τὰς διόδους τῶν πτερῶν ἄρδει τε καὶ ὥρμησε πτεροφυεῖν τε καὶ τὴν τοῦ ἐρωμένου αὖ ψυχὴν ἔρωτος ἐνέπλησεν.
He uses side by side pres. ind. and gn. ao.; I wonder for what reason? For the sake of variety or some rhythmic effect?
That’s a good question, to which I can give no fully satisfying answer, but it doesn’t strike me as particularly odd (see e.g. Smyth 1931.a). The two aorists give the result of the watering. That suggests it’s an issue of semantics.