Edward Gibbon

Ferviente admirador de la antiguo Roma, Edward Gibbon se preguntó por las causas de que un imperio tan impresionante acabara desapareciendo. Tras más de una década de trabajo, su respuesta fue la extraordinaria Decadencia y caida del Imperio romano, un clasico indiscutible tanto a nivel historiografico, que arranca en uno de los momentos algidos de Roma y finaliza con el desplome de Bizancio, ha mantenido su vigencia y su valor hasta hoy.Esta edicion recoge los pasajes mas relevantes de esta obra, que originalmente se publico en seis tomos. Por lo demas, gracias a las anotaciones pertinentes, su lectura condensa todo el universo antiguo al que nos traslado su autor.

Ferviente admirador de la antiguo Roma, Edward Gibbon se preguntó por las causas de que un imperio tan impresionante acabara desapareciendo. Tras más de una década de trabajo, su respuesta fue la extraordinaria Decadencia y caida del Impreio romano, un clasico indiscutible tanto a nivel historiografico, que arranca en uno de los momentos algidos de Roma y finaliza con el desplome de Bizancio, ha mantenido su vigencia y su valor hasta hoy.Esta edicion recoge los pasajes mas relevantes de esta obra, que originalmente se publico en seis tomos. Por lo demas, gracias a las anotaciones pertinentes, su lectura condensa todo el universo antiguo al que nos traslado su autor.

La «Historia de la decadencia y caída del Imperio Romano» comprende 1300 años de vicisitudes políticas en Roma y Bizancio, las historias particulares de los pueblos que tuvieron relación con el Imper

«El libro de Gibbon es un texto profético, que encierra un diagnóstico perfectamente aplicable a lo que está ocurriendo hoy en mi país. Se podría titular Decadencia y caída del Imperio Americano.»

La historia de la decadencia y ruina del Imperio romano comenzó a publicarse en 1776 y se completó once años más tarde. La presente edición es reproducción facsimilar de la primera y única hasta ahora publicada en castellano, aparecida en Barcelona en 1842. El contenido de este primer tomo (años 96 a 313) comienza con la floreciente epoca de los Antoninos, y continua, entre otros, con la historia de Severo, Caracalla, Maximino, Decio Neron, Claudio, Aureliano y Diocleciano. Es, pues, la historia de los tres primeros siglos de la epoca moderna, en la que se configura la decadencia de Roma.

Trad., José Mor Fuentes.¿Por qué una herejía judía convertida en la religión de los esclavos se impuso en Roma y qué papel jugó en su ruina? Para Gibbon (1737-1794), las caídas de Roma y Constantinopla tuvieron su origen en un proceso de decadencia moral provocada por la pujanza de un cristianismo a contramano de los ideales de Roma, que eran la libertad intelectual y moral. El escandalo que provoco la obra en los circulos religiosos sumado a la seriedad del trabajo y al brillante estilo literario del autor, probablemente jamas igualado en lengua inglesa, posibilitaron su inmediato exito.

Lopera copre la storia dellImpero romano da Traiano, dal 98 al 1453, concludendosi nel 1590. Egli prese come materiale per il suo lavoro i comportamenti e le decisioni che portarono prima alla lunga decadenza e poi alla caduta dellImpero romano: Impero bizantino e Impero romano doccidente, esponendo una spiegazione circa i motivi della sua caduta. Il suo pessimismo ed il distaccato uso dellironia e comune al genere storico di questo periodo.Nonostante abbia scritto anche altre opere, Gibbon dedico gran parte della sua vita (1772-1789) a questo suo lavoro. La sua autobiografia Memoirs of My Life and Writings e dedicata per gran parte alle sue riflessioni su come il libro sia virtualmente divenuto la sua stessa vita. Egli paragono la pubblicazione di ogni volume alla nascita di un nuovo figlio.[1]Gibbon lavorava in questo modo: modellare di getto un intero paragrafo, ripeterlo a alta voce, depositarlo nella memoria, ma sospendere lazione della penna fin tanto che non avessi dato lultima rifinitura al lavoro. Gibbon stesso noto una certa differenza di stile tra i vari volumi che compongono la sua opera: il primo volume era secondo lui un po aspro e elaborato, il secondo e il terzo maturati in naturalezza e precisione, mentre negli ultimi tre, composti per lo piu in Svizzera (a Losanna), temeva che luso costante di parlare in una lingua e scrivere in unaltra abbia infuso una certa mescolanza di gallici idiomi.

Lopera copre la storia dellImpero romano da Traiano, dal 98 al 1453, concludendosi nel 1590. Egli prese come materiale per il suo lavoro i comportamenti e le decisioni che portarono prima alla lunga decadenza e poi alla caduta dellImpero romano: Impero bizantino e Impero romano doccidente, esponendo una spiegazione circa i motivi della sua caduta. Il suo pessimismo ed il distaccato uso dellironia e comune al genere storico di questo periodo.Nonostante abbia scritto anche altre opere, Gibbon dedico gran parte della sua vita (1772-1789) a questo suo lavoro. La sua autobiografia Memoirs of My Life and Writings e dedicata per gran parte alle sue riflessioni su come il libro sia virtualmente divenuto la sua stessa vita. Egli paragono la pubblicazione di ogni volume alla nascita di un nuovo figlio.[1]Gibbon lavorava in questo modo: modellare di getto un intero paragrafo, ripeterlo a alta voce, depositarlo nella memoria, ma sospendere lazione della penna fin tanto che non avessi dato lultima rifinitura al lavoro. Gibbon stesso noto una certa differenza di stile tra i vari volumi che compongono la sua opera: il primo volume era secondo lui un po aspro e elaborato, il secondo e il terzo maturati in naturalezza e precisione, mentre negli ultimi tre, composti per lo piu in Svizzera (a Losanna), temeva che luso costante di parlare in una lingua e scrivere in unaltra abbia infuso una certa mescolanza di gallici idiomi.

Lopera copre la storia dellImpero romano da Traiano, dal 98 al 1453, concludendosi nel 1590. Egli prese come materiale per il suo lavoro i comportamenti e le decisioni che portarono prima alla lunga decadenza e poi alla caduta dellImpero romano: Impero bizantino e Impero romano doccidente, esponendo una spiegazione circa i motivi della sua caduta. Il suo pessimismo ed il distaccato uso dellironia e comune al genere storico di questo periodo.Nonostante abbia scritto anche altre opere, Gibbon dedico gran parte della sua vita (1772-1789) a questo suo lavoro. La sua autobiografia Memoirs of My Life and Writings e dedicata per gran parte alle sue riflessioni su come il libro sia virtualmente divenuto la sua stessa vita. Egli paragono la pubblicazione di ogni volume alla nascita di un nuovo figlio.[1]Gibbon lavorava in questo modo: modellare di getto un intero paragrafo, ripeterlo a alta voce, depositarlo nella memoria, ma sospendere lazione della penna fin tanto che non avessi dato lultima rifinitura al lavoro. Gibbon stesso noto una certa differenza di stile tra i vari volumi che compongono la sua opera: il primo volume era secondo lui un po aspro e elaborato, il secondo e il terzo maturati in naturalezza e precisione, mentre negli ultimi tre, composti per lo piu in Svizzera (a Losanna), temeva che luso costante di parlare in una lingua e scrivere in unaltra abbia infuso una certa mescolanza di gallici idiomi.

La historia de la decadencia y ruina del Imperio romano comenzó a publicarse en 1776 y se completó once años más tarde. La presente edición es reproducción facsimilar de la primera y única hasta ahora publicada en castellano, aparecida en Barcelona en 1842. El contenido de este cuarto tomo (años 395 a 582) describe las invasiones de los barbaros: los godos, los vandalos y los hunos conquistan y arrasan el Imperio; se establece la monarquia de los galos en Francia, de los visigodos en España y los sajones invaden Inglaterra.

La historia de la decadencia y ruina del Imperio romano comenzó a publicarse en 1776 y se completó once años más tarde. La presente edición es reproducción facsimilar de la primera y única hasta ahora publicada en castellano, aparecida en Barcelona en 1842. El contenido de este tercer tomo (años 312 a 398) esta centrado en las guerras contra la herejia, bajo los reinos de Juliano, Joviano y Graciano, y hasta la particion definitiva del Imperio entre los hijos de Diocleciano.

The great work of Gibbon is indispensable to the student of history. The literature of Europe offers no substitute for "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire." It has obtained undisputed possession, as rightful occupant, of the vast period which it comprehends. However some subjects, which it embraces, may have undergone more complete investigation, on the general view of the whole period, this history is the sole undisputed authority to which all defer, and from which few appeal to the original writers, or to more modern compilers. The inherent interest of the subject, the inexhaustible labor employed upon it; the immense condensation of matter; the luminous arrangement; the general accuracy; the style, which, however monotonous from its uniform stateliness, and sometimes wearisome from its elaborate ar., is throughout vigorous, animated, often picturesque always commands attention, always conveys its meaning with emphatic energy, describes with singular breadth and fidelity, and generalizes with unrivalled felicity of expression; all these high qualifications have secured, and seem likely to secure, its permanent place in historic literature.

In judging the The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire it should carefully be observed that it falls into two parts which are heterogeneous in the method of treatment. The first part, a little more than five-eighths of the work, supplies a very full history of 460 years (A.D. 180641); the second and smaller part is a summary history of about 800 years (A.D. 6411453) in which certain episodes are selected for fuller treatment and so made prominent. To the first part unstinted praise must be accorded; it may be said that, with the materials at the authors disposition, it hardly admitted of improvement, except in trifling details. But the second, notwithstanding the brilliancy of the narrative and the masterly art in the grouping of events, suffers from a radical defect which renders it a misleading guide. The author designates the story of the later empire at Constantinople (after Heraclius) as "a uniform tale of weakness and misery," a judgment which is entirely false; and in accordance with this doctrine, he makes the empire, which is his proper subject, merely a string for connecting great movements which affected it, such as the Saracen conquests, the Crusades, the Mongol invasions, the Turkish conquests. He failed to bring out the momentous fact that up to the 12th century the empire was the bulwark of Europe against the East, nor did he appreciate its importance in preserving the heritage of Greek civilization. He compressed into a single chapter the domestic history and policy of the emperors from the son of Heraclius to Isaac Angelus; and did no justice to the remarkable ability and the indefatigable industry shown in the service of the state by most of the sovereigns from Leo III. to Basil II. He did not penetrate into the deeper causes underlying the revolutions and palace intrigues. His eye rested only on superficial characteristics which have served to associate the name "Byzantine" with treachery, cruelty, bigotry and decadence. It was reserved for Finlay to depict, with greater knowledge and a juster perception, the lights and shades of Byzantine history. Thus the later part of the Decline and Fall, while the narrative of certain episodes will always be read with profit, does not convey a true idea of the history of the empire or of its significance in the history of Europe. It must be added that the pages on the Slavonic peoples and their relations to the empire are conspicuously insufficient; but it must be taken into account that it was not till many years after Gibbons death that Slavonic history began to receive due attention, in consequence of the rise of competent scholars among the Slavs themselves. This is volume nine out of twelve.

In judging the The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire it should carefully be observed that it falls into two parts which are heterogeneous in the method of treatment. The first part, a little more than five-eighths of the work, supplies a very full history of 460 years (A.D. 180641); the second and smaller part is a summary history of about 800 years (A.D. 6411453) in which certain episodes are selected for fuller treatment and so made prominent. To the first part unstinted praise must be accorded; it may be said that, with the materials at the authors disposition, it hardly admitted of improvement, except in trifling details. But the second, notwithstanding the brilliancy of the narrative and the masterly art in the grouping of events, suffers from a radical defect which renders it a misleading guide. The author designates the story of the later empire at Constantinople (after Heraclius) as "a uniform tale of weakness and misery," a judgment which is entirely false; and in accordance with this doctrine, he makes the empire, which is his proper subject, merely a string for connecting great movements which affected it, such as the Saracen conquests, the Crusades, the Mongol invasions, the Turkish conquests. He failed to bring out the momentous fact that up to the 12th century the empire was the bulwark of Europe against the East, nor did he appreciate its importance in preserving the heritage of Greek civilization. He compressed into a single chapter the domestic history and policy of the emperors from the son of Heraclius to Isaac Angelus; and did no justice to the remarkable ability and the indefatigable industry shown in the service of the state by most of the sovereigns from Leo III. to Basil II. He did not penetrate into the deeper causes underlying the revolutions and palace intrigues. His eye rested only on superficial characteristics which have served to associate the name "Byzantine" with treachery, cruelty, bigotry and decadence. It was reserved for Finlay to depict, with greater knowledge and a juster perception, the lights and shades of Byzantine history. Thus the later part of the Decline and Fall, while the narrative of certain episodes will always be read with profit, does not convey a true idea of the history of the empire or of its significance in the history of Europe. It must be added that the pages on the Slavonic peoples and their relations to the empire are conspicuously insufficient; but it must be taken into account that it was not till many years after Gibbons death that Slavonic history began to receive due attention, in consequence of the rise of competent scholars among the Slavs themselves. This is volume one out of twelve.

In judging the The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire it should carefully be observed that it falls into two parts which are heterogeneous in the method of treatment. The first part, a little more than five-eighths of the work, supplies a very full history of 460 years (A.D. 180641); the second and smaller part is a summary history of about 800 years (A.D. 6411453) in which certain episodes are selected for fuller treatment and so made prominent. To the first part unstinted praise must be accorded; it may be said that, with the materials at the authors disposition, it hardly admitted of improvement, except in trifling details. But the second, notwithstanding the brilliancy of the narrative and the masterly art in the grouping of events, suffers from a radical defect which renders it a misleading guide. The author designates the story of the later empire at Constantinople (after Heraclius) as "a uniform tale of weakness and misery," a judgment which is entirely false; and in accordance with this doctrine, he makes the empire, which is his proper subject, merely a string for connecting great movements which affected it, such as the Saracen conquests, the Crusades, the Mongol invasions, the Turkish conquests. He failed to bring out the momentous fact that up to the 12th century the empire was the bulwark of Europe against the East, nor did he appreciate its importance in preserving the heritage of Greek civilization. He compressed into a single chapter the domestic history and policy of the emperors from the son of Heraclius to Isaac Angelus; and did no justice to the remarkable ability and the indefatigable industry shown in the service of the state by most of the sovereigns from Leo III. to Basil II. He did not penetrate into the deeper causes underlying the revolutions and palace intrigues. His eye rested only on superficial characteristics which have served to associate the name "Byzantine" with treachery, cruelty, bigotry and decadence. It was reserved for Finlay to depict, with greater knowledge and a juster perception, the lights and shades of Byzantine history. Thus the later part of the Decline and Fall, while the narrative of certain episodes will always be read with profit, does not convey a true idea of the history of the empire or of its significance in the history of Europe. It must be added that the pages on the Slavonic peoples and their relations to the empire are conspicuously insufficient; but it must be taken into account that it was not till many years after Gibbons death that Slavonic history began to receive due attention, in consequence of the rise of competent scholars among the Slavs themselves. This is volume ten out of twelve.

In judging the The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire it should carefully be observed that it falls into two parts which are heterogeneous in the method of treatment. The first part, a little more than five-eighths of the work, supplies a very full history of 460 years (A.D. 180641); the second and smaller part is a summary history of about 800 years (A.D. 6411453) in which certain episodes are selected for fuller treatment and so made prominent. To the first part unstinted praise must be accorded; it may be said that, with the materials at the authors disposition, it hardly admitted of improvement, except in trifling details. But the second, notwithstanding the brilliancy of the narrative and the masterly art in the grouping of events, suffers from a radical defect which renders it a misleading guide. The author designates the story of the later empire at Constantinople (after Heraclius) as "a uniform tale of weakness and misery," a judgment which is entirely false; and in accordance with this doctrine, he makes the empire, which is his proper subject, merely a string for connecting great movements which affected it, such as the Saracen conquests, the Crusades, the Mongol invasions, the Turkish conquests. He failed to bring out the momentous fact that up to the 12th century the empire was the bulwark of Europe against the East, nor did he appreciate its importance in preserving the heritage of Greek civilization. He compressed into a single chapter the domestic history and policy of the emperors from the son of Heraclius to Isaac Angelus; and did no justice to the remarkable ability and the indefatigable industry shown in the service of the state by most of the sovereigns from Leo III. to Basil II. He did not penetrate into the deeper causes underlying the revolutions and palace intrigues. His eye rested only on superficial characteristics which have served to associate the name "Byzantine" with treachery, cruelty, bigotry and decadence. It was reserved for Finlay to depict, with greater knowledge and a juster perception, the lights and shades of Byzantine history. Thus the later part of the Decline and Fall, while the narrative of certain episodes will always be read with profit, does not convey a true idea of the history of the empire or of its significance in the history of Europe. It must be added that the pages on the Slavonic peoples and their relations to the empire are conspicuously insufficient; but it must be taken into account that it was not till many years after Gibbons death that Slavonic history began to receive due attention, in consequence of the rise of competent scholars among the Slavs themselves. This is volume twelve out of twelve.

In judging the The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire it should carefully be observed that it falls into two parts which are heterogeneous in the method of treatment. The first part, a little more than five-eighths of the work, supplies a very full history of 460 years (A.D. 180641); the second and smaller part is a summary history of about 800 years (A.D. 6411453) in which certain episodes are selected for fuller treatment and so made prominent. To the first part unstinted praise must be accorded; it may be said that, with the materials at the authors disposition, it hardly admitted of improvement, except in trifling details. But the second, notwithstanding the brilliancy of the narrative and the masterly art in the grouping of events, suffers from a radical defect which renders it a misleading guide. The author designates the story of the later empire at Constantinople (after Heraclius) as "a uniform tale of weakness and misery," a judgment which is entirely false; and in accordance with this doctrine, he makes the empire, which is his proper subject, merely a string for connecting great movements which affected it, such as the Saracen conquests, the Crusades, the Mongol invasions, the Turkish conquests. He failed to bring out the momentous fact that up to the 12th century the empire was the bulwark of Europe against the East, nor did he appreciate its importance in preserving the heritage of Greek civilization. He compressed into a single chapter the domestic history and policy of the emperors from the son of Heraclius to Isaac Angelus; and did no justice to the remarkable ability and the indefatigable industry shown in the service of the state by most of the sovereigns from Leo III. to Basil II. He did not penetrate into the deeper causes underlying the revolutions and palace intrigues. His eye rested only on superficial characteristics which have served to associate the name "Byzantine" with treachery, cruelty, bigotry and decadence. It was reserved for Finlay to depict, with greater knowledge and a juster perception, the lights and shades of Byzantine history. Thus the later part of the Decline and Fall, while the narrative of certain episodes will always be read with profit, does not convey a true idea of the history of the empire or of its significance in the history of Europe. It must be added that the pages on the Slavonic peoples and their relations to the empire are conspicuously insufficient; but it must be taken into account that it was not till many years after Gibbons death that Slavonic history began to receive due attention, in consequence of the rise of competent scholars among the Slavs themselves. This is volume three out of twelve.

In judging the The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire it should carefully be observed that it falls into two parts which are heterogeneous in the method of treatment. The first part, a little more than five-eighths of the work, supplies a very full history of 460 years (A.D. 180641); the second and smaller part is a summary history of about 800 years (A.D. 6411453) in which certain episodes are selected for fuller treatment and so made prominent. To the first part unstinted praise must be accorded; it may be said that, with the materials at the authors disposition, it hardly admitted of improvement, except in trifling details. But the second, notwithstanding the brilliancy of the narrative and the masterly art in the grouping of events, suffers from a radical defect which renders it a misleading guide. The author designates the story of the later empire at Constantinople (after Heraclius) as "a uniform tale of weakness and misery," a judgment which is entirely false; and in accordance with this doctrine, he makes the empire, which is his proper subject, merely a string for connecting great movements which affected it, such as the Saracen conquests, the Crusades, the Mongol invasions, the Turkish conquests. He failed to bring out the momentous fact that up to the 12th century the empire was the bulwark of Europe against the East, nor did he appreciate its importance in preserving the heritage of Greek civilization. He compressed into a single chapter the domestic history and policy of the emperors from the son of Heraclius to Isaac Angelus; and did no justice to the remarkable ability and the indefatigable industry shown in the service of the state by most of the sovereigns from Leo III. to Basil II. He did not penetrate into the deeper causes underlying the revolutions and palace intrigues. His eye rested only on superficial characteristics which have served to associate the name "Byzantine" with treachery, cruelty, bigotry and decadence. It was reserved for Finlay to depict, with greater knowledge and a juster perception, the lights and shades of Byzantine history. Thus the later part of the Decline and Fall, while the narrative of certain episodes will always be read with profit, does not convey a true idea of the history of the empire or of its significance in the history of Europe. It must be added that the pages on the Slavonic peoples and their relations to the empire are conspicuously insufficient; but it must be taken into account that it was not till many years after Gibbons death that Slavonic history began to receive due attention, in consequence of the rise of competent scholars among the Slavs themselves. This is volume four out of twelve.

In judging the The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire it should carefully be observed that it falls into two parts which are heterogeneous in the method of treatment. The first part, a little more than five-eighths of the work, supplies a very full history of 460 years (A.D. 180641); the second and smaller part is a summary history of about 800 years (A.D. 6411453) in which certain episodes are selected for fuller treatment and so made prominent. To the first part unstinted praise must be accorded; it may be said that, with the materials at the authors disposition, it hardly admitted of improvement, except in trifling details. But the second, notwithstanding the brilliancy of the narrative and the masterly art in the grouping of events, suffers from a radical defect which renders it a misleading guide. The author designates the story of the later empire at Constantinople (after Heraclius) as "a uniform tale of weakness and misery," a judgment which is entirely false; and in accordance with this doctrine, he makes the empire, which is his proper subject, merely a string for connecting great movements which affected it, such as the Saracen conquests, the Crusades, the Mongol invasions, the Turkish conquests. He failed to bring out the momentous fact that up to the 12th century the empire was the bulwark of Europe against the East, nor did he appreciate its importance in preserving the heritage of Greek civilization. He compressed into a single chapter the domestic history and policy of the emperors from the son of Heraclius to Isaac Angelus; and did no justice to the remarkable ability and the indefatigable industry shown in the service of the state by most of the sovereigns from Leo III. to Basil II. He did not penetrate into the deeper causes underlying the revolutions and palace intrigues. His eye rested only on superficial characteristics which have served to associate the name "Byzantine" with treachery, cruelty, bigotry and decadence. It was reserved for Finlay to depict, with greater knowledge and a juster perception, the lights and shades of Byzantine history. Thus the later part of the Decline and Fall, while the narrative of certain episodes will always be read with profit, does not convey a true idea of the history of the empire or of its significance in the history of Europe. It must be added that the pages on the Slavonic peoples and their relations to the empire are conspicuously insufficient; but it must be taken into account that it was not till many years after Gibbons death that Slavonic history began to receive due attention, in consequence of the rise of competent scholars among the Slavs themselves. This is volume five out of twelve.