A number of Classical writers discussed Gaul in their respective works. Polybius and Livy each wrote extensive histories of the Classical World. While Polybius’ Histories only survives largely in fragments, Livy’s History of Rome has been translated in its entirety, giving us not only a detailed look at Rome as a whole but also at the Romans’ relationship with the Gauls.

 

  Book V of Livy’s work recounts the Gallic attack on Clusium and subsequent sacking of Rome. Traditionally dated in either 390 or 387 B.C., the campaign almost serves as a microcosm for the Gallic world, one defined by a warring people, divided by their tribal labels but largely united by their testy relationship with Rome. Upon attacking Clusium, Livy says the city’s people “were appalled by this strange war,”1 indicating that these two cultures had jarring aesthetic differences: the Gallics fought with little protection except for the torcs on their necks, a far cry from the effective armor of Roman fighters. Livy further describes the Gauls as people who “cannot control their passions”2, while simultaneously being an efficient fighting machine whose “swift… approach created most alarm in Rome”3. This paints a unique picture of a Gallic people who were both emotionally committed to their fight and highly skilled in battle, all at once.

 

  Livy says the killing of a Gallic chieftain by a Roman representative during negotiations at Clusium was the impetus for the Gauls to march towards Rome. They met at Allia, eleven miles outside of Rome, where the Gauls once again proved their prowess in battle, crushing the Romans. The Gauls, however, would eventually surrender at Ardea, and Livy uses the scene to give us some more clues about the Gallic life. He remarks that the heat eventually drove the Gauls to sickness, given they were “accustomed as a nation to wet and cold.”4 Combined with the (somewhat humorous) comment that the Gauls’ beards were “universally worn long”5, Livy makes the impression these people were not comfortable in the drier, warmer climate of Italy, compared to their native land.

 

  Livy portrays the surrender of the Gauls as a great triumph for the Roman people, led by Camilus. The objectivity of Livy’s account can be questioned, as it appears that he used the whole scene somewhat as a device to bolster the glory of the Roman Republic. That said, the piece gives us a vivid image of the Roman perception of the Gauls.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Similarly, Julius Caesar gives us an even more detailed image of the Gauls, this time in the context of the Gallic Wars from 58-51 BCE. Caesar spent almost ten years leading campaigns to conquer the people of Gaul, all the while writing detailed logs of exploits in his Commentaries on the Gallic Wars. Similar to Livy’s work, one must take the author’s bias in account when evaluating the historicity of the work; in Caesar’s case, the commentaries were written for the purpose of recording his own triumphs and glorifying his own achievements for political purposes. That said, the piece does give us another great view of the Roman perception of Gaul in historical context.

 

  The first line of the work--“Gaul as whole consists of three separate parts”6 --gives us a very basic political map of the area: the Belgae inhabit the northern portion, the Aquitani live in the south, and the Celts inhabit the middle. Throughout, Caesar details his relationships with the various tribes of the area; the Aeduii would be a consistent ally, while tribes like the Belgae and Veneti would prove formidable enemies to Caesar. To the Gauls, the decision was whether to fight Caesar’s powerful troops to maintain independence, or to accept Roman rule and avoid risking casualties. For those who chose to go to battle, it was evident that (just like the Gauls who sacked Rome three centuries before them) these tribes were adept fighters. Caesar admits in Book V, that the Eburones, a northern tribe, “were equal to [his] men in courage and keenness for the fight”7, but no group of tribes seemed to be able to completely thwart Caesar’s campaign. This highlights one last important distinction of the Gauls: while their culture was homogeneous across tribes, the lack of any central leadership in Gaul restricted them from ever gaining the same prominence as the Romans.

 

________________________________________

 

1. Livius, Titus. "Book 5: The Veii and the Destruction of Rome by the Gauls." In The History of Rome, Volume 1, translated by Rev. Canon Roberts, edited by Ernest Rhys. J. M. Dent & Sons, 1905, 35.

 

2. Livius, Titus. "Book 5: The Veii and the Destruction of Rome by the Gauls." In The History of Rome, Volume 1, translated by Rev. Canon Roberts, edited by Ernest Rhys. J. M. Dent & Sons, 1905, 37.

 

3. Livius, Titus. "Book 5: The Veii and the Destruction of Rome by the Gauls." In The History of Rome, Volume 1, translated by Rev. Canon Roberts, edited by Ernest Rhys. J. M. Dent & Sons, 1905, 37.

 

4. Livius, Titus. "Book 5: The Veii and the Destruction of Rome by the Gauls." In The History of Rome, Volume 1, translated by Rev. Canon Roberts, edited by Ernest Rhys. J. M. Dent & Sons, 1905, 48.

 

5. Livius, Titus. "Book 5: The Veii and the Destruction of Rome by the Gauls." In The History of Rome, Volume 1, translated by Rev. Canon Roberts, edited by Ernest Rhys. J. M. Dent & Sons, 1905, 41.

 

6. Caesar, Julius. The Battle for Gaul. Translated by Anne Wiseman. Boston, Massachusetts: D.R. Godine, 1980, 17.

 

7. Caesar, Julius. The Battle for Gaul. Translated by Anne Wiseman. Boston, Massachusetts: D.R. Godine, 1980, 104.