Stirling Bartholomew wrote: is it really probable that all of these lexicons were edited by slackers?
Obviously not, but I have noticed that it seems to be the lexicographers themselves who are the most aware of the deficiencies of the lexicons. For example, John Lee (of the Macquarrie Moulton and Milligan project) in his chapter 'The Present State of Lexicography..' in the Danker festschrift 'Biblical Greek Language..', p. 66:
if one does not know the meaning of a word, one is predisposed to trust the [lexicon].
Yet this trust is misplaced. The concise, seemingly authoritative statement of meaning can, and often does, conceal many sins - .. above all, dependence on predecessors.
Likewise, see John Chadwick and Peter Glare on Liddell and Scott. Chadwick: 'Only if you have yourself wrestled with these problems [of lexicography] will you how deficient the articles [ie the entries, in L&S] before you are.' [In 'The Case for Replacing Liddell and Scott', BICS 1994].
Needless to say, I am full of admiration, even awe, of their achievements. But surely this doesn't preclude examining individual entries, especially when they seem surprising. I looked up LEH, and the example they give under the meaning 'to be at hand, to arise' is an aorist subjunctive:
ἐὰν δὲ ἐνστῇ πόλεμος Ῥώμῃ προτέρᾳ .. [1 Maccabees 8.24]
If there come first any war upon the Romans .. [Brenton]
But if war should come to Rome first .. [NETS]
I don't think 'at hand' would be correct here (it seems closer to 'arise'). It's the terms of a mutual assistance treaty, which surely would come into force if a war actually came, not if it was only imminent.
LEH also give an example with the perfect, and give it the meaning 'threatening', but both Brenton and NETS have a simple present:
Ἵνα τί ἐκόπωσας πάντα τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον πολέμου μὴ ἐνεστηκότος ἡμῖν;
'when there is no war threatening us' [LEH]
Why hast thou put all this people to so great trouble, seeing there is no war betwixt us? [Brenton]
Why have you wearied all these people without there being a war with us? [NETS]
The present here seems simpler. Surely Tryphon can just be saying to Jonathan, 'why have you come with so great an army, when we are not at war with each other?'.
Andrew