Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, South-Carolina) 1852-1852, 1852-02-27
Hannibal and Napoleon.

Scarce any one, Il t all familiar with history,
can have failed to observe the extraordinary
parallrlism SO strklngly touched upon by Ar.
ncld. Twice" he says, "in history, has there
been witnessed the struggle of the highest indi-
vdual genius against the resources and insti.
tutions of a great nation and in bo.h cases the
nation has been victorious. For seventeen
years Hauibal strove against Rome; for six.
teen years Napoleon Bouaparte strove against
England; the effect of the first ended in Zama,
the second in Waterloo The extraordinary
simllitude of the genius, conduct, and military
character Of these two giants in arms, is far
from ending with this general resemblance
Almost from point to point their destinies are
similar. At the age oftwentv.sx Hannibal was
ELECTED to the supreme command ,of the Garth.
ayinian armies, and thenceforth. to the close of
the war, he disposed at his will the resources
and held in the hollow Of his hand the councils
.of his country.
At the age Of twentysix, Napoleon assumed
the command Of the army of Italy, and from
thence his fortunes and his will were those of
France. The scenes Of glory Of both were the
Alps and Italy. Both had the faculty Of seeing
at glance where the blow must be planted,
which should cripple the enemy; both deliver.
ell that blow in$tantaneously and irlesistibly.
Both had the same reliance on their cavalry as
an army of service-Ianibal winning by it all
his greatest victories, and Napoleon insisting
to the list that cavalry, in equal force, equally
led, must conquer infantry. Both vauqushed
every leader to the very last; and there is pro-
badly no one so prejudiced as to assert at this
duy that oitbor I,nnth,l N,p,1,o,, Eo,nJ -
his conqueror a superior in strategy or military
genius Nor does the similarity end even here
for both found their final vanquishers in gener.
ais made in Spain by conflicts with their own
lieutenants, who were in no wise superior to
other eminent leaders of their enemy; and both
ultimately pershed miserably, in exile, and
victims to the countries which they had kept
so long in awe and perturbation.
As men ofgenuine greatness, shall observe
only that no single act Of Hannbal's ever SUD.
served to any selfish motive, or ministered to
his own aggrandizcment and that no single act
Of Napoleon's did not SO. The consideration
of self would seem never to have occurred to
the one, to have been ever present to the 9th.
er. Both were fanatics for glory; the one be.
cause his own was his country's, the other be.
cause his country's was his own. Both were
accused by their enemies OF great moral crimes
and trrpitude and both, in the main, unjustly
1t is one OF the sad truths concerning warfare,
but no less truth, that in playing the game Of
war, with nations Tor playtlIings, and the world
for field, expediency must he in great de.
gree the moral rule; aud that, if the game isto
be played at all, the suffering or the lives Of
individuals, even if those individuals be counted
by thousands, must not be considered, where
the sufferings the lives Of millions are in
question.
The sin lies in playing the game at all, not
in the details or the practice of the pay. Both
these great men were stern and unreentng in
carrying out the Ines which they held it true
policy to lay down neither, so far as history
shows, was tainted in the least degree by any
thing resembling personal cruelty Both have
been accused Of fathlessness--a charge never
in any case to be much re yarded, as brought be.
tween nations for nations are ever prompt to
declaim loudly, wher the 10 ,rs, against deeds,
the like of which themselves commit readily
when the winners h, the case of Hannibal,
the Romans had all the history writing to them.
selves; thence, Punic faith is to this day the
proverb for entire faithlessness. Had the
French writers alone made the worlds annals
Of the late great struggle, "perfdous Albion"
had gone down byword to all ages. Had
the English held the like station, the utter faith.
lessness of Napoleon would have become pro.
verbal with prosperity.