Both Carthage and Rome fought long and hard for the victories of the Punic Wars. . The Punic Wars were an example of Rome's great wealth and size, and Cartridges leaders, strategies and government. Hannibal strategies, bravery and determination led him to be very successful in the first Punic War, but because of his lack of support from the council and small army, gave rome a great leg up, leading them to victory. If Rome's wealth and size was removed they would not have had conquered Carthage. Hannibal was not only a strong leader, but also had the knowledge of warfare that Romans could not dream of. Hannibal grew up being taught the art of war by his father who wanted to conquer Rome. Hannibal took an oath to dedicate his life to destroy rome.Once his father had been killed he stepped up and decided to fill his father's shoes. Hannibal's war tactics that were passed on through his father lead him through the first Punic Wars With flying colors. But when the third war rolled around the council denied him help and support, so his army was much smaller than the one that Rome had built. If the council had supported him and provided him with a bigger army, he would have without a doubt won against Rome. His knowledge was more than double of Sco. If Rome's wealth and size were irrelevant, Hannibal and Carthage would have …show more content…
Unfortunately these two things were things that Carthage lacked. The Roman army was much larger than the Carthage army which gave them an immediate advantage over carthage. Rome's lack of knowledge and strategies were apparent when Carthage beat them in the first punic wars easily, but their army size and growth of knowledge led them to victory in the third. If the two armies were the same size, the Carthage army would destroy the Roman army because even with the Roman improvement they would not even come close to the knowledge and strategies that Hannibal had studied all of his