Abstract
This paper follows the literary receptions of one work from Xenophon of Athens (430-352 BC.) Throughout various cultural periods his mirror-for-princes Cyropaedia played a political and educative role. Xenophon is a prime example of a classical writer who specialized in exemplum texts like Cynegeticus (On Hunting), Peri hippikēs (On horsemanship) and Hipparchicus (Cavalry Commander). More than practical manuals, they should be understood as instructions in aristocratic morals and manners. The political idea of guiding rulers in the best forms of government trough literature was groundbreaking when appearing in some late-bronze age inscriptions in Mesopotamia (1700 BC). Generations later Greek city-states would adopt the literary subject of how to rule, and here we know for certain that writers developed a politically oriented literature, the mirrors- for-princes genre. More specifically developing the genre of poetic instruction. Cyrus the great as ideal of a good ruler fitted in a dawning political debate where oral traditions already had established the first Persian king as an example of good rule. A ruler who gathers all the pre-classical nations and creates a empire of happy and willing subjects. It is likely that Xenophon perceived the historical description of Cyrus life as already documented by Herodotus account established half a century earlier. Most of the story fits Herodotus History but lacks dates and support an unclear borderline between reality and fiction. The work is politically speculative in a literary sense and without negative connotations. The Socratic writers started to address reality by making ideal and fictitious stories with political intentions of influencing their own times (for instance Cyropaedia and Plato s image of the ideal society Atlantis in Kritias). Other contemporary writers soon followed suit and became vessels of a range of fictious ideas about government and governmentality (Isocrates and later Cicero). Historian Christopher Nadon interprets Xenophon s imperial government philosophy as the first complete literary answer to the consitutional discussions that evolved in the Greek city-state systems, while Christopher Whidden calls Cyropaedia ideology for enlightened hedonism . Xenophon made some literary innovations. The first being to portray historical characters biographically, but presented in a fictitous frame. A method that allowed presentations of historical figures with ideal abilities. Abilities that no longer had direct linkage to the Gods but rather were based in the developing philosophical ethics of the Socratic writers. In this way, Cyropaedia could be seen as literature adapted to the new historical reality the Greeks were creating in this period, intended or not. Xenophon also wrote for addressees in the present form. A fact that made Mikhail Bakthin (1895-1975) claim that Cyropaedia ought to be considered as the first complete novel since it embodies what is perceived to consitute novels, namely history and fiction at the same time. Regarding its literary reception, one should first name the period in classical Greece (ca. 380- 325 BC) where it was popular and then certainly became latinized by Cicero (106-46 BC) and other Greek-learned Romans that continued its use until the fall of the Roman Empire (476. AD). The work re-emerged during the Italian city-states in the 1350s and was further adapted by city republics and Christian monarchies in the 14th century. New research on political literature indicates that texts written with royal themes and with royal addressees dominated literary reception in the early-modern period in Europe. This applied in particular to Cyropaedia that was translated and mentioned in a significant number of mirrors-for-princes texts appearing across Europe, being one of few works maintaining frequent popularity through these periods. Almost every educated person under the Reformation would have been acquainted with Xenophon s work, and notable aristocrats and statesmen in France and England used it in promotion of their own political grounds. Cyropaedia peaked as a published work around the year 1600. Finally it became popular in the absolutist regimes of the 16th and 17th century which in the end saw monarchy-oriented literature becoming unpopular. In contrast, parliamentary ideals slowly secured new grounds, especially in England from the 14th century. Over time monarchical literature notably ceased to attain influence in the Enlightenment due to changing political realities in European states. Cyropaedia certainly became controversial after James I and VI s application of it in claiming his absolutistic regime from 1603. Abolishment of absolutism also came a few decades later in England. After the Reformation the Cyropaedia represented a part of l'ancien regime since the aristocratic and the monarchical literature of instruction both represented old established governmental cultures and became an overt topic of discussion. Political writers were increasingly discarding monarchical texts since monarchical ideals where declining in most European states. Plato would now reprecented a political alternative to Xenophon, ironically since Xenophon s works had done the same with Plato and his more political role in the middelages. Plato appeared as a more neutral choice of classical reference into modernity, leading Cyropaedia into a phase of non-reception after the Enlightenment. Some scholars documented its previous value in reception studies in the 19th century but it was not after the 1990 s a field of research started looking anew upon the mirror-for-princes and their literary impact in European thinking. My first claim is that Cyropaedia played a role between two major political movements in European thinking that where in ideological conflict from the Renaissance onwards. A classical republican literature represented by Cicero (106-43 BC) and later a new republican tradition evolving from writers such as Machiavelli (1469-1527) and continued with Voltaire, Rousseau and Hume, amongst others. This stood in political opposition to another tradition, the new monarchical literature that evolved from the fragmented middle-age kingdoms (800-) and was later transfigured in the Renaissance by writers such as Baldassare Castiglione (1478-1529) and Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466-1536) who revived the ancient monarchical texts from Greece and Rome. Monarchical ideals moved forward in France and England through famous writers such as Philip Sidney (1554-1586), François de Saligiac de la Mothe-Fénelon (1651-1715) and Andrew Michael Ramsay (1686-1743) until the 16th century. My second claim is that there are some secular strands in Cyropaedia, especially when Xenophon emphasizes some form of free will in order to educate oneself in the right moral codes. This results in a utility for how to realize ideal behaviour in a continuous development. The secular element is clearly present since Xenophon nowhere implies that the prince needs anything other than correct education and favourable skills to utilize the ideals of virtue (even though some reverence is to be recommended especially in conflicts). In this respect Xenophon s political philosophy was perhaps more secular than Plato s that would maintain the divinity s abstract role in the ruling of the state (in The Republic and others). In modern times Xenophons secular innovation has been taken somewhat for granted, especially after writers such as Machiavelli s and Castiglione s secular claims in their respective mirrors-for- princes, being that nature and nurture are both necessary components of the ruler s capacity, an idea that both where acquainted with in Xenophon s political account and referred to it.