Log in

View Full Version : Hannibal V. Alexander


steve
03-21-2005, 04:57
im writing a paper on why i think Hannibal was a better general, if any one has any opinions , facts or arguments it would help out alot. thanks.
discovery1
03-21-2005, 05:39
Use the board search engine. I'm sure this has been discussed before.
Byzantine Prince
03-21-2005, 06:25
GAh! Stop comparing Alexander to other generals. He is undisputably the greatest military genius of all time. He cannot be surpassed.
Rosacrux redux
03-21-2005, 10:50
Hannibal himself thought that both Alexandros and Pyrrhos were better generals than he was. Also, despite the brilliant encirclement at Cannae, and his extraordinary performance at Trevia and Tracimene, eventually Hannibal lost the war ...Alex died practically undefeated.
Gregoshi
03-21-2005, 16:32
Come on BP, it never hurts to challenge conventional wisdom and known "facts" every now and then. You never know, every so often the apple cart gets upset. ~;) Sounds like steve has a challenging paper to write and I doubt waving the white flag and saying "BP states Alexander is far better than Hannibal - period" will yield high marks from his teacher. :laugh4:


steve, here is a thread on this very issue: Hannibal vs Alexander (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=33072). Hopefully it will be a good start for you.
steve
03-21-2005, 16:34
thank you ~:cheers:
Drag0nUL
03-21-2005, 20:49
GAh! Stop comparing Alexander to other generals. He is undisputably the greatest military genius of all time. He cannot be surpassed.
Can you prove it? :charge:
Seriously I think Alexander was a great general, but not a military genius as many people say. His greatest assets were speed of thinking and adaptability. He was unequalled in spotting weaknesses in his enemy's battle line and exploiting them, but never got even near devising something like Hannibal's encirclement of Roman army at Cannae.
In a direct, Carthaginian vs. Macedonian army battle I am firmly convinced Hannibal would win. Alexander was too bold and would probably have dived head-forward in one of the traps Hannibal would have surely prepared for him.
for Steve: you might want to check this link: http://www.simaqianstudio.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t2158.html
Byzantine Prince
03-21-2005, 21:18
Can you prove it?

What Rosacrux redux said:

Hannibal himself thought that both Alexandros and Pyrrhos were better generals than he was.
I am a direct descendant of Pyrrhos. ~D
Drag0nUL
03-22-2005, 16:09
Maybe he was just being modest.Or maybe he wanted to avoid praising Scipio(if he said he was the greatest general, what did that make Scipio, who defeated him?).We may never know.
conon394
03-22-2005, 16:16
C'mon B_P

Daddy handed Alex the complete package, all he had to do was defeat the rotten, tottering Persian Empire.
At Plataea the Greeks were completely scattered, out of position and lacking cavalry, and the Persians still lost. In fact the Persians pretty much lost anytime a Greek or Macedonian army took the field. So I fail to see what makes Alexander so impressive.
Byzantine Prince
03-22-2005, 18:35
I don't have to convince any of you. Alexander isn't considered the greatest hero of all time for nothing. He had enormous amount of skill. I still can't figure out how he went as far as he did. If the Romans tried to emulate him and attack the east they would lose 100% quaranteed.
Drag0nUL
03-22-2005, 19:52
I don't have to convince any of you. Alexander isn't considered the greatest hero of all time for nothing. He had enormous amount of skill. I still can't figure out how he went as far as he did. If the Romans tried to emulate him and attack the east they would lose 100% quaranteed.
Nobody is trying to deny Alexander's merits.(at least I am not).However tehre is a quote somewhere in RTW( can't recall the author):'Adversity reveals teh genius of a general; good fortune conceals it'.And Alexander had plenty of good fortune.
And about the greatest general of all time: Napoleon would beat Alexander any time or place. Or maybe he wouldn't even bother to fight himself, but send one of his younger marshals to get some combat experience(this is just me being a little mean ~;) )
Harald Den BlåToth
03-23-2005, 16:11
I don't have to convince any of you. Alexander isn't considered the greatest hero of all time for nothing. He had enormous amount of skill. I still can't figure out how he went as far as he did. If the Romans tried to emulate him and attack the east they would lose 100% quaranteed.

I wouldn't say that.
He was a smart gambler indeed. He reached so far becouse, as opposed to his enemies, he had an army wich obeyed his orders.