Disputatio:De bello Gallico

Add topic
Active discussions


If it's Libri historici and Libri autobiographici, why isn't it Scripta Italica? The lack of parallelism of Italiae scripta makes my screen twitch! IacobusAmor 16:38, 8 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)

aliena lingua scribis! Scribe Latina!

...divisa in partis trisRecensere

Yes, Donatello, it is not a mistake, that is really the wording Caesar used. You may not like it and prefer the more conventional "partes tres", but when quoting we should use the exact words. You can't find anything more official than OCT. In general when reading Caesar you'll find that in the acc. pl. he propably always uses -is in the 3rd decl. Next time please don't make such alteratings without proper research. --Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 18:00, 18 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

You might find it in the preview: http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0198146027 --Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 18:05, 18 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
Actually Ceasar was a Mexican Cook, Cesar who was talking about the Chicken: Gallina est omnis divisa in partis tris...--Jondel (disputatio) 19:19, 18 Augusti 2013 (UTC) :)
I see. I didn't know that (not the chicken thing). Thanks. :) I guess then he would continue as: "...quarum unam editur Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum linguas gustant, nobis aromatibus condiuntur." -- Donatello (disputatio) 02:59, 19 Augusti 2013 (UTC).
To be fair, some other texts use the "classical" spelling, such as this one at the Bibliotheca Augustana, which is apparently based on the Teubner text. Teubners are good too. But I agree with Nicolaus that the OCT is a highly reliable source, and since we cite it in the footnote we should stick to what the cited source says. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:42, 19 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
Revertere ad "De bello Gallico".