I placed regular verbs and infinitives in green and participles in red.
So far, I have this very rough translation,
“Earlier I believed that to allow the one who is wishing, leading to quietness, neither to have lawsuits nor events; but now all coming together beside hope, and I am becoming toward a fearful (terrible) contest.”
What does ἐξεῖναι depend on? What is the construction? Remember that ἐξεῖναι is an impersonal verb that takes the dative. Don’t translate it as an infinitive.
ἡσυχίαν ἄγοντι,
What kind of participle is “ἄγοντι” and what does it agree with? One of the meanings of ἄγω is “keep, observe” and LSJ gives “ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν keep quiet, be at peace or at rest,”.
Do you remember we had πράγματα before? It isn’t events.
νῦν δὲ πάντα συμβαίνει παρ’ ἐλπίδα
συμβαίνω has an impersonal meaning see p. 201. “(impersonal) come to pass, happen”. Do you remember that a neuter pl takes a third person singular? So take πάντα συμβαίνει together.
καὶ εἰς δεινὸν ἀγῶνα καθίσταμαι.
καθίσταμαι is from καθίστημι. Do you recognise the form and meaning?
Hope this helps. Try to sort out your understanding of the syntax and the structure and then see if you can translate.
What kind of participle is “ἄγοντι” and what does it agree with? One of the meanings of ἄγω is “keep, observe” and LSJ gives “ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν keep quiet, be at peace or at rest,”.
ἄγοντι is a dative, singular, masculine/neuter, present, indicative participle. The only other word between the commas is ἡσυχίαν, which is an accusative, so now I am not sure if ἄγοντι goes with ἡσυχίαν or βουλομένῳ.
Do you remember we had πράγματα before? It isn’t events.
I tried listing my posts and clicking on “search these results” but could not get anything to list. πράγματα can mean deeds, actions, troubles, and events, or circumstances.
νῦν δὲ πάντα συμβαίνει παρ’ ἐλπίδα
συμβαίνω has an impersonal meaning see p. 201. “(impersonal) come to pass, happen”. Do you remember that a neuter pl takes a third person singular? So take πάντα συμβαίνει together.
καὶ εἰς δεινὸν ἀγῶνα καθίσταμαι.
καθίσταμαι is from καθίστημι. Do you recognize the form and meaning?
καθίσταμαι means stand, appoint, be established. or become.
It is an infinitive but it follows ἐνόμιζον so what is the construction?
ἄγοντι is a dative, singular, masculine/neuter, present, indicative participle.
But what sort of participle? look at p. 227 again.
I am not sure if ἄγοντι goes with ἡσυχίαν or βουλομένῳ
What cases are ἡσυχίαν and βουλομένῳ? You have already said ἄγοντι is dative.
I tried listing my posts and clicking on “search these results” but could not get anything to list.
πράγματα can mean deeds, actions, troubles, and events, or circumstances.
What cases are ἡσυχίαν and βουλομένῳ? You have already said ἄγοντι is dative
ἡσυχίαν is accusative, and βουλομένῳ is dative.
But what is the form? Active or…?
It is a middle/passive
But what sort of participle? look at p. 227 again.
I cannot figure that one out until I know for sure what ἄγοντι goes with. At first I thought it went with ἡσυχίαν because that was the only other word between the commas, but ἡσυχίαν is an accusative, so now I do not know if the commas take precedence or if I need to look at the dative that is right before the commas or some other dative?
I cannot figure that one out until I know for sure what ἄγοντι goes with. At first I thought it went with ἡσυχίαν because that was the only other word between the commas, but ἡσυχίαν is an accusative, so now I do not know if the commas take precedence or if I need to look at the dative that is right before the commas or some other dative?
ἄγοντι is a circumstantial participle . That’s the first thing to realise. It agrees with βουλομένῳ because they are both in the dative case. Did you look to see what kind of circumstantial participle it is? See p. 227. Here you will have to come up with what seems to make the best sense.
As you have worked out ἡσυχίαν is accusative so it’s the object of ἄγοντι.
Punctuation can help you understand sentences but the Ancient Greeks didn’t use any so the Greek makes sense without the punctuation if you analyse the grammar carefully. Remember that you can expect a grammatical link between clauses in sentences unless there is an absolute construction.
Earlier I believed that it is permitted to the one who is wishing, by keeping quiet, neither to have lawsuits nor troubles; but now all is happening beyond hope, and I am placed into a terrible contest.
In previous threads we have worked on circumstantial participles. On p. 227 (which I suggested you look at) you can see examples of Temporal, Concessive, Causal and Conditional clauses. Which do you think best fits here?
Forget instrumental you are on the wrong track there. The participle is in the dative case because it agrees with βουλομένῳ, the case of ἄγοντι has no other significance than that.
I think you need to revise circumstantial participles.
I don’t know where you are going with this, but I read in the “Middle Liddell,” “3. with Verbs, ἡσηχίαν ἄγειν to keep quiet, be at rest, keep silent, . . .”
Your choice to translate ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν as to keep quiet is fine. No problem with that. But seneca wants to make sure that you really know what you are doing when you translate ἡσυχίαν ἄγοντι as “by keeping quiet”. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think your translation is wrong, but you may have arrived at this from a wrong conclusion that will get you in trouble down the line when encountering other examples of particple constructions.
As seneca pointed out earlier, ἄγοντι is in the dative case. But this is not an instrumental dative. If your reasoning is “instrumental dative” —> by keeping quiet, then it’s misguided. It might help to look at the first part of this sentence without those commas:
ἔξειμι governs the dative τῷ βουλομένῳ: it is possible for someone who wishes
Now the participle ἄγοντι gives further information about this person who wishes and therefore agrees with this word in case and number: dative singular. That’s the only reason why this is a dative.
And then you really should heed the advice to re-read what a circumstantial participle is and why the translation by keeping quiet is still possible but for different reasons.
Lukas I know that you have been introduced by M. to the instrumental dative in this chapter and I can see that you are trying to apply it here. But that is not what is needed here.
I can’t really do anymore (other than telling you what the answer is) to repeat what I said earlier “In previous threads we have worked on circumstantial participles. On p. 227 (which I suggested you look at) you can see examples of Temporal, Concessive, Causal and Conditional clauses. Which do you think best fits here?” Answer that question and you will see what I am driving at.
etcetera has tried to spell out what I have said in previous posts. Perhaps you will understand him better than you understand me.
For the avoidance of doubt ἡσυχίαν ἄγοντι is not an instrumental dative. So think again referring to the chapter on supplementary participles. It may be best to abandon your translation of “by keeping quiet” and think of another way to express the syntax of this clause and its relationship to the main verb.
The only other category I can come up with, if βουλομένῳ governs ἄγοντι, is that it must be a conditional participle. The writer was hoping that the situation would work if he kept quiet, but later figured out that keeping quiet did not work. I am not sure if f βουλομένῳ governs ἄγοντι or if it is the other way around. Drawing the arrow the right way is part of my troubles.
