[497] De Bello Gallico, VII. 52.
[498] “In the war of the Gauls, Caius Julius Cæsar was surprised by an enemy, who carried him off, armed as he was, on his horse, when another Gaul, who recognized Cæsar, called out, intending to insult him, “Cæcos, Cæsar!” which in the Gaulish language signifies, let him go, set him loose; and so he escaped. Cæsar says so himself, in his Ephemerides, in the passage where he speaks of his good fortune.” (Servius Maurus Honoratus, a grammarian of the fifth century, in his commentary on the 11th book of the Æneid, line 743, II. p. 48, edit. Albert Lion.)
The manuscripts of Servius do not all present the same reading. The following are some of the principal variations: Cecos, Cæsar; Cæcos ac Cæsar; and Cæsar, Cesar.
[499] Plutarch, Cæsar, 29.
[500] There has always been a ford at Bourbon-Lancy.
[501] De Bello Gallico, VII. 56.
[502] A sling-ball of lead has been found at Sens, on which are stamped in relief the words “T. Labienus.” This ball forms part of the collection of the Museum of Saint-Germain.
[503] MM. de Saulcy and J. Quicherat have already demonstrated in a conclusive manner that Labienus must have followed the left bank of the Yonne, after leaving Sens, and that he crossed over to the right bank of the Seine at Melun. In fact, Labienus, on the right bank, found himself, as Cæsar says, threatened on one side by the Bellovaci, on the other by the army of Camulogenus (VII. 59). On the opposite bank, on the contrary, Labienus would not have been placed between the two, since he would have had Camulogenus in front, and, at a greater distance, the Bellovaci coming from the north.
“A very large river kept the legions separated from their reserve and their baggage.” This very great river cannot be the Marne, which Cæsar does not even mention in the whole course of this campaign: it was evidently the Seine, which Labienus has crossed once only, at Melodunum (Melun); by crossing over to the right bank, he was separated from his base of operations, which was at Sens. On the contrary hypothesis, no river would have separated Labienus from his line of retreat; unless we admit, with Dulaure and several others, the identity of Agedincum with Provius, which is no longer possible.
The Captain of the Staff Rouby has made investigations on the spot, which prove that from Sens the most ancient ways leading to Paris passed on the left bank of the Yonne and of the Seine. Moreover, the discoveries of M. Carré have made us acquainted with the exact direction followed by the Roman road after quitting Sens towards Paris; it was entirely on the left bank of the Yonne. If Cæsar’s lieutenant had followed the right bank of the Yonne, he would, the day after his departure, have been arrested by the course of the Seine, and would have fallen in with the Gaulish town of Condate, built in the very angle of the two streams, in the midst of perhaps impassable marshes. If only a few thousand Gauls had occupied the heights which played so important a part in the campaign of 1814, Labienus, compelled to seek for a place to cross higher up the stream, would have been diverted considerably from his aim.