|
|
|
Excluded
|
|
Posts: 793
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: North London, , United Kingdom
|
|
|
19-09-07, 07:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bredder Tukoma
Yeah and we know what happened to Hannibal.
Routed by his own tactics.
|
Apparently not.
His problem was a logistics problem. He had a problem with his supply line not his fighting tactics.
Quote:
Hannibal suffered from one particular weakness: as a commander of an invading foreign army on Italian soil, effectively cut off from the home country by a lack of seaborne resupply ability, his only hope of destroying Rome was by enlisting the support of her allies. As long as the Italians remained loyal to Rome, then there was no hope that Hannibal would win; but should the Romans keep on losing battles to him, their allies’ faith in them would weaken. Therefore, Fabius knew that the only other way to defeat Hannibal was never to engage with him in pitched battles, so as to deprive him of any victories he may gain. He determined that Hannibal's extended supply lines, and the cost of maintaining the Carthaginian army in the field, meant that Rome had time on its side. Rather than fight, Fabius shadowed Hannibal's army and avoided battle. While seeking to avoid battle, Fabius instead sent out small detachments against Hannibal’s foraging parties, and always maneuvered the Roman army in hilly terrain, so as to nullify Hannibal’s decisive superiority in cavalry. Residents of small northern villages were encouraged to post lookouts, so that they could gather their livestock and possessions and take refuge into fortified towns. He used interior lines to ensure that at no time could Hannibal march on Rome without abandoning his Mediterranean ports, while at the same time inflicting constant, small, debilitating defeats on the North Africans. This, Fabius knew, would wear down the invaders’ endurance and discourage Rome’s allies from going over to the enemy, without having to challenge the Carthaginians to a decisive battle.
|
|
 |