کورش نامه

by Xenophon, گزنفون, رضا مشایخی (translator)

کورش نامه کتابی است پر ارزش درباره شرح زندگی و کشورگشایی های کورش ، شاهنشاه بزرگ هخامنشی. در این کتاب گزنفون ، مورخ و سردار معروف یونانی، به شرح زندگی کورش می پردازد و سرگذشت وی را از زمان تولد تا درگذشت ، آمیخته با پند و افسانه ، بیان میکند و اطلاعاتی گرانبها درباره آداب و رسوم ایرانی ، تربیت جوانان ، آیین جنگاوری ، وضع اجتماعی و تشکیلات سلطنتی هخامنشیان به دست میدهد. این کتاب ، علاوه بر فایده های بی شمار تاریخی ، از نظر اخلاقی نیز کتابی ارزنده و آموزنده است ، و قهرمان کتاب ، کورش بزرگ ، نمونه ای است از انسانی با فضیلت و دارای سجایای اخلاقی.
چاپ ۱۳۹۶

Genres: History, Philosophy, Classics, Nonfiction, Biography, Politics, Leadership

275 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 361

About the author

Xenophon (Ancient Greek Ξενοφῶν, Modern Greek Ξενοφώντας; ca. 431 – 355 BC), son of Gryllus, of the deme Erchia of Athens, was a soldier, mercenary and a contemporary and admirer of Socrates. He is known for his writings on the history of his own times, preserving the sayings of Socrates, and the life of ancient Greece.

Historical and biographical works:
Anabasis (or The Persian Expedition)
Cyropaedia
Hellenica
Agesilaus

Socratic works and dialogues:
Memorabilia
Oeconomicus
Symposium
Apology
Hiero

Short treatises:
On Horsemanship
The Cavalry General
Hunting with Dogs
Ways and Means
Constitution of Sparta

Reviews

[Patrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

I could not disagree with KC's review of this work more strongly. Cyrus is not meant to be a hero for the reader, although on first blush he is very attractive. Instead, Xenophon intends to point us, ever-so subtly, to Socrates and his teachings (the speech Cambyses gives to Cyrus on the way out of Persia, the teacher of Tigranes, etc., etc.). Indeed, I believe the title alludes neither to the education Cyrus received nor the education he gave. Instead, it refers to the education Cyrus lacks: the Socratic education.

This book does not discuss atoms, gravity, genes, etc., etc. because it concerns itself with the human things. Indeed, the frequent mention of the gods in the Education is prefaced by the fact that Cyrus interpreted his own signs from the gods, so as always to get favorable prophesies. In its search of the human things, Xenophon's work is subtle, beautiful, and deep.

Moreover, KC's review is remarkably ironic in its reference to The Prince. In The Prince, Machiavelli chastises Scipio for reaching the very same conclusion as KC does about the Education of Cyrus. Scipio too thinks Cyrus a sterling example, and this leads to his eventual downfall. Machiavelli points this out so that we may know how to read not only the ancient books, but The Prince as well.

The Education of Cyrus is an utterly serious look at the life of action in its highest form, as well as the inherent deficiencies of this life when viewed within the larger context of the philosophical life. The issues surrounding the question of what the best sort of life one may live continues to be relevant and meaningful in a way that atoms and gravity never will.

When paired with the Socratic works of Xenophon, the Education of Cyrus offers a distinct presentation by which to judge what the best life is, and how we might live it.

[Debbie Zapata · Rating 2 out of 5]

Oh, Xenophon. I loved spending time with you when you talked about horses and I thought I would love this book too. Or at the least be more interested in it than I turned out to be. I mean, this is one of the books Alexander The Great carried with him while he conquered the world! How cool is it to be able to read the same book as someone who lived so long ago?!

But I'm sorry, my friend. This book may have been fascinating, educational and helpful to our man Alexander, but for me it quickly became dull. I'm so sorry. I was okay through Book One, when Cyrus was a boy and learning how to behave like both a man and a King. But in Book Two when the fighting began, you lost me. I began to skim. And after that I simply could not recapture the enthusiasm I had when I started to read. Alexander needed to read this book, and according to the tales told about him, he took your lessons to heart. Most of them, anyway.

But I am not a ruler. I don't have a queendom outside the walls of my own house, and I do not plan on conquering the world any time soon. (Although of course I do think I could run it better than some of the people in charge at the moment, but these days who doesn't feel that way?) So I am giving up with this book. I will try some of your other titles soon, Xenophon. And if for some reason I end up feeling the same way when I read them, well, I will go back to the barn and we will sit and gossip once again about horses. I could do that with you all day long.

DNF after Book 2 of 8.

[Sara · Rating 5 out of 5]

How to use people instrumentally

[Aroosha Dehghan · Rating 5 out of 5]

کورش نامه کتابی درباره‌ی زندگی کورش بزرگ (کورش دوم هخامنشی) به قلم گزنفونه. در این کتاب زندگی کورش از تولد تا مرگ شرح داده شده و میشه از میان اون به اطلاعات سودمندی درباره‌ی آداب و رسوم ایرانی، شیوه‌ی تربیتی جوانان، آیین‌ها جنگ، فرهنگ، سبک زندگی و... در ایران هخامنشی دست پیدا کرد.
البته کتاب کورش‌نامه خالی از افسانه نیست چون گرنفون در این کتاب کورش رو به عنوان نمونه‌ای از یک شاه آرمانی تصویر کرده. به همین دلیل حتما باید در کنار منابع دیگه مورد استفاده قرار بگیره اما در مجموع، یکی از مهم‌ترین منابع درباره‌ی زندگی کورش بزرگ و شیوه‌ی زندگی ایرانی‌هاست.

درباره‌ی گزنفون:
گزنفون تاریخ‌نگار و نویسنده‌ی یونانی بود که در نزد سقراط درس می‌خواند و در اینباره کتاب‌های «خاطرات سقراطی»، «دفاعیه‌ی سقراط» و «ضیافت» رو نوشت. او در زمان جنگ کورش کوچک با اردشیر دوم هم به عنوان فرمانده‌ی سپاه مزدور یونانی در ارتش کورش کوچک خدمت کرد و پس از شکست کورش، هنگام بازگشت به یونان کتاب «بازگشت ده هزار نفری» رو نوشت.

[Sharon · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Thy kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians." This was the interpretation of the handwriting on the wall during the feast of Belshazzar according to the Old Testament book of Daniel. The Education of Cyrus also contains an account of this event. My curiosity on this topic is what led me to read this book. While the prophet Daniel records what happened inside the walls of Babylonia, Xenophon records what took place outside the walls leading up to this particular conquest. While Xenophon does not write of Daniel and the handwriting on the wall, he does, like Daniel, give an account of the arrogance, revelry, and then incredulity of the Babylonians as Cyrus and his soldiers successfully capture this powerful kingdom. As fascinating as it was to read this account from a Greek Historian, this book contains so much more that is also worthwhile.

If Cyrus was indeed the kind of man portrayed by Xenophon, it is no wonder he was called 'The Great.' The way Cyrus motivated the soldiers, the way he trained them, the way he treated those conquered, the way he tried to inspire his men to virtue as opposed to forcing them to obey: Xenophon goes into detail about all of these things. In addition to Cyrus's rise to prominence, the Historian also writes about the education of Persian boys. There are also a couple of short love stories.

P.S. That Cyrus allowed the Jews to return home and allowed for their religious freedom is also a testimony to his leadership. But that is another story.

This is a book I will revisit.

[Lauren Collins · Rating 3 out of 5]

-would be 4 stars if i wasn’t just a girl who gets bored by battle descriptions!

-my Cyrus skepticism waned as I read: he’s competent (he knows how to succeed via battle tactics & people skills and always does), he’s responsible (he’s aware of the even small detail in his army), he’s diligent (never rests on his laurels), he’s pious (makes sacrifices and attends to justice), he’s benevolent (he cries when others face tragedy; he counts it more blessed to give than to receive)

-BUT his relationship with virtue is questionable. cyrus takes his father’s opening advice: the best way to appear virtuous is to be virtuous. but there is also frequent reference to the appearance of virtue. does appearance/image indicate a deceit? is the virtue false if its intended for self-benefit and not done for its own sake?? OR is the appearance of virtue emphasized not in contrast to the real presence of virtue, but to highlight how since a ruler necessarily deals in visibility & imitation, for a good ruler it’s virtue that’s on display?

- at the beginning, we are told that people will only submit to rule if they trust their ruler to exceed them at looking out for their own good. At the end, Cyrus explains to his sons that the trustworthiness required for friendship is not natural (no one is born with it), but also cannot be compelled by force. it can only won through benevolence. (Benevolence makes manifest the will and ability to care for someone’s good—appearance as manifestation, not deceit). However, as he gives his friends generous gifts, Cyrus intentionally stirs up strife among them to ensure he’s the only one they love—does this prove he doesn’t actually have goodwill toward those he bestows with benevolence? is that a problem?

(justice seems to oscillate between the standard of the fitting and the standard of ownership, maybe i’ll have more thoughts on this later)

[Mahdi Ghasemi · Rating 3 out of 5]

از تاریخ و سرگذشت های اخلاف خود پند بگیرید ؛ تاریخ مکتب پند و عبرت است

* مختصری در مورد نویسنده:
گزنُفُن (تقریبی 430 الی 354 پیش از میلاد) یکی از نویسندگان نامدار یونانیِ عهد باستان بود. وی یکی از مریدان سقراط و نگارنده کتب فلسفی از جمله خاطرات سقراطی ، دفاعیه سقراط و ضیافت بوده است. گزنفن همچنین بعنوان فرمانده سربازان مزدور یونانی در جنگ بین کوروش دوم (کورش صغیر) و اردشیر دوم ، حضور داشت که با شکست و مرگ کوروش به یونان بازگشت. گزنفن به دلیل حمایت از استادش سقراط و متهم نمودن کسانی که سقراط را به محامه کشانده بودند از آتن اخراج و باقی عمر خویش را در اسپارت گذراند.

* درباره ی کتاب حاضر:
کورش نامه روایتیست کلاسیک از کودکیِ کورش اول(کورش کبیر) تا لحظه ی مرگ وی. نویسنده بسیاری از فضایل اخلاقی ، مهارت های نظامی ، کشورداری و رواداری های سیاسی _ مذهبی را که البته ایده آل های خود اوست به کورشِ تاریخی نسبت میدهد. اما با مطالعه دقیق و پردامنه تاریخ خواهیم فهید که کورش تاریخی نه اینکه تمامی خصلت ها و صفات فوق ، بلکه از هرکدام از آنها مقداری را که سبب شود یک یونانی را به وجد آورد ( یونانیان از آغاز حکومت پارسیان و تا حدود هزارسال بعد از آن چه در هیئت یونانیان و چه در قاموس رومیان با ایرانیان در جنگ و رقابت قرار داشتند) در خود داشته است. نه فقط با اتکا به این کتاب بلکه با مطالعه تاریخ میتوان فهمید که کورش و اعمال او در آن دوران ، درخشان و کم نظیر بوده است. اما کورش نامه را نمیتوان تماما بعنوان منبعی تاریخی دانست زیرا صرفا داستانیست که حاصل آمیزش تخیلات نویسنده ، روایات و مختصاتی کم و بیش تاریخیست. به عبارتی روشنتر ؛ گزنفن در آن دوران برای آمیزش دو عنصر: حکمت فاسفی که از استادش به ارث برده و مهارت کشورداری ، کاراکتری مناسب تر از کورش کبیر در تاریخ پیدا نکرده است. برای همین خواننده ای که آثاری چون حکمت سقراط ، ضیافت و خاطرات سقراطی را پیشتر مطالعه نموده باشد خواهد فهمید که گاهی روح سقراط در کالبد کورش و بعضا روح کورش در کالبد سقراط هویدا میشود.
فارغ از اینها ؛ کتاب اطلاعات کم اما مفیدی درباره ی آداب و سنن فرهنگی و مذهبی پارسیان در اختیار محقق میگذارد.

16 اردیبهشت 99

[Nolan Croce · Rating 3 out of 5]

I support what the author is saying but it was extremely boring and difficult to pick out the good stuff. Like a crab leg and you have to pick the meat off.

[Erik Rostad · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fictionalized account of the life of Cyrus the Great 160 years after he died. Xenophon raises the problem that it is difficult for people to rule people as it divides them into two separate groups - the rulers and the ruled. Yet, here is Cyrus who navigated that tension into one of the most successful empires in the ancient world. This is Xenophon's attempt to describe how Cyrus did it by considering the education and preparation he got along the way and how he applied those lessons. Despite slogging along at times, I really enjoyed this book.

[Jamie]

I have an abridged paperback that I can’t find on Goodreads; using this as a reminder that I’ve read the abridged but should track down the full text.

[Marcos Augusto · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Cyropaedia Xenophon investigated leadership by presenting the life story of Cyrus II, founder of the Persian Empire. Because the story differs flagrantly from other sources and the narrative’s pace and texture are unlike those of ordinary Greek historiography, many analysts have classed the work as fiction. Story line is certainly subordinate to didactic agenda, but Xenophon may have drawn opportunistically on current versions of the Cyrus story rather than pure imagination. The result is fictive history, more analogous to Socratic literature than to the Greek novel (to which it is sometimes pictured as antecedent). In the Cyropaedia, techniques of military and political leadership are exposed both through example and through direct instruction.

[KC · Rating 2 out of 5]

At some point in the past six months, I read a passing reference to Cyrus in a book review as having been favorable noted by Machiavelli. No matter, I noted it long enough to park in my Amazon shopping cart until it could come home. Eventually when I re-read The Prince, I may come back and include that reference here.

I wasn’t impressed. As I get older and hopefully wiser, I have less and less patience with reading the ancients. Yes, humans are murderous and conniving, gracious and noble, sometimes all at once. However, every fifth grader should know more than an Aristotle or Augustine, literally. Xenophon is ever and finally ignorant of gravity, or genes, or germs just to stick with the letter ‘g’. Whatever insights into human nature the ancients gained and can share with us are forever leavened with fatal misunderstandings of the world, attributable to ill humors, the gods, and fates instead of electrons and Brownian motion.

According to Xenophon, writing a hundred years after his reign, in the 5th century BC, Prince Cyrus grew up in a semi-Platonic society. The best and brightest (or at least the children of the well-to-do) were kept apart and drilled hours a day on their way to becoming full citizens, or peers. The King raised an army to answer the call of an ally, and chose his son Cyrus to lead. Cyrus first instructed the peers take several commoners under their wings to whip into shape for the campaign. Cyrus would cajole, bribe, and ferociously fight his way to uniting the middle east while giving all credit to the gods and fates and sacrifices – presumable goats I guess, not prisoners. The text never really states what is being sacrificed. Cyrus also democratically shared the spoils of his campaign with his troops, increasing their loyalty and determination.

Here then is an ancient after Machiavelli’s lead heart. He carefully and completely attributed his meticulously planned successes to the whims of fate and the beneficence of the gods, and then grew into the comforts of his office until death, at which point his kingdom dissolved into the various factions he had united. Xenophon thought this a sterling example. Men with little will risk it to gain everything. A politician who can subvert the greed of others, thus multiplying his own, wins all.

This can only be seen as noteworthy if contrasted with the essentialist absurdities of Plato. A shorter review might be that Thrasymachus was right and Socrates wrong. We will not succeed in a given fight if we are the most gracious or morally correct, but instead only if the most powerful. Strategic underdogs can win tactical victories through dash and daring but only because they won the field between the two competitors on the given day, not because they possessed the purest form of dash and dare.

Two starts for describing phalanx warfare.

[Yann · Rating 4 out of 5]

La vie de du fondateur de l'empire Perse, qui fut le plus formidable adversaire des grecs, est le sujet de cet ouvrage de Xénophon. Tout est mis en œuvre dans ce texte pour magnifier les qualités morales de Cyrus qui depuis l'enfance est présenté comme un modèle pour son entourage, et qui deviendra à même de soumettre l'Asie plus encore en inspirant une amitié et une affection sincère à ses amis, sujets et vassaux à force de bontés et d'attentions, que par ses talents militaires, sa tempérance, son courage et son sens de la justice. C'est donc un ouvrage moral que Xénophon propose à ses concitoyens en leur présentant un exemple à suivre et à méditer. On trouvera donc un portrait plus proche de vies de Plutarque que des mythes historiques de Hérodote, lequel est plus riches en anecdotes diverses, et qui embrasse un période bien plus large. Mais le propos de Xénophon et aussi de montrer la cruelle décadence de l'empire Perse, qui trahissant l'héritage de son fondateur, a oublié les vertus qui lui ont permis de bâtir sa grandeur, alors qu'elle se vautre de son temps dans le luxe, les intrigues, les injustices et la violence. Il la connait bien, ayant participé à la retraite des 10000 qu'il relate dans l'Anabase. Ces textes annoncerons pour les grecs que le temps est venu de fondre sur ce fruit malade, et Alexandre sera celui qui le cueillera, en poussant jusqu'à l'Inde une expédition d'une audace sans équivalents. Si j'ai été ravi de mettre la main sur ce texte difficile à trouver, j'ai été outré de colère par le nombre invraisemblable de coquilles qui entrelardent le texte, et qui par l'irritation qu'elles inspirent nuisent véritablement au plaisir du texte. Est ce si difficile de soumettre à la censure d'un relecteur compétent un ouvrage que l'on prétend soumettre à ce prix aux jugements du public ?

[Gijs Grob · Rating 4 out of 5]

In dit boek beschrijft Xenophon het leven van de Perzische koning Cyrus de Grote (ca. 600-530 v. Chr.) en laat hij zien waarom die zo'n groot staatsman was. Xenophon staat bekend als historisch schrijver, maar het is duidelijk dat hij voor zijn Cyropaedia veel uit zijn eigen duim heeft gezogen. Dat blijkt niet alleen uit enkele anachronismen of het feit dat Xenophons relaas op veel punten afwijkt van andere bronnen, maar ook uit de enorme detaillering - Xenophon schrijft soms alsof hij er zelf bij was. Maar eigenlijk is dat ook het leukste aan het boek, het leest voor een groot deel als een echte historische roman (Cyrus stierf 160 jaar voor Xenophon diens biografie schreef).

Xenophon vertelt met veel verve over Cyrus' jeugd en zijn veldtochten, die het grootste deel van het boek beslaan. Maar als leerling van Socrates wil de schrijver ook laten zien wát nu een goede leider maakt en hij lardeert zijn bijna hagiografische biografie met filosofieën over o.a. goede opvoeding, goede oorlogstactieken en goed bestuur. Xenophon schetst Cyrus als een vorst die regeert op basis van eerlijke behandeling, wederzijds vertrouwen en respect, als iemand die zelf het goede voorbeeld geeft en - opvallend - als iemand met wie je kan lachen. Zo worden er hele tafelgesprekken inclusief grappen opgetekend. Deze passages zijn dan ook uitermate onderhoudend.

En passant leren we over allerlei vernieuwingen uit die tijd (bijv. het voorzien van strijdwagens van draaiende messen en een postsysteem op basis van paardenwisselstations). Ook wordt pijnlijk duidelijk dat vrouwen in de tijd van Xenophon geheel niet terzake deden. Er is er slechts één die een enkele rol van betekenis speelt, de door Cyrus gevangen genomen vorstin Pantheia, die een eigen tragisch verhaaltje heeft.

[Zachary Rudolph · Rating 4 out of 5]

“What!" cried Cyrus, "can one solitary speech fill the hearer's soul on the selfsame day with honour and uprightness, guard him from all that is base, spur him to undergo, as he ought, for the sake of glory every toil and every danger ... ? If such thoughts are ever to be engraved in the hearts of men and there abide, we must begin with the laws ... And then we ought to have tutors and governors to instruct and teach and train our citizens until the belief is engendered in their souls"

[Matin Pyron · Rating 4 out of 5]

زندگینامه کوروش بزرگ نیست، کوروش سوم رو گزنفون دربارش گزارش داده و در کل جالب بودش ولی یکم خسته کننده ممکنه‌ بشه کتاب
از عادت های ایرانیان هخامنشی میشه به دروغ نگفتن، آب دهان ننداختن، سر سفره غذا خوردن و اینا اشاره کرد. اطلاعات مفیدی داشت

[Betawolf · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don't even know how to classify this. Is it historical fiction? A treatise on government? Is it a hagiography or a satire? Does it answer Thucydides, or Plato, or Aeschylus? I've opted for 'biography' in my shelving system, but that decision comes with many asterisks. Certainly it's not striving for historical accuracy, but neither is it all conclusively fictitious -- for all we know, this is partly spun from tales told in Persia and Greece in Xenophon's time that may even be correct. What it is, anyway, is Xenophon's story of Cyrus. Not, I hasten to add, Cyrus the Younger, the leader of the ill-fated expedition covered in Xenophon's Anabasis, whom Xenophon actually met and knew; this Cyropaedia is a biography of Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Achaemenid Empire, who died about 100 years before Xenophon was born.

Given that it is difficult to always have a good king, there is a school of political thought that we should limit their powers, or replace the kings with assemblies of the people, as while these systems are less beneficial than a good king, they are less terrible than a bad one (and some in this school might even say that monarchy in itself is for some reason bad). The other school of thought is we should just teach princes to be good kings. This is a function of Cyropaedia -- to use an (extremely dubious) biography of Cyrus the Great as a way to illustrate the virtues of a good leader. Xenophon's Cyrus is bold yet always invites counsel, honourable yet possessed of fierce cunning, inspirationally majestic yet keenly attentive to the smallest details. He is generous with all his worldly goods, but rich beyond measure because of the friendship he inspires.

The reason this doesn't become dull despite being an eight-volume book about kingly virtue is because Xenophon knows what the hell he's doing. The story he presents is pretty entertaining because it's a story that a restless young man might actually want to read. The main character grows and gains skills, there are lots of battle scenes, there's humorous conversation over drinks. Then there are practical discussions, of logistics, of how an army should be trained, of how to march in good order, how to arrange a camp, how to divide spoils. And scattered throughout all of this are just these occasional startling gems of philosophic insight and human detail. Xenophon describes and remedies the bystander effect; Cyrus and a random guardsman dive suddenly and casually into a debate on the nature of love; Cyaraxes makes passionately clear how kindness can be ill-service. There are powerful lines lurking in here, sermons mixed with strategy.

It is, to be sure, not a real historical project, and it does not take a classicist's insight to notice that Cyrus is unlikely to have actually worshipped Zeus, or that much of the behaviour Xenophon attributes to the Persians is actually the behaviour of the Spartans. In many ways Xenophon's Cyrus is a hybrid, of the histories that Xenophon knew of the man, of the Spartan military machine that he bore arms alongside, and of Xenophon himself, as a military leader and orator with first-hand experience of the lands and peoples discussed.

Among many others, giants such as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar and Gustavus Adolphus have counted Cyropaedia one of their favourite works. Good may be debated, but great leaders certainly. And what might each of them have thought, I wonder, of that humbling epilogue?

[Ari · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked it. It felt a bit like a fantasy novel -- the plot was "boy rises from obscurity to greatness, via hard work, winning personality, and some opportune trickery, all while exploring strange lands and recruiting allies." Unlike most fantasy novels, though, Xenophon knew a lot about war, politics, and horses. It shows.

It also has a very Platonic feel to it -- there are many long digressions about ethics, the good society, the nature of virtue, about the ideal life, and so forth. Unlike Socrates, Cyrus is a man of action. His goal is not to explain the good, it is to encourage it, using both persuasion and power.

The ending feels very different from the body of the text -- the first seven books are about the rise of Cyrus, accomplished by his virtue; the last book is about his legacy and the creation of the Persian empire. The implication, particularly of the epilogue, seems to be that his virtue largely died with him -- "no sooner was he dead than his sons were at strife, cities and nations revolted, and all things began to decay"

I thought the translator's remarks in the Gutenberg edition weren't particularly insightful or helpful.

[Xavier Shay · Rating 2 out of 5]

call me a philistine but this is really just self-important white guy rambling. I mean yeah there's some basic wisdom in there - Cyrus seems pretty legit for the time - but nothing not covered by modern, better written books. As a historical item it's interesting, but not worth it unless you're really interested in a biased view of the times.

[MM · Rating 5 out of 5]

I can hardly imagine a better book on people management. A fundamental study of human relationships that will definitely survive for another 2000 years. Some of the bits may seem a little simplistic if you are particularly concerned about its application in today's world, but even these could serve as useful reference points when judging people's motives. Truly a masterpiece.

[Janice]

Providence College faculty reading group, Spring 2014

[Emily · Rating 2 out of 5]

cyrus is annoying and self-righteous and a bit of a douchebag lol

[Illiterate · Rating 3 out of 5]

How should a despot rule? Virtuously, while making use of underhand tactics.

[Helia Behrouzfar]

Please just look at the original publication year. That publication year is almost miraculous, I love it.
Cyropaedia is categorized as a philosophy book, written by Xenophon to use historical characters to showcase his opinions on generalship and honor and gallantry. Ergo it is a rather preachy kind of book. I’m not a fan of those. However, the names of cities and places, civilizations, and the kings are historical, and that part, I enjoy. Assyrians, Hyrcanians, the Medes, and the Persians were discussed.
Two points stood out to me. That Cyrus kept praying to the god Zeus, and that he had meticulous methods to treat his slaves. Worshiping Olympian gods, and keeping slaves goes against much of what I have been taught about Cyrus the Great. But this is just the beginning, I think I will learn more about him in the following year. The Greeks, after all, were the enemy of Persians. Why bother portray them as honorable, and indeed why bother with accuracy in the telling of their tale?
Greek values come through by and large. For example, the orderly way that a Greek chorus would perform in a play, and how the army would benefit from copying the method. “And when they were all out of range, they halted and reformed their ranks, better than any chorus could have done, every man of them knowing exactly where he ought to be.” That soldiers were given prizes to recite plays was a fun fact I had learned only days before.
This paragraph captured my attention in that it mentions places I have been to and it makes me feel the weight of history (I would love to visit them again after reading this). Time passes, but the land stays the same.
“Then, seeing that all was got together, he set out for that campaign of his, on which, the story says, he subdued the nations from the borders of Syria as far as the Red Sea, after that there followed, we are told, the expedition against Egypt and its conquest. From that time forward his empire was bounded on the east by the Red Sea, on the north by the Euxine, on the west by Cyprus and Egypt, and towards the south, by Ethiopia. Of these outlying districts, some were scarcely habitable, owing to heat or cold, drought or excessive rain. But Cyrus himself always lived at the centre of his dominions, seven months in Babylon during the winter season, where the land is warm and sunny, three months at Susa in the spring, and during the height of summer in Ecbatana, so that for him, it was springtime all the year.”
In conclusion, nice read.

[Joshua · Rating 4 out of 5]

Only understood this book because of Ambler's intro. Highly recommend reading that before or after you finish. The whole time I was reading it I was pretty convinced that Cyrus was a pretty great king, because he seemed to care about virtue and doing right by his subjects. I was under the impression that Xenophon wrote this as to give Socrates' philosopher king trope a real life example.

But I was wrong, and even without the introduction, it is pretty clear that Cyrus falls into greed at the end of the book, which results in the fracturing of his empire. The introduction clarified that this was apparent even early in the book. Like the Milgram marshmellow experimenters, Cyrus still desires wealth/power/etc, he is just really good at playing the long game.

Xenophon's thesis is thus that even this behavior in the long run leads to ruin. I'm not sure if he was a stoic, but I think like Socrates and the stoics, he would have agreed with the idea that virtue is the sole good. A ruler has to care about virtue above all else, and this "politicking" for power, wealth, etc, is not a stable foundation for a state.

There was also a thread of Marxist analysis in here. One of Cyrus's key innovations is the meritocracy, which elevates the lower classes out of poverty if they are competent. But like the other good things that Cyrus wrought, they do not last after his death, because he does not have a virtuous philosophy of rulership.

The history in this book was weird, and totally inaccurate (at least if you are taking the histories as true). The conflict between Media and Persia does not exist, the war with Lydia is far less interesting, as is the siege of Babylon. Cyrus also dies in a completely different way according to Herodotus, who claims he was killed by Tomyris of the Massagetae. It's no wonder the two historians choose a different method of death to fit their narrative. Herodotus's central thrust is not to mess with the gods, and thus Cyrus, who conquered too much of the world, had to die for his greed. Xenophon, who thinks Cyrus's biggest flaw is lack of inherent virtue, of course has to have him die indolently in vice.

I would certainly be interested in learning more about the historiography of this book. I know Machiavelli references it in the prince, but I wonder if Alexander read it and/or the histories. Contrasting the two tales of Cyrus' life has been super interesting to me, and I can imagine that it would be even more so to someone who was in a position to rule.

[Jerome Welch · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredible book. Many life lessons that can be applied even today.

From start to finish, Cyrus is portrayed as someone who you ought to be like. And it’s true. If someone becomes known as ‘Cyrus the Great’ or the ‘king of kings,’ who started one of the greatest empires in history, then they probably were doing something right.

Cyrus is constantly innovating. Always working on new ways to lead, to fight, and to teach. Most importantly, he finds ways to make the best out of every situation. Lose a battle? Just hire the enemy. Not enough soldiers? Just invent new siege weapons.

Constant cunning trickery is what makes Cyrus so great. He struggles when initially presented with this fact, but once he accepts it, he shines and grows so rapidly it’s hard to keep up.

It is a little dramatized, however that’s to be expected with something like this.

[Vahid Askarpour · Rating 5 out of 5]

روایت متحدشدن مادها، شوشیان، پارسیان، هیرکانیان، ارمنیان و «ملل» دیگر (عبارتی که از متن بیستون برمی‌آید) علیه آشوریان به فرماندهی کورش که نطفه‌ی امپراتوری پارس را می‌بندد؛ از زبان گزنفون، مورخ یونانی، که خلاف روایات هرودوت و سی‌تسیاس از وی آمیختگی کمتری با اساطیر یونانی و عقلانیت و انسجام بیشتری دارد!

[Amogh Joshi · Rating 5 out of 5]

A quintessential read that suggests the mentality and life of an "ideal ruler" - and how even this form of leadership has its own positives and negatives. The Education of Cyrus is a necessary read for all, as it poses some of the most critical questions of human nature: why are we so quick to destroy ourselves?

[Caroline · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderful! I think the question is, how and why does a leader persuade his followers to trust he is noble and virtuous, and guide them in this same way, in war and in peace?

[Czarny Pies · Rating 4 out of 5]

Xenophon was a friend whose loyalty and narrative skills exceeded those of Doctor Watson, the boon companion of Sherlock Holmes. He wrote “Hellenica” to complete the “History of the Peloponnesian Wars” of his friend Thucydides. His “Apology” [of Socrates] is as good as that of Plato. In the “Cyropaedia” one finds a brilliant defense of Cyrus the Younger whom Xenophon served a mercenary.
Because some passages seem highly improbable, some commentators have labelled the work to be a novel. In fact, it should be regarded as an important historical record written by a highly partisan observer.