From: tgpedersen
Message: 60552
Date: 2008-10-01
>That's not what I said. Dio Cassius draws the general conclusion that
>
>
> --- On Tue, 9/30/08, tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> when he claims has has been attacked by "omnes
> > Galliae civitates", then that is from his point of view what had
> > happened.
> >
> > GK: We don't know what Ariovistus said. Caesar wrote DBG.
> What C. wrote A. said was damning to Caesar, so much that Dio
> Cassius could use it against him.
>
> ****GK: Cassius Dio does not confirm your fantasy of a common
> assault of Aedui and Sequani against Ariovistus before Caesar's
> involvement.
> And DBG 6:12 confirms the traditional account.****DBG 6:12 doesn't mention any conflict between the Sequani and
> The account of what A. said is so full ofAnd the rest was from the bottom of the barrel.
> internally consistent details that it must come from secretarial
> notes, C. would have seen to were taken in such an important
> negotiation.
>
> > And we know his loose use of "Galli" and "Gallia".
> We know your loose use of it to make your story stick.
>
> ****GK:I prefer Caesar's story (along with established
> historiography) to yours. If you can't understand (or won't
> understand) what you read,that's your problem.****
>
>
> > Give it up, Torsten.You can't win this one.
> Yes, that is now your last hope.
>
> ****GK: Frankly my dear Torsten, I don't give a damn (:=)) You're
> welcome to your fantasies if they make you happy. They won't play
> in the league of serious historians.****
>
> > (Torsten)In general, people get a lot of enjoyment out of kicking
> > the loser. Historians are definitely no exception. That standard
> > version is at odds with elementary psychology.
>
> > GK: Torsten psychology is not elementary psychology. (:=)))
> Whatever. Anything concrete?
>
> ****GK: That very question.****
>