Money and tail, like everything.

>>435563
loot

>>435563

Visigoths sacked Rome after failing attemps to get a satisfactory deal with the Romans.
Note that Roman capital was already in Ravenna.

>>435563
The Roman military relied in that time greatly on the use of the foederati. This was their downfall. The germanic foederati under Arminius rebelled and took over Rome.

It's right there in the world, m80. "Sack". As in put all their valuable shit into a sack and carry it off. Now you have all their stuff, and any attractive women and children you feel like carrying off as well.

Beyond the basic value of stealing all their gold cups and ermine robes, plunder is an important obligation a leader had to his followers. Providing them with opportunities for plunder was a big part of why they followed you. So if the Romans weren't gonna play ball, you'd just get what you needed the old fashioned way.

>>435563
Rome was sacked like a bunch of times: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Rome

And it was for the same reasons every time. Money, glory, bitches.

>>435611

Was there any sack of Rome in between the Celts and the Visigoths?

>>435729
Nope Rome was to busy sacking everyone else

>>435563
>so I cn cop dat cash money ja feel ma nicca

essentially nig tier looting

>>435729
Well I guess if you count Romans sacking Rome their were quite of few "sackings" in-between but I don't really know if they were proper sackings or if Roman generals treated Rome with velvet gloves when they took it over to assert their power.