Xenophon

Another Christmas, another lovely Landmark edition under the tree for me. These books are just so copious and so carefully produced and edited; as long as they keep printing them I'll keep requesting them from Santa.

As for Anabasis, it lived up to my expectations of a real gnarly time (mostly) in Asia Minor. Whether sweating in the blazing heat of the desert, hightailing it from hostile Kurds, freezing their nuts off (literally — frostbite) in the mountains of Armenia, dodging angry tribes show more as they track the coast East, being evicted from Byzantium, or getting caught up in internecine strife in Thrace, the Greeks never have it easy.

Some highlights were the "hallucinogenic honey" incident, the undergound villages, Thracian table manners, and Xenophon stalling the entire army for several days while he waits for the omens to come out right (it's suggested by the editors that their livestock was ill, resulting in the entrails looking funny on sacrifice — finally someone arrives by boat with some fresh bullocks, they slit one open and are good to go). There's lots of elegant, persuasive Greek rhetoric (all of it from the author) plenty of creative military tactics and improvisation (like when they train their own slingers and cavalry overnight to get the Persians off their backs), and of course — Thalassa, thalassa! A nice coincidence that I read this right after Ulysses which famously quotes the Greek cry of joy at finally seeing the sea. show less

Can you imagine if your life's work survived over 2000 years, only to be remembered as a second-rate imitation of some one else's? That, apparently, is Xenophon's fate, as even the translator's intro compares his work negatively to that of Thucydides, whose work Xenophon intends to add to with his "sequel".

The other criticism Xenophon receives is one of "pro-Sparta bias". It's true a lot of the work prioritises the Spartan point of view, but I find the criticism a little funny because aren't show more we almost always working from an Athenian bias when it comes to Ancient Greece? Also, it seems like Xenophon had fairly understandable reasons (from his own personal experience) to prefer Sparta over Athens.

Moving on to my own thoughts. It's true that I found it less engaging than Thucydides. Xenophon lacks those moments of emotion, the raw descriptions of the soldiers' experience in battle or the terror and misery of defeat. Whether a dry tone is more appropriate to a historical work is a good question, although some of the best history is that which really puts you into the shoes of those who experienced it. There's also the lack of structure, or arc, and again I suppose you could take exception to my complaint that a history book is simply a succession of things happening, since history itself is merely a bunch of things happening, but I find history works best when the author helps you to understand the big picture of what is going on. I found myself constantly wondering "What is the point? Where are we going?" as I proceeded through the endless succession of wars and treaties and wars again.

The ending, however, ties everything together, and if this was Xenophon's intent then honestly it was a stroke of genius. We end with an indecisive battle involving almost all of the powers of Greece - it had been expected that the outcome of the battle would decide the future balance of power for Greece, but instead it ends with nobody better off, and as Xenophon notes, perhaps even more confused than ever. This ending reframed the entire work for me. "What is the point?" is the point! By the end of the book Greece is no better off than where it started. We still have three major powers (Sparta, Athens, Thebes) constantly fighting for control, allying and re-allying in every possible configuration. We still have the Persians and the Macedonians waiting in the wings to take advantage of this strife (or adding fuel to the fire any time it looks like it will settle down).

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the message we're supposed to take away is some nihilistic "nothing matters" one, but rather that we should learn from the foolishness of the Greek nations who could not see beyond their petty grudges and power plays to actually better themselves. If they'd been able to rise above they could have spent that time building something stronger and more enduring, but if I have my vague idea of Greek history correct, they are all about to get conquered by the Macedonians, meaning that all of this was, indeed, absolutely pointless (in hindsight). show less

Xenophon's account of a half-century of complete and total internecine mayhem — the Persians playing Sparta, Thebes and Athens off against each other with very little effort — is summed up thematically in its concluding words, describing the battle of Mantineia:

"And although each side claimed the victory, neither side was seen to have gained anything — no city, territory or increased rule — that they did not have prior to the battle. In Greece as a whole there was more uncertainty show more and disturbance after the battle than there had been before."

This is the most annalistic of the six Landmark editions, with no real unifying narrative except the Greek addiction to self-sabotage, but I still find it wonderful to read and, thanks to the luxurious maps, annotations, introductions and appendices, actually understand these texts from across a gulf of time. show less

As presented by Xenophon, Socrates is a man who knows he is the smartest guy in the room but disguises it from those who don’t know him well. When asked at the symposium to join in telling the party what he is best at or proudest of, Socrates answers, not philosophy, but pimping, by which he seems to mean introducing people to one another. He always has more than one item on his agenda. When he discusses farming in the Oeconomicus, he is interested not only in how to run a farm but also in show more the nature of what it means to be a gentleman and the nature of goodness.
His interrogators seldom understand his irony. In the Apology, when he is asked why he chooses death over some of the other punishments he might ask for, he says that he wants to die before he has to put up with the pains of old age. Kill me now because old age sucks is not a serious argument, but Socrates is the only one in the room who seems to know that.
Bisexual eroticism also stands out in Xenophon’s version of the Symposium. Most of the guests, including Socrates, seem equally turned on by boys and girls, but in the end, everyone except Socrates goes home to play with their wives and girlfriends. Socrates is not anxious to go home to Xantippe, his difficult wife. He heads out into the night alone.
I wish I had read these pieces when I first encountered Socrates in Plato. show less