Hannibal didn't have siege equipment to attack Rome itself and Rome was one of the largest city in the mediterranean. So I think he was right not laying siege to it.
Hannibal didn't have siege equipment to attack Rome itself and Rome was one of the largest city in the mediterranean. So I think he was right not laying siege to it.
Last edited by Apázlinemjó; 04-03-2009 at 10:19.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Finished essays: The Italian Wars (1494-1559), The siege of Buda (1686), The history of Boius tribe in the Carpathian Basin, Hungarian regiments' participation in the Austro-Prussian-Italian War in 1866, The Mithridatic Wars, Xenophon's Anabasis, The Carthagian colonization
Skipped essays: Serbian migration into the Kingdom of Hungary in the 18th century, The Order of Saint John in the Kingdom of Hungary
How easy we show our national stereotypes, us armchair generals and basking in the glorious sunlight of hindsight pass such easy judgements with scant regard for the "boring" difficulties real commanders faced like troop quality, supplies, political interference etc.
"Tell them I said something......"
Pancho Villa
Completed; Rome AD14!
I just mean that Petraeus gets loads of hype and publicity, as if he was the 'savior of iraq'. in reality he is just an adequately intelligent and well-read man who remembers previous counter-insurgencies conducted by the brits and others.
"urbani, seruate uxores: moechum caluom adducimus. / aurum in Gallia effutuisti, hic sumpsisti mutuum." --Suetonius, Life of Caesar
The mere mention of Hannibal at the gates, even when he wasn't, scared the hell out of the entire city. We'll never know what kind of success he could have had, because he never tried. You don't necessarily have to take a city by assault to have a successful siege.
Isn't a bit difficult to examine the career of a General who is A) not finished with his career, and B) never really fought any actual battles? Sure he's commanded in operations but we're talking about insurgency type stuff, not serious campaigning. Maybe if the U.S. were to face another major world power and he had to go up against an actual adversary, we might see what he's capable of. Let us hope that doesn't happen but is he really over-rated? All I have heard is that he is a charismatic leader, and one of the top 100 intellectuals around, and he left Iraq in better shape than he found it. I don't hear anyone running around saying, "that Petaeus, he's greater than Napoleon!"
Last edited by Africanvs; 04-03-2009 at 14:18.
"Insipientis est dicere, Non putarvm."
"It is the part of a fool to say, I should not have thought."-Pvblivs Cornelivs Scipio Africanvs
Lives: Pvblivs Cornelivs Scipio (A Romani AAR)
Lives: Alkyoneus Argeades (A Makedonian AAR)
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Finished essays: The Italian Wars (1494-1559), The siege of Buda (1686), The history of Boius tribe in the Carpathian Basin, Hungarian regiments' participation in the Austro-Prussian-Italian War in 1866, The Mithridatic Wars, Xenophon's Anabasis, The Carthagian colonization
Skipped essays: Serbian migration into the Kingdom of Hungary in the 18th century, The Order of Saint John in the Kingdom of Hungary
I think the nutrition value of stubbornness is rather low.
Bookmarks