Revista Classica, v. 28, n. 1, p. 161-176, 2015 161 SELF-REVELATION AND CONCEALMENT IN CAESAR’S DE BELLO GALLICO: CICERO, ORGETORIX, AND THE BELGAE William Henry Furness Altman* * Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina ABSTRACT: Building on the work of others who have seen an allusion to the First Triumvirate in the tripartite Gallic conspiracy led by Orgetorix, this article shows how Caesar reveals himself as formidable between the lines of De bello Gallico, and particularly in its famous opening. KEYWORDS: Julius Caesar, De bello Gallico, First Triumvirate, Cicero. AUTORREVELAÇÃO E DISSIMULAÇÃO NO DE BELLO GALLICO DE CÉSAR, CÍCERO, ORGETORIX E OS BELGAS RESUMO: Baseando-se no trabalho de outros estudiosos que viram uma alusão ao Primeiro Triunvirato na tripartite conspiração gálica comandada por Orgétorix, este artigo mostra como César se revela como alguém formidável nas entrelinhas da obra De bello Gallico, e particularmente em sua famosa abertura. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Júlio César, De bello Gallico, Primeiro Triunvirato, Cícero. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 The reference is to 1 aesar apparently delays his “entrance into history.” Strasburger 1938. Although by no means hesitant to make himself 2 2 De Bello Gallico 7.88.1. C conspicuous in De Bello Gallico, he mentions References will be to Du himself for the first time at 1.7.1, using the dative form Pontet 1890, and will be . Even at 1.7.1, then, it is only after information cited by book, chapter, and Caesari section numbers alone. 162 Revista Classica, v. 28, n. 1, p. 161-176, 2015 3 has come “to Caesar” that he assumes his characteristic role The rival claims of Massilia and Narbo are as the subject of three verbs—parallel to his more famous discussed in Holmes triplet veni, vidi, vici—maturat, contendit, and pervenit. The 1911, p. 3-4. fact that his first entrance is marked by precisely three verbs 4 1.1.3. Unless otherwise reminds us of his book’s famous opening sentences, where indicated, all translations triads multiply: Gaul has been divided into three parts are my own. (1.1.1), its inhabitants differ among themselves in three 5 See Torigian 1998, respects (1.1.2), and three rivers are required to divide them p. 46-47. geographically (1.1.2). Moreover, when Caesar explains why 6 Fränkel 1955, p. 304: the Belgae are the strongest/bravest of them all (fortissimi “Die Parallele mit Caesars omnium), he gives three reasons for their strength in 1.1.3: eigenem Aufstieg liegt um so näher, als zu Orgetorix’ (1) their greater distance from the cultus and humanitas of Unternehmen auch ein the Roman Province of Narbonese Gaul,3 (2) the fact that Triumvirat mit zwei anderen Männern gleichen merchants seldom come among them, importing “those Schlages gehört, dessen things that pertain to effeminizing spirits,”4 and (3) they Ziel die Beherrschung are continuously waging war with their neighbors, the Galliens war (1.3.8).” Germans. In addition to seeing these triads as signs of careful 7 Gerhard 1991, p. 271: composition in general,5 I will argue more specifically in “il faut examiner le parallélisme frappant, this paper that it was Caesar’s intention to reveal what I quique jamais encore will call his “formidable” position among the secret étudié, entr la coalition conspiracy of Crassus, Pompey, and Caesar, known to des trios princes gaulois et le triumvirat de César, posterity as “the First Triumvirate,” and will furthermore Pompée et Crassus.” suggest that this intention should be considered in the 8 Gerhard 1991, p. 273: context of Caesar’s rivalry not only with his fellow-triumvirs, “6. L’echec de la coalition. but with Cicero. Orgétorix, dénoncé, inculpé, incarcéré, mourut en prison (1, 4). Le triumvirat de Cesar, 2. THE DIALECTIC OF SELF-REVELATION AND CONCEALMENT Pompée et Crassus, s’il ne connut pas une fin 6 analogue, était en réalité Following a hint from Hermann Fränkel, Yves dissous lors de la rédaction Gerhard argued in his path-breaking 1991 article “Orgétorix du Bellum Gallicum, en l’Helvète et la Bellum Gallicum de César” that the conspiracy 52 ou 51.” The attached note cites Michel Rambaud, of Orgetorix the Helvetian, Dumnorix the Aeduan, and pioneer of the critical Casticus the Sequanian was an allusion to the First reading of Caesar’s 7 commentaries. “Le mort Triumvirate. Gerhard remarks six important parallels: (1) en couches de Julia en the secret character of the alliance, (2) the chronological septembre 54 puis celle simultaneity of the two triads, (3) the common goal of the de Crassus en juin 53 rompirent l’alliance entre two conspiracies, i.e., the achievement of kingly power César et Pompée, et (regnum), (4) the use of marriage for a political goal in both, déclenchèrent l’hostilité (5) a common appeal to the people against the aristocracy, que déboucha la guerre 8 civile.” The parallel and (6) the eventual defeat of the coalitions. Before Revista Classica, v. 28, n. 1, p. 161-176, 2015 163 modifying Gerhard’s conclusions, particularly with regard between Orgetorix giving to “(6),” it is important to state that I fully endorse his his daughter in marriage to Dumnorix and Caesar approach and intend to extend it. Admiring Gerhard, I giving Julia to Pompey also note with pleasure that Catherine Torigian9 cites his would have been the decisive clue for a Roman article in the important collection Julius Caesar as Artful reader and should be so Reporter and, more recently, so does Randy Fields,10 yet as well for us; see another high school Latin teacher.11 Gerhard’s fourth parallel at 272. There is good reason for this connection: high school 9 Latin teachers are accustomed to begin at the beginning, Torigian 1998, p. 60 n. 14 and 52-53: “Yet such and it is in the famous opening words of Caesar’s De Bello connections as he [sc. Gallico that the curious dialectic between concealment and Gerhard] makes between self-revelation that is my subject first appears. To begin Orgetorix and Caesar are, in Gerhard’s own opinion, with, the use of the word “dialectic” suggests philosophy insufficient grounds for and Caesar introduces dialectic in this sense by the words Caesar’s inclusion of the Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres. The philosophical Orgetorix story, and Gerhard ends his study dialectic in play here is, or rather involves, the ancient with the admission that problem of the One and the Many: if Gaul is actually one, he does not know why the episode is there. The i.e., if there exists such a thing as Gallia omnis, then “it” is notion of a parallel not divided into many parts. On the other hand, if it is triumvirate is indeed a essentially “divided,” then it is not one. Impatient of captivating one, but it does not take into consideration philosophical conundrums, we reply that it is obviously the presence of a rhetorical both: hence the applicability of the word “dialectic.” With link between Orgetorix’ the word “dialectic” having been justified, then, the dialectic thinking and Caesar’s own which reveals how of self-revelation and concealment is implicit in the words inclusion of the episode divisa est. Nothing would be easier than to tell the budding serves Caesar’s propagandistic goals. The Latinist that these words mean: “Gaul is divided.” But if link is established when a the intent is actually to teach Latin, then these words must statement pronounced be recognized as the classic example of the perfect passive: initially in Caesar’s voice 12 reappears as oratio obliqua as a matter of grammar, then, “Gaul has been divided.” [cf. following note] in the To delve a bit further into the subterranean simplicities mouth of Orgetorix.” 10 that are the lowly high school teacher’s stock in trade, the Fields 2005, p. 20 n. 61. verb dividere does not involve an act of what we would call This citation is attached to “dividing” (i.e., cutting, splitting, or separating) but rather, the following sentence: “The speech is framed by primarily, an act of “seeing”: Gaul has been seen in its Orgetorix’ exhortation to discrete, distinct, (pardon the etymological neologisms:) assume supreme command dis-verse, and indeed dis-ferent parts. But “having been (Caesar uses a form of the word regnum three times in seen” (as dis-tinct and dis-visible) by whom? Certainly not the narrative surrounding by the Romans: there is no reference here to Cisalpine, Orgetorix’ speech), and immediately before the Narbonese, and the non-Roman “hairy” or “trouser-wearing” speech, the Helvetian king Gaul beyond it—the obvious triad from a contemporary arranges the marriage of Roman’s perspective—but instead, the two parts of Gaul his daughter to Dumnorix, 164 Revista Classica, v. 28, n. 1, p. 161-176, 2015 a political arrangement that every Roman knows (Cisalpine and Narbonese Gaul) that undoubtedly recalled to Caesar’s audience the are ignored while that distant Transalpine Gaul—well parallel Roman arrangement beyond the Roman provincia—has been seen by an between Caesar and unnamed someone as not only being “all Gaul,” but also as Pompey [n. 61].” divided into three parts. Quite apart, then, from exposing 11 Fields teaches Latin at a his readers to the dialectic of the One and the Many, Caesar private high school in Atlanta, Torigian is an is not only revealing himself to be the missing ablative of experienced secondary agent by whom Gaul “has been divided” in a totally school Latin teacher, unfamiliar, and indeed in a non-Roman way,13 but has formerly of the Browning School, and GERHARD unquestionably concealed himself as this secret agent.