ancient

...this really is a monumental work. It is common to say that Gibbon was a great writer but it's best to look elsewhere for the history...if you can swallow, say, _The Federalist Papers_, you will enjoy Gibbon.

...There is still a lot of good history to learn in Gibbon. The important thing to remember is that Gibbon often takes the point of view of conservative elements in Rome, so he inherits a particular agenda that does not look favorably on the decline of Rome the city or the Roman senate, or on the rise of the military dictatorship.

That just means that the punch line is, don't make Gibbon your introduction to Roman history. Maybe start with Michael Grant's _History of Rome_. But Gibbon is still a valuable read from a purely historical point of view, not just a literary one.

Also important to remember is that Gibbon uses "decline and fall" in maybe a different way than we do. He essentially means the drift away from the principles and institutions of Golden Age Rome (that's the conservatism again) over the 1500 years that the Roman Empire (as he conceived it -- rolling the Byzantine Empire into the Roman) existed.

DON'T read these volumes (this 3 volume Modern Library edition is a complete reproduction of the 6 volume text edited by J.B. Bury) if you want to learn about the death of the Roman Republic, because it's not covered (for that and other general history try Cary and Scullard's _A History of Rome Down to the Reign of Constantine_). Gibbon begins (in Vol. 1) in the 2nd century AD and goes (in Vol. 3) to 1453 AD; the Republic ended in the 1st century BC. Trite comparisons aside, it's also difficult to find anything deep or valuable in Gibbon that directly foreshadows the modern American experience. For starters, the grand princples of Federalist America are different from Golden Age Rome, and any decline away from them is fundamentally different (if there even is such a decline).

This is an excellent abridged edition of Edward Gibbon's classic "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" and it makes both a perfect introduction for those just getting into Gibbon and a useful portable copy for people who have the entire set. This abridgement includes much of Gibbon's coverage of the decline and fall of the western empire and some interesting chapters and excerpts from the remainder of the work, ideal for the general reader. Most of Gibbon's history still stands up after 200 years (and footnotes point out where it doesn't), and it is written in an absolutely gorgeous English style. Anyone interested in Rome owes it to themselves to read Gibbon, and this is a good place to get your feet wet.

You've got to read Gibbon, IMO, to be educated about separation of Church and State, about the history of ideas, and, as many have noted, about Roman and Christian history itself.

That said, I think Gibbon's gifts as a writer are over-rated.

This man DOES NOT get to the point, or tend to express an over-arching theme that he can point to with facts in an explicit way. Rather, he takes a roundabout view of things, and ferreting out the main point or theme is difficult amidst all the ancillary material presented. Gibbon would be a flop as a journalist, or as a corporate communicator today.

As a better example of history well-written, try the Pelican History of the World, by J. M. Roberts.

However, with that exception, Gibbon's style and wit are worthy of emulation.