Julius Caesar Crossing The Rubicon Summary

In the world of Historians, the crossing of the Rubicon river by Julius Caesar has been a much debated topic about the actual events that took place. However, as to what actually happened when Caesar crossed the Rubicon is another issue entirely, if he even crossed at all. Despite the ongoing debate of this event, it was a significant moment in history, as it led to [several other events].
In the article “Crossing the Rubicon. A Historical Study,” by Anke Rondholz, she compares different accounts of Caesar crossing the Rubicon in a historiographical format as she cross-references these separate accounts. She begins by stating,
The river crossing is mentioned in six extant sources which are, in chronological order, Velleius Paterculus, Lucan,

Plutarch, Suetonius, Appian and the late-antique Orosius. Four of these sources not only mention the Rubicon but present the circumstances of the transgression in detail. Caesar’s decision to cross the small river is represented schematically as fatal and disastrous; the whole scene even serves to confirm the sources’ overall presentation of Caesar’s character.

She uses these six sources to compares the different accounts of Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon river.
Before addressing the other perceptions of the crossing of the Rubecon, Rondholz looks at Caesars own account in Bellum Civile.

She states that, “Caesar himself, in the Bellum Civile, does not mention the crossing of the Rubicon.” This was intriguing, especially since if anyone were to write down or record the crossing of the Rubicon it would be Caesar himself. This poses the question, if he really even crossed the Rubicon river, or if it was a symbolic event written by others, or if he just simply didn’t find the event relevant enough to record

himself.
Advancing into Rondholz article, she mentions the record of Velleius in regards to the crossing.

She states that he does not give much detail on the event, but does mention that, “according to Velleius, Caesar crossed the river with his army, which suggests a large body of troops. Caesar is motivated by his realization of the inevitability of war, after all of his proposals for a compromise had been rejected by the senate.” Interesting, Rondholz titles this section about Velleius’ account as “Meager Sources: Velleius and Orosius.” This title emphasizes his less detailed version of the crossing of the Rubicon. In regards to what was actually discussed by Velleius, the large army that Caesar had cross the river emphasizes, according to Rondholz, his realization of the approach of war.
Rondholz titles Lucan’s account as “An Epic Crossing,” suggesting that it is told more in the form of a story. Such language that suggests this is an epic, as recounted by Rondholz, is mentioned as follows:
In keeping with Caesar’s characterization as a lightning bolt… his destructive speed is prominent in the Rubicon scene. Caesar rushes across the Alps… when he starts the civil war…he carries the signs across the river in a hurry… after the crossing he pushes his army forward… and moves faster than a missile whirled by a Balearic slingshot or a Parthian bow… Caesar’s stay in Ravenna is not

mentioned.

This recount of the event is more hyperbolic in character. Especially with the mention of lightning bolts, his rush to cross the Alps and the Rubicon river itself. It’s very descriptive in a way that one would not usually use when recounting an event, but when telling a story.
In the conclusion of her article, Rondholz outlines a few items that all of the accounts of the crossing of the Rubicon have. “First, there is the speed with which Caesar proceeds.” Another similar aspect that Rondholz points out between all the accounts is, “all of these sources (save Velleius Paterculus and Orosius) have in common is the connection of the river crossing to a supernatural element.” She also mentions, and I found this questionable that she decided to put this in her conclusion, that “it is impossible to decide definitely in the surviving texts about Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon from which source they are derived.” She says it is impossible to which of these accounts is true. So based off what she has presented in her article, the reader can assume that what would most likely be truthful in all these accounts are the things that they all have in common.