#only figured out there was also paraphrasing by comparing against a more strict translation

[formicarum-rex]

World history prof sent us a chapter from a public domain "translation" of Caesar and asked us to analyze "Caesar's writing." But the copy they sent was actually a mix of close word-for-word translation, a bit of a paraphrasing, and the translator's own comments ("Caesar doesn't tell us where this camp was but it was probably in so-and-so," "this is among the most emotional Caesar's writing is in his whole account," etc). Which was frustrating, because Caesar himself speaks in the third person, and there's no demarcation between where these comments begin or end, and it leads one to doubt every little comment.

I went back to the introduction and the author/translator isn't claiming to do a proper translation, just render in English the story of his campaign. Which is fair! But it was a weird read going into it expecting pure Conquest of Gaul, like Caesar Would Not Say That About Himself.