Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Nameless city in Africa taken by Scipio
#16
Michael wrote:

It does indicate an earlier source because Polybius does not include Minucius Thermus`capture of a supply train and that is because it would conflict with Polybius borrowing of the three spies story by Herodotus.
 
One does not have to go back to Herodotus. According to Frontinus, in 280 BC, during the war with Pyrrhus: “the consul Valerius Laevinus, having caught a spy within his own camp, and having confidence in his own forces ordered the man to be led around, observing that, for the sake of terrifying the enemy, his army was open to inspection by the spies of the enemy, as often as they wished.”
 
Michael wrote:
In Appian`s account, which makes a whole lot more sense than Polybius, the capture of this Carthaginian detactment is the event that compels Hannibal to open negotiations with Scipio.
 
Look at how ridicules Polybius’ account is. When Hannibal was informed by his spies of the events that unfolded, Hannibal, full of admiration for Publius Scipio, had a strong desire to meet Publius Scipio. Hannibal had heralds sent to Publius Scipio to establish a place and time for a meeting. Here we are expected to believe that Hannibal was driven by a strong desire to meet Scipio out of nothing more than admiration. Are we expected to believe this drivel? Livy writes that when both commanders met, for a few moments both commanders gazed upon each other in silent admiration. Well admiration seems to be the latest pop culture among the Romans and Carthaginians. As Hannibal wanted to meet Scipio out of admiration, it would seem Hannibal had achieved his goal. This was not the first time Hannibal was inflicted with admiration for a member of the Scipio family. According to Polybius, when Hannibal learnt that Publius Scipio the Elder had taken the difficult undertaking of travelling from the Rhone to Etruria, Hannibal was filled with amazement and admiration for Publius Scipio the Elder. However, in this incident, Hannibal did not feel the need to request a meeting with Publius Scipio the Elder.
 
Scipio then broke camp and encamped at the town of Naragara, which had adequate water within easy reach (a spear throw from the Roman camp). Scipio then sent word to Hannibal for a meeting. Here we have Scipio dictating events. On receiving this news, Hannibal broke camp, and moved to within some 30 stades from the Roman camp. At this point Polybius wants us to believe that Hannibal moved to a favourable location chosen by his enemy out of admiration for Scipio. I can just see Hannibal jumping up and down with excited about meeting Scipio, and counting down the days. Polybius explains that the site of Hannibal’s camp was convenient for his present design, but was too far away from any water, and this caused his men some considerable hardship. Unfortunately, Polybius fails to explain what Hannibal’s present design was that made him position his camp too far from water. The reason is because it is a broken narrative taken from another source, and a source following historical fact. And if anyone studied the peace terms, they will find Scipio had the full permission of the Roman senate to make peace on whatever term he deemed acceptable, an authority Scipio implemented because Nero had been given the same power of imperium as Scipio, and also the province of Africa. Another rooster was entering the chook yard.
 
So now the story must find a way of getting rid of Nero. Following Livy’s chronology, in 202 BC, the consul Tiberius Claudius Nero was ordered by the Roman senate to take his fleet of 50 quinqueremes from Italy, to Sicily and from there to Africa. This is the same number of quinqueremes allocated to Cnaeus Octavius, and the same number of Carthaginian warships that captured the stranded Roman transports. Therefore, the fleet under the command of Cnaeus Octavius in 203 BC has been substituted for Tiberius Claudius Nero’s consular fleet of 202 BC.
 
And this is where the fabrication begins, and pathetically written. Livy has Tiberius Claudius Nero being extremely slow in getting the fleet ready and putting to sea. When Nero finally left Rome, his fleet was caught in a violent storm between the ports of Cosa and Loretum, but still succeeded in taking refuge in the port of Populonia in Italy. After the storm has past, Nero sailed to Elba, then on to Corsica and then to Sardinia. Unfortunately, whilst rounding the Montes Insani, Nero’s fleet was, oh yes and here it comes, caught in a worse storm than the last one. Many of Nero’s ships were scattered, others wrecked, while others were damaged. Nero’s fleet took refuge in Caralis, and while repairing his fleet, winter set in. When his year of office expired in 201 BC, as Nero was not granted an extension of his imperium, Nero returned to Rome with the fleet.
 
The false narrative has now gotten rid of a somewhat unlucky and lethargic Nero. And this is the first chink that exposes the false narrative and chronology, and that is the number of ships supposedly providing supplies to Scipio’s army. It is a consular fleet, not a supply fleet.
 
In 215 BC, Livy has the Scipio brothers with a force of 16,000 men defeat a Carthaginian army of 60,000 men. Against such great odds, the Scipios’ even manage to capture all three Carthaginian camps. The figure of 16,000 Romans tells the story. It is the number of men for part of a Roman army based on the fleet organisation. However, the 16,000 men states that Gnaeus Scipio was not present. This action belongs elsewhere, and most likely when the Scipio’s were killed. So to boost Gnaeus army, someone invented the story of the 20,000 mercenaries with his army.
 
In relation to the Carthaginian casualties for one battle, Livy writes that according to Claudius Quadrigarius as many as 37,000 Carthaginians were killed and 1,830 were captured. If you take the 1,830 Carthaginian prisoners and rounded them to 1,850 prisoners (+20 men) and then multiplying this by 20, you arrive at 37,000 men.
 
So who could have written all of this embellished rubbish? Is Claudius Quadrigarius our man? The navel engagement of 217 BC concerning Gnaeus Scipio shows it could not have been Polybius making up these legendary accounts surrounding the Scipio family. However, what about Alimentus? Alimentus was a prisoner of the Carthaginians, and supposedly spend his time as a slave under chains the whole time. If Alimentus was part of the Romans prisoners working in the fields of Africa that were freed by Scipio (according to Appian), then Alimentus could have been very beholding to the Scipios and had decided to write exaggerated accounts and battles based on real events, but turning Roman defeats into fictitious Roman victories in another theatre of war. Many of these fabricated stories are interconnected with high Carthaginian casualties, like someone just wants the Carthaginians killed on a mass level, and originating from someone with a deep hatred for the Carthaginians.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Nameless city in Africa taken by Scipio - by Steven James - 03-31-2019, 05:58 AM

Forum Jump: