“Nec minus interea” 1. 633 &c., a common form of transition in Virg. Hom. generally draws the contrast between two contemporaneous actions by repeating the first in a summary form before proceeding to the second—ὡς ὁ μὲν . . . αὐτάρ: and so does Virg. sometimes, as in 1. 656 foll. The meaning here is that while Aeneas is plucking the bough and carrying it to the temple, the Trojans, having finished hewing wood, are constructing the pile, &c.
 Flebant of funeral lamentation E. 5. 21. “‘Ingrato:’ tristi, ut gratum laetum aliquid dicimus. Alii ‘ingrato’ dicunt gratiam non sentienti,” Serv. Heyne, after Taubm., rightly prefers the latter. So in the Copa (attributed to Virg.) v. 35, “Quid cineri ingrato servas bene olentia serta?” Heyne comp. κωφὴν γαῖαν of the body of Hector, Il. 24. 54. The dead body is called ‘cinis’ by anticipation, as Donatus remarks. Forc. quotes no instance of ‘suprema’ for obsequies earlier than Virg., after whose time it is frequent. “Supremis muneribus” 11. 25, “supremum honorem” ib. 61. ‘Ferre’ of offerings 3. 19 &c.
 With the description of the pile comp. that of the pile of Patroclus Il. 23. 163 foll. On the whole I agree with Wakef. and Henry in connecting ‘taedis’ with ‘pinguem,’ ‘robore secto’ with ‘ingentem:’ see on 4. 505, where ‘taedis’ and ‘robore secto’ are also explained.
 Ingentem: comp. v. 178 above. The greater the pile, the greater the honour. Patroclus' pile measured a hundred feet both ways, Il. l. c.; there however many bodies of men and horses were burnt. ‘Frondibus atris,’ leafy boughs from funeral trees like the yew.
[216, 217] “Sectaque intexunt abiete costas” 2. 16. Cerda distinguishes ‘frondibus atris intexunt latera’ from ‘feralis ante cupressos constituunt,’ making the latter refer to the custom of planting cypresses at Rome before the doors of the dead (Pliny 16. 33). This however does not prove that cypresses were planted before funeral piles, while we know on other authority that they were used in making or dressing the piles. Serv. tells us from Varro that piles were surrounded with cypresses that the smell of the burning wood might overpower that of the burning body, and Stat. 9. 460., 5. 54, in passages apparently imitated from the present, makes the cypress used in the composition of the pile. (Sil. 10. 535 has “maestas ad busta cupressos,” which may possibly support Cerda's view, as the cypresses are distinguished from other trees which would form a part of the pile: but the passage is too brief to build upon.) ‘Ante constituunt’ will then refer to the laying down or perhaps setting upright of cypress trees or branches before the process indicated by ‘intexunt’ takes place. Or Heyne may be right in taking ‘ante’ locally, the pile being faced with trunks of cypresses. These he supposes to be used for trophies, like the oak in 11. 4, in which sense of course he understands the next clause ‘decorantque’ &c.; but Forb. seems right in arguing from 11. 193 foll. that the arms (whether of Misenus himself, Il. 6. 418, Od. 12. 13, or of enemies despoiled by him) are thrown on the pile. See on 4. 496.
 The washing and anointing of Patroclus' body are described more minutely Il. 18. 343 foll. ‘Undantia’ with ‘flammis,’ as it is the process of boiling that is going on. Comp. Virg.'s own simile 7. 462 foll.
 Expediunt 1. 178. The meaning is simply that they get the pots boiled or get ready boiling water. The remainder of the line is from Enn. A. 3. fr. 8, “Tarcuini corpus bona femina lavit et unxit,” as Serv. remarks. ‘Frigentis corpus’ is more poetical than ‘mortui corpus’ or than ‘frigidum corpus.’
 Forb. comp. Ter. And. 1. 1. 101, “ad sepulcrum venimus: In ignem inposita est: fletur.” ‘Fit gemitus’ like “fit strepitus” 1. 725, “fit sonitus” 2. 209. ‘Defleta’ like “fleti” v. 481, “deflere” having the additional force of weeping one's fill, as in 11. 59. ‘Toro’ = “feretro,” the bier being laid on the pile and burnt with it. Comp. 4. 507, 659, where it is used of the “lectus iugalis” which Dido has spread on the top of the pile.
 Purple robes were used for wrapping the dead at great Roman funerals. See among a number of testimonies in Cerda's note Livy 34. 7, “Purpura viri utemur . . . magistratibus in coloniis municipiisque . . . togae praetextae habendae ius permittemus, nec id ut vivi solum habeant tantum insigne, sed etiam ut cum eo crementur mortui.” There is also some Homeric analogy for the custom. In Od. 24. 59 the ocean nymphs put immortal garments round the dead Achilles, who is apparently burned in them: in Il. 24. 795 foll., when Hector has been burned, his relations collect his bones and put them in a basket, πορφυρέοις πέπλοισι καλύψαντες μαλακοῖσιν. Virg. makes Aeneas wrap Pallas in the same manner 11. 72 foll. ‘Velamina nota,’ as Heyne remarks, can hardly be understood except of the garments Misenus had worn when alive. The other alternative would be to refer ‘nota’ to the customariness of thus covering the dead. There is the same sort of doubt about “munera nota” 11. 195.
 Subire in the sense of supporting generally takes an acc., sometimes, though rarely, the dat. or abl. It is not easy to distinguish these two last cases: in sense they would appear to differ, the one being equivalent to the acc. (move towards a thing, place one's self under), the other denoting motion when placed under. In the few instances where the construction occurs the reading is not always certain, the acc. being generally found as a variety. Forc. quotes among others Cic. Div. Verr. 14, “Poterisne eius orationis subire invidiae?” the reading of Asconius, who comments on it, “Quasi Latine dixit, ut ‘magno ponderi subire.’” But the MSS. of Cic. give ‘invidiam.’ To carry the bier was esteemed an honour to the deceased among the Romans, as to bear the pall with us: Taubm. comp. Tac. A. 1. 8, “Conclamant patres, corpus (Augusti) ad rogum humeris senatorum ferendum.”
Triste ministerium is not, as
Heyne thought, an interjection, but a
cognate acc., or acc. in apposition to the
action of the verb. The construction is
infinitely rarer in Latin than in Greek
(see on G. 3. 41): Forb. however comp.
9. 53., 10. 311., 11. 383, to which add 8.
487. But the words may conceivably be a
nom.; comp. 1. 168., 8. 422. ‘Subiectam’
&c. = ‘subiecere et tenuere.’ ‘Subiicere’
of setting fire to a thing 2. 37., 11. 186.
Cerda comp. Lucr. 6.1285, “subdebantque
faces,” of burning the dead during the
plague of Athens. It would seem from 11.
185, “huc corpora quisque suorum More
tulere patrum,” that ‘more parentum’
here refers to the whole action, probably
indeed to the whole process of the funeral.
If it has any special reference, it would
probably be to ‘aversi,’ as Lersch understands
it Antiqq. 9. § 86. Serv. however
says “‘More parentum:’ propinquioribus
enim virilis sexus hoc dabatur officium,”
an explanation which may either mean
that Virg. implies that the nearest male
relatives officiated, or that Misenus' comrades
took the part which would naturally
have devolved on his parents. This latter
view is taken by Erythraeus, who comp.
Lucan 6. 530 foll. (of the witch Erichtho):
“Fumantis iuvenum cineres ardentiaque
E mediis rapit ipsa rogis ipsamque parentes
Quam tenuere facem.
 Lersch, § 86, comp. Arnob. 7. 51, “Pulticulae, tura cum carnibus, rapacium alimenta sunt ignium et parentalibus coniunctissima mortuorum,” Tac. A. 3. 2, “Pro opibus loci vestem, odores, aliaque funerum sollemnia cremabant.” The first passage explains ‘dapes,’ which doubtless refers to the victims, not, as some have thought, to the spices and oil. So perhaps 3. 301, where see note. In 5. 92 the reference is doubtful. For the application of ‘dapes’ to sacrifices see Forc. Victims are also mentioned 11. 197 foll., after Il. 23. 166, Od. 24. 65, none of which passages however speak of spices or oil. Libations of oil were made in the subsequent offerings to the grave (E. 5. 68 note: see other passages quoted by Lersch, § 68, “De Libationibus”), which seem to have had much in common with the actual funeral solemnities. See also Od. 24. 73, referred to on v. 227 below. ‘Fuso crateres olivo’ is doubtless the abl. of description, cups of poured out oil. Really of course it is not the cup that is burnt, but its contents, so that ‘crateres’ is used somewhat like “pocula” E. 8. 28.
 The line, as Heyne remarks, is modelled on Il. 9. 212, αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κατὰ πῦρ ἐκάη καὶ φλὸξ ἐμαράνθη, compared with Il. 23. 228, τῆμος πυρκαΐη ἐμαραίνετο, παύσατο δὲ φλόξ. ‘Conlapsi cineres’ is from Il. 23. 251, βαθεῖα δὲ κάππεσε τέφρη.
 In Il. 23. 250., 24. 791 the flame is quenched with wine and then the bones are collected: but in Od. 24. 72, the bones are collected after the body is consumed and are placed in (a vessel containing?) wine and oil. In Il. 23. 253 a double layer of fat is spread over the bones.) Virg. seems to follow the Od., probably understanding λέγομεν ἐν οἴνῳ καὶ ἀλείφατι of something which took place before the bones were placed in the vessel. In the three passages of Hom. the fire is allowed to burn all night and is quenched or quenches itself the next morning: and Virg.'s account in Book 11 (vv. 201, 210) is somewhat similar.
 Lecta, collected from the pile, λέγειν or λέγεσθαι in Hom. ll. cc. The process was called ὀστολογία: Aesch. wrote a play named Ὀστολόγοι. ‘Cadus’ is doubtless an urn, as κάδος is used for a balloting urn. In Hom. the vessels differ: Patroclus' bones are placed in a golden φιάλη, Hector's in a golden λάρναξ, Achilles' in a golden ἀμφιφορεύς, the work of Hephaestus and gift of Dionysus. Brazen urns are common among Italian remains. Corynaeus is specified, as Heyne remarks, merely for specification's sake. The name occurs again 9. 571., 12. 298. This man may be identified with either, as both are probably Trojans. The name is variously spelt in the MSS.; but Heyne remarks that it must be Κορυναῖος from Κορύνη.
 Corynaeus also performs the lustration, that the crews might be purified from the pollution contracted by the dead body, v. 150 above. It does not appear whether lustration formed a regular part of a Roman funeral, as of course we cannot argue from this passage that it did: but there was a lustration in the month of February, the month of special solemnities in honour of the Di Manes. Macrob. Sat. 1. 13 says “lustrari eo mense civitatem necesse erat, quo statuit ut iusta dis Manibus solverentur.” ‘Ter:’ comp. E. 8. 73, 75 notes. Serv. says “‘Circumtulit:’ purgavit. Antiquum verbum est. Plautus: ‘Pro larvato te circumferam,’ i. e. purgabo.” This passage is not in the extant works of Plautus: but there is a similar one in Amph. 2. 2. 143, “quin tu istane iubes Pro cerrita circumferri?” It is to be explained on the analogy of the double structure of ‘circumdare’ &c. ‘aliquam rem alicui’ and ‘aliquem aliqua re,’ ‘circumtulit socios pura unda’ being a variety for ‘circumtulit socios puram undam.’ See on G. 4. 337. If not originally Virg.'s own expression, it is at any rate precisely such a one as we should expect him to affect, so that we need not be tempted by varieties like ‘puram undam,’ the reading of one MS., ‘circumvenit,’ found in another, or ‘circumluit,’ which is found in the margin of a MS. of Macrob. Sat. 3. 1. Sophocles, whose inversions of language are very like Virg.'s, has a similar expression El. 709, ὅθ᾽ αὐτοὺς οἱ τεταγμένοι βραβῆς Κλήροις ἔπηλαν, which has been similarly altered by reading κλήρους.
 The manner of the lustration is described, sprinkling with a wetted branch. Bay was used as well as olive, Juv. 2. 158. Serv. quotes Donatus as saying that Virg. substituted the olive for the bay out of compliment to Augustus, whose birthday was marked by the springing up of a bay on the Palatine, and that it was not thought well that the triumphal associations of the tree should be mixed up with funeral reminiscences. Lersch shows that the olive was connected with funerals from Pliny 35. 12, 46, “Quin et defunctos sese multi fictilibus soliis condi maluere, sicut M. Varro, Pythagorico modo, in myrti et oleae et populi nigrae foliis.” Cerda shows the same connexion from Demosth. and Artemidorus. ‘Rore et ramo’ is a good instance of ἓν διὰ δυοῖν: see on G. 2. 192. “Felici comptus oliva” 7. 751, distinguished from the oleaster.
 For ‘viros’ Rom., Pal. a m. p., and others give ‘domos,’ apparently introduced by some one who thought of the lustration of houses at Rome. Pierius thought it might be explained of the camp. Another MS. has ‘choros,’ which Heins. preferred, but Heyne rightly rejects. “Dixitque novissima verba” 4. 650. The reference seems to be to the ‘vale’ with which they took leave of the dead, not to the ‘ilicet,’ with which the assembly was dismissed. Serv. objects to the former view that the ‘vale’ was not said till after the burial: but 11. 97 seems to show that it might come even before the burning. In v. 506 below, 3. 68 we may remember that the erection of the tomb stood in place of a proper burial.
 The mention of Aeneas may be intended to intimate that it was at this point that he returned (see v. 212 above); but such things cannot be pressed in Virg. The setting up of a tomb in Hom. follows similarly at once upon the burning and the collecting of the bones, Il. 23. 255 foll., 24. 797 foll., Od. 12. 14., 24. 80 foll. The first and last of these passages will illustrate ‘ingenti mole,’ the size of the barrow, of earth and stones, being greater according to the honour intended. So Aesch. Cho. 351, πολύχωστον ἂν εἶχες Τάφον διαποντίου γᾶς, Δώμασιν εὐφόρητον.
 Arma seems to refer to ‘remumque tubamque,’ like “Cerealia arma” 1. 177 &c., as his arms in the strict sense appear to have been burnt with him, v. 217. Serv., who felt the difficulty, took the meaning to be that the arms were sculptured on the tomb. ‘Viro’ explains ‘sua,’ which would naturally refer to Aeneas himself. The oar Misenus has in common with Elpenor, Od. 11. 77., 12. 15, who has his fixed ἀκροτάτῳ τύμβῳ: the trumpet is his own.
[236-263] ‘Aeneas then begins the preliminaries of his descent. Black cattle are sacrificed to the infernal powers at the mouth of a mephitic cave. As the day dawns, the approach of Hecate is perceived, and Aeneas and his guide descend.’