Julius Caesar

Quintilian said of Caesar that, he alone could have rivalled Cicero for his elegance of language and purity of style. I dont know about his Latin but, judging by how 'The Conquest of Gaul' translates in English I take his word for it! A straightforward yet epic narrative where anthropology, geography and above all campaigns' diary and military accounts are all mixed together in an exciting tale of the Gallic Wars, fast paced and riveting these commentaries will glue you up to the last page. show more

More interesting though is how, with insight, Julius Caesar portrays himself. Reading it for what it is (a pure work of propaganda destined to serve his future political career) 'The Conquest of Gaul' is a masterpiece. It contains indeed the right balance between what needs to be boldly asserted (e.g. his triumph in subjecting -or at least winning on the battlefields!- difficult warlike peoples) and what can be displayed in-between the lines (e.g. his ability to negotiate, brutally or mercifully as circumstances dictates, with a complicated network of divided tribes).

Strikingly then, here's a book that shows Caesar how he wanted to appear. More than a triumphal military leader, charismatic and respected by his men, he also was a canny and tactful politician who had both honour and Rome's interest at heart.

As an account of the Gallic Wars it is riveting. As a work of political propaganda it's just masterfully calculated. Remarkable! show less

I can't read this without hearing the voice of Ciaran Hinds (who played Caesar on the tv series Rome) narrating this.....

Although undoubtedly Caesar was writing for both then-current political consumption as well as perhaps for posterity, this is a surprisingly frank and detailed account of the 10 years it took Caesar to conquer Gaul (France, Belgium and parts of Germany, Switzerland and Italy). He details both the valor of the Gauls (his enemy) and well as periodic stupidity or cowardice of show more certain Romans, as well as the to-be-expected accounts of heroism on the part of Romans. His language is strikingly modest and he is constantly naming soldiers of the line and giving credit to others. While again this is partly undoubtedly to encourage political support and loyalty, one can't but believe that Caesar had internalized a leadership style that gave credit to others (whilst undoubtedly seeing the benefit to himself thereby). His account of the cultural practices of the Druids is quite interesting and it's clear that Caesar was a student of the people he hoped to conquer. It's interesting to read quotes such as this - "Next to him (Mars the god) come Apollo, Jupiter, and Minerva, and about them their ideas correspond fairly closely with those current among the rest of mankind, viz. that Apollo expels diseases, that Minerva teaches ...." and speculate on Caesar's own perspective on the gods their potential uses for political purposes.

A common practice of the time to encourage compliance after a victory was the taking of hostages. One can't go more than a few pages without more hostages being taken, often in the hundreds. Indeed later in the book we find that there is almost an entire city dedicating to housing the hostages taken in the war.

We see in the text that Caesar was always mindful of appearance and ceremony. For example, "Caesar was nevertheless strongly of the opinion that to do so by means of boats would neither be unattended by risk, nor worth of his own or his country's dignity." And surprisingly matter-of-fact about the business of war: "It remained, therefore, only to do the work of devastation, and for this a few days were spent in burning the farms and villages and in rooting up the crops". (It is striking how much of the conquest is dictated by weather and seasons - Caesar often retires to Rome for the winter, for example). There is surprising amount of engineering in warfare here - there are many accounts of interesting bridge-building techniques and challenges.

The Conquest of Gaul culminates in the battle of Alesia where the Gaul King Vercingetorix surrenders to Caesar after a prolonged siege and battle. (The description of the innovations Caesar and his army made in fortifications are quite interesting.). Interestingly enough there is little description of Vercingetorix's fate in the book (nor much celebration of what would prove the final victory for Caesar), but he would be sent to Rome, kept a prisoner for 5 years, and executed during Caesar's triumph, but that time period is not covered by the book. show less

Boken är inte en opartisk betraktelse av inbördeskriget mellan Caesar och Pompejus. Det är ett av Caesars verktyg för att befästa och utöka sin makt i Rom. Till skillnad från Kriget i Gallien, där gallerna för alla romare var den självklara fienden, är Inbördeskriget, där vän och fiende var mindre tydliga, fylld av hyllningar av Caesars karaktär och beslut och utmålande av Pompejus och hans anhängare som moraliskt fördärvade.

Men kanske på grund av just det är boken show more läsvärd för någon intresserad av romersk historia. Här är en romersk härförares, och inte bara vem som helst utan Caesars, egna ord om fälttåg och slag som formade det romerska imperiet. Propagandavapnet har idag blivit till en sällsynt inblick i legionernas kampanjer och leverne.

För någon som söker mer övergripande kunskap om perioden rekommenderar jag dock att leta efter ett annat verk då detta är en sida av historien, är skriven på ett rätt torrt språk och som också slutar något abrupt med att kriget i Egyptien ska starta på allvar. show less

When I was a freshman at highschool, school officials for some reason decided that all of us must take French. I hated French and I rebelled. Our teacher, Mrs Lippisch (a kindly German lady whose husband brought her over from the old country) for some reason decided that I should not be expelled from school just because I refused to endure French. So she gave me a paperback, English translation of Caesar's "de Bello Gallico."

I took the book home and started reading and I've never recovered show more from the experience. To this day I maintain that de Bello Gallico is the greatest thing ever written by anyone and that Julius Caesar was and remains the greatest man who ever lived. Now Landmark has published this marvelous compilation of Caesar's works I can read and enjoy everything the man wrote. I'm gonna take a bath in Caesar.

Surely those remarks will raise some hoohaa from a million bookworms. I don't care. My conviction is an honest one, honestly come by, and is proof against all argument to the contrary because my conviction in this matter isn't rational. The rest of the world has my permission to live with it, because it's never going to change and I'm not running for President, so what I believe should rightly make no difference to anyone.

I'm just some jerk who loves "de Bello Gallico". If you read "de Bello Gallico" and decide you like it too, we might start a club. . . . show less