be influenced not only by a desire to ward off danger from others, but also by a desire that the enemy himself should become a friend. Upon these, therefore, a responsibility rested, which does not belong to us-the responsibility of pressing the soundest reasons in the most kind and earnest way, in the hope that his heart might be opened to receive the truth. But now his ear can no longer listen to argument or to entreaty, and modern editors can only endeavour to prevent others from being misled by errors in the narrative of facts, and from drawing wrong inferences from the mode, in which true facts themselves may be related. The public owe a debt of gratitude to Wenck, M. Guizot, and Dean Milman, for the care they have bestowed on those portions of the history where religion demanded their services, as well as on other parts which either required correction, or admitted of extension, or, from apparent inconsistency, called for explanation. M. Guizot in the preface to his translation, gives a very interesting account of his repeated and sifting examination both of the text and of the notes, showing his anxiety to avoid all prejudiced judgments, and, at the same time, his determination not to spare censure, where he deemed it imperative on him, as a Christian and as a scholar, to administer it.

The result of the labours of these editors has been altogether favourable to the character of Gibbon as an accurate historian; and the student may confidently use his work as the text bookmay we not add, the best text-book-for the very remarkable period which it embraces. Wherever Gibbon is enabled to consult authors of acknowledged ability and good faith, their value to us is enhanced by the graces of his own composition, and by the skilful arrangement or condensation of his materials. And in the more intricate paths of the history, we shall find our toil lightened and our time saved, by the manner in which he has drawn from writers of an inferior order, from tedious, contradictory, and voluminous records, whatever can most attract, and most deserve attention.

A few remarks may be here made with respect to the biography of Gibbon. He himself has rendered us the best assistance by his own record of the principal passages in his life, and by the estimate he has made of his own character.

The life of any distinguished writer is made peculiarly valuable when we are enabled to understand the circumstances which led to the choice of the subject to which he most devoted his time, and on which his fame is chiefly founded; and we gain no little instruction when we are also permitted to see how the author had fitted himself for the task. M. Guizot, has, therefore judiciously confined his notice of Gibbon's life to such trustworthy accounts, as give us a slight understanding of these circumstances. We observe the great range of his historical studies, even from an

66

early period of life; we learn that his memory was very retentive, that his curiosity was unbounded; that his diligence was unwearied, and we are satisfied with the truth of his serious protestation, that he always endeavoured to draw from the fountain head."

As we are not discerners of the thoughts of the heart, we must not condemn him for want of sincerity either in his conversion to Romanism, or in his re-conversion to the Protestant faith; but his own Memoirs show, that there was not that child-like and humble spirit, which is the spirit most necessary for admitting and for retaining the truth. It is in vain for any sceptic to justify his indifference or opposition to the Gospel by pleading any defects in education. It is doing grievous wrong to the care of God for an immortal soul to suppose that such defects can excuse a being accountable for the use of his understanding, in his rejection of heavenly truth. There must be some fault in the heart, some self-will, some pride of intellect, which glories in shaking off the yoke of religious restraint, and which fancies that the powers of reason are insulted because God himself wishes to guide or employ them.

It is said that in society Gibbon did not attempt to display his great learning ostentatiously; that he had no desire to engross the chief attention. At one period it appears that he shewed a greater wish to be received as a man of fashion than merely as one of literary reputation. He gained the regard and confidence of his friends; his attachment to them was sincere; he never left any, nor neglected any in changes of fortune.

A new edition of this valuable history is now offered in a convenient form, and rendered as complete as possible by additional notes. Since the time of Gibbon, new light has been thrown on many parts of his subject. To collect this for the use of the student, the labours of foreign scholars have been made available. These will assist readers in forming a correct judgment of the opinions or the mistakes of the author, whilst he is describing those "revolutions which gradually undermined, and at length destroyed, the solid fabric of human greatness."

M. GUIZOT'S PREFACE

TO THE SECOND EDITION OF HIS TRANSLATION.

To reprint a good work and revise an imperfect translation, are not my only motives for publishing this new edition of Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. I have also been induced to remodel my version of it and supply original notes, for the purpose of correcting omissions and errors, which are the more serious, because, being involved in the immense mass of facts, which a history so extensive comprises, they are calculated to mislead the superficial, who believe all that they read, and even the attentive, who know not how to study all that they are reading.

Numerous writers, learned men and philosophers too have bestowed much attention and labour on this portion of history. The gradual decline of the most extraordinary dominion, that ever led captive and oppressed a world-the fall of that widest of empires, which, constructed out of the wreck of so many kingdoms, republics, and communities, both barbarian and civilized, was then itself in its turn broken up into another host of communities, republics, and kingdoms-the abolition of the religion. of Greece and Rome- the origin and growth of two other religions, which have shared between them the fairest provinces of earth-the old age of the ancient world—the spectacle of its expiring glory and moral degeneracy—the infancy of the modern world—the picture of its early progress, and of a new impulse given to mind and character-these form a subject to attract and interest all who do not look with indifference on those memorable epochs, when, as Corneille so beautifully said

"Un grand destin commence, un grand destin s'achève."

Learning, philosophy, and eloquence, have vied with each other, either to set in order or to delineate the ruins of this vast edifice, so grand before it fell, and destined to be replaced by others as grand. MM. de Tillemont, Lebeau, Ancillon, Pagi, Eckhel, and many other French and foreign writers, have investigated them throughout; they have plunged into the confused mass, seeking for dates, references, facts, details, &c.; and with more or less of extensive erudition and enlightened discrimina

tion, they have in some degree collected and arranged anew, the scattered materials. I am unwilling to detract from the merit of labours, which have been unquestionably useful, but they are sometimes intombed beneath the mass into which they plunged. Either intentionally restricting the object and range of their studies, or unknown to themselves, intellectually confined within certain limits, the search after facts was allowed so to engross their minds, that the concourse of ideas was neglected. The ruins were explored and light let in, but no monument was reconstructed. Their works present not to the reader those general views which enable him to survey, at a single glance, a wide extent of country or a long series of ages; he cannot, amid the darkness of the past, distinguish clearly the progress of mankind, changing incessantly their semblance, but not their natures; their manners, but not their passions; and arriving always at the same results, though by diverging ways. Yet these are the views which constitute the philosophy of history, and without which its records are but a heap of incoherent, inconclusive, and unconnected facts. On the other hand, Montesquieu, in his "Considerations on the Causes of Roman Grandeur and its Fall,” throwing over his subject the pervasive glance of genius, has called up before us a throng of ideas, always profound, and generally new; but they are sometimes not precise, nor are they in constant accordance with the true character and real connection of facts; they are often derived from those rapid and ingenious perceptions, in which a great mind too willingly indulges, because it delights in manifesting this kind of creative power. It is the just and happy privilege of genius, that its errors are pregnant with truth; it may at times lose itself on the path which it opens; but the path is open, and more cautious followers may tread it surely.

Less vigorous, less profound, less elevated than Montesquieu, Gibbon appropriated to himself the subject, of which his predecessor had pointed out the extent and rich stores. He carefully traced and untwisted slowly the whole progressive chain of those occurrences, some of which Montesquieu had used, rather as pegs whereon to hang his own ideas, than as guide-posts to show his reader the course and mutual influence of events. The English historian was eminently gifted with the penetration which ascends to causes, and the sagacity which discerns such as are true amid those which are only apparently so; he was born in an age when enlightened curiosity studied the gear of the social machine, and strove to understand the connection of its parts, their working, their use, their effects, and their importance; the pursuits and the stretch of his mind placed him on a level with the lights of his age; the materials-that is, the facts of history, he examined and criticised with a judicious erudition; its moral

aspect-that is, the relation of events between themselves and with the actors, he regarded with a skilful philosophy. He was aware that a dry detail of facts excites no other interest than the idle curiosity which desires to know the actions of other men; and that history, to be truly useful and serious, must look at the society which it depicts, in all the different points of view in which it is seen by the statesman, the warrior, the magistrate, the financier, the philosopher, and all whose position or knowledge may lay open to them the springs of action. Equally just and noble, this idea, as it appears to me, inspired the author, while composing his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. It is not a simple recital of the events which agitated! the Roman world, from the elevation of Augustus to the taking of Constantinople by the Turks. With this picture we find constantly associated the state of the finances, of opinions, of manners, of the military system, and of all those internal and concealed causes either of prosperity or misery, by which the existence and welfare of society are silently established or secretly undermined. Faithful to that recognized, but neglected law, which prescribes fact as the guide of general reflections, and a step-by-step adherence to its slow but necessary course, Gibbon has produced a work remarkable for the extent of its views, although seldom dignified by exalted ideas; and abounding in positive and interesting results, in spite of its author's scepticism.

The merits of the work are incontestably proved by its success in an age which had produced Montesquieu; and which, at the time of the publication, still possessed Hume, Robertson, and Voltaire: they are confirmed by the subsequently undisturbed permanence of that success. In the most enlightened countries of Europe, in England, France, and Germany, Gibbon is always quoted as an authority. Even those who have detected his inaccuracies, or do not assent to some of his opinions, never point out his mistakes nor contest his views, but with the respect due to superior merit. My labours have required that I should consult the writings of philosophers who have discussed the financial resources of the Roman empire, of learned men who have studied its chronology, of theologians who have sounded the depths of ecclesiastical history, of lawyers who have carefully investigated the Roman jurisprudence, of oriental scholars well versed in Arab customs and the Koran, and of modern historians who have largely inquired respecting the Crusades and their influence each of these writers has remarked and indicated in the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, some instances of negligence, some false, or at least imperfect views, and sometimes even omissions, which it is difficult to consider as not designed; they have set right some facts and advantageously contradicted some assertions; but for the most part, they made