“Ah there is one thing about them more wonderful than their numbers … in all that vast number there is not one man called Gisgo.”

—  Hannibal

Spoken as a jest to one of his officers named Gisgo, who had remarked on the numbers of Roman forces against them before the Battle of Cannae (2 August 216 BC), as quoted in A History of Rome (1855), by Henry George Liddell Vol. 1, p. 355
Variant translation: You forget one thing Gisgo, among all their numerous forces, there is not one man called Gisgo.

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update Feb. 1, 2024. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Ah there is one thing about them more wonderful than their numbers … in all that vast number there is not one man calle…" by Hannibal?
Hannibal photo
Hannibal 6
military commander of Carthage during the Second Punic War -247–-183 BC

Related quotes

Alan Turing photo

“To each computable sequence there corresponds at least one description number, while to no description number does there correspond more than one computable sequence. The computable sequences and numbers are therefore enumerable.”

Alan Turing Computable Numbers

On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem (1936)

Richard Feynman photo

“There are 1011 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.”

Richard Feynman (1918–1988) American theoretical physicist

from a 1987 class, as quoted in David L. Goodstein, "Richard P. Feynman, Teacher," Physics Today, volume 42, number 2 (February 1989) p. 70-75, at p. 73
Republished in the "Special Preface" to Six Easy Pieces (1995), p. xx.

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi photo

“Many Westerners forget that when the Prophet spoke of four wives as the maximum allowable number, he had in mind a reduction to four as compared to the number then often prevailing; moreover, Mohammed specified that a man should acquire more than one wife only if he could treat them all with equal justice - obviously a difficult feat for even the most diligent man to achieve. In effect, then, the Prophet curtailed the number of wives.”

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (1919–1980) Shah of Iran

Page 233
Publications, Mission for my Country (1961)

Simone Weil photo

“The number 2 thought of by one man cannot be added to the number 2 thought of by another man so as to make up the number 4.”

Simone Weil (1909–1943) French philosopher, Christian mystic, and social activist

Oppression and Liberty (1958), p. 82

Louis B. Mayer photo

“The number one book of the ages was written by a committee, and it was called The Bible.”

Louis B. Mayer (1884–1957) American film producer

To a writer who complained that his work was being changed.
Halliwell's Who's Who in the Movies (2001 ed)

Bill Engvall photo

“I've come up with the three things you never want to hear at your kid's parent/teacher conference. Number one: "You're only responsible for the first $10,000 worth of damage." Number two: "We have medication for this." And number three: "It was more than an ounce and he was less than 100 yards from the school."”

Bill Engvall (1957) American comedian and actor

Cheap Drunk: An Autobiography (2002)

Louis C.K. photo

“A woman saying yes to a date with a man is literally insane and ill-advised, and the whole species' existence counts on them doing it. I don't know how they…how do women still go out with guys, when you consider the fact that there is no greater threat to women than men? We're the number one threat to women. Globally and historically, we're the number one cause of injury and mayhem to women. We're the worst thing that ever happens to them. That's true! You know what our number one threat is? Heart disease.”

Louis C.K. (1967) American comedian and actor

Oh My God

Étienne Bonnot de Condillac photo

“To the eye of God there are no numbers: seeing all things at one time, he counts nothing.”

Étienne Bonnot de Condillac (1714–1780) French academic

As quoted in Physically Speaking: A Dictionary of Quotations on Physics and Astronomy (1997), p. 101.

John Wallis photo

“Let as many Numbers, as you please, be proposed to be Combined: Suppose Five, which we will call a b c d e. Put, in so many Lines, Numbers, in duple proportion, beginning with 1. The Sum (31) is the Number of Sumptions, or Elections; wherein, one or more of them, may several ways be taken. Hence subduct (5) the Number of the Numbers proposed; because each of them may once be taken singly. And the Remainder (26) shews how many ways they may be taken in Combination; (namely, Two or more at once.) And, consequently, how many Products may be had by the Multiplication of any two or more of them so taken. But the same Sum (31) without such Subduction, shews how many Aliquot Parts there are in the greatest of those Products, (that is, in the Number made by the continual Multiplication of all the Numbers proposed,) a b c d e. For every one of those Sumptions, are Aliquot Parts of a b c d e, except the last, (which is the whole,) and instead thereof, 1 is also an Aliquot Part; which makes the number of Aliquot Parts, the same with the Number of Sumptions. Only here is to be understood, (which the Rule should have intimated;) that, all the Numbers proposed, are to be Prime Numbers, and each distinct from the other. For if any of them be Compound Numbers, or any Two of them be the same, the Rule for Aliquot Parts will not hold.”

John Wallis (1616–1703) English mathematician

Source: A Discourse of Combinations, Alterations, and Aliquot Parts (1685), Ch.I Of the variety of Elections, or Choice, in taking or leaving One or more, out of a certain Number of things proposed.

John Wallis photo

“Let as many Numbers, as you please, be proposed to be Combined: Suppose Five, which we will call a b c d e. Put, in so many Lines, Numbers, in duple proportion, beginning with 1. The Sum (31) is the Number of Sumptions, or Elections; wherein, one or more of them, may several ways be taken. Hence subduct (5) the Number of the Numbers proposed; because each of them may once be taken singly. And the Remainder (26) shews how many ways they may be taken in Combination; (namely, Two or more at once.) And, consequently, how many Products may be had by the Multiplication of any two or more of them so taken. But the same Sum (31) without such Subduction, shews how many Aliquot Parts there are in the greatest of those Products, (that is, in the Number made by the continual Multiplication of all the Numbers proposed,) a b c d e.”

John Wallis (1616–1703) English mathematician

For every one of those Sumptions, are Aliquot Parts of a b c d e, except the last, (which is the whole,) and instead thereof, 1 is also an Aliquot Part; which makes the number of Aliquot Parts, the same with the Number of Sumptions. Only here is to be understood, (which the Rule should have intimated;) that, all the Numbers proposed, are to be Prime Numbers, and each distinct from the other. For if any of them be Compound Numbers, or any Two of them be the same, the Rule for Aliquot Parts will not hold.
Source: A Discourse of Combinations, Alterations, and Aliquot Parts (1685), Ch.I Of the variety of Elections, or Choice, in taking or leaving One or more, out of a certain Number of things proposed.

Related topics