12.12.2012 Views

SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...

SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...

SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

So long as he was in Italy no one was a match for him in the field, and<br />

after the battle of Cannae no one encamped face to face with him on<br />

open ground.<br />

<strong>The</strong>n undefeated he was recalled to defend his native land; there he<br />

carried on war against against Publius Scipio, the son of that Scipio<br />

whom he had put to flight first at the Rhone, then at the Po, and a third<br />

time at the Trebia.<br />

157<br />

Rolfe, 1984, 267.<br />

On the face of it, these two sentences, and particularly the second one, seem to<br />

contradict Plutarch‟s remark about Nepos allowing for sundry defeats of Hannibal, but<br />

the picture changes if the first sentence is interpreted to allow for certain types of victory<br />

against Hannibal (such a quibble may seem trivial today, but for ancient Roman society<br />

in which family honour and social ranking were so important, every detail counts). Such<br />

victories may include the successful defence of townships attacked by Hannibal (e.g.<br />

Nola or Neapolis); retaking townships that had previously defected or surrendered to<br />

Hannibal; skirmishes, or other forms of action that did not compare to Cannae or Zama<br />

in terms of being a formal battle on open ground. It is unfortunate that the editor‟s<br />

chapter division separates sentence 5.4 from sentence 6.1 because this removes an<br />

important context for understanding the second sentence in relation to Plutarch‟s<br />

comment. <strong>The</strong> sensational claim in 6.1 that Hannibal was undefeated in Italy should, I<br />

believe, be qualified by the preceding sentence that no-one faced him in an open-field<br />

style battle. Evaluating these two sentences together correlates more closely with<br />

Plutarch‟s assessment of Nepos‟ text (assuming, I think reasonably, that Plutarch‟s<br />

remarks encompassed the Hannibal biography).<br />

Plutarch‟s comments may also be compared to the relevant sections of Livy‟s text,<br />

and Livy is much less ambiguous than Cornelius Nepos‟ Hannibal. Livy records a<br />

number of Roman claims for successes over Hannibal in Italy which contradict the idea<br />

that Hannibal was undefeated in Italy, and not only by Marcellus. P. Licinius and P.<br />

Sempronius reported that they defeated Hannibal with their combined armies in<br />

Bruttium; Gnaeus Servilius claimed that he drove Hannibal out of Italy (Livy, 29.36;<br />

30.6; 30.24.1). Unfortunately, there are no further details in support of these reports, and<br />

it is Livy‟s portrayal of Marcellus that offers the strongest counter to the claim.<br />

Livy includes three victories over Hannibal by Marcellus, of which the first was<br />

particularly important for lifting Roman morale and demonstrating that Hannibal was<br />

neither invincible nor divinely protected (Livy, 23.45; 24.17; 27.13). In literary terms,

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!