Ancient Rome was the site of some of the most brutal and intense wars in history. Two of the most notorious battles were the Battle of Cannae and the Battle of Vercellae, which remain to this day as some of Rome’s most famous and bloodiest fights.
The Battle of Cannae took place in 216 BCE and was fought between a large force of Carthaginian and Celtic warriors. Led by Hannibal Barca and a contingent of 80,000 soldiers, the small Roman army amounted to only 50,000 Legionnaires. The Battle of Cannae is renowned as one of the most tactical and successful battlefield performances of antiquity and has been cited in modern times as an example of supreme military efficiency.
Dr John Gascoigne, a professor of warfare and strategy at the University of Oxford, believes that “the Battle of Cannae was a true demonstration of the Roman ethos of strength in numbers and the reliance on formation tactics on the battlefield. Hannibal deployed a tactical maneuver to surround his enemy and leave them essentially powerless, it was a brilliant feat of warfare engineering.”
The brutality of the fight was indisputable; the second bloodiest battle in Roman history. In just one day, it is believed that over 50,000 Romans perished and turned the tide of the war decisively in favour of the Carthaginian leader.
The Battle of Vercellae, in present-day northern Italy, marked the turning point of the Second Punic War during the early third century. Just as during the Battle of Cannae, the forces of the Carthaginian commander, Hannibal, greatly outnumbered the Roman army, numbering some 60,000 troops. Nevertheless, the Romans prevailed and marked an important shift in the war’s strategy.
Military professor at the University of California, Bob Richards, points out that “Although the Battle of Vercellae was a loss for Hannibal, he should be admired for his defiance. Whilst the Romans had better resources, Hannibal still put up a great fight and it can be seen as Rome’s most total victory.”
The battle saw Hannibal and the Carthaginians suffer their worst defeat; it is thought that more than half of their force was killed, wounded or captured by the Roman armada and thus resulted in a complete loss for the Carthaginian forces. It is often remembered as the final, brutal blow in the war against Rome.
The Impact of Roman Warfare
Roman warfare during the early centuries of the empire had an intense and long-lasting impact. Whether it be through exemplary leaders such as Scipio Africanus or the complex strategies and tactics employed, the Roman army was a powerful and formidable force.
From the transportation of military equipment across treacherous terrains and rivers to the expansive network of roads and strongholds they created and maintained, the efficiency and organisation of the Roman army can still be respected and admired today.
The army itself was made up of citizens, which not only provided a way to honour their country but also provided the means for Roman autonomy. After the conquest of Italy, a process of unification ensued which successfully brought the neighbouring territories together under one banner and authorised the Roman government.
Critics such as Dr Adam Stewart from the Institute of Roman Affairs believe that, “Rome was a complex network of politics and warfare, where both of these components coexisted as an organic and successful mechanism. The development of militant tactics and strategies alongside practical and political policy allowed for the expansion of Roman power and was a great success on which many empires have modelled their own development.”
The Impact of the Battles
The two battles of Cannae and Vercellae were undoubtedly some of the bloodiest and most influential in Roman history. Alongside the invasion of many other territories, they provided monumental victories for the Roman forces and acted to cement the already formidable strength and power of the Roman army.
The strategic and tactical displays of both Hannibal and Scipio Africanus allowed for a vast array of knowledge as to the perfect execution of a battle. They also allowed for the understanding of an appropriate deployment of troops, the use of terrain and the customisation of equipment in order to triumph on the battlefield.
These two engagements, alongside many other battles, have acted as a major source of inspiration for modern day warfare. Without them, the portrayal of war in the modern world would be drastically different and the natural persistence of ancient tactics remain today.
Public Perception of War
Despite the development of many other tactics which minimise casualties, the perception of war through the public eye remains stubborn and unmoving. Whether it be from the nations who partake in it or from the pundits who witness it, war is rarely seen as an effort to procure peace and is instead viewed as a regrettable but necessary factor in the human world.
International relations theorist, James Hooker remarks that, “to the public, war is nothing but a sporting event or a violent spectacle. Rarely does war have a sympathetic public response and is ostracised for the effects it has on both society and its inhabitants.”
Although there have been progressive steps made in reducing combat casualties, the perception of war still lacks the innovation and compassion seen from those who partake in it. Simplistic formulas such as the winning of a war defines the aptitude of a leader and disregards the plight of the men and women who fight.
The Legacy of Ancient Warfare
The two bloody battles of Cannae and Vercellae are eternally remembered and talked of in modern discourse. They each act as a pinnacle of strength and tactical genius, symbolising Roman power and resilience.
The strategic manoeuvres deployed by Hannibal and Scipio Africanus remain valid to this day, with advanced militaries utilising such tactics in the field. Without such battles, modern warfare would be drastically different and lack the diversity which allows nations to protect their citizens.
The public view of warfare, however, struggles to progress. On the whole, combat is still seen as a barbaric means for achieving a goal rather than peaceful resistance. The desire for war has been reduced, yet a fascination and love for militarism remains in popular culture, where appreciation of those who sacrificed their lives to protect their nation is scarcely seen.
The Consequences of War
Whatever a nations reasons for going to war, the consequences of such engagements can sometimes be powerful and long-lasting. Whether it be mental or physical, the distress brought on by warfare is immense and should never be overlooked.
Psychiatrist, Lydia Klein, believes that “The most important consequence of war is the mental damage it brings to the individuals who experience it. The psychological trauma that comes along with battle and witnessing death can leave a person forever changed and can act as a hindrance to future development.”
Not only do wars have a lasting impact on their participants, but also on the environment in which it takes place. Whole landscapes and landscapes are forever changed and irreparably damaged as a result of combat. This destruction can act as a major hindrance to population growth and claims an immeasurable amount of resources.
The sheer power which warfare possesses should never be understated. Its ability to ruin whole nations can have a dramatic and negative effect and is rarely fully understood by those who perceive it from the sidelines.
The Human Cost of War
Whenever war commences, decisions are made which place human lives in peril. Commanders must choose between strategy and defence, between life and death.
These decisions are never easy and sociologist Alice Byford remarks that “It is my opinion that war is cruel and unnecessary, but it cannot be denied that it requires a brave heart and an unyielding determination. Leading any army into battle requires an immense amount of self-control and internal fortitude and it must never be forgotten that wartime decisions depend on the bravery and resilience of those who take part in it.”
The amount of human life which is sometimes lost in a single engagement can be harrowing and shocking, yet the aftermath of such of a battle yields a much more grievous sensation. The survivor’s guilt coupled with the despair of losing friends can be too much for some and has been rightly recognized as a major mental health issue.
It is at this moment that the human cost of war becomes apparent and those who remain must come to terms with their own guilt and the destruction that effected their lives. The sinister truth is that such loss will always be a part of warfare and is an underlying reality which all participants must understand.
The Price of Victory
Events such as the Battle of Cannae and Vercellae often see entire cultures shift and even disappear. The cost of victory can be high, with entire population’s rights and liberties being revoked as a result of a call to arms.
Rebecca Harrington, a professor of international politics, believes that “Population displacement, the destruction of ancient and cultural sites, the persecution of minorities and the eradication of political parties are all ghostly reminders of a war’s impact. Such instances of violence and human cruelty should never be forgotten and every effort should be made to try and prevent them from happening again.”
The cost of war can be seen in a variety of ways, from the destruction of whole cities to the marks of battle seen in the faces of its survivors. Such a cost is eternal and can never be measured in any tangible form.
It should never be forgotten that many of those who are forced to experience war do not even acknowledge its reason or relevance, and are instead another tally in the list of those who fell in service of their country or beliefs.
