1 comments about Caesar: De Bello Gallico VI / Gallic War VI (Caesar) (Caesar).

1. Caesar's Gallic War (the literary work, not the actual war) is an interesting exercise in a politician attempting to justify and explain his conquest of Gaul to ordinary Romans while also trying to show his breadth of learned-ness - quite a task, really. He pretty much pulls it off, too...but that is another matter altogether, more suited to Classics students' essay topics.
   This edition of the Sixth Book of De Bello Gallico is, as are most BCP texts, best for students - at times some of the most self-evident phrases are 'helpfully' translated.
   The vocab at the back is helpful if a little narrow in interpreting the nuances of words; it's always quite nice to find you won't have to drag your Lewis & Short/Chambers & Murray out to translate or along to class...
   The introductory passages at the beginning of the edition are in general interesting, if a little dry and unspecific at times. The small glosses at the beginning of each chapter are almost too explanatory - it ends up taking half the surprise out of what might happen in the chapter...but I suppose it's all for the best and prevents you getting completely lost in the rare complex phrases of Caesar, or totally getting the wrong idea due to mistranslating one word.
   In general, this edition is helpful and suits undergraduate language students (though the series is apparently aimed at 'A' and 'O' level students!) though perhaps the more learned out there will sniff at the simplicities...

2 comments about Caesaris Bellum Helveticum; Caesar's Gallic Wars (NTC Publishing Group Titles).

1. For those who grew up savoring the Classics Illustrated version of Caesar's Gallic Wars, this book is a leap to the next level: a lavishly and accurately drawn comic book style history(vaguely--but only--reminiscent of the best details of the Asterix series comix--). This fascinating book allows the characters to 'speak' Caesar's Latin and the reader to make the translations, which come surprisingly easy, even to the moderatley proficient. To those who know the Gallic Wars, it would certainly add a further diminsion, and for those just discovering Caesar, it would provide helpful illustrations of the peoples and the military arts of both Gallic and Roman camps. If there is any drawback, it is in the fact that only Book I, Bellum Helveticum, is covered. Succeeding Books II-VII are extracted and included in the appendix, but having had the appetite whetted for dymanic illustrated story-telling, one can only hope that the remainding chapters be given the same fine treatment.



2. This comic book treatment of the first part of Caesar's Gallic War is a real treat for the beginning and intermediate Latin student who may want a break from the usual textbooks. The artwork is colorful and aids in understanding what the characters are saying on the page. The Latin is in short bits and is not too complex (or too simple). There are also a number of humorous touches in the details of some of the drawings which I only noticed after a couple of readings.

   This book has turned out to be a surprisingly useful tool in my own beginning Latin studies.

No comments about The Gallic Wars (Commentarii De Bello Gallico).

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

No comments about Caesar's Gallic War.

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.

3 comments about Caesar's Gallic Wars.

1. Osprey's Essential History Volume 43, Caesar's Gallic Wars 58-50 BC, covers the series of wars in wars in Western Europe that made Julius Caesar a household name in ancient Rome. Kate Gilliver, a British academic who took in PhD in Roman military theory, uses Caesar's own commentaries as the basis for her synopsis, but tempers that biased account with input from other sources to provide greater balance. Indeed, military readers will be pleased with the sound use of military analysis in order to add value to this account; unlike many other historians who attempt to detail ancient campaigns, Gilliver remains focused on the primary elements of the conflict and does not become distracted with archaeological minutiae. The campaign maps provided in this volume also add greatly to the narrative, since most translations of Caesar's commentaries lack effective maps to demonstrate Roman operations. Overall, Gilliver's account should be pleasing to academics and military professionals, for shedding greater insight into how, why and what Caesar accomplished in Gaul.

   Caesar's Gallic Wars begins with a short introduction, a chronology, and a section on the background to the war. The section on the warring sides is 12 pages long and notes that, "the Gallic warriors fought as individuals, " but "the might of the Roman army lay in the strength of its formations, and that was based on unit morale, discipline and training." The heart of Gilliver's narrative - the sections on the outbreak of the war and the main campaigns of 58-50 BC, spans some 35 pages. The narrative is greatly aided by seven maps: the campaigns of 58 and 57 BC, the battle against the Helvetii in 58 BC, the battle against the Nervii in 57 BC, the campaigns of 56 and 55 BC, the campaigns of 54 and 53 BC, the campaigns of 52 and 51 BC, and the siege of Alesia. The final sections include portrait of a soldier (Caesar's centurions), the impact of the conflict (loss of life, slavery, destruction, food supplies, religious and social changes), portrait of a civilian (Roman merchants), how the war ended (Roman triumphs), and conclusions. The section of further reading is overly-brief, and considering the author's academic background, should have included pertinent journal articles from relevant historical and archaeological texts.

   Gilliver makes a number of interesting and often understated points about the military aspects of the Gallic Wars. First, the Romans had a technological edge in field artillery and siege warfare techniques that hurt the morale of Gallic opponents. In particular, the scorpion was a very effective anti-personnel weapon for which the Gauls had no equivalent. The Gaullic oppidum, or hill forts, had seemed resilient to attack in tribal warfare but they were easily reduced by efficient Roman siege methods. Second, the Gauls were accustomed to tribal warfare where rival armies disbanded during the winter months, but the professional Roman armies were capable of staying together year after year. Rome's ability to conduct a sustained military presence in conquered Gaullic territory undermined the Gaul's hopes that they could ride out an invasion. Third, the Roman army was virtually unbeatable in conventional battles and the only effective means of resistance was guerrilla warfare. Gilliver notes that other than the heavy losses inflicted on Sabinus' legions during the revolt of 53 BC and the repulse at Gergovia in 52 BC, the Roman army generally dominated combat operations throughout the wars. Although Caesar's campaigns may not seem like Blitzkrieg-style operations to the modern mind, Gilliver notes, "for the Gauls, the intensity of Roman campaigning and particularly the speed with which their lands were reduced to provincial status must have been a terrible shock." A fourth military point that Gilliver makes concerns the inability of the Gauls to form a common defense against the Romans; indeed, Caesar was particularly adept at playing upon tribal rivalries to divide and conquer his foes.

   Gilliver also makes the interesting conclusion that Caesar used the wars in Gaul to build himself a fortune (from the sale of slaves) and a military reputation, both of which were necessary to further his political ambitions. Caesar's campaigns succeeded in neutralizing all effective resistance to Roman occupation, but it took several more generations to pacify the entire countryside. Operationally, Caesar was also quite brutal - even by Roman standards - and he strove to inflict (or claim) maximum losses upon the enemy. Gilliver notes that a Roman general had to kill at least 5,000 enemies in order to gain a triumph in the capital. Furthermore, Caesar used cruelty to weaken the will to resistance in his foes. In 52 BC, Caesar's troops stormed the oppidum of Avaricum and massacred all 40,000 inhabitants. In 51 BC, Caesar eliminated one of the final Gaullic holdouts at Uxellodunum but, "instead of massacring the defenders, Caesar cut off their hands and set them free, to serve as an example of the punishment meted out to those who resisted Rome." Caesar was also capable of military "stunts" like bridging the Rhine River and brief expeditions to Britain, both of which captured the Roman imagination but provided no tangible strategic benefits. Gilliver's account of the Gallic Wars is excellent in every regard and is a model synthesis, particularly given the restraints of limited ancient sources.




2. 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.



3. 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.

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

1. This classic is well worth the time of any buff on Roman History. If you are a true buff you already own it! There are eight "books" comprising about 15-25 pages apiece. Each book a reflection on the previous year's effort in Gaul. The style is plain and to the point. Written in order to curry favor in Rome and document his campaigns, Caeser is guilty of inflating enemy numbers according to some historians. Never the less he painstakingly records the relations between the tribes of the time, the Gauls,Celts, and Germanic peoples are all referenced. The final three books regarding the Civil War are longer. Ramon L. Jimenez's "Caesar against the Celts" is a great companion for this one. He has a good bibliography as well since this translation of the "Commentaries" is lacking of one. For fans of HBO's Rome television show, check out Book V chapter XLIV.



2. I would strongly recommend getting a higher quality, clearer translation. This version of the classic is near incomprehensible compared to the Penguin or Oxford versions.



3. 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.



4. 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.



5. 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.

5 comments about The Gallic War (Oxford World's Classics).

1. This is an unexpectedly poor translation of Caesar's great work, especially for an Oxford Classics edition. I found several obvious mistranslations, including at least one major error. The English is often awkward and unnatural, and fails to convey the lucid elegance of Caesar's Latin. Strangely enough, the book doesn't have a map of the whole of Gaul. There are a few larger scale maps, but it's not particularly clear how they fit together or even which parts of Gaul are being shown. The notes are at the back of the book, rather than in footnotes, so that the reader has to constantly flip back and forth to read them.

   The worst error I came across was in the translation of the well-known incident in 2.25 where Caesar grabs a shield and personally runs forward into the front line of battle, saving a critical situation. Hammond's translation has the chief centurion Baculus doing this, rather than Caesar. Since Baculus is described only two lines earlier as being so seriously wounded that he is unable to stand, this reading defies not only Latin grammar, but also common sense. No justification is offered for this weird interpretation.

   Throughout the book there is a certain lack of insight in translating military words. For example, in 4.25 Hammond twice translates 'tormenta' as 'missiles', although in fact it means 'catapults' (that is, bolt-firing machines like large crossbows). In the next paragraph 'speculatoria navigia' is translated as 'spy vessels', when 'scout ships' would be both more accurate and more natural English.

   These examples are just the very tip of the iceberg. In general this translation is feeble and riddled with inaccuracies. Most of it is is very stilted English. The publisher's blurb about how it reflects the purity of Caesar's Latin is completely untrue.




2. 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.




3. 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.



4. 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.



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

1. Just imagine that in this book you can read the account of the Gallic wars told by the hero of them. Yes, an egocentric and arrogant hero, but who among us feels able to accomplish what he did? This book is an example of rigorous writing, of military genius, of courage and will. First, Caesar quenches the revolt of the Helvetians (in today's Switzerland). Then, the German Ariovistus invades Gaul and is defeated by Caesar. Next year, Caesar defeats the Belgians. The third year, Caesar goes to sea to fight a maritime battle against the Vanesians, and then pacifies Aquitaine, in today's Northern France. In the winter, he crosses the Rhin and defeats the Suavians. And then he accomplishes a prowess: he crosses the English Channel to fight the Britons. Hey, a Roman conquering England? That is adventure.

   But not everything goes smoothly for the Roman armies. In an ambush, the Gaul Ambiorix (is that where Asterix comes from?) devastates the armies of the Romans Sabinus and Triturius. This sparks a revolt by other Gaulians, who set siege to the Roman general's Quintus Cicero's fortress. But Caesar comes to the rescue and they win. Other battles ensue, but the last campaign is the most famous: Vercingetorix, a Gaulian leader, revolts and manages to put the Romans in great trouble, since his revolt has plenty of followers all over Gaul. After defeating Vercingetorix, Caesar has to placate all the Gaul, in a series of hard battles. Seeminlgy not tired after eight years in Western Europe, Caesar then returns to Italy and starts the Civil War.

   The greatness of this book is that it takes you by the hand to some of the most important battles in History. Yes, they are far from us, but they shaped the Roman Empire and thus, our very own civilization. There is no substitute for the story being told by the main protagonist, strategist and conductor of it. It is many things: a crucial History book, good literature, and exciting adventure. What else can a reader ask for?




2. Julius Caesar's dramatic commentary on the Gallic campaigns is an extremely riveting account of a man whose brilliance has yet to be eclipsed by any other political or military leader. As a work of military history, Ceasars campaign style combines exciting strategic and tactical views that led him and his legions to excel in pivotal battles against armies 2 and 3 times thier size. In addition, Ceaser shows his diplomatic knack, with detailed descriptions of his negotiations with the Gallic leaders. A read which is well worth it, in either the original Latin or as a translation.



3. Ceasar apparently wrote this little gem for the same reason that a modern politician makes a speech, basically for his own publicity and fame. If you know that, and know about how the romans fought, this is a cool book to check out.



4. Although there are many translations of Caesar's Gallic War, Loeb is unique in providing the reader with not only the translation, but the original Latin text on the accompanying page. Loeb also provides translations from some of the best scholars in classical studies. As for the text itself, it is a priceless insight into the life of one of the world's greatest statesmen and military leaders.
   
   Caesar's third person account covers his campaigns in Gaul, Germania, and Britannia (modern Switzerland, France, Belgium, Germany, and England) from 58-50 B.C. Most modern scholars agree that the works were probably dictated by Caesar and written down by one or more of his subordinates. It is important to understand that Caesar's Commentaries were rhetorical and had a political agenda. Caesar often dictated the development of his campaigns to be dispatched to Rome so that it could be propagated by his political supporters. This was done because Caesar's extraordinary command in Gaul was always subject to being terminated by his opponents, whereby he could face criminal prosecution upon his return. By the public circulation of these propagandist bulletins, Caesar sought to obtain support in the Senate or in the Forum with the people to both avoid Rome's political pitfalls and subjugate Gaul at the same time while getting filthy rich in the process.
   
   Caesar is extremely detailed as to his tactics and strategies. He presents his information in a brief and concise way without sophistry. Caesar provides his rationale for his strategies and his evaluation of the enemy's potential. Caesar gives a detailed account of movements, sieges, river crossings, and his mastery of logistics. His best account is probably his final struggle with Vercingetorix, the fierce and charismatic Gallic chieftan who rallied all of the tribes in one final struggle against Rome and surrendered at the siege of Alesia. Ceasar clearly shows admiration for his fierce opponent and how he honorably surrendered himself at Alesia in 50 B.C. to save his followers from imminent starvation: Caesar had him garotted soon after returning in Triumph. The Commentaries also recite his unfulfilled victory/miserable defeat in conquering Britain. Caesar's commentaries are also extremely valuable in understanding the Gauls or Celts in general. As time passed after Caesar's conquest, the Gauls and most Celtic cultures became completely assimilated into Roman civilization and left little of their heritage behind. Unfortunately, Celtic culture had no written tradition and much of their culture is understood through the works of their Roman invaders or through Greek writers such as Polybius. Indirect information about Celtic culture is also obtained from studying its surviving offspring in Wales and Ireland. Thus, Caesar's writing offers a unique insight into Celtic culture, politics, and religion of druidism. As a matter of fact, Caesar probably sped up the extinction of Celtic culture by systematically persecuting the druidic sects who were the Celts' spiritual force and keepers of knowledge. A similar strategy was effectively carried out by the Spanish conquistadores in the Americas 1500 years later, thereby eliminating all essential traces of indigenous identity and solidarity. His commentaries do have some exaggerations as to troop numbers and fabled stories of the still unknown Germanic tribes; in those cases much of what he recites are rather fanciful accounts similar to those of 15th century European navigators.
   
   As an author, Caesar is one of only three statesmen/authors from the late Roman Republic whose works have survived (Sallustius and Cicero being the others.) Along with his Civil War commentaries, his work is a priceless look into the politics, culture, warfare, and personalities of that period. Few, if any, political or militray leaders in history have had an impact on humanity as great and far reaching as Caesar. His conquests and statesmanship still resonate today in both our political and social institutions. It is a work that everyone should read at least once in their life to better understand the world they live in today.



5. 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)