Zama: The Battle That Never Was?

[Robert Vermaat]

There is also the story of the emperor Claudius claiming the saecular games he was holding was once in a lifetime event. Those who had witnessed the Saecular games held by Augustus were extremely amused.

Hi Steven,

I read your reply, but I guess you did not really answer my question. I think I was not clear enough. Of course sources can be right, wrong, or party both. Of course the Bible is to be believed or not, and witnesses can be mistaken. That's all fine. For now I accept your position that Polybius made it all up. Now about the consequences.

However my question did not relate to that, or the proof for the battle. I was merely very interested why we don't find anything (at least no one told me) about Polybius being ridiculed. After all, you are saying that he invented what must have been one of the most famous battles of the age. Scipio built a lot of his reputation on that victory, right? And yet there were plenty of people around who must have known that (if you're correct) it was all bogus. So why was Polybius not ridiculed by people who would as a mused as the ones who had witnessed Augustus' Saecular games? And who of course could hardly ridicule Claudius because, well, he was the emperor after all? Why was Scipio not ridiculed or even attacked by his opponents for claiming victory at Zama, or if he did not because Polybius faked it, why was the latter not turned out of the libraries as a great fibber? We may think what we want about ancient historians and the literal truth, but inventing an enormous battle was not done even at that time.

So I'll ask my question again: this is about Polybius and his reputation, and I'll add another:

1 - Why do we not find any evidence of Polybius being attacked by his contemporaries, who would have known he was lying?
2 - What, if correct, does the invention of Zama mean to us for accepting Polybius as a source? For if correct, we'd be forced to doubt everything Polybius writes and which we can't confirm from other sources, right?