Xenophon’s Cyropaedia is a fictional account of the life of Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Persian Empire. This article argues that reading the Cyropaedia through an Aristotelian lens provides a useful means by which to understand Xenophon’s analysis of Cyrus’s empire. On an Aristotelian reading, a crucial facet of Cyrus’s knowledge is his view that the household provides an appropriate model by which to found and govern an empire. By incorporating many nations into what I call his ‘imperial (...) household’, Cyrus finds a way to avoid what Xenophon sees as the fundamental problem of political rule, which is that human beings do not wish to be ruled by others and eventually revolt against their rulers. But in contrast to all previous rulers known to Xenophon, Cyrus secures his subjects’ obedience. He does so by treating them as women, children, and slaves, each of whom looks to him as the head of the household. Under Cyrus, the perpetual political revolutions Xenophon describes thus become a thing of the past, at least so long as Cyrus is alive to preside over his imperial household. But Xenophon also suggests that order, peace, and security in the empire come at a cost. In order to keep his subjects in line, Cyrus as leader must distort and do violence to their humanity. Read carefully, the Cyropaedia thus provides a thoughtful critique of imperial ambition and empire. (shrink)

In the Gorgias, Plato explores the relationship between statesmanship and rhetoric. Socrates argues that the true statesman uses the true rhetoric in the attempt to make others better through speeches. In the conversation with Gorgias, Socrates forces him to see the potentially disastrous consequences of teaching a kind of rhetoric that is morally neutral, which suggests the need for an uncompromisingly true or just rhetoric. In the exchange with Polus, Socrates attempts the just reformation of rhetoric into true rhetoric to (...) counter the unjust rhetoric of Polus. In his discussion with Callicles, Socrates uses the true rhetoric to try to moderate him, but his failure reveals the limits of true statesmanship. By examining these three exchanges, I shed light on a unique and neglected paradox of the Gorgias. As clearly as the dialogue articulates what constitutes a true statesman, it challenges his own practice. Socrates, as the true statesman possessing the true rhetoric, is powerless to achieve his goals. However, a potential way to expand the success of the true statesman can be seen by going back to the discourse between Socrates and Gorgias and forging an alliance between them. (shrink)