This is the text of Hdt. 6.105.1–2, as printed by the most recent editors, WilsonFootnote 1 and Hornblower–Pelling:Footnote 2
καὶ πρῶτα μὲν ἐόντες ἔτι ἐν τῷ ἄστεϊ οἱ στρατηγοὶ ἀποπέμπουσι ἐς Σπάρτην κήρυκα Φιλιππίδην, Ἀθηναῖον μὲν ἄνδρα, ἄλλως δὲ ἡμεροδρόμην τε καὶ τοῦτο μελετῶντα· τῷ δή, ὡς αὐτός γε ἔλεγε Φιλιππίδης καὶ Ἀθηναίοισι ἀπήγγελλε, περὶ τὸ Παρθένιον ὄρος τὸ ὑπὲρ Τεγέης ὁ Πὰν περιπίπτει· βώσαντα δὲ τὸ οὔνομα τοῦ Φιλιππίδεω τὸν Πᾶνα Ἀθηναίους κελεῦσαι ἐπειρωτῆσαι, δι᾽ ὅ τι ἑωυτοῦ οὐδεμίαν ἐπιμελείαν ποιεῦνται, ἐόντος εὐνόου Ἀθηναίοισι καὶ πολλαχῇ γενομένου σφι ἤδη χρηστοῦ, τὰ δ᾽ ἔτι καὶ ἐσομένου.
In this famous section, Herodotus describes the epiphany of Pan, who gives the courier Philippides instructions to take to Athens. Wilson has convincingly argued that the text of the MSS (Ἀθηναίοισι κελεῦσαι ἀπαγγεῖλαι, δι᾽ ὅ τι ἑωυτοῦ οὐδεμίαν ἐπιμελείαν ποιεῦνται, ‘he [Pan] ordered him [Philippides] to report to the Athenians why they neglect him’) is corrupt, since the god, who wonders why the Athenians do not pay regard to him, clearly entrusts Philippides with the task of putting the question to them. According to Wilson, the verb ἀπαγγέλλω, present in the previous sentence and mistakenly repeated in this passage, replaced an original ἐπειρωτῆσαι; as a consequence of the corruption, the dative Ἀθηναίοισι was substituted for the accusative Ἀθηναίους, which could no longer be maintained.Footnote 3 In agreement with Hornblower–Pelling,Footnote 4 I am inclined to accept Wilson's hypothesis, but would cast doubt on ἐπειρωτῆσαι, the reading printed by the editors, and εἰρωτῆσαι, suggested exempli gratia by Hornblower–Pelling in their commentary.Footnote 5 They surprisingly did not notice that Herodotus never uses the aorist infinitives ἐπειρωτῆσαι and εἰρωτῆσαι, but only infinitives like εἰρέσθαιFootnote 6 (x6: 1.87.2, 5.105.1, 7.101.1, 8.65.2, 8.118.2, 9.16.2), ἐπειρέσθαι (x12: 1.19.2, 1.30.2, 1.86.4, 1.90.2, 1.91.4, 1.153.1, 3.32.2, 4.9.2, 6.61.4, 6.66.1, 8.88.2, 9.55.1), εἰρωτᾶν (x3: 1.90.4, 5.87.2, 7.151.1) and ἐπειρωτᾶν (x6: 1.53.1, 1.86.4, 1.90.4, 4.9.4, 4.15.3, 6.52.3); the forms ἐπειρωτῆσαι and εἰρωτῆσαι are completely foreign to Herodotean usage. I therefore propose to print the following text:
βώσαντα δὲ τὸ οὔνομα τοῦ Φιλιππίδεω τὸν Πᾶνα Ἀθηναίους κελεῦσαι ἐπειρέσθαι, δι᾽ ὅ τι ἑωυτοῦ οὐδεμίαν ἐπιμελείαν ποιεῦνται.
There are twelve instances of the infinitive ἐπειρέσθαι in Herodotus,Footnote 7 and strong parallels seem to support this conjecture (1.86.4: τὸν Κῦρον ἀκούσαντα κελεῦσαι τοὺς ἑρμηνέας ἐπειρέσθαι τὸν Κροῖσον τίνα τοῦτον ἐπικαλέοιτο; 3.32.2: Καμβύσεα δὲ μαθόντα τοῦτο ἐπειρέσθαι δι᾽ ὅ τι δακρύει); moreover, we find ἐπειρέσθαι twice in Book 6 of the Histories (6.61.4: ἐπιφανεῖσαν δὲ ἐπειρέσθαι μιν ὅ τι φέρει ἐν τῇ ἀγκάλῃ; 6.66.1: ἔδοξε Σπαρτιήτῃσι ἐπειρέσθαι τὸ χρηστήριον τὸ ἐν Δελφοῖσι εἰ Ἀρίστωνος εἴη παῖς ὁ Δημάρητος). The infinitives εἰρέσθαι, εἰρωτᾶν and ἐπειρωτᾶν also should be taken into account (cf. 8.118.2: ἐς δεῖμα πεσόντα τὸν βασιλέα εἰρέσθαι βώσαντα τὸν κυβερνήτην εἴ τις ἐστί σφι σωτηρίη).