This chapter places Xenophon's systematic and comprehensive thought about the ordering of self and society in the context of his lived experience. Xenophon lived through the turbulent reordering of the Greek world as its greatest city, Athens, adjusted to its defeat in the Peloponnesian War and to the continuing contest for hegemony. In the past, he has been criticized for failings in his method, for falling short of modern disciplinary norms of historiography and philosophy. But where the scientific turn of historiography in the nineteenth century and the analytic turn of philosophy in the twentieth century caused scholars to treat Xenophon as a lesser author and thinker than Thucydides and Plato respectively, more recent scholarly developments, from the close readings of Straussians to the deployment of literary theoretical approaches such as historicism and narratology, have led to a better understanding of his distinctive achievement. The second section of this chapter uses new critical approaches to examine key features of Xenophon's prose style, ranging from its display in narrative set-piece scenes to his artful deployment of elevated rhetorical registers of language and dramatic irony. It explores his use of exemplarity to inform and educate the elite, the kaloi kagathoi, ‘gentlemen of quality’, who appear to have been his primary intended audience.

Xenophon's thought on life and relationships within the household yields compelling insights into domestic life in ancient Greek cities, and attitudes towards the personal relationships which connected citizens to each other. The household also provides a location in which values and knowledge are transmitted between husband, wife, and subordinate workers (Oeconomicus), and in which discussions between friends and citizens can take place (Symposium). The presence of Socrates signals the normative and prescriptive element of these works. The good order of the household, and the behaviour of husband and wife within it, can be paralleled in Xenophon's taxonomy of social organization with the order of society at the level of city, army, and empire. The placing of the domestic within this normative structure means that one should be cautious in interpreting his work as straightforwardly descriptive of Athenian domestic life.

Although Xenophon spent much of his adult life living outside Athens and the polis framework, Athens itself and the city as the basis for achieving the good life were central to his thought, both philosophical and practical. He keenly observed the practices of other communities, especially Sparta, long a source of fascination for Athens’ elite. He compared the impact of different customs and forms of rule on cities such as Sparta (Constitution of the Lacedaimonians, Agesilaus), Syracuse (Hiero), and his imagined Persia and Babylon (Cyropaedia). Some of his thought on constructing political communities is contained in his politeia texts (LP; Cyr. 1.2), but his most sustained and systematic engagement with the topic is through Socrates’ conversations with Athenians in Book 3 of the Memorabilia.

From the Iliad onwards, Greek writers treated military camps as analogues of political communities, with their hierarchical structures and mass assemblies, places where generals shared plans with their troops and occasionally faced their criticism. Xenophon's exploration of order and leadership finds the military context a fruitful one.

Xenophon's thought on monarchy and the monarchical control of empire offers a distinctive contribution to political theorizing. He considers how an individual can be seen and agreed to merit the position of sole ruler, and so exercise power over his subjects identifies three main grounds for monarchical authority: ancestry, connection to the gods, and personal excellence (Cyr. 7.2.24). The phenomenon of royalty extends beyond the king himself, to his family and through his court. Royal women have a distinctive status compared with other women, with the possibility of greater agency. Xenophon depicts several such women, all from outside mainland Greece, as knowledgeable political actors and commentators: Mandane (Cyr. 1.3), Mania (Hell. 3.1.10–15), and Pantheia (Cyr. 4.6, 5.1, 6.1, 6.4, 7.3).

As Chapter 2 noted, the critical evaluation of Xenophon by scholars has changed over time. Nineteenth- and twentieth-century criticisms of his philosophical and historical writing have now largely been replaced by an appreciation of both the literary qualities of his work and the evidence they provide for the thought of his time, as well as his own contribution. While Chapter 2 examined modern critical readings of Xenophon as historiographer and philosopher, this final section surveys readings and translations from ancient to modern times, and the differing uses to which Xenophon's work has been put. Different works have spoken to different times, as fashions have changed. This chapter offers some key moments in the history of the reading of Xenophon; the diversity of literary and theoretical responses to his work demonstrates the generic breadth and enduring interest of his work.