Book Reviews: City-State and World State in Greek and Roman Political Theory Until Augustus. By MASON HAMMOND. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1951. Pp. x, 217. $4.00.)

• DOI: 10.1177/106591295200500417
• Published date: 01 December 1952
• Date: 01 December 1952
• Subject Matter: Articles

672
City-State and World State in Greek and Roman Political Theory Until
Augustus. By MASON HAMMOND. (Cambridge: Harvard University
Press. 1951. Pp. x, 217. $4.00.)
According to the preface, this book is an enlargement of a series of
six lectures delivered under the auspices of the Lowell Institute in 1948.
In it the author analyzes &dquo;the conflict in political thought between the
dominant political concept of the city-state, as established by Aristotle
and Plato and developed in the Hellenistic period in the theory of the
mixed constitution, and the need to find some theoretical basis for the
large political organization which arose in fact in the Hellenistic and
Roman periods.&dquo; It is the author’s judgment that the lesson which one
may learn from the study is &dquo;that too great respect for tradition is fatal
to any society.&dquo; He concludes that the political failures of the Greek city-
state and Rome stemmed from their inability to meet the challenge of
expanding governmental organization. The reader is presumed to possess
a considerable background of historical information, particularly in the
earlier chapters. Too little emphasis is placed upon the varied origins
of the Greek city-states. There is considerable evidence not included in
the book to prove that schools of philosophy were not the only groups
to influence political governments. One-third of the book (four chapters)
is devoted to a discussion of Cicero’s place in Roman political life and
thought. While it may be conceded that Cicero, as a thinker, has been
neglected during the last century or so, one may well ask why the author
omitted even a brief discussion of the place of Augustine when he refers
to him as one of the three men in the history of Roman literature who
can be regarded seriously as a political theorist. If he was important-
and it is agreed that he was-a chapter could well have been devoted
to him in spite of the book’s subtitle which limits it to the reign of
Augustus. After...