Page images

the secondary titles used by Suetonius; and as bearing upon the choice of a title, the point of view of both Greek and Roman writers with reference to the place of personal narrative in relation to other forms of historical composition. The limitations of this paper make it impracticable to follow out these or other lines of inquiry here; but it may be worth while to outline what may be considered as on the whole a not improbable explanation of the way in which the titles of both the Gallic and the Civil Wars came to be as they are.


Caesar wrote the seven books of the Gallic War rapidly, arranging the material by years and numbering the rolls (volumina) I to VII as he finished them, so as to indicate the order; referring back when necessary to preceding portions of the work by memory, and using indefinite references (as ut or ut ante or ut supra demonstravimus, ut or ut supra demonstratum est) instead of the more definite references ordinarily used by writers who make a greater labor of composition and write more deliberately. Thus Hirtius, referring to Caesar's Book vii, has superiore commentario (viii, 4, 3; 30, I; 38, 3).

Avoiding the use of definite references, he had no occasion to employ in his text a word referring to an individual book ; had he done so, we may suppose that, consistently with his use of the plural commentarii and with the usage exemplified by Hirtius, he would have chosen commentarius instead of liber, and that this word would have been supplied by him with the numeral adjective had he thought it necessary to designate the separate books by formal inscriptions (as commentarius tertius) instead of the simple numbers.


At some time between the end of the year 48 and March of 44 (probably after July, 46), encouraged by the reception of his commentarii i-vii, and desiring for many reasons to put into circulation a summary of the events of the Civil War from his own point of view, Caesar undertook to continue the work; though harried and worn and interrupted, he succeeded in completing (probably by dictation) two rolls, of which the first contained an account of the events of the year 49 and included Books i and ii, as the work is divided in modern editions, while the second treated the events of 48, being Book iii of the editions. It may be that he expected at some future time to write an account of the events of 51 and 50; but the battle of Pharsalus, as the fall of Alesia, marked a climax and turning-point of his fortunes, and taking up first that which was most important, he commenced the first of the new rolls with the negotiations at the beginning of January, 49, from which the course of events led rapidly and naturally to Pharsalus and Egypt; circumstances did not permit him to carry the narrative beyond the beginnings of the Alexandrian War. The two rolls that were finished may have been numbered X and XI, space being left in the enumeration for two other rolls covering the events of 51 and 50; or possibly they were numbered VIII and IX to follow immediately the first series.

After Caesar's death either his trusted friend Cornelius Balbus, to whom he had committed the charge of important interests when absent from Rome, or Aulus Hirtius, obtained possession of the two finished rolls. Balbus, desiring out of regard for Caesar's memory not to allow them to be published without a presentation, from Caesar's point of view, of the events immediately preceding and following those of 49 and 48, persuaded Hirtius to fill out the missing portions of the commentarii (B.G. viii, praef. 1, 2).

3. Hirtius, troubled by ill health and pressed by many affairs, nevertheless found time to finish and send to Balbus, with a dedicatory preface, an account of the events of the years 51 and 50, so bridging the chasm between the old commentarii and the new; the final revision and transmission to Balbus of the latter part of his work, continuing his narrative to the death of Caesar, may have been prevented by his own death, only a year after that of the Dictator.

The commentarius covering the events of 51 and 50 was viewed by Hirtius as something interjected into the writings of Caesar (praef. 3 qui me mediis interposuerim Caesaris scriptis); either Hirtius or Balbus (probably the latter) arranged in order a copy of the first seven commentarii, the interjected roll of Hirtius, and the two new rolls left by Caesar, so as to make an orderly collection of the whole as follows:

[blocks in formation]



51 and 50 Hirtius

Caesar (Books i and ii of the

Civil War as it appears in

the editions)

Caesar (Book iii of the Civil

War in the editions) All these were included under the general title C. Tuli Caesaris commentarii rerum gestarum ; the question of the authorship and addition of the Alexandrian, African, and Spanish Wars need not be raised here. The eighth roll had a special inscription, in which the word commentarius and the name of Hirtius appeared; traces of this special inscription, in a corrupt form, are found in certain manuscripts, as are also traces of the original numbering of the books.

4. Strabo knew Caesar's commentarii (ÚTrouvňuara) as only a single work; he refers to the Gallic War under the general title (iv, Ι ούτω δε και ο θεός Καίσαρ εν τοις υπομνήμασιν είρηκεν). But the subject-matter was so sharply differentiated that the rolls composing the work naturally came to be reckoned in two groups, those relating to the Gallic War and those relating to the Civil War. Livy in his own work recognizes a similar grouping of the books relative to the Samnite Wars (x, 31, 10). To the readers of a work written in rolls the grouping of books related in subject-matter was even more a matter of convenience than with us, who use a different kind of volume.

The two groups of Caesar's commentarii were probably offered for sale separately by the booksellers. By the time of Suetonius the division of the work into two parts was so generally recognized that to his adaptation of the title, rerum suarum commentarii, he added as epexegetical secondary titles Gallici civilisque belli Pompeiani, the adjective Pompeiani being added to indicate that Caesar's own books on the Civil War, as distinguished from the continuations mentioned in the next sentence, covered only the struggle with Pompey. The continuations known to Suetonius were apparently the same as those which we have; they were probably arranged as they appear in the Ashburnham manuscript, the Alexandrian War being numbered XI, the African War XII, and the Spanish War XIII.

5. The thirteen rolls of the Caesarian corpus in their proper order were copied into a manuscript of the ordinary codex form, each roll being of course reckoned a separate book (liber). This codex, or an early descendant, became badly

The parts which suffered most were the first page, the last page, and the page containing the opening sentences of Book ix, to which, as the beginning of the Civil War, those looking at the manuscript would turn more frequently than to any other part between the two covers. At last the leaves on which were these pages became loose and disappeared; thus were lost the first page containing the title, which was usually put on the first page of a codex (Aug. Ep. 40, 2, Corp. Script. Eccl. Lat. XXXIV, 2, p. 71; cited by Dziatzko, Ausg. Kapitel des ant. Buchwesens, p. 179), a leaf containing the end of Book viii and the beginning of Book ix, and one or more leaves with the end of the Spanish War. Of the origin of other lacunae it is not necessary here to speak.



From this mutilated codex came at least three descendants to all of which titles were supplied :

a. In one copy, by an error easily explicable, the new title assigned the work to Suetonius; descendants of this exemplar, or the exemplar itself, were used in the fifth century by Orosius (cf. vi, 7, 2 and Jahresberichte des phil. Vereins zu Berlin, 1885, pp. 154-156) and Apollinaris Sidonius (Ep. ix, 14, 7 opera Suetonii = opera Caesaris).

b. In another copy, though the work was recognized as Caesar's, Ephemeris Gaii Iulii Caesaris or C. Iulii Caesaris was supplied as a title by some reader of Plutarch's life of Caesar (22 ο μεν Καίσαρ εν ταις εφημερίσι γέγραφεν) or a similar Greek source now lost; this manuscript or a descendant of it was used by Symmachus in the year 396 (Ep. iv, 18, 5 Sume ephemeridem C. Caesaris decerptam bibliotheculae meae, ut tibi muneri mitteretur).

c. In the third copy, which was in the line of descent to the archetype of all existing manuscripts, libri Gaii Iulii Caesaris was supplied as a general title, and then de narratione temporum belli Gallici, or something similar, was added as a secondary title of Books i-viii; hence came the form of the title which appears in the ß manuscripts. As the beginning of Book ix had disappeared, one of the scribes who copied from the archetype (X) or from the princeps of the B class, noticing that this book commenced a new subject, supplied a form of bellum civile as a title, divided the book into two parts, numbering these as Books i and ii of a separate work, and changing the number of Book x to iii; hence the division of the Civil War as it is found in most manuscripts.

7. The variant forms of the titles of Caesar's work found in the manuscripts and in the early editions may all be explained as arising in part from the acquaintance of scribes and editors with more than one manuscript, and in part from attempts to restore the ancient title from literary sources.

« PreviousContinue »