This is the article. At point. [link]

An article regarding Julius Caesar and his participation in the Gallic Wars. One hundred years ago, its bold statements could be construed as absolute fact. However today, much like "Christopher Columbus discovering America first" is known as a blatant fabrication. Almost. Its still taught in elementary schools, simply because its easy to remember. Wikipedia (and to an equal extent the History Channel) caters to people who want to be smart... in an hour. Very few people above this bubble of suck get to express what in some cases amounts to common sense. Below is a line for line correction I've made. Feel free to cross scale it with the article.



-- ANALLY PROTRACTED LECTURE TO FALLOW --


WIKIPEDIA:: “The Gallic Wars were a series of military campaigns waged by the Roman proconsul Julius Caesar against several Gallic tribes, lasting from 58 BC to 51 BC.”


Reality:: *With and against* several Gallic tribes.


WIKIPEDIA:: ”The Gallic Wars culminated in the decisive Battle of Alesia in 52 BC, in which a complete Roman victory resulted in the expansion of the Roman Republic over the whole of Gaul.”


Reality:: A complete Roman victory resulted in hmogeny over Gaul and the inductment of several Gallic client states.


WIKIPEDIA:: ” This military campaign is painstakingly described by Julius Caesar himself in his book Commentarii de Bello Gallico, which is the most important historical source. This book is also a masterwork of political propaganda, as Caesar was keenly interested in manipulating his readers in Rome.”



Reality:: This military campaign is painstakingly described by Julius Caesar himself in his book Commentarii de Bello Gallico, which is the **sole historical source.** This book is also a masterwork of political propaganda, as Caesar was keenly interested in manipulating his readers in Rome.



WIKIPEDIA:: ”The Gallic tribes on the other hand were quite civilized, wealthy, and totally divided. Many of them had traded with Roman merchants, and had been already influenced by Roman culture. Some of them had even changed their political systems from tribal monarchies into Rome-inspired republics.”


Reality:: Every known Celtic state was a Confederate Republic of some nature. Including ones erroneously said by the Romans to be ruled by “kings” such as Galatia. The Celts very clearly had a longer, stronger and more genuine theory of democratic governing then the Romans or Greeks did. Many of their republics predated Rome. Brennos was elected by a council of 12 elders/representatives, who where in turn elected by their own peoples, to invade Roman territory because they (the Romans) where unable to fallow civilized diplomatic proceedings and then known international law. (A roman diplomat assassinated a Gaulish petty king. Circa 390 BC) Vercingetorix was also elected in such a fashion. There are individual deviations noted throughout the ages where King/Emperors would reign without digression, but no more so then in Greece or Rome. There is certainly no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Celt designed republics where “roman styled.”



WIKIPEDIA:: “The following year, 56 BC, Caesar turned his attention to the tribes of the Atlantic seaboard, notably the Veneti tribe in Armorica (modern Brittany), who had assembled a confederacy of anti-Roman tribes. The Veneti were a seafaring people and had built a sailing fleet in the Gulf of Morbihan, requiring the Romans to build galleys and undertake an unconventional land and sea campaign. Again, Caesar successfully defeated the Gauls, destroying their tribes.”


Reality:: Caesar didn’t build a sailing fleet of galleys. The Pictones the Pictavii and the Santones, Celtic tribes allied to him, did. The combined forces, together, defeated the Armorican confederacy. Their capital “Dariotitum” (Vannes, so named after them) was captured and looted extensively. A large portion of the populace being sold into slavery ect. This only succeeded in making neighboring Gallic client state the Namnetes, more powerful. The Veneti reemerged as the predominant power of Armorica in the 5th and sixth centuries. The tribe was very obviously not “destroyed.”


WIKIPEDIA:: ”The campaigns of 55 BC and early 56 BC have caused controversy for many centuries. They were controversial even at the time among Caesar's contemporaries, and especially among his political opponents, who decried them as a costly exercise in personal aggrandizement. In modern times, commentators have been sharply divided between critics of Caesar's nakedly imperialist agenda and defenders of the benefits that the expansion of Roman power subsequently wrought in Gaul.”


Reality:: Alleged benefits. (until named, debated and proven in turn)


WIKIPEDIA:: ” Discontent among the subjugated Gauls prompted a major uprising in the winter of 54–53 BC, when the Eburones of north-eastern Gaul rose in rebellion under their leader Ambiorix. Fifteen Roman cohorts were wiped out at Atuatuca Tungrorum (modern Tongeren in Belgium) and a garrison commanded by Quintus Tullius Cicero narrowly survived after being relieved by Caesar in the nick of time. The rest of 53 BC was occupied with a punitive campaign against the Eburones and their allies, who were said to have been all but exterminated by the Romans.”


Reality:: The territories of a few of the Belgic powers involved where absorbed directly into the Roman Empire, losing their client state status. Which most of Gaul and Belgium retained throughout the war and into the coming centuries.


WIKIPEDIA:: ”He systematically gathered intelligence on the Gallic tribes to identify their characteristics, weaknesses, and divisions, thereby being able to dispose of them in turn.”


Reality:: *engage them in turn.* “Disposing” implies a level of extermination and annexation that generally did not occur during the war. Bad use of language like this caused other erroneous statements such as how Caesar “destroyed” the Veneti.


WIKIPEDIA:: ”Conversely it could have also been possible that Gallic defeat was, in part, the result of generations of warfare against German invaders who were subdued at great cost of manpower. Caesar mentioned that a long standing conflict between the Aedui and Arverni had ravaged and depleted the Gallic nobility, especially the Aedui nobility, thus causing Germanic military aid to be sought in this conflict.”


Reality:: Gaul was in a state of several concurrent civil wars prior to the roman invasion. Many Celtic powers employed mercenaries from the geographic confines of what is now Germany. Current language gives far to much credence to the theory that “Germans” where an independent and unique power block set in dynamic opposite with the Celts. Which though theatric, as most Roman accounts are is not verifiable archaeologically. Archaeologically the only difference between Celtic huts and the huts in Denmark at this time where that the Danish huts had slightly thicker walls for more insulation and generally had less objects of wealth accumulated in them. Caesar had acquired the word “German” from Celts he had met and fails to notice that every “German” he meets has the uncanny ability to speak fluent Gaulish. Hearsay that Julius Caesar overheard does not become documentable fact, no matter what level of respect anyone has for the man. Celtic culture originated in Germany and likely remained there in a classical La Tene sense, changing as all cultures do, until the migration era.

The most critical note missing in this article is **the continued existence of Gallic client states as localized political entities.** This reason, specifically, is why most Gauls didn’t have Roman Citizenship until 205 AD. The autonomity of Gallic client states should not be underestimated. Vercingetorix was born to the Arverni, a Gallic client state that had been a part of the roman political sphere for over 70 years prior to his birth. Immediately fallowing his capture, for example, soldiers from Aedui and Arverni states respectively, where pardoned and allowed to return home unmolested.

The Aedui, The Arverni, The Bellovaci, The Bituriges-Cubi, The Carnutes, The Cenomani, The Helvii (not to be confused with Hellvetti), The Leuci, The Lingones, The Mediomatrici, The Meldi, The Namnetes, The Nitiobriges, The Parisii, The Pictavii (not to be confused with the Picts), The Remi, The Santones, The Segovellauni, The Segusiavi, The Sequani, The Treveri, The Tungri, The Turoni, The Vellavi, The Veneti and various Volcae subsects. All enjoyed this status. A full two thirds of Gaul. Rominzation is only recorded to have occurred (in a practical sense) To the Lingones.

The conquest has been perpetually misinterpreted, first by Julius Caesar seeking to elevate himself and then millennia later by Victorian Scholars, using 19th century terminology for a document produced in 50 BC, backed by a racist agenda aimed at the persecution of Gaelic and British cultures. The continued existence of Celtic client states in Gaul is verified, beyond a shadow of a doubt, by Zosimus, a late Roman Historian. Who himself writes that in the year 410 AD.


Zosimus:: ”Constans was afterwards a second time sent into Spain, and took with him Justus as his general. Gerontius being dissatisfied at this, and having conciliated the favour of the soldiers in that quarter, incited the barbarians who were in Gallia Celtica to revolt against Constantine. Constantine being unable to withstand these, the greater part of his army being in Spain, the barbarians beyond the Rhine made such unbounded incursions over every province, as to reduce not only the Britons, but some of the Celtic nations also to the necessity of revolting from the empire, and living no longer under the Roman laws but as they themselves pleased. The Britons therefore took up arms, and incurred many dangerous enterprises for their own protection, until they had freed their cities from the barbarians who besieged them. In a |175 similiar manner, the whole of Armorica, with other provinces of Gaul, delivered themselves by the same means ; expelling the Roman magistrates or officers, and erecting a government, such as they pleased, of their own.

Thus happened this revolt or defection of Britain and the Celtic nations”

--- Sources to "Nova Historia"


-- Lecture Over--



Next Journal Subject: The Riddle of Steel.