Modern Age - Summer 2014 - 65

REVIEWS

ary source published in 1867, which asserts
that the plays of Plautus and Terence are all
"translations" of Greek originals (52). The
relation between these Roman playwrights
and their Greek models has come to be seen
as a bit more complicated by a century and
a half of subsequent classical scholarship. In
any case, it is odd to disparage Roman literature without so much as a mention of Virgil,
Horace, Ovid, and a host of other brilliant
Latin writers.
In any case, the Romans cheerfully admitted how much they derived from Greek
philosophy, literature, and science. Graecia
capta ferum victorem cepit et artis / intulit
agresti Latio, Horace writes, and to the
Emperor Augustus, no less: "Captive Greece
conquered the savage victor and brought the
arts into rustic Italy" (Epistolae 2.1.156-57).
In the "blissful groves" of Elysium, the shade
of Anchises tells his heroic son Aeneas that
while others will surpass them in the arts,
oratory, and philosophy, it will fall to the
Romans "to impose their rule on the peoples
(these will be your arts) and add settled custom to peace, to spare the conquered and cast
down the proud" (Aeneid 6.851-53). Cicero
(whom Stark mentions only twice and not in
the chapter on Rome) makes a similar claim
for Roman distinction at the beginning of
the Tusculan Disputations.
Rarely did the Romans live up to this
exalted image of themselves; mortal men
and their institutions rarely do. Nevertheless, the ideal is a critical part of the Western
heritage. Cicero and Virgil and, in his own
way, Horace are arguably more important
in shaping the minds of-for instance-the
American Founders than direct contact with
the Greeks. The crucial role of Rome in mediating the Greek and Judeo-Christian tradition is a point well made by Remi Brague in
Eccentric Culture: A Theory of Western Civilization (1992, trans. 2002), a book that Stark

does not mention, which might have added a
rich layer of subtlety to his discussion.
The motivation of Stark's dismissal of the
Roman contribution to Western civilization
is revealed in the second and third parts
of How the West Won, "The Not-So-Dark
Ages (500-1200)" and "Medieval Transformations (1200-1500)." These sections
are the heart of the book and constitute an
invaluable contribution to any discussion of
the unique place of the West in the history
of the world. It was during the so-called
Dark Ages, Stark maintains, that numerous advances in technology and trade were
developed, and even the rudiments of capitalist free enterprise-counterintuitively in
Christian monasteries. Later in the Middle
Ages the university and the foundations of
modern science emerged. Contrary to the
typical historical versions, inventions, trade,
and the general level of culture advanced
much more rapidly in Europe than in the
Islamic world. The manifest superiority of
Western weapons and tactics during the
Crusades are a notable demonstration,
since the Crusaders were able to defeat
Muslim forces and dominate the Holy Land
for several centuries, although they were
fighting far from home and were vastly
outnumbered.
Stark points out that rapid European development during this period owes much to the
beneficent influence of the Church, which
was important both as an effective administrative institution and as a prophetic voice of
liberating doctrine. He posits a sharp contrast
between the Judeo-Christian emphasis on the
individual, endowed with free will, and other
religions and civilizations, which stressed fate
and the subjection of the individual to hierarchical powers and his submersion in the mass
of indistinguishable humanity. Much of his
animus against the Roman Empire arises
from its tendency to resemble the oppressive,
65

Modern Age - Summer 2014

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Modern Age - Summer 2014