12-13-2014, 02:29 PM
I believe Polybius was the original author of the battle of Zama. Up until Polybius, no one wrote about the battle because it never existed. It’s a fabrication. From the moment Scipio refused to accept the Roman senates offer of fighting Hannibal in Italy, does the contradiction and propaganda begin. I’m not denying Scipio’s battles in Africa, but I believe after the Great Plains the Carthaginians sued for peace, and as part of the peace negotiations Hannibal left Italy. And why wouldn’t he. At that point in time he must have known Carthage could not win. If you dig through the varying accounts of the aftermath of Zama, and if you remain a neutral observer, you find one contradiction after another. At the beginning of the SPW because the Carthaginians did not hand over Hannibal as demanded by the Romans, war was declared. So here we have Hannibal supposedly defeated by Scipio and the Romans fail to ask for Hannibal to be handed over. Nepos has Hannibal years after Zama still in the field with an army, and this is the reason why the Romans refuse to hand back the Carthaginians hostages. Polybius has Margo conveniently die while returning to Italy, however, Nepos and some others have him still alive and helping Hannibal escape from Carthage.
I have learnt to listen to the lone voice in the crowd. Cicero, Dionysius and Livy state that it was Servius Tullius that changed the tribes, introduced the census and the century assembly, yet Zonaras the lone voice in the crowd writes that nothing of any importance was undertaken during the reign of Servius Tullius. However, I can prove five times over that everything Cicero, Dionysius and Livy accredit to Servius Tullius was in fact introduced during the reign of Tarquinius Superbus. Zonaras, the lone voice is correct.
I’m still in the middle of compiling everything about Zama and the many myths surrounding Scipio and I believe I can build a strong case for Zama being nothing more than fiction. The elephants probably belong to Bagradas, Hannibal’s first line of mercenaries fighting the Carthaginian second line probably belongs to the mercenary war, and Scipio’s extending his line, probably the Great Plains.
When I was last in Thailand I got my official Thai government mahout license and some of the actions of the elephants at Zama is written by someone who knows nothing about elephants. And where did those 80 elephants materialise from. They weren’t available for the Great Plains. Regulus during the first Punic war faced Carthaginian armies on two occasions with elephants, so why weren’t they at the Great Plains? Being trained maybe? More questions just keep piling up with this battle. And why can’t one ancient author agree on the name of the battlefield, or where it was? And when you factor in Baecula, this hints of another fabricated battle.
So why fabricate the battle of Zama? Simple. Hannibal inflicted Rome’s greatest defeat it had to be revenged in some form or another, even if fabricated. So after the Romans sack Carthage what is to stop them rewriting history. Carthage was ablaze so I imagine any records went up in smoke. And who was supposedly present at the sack of Carthage? It was Polybius. And who was in charge of the Roman army? None other than Scipio Aemilianus.
Zama gives a climax to the SPW and glorifies Scipio and the family name, whereas a peace treaty that saw Hannibal arrive back in Africa with those forces who wanted to join him and Scipio going home without fighting Hannibal is very anti climatic. I find it interesting that when the Roman senate relented and let Scipio invade Africa, he was not allowed to levy and army by the official methods but by volunteers. This strongly indicates that the senate was punishing Scipio. If Scipio was the great commander he’s suppose to be, then why not face Hannibal in Italy? Maybe he didn’t have the nerve and preferred to fight lesser skilled generals with inferior troops, which he knew he would be pitted against if he invaded Africa.
I have learnt to listen to the lone voice in the crowd. Cicero, Dionysius and Livy state that it was Servius Tullius that changed the tribes, introduced the census and the century assembly, yet Zonaras the lone voice in the crowd writes that nothing of any importance was undertaken during the reign of Servius Tullius. However, I can prove five times over that everything Cicero, Dionysius and Livy accredit to Servius Tullius was in fact introduced during the reign of Tarquinius Superbus. Zonaras, the lone voice is correct.
I’m still in the middle of compiling everything about Zama and the many myths surrounding Scipio and I believe I can build a strong case for Zama being nothing more than fiction. The elephants probably belong to Bagradas, Hannibal’s first line of mercenaries fighting the Carthaginian second line probably belongs to the mercenary war, and Scipio’s extending his line, probably the Great Plains.
When I was last in Thailand I got my official Thai government mahout license and some of the actions of the elephants at Zama is written by someone who knows nothing about elephants. And where did those 80 elephants materialise from. They weren’t available for the Great Plains. Regulus during the first Punic war faced Carthaginian armies on two occasions with elephants, so why weren’t they at the Great Plains? Being trained maybe? More questions just keep piling up with this battle. And why can’t one ancient author agree on the name of the battlefield, or where it was? And when you factor in Baecula, this hints of another fabricated battle.
So why fabricate the battle of Zama? Simple. Hannibal inflicted Rome’s greatest defeat it had to be revenged in some form or another, even if fabricated. So after the Romans sack Carthage what is to stop them rewriting history. Carthage was ablaze so I imagine any records went up in smoke. And who was supposedly present at the sack of Carthage? It was Polybius. And who was in charge of the Roman army? None other than Scipio Aemilianus.
Zama gives a climax to the SPW and glorifies Scipio and the family name, whereas a peace treaty that saw Hannibal arrive back in Africa with those forces who wanted to join him and Scipio going home without fighting Hannibal is very anti climatic. I find it interesting that when the Roman senate relented and let Scipio invade Africa, he was not allowed to levy and army by the official methods but by volunteers. This strongly indicates that the senate was punishing Scipio. If Scipio was the great commander he’s suppose to be, then why not face Hannibal in Italy? Maybe he didn’t have the nerve and preferred to fight lesser skilled generals with inferior troops, which he knew he would be pitted against if he invaded Africa.
