Annali delia Scuola Normale di Pisa
Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum
F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, vols I-II, Berlin 1923–30; vol. Ill, Leiden 1943–58
H. Peter, Historicorum Romanorum reliquiae, vol. I, Lipsiae, 1914; vol. II, Lipsiae 1906 [Stutgardiae 1967ed. stereotypa]
H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae selectae, vols I-TV, Berlin 1892–1916
Journal of Roman Studies
T. R. S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, vols I-II, Cleveland OH 1951–2; vol. Ill (Suppl.), New York 1986
E. Malcovati, Oratorum Romanorum Fragmenta, Augustae Taurinorum, 1955
A. Pauly and G. Wissowa, Realencyclopädie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1893–1980
W. Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum, vols I-IV, Leipzig 1915
The Corpus Caesarianum
The Collection Lemaire (vols 1–4, Paris 1819–22) includes the Byzantine translation of books 1–7 of the Gallic War. Note also the ‘classic’ commentary by F. Kraner, W. Dittenberger and H. Meusel on the Commentaries (Weidmann: Berlin; latest edn rev H. Oppermann: 18th edn 1960 for the Gallic War, 16th edn 1959 for the Civil War).
A valuable collection of the Commentaries and the three Wars was produced by A. Pennacini et al. and published in 1993 by Einaudi and Gallimard, with the somewhat inappropriate title ‘Opera omnia’. (p.371) (It does not contain the letters from Cicero's correspondence with Atticus, or the fragments.) Note in particular the commentary by Albino Garzetti on the Gallic War and the translation by Antonio La Penna of the Civil War.
For the Gallic War and the Civil War, the following editions remain essential:
C. Julii Caesaris Bellum Gallicum, ed. Otto Seel (Leipzig: Teubner 1961, 3rd edn 1977) is of value above all for the collected documents on Caesar and his works. For the text, however, the critical apparatus of W. Hering (Leipzig: Teubner 1987) is more cautious and reliable.
L.-A. Constans̓ slim volume, Guide illustré des campagnes de César (Paris: 1929) is a vital addition to the study of the Gallic War.
On the civil war the editions by Alfred Klotz and Pierre Fabre are valuable and complement each other: C. Iulii Caesaris, Commentarii, vol. 2, Commentarii belli civilis, ed. Alfred Klotz (Leipzig: Teubner 1957); César, La guerre civile, vols 1–2, ed. Pierre Fabre (Paris: Les Belles Lettres 1936).
The remainder of the Corpus Caesarianum, including fragments of lost works and letters, is in vol. 3 of Alfred Klotz's edition of 1927 (Leipzig: Teubner 1957).
However, for each of the wars it is necessary to have recourse to the specialised editions, with both textual and interpretative improvements: César, Guerre d̓Alexandrie, ed. J. Andrieu (Les Belles Lettres: Paris 1954); Pseudo-César, Guerre d̓Afrique, ed. A. Bouvet, new edn J.-C. Richard (Les Belles Lettres: Paris 1997); [C. Iulii Caesaris], Bellum Hispaniense, ed. Giovanni Pascucci (Le Monier: Florence 1965).
For the few surviving letters, documents and fragments of lost correspondence, the primary collection is by Paolo Cugusi, in vol. 2 of Epistolograpbi Latini minores (Paravia: Turin 1976), pp. 72–112 (with commentary in the second part of the volume). It should be pointed out that this collection also contains information on letters which Caesar wrote (but which have not necessarily been included in collections) as well as on the collections of Caesar's letters which were compiled and circulated as such at one time or another (probably not immediately, to judge from Suetonius̓ comments). The primary source of information here is Suetonius̓ Life of Caesar 56.6. A corpus of ‘autographs’ of letters from Caesar to Cleopatra was passed on to Octavian by Cleopatra herself (Dio Cassius 51.12.3) shortly after Actium. It is characteristic that Suetonius makes no mention of these (p.372) among the collections of Caesar's letters in existence in his day, yet it is hardly likely that Octavian would have destroyed them.
An example of the very useful work that can be done on the fragments is Hans Jürgen Tschiedel's edition of the fragments of the Anticato (Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft: Darmstadt 1981).
Of the contemporary sources the most important is clearly Cicero: his letters, his Catilinarian and ‘Caesarian’ speeches, and his so-called ‘Philippics’. Cicero's testimony on Caesar is broad and at times contradictory. The annotated editions using a single chronological order regardless of the collection are to be preferred: R. Y. Tyrrell and L. C. Purser, Correspondence of M. T. Cicero (Hodges Figgis and Longmans Green: Dublin and London, vol. 1, 1904 [3rd edn], vol. 2, 1906 [2nd edn], vol. 3, 1914 [2nd edn], vol. 4, 1918 [2nd edn], vol. 5, 1915 [2nd edn], vol. 6, 1933 [2nd edn], vol. 7, 1901 [index]); and L.-A. Constans, J. Bayet and J. Beaujeu (Collection Budé: Paris, vol. 1, 1940-vol. 11, 1996). D. R. Shackleton-Bailey's attempt to impose chronological order within each collection is less successful. Nevertheless, Shackleton-Bailey's commentary on the Letters to Atticus (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge 1965), preceded by an important introduction on the history of the text (vol. 1, pp. 59–76), is extremely valuable. Fragments of Cicero's correspondence (in vol. 3 of Watt's Bibliotheca Oxoniensis [Oxford 1958, 2nd edn 1965]) display traces of the practice of the ancient grammarians, who collected both Caesar's letters to Cicero and vice versa (pp. 153–6); but the tradition was marred by confusion between Caesar and Octavian (both referred to as Caesar).
As for Asconius and his valuable commentary, written in the time of Nero, on Cicero's speeches, the edition generally used is by A. C. Clark (Q. Asconii Pediani, Orationum Ciceronis quinque enarratio) [Bibliotheca Oxoniensis: Oxford 1907]). Attention is sometimes given also to the text offered by A. Kiessling and R. Schoell in the Berlin edition (Weidmann: Berlin 1875). The commentary by Bruce A. Marshall, A Historical Commentary on Asconius (University of Missouri Press: Columbia 1995), is also worth noting.
The life of Caesar was treated in ancient sources both in monographic form (the Lives of Plutarch and Suetonius) and within the framework of historical narrative.
(p.373) For Plutarch's Life of Caesar the historical commentary by Albino Garzetti, with a good Italian translation, is essential (La Nuova Italia: Florence 1954). The text is that established by Konrat Ziegler in Plutarcbi Vitae 2.2 (Teubner: Leipzig 1968). For Suetonius the text by Maximiiianus Ihm remains irreplaceable (Suetonii, De vita Caesarum libri VIII [Teubner: Leipzig 1907]). Unfortunately there is no modern historical commentary on Suetonius' Life of Caesar: the work by H. Doergens (Leipzig 1864) is disappointing and verbose; the somewhat pedantic work by H. E. Butler and M. Cary is fairly serviceable (Svetonii Tranquilli Divus Iulius [Clarendon Press: Oxford 1927]), though marred by some surprising errors (e.g. p. 70, where it is repeatedly stated that Gaius Memmius was a consul, although the ruin of his career is well known). Isaac Casaubon's commentary on Suetonius' Twelve Lives (1595, 2nd edn Geneva 1596) still renders useful service. Among the Italian translations, that by Felice Dessi, with a good introduction by Settimio Lanciotti, stands out (BUR: Milan, 3rd edn 1989).
Of the historical narratives, those of Sallust, Vellerns Paterculus, Annaeus Florus, Appian and Dio Cassius have survived. Some histories which gave ample treatment to Caesar – those of Seneca the Elder, beginning in 133 BC, and Asinius Pollio, beginning in 60 BC – did not survive until the Middle Ages, but it is possible that Lucan's Pbarsalia (Bellum Civile) partly relies on them. Of Livy's work relevant to the period only the summaries (Periocbae) have survived. No account is taken here of minor or minimal treatments such as de Viris Illustribus by Aurelius Victor.
Sallust, a follower of Caesar, gives much space to him in The Catilinarian Conspiracy: it contains the only surviving version, quite possibly a reliable one, of one of Caesar's speeches, delivered in the Senate in December 63 BC. The edition of Sallust by Alfred Kurfeß, reprinted many times (Teubner: 3rd edn Leipzig 1957, latest reprint 1991) is the most reliable, and Alfred Ernout's translation is as usual admirable (Salluste [Collection Budé: Paris 1941, 3rd edn 1960]). In Italian one should read the translation by Lidia Storoni (BUR: Milan 1976). The so-called letters of Sallust ad Caesarem senem are a later fabrication.
On Vellerns, the historian who wrote in the time of Tiberius, the recent text with commentary by Maria Elefante (Olms-Weidmann: Hildesheim, Zurich and New York 1997) does not supersede that by C. Stegmann von Pritzwald (Teubner: Leipzig, 2nd edn 1933). In Italian the translation by Leopoldo Agnes (UTET: Turin 1969) is more reliable than that by Rusconi.
(p.374) Annaeus Florus wrote during the time of the emperor Hadrian (AD 118–37). The edition referred to is that by Enrica Malcovati: L. Annei Flori, Quae exstant (Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato: Rome, 2nd edn 1972).
For the second book (entirely devoted to Caesar) of Appian's Civil Wars, unlike the other books of the same work, there is no historical commentary. (Appian was the Alexandrian historian at the time of Fronto and Antoninus Pius.) The critical text for reference remains that of Ludwig Mendelssohn, revised by Paul Viereck (Teubner: Leipzig 1905). The good English translation in the Loeb Library, by Horace White, has the drawback of departing from the paragraph division of the Teubner text.
For Dio Cassius (who in the time of the Severi wrote his History of Rome in Greek, in no fewer than 80 books), the edition by U. Ph. Boissevain (Weidmann: Berlin 1905, repr. 1955 vols 1–4; vol. 5, Index Graecitatis, ed. W. Nawijn) is unsurpassed. Books 37–44.20 deal mainly with the story of Caesar. Dio Cassius takes much from Livy and perhaps also from Caesar's Commentaries.
For the fragments of Livy's lost books, see the edition by W. Weissenborn and H. J. Müller (vol. 10 of the annotated Livy), (Weidmann: Berlin , 3rd edn 1962, pp. 167–80).
The most reliable reconstruction of the various stages of Caesar's public career is to be found in vol. 2 of Magistrates of the Roman Republic [ = MRR] by T. R. S. Broughton (American Philological Association: Cleveland OH 1952), under the years 81–44 BC. Note also the corrections in vol. 3 (Supplement, Scholars Press: New York 1986), pp. 105–8. T.P. Wiseman's New Men in the Roman Senate (139 BC–AD 14), University Press, Oxford 1971, is very useful. On Caesar's life up to the time of the triumvirate, H. Strasburger, Caesars Eintritt in die Geschichte (Neue Filser, Munich 1938), is irreplaceable. In matters of chronology and referencing, Broughton's dry but exhaustive treatment, with that of Strasburger (in particular the tables on pp. 7–23), replaces two valuable works by Paul Groebe: one which occupies a large part of the volume devoted to the gens Iulia in W. Drumann's rewritten Geschichte Roms (Borntraeger, vol. 3, 1906, pp. 125–684 and 695–827); and the later (1918), more schematic and compact, inthe entry ‘Iulius’ (No. 131) of Pauly-Wissowa (=RE). The concluding part of this entry (Caesar als Schriftsteller, cols (p.375) 259–75) is by Alfred Klotz. Political interpretations of Caesar's work will be found in the following groundbreaking studies (not overlooking the Précis des guerres de César  by Napoleon I, published by Marchand in 1836): Römische Geschichte, by Theodor Mommsen (1854–6); L̓Histoire de Jules César (1865–6), completed by Stoffel for the civil war period; Eduard Meyer, Caesars Monarchie und das Prinzipat des Pompejus (Cotta: Stuttgart and Berlin, 3rd edn 1918); Caesar, by Matthias Geizer (Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt: Stuttgart and Berlin 1921, 1940, 1960); César, by Jérôme Carcopino (Presses Universitaires de France: Paris  1968). Ronald Syme's Roman Revolution (Clarendon Press: Oxford 1939) remains essential, as does his collection of essays on Roman history ((Roman Papers, ed. E. Badian [vol. 7 by A. R. Birley], vols 1–7 [Clarendon Press: Oxford 1979–91]). The Last Generation of the Roman Republic (University of California Press: Berkeley, Los Angeles and London 1974) is a thorough study by E. S. Gruen. All these works are rather more enjoyable than the somewhat overwhelming biography by Christian Meier (Severin und Siedler: Berlin 1982).
For all judicial and constitutional matters connected with Caesar's political actions, the essential work is still Francesco De Martino's Storia della costituzione romana, vol. 3 (Jovene: Naples 1973).
On the granting of citizenship to the Transpadanians, see the following, at least: E. Gabba, Italia romana (Ed. New Press: Como 1994), ch. 21, esp. pp. 242–3; G. Bandeiii, ‘Colonie e municipi delle regioni transpadane in età repubblicana’, in Le città nell̓Italia settentrionale romana (Atti, Trieste 1987) (Ed. École française de Rome: Rome 1990), pp. 251–77, esp. 260–3; also, more generally, W. Eck and H. Galsterer (eds), Die Stadt in Oberitalien und in den nordwestlichen Provinzen des Römischen Reiches (Verlag Philipp von Zabern: Mainz 1991), esp. the contribution by F. Cassola.
For the broad field constituted by the ‘reception’ of the figure of Caesar through the ages, see the contributions to the collection in honour of M. Rambaud, Présence de César (Les Belles Lettres: Paris 1985); also the painstakingly precise entry ‘Caesar im Mittelalter’ in Lexikon des Mittelalters, 2 (Artemis: Munich and Zurich 1983), cols 1351–60, not to mention the entry for Caesar in the Dutch dictionary Van Alexandres tot Zenobia (SUN: Nijmegen 1987–9), largely devoted to Caesar's ‘reception’. Above all, see Zwi Yavetz, Julius Caesar and his Public Image  (Thames and Hudson: London 1983), esp. ch. 1. and also Maria Wyke (ed.), Julius Caesar in Western Culture (Blackwell: 2006).
(p.376) On the difficulty the sources of the time of Augustus and Tiberius found themselves in with regard to the republican ‘hero’, see Lily Ross Taylor, ‘Catonism and Caesarism’, in Party Politics in the Age of Caesar (University of California Press: Berkeley and Los Angeles 1949), pp. 162–82, and the essay by Arturo De Vivo, ‘La morte negata: Caton Uticense nella “Storia” di Velleio’, in Costruire la memoria: Ricerebe sugli storici latini (Loffredo: Naples 1998), pp. 49–62.
The delicate position of Mark Antony during the last months of Caesar's life is described by R. F. Rossi, ‘Antonia fra Cesare ed i congiurati’, in Marco Antonio nella lotta politica della tarda repubblica romana (Università di Trieste 1959), pp. 33–63.
On Caesar's death see J. R V. D. Balston, ‘The Ides of March’, Historia, 7 (1958), pp. 80–94 (with the judgement, ‘without the immense prestige of Brutus' personality […] the conspiracy could never have taken place’); also some chapters of U. Gotter, ‘Der Diktator ist tot!’, Historia Einzelscbriften, 10 (Steiner Verlag: Stuttgart 1996), and the first chapter of Jochen Bleicken, Augustus: Eine Biographie (Alexander Fest Verlag: Berlin 1998). On the religious and political aspects of Caesar's funeral, see A. Fraschetti, Roma e il principe (Laterza: Rome and Bari 1990), pp. 46–59.
For bibliographical guidance see the materials in vol. 1.3 (1973) of Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt (de Gruyter: Berlin and New York), pp. 457–87, and the bibliography by M. De Nonno, P. de Paolis and C. Di Giovine in Lo spazio letterario di Roma antica, vol. 4 (Salerno: Rome 1991), pp. 302–8.