What do you think?
Rate this book
Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths
nan
288 pages, Paperback
First published May 11, 2009
27 people are currently reading
428 people want to read
About the author
Robin Waterfield
111 books698 followersRobin Anthony Herschel Waterfield is a British classical scholar, translator, editor, and writer of children's fiction.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
July 19, 2012
While we hear about a “trial of the century” every 10 or 12 years in this country, there are only two trials that command our attention after two millenniums. One is the trial of Jesus before Pontius Pilate in Roman-occupied Judea and the other the trial of Socrates about 400 years before in Athens, Greece. The 2009 book “Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths” by Robin Waterfield looks at that second trial, a trial of the Greek philosopher by a jury of 500 people.
Waterfield, who lives on a farm in southern Greece, is best known for his translations of ancient Greek playwrights, historians, and philosophers. He knows his stuff, and his bibliography runs 18 pages. We learn that trials in ancient Athens could last no more than one day. We also find out that there was no public prosecutor; individuals brought cases against other individuals. “The main curiosity here is that even for the most serious crimes, such as murder, the state offered no help; if no individual chose to prosecute a case, it would not come to court.”
The organization of the book, however, bothers me. While the author is indeed wise to provide context to the famous one-day trial of Socrates in 399 B.C., I think in this case there is much too much of a good thing.
The first 47 pages examine the charges against Socrates, the Athenian legal system, and reliability of the two main sources about the trial itself. Then for 146 pages we get a biography of the infamous Alcibiades, a student of Socrates, and a unnecessarily detailed history of the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta and its effect on Athenian life. Then we return to the trial for 11 pages, and the book ends. In a 208-page book (excluding the bibliography, references, glossary, and index), the trial gets only 58 pages. Yes, the Peloponnesian War and Alcibiades deserve mention, but not three-quarters of the book.
The ending seems truncated: Waterfield re-creates the prosecution speech against Socrates over four pages. Although we get a small discussion early in the book about Xenophon’s and Plato’s versions of Socrates’ defense speech, concluding the book we get no quotations from either of these sources. There is no discussion of the immediate aftermath of the trial or the changing interpretations over the centuries by historians and philosophers of the validity of the charges or the justness of the verdict.
Waterfield, who lives on a farm in southern Greece, is best known for his translations of ancient Greek playwrights, historians, and philosophers. He knows his stuff, and his bibliography runs 18 pages. We learn that trials in ancient Athens could last no more than one day. We also find out that there was no public prosecutor; individuals brought cases against other individuals. “The main curiosity here is that even for the most serious crimes, such as murder, the state offered no help; if no individual chose to prosecute a case, it would not come to court.”
The organization of the book, however, bothers me. While the author is indeed wise to provide context to the famous one-day trial of Socrates in 399 B.C., I think in this case there is much too much of a good thing.
The first 47 pages examine the charges against Socrates, the Athenian legal system, and reliability of the two main sources about the trial itself. Then for 146 pages we get a biography of the infamous Alcibiades, a student of Socrates, and a unnecessarily detailed history of the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta and its effect on Athenian life. Then we return to the trial for 11 pages, and the book ends. In a 208-page book (excluding the bibliography, references, glossary, and index), the trial gets only 58 pages. Yes, the Peloponnesian War and Alcibiades deserve mention, but not three-quarters of the book.
The ending seems truncated: Waterfield re-creates the prosecution speech against Socrates over four pages. Although we get a small discussion early in the book about Xenophon’s and Plato’s versions of Socrates’ defense speech, concluding the book we get no quotations from either of these sources. There is no discussion of the immediate aftermath of the trial or the changing interpretations over the centuries by historians and philosophers of the validity of the charges or the justness of the verdict.
August 2, 2010
A superb little book that re-creates the historical background of Socrates's trial for corrupting Greek youth in 399 B.C. Author Robin Waterfield steps back and sketches in the events of the Peloponnesian War as they affected public opinion relating to the trial and sentencing of the Greek philosopher. It appears that Socrates was extensively associated with Alcibiades, Critias, and other members of the oligarchic party that -- whether true or not -- were widely blamed for (1) Athens's loss to Sparta in the war and (2) the widespread violence and rapine of the rule of the Thirty, who for two years controlled the city after Sparta occupied the city.
In 399 B.C., Athens had no code of laws such as we have to prosecute malefactors. Instead, one was frequently condemned for one's friends, and it was widely known that Socrates was running with a group of highly unpopular people. By the time of the trial, democracy had been restored to Athens; but its rule was uneasy, and it felt vengeful toward the party that had led to so much recent suffering.
In sum, Why Socrates Died is about a whole lot more than Socrates sitting in his cell with friends, and drinking the hemlock poison that killed him. To my mind, this book is a model of the way history books should be written. That it was written by the greatest living translator of Plato and Xenophon just adds to its authenticity.
In 399 B.C., Athens had no code of laws such as we have to prosecute malefactors. Instead, one was frequently condemned for one's friends, and it was widely known that Socrates was running with a group of highly unpopular people. By the time of the trial, democracy had been restored to Athens; but its rule was uneasy, and it felt vengeful toward the party that had led to so much recent suffering.
In sum, Why Socrates Died is about a whole lot more than Socrates sitting in his cell with friends, and drinking the hemlock poison that killed him. To my mind, this book is a model of the way history books should be written. That it was written by the greatest living translator of Plato and Xenophon just adds to its authenticity.
July 26, 2018
Beyond the accounts of Plato and Xenophon, this book and the one previously written by I.F. Stone describe the perimeters of the debate as regards the judicial condemnation of Socrates. While the former two, both students of the iconoclastic philosopher, provide apologetic accounts, Stone and Waterfield set the judgment within the context of the period as it followed upon the Athenian defeat and the terror of The Thirty, some of whom had been followers of Socrates and, like him, proponents of aristocratic oligarchies such as that of victorious Sparta. However, while Stone emphasizes the Sparta connection, Waterfield, while not excluding it, is at pains to show how Socrates himself was no simple admirer of Sparta, his preferred aristocracy being one of educated virtue, not simple genetic inheritance.
December 20, 2020
This is probably a 5 star book, but it took me three fall semesters to finish it. (I teach a class set in 403 BCE Athens each fall.)
Initially (fall of 2018), it was too hard for me to read because it is drenched with detail about decades of war, politics, trade, the arts, and religion. Each paragraph could serve as the material for an entire college class lecture for the uninitiated. For 45 weeks total (the weeks I taught my course for three fall semesters), I read voraciously about the bare facts of 5th C. Athens. By the fall of 2020 Waterfield's book contained too much review.
Nevertheless, I may end up reading this book every July as a way to prepare me to teach the Reacting to the Past course*.
Here is the TOC (sans front matter and back matter because I'm being lazy) for _Why Socrates Died_:
The Trial of Socrates 1. Socrates in Court, 2. How the System Worked 3. The Charge of Impiety
The War Years 4. Alcibiades, Socrates and the Aristocratic Milieu 5. Pestilence and War 6. The Rise and Fall of Alcibiades 7. The End of the War 8. Critias and Civil War
Crisis and Conflict 9. Symptoms of Change 10. Reactions to Intellectuals
The Condemnation of Socrates 11. Socratic Politics 12 A Cock for Asclepius
The book sometimes reaches back to the Athens before the Persian Wars and Athens after the Macedonian Conquest. However, the book primarily focuses on from The Pelopponesian War through the Trial of Socrates), I then found the book to have a lot of review / context that isn't directly--despite the title--about the Trial of Socrates--particularly chapters 4 through 8. After abandoning this book in the fall of 2018 and the fall of 2019 for being too complex, I found myself anxious to find the connections between an encyclopedic review of 5th C. Athenian history and a specific argument. For those who are classicists, the last four chapters will be sufficient to see Waterfield's contribution.
Particularly instructive is Waterfield's fictitious speech by Anytus, a speech he writes based on extensive research of the historical context, information about Anytus, and various representations of Socrates' Trial as well as pamphlets that use the trial as fodder for instruction in rhetoric. It's very engaging because of a great mix of reason and evidence (See pages 197-201). I might assign it to my students after they complete their own mock trial. (It would be stacking the deck for the democratic faction if I assign it prior.)
Basically, Socrates "was punished for the intergenerational conflict, which was caused by social factors rather than by individuals, and certainly not by a single individual; he was punished as a morally subversive teacher, when there were others who could equally have had this odd charge pinned on them; he was punished as a critic of democracy, which he was far from alone; even Critias and Alcibiades were products of the time rather than of his teaching. Socrates was put to death because t the Athenians wanted to purge themselves of undesirable trends, not just of an undesirable individual" (p. 202).
*There are several historical settings in the RTTP library, but the one I teach is based on the 4th edition (2015) of the RTTP textbook _The Threshold of Democracy: Athens 403 BCE" by Josiah Ober, Naomi J. Norman and Mark C. Carnes.
Initially (fall of 2018), it was too hard for me to read because it is drenched with detail about decades of war, politics, trade, the arts, and religion. Each paragraph could serve as the material for an entire college class lecture for the uninitiated. For 45 weeks total (the weeks I taught my course for three fall semesters), I read voraciously about the bare facts of 5th C. Athens. By the fall of 2020 Waterfield's book contained too much review.
Nevertheless, I may end up reading this book every July as a way to prepare me to teach the Reacting to the Past course*.
Here is the TOC (sans front matter and back matter because I'm being lazy) for _Why Socrates Died_:
The Trial of Socrates 1. Socrates in Court, 2. How the System Worked 3. The Charge of Impiety
The War Years 4. Alcibiades, Socrates and the Aristocratic Milieu 5. Pestilence and War 6. The Rise and Fall of Alcibiades 7. The End of the War 8. Critias and Civil War
Crisis and Conflict 9. Symptoms of Change 10. Reactions to Intellectuals
The Condemnation of Socrates 11. Socratic Politics 12 A Cock for Asclepius
The book sometimes reaches back to the Athens before the Persian Wars and Athens after the Macedonian Conquest. However, the book primarily focuses on from The Pelopponesian War through the Trial of Socrates), I then found the book to have a lot of review / context that isn't directly--despite the title--about the Trial of Socrates--particularly chapters 4 through 8. After abandoning this book in the fall of 2018 and the fall of 2019 for being too complex, I found myself anxious to find the connections between an encyclopedic review of 5th C. Athenian history and a specific argument. For those who are classicists, the last four chapters will be sufficient to see Waterfield's contribution.
Particularly instructive is Waterfield's fictitious speech by Anytus, a speech he writes based on extensive research of the historical context, information about Anytus, and various representations of Socrates' Trial as well as pamphlets that use the trial as fodder for instruction in rhetoric. It's very engaging because of a great mix of reason and evidence (See pages 197-201). I might assign it to my students after they complete their own mock trial. (It would be stacking the deck for the democratic faction if I assign it prior.)
Basically, Socrates "was punished for the intergenerational conflict, which was caused by social factors rather than by individuals, and certainly not by a single individual; he was punished as a morally subversive teacher, when there were others who could equally have had this odd charge pinned on them; he was punished as a critic of democracy, which he was far from alone; even Critias and Alcibiades were products of the time rather than of his teaching. Socrates was put to death because t the Athenians wanted to purge themselves of undesirable trends, not just of an undesirable individual" (p. 202).
*There are several historical settings in the RTTP library, but the one I teach is based on the 4th edition (2015) of the RTTP textbook _The Threshold of Democracy: Athens 403 BCE" by Josiah Ober, Naomi J. Norman and Mark C. Carnes.
March 3, 2017
In a very manageable 204 pages, Waterfield's Why Socrates Died opens with Socrates’ trial and death by hemlock, then takes us into the backstory of the Peloponnesian War and the social changes wrought by Athens’ eventual defeat, and finally presents his theory of why Socrates stayed in Athens and accepted death when he could so easily have escaped.
As I know very little of Socratic thought and ancient Greek history, this subject could easily have proved difficult to follow. So I was impressed by the clarity of Waterfield’s writing and the easily understandable structure of this book, which made it possible even for an amateur historian like me to gain a fair amount of understanding of a very far-off world.
I didn’t learn much about Socrates himself, though. The larger-than-life character in this book is Alcibiades, Socrates’ pupil and, possibly, toyboy. Socrates himself seems rather pushed to the margins; this is a book about his environment rather than the man himself. I don't think that this detracts from the book, though; in fact it has piqued my interest to learn more about Socrates.
Waterfield is scholarly, engaging with other historians and discussing their theories in contrast with his own. Yet I never really had the impression that I was reading a piece of historical scholarship; the narrative flows well, and he follows the delightful contemporary practice of making his notes almost entirely inconspicuous. I did get a bit bogged down in the description of the war, but then I always have trouble following political narratives when the players are not well known to me.
I thought that the book really came into its own once the account of the war was over and we returned to the time of the trial. Waterfield makes some truly interesting comparisons between Socrates’ day and American history of the 60s and 70s. From the jacket photo I would say that he’s slightly older than me, which makes him a true Boomer (whereas I am on the cusp) and explains why this comparison comes so naturally to him. He also made some remarks that got me thinking about our own “democracy” and recent history.
Waterfield’s final theory is only a theory, and he doesn’t try to sell it as the only solution to the mystery of Socrates’ death. Still, I found it plausible and neatly put. Altogether an excellent book: highbrow without being inaccessible, nicely structured and well edited. I got through the whole thing without once being annoyed by the writing, which is rare for me.
As I know very little of Socratic thought and ancient Greek history, this subject could easily have proved difficult to follow. So I was impressed by the clarity of Waterfield’s writing and the easily understandable structure of this book, which made it possible even for an amateur historian like me to gain a fair amount of understanding of a very far-off world.
I didn’t learn much about Socrates himself, though. The larger-than-life character in this book is Alcibiades, Socrates’ pupil and, possibly, toyboy. Socrates himself seems rather pushed to the margins; this is a book about his environment rather than the man himself. I don't think that this detracts from the book, though; in fact it has piqued my interest to learn more about Socrates.
Waterfield is scholarly, engaging with other historians and discussing their theories in contrast with his own. Yet I never really had the impression that I was reading a piece of historical scholarship; the narrative flows well, and he follows the delightful contemporary practice of making his notes almost entirely inconspicuous. I did get a bit bogged down in the description of the war, but then I always have trouble following political narratives when the players are not well known to me.
I thought that the book really came into its own once the account of the war was over and we returned to the time of the trial. Waterfield makes some truly interesting comparisons between Socrates’ day and American history of the 60s and 70s. From the jacket photo I would say that he’s slightly older than me, which makes him a true Boomer (whereas I am on the cusp) and explains why this comparison comes so naturally to him. He also made some remarks that got me thinking about our own “democracy” and recent history.
Waterfield’s final theory is only a theory, and he doesn’t try to sell it as the only solution to the mystery of Socrates’ death. Still, I found it plausible and neatly put. Altogether an excellent book: highbrow without being inaccessible, nicely structured and well edited. I got through the whole thing without once being annoyed by the writing, which is rare for me.
January 23, 2019
I was unaware that the Socrates I looked up to was actually a creation of Plato. The guy who with a few questions could make it apparent that the most learned humans don't actually know a thing. The guy who always seemed to be the face of the people on the street calling out the powerful. The guy who said he heard the voice of Apollo as a metaphor for the faculty for rationality that humans seem to posses. The guy who refused to pay the fine of 30 pieces of silver to save his own life: the guy martyred for his beliefs. Martyred for trying to awaken the youth.
Yeah that guy is just Plato's story.
I didn't really know much about Xenophon's Socrates which did a nice job of unseating my previous assumptions about the historical figure, setting the stage for an understanding of the historical Socrates.
Socrates was an oligarch. He fought against the democracy and for the aristocracy/oligarchy throughout his life. It didn't seem he did it for any serious material reasons, being a smallholding farmer (land he apparently gained from his service as a soldier).
The book covers a wide breadth of treatment of Socrates, but focuses a lot on Socrates relationship with Alcibiades and the infamous 'desecration of the herms' after a symposium which Alcibiades was blamed for. This event led to the exile of Alcibiades and a whole chain of happenings which came close to asphyxiating democracy in its cradle. Every step of the way Socrates supported the push towards a Spartanesque oligarchy to be installed in Athens.
In fact Socrates execution may have been the result of efforts to liquidate the oligarchic counter-revolution after their attempt to turn Athens in to a new Sparta fell through.
Yeah that guy is just Plato's story.
I didn't really know much about Xenophon's Socrates which did a nice job of unseating my previous assumptions about the historical figure, setting the stage for an understanding of the historical Socrates.
Socrates was an oligarch. He fought against the democracy and for the aristocracy/oligarchy throughout his life. It didn't seem he did it for any serious material reasons, being a smallholding farmer (land he apparently gained from his service as a soldier).
The book covers a wide breadth of treatment of Socrates, but focuses a lot on Socrates relationship with Alcibiades and the infamous 'desecration of the herms' after a symposium which Alcibiades was blamed for. This event led to the exile of Alcibiades and a whole chain of happenings which came close to asphyxiating democracy in its cradle. Every step of the way Socrates supported the push towards a Spartanesque oligarchy to be installed in Athens.
In fact Socrates execution may have been the result of efforts to liquidate the oligarchic counter-revolution after their attempt to turn Athens in to a new Sparta fell through.
June 8, 2010
Waterfield builds a strong case for the logical inevitability of Socrates trial and execution. Set against a backdrop of civil war, loss of empire, and the murderous but blessedly brief reign of the 30 tyrants, Socrates' lack of love for democracy, and close association with the oligarchs, left him looking like the enemy of a threatened people.
In the course of a gallop through the Peloponnesian Wars, Waterfield shines a light on areas not covered by Thucydides, filling in many gaps for the reader's general knowledge.
For those who know Plato's dialogues (especially Alcibiades, Gorgias and Symposium) better than they know Attic history, Alcibiades' may be the chief interest here. Socrates as teacher was trying to influence key people in Athenian society to build his ideal moral and political system - and we see in this work that Athens didn't react kindly to the results of his efforts.
Also fascinating (to me) is the explanation of Athens' legal system in all its democratic glory. Seems the very model of Rebekah Wade's tabloid lynch mob ideal [1:].
The useful bibliography at the end saddened me a little, as all of the Socratic translations & editions [2:] are published after I last bought one, so it looks like I need to get new editions before my next re-read & re-evaluation of Plato. So sad to have to buy more books, eh? ;^)
[1:] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebekah_...
[2:] Of course it's just possible that Mr Waterfield wants us to buy his editions for purely selfish reasons - but I think I'll give him the benefit of the doubt ;)
In the course of a gallop through the Peloponnesian Wars, Waterfield shines a light on areas not covered by Thucydides, filling in many gaps for the reader's general knowledge.
For those who know Plato's dialogues (especially Alcibiades, Gorgias and Symposium) better than they know Attic history, Alcibiades' may be the chief interest here. Socrates as teacher was trying to influence key people in Athenian society to build his ideal moral and political system - and we see in this work that Athens didn't react kindly to the results of his efforts.
Also fascinating (to me) is the explanation of Athens' legal system in all its democratic glory. Seems the very model of Rebekah Wade's tabloid lynch mob ideal [1:].
The useful bibliography at the end saddened me a little, as all of the Socratic translations & editions [2:] are published after I last bought one, so it looks like I need to get new editions before my next re-read & re-evaluation of Plato. So sad to have to buy more books, eh? ;^)
[1:] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebekah_...
[2:] Of course it's just possible that Mr Waterfield wants us to buy his editions for purely selfish reasons - but I think I'll give him the benefit of the doubt ;)
May 18, 2022
This book is not nearly as analytical, nor does it challenge, as much as the title suggests. 2.5 stars and I've rounded it up as it's generally well-written - its main sin is not delivering what it says it well. If it had a different title it might have been considered a better book.
It is a very good (well, I did not check the historical facts, but the details are impressive) picture of the time of Socrates. There is a lot of detail about his lover Alcibiades, about the war, about how the government and a trial system worked. The last is the most relevant and it was a good set up to Waterfield's book. Unfortunately some of the rest seemed likie a lengthy rambling of part of the historical area that Waterfield was personally interested in with not enough care to link them to the theme topic - "Why Socrates Died". Or if the link was made, it was made well after a long ramble and was made somewhat tenuously. The book needed more focus.
I would rate this book 2.5 stars for the portrait of an interesting period and what looks like a very good piece of research into that time. However, I found it a frustrating book as I was expecting an analysis of the trial and a challenge of myths - holding them up, examining them and pulling them apart - which I didn't get. A lot of the boopk did not feel it as about Socrates at all.
I did think I learned some interesting facts about this period though, and perhaps a good deal more about Alcibiades than I expected to or wanted to.
It is a very good (well, I did not check the historical facts, but the details are impressive) picture of the time of Socrates. There is a lot of detail about his lover Alcibiades, about the war, about how the government and a trial system worked. The last is the most relevant and it was a good set up to Waterfield's book. Unfortunately some of the rest seemed likie a lengthy rambling of part of the historical area that Waterfield was personally interested in with not enough care to link them to the theme topic - "Why Socrates Died". Or if the link was made, it was made well after a long ramble and was made somewhat tenuously. The book needed more focus.
I would rate this book 2.5 stars for the portrait of an interesting period and what looks like a very good piece of research into that time. However, I found it a frustrating book as I was expecting an analysis of the trial and a challenge of myths - holding them up, examining them and pulling them apart - which I didn't get. A lot of the boopk did not feel it as about Socrates at all.
I did think I learned some interesting facts about this period though, and perhaps a good deal more about Alcibiades than I expected to or wanted to.
November 30, 2009
I recently reread Plato's four "death of Socrates" dialogues (Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo) and wanted a bit more historical background than I could glean from the Penguin introduction. Waterfield's study, sub-titled "Dispelling the Myths," delivered exactly what it promised. Waterfield places Socrates's trial in the perilous context of the recently-lost Peloponnesian war and just-overthrown tyranny of "the Thirty." Throughout his life Socrates had never bothered to hide his contempt for democracy. Praised by an oracle, inspired by "a god," he was elitist to the core – although more in the philosophical than the socio-economic sense. Still, there was a disturbing degree of overlap, and Waterfield is convincing that Socrates was tried and condemned for his irritating political posture, not martyred for his noble philosophy.
Waterfield's writing is clear, if a bit dry – especially by comparison to I.F. Stone's fiery Trial of Socrates (which has aged better than I expected). He also offers a concise overview of the course of the Peloponnesian war, which you know – if you've slogged through Thucydides or even Kagan - is not easy to do.
Waterfield's writing is clear, if a bit dry – especially by comparison to I.F. Stone's fiery Trial of Socrates (which has aged better than I expected). He also offers a concise overview of the course of the Peloponnesian war, which you know – if you've slogged through Thucydides or even Kagan - is not easy to do.
March 31, 2025
Gran libro de un autor del que lamentablemente -para los que solo hablamos la lengua de Cervantes-, hay pocos libros traducidos. Con una claridad digna de quien domina el tema, el autor nos traslada al mundo de Sócrates y nos da un contexto de la época, que ayuda a entender lo que ocurría en esos tiempos y el porqué del juicio al que fue sometido el personaje,
En este punto debo decir que el título es un poco engañoso, el protagonista no pareciera ser Sócrates, ni su enjuiciamiento, desfilan personas que se roban el espectáculo, como el mismísimo Alcibíades o los acontecimientos de la Guerra del Peloponeso, y aquí valga la pena decir que es una lástima que, después de dedicarle un muy buen análisis a dicha guerra, en uno de sus momentos culminantes como lo fueron los acontecimientos de la campaña de Siracusa, pase de largo. Sin embargo, como dice el autor, no era un libro sobre la guerra sino sobre Sócrates, pero es que nos deja con un mal sabor que si venía haciendo una análisis de la guerra, de repente se detenga en ese momento tan crítico, para retomar el hilo inicial.
Pegas a parte, es un excelente libro, documentado hasta decir no mas y lleno de citas que ayudan aún mas a entender el contexto.
En este punto debo decir que el título es un poco engañoso, el protagonista no pareciera ser Sócrates, ni su enjuiciamiento, desfilan personas que se roban el espectáculo, como el mismísimo Alcibíades o los acontecimientos de la Guerra del Peloponeso, y aquí valga la pena decir que es una lástima que, después de dedicarle un muy buen análisis a dicha guerra, en uno de sus momentos culminantes como lo fueron los acontecimientos de la campaña de Siracusa, pase de largo. Sin embargo, como dice el autor, no era un libro sobre la guerra sino sobre Sócrates, pero es que nos deja con un mal sabor que si venía haciendo una análisis de la guerra, de repente se detenga en ese momento tan crítico, para retomar el hilo inicial.
Pegas a parte, es un excelente libro, documentado hasta decir no mas y lleno de citas que ayudan aún mas a entender el contexto.
May 31, 2017
An enjoyable read, it narrates the socio-political context leading to Socrates' trial and execution in 399 BC. Although the last chapter is a bit disappointing, it is well argued and documented. The book argues that Socrates was condemned because he was a known critic of democracy and traditional values, and a teacher and close friend of impious oligarchs like Critias and Alcibiades. A required reading for anyone interested in Greek history and philosophy.
September 13, 2017
I would recommend this book to both those who are not familiar with Socrates' trial and those who want more backstory into the time it took place. The work was well written and the sources in the back of the work were excellent.
January 1, 2018
Excellent coverage of the second half of Athens' war with Sparta and a complete picture of the career of Alcibiades. The trial of Socrates is bracketted around the main thrust of the story stressing the effects of a generational conflict within Athens at that time.
October 30, 2025
Scapegoat. Cancel culture vibes.
For re-readings: just focus on last chapter.
Other values: good but dense descripción of Peloponesian war and all things Alcibiades.
Nice social, political and religious context provided.
Recommended.
For re-readings: just focus on last chapter.
Other values: good but dense descripción of Peloponesian war and all things Alcibiades.
Nice social, political and religious context provided.
Recommended.
October 21, 2016
Socrates is presented as a martyr and the scapegoat for Athens's sins during the Peloponnesian War, a willing scapegoat who had failed to achieve his political mission of renewing the city through training moral experts to be political leaders, and dangerously associated with the more obviously blameworthy (and infamous) Alcibiades.
April 6, 2019
Interesting book.
April 14, 2019
Seems he kinda had it coming.
August 1, 2022
Excellent book, I highly recommend
December 15, 2024
Makes one wish that Socrates actually existed.
July 6, 2010
This is the sort of book I would ordinarily have enjoyed a good deal if I wasn't already somewhat familiar with the substance of its thesis. Waterfield has an engaging authorial voice and does an excellent job providing fuller historical context for Socrates's arraignment, trial, and execution. Treated in full here are not only the usual analyses of Plato's and Xenophon's respective failings as objective biographers (among other primary source material), but summaries of the Pelopennesian War, a digest of the consequences of three Athenian coups and countercoups, and the life and annoying times of that great hedonist/narcissist/traitor Alcibiades.
This is presented more or less in chronological order, and the best chapter here is the last ("A Chicken for Aesclepius"), which imagines the prosecution summary given by Anytus in a plausible if somewhat prosaic fashion. I probably would have shown this book more patience if I didn't have a nighttable-full of Neil Simon clamoring at me. I am very much enjoying the copy of his memoir Rewrites at the moment, pausing only when the other books I have on hold at the library arrive and deferring this pleasure only because the Simon I own and the others have a loaner's more limited lifespan. But look, once you know the rudiments of this time in history -- and if you read the end of the first volume of Larry Gonick's brilliant Cartoon History of the Universe you will -- there's nothing to engage you further if (like me) you are only casually interested in this subject matter. No doubt those with a budding passion for ancient Greece will find this book among the best of the available sources, but as retellings go, there just wasn't enough that was new in style or substance to encourage a close read.
Sorry, Waterfield. You're not as amusing as Neil Simon. In all fairness, though, nor are most people. Admittedly not a fair basis for a review, but alas, I can only take them as they come and before I forget.
This is presented more or less in chronological order, and the best chapter here is the last ("A Chicken for Aesclepius"), which imagines the prosecution summary given by Anytus in a plausible if somewhat prosaic fashion. I probably would have shown this book more patience if I didn't have a nighttable-full of Neil Simon clamoring at me. I am very much enjoying the copy of his memoir Rewrites at the moment, pausing only when the other books I have on hold at the library arrive and deferring this pleasure only because the Simon I own and the others have a loaner's more limited lifespan. But look, once you know the rudiments of this time in history -- and if you read the end of the first volume of Larry Gonick's brilliant Cartoon History of the Universe you will -- there's nothing to engage you further if (like me) you are only casually interested in this subject matter. No doubt those with a budding passion for ancient Greece will find this book among the best of the available sources, but as retellings go, there just wasn't enough that was new in style or substance to encourage a close read.
Sorry, Waterfield. You're not as amusing as Neil Simon. In all fairness, though, nor are most people. Admittedly not a fair basis for a review, but alas, I can only take them as they come and before I forget.
October 17, 2013
“For anyone who has read Xenophon's Retreat (Greece, Persia & the end of Golden age) well he is in for a treat again with this book. It's a riveting analogy of what might have happened, a very in-depth analysis of the last days of the greatest philosopher ever.
His track of thought is that Socrates was a great philosopher & very eccentric at the same time he believes that the much read theories of the last days of the great man was basically something his two illustrious students creation of a character to further their cause, namely Plato & Xenophon. For one who indulges in history it would be known that the latter two are also great Greek legends of the past.
Was the 'Socrates Apology' that was penned by Plato (brilliant rendition) a vehicle to further the cause of Philosopher Plato & similarly the 'Apology' by Xenophon a similar vehicle for his cause?
Think about it, around 500BC there was Pythagores who lived in Athens and build a cult of followers around him. A century later comes in the thinker philosopher Socrates who had Students like Alcibiades & Critias and reputed followers like Xenophone & Plato. Plato makes it big and writes the republic and has his own bunch of followers one amongst them is Aristotle. The same man who moves out of Athens post the death of Plato and starts his own school. His illustrious students are no less than Alexander (the world conqueror) Ptolemy I Soter (Future General) & Cassander (King of Macedon). These guys left behind a legacy that modern civilizations wake up to everyday.
Some of these thinkers basic thinking and the surrounding politics/beliefs/faith/turmoil/ambitions/upbringing/ethos get unveiled. Also the book uncovers the mysteries that surrounded the death of Socrates.
For those who love politics & History this is a MUST Read.
His track of thought is that Socrates was a great philosopher & very eccentric at the same time he believes that the much read theories of the last days of the great man was basically something his two illustrious students creation of a character to further their cause, namely Plato & Xenophon. For one who indulges in history it would be known that the latter two are also great Greek legends of the past.
Was the 'Socrates Apology' that was penned by Plato (brilliant rendition) a vehicle to further the cause of Philosopher Plato & similarly the 'Apology' by Xenophon a similar vehicle for his cause?
Think about it, around 500BC there was Pythagores who lived in Athens and build a cult of followers around him. A century later comes in the thinker philosopher Socrates who had Students like Alcibiades & Critias and reputed followers like Xenophone & Plato. Plato makes it big and writes the republic and has his own bunch of followers one amongst them is Aristotle. The same man who moves out of Athens post the death of Plato and starts his own school. His illustrious students are no less than Alexander (the world conqueror) Ptolemy I Soter (Future General) & Cassander (King of Macedon). These guys left behind a legacy that modern civilizations wake up to everyday.
Some of these thinkers basic thinking and the surrounding politics/beliefs/faith/turmoil/ambitions/upbringing/ethos get unveiled. Also the book uncovers the mysteries that surrounded the death of Socrates.
For those who love politics & History this is a MUST Read.
February 19, 2016
It is a long while since I read this book (and I may be too influenced by my memories of IF Stone's The Trial of Socrates) but I do not recognize the book I read from the summary here. Socrates died because he was anti-democratic and associated with and encouraged young aristocratic men of anti-democratic leanings, this at a time when the city had suffered horribly from the oligarchic dictatorships of the Four Hundred and the Thirty. Socrates corruption of youth was to encourage them in attitudes that Athenians feared would lead to new horrors.
To quote the review by Charlotte Higgins in the Guardian: "The most important reason Socrates was condemned, argues Waterfield, was his association with this young generation of controversial men such as Alciabiades. He skilfully draws out Socrates's probable anti-democratic leanings in his vivid description of the brutal oligarchic revolutions that engulfed the city in 411 and 404. Critias, one of the most bloody figures of that second coup, was a pupil of Socrates."
To quote the review by Charlotte Higgins in the Guardian: "The most important reason Socrates was condemned, argues Waterfield, was his association with this young generation of controversial men such as Alciabiades. He skilfully draws out Socrates's probable anti-democratic leanings in his vivid description of the brutal oligarchic revolutions that engulfed the city in 411 and 404. Critias, one of the most bloody figures of that second coup, was a pupil of Socrates."
March 5, 2011
This book about Socrates actually is much more about Alcibiades and the fate of Athens during the Peloponnesian War. Socrates is shown as deeply involved with the Athenian aristocrats and linked to the Thirty tyrants, choosing to stay in Athens after the turn back to democracy, and basically accepting his being a scapegoat to cleanse the Athenian democracy for it's errors that brought it down in the war against Sparta.
I would be very interested in a Freudian perspective on the relation between Socrates and Plato, which sometimes seems to me a reversion of the Oedipus complex, Plato the Son bringing Socrates the Father to life. Also from a religious perspective, taking into account the immense influence of Plato on christian thought, there's a nice reversal between Plato the Son and God of philosophy and Socrates the Father and Savior of philosophy.
I would be very interested in a Freudian perspective on the relation between Socrates and Plato, which sometimes seems to me a reversion of the Oedipus complex, Plato the Son bringing Socrates the Father to life. Also from a religious perspective, taking into account the immense influence of Plato on christian thought, there's a nice reversal between Plato the Son and God of philosophy and Socrates the Father and Savior of philosophy.
January 14, 2012
Socrates is a (fairly) well-known name in modern culture, but understanding what he actually did and the circumstances of his death are generally vague and not well understood. In this book, Robin Waterfield investigates why Socrates died. In doing so, he not only sets out there mere facts of what happened, but explains the context of the Greek culture and historical events that led to the culmination of the event in question. I admit to getting somewhat lost in the midst of the names, but this is merely how things are and is not the author’s fault. Waterfield does not present a mere recitation of the facts, but explains the sources of his materials, evaluates the veracity of the sources and cogently puts forward a compelling narrative and coherent argument of the wider cultural and social circumstances to place everything in context.
March 27, 2012
I admire the in-debt knowledge of the author on all matters Greece during the turmoil of its misbegotten period of attempted empire building. The title in reflection doesn't in my humble opinion reflect the content of the book. The trial and death of Socrates is covered in the first few chapters and then the history lesson begins and continues pretty well for most of the book until Socrates is again brought up in the context of the aforementioned history. I appreciate the thorough review of the highly intricate and complex history of Athens, Sparta and the empire however it is so dense in places that i was at times lost. The need for the lesson is important in the context of why the author considers why Socrates was singled out and charged as he was. Anyway its a well done presentation but if one is looking for all Socrates all the time this may not be for you.
April 30, 2010
At first, I was a little hostile over how much care and research this man has done into the minutiae of ancient Athenian culture (which does tend to happen when you read for a living and have to take special pains into how something is properly pronounced--since it actually was "all Greek to me"). However, when you realize the care and research it must've taken for Waterfield to reconstruct what was going on in Athens at the time of Socrates' life, you have to be impressed. And, he tidies up all that minutiae into a perfectly rational argument into why exactly he feels that Socrates was put to death. It's a bit messianic, but a very fascinating read.
November 29, 2009
This book attempts to unravel some of the seeming mystery behind the death of Socrates - portrayed as so obviously unfair by our major sources (Plato and Xenophon, both sympathetic to Socrates) as to make any reasonable modern person find it hard to believe that such a thing could have happened. Waterfield tries to examine as many of the facts as possible and not just rely on the traditional accounts in Plato and Xenophon to reconstruct the reasons why Athens in 399 B.C.E. thought it necessary to put Socrates to death.
December 24, 2009
Understanding of Athenian and modern Greek Law and what really happened before Socrates drank a cup of the poison hemlock.
February 11, 2010
Really interesting and throughtful.
January 2, 2015
Really interesting look into why Socrates was so dangerous in his time. Dude hated democracy, by the way.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews