Hannibal was an incompetent general

It was several years after Hannibal's ultimate defeat at Zama, that the grizzled Carthaginian general happened to meet his old rival, Scipio Africanus, once again, only this time on a less formal occasion. Africanus was sent by Rome on a diplomatic mission to Antiochus III's court. It was here that Hannibal had fled into exile after the Romans demanded he be surrendered to them. Appian recorded one of their meetings in a gymnasium. http://www.livius.org... In verse 10, Hannibal, in his arrogance and pride, suggested that he of all generals, was the third greatest general, and would have been the aboslute greatest had he not been beaten by Africanus. His reasoning is this:"When I was a young man I conquered Spain and crossed the Alps with an army, the first after Hercules. I invaded Italy and struck terror into all of you, laid waste 400 of your towns, and often put your city in extreme peril, all this time receiving neither money nor reinforcements from Carthage." These may seem like laudable feats from a great general, but here in this debate, I will persuade that what Hannibal himself viewed as great feats were in fact horrible errors in strategy. His conquests in Spain, march across the Alps, and campaigns in Italy were costly manpower and resource wise, mismanaged whenever a foothold was gained, and didn't accomplish anything of real value for Carthage. It was his pride and arrogance that blinded him to the truth of his campaign and ultimately persuade many of us to this effect as well.My burden of proof is not to show how Hannibal was the worst general. He did win some decisive military battles. However, his general strategies for his campaign were tremendously poor. Beginning with the seige of Saguntum, Hannibal made his first mistake. Rome had just recently allied itself with Saguntum in order to preserve its independence as it is a focal trade point, but Hannibal, itching for war with Rome, had the city beseiged and captured. An unnecessary engagement to say the least, however soon after, war was declared. It was Hannibal's pride that began his ultimate undoing, and it wouldn't be the end.The war itself was sanctioned by the oligarchy back in Carthage, and Hannibal eagerly began to cross the Alps and invade Rome. However this was his second grevious mistake. An estimate by Polybius, numbers Hannibal's infantry at 90,000 and cavalry at 12,000. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu... The general consensus is that these numbers are exaggerated, but nevertheless it was still a huge army for the time. Had Hannibal consolidated his holdings in Spain and waited to engage Rome's army as it arrived by ship, he could have dealt decisive blows against Rome on his own land with his Spanish allies. An unfortunate consequence of this was during Hannibal's famous march across the Alps, roughly half of his army died. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu... What a blunder! Thousands of military veterans perished needlessly. Because of his arrogance and pride, Hannibal made his second mistake.During his campaign in Italy, Hannibal could never hold onto any city or town permanently. Every time he conquered a city, Rome would be right behind him to take it back. All the Italian Allies were fiercely loyal to Rome. Through guerilla warfare and scorched earth tactics, Hannibal's army was constantly worn down. Unfortunately the Roman's just couldn't take this and had to have a pitched battle with Hannibal. Thus Cannae happened. It was at this point that many cities began to defect to Hannibal without even having been conquered. Yet Hannibal never beseiged Rome itself because he couldn't. He had too few men, and not enough resources to beseige such a large city. What he should have done was regroup back in Carthage and prepare for a final assault on the city of Rome. Unfortunately due to his pride he couldn't bare to leave Italy. He ordered his reinforcements to be brought to him, and it was this final mistake that sealed Hannibal's fate. The Roman's defeated the two reinforcement armies before they could reach Hannibal.Soon Africanus, whom Hannibal would have faced in Spain, made his way to North Africa and defeated the Carthaginians in battle. A peace deal was signed immediately, and Hannibal was relucanctly recalled back to Carthage. Soon after his arrival, Hannibal rashly wanted to fight Africanus with his army of veterans, but was ultimately defeated at the battle of Zama. Had Hannibal calmed his war party, and properly prepared his army, he may have won the battle of Zama and possibly could have assaulted Rome itself, but instead his pride and arrogance disallowed him from victory. Seeing Hannibal for who he is, we can determine that Hannibal was not similar to truly great strategists and generals such as Genghis Khan, Sun Tzu, Julius Caesar, and many others. These men not only had tactical talents, but also had incredible minds for strategy. Nearly every single strategic move throughout Hannibal's whole campaign was a rash and foolhardy mistake only a self-lauding, prideful, arrogant man would make. Hannibal is like a dog chasing after a car. He chases and chases with great enthusiasm and speed, but once he catches the car, he doesn't know what to do with it.Here, the famous Latin quote by Maharbal applies, "You, Hannibal, know how to gain a victory; you do not know how to use it." -Livy, The History of Rome 22.51 Therefore its due to Hannibal's pride, foolhardiness, and arrogance that draw him as an incompetent general.Sources:Polybius Histories Book 3 http://www.perseus.tufts.edu...Appian's History of Rome: The Syrian Wars http://www.livius.org...Livy, The History of Rome Books 21-30 http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu...