Hannibal Abandoned by Carthage | BBC Studios

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 10 лют 2025
  • Drama charting the rise and fall of Hannibal, the Carthage Warrior. The Carthage Senate refuse Hannibal more troops and no longer believe Rome will surrender. Free History clip from the BBC.
    This is a channel from BBC Studios who help fund new BBC programmes. Service information and feedback: www.bbcstudios...

КОМЕНТАРІ • 64

  • @messianic_scam
    @messianic_scam 4 роки тому +57

    crossing half the world seas ,rivers ocean, islands with one army this man was driven by anger and revenge

  • @Fenris77
    @Fenris77 14 років тому +58

    Hannibal´s misstake was to think that Rome would abide by the rules!
    Carthage itself they´re misstake was their fear off Hannibal by that time Carthage should have won the war yet they helped Rome by refusing to send aid to Hannibal!

    • @eldeebcampeador
      @eldeebcampeador 9 місяців тому +2

      Hannibal's greatest mistake is Mago not killing Hanno The Great at the senate.

    • @Fenris77
      @Fenris77 9 місяців тому

      @@eldeebcampeador Hanno? Hanibal's father? Hanibal was not even around yet.
      Their worst mistakes was that they expected Rome to be acting civilised.

    • @eldeebcampeador
      @eldeebcampeador 9 місяців тому +1

      @@Fenris77 No, Hanno II, also known as Hanno The Great, he fought with Hannibal's father during the First Punic War and the Mercenary War and then betrayed Hannibal by telling Mago infront of the Senate that of Hannibal was indeed destroying the Romans then he needed no help from Carthage and decided to send the reinforcements to Iberia to support Hasdrubal Barca to protect his silver mines in Iberia.

    • @Fenris77
      @Fenris77 9 місяців тому

      @@eldeebcampeador I need to check that out I do know Hanibal or the Barca's in general was betrayed.
      And in the end Carthage lost it all because of those squabbling.

  • @PalleRasmussen
    @PalleRasmussen 15 років тому +18

    Rome was too large to take anyway, both Hannibal and Pyhhrus knew that. And their incredible will to fight and manpower made them very difficult to conquer. Add to that their policy in keeping their allies and Rome was almost unbeatable. You could win a battle, but after the conquest of Magna Graeca... Rome was almost unstoppable- only a united and determined Kart- Hadast could have.

    • @vynsferrer7203
      @vynsferrer7203 5 місяців тому

      stupid Carthage is much larger than the whole Italy, fucking dumb, the senators just didn't support their cause.

  • @Thrashmetalman
    @Thrashmetalman Рік тому +11

    Dr bashir really loved his war holo novels

  • @stephenbarnigham5192
    @stephenbarnigham5192 2 роки тому +16

    That was the Carthaginian's mistake! NOT Equipping Hannibal to Utterly Destroy the Romans,Ended in the complete Destruction of Carthage!

  • @jarogniewtheconqueror2804
    @jarogniewtheconqueror2804 7 років тому +10

    That is my friends how you lose a war

  • @skyz
    @skyz 15 років тому +22

    Actually, Hannibal lost most of his siege weapons while he was crossing the alps, so what he really needed were siege weapons.
    We can see that his army could destroy the Roman's, but with no siege weaponry, he would have no hope of capturing any cities.

    • @Lightingwarrior
      @Lightingwarrior 6 років тому +2

      Ancient armies were fully capable of building their own siege weapons during sieges. Often enough they would build catapults and siege towers and landder from surrounding trees

    • @mistarnoob1495
      @mistarnoob1495 4 роки тому +7

      But hannibal did not like sieges. He had terrible losses from the smallest fortified cities. He was a brilliant field commander tho. But a siege of rome would he not succeed in

    • @raxn2673
      @raxn2673 9 місяців тому

      In Campania, Hannibal laid seige to a city, and built a seige tower with his army.
      Seige weapons were nice, but Hannibal could navigate without them - he needed men.

    • @geenkaas6380
      @geenkaas6380 6 місяців тому +1

      Hannibal had spent 8 months besieging Seguntum before capturing it. Besieging city's like Rome would have taken years

  • @biohaker
    @biohaker 15 років тому +19

    Hey I'm Greek, I do respect Carthage and I wish one day to visit that mythical city! Although I can't compete Hannibal or Carthaginian armies, to the Greek armies and their excellence! I'm watching now the documentary, cause I did a test in facebook "What great general are you", so it said I'm Hannibal hehe :p

  • @blakerainwater6036
    @blakerainwater6036 2 роки тому +2

    Where can one stream this film in the US?

  • @lilahdog568
    @lilahdog568 2 роки тому +7

    Imagine if carthage won, how western civilization would turn out.

    • @GrandTerr
      @GrandTerr 2 роки тому +7

      Hard to imagine, but maybe Greek influence of democracy and philosophy would be much, much weaker which would make Europe likely something not good. No Christianity, no important values of individualism.

    • @zherean42069
      @zherean42069 Рік тому

      ​@@GrandTerr oh shit, I just realized how old the Romans are

    • @zherean42069
      @zherean42069 Рік тому

      ​@@GrandTerr oh shit, I just realized how old the Romans are

    • @DIEGhostfish
      @DIEGhostfish Рік тому

      I mean in the long run we've got the same religious ceremony as Carthage. (And Canaan)

    • @ivancolonna7520
      @ivancolonna7520 5 місяців тому +1

      Many civilizations would have had a more common practice of sacrificing their human babies to the God called Baal.

  • @THEFRITZ23
    @THEFRITZ23 12 років тому +7

    I think you will find all empires and wars were forged and won by luck.
    a great general once said " The victor, is he who commits less errors than his opponent"

  • @pagola
    @pagola 17 років тому +2

    a day and age of savegry and true warriorhood

  • @unathisilo4941
    @unathisilo4941 4 місяці тому

    Hannibal humiliated rome and expected a surrender

  • @amuktadir1991
    @amuktadir1991 3 роки тому

    Gayjalis choice depends on gajjali,carthage was 1st,rome was 2and,sassanid was 3rd.

  • @agar2134
    @agar2134 15 днів тому

    If you only knew how romans hated them for sacrifices babies😢

  • @honey4xi
    @honey4xi 6 років тому +2

    *Alexander's Macedonian army* had achieved its goal to defeat completely the Persian Empire. But *Hannibal's Carthage army* had not achieved its goal to defeat completely the Roman Empire. Alexander the Great was the outstanding hero. But, Hannibal was the warrior conqueror.

    • @locusta4662
      @locusta4662 2 роки тому +2

      Alexander had the best army . Actually Hannibal couldn't take Rome because he didn't have the numbers . He basically won most of his battle tnx to horsemen and this is why he is remembered even now . If you want to talk about the size of the territory conquered then Gengis khan was better than Alexander but i don't think so .

  • @amuktadir1991
    @amuktadir1991 3 роки тому

    Babul nangta christikul e,no more,Iman gajjali is seeing.

  • @nickr1246
    @nickr1246 Рік тому +1

    SHIIIIET HE DUN LOOK LIKE ME SHIIIIET MUHFUGGAS WE WIZ KAAAAAANGGGGZZZZ

  • @LonelyKetchup32
    @LonelyKetchup32 14 років тому

    @Elany13 I tried telling that to an idiot but he couldn't register that.

  • @jankrupka2843
    @jankrupka2843 4 роки тому +1

    Redeploying the troops to Spain would not be a bad strategic decision if the Hanibal withdrew from Italy to Carthage and part of his army strengthened troops in Spain!

  • @agar2134
    @agar2134 15 днів тому

    Rome is just modern day China and Russia 😮😮

  • @jacklou8553
    @jacklou8553 2 місяці тому

    just like the Republicans today

  • @amuktadir1991
    @amuktadir1991 3 роки тому

    But iran is a muslim country in this days,and for my south asia they are going a bit late.

    • @baileygregory9192
      @baileygregory9192 4 місяці тому +2

      This has nothing to do with Iran or persia. Its about rome and cathage. Who were in north africa

  • @ozzell
    @ozzell 15 років тому

    True. Carthage sucks.

  • @eldeebcampeador
    @eldeebcampeador 9 місяців тому

    This is actually a great freaking movie! Wow! Just amazing!! Why can't they make movies like this again!

    • @rupertsmith5815
      @rupertsmith5815 4 місяці тому

      what do you mean by not make them like this again ?

    • @eldeebcampeador
      @eldeebcampeador 4 місяці тому +1

      @@rupertsmith5815 Because they can't make them good like that again. Most of today's movies are absolute trash except a very select few.

    • @rupertsmith5815
      @rupertsmith5815 4 місяці тому

      @@eldeebcampeador well no offence but this is a very cheap TV movie and there are plenty of really well made smaller films out there

    • @eldeebcampeador
      @eldeebcampeador 4 місяці тому +1

      @@rupertsmith5815 The reason why I said that this is a great movie is how similar it was to the actual interaction that happened in the Carthaginian senate between Hanno II and Mago Barca. Doesn't matter if the movie was cheap, this is sensational.

    • @rupertsmith5815
      @rupertsmith5815 4 місяці тому

      @@eldeebcampeador Yeah but there are very accurate historical films coming out today like Oppenheimer or Corsage or the Fox
      All are very historically accurate
      When it comes to historical dramatisation more productions today pay attention than before to the facts