The Fall of the Roman Empire Revisited: Sidonius Apollinaris and His Crisis of Identity

Published by the Corcoran Department of History at the University of Virginia. ^ | 2-1-03 (Volume Thirty-Seven) | By Eric J. Goldberg

[DeaconBenjamin]

Did mobs exist in Alexandria in the time of Theophilus? Most probably. Did the "seven wonders of the world" library exist in Alexandria at that time? The evidence does not appear to support such a belief.

[yankeedame]

This makes sense to me. Excellent article. Gibbon was blinded by Enlightenment rationalism and anti-Christian animus....
While I agree with your statement en toto I question the use of the word "blinded". Gibbson was not blinded by the Enlightenment so much as he was a product of it. Which, in turn, accounts for the anti-Christian undertoe found in his writings.

What's obvious on the largest scale is that Rome fell and Christian Europe rose in its place...
Yet, IMHO, it was not a case of The Church waiting eagerly in the wings. The Church and the Empire were like compensating buckets in a well. The Empire represented and maintained organization. The further it weakened, the more The Church, already (and the only one) possessing a well structured, well organization administration was obligued-- either by force of circumstance or opportunity-- to replace that of the politically leperous Empire.

[KellyAdmirer]

I had never seen this analysis before, thanks for posting it.

It has striking similarities to what happened at the end of the Eastern Roman Empire 1000 years later. The clergy then fought any political approaches to Rome based on religious compromise that were being attempted to stir up another Crusade. These approaches also, as in the earlier times, were advocated and supported by "liberal" or "worldly" politicians. The clergy were fiercely resistant to any accomodation of their religious principles despite the fact it might save the remnants of the Empire. They wisely (from their perspective) held to their principles despite promises of short-term gain. The earlier, Apollinaris Western Romans only reached this epiphany after their Empire already was lost and it was too late.

Expressed in more contemporary terms, Sidonius Apollinaris was a liberal politician who turned conservative only after his liberal friends betrayed what he really stood for. His liberal accomodation undermined what he wanted, a strong Roman Gaul. So, in a sense he helped define "conservative" as "a liberal who got mugged." The Eastern Roman clergy never made his initial mistake, was conservative throughout, and their religion managed to survive to the present day. Food for thought.

[yankeedame]

I'd expect the fall of the "American empire" to be the result of a nuclear explosion in D.C. rather than diversity in American cities

LOL! Silly, empirers don't fall like a brick heaved through a plate glass window.
Besides, when Gibbon's books were published the British chattering-class was full sure that he was talking about them, the decline and fall of the British Empire, etc., etc.; things like that.
It's the same as every generation being sure that their's is the time of the Apocalypse because of Bibical signs apparently coming true.
It's all a case of: "We see what we look for."

[Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy]

There was no Library of Alexandria for the Arabs to destroy, had they been so inclined. In fact, the Arabs preserved all of the Greek learning they could find, and translated it (along with Persian and Indian learning) into Arabic.

Christian destructive efforts - whether purely the action of mobs, or organized by Church leaders - against pagan temples, pagan learning, and pagan philosophers - is massively documented and undeniable. Whether one particular Churchman is to be blamed for the destruction of the Library, or not, is beside the point.

[Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy]

I'd expect the fall of the "American empire" to be the result of a nuclear explosion in D.C. rather than diversity in American cities.

Totally absurd. Nuke DC all you want; it will not destroy America if America is healthy. But America is not healthy.

You are, like Gibbon, making the classic mistake of only being able to see external enemies. Gibbon speculated on the possible fall of Western Civilization, and noting the vast power and health of Europe in the 18th century, and the puny powerlessness of the external "barbarians", predicated a rosy future for the West. He was right in the short term, wrong in the long term.

Rot begins from within. Accepting millions of strangers into our midst is just a symptom of the rot, but it will rapidly become not just a symptom, but a disease in its own right, when the sh!t hits the fan. Compared to what is coming, a mere nuke in DC will feel like a pinprick.

[A. Pole]

The story that Theophilus destroyed a library is clearly a fiction that we can very precisely lay at the door of Edward Gibbon. It is in his monumental Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire that we first find the allegation made. Gibbon seems mainly concerned to clear the Arabs of the responsibility of destroying the library and allows his marked anti-Christian prejudice to cloud his better judgement.

Gibbon was a fanatical follower of anti-Christian "Enlightement" (which should be named "Endarkenment"). From "Enlightement" comes the tradition of bsessive whitewashing of Muslims at the expense of Christians. Shiftin the blame from the Omar barbarians who destroyed the Alexandrian library to the Greek Christians is an example of successful anti-Christian slander.

[A. Pole]

Christian destructive efforts - whether purely the action of mobs, or organized by Church leaders - against pagan temples, pagan learning, and pagan philosophers - is massively documented and undeniable.

You are repeating the anti-Christian slur peddled by Enlightement libertines and established in the popular mind of English speaking countries. Byzantine Christians loved learning and preserved the ancient Greco-Roman culture of antiquity. Their main "crime" was that they were genuine Christians. This is an offence the enlightened historians will never forget.

[Ohioan]

A very interesting read, indeed. While everyone seems to be putting their own spin on it, it does reveal a dichotomy between ethnic identity and ideological identity, which goes to the core of the present debate over American immigration policy--and, indeed, to a much wider spectrum of issues.

Basically, the Left would define America in terms of an ideology--and some Conservatives have taken the bait. Our problem is not, however, really understandable in those terms. While the writer referred to in the essay could find solace in his Faith, there is not even the suggestion of a refuge for a loss of the American identity in any ideological substitute.

The American identity does have ideological aspects, but they are more in the form of unique images than a clear, common philosophy. To be sure, Virginia traditionally has a philosphy, as does Massachusetts. But they are conflicting philosophies. The common area--the area in which we Ohioans and you in other States are all Americans--are in major part image driven, dependent upon a common struggle and common interest, rather than a common value system. The vital images are being lost, today, in the Left's promotion of what I call a "musical chairs" concept of ethnicity, which is totally nonsensical.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[A. Pole]

Im not ready to clear the mob led by the Bishop of Alexandria of all blame are you saying that mob didn't exist?

The Christian mob destroying the library is as real as Serbian rape camps or throwing out babies from incubators by Iraqis in Kuwait. And Muslim barbarians led by Omar (the real culprits) are as civilised as KLA thugs.

[A. Pole]

One explanation for the fall of the Western Roman Empire was higher and higher taxes and ever-expanding bureaucracy.

There was also the stratification of society where the decadent super-rich acquired most of wealth while being exempt from taxation. The impoverished majority had to carry the burden of taxation and of growing bureaucracy so the barbarians were often more preferable. The poor got some break and redistribution of property.

[weikel]

Looks like there are some factional histories, Ill trust Gibbon until I see proof otherwise. Yeah the Serb rape camps were BS.

[weikel]

impoverished majority had to carry the burden of taxation and of growing bureaucracy

That was true throughout the Empire's history( well except for the huge bueracracy created in Diocletian's time). The problem was Constantine bound the formerly free peasants to the land and made the tradesmen professions hereditary( and increased taxes a lot). He also demoralized and weakened the border armies by creating elite reserve armies at Rome and Byzantium( for political not military reasons an army closer to him with handpicked officiers was more likely to be loyal). Then Theodosius started giving land to the barbarians within the Empire... if fell pretty quickly after that.

[A. Pole]

Looks like there are some factional histories, Ill trust Gibbon until I see proof otherwise.

Get any decent Byzantine history from Amazon - I recommend Vasiliev or Ostrogorsky. Gibbon was a splendid writer and managed to impress and hypnotise readers with his vision. But at his time people in England knew squat about late antiquity or Christian East. And he had a Deistic pro-Muslim agenda. Read solid history on the subject and you will have many proofs.

Gibbon is a great writer to be valued for his ideas, not because his work was true in factual sense but was true as a didactic phantasy.

[weikel]

Its true he was "biased" to say the least against the Eastern Empire. He wasn't pro Muslim I read his stuff on Mohammed and he basically said Mohammed was a power hungry whackjob who united the Arabs under a barbarous religion, and that Islam was only peaceful until Mohammed had an army behind him( then he started preaching a much more militant and intolerant religion). I'll check those guys out at some hypothetical point where I have the time.

[mrustow]

Bump for later study.

[Tauzero]

FATC: "The changing identification analysis as an explanation for the fall of the empire raises intriguing questions for the potential of the American "empire" (i.e., the diverse conglomerations of cultures that live in the U.S.) to do the same."

Cicero: "One explanation for the fall of the Western Roman Empire was higher and higher taxes and ever-expanding bureaucracy. Another factor was internal faction and what might be called party politics."

Add a dash of Hayek and we might have a synthesis. Small government with few laws and few taxes requires at least a minimal level of cultural homogeneity, so that most laws are by and large voluntarily obeyed, and, perhaps more importantly, never articulated as written law at all. Without common culture -- without tacit rules of behavior which we can assume that most will follow most of the time -- the need for articulation increases, as does the desire to use the state to impose by force one set of rules upon all.

[Tokhtamish]

Interesting analogy. As one 15th century Orthodox prelate put it, "Better a sultan's turban than a bishop's mitre."

They understood that the Balkans, unlike the Levant, Egypt, and North Africa, would stay Christian under Turkish rule.

[Sparta]

If you want on or off the Western Civilization Military History ping list, let me know.

[SAMWolf]

Bump