News and citizen. [volume] (Morrisville, Vt. ;) 1881-current, 1922-07-12
Hannibal
BY WALLACE PECK

| BY WALLACE PECh
More than two thousand years age
ancient Carthage witnessed a sym.
bolic act of the perpetuatlon OF re-
venge; an act inspired by hatred; an
act which became guiding force in
the life of her greatest general
Imagine a small lad called Hannibal
being led to a sacrifcial alter by his
father and there, with his small hand
resting upon the consecrated victim
swearing that in years to come he
would make war upon Rome, the bit
ter enemy of Carthage; that he
would satisfy the Carthaglnlan de-
sire for revenge.
I This was done, no doubt, partly to
amuse young Hannibal, and to re-
trieve his disappointment in not being
able to go to war then, but he remem-
bered it and longed for the time to
come when he could go to war against
the Romans.
Hannibal was a wonderful leader
of men. Under the spell of his
genius all types of men were welded
into homogeneous whole, which COM
bined the utmost play of individual
, prowess, with all the precision of a
machine. No whisper of disaffection
or mutiny was ever heard in Hanni-
balls camps. Italians deserted by
thousands to Hannibal, but no Han
nibalian veteran, even when his star
was on it's wane, ever deserted to
Rome. Polite as he was brave, and
generous as he was far-sighted, Han
nibal could arouse alike the love, and
the fear, the calm confidence and the
passionate enthusiasm of all the vari-
Gus races who had the privilege of
serving under his standard.
Let us consider the military genius
of Hannibal with that of the foremost
military geniuses of other ages and
times, such as Alexander the Great,
General Lee and Marshall Foch, in
order to determine the rank among
the greatest warlords Of ancient and
modern times.
Hannibal's methods of warfare are
very interesting. He was master
of offensive warfare, as we'll as de-
fensive, but was compelled to use de-
fensive tactics the greatest part of
the time on account of inferior num-
bers. His principal method of war
fare was to lure the enemy into a
condition or place of great disadvan-
tage, and then slaughter them I'M
awares of and unprepared for their
fate. But he also showed great
strategy on the open field of battle,
where overwhelmed by numbers, his
cleverness and military genius alone
saved him. In these circumstances
he used his Numidian cavalry and
solid formation to immense advan-
tage.
AS most of US know, Alexander the
Great employed to great extent the
phalanx, of which he was the orig
inator. He also used his cavalry to
remarkable advantage, always en-
deavoring to weaken the center of
the enemies army, and then throw
his heavy phalanx against it, thus
crushing it and winning his victory.
This military genius in his struggle
for world supremacy displayed his
illustrious generalship wonderfully.
1t is interesting to note that the guild
ing star of Alexander's life was 81
steal no victory" a principal which
he upheld throughout his life.
General Lees method of warfare is
we'll summed up in sentence taken
from the Philadelphia Age: "As a
great master of defensive warfare
Lee will probably not be ranked in
ferior to any general in history"
But nevertheless with all due respect
to this statement, he is far below
Hannibal in military ability, espe-
cially when you consider the condi-
tions, and obstacles which confronted
each man.
While Lee had the enormous ad-
vantage of fighting on native and
familiar soil, Hannibal faced that
great disadvantage of fighting on
foreign and unfamiliar soil. The
whole heart of the South was with
Lee and backed him up faithfully to
the last moment. Hannibal had no
backing from his country whatsoever.
What he did, he accomplished alone,
solely by his strategy and military
genius, unaided by his native land.
Lee was surrounded by able and COM
petent generals, Hannibal fought
practically alone, aided only by his
brother, who commanded the cavalry.
Just think of the wonderful thing
Hannibal accomplished, and of the
obstacles against which he had to
fight. Consider Lees military ability
and the conditions and obstacles he
faced, and put him in Hannibal's
place, and ask yourself, "What would
he have accomplished? There can
be only one answer in your mind, I
the same as there is in mine, he
would have failed. But if you were
to reverse the conditions and put
Hannibal in Lees place, I firmly be-
lieve that the South would have been
the victor instead of the vanquished. /
General Lee was a very able COM
but / think that Hannibal, i
with his keen, sense of strategy. was
much better skilled in the art of war.
But" you question, "does not
Foch. the hero of the great
World War, surpass Hannibal in gen.
The conditions of France in the
twentieth century cannot be COM
pared with the conditions of Tta1v