# Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres



## showcase

What does _Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres _mean? 
Thanks.


----------



## Leopold

All the Gaul is divided in three parts.

L.


----------



## Kevin Beach

These are the opening words of Julius Caesar's "Gallic Wars, Book 1".

The standard BrE translation of the passage is "The whole of Gaul is divided into three parts".


----------



## Joca

Kevin Beach said:


> These are the opening words of Julius Caesar's "Gallic Wars, Book 1".
> 
> The standard BrE translation of the passage is "The whole of Gaul is divided into three parts".


 
Well, I was wondering if the right traduction wouldn't rather be...

The whole of Gaul *was* divided into 3 parts.


----------



## modus.irrealis

I think in theory it could be translated that way, but in context it seems to make more sense as "is divided" since Caesar is simply describing Gaul rather than narrating any events.


----------



## roymail

It's called in French "un parfait résultatif".


----------



## berndf

Joca said:


> Well, I was wondering if the right traduction wouldn't rather be...
> 
> The whole of Gaul *was* divided into 3 parts.


 
I am not sure I understand Why you want to do that? Wouldn't _The whole of Gaul *was* divided into 3 parts_ rather be _Gallia *erat* omnis divisa in partes tres?_


----------



## Joca

berndf said:


> I am not sure I understand Why you want to do that? Wouldn't _The whole of Gaul *was* divided into 3 parts_ rather be _Gallia *erat* omnis divisa in partes tres?_


 
As far as I know, _Gallia erat ... divisa _would be the same as _Gaul had been divided._


----------



## berndf

I thought word order mattered for once here: passive pluperfect would be _divisa erat_. In the above sentence, I would understand _divisa_ as an adjective. But maybe I am wrong.


----------



## modus.irrealis

I don't think word order distinguishes between the two. For example, from later on in Caesar:

_Ea res est Helvetiis per indicium enuntiata_.
The design was revealed to the Helvetii by informers.

But just so I can make sure I'm clear on this, because English _be_ + past participle is also ambiguous, we have the following equivalences, right? (I included the hopefully correct German because I believe it distinguishes everything).

is divided = est divisus = ist geteilet
was divided = est divisus = ist geteilet worden
was divided = erat divisus = war geteilet
had been divided = erat divisus = war geteilet worden

And come to think of it, there's also the following, right?

is (being) divided = dividitur = wird geteilet
was (being) divided = dividebatur = ward geteilet


----------



## berndf

modus.irrealis said:


> I don't think word order distinguishes between the two. For example, from later on in Caesar:
> 
> _Ea res est Helvetiis per indicium enuntiata_.
> The design was revealed to the Helvetii by informers.


 
Accepted. This is certainly a passive perfect. 

The difference is than only context. In the sentence _Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres _it is the state of being divided which matters and not the act of dividing. Therefore _divisa_ is an adjective.


----------



## Kevin Beach

I bet Caesar hadn't got a clue whether it was an adjective, a participle or anything else!


----------



## berndf

Kevin Beach said:


> I bet Caesar hadn't got a clue whether it was an adjective, a participle or anything else!


You bet he had thorough training in rhetoric which certainly included grammar und lots of it.


----------



## MrsBeeton

I suppose you are all quoting this correctly, but my recollection of this line is "Gallia in tres partes divisa est".  Have I been wrong all these years?  It has to mean "Gaul is divided into three parts" because when Caesar wrote it, it was.


----------



## Cagey

MrsBeeton said:


> I suppose you are all quoting this correctly, but my recollection of this line is "Gallia in tres partes divisa est".  Have I been wrong all these years?  It has to mean "Gaul is divided into three parts" because when Caesar wrote it, it was.



As Kevin Beach says in post #3, the thread title is the opening of the first book of Caesar's _Gallic War.  __Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, _quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur.​The version you remember is a more conventional Latin word order, but the flexibility of Latin has allowed Caesar to put place the relative ("of which ....) immediately after its antecedent: _three parts_."_The whole of Gaul is divided_ _into three parts_, of which the Belgae inhabit one, another, the Aquitani, and the third, those who are called 'Celts' in their own tongue, 'Gauls' in ours." ​The discussion above agrees with you that it must be "_is_ divided."  They also agree that accurate translation must involve knowledge of the historical context: syntax alone would allow it to be translated as "was divided/ has been divided" as well as "is divided".


----------



## roymail

roymail said:


> It's called in French "un parfait résultatif".


It means that the perfect can express the result, in the present, of an action or an event of the past.
Gaul was divided and is still divided now (when Caesar wrote it).
The present _incolunt _shows that it is so here.

I hope my English is clear enough


----------



## Electa55

MrsBeeton said:


> I suppose you are all quoting this correctly, but my recollection of this line is "Gallia in tres partes divisa est".  Have I been wrong all these years?  It has to mean "Gaul is divided into three parts" because when Caesar wrote it, it was.


Yes, that's the wording I remember, too. So have we both been wrong all these years? 50 years, in my case.


----------



## Penyafort

I don't quite get why some would hesitate, it's present tense and that is what we see in translations.

My understanding is that they were Celts (Gauls), Basques (Aquitanians) and people from the Northwestblock or Belgians. But while the tense is rather clear, the peoples are still indeed a matter of debate.


----------



## A User

De bello gallico - liber I

Gallia *est* omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam *incolunt* Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli *appellantur*. Hi omnes lingua, institutis, legibus inter se *differunt*. Gallos ab Aquitanis Garumna flumen, a Belgis Matrona et Sequana *dividit*...

All verbs are in present tense. Can you read *divisa est *(passive perfect) with that word order? No, you can't.


----------

