Customer Reviews

Seven Commentaries on The Gallic War (World's Classics)

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

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.

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.

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. 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. Of his ten commentaries extant, seven are contained here in his account of the Gallic Wars. An additional eighth book was written by Aulus Hirtius in order to bridge the gap between the pacification of Gaul, through the Civil Wars, until finally Caesar himself resumes his narrative with his last three commentaries on the Alexandian, African, and Spanish Wars. The work itself, of course, deals with Caesar's campaigns and relations with the Celtic and German tribes, the Celts in Gaul, and the German's east of the Rhine. Although war is not the only issue Caesar records. His interest in Celtic and Germanic culture is apparent since he provides much important evidence about the diverse tribes' way of life. This information is treasured since the Celts, though literate, were forbidden by the druids to write, and also the Germans provided no single indigenous historian until Jordanes in the middle of the sixth century. Overall, the commentaries of the Gallic Wars are a valuable source for the times and a definite work of profound literary merit.

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.

Julius Caesar's self-promoting memoirs of his time as a Roman general in Gaul are a surprisingly interesting read. While it is a bit hard to keep track of the shifting alliances between the many Gallic tribes, Caesar describes Roman battlefield maneuvers, siege warfare, and diplomacy in a clear, readable manner. I felt that the subtext of the book was "I, Julius Caesar, am an awesome general and savvy diplomat. I always displays great reason and mercy but am not afraid to punish treachery." Nevertheless, it is a fascinating look at warfare in the ancient world.

I found this book to be a very difficult read. Caesar frequently changes perspectives, mostly writing in the third person, but occasionally switching to the first. He also speaks a mixture of present and past tenses that even more confuse the reader. Once you get into the flow of things, though, the book is a good read and rewarding experience.

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.

Caesar has always been a hero to me, not the power driven, egotistical monster that many see him as today. You cannot judge him by today's standard but only by the standards of his time. If there had been no Caesar (or Alexander), our world would be quite different today. It amazes me that I can read the words of the man himself. The Gallic Wars is truely a gem for anyone interested in Caesar or the Roman Republic. You feel as though you have insight into his special genius.

Caesar has always been a hero to me, not the power driven, egotistical monster that many see him as today. You cannot judge him by today's standard but only by the standards of his time. If there had been no Caesar (or Alexander), our world would be quite different today. It amazes me that I can read the words of the man himself. The Gallic Wars is truely a gem for anyone interested in Caesar or the Roman Republic. You feel as though you have insight into his special genius.

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.