Book Reviews 587

Meanwhile both Spain and Portugal saw debate over the desirability of change, with the fall from power of Olivade and Pombal, while France was preoccupied by the internal financial problems that led to the fall ofNecker. If reform were to come, in the early 178Os, it seemed most likely in the smaller states, such as the United Provinces or Geneva, but the failure of revolution there allowed the initiative for political change to pass to Central and Eastern Europe. There reform came from above rather than below, in the form of Maria Theresa, Joseph II and Catherine the Great, but resistance from the peripheral regions of the Habsburg domains-in Belgium, Hungary and Transylvania-made clear the difficulties that such reform faced. By the late 1780s reform from above was clearly in trouble, and the realisation of this in France paved the way for the outbreak of the revolution.

Dealing with such a vast canvas Venturi’s style leaves little time for synopsis or analysis, relying instead on the juxtaposition of varied contemporary viewpoints, interspersed with historiographical reflections. The great strength of such an approach lies in the sheer accumulation of detail, and the subtlety with which he analyses and juxtaposes contemporary arguments. This enables him to argue that, as 1789 approached, writers and readers throughout Europe became increasingly aware of a sense of crisis and inexorable change. The Notizie def mondo, published in Florence, predicted in late 1783 that the continent of Europe was in decline while America and Russia were rising in power and influence. It can hardly be blamed for not anticipating the imminent revolution in France, or for ignoring the impact that industrialisation was soon to have, both on the balance of power within Europe and the relationship of Europe with the rest of the world. Neither can it be blamed for not seeing that the very problems that were creating a sense of crisis in Europe were also providing a latent dynamic that was to lead to outbreak of the French revolution. Yet Venturi shows clearly why the outlook appeared so uncertain and so pessimistic, at least to Italian observers, and these two volumes therefore put at the disposal of English language readers a valuable reconstruction of the intellectual world of the late-eighteenth-century elite. And intellectual history is essentially what it is, for Venturi totally omits the analysis of social structures or of social conflict, and has very little to say on popular culture, or even on the structures of administration and government. These are not his concerns. The mental world of the literate elite is, and his mastery of this alone is enough to make this book essential reading for all those interested in the revolutionary upheavals of the late-eighteenth century.

University CoIIege Dublin Hugh Gough

Histoire de la construction europbenne, Charles Zorgbibe (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1993), viii + 376 pp., 124 FF. P.B.

The desire for some form of European union is anything but a new idea. Concern about the effects of the continent’s political fragmentation motivated political thinkers, pamphleteers, propagandists and politicians to draft manifold plans over the centuries to achieve something like a confederal structure. However, not until the shock of the Second World War was there sufficient momentum behind the concept to give it some kind of practical application, For half-a-century now, therefore, statesmen, technocrats and the moulders of public opinion have had such powerful conviction and commitment that they have been able to launch the European enterprise, sustain it during so many vicissitudes and provide it with a constitutional framework for yet further development by means of the Treaty of Maastricht.

Histoire de la construction europkenne is a succinct narrative of this 50-year course of events. The author is a distinguished French academic who has written prolifically and

588 Book Reviews

wide-rangingly on International Relations. He has a lucid, matter-of-fact style which will make the book accessible and useful to students of the subject. Furthermore, the utility of the book is enhanced by two considerate features. One is a detailed table of contents; the other is the provision of 35 documents-key primary sources to illuminate the most important facets of the story. On the other hand, it is unfortunate that Professor Zorgbibe did not feel it necessary to furnish his readers with an index, a bibliography or thorough footnotes.

As to the content, the bulk of the book is a history of the evolution of the European Community from the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community to the Maastricht Treaty. However, three chapters are of particular interest for falling outside this basic story-line. These are worth separate commentary.

Chapter 9 opens thus: ‘S’il est un principe qui sous-tend la construction politique de /‘Europe, c’est celui de la Ikgitimitt! dkmocratique’ (p. 201). What is significant is that the chapter is devoted to the work of the Council of Europe in setting human rights standards. The enthusiasts for a federal Europe in the immediate post-war period were disappointed by the weakness of the Council of Europe-hence the change of tack to the functionalist construction of the ECSC, EEC and Euratom. It is ironic, therefore, that the half-hearted supra-national authority of the Council of Europe is still needed to uphold the democratic principles upon which the European Community is supposedly founded. In the meantime, many a critic of the Community mutters complaints about the ‘democratic deficit’. The irony seems to have eluded the author.

The second chapter dealing with matters outside the main theme of the book is entitled ‘La Iongue marche vers I’Est’. This deals with the relations between the EEC/EC and the Soviet bloc from 1957 to 1989. Not only is this chapter illuminating in its own right, but three of the appended documents provide fascinating evidence of the Common Market as viewed from the perspective of Moscow. The chapter ends with a tantalising comment concerning the relevance of post-1989 events to the ‘deepening’ versus ‘widening’ controversy. The possibility and desirability of the accession of some former Communist states, notably Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary has been a livelier issue than this passing reference to the question would suggest.

The concluding chapter, besides being commendably up-to-date to October 1992, provides a glimpse of the author’s own position. He is bitterly hostile to ‘I’attention maniaque que Porte la Commission.. . au volume d’eau que doivent IibPrer Ies eurotoiiettes.. . la compPtence des instances communautaires doit Ctre strictement circonscrite’ (p. 366). And his parting shot is to regret the lack of imagination, creativity and political courage of those who drafted the Maastricht Treaty and thus lost the opportunity for further effective political evolution.

What, now, of the core of the book? It is a workmanlike and, within its self-imposed limits of length, thorough survey of the development of the European Community. I would like to comment on Zorgbibe’s handling of two phases.

The first concerns the period 1941-1950. I would have wished for more on the continuity of the personnel who worked so zealously for European union from war-time to post-war. Monnet and his drafting collaborators were vital for the success of the Schuman Plan, the crucial turning-point in the campaign for a European Community. Yet there is no sense of continuity in the person of Monnet; and indeed the foundation of the ECSC is described in two pages compared to the five pages allotted to the still-born European Defence Community. Nor do we learn of Spinelli’s dogged work from the Ventonene manifesto of 1941 to the Crocodile Club (though, true, he is given credit for the Dooge Report Cpp. 194-1961).

Zorgbibe shows a surer hand in dealing with de Gaulle’s concept of a ‘union de’tats’. He reveals him determined to break the functional and mechanistic approach to the question of European union and yet being guilty of insisting on a policy which was at root a

Book Reviews 589

paradox. The paradox lay both at the heart of the Gaullist vision and in his specific treatment of Great Britain’s abortive application in 1961. Zorgbibe characterises the inherent contradiction thus; ‘voIont& depromouvoir I’indkpendence de rEurope, mais refus de toute autorite’politique europienne de natured asseoir rette indkpendence @. 90). Thus, in vetoing the United Kingdom’s application for membership ‘Ie gPne’raI de Gaulle voulait rbaliser une Europe de style britannique, mais sans Ia Grande-Bretagne’ @. 71).

Although Great Britain is now a member, the recent problems over the ratification of Maastricht and, for example, the squabbles between the U.S.A. and French-led EC opposition in the Uruguay Round of GATT, reveal that this fundamental paradox is still unresolved.

Brighton Derek Heater

Epikur, MaIte Hossenfelder (Munchen), (Beck’sche Reihe; Bd. 520: GroBe Denker), 178 Seiten.

Kaum ein antiker Philosoph ist schon zu seinen Lebzeiten von seinen Anhangern so begeistert verehrt, von seinen Gegnern aber so scharf angegriffen und immer wieder grtindlich miaverstanden worden wie der 341 v.Chr. als Sohn attischer Kolonisten auf Samos geborene Epikur: Gltihenden Jtingem wie dem Riimer Lukrez galt er als Gott, der den einzelnen Menschen aus Angst, Furcht und Unlust befreit, ihm dadurch Lust verschafft und ihm in innerer Ruhe und Gelassenheit sein auf das Erdenleben beschrlnktes Gliick geniel3en liigt. Seinen Gegnern, insbesondere manchen Stoikern und splter dem Christentum, galt er unter bewui3ter Verdrehung seiner Hauptlehren als Atheist und Inbegriff des ungehemmten GenuSmenschen. Nur wenige unter denen, die sich kritisch mit seinem Gedankengut auseinandersetzten, aber such manches von seiner auf konkrete Lebensbewaltigung ausgerichteten Ethik fur eigene Konzepte zunutze machten, wie etwa der riimische Philosoph Seneca, gestanden ihm Lauterkeit des Denkens zu und drtickten ihre Hochschiitzung aus. Wie sehr aber seine Anschauungen bis in die Gegenwart wirken und Ausgangspunkt fur eigene Konzeptionen bilden, mag das Beispiel der marxistischen Philosophie belegen, deren Ahnherr Karl Marx sich in seiner Dissertation mit dem Unterschied zwischen demokritischer und epikureischer Natur- philosophie befaBt hatte.

MaIte Hossenfelder, Jahrgang 1935, zunachst Professor fur Philosophie an der Universitlt Miinster, jetzt an der Universitlt Graz, hatte sich schon 1985 im dritten Band der von Worfgang Rijd herausgegebenen Geschichte der Philosophie: ‘Die PhiIosophie der Antike 3 - Stoa, Epikureismus und Skepsis’ intensiv mit Epikur beschiftigt und seine Lehre vor allem im Zusammenhang und Widerstreit der anderen prlgenden hellenistischen Philosophenschulen dargestellt. Vieles an Epikurs Philosophie ist eben nur aus den such den anderen Schulen vorliegenden Grundverhaltnissen des friihen Hellenismus verstlndlich, wie z.B. die Betonung des Individualismus, der Vorrang der praktischen Vernunft, das Grundprinzip der Eudaimonie.

Das vorliegende Buch ist von Anlage, Stil und Darbietung ein iiberaus gelungener Versuch, auf beschrlnktem Raum nicht nur Fachleuten, sondern such einem weiteren interessierten Leserkreis Epikur und seine Lehre nahezubringen. Es bietet zudem geniigend Einblicke in den Forschungsstand und gibt eine umfassende Bibliographie (S. 155-169) tiber Ausgaben Epikurs und der wichtigsten Epikureer (S. 155-157), tiber Sekundlrliteratur zu den Epikureern (mit dem Schwergewicht auf neuerer Literatur, S. 158-163), aber such, was besonders hervorzuheben ist, zur Nachwirkung Epikurs bis in