In this paper I sought to determine whether or not Hannibal Barca had a grand strategy to deal with the Romans during the Second Punic War. If Hannibal did have a strategy, I would try to determine what his strategy was and if it was actually feasible. I approached this question by looking into the background leading up to the Second Punic War, the primary sources explanation of Hannibal’s strategy during the Second Punic War, the logistical feasibility of the plan, and Hannibal’s movements throughout Italy during the war. In conclusion I decided that Hannibal did have a Grand strategy and that it was to alienate the Italian allied city-states from Rome in order to gain the logistical supplies and manpower to bring down Rome. In the end the reason that Hannibal lost the second Punic War is because he misunderstood the relationship that existed between the allied Italian states and Rome. This question is important because it sheds new light on the relations between Rome and its allied states. It also brings new questions to the foreground to try and explain what exactly was the relationship between Rome and its allies during this period.

It has generally been thought that Hannibal was a hostile individual and despised in Roman society because of his non-Roman status and his apparent tendency to be deceptive, cruel and savage. Yet, our understanding of Hannibal as a character is limited. This thesis attempts to address his characterisation through an examination of his night-time military exploits, and argue that our knowledge of Hannibal can be expanded upon by examining how Livy characterised Hannibal in his account of the Second Punic War. Furthermore, this thesis takes a fresh approach to Hannibal’s characterisation, considering Livy’s use of ‘the night’ in association with military activity, and revealing that Hannibal displayed traits that the Romans themselves valued. Thus, Hannibal’s character is developed through a nocturnal military setting, and he becomes comparable to Rome’s finest generals, including Fabius Maximus, Marcellus and Scipio Africanus. Similarly, it is also shown that he exhibited Roman military virtus in place of the traits traditionally thought to be synonymous with the non-Roman. By analysing the character of Hannibal in this manner, we reveal that in Roman thought he was an ambiguous character, whilst simultaneously highlighting how the Romans both perceived and used the night within the context of the army.

The ancient city of Morgantina in Sicily was an important city during the Hellenistic age and probably member of a koinon (a union) under the leadership of Syracuse. Much research has been done on the city of Morgantina, but as far as I know, no study has had the aim to show what role Morgantina played in the Second Punic War. Therefore, this essay focuses on Morgantina during and after the Second Punic War (218–201 BCE). The main questions presented in this essay are what happened to the city after the war and what was the aftermath of the war? What happened to the people in the town and why were some houses abandoned and others not? To answer these questions archaeological evidence (numismatic material and buildings) as well as ancient historians’ narrations have been used (the historians used are Diodorus Siculus, Livy, Cicero and Strabo). The study argues that Morgantina might have been the last important free Greek town in Sicily (and possibly the very last) and that the city probably did not fight actively for either side, but might have provided Rome with grain and therefore taken Rome’s side.

Pendant la deuxième guerre punique, Rome et Carthage s'affrontent pour l'hégémonie de la partie occidentale de la Méditerranée de 219/218 à 201 av. J.-C. Cette guerre a été remémorée tout au long des siècles dans les écrits de I 'Antiquité. L'étude de la mémoire de la deuxième guerre punique durant l 'Antiquité consiste à analyser le fonctionnement de cette « mémoire collective », à repérer ses usages et ses abus. Pour répondre à cet objectif, un corpus de texte de vingt auteurs de I 'Antiquité, de Fabius Pictor à Augustin, a été sélectionné. Une première étude comparative des récits de ces vingt auteurs a permis d'établir les caractéristiques de cette mémoire collective. Une seconde étude comparative, à partir d'une méthode adaptée, élaborée à l'aide des outils de la sémiotique et de l'analyse du discours, a servi à l'analyse détaillée de trois épisodes clé de cette guerre : la chute de Sagonte et le déclenchement de la guerre, le passage des Alpes d'Hannibal, la bataille du lac Trasimène. La mémoire collective de la deuxième guerre punique, outre de « mémoire de guerre », peut être qualifiée de « mémoire civique » et de « mémoire manipulée ». Elle valorise les qualités des Romains (la virtus, la fides et la pietas) qui fondent leur identité à travers une série d'exemples. Certains faits historiques sont devenus des éléments structurant la mémoire collective de cette guerre. Entre le IIe siècle av. J.-C. et le Ve siècle ap. J.-C. quatre moments ont été caractérisés au niveau du fonctionnement de la mémoire collective : le moment d'historisation, le moment d'exemplarité, le moment de réduction, le moment de détournement. / During the Second Punic War, Rome and Carthage confront each other for the hegemony of the western part of the Mediterranean from 219/218 to 201 BC. This war was remembered throughout the centuries in the writings of the Antiquity. The study of the memory of the Second Punic War during the Antiquity consists to analyze the operation of this « collective memory », to identify its uses and abuses. To reach this objective, a text corpus about twenty authors of the Antiquity was selected, from Fabius Pictor to Augustin. A first comparative study of the stories about the Second Punic War of these twenty authors covers the identification of the characteristics of this collective memory. A second comparative study, based on a method elaborated with the semiotics concepts and discourse analysis, was used for a detailed analysis of three episodes of this war : the fall of Sagunto and the outbreak of war, the passage of the Alps by Hannibal, the battle of Lake Trasimeno. Thus, the collective memory of the Second Punic War, in addition to « war memory », can also be described as a « civic memory » and a « manipuled memory ». This collective memory develops the roman qualities (virtus, pietas and fides) who based their identity through a series of exempla. Some historical events of this war have become structuring elements of this collective memory. Between the second century BC and the fifth century AD., four moments were distinguished in the functioning of the collective memory of the Second Punic War : the moment of « historisation », the moment of« exemplarity », the moment of« reduction », and the moment of «diversion».

In this thesis, a coin from the Hannibalic occupation of Taras is analysed and discussed. The method applied in the analysis is Panofsky’s iconological method, and the theoretical framework has been derived from the research questions themselves in dialogue with modern numismatic research.  The focus of the discussion is on the relationship between the coin and its historical context. In the thesis, it is argued that the coin is a didrachm with heavily reduced weight, and that the weight reduction is a result of the financial difficulties caused by the Second Punic War. / Denna uppsats är en analys av ett mynt from Hannibals ockupation av Taras. Den metod som tillämpas i analysdelen är Panofskys ikonologiska metod. Det teoretiska ramverket har sin utgångspunkt i uppsatsens frågeställning, och har utarbetats i dialog med modern numismatisk forskning. Diskussionsdelen fokuserar på förhållandet mellan myntet och dess historiska kontext. I uppsatsen framförs argument för att myntet är en didrachm med kraftigt reducerad vikt, och att viktreduktionen är en följd av de finansiella svårigheter som orsakades av Andra puniska kriget.