Attila vs. Gaiseric Essay
AP World History
The Huns lead by the King Attila and the Vandals lead by King Gaiseric both greatly aided if not, generated the fall of the Roman Empire. The question is which group had more influence on this barbaric act of conquering? Attila the Hun had the audacity to attack the unmatched Roman Empire; this made a massive distraction for the Vandal King Gaiseric. Gaiseric invaded and took over the North African province of the Roman Empire during this distraction. This gave Gaiseric a firm grip on the leash wrapped around the food supplies that needed to be sent into Rome, therefore a lot of power was in his hands.
Attila the Hun was a great warrior and leader of not only the Central Asian Huns, but also the Germanic, Iranian, and Slavic peoples that comprised his army and civilization. He strategized the attack on the Eastern Roman Empire in the early 440’s CE, and the attacks on the Western Roman Empire in the Early 450’s CE. These attacks gave him the control that he craved, but was short-lived when the mighty Hun King drowns in his unconscious nose bleed caused by his large ingestion of alcohol after his wedding.
Gaiseric fueled his invasion by the distractions being created by Attila the Hun. His invasion into the Roman province of North Africa had an extreme impact on the Roman Empire. This province was the main export of food that the Roman Empires needed for their civilians and troops, without that; there would be a massive famine. Gaiseric didn’t want complete control over the Roman Empire; he just wanted a stable area for his people to flourish upon. So Gaiseric allowed for the exports into the empire continue and him and is people lived happily until the Roman Empire wiped them out in 534 CE. Also Gaiseric’s army also sacked Rome in 455 CE, and the only damage that was done was that a roof of a very old building had fallen off.
It is to my knowledge that Attila the Hun had a larger influence on the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document