Butthisargument—one，whenconfinedwithinreasonablelimits，ofunanswerableforce—becomesmorefeebleanddisputableinproportionasitrecedesfromthebirthplace，asitwere，ofthereligion。ThefurtherChristianityadvanced，themorecausespurelyhumanwereenlistedinitsfavor；norcanitbedoubtedthatthosedevelopedwithsuchartfulexclusivenessbyGibbondidconcurmostessentiallytoitsestablishment。ItisintheChristiandispensation，asinthematerialworld。InbothitisasthegreatFirstCause，thattheDeityismostundeniablymanifest。Whenoncelaunchedinregularmotionuponthebosomofspace，andendowedwithalltheirpropertiesandrelationsofweightandmutualattraction，theheavenlybodiesappeartopursuetheircoursesaccordingtosecondarylaws，whichaccountforalltheirsublimeregularity。SoChristianityproclaimsitsDivineAuthorchieflyinitsfirstoriginanddevelopment。Whenithadoncereceiveditsimpulsefromabove—whenithadoncebeeninfusedintothemindsofitsfirstteachers—whenithadgainedfullpossessionofthereasonandaffectionsofthefavoredfew—itmightbe—andtotheProtestant，therationaChristian，itisimpossibletodefinewhenitreallywas—lefttomakeitswaybyitsnativeforce，undertheordinarysecretagenciesofall—rulingProvidence。Themainquestion，thedivineoriginofthereligion，wasdexterouslyeluded，orspeciouslyconcededbyGibbon；hisplanenabledhimtocommencehisaccount，inmostparts，belowtheapostolictimes；anditwasonlybythestrengthofthedarkcoloringwithwhichhebroughtoutthefailingsandthefolliesofthesucceedingages，thatashadowofdoubtandsuspicionwasthrownbackupontheprimitiveperiodofChristianity。

"Thetheologian，"saysGibbon，"mayindulgethepleasingtaskofdescribingreligionasshedescendedfromheaven，arrayedinhernativepurity；amoremelancholydutyisimposeduponthehistorian:—hemustdiscovertheinevitablemixtureoferrorandcorruptionwhichshecontractedinalongresidenceuponearthamongaweakanddegenerateraceofbeings。"Divestthispassageofthelatentsarcasmbetrayedbythesubsequenttoneofthewholedisquisition，anditmightcommenceaChristianhistorywritteninthemostChristianspiritofcandor。Butasthehistorian，byseemingtorespect，yetbydexterouslyconfoundingthelimitsofthesacredland，contrivedtoinsinuatethatitwasanUtopiawhichhadnoexistencebutintheimaginationofthetheologian—ashesuggestedratherthanaffirmedthatthedaysofChristianpuritywereakindofpoeticgoldenage；—sothetheologian，byventuringtoofarintothedomainofthehistorian，hasbeenperpetuallyobligedtocontestpointsonwhichhehadlittlechanceofvictory—todenyfactsestablishedonunshakenevidence—andthence，toretire，ifnotwiththeshameofdefeat，yetwithbutdoubtfulandimperfectsuccess。

Paley，withhisintuitivesagacity，sawthroughthedifficultyofansweringGibbonbytheordinaryartsofcontroversy；hisemphaticsentence，"Whocanrefuteasneer?"

containsasmuchtruthaspoint。Butfullandpregnantasthisphraseis，itisnotquitethewholetruth；itisthetoneinwhichtheprogressofChristianityistraced，incomparisonwiththerestofthesplendidandprodigallyornamentedwork，whichistheradicaldefectinthe"DeclineandFall。"ChristianityalonereceivesnoembellishmentfromthemagicofGibbon'slanguage；

hisimaginationisdeadtoitsmoraldignity；itiskeptdownbyageneralzoneofjealousdisparagement，orneutralizedbyapainfullyelaborateexpositionofitsdarkeranddegenerateperiods。Thereareoccasions，indeed，whenitspureandexaltedhumanity，whenitsmanifestlybeneficialinfluence，cancompelevenhim，asitwere，tofairness，andkindlehisunguardedeloquencetoitsusualfervor；but，ingeneral，hesoonrelapsesintoafrigidapathy；affectsanostentatiouslysevereimpartiality；notesallthefaultsofChristiansineveryagewithbitterandalmostmalignantsarcasm；reluctantly，andwithexceptionandreservation，admitstheirclaimtoadmiration。

Thisinextricablebiasappearseventoinfluencehismannerofcomposition。WhilealltheotherassailantsoftheRomanempire，whetherwarlikeorreligious，theGoth，theHun，theArab，theTartar，AlaricandAttila，Mahomet，andZengis，andTamerlane，areeachintroduceduponthescenealmostwithdramaticanimation—theirprogressrelatedinafull，complete，andunbrokennarrative—thetriumphofChristianityalonetakestheformofacoldandcriticaldisquisition。Thesuccessesofbarbarousenergyandbruteforcecallforthalltheconsummateskillofcomposition；whilethemoraltriumphsofChristianbenevolence—

thetranquilheroismofendurance，theblamelesspurity，thecontemptofguiltyfameandofhonorsdestructivetothehumanrace，which，hadtheyassumedtheproudnameofphilosophy，wouldhavebeenblazonedinhisbrightestwords，becausetheyownreligionastheirprinciple—sinkintonarrowasceticism。ThegloriesofChristianity，inshort，touchonnochordintheheartofthewriter；hisimaginationremainsunkindled；hiswords，thoughtheymaintaintheirstatelyandmeasuredmarch，havebecomecool，argumentative，andinanimate。WhowouldobscureonehueofthatgorgeouscoloringinwhichGibbonhasinvestedthedyingformsofPaganism，ordarkenoneparagraphinhissplendidviewoftheriseandprogressofMahometanism?ButwhowouldnothavewishedthatthesameequaljusticehadbeendonetoChristianity；thatitsrealcharacteranddeeplypenetratinginfluencehadbeentracedwiththesamephilosophicalsagacity，andrepresentedwithmoresober，aswouldbecomeitsquietcourse，andperhapslesspicturesque，butstillwithlivelyandattractive，descriptiveness?Hemighthavethrownaside，withthesamescorn，themassofecclesiasticalfictionwhichenvelopstheearlyhistoryofthechurch，strippedoffthelegendaryromance，andbroughtoutthefactsintheirprimitivenakednessandsimplicity—ifhehadbutallowedthosefactsthebenefitoftheglowingeloquencewhichhedeniedtothemalone。Hemighthaveannihilatedthewholefabricofpost—apostolicmiracles，ifhehadleftuninjuredbysarcasticinsinuationthoseoftheNewTestament；hemighthavecashiered，withDodwell，thewholehostofmartyrs，whichowetheirexistencetotheprodigalinventionoflaterdays，hadhebutbestowedfairroom，anddweltwithhisordinaryenergyonthesufferingsofthegenuinewitnessestothetruthofChristianity，thePolycarps，orthemartyrsofVienne。

Andindeed，if，afterall，theviewoftheearlyprogressofChristianitybemelancholyandhumiliatingwemustbewarelestwechargethewholeofthisontheinfidelityofthehistorian。Itisidle，itisdisingenuous，todenyortodissembletheearlydepravationsofChristianity，itsgradualbutrapiddeparturefromitsprimitivesimplicityandpurity，stillmore，fromitsspiritofuniversallove。ItmaybenounsalutarylessontotheChristianworld，thatthissilent，thisunavoidable，perhaps，yetfatalchangeshallhavebeendrawnbyanimpartial，orevenanhostilehand。TheChristianityofeveryagemaytakewarning，lestbyitsownnarrowviews，itswantofwisdom，anditswantofcharity，itgivethesameadvantagetothefutureunfriendlyhistorian，anddisparagethecauseoftruereligion。

Thedesignofthepresenteditionispartlycorrective，partlysupplementary:corrective，bynotes，whichpointout(itishoped，inaperfectlycandidanddispassionatespiritwithnodesirebuttoestablishthetruth)suchinaccuraciesormisstatementsasmayhavebeendetected，particularlywithregardtoChristianity；andwhichthus，withthepreviouscaution，maycounteracttoaconsiderableextenttheunfairandunfavorableimpressioncreatedagainstrationalreligion:supplementary，byaddingsuchadditionalinformationastheeditor'sreadingmayhavebeenabletofurnish，fromoriginaldocumentsorbooks，notaccessibleatthetimewhenGibbonwrote。

Theworkoriginatedintheeditor'shabitofnotingonthemarginofhiscopyofGibbonreferencestosuchauthorsashaddiscoverederrors，orthrownnewlightonthesubjectstreatedbyGibbon。Thesehadgrowntosomeextent，andseemedtohimlikelytobeofusetoothers。TheannotationsofM。GuizotalsoappearedtohimworthyofbeingbetterknowntotheEnglishpublicthantheywerelikelytobe，asappendedtotheFrenchtranslation。

Thechiefworksfromwhichtheeditorhasderivedhismaterialsare，I。TheFrenchtranslation，withnotesbyM。

Guizot；2dedition，Paris，1828。TheeditorhastranslatedalmostallthenotesofM。Guizot。Wherehehasnotaltogetheragreedwithhim，hisrespectforthelearningandjudgmentofthatwriterhas，ingeneral，inducedhimtoretainthestatementfromwhichhehasventuredtodiffer，withthegroundsonwhichheformedhisownopinion。InthenotesonChristianity，hehasretainedallthoseofM。Guizot，withhisown，fromtheconviction，thatonsuchasubject，tomany，theauthorityofaFrenchstatesman，aProtestant，andarationalandsincereChristian，wouldappearmoreindependentandunbiassed，andthereforebemorecommanding，thanthatofanEnglishclergyman。

TheeditorhasnotscrupledtotransferthenotesofM。

Guizottothepresentwork。Thewell—known??ealforknowledge，displayedinallthewritingsofthatdistinguishedhistorian，hasledtothenaturalinference，thathewouldnotbedispleasedattheattempttomakethemofusetotheEnglishreadersofGibbon。ThenotesofM。GuizotaresignedwiththeletterG。

II。TheGermantranslation，withthenotesofWenck。

Unfortunatelythislearnedtranslatordied，afterhavingcompletedonlythefirstvolume；therestoftheworkwasexecutedbyaveryinferiorhand。

ThenotesofWenckareextremelyvaluable；manyofthemhavebeenadoptedbyM。Guizot；theyaredistinguishedbytheletterW。

[Footnote*:TheeditorregretsthathehasnotbeenabletofindtheItaliantranslation，mentionedbyGibbonhimselfwithsomerespect。Itisnotinourgreatlibraries，theMuseumortheBodleian；andhehasneverfoundanybooksellerinLondonwhohasseenit。]

III。TheneweditionofLeBeau's"HistoireduBasEmpire，withnotesbyM。St。Martin，andM。Brosset。"ThatdistinguishedArmenianscholar，M。St。Martin(now，unhappily，deceased)hadaddedmuchinformationfromOrientalwriters，particularlyfromthoseofArmenia，aswellasfrommoregeneralsources。ManyofhisobservationshavebeenfoundasapplicabletotheworkofGibbonastothatofLeBeau。

IV。TheeditorhasconsultedthevariousanswersmadetoGibbononthefirstappearanceofhiswork；hemustconfess，withlittleprofit。Theywere，ingeneral，hastilycompiledbyinferiorandnowforgottenwriters，withtheexceptionofBishopWatson，whoseableapologyisratherageneralargument，thananexaminationofmisstatements。ThenameofMilnerstandshigherwithacertainclassofreaders，butwillnotcarrymuchweightwiththesevereinvestigatorofhistory。

V。Somefewclassicalworksandfragmentshavecometolight，sincetheappearanceofGibbon'sHistory，andhavebeennoticedintheirrespectiveplaces；andmuchusehasbeenmade，inthelattervolumesparticularly，oftheincreasetoourstoresofOrientalliterature。Theeditorcannot，indeed，pretendtohavefollowedhisauthor，inthesegleanings，overthewholevastfieldofhisinquiries；hemayhaveoverlookedormaynothavebeenabletocommandsomeworks，whichmighthavethrownstillfurtherlightonthesesubjects；buthetruststhatwhathehasadducedwillbeofusetothestudentofhistorictruth。

Theeditorwouldfurtherobserve，thatwithregardtosomeotherobjectionablepassages，whichdonotinvolvemisstatementorinaccuracy，hehasintentionallyabstainedfromdirectingparticularattentiontowardsthembyanyspecialprotest。

Theeditor'snotesaremarkedM。

Aconsiderablepartofthequotations(someofwhichinthelatereditionshadfallenintogreatconfusion)havebeenverified，andhavebeencorrectedbythelatestandbesteditionsoftheauthors。

June，1845。

Inthisnewedition，thetextandthenoteshavebeencarefullyrevised，thelatterbytheeditor。

Someadditionalnoteshavebeensubjoined，distinguishedbythesignatureM。1845。

PrefaceOfTheAuthor。

Itisnotmyintentiontodetainthereaderbyexpatiatingonthevarietyortheimportanceofthesubject，whichIhaveundertakentotreat；sincethemeritofthechoicewouldservetorendertheweaknessoftheexecutionstillmoreapparent，andstilllessexcusable。ButasIhavepresumedtolaybeforethepublicafirstvolumeonly^1oftheHistoryoftheDeclineandFalloftheRomanEmpire，itwill，perhaps，beexpectedthatI

shouldexplain，inafewwords，thenatureandlimitsofmygeneralplan。

[Footnote1:Thefirstvolumeofthequarto，whichcontainedthesixteenfirstchapters。]

Thememorableseriesofrevolutions，whichinthecourseofaboutthirteencenturiesgraduallyundermined，andatlengthdestroyed，thesolidfabricofhumangreatness，may，withsomepropriety，bedividedintothethreefollowingperiods:

I。ThefirstoftheseperiodsmaybetracedfromtheageofTrajanandtheAntonines，whentheRomanmonarchy，havingattaineditsfullstrengthandmaturity，begantovergetowardsitsdecline；andwillextendtothesubversionoftheWesternEmpire，bythebarbariansofGermanyandScythia，therudeancestorsofthemostpolishednationsofmodernEurope。Thisextraordinaryrevolution，whichsubjectedRometothepowerofaGothicconqueror，wascompletedaboutthebeginningofthesixthcentury。

II。ThesecondperiodoftheDeclineandFallofRomemaybesupposedtocommencewiththereignofJustinian，who，byhislaws，aswellasbyhisvictories，restoredatransientsplendortotheEasternEmpire。ItwillcomprehendtheinvasionofItalybytheLombards；theconquestoftheAsiaticandAfricanprovincesbytheArabs，whoembracedthereligionofMahomet；therevoltoftheRomanpeopleagainstthefeebleprincesofConstantinople；andtheelevationofCharlemagne，who，intheyeareighthundred，establishedthesecond，orGermanEmpireoftheWestIII。Thelastandlongestoftheseperiodsincludesaboutsixcenturiesandahalf；fromtherevivaloftheWesternEmpire，tillthetakingofConstantinoplebytheTurks，andtheextinctionofadegenerateraceofprinces，whocontinuedtoassumethetitlesofCaesarandAugustus，aftertheirdominionswerecontractedtothelimitsofasinglecity；inwhichthelanguage，aswellasmanners，oftheancientRomans，hadbeenlongsinceforgotten。Thewriterwhoshouldundertaketorelatetheeventsofthisperiod，wouldfindhimselfobligedtoenterintothegeneralhistoryoftheCrusades，asfarastheycontributedtotheruinoftheGreekEmpire；andhewouldscarcelybeabletorestrainhiscuriosityfrommakingsomeinquiryintothestateofthecityofRome，duringthedarknessandconfusionofthemiddleages。

AsIhaveventured，perhapstoohastily，tocommittothepressaworkwhichineverysenseoftheword，deservestheepithetofimperfect。Iconsidermyselfascontractinganengagementtofinish，mostprobablyinasecondvolume，^2thefirstofthesememorableperiods；andtodelivertothePublicthecompleteHistoryoftheDeclineandFallofRome，fromtheageoftheAntoninestothesubversionoftheWesternEmpire。

Withregardtothesubsequentperiods，thoughImayentertainsomehopes，Idarenotpresumetogiveanyassurances。TheexecutionoftheextensiveplanwhichIhavedescribed，wouldconnecttheancientandmodernhistoryoftheworld；butitwouldrequiremanyyearsofhealth，ofleisure，andofperseverance。

[Footnote2:TheAuthor，asitfrequentlyhappens，tookaninadequatemeasureofhisgrowingwork。Theremainderofthefirstperiodhasfilledtwovolumesinquarto，beingthethird，fourth，fifth，andsixthvolumesoftheoctavoedition。]

BentinckStreet，February1，1776。

P。S。TheentireHistory，whichisnowpublished，oftheDeclineandFalloftheRomanEmpireintheWest，abundantlydischargesmyengagementswiththePublic。Perhapstheirfavorableopinionmayencouragemetoprosecuteawork，which，howeverlaboriousitmayseem，isthemostagreeableoccupationofmyleisurehours。

BentinckStreet，March1，1781。

AnAuthoreasilypersuadeshimselfthatthepublicopinionisstillfavorabletohislabors；andIhavenowembracedtheseriousresolutionofproceedingtothelastperiodofmyoriginaldesign，andoftheRomanEmpire，thetakingofConstantinoplebytheTurks，intheyearonethousandfourhundredandfifty—three。ThemostpatientReader，whocomputesthatthreeponderous^3volumeshavebeenalreadyemployedontheeventsoffourcenturies，may，perhaps，bealarmedatthelongprospectofninehundredyears。ButitisnotmyintentiontoexpatiatewiththesameminutenessonthewholeseriesoftheByzantinehistory。Atourentranceintothisperiod，thereignofJustinian，andtheconquestsoftheMahometans，willdeserveanddetainourattention，andthelastageofConstantinople(theCrusadesandtheTurks)isconnectedwiththerevolutionsofModernEurope。Fromtheseventhtotheeleventhcentury，theobscureintervalwillbesuppliedbyaconcisenarrativeofsuchfactsasmaystillappeareitherinterestingorimportant。

[Footnote3:Thefirstsixvolumesoftheoctavoedition。]

BentinckStreet，March1，1782。

PrefaceToTheFirstVolume。