������

This dissertation examines the poignancy of civil war for Rome in the late Republican through early Imperial period as focalized through portrayals of Julius Caesar.  Through a comparative examination of qualities and catchwords found in Caesar’s self-portrait in the Bellum Civile as treated by Sallust’s Bellum Catilinae, Velleius Paterculus’ Historiae, and Lucan’s Pharsalia, I contend that each portrayal of Caesar should be read against Caesar’s own account of civil war.  By reading each author’s fashioning of Caesar against Caesar’s own treatment one finds shifts in issues and traits accord to their relevance to an author’s own times, aims, and view of the relationship between Republic and Principate.  Furthermore, whether an author portrays Caesar in a positive or negative light is likely a consequence of his view of the current “Caesar” (i.e., Octavian, Tiberius, or Nero).