What do you think?
Rate this book
Caesar's Wars; Alexandrian, African and Spanish
This book contains the three works that describe the campaigns of Caesar but are not written by him. The first book (Alexandrian War) was possibly written by Aulus Hirtius who was one of Caesar's friends and supporters. The other books, the African War and the Spanish War, were written by unknown officers who took part in these campaigns and are therefore attached to Caesar for easier recognition. All the three separate books are included in this single volume.
130 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1955
1 person is currently reading
128 people want to read
About the author
Gaius Julius Caesar
2,038 books564 followersborn 12 July 100 BC
died 15 March 44 BC
Statesman and historian Julius Caesar, fully named Gaius Julius Caesar, general, invaded Britain in 55 BC, crushed the army of the politician Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus in 48 BC, pursued other enemies to Egypt, installed Cleopatra as queen in 47 BC, and returned to Rome, and the people in 45 BC gave him a mandate to rule as dictator for life; Gaius Cassius Longinus and Marcus Junius Brutus feared that he intended to establish a monarchy and led a group of republicans, who on 15 March 44 BC murdered him.
Marcus Licinius Crassus joined Caesar and Pompey in the first triumvirate to challenge the power of the senate in 60 BC.
Pompey with Caesar and Crassus formed a ruling triumvirate from 60 BC to 53 BC, but Caesar later defeated Pompey.
Caesar conquered Iberian peoples of Aquitania in 56 BC.
Cassius led members of the conspiracy to assassinate Caesar.
Brutus conspired to assassinate Caesar.
After his assassination, Gaius Octavius, his grandnephew, in 44 BC took the name Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus, to whom English texts often refer simply as Octavian.
He notably authored Latin prose. He played a critical role in the events to the demise and the rise of the empire.
In 60 BC, Caesar and Marcus Licinius Crassus formed an alliance that dominated for several years. Marcus Porcius Cato the Younger with the frequent support of Marcus Tullius Cicero among the Optimates within the senate opposed their attempts to amass power as Populares.
Victories of Caesar in the Gallic wars, completed before 51 BC, extended territory to the English Channel and the Rhine. Caesar first then built a bridge across the Rhine and crossed the channel.
After the death of Crassus in 53 BC, his rival realigned with the senate, but these achievements granted him unmatched military power and threatened to eclipse the standing. With the Gallic wars concluded, the senate ordered Caesar to step from his military.
Caesar refused the order and instead crossed the Rubicon with the thirteenth legion, left his province, and illegally entered Italy under arms to mark his defiance in 49 BC. Civil war resulted, and victory put Caesar him in an unrivalled position of power and influence.
Julius Caesar assumed control of government and afterward began a program of social reforms, including the creation of the calendar. He centralized the bureaucracy, and proclamation "in perpetuity" eventually gave him additional authority. Nevertheless, people resolved not the underlying conflicts, and on the ides, 15 March 44 BC, rebellious senators assassinated Caesar.
We know much from own accounts of military campaigns of Caesar and from other contemporary sources, mainly the letters and speeches of Cicero and the writings of Gaius Sallustius Crispus. Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus and Mestrius Plutarchus wrote the later biographies, also major sources. Many people consider supreme military greatness of Caesar.
People regarded Caesar during his time of the best orators and prose authors in Latin; even Cicero spoke highly of his rhetoric and style. Only war commentaries of Caesar survived. From other works, other authors quote a few sentences. He wrote his funeral oration for Julia, his paternal aunt, among his lost works. Cicero published praise; in response, he wrote Anticato , a document, to defame Cato. Ancient sources also mention poems of Julius Caesar.
A new series of civil wars broke, and people never restored the constitutional government. Octavian, adopted heir of Gaius Julius Caesar, defeated his opponents in the civil war and afterward rose to sole power as Augustus. Octavian set about solidifying his power, and the era of the empire began.
died 15 March 44 BC
Statesman and historian Julius Caesar, fully named Gaius Julius Caesar, general, invaded Britain in 55 BC, crushed the army of the politician Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus in 48 BC, pursued other enemies to Egypt, installed Cleopatra as queen in 47 BC, and returned to Rome, and the people in 45 BC gave him a mandate to rule as dictator for life; Gaius Cassius Longinus and Marcus Junius Brutus feared that he intended to establish a monarchy and led a group of republicans, who on 15 March 44 BC murdered him.
Marcus Licinius Crassus joined Caesar and Pompey in the first triumvirate to challenge the power of the senate in 60 BC.
Pompey with Caesar and Crassus formed a ruling triumvirate from 60 BC to 53 BC, but Caesar later defeated Pompey.
Caesar conquered Iberian peoples of Aquitania in 56 BC.
Cassius led members of the conspiracy to assassinate Caesar.
Brutus conspired to assassinate Caesar.
After his assassination, Gaius Octavius, his grandnephew, in 44 BC took the name Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus, to whom English texts often refer simply as Octavian.
He notably authored Latin prose. He played a critical role in the events to the demise and the rise of the empire.
In 60 BC, Caesar and Marcus Licinius Crassus formed an alliance that dominated for several years. Marcus Porcius Cato the Younger with the frequent support of Marcus Tullius Cicero among the Optimates within the senate opposed their attempts to amass power as Populares.
Victories of Caesar in the Gallic wars, completed before 51 BC, extended territory to the English Channel and the Rhine. Caesar first then built a bridge across the Rhine and crossed the channel.
After the death of Crassus in 53 BC, his rival realigned with the senate, but these achievements granted him unmatched military power and threatened to eclipse the standing. With the Gallic wars concluded, the senate ordered Caesar to step from his military.
Caesar refused the order and instead crossed the Rubicon with the thirteenth legion, left his province, and illegally entered Italy under arms to mark his defiance in 49 BC. Civil war resulted, and victory put Caesar him in an unrivalled position of power and influence.
Julius Caesar assumed control of government and afterward began a program of social reforms, including the creation of the calendar. He centralized the bureaucracy, and proclamation "in perpetuity" eventually gave him additional authority. Nevertheless, people resolved not the underlying conflicts, and on the ides, 15 March 44 BC, rebellious senators assassinated Caesar.
We know much from own accounts of military campaigns of Caesar and from other contemporary sources, mainly the letters and speeches of Cicero and the writings of Gaius Sallustius Crispus. Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus and Mestrius Plutarchus wrote the later biographies, also major sources. Many people consider supreme military greatness of Caesar.
People regarded Caesar during his time of the best orators and prose authors in Latin; even Cicero spoke highly of his rhetoric and style. Only war commentaries of Caesar survived. From other works, other authors quote a few sentences. He wrote his funeral oration for Julia, his paternal aunt, among his lost works. Cicero published praise; in response, he wrote Anticato , a document, to defame Cato. Ancient sources also mention poems of Julius Caesar.
A new series of civil wars broke, and people never restored the constitutional government. Octavian, adopted heir of Gaius Julius Caesar, defeated his opponents in the civil war and afterward rose to sole power as Augustus. Octavian set about solidifying his power, and the era of the empire began.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
May 27, 2024
Who does he think he is, giving Julius Caesar just three stars?? I know that's what you're asking.
Historically speaking, this is of course a five-star book. We're lucky to have it. But Caesar didn't write it, and it shows. Just as I docked The Civil Wars a star for being substandard, this loses two stars because it's worse. The part on the Spanish War is judged by many to be the very worst full Classical Latin manuscript that survives.
Despite giving it that honest rating, I'm very happy to have finally gotten around to this one, and I recommend it. I should have read it fifty years ago, really.
If you're unfamiliar with the basic history, this volume contains three short histories of three "mop-up wars" that finished the civil war, after Pompey was defeated at Pharsalus. Pompey fled to Egypt, where he was murdered by the boy Pharoah. Caesar was chasing him when he found this out, and he tried to settle the civil war that Egypt was waging, with Cleopatra on one side, and Ptolemy on the other. Caesar got encircled in Alexandria Harbor, basically, and the first book covers that dicey situation. That part was clearly written from Caesar's notes, by whoever it was who wrote the last bit of The Civil Wars.
After defeating the boy-Pharoah in Egypt, Caesar returned to Rome. But Cato and Scipio had assembled an army in Africa, and the general sent to control them, Curio, started well and then got crushed by Juba's general. Caesar had to go straighten this mess out. There were some difficult battles in this campaign, and some very interesting tactics. Both sides used the tactic of setting up a fortified camp, then extending parallel walls from one side of the camp, and then moving the camp to the other end of that alley. Slow crawls across valleys in the face of the enemy ensue.
This campaign was difficult because Caesar had no solid control of ports on the coast, so his troops and supply convoys tended to become scattered. He was heavily outnumbered at the outset, especially in cavalry, so he gets in tricky situations. Eventually, however, Cato commits suicide, Scipio flees and commits suicide during a naval defeat, and Caesar goes back to Rome to deal with the messes there.
Alas, his appointed governors of Spain were crooks, and Further Spain revolted, as did other folks, led by Pompey's son. Caesar had to go settle his hash, because if you want a thing done right, ya gotta do it yourself. He again arrives outnumbered, but troops start defecting to him, or simply deserting, pretty steadily, and he gradually takes command.
I did find some of the tactical discussions interesting, and this volume is the first history that pays special attention to the number of naval vessels with bronze beaks (rams) on them. They clearly had a major tactical influence, and the numbers mattered.
The downside of these books, especially the latter two, is that the discussion of motivations is much thinner, and the descriptions are frequently a mess. The third book is also in bad shape, as well as badly written, so there are gaps and some weirdly ambiguous passages.
But it's history in primary sources. Primary sources rule.
Historically speaking, this is of course a five-star book. We're lucky to have it. But Caesar didn't write it, and it shows. Just as I docked The Civil Wars a star for being substandard, this loses two stars because it's worse. The part on the Spanish War is judged by many to be the very worst full Classical Latin manuscript that survives.
Despite giving it that honest rating, I'm very happy to have finally gotten around to this one, and I recommend it. I should have read it fifty years ago, really.
If you're unfamiliar with the basic history, this volume contains three short histories of three "mop-up wars" that finished the civil war, after Pompey was defeated at Pharsalus. Pompey fled to Egypt, where he was murdered by the boy Pharoah. Caesar was chasing him when he found this out, and he tried to settle the civil war that Egypt was waging, with Cleopatra on one side, and Ptolemy on the other. Caesar got encircled in Alexandria Harbor, basically, and the first book covers that dicey situation. That part was clearly written from Caesar's notes, by whoever it was who wrote the last bit of The Civil Wars.
After defeating the boy-Pharoah in Egypt, Caesar returned to Rome. But Cato and Scipio had assembled an army in Africa, and the general sent to control them, Curio, started well and then got crushed by Juba's general. Caesar had to go straighten this mess out. There were some difficult battles in this campaign, and some very interesting tactics. Both sides used the tactic of setting up a fortified camp, then extending parallel walls from one side of the camp, and then moving the camp to the other end of that alley. Slow crawls across valleys in the face of the enemy ensue.
This campaign was difficult because Caesar had no solid control of ports on the coast, so his troops and supply convoys tended to become scattered. He was heavily outnumbered at the outset, especially in cavalry, so he gets in tricky situations. Eventually, however, Cato commits suicide, Scipio flees and commits suicide during a naval defeat, and Caesar goes back to Rome to deal with the messes there.
Alas, his appointed governors of Spain were crooks, and Further Spain revolted, as did other folks, led by Pompey's son. Caesar had to go settle his hash, because if you want a thing done right, ya gotta do it yourself. He again arrives outnumbered, but troops start defecting to him, or simply deserting, pretty steadily, and he gradually takes command.
I did find some of the tactical discussions interesting, and this volume is the first history that pays special attention to the number of naval vessels with bronze beaks (rams) on them. They clearly had a major tactical influence, and the numbers mattered.
The downside of these books, especially the latter two, is that the discussion of motivations is much thinner, and the descriptions are frequently a mess. The third book is also in bad shape, as well as badly written, so there are gaps and some weirdly ambiguous passages.
But it's history in primary sources. Primary sources rule.
February 20, 2026
El texto se le adjudica a Julio César, aunque muchos estudiosos ponen en duda esta autoría y sostienen una teoría plausible: que la obra, si bien se basa en los escritos y apuntes del general, fue redactada en su mayor parte por su secretario Hircio. Tras la lectura, resulta difícil no coincidir con esta postura. Habiendo leído De bello Gallico y De bello civili, la diferencia narrativa es evidente: aquí el estilo es irregular, por momentos confuso, y se detiene en eventos menores que no siempre justifican su inclusión. Esto podría explicarse por el contexto mismo de la obra: un César absorbido por los frentes bélicos y sus avatares difícilmente podía dedicar tiempo y cuidado a la redacción de tres textos consecutivos.
☆★★/★★★
1. Claridad y enfoque narrativo del tema
El libro mantiene un enfoque claro en lo que considera relevante de cada una de las campañas —África, Hispania y Alejandría— y busca conservar el tono de informe militar presente en las obras anteriores. El nivel de detalle sobre movimientos, decisiones y consecuencias directas para César o sus enemigos permite conocer los hechos desde la perspectiva del general y entender cómo se consolidó como imperator en el campo de batalla.
Sin embargo, ese mismo afán descriptivo termina jugando en su contra: se incluyen acciones sin peso estratégico real, irrelevantes incluso para una escaramuza, lo que vuelve la lectura densa y en algunos tramos confusa, aun para lectores familiarizados con estas guerras. A esto se suma la exageración evidente de las cifras de bajas: si en textos previos los números eran optimistas pero verosímiles, aquí el tono propagandístico cruza la línea de lo creíble.
☆/★
2. Diseño de la portada y material gráfico
Que se trate de una obra antigua no exime a las ediciones modernas de una propuesta visual más cuidada. La edición que poseo es funcional pero poco ambiciosa: carece de mapas, esquemas u otro material gráfico que ayude a visualizar los movimientos militares y los escenarios de combate. Con un mejor trabajo editorial, el libro podría convertirse también en una pieza visual destacable dentro de la biblioteca y no solo en un texto de valor histórico.
☆/★
3. Conexión personal y emocional
Desde una valoración personal, en este conjunto de textos se diluye parte de la personalidad de César. Sus acciones se perciben más como respuestas automáticas a los hechos que como el producto de una mente estratégica brillante, rasgo que sí destaca en otras obras. Esto refuerza la hipótesis de una autoría mediada por Hircio.
Para alguien que disfruta la literatura bélica e histórica, las descripciones de las batallas resultan irregulares: algunas transmiten tensión y dinamismo, pero otras se leen de forma mecánica, solo como un trámite necesario para avanzar en el texto.
☆★★/★★★
1. Claridad y enfoque narrativo del tema
El libro mantiene un enfoque claro en lo que considera relevante de cada una de las campañas —África, Hispania y Alejandría— y busca conservar el tono de informe militar presente en las obras anteriores. El nivel de detalle sobre movimientos, decisiones y consecuencias directas para César o sus enemigos permite conocer los hechos desde la perspectiva del general y entender cómo se consolidó como imperator en el campo de batalla.
Sin embargo, ese mismo afán descriptivo termina jugando en su contra: se incluyen acciones sin peso estratégico real, irrelevantes incluso para una escaramuza, lo que vuelve la lectura densa y en algunos tramos confusa, aun para lectores familiarizados con estas guerras. A esto se suma la exageración evidente de las cifras de bajas: si en textos previos los números eran optimistas pero verosímiles, aquí el tono propagandístico cruza la línea de lo creíble.
☆/★
2. Diseño de la portada y material gráfico
Que se trate de una obra antigua no exime a las ediciones modernas de una propuesta visual más cuidada. La edición que poseo es funcional pero poco ambiciosa: carece de mapas, esquemas u otro material gráfico que ayude a visualizar los movimientos militares y los escenarios de combate. Con un mejor trabajo editorial, el libro podría convertirse también en una pieza visual destacable dentro de la biblioteca y no solo en un texto de valor histórico.
☆/★
3. Conexión personal y emocional
Desde una valoración personal, en este conjunto de textos se diluye parte de la personalidad de César. Sus acciones se perciben más como respuestas automáticas a los hechos que como el producto de una mente estratégica brillante, rasgo que sí destaca en otras obras. Esto refuerza la hipótesis de una autoría mediada por Hircio.
Para alguien que disfruta la literatura bélica e histórica, las descripciones de las batallas resultan irregulares: algunas transmiten tensión y dinamismo, pero otras se leen de forma mecánica, solo como un trámite necesario para avanzar en el texto.
November 29, 2024
An interesting look into the past, and looking into the minds of those long ago.
Read
April 10, 2009 I read these after I had already read "The Gallic Wars" and "The Civil War" to see how the story ends; I was disappointed there--the end of "The Spanish Wars" is lost. Nevertheless, books about ancient wars written by the Generals that carried them out are rare. These are Ceasar's reports to Rome on the wars he carried out, and while they lack the tell-all quality and hand wringing confessions of the modern celebrity bio, it is the point of view of the man who eventually took over the Roman Empire. His success alone argues this as a must--read, particularly as this work has inspired the likes of Ivan the Terrible, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Adolf Hitler. It has fueled the desires of every petty fantasy of world conquest that has since dominated western culture. Read it for self-defense!
The part I found most interesting was the African War, in which the veteran legions of Ceasar clashed with the veteran legions of Scipio--a battle between two of the empire's greatest generals. It is one of the few places in these chronicles where Ceasar actually has to admit to some setbacks in an unvarnished way. This really shows the strategy, equipment and brutality of war at the hieght of Roman glory, and--along with the two preceding books--sets the style for western warfare for centuries to come.
The part I found most interesting was the African War, in which the veteran legions of Ceasar clashed with the veteran legions of Scipio--a battle between two of the empire's greatest generals. It is one of the few places in these chronicles where Ceasar actually has to admit to some setbacks in an unvarnished way. This really shows the strategy, equipment and brutality of war at the hieght of Roman glory, and--along with the two preceding books--sets the style for western warfare for centuries to come.
August 16, 2013
I first read excerpts from The Gallic War in high school Latin. Then in college, my fellow ROTC cadets and I were encouraged to read as much military history as possible, including Caesar's Gallic War.
Now, as a mature adult with a strong interest in history, I decided to read not only The Gallic War, but Caesar's accounts of his other wars. Why? Because Caesar represents a pivotal point in the transition between Roman Republic and Roman Empire, and so I hoped to gain an insight into more than mere military strategy, but the factors that resulted in this fundamental change. After all, twenty-first century America appears to be in the same kind of transition.
I chose the Loeb Classical Library edition because it has the original Latin on the left-hand page and an English translation on the right. I was hoping to enjoy not only the substance of this classic, but also to re-kindle my interest in Latin. I can now say with certainty that I do not recall enough Latin to comprehend even a single sentence.
Now, as a mature adult with a strong interest in history, I decided to read not only The Gallic War, but Caesar's accounts of his other wars. Why? Because Caesar represents a pivotal point in the transition between Roman Republic and Roman Empire, and so I hoped to gain an insight into more than mere military strategy, but the factors that resulted in this fundamental change. After all, twenty-first century America appears to be in the same kind of transition.
I chose the Loeb Classical Library edition because it has the original Latin on the left-hand page and an English translation on the right. I was hoping to enjoy not only the substance of this classic, but also to re-kindle my interest in Latin. I can now say with certainty that I do not recall enough Latin to comprehend even a single sentence.
July 13, 2009
apparently ghost-written! "I came, I saw, I had someone write it up for me". Thorly enjoy following the great Caesar's career trajectory in literature and history. He is writing himself into posterity in the same way the Jews did with the Pentateuch: by combining history, biography and wishful thinking/fiction to create a God to be worshiped through literature.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews