ὅμως δὲ ὡς ὁ Κῦρος ἐπεὶ παρήγγειλεν
I don’t think they can be used side by side, so only one should be left, as in the Loeb edition.
The OCT(?—Perseus) has ὅμως δὲ ὡς ὁ Κῦρος ἐπεὶ παρήγγειλεν, ἐστράφησαν πάντες ἀντιπρόσωποι τοῖς πολεμίοις· καὶ ἦν μὲν πολλὴ πανταχόθεν σιγὴ ὑπὸ τοῦ τὸ μέλλον ὀκνεῖν· ἡνίκα δὲ ἔδοξε τῷ Κύρῳ καιρὸς εἶναι, ἐξῆρχε παιᾶνα, συνεπήχησε δὲ πᾶς ὁ στρατός.
To have both ὡς and ἐπεὶ (if that’s what you mean) certainly surprises. Combined textual variants, or what? I don’t have a critical text.
The ensuing silence (καὶ ἦν μὲν πολλὴ πανταχόθεν σιγὴ) makes a great impression. It’s reminiscent of that tremendous moment in Euripides’ Bacchae when everything falls silent just before the bacchants launch their attack on Pentheus as he’s perched helplessly on the tree-top (σίγησε δ᾽ αἰθήρ, σῖγα δ᾽ ὕλιμος νάπη)—an effect repeated by the half-hour of silence that follows the opening of the seventh seal in the Apocalypse.
I’ve come to realize that Xenophon is a much underrated writer, as well as an understated one.
I’m afraid that Google instantly spoiled this one for me, displaying a version with [ἐπεὶ] on the front page when I went to search for the Greek context. But I can’t pretend I could have noticed an issue without any other aids, as mwh did, and who always impresses me.
You can follow the story here back through the old editions. First, Marchant’s OCT replaces καὶ with ὡς and brackets [ἐπεὶ]. In this, he follows Hug. Perseus drops the brackets through plain error, it seems.
Hug explains what he’s doing in the Teubner. (To the extent that my very poor Latin can grok Hug here, anyway.) He says that there are two textual variants ὅμως δὲ καὶ ὁ Κῦρος ἐπεὶ παρήγγειλεν (CAD : Marchant C A E H et D F), and ὅμως δὲ ὁ Κῦρος … (G : Marchant same). He first states that the archetype had δὲ καὶ ὁ, but notes that other editors [Dindorf (and others?) though I don’t see a note on it in Dindorf] thought that καί is pointless, and believes that the καί has replaced ὡς due to the proximity to ὅμως, that the subject ὁ Κῦρος should follow the conjunction.
Personally, I think that he’s right that the καί must be understood to “sensu carere”. But I don’t agree with Hug or Marchant in performing this surgery to get rid of it. The καί simply responds in a fairly meaningless verbal way to οὕτω καὶ (which does make sense), and just sort of continues things. Getting rid of the blemish levels the text. The archetype version as identified by Hug, I think, ὅμως δὲ καὶ ὁ Κῦρος ἐπεὶ…, really was what Xenophon said aloud to his slave, spinning out the story.