No comments about Caesar: Gallic War II (Bk.2).

No comments about Caesar's Gallic War.

5 comments about Caesar's Gallic Wars.

1. I must confess that I don't know much about Ancient History. That is why I am really enjoying Osprey's Essential History series. This book is a better one in the series. It is well written and laid out (unlike The Punic Wars, which looked like it was assembled in a tornado). The colour maps and diagrams are placed close to the corresponding text.
   Of course it only skims the surface of Caesar's conquest of Gaul (modern day France), but that is all I want for now. It nicely sets up the next book in the series: Caesar's Civil War.



2. As I say in my Amazon's AYA page I'm a history buff. Caesar is one of my favorite characters. I've read his "Commentaries" and "The Civil War", Suetonius' "The Twelve Caesars", Plutarch's "Lives" and a score of contemporary books about his life.
   In my periodic searches I've found Kate Gilliver's "Caesar's Gallic Wars" and the excellent review of it from Dr. Forczyk and decided to give it a try.
   
   I wasn't disappointed. This is a great resume of the Roman conquest of Gaul. In only 96 pages the author gives a very concise, clear and accurate picture. Maps of the campaign and specific battles are wonderful. For the first time I was able to visualize the enormous distances covered by Roman Legions in such a brief time period and the strategic difficulties they had to overcome.
   Ms. Gilliver starts with a synopsis of the events preceding the campaign, continue with a comparison of Roman and Gallic mentality and attitudes on regard of war. Then describes the campaign itself and finally gives an evaluation of the impact on Gaul and Rome.
   
   Osprey's edition is very well done, first quality paper and reproductions and a dynamic presentation of the text.
   This book may suites as an introduction for neophytes or as a graphic resume for students and researchers.
   Reviewed by Max Yofre.



3. This book wasn't bad, and I liked it, but it certainly wasn't worthy of 5 stars. The book had many deficiencies. For example:
   
   The "Pax Romana" section didn't really address to what extent Caesar was responsible for the Pax Romana period.
   
   For a book focused on Caesar's Gallic Wars, too little effort was spent describing the actual strategies of Caesar, and too much on assessing Caesar's own bias in his own writings. As far as I could tell, this book wasn't supposed to be a critique of Caesar's writing, it was supposed to be a history lesson. One note in the introduction about the inadequacy of Caesar himself as an unbiased source would have sufficed.



4. This is not a book for the light hearted. You will need to know your history. The difficulty in reading this book was not having a map of the cities with todays locations in them. If you love history, you may enjoy this book.



5. This book provides a very good introduction to the topic in only 96 pages (about half of which are illustration) and can be read in about an hour and a half or two. First, like most Osprey series books in the series, it provides a few pages to provide some perspective into the region and the relationship between Rome and the peoples of Gaul (mostly one of border tensions and warfare). Then a few pages summarize the armies in terms of organization, weapons and other equipment, leadership, fighting strategies and strengths and weaknesses of each side. Although it is short it is quite good. Then there is a history of the campaign along with underlying analysis as to why Rome was able to eventually defeat the Gauls. Finally there are a few pages regarding the implications of this victory and Rome's attempts to convert the area into a Roman province. All and all an excellent introduction to the topic and an excellent primer for the hour and a half or two required to read it.

No comments about The Gallic Wars: Julius Caesar's Account of the Roman Conquest of Gaul.

No comments about Caesar Completely Parsed: Completely Parsed Caesar's Gallic War Book I With Interlinear and Marginal Translations (Latin Edition).

5 comments about Rome's Enemies (2): Gallic and British Celts (Men-at-Arms).

1. Not particuarly good. I'd recommend Celtic Warriors (by Time Newark) or nearly any book by Peter Berresford Ellis, if you can get ahold of them. The saving grace, however, is in the artwork. Angus McBride is certainly talented, and people should check out his other works.
   As for the text, there is not much too it. The classifications of helmets was good, but the history seems to come entirely from pro-Roman sources, such as Caeser. It therefore contains a large number of mistakes about Celtic civilization, mostly ones that reinforce the stereotype of "noble savages".



2. This work is of the usual Osprey format for use by wargamers and those interested in military history. The author opens with a chronology, then an introduction defining the Celts/Gauls and the associated archaeology and sources. From there the text expands into discussion of the warriors and culture, then arms and armor, followed by warfare, and finally a discussion of the plates.
   
   The plates by Angus McBride are of high quality--vivid, properly proportioned, with well-chosen poses. They illustrate an appropriate variety of Celtic/Gallic warrior styles and equipment. The only negative is that there are only eight plates in total.
   
   Unfortunately, the ancient Celts/Gauls did not use written language so their story is necessarily told to us largely from Roman and Greek perspectives, supplemented by what has been discovered through archaeology. Celtic culture was one of small fort communities and farmsteads, rather than the developed metropolitan centers of Greek, Roman, and various Eastern cultures. While this put the Celts at a disadvantage, it was made worse by the tribal, non-centralized government that was characteristic of the ancient Celts. Strong "federal" governments like Rome gradually and eventually subdued the Celts/Gauls (as Rome had done to other disunited cultures, including the Greek world.)
   
   The Celtic/Gallic army and warrior were to be feared. While lacking Roman organizational structure and engineering capabilities, the warriors proved more than a match for Rome on many occasions. Gauls sacked Rome ca. 390 BC and it was nearly 350 years before Rome conquered all mainland Celts. Along the way Celtic/Gallic forces were a severe threat to Rome on many occasions, especially in the army of Hannibal. Rome owed a number of its military advances to assimilation of Gallic/Celtic equipment.
   
   I highly recommend this work to those interested in Celtic warfare of the classical period (and those interested in learning what the Romans were up against in their early history.)



3. the amount of scholarship enclosed in these little more than pamphlet simply amazes. there is always some archaeological digs in these books usually showing a chief or warriors burial with artwork.lots of pictures and good explanations of them and good maps considering that in 200 BC the technology of accurate mapmaking was (not there)!! I think isaw a few of these costumed bezerkers in the movie Braveheart,which just shows how little crazed naked swordsmen changed over 2000 years.The book could have been enhanced by a very brief discussion on the stimulants used by these warriors a subject glossed over by showing some ale horns.Imean who would go into battle stark naked with only a sword without being "on something" unless they were in the ecstatic throes of religious feverency,like calling for Odin??Could it be love of the motherland or fear of shame to the family?Sort of like I'm no draft dodger,here's all of me!As shakespeare said,"courage to go to their deaths as men go their beds"!!I know a beserker would be offended clear to Valhalla by some PG rated copyist insisting on hiding the vitals with a horsehair plume or a strategically angled shield.I've heard some beserkers never carried a shield. C'mon I've seen alot worse in National Geographic. Are you afraid the local farm library won't buy it with a full picture,they won't buy it anyway unless there are some "honey do" projects or "puppy wonderful" tales included.a beserker has come there to die,not to be "politically correct"!I,m surprised Osprey hasn't done one on the beserker.it would sell,at least i would buy it.These books are meant for both info and fun.You also get an idea of how organized the Roman army must have been to subject these people.



4. Overall, the text of this book is not worth much (the information on the helmets, swords, etc. can be found just about anywhere, and often in greater detail, while the section on 'Celtic' history is just plain weak), but McBride's beautiful artwork, if nothing else, could make it a worthy purchase. Some of the plates in this book,, notably 'D' showing a chieftain in a chariot beign followed by a pack of curious local children and dogs, are simply spectacular.
   
   If you are looking for a good Osprey-style intro to the warriors of the proud, disparate tribes of Gaul and Britannia, try Stephen Allen's 'Celtic Warrior 300 BC - AD 100', it is better-researched, has more material, and the artwork is almost as good. But, if you are a devoted fan of Angus McBride, buy this book!



5. The plates in this book are beautifully illustrated and there is a fair amount of interesting information on Iron Age Gallic and British weaponry and armor.
   However, I found much of the information too be quite outdated and was annoyed at the authors' constant grouping of diverse cultures from throughout Europe into some kind of "Celtic" blob.

5 comments about Caesar's Commentaries: On The Gallic War and On The Civil War.

1. It is a very interesting read, but can be hard to follow if you are not a history buff or a fan of Roman History + Ceasar. For the time, the thought process and lucid writing techniques are above average. If you want to get a real sense of history with first hand knowledge, then this is a great read for history buffs, and non-history buffs as well.



2. Caesar might have been a good general but he's a uniquely boring writer with leaden descriptions of intensely exciting campaigns. The other problem is that it's best to read Roman writers in the original Latin as that way the "otherness" of ancient Romans comes across better. Ergo taedet me istius libris. Dabit deus his quoque finem.



3. Mostly written by Caesar, this book provides an insightful view of ancient warfare from a general's perspective, including such topics as the siege, infantry/calvary interaction, the value of enemy awareness, military engineering, intelligence, moral building, calculated risk, and so on. It also describes such topics as the ancient use of the defeated providing hostages, the temperament of the Celtic tribes, the competition for the areas west of the Rhine (Gaul), the lifestyles and state of civilization of the Germanic tribes (this may be the first recorded account of the Germans), and political strategies.
   
   Note that Caesar writes in the third person, which almost makes it seem like it was written by an impartial historian (which is obviously not the case... Hence, its accuracy must be questioned to some degree).
   
   The only downside of this book is its translation, which I compare to reading an old version of the bible. Sentences run very long, paragraphs cover entire pages, verbs are placed in odd parts of sentences,.. etc. It takes a while to get through it. It is, however, worth the effort, and is a interesting window into the past.



4. I am not learned in Latin but the translation did not flow in English. The tenses changed so suddenly and inappropriately that I suspect the translator of being too literal and the end result was difficult to read in English. It gave the impression of one step above a computer translation. I can't imagine Caesar and his scribes being so crude.I must read another edition before I have an opinion on the book-it was difficult and tedious to read. Maps would have been helpful.



5. I liked the translation--it brought Caesar's style to life. It also seemed to me that the section completed by Caesar's associate was distinct in style, which again made Caesar's more vivid. Be warned, though, that there is absolutely no commentary, which for me was problematic, as it the work clearly has its propaganda elements, and it would be nice to know exactly how much of a stretch some representations are. But for those looking for a straight translation, it's a nice choice.

5 comments about The Gallic War (Loeb Classical Library).

1. If you have bought a Loeb Classic before you already know that they are well manufactured books that are meant to last. In addition, the major feature of the series is that the original text appears in the original language on one page, across from the translation on the facing page - with a few exceptions.**
   
   **Exception example: with the works of the poet Catullus you will find all the steamy good parts are in Latin on both pages.
   
   Another feature of the series is that the translators are generally top notch.
   
   That said, let's talk about Julius' tome. Extremely fun to read and in general of significant importance not only as it pertains to Rome - it's politics, military agenda, etc. -- but in respect to understanding who was doing what in the provinces.
   
   As a fan of barbarians everywhere, but particular of those tall woad-blue fellows, I can say this work is critical, although there are assuredly some historians that would debate Caesar's accuracy.
   
   As to the translation, Prof. Edwards departs from the modern tradition (or they depart from him) by using third person, just as Caesar did. Most modern scholars have converted to first person, but this hardly matters unless you have a fear of formal, proper English. For this is precisely what you will find in this book. No modern cadences here.
   
   Besides a fine translation, inside this book there are maps and sketchings that include that wonderful bridge that was constructed over the Rhine, as well as the gallic wall construction, roman seige appliances and a very valuable campaign map.
   
   I don't know about you but I find the campaign map a God-send. And after reading more recent translations I have had to resort to my old Loeb because it takes me forever to figure out where the heck the Helvetii lived and where I left Uxellodunum. [Yes, it's in France but east or west of the Garonne river I am forever forgetting.]
   
   Five Stars. [A+]. Sturdy little book made to last. Opposing pages have Latin on one side and English on the other. Annotated and footnoted for scholars. Includes fold-out maps and diagrams. Excellent story for history buffs.
   
   For those practicing their Latin: Caesar's Latin is the some of the clearest and simplist of the classic style. In other words, not too much future or past pluperfect tenses and that sort of thing. Frequently quoted in Wheelock and other texts. Having the translation right there on the facing page is invaluable.
   
   Additional Information on what you will find:
   
   Table of 'Contents'
   Introduction
   Analysis of Books
   - (This entails a brief summary of Caesar's activities w/ dates. Under Book V, one would see (54 BC) and something like the following:
   
   1-23 Second expedition to Britain
   Preparation of a fleet - (2-8. Caesar composes the factions of the Treveri' Cingetorix and Indutiomarus - the intrigues of Dumnorix....
   
   Gallic War (the commentaries themselves)
   
   Appendices
   A. The Roman Army
   B. Britain
   
   Indexes
   I. Persons
   II. Tribes
   III. Geography
   IV. Subjects
   
   Maps and Plans
   --The Battle against the Helvetii
   --The Battle of the Aisne
   --The Battle of the Sambre
   --Bridge over the Rhine
   --Plan of Gergovia
   --Plan of Alesia
   --Siege Appliances
   --Gaul
   --Campaign Map
   
   Editors Note (1979)



2. Edwards' translation of Caesar's 'de Bello Gallico' may not be the best, but all the same, this edition heartily deserves 5 stars. While I never found anything in his translation that I really disagreed with, it is not a typical Loeb hyper-literal translation. This is not a real issue for the initiated reader, as Caesar's Latin is not difficult to read. I can't blame Loeb for wanting a less-literal translation of Caesar, as the casual reader would quickly tire of the ablative absolutes and long sentences. Thus, it is decent. While not terribly literal, it is correct and readable.
   
   The appendices are where this edition really shines. It includes a number of useful battle and campaign maps, as well as a brief essay on the bridge over the Rhine and a number of drawings of siege works.
   
   The Penguin edition may a more literal translation, but this has the Latin text and a great set of appendices. This edition should remain the standard text for 'de Bello Gallico' for years to come.



3. The Gallic War by Julius Caesar. Published by MobileReference (mobi).
   
   Caesar's first-hand account of his campaigns is very sincere and to the point, yet strikingly authoritative and deep at the same time. Not a hint of arrogance or prejudice is found in his narrative as well. His prose is eloquent, and certainly rivals some of the greater Latin authors of his age. If there were anything Caesar was as skillful at other than the arts of war, it would have to be his ability as an author.



4. This review concerns the Kessinger Publishing's "Legacy Reprints" edition:
   Caesar: The Gallic War
   
   This edition is a reproduction (photocopy) of the Heinemann/Putnam 1919 edition. As such, it is very difficult to read (every page is a poor-quality photo reproduction with black text on a gray background - very low contrast, difficult to read for long).
   
   There are no maps included in this edition.



5. A great book, but I am totally surprised that Caesar, with all his education and first-hand knowledge of Gaul, makes no mention of Le Petit Village Galois and Asterix. That is the only flaw I could think of. Translation...yes, it is stylistically nowhere the original, but helps poor slobs like me with a second-rate knowledge of Latin to understand the passages I could not otherwise, so it is basically serviceable, if used only for this purpose

5 comments about The Gallic War: Seven Commentaries on The Gallic War with an Eighth Commentary by Aulus Hirtius (Oxford World's Classics).

1. The Gallic War is a wonderful resource that I first read in junior high (I'm a history nut) and I found that it really instilled in me the idea that the more things change, the more things stay the same. Policitians were as ambitious and arrogant, War as brutal, and Armies as powerful 2,000 years ago as they are today.

   While I have not read this edition, and the factual errors that Mark Snegg pointed out in his review are inexcusable, Mr. Snegg should check his facts before criticizing the error of others. A catapult is a fieldpiece that uses counterweight, pulleys and lever action to hurl a large rock of pot of greek fire at the enemy. A weapon which hurls a large bolt or arrow with pulley action is a ballista.




2. Mark Snegg's correction about Baculus would seem incorrect-- to judge from the "Search Inside" feature. Type in "Baculus," go to the first link, and there at 2.25 is Caesar, not Baculus, charging into the fray.
   
   But I picked up the book in Borders last night, and the copy I looked at had Baculus, not Caesar, as Mr. Snegg found.
   
   Where is Amazon getting the texts it's scanning?
   
   UPDATE: Contacted Oxford & got this reply:
   
   The passage to which you refer did contain a significant error - the substitution of Baculus for Caesar - but it was corrected at least three years ago. The passage on Amazon reflects the current state of the text, and the copy you saw in Borders must have been an old impression; we have reprinted several times since the correction was made.



3. I was privileged to read the review in the original Latin (directly from the original Amazon's mouth) and there were numerous errors in translation of this controversial work. "Catapult" is a pumice-like substance Romans used as litter in their feline pet's "bathrooms." A ballista is a large sausage made from bundles (fasces) of shredded pork. Caesar actually ran away from the battle in question but he ran backward (baculus)--hence the confusion. "Speculatoria navigia" are Roman reading glasses used to navigate Pliny. "Levitas" is what's sometimes needed to keep our buns from burning.
   
   As far as translations go, this one reads a lot better for me than the original written in a language I can't understand.



4. I can't speak for the translation, but the economy and clarity of Caesar's writing inspired me when I first read him. Even translated, Cicero's writing makes me suspicious of him; while Plutarch's speaks wise reflection and common sense.
   
   Reading Caesar, you feel his vitality. An intelligent man of action whose letters must have made his countrymen in Rome take notice.
   
   It's interesting to speculate how these communications were received in Rome. The effortless confidence and commanding tone must have inspired as much fear as respect.
   
   I know if one of my managers in the field started sending me emails like this, I'd wonder whether he had designs on my job. Is it inspired competance in the writing that causes a feeling of inferiority, or is it naked ambition on a subliminal level that puts one on his guard? Whatever the answer, this is powerful stuff.



5. Of all the translations being published, this one is the easiest to read and maintains every bit of the accuracy of its peers. If you need a copy of Gallic War, this is the one to buy.

5 comments about The Conquest of Gaul (Penguin Classics).

1. De Bello Gallico - Julius Caesar third person account of his conquest of Gaul (modern day France, and large parts of Switzerland and Belgium, approximately) is well known for its opening line: Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres... This military chronicle brings us back to a time when rules of engagement were very different to our own: today, Caesar would be facing charges of genocide at the International Criminal Court for wiping out the Helvetii, for example. The book is fascinating at times but is also repetitive - so many tribes gets you confused. But it allows us to see a very different morality to our own - Caesar naturally thought nothing of killing, ethnically cleansing or enslaving his enemies, as well as a picture of the lives of the european tribes that lived outside the Roman empire. A must for Asterix fans.



2. If the pre-christian world is where your interests are this book belongs in your collection. The good old days when power and might formed and held together the greatest empire to ever rule the known world.



3. This was the first translation of the Gallic War I read, and it is still my favorite. The index with all the tribes, forts, etc. is particularly useful (a lot of translations don't have one, and to my knowledge none have as comprehensive of one).



4. Why he came, what he saw, whom he conquered. Rendered unto the reader what is Caeser's story.



5. First off, do not read this book with the intention of remembering the names of all of the tribes and people involved in this conquest. If you keep that in mind then this book is great. The first half was hard to get into for me as I tried to remember all the names, locations, dates, etc. Later in the book I gave up and enjoyed the read. I would recommend to anyone looking for a detailed account of the Gallic Conquest.