A widely discussed issue in the study of Caesar is that of the literary genre commentarius. This has been a topic of discussion since A. Klotz's studies on Caesar, revolving around two questions: 1. How is the term commentarius to be interpreted; what meaning did Caesar associate with this word when he titled his writings as such? 2. To what extent did Caesar adhere to the conventions of the genre he chose, and to what extent did he expand or break them? Both questions can only be answered hypothetically due to the significant lack of material other than Caesar's BG and BC. However, the second question raises a problem that remains relevant even if it is not framed in terms of genre: the issue of stylistic differences in Caesar's commentaries. Whether the literary form of the commentarii is gradually neglected and Caesar inadvertently becomes a narrative historian, or.