Who Was the Better General, Hannibal or Scipio?

Hannibal was a genius when it came to battlefield tactics, but not as adept at strategy or logistics.

Scipio Africanus was a genius at all three.

Scipio’s Spanish campaign shows his proficiency at battlefield tactics, strategy and logistics. The first thing he did was to conquer New Carthage where the Carthaginians stored their wealth and kept hostages from all of the Spanish tribes. This was a brilliant strategy because not only did it gain the Romans great wealth in gold and silver needed to carry on the war, hire mercenaries from among the Spanish tribes and conciliate tribal leaders, but giving back the hostages to their tribes won Scipio the affection of tribes that had been allied with Carthage. They also capture all of the Carthaginian ships in the harbor as well as a large quantity of weapons. Once an initial slaughter was ended, he put the artisans of the city to work manufacturing weapons and other necessities for the Roman army, and pressed able bodied young men into rowing crews, promising them all freedom once they were no longer needed if they applied themselves well.

Scipio’s battlefield acumen is displayed by how he conducted the Battle of Ilipa, which certainly ranks with the Battle of Cannae in terms of a smaller force defeating a larger force. You can read about the details of this battle in Africanus, Greater than Napoleon by the military historian B.F. Liddle-Hart.

Scipio cleared Spain of all Carthaginian forces within four years, having initially faced three Carthaginian armies totaling 75,000 men.

So what happened when Scipio confronted Hannibal at the Battle of Zama in 202 B.C.? It was a decisive Roman victory. In Hannibal’s defense, it may be said that his veterans were past their prime, and he also had to rely partially upon newly recruited and relatively untrained forces, while Scipio’s forces were all well trained because he trained them for a year on Sicily before invading Africa. Scipio found a strategy to neutralize Hannibal’s elephants which were intended to disrupt Roman ranks. The biggest factor, however, was the Romans’ superiority in cavalry. Hannibal had only 6000 cavalry because he had to destroy many of his horses before leaving Italy while Scipio’s 3000 Roman cavalry was augmented by 6000 Numidian cavalry from the Numidian King Massinissa. It was probably the Romans’ superiority in cavalry that was the decisive factor in the Roman victory at the Battle of Zama.

Scipio knew how to win a battle and he knew how to win a war. Hannibal knew how to win a battle, but he didn’t know how to win a war.

Speak Your Mind

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.