Butthisargument—one,whenconfinedwithinreasonablelimits,ofunanswerableforce—becomesmorefeebleanddisputableinproportionasitrecedesfromthebirthplace,asitwere,ofthereligion。ThefurtherChristianityadvanced,themorecausespurelyhumanwereenlistedinitsfavor;norcanitbedoubtedthatthosedevelopedwithsuchartfulexclusivenessbyGibbondidconcurmostessentiallytoitsestablishment。ItisintheChristiandispensation,asinthematerialworld。InbothitisasthegreatFirstCause,thattheDeityismostundeniablymanifest。Whenoncelaunchedinregularmotionuponthebosomofspace,andendowedwithalltheirpropertiesandrelationsofweightandmutualattraction,theheavenlybodiesappeartopursuetheircoursesaccordingtosecondarylaws,whichaccountforalltheirsublimeregularity。SoChristianityproclaimsitsDivineAuthorchieflyinitsfirstoriginanddevelopment。Whenithadoncereceiveditsimpulsefromabove—whenithadoncebeeninfusedintothemindsofitsfirstteachers—whenithadgainedfullpossessionofthereasonandaffectionsofthefavoredfew—itmightbe—andtotheProtestant,therationaChristian,itisimpossibletodefinewhenitreallywas—lefttomakeitswaybyitsnativeforce,undertheordinarysecretagenciesofall—rulingProvidence。Themainquestion,thedivineoriginofthereligion,wasdexterouslyeluded,orspeciouslyconcededbyGibbon;hisplanenabledhimtocommencehisaccount,inmostparts,belowtheapostolictimes;anditwasonlybythestrengthofthedarkcoloringwithwhichhebroughtoutthefailingsandthefolliesofthesucceedingages,thatashadowofdoubtandsuspicionwasthrownbackupontheprimitiveperiodofChristianity。
  "Thetheologian,"saysGibbon,"mayindulgethepleasingtaskofdescribingreligionasshedescendedfromheaven,arrayedinhernativepurity;amoremelancholydutyisimposeduponthehistorian:—hemustdiscovertheinevitablemixtureoferrorandcorruptionwhichshecontractedinalongresidenceuponearthamongaweakanddegenerateraceofbeings。"Divestthispassageofthelatentsarcasmbetrayedbythesubsequenttoneofthewholedisquisition,anditmightcommenceaChristianhistorywritteninthemostChristianspiritofcandor。Butasthehistorian,byseemingtorespect,yetbydexterouslyconfoundingthelimitsofthesacredland,contrivedtoinsinuatethatitwasanUtopiawhichhadnoexistencebutintheimaginationofthetheologian—ashesuggestedratherthanaffirmedthatthedaysofChristianpuritywereakindofpoeticgoldenage;—sothetheologian,byventuringtoofarintothedomainofthehistorian,hasbeenperpetuallyobligedtocontestpointsonwhichhehadlittlechanceofvictory—todenyfactsestablishedonunshakenevidence—andthence,toretire,ifnotwiththeshameofdefeat,yetwithbutdoubtfulandimperfectsuccess。
  Paley,withhisintuitivesagacity,sawthroughthedifficultyofansweringGibbonbytheordinaryartsofcontroversy;hisemphaticsentence,"Whocanrefuteasneer?"
  containsasmuchtruthaspoint。Butfullandpregnantasthisphraseis,itisnotquitethewholetruth;itisthetoneinwhichtheprogressofChristianityistraced,incomparisonwiththerestofthesplendidandprodigallyornamentedwork,whichistheradicaldefectinthe"DeclineandFall。"ChristianityalonereceivesnoembellishmentfromthemagicofGibbon'slanguage;
  hisimaginationisdeadtoitsmoraldignity;itiskeptdownbyageneralzoneofjealousdisparagement,orneutralizedbyapainfullyelaborateexpositionofitsdarkeranddegenerateperiods。Thereareoccasions,indeed,whenitspureandexaltedhumanity,whenitsmanifestlybeneficialinfluence,cancompelevenhim,asitwere,tofairness,andkindlehisunguardedeloquencetoitsusualfervor;but,ingeneral,hesoonrelapsesintoafrigidapathy;affectsanostentatiouslysevereimpartiality;notesallthefaultsofChristiansineveryagewithbitterandalmostmalignantsarcasm;reluctantly,andwithexceptionandreservation,admitstheirclaimtoadmiration。
  Thisinextricablebiasappearseventoinfluencehismannerofcomposition。WhilealltheotherassailantsoftheRomanempire,whetherwarlikeorreligious,theGoth,theHun,theArab,theTartar,AlaricandAttila,Mahomet,andZengis,andTamerlane,areeachintroduceduponthescenealmostwithdramaticanimation—theirprogressrelatedinafull,complete,andunbrokennarrative—thetriumphofChristianityalonetakestheformofacoldandcriticaldisquisition。Thesuccessesofbarbarousenergyandbruteforcecallforthalltheconsummateskillofcomposition;whilethemoraltriumphsofChristianbenevolence—
  thetranquilheroismofendurance,theblamelesspurity,thecontemptofguiltyfameandofhonorsdestructivetothehumanrace,which,hadtheyassumedtheproudnameofphilosophy,wouldhavebeenblazonedinhisbrightestwords,becausetheyownreligionastheirprinciple—sinkintonarrowasceticism。ThegloriesofChristianity,inshort,touchonnochordintheheartofthewriter;hisimaginationremainsunkindled;hiswords,thoughtheymaintaintheirstatelyandmeasuredmarch,havebecomecool,argumentative,andinanimate。WhowouldobscureonehueofthatgorgeouscoloringinwhichGibbonhasinvestedthedyingformsofPaganism,ordarkenoneparagraphinhissplendidviewoftheriseandprogressofMahometanism?ButwhowouldnothavewishedthatthesameequaljusticehadbeendonetoChristianity;thatitsrealcharacteranddeeplypenetratinginfluencehadbeentracedwiththesamephilosophicalsagacity,andrepresentedwithmoresober,aswouldbecomeitsquietcourse,andperhapslesspicturesque,butstillwithlivelyandattractive,descriptiveness?Hemighthavethrownaside,withthesamescorn,themassofecclesiasticalfictionwhichenvelopstheearlyhistoryofthechurch,strippedoffthelegendaryromance,andbroughtoutthefactsintheirprimitivenakednessandsimplicity—ifhehadbutallowedthosefactsthebenefitoftheglowingeloquencewhichhedeniedtothemalone。Hemighthaveannihilatedthewholefabricofpost—apostolicmiracles,ifhehadleftuninjuredbysarcasticinsinuationthoseoftheNewTestament;hemighthavecashiered,withDodwell,thewholehostofmartyrs,whichowetheirexistencetotheprodigalinventionoflaterdays,hadhebutbestowedfairroom,anddweltwithhisordinaryenergyonthesufferingsofthegenuinewitnessestothetruthofChristianity,thePolycarps,orthemartyrsofVienne。
  Andindeed,if,afterall,theviewoftheearlyprogressofChristianitybemelancholyandhumiliatingwemustbewarelestwechargethewholeofthisontheinfidelityofthehistorian。Itisidle,itisdisingenuous,todenyortodissembletheearlydepravationsofChristianity,itsgradualbutrapiddeparturefromitsprimitivesimplicityandpurity,stillmore,fromitsspiritofuniversallove。ItmaybenounsalutarylessontotheChristianworld,thatthissilent,thisunavoidable,perhaps,yetfatalchangeshallhavebeendrawnbyanimpartial,orevenanhostilehand。TheChristianityofeveryagemaytakewarning,lestbyitsownnarrowviews,itswantofwisdom,anditswantofcharity,itgivethesameadvantagetothefutureunfriendlyhistorian,anddisparagethecauseoftruereligion。
  Thedesignofthepresenteditionispartlycorrective,partlysupplementary:corrective,bynotes,whichpointoutitishoped,inaperfectlycandidanddispassionatespiritwithnodesirebuttoestablishthetruthsuchinaccuraciesormisstatementsasmayhavebeendetected,particularlywithregardtoChristianity;andwhichthus,withthepreviouscaution,maycounteracttoaconsiderableextenttheunfairandunfavorableimpressioncreatedagainstrationalreligion:supplementary,byaddingsuchadditionalinformationastheeditor'sreadingmayhavebeenabletofurnish,fromoriginaldocumentsorbooks,notaccessibleatthetimewhenGibbonwrote。
  Theworkoriginatedintheeditor'shabitofnotingonthemarginofhiscopyofGibbonreferencestosuchauthorsashaddiscoverederrors,orthrownnewlightonthesubjectstreatedbyGibbon。Thesehadgrowntosomeextent,andseemedtohimlikelytobeofusetoothers。TheannotationsofM。GuizotalsoappearedtohimworthyofbeingbetterknowntotheEnglishpublicthantheywerelikelytobe,asappendedtotheFrenchtranslation。
  Thechiefworksfromwhichtheeditorhasderivedhismaterialsare,I。TheFrenchtranslation,withnotesbyM。
  Guizot;2dedition,Paris,1828。TheeditorhastranslatedalmostallthenotesofM。Guizot。Wherehehasnotaltogetheragreedwithhim,hisrespectforthelearningandjudgmentofthatwriterhas,ingeneral,inducedhimtoretainthestatementfromwhichhehasventuredtodiffer,withthegroundsonwhichheformedhisownopinion。InthenotesonChristianity,hehasretainedallthoseofM。Guizot,withhisown,fromtheconviction,thatonsuchasubject,tomany,theauthorityofaFrenchstatesman,aProtestant,andarationalandsincereChristian,wouldappearmoreindependentandunbiassed,andthereforebemorecommanding,thanthatofanEnglishclergyman。
  TheeditorhasnotscrupledtotransferthenotesofM。
  Guizottothepresentwork。Thewell—known??ealforknowledge,displayedinallthewritingsofthatdistinguishedhistorian,hasledtothenaturalinference,thathewouldnotbedispleasedattheattempttomakethemofusetotheEnglishreadersofGibbon。ThenotesofM。GuizotaresignedwiththeletterG。
  II。TheGermantranslation,withthenotesofWenck。
  Unfortunatelythislearnedtranslatordied,afterhavingcompletedonlythefirstvolume;therestoftheworkwasexecutedbyaveryinferiorhand。
  ThenotesofWenckareextremelyvaluable;manyofthemhavebeenadoptedbyM。Guizot;theyaredistinguishedbytheletterW。
  [Footnote*:TheeditorregretsthathehasnotbeenabletofindtheItaliantranslation,mentionedbyGibbonhimselfwithsomerespect。Itisnotinourgreatlibraries,theMuseumortheBodleian;andhehasneverfoundanybooksellerinLondonwhohasseenit。]
  III。TheneweditionofLeBeau's"HistoireduBasEmpire,withnotesbyM。St。Martin,andM。Brosset。"ThatdistinguishedArmenianscholar,M。St。Martinnow,unhappily,deceasedhadaddedmuchinformationfromOrientalwriters,particularlyfromthoseofArmenia,aswellasfrommoregeneralsources。ManyofhisobservationshavebeenfoundasapplicabletotheworkofGibbonastothatofLeBeau。
  IV。TheeditorhasconsultedthevariousanswersmadetoGibbononthefirstappearanceofhiswork;hemustconfess,withlittleprofit。Theywere,ingeneral,hastilycompiledbyinferiorandnowforgottenwriters,withtheexceptionofBishopWatson,whoseableapologyisratherageneralargument,thananexaminationofmisstatements。ThenameofMilnerstandshigherwithacertainclassofreaders,butwillnotcarrymuchweightwiththesevereinvestigatorofhistory。
  V。Somefewclassicalworksandfragmentshavecometolight,sincetheappearanceofGibbon'sHistory,andhavebeennoticedintheirrespectiveplaces;andmuchusehasbeenmade,inthelattervolumesparticularly,oftheincreasetoourstoresofOrientalliterature。Theeditorcannot,indeed,pretendtohavefollowedhisauthor,inthesegleanings,overthewholevastfieldofhisinquiries;hemayhaveoverlookedormaynothavebeenabletocommandsomeworks,whichmighthavethrownstillfurtherlightonthesesubjects;buthetruststhatwhathehasadducedwillbeofusetothestudentofhistorictruth。
  Theeditorwouldfurtherobserve,thatwithregardtosomeotherobjectionablepassages,whichdonotinvolvemisstatementorinaccuracy,hehasintentionallyabstainedfromdirectingparticularattentiontowardsthembyanyspecialprotest。
  Theeditor'snotesaremarkedM。
  Aconsiderablepartofthequotationssomeofwhichinthelatereditionshadfallenintogreatconfusionhavebeenverified,andhavebeencorrectedbythelatestandbesteditionsoftheauthors。
  June,1845。
  Inthisnewedition,thetextandthenoteshavebeencarefullyrevised,thelatterbytheeditor。
  Someadditionalnoteshavebeensubjoined,distinguishedbythesignatureM。1845。
  PrefaceOfTheAuthor。
  Itisnotmyintentiontodetainthereaderbyexpatiatingonthevarietyortheimportanceofthesubject,whichIhaveundertakentotreat;sincethemeritofthechoicewouldservetorendertheweaknessoftheexecutionstillmoreapparent,andstilllessexcusable。ButasIhavepresumedtolaybeforethepublicafirstvolumeonly^1oftheHistoryoftheDeclineandFalloftheRomanEmpire,itwill,perhaps,beexpectedthatI
  shouldexplain,inafewwords,thenatureandlimitsofmygeneralplan。
  [Footnote1:Thefirstvolumeofthequarto,whichcontainedthesixteenfirstchapters。]
  Thememorableseriesofrevolutions,whichinthecourseofaboutthirteencenturiesgraduallyundermined,andatlengthdestroyed,thesolidfabricofhumangreatness,may,withsomepropriety,bedividedintothethreefollowingperiods:
  I。ThefirstoftheseperiodsmaybetracedfromtheageofTrajanandtheAntonines,whentheRomanmonarchy,havingattaineditsfullstrengthandmaturity,begantovergetowardsitsdecline;andwillextendtothesubversionoftheWesternEmpire,bythebarbariansofGermanyandScythia,therudeancestorsofthemostpolishednationsofmodernEurope。Thisextraordinaryrevolution,whichsubjectedRometothepowerofaGothicconqueror,wascompletedaboutthebeginningofthesixthcentury。
  II。ThesecondperiodoftheDeclineandFallofRomemaybesupposedtocommencewiththereignofJustinian,who,byhislaws,aswellasbyhisvictories,restoredatransientsplendortotheEasternEmpire。ItwillcomprehendtheinvasionofItalybytheLombards;theconquestoftheAsiaticandAfricanprovincesbytheArabs,whoembracedthereligionofMahomet;therevoltoftheRomanpeopleagainstthefeebleprincesofConstantinople;andtheelevationofCharlemagne,who,intheyeareighthundred,establishedthesecond,orGermanEmpireoftheWestIII。Thelastandlongestoftheseperiodsincludesaboutsixcenturiesandahalf;fromtherevivaloftheWesternEmpire,tillthetakingofConstantinoplebytheTurks,andtheextinctionofadegenerateraceofprinces,whocontinuedtoassumethetitlesofCaesarandAugustus,aftertheirdominionswerecontractedtothelimitsofasinglecity;inwhichthelanguage,aswellasmanners,oftheancientRomans,hadbeenlongsinceforgotten。Thewriterwhoshouldundertaketorelatetheeventsofthisperiod,wouldfindhimselfobligedtoenterintothegeneralhistoryoftheCrusades,asfarastheycontributedtotheruinoftheGreekEmpire;andhewouldscarcelybeabletorestrainhiscuriosityfrommakingsomeinquiryintothestateofthecityofRome,duringthedarknessandconfusionofthemiddleages。
  AsIhaveventured,perhapstoohastily,tocommittothepressaworkwhichineverysenseoftheword,deservestheepithetofimperfect。Iconsidermyselfascontractinganengagementtofinish,mostprobablyinasecondvolume,^2thefirstofthesememorableperiods;andtodelivertothePublicthecompleteHistoryoftheDeclineandFallofRome,fromtheageoftheAntoninestothesubversionoftheWesternEmpire。
  Withregardtothesubsequentperiods,thoughImayentertainsomehopes,Idarenotpresumetogiveanyassurances。TheexecutionoftheextensiveplanwhichIhavedescribed,wouldconnecttheancientandmodernhistoryoftheworld;butitwouldrequiremanyyearsofhealth,ofleisure,andofperseverance。
  [Footnote2:TheAuthor,asitfrequentlyhappens,tookaninadequatemeasureofhisgrowingwork。Theremainderofthefirstperiodhasfilledtwovolumesinquarto,beingthethird,fourth,fifth,andsixthvolumesoftheoctavoedition。]
  BentinckStreet,February1,1776。
  P。S。TheentireHistory,whichisnowpublished,oftheDeclineandFalloftheRomanEmpireintheWest,abundantlydischargesmyengagementswiththePublic。Perhapstheirfavorableopinionmayencouragemetoprosecuteawork,which,howeverlaboriousitmayseem,isthemostagreeableoccupationofmyleisurehours。
  BentinckStreet,March1,1781。
  AnAuthoreasilypersuadeshimselfthatthepublicopinionisstillfavorabletohislabors;andIhavenowembracedtheseriousresolutionofproceedingtothelastperiodofmyoriginaldesign,andoftheRomanEmpire,thetakingofConstantinoplebytheTurks,intheyearonethousandfourhundredandfifty—three。ThemostpatientReader,whocomputesthatthreeponderous^3volumeshavebeenalreadyemployedontheeventsoffourcenturies,may,perhaps,bealarmedatthelongprospectofninehundredyears。ButitisnotmyintentiontoexpatiatewiththesameminutenessonthewholeseriesoftheByzantinehistory。Atourentranceintothisperiod,thereignofJustinian,andtheconquestsoftheMahometans,willdeserveanddetainourattention,andthelastageofConstantinopletheCrusadesandtheTurksisconnectedwiththerevolutionsofModernEurope。Fromtheseventhtotheeleventhcentury,theobscureintervalwillbesuppliedbyaconcisenarrativeofsuchfactsasmaystillappeareitherinterestingorimportant。
  [Footnote3:Thefirstsixvolumesoftheoctavoedition。]
  BentinckStreet,March1,1782。
  PrefaceToTheFirstVolume。