From June 2–16, 455, Gaiseric’s Vandals looted Rome, sailing up the Tiber from Carthage’s harbors. Silver plate slid from storerooms; the creak of wagons echoed through the Forum. The sack was a dividend on Africa’s loss: a kingdom funded by Roman revenues returned to collect in person.
What Happened
Sixteen years after Carthage fell, its king came to Rome. Gaiseric’s fleet—built with customs dues that once filled imperial chests—rode the Tiber’s slow current past the Isola Tiberina and the embankments below the Aventine. For fifteen days, June 2–16, 455, his men methodically looted the city. They sought treasure, captives, leverage—not flames for their own sake [13][15].
The scene mixed ritual and ruin. Chroniclers describe processions of clergy pleading for restraint at St. Peter’s, where the basilica’s shadow fell like a shield over those who huddled inside. Outside, the sound was relentless: the crack of doors forced, the rumble of carts, the shouts of orders in foreign accents. Scarlet banners flapped in the summer air as warehouses emptied [13].
Why Rome again? Because Africa had been Rome’s purse, and now it was Gaiseric’s. The 442 settlement had acknowledged that reality; the 455 sack exploited it. With naval control of the Sicilian straits, the Vandals could strike coasts from Campania to Latium, and Rome had little fleet left to oppose them. Ricimer’s soldiers guarded Italian power politics; they could not conjure ships or money from thin air [13][15][16].
The Vandals took portable wealth: liturgical vessels, gilded statuary, household silver. They took people too, slaves and nobles alike, to be ransomed in Carthage’s harbors with their forest of masts and tar‑smelling docks. The city’s bones—the aqueducts, forums, and temples—mostly remained. But the humiliation deepened, and with it the sense that Rome’s security had become a commodity to be traded.
In Ravenna, officials drafted letters in sober tones, as if phrasing could change the ledger. In reality, the sack confirmed the arithmetic: without Africa’s revenues, the West could not fund a deterrent fleet; without a fleet, no coastal city—least of all Rome—was safe from a power that combined ships with will [13][15].
When the sails retreated toward the Tyrrhenian, Rome counted losses and survivors. The river carried the Vandals south, their holds heavy, their confidence heavier. The West had been taught again that weakness invites repetition.
Why This Matters
The Vandal sack was the materialization of fiscal collapse into catastrophe. It monetized Africa’s loss in the streets of Rome, turning missing customs dues into missing silver plate and captive citizens. It demonstrated Gaiseric’s strategic reach and Rome’s lack of naval answers, further undercutting senatorial confidence in imperial protection [13][15][16].
This event exemplifies the theme of loss of Africa and fiscal collapse. Gaiseric was able to build, crew, and supply the fleet that looted Rome because Carthage paid for it. The West’s inability to rebuild a comparable fleet or sustain coastal defenses flowed from the same hole in the budget recognized in 442 [13][15].
In the narrative arc, 455 intensified the shift of authority to men who controlled troops independent of imperial treasuries. Ricimer’s subsequent dominance owes as much to the state’s empty purse as to his talent. When emperors cannot prevent sacks, kingmakers step forward, and subjects quietly adjust their loyalties.
Historians distinguish this sack from 410’s in motive and method—more systematic plunder, more maritime power behind it—but both tell the same story: Rome had become a place that others could pressure at will, and Western emperors could not credibly promise safety [13][15].
Event in Context
See what happened before and after this event in the timeline
Ask About This Event
Have questions about Vandal Sack of Rome? Get AI-powered insights based on the event details.