Posted on 07/23/2025 3:13:24 AM PDT by Cronos
I consider Gibbons conclusions as actually detrimental to both the study of the Roman Empire and to the west I'm general as this above extract is used by numerous Mohammedans to criticize Christianity
bkmk
Gibbon’s work is colored by an Enlightenment-era skepticism toward organized religion, particularly Catholicism, which he often portrays as superstitious, dogmatic, and detrimental to the Roman Empire’s stability:
Gibbon argues that Christianity undermined the Roman Empire by promoting pacifism, otherworldliness, and a rejection of civic virtues (e.g., Volume 1, Chapter 15). He suggests that the Church diverted resources and loyalty from the state to ecclesiastical concerns. This oversimplifies the complex socio-political factors of Rome’s decline—such as economic instability, barbarian invasions, and internal corruption—while scapegoating Christianity.
Historians, like Christopher Dawson (The Making of Europe), argue that the Church preserved Roman culture through its institutions, monasteries, and legal traditions, fostering continuity rather than collapse.
Gibbon romanticizes pagan Roman culture, implying that Christianity supplanted a vibrant religious system (Volume 1, Chapter 2). In reality, paganism was already declining due to internal inconsistencies and lack of institutional cohesion, as noted by scholars like Peter Brown (The World of Late Antiquity).
Gibbon’s deistic leanings lead him to view miracles and divine providence with skepticism, dismissing accounts in Christian sources like Eusebius or Lactantius as fabrications (Volume 1, Chapter 15). Catholic theology, rooted in the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, holds that divine intervention is compatible with historical events. Gibbon’s rejection of the supernatural distorts his analysis of Christianity’s appeal and influence.
Gibbon’s focus on the Western Roman Empire’s fall overlooks the Eastern (Byzantine) Empire, where Christianity and imperial authority coexisted for centuries. This omission undermines his thesis, as the Eastern Church’s integration with the state, as described by scholars like John Meyendorff (Byzantine Theology), suggests Christianity was not inherently destructive to empire.
Gibbons is pretty good at reconstructing the dynamics at work in the Roman Empire but some of his conclusions are a bit off.
Not sure that Christianity weakened the empire as much as he claims but it did add one further division into an already collapsing system and the pure Christianity of the time was badly at odds with the violence and warfare of the pagan world at the time.
Christianity prevailed, but at a high cost
Western Civilization was the end result of this process and it worked out pretty good until we destroyed it
Gibbon covers 16 centuries of the empire’s history.
There’s a rather well-done overview of the multi-volume set online. The professor includes many photographs of ruins, artwork, maps, etc. to help set the scenes.
I binge-watched it one rainy weekend when Prime had it for free.
I have heard archeologists say that Gibbons is considered worthless as far as his conclusions but very valuable for his collection of historical references, which he ignored in drawing his conclusions.
We have an ancestor mentioned during the crusades in the collection so I bought a set.
I think it is still relevant, but not in every way as you rightly point out.
BTW, IIRC, Gibbons was a raging Tory and was not in any way friendly to the American Revolution, but I know he was a man of his time in England.
It is a useful book, though, but shouldn’t be swallowed wholly...anymore. It once was.
To ask if it is relevant means you never read it
I’ve read it and as I learnt more, have come to loathe it for giving wrong conclusions. Kinda like watching CNN that shows part of the truth and pushes the narrative in a completely wrong direction.
It’s still essential reading, if only for its literary merit, which is unsurpassed.
The ‘Decline and Fall’ stands as a historical landmark, no matter what your individual perspective is. Also, he wrote it long before he had access to any of the archaeological documents that WE rely on in our educational process.
You are right, I didn’t read it largely because I wasn’t interested in picking through propaganda. I can see why someone would be interested in the (British version of) “history of history” but I am more interested in the evidence of historical events.
Hmm.. well, yes, it was a magnum opus for the 18th century.
His gathering of facts for that time is impressive.
His conclusions where he colors the facts based on his personal bias is noticeable even for that time.
Not sure who said every great library includes a full set of Gibbons - unread.
The people who cherry pick one of his descriptions and debate whether he was right or wrong are wasting our time.
Gibbons Decline is the greatest history and the greatest description of the human condition ever written.
It’s massive and covers approx. 1500 years of history. Therein he unleashes hundreds of truisms on behavior.
If he discussed religion as a contributing factor to the fall of Rome, he also discussed it softening the fall.
As for using him to defend Islam, that would be extremely difficult for anyone who reads the history of Islam in his massive work.
Decline is endlessly full of human and epic stories and you read and can’t imagine they haven’t been turned into great movies.
But many readers don’t bother to check up and walk away with his (incorrect) conclusions
But, history is written differently by different authors at different periods over time. You read it, if for no other reason than that it's interesting to learn how one age or one culture has seen and described the facts available to them, in THEIR lifetime.
I think that is what was meant by the person who said, 'If you didn't read 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire', then you can't be regarded as an educated person'.
There are a great many books that are important to read, even though finally revealed facts prove that they are dated.
The EurAsian horse tribes are rarely mentioned in connection with the fall of both the Western Roman Empire, or the Eastern Roman Empire a thousand years later.
These horse tribes coming out of the Steppe had an enormous impact on all of Europe’s history, constantly pillaging Eastern and Central Europe, not unlike the rampages of the Vikings in the West a thousand years later.
Anything by ZZ Topp is relevant!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.