June 2, AD 455

Sack of Rome (455)

Gaiseric's forces enter Rome and begin a fourteen-day sack

The pope’s reported bargain did not stop the robbery: it traded a city without fire or mass killing for a city open to plunder.

2 June 455, an undefended city

With Rome effectively undefended, Gaiseric reached the city on 2 June 455 and Pope Leo I met him outside the gates.

According to Prosper’s contemporary account, Leo obtained assurances against destruction by fire and against indiscriminate killing — not against plunder.

The western emperor Petronius Maximus had been killed while attempting to leave Rome shortly before Gaiseric entered.

Fourteen days of loading ships

Vandal forces entered Rome on 2 June and began a methodical sack that continued through 16 June.

Procopius reports specifically that the looters removed half of the gilded bronze roof of the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus.

How destructive the sack was is debated: the evidence securely establishes extensive stripping and plunder, not indiscriminate demolition of Rome.

An empress aboard the fleet

Procopius reports that Gaiseric took Licinia Eudoxia and her daughters Eudocia and Placidia, along with imperial treasure and other valuables, back to Carthage.

Later sources claim Eudoxia had invited him. Hydatius labels that story hostile rumour, and modern reference works treat it cautiously.

At Carthage, Bishop Deogratias sold church valuables to redeem and assist captives; Victor of Vita does not say that every captive was freed.

Sources

Researched 23 Aug 2026 6 sources not yet audited

How this was checked

Researched from the web into a fact sheet and rewritten from that sheet. This article has not yet had an independent model audit. How the pipeline works →

What the sources leave uncertain

Prosper supplies the only surviving fifth-century report of Leo's meeting with Gaiseric. It supports promises against fire and slaughter, not a promise to refrain from plunder.
Later sources claim that Eudoxia invited Gaiseric, but Hydatius labels that story hostile rumor, and modern reference works treat it cautiously.
The physical destructiveness of the sack is debated. The evidence securely establishes extensive stripping and plunder, but not indiscriminate demolition of Rome.
Ancient accounts do not provide a reliable casualty total.