How to translate this line from Xenophon? (Const. Lac. 9.1)

Question

I'm working on this line from Xenophon, and I'm having a little trouble with the second clause.

ἄξιον δὲ τοῦ Λυκούργου καὶ τόδε ἀγασθῆναι, τὸ κατεργάσασθαι ἐν τῇ πόλει αἱρετώτερον εἶναι τὸν καλὸν θάνατον ἀντὶ τοῦ αἰσχροῦ βίου:
(Xenophon Const. Lac. 9.1)

Here's my translation:

And this [deed] of Lycurgus is also deserving to be admired, accomplishing in the city that a noble death is preferable to a disgraceful life.

I find it peculiar that "ἐν τῇ πόλει αἱρετώτερον εἶναι τὸν καλὸν θάνατον ἀντὶ τοῦ αἰσχροῦ βίου" is not placed inside the articular infinitive—between the article and the infinitive κατεργάσασθαι. Why is this? I thought that the subjects, objects, and modifies of an articular infinitive were to be placed inside.

Also, why do we get εἶναι, and not ἐστὶ? Is the verb following an articular infinitive supposed to be an infinitive? I wasn't aware of such a rule. Or is it that the first clause somehow introduces indirect statement?

In addition to these questions, I welcome any improvements.

Answer 1

Where did you read that the constituents of an articular infinitive need to be between the article and the infinitive? I would say they need to belong to the infinitive and be subordinate to it (and not to something else), but their location is no more limited than the modifiers of other nouns (i.e. than the elements of other noun groups). Otherwise, this sentence would be harder to parse: you'd only know you were inside an infinitival construction after you had read all the constituents, which is tiring; you wouldn't know what e.g. the ἐν τῇ πόλει phrase was dependent upon until the very end. Lastly, Greek is generally fairly free with respect to word order.

How would ἐστὶ work? Then there would have to be a full subordinate clause, which is only possible after a conjunction or relative pronoun, which is absent here. It is simply an a.c.i., whence your accomplishing ... that, and whence εἶναι and all the accusatives.