Caesar's Civil War

Rating:
Summary: Now it's Legion vs. Legion.
Review: As I say in my Amazon's AYA page I'm a history buff. Caesar is one of my favorite historical characters. I've read his "Commentaries" and "The Civil War", Suetonius' "The Twelve Caesars", Plutarch's "Lives" and a score of contemporary books about his life.
After reading Kate Gilliver's "Caesar's Gallic Wars" in this same collection I went for this volume.

I wasn't disappointed. Osprey's Essential History is a great resource for History "aficionados", in a very compact book series with excellent presentation, first quality paper and nice reproductions gives the reader a succinct and complete view of the subject.

This is a great resume of the Roman Civil War (49 - 44 BC). In only 96 pages (the customary format) Adrian Goldsworthy gives a complete, clear and accurate picture.
Maps of all main battles are wonderful and detailed, helping to understand the positioning and evolution of the confronting forces.

Mr. Goldsworthy starts with a synopsis of the events preceding the break out of the war, the different actors, the balance of power and the political situation of the last days of the Republic. Continue with a description of Roman's Legion, composition, leadership style and combat doctrine. Next he focuses on the Civil War itself, starting with the Rubicon crossing till the final battle of Munda.
Jumping from the general picture to the intimacies of "real people", the author reconstruct the experiences of a Centurion, Cicero and Caesar himself; putting the reader in touch with "everyday" occurrences.
Finally a short description of what happened after Caesar's murder is given completing the picture of those turbulent days.
As a bonus Mr. Goldsworthy provides thumbnail bios of main characters. This is a very helpful feature due to the repetitive use of patronymics done by Romans which tend to confuse sometimes the reader.

This book may suites as an introduction for neophytes or as a graphic resume for students and researchers.
Reviewed by Max Yofre.

Rating:
Summary: Caesar versus Pompey
Review: Osprey's Essential History #42, Caesar's Civil War 49-44 BC, is a fine summary of the climactic struggle that began to mark Rome's slide from Republic to monarchy. Adrian Goldsworthy, an English scholar of the Roman military, uses Caesar's own commentaries and Appian's later history as the basis for this account. In fact, this volume is probably Goldsworthy's best effort to date. Overall, this is easily the best summary of Caesar's struggle for supreme power available.

Caesar's Civil War 49-44 BC begins with a short introduction on the Roman Republic, a chronology, a section on the background to the war (the First Triumvirate) and a 6-page section on the opposing sides. The main narrative is 37 pages and covers operations between Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon River and the Battle of Munda. Final sections include portrait of a soldier (Caesar's centurions), the development of the dictatorship, portrait of a civilian (Cicero), Caesar's assassination, and the end of the Republic (which covers the final struggle between Antony and Octavian). One interesting addition is a 2-page glossary that provides thumbnail biographies of all the key characters. There are a total of seven maps in this volume: the Roman world in 50 BC, Caesar's advance through Italy, the Ilerda campaign, the Battles of Dyrrachium, Pharsalus, Thapsus and Munda. Given the extent of operations during the civil wars, the maps are not quite sufficient to follow operations in a number of areas, including Spain, Syria, Greece and Africa.

Military readers will be interested by Goldsworthy's discussion of the changing role of the Roman military and its relationship to the outbreak of civil war. By the 1st Century BC, the Roman Army had been transformed from the part-time citizen militia into a standing force. However, Goldsworthy writes that, "the senate refused to acknowledge this change, maintaining that military service was a duty requiring no formal reward, and made no provision to provide for discharged soldiers." Instead, "soldiers started to become more loyal to generals who offered such rewards than to the republic which neglected them. The rise of the professional army was probably the most important of the problems besetting the Republic with which the Senate failed to deal..." After the civil war ended, the victorious Augustus acted to remedy these defects by standardizing military pay and terms of service, as well as providing a guaranteed pension for discharged veterans. Goldsworthy concludes that, "Augustus took care that the legionaries' loyalty was focused on him and no one else. The men were paid by the emperor, swore an oath of loyalty to him and ...received medals from him."

It is clear that the author is sympathetic to Caesar's motives in precipitating a five year long civil war. Certainly Caesar had ample reason to fear that his political rivals would engineer his demise once he laid down the governorship and returned to private life. Pompey, as usual, is presented as a lucky opportunist who lacked the skill or charisma of Caesar (remember, the winners write the history, not the losers). Caesar's frequent clemency of captured prisoners is contrasted against Pompey's execution of captured prisoners. Indeed, some of Caesar's best troops in the later half of the civil war were former pro-Pompey legionaries who had been recruited after being captured. Goldsworthy also does a fine job contrasting the differing command styles of Caesar and Pompey. When the veteran 10th Legion mutinied in 47 BC, Caesar not only calmed the troops but, "soon the legionaries...were begging him to decimate them and take them back into his service." Pompey on the other hand, was the first to flee the battlefield at Pharsalus and was unable to instill his troops with sufficient will to fight. On the operational level, Goldsworthy praises Pompey as "a great organizer, [who] had taken care to gather plenty of food and fodder to supply his troops." Caesar on the other hand, put little effort into logistics and his operations were usually conducted on a shoestring. Pompey was great at raising large armies, but Caesar was great at leading them into battle (often out-numbered). Goldsworthy also notes that while Caesar's actions often seem rash to modern observers, that boldness was considered an essential characteristic for a Roman general. Overall, Caesar's Civil War 49-44 BC is one of the very best of this series and a real gem in itself.

Rating:
Summary: Caesar versus Pompey
Review: Osprey's Essential History #42, Caesar's Civil War 49-44 BC, is a fine summary of the climactic struggle that began to mark Rome's slide from Republic to monarchy. Adrian Goldsworthy, an English scholar of the Roman military, uses Caesar's own commentaries and Appian's later history as the basis for this account. In fact, this volume is probably Goldsworthy's best effort to date. Overall, this is easily the best summary of Caesar's struggle for supreme power available.

Caesar's Civil War 49-44 BC begins with a short introduction on the Roman Republic, a chronology, a section on the background to the war (the First Triumvirate) and a 6-page section on the opposing sides. The main narrative is 37 pages and covers operations between Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon River and the Battle of Munda. Final sections include portrait of a soldier (Caesar's centurions), the development of the dictatorship, portrait of a civilian (Cicero), Caesar's assassination, and the end of the Republic (which covers the final struggle between Antony and Octavian). One interesting addition is a 2-page glossary that provides thumbnail biographies of all the key characters. There are a total of seven maps in this volume: the Roman world in 50 BC, Caesar's advance through Italy, the Ilerda campaign, the Battles of Dyrrachium, Pharsalus, Thapsus and Munda. Given the extent of operations during the civil wars, the maps are not quite sufficient to follow operations in a number of areas, including Spain, Syria, Greece and Africa.

Military readers will be interested by Goldsworthy's discussion of the changing role of the Roman military and its relationship to the outbreak of civil war. By the 1st Century BC, the Roman Army had been transformed from the part-time citizen militia into a standing force. However, Goldsworthy writes that, "the senate refused to acknowledge this change, maintaining that military service was a duty requiring no formal reward, and made no provision to provide for discharged soldiers." Instead, "soldiers started to become more loyal to generals who offered such rewards than to the republic which neglected them. The rise of the professional army was probably the most important of the problems besetting the Republic with which the Senate failed to deal..." After the civil war ended, the victorious Augustus acted to remedy these defects by standardizing military pay and terms of service, as well as providing a guaranteed pension for discharged veterans. Goldsworthy concludes that, "Augustus took care that the legionaries' loyalty was focused on him and no one else. The men were paid by the emperor, swore an oath of loyalty to him and ...received medals from him."

It is clear that the author is sympathetic to Caesar's motives in precipitating a five year long civil war. Certainly Caesar had ample reason to fear that his political rivals would engineer his demise once he laid down the governorship and returned to private life. Pompey, as usual, is presented as a lucky opportunist who lacked the skill or charisma of Caesar (remember, the winners write the history, not the losers). Caesar's frequent clemency of captured prisoners is contrasted against Pompey's execution of captured prisoners. Indeed, some of Caesar's best troops in the later half of the civil war were former pro-Pompey legionaries who had been recruited after being captured. Goldsworthy also does a fine job contrasting the differing command styles of Caesar and Pompey. When the veteran 10th Legion mutinied in 47 BC, Caesar not only calmed the troops but, "soon the legionaries...were begging him to decimate them and take them back into his service." Pompey on the other hand, was the first to flee the battlefield at Pharsalus and was unable to instill his troops with sufficient will to fight. On the operational level, Goldsworthy praises Pompey as "a great organizer, [who] had taken care to gather plenty of food and fodder to supply his troops." Caesar on the other hand, put little effort into logistics and his operations were usually conducted on a shoestring. Pompey was great at raising large armies, but Caesar was great at leading them into battle (often out-numbered). Goldsworthy also notes that while Caesar's actions often seem rash to modern observers, that boldness was considered an essential characteristic for a Roman general. Overall, Caesar's Civil War 49-44 BC is one of the very best of this series and a real gem in itself.