“ἴδῃς” (x) is of course wrong, and “ἀτιμήσω, ἀτιμήσῃ” are evidently corrections which further require a conjunction in 73. Such an insertion, whether after “καταστρέψας” (Franke), or after “ὤσῃ” (Giphanius) is not a legitimate critical proceeding. The two participles, though ungraceful, seem original, and are defended by Matthiae. There is a similar, though easier, example in Il. 12.113 f. “νήπιος οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλε, κακὰς ὑπὸ κῆρας ἀλύξας”,“ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν ἀγαλλόμενος παρὰ νηῶν”
“ἂψ ἀπονοστήσειν”. Theog. 521 f. a second participle “δήσας” is well attested.
The construction is not uncommon in later Greek: cf. Nub. 937 f. with Teuffel's note, Eur. Or.656 f., Troad. 643 f.