Revisiting Zama

[Paralus]

Yes, why Hannibal would need a reconnaissance of Scipio`s forces if he had already engaged with the enemy`s cavalry several days beforehand ?

The fact that Hannibal had engaged the enemy's cavalry several days beforehand does not necessarily tell him anything more about the Roman forces than encountering Mazaeus prior to Gaugamela told Alexander about Dareios' forces. Which is not say I agree that the three spies is factual.

I've no issue with Hannibal engaging with the Romans via Massinisa and arranging the truce which the Carthaginians subsequently broke leading to Zama. If what you are saying is that the only battle of Zama was the cavalry engagement and skirmishes and that Polybios has fabricated this climactic battle to the aggrandisement of the Scipionic house, then we see things terribly differently. That Africanus received such a cognomen and triumph for a cavalry battle, I cannot see (or are we suggesting Great Plains?). That Roman history was so distorted within living memory of at least some of those there beggars belief. Many of these soldiers and officers went on to Greece with Flamininus as well as elephants captured from Carthage. I believe it's been mentioned hereabouts, but the Scipios had many political enemies - Africanus particularly. That these would sit by as history was rewritten is difficult to understand. Rome is not Egypt where, for example, the "heretic" Akhenaten can be literally erased from the record!