Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T00:11:49.303Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VII. Conclusion: Xenophon Through Time

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2024

Get access

Extract

As Chapter 2 noted, the critical evaluation of Xenophon by scholars has changed over time. Nineteenth- and twentieth-century criticisms of his philosophical and historical writing have now largely been replaced by an appreciation of both the literary qualities of his work and the evidence they provide for the thought of his time, as well as his own contribution. While Chapter 2 examined modern critical readings of Xenophon as historiographer and philosopher, this final section surveys readings and translations from ancient to modern times, and the differing uses to which Xenophon's work has been put. Different works have spoken to different times, as fashions have changed. This chapter offers some key moments in the history of the reading of Xenophon; the diversity of literary and theoretical responses to his work demonstrates the generic breadth and enduring interest of his work.

Type
Chapter
Information
New Surveys in the Classics , Volume 48: Xenophon , 2018 , pp. 128 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Danzig 2003a; Atack 2018b. See also Chapter 6.

2 Atack forthcoming.

3 Cic. Sen. 59; Xen. Oec. 4.4–11.

4 Cicero Q Fr. 1.1.23. Elsewhere (Leg. 2.56) Cicero is happy to use the Cyropaedia as a source of information about Persian burial practices. See Humble 2020: 31–5. I thank Malcolm Schofield for further suggestions on Cicero's use of Xenophon.

5 References to Cyrus: Cic. Fam. 5.12.3, Q Fr. 1.1.23, 1.2.7, Sen. 30, 32, 79, 81, Leg. 2.56, Rep. 1.43, Off. 2.16; Choice of Hercules: Cic. Off. 1.118.

6 Cic. Off. 2.16.

7 Phillips and Willcock 1999.

8 On Arrian's interactions with Xenophon's Anabasis, see Miltsios 2022; Strazdins 2022.

9 Gray 1990.

10 Sil. Pun. 15.68–120; Bull 2006: 97.

11 C. Cooper; Gengler 2020.

12 Philostr. V A 6.11.3–8. I thank Phil Horky for this point.

13 Eunap. VS 453.

14 See Tatum 1989: 4–9. On the genre across cultures, see Blaydes et al. 2018; in relation to Cyrus, see Grogan 2014: 37–69.

15 Grogan 2007: 65.

16 Humble 2017.

17 Filelfo 1477.

18 Bodleian MS. Canon. Class. Lat. 131.

19 Asulanus 1525. The Hellenica had been included in an earlier volume of historical texts: Gemistus 1503.

20 Machiavelli 1970, 1988.

21 Machiavelli 1988: chs 6, 16, 26.

22 Rasmussen 2009.

23 Grogan 2007, 2020.

24 Rood 2017a.

25 Fielding 1762.

26 Hall 2016: 128.

27 Humble 2017.

28 Ricks 2020: 81–2.

29 Bysshe 1712, with many subsequent editions; the volume drew on François Charpentier's 1650 French translation and included the latter's short biographical sketch.

30 Franklin 1887: 50.

31 Franklin 1887: 383–404.

32 Thomas Jefferson, ‘Letter to William Short, 31 October 1819’, cited in Ricks 2020: 82.

33 Sterne 1967, e.g. vol. 5, chs 16, 26; Tatum 1989: 3–4, Humble 2017: 431–2.

34 Rood 2010.

35 Rijksbaron 2002; Rood 2004b: 43–50.

36 Schleiermacher 1987, originally published 1815, with English translation in Hare 1832–3: ii.538–55.

37 Burnet 1911: xiii–xxiii.

38 Vlastos 1957: 498–500, 1991: 30; see Morrison 1987.

39 L. Strauss 1959; see also Dorion 2001.

40 Rasmussen 2009.

41 For example Tamiolaki 2019, 2020a.

42 Sandridge 2012.

43 Foucault 1977.

44 Foucault 1984–6. See Jarratt 2014; Elden 2016: 134–63.

45 Foucault 1984–6: ii.165. See Foxhall 1994.

46 Foucault 1984–6: iii.50.

47 Foucault 1984–6: vol. 2; Elden 2016.