DISQUS

Stephen Downes · 2 years ago

Gibbon's book is named (and about) the decline and fall, not the rise and fall.

Carol Jurd · 2 years ago

I haven't read (or listened to) all of Gibbon's book/s, but he does seem to ignore the fact that (a) the Roman empire lasted for a very long time, (b) the eastern Roman empire (which he rather dismisses) lasted even longer. Does he perhaps attribute this to moral reasons, where perhaps there were other underlying causes: the rise of other powerful nations, economic fluctuations. It's easy to oversimplify and draw similes from a very unsimilar situation.

Len · 1 year ago

Gibbon did not ignore the length of the Roman Empire. Moreover, his book deals with the empire's decline --not its rise!

His work is a major literary achievement of the 18th century --still cited by scholars. Gibbon, consulted more original and ancient sources than any other 'Rome' scholar then or now. He 'pioneered' the use of 'footnotes'. Therefore, we know what Gibbon read and the conclusions derived thereof. To assert that Gibbon ignored the length of the Roman Empire is like saying Einstein ignored the speed of light!

Gibbon's history was published in six extensive volumes in 1776. It went through six printings. The original volumes were published as quartos, a common publishing practice of the time.

Even the period covered by Gibbon is not 'short' --the period after Marcus Aurelius (from just before 180) to 1453. Gibbon most certainly knew a thing or two, as well, about the Eastern Empire. He is consulted by everyone writing about it today.

ratanlaxmi · 1 year ago

ed gibbon was very gifted, i would love to have all his introduction in the seven books that got printed. it will be heaven,s edelweis shower on me.
ratanlaxmi
9.10.2008

ratanlaxmi · 1 year ago

i would love to have the preface ofall the seven books of edward gibbon,s.
it would be heaven,s edweils shower on me.
ratanlaxmi
9.10.2008