Is Edward Gibbon's "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" still considered accurate considering historical excavations, findings, and new evidence of the fall of the Roman Empire? Is it considered outdated?

by Isatis_tinctoria

Is Edward Gibbon's "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" still considered accurate considering historical excavations, findings, and new evidence of the fall of the Roman Empire? Is it considered outdated?

I have no doubt the prose and syntax is articulately put together and worth a read on those merits.

However, I'm wondering if considering the years since there is new evidence suggesting a different approach.

I'm not exactly concerned with this thesis "loss of civic virtue," but rather his understanding of the events as being accurate? Did he have false information?

lagerbaer

Not to discourage another answer, but this question seems to be answered somewhat here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/historians_views#wiki_historians.27_views_of_edward_gibbon.27s_.22decline_and_fall_of_the_roman_empire.22

Colest

I would like to tack on a question to this? I know Gibbon's attribution of Christianity as the top reason for the decline and fall is very outdated but is Christianity not seen as a contributing factor at all anymore by most historians?