Gibbon and the Clergy: Private Virtues, Public Vices
When the inaugural volume of Edward Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was published in February 1776, the English public greeted it with a mixture of veneration and anxiety. Many agreed that it was a classic work, but some critics, mostly clergy, questioned its treatment of Christia...
| 1. VerfasserIn: | |
|---|---|
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Lade...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
1990
|
| In: |
Harvard theological review
Jahr: 1990, Band: 83, Heft: 4, Seiten: 399-414 |
| Online Zugang: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallele Ausgabe: | Nicht-Elektronisch
|
| Zusammenfassung: | When the inaugural volume of Edward Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was published in February 1776, the English public greeted it with a mixture of veneration and anxiety. Many agreed that it was a classic work, but some critics, mostly clergy, questioned its treatment of Christianity. Scholars have approached the ensuing controversy from several angles: Gibbon's reticence reduced it, theologically speaking, to a sampling of doctrinal viewpoints; considered as a literary phenomenon, the controversy merely provoked Gibbon to relegate his opponents to literary oblivion; historiographically, it affirmed the subordination of religious to civil history and the application of philosophical principles to the study of early Christianity. Though each is valid, none of these approaches accounts sufficiently for the historical context in which the controversy occurred. Yet an appreciation of the historical context of the controversy is necessary if Gibbon's achievement and eighteenth-century England's perspective on the problem of Christian origins are to be understood. This article observes Gibbon as he perfected his approach to religion, pondered the criticisms of his opponents, and sought to vindicate himself. In contrast to previous appraisals, it emphasizes that Gibbon was an occasional polemicist, that the controversy affected him deeply, and that, judged by contemporary standards, his critics successfully exploited their advantages in the debate. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1475-4517 |
| Enthält: | Enthalten in: Harvard theological review
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0017816000023865 |