How long is decline and fall of the roman empire

Conscious pride taught the German females to suppress every tender emotion that stood in competition with honor, and the first honor of the sex has ever been that of chastity. The sentiments and conduct of these high-spirited matrons may, at once, be considered as a cause, as an effect, and as a proof of the general character of the nation.

Female courage, however it may be raised by fanaticism, or confirmed by habit, can be only a faint and imperfect imitation of the manly valor that distinguishes the age or country in which it may be found.

The above isn't incidental--it's practically the keynote to Gibbon's theory. The Emperor Alexander Severus, who Gibbon overall admires, according to him had two key flaws--he was born in the "effeminate" East--and he listened to his mother too much. At least one-fourth into the first volume, Gibbon's theory seems to be Rome's decline came because Romans lost the manly men virtues. And yes, I know; it's the times in which Gibbon wrote to blame, and I should make allowances for that and take out of his history what good I can.

But added to how slow a read this was and feeling fidgety wondering just how much of the facts are just plain wrong I may try an abridged edition someday. I noticed one shelved at Barnes and Noble that covers the material of the first volume in only pages. I might find that more bearable. Or just take my friend's advice and next time I'm in the mood to read about the Romans read Suetonius' The Twelve Caesars , which my friend swears is awesome.

View all 3 comments. Tackling this massive classic has been on my bucket list for some time, and after finishing Volume One, the first of Six I know, I can hardly believe it either volumes, here are some summary thoughts so far: 1. Took me a while to decide whether to read it, or listen on Audible. I've listened to quite a few books on Audible, so my comfort level plus all the spare moments I can find in traffic or longer drives to listen gave me the courage to go that route.

I'm loving the Naxos AudioBooks versi Tackling this massive classic has been on my bucket list for some time, and after finishing Volume One, the first of Six I know, I can hardly believe it either volumes, here are some summary thoughts so far: 1.

It's true that Gibbon had quite the vocabulary, and his prose can be dense. But once you get used to the experience, it becomes very rich and beautifully elegant. The man was a master stylist, with a good dose of wit, and very much opinionated. The knowledge and research that went into this work are just overwhelming. A nice bonus is that the Audible version has a good PDF reference guide for each volume.

Very helpful! So far, I have found this to be a unique, challenging and very well written work of history. Gibbon takes a departure from chronology at the very end to present a substantial and sometimes controversial discussion of the Christian Religion, and its founding, advance and impact during those years. There's a LOT of info, and I have often required some short rewinds to help myself keep up. But it's been well worth the adventure so far, and I'm looking forward to Volume 2!

I've just finished Volume I, and II is up next. I would recommend against getting the version edited by H. Milman if at all possible, unless you like books that are edited by someone who thinks it's okay to mutilate someone else's work by adding a LOT more Christian nonsense to it.

He even criticizes the author for attempting to be reasonably objective. This is NOT okay, and it is detrimental to a book that is rightly considered to be a masterpiece of historical writing. Do yourself a favor and get yourself a finely written, unabridged version of Gibbon that isn't edited by a chimp, and enjoy yourself.

View all 4 comments. May 04, Debbie is currently reading it. This book is amazingly readable. Unfortunately, no matter how easy the reading, pages are still pages with footnotes but no pictures or white-spacey dialogue. I don't think I'm going to finish this before book club on Thursday. Oh, and my other quibble, aside from the large bulk, is the sad lack of maps and a chronology. This book is pages, people!

I don't have time to pull out my atlas and look up dates on Wikipedia! Aug 19, Jacob Stelling rated it really liked it. On Gibbon - upon a second reading of this text, in full, in a non-academic setting, I both find myself enjoying and critiquing Gibbon more.

On the one hand, his analysis and overarching argument is woven together with a fluency which I find enviable, as well as proving to be incisive at times.

However, on the other hand, I do see more questionable parts of his narrative, and the overstating and understating of various parts of the history, particularly in terms of the fall of the West.

Finally, On Gibbon - upon a second reading of this text, in full, in a non-academic setting, I both find myself enjoying and critiquing Gibbon more. Most readers, including myself, are discouraged from ever attempting to read Decline and Fall because of its length. I can confirm, having reached the end of the first volume, that our fears of boredom or exhaustion are exaggerated.

In truth, Gibbon needs an editor, not an abridgement. A small number of dull and superfluous passages, often dealing with trifles remote from our own concerns such as the internecine squabbles over Trinitarianism, or the unspectacular lives of quickly-forgotten pret Most readers, including myself, are discouraged from ever attempting to read Decline and Fall because of its length. A small number of dull and superfluous passages, often dealing with trifles remote from our own concerns such as the internecine squabbles over Trinitarianism, or the unspectacular lives of quickly-forgotten pretenders to the imperial throne , are unhappy exceptions in what is otherwise a beautifully rendered history, full of eloquence and wit.

To echo Churchill, I read it with pleasure from cover to cover. Its literary virtues have not lost any of their lustre with time. Disguised beneath the idiom of the 18th century is an intimate tone that renders the work not only accessible but positively lively. Gibbon wrote Decline and Fall as an amateur historian, not as an ideologue or a doctrinaire. His approach is human rather than scientific; his aphorisms generalized from experience rather than deduction.

He was a master of the ironic mode of narration, and is often quite funny. The rise of Christianity, in particular, provided fertile soil for his sly humour: "At such a period, when faith could boast of so many wonderful 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 important 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, however anxious for the conversion of a friend, thought proper to decline this fair and reasonable challenge.

His reliance on dubious sources is problematic for obvious reasons, but he is more likely to be reproached for the sin of omission.

His version of the Roman Empire concerns only emperors and generals, war and the sweep of religion. Culture, society, learning, ideas, and everyday life do not figure in his definition of history: "In great monarchies millions of obedient subjects pursue their useful occupations in peace and obscurity.

The attention of the writer, as well as of the reader, is solely confined to a court, a capital, a regular army, and the districts which happen to be the occasional scene of military operations. Those seeking histories organized thematically, or written from the bottom-up, should look elsewhere. In any case, it is rarely profitable or interesting to judge a work according to goals it never set for itself.

Gibbon's lasting fame is deserved not because—as is often the case with so many masters whose works are today unreadable—he was influential or innovative, but because his writing still solicits our interest and our attention. Despite the distance separating us, his voice is remarkably familiar to modern ears.

Highly recommended if you have six weeks to spare. I have been reading this for the last five months and I feel exhausted. Definitely not for people who prefer light reading. The explanation is sometimes frivolous and redundant. The footnotes are not really helpful; they just confused me even more. The first chapters are the best.

The last ones Nevertheless, I'd still recommend this as a reference for those who are interested in Roman Empire history. So many interesting tidbits and background i I have been reading this for the last five months and I feel exhausted. So many interesting tidbits and background information on the important events occurred at that time. Despite the three stars rating, I'll never regret I read this book.

Hell, maybe someday I'll have time and mood to read the next volume, who knows. View all 5 comments. The particulars of a given place and time are incidental to why this work and its author have had a lasting impact. At least for me, curiosity about Rome subsided as I was more and more drawn in to the spell of the author.

This was Edward Gibbon's space within which to expound on the sweeping currents of history and the trickling eddies of individual flawed lives that feed into them. How does the discipline of a common goal strengthen individual men and the broader culture? How does the irony of The particulars of a given place and time are incidental to why this work and its author have had a lasting impact. How does the irony of reaching that goal and being sapped by prosperity undermine the very positive attributes which brought prosperity in the first place?

This is why anyone who wants to understand his or her own age should read Gibbon. View 2 comments. Nov 01, Matt Brady added it Shelves: read-in Where to begin? How do you even rate a legendary text like this, after two hundred years of existence, carrying two hundred years of cultural baggage along with it.

It's Gibbon. He doesn't need me, because he's like Tacitus or Herodotus, or any of those other historians that you refer to by only one name. Men who wrote monumental tomes that everyone familiar with them acknowledges as masterpieces, but nobody has ever seems to want to read.

Still, I feel bad to own a book that I've not read, and t Where to begin? Still, I feel bad to own a book that I've not read, and there they are taking up a good third of a shelf, taunting me with its monumental-ness.

A chapter a day, I figured. There are only 70 some chapters in the whole work. I can do that, right? You see, I was expecting it to be a slog. A mire of 18th century scholastic who-ha, with long strings of untranslated Latin.

I was expecting to read Gibbon like I read War and Peace - to have passed my eye over every word of every page, in order to add another notch to my belt. Not so! Gibbon is engaging, he's witty, he's erudite. Hell, he's readable. Oh sure, he's very much the 18th century scholar. For all his wit, he isn't afraid to be dry, and often is. Also, he takes his readers knowledge about certain Classical events and personalities for granted.

Not up on your myth? Don't know who Agrippina or the Gracchi were? You might not want to start here. While it's not necessary, understanding Gibbon's allusions added my enjoyment.

Volume 1 of my edition covers, roughly, the years AD - AD. It's a sprawling, bloody work, full of death and mayhem and, occasionally, shining moments of greatness and hope. But then the Praetorians kill everyone off again, and sell the Purple to the highest bidder. Gibbon has been the surprise of the year.

What I though was going to be a laborious exercise in pretension has turned out to be a rewarding, and enjoyable experience. Reading him, it's easy to see why he was so influential. Wit, irony, and pessimism. It's like the holy trinity of historical writing, and Gibbon is the reason why. He looses a star, not because he doesn't deserve it, but rather, because there's just so much he has to say.

He covers a lot of ground, and some of it he just gives the briefest mention too. This is frustrating sometimes, especially when he refers back to them, expecting you to remember incidents that he tossed out as casual events. You've forgotten about them by then, and need to leaf back. It really is a book that needs to be re-read several times to make the most of, and the fact that it's just so big hampers that.

Also, the edition I'm reading is a reprint of the edition, edited by J. For a long time it was the definitive edition of the work, but it's years old now, and Bury's notes and helps are showing their age. Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Ghost on the Throne. The Nicomachean Ethics. The Makers of Rome. The Annals of Imperial Rome. Democracy in America. Alexis De Tocqueville and Alexis de Tocqueville. Timelines of History. Related Articles. Looking for More Great Reads? Download Hi Res.

Get the latest updates from Edward Gibbon. And go from well-read to best read with book recs, deals and more in your inbox every week. We are experiencing technical difficulties. Please try again later. His literary productions were by no means contemptible. Gibbon famously blamed Christianity for the disintegration of the Roman empire:.

It is, in other words, a work of universal interest, and timeless influence, unquestionably a magnificent classic of our literature. Perhaps the greatest and certainly one of the most influential history books in the English language retains its power today. He is a connoisseur of life. View all 4 comments. The obvious issue to address in reviewing the 3,page unabridged edition of Gibbon's masterpiece, is whether the maniacal effort to attack such a work could ever justify preferring it over a single-volume abridged edition.

That is an easy call. This work is occasionally tough, often exciting, but in every sense a necessity over any attempts to edit down Gibbon. I tried the page Modern Library edition and found it fragmented and hard to follow, simply because Gibbon is telling a story tha The obvious issue to address in reviewing the 3,page unabridged edition of Gibbon's masterpiece, is whether the maniacal effort to attack such a work could ever justify preferring it over a single-volume abridged edition.

I tried the page Modern Library edition and found it fragmented and hard to follow, simply because Gibbon is telling a story that defies attempts to hone it down. Is the language stilted and occasionally hard to follow?

The first three volumes were released in , and the last three in Not only are the sentences convoluted and overextended in a manner far greater than 19th-century writers like Dickens, but Gibbon is inclined to use quaint, silly, and occasionally racist terms that were common in his era.

Notions that racial characteristics could be determined by the latitudinal source of an indigenous people's homeland, or that a national culture could be described as "effeminate," have to be taken with an understanding of the limited intelligence of Western philosophers years ago. But let's remind ourselves of what Gibbon really accomplished.

Without the benefits of online inquiries or Wikipedia, without the easy ability to travel that some historians take for granted, Gibbon did far more than compile a history of the Western Roman empire from the time of Commodius to the collapse of Rome in the s, as well as the companion history of the Eastern Roman Byzantine empire from AD to AD.

On the way, he compiles histories of Christianity heresies as well as Catholic and Eastern Orthodoxies , Islam Sunni and Shia , and a host of "barbarian" and tribal cultures such as Franks, Goths, Suevi, Huns, Vandals, Persian Sassanid and beyond , khanates, Timurid, and every imaginable iteration thereof. Gibbon tells history as it should be told - as a flow of peoples across a landscape, not as a collection of static dates and personages to be memorized in history class though, truth be told, it would be useful for him to include a few more dates than the years placed in the margins of each page.

It deserves mention that the Catholic Church proscribed this book for more than years, and not only or primarily because of how cruel Gibbon was to the Catholic Church I for one would call him "cruel but fair," and he often bent over backward to make the case for orthodox interpretations of Christianity.

Instead, the main reason the Catholic Church attacked Gibbon is because he described events that really happened. At several points in the last years, the Catholic Church has tried to claim that certain events in its attacks on heresy, and certain fights between popes and anti-popes, never happened. Gibbon will have none of that, nor will be accept the events in the lives of the saints as being wholly truthful. When he demanded fact-checking on claims of the Catholic Church, it is no wonder the church hierarchy wanted him banned.

Many suggest that Gibbon worked with more care on the first three volumes covering the Western Empire than he did on the final three volumes. It's true that after the attempt by Emperor Justinian to re-take the Mediterranean, the narrative falters a bit.

Some critics say that this is because Gibbon found the Greek Orthodox Byzantines to be less palatable than the traditional Romans. It's understandable he would have these feelings, because the Byzantine government and culture did not give rise to any great philosophers and historians, only treacherous rulers who would torture each other in odd lines of succession. After the ridiculous wars of iconoclasm in the eighth and ninth centuries, the rest of Byzantine history was just a slow ride down to the day in the midth century when Constantinople was finally conquered by Ottoman Muslims.

But Gibbon's problems in the final three volumes were really ones of organization. Perhaps because he didn't want to confuse the readers with the strange succession of emperors, Gibbon groups capsule histories of the emperors early on, then goes back to talk about Islam's spread, the schisms between Orthodox and Catholic churches, the meaning of the steppe-warrior invasions both Zingis Khan and Timur , and even some odd chapters on Roman civil uprisings.

There are times in the last two volumes of the history that the reader has to focus to keep the narrative train on the tracks. And the modern reader always must keep access to Wikipedia handy, because Gibbon rattles off some names tangentially that must be looked up and appraised merely to understand the point he is trying to make.

But as challenging as Gibbon's own idiosyncracies are, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire deserves its reputation as the most significant work of history ever accomplished by a single author in the last years. The personality that comes through in the writing shows us that this multi-volume study was not written by committee. Yet the scope of what Gibbon did, writing in , seems far beyond what most modern historians could accomplish with the aid of electronic tools.

Maybe Will and Ariel Durant's Civilization series deserves to be placed ahead of Gibbon's for that series' massive size and the equally exquisite writing. Yet the Durants were trying to describe global cultures and their histories in an open and free-flowing way. Gibbon was on a mission to tell a story that had no happy ending, and the reader morbidly follows as though this was the real-world Game of Thrones : the story inevitably will end badly for all concerned, yet we can't put the book s down.

View all 11 comments. Mar 03, Szplug rated it it was amazing. I borrowed the first two volumes—amongst my Dad's all-time favourites—from his study when I was around fourteen; and my enduring fascination with the Roman Empire, and ancient history in general, most likely stems from a combination of the heady brews of Gibbon's and Tolkien's masterworks, which ignited within me a terrific thirst for mythology, legend, and history that has yet to be slaked.

As far as The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire is concerned, I believe that Gibbon is the greatest pr I borrowed the first two volumes—amongst my Dad's all-time favourites—from his study when I was around fourteen; and my enduring fascination with the Roman Empire, and ancient history in general, most likely stems from a combination of the heady brews of Gibbon's and Tolkien's masterworks, which ignited within me a terrific thirst for mythology, legend, and history that has yet to be slaked.

As far as The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire is concerned, I believe that Gibbon is the greatest prose stylist in the English language after Shakespeare: even today, decades after that always-so-important first read, I still bear the scars—and leave lingering traces—of my hapless efforts to simulate the effortless erudition, sinuous sublimity, poetic polish, and mellifluous majesty of the supremely gifted Gibbon in my own comparatively shabby scribbling.

I always recommend reading the unabridged version—how dare they slice up Gibbon's beautiful prose painting! View 2 comments. Best narrative history ever written. Gibbon had so many fewer sources and tools than we have today, but his basic conclusions from the late 18th century information he had are still largely correct today. A weakened military and political state that relied heavily on barbarian mercenary soldiers for defense was doomed.

The different internal barbarian factions just served to divide the military and political and religious structures to a point to where they were easy pickin's from both inside and Best narrative history ever written. The different internal barbarian factions just served to divide the military and political and religious structures to a point to where they were easy pickin's from both inside and outside the empire.

The western empire falling first while the eastern Greek Byzantine empire, under less external pressure, survives much longer.

Until their Roman Christian Crusader brothers came to sack them. Gibbons details the whole ugly mess down to minute detail and doesn't leave anything out, from incest to slaughter. His narrative is lively and opinionated, full of both shock and humor. Read the whole damned thing, footnotes and all, not some abridged abomination.

This is a literary work as much as an historical work. Anyone who needs an abject lesson on how the modern western world is going to go, should read these books. We're already in the age of bread and circuses. View 1 comment. Reading parts of this again for work, and realised I never reviewed this absolutely massive book.

One of the most fascinating and distorted works of history ever written, created by one of the most famous and biased and opinionated historians of all time. Full review to come. Apr 06, Bettie rated it really liked it Shelves: spring , tbr-busting , fraudio , film-only , ancient-history.

This abridgment retains the full scope of the original, but in a breadth comparable to a novel. This unique edition emphasizes elements ignored in all other abridgments—in particular the role of religion in the empire and the rise of Islam. In the meantime I have found a film which beats the faeces out of Gladiator to entertain whilst I paint a yellow streak down my back. View all 6 comments. Feb 15, Alan rated it it was amazing Shelves: books-read-in-original-language.

Gibbon's great, repeated subject: magnificent, superior ideas reduced by human motives to narrow self-aggrandising brutality. Every paragraph may be read as a comment on our contemporary politics, because Gibbon writes of character and social structure.

Take hypocrisy. Might we not find current U. So did the Senate, putative selector, decline because of the military tradition. The result: an eight month interregnum, without sedition During these centuries after Augustus, Christianity grew.

Continuing"On the Progress of Christianity," "It is a very ancient reproach, suggested by the ignorance or the malice of infidelity, that the Christians allured into their party the most atrocious criminals, who, as soon as they were touched by a sense of remorse, were easily persuaded to wash away, in the water of baptism, the guilt of their past conduct…" Sounds like the Evangelicals in U.

S, Jimmy Swaggart, "I have sinned! He relegates to a footnote a Catholic detail, on miracles that Bernard of Clairvaux assigned to everybody but himself, "In the long series of ecclesiastical history, does there exist a single instance of a saint asserting that he himself possessed the gift of miracles?

As for Judaism, "The first fifteen bishops of Jerusalem were all circumcised Jews… and their congregation united the law of Moses and the doctrine of Christ called Nazarenes. Christianity is a principal cause. Tertullian recommended Christians flee to avoid murdering, in military service, and also in civil administration. Christianity valued chastity, that some Virgins in Africa disdained flight, "permitted deacons to share their bed and gloried Writing on Theodosius, who in Constantinople suppressed my favorite Arianism, his daughter Galla Placida in Ravenna—where some Arian chapels still exist, showing Christ with a penis.

Gibbon continually contrasts idealism and force, religion and murder. View all 3 comments. This book volume 1 only has been on my "To Read" list for almost as long as I have known about it - possibly my High School World History class, freshman year, since it had a very significant section on Rome. I am very glad it stayed on my To Read list and that I finally got around to it.

Fascinating book, for sure. And I believe there are some excellent "lessons" to be learn I listened to the Audiovox. And I believe there are some excellent "lessons" to be learned from this book about Rome, but which may also apply to United States of America, especially the America of recent times.

Even though it is about years old, it is still quite "readable" - the style being quite pleasurable to listen to and not archaic. This first volume is another of the great works published in , along with the magnificent "Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith and of course the brilliant "Declaration of Independence. The number one lesson from this first volume of the full volume set - not sure when I will get to the other five, but doing long road trips sure makes it easy and pleasurable - is that having a powerful military accountable to an emperor president?

There are other lessons and great parts to the book, but I need to find my brief notes taken from the long car ride that made listening possible. A note on the Librivox edition NOT Audible I listened to: The book was narrated by a funky tag-team of volunteers, each reading chapters or so, before yielding to the next.

Most were not too hot, but there was one truly outstanding British fella who read about 10 chapters or so, just before the ending chapter, read by I believe, an American, who was not bad, but too halting and pedestrian for my taste. A few of the readers tried really hard to do well, but their accents just made it too tough for this listener to follow, understand and enjoy.

But the Librivox. Hopefully I will append this review in the not-too-distant future, when I find my notes, or think of additional comments worthy of adding. Sampling this classic is highly recommended for any history buff, interested person in Rome, or someone concerned about the stunning loss of liberties in the US these days and threats to their own freedoms.

Jan 13, Traveller rated it really liked it Shelves: history. Classic treatment by the eminent historian Gibbon of not only the contributing factors to the fall of the Roman Empire, but a blow-by-blow account of the course of its decline. For more pertinent thoughts, please see the comment box below. May 26, Czarny Pies rated it really liked it Shelves: european-history , greek-and-roman. From the perspective of the 21st century, this book is quite preposterous.

Thus it starts in the Italian peninsula and finishes in the Middle East. The narrative runs from classical antiquity, passes through the middle ages and concludes in the Renaissance.

The scope is too wide and the time frame is absurdly long. It is of course a remarkable work of scholarship. At From the perspective of the 21st century, this book is quite preposterous.

At the time Gibbon was writing in the 18th century none of the classical works had been translated into modern languages so Gibbon read everything in the original Greek or Latin versions.

This is an exploit that has never and will never be repeated. View all 9 comments. This history was impressive. Gibbon has a beautiful writing style.