1-7. These lines represent the introduction to Lucan's poem. Here, the author makes his view of the civil wars plain: "legality conferred on crime" (2); "a conflict waged with all the forces of the shaken world for universal guilt" (5-6). This, then, is Lucan's main theme: the heedless and unwarranted destruction of the civil wars in the late Roman Republic. Indeed, he states that these wars were "worse than civil wars" (1)—presumably because Pompey and Caesar were related by marriage.
8-32. In this passage, Lucan declares that the wars were wasteful, not because they resulted in countless deaths and destruction, but because they prevented the Romans from devoting their attention and efforts toward foreign conquest and, subsequently, from conquering the world. This is what he means when he states that they were "wars which would bring no triumphs" (12). A "triumph," or an elaborate military parade in Rome, could be held only in honor of a victory over a foreign people.
33-45. Ironically, though, Lucan now seems to suggest that it was all worthwhile, since the wars ultimately paved the way "for Nero's coming" (34). On the other hand, one could argue that the many references to battles and sieges in this passage actually reflect a discreet sense of disdain for the wars and their outcome.
45-66. Aside from the poet's excessive praise for Nero, there is very little in this passage that is noteworthy. Some critics have suggested that the praise is sarcastic, and, when viewed within the context of the poem as a whole, this argument certainly seems justified. I am inclined to agree with J. R. Jenkinson (8-9), however, who maintains that the praise is sincere for two reasons: 1) the first three books of the Pharsalia were probably written before Lucan's break with Nero (That is, before he had a reason to mock the emperor.), and 2) it is much more likely that, in these lines at least, Lucan is imitating the poet Vergil, who was already an icon in the epic tradition. In keeping with that tradition, Lucan invokes the emperor, whom he deifies, as his muse (63-66).
67-120. According to Lucan, the principal cause of the civil wars was "the envious chain of destiny" (70), or, rather, fate. To put it simply, Rome became too great and too powerful for her own good. To emphasize the enormity of the destruction of the wars, Lucan also compares them to an apocalypse: "So, when the final hour brings to an end the long ages of the universe, its structure dissolved, reverting to primeval chaos, then fiery stars will plunge into the sea, the earth will be unwilling to stretch flat her shores and will shake the water off, Phoebe will confront her brother and for herself demand the day, resentful of driving her chariot along its slanting orbit, and the whole discordant mechanism of universe torn apart will disrupt its own laws" (72-80). Finally, it is interesting that Lucan chooses to portray Crassus as a benevolent figure—the voice of moderation and peace between Pompey and Julius Caesar. As a willing participant in the First Triumvirate, Crassus bears as much guilt for the future upheavals as the other two conspirators. Lucan's idealized view of him, then, may be due to the fact that he was killed first (53 B.C.) and, therefore, did not commit as many crimes as the others.
120-157. In this passage, Lucan contrasts the characters of Pompey and Caesar. While he says that it is impossible to determine who was right and who was wrong, he does state that the two adversaries were not evenly matched. Pompey, who was six years older than Caesar, had become accustomed to the flaccid routine of civil life and had "unlearnt the general's part" (131). Now, he had come to rely solely upon popular support (He built Rome's first stone theater in 55 B.C.) and the fame of his former achievements. Caesar, on the other hand, was much more ambitious. On the whole, one gets the feeling that Lucan is slightly less sympathetic toward Caesar and his "rejoicing to create his path by destruction" (150).
158-182. As in lines 67-120, Lucan draws a connection between the early expansion of Rome during the Republic and the troubles that were soon to follow: "For when Rome had subdued the world and Fortune introduced excessive wealth, when morals gave way before prosperity, when booty and the plunder from the enemy urged luxurious life, then there was no limit to gold and houses, and hunger spurned the tables of former times; clothes hardly decent for young wives to wear were seized upon by men; warrior-bearing poverty they shun, and from all the world import the bane of every nation" (160-167). Additionally, however, this passage contains a reference to the latifundias, or the large, landed estates that began to appear in the Italian peninsula after 146 B.C. Here, Lucan mentions one of the many problems associated with the latifundia—the fact that it was invariably worked by "unknown tenant-farmers" (168) or slaves. The poet's choice of words suggests that he believed this development had an adverse effect upon the Romans' cultural heritage.
183-227. In January, 49 B.C., Caesar crossed the Rubicon River with his legions. Since this was a violation of Roman law, he had good reason to hesitate: "Then trembling struck the leader's limbs, his hair grew stiff, and weakness checked his progress, holding his feet at the river's edge" (192-194). The deployment of cavalry to reduce the force of the river's current is a realistic action which lends credibility to the account, and, again, Lucan's view of Caesar, who chose to "'abandon peace'" (225) and who said "'farewell to treaties'" (226) is rather unfavorable.
228-261. One wonders about Lucan's statement that, on the first day of Caesar's invasion, "clouds confined the mournful light, perhaps by wish of the gods" (234-235). It is unlikely that this detail is based upon an eye-witness account, and, therefore, it is suggested here that Lucan is merely embellishing the truth in order to augment the gloomy atmosphere surrounding Caesar's actions. On the other hand, Lucan's comment that Caesar could be seen "towering among his troops" (246) is probably an allusion to the general's being mounted on horseback. Furthermore, modern historians are usually struck by the poet's crude understanding of "military geography" in this passage. The fact that Ariminum lay on a direct route to Rome automatically meant that it would be the unfortunate way station for many of Rome's enemies (the Gauls, Hannibal, Caesar, etc., etc.).
261-295. In these lines, Lucan notes that, while Caesar was already "keen for war" (293), he nevertheless managed to rationalize his actions with the help of the Fates and an exiled tribune named Curio. It was Curio who informed Caesar that his son-in-law (i.e., Pompey) had determined to remove him from power. Thus, Caesar probably believed that he had no choice but to march on Rome. On a side note, Lucan also states that the senators bragged about the Gracchi's doom (267; see Appian, Civil Wars, I and Plutarch, Tiberius Gracchus and Gaius Gracchus).
296-351. It is at this point that Caesar makes his first great speech in the poem. Upon assembling his troops, he informs them that Pompey has just declared their general (i.e., Caesar) a traitor and an enemy of Rome. To further solicit their support, he suggests to his men that, after ten years of hard campaigning, they shall not receive compensation from Pompey's dilapidated government. Since no such claim has been made before in the poem, one must assume that this is entirely Caesar's invention. Finally, one should not fail to notice that it is Caesar (and not Lucan) who vilifies Pompey in this passage: "'Afraid that obscure old age will confine him in his weariness, impious battles he plans, accustomed to civil war, —Sulla's pupil, he surpasses his instructor in crime. . . . Magnus, grown accustomed to licking Sulla's sword, your thirst endures. Blood, once tasted, never lets the defiled throat return to gentle ways. What end will such long tyranny yet find? What limit is there to his crimes? Presumptuous man'" (324-334)!
352-391. Evidently, Caesar's speech had the desired effect. A centurion named Laelius immediately declares his steadfast devotion to Caesar and his willingness to embark upon civil war. Since no other reference to this character has yet been found, it is reasonable to assume that he is the fictitious, literary personification of the multitude of nameless, faceless legionnaires and their views. Still, Lucan is careful to note that at least part of the soldiers' loyalty was due to "their hideous love of the sword" (355) and "their terror of their leader" (356).
392-465. This passage is roughly analogous to the catalogue of ships in Book II of Homer's Iliad. By listing the many peoples from far-off lands who rejoice at the departure of Roman troops, Lucan gives some idea of the size of the force which was assembling under Caesar. More importantly, however, by focusing on the Gallic and not the Roman forces (as one would expect), Lucan implicitly identifies the Roman legions with the barbarians, and, in so doing, he underscores the fact that Caesar, like a foreign enemy, is marching on Rome (Batinski, 19). This notion is reinforced by the poet, who expresses regret at Caesar's "leaving the world [i.e., Roman territory] exposed to foreign nations" (465).
466-486. As Caesar's great host moves toward Rome, his impending invasion gives rise to fear and, by extension, rumors (e.g., that his legions are accompanied by hordes of Germanic barbarians).
486-522. Encouraged by the senators, the people panic and abandon Rome: "Now none could be detained by his father weak with age, nor a husband by his wife's laments, nor by ancestral Gods for long enough to utter prayers for preservation so uncertain; none lingered on the threshold and then left, after looking his fill maybe for the last time on beloved Rome: the multitude raced on, unstoppable" (504-509). Since Caesar's army has not yet arrived, it is difficult to imagine (as Lucan suggests) that the entire city was evacuated. Even when the Gauls sacked Rome in ca. 386 B.C., there were still some Romans who had been left behind in the city (see Livy, V.40-41).
522-583. This is another passage filled with apocalyptic imagery: "Dark nights witnessed unfamiliar stars" (526); "tongues of animals took readily to human sounds" (561); "people's offspring were unnatural in shape of limb and number" (562-563), and "Marius burst his tomb and raised his head by Anio's chill waters" (582-583). It is probably no coincidence that Marius and Sulla are mentioned in this passage. Both, of course, were principal instigators of an earlier civil war.
584-638. In times of crisis, it was customary to bring in a prophet. Since the art of divination was an Etruscan skill, it is also understandable that Lucan should mention an Etruscan prophet—Arruns. The scene that follows, one of the most graphic animal sacrifices ever recorded, is further evidence of Lucan's interest in the sensational.
639-672. Since Arruns' prophecies were ambiguous, Lucan now uses the astrologer Figulus for clarification. Figulus predicts "imminent destruction . . . for Rome and humankind" (644-645), but, in the same voice, he suggests that the Romans should be thankful for the war, because "the peace they long for brings a master" (670). In short, this passage succinctly depicts the Romans' predicament: bloody civil war or quiet submission.
673-695. Finally, a woman runs screaming through the city (which, according to Lucan, had already been abandoned; 486-522), foretelling the Romans' fate. Her outburst serves two purposes: 1) as the last of three consecutive prophecies, it emphasizes the desperate situation of the Roman people, and 2) if one reads carefully, he or she will notice that the woman's predictions contain definite allusions to several major events in the upcoming wars. The "'unsightly headless corpse'" (686) in Egypt, for example, is Pompey, and the "'impious war waged in the Senate's midst'" (691) is a scornful reference to Caesar's assassination in 44 B.C.