Happy Latin: Caesar’s BattlesHour 19 · The Second Crossing of the Rhine · DBG 6.9–10, 6.29

Hour 19 — The Second Crossing of the Rhine · DBG 6.9–10, 6.29

Note on sources. The source course-design document specifies Hour 19 = Second Crossing of the Rhine = Wheelock Ch. 19 = Perfect Passive System. Latin from PerseusDL canonical-latinLit (Holmes 1914), lightly smoothed; English from McDevitte & Bohn (1869), adapted; grammar from Wheelock 6th edn. revised (LaFleur 2005), Ch. 19.

Briefing

From Hour 18 to Hour 19 — the bridge, rebuilt

Hour 18 closed the punitive year (53 BC) with the Eburones almost extinguished and Ambiorix still at large. Hour 19 goes back a few months — to the same campaigning year — when Caesar makes a second crossing of the Rhine. The first was in 55 BC (Hour 11), an act of pure political theater. The second is different. Some Belgic tribes have been receiving German support across the river. Caesar wants to punish that support and to demonstrate that the Rhine is no barrier — twice.

The geography is symbolic. Caesar builds the new bridge a short distance above the site of the first one. The Ubii — the Germanic people who welcomed Caesar across in 55 BC — surrender quickly. The dangerous neighbors are the Suebi, who choose not to fight but retreat into their vast forests, where Roman logistics fail. Caesar advances a short distance, finds nothing, and turns back. He then does something striking — destroying only the German end of the bridge, leaving the Gallic end intact. The door is closed but not removed; I can come back at any time.

Hour 19: Second Crossing of the Rhine — Source: DBG 6.9–10, 6.29

With this matter settled, Caesar set out against the Treveri, and after the Treveri had been subdued, he decided to cross over into Germany. In the same place where, in the previous year, the bridge had been built, a new one was built a little upstream — on this plan, that if the older bridge were destroyed, the newer would remain. With the bridge completed, Caesar led his forces across. The Ubii, with envoys having been sent to him, were received: it was said by Caesar that he would inflict no penalty on them. By the Ubii, Caesar was informed that the Suebi, with all their forces, had withdrawn into the woods. Caesar, when these things had been learned, advanced into the territory of the Suebi. But the Suebi were not found: they had hidden themselves in the densest forests. What was to be done? What plan of war was to be undertaken? Caesar realized that he could not advance. Therefore Caesar returned to the territory of the Ubii. In this matter, with a few days consumed, the entire army was led back; supplies were collected; but the hope of capturing Ambiorix was set aside. Caesar, after he had led the army back across the Rhine, broke the bridge: the earlier (Gallic) part being left intact, the later (German) part being destroyed. Caesar had done this with the purpose that the Germans who lived across the Rhine would know that a return for the Romans into their territory was always prepared.

Connection to Wheelock

This hour pairs with Wheelock Chapter 19 — Perfect Passive System (Indicative) and the Interrogative Pronoun.

• Perfect-passive system: participle (PP4) + esse. Amātus sum "I have been loved"; amātus eram "I had been loved"; amātus erō "I shall have been loved." The participle is the perfect passive participle (PP4) and agrees with the subject in number and gender.
• Interrogative pronoun: quis? (m./f. nom., "who?"), quid? (n., "what?"), with oblique forms cuius, cui, quem, quō. Mostly identical to the relative pronoun (Hour 17).

Today's Task

Identify all the verbs (finite + infinitives) AND all perfect-passive-system forms and interrogatives.

Grammar Target — Perfect Passive System & Interrogative Pronoun

Part 1 — Perfect-passive system = participle + esse

The participle agrees with the subject in number and gender — like any adjective. A perfect-passive verb form has two pieces of information: the participle (tense + voice + agreement) and the esse-form (person + number + secondary tense).

Part 2 — Interrogative pronoun

Plural same as relative (quī, quōrum, quibus).

Three warning signs

1. The participle is an adjective. The participle agrees with the subject; if the participle is fem. pl., the subject must also be.
2. quis vs. quī. Quis venit? = "Who comes?" (interrog.). Quī venit, Cicerō est = "He who comes is Cicero" (rel.). Same form, context decides.
3. Latin perfect passive translates two ways: "was loved" or "has been loved."

Vocabulary

(96 entries — see HTML for full badge-tagged table. New badge: INTERROG marks interrogative pronouns quis, quid.)

Selected entries:

Tagging rules in effect this Hour

• Rule #1 — Indicative (red). Carried.
• Rule #2 — Subjunctive. dēstrūctus esset, dūcerētur, scīrent, interrogārētur, putet.
• Rule #3 — Connective yellow (carried). Quā (ss. 1, 8), quibus (s. 5).
• Rule #4 — Infinitive. trānsīre, posse, recēssisse, missōs esse, esse parātum, captum esse.
• Rule #5 — Participle. Many.
• Rule #7 — Noun-adj phrase. Carried.
• Rule #8 — Abl. abs. Multiple in ss. 1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 11.
• Rule #9 — Noun-case ★. Carried.

New this hour: the Battle Task's second toggle isolates perfect-passive-system forms and interrogatives — the Wheelock-Ch.19 grammar focus.

Battle Task — Identify all verbs, and perfect-passive / interrogative forms

Hour 19 Passage on the Second Crossing of the Rhine

(Perf.-pass. / interrog. targets in bold, other verb targets in italics. Yellow ⚡ = connecting relative carried from Hour 17.)

1. ⚡Quā rē cōnstitūtā, Caesar in Trēverōs prōfectus est, et, postquam Trēverī domitī sunt, in Germāniam trānsīre cōnstituit.
2. Eōdem locō quō priōre annō aedificātus erat pōns paulō superius aedificātus est; eā ratiōne, ut, cum superior dēstrūctus esset, posterior manēret.
3. Pōnte cōnfectō, Caesar copias trādūxit. Ubiī, [missīs ad eum lēgātīs], recēptī sunt: dictum est a Caesare sē in eōs nullam poenam exitūrum.
4. Ab Ubiīs Caesar certior factus est Suēbōs cum omnibus cōpiīs in silvās recēssisse et reliquōs in tūta loca missōs esse.
5. Caesar, ⚡quibus rēbus cognitīs, in finēs Suēbōrum prōcessit. Sed Suēbī repertī nōn sunt: in dēnsissimās silvās sē abdiderant.
6. Quid faciendum esset? Quae ratiō bellī suscipienda? Caesar progredi non posse cōgnōvit: silvae erant trānsīre impossibilēs.
7. Reversus est igitur Caesar in finēs Ubiōrum, et datum est imperium ut exercitus rūrsus trāns Rhēnum dūcerētur.
8. ⚡Quā in re cōnsumptīs diēbus paucīs, exercitus omnis trāductus est; commeātūs comportātī sunt; spēs autem capiendī Ambiorigis dēposita est.
9. Caesar, cum trāns Rhēnum exercitum redūxisset, pōntem interrūpit: priōre parte in Galliā relictā, posteriōre parte in Germāniā dēstrūctā.
10. Eō cōnsiliō Caesar id fēcerat, ut Germānī quī trāns Rhēnum habitābant scīrent rēditum semper Rōmānīs in suīs finibus esse parātum.
11. Hīs rēbus [cōnfectīs], Caesar exercitum in hīberna redūxit; bellum hōc annō est cōnfectum.
12. Sed cum dē Ambiorige interrogārētur, Caesar respondit: "Quis rēgem Eburōnum captum esse putet? Numquam captus est."

Answer Key — Perfect-Passive / Interrogative Targets (17 distinct units; 21 clickable spans counting two-word forms)

Answer Key — Other Verbs (~28 forms)

S. 1: cōnstitūtā, prōfectus est, trānsīre, cōnstituit S. 2: manēret S. 3: cōnfectō, trādūxit, exitūrum S. 4: recēssisse S. 5: cognitīs, prōcessit, abdiderant S. 6: posse, cōgnōvit, trānsīre S. 7: reversus est, dūcerētur S. 8: cōnsumptīs S. 9: redūxisset, interrūpit, relictā, dēstrūctā S. 10: fēcerat, habitābant, scīrent S. 11: cōnfectīs, redūxit S. 12: interrogārētur, respondit, putet

Questions on the Narrative

1. Why does Caesar build the second bridge paulō superius — slightly upstream from the first? What rhetorical / strategic point does the location make?
2. In sentence 4 Caesar uses certior factus est ("was informed"). Translate the indirect statement that follows. What's the participle-agreement clue in missōs esse?
3. Sentence 6 has two interrogatives in rapid succession. What kind of question does each ask? Is Caesar genuinely uncertain, or staging uncertainty?
4. Sentence 9 describes the partial destruction of the bridge. What rhetorical / political work does the participle phrase priōre parte... relictā, posteriōre parte... dēstrūctā do?
5. Sentence 10 contains a perfect-passive infinitive esse parātum in indirect statement. Identify the agreement of parātum — what is its subject?
6. Sentence 12: Caesar's rhetorical question Quis... putet? expects what answer? Compare to Hour 18's confident Ambiorix sōlus salvus est.

Further Questions — Translation

Translate sentences 2, 9, and 12 into idiomatic English. Pay attention to: - The double "if-clause" construction in s. 2 (the bridge-redundancy plan). - The chiastic structure in s. 9 (priōre... relictā vs. posteriōre... dēstrūctā). - The bitter rhetorical question in s. 12 and the perfect-passive infinitive captum esse.

Screening

Proposed clip: Time Team Special: Caesar's Bridge over the Rhine (Channel 4, 2009) — same as Hour 11, but watched again with Hour 19's eyes. Netflix's Barbarians (2020) for the German-forest-retreat tactic at Teutoburg, AD 9. Subject to instructor confirmation.

Discussion

1. Why does Caesar describe the construction of the second bridge in essentially passive voice? Compare to Hour 11's active-voice description of the first bridge.

2. The Suebi don't fight. They retreat. Caesar's pursuit fails. Why does Caesar let himself be heard not knowing what to do (s. 6)?

3. Sentence 9's partial destruction is brilliant. What changed in Caesar's strategic posture between 55 BC and 53 BC?

4. Caesar's rhetorical question in s. 12 reframes failure. What's the tactic?

Intermission

Break before Hour 20 (Attack on the Atuatuca Garrison; we read the immediate aftermath of Hour 13's disaster).

Sources

• Latin text: De Bello Gallico 6.9–10, 6.29, from PerseusDL canonical-latinLit corpus (phi0448), with light morphological smoothing.
• English translation: McDevitte & Bohn (1869), adapted.
• Grammar: Wheelock 6th edn. revised (LaFleur 2005), Ch. 19.
• Course design: 0 Caesar's Latin Course Structure and Task 1-2 .docx.
• The two Rhine bridges: Peter Connolly, Greece and Rome at War (1981), ch. on Roman military engineering; Adrian Goldsworthy, Caesar: Life of a Colossus (2006), ch. 13.
• The Suebi-forests motif: J. B. Rives, Tacitus, Germania (1999), commentary on Tacitus Germ. 38–46 (the Suebi as the standard "ungovernable Germans" of Roman ethnography); Stefan Burmeister & Heidrun Derks (eds.), 2000 Jahre Varusschlacht: Mythos (2009), on the Suebi as ancestors of the Teutoburg adversaries.
• Caesar's passive-voice strategy: Christina Shuttleworth Kraus, "Caesar's Plain Style" in Latin Historians (Greene & Kraus, eds., 1997).