1700072914 2. The cited dates are in accordance with Stoffel’s calculations, based on the estimates of the astronomer Leverrier, which were requested by Napoleon III. According to Ideler, Mommsen, Matzat, Soltau, and Unger, the events occurred some three weeks earlier.

1700072915

1700072916 3.When Caesar moved out on the following day and initially took the route back toward Ilerda, the Pompeian soldiers naturally believed that a lack of provisions was forcing the enemy to retire. This does not contradict the sentence above, however.

1700072917

1700072918 8　希腊战役

1700072919

1700072920 1.Perhaps even a few more.Gröbe, in Drumann’s Roman History（Römische Geschichte），2d ed.，3：710.

1700072921

1700072922 2.28 November 49 B.C, according to Stoffel；5 November, according to Mommsen.

1700072923

1700072924 3.These observations and the confirmation of these points had already been made by a commission sent out by Napoleon III in 1861 in a work published by L. Heuzay, Julius Caesar’s Military Operations, studied on the Terrain by the Macedonian Commission（Les operations militaires de Jules Cesar，étudiees sur le terrain par la mission de Macédoine）（Paris，1886），which was confirmed by Stoffel in Life of Caesar（Vie de Cesar）1：138.

1700072925

1700072926 4.Domaszewski, in Armies of the Civil Wars（Heere der Bürgerkriege）pp.171-172，considers it impossible for legions to have come from Italy to Illyria, since the Pompeians controlled the sea. This reason is not convincing, since the land route was open.

1700072927

1700072928 5.Up to the present this point has probably not been sufficiently emphasized. Ranke, in his World History（Weltgeschichte），even states the opinion that we have descriptions of the battle of Pharsalus that stem from supporters of the Senate and of Pompey. Such is the case only to the extent that Livy wrote from the Pompeian point of view and Lucanus, particularly, presented the civil war with this bias. But these two were already significantly dependent on written sources, and since, despite their bias, they have practically nothing that does not go back to either Caesar or Pollio, that is a sure proof that a truly Pompeian original source containing unique information either did not exist or had already disappeared at that time. Lucanus apparently did do his best to find such a source but it is downright astonishing how little of a positive nature his work contains which would not be known from other sources. Plathner, in On the Credibility of the History of the Civil War（Zur Glaubwürdigkeit der Geschichte des Bürgerkrieges）（Bernburg Pro-gramm，1882），has compiled these points very well and has shown that Lucanus used Livy as a source. And so the two of them were able to express their sympathy for Pompey’s cause only through the material handed down from the enemy side.

1700072929

1700072930 6.Appian and Dio Cassius write of important defeats suffered, in turn, by these detached corps. These reports probably have to stem from Asinius Pollio, but if they were true, there would have had to be in some way or other more significant consequences. We must therefore prefer Caesar’s report; Pollio must have been taken in by the exaggerated accounts of persons who took part in those battles.

1700072931

1700072932 7.Plutarch, Caesar, Chapter 43.

1700072933

1700072934 8.That is the sense of Bell. Civ.84.2 and 85.1.

1700072935

1700072936 9　法萨卢斯会战　无

1700072937

1700072938 10　内战末期诸战役　无

1700072939

1700072940 11　战　象

1700072941

1700072942 1.Polybius 3.14.

1700072943

1700072944 2.Livy 25.41.

1700072945

1700072946 3.Sallust, Jugurtha, Chapter 53.

1700072947

1700072948 4.According to the observation by Fröhlich in The Significance of the Second Punic War（Die Bedeutung des zweiten punischen Krieges），p.20.

1700072949

1700072950 5.Valerius Maximus 9.3. Appian, Iberia, Chapter 46.

1700072951

1700072952 6.Orosius 5.13. Florus 1.37.

1700072953

1700072954 7.Schubert, in Pyrrhus, p.222，calls attention to the fact that in the account of Pyrrhus’campaign in Sicily, which goes back to Timaeus, hardly any mention is made of the elephants.

1700072955

1700072956 8.J.Chr.D. Schreber, in The Mammals（Die Saugetiere）（Erlangen，1775），1：245，which is still today the authoritative work on descriptive zoology, strongly emphasizes this point and says that the elephant is even sensitive to the bite of a fly. In Volume 6 of the same work, by J.A. Wagner（1835），p.265，it is recounted how the javelins of hunters remain imbedded in the body and gradually kill the elephant. Baker, in The Albert Nyanza，1：284，tells how skilled hunters can kill an elephant directly by a stab with a spear from below.

1700072957

1700072958 9.Appian, Iberia, Chapter 46.

1700072959

1700072960 12　结论

1700072961

1700072962 1.Frontinus，4.7.1. Similarly, Bell. Afric, Chapter 31.

1700072963

[ 上一页 ]  [ :1.700072914e+09 ]  [ 下一页 ]