Cyrus’s Imperial Household: an Aristotelian Reading of Xenophon’s Cyropaedia

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.

Omitted Variables, Intent, and Counterfactuals: A Response to Michael H. Nelson

I have written elsewhere: “Where there exists a critical mass of scholars working on similar sets of questions—critiquing and building on one another's work—knowledge accumulation is more likely to occur.”1 It is with this statement in mind that I proceed with my response to Michael Nelson's thoughtful critique on my previous article (see Allen Hicken, “Party Fabrication: Constitutional Reform and the Rise of Thai Rack Thai,” Journal of East Asian Studies 6, no. 3 [2006]: 381–407). Rather than a point-by-point rebuttal, I will focus on three of the most interesting and challenging of Nelson's theoretical critiques. The first substantive issue concerns the charge of omitted variable bias—specifically, in reference to the omission of local political groups from a macro-institutional account. The second and third criticisms are more methodological. First, can we or should we ascribe motives to political actors? Second, how can we use counterfactuals to solve problems of observational equivalence?

REVIEW: Noted: Thoughtful web challenges

Review of Web Journalism: Practice and Promise of a New Medium, by James Glen StovallWeb journalism is more of a thoughtful critique of online publishing than a 'how to' training text. While it tackles the challenges posed by the Daily. Me syndrome, it also questions the ability of journalists to think afresh. Stovall argues that journalists are trained to think lineally and they mostly comfortable with inverted pyramid and other structures: 'It will take some time to reformulate their thinking' (p. 196).

SHOULD CITIZENS OF A WELFARE STATE BE TRANSFORMED INTO “QUEENS”? A RESPONSE TO RISSE

Mathias Risse has provided a thoughtful critique of my book, raising serious points about a major part of the argument. I am glad to have the opportunity to reflect further on it.

Re-analysis of NAEP Math and Reading Scores in States with and without High-stakes Tests: Response to Rosenshine

Here we address the criticism of our NAEP analyses by Rosenshine (2003). On the basis of his thoughtful critique we redid some of the analyses on which he focused. Our findings contradict his. This is no fault of his, the reasons for which are explained in this paper. Our findings do support our position that high-stakes tests do not do much to improve academic achievement. The extent to which states with high-stakes tests outperform states without high-stakes tests is, at best, indeterminable. Using 1994-1998 NAEP reading and 1996-2000 NAEP math data and accounting for NAEP exemption rates for the same years, we found that states with high-stakes tests are not outperforming states without high-stakes tests in reading in the 4th grade or math in the 8th grade at a statistically significant level. States with high-stakes tests are, however, outperforming states without high-stakes tests in math in the 4th grade at a statistically significant level. Our findings also support our earlier stance that states with high-stakes tests are exempting more students from participating in the NAEP than are states without high-stakes tests. This is more prevalent the more recent the NAEP test administration. This is illustrated in the tables below.