Is Gibbon's use of "association" a misprint or unfamiliar sense of the word?

Question

In chap. 45 of the Decline and Fall, when Tiberius is made Augustus 4 years before the death of Justin II, Gibbon's marginal note reads "Association of Tiberius, A.D. 574". As far as I've been able to determine, all editions use the word 'association', but I suspect it may be a misprint for 'accession'. Is this a misprint -- perhaps a misreading of Gibbon's MS -- or a technical (or rare) use of 'association'?

Answer 1

Your research into this single word "association" is amazing and admirable! I'd love to have you as my student! The way this was taught to my students was that the use of "association" in Chapter 49 was probably due to one or more of the following possibilities: 1. ambiguity 2. colloquialism 3. pun. If this particular source came from Gibbon's research of ancient Roman texts, ambiguity of the ancient definition of "association" might explain this confusion. Colloquialism might also be the cause of use of "association", either in Gibbon’s or Roman time, due to different meanings of words in different localities. A pun or play on words, "association/accession", could also explain this conundrum, as Gibbon was known for his humorous marginal or foot notes. Sort of reminds me of Shakespeare! Since all translations of Decline and Fall seem to use the word "association" in the same places, this would indicate that the translations were correct (or copied Gibbon) and this was not a misprint. Additionally, it's hard to believe that Gibbon would have misused a word derived from Latin as his scholarly presentation of the material elsewhere is obvious. I would simply try to use the word in context and enjoy the fact that we have this text at all!