Talk:Gallic Wars/Archive 1

Gallic numbers
Exact Gallic numbers are impossible to know exactly, but where on earth did the uncited figure of "3 million warriors" come from? That seems absurdly high. Caius Magnus (talk) 22:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems odd that Caesar killed a million, when the census shows only 368,000 Gauls. 71.171.89.90 (talk) 19:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Britain
I've included information about the failed attempt by Caesar ti invade and conquer Britain. To say that the second expedition into Britain wasn't intended to conquer is odd when it was the single largest Channel crossing until D-Day in WWII. Including the full-scale invasions of Claudius and William the Conqueror? Caesar was simply making a raid to impress the citizens in Rome "Caesar was in Britania - the moon". As the weather changed many of his ships were damaged and he returned to Gaul. Flamarande 23:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Changed some of the info under Punitive Expeditions. There's a lot more to do though. 128.135.136.175 17:44, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Factors for roman success
"Caesar's Gallic opponents were considerably less capable militarily than the Romans."

Though this must be true to some extent (due to the fact that the gallic tribes LOST to the romans) it needs some sort of evidence, perhaps a quotation from de bello gallico.

Or there could be a new article on gallic military technology compared to roman military technology.

 "They could field large armies but suffered from a lack of flexibility and discipline."

Once again, this needs evidence to behind it.

 "Gallic warriors were ferocious opponents and were much admired for this by the Romans (see the Dying Gaul)," 

It may be true that the romans respected their gallic enemies by honoring them with commemorative statues, but I still think a bit more evidence is needed to really hit home the idea romans thought the gauls were ferocious and that they respected them because of this.

"but they lacked discipline in the field.Their tactics were effectively confined to charging their opponents en masse, and their lack of cohesion made them incapable of any sophistication in battle. They also lacked any logistical support and were unable to stay in the field for as long as the Romans."

Evidence is needed to support this. Preferably in the form of a quotation from a classical source.

I know several historians who specialize in the subject of celtic warfare, equipment and strategy who would most likely disagree with the claim that the gallic tribes battle strategy consistent of grouping together and charging.

I'll continue to discuss this subject in here before making any edits myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cape&cowl (talk • contribs)

That is largely the view presented in Caesar's 'The Gallic War'. Unfortunately other more appropriate sources on the wars are very difficult to find, but if you know of any feel free to include the information and views that they give.

The Romans were terrified by the fine order of the Celtic host, and the dreadful din, for there were innumerable hornblowers and trumpeters, and the whole army were shouting their war cries. Very terrifying too were the appearance and the gestures of the naked warriors in front, all in the prime of life and finely built men, and all in the leading companies richly adorned with gold torcs and armlets. - Polybius in Histories describing the Celts at Telamon. I think this falsifies claims about the lack of discipline, organization and simple tactics. 'Fine order' points to them using formations, and hornblowers and trumpeters are used for relaying orders and points to more complicated tactics. Maraud (talk) 18:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Dates please?
(from Talk:Helvetian War)

Could dates please be added to this article?--Benn M. 09:54, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
 * There are a number of dates throughout the article and the wars' duration is listed in the infobox. Or are you after days/months fro particular incidents? Many of these can be found under each battle.Lisiate 21:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've included the dates in the intro as well. Str1977 (talk) 21:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

´lasting from 58 BC to 51 BC` is this correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.250.26.157 (talk) 22:46, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Caesar's work is "only slightly tendentious"?
Isn't Caesar often accused of falsifying history and of fabricating numbers? 96.231.17.131 (talk) 23:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Campaign against the Helvetii
This section was apparently composed by someone who closely followed Caesar's Book 1, but still with claims I didn't find there (for these parts I left or put new citation tags, and simply suppressed a few doubtful things). Regarding the rest I slighty corrected, and gave precise references in De Bello Gallico. (The composer of this section apparently got tired: while each of the first paragraphs covers one or two Caesar's paragraphs, the two last ones cover the last 17 Caesar's paragraphs!). Sapphorain (talk) 11:18, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Military intelligence standpoint on Caesar
Since the Caesar page is protected till April, I added Amiram Ezov as an reference in the Gallic Wars page if anyone was interested in learning more about Caesar from a Military intelligence standpoint.

Russian Map
The Russian Wiki has a good automated map that just appeared. See language bar on the left. If a subject matter expert thinks it is accurate he might type WP:map into the search box. They usually have someone who can do a translation. Benjamin Trovato (talk) 00:57, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Gallic Wars Campaign Box
Does anyone know what happened to Gallic Wars Campaign Box? It disappeared from all the individual battle pages. Chunterkap (talk) 02:05, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's still there, right under the infobox. SpinningSpark 10:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gallic Wars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120119114742/http://www.scifidimensions.com/Aug03/druidking.htm to http://www.scifidimensions.com/Aug03/druidking.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:17, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

The aftermath?
After Caesar had obtained absolute power in Rome, circa 46 BC, he packed the senate with his allies: Centurions from his army; Italic aristocrats who he owed money to; and most shocking of all, Gauls! These Gauls were of course Roman citizens. For Caesar had seen to that, liberally handing out citizenship to his Cisapline and Transapline Gallic allies.

Augustine would remove the Gallic Senators out after Caesar's death. However, it shows that Caesar's power was drawn not just from the Roman army (originally raising legions from his allies in Cisapline Gaul) and Italic aristocrats, but also from the Gauls post-invasion. Unfortunately, there is little to no work on the subject. We are told the had Roman names and spoke Latin (Greek speakers were not welcome). Of course Latin was not hard for the Gauls, Latin and Gaulish are said to be from same Italo-Celtic branch of the Indo-European languages. (And some historians claim that the Romans communicated in Greek during the invasion, as the Gauls could read Latin due to its similarity with Gaulish).

As the subject of Gallic relationship with Rome is of little interest, I wonder if there will any investigation as the extent Caesar relied on Gallic (and also Galatian) support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:A715:9A00:9D1C:8CA4:316C:C31 (talk) 06:39, 22 August 2020 (UTC)