Wi: Hasdrubal links up with Hannibal?

For those who don't know, Hasdrubal lead an army of 30,000 over from Spain and across the alps into the po valley intending on linking up with Hannibal. The roman consular armies managed to unite before Hannibal caught wind of it, and crushed Hasdrubal and Hannibals dreams of achieving some decisive victory in Italy.

So what if Hasdrubal was able to link up with Hannibal? There would definitely be no roman army that could even hope to defeat Hannibal then. Iirc, Hasdrubal brought siege equipment as well...
 
I think by this point, and I say this as a Hannibal fan (thanks to Colonel Dodge), even a link up would only make for a possible win, not a certainty.

The Romans are too good at this point to be easily beaten.
 
I think by this point, and I say this as a Hannibal fan (thanks to Colonel Dodge), even a link up would only make for a possible win, not a certainty.

The Romans are too good at this point to be easily beaten.

Rome had Rome left as a last barrier, provided Hannibal's army keeps winning in the field (possible). If Rome fell before Carthage, it'd be all over, the other cities would defect.

But that's a LOT easier said than done.
 
Rome had Rome left as a last barrier, provided Hannibal's army keeps winning in the field (possible). If Rome fell before Carthage, it'd be all over, the other cities would defect.

But that's a LOT easier said than done.

Yeah. Even with siege equipment, that just means Hannibal can besiege Rome with some chance of it working.
 
Hannibal would have an army of 70,000 more or less. That's certainly enough for him to feel confident in besieging Rome. Rome may even sue got peace if he does.
 
Hannibal would have an army of 70,000 more or less. That's certainly enough for him to feel confident in besieging Rome. Rome may even sue got peace if he does.

How big an army Hannibal has is only relevant to how it compares to what Rome can put in his way, and it's more than 70,000 men.
 
How big an army Hannibal has is only relevant to how it compares to what Rome can put in his way, and it's more than 70,000 men.

If he could defeat an army of 80,000 with a force of 40,000, I think he's fairly capable of defeating an army equal his size in the field-an army, really, that has little actual fighting experience. And Rome may very well be pressured into meeting Hannibal in the field-if the populace sees Hannibal with an army of 70,000, they might just have a heart attack. While the senate and ruling class of Rome may very well believe they can withstand against Hannibal, the people may not, and you could imagine a lot of chaos in the city. Hannibal wouldn't even have to assault the city-just stay long enough to entice the Romans (maybe under Scipio who is returning from Spain soon) to abandon the Fabian strategy and try to deal with Hannibal once and for all-if he wins that, then Rome literally has nothing to draw on.
 
For those who don't know, Hasdrubal lead an army of 30,000 over from Spain and across the alps into the po valley intending on linking up with Hannibal. The roman consular armies managed to unite before Hannibal caught wind of it, and crushed Hasdrubal and Hannibals dreams of achieving some decisive victory in Italy.

Small nitpick: the consuls met up, but the armies didn't. The vast majority of Nero's army remained in the south containing Hannibal while Nero joined Livius with a cavalry contingent IIRC.

So what if Hasdrubal was able to link up with Hannibal? There would definitely be no roman army that could even hope to defeat Hannibal then. Iirc, Hasdrubal brought siege equipment as well...

This was the basis of my timeline Xamm Anim... but I will admit that I make Hannibal's job easier than it would probably have been in real life. Even with Hannibal and Hasdrubal merging their armies (giving them around 60,000 total), they still probably have to defeat around 10-12 legions (adding up to over 100,000 troops once one adds the matching allied troops) that were stationed in Italy, plus manage to take Rome. There is a chance that Hannibal defeating another giant Roman army would be enough to make Rome surrender, but it's probably more likely that they continue and try and recall Scipio and whatever other troops they have back to Italy to try and oust Hannibal during his siege. And it is worth mentioning that Hannibal did not have a great track record in sieges either; he had a lot of difficulties once Rome adopted Fabius' strategy taking any cities.

It is possible, but his odds are still pretty low of pulling it out. Freely admitting that I pulled these numbers out of my ass, I'd say Hannibal had around a ten percent chance of winning the war without Hasdrubal's reinforcements (and that's probably generous); with Hasdrubal's reinforcements, it's probably around a thirty percent chance, depending on Rome's response and how quickly Hannibal can merge with Hasdrubal and march on Rome.
 
If he could defeat an army of 80,000 with a force of 40,000, I think he's fairly capable of defeating an army equal his size in the field-an army, really, that has little actual fighting experience.

The field is not the only place Hannibal has to fight, or we'd be asking "What if Hannibal lost?"

And Rome may very well be pressured into meeting Hannibal in the field-if the populace sees Hannibal with an army of 70,000, they might just have a heart attack. While the senate and ruling class of Rome may very well believe they can withstand against Hannibal, the people may not, and you could imagine a lot of chaos in the city. Hannibal wouldn't even have to assault the city-just stay long enough to entice the Romans (maybe under Scipio who is returning from Spain soon) to abandon the Fabian strategy and try to deal with Hannibal once and for all-if he wins that, then Rome literally has nothing to draw on.

Rome has plenty to draw on, and that's not even counting measures such as freedman legions (already taken but which could be continued).
 
The field is not the only place Hannibal has to fight, or we'd be asking "What if Hannibal lost?"
Then he continues to pillage the countryside and Rome can't do thing one about it. Scipio had to practically conduct the invasion of North Africa all by himself with a weak Hannibal in Italy. If you think they were reluctant to let him go to North Africa OTL, there's not a chance in hell they are going to let him even consider invading North Africa with a 70,000 man army right at their backdoor. They almost have to come out at some point. Plus Fabius Maximus died in 203-you lose the biggest advocate for the Fabian strategy.

Rome has plenty to draw on, and that's not even counting measures such as freedman legions (already taken but which could be continued).

I hate how everyone feels Rome has this thing about them where they will never surrender. They were perfectly capable of seeing the writing on the wall. With another defeat of another 70-80,000 man army in the field, they don't have to just believe Hannibal would come knocking on Rome's doorstep, he will be. Because he actually has an army capable of taking on the city, not to mention siege equipment, he won't do what he did after Cannae and just continue to waltz around Italy. Rome's going to be in serious danger (at least from its citizens perspective) and peace is really the only option-giving up Sardinia, Corsica, and Sicily is worth saving Rome from the same fate it suffered from Brennus.
 
Then he continues to pillage the countryside and Rome can't do thing one about it. Scipio had to practically conduct the invasion of North Africa all by himself with a weak Hannibal in Italy. If you think they were reluctant to let him go to North Africa OTL, there's not a chance in hell they are going to let him even consider invading North Africa with a 70,000 man army right at their backdoor. They almost have to come out at some point. Plus Fabius Maximus died in 203-you lose the biggest advocate for the Fabian strategy.

And his pillaging the countryside has done so much to bring the war closer to victory for Carthage.

. . . what's that Hannibal? It hasn't? Thanks Hannibal, owe ya one when I get to the afterlife myself.

203 is four years later. Now admittedly Fabius is rather old at this point, but if you're going to invoke his OTL death date as "soon", saying "well, he can die earlier" in regards to it being not so soon seems . . .

Welll. . . not really furthering this discussion.

And Fabius is hardly the only one willing to do it.

I hate how everyone feels Rome has this thing about them where they will never surrender.
This from the person arguing that if you avoid Teutoburg Wald Rome would never give up Germania, right?

That aside: It's not "never surrender". IF you somehow put Rome in a position where it was "surrender or worse", it would surrender.

But Hasrdubal, bless his heart, joining his far more capable brother isn't it.

It's the equivalent of giving Lee substantial reinforcements for Gettysburg, at best. It gives Carthage a chance of turning around a war that is being lost at this point, it doesn't ruin Rome's hope of victory.

They were perfectly capable of seeing the writing on the wall. With another defeat of another 70-80,000 man army in the field, they don't have to just believe Hannibal would come knocking on Rome's doorstep, he will be. Because he actually has an army capable of taking on the city, not to mention siege equipment, he won't do what he did after Cannae and just continue to waltz around Italy. Rome's going to be in serious danger (at least from its citizens perspective) and peace is really the only option-giving up Sardinia, Corsica, and Sicily is worth saving Rome from the same fate it suffered from Brennus.
Except that the odds of Rome facing that aren't very good, and the people who would be making the decision know that. They treated Cannae - as neat an example of an army being crushingly and humiliatingly defeated as we can find in Western military history - as grounds for renewed effort.

And its not as if Rome is ungarrisoned, dependent solely on the field armies and Hannibal supposedly not knowing how to follow up a victory to defend itself.
 
Last edited:
Top