jswilkmd wrote:Sure. There are several such instances. Here's but one example:
ὁπόσας εἶχε φυλακὰς ἐν ταῖς πόλεσι παρήγγειλε τοῖς φρουράρχοις ἑκάστοις λαμβάνειν ἄνδρας Πελοποννησίους ὅτι πλείστους καὶ βελτίστους, ὡς ἐπιβουλεύοντος Τισσαφέρνους ταῖς πόλεσι.
He ordered (aorist) each of the commanders of as many garrisons as he was having (imperfect) in the cities to take the most and best Peloponnesian men, (on the grounds) that Tissaphernes had designs upon their cities.
Why the imperfect εἶχε here? I guess it's to convey some sort of customary notion, like "as many garrisons as he would have in the cities." But English idiom certainly is content with "as many garrisons as he had in the cities."
I'm not sure if there's any particularly definitive reason he uses the imperfect here. I've noticed in Thucydides, too, that the aorist and imperfect are sometimes used almost interchangeably. I suppose in this case the imperfect is just slightly more vivid.
I have a question of my own: Τισσαφέρνους is genitive here, right? That would make it a third declension noun, if I'm not mistaken. Yet all the sources I can find say Τισσαφέρνης is first declension. But the genitive of that would have to be Τισσαφέρνου. What gives?
jswilkmd wrote:As an aside, there is a lot of bizarre/interesting syntax in this sentence, too:
The relative clause, ὁπόσας εἶχε φυλακὰς is accusative by attraction (as the object of εἶχε), but in actuality, it modifies τοῖς φρουράρχοις ἑκάστοις in a genitive of subordination relationship and we should expect τῶν φυλακῶν ὁπόσων εἶχε κτλ.
And why ὁπόσας instead of πάντας anyway?
This isn't especially unusual for Greek. There's a definite preference for saying "however many X as..." as opposed to "all of X that...", contrary to English usage. I don't think there's any case-attraction here, either, as the indefinite relative pronoun regularly adopts the case required by the relative clause itself, which must be accusative in this sentence.
You're right, however, that the indefinite relative pronoun cannot logically have τοῖς φρουράρχοις ἑκάστοις as its antecedent, so you have to supply a genitive as the implied antecedent. So literally: "However many garrisons he had, he ordered each commander [of them] to...etc."
jswilkmd wrote:The use of indirect discourse (ὅτι πλείστους καὶ βελτίστους) here seems odd to me, too, but comprehensible. Smooth English idiom pretty much demands that these adjectives be placed simply in front of the noun they modify, rather than in a dependant clause of some sort. Hence "the most and best Peloponnesian men."
I'm pretty sure ὅτι here doesn't introduce indirect discourse. It's modifying the superlatives πλείστους and βελτίστους as an adverb that means "as possible".
"jswilkmd wrote:The use of ὡς plus a participle of purpose is interesting--this construction sets forth the ground of belief on which an agent acts and asserts the thought, assertion, or real or presumed intention in the mind of the agent without implying it is the idea of the writer/speaker himself (Smyth sections 2086, 2086c). It's Xenophon's way of letting the reader know that Cyrus said this, and not that it was really true.
Yes. There's isn't necessarily any implication as to the truth or falsity of the reasoning, but the reasoning is definitely Cyrus'.