I think Xenophon is often forgotten when Greek writers are cited. Xenophon was a student of Socrates, a soldier (even a general), a philosopher and a historian. He also inspired Arrian, who took his name in homage. His most cited work is Hellenica, since it follows the work of Thucydides, but it is in my opinion one of his worst books.
I would recommend reading:
Cyropaedia, a very interesting book about Cyrus, it helps understand how the Persian Empire was created (maybe it should be read before Herodotus) and it is sometimes seen as a refutation of Plato's Republic.
Anabasis, an incredible story about 10,000 Greek soldiers going into the Persian Empire as mercenaries and having to come back on their own, fighting many different people for 15 months, Xenophon became a general of the army during its journey.
Memorabilia, a defence of Socrates, trough dialogues showing you who Socrates really was.
Constitution of the Spartans, a short book that will help you truly understand who the Spartans were and how the city worked.
So if you have started with the Greeks, don't forget Xenophon, he has written other books than Hellenica and he's really worth reading.
Xenophon thread
Other urls found in this thread:
ashokkarra.com
leostrausstranscripts.uchicago.edu
ashokkarra.com
gutenberg.org
twitter.com
If I'm not that interested in actual history, but read Plato/Aristotle for the philosophy and Homer for the phenomenal drama, is Xenophon still enjoyable? Or is he similar to Herodotus in that way?
I agree, but wouldn't take too much of the Cyropaedia to be about actual persia
he's a socratic, so he's a reputable source or Socratic morality.
Hellenica is actual history, but it's not a good book, since Xenophon is far inferior to Thucydides in that regard. His other books are more philosophical. Like I said, Cyropaedia is kind of a book about politics, even though it is a biography of Cyrus, the Anabasis might be a bit tedious to read, but still really worth it. And Xenophon's other books are philosophical, but easy to read. Just don't read the two books about horses if you don't care about horses and don't expect Xenophon to be as deep as Plato.
He's more akin to reading Thucydides than Herodotus, less gossipy, more to the heart of the matter, though he's less tortuous stylistically than Thucydides.
I like reading him, but he's less explosively exciting than Plato or Aristotle. Much subtler, more given to indicating than outright saying something. Like, he'll say, about the cities he and his men encounter in the Anabasis, that they were "inhabited, prosperous, and large" as a standard formula, which usually a reader will ignore, but there are passages where he'll leave out one of those descriptors to indicate the city's condition in a tactful way, so that when he describes one city as merely prosperous and large, he can politely say that the citizens have either fled or been killed. One of his explicit principles (I forget where though, it might well be the Anabasis) is to speak about good things and downplay the bad, which doesn't mean not saying anything bad, more than just leaving people's hopes in place. Another example is his description of the traitor Meno's end (the same Meno from the Platonic dialogue by that name). Most people take it that he says that Meno was executed by the Persians in a suitably tortuous way, but he really doesn't, and just reports what's been said by others about his end, indicating that either a traitorous man didn't actually get his just deserts for his actions.
He's a weirdo, but he makes himself look so astounding normal and traditional that most modern readers would be inclined to dismiss him as just some Ancient Greek normie.
I should check som of him out then
I imagine there must be so many Greek authors either forgotten about or mostly overlooked simply because of the stature of Plato + Aristotle. Rough to stand in the shadow of the guys who created western thought.
What the fuck
in what way did you find Anabasis tedious?
it's one of the greatest adventures any man has ever lived
I consider the Estate Manager to be the conservative founding document. Everybody should read it.
The end is a bit tedious, the d'ont fight anymore, they're just arguing about shit.
Conservative in what sense?
Haven't read it, but you peaked my interest—Wikipedia's summary only talks about it as standard economics
Not so many, because few have more than fragments
I mean traditional living and hierarchy. A good bit of it is about the relationship between and men and women and the roles and duties they should have.
Xenophon was very conservative, Cyropaedia and Constitution of the Spartans are also must-read if you want to understand his conservative side.
A shame in and of itself.
One can only hope what survived is mostly by merit, but considering how many dramas are lost , probably not
Anyone know why Plato's entire works managed to survive? Especially in contrast with Aristotle
>Anyone know why Plato's entire works managed to survive? Especially in contrast with Aristotle
Large part of it is that Plato's Greek is very eloquent and he has also been a stylistic guide who could be read by people uninterested in philosophy just for the pretty prose and witty statements. He's probably the closest thing to a Cicero or Shakespeare in terms of influence on their respective language, although Greek had way too many exemplary authors to allow Plato or anyone else to stand out as much as those two.
Aristotle's exoteric works on the other hand appear to have been lost largely due to his esoteric works being refound in late antiquity. No one wanted to read his pop-science when his academic writings became available. That said, I've had the impression that it took a couple of centuries before Aristotle caught on outside of his own school as most seem to have felt his successors at the Lyceum filled his boots well enough. The loss of most of Theophrastus' writings, for example, is possibly a greater tragedy than the loss of Aristotle's exoteric works. Cicero did praise Aristotle's prose as being better than Plato's, but it seems to me that he was alone in this.
I like Xenophon for his philosophy.
I've actually been reading the Penguin collection of all his Socratic works, and I'm sorry but Xenophon is a boring cunt.
I feel like I'm reading the 400 BC equivalent of Ben Shapiro or fucking Peterson, literally just the most generic social conservative talking points and not even really explored either just stated.
It's a total misrepresentation to describe his Memorabilia as "showing you who Socrates really was". Xenophon is a clearly lesser mind who was doing what quite a few people other than Plato and himself did at the time and using Socrates to give some credibility to his own ideas.
At best you can say he was attributing more accepted views of the time to try and rehabilitate the public perception of Socrates after his death, if you want to be charitable.
Hellenica on the other hand, I actually quite enjoyed
>talking points
Every single person who has uttered this phrase is a dumb cunt, without fail.
ok fine I generally agree with you on that, and btw I'm fairly right wing and not really opposed to a lot of what Xenophon actually believed. I'm reading The Estate Manager right now, and I'm basically in agreement, but I have to wonder who this guy was writing for.
He doesn't really try and explore these ideas (the natural roles of men and women, the value of hard work, etc.) he just states things. This is good and this is bad, and the truly good man does good things and the slavish man does bad things.
He really likes to repeat himself too, which might be less annoying if he actually had some novel insights.
I'm not even joking, people who read him while he was alive were probably the same people who unironically buy 12 rules for life today
Try the following very short essay as an example of a fruitful reading of Xenophon.
ashokkarra.com
What the hell does Jordan Peterson have to do with anything?
I think anyone's saying that Xenophon reads like he's giving really basic advice on how to live, which is fair. Xenophon's been dismissed in academia since the 19th century as a simpleton compared to Plato. (Which is unfair, but that's the fashion in the academy right now.)
stop being obtuse
I will give this a read later, saved the link
I'm not being obtuse, Mr. Dufrain. I'm saying you have no good reason to be talking about Jordan Peterson in the context of Xenophon and you're a weirdo for doing it.
I must say I also have found Xenophon very boring. I haven’t tried his history yet, I do want to read his Anabasis. But his Socratic works seem unceasingly dry and shallow and of course it’s very hard to not simply compare him to Plato and see him pale in comparison. Should I keep working through his memorabilia? I know there is a straussian school of thought that is a big fan of Xenophon, perhaps I am mistaken in blowing him off?
He's not good. He's a historical curiosity, nothing more.
He's better to read alongside the Straussians, it really brings out how clever he is, but Strauss's own books are kind of hard. I think there's a transcript of one of his lecture course available online though, and that's very clear and helpful.
Found the course here:
leostrausstranscripts.uchicago.edu
This essay on the Spartan Constitution is also really good.
looks like sam hyde
His writing is boring as fuck
He's the best puppy namer.
Like what?
i find his works comfy to read since they are pretty straightfoward. it's a good intro to the socratic philosophy before you read plato.
>I'm fairly right wing
you have absolutely no clue what you are
fuck off i don't want to read some asshole's opinon....i want to read the dude himself
you have to learn how to
Writing a sequel to Thucydides invited unfavourable comparisons. He had nothing like the impartiality and meticulousness of his predecessor.
He's worth reading just for the Anabasis though. Not because he's a great writer, but because it's an amazing story.
The point is that there are better and more careful readers out there who don't dismiss Xenophon. For posters asking why anyone should think Xenophon is worthwhile, posting someone's essay that demonstrates *how they read him* is a perfectly legit response.
bump
Hellenica isn't bad at all though it is definitely far inferior to Thucydides
Well the fucker died without getting to the end, it had to be done and isn't his version of the sequel the only one that survives
Were there others?
I'm grateful for this post.
Cheers dude. I'm the Strauss fan above. His writings on Xenophon are probably the best and most helpful out there.
at least a couple are mentioned in ancient sources that I know of, then the oxyrhincus fragments could be yet another
is this a good edition?
It's probably one of the better editions out there, but truth be told, there's no outstanding edition of the Hellenica available.
Heck yeah. Really want to read the Anabasis. Herodotus gives a synopsis of that story and it sounds fascinating.
It's not poetry or philosophy and Xenophon famously wrote in very simple language, The Anabasis is probably only as famous as it is because it's so frequently used for teaching people ancient greek
Yeah, that version is good and the introduction and notes I found helpful
But that's one of his strength from an historical perspective. His views, while presented eloquently, are much closer to the mainstream of the time, especially in these bait societal topics, than those of a bizarro fascist like Plato (I don't intend that as a bad thing).
I would strongly recommend The Polity of the Athenians and the Lakedaimonians to anyone who wants to start with the greeks. It is very short but important. I think it should be read before any other greek history book so that you get a feel for what the difference between the two states are. These are the states that will play the greatest role in both Herodotos and Thukydides. gutenberg.org
>Herodotus
wat
are you talking about another guy also named Herodotus
the Herodotus, he was dead
He's probably getting confused. Xenophon himself references the Anabasis briefly in Hellenica.
Thank you for an insightful post user, now I'm intrigued as heck. Whose translations would you recommends for new reader like me ??
The Agora Editions of Xenophon's writings are really good, probably the best translations of his work available. Though I should note that they don't have all of his works translated yet. But their editions of the Memorabilia, Education of Cyrus, Anabasis, and shorter writings are among the best. Robert Bartlett also has a really good set of translations of the shorter Socratic writings.
The Agora Editions of Xenophon's writings are really good, probably the best translations of his work available. Though I should note that they don't have all of his works translated yet. But their editions of the Memorabilia, Education of Cyrus, Anabasis, and shorter writings are among the best. Robert Bartlett also has a really good set of translations of the shorter Socratic writings. There's also a very good literal translation of the Oeconomicus included in Strauss's commentary on it, Xenophon's Socratic Discourse.
There is a difference between a real deal, valuing his individual views of things making or not making sense, a professional social weasel and an artsy self-infatuated pseud.
Xenophon's descriptive style differs radically from the literary style attributed to Socrates in his writings. Plato writes everyone samely, copies of himself for that delicious "good job, me, hey you, me, see, that guy, me, he can say no wrong, ever, I, me, wholeheartedly agree and endorse with him, me, and so should you, me" over and over and over again.
Xenophon might have entertained his vast share of delusions, but at the very least he wasn't, by and large, interested in INTENTIONALLY deluding the reader, which is far more than can be said about the other two.
Thank you user!!
Besides, Socrates wasn't even the originator of the crowning Greeks' achievement: reduction to absurdity. That one originated in geometry through the infamous incommensurability proof, as the method of infinite descent. THIS is where the actual historically hot shit was in the context of the history of human thought. This - and eventual composution of "Elements" it eventually led to. Not some oh-so-sophisticated oh-so-eloquent brainfarts of some cheap semi-demagogue semi-fiction-writer.
were you just looking for some thread in which to rail against plato, found this one and thought "eh, good enough"? kek
Dude Sam Hyde lol
burger lowbrows pls go