Fuerint quaecumque was the old reading before Heins., introduced apparently by those who thought, as Wagn. and Henry do still, that the clause referred to ‘cuncta.’ It is found in Gud. corrected and some others, and supported by Pal., “fuerit quaecumq” (the last two letters seem to be lost). ‘Fuerit quodcumque,’ beside Med., Gud. originally, &c., Serv. and Donatus, has the authority of Phaedrus, who imitates the passage 3 Prol. 27, “Sed iam, quodcunque fuerit, ut dixit Sinon, Ad regem cum Dardaniae perductus foret, Librum exarabo tertium Aesopi stilo,” thus showing that he understood the words to mean ‘in any event’ (i. e. as explained v. 31, ‘whether you read it or not’), a view which the future sense of ‘fuerit’ favours. Henry however thinks Phaedrus means ‘this book, such as it may be.’ Serv. remarks that ‘quodcumque’ is euphemistic, as we say, ‘let the worst come to the worst.’ Weidner comp. Od. 21. 212, σφῶϊν δ᾽, ὡς ἔσεταί περ, ἀληθείην καταλέξω, which Virg. may have thought of.
 Vera adheres to ‘fatebor,’ ‘I will tell all truly.’ ‘Negabo’ as ‘fatebor,’ ‘I am not going to deny.’ So in Ovid's imitation, M. 13. 315, “nec me suasisse negabo,” where Ulysses is entering on the charge about Philoctetes. ‘Finget’ points the same way.
 Hoc primum: a sort of parenthesis, like “hoc tantum” v. 690. ‘This to begin with,’ as in declaring that he should not deny himself to be a Greek he had as it were given them incidentally his first instalment of truth.—‘Nec si’ &c. The sentiment, according to Macrob. Sat. 6. 1, is taken from Attius, Teleph. fr. 6, “Nam si a me regnum Fortuna atque opes Eripere quivit, at virtutem non quiit.”
 “Te quoque dignum Finge Deo” 8. 365. ‘Fingo’ is stronger than “facio” —‘she has moulded him into misery, but shall never mould him into falsehood.’ Comp. the use of the word 6. 80, G. 2. 407.—‘Vanum’ 1. 392. Observe the position of ‘inproba:’ ‘her insatiate malice shall not go so far as to make me a liar.’ ‘Inprobus’ is used specially of those who make others unscrupulous, 4. 412, E. 8. 49. See generally on G. 1. 119.
 Fando, ‘in talking:’ note on E. 8. 71. ‘Aliquid,’ the old reading, supported by some MSS. both of Virg. and of Priscian p. 811, evidently arose from a misunderstanding of ‘aliquod,’ as if it went with ‘fando.’ ‘Aliquod nomen’ seems equivalent to “si nomen fando pervenit alicubi” or “aliquo tempore,” or perhaps “aliqua forte,” on the principle illustrated E. 1. 54. Ovid has imitated this line (15. 497), “Fando aliquem Hippolytum vestras, puto, contigit auris . . . occubuisse neci.”
 For Palamedes see Heyne's Excursus, where it is shown that Virg. made a confusion in connecting him with Belus. The quantity of the penultimate of the patronymic is contrary to rule, but mentioned as an exception by Priscian, p. 584. ‘Incluta fama gloria:’ Palamedes appears to have figured in the tragedians (see the fragments of Aesch., Soph., Eur.) as a kind of human Prometheus, some of the inventions of the latter being actually attributed to him. He was a favourite subject with the Sophists, some of whom exercised their ingenuity in dressing up a case for him or for Ulysses, while others fixed on him as the true type of a hero, not violent, like Achilles, but wise after the Stoic pattern, and even insinuated that Homer's silence about him was owing to jealousy of his supposed poetical power.
 Falsa sub proditione means not ‘under a false charge of treason,’ as all the editors take it, a sense which the words would hardly bear, nor ‘at the time of a false alarm of treason’ (Henry), which would be an inopportune detail, and barely consistent with the legend, but simply ‘under a false information,’ ‘proditio’ being equivalent to ‘indicium,’ as in Flor. 3. 18, “postquam id nefas proditione discussum est,” just as in Ov. Amor. 2. 8. 25, “index” and “proditor” are synonymous, “index ante acta fatebor, Et veniam culpae proditor ipse meae.” There is no reference whatever to the pretended treason of Palamedes, though that happened to be the subject of the charge. The repetition ‘falsa sub proditione, Insontem, infando indicio’ is sufficiently accounted for by Sinon's apparent horror of the transaction. ‘Sub proditione,’ like “sub crimine,” Juv. 10. 69.
 Cassus lumine occurs Lucr. 4. 368, of darkness or shadow, and Cic. Arat. 369 has “non cassum luminis ensem,” of a constellation. ‘Lumen’ here of course is the light of day or life, as in 12. 935, “corpus spoliatum lumine,” so that the expression is equivalent to “aethere cassis,” 11. 104, and agrees exactly with ‘demisere neci.’ Comp. Aesch. Eum. 322, ἀλαοῖσι καὶ δεδορκόσιν.
 The apodosis begins here. ‘In case you ever heard of Palamedes, I was his companion in arms and near kinsman,’ i. e. I may designate myself as such; an ellipsis, as Trapp remarks, as good in English as in Latin. ‘Illi’ then is the emphatic word. ‘Comitem’ and ‘consanguinitate propinquum’ are not strictly co-ordinate, as the meaning evidently is that Sinon was sent to be Palamedes' comrade, being already his kinsman; but writers are not always conscious grammarians, and instances may be found even in prose where the ordinary epithet is confounded with the epithet used predicatively.
 Of the various explanations devised by the commentators to account for the mention of the poverty of Sinon's father, the most natural seem to be that some specification was to be expected in a plausible tale, and that poverty, while increasing the pathos of the story, would account for Sinon's dependence on a superior. So in the case of Achemenides, 3. 615. ‘In arma,’ to war, Lucan 3. 292. ‘Primis ab annis’ can only mean ‘from my early youth,’ as in 8. 517, in spite of the difficulty to be noticed v. 138. It is probable, as Cerda suggests, that Virg. may have been thinking of the early age at which the Romans were sent to war; and this perhaps may lead us, with Heyne and Wagn., to extend a similar reference to ‘pauper,’ war in Virgil's time being a lucrative calling. Weidner attempts to connect ‘primis ab annis’ with ‘comitem,’ which would be intolerably harsh.
 Stabat regno incolumis is rightly explained by Heyne as a variety for “erat regno incolumi.” Comp. 1. 268. ‘Regno’ is used for “regia dignitate” 9. 596. For ‘regumque’ Canon. originally and some inferior MSS. have ‘regnumque,’ the old reading, which is scarcely intelligible, as ‘regnum’ could not stand for the state of the Greeks at Troy, and with Palamedes' influence at home we have clearly nothing to do. ‘Vigebat:’ Lucr. 4.1156, “Esse in deliciis, summoque in honore vigere.”
 Conciliis is the reading of Med. and Pal., ‘consiliis’ of the Verona palimpsest originally, and some others. The received distinction between the two words is that the former signifies an assembly in general, the latter a select deliberative body. The latter seems decidedly preferable, as the addition of ‘regum’ shows that the Homeric βουλὴ γερόντων, not the ἀγορή, is meant, and deliberative ability was the special virtue of Palamedes. Besides, ‘consiliis’ enables us at once to account for the corruption ‘regnum’ in the previous line.
 Gessimus nomen decusque, like “gerere honorem,” “auctoritatem,” &c. ‘Pellacis,’ Med., Gud. corrected, Serv., Donatus on Ter. Phorm. 1. 2. 17, Velius Longus, p. 2227 P. ‘Fallacis,’ Pal., Gud. originally, probably Verona palimpsest, Charisius, p. 52. Comp. G. 4. 443. Macleane on Hor. Od. 3. 7. 20, in resisting Bentley's unauthorized attempt to substitute “pellax” for “fallax,” throws a doubt on the very existence of the former word, as not deducible from “pellicere;” Germanus however suggests that it may come from “pello,” the verb of which “appello,” “compello,” “interpello,” are compounds, and quotes a legal term “virgines appellare.” The word is also found in Auson. Epitaph. 12. 4, and Arnob. pp. 58, 231.
 Adflictus: dashed down from my prosperity, as Henry explains it; so ‘tenebris,’ in obscurity, contrasts with ‘nomenque decusque.’ “Ipsi se in tenebris volvi caenoque queruntur,” Lucr. 3.77. Comp. Id. 2. 15, 54., 5. 11. The last passage might be quoted in support of a curious variety in the Verona palimp. here, ‘fluctuque.’
 Et follows ‘nec,’ ‘nec tacui’ being taken as a positive statement. ‘Tulisset’ as ‘ferebant,’ v. 34. “Quidve ferat Fors,” Enn. A. 203. The pluperfect is used on account of the oratio obliqua, as in v. 189., 3. 652., 9. 41, Livy 34. 6, which confirms the opinion that the so-called futurum exactum is really only the perf. subj. Wagn.'s other instances are not to the point. ‘Tulisset’ apparently for “se tulisset,” i. e. “obtulisset.” So the dictionaries quote “ferentem” from Nep. Datam. 4. 5. “Ferebant” v. 34 is not quite the same. “Fors” is often said “ferre” in a transitive sense, as in Enn. A. 203, “quidve ferat Fors.” See on 11. 345.
 “Remeare proprie de victoribus dicitur. Vid. Cort. ad Lucan. 7. 256, et Burm. ad Val. Fl. 4. 589.” Forb. ‘Argos’ for Greece: his real country of course was Euboea. Heyne rather prefers the reading of some inferior MSS. ‘agros.’
 Promisi ultorem. There is no occasion to understand “fore” here or in 4. 227. Comp. Sen. Contr. 4. 29. Quint. Decl. 1. 6. (Forc.) ‘Verbis’ opposed to ‘tacui:’ ‘by speaking out I made myself a bitter enemy (in Ulysses).’
 Hinc, from this time, as ‘semper’ seems to show. ‘Labes:’ the imitation of this passage in Justin 17. 1, “Haec prima mali labes, hoc initium impendentis minae fuit,” shows that he took ‘labes’ in its primary sense of a downfall, as in Lucr. 2.1145, “dabunt labem putrisque ruinas.” We may paraphrase then “Hinc primum fortunae meae ruere incipiebant.” So Serv. “ruinam significat, a lapsu.” There is a passage immediately preceding this explanation of Serv., which has led to a suspicion that he had a different text from that before us: “Quia secuta sunt postea oraculum et adscita Calchantis factio: adscita sane dicitur adsumpta.” From this Cunningham extracted “Hinc adscita mihi labes.” But the gloss would be unintelligible without ‘prima,’ which it is evidently intended to explain, though the lemma seems to have fallen out. It would almost seem as if Serv. had used the word ‘adscita,’ and some later grammarian had explained it by ‘adsumpta,’ his note afterwards coming to be incorporated in Serv.'s text.
 With ‘spargere voces,’ comp. the Greek σπερμολόγος. ‘In volgum’ is in accordance with the representations of Ulysses in the Greek drama as δημοχαριστής (Eur. Hec. 134), τοῦ ὄχλου μέτα (Id. Iph. A. 526).
 Quaerere conscius arma, ‘to seek allies as a conspirator,’—nearly equivalent to “quaerere arma consciorum,” or “quaerere conscios,” as Wagn. gives it. ‘Quaerere arma’ occurs in this very sense 11. 229. That Ulysses sought for allies appears from the introduction of Calchas, and from the anticipation of the event, v. 124, which argues that his designs were not entirely a secret.
 The old punctuation made the question end at ‘moror,’ regarding ‘si omnis’ as the protasis to ‘sumite.’ Wagn., who changed it, might have urged that ‘quidve moror,’ standing alone, would come in rather tamely after the previous line, that the contrast between ‘moror’ and ‘iamdudum’ is better brought out by the alteration, and that the use of ‘iamdudum’ with the imperative, as in other passages, implies a vehemence hardly compatible with the precedence of a conditional clause. An argument, too, may perhaps be drawn from a slight verbal similarity in one of these passages, Stat. Theb. 1. 268, “quo tempore tandem Terrarum furias abolere et saecula retro Emendare sat est? Iamdudum a sedibus illis Incipe,” which looks as if Statius had found the interrogation after ‘sat est’ in his copy of Virg. ‘Ordine habetis,’ like “honestatem eo loco habet,” Cic. Fin. 2. 15.
 Id, that I am a Greek, v. 79. ‘Iamdudum’ with the imper. or subj. (Ov. M. 2. 482, A. A. 2. 457) is to be explained as a violation of logical congruity, for the sake of emphasis, ‘iamdudum’ belonging to past, ‘sumite’ to a future time, so that the Trojans are bidden to punish long since, because they have long since had the right to do so.
[105-144] ‘Pressed to enter into detail, he relates that the Greeks were enjoined by an oracle to offer a human victim before their departure, and that he was singled out for the purpose by the machinations of Ulysses, but escaped.’