Xenophon has for long, and understandably, enjoyed a privileged position as a reliable source on Sparta. Commander of a grand military expedition of Sparta's devising, and a dependent of Sparta's influential king Agesilaos, Xenophon knew Sparta from the inside, and - as himself an Athenian in exile - was well placed to comment on Sparta's difference. The simplicity of his Greek style has a perfume of honesty. And yet... Recent research has with increasing force called into doubt Xenophon's motives and truthfulness - especially as regards Sparta. Analysis of his Hellenica reveals much evasion and euphemism about Sparta's failings - complicated by occasional outbursts against the iniquity of Spartan imperialism. His euphemistic Constitution of the Lakedaimonians (itself containing such an outburst), and his near-hagiography of the dead Agesilaos, have variously evoked trust and suspicion in historians. This book, by a distinguished team of specialists in Spartan history, is the first of a short series from CPW, approaching Spartan reality by way of close analysis of our main contemporary Greek sources: their access, their biases, the literary structure and the genre of their works.

Xenophon is usually believed to have written his Hellenica as a general ''history of his own times'' in Greece, and is criticized for his disproportionately close attention to Spartan affairs and his apparent bias in favour of the Spartans. But his treatment of Sparta is much more coherent and purposive than has been noticed; and knowing the cirumstances of his life, we should consider that there were ample reasons of prudence (at least) for him to have written with much circumspection about Sparta and especially about Agesilaus and Agesilaus' friends. This methodical interpretative study of Lysander in the Hellenica as well as of the Polity of the Lacedaemonians demonstrates that Xenophon wrote aobut this city - famous for the communal life of its citizens - with critical and philosophic intent. As a case study in reading classical history, it might signal the need for a complete reevaluation of other historians as well.

Xenophon of Athens (c. 430-354 BCE) has long been considered an uncritical admirer of Sparta who hero-worships the Spartan King Agesilaus and eulogises Spartan practices in his Lacedaimoniôn Politeia. By examining his own self-descriptions - especially where he portrays himself as conversing with Socrates and falling short in his appreciation of Socrates' advice - this book finds in Xenophon's overall writing project a Socratic response to his exile and situates his writings about Sparta within this framework. It presents a detailed reading of the Lacedaimoniôn Politeia as a critical and philosophical examination of Spartan socio-cultural practices. Evidence from his own Hellenica, Anabasis and Agesilaus is shown to confirm Xenophon's analysis of the weaknesses in the Spartan system, and that he is not enamoured of Agesilaus. Finally, a comparison with contemporary Athenian responses to Sparta, shows remarkable points of convergence with his fellow Socratic Plato, as well as connections with Isocrates too.

This work presents a new critical edition of The Spartan Constitution, a treatise in state philosophy attributed to the historian Xenophon (c. 430 - c. 355 B. C.). The Greek text, reconstructed on the basis of extant manuscript sources, is prefaced by an introduction and supplemented by a critical commentary and an English translation. The introduction discusses the problem of the text's authenticity and dating and provides a comprehensive account of its sources, reception, language, style and structure as well as an analysis of the manuscript sources and the textual tradition. The commentary addresses linguistic as well as historical problems.

Introduces Xenophon's writings and their importance for Western culture, while explaining the main scholarly controversies.

The advances in Xenophontic studies of the last generation have still not resulted in a definitive literary treatment of the Hellenica 1-2, so Xenophon’s description of the Peloponnesian War deserves closer examination. This book aims to show that Xenophon has crafted his narrative in such a way as to reinforce the opinion of Thucydides, whose work he continued, that the development of the Peloponnesian War depended to a great extent on Persian money, but the factors that ultimately determined its outcome were the moral virtues and the skills of the military leaders of Athens and Sparta. Regarding Athens, Xenophon wants to show that despite Persia’s support of Sparta, Athens lost the war because of its troubled relationship with Alcibiades; the moral disintegration of the Athenians who condemned illegally the Arginousai generals and the appointment of generals who were greatly inferior. Concerning Sparta, Xenophon leads his readers to believe that in spite of- not because of- the interference of Persia in the Peloponnesian War the moral and military qualities of Lysander and Callicratidas were what turned the course of the war either in favor of or against Sparta in each phase of the war.