A few weeks ago I finished reading The Gallic War by Julius Caesar, or Commentaries about the Gallic War to be precise. It’s far more easy to read than the other ancient epics I’ve read so far. As an account of a military campaign it’s quite exciting to read, especially when the Romans (or Gauls on several occasions) execute a well thought out tactical plan to deceive and defeat their enemy. This brought back memories about Sun Tzu’s writings in The Art of War, which mentions that all warfare is based on deception. Besides the account of the military campaign, Caesar also describes the geography of Gaul and the culture of the Gauls and Germans. Not surprisingly he writes describes their way of life with disdain, dismissing them as barbarians.
Even though Julius Caesar is without a doubt an excellent general, quite a few mistakes are made during his campaigns either by himself or those under his command. Caesar’s invasions of Britain can be considered pointless, because he doesn’t conquer territory but merely brings it into Rome’s political sphere of influence. After Gaul is pacified, Ambiorix revolts and later Vercingetorix starts a greater revolt. I keep thinking, could the Gallic War have been conducted in a better way, could those revolts have been prevented? You often read about the Romans asking for hostages from subordinated or defeated tribes during the course of the events. Apparantly they don’t have hostages or are not able to use the hostage to exact pressure on the revolters in case of the revolts of Ambiorix and Vercingetorix. Caesar easily pardons his enemies when they surrender, maybe if he had been more cruel to set an example the Gauls wouldn’t have revolted as easily? On the other hand, according to the book Vercingetorix and the other leaders chose to revolt because they would rather be defeated than subordinated to the Romans.