Xenophon Anabasis 1

Notascooby

Civis Illustris
Χαίρετε φίλοι

I'm having trouble with another sentence from Xenophon that someone can hopefully help with.

From 1.7.9

εν δε τω καιρώ τουτω Κλεαρκος ωδε πως ηρετο τον Κυρον.

To me this says 'In this moment Clearchos asked Cyrus thus'. I checked a translation and this seems to be good but ωδε πως has me perplexed. This is literally " in this way in any way". Is this some kind of idiom or have I missed something?

mihi videtur sicut Xenophon scripserit 'sic ullo modo'

Cheers
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
At first sight I'm inclined to take the phrase as literally "this way in some way" and the idea as "in roughly this way" or the like. But I'm not familiar with the phrase.
 
Clitics like this πως are, if I recall, often entirely semantic in nature. It is more an assertion of faith on the part of the speaker (or rather the lack thereof). You might even translate:
At that moment Clearcus is supposed to have questioned Cyrus thus:

Or, more exactly, because the πως modifies the adverb itself:
At that moment Clearcus questioned Cyrus along these lines. This indicates that we are getting the gist, as opposed to the exact words.
 

Notascooby

Civis Illustris
I finished book one of the Anabasis and started reading it again (it'll be easier the second time so I'll be able to enjoy the story). I'm only a few pages in and I'm noticing that there are quite a lot of errors in the commentary (Steadman's commentary). I've mentioned in another thread that his commentary on Livy has a number of mistakes and now it would seem that his commentary of Xenophon's Anabasis is the same. I still like them because they are free and it's nice having the vocabulary in front of you (Not without errors).

I am collecting lists of all the errors that I find and will email them to Dr Steadman'. I should say that I like these commentaries and really appreciate the work that Dr Steadman' has put into them but be warned that they are not without error.
 

Michael Zwingli

Active Member
Here is one translation, by Carleton Brownson in a Harvard University Press edition:

From there they made ready to try to enter Cilicia. Now the entrance was by a wagon-road, exceedingly steep and impracticable for an army to pass if there was anybody to oppose it; and in fact, as report ran, Syennesis was upon the heights, guarding the entrance; therefore Cyrus remained for a day in the plain. On the following day, however, a messenger came with word that Syennesis had abandoned the heights, because he had learned that Menon's army was already in Cilicia, on his own side of the mountains, and because, further, he was getting reports that triremes belonging to the Lacedaemonians and to Cyrus himself were sailing around from Ionia to Cilicia under the command of Tamos.

Not sure if this is the same translation to be found in the Loeb Classics edition, which I have (somewhere), and will try to put my hands on.
 
Last edited:

Notascooby

Civis Illustris
Χαίρετε παντες

Got a couple of questions I hope someone can assist with.

In 4.8 Xenophon uses the word ιτωσαν. The (potentially dodgy) commentary says that this is the 3p imperative of ερχομαι, is this correct? I can't find this form in any of my grammar books. I've memorised the 3p present imperatives of this verb as ιτω και ιόντων.

Secondly at 4.17 Xenophon scripsit ' Μενωνι δε και δωρα ελεγετο πεμψαι μεγαλοπρεπως', why is the adverb used here?

Thanks
 
The (potentially dodgy) commentary says that this is the 3p imperative of ερχομαι, is this correct? I can't find this form in any of my grammar books.
This is one of those forms one meets with seldom; Smyth says it's used only "rarely in X & Plato."
It is indeed 3rd pers. plural imperative, alonside your ιόντων (making it a 'collateral form', that is an equally valid form though more rare). The ending seems to imply a historical aorist, but Smyth doesn't give that information. It's moot anyway, for the sense is the same.

The adverb is probably because μεγαλοπρεπής is a syntactic complex, an adjectival version of the phrase 'μεγάλωι πρέπει' meaning 'it beseems a great (man/person)'. To call the δωρα this word, would mean that they were worthy of a great man, not necessarily that they had been sent by one. An exacting translation of μεγαλοπρεπως would be:
'After the fashion of a great man/ in a manner befitting a great man'.
 

Notascooby

Civis Illustris
Got another issue I can't resolve.

From 1.9.6

Και αρκτον ποτε επιφερομενην ουκ ετρεσεν αλλα συμπεσον κατασπασθη απο του ιππου και τα μεν επαθεν ων καί τας ωτειλας ειχεν τελος δε κατεκανε

The bit τα μεν επαθεν has me pickled. It seems to mean " he suffered some stuff( injuries) but what is τα? There is a grave accent on it. I am guessing it is some contracted form of τις as that makes some kind of sense to me and Xenophon has used a couple of alternative forms of τις. There is nothing in my grammar book to say that τα is from τις though so I'm unsure.

Any help is appreciated, thanks.
 

Etaoin Shrdlu

μεσσηγυδορποχέστης
It's the accusative plural of what you probably think of as the definite article, but in its original sense as a pronoun. This may help: http://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/monro/ὁ-ἡ-τό

Greek is very fond of contrasts with μεν and δε. You can, if you insist, mechanically translate the idiom as 'on the one hand he suffered some things, on the other he killed', but the English language will thank you if you turn it into something like 'despite being wounded, he managed to kill the boar'. Just as long as you understand the construction.
 

Notascooby

Civis Illustris
Thank you. I'm familiar with the whole ο μεν...ο δε thing, it is extremely common. But I've always seen it as οι μεν..όι δε meaning some...others. The way Xenophon has used it here I wasn't too familiar with but now you've pointed it out it was obvious.

Thanks again,:thumb-up:
 

Notascooby

Civis Illustris
Hit another snag

εἰ δέ τινα ὁρῴη δεινὸν ὄντα οἰκονόμον ἐκ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ κατασκευάζοντά τε ἧς ἄρχοι χώρας καὶ προσόδους ποιοῦντα, οὐδένα ἂν πώποτε ἀφείλετο, ἀλλ᾽ ἀεὶ πλείω προσεδίδου: ὥστε καὶ ἡδέως ἐπόνουν καὶ θαρραλέως ἐκτῶντο καὶ ἐπέπατο αὖτις ἥκιστα Κῦρον ἔκρυπτεν: οὐ γὰρ φθονῶν τοῖς φανερῶς πλουτοῦσιν ἐφαίνετο, ἀλλὰ πειρώμενος χρῆσθαι τοῖς τῶν ἀποκρυπτομένων χρήμασι.

"Furthermore, whenever he saw that a man was a skilful and just administrator, not only organizing well the country over which he ruled, but producing revenues, he would never deprive such a man of territory, but would always give him more besides. The result was that they toiled with pleasure and accumulated with confidence, and, more than that, no one would conceal from Cyrus the store which he had acquired; for it was clear that he did not envy those who were frankly and openly rich, but strove to make use of the possessions of such as tried to conceal their wealth."

The translation is from Perseus which says " no one would conceal from Cyrus". Where is he getting no one from? The words next to the obelus's(obeli?) are wrong? I can't make sense of αυ unless its actually ου and is joined with τις to give ουτις and this is where the translator got "no one" from?

Thanks
 
Notascooby dixit:
The words next to the obelus's(obeli?) are wrong?
The obelisks indicate that the text is dubious for some reason, e.g., it is written in another hand, is an insertion from another text, is smudged/worn/partly missing, is otherwise nonsensical/ungrammatical, etc.

Your translator has chosen to ignore what is written & insert his own supposition or 'emendation', and it is ουτις.
 

Notascooby

Civis Illustris
The obelisks indicate that the text is dubious for some reason, e.g., it is written in another hand, is an insertion from another text, is smudged/worn/partly missing, is otherwise nonsensical/ungrammatical, etc.

Your translator has chosen to ignore what is written & insert his own supposition or 'emendation', and it is ουτις.
Χάριν σόι εχο
 
Top