past Rome, ravaging the countryside as he went, as Fabius employed his tactics. Hannibal evaded Roan troops once again at Ager Falernus, in south Italy. Minucius's troops were soundly wooped at Geronium (also in south Italy), saved by Fabius's men. And then Vero attacked Hannibal at Cannae, a bit further south in Italy. I hope I've explained well enough.

Monocle Enthusiast Yea, I later did a bit more research and found out he just marched past rome to go south. But why did he march past Rome and not sack the city??

I think he didn't have enough manpower, but I don't know.

Truth Because he didn't have the supplies or the men to take one of the biggest cities in the world, and he knew that attacking Rome would only make them stronger, as the senate would have to put aside all their differences and fight together to defend the city. Also besieging the city leaves him unable to manoeuvre around Italy and destroy the Roman resources.

Truth From what I have researched I think it was that he wanted to wait and have Rome beg to him also I believe he wanted to wait until he had Rome's allies against it. I may be wrong but I think that's the case based on what I've learned