Hasdrubal wins at Metaurus, Carthaginian Victory in the Second Punic War?

Pretty much the question as stated. The POD would be 207 BC, with Claudius Nero's death occurring early in the battle. Without Nero's leadership the Romans are defeated by the Carthaginians. If Hasrubal's army was able to reconnect with Hannibal's army, could the united force have marched on Rome and forced a humiliating defeat not unlike OTL's Battle of Zama?

I need some help with this as I am using this POD in a TL. I am not great at Roman history but I am researching the topic. And I am also interested in whether or not, without Roman interference and Carthaginian support, Phillip V of Macedonia could've united Greece under the Macedonian throne.
 
Yeah and if Hannibal gets the reinforcements he needs it could result in a world without a Roman Empire. Or even a Roman Civil War.
 
Can't help but commenting on this. ;)

Pretty much the question as stated. The POD would be 207 BC, with Claudius Nero's death occurring early in the battle. Without Nero's leadership the Romans are defeated by the Carthaginians. If Hasrubal's army was able to reconnect with Hannibal's army, could the united force have marched on Rome and forced a humiliating defeat not unlike OTL's Battle of Zama?

I would think yes, but Rome is Rome, and they might reject peace and try and repel Hannibal at Rome's gates. But I should think that a rejuvenated Hannibal with 50,000 men could force a peace on Rome if Metaurus is won, and maybe if Hannibal defeats the rest of Nero's force in the south.

I doubt the peace would be nearly as crippling as what Rome did to Carthage - I'd expect that Hannibal would merely demand Corsica, Sardinia, and Sicily, Rome's complete withdrawal from Spain, probably some concessions to Philip, and some financial stuff, like prisoners and tribute - not like breaking up Rome's allies or anything, because Rome wouldn't agree to that, and then you're stuck with the war continuing and Hannibal besieging Rome, which is one of his weaker points, and you still have Roman armies in Sicily, Sardinia, Gaul, and Scipio in Iberia IIRC.

I need some help with this as I am using this POD in a TL. I am not great at Roman history but I am researching the topic. And I am also interested in whether or not, without Roman interference and Carthaginian support, Phillip V of Macedonia could've united Greece under the Macedonian throne.

Philip very well could have or at least started to; Rome's meddling is a large part of why, in my opinion, Macedonia failed to reconquer Greece, and why Ptolemaic Egypt survived long term. The Cretan War/The Fifth Syrian War could be of some interest to you with the Diadochi.
 
Can't help but commenting on this. ;)



I would think yes, but Rome is Rome, and they might reject peace and try and repel Hannibal at Rome's gates. But I should think that a rejuvenated Hannibal with 50,000 men could force a peace on Rome if Metaurus is won, and maybe if Hannibal defeats the rest of Nero's force in the south.

I doubt the peace would be nearly as crippling as what Rome did to Carthage - I'd expect that Hannibal would merely demand Corsica, Sardinia, and Sicily, Rome's complete withdrawal from Spain, probably some concessions to Philip, and some financial stuff, like prisoners and tribute - not like breaking up Rome's allies or anything, because Rome wouldn't agree to that, and then you're stuck with the war continuing and Hannibal besieging Rome, which is one of his weaker points, and you still have Roman armies in Sicily, Sardinia, Gaul, and Scipio in Iberia IIRC.

Philip very well could have or at least started to; Rome's meddling is a large part of why, in my opinion, Macedonia failed to reconquer Greece, and why Ptolemaic Egypt survived long term. The Cretan War/The Fifth Syrian War could be of some interest to you with the Diadochi.

Thanks for the answer. Its very helpful to have someone knowledgeable in the subject posit on it.
 
Top