Davus Parker Posted July 28, 2006 Report Share Posted July 28, 2006 greetings, i have just started reading gibbons, the decline and fall, am i wasting my time? i have heard that it is now outdated thankyou Davus Parker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted July 28, 2006 Report Share Posted July 28, 2006 If nothing more, you will get a list of the players from Augustus onwards. You can make up your own mind as regards his opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted July 28, 2006 Report Share Posted July 28, 2006 Gibbons is still an essential read in my opinion regardless of any dating of the content. The style may be a bit different (written in the late 18th century) than what we are accustomed to today and the methods of delivering a scholarly review of history may have changed, but Gibbon is still quite highly regarded as secondary source material due to his excellent citing of ancient sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted July 28, 2006 Report Share Posted July 28, 2006 Take P.P.'s advice. He knows what of he writes. Good luck with the Latin , Greek and French footnotes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted July 28, 2006 Report Share Posted July 28, 2006 Take P.P.'s advice. He knows what of he writes. Good luck with the Latin , Greek and French footnotes. Â Not only are his footnotes complete, but much like his entire narrative I love how they are also laden with various opinions and conjecture. Would not Gibbon pretty much be considered the father of the annotated footnote (at least in the writing of history anyway)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pertinax Posted July 28, 2006 Report Share Posted July 28, 2006 Gibbon is still well worth a read, I am trying to get my hands on a full secondhand set printed on quality paper at present, I first read him when I was at school and despite the "archaic" manner I found the text resonated strongly. Thats quite a while ago now, but I havent changed my mind as to the vivid immediacy of the text. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Octavius Posted July 28, 2006 Report Share Posted July 28, 2006 It is also a good book to get a handle on proper English. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pertinax Posted July 28, 2006 Report Share Posted July 28, 2006 It is also a good book to get a handle on proper English. Yes indeed, a bit like reading the King James' Authorised Bible and then reading a "modern" Bible: one is true and fulsome language, the other is a collection of joined-up words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 Gibbons was enjoyable reading, filled with pithy passages. Some of his central theories regarding the collapse of the Empire are however contested. Â If you're a devout Christian, you might take offense at aforesaid theories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil61 Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 greetings,i have just started reading gibbons, the decline and fall, am i wasting my time? i have heard that it is now outdated thankyou Davus Parker  I'm not sure if it's really outdated so much as a large part of his opinions, especially on the influence of Christianity, isn't really shared today. It's still excellent and Gibbon isn't always shy about where he stands. It is also one of the most important and influential histories ever written and essential reading for anyone with a serious interest in Rome. You'd make a good choice to read it I'd say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil25 Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 Is Shakespeare's study of Richard III outdated? Â Historically, of course it is. But the mind of a great writer and intellect applied to a person or period must surely have lasting value. Â Why do we still read the Illiad? Â Gibbon's is a great book - akin to Macauley's great History of Britain - thoroughly researched (at the time of writing); immensely well thought through, vast in scope and scale. Â Epic and tremendous. Â Do you know the story of the hanoverian royal duke who encountered Gibbon at work in the King's library. As he passed the duke said, "Scibble, scribble, scribble, Mr Gibbon!!" Â Some scribbling: some book! As Churchill might have observed. Â Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leguleius Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Gibbon's Decline and Fall is probably the best piece of historical writing in the English language. Â The prose is marvelously elegant but readable: "Gordianus, their procunsul, and the object of their choice, refused, with unfeigned reluctance, the dangerous honour, and begged, with tears, that they would suffer him to terminate in peace a long and innocent life, without staining his feeble age with civil blood. Their menaces compelled him to accept the Imperial purple, his only refuge indeed against the jealous cruelty of Maximin; since, according to the reasoning of tyrants, those who have been esteemed worthy of the throne deserve death, and those who deliberate have already rebelled." - Chapter 7 Â The references to sexual goings-on are subtle (due to the age in which he wrote) but never unclear: "Faustina, the daughter of Pius and the wife of Marcus [Aurelius], has been as much celebrated for her gallantries as for her beauty. The grave simplicity of the philosopher was ill calculated to engage her wanton levity, or to fix that unbounded passion for variety which often discovered personal merit in the meanest of mankind. The Cupid of the ancients was, in general, a very sensual deity; and the amours of an empress, as they exact on her side the plainest advances, are seldom susceptible of much sentimental delicacy. Marcus was the only man in the empire who seemed ignorant or insensible of the irregularities of Faustina..." There follows an educational footnote, "The world has laughed at the credulity of Marcus; but Madam Dacier assures us (and we may credit a lady) that the husband will always be decieved, if the wife condescends to dissemble." - Chapter 4 Â And Gibbon has a wonderful line in humanist irony when discussing the early Church: "At such a period, when faith could boast so many victories over death, it seems difficult to account for the scepticism of those philosophers who still rejected and derided the doctrine of the resurrection. A noble Grecian had rested on this ground the whole controversy, and promised Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, that, if he could be gratified with the sight of a single person who had actually been raised from the dead, he would immediately embrace the Christian religion. It is somewhat remarkable that the prelate of the first eastern church thought proper to decline this fair and reasonable challenge." - Chapter 15 Â I believe I'm correct in saying that Gibbons narrative chronolgy is still considered accurate, although these days less emphasis is put on the decline and 'decadence' of the empire than on the actions of the barbarians in explaining why the empire fell. Â Scholarly and entertaining. Read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerfectimusPrime Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 I've read some of it. Awfully biased I've heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davus Parker Posted July 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 thank you very much, i definatly will endvor to finish reading it, but with an open mind thanks again Davus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.