The History Book Club discussion

Hello Everyone,

This begins the eighth week's reading in our new Spotlighted group discussion.

The complete table of contents is as follows:

SYLLABUS:

Table of Contents

Introduction xi - cvi
A Note on the Text – cvii – cviii
Acknowledgements – cix
Selected Further Readings – cx – cxi
Chronology – cxii –cxiii
Preface – 1 – 4
Advertisement 5

TOC – First Volume

ONE: The Extent and Military Force of the Empire, in the Age of the Antonines p. 31

TWO: Of the Union and Internal Prosperity of the Roman Empire in the Age of the Antonines p. 56

THREE: Of the Constitution of the Roman Empire in the Age of the Antonines p. 85

FOUR: The Cruelty, Follies, and Murder of Commodus – Election of Pertinax – His Attempts to reform the State. – His Assassination by the Pretorian Guards. p. 108

FIVE: Public Sale of the Empire to Didius Julianus by the Praetorian Guards. – Clodius Albinus in Britain, Pescennius Niger in Syria, and Septimius Severus in Pannonia, declare against the Murderers of Pertinax. – Civil Wars and Victory of Severus over his three Rivals. – Relaxation of Discipline, - New Maxims of Government. p. 127

SIX: The Death of Severus. – Tyranny of Caracellaa. – Usurpation of Macrinus. – Follies of Elagabulus. – Virtues of Alexander Severus. – Licentiousness of the Army. – General State of the Roman Finances. – p. 149

SEVEN: The Elevation and Tyranny of Maximin. – Rebellion in Africa and Italy, under the Authority of the Senate. – Civil Wars and Seditions. – Violent Deaths of Maximin and his Son, of Maximus and Balbinus, and of the three Gordians. – surpation and secular Games of Philip. p. 187

EIGHT: Of the State of Persia after the Restoration of the Monarchy of Artaxerxes p. 213

NINE: The State of Germany till the Invasion of the Barbarians, in the Time of the Emperor Decius. p. 230

TEN: The Emperor Decius, Gallus, Aemilianus, Valerian, and Gallienus. – The general Irruption of the Barbarians, - The thirty Tyrants. p. 253

ELEVEN: Reign of Claudius. – Defeat of the Goths. – Victories, Triumph, and Death of Aurelian. p. 295

TWELVE: Conduct of the Army and Senate after the Death of Aurelian. – Reigns of Tacitus, Probus, Carus, and his Sons. P. 327

THIRTEEN: The Reign of Diocletian and his three Associates, Maximian, Galerius, and Constantius, - General Re-establishment of Order and Tranquility. – The Persian War, Victory and Triumph. – The New Form of Administration. – Abdication and Retirement of Diocletian and Maximian. p. 358

FOURTEEN: Troubles after the Abdication of Diocletian. – Death of Constantius. – Elevation of Constantine and Maxentius. – Six Emperors at the Same Time. – Death of Maximian and Galerius. – Victories of Constantine over Maxentius and Licinius. – Re-union of the Empire under the Authority of Constantine. p. 400

FIFTEEN: The Progress of the Christian Religion, and the Sentiments, Manners, Numbers, and Condition of the primitive Christians. p. 446

SIXTEEN: The Conduct of the Roman Government towards the Christians, from the Reign of Nero to that of Constantine. p. 514


Appendix I – 1084 - 1105

Edward Gibbon

Note: This is a group membership selected book.

The assignment for this eighth week includes the following segments/pages:

WEEK SEVEN: The Elevation and Tyranny of Maximin. – Rebellion in Africa and Italy, under the Authority of the Senate. – Civil Wars and Seditions. – Violent Deaths of Maximin and his Son, of Maximus and Balbinus, and of the three Gordians. – surpation and secular Games of Philip. p. 187 - 212


We look forward to your participation; but remember this is a non spoiler thread.

We will open up threads for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers.

This book was kicked off on May 10th. This will be the eighth week's assignment for this book.

We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library.

A special welcome to those who will be newcomers to this discussion and thank you to those who have actively contributed on the previous Spotlighted book selection. We are glad to have you all.

Welcome,

~Bentley

TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL

Since Sunday is July 4th and many folks celebrate the Monday following. The next thread will be opened up on Tuesday because of the holiday weekend.

Be advised that I love Gibbon but because of surgery etc, I am catching up so please feel free to open up the thread and conversation.

I could have delayed the discussion and added the weeks at the end but preferred to keep plowing through and I will catch up so as not to delay everyone else.

Bently, cheers to a speedy recovery!

One of my ongoing problems with Gibbon is his highly opinionated style. In chapter VIII he relies heavily on the use of unflattering adjectives for his least favorite subjects, referring to Indians and others as "effiminate." The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire is as much an insight into late 18th century Anglo-Saxon man as it is a history of antiquity.

One of the enlightened 18th century man's conceits is manifested in his sentimentalism for the idea of a "noble savage." Western man accepts non-westerners only as long as they are in a state of technological, economic, and cultural peonage. The thing he secretly dreads is the competition of a rival who is his equal.

Of course, an 18th century man like Gibbon is hardly candid about this. It would be like the contemporary upper class admitting their caste is categorically racist.

The defense mechanism takes the shape of defining what kind of other is the "good kind" and which is the "bad kind." The "good kind" is presumed to be one who stays within his own boundaries and does not aspire to parity with his neighbors. The "bad kind" is one who gets "uppity" by striving for prominence, parity, or superiority.

Yet even an eighteenth century chauvinist like Gibbon cannot ignore the fact that he, too, descended from savagery. This might put him at odds with his veneration of the "noble" state of innocence awarded to the humble primitive. So he ascribes some fundamental virtue of character (or maybe destiny) to his race. In other words, the Anglo-Saxon or Teuton was not "destined" to remain forever a savage; barbarism was merely a stage. But the other... well, there's no indication he is destined or physiologically endowed to make the same ascent and should thus be contented to remain in his place.

It's much more complicated than this, and I'm neither a sociologist or philosopher. But I see evidence of this mindset throughout Gibbons's manuscript. In this chapter he writes (emphasis mine):

"The Persians, long since civilized and corrupted, were very far from possessing the martial independence, and the intrepid hardiness, both of mind and body, which have have rendered the northern barbarians masters of the world." p. 120

While I'm on this train of thought, I might as well point out how contemporary westerners have inherited the 18th century tradition. We've recently smoothed and buffed it into something much less garish and offensive, but we still tend to think along the same terms whether we like it or not.

The war in Afghanistan, for example: Allied security forces think themselves inherently better prepared to secure the peace than the local candidates. We see the characterization of Afghans as too individualistic to organize into regimental police or military operations. And while this clearly means we think they are the western soldier's inferior in force and discipline, we choose to say it in a way that suggests we really admire them nonetheless. In the American Southern parlance, the phrase "bless their hearts" applies. We think of them as irrepressible little scamps, like bearded Charlie Chaplins or Laurels and Hardys.

Again, Gibbon:

"(The Persians) were equally unskilled in the arts of constructing, besieging, or defending regular fortifications. They trusted more to their numbers than to their courage, more to their courage than to their discipline." p. 120

It makes me wonder what would have happened if the armies of Artaxerxes had held out longer or won. Or, indeed, what Gibbon would say about the Ottomans, Mustafa Atatürk, or Faisal I of Iraq if he could have observed them. How would Gibbon have interpreted Asiatic success?

(I ask anyone suspicious of this line of reasoning to suspend judgment until (s)he has read chapter IX. No spoilers, but Gibbon's got some real zingers up his sleeve about Germany.)

Patrick wrote: "Bently, cheers to a speedy recovery!

One of my ongoing problems with Gibbon is his highly opinionated style. In chapter VIII he relies heavily on the use of unflattering adjectives for his leas..."

It's hard not to agree with you on Gibbon's opinionated style, Patrick. Some of what he writes is fairly abhorrent, and I had the same type of reaction when I was reading of the faults he found in the Persian military. However, I would give him a bit of a pass, because other than a few ethnographic works here and there, people of the West still had little knowledge of Eastern civilizations at the time of his writing the book. The unfortunate truth is that humans tend to fear and mock what they do not (or cannot) understand.

His more racist comments have also made me wonder: "What are historians 200 years from now going to be saying about us and our way of thinking?"

You're the second person who's advised that I "give Gibbon a pass." I might as well. I mean, what else can I do? Send him a nasty letter?

No, I'm not really mad at Gibbon. I decided early on that Gibbon's narrative is more interesting for its character than substance. This is the most comfortable feature for me to grab onto at this point in the process. I'm suffering from a little antiquity fatigue - the "-us people" are starting to run together.* I admit to being in the thick of a discipline I didn't prepare for. My training was in American and 20th century history.

Since Gibbon writes at the same time as the American revolutionaries, and opines about heavy issues of civic life and death, understanding his predjudices and philosophy ultimately compliments my understanding of my own country. What better way to look at it as we head into the 4th of July holiday weekend?

(Gibbon says some things in the next chapter that sound a little Thomas Paine-in-France-esque, for those who might want to be reminded of other 18th century revolutionary modes. It's really quite interesting.)



*"-Us people" being people whose last names end with the letters "us." Augustus, Commodus, Marcus, et al.

I was wondering why Gibbon referred to the Indians as effeminate when they were in possession of the most fertile part of that world and had been able to hold it against all comers.

What was the point about all the Zoroasterism? Was Gibbon trying to make some point about contemporary European religious practice?

When Gibbon was listing all the animals that accompanied the imperial court, I was thinking about all the dung produced and the smell. That many animals would strip a land bare of all pasture in a short time. It would have to be a continually moving host just to keep the animals fed.

Patricrk wrote: "I was wondering why Gibbon referred to the Indians as effeminate when they were in possession of the most fertile part of that world and had been able to hold it against all comers.

What was the..."

I felt that this might be the case as well. He did seem to speak out against religion.