Ch. 72

Link to Latin Library

Title

Quibus¹ rebus cognitis ex perfugis et captivis, Caesar haec² genera munitionis instituit. Fossam pedum viginti directis³ lateribus duxit, ut⁴ eius fossae solum⁵ tantundem⁶ pateret quantum⁶ summae fossae labra distarent. 2 Reliquas omnes munitiones ab ea fossa pedes quadringentos reduxit, [id]⁷ hoc⁸ consilio, quoniam⁹ tantum esset necessario spatium complexus, nec facile¹⁰ totum corpus corona militum cingeretur, ne de¹¹ improviso aut¹² noctu ad munitiones hostium multitudo advolaret aut¹² interdiu tela in¹³ nostros operi destinatos conicere possent. 3 Hoc¹⁴ intermisso spatio duas fossas quindecim pedes latas, eadem altitudine perduxit, quarum interiorem¹⁵ campestribus¹⁶ ac demissis locis aqua¹⁷ ex flumine derivata complevit. 4 Post eas aggerem¹⁸ ac vallum¹⁸ duodecim pedum exstruxit. Huic¹⁹ loricam²⁰ pinnasque²⁰ adiecit grandibus²¹ cervis eminentibus ad commissuras pluteorum²² atque aggeris, qui²³ ascensum hostium tardarent, et turres toto opere circumdedit, quae pedes LXXX inter se distarent.

Chapter 73 - English

 note - read this chapter in English, since the siege vocab is too wild to do in Latin

As it was necessary that at one and the same time timber and corn should be procured, and lines of such extent constructed, our forces, having to proceed to a considerable distance from camp, were reduced in number; and sometimes the Gauls would try to make an attempt upon our works by a sortie in force from several gates of the town. Caesar, therefore, thought proper to make a further addition to these works, in order that the lines might be defensible by a smaller number of troops. Accordingly, trunks or very stout branches of trees were cut, and the tops thereof barked and sharpened, and continuous trenches five feet deep were dug. Into these the stumps were sunk and fastened at the bottom so that they could not be torn up, while the bough-ends were left projecting. They were in rows of five fastened and entangled together, and anyone who pushed into them must impale himself on the sharpest of stakes. These they called “markers.”⁠ In front of these, in diagonal rows arranged like a figure of five,⁠ pits three feet deep were dug, sloping inwards slightly to the bottom. In these, tapering stakes as thick as a man’s thigh, sharpened at the top and fire-hardened, were sunk so as to project no more than four fingers’ breadth from the ground; at the same time, to make all strong and firm, the earth was trodden down hard for one foot from the bottom, and the remainder of the pit was covered over with twigs and brushwood to conceal the trap. Eight rows of this kind were dug, three feet apart. From its resemblance to the flower the device was called a “lily.” In front of all these, logs a foot long, with iron hooks firmly attached, were buried altogether in the ground and scattered at brief intervals all over the field, and these they called “spurs.”

Quibus rebus….. captivis: I absolutely should not need to point this out anymore ↩
haec genera munitionis: genus, generis (n) can have a lot of different meanings. Here, you want “kind/type,” since he’s going to list the different siege fortifications ↩
directis lateribus: ablative of description, with vertical sides ↩
ut …..labra distarent: this is a result clause, though there’s not really an intensifier word to trigger it. With the result that the bottom of this trench stood open (was wide) just as much as the edge of the top of the trench stood apart. (meaning that the width at the bottom was the same width as at the top.) ↩
solum: solum, soli (n) – bottom, ground. NOT sol, solis (m) – sun NOR solus, -a, -um – alone, only ↩
tantundem….quantum: just as much as…. ↩ ↩²
[id]: words in brackets in Latin/Greek texts show that a modern editor thought the word(s) did not belong in the original text, but did not feel confident enough to remove it. If you saw a word in <pointy brackets,> this means the opposite, that they thought the word(s) should be inserted ↩
[id] hoc consilio: supply a fecit, I’d imagine. [He did] it with this plan ↩
quoniam ….. complexus: since there was by necessity such a space of surrounding. Take complexus as genitive here ↩
facile totum …. cingeretur: take totum corpus as your subject, referring to the body of siege crafts. Corona is ablative of means ↩
de improviso: unexpectedly, without warning ↩
aut….aut: (n)either….(n)or ↩ ↩²
in nostros operi destinatos: against our (troops) having been engaged in the work (building of siege crafts) ↩
Hoc intermisso spatio: behind this open space ↩
Interiorem: interiorem fossam, the trench nearer to the town ↩
campestribus ac demissis locis: from level (campestribus) or low-lying (demissis) places ↩
aqua: ablative of means with complevit, filled it with water ↩
aggerem ac vallum: an agger (Control+F “agger” on the link) is a mud-ramp wall used to make the ground level with the top of the enemy wall. A vallum is translated as palisades, which is a row of stakes erected as a defensive wall ↩ ↩²
huic: to this, dative singular ↩
loricam pinnasque: lorica is a breastwork, a mound/wall thrown up about the height of a man’s chest. Pinnae are parapets, an area where the wall extends at the top of a structure, where someone could stand to look down at the enemy and/or fire upon them ↩ ↩²
grandibus cervis eminentibus: A lot of Roman military terms take their names from animals (testudo, musculus, corvus, etc), like the cervus, which ordinarily means “stag/elk.” This refers to a cheval de frise (Frisian Horse, in French), which are defensive spikey (much like the antlers of an elk) obstacles meant to slow down an enemy charge ↩
pluteorum: WOW this is a lot of siege vocab. A pluteus is a covering made of wicker that is usually used to protect men as they’re building these siege engines, but can also be used to provide extra defense and cover ↩
qui ascensum hostium tardarent: the subjunctive verb (tardarent) within this relative clause makes this either a relative clause of characteristic or, as it is here, a relative clause of purpose. The junctions of the shields and agger were meant to slow down the ascent of the enemy, so that’s where we get the purpose-y nature of this phrase ↩