Editing Edward Gibbon (section)

==Legacy==
{{Conservatism UK|Intellectuals}}
A view frequently attributed to Gibbon, that the Roman Empire fell due to its embrace of Christianity, is not widely accepted by scholars today. Gibbon argued that with the empire's new Christian character, large sums of wealth that would have otherwise been used in the secular affairs in promoting the state were transferred to promoting the activities of the Church. However, the pre-Christian empire also spent large financial sums on religious affairs and it is unclear whether or not the change of religion increased the amount of resources the empire spent on religion. Gibbon further argued that new attitudes in Christianity caused many Christians of wealth to renounce their lifestyles and enter a monastic lifestyle, and so stop participating in the support of the empire. However, while many Christians of wealth did become monastics, this paled in comparison to the participants in the imperial bureaucracy. Although Gibbon further pointed out that the importance Christianity placed on peace caused a decline in the number of people serving the military, the decline was so small as to be negligible for the army's effectiveness.<ref>Heather, Peter. The fall of the Roman Empire. Oxford University Press, 2005, 122–123.</ref><ref>{{New Cambridge Medieval History | volume=1 | last = Gerberding | first = Richard | chapter= The later Roman Empire | pages= 25–26}}</ref>

Many scholars argue that Gibbon did not in fact blame Christianity for the empire's fall, rather attributing its  decline to the effects of luxury and the consequent erosion of its martial character. Such a view echoes the outlook of the Greek historian Polybius, who similarly explained the decadent Greek world's eclipse by the ascendant Roman Republic in Mediterranean affairs. In this understanding of Gibbon, the process of Rome's decay was well underway before Christian adherents numbered a large proportion of the empire. Hence, although Gibbon might have seen Christianity as hastening Rome's fall, he did not consider it as the root cause.<ref>{{cite journal|title= Gibbon Observed |volume=81 |year=1991 |journal=The Journal of Roman Studies |pages=132–56 | last1 = Ghosh | first1 = P. R.|doi = 10.2307/300494|jstor=300494 |s2cid=250351907 }} p. 137</ref><ref>Pocock, ''Religion: The First Triumph''. See p. ix, xiii.</ref>

Gibbon's work has been criticised for its scathing view of the Christian church as laid down in chapters XV and XVI, a situation that resulted in the banning of the book in several countries. Gibbon was accused of disrespecting, and none too lightly, the character of Christian doctrine, by "treat[ing] the Christian church as a phenomenon of general history, not a special case admitting supernatural explanations and disallowing criticism of its adherents". More specifically, the chapters excoriated the church for "supplanting in an unnecessarily destructive way the great culture that preceded it" and for "the outrage of [practising] religious intolerance and warfare".<ref>Craddock, ''Luminous Historian'', p. 60; also see Shelby Thomas McCloy, ''Gibbon's Antagonism to Christianity'' (Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1933). Gibbon, however, began chapter XV with what appeared to be a moderately ''positive'' appraisal of the Church's rise to power and authority. Therein he documented one primary and ''five'' secondary causes of the rapid spread of Christianity throughout the Roman Empire: primarily, "the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and... the ruling providence of its great Author;"  secondarily, "exclusive zeal, the immediate expectation of another world, the claim of miracles, the practice of rigid virtue, and the constitution of the primitive church." (first quote, Gibbon in Craddock, ''Luminous Historian'', p. 61; second quote, Gibbon in Womersley, ''Decline and Fall'', vol. 1, ch. XV, p. 497.)</ref>

Gibbon, in letters to Holroyd and others, expected some type of church-inspired backlash, but the harshness of the ensuing torrents exceeded anything he or his friends had anticipated. Contemporary detractors such as [[Joseph Priestley]] and [[Richard Watson (bishop of Llandaff)|Richard Watson]] stoked the nascent fire, but the most severe of these attacks was an "acrimonious" piece by the young cleric, Henry Edwards Davis.<ref>Henry Edwards Davis, ''An Examination of the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Chapters of Mr. Gibbon's'' History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (London: J. Dodsley, 1778).  [https://archive.org/details/anexaminationfi00davigoog online].</ref>

Gibbon's apparent antagonism to Christian doctrine spilled over into the Jewish faith, leading to charges of [[anti-Semitism]]. For example, he wrote:

<blockquote>From the reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius, the Jews discovered a fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in [[Kitos War|the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene]], where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting natives; and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation which was exercised by the arms of legions against a race of fanatics, whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government, but also of mankind.<ref>Womersley, ed., ''Decline and Fall'', vol. 1, ch. XVI, p. 516. [http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/gibbon/02/daf02001.htm see online] Gibbon's first footnote here reveals even more about why his detractors reacted so harshly: ''In Cyrene, [the Jews] massacred 220,000 Greeks; in Cyprus, 240,000; in Egypt, a very great multitude.  Many of these unhappy victims were sawed asunder, according to a precedent to which David had given the sanction of his examples. The victorious Jews devoured the flesh, licked up the blood, and twisted the entrails like a girdle around their bodies. see Dion Cassius l. lxviii, p. 1145.'' As a matter of fact, this is a verbatim citation from [http://cojs.org/cojswiki/Dio_Cassius,_Historia_Romana_LXVIII,_32:1-3:_The_Jewish_Uprising Dio Cassius, Historia Romana LXVIII, 32:1–3: The Jewish Uprising] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130306014330/http://cojs.org/cojswiki/Dio_Cassius,_Historia_Romana_LXVIII,_32:1-3:_The_Jewish_Uprising |date=6 March 2013 }}: ''Meanwhile, the Jews in the region of Cyrene had put one Andreas at their head and were destroying both the Romans and the Greeks. They would cook their flesh, make belts for themselves of their entrails, anoint themselves with their blood, and wear their skins for clothing. Many they sawed in two, from the head downwards. Others they would give to wild beasts and force still others to fight as gladiators. In all, consequently, two hundred and twenty thousand perished. In Egypt, also, they performed many similar deeds, and in Cyprus under the leadership of Artemio. There, likewise, two hundred and forty thousand perished. For this reason no Jew may set foot in that land, but even if one of them is driven upon the island by force of the wind, he is put to death. Various persons took part in subduing these Jews, one being Lusius, who was sent by Trajan.''</ref></blockquote>

===Influence===
[[File:Edward Gibbon by Henry Walton cleaned.jpg|thumb|Portrait of Edward Gibbon by [[Henry Walton (English painter)|Henry Walton]]]]

Gibbon is considered to be a son of the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] and this is reflected in his famous verdict on the history of the [[Middle Ages]]: "I have described the triumph of barbarism and religion."<ref>Womersley, ''Decline and Fall'', vol. 3, ch. LXXI, p. 1068.</ref> Politically, he rejected the radical egalitarian movements of the time, notably the [[American Revolution|American]] and [[French Revolution]]s, and dismissed overly rationalistic applications of the [[Human rights|rights of man]].<ref>Burke supported the ''American'' rebellion, while Gibbon sided with the ministry; but with regard to the ''French'' Revolution they shared a perfect revulsion. Despite their agreement on the FR, Burke and Gibbon "were not specially close," owing to Whig party differences and divergent religious beliefs, not to mention Burke's sponsorship of the [[Civil List and Secret Service Money Act 1782]] which abolished, and therefore cost Gibbon his place on, the government's Board of Trade and Plantations in 1782. see Pocock, "The Ironist," ¶: "Both the autobiography...."</ref>

Gibbon's work has been praised for its style, his piquant epigrams and its effective irony. [[Winston Churchill]] memorably noted in ''[[My Early Life]]'', "I set out upon...Gibbon's ''Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'' [and] was immediately dominated both by the story and the style. ...I devoured Gibbon. I rode triumphantly through it from end to end and enjoyed it all."<ref>Winston Churchill, ''My Early Life: A Roving Commission'' (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958), p. 111.</ref> Churchill modelled much of his own literary style on Gibbon's. Like Gibbon, he dedicated himself to producing a "vivid historical narrative, ranging widely over period and place and enriched by analysis and reflection."<ref>Roland Quinault, "Winston Churchill and Gibbon," in ''Edward Gibbon and Empire'', eds. R.  McKitterick and R. Quinault (Cambridge: 1997), 317–332, at p. 331; Pocock, "Ironist," ¶: "Both the autobiography...."</ref>

Unusually for the 18th century, Gibbon was never content with secondhand accounts when the primary sources were accessible (though most of these were drawn from well-known printed editions). "I have always endeavoured," he says, "to draw from the fountain-head; that my curiosity, as well as a sense of duty, has always urged me to study the originals; and that, if they have sometimes eluded my search, I have carefully marked the secondary evidence, on whose faith a passage or a fact were reduced to depend."<ref>Womersley, ''Decline and Fall'', vol. 2, Preface to Gibbon vol. 4, p. 520.</ref> In this insistence upon the importance of primary sources, Gibbon is considered by many to be one of the first modern historians:

<blockquote>In accuracy, thoroughness, lucidity, and comprehensive grasp of a vast subject, the 'History' is unsurpassable. It is the one English history which may be regarded as definitive...Whatever its shortcomings the book is artistically imposing as well as historically unimpeachable as a vast panorama of a great period.<ref>Stephen, ''DNB'', p. 1134.</ref></blockquote>

The subject of Gibbon's writing, as well as his ideas and style, have influenced other writers. Besides his influence on Churchill, Gibbon was also a model for [[Isaac Asimov]] in his writing of ''[[The Foundation Series|The Foundation Trilogy]]'', which he said involved "a little bit of cribbin' from the works of Edward Gibbon".<ref>Groat, Brian. "[https://medium.com/self-starter/asimov-on-how-to-be-prolific-43ccd8042ccb Asimov on How to Be Prolific]". Medium.com, 25 October 2016. Retrieved 30 April 2018</ref>

[[Evelyn Waugh]] admired Gibbon's style, but not his secular viewpoint. In Waugh's 1950 novel ''[[Helena (Waugh novel)|Helena]]'', the early Christian author [[Lactantius]] worries about the possibility of {{"'}}a false historian, with the mind of [[Cicero]] or [[Tacitus]] and the soul of an animal,' and he nodded towards the [[gibbon]] who fretted his golden chain and chattered for fruit."<ref>London: Chapman and Hall, 1950. Chapter 6, p. 122.</ref>