Xenophon the Athenian, who is well known as a historian and a witness of Socratic philosophy but is usually excluded from the list of classical writers on education, actually developed his own systematic thought on moral education from a social and mainly political perspective in his extant works. His discourse on moral education presents for us the view of an unusual historical figure, an innovative thinker as well as a man of action, a mercenary general and a world citizen in his age; and is therefore different from that of contemporary pure philosophers, such as Plato and Aristotle. Furthermore, as a prolific author respected in both the classical world and the early modern era, Xenophon’s doctrine on moral education greatly influences the later development of European cultural history. This thesis explores the background and content of Xenophon’s thought on moral education, as well as its application in his other literary works, which are not directly on the same topic but are indirectly influenced by it. Part 1 discusses the background which produces Xenophon’s thought on moral education. As a historian of his own age, Xenophon’s negative view of the world he lived in is fully expressed in his Hellenica; and his idea of social education organised by a competent political leader serves as a proposal to transform the disordered Greek world in his time. As a follower of Socrates, Xenophon adopts his teacher’s approach of focusing on the study of moral issues and leadership; and the need to make apology for Socrates helps to shape many heroes in Xenophon’s works into extremely pious men and beneficial moral teachers. Part 2 analyses the content of Xenophon’s thought on moral education. This idea is systematically explained in his Cyropaedia and advocated in a rhetorical and persuasive manner in his Hiero. By modern ethical standards, Xenophon’s moral education is supported by dark art of government and cannot always be justified; but this dark side is tolerable in Xenophon’s view as long as it ultimately serves for good purpose. In his Poroi and Oeconomicus, Xenophon makes a further development of his thought by confirming that the art of accumulating and using wealth is also an indispensable skill for organisers of social education. Part 3 presents the application of Xenophon’s theory of moral education in his epoch-making literary composition. His Agesilaus, which serves as a prototype for later biographies, depicts a historical figure living and acting according to the ethical principles which Xenophon sets for ideal political leaders; while his Oeconomicus, which influenced Hellenistic and Roman agricultural works greatly, attempts to bring the experience of public education into the domestic sphere. The analysis of these themes confirms that Xenophon actually established a theory of moral education, which is social, highly political but also philosophical, in his extant corpus. On the one hand, Xenophon’s theory is less profound than that of Plato or Aristotle and is sometimes superficial and occasionally self-contradictory; on the other hand, the theory is original, innovative and influential in the history of classical literature, and therefore deserves our respect and serious treatment.

This thesis contains a discussion of the historical content of the London papyrus, POxy C42, the f1orentine papyrus,PSI \304 and the recently published fragment PCairo. (Ter.tp. irw. no. 2G/6/2//l-35),collectively known as the Hellenica Oxyrhynchiu (P). The focal point is the Asiatic campaign of Agesilaus and the battle of Sardis. Impressions gained from a personal investigation of the terrain are reviewed and an attempt is made to isolate the misconceptions that have hampered more constructive thinking on this episode of history. An endeavour is made to arrive at a personal reconstruction of the battle of Sardis and an assessment of P's credibility and value as an historian. The thesis concludes that there is no valid reason to doubt P's credibility and that discrepancies between the two main sources, Xenophon and P. can be ascribed to the difference in histographical approach. The autumn campaign of Agesilaus is discussed to illustrate more clearly how Xenophon's approach conditioned his writing of history / Classics & Modern European Languages / M.A. (Greek)

This thesis contains a discussion of the historical content of the London papyrus, POxy C42, the f1orentine papyrus,PSI \304 and the recently published fragment PCairo. (Ter.tp. irw. no. 2G/6/2//l-35),collectively known as the Hellenica Oxyrhynchiu (P). The focal point is the Asiatic campaign of Agesilaus and the battle of Sardis. Impressions gained from a personal investigation of the terrain are reviewed and an attempt is made to isolate the misconceptions that have hampered more constructive thinking on this episode of history. An endeavour is made to arrive at a personal reconstruction of the battle of Sardis and an assessment of P's credibility and value as an historian. The thesis concludes that there is no valid reason to doubt P's credibility and that discrepancies between the two main sources, Xenophon and P. can be ascribed to the difference in histographical approach. The autumn campaign of Agesilaus is discussed to illustrate more clearly how Xenophon's approach conditioned his writing of history / Classics and Modern European Languages / M.A. (Greek)

Cette étude a pour but d’analyser l’attitude de Xénophon vis-à-vis d’Athènes et de la démocratie. En retraçant les événements de l’histoire athénienne comme ils sont relatés dans les Helléniques et comme l’auteur les a vécus, le travail vise à démontrer : - que Xénophon ne condamne pas la démocratie comme une forme politique injuste, bien qu’il n’approuve pas ses choix politiques au cours du Ve siècle ; - que, grâce à la leçon tirée de l’expérience de l’échec subi au Ve siècle, Athènes est la seule cité capable, aux yeux de l’auteur, de résoudre le conflit entre Grecs et d’apporter la paix en Grèce au IVe siècle ; - que Xénophon essaie d’améliorer la démocratie sans apporter de réformes structurelles, mais à travers une réforme des mentalités politiques selon le modèle socratique. / The following study aims to analyse Xenophon’s attitude to Athens and democracy. By recounting the events of Athenian history as they are related in Hellenica and as the author experienced them, the work aims to demonstrate: - that Xenophon does not condemn democracy as an unfair form of politics, even though he does not agree with the political decisions made by Athens during the 5th century B.C. - that, due to the lessons it learnt from its defeat in the 5th century B.C., Athens is the only city capable, in the eyes of the author, of resolving the conflict between Greeks and bringing peace to Greece in the 4th century B.C. - that Xenophon would like to improve democracy, not through structural reforms but through a reform of political thinking based on the Socratic model.

No description available.

<p>This thesis has two primary aims: 1) to add weight to the minority opinion that Xenophon is not naively pro-Spartan and that while he appreciates and admires certain facets of the Spartan socio-political system, he recognises and criticises its inherent flaws, and 2) to show that Xenophon is consistent and even-handed in his treatment of Spartans throughout his works with no significant alteration over the period of his literary output. The focus is on those works in which Spartans figure most prominently: the Anabasis, Hellenica, and Respublica Lacedaemoniorum; the Agesilaus and Cyropaedia are dealt with insofar as they complement and illuminate matters under discussion.</p> <p>The first two chapters show that very little is known with certainty about Xenophon's life and the chronology of the relevant works. I argue that this lack of factual evidence has opened the way for scholars to make inaccurate and misleading speculations in support of the traditional view that Xenophon is uncritically pro-Spartan. In the next two chapters various Spartan leaders in the Anabasis and Hellenica are examined with respect to the qualities which Xenophon believed a good leader should possess. It is concluded that Xenophon shows no obvious bias toward Spartans in either work; praise and criticism are apportioned as due. The fifth chapter considers the Respublica Lacedaemoniorum with emphasis on those aspects of the Spartan lifestyle which bear most directly on the way Spartan leaders function. The standard view of the work as encomiastic is challenged and its purpose is reassessed. I argue that Xenophon simply presents an analysis of those Spartan laws and institutions which he believed allowed Sparta to rise to pre-eminence in the Greek world. A comparison with what he says elsewhere shows that he did not necessarily consider these laws to be ideal or worthy of imitation. A short conclusion draws attention to the consistency in Xenophon's attitude to Sparta in the works considered.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Nombre d’œuvres d’époque impériale montrent que Xénophon était considéré comme un modèle littéraire éminent. La présente thèse offre une analyse de la réception de Xénophon dans les discours de l’orateur Ælius Aristide, lesquels n’ont pas encore été traités sous cet angle. Les œuvres aristidiennes examinées sont : les Discours platoniciens (or. 2-4), le discours Sur la digression (or. 28), la déclamation En faveur de la paix avec les Athéniens (or. 8), l’ensemble des cinq Discours leuctriens (or. 11-15), les témoignages sur la déclamation perdue Callixène, le Panathénaïque (or. 1) et l’éloge À Rome (or. 26). L’histoire grecque a une importance cruciale dans cette enquête : Aristide s’est particulièrement intéressé aux événements de l’après Leuctres. L’analyse des références historiques aux Helléniques met en avant l’érudition de l’orateur et son intérêt pour les discours contenus dans cet ouvrage de Xénophon. L’examen du travail littéraire d’Aristide sur le texte de Xénophon pourra contribuer à améliorer l’exégèse des discours aristidiens analysés, et fournira un nouveau volet aux recherches sur la réception de Xénophon. / Several ancient literary works show that Xenophon was considered during the Imperial period as a preeminent model. The present study analyses the reception of Xenophon in Ælius Aristides’ speeches, which have never been explored from this perspective. The works taken into account are the Platonic speeches (or. 2-4), the speech Concerning a remark in passing (or. 28), the declamation On making peace with the Athenians (or. 8), the group of the five Leuctran orations (or. 11-15), the evidence of the lost declamation Callixenus, the Panathenaicus (or. 1) and the speech To Rome (or. 26). Greek history has a crucial importance in this investigation: Aristides was particularly concerned by the events following the battle of Leuctra. The examination of the historical allusions to Xenophon’s Hellenica reveals Aristides’ erudition and his interest in the speeches included in this work. Looking at Aristides’ use of Xenophon’s texts can contribute to improving the exegesis of the Aristidian works and open a new path into research on Xenophon’s reception.