1. Caesar’s Commentaries are splendid, if you’re into this sort of thing. Your initial interest lies at the heart of whether this book hits you or not. The book deals with Caesar’s military expeditions to Gaul and Britain in the mid-50s BC. It is written by Caesar as a straight from the horse's mouth account. We get some of the thinking behind Caesar’s decisions, and a portrayal of the information he had available. These insights are valuable to understanding the campaigns in Gaul. But, because this book uses naming conventions that are obscure to me, living in the 21st century, I am sometimes lost. For instance, when Caesar turns North, doing the equivalent of burning the ships, it's pretty obscure; my understanding of that risky strategic decision doesn't so much come out from this book as from knowledge about the campaign that I already had before I read. And contextual understanding was key to my enjoyment of this book.
All Gaul is divided into three parts, one of which the Belgae inhabit, the Aquitani another, those who in their own language are called Celts, in ours Gauls, the third. Of all these, the Belgae are the bravest, because they are farthest from the civilisation and refinement of [our] Province, and merchants least frequently resort to them and import those things which tend to effeminate the mind; and they are the nearest to the Germans, who dwell beyond the Rhine, with whom they are continually waging war. The Belgae rise from the extreme frontier of Gaul, extend to the lower part of the river Rhine; and look towards the north and the rising sun.2. Caesar’s concise writing tends to descriptions and chronological progression—pushing the plot forwards instead of spinning off into sidetracks. For instance.
Caesar, being informed of these things by Crassus, since he was so far distant himself, orders ships of war to be built in the meantime on the river Loire, which flows into the ocean; rowers to be raised from the province; sailors and pilots to be provided. These matters being quickly executed, he himself, as soon as the season of the year permits, hastens to the army.Yes, he writes in third person. But you can see how, outside of the Latin tendency to phrases built on phrases, this is pretty concise writing compared to other classical writers. It’s direct. How he talks ties directly into that tone he has set.
In the camp of the Helvetii, lists were found, drawn up in Greek characters, and were brought to Caesar, in which an estimate had been drawn up, name by name, of the number which had gone forth from their country of those who were able to bear arms; and likewise the boys, the old men, and the women, separately. [...] The sum of all amounted to 368,000. Out of these, such as could bear arms [amounted] to about 92,000. When the census of those who returned home was taken, as Caesar had commanded, the number was found to be 110,000.3. The tone of the book sets the stage for the two thousand years of debate that have followed. On one hand, this book summarizes his dispatches to Rome, his political bonifides to help him be popular in Rome. He talks about certain soldiers, names them specifically, and praises them, to show how tied in he is with all strata of Roman classes—something he does in his life continually. He discusses his own astounding acts—building a bridge in ten days, visiting Britain, and his military exploits. He doesn’t so much praise himself as spend enough time talking about them that the reader can’t help but understand how incredible his actions are.
—But the real question is how he treats the Gauls, Belgae, and Germans in the book. He treats them with a weird mix of respect and disdain, and this has been the source of debate ever since. Is Caesar a genocidal maniac? Is he a liberator? What are his intentions with Gaul, not why is he there—to escape his debtors—but what does he intend to do with it once he has conquered it? Or pacified Gaul into a desert. The Gauls come off like William Wallace—shouting “FREEDOM” and running out of the woods towards the civilized invaders. Yet Caesar goes around killing them over and over again. And discusses how they are not housebroken. My personal answer to this question is that Caesar is trying to strike a balance between establishing his credentials, while also lessening the Roman fear of the Gaul so that they can assimilate.
Caesar, for those reasons which I have mentioned, had resolved to cross the Rhine; but to cross by ships he neither deemed to be sufficiently safe, nor considered consistent with his own dignity or that of the Roman people. Therefore, although the greatest difficulty in forming a bridge was presented to him, on account of the breadth, rapidity, and depth of the river, he nevertheless considered that it ought to be attempted by him, or that his army ought not otherwise to be led over. He devised this plan of a bridge. He joined together at the distance of two feet, two piles, each a foot and a half thick, sharpened a little at the lower end, and proportioned in length to the depth of the river. [...] These beams were bound together by timber laid over them in the direction of the length of the bridge, and were [then] covered over with laths and hurdles; and in addition to this, piles were driven into the water obliquely, at the lower side of the bridge, and these serving as buttresses, and being connected with every portion of the work, sustained the force of the stream: and there were others also above the bridge, at a moderate distance; that if trunks of trees or vessels were floated down the river by the barbarians for the purpose of destroying the work, the violence of such things might be diminished by these defences, and might not injure the bridge. Within ten days after the timber began to be collected, the whole work was completed, and the whole army led over.4. In all, great book. Glad I read it. But not great for everybody. It’s incredibly focused and concise, but it also glosses over some of his defeats and successes. It also hides information behind archaic naming conventions. It’s interesting to get Caesar’s thoughts on these events in his life, but some of my enjoyment of this book comes from this inherent interest in Caesar and this time period, rather than the book drawing me in.
Caesar, having stationed his army on both sides of the fortifications, in order that, if occasion should arise, each should hold and know his own post, orders the cavalry to issue forth from the camp and commence action. There was a commanding view from the entire camp, which occupied a ridge of hills; and the minds of all the soldiers anxiously awaited the issue of the battle.[...] When the Gauls were confident that their countrymen were the conquerors in the action, and beheld our men hard pressed by numbers, both those who were hemmed in by the line of circumvallation and those who had come to aid them, supported the spirits of their men by shouts and yells from every quarter. As the action was carried on in sight of all, neither a brave nor cowardly act could be concealed; both the desire of praise and the fear of ignominy, urged on each party to valour.
No comments:
Post a Comment