text: On 22 June, the "National Post" reported that the O'Toole campaign received a confession letter from MP staff member implicating Lall and describing him as a "senior regional adviser to the Peter MacKay campaign." Later in the day, the RCMP released a statement saying they have begun an investigation into O'Toole's allegations against the MacKay campaign, while Lall stated that he is "aggressively pursuing" legal action against the O'Toole campaign. MacKay spokesperson Chisholm Pothier told CBC News Tuesday that the O'Toole team sent its confidential passwords and logins to more than 300 MPs and their political staff members — something Pothier said was done "negligently and with no reasonable expectation of privacy." In response, O'Toole campaign manager Fred DeLorey tweeted, "this is a willful attempt at deception. There is a big diff between sending invitees a code for specific meetings and someone breaking into the private admin and stealing all of the files. The former is standard operations, the latter is a crime. That is what is being investigated."


title: 2020 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election

text: On 24 June, an ex-staff member to MP Greg McLean admitted to trying to leak Erin O'Toole's confidential video records, but says the MacKay campaign turned him down, according to Toronto Star's Alex Boutilier and Kieran Leavitt. MP McLean later tweeted, "sadly, this is completely inconsistent with what was told to me and senior O'Toole officials by this young man. I know not to trust this. The police investigation will determine the truth" Erin O'Toole Campaign staff member Anthony Koch also tweeted, "how do you explain the Calgary and midtown Toronto IP addresses that accessed the zoom admin account illegally multiple times over the course of a week and downloaded over 140 unique videos?"


text: The fifth debate was turned into a fireside chat with the remaining two candidates after Leslyn Lewis released a statement sending her regrets due to a medical issue. Soon after Peter MacKay chose to not attend the debate.


text: On 11 January 2020, the party's Leadership Election Organizing Committee released the Rules and Procedures for the 2020 Leadership document. It confirmed the vote would be held under instant-runoff voting, open to those who are members of the Conservative Party of Canada as of 17 April. (This date was later pushed back to 15 May.) To appear on the ballot, a member must apply to the Leadership Candidate Nomination Committee between 13 January and 27 February, with 1,000 signatures of endorsement from party members (which must span at least 30 Electoral Districts in 7 provinces), a $25,000 installment of the registration fee and a completed 42-page Leadership Contestant Questionnaire, which requires them to declare they accept "the policies, principles, goals and objectives" of the Conservative Party. If approved by the Committees, the applicant has until 25 March to provide the remainder of the 3,000 endorsement signatures and $200,000 registration fee. In addition a $100,000 Compliance Deposit is required prior to 25 March but is returned upon completing required financial filings and adhering to Rules and Procedures document. As in the 2017 leadership election, each electoral district is given 100 points which are distributed according to weight of a candidate's vote in that electoral district, with the first candidate receiving 16,901 points wins the leadership race.


text: Verified candidates are authorized contestants that have paid the full $200,000 registration fee, the entire $100,000 compliance deposit, and submitted all 3,000 required signatures of endorsement by 25 March 2020. Verified candidates have secured their name on the leadership ballot.


text: Leslyn Lewis, 49, is a Toronto lawyer and the former CPC candidate for Scarborough—Rouge Park, Ontario in the 2015 election. Leslyn Lewis holds a bachelor's degree from University of Toronto, two master's degrees, a law degree from Osgoode Hall Law School and a PhD in International Law. Leslyn Lewis is also a Vice Chair of the Ontario Trillium Foundation and Chair of the Partnership Committee.


text: Peter MacKay, , was the MP for Central Nova (2004–2015), and for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough (1997–2004). He was Minister of Justice and Attorney General (2013–2015), Minister of National Defence (2007–2013), Minister of Foreign Affairs (2006–2007), Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada (2004–2015). He was the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada (2003) at the time of the merger. Prior to entering politics, Peter MacKay worked as a Crown Attorney.


text: Erin O'Toole, , is the MP for Durham (2012–present), the Shadow Minister of Foreign Affairs (2017–present), and the former Shadow Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (2015–2016) and Minister of Veterans Affairs (2015). He placed third in the 2017 Conservative leadership election. Prior to entering politics, Erin O'Toole served in the Royal Canadian Air Force, where he held the rank of Captain, and was a lawyer after completing military service.


text: Derek Sloan, , is the MP for Hastings—Lennox and Addington (2019–present). Prior to entering politics, Derek Sloan worked as a lawyer in private practice.


text: Approved applicants who failed to pass the second qualification stage that required 2,000 signatures and the submission of the full $100,000 compliance fee and at least $50,000 of the entrance fee by 25 March 2020 or who disqualified between Stage 1 and Stage 2.


text: Marilyn Gladu, 57, is the MP for Sarnia—Lambton (2015–present), and was the Shadow Minister of Health (2017–2020), Shadow Minister of Science (2015–2017). Prior to entering politics, she was an engineer for Dow Chemical.


text: Rudy Husny is Director of Stakeholder Relations in the Office of the Leader of the Official Opposition and candidate in Outremont in 2011 and 2015.


text: Jim Karahalios is a corporate lawyer and founder of activist groups "Axe The Carbon Tax" and "Take Back Our PC Party". He sued the Ontario PC party after narrowly losing an election in November 2018 for party president, but the case has not yet been tried. He is accusing the Ontario PC party of ballot stuffing in that election.


text: Rick Peterson, , is a venture capitalist, party fundraiser, principal of Peterson Capital, and a former candidate for leadership of the British Columbia Conservative Party. He was a member of the Progressive Conservatives at the time of the merger. He ran and placed 12th in the 2017 Conservative leadership election.


text: Declared candidates who failed to pass the first qualification stage by obtaining at least 1,000 signatures, submit at least $25,000 of the entrance fee by 27 February 2020 and/or pass the vetting process.


text: Richard Décarie, , was the Deputy Chief of Staff to then-Opposition Leader Stephen Harper and Chief of Staff & Senior Advisor to then-Premier Jean Charest.


text: Bobby Singh is a Toronto businessman and the former CPC candidate for Scarborough—Rouge Park, Ontario in the 2019 election. Endorsed Peter MacKay.


text: Irvin Studin is a senior fellow at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, a Rhodes Scholar, former professional soccer player with the Toronto Lynx, and served in the Privy Council Office between 2002 and 2006.


text: CEO and chair of employment firm MaxSys Staffing and Consulting (1993–present), deputy chief of staff to Paul Dick (1993), Progressive Conservative candidate for Lanark-Carleton in 2000.


text: Aron Seal, a former policy advisor to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Director of Policy for Tony Clement and Jim Flaherty.


text: Withdrew saying that new signature requirements and deadlines were "designed to keep outsider candidates out". Endorsed Rudy Husny.


text: During the first quarter Marilyn Gladu raised $94,734, Rick Peterson raised $35,598 and Rudy Husny raised $28,941. They withdrew from the leadership race during the first quarter. Jim Karahalios raised $294,522 from 1,700 donors, but was disqualified.


text: Some numbers for the second quarter (April to the end of June 2020) were obtained by The Globe and Mail and confirmed with the campaigns. The Conservative Party has not confirmed any numbers for the second quarter. Finalized numbers must be submitted to Elections Canada at the end of July and should be available some time after.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The San Francisco Chronicle is a newspaper serving primarily the San Francisco Bay Area of Northern California. It was founded in 1865 as "The Daily Dramatic Chronicle" by teenage brothers Charles de Young and Michael H. de Young. The paper is owned by the Hearst Corporation, which bought it from the de Young family in 2000. It is the only major daily paper covering the city and county of San Francisco.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The paper benefited from the growth of San Francisco and had the largest newspaper circulation on the West Coast of the United States by 1880. Like other newspapers, it experienced a rapid fall in circulation in the early 21st century and was ranked 18th nationally by circulation in the first quarter of 2021.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: In 1994, the newspaper launched the SFGATE website, with a soft launch in March and official launch November 3, 1994, including both content from the newspaper and other sources. "The Gate" as it was known at launch was the first large market newspaper website in the world, co-founded by Allen Weiner and John Coate. It went on to staff up with its own columnists and reporters, and even won a Pulitzer Prize for Mark Fiore's political cartoons.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: In 2013, the newspaper launched its own namesake website, SFChronicle.com, and began the separation of SFGATE and the "Chronicle" brands, which today are two separately run entities.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The "Chronicle" was founded by brothers Charles and M. H. de Young in 1865 as "The Daily Dramatic Chronicle", funded by a borrowed $20 gold piece. Their brother Gustavus was named with Charles on the masthead. Within 10 years, it had the largest circulation of any newspaper west of the Mississippi River. The paper's first office was in a building at the corner of Bush and Kearney Streets. The brothers then commissioned a building from Burnham and Root at 690 Market Street at the corner of Third and Kearney Streets to be their new headquarters, in what became known as Newspaper Row. The new building, San Francisco's first skyscraper, was completed in 1889. It was damaged in the 1906 earthquake, but it was rebuilt under the direction of William Polk, Burnham's associate in San Francisco. That building, known as the "Old "Chronicle" Building" or the "DeYoung Building", still stands and was restored in 2007. It is a historic landmark and is the location of the Ritz-Carlton Club and Residences.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: In 1924, the "Chronicle" commissioned a new headquarters at 901 Mission Street on the corner of 5th Street in what is now the South of Market (SoMa) neighborhood of San Francisco. It was designed by Charles Peter Weeks and William Peyton Day in the Gothic Revival architecture style, but most of the Gothic Revival detailing was removed in 1968 when the building was re-clad with stucco. This building remains the "Chronicle"s headquarters in 2017, although other concerns are located there as well.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: Between World War II and 1971, new editor Scott Newhall took a bold and somewhat provocative approach to news presentation. Newhall's "Chronicle" included investigative reporting by such journalists as Pierre Salinger, who later played a prominent role in national politics, and Paul Avery, the staffer who pursued the trail of the self-named "Zodiac Killer", who sent a cryptogram in three sections in letters to the "Chronicle" and two other papers during his murder spree in the late 1960s. It also featured such colorful columnists as Pauline Phillips, who wrote under the name "Dear Abby," "Count Marco" (Marc Spinelli), Stanton Delaplane, Terence O'Flaherty, Lucius Beebe, Art Hoppe, Charles McCabe, and Herb Caen.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The newspaper grew in circulation to become the city's largest, overtaking the rival "San Francisco Examiner". The demise of other San Francisco dailies through the late 1950s and early 1960s left the "Examiner" and the "Chronicle" to battle for circulation and readership superiority.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The competition between the "Chronicle" and "Examiner" took a financial toll on both papers until the summer of 1965, when a merger of sorts created a Joint Operating Agreement under which the "Chronicle" became the city's sole morning daily while the "Examiner" changed to afternoon publication (which ultimately led to a declining readership).


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The newspapers were officially owned by the San Francisco Newspaper Agency, which managed sales and distribution for both newspapers and was charged with ensuring that one newspaper's circulation did not grow at the expense of the other. Revenue was split equally, which led to a situation widely understood to benefit the "Examiner", since the "Chronicle", which had a circulation four times larger than its rival, subsidized the afternoon newspaper.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The two newspapers produced a joint Sunday edition, with the "Examiner" publishing the news sections and the Sunday magazine, and the "Chronicle" responsible for the tabloid-sized entertainment section and the book review. From 1965 on the two papers shared a single classified-advertising operation. This arrangement stayed in place until the Hearst Corporation took full control of the "Chronicle" in 2000.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: Beginning in the early 1990s, the "Chronicle" began to face competition beyond the borders of San Francisco. The newspaper had long enjoyed a wide reach as the de facto "newspaper of record" in Northern California, with distribution along the Central Coast, the Central Valley, and even as far as Honolulu, Hawaii. There was little competition in the Bay Area suburbs and other areas that the newspaper served, but as Knight-Ridder consolidated the "Mercury News" in 1975; purchased the "Contra Costa Times" (now "East Bay Times") in 1995; and as the Denver-based Media News Group made a rapid purchase of the remaining newspapers on the East Bay by 1985, the "Chronicle" realized it had to step up its suburban coverage.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The "Chronicle" launched five zoned sections to appear in the Friday edition of the paper. The sections covered San Francisco and four different suburban areas. They each featured a unique columnist, enterprise pieces, and local news specific to the community. The newspaper added 40 full-time staff positions to work in the suburban bureaus. Despite the push to focus on suburban coverage, the "Chronicle" was hamstrung by the Sunday edition, which, being produced by the San Francisco-centric "un-"Chronicle"" "Examiner", had none of the focus on the suburban communities that the "Chronicle" was striving to cultivate.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The de Young family controlled the paper, via the Chronicle Publishing Company, until July 27, 2000, when it was sold to Hearst Communications, Inc., which owned the "Examiner". Following the sale, the Hearst Corporation transferred the "Examiner" to the Fang family, publisher of the "San Francisco Independent" and "AsianWeek", along with a $66-million subsidy. Under the new owners, the "Examiner" became a free tabloid, leaving the "Chronicle" as the only daily broadsheet newspaper in San Francisco.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: In 1949, the de Young family founded KRON-TV (Channel 4), the Bay Area's third television station. Until the mid-1960s, the station (along with KRON-FM), operated from the basement of the "Chronicle" Building, on Mission Street. KRON moved to studios at 1001 Van Ness Avenue (on the former site of St. Mary's Cathedral, which burned down in 1962). KRON was sold to Young Broadcasting in 2000 and, after years of being San Francisco's NBC affiliate, became an independent station on January 1, 2002, when NBC—tired of Chronicle's repeated refusal to sell KRON to the network and, later, Young's asking price for the station being too high—purchased KNTV in San Jose from Granite Broadcasting Corporation for $230 million.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: Since the Hearst Corporation took ownership in 2000 the "Chronicle" has made periodic changes to its organization and design, but on February 1, 2009, as the newspaper began its 145th year of publication, the "Chronicle" Sunday edition introduced a redesigned paper featuring a modified logo, new section, and page organization, new features, bolder, colored section-front banners and new headline and text typography. The frequent bold-faced, all-capital-letter headlines typical of the "Chronicle"s front page were eliminated. Editor Ward Bushee's note heralded the issue as the start of a "new era" for the "Chronicle".


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: On July 6, 2009, the paper unveiled some alterations to the new design that included yet newer section fronts and wider use of color photographs and graphics. In a special section publisher, Frank J. Vega described new, state-of-the-art printing operations enabling the production of what he termed "A Bolder, Brighter "Chronicle"." The newer look was accompanied by a reduction in size of the broadsheet. Such moves are similar to those made by other prominent American newspapers such as the "Chicago Tribune" and "Orlando Sentinel", which in 2008 unveiled radically new designs even as changing reader demographics and general economic conditions necessitated physical reductions of the newspapers.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: On November 9, 2009, the "Chronicle" became the first newspaper in the nation to print on high-quality glossy paper. The high-gloss paper is used for some section fronts and inside pages.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The current publisher of the "Chronicle" is Bill Nagel. Audrey Cooper was named editor-in-chief in January 2015 and was the first woman to hold the position. In June 2020 she left to be the editor-in-chief of WNYC, New York City. In August 2020, Hearst named Emilio Garcia-Ruiz the publication's editor in chief. Ann Killion has written for "Sports Illustrated". Carl Nolte is a journalist and columnist. Tom Stienstra is a columnist.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The newspaper's websites are at SFGate.com (free) and SFChronicle.com (premium). Originally "The Gate", SFGATE was one of the earliest major market newspaper websites to be launched, on November 3, 1994, at the time of The Newspaper Guild strike; the union published its own news website, "San Francisco Free Press", whose staff joined SFGATE when the strike ended. SFChronicle.com launched in 2013 and since 2019 has been run separately from SFGATE, whose staff are independent of the print newspaper. across all platforms the Chronicle has 34 million unique visitors each month, with SFGATE receiving 135.9 million pageviews and 25.1 million unique visitors per month and SFChronicle.com 31.3 million pageviews and 31.3 million unique visitors per month globally.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The paper has received the Pulitzer Prize on a number of occasions. Despite an illustrious and long history, the paper's news reportage is not as extensive as in the past. The current day "Chronicle" has followed the trend of other American newspapers, devoting increasing attention to local and regional news and cultural and entertainment criticism to the detriment of the paper's traditionally strong national and international reporting, though the paper does maintain a Washington, D.C., bureau. This increased focus on local news is a response to the competition from other Bay Area newspapers including the resurrected "San Francisco Examiner", the "Oakland Tribune", the "East Bay Times" (formerly "Contra Costa Times") and the "Mercury News".


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: Lance Williams and Mark Fainaru-Wada received the 2004 George Polk Award for Sports Reporting. Fainaru-Wada and Williams were recognized for their work on uncovering the BALCO scandal, which linked San Francisco Giants star Barry Bonds to performance-enhancing drugs. While the two above-named reporters broke the news, they are by no means the only sports writers of note at the "Chronicle". The "Chronicle"s sports section, edited by Al Saracevic and called "Sporting Green" as it is printed on green-tinted pages, is staffed by a dozen writers. The section's best-known writers are its columnists: Bruce Jenkins, Ann Killion, Scott Ostler, Saracevic and Tom Stienstra. Its baseball coverage is anchored by Henry Schulman, John Shea, and Susan Slusser, the first female president of the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA).


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: The "Chronicle's" Sunday arts and entertainment insert section is called "Datebook", and has for decades been printed on pink-tinted paper in a tabloid format. Movie reviews (for many years written by nationally known critic Mick LaSalle) feature a unique rating system: instead of stars or a "thumbs up" system, the "Chronicle" has for decades used a small cartoon icon, sitting in a movie theater seat, known as the "Little Man," explained in 2008 by the "Chicago Sun-Times" film critic Roger Ebert: "...the only rating system that makes any sense is the Little Man of the "San Francisco Chronicle", who is seen (1) jumping out of his seat and applauding wildly; (2) sitting up happily and applauding; (3) sitting attentively; (4) asleep in his seat; or (5) gone from his seat."


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: Another area of note is the architecture column by John King; the "Chronicle" is still one of the few American papers to present a regular column on architectural issues. The paper also has regular weekly sections devoted to Food & Home and Style.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: Circulation has fallen sharply since the dot-com boom peaked from around 1997 to 2001. The "Chronicle"s daily readership dropped by 16.6% between 2004 and 2005 to 400,906; The "Chronicle" fired one quarter of its newsroom staff in a cost-cutting move in May 2007. Newspaper executives pointed to growth of SFGate, the online website with 5.2 million unique visitors per month – fifth among U.S. newspaper websites in 2007.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: In February 2009, Hearst chief executive Frank A. Bennack Jr., and Hearst President Steven R. Swartz, announced that the "Chronicle" had lost money every year since 2001 and more than $50 million in 2008. Without major concessions from employees and other cuts, Hearst would put the papers up for sale and, if no buyer was found, shut the paper. San Francisco would have become the first major American city without a daily newspaper. The cuts were made.


title: San Francisco Chronicle

text: In spite of – or perhaps because of – the threats, the loss of readers and advertisers accelerated. On October 26, 2009, the Audit Bureau of Circulations reported that the "Chronicle" had suffered a 25.8% drop in circulation for the six-month period ending September 2009, to 251,782 subscribers, the largest percentage drop in circulation of any major newspaper in the United States. "Chronicle" publisher Frank Vega said the drop was expected as the paper moved to earn more from higher subscription fees from fewer readers. In May 2013, Vega retired and was replaced as publisher by former "Los Angeles Times" publisher Jeffrey M. Johnson. SFGate, the main digital portal for the "San Francisco Chronicle", registered 19 million unique visitors in January 2015, making it the seventh-ranked newspaper website in the United States.


title: BillyBoy*

text: BillyBoy* (born 10 March 1960) is an American artist, socialite and fashion designer who was a muse of Andy Warhol. Born in Vienna, he was adopted by a Russian couple who moved to New York City when he was four.


title: BillyBoy*

text: In 1979 BillyBoy* began to design and manufacture costume jewellery under the label "Surreal " in Paris.


title: BillyBoy*

text: BillyBoy* had a collection of over 11,000 Barbie dolls and 3,000 Ken dolls, and in 1987 authored the book "Barbie: Her Life and Times". During 1984–1990 Mattel sponsored two tours called ' (New Theatre of Fashion) curated by BillyBoy*. Like the original 1945 exhibit ', the exhibitions consisted of hundreds of dolls—in this case Barbie dolls—wearing miniature outfits made by Yves Saint Laurent and other prominent fashion designers. The exhibition toured France on board a TGV-train entitled "". BillyBoy* designed two Barbie dolls for Mattel working as a designer and consultant, "" in 1984 and "Feelin' Groovy" in 1986. After finishing working with Mattel, BillyBoy* formed the "BillyBoy* Toys" company, and in 1989 BillyBoy* and his partner released the Mdvanii fashion doll.


title: BillyBoy*

text: Warhol's last work "Barbie, Portrait of BillyBoy*" was a painting of BillyBoy* depicted as a Barbie doll and was presented to BillyBoy* in New York on 10 February 1986. The painting was gifted to BillyBoy* and hung in his living room. In 2014 the painting sold at the auction house Christie's for £722,500 ($1,161,780). A second version of Warhol's painting, this time with an orange-red background instead of blue, was created for and purchased by Mattel.


title: BillyBoy*

text: In 1978 or 1979 BillyBoy* moved to Paris, where later his shop would be at 6 Rue de la Paix, Paris. In 1993 BillyBoy* and his partner Jean Pierre Lestrade ("Lala") moved to Trouville-sur-Mer in France, then in 1997 to Switzerland, and finally in 2011 to Delémont, the capital of the Canton of Jura and near Basel. On 6 February 2012 BillyBoy* and Jean Pierre Lestrade married at the L’Hôtel de Ville in Délémont.


title: BillyBoy*

text: On 13 February 1998 BillyBoy* and Lestrade founded the "" non-profit in Yverdon-les-Bains, Switzerland. In 2012 the website of the Foundation was updated to reflect the creation of a future museum in Delémont.


title: Elisabetta Gregoraci

text: She was born in Soverato, province of Catanzaro, Calabria, in southern Italy. Gregoraci started her career on the Italian television show "Libero" as a dancer, before replacing model Eva Herzigová for the Wonderbra campaign.


title: Elisabetta Gregoraci

text: Gregoraci gained notoriety when it came to light that she had offered sexual favours in return for a job as a showgirl for the Italian national public television company RAI. She was estranged from RAI and hired by the former Italian Prime Minister and owner of Mediaset Silvio Berlusconi, acting as a hostess in the show "Buona Domenica".


title: Elisabetta Gregoraci

text: On 14 June 2008, Gregoraci married Flavio Briatore, then Formula One manager, in the Santo Spirito in Sassia, Rome. The driver of the bridal car was Fernando Alonso, who after the ceremony drove the newlyweds to the reception at the castle of Torcrescenza.


title: Elisabetta Gregoraci

text: Gregoraci gave birth to a son in 2010. Briatore already has daughter Leni Klum with German model Heidi Klum, although he is not involved in her life.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The Battle of the Allia was a battle fought between the Senones – a Gallic tribe led by Brennus, who had invaded Northern Italy – and the Roman Republic. The battle was fought at the confluence of the Tiber and Allia rivers, 11 Roman miles (16 km, 10 mi) north of Rome. The Romans were routed and subsequently Rome was sacked by the Senones. According to scholar Piero Treves, "the absence of any archaeological evidence for a destruction-level of this date suggests that [this] sack of Rome was superficial only."


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The date of the battle has been traditionally given as 390 BC in the Varronian chronology, based on an account of the battle by the Roman historian Livy. Plutarch noted that the battle took place "just after the summer solstice when the moon was near the full [...] a little more than three hundred and sixty years from the founding [of Rome]," or shortly after 393 BC. The Greek historian Polybius used a Greek dating system to derive the year as having taken place in 387 BC, which is the most probable. Tacitus listed the date as 18 July.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The Senones were one of the various Gallic tribes that had recently invaded northern Italy. They settled on the Adriatic Coast around what is now Rimini. According to Livy, they were called to the Etruscan town of Clusium (now Chiusi, Tuscany) by Aruns, an influential young man of the city who wanted to take revenge against Lucumo, whose son had "debauched his wife." When the Senones appeared, the Clusians felt threatened and asked Rome for help. The Romans sent the three sons of Marcus Fabius Ambustus, one of Rome's most powerful aristocrats, as ambassadors. They told the Gauls not to attack Clusium and that if they did, the Romans would fight to defend the town. They then asked to negotiate peace. The Senones accepted peace if the Clusians would give them some land. There was a quarrel and a battle broke out. The Roman ambassadors joined in. One of them killed a Senone chieftain. That was a violation of the rule that ambassadors had to be neutral. The brothers had taken sides and one of them had also killed Simone. The Gauls withdrew to discuss what action to take.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Lucumo was the king of the city. He assigned the guardianship of his son to Aruns before he died. When the son became a young man, he fell in love with the wife of Aruns and seduced her. The grieving Aruns went to Gaul to sell wine, olives, and figs. The Gauls had never seen such products and asked Aruns where they were produced. He replied that they came from a large and fertile land, inhabited by only a few people who were not good fighters. He advised them to drive the people out of their land and enjoy the fruit as their own. He persuaded them to come to Italy, go to Clusium, and make war. Dionysius' account presumes that those Gauls had not invaded Italy and were in Gaul. When Quintus Fabius, one of the Roman ambassadors, killed a Gallic leader, they wanted the brothers to be handed over to them to pay the penalty for the men they had killed.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: When the ambassadors of the Senones arrived in Rome and demanded the three Fabii brothers be handed over to them, the Senate was pressured by favouritism not to express opinions against the powerful Fabia family. To avoid being blamed for a possible defeat if the Gauls attacked, they referred the matter to the people. Livy wrote that "those whose punishment they were asked to decide were elected military tribunes with consular powers [heads of state] for the coming year." The Gauls were enraged that those who had violated the law of nations had been honoured and marched on Rome, 130  km (81  mi) from Clusium. Livy wrote that "in response to the tumult caused by their swift advance, terrified cities rushed to arms and the country folk fled, but the Gauls signified by their shouts wherever they went that their destination was Rome."


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The number of fighters involved in the battle is not known for sure. Plutarch writes that the Romans were not outnumbered and had 40,000 men but that most were untrained and unaccustomed to weapons. Dionysius of Halicarnassus writes that the Romans had four well-trained legions and a levy of untrained citizens that was larger in number. That would give a rough figure of some 35,000. Diodorus Siculus writes that the Romans had 24,000 men. Livy gives no figures. The modern historians Cary and Scullard estimate that the Romans had 15,000 men and the Gauls 30,000 to 70,000. Peter Berresford Ellis gives an estimate of a minimum of 24,000 based on the assumption that "the Romans had... four legions – for each consul had two legions under his command – and given that each legion had 6,000 men". He also thinks that there may have been a contingent of allied troops. He thinks that the "Senones' tribal army could scarcely number more than 12,000".


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The figures given by ancient historians for the size of the Roman army engaged in the battle are unlikely since they are notorious for exaggerating figures. Contrary to Berresford Ellis's assertion, the Romans then had only two legions. The number of legions was not increased to four until later in the century, during the Second Samnite War (326-304 BC), and the first record of four legions occurred in 311 BC. The Romans then also had additional military commanders: the praetor, who had been instituted in 366 BC, and the proconsul, who was a consul who received an extension of his term of military command (the practice started in 327 BC). The first historical hints of the consuls leading more than one legion were for 299 BC (during a war with the Etruscans) and 297 BC, during the Third Samnite War (298-290 BC). The first explicit mention of a consul with two legions is in 296 BC. In 295 BC, the Romans deployed six legions; four led by the two consuls, and fought a coalition of four peoples (the Samnites, Etruscans, Umbrians and Senone Gauls) in the huge Battle of Sentinum. Two were led to another front by a praetor. The battle of the Allia took place in the early days of Rome when the Roman army was much smaller and its command structure was much simpler. The Roman army had only two legions, and the two consuls were the sole military commanders, each heading one legion. In addition, the battle occurred in the early history of the Roman Republic, while the consulship alternated with years in which Rome was headed by military tribunes with consular power, often referred to as consular tribunes instead, and 390 BC was a year in which six consular tribunes were in charge. Therefore, Berresford Ellis's assertion that the Romans at the battle of Allia had four legions, two for each of the two consuls, is doubly anachronistic. Moreover, the Roman legions had 6,000 men on only a few exceptional occasions. In the early days of the Republic, when the Battle of the Allia took place, it was 4,200. Later, it was 5,200 when at full strength, which was often not the case. Accordingly, the Roman force at the battle was likely substantially smaller than estimated.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The size of the population of Rome also needs to be considered. In its early days, Rome was still a city-state of only regional significance, and its territory did not stretch beyond 50  km (30  mi) from the city. Cornell notes that the estimates of the population of Rome in the late 6th century BC, based on the size of its territory range between 25,000 and 50,000, and thinks that the more likely figure is 25,000-40,000. The seminal work by Fraccaro gives a pool of military manpower of 9,000 men of military age (aged between 17 and 47), which would require a minimum population of 30,000.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Archaeological evidence shows that in the 5th century BC, there was an economic downturn that would have precluded considerable population growth. The territory of Rome had increased by 75% by the early 4th century, but the bulk of the increase was caused by the recent conquest of the city of Veii and its territory, and its population did not have Roman citizenship, a requirement to serve in the Roman army. Such considerations make it unlikely that the size of the population of Roman citizens would have been large enough to provide a military pool of 24,000 or more soldiers at the time of the Battle of the Allia.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In addition to the above factors that give further reasons to doubt the figures given about the size of the Roman forces at the Battle of the Allia, it has to be noted that the Romans did not have much time to prepare for the battle properly since after their embassy was rebuffed by the Romans, the Gauls immediately marched on Rome, only a few days’ marches away. The Roman army was then a part-time militia of peasant farmers levied for the military campaigning season and then returning to their farms. Not all men of military age were drafted every year. Some of the soldiers would have lived some distance from Rome and so needed time to walk there, the main means of travel for peasants.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The size of the Senone force should not be overestimated, either. The estimate given by Cary and Scullard of 30,000-70,000 (see above) is highly unlikely. Berresford Ellis rightly points out that his figure of 12,000 would have been quite large for a single tribe.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: There are only two ancient accounts that provide details of the battle. One is by Livy, and the other is by Diodorus Siculus.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: According to Livy, no special measures were taken in Rome, and the levy "was not larger than had been usual in ordinary campaigns." The Gauls marched on Rome so quickly that "Rome was thunderstruck by the swiftness at which they moved, which is shown both by the haste in mustering the army as if it were meeting a spur-of-the-moment emergency and the difficulty in getting any further than the eleventh milestone." The Romans presumably were outnumbered. They did not set up camp or build a defensive rampart and they did not divine the gods, as they were supposed to. They extended the wings to avoid being outflanked, but that made their line so thin and weakened that the centre could hardly be kept together. They placed the reserves on a hill on the right. Brennus, the Senone chieftain, suspected that to be a ruse and that the reservists would attack him from the rear while he was fighting the Roman army in the plain. He, therefore, attacked the hill.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The Romans panicked. The left-wing threw their arms down and fled to the bank of the River Tiber. The Gauls killed the soldiers who were blocking one another's path in the disorderly flight. Those who could not swim or were weak were weighed down by their armour and drowned. Still, the majority of these men reached Veii, an Etruscan city that had recently been conquered by Rome and was near the other bank. They did not even send a messenger to warn Rome. The right-wing, further from the river and closer to the hill, fled to Rome. The Gauls were surprised at how easy their victory had been.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The ancient Greek historian Diodorus Siculus said the Romans marched and crossed the River Tiber. He is the only ancient historian who placed the battle on the right bank of the river. The Romans lined up their best troops, 24,000 men, in the plain and placed the weakest troops on the hill. The Celts also lined up, placed their best men on the hill, and easily won the clash. The bulk of the Roman soldiers in the plain fled to the river in a disorderly manner and impeded each other. The Celts killed the men in the rear. Some Romans tried to cross the river wearing their armour, which, according to Diodorus, they prized more than their lives, but that weighed them down. Some drowned and some managed to reach the bank further downstream with great effort. As the Gauls kept killing the Romans, the soldiers then threw their arms away and swam across the river. The Gauls threw javelins at them. Most of the survivors fled to the city of Veii. Some returned to Rome and reported that the army had been destroyed.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Plutarch wrote that the Gauls encamped near the confluence of the Allia with the Tiber, some 18  km (11  mi) from Rome, and attacked the Romans suddenly. There was a "disorderly and shameful battle." The Roman left wing was pushed into the river and destroyed while the right-wing withdrew before the Gauls' attack from the plain to the hills and most of them fled to Rome. The rest of the survivors escaped to Veii at night. "They thought that Rome was lost and all her people slain."


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Livy provides a detailed account of the sack of Rome. The Gauls were dumbfounded by their sudden and extraordinary victory and did not move from the place of the battle, as if they were puzzled. They feared a surprise and despoiled the dead, as was customary for them. When they did not see any hostile action, they set off and reached Rome before sunset. They saw that the city gates were open and that the walls were unmanned. That was another surprise. They decided to avoid a night battle in an unknown town and encamped between Rome and the River Anio. The inhabitants of Rome were in panic and did not know that most of their soldiers had fled to Veii, instead of Rome, and thought that the only survivors were those who fled back to Rome and that they had only a tiny force. Realising that they were defenceless, they decided to send the men of military age, the able-bodied senators and their families to the Capitoline Hill with weapons and provisions to defend the fortress. The Flamen of Quirinus and the Vestal Virgins, who were priests, were to take "the sacred things of the State" away and continue to perform their sacred cults. The situation was so dire that the elderly were left behind in the city and former consuls stayed with them to reconcile them with their fate. However, many of them followed their sons to the Capitoline. No one had the heart to stop them. Many people fled to the Janiculum Hill just outside the city and then dispersed to the countryside and other towns. The Flamen of Quirinus and the Vestal Virgins could take only some of the sacred objects and decided to bury the rest under the chapel next to the Flamen's house. They set off to the Janiculum with what they could carry. Lucius Albinus, who was leaving the city on a wagon, saw them walking. He ordered his wife and children to get off and gave them and the sacred vessels of Rome a lift to Caere, an Etruscan city on the coast that was an ally of Rome.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Those who had been officers of state decided to meet their fate wearing their ceremonial dresses and "the insignia of their former rank and honour and distinctions". They sat on their ivory chairs in front of their houses. The next day, the Senones entered the city. They passed through the open Colline Gate and went to the Roman Forum. They left a small body to guard there against any attack from the Capitoline and went through the streets for plunder. They did not meet anybody. People moved to other houses. The Gauls returned to the area of the Forum. Livy memorably described Gauls' encounter with the elderly patricians:


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Despite the above statement, Livy wrote that the fires were not as widespread as one could expect on the first day of the capture of a city and speculated that the Gauls wanted not to destroy the city but only to intimidate the men on the Capitoline Hill into surrender to save their homes. Despite the anguish at hearing "the shouts of the enemy, the shrieks of the women and boys, the roar of the flames, and the crash of houses falling in", the men were resolved to continue to defend the hill. As that continued day after day, "they became as it was hardened to misery". After a few days, seeing that even though nothing survived "amidst the ashes and ruin" of the city, there was no sign of surrender, the Senones attacked Capitoline Hill at dawn. The defenders let the enemy climb up the steep hill and flung them down the slope. The Gauls stopped halfway up the hill. The Romans charged and inflicted such high casualties that the enemy never tried to take the hill again.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Instead, they prepared a siege. They divided their forces into two. One division besieged the hill, and the other went foraging in the territories of the neighbouring cities because all the grain around Rome had been taken to Veii by the Roman soldiers who had fled there. Some Gauls arrived at Ardea, where Marcus Furius Camillus, a great Roman military commander who had seized Veii a few years earlier, had gone when he was exiled because of accusations of embezzlement. Camillus rallied the people of Ardea to fight. He marched at night, caught the camp of the Gauls by surprise, and massacred the enemy in their sleep. Some Gallic fugitives got near Antium and were surrounded by its townsmen.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Meanwhile, in Rome, both sides were quiet. The Senones conducted the siege "with great slackness" and concentrated on preventing the Romans from slipping through their lines. The patrician clan of the Fabii held an annual sacrifice on the Quirinal Hill. Gaius Fabius Dorsuo came down the Capitoline carrying the sacred vessels, passed through the enemy pickets and went to the Quirinal. He duly performed the sacred rites and returned the Capitoline. Livy commented, "Either the Gauls were stupefied at his extraordinary boldness, or else they were restrained by religious feelings, for as a nation they are by no means inattentive to the claims of religion".


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In the meantime, the survivors of the battle who had fled to Veii began to regroup. Led by Quintus Caedicius, the centurion they chose as their leader, they routed a force of Etruscans who looted the territory of Veii and intended to attack this city. They made some prisoners lead them to another Etruscan force, which was at the salt works, and inflicted even greater losses on that force. Caedicius' forces grew, and some Romans who had fled the city went to Veii. Volunteers from Latium also joined them. Caedicius decided to summon Camillus to take the command, but that required approval of the Senate. They sent Cominius Pontius, a soldier, to Rome as a messenger. He went down the River Tiber on a cork float and reached Rome. He reached the Capitoline by scaling "a precipitous rock which, owing to its steepness, the enemy had left unguarded". The Senate decreed that the popular assembly was to pass a law that annulled the banishment of Camillus and appointed him dictator (commander-in-chief). Camillus was escorted from Ardea to Veii.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The Senones either found footprints left by Cominius Pontius or discovered a relatively-easy ascent up the cliff. They climbed it and reached the summit of the Capitoline at night. They were heard not by the guards and the dogs but by the geese sacred to the goddess Juno, which woke up the Romans. Marcus Manlius Capitolinus, a former consul, knocked down a Gaul who had reached the top. He fell on those behind him. Manlius also killed some Gauls who had laid aside their weapons to cling to the rocks. He was joined by the other soldiers and the enemy was repulsed. Manlius was commended for his bravery. Quintus Sulpicius wanted to court-martial the guards who had failed to notice the enemy, but the soldiers prevented him from doing so. It was agreed to blame one man, who was thrown down the cliff.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Famine began to afflict both armies. The Gauls were also affected by pestilence. They were on low ground between the hills, which had been scorched by the fires and there was malaria. Many of them died because of disease and the heat. They started to pile the dead bodies and burn them, instead of burying them, started negotiations with the Romans and called on them to surrender because of the famine. They also hinted that they could be bought off. The Roman leaders, who were waiting for Camillus to arrive with an army from Veii, refused. Eventually, the starving soldiers called for surrender or an agreement on a ransom on the best terms that they could. Quintus Sulpicius and Brennus, the leader of the Senones, held talks. They agreed on a ransom of a thousand pounds of gold. The Senones cheated, using heavier weights to weigh the gold. When the Romans protested, 'Brennus tossed his sword on the scale, uttering words intolerable to the Roman ears, namely 'Vae victis,' or ‘Woe to the vanquished!'"


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Paying off the Senones to leave the city was a humiliation for the Romans. However, as Livy put it, "god and man forbade the Romans to be a ransomed people". Before the weighing of the gold had been completed, Camillus reached Rome and ordered the gold not to be taken away. The Gauls said that an agreement had been made, but Camillus said that since it had been struck by an official of lesser status than he was, it was invalid. Camillus then offered battle, and the Senones were easily defeated. They have defeated again 13  km (8  mi) east of Rome. Livy wrote the "slaughter was total: their camp was captured and not even the messenger survived to report the disaster".


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In the account of Diodorus Siculus, which is much less detailed, the Senones spent the first day after the battle by the Allia cutting off the heads of the dead, which he claimed was their custom, and then encamped by the city for two days. Meanwhile, the despairing inhabitants of Rome thought that the whole army had been wiped out and that there was no chance of resistance. Many of them fled to other towns. The leaders of the city ordered food, gold, silver and other possessions to be taken to Capitoline Hill, which was then fortified. The Senones thought that the noise in the city meant that a trap was being prepared. However, on the fourth day, they broke down the city gates and pillaged the city. They made daily attacks on the Capitoline but did not hurt any civilians. They suffered many casualties. Finding that they could not take it by force, they decided to lay siege.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Meanwhile, the Etruscans raided the Roman territory around Veii, capturing prisoners and booty. The Roman soldiers who had fled to Veii ambushed them, put them to flight, seized their camp, regained the booty, and took a large number of weapons. The Romans reconstituted an army, gathered men who had dispersed in the countryside when they fled Rome and then decided to relieve the siege of the Capitoline Hill. Cominius Pontius was sent as a messenger to the Capitoline Hill to tell the besieged about the plan and that the men at Veii were waiting for an opportunity to attack. There is no mention of Camillus in the account of Diodorus Siculus.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Pontius swam across the River Tiber and went up a cliff, which was difficult to climb. After giving his message, he returned to Veii. The Gauls noticed the track left by Pontius and ascended the same cliff. The Roman guards were neglectful of their watch and the Gauls escaped detection. When the geese made a noise, the guards rushed against the attackers. Diodorus called Manlius Capitolinus Marcus Mallius and wrote that he cut off the hand of the first Senone climber with his sword and pushed him down the hill. Since the hill was steep, all enemy soldiers fell and died. Then, the Romans negotiated peace and persuaded the Gauls "upon receipt of one thousand pounds of gold, to leave the city and to withdraw from Roman territory".


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Plutarch painted a greater picture of destruction and killings than Livy. The Gauls went to Rome on the third day after the battle, where the gates were open, and the walls were unguarded. They marched through the Colline gate. Brennus had the Capitoline Hill surrounded and went to the Forum. He was surprised to see the men sitting outdoors and remaining quiet without fear when they were approached, "leaning on their staves and gazing into one another's faces". The Gauls hesitated to get close to them and touch them and regarded them as superior beings. However, a Gaul plucked up his courage and stroked the long beard of Papirius Marcus, who hit him hard on the head with his staff. The Gauls then killed all men and sacked and burned the houses for many days. The defenders of Capitoline Hill did not surrender and repulsed an attack. The Gauls killed everyone they captured, including women, children and the elderly. The Gauls entered Rome shortly after the Ides of July and withdrew from the city about the Ides of February (February 13), the siege lasted seven months.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Plutarch also notes that some Gauls reached Ardea and that Camillus rallied the city against them and attacked them. On hearing the news, the neighbouring cities called to arms the men of military age, especially the Romans who had fled to Veii. They wanted Camillus to be their commander but refused to do so before he was legally elected. Plutarch then relayed the story of Pontius Cominius and his mission to Capitoline Hill. Camillus could not cross the bridge over the Tiber because the Gauls were guarding it and so he swam across supported by pieces of cork and went to the Carmental Gate. When he reached the top of the Capitoline, the Senate appointed Camillus as dictator. Camillus gathered soldiers from the allies and went to Veii, where there were 20,000 soldiers.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: After the episode of the geese of Juno, the Gauls were less hopeful. They were short of provisions but did not go foraging because they feared Camillus. They were also affected by the disease because they were encamped amid ruins, and there were dead bodies scattered everywhere. The wind scattered ash, which made breathing difficult. They were also suffering from the Mediterranean heat to which they were not accustomed. The Gauls "were now whiling away the seventh month in its siege. For all these reasons the mortality was great in their camp; so many were the dead that they could no longer be buried".


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The defenders of the Capitoline, in turn, could not get news from Camillus because the city was closely guarded by the enemy. Famine worsened, and the city became dejected and agreed to pay a ransom.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: When Camillus arrived in Rome, he lifted the gold from the scales and said that it was the Roman custom to deliver the city with iron, not gold. He then said that the agreement to pay a ransom had not been made legally since it was made without him, who had been made the legal ruler, and so it was not binding. The Gauls now had to say what they wanted because "he [had] come with legal authority to grant pardon to those who asked it, and to inflict punishment on the guilty, unless they showed repentance". Brennus began a skirmish. The two sides could not fight a battle because no battle array was possible "in the heart of the ruined city". Brennus led his men to their camp and then left the city during the night. At dawn, Camillus caught up with them and routed them "[of] the fugitives, some were at once pursued and cut down, but most of them scattered abroad, only to be fallen upon and slain by the people of the surrounding villages and cities".


title: Battle of the Allia

text: News of the Gallic sack reached Greece. Plutarch mentions an inaccurate story by Heracleides Ponticus and that Aristotle wrote about the capture of Rome by the Gauls and said that the saviour of the city was "a certain Lucius", not Camillus.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The accounts of the battle of the Allia and the sack of Rome were written centuries after the events, and their reliability is questionable. That may also account for the discrepancies between Livy and Diodorus Siculus concerning the sack of the city.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The rescue of the city by Camillus is seen by many modern historians as an addition to the story since he was not mentioned by Diodorus Siculus and Polybius, another ancient Greek historian. Diodorus said that the Gauls were defeated at the Trausian Plain, an unidentified location, by an Etruscan army when they were on the way back from southern Italy. Strabo wrote that they were defeated by Caere (the Etruscan city, allied to Rome, to which the Vestal priestesses had fled) and that the Caerites recovered Rome's ransomed gold. That runs counter to the notion that Camillus stopped the payment of a ransom to the Senones. As has been noted, Plutarch wrote that Aristotle said that Rome was saved by "a certain Lucius". That could be Lucius Albinus, who was said to have given the priestesses a lift to Caere. The role of Caere in the saga of the Gallic sack is unclear, and it may be that it played a more important role than in the Roman tradition.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: There is also the question of what the Senones were doing in central Italy. Diodorus Siculus wrote that the Senones were "distressed and eager to move" because they had settled to a place (the ager Gallicus) that was too hot. They armed their younger men and sent them out to seek a territory where they might settle. Therefore, they invaded Etruria, the 30,000 sacked the territory of Clusium. However, Cornell finds that to be unconvincing. Throughout the story, the Senones appear to be a warrior band. There is no mention in any of the accounts of wives and children, who would have been present if the Gauls had been a migrating people in search of land. Cornell thinks that they were mercenaries. A few months after the sack of Rome, Dionysius I of Syracuse, the tyrant of the Greek city of Syracuse, in Sicily, hired Gallic mercenaries for a war in the south of Italy. It may well be that was why the Senones were on their way to the south. The story of their defeat on their way back from the south seems to fit with that hypothesis. It could also be that the Senones went to Clusium because they had been hired by one of two political factions at loggerheads to intervene in political struggles in the city, rather than the romanticised story of Aruns's revenge for his wife.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The Gallic sack was a humiliation for Rome and set in motion a series of wars against nearby peoples. Rome, in conjunction with the Latin League, a coalition of other Latin cities, and the Hernici, had spent much of the 5th century fighting against the Volsci and Aequi, who lived to the south, in response to the latter's attacks on their territory. Immediately after the sack, there were attacks by the Volsci and the Etruscan city-states in southern Etruria. Rome responded aggressively. That led to a breakdown of her alliances with the Latin League and the Hernici and rebellions by several Latin cities. Rome spent the next 32 years fighting the Volsci, the Etruscans and the rebel Latin cities.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In 389 BC, the Volsci took up arms and encamped near the Latin city of Lanuvium. Camillus defeated them and laid "waste all the Volscian countryside, which forced the Volsci to surrender." Livy wrote that with this Rome "acquired undisputed control" of the Pomptine Marshes in the southern part of the Volscian territory. However, the Volsci subsequently continued to fight. Camillus then moved against the Aequi who were preparing for war and defeated them, too. The Etruscans captured the colony of Sutrium in southern Etruria and Camillus repelled them. In 388 BC, the Romans laid waste the territory of the Aequi to weaken them and carried out incursions into the territory of the Etruscan city-state of Tarquinii, capturing and destroying Cortuosa and Cobra. In 386 BC the Volscian of the town of Antium gathered an army which included Hernici and Latin forces near Satricum, not far from Antium. A battle with the Romans was stopped by rain, and the Latins and Hernici then returned home. The Volsci retreated to Satricum, which was taken by storm. In 386 BC, the Etruscans seized Sutrium and Nepet, two Roman colonies in southern Etruria. The Romans asked the Latins and Hernici why they did not provide Rome with soldiers, as they were supposed to, under their alliances. Both replied that it was because of "their constant fear of the Volsci." They also said that their men who had fought with the Volsci had done so of their own volition and not under the orders of their councils. However, it was clear that Rome's aggressive actions had caused them to defect and become hostile. In 385 BC, there was another war with the Volsci, who were supported by the rebelling Latins and Hernici as well as the Roman colony of Circeii and Roman colonists from Velitrae. The force was defeated, and most of the prisoners were Latins and Hernici. The Romans planted a colony with 2000 colonists at Satricum.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In 383 BC, the Latin city of Lanuvium rebelled. The Roman senate decided to found a colony at Nepet in southern Etruria and allot land in the Pomptine Marshes to the Roman poor to gain popular support for a war. An epidemic, however, prevented any war. That prompted the Romans at Velitrae and Circeii to sue for pardon, but they were dissuaded by the rebels, who also encouraged pillaging in Roman territory. The Latin city of Praeneste also became rebellious and attacked the territories of the Latin towns of Tusculum, Gabii, and Labici, which were Roman allies. In 382 BC, the Romans attacked and defeated a rebel force in which men from Praeneste almost outnumbered the force of the Roman colonists, near Levitra. The Romans did not attack the town because they were unsure about their success and did not think it was right to exterminate the Roman colony.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Still, in 382 BC, Rome declared war on Praeneste, which joined the Volsci. The joint force took the Roman colony of Satricum despite strong resistance by the Roman colonists. In 381 BC, the Romans levied four legions and marched on Satricum. There was a fierce battle that the Romans won. There were men from Tusculum among the prisoners. After Tusculum broke its alliance with the Romans, Rome declared war on it. However, when the Romans entered its territory, Tusculum did not fight and was granted peace.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In 380 BC, the Praenestines marched into the territory of Gabii and advanced against Rome's walls at the Colline Gate and encamped near the River Allia, where the Gauls had defeated Rome. The Romans defeated them and marched into the territory of Praeneste, seizing eight towns under its jurisdiction and then Levitra. Finally, they confronted Praeneste, the heart of the rebellion, which surrendered. In 378 BC, the Volsci ravaged the borders of Roman territory. The Romans sent an army to Antium on the coast and another to Electra and the mountains and applied a scorched earth policy. In 377 BC, a joint Latin and Volscian force encamped near Satricum. The Romans levied three armies: one was a reserve legion, one defended the city and the third, the largest, marched on Satricum. The enemy was routed and fled to Antium. A quarrel now broke out between the Initiates and the Latins. The former were inclined to give up, but the latter did not and left. The Initiates surrendered their city and lands. The Latins burned Satricum in revenge. Then, they attacked Tusculum, which was rescued by the Romans.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In 370 BC, the Roman colonists of Velitrae made several incursions into Roman territory and besieged Tusculum, knowing that Rome did not have an army because the plebeian tribunes had paralysed the Roman state. Thereafter, the tribunes allowed the election of heads of state and the levy on an army, which drove the rebels from the Tusculum and laid a protracted siege on Levitra. Livy did not state when it ended, but it must have been in 366 BC. In 367 BC, the rebels arrived in Latium. An ageing Camillus defeated them near the Alban Hills, and most of the rebels then fled to Apulia.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In 366, there were reports of defection of the Hernici. In 362, Rome declared war on them. The Romans were ambushed and routed. The consul who led the army died in the battle, and the Hernici surrounded the Roman camp. The Romans sent a relief force and the Hernici were defeated in a tough battle. In 361, the Romans seized Ferentinum, a town of the Hernici. When they were on their way back, the people of the Latin city of Tibur shut the city gates on them. In 360, the Gauls encamped near the River Anio. After some skirmishes, the conflict was resolved by single combat between Titus Manlius and a Gaul, which the former won. The Gauls left, went to Tibur, and allied with it, receiving supplies from the city. Then, the Gauls went on to Campania. In 360 BC the Romans attacked Tibur, prompting the Gauls to return to render aid. They then ravaged the territories of Labici, Tusculum, and Alba Longa. The Romans kept an army at Tusculum and fought the Gauls with another one, not far from Rome's Colline gate. After a tough battle, the Gauls went to Tibur again. The two allies were defeated by the two Roman armies. A third Roman army defeated the Hernici in a major battle. In 359, a small force from Tibur arrived at the walls of Rome, but it was repelled easily. In 358, the Etruscan city of Tarquinii was plundered by Roman territory by Etruria. The Romans levied an army against them and one against the Hernici.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: That year, the war with the Latins and Hernici ended. Peace with the Latins was prompted by rumours of a Gallic war. The Latin League renewed the alliance with Rome they had made in 493 (the foedus Cassianum), which had lapsed shortly after the Gallic sack of Rome and the subsequent rebellions by several Latin cities. The Latin League provided Rome with soldiers. Thus, the Gauls were the cause of both the falling out between these two parties after the sack of Rome and their reconciliation in 358. The Gauls went to Praeneste and encamped near Pedum. The Roman commander, Gaius Sulpicius, delayed engaging in battle to wear down an enemy which had no food supplies in unfriendly territory and "whose strength and courage lay wholly in attacking, and languished as soon as there came a slight delay." Eventually, the Gauls provoked a battle, which the Romans won. Another Roman army defeated the Hernici and reduced them to subjection. Meanwhile, a third Roman army was defeated by Tarquinii, which killed 307 captured Roman soldiers as a sacrifice. The city of Falerii had sided with Tarquinii but refused to hand over Roman soldiers who had fled there from the battle. Velitrae and the Volscian city of Privernum devastated the Roman fields with sudden raids.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Although the conflict with the Latin league and the Hernici had ended, there were still troubles with the Volsci, Tibur, and the Etruscans. In 357, Rome ravaged the territory of Privernum and then attacked the city, which surrendered. In 356, a Roman army pushed a force from Tibur into their city and pillaged its fields. Another army was routed by Tarquinii and Falerii. A coalition of Etruscan city-states, led by the two cities, advanced to the salt works. The Romans crossed the River Tiber on rafts and seized the enemy camp by surprise, captured 8000 prisoners, and drove the Etruscans out of the Roman territory. In 354, the Romans seized Empulum which was in the territory of Tibur and ravaged lands that belonged to Tarquinii. In 353, they took Sassula, which also belonged to Tibur and surrendered. They also routed the army of Tarquinii, taking many prisoners. They picked 158 noblemen among them, took them to Rome, scourged them, and beheaded them in revenge for the Romans who had been sacrificed by the Tarquinenses. In 353, the Etruscan city of Caere, which had helped Rome during the Gallic sack of Rome, allied with Tarquinii. The Etruscans pillaged the area near the salt works and took their booty in the territory of Caere. The Volsci attacked Roman territory. Caere sent envoys to Rome to beg forgiveness, claiming that it was some country people who joined the pillaging and that the city had not prepared for war. Rome accepted peace and granted a hundred-year truce. The Romans turned their attention to Falerii. They did not encounter any armies and pillaged the countryside, sparing the towns.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In 350, there were troubles with the Gauls and a Greek fleet. A huge army of Gauls had encamped in Latium. The Romans levied an army of four legions led by a consul and a praetor. They encamped at a height close to the Gallic camp and then defeated them. The Roman consul, who was wounded, did not pursue the fugitives, who fled to the Alban Hills. In 349, the Gauls came down from the hills and ravaged the coastal plain. The Greeks carried out naval attacks on the coast from the mouth of the River Tiber to Antium. The Gauls and the Greeks happened to encounter one another and a battle ensued, and the former then withdrew to their camp and the latter to their ships. The Latin League refused to provide Rome with soldiers. The Romans enlisted men everywhere in their territory, including the countryside, and levied ten legions with 4200 infantry each. One of the two consuls died, and the other consul took sole charge of the war. He left two legions in the city to defend it and shared the command of the other eight with a praetor, who was put in charge of preventing the Greeks from landing. The consul encamped in the Pomptine Marshes. He aimed to prevent the Gauls from obtaining their sustenance through plunder. There was single combat between a Gaul and a Roman, which the latter won. That was followed by a battle, which the Romans won. The Gauls scattered among the Volsci, and some of them went to Etruria and others to Apulia. The consuls then joined the other legions to deal with the Greek fleet. There was no battle, and the Greeks were kept offshore. Eventually, the Greeks ran out of water and left.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: In 348 and 347, there was peace. In 346, the Volsci of the city of Antium sent envoys to the cities of the Latins to try to stir up a war. The Romans attacked Satricum, which the Volsci had rebuilt two years earlier. They defeated an army of Initiates and other Volsci, which had been levied in advance, and fled to Satricum. The Romans besieged the town, 4000 of the enemy surrendered, and the victorious army burned down the town. In 345, the Aurunci carried out an unexpected raid. It was feared that it was a joint design with the Latin League. The Romans defeated the Aurunci in a single battle, made a surprise attack on the Volsci, and seized the town of Sora.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Some modern historians follow Karl Julius Beloch, who dismissed the Roman victories soon after the sack. One reason is that they are not mentioned by the Greek historians Diodorus Siculus and Polybius. The other is the assumption that Rome had been damaged too much to be so successful militarily.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: Livy said that the city was burnt and that it then developed a haphazard layout because it was rebuilt hastily. However, Cornell notes that Diodorus Siculus and Polybius made only scarce references to the period. He also disputes the extent of the damage suffered by Rome. He points out that there is no archaeological trace of the damage to the sack. Signs of burning that were thought to be dated to this event have subsequently been dated to the rebellion that had brought down the Roman monarchy more than a century earlier. Cornell thinks that the Senones ransacked the city but were interested only in the booty, left most of the buildings alone, and went after they had been bought off. It was common for the layout of ancient cities to be haphazard. He adds that Rome's recovery was aided by cementing the newly-conquered territory of Veii by granting its inhabitants citizenship without the right to vote and by a strengthening of the alliance with Caere, which had helped Rome during the Gallic sack. After the initial setback and attacks, Rome resumed its expansionism of the late 5th and early 4th centuries.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: A few years after the sack, Rome began to build new city walls using ashlar masonry from a quarry in the territory of Veii. It was a huge undertaking as the wall was 11  km (7  mi) long. The original wall had been built in carpaccio tuff, the local stone, which was of rather poor quality because it is a quite friable stone. The wall was rebuilt with a type of yellow tuff, named Grotta Oscura (after its main quarry), which was of much better quality, in the territory of Veii. Thus, the acquisition of Veii provided Rome with better masonry for construction. However, the new rock was harder and thus more difficult to work.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The Gallic sack led to a long-lasting and profound fear of the Gauls in Rome. In 350 and 349 BC, unspecified Gauls attacked Latium. They were probably marauding raids. On the second occasion, Marcus Valerius Corvus was said to have fought a duel with a Gallic champion. Polybius said that Rome made a peace with the Gauls, who did not return for 30 years. Despite Rome defeating the Senones in the Battle of Sentinum (295) during the Third Samnite War (298-290), popular fear of Gauls persisted. In 228, 216, and 114 fears of Gallic attacks led to the Romans performing human sacrifices by burying alive a pair of Gauls and a pair of Greeks even though human sacrifice was not a Roman custom. Presumably, it was done to avert the danger of another Gallic disaster.


title: Battle of the Allia

text: The "Historia Regum Britanniae", a medieval work of fiction written c. 1136 by Geoffrey of Monmouth on the legendary kings of Britain, depicts Brennus as leading both Britons and Gauls. He besieges Rome for three days until his brother comes to aid in the invasion. The Romans defend the city for many days and are successful in repelling the invaders. Finally, the two consuls don armour and join the men defending the city. They push the invaders back, but Belinus can reform the lines and stop the attacks. Brennus and Belinus continue forward until the walls are breached and the Britons and Gauls invade the city. According to the story, Brennus stayed in Rome and ruled ruthlessly for the rest of his days.


title: Whig history

text: Whig history (or Whig historiography) is an approach to historiography that presents history as a journey from an oppressive and benighted past to a "glorious present". The present described is generally one with modern forms of liberal democracy and constitutional monarchy: it was originally a satirical term for the patriotic grand narratives praising Britain's adoption of constitutional monarchy and the historical development of the Westminster system. The term has also been applied widely in historical disciplines outside of British history (e.g. in the history of science) to describe "any subjection of history to what is essentially a teleological view of the historical process". When the term is used in contexts other than British history, "whig history" (lowercase) is preferred.


title: Whig history

text: In the British context, whig historians emphasize the rise of constitutional government, personal freedoms and scientific progress. The term is often applied generally (and pejoratively) to histories that present the past as the inexorable march of progress towards enlightenment. The term is also used extensively in the history of science to refer to historiography that focuses on the successful chains of theories and experiments that led to present-day theories, while ignoring failed theories and dead ends.


title: Whig history

text: Whig history laid the groundwork for modernization theory and the resulting deployment of development aid around the world after World War II, which has sometimes been criticized as destructive to its recipients.


title: Whig history

text: The British historian Herbert Butterfield coined the term "Whig history" in his short but influential book "The Whig Interpretation of History" (1931). It takes its name from the British Whigs, advocates of the power of Parliament, who opposed the Tories, advocates of the power of the king.


title: Whig history

text: Butterfield's usage of the term was in relation to the British or American Whig parties or Whiggism, but rather took aim at "the nineteenth-century school of historiography that praised all progress and habitually associated Protestantism with liberal views of liberty". The terms "whig" and "whiggish" are now used broadly, becoming "universal descriptors for all progressive narratives".


title: Whig history

text: When H. A. L. Fisher in 1928 gave a Raleigh lecture, he implied that the "whig historians" really were Whigs (i.e. associated with the Whig party or its Liberal successor) and had written centrist histories that were "good history despite their enthusiasm for Gladstonian or Liberal Unionist causes"; on introduction the term was mostly approbatory, unlike Butterfield's later use, since Fisher applauded Macaulay's "instructive and illuminating" history. By the time Butterfield wrote his "Whig Interpretation", he may have been beating a dead horse: P. B. M. Blaas, in his 1978 book "Continuity and Anachronism", argued that whig history itself had lost all vitality by 1914. Subsequent generations of academic historians have rejected Whig history because of its presentist and teleological assumption that history is driving toward some sort of goal.


title: Whig history

text: Butterfield's purpose with writing his 1931 book was to criticise oversimplified narratives (or "abridgements") which interpreted past events in terms of the present for the purposes of achieving "drama and apparent moral clarity". Butterfield especially noted:


title: Whig history

text: Butterfield argued that this approach to history compromised the work of the historian in several ways. The emphasis on the inevitability of progress leads to the mistaken belief that the progressive sequence of events becomes "a line of causation", tempting the historian to go no further to investigate the causes of historical change. The focus on the present as the goal of historical change leads the historian to a special kind of "abridgement", selecting only those events that seem important from the present point of view.


title: Whig history

text: He also criticised it for modernising the past: "the result [of whig history] is that to many of us [historical figures] seem much more modern than they really were, and even when we have corrected this impression by closer study we find it difficult to keep in mind the differences between their world and ours".


title: Whig history

text: Whig history is also criticised as having an overly dualist view with heroes on the side of liberty and freedom against traditionalist villains opposing the inevitability of progress. It also casts an overly negative view of opposing parties to heroes described, taking such parties "to have contributed nothing to the making of the present" and at worst converting them into a "dummy that acts as a better foil to the grand whig virtues". Butterfield illustrated this by criticising views of Martin Luther and the Reformation which "are inclined to write sometimes as though Protestantism in itself was somehow constituted to assist [the process of secularisation]" and misconceptions that the British constitution was created by Whigs opposed by Tories rather than created by compromise and interplay mediated by then-political contingencies.


title: Whig history

text: He also felt that whig history viewed the world in terms of a morality play: that "[the whig historian imagines himself] inconclusive unless he can give a verdict; and studying Protestant and Catholic in the 16th century he feels that loose threads are still left hanging unless he can show which party was in the right".


title: Whig history

text: Butterfield instead advances a view of history stressing the accidental and contingent nature of events rather than some kind of inevitable and structural shift. Moreover, he called upon historians "to evoke a certain sensibility towards the past, the sensibility which studies the past 'for the sake of the past', which delights in the concrete and the complex, which 'goes out to meet the past', which searches for 'unlikenesses between past and present'".


title: Whig history

text: A decade later however, if under wartime pressure from the Second World War, Butterfield would note of the Whig interpretation that "whatever it may have done to our history, it has had a wonderful effect on our politics...In every Englishman there is hidden something of a whig that seems to tug at the heart-strings".


title: Whig history

text: Butterfield's formulation has subsequently received much attention and the kind of historical writing he argued against in generalized terms is no longer academically respectable. Despite its polemical success, Butterfield's celebrated book was criticized by David Cannadine as "slight, confused, repetitive and superficial". However, of the English tradition more broadly, Cannadine wrote:


title: Whig history

text: E. H. Carr in "What is history?" (1961) gave the book the backhanded compliment of being "a remarkable book in many ways" noting that "though it denounced the whig interpretation over some 130 pages, it did not... name a single whig except Fox, who was no historian, or a single historian save Acton, who was no whig".


title: Whig history

text: Michael Bentley analyses Butterfield's whig theory as referring to a canon of 19th-century historians in and of England (such as William Stubbs, James Anthony Froude, E. A. Freeman, J. R. Green, W. E. H. Lecky, Lord Acton, J. R. Seeley, S. R. Gardiner, C. H. Firth and J. B. Bury) that in fact excludes few except Thomas Carlyle. The theory identifies the common factors and Bentley comments:


title: Whig history

text: Carlyle apart, the so-called Whigs were predominantly Christian, predominantly Anglican, thinkers for whom the Reformation supplied the critical theatre of enquiry when considering the origins of modern England. When they wrote about the history of the English constitution, as so many of them did, they approached their story from the standpoint of having Good News to relate ... If they could not have found the grandeur that they developed had they been writing half a century earlier, neither could they have supported their optimism had they lived to endure the barbarisms of the Somme and Passchendaele.


title: Whig history

text: Roger Scruton takes the theory underlying whig history to be centrally concerned with social progress and reaction, with the progressives shown as victors and benefactors. According to Victor Feske, there is too much readiness to accept Butterfield's classic formulation from 1931 as definitive.


title: Whig history

text: In Britain, whig history is a view of British history that sees it as a "steady evolution of British parliamentary institutions, benevolently watched over by Whig aristocrats, and steadily spreading social progress and prosperity". It described a "continuity of institutions and practices since Anglo-Saxon times that lent to English history a special pedigree, one that instilled a distinctive temper in the English nation (as whigs liked to call it) and an approach to the world [which] issued in law and lent legal precedent a role in preserving or extending the freedoms of Englishmen".


title: Whig history

text: Paul Rapin de Thoyras's history of England, published in 1723, became "the classic Whig history" for the first half of the eighteenth century. Rapin claimed that the English had preserved their ancient constitution against the absolutist tendencies of the Stuarts. However, Rapin's history lost its place as the standard history of England in the late 18th century and early 19th century to that of David Hume.


title: Whig history

text: According to Arthur Marwick, however, Henry Hallam was the first whig historian, publishing "Constitutional History of England" in 1827, which "greatly exaggerated the importance of 'parliaments' or of bodies [whig historians] thought were parliaments" while tending "to interpret all political struggles in terms of the parliamentary situation in Britain [during] the nineteenth century, in terms, that is, of Whig reformers fighting the good fight against Tory defenders of the status quo".


title: Whig history

text: In "The History of England" (1754–1761), Hume challenged whig views of the past and the whig historians in turn attacked Hume; but they could not dent his history. In the early 19th century, some whig historians came to incorporate Hume's views, dominant for the previous fifty years. These historians were members of the "New Whigs" around Charles James Fox (1749–1806) and Lord Holland (1773–1840) in opposition until 1830 and so "needed a new historical philosophy". Fox himself intended to write a history of the Glorious Revolution of 1688, but only managed the first year of James II's reign. A fragment was published in 1808. James Mackintosh then sought to write a Whig history of the Glorious Revolution, published in 1834 as the "History of the Revolution in England in 1688".


title: Whig history

text: Hume still dominated English historiography, but this changed when Thomas Babington Macaulay entered the field, utilising Fox and Mackintosh's work and manuscript collections. Macaulay's "History of England" was published in a series of volumes from 1848 to 1855. It proved an immediate success, replacing Hume's history and becoming the new orthodoxy. As if to introduce a linear progressive view of history, the first chapter of Macaulay's "History of England" proposes:


title: Whig history

text: The history of our country during the last hundred and sixty years is eminently the history of physical, of moral, and of intellectual improvement.While Macaulay was a popular and celebrated historian of the whig school, his work did not feature in Butterfield's 1931 "Whig Interpretation of History". According to Ernst Breisach, "his style captivated the public as did his good sense of the past and firm whiggish convictions".


title: Whig history

text: William Stubbs (1825–1901), the constitutional historian and influential teacher of a generation of historians, was the author of the extremely influential "Constitutional History of England" (published between 1873–78) and became a crucial figure in the later survival and respectability of whig history. According to Reba Soffer,


title: Whig history

text: Stubb's history began with an imagined Anglo-Saxon past into which representative parliamentary institutions emerged and fought for control with the absolutist crown in various stages (including overreaches in during the English Civil War) before uniting in "nation, church, peers and people" in the Glorious Revolution. This view of events was substantially challenged: Maitland discovered in 1893 that the early "parliaments" had "no hint of operating as a representative body but resembled instead a meeting of the King's Council, called to meet the king's purposes; it passed no 'legislation', but rather considered petitions or 'bills' as though acting as an ultimate court of justice". Albert Pollard, writing in 1920, also shot through much of Stubbs' ideas on the representative and law-making powers of early English parliaments, pulling the emergence of a semi-independent House of Commons to the 1620s.


title: Whig history

text: Political history was the usual venue for whig history in Great Britain, but it also appears in other areas. Robert Hebert Quick (1831–1891) was one of the leaders of the Whig school of the history of education, along with G. A. N. Lowndes. In 1898, Quick explained the value of studying the history of educational reform, arguing that the great accomplishments of the past were cumulative and comprised the building blocks that “would raise us to a higher standing-point from which we may see much that will make the right road clearer to us”.


title: Whig history

text: Frederic William Maitland is "now universally recognised as the first practitioner of the modern discipline of history", using "medieval law as a tool to prise open the mind of medieval men". Blaas, in "Continuity and Anachronism" (1978) discerns new methods in the work of J. H. Round, F. W. Maitland and A. F. Pollard; Bentley believes that their work "contained the origins of much twentieth-century [historical] thinking in England". Marwick also positively mentions Gardiner, Seeley, Lord Acton, and T. F. Tout as transforming the teaching and study of history at British universities into a recognisable modern form.


title: Whig history

text: The First World War, however, did substantial damage to whig history's fundamental assumption of progress and improvement:


title: Whig history

text: Accelerated by the sceptical power of a new breed of historian epitomized in the brilliance of F. W. Maitland, whiggery had begun its turn downwards (we are told) and met its Waterloo on the Somme ... [T]win thrusts—on the one hand cultural despair in face of a dead civilization, on the other a determination to make history say something different for the post-war generation—worked between them to put whig susceptibilities between a rock and a hard place.


title: Whig history

text: Bentley also speculates that 19th-century British historiography took the form of an indirect social history which "attempted to embrace society by absorbing it into the history of the state", a project gravely disrupted by the First World War and renewed questions on "the pretensions of the state as an avatar of social harmony". He, however, notes that whig history has not died "outside the academy" and lives on partially in criticism of history as something published in "a row of small-minded monographs written by authors calling themselves 'doctor', whose life-experience and sense of English culture extended no further than taking cups of tea in the Institute of Historical Research".


title: Whig history

text: It has been argued that the historiography of science is "riddled with Whiggish history". Like other whig histories, whig history of science tends to divide historical actors into "good guys" who are on the side of truth (as is now known), and "bad guys" who opposed the emergence of these truths because of ignorance or bias. Science is seen as emerging from "a series of victories over pre-scientific thinking". From this whiggish perspective, Ptolemy would be criticized because his astronomical system placed the Earth at the center of the universe while Aristarchus would be praised because he placed the Sun at the center of the solar system. This kind of evaluation ignores historical background and the evidence that was available at a particular time: Did Aristarchus have evidence to support his idea that the Sun was at the center? Were there good reasons to reject Ptolemy's system before the sixteenth century?


title: Whig history

text: The writing of Whig history of science is especially found in the writings of scientists and general historians, while this whiggish tendency is commonly opposed by professional historians of science. Nicholas Jardine describes the changing attitude to whiggishness this way:


title: Whig history

text: By the mid-1970s, it had become commonplace among historians of science to employ the terms "Whig" and "Whiggish", often accompanied by one or more of "hagiographic", "internalist", "triumphalist", even "positivist", to denigrate grand narratives of scientific progress. At one level there is, indeed, an obvious parallel with the attacks on Whig constitutional history in the opening decades of the century. For, as P. B. M. Blaas has shown, those earlier attacks were part and parcel of a more general onslaught in the name of an autonomous, professional and scientific history, on popular, partisan and moralising historiography. Similarly, ... For post-WWII champions of the newly professionalized history of science the targets were quite different. Above all, they were out to establish a critical distance between the history of science and the teaching and promotion of the sciences. In particular, they were suspicious of the grand celebratory and didactic narratives of scientific discovery and progress that had proliferated in the inter-war years.


title: Whig history

text: More recently, some scholars have argued that Whig history is essential to the history of science. At one level, "the very term 'the history of science' has itself profoundly Whiggish implications. One may be reasonably clear what 'science' means in the 19th century and most of the 18th century. In the 17th century 'science' has very different meaning. Chemistry, for example, was then inextricably mixed up with alchemy. Before the 17th century dissecting out such a thing as 'science' in anything like the modern sense of the term involves profound distortions." The science historians' rejection of whiggishness has been criticised by some scientists for failing to appreciate "the temporal depth of scientific research".


title: Whig history

text: Retrospectives on modern macroeconomics are generally whiggish histories. For example, the popularisation of mathematical models by Paul Samuelson's "Foundations of Economic Analysis", when viewed by economists trained in a mathematical framework becomes "an important milestone on the road to the mathematization of economics" in a story told by the victorious. Yet "those who do not agree that such mathematization is a good thing could argue that the mathematical developments... represent a regression rather than a progression". The introduction of rational expectations similarly carries implicit hindsight bias: people who disagree on the reality of agents making decisions in the manner assumed (e.g. behavioral economics) "would not necessarily rejoice in [rational expectations'] present ascendancy".


title: Whig history

text: Burrow views Marxist history, with its "[supposed] anticipated terminus from which it derives its moral and political point", as "characteristically whig".


title: Whig history

text: One very common example of Whig history is the work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, to whom is often ascribed a teleological view of history with an inexorable trajectory in the direction of progress.


title: Whig history

text: Marxists have had varied views on Whig history. The traditional inheritance of Hegel, interpreted through the Engels' articulation of historical materialism, implied that history progressed from a "primitive communism", through slave societies, feudal societies, capitalism, and finally to socialism and communism. However, contemporary Marxists, such as Ellen Meiksins Wood, have aggressively challenged those assumptions as deterministic and ahistorical. Walter Benjamin criticized conception of history which assumed a necessarily progressive or teleological course, though he did not employ the term "Whig history". "The danger affects both the content of the [progressive] tradition and its receivers. The same threat hangs over both: that of becoming a tool of the ruling classes. In every era the attempt must be made anew to wrest tradition away from a conformism that is about to overpower it."


title: Whig history

text: In "The Anthropic Cosmological Principle" (1986), John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler identify whiggishness with a teleological principle of convergence in history to liberal democracy. This is in line with what Barrow and Tipler call the "anthropic principle".


title: Whig history

text: James A. Hijiya points out the persistence of whiggish history in history textbooks. In the debate over Britishness, David Marquand praised the whig approach on the grounds that "ordered freedom and evolutionary progress "have" been among the hallmarks of modern British history, and they "should" command respect".


title: Whig history

text: Historian Edward J. Larson in his book "Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion" (1997) challenged a whiggish view of the Scopes trial. The book won the Pulitzer Prize for History in 1998.


title: Mihai Eminescu

text: Mihai Eminescu (; born Mihail Eminovici; 15 January 1850 – 15 June 1889) was a Romanian Romantic poet from Moldavia, novelist, and journalist, generally regarded as the most famous and influential Romanian poet. Eminescu was an active member of the Junimea literary society and worked as an editor for the newspaper "Timpul" ("The Time"), the official newspaper of the Conservative Party (1880–1918). His poetry was first published when he was 16 and he went to Vienna, Austria to study when he was 19. The poet's manuscripts, containing 46 volumes and approximately 14,000 pages, were offered by Titu Maiorescu as a gift to the Romanian Academy during the meeting that was held on 25 January 1902. Notable works include "Luceafărul" ("The Vesper/The Evening Star/The Lucifer/The Daystar"), "Odă în metru antic" ("Ode in Ancient Meter"), and the five "Letters" ("Epistles/Satires"). In his poems, he frequently used metaphysical, mythological and historical subjects.


title: Mihai Eminescu

text: His father was Gheorghe Eminovici, an aristocrat from Bukovina, which was then part of the Austrian Empire (while his grandfather came from Banat). He crossed the border into Moldavia, settling in Ipotești, near the town of Botoșani. He married Raluca Iurașcu, an heiress of an old noble family. In a Junimea register, Eminescu wrote down his birthday date as 22 December 1849, while in the documents of Cernăuți Gymnasium, where Eminescu studied, his birth date is 15 January 1850. Nevertheless, Titu Maiorescu, in his work "Eminescu and His Poems" (1889) quoted N. D. Giurescu's research and adopted his conclusion regarding the date and place of Mihai Eminescu's birth, as being 15 January 1850, in Botoșani. This date resulted from several sources, among which there was a file of notes on christenings from the archives of the Uspenia (Princely) Church of Botoșani; inside this file, the date of birth was "15 January 1850" and the date of christening was the 21st of the same month. The date of his birth was confirmed by the poet's elder sister, Aglae Drogli, who affirmed that the place of birth was the village of Ipotești, Botoșani County.


title: Mihai Eminescu

text: Mihail (as he appears in baptismal records) or Mihai (the more common form of the name that he used) was born in Botoșani, Moldavia. He spent his early childhood in Botoșani and Ipotești, in his parents family home. From 1858 to 1866 he attended school in Cernăuți. He finished 4th grade as the 5th of 82 students, after which he attended two years of "gymnasium".