UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The development of Xenophon's political ideas Rahn, Peter Jacob 1969

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1969_A8 R35.pdf [ 6.36MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0104220.json
JSON-LD: 1.0104220+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0104220.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0104220+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0104220+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0104220+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0104220 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0104220.txt
Citation
1.0104220.ris

Full Text

THE DEVELOPMENT OF XENOPHON'S POLITICAL IDEAS by PETER JACOB RAHN B.A. , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1962 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF WHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of CLASSICS We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the re q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA J u l y , 1969 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C olumbia, I a g r e e t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and Study. I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g or p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date ABSTRACT This t h e s i s t r a c e s the development of Xenophon*s p o l i t i c a l ideas from h i s youth to o l d age. S p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n i s given to statements of e v a l u a t i o n i n the H e l l e n i c a concerning events that occurred i n h i s l i f e t i m e . The b a s i c a t t i t u d e s and ideas of h i s other works are analysed and f i t t e d i n t o the chronolo- g i c a l framework provided by the study of the H e l l e n i c a . Then we conclude that Xenophon's ideas were not s t a t i c but changed to meet the immediate needs of the Greek s t a t e s . The bases upon which h i s ideas are founded are two a t t i t u d e s that are c o n s t a n t l y i n a t e n s i o n . These are, on,the one hand, an a r i s - t o c r a t i c admiration of the heroic w a r r i o r and, on the other, an a t t i t u d e designated as p h i l a n t h r o p i a . ACKNOWLEGMENT I wish to express my a p p r e c i a t i o n to Professo r s H. G. Edinger and J . R u s s e l l f o r t h e i r encouragement and c r i t i c i s m at the outset of t h i s undertaking, and to Mr. P. Harding f o r se v e r a l s t i m u l a t i n g d i s c u s s i o n s . F i n a l l y , I am e s p e c i a l l y indebted to Pro f e s s o r M. F. McGregor, the d i r e c t o r of t h i s t h e s i s , f o r h i s advice and c r i t i c i s m . TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABBREVIATIONS i v INTRODUCTION v i CHAPTERS 1 Xenophon's E a r l y L i f e 1 2 Xenophon i n the Prime of L i f e 21 3 Xenophon and the B a t t l e of Coronea . . . 32 4 Xenophon and Tyranny 44 5 Xenophon's Defence 51 6 Greece and P e r s i a . 62 7 Xenophon and Is o c r a t e s $9 & Conclusion 101 BIBLIOGRAPHY 106 ABBREVIATIONS Ath. P o l . de i n v . Diog. L a e r t . Pan. Thuc. Anab. C y n . Cyr. H e l l . Mem. Resp. Lac. v e c t . AJP TAPA APh JAW Cla s s , et Med, I Ancient Authors A r i s t o t l e , Atheniensium Respublica. C i c e r o , de_ inve n t i o n e . Diogenes L a e r t i u s , V i t a e Philosophorum. I s o c r a t e s , Panegyricus. Thucydides, H i s t o r i a . Xenophon, Anabasis. Xenophon, Cynegeticus. Xenophon, Cyropaedia. Xenophon, H e l l e n i c a . Xenophon, Memorabilia. Xenophon, Respublica Lacedaemoniorum. Xenophon, de v e c t i g a l i b u s . I I Journals American Journal of P h i l o l o g y . American P h i l o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n Transactions and Proceedings. L'Annee P h i l o i o g i q u e . Bursian's J a h r e s b e r i c h t . C l a s s i c a et Mediaevalia. C l a s s . Journ. C l a s s i c a l J o u r n a l . Class. P h i l . C l a s s . Rev. C l a s s i c a l ' P h i l o l o g y . C l a s s i c a l Review. Cl a s s . Wor. C l a s s i c a l World ( ^ C l a s s i c a l Weekly). V JHS J o u r n a l of H e l l e n i c S t u d i e s . Mus. Hel. Museum Helveticum. REG Revue des Etudes greques. Rhein. Mus. Rh e i n i s c h e s Museum. Wien. Stud. Wiener Studien. INTRODUCTION Any attempt to understand and to evaluate the work of an author must consider the age in which he lived and the society that influenced him. Such i s the case with Xenophon. The lack of appeal that he has for our age''" exists, I believe, because he has been dealt with in an uncritical manner. Xenophon has often been censured because he is moralistic, shallow and p prejudiced. Most scholars of our times have arbitrarily and unsympathetically compared him with their own likes and dis- likes and failed to notice the influence of the society in which he lived and his experiences upon him. It is in this vein that H. J. Rose writes? For great i s not.the word to use of Xenophon. In him, a mind which i t would be flattery to ca l l second-rate and a character hide-bound with con- vention attain somehow to a very respectable One need only examine the indices of any classical publi- cation during the past ten years to notice the dearth of articles on Xenophon in comparison with the large number of his works. E.jjj., J. B. Bury, The Ancient Greek Historians, 153, and C. M. Bowra, Ancient Greek Literature, 147. For f u l l biblio- graphical data see pages 106-117. l i t e r a r y expression and are presented with at l e a s t two subjects on which i t i s ne a r l y impossi- b l e to be wholly d u l l . 3 Judgments of such a kind presuppose that the scholar's own system of values i s i n some way b e t t e r than Xenophon's. This i s an assumption that cannot be proved. Another approach seeks r a t h e r t o understand Xenophon i n the l i g h t of the s o c i e t y i n which he l i v e d . Inquiry must be made i n t o the events t h a t took place d u r i n g h i s l i f e t i m e and c o n s i d e r a t i o n given to ideas and a t t i t u d e s of h i s contemporaries i n order t o determine what the major issues of h i s day were and what may have been the questions w i t h which he was confronted. Only 'when i t i s c l e a r to what questions he addressed himself can we begin to under- stand how Xenophon's ideas changed and developed. Since Xeno- phon' s l i f e t i m e covered a span of approximately s e v e n t y - f i v e years, i t i s probable that the p o l i t i c a l l y important questions of h i s age w i l l have undergone some change. Xenophon's answers w i l l undoubtedly have v a r i e d w i t h the m o d i f i c a t i o n or the recas- t i n g of p o l i t i c a l views and the e v e n t f u l l i f e t h a t he l i v e d . This work attempts to understand the c o n t r a s t i n g p o l i t i c a l ideas of Xenophon that are found i n h i s work i n the l i g h t of h i s generation and h i s experiences. That these c o n t r a s t i n g ideas were not haphazardly assumed but were part of a p a r t i c u l a r view of l i f e and the r e f o r e d e l i b e r a t e l y espoused at d i f f e r e n t times w i l l , I hope, a l s o be demonstrated. 3H. J . Rose, A Handbook of Greek L i t e r a t u r e . 305- v i i i The desirability of such a study arises from the growing tendency among scholars^ to find in the writings of Xenophon and particularly in the Hellenica subjective accounts of events. Much of his narrative assumes that the reader of his day had previous knowledge of Xenophon*s ideas as expressed in other works. Some attempts have been made to set forth what is known as "Xenophon's p o l i t i c a l idealism."5 An attempt of this kind i s , however, not sufficient since i t assumes that Xenophon's ideas remained static and that they are f u l l y and comprehensively expressed in the Cyropaedia. The following pages w i l l give a wider scope to Xenophon's p o l i t i c a l views. 4E . f r ., H. R. Breitenbach, Xenophon von Athen, I656 - 1701, and Peter Kfafft, "Vier Beispiele des Xenophontischen in Xeno- phons Hellenika," Rhein. Mus., CX (I967), 103-150. % . Weathers, "Xenophon's P o l i t i c a l Idealism," Class. Journ•, XLIX (1953-54), 317-321. CHAPTER 1 XENOPHON'S EARLY LIFE Xenophon was born in.Attica in the deme of Erchia about 430 B.C.2 He grew up amidst the exaltation and the anguish that Athens experienced during the Peloponnesian War. He saw the p o l i t i c a l confrontation between the democrats and the oligarchs. He noticed how the mob could be swayed against the advice of a man like Pericles by the oratory of a demagogue like Cleon or Alcibiades^ so that the Athenians refused peace in 425, undertook the expedition against Syracuse in 415 and eventually brought ruin upon the great city of Athens. The continuing t r i a l s of Athens after 415 caused deep resentment among those who bore the burden of taxation and who saw decisions being made for them by others. To the question "Why i s Athens losing the war?" the answer was often given that i t was the fault of the p o l i t i c a l sys- tem in which the demos was easily swayed and turned to what was ^Diog. Laert., 2, 48. 2Anab., III, 1, 25 and 2, 3 7 . Both passages indicate that Xenophon took part in Cyrus'^march when he was either too young to be elected strategos or had just reached the minimum age of thirty. 0. Gigon, Kommentar zum Ersten Buch von Xenophons Memor- abilien, 106, places Xenophon's birthdate in the year 441/0 B.C., following Apollodorus, although he questions the grounds upon which the date i s based (cf. F. Jacoby, Frag, gr. Hist., no. 244, comm. to frag. 343). 3Thuc, IV 15-23; VI, 9 - 1 5 - 2 r e a d i l y at hand.'*' Although we do not know whether Xenophon took part i n the r e s u l t i n g o l i g a r c h i c r e v o l u t i o n i n 411 we suspect that he came from a home that was o l i g a r c h i c i n sympathy because he belonged to the c l a s s of knights ( f o r the hi p p e i s supported the o l i g a r c h s both i n 411 and i n 404/3). Later he considered him- s e l f a candidate f o r the p o s i t i o n of stra t e g o s . ^ In 409/& he pro- bably accompanied the Athenian e x p e d i t i o n that undertook the siege of Chalcedon and i n 406 he p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the se a b a t t l e at A r g i n - usae.k In the o l i g a r c h i c r e v o l u t i o n i n 404/3 he served i n the cav- a l r y under the guidance of the Eleven.7 That he could support the bloodshed and e x i l e s of that year i n d i c a t e s how thoroughly he must have been d i s i l l u s i o n e d w i t h the demos. VThuc., I , 20, 1 and 3- ^Anab. I l l , 2, 37 ( c e r t a i n l y an e a s i e r p o s i t i o n to obtain i f one had been prominent through b i r t h or p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y ) . °Hell. I , 4, 25 and 35- The conclusion i s based on the f u l l - ness of the d e s c r i p t i o n given and on the theory t h a t much of the n a r r a t i v e i s b a s i c a l l y Xenophon's eye-witness account. ?H_ell. I I , 3 , 12 i n d i c a t e s Xenophon's sympathy f o r the e a r l y work of the T h i r t y . His a b i l i t y as a cavalryman i s c l e a r from hi s works de equitandi r a t i o n e and de equitum magistro. He men- t i o n s t h a t he rode d u r i n g the re t u r n from the Anabasis (Anab. I l l , 3, 19; V I I , 6 ) . F i n a l l y h i s d e s c r i p t i o n of the c a v a l r y ' s a c t i v i t y under the T h i r t y i s very f u l l ; H e l l . I I 4, 2-10 and 24-26. In f a c t the d e s c r i p t i o n of the year of the T h i r t y occupies h a l f as much space as the account of the previous s i x years toge- t h e r . See W. P. Henry, Greek H i s t o r i c a l W r i t i n g , 73. 3 It was during these years of c r i s i s and p o l i t i c a l turmoil that Socrates became eminent. The association of Critias and Alcibiades with Socrates before they achieved p o l i t i c a l promin- ence (or notoriety) had created great animosities between the demos and those who had a reputation for wisdom. The hatred and fear of oligarchy in any form that were r i f e in Athens after 403 extended to the social and intellectual circles from which the extremists had sprung. The relationship of the extreme oligarchs with the Sophists, and also with Socrates, was widely known among the people of Athens but greatly misunderstood. As a result, Socrates was associated indiscriminately with a l l the attributes of the Sophists. Hence, he appeared to some as a friend of the aristocrats, a despiser of the common people, a corrupter of morals and an atheist. Xenophon also experienced something of this hostility, for he had supported the oligarchs. Furthermore, a personal relationship existed between Xenophon and Socrates.9 It is as a result of these factors that the Cynegeticus (the earliest of his works1*-*) contains his strong castigation of %em. I, 2, 16. 9cicero,. de inv. I, 31, 5 quotes the Socratic Aeschines in a passage that links Xenophon and his wife with Socrates. Xenophon himself both in Mem. I,3, 3-13 and in Anab. I l l , 1, 5-7 makes a point of his relationship with Socrates. !0The evidence for considering this work early in origin is given by H. Richards, "The Hellenics of Xenophon," Class. Rev., XV (1901) 197-203, and "The Minor Works of Xenophon," Class. Rev.. XII (1898) 285-292; J. Mewaldt, "Die Composition des Xenophontischen Kynegetikos," Hermes, XLVI (1911) 70 -92. the S o p h i s t s . T h e majority claim to lead the young to virtue but they do the opposite. They write books that off e r empty pleasures to the young but contain no a p e x i i . Concerning t h e i r style Xenophon says that xoc uev priuaxa avxoZq, i^f^sm^iqzyvCi\iai, 6e 6p&3c, e x o u a o u ... oi>6au.o0 . 1 2 Then he seeks to a l i g n him- s e l f with the people of his own day when he says, iieyovoi 6c n a l a\\ot T i o M o l TOU? vuv aoqptoxag xat ou [ t o u s ] cpiAoaocpous ,OTI ev xoZq o v o j i a a t a o c p i C o v T C U , OUH ev x o t s vorinaou . ̂  He i s expressing an attitude that i s the an t i t h e s i s of his attitude to the Sophist Gorgias, as he enunciates i t i n the A n a b a s i s . p o r Proxenus as a pupil of Gorgias seems to have displayed some rather l o f t y ideals and q u a l i t i e s in his quest f o r fame, power and wealth The explanation f o r the expression of Xenophon's attitude toward the Sophists i n the Cynegeticus i s of a two-fold nature. F i r s t , I think that he actually f e l t some antagonism toward those who appeared wise and, for a fee, surrounded themselves with pupils, in d i r e c t contrast to Socrates, who asked nothing of other men except a willingness to engage in discussion. These are the men who ev TOCS o v o n a a u a o c p i C o v x a u xal OUH ev xoi<; v o r i u a a t v • Those whom Xenophon c a l l e d Sophists knl xy elanaxav "kiyovai, na! ypacpouatv e n l T £ eauTuiv n e p d e i , , . . . ou6e yap 00905 auxwv e y e v e T O 0 & 6 i : LCyn. 13,1. 1 2Cyn. 13,3. 1 3 I b i d . , 6. 1^Anab. II, 2, 6, 16-20. 1 5Cvn. 13,8. 5 Xenophon i d e n t i f i e d h imself w i t h ca n o U o i to gain t h e i r a t t e n t i o n and sympathy i n order that he might r e v e a l the second reason f o r h i s c a s t i g a t i o n of the Sophists. He wished to r e c t i f y the misunderstanding that had a r i s e n concerning the r e l a t i o n s h i p of Socrates t o himself and others of o l i g a r c h i c sympathy against whom there was obvious h o s t i l i t y , i n s p i t e of the general amnesty that had been declared a f t e r the r e s - t o r a t i o n of the democracy i n 403 , and d i r e c t t h i s h o s t i l i t y where he thought i t b e l o n g e d — a g a i n s t the demagogues. To t h i s end he concludes h i s harangue against.the Sophists as f o l l o w s : TOC uxv ouv T W V 00910-Twv TrapaYYeknaTa uapatvw <pu\dTTea$at,, x a 6e T O J V cpi\oa6<pa>v kv§\)\xT\\ia.-zaL \xr\ a x u u d C e t v . 01 uev yap aocpiarai TtXouatous xal veou? ^npwvcat, oi 6e - ' N » r 17 cpiAoaocpot naau xotvol xal <pt\oi . He here attempts t o make a simple d i s t i n c t i o n by means of which the common people of Athens may c l e a r l y i d e n t i f y who are t h e i r r e a l foes and who are not. Furthermore, since Xenophon was as s o c i a t e d w i t h Socrates, who according to Xenophon's d e f i n i t i o n could not be considered a Sophist, the h o s t i l i t y t h a t had a r i s e n a f t e r 404/3 against the s o c i a l and i n t e l l e c t u a l c i r c l e i n which Xenophon moved might be d i v e r t e d elsewhere. This was the extent of h i s defence against the h o s t i l i t y r o f the general p u b l i c . Never d i d he t r y to hide h i s high regard f o r the true philosopher or deny h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h him. l 6 H e l l . I I , 4, 43. 17 Cyn. 13, 9. 6 This brings us face to. face with the problem of what this relationship was. If one considers the account of Socrates' behaviour as Xenophon gives i t in the Memorabilia, two character- i s t i c s become evident. First, i t has an extraordinary emphasis on the religious nature of Socrates' conduct. In these r e l i g i ^ ous references several scholars 1^ have found a thematic and rhetorical arrangement that serves as the framework within which we see Socrates actively engaged in improving the people with whom he comes in contact. This is the second characteristic of Xenophon's account. Socrates is constantly described with the words ouxwg ajcpe\euv ECOHEL U.OL xouq o u v o v x a ? . When oneconsiders this statement in relation to the dialogue with Aristippus 2 1 where the main point is that whether something is x a \ 6 v x e n a y a ^ o v is relative to whether i t is euxpticrxov i t quickly becomes apparent 2 2 that Socrates is exemplary in his behaviour. What is relative can best be taught by example. Therefore Socrates engages in 1 ^ M e m . I, 1, 1-9, 20; I 3,1-4; I, 4, 2-19; III, 3, 10; III, 9, 15; IV, 3, 2-18; IV, 6, 1-5; IV, 7, 6, and 10; IV, 8, 1-11. 19ivo Bruns, Das Lit erarische Port rat der Griechen, 361- 378; H. Erbse, "Die Architektonik im Aufbau von Xenophons Memora- bilie n , "Hermes, LXXXXIX (1961), 257-2 67; 0. Gigon, Kommentar sum Ersten Buch von Xenophons Memorabilien and Kommentar sum Zweiten Buch von Xenophons Memorabilien y passim. 2QMem. I, 3, 1; I, 4, 1; II, 1, 1; HI, 1, 1; IV, 1, 1; 21Mem. I l l , 8, 1-7- 22Mem. I,:,2, 17; I, 2, 1; I, 5, 6; IV, 1, 1. 7 making good soldiers, good citizens and good people by voiiiCwv x a l \evu>v x a l npaxTwv. In this usefulness Socrates became noble and good. From these two distinctive features of the work I think i t necessary to conclude that in the Memorabilia Xenophon considered the formal charges brought against Socrates at his t r i a l of grave importance. When one compares this attitude toward his t r i a l with that of Plato in the Apology the dissimilitude is at once obvious. In the latter account hostility against Socrates arose not from impiety or corrupting the youth (as the formal charge stated) but from his relationship to the leading p o l i t i c a l men of the c i t y . 2 ^ He had incurred their hatred (and along with this the prejudice of the majority of the citizens) 25 D v revealing their lack of wisdom through; questioning and cross-examination. What Socrates' role had been in the state and what i t would continue to be i f he remained alive was'e depicted by the example of the f l y that arouses a big and well-bred but lethargic horse to action. In the midst of this hostile setting, Socrates twice came to the city's attention, once when he opposed the i l l e g a l t r i a l of the generals after the battle of Arginusae and later when contrary to 23Mem. II, 10, 6; II, 9, 4- 24piato, Apology. 21B-22A; 29C-30B. 2 5 P l a t o , Apology, 28B. 2 6 I b i d . , 30E, 31A. s the orders of the Thirty he refused to bring Leon the Salaminian to be put to death. 2 7 Plato then makes Socrates' p o l i t i c a l a c t i - vity the main source of Athens* enmity toward him and, indirectly, of his death. This delineation of Socrates' behaviour seems to agree at least in part with the quibbling character whom Aristophanes 28 lampoons in the Clouds. Xenophon himself gives some credence to the Platonic portrayal in that he considers the opposition of Socrates to the t r i a l of generals worthy of mention in his histo- 29 r i c a l narrative. 7 Even in the Memorabilia Xenophon repeats the account of Socrates' behaviour in public office-^ but then passes on hurriedly to other things. It seems reasonable, then, to ass- ume that he was aware of another view of the t r i a l of Socrates and that he deliberately chose to give his portrayal the emphasis denoted above. The question why religion plays such an important part in the Memorabilia becomes even more perplexing when one notes that some of Xenophon's early work3! is written without reference to 2 7 Plato., 'Apology, 32A-E. 2 8Aristophanes, Clouds, 143-168. 2 ^ H e l l . I, 7, 15- For-the latest discussion concerning the problems that arise from comparison of the various accounts of these events see Henry, Greek Historical Writing, 100 - 107. 3°Mem. IV, 4 , 1 - 4 - ^Cynegeticus; de equitandi ratione; de equitum1 magistro. the gods. Among these the H e l l e n i c a r e v e a l s the most s t a r t l i n g tendency because i n Books one and two he ignores r e l i g i o u s r i t u a l (_e._g. s a c r i f i c e s before a campaign) but from the beginning of Book three such matters are mentioned w i t h i n c r e a s i n g frequency. Thus he d i s p l a y s a growing awareness of the r o l e of r e l i g i o n i n Greek s o c i e t y . Furthermore Anabasis, V I I , 3, 5, i n d i c a t e s t h a t Xenophon made some sort of r e t u r n to the p a t e r n a l gods.-^ The date of w r i t i n g of the Memorabilia (see i n f r a 52) i s long a f t e r the year 399/3, when the change i n Xenophon's r e l i g i o u s a t t i t u d e s i s supposed to have taken place. Hence i t seems reasonable t o hope that i n the essence of h i s r e l i g i o n we s h a l l f i n d some reason f o r the emphasis i n the p o r t r a y a l of Socrates, The opportunity t o express h i s r e l i g i o u s conception i n h i s own way was given to him at S c y l l u s . 3 3 Here, having been granted an estate by the Spartans, he purchased a sacred p r e c i n c t t h a t he made of s p e c i a l importance to the surrounding Greek peoples by f i n a n c i n g a r e l i g i o u s f e s t i v a l w i t h the produce taken from the land. Part of the r i t u a l was a hunt organized by Xenophon's sons; and others, ot pou\6|ievot avdpeg, j o i n e d i n . 3 ^ " The r e l i g i o u s a c t i v i t y of Xenophon then provided the neighbourhood with an opp- o r t u n i t y to meet i n a s o c i a l and f e s t i v e atmosphere. No doubt people a t t e n d i n g the Olympic games a l s o v i s i t e d Xenophon. 35 Thus 3 2 i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note that on t h i s occasion he s a c r i - f i c e s t o Zeus # . M e c \ t x t o s t "the soother," "the kind one." 3 3Anab. V, 3, 7-13- 3 4Anab. V, 3, 10. 35Anab. V, 3, 7- 10 Xenophon could see near at hand how the pan-Hellenic religious festivals fostered the sense of Greek community and identity. It was here that the Olympic spir i t worked for concord and fellow-feeling. As Gilbert Murray says with reference to the f i f t h century, "It i s , after a l l , a good deal to say, that in Greek history we find almost no warring of sects, no mutual tor- tures or even blasphemies."3° In the Olympian religion, without roots in any particular s o i l , Xenophon found a most powerful auxiliary in bringing about Greek harmony, for each state could find some aspect of the individual god's worship with which i t could identify and on which i t could project i t s own conceptions and so feel that i t fit t e d in with things Greek. In the Memorabilia i t s e l f we find at least two passages that seem in accord with the ideas expressed above. In the first,37 Xenophon t e l l s the story of how the Priestess, in answer to the question how i t was necessary to act concerning sacrifices or ancestral cults or other such things, replied that one should act v6|ii*) Tt6\eu)s. While the story i t s e l f may well illustrate the p o l i - t i c a l astuteness of Delphi in maintaining a non-sectarian nature, i t is told by the author to show that Socrates' religious behaviour was in accord with this attitude. The second passage-^ has been exhaustively dealt with by . Murray, Five Stages of Greek Religion, 70. 37Mem. I, 3, 1. 38Mem. I l l , g, 10. 11 Gunnar Rudberg.^9 j n his discussion he points out how this statement with i t s certainty of tone and i t s interest in the physical universe stands in contrast to the usual hesitancy and ideological concern of Socrates in other Socratic works. He then goes on to suggest that this passage is an example of an author imposing on Socrates, the epitome of wisdom, a typically Hellenic a t t i t u d e — i n this instance, in the sphere of religion. Thus Xeno- phon has given expression.to a common Greek notion through the mouth of Socrates. To sum up, then, we must say that the remarkable religious stress of Xenophon's Socratic writing is found not because of Socrates's influence on our author but rather because the views of the author have in some instances been placed in the mouth of Socrates. In fact Xenophon's awareness of the importance and function of religion in Greek society comes after the death of Socrates and is intimately connected with the author's p o l i t i c a l ideas (see infra 57). The presentation of Socrates as an exem- plary individual is probably a similar mixture of idealism and historial reality. Therefore Xenophon took the formal charges against Socrates seriously because thus he could best express what he considered to be important attitudes and aspirations. Xenophon has consciously deployed his material to present to us an exemplary figure with particular emphasis on his religious nature since this was in harmony with Xenophon's p o l i t i c a l ideas. 39 G . Rudberg, "Temp©! und Altar bei Xenophon," Symbolae Osloenses, XVIII (1938), 1-8. On the other hand 0. Gigon, "Xenophent'©a," Eranos, (1946) 131-152 points out what he considers to be the core of historical Socratic dialogue. 12 Perhaps the most significant p o l i t i c a l influence that affected Xenophon in his youth was the work of Thucydides. Thucydides was, as a result of family-background, oligarchic and anti-democratic. He had experienced exile because of what the demos considered failure. M. F. McGregor^O has pointed out that, while Thucydides could admire a great man (Pericles) in p o l i t i c a l office in a democratic state, he reserved and maintained ^M. F. McGregor, "The Politics of the Historian Thucydides," Phoenix, X $1956), 93-102. G. E. M. de Ste. Croix, "The Character of the Athenian Empire, "Historia, III (1954), 1-41 (particularly 31-37) , anticipates much that McGregor says in his a r t i c l e . H. D. F. Kitto, Poiesis, 313, writes that i t would be small-minded to say simply (because of Thuc. VIII, 97, 2 ) : "Thucydides was antidemocratic." But then he goes on to postulate (339) that a large group of Thucydidean generalisations in the speeches revolve around the uncertainty of the future. On page 342 he writes that these generalisations (e.g.., IV, 65, 4) "resemble outcrops of rock which indicate the presence below the surface of a continuous stratum. They are part of what Thucydides himself i s thinking." Thus he uses a method much more tenuous than McGregor's in ascri- bing to Thucydides what i s mo:_st certainly a conservative attitude. Finally, we should note that John H. Finley Jr., Thucydides, 2$-33, gives a synthesis of the two points of view outlined above by suggesting that Thucydides, a democrat in his youth, gradually became a ;disillusioned conservative in old age. 13 a distrust of the democratic system, which caused him to express certain brief but pregnant remarks concerning to TtXn^o?. It was this same reasoned distrust of democracy that led him to evalu- ate the f i r s t days of government under the moderate oligarchy of the Five Thousand as a time when oi 'ASnvaiot tpatvovxat eu 41 uoXtxeuaavTe? . This was the man who was s t i l l l i v i n g during Xenophon's youth; whom Xenophon must have read carefully; and whom he tried to emulate by continuing the history of Athens and Sparta where Thucydides l e f t off. Some scholars even think that they worked together for some time before Thucydides died.^ 2 That both were of the same intellectual circle and attached to men of similar policies i s perceptible when one considers for a moment the comments that they makenr concerning a number of their contemporaries who are linked p o l i t i c a l l y . Thucydides writes of Antiphon as the man who devisedthe overthrow of the demo- cracy by the council of the Five Thousand.^ Later he most ably (apioToc) defended himself in his alliance with the Four Hundred. Finally Thucydides describes him as a man inferior to no one of the Athenians of his own day in apexr\. ^Thuc. VIII, 97, 2. ^ 2F. E. Adcock, Thucydides and his History, 98-100. For the latest discussion concerning this theory see W. P. Henry, Greek Historical Writing, 74-81. 43-rhuc. VIII, 68, 1-2. 14 In the H e l l e n i c a the account of the t r i a l and death of Theramenes^ f o r opposing the more extreme p o l i c i e s of Crit.ias evokes from Xenophon a statement of admiration because Theramenes disp l a y e d t o cppoviuov even i n death.^5 Theramenes l i n k s h i s own condemnation w i t h that -of three o t h e r s — L e o n the Salaminian;' N i c e r a t u s , the son of N i c i a s , and Antiphon . ^ 6 A l i t t l e l a t e r he places himself i n the p o l i t i c a l party that opposes Thrasybulus, Anytus and A l c i b i a d e s , ^ who r e l y on the p o l i t i c a l support of TO -rc\r|$os. Xenophon thus approves of an a t t i t u d e towards the demos s i m i l a r t o that expressed by Thucydides. That both give approval t o people of the same c i r c l e i n d i c a t e s that Thucydides and Xenophon, i n h i s e a r l y days, were of a s i m i l a r p o l i t i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n . This b r i n g s us to the question r a i s e d above of Thucydides' d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e on Xenophon. W. P..Henry has attacked the idea that Xenophon wrote a c o n t i n u a t i o n of T h u c y d i d e s ^ because t h i s theory has hindered scho l a r s from c o n s i d e r i n g h i s work as an ^ H e l l . 1 1 , 3 , 15-56. Cf. A r i s t o t l e , Ath. P o l . , 28, 5; 33-37. L y s i a s , 12, 66, and p o s s i b l y Thucydides, V I I I , 89, 2 i n d i c a t e a d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e t o Theramenes. Raphael Sealey, "The Revolution of 411 B.C.," i n Essays i n Greek P o l i t i c s , 111- 133, questions the whole concept of l o y a l t y t o a p o l i t i c a l party or group. ^ H e l l . I I , 3 ,56. 4 6 H e l l . I I , 3 , 3 3-40. ^ H e l l . 1 1 , 3 , 42. ^ G r e e k H i s t o r i c a l W r i t i n g , 14-54. 15 e x p r e s s i o n o f i t s a u t h o r and , t h e r e f o r e , s t u d y i n g i t f o r what i t s a y s . T h i s a t t a c k i s n e c e s s a r y s i n c e i t does seem a somewhat e x t r e m e - a s s u m p t i o n t o e x p e c t a c a r b o n - c o p y o f T h u c y d i d e s i n t h e H e l l e n i c a . N e v e r t h e l e s s one s h o u l d not be h e s i t a n t about s e e i n g t h e i n f l u e n c e o f T h u c y d i d e s i n some p a r t o f X e n o p h o n ' s work s i n c e t h i s need not d e t r a c t f rom a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e a u t h o r — i n f . f a c t , i t may show h i s good s e n s e . Thus I see n o t h i n g u n l i k e l y i n b e l i e v i n g t h a t Xenophon d i d i n d e e d make use o f c e r t a i n c o n v e n t i o n s o f Thucydides (e_ .£ . » apxo- nevou xe^wvos • apxouivou TOU depou? ; and t o t h e s e we might add c i t a t i o n s o f t h e ephor a t S p a r t a , and archon a t A thens ) . ^9 i f Xenophon uses t h e s e c o n v e n t i o n s i n c o n s i s t e n t l y t h i s i s i n no sense p r o o f t h a t he d e n i e s "a t e v e r y t u r n t h e r e i s any c o n n e c t i o n between h i s own and the h i s t o r y o f T h u c y d i d e s . " - ^ L e t u s , however , r e v e r t t o Xenophon and see what he says about h i s t o r i c a l w r i t i n g . The f i r s t passage where Xenophon i n d i - cates some c r i t e r i a r e a d s as f o l l o w s : nal TOUTO ulv OUH ayvou), OTL TauTa anoq>$£y\ia.xa OUH aCt6\oya, E H E I V O 6E npCvw TOU <xv6pos ayaaTOv, TO TOU -&avaTOu TtapeaTTiHOTOs U^TE TO qppovinov urJTE TO •rcaiYVLw6es anoXmeiv E H TT}S 4>uxTk."^ The words TauTa auo<p$£YU.aTa r e f e r t o t'he ehtsire. . .account o f the condemna t ion and d e a t h o f Theramenes . H i s a p o l o g y r e s u l t s from ^9 H . R . B r e i t e n b a c h , Xenophon von A t h e n , I656-I658, o u t - l i n e s t h e c h r o n o l o g i c a l r e f e r e n c e s . F o r m e n t i o n o f ephors and a r c h o n s see H e l l . I , 3, 1; I , 6, 1; I I , 1 ,10; I I , 3 , 1. C f . T h u c . I I , 1 and 2. 50w, P . H e n r y , Greek H i s t o r i c a l W r i t i n g , 54- 16 an awareness that they are not noteworthy (a^ioX-oya ). Thus he i m p l i e s that there are some e s t a b l i s h e d c r i t e r i a f o r h i s t o r i c a l w r i t i n g t o which he s t i l l adheres i n par t . In using and 5£ he f u r t h e r i n d i c a t e s t h a t there e x i s t s i n h i s mind a ten s i o n between e s t a b l i s h e d c r i t e r i a that he has learned and a n a t u r a l i n c l i n a t i o n w i t h i n himself. The next passage that we s h a l l consider shedsfurther l i g h t on what these c r i t i e r i a might be. I t reads i n part as f o l l o w s : YLvwcrxco ^e V ouv oxt ev xouxots ouxe 6andvT)na ouxe xtv6uvov ouxe unxdvnua a£t6\oYoybu6ev 6tr)YOUM.at.... xouxo yap r\6r) uoMwv nal xpTl^ctxajv x a l xtv6uvu)v a£to\oYu>xaxov <xv6pbq epyov eaxuv.^ 2 Here i t becomes quite p l a i n that according to usual c r i t e r i a the noteworthy subjects i n h i s t o r y are great expenditure ( 6audvT)na)» danger (xtv6uvo$) and stra t e g y (unxdvrpa ). Furthermore, Xeno- phon candidly records h i s ;.growing:: opposition t o these e s t a b l i s h e d c r i t e r i a through the use of the s u p e r l a t i v e a£to\oYu>xaxov. The l a s t passage addssone f u r t h e r d e t a i l . Xenophon w r i t e s : a\\a yap xwv \iev iizya\wv noXecav, et xt xa\bv enpa^av, anavxeq oi auyYpacpet? neuvnvxatj, enol 6e 6oxet, x a l et xtg Htxpa iioXt? ouaa no\\a x a l xa\a 'ipya 6tarcercpaxxat,ext iiaXAov a£tov etvat anocpatvetv ^ 5 1 H e l l . I I , 3, 56. 5 2 H e l l . V, 1, 4. 5 3 H e l l . V I I , 2, 1. 1 7 T h i s passage was w r i t t e n a f t e r 366, f o r i t serves as an i n t r o - d u c t i o n t o an account of the a c t i v i t i e s of the people of P h l i u s . Here i t becomes evident that a c c o r d i n g t o these c r i t e r i a approved by "aitavxe? ot avyypayeZs the usual p a r t i c i p a n t s i n a h i s t o r i c a l account are great c i t i e s . Here, a l s o , Xenophon d e c l a r e s that h i s i s a s t i l l more worthy ( ext. naMov a£iov) subject f o r h i s t o r i c a l w r i t i n g than t h a t of other w r i t e r s . We can now conclude from our i n v e s t i g a t i o n t h at f o r Xenophon the concept of what was noteworthy governed h i s choice of h i s t o r i c a l m a t e r i a l and that as he i n t e r - p r e t e d t h i s concept f o r hi m s e l f he was g r a d u a l l y f o r c e d to oppose the t r a d i t i o n a l s e l e c t i o n of subj e c t matter--namely, great c i t i e s making great expenditures, enduring great dangers and i n v e n t i n g new s t r a t e g y . Where d i d t h i s concept of noteworthiness come from? Who f i r s t used as subject matter f o r h i s t o r y g r e a t c i t i e s making gre a t expenditures? We t u r n t o the opening chapter of Thucydides: ...' dp^duevo? e6$us na^iaxauevou na! e\Ttiaac; u-eyav xe eaea^at na! a£io\oYwxaxov xtuv T t p o y e - YEVTiuevoov, xeHu.atp6u.evos oxt dnnaCovxes xe rjaav kq auxbv du.<p6xepot uapaaHeuii xfi w£ai «••• Htvnaus yap auxn neytaxr) 6t) xots "EAAnaiv eyevexo HOC! uepei x i v ! xwv pappdpwv a>s 6e eiTtetv na! £711. rcXetaxov dv^pwixooy. 5 4 T h u c . I, 1, 1, 2. 18 Again we read: TOUTOU 6 s TOU UO\EUOU UT)X6C; T E uEya 7ipou|3n, ua^-nnaTa T E £UVTIVEX$T) yevia&ai EV auTti) TT) EXXaot ota oux ETEpa EV lay XP°vw • The ideas that recur are remarkably f a m i l a r . The work i s to be the h i s t o r i c a l n a r r a t i v e of a war that i s the most noteworthy of a l l t hat have taken place. This i s why the author undertook t o recount what happened. What makes the events noteworthy i n the eyes of the author i s that both c i t i e s at the height of t h e i r power ( dxu.aCovTEs) entered a war that was very long, brought great s u f f e r i n g s i n t o Greece and a f f e c t e d a great part of mankind ( i n d i r e c t l y , then, great expenditures, great dangers and much stra t e g y ; c f . Thuc. I, 18, 3 « ) There seems l i t t l e doubt that Thucydides i n f l u e n c e d Xenophon both i m p l i c i t l y and e x p l i c i t l y i n what he w r i t e s i n h i s h i s t o r i c a l n a r r a t i v e . F i n a l l y an a m p l i f i c a t i o n of-Xenophon's p o l i t i c a l views, c l o s e l y l i n k e d to h i s e a r l y experience, i s a l s o found i n the Cynegeticus. One of the most obvious a t t i t u d e s that Xenophon- d i s p l a y s i n t h i s work i s h i s commitment to a s o c i e t y engaged i n a w a r - e f f o r t . Man may engage i n the sport of hunting f o r h i s enjoyment and exe r c i s e but i t s c h i e f r e s u l t i s to t r a i n people f o r war: 5 5Thuc. I, 2 3 , 1. uKpeXTfaovTai b' 0 £ eui^uuriaavTe? TOUTOU TOU Ipyou u o \ \ d ! u y t e i d v xe yap T O L ? cruiu.ao*t n a p a a H e u d C e t n a l o p a v H O U a x o u e u v u a W o v , YTlpacr^etv 6e r\xxov, xa &z ,npo<; TOV u6\e|i.ov \xa\ioxa n a i 6 e u £ i . ^ Xenophon had experienced nothing but e x t e r n a l and i n t e r n a l s t r i f e during the e a r l y years of h i s l i f e . M i l i t a r y f o r c e seemed to be the most v i t a l concern f o r a state at war. I f a man could not f i g h t he was of l i t t l e use t o the s t a t e . Hunting was the f i r s t p u r s u i t t h a t a young man should take up57 since i t could best i n c u l c a t e valour i n young men and * 58 make them a p i o p o u s . T r a i n i n g i n hunting would make men s e r v i c e a b l e to t h e i r f e l l o w - c i t i z e n s and p a r t i c u l a r l y f i t 59 f o r war. C l e a r l y , then, by the time Xenophon made h i s f i r s t l i t e r - ary attempt c e r t a i n p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s had begun to c r y s t a l - l i z e as a r e s u l t of h i s f a m i l y background, i n t e l l e c t u a l a s s o c i - a t i o n and e a r l y experience. There was a preoccupation w i t h war and an emphasis on d i r e c t p h y s i c a l involvement. P o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y a l s o required t h a t a t t e n t i o n be given t o philosophy and to the wise men of the s t a t e . Although r e l a t i n g p o l i t i c s w i t h philosophy engendered c e r t a i n h o s t i l e a s s o c i a t i o n s i n the minds of the populace, t h i s union, he f e l t , must be expounded 5 6Cyn. 1 2 , 1 . 5 7 C y n . 2 , 1 . 5 8 I b i d . , 12, 7-9. 5 9 I b i d . , 13, 11. 20 and defended. The gradual d e p l e t i o n through execution of the i n t e l l e c t u a l c i r c l e t o which Xenophon belonged revealed the grim ne c e s s i t y f o r c r e a t i n g an atmosphere of harmony and s e l f - c o n t r o l i n order t o achieve a st a b l e p o l i t i c a l system. His a s s o c i a t i o n with people l i k e Thucydides (whose views he must have known rath e r w e l l i n order to be able t o con s c i o u s l y forsake them when he grew older) and Socrates i n f l u e n c e d him toward what must be regarded as a conservative approach to p o l i t i c a l problems. CHAPTER I I XENOPHON IN THE PRIME OF LIFE A f t e r the r e v o l u t i o n i n 404/3 the hatred of the demos f o r a l l the supporters of o l i g a r c h y and the s o c i a l and i n t e l l e c t u a l c i r c l e s from which they arose blazed f o r t h i n t o renewed f i g h t i n g when the T h i r t y and t h e i r supporters i n E l e u s i s began t o h i r e mercenaries. I t was a t t h i s point that a l l the f o r c e s of demo- c r a t i c Athens took the f i e l d and when they had c a l l e d the gen- e r a l s of the o l i g a r c h i c f a c t i o n t o a conference they k i l l e d them and persuaded the others through r e l a t i v e s and f r i e n d s t o r e t u r n t o Athens and l i v e together under a democratic government."'" C l e a r l y the demos had, at t h i s p o i n t , gained the upper hand i n Athens and i t must have been a very uncomfortable place i n which t o l i v e f o r those who had formerly been the a c t i v e supporters of o l i g a r c h y . A r i s t o t l e i n d i c a t e s t h a t a f t e r the general amnesty: I I ) many intended t o migrate ( n a ! uoXXwv nev e i u v o o u v x w v e£oLHetv) but were f o i l e d i n the attempt t o r e g i s t e r ; 2) there was a movement against the members of the o l i g a r c h i c party; ( x i ? r)p£ctxo xwv KaxeXr|Xu$6xu>v u.vT)aLHaHeCv)that was q u i e t l y suppressed. Thus one can r i g h t l y assume that there was a general d i s t r u s t of the amnesty or a r e f u s a l t o work with democracy among those who had supp- orted the o l i g a r c h s . That Xenophon can r i g h t l y be considered i n t h i s number i s shown by h i s a t t i t u d e s toward Sthens t h a t he d i s - plays i n h i s e a r l y work (see i n f r a 2 9 )• The movement against 1 H e l l . I I , 4 , 4 3 . Cf. A r i s t o t l e , Ath. P o l . 4 0 . 22 the o l i g a r c h i c party a f t e r the amnestVj although put down ;would only have increased the s u s p i c i o n with which the conservatives viewed the general amnesty. As a r e s u l t Xenophon was quick t o leave Athens and j o i n h i s f r i e n d Proxenus to take part i n the events that he des- c r i b e s i n the Anabasis. The eagerness with which Xenophon joined t h i s campaign i s demonstrated by the d i s c u s s i o n w i t h o Socrates. He suggested that Xenophon i n q u i r e at Delphi whe- th e r he should go w i t h Proxenus. Xenophon, however, d i d not even question whether he should go or not, but only t o what gods he should s a c r i f i c e i n order to r e t u r n s u c c e s s f u l l y . That Xeno- phon showed such eagerness t o go on the e x p e d i t i o n , i n s p i t e of the warning of Socrates t h a t t h i s journey might give the Atheni- ans grounds t o accuse him of^ philo-Laconiaq., i n d i c a t e s how desirous he was of l e a v i n g Athens. Perhaps the passage that most c l e a r l y sets f o r t h why Xeno- 3 phon l e f t Athens comes i n the Anabasis. Proxenus extended t o Xenophon the i n v i t a t i o n t o j o i n the expedition (and Proxenus was a very upright and outstanding person).^" Then Jh'e-ohatUs bad added a promise that c a r r i e d a d e f i n i t e appeal f o r Xenophon. unuoxveCTO 6e auxip, EL e \ d o i , cptXov auxbv Kupcp TtoiTiaetv ov auxbg ecpn npetxxu) eaux^ vojitCeiv xfjs naxpt6og. ** There i s an i n d i c a t i o n here t h a t Xenophon was i n t e r e s t e d i n i n d i v i d u a l s who were prominent i n the ancient world. Thus t o 3Anab. I l l , 1, 4-10. 4Anab.. . I l l , 1, 4. 5Anab. I l l , 1, 10. Cf. Anab. I , 9, 17. 23 become acquainted w i t h Cyrus was one of the motiva t i n g f a c t o r s i n the d e c i s i o n t o go to S a r d i s . There Xenophon must a l s o have been a f f e c t e d by Cyrus the Younger, f o r he says that when they reached C i l i c i a i t seemed c l e a r t h a t the a t t a c k was d i r e c t e d against the King. Then he adds: cpopouu-evoi 6e X T I V o6bv x a l a x o v x e s ouu>s o i u o X X o l u 6>* a i a x u v n v x a l aXX^Xuv x a l K u p o u auvrixoXou$ncrav. This statement i m p l i e s that the Greeks' d e c i s i o n t o continue the march was t o some extent r e l a t e d to t h e i r regard f o r Cyrus. Then the author of the Anabasis continues: wv etc, n a ! Eevoqpwv Proxenus' judgment that Cyrus was of more concern to him than was h i s n a t i v e state seems to i n d i c a t e that the e n t i r e n a r r a t i v e may be viewed as an account of the a l t e r n a t i v e s open t o Xenophon. The f i n a l statement r e v e a l s that Xenophon's concern w i t h the great i n d i v i d u a l already was an i n f l u e n c i n g f a c t o r i n p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n s t h a t he made as e a r l y as 400 B.C. Xenophon gives f u r t h e r i n s i g h t i n t o what motivated the s o l d i e r s (of whom he has s a i d he was one) i n a l a t e r passage. TOJV Y^P oxpaxcoaxuiy ot TtXeCaxoi r)aav ou audvei. j3iou exTtETtXeuxoxec; £ n l x a u x n v xrjv uaaSocpopdv, a X X a X T J V K u p o u apexTiv a x o u o v x e s , OL txev x a l av6pag a y o v x e s , ol 6e x a l TtpoaavnXuwoxes x P ^ u a x a , . . . Thus a p o r t i o n of the men who were mobilized under Cyrus were not without means. In f a c t some even spent money to go on the 6Anab. I l l , 1, 10. Cf. Anab. I , 9, 17. 7AHab• VI, 4, 6\ expedition because they had heard of the m i l i t a r y excellence ( apexii) of Cyrus.^ There seems t o have been a d e s i r e f o r an experience here t h a t was d i f f e r e n t from the ordinary since people a c t u a l l y spent money to engage i n warfare on the side that they thought would be v i c t o r i o u s . The d e s i r e f o r adven- t u r e was another important m o t i v a t i n g f a c t o r among those j o i n - i n g the e x p e d i t i o n . Monetary c o n s i d e r a t i o n s may a l s o have iLnfluene'edenced Xenophon t o leave Athens. The Peloponnesian War had drained the c i t y of i t s wealth. In a d d i t i o n the o l i g a r c h i c r e v o l u t i o n and i t s l a t e r overthrow had caused i t s supporters f u r t h e r econo- mic hardship. On the other hand reports i n d i c a t e d that other 9 people had fa r e d w e l l i n the s e r v i c e of Cyrus. As a r e s u l t , Xenophon says, some men had gone on t h i s e x p e d i t i o n xp^ax* auxoic xxnaduevoi r)£ovxes ratXiv. That Xenophon belonged to t h i s group 3is:.pos.sibley since he himself had t o s e l l h i s horse upon reaching the Hellespont because of l a c k of f i n a n c e s . In f a d the behaviour of the e n t i r e mercenary army upon reaching the Hellespont seems t o plunder and wealth. be d i c t a t e d by the p o s s i b i l i t y of o b t a i n i n g 11 ^ " M i l i t a r y e x c e l l e n c e , " because we are d e a l i n g w i t h the thoughts of mercenaries who would be concerned w i t h war. 9Anab. V I , 4, 3. 1 QAnab. V I I , 3, 6 . ^Anab. VI, 6, 37, 38. The Greek army's involvement w i t h Seuthes seems to be motivated mainly by monetary considerations Anab. V I I , 2, 10-38. The opportunity of a journey to Asia Minor, then, provided Xenophon with an escape from the hostility of his fellow Atheni- ans and with the possibility of making the acquaintance of a man of his time whom some considered great. As Xenophon returned through the f e r t i l e territory of northern Mesopotamia he noted the richness of the land and the great quantity of food that had been harvested during the autumn 12 of 401. He recognized with what ease these possessions could be taken from the Persians and, remembering the Battle of Cunaxa, he became aware of the obvious superiority of the Greek armies. As he realized that the strength of most barbarian armies lay in Greek mercenaries, Xenophon must have been vividly aware of the tragedy of Greek dissension. He saw the betrayal of Greeks to the Persians by a Greek, Phalinus, bought by promises of wealth and power he saw the constant factional strife based on regional loyalties among the Greeks themselves^ and, gradually, 16 he comprehended the need for unity among a l l Greeks i f they were not to become the victims of their own concept of p o l i t i c a l freedom. Another result of the excursion into Persia was a broaden- ing of interest in mankind in general. As he travelled he 1 2Anab. II, 3 , 14-16. 1 3Anab. I l l , 2, 14-16. ^Anab. II, 1, 7-10. 15&nab. V, 6, 25. l 6Anab. I l l , 1, 33. Cf. ] mi, 2, 29-32. p e r c e i v e d something of Herodotus' i n t e r e s t i n the customs of 17 v a r i o u s peoples ' and as a r e s u l t he noted the d i s t i n c t i v e p e c u l i a r i t i e s of v a r i o u s t r i b e s — t h e p i e r c e d ears of the L y d i - a n s , ^ the dances of the P a p h l a g o n i a n s , ^ the sexual a t t i t u d e s of) of the Mossynoecians, u the underground houses of a b a r b a r i a n v i l l a g e , 2 - ^ - and the c o n t r a s t between the P e r s i a n splendour and 22 the Spartan s i m p l i c i t y . T h i s i n t e r e s t i n other people grew beyond an i n t e r e s t i n t h e i r customs u n t i l i t found e x p r e s s i o n i n a deep reverence f o r l i f e that extended even to one's ene- mies and saw the h o r r o r of the senseless d e s t r u c t i o n of humanity, 17 'H. R. Breitenbach, Xenophon von Athen, 1899, and Wilhelm Schmid, Geschichte der g r i e c h i s c h e n L i t e r a t u r , Part I, V o l , I I , 664-665, say that Xenophon w r i t e s under the i n f l u e n c e of Hero- dotus. G. A. Sauppe, L e x i c o l o g u s Xenophonteus, has shown t h a t Xenophon's usage i s a mixture of many d i a l e c t s . Although i t i s easy t o see t h i s as t h e j _ r e s u l t <of Xenophon's changing h i s p l a c e of r e s i d e n c e s e v e r a l times d u r i n g h i s l i f e t i m e , i t may be t h a t he has purposely chosen t o vary h i s s t y l e t o emphasize what he thought (see i n f r a 35-37 ) about Greek u n i t y ; he i s aware of s t y l e (see Cyn. 13) and h i s usage i s the r e s u l t of conscious e f f o r t . l gAnab. I l l , 1, 32. 1 9 A n a b . IVY 1, 5-14. 2 0 A n a b . V, 4, 30-34- 2 1 A n a b . IV, 5, 25-26. 2 2 H e l l . IV, 1, 29-31. 23 Anab. IV, 7, 13, 14- 27 Xenophon c l e a r l y analysed the. reason f o r enmity among men i n h i s account of the Greek army's dealings w i t h Paphlagonians. Here the story begins w i t h the Greeks p i l l a g i n g the Paphlagonians' t e r r i t o r y and the Paphlagonians engaged i n kidnapping and f u r t i v e a t t a c k . A f t e r ambassadors came from t%e",Paphla;gon::i,ari'sy there" was a night of f e a s t i n g and dancing out of which there arose an admira- t i o n f o r the c u l t u r e and s k i l l of the other group. The end of the story came the next morning when the Paphlagonian ambassa- dors were introduced to the army. The r e s u l t : x a l e6o££ TOL<J oTpcxTUUJTOC15 U.T*|T£ a d i x e i v nacpXayovaq [ir\xe a6ixeia$ou . Xenophon had learned t h a t one of the causes of the disharmony among the races was a l a c k of understanding and a p p r e c i a t i o n f o r the c u l t u r e of other peoples. ° As a r e s u l t of t h i s i n s i g h t Xenophon undertook t o extend h i s sympathy and p h i l a n t h r o p i a even t o those who were reputed to be enemies. In consequence of t h i s view Xenophon broke what was f o r him a guiding p r i n c i p l e of behaviour, namely, obedience 2Wap_. VI, 1, 1. -14 2 5Anab. VI, 1, 14. 2 ^ T h i s sympathy f o r the other races was l a t e r developed to such an extent t h a t when Xenophon wrote the Anabasis he r a r e l y showed open d i s a p p r o v a l of a l i e n customs'7"'. Hence when he made a judgment concerning a c u l t u r e (the Mossynoecians') he removed the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h i s judgment from himself and placed i t on TOUS auoTpaTSUonevous (Anab. V, 4, 34) . 2 8 t o those who represented the leaders of Greece (the Spartan general, Cheirisophos), and disagreed concerning the treatment of the barbarian c h i e f t a i n who served as t h e i r guide. As Xeno- phon himself says , T o G x 6 uve 6T) XEiptaocpt*} x a l SevocpujvTt, u.6vov 6ud- tpopov ev Tfl rcopeia e y e v e x o , TJ TOU TJYJAOVOS x d x w a i s x a l a u e X e t a . ^ Thus Xenophon became a champion of the d i g n i f i e d treatment that he f e l t a l l men, be they f r i e n d s or enemies, deserve simply because they are human beings. This a t t i t u d e r e s u l t e d , from the h o s t i l i t y that he had experienced and the s u f f e r i n g and anxie t y he had endured during the excursion i n t o P e r s i a . H o s t i l i t y u s u a l l y breeds h o s t i l i t y , but, on the other hand, when men are confronted w i t h enmity they can sometimes t u r n i t aside through d i g n i f i e d and sympathetic treatment of those w i t h whom they d i f f e r . Perhaps Xenophon discovered t h a t i t was e a s i e r to remove h o s t i l i t y by p h i l a n t h r o p i a than.by v i o l e n c e as he moved from y o u t h f u l i d e a l i s m to maturity. A f t e r the Ten Thousand returned from P e r s i a they remained under Xenophon's l e a d e r s h i p u n t i l the s p r i n g of 3 9 9 , when he 23 handed the command over to Thibron. Xenophon himself remained 2Q i n A s i a w i t h the troops " and did not r e t u r n to Athens u n t i l the 30 s p r i n g of 3 9 5 • Perhaps h i s d e c i s i o n to remain i n A s i a was inf l u e n c e d by the news of the death of Socrates i n 3 9 9 - 'When 27Anab. IV, 6 , 3 . 2 8Anab. V I I , 8 , 21+. 2 9 H e I l . I l l , 2 , 7- 3 0 H e l l . I l l , 5 , 1 - 2 5 - 29 Xenophon heard that he had been found g u i l t y , ou? IIEV T) 7toX.t,s $eoug o i vouaCwv, exepa 6e Haiva datjiovia etacpepuiv •.. he was perplexed. In his youthful idealism, Xenophon had seen only the Socrates who was, i n his eyes, in search of truth (both p o l i t i c a l 32 and moral) and who stood f o r obedience to the law. " The shock of his t r i a l and death seems to have brought to Xenophon's atten- tion the i n s t a b i l i t y of the Athenian constitution and the refusal 33 of the Athenians to recognize ap£-cf"i i n t h e i r midst. D i s i l l u - sioned by the events at Athens'ihe began to look elsewhere f o r a constitution that would make men practise a.ozir\ since no one would follow i t voluntarily. 3^" Thus Xenophon f e l t that the rule of law was essential since through i t men could be compelled to practise apexrj and HaXoxayaSia. For the laws to be e f f e c t i v e there must be respect for the constitution among the c i t i z e n s . To i n s t i l l t h i s i n the c i t i z e n body the laws must be very o l d 3 ^ and, i f 37 possible, have obtained divine sanction. To t h i s must be added the importance of example since, as we saw i n Chapter I, vi r t u e and goodness cannot be taught in any other manner 31Mem. I, 1 , 1 . 3 2 H e l l . I, 7, 1 5 . 3 3 T h i s i s an important feature of what he portrays in H e l l . I and I I . Cf., H e l l . I, 7 , 33- 32)-Resp. Lac. 10 , 4 - 3 5 I b i d . 3 % e s p . Lac. 10 , 8 . 3?Resp. Lac. 8, 5- 30 (see supra &). In the R e s p u b l i c a Lacedaemoniorum Xenophon found what he thought at t h a t time t o be the most e s s e n t i a l i d requirements f o r good government. Here was a c o n s t i t u t i o n t h a t compelled i t s c i t i z e n s t o a c t i n accordance w i t h apexf\ , t h a t was very o l d , sanctioned by the d i v i n e and p r a i s e d by a l l 3^The date f o r the w r i t i n g of the Resp. Lac. i s based on Sparta's l a c k of p o p u l a r i t y d e s c r i b e d i n chapter 14. T h i s g i v e s a p o s s i b l e date between 395, j u s t b e f o r e the B a t t l e of Coronea, and 383, when the Spartans had s e i z e d Cadmea. Resp. Lac. 15 i n d i c a t e s a p p r e c i a t i o n of Spartan k i n g s h i p , an a t t i t u d e he c e r - t a i n l y d i d not hold a f t e r Cadmea. W. Jaeger, P a i d e i a , I I I , 166, I67, and 326 note 56, argues f o r the l a t e d a t i n g of both the R e s p u b l i c a Lacedaemoniorum and the Cyropaedia on the b a s i s of the s i m i l a r i t y o f the endings, i n which Xenophon blames the contem- porary P e r s i a n s and Spartans f o r l a p s i n g from t h e i r own i d e a l s . He concludes t h a t t h i s s i m i l a r i t y proves t h e i r a u t h e n t i c i t y and and t h a t t h e r e f o r e both must have been p u b l i s h e d i n the l a s t ten y e a r s of h i s l i f e , f o r the Cyropaedia (VIII, 8, 4) mentions the b e t r a y a l of the sat r a p A r i o b a r z e n e s by h i s own son i n 360. I f i n d t h i s u n s a t i s f a c t o r y because s i m i l a r i t y of ending, while i t may i n d i c a t e a u t h e n t i c i t y , does not prove t h a t both works were p u b l i s h e d a t the same time. Furthermore, as w i l l be argued l a t e r (see i n f r a 42,43) , the c o n c l u s i o n of the Cyropaedia c o n t r a d i c t s much of the rest-b of the work and i n order t o account f o r t h i s c o n t r a d i c t i o n I b e l i e v e there was a change i n Xenophon's p o l i - t i c a l i d e a s t h a t would r e q u i r e a t i m e - l a p s e between the bulk of h i s w r i t i n g and h i s f i n a l chapter j u s t a f t e r 36O. Cyr. V I I I , 8, 4 i n no way proves that the whole work was w r i t t e n at about t h a t time. men, and that provided an example f o r the c i t i z e n body i n the persons of the Kings who, as Donald Kagan suggests, became the embodiment of l a w . ^ Thus the years j u s t before the B a t t l e of Coronea r e v e a l Xenophon as a man d i s i l l u s i o n e d w i t h h i s native s t a t e , g i v i n g c a r e f u l thought t o p o l i t i c s and p o l i t i c a l systems, preoccupied w i t h the laws and customs of mankind i n general, and f a s c i n a t e d by the behaviour of i n d i v i d u a l s . These va r y i n g streams of thought he attempted to a s s i m i l a t e i n the Respublica Lacedae- moniorum. A f u l l e r expression of these and other ideas can be discovered i n another work of Xenophon's, the Cyropaedia. 3 9 R e S p . Lac. 10, 8. 40 R esp. Lac. 13 and 15. Donald Kagan, The Great Dialogue, 152-154. CHAPTER I I I XENOPHON AND THE' BATTLE OF CORONEA While Xenophon remained i n As i a he became acquainted w i t h A g e s i l a u s , who had been sent to wage war on the Persians."'' Xenophon probably noted w i t h some d e l i g h t how Agesilaus obtained the l o y a l t y of h i s s o l d i e r s and enjoyed great success i n h i s e a r l y campaigns. Nevertheless, Xenophon wished t o t e s t the p o l i - t i c a l atmosphere of h i s home-state a f t e r a prolonged absence. The performance of the r e l i g i o u s r i t e s that he had vowed to f u l f i l l when he l e f t w i t h Proxenus on the excursion i n t o P e r s i a provided an i d e a l opportunity f o r the p r o j e c t . Therefore, he returned to Greece and made h i s d e d i c a t i o n at the Athenian shrine i n D e l p h i . The democraticc r u l e i n Athens must have been ra t h e r u n s a t i s f a c t o r y t o Xenophon, f o r i n the s p r i n g of 394 he r e j o i n e d Agesilaus i n A s i a to pursue h i s quest f o r the subjugation of P e r s i a . The democratic f a c t i o n at Athens had been unsympathetic 3 to any p o l i c i e s t h a t Xenophon endorsed, and, perhaps h o s t i l e to h i s person. At any r a t e , war against the r i c h e s of P e r s i a seemed the most r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e t o l i f e i n A t t i c a , and Agesilaus^" the man most l i k e l y to c a r r y out what Xenophon viewed as a most p r o f i t a b l e venture. 1 H e l l . I l l , 4, 1. 2Anab. V, 3 , 5. 3 See supra 13,14- ^"In f a c t Agesilaus advocated t h i s p o l i c y at Sparta before he was sent to A s i a ; H e l l . H I , 4, 1 and 2. 3 3 Because of the success of Ages i l a u s , the Per s i a n satrap adopted a p o l i c y of b r i b i n g c e r t a i n s t a t e s i n Greece to s t a r t a war, i n order to b r i n g the Spartans i n t o c o n f l i c t w i t h t h e i r f e l l o w Greeks and thus cause the r e c a l l and removal of Agesi- laus from A s i a , In t h i s the Per s i a n was most s u c c e s s f u l and as a r e s u l t we f i n d Xenophon present at the B a t t l e of Coronea i n the camp of the enemy of Athens i n 3 9 4 . That Xenophon was not present at t h i s b a t t l e as a v i c t i m of circumstance or chance, but r a t h e r because of a d e l i b e r a t e choice, seems c l e a r from a d i s c u s s i o n i n the Anabasis^ concerning h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the t i t h e from the sale of booty. Xenophon says that before he set out w i t h Agesilaus against Boeotia he l e f t the share belong- i n g t o Artemis with her p r i e s t , Megabyzus, at Ephesus, o x i auxbs HLv6uveuacov eSonei l e v a t , , x a l eneaxe iAev , f jv \ikv auxbc; awftfi,aux<v &Tto6ouvai* r\v 6e T L TOX$TI, a v a $ e i v a t Tiourjadnevov xf) ' A p x e u - i d i o T I o l ' o i x o x a p i e u a S a i xfi From the foregoing statement i t i s c l e a r t h a t Xenophon knew before he set out with Agesilaus that he would encounter danger to h i s l i f e . That t h i s danger would come i n part from the Athenians, the foes of Agesilaus, was obvious. Yet Xenophon consciously chose to remain on the Spartan s i d e . As a r e s u l t , he was e x i l e d from Athens, not as i s often sugges- ted because of h i s campaign w i t h Cyrus, but because of h i s act i o n s ^According to Xenophon ( H e l l . I l l , 5 , 1) T i t h r a u s t e s of Sa r d i s ; according to H e l l e n i c a Oxyrhynchia ( I I , 5 ) Pharnabazus of Phrygia, which i s supported by Polyaenus, I, 4 8 . 6Anab. V, 3 , 4 - 6 . 34 at Coronea. He then s e t t l e d on an estate i n S c y l l u s near Olym- p i a , which he received from the Spartans. That Xenophon should suddenly t u r n h i s back on h i s home when only a few years before d u r i n g the a n a b a s i s 9 he was proud that he was an Athenian r e q u i r e s explanation. Why d i d he t u r n t o v i o - lence a g a i n s t h i s own state? A p a r t i a l answer may l i e i n the h o s t i l i t y that he had faced at Athens and i n h i s own d i s i l l u - sionment with the Athenian c o n s t i t u t i o n . This answer, however, 'I t h i n k Xenophon's e x i l e must be placed a f t e r the B a t t l e of Coronea, f o r i n Anab. V, 3 , 7 immediately a f t e r the d i s c u s - s i o n concerning the deposit l e f t w i t h Megabyzus before the b a t t l e Xenophon says, 'E-rcei,6ri 6* ecpeuyev 6 Sevocpwv, Megabyzus returned t o him the deposit . I f eueidii i s temporal and means "When Xenophon was i n e x i l e , " then h i s e x i l e must have taken place a f t e r Coronea. I f on the other hand ineibri i s c a u s a l , "Since Xenophon was i n e x i l e , " i t i n d i c a t e s that e x i l e causes Megabyzus to b r i n g the deposit t o Xenophon i n S c y l l u s . Instead of one of the expected a l t e r n a t i v e s , death or a safe r e t u r n , e x i l e has r e s u l t e d from the B a t t l e of Coronea. In e i t h e r case the b a t t l e , h i s e x i l e and the r e t u r n of the deposit are a l l l i n k e d i n Xenophon's mind. Although Anab. I l l , 1, 5-7 mentions another p o s s i b l e reason f o r h i s e x i l e and i s used as evidence of an e a r l i e r date, I consider t h i s passage t o be consistent with one of the ba s i c aims of h i s l a t e r work. See i n f r a 56. ^Anab. V, 3 , 7. 9Anab. I l l , 1, 45. denies the insights that he received concerning the treatment of one's enemies during the. excursion with the Ten Thousand. I think that a better and more complete answer l i e s in an exami- nation of the Cyropaedia, which he produced shortly after these events. Xenophon had seen the luxury, of Persia and compared i t with the poverty of the Greeks. He realized that the Greeks as fighting men were far superior to the barbarians. He was also aware that the Greeks neutralized their superiority because of internal strife and disunity. Since he had fought and marched with the Greeks of other states he had lost his parochial view- point. He wanted a l l Greece to be united in the quickest and best way possible. In Agesilaus he f e l t that he had found the man who could best bring about p o l i t i c a l unity and also conduct a successful campaign against Persia. In the victory of Age- silaus at Coronea, Xenophon must have had his hopes strengthened. It was after this that he produced the C y r o p a e d i a , t o lay out what seemed to him the ideal form of government for the Hellenic world torn by parochialism, namely a beneficent::* monarchy. l uThe exact date of the writing of the Cyropaedia is unknown. That i s was written after Xenophon had opportunity to observe the Spartan system is likely, since Book I seems to be a description of the Spartan training for boys. That Xenophon wrote the work before he became disillusioned with tyranny (about 370, see infra 48-50) is obvious. Also see supra 30 note 38. 36 In t h i s work Xenophon s t a t e s that h i s i n t e r e s t i n Cyrus i s based on the f a c t that TOOOUTOV dirjveyncv E L ? TO apxetv av$pu>7Kov He a t t r i b u t e s Cyrus*> success to f o u r t h i n g s — h i s c u l t i v a t i o n of es t a b l i s h e d r e l i g i o n , h i s m i l i t a r y t r a i n i n g , h i s humane treatment of a l l men and h i s d e d i c a t i o n t o philosophy. In accordance w i t h the nature of e s t a b l i s h e d r e l i g i o n , he co n s t a n t l y prayed 'EaTta TxaTpipa x a l A t l TtaTp^tf). He was guided by omens. He never under- took an important campaign without s a c r i f i c i n g to the gods. F i n - a l l y , when he had conquered, he maintained h i s worship of Zeus and the other gods."^ The motivation of h i s r e l i g i o u s l i f e f o l l o w s : TOUC; :6e T i a p e x o v T a ? e a u T O u s evouuae ndXtaT *av inX TOC xa\a x a l aya$a enatpetv,: erceiuep apx<*>v ^jv auTwy, et'- auTog eauTOv CTCL- 6etHvuetv netpwTO TOU? ocpxouevoK rcdvTwv udXicrra HeHoan'nu.evov TTI a p £ T T | . ^ ...OUTU) 6r) YLYVWOHWV iipu)TOv uev TOC nepl TOUS fi $eou$ uicXXov EwxovouvTa ETiEdeinvuev eauTOv ev TOUT(*J T U xpovtp, ETIEI Eu6atLioveaT£pos r j v . ^ Thus h i s r e l i g i o u s example was to d i r e c t h i s subjects to be naXol naya^ot. Cyrus, as has already been pointed out, was t r a i n e d i n regimental f a s h i o n s i m i l a r to t h a t of the Spartans. 1 2 C y r . I, 6, 1; I I I , 3, 58; V I I , 1 , 26; V I I , 5, 57; V I I I , 7, 2. Greek r e l i g i o n d i d not have an extreme sense of i t s own uniqueness and thus a Greek would simply apply the customary names to f o r e i g n e q u i v a l e n t s ; c f . Herodotus, Book I I . 1 3 C y r . I , 6 , 1; I I , 4, 19- l 4Cy_r. V I I I , 3 , 11, 12. 15 Cyr. V I I I , 1, 21. l 6 C y r . V I I I , 1, 23. 37 He also practised for war in the way that was considered the 1 7 18 best, ' by hunting. He developed his men for war by putting them through exercises designed to make them perspire and by 19 taking them on the hunt. 20 Cyrus then set up an elaborate military system. The reason for this is clear from one of his speeches: ... 5 6* av aauvxaxxa f), ava'yxTi xauxa a e l Tipdynaxa i t a p e x e i v The result of the pyramidal structure of command that is used in Cyrus* army is discipline and a transmission of honourable military s k i l l s through the example of the leaders. e~ From these elaborate military preparations come two posi- tive benefits. In addition to presenting the obvious military- superiority of Cyrus' troops, Xenophon emphasizes that Cyrus accumulated knowledge that enabled him to form a government, bureaucratic in nature. As a result of this bureaucracy Cyrus had centralized a l l the administrative functions, waxe x a l xtp Kupw e y e v e x o o X c y o i s dtaXeyojievtp |it)6ev xwv caxeCwv axnLieX^xa)? e x e i v . Military experience, then, produced a careful and com- plete ruler. 1 7Cyr. I, 2, 10. l 8Cyr. I, 4, 15- 1 9-cyr. II, 1, 20-22; VIII, 1 , 34. 2 CV. V, 1, 20-28. 2 1Cyr. IV, 5, 37. 2 2Cyr. II, 1, 30, 31 and II, 2, 28. 23Cyr. VIII, 1, 14, 15. See Neal Wood, "Xenophon's Theory of Leadership," Class, et Med., XXV (I964) 33-66. 38 Cyrus a l s o possessed the q u a l i t y of p h i l a n t h r o p i a . Through the e x e r c i s e of t h i s q u a l i t y he won the a l l e g i a n c e of h i s f e l l o w countrymen 2^ who l a t e r became the b a s i s of h i s powerful army.2'' Cyrus a l s o sought t o i n c u l c a t e t h i s q u a l i t y i n h i s s o l d i e r s . In one of h i s speeches concerning t h e i r conduct he says of the con- f i s c a t i o n of an enemy's property, ouxouv & 6 i x i a yt e£exe o x i av exnxe, a X X a ^ X a v S p w u t q s v o u x ' &qpatpriaea^e, r\v x i eaxe exeuv abxovq • Cyrus' p h i l a n t h r o p i a i s based on enlightened s e l f - i n t e r e s t . He e x h i b i t s t h i s t r a i t as the best way t o remove enmities and i l l - w i l l , whether t h i s concerns the nations that h i s army conquers or h i s own personal sa f e t y . Tcpulxov ixkv yap 6toe & e l x o u x p o v o u cptXay^pountav xfis 4>UXT)S &q e 6 u v a x o LiaXuaxa eve<pdv i C e v , r i y o u n e v o s , toarcep ou pd6uov e a x i cpLXetv xovq n i a e i v 6oHoCvxa$ ou6 * e u v o e t v xoCs xaxovoic;, ouxw x a l xol>s y vwa^evxa? <piXoOai x a l euvoouaiv, oux av 6 u v a a $ a u u t a e u a ^ a u tmb xwv cpiXeia&ai r ) Y ° u ^ £ V U ) V ^ As a r e s u l t , f i r s t Cyrus obtains the w i l l i n g obedience of h i s subordinates. One of these, Chrysantes, addresses h i s f e l l o w - commanders and urges them to obey Cyrus and t o o f f e r themselves f o r whatever s e r v i c e Cyrus may need them. The motivation f o r t h i s i s sta t e d at the beginning of h i s speech: o f xe yap naxepes rcpovoouat xwv Tiai6u)v OTOJO? Ltifaoxe auxous x<rya$a ETILXEt4>ei • 2 4 C y r . I , 4, 1. 2 5 C y r . I I , 1, 19. 2 6 C y r . V I I , 5, 73- 2 7 C y r . V I I I , 2, 1. 39 Kupoq te U.01 6 O H E L vuv O U U PO U X E U E L V T j u t v icp' GOV uaXuax av euoaiuovouvTec; 6iaTEA.cap.ev. Second, Cyrus achieves a l a s t i n g fame i n which the f a c t t h a t he was<piAav-&pum6TaTQS i n s p i r i t i s t o l d i n s t o r y and s celebrated i n song uno TUJV pappapwv C T U x a i vuv. Cyrus i s a l s o c e l e b r a t e d i n song because he i s cpi\ou.a$£o'TaToc,. This q u a l i t y i s demonstrated when Cyrus engages i n a long d i a - logue w i t h h i s f a t h e r concerning the importance of r e l i g i o u s co-oservance, the p r a c t i c a l expression and value of beneficence, the best kinds of m i l i t a r y t r a i n i n g and t a c t i c s (when i t i s best to a t t a c k the enemy, and how to take advantage of the ene- my*s weakness). S. I . Pease^l has, among other t h i n g s , analysed the v a r i o u s types of b a t t l e s i n which Xenophon sets f o r t h the t a c t i c s i n v o l v e d . These i n c l u d e the open b a t t l e f i e l d (7 ,^1) , siege (7, 5) , b o r d e r - r a i d s ; (;1, 4 ) , mountain-fighting (3, 2 ) , and n i g h t - f i g h t i n g (3, 3 - 4 , 2 ) . Many of these are preceded or followed by d i s c u s s i o n between Cyrus and some of h i s c l o s e s t a d v i s e r s and f r i e n d s i n which the a c t i o n s undertaken are d i s c u s - sedv, While these can hardly be considered as examples of p h i l o - s o p h i c a l l i t e r a t u r e of the P l a t o n i c type, the f a c t that many of these matters are set f o r t h i n dialogue form impresses one with 2 g C y r . V I I I , 1 , 1 . 2 9 C y r . I , 2, 1 . 3°Cyr.- I , 6, 2 . 31 J S. I . Pease, "Xenophon's Cyropaedia f the Compleat General," C l a s s . Journ.. XXIX (1933) 436-40. the i d e a t h a t Cyrus was a r a t i o n a l , c a l c u l a t i n g , p e r c e p t i v e and s e l f - c o n t r o l l e d man who r e f u s e d to act without g i v i n g h i s p o l i - c i e s c a r e f u l c o n s i d e r a t i o n . While t h i s type o f d i s c u s s i o n i s of great importance, what makes Cyrus p e c u l i a r l y f i t t o r u l e i s that he surpasses a l l h i s f e l l o w s i n f o r e s i g h t and i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t y . The e n t i r e d i a - l o g u e 3 2 between Cyrus and h i s f a t h e r assumes Cyrus' s u p e r i o r r a t i o n a l i t y . Near the end the d i s c u s s i o n t u r n s t o Cyrus' r e l a - t i o n s h i p w i t h h i s s u b j e c t s . H i s f a t h e r (who i s o b v i o u s l y g i v i n g Xenophontean advice) says, eu 6e XP*0 n a l T O U T O ei6evai, O T L onoaou? av a£cca<j aoi nzC&ea&ai, n a l e x e t v o i Ttavxe? a^uiaCTOuau ae upb eauxwv 0ou\euea$ac. A man who wishes t o r u l e s u c c e s s f u l l y and obtain the obedience of h i s people must have g r e a t e r wisdom than most men s i n c e t h i s i s what h i s countrymen expect of him. Nev e r t h e l e s s t h i s does not f r e e the monarch to make a r b i t - r a r y d e c i s i o n s as he p l e a s e s . In a d d i t i o n t o the r e s t r a i n t s placed upon him by h i s d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h h i s a d v i s e r s , he makes h i s d e c i s i o n s w i t h the law as h i s guide. T h i s i s the advice t h a t h i s mother g i v e s the young Cyrus concerning the p r i n c i p l e of k i n g s h i p t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h e s P e r s i a n monarchy from Median tyranny. 3 2 C y r . I, 6, 1-46. 3 3 C y r . I, 6, 42. 41 nal 6 ab? naxT)p upanos x a xexaYueva uev no L E U xfl noXei, x a xexayu-eva 6e \au|3(xvei, uexpov 6e aux£ oux h tyvxh aXX* 6 vou-o? e a x C v . ^ The reason that v6u.o<g i s to be Cyrus' (and the ideal king's) guide i s that it: adduces the cooperation; of the people of the nation. Again we return to the dialogue and this time note What part of his father's advice Cyrus repeats. xouc; 6e a d e u t x a euxouxvou? ououoc; eqprja^a etxbc; e i v a t itapa $ewv a x u x e t v waraep n a l uapa av^pWi ixwv/aTipaKxeLv xou? napdvoua 6eou ,evous. Thus regard for vou-og is essential i f one i s to achieve anything among men and becomes the key to the ideal ruler's success. The successful monarch, then, displays religious reverence, philan- thropia, military excellence and intellectual superiority within the framework of vouoc;. As the embodiment of good government Cyrus i s an exemplary individual. This kind of polity was espoused by Xenophon because of i t s great stability. 3^* He had begun by reflecting on the many revo- lutions that take place and then noticed the inability of masters even in private homes to maintain their authority. In contrast, onw man, Cyrus, ruled not only his own household but a vast empire. As a result Xenophon says, fivayHaCoueSa Liexavoeiv p.T) ouxe xoov aduvdxwv ouxe xwv x a^ e T O2v epvwv f) xb dv&poonwv apxetv, r\v xe? eutaxau-evu)? xouxo rcpdxxr) • ^ 3 4 c v r . I, 3, 18. 3 5Cyr. I, 6 , 6 . 3 6Cyr. I, 1, 1. 3 7Cyr. I, 1,3. 42 The adverb i%io%a\i£vu)<; i n d i c a t e s that the author intends to describe one who does know how t o provide s t a b i l i t y i n h i s r u l e . As a r e s u l t of the foregoing c o n s i d e r a t i o n , I t h i n k t h a t we can now give a reasonable and unwavering answer to the question, "Why d i d Xenophon f i g h t against h i s home-state at Coronea?" Wearied of the c o n t i n u a l q u a r r e l i n g and p r o v i n c i a l i s m , Xenophon f e l t that the only hope f o r the Greek s t a t e s was t o set up the most s t a b l e form of government he could i m a g i n e — a beneficent':- monarchy. Agesilaus momentarily seemed to f i t t h i s i d e a l and so Xenophon r e j e c t e d h i s mother-state f o r the good of a l l Greece. No d i s c u s s i o n of the Cyropaedia i s complete without exami- nation of the l a s t chapter. Xenophon s t a t e s t h a t the purpose of h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s the cdis cove ry and 'presentation.,of; a man who e x c e l l e d i n governing. 3^ Yet i n the l a s t part of h i s work he says: iyui uev 6*n o i u a i cntep uue&eunv aneipyda^ai n o t . cpnLil yap n£paa<; n a l T O U S O-UV auToC? x a l aaeBeaTepous uepl $eou$ nal avooawTepouc; Ttepl avyyevei*; n a l * a6txu)Tepous Ttepl T O U S a M o u s nal a v a v 6 p o T E p o u s TOC etc. T O V no\euov vuv ri upoa^ev a r c o d e S e i x ^ a i • ^ To prove that the Persians of h i s day are i n f e r i o r to those of the past does not seem t o be the purpose of Books I - V I I I , 7, 28, which are c l e a r l y presenting Cyrus and a l l the Persians i n a most favourable l i g h t . Only the l a s t chapter i n d i c a t e s anything dero- gatory about the Persians and t h i s i n d i r e c t c o n t r a d i c t i o n to ^°Cyr. I , 1, 6. 3 9 C y r . V I I I , 8, 27. 4 3 s t a t e m e n t s o f t h e p r e c e d i n g p a r t o f the book . Xenophon i n t r o - duces h i s r e c o r d o f t h e P e r s i a n s ' d e g e n e r a t e t e n d e n c i e s w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t : no\v 6e n a l -cd6e xe<^P°ves v u v e t c a . ^ I n c o n t r a s t t he i n s t i t u t i o n s and p r a c t i c e s o f C y r u s i n t h e p r e v i - ous p a r t o f t he work a r e f r e q u e n t l y s a i d t o endure O U T W x a l v u v A1 ext . These c o n t r a d i c t o r y s t a t e m e n t s can be r e s o l v e d by t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e r e i s a l o n g t i m e - l a p s e between one adve rb ((vuv); and the o t h e r . Tha t t e n o r t w e n t y y e a r s have pa s sed i s p o s s i b l e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h i s does no t seem t o me t o be s u f f i - c i e n t . The re i s an o b v i o u s change o f p u r p o s e . What t h e n a t u r e o f t h i s change i s , why and when i t c a m e a b o u t , must be the s u b j e c t o f ou r f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n . 4 0 C y r . V I I I , 8 , 4 . 4 1 C y r . I , 3 , 2 ; I , 4 , 2 7 ; I I , 4 , 2 0 ; I I I , 3 , 2 6 ; I V , 2 , I V , 3 , 2 3 ; V I I I , 1 , 6 ; V I I I , 1 , 3 7 ; V I I I , 2 , 4 ; V I I I , 2 , 7 ; V I I I , 4 , 5 ; V I I I , 6 , 1 6 . Not one o f t h e s e pas sages i n d i c a t e s a n y t h i n g d e r o g a t o r y abou t " t he p r e s e n t - d a y P e r s i a n . " CHAPTER IV XENOPHON AND TYRANNY After the Battle of Coronea, Xenophon continued his f r i e n d - ship with Agesilaus and encouraged him i n the pursuit of a united Greece. U n t i l the King's Peace of 386 Agesilaus was the dominant figure on the Greek p o l i t i c a l s c e n e . I t was also during t h i s time that Thebes t r i e d to reestablish the Boeotian League and thus incurred the hatred of Agesilaus, Xenophon and, probably, the whole of Greece. 3 Xenophon's d i s l i k e of Thebes was based on the fact that she was one of the main causes of the s t r i f e that f o l - lowed both Coronea i n 394 and the King's Peace of 386. As a res u l t , Xenophon could view only with great d i s l i k e those who auvexuk 6e pouX.Eu6u.evoi, . . . omos av TTJV fiyenovCav X d p o i e v TTJS *EXXa6 since they disrupted the plan that was uppermost in Xenophon's mind: to bring an end to the inter n a l s t r i f e among the Hellenes and to t h e i r s e l f - d e s t r u c t i o n . I t was because of t h i s disruptive work of the Thebans, the rebuilding of Athenian strength and the a c t i v i t y of Conon on behalf of the Persians, that Sparta and Agesilaus no more than held t h e i r own against t h e i r antagonists.^ But when Antalcidas managed to negotiate a peace with King •'-Hell. IV, 5, 1. 2 H e l l . V, 1, 33. 3Henry, Greek H i s t o r i c a l 4 H e l l . VII, 1, 33. 5 H e l l . V, 1, 36. Writing, 207,208. 45 Artaxerxes i n which the Greek s t a t e s were to be autonomous. and Athens was p a c i f i e d i n that she was allowed t o r e t a i n Lemnos, Imbros and Scyros, Xenophon says t h a t the Spartans uoXu euiHudeorepoi f§.¥;£vO^T^HSitYtln becoming the champion of the King's Peace Sparta obtained c o n t r o l of the i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l p o l i c y of the Greek s t a t e s . Through making the other s t a t e s autonomous Sparta des- d troyed the Boeotian League and much of the power of Athens. Thus Sparta was now i n a p o s i t i o n to give l e a d e r s h i p to a l l Greece i n d e a l i n g w i t h P e r s i a and Agesilaus i n p a r t i c u l a r could, as king of Sparta, go about the business of making a l l the Greeks favourable to him and of f u l f i l l i n g the expectations that Xenophon expresses i n the Cyropaedia. This was Xenophon's hope as he viewed the King's Peace. I t appears t h a t , at f i r s t , Agesilaus t r i e d to f o l l o w the p o l i c y of t r e a t i n g those who had been h o s t i l e before the Peace 9 of 3&*6 w i t h kindness i n accordance w i t h the i d e a l p o l i c y that Xenophon sets f o r t h i n the C y r o p a e d i a . F o r when the Spartans 6 H e l l . V, 1, 31. . ? H e l l . V, 1, 36. That Xenophon m i s c a l c u l a t e d the amount of antagonism that the Peace evoked among the Greek s t a t e s i s obvious. Cf. I s o c r a t e s , Panegyricus 115-122. g H e l l . V, 1, 36. 9 H e l l . V-j.,2, 1-3. "^The s t o r y of Panthea i s one of Xenophon's most v i v i d i l l u s t r a t i o n s of the advantages of treating a captured enemy w i t h d i g n i t y and respect, V, 1, 2-17; VI, 1, 45. 46 set out t o c h a s t i s e the Mantineans, Agesilaus excused himself 1 9 from l e a d i n g an ex p e d i t i o n of revenge. Gradually, however, as the Spartans continued t h e i r arrogant and vengeful p o l i c y , Age- s i l a u s was a l s o drawn i n t o the turmoil"'" 3 and, instead of a t t a c h - in g the other Greek s t a t e s t o Sparta through kind and d i g n i f i e d treatment, he a l i e n a t e d many Hellenes by h e l p i n g t o set up pro- Spartan o l i g a r c h i e s i n se v e r a l of the states."'" 4 I t seems that i t was during t h i s period of increased harsh- ness on the part of the Spartans t h a t Xenophon gr a d u a l l y became aware of some of the d i f f i c u l t i e s t h a t are present i n a monarchy. A f t e r d e s c r i b i n g the defeat of the Spartans at Olynthus i n 3^1 he suggeststhat men should never c h a s t i s e anyone, even s l a v e s , i n anger, noMdxLS yap nal deaito-cai OPYLCOLIEVOL LIELCW nana £7ta$ov f) e n o t n a a v . . . . TJ LIEV Y«P opyt) anpovontov, TJ 6E YVWLITJ axonsL ou6ev TJTTOV LIT) TL na&j) r) otvjiq $\&(L>r\ T L TOUS TIO\EULOUS . 1^ This censure echoes the p o l i c y already enunciated i n the Cyropaedia that i n d e a l i n g w i t h one's enemies one must seek above a l l t o avoid shaste .•arid" thoughtlessness. n H e l l . v, 2, 1. 1 2 H e l l . v, 2, 3 . 1 3 H e l l . v, 3 , 13. ^ H e l l . v, 3 , 25. 1 5 H e l l . v, 3 , 7. 47 A f t e r the King's Peace the Spartans achieved a p o s i t i o n i n which the Thebans were completely i n t h e i r power since they held the Theban a c r o p o l i s , the C o r i n t h i a n s were f o r c e d t o support Sparta, the A r g i v e s were humbled, the Athenians were without 1 6 a l l i e s and t h e i r own u n f a i t h f u l a l l i e s had been punished. Xenophon ends the account of these Spartan achievements w i t h the statement, TtavTobiaatv f̂ 6rj xaXws x a l &a<pa\uk TJ apxTi E 6 O X E I a u x o t s x a x e a x e u d a ^ a i .. That Xenophon questioned the v a l i d i t y of t h i s s u p e r f i c i a l t r a n q u i l l i t y seems obvious from the statement that, i n t r o d u c e s the next s e c t i o n , i n which he l a y s the blame f o r Sparta's d e f e a t a t L e u c t r a i n 371 on the Lacedaemonians f o r f a i l - i n g t o abide by the King's Peace, which guaranteed that the Greek 17 s t a t e s should remain autonomous. ' Xenophon w r i t e s , noWa (lev ouv av xiq s x o t x a l aWa kiyziv x a l 'EX.X.nvtxoc x a l f J a p p a p t x d , & e o l O U T E TCOV aaepouvxcov O U T E T W V dvoata notouvTwv du.£\ouat* v u v ye u.T]v \ E £ W TOC itpoxeuu-eva. A a x E d a t i i o v t o t T E yap o t o n o a a v T e s a u T o v o u o u ? e d a E t v xa<; noXeiq TTJV E V ©TiPatg d x p o i t o X a v xaTaaxovTEs u n * auTtov u,6vu)v Twv d6 txTj^EVTcav E x o X d a ^ n a a v . ifx *; •>¥ By u s i n g words such as d v o a t a , ddtxrj'&evTUJv and Exo\do$Tiaav he i n d i c a t e s t h a t the Thebans had been t r e a t e d u n j u s t l y , t h a t the g u i l t l a y with the Spartans and th a t s e i z i n g the Theban a c r o p o l i s l 6 H e I l . V, 3, 2 7 . 1 7 H e l l . V, 4, 1. Cf. H e l l . V I I , 3, 6-12 where there i s a severe indictment of one-man r u l e . 7 48 was an act of i r r e v e r e n c e . That Xenophon's condemnation a p p l i e s not only to Sparta g e n e r a l l y but to Agesilaus i n p a r t i c u l a r becomes evident—when one reads the account of Sparta's i n v a s i o n of Cadmea c a r e f u l l y . Here Xenophon mentions s p e c i f i c a l l y that A g e s i l a u s supported Phoebidas' i n v a s i o n of Cadmea i n faeefofothe 18 anger of the Ephors and the m a j o r i t y of the c i t i z e n s . Thus there i s l i t t l e doubt that Xenophon disagreed w i t h Agesilaus over the p o l i c y followed a f t e r 386. As he saw the' mistreatment of the other Greek s t a t e s by Sparta and Agesilaus under the pre- t e x t of e n f o r c i n g the King's Peace, he became d i s i l l u s i o n e d w i t h h i s former i d e a l government and r e a l i z e d t h a t beneficent bone-man r u l e was perhaps an i m p r a c t i c a l i d e a l . I t was f o r t h i s reason th a t he wrote the Hiero. i n which he expresses h i s growing doubt about k i n g s h i p ( s i g n i f i c a n t l y Hiero i s a t y r a n t ) as the i d e a l 19 form of government i n a r a t h e r oblique way. 7 This work presents an imaginary conversation between the t y r a n t Hiero and the poet 20 Simonides. L. Strauss has pointed out that the use of conver- s a t i o n puts the work i n the realm of p h i l o s o p h i c a l l i t e r a t u r e , compels a c o n f r o n t a t i o n of the wise man and the p u p i l , and leads one to consider the question of the r e l a t i o n s h i p of theory t o p r a c t i c e . I t a l s o f u r n i s h e s proof of the unjust t y r a n t ' s unhappi- ness since the t y r a n t himself i n d i c t s . t y r a n n y i n the f i r s t l 8 H e l l . V, 2, 25-32. "^He i s oblique because Agesilaus and the Spartans had befriended him and i t would have been r a t h e r incongruent with the i n t e r e s t s of Xenophon to speak c l e a r l y . 2 0 L . Strauss, On Tyranny 33. 49 21 p o r t i o n . I t does not prove t h a t a beneficent t y r a n t i s happy. 22 I t only promises. The work then places an a c t u a l s i t u a t i o n opposite an i d e a l one; we know tha t the former e x i s t s . The ba s i s upon which an appeal t o the i d e a l one-man r u l e i s made to Hiero i s that i t w i l l - give him greater pleasure and more 23 honour and l o v e . A p o l i t i c a l conversation that one would expect t o be d e a l i n g w i t h such ideas as v i r t u e , j u s t i c e and government i n contrast emphasizes the pleasure or pain a r i s i n g from the a c t s of the r u l e r . This demonstrates t h a t on a prac- t i c a l l e v e l the one-man government i s motivated by an i n t r o - spective kind of s e l f i s h n e s s — a l e v e l at which appeals to a l o f t y i d e a l such as v i r t u e or j u s t i c e are u s e l e s s . Neverthe- l e s s , a wise man must t r y t o improve the government and thus Simonides appeals as best he can to Hiero by f i r s t making him aware of h i s wretched l o t and then s e t t i n g before him the a l t e r n a t i v e t h a t , since r u l e r s are able noXKanXdaia L IEV 6laTtpdxTOv- T E S i c p e X E t v , 2 ^ i t i s l i k e l y t hat they n a l TCOXU LICXWOV cptXeCa&ai i c 25 TCJV L O U O J T U J V . The advice of Simonides i s l i s t e n e d to by Hiero but a f t e r he has heard i t he does not say anything. The i m p l i c a t i o n i s ^-'-Hiero 1-8, 13. 2 2 H i e r o 11, H . 2 3 H i e r o 11, 12. 2 4 H i e r o 3, 7- 2 5 I b i d . 50 that he b e l i e v e s Simonides* advice to be f u l l of wisdom f o r he acknowledges that Simonides i s a wise man.2^ But, as A. Kojeve has pointed o u t , 2 7 he does not say t h a t he i s going to f o l l o w Simonides's advice and hence we assume that he i s not going t o do anything about i t . Simonides has set the good tyranny oppo- s i t e the bad one. I t i s up t o Hiero t o ask Simonides how he could maintain himself i n power without having recourse t o v i o - lence while g a i n i n g x^pi-S by means of appropriate measures. Hiero does not do t h i s . By p o r t r a y i n g Hiero as r e j e c t i n g good advice, Xenophon f u r t h e r i n d i c a t e s that good tyranny that i s not l e g a l r u l e but nevertheless r u l e over w i l l i n g subjects (as i n the Cyropaedia) and thus dependent on the character of the t y r a n t i s achieved w i t h great d i f f i c u l t y . 2 6 H i e r o 1, 1. 2 7 A l e x a n d r e Kojeve, "Tyranny and Wisdom," i n L. Strauss, On Tyranny, 144. CHAPTER V XENOPHON'S DEFENCE In 371 a f t e r the B a t t l e of Leuctra S c y l l u s f e l l i n t o the hands of the Elaeans and Xenophon went t o l i v e i n Corinth.''" As a r e s u l t of t h i s b a t t l e Athens and Sparta moved c l o s e r together p o l i t i c a l l y and a r e c o n c i l i a t i o n seems to have taken place between him and Athens since h i s son died while f i g h t i n g i n the Athenian c a v a l r y i n 362. Because he had observed that Agesilaus had f a i l e d to check the r i s i n g power of Thebes, Xenophon was d r i v e n to seek a new s o l u t i o n t o the problem of Greek d i s u n i t y . As he considered h i s own experience (perhaps i n a n a l y s i n g what had made i t p o s s i b l e f o r the Ten Thousand t o act i n harmony) he concluded t h a t u n i t y had been the r e s u l t of the combined l e a d e r - ship of an Athenian, h i m s e l f , 3 and a Spartan, Cheirdisophos. As he g e n e r a l i z e d from h i s own experience, he must have seen a ray x D i o g . L a e r t . , 2, 53,and 54. 2 l b i d . ^ T h a t t h i s might be an exaggerated r o l e i s d o u b t f u l when one r e f l e c t s t h a t Xenophon rose to a p o s i t i o n of prominence a f t e r the Greek s t r a t e g o i had been k i l l e d . J . Roy ("The Mer- cenaries of Cyrus" H i s t o r i a XVI [1967] 293) defends the p o s i - t i o n of Xenophon i n the Anabasis by drawing a p a r a l l e l from Anab. I I , 2, 5, where Clearchus held the p o s i t i o n of primus i n t e r pares not because he had been elected but because h i s colleagues saw t h a t he was a n a t u r a l leader. 52 of hope for a l l Greece, Perhaps, under the combined leadership of Athens and Sparta, Greece could achieve p o l i t i c a l harmony. In order to convince the Athenians of what was for Xeno- phon a new p o l i t i c a l ideal, i t was essential that he make a defence acceptable to them. About 370 he undertook the writing of the Memorabilia. 4 That he began i t as an apology of Socrates is clear. Part of this apology seems to be that Socrates' tea- ching was protreptic in that he always led his true students to arete, before he made them masters of dialectic. He did this mainly through his knowledge of religion. According to the pre- sentation i n the Memorabilia, Socrates believed in a kind of a l l - pervasive divinity, yvwaet T O $ e i o v O T U T O O O U T O V x a l T O I OGT O V e a T t v waS* aiia TKXVTCX opav nal udvTa acxoueiv x a l navxaxoG napetvat x a l aua ridvTwv £Hi|ie\eCa&ai.. 6 T n i s divinity, when worshipped vout^ itoXewg... •7 XOCTQC 6uvdf*uyi,: , wi l l counsel man in matters that are unknown to him. By setting forth these ideas as the basis of Socrates' religion, Xenophon makes him a supporter of traditional Greek religion in order to answer the charge that he did not believe in the gods of the state. M̂em. I l l , 5, 4 anticipates a Boeotian invasion. This was highly unlikely between 403 and approximately 3 71 because Thebes and Athens were nominally involved in intrigue against Sparta (Hell. VI, 3, 1)« Hence one must assume that publication was after 371. %em. I, 1, 1. M̂em. I, 4, 18. Socrates i s speaking to Aristodemus. ?Mem. IV, 3, 16. Cf. I, 3, 1 and 3. 8Mem. I, 4, 18. 53 Xenophon makes another point i n Socrates* defence. He had a l s o been accused of b r i n g i n g new gods i n t o the s t a t e . The extent to which t h i s charge was true according t o the Memorabilia was t h a t Socrates' psyche had a greater share i n to -ftetov, because of which he had s p e c i a l guidance a xe XP*1 rcoteiv x a l a \ir\. Since a l l men share to some degree i n xb $ e C o v , ^ Socrates' r e l i g i o n i s presented as the normal r e l i g i o n of a l l the Greeks. That Socrates experienced s p e c i a l guidance i n comparison w i t h other Greeks emphasizes the paradox of Socrates' r e l i g i o u s views. His r e l i g i o n i s at the same time s i m i l a r t o the common r e l i g i o n of most Greeks and yet s u p e r i o r . In c o n s i d e r i n g the purpose to be served by these r e l i g i o u s views, we f i n d Xenophon's defence l i n k e d w i t h t h a t of Socrates. I t seems that a man of a b i l i t y could be kept from i n j u s t i c e and e v i l - d o i n g by the proper awareness of the gods. For Xenophon says of Socrates: xb uxv ouv Xexxtxobs x a l npaxxtxous x a l unxavtxou? ytyvea^at xous oruvovxa? oux ecrJteu6ev, aXXa upoxepov xouxwv coexo xP^vat auxppoauvriv auxoCs Lyyzv£a&ai» xou? yap aveu xou awppoveCv xauxa 6uvau.evou? aStxtoxepouc; xe x a l duvaxwxepou? xaxoupyeCv ?Mem. IV, 3, 12. 10Mem. IV, 3, 14. 54 EVOLUCEV elvoa. npaJxov nev 6r\ uepl ^eoug enetpaTO awcppovas uoteuv tous auvovxas. Conversely, i f someone has been made auxppwv tiepl $eous (prudent concerning t r a d i t i o n a l Greek r e l i g i o n ) by Socrates (and Xenophon takes care t o point out that he himself heard the conversation concerning the gods recorded i n IV, 3, 2-18) such a person i s obviously 6txat6xepos xal duvawrepos aya^oupyetv. The establishment of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p between Xenophon and Socrates could hardly be considered as a defence of Socrates (unless there was a l s o a defence of Xenophon) since Xenophon had been i n disgrace at Athens f o r approximately twenty years before he wrote the Memorabilia. But should there be a defence of Xenophon and should h i s e x i l e be repealed (although, i n f a c t , brought about by p o l i t i c a l pressure) Socrates would i n d i r e c t l y be j u s t i f i e d i n the eyes of the common people. The defence of one was p a r t of the defence of the other. Then the question whether the p u b l i c a t i o n of the Memorabilia, the H e l l e n i c a , and 11Mem. IV, 3, 1 - 2 . 0u>9pu)v uepl "deous means "of a sound mind, prudent, d i s c r e e t concerning the gods." Since Socrates i s t r y i n g t o make men thus, Xenophon must mean awypuv i n the Soc- r a t i c r e l i g i o u s sense discussed above. 12 The date of the p u b l i c a t i o n of the H e l l e n i c a depends on a statement of Xenophon t h a t , a f t e r the death of Alexander of Pherae i n 358, Tisiphonus held the p o s i t i o n of r u l e r axpt ov obe b \6yoq eypctcpeTO ( H e l l . IV, 4, 38). 55 the Anabasis^- 3 came before or a f t e r Xenophon's e x i l e was rescinded i s unimportant. Of importance i s the f a c t that the common people of Athens read them. -̂ The Anabasis was w r i t t e n a f t e r 394 since Xenophon had not yet been e x i l e d at th a t time and reference i s made to bis--"-exile i n V I I , 7, 57. A. Lesky, A H i s t o r y of Greek L i t e r a t u r e . 6l£, suggests t h a t the p u b l i s h i n g of the Anabasis can be put a f t e r 379 as i t assumes the withdrawal of the Spartan g a r r i s o n from Theban Cadmea; Anab. V I , 6, 9. Cf. H e l l . V, L. Joseph Kesk, "Die Tendenz der Xenophontischen Anabasis," Wien. Stud., X L I I I (1922- 23) I36- I46, suggests t h a t the best evidence f o r the p u b l i c a t i o n - • date, however, i s found i n the d e s c r i p t i o n of h i s estate at S c y l - l u s i n V, 3, 7 -13. In t h i s passage a l l the f e s t i v i t i e s c e l e b r a t e d there are described e i t h e r i n the imperfect or the a o r i s t tense. I f these a c t i v i t i e s p e r s i s t e d when t h i s passage was w r i t t e n , the use of these tenses would be i n a p p r o p r i a t e . The imperfects c l e a r - l y i n d i c a t e r e i t e r a t i v e a c t i v i t y previous t o the w r i t i n g of t h i s passage, and the a o r i s t s a c t i v i t y i n the past t h a t has stopped. There are a number of forms of ettai* (evetcru ,eo"Ttv[ 33) i n the pre- sent-tense. Most of these r e f e r t o the e s t a t e , which would natur- a l l y continue t o e x i s t even though Xenophon d i d not occupy the lan d . There i s a l s o one p e r f e c t , earnxe t which r e f e r s t o the a l t a r that was set up i n past time and i s probably s t i l l i n e x i s - tence at the time of w r i t i n g . From the foregoing i t seems c l e a r that Xenophon no longer occupied S c y l l u s when t h i s passage was w r i t t e n . Hence, the Anabasis must have been published a f t e r Leuctra (371). In a d d i t i o n I hope to show (see i n f r a 56-6O ) 56 In making h i s defence i n the Anabasis Xenophon p o i n t e d l y ignores h i s e x i l e f o r h i s part i n the B a t t l e of Coronea and h i n t s that i t was because of h i s excursion with Cyrus.14 Now there i s no doubt that any involvement w i t h the Persians would i r r i t a t e many of the people of Athens ( f o r they had supported Sparta i n the Peloponnesian War) but t h a t he had been i n the Spartan camp at Coronea would have been i n t o l e r a b l e . Therefore, he ca n d i d l y admits th a t he went w i t h the Per s i a n s ; not as a 15 mercenary, however, but as a f r i e n d of Proxenus. 7 His only that the work contains a p o l o g e t i c elements. C e r t a i n l y there would have been l i t t l e point i n p u b l i s h i n g such a document before 371 since I I I , 1, 5-7 h i n t s that Xenophon was p h i l o - Laconian and p u b l i c a t i o n would only have increased h o s t i l i t y toward him. A f t e r t h i s date, however, the t r e a t y between Athens and Sparta would have removed some of the stigma of being pro- Spartan. Cf. G. B. Nussbaum, The Ten Thousand, 5. For f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n see A. Kappelmacher, "Xenophon und Is o k r a t e s , " Wien. Stud., X L I I I (1922) 212-213; J . Morr, "Zum Sprachgebrauche Xeno- phons," Wien. Stud., XLVIII (1930) 11-24; and M. MacLaren, "Xenophon and Themistogenes," TAPA LXV (1934) 240-247- 14Anab. I l l , 1, 4-7- 1 5 I b i d . 17.7, .1, :..0?. 57 activity until the death of Cyrus is to f u l f i l l the customary 16 religious r i t u a l . Furthermore, Xenophon and the other Greeks 17 had been deceived about the purpose of the expedition. ' Only after the Battle of Cunaxa does Xenophon undertake to fight and then i t i s clearly for the Greeks against the Persians. One of the most striking things about his autobiography in the Anabasis i s his constant attendance to customary religious r i t u a l . F i r s t , we note that he set out on this expedition after he had offered sacrifices according to the prescription 18 of the Delphic Oracle. Again, we find that Xenophon and the generals dutifully set aside a tenth of the plunder for Apollo 19 of Delphi and Artemis of Ephesus. When the army has been con- taminated by an impious deed of a large body of men, i t i s at Xenophon's suggestion that i t is cleansed by the customary purification-rites. w Finally, before his last undertaking in the work (which i s , of course, successful), we find him sacri- * 21 f i c i n g whole swine T<V TtocTpitp vou-tp. In a l l this he i s obviously acting in accord with TOC rcepl $eous v6|n,u.a. 1 6Anab. I, 3 , 15, 16. 1 7Anab. I l l , 1, 10. l gAnab. I l l , 1, 8. 1 9 Anab. V, 3, 4. 2 0Anab. V, 7, 35. 2 1Anab. VII, 8, 5. 58 There i s , however, much more to Xenophon's r e l i g i o n than t h a t . He a l s o has a share of that p e c u l i a r d i v i n i t y a t t r i b u t e d to Socrates. During the course of the army's r e t u r n he i s g u i - ded by the gods i n a dream to p r e d i c t that the d i f f i c u l t s i t u a - 2 t i o n i n which the army f i n d s i t s e l f w i l l be favourably r e s o l v e d . Again, i n the midst of a d i f f i c u l t b a t t l e , a god r e v e a l s b a t t l e - 23 t a c t i c s to Xenophon through a n a t u r a l phenomenon. J As a r e s u l t of t h i s guiding genius Xenophon and h i s companions, o i orrcV -uov ':-&€u>v apxoLievot, have not erred i n p o l i c y , and achieve more honour than those who t a l k e d b o a s t f u l l y , as though possessing greater wisdom, made a t a c t i c a l e r r o r and su f f e r e d as a r e s u l t . 2 4 C l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o the idea of g u i d i n g genius i s Xenophon's a b i l i t y t o understand d i v i n a t i o n because of h i s constant a t t e n - dance at s a c r i f i c e s . In f a c t , even an a u t h o r i t y i n d i v i n a t i o n , S i l a n u s , & U - C X V T L S, d i d not dare t o d i s t o r t the omens when Xeno- 2cr> phon was l o o k i n g on. On the b a s i s of t h i s great knowledge of omens, Xenophon refused t o usurp the m i l i t a r y l e a d e r s h i p that r i g h t l y belonged to the Lacedaemonians;^ 0 he was forced to remain w i t h the army when i t reached the Hellespont, although he d e s i r e d 2 2Anab. IV, 3 , 8-13. Cf. a l s o I I I , 1, 11-25. 2 3Anab. V, 2 r 2 4 . 2 4Anab. V I , 3 , 18. 2 5Anab. V, 6, 29. 2 6Anab. VI, 1, 31. 59 27 t o go home; ' he refused t o hand over the armjr to Oleander, the governor of Byzantium 2^ (which undoubtedly would have caused d i f f i c u l t y f o r some members of the army, such as Agasias and perhaps those mercenaries who were from the s t a t e s f r i e n d l y to the Athenians a t t h a t t i m e ) ; and he d i d not remain w i t h Seuthes, the T h r a c i a n , 2 9 but went back i n t o I o n i a (where he l a t e r handed over the army to the Spartan, T h i b r o n ) . Some of these a c t s seem almost c o n t r a d i c t o r y . Some might have been the cause of i l l - w i l l a t Athens or Sparta. However, on the b a s i s of h i s s k i l l i n d i v i n a t i o n he must be exonerated, 3*^ f o r t h i s r e l i a n c e on the w i l l of the gods makes h i s l e a d e r s h i p f r e e from s e l f - i n t e r e s t and h i s a c t i o n s u n a s s a i l a b l e by a l l ' who a c t u a l l y b e l i e v e i n the gods and those who seem t o . Only those who are unconcerned t h a t they might appear impious would dare to harbour any i l l - w i l l toward Xenophon openly. Throughout the a c t u a l f i g h t i n g and d a i l y a c t i v i t y of the r e t u r n march i t seems to be Xenophon's purpose eu uoietv aWovq, Xenophon demonstrates t h i s most v i v i d l y i n h i s account of the soldier%'inquIry. i n t o the conduct of a l l the generals. 3"' - 27Anab. VI, 2, 15. 2 8 A n a b . VI, 6, 36. 2 9 A n a b . V I I , 6, 44. 3 0 G . B. Nussbaum, The Ten Thousand, 140-146, analyses the importance of the"higher frame" i n Xenophon's l e a d e r s h i p . Cf. Anab. V, 6, 28. 3 1 A n a b . V, 8, 2-11. 60 Here Xenophon, too, i s charged (with s t r i k i n g a s o l d i e r ) but i t i s c l e a r l y shown t h a t the moti v a t i o n f o r h i s a c t i o n i s h i s reverence f o r l i f e i n t h a t he forced one of h i s s o l d i e r s t o carry a wounded and dying man when he was about to bury him i n the snow. The r e b u t t a l of h i s accuser i s t h a t the man died l a t e r and, hence, he i m p l i e s that Xenophon struck him u n j u s t l y . To t h i s Xenophon gives the f o l l o w i n g r e p l y : x a l yap rjLieCs . . . wdcvxes aito^avouLieda" xouxou zfy* My*?* ouv e v e x a Cwvxa? T)u.as 6 e i x a x o p u x ^ v a u ; ^ 2 C l e a r l y i t was Xenophon's purpose that l i f e , although only a f l i c k e r , be preserved. This was the b a s i s of h i s a c q u i t t a l . This theme of h i s concern f o r others i s co n s t a n t l y r e i t e r a - ted throughout the work. F i n a l l y , i n the l a s t chapter, a f t e r the army has obtained a great deal of booty, Xenophon i s rewarded by those he has l e d , waxe i x a v b v x a l aXXov r\5r) eu Tiotetv .^Thus h i s p h i l a n t h r o p i a , which i s the b a s i s both of h i s a c q u i t t a l and com- mendation by those he l e d , becomes an i n t e g r a l part of h i s apology. In the H e l l e n i c a there i s a f u r t h e r defence of Xenophon's involvement w i t h the Ten Thousand. On t h e i r r e t u r n to the Hellespont the army under Thibron's l e a d e r s h i p had oppressed c e r t a i n Greek c i t i e s i n a manner i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e i r r e l a - t i o n s h i p as a l l i e s . This had caused some c r i t i c i s m of Xenophon f o r handing over the army to T h i b r o n 3 4 and had a l s o brought the . 3 2Anab. V, 8, 11. 3 3Anab. V I I , g , 24 . Cf. V, 6, 28. 3Z)-Anab. V I I , 8, 24. 61 army the censure of the Spartans. Xenophon's defence on the f i r s t charge i s found i n the f a c t t h a t even the Athenians had sent a detachment of c a v a l r y to Thibron. 3- 5 His defence against the second charge i s based on the commendation sent by the ephors t o the army under i t s hew leader, t o which the r e p l y i s made, a\k', to av6pes A a x e 6 a i u 6 vtot, T J I I E L S U E V eauev O L OCUTO! vuv xe KOCL uepuatv* apxwv 6e aXXos u.£v vuv, aXXog 6e T O " na-pcX^ov.TO ouv OC L T L O V TOU VUV U.EV [IT] £^0CU.0CpT(ZV£ L V , T O T E 6 E , CtUTO L r\5r) LXOCVOL £aT£ •zc Y L Y V W O H E L V . S i n c e we have suggested that Xenophon's e x i l e i s t o be ass o c i a t e d w i t h the events of 394 i t i s a l s o of i n t e r e s t to note how Xenophon presents the B a t t l e s of Nernea and Coronea. F i r s t , the Athenians are described as the bravest of the a l l i e s , f o r w h i l e the Boeotians were opposite the Spartans they were not eager t o f i g h t , but, when the Athenians naTOc AOCH£6OCLUOVLOUC; E Y E V O V T O , the Boeotians £u$u$ T O T E LEpoc HOCXOC etpoccrocv E L V O C L nal napiyy- YELXav 7iapaaH£udC£a^at tbs M.aXT)S £o*ou.£vns • Within a few months Agesilaus accompanied by Xenophon 3^ came from A s i a w i t h h i s troop s . He was met by Boeotians, Athenians, Ar g i v e s , C o r i n t h i a n s , Aenianians, Euboeans and both groups of L o c r i a n s . 3 9 Agesilaus occupied the r i g h t wing w i t h the Orchomenians on h i s extreme 35_Hell. I l l , 1 , 4. 3 6 H e l l . I l l , 2, 7. 3 7 H e l l . IV, 2, 18 3^Anab. V, 3 , 6. 3 9 H e l l . IV, 3 , 15- 62 l e f t . 4 ^ Against him were s t a t i o n e d the Argives, w h i l e the Thebans (as usual) were f a c i n g the Orchomenians. When the f o r c e s met, Agesilaus defeated the Ar g i v e s , the Thebans defeated the Orcho- menians, and the phalanx commanded by Herippidas and w i t h him the Ionians, Aeolians and Hel l e s p o n t i n e s rushed f o r t h and et? 6opu icpLHOLievot etpe^av T O na^' auTOug.^ Among the group designated by T O are to be found a l s o the Athenians but there i s no f u r t h e r mention of t h e i r name i n connection w i t h the B a t t l e of Coronea. 4 2 Obviously Xenophon seeks t o avoid i r r i t a t i n g the Athenians i n what must be f o r him a very d e l i c a t e s i t u a t i o n . From our d i s c u s s i o n we can conclude then that Xenophon's defence of himself c o n s i s t s of the f o l l o w i n g p o i n t s : 1) as a f r i e n d of Socrates he had been subjected t o Socrates' teaching concerning the gods and thus was able to behave j u s t l y and to do good ({aYa&dupiy$Cv}); 2) h i s account of h i s behaviour i n the Anabasis demonstrates h i s s e l f - s a c r i f i c e i n doing good w i t h i n a r e l i g i o u s framework; 3) the a c t i v i t y of Xenophon and the army of the Ten Thousand a f t e r i t s r e t u r n t o the area of the Aegean although i r r i t a t i n g t o some Greek states (Athens included) i s the f a u l t of a le a d e r imposed on the army by Sparta; 4) i n d i s c u s s i n g the B a t t l e of Coronea Xenophon attempts to play down the involvement of Athens and t o emphasize t h a t i t was Spartan against Theban m i l i t a r y p o l i c y . When he had made these p o i n t s he was able to urge a p o l i t i c a l a l l i a n c e . 4 0 H e l l . IV, 3, 16. 41] 42T 1 H e l l . IV, 3, 17. ' H e l l . IV, 3, 15-23 CHAPTER VI GREECE AND PERSIA In the previous chapter we noted that Xenophon's concep- tion of a new solution to the problem of Greek disunity had motivated him to make a defence of himself and Socrates whose pupil he was. If he was already considering a new approach to the problem then i t should not be surprising i f we should also find mention of his solution in the works that contain his defence. This, in fact, is what we find. The Memorabilia, the Anabasis.and the Hellenica, which, as has been demonstrated, contain apologetic elements, also express p o l i t i c a l ideas that dif f e r markedly from his earlier views on the subject of Greek unity. Since these ideas are sometimes expressed in oblique ways, before we undertake consideration of them, i t is necessary to look at Xenophon's method of presentation. One of the most obvious ways in which Xenophon presents ideas is to take some figure from an earlier generation and to idealize him to such an extent that he becomes the perfect bio- graphical expression of these ideas. We have already seen that he does this in the Cyropaedia, where Cyrus the Great becomes the ideal monarch, although we know that not a l l his actions were of such an ideal nature."^" Xenophon uses Socrates in somewhat the Herodotus, I, 95-216. See also R. Hoistad, Cynic Hero and Cynic King, 82-86. 64 same manner but the account i s tempered because other people s t i l l remembered the h i s t o r i c a l Socrates when the Memorabilia was w r i t t e n . C l o s e l y r e l a t e d to t h i s b i o g r a p h i c a l method i s what might be c a l l e d a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l expression. Xenophon portrays himself i n the Anabasis a c t i n g out the ideas that aTe'rehuriciate'd •by:So~dra~te;s': i n the Memorabilia. As has already been shown there i s a close i d e n t i f i c a t i o n between his r e l i g i o u s p i e t y and the teachings of 2 Socrates as Xenophon gives them. Thus through h i s a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h Socrates he enhances h i s own r e p u t a t i o n . I t i s t h i s method of expression that a l s o enables Xenophon to speak out on the p o l i t i c a l i s s ues of the day. In the Memora- b i l i a Socrates engages i n p o l i t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h three men- P e r i c l e s , Glaucon, and Charmides. Of immediate concern are the l a t t e r two. Glaucon was a f o o l i s h youth erci&uuwv npoora-ceueiv TTJC; noXeoj? who had become KaxayeXaaxoq. Socrates through s k i l l f u l q uestioning shows Glaucon how u t t e r l y ignorant he i s and thus r e s t r a i n s him from making f u r t h e r f o o l i s h statements i n p u b l i c . The i m p l i c a t i o n i s that i f one knows nothing about p o l i t i c s one should keep q u i e t . Onsthe contrary Socrates' d i s c u s s i o n w i t h ^Not only i n r e l i g i o n but a l s o i n the area of p h i l a n t h r o p i a i s Xenophon portrayed as the embodiment of Socrates' teaching. Cf. Mem. I l l , 9, 14, 1$ and Anab. V I I , 6, 4; £, 23. 3Mem. I l l , 6, 1. Charraides, who does understand p o l i t i c s , i s concluded by the f o l l o w i n g : x a l u.Ti a u x X e t T W V T T J ? TCOXEIOS, e l ' T I 6 u v a x o v e a x t 6 t a at p e X x t o v e x e t v * TOUTODV Y^P xaXtos E X O V T O J V ou M-6VOV ot a W o t n o X t x a t , A \ \ a x a l o t a o l (ptXot * , x a l a u x b s ah o d x iXaxiaxa wcpeXTjaru ^ I t i s the duty of the knowledgeable man to be a c t i v e i n p o l i - t i c a l l i f e i n order t o b e n e f i t h i s f e l l o w c i t i z e n s and hence himself. The motivation i s once again the so r t that Xenophon 1s age i n r e t r o s p e c t would c l e a r l y understand. Since the idea of Xenophon as the embodiment of Socrates' teachings seems w e l l developed i n the spheres of r e l i g i o n and p h i l a n t h r o p i a , perhaps Xenophon here endows hi m s e l f w i t h S o c r a t i c a u t h o r i t y to speak and act concerning the p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n i n Greece. F i n a l l y , Xenophon a l s o uses speeches, given i n a h i s t o r i c a l s e t t i n g , and d i r e c t statement to express c e r t a i n p o l i t i c a l ideas. The speech of Cyrus at the beginning of the i n l a n d march'' demon- s t r a t e s t h i s technique r a t h e r w e l l . Cyrus, hoping t o i n s p i r e h i s troops, sets before them a p i c t u r e of Persian r i c h e s . Although t h i s may have been the b a s i c d e s c r i p t i o n of P e r s i a that Cyrus a c t u a l l y gave to h i s troops i n 401, the f a c t that Greeks read ^Mem. I l l , 7, 9- Both Xenophon and P l a t o agree t h a t although Socrates d i d not p a r t i c u l a r i l y enjoy p o l i t i c a l involvement he showed h i s p o l i t i c a l concern by t r y i n g to make p o l i t i c i a n s b e t t e r . Xenophon makes Socrates p r a c t i c a l r a t h e r than i d e o l o g i c a l . 5Anab. I , 7, 6. 66 t h i s a f t e r 370 must suggest to the minds of Xenophon's readers the d e s i r a b i l i t y of an i n v a s i o n of P e r s i a to b o l s t e r the sagging fortunes of the Greek s t a t e s . To determine whether Xenophon i s consciously p r e s e n t i n g these ideas one requires some d i r e c t statement. That such statements e x i s t i n the works of Xenophon that are at present under c o n s i d e r a t i o n w i l l be shown i n our f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n . With the preceding methods of expression i n mind l e t us turn t o an a n a l y s i s of Xenophon's a t t i t u d e s toward the three s t a t e s that were most prominently i n v o l v e d i n the events t h a t t r a n s p i r e d during h i s l i f e t i m e . I f Xenophon s t i l l f e l t the n e c e s s i t y of war against P e r s i a that had l e d him t o show great a p p r e c i a t i o n f o r the work of Agesilaus i n As i a from 396 t o 394 and i f at the same time he had l o s t confidence i n one-man r u l e , then i t i s reasonable that he would somehow in v o l v e Sparta, Athens or Thebes i n such an undertaking. The favourable p o r t r a y a l of the Spartans i n the H e l l e n i c a has been considered an i n d i r e c t defence of Xenophon's r e l a t i o n - ship w i t h them. Most c e r t a i n l y Xenophon exonerates the Spartans f o r t h e i r a c t i o n s i n enforcing the King's Peace by p l a c i n g the blame f o r the beginning of h o s t i l i t i e s upon the Argives, Boeotians and the Cor i n t h i a n s f o r a c c e p t i n g Persian gold. Xenophon a l s o defends Agesilaus f o r a c q u i t t i n g Sphodrias ( f o r Xenophon admits H e l l . IV, 4, 2. 6 7 n a l TtoMous e6o£ev CCUTTI 6T) . a d i H c i r a T a e v Aaxe6aLu.ovt^ri)6uHT) Hpidfjjvat.) because of the p h i l a n t h r o p i a of t h e i r two sons and of Sphodrias' honourable behaviour a f t e r the a c q u i t t a l . C e r t a i n l y t h i s inva- s i o n of Piraeus by Sphodrias (because of the monetary exhor t a t i o n of the Thebans) was considered i n a very grave l i g h t by the Athe- nians. Xenophon's p o r t r a y a l of these a f f a i r s might seem an i n d i - r e c t apology f o r h i m s e l f . I do not t h i n k that t h i s i s h i s purpose. Xenophon could not undertake a defence of h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the Spartans because t h i s would have emphasized the p o l i t i c a l gap between Athens and Sparta and would therefore have been contrary to h i s other purpose, namely, the u n i t i n g of a l l Greece under the hegemony of Athens and Sparta. E. Schwartz has suggested that the H e l l e n i c a i s Xenophon's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of Sparta's involvement i n the events of the f i r s t h a l f of the f o u r t h century. He seeks to c l a r i f y Spartan a c t i o n to the Athenians (and t o other Greek >• 9 s t a t e s j i n order to b r i n g them c l o s e r together. I should modify t h i s and say t h a t t h i s i s one of h i s purposes i n the second part of the H e l l e n i c a ( I I , 3 , 10 - V I I , 5 , 2 7 ) , 1 S but the f i r s t p a r t ' H e l l . V, 4 , 2 4 . 8 H e l l . V, 4 , 33. ^Schwartz, E. "Quellenuntersuchung zur Griechischen Geschichte," Rhein. Mus., XLIV (1839) l'6i:-193. -^In a d d i t i o n to presenting the r i s e , d e c l i n e and f a l l of Sparta up to the B a t t l e of Mantinea, Xenophon displa^ r s a f a s c i n a - t i o n f o r i n s t r u c t i o n through b i o g r a p h i c a l paradigms. See Peter K r a f f t , " V i e r B e i s p i e l e des Xenophontischen i n Xenophons H e l l e - n i k a , " Rhein. Mus. CX (1967) 103-150. 6 8 i s much e a r l i e r and had been undertaken as a completion of Thucydides. i : L J"LH. Richards ("The H e l l e n i c s of Xenophon," C l a s s . Rev. XV [ 1 9 0 1 ] 1 9 7 - 2 0 3 ) has demonstrated t h a t only H e l l e n i c a I-II, 3 , 1 0 ( H e l l . A) shows any c l e a r resemblance t o h i s e a r l i e s t , work, the Cynegeticus. H e l l . B i s d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t i n s t y l e . Mac- Laren ("On the Composition of Xenophon's H e l l e n i c a , " AJP LV [ 1 9 3 4 ] 1 2 3 - 1 3 9 J enumerates the f o l l o w i n g : 1 ) the a n n a l i s t i c method of r e p o r t i n g events i s used i n H e l l . A but abandoned i n H e l l . B. 2 ) S a c r i f i c e s before a b a t t l e are mentioned only i n H e l l . B. 3 ) No expressions of p r a i s e or censure are found i n H e l l • A. 4 ) The words LtrW, are, wcrce, a5, L I E V T O L , ycf6r] are r a r e l y found i n H e l l . A but often i n H e l l . B. 5 ) The f u t u r e o p t a t i v e i s employed only i n H e l l . B. 6 ) The m i l i t a r y usages i n H e l l . A are s i m i l a r t o those of Thucydides and are non-Doric; the usages i n H e l l . B are o f t e n Doric and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the Anabasis. 7 ) At the end of the account i n H e l l . B there i s u s u a l l y a short sentence containing a demonstrative word such as outtos t h a t r e a l l y adds nothing t o the n a r r a t i v e ; t h i s phenomenon occurs 4 9 times i n H e l l . B, once i n H e l l . A. 8 ) Xenophon never speaks i n the f i r s t person i n H e l l . A, but 1 9 times i n H e l l • B. H . MacLaren enumer- ates some other d i f f e r e n c e s but I have chosen only those that I f i n d most convincing. Many of the others can be dismissed e i t h e r as s u b j e c t i v e statement or as proportionate t o the amount of m a t e r i a l i n each part of the work. This d r a s t i c change, because i t occurs immediately a f t e r I I , 3 , 1 0 and i s based on many i n s t a n - ces, i s i n t e r p r e t e d as proof that a d e f i n i t e i n t e r v a l of time passed between the composition of H e l l . A and B. 69 Xenophon's pr e s e n t a t i o n of h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p to the Spartans i n the Anabasi s f u r t h e r emphasizes th a t he has no i n t e n t i o n of defending himself a g a i n s t any charge of being i n sympathy w i t h them. In f a c t , Xenophon st r e s s e s that he worked i n complete harmony w i t h the Spartan Cheirisophos. A f t e r Cheirisophos recognizes the worth of Xenophon t o the army and a l s o i d e n t i f i e s 12 him as an Athenian ' there i s complete harmony between the two le a d e r s , except f o r one i n c i d e n t when there i s disagreement over the treatment of a captive guide. Xenophon says t h a t T O U T O ye 6rj Xeipta6<pi}) x a l EevocpwvTi. u.6vov 6td<popov £v T P Tiopeta eyeveTO...^ In a d d i t i o n t o t h i s Xenophon c o n s t a n t l y shows the utmost defer- ence t o the Spartan s t a t e . As a r e s u l t of t h i s deference he, an Athenian, refuses to be chosen the s i n g l e leader of the army, 14 Aaxe6atp,ovtGU av6pbg napovTOs • The Spartans deserve t h i s respect because they are the strongest Greek s t a t e . 6pu) y^P oxi x a l TTI TcaTpt6i uou ou 7tp6a$ev EitavaavTO T I OXE U I O U V T E S nplv Ercotrjaav rcaaav TTJV T I OXL V O U O X O Y E L V Aaxedatnovtou? x a l auTwv T)YEu.6vac; E t v a t . ^ That t h i s deference i s i n accord w i t h the w i l l of the gods simply r e i n f o r c e s the p o s i t i o n that the Spartans had a t t a i n e d . C l e a r l y , then, Xenophon's r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the Lacedae.monians i s not one to be despised or defended but rat h e r e x a l t e d . 1 2Anab. I l l , 1, 4 5 - 1 3Anab. IV, 6, 3- lz*-Anab. VI, 1, 26. 15 Anab. VI, 1, 27. Xenophon i s speaking. Nevertheless, there i s another aspect t o the i n c i d e n t . 16 Xenophon was the f i r s t choice of the s o l d i e r s . L a ter when Xenophon i s on h i s way home but the army i s i n d i f f i c u l t y Xenophon s a i l s back and goes t o them, ou 6e aTpaTiwTcxt e6ec!avT0 r \ >. V tl 17 r|6eu)S x a l euftug e i u o v T O a a u e v o i . At another time Xeno- r 18 phon i s described as f i X o a x p a T t u h r r i s. C l e a r l y , he had a great i n f l u e n c e on and appeal t o the s o l d i e r s . Cheirisopho.s i n d i c a t e s t h i s i n the speech he makes to the s o l d i e r s i n accepting the highest command when he quotes someone as saying of Xenophon, before the e l e c t i o n of one commanding o f f i c e r , that a u x b v T i u a a i w v i u a X X o v a p x e t v auve$e\fjcjtxi A a p 6 a v e C o v x t T O U K X e d p x o u a x p a x e u n a t o s ^ eauxqj ACXHUJVI o v x i T h i s i n d i c a t e s t h a t , although a supreme commander had been e l e c t e d , Xenophon would always have an u n o f f i c i a l share of the command. In a d d i t i o n t o p o r t r a y i n g himself as the euepyexTjs of the army, Xenophon here d e f i n e s by example the r o l e of the Athenians i n a united Greece. In the con t r a s t between h i s own and the le a d e r s h i p of Clearchus, the Spartan, the need f o r Athenian i n f l u e n c e i n Greek p o l i t i c s i s most evident. The f i r s t two books of the Anabasis give us an i n s i g h t i n t o the a c t i v i t i e s of Clearchus as primus i n t e r pares. 20 Xenophon sums up Clearchus' l e a d e r s h i p as f o l l o w s : a) he was fond of war; b) he was i n a constant s t a t e of readiness f o r VI, 1, 19. V I I , 2, 9. V I I , 6, 4- VI, 1, 32. The ouv probably goes w i t h apxeiv. I I , 6, 1 -15. 16 Anab. 1 7Anab. 1^Anab. 1 9Anab. 2 0Anab. battle; c) he was self-controlled in frightening circumstances. The next point i s introduced with the statement, x a l apx^xbs 6* E X E Y E T O E i v a i . . . 2 ^ The word kkiyexo indicates that there is some doubt in Xenophon's mind about the accuracy of this statement. He then goes on to admit that Clearchus was competent in pro- viding for his army. It i s in the area of human relations that Xenophon disagreed with the Spartan for he relied s t r i c t l y on compulsion and punished the army on principle because he said u>S 6eoi x b v oTpaT l u k r j v cpoBeto"-&cu L i a W o v xbv a p x o v x a f) x o u s K O X E L U O U S , EC L I E W O L rj cpuXaxas c p u X d^Etv f] cpt\wv <xcp££Eo"-&ai r\ aTtpoqpaaLaxios t e v a i u p b s T O U S U O X E U L O U S . The result of this kind of leadership was that in danger his men followed him readily but, when the danger was past, those who could would desert him for another commander. Xenophon ends the section concerning Clearchus' relationship to his soldiers thus: x a l yap ouv c p i \ i a U E V x a l Euvoia E H O U . E V O U S O U 6 E U O X £ tl\zv 2lAnab. II, 6, 8. The word txiyexo i s a third person pas- sive. Whenever Xenophon wishes to express praise or blame he does so in the f i r s t person as in the rest of this passage. Impersonal or third-person construction usually indicates that Xenophon does not agree. Consider the incident of Sphodrias; Hell. V, 4, 15-34. 2 2Anab. II, 6, 10. 2 3Anab. II, 6, 13. 72 The i m p l i c a t i o n i s that, i n a d d i t i o n to i n s t i l l i n g d i s c i p l i n e , l e a d e r s h i p must develop f r i e n d s h i p and goodwill among the f o l - l owers—something the Spartan had f a i l e d to do. Clearchus has another f a u l t as w e l l . Although he i s a good a d m i n i s t r a t o r , he l a c k s d i r e c t i v e a b i l i t y . G. B. Nussbaum 2 Z f has t r a c e d e x t e n s i v e l y h i s attempts to deceive the army by f a i l - i n g t o go through the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l channels t h a t the Greek s o l d i e r s assumed to be i n existence. Thus Clearchus l o s t the confidence of the army, and i n i t s place m i s t r u s t and s u s p i c i o n arose. I t was, i n f a c t , h i s t o t a l l a c k of inventiveness and relu c t a n c e to commit himself t o a course of a c t i o n that p r e c i p i - t a t e d the c r i s i s i n which the army found i t s e l f when Xenophon was el e c t e d g e neral. 25 The c o n t r a s t i s obvious. Clearchus the Spartan although a good m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t o r , f a i l e d miserably i n the important areas of human r e l a t i o n s and p o l i t i c a l resource- f u l n e s s . On the other hand, under the combined d i r e c t i o n of the Spartan,Cheirisophos (who possessed mainly a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a b i l i t y ) 2Z»-G. B. Nussbaum, The Ten Thousand, 118-120. 2 5Anab. I I , 2, 1-5, 34- 2 6 S e e G. B. Nussbaum, The Ten Thousand, 117- Part of the success of t h i s l e a d e r s h i p a l s o l i e s i n i t s greater dependence on the assembly. Xenophon d i s p l a y s an increased awareness of the l i m i t a t i o n s of the i n d i v i d u a l and a more a c t i v e r e l i a n c e on c o l l e c t i v e ingenuity than he does i n the Cyropaedia. This i s a more democratic a t t i t u d e . 73 and the Athenian Xenophon (who s p e c i a l i z e d i n p h i l a n t h r o p i a and inventiveness) the army survived and escaped from i t s dangerous s i t u a t i o n . Thus i t i s the harshness and l a c k of c r e a t i v e p o l i c y - making of the Spartans t h a t evoke Athenian i n f l u e n c e i n Greek p o l i t i c s . Nevertheless, throughout the speeches i n the Anabasis Xeno- phon f r e q u e n t l y makes the point that t o survive against the Persians good l e a d e r s h i p and d i s c i p l i n e are a b s o l u t e l y e s s e n t i a l , aveu yap apxovxwv o i > 6 e v av ouxe xa\bv ouxe dya'&bv y e v o i x o i i ? p,ev auveXovxt etrceCv oudauoG, ev 6 e 6T) XOCC; uoXeuixoCs it a v x d i t a a i v . t ) uev yap e6xa£ia atpCeiv 6oxeC, « * » t \ w / ?7 T) 6 e axa^ua nokkovq T)6T) ctno \u) \eHev. Only under s k i l l f u l guidance, w i t h u n i t y among the ranks, w i l l the Greeks be able \<xu.Bdveiv xa xwv r)xxovu)v. But f a c t i o n and d i v i - 28 sion can lead only to d e s t r u c t i o n . In order to avoid t h i s the leader must be strong and w i l l i n g to e x e r c i s e d i s c i p l i n e . The Spartans are the strongest. But the people of c u l t u r e and refinement, with an awareness of human d i g - n i t y , are the Athenians. Because of t h e i r appeal to the other Greeks they can be the u n i f y i n g f o r c e by means of which a l l Greece may u n i t e under Sparta's l e a d e r s h i p but whom Sparta must acknowledge p a r t i c u l a r l y i n making p o l i c y . The H e l l e n i c a c l e a r l y r e i n f o r c e s t h i s suggestion. Sparta i s the strongest. She i s the d i s c i p l i n a r i a n . She enforces the 2 7Anab. I l l , 1 , 3 8 . Cf. I l l , 2 , 2 9 - 3 2 . 2 gAnab. V, 6 , 3 2 . 74 King's Peace of 3^6. 2 9 The Spartans were defeated i n the B a t t l e of Leuctra3<~> by the Thebans (as agents of the gods) not because they were the weakest, since they s t i l l had two regiments (one- t h i r d of the army) at home, but because they had misused t h e i r 31 power. A f t e r t h i s b a t t l e we f i n d the Athenians t a k i n g the lead i n e s t a b l i s h i n g an a l l i a n c e based on the King's Peace and thus i n essence u n i t i n g much of Greece under Spartan l e a d e r s h i p w h i l e s t i l l m a i n t a ining auxovououg euvau ouiouux; x a l uaxpa? x a l * ' 32 \xEya\a.<z noXeus. Before the B a t t l e of Leuctra there i s a s e r i e s 33 of three speeches d e l i v e r e d by Athenian ambassadors to Sparta. J Among these the f i r s t speaker, C a l l i a s , speaks i n dip l o m a t i c f a s h i o n about the d e s i r a b i l i t y of peace between Athens and Sparta from a h i s t o r i c a l and a r e l i g i o u s p e r s p e c t i v e . The second spea- ker, A utocles, i n p o i n t i n g out the causes of war, speaks out on behalf of the other c i t i e s of Greece. F i n a l l y , the t h i r d speaker, C a l l i s t r a t u s , p o i n t s out the advantages of an a l l i a n c e among the c i t i e s of Greece w i t h Athens and Sparta t a k i n g the lead f o r eucrl uiev 6T)71OU uaoaiv xiov no\eu>v at uev xa uuiexepa, at 6e xa rjuiexepa cppovouaau, x a l ev exaaxT) TioXeu ca uev XaxwvuCouauv, ou axxuxuCouauv. 2 9'Hell. v, 1, 35, 36. 3 0 H e l l . vi, 4, 13-15- 3 1 H e l l . v, 4, 1. 3 2 H e l l . vi, 5, 1-3. 3 3 H e l l . vi, 3, 1-20. 3 4 H e l l . vi, 3, 14- 75 That Athens f u l f i l l s the r o l e of u n i t i n g Greece i n a h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n does not n e c e s s a r i l y mean that Xenophon had t h i s i n mind f o r her. That ambassadors make speeches th a t suggest t h i s course of a c t i o n to h i s readers does emphasize the r o l e that Xenophon had defined f o r her by example i n the Anabasis. The p r e s e n t a t i o n of the p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s from 374 t o 369 i n the H e l l e n i c a p reveals c l e a r l y what p o l i c i e s Xenophon endorsed by the a t t i t u d e s he expresses toward the men invol v e d . Two of the men who are l i n k e d i n the n a r r a t i v e are the Athenians, I p h i c r a t e s and C a l l i s t r a t u s (mentioned e a r l i e r ) . When Xenophon has given the account of I p h i c r a t e s ' hasty sea voyage t o Corcyra t o give a i d to the democratic f a c t i o n f i g h t i n g against the Spar- tans and commended him f o r h i s t r a i n i n g methods, he w r i t e s the f o l l o w i n g . 1 eyw uev or\ TauTTjv TTJV oxpaxny Cav TWV 'IcpLxpaxous o6x T)HuoTct ETiaivu), eneixa x a l xb upoae\ea$au xeXeCaat eauTt»i KaWtaTpaTov Te TOV 6T)|ITIY6POV, 06 ud\a eTtiTifaetov ovTa .... Two very important p o i n t s emerge from t h i s passage. F i r s t , the words oux r\M.\.axa i n d i c a t e t h a t , although there has been no men- t i o n of i t thus f a r , I p h i c r a t e s ' attempt t o work together with C a l l i s t r a t u s i s one of the foremost reasons f o r the pr a i s e t h a t he r e c e i v e s i n the H e l l e n i c a . Second, we n o t i c e t h a t i n some way they were opposed to one another (KaWCaTpaTOv ou u.d\a ZTIIXT)- 6 e i o v ovTa ). ) . This d i f f e r e n c e between them was p o l i t i c a l . 3 ^ H e l l . VI, 2, 1, - V I I , 1, 14. 3 6 H e l l . VI, 2, 39. 76 C a l l i s t r a t u s was concerned w i t h b r i n g i n g about peace between Athens and S p a r t a . 3 7 I p h i c r a t e s ' antagonism to the Lacedaemon- ians becomes apparent i n h i s d e l a y i n g t a c t i c s 3 ^ as general of the army that was t o go to the a i d of Spartans when the Thebans invaded t h e i r land l a t e i n 370. This a c t i v i t y i s summed up as f o l l o w s eu uev ouv a \ \ o T U XOC\<JJC; e a T p c r r r i Y n a e v , ou 4>EYU>* e n e u v a utevTOu a ev T £ xpovt^ exeuvto e i t p a £ e , ndvTa<.eupuaKoj TCX uev l i d T n v , TCC 6e Haulaau^cpopws TicrcpaYiieva auT(j). At another p o i n t i n d e s c r i b i n g I p h i c r a t e s * behaviour he asks , 3 9 the r h e t o r i c a l question, Tta>c/-.6u rcoMr) dcppoauvn; In t h i s statement and by the use of the words udTnv andaauu-cpopws Xenophon i n d i - cates h i s sense of f r u s t r a t i o n because of the f a i l u r e of the Athenian army to a i d Sparta e f f e c t i v e l y . In Xenophon's mind I p h i c r a t e s must bear the blame f o r t h i s . Athens could have made the t i e s w i t h Sparta much stronger through an e f f e c t u a l program of a i d . That t h i s d i d not occur could only be the r e s u l t of I p h i c r a t e s * d e l i b e r a t e p o l i c y since he had displayed outstanding m i l i t a r y a b i l i t y p r e v i o u s l y . The s t r u c t u r e of the n a r r a t i v e 4 ^ of the conference at Athens i n 370 that r e s u l t e d i n the a u x i l i a r y e x p e d i t i o n of I p h i c r a t e s a l s o r e v e a l s what p o l i c i e s and which speakers were of importance to Xenophon. A. Banderet has enumerated some of the important 3 ? H e l l . VI, 3, 3 . 38 39 H e l l . VI, 5, 4 Q. H e l l . VI, 5, 51 and 52. 4 0 H e l l . VI, 5, 33-49. 77 p o i n t s . ^ The two speeches t h a t hold our a t t e n t i o n and are c e n t r a l t o the account are those of C l e i t e l e s the C o r i n t h i a n and P r o c l e s the P h l i a s i a n . The i n t r o d u c t i o n to these speeches i s a g e n e r a l i z e d statement of what the Spartan ambassadors s a i d , then a hasty resume' of s p e c i f i c p o i n t s and the r e s u l t — a n uproar i n the Athenian assembly. Then come the two speeches and i n the concluding statement Xenophon h a s t i l y passes over the arguments of the o p p o s i t i o n w i t h the f o l l o w i n g words: uexa xauxa E 3 O U \ O V T O ou 'A - & T ) V O U O L, x a l xwv vibv avTuXeyovTuiv oux T I V E L X O V T O » ' 42 axouovTES... From the l i s t of names of the Spartan ambassadors i t i s obvious that the author d i d have more s p e c i f i c knowledge concerning the arguments and courses of a c t i o n suggested by the other p a r t i e s than he mentions i n h i s account. He has suppressed t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n i n order to give prominence t o the two speeches he does n a r r a t e . 43 The f i r s t speech, by C l e i t e l e s , i s very short and makes the C o r i n t h i a n s innocent v i c t i m s , s u f f e r i n g at the hands of the Thebans. Therefore they deserve the a i d of Athens. In an assembly d e a l i n g with Spartan-Athenian r e l a t i o n s t h i s speech th a t j u s t i f i e s C o r i n t h seems almost superfluous. What we do have here i s C o r i n t h a c t i n g as a mediator between Athens and Sparta. One must remember that at t h i s time Xenophon hi m s e l f was l i v i n g ^ A . Banderet, Untersuehungen zu Xenophons H e l l e n i k a , commentary to the passage s p e c i f i e d . 4 2 H e l l . VI, 5, 49. 4 3 H e l l . VI, 5, 37. 78 at C o r i n t h . The C o r i n t h i a n p o l i c y enunciated and demonstrated i n t h i s passage a t t r a c t e d him to t h i s c i t y . Thus Xenophon's personal p o l i t i c s i n f l u e n c e d the n a r r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e . P r o c l e s ' s p e e c h , 4 4 by f a r the longer and t h e r e f o r e s t r u c - t u r a l l y more important, urges that the Athenians give a i d to the Lacedaemonians. He gives the f o l l o w i n g reasons: 1) I f they refuse, the Thebans w i l l t u r n against A t t i c a a f t e r d e v a s t a t i n g Sparta and Athens w i l l then have to f i g h t them alone.45 2) The Athenians' past h i s t o r y (when they aided a l l who were wronged and f l e d t o them f o r refuge) compels them t o undertake t o a s s i s t Sparta.^" 3) There i s the h i n t of another war; w i t h P e r s i a ( zi noxe TtdXtv e \ $ o i xfl * E \ \ d 6 u x i v & u v o s VTCO BapBdpwv ). In such a c i r - cumstance, whom would they r a t h e r t r u s t as a l l i e s than the Spar- tans whose countrymen f e l l at Thermopylae before the P e r s i a n (6 BdpBocpos) could gain entry i n t o G r e e c e . 4 7 4) The gods who see and know a l l have provided t h i s opportunity ( ULUV 6e vuv e n $eu)v T L V O S xotipbc; TtapayEYevirtaOfor Athenians to a i d the Spartans and obtain them as staunch ( d r cpocpaoaaTOug)allies. 4^ The d e c i s i o n of the Athenian assembly to f o l l o w the advice of P r o c l e s could be 44 H e l l . VI, 5, 38-48. 4 5 H e l l . VI, 5, 33, 39. 46 47 48 H e l l . VI, 5, 44-47. I b i d . , 43. I b i d . , 41. 79 seen as proof of the h i s t o r i c a l importance of t h i s speech and t h e r e f o r e one could argue that the s t r u c t u r e i n no way i n d i c a t e s any personal p o l i t i c a l concerns of Xenophon. However, i n the next year at another conference i n Athens to d i s c u s s the terms of the a l l i a n c e P r o c l e s , the P h l i a s i a n ambassador to Athens, emphasizes (again i n a speech)^ 9 that the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two c i t i e s should be one of united l e a d e r s h i p w i t h Athens r u l i n g by sea and Sparta by la n d . e u o l 6e 6 O H E L xocuxa O U H av&pumivT) u a M o v t) $ e i a cpuaet xe n a l xuxTl 6 t-wp Ca^ai That Athens and Sparta share the hegemony of the Greek sta t e s i s d i v i n e w i l l . The speech from which t h i s sentence i s taken i s again the longest, the most e x p l i c i t , and c e n t r a l t o the s t r u c - t u r e , yet t h i s time the assembly acts d i f f e r e n t l y from what Procles a d v i s e s . Thus we have two speeches ( s i m i l a r i n theme) by the same man given equal n a r r a t i v e importance but v a r y i n g i n the response they evoke. That Xenophon records the second speech, although i t may be h i s t o r i c a l l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t and i s a m i n o r i t y o p i n i o n , whereas he v i r t u a l l y ignores the m i n o r i t y view, i n the pre- vio u s account, i n d i c a t e s the accord that he f e e l s f o r the ideas that P r o c l e s expresses. 49JHel l . V I I , 1, l - H . ^ H e l l . V I I , 1 , 2 . This i n no way c o n t r a d i c t s the humani^ t a r i a n r o l e emphasized e a r l i e r . Nowhere has Xenophon suggested that Athens should not be inv o l v e d i n m a r t i a l l e a d e r s h i p as w e l l . 80 The pre s e n t a t i o n of the Boeotians i n Xenophon's works i s of i n t e r e s t because he i s ofte n accused of pr e j u d i c e toward the Thebans and of ignoring' Epaminondas.^ That he ignores Epami- nondas may be questioned. A l b e r t Banderet has noted t h a t , when Epaminondas was f i r s t e l e c t e d general, Pelopidas s t i l l exercised CO a great deal of i n f l u e n c e i n Thebes. Epaminondas* e a r l y repu- t a t i o n i s probably the r e s u l t of an exaggerated account by h i s - t o r i a n s such as K a l l i s t h e n e s , c a l l e d a n t i - S p a r t a n and pro- Boeotian by K. Miinscher. 53 To t h i s one might add the observation that s i n c e the settlement t h a t Epaminondas made w i t h the Achaeans was c r i t i c i z e d and revoked a t Thebes we might conclude that i n 367 h i s i n f l u e n c e was not as great as i s sometimes suggested.-' 4 When he does assume the undisputed l e a d e r s h i p of the Boeotians he r e c e i v e s the admiration of Xenophon. euxuxT) uxv ouv O U H aV'eywYE cp^aouni TTJV OTPCXTT)YCOLV auTtp YEvea&ai* oaa nevtca upovoiac; 5-^For the l a t e s t d i s c u s s i o n see W. P. Henry, Greek H i s t o - r i c a l W r i t i n g . 194• 5 2 A . Banderet, Untersuehungen zu Xenophons H e l l e n i k a , Commentary to V I I , 1, 33-38. 53K. Munscher, "Xenophon i n der Griechischen-Romischen L i t e r a t u r , " P h i l o l o g u s , Supp. X I I I , 30. 5 4 H e l l . V I I , 1, 41 -43. 81 epya na! T OXU T I S eaxuv, ou6ev U.OL 6O H E L avrip eXXtneuv. upwTOv nev yap eyuye Eitatvw ... ."^ Then Xenophon goes on to p r a i s e s e v e r a l of h i s t a c t i c a l manoeuvres and h i s l e a d e r s h i p . Thus the author evinces an a p p r e c i a t i o n f o r Epaminondas s i m i l a r to what he has f o r many other i n d i v i d u a l s . That he presents the Boeotians i n general and the Thebans i n p a r t i c u l a r i n a bad l i g h t i s the r e s u l t of t h e i r working at cross-purposes to him. Almost as soon as Xenophon begins to o f f e r advice t o h i s f e l l o w Greeks i n the Anabasis a. man w i t h a Boeotian d i a l e c t suggests that the only means of safety f o r the army l i e s 56 i n n e g o t i a t i o n w i t h the Pe r s i a n k i n g . This man's a t t i t u d e i s re j e c t e d because events have shown t h a t the Persians cannot be t r u s t e d . A man wit h such ideas nod TTJV 7iaxpt6a Haxataxuveu nal naaav TTJV 'EXXa6a, 8 T I "EXXT J V wvtTotouTOs e a x i v . This a t t i t u d e i s unworthy of the Greek race (and i n a humorous moment the man turns be. out t o A a kind of Lydian who wears e a r r i n g s ) . L a t e r i n the Anabasis Xenophon has f u r t h e r t r o u b l e w i t h Thorax, the Boeotian, „ — , „ 59 os rcspi o-TpotTTiYLas HEvocpwvTU i\ia\exo. i n the H e l l e n i c a the Thebans are c o n s t a n t l y n e g o t i a t i n g w i t h P e r s i a and seeking the hegemony of the Greek s t a t e s . In t h i s they do not have the support of t h e i r f e l l o w B o e o t i a n s . ^ Perhaps the most obvious statement of 5 5 H e l l . V I I , 5, 8. 5 6Anab. I l l , 1, 26. 5 7Anab. I l l , 1, 30. 5 8Anab. I l l , 1, 31. 5 9Anab. V, 6, 25. Cf. V, 6, 19, 25. 6 0 H e l l . VI, 3, 19, 20. 82 Theban i n t e n t i o n s i s found a f t e r the d e s c r i p t i o n of the B a t t l e of L e u c t r a . The Thebans now wish to become enforcers of a new King's Peace t h a t has been w r i t t e n out according to t h e i r r e q u e s t . ^ They i n v i t e a l l the Greek c i t i e s to come and hear i t proclaimed. When the ambassadors are present, they ask them to swear but the ambassadors r e p l y t h a t they have come to hear, not t o swear. Xenophon ends the account w i t h the f o l l o w i n g words: nal aurr) nev T) IleJ*- \oni6ou nal TUJV QnBaLwv/xfk apx^k rcepiBoXr) OUTOJ 6ie\u$r). The word :auirr) seems to i n d i c a t e that there were other attempts of a s i m i - l a r nature. Perhaps W. P. Henry i s c o r r e c t when he says that Xenophon r e f l e c t e d an age t h a t hated the Thebans and deservedly so. C e r t a i n l y i t would be u n s u i t a b l e f o r such a s t a t e t o t r y to b r i n g about harmony among the Greek s t a t e s . The ideas that Xenophon expresses about the three l e a d i n g Greek s t a t e s i n d i c a t e t h a t : 1) Sparta i s b a s i c a l l y the strongest and the best equipped to f i g h t on land and to act as an executive body but she l a c k s humanity; 2) Athens i s more appealing to the Greeks because she has a greater sense of the humane and she i s n a t u r a l l y the leader by sea; 3) Thebes, although her people are good s o l d i e r s , i s hated by most Greeks and t h e r e f o r e cannot undertake a l e a d i n g r o l e . Since we have e s t a b l i s h e d that Xenophon supported a united hegemony f o r Greece we must next determine whether the presenta- t i o n of the Persians i s a l s o coherent w i t h h i s purpose. They 61 62 63 H e l l . V I I , 1, 36. H e l l . V I I , 1, 40. Henry, Greek H i s t o r i c a l W r i t i n g , 194. 83 6y are the ancestral enemies of the Greeks. The Greeks are i ; :̂ cJy superior to the Persians in fighting for did they not defeat a vast Persian army at Cunaxa almost by themselves?^^ j n fact the Greeks were such good fighters during the Anabasis that later the Persian satrap, Tissaphernes, remembering how Cyrus' Greek forces fought and thinking a l l the Greeks similar, oux £ 0 O U \ E T O r 6A ndxec^at but would rather negotiate. ° In addition, Xenophon presents the luxury of the Persian. At the beginning of the Anabasis Cyrus makes a speech to the Greeks portraying the riches of Persia.^ 7 Later the Greek soldiers enter villages 68 rich in a l l kinds of foods, which are described in some detail. In the Hellenica Pharnabazus and his luxurious carpets are con- 6 9 trasted with the simplicity of the Greeks. Not only, however, i s Persia a land of riches. Its people are also weak and easily conquered. In his account of events after 374 Xenophon shows a certain preoccupation with Persia that often appears in his narrative. P. K r a f f t 7 ^ has analysed the story of Jason7-'- and concludes that the author makes many 6^Anab. III , 1, 12 , 13- 6 5Anab. III , 2, 14 -16. 6 6 H e l l . III , 2, 18 6 7Anab. I, 7, 6. 6 gAnab. I I , 3, 14-16. ^ H e l l . 29-32. 7 0P. Krafft, "Vier Beisp i Hellenika," Rhein. Mus. 84 assumptions about h i s readers' understanding of the behaviour of Jason. Hence he t e l l s us that Jason went about b u i l d i n g morale among h i s s o l d i e r s . a n d rewarding them. But Xenophon does not say why Jason undertook these procedures. He assumes th a t the reader knows th a t these are the a c t i o n s of a good leadersas described i n the Cyropaedia. These assumptions show that Xeno- phon was so involved i n h i s own thoughts t h a t he f a i l e d to n o t i c e that he r e a l l y conveyed l i t t l e h i s t o r i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n . This e x p l a i n s why i n the midst of Jason's plans f o r expansion we suddenly f i n d a d i s c u s s i o n of the Persians and how e a s i l y they could be conquered. Jason ends h i s d i s c u s s i o n of P e r s i a w i t h the words, 0 1 6 a Y a p P ^ a v x a s t x o u s exeC av^pujnou? TCXT)V evb? iiaXXov 6ou- 7? X e t a v f) aXxriv ueueXexnxoxas . K r a f f t suggests that f o r someone who i s t a l k i n g about the m i l i t a r y and p o l i t i c a l weakness of a people t o be concerned w i t h one exception (TCXTIV evoc; ) i s r i d i - culous. The poin t i s that Xenophon i s p r o j e c t i n g h i s own thoughts about P e r s i a i n t o the conversation. In f a c t , t a l k of conquering P e r s i a i s l u d i c r o u s f o r someone who has not yet gained c o n t r o l of the t e r r i t o r y on e i t h e r side of h i s own s t a t e . This d i s c u s s i o n of P e r s i a i s a s u b j e c t i v e viewpoint of Xenophon coming to the surface quite unconsciously w i t h the t a l k of e x p a n s i o n . 7 3 This same preoccupation w i t h expansion t o the East i s evident i n the Anabasis. The Pe r s i a n empire i s described thus 7 2 H e l l . V I , 1, 12. 7 3 C f . H e l l . V I I , 1, 38. 85 by X e n o p h o n : K.xal aruvc6eiv 6* rjv x$ ji^oqixpvxb- xov voGv xfi SaatXews apxfl T t \ f ) $ e i Liev x^pag nal av^pojncav Caxupa ouaa, Tot? 6e nfjxeca o6wv x a l T U bitandabai xa§s6uvd|i£t.s aaftevris, e" xiq 5 i a xaxewv xbv noXeuov noioCxo. C l e a r l y , Xenophon has considered t h i s empire and noted i t s weakness, e" xig (Greek?) should undertake a campaign. The most d i r e c t statement of a Greek campaign against P e r s i a comes i n a speech Xenophon makes to h i s army. One of the m o t i v a t i n g f a c t o r s he suggestsfor t r y i n g t o re t u r n home i s the improvement of the Greek l o t . 6oxeC ouv u o i etxbg xal 6txaiov euvai npuJxov el<z xrjv *E\\a6a xal Ttpbc; xou? ouxeCoug n e i p a a & x i atp i xv e i a^a i xal ETu6ei£ai xoiq " E W n a i v oxu exovxe? itevovxai, e£bv a u x o u ? xou$ vuv ax\r)pa5c exeC TtoTUxeu- 75 ovxac; ev&d6e x o u i a a u i v o u s n\ouaiou$ opav. H e s u £ £ e s t s that i f a Greek i s s u f f e r i n g from poverty (and many Greeks were a f t e r the Peloponnesian War and the qua r r e l s of the e a r l y f o u r t h century) i t i s h i s own f a u l t because the r i c h e s of P e r s i a are there to be taken. F i n a l l y , - l e t us consider Socrates' d i s c u s s i o n with P e r i c l e s i n the Memorabilia.7° The f i r s t point Socrates makes i s that h i s t o r i c a l l y and i n matters of u n i t y the Athenians surpass the 77 Boeotians. The Spartans are supe r i o r to the Athenians because 7 4Anab. I, 5, 9. 7^Anab. I l l , 2, 26. 7°Mem. 3, 5. 77Mem. 2 -4- 86 yd of t h e i r obedience, harmony and t h e i r t r a i n i n g . The Athenians, however, h i s t o r i c a l l y shared the l a u r e l s f o r great deeds w i t h the S p a r t a n s . 7 9 Now f i n a l l y (although t h i s i s not the obvious pur- pose of the dialogue) Socrates points out that the Mysians and the P i s i d i a n s noucpiug umXuauevca duvavxau TtoXXot |iev T T | V BaaiXews Xwpav na-caSeovces Hanonouetv, auxot oe CT)V eXeu&epoi. This men- t i o n of the King's t e r r i t o r y seems r e l a t i v e l y meaningless to the obvious purpose. Xenophon could have chosen other examples. This choice i n d i c a t e s t h a t there i s i n t h i s dialogue a second l e v e l of i n t e n t that emphasizes much that has been suggested i n the Anabasis and the H e l l e n i c a . The question whether Xenophon c o n s c i o u s l y took up t h i s p o l i - 81 t i c a l theme i n h i s w r i t i n g s has been put by Mesk. In order to answer t h i s i t seems best now to r e t u r n to the l a s t chapter of the Cyropaedia. I f one can f i n d i n t h i s s e c t i o n (so r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t from the rest of the work) some evidence of the ideas j u s t presented I b e l i e v e i t f a i r to assume that i t was the con- scious p o l i t i c a l purpose of Xenophon t o urge the Greeks t o unite aga i n s t the P e r s i a n s . The f i r s t point that Xenophon makes i s that the Persians have d e t e r i o r a t e d and at the present time are much worse than i n 82 the past. This d e t e r i o r a t i o n was unknown to the Greeks who 7gMem. 15-17. 79Mem. 10-11. g0Mem. 3 , 5, 26. 81, Mesk, J . "Die Tendenz der Xenophontischen Anabasis," Wien. Stud., X L I I I (1922-23) I36- I46. g 2 C y r . V I I I , 8, 2, 4. 87 do joined the exp e d i t i o n of Cyrus the Younger. ? P h y s i c a l l y , they have grown weak because of l u x u r y ; they have ceased t o h u n t . ^ F i n a l l y , any wars they undertake r e q u i r e the help of the Greek d c mercenaries even when f i g h t i n g against the Greeks. p From t h i s , i t appears f i r s t t hat the Greeks who undertook the expedition w i t h Cyrus are not to be censured since they were deluded by promises that the Persians f a i l e d t o keep--a statement apologe- t i c i n nature. That the Persians have become l a z y and degener- ate seems an i n s u f f i c i e n t motive, i n and of i t s e l f , f o r w r i t i n g t h i s l a s t chapter unless i t c o n t r i b u t e s to an o v e r a l l conscious purpose, namely, a Greek ex p e d i t i o n d i r e c t e d against these Per s i a n s . The question, "When d i d Xenophon conceive of t h i s purpose?" i s r a i s e d by J . M o r r , ^ who suggests t h a t Xenophon became con- scious of such an excursion d u r i n g the anabasis i n 401/0. This i s undoubtedly t r u e . Under what s o r t of lea d e r s h i p t h i s m i l i - t a r y e x p e d i t i o n was to take place was not however s a t i s f a c t o r i l y r e s o l v e d i n Xenophon's mind u n t i l l a t e r i n h i s l i f e . I t seems to me that the. conscious purpose of u n i t i n g the Greeks under the combined l e a d e r s h i p of Athens and Sparta must c o i n c i d e w i t h Xenophon's growing d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t w i t h one-man r u l e . H i s t o r i - c a l l y , t h i s occurred about the time of the B a t t l e of Leuctra. g3cyr. V I I I , 8, 2, 3. g 4 C y r . V I I I , 8, 2, 12. ^ 5 C y r . V I I I , 8, 2, 26. 86 Morr, J. "Xenophon und der Gedanke elnes a l l - G r i e c h i s c h e n Eroberungszuges gegen P e r s i e n , " Wien. Stud. XLV (1926-27) 186-201. m C e r t a i n l y , t h i s agrees w i t h the date of p u b l i c a t i o n of the Memorabilia and the Anabasis (see supra 54,55 ). Why d i d Xenophon undertake to set the d e s i r a b i l i t y of a campaign against the Persians before the eyes of Greece? From boyhood he had been i n f l u e n c e d by or inv o l v e d i n war. I t was a part of the heroic and, perhaps, a r i s t o c r a t i c t r a d i t i o n . The i n e v i t a b i l i t y of war seemed t o Xenophon's generation to be an es t a b l i s h e d f a c t . I f Greece must be at war, l e t i t be against an e x t e r n a l foe. I n t e r n a l s t r i f e could lead only to s e l f - a n n i h i l a t i o n . Xenophon's own words i n concluding the H e l l e n i c a .and the d e s c r i p t i o n of the B a t t l e of Mantinea express t h i s idea most v i v i d l y . xouxiov 6e 7ipax$evTu>v xouvavxCov Lyeyivrixo ou evouaaav itdvxec; av$pumot eaea&ai. ovv£.\r)\v&vCa<z yap axe6bv andanq TT)S 'E \Ad6os x a l avxixexayu-evuv, o u 6 e l s r\v oaxiq oux V E T O , e i udxT] eaoixo, xovq (iev xpax^aavxas ap£eiv, xovq 6t xpaxn^evxac; unnxoous eaea^at* o bt $ebc; ouxws euoiTjaev waxe aatpoxepoi, uiev xponaCov tig vevtxnxoxe? eaxTjaavxo, xovq be taxauevou? o u 6 e x e p o i exwXuov, vexpoug 6e ,au<poxepoi. uev u>s vevtxrjxoxeq uTtoarcov6ous aniboaav, au/poxepoi, St T)xxn|ievoL uTioaTcovSou? aneKdupavov, vevcxnxevai bt cpdaxovxes exdxepoi ouxe x^pqt ouxe Tco\ei ouxe apxfi o u 6 e x e p o i ou6ev TiXeov exovxe? e^avrjaav T\ nplv xnv udxT)v yevea^ai*'axpcaia 6e x a l xapaxr) ext nXetcov u.exoc XTJV u-dxnv eyevexo fj 7ipoa-&ev ev xfi * E \ \ d 6 t . CHAPTER VII XENOPHON AND ISOCRATES Before we consider Xenophon's l a s t study, de v e c t i g a l i b u s , i t i s necessary t o di s c u s s b r i e f l y the work of another l i t e r a r y f i g u r e of the f o u r t h century whom because of the obvious s i m i l a r i - t i e s of theme i n h i s w r i t i n g s we can no longer ignore. I s o c r a t e s 1 2 was born i n 436. He studied under Gorgias of L e o n t i n i , one of the f i r s t (at the Olympic f e s t i v a l of 408) to urge the Greeks to unit e and make war against the b a r b a r i a n s . 3 He was a l s o a Sxacpoc; of Socrates f o r whom Socrates p r e d i c t e d a great f u t u r e . 4 Of p a r t i c u l a r concern to us are four of h i s works published i n Xeno- phon's l'ifetime*,. the Panegyricus i n 380,^ h i s l e t t e r s to Dionysius 6 7 £ a f t e r 370 and t o Archidamus i n 3 5 6 , ' and d_e Pace i n 355. ^"In the archonship of Lysimachos, 436/5, 01. 86 .1 : Diog. La e r t . 3 . 3 . 2 C i c e r o , Orator, 176. 3 P h i l o s t r a t u s , Ep. 73 i n H. D i e l s , Die Fragmente der Vorso- k r a t i k e r , edited by Walther Kranz; s i x t h e d i t i o n , I I , 279- F.W. Bl a s s , Die a t t i s c h e Beredsamkeit, I, 59 argues f o r 392. 4 P l a t o , Phaedrus, 273,279- -*This work was w r i t t e n when Athens was without any p o s i t i o n of l e a d e r s h i p and Sparta was at the height of her power, hence, s h o r t l y before the Second Athenian Confederacy of 373/7. A f t e r 370 since the Spartans are no longer i n power; Ep. , 1 , 8 . ^ I s o c r a t e s says he was eighty years of age when he wrote i t ; Ep. 9 ,16. °The r e v o l t s of Chios, Kos, Rhodes and Byzantium, which occur- red between 357 and 355, are s p e c i f i c a l l y r e f e r r e d t o i n de Pace 16. 90 In the Panegyricus Isocates addresses himself t o a number of p o l i t i c a l problems. In 3$0 Sparta as the enforcer of the King's Peace held almost absolute sway over Greece. Although Athens had l i t t l e a u t h o r i t y outside A t t i c a , I s o c r a t e s sensed the d i s i l l u - sionment w i t h Sparta present i n some s t a t e s . When he w r i t e s , xwv yap 'EMTJVWV ot LIEV ucp' r juiv , OI 6' unb AanedcuiiovCoi<; etoriv, 9 he i s o b l i q u e l y c a l l i n g upon Athens to r e e s t a b l i s h her leader- ship among the Greek s t a t e s . T a c t f u l l y (because Sparta held the hegemony at t h i s time) he says that Athens and Sparta should share the hegemony of G r e e c e . H e then goes on t o e x p l a i n why Athens deserves the l e a d e r s h i p . She has held a t r a d i t i o n a l place of honour among the Greek s t a t e s and has bestowed the greatest b e n e f i t s on her fellow-Greeks."^ Nowhere does he mention any reason why Sparta should have a share i n the hegemony. Instead he says that the Spartans are hard t o persuade, napeiXrjcpaca yap ^eu6f] \6yov, cos eaxiv auxois TiyeCa^au Ttdxpiov* r)v 6* eiu6ei£ri xis auxous xauxnv XTJV XUU.T)V rifiexepav ouaav jaaWov r\ neuvtov . ...^2 In another passage, w h i l e defending the a c t i o n s of Athens i n the punishment of Melos, (416 B.C.), Iso c r a t e s emphasizes that the harsh treatment of Athens' a l l i e s , although at times neces- sary, was s t i l l more r e s t r a i n e d than the behaviour of the Spart-ans, 9Pan. 16. 1 0 P a n . 17. U P a n . 21, 22. l 2 P a n . 18 l 3 P a n . 100-106. 91 Clearly, as he says later, he was calling on Athens to unite the Greek states. The motivation for establishing this hegemony was a lack of homonia in Greece about 330. Greek states were in 1 — financial trouble. As a result they became aggressive toward one another in the hope of easing their economic distress by seizing 15 land and wealth from neighbouring states. J At the same time each state experienced internal quarrels because of s t r i f e bet- 1 6 ween rich and poor. To alleviate the economic crises the Greeks needed a state to lead a campaign against Persia. In this conquest of a large portion of Persia, plunder and wealth would be brought back to Greece and the poverty-stricken Greeks from 17 the various states could be settled in Persia. This, then, i s to be the nature of the hegemony-leadership in a war against Persia, which w i l l be voluntarily accepted by other Greek l^Antidosis 57, 53. K. Bringman, Studien zu den politischen IdSen des Isokrates, 28-46, disputes this idea that Isocrates urged a revival of the naval empire. I think that by praising the f i r s t Confederacy (Pan. 103-106) and using i t as an example of how to benefit the Greek states, he gave strong impetus to the reestablishment of the naval empire at Athens whether this was his intention or not. 15p_an. 173, 174- 1 6Pan. 36. 1 7Pan. 173- 92 18 states. Isocrates must have been pleased to see the Second Athenian Confederacy begun in 378/7, which promised to each of Athens' a l l i e s ... e£etvai au[ x]w[. i ' e\ e u$ep]uH o v x t x a ! auxov6u.wi, H O \ L T [ £uou.ev]a )L T ioXaxeCav TJV a v POUXTVXOU, U.T]XE [<ppoup]ocv e t o d e x o - uieviui. \xr\xz a p x o v x a vno[ 6ex3 ou.£vwi u.r)xe cpopov c p e p o v x i . ^ Xenophon in the presentation of the ideas discussed in the previous chapter was obviously in agreement with Isocrates concerning the need for a campaign against Persia to relieve the financial distress in Greece. He also agreed that there was a need for someone to give leadership. That the Athenians should have a share in this leadership and that they were to f u l f i l l a humane and harmonizing role in Greek politics were absolutely essential to the success of any united campaign. I think, however, that he differed strongly with Isocrates concer- ning Sparta. While Isocrates considered that Sparta was euno6u)v * * * * * t * 9 c •* 20 xTI XOJV E M n v w v euoatp-ovuct, Xenophon, as has been shown, Isocrates even suggests that they need not trouble the rest of Greece to contribute soldiers since a l l w i l l want to join voluntarily when they see the nature of the expedition; Pan. 135- •*-9The decrees relating to this alliance are found in M. N. Tod, Greek Historical Inscriptions, vol. 2, 113, 121, 122, 123. For the passage see 123. 15-23 (IG I I 2 43) . 2 0Pan. 20. 93 c o n s t a n t l y , defers to the Spartans, since a l l Greece agrees t h a t xohq AaxedounovCouc. T)Yeu6vas eivai.̂ In the de Pace I s o c r a t e s r e v e a l s great d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the p o l i c i e s that Athens followed i n the Second Athenian A l l i a n c e . ^ xAnab. VI, 1, 26, 27. The question whether Xenophon in f l u e n c e d I s o c r a t e s or v i c e - v e r s a has been the subject of much controversy among German s c h o l a r s . Cf. Josef Mesk, "Die Tendenz der Xenophontischen Anabasis," Wien. Stud., XLIII (1922) I36-I46 ; A l f r e d Kappelmacher, "Xenophon und Is o k r a t e s , " Wien. Stud., X L I I I (1922) 212-213; Josef Morr, "Xenophon und der Gedanke eines a l l g r i e c h i s c h e n Eroberungszuges gegen P e r s i e n , " Wien• Stud., XLV (1927) 186-201; and K. Munscher, "Xenophon i n der g r i e c h i s c h - rornischen L i t e r a t u r , " P h i l o l o g u s , Supp. X I I I , part I I , 1-24. Since there i s a demonstrable f r i e n d s h i p between Xenophon and rt Isocrates ( c f . Munscher, l o c . c i t . ) , i t seems f o o l i s h to i n s i s t t h a t , because a passage i n one author i s s i m i l a r to a passage i n the other author, one was t h e r e f o r e w r i t t e n before the other, or v i c e - v e r s a , or perhaps at the same time. (The assumption i s that p r i o r i t y of w r i t i n g proves the f i r s t author t o be the dominant i n f l u e n c e . ) Friends tend to. e x e r c i s e an unconscious i n f l u e n c e on one another and often ideas between them have been discussed long before they appear i n p r i n t . Thus we s h a l l confine ourselves to p o i n t i n g out some of the s i m i l a r i t i e s and the d i f f e r e n c e s i n the works of Xenophon and I s o c r a t e s , a d m i t t i n g the dependence of.one on the other. 94 Instead of u n i t i n g Greece, Athens conducted h e r s e l f i n such a way that Chios, Kos, Rhodes and Byzantium r e v o l t e d from the con- federacy i n 3 57. As a r e s u l t I s o c r a t e s wrote the de. Face to suggest x P ^vcu 7 i o i e C a $ a i TTJV euprjvriv u.T) u o v o v npoq X i o u g n a l ' ; P O 6 L O U ? n a l B u C a v x t o u s x a l K $ o u s c t \ \ a rcpbs a-rcavTa? avftptorcouc; • To emphasize t h i s he expounds the t h e s i s t h a t i n j u s t i c e and 23 i m p e r i a l i s m are great f o l l y and madness tha t b r i n g d i s a s t e r . Even w i t h a l l her r i c h e s Athens could not maintain the f i r s t empire. 2^ C e r t a i n l y i n her present f i n a n c i a l l y b e r e f t c o n d i t i o n Athens w i l l not be able t o c o n t r o l her second empire, although t h i s seems to be her i n t e n t i o n since she has f a l l e n back i n t o 2 S her old i m p e r i a l i s t i c a t t i t u d e . J Sparta had a l s o obtained a lar g e empire and because of i t was almost destroyed i n a very 26 short time. As a r e s u l t of i m p e r i a l i s t i c p o l i c y both c i t i e s 27 obtained only the hatred of t h e i r f e l l o w Greeks. ' Therefore i t becomes obvious t h a t i n j u s t i c e , which i s equated w i t h i m p e r i - a l i s m , i s u n p r o f i t a b l e . On the other hand, a p o l i c y based on e u a e p e t a , 6ixcuoauvT), and aaxpoauvT) (which are i d e n t i f i e d w i t h r e p u d i a t i o n of naval 2 2 d e Pace,16. 2 3 d e Pace 17. 2^de Pace 75-90. 25de Pace 29. 2 6 d e Pace 95- 27de Pace 104, 105 95 2B imperialism) w i l l b r i n g p r o s p e r i t y t o the s t a t e . I f Athens w i l l r e t u r n to the o r i g i n a l p o l i c y of the Second Naval League (to t r e a t her a l l i e s as f r i e n d s , not su b j e c t s , and t o defend 29 t h e i r autonomy) she w i l l win the favour of the r e s t of Greece. This p o l i c y seems t o have taken precedence over the idea of a 30 march against P e r s i a . ^ Nevertheless Athens must s t i l l maintain a strong m i l i t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n t o be used to a i d other Greek 31 s t a t e s that have been oppressed or attacked u n j u s t l y . Athens w i l l o btain the f r i e n d s h i p of other s t a t e s and w i l l prosper i f she seeks a p o s i t i o n i n Greece analagous t o that of the Spartan kings, who could be put to death f o r wrongdoing but whom every Spartan was eager t o defend at the cost, even of h i s l i f e 32 because of t h e i r p o s i t i o n of honour. That I s o c r a t e s had not given up h i s idea of war against P e r s i a i s i n d i c a t e d by se v e r a l of the l e t t e r s that he sent t o var i o u s t y r a n t s of h i s time. The f i r s t of these, t o Dionysius of Syracuse, was w r i t t e n a f t e r 3 7 0 . 3 3 In i t he advises Dionysius that Athens w i l l a l l y h e r s e l f t o him el' Tt npaTTOts imep TT)S 2 8 d e Pace 63, 64. 2 9 d e Pace 134, 135. This leads Isocrates t o the statement HT)6e 6eo"rtOTtHU)s, aWa autitiaxtHuk auxwv entaxaxcaLiev. 3 0 d e Pace 16. 3 1 d e Pace 136-141. 3 2 d e Pace 142, 143• 3 3 S e e Supra 8 9 n. 6. 96 'EMddos dya^ov.^^In 356,35 s h o r t l y before he wrote de Pace, he sent a l e t t e r to Archidamus i n which he d e c r i e d the l o t of the Greeks and suggested that Archidamus would f i n d the r e s t of Greece ready to choose him as leader i n a united campaign against Persia.- 5 Later he s i m i l a r l y urged P h i l i p t o undertake such a campaign, i n which he would f i n d Athens the most u s e f u l of a l l Greek c i t i e s i f she should become h i s a l l y . 3 7 The conclusion that "the symmachy of I s o c r a t e s ' dream was a m i l i t a r y entente of autonomous c i t i e s under a generalissimo who might be king i n his. own country, but among h i s a l l i e s was simply chosen as commander"^ seems c o r r e c t . However, when Iso c r a t e s wrote the de Pace he had become aware that Athens, r a t h e r than c o n t r i b u t i n g to homonoia among Greek s t a t e s , was again a c t i n g as a d i s r u p t i v e force i n Greek p o l i t i c s . Hence, he changed h i s ideas about the campaign against P e r s i a as they had been expressed i n the Panegyricus i n that he no longer thought t h a t a P e r s i a n e x p e d i t i o n would b r i n g peace to Greece but, r a t h e r , that harmony among the Greek sta t e s was a p r e r e q u i s i t e to a s u c c e s s f u l war against P e r s i a . Therefore he urged Athens t o f o r g e t about aggression against P e r s i a since she seemed i n v a r i a b l y t o t r a n s f e r t h i s aggression to h e r . f e l l o w - 3^Ep_. 1, 3. 35see supra 90 n. 7- 3 6E£. 9, 17. 3 7Ep_. 2, 17. 3^E. Barker, "Greek P o l i t i c a l Thought and Theory i n the Fourth Century," CAH VI 519- 97 Greeks. Rather Athens should leave the l e a d e r s h i p against the Persians t o one of the monarchs of the time and concentrate on c r e a t i n g harmony among the Greeks. I t seems reasonably c l e a r that i n the de Pace I s o c r a t e s has suggested a r o l e f o r Athens that i s s i m i l a r to what Xenophon has w r i t t e n (see supra 69-73). He d i f f e r s from Xenophon i n the type of l e a d e r s h i p he envisages f o r Greece. Where Xenophon had ear- l i e r suggested a b e n e f i c i e n t tyranny i n which the King f i r s t con- quers the s t a t e and then wins the l o y a l t y of the people through p h i l a n t h r o p i a , I s o c r a t e s thought that the Greeks would v o l u n t a r i l y choose a monarch, Archidamus, as lead e r . At a l a t e r date Xenophon had g r a d u a l l y moved from the thoughtof a beneficent tyranny to the idea of Sparta ( i n a l l i a n c e w i t h Athens) re s p o n s i b l e f o r the a c t u a l command against the Pe r s i a n s . Whether Isocr a t e s ever hon- e s t l y d i s p l a y e d any philo-Laconian a t t i t u d e s i s open t o question. Xenophon's f i n a l work, de v e c t i g a l i b u s , w r i t t e n about 3 5 5 , 3 9 39Dat i n g i s based on the c o n d i t i o n of Athens presented i n the work and on the statement that the Phocians are i n c o n t r o l of Delphi (Vect. 5, 10), which happened i n 356. He died s h o r t l y TlOpOL afterwards. W. Schwahn, "Die Xenophontischen Aund die athenische I n d u s t r i e i n v i e r t e n Jahrhundert," Rhein, Mus., LXXX (1931) 2 53- 278, i n d i c a t e s h i s doubt about the authorship of t h i s work. His view i s opposed ( c o r r e c t l y ) by A. Wilhelm, "Untersuchungen zu Xenophons nop01,"-Wien. Stud., L I I (1934) 18-56. 93 shows some s i m i l a r i t y to the d_e Pace i n t h a t Xenophon a l s o oppo- ses the idea that eug xP^M-axa Hep&aXewTepov . e i v a i -ufl %6\zi •noXenov n e i p n v r i v . Xenophon had seen that the f i n a n c i a l d i s t r e s s of Athens had motivated her to f o l l o w a p o l i c y of i n j u s t i c e toward other c i t i e s and now he seeks a method of supplying Athens with the f i n a n c i a l resources that w i l l a l l o w her to pursue a peaceful p o l i c y and remove enmities from her. He suggests increased r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the m e t i c ^ l greater a t t e n t i o n to the needs of commercial men, 4 2 more lod g i n g houses near the harbour to a t t r a c t v i s i t o r s , 4 3 a p u b l i c l y owned m e r c h a n t - f l e e t , 4 4 re-opening the s i l v e r mines at Laurium 4^ and o b t a i n i n g a p u b l i c body of s l a v e s . 4 0 I f Athens i s t o enjoy t h i s f i n a n c i a l r e s t o r a t i o n she must have peace. Not coercion but good s e r v i c e to her f e l l o w Greeks formerly gave I 7 Athens a p o s i t i o n of ascendancy. These suggested reforms appear t o be r a d i c a l l y l i b e r a l i n nature. They stand out as attempts to make l i f e more p l e a s i n g t o immigrants, f o r e i g n e r s , and people who lacked the p r i v i l e g e s 4 0 V e c t . 5, 11. 4 1 V e c t . 2, 1 -5 . 4 2 V e c t . 3, Iv44- 4 3 V e c t . 3, 12. 4 4 V e c t . 3, 14. 4 5 v e c t . 4, 1-12. 4 o V e c t . 4, 14-25- 4 7 V e c t . 5, 1 and 5 • 99 of c i t i z e n s h i p . They a l s o r e f l e c t Xenophon's own a t t i t u d e s to other Greeks as he revealed them at S c y l l u s . In the next passage Xenophon once again-re-echoes the p o l i - t i c a l ideas and a t t i t u d e s that have p r e v i o u s l y been discussed. His philo-Laconian f e e l i n g i s s t i l l present: cxWot LIT)V nal Aax£6atLiov t o t ou 8 t a a $ £ v x £ s ucp' rinwv d \ X * e u itdaxovxEc; e u e x p e ^ a v ' A S n v a t o t s T i e p t xr\q nyELtovtac; $ E a $ a t onux; B p u X o t v x o . Once again he reminds the Athenians of the Spartan p o s i t i o n and then suggests that Athens go about the business of r e c o n c i l i n g Greece, n a l a v e u novuv nal a v e u xtv6vvoov nal danavnc; Xenophon's p h i l a n t h r o p i a i s d i s p l a y e d i n h i s advice to Athens i n defending h e r s e l f . For i f she should be wronged by any s t a t e s but followed a p o l i c y of j u s t i c e , he suggests, u o X u $ a x x o v av xtuu)pottie$a a u x o u g , since the enemy o u 6 e v a . . . av E X O t E v a u u . a a x o v . ^ ^ In o f f e r i n g advice to Athens the f i n a l chapter reveals another of Xenophon's p o l i t i c a l i deas. He s t i l l maintains some of h i s respect f o r the old customs, i n s t i t u t i o n s and r e l i g i o n . For he suggests, c e p e u a t b\ nal BouXfl x a l cxpxatc; nal Inncvai x a n d x p t a dno6uao t i e v I f i t seems best t o Athens t o undertake these eco- nomic reforms, he says, o - u u B o u X e u a a t u ' av sywys 7t£|icJ;avxa<; nal Etc; Au)6wvr)v x a l E t ? AsXcpous £7i£p£a$at xouc; ^ E O U C ; . ^ 2 Thus the de_ v e c t i g a l i b u s r e a f f i r m s that Xenophon held many of the a t t i t u d e s discussed i n the previous chapters. These ^ V e c t . 5, 7- 4 9 V e c t . 5, 8. 5°Vect. 5, 13. 5 1Vect. 6, 1. 5 2Vect. 6, 2. 100 always a f f e c t e d h i s ideas about Greek u n i t y . However, the economic c r i s i s that threatened Greece and caused much of the p o l i t i c a l t u r m o i l forced him, as i t d i d I s o c r a t e s , t o pursue new ideas i n the hope of s o l v i n g the problem. Although he began by t r a c i n g a f e d e r a l s o l u t i o n t o the economic problem, the s t r i f e and d i s c o r d among l o c a l s t a t e s forced him t o look f o r some means of s e t t i n g before the eyes of Greece a st a t e that could serve as a model i n r e p u d i a t i n g a p o l i c y of aggres- sion against other Greeks and i n seeking a s o l u t i o n to i t s pro- blems w i t h i n the confines of i t s own t e r r i t o r y . Therefore he c a l l e d upon Athens to make another e f f o r t to be a benefactor to a l l Greece, as she had been formerly, by p o o l i n g her i n t e r n a l resources and making c e r t a i n commercial innovations to a l l e v i a t e economic d i s t r e s s and so remove one of the causes of Greek d i s u n i t y . CHAPTER IX CONCLUSION In the preceding pages we have traced Xenophon's p o l i t i c a l ideas as they v a r i e d throughout h i s l i f e t i m e . To t h i s end we have looked c a r e f u l l y at h i s expressions of a p p r e c i a t i o n and censure concerning the events t h a t he describes i n the H e l l e n i c a Tozamplify these statements, a f f i n i t i v e ideas i n h i s other major works have been drawn i n t o the d i s c u s s i o n . There are two paradoxical a t t i t u d e s that Xenophon held. F i r s t , he maintained a deep and enduring respect f o r the a r i s t o - c r a t i c conception of the heroic w a r r i o r . The i n d i v i d u a l who surpassed a l l h i s f e l l o w s i n r e l i g i o u s p i e t y , a b i l i t y , knowledge and wisdom i s seen i n the H e l l e n i c a , the Cyropaedia and the M e m o r a b i l i a . T h i s same notion i s responsible f o r h i s p h i l o - Laconian a t t i t u d e . The Spartan w a r r i o r was the c l o s e s t contem- porary i n c o r p o r a t i o n of t h i s o l d i d e a l . Sparta's c o n s t i t u t i o n s t i l l attempted to develop c i t i z e n s of such a k i n d . The second a t t i t u d e that was deeply ingrained i n Xenophon's mind has been designated as p h i l a n t h r o p i a . I t was a respect f o r the customs, behaviour and persons of a l l men. This c o n s i d e r a t i l e d Xenophon t o oppose the extreme o l i g a r c h y of C r i t i a s and t o ^Even Socrates engages i n d i s c u s s i o n of b a t t l e - t a c t i c s i n the Memorabilia, I I I , 5* Xenophon r e v e a l s a s o l d i e r ' s f a s c i n a - t i o n f o r m i l i t a r y matters i n almost a l l h i s works. 102 express a p p r e c i a t i o n f o r the work of Theramenes. I t was t h i s same con c e p t i o n t h a t gave r i s e t o the i n c r e a s e d importance of the assembly t h a t we f i n d i n the Anabasis and was enunciated i n i t s most r a d i c a l form i n the de v e c t i g a l i b u s . These a t t i t u d e s are i n a constant t e n s i o n i n Xenophon's w r i t i n g . T h i s t e n s i o n i s u n d e r l i n e d by t h r e e t h i n g s . F i r s t , h i s l i f e ' s span covered a time of extremely r a p i d change. He saw the f i r s t Athenian empire and Athens as a r i c h and powerful s t a t e . He a l s o saw the d i s i n t e g r a t i o n of the empire and l a t e r the f i n a n - c i a l l y b e r e f t c o n d i t i o n of Athens i n 355- He a l s o saw Sparta approach the p i n n a c l e of power among the Greek s t a t e s only to l o s e her c o n t r o l through harsh and i n c o n s i d e r a t e treatment of other Greeks. Thus he f e l t t h a t the s o l u t i o n f o r Athens was more d i s c i p l i n e and f o r Sparta g r e a t e r humaneness. Second, Xenophon had a sense of involvement i n the events of h i s time t h a t f o r c e d him t o take a stand q u i c k l y , p r a c t i c a l l y and t h e r e f o r e sometimes w i t h l i m i t e d o b j e c t i v i t y . He was i n v o l v e d i n the revo- l u t i o n s of 411 and 404. He was present at the B a t t l e of Coronea. Hi s son d i e d i n the c a v a l r y s k i r m i s h b e f o r e Mantinea i n 362. Xenophon's e x i l e from Athens a l s o i n d i c a t e s a c t i v e p o l i t i c a l involvement. Thus Xenophon's d e c i s i o n s and thoughts were i n some measure a f f e c t e d by e x t e r n a l f o r c e s . T h i r d , we have a l a r g e c o l - l e c t i o n of h i s works c o v e r i n g almost the e n t i r e spectrum of h i s l i f e . I t h i n k that t h i s i n v a r i a b l y makes the t a s k of f i n d i n g a " c o n s i s t e n c y " i n h i s work much more d i f f i c u l t s i n c e i t seems to me a r a r e phenomenon when a person pursues only one i n t e r e s t w i t h s i n g l e n e s s of mind f o r an e n t i r e l i f e t i m e . C e r t a i n l y Xenophon's 103 ideas under the s t r e s s of the changing times and constant i n v o l v e - ment could hardly be expected t o remain r i g i d from youth t o old age. Thus Xenophon's p o l i t i c a l ideas work themselves out i n a t e n s i o n between the concept of the heroic i n d i v i d u a l and the i n t e r e s t i n mankind g e n e r a l l y . I t i s h i s concern w i t h the f o r - mer that r e v e a l s i t s e l f i n h i s espousal of o l i g a r c h y w h i l e the l a t t e r motivated him t o support the moderates i n 404• The defeat of Athens by Sparta and h i s f r i e n d s h i p w i t h Agesilaus again r e i n - f o rced h i s admiration f o r the heroic i n d i v i d u a l and led to h i s w r i t i n g of the Respublica Lacedaemoniorum and the Cyropaedia. His p h i l a n t h r o p i a brought about h i s d i s a p p r o v a l of Sparta's and Agesil a u s ' a c t i v i t y a f t e r the King's Peace of 336. This a t t i t u d e gains even more emphasis i n the Anabasis where the assembly i s of much greater importance t o the leaders than the common people or the c i r c l e of a d v i s e r s are t o Cyrus i n the Cyropaedia. Neverthe- l e s s he s t i l l maintained h i s i n t e r e s t i n the i n d i v i d u a l , as i s demonstrated i n h i s accounts of Jason of Pherae, I p h i c r a t e s , Epaminondas,^ and Socrates. In h i s l a s t work, h i s concern f o r common people l e d him to suggest that metics be given greater p o l i t i c a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n Athens and other s i m i l a r l y r a d i c a l ideas. Thus i t i s c l e a r that p o l i t i c s f o r Xenophon meant 2 H e l l . VI, 1, 4-19 and 4, 20-37- 3 H e l l . VI, 2, 13-39. *-Hell. V I I , 5, 4-25- 104 espousing the p o l i c y that the immediate s i t u a t i o n demanded. Once again we are reminded of Socrates* d i s c u s s i o n w i t h A r i s t i p p u s where the main point of the conversation i s that the b e a u t i f u l and the good are r e l a t i v e concepts. itdvTCX yap aya^cx uev xal xaXd'eaTi npbq a av eu exT) Xenophon l a y s great s t r e s s on xaXov x & y a & o v T h i s i s what he wishes t o see among the Greek-speaking peoples and what he s t r e s s e s i n h i s own l i f e . I t seems reasonable, then, to expect Xenophon to make p r a c t i c a l d e c i s i o n s i n keeping w i t h the circumstances. In a d d i t i o n t o the teaching of Socrates, t o whom Xenophon a s c r i b e s t h i s pragmatic philosophy of l i f e , Gorgias may have i n f l u e n c e d Xenophon to f o l l o w the course he d i d i n the making of d e c i s i o n s . Wilhelm N e s t l e 7 makes the f o l l o w i n g p o i n t s : 1) Xeno- phon knew the teaching of Gorgias very w e l l ( c f . Anab. I I , 6, 16-20) ; 2) one of Gorgias' main teachings was that d e c i s i o n s must be made on the b a s i s of present circumstances, one's u l t i m a t e goal and whether one was d e a l i n g w i t h f r i e n d s or enemies; and 3) Xeno- phon r i g h t l y makes Gorgias the teacher of Proxenus, h i s f r i e n d , but ignores t h a t he was a l s o the teacher of Menon, h i s enemy. Thus Xenophon seems to have had some admiration f o r Gorgias. 5Mem. I l l , 8, 7. °Lac. P o l . 10, 4. 7Wilhelm N e s t l e , "Xenophon und die S o p h i s t i k , " Philogus, XCIV (1939) 31-50. 105 Whether we a s c r i b e t h i s pragmatic philosophy to Socrates or Gorgias, I t h i n k t h a t Xenophon d e l i b e r a t e l y espoused the p o l i t i - c a l p o l i c y that seemed best f o r the s t a t e s of H e l l a s i n a given s i t u a t i o n . Thus one must be very c a r e f u l i n speaking of a p o l i - t i c a l i d e a l i n Xenophon since h i s p o l i t i c s were subject t o change according to the circumstances. BIBLIOGRAPHY I. Ancient Authors and Texts Apollodorus. Frag, der Gr. H i s t . IIB, No. 244. Edited by F. Jacoby. Leiden 1962. A r i s t o t l e . Atheniens^um Respublica. (1) E d i t e d by F. G. Ken- ., yon. Oxford 1920. (2) E d i t e d and t r a n s l a t e d by H. Rack- ham. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1935. C i c e r o , de inventione. E d i t e d and t r a n s l a t e d by H. M. Hubbell. L o e b . C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1949. . de oratore. Books I and I I edited and t r a n s l a t e d by E. W. Sutton and H. Rackham. Book I I I edited and t r a n s - i l a t e d by H. Rackham. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1942. . Orator. Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by H. M. Hubbell. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1939. . Rhe t o r i c a . E d i t e d by A. S. W i l k i n s . Two volumes. Oxford 1903. Diogenes L a e r t i u s . V i t a e Philosophorum. (1) Edited by H. S. Long. Oxford I964. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by R. D. Hicks. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass.' 1925. Two volumes. Herodotus. H i s t o r i a e . (1) E d i t e d by C. Hude. Th i r d E d i t i o n . Two volumes. Oxford 1927. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by A. D. Godley. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cam- bridge, Mass. 1920. I s o c r a t e s . Opera Omnia. Volumes I and I I edited and t r a n s - l a t e d by George N o r l i n . Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1928. Volume I I I e d i t e d and t r a n s - l a t e d by L. Van Hook. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1945. Oxyrhynchia H e l l e n i c a . E d i t e d by B. P. G r e n f e l l and A. S. Hunt. London 189S-1920. P h i l o s t r a t u s . Die Fragmente der V o r s o k r a t i k e r . S i x t h E d i t i o n . Edited by H. D i e l s and V/. Kranz. B e r l i n 1964. Volume I I . 279. P l a t o . Apologia. (1) E d i t e d by J . Burnet. Oxford 1900. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by H. N. Fowler. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1914. . Phaedrus. Ed i t e d by J . Burnet. Oxford 1901. TI Polyaenus. Stratagemata. E d i t e d by E. Wo f l i n and I. Melder. Second E d i t i o n . L e i p z i g 1$87« Thucydides. H i s t o r i a . (1) E d i t e d by H. S. Jones and J. E. Powell. Second e d i t i o n . Two volumes. Oxford 1942. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by C. F o r s t e r Smith. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1919- 108 Xenophon. Agesilaus. (1) E d i t e d by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1920. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1925. . Anabasis. (1) E d i t e d by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1904. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by Carleton L. Brownson. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1921. . Cynegeticus. (1) E d i t e d by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1920. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1925. . Cyropaedia. (1) Edited by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1910. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by W. M i l l e r . Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1914. . de equitandi r a t i o n e . (1) Edited by B. C. Marchant. Oxford 1920. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1925. . de equitum magistro. (1) Edited by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1920. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1925. . H e l l e n i c a . (1) E d i t e d by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1900. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by C. L. Brownson. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1918. . Hiero. (1) Edited by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1920. (2) E d i t e d and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb C l a s s i - c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass.:1925. 109 Xenophon. Memorabilia. (1) Edited by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1901. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1923. . Oeconomicus. (1) E d i t e d by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1901. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb L i b r a r y C l a s s i c a l A . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1923 . . Respublica Lacedaemoniorurn. (1) E d i t e d by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1920. (2) Edited and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1925. . de v e c t i g a l i b u s . (1) E d i t e d by E. C. Marchant. Oxford 1920. (2) E d i t e d and t r a n s l a t e d by E. C. Marchant. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1925. "Xenophon" i n Diogenes L a e r t i u s , V i t a e Philosophorum. E d i t e d and t r a n s l a t e d by R. D. Hicks. Loeb C l a s s i c a l L i b r a r y . London and Cambridge, Mass. 1925- Volume I . I I . Modern Authors Adcock, F. E. Thucydides and h i s H i s t o r y . Cambridge 1963. Anderson, J. K. "Notes on Some Point s i n Xenophon's Tiepl t U T i i K f k , " JHS LXXX (I960), 1 -9 . Banderet, A. Untersuchungen zu Xenophons H e l l e n i c a . Basel 1919. 110 Barker, E. Greek P o l i t i c a l Theory; Plato and his Predecessors. Sixth Edition. London 1964. . "Greek P o l i t i c a l Thought and Theory in the Fourth Century." CAH VI, 505-535- Bassett, S. E. "Wit and Humour in Xenophon," Class. Journ. XII (1917), 565-574. Baynes, N. H. Byzantine Studies and Other Essays. London 1955- 144-167- Beloch, K. J. Griechische Geshichte. Part Two. Volume Two. ' K Berlin 1931. 2 0 - 2 5 - Birt, T. "Zu Antisthenes und Xenophon," Rhein. Mus. LI (1896), 153-157- Blass, F. W. Die attische Beredsamkeit. Second Edition. Leipzig 1887- Volume I. Bowra, C. M. Ancient Greek Literature. New York i 9 6 0 . Breitenbach, H. R. Xenophon von Athen. Stuttgart 1966. Bringman, K. Studien zu den politischen ideen des Isokrates. Gottingen 1 9 6 5 . Bruns, I. Das literarische portrat der Griechen. Berlin I896. Buchner, E. Der Panegyrikos des Isokrates. Historia, Einzel- schriften 2 . Wiesbaden 1958. I l l Bury, J- B. The Ancient Greek Historians. &@wdX>6rk 1958. Calhoun, G. M. "Xenophon Tragodos," Class. Journ. XVII (1921), 141-149. Chrimes, K. M. T. The Respublica Lacedaemoniorum ascribed to Xenophon. Manchester 1948. Chroust, A. H. Socrates, Man and Myth: Two Socratic Apologies. London 1957- . "Xenophon, Polycrates and the Indictment of Socrates," Class, et Med. XVI (1955), 1-77. Diels, H. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Edited by Walther Kranz. Sixth E d i t i o n . B e r l i n 1964. Volume I I . Erbse, H. "Die Architektonik im Aufbau von Xenophons Memora- bilie n y " . Hermos LXXXIX (1961), 257-287. Finley, J. H. Thucydides. Ann Arbor 1963. Gigon, 0 . Kommentar zum Ersten Buch von Xenophons Memora- b i l i e n . .Basel 1953. . Kommentar zum Zweiten Buch von.Xenophons Memora- b i l i e n • Basel 1956. . "Xenophontea," Eranos (1946), 131-152. G r i f f i t h , G. T. "The Greek.Historians," i n F i f t y Years of C l a s s i c a l Scholarship. Edited by Maurice Platnauer. Oxford 1954. 150-192. 1 1 2 Gwynn, A. "Xenophon and Sophaenetus," C l a s s . Quart. XXIII (1929), 39-40. Hammond, N. G. U H i s t o r y of Greece t o 3 2 2 B.C. Oxford 1 9 6 3 . Havelock, E. A. "The Evidence f o r the Teaching of S o c r a t e s , " TAPA LXV ( 1 9 3 4 ) , 2 8 2 - 2 9 5 - Henry, ¥. P. Greek H i s t o r i c a l W r i t i n g . Chicago 1 9 6 6 . H o i s t a d , R. Cynic Hero and Cynic King. Uppsdla 1 9 4 8 . Horn, R. C. "The Last Three Books of Xenophon's Anabasis," C l a s s . Wor. XXIX ( 1 9 3 5 ) , 1 5 6 - 1 5 9 . Jacoby, F. Die Fragments der G r i e c h i s c h e n H i s t o r i k e r . L e i d e n 1 9 6 2 . Part I I . Volume B. Jaeger, W. P a i d e i a : The I d e a l s of Greek C u l t u r e . T r a n s l a t e d by G i l b e r t Highet. New York 1 9 4 4 - Volume I I I , I 5 6 - I 8 I . Kagan, D. The Great Dialogue: H i s t o r y of Greek P o l i t i c a l Thought from Homer to P o l y b i u s . New York I965- Kappelmacher, A. "Xenophon und I s o k r a t e s , " Wien. Stud. XLIII ( 1 9 2 2 ) , 2 1 2 - 2 1 3 . Kingsbury, A. "The Dramatic Techniques of Xenophon's Anabasis," C l a s s . Wor. XLIX ( 1 9 5 5 ) , I 6 I - I 6 4 . K i t t o , H. D. F. P o i e s i s . Berkeley 1 9 6 6 . K r a f f t , P. " V i e r B e i s p i e l e des Xenophontischen i n Xenophons H e l l e n i k a , " Rhein. Mus. CX ( I 9 6 7 ) , 1 0 3 - 1 5 0 . 113 L a i s t n e r , M. L. W. A H i s t o r y of the Greek World 479-323 B.C. Thi r d E d i t i o n . London 1957. Lehman-Haupt, C. F. "Der Sturz des Kroisos und das H i s t o r i s c h e Element i n Xenophons Kyropaedie, I';" Wien. Stud. XLVII - (1929), 123-127. . "Der Sturz des Kroisos und das H i s t o r i s c h e -11 Element i n Xenophons Kyropaedie, I I , " Wien. Stud. L (1932), 152-160. Lendle, 0. "Der B e r i c h t Xenophons uber d i e Schlacht von Kunaxa," Gymnasium LXXIII (1966), 429-452. Lesky, A. A H i s t o r y of Greek L i t e r a t u r e . Translated by James W i l l i s and C o r n e l i s deHeer. London 1966. L i d d e l l , H. G. and Scot t , R. A,Greek-English Lexicon. Ninth E d i t i o n r e v i s e d and augmented by H. S. Jones a s s i s t e d by R. McKenzie. Oxford 1940. McGregor, M. F. "The P o l i t i c s of the H i s t o r i a n Thucydides," Phoenix X (1956), 93-102. MacLaren, M. "On the Composition of Xenophon's H e l l e n i c a , " AJP LV (1934), 121-139, 249-262. . "Xenophon and Themistogenes," TAPA LXV (1934), 240-248. M a r s c h a l l , T. Untersuchungen zur Chronologie der werke Xeno- phons. Munchen 19.28. 114 Mesk, J . "Die Tendenz der Xenophontischen Anabasis," Wien. Stud. X L I I I (1922-23), 136-146. Mewaldt, J . "Die Composition des Xenophontischen Kynegetikos," Hermes XLVI (1911), 70-92. Morr, J . "Xenophon und der Gedanke eines A l l - G r i e c h i s c h e n Eroberungszuges gegen P e r s i e n , " Wien. Stud. XLV (1926-27), 186-201. _ _ _ _ _ _ "Zum Sprachgebrauche Xenophons," Wien. Stud. XLVIII (1930), 11-24. Morrison, J . V. "Socrates and Antiphon,"'Class. Rev. N.S. V (1955), 8-12. Munscher, K. 0. "Xenophon und die L i t e r a t u r s e i n e r Z e i t , " P h i l o l o g u s Supplement X I I I (1920) Part 2, 1-34- Murray, G. - Five Stages of Greek R e l i g i o n . New York 1955. Myres, J . L. The P o l i t i c a l Ideas of the Greeks. London 1927. N e s t l e , W. "Xenophon und die S o p h i s t i k P h i l o l o g u s 'XCIVJ ") (1939), 31-50. Nussbaum, G. B. The Ten Thousand. A Study i n S o c i a l Organi- z a t i o n and A c t i o n i n Xenophon's Anabasis. Leiden 1967- Parke, H. W. "Chaerophon's i n q u i r y about Socrates," C l a s s . P h i l . LVI (1961), 249-250. 115 Pease, S. I . "Xenophon's Cyropaedia, the Compleat General," Cl a s s . Journ. XXIX (1933), 436 - 4 4 0 . P r e n t i c e , W. K. "Themistogenes of Syracuse," AJP LXVIII ( 1 9 4 7 ) , 73-77. Richards, H. "The H e l l e n i c s of Xenophon," Class.Rev. XV (1901), 197-203. . "The Minor Works of Xenophon," C l a s s . Rev. XI ( 1 8 9 7 ) , 17-21, 133-136, 229-237, 332-339, 418 - 4 2 5 . C l a s s . Rev. X I I ( I898), 193-195, 285 - 2 9 2 , 383-390. C l a s s . Rev. X I I I (1899), 198-200, 342-349. Roy, J . "The Mercenaries of Cyrus," H i s t o r i a XVI (1967), 287-323. . ^Xenophon's Anabasis: The Command of the Rearguard i n Books 3 and 4 , " Phoenix XXII (1968), 158-159. Rose, H. J . A.Handbook of Greek L i t e r a t u r e . New York i960. Ryder, T. T. B. Koine E i r e n e . Oxford 1965. Rudberg, G. "Tempel und A l t a r b e i Xenophon," Symbolae Osloenses XVIII (1938), 1 -8 . Saacke, J . A. "An Admirer looks at the Horsemen of Ancient Greece," C l a s s . Journ. XXVII (1942), 323-333. Sanders, H. M. The Cynegeticus. Baltimore 1903. 116 Sauppe, G. A- Lexicologus Xenophonteus. L e i p z i g 1869. Schmid, V/. Geschichte der Griechischen L i t e r a t u r . ?:'Munchen 1934. Part I . Volume I I . Schwann, W. "Die Xenophontischen nopqi und die a t t i s c h e i n d u s t r i e im v i e r t e n Jahrhundert," Rhein. Mus. LXXX (193D, 253-278. Schwartz, E. "Quellenuntersuchungen zur Griechischen Geschi- chte," Rhein. Mus. XLIV 91839), 161-193. Scott, J . A. "Xenophon and Dio Chrysostom," C l a s s , tfor. XVIII (1924), 44. Sealey, R. "The Revolution of 411 B.C.," Essays i n Greek P o l i t i c s . New York 1966. 111-132. Shero, L. R. "Xenophon's P o r t r a i t of a Young Wife," C l a s s . Wor. XXVI (1932), 17-21. S i n c l a i r , T. A. A H i s t o r y of Greek P o l i t i c a l Thought. Second E d i t i o n . London 1967• Sne11, B. The Discovery of the Mind: The Greek O r i g i n s of European Thought. Translated by T. G. Rosenmeyer. New York i960 . 246-263. Spaulding J r . , 0 . L. "The Ancient M i l i t a r y W r i t e r s , " C l a s s . Journ. XXVIII (1932), 657-659. Strauss, L. On Tyranny. London 1963. Sturz, F. W. Lexicon Xenophonteum. Reprinted from 1831 e d i t i o n . Hildesheim I964. Volumes I-IV. Tod, M. N. A S e l e c t i o n of Greek H i s t o r i c a l I n s c r i p t i o n s . Oxford 1962. Volume I I . Usher, S. "Some Observations on Greek H i s t o r i c a l N a r r a t i v e , AJP LXXXI (I960), 358-372. Weathers, W. "Xenophon's P o l i t i c a l Idealism," C l a s s . Journ. XLIX (1953), 317-321 and 330. Wilcken, U. "Zu Jason von Pherae," Hermes, LIX (1924), 123-127. Wilhelm, A. "Zu Xenophons AaHe6atuov uov 7io\iTeua," Wien. Stud. XLIV (1924), 154-159. . "Untersuchungen zu Xenophons nopot Wien. Stud L I I (1934), 18 - 5 7 . Wood, N. "Xenophons Theory of Leadership," C l a s s , et Med. XXV (1964), 33-65.

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 9 4
France 4 0
China 2 11
Spain 1 0
Argentina 1 0
Egypt 1 1
United Kingdom 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 5 11
Ashburn 2 0
Mountain View 2 0
Chengdu 1 0
Buenos Aires 1 0
Plano 1 0
Croydon 1 0
Cairo 1 1
Sunnyvale 1 1
Wilkes Barre 1 0
Beijing 1 0
Wilmington 1 0
Clarks Summit 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0104220/manifest

Comment

Related Items