ἕπεσθαι ἐκέλευσεν ὡς ἂν αὐτὸς ἡγῆται: Cyr., 2., 4., 3
Is this a causal sentence? I have not found in grammars subj with an in causal sentences. How is a future cause referred to?
ὡς αὐτὸς ἂν ἡγῆται is a “general” relative clause in indirect speech. In direct speech, the command would be ἕπεσθε ὡς ἂν ἡγῶμαι. Optative without ἄν would also be possible. ἕπεσθαι ἐκέλευσεν ὡς αὐτὸς ἡγοῖτο. See Smyth 2603.
and where is the antecedent? I know that if converted into oratio obliqua it would become opt without an but to complicate the things more my commentary says it should be ὥς ἂν αὐτὸς ἡγοῖτο if converted into OO.
Maybe ὥς is temporal here?
and where is the antecedent?
This seems a very strange question. Why do you want an antecedent?
“Do as I ask.” “Do what I tell you.” “Follow where I lead.” “I go where I please.” “You can ask me whatever you want.” etc.etc.etc. You must have seen dozens of such relative clauses with αν and subjunctive. In some there might be an antecedent, but absence of one should not throw you.
And whatever makes you think this is a causal sentence? And whatever makes you think ὡς might be temporal?
my commentary says it should be ὥς ἂν αὐτὸς ἡγοῖτο if converted into OO
Does it really? What commentary is this? ὡς ἂν αὐτὸς ἡγοῖτο (note ὡς not ὥς), is a potential optative, and would mean “as he himself would lead.”
Well then, maybe your commentary is wrong or maybe Smyth is wrong.
Antecedent – you can supply an understood correlative οὕτως if you like.
Cross-posted with mwh.
ok thanx i got it finally, The commentary i found online is by Rev. Hubert A. Holden, Cambridge, 1887
The ἄν must be a rather unfortunate typo in Holden’s commentary