Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Nameless city in Africa taken by Scipio
#31
I would have said that Laelius was Polybius` main eye witness with Laelius providing Polybius with what he wanted to hear about Zama. In the same factional camp, most likely they were in collusion in the reporting of most of the events in the war that related to Scipio Africanus.
There are two events where Laelius was probably not a witness and do not appear in Polybius` account of the campaign in 202 BC.
Laelius was probably not interested in describing the victories of Minucius Thermus and Gaius Octavius anyhow, but these battle accounts must have originated from earlier histories and I assume Polybius was aware of them.
Of course, Thermus` battle is left out because it would clash with Polybius` borrowed three spies story, but I believe that Thermus`s action, the event in Appian that caused Hannibal to seek to negotiate with Scipio, is more likey to have been fought against a reinforcement from Vermina. I think this very likey to be the case if you take into account that Scipio`s position would have been a central one; ideal to intercept and ambush a force approaching from the west to reinforce Hannibal in the east, close to the city of Zama.
It would appear that Hannibal`s position was bad after the cavalry battle near Zama, but it was not a disaster; only skirmishes followed Appian`s cavalry battle, not a pursuit and Thermus who would have been following Hannibal`s supply train, would not have been able to get into an ambush position ahead of Hannibal`s equipment train.

Octavius victory against Vermina is omitted because at that point in the narrative Polybius tells us that Laelius is sent to Rome with news of a victory against Hannibal. The story seems to me to come from Laelius` perspective.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Nameless city in Africa taken by Scipio - by Michael Collins - 04-13-2019, 06:57 PM

Forum Jump: