5., 5., 41

[Constantinus Philo]

καλέσας ὁ Κυαξάρης ἠξίου τὸν Κῦρον διὰ χρόνου ἰδόντα αὐτὸν συνδειπνεῖν.
Why is the word order so distorted? The normal word order would be, as I think the following: ὁ Κυαξάρης, καλέσας τὸν Κῦρον διὰ χρόνου ἰδόντα αὐτὸν, ἠξίου συνδειπνεῖν,

[ducky123]

I’m slightly struggling with this passage too. The Loeb translation is ‘Cyaxares summoned Cyrus and asked him, as he had not seen him for a long time, to dine with him’.

Does ἰδόντα then refer to Cyrus and αὐτὸν Cyaxares? I expect it must but it feels back to front to me, the usual motivation for “you” inviting someone is because “you” hadn’t seen “them” not because “they” hadn’t seen “you”.

Anyway, in clunky English and to remove the negative: Cyaxares summoned Cyrus since he (Cyrus) was seeing him (Cyaxares) after a long period (apart).

The participle ἰδόντα implying cause.

[mwh]

It didn’t jar as I read it, but certainly the writing is a bit loose. The main statement is of course καλέσας ὁ Κυαξάρης ἠξίου τὸν Κῦρον (...) συνδειπνεῖν—no difficulty about that. διὰ χρόνου ἰδόντα αὐτὸν is an interposed explanatory phrase. We might have found ιδών easier, but it makes good enough sense as it stands, as if Cyax prefaced his dinner invitation by saying “It’s been a while since you visited.”

[ducky123]

Yes, I almost put in my reply that I might have expected to see ιδών here.

[jeidsath]

It immediately reminded me of the Republic's: διὰ χρόνου γὰρ καὶ ἑωράκη αὐτόν

I think that the Loeb is misleading here. διὰ χρόνου ἰδεῖν is a special usage, and that the διὰ χρόνου works as a single adverbial unit with a verb. διὰ χρόνου ἰδόντα is not introducing an explanation, but describing the συνδειπνεῖν. He's asking him "to dine with him and catch up" or "dine with him and renew acquaintance".

ἰδών would change to meaning to something closer to the Loeb. "...seeing him after a long time apart, he requested..." TLG'ing, I see an example of that very clearly in Memorabilia: Ἄλλον δέ ποτε ἀρχαῖον ἑταῖρον διὰ χρόνου ἰδών, Πόθεν, ἔφη...

[ducky123]

The 1914 Walter Miller Loeb uses ἰδών. It has a footnote, ἰδών most Edd, MSS ἰδόντα

Perseus (Xenophontis opera omnia, vol. 4. Oxford, Clarendon Press. 1910) uses ἰδόντα. But, Perseus uses the 1914 Loeb English translation, so if there’s a mismatch within Perseus that’s perhaps how it’s crept in.