Abstract
AbstractThe article challenges the widespread view that the Gallic ransom mentioned in a number of sources for the events traditionally known as the Sack of Rome in 390BCshould be understood as evidence that the Gauls did not take Rome in its entirety. The article shows in contrast that, whatever happened in the night when the geese suffered from insomnia on the Capitoline Hill, a ransom is a perfectly suitable element in a story of a Gallic take-over of Rome—hill and all; and that it cannot be taken as evidence that an alternative narrative to the successful defence of the Capitoline Hill never existed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
