Nuntius may be either the messenger or the message: see on 4. 237. ‘Per regia tecta:’ he goes through the house (if we suppose the messenger to be meant) seeking Latinus and spreading alarm and confusion (‘ingenti tumultu’） as he goes.
 Descendere: because the army was advancing partly along the mountains, v. 513.
 Rom. has ‘animo,’ which may lend some colour to the notion that ‘animi’ is a gen. (see on 2. 120): ‘concussa pectora’ however is decidedly against it. “Concussi animi” 9. 498: there however the effect is not the same as here.
 “Stimulis haud mollibus iniicit iras” below v. 728. Here the metaphors in ‘stimulis’ and ‘arrectae’ do not seem quite to agree: probably however the latter has merely the general notion of excitement.
 “Adsensu vario” 10. 97, where the meaning is that some agreed with one speaker, some with another. Here the meaning seems to be that the noise was one of disapproval rather than of approval, indicating that they were divided among themselves, not that they were supporting this or that view. Wagn. restores ‘ad auras’ from Med., as the less strong expression: but ‘in auras’ is found in all Ribbeck's other MSS.
 For the two similes that follow comp. 7. 699 foll., though there it is actual singing that is the point of comParison, not merely an inarticulate murmur.
 Pal. corrected, supported by Gud. originally, has ‘piscosoque.’ ‘Padusa’ was the name of one of the mouths of the Padus, which has now ceased to exist: see Dict. G. ‘Padus.’ It was also known as “Fossa Augusta.” With ‘piscoso’ Cerda comp. Ὕλλῳ ἐπ᾽ ἰχθυόεντι Il. 20. 392.
 Immo has substantially the same force as in passages where it repeats a previous assertion with emphasis. Turnus ironically endorses what they are doing, and bids them go on by all means. ‘Arrepto tempore’ not, as Heyne and some others think, with ‘cogite,’ but as Cerda took it, with ‘ait.’ Turnus seizes the moment of excitement to speak.
 Armis contains an implied opposition to talking, though talking is not specified in the previous line. ‘Ruunt’ is the reading of all Ribbeck's MSS., and seems decidedly preferable to ‘ruant,’ which Wagn. and Forb. retain. As Pierius remarks, “fatendi modo, ut rem praesentem intento quasi digito indicet, magis movet.”
 Edice: the compounds of “dico” seem not to take the shortened form “dic” in the imperative, though we find “educ” from “educo,” “affer,” “confer” &c. from “affero,” “confero” &c., and “calefac” from “calefacio” (Madv. § 114 c). Pal. and originally Gud. have ‘maniplos,’ which Ribbeck prefers, as otherwise four successive lines will end in ‘is:’ but the change does not seem worth making.
 For ‘equitem’ Rom., Pal. corrected, Gud., and another of Ribbeck's cursives and a third corrected have ‘equites,’ the reading before Heins. ‘Equitem’ however is supported by Serv., and the pl. may have been introduced by some one who did not understand the construction to make the word agree with ‘Rutulos,’ as some editors have taken it. ‘Messapus’ and ‘Coras’ nom., as if “diffundant” were to follow. ‘In armis’ = “armatum.”
 Rom., Canon., and one of Ribbeck's cursives read ‘firment—capessant,’ which is partially supported by Med. a m. p. and another cursive, and was retained by Heyne. Wagn. Q. V. 8. 4. 6 lays down the doctrine that ‘pars’ is followed by a pl. in Virg. only when the whole of which it forms a part has been spoken of in the pl., or when a preceding part has been described as “alii”—a strange and arbitrary proposition, which he finds some difficulty in reconciling with 6. 642. There can be little doubt that either may be used indifferently.