Customer Reviews

The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Penguin Classics)

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

This is an enormous amount of content and value for just 99 cents. Regarding this Kindle edition: I have purchased a number of inexpensive books on the Kindle, and as I have posted elsewhere, I feel that getting great works at cheap prices is one of the great things the Kindle enables. This Kindle version of Gibbon is fine - the table of contents are active, the formatting looks good to me at all of the font sizes. In reading the comments to the prior review, it sounds like the publisher made these changes in response to comments.

Historians love revision. It's why so few histories of the 19th century endure; new evidence and interpretations render them useless. Even Carl Sandburg's superb biography of Abraham Lincoln sags under the weight of new research.

Why, then, is The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire timeless? The author wasn't a post-modernist man trapped in an Enlightenment body; Gibbon had no conception of social history or archeology, his 18th century idea that climate affects morality is long out of date, and his analyses of the Middle East are hampered by his reliance on second-hand sources. But in 200 years no one has seriously challenged the framework Gibbon used to explain the fall of the empire. In fact, contemporary histories of Rome still owe a great deal to him.

Why? One reason is his careful use of documents. Decline and Fall relies mostly on writers like Ammianus and Sidonius, who tried to be impartial. Another is Gibbon's almost superhuman objectivity; while individual characters are berated for this and that, the author is usually sympathetic to human foibles, and always tells his tales with as much complexity as the sources will allow. Which is one reason the work's alleged hostility to Christianity is overstated; Gibbon said the religion played a role (not "the" role) in the fall of Rome, and even praises the new faith for breaking "the violence of the fall, and mollify(ing) the ferocious temper of the conquerors." There's one stumble, and that's the section on the various heresies and religious controversies of the 300s. Duty required Gibbon to analyze the niggling and sometimes incomprehensible arguments over Christ's nature (and he confessed he didn't understand the passions behind them), but the historian gets bogged down in theological jargon and never makes it clear what role those heresies played in the fall until the end of Volume III. By then you've forgotten the details.

That's a small scratch in the masterpiece. In two centuries no one has challenged his famous conclusion: "The story of its ruin is simple and obvious; and instead of inquiring why the Roman empire was destroyed, we should rather be surprised that it had subsisted so long." Today we have more details, but the trajectory Gibbon plotted has never been recalculated.

Decline and Fall is also a great read, and one of the best narratives in the English language. War, idealism, corruption, droll asides and the clash of civilizations fly along a brisk stream of prose. If you've got the time, try the unabridged version -- it's 3,000 pages, but the work moves faster than books a tenth its size.

The work reflects the best concertos of its time, where a supporting background built themes, and a soloist expanded those ideas in clear, simple notes. So it is with Decline and Fall; Gibbon weaved numerous histories into a harmonious whole, and his asides and analyses deepened our understanding of the whole epoch. Mozart would have applauded.

This work has often been called, and rightly I believe, the most significant historical text ever written in the English language. Even in abridged form this work is spectacular, but as a whole this treatise on the fall of Rome is nothing short of monumental. In fact, the whole work covers a period of history not only concerning the fall of the Roman Empire, but also some ten centuries after the barbarian invasion of Rome, encompassing not only the events which led to the ruin of the empire but also every significant occurrence concerning the land, people, or allies of the fallen kingdom. Gibbon easily could have ended his history with the fall of the western empire, but instead he chose to continue a work to which he dedicated a great portion of his life, and for which the world will be forever in his debt.

Because the work spans such a large portion of civilized European history, it is fairly easy to abridge. The most important information concerning the decline of the center of civilization can be condensed into one rather large volume, and the rest (concerning Huns, Saracens, and the like) can be summed up in a matter of pages.

The abridgement is concise in many ways, yet severely wanting in others. As is always the case with an abridgement of a great work, much that is valuable has been spliced and omitted. Despite the problems with this abridgement, however, this work is a great joy to read. More importantly, it is packed with pertinent information about the fall of the Roman empire. If one of the ultimate goals of history is to learn from the past, there is much we can learn from Gibbon's work.

For those with as much interest in the English language as in Roman history, Gibbon is one of the greatest stylists who ever lived. Moreover, his dramatic sense is manifest not only in the events he describes,but also in the very sentences he uses to describe them.

I wonder what he would think of the language of the internet.

Bless the internet for making Gibbon available for everybody; and Gibbon for making great language available on the internet!

This work was merely the abridged version (the actual version is 3000 pages long), but Gibbon's command and use of the English language is so rich and varied that one must take the time necessary to savor and fully digest his arguments. Besides, at nearly 800 pages, this isn't light reading.

Editor David Womersley did a masterful job with the editing. In situations where chapters of the abridged version were truncated, Womersley still favored the reader with a description of Gibbon's arguments, as well as with commentary on why/how Gibbon's observations were of consequence. Additionally, Womersley's introduction is well worth one's time--he is able to give us an accurate and fascinating portrait of Gibbon, which enables us to better understand and appreciate the nature of Gibbon's arguments.

Of course, the best part about the book is Gibbon's own observations regarding the history of Rome. Gibbon was a masterful and witty commentator--oftentimes issuing backhanded insults and wryly discussing certain historical personages. Even the footnotes are filled with such commentary. Consider one footnote where Gibbon said "The Dissertation of M. Biet seems to have been justly preferred to the discourse of his more celebrated competitor, the Abbé le Boeuf, an antiquarian, whose name was happily expressive of his talents." Of the emperor Gordian, Gibbon remarked that both his gigantic collection of books, and his impressive collection of concubines were "for use rather than ostentation." Who could help but be charmed by this cheeky and mildly scandalous commentary?

But beyond dry wit and well-placed insults, Gibbon's work stands out because it is so relevant to our world today. The collapse of empire is a subject of much debate in the United States--what with various commentators and pundits assuring us that we will go the way of the Romans quite soon. Gibbon tells us what the crumbling of an empire really is and what it means--in sumptuous detail. In discussing the empire of the Romans, Gibbon lends perspective to geopolitical arguments of today. We can use his analysis as a starting point--the definitive discussion on how a world power may reach its nadir, and may ultimately see its power dissipate.

At times, Gibbon's attention to historical detail is eerie in its ability to pick out important and consequential subjects for discussion. In analyzing the rise of Islam, Gibbon remarks upon the rewards that await the faithful Muslim: "Seventy-two Houris, or black-eyed girls, of resplendent beauty, blooming youth, virgin purity, and exquisite sensibility, will be created for the use of the meanest believer; a moment of pleasure will be prolonged to a thousand years, and his faculties will be encreased a hundred fold, to render him worthy of his felicity." Tell me that you don't read that passage without a shiver running down your spine. Over two hundred years before the attacks of September 11th, Gibbon identified and remarked on the mythology that would drive madmen to plot and execute that mad deed.

Equally impressive was Gibbon's complete and absolute mastery of allegory and analogy. His use of the story of the "Seven Sleepers" to describe the human advancement "from youth to age, without observing the gradual, but incessant, change of human affairs," is a shining example, as Womersley points out, of "human insight, historical vision and philosophical reach" that confirm Gibbon's "range and power as a historian." A relation of the history of the Paulician sect would have struck other lesser historians as tedious and unnecessary, but Gibbon--who was no lesser historian--undertook an analysis of the history with excellent results--making clearer to the reader the nature of religious culture in Gibbon's own time.

Like any work devised by the human hand, the book does have characteristics that receive criticism. Throughout The Decline and Fall Gibbon takes shots at the Persians--a sore spot with me, personally. One bit appears to occur when Gibbon discusses Sultan Mahomet [Mohammad] II of the Ottoman Empire. Remarking on the fact that Mohammad II "spoke or understood five languages, the Arabic, the Persian, the Chalaean or Hebrew, the Latin and the Greek," Gibbon goes on to say that "The Persian might indeed contribute to [Mohammad's] amusement, and the Arabic to his edification." Needless to say, this is a slam against the Persian language--one of the most beautiful and lyrical tongues in existence, and a language that is perfectly suited to poetry--as Hafez, Rum'i, Sa'adi and Omar Khayyam would attest to, and do attest to by their eternally magnificent poetry. Gibbon also has his favorite figures. He openly roots for the Romans, under Emperor Julian, to vanquish the Persian Empire by force of arms, and laments the fact that the Romans lost their holdings in Persia thanks to the death of Julian, and the incompetence of the Emperor Jovian--Julian's successor. Indeed, Gibbon goes so far as to say that "Julian, on this occasion, shewed himself ignorant, or careless, of the laws of civility, which the prudence and refinement of polished ages have established between hostile princes. Yet these wanton ravages need not excite in our [heart] any vehement emotions of pity or resentment. A simple, naked, statute, finished by the hands of a Grecian artist, is of more genuine value than all these rude and costly monuments of Barbaric labor: and if we are more deeply affected by the ruin of a palace, than by the conflagration of a cottage, our humanity must have formed a very erroneous estimate of the miseries of human life." Additionally, Gibbon tells us that "The native race of Persians is small and ugly: but it has been improved by the perpetual mix of Circassian blood." Maybe it's just because my ethnicity is Persian, but I found these remarks wholly unnecessary.

Additionally, Gibbon lionizes Mohammad II, Julian, the Byzantine general Belisarius, and others--lending such favoritism at times that one cannot help but wonder whether his analysis is sufficiently dispassionate. And despite the fact that Gibbon was a believing Christian, Gibbon does show a hostility to religion that is characteristic of a man of the Enlightenment, but one that stands out nonetheless, and could very well have colored his analysis. I suppose that "The Decline and Fall" wouldn't be the same if this opinionated commentary was omitted, and overall, I did rather enjoy having the opportunity to gain an insight into Gibbon's own feelings and beliefs, but the reader should be warned that Gibbon's history is not exactly objective in nature.

In the end, however, these are trifling concerns. I haven't created anything like a Top Ten List of Favorite Books, but when I do, Gibbon's magnum opus will surely be included, and will have a place of honor. In remarking on the success of "The Decline and Fall," Gibbon stated that "my book was on every table, and almost on every toilette." I would not be in the least bit surprised if this were so, and few works in history would deserve similar popularity and acclaim. Given Gibbon's masterful historical relation, given his erudition and expert use of the English language and the contribution he made to the language through his work, and given the relevance of "The Decline and Fall" to our present day and age, let us hope for the sake of contemporary intelligence and society, that more tables and toilettes are graced with a copy of this magisterial work. More importantly, let us hope that Gibbon is read faithfully and constantly--like a Bible of the Enlightenment whose discussion of the past could very well serve to illuminate the present and the future, and offer guidance to meeting the challenges posed to us by modern day events.

This is a fantastic text for students of history. The author had a gift for explaining this turbulent period in world history. As for the quality of the layout of this book, i only have the most recent edition and it is fine.

This book is not a light read. If you are not ready for a very healthy and deep read then you may want to skip this selection. If you are up to it though this is a great book.

For my money, this was a must have.

I've read several old comments discussing formatting issues with the kindle edition of this (great!) book.

I recently bought a copy and find the formatting and TOC to be fine, however it is extremely annoying that annotations are placed in-line with the actual text. Annotations interrupt the text so frequently that I find this book to be extremely difficult to read in the kindle format.

5 star content, but 2 star for in-line annotations all over.

This book would be worth every penny if purchased solely for David Womersley's introduction. The introduction is written so beautifully that it effortlessly carries the reader through every facet of the life of Edward Gibbon. I intended but to scan only a few pages of the introduction. Candidly, I expected it to be at best irrelevant and at worst tiresome. I was struck at once by how thoroughly Gibbon's life was recounted. My imagination was launched into flights of fancy at the sharp contrasts between Gibbon's classic European education and my decidedly less useful American public indoctrination. Gibbon spent time with major philosophers and these interactions helped to shape an intellect that was uniquely able to see 'truth', especially through religious dogma. The introduction provides the reader with invaluable insight and, dare I say, a device that may grant the reader a greater understanding and likely a greater appreciation of this classic work. Womersley has wisely chosen to abridge only the number of chapters while not `blending' chapters. Womersley explains that the beauty of Gibbon's writing is best viewed in the arc of a complete chapter and therefore 'blending chapters' would be a horrible injustice. I liken Gibbon's writing to that of a non-fictional Shakespeare. Shakespeare helped us see truth in fictional stories as Gibbon does so in a non-fictional format. This is THE book to buy about the Roman Empire. Bravo - Sir Womersley!

There are few other words which better describe Gibbon's sprawling masterpiece, starting in the Augustan Age of the Early Empire and Climaxing nearly 1400 years later with a vivid description of the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, Gibbon's work will most likely never be eclipsed. Recent historians chide Gibbon for his poetic style and "non-objective" view point, but I rather say that those are the same reasons that make his definitive work stand above all others. Gibbon's provides not only a richly detailed history, full of intrigues and good story telling, by also relates the attitudes in the governing and the governed at each period of time, telling as much a tale of history as one of declining values and a slide from the pinnacle of rome power to a morass of decadence and selfishness that tears the empire apart in the years to come. Gibbon does not shy from calling wrong wrong and right right, much in the tradition of greek moralist historians that came before him, and it his strong viewpoint and this undercurrent of the loss of the roman and moral self that allows him to so sucessfully tie this epic together. This is a long book, so don't go into it lightly, but it is certainly rewarding. I thoroughly enjoyed this so much, that I plan to reread it again in the future, which for me is an astounding occurence. I also realise I am not reading the original, as much of Gibbon's work on the later Empire is marred by inaccuracies, but still at nearly a thousand pages, it is still a dense tome. In all my readings, I have never come across so impressive a text as this one, and don't believe I shall again.

edited by Hans-Fredrich Mueller

I finally finished this massive treasure, which isn't even exhaustive. And I can't imagine the colossal task in both time and energy it took to write it. It took Gibbon twelve years, from 1776 to 1788. I find it more than a coincidence that he began writing in the year of our independence. Even in this abridged form (which is what you will more likely come across) it is still a huge undertaking; though Mueller, in his critical forward, tells us it is necessary for it to become readable. Mueller also says he prided himself in being meticulous and accurate while still being manageable. And very helpful is the addition of dates bracketed throughout the text. An index would have been useful. In Boorstin's introduction he cites the major impact this work had on him; he calls it intimate. I would have never thought of it in that way, but now after ingesting all six volumes I understand why he calls it intimate. Gibbon does not mince words either. His work will always be remembered and its impact can still be felt today. He is an artist, like no one I have read before. Keep a dictionary handy. I also recommend reading the forward and the introduction, especially after studying Gibbon's great work. They take into question Gibbon's devotion to Christianity and his offensiveness towards it. I see Gibbon as mixed in his beliefs, though he wrote as he saw it; and I find that he saw the truth when he found it. Did he believe infrastructure was valued over its people?

The role of emperor was not a secure job. "Such was the unhappy condition of the Roman emperors that, whatever might be their conduct, their fate was commonly the same." The polytheistic Roman Empire was very much a melting pot (half slaves) and within it were many schisms. I see parallels---such as the oppressive taxes, the corrupt politicians, the tyrannical government, the effemination, and the endless warfare---to our United States, and a warning for our future.

So what caused the fall? For Gibbon, the gradual decline began after Christ, until the eventual fall some fifteen hundred years later. Chapters are built upon the reigns of the emperors as they came to power, except where he periodically inserts chapters concerning the Christian influence, the Christian persecutions, the corrupt church, the persecution of the church toward others, the Crusades, the rise of Islam, the debilitating taxes and, towards the end, he concentrates on the impact by the surrounding nations. The Empire became a black hole and split to form an East and a West---the West to totally collapse. There were many causes: the slow introduction of Christianity over Paganism and the conversion to it, the collapse of the military, the always and increasing threat of outside peoples, alienating allies and provoking enemies, the corruption within (the people), and of course the self righteous emperors. Entropy would take over and finally lead to the collapse of the infrastructure.

Rome was both a curse and a blessing for Christianity. Many were converted, but the power of Catholicism and the Pope led to the eventual corruption and apostasy of the church. We have our many deists and polytheists just as the Romans. Do you not find a familiarity to us and the Romans?

LORD bless
Scott