Edward GibbonRezensionen

This book is full of names that are unfamiliar to me as a modern reader. Here are a few notes that I copied out as I read it. There are many more that I highlighted, but didn’t copy.

It reminded me of the Book of Mormon. It is a often repeated scene of someone coming to power and then being overthrown by a rival party. It is a story of many cruel and tyrannical rulers interspersed with an occasional mediocre ruler and rarely a good one. It seems like the good rulers did not last long because of jealousies stirred up by rivals, perhaps aided by their own missteps.

The theme is familiar: Corrupt rulers and people. Just like in the Old Testament and in the Book of Mormon. In our New Testament Institute class we are learning lots of connections that we don’t see when we quickly read the English translation, but would be obvious to someone reading in the original tongue. In the Greek and the Hebrew of the Bible there are things that don’t make it into the English translation. If we don't read these old books (and old languages), we miss those connections.

One example of the precarious situation prominent people were often in.
"It was dangerous to trust the sincerity of Augustus; to seem to distrust it was still more dangerous." (Kindle Location 4706).

The language of 1776 to 1788 is quite different than ours. I find it delightful to read even though it is at time hard to follow quite what the meaning is.
"Quintilius, who possessed not sufficient moderation or courage to descend into the private station to which the patriotism of the late emperor had condemned him. Without delay or reflection, he assumed the purple at Aquileia, where he commanded a considerable force; and ... his reign lasted only seventeen days," (Location 10082) "The general design of this work will not permit us minutely to relate the actions of every emperor after he ascended the throne," (Location 10087)

"Yet if the memory of its champions is almost buried in oblivion, we need not repine; since every age, however destitute of science or virtue, sufficiently abounds with acts of blood and military renown." (Location 39818)

Arthur used to be a prominent hero. Now his name as an actual person has been largely erased.
"But every British name is effaced by the illustrious name of Arthur," (Location 39833) "At length the light of science and reason was rekindled; the talisman was broken; the visionary fabric melted into air; and by a natural, though unjust, reverse of the public opinion, the severity of the present age is inclined to question the existence of Arthur." (Location 39847)

Belisarius
I have been reading this book with interest, but not involvement. Halfway though the book, Rome's greatness is past, the barbarians are winning, there are several chapters about the general Belisarius. I found myself emotionally involved in rooting for him. He was not only a great general; he was also a good man. Several times, he would win battles against the barbarians, and then court jealousies would call him back to Rome, effectively leaving the field for the barbarians to come back in. Yet, he obeyed. And then to find out that his wife was not only unfaithful, but a multiple murderer who tortured her victims, including her son - ouch.

It seemed to go on for many chapters about the apostasy of the Christian church, the warfare between the various factions, and the atrocities the party in power committed against people who believed differently than them. And when the persecuted party came to power, they were often just as cruel as the ones they replaced.

In chapter XXI: Persecution of Heresy: "Every year, nay, every moon, we make new creeds to describe invisible mysteries. We repent of what we have done, we defend those who repent, we anathematize those whom we defended. We condemn either the doctrine of others in ourselves, or our own in that of others; and reciprocally tearing one another to pieces, we have been the cause of each other's ruin." (Location 21821)

"Oppressed by this painful dialogue, the Persian complained of intolerable thirst, but discovered some apprehension lest he should be killed whilst he was drinking a cup of water. "Be of good courage," said the caliph; "your life is safe till you have drunk this water:" the crafty satrap accepted the assurance, and instantly dashed the vase against the ground." (Location 55947)

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION: GIBBON BY JAMES COTTER MORISON HISTORY OF THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE BY EDWARD GIBBON
Volume 1 Introduction
Chapter I: The Extent Of The Empire In The Age Of The Antonines.
Chapter II: The Internal Prosperity In The Age Of The Antonines.
Chapter III: The Constitution In The Age Of The Antonines.
Chapter IV: The Cruelty, Follies And Murder Of Commodus.
Chapter V: Sale Of The Empire To Didius Julianus.
Chapter VI: Death Of Severus, Tyranny Of Caracalla, Usurpation Of Marcinus.
Chapter VII: Tyranny Of Maximin, Rebellion, Civil Wars, Death Of Maximin.
Chapter VIII: State Of Persia And Restoration Of The Monarchy.
Chapter IX: State Of Germany Until The Barbarians.
Chapter X: Emperors Decius, Gallus, Aemilianus, Valerian And Gallienus.
Chapter XI: Reign Of Claudius, Defeat Of The Goths
Chapter XII: Reigns Of Tacitus, Probus, Carus And His Sons.
Chapter XIII: Reign Of Diocletian And This Three Associates.
Chapter XIV: Six Emperors At The Same Time, Reunion Of The Empire.
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To Constantine.
Volume 2
Chapter XVII: Foundation Of Constantinople.
Chapter XVIII: Character Of Constantine And His Sons.
Chapter XIX: Constantius Sole Emperor.
Chapter XX: Conversion Of Constantine.
Chapter XXI: Persecution Of Heresy, State Of The Church.
Chapter XXII: Julian Declared Emperor.
Chapter XXIII: Reign Of Julian.
Chapter XXIV: The Retreat And Death Of Julian.
Chapter XXV: Reigns Of Jovian And Valentinian, Division Of The Empire.
Chapter XXVI: Progress of The Huns.
Volume 3
Chapter XXVII: Civil Wars, Reign Of Theodosius.
Chapter XXVIII: Destruction Of Paganism.
Chapter XXIX: Division Of Roman Empire Between Sons Of Theodosius.
Chapter XXX: Revolt Of The Goths.
Chapter XXXI: Invasion Of Italy, Occupation Of Territories By Barbarians.
Chapter XXXII: Emperors Arcadius, Eutropius, Theodosius II.
Chapter XXXIII: Conquest Of Africa By The Vandals.
Chapter XXXIV: Attila.
Chapter XXXV: Invasion By Attila.
Chapter XXXVI: Total Extinction Of The Western Empire.
Chapter XXXVII: Conversion Of The Barbarians To Christianity.
Chapter XXXVIII: Reign Of Clovis.
Volume 4
Chapter XXXIX: Gothic Kingdom Of Italy.
Chapter XL: Reign Of Justinian.
Chapter XLI: Conquests Of Justinian, Character Of Balisarius.
Chapter XLII: State Of The Barbaric World.
Chapter XLIII: Last Victory And Death Of Belisarius, Death Of Justinian.
Chapter XLIV: Idea Of The Roman Jurisprudence.
Chapter XLV: State Of Italy Under The Lombards.
Chapter XLVI: Troubles In Persia.
Chapter XLVII: Ecclesiastical Discord.
Chapter XLVIII: Succession And Characters Of The Greek Emperors.
Volume 5
Chapter XLIX: Conquest Of Italy By The Franks.
Chapter L: Description Of Arabia And Its Inhabitants. (The rise to prominence and warfare of Mahomet.)
Chapter LI: Conquests By The Arabs.
Chapter LII: More Conquests By The Arabs.
Chapter LIII: Fate Of The Eastern Empire.
Chapter LIV: Origin And Doctrine Of The Paulicians.
Chapter LV: The Bulgarians, The Hungarians And The Russians.
Chapter LVI: The Saracens, The Franks And The Normans.
Chapter LVII: The Turks.
Chapter LVIII: The First Crusade
Volume 6
Chapter LIX: The Crusades.
Chapter LX: The Fourth Crusade.
Chapter LXI: Partition Of The Empire By The French And Venetians.
Chapter LXII: Greek Emperors Of Nice And Constantinople.
Chapter LXIII: Civil Wars And The Ruin Of The Greek Empire.
Chapter LXIV: Moguls, Ottoman Turks.
Chapter LXV: Elevation Of Timour Or Tamerlane, And His Death
Chapter LXVI: Union Of The Greek And Latin Churches.
Chapter LXVII: Schism Of The Greeks And Latins.
Chapter LXVIII: Reign Of Mahomet The Second, Extinction Of Eastern Empire
Chapter LXIX: State Of Rome From The Twelfth Century.
Chapter LXX: Final Settlement Of The Ecclesiastical State.
Chapter LXXI: Prospect Of The Ruins Of Rome In The Fifteenth Century.

Gibbon, Edward. History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Annotated) Kindle Edition.

Goodreads tells me that I have 364 Kindle Notes and Highlights. This reading captured my interest much more than the last edition that I read, which was in 2012. I like this edition.

Rare edition from 1830, all four of four volumes. Full leather.

Reread, spring 2024. Like most history of the time Gibbon concentrates on leaders, wars and battles and politics. He does, however, expand on the influence of Christianity including the battles between different sects. Not strong on the effects of geography, he attributes a lifestyle of herding to indolence rather than recognizing that the Eurasian steppes do not support the same type of agriculture as the Mediterranean or of Western Europe. It is still a pleasure to read his fluent, detailed, yet comprehensible prose style.

Edward Gibbon€™s classic timeless work of ancient Roman history in 6 volumes collected into 2 boxed sets, in beautiful, enduring hardcover editions with elegant cloth sewn bindings, gold stamped covers, and silk ribbon markers.

This abridged and illustrated version of Gibbon's masterpiece is the first of its kind. Lavishly illustrated with hundreds of photographs of Roman sites, paintings, line drawings, and prints from archives throughout Europe, it will prove to be a collector's item for classicists and historians and will stand as a valuable reference work for libraries and universities alike. Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empireis a fine addition to the private collection of all those who love history and who admire the work of one of the greatest historians who ever set pen to paper.

My gosh this was a slog! Six books of 600 pages each. It was definitely worth the effort, though. I must admit that the level of detail was daunting, but the patterns that such detail exhibited the rhyming history that Mark Twain remarked upon.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to comprehensively rate the series. My favorite aspects of the series are the comprehensive research against primary sources (I gave up trying to read the footnotes after about the second book) and the double-history perspective of a late-18th-century writer examining Roman and Byzantine history. This is an impressive feat of scholarship!

Another motivation for my reading the series was to fill the gaps of my understanding of this massive span of time. Naturally, the interminable list of emperors' names blended together after a while, but the sweep of the narrative will guide me when I next encounter these names, times, and places. The podcast Hardcore History had already done a pretty comprehensive job covering the Mongolian Empire, so it was satisfying to see that narrative mesh with Gibbon's description of the period. I expect this will happen many times over the course of my future reading.

If you're interested in the history of Western Civilization, I'd recommend putting in the effort to read the entire series. Although I found the level of detail to be tedious at times, I am glad that I persevered.

I read these volumes over one summer as sort of a challenge for myself, reading along often without paying much attention. Now, I wonder why I finished these.

Like a series of visits to an eccentric, garrulous and bigoted uncle who is a famous expert on Roman history (I think of him as being played by Sir Ralph Richardson). The structure of his sentences and the pattern of his sentence structures (e.g. backwards, inside-out, simple declarative), especially in relationship to their content and especially considering the length of the work, is incredible.

An 18th century exploration into the events surrounding the Roman Empire and its territories from ca. 180 until the 15th century.

The author is an 18th century Brit who has granted the ancient Romans their conceit, and the work must be read and understood in that light. One of the great opportunities for reflection in reading this work in the early 21st century is to consider what Europe, north Africa, and western Asia must have looked like to someone living in 1776, and the different forms of continuity and discontinuity which are maintained. As an example, Gibbon confesses how there are some areas of Italy which, in his day, had not yet recovered in population from the Byzantine-Gothic wars and the bubonic plague of the middle of the 6th century; we would not be able to make such an observation on the other side of the population boom which has attended to the industrial revolution.

Gibbon does well at considering not just secondary but especially primary sources, and he is rather opaque about his biases and prejudices regarding them. The length of discourse ebbs and flows with the amount and quality of these witnesses: the introductory books set forth the condition of the Empire in the days of the Antonines, the generally confessed high point of the Roman Empire, and fills in some of the details about the infrastructure of the Empire as it had developed from the days of Augustus. Then over a few books Gibbon covers the long/awful "third century" of 180-280 and all of the trials of the Empire. The fourth century resurgence and crisis defeats of 280-400 are covered in many books, including discussions of the development of Christianity, and thus ends the first modern volume. Then Gibbon gets to the collapse of the Empire at the hands of the German tribes in the West, and the maintenance of the Empire in the East. Over many books we read of Justinian, his conquests, and his law code; Gibbon has precious little to say about the Justinian plague beyond its virulence. Gibbon quickly covers Justinian through Heraclius, and the second modern volume ends with his characterization of the various Emperors from Heraclius until Isaac Angelus and the Latin conquest of Constantinople. The third modern volume covers the medieval period, and does so in two phases: from 600-1200, looking in across the world of the former Roman Empire and the exploits in Italy, Charlemagne and the Holy Roman Empire, Muhammad, the rise of Islam, the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates, the Bulgarians, Russians, Normans, the Turks, and then the Crusades, leading to the Fourth Crusade. Then Gibbon does something similar with the 1200-1450 period: the Greek loss of Constantinople, their fragmented empires, and recovery of Constantinople; the Mongols and the rise of the Ottomans; relationship between Byzantium and the West; the final loss of the Eastern Roman Empire; and Gibbon concludes by considering Rome itself from the tenth century until the end of the Great Schism. He then renders some conclusions.

Gibbon is often criticized for how he blames the fall of Rome on Christianity. I did not perceive in his work any truly monocausal explanation of this sort. In places where he would presume Christianity would have loosened the "martial spirit" of the Romans, he would be misguided. While Gibbon is a man of the Enlightenment - and in his notes you can tell he is a big fan of Hume and the Scottish Enlightenment in particular - his explorations of the various doctrinal controversies are well expressed and reasoned, and he seems less condemnatory of the religion itself and much more fatigued with the constant in-fighting over ultimately speculative matters. And in truth the divisions within Christianity absolutely weakened the standing of the Empire: when the Coptic Christians of Egypt welcomed the conquest of the Muslims so they would no longer be under the yoke of Constantinople, that tells you something; a big part of the ultimate end of the Byzantine Empire was the division and hostility engendered between them and the Catholics to the west.

What should stand out about this narrative, both as told by Gibbon and in general, is not about how Rome declined and fell, as if we can thus read the tea leaves about how such powers decline and fall in order to ameliorate our own, because all powers invariably rise, decline, and fall. Instead, it should be about the resilience of the Roman Empire: the miracle is not that it collapsed, but that it endured for so long in reality, and has never been exorcised from the mentality of Europeans ever since. "Caesars" as Kaisers and Czars and Sultans ruled in Europe until only a century ago; one cannot understand medieval and modern European history without grappling with how the Roman Empire continually captured their imagination.

The most modern research leads us to put far more weight on the role of climate change and its attendant consequences: more challenging food growing conditions which can quickly lead to greater ravaging and repine, the ferret and the transmission of the bubonic plague, and thus a devastation in the 6th century which leaves its mark in the archaeological record for over a century and which the world of Late Antiquity could not adequately recover (and, as seen above, in some respects, had not even recovered by the time the United States of America came into being!). If we're looking for a big lesson from Rome about how powers fall, that's the one we should heed.

Cuarto y último de la nueva edición íntegra, en cuatro volúmenes, de este gran clásico de la historiografía concebido según los cánones del espíritu de la Ilustración. El cuarto tomo (años 733 a 1430) se ocupa, entre otros acontecimientos, de la desintegración del Imperio Romano de Occidente, las tres primeras cruzadas, la conquista de Constantinopla por los turcos y la consolidación de Estado eclesiástico.

Tercero de la nueva edición íntegra, en cuatro volúmenes, de este gran clásico de la historiografía concebido según los cánones del espíritu de la Ilustración. En este tercer tomo (años 412 a 1055) se prosigue el relato de las invasiones bárbaras y se narran, entre otros hechos, las revoluciones de Persia, la coronación de Carlomagno, la aparición del islam y los primeros sitios de Constantinopla.

Segundo de la nueva edición íntegra, en cuatro volúmenes especialmente ideada para su fácil manejo por parte del lector con mapas e índice de contenidos, de este gran clásico de la historiografía concebido según los cánones del espíritu de la Ilustración. Este segundo tomo (años 312 a 582) describe las herejías religiosas ocurridas bajo los reinados de Juliano, Joviano y Graciano, la partición del Imperio entre los hijos de Diocleciano y las invasiones bárbaras.

En este primer tomo (años 96 a 438) se narran, entre otros hechos, el esplendor de la época de los antoninos, la fundación de Constantinopla, la conversión del emperador Constantino y el establecimiento de Iglesia católica.

An absolutely massive work, served up in a less forbidding shape in this edition, which has 28 in full of the book's 71 chapters (the omitted chapters, however, are served up in one-page summaries, so you at least get a feel of what you're missing). We are used to thinking of the Roman Empire in positive, even superlative, terms, but here the accent is on its weaknesses and failures. One gets the impression of a regime that depended too much on mercenary armed forces, who seem to have continually blackmailed the rulers; and of an inordinately self-serving ruling class, with rare exceptions like Marcus Aurelius or Trajan in the early years, and the chronic problem of an orderly succession, which seems to have been as traumatic and blood-soaked as in the Turco-Mongol world. The story is also that of the gradual ascendancy of Christianity, and its usurpation of the state apparatus. Little importance seems to have been given to the state-building prowess, the massive infrastructure, the Pax Romana which is touted as a gift to humanity. The story of the fall of Constantinople is especially heart-wrenching. The breadth and depth of the author's scholarship is mind-blowing.
For our era, Gibbon's work serves as a warning against depending too much on the armed forces to maintain the state; and the relative weakness of a state religion based on astrology, superstition,and the divine right of kings.

Edward Gibbon is almost intimidating to read. He has full command of grammar, vocabulary, and style while quoting multiple languages including ancient Greek. He's an agreeable voice and provides a window on life in England and Switzerland in the last half of the 18C. Be sure to keep a dictionary by your side as you read his Memoirs.

Very interesting so far. Of course, this is only volume 1 of 6.

A useful abridgment of approximately the first, and most important, half of the great work. Running from the origins of the Roman Empire in the Augustan reforms through to Alaric's reduction of the 'Eternal' City in 410 CE - focusing, of course, on the latter part of that span -this book is an invaluable resource in setting out the sweep of the decline of antiquity's most powerful empire. One day, I shall bite the bullet and read the original, but until I have a month or so spare to set aside, this will do very nicely

Best narrative history ever written. Gibbon had so many fewer sources and tools than we have today, but his basic conclusions from the late 18th century information he had are still largely correct today.

A weakened military and political state that relied heavily on barbarian mercenary soldiers for defense was doomed. The different internal barbarian factions just served to divide the military and political and religious structures to a point to where they were easy pickin's from both inside and outside the empire. The western empire falling first while the eastern (Greek) Byzantine empire, under less external pressure, survives much longer. (Until their Roman Christian Crusader brothers came to sack them.)

Gibbons details the whole ugly mess down to minute detail and doesn't leave anything out, from incest to slaughter. His narrative is lively and opinionated, full of both shock and humor.

Read the whole damned thing, footnotes and all, not some abridged abomination. This is a literary work as much as an historical work.

Anyone who needs an abject lesson on how the modern western world is going to go, should read these books. We're already in the age of bread and circuses.

The first four volumes are highly intriguing and very interesting. Gibbon has a very interesting take on Rome’s fall and its connection to what he was experiencing in the 1770s. Given this connection to him, it’s hard to separate his bias, but the bias makes sense. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it, and I can’t wait to read the last four volumes.

La opinión de Jorge Luis Borges sobre este libro es muy superior a la mia. Así que mejor copiar y pegar:

Las propias deficiencias, o, si se quiere, abstenciones de Gibbon, son favorables a la obra. Si ésta hubiera sido escrita en función de tal o cual teoría, la aprobación o desaprobación del lector dependerían del juicio que la tesis pudiera merecerle. Tal no es, ciertamente, el caso de Gibbon. Fuera de aquella prevención contra el sentimiento religioso en general y contra la fe cristiana en particular que declara en ciertos famosos capítulos, Gibbon parece abandonarse a los hechos que narra y los refleja con una divina inconsciencia que lo asemeja al ciego destino, al propio curso de la historia.

El buen sentido y la ironía son costumbres de Gibbon. Tácito alaba la reverencia de los germanos, que no encerraron a sus dioses entre paredes y que no se atrevieron a figurarlos en madera o en mármol; Gibbon se limita a observar que mal podían tener templos o estatuas quienes apenas tenían chozas. En lugar de escribir que no hay confirmación alguna de los milagros que divulga la Biblia, Gibbon censura la imperdonable distracción de aquellos paganos que, en sus largos catálogos de prodigios, nada nos dicen de la luna y del sol, que detuvieron todo un día su curso, o del eclipse y del terremoto que acompañaron la muerte de Jesús.

...La obra de Gibbon sigue incólume y es verosímil conjeturar que no la tocarán las vicisitudes del porvenir. Dos causas colaboran en esta perduración. La primera y quizá la más importante, es de orden estético; estriba en el encanto, que, según Stevenson, es la imprescindible y esencial virtud de la literatura. La otra razón estribaría en el hecho, acaso melancólico, de que al cabo del tiempo, el historiador se convierte en historia y no sólo nos importa saber cómo era el campamento de Atila sino cómo podía imaginárselo un caballero inglés del siglo XVIII.

Edward Gibbon foi um clérigo inglês do século XVIII. Foi o primeiro a fazer um estudo secular da História da religião. O primeiro volume de “Declínio e Queda do Império Romano” foi publicado pela primeira vez em 1776.
A versão utilizada de “Declínio e Queda do Império Romano” é a edição abreviada organizada por D.M. Low, publicada pelo Círculo de Leitores em 1995.
A obra “Declínio e Queda do Império Romano” de Edward Gibbon é agradável de ler graças às pequenas histórias que colorem as suas páginas. Não apenas por isso, mas também porque é uma obra que se preocupa com o acontecimento, deixando a análise das conjunturas e das estruturas para séculos posteriores, é também rica em informação, revelando a grande erudição do seu autor. Este é o seu maior mérito: a concentração de informação relativa ao tempo histórico curto, ao tempo do acontecimento.
Apesar da distância de cerca de quinze séculos entre o tempo acerca do qual Gibbon escreve e o tempo em que ele escreve, apesar da sua intenção de se colocar como observador imparcial dos acontecimentos que narra, apesar da obra de Gibbon se poder considerar como objectivamente imparcial, no entanto, a mesma padece de uma falta de imparcialidade que nos é transmitida de forma subjectiva pela adjectivação empregue. O talento literário de Gibbon, bem patente na obra, que o levou a colocar adjectivos onde apenas as regras da retórica os poderiam reclamar, levou-o também a deslocar-se espiritualmente para o Império Romano, do que resultou uma narrativa viva e rica. Assim, em consequência deste posicionamento intelectual, resulta que Gibbon nos surge Romano na oposição Romanos – Bárbaros, e Cristão na oposição Cristãos – Pagãos.
Cedo o cristianismo conheceu no seu seio uma oposição gregos – latinos ou oriente – ocidente. Também aqui Gibbon toma posição, a qual nos é indicada pelos adjectivos empregues. Assim, ficamos a saber que o clero e o povo do Oriente tinha “uma vã predisposição para a argumentação”[1], enquanto a Igreja Ocidental vivia em “feliz ignorância”[2]. Pela imagem valorativa transmitida por estas expressões, ficamos a saber que é melhor ser ignorante e ter fé do que empreender vãs buscas da verdade, pois Jesus disse: “Felizes os pobres de espírito, pois serão felizes”[3].
Não devemos ser demasiado severos com Gibbon, analisando a sua obra com as exigências de rigor e isenção que se esperam de um historiador contemporâneo. Em vez disso, devemos reconhecer que Gibbon é fiel à sua concepção de História. E que concepção é essa? É o próprio Gibbon quem nos responde: “A História que se propõe registar as ocorrências do passado para instrução dos séculos futuros, dificilmente mereceria esta honrosa função se condescendesse em defender a causa dos tiranos ou justificar os lemas da perseguição”[4].
Com este fito em vista, Gibbon não hesita em completar a História com suposições e possibilidades. Deste modo, tenta suprir com a um tanto de razão e outro tanto de intuição a falta de fontes: “Pode supor-se que eles insistiram em todos os pontos susceptíveis de afagar o orgulho, a piedade ou os receios do seu soberano, levando-o à destruição do cristianismo. Talvez tivessem explicado que a gloriosa obra de libertação do império...”[5].
A História escrita por Gibbon, surge assim valorativa e especulativa. Como exemplo desta falta de rigor, tomemos o sub- capítulo dedicada a Atanásio intitulado “O carácter e as aventuras de Atanásio”[6]. A admiração de Gibbon por Atanásio é evidente e, neste caso particular, não apenas de forma subjectiva mas também de forma bem objectiva. O carácter de Atanásio é exaltado e surge-nos, ao mesmo tempo, como um herói e um santo. Porém, se um herói é forçosamente um aventureiro, tal predicado não se pode aplicar a um santo. E, “aventuras” será uma descrição literária de uma vida fictícia ou uma biografia histórica? O posicionamento valorativo e especulativo de Gibbon relativamente a Atanásio pode ser ilustrado pela transcrição de apenas três frases: “Atanásio mostrou uma superioridade de carácter e talento que o teria qualificado, muito mais do que os degenerados filhos de Constantino, para governar uma grande monarquia”[7].
Quanto ao seu posicionamento religioso, Gibbon coloca-se como defensor da linha ortodoxa que chegou vitoriosa ao seu século. Assim, distingue o tronco ortodoxo das ramificações heréticas de forma radical: “a linha quase imperceptível que separa a fé ortodoxa da depravação herética”[8]. Mas se a ortodoxia é uma heresia que se implantou, então toda a fé será depravação? Efectivamente a linha que separa a ortodoxia da heresia é muito ténue, quase imperceptível e demasiado circunstancial, pelo que o autor nos mostrou um exemplo de adjectivação não só desnecessária mas incorrecta.
Este posicionamento de Gibbon é, voltamos a dizê-lo, apenas subjectivo, subentende-se dos adjectivos utilizados. Em matéria objectiva, Gibbon coloca as perseguições aos Cristãos no lugar que lhe competem, isto é, retira aos Cristãos o papel de vítimas inocentes que a História sagrada dos séculos lhes havia atribuído; ao mesmo tempo que mostra os Romanos como magistrados tolerantes e não como algozes implacáveis. Parece lamentar também a associação entre trono e altar que se deu com Constantino, vendo essa associação como o início da corrupção do ideal Cristão dos primeiros séculos.
Neste campo começa por referir as “morais austeras dos primeiros cristãos”[9], mas avisando desde logo que “a virtude dos cristãos primitivos era frequentemente protegida pela pobreza e pela ignorância”[10]. Assim, por exemplo, explica qual a origem e razão da aversão cristã pela sensualidade, que o sexo é pecado que é punido com a morte, mas que a morte torna necessário o sexo: “A casta severidade dos padres relativamente ao comércio dos dois sexos provinha do mesmo princípio – a sua aversão por todos os gozos que pudessem satisfazer a natureza sensual e degradar a essência espiritual do homem. Defendiam, como ideia favorita, que, se Adão permanecesse obediente ao Criador, ele teria vivido para todo o sempre num estado de pureza virginal (...). O uso do casamento só foi permitido à sua posteridade decaída como um expediente necessário para continuar a espécie humana e como uma restrição, embora imperfeita, à natural luxúria do desejo”[11].
Esta moral, por vezes excessiva, não escapa à crítica de Gibbon, que observa de forma muito objectiva que as Igrejas enriqueciam enquanto os seus fiéis empobreciam, mas fá-lo de forma indirecta, colocando-se dentro do Império, transferindo a autoria dessa constatação para os magistrados Romanos: “no tempo do imperador Décio, os magistrados achavam que os cristãos de Roma possuíam fortunas muito consideráveis; que vasos de ouro e prata eram utilizados no seu culto religiosos; e que muitos dos seus prosélitos tinham vendido as suas terras e casas para aumentar os fundos públicos da seita, em detrimento, na realidade, dos seus infelizes filhos que se viam reduzidos à mendicidade porque os pais tinham sido santos”[12].
Realça a importância que os primitivos Cristãos davam ao Antigo Testamento, mais do que a Jesus: “... mas quando deviam demonstrar a origem divina do cristianismo, insistem muito mais veementemente nas profecias que anunciavam o Messias do que nos milagres que acompanharam a sua vinda”[13]. Esta é uma ideia que estaria no espírito de um cristão do século XVIII ou doutro século em que o Cristianismo já estivesse solidamente implantado. Nestas condições, tendo o Cristianismo já um historial de séculos, pode-se relevar a emanência do sagrado através de Cristo e desprezar as profecias do Antigo Testamento como “coisas dos Judeus”. Não era assim no primeiro século. O Cristianismo estava a formar-se e só podia mostrar maturidade reclamando-se como seguidor de um Messias há muito anunciado nos escritos judaicos que, por esse motivo, também seriam Cristãos. Aliás, ficaram cristãos, pois a Bíblia Católica ou Protestante incluem os livros judaicos do Antigo Testamento.
Outra razão se pode ainda apontar para esta “inversão” de valores. Os não Cristãos, mais os judeus que os gentios, podiam com mais facilidade recusar a origem divina de Cristo e a ocorrência de milagres, do que as profecias que anunciavam o Messias. Assim, restava aos Cristãos convencer os outros que Jesus era o Messias.

Más de 250 años de historia, desde Marco Antonio (~ año 100) a la invasion de los hunos (~ año 375).

Este libro aunque se llama Vol 1, realmente contiene los volumenes 1 y 2 originales que fueron publicados en 1776 and 1781.

Este libro es bastante largo con más de 1000 páginas pero se hace muy ameno.
Es una larga sucesion de traiciones, asesinatos, guerras civiles, guerras externas, internas, politicas, conjuras familiares, etc. En un momento, la propia abuela del emperador se conjura para que le asesinen y poner a su primo.
Una especie de juego de tronos pero esto es historia autentica.

El lenguaje del libro es a la vez sencillo pero bello. Ameno y bien explicado

La unica pega que le encuentro son esos capitulos sobre el cristianismo que no mantienen el nivel de tension del resto del libro. Tambien parece que el ritmo se esta ralentizando. La mitad del libro es la explicación de los ultimos 75 años de este periodo mientras que la primera mitad explica los otros 200 años.

El mismo estilo que el volumen I, un lenguaje magnifico que te mantiene pasando hojas y hojas.
Los capitulos que me parecieron pesados son los relacionados con la cristiandad. Creo que lo podria haber resumido bastante.
Y en cierta forma la guerra en Italia de Belisarious. Muy interesante pero creo que se alargo demasiado.

Por lo demas, maravilloso.
En este libro finalmente Roma cae, pero ah! Es solo el imperio del Oeste, aun queda el imperio del Este! El ultimo capitulo que realmente deberia ser el primero del siguiente libro explica rapidamente la vida de todos los emperadores hasta el final del imperio del Este.

La Historia de la decadencia y caída del Imperio romano es una obra histórica escrita por el británico Edward Gibbon, que describe la civilización occidental, así como las conquistas islámicas y mongolas, desde el apogeo del Imperio romano hasta la caída de Constantinopla.

Volumes V and VI include probably the most interesting period for my taste, while also including the worst individual chapter and even more unnecessary Byzantine-bashing (Constantinople's "decline is almost coeval with her foundation") and even clearer bias on Gibbon's side. It's fascinating to read someone so blithely unaware of the inconsistencies in his own beliefs, and so happily accepting of the superiority of his own class. You know who should control everything, Gibbon asks? The most wealthy merchants and the nobility. Why? Because that's freedom and liberty. But don't let others have freedom and liberty, that way lies anarchy. This is based on a rigorous classicism, which imagines that "the old patricians were the subjects, the modern barons the tyrants, of the state." Yes. In Ancient Greece, the massively wealthy just hung out talking about Homer all day. Ignore the slaves being used as footstools while they read.

On the other hand, the sheer volume of things he knows makes it much harder for him to keep up his own bigotries for long, and he concludes there there were many causes for end of Rome in both West and East--not just one. He's clearly made uncomfortable by the knowledge that what we have of Ancient Rome in the West was saved by the Papacy, but gives Sixtus V his due. Womersley argues in the introduction that Gibbon's movement away from philosophical history was complete by the end of the History, but that's a bit extreme.* There's plenty of hatred for everyone who isn't a rich, British, post-Anglican rationalist.

And there are still plenty of great fantasy-novel stories in this volume; I expect a dissertation soon, "Fall of Thrones: Gibbon's influence on George R. R. Martin". And many perfect turns of phrase: "Hitherto the weight of supernatural belief inclines against the Protestants; and many a sober Christian would rather admit that a wafer is God, than that God is a cruel and capricious tyrant." Not sure the doctrine of predestination is coming back from that. "The battles won by lessons of tactics may be numbered with the epic poems created from the rules of criticism." Hah. On gunpowder: "If we contrast the rapid progress of this mischievous discovery with the slow and laborious advances of reason, science and the arts of peace, a philosopher, according to his temper, will laugh or weep at the folly of mankind."

It makes me slightly uncomfortable that it took me so long to put my finger on the great flaw in Gibbon's prose, but I finally did: his rhythms and cadences don't alter according to the importance of the information being presented. Whether he's describing one of the most important points in his argument, or just throwing away a line about a fifth-rate Byzantine princeling, his words *sound* the same. In this, at least, we've gone one better than Gibbon. But, as he says, "Genius may anticipate the season of maturity; but in the education of a people, as in that of an individual, memory must be exercised, before the powers of reason and fancy can be expanded; nor may the artist hope to equal or surpass, till he has learned to imitate, the works of his predecessors." Gibbon helps us to to exercise memory, his work is an example of the powers of reason, and he is certainly an artist worthy of imitation, as well as worth surpassing.




*: The best part of Womersley's excellent introduction is his quote from Johnson's 'Journey to the Western Islands': "whatever withdraws us from the power of our senses; whatever makes the past, the distant, or the future predominate over the present, advances us in the dignity of thinking beings." Most certainly this applies to Gibbon's History.