From: The Dial, Vol. II No. IV (April 1842)
Author:
Published: E. P. Peabody 1842 Boston
The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. By EDWARD GIBBON, Esq., with notes by the Rev. H. H. Milman, & c. New York : 1841. 4 vols. 8vo.
This work is from the same press with the former, and the paper and print are of the same character. This new edition contains, in addition to the original work of Gibbon, 1. A preface by Mr. Milman, which is valuable for its hints and suggestions; 2. Notes from the same hand, with others selected from M. Guizot, and M. Wenck, a German translator of a part of the work. The notes of M. Wenck, which extend over only a very small part of the history, are apparently the work of a scholar, familiar with the sources of ancient story, and also with recent historical essays. The notes of M. Guizot are more numerous, and sometimes important. They are marked in general by a certain scholarly aspect, but are not seldom deficient in liberality of sentiment. We should say Guizot has the better head, and Milman the better heart, for surely he is no bigot. But of Mr. Milman’s own contributions we must speak more at length.
He undertook the task of a new edition of Gibbon. This problem, therefore, was before him, to render his original as complete, in relation to all historical literature now extant, as it was at Gibbon’s time, in relation to the literature written before his day. The editor is to make Gibbon’s history a manual as fit for the present day, as it was when first published for that day. This is a serious work. I. The editor must expose his author’s errors, and correct his misstatements. This he has often attempted, but rarely accomplished, and for this plain reason, such a work would require at least the equal of Gibbon, the learning of the scholar, the thought of the philosopher. From Mr. Milman we must expect neither. Still, we are grateful for what he has done. Now and then he corrects an error, or points out an unfair remark, exposes a sarcasm, or refutes a sneer. He always does it, if we remember well, in good temper, and does not think it part of a Christian’s duty to get into a passion with an infidel.
II. We should demand of an editor a reference to all the important literature which assails or defends the text, and a digest of it in the proper places; a reference to all the valuable criticisms made in Gibbon’s time, or subsequently. Gibbon himself, in a very simple way, refers to all the most valuable literature relating to the vast range of subjects that comes before him. He gives an encyclopedia of critical information respecting Roman affairs. But few works of importance escaped his eye, whether they favored his opinions or opposed them. Now, Mr. Milman rarely refers to any of the numerous works published in opposition to Gibbon. An account of those attacking his celebrated xvth and xvith chapters so numerous,—so respectable are some, and so insolent are others,—would be interesting and instructive in our day, when they are for the most part forgotten with their authors.
III. The editor must connect all discoveries and conclusions of subsequent historians, with the text, or incorporate them with the notes, and thus make the work complete for our times. This M. Guizot attempts, in some points, and not without success. Mr. Milman now and then makes the attempt, but rarely succeeds. His notes in general, when compared with Gibbon’s, are weak and frivolous. We have collected some instances to substantiate the assertion, but have not space for them at present. But to recur to the first head, supplying the omissions, and correcting the errors of his author, and cite a case in point,—Gibbon’s great sin, it seems to us, in regard to his treatment of Christianity, is this; that while he omits no occasion to sneer at the pretensions of the church, the wickedness, hypocrisy, and superstition of its members, he continues to pass dry-shod over the instances of Pagans becoming Christians, and living a divine life of faith and works. These omissions it was incumbent on the editor to supply, especially when the editor is a Christian, and his author an infidel, and still more especially when the editor is himself the historian of Christianity.
To sum up the matter in a few words between the historian and his editor, Gibbon appears to us as a tall giant, with a deportment haughty and arrogant, a face secular even to profanity, marked with coarse sensuality, but stamped with strong and masculine sense, and lit up with keen and flashing eyes, walking loftily about in the ruins of a temple, with a huge flambeau in his hand, smoking like a light-house. Where he treads, some walls totter, and some columns fall. He applies his torch, now to the face of a marble statue, makes its features appear in his plain light, but leaves a smooch on the face; now he holds his torch at the entrance of some hidden crypt, supposed to be full of holiest relics, and discloses the apparatus of debauchery and deceit; he throws down venerated images, and treads them to dust; delights to blacken what seems fair to the pious, and bring to light what mortals hide with shame. Though he represent the outline of each object as it is, yet by dexterously shifting his light, he makes their shadows take what forms he will. On the other hand, Mr. Milman is a well-dressed page, who walks gracefully, and at a respectable distance behind the giant; carries in a silver case a little taper of wax; with a delicate mouchoir, attempts to remove the smooch, but sometimes makes it worse; picks up the fragments of sacred stone, but cannot make them live again; holds up his tiny light to discover the well wrought finger of Jupiter thundering in the marble, but has not light enough to give the awful face of the God, still less to change the shadows of the giant’s torch.
We are obliged to postpone notices of several works, that have been sent us by their authors, to the next number of this publication.
All Sub-Works of The Dial, Vol. II No. IV (April 1842):
PDF Sub-Works open in a new tab. Close the tab when done viewing to return here.
