Hasdrubal
Could not find Hasdrubale in Logeion dictionaries.
Hasdrubale Proper-name noun: masculine ablative singular of Hasdrubal
- a Punic name. The most celebrated are,
- 1 Son of Mago, the founder of the power of Carthage, Just. 19, 1.—
- 2 Son of Hanno, who fought in Sicilia during the first Punic war, Cic. Verr. 2, 3, 54, § 125.—
- 3 The son-in-law of Hamilcar Barcas, Nep. Hann. 3, 2; Liv. 21, 1 sq.—
- 4 The son of Hamilcar Barcas, brother of Hannibal, defeated B. C. 207 at the Metaurus, Liv. 27, 18 sq.; 49 sq.; Nep. Hann. 3, 3; Cat. 1, 2; Hor. C. 4, 4, 38; 72; Ov. F. 6, 770.—
- 5 Son of Gisco, third Carthaginian general in Hispania, Liv. 24, 41; 28, 1; 12 sq.—
- 6 A general against Masinissa, Cic. N. D. 3, 38, 91; Liv. Epit. 51; Val. Max. 3, 2 ext. 8 al.—
- II Deriv.: Hasdrŭbălĭānus, a, um, adj., belonging to one Hasdrubal: funus, Sid. Ep. 1, 5.
- 1. jongere broer v. Hannibal, veldheer in de 2e Pun. oorlog, sneuvelde in 207 v. Chr.;
- 2. schoonzoon v. Hamilcar Barcas.
(Ἀσδρούβας). According to Gesenius (d. Pthoen. Mon. pp. 401, 407) this name is more correctly written Asdrbhal, without the aspiration, which has been adopted from a mistaken analogy with Hannibal, Hamilcar, &c. (See Drakenborch, ad Liv. 21.1.) The same writer explains it as signifying cujus auxilium est Baal.
1. A Carthaginian general, son of Mago, is represented by Justin as being, together with his father and his brother, Hamilcar, one of the chief founders of the military power and dominion of Carthage. According to that writer he was eleven times invested with the chief magistracy, which he calls dictatorship (dictatura, by which it is probable that he means the chief military command, rather than the office of suffete), and four times obtained the honours of a triumph, an institution which is not mentioned on any other occasion as existing at Carthage. But the only wars in which Justin speaks of him as engaged, are one against the Africans, which appears to have been on the whole unsuccessful, and one in Sardinia, in which Hasdrubal himself perished. (Just. 19.1.) He left three sons, Hannibal, Hasdrubal, and Sappho, who are said to have followed up their father's career of conqutest, and to have held, together with their cousins, the three sons of Hamilcar, the chief direction of all affairs at Carthage; but their particular actions are not specified. (Id. 19.2). The chronology of this part of the Carthaginian history, as related by Justin, is extremely uncertain.
2. A son of the preceding, of whom nothing more is known. (Just. l.c.)
3. One of the commanders of the great Carthaginian army which was defeated by Timoleon at the river Crimissus, in B. C. 339. [Timoleon]. Plutarch, the only author who mentions the names of the Carthaginian generals, on this occasion (Timol. 25) does not tell us what became of them.
4. A Carthaginian general in the first Punic war, called by Polybius son of Hanno. He is first mentioned as one of the two generals appointed to take the field against Regulus in B. C. 256, and who, by their injudicious management, brought Carthage to the brink of ruin. (Plb. 1.30_31.) Though the virtual command of the army was soon after transferred to Xanthippus, it does not appear that the generals were ever deposed; and after the final defeat of Regulus, Hasdrubal was immediately despatched to Sicily, with a large army, and not less than 140 elephants. (Id. 38.) The terror with which these animals at this time inspired the Romans rendered them unwilling to encounter Hasdrubal in the field, and thus gave him the command of the open country, notwithstanding which he appears to have wasted his time in unaccountable inactivity; and during a period of two years to have effected nothing beyond a few unimportant skirmishes. At length, in the beginning of B. C. 250, he was aroused to exertion, and advanced to attack the Roman consul, L. Caccilius Metellus, under the walls of Panormus. But Metellus, by his skilful dispositions, not only repulsed his attack, but totally defeated his army; and, what was of the greatest consequence, killed or took captive all his elephants. This defeat had more than almost any other a decisive influence on the fate of the war, as from this time the Roman superiority by land was almost undisputed. Hasdrubal escaped from the action to Lilybaeum, but was put to death on his return to Carthage. (Plb. 1.39, 40; Diod. Exc. Hoesch. 23.14, p. 506; Zonar. 8.14; Oros. 4.9.)
5. A Carthaginian, son-in-law of the great Hamilcar Barca. He appears to have early taken part in public affairs, and distinguished himself while yet a young man as one of the most influential leaders of the democratic party at Carthage during the interval between the first and second Punic wars. Community of interests led to a close connection between him and Hamilcar Barca, whose daughter he had married, and whom he accompanied into Spain in 238 B. C. From thence he was sent back to Africa to take the command in a war against the Nnmidian tribes, whom he completely defeated and reduced to submission. (Diod. Exc. Hoesch. 25.2. p. 510). At what time he returned to Spain we know not, but we find him there in B. C. 229, when, after the death of Hamilcar, he hastened to collect together his scattered forces, and was soon after nominated by the government of Carthage to succeed him as commander-in-chief. Hasdrubal does not appear to have been distinguished so much by his talents for war, as by his political management and dexterity, and especially his conciliating manners: and these qualities, as they had first gained him popularity at home, were now also of the utmost service in conciliating the minds of the Spaniards, and gaining them over to the Carthaginian alliance. Still more to increase this disposition, he married the daughter of one of the Spanish chieftains. (Diod. l. c p. 511.) At the same time, by the foundation of the city of New Carthage, in a situation admirably chosen, on account of its excellent port and easy communication with Africa, as well as from its proximity to the silver mines of Spain, he contributed gr atly to the consolidation of the Carthaginian empire in that country. Meanwhile he carried on warlike operations against the more distant and hostile tribes; and these enterprizes, the conduct of which he entrusted to the young Hannibal, are said to have been almost uniformly successful. By these means he had already extended the dominion of Carthage over a great part of the peninsula, when he was assassinated by a slave, whose master he had put to death (B. C. 221). He had held the command in Spain for a period of between eight and nine years. (Plb. 2.1, 13, 36; Diod. Exc. Hoesh. 25.3, p. 511; Appian, App. Hisp. 4_8; Liv. 21.2; Zonar. 8.19.)
According to Fabius (ap. Plb. 3.8), Hasdrubal had been so elated by the successes he had obtained in Spain, that he repaired to Carthage, with the design of overthrowing the constitution of his country, and establishing himself in the possession of unlimited power; but failing in this object, he returned to Spain, and thenceforth governed that country with uncontrolled and arbitrary authority. Notwithstanding the censure of Polybius, there is certainly nothing in itself improbable in this statement: the position of Hasdrubal in Spain, like that of his predecessor and successor, was in great measure independent of the government at home, a fact sufficiently proved by the remarkable circumstance that the celebrated treaty which fixed the Iberus as the boundary of the two nations was concluded by the Romans, not with the Carthaginian government, but with Hasdrubal alone. (Plb. 2.13, 3.27, 29; Liv. 21.2, 18, 19.) A splendid palace which he erected at New Carthage was also pointed out as an additional proof of his assumption of sovereign power. (Plb. 10.10.9.)
6. Son of the great Hamilcar Barca, and brother of the still more famous Hannibal. He is mentioned as being present in the battle in which his father lost his life, and from which he escaped, together with his brother Hannibal, to the city of Acra Leuce. (Diod. Exc. Hoesch. 25.2.) This is the only notice we find of him previous to the departure of Hannibal for Italy; but it is evident that he must not only have been trained up in war, but must have already given proofs of his ability, which led his brother to confide to him the important command of the army in Spain, when he himself set out on his daring march to Italy, B. C. 218. The troops left under his command amounted to less than 13,000 foot and 2500 horse, principally Africans (Plb. 3.33); but he doubtless greatly increased this number by levies among the Spaniards themselves. With a part of this force he advanced to support Hanno, who had been left in charge of the province between the Iberus and the Pyrenees, against Cn. Scipio; but that general was defeated, and his army destroyed before he could arrive, and he was obliged to content himself with cutting off a body of the Roman soldiers who were attached to the fleet. (Plb. 3.76; Liv. 21.61.) The next spring (B. C. 217) he advanced from New Carthage, where he had wintered, with the intention of dispossessing Cn. Scipio of the province north of the Iberus; but the loss of his fleet, which was almost destroyed by that of the Romans, appears to have paralysed his movements, and he did not even cross the Iberus. Before the end of the season, P. Scipio joined his brother with large reinforcements from Rome, and they now assumed the offensive, and crossed the Iberus, without Bostar, who had been despatched by Hasdrubal to oppose them, venturing to meet them in the field. No decisive action took place before the winter; but Bostar, by suffering the Spanish hostages to fall into the hands of the Romans [Bostar No. 3], gave a shock to the Carthaginian influence throughout Spain which it hardly recovered. (Plb. 3.95_99; Liv. 22.19-22.) The campaign of the next year, 216, which was marked in Italy by the great victory of Cannae, was signalised by no decisive results in Spain, Hasdrubal having apparently confined himself to defensive operations, or to enterprises against the Spanish tribes. But when the news of the battle of Cannae reached Carthage, orders were immediately sent to Hasdrubal to march at once into Italy, in order to support and co-operate with the victorious Hannibal, and Himilco was sent with a fresh army to supply his place in Spain. But the execution of this plan was frustrated by the total defeat of Hasdrubal in a battle with the two Scipios near the passage of the Iberus; and this disaster was followed by the defection of many of the native tribes. (Liv. 23.26-29, 32; Zonar. 9.3.) The Carthaginians now sent to his relief his brother Mago, with a force of 12,000 foot, 1500 horse, and 20 elephants, which had been previously destined for the assistance of Hannibal in Italy; and we henceforward find the two brothers cooperating in the war in Spain. But our knowledge of their proceedings is very imperfect: the Roman accounts are full of the most palpable and absurd exaggerations; and it is utterly impossible to form any thing like a clear conception of the military operations of either side. Hence a very brief notice of the leading events of the war is all that can be here attempted. It may be observed, however, that the operations of the generals on both sides must naturally have been determined in great measure by the fluctuating policy of the different Spanish tribes, concerning which we have scarcely any information; and this circumstance may sometimes serve to explain changes of fortune which would otherwise appear wholly unaccountable.
In the year 215 we find Hasdrubal and Mago employed with their united forces in the siege of Illiturgi, when the two Scipios came up to the relief of the city, totally defeated them, and took their camp. But this disaster did not prevent them from soon after forming the siege of Indibilis, where, it is said, they again experienced the like ill fortune. (Liv. 23.49.) The next year, 214, was marked by the arrival in Spain of a third Carthaginian general, Hasdrubal the son of Gisco, with a considerable army; but, notwithstanding this reinforcement, nothing memorable was effected. The Roman accounts indeed speak of two successive victories gained by Cn. Scipio, but followed (as usual) by no apparent results. (Liv. 24.41, 42.) Of the campaign of 213 no particulars are recorded by Livy; but according to Appian (App. Hisp. 15), Hasdrubal was employed during a part of this year in Africa, having been sent for by the government at home to carry on the war against the revolted Numidians, which he brought to a successful termination, and then returned to Spain. The following year (B. C. 212) was at length marked by a decisive success on the part of the Carthaginians. The two Scipios appear to have roused themselves to make a great effort, and dividing their forces, marched to attack the separate Carthaginian armies at the same time. The result was fatal: Cn. Scipio, who was opposed to Hasdrubal, was at once paralysed by the defection of 20,000 Celtiberian mercenaries, who were gained over by the Carthaginian general: meanwhile his brother Publius had fallen in an engagement with the Numidian cavalry of Hasdrubal son of Gisco and Mago; and those two generals having hastened to join their forces with those of the son of Barca, Cn. Scipio was surrounded by their united armies, his camp taken, and he himself slain, with the greater part of his troops. (Liv. 25.32_36; Appian, App. Hisp. 16.)
This victory appeared to be decisive of the fate of the war in Spain; and we do not see what now remained to prevent Hasdrubal from setting out on his march to Italy. Yet we hear of no measures tending to this result, and are unable to account for the loss of so valuable an opportunity. But the history of this part of the war has been so effectually disguised, that it is impossible to conjecture the truth. It appears that the remains of the Roman armies had been collected together by a Roman knight, named L. Marcius, who established his camp to the north of the Iberus; and was able to defend it against the attacks of the enemy; but the accounts (copied by Livy from Claudius Quadrigarius and Valerius of Antium) of his great victories over the Carthaginian armies, and his capture of their camps, are among the most glaring exaggerations with which the history of this war has been encumbered by the Roman annalists. Still more palpably absurd is the story that the Roman praetor, Claudius Nero, landing in Spain with a force of 6000 men, found Hasdrubal encamped in so disadvantageous a position, that his whole army must have fallen into the power of Claudius, had he not deluded that general by a pretended negotiation, under cover of which he drew off his forces. (Liv. 25.37_39, 26.17; comp. Appian, App. Hisp. 17, and Zonar. 9.5, 7; and see some judicious remarks on this part of Livy's history by a soldier and a statesman in Raleigh's History of the World, book 5, ch. 13, sect. 11.) All that is certain is, that when the youthful P. Scipio (the son of that Publius who had fallen in the preceding year) landed in Spain in 211, he found the whole country south of the Iberus in the undisputed possession of the Carthaginian generals. Their three armies were, however, separated in distant quarters of the peninsula, probably engaged in establishing their dominion over the native tribes: while the more settled Carthaginian province was comparatively neglected. Of this disposition Scipio ably availed himself, and by a sudden blow, made himself master of New Carthage, the heart of the enemy's dominion, and the place where their principal stores had been collected. (Plb. 10.7_20; Liv. 26.20, 41_48; Appian, App. Hisp. 19_24.)
Hasdrubal had been occupied in the siege of a small town of the Carpetanians, at the time that this blow was struck: we know nothing of the measures which either he or his colleagues adopted in consequence; but we are told that the conquest of New Carthage co-operating with the personal popularity of Scipio, caused the defection of many of the Spanish tribes from the alliance of Carthage, among others that of Indibilis and Mandonius, two of the most influential, and hitherto the most faithful of her supporters. Hasdrubal, alarmed at this increasing disaffection, determined to bring matters to the issue of a decisive battle, with the view of afterwards putting in execution his longmeditated advance to Italy. But while he was still engaged in his preparations for this purpose, and was collecting a supply of money from the rich silver mines of Andalusia, he was attacked by Scipio in his camp at Baecula, and, notwithstanding the strength of his position, was forced from it with heavy loss. The defeat, however, can hardly have been so complete as it is represented by the Roman writers, for it appears that Hasdrubal carried off his treasure and his elephants in safety, and withdrew unmolested towards the more northern provinces of Spain. Here he held a consultation with the other two generals (his brother Mago and Hasdrubal the son of Gisco), at which it was agreed that he himself should proceed to Italy, leaving his two colleagues to make head against Scipio in Spain. (Plb. 10.34_40; Liv. 27.17_20.)
Of the expedition of Hasdrubal to Italy, though it is one of the most important events of the war, we have very little real knowledge. The line of his march was necessarily different from that pursued by Hannibal, for Scipio was in undisputed possession of the province north of the Iberus, and had secured the passes of the Pyrenees on that side; hence Hasdrubal, after recruiting his army with fresh troops, levied among the northern Spaniards, crossed the Pyrenees near their western extremity, and plunged into the heart of Gaul. What were his relations with the Gallic tribes--whether the period spent by him among them was occupied in peace or war--we know not; but, before he reached the foot of the Alps, many ot them had been induced to join him, and the mention among these of the Arverni shows how deep into the country he had penetrated. The chronology is also very obscure. It is certain that the battle of Baecula was fought in B. C. 209, but whether Hasdrubal crossed the Pyrenees the same year we have no evidence: he must, at all events, have spent one winter in Gaul, as it was not till the spring of 207 that he crossed the Alps, and descended into Italy. The passage of the Alps appears to have presented but trifling difficulties, compared with what his brother Hannibal had encountered eleven years before; and he arrived in Italy so much earlier than he was expected, that the Romans had no army in Cisalpine Gaul ready to oppose him. Unfortunately, instead of taking advantage of this, to push on at once into the heart of Italy, he allowed himself to be engaged in the siege of Placentia, and lost much precious time in fruitless efforts to reduce that colony. When at length he abandoned the enterprise, he continued his march upon Ariminum, having previously sent messengers to Hannibal to apprise him of his movements, and concert measures for their meeting in Umbria. But his despatches fell into the hands of the Roman consul, C. Nero, who instantly marched with a light detachment of 7000 men to join his colleague, M. Livius, in his camp at Sena, where his army was now in presence of Hasdrubal. Emboldened by this reinforcement, the two consuls proceeded to offer battle to the Carthaginian general; but Hasdrnbal, perceiving their augmented forces, declined the combat, and retreated towards Ariminum. The Romans pursued him, and he found himself compelled to give them battle on the right bank of the Metanurus. It is admitted by his enemies that on this occasion Hasdrubal displayed all the qualities of a consummate general, but his forces were greatly inferior to those of the enemy, and his Gaulish auxiliaries were of little service. The gallant resistance of his Spanish and Ligurian troops is attested by the heavy loss of the Romans; but all was of no avail, and, seeing the battle irretrievably lost, he rushed into the midst of the enemy, and fell sword in hand, in a manner, says Livy, worthy of the son of Hamilcar and the brother of Hannibal. The loss on his side had amounted, according to Polybius, to 10,000 men, while it is exaggerated by the Roman writers (who appear anxious to make the battle of the Metaurus a compensation for that of Cannae), to more than 50,000. But the amount of loss is unimportant; the battle was decisive of the fate of the war in Italy. (Plb. 11.1-3; Liv. 27.36, 39, 43_49; Appian, App. Hisp. 28, Annib. 52, 53; Zonar. 9.9; Oros. 4.18; Eutrop. 3.18.) The consul, C. Nero, hastened back to Apulia almost as speedily as he had come, and is said to have announced to Hannibal the defeat and death of his brother, by throwing down before his camp the severed head of Hasdrubal. (Liv. 27.51.)
The merits of Hasdrubal as a general are known to us more by the general admission of his enemies, who speak of him as a worthy rival of his father and his brother, than from any judgment we can ourselves form from the imperfect and perverted accounts that have been transmitted to us. Of his personal character we know nothing : not a single anecdote, not a single individual trait, has been preserved to us by the Roman writers of the man who for so many years maintained the struggle against some of their ablest generals. We can only conjecture, from some of the events of the Spanish war, that he possessed to a great degree the same power over the minds of men that was evinced by other members of his family; and his conduct towards the subject tribes seems to have been regarded as presenting a favourable contrast to that of his namesake, the son of Gisco. (Plb. 9.11.)
7. A member of the senate of Carthage, who, according to Zonaras (8.22), took the lead in recommending the rejection of the demands of Rome, and the declaration of war, when the Roman embassy arrived at Carthage, after the fall of Saguntum, B. C. 219. He is not mentioned by any other writer.
8. An officer of high rank in the army of Hannibal. He is first mentioned as being entrusted by that general with the care of transporting his army over the Po (Plb. 3.66); and we afterwards find him employed in preparing the arrangements for the well-known stratagem by which Hannibal eluded the vigilance of Fabius, and effected his escape from Campania through the passes of the Apennines. (Id. 3.93; Liv. 22.16.) He at this time held the chief direction of all military works (ὁ ἐπὶ λειτουρλιῶν τεταλμένος); but there is little doubt that it is the same person whom we afterwards find in command of Hannibal's camp at Geronium on the occasion of his action with Minucius (Plb. 3.102), and who also commanded the left wing of the Carthaginian army at the battle of Cannae (B. C. 216). On that memorable day, Hasdrubal rendered the most important services. The Spanish and Gaulish horse under his command, after an obstinate combat, obtained the victory over the Roman cavalry to which they were opposed, cut to pieces the greater part of them, and dispersed the rest. As soon as he saw his victory in this quarter complete, Hasdrubal hastened to recal his troops from the pursuit, and led them to the suppoit of the Numidian cavalry of the right wing, against whom the Roman allies had hitherto maintained their ground, but took to flight on perceiving the approach of Hasdrubal. He thereupon left it to the Numidians to pursue the enemy, and, bringing up his cavalry to the centre of the field, by a well-timed charge upon the rear of the Roman infantry, at the same time that they were engaged both in front and flank with Hannibal's African and Spanish foot, effectually decided the fortune of the day. (Plb. 3.115-118; Liv. 22.46_48.) Appian, whose account of the battle of Cannae (Annib. 20-24) differs very much from that of Polybius, and is far less probable, assigns the command of the left wing of the Carthaginian army to Hanno, and that of the right to Mago, and does not mention Hasdrubal at all. It is more singular, that after this time his name does not occur again either in Polybius or Livy.
9. Surnamed the Bald (Calvus), commander of the Carthaginian expedition to Sardinia in the Second Punic War, B. C. 215. The revolt of Hampsicora in Sardinia having excited in the government of Carthage hopes of recovering that important island, they placed under the command of Hasdrubal a fleet and army equal to those sent into Spain under Mago, with which he put to sea; but a storm drove his armament to the Balearic islands, where he was obliged to remain some time in order to refit. Meanwhile, affairs in Sardinia had taken an unfavourable turn, notwithstanding which, he landed his forces in the island, and uniting them with those of Hampsicora, marched straight upon Caralis, when they were met by the Roman praetor, T. Manlius. A pitched battle ensued, which ended in the total defeat of the Carthaginian army. Hasdrubal himself was numade prisoner, and carried in triumph to Rome by Manlius. (Liv. 23.32, 34, 40, 41; Zonar. 9.4; Eutrop. 3.13.)
10. Son of Gisco. one of the Carthaginian generals in Spain during the Second Punic War. He is first mentioned as arriving in that country, with a considerable army, in B. C. 214, and as cooperating with Hasdrubal and Mago, the two sons of Hamilcar, in the campaign of that year. But, notwithstanding the union of their three armies, they were able to effect nothing decisive. The outline of the events which marked the Spanish war from this year until the departure of Hasdrubal the son of Hamilcar to Italy, has been already given in the life of the latter [No. 6], and it seems unnecessary to recapitulate it, in order to point out the share which the son of Gisco took in the successes or reverses of the Carthaginian arms. From an early period of the war, dissensions arose between the three generals, which doubtless contributed not a little to the fluctuations of its success, and which appear to have risen to a still greater height after the defeat and death of the two Scipios (B. C. 212) had left them apparently undisputed masters of Spain. The particular part which the son of Gisco took in these is nowhere mentioned, but it is difficult to avoid the conjecture that they were in great part owing to his jealousy of the sons of Hamilcar; and Polybius expressly charges him (9.11, 10.35, 36) with alienating the minds of the Spaniards by his arrogance and rapacity, among others that of Indibilis, one of the chiefs who had been most faithfully attached to the Carthaginian cause. [Indibilis.]
When Hasdrubal the son of Hamilcar, after his defeat at Baecula by Scipio (B. C. 209), moved northwards across the Tagus, he was joined by his two colleagues, and, at the council of war held by them, it was agreed, that while the son of Hamilcar should prosecute his march to Italy, the son of Gisco should confine himself to the defence of Lusitania and the western provinces of Spain, taking care to avoid a battle with Scipio. (Liv. 27.20.) This accounts for his inaction during the following year. In the summer of 207 we hear of him in the extreme south, near Gades, where he was joined by Mago with the remains of his army, after his defeat by M. Silanus. [Mago.] But though Scipio followed Mago to the south, and endeavoured to bring Hasdrubal to a battle, that general evaded his designs, and the campaign came to a close without any decisive action. The next year (206) having greatly augmented his army by fresh levies, Hasdrubal found himself at the head of a force of 70,000 foot and 4500 horse, with which he and Mago no longer hesitated to meet the enemy in the field. They were attacked by Scipio at a place called by Polybius Elinga, by Livy Silpia, situated apparently in the mining district of Baetica, and, after a long and obstinate combat, totally defeated. This battle, which seems to have been one of the most striking instances of Scipio's military genius, was decisive of the war in Spain; Hasdrubal and Mago, with the remains of their scattered army, took refuge within the walls of Gades. (Plb. 11.20-24; Liv. 28.1-3, 12_16; Appian, App. Hisp. 24_28.) The former appears to have henceforth abandoned all hopes of prosecuting the war in Spain, and turned all his attention to Africa, where Scipio had already entered into negotiations with Syphax, the powerful king of the Massaesylians. Hasdrubal, alarmed at these overtures, hastened in person to the court of the Numidian king, where it is said he arrived at the same time with Scipio himself, and spent some days in friendly intercourse with his dreaded adversary. (Liv. 28.17, 18; Appian, App. Hisp. 30.) He was, however, successful in detaching Syphax from his meditated alliance with Rome, a success said to have been owing in great part to the charms of his daughter Sophonisba, whom he gave in marriage to the Numidian prince; but this same measure had the effect of completing the alienation of Masinissa, prince of the Massylians, to whom Sophonisba had been previously promised. Hasdrubal, however, did not regard his enmity in comparison with the friendship of Syphax, whom he not long after instigated to invade the territories of Masinissa, and expel that prince from the whole of his hereditary dominions. (Liv. 29.23, 31; Appian, App. Pun. 10_12; Zonar. 9.11, 12.)
Such was the state of affairs when Scipio landed in Africa, in B. C. 204. Hasdrubal, who was at this time regarded as one of the chief citizens in his native state, was immediately placed at the head of the Carthaginian land forces, and succeeded in levying an army of 30,000 foot and 3000 horse, which was quickly joined by Syphax with a force of 50,000 foot and 10,000 horse. The approach of these two powerful armies compelled Scipio to raise the siege of Utica, and establish his camp in a strong position on a projecting headland, while Hasdrubal and Syphax formed two separate camps to watch and, as it were, blockade him throughout the winter. The Numidian king, however, allowed himself to be engaged in negotiations with Scipio, during the course of which the Roman general was led to form the dreadful project of burning both the hostile camps. With the assistance of Masinissa, he was enabled fully to accomplish this horrible scheme: the camp of Hasdrubal and that of Syphax were set on fire at the same time, while they were surrounded by the enemy's troops: thousands of their men perished in the flames, the rest fell by the sword of the enemy in the darkness and confusion: out of 90,000 men, it is said that a few fugitives alone escaped, to tell the tale of this fearful massacre. Among these, however, was Hasdrubal himself, who hastened from the scene of the disaster to Carthage, where he succeeded in persuading the senate once more to try the fortune of war. Syphax had also escaped, and was soon able to raise another army of Numidians, with which he again joined Hasdrubal. But their united forces were a second time overthrown by Scipio; and while Syphax fled once more into Numidia, Hasdrubal returned to Carthage, B. C. 203. (Plb. 14.1-8; Liv. 29.35, 30.3_8; Appian, App. Pun. 13-23; Zonar. 9.12.) This is the last notice of him that occurs in Polybius or Livy; according to Appian, on the contrary, he avoided returning to Carthage, from apprehension of the popular fury, and assembled a force of mercenary and Numidian troops, with which he kept the field on his own account, having been condemned to death for his ill success by the Carthaginian government. Notwithstanding this, he continued to concert measures, and co-operate with his successor, Hanno the son of Hamilcar; and on the arrival of Hannibal from Italy his sentence was reversed, and the troops he had collected placed under the command of that general. But the popular feeling against him had not subsided: he was compelled to conceal himself within the city, and, on some occasion of a sudden outbreak of party violence, he was pursued by his enemies, and with difficulty escaped to the tomb of his family, where he put an end to his life by poison. His head was cut off and paraded in triumph by the populace through the city. (Appian, App. Pun. 24, 29, 30, 36, 38; Zonar. 9.12, 13.)
11. A Hasdrubal, who must be distinct from the preceding, is mentioned by Livy and Appian as commanding the Carthaginian fleet in Africa in B. C. 203. According to the Roman accounts he was guilty of a flagrant violation of the law of nations by attacking the quinquereme in which the ambassadors sent by Scipio were returning to his camp: they, however, made their escape to the land. He had previously been engaged in an attack upon the Roman squadron under Cn. Octavius, which, together with a large fleet of transports, had been wrecked on the coast near Carthage. (Liv. 30.24, 25; Appian, App. Pun. 34.) It is probable that he is the same who had been sent to Italy, at an earlier period of the same year, to urge the return of Hannibal to Africa. (Id. Annib. 58.)
12. Surnamed the Kid (Haedus, Liv. 30.42, Ἔριφος, Appian, App. Pun. 34), was one of the leaders of the party at Carthage favourable to peace towards the end of the Second Punic War. Hence when the envoys sent by Scipio were in danger of their lives from the fury of the populace at Carthage, it was this Hasdrubal, together with Hanno, the leader of the anti-Barcine party, that interposed to protect them, and sent them away from the city under convoy of two Carthaginian triremes. (Liv. 30.25; Appian, App. Pun. 34.) According to Appian (Ib. 49), he was one of the ambassadors sent to Scipio to sue for peace after tho battle of Zama (B. C. 202)). Livy also mentions him as one of the envoys (all men of the highest rank at Carthage) deputed to Rome to fix the terms of the final treaty of peace on that occasion, and attributes the success of the negotiation in great measure to his personal influence and ability. (Liv. 30.42). On his return to Carthage he is again mentioned as taking part against Hannibal in the discussions concerning the peace. (Id. ib. 44.)
13. General of the Carthaginians in their last fatal struggle with Rome, known by the name of the Third Punic War. He is first mentioned at the time of the breaking out of the war with Masinissa, which immediately preceded that with Rome, B. C. 150. Hasdrubal at this time held the office called by Appian boetharch (Βοήθαρχος), the nature of which is very uncertain; but when Masinissa, after the insult offered to his two sons, Gulussa and Micipsa, whom he had sent to Carthage as ambassadors, commenced open hostilities by the siege of Oroscopa, Hasdrubal was sent against him at the head of 25,000 foot and 400 horse, which forces were quickly increased by the accession of 6000 Numidiai cavalry, who deserted from Masinissa. With this force he did not hesitate to give battle to the Numidian king: the action which ensued was fiercely contested from morning till night, without any decisive advantage on either side; negotiations were then commenced by the intervention of Scipio, who was accidentally present; but these proved abortive, and Masinissa afterwards succeeded in shutting up Hasdrubal in such a position that he was able to cut off his supplies, and finally compelled him by famine to capitulate. By the terms of the treaty, the Carthaginians were allowed to depart in safety, leaving their arms and baggage; but these conditions were shamefully violated: the Numiidians attacked them on their march in this defenceless state, and cut to pieces by far the greater part of them; very few made their escape, together with Ilasdrubal, to Carthage. (Appian, App. Pun. 70_73.) After this disaster, the Carthaginians, apprehensive of the danger that threatened them from Rome, sought to avert it by casting the responsibility of the late events upon individuals, and accordingly passed sentence of banishment on Hasdrubal, together with all the other leaders in the war against Masinissa. He thereupon took refuge among the neighbouring Africans, and soon collected around his standard an army of 20,000 men, with which lie awaited the issue of events. The Carthaginians found, when too late, that all concessions were unavailing to conciliate their inexorable enemies; and while they prepared for a desperate resistance within the city, they hastened to recal the sentence of Hasdrubal, and appointed him to the chief command without the walls, B. C. 149. His own army gave him the complete command of the open country, and enabled him to secure abundant supplies to the city, while the Romans with difficulty drew their provisions from a few detached towns on the coast. Hovering in the neighbourhood of Carthage, without approaching close to the enemy, Hasdrubal prevented them from regularly investing the city, and, by means of his light cavalry, harassed and impeded all their movements. At length the Roman consul, Manilius, was induced to undertake an expedition against Nepheris, a stronghold in the interior, where Hasdrubal had established his headquarters; but far from succeeding in dislodging him from thence, he was repulsed with heavy loss, and suffered severely in his retreat. (Appian, App. Pun. 74, 80, 93, 94, 97, 102_104; Liv. Epit. xlix.) A second attempt on the part of Manilius having proved equally unsuccessful, Hasdrubal became so elated that he aspired to the sole command, and procured the deposition of the other Hasdrubal, the grandson of Masinissa [No. 14], who had hitherto held the command within the city (Id. 108, 111). On the arrival of Scipio (B. C. 147) to carry on the war, which had been so much mismanaged by his predecessors, Hasdrubal advanced close to the walls of Carthage, and encamped within five stadia of the city, immediately opposite to the camp of the Roman general. But notwithstanding this proximity, he did not prevent Scipio from surprising by a night attack the quarter of the city called Megara. By way of revenging himself for this disaster, Hasdrubal, who had now withdrawn his forces within the walls of Carthage, put to death all the Roman prisoners, having previously mutilated them in the most horrible manner, and in this state exposed them on the walls to the eyes of their countrymen. By this act of wanton barbarity he alienated the minds of many of his fellow-citizens at the same time that he exasperated the enemy; and the clamour was loud against him in the senate of Carthage. But he now found himself in the uncontrolled direction of the military force within the city, a position of which he availed himself to establish a despotic authority: he put to death many of the senators who were opposed to him, and assumed the garb and manners of royalty. When Scipio had at length succeeded in completely investing the city, and famine began to make itself felt within the walls, Hasdrubal carefully reserved the supplies which from time to time were introduced, and distributed them only among his soldiers and those of the citizens on whom he mainly relied for the defence. At the same time he opened negotiations with Scipio, through the medium of Gulussa; but that general having offered him terms only for himself with his family and a few friends, he refused to purchase his personal safety by the abandonment of his country. Meanwhile the siege of Carthage was more and more closely pressed, and in the spring of 146 Hasdrubal saw himself compelled to abandon the defence of the port and other quarters of the city, and collect all his forces into the citadel called Byrsa. Against this Scipio now concentrated all his attacks; the ground was contested foot by foot, but the Romans renewed their assaults without ceasing, both by night and day, and gradually advanced by burning and demolishing the houses along all the streets which led to the citadel. At length the mass of the inhabitants submitted to Scipio, and were received as prisoners; the Roman deserters alone. with a few others who despaired of pardon, took refuge in the sacred precincts of the temple of Aesculapius, and still held out with the fury of desperation. Hasdrubal at first fled thither with his wife and children; but afterwards made his escape secretly to .Scipio, who spared his life. It is said that his wife, after upbraiding him with his weakness, threw herself and her children into the flames of the burning temple. Scipio carried him prisoner to Rome, where, after adorning the triumph of his conqueror, he spent the rest of his life in an honourable captivity in some one of the provincial towns of Italy. (Appian, App. Pun. 114, 118, 120, 126-131; Polyb. Exc. xxxix.; Zonar. ix, 29, 30; Liv. Epit. li.; Oros. 4.22, 23; Flor. 2.14.) Polybius, from whom all our accounts of this war are directly or indirectly derived, has drawn the character of Hasdrubal in the blackest colours, and probably not without prejudice : the circumstances in which he was placed must have palliated, if not excused, many arbitrary acts; and however justly he may be reproached with cruelty, there seems strong evidence of his being a man of much greater ability than the historian is willing to allow. Nor must we forget that he refused to purchase his own personal safety so long as there remained even the slightest chance of obtaining that of his country.
14. A grandson of Masinissa by the mother's side, but apparently a Carthaginian by birth. He was appointed to the chief command within the walls of the city, when the Carthaginians, in B. C. 149, prepared for their last desperate resistance against the Roman consuls Censorinus and Manilius. How far we are to ascribe to his authority or directions the energetic measures adopted for the defence of the city, or the successful resistance opposed for more than a year to the Roman arms, we know not, as his name is not again mentioned by Appian until after the defeat of Calpurnius Piso at Hippo in the following year, B. C. 148. This success following the repeated repulses of Manilius in his attacks on Nepheris, had greatly elated the Carthaginians; and in this excitement of spirits, they seem to have been easily led to believe a charge brought by his enemies against Hasdrubal of having betrayed their interests for the sake of his brother-in-law, Gulussa. The accusation was brought forward in the senate, and before Hasdrubal, astounded at the unexpected charge, could utter a word in his defence, a tumult arose, in the midst of which he was struck down, and despatched with blows from the benches of the senators used as clubs. According to Appian, his destruction was caused by the intrigues of his rival and namesake, No. 13. (Appian, App. Pun. 93, 111 ; Oros. 4.22.) [E.H.B]
(Ἀσδρούβας, meaning in Punic “(whose) help (is) Baal”). (1) A Carthaginian general, son of Mago, who succeeded to the titles and glory of his father. It was under his conduct that the Carthaginians carried the war into Sardinia. He received in that island a wound which caused his death, B.C. 420 (Just.xix. 1).
(2) Son of the preceding, made war upon the Numidians, and freed Carthage from the tribute she had been compelled to pay for being permitted to establish herself on the coast of Africa (Just.xix. 2).
(3) A son of Hanno , sent into Sicily at the head of a powerful army to oppose the Romans. He was defeated by Metellus, the Roman proconsul, B.C. 251. Hasdrubal fled to Lilybaeum, but was condemned to death by his countrymen at home.
(4) Son-in-law of Hamilcar, distinguished himself under the orders of that general in the war with Numidia. On the death of his father-in-law he was appointed commander, and carried on military operations in Spain during eight years. He reduced the greater part of that country, and governed it with wisdom and prudence. He founded Carthago Nova (Carthagena). The Romans, wishing to put a stop to his successes, made a treaty with Carthage, by which the latter bound herself not to carry her arms beyond the Iberus. Hasdrubal faithfully observed the terms of this compact. He was slain, B.C. 220, by a slave whose master he had put to death (Livy, xxi. 2; Polyb. ii. 1, 13, iii. 12, x. 10).
(5) Son of Hamilcar, brought from Spain large reinforcements for his brother Hannibal. He crossed the barrier of the Alps, and arrived in Italy, but the consuls Livius Salinator and Claudius Nero, having intercepted the letters which he had written to Hannibal, informing him of his arrival, attacked him near the river Metaurus, and gave him a complete defeat, B.C. 208. Hasdrubal fell in the battle, with 56,000 of his troops. The Romans lost about 8000 men, and made 5400 prisoners. The head of Hasdrubal was severed from his body, and was thrown a few days afterwards into the camp of Hannibal. Before attempting to enter Italy by land, Hasdrubal attempted to cross the sea from Spain, but was defeated by the Roman governor of Sardinia (Livy, xxi. 23; Polyb. xi. 1).
(6) A Carthaginian commander, son of Giscon, who commanded the forces of his country in Spain during the time of Hannibal. Being seconded by Syphax, he afterwards carried on the war against the Romans in Africa, but was defeated by Scipio. He died B.C. 206 (Livy, xxiv. 41, xxix. 35, xxx. 5).
(7) A Carthaginian, surnamed “the Kid” (haedus), an opponent of the Barca faction. He advised his countrymen to make peace with the Romans, and censured the ironical laugh of Hannibal in the Carthaginian Senate, after the peace was concluded.
(8) A Carthaginian general, who, during the siege of Carthage by the Romans, commanded an army of 20,000 men without the walls, with which he kept constantly harassing the besiegers. Being compelled at last to take refuge with his forces within the city, he took command of the place, and for a long time bravely withstood the attacks of the Romans. After the capture of the city, he retired with the Roman deserters, who had no quarter to expect, into the temple of Aesculapius in the citadel, resolved to bury himself under its ruins, taking with him, at the same time, his wife and two young sons. At length, however, having secretly left the temple, he threw himself at the feet of Scipio, and supplicated for life. Scipio granted his request, and showed him as a suppliant to the deserters in the temple. These desperate men, after venting against him a torrent of reproaches, set fire to the temple, and perished amid the flames. His wife, when the fire was kindling, displayed herself on the walls of the building in the richest attire she could procure, and, having upbraided her husband for his cowardice, slew her two sons, and threw herself, with them, into the burning pile (Appian, Bell. Pun. 131).