Simulata mente, with an assumed feeling—making as though she desired nothing more than that she and her rival and the parties they favoured should come to terms. ‘Enim,’ as Wund. remarks, gives the reason why Venus does not speak sincerely—she repels craft by craft.
 Wakef. ingeniously reads ‘Italia,’ comp. 1. 38: but ‘regnum Italiae,’ the empire which in the designs of fate already belonged to Italy, is more forcible, especially in a Roman's mouth. The want of obviousness in the construction has led to varieties in the MSS., many giving ‘adverteret,’ two or three ‘Libycis—oris.’
 Ingredi of beginning to speak, 6. 867.
 ‘Who would rather have thee for an enemy than a friend?’ There may be some stress on ‘bello,’ as if it were intended to be opposed to such a phrase as “contendere beneficiis,” but it is simpler to understand the two words as equivalent to ‘pugnare.’
 Si fortuna sequatur occurs again 8. 15. The notion intended is that of a favourable result; but it is not easy to see whether it is meant to convey that notion through ‘fortuna,’ or ‘sequatur,’ or, what is perhaps most probable, through both. ‘Sequi’ in the two latter cases would have the force of its cognate “secundus,” as Forb. remarks. Instances of ‘sequi’ with or without a case simply in the sense of an event happening are given in Forc.
 The choice lies between connecting ‘fatis’ with ‘incerta,’ the abl. being supposed to be used interchangeably with the genitive, a construction which might be supported by the analogy of ‘peritus,’ as Wund. remarks, and understanding ‘fatis feror’ in some such sense as ‘I am led blindly by destiny.’ Wund. says of ‘feror’ “statum rei durantem notat,” but the instances he quotes (v. 376 below, “Heu furiis incensa fero,” 10. 630 “Aut ego veri Vana feror”) seem to show that being carried along is the notion intended. ‘Si:’ whether.
 Foedera occurs 12. 191 in the parallel instance of the Trojans and Latins coalescing into one nation.
 Excipere of reply, one speaker taking the conversation from the hands of another, 9. 258.
[115-128] ‘Juno then proposes to break up a hunting party on which Dido and Aeneas are going the next day with a storm which shall force the lovers to take refuge in a cave. Venus assents.’
 Confieri, the reading of Rom., of Med. a m. sec., and a few other MSS., supported also by Serv., has been corrupted in the majority of copies into ‘quod fieri,’ ‘quo fieri,’ ‘hoc fieri,’ ‘quid fieri,’ ‘an fieri.’ The word is used several times by Lucr., and is found in Terence, Caesar, &c. Pal. is defective from this line to v. 162.
 For ‘primos’ Med. (a m. pr.) and Rom. give ‘primus:’ but their agreement cannot outweigh the awkwardness of ‘primus’ followed by ‘crastinus.’ ‘Ortus extulerit Titan’ like “Aurora ostenderit ortus” G. 4. 544.
 Titan of the sun, note on 6. 725. Here and in 5. 65, where the words recur, ‘radiisque retexerit orbem’ is generally taken of the sun's rays removing the curtain of night from the world—an interpretation sufficiently supported by 9. 461, “iam rebus luce retectis.” But it is worth considering whether, as has been suggested to me, ‘retexerit’ may not be from “retexo,” ‘orbem’ being the orb of the sun, which having been unwoven at night is rewoven in the morning. The expression is likely enough to have been suggested by Lucr. 5 389, “radiisque retexens aetherius sol,” where the absorption of water from the sea by the sun is spoken of. Ov. M. 7. 531 has “Luna quater plenum tenuata retexuit orbem,” where, though the sense of “retexo” is precisely opposite, that of unweaving, the expression is identical. Virg. himself (12. 763) has “retexunt orbis” of reweaving a circle, i. e. performing a circular movement a second time. The form “retexi” for “retexui” is supported by Manil. 4. 214. Perhaps, however, the context of 5. 65 is rather against this, as it is there Aurora, not Titan, that is spoken of.
 There is no reason to doubt with Forb. whether ‘nigrantem’ here is active or neuter. Even if the use of ‘nigro’ actively were less rare than it is, an active participle here would be awkward to the last degree, as may be seen by substituting any word which would at once suit the metre and agree in sense with ‘nigro,’ such as “foedantem” or “fuscantem.” ‘Commixta grandine,’ ‘nimbus’ being a raincloud, so that it is a shower of mingled rain and hail that is here meant.
Gossrau, Ladewig, and Henry are,
I think, right in following Serv. against the
later editors, and explaining ‘alae’ as
the “alatores,” who appear from Isid.
Orig. 10 quoted on G. 3. 413 and other old
authorities to have been a distinct class of
huntsmen. They are generally supposed
to have been mounted like cavalry, of
which the ‘alae’ of the Roman army originally
consisted: Mr. Long, however,
thinks that they were beaters or drivers,
so called from their position on the flank,
the people for whom the game was driven
answering to the legions in the centre.
The other interpretation, understanding it
of the red feathers with which the game
was scared (see on G. 3. 372), is not in
Virg.'s manner, though it may suit a more
modern taste, dwelling as it does on an unimportant
circumstance, with the object of
producing a picturesque effect. The change
of nom. at ‘cingunt,’ too, is an objection
to this view, though a slight one. A similar
question has been raised on the use of
‘ala’ in a passage in Silius Italicus (2. 418),
describing this very scene:
“Hinc et speluncam furtivaque foedera
Callaicae fecere manus: it clamor ad auras
Latratusque canum, subitoque exterrita nimbo
Occultant alae venantum corpora silvis.
 Tegentur seems to imply not that the rest of the party are to be sheltered or hidden, but that they are to be shrouded so that they cannot see Dido and Aeneas. It would be possible of course to take ‘tegentur’ = “tegent se,” but ‘nocte opaca’ is rather against this.
 1. 73.
 Henry seems right in contending that by ‘Hymenaeus’ we are here meant to understand not merely the bridal, which, as he remarks, is expressed elsewhere in Virg. and in other writers by the plural, but the god of marriage, whose presence was invoked at the ceremony, and is here promised by Juno. ‘Hic’ then will be the adverb, not the pronoun. Henry however apparently goes too far in supposing that stress is meant to be laid on the concurrence of the three deities essential to a perfect marriage, Juno, Venus, and Hymenaeus, as though this may be the spirit of the passages which he quotes from Ovid, esp. M. 9. 795, the absence of any reference to Hymenaeus below vv. 166 foll. seems to show that Virg. did not regard him as co-ordinate with Juno. Venus too, we must remember, is asked to give her tacit consent, not her active co-operation. ‘Petenti’ may go either with ‘adversata’ or with ‘adnuit:’ perhaps the latter is more probable. Rom. has ‘aversata,’ which is mentioned by Serv.
 Dolis repertis has been taken of Juno's craft discovered by Venus (Serv., Burm., Gossrau), of the craft devised by Juno (Heyne, Forb., Henry), and of Venus' fraud devised against Juno (Thiel). The first is surely far the best, in point of sense; while in point of language it is sufficiently vindicated against Heyne's objection by the passages adduced by Gossrau, esp. Claud. In Eutrop. 1. 88, “fraude reperta Cautior elusi fremitus vitare mariti.” ‘Dolis repertis’ will then be abl. abs., though “ridere aliqua re” seems to be an admissible construction, as in Hor. 2. S. 8. 83, “Ridetur fictis rerum,” doubtfully comp. by Forb.
[129-159] ‘At the dawn of the next day the preparations for the hunt begin. Huntsmen, nobles, and all are ready waiting for the queen, who at last appears in splendid attire and with a large retinue. They are joined by the Trojans and Aeneas, who looks as majestic as Apollo. The hunt begins. Ascanius is particularly active, and wishes he were chasing real savage beasts.’