Talk:Sack of Rome (455)

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Duncanrmi in topic just for the sake of readability

Second sack of Rome? edit

The article starts by saying, "The sack of 455 was the second of three sacks of Rome" - wasn't it the third - 1. 390 BC by Brennus, 2. 410, 3. 455? Maybe it was meant in more "modern" times, whereas the Brennus one was semi-mythical? Cornelius (talk) 03:41, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

According to Sack_of_Rome (disambiguation) it was third of six.

just for the sake of readability edit

can we stick to one version of geiseric's name, whichever is the preferred?

duncanrmi (talk) 04:15, 27 June 2018 (UTC)Reply