A Dinner Date with Scipio Africanus and Hannibal

In 193 BC the Roman general Scipio Africanus, the subduer of Carthage due to his victory at the Battle of Zama, after a period outside of the Roman political spotlight was part of a delegation sent to help settle a dispute that was brewing with Antiochus III of Syria.

Scipio Africanus

Seven years after the Battle of Zama saw Roman power finally destroy Carthage in the second Punic War, Hannibal Barca, the great terror of Rome, went into voluntary exile after the Romans requested his surrender, seeing Carthaginian power growing again under his leadership. Travelling the Mediterranean in 193 BC he ended up at the court of Antiochus III preparing for war with Rome and offered his help in his war.

Livy in his Ab Urbe Condita writes of a legendary meeting between these two great and influential men at the court of Antiochus III and a conversation that followed

"When Africanus asked who, in Hannibal's opinion, was the greatest general, Hannibal named Alexander, the king of the Macedonians because with a small force he has routed armies innumerable and because he has traversed the most distant regions, even to see which transcended human hopes. To the next request, as to whom he would rank second, Hannibal selected Pyrrhus, saying that he had been the first to teach the art of castrametation, besides no one had chosen his ground or placed his troops more discriminatingly; he possessed also the art of winning men over to him, so that the Italian people preferred the lordship of a foreign king to that of the Roman people, so long the master in that land. When he continued, asking whom Hannibal considered third, he named himself without hesitation"

Livy Ab Urbe Condita Book 35 Chapter 14

It's fairly safe to say that Scipio was angling for a compliment of his own military acumen from a man he had beaten in war, and also to have a little dig at Hannibal no doubt. But let us analyse the three men Hannibal chose as the greatest generals.

Ingot showing elephants from the army of Pyrrhus
from the British Museum

Alexander the Great is without doubt one of the greatest generals and kings the world has ever seen. In the space of a decade Alexander conquered the Persian empire destroying great armies with his Macedonian forces, travelled as far as and into the Hindu Kush and it was only a mutiny of his men that saw him turn back. His slowly emerging empire saw a homogenisation of Greek and Persian ideals and it was only his sudden illness and death in 323 BC that saw his plans fail.

Pyrrhus was an enemy of early Rome. King of Epirus, Pyrrhus was persuaded to aid the Italian Tarentines in their struggle against the Romans. In 280 BC he landed in Italy with the intention of aiding the city of Tarentium and no doubt carving out his own little empire on Italian soil too. Pyrrhus won many victories over the armies of Rome, and his placing and positioning of military camps is often sited as the first example of tactical placement, but he lost so many of his own men in the battles he had to withdraw from Italy, causing it to be named a Pyrrhic victory,

" If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined"

Plutarch Life of Pyrrhus

Finally, Hannibal named himself. The scourge of Rome for many years, Hannibal had crossed the Alps, defeated the Romans in three stunning battles at Trebia, Trasimene and Cannae and came the closest anyone has ever come to destroying Roman power. It was only Rome's complete refusal to surrender and repeated raising of new armies that wore down Hannibal's power in Italy.

Hannibal Barca

There is little to argue with Hannibal in his choices. Alexander the Great was universally recognised throughout the Greek and Roman world as the pinnacle of what it meant to be a general, conqueror and great man, Roman Emperors of the 1st century AD, like Augustus and Gaius Caligula were still trying to link themselves with him.  His choice of Pyrrhus is no doubt due to his developing the tactical art of the placement of military camps and troops, something which Hannibal learnt from himself in his own wars with Rome. Pyrrhus might have eventually lost against Rome, but he laid the ground work for future military tacticians. Hannibal's own achievements in warfare are well known, no more so then his great victory at Cannae and his clever tactics to almost completely wipe out the Roman legions. 

Hannibal's choice of himself for the final slot, led Scipio to break into a laugh and ask,

"What would you say if you had defeated me?"

"Then, beyond doubt" he replied,

"I should place myself both before Alexander and before Pyrrhus and before all other generals"

Livy Ab Urbe Condita Book 35 Chapter 14

Flattery will get you everywhere it seems, as it is reported that Scipio was stirred deeply as "Hannibal had segregated him from all other commanders as one beyond estimation"

Of course if you actually analyse what Hannibal says he is still back-handedly complimenting Scipio. In a nuanced sentence Hannibal recognises the fact that Scipio is the man that defeated him and Carthage, but still doesn't fully accept it outright as ranking as great as his own achievements. 

Opposing generals meeting to trade witty barbs is rare, especially when it is two generals of Scipio's and Hannibal's stature. In a war that spanned the Mediterranean and saw Carthage within reach of destroying Roman power before their own eventual demise, it is nice to think that at the end of it, Hannibal with his little witticism won the final blow in the long bloody Second Punic War for his city, Carthage.

Thanks for Reading

James