Gibbon's Vindication
0) The Text
I found a transcript on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library site, and edited that text into a single HTML file on my own site here (and a .docx file including the footnotes here). However, if you want the full glorious 135 pages of the original, Google Books has it available for you here.
Google Books also has several of the publications criticised by Gibbon:
1) Good quotes
Several on accepting and dealing with criticism: I have never affected, indeed I have never understood, the stoical apathy, the proud contempt of criticism, which some authors have publicly professed. Fame is the motive, it is the reward, of our labours; nor can I easily comprehend how it is possible that we should remain cold and indifferent with regard to the attempts which are made to deprive us of the most valuable object of our possessions, or at least of our hopes.
But responding to such critics is a hostile march over a dreary and barren desert, where thirst, hunger, and intolerable weariness, are much more to be dreaded, than the arrows of the enemy.
A couple of profound thoughts on the duties of the historian, first on primary sources: The Writer who aspires to the name of Historian, is obliged to consult a variety of original testimonies, each of which, taken separately, is perhaps imperfect and partial. By a judicious re-union and arrangement of these dispersed materials, he endeavours to form a consistent and interesting narrative. Nothing ought to be inserted which is not proved by some of the witnesses; but their evidence must be so intimately blended together, that as it is unreasonable to expect that each of them should vouch for the whole, so it would be impossible to define the boundaries of their respective property.
Then on secondary sources: It is the right, it is the duty of a critical historian to collect, to weigh, to select the opinions of his predecessors; and the more diligence he has exerted in the search, the more rationally he may hope to add some improvement to the stock of knowledge, the use of which has been common to all.
Gibbon springs rather unexpectedly to the defence of the Welsh: Those Critics who interpret the comparison of Palestine and Wales as a tacit libel on the former, are themselves guilty of an unjust satire against the latter, of those countries.
And even more unexpectedly to the defence of early Christian women: These trifling and peevish cavils would, perhaps, have been confounded with some criticisms of the same stamp, on which I had bestowed a slight, though sufficient notice, in the beginning of this article of Mosheim; had not my attention been awakened by a peroration worthy of Tertullian himself, if Tertullian had been devoid of eloquence as well as of moderation - "Much less does the Christian Mosheim give our infidel Historian any pretext for inserting that illiberal malignant insinuation, "That Christianity has, in every age, acknowledged its important obligations to FEMALE devotion;" the remark is truly contemptible."
It is not my design to fill whole pages with a tedious enumeration of the many illustrious examples of female Saints, who, in every age, and almost in every country, have promoted the interest of Christianity. Such instances will readily offer themselves to those who have the slightest knowledge of Ecclesiastical History; nor is it necessary that I should remind them how much the charms, the influence, the devotion of Clotilda, and of her great-grand-daughter Bertha, contributed to the conversion of France and England. Religion may accept, without a blush, the services of the purest and most gentle portion of the human species: but here are some advocates who would disgrace Christianity, if Christianity could be disgraced, by the manner in which they defend her cause.
He is of course devastating about Davi(e)s, to whom the bulk of the Vindication is addressed: My readers, if any readers have accompanied me thus far, must be satisfied, and indeed satiated, with the repeated proofs which I have made of the weight and temper of my adversary's weapons. They have, in every assault, fallen dead and lifeless to the ground: they have more than once recoiled, and dangerously wounded the unskilful hand that had presumed to use them.
I cannot profess myself very desirous of Mr. Davis's acquaintance; but if he will take the trouble of calling at my house any afternoon when I am not at home, my servant shall shew him my library, which he will find tolerably well furnished with the useful authors, ancient as well as modern, ecclesiastical as well as profane, who have directly supplied me with the materials of my History.
And demolishes Chelsum's attempts to defend Eusebius: Besides the reasonable grounds of suspicion, which suggest themselves to every liberal mind, against the credibility of the Ecclesiastical Historians, and of Eusebius, their venerable leader, I had taken notice of two very remarkable passages of the Bishop of Caesarea. He frankly, or at least indirectly, declares, that in treating of the last persecution, "he has related whatever might redound to the glory and suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace, of Religion." Dr. Chelsum, who, on this occasion, most lamentably exclaims that we should hear Eusebius, before we utterly condemn him has provided, with the assistance of his worthy colleague [Randolph], an elaborate defence for their common patron; and as if he were secretly conscious of the weakness of the cause, he has contrived the resource of entrenching himself in a very muddy soil, behind three several fortifications, which do not exactly support each other. The advocate for the sincerity of Eusebius maintains: 1st, That he never made such a declaration: 2dly, That he had a right to make it: and, 3dly, That he did not observe it.
Finally, he concludes by urging us to forget the entirety of the 135 pages we have just read: It is not without some mixture of mortification and regret, that I now look back on the number of hours which I have consumed, and the number of pages which I have filled, in vindicating my literary and moral character from the charge of wilful Misrepresentations, gross Errors, and servile Plagiarisms. I cannot derive any triumph or consolation from the occasional advantages which I may have gained over three adversaries, whom it is impossible for me to consider as objects either of terror or of esteem. The spirit of resentment, and every other lively sensation, have long since been extinguished; and the pen would long since have dropped from my weary hand, had I not been supported in the execution of this ungrateful task, by the consciousness, or at least by the opinion, that I was discharging a debt of honour to the Public and to myself. I am impatient to dismiss, and to dismiss FOR EVER, this odious controversy, with the success of which I cannot surely be elated; and I have only to request, that, as soon as my Readers are convinced of my innocence, they would forget my Vindication.
But I don't think we can.
2) Summary
Gibbon responds to several of his critics: mostly (80 pages of the 135) Davies, who accuses him of historiographical malfeasance; very briefly Apthorpe (with whom he claims to find no serious points of difference); slightly less briefly Watson (though he finds only one point of difference with him); at greater length (40 pages) Chelsum and Randolph, who attack him from an explicitly Christian and Protestant position; and finally and briefly the Anonymous Gentleman, who attacks him from a Catholic position. To read only Gibbon's side of the story is perhaps a bit unfair, but I'm more interested in him than in his opponents.
3) Points arising
I wanted to divert to this text partly because my own travel plans mean I can't get directly into Vol II but mainly because we are stepping away from history and into the pamphlet wars of the eighteenth century, which in a lot of ways are the direct ancestor of the blogosphere of today.
Gosh, if only internet flame wars were conducted like this! The angry tone and personal invective are there (and note how accusations of Papistry can approach an eighteenth-century application of Godwin's Law), but the fact was that to get noticed, you had to make a non-trivial expenditure for publication, and to invest rather more than ten seconds of thought. This means that at least some reflection and analysis went into the process. Even Davies, whose mistakes Gibbon mercilessly exposes, at least writes in complete and usually eloquent sentences. (I admit I have only glanced at some of the 280 pages of the Examination.)
Having said that, actually the core of the Vindication is Gibbon's concept of how to write good history, his defence of his own methods against Davies, and his criticism of Chelsum, Randlph and above all Eusebius for writing bad history. I've given the key quotes already; they should be written on the wall of every historical writer. If you are prepared to enjoy vigorous controversies on somewhat obscure subjects, the Vindication is entertaining.
4) Coming Next
I will be travelling from Cyprus to Southern Sudan via Istanbul and Nairobi next weekend, so will be unlikely to post here. I've had an offer of a guest post, and am pleased to accept, but no big problem if the person concerned discovers that other things take priority.
The weekend after, I get back from Africa on the Saturday, so I may after all be able to tackle the first chapter of Vol II - Chapter XVII on Constantinople and Constantine. You can find it here or here. However I will now definitely be travelling again (in Portugal) over the first weekend of February, so would welcome proposals of guest posts (and have already issued one invitation, though other expressions of interest would be gratefully received).
I found a transcript on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library site, and edited that text into a single HTML file on my own site here (and a .docx file including the footnotes here). However, if you want the full glorious 135 pages of the original, Google Books has it available for you here.
Google Books also has several of the publications criticised by Gibbon:
- Henry Edward Davies, BA, of Baliol College, Oxford: An Examination of the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Chapters of Mr. Gibbon's History, in which his View of the Progress of the Christian Religion is shown to be founded on the Misrepresentation of the Authors he cites; and numerous Instances of his Inaccuracy and Plagiarism are produced.
- East Apthorpe, M.A., Vicar of Croydon: Letters on the Prevalence of Christianity before its Civil Establishment. With Observations on a late History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
- R. Watson, DD FRS and Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge: An Apology For Christianity, in a Series of Letters, Addressed to Edward Gibbon, Esq; Author of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
1) Good quotes
Several on accepting and dealing with criticism: I have never affected, indeed I have never understood, the stoical apathy, the proud contempt of criticism, which some authors have publicly professed. Fame is the motive, it is the reward, of our labours; nor can I easily comprehend how it is possible that we should remain cold and indifferent with regard to the attempts which are made to deprive us of the most valuable object of our possessions, or at least of our hopes.
But responding to such critics is a hostile march over a dreary and barren desert, where thirst, hunger, and intolerable weariness, are much more to be dreaded, than the arrows of the enemy.
A couple of profound thoughts on the duties of the historian, first on primary sources: The Writer who aspires to the name of Historian, is obliged to consult a variety of original testimonies, each of which, taken separately, is perhaps imperfect and partial. By a judicious re-union and arrangement of these dispersed materials, he endeavours to form a consistent and interesting narrative. Nothing ought to be inserted which is not proved by some of the witnesses; but their evidence must be so intimately blended together, that as it is unreasonable to expect that each of them should vouch for the whole, so it would be impossible to define the boundaries of their respective property.
Then on secondary sources: It is the right, it is the duty of a critical historian to collect, to weigh, to select the opinions of his predecessors; and the more diligence he has exerted in the search, the more rationally he may hope to add some improvement to the stock of knowledge, the use of which has been common to all.
Gibbon springs rather unexpectedly to the defence of the Welsh: Those Critics who interpret the comparison of Palestine and Wales as a tacit libel on the former, are themselves guilty of an unjust satire against the latter, of those countries.
And even more unexpectedly to the defence of early Christian women: These trifling and peevish cavils would, perhaps, have been confounded with some criticisms of the same stamp, on which I had bestowed a slight, though sufficient notice, in the beginning of this article of Mosheim; had not my attention been awakened by a peroration worthy of Tertullian himself, if Tertullian had been devoid of eloquence as well as of moderation - "Much less does the Christian Mosheim give our infidel Historian any pretext for inserting that illiberal malignant insinuation, "That Christianity has, in every age, acknowledged its important obligations to FEMALE devotion;" the remark is truly contemptible."
It is not my design to fill whole pages with a tedious enumeration of the many illustrious examples of female Saints, who, in every age, and almost in every country, have promoted the interest of Christianity. Such instances will readily offer themselves to those who have the slightest knowledge of Ecclesiastical History; nor is it necessary that I should remind them how much the charms, the influence, the devotion of Clotilda, and of her great-grand-daughter Bertha, contributed to the conversion of France and England. Religion may accept, without a blush, the services of the purest and most gentle portion of the human species: but here are some advocates who would disgrace Christianity, if Christianity could be disgraced, by the manner in which they defend her cause.
He is of course devastating about Davi(e)s, to whom the bulk of the Vindication is addressed: My readers, if any readers have accompanied me thus far, must be satisfied, and indeed satiated, with the repeated proofs which I have made of the weight and temper of my adversary's weapons. They have, in every assault, fallen dead and lifeless to the ground: they have more than once recoiled, and dangerously wounded the unskilful hand that had presumed to use them.
I cannot profess myself very desirous of Mr. Davis's acquaintance; but if he will take the trouble of calling at my house any afternoon when I am not at home, my servant shall shew him my library, which he will find tolerably well furnished with the useful authors, ancient as well as modern, ecclesiastical as well as profane, who have directly supplied me with the materials of my History.
And demolishes Chelsum's attempts to defend Eusebius: Besides the reasonable grounds of suspicion, which suggest themselves to every liberal mind, against the credibility of the Ecclesiastical Historians, and of Eusebius, their venerable leader, I had taken notice of two very remarkable passages of the Bishop of Caesarea. He frankly, or at least indirectly, declares, that in treating of the last persecution, "he has related whatever might redound to the glory and suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace, of Religion." Dr. Chelsum, who, on this occasion, most lamentably exclaims that we should hear Eusebius, before we utterly condemn him has provided, with the assistance of his worthy colleague [Randolph], an elaborate defence for their common patron; and as if he were secretly conscious of the weakness of the cause, he has contrived the resource of entrenching himself in a very muddy soil, behind three several fortifications, which do not exactly support each other. The advocate for the sincerity of Eusebius maintains: 1st, That he never made such a declaration: 2dly, That he had a right to make it: and, 3dly, That he did not observe it.
Finally, he concludes by urging us to forget the entirety of the 135 pages we have just read: It is not without some mixture of mortification and regret, that I now look back on the number of hours which I have consumed, and the number of pages which I have filled, in vindicating my literary and moral character from the charge of wilful Misrepresentations, gross Errors, and servile Plagiarisms. I cannot derive any triumph or consolation from the occasional advantages which I may have gained over three adversaries, whom it is impossible for me to consider as objects either of terror or of esteem. The spirit of resentment, and every other lively sensation, have long since been extinguished; and the pen would long since have dropped from my weary hand, had I not been supported in the execution of this ungrateful task, by the consciousness, or at least by the opinion, that I was discharging a debt of honour to the Public and to myself. I am impatient to dismiss, and to dismiss FOR EVER, this odious controversy, with the success of which I cannot surely be elated; and I have only to request, that, as soon as my Readers are convinced of my innocence, they would forget my Vindication.
But I don't think we can.
2) Summary
Gibbon responds to several of his critics: mostly (80 pages of the 135) Davies, who accuses him of historiographical malfeasance; very briefly Apthorpe (with whom he claims to find no serious points of difference); slightly less briefly Watson (though he finds only one point of difference with him); at greater length (40 pages) Chelsum and Randolph, who attack him from an explicitly Christian and Protestant position; and finally and briefly the Anonymous Gentleman, who attacks him from a Catholic position. To read only Gibbon's side of the story is perhaps a bit unfair, but I'm more interested in him than in his opponents.
3) Points arising
I wanted to divert to this text partly because my own travel plans mean I can't get directly into Vol II but mainly because we are stepping away from history and into the pamphlet wars of the eighteenth century, which in a lot of ways are the direct ancestor of the blogosphere of today.
Gosh, if only internet flame wars were conducted like this! The angry tone and personal invective are there (and note how accusations of Papistry can approach an eighteenth-century application of Godwin's Law), but the fact was that to get noticed, you had to make a non-trivial expenditure for publication, and to invest rather more than ten seconds of thought. This means that at least some reflection and analysis went into the process. Even Davies, whose mistakes Gibbon mercilessly exposes, at least writes in complete and usually eloquent sentences. (I admit I have only glanced at some of the 280 pages of the Examination.)
Having said that, actually the core of the Vindication is Gibbon's concept of how to write good history, his defence of his own methods against Davies, and his criticism of Chelsum, Randlph and above all Eusebius for writing bad history. I've given the key quotes already; they should be written on the wall of every historical writer. If you are prepared to enjoy vigorous controversies on somewhat obscure subjects, the Vindication is entertaining.
4) Coming Next
I will be travelling from Cyprus to Southern Sudan via Istanbul and Nairobi next weekend, so will be unlikely to post here. I've had an offer of a guest post, and am pleased to accept, but no big problem if the person concerned discovers that other things take priority.
The weekend after, I get back from Africa on the Saturday, so I may after all be able to tackle the first chapter of Vol II - Chapter XVII on Constantinople and Constantine. You can find it here or here. However I will now definitely be travelling again (in Portugal) over the first weekend of February, so would welcome proposals of guest posts (and have already issued one invitation, though other expressions of interest would be gratefully received).