Can anyone recommend good scholarly surveys of Xenophon? I get the vague sense that he's considered an inferior historian to Thucydides and an inferior writer to almost any other Greek "must-read." And I want to know why.
I finished Mastronarde and am really, really enjoying Xenophon. I'm slowly making my way through the Apology at the same time, but Xenophon is so much more exciting. Battles, marches, more battles, political betrayals. Whereas not even one person has died in the Apology yet.
I probably just have the taste of a 14-yr-old British schoolboy. But seriously, why do people look down on Xenophon?
Scholarly opinions on Xenophon?
- exorcist
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:03 am
- Barry Hofstetter
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1739
- Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm
Re: Scholarly opinions on Xenophon?
And bustards -- don't forget the bustards.
It may be because most of Xenophon is in a narrative format, and so tends to be a bit easier to the beginning reader than other authors, who may not only write with more complicated syntax, but whose content is more difficult (abstract is often more difficult, particularly when it comes dressed in a another language). But don't let the naysayers trouble you -- Xenophon is a fine author, and your Greek will improve substantially as you read him.
It may be because most of Xenophon is in a narrative format, and so tends to be a bit easier to the beginning reader than other authors, who may not only write with more complicated syntax, but whose content is more difficult (abstract is often more difficult, particularly when it comes dressed in a another language). But don't let the naysayers trouble you -- Xenophon is a fine author, and your Greek will improve substantially as you read him.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Cuncta mortalia incerta...
Cuncta mortalia incerta...
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm
Re: Scholarly opinions on Xenophon?
People look down on Xenophon because he was neither Thucydides nor Plato. That was his fate. But that doesn't mean he isn't worth reading.
My personal opinion is that the Anabasis is a more engaging entry into reading real prose in Greek than Caesar in Latin because things often go wrong in Xenophon. There's a real sense of struggle and in the end of achievement. In Caesar nothing ever goes wrong, or if it does ever so briefly, Caesar always saves the day in the nick of time.
My personal opinion is that the Anabasis is a more engaging entry into reading real prose in Greek than Caesar in Latin because things often go wrong in Xenophon. There's a real sense of struggle and in the end of achievement. In Caesar nothing ever goes wrong, or if it does ever so briefly, Caesar always saves the day in the nick of time.
Bill Walderman
- Constantinus Philo
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm
Re: Scholarly opinions on Xenophon?
Caesar is also much more difficult because of constant reported speech and representation.
Semper Fidelis
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm
Re: Scholarly opinions on Xenophon?
That's exactly why he's a good author to start reading real Latin with. He confronts you with all the gnarly constructions you just learned about in your whirlwind tour of Latin syntax, and his style is largely devoid of ornamentation, which would be a distraction. It's like eating unpalatable vegetables without any sort of dressing because some nutritionist has decided they're good for you.Caesar is also much more difficult because of constant reported speech and representation.
Xenophon is much more palatable once you get past the enumeration of parasangs. But if you learn nothing else, you'll master the verb εξελαυνω.
Bill Walderman
- seneca2008
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2006
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 1:48 pm
- Location: Londinium
Re: Scholarly opinions on Xenophon?
You might find “Michael A. Flower, "The Cambridge Companion to Xenophon"” useful.
The publisher’s website has the following description:
The publisher’s website has the following description:
There is review at Bryn Mawr http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2017/2017-10-19.htmlThis Companion, the first dedicated to the philosopher and historian Xenophon of Athens, gives readers a sense of why he has held such a prominent place in literary and political culture from antiquity to the present and has been a favourite author of individuals as diverse as Machiavelli, Thomas Jefferson, and Leo Tolstoy. It also sets out the major problems and issues that are at stake in the study of his writings, while simultaneously pointing the way forward to newer methodologies, issues, and questions. Although Xenophon's historical, philosophical, and technical works are usually studied in isolation because they belong to different modern genres, the emphasis here is on themes that cut across his large and varied body of writings. This volume is accessible to students and general readers, including those previously unfamiliar with Xenophon, and will also be of interest to scholars in various fields.
Persuade tibi hoc sic esse, ut scribo: quaedam tempora eripiuntur nobis, quaedam subducuntur, quaedam effluunt. Turpissima tamen est iactura, quae per neglegentiam fit. Et si volueris attendere, maxima pars vitae elabitur male agentibus, magna nihil agentibus, tota vita aliud agentibus.
- exorcist
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:03 am
Re: Scholarly opinions on Xenophon?
seneca2008 - Thanks for the recommendation; I started on The Cambridge Companion to Xenophon and am finding it very useful. Good reference for other sources, too.