Xenophon wrote Hellenika as a continuation of Thucydides' unfinished history of the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta. Scholars have often found Hellenika wanting, sometimes doubting whether it should even be called history, because many fundamental events have been omitted, and Xenophon appears to have selected his information capriciously out of bias in favor of Sparta.;I argue two main points. First, Hellenika is history: Xenophon leaves a record of events for posterity, and his selectivity of information is consistent with historiographic tradition laid down by Herodotus and Thucydides. Second, Hellenika is a work of persuasion: Xenophon persuades his readers that once the Spartans won leadership over Greece in the War, the Greek world descended into political chaos, because the cities fell fighting among each other out of greed instead of resolving their conflicts peacefully. Far from shielding the Spartans, Xenophon holds them chiefly responsible. Their propaganda in the War was that they would bring freedom from the oppressive rule of the Athenians. After the War they became even more oppressive leaders, and the Greek cities turned against them and split into factions.;I submit that Xenophon proves his case by rhetorically selecting and arranging the events so as to build the picture of political disorder in the Greek world. By describing incidents in systematic antithesis, he shows how the major cities, Sparta, Thebes, and Athens, forfeited supremacy over Greece due to mistakes made by their leaders. Once Greece was left without stable leadership, confusion took over.;Xenophon's ideal vision for Greece consisted of harmonious relations among the cities. Although he admired Sparta, in Hellenika he attempted to convey his unfortunate realization: it was Athens, not Sparta, that had any prospects of negotiating a common peace. While the Spartans had many merits, their leadership was ultimately destructive of peaceful coexistence in Greece.
展开▼
