Product Description
Xenophon’s masterpiece The Education of Cyrus–a work admired by Machiavelli for its lessons on leadership–is at last available in a new English translation for a new century. Also known as the Cyropaedia, this philosophical novel is loosely based on the accomplishments of Cyrus the Great, founder of the vast Persian Empire that later became the archrival of the Greeks in the classical age. It offers an extraordinary portrait of political ambition, tale… More >>
#1 by Anthony J Patti on February 7, 2010 - 4:38 am
Xenophobia is the fear of foreigners. Yet Xenophon’s greatest book was a biography of the most hated foe of the greeks, Cyrus.
Cyrus was the greatest emperor of the Persian empire, and the antecedent (see what a great scholar I am? I can’t remember all the exact facts like a real student should; I read this stuff for fun) of the Persian emperor who Alexander defeated right before Alexander went crazy and decided to conquer the rest of the world while he was on a streak.
In today’s Jingoistic anti-Iran & Iraq climate, it’s illuminating to get the Persian perspective on world history, and since I haven’t found any Persian histories written from the ancient Persian viewpoint, this book is the best I’ve read.
Rating: 5 / 5
#2 by Peyman ADLDOUSTI on February 7, 2010 - 6:01 am
This book was indepth research of King of kings Cyrus the Great with respect how did He became the King of Persia/Iran.
Interestingly, Cyrus the Great became the King of Iran not by having large army but by hard work, and relying on His good allies and friends to establish His empire.
If English is your second language or if you are first time reader of Cyrus the Great you may wish to read this book “Xenophon’s Cyrus The Great” by Larry HEDRICK in order to grasp King of kings Cyrus the Great very well.
Ahura Mazda be with you.
Rating: 5 / 5
#3 by Ashok Karra on February 7, 2010 - 6:10 am
This book is not in the style of a Platonic dialogue, or a play (whether a tragedy or comedy), a Homeric epic (but if you’re careful, you’ll note parallels), or a history (like Herodotus).
No, Xenophon – a contemporary of Plato’s, a student of Socrates – was considered a philosopher way back when. He tells a story and you might think it is a history that is meant to be accurate. There is nothing accurate about Xenophon’s use of history in this book; however, the story is well-told and funny, and the prose moves fast in this edition. (Which was your primary concern, of course: that this was a good read.)
He does teach philosophy – ancient philosophy concerned with ethics and politics – in an interesting way. The plot of the book is as follows: Cyrus of Persia receives an education unlike any of his peers. With that education, and a considerable bit of ruthlessness, he attempts to take over the world.
It’s difficult to write a story where different philosophical viewpoints define characters and events. Somehow, Xenophon pulls this off, and manages to entertain his reader with tales of battles, lots of humorous exchanges between characters, and even some love stories strewn throughout.
(If you do Classics, you probably want to get acquainted with Xenophon, fast.)
Rating: 4 / 5
#4 by HistoryBuff on February 7, 2010 - 8:48 am
This book is fine as a modernization of an ancient classic but several things need to be understood. Xenophon never intended to write a biography of Cyrus. He was writing an idealized portrait of a long dead Persian ruler. He combined what he knew about Persia, a few facts about the historical Cyrus and a fictional vision of a what he thought was the ideal ruler. The original is much closer to Maciavelli’s the Prince in purpose than it is to Plutarch’s “Lives”. So when credit is being given for the wisdom in the book, it must be given directly to Xenophon, not Cyrus. You learn very little about Cyrus and Persians in the original and a lot about Xenophon and Greeks (particularly Sparta, Xenophon’s real life ideal.)
Rating: 2 / 5
#5 by Ryan S. Mease on February 7, 2010 - 9:57 am
This translation is incredibly easy to read; I enjoyed it very much. My only complaint is that it uses endnotes rather than footnotes. Even so, the translation is so approachable that one can garner much from this work with little historical background. The introduction is interesting if a bit of a ramble.
Rating: 4 / 5