|Abstract: ||The author attempts to elucidate some discrepancies connected with the course of the conflict
between Pompey and Caesar in 50 B.C., and particularly with the statements made by
G. Scribonius Curio in the Senate, the reason being that the information obtained from the
sources and concerning the events in question is often fragmentary, unpredse, or too general.
As a result, those events are treated in historiography in different ways.
Unclear, for example, and subject to many interpretations are the data, included in a report by
Aulus Hirtius (Bell. Gall. VIII. 52. 4—5), concerning the skirmishes between Caesar and Pompey,
and between their supporters, that took place in the Senate between March 1, and December 9,
in 50 B.C. They are very important because some of them can be found only in Hirtius, who,
however, is known for his pro Caesar bias.
Our idea of the course of the rivalry between Pompey and Caesar in 50, of the Senate debates,
and the Senate moves of Curio, the tribune of the people, depends then on our estimation of the
trustworthiness of the information provided by Aulus Hirtius, and on the correct dating of the
events referred to in it. It is these questions that dedded the developments in the Republic several
months before the outbreak of the second civil war.
The author begins his reflections by estimating the trustworthiness of Aulus Hirtius’
information, included in the discussed fragment of his report. He strives then to recognise the
nature of the tendencies appearing in it, and, above all, to establish whether its tendentiousness
undermines the truthfulness of the facts provided by it.
Having established the reality and authenticity of the events described by Hirtius, the author
embarks on the task of dating them. This is achieved by means of comparing various facts
provided by Hirtius between one another, and also with the facts included in Cicero’s
correspondence, in the work by Appian of Alexandria, and, to a lesser degree, in the reports by
other ancient authors.
As a result, the conclusion is reached that the examined fragment of the Bellum Gallicum is
composed of two largely different parts:
The first (Bell. Gall. VIII. 52. 4), which treats of the proposition, insisted upon by Curio, of
resolving the conflict between Caesar and Pompey, may be connected with the Senate debates that
took place between March 1 through December 9, 50 B.C., as it is in that period that tribune
of the people canvassed for the acceptance of his motion.
The other (Bell. Gall. VIII. 52. 5), informing about the attempt by Curio to submit his
proposal to voting, about the intervention of the consuls, and the walkout of the senators,
should be connected only with the debate on March 1, 50 B.C., devoted exclusively to the
resolution of the conflict between Pompey and Caesar.|