Anabasis 7.6.36

[jeidsath]

ἀλλ᾽ ἔχετε μέν με οὔτε φεύγοντα λαβόντες οὔτε ἀποδιδράσκοντα: ἢν δὲ ποιήσητε ἃ λέγετε, ἴστε ὅτι ἄνδρα κατακεκονότες ἔσεσθε πολλὰ μὲν δὴ πρὸ ὑμῶν ἀγρυπνήσαντα, πολλὰ δὲ σὺν ὑμῖν πονήσαντα καὶ κινδυνεύσαντα > καὶ ἐν τῷ μέρει καὶ παρὰ τὸ μέρος> , θεῶν δ᾽ ἵλεων ὄντων καὶ τρόπαια βαρβάρων πολλὰ δὴ σὺν ὑμῖν στησάμενον, ὅπως δέ γε μηδενὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων πολέμιοι γένησθε, πᾶν ὅσον ἐγὼ ἐδυνάμην πρὸς ὑμᾶς διατεινάμενον.

κατακεκονότες ἔσεσθε – future perfect

πολλὰ…ἀγρυπνήσαντα/πονήσαντα/κινδυνεύσαντα/στησάμενον – πολλὰ meaning “often”

θεῶν δ᾽ ἵλεων ὄντων – something like “from the gods who are graceful” rather than genitive absolute, I think?

διατεινάμενον – the ὅσον ἐγὼ ἐδυνάμην is its own clause, and this refers back to the “ἄνδρα” (Xenophon himself) who is the subject all of the indirect discourse after ἴστε ὅτι

καὶ ἐν τῷ μέρει καὶ παρὰ τὸ μέρος – This was the bit that stuck me. It looked like some idiom that I didn’t know. But the LSJ references it, and translates “in and out of turn,” which makes sense.

@Perseus Brownson/Heinemann Translation

“You hold me in your power, then, and not as a captive that you have taken in flight or as a runaway slave; and if you do what you are proposing, be sure that you will have slain a man who has passed many sleepless nights for your sake, who has endured many toils and dangers with you, both in his turn and out of his turn, who has also, by the graciousness of the gods, set up with you many trophies of victory over the barbarians, and who, in order to prevent your becoming enemies to any one among the Greeks, has exerted himself to the very utmost of his power in opposition to you.

Notice that the traslation has made “has exerted himself” into 3rd person.

I would have said “upon you” or even paraphrased “to persuade you” rather than “in opposition to you.” However, the Galen reference cited by the LSJ for “oppose” (4.773) seems a clear parallel to this. After discussing Plato’s theory of the tripartite soul, one part lying in the heart, one the liver, and one the head, our author says: …Πλάτων μὲν φαίνεται πεπεισμένος· ἐγὼ δὲ, οὔθ’ ὡς ἔστιν, οὔθ’ οὐκ ἔστιν, ἔχω διατείνασθαι πρὸς αὐτόν. Plato is persuaded, but the author is not persuaded either way, being διατείνασθαι πρὸς αὐτόν. Still, I don’t buy “in opposition to you” in this context. Xenophon is still buttering them up.

Comments on any of the above are welcome, but I wonder a bit at τῷ μέρει καὶ παρὰ τὸ μέρος. Is Xeonphon particularly talking about going above and beyond his duties as a general, or is he suggesting that even as a general, he took his turn at certain common tasks?

[Hylander]

A few comments:

“κατακεκονότες ἔσεσθε – future perfect” Yes.

θεῶν δ᾽ ἵλεων ὄντων is surely genitive absolute. The participle ὄντων makes this clear. It’s somewhat like gratia dei, “by the grace of God” as we would say in English.

πολλὰ – translate it “often” here but of course it’s really a neuter plural accusative.

“the traslation has made “has exerted himself” into 3rd person” The translation makes all the participles relative clauses with 3rd person sing. verbs because it works better in English. The referent of the participles is, as you note, ἄνδρα. It would be strange in English to use 1st pers. verb forms in translating. But of course X. doesn’t need to think about this because he is using participles, not finite verb forms.

The key to πρὸς ὑμᾶς διατεινάμενον is πρὸς. LSJ:

C. WITH ACCUS., * * *

4. in hostile sense, against, “π. Τρῶας μάχεαι” Il.17.471; “ἐστρατόωνθ᾽ . . π. τείχεα Θήβης” 4.378; π. δαίμονα against his will, 17.98; “βεβλήκει π. στῆθος” 4.108; “γούνατ᾽ ἐπήδα π. ῥόον ἀΐσσοντος” 21.303; “χρὴ π. θεὸν οὐκ ἐρίζειν” Pi.P.2.88; “π. τοὐμὸν σπέρμα χωρήσαντα” S.Tr.304; “ἐπιέναι π. τινάς” Th.2.65; “ὅσα ἔπραξαν οἱ Ἕλληνες π. τε ἀλλήλους καὶ τὸν βάρβαρον” Id.1.118; “ἀγωνίζεσθαι π. τινά” Pl.R.579c; “ἀντιτάττεσθαι π. πόλιν” X.Cyr.3.1.18: > also in argument, in reply to, “ταῦτα π. τὸν Πιττακὸν εἴρηται” Pl.Prt.345c; and so in the titles of judicial speeches, πρός τινα in reply to, less strong than κατά τινος against or in accusation, D.20 tit., etc.; “μήτε π. ἐμὲ μήτε κατ᾽ ἐμοῦ δίκην εἶναι” Is.11.34.

I don’t think he’s buttering up the soldiers. Xenophon portrays himself as a bold leader, willing to “think outside the box” and speak his mind, even when he has something unpopular to say. In fact, that’s what he’s doing here, isn’t it? He’s telling his audience that he has saved them from the consequences of their own rashness, and he’s now doing the same thing–boldly advising them against their inclinations–when apparently his life is at stake.

Note the rhetorical progression of prepositions and participles: πρὸ ὑμῶν ἀγρυπνήσαντα . . . σὺν ὑμῖν πονήσαντα καὶ κινδυνεύσαντα . . . σὺν ὑμῖν τρόπαια στησάμενον (reminding them of their successes under his command) and finally πρὸς ὑμᾶς διατεινάμενον. He builds up to the climax, justifying his occasional opposition to the soldiers’ inclinations–and in this speech that’s exactly what he’s doing–by putting it in the context of his services to them: he has even spoken out strenuously [διατεινάμενον] in opposition to them when they were about to do something rash that might turn other Greeks against them.

In citing Galen, keep in mind that Galen (or whoever wrote the particular treatise in the corpus of medical works attributed to Galen) was writing in koine, five or six centuries after Xenophon. There’s ample support for using for πρός in the sense of in opposition to" in 5th-4th century Attic, and particularly in the titles to speeches.

καὶ ἐν τῷ μέρει καὶ παρὰ τὸ μέρος – I think this means something like “in his capacity as elected leader and otherwise.” I wouldn’t be too specific.