Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

Jul 2018
5
San Diego
#1
In the first chapter, where Gibbons describes the conquest of Britain, he describes the Emperors as stupid, dissolute, and timid. It looks like he is referring to Domitian. Why does Gibbon not mention: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, and Titus? Is he really only referring to Domitian?
All answers are appreciated.
Best regards,
Bill
 

Chlodio

Ad Honorem
Aug 2016
3,932
Dispargum
#2
You might have to read a little farther but he does have a high opinion of the Antonines of the second century: Trajan, Hadrian, and Marcus Aurelius in particular.
 
Jul 2018
5
San Diego
#3
Thank you. I have read most of the first volume. I'm reading it for detail.

I asked the question because I noticed that Gibbon's identifies three Emperors: Claudius, Nero and Titus in the footnote to this sentence, but does not list the other Emperors during the conquest of Britain. Also, he really seems to be disappointed with one of the rulers during this time.
 
Nov 2010
7,590
Cornwall
#5
I think it's probably fair to say that Gibbon, whilst being a classic work, is not an ultimate reference for true facts. He had only a fraction of the learned opinions, knowledge and discoveries we have access to today. And no internet or TV!
 

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,028
Connecticut
#7
In the first chapter, where Gibbons describes the conquest of Britain, he describes the Emperors as stupid, dissolute, and timid. It looks like he is referring to Domitian.
I think Gibbon was referring to Claudius (timid) and Nero (dissolute) who presided when Britain was conquered and subdued.
Domitian had his critics, but I don't think the epithets apply to him. Mommsen had a high opinion of him.