Repeated with some expansion A. 8. 26, 27.
 Iacentis in somnis perhaps from Lucr. 4.987, “cum membra iacebunt In somnis.” Heyne read ‘insomnis.’ Arguing from the mention of the moonlight and from the words “nec sopor illud erat” v. 173, that this could not be a dream. Wagn. and Jahn make the moonlight part of the dream, and understand v. 173 to mean that it was not a mere dream. The truth seems to be that we have here a mixture of dream and vision, as in 1. 355, 2. 296, the moonlight belonging to the latter, the other circumstances to the former. The word ‘visi’ here, as Wagn. admits, proves nothing, being equally applied to real and to fanciful appearances.
 Imitated from Lucr. 2.114 “cum solis lumina eumque Inserti fundunt radii per opaca domorum.” Virg., more suo, transfers the epithet ‘inserti’ from the light introducing itself into the room to the windows let into the wall.
 Repeated from 2. 775, and omitted here in many copies in the time of Serv.
 Ultro: without waiting to be asked. ‘Tua ad limina’ is understood by Heyne of Aeneas' chamber, the Penates being already in the house. It seems better to say that the actual existence of the gods is separated from their presence in their images. The Penates, like other gods, have their home elsewhere, and come thence to Aeneas.
 Wagn. makes a distinction between “tollere in astra” and “tollere ad astra,” the first being used strictly of apotheosis, the second also of mere metaphorical immortality or exaltation. See on E. 5. 51. When we come however to look at the principle of the distinction, it appears to fail. “Tollere ad auras” may differ from “tollere in auras,” the one meaning rising towards the air, the other elevation into it: but here the elevation is the same, the difference being that in the one case it is literal, in the other rhetorical. There seems then no reason why we should not with Heyne understand these words generally of the superhuman glory of Aeneas' descendants, not with Serv. specially of the apotheosis of Caesar or Augustus, which would harmonize less well with the following clause, and be further objectionable, as merging Aeneas' own deification in that of his posterity.
 Magnis, not, as is generally understood, the “nepotes,” but the “magni Penates” (9. 258) or “magni di” who are speaking, the authors and impersonations of this national greatness. Comp. 2. 295, “his moenia quaere Magna,” and the remark of Donatus quoted there. The ‘moenia’ are the city of Lavinium, the Italian settlement, regarded however doubtless as the cradle of the eternal city itself. The attempt of Heyne and others to press ‘para,’ as if in founding Lavinium Aeneas were preparing for Rome, is altogether needless, ‘para’ being obviously equivalent to “quaere” in the parallel passage from Book 2.
 The separation of ‘Delius’ and ‘Apollo’ has the effect of two nominatives, though ‘Delius’ is doubtless intended to be merely an epithet. Comp. 1. 195, 411, 691, E. 6. 2. Forb. comp. Ov. 3 Amor. 9. 21, “Quid pater Ismario, quid mater profuit Orpheo?”
[163-166] Repeated from 1. 530—533, where see notes.
 Nobis illustrates ‘magnis’ v. 159. They identify themselves with the Trojans, or rather the Trojans with themselves. ‘Propriae’ v. 85, to which it perhaps refers, as if it had been said, “Here is that settled home you prayed for.” ‘Hinc Dardanus ortus’ 7. 240.
 The natural meaning of the words would seem to be that Iasius was the father of Dardanus, and the ultimate progenitor of the Trojan race. No tradition however appears to favour this view: and Virg. himself in 7. 219 apparently follows the Homeric story (Il. 20. 215), which makes Dardanus the son of Zeus. The legends vary (see Dict. Biog. Dardanus, Iasion): but those which assert a connexion between Dardanus and Iasion or Iasius make them brothers. This also might be reconciled with the text, which would then mean that the brothers sprung from Italy, and that Iasius, one of them, was the father of the Trojans. Here again however we should be at issue with the legends, and with Virg.'s language elsewhere, which speak of Dardanus as the author of the race, Iasius having settled, not in Phrygia, but in Samothrace. If then we wish to make Virgil consistent with himself, and with the line of tradition which he seems to have followed, we must suppose him to use ‘pater’ rather vaguely, and to intend ‘a quo’ to refer to Dardanus. But the language is certainly against this; and those who prefer to consider that he has attributed to Iasius what is elsewhere attributed to Dardanus may perhaps fortify themselves by appealing to 7. 208, where not Iasius but Dardanus is said to have penetrated into Samothrace.
 Corythum is probably the place, Corythus or Cortona, not its founder, Corythus, who according to one story was the father of Dardanus. Comp. 7. 209., 9. 10, where it appears to stand for the country. At the same time the legendary connexion with Dardanus would be a reason for Virg. using the word, without committing himself to the story. ‘Requirat’ Med., fragm. Vat. Others have ‘require’ or ‘requiras.’ The two latter readings might be supported from ‘tibi’ in the next line; but the former, besides being less obvious, is confirmed by the parallel passage 12. 75 foll. “Phrygio mea dicta tyranno Haud placitura refer . . . . Non Teucros agat in Rutulos.”
 The sentence is interrupted by a parenthesis, which produces an anacoluthon, v. 175 introducing another sentence. With Ribbeck I have restored ‘et’ for ‘ac,’ on external grounds, though the exact state of the evidence is not clear. Wagn. admits that ‘et’ is found in Med. and fragm. Vat., but says that the other MSS. supporting it are few and modern: Ribbeck quotes only two Berne MSS. for ‘ac,’ leaving it to be inferred that ‘et’ is the reading of the rest of his copies, including not only Pal., but Gud.
 ‘Velatas,’ crowned with fillets. Comp. 5. 134, 366., 7. 154., 11. 101. Two representations of the Penates of different Roman families so crowned are mentioned by Lersch, Antiqq. p. 149.
 The sweat shows the powerful impression made by fear or otherwise upon the mind. Gossrau and Forb. comp. 7. 459, Sil. 8. 187, though they go too far when they speak of sweat as a sign of the reality of the vision. Macrob. Sat. 6. 1 instances the line as an imitation of Ennius (A. 16, fr. 6), “Tunc timido manat ex omni corpore sudor,” which seems also to have been copied by Lucr. 6.944.
 Comp. 2. 688. As in 5. 743., 8. 70, Aeneas offers up a prayer or sacrifice after the vision. ‘Munera’ of wine 1. 636.
 Intemerata seems to include the two notions which have been assigned to the word by Wagn. and Wund., the wine being both unmixed and choice (unblemished, as victims are called ‘egregii’ &c.). The feeling is the same in Aesch. Ag. 94, φαρμασσομένη χρίματος ἁγνοῦ Μαλακαῖς ἀδόλοισι παρηγορίαις. The hearth was the altar of the Penates. ‘Honore’ v. 118. ‘Laetus:’ the performance of the sacrifice had apparently given him time to recover himself, so that he could tell his father with pleasure (v. 169). ‘Perfecto:’ see on 4. 639.
 “‘Ambiguam:’ non incertam sed modo duplicem,” Serv., an interpretation which would agree with Horace's “ambiguam Salamina,” a second Salamis (1 Od. 7. 29, quoted by Emmenessius). The word however seems rather to mean capable of being referred to either source, “quod est ambiguarum proprium, res duas significari,” as Forcell. quotes from Cic. Orat. 34. The ‘ambiguity’ here would lie in the possibility of tracing the line either to the king of the country or to the settler who married his daughter, though, as we have seen on v. 107, there is a further ambiguity which presses on us, if it did not press on Anchises or on Virg., the difficulty of determining which was the father-in-law and which the son-in-law.
 Novo errore seems best explained by Gossrau of the surprise of Anchises when informed of his mistake (see on G. 4. 357), the word being used to produce an apparent antithesis with ‘veterum,’ as Serv. long ago remarked. Other instances of mere verbal antithesis are given in my note on Aesch. Cho. 272. Or we may say that there is a touch of humour in the word, expressing the contrast between old places and new mistakes, as it strikes the mind of Anchises, a meaning which I have endeavoured to bring out in my verse translation. “And smiles that ancient lands have wrought Such new confusion in his thought.” Henry's interpretation, referring ‘novo’ to the previous mistake about settling in Thrace, which he assumes, plausibly enough, to have been advised by Anchises, is less likely, as that mistake was of a different kind, unconnected with ancient tradition, and so could hardly be called an ‘error veteris loci.’ ‘Error locorum’ like “errore viae” 7. 199.
 Nunc repeto 7. 123. The fuller expression “repetere memoria” is found in Cicero; but “repetere” alone is used by the poets and silver-age prose authors. ‘Debita:’ so Aeneas 7. 120 addresses Italy, “fatis mihi debita tellus.”
 It seems doubtful whether ‘vocare’ means to give the names, or to invoke as a prophetess might invoke a fixed yet apparently lingering destiny: τὸ μόρσιμον μένει πάλαι, εὐχομένοις δ᾽ ἂν ἔλθοι (Aesch. Cho. 465).
 Crederet: who could think so in those days? an idiomatic use of the imperfect, where we should prefer the pluperfect, ‘who would have thought so?’ For ‘moveret,’ as might be expected, some of Ribbeck's cursives give ‘moneret.’
 Phoebo, because he sent the message by the Penates.
 Ovantes, at having at last discovered what their destiny was.
 Currimus aequor is one of those constructions found in Greek as well as in Latin, which it is difficult to unravel satisfactorily. We may call it an extension of the construction “currit iter,” which is found 5. 862, and say that from being used with a cognate accusative, the intransitive verb comes to be used with an ordinary accusative of the object, which happens to give nearly the same sense as the cognate; or we may account for it as an accusative of the object put loosely with a verb which is generally intransitive. The expression occurs again 5. 235, and is used by Ov. ex Ponto 1. 3. 76.
[192-208] ‘When out of sight of land, we were involved in a storm, which raged for three days and nights. On the fourth day land appears.’