What if the famous Carthaginian general, Hannibal Barca, had not lived long enough to see the outbreak of the Second Punic War? What would be the effects on this conflict, especially if we assume that the Romans end up winning at Cannae?
WI: No Hannibal Barca?
- Thread starter GauchoBadger
- Start date
There might not be a Second Punic War. Even if there is there is definitely no invasion of Italy as that is Hannibal’s brainchild.
The war would mostly be fought in Spain and Africa. Rome wins.
But there would be no Third Punic War as that was the result of Hannibal’s trauma.
So long term, it would be better for Carthage.
To put it one way: It was Hannibal and only Hannibal who was winning battles of any kind. Everywhere else, the Romans was beating Carthage senseless. If there is a Second Punic War, Rome wins hands down, and turn Carthage into a tributary.
If there is no Second Punic War, then the two fights proxy wars, and/or Carthage still becomes a tributary.
If there is no Second Punic War, then the two fights proxy wars, and/or Carthage still becomes a tributary.
Barcids were at this point forming a dynasty of military leaders in Spain. If Hannibal dies, I'd suspect Hasdrubal would succeed his brother as autocrat (meaning military-political leader) of most of Spain.
Problem is that we don't know much about him, so it's hard to really assess his qualities and issues : but I don't see why he would really depart from Barcid general strategy and not try to take Saguntum, which would still evolve into a Second Punic War.
How would he manage it...Eventually, I think he wouldn't have much choice but to rely a lot on Celtiberian and Ibero-Punic armies, additioned from troops amassed in Gaul which means that he would cross the Alps all the same than Hannibal.
The difference might be appearing only as Hasdrubal enters in Italy and wheter or not he lacks his brothers' strategical skills. Personally, I think he would still use the same tactics as Hannibal's, as he used them at Dertosa IOTL, and at this point Romans would still very likely loose when faced to the same battles. @Historyman 14 is right that Romans won, elsewhere, but it's less about Hannibal (at least not entierely) than because they adapted themselves to Punic tactics, which they wouldn't face to Hasdrubal in the early 210's.
Now, would Hasdrubal be able to adapt these same tactics at Cannae? Again, it's hard to say giving we don't know much about him, but we can assume he wouldn't ITTL. I don't think it would turn into a reverse disaster for the Carthaginian army, tough, as I think the general would still be able to pull out and rely on his Gallic infantry to contain. I'd say it could range from either a strategical stalemate to pyrrhic victory for Romans at this point.
How the war would evolve from this? I could see Romans pushing their advantage, and that's might be a strategical trapping (even if less disastrous, of course, than the IOTL situation) allowing Hasdrubal to hold in Italy for a while but without a really good position.
It could, IMO, go either way between an expedition in Spain to serve as a supply and reinforcement denier, or as the situation is less pressing in Italy itself focusing on Asdrubal with reinforcement being sent directly into Italy (either trough Spain or in Northern Italy). The war would be different (possibly less "unforgivable") and I could see Carthage pulling over IOTL without Hannibal as a charismatic political leader to gain credence in the M'.
Hasdrubal and the Carthaginians are just going to be less successful in any second war. Why? Because's let's face it: Hannibal was one of the greatest tacticians and leaders of all time. I doubt his brother, or anyone else could have the same success as in OTL.
I wound not be surprise if Hasdrubal and any force he leads is obliterated through attrition and some battles.
And in the end, this would be better for the Carthaginians, as you put it 'pulling over'. It can enjoy life as a useful Roman client in North Africa. (As the Republic prefer to rule that way then outright annexation.)
That's entierely speculative (and I don't say that in bad part) : Hasdrubal was raised similarily than his brother, and used same tactics. We simply don't know much about him, safe this.
I agree that Hannibal may have been more politically minded and more charismatic (but in no small part because Hannibal lived longer than his brother, while Hasdrubal was in Hannibal's shadow), but I don't think it's relevant to consider him as some sort of genius whom skills would be so removed from this world that someone having passed trough same experiences at this pointcouldn't at least match on several parts.
Sure, we could assume, rather than being certain, that Hasdrubal wouldn't have the same tactical adaptability than his brother and that wouldn't be worrysome or implausible, especially as the OP ask for a Carthaginian defeat at Cannae, but as well because how Hasdrubal led at Dertosa show that he might have lacked this deeper adaptability or at least enough insight to realize that Romans did adapted to Carthaginian warfare.
But, really, Hasdrubal would have the same basic experience, logistics, same Barcids policies and military resources than Hannibal there. Until Romans general eventually match Carthaginian tactical skills and loose a bit of "honour before reason" that dominated their mindest at this point, it have to be taken in account.
Last edited:
There’s much speculation involving Hannibal’s direct attack on Italy. Was it a Barcid plan all along, thought and elaborated by Hamilcar from the very beginning? Or did Hannibal come out with it in 221? We have no way to know, but a Second Punic War is an inevitability, since Carthage still had fight in her to keep Roman power in check before it further encroached in her territory, and Rome was definitely on a path of aggressive and unrelenting expansion. One of two things could happen. Either Hasdrubal invades Italy as his brother did, and inevitably loses, because seriously, the very act of surviving and defeating Roman armies after having suffered tremendous attrition in crossing the Alps was something very, very few people could get away with, and I doubt Hasdrubal had the same tactical genius as his brother, or he stays in Spain and keeps the war there, and still loses, Carthage couldn’t just compete with Roman manpower, Rome would just send army after army in Spain and Africa until she won, and eventually she would, especially if Scipio is still involved ITTL. After that, Carthage becomes tributary and, when the time comes, Third Punic War would play out pretty much as IOTL, grand rhetorics aside.
actually in Spain they were kicking there ass until the Roman version of crossing the alps happening with them heading for novocarthage and in Sicily was the front where they won okayish and only because they had a genius who did some crazy stuff overall just a waste of resources and Rome would kill Carthage eventually in a next war just when they are more powerful
Actually, Gneus and Publius Scipio were handling things rather competently in Spain, unfortunately for them they relied too heavily upon the Spaniards, and unwisely decided to divide their forces trusting that they would keep their loyalty to Rome. Thus the Spaniards’ betrayal, not any real tactical talent from the Carthaginians, brought about the temporary downfall of Roman fortunes in Spain.
FillyofDelphi
Banned
If Hannibal haden't lived long enough to see the 2nd Punic War, than the War would not be breaking out in a manner in the same context as OTL's, as the whole move on Saguntum was his initiative. Given the Roman campaigns into Cisalpine Gaul and having to deal with the most recent in the (steady) pulses of trans-alpine invasions into the Po river valley, I'd argue the war is delayed under a less-aggressive Barca who dosen't appear to be threatening Rome's perceived sphere of interest in the Gulf of Lion being intruded upon as the Romans instead turn north to establish a permanent presence in the north of the Peninsula so they can secure the Alpine passes and remove that irritant and gather up good, easily managable farmland on an easily-securable front. Once that's done in a few decades, of course, they'll be looking towards routes of expansion, but by then the Barcids will have a more solidly established position in Iberia and will be on the strategic defensive rather than offensive, while the Romans might also decide to pursue expansion first across the Adriatic once the Ilyrians become the primary commerical irritants and cities of Magna Graecia seek out allies to try to resist Roman efforts to clientize them or integrate them under direct Roman control.