FURTHER READING

Caesar has never been short of biographers. Mommsen’s admiring interpretation of Caesar (1904) as the one man who saw clearly the ills of the Republic and aimed throughout to substitute a new system still has its followers. The classic biography remains that of Gelzer, first published in German in 1921, then revised through six editions until 1960, and made available in English in 1968. It is a thorough and judicious political study, well documented, and an indispensable starting point. Meier’s extensive treatment (1995), which appeared first in German in 1982, offers a strongly personal and stimulating view of Caesar and is well worth reading, but lacks footnotes or bibliography. Among the newest works, that of Goldsworthy (2006) is the most comprehensive, readable, and reliable. It is directed to a broader readership than Gelzer, and its references to modern scholarship are highly selective. Canfora (2007) presents an idiosyncratic portrait, often lively and provocative, but short on argumentation and peculiar in its organization. A most serviceable and annotated assemblage of modern scholarship on Caesar, up to the date of its publication, can be found in Gesche (1976). On the early stages of Caesar’s career, Strasburger (1938) is relentlessly critical and questioning of the sources, and, although he may err on the side of skepticism, he supplies an invaluable check on speculation. The politics of the 60s and the consulship of Caesar are aptly summarized by Wiseman (1994) and explored through the perspective of other major figures, Crassus, Pompey, and Cicero, by Ward (1977), Seager (1979), and Mitchell (1979, 1991). Among studies of the late Republic more generally, Meier’s notion (1966) of a ‘‘crisis without an

Alternative’’ has given rise to much discussion and argument, but the book is no easy read. On the workings of late-Republican politics, Taylor (1949), Gruen (1974), and Brunt (1988) give a good sense of the major controversies, and suggest very different answers.