Find » Society » History » Top Generals in Ancient History - A...

Top Generals in Ancient History - Alexander, Hannibal, Caesar, Scipio

By Jacob Malewitz, published Jun 15, 2007
Published Content: 328  Total Views: 85,603  Favorited By: 19 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 3.0 of 5
Throughout antiquity there have been many generals to note. This article will focus more on the Hellenistic generals, those of Greece, Rome, and Carthage, as they are the most popular in studies. If one of these generals were to be considered the most successful, it would be Alexander the Great. Caesar's story has been told many times more, as he lived a longer life and much about him was recorded. Scipio is likely the least known, even though history holds him as an important figure to the Roman Republic. Scipio didn't end the republic like Caesar did, so perhaps he was of a different character.

Not one of these generals was a Greek, which is interesting because each had a connection to Greece. Perhaps in another article heroes like Leonidas (who fought at Thermopylae, famous battle told in the movie "300") might be mentioned.

Alexander the Great - This Macedonian general conquered most of the known world while still in his twenties. His father led the conquering of Greece, but Alexander went on to conquer all of the Persian empire, which included Mesopotamia and Egypt. He would have kept going but his veterans refused to push on into India. He died at a young age leaving no suitable heir, which was his greatest mistake.

Hannibal - Hannibal was one of the most famous generals of ancient times. Though he didn't conquer the lands Alexander the Great did, he was almost always facing a superior Roman army. He fought during the Punic Wars, which were between Rome and Carthage. Hannibal crushed the armies of the Roman republic again and again. He came close, and perhaps could have, burned Rome to the ground after his victories. He even played politics in Italy, uniting many small states in the peninsula who thought he could beat Rome. His most notable victory was against a superior Roman army at Cannae, a battle which has been the subject of many books about the Punic wars. After the war was lost, he was hounded and killed by an assassin of Rome.

Top Generals in Ancient History - Alexander, Hannibal, Caesar, Scipio

Hannibal was infamous for bringing his elephants into the fold during his battles against Rome. However, most died passing through the mountains in Italy.

Credit: Courtesy Yahoo.com

Copyright: Yahoo

Takeaways
  • Alexander the Great conquered most of the known world
  • Hannibal defeated many Roman armies, but was finally beaten by Scipio Africanus.
  • Each of these generals has been not only in histories but literature.
Did You Know?
There was a civil war in the Roman Republic between Caesar and Pompey, which Caesar was victorious in.
Comments
Comments 1 - 14 of 14
 
 
You have got to be kidding, the battlefield tactic of infantry holding while cavalry was a Macedonian invention perfected by Alexander the Great. So in reality Alexander is ahead of Scipio and Hannibal as they used a tactic he perfected.

Posted on 08/21/2008 at 7:08:25 PM

 
XD, Scipio raised and trained his African army, and he was granted the remains the of the legion that lost at Cannae. THAT is supposed to be his fantastic support from Rome? "It says that Scipio was worried when Hannibals cavalries drove Scipio's numidian cavalries out from the battle. Which shows that it was Hannibal who had the control of the battle" Simply incorrect. Scipio's superior cavalry drove Hannibal' s calvary from the field (granted, a bit too far), then turned out and crashed into Hannibal's rear. The reason Hannibal is more famous than Scipio, is the same reason why Napoleon is more famous than the Duke of Wellington. Everyone likes to admire the shooting star, the almost-great. That both Hannibal and Napoleon were defeated by superior commanders is rather boring to most. And as a last note, shown by Scipio's battle at Cartagena, Scipio could effectively conduct a siege, something Hannibal was incapable of. Scipio 1 - 0 Hannibal

Posted on 07/19/2008 at 12:07:55 PM

 
XD, Scipio raised and trained his African army, and he was granted the remains the of the legion that lost at Cannae. THAT is supposed to be his fantastic support from Rome? "It says that Scipio was worried when Hannibals cavalries drove Scipio's numidian cavalries out from the battle. Which shows that it was Hannibal who had the control of the battle" Simply incorrect. Scipio's superior cavalry drove Hannibal' s calvary from the field (granted, a bit too far), then turned out and crashed into Hannibal's rear. The reason Hannibal is more famous than Scipio, is the same reason why Napoleon is more famous than the Duke of Wellington. Everyone likes to admire the shooting star, the almost-great. That both Hannibal and Napoleon were defeated by superior commanders is rather boring to most. And as a last note, shown by Scipio's battle at Cartagena, Scipio could effectively conduct a siege, something Hannibal was incapable of. Scipio 1 - 0 Hannibal

Posted on 07/19/2008 at 12:07:11 PM

 
khalid ibn al-walid and alexander 1 on 1 the top 2 greatest generals in history, they match each other.

Posted on 07/06/2008 at 5:07:55 AM

 
Your all nerds

Posted on 05/13/2008 at 6:05:06 PM

 
Ok people, according to the historians Hannibal is a better general than Scipio. The reason being is that the tactic that Scipio used against Hannibal was the tactic invented by Hannibal,(hold the infantry while attacking with horses from the back). and Chadd de Las casas u said 'Scipio defeated Hannibal on Carthaginian soil against a numerically superior, well supplied army with the opportunity for retreat, and 80 war elephants." Well, Hannibal DID have more soldiers but the thing is they were mercenaries, while Scipio's soldiers were well trained & armoured legionaries. I am pretty sure you will agree with me that mercenaries won't have chance against Roman soldiers. Also there is a record of Scipio during the zama battle. It says that Scipio was worried when Hannibals cavalries drove Scipio's numidian cavalries out from the battle. Which shows that it was Hannibal who had the control of the battle. So point is Hannibal had shitter army

Posted on 11/17/2007 at 9:11:00 PM

 
Macedonia did meet Rome in battle M.D.C. And it was Scipio's brother that met them. And he won. So I think that answers your scenario. And I'm still confused how "beating" someone makes them inferior. It's like saying Evander Holyfield is an inferior fighter to Tyson because he...beat Tyson.

Posted on 08/30/2007 at 2:08:00 PM

 
Chadd, you say that because you love Roman history. I want to see a scenario where Macedonia meets Rome in battle. Generals Alexander vs General Scipio. Interested or interesting? Marquis Canaday--

Posted on 08/29/2007 at 2:08:00 PM

 
I would have to agree with Chadd De Las Casas that Scipio should be more acknowledged. Whilst Hannibal failed to force the romans to surrender, Scipio destroyed Carthaginian armies in Spain. Probably unknown to people, he defeated the Carthaginians in another battle in North Africa, before also fighting Hannibal at Zama. I am not saying Scipio a lot better than Hannibal but I would say he was close to equal. Although Cannae was indeed a tactical masterpiece, perhaps people should also read about Scipio's battle at Ilipi.

Posted on 06/29/2007 at 10:06:00 PM

 
Scipio defeated Hannibal on Carthaginian soil against a numerically superior, well supplied army with the opportunity for retreat, and 80 war elephants.

Posted on 06/16/2007 at 12:06:00 AM

 
Scipio was on Roman soil against Hannibal who hadn't received much help from Carthage. Hannibal defeated Roman army after Roman army, always facing superior forces. It was Scipio's battle to lose.

Posted on 06/15/2007 at 10:06:00 PM

 
Out of curiosity, why would you put Hannibal before the man who bested him with battlefield ingenuity?

Posted on 06/15/2007 at 7:06:00 PM

 
This wasn't a top five list, but I would put Alexander ahead of Scipio, as stated in the article. Alexander created a massive empire with his exploits. I might even put Hannibal in front of Scipio for battlefield ingenuity. I am not as knowledgeable on Scipio--only one biography on him read. I am glad you're familiar with him, as many novice historians not interested in Roman generals other than Caesar haven't. Thanks for looking at my article.

Posted on 06/15/2007 at 12:06:00 PM

 
Scipio should be on the top of that list - even before Alexander and Hannibal for his exploits, battlefield ingenuity, and the flexibility of his tactics.

Posted on 06/15/2007 at 11:06:00 AM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Comments 1 - 14 of 14
 
Advertisment