Preview

2nd Punic War: The Battle Of Cannae

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1788 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
2nd Punic War: The Battle Of Cannae
Battle tactics are said to have changed over time. However, just the opposite is evident. Battle tactics are for anyone to use, but work best with military’s that are stable and continually training. In many cases, militaries throughout the world can be seen using the same tactics today as used in the 2nd Punic War particularly The Battle of Cannae. What make tactics improve so well is the repetition of both practicing in training and executing tactics on the battlefield. Battle tactics improved with the establishment of a professional military because, most soldiers who were now veterans could move up in ranks and understand how they were previously defeated in different battles. Roman soldiers range from male 17-45 years of age. Each soldier must be a …show more content…
Though this would be the primary dominate force on the battlefield, Rome actually lost battles because they were primarily heavy infantry. Roman soldiers adopted fighting tactics of other forces and enemies to become the most elite force on the battle field. Starting out, soldiers fought like the Greek worriers known as hoplites. Hoplites were essentially an infantry man armed with a shield and spear, which were on reserve until called to battle. The tactics that were adopted from the Hoplites was a formation called the Phalanx. This formation consisted of soldiers lining up shoulder to shoulder with their weapon in one hand and shield in the opposite. Not only did this help with shields protecting one another, it made lines impenetrable for arrows, spears and enemy as long as they maintained a solid line side by side.2 One general, wreaking havoc throughout the Roman lands was known as Hannibal Barca. Following in his father’s footsteps as a superior military general, he challenged Rome in battle every chance he could. After several attempts of coaxing Rome into battle he achieves a decent victory at the Battle of Trasimene in 217

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    On thermopylea and platea

    • 1303 Words
    • 4 Pages

    One of the main reasons the Spartans and the other Greeks were able to hold out so long at Thermopylae and secure victory at Plataea was primarily due to their superior battle tactics. The most notable and successful tactic employed by the Greeks was the Phalanx manuver, a wall of overlapping shields and layered spear points, the troops were trained to hold their position within the phalanx which created and almost impenetrable wall, they would then push as one and then attack as one. Out of all the Greeks the Spartans were by far the strongest and most well trained thus their…

    • 1303 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    From 218 to 202 BCE, the Carthaginian general Hannibal Barca launched his brutal campaign to crush the early Roman republic and would ultimately be defeated on the plains of Zama. Despite these individual events being separated by a century, Hannibal’s second Punic war against Rome generated the factors necessary for the Republic to professionalize her military. The war brought about massive political discourse, social discourse, and a more rampant depletion of the overall manpower in Italy than before. This chaos would allow the Gracchi brothers Tiberius and Gaius to be elected as tribunes in the Roman Senate. Their combined attempts at agrarian reforms, in turn, would brew even greater political uproar between the people and the Senate. The…

    • 1735 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hannibal Barca was born in 247 B.C. in the city of Carthage, which was located in modern Tunis, or the northern tip of Africa. His father, Hamilcar Barca, was a great Carthaginian general of the army who fought in the First Punic War between Rome and Carthage, which the latter lost. At a very young age, Hamilcar made Hannibal promise "eternal hatred towards Rome" (Lendering, 1). At around age nine, Hannibal accompanied his father on an expedition to gain a hold in Spain. During this time was when Hannibal probably gained most of his military knowledge that helped him greatly later in life. When Hannibal's father and older brother died in 229 and 226, Hannibal was elected commander-in-chief of the Carthaginian army. About ten years later, Hannibal, acting on his promise to his father, attacked the city of Sagantum in Spain, which was controlled by the Romans. This attack led to the start of the Second Punic War between Carthage and Rome.…

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Yes, indeed throughout history, Rome ultimately exhibited a readiness to adapt its military tactics and strategy to successfully confront particular challenges. The Roman military was a highly organized institution. There was a straightforward system of rank, and a number of different splitting up of the basic unit. The entire basis of Roman infantry tactics was the idea that by keeping troops in arranges, one could fight more successfully. Most military commanders of the day simply had their troops rush passionately at the enemy, relying on better numbers, better soldiers, or luck to hold the day. The Romans realized that they could not always rely on these, so they turned to strategy. Each situation was wrapped up differently, taking into account land, the type and strength of the opponent's troops, and the type and strength of the Roman's troops. The Romans also thought that the best tactic would be the one that had the most effect without exposing the troops to unnecessary risk. One of them was to cut off their opponent from his resources. Armies run on their stomachs and equipment, and both require regular supplies. Without a stable supply of food and water, an army will starve or dehydrate killing or uncomforting the troops and they would fall apart. The Roman Soldiers would attack the resources themselves. When they conquered territory, they took as much as they could. This not only gave them more food, it prevented it from falling into their opponent's hands and they would also try to cut off the transportation so the amount of supplies that could reach the enemy was severely reduced. One of the most famous tactics that the Romans used was called “siege”. Siege was a military operation in which troops surround a place and cut off all outside access to force surrender. The Romans would typically build a wall around the existing city to help control the enemy. This wall would be built to prevent the enemy from escaping. The ongoing siege would eventually…

    • 358 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In the second century B.C. Rome became the prominent power in Central Italy. The people of Rome achieved this feat through a series of warfare, and diplomacy. Whether attacking or defending they fought with organization, quality in leadership, ability, and discipline. In fact, they used these traits in virtually all aspects of their lives.…

    • 1649 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Greeks basic soldier was a foot soldier that was trained for close combat. The basic combat soldier in Rome was a horse rider and an expert bowman. This was also due in part to the increase in technology as well. The Grecian hoplite would also carry a spear that compared to the Roman pilum as a predecessor. The pilum was much longer and could be thrown a lot further.…

    • 414 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Roman Legion and the Greek Phalanx were both battle formations that were similar in many ways, yet completely different in many other ways. Both formations were formed through strict organization of soldiers and commanding officers. Although both implemented strong organization, they organized their soldiers in a different manner. The Greek Phalanx was one big unit of heavily armored soldiers that were tightly packed and strapped with primarily long spears, shields and short stabbing swords. Due to the weaponry and formation they were incapable to move excessively or turn quickly. If they wished to change direction all spears had to be lifted and then the soldiers were capable to move, but only minimal as they were tightly packed. The Roman Legion on the other hand were both medially or heavily armored soldiers broken up into small groups called maniples and were much more mobile. The Roman Legion consisted of soldiers armed with throwing spears, shields and strong short swords. The Short stabbing sword is a key difference as it was used by the Romans as a primary, rather than the spear. This sword meant they were more mobile and independent on the battlefield. This independence allowed them to freely retreat, flank or attack an enemy. Analyzing these formations from a birds eye point of view also shows key differences. The Greek Phalanx from a birds eye point of view would look like evenly spaced bricks of men of about 16 with spears pointing out. The Roman Legion would range from small formations to larger formations wielding different long range or short ranged weapons, they would also be strategically stretched out to flank and also defend.…

    • 287 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    One of the main reasons Rome fell was because of military weaknesses. The military was weak because of the army’s laziness. The excerpt from the ancient book ‘Concerning Military Matters’ by the historian Vegetius, states “Parade ground drills were abandoned, the customary armor began to seem heavy since the soldiers rarely ever wore it...So our soldiers fought the Goths without any protection for chest ad head and were often beaten by archers.” Since the army was too weak to wear the armor,…

    • 213 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In my first paragraph military mistakes is an important reason why Roman fell is because when the parade-ground drills were abandoned, soldiers became used to hot wearing protective armor.When…

    • 208 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Gladiators

    • 558 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Rome’s military might have been small but it was mighty, it had excellent military tactics and strong military generals. This contributes to why they kept on winning many battles. The fights that were won prisoners of war were taken. Many of the prisoners were then sold into the gladiatorial school and tried to earn their freedom, fighting in the gladiator games.…

    • 558 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Roman Empire declined and fell because of politics. However, the empire was strong at a point until the third century crisis happened. The last emperor before the crisis began was Marcus Aurelius, and the empire went from peaceful and Pax Romana to catastrophe and they called it “the anarchy.” There were both internal and external conflicts throughout the empire. The external problems were the violations of the borders by the Germanic tribes and, “full-scale war with Sassanian Persian Empire on eastern border,” (Nardo). There were also leadership conflicts because if barbarians were to attack, there wouldn’t be a leader to make order. Since barbarians did attack, it made Rome weak when…

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hannibal's Legacy

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The legacy of Hannibal Barca was that of a great military strategist and general; he was named one of Rome’s greatest enemies. He found much of his strategy and hatred for Rome from his father, Hamilcar Barca. Hamilcar was also a hero and military leader and conquered much of Spain; he inspired Hannibal to hate Rome and trained him from boyhood for leadership and battle. While Hamilcar lead the first Punic war, the second and third Punic wars were lead by Hannibal and his multicultural armies. Hannibal not only relied on his devoted armies but he had both elephants and cavalry to add both surprise and strategy.…

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The entire foundation of Roman infantry tactics was the idea that by keeping troops in order, one could fight more effectively. Most military commanders of the day simply had their troops rush wildly at the enemy, relying on superior numbers, better soldiers, or luck to carry the day. The Romans realized that they could not always rely on these, so they turned to strategy. Each situation was handled differently, taking into account terrain, the type and strength of the opponent's troops, and the type and strength of the Roman's troops. Here are some common formations, and tactics that were organized by formations.…

    • 850 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The pivotal battle of marathon describes the struggle in broad strokes. The Athenian tribes arrayed themselves “in an unbroken line” and “charged the enemy at a run” after they found the portents favorable with a sacrifice. Then again at Thermopylae the descriptions of the actually fighting itself are rather vague. The greek success is attributed to longer spears and the advantage of being in a narrow defile. The most detailed part of the action itself comes from describing how the Spartans would feint retreat only to turn about again “and inflict heavy losses on them.” This does not inform readers much on a Greek way of fighting or the details of their tactics. These accounts do reinforce Everett Wheeler’s conclusions that the Hoplite was a very flexible warrior, contrary to the heavy phalangite infantry stereotype. In both cases the military lessons are general and perhaps obvious. They involve the placement of the army and a brief description of why it worked, such as having longer…

    • 797 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ancient Rome Vs Athens

    • 906 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Sparta was the most feared city-state in all of Greece, and the Roman Empire was a global superpower. One of Sparta’s values is that a warrior never backs down in battle. For example, during the Persian War, when Sparta and Athens were allied, Persia went for Sparta first. The Spartans lost, however, they didn’t go without an extremely intense fight. With three hundred Spartans, King Leonidas faced an entire Persian army in efforts to allow the other Greeks a chance to recover. Every single soldier sacrificed his life in an effort to save Greece. Herodotus, a Greek historian, recalls the battle of Thermopylae; “Here they defended themselves to the last, such as still had swords using them, and the others resisting with their hands and teeth,” It was a loss in battle, but it was a win for the Greeks. The Roman Empire was similar to this determination in an example concerning the Gallic War. The Germanics thought they had the upper hand due to the fact that there was a river separating Gaul from Rome, however, that never stopped the Romans. Julius Caesar, Ancient Rome’s most famous dictator, ordered for his soldiers to construct a wooden bridge to cross the Rhine River. In a mere few days, Caesar’s army would cross the river, demonstrating that the Roman Empire could go anywhere. Therefore,…

    • 906 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays