Hannibal Barca vs. Alexander the Great...who would win?

Take a guess who I would pick.

Who would care?

Wow, why the hostility, Setanta? The poster had a question/comment, and if he is knowledgable in the area in which he inquired, he would probably know the answer.

Gosh......

There's no hostility, and i have a perfect right to ask such a question, just as you do to attempt to criticize me.

This is apples to oranges stuff, and has a rather adolescent tenor. Hannibal was a mature man with considerable skills of leadership and military judgment. Alexander III of Macedon (who does not deserve to be called great), was a sociopathic, homicidal adolescent who never grew up, and reaped an undeserved reputation for the combined efforts of his father, and the officers who learned their trade under his father. I have absolutely no respect for him as a military leader, and considerable respect for Hannibal.

I also have a considerable respect for the study of history, and questions such as this reduce the study of history to the level of a first-person shooter video game.

Happy now, ALV? There's some hostility for ya, now you'll have something with which to make a comparison in the future.

OK. I was looking at your response, which was "who cares" and thought it was directed at my post, which was "guess who I would pick."

I see now that you were responding to the original poster's question. I assumed you were taking a shot at me, for which I apologize.

As for my original response to the original post, as you can see (since you seem to have a good knowledge of Hannibal) my Avatar is he.

I use Hannibal (for now), because he is one of the few persons in which history has turned (which I think is a cool subject in itself). There is considerable expectation that after the Battle of Cannae during the Second Punic War that Hannibal might have been able to press his attack on Rome, in which case our world today would be much different today.

So, it looks like I was mistaken about your response. It looks like you thought I was taking a shot at your comment at the comparison between Hannibal and Alexander.

Whew! Misunderstandings like this have probably caused some of those wars in the past!

So, are we OK now?

Yeah, i've got no gripe either with you, or with the original poster.

I am sick to death of Alexander III of Macedon, the most overrated "military" man in the ancient world.

...
"What Ifs" are an important tool for historians.

They force a person to look at all the factors, change one, and try to determine how/if that factor would have effected the outcome.

Short Answer: Hannibal wins - no question about it.

//BW

Statistically. Alex wins.

He never lost, and homicidal tendencies comes in handy in this venue.

Alexander.

Didn't Alex die of monkey bite??
Hmmm Hannibal would win on that fact alone i think...

ok.................

PETA aren't too fond of Hannibal...cruelty to elephants and all....

no

No Alex died of Alcoholism. I think it was blood poisoning in the end that topped him. Yet it's widely accepted drinking played the biggest part in his demise.

As for this whole discussion, I recently saw a program here in the UK, which pitted generals against each other. These two were battled. They used today's generals a Brit and American. Brit controlled hannibal American Alex. Hannibal won. Now this may seem like a spurious entertainment excercise but in fact it was pretty good with it's detail. It assessed both men at their zenith and pitted them in fair conditions. Both generals used the strategies as they felt the men at the time would have and Hannibal came out on top. It was a very tight battle.

As for me I feel you're being over harsh on Alex. I don't profess to be an expert, but from what I see he was certainly an outstanding general and his accomplishments speak for themself.

hannibal were very interested in alexander, he admired it as all the leaders in that time and in this one, he was inspired by him but Barca was a family that gived too many famous leader, his father Hamilcar for example, then i suppose if they met each other with the clever and the ability of making vitor from a loss that showed hannibal, when he wins with an army that counts the less than a half of the enemy one, Hannibal will win.

Hannibal
Alexander III of Macedonia is over-rated, Hannibal would win.

to all who dares to read it
well well wat are we arguing about today? o whos a better fighter: alexander or hannibal? well it depends if we are talking pimp slapping or just like a street fight. i think hannibal would win the pimp slapping fight. now all the little kids out there that doesnt know wat pimp slapping means u will find out soon enough. the real question here is who was a bigger pimp. judging by the pics of both guys neither one of them had anything to brag about. so in conclusion alexander probably got layed a few more times than hannibizzal. u see kids it doesnt matter who a better fighter was because we all will die someday it just depends on how many girls we get. let that be a lessonf or all of u.

Your mom thinks Alexander will win.
fellows.....dont be jealous bekuz ive been online all day chatting to babes. first of all, it would be nice if u could pull me into town. second of all, alexander is a cage fighter so he would win. hannibal has no skills and girls only like guys with great skills. since alexander wuz a cage fighter with great skills, he would win. thats wut im talkin about. alrite guys.....peace out.
"Y do u love me? Y do u need me? yes i love technology. but not as much as u u c. but i still love technology. always and forever. always and...forever."