Some modern historians have reevaluated Hannibal in that maybe his success had less to do with his own skill as a commander and more to do with the incompetence of the Roman commanders he faced. The first time he faced a competent Roman commander he lost. Scipio for example, defeated him using virtually the same tactics Hannibal had used at Cannae. Fighting for Arche Seleukeia, Hannibal also proved less than able. His father Hamilcar may have been a far more able commander.
Once again I am forced to agree. This is a similar situation to the one the Romans had during the Third Servile War led by Spartacus . It wasn't that Sparticus was particularly good. I would say he was competent and well motivated. On the other hand Crassus proved himself to be plodding and incompetent and his brand new legions proved to be a reflection of their general. Only an incompetent would have had to resort to decimation as Crassus did to instill discipline.
1) This is a damn good presentation gtg869x well done!
Many look at a Roman Legion as a constant, they were not. Scipio's legions were quite different from the professional Roman Legions that were created after the Marian reforms a century later.
I'd like to see you do another one in this format on the battle of Cyrrhestica in 38 BC where Publius Ventidius Bassus gave Rome its initial crushing revenge for Crassus's defeat and death at the battle of Carrahe at the hands of the Parthians.
@1138thz The Romans only lost at Carrhae because Marcus Licinius Crassus was an imbecile. He spread his forces out and parked them under the desert sun while horse archers and heavy cavalry picked them apart.
"The Romans only lost at Carrhae because Marcus Licinius Crassus was an imbecile."
I agree! Crassus was an incompetent fool.
The Roman response was a more powerful Auxilia- more slingers, archers and cavalry and heavier shields (one more layer of boiled leather.) and more pack animals to carry more water and projectile ammo. The Result...the total slaughter of the Parthians at Cyrrhestica by the Roman forces commanded by Publius Ventidius Bassus.
the Mitanni, the deities Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatya (Ashvins) are invoked. Kikkuli's horse training text includes technical terms such as aika (eka, one), tera (tri, three), panza (pancha, five), satta (sapta, seven), na (nava, nine), vartana (vartana, turn, round in the horse race). The numeral aika "one" is of particular importance because it places the superstrate in the vicinity of Indo-Aryan proper as opposed to Indo-Iranian or early Iranian (which has "aiva") in general [2]
The reason some people say that chengis khan or Alexander the Great is because they done more,but here is what people dont look at,they both were kings,they could have all the resources they wanted,other wise Hannibal was only a general and could not have all the resources he needed if he was a warrior king maybe things would have turned out differently but thats only my belief.
A bit biased and contradictory. He says most of Hannibal's troops were inexperienced, but at 7:02 he mentions that Hannibal's front lines were composed of 12,000 Ligurians and Gauls from Hannibal's campaigns in Italy. The 2nd line contained troops from Macedonia; and Philip would hardly have sent raw recruits. But I will agree that the rest of the 2nd line may have been green troops. And the 3rd line of course Hannibal's 24,000 elite troops. All in all, hardly an inexperienced army.
That's nice, but what kind of "provocation" from Roman side was there with Sagantum?
The whole story looks pretty much like the beginning of the WWII. Maybe Romans also looked forward to another war with Carthago, but Hannibal was interested in it much more. So, it was he who provoked Rome by sieging Sagantum which had a treaty with Rome (just like Poland with England). Thus the Romans were forced to declare war on Carthagenian aggressors, otherwise Rome would have lost all her allies.
even his a good general,Hannibal is more on the 3rd place,Alexander the Great is on first and Ghinghis Khan on the 2nd,because Alexander didn't lose any battle(and he fought against 300.000 persians) and Ghinghis had the biggest empire ever created,and he was a barbarian by roman standards.Hannibal lose at battle of Zama against a smaller force and at the battle of canae the romans wasn't twice as much,they were like 70000 and Hannibal's forces was 50000
He lost to a smaller force - one that outnumbered him in cavalry and were pretty much a veteran army - Hannibal had a strong core of his italian veterans (up to 20,000) but the rest were quickly raised levies, or unreliable mercenaries - Scipio had the better army, and even then, it was a close call thing.
@kivati Scipio's army was made up of volunteers and the disgraced survivors of the Battle of Cannae. Men forced to stay in exile in Sicily. Hannibal had not only his veterans, but a strong contingent of Gaelic warriors and yes some hastily raised Carthaginian troops. Scipio's army had the better general (namely Scipio himself), in the end that's what made the difference
No - those disgraced survivors had been turned into a veteran force much better than what Hannibal had at Zama. They also included the survivors from the two battles of Herdonia - esssentially these men had campainged together for years. Scipio's army was a more homogenous army than Hannibal's at Zama with an officer corp used to working together. Hannibal's third line was his veterans, and we are told they numbered 12,000.
Hannibal's army was made up of very low morale soldiers and disparate armies which had yet to gel, hence why he used them as separate bodies with their own officers. They were also made up of many national elements which would have been harder to work with that the Roman force. At Zama you had two superb commanders, but Scipio had an excellent army, whereas Hannibal, and only thanks to his veterans, had an average one.
Hannibal had an army about 40,000 strong, outnumbered Scipio by about 5000 men, but Scipio had the better disciplined and organized infantry, and also superiority in cavalry.
@kivati Ah the ultimate question should be, why did he have a superiority in Cavalry? Why were his troops better trained and more disciplined? And what were Hannibal's 80 elephants, chopped liver? That's 80 more elephants than Scipio had
if you are interested to see some battles reconstitution watch my channel i have the battle of marathon from the history channels series Battles BC and i will post more soon
In my book, Hannibal was the greatest general that has ever lived, even beyond greats like Alexander The Great, Napoleon, Pyrrhus, Julius Caesar and Genghis Khan. The forementioned may have obtained more land and conquering and have gathered more prestige, but none had the out of this world tactical brilliance that Hannibal had. His unlikely victory at Cannae alone is still dumbfounding to me...
@wami659 Alexander and Genghis Khan were the rulers of their country AND generals. In terms of Generalship alone Hannibal was a lot smarter, more resourceful a better leader. Also Hannibal had to deal with both an empire in decline and against an empire that was a rising star- not to mention being politically undermined at the Carthaginian court. On the battlefield Hannibal was more successful against tougher opponents.
@VikingTerror I've asked this question before before to people who seem to insist that Hannibal was the greatest thing since slice bread. Tell me four great generals Hannibal fought?
scipte the young was rome first ever gernal that was 20 his dad lost and was kill in north italy years before young scipte lost at carthae that made him stonger
It wasn't that Hannibal's army was inexperienced par say. The Catheginians didn't have a standing army really. for the most part they used mercenaries. and thats the truth. But good enough for me. great documentry
say you seem to know something about this, just wanted to know if the King Phillip of Macedon mentioned in the clip, is the same Philip who was Alexander's father?(who fought Darius twice etc and crushed his army...)
That's what you said to yourself while looking in the mirror, didn't you, beautiful Israeli donna? As someone who has family in Israel, I can tell you that you all will speak arabic for sure and very soon. Unless you have more babies.
Did I ever say that China is interested in war, my now-Israeli and soon-to-be Palestinian friend? I never said that. They certainly appear more peaceful than Bibi or your neighbors in a little town on the coast of Mediterranean that you bombed recently.
First of all, we are really generous people, as we liberated Iraq at the expence of our own bankrupcy. Talk about sacrifice!
Second, you can speak Chinese simply because of economic opportunities, because all the money will be in China in the next century. Of course, you can also speak Arabic because all the soldiers of the future will be muslim, as all others are SquareHeads and Slackers and do not have babies while rotting in their socialist welfare states.
LOL you talk crap, why would all the money be in china? there are other rising economies like india and germany, not to mention the powerhouse that is the US, and arabs will never take israel, they have tried many times and always fail.
Thank you SquareHead, I appreciate your passionate views. The other best economies are in my opinion Vietnam and Malasia.
As for Arabs never taking Israel, I wish you were right. But demographics is destiny, and with the demise of US the writing is on the wall. Hopefully, there will be no blood in the transition.
And thanks for wishing to have me shot. Perhaps, I can move to Gaza. Then if Hamas will not whack me, I might be blown up by one of your bombs.
dude im totally libertarian thats amazing hell yea a power government sucks i love guns i love freedom i love....to be able to get real money and work hard :) i wish there were more of us i think pen from pen teller is like us :)
Well researched and presented. Great work. Hannibal taught Scipio everythinh he knew. It is ironic that Scipio used Hannibal's own tactics against him. Hannibal by 218bc may have been passed his best as Napoleon was at Waterloo in 1815.
That is so CRAP man you did not do the battle what a waste of time
Embarrassmeguy 4 days ago
Comment removed
alexarw1 1 week ago
lolol...within two seconds I recognized the Rome Total War music. Nice vid
fostersfibs 2 weeks ago 3
rome total war music is just epic - best music of the total war entire series.
kombatzero 1 month ago
@kombatzero Music on the Europa Barbarorum mod is even better. Much better game than vanilla RTW as well.
gurumagoo 3 weeks ago
dude Do you make more of these. I would love to see some shogun 2 ones. this is very entertaining.
texasallstar6969 1 month ago
Awsum knowledge u have its kinda like having a computer talk to u
doggiesrulz 1 month ago
Top bloke who made this!
l00072878 2 months ago
My hamster legion decimated many guini pigs in the gtreat war but the mighty army of sheep overwhelms me damn those lion generalls
hazman232 2 months ago
Some modern historians have reevaluated Hannibal in that maybe his success had less to do with his own skill as a commander and more to do with the incompetence of the Roman commanders he faced. The first time he faced a competent Roman commander he lost. Scipio for example, defeated him using virtually the same tactics Hannibal had used at Cannae. Fighting for Arche Seleukeia, Hannibal also proved less than able. His father Hamilcar may have been a far more able commander.
gurumagoo 3 months ago
@gurumagoo
Once again I am forced to agree. This is a similar situation to the one the Romans had during the Third Servile War led by Spartacus . It wasn't that Sparticus was particularly good. I would say he was competent and well motivated. On the other hand Crassus proved himself to be plodding and incompetent and his brand new legions proved to be a reflection of their general. Only an incompetent would have had to resort to decimation as Crassus did to instill discipline.
1138thz 3 months ago
@1138thz An army of sheep led by lion would defeat an army of lions led by a sheep.
gurumagoo 3 months ago
@gurumagoo An army of lions led by a liger is much better than both :P
DestroyerOfSense000 2 months ago
@DestroyerOfSense000 An army of Guinea Pigs led by a Hamster would be even more formidable.
gurumagoo 2 months ago
@gurumagoo I used to have guinea pigs and let me assure you they'd rout before the enemy was a mile away
DestroyerOfSense000 2 months ago
@gurumagoo I see what you did there.
Altair565 1 month ago
@gurumagoo maybe but what if the sheep was sick of being a sheep
player3172 3 weeks ago
Bergen Catholic FTW
xxprosniqerxx18 4 months ago
I was bummed when my history teacher said we wouldn't be getting into battles and tactics, stuff like this is just so cool.
BuddhaMyFaceisStupid 5 months ago
@BuddhaMyFaceisStupid Go to military school.
Ilovegames16 5 months ago in playlist battles bc 2
This has been flagged as spam show
1) This is a damn good presentation gtg869x well done!
Many look at a Roman Legion as a constant, they were not. Scipio's legions were quite different from the professional Roman Legions that were created after the Marian reforms a century later.
I'd like to see you do another one in this format on the battle of Cyrrhestica in 38 BC where Publius Ventidius Bassus gave Rome its initial crushing revenge for Crassus's defeat and death at the battle of Carrahe at the hands of the Parthians.
1138thz 5 months ago
Comment removed
1138thz 5 months ago
@1138thz The Romans only lost at Carrhae because Marcus Licinius Crassus was an imbecile. He spread his forces out and parked them under the desert sun while horse archers and heavy cavalry picked them apart.
gurumagoo 3 months ago
@gurumagoo
"The Romans only lost at Carrhae because Marcus Licinius Crassus was an imbecile."
I agree! Crassus was an incompetent fool.
The Roman response was a more powerful Auxilia- more slingers, archers and cavalry and heavier shields (one more layer of boiled leather.) and more pack animals to carry more water and projectile ammo. The Result...the total slaughter of the Parthians at Cyrrhestica by the Roman forces commanded by Publius Ventidius Bassus.
1138thz 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the Mitanni, the deities Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatya (Ashvins) are invoked. Kikkuli's horse training text includes technical terms such as aika (eka, one), tera (tri, three), panza (pancha, five), satta (sapta, seven), na (nava, nine), vartana (vartana, turn, round in the horse race). The numeral aika "one" is of particular importance because it places the superstrate in the vicinity of Indo-Aryan proper as opposed to Indo-Iranian or early Iranian (which has "aiva") in general [2]
goran21715 5 months ago
The reason some people say that chengis khan or Alexander the Great is because they done more,but here is what people dont look at,they both were kings,they could have all the resources they wanted,other wise Hannibal was only a general and could not have all the resources he needed if he was a warrior king maybe things would have turned out differently but thats only my belief.
Evilfish567 6 months ago
Someone read livy.
Ebuverthebicepcurler 6 months ago
What game is that ? Is it Rome total war ?... Or a different game ?
susie1201 7 months ago
@susie1201 rtw
thebestanthe3rd 4 months ago
A bit biased and contradictory. He says most of Hannibal's troops were inexperienced, but at 7:02 he mentions that Hannibal's front lines were composed of 12,000 Ligurians and Gauls from Hannibal's campaigns in Italy. The 2nd line contained troops from Macedonia; and Philip would hardly have sent raw recruits. But I will agree that the rest of the 2nd line may have been green troops. And the 3rd line of course Hannibal's 24,000 elite troops. All in all, hardly an inexperienced army.
gaiusscipio 7 months ago
these where black men fighting on both sides
thekingssquare 9 months ago
That's nice, but what kind of "provocation" from Roman side was there with Sagantum?
The whole story looks pretty much like the beginning of the WWII. Maybe Romans also looked forward to another war with Carthago, but Hannibal was interested in it much more. So, it was he who provoked Rome by sieging Sagantum which had a treaty with Rome (just like Poland with England). Thus the Romans were forced to declare war on Carthagenian aggressors, otherwise Rome would have lost all her allies.
Artyom2012 9 months ago
Well put together sir.
*****
mrtundra45 1 year ago
Great video who need flashy shows to learn.
REDTEROR 1 year ago
That goes to show that using exotic and unexpected weapons (i.e. the war elephants) doesn't always work out well.
boettcherownzu 1 year ago
even his a good general,Hannibal is more on the 3rd place,Alexander the Great is on first and Ghinghis Khan on the 2nd,because Alexander didn't lose any battle(and he fought against 300.000 persians) and Ghinghis had the biggest empire ever created,and he was a barbarian by roman standards.Hannibal lose at battle of Zama against a smaller force and at the battle of canae the romans wasn't twice as much,they were like 70000 and Hannibal's forces was 50000
HerasBoss 1 year ago
@HerasBoss
He lost to a smaller force - one that outnumbered him in cavalry and were pretty much a veteran army - Hannibal had a strong core of his italian veterans (up to 20,000) but the rest were quickly raised levies, or unreliable mercenaries - Scipio had the better army, and even then, it was a close call thing.
kivati 1 year ago
@kivati Scipio's army was made up of volunteers and the disgraced survivors of the Battle of Cannae. Men forced to stay in exile in Sicily. Hannibal had not only his veterans, but a strong contingent of Gaelic warriors and yes some hastily raised Carthaginian troops. Scipio's army had the better general (namely Scipio himself), in the end that's what made the difference
gaiusscipio 7 months ago
@gaiusscipio
No - those disgraced survivors had been turned into a veteran force much better than what Hannibal had at Zama. They also included the survivors from the two battles of Herdonia - esssentially these men had campainged together for years. Scipio's army was a more homogenous army than Hannibal's at Zama with an officer corp used to working together. Hannibal's third line was his veterans, and we are told they numbered 12,000.
kivati 7 months ago
Hannibal's army was made up of very low morale soldiers and disparate armies which had yet to gel, hence why he used them as separate bodies with their own officers. They were also made up of many national elements which would have been harder to work with that the Roman force. At Zama you had two superb commanders, but Scipio had an excellent army, whereas Hannibal, and only thanks to his veterans, had an average one.
kivati 7 months ago
@kivati Yeah and the Carthiginians lost the Numidians to Scipios army. Bummer.
hanbaal 5 months ago
Hannibal had an army about 40,000 strong, outnumbered Scipio by about 5000 men, but Scipio had the better disciplined and organized infantry, and also superiority in cavalry.
kivati 7 months ago
@kivati Ah the ultimate question should be, why did he have a superiority in Cavalry? Why were his troops better trained and more disciplined? And what were Hannibal's 80 elephants, chopped liver? That's 80 more elephants than Scipio had
gaiusscipio 7 months ago
if you are interested to see some battles reconstitution watch my channel i have the battle of marathon from the history channels series Battles BC and i will post more soon
rey132011 1 year ago
Great Job!
SteveMVz 1 year ago
In my book, Hannibal was the greatest general that has ever lived, even beyond greats like Alexander The Great, Napoleon, Pyrrhus, Julius Caesar and Genghis Khan. The forementioned may have obtained more land and conquering and have gathered more prestige, but none had the out of this world tactical brilliance that Hannibal had. His unlikely victory at Cannae alone is still dumbfounding to me...
VikingTerror 1 year ago
@VikingTerror
can't agree that he was a better general than Alexander or Khan. They never lost?
wami659 10 months ago
@wami659 Alexander and Genghis Khan were the rulers of their country AND generals. In terms of Generalship alone Hannibal was a lot smarter, more resourceful a better leader. Also Hannibal had to deal with both an empire in decline and against an empire that was a rising star- not to mention being politically undermined at the Carthaginian court. On the battlefield Hannibal was more successful against tougher opponents.
fp470 9 months ago
@VikingTerror I've asked this question before before to people who seem to insist that Hannibal was the greatest thing since slice bread. Tell me four great generals Hannibal fought?
gaiusscipio 7 months ago
nice
hermanuslinssen 1 year ago
nicely done!
TheHorsenation 1 year ago
scipte the young was rome first ever gernal that was 20 his dad lost and was kill in north italy years before young scipte lost at carthae that made him stonger
jedq 1 year ago
scipte the young tuck spain cz his dad was kill by habial
jedq 1 year ago
It wasn't that Hannibal's army was inexperienced par say. The Catheginians didn't have a standing army really. for the most part they used mercenaries. and thats the truth. But good enough for me. great documentry
Scroopulous 1 year ago
At first I thought "ahh another random guy making his own lame documentary" but hey, its actually pretty good.
MidnightSun009 1 year ago
So, the battle took place in N. Africa?
TenderTrap86 1 year ago
dude how did you do the maps?They look awesome, could you please tell me?
ernadmahmic 1 year ago
music is from Jeff von Dyck =D
LucariusofSparta 1 year ago
wtf rtw music lol
punongkahoy312 1 year ago
nice stuff. I assume this is RTW realism?
Olekander 2 years ago
nice work, cheers
Caboose3012 2 years ago
what rome total war mod is this? i have the normal total war and barbarian invasion and no one have that kind of soldiers
mffown 2 years ago
i think he used the mod RTR rome total realism
rennekooo 2 years ago
ty, ui download it now but how can i uppgrade my rome total war goldedition so i can play the mod?
mffown 2 years ago
he made a documentary, that means he need to tell wath hapened, and not wath YOU want to see Shroshoe.
giordano373 2 years ago
lol,srry that was my cousin
Shroshoe 2 years ago
good video 5/5
YourBestFri3nd 2 years ago
very good work with the video, but why did you chose such a weird name: gtg869x. it doesn't make any sence.
iamthedutchguy 2 years ago
Lol,at one point,atleast make a video where the good guys DONT LOOSE or the better army actually WINS.
Shroshoe 2 years ago
This is what really happened and good guys wow!
Oldcartoons571 2 years ago
I got to get me rome total realism
Hunte9753 2 years ago
You have done good research
mrjames9999 2 years ago 13
wait, thats not the same flag of Crthage in RTW
212commandercody 2 years ago
cartaginesi suck
normannodelsud 2 years ago
so does your spelling
DrakeVonDeath 2 years ago 2
Have you ever considered taking a university course in media studies? You have real potential.
leeham991 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
hell ya! we persians whooped the romans!
eeranyA39 2 years ago
did you make this yourself?
THEMAGICEYETV 2 years ago
Good job. 5 stars.
Mandy3735 2 years ago
is this someone reading from a book?
ereiou 2 years ago 4
A book, no. A script, yes.
gtg869x 2 years ago 9
@crawhip2
This is King Philip V (238 BC - 179 BC)
100 years after Alexanders father,
Philip II (382336 BC)
Octavius0 2 years ago
say you seem to know something about this, just wanted to know if the King Phillip of Macedon mentioned in the clip, is the same Philip who was Alexander's father?(who fought Darius twice etc and crushed his army...)
crawhip2 3 years ago
crawhip2,the philip in this video is not the same as Alexander father, this was after alexander died.(it was Alexander who fought Darius twice)
vincerelee 3 years ago
thanks for pointing that out to me.
crawhip2 3 years ago
According to Hannibal, Italy and Spain should be part of Morocco. And soon it will be...
sinitskyd 3 years ago
because they sure speake french...
cheezcola 3 years ago
I thought they speak Arabic in Morocco though... Never mind, we will all be speaking Chinese soon.
sinitskyd 3 years ago
Retard
SquareHeadSlacker 2 years ago
That's what you said to yourself while looking in the mirror, didn't you, beautiful Israeli donna? As someone who has family in Israel, I can tell you that you all will speak arabic for sure and very soon. Unless you have more babies.
sinitskyd 2 years ago
China has no interest in war you fool, the west fuels its economy, declaring war would probably destroy it.
And btw I DO speak Arabic, as well as Hebrew.
SquareHeadSlacker 2 years ago
Did I ever say that China is interested in war, my now-Israeli and soon-to-be Palestinian friend? I never said that. They certainly appear more peaceful than Bibi or your neighbors in a little town on the coast of Mediterranean that you bombed recently.
sinitskyd 2 years ago
You said we all be speaking chinese soon, why the fuck would we do that unless we are conquered, fucking retard.
Where I live has nothing to do with this, do I mention what your country does to Iraq, no.
SquareHeadSlacker 2 years ago
First of all, we are really generous people, as we liberated Iraq at the expence of our own bankrupcy. Talk about sacrifice!
Second, you can speak Chinese simply because of economic opportunities, because all the money will be in China in the next century. Of course, you can also speak Arabic because all the soldiers of the future will be muslim, as all others are SquareHeads and Slackers and do not have babies while rotting in their socialist welfare states.
Salam
sinitskyd 2 years ago
LOL you talk crap, why would all the money be in china? there are other rising economies like india and germany, not to mention the powerhouse that is the US, and arabs will never take israel, they have tried many times and always fail.
Fucking idiots like you should be shot.
SquareHeadSlacker 2 years ago
Thank you SquareHead, I appreciate your passionate views. The other best economies are in my opinion Vietnam and Malasia.
As for Arabs never taking Israel, I wish you were right. But demographics is destiny, and with the demise of US the writing is on the wall. Hopefully, there will be no blood in the transition.
And thanks for wishing to have me shot. Perhaps, I can move to Gaza. Then if Hamas will not whack me, I might be blown up by one of your bombs.
Happy Pesach.
sinitskyd 2 years ago
אני שונא אותך
SquareHeadSlacker 2 years ago
Thank you for hating me, my square-headed friend. Sometimes, I do not like myself either.
Unfortunately, we have hard realities to face: bankrupcy for my country and some very hard times ahead for yours.
Lehitraot.
sinitskyd 2 years ago
Comment removed
de4th1snt3nough 2 years ago
From what I hear from other chinese people, China's government isn't nice lol
1989dman 2 years ago 2
being a libertarian-minded individual, I tend to agree with you. No powerful government is good.
sinitskyd 2 years ago 2
Well all great nations tend to go on the dark side. What started as something noble gets twisted as the years go by.
1989dman 2 years ago 3
dude im totally libertarian thats amazing hell yea a power government sucks i love guns i love freedom i love....to be able to get real money and work hard :) i wish there were more of us i think pen from pen teller is like us :)
de4th1snt3nough 2 years ago
Comment removed
sirtyeson1 3 years ago
at first, i didn't realy like your narrating voice. but as i continued to listen, i thought you were one hell of a talented narrator!
jsjuno 3 years ago
after all this previous nonesense this is a refreshingly well done, well informed video.
Excellent work!
KenBalboJones 3 years ago
well finally someone realy knows something about the Punic wars, great vid,
Umbrella0021 3 years ago
Well researched and presented. Great work. Hannibal taught Scipio everythinh he knew. It is ironic that Scipio used Hannibal's own tactics against him. Hannibal by 218bc may have been passed his best as Napoleon was at Waterloo in 1815.
Redcoat66 3 years ago
nice job
bradyischamp 3 years ago