Talk:Sack of Rome (410)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the WikiProject for Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors who write Wikipedia's Classics articles. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Rome (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rome, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the city of Rome and ancient Roman history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject History (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject icon A version of this article was copyedited by Pax85, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 2 March 2011. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.
 

End of empire[edit]

The article says that the 410 sack of Rome is considered to be the end of the western Roman Empire, but the great majority of historians believe the year 476 marked its end with the deposing of Romulus Augustulus.

Uncertain of categorization[edit]

I'm not sure this should be categorized as a battle, since no actual fighting took place... Abou 02:35, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Not Accurate[edit]

Page needs alot of work. I will do some tonight. Cheers, MedievalScholar 19:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Still could use more information, I will post more as I collect more sources. Thanks to those who worked on the article before me! TonyMcGuire (talk) 18:30, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Citations are a mess[edit]

I just added a citation for one of the unverified claims made in the article. Don't have time now to add any more but hopefully others will... Quadrifoglio (talk) 17:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Which kind of pepper?[edit]

Do sources state whether Alaric demanded black pepper or long pepper? It seems that both were imported into Europe. Badagnani (talk) 06:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

"Third siege and sack" section needs major work[edit]

The section "Third siege and sack" has some major issues.

First of all, the line "This was the first time the city had been sacked in 800 years, and its citizens were devastated." appears to contradict Sack of Rome (387 BC). If for some reason the 387 one is somehow not considered a proper "sack", this needs to be elaborated. Otherwise, this line needs to be removed as it is false.

Reply: Bearing in mind that the Gauls sacked the city in 387 BC, this seems broadly accurate - the gap was 723 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.73.85.98 (talk) 15:15, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Secondly, this line struck me: "On August 24, 410, slaves opened Rome's Salarian Gate and the Visigoths poured in and looted for three days." This one line says a lot about Roman society of the time. In many cases in the ancient world, where there was an institutionalized slave class, they mostly (with the occasional revolt) accepted their place, especially if there was a common outside enemy, and so society continued to function. Now we have slaves opening the gates of Rome to allow the enemy to pour in and rape and burn and pillage and loot? That one sentence makes it clear that Roman civilization had decayed to the point where a substantial subsection of the population hated their whole country. This REALLY needs to be elaborated, simply because it is so interesting. To leave it an almost casual comment as it is in the article is damn-near criminal to any readers who happen to be interested in the evolution of human society. Mbarbier (talk) 15:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Not violent because of religion? POV[edit]

Article-quote: "Because the barbarians had converted to the Christian sect Arianism, it was not a particularly violent looting with relatively little rape, murder and damage to buildings". End quote. This needs clarification. The phrase seems to suggest that the reason to why the looting was not severe, was because the "barbarians" was Christian. That is hardly very NPOV. --85.226.41.82 (talk) 14:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Accuracy of date[edit]

August 24th Gregorian reckoning, which was not used at the time? Julian reckoning? How is the date known? Was it originally given as anno Domini or as anno Urbis conditae? --209.201.114.50 (talk) 01:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


1600 years gone by[edit]

Just for curiosity, the (western) roman empire ended 1600 years ago, made just few days ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.102.38.146 (talk) 11:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

No it didn't, the visigoths never conquered the western roman empire. we will have to wait until 2076 for the 1600th anniversary of the extinction of the western roman empire.--99.141.195.122 (talk) 19:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Backman citation appears incorrect[edit]

In Backman, Clifford R. (2009), The worlds of medieval Europe (2 ed.), Oxford University Press, p. 47 (footnote), ISBN 9780195335279 the quotation of Jerome appears to be wrong. This quote is currently in the lead text and I have changed it based on a direct quotation from Jerome's letter as repeated in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VI/The Letters of St. Jerome/Letter 127 paragraph 12. If anyone would care to verify Backman's form of the quotation I would be happy to see this changed to a different quote from Jerome. (talk) 17:00, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Wrong link to "second battle of Adrianople" in the 1700s[edit]

Deleted the link. --131.111.233.196 (talk) 17:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Pejoratives[edit]

Its seems terribly unencyclopedic to use the pejorative term "barbarians" to refer to those that sacked Rome. Murderbike (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC)