Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ permalink
Hannibal crossing the Alps
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Friday, 9th September 2005
This board is too quiet, so here's a question. What are the views on which pass Hannibal used to cross the Alps?
John Prevas in "Hannibal Crosses the Alps", one of the most recent books, suggests that it was the Col de la Traversette, the most difficult and dangerous of all the passes. He claims it is usually discounted because most theories are based on scholars looking at maps, while he has walked the route. He includes some interesting photographs in the book which seem to support his theory. The problem I have is that I have read several books on this subject and none of them agree. -
Message 2
Posted by oneida (U2016081) on Friday, 9th September 2005
Unfortunately I'm not an archaeologist, so I have more questions than answers.
I'm wondering if you can tell me whether anybody has ever actually tried excavating the passes for elephant remains.
And incidentally, you've inspired me; I'd like to take this moment to pitch a new show to the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ. I'd call it "Elephant Crossing". All the suspected Alp-crossing routes would be retraced with live pachyderms. We could even throw in a little History of the War Elephant while we're at it.
Do you think Mr. Prevas would be willing to host it? (If not, we'll have to rename it Two Men on an Elephant and cross our fingers...)
-
Message 3
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Saturday, 10th September 2005
As fas as I know, most attempts to re-trace the route have been done with maps from the comfort of a study far away. That is Prevas's point. I'm not aware that anyone has looked for remains of anything. I often thought that if Hannibal lost so many thousands of men as the sources say, there should surely be somefhing, somewhere, even if it is a rusty old knife blade.
Prevas states that Col de la Traversette is virtually impassable except in summer and even then only with care. If Hannibal did use that pass in early winter, it makes his achievement even more remarkable, but it would explain why so many of his men did not survive the crossing.
Prevas claims that Hannibal was aiming for on eof the easier passes but was misled by th elocal guides and / or simply got lost, so had to go by th emost difficult route.
Did Ian Botham not raise some money for charity a few years ago by walking the Alps with an elephant? Mind you, I bet he took one of the easier passes. -
Message 4
Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Saturday, 10th September 2005
It is extremely unlikely that anyone would find any.
In "two men in a trench" they were unable to find any human remains of the battle of Flodden despite 10,000 Scots having been killed there.
One would be looking for the possible remains of 27 elephants over a very wide area. -
Message 5
Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Saturday, 10th September 2005
Tony
in another posting replying to someone who suggested that jesus did not exist, I put forward the suposition that Hanibal never existed and that the Romans made him up to justify their destruction of Carthage in 146 BC. I pointed to the despute over the route over the alps as part of the 'evidence'! -
Message 6
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Sunday, 11th September 2005
Fair point on the search for remains, Tim. My opint is that it was not just elehoants who were lost (and did he lose as many as 27 in the corssing? He still had a few left at Trebia). According to POlybius and Livy, hundreds of men fell to their deaths while on the last high pass. None of them would have been buried, and they would all habve been caryring weapons, shields, wearing some sort of armour.
As to whether Hannibal existed, that's an interesting proposition. However,if you are citing the lack of physical remains, are you not arguing against your own previous post? I also think that there is too much known about Hannibal from his travels to other countries after he fled Carthage for him to be a figment of Roman imagination. The sources name a lot of names of Roman, Punic and other contemporaries. If he was an invention, surely someone would have blown the whistle? -
Message 7
Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Sunday, 11th September 2005
Tony
Hanibal set off with either 36 or 37 elephants, from memory. He definately only had 10 at the Trebia and none at either Trasimine or Cannae which shows how the effects of elephants have been exagerated. The only battle where he had a lot was Zama (80) and he lost that one. I agree that he lost a lot of men and equipment as well but again I think we would be lucky to find remains (as in the famous body found between Italy and Austria).
On the evidence for Hanibal existing. When I put forward this proposition no one came up with a definate contempory non Roman sourse. there certainly is not a Carthaginina one. the two main Roman sourses are Livy and Polibius. Livy is the most extensive but he also less reliable and wrote about 200 years after the events. POlybius was present at the fall of Carthage 146 BC. Hanibal invaded Italy 218 BC so you can see there is a considerable gap, would there have been anyone alive to dispute the 'Roman fiction'?
Concerning the accouints mentioning lots of other historical persons so do contemporary historical fiction. King Stephen, Empress Matilda, king David I, Earl Ranalf are all historical persons; Brother Cadfael and Hugh Beringer are not. -
Message 8
Posted by Rurfus (U1800117) on Sunday, 18th September 2005
Polybius is not Roman, he came from Greece. He only went to Rome when he was taken as a hostage after the Roman conquest.
Polybius purpose in writing was to show how Rome came to dominate the Mediterranean. He saw this, understandably given the time he was writing, as the decisive development in world history, and one which accordingly had to be explained and understood. Specifically he wrote in Greek for a Greek audience and sought to explain to them the change in world affairs to which they had to become adjusted. Indeed some Greeks have seen him as an apologist for Rome and a traitor.
In his work he does make reference to primary sources he used in one of his sections of Hannibal. From what I recall he spoke of the temple of Juno at Croton he found a bronze tablet left by Hannibal, I recalled he then went onto say having thought it reliable he used it as a source. Another one i recall off the top of my head was his interviews with the son of a Numidian King who was alive at Hannibal's time. Alot of son's easily could have been alive at the time of 146BC. They would have been in there 50's-70's (although this point is only guesswork).
He was a client of Scipio family, hence why he was present at the fall of Carthage. From what i read the sources of the previous members of their family were made widely availiable to him. Carthaginian sources would have been destroyed durring the sacking of Carthage. I doubt many would have spread accross the Mediterranean since Carthage was no longer able to project it's influence. We are only dealing with the sources that survived. I do not believe a fair bit of the stuff Livy said. He came too late after the actual events itself. -
Message 9
Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Sunday, 18th September 2005
"Polybius is not Roman, he came from Greece. He only went to Rome when he was taken as a hostage after the Roman conquest.
Indeed some Greeks have seen him as an apologist for Rome and a traitor."
That to me makes him a 'Roman' Sourse
"In his work he does make reference to primary sources he used in one of his sections of Hannibal. From what I recall he spoke of the temple of Juno at Croton he found a bronze tablet left by Hannibal, I recalled he then went onto say having thought it reliable he used it as a source."
I think this is the one where Hanibal is supposed to have recorded the forces he entered Italy with 20,000 foot, 6,000 cavalry and 10 Elephants.
But then Goeffrey of Monmouth claims a primary sourse as does 'Lord of the Rings'!
"Alot of son's easily could have been alive at the time of 146BC. They would have been in there 50's-70's (although this point is only guesswork)."
How many copies of Polybius were there and is it the original version? I do not know but if it is like for example Caeser's Gaullic War then the earliest manuscript my well be medievil.
By the way I do not doubt the existance of Hanibal, just trying to make a point.
Livy also appears to have used early sourse but is so pro Roman that it makes him very unreliable. -
Message 10
Posted by Rurfus (U1800117) on Monday, 19th September 2005
"How many copies of Polybius were there and is it the original version?"
I believe the version's we got the translation from come down from Constantinople from about the 10th century AD. I looked in the front of my copy and it said a interest in him developed in the 1500's with copies of his work circulating. Also funnily enough the oldest version's were not in latin!
Calling him a Greek and Roman source is not so clear cut. On detailed examination their are sound arugements to call him a Greek as well as a Roman source. Regardless, i find him more reliable than Livy.
What made me find Livy unreliable was his approach in some area's to writting the history of the war with Hannibal. He invites conversations and events that nobody could have possibly written down. It is because he wants to focus his work upon characters making parts of the war a battle of personalities. Facts can be used loosely in his eyes. -
Message 11
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Monday, 19th September 2005
Tim,
We seem to be getting a bit off thread, bit I like your theory, even though I don’t agree with it. It is a tough one to argue against. Do you have any idea whether there is any archaeological evidence at, for example, Cannae, that any of th ereported battles did take place?
I am sure one could point out lack of corroborative evidence for a number of characters from ancient times. King Solomon? Caratacus? -
Message 12
Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Monday, 19th September 2005
Tony
As I said before I do not believ it myself but I originated as an arguement against someone who stated on the old pages that Jesus never existed.
On the question of Cannae I am not aware of any evidence though that does not been that it does not exist. The same applies to the Trbia and Trasamine. What seems to be the case, and I do not know the reason but while individual graves survive mass graves rarely do. An example where they have, at least I assume it is a mass grave, is that from the Viking great army at Repton. In the TV series 2 men in a trench even with the latest techniques they have never found a mass grave most particularly at Flodden. I am not aware that anyone has found a mass grave at Stamford bridge despite the bones still being a site that travellors noted over 100 years later.
There is no corroborative evidence for Solomon outside the bible. There are some place names for Caradoc though but then there are masses of place names for Arthur.
The question with all of these people is could one reasonably expect to find corroborative evidence for them? -
Message 13
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Monday, 19th September 2005
I think we are in agreement here. It is bizarre, sn't it? Mind you, if the bodies were simply left on the surface, or perhaps burned rather than buried, there wouldn't be much left to find. As you say, mass graves seem very hard to find. However, I recall seeing a TV programme a while back where some skeletons were found near Stanford Bridge, allegedly he remains of som eVikings who tried, and obviously failed to get back to their ships, asthe remains were found near the river.
-
Message 14
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Tuesday, 20th September 2005
Rufus, true but then Livy's work was intended to be read outloud and audiences expected a good speech from their characters. Even Thucydides obliged and Polibius has to take tiome to justify the absence of such excursions. Besides all that time spent in declension classes meant that they were itching to demonstrate their skill. It must therefore be considered that Livy's history is as much an entertaining experience recounting past tales and not neccesarily a bare list of the facts, though what we have is intriguing and practically unrivalled. For the most part Livy appears to rely on accounts of events given to the Senate by comanders in the field and as such they often had their own political reasons to write up the scale of their succes or the depth of their sacrifice on behalf of Rome. That it concentrates on personalities is therefore unsurprising, especially given the way that Roman commanders latched onto the romance of single combat with Gallic chieftians to decide a battle causing the Senate to outlaw the practice.
-
Message 15
Posted by Thjodolf (U1900675) on Saturday, 1st October 2005
The problem with any possible finding of elephant remains in the Alps is Hasdrubal also passed that way. I believe that no elephants were lost during the Hannibal's Alpine crossing, so any find of elephant remains would point to the younger brother. The crossing took just over two weeks and apparently 30,000 infantry and 4,000 cavalry were lost, so even discounting baggage animals, camp followers, etc, Hannibal was losing about 2,000 men each day, that is quite some trail to leave! No doubt the majority of the men were lost at two or three points where the mountain tribes launched their attacks. Since Polybius there have been armchair theorists and 'hiking' historians like Prevas and Connolly searching for, and claiming to have found, Hannibal's precise route, but has there ever been a seriously big and systematic search for the path taken by the Carthaginian? Given the numbers of men/beasts/material lost en route and the relatively few valleys possible as routes for the army one would think that significant traces are still waiting to be found despite the distance in time and Alpine conditions over the centuries. Has there been a major archaeological search, anyone? Polybius suggests that Hannibal's route was not particularly hazardous (as I believe Prevas claims - I haven't read Prevas for a couple of years, but I recall he emphasised the harshness of the route). Polybius claimed to have personally explored the area where Hannibal crossed, but does not mention any physical evidence of such large losses (of course if Polybius was in the right area and there was no evidence about 70 years after the event, then perhaps it would be a tad optimistic to hope to find anything over 2,000 years later!! But maybe the "wonders of technology" and a large scale systematic search might yet find something...if only someone would do it!! It's an amazing part of the world, I like Connolly's theory Mont Genevre, but until a major find is made Hannibal's crossing route is something of a Loch Ness Monster or Sasquatch
-
Message 16
Posted by dwrmatt (U1984005) on Monday, 3rd October 2005
...the answer lies in Bk 3 of Silius' Punica
-
Message 17
Posted by Thjodolf (U1900675) on Wednesday, 5th October 2005
And the answer is...? Silius is far more unreliable (and later!) historical source than Livy perhaps?! Whatever happened to the proposed movie about Hannibal starring Vin Diesel? Hopefully drowned at birth
-
Message 18
Posted by dwrmatt (U1984005) on Wednesday, 5th October 2005
I was being a little disingenuous suggesting Silius - the Punica is an epic poem that is, to oversimplify (but maybe by not too much), a hybrid of the Aeneid and Livy's account of the wars. One day I may have to write a commentary on one of the books, a task that I look forward to with relish.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.