Bellum Gallicum Research Articles

A New English Translation of the Bellum Gallicum (on J. J. O’Donnell, Julius Caesar: The War for Gaul. A New Translation)

A New English Translation of the Bellum Gallicum (on J. J. O’Donnell, Julius Caesar: The War for Gaul. A New Translation)

The First Supine inBellum GallicumandBellum Civile: A Study of Caesar as Grammarian, Narrator, andExemplum

The First Supine in<i>Bellum Gallicum</i>and<i>Bellum Civile</i>: A Study of Caesar as Grammarian, Narrator, and<i>Exemplum</i>

La literatura medieval hispánica en la imprenta (1475-1600) eds. by María Jesús Lacarra y Nuria Aranda García

Reviewed by: La literatura medieval hispánica en la imprenta (1475-1600) eds. by María Jesús Lacarra y Nuria Aranda García Emily C. Francomano Lacarra, María Jesús, y Nuria Aranda García, eds. La literatura medieval hispánica en la imprenta (1475-1600). Valencia: Universitat de València, 2016. 272 pp. ISBN: 978-84-370-9998-9 This volume of essays accompanies the launch of COMEDIC (Catálogo de obras medievales impresas en castellano), an on-line, open-access database (http://comedic.unizar.es) created by the University of Zaragoza's "Grupo de Investigación Clarisel". In their preface to the anthology, María Coduras and María Jesús Lacarra outline the genesis and design of COMEDIC and provide readers with a view of the "back end" of the database, including the structuring of metadata, data management and programming systems used, and design principles of the database. As Coduras and Lacarra explain, the primary objective of the COMEDIC project is to study the transmission, evolution, transformation, and reception of medieval Castilian literature in the advent of print and the century following the incunable period, highlighting the success of certain genres above others, the ability of printers to serve the needs and desires of the market, and the ways in which medieval works took on new meaning as they traveled from one century and printed edition to another. At the time of the volume's publication in 2016, COMEDIC contained bibliographic entries detailing the early print editions of twenty-two medieval works. The database, like many other projects in Digital Humanities, is open to continual expansion and, at the time of this writing, COMEDIC offers bibliographical entries on twenty-four medieval works representing a wide range of genres, including -but not limited to- sentimental fictions, cancioneros, hagiography, and sapiential literature. The twelve essays contained in this anthology are not only a testament to the labor of the COMEDIC team, but also to the kind of work that the database makes possible, as well as the evolution of Digital Humanities projects in the field. Five of the authors take a diachronic view of editions and textual evolution: José Aragüés Aldaz on the Leyenda de los santos, María Jesús Lacarra on the Libro de las propiedades de las cosas, Gaetano Lalomia on the editions of the Spanish translation of Boccaccio's Fiammetta, and María Carmen Marín Pina on the 16th- century editions of Cárcel de amor. Marianela García Sampere's study of the Lo plant de la Verge María shows how the examination of editions over time sheds light on issues of authorship. Tree essays are dedicated to relationships between texts and images: Juan Manuel Cacho Blecua on text and images of vengeance in La estoria del noble Vespasiano, Daniela Santonocito on the woodcuts in the Libro de [End Page 132] montería, and María Sanz Julián on the title pages of the Baladro del sabio Merlín. Josep Lluís Martos and Antonio Moreno Hernández contribute bibliographic descriptions of single editions: a cancionero and the Bellum Gallicum, respectively. Manuel José Pedraza turns to the influence and career of the printer Jorge Coci. While most of the essays relate directly to titles represented in the database and focus on Castilian texts and editions produced in what is today Spain, two essays look at issues of translation and international networks of printers (Gaetano Lolomia, María Sanz Julián, and Manuel José Pedraza), reminding readers that, in the 16th century, the transmission, reception, and evolution of medieval literature from many of the literary traditions now identified by the borders of modern states were transnational as well as diachronic processes. By turning the post-incunable period and focusing on how some medieval works moved from manuscript into print, COMEDIC expands upon the essential bibliographic store of other databases such as PhiloBiblon (http://bancrof.berkeley.edu/philobiblon/). Charles Faulhaber's essay on the history and future of PhiloBiblon provides readers with a concise history of the transition from humanities computing in medieval studies to the advent of the semantic web and Digital Humanities. Troughout, the essays continually...

Heroic Resonances in Caesar's Bellum Gallicum 5

Caesar uses elements of epic and tragic type-scenes to create heroic resonances in book 5 of the Bellum Gallicum. By invoking the heroic world and implicitly likening his role to that of the gods in the context of 54 b.c.e. (a particularly difficult year in the Gallic campaigns), Caesar reassures his audience of his efficiency and effectiveness in command. Caesar's struggles in 54 are reframed as dramatic and heroic exploits, and temporary challenges to his command in Gaul are resolved by Caesar's infallible will and counsel.

IRONY AND THE TEXT OF CAESAR, BELLVM GALLICVM 5.31.5

The sentence that comprises 5.31.5 in Caesar's Bellum Gallicum has long been felt to be problematic. It was deleted entirely by H. Meusel. A. Klotz posited a lacuna after quare. Others sought smaller adjustments. Yet, the defence of the text as transmitted also drew advocates (T. Rice Holmes, A. Ernout, O. Seel) and the debate quietened. The current Teubner edition, by W. Hering in 1987, prints the transmitted text and does not acknowledge the debate in the apparatus criticus. I propose a new solution, one that reinterprets the sentence in context and requires a small textual change from et to nec. I will first set the context and identify problems with the conventional understanding of 5.31.5.

Caesars Absicht bei der Herausgabe des Bellum Gallicum

It is a commonly held view that the Bellum Gallicum was a tool of Caesar’s political propaganda, with which he wanted to win the public opinion in Rome. The paper aims to argue against this, since he probably did not even publish it himself but considered it only as a basis for a future rhetorical revision by a historiographer. The text we have is thus presumably an anonymous edition.

"Imaginary Geography" in Caesar's Bellum Gallicum

Caesar"s "imaginary geography" of Germania as an infinite extension without any patterns but simply endless forests contrasts with his presentation of Gallia as an overviewed space. Within these geographies different concepts of space prevail, all of which serve to explain why his celeritas ceases in Germania. Having crossed the Rhine and thereby entered terra incognita like Alexander and Pompey, he refrains from campaigning because of the geographical conditions. By alluding to Scythia"s similar space and Darius" failure, he shows himself to act prudently. It is also a characteristic of the imperator optimus to know when a venture is too risky.

César, &lt;i&gt;Bellum Gallicum, Parisinus Lat.&lt;/i&gt; 5767

This article is a philological approach to the text of the Bellum Gallicum by Caesar in the thirteenth century manuscript Parisinus Lat. 5767 (P), in order to clarify its relationship with the textual tradition of the B.G. The method employed focuses on two elements : the distinctive features of tituli and colophons, and the collation and internal analysis of the text. The study allows to conclude that P belongs to the family Χ (A and Q) of the a manuscripts, and shows internal evidence of relation with Q, although P is not merely a copy of Q, but it comes from an hyparchetype closely related with Q, but distinctly different, and with great critical value.

(review)

MLR, 100.2, 2005 543 by Kern draws together recurring patterns of reception; foran initial orientation, this is as convenient as any essay currently in print. The complex and varying relationship between the ancient and medieval worlds is explored, with interesting observations on the importance of Alexander and Virgil, and on the almost complete lack of inter? est in Oedipus and Prometheus. While some of the texts, particularly the chronicles and the courtly retellings of Homer, Virgil, and Ovid, have classical figures as their primary material, others tend to referto them in passing ('name-dropping', as Kern puts it), and here the exemplary role becomes predominant: one thinks of Alexander in Hartmann's Erec or Dido in Gottfried's Tristan. The strategies by which medieval writers rationalizedpolytheismare of particular interest. Kern tags this 'Versohnung mit der Mythologie' and highlights three broad possibilities: deities can be heroes who were posthumously declared by the foolish to be gods (the 'historical' strategy), they can be devils or demons who possibly even sit enthroned on the planets named after them (the 'physical' strategy?perhaps 'cosmological' would be a better term), or they can be moral fictions teaching Christian truths to a world ante gratiam (the 'allegorical' strategy). All this is convincingly portrayed. The Lexikon itselfis thorough. All the lemmata are personal names from antiquity: Greek heroes, Roman generals, literaryprotagonists, and inhabitants ofthe Pantheon. Each entry firstlists references in Middle High German literature, grouped accord? ing to genre, and then comments on interesting motifs, lines of transmission, and patterns of development. The commentary sections are designed to be read alone, and thus provide an easy starting point forthe reader wishing to contextualize a clas? sical figurein medieval thought generally. Occasionally one could wish formore?the Annolied*s remarkable relocation of the Bellum Gallicum to Germany is inadequately expounded in the article on Caesar?but generally the commentaries do justice to the needs of the casual reader, and bibliographical references lead to fuller discussions elsewhere. The Lexikon strives for a fairportrayal of German literature in the period 1050-1350, but using representative texts rather than attempting a comprehensive coverage. So, for example, the absence of the Christherre-Chronik means that the article on Pallas (Minerva) lacks the fascinating detail of her invention of spinning, an accolade normally accorded to Adam's daughter Noema. But on the whole there is little of importance missing. A useful index of variant forms allows the user quickly to discover, for example, that Jans der Enikel's 'Frictonius' is a misreading of 'Erictonius '. Effective use of the Lexikon does require the reader to be aware of a series of abbreviations and sigla which are not always obvious, and the occasional user is often frustrated that the explanation of these is not readily to hand: it is in fact to be found on pages lx-lxii. In the end I had to make an inlay card listing these data; perhaps in a future edition the publishers ought to provide one. With this nod in the direction of user-friendliness, the volume is as useful for quick reference as for detailed study. The Lexikon der antiken Gestalten will certainly become a standard tool for scholars working on courtly literature, historiography, and medieval thought. University of Regensburg Graeme Dunphy Erzahlform im hofischenRoman: Studien zur Fokalisierung im (Eneas', im 'Iwein' und im 'Tristan'. By Gert Hubner. (Bibliotheca Germanica, 44) Tubingen and Basel: Francke. 2003. x + 458pp. ?78. ISBN 3-7720-2035-6. For a book of this length to be devoted to three court romances which have been the centre of scholarly attention for well on two centuries, the author has to justify himself by the novelty of his approach. For Gert Hubner, this is the critical concept of focalization, resting on the three-point relationship between the narrator, the world 544 Reviews presented by him, and the characters' experience of that world. As is made clear, Hubner is largely dependent on, but not uncritical of, the work of Gerard Genette. The firstfour chapters make up a lengthy,almost entirely theoretical, presentation of problems, terminology, and method, taking up more than a quarter of the whole book. A short introductory chapter discusses Auerbach's well...

F. Cairns and E. Fantham (eds), Caesar Against Liberty? Perspectives on his Autocracy (Papers of the Langford Latin Seminar 11). Cambridge: Francis Cairns (Publications), 2003. Pp. xxi + 232. ISBN 0-905205-39-1. £37.50.

F. Cairns and E. Fantham (eds), Caesar Against Liberty? Perspectives on his Autocracy (Papers of the Langford Latin Seminar 11). Cambridge: Francis Cairns (Publications), 2003. Pp. xxi + 232. ISBN 0-905205-39-1. £37.50. - Volume 94

Falling Masts, Rising Masters: The Ethnography of Virtue in Caesar's Account of the Veneti

CAESAR'S ACCOUNT OF THE REVOLT of the Veneti and neighboring tribes along the northwest coast of Gaul (BGall. 3.8-15) contains a clear assertion of Rome's superiority in virtus over her foes. While the account of the Veneti has sparked considerable debate over Caesar's political motivations and Venetic topography, 1 the passage's literary themes merit study in their own right. This paper examines the respective roles of technology and virtus in Caesar's presentation of the Venetic defeat. The first section establishes that Caesar conceived of the sea battle fought against the Veneti as a contest about virtus. The next section argues that the technology of enemy boat design detailed in an ethnographic passage is represented by Caesar as a source of Venetic strength in place of true fighting spirit. This naval ethnography, dismissed by several commentators as an afterthought awkwardly inserted into the text, 2 is, on the contrary, the cornerstone of a sophisticated exposition on the theme of native technological strength failing to compensate for a lack of virtus. Caesar's presentation of the final defeat of the Veneti at sea, the subject of the third section, exposes native weakness in a remarkable scene wherein falling masts and sudden calm metaphorically cast enemy failure within a gendered opposition of hard and soft. [End Page 601] The Presentation of the Sea Battle as a Contest about Virtus At the beginning of the account, the Veneti prove to be formidable adversaries despite their apparent reluctance to face the Romans in battle. The unusual position of their strongholds, on the tips of spits or promontories, shelters the Veneti from sea-borne attack. As Caesar points out, the violent swelling of the tide (aestus) characteristic of these northern regions and the presence of dangerous shoals make approaching the headlands by sea difficult (3.12.2-3). A further Roman disadvantage is their inadequate knowledge of the region's shoals, ports, and islands where the fighting will have to be waged. 3 Even when the Romans manage to besiege enemy positions, the Veneti's possession of a superior fleet allows them to abandon compromised strongholds and fortify new ones. Faced with an enemy skilled at tactical retreat, the Romans must delay a decisive resolution of the campaign until they finish assembling a fleet of their own. 4 The Veneti stand in contrast to other tribes Caesar has fought, at least among those described in any detail. They lack the fighting virtues of masculine fortitude and courage in battle. Caesar ascribes Venetic power to three factors: a great number of ships, control over ports and trade with Britain, and a combination of knowledge (scientia) and experience (usus) in naval matters. 5 He credits the Veneti with being a coastal power, respected by their neighbors and preeminent in auctoritas. 6 This term is commonly paired with other words that reflect the courage of the Gauls, such as fortissimus, acerrimus, or occasionally even virtus. But Caesar's entire account of the Veneti is noticeably lacking in any explicit description of enemy fighting spirit. 7 In contrast, the Bellovaci at Bellum [End Page 602] Gallicum 2.4.5 are said to reign over their neighbors (inter eos) both in auctoritas and virtus. The term virtus itself covers a wide range of meanings. At its core are the concepts of masculine fortitude and courageous action. 8 Caesar describes another Gallic tribe, the Senones, in similar terms: civitas in primis firma et magnae inter Gallos auctoritatis (BGall. 5.54.2), where firma is paired with auctoritas.Fortis and acer occasionally serve as crude adjectival equivalents of virtus, as evidenced by an example at Bellum Gallicum 5.43.4, in which Caesar equates virtus with fighting in a manner acerrime fortissimeque in the case of Roman legionaries. A distinction exists between these terms and audacia and ferox, which convey the...

A propos du Rhône comme limite de la cité de Vienne au Haut-Empire (en amont de Lyon)

In the Bellum Gallicum, Caesar writes that the Allobroges possessed villages and properties on the right bank of the Rhone. Much ink has been spilt about this assertion, because scholars do not agree about the places in which these estates were located. By relying on Caesar's text, onomastic and the type of funerary monuments, the author concludes that in the end of the Republic, the Allobroges possessed only bridgeheads on the right bank, and that under the Principate the Rhone was the boundary between the territory of Vienna and those of the cities located on the right bank (Sequani, Ambarri) .

XPDNC/Writing Caesar ("Bellum Ciuile")

Julius Caesar's "Bellum Ciuile" writes Caesar-articulates a particular construction of its subject: Caesar. The essay shows how writing in the civil war wins and loses the war, and how the writing of the Civil War exploits this throughout its course. The initial suppression of Caesar's letter to the senate in 49 BCE creates a lack which the rest of the text is to supply, and a structure of injustice inflicted on Caesar by villainous manipulation of communiqués. The narrative presents Caesar's withheld claims over and again, in an ever-lengthening set of dramatized formulations and vindications, both in the form of his own behaviour and in its contrast with his enemies'. The many and various roles of writing in the civil war are examined, from orders and despatches to the propagandist war of words, and it is shown how the conflict is moralized through polarity between the letters sent by the two sides. Caesar presents himself as the last proconsular conqueror of the republic, playing the patriotic general from Gaul to Alexandria, where the "Bellum Ciuile" gives out-in time for this the first writer and mythographer of the Roman Empire to hide his hero's overthrow of the political order. It is argued that Caesar runs Bellum Gallicum and "Bellum Ciuile" together to make a seamless continuum, as a vital strategy for occluding, denying, and displacing civil war from the triumphant procession across a welcoming Roman world he offers in the "Bellum Ciuile".

Ab inimicis incitatus : On Dating the Composition of Caesar's Bellum Civile

R.T. Macfarlane: The Composition of Caesar's Bellum Civile 107 Ab inimicis incitâtus: On Dating the Composition of Caesar's Bellum Civile Roger T. Macfarlane The study of the circumstances under which Caesar wrote and published the Bellum Civile has been a battle of no Uttle consequence among scholars. The ground they fight over is a certain knowledge of when Caesar actually composed and disclosed die account of die civil war. To know the date of the composition and publication of the Bellum Civile is to hold the key to understanding Caesar's rhetorical stance in the narrative. Drawing upon external and internal evidence, scholars have argued various theories of composition which place Caesar's authorship either very early or very late. Indeed, in some hypotheses the composition of the Bellum Civile is placed so late in Caesar's life that the work is supposed to have been cut short at his death.1 The purpose of this paper is to examine Caesar's method of referring to his enemies and to suggest how this helps give a fairly precise date to die composition of one portion ofthe text. Klotz believed that Caesar was writing the Bellum Civile at the time of his death and tiiat the narrative was first pubUshed after Caesar's death.2 While the text has suffered from the process of textual transmission, at many especially difficult passages, according to Klotz, Caesar had left the text in sketches. Caesar intended to rewrite and correct this rough draft, and would have done so, had he not died unexpectedly. Contrarily, Barwick claimed in 1938 and more strongly in 1951 that 1 For summaries see M.T. Boatwright, "Caesar's Second Consulship and the Completion and Date of the Bellum Civile," CJ 84 (1988) 31, note 1; and H. Gesche, Caesar (Darmstadt 1976) 12125 , 276-81. 2 A. Klotz, "Zu Caesars Bellum Civile," RhM 66 (1911) 85-89; and id., ed., C. Iulii Caesaris Commentarii Belli Civilis, 2nd ed. (Leipzig 1969) ix. 108Syllecta Classica 7 (1996) Caesar had already published one edition of the Bellum Civile before the Ides of March. This edition, claims Barwick, was packed with falsehoods and errors that had been necessitated by the urgency of the circumstances surrounding their composition.3 This first edition would have been rewritten and corrected—made more honest—after the propaganda had worked its effects, had he Uved long enough to do it4 A paucity of definitive external evidence—a handful of statements in Cicero, Hirtius, and Suetonius—makes it difficult to determine with certainty when the Bellum Civile appeared.5 Klotz and Barwick disputed the meaning ofthese common passages to different ends. Collins advised that neither Barwick nor Klotz could with certainty use Hirtius, or Suetonius' report of Asinius Pollio's opinion, and that such external evidence might "just as well be used against Barwick as for him."6 If the external evidence is thrown out, the loss is not great.7 The examination of internal evidence, instead, makes it possible to determine when and how Caesar wrote the Bellum Civile. Collins took the position that Caesar composed the Bellum Civile by autumn 48 but left it unpublished.8 An abrupt psychological and philosophical change came over Caesar, when he found himself unchallenged at the conclusion of the war with Pompey.9 This freedom from opposition caused Caesar to initiate his contact with Egyptian monarchy, which contact brought a change of attitude and made itself manifest in his tiiird consulship. These events, according to ColUns, necessitated that 3 K. Barwick, "Caesars Commentarii und das Corpus Caesarianum," Philologus, supple. 31 (Leipzig 1938); id., Caesars Bellum Civile. Tendenz, Abfassungszeit und Stil (Berlin 1951) 131. 4 Barwick's argument (ibid.) caused Klotz to withdraw from using Pollio's critique in his second edition, conceding that nothing can be concluded from Suetonius, Julius 56.4. In withdrawing , Klotz acknowledged that already it had been demonstrated that the words of Pollio can apply to either the Bellum Gallicum or the Bellum Civile. Cf. A. de Meß, Das Erbe der Alten 7 (1913) 180, a response to Klotz' article of 191 1, "Zu Caesars Bellum Civile" (above, note 2), 5 Cicero, Brutus 262...

La Picardie existe-t-elle dans l'Antiquité ?

Does Picardie Exist in Antiquity ? Before the creation, in 1964, of a rather artificially delineated "Région Picardie", Picardie had never had a political existence of its own ; it was essensially based, and had been so since the Middle Ages, on linguistic differences. Yet, the Bellum Gallicum stresses the importance of a group called by Caesar the Belgium, composed of the Ambians, the Atrebates and the Bellovaques, together with some satellites. Several clues lead us to think that the Belgium was not only an ethnic, cultural and geographical group within the Gaule Belgique, but also a politically structured group, remote ancestor of a Picardie currently in the making. Caesar, indeed, insists on the specificity of the Belgians, depicted as warriors all the more frightening as they are closer to the Barbarians, more distant from the enervating effets of civilization : this cliché seems to conceal other realities, among which that of a force deriving from political cohesion around a nucleus, the Belgium.

A Vocabulary Study of Six Elementary Textbooks

Historically, therefore, no ... alguno patterned itself after Latin idiom non ... aliquis with negative significance of latter. The Latin word alius and its corresponding Spanish word otro (otro from Latin alter which means the other of two) were regarded as negatives. The word aliter in following Latin sentence may be translated not, without violating sense. Sed ratio ordoque agminis aliter se habebat ac Belgae ad Nervios detulerant. But plan and order of line of march was (other than) = (different from) = (not) what Belgians had reported to Nervii (Bellum Gallicum, 11, 19). The addition of word unus to aliquis to form alguno may have come into Spanish when Latin inflections were being lost. The significance of aliquis was not destroyed, but its negative aspect was further obscured. But translation of etymons of alguno reveal following: alius, no; quis, (3) any; unus, one. The English words not anyone equal someone. The post position of alguno to indicate a negative idea was, perhaps, an invention after true nature of alguno and its Latin antecedents had been forgotten. The novelists before Cervantes used alguno without regard to position: Y a este proposito dice Plinio que no hay libro por malo que sea que no tenga alguna cosa buena (4). No se toco cosa alguna (5). In Gil Blas is this use of alguno: En no haberme entregado algun arriero. The conclusions are that alguno historically and semasiologically is a true negative, that its metamorphosis from translation not anyone to that of someone has disguised its origin, and that its post positiveness to indicate negativeness is a late development in Spanish language.

Pure Well of Latin Undefiled

In a recent article in this QUARTERLY, while discussing the classical authors read by Montaigne, I ventured at one point to express myself as follows in connection with the great essayist's profound respect for Caesar: “It is not without interest that so understanding a critic of Roman literature as Mackail should likewise have felt, as some others of us are not ashamed to feel, that Julius Caesar stands side by side in Latin prose with Lucretius in poetry as exhibiting at the peak what the Latin language could achieve by itself, without richness and beauty gathered from alien sources; the appreciation of Caesar's Bellum Gallicum is the appreciation of latine loqui on the prose side.” A subsequent reviewer of my article, Professor Gilbert Norwood, quem honoris causa nomino, speaks of it, as arousing his “wrathful amazement with a sudden paean in praise of Caesar's 'style'”; the reference must be to the quotation above. This drives me back to consider once again what I actually said about Caesar's writing, and also leads me to enquire what it may have been that excited in my reviewer indignation and surprise. Beyond that I should like to set out as dispassionately as I can, without any paeans, my reasons for regarding Julius Caesar as quite unique on his literary side.

The Text of the Bellvm Gallicvm and the Work of H. Meusel

Every one who has used Dr. Meusel's excellent edition of Caesar's Bellum Ciuile will welcome the first volume, comprising Commentaries I.–IV., of his final edition of the Bellum Gallicum. Nominally, each of the two books is a revision of the work of other men,–in the former case of Kraner and Hofmann, in the latter of Kraner and Dittenberger; really each, especially the latter, contains the fruit of so much independent research that the personalities of the older editors are obscured. That part of the joint work of Kraner and Dittenberger which corresponds with the revision consisted of 199 pages ; the revision extends to 464. As Meusel remarks in the Preface, it is no longer intended for the use of schools, but of teachers and classical scholars. The historical introduction and the section on the Roman army, which retain much of Kraner's work, have been carefully retouched; many of the footnotes have been corrected or rewritten; many, both on linguistic points and on the subject-matter, have been added.

A Collation of Codex Lovaniensis

Codex Louaniensis, or L, the best MS. of Caesar in the British Museum (Add. MSS. 10,084), which is assigned to the eleventh century, has been collated by Alfred Holder for his edition of the Bellum ciuile and by Mr. R. L. A. Du Pontet for his edition of the Bellum Alexandrinum and the Bellum Africanum; but for the Bellum Gallicum no collation has hitherto been available. Last year I made one, which I sent to Dr. Meusel. He urged me to publish it, remarking that it would be very useful, as ‘wir haben nun ein sichereres Urteil über die Familie φ.’ Relying upon Holder's collation, he had described L in his own edition of the Bellum ciuile (1906, p. viii) as ‘a twin-brother of Ashburnhamianus’ (S); and so it is in the Bellum ciuile, but, as he acknowledged after reading my collation, not in the Bellum Gallicum. The first folio, comprising i, I–6, §3 (… bono animo in), is by a later hand. The MS. is described in the Catalogue thus: ‘c. Jvlii Caesaris commentariorum libri. Desinit cum verbis “res eis suppeteret” in libro de Bello Africano, cap. 33. Codex membranaceus, sec. XL, sed folium primum a manu recentiori suppletum est. Folio [10,084.].’

Stock's Bellum Gallicum - Caesar de Bello Gallico, Bks. I.–VII., according to the text of Emanuel Hoffmann (Vienna, 1890), with Introduction and Notes by St. George Stock. Oxford, Clarendon Press. Pp. 586. Post 8vo. Cloth. Price 10s. 6d.

Stock's Bellum Gallicum - Caesar de Bello Gallico, Bks. I.–VII., according to the text of Emanuel Hoffmann (Vienna, 1890), with Introduction and Notes by St. George Stock. Oxford, Clarendon Press. Pp. 586. Post 8vo. Cloth. Price 10<i>s</i>. 6<i>d</i>.