Introduction
In his work Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Gibbon presents a compelling argument suggesting that Christianity played a significant role in Rome’s decline. It is defined by shifting society’s focus from disciplined warfare to a more urban lifestyle. While this perspective is valid, an alternative viewpoint contends that Christianity revitalized the Roman Empire by allowing outsiders to join a Christian community, fostering unity.
This paper will investigate whether the alleged moral decline through Christianity was a cause of or even connected to the fall of Rome. Examining Gibbon’s argument within the context of the Enlightenment becomes crucial. It is because it was a period marked by reason, and exploring how his perspective aligns with or diverges from subsequent theories will provide valuable insights into this historical study.
Edward Gibbon’s View on the Fall of Rome
Christianity emerged as a slight religious movement within the Roman Empire in the first century. Christianization within the Roman Empire was gradual and did not occur abruptly (Cole and Carol 154). Even as the Western Roman Empire faced its decline in 476 CE, Christianity continued to propagate.
Gibbon contends that Christianity eroded the traditional Roman system of values by replacing deeply ingrained polytheism with Christian beliefs (224). The authority and credibility of rulers suffered as the cultural notion of the emperor’s divine status gave way to the importance of God, positioning the emperor as subordinate (Gibbon 225). Christians refused to participate in customs such as incense burning on the birthday of the Roman Emperor even before Constantine.
Augustine’s Confessions offers some supporting evidence for the transformation in societal values influenced by Christianity. Augustine makes an unwavering commitment to prioritize serving God over honor or wealth. The theme of people converting to Christianity due to a desire for recognition and earthly authority becomes evident. Gibbon’s assertion revolves around Christianity challenging established Roman values, particularly regarding the emperor’s divine status (Gibbon 227). However, the impact of these challenges on the emperor’s authority is debatable, and Augustine’s experiences suggest a profound shift in values influenced by Christian principles.
There is a counsel in the Bible that one was supposed to go and sell what he had and give it to the poor. It can be linked to the ascetic movement within Christianity, which took these principles to their utmost limits. The Life of St. Antony, for instance, portrays an extreme manifestation where he opted for a solitary existence, engaging in spiritual battles against demons while sustaining himself with a minimal diet (Cole and Carol 148).
Gibbon’s assertion that “whole legions were buried in these religious ranks” may have exaggerated the importance of these dedicated individuals who may not have significantly contributed to the state’s progress as implied (Gibbon 228). Given this, Gibbon argues that the rise of Christianity caused some of Rome’s moral collapse. He blamed the initiation of a cultural change away from military discipline and national loyalty toward a life focused on giving up lavish spending and committing oneself to God.
Examining the distinctions between adherence to the traditional Roman religion and Christianity is crucial to grasp this argument thoroughly. Christianity introduced a novel emphasis on cultivating a personal relationship with God, prompting conversions and giving rise to a new societal structure. The concept of an afterlife motivated individuals to preserve earthly pleasures while leading simple urban lives and engaging in education, work, and communal contributions within the Christian community.
It is reasonable that Christians, engrossed in this newly cultured civilization, may have disregarded the potential threat of a barbarian invasion. They may have neglected their duties to serve in the military and governmental roles when faced with a serious barbarian threat, prioritizing the promotion of Christianity (Cole and Carol 154). It supports the argument that Rome’s cultural ideals, such as dignity and rank, remained intact; however, the avenues to achieve them shifted toward the Church. The downfall of Rome could be linked to this redirection, a consequence of the ascent of Christianity, as it led to a deviation from customary military discipline and the Pagan devotion to gods.
Did Christianity Strengthen or Weaken Rome?
However, due to its unifying and civilizing impact on the population, Christianity can be perceived as a factor that contributed to the recovery of the Roman Empire. Emperor Constantine’s conversion to Christianity and the 313 Edict of Milan, which permitted religious tolerance for all faiths, especially Christianity, marked a turning point in history early in the 4th century (Cole and Carol 149).
Constantine received a divine sign at the Battle of Milvian Ridge, solidifying his conviction that God supported his cause. Following the austere practices of the preceding generation, Constantine ushered in the “Great Thaw” in the early fourth century, rejuvenating the civilized world. Astutely observing Rome’s stagnant economy, deteriorating infrastructure, and sole source of income, Constantine’s new and prosperous capital was influenced by the Christian God while retaining a fundamentally classical character.
Constantinople was the hub of Eastern culture, commerce and the nexus of Christian and Greek classical ideas. Suppose one assumes that Constantine’s policies were closely tied to the evolution of Christianity. In that case, Christianity contributed to the prosperity of the Eastern Roman Empire rather than being a factor in Rome’s decline (Cole and Carol150).
Constantine’s pivotal role in the founding and development of the city is evident in its name, Constantinople. Moreover, the confessional practices of Christianity exemplify the unity within the Christian community. Hence, Christianity can be viewed as positively influencing the population, fostering a sense of community.
It is crucial to consider the distinctions between the East and the West. The failure of the East and West to effectively cooperate in the face of external threats caused them to start drifting apart. The main factor dividing the East and West was their economic conditions. The region lost its military unity and split due to the West’s collapsing economy and diminished significance in the eyes of the East (Cole and Carol 148). As a result, the differences between the East and the West can be attributed to their differing economic and geographic circumstances rather than their shared theological beliefs. Therefore, rather than Christianity being the primary cause of the fall of the Western Roman Empire, several other factors also had a role.
Conclusion
The conspicuous point that the Roman Empire did not indeed collapse is the unaddressed aspect in discussions about Christianity’s impact on Rome’s fall. Admittedly, the barbarians gained complete control of the West following the emperor’s resignation, which could be linked to adopting the new Christian way of life. However, the survival of the Eastern Roman Empire for another millennium contradicts Gibbon’s assertion that the decline of the Western Roman Empire resulted from moral decay brought about by Christianity (229). The shared history and common religion of the East and West undermine the argument that Christianity contributed to the downfall of the West. In conclusion, one can say that the fall of the Roman empire was not contributed by the rise of Christians but by the differing economic and geographic circumstances between the East and the West.
Works Cited
Cole, Joshua, and Carol Lynne Symes. “Western Civilizations.” vol. 1, 2020.
Gibbon, Edward. “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.”Bohn, Vol. 1, 1887.