Rex Warner's is a pretty sleepy translation, albeit an important, early effort (from 1950). Compare the following passage (on the first page) from Warner...

"But, after the death of Darius, when Artaxerxes was established on the throne, Tissaphernes maligned Cyrus to his brother and accused him of plotting against him. Artaxerxes believed the story and arrested Cyrus with the intention of putting him to death: but his mother by her entreaties secured his life and his recall to his province. Still, after the danger and disgrace from which he had escaped, Cyrus took measures to ensure that he should never again be in his brother's power; instead, if he could manage it, he would become king in his brother's place."

... with WHD Rouse's translation (1959). Rouse drives home the point much faster:

"But when Dareios died and Artaxerxes succeeded, Tissaphernes slandered Cyros to his brother and said he was plotting against him. The king believed him, and siezed Cyros to put him to death, but his mother begged him off and sent him back to his province. When Cyros got clear of this danger and disgrace, he determined never again to be in his brother's power, but to make himself king instead, if he could."

Now if only Stanley Lombardo would put the Anabasis on his to-do list. He had an incredible touch with the Iliad.

I bought the book because I had to read it for one of my classes. But I was pleasantly surprised. Xenophon provides an interesting Greek perspective on the Persian Empire. And while the writing is a bit boring to read in places, overall it is a page turner. (if you enjoy reading history that is)

I would recommend this for anyone interested in the ancient world. But be warned, it is a translation of ancient writing, so it reads accordingly.

I went into this with great anticipation. I'm a huge fan of Steven Pressfield's military historical fiction, and thought that Xenophon was likely an influence on Pressfield's writing. The results held up well, although with a minor drawback.

The story stumbles a little in the beginning through the march into Persia. There are maybe one or two too many asides too early on. but soon Xenophon finds his narrative footing and the books relentless battles and skirmishes begin to grip the reader. This initial pace is my only real qualm, and it is minor. On to the good!

One way in which the book excels is in it's portrayal of an army travelling through exotic locales and cultures (from a Greek's point of view as it would seem at the time). I had heard ahead of time that Xenophon had the sort of perepective of a 'civilized' man who was touring barbarian lands. While there is certainly some of that slant, I found it not nearly as prejudiced as noted. Xenophon seems, for his time, to be fairly open to foreign ideas, and judges men on their conduct and honor, not what country they happen to be from.

While the battles are done well enough, what makes this book timeless and an essential look into the philisophy of the ancient world is it's portrayal of what it means to keep your honor and dignity, and never compromise your values no matter how dire your situation looks. This is where Xenophon as his own protagonist in the story works so effectively (a somewhat unconventional style; third person of his own life). He is a man of straight moral bearings, which is essential to liking what is, basically, a group of marauders who don't hesitate to enslave women and children if they can sell them at market for some bushels of barley.

Xenophon, through council of his fellow warriors, as well as his diplomatic skills with foreign powers, displays what is fundamentally the supreme virtues Greek Philosophy idealized. Being an Athenian, who spent a lot of time with Spartans, Xenophon displays the words and action representing the best of both cities, as well as additional ethics he picks up on from other leaders such as Noble Prince Cyrus.

That is not to say that Xenophon is historically representing himself as he always acted, but this is mostly irrelevant. What has echoed through in his writing from antiquity is that THIS is what he believed every leader should aspire to behave as, both to honor his peers, and to also do honor to himself and his house. And it is just as true today. Live by a moral code in all you do, and everything else is up to the Fates.

As a final note, to anyone reading the edition with the George Cawkell introduction, I advise that you skip it until after reading the story. Cawkell seems to me, a man of backhanded compliments to Xenophon. In fact most of his intro consists of borderline character assassinations on Xeno. Some of it may be true about his inaccuracies in geography and a few events to which we have other historians' versions, but a note to take it with a grain of salt is sufficient, not a full-on devalue of the work as a whole. He has many interesting things to say about the times it portrays, but I think he forgets that his job is ONLY to do this, not sneak in his own criticisms to people before they even get to the first page of the book to form their own impressions objectively.

This was an entertaining glimpse into the capabilities of a Greek mercenary army. The army starts by fighting its way through enemy territory (Persia) to get back home. Once they do arrive home, the army is perceived as a threat by their own people due to the fact that they are a large, well trained and very experienced standing army with no employer. So Xenophon tells the tale of this Army and its ups and downs as they try and find their niche in the ancient world.

If you are like me and AGI (Ancient Greece Ingnorant), I recommend reading through the introduction quickly or not at all before you start the book. Turn back to it and read it more in depth as you proceed through the book. I was unfamiliar with the goings-on of ancient Greece before I started the book so much of the subject matter in the introduction confused me. When I read the introduction again after I completed the book I understood it much better.

**I do not have a lot of knowledge on the subjest of ancient Greece nor have I read extensively any literature prior to this pertaining to the time period other than The Illiad and The Oddysey. My grammer sucks too**

Xenophon accompanied the Ten Thousand, a large army of Greek mercenaries hired by Cyrus the Younger, who intended to seize the throne of Persia from his brother, Artaxerxes II. Though Cyrus' army was victorious at Cunaxa in Babylon (401 BCE), Cyrus himself was killed in the battle, rendering the victory irrelevant and the expedition a failure. Stranded deep in enemy territory, the Spartan general Clearchus and most of the other Greek generals were subsequently killed or captured by treachery on the part of the Persian satrap (or warlord) Tissaphernes. Xenophon played an instrumental role in encouraging the Greek army of 10,000 to march north to the Black Sea. Now abandoned in the middle of the hostile Anatolian plateau, without communications and supplies other than what they could obtain by force as they went, the 10,000 had to fight their way northward, making ad hoc decisions as to their destiny. Ultimately this "marching republic" managed to reach the shores of the Black Sea, which meant home for most of the soldiers.

I sometimes find reading ancient literature somewhat difficult, but Xenophon (as translated by Rex Warner) was fairly straight forward and easy to understand. The political infighting doesn't seem to have changed much in 2400 years, and I think that a few executions for disciplines' sake may not be out of order now-a-days. It is also a grand adventure and very interesting travelogue of Ancient Near East, with descriptions of some of the tribes from the former Hittite empire. A definite classic that those with an interest needs to read.

A very interesting story about the expedition of ten thousands Greek mercenary soldiers who were motivated by financial rewards by Cyrus the younger for war against his brother, Atraxerexes II.

Cyrus was killed in Cunaxa battle and Greek army negotiated with the Persian satrap Tissaphernes about returning back to Greece but the satrap had the intension to destroy the invading army and made it very hard for them to return from the same root and they had to divert towards Armenia first and then to southern coast of Black Sea.

They faced great difficulties on their march through hostile territories and were attacked several times by natives.

What is most interesting about this edition of "the Persian Expedition" is its first 48 pages of introduction by George Cawkwell and he is specialized in Greek history from sixth to fourth century and in his fantastic introduction and foot notes he explains about Xenophon's Pan-Hellenic motives and disputed narratives about victory of ten thousands Greek army against 1.2 millions Persian army!! And how villages were plundered on their root to Persia and people were taken as hostages and were sold as slaves later.

Persian history is indebted to some Great scholars for their research and for exposing the true about the history.

A very interesting story about the expedition of ten thousands Greek mercenary soldiers who were motivated by financial rewards by Cyrus the younger for war against his brother, Atraxerexes II.
Cyrus was killed in Cunaxa battle and Greek army negotiated with the Persian satrap Tissaphernes about returning back to Greece but the satrap had the intension to destroy the invading army and made it very hard for them to return from the same root and they had to divert towards Armenia first and then to southern coast of Black Sea.
They faced great difficulties on their march through hostile territories and were attacked several times by natives.
What is most interesting about this edition of "the Persian Expedition" is its first 48 pages of introduction by George Cawkwell and he is specialized in Greek history from sixth to fourth century and in his fantastic introduction and foot notes he explains about Xenophon's Pan-Hellenic motives and disputed narratives about victory of ten thousands Greek army against 1.2 millions Persian army!! And how villages were plundered on their root to Persia and people were taken as hostages and were sold as slaves later.
Persian history is indebted to some Great scholars for their research and for exposing the true about the history.

This is the book that inspired all the swash-buckler adventures. A true escape coutresy good old boy XENOPHON...LOTS OF FUN

The narator is not one of my favorite Blackstone narators but that seems more a matter of personal taste. The content/translation of the material is where the value lies in this recording. Xenophon's tact and humor in telling this legendary tale makes it poetry as much as history and the narator gives it a good rendition.

The Persian Expedition or the "Anabasis" is a history of the expedition of a Greek Mercenary Army into the heart of the Persian empire to install Prince Cyrus upon the Persian throne. After success in battle against the Persian Emperor Artaxerxes, Cyrus is killed in battle and subsequently the Greek commanders are treacherously killed during truce negotiations. Despite being trapped in enemy territory, a thousand miles from assistance, the Greeks rally and retreat through Turkey to Byzantium via Armenia and the Black sea's coast despite determined opposition from Persian forces and tribal groups and natural dangers such as the mountains and rivers which threatened to halt the Greek retreat.

Xenophon was an Athenian who joined the expedition without rank, but following the Persian execution of the officers, was elected to the rank of General based upon his arguments that the Persian could no longer be trusted and that the Greeks only hope for survival and freedom was extricate themselves from there predicament. By the end of the march Xenophon has become one of the most respected of the Greek leaders and after successfully returning to Europe, he leads the survivors in the service of Seuthes II to secure the Thracian throne.

The Persian Expedition at its most simple a rip roaring tale of survival in the face of seemingly overwhelming odds. But it also provides a is a fascinating picture of the Greek city state culture and religion and how both of these factors impacted on the Greek military forces and endeavours constantly creating frictions within the various factions which made up the Greek force. Also the Persian Expedition provides an interesting analysis of the Persian empires strengths and weakness, an analysis which would later form the basis of the Alexander's campaigns "Indeed an intelligent observer of the Kings empire would form the following estimate "It is strong in respect to the extent of its territory and number of inhabitants ; but it is weak in respect of its lengthened communications and the dispersal of its forces"

However on a more universal basis the Persian Expedition is worth reading for Xenophon's insights on leadership, with much detailed analysis of the personality and styles of the various leaders of the expeditions and how the soldiers reacted to these personalities.

This is one of my favorite Classical texts--a thrilling "true" story of Xenophon and the 10,000's roundabout retreat out of what is now Iraq and Turkey from an angry Persian army. However, kudos to Rex Warner's translation which makes it a thrilling narrative that will hold a Grecophile on the edge of their seat better than, say, a lot of other academic translations of Classical authors. The hardest thing to get used to at first is Xenophon referring to himself in the 3rd person. This passes; however, I wonder why some bold translator has never just gone ahead and translated Xenophon in the 1st person. What difference could it possibly make?

This book captured ancient Iran's history as Cyurs rised against his brother and was defeated. In this book, these was a main character with name of Xenophon, who was a mercenary under command of Cyrus. Once Cyrus captured by his brother force and killed. Xenophon and his men were left by themselves and had make their way back to Greece. Eventually, he made his way to Greece. Interesting point that at the end of the book Xenophon decided to attack at one rich Iranian family and salve them, as he did.

I became aware of this story when reading Will Durants History of Ancient Greece. Durant described it as one of the greatest military accomplishments in history. I knew right then, I had to read it.

This is the account of an army of 10,000 Greek mercenaries who were hired by Cyrus the Persian to help him overthrow his brother, the King. Cyrus, however, was defeated and killed in battle stranding the Greeks in Persia. To make matters worse, the Greek officers were slain by Persians under a false flag of truce, leaving the army leaderless, surrounded by overwhelming hostile forces and without provision 1500 miles from home. Leaderless, broke and despondent, the army, encouraged by Xenophon (354 B.C.) who was a solider on the expedition, elected new offices and began to fight its way home.

This is a story of leadership, faith and courage. What is particularly interesting is the dialogues recorded (or recreated) by Xenophon. Especially telling was the debate among the officers as they were negotiating with the Persians before they were slaughtered. They were caught between the proverbial rock and hard place. Could they trust the Persian truce? Were they capable of defeating such a large army so far from home? If they choose to retreat, just how could they get this army of 10,000 home? They choose to negotiate and were betrayed and killed.

No group of people remains leaderless for long. Leaders will arise, for the good or the worst. Fortunately for the Greeks, good men began to lead, and the long retreat up through Armenia, Kurdistan and to the Black Sea began. Throughout the march they faced one crisis after another- attacked by hostiles, struggling through the snowy mountains, depraved of food, water and provision.

What is particularly sad, was the growing anarchy in the army as it came nearer to Greek civilization. Party factions arose, men began identify with their particular city-state rather than the army, resulting in discouragement and loss of life.

This has to rank with one of the greatest military marches in history, perhaps only matched my Mao's long march during the Communist revolution in China. It is worth the read.

Between the fall of the Athenian Empire and the rise of Alexander, many Greeks sought adventure and fortune as mercenaries. Cyrus of Persia attempted to usurp the throne with an army stiffened by 10,000 Greek mercenaries. The author found himself among that number. Cyrus went down to defeat and death at the Battle of Cunaxa, but one contingent of his army emerged victorious--The Ten Thousand. Alone and unsponsored, surrounded by enemies, and deep in the heart of Persia, The Ten Thousand began their fighting retreat to the sea and freedom. Along the way they met with battle, treachery, hardship, and death. Xenophon became one of their leaders, and eventually lived to write this stirring account of their exploits. The successful retreat of the Ten Thousand served as proof to Phillip of Macedon that a Greek army could conquer Persia, and he made his preparations for the invasion. Phillip's death forestalled his plans, but Alexander took up his father's project and the rest, as they say, is history. If there had been no Westward march by the Ten Thousand, there may have been no Eastward march by Alexander.

The classic story of the march of the "ten thousand" from fatalism to freedom is exciting to read, but is it factual? Many scholars have believed that it was composed using diaries Xenophon kept with him on the campain, but certain inconsistences in the narrative leave this in doubt. However, whether it is a true to life account or not it remains a testament to the will for survival and the Greek spirit of brotherhood among men under pressure.

Xenophon's Anabasis (or "The Persian Expedition", as it is called here) is a classic tale of adventure, and a model of precise style on par with the more familiar works of Roman authors like Julius Caesar (De bello gallico) and Tacitus (Germania). Like Caesar, he uses simple, straightforward language, and the language reflects the character of the man who helped lead 10,000 Greek mercenaries through hostile territory: a man of clear values, determination, ambition, and a strong sense of honor. With Tacitus he shares an interest in odd details and in strange customs of foreign people: "a four days' march of sixty miles took him to the river Chalus, which was a hundred feet in breadth and full of large tame fish which the Syrians regarded as gods and would not allow anyone to harm them. (They think the same way about pigeons.)".

Xenophon's story has an immediacy and clarity that is truly amazing given the fact that he wrote it down 30 years after the events took place, and that we read it today, almost 2,400 years later. The Italian writer Italo Calvino captured the vivid yet factual tone of the Persian Expedition very nicely when he remarked that reading the book today "is the nearest thing to watching an old war documentary which is repeated every so often on television or on video." (Calvino's essay can be found in his collection of essays "Why Read the Classics?") Although the story is a never-ending succession of visual details and action, it is never boring. Xenophon writes succinctly, sprinkles small anecdotes, portraits of soldiers, speeches, and interesting details over the text, and peppers the story with exotic details.

Certain passages of the Persian Expedition reminded me of Hemingway's "A Moveable Feast". Especially in the way both authors employ visual images and celebrate the qualities of food. Hemingway enjoys "the oysters with their strong taste of the sea and their faint metallic taste that the cold white wine washed away, leaving only the sea taste and the succulent texture"; Xenophon reminisces that "going forward, then, they arrived at the villages where the guides told them they could get supplies. There was plenty of corn there and date wine, and a sour drink made form boiled dates. As for the dates themselves, the sort which one sees in Greece were set aside for the servants, while the ones reserved for the masters were choice fruit, wonderfully big and good looking. Their colour was just like amber, and they used to dry some of them and keep them as sweets." The big difference, however, is that the aging Hemingway recreated the joy of his best years in Paris whereas the old Xenophon wrote an account of the most challenging weeks of his life.

Xenophon is not only a very fine writer, he is also a man whose writing reveals his ethics. As it befits the writer who does not want to hit his readers on the head with a sermon, his morality is implicit in the style in which he writes, and in the tone of his story. Xenophon is not a sufferer, nor is he a stoic. He is an officer, a professional soldier. Xenophon's morality is that of a man of action who decides on right and wrong by looking at what he needs to do in order to master a given situation: "what we have to do is to surmount our difficulties like brave men, not to give in, but to try, if we can, to win honour and safety by victory." Italo Calvino sensed in this attitude a precursor to the modern ethic of perfect technical efficiency, but in my opinion, Xenophon's ethics are more informed by a sense of commitment to the men he commands and the gods he respects. Xenophon strives to do his job well in order to generate discipline, solidarity and trust among his men, which is necessary not only for surviving the hardships of the journey but also for keeping one's dignity. He knows the psyche of his soldiers ("when people are not trusted, their words, I notice, merely drift about without force in themselves and without inspiring confidence in others") and he knows how to motivate them ("there will be a great rise in their spirits if one can change the way they think, so that instead of having in their heads the one idea of 'what is going to happen to me?' they may think 'what action am I going to take?'").

Even if one can not enjoy Xenophon's qualities as a storyteller, or if one does not agree with his ethics, the Persian Expedition is still a fine example of how literature can give style and sense to a military debacle and a desperate adventure which, being a retreat after a defeat, is not honorable or heroic in itself.

The march of "the 10,000" (actually about 12,500 started the march) is an epic tale but it lacks any real military lessons. Xenophon, like most ancient writers, is unreliable when it comes to numbers: for example, he claimed that the Persian army at the Battle of Cunaxa was over 1 million strong and that the Greeks suffered only one hoplite wounded. More than likely, Greek casualties were slight because the battle was more of a meeting engagement that stopped once Cyrus got himself killed by stupidly charging into the enemy masses with only his personal escort. After treacherously murdering the Greek officers in a fake parley, the Persians made only half-hearted efforts to block or harass the retreating Greeks. The Greek army was handicapped not only by the loss of its officers and Persian allies but by its own composition; an infantry-pure force with virtually no cavalry and only a handful of archers. The Greeks suffered heavily from the constant skirmishing with the mountain tribes in Armenia and even more from the winter snows.

Some points are evident. Unlike the earlier Greek armies in the Peloponnesian Wars that were motivated by patriotism or the later Macedonian army that was a professional force, Xenophon's army was a diverse force, with loose cohesion and poor discipline that was motivated primarily by a desire for plunder and booty. This was a mercenary army. Amazingly, individual subordinate commanders would abandon their troops and strike off on their own when they could commandeer ships. Xenophon himself was probably more of a politically ambitious military dilettante than a true soldier. When the army reached safety, the ingrate subordinates turned on Xenophon and threatened him with death over pay issues. This was a force with absolutely no loyalty to any city or leader. By the end of the march, the army lost almost all cohesion and began to split into ethnic groups. Surprisingly, the returning Greek mercenaries were quite brutal to the Greek colonies in Asia Minor that received them.

It is also amazing how military decisions were made, particularly the heavy influence of religious sacrifices and soothsayers - I don't think Alexander would have put up with so much of this nonsense (e.g. the Gordian knot episode). At one point, the Greeks stopped their attack during an opposed river-crossing and conducted sacrifices in the middle of the river on whether or not to proceed. Reconnaissance was not a Greek strongpoint, since they tended to blunder into trouble, had poor local security and relied very heavily on dumb luck. Probably the thing that saved their stranded army was the unwillingness of their foes to come to grips at close range and overwhelm them. They actually fought no large-scale battles during the entire expedition, including the tactical oddity of Cunaxa.

Rex Warner's translation is excellent and quite clean of misunderstanding. There is only one map depicting the general route of the Greek mercenaries.

This historical book deals with a group of Greek mercenaries who are hired to fight a war in Persia as one brother, Cyrus, builds an army to take the kingdom from his brother, Artaxerxes, around 400 BC. Although Xenophon's histories are really memoirs from his own experience, there are probably many errors in proportion but no errors in flavor. And this is a good account of how battles were fought and how armies worked at this time. Provides a good fill between the end of the Peloponesian War and Alexander the Great. Typically straight-forward reading, although it is sometimes difficult to keep track of the men, especially if you put the book down for a few days. But a Glossary is provided for just this problem as is a map so you can follow their movements. Overall good if you are interested in the history of war or Ancient Greece and Persia. It's only real fault is that it starts to drag towards the end. Deserves three and a half stars for how it reads. Historically it's a gem.

This is a brilliant first person account of learning leadership the hard way - defeated in combat, in enemy territory, surrounded and cut off with all officers dead. Xenophon was selected to lead the army. He took command and lead his army home against immense odds.

This is an excellent translation of Xenophon's classic report, also known as "Anabasis." Xenophon (c. 430 B. C. to c. 355 B. C.) was a Greek soldier and historian who was born in Athens and was a student of Socrates. In 401 B. C., Xenophon joined an army of Greek mercenaries who were aiding Cyrus the Younger in his military campaign against his brother, King Artaxerxes II. Unfortunately, Cyrus was killed in the Battle of Cunaxa in 401 B. C. and the 10000 Greeks find themselves alone in enemy territory, more than 1000 miles from the nearest Greek colony. In addition, the leaders of the force were treacherously murdered by the Persian satrap Tissaphernes. Xenophon is one of the Greek leaders chosen to lead the army in retreat out of Persia. In a march that lasted five months, traveled over 1500 miles, and overcoming many obstacles (both external and internal), they finally reach the colony of Trapezus (now Trabzon, Turkey) on the Black Sea. This book, which (in the original Greek) is usually the first book read by modern students of the ancient Greek language, is Xenophon's eyewitness account of that retreat and is one of the most famous books in military history. It should be required reading for everyone.