Gibbon- Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Chapter XVII

Project Guttenburg ^ | 1781 | Edward Gibbon

[hc87]

A people elated by pride, or soured by discontent, are seldom qualified to form a just estimate of their actual situation. The subjects of Constantine were incapable of discerning the decline of genius and manly virtue, which so far degraded them below the dignity of their ancestors; but they could feel and lament the rage of tyranny, the relaxation of discipline, and the increase of taxes. The impartial historian,who acknowledges the justice of their complaints, will observe some favorable circumstances which tended to alleviate the misery of their condition. The threatening tempest of Barbarians, which so soon subverted the foundations of Roman greatness, was still repelled, or suspended, on the frontiers. The arts of luxury and literature were cultivated, and the elegant pleasures of society were enjoyed, by the inhabitants of a considerable portion of the globe. The forms, the pomp, and the expense of the civil administration contributed to restrain the irregular license of the soldiers; and although the laws were violated by power, or perverted by subtlety, the sage principles of the Roman jurisprudence preserved a sense of order and equity, unknown to the despotic governments of the East. The rights of mankind might derive some protection from religion and philosophy; and the name of freedom, which could no longer alarm, might sometimes admonish, the successors of Augustus, that they did not reign over a nation of Slaves or Barbarians.

[eleni121]

old Romans worked harder at maintaining the world they lived in because it was all they had

---

No because your conclusion is based in very simplistic logic...but not any more or less simplistic than the erroneous and narrow views of Gibbons.

[Flag_This]

"Notwithstanding all the other signs of decline, the most fatal defect was Rome's failure to solve the problem of succession. Every time an emporer died there was basically a free for all for power, which sometimes even resulted in multiple "emperors."

I've always heard that was one of the contributing factors, but if it was, it was a problem they had for over 400 years before the collapse.

[colorado tanker]

It's always been interesting to me that most Europeans choose to focus on the "decline and fall" in the Western Roman Empire rather than the fact the Eastern Empire lived on another 1000 years, at times with a quite brilliant civilization.

Although Rome contributed much to Western civilization, the fact is our civilization wouldn't have come into existence had Rome not fallen to our "barbarian" ancestors.

[SunkenCiv]

/bingo

[Beowulf2]

Are you at the place where the really old Hessen general (name slips my mind) and Cornwallis are talking and the Hessen tells Cornwallis to read this Roman book? If you have read that part, can you tell me the name of the book?

[Billthedrill]

Gibbon's case was a little stronger than that, IIRC. It wasn't so much a matter of religion - he also claimed that the charitable practices of the early Christian movement siphoned off potential tax money and more important, that the structuring of the early Church drew off administrative talent that might have done better - well, actually, Gibbon showed that it DID do better - in maintaining administrative efficiency through times of stress than the time-servers who were in the formal Roman government.

It was never a particularly strong case to begin with and I half suspect Gibbon of including it out of a bit of late 18th-century sensationalism. Nor did he claim it was the only cause of the fall of the Western empire. But I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. The Church did abide, after all, and the (Western) Roman government did not.