Hannibal-in-the-Alps questions

[Jona Lendering]

Two weeks ago, I saw a fascinating documentary about Hannibal on the German TV, which was made by Jörg Altekruse for Arte, a Spanish TV network and the German WDR. It was certainly not bad, and I liked to watch how a team of academicians (Armin Reller, Pedro Barceló) plus a circus artist (Wendel Huber) guided an elephant across the Alps. There were more people in that team, but I have not written down all their names.

Although spectacular, I was also intrigued by several statements.

(1)
It was said that Hannibal's army counted 100,000 men. That is what Polybius says; but according to Serge Lancell (Hannibal, 1995), he exaggerates. I thought that Lancell was summarizing the communis opinio. Am I wrong?

(2)
They said that Hannibal's crossing the Alps with elephants was some sort of PR stunt, intended to make a comparison with Heracles, who went from Spain to Italy with the cattle of Geryon. But were the Punic soldiers aware of the existence of this myth? (I only know about Hercules' return through Italy from Latin sources, like Livy.)

(3)
They stated that winter started early in 218. As far as I know, the soldiers encountered snows of the previous year when they were descending. Have I missed something?

(4)
Finally, they said that when the Romans were regaining ground and brought down Carthage, they obtained so much silver that it created inflation. As far as I know, the Romans debased their currency. Again, have I missed something?

I am seriously starting to doubt things I thought I knew for certain, but I have not read anything more recent than Serge Lancel's book. (I have not read Prevas' book, for instance.) Anyone any thoughts?

[S SEVERUS]

1) There was a substantial number of soldiers he send home before he reached the Rhone. He probably entered Italy with 20.000 - 25000 soldiers so i don't think he would lose 75.000 soldiers in the crossing of the alps.

[Jona Lendering]

1) There was a substantial number of soldiers he send home before he reached the Rhone. He probably entered Italy with 20.000 - 25000 soldiers so i don't think he would lose 75.000 soldiers in the crossing of the alps.

Exactly the point Lancel makes: if Hannibal had lost 3/4 of his army before he entered Italy, his soldiers would have lynched him. He must have started with a much smaller army (Lancel thinks 40,000; after leaving 10,000 men in Andalusia, the losses at the Rhone and in the Alps become acceptable).

[Aryaman2]

Yes, Polybius said 90.000 infantry and 12.000 cavalry, while he is very reliable for Greek numbers, he is regularly inflating numbers for Carthaginians or Romans, except when he cites the tabula Laciniana, the only instance in which we actually have a solid base for numbers, so that the logic process is to start with the numbers given in the tabula (26.000) and count back. The total number of 40.000 seems quite plausible to me, and probably on the higher end.
As for the communis opinio, here I am always puzzled by the lack of comunication between military historians of different periods, a military historian of a modern period would tell you that 100.000 is simply imposible, but especialist in Ancient History are much more ready to accept even higher figures for Ancient armies.

[Aryaman2]

As for point 4, the Romans had to debase coin, but after the fall of Carthago Nova and Castullum they got possesion of very important silver sources, i don´t know if that really caused inflation though.

[Jona Lendering]

As for point 4, the Romans had to debase coin, but after the fall of Carthago Nova and Castullum they got possesion of very important silver sources, i don´t know if that really caused inflation though.

Debasement of 50% in 217, and further debasement after Cannae in 216. The denarius was introduced in 214. So that antedates the capture of Carthago.

[Aryaman2]

As for point 4, the Romans had to debase coin, but after the fall of Carthago Nova and Castullum they got possesion of very important silver sources, i don´t know if that really caused inflation though.

Debasement of 50% in 217, and further debasement after Cannae in 216. The denarius was introduced in 214. So that antedates the capture of Carthago.

Yes, the sequence could be
1) Romans had to debase coin to pay war expenses
2) When war got better, they got the Silver mines in Spain, and the flood of silver was the cause of inflation

OTOH, it could be the debased coin that caused inflation by itself, as logically prices would go up against a coin that is losing silver content.

[Epictetus]

(2) They said that Hannibal's crossing the Alps with elephants was some sort of PR stunt, intended to make a comparison with Heracles, who went from Spain to Italy with the cattle of Geryon. But were the Punic soldiers aware of the existence of this myth? (I only know about Hercules' return through Italy from Latin sources, like Livy.)

This is interesting. I’ve never heard this before.

Regarding the question whether the Punic soldiers were aware of this myth, I would be extremely surprised if they were not. In fact, it has been suggested that the cult of Hercules may have actually been introduced to Rome by Phoenician traders during the earliest orientalising phase.

In the Origin of the Legends: Evander and Hercules section of Cornell’s excellent book he says:

Two major sanctuaries were established, the Great Altar (Ara Maxima) and the shrine of Hercules Victor, both situated in the Forum Boarium. The cult of Hercules in Rome was closely connected with commerce, and this fact, together with the location of the shrines, suggests that it was introduced by Greek traders. This was the view of Bayet, who also drew attention to versions of the Hercules-Cacus story in the Greek cities of southern Italy.

An alternative theory, not ruled out by Bayet, is based on the close affinities between Hercules and the Phoenician Melqart, and maintains that the Roman Hercules was of Phoenician origin. It has been suggested that the cult was introduced by Tyrian merchants who took up residence in the Forum Boarium; but this interesting suggestion has not been substantiated by archaeology.

T.J. Cornell. The Beginnings of Rome, page 69.

Even if they did not introduce the cult of Hercules to Rome, I would think that the Phoenicians would have learned of this myth sometime in the intervening centuries. The Carthaginians had extensive contacts with Greeks, Etruscans and Latins for hundreds of years prior to Hannibal crossing the Alps. Bietti Sesteri has documented dozens of Punic influences in graves throughout central Italy in her superb book The Iron Age Community of Osteria dell’Osa.

Of course, this doesn’t answer the question if Hannibal really did make the comparison.

[Jona Lendering]

In the Origin of the Legends: Evander and Hercules section of Cornell’s excellent book he says:

... An alternative theory, not ruled out by Bayet, is based on the close affinities between Hercules and the Phoenician Melqart, and maintains that the Roman Hercules was of Phoenician origin. It has been suggested that the cult was introduced by Tyrian merchants who took up residence in the Forum Boarium; but this interesting suggestion has not been substantiated by archaeology.

It's even better than was initially believed. In the Roman legend, Hercules sleeps when his cattle is stolen, and wakes up. This became unexpectedly a crucial point when it was discovered, not so long ago, that the Phoenicians believed that Melqart stood up from the death.

[ParthianBow]

I think that rather than the attempt to emulate Hercules, Hannibal went over the Alps to surprise the Romans, and because the during the First Punic War, the Carthaginians had lost supremacy of the seas. Any large scale naval operation would have risked total disaster if contact with the Romans was established (that's the opinion of Nigel Bagnall in his excellent The Punic Wars).