Satus Anchisa v. 424. In both places there may be a force in the designation, as the games were given in honour of Anchises, though elsewhere it seems to be a mere poetical variety, as in 6. 331. Aeneas, as Henry remarks, distributes the prizes as ἀγωνοθέτης, like Achilles in Il. 23. ‘Cunctis vocatis,’ as they would naturally have crowded round the shore to see the race.
 The announcement of the conqueror in the Greek games was made by the herald. In Homer the competitors seize on their prizes as soon as they come in.
 ‘Advelare,’ a rare word, the only other instance being quoted from Lampridius' (one of the Scriptores Historiae Augustae) life of Commodus 15.
 Aptare, the reading before Heins., is found in Gud. a m. s., and three other of Ribbeck's cursives: but it would be difficult to give it any good sense. For the construction of ‘optare,’ ‘ferre’ see on 1. 319. So Hom. Il. 23. 512, δῶκε δ᾽ ἄγειν ἑτάροισιν ὑπερθύμοισι γυναῖκα Καὶ τρίποδ᾽ ὠτώεντα φέρειν. ‘In navis’ shows that the reward is given to all the crews, and so ‘ipsis ductoribus,’ who are mentioned in contrast. Comp. v. 62 above. ‘Optare’ however seems to have a special reference to the winner, who takes his choice, leaving the rest to follow him.
 Magnum: the silver talent was heavier than the gold: see Dict. A. ‘Talent.’ Comp. note on v. 112 above, and see on 9. 265.
 A ‘chlamys’ (Dict. A. s. v.), or scarf embroidered with gold, with a double border of purple.
 Purpura Meliboea is from Lucr. 2.500. ‘Maeander’ or ‘Maeandrus’ is used metaphorically by Cic. in Pison. 22, “quos tum Maeandros . . . . . quae deverticula flexionesque quaesisti?” Here it implies that the border (usually called “limbus” 4. 137) was a wavy one. With ‘cucurrit’ the commentators comp. περὶ δὲ χρύσεος θέε πόρκης Il. 6. 320. Comp. also Il. 23. 561, ᾧ πέρι χεῦμα φαεινοῦ κασσιτέροιο Ἀμφιδεδίνηται, which was evidently in Virg.'s mind, though it is said of the border of a breastplate. It is disputed whether Meliboea is the town of Thessaly, which is evidently intended by Lucr. l. c. “Meliboeaque fulgens Purpura Thessalico concharum tacta colore,” or an island at the mouth of the Orontes, which was famous for purple-fish. ‘Meliboeus’ is formed from it as an adj. by poetical licence, as in 3. 401 “ducis Meliboei.”
 The picture is embroidered on the scarf, not, as Forb. apparently thinks, on the border. ‘Intextus’ is loosely constructed with the clause ‘quam—cucurrit,’ as if “et cui” had preceded. ‘Frondosa Ida,’ a local abl. Henry is probably right in supposing that two scenes are represented, Ganymede hunting and Ganymede carried away. Heyne's notion that the early part of the description is merely intended to inform us that the carrying away took place while Ganymede was hunting is inconsistent with ‘acer, anhelanti similis,’ which is evidently pictorial, at the same time that it could not have been represented as Ganymede's expression while he was in the eagle's talons: and Wagn.'s solution of the knot by saying “bonum Vergilium hic dormitasse” is not very likely in a case like this, where the inconsistency must have been as obvious to the poet as to his readers.
 So of the representation of Porsenna on the shield of Aeneas, 8. 649, “Illum indignanti similem, similemque minanti Aspiceres.” ‘Ab Ida’ seems to belong to ‘rapuit,’ as Gossrau thinks, not to ‘praepes.’ It thus answers the purpose of telling us that the scenery is the same as in the former representation. ‘Praepes’ means no more than swift, without indicating whether the motion is up or down. Ovid is fond of using the word as a subst., like “ales” (comp. M. 4. 714, where he calls the eagle “Iovis praepes”), and this may be the meaning here: but the use occurs nowhere else in Virg., and in 9. 564, where part of v. 255 is repeated, ‘Iovis armiger’ is a subst., not an epithet. The story of Ganymede is glanced at in Il. 20. 234, where it is merely said that the gods carried him off for his beauty, that he might dwell with them and be Zeus' cupbearer, and referred to more at length in the Hymn to Aphrodite, vv. 203 foll., where we are told that he was carried away by a storm.
 The picture is not unlike that in v. 669 below, where Ascanius' keepers try in vain to hold him. The attitude is that of despairing supplication and appeal to heaven: comp. 2. 405, 406.
 Custodes v. 546. ‘Saevitque canum latratus in auras’ is said by Macrob. Sat. 6. 2 to be taken from a passage in Varius, a simile of a dog looking for a deer, where however the resemblance of the thought is entirely general, and the verbal similarity is confined to the words “Saevit in absentem.” ‘Saevit latratus in auras’ means more than “furit aestus ad auras” 2. 759, “quis tantus plangor ad auras” 6. 561, containing, as Wagn. remarks, not only the notion of the bark ascending to the sky, but that of its being directed against the sky, the dogs baying savagely at the eagle as he loses himself in the clouds, and so at the heaven itself, as they are said to howl at the moon.
 Serv. fancies ‘virtute’ is meant to contrast with the favour of the gods by which Cloanthus won. He might have supported the view by quoting Il. 23. 515, κέρδεσιν, οὔτι τάχει γε, παραφθάμενος Μενέλαον. Virg. however can have had no such meaning, though he doubtless meant to indicate that Mnestheus' place was well won.
 See on 3. 467.
 Δώσω οἱ θώρηκα, τὸν Ἀστεροπαῖον ἀπηύρων, Il. 23. 560. Comp. also Il. 15. 529 foll. Demoleos does not appear in Hom., so that, if not invented by Virg., he probably comes from the cyclic writers. For the spelling and inflexion of his name see on 2. 371.
 ἔδωκεν . . . Ἐς πόλεμον φορέειν, δηΐων ἀνδρῶν ἀλεωρήν, Il. 15. 532, 533. ‘Viro’ after ‘huic,’ like “virgo” after “illa” below v. 610, “puella” after “illa” G. 4. 458, rather rhetorically than for the sake of clearness, the force of the word here being that the present was a proper one for a hero.
 Phegeus and Sagaris of course are personages created by Virg. Possibly they may be the same whom we hear of again 9. 575, 765.
 Multiplicem referring to the numerous lines of chainwork. ‘Connixi humeris’ like “obnixae humeris” 4. 406., 9. 725. Comp. also “toto connixus corpore” 9. 410., 10. 127, which seems to show that ‘connixi’ here does not mean using their joint powers, but severally using all their powers.
 Cursu is emphatic: not only was he able to wear the mail, but he could run with it on him. Virg. probably thought, as Heyne suggests, of Il. 5. 303, ὃ οὐ δύο γ᾽ ἄνδρε φέροιεν . . . . ὁ δέ μιν ῥέα πάλλε καὶ οἶος. Thus ‘cursu’ will go with ‘agebat,’ not, as Forb. thinks, with ‘palantis,’ though that might possibly be defended, as the speed of the fugitives would imply the speed of the pursuer. “Cursu timidos agitabis onagros” G. 3. 409. ‘Demoleus’ Med., ‘Demoleos’ Rom., Pal., Gud.: see on 2. 371. “Palantis agit” 11. 734.
 Cymbia 3. 66, probably answering to φιάλη Il. 23. 270. Virg. doubtless means that there were two of them, so that we must either supply ‘gemina’ or take ‘cymbia’ as a dual. “Argento perfecta atque aspera signis” 9. 263. ‘Argento’ with ‘perfecta,’ = “argento affabre facta.” Virg. judiciously gives less space to the third prize than to the others.
[268-285] ‘When the rest had been rewarded, Sergestus arrived, rowing helplessly, like a wounded snake. He gets a prize too.’
 Iamque adeo 2. 567., 9. 585. It is very doubtful whether ‘donati’ is a finite verb, ‘erant’ being supplied, or a participle co-ordinate, not with ‘evincti,’ but with ‘superbi.’ ‘Opibus superbi’ like “tauro superbus” below v. 473.
 They wore a ribbon or ‘lemniscus’ (Dict. A. s. v.) intertwined with the bay or olive wreath, the ends, ‘taeniae,’ hanging down. Serv. refers to Varro as saying that the addition of the ‘lemniscus’ made the decoration more honourable. The contracted form ‘taenis’ is found in Med., Pal., Rom., Verona fragm., and Gud., and approved by Lachm. on Lucr. 5.85; so I have followed Ribbeck and Haupt in restoring it.
 Debilis is exactly ‘disabled,’ being ‘de-habilis,’ as ‘debeo’ is ‘dehabeo.’ Heyne thinks ‘ordine debilis uno’ means that one whole side was disabled, not one tier only. In that case we may comp. Ov. 3 ex Ponto 1. 67 (quoted by Forc.), “Cumque ego deficiam, nec possim ducere currum, Fac tu sustineas debile sola iugum.”
 The comparison seems to be Virg.'s own. There is an illustration from a serpent cut in pieces Lucr. 3.657 foll., but the resemblance to Virg. is extremely faint. ‘Saepe’ in comparisons below v. 527 &c. Heins. ingeniously fancied that it might here be the abl. of ‘saepes.’ ‘Aggere viae’ = “via aggesta.” Turnebus Adv. 11. 6 quotes two instances from Sidonius Apollinaris, Carm. 24. 5, Epist. 1. 5 (to which Forb. adds Rutilius 1. 39), where ‘agger’ alone = ‘via.’ A slightly different explanation is suggested in Dict. A. ‘viae:’ “The centre of the way was a little elevated, so as to permit the water to run off easily, and hence the terms ‘agger viae’ (Isidor. 15. 16. § 7, Ammian. Marcellin. 19. 16: comp. Virg. A. 5. 273), and ‘summum dorsum’ Stat. 4 Silv. 3. 44, although both may be applied to the whole surface of the ‘pavimentum.’” ‘Deprensus,’ surprised by the wheel or blow: comp. v. 51 above.
 Ribbeck reads ‘transit’ from Rom., in obedience to a decision of Lachmann's on the quantity of the final syllable in that and similar words, the propriety of which I have ventured to question on 2. 497. Wagn. Lectt. Verg. pp. 316 foll. argues elaborately against the change in the present case, as introducing a rhythm avoided by Virg. ‘Ictu’ with ‘gravis.’ See note on G. 3. 506.
 The reading of the first two words of this line is involved in considerable doubt. ‘Nixantem nodis’ is found in Med. (corrected into ‘nitentem’), Pal., Verona fragm., and Gud. a m. p.: “nexantem nodis” in Rom., Gud. a m. s., and the Medicean of Pierius, supported by Prisc. 861 P, 904 P, and Eutychius 2. 17: ‘nexantem nodos,’ the common reading before Heins., in some old MSS. which Pierius does not name (a suspicious circumstance which throws doubt on many of his readings), and two later copies. Wagn. and the later editors restore ‘nixantem nodis,’ which they understand of the serpent working itself on with its coils, that being its normal state of motion, which its mutilation retards. The fact however is traversed by Mr. Long, who observes to me that the motion of a serpent is laterally sinuous, not vertically sinuous or in coils; and the argument for ‘nexantem,’ like that for ‘subnexus’ 4. 217, is not easily to be resisted, viz. the improbability that Virg., speaking of twines and coils, should have passed over ‘nexare’ and chosen a word so nearly resembling it. ‘Nexantem nodis’ too will enable us to account readily for the variations: the construction was seen to be an unusual one: so while one set of correctors altered the abl. into the acc., another altered the verb. (Wagn. however argues with some plausibility that ‘nixantem’ was first altered into ‘nexantem’ as the more natural word, and then ‘nodis’ into ‘nodos.’) ‘Nexantem nodis’ then will be a Virgilian variety for ‘nexantem nodos’ or ‘nexantem se in nodos,’ ‘nexantem’ being used intransitively, like other transitive words in Virg., and ‘nodis’ a modal abl. It is not easy to say whether the line is meant to represent the serpent's state as affected by the wound or as struggling against it. “‘Membra:’ etiam hoc ab homine transtulit” Serv., who had made the same remark about ‘clauda.’
 The ship made slow way with rowing, but she spread her sails. ‘Vela facere’ was a phrase for this, as appears from Cic. Tusc. 4. 4, “statimne nos vela facere, an quasi a portu egredientis paululum remigare?” the first alternative being explained afterwards by “utrum panderem vela orationis statim.” So “velificare.” “Pleno subit ostia velo” 1. 400. The order ‘plenis—velis’ is found in some MSS. here, including Med.; but Wagn. seems right in his remark that as the second clause repeats the first, it is better that ‘velis’ should stand at the head of it.
 Promisso is a piece of indirect narrative. Virg. does not, like Homer, tell us at the beginning of this first race what the prizes are to be; but we now learn, what might be inferred from the analogy of the subsequent games, that every competitor understood that he was to receive a prize. The rewarding of Sergestus is parallel to the rewarding of Eumelus Il. 23. 534 foll.
 θῆκε γυναῖκα ἄγεσθαι ἀμύμονα ἔργ᾽ εἰδυῖαν Il. 23. 263, where the woman and a tripod together make up the first prize. The beaten candidate in the wrestlingmatch, ib. 704, 705, is to receive a female slave, πολλὰ δ᾽ ἐπίστατο ἔργα, τίον δέ ἑ τεσσαράβοιον. Gossrau has a quaint note: “Non ex nostro more id donum iudicandum est. Americanus homo non mirabitur, si haec legit.”
 Cressa, Κρῆσσα, G. 3. 345. ‘Genus’ a Greek acc., as in 8. 114, “Qui genus?” 12. 25, “Nec, genus indecores.” “Circum ubera nati” 3. 392. “Sub ubera” has the united support of Pal. a m. p., Med., Rom., and Gud.; but it would not be easy to discover the propriety of the acc.
[286-314] ‘Aeneas, followed by the spectators, goes to an inland circus and proclaims a foot-race. Many enter, both Trojans and Sicilians. He promises a prize to all, and three more conspicuous presents to the first three.’