How to prepare Cavalry; On the Cavalry Commander, Xenophon

Why you might read On the Cavalry Commander?

This piece shows us how Athens structured her standing army. It allows us to see their preparations for war. It rounds out our view of cavalry in Athens. In my education project, this fills in gaps in my understanding of ancient warfare.

Synopsis of On the Cavalry Commander

This short treatise gives us a look into what went into training, maintaining and commanding Athenian cavalry. 

It starts with how to recruit cavalry, and raise the funds necessary. It continues with how to train the cavalry. Both as a unit and what you should instruct them to do on their own.

It sidetracks into how cavalry should be displayed during processions and feasts. The suggestions given would make the Cavalry look as good as possible. 

Finally, it finishes with how to March and command a force at war. It covers both with and without infantry support.

Reflections on On the Cavalry Commander

Xenophon gives his ideas on how the cavalry should be trained and maintained. This holds quite a bit of weight as he commanded the army in the retreat from Persia. And while it holds a lot of insight into how the army,  was run, we must hold it as one man's opinion, however, qualified he may be. We do not know if he ever had a chance to implement this regime and how successful it was in use.

His coverage of displaying the horsemanship of the men at festivals is a little hard for me to imagine. But I'm willing to trust Xenophon that it would be impressive. It is interesting that these displays are part of the festivals. I guess it is as good of a time as any to show the populace the prowess of the armed forces.

What others have to say about On the Cavalry Commander

"Xenophon is not shy about repeatedly mentioning the service the commander owes to the gods" From Ashoakkara

Comparisons with other texts

The easy comparison to make is between On the Cavalry Commander and On Horsemanship. The big difference is that On Horsemanship focuses on the individual.  By contrast On the Cavalry Commander is focused on the formation of horsemen. 

An interesting comparison is between the use of the Cavalry in Athens and the supposed use of horses in, the much earlier, Illiad. In the Illiad, chariots are used only to get to the battle. By contrast, the Cavalry of Xenophon are expected to fight, scout and generally be part of the order of battle.

Conclusion

This text completes Xenophon's discussion of the horse and its use in war. It covers recruiting men, training men and leading them in battle. It also sidetracks to give detail on how to display the cavalry in the festivals.

Have you read On the Cavalry Commander? If so what did you think of it? 

 

Want to read On the Cavalry Commander but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of On the Cavalry Commander. 

The running of Sparta; The Constitution of the Lacedemonians, Xenophon

Why you might read The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians?

The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians gives a non-Spartan view of the city-state of Sparta. It is written by an Athenian and gives many ways in which the Spartans differ from their neighbours. In self-education project, it gives context to all other texts that deal with what Sparta did.

Synopsis of The Constitution of the  Lacedaemonians

Xenophon covers the training of boys and young men first. He covers both how they are trained and fed. It is a vigorous and comprehensive system that trains and teaches. The system places them with their peers rather than in their households. 

He explains how cooking and eating were moved to the public sphere. As well as how the mixing of ages helped temper young men. As well as the need to walk home in the dark deterring the overconsumption of wine.

He finishes by commenting that the Spartans seem to have eased up on these laws and regulations. It seems to him that they are becoming more like the rest of the Greeks. He points to this as why they have fallen away from being the preeminent state.

Reflections on The Constitution of the  Lacedaemonians

This is a fascinating insight into the setup of Sparta. Xenophon attributes it all to one man. The insight he must have had if it was truly all his doing. I wonder though if it would have stuck for even as long as it did if it had not been instituted by a Spartan patriarch.

The training of the boys I definitely more brutal than if they had been left to their fathers to teach. But I think the biggest thing that comes from it is the sense of unity. This unity will serve them well on the battlefield as well as in public life.

I do think Xenophon has a utopian view of the spartan regime. But this is likely to happen when you see the results it granted Sparta.

What others have to say about The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians

"...is the most comprehensive extant account of Spartan institutions. As an oligarchically-inclined exile from Athens, who had fought alongside Spartan generals in the Persian Expedition, and later against Athens at the battle of Coronea, Xenophon was a well-placed and highly sympathetic observer of Spartan customs." From Tom Griffin

Comparisons with other texts

The Constitution of the Athenians is a critique. It gives little to no detail about the constitution itself. By contrast, the constitution of the Lacedaemonians focuses entirely on the running of Sparta. As well as how it differed from the rest of Greece. They provide very different insights. Ready the most they have in common are their names.

The History of the Peloponnesian War details how Sparta wages war with Athens. It gives us insight into the political life and warrior life of Sparta. By contrast, The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians gives us insight into life within their own borders. It is hard to tell whether the war is before or after the decline that Xenophon notes. But possibly it is what he is alluding to when he says other powers have vied for control. 

Conclusion

The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians covers the training of young men. It covers the instruction for public life. It finished off with the structuring of the army and the place of the king. It lets us see what built the power of Sparta and how different it ready was from the rest of Greece. Though they fell away from it and it lead to their demise.

Have you read The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians? If so what did you think of it? 

 

Want to read The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Constitution of the Lacedaemonians. 

A Critique of Democracy; The Constitution of the Athenians, Xenophon

 Why you might read The Constitution of the Athenians?

In a lot of works, we see the Athenian Constitution in action. It is a nice change of pace to actually discuss whether it works or is the best option. It is also the first critique that is not a satire we have seen. It makes a good balance to the prodemocracy parts of my reading project.

Synopsis of The Constitution of the Athenians

Giving the plebs a voice is a bad idea. It gives rise to the wealthy only looking after themselves and the plebs being less well off. He gives Oligarchy as an alternative. Saying that the wealthy are better educated and able to do what is best rather than popular. Xenophon spends a little time at the end giving issues with the courts. Especially how they could never get through everything. He does not propose a solution but rather leaves that to the reader.

Reflections on The Constitution of the Athenians

Like I said in the intro it is nice to see a critique of democracy as the Greeks practised it. Today we are so in love with democracy that we see all other forms as inferior. This piece reminds us that there are other options. And that they have their own positives and negatives.

This could have been done with a more in-depth discussion. At its current depth, it is unlikely to convince anyone who is not already persuaded. Persuaded that democracy is not the best option. 

I'm unsure what the author is hoping to achieve in this piece. Maybe it's a piece of pro-oligarchy propaganda. 

What others have to say about The Constitution of the Athenians

"This work represents both a philological and a historiographical problem, because, even if it was transmitted in the corpus of Xenophon’s work, it is considered to have been written by another author, known as Speudo-Xenophon or “Old Oligarch”" From Archai

"The pamphlet aims to show that the demos (common people) at Athens run affairs in their own interests, and it takes the curious form of a salute from an anti‐democratic viewpoint." From Oxford Reference 

Comparisons with other texts

In Agesilaus we see Xenophon praising a competent King. This seems in keeping with what we see here with Xenophon taking a stand against Democracy. Both are short Pithy texts with little fluff. That being said Agesilaus has a bit more depth of argument. As well as a bit more evidence for its claims.

The Acharnians is not directly about the democracy of Athens. It does however deal with Athens during the war. Here we see the courts in action, or inaction as the case may be. We see through this how ineffective the collective process can be in its need to consult all. This is exactly one of Xenophon's points about The Constitution of the Athenians.

Conclusion

The Consitution of the Athenians is possibly not written by Xenophon. But it is traditionally part of Xenophon's corpus. It covers the downsides of Democracy while lauding Oligarchy as a better alternative. 

Have you read The Constitution of the Athenians? If so what did you think of it? 

 

Want to read The Constitution of the Athenians but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Constitution of the Athenians. 

The Doctor's through the Parson's Tales; The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer

Why you might read The Canterbury Tales?

The Canterbury Tales is the most well-known work of Chaucer. And Chaucer is the father of English literature. So if you are going to read any of his work here is the place to start. No Self-Education project is complete without this classic. Be warned though it is rather long, and if you don't want to read middle English find a good modern translation.

Synopsis of The Canterbury Tales(Part 2)

The Doctor's Tale:

A corrupt judge lusts after a virgin daughter and puts together a plot to get her in his power. He puts together a case with the story that she is a slave that her father has abducted. The father sees through this plot and kills the daughter to save her. The judge then conspires to put the father to death but the people rebel and through the judge in jail. In jail he kills himself. 

The Pardoner's Tale:

Three friends go to kill death after another friend dies. They find him under an oak tree beside him is a pile of gold. They quickly forget about death and plan to take the money in the morning. They draw straws for someone to go to town for food and drink. The two left then plan to stab the one fetching food and drink. But the one who went to town poisons the wine. So the two kill the third and then die from the poison in the wine.

The Shipman's Tale:

A Shipman's wife spends too much money and ends up in debt. She asks a monk, a close friend for money. He borrows it off the shipman and gives it to her. He tells the shipman he has repaid the money to the wife. The shipman confronts his wife and she returns the money and says she will pay the debts with her body.

The Prioress' Tale:

Jews abduct a Christian boy. When he doesn't stop singing to the virgin Mary they kill him by slitting his throat. They throw him in the sewer, but he keeps singing. His family find him and he explains the virgin Mary helped him keep singing.

Chaucer’s Tale of Sir Thopas:

A parody of romantic poems. This start with Sir Thopas searching for the Elf Queen. He is distracted by fighting with the giant Sir Olifaunt. Here the tale ends as the Innkeeper interrupts Chaucer and begs him to stop.

Chaucer's Tale of Meliboeus:

Unlike every other tale, this one is told in prose. This tale is a conversation between a husband and wife. The wife is trying to convince the husband to forgive a wrong and not seek revenge. They go back and forth with both appealing to historical and biblical figures. Eventually, the husband concedes but still chastises the wrongdoers before forgiving them.

The Monk's Tale:

The monk tells 17 short tales. These come from the bible and historical tales. They range from Adam to Lucifer, and Nero to Julius Caesar.

The Nun's Priest's Tale:

A cock and his hens are looked after by a simple family. The cock is showy and proud. The cock has a dream about being killed but the hens convince him it was nothing. He exits the henhouse that morning and meets a fox and is alarmed. But the fox convinces him that he is a friend and asks him to sing. While he is singing the fox grabs him by the neck and runs off into the forest with him. The cock escapes into the forest and the fox tries to trick him again but he is too smart for that.

The Nun's Second Tale:

A Christian maid is married to a pagan man. She on their wedding night tells him of her guardian angel. He doesn't believe her so she sends him on a pilgrimage to see a saint. He converts upon meeting with the saint. He returns to her and see's her angel who gives him one wish. He wishes his brother to have faith in God. The brother converts and travels to the saint to be baptised. The brothers are then martyred.

The Canon's Yeoman's Tale:

An Alchemist swindles a priest with a powder to turn mercury into silver. The con is rather elaborate and the priest is convinced and pays a large sum. The Alchemist gets away before the deception is uncovered.

The Manciple's Tale:

A jealous husband keeps his wife at home but she stays and takes a lover anyway. This husband owns a snow-white crow that can mimic human speech and voice. The crow tells the husband of his wife's infidelity and in a rage, the husband kills his wife. He then feels remorse for this and blames the crow. He then plucks the bird and turns it black.

The Parson's Tale:

This is not a tale but rather a treatise on the deadly sins and repentance in Christ. The translation I was working from does not give it in full. Instead mixes summary with full text in what is otherwise a very long text.

Reflections on The Canterbury Tales(Part 2)

The treatise that is the Parson's Tale really drives home the position of the Parson as a teacher of the faith. We have seen other religious men tell tales. By contrast, the parson chooses to preach rather than do something as frivolous as telling a tale or jape. He even says as much in his introduction.

Chaucer's prayer at the end of the text is interesting. He seems to ask forgiveness for his works. It starts out as a meaty prayer, which is to be expected of his time when the church was so much more dominant.

The self-insert of Chaucer feels a little out of place. Yet at the same time, it gives the author a first-hand look at the tales he is telling. It becomes a retelling of something that could have happened rather than a story made up of whole cloth.

What others have to say about The Canterbury Tales

"One character specifically used to reflect Chaucer's views on  Scottish culture, the lower class, and corrupt businessmen is the Miler" From Bartleby

"He along with other pilgrimages gathered on a spring evening at the Tabard Inn in Southwark, the place of departure and arrival for the pilgrimages to the shrine of St. Thomas Becket at Canterbury." From Poem Analysis

Comparisons with other texts

The Legend of Good Women is also a collection by Chaucer. It is much more compact and tells Chaucer's versions of stories of well-known women. By contrast, the Canterbury Tales is focused more on men. The Canterbury tales are a mix of well-known tales as well as more original ones. It is also held together by a meta-narrative rather than a theme. 

Like the Everyman and Miracle Plays we see a set of tales that tell us as much about the author and his times as they do about the stories themselves. The Everyman and Miracle Plays however have a biblical theme and a multitude of authors. By contrast, while priests and monks may be characters in the Tales the themes are not religious.

Conclusion

This second half of the Canterbury tales covered a variety of stories. These often invoke another pilgrim to tell a story in response. They are not linked by theme but rather by a meta-narrative told between each story. These tales come from a diverse group of pilgrims heading for Canterbury. It ends with Chaucer praying.

Have you read The Canterbury Tales? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The Canterbury Tales but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Canterbury Tales. 

What to look for in a horse; On horsemanship; Xenophon

Why you might read On Horsemanship?

On Horsemanship is one of the earliest works on horsemanship. It gives us insight into the choosing and training of horses in ancient Greece. Its author was an avid horseman often commanding troops from horseback. But Xenophon has another book on the cavalry commander. It is easy enough to follow even for someone who knows nothing about horses.

Synopsis of On Horsemanship

This book gives a detailed analysis of how to choose an unbroken horse. What to look for both in temperament and physically. He then also gives advice on buying a horse that has already been broken and ridden. Finally, he explains how to train a horse for war and for the parade.

Reflections on On Horsemanship

Like I said it is easy enough to read even for a person who knows nothing about horses. It is not overly technical but in places, it is a bit vague and I would not know how to implement what he suggests.

The differences between what to look for between the unbroken to the broken horse. Of course, a lot of it is the difference based on being able to test the broken horse. In the broken case there is less about the physicality of the horse.

What others have to say about On Horsemanship

"Xenophon intended the concise On Horsemanship, above all, to be practical — a work of applied theory. Neither geography nor overall military strategy, that is, predisposed ancient Greece to practising mounted warfare or to developing advanced cavalry tactics, so despite the status of Athenian cavalry as “a corps d’élite,”" From Horse Talk

"It is the first work known to emphasise training techniques that take account of the horse's psyche as well as his physical condition." From Local Riding

Comparisons with other texts

Being the first book on horsemanship leaves little to compare with content-wise. This leaves me with only the craftsmanship to comment on.

Like Apology, this is an easy read. In both Xenophon is concise while still explaining his point in enough detail for the reader to get his point. Both works do not assume that the reader has much in the way of prior knowledge.

Conclusion

 A simple read. It gives insight into the ancient Greek way of horsemanship and the training of horses for war. Written in such a way as to be understandable to the layman as well as the one who knows horses. 

Have you read On Horsemanship? If so what did you think of it? 

 

Want to read On Horsemanship but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of On Horsemanship. 

An account of Socrates' trial; Apology, Xenophon

Why you might read Apology?

Apology is a short telling of the trial of Socrates and gives us a quick insight into the man. We have no writings by Socrates himself. Instead, we have the writings of two of his disciples, Xenophon and Plato. As part of your self-education, it gives an introduction to Socrates. 

Synopsis of Apology

Apology is a short telling of the trial and defence of Socrates. Xenophon was not in Athens at the time. He instead tells the story based on what he is told by Hermogenes. He is taken to trial by Anytus and condemned. His disciples see the trial as unfair and unjust. But Socrates sees it as his time today and is positive about dying before reaching old age.

Reflections on Apology

This is a second-hand account that reports to tell the words of Socrates in his trial. As such it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. It is well known that eyewitness accounts vary and this is then told by a third party. That being said Xenophon did know Socrates well. While not 100%, will still be a fair representation of what he might have said.

Xenophon in some places specifically says that he heard this bit from Hermogenes. This makes me wonder if he had other unknown sources as well.

Socrates faces death with a philosophical, pun not intended, outlook. His view that it is better to die while still in his prime is interesting. It shows a different outlook on old age as something to be avoided. Compared with today's twilight years and retirement.

What others have to say about Apology

"Xenophon's Apology was written about 15 years after Socrates died, which would be about 386 B.C." From Roangelo

"is an account of Socrates' defence at his trial in 399 BC. There are some differences of emphasis with Plato's dialogue of the same name, the only other extant account of the trial." From Tom Griffin

"What might be thought a trivial point about style hearkens to a much larger problem, as Socrates deliberated both on his defence (apologias) and the end of his life." From Ashokkarra

Comparisons to other texts

The Clouds takes aim at Socrates' work. It basically calls those who follow it fools. By contrast, Apology shows Socrates in a positive light. Though little of it is about his teaching perse, we do see his defence to the charges. From this, we gain some knowledge of his outlook.

Agesilaus speaks also of the dead after they are gone. But by contrast, it tells of his deeds, whereas Apology tells of his trial. This focus on the last moments of life gives a different kind of insight. Although both are prey to giving a positive spin on the deaths.

Conclusion

Apology gives a secondhand view of the trial of Socrates. It is far from impartial but does give us a feel for the man. How he approached death, even an unjust one, with an eye to the loss of suffering rather than loss of opportunity.

Have you read Apology? If so what did you think of it? 

 

Want to read Apology but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of Apology. 

The long way home; Anabasis, Xenophon

Why you might read Anabasis?

Anabasis is a concise telling of the Greek expedition into Persia and their journey home. They are following Cyrus the would-be Persian King.  

For history, it is an easy read and gives great insight into the life of Xenophon. This knowledge will give some insight into his philosophical works. Overall, it builds into the understanding of the ongoing conflicts between Greece and Persia.

Synopsis of Anabasis

Book I: 

 The first book outlines how Cyrus gathers an army and marches for the capital. He goes to face his older brother who is king. Cyrus is trying to stage a coup. Xenophone gives details of the origin of each section of troops. This includes a sizeable Greek contingent. Their march inland to Babylon is told in great detail. This consists of the distances between the cities in which they stopped. It ends with the battle between Cyrus and the King and how different parts of the army succeed on both sides. In the end, however, Cyrus dies

Book II:

This book outlines the talks between the Greeks and the King. There is much going back and forth. The Greeks as cut off, surrounded by enemy territory. And so they try to get peace but come from a prideful situation. They see themselves as the victors of the battle and so will not surrender arms. Talks go back and forward. Eventually, the King showed his hand by executing almost all the generals of the Greeks. 

Book III:

his book details the regrouping of the Greek force under new leadership. This includes Xenophon himself. This only happens after everyone is despondent for a while. After much discussion, they resolve to fight their way home. They head off in a box formation with the baggage in the centre. They burn the wagons, the tents, and anything that might be excess to need. They skirmish with the king's forces a couple of times. They are outmatched without archers and cavalry. They remedy this by pulling men from the baggage train that can use slings. As well as using captured horses that were being used as beasts of burden repurposed as cavalry. From here they back themselves into a corner up a valley and have to come back out. They resolve to go north after hearing reports from locals. 

Book IV:

This book details the flight north of the Greek army. They proceed to the headwaters of both the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Large portions go past without getting more than a mention. Xenophon however goes into detail on battles including the taking of a stronghold. He also notes the men's reaction to finally seeing the sea. They start shouting and running until the entire army is on top of a mountain and can see the sea. The peoples they meet on the way are a mix of friendly and set on war. That being said almost every time a dialogue can be established there is an oath sworn not to burn the villages. These the Greeks happily swear and are happy to keep as they have no quarrel with the inhabitants.

Book V:

This book details the attempt to go home by the sea and the eventual march by land. The men upon reaching the sea lose their will to walk. But after not enough boats can be retrieved to carry the army and provisions run low they must move on by foot. The peoples they find are a mix of friendly and unfriendly. This is generally determined by if they are barbarians or a greek colony. Much thought is put into how to get some plunder and not go back to Greece empty-handed. 

Book VI:

his book details the continuation of the move through the outer greek territories. It also includes the separation and reformation of the army. The army first decides to appoint a commander. And do away with the council of generals they currently have. Xenophon is the candidate they want but he does not want the job. Within a week of appointing a commander, the army splits into 3 by racial lines. One goes by sea and is fine, two go by land. One runs into the enemy and is surrounded by the enemy. Xenophon commanding the other land force goes to their aid. After rescuing this part the army reforms and gives pledges not to break up again. 

Book VII:

This book details the expedition in Thrace for pay. Xenophon had great difficulty persuading the employing king to pay the soldiers. Even though it had been promised. Xenophon by this point wanted to leave the army and proceed home alone. However, circumstances and sacrifices kept him at the head of the army. Until the Lacedemonian generals take over at the entry to Greece to start another war. The book ends with a list of the countries they have travelled through and a total time of 1 year and 3 months. 

Reflections on Anabasis

Interestingly, Xenophon chooses to tell this story from a third-person perspective. It is easy due to this to forget that he wrote it. As a modern reader, I wonder if that was done to try and hide the bias in the telling. Either that or if it was the done thing for histories at the time of writing.

The problem of feeding and paying the army is a major issue throughout the whole campaign. This is especially true after the death of Cyrus. It has always been true that an army marches on its stomach. The occasional offers of others to pay the army is interesting, even if they don't tend to follow through. It also lead to some interesting decisions about the route. It was often better to march through hostile territory so that you could take from the villages. by comparison, if you went through friendly land where you had to pay for your food. After a long march, there was no money to hand so taking from the land became more and more necessary.

Xenophone ending up in charge of the army is interesting as well as he does not really seem qualified. He is rather is placed there when the generals are killed by the Persian King. He seems to do a really good job considering the situation. The only thing anyone can accuse him of is that he is overly fond of the soldiers and wants them to get their pay. At no point do they face an army on the same terms though. They are too big and manage to scare off opponents rather than facing them.

What others have to say about Anabasis

"It contains a famous account of the mercenaries’ long trek (“the march of the 10,000”) from near Babylon to the Euxine (Black Sea) after Cyrus’s defeat at the Battle of Cunaxa (401 BC). Xenophon, who had accompanied the force in a private capacity, was largely responsible for their successful retreat through his resourcefulness and courage.

It is likely that the Anabasis, which was initially published under the pseudonym Themistogenes of Syracuse, was composed some 20 years after the events it describes. Textual evidence suggests that it was subsequently revised." From Brittanica

"Anabasis is a classic story of an army’s retreat from disaster, told by the man who was thrust into the role of saving it. Anabasis means “march inland from the coast,” which is a paradoxical title for a book that is mostly about a march to the coast from inland" From The Hoover Institute

Comparisons to other texts

While this march is of epic proportions this book is a history rather than an epic. It details more of the politics and the discussions than it does the fighting. By comparison, the Illiad is far more focused on the battles and the heroic actions undertaken in the fighting. but unlike the Illiad, the force is moving. First, they head inland to Babylon and then north to the sea and back to Greece. Also, they generally don't face opposing armies in battle after the first battle with the King.

It is much shorter and more readable than The Histories. It only has to cover the politics of one camp. It has far fewer conflicts and doesn't go into much detail about the battles. As such it doesn't get bogged down as often. In a way, these two texts tell the opposite story. The Histories tell of the Persian invasion of Greece and Anabasis the invasion of Persia by a Greek army.

Like The Peloponnesian War, the author lived through the conflict. But unlike it, the author himself is a major player rather than just a bit part. Due to this, we get a lot more speeches to the troops. As well as more discussions that lead to the decisions than we do in the Peloponnesian War.

Conclusion

Anabasis is a good read, giving us the original telling of the March of the 10,000. It gives us insight into a portion of the life of Xenophon. Showing us how armies with multiple generals could make command decisions. It details the hardship of being stranded without a benefactor. But it also shows the tenacity of the greek soldiers in getting home again.

Have you read Anabasis? If so what did you think of it? 

 

Want to read Anabasis but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of Anabasis. 

The Knights through to the Franklins Tales; The Canterbury Tales, Chaucer

Why you might read The Canterbury Tales?

The Canterbury Tales is the most well-known work of Chaucer. And Chaucer is the father of English literature. So if you are going to read any of his work here is the place to start. No Self-Education project is complete without this classic. Be warned though it is rather long, and if you don't want to read middle English find a good translation.

Synopsis of The Canterbury Tales(Part 1)

Woven around the tales themselves is a meta-narrative of a group of pilgrims telling stories at the behest of their host.

The Knight's Tale:

Two knights are imprisoned and fall in love with the woman they see out of the prison window. One gets released, the other exiled. The exiled one sneaks back and enters the lady's service. They come across each other and duel for the lady. One is wounded and wins the lady. Before dying in his bed he tells her she should marry the other as he loves her.

The Miller's Tale:

Is a Bawdy tale of a wife who has an affair with the border. She is also desired by another who comes to her window and begs for a kiss. She agrees but presents her behind out the window which he kisses. He goes away angry and returns to beg for another kiss. This time the lover presents his behind but is branded with a hot iron for his troubles.                            

The Revee's Tale:

Is another Bawdy tale. This time of a miller who is dishonest. He cheats two students with their grain. They get revenge by sleeping with his wife.

The Cook's Tale:

A short fragment of an Apprentice cook who loses his job for womanising and gambling.

The Man of Law's Tale:

A Muslim sultan converts to Christianity to marry an Italian girl. His mother is livid and has all at a feast killed including the Sultan, but sparing the girl.

The girl is then sent back to Italy but is shipwrecked. Here she is courted by a suitor who she rebuffs. In anger, he then kills the local lord's wife and plants the knife on the girl. The trial acquits her but the Emperor who is the Judge then marries the girl. They have a son. but again the mother inlaw schemes. This time she gets the girl sent off to sea. When the Emperor comes home he kills his mother for having deprived him of his wife and son. Eventually, though he finds them in Rome and moves to England.

The Wife of Bath's Tale:

A young woman is raped by a knight. King Arthur wants him killed but Guinevere talks him into letting her sentence him. She gives him one year and a day to find out what a woman most wants. He searches the kingdom but every woman gives him a different answer. He eventually meets an old hag who says she will tell him if he promises to do what she asks. He returns to court and announces what a woman most want is sovereignty over their husband. All the women agree he is right and he is freed. the old woman demands he marry her, which he does grudgingly. once in bed she asks if he would rather have a young woman and he says it is her choice. with that he finds her changed into a young woman for he has given her that sovereignty.

The Friar's Tale:

A summoner meets a bailiff who turns out to be the devil. They make a pact to take whatever they can and share it. They come across a man with a stuck horse and cart. He says devil take it all and the summoner asks why the devil doesn't. He explains that the man doesn't mean it. The summoner tries to swindle a widow but she tells the devil to take him. He questions her intent and she says she means it so the devil takes the summoner to hell.

The Sompnour's Tale:

A friar on his deathbed is begged by two monks to make a donation to their order. He agrees to give them a jewel but it turns out to just be a fart.

The Clerk's Tale:

A Marquis marries a low-born woman and subjects her to horrible tests of love. these include the removal of their children and her demotion from wife to a maid. When she passes all the tests he proclaims his love and returns the children.

The Merchant's Tale:

A man marries for all the wrong reasons a young woman. His squire falls in love with her, and she reciprocates. They contrive to be together. By this time the man is old and blind. The squire waits in a tree in the garden and the young woman talks her way into going up the tree. The old man receives his sight back from the gods to find them in the tree having sex. But the young woman talks her way out of it by saying he is going mad,

The Squire's Tale:

This tale is incomplete. A king receives four magical gifts; A brass horse, a mirror, a sword and The speech of birds. The horse is incredibly fast and reliable. The mirror shows the future. The sword can cut through armour and heal wounds.

The Franklin's Tale:

A woman's husband is away at sea and a young man comes to love her. she promises to be with him if he removes the rocks from the shore. He manages this with a magic illusion. Her husband insists she must uphold her promise. But the young man releases her from the promise upon seeing her love for her husband.

Reflections on The Canterbury Tales(Part 1)

Tying the stories together with a meta-narrative is quite interesting. The stories themselves do not share any theme or anything else to tie them together. This makes one story out of what would have otherwise been a collections of short stories told as poems.

The incomplete tales tell us just enough to have us hooked and wishing we could know the rest of the story.

The back and forth between the storytellers show us the group dynamics. The group might be together on a pilgrimage but that doesn't mean they respect or like each other. We often see the roles reversed in stories that come after each other. This is based mostly on occupation. In fact, very little else is known about the storytellers other than their occupation.

What others have to say about The Canterbury Tales

"One of the reasons Chaucer is so important is that he made the decision to write in English and not French. In the centuries following the Norman invasion, French was the language spoken by those in power. The Canterbury Tales was one of the first major works in literature written in English." From the British Library

"Chaucer does not name himself in the General Prologue, but he is one of the characters who gather at the Tabard Inn. All of the descriptions of the pilgrims in the Prologue are narrated through the perspective of the character of Chaucer (which may or may not be the same as that of the author Chaucer)." From LitCharts

Comparisons with other texts

The Legend of Good Women is also a collection by Chaucer. It is much more compact and tells Chaucer's versions of stories of well-known women. By contrast, the Canterbury Tales is focused more on men. The Canterbury tales are a mix of well-known tales as well as more original ones. It is also held together by a meta-narrative rather than a theme. 

Like the Everyman and Miracle Plays we see a set of tales that tell us as much about the author and his times as they do about the stories themselves. The Everyman and Miracle Plays however have a biblical theme and a multitude of authors. By contrast, while priests and monks may be characters in the Tales the themes are not religious.

Conclusion

This first half of the Canterbury tales covered a variety of stories. These often invoke another pilgrim to tell a story in response. They are not linked by theme but rather by a meta-narrative told between each story. These tales come from a diverse group of pilgrims heading for Canterbury.

Have you read The Canterbury Tales? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The Canterbury Tales but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Canterbury Tales. 

In praise of a Spartan King; Agesilaus, Xenophon

 Why you might read Agesilaus?

Agesilaus is often seen as the first biography. It details the achievements of Agesilaus II. It is said to be one of Xenophon's lesser works. That should not overshadow its importance to the genre of biography. Nor should it diminish how it helps to round out the understanding of Xenophon's work. An easy read that strikes the balance between recording the truth and readability.

Synopsis of Agesilaus

Xenophon starts his tribute to Agesilaus by detailing his victories as the king. These start in the subduing of Asia against the Persians. He then finds himself recalled due to problems at home. Xenophon then details his victories around the greek sphere. He includes the victories not won by might but by cunning or diplomacy. Xenophon then moves on to the character of Agesilaus. He details how religious he was, even respecting the temples of foreign gods. He adds how trustworthy his word and oaths were. He describes his humility and simple lifestyle and contrasts it with the king of the Persians. He gives stories from Agesilaus' life to underline his point in all these things. Xenophobe finishes with a summary of his points. In this, he admits that this reads like a eulogy of only the high points. He then tries to assure the reader that this is really how Agesilaus was.

Reflections on Agesilaus

It is hard at first to see past Xenophon's praise. Everything seems to be perfect, all the battles won. Xenophon does directly address this at the end of the work. It is also worth noting that the victories are because of good management. That and not going to a battle that he could not win. That being said he was still willing to take a chance.

It is interesting how many categories Xenophon broke Agesilaus' character down into. He separates his humility from his religiosity from his trustworthiness. While he doesn't use the same examples they can be at times very similar. This can make it hard to remember the specifics of the text.

I thought that Xenophon's inclusion of what he calls his urbanity. The idea that this was a powerful man that still did the simple things. Things like small talk or talking over a friend's problems. It adds an interesting highlight to the painting of his character. I would think most biographical authors would find it superfluous. That being said its inclusion does round out the view of this great king of Sparta.

What others have to say about Agesilaus

"The Agesilaus (Greek: Ἀγησίλαος) is an account of the life of King Agesilaus II of Sparta by Xenophon, one of the earliest examples of biographical writing." From Tom Griffin

"The Agesilausis an odd work. It praises the Spartan king Agesilaus as the champion and defender of Greeks: the text is imbued with the highly politicised language of Greek-barbarian opposition." From a paper by Rosie Harman

Comparisons to other texts

Thucydides' History focuses on a war between the Greeks and Persia. It covers whichever kings and citizens were in power. By contrast, Agesilaus follows one king of Sparta. Agesilaus details the myriad of wars he fought over the course of his kingship. But it does start with his war against Persia. It also does so in a lot less detail and strikes a better balance between accuracy and readability. Agesilaus is set after Thucidides' History and is affected by its outcome. Finally, Thucudides' History covers the war in Greece. At the same time, Agesilaus takes the war to the Persians in Asia.

The Peloponnesian war covers Greeks at war with each other. Agesilaus covers many things, but it also covers some battles on the greek peninsula. The Peloponnesian war gives the hegemony we see here. This allows for collecting forces for the war in Persia to be led by Sparta. Agesilaus is written later and it is from that hegemony that we get the war in Asia.

Conclusion

Agesilaus reads like a eulogy and Xenophon even admits this late in the book. There is no doubting that Agesilaus was a great king of Sparta but the book is very one-sided on his greatness. Xenophon was a great friend of Agesilaus II and shows him in a very positive light. It covers both battles and Agesilaus' character to give a fairly complete view of his achievements. 

Have you read Agesilaus? If so what did you think of it? 

 

Want to read Agesilaus but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of Agesilaus.