Hannibal Lecter did not seem to be very successful in his life. How to evaluate his tactics and ability?

Hannibal is known as the greatest strategist in history. From the achievements of his life, it is worthy of the name. It is certainly not too much to say that he is a genius, not to mention that he is a strategic genius. It is just that he was born at an untimely time. The hero is useless and fell into a sad hero. According to Levi, there was no enemy in Roman history that made Rome tremble. What kind of person is Hannibal? Let’s take a look at Li Wei’s Description: he shows incomparable confidence and courage when he is with the soldiers. He is no bolder in the face of danger and no calmer in danger. His body and mind are indomitable. He can be shocked and endure extreme cold and heat, regardless of the soft bed or quiet environment, He was often seen sleeping on the ground wrapped in a military cloak. He took the lead in the battle. After the battle, he was the last to leave the battlefield. It can be seen from these descriptions that Hannibal, like the Romans, had the main qualities of barbarians, such as courage, responsibility and determination. In this way, Hannibal was fighting alone, while Rome was not fighting alone. The great Roman Legion inherited the glorious tradition of Mars, the God of war, and did not give Hannibal any chance. In this way, how Hannibal could defeat Rome reminds me of Aetius at the end of the Empire, known as the last Roman, although brave, wise, strategic vision With the same ideal as Hannibal, but it is also an untimely time to save Rome in danger with personal ability, but man can’t save the collapse of Rome, and Hannibal can’t save the decline and destruction of Carthage.

Hannibal has a persistent ideal, which is to take Rome as the enemy and destroy Rome. This is to dominate Hannibal with this oath and ideal he had since childhood, so that Hannibal always lives for his ideal and insists on fighting Rome with his ideal, because he has this ideal and will to dominate him, He fought in Italy for more than ten years without supplies or assistance from his motherland, and he did not lose. If such a person fails, the only reason is that he has a strong opponent, and this strong opponent is not a strong force. Practice has proved that the miscellaneous army or mob led by Hannibal can also defeat the well-equipped Roman regular army and win all the way from trabia to Cheney, The once arrogant Romans never expected to meet such a powerful opponent. The piros with the Macedonian array is just a thing of the past, and so are the barbaric Gauls. No one has brought so many failures and fears to the Romans like Hannibal. If the Romans only have strong combat power, Hannibal will win, World history will be rewritten. But what Hannibal never understood was that the real powerful opponent he faced was the Roman system. This system is embodied in the two party. The aristocratic system of separation of three powers not only guarantees the full expression of public opinion, but also maximally uses the power of elite and elite to govern the country. From today’s perspective, the system of separation of powers is the best political system. With the success of today’s United States, we have no reason to doubt the superiority and rationality of this system, but the aristocratic separation of powers in Rome is played without slaves, which is the biggest defect criticized by future generations. What are the characteristics of this system? The first is the participation of the whole people, which can call on and gather the strength of the whole people; The second is boldness. What people decide together is often bolder and more radical than individual decisions. The third is to treat all citizens more fairly and equally. What are the disadvantages? The biggest disadvantage is that the efficiency is low. Sometimes one thing quarrels for a long time and cannot be decided. In addition, the policy implementation is discontinuous and may change frequently. In contrast, what are the advantages of Hannibal? First of all, he has talented strategic vision and excellent tactical command ability; Secondly, with shining personal charm, it can not only stabilize the miscellaneous teams of different nationalities and languages from different regions, but also continuously attract many people to join his team.

let’s compare the war between Hannibal and Rome in detail. From strategic and tactical command, supply, personnel, equipment, diplomacy and geographical advantage.

,

,

and

strategies must be a little better than Hannibal. Hannibal left the base of Cartagena, crossed the Ebro River, crossed the Alps and out of the trough. It is an absolutely imaginative strategic planning in the history of ancient wars. Today’s war strategies are similar to the Normandy landing and the surprise attack on France by bypassing the Maginot line, With this, Hannibal was able to firmly sit in the first position of western historical strategist. However, although Hannibal’s spear is sharp enough, the Roman shield is not paper paste. After the Senate figured out that Hannibal can’t be hard hit, Fabian was re used, and the procrastination strategy was implemented. If you can fight, you can’t defend. Some areas adopted the scorched earth strategy, but you won’t fight with Hannibal. Fabian’s shield is strong enough, It is difficult for the sharp sword of Hannibal to be used. It can be said that Fabian blocked Hannibal’s first and most violent attack momentum from the Alps. Otherwise, if it is completely hard, the spear of Rome may be broken directly. Therefore, Hannibal had a slight advantage in the early stage of strategy, but the advantage was not so obvious. We know that later, due to the disadvantages of the Roman system, Fabian was replaced, and varo gave Hannibal eight legions, which also achieved Hannibal’s battle of Cheney, which occupies an important position in world history. Hannibal’s spirit in heaven has to thank varo. In the later stage of the Second Punic War, the comparison of strategic situation was different. Rome also had a commander with the same ability as Hannibal, that is, sippia. This king was born into a noble, young and rich in military career. He was not inferior to Hannibal in terms of strategy and tactics, but was aggressive. Therefore, the strategies of this period were tied with each other. Throughout the war, Hannibal had only a slight advantage over Rome. The reason why such a strategic genius only had a slight advantage over Rome was mainly due to the Roman system, which could gather the strength of all elites against HannibalPull. In terms of

,

,

and

tactical command, Hannibal had an absolute advantage in the early and middle stages. Hannibal had not lost a battle in the Italian battlefield. Except for valo, smart people such as old Fabian were far away from him, which is enough to show that Hannibal had no one in Rome at that time. From trabia to Cheney, all are Hannibal’s Classics and masterpieces, fully demonstrating his tactical ability and talent. In the later period, sippia in Rome was a tactical genius with Hannibal’s ability. Of course, sippia learned a lot from Hannibal, but the back waves of the Yangtze River pushed the front waves, and the green came out of the blue and was better than the blue. Finally, in Zama, although Hannibal was well prepared, he was defeated and fled by sippia, a sacrificial calf. It has been discussed before that xipia defeated Hannibal mainly because the Roman Legion was too strong and Hannibal’s mob was too bad. If the two managers were changed, xipia would fail. In fact, some of the Carthaginian army against sippia were veterans brought back from Italy and some were recruited by Hannibal back to Africa, mainly nubidians and Moors. Moreover, sippia’s Legion was not the regular army of Rome, but several legions recruited in Sicily with the permission of the Roman Senate, There is also a gap between the combat effectiveness and combat experience of the regular army in Rome. In this way, there is absolutely no big gap in the ability of the two armies. The flanks of sippia and Hannibal are nubidian cavalry. In the end, Hannibal’s failure is attributed to the fact that he met a commander with the same ability level, and sippia is more energetic and offensive, And Hannibal is just going downhill. Therefore, in terms of tactical command, although sippia saved a lot for Rome in the later stage, Hannibal had the upper hand on the whole. The most important issue is to compete for the strategic and tactical resources of the two countries. The most important issue is not to compete for the strategic and tactical resources of the two countries, but to compete for the strategic and tactical resources of the two countries, On the other hand, luck accounted for a lot of ingredients. In addition, it took many years for the mountain of pressure to really control Persia. Hannibal had problems in the supply of resources and personnel. During the Second Punic War, the sea power in the Mediterranean was completely controlled by Rome, otherwise Hannibal didn’t have to go around a big circle to Italy. Therefore, Hannibal could hardly get the supply of resources from Spain and Carthage from the sea. What he could do was to rob constantly, sometimes he could grab it, sometimes he couldn’t, Therefore, and resource supply are very bad and painful for Hannibal. After taking japuya, the situation is a little better. After a long drought and sweet dew, those soldiers who have been living in the wind and rain for a long time suddenly eat well, sleep well, bathe and have beautiful women, so that they can understand that the original war is just like this. Is the war they are engaged in for today, Therefore, later historians have always believed that japua has seriously weakened the fighting spirit of Hannibal’s forces. This is Hannibal’s “Hackney”. In addition, in terms of personnel supply, Hannibal can only get personnel supply from Gauls when he was in northern Italy, but Gauls have poor combat effectiveness and tactical skills, and can only be used as cannon fodder at most, His core fault is that the nubidian cavalry and Spanish infantry can not be effectively supplied, and there are not many non Latin city states in Italy, so personnel supply is Hannibal’s most fatal weakness. In contrast to the logistical supplies of Rome, it’s no wonder that the local operations, regardless of resources and personnel, are great. Although Rome’s living forces have been destroyed by almost half after two serious blows of trabia and Cheney, due to the advantages of Rome’s political system, the people are not frightened by Hannibal, nor complain about the incompetence of conquest, But more actively joined the army. Rome soon recruited four legions. Of course, Rome, which experienced two major failures, also showed a state of hopelessness. The newly recruited four legions included 8000 slaves. More importantly, none of the Roman allies, especially the Latin alliance, abandoned Rome, and both resources and auxiliary forces continued to support it. I think this is the most important factor in Rome’s victory over Hannibal. After such a major failure, the Latin alliance still firmly supported Rome, It is mainly due to the superiority of Rome’s political system to the Latin alliance. It gives citizenship and freedom to the Latin alliance. To put it bluntly, I conquer you, but now you and I are equal. It is really attractive. From the perspective of human nature, the pursuit of freedom and citizenship is a higher realm that everyone pursues. Just like in the ninth legion, iska, as a British man and a Roman slave, followed Marcus against his tribe wholeheartedly. Its greatest attraction lies in Roman citizenship and freedom. Hannibal hoped that the Roman alliance would betray Rome after Cheney, but no Latin alliance betrayed Rome except some Greek city states and other non Latin city states. Completely deviating from Hannibal’s expectations means that Hannibal’s most powerful, deadly and most drastic strategy after hacking Nigeria was broken by the solid city-state alliance brought by the strong institutional foundation of Rome. This was beyond Hannibal’s expectation, otherwise Hannibal would still attack Rome. However, according to Hannibal’s siege ability at that time, it was not so easy to win the Rome City painstakingly managed by Romulus. You should know that Hannibal’s mistake was very close to Rome. Hannibal was a smart man. He must have analyzed the price of winning Rome, Even if Hannibal took Rome, with his strength at that time, it would be difficult for Hannibal with difficult supply to face the counterattack of the Romans. At that time, Rome could recruit legions in other provinces, and the city-state alliance could also provide sufficient auxiliary forces. Therefore, Hannibal had little chance of winning the attack on Rome. You know, the Gauls tried and failed more than 100 years ago. Generally speaking, in terms of supply, the Romans had an absolute advantage over Hannibal, which was also the most critical and fatal advantage. In terms of

,

,

and

equipment, Buni’s equipment is slightly inferior to that of Rome. For example, the equipment of many Gauls is actually unevenIn addition to meeting their own requirements, peace is more in sharp contrast.

think about when the Chinese nation showed such spirit in the history of resisting foreign aggression (don’t tell me what it was like to have someone). We didn’t see this spirit later except in the Han Dynasty. Look at how we resisted the Khitans, the Jin people and the Mongols, How to resist the female reality is mostly to open the gate and warmly welcome the enemy, because tyranny makes them unable to get what they want, and they must hope to change their needs and opportunities. The system of

,

,

and

has its advantages, but it was eventually replaced by the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire. I still can’t fully explain this.