Outcomes

Two of the ancient world's greatest battles were fought on this date. Both were decisive. One is well known; the other all but forgotten. But the forgotten battle changed the course of history; the well known one ultimately meant nothing, other than the death of its participants.

Cannae is one of the great battles of history, still taught in military academies throughout the world. In 216 B.C. Hannibal and his outnumbered Carthaginians annihilated a much larger Roman force. Eight legions were destroyed, along with hundreds of Noble Romans including a Consul. This triumph, coming on the heels of two other spectacular successes (Trebia in 218 B.C. and Trasimene in 217 B.C.) allowed Hannibal to separate Rome from its client city-states in southern Italy. It was perhaps Rome's darkest hour.

A century earlier in 338 B.C., Macedon's king Philip II and his son Alexander the Great fought an alliance of Greek city states at Chaeronea. Philip's new phalanx formation - combined with the recklessly aggressive tactics of his son - annihilated the Greek hoplite army. The Theban Sacred Band - the most elite troops of the day, and the ones who had finally broken the Spartan army - died almost to a man. It was almost the same result that the Romans would face.

And yet Cannae had almost no long term impact at all, and Chaeronea opened the door to a new age. Seven years later Alexander crushed the mighty Persian Empire of Darias, and shortly after that stood on the banks of the Indus river weeping that there were no more worlds to conquer. Seven years after Cannae, Hannibal found himself stalemated in Italy while a resurgent Rome squeezed Carthaginian Spain. A couple years after that, he was recalled to protect Carthage itself from a Roman invasion force.

Why the different outcomes? The key to unlocking the puzzle comes from an old, cynical saying: The world is run by "C" students.

Hannibal was a brilliant tactical commander, who consistently pulled victory from defeat by brainpower. Always outnumbered, typically with less reliable troops, he nonetheless deployed them in ways that overmastered his opponents. He lost very few battles - Zama really was the only one, and the war was all but over by then. But there was only one of him.

Philip created a system, which put different troops and organizations into formations that many commanders - he himself, Alexander, and a whole family tree of Hellenistic potentates - could use effectively to dominate the ancient battlefield. While Alexander is considered one of the great generals of all time, other lesser followers were able to subdue large kingdoms using this system.

Hannibal needed another Hannibal to hold off the Roman juggernaut in Spain. Instead, he had his brother, Hasdrubal, who lacked the requisite brilliance. And so Carthage fell, it's walls pulled down and its fields plowed with salt. Alexander died young, but great Hellenistic kingdoms rose under Antipater, Seleusis, and Ptolemy. Lacking Alexander's (or Hannibal's) brilliance, they effectively used Philip's system.