WI: No Mercenary War?

After the first Punic War, Carthage saw a revolt by its Mercenaries from the first Punic war

Lets say this never happened, and Carthage was not damaged by this war

How does this affect the Second Punic War?
Could this possibly lead to victory for Carthage?
 
After the first Punic War, Carthage saw a revolt by its Mercenaries from the first Punic war

Lets say this never happened, and Carthage was not damaged by this war

How does this affect the Second Punic War?
Could this possibly lead to victory for Carthage?
The mercenary revolt had little to no impact on the start of the Second Punic War. Firstly the Barcas were looking to pick a fight with the Romans. Secondly there were enough flash points in the Western Med that some one was going to have a causus belli to start another war. That the Hannibal was the man is merely a matter of events.

On the matter of strength, if the Carthage had been as committed to victory as Rome and put in the resources they might have got a draw. As they did not, they lost.
 
A more interesting one is the opposite. Having taken advantage of the MW to pinch Sardinia and Corsica, WI the Romans go on to take the Balearics and the Carthaginian foothold in mainland Spain?

That leaves Carthage with no base on the European side of the Med, so no way for Hannibal to invade Italy. What then? Does she march the other way, and console herself for her European losses by taking Egypt or somewhere?
 
A more interesting one is the opposite. Having taken advantage of the MW to pinch Sardinia and Corsica, WI the Romans go on to take the Balearics and the Carthaginian foothold in mainland Spain?

That leaves Carthage with no base on the European side of the Med, so no way for Hannibal to invade Italy. What then? Does she march the other way, and console herself for her European losses by taking Egypt or somewhere?

Interesting thought, could this possibly lead to Carthage controlling all of North Africa?
 
The Mercenary War was a result of Carthage losing the First Punic War, and was forced to pay war indemnities by Rome, thus rendering Carthage unable to pay the vast number of mercenary companies in their service.

Also, Ptolemaic Egypt possessed a greater amount of manpower than the Carthaginians and weren't as dependent on mercenaries. An invasion of Egypt by Hannibal might be even more futile than the invasion of Italy. Beside, Hannibal was not seeking the conquest of Rome. He simply wanted to destroy it, which would give Carthage a chance to recover its former supremacy in the western Mediterranean.
 
After the first Punic War, Carthage saw a revolt by its Mercenaries from the first Punic war

Lets say this never happened, and Carthage was not damaged by this war

How does this affect the Second Punic War?
Could this possibly lead to victory for Carthage?

It was difficult for Carthage to pay off the mercenaries but not impossible. Carthage did eventually find the money but too late. By the time she paid up, extremists had got control of the mutiny. It is very credible that the Carthaginian leadership might have decided to pay the mercenaries off at the beginning, even if it meant stripping the temples, and so avoided the mutiny.

Consequences. Hanno remains dominant. The conquest of Spain was Hamilkar's project so Carthage's foot hold in spain would have remained small.

After the mutiny, Rome took advantage of Carthage's weakness to grab Sardinia and Corsica. It was this which convinced Hamilkar that a new war with Rome was inevitable and Carthage must fight it despite the greater resources at the disposal of Rome. No mutiny = no object lesson in Roman greed = Carthage lives on in false security until it faces a Rome that has already conquered Macedon and the east and taking Carthage is mere mopping up.

Hence no mutiny means Carthage would have been less able to resist Rome.

But

Hanno was very much in favor of an African policy. Even after the mercenary atrocities he seems to have been willing to try and win over more moderate rebels.

No mutiny Hanno remains dominant. He brings all of north Africa under direct rule of Carthage. Rome's big advantage was its large citizen base. Hanno might well have been willing to extend Carthaginian citizenship to the Libyans. Without the bitterness of the mercenary war he might have been able to get that voted thru.

Rome gets involved in a war with Macedon. Macedonia is not facing veterans hardened by the fighting of our time lines 2nd Punic wars but green troops.
Rome is initially defeated. She recruits new armies to avenge the defeat but in Carthage a war party is encouraged to make a try to reclaim Sicily.
Hanno was no pacifist. He simply did not wish to see Carthage fight a war it could not win - a war in alliance with Macedon might well have been to him a winnable war. Hanno and Hamilkar had been friends until the mutiny and only fell out during it. Hence without that falling out Hanno would have had no objection to Hamilkar's son leading the invasion of Sicily.

Hence no mutiny - Carthage waits until Rome is faced with a 2 front war. Rome goes
down in defeat to the mass citizen armies of Carthage.

Daivid
 
Top