Caesar Bibliography
Essentials
Carolyn Hammond, Caesar: The Gallic War (Oxford World Classics) (Oxford: OUP, 1996). Translation, a few notes, a glossary, and a bibliography much better than that in the Penguin. Includes Hirtius, BG 8.
J.M. Carter, Julius Caesar: The Civil War, with the Anonymous Alexandrian, African, and Spanish Wars (Oxford World Classics) (Oxford: OUP, 1997). 0199540624. Outstanding translation, intro., notes, and very full glossary, maps, biblio.
R. Du Pontet, C. Iuli Caesaris Commentariorum Libri VII De Bello Gallico cum A. Hirti Supplemento (Oxford: OUP, 1900). C. Iuli Caesaris Commentariorum Libri III De Bello Civili (Oxford: OUP, 1900). The OCTs.
J.M. Carter, Julius Caesar: The Civil War: Books I&II (Warminster: Aris & Philips, 1991) 0856684627. Julius Caesar: The Civil War: Book III (Warminster: Aris & Philips, 1993) 0856685836. Improved text, excellent translation, superb historical and interpretive notes.
Modern Historians
Kate Gilliver, Caesar's Gallic Wars, 58-50 BC (Essential Histories series) (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2002). Brief, inexpensive, reliable, excellent pictures, maps, and illustrations.
Adrian Goldsworthy, Caesar's Civil War, 49-44 BC (Essential Histories series) (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2002). Brief, inexpensive, reliable, excellent pictures, maps, and illustrations.
Adrian Goldsworthy, Caesar: Life of a Colossus (New Haven: Yale, 2006).
Matthias Gelzer, Caesar: Politician and Statesman, trans. Peter Needham (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1968; 6th German ed. 1959). Fundamental, and virtually a history of the period. Full listing of ancient sources in the footnotes.
Caesar's Style
Harry Sidebottom, "Winter Quarters: Exploring Battle and Leadership," in Sidebottom, Ancient Warfare: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 99-111. Caesar's account of the episodes of Sabinus and Cotta and Cicero in BG 5 shows that equipment matters, but that it is morale and generalship that determines success or failure. Much of the account fits the conventional template of noisy, irreligious barbarians vs. disciplined and collectively courageous Romans, yet here and there the Romans behave like barbarians, and the Gauls have as much virtus as the Romans. Caesar's assessment of Sabinus and Cotta in 5.33 shows that good generalship is not a historical constant, but culturally determined.
J. E. Lendon, "The Rhetoric of Combat: Greek Military Theory and Roman Culture in Julius Caesar's Battle Descriptions," Classical Antiquity 18 (1999) 273-329. Caesar's battle narratives show his belief in the importance of psychological factors in battle, not just tactics, as in much of the Greek tradition. "To Caesar tactics (impetus), animus, and virtus share the battle equally, and by dividing the battle description into tactical, animus, and virtus segments, the very structure of the Roman general's account elegantly reflects that fact." (320, on the Helvetian episode) Problems in the topographical reporting of battles derive from Caesar's desire to make clear, not the terrain itself, but the interplay of terrain, morale, courage, and generalship. The Roman ethic of virtus forms a distinctive element in Caesar's battle narratives, in contrast to the Greek tradition. "The virtus battle tests masculine excellence in the eyes of a real or imagined public. In the realm of virtus the constant preoccupation of the soldier is with what people will think" (310). Caesar manipulates this psychology in his own men and in his enemies. Many features of Caesar's battle narratives stem not merely from a desire to promote himself but a desire to assert his ideas on war craft against the background of Greek theory.
William Batstone and Cynthia Damon, Caesar's Civil War (Oxford Approaches to Classical Literature) (Oxford: OUP, 2006). A sophisticated but accessible treatment of BC from a literary point of view.
Kimberly E. Kagan, The Eye of Command (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006). Discusses Caesar's style as it relates to understanding the nature of battle.
Andrew M. Riggsby, Caesar in Gaul and Rome: War in Words (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2006). A subtle and sophisticated treatment of just about every aspect of the BG, including a good reading of the first paragraph of BG 1 (pp. 28–32), lots on ethnography, and a fascinating discussion of virtus in the BG (pp. 83–105). Virtus is the mental toughness to do what is required; the Germans acquire it through individual exercise in confrontation with nature and with enemies; Romans acquire it in groups through experience and by submission to authority in difficult circumstances. “Caesar locates a tension within the nature of virtus: resisting outside forces (like the enemy) versus resisting internal ones (like the urge to rush into battle too soon).” (90) C. makes virtus largely a function of obedience to himself, and this may have a broader lesson: “If submission to Caesar could be manly in war, why not in peace?” (105).
Christopher B. Krebs, “’Imaginary Geography’ in Caesar’s Bellum Gallicum,” American Journal of Philology 127 (2006) 111–136. C. gives the impression in his knowledge of Gallic territory of total control, “the space is intellectually mastered,” which goes together with territorial mastery. Unlike Pliny, Tacitus and others, C. does not mention any other boundary for Germany besides the Rhine, giving the impression that it is boundless, thus justifying his inaction there. The predominant concept of space in Gaul and Britain is "strategic," a space in which one travels and acts; in Germany it is "geographic" space, not space in which one acts but which one struggles to fathom. C. portrays himself going into Germany as a bold explorer of terra incognita like Alexander and Pompey, but, unlike Darius in Scythia (Herodotus 4.46-7), he is circumspect and cautious enough not to risk his soldier’s lives.
Hester Schadee, “Caesar’s Construction of Northern Europe: Inquiry, Contact and Corruption in De Bello Gallico,” Classical Quarterly 58 (2008) 158–180. Presentation of ethnographic information is connected with C.’s imperialist projects and military aims. The apparent objectivity of the opening paragraph of BG 1 falsely presents Gaul as a unity, ready to be conquered. When C. represents himself as inquiring about unknown peoples, as with the Helvetii and Nervii, he sets himself up as an explorer who added to Roman knowledge. When he makes no inquiry, as with the Suebi, the implication is that they are not just unknown but unknowable. Caesar’s picture of Germania suggests that it is unknowable, incorruptible and therefore unconquerable. In the British expeditions C. emphasizes his obtaining of information. “Controlling the island intellectually, Rome can control it militarily.” (175) The Gauls are portrayed as more civilized than the Germans, hence a more appropriate addition to the empire than the unknowable forests of Germany.
P.T. Eden, “Caesar’s Style: Inheritance versus Intelligence,” Glotta 40 (1962) 74-117. The classic description of the nuts and bolts of Caesar’s prose style, with copious examples. The plainness is a conscious choice, with roots in annalistic histories like those of Claudius Quadrigarius and Calpurnius Piso: preference for accurate and literal words over poetic and invented; non-avoidance of repetitions; parataxis with lots of resumptive pronouns and adverbs; repeated antecedents for relative pronouns; unemotive word order. But later in BG and especially in BC Caesar evolves a more ornate and emotional version of this style as he becomes more emotionally involved with the events: instances of anaphora, chiasmus, tricola, direct speech, and sententiae all increase, and word order becomes more expressive. The overall goal of the style is to convey an impression of truthiness, in contrast to what Pompey was doing with inflated literary accounts of his deeds in the East written by hangers-on.
H.C. Gotoff, “Towards a Practical Criticism of Caesar’s Prose Style,” Illinois Classical Studies 9 (1984) 1–18. Caesar’s style is closer to that of Cicero and Livy than Eden allows. Note the use of hyperbaton, subordination using participles, and some elaborate periodic structures. This is true even in the earlier books, as can be seen in BG 2.27.
Mark F. Williams, “Caesar’s Bibracte Narrative and the Aims of Caesarian Style,” Illinois Classical Studies 10 (1985) 215–226. Defense of the subtlety and sophistication of BG’s early books, using the example of BG 1.23ff. Caesar’s style is the “culmination of the old annalistic genre,” not second rate Cicero and Livy.
