Skip navigation
  • Home
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Browse Items by:
    • Publication Date
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Department
  • Sign on to:
    • My MacSphere
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile


McMaster University Home Page
  1. MacSphere
  2. Open Access Dissertations and Theses Community
  3. Open Access Dissertations and Theses
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/14129
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorPaul, George M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHumble, Noreenen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-18T17:06:24Z-
dc.date.available2014-06-18T17:06:24Z-
dc.date.created2014-05-01en_US
dc.date.issued1997-06en_US
dc.identifier.otheropendissertations/8958en_US
dc.identifier.other10043en_US
dc.identifier.other5542481en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/14129-
dc.description.abstract<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>en_US
dc.subjectClassicen_US
dc.subjectSpartaen_US
dc.subjectHellenica and Respub/ica Lacedaemoniorum.en_US
dc.subjectAncient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquityen_US
dc.subjectClassical Literature and Philologyen_US
dc.subjectClassicsen_US
dc.subjectOther Classicsen_US
dc.subjectAncient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquityen_US
dc.titleXenophon's View of Sparta: a study of the Anabasis, Hellenica and Respub/ica Lacedaemoniorumen_US
dc.typethesisen_US
dc.contributor.departmentClassicsen_US
dc.description.degreeDoctor of Philosophy (PhD)en_US
Appears in Collections:Open Access Dissertations and Theses

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
fulltext.pdf
Open Access
11.66 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record Statistics


Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Sherman Centre for Digital Scholarship     McMaster University Libraries
©2022 McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 | 905-525-9140 | Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy | Feedback

Report Accessibility Issue