/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11960700]

Is it worth reading?

[Anonymous No.11960710]

ya probably

[Anonymous No.11960717]

>reading a book about old dead white men
this in an intersectional board sweatie

[Anonymous No.11960720]

>>11960717

umm romans were POC.

[Anonymous No.11960727]

read it and find out

[Anonymous No.11960758]

>>11960700
Yes

[Anonymous No.11960783]

Great investigation for its time, especially for something made by one person.
Christian historians will tell you it's outdated and wrongly blames the fall of the Western Roman Empire on Christianity.

[Anonymous No.11960798]

>>11960720
that's what a fucking nazi would say

[Anonymous No.11960816]

>>11960720
Lamoo.

[Anonymous No.11960839]

>>11960700
>one of the greatest works of history
>"is it worth reading"
Maybe you would enjoy another book instead.

[Anonymous No.11960917]

>>11960798
Where do you think you are, sweetie?

[Anonymous No.11961038]

>>11960839
It’s a 100 bucks. Hard for me to pay that much for anything that expensive

[Anonymous No.11961044]

>>11961038
Everyman's editions are very good quality and it will take you a long time to get through. It's not an outlandish price

[Anonymous No.11961050]

>>11960700
Is the book well sourced and not filled with revisionism? Is it recommended by academics?

[Anonymous No.11961064]

>>11960700
It's so good. No Roman history has come close to synthesizing an overarching narrative with the most minute scholarship. Take his conclusions with a grain of salt however. I say this as a MA Classics student who loves Gibbon and unironically believe he was right about a majority of things but off on others i.e. The Goths, barbarians as a whole, were a prime reason for the fall. Yes, I agree (This is already controversial) but adding a caveat: The main reason the Gothic crisis spiraled out of control was the economic policy precipitated by elites. There are many examples of his excellent interpretations and conclusions but some are dated. READ IT SENPAI

[Anonymous No.11961161]

>>11960700

>"Reflecting the thought of his age, Gibbon maintained in his history this idea: "I have described the triumph of barbarism and religion." In other words, Gibbon considered that the historical development of human society from the second century AD was a retrogressing movement. Today, of course, Gibbon's chapters on Christianity are of little more than historical interest."

[Anonymous No.11961187]

>>11960700
yes, and you should install the volumes right to left in the box so that the cascade of pages is uninterrupted and each book flows into the next.

[Anonymous No.11961190]

no

[Anonymous No.11961236]

>>11960700
>Emperor dickshit murders everyone and lets Praetorian bully everyone
>Praetorian murder him out of fear they're next
>Emperor bitchboi tries to restore order
>Praetorian murder him because they can't murder and rob freely
That's what I got for the first 300 pages or so

[Anonymous No.11961354]

>>11961050
idk if this is a troll or not but generally if it is recommended by academics it probably isn't very good

Gibbon's is the most comprehensive and well written history on the Roman Empire without question. If you ask some cuck professor he will tell you to read Mary Beard. Think about that for a moment.

[Anonymous No.11961388]

>>11960717
>sweatie
It might as well be.

[Anonymous No.11961412]

>>11960700
>4,000 pages
I don't know if I'll finish it until I'm an elderly man and by then I'm not sure what utility it will be of. I guess I'm just not as into this stuff as others, though.

[Anonymous No.11961795]

>>11961064
What do you mean by minute scholarship?

[Anonymous No.11961864]

>>11960700
I'm a classics student and all in all it is worth reading if you're interested in enlightenment understandings of the 'classical world' and its perception. Reception studies, which is the study of how the ancient world, which remains deliberately vaguely defined, was/is conceptualised, is a blossoming realm in classics so if you're a history student it is probably worth reading. As a text actually regarding the history of the ancient world its conclusions are quite off the mark and uses sources that have been proven to be forgeries.

[Anonymous No.11961880]

>>11961354
Does he just limit himself to the fall rome or does he also discus it's creation and growth?

[Anonymous No.11961935]

>>11961864
What is a good well sourced and up-to-date book or volumes of books on Roman history?

[Anonymous No.11962103]

>>11961880
Only the decline and fall. It starts at Trajen iirc, the height of the empire anyway and then goes into its decline and fall. It's called decline and fall not creation, growth, decline, and fall anonymous!

[Anonymous No.11962150]

>>11961935
honestly for a very entry level introduction to Rome Beard's SPQR is not bad. If you want to avoid her work though Scullards Gracchi to Nero is good for an overview of the late republican and julio-claudian emperors. Michael Crawfords The Roman republic is also good for this time period and is a concise read. Otherwise textbooks are your best bet. Do you want any textbook recs?

[Anonymous No.11962175]

>>11960700
It's cool for the time but some of his choices (like translating about four completely different terms as "mercenaries") leads to some distorted pictures of what actually happened

[Anonymous No.11962534]

>>11961038
Just buy a used older copy on ebay for $50.

And yes, it's very worth reading.

[Anonymous No.11962542]

>>11961864
>. Reception studies, which is the study of how the ancient world, which remains deliberately vaguely defined, was/is conceptualised, is a blossoming realm in classics

[Anonymous No.11962818]

>>11961354
If by comprehensive you mean using limited sources, coming to poorly backed conclusions especially regarding religion, and in large parts being a defense of the ideology of the time rather than a true history, then sure.

It should be read as an entertaining analysis of Roman history that also represented a major movement in historical methodology, not as a real view of what occurred or a "comprehensive" analysis of the sources available on the period.

>>11961864
This guy gets it

[Anonymous No.11962887]

>>11962818
the fuck are you talking about, a "true history"? if you think history nowadays is more 'objective' than what Gibbon wrote in the late 18th you're a dumb fool.

His conclusions about Christianity are inconsequential to the rest of the work which approaches perfection in writing and historical narrative. You will not find anything new in any of the modern texts. We haven't learned anything new about Rome in the last 200 years that changes anything significant.

[Anonymous No.11963151]

>>11961388
fuck off newfag cunter

[Anonymous No.11963172]

>>11962542
Historiography has been a thing for forever dude

[Anonymous No.11963183]

>>11960700
Ancient Rome makes more sense when you realize it was run by Italians.

[Anonymous No.11963833]

>>11960783
>Christian historians will tell you it's outdated and wrongly blames the fall of the Western Roman Empire on Christianity.
And they would be correct.
>Great investigation for its time, especially for something made by one person.
This man is single-handedly responsible for the retardation of Byzantine studies in the English speaking world for the 150 years after him.

[Anonymous No.11963872]

>>11963833

>This man is single-handedly responsible for the retardation of Byzantine studies in the English speaking world for the 150 years after him.

This.

Gibbon was buddy buddy with Voltaire

[Anonymous No.11963890]

>>11963833
Why did Christianity not cause the fall of the Roman empire?

[Anonymous No.11963962]

>>11963890
Why didn't pythagoricians?

[Anonymous No.11964422]

>>11960700
It's not considered accurate by the standards of modern historians, but it has a particular place in western culture so I could see purpose in reading it there.

[Anonymous No.11964768]

>>11963183
t. Dante
Virgil is never going to love you just because you whiteknight him online