Protinus, next in order. ‘Orsilochum’ above v. 636. Butes cannot well be the same as the one mentioned 9. 647. ‘Maxuma Teucrum corpora’ like “nemorum maxuma aesculus” G. 2. 15; the gen. being really partitive, though a different substantive is introduced. ‘Corpora’ in apposition, 10. 430. The verb is partly understood from what goes before (comp. 9. 334), partly supplied from ‘fixit,’ ‘eludit’ &c.
 Sedentis, sitting on horseback.
 Lucere of an interval 9. 383. ‘Laevo,’ the blow is dealt on the left side. The ‘parma’ was borne by the light-armed troops and by the cavalry. Lersch § 31 strangely supposes Butes to be an exception to this rule.
 Camilla flies from Orsilochus in a gradually narrowing circle, so that at last they are brought almost side by side, when she strikes him down. ‘Magnum:’ the circle was at first large, but afterwards diminished. ‘Agitare’ of pursuit, v. 686 above.
 Eludit seems to mean, not baffles his pursuit, but deceives him, making him think himself the pursuer, while he is really the pursued. ‘Gyro interior,’ more inward in respect of wheeling, i. q. “gyro interiore.” Forb. comp. Hor. 2 S. 6. 26, “Interiore diem gyro trahit,” where the metaphor is from a charioteer in the circus taking the side nearest to the goal.
 “Altior insurgens” 12. 902. ‘Insurgens’ was read here before Heins., but is found in none of Ribbeck's MSS. “Tum caput orantis nequiquam, et multa parantis Dicere, deturbat terrae,” 10. 554. Heyne asks how Orsilochus comes to pray for mercy, when he supposes himself the pursuer. Wagn. replies, that he may very well have prayed when he found out his mistake. The apparent inconsistency is in fact due to Virg.'s characteristic rapidity of narrative.
[699-724] ‘One of her enemies induces her to dismount, and then attempts to escape on horseback; but she overtakes and kills him.’
 ‘Appenninicola’ does not occur elsewhere; but Ov. M. 15. 432 has “Appenninigena.” The father's name is put instead of the son's for the sake of variety, as in 9. 581. There seems no reason to suppose, with Serv. and Gossrau, that the son bore the name of the father; v. 717 is against it.
 Serv. on v. 715 quotes from Nigidius de Sphaera (?), “Nam et Ligures qui Appenninum tenuerunt latrones, insidiosi, fallaces, mendaces,” and from Cato's Origines, book 2, “Sed ipsi” (the Ligurians) “unde oriundi sunt exacta memoria illiterati mendacesque sunt, et vera minus meminere.” For the bad reputation of the Ligurians among the Romans comp. Cic. pro Cluentio 26, “Hoc enim sibi Staienus cognomen (Paetum) ex imaginibus Aeliorum delegerat, ne si se Ligurem fecisset, nationis magis suae quam generis uti cognomine videretur.” Sallust, Iug. 38, mentions the desertion from the Romans of a Ligurian cohort. ‘Fallere,’ as if with him to live was to deceive. “Dum fata deusque sinebat” 4. 651.
 Consilium, opposed to valour. “Singulari militum nostrorum virtuti consilia cuiusque modi Gallorum occurrebant,” Caes. B. G. 7. 22, quoted by Forc. ‘Versare dolos’ 2. 62 note. Here it is rather pleonastic with ‘consilio et astu.’ ‘Ingressus’ with inf. is common in prose: see Forc. ‘Astu’ 10. 522.
 Incipit haec 8. 373. Forb. comp. Stat. Theb. 10. 876, “et quid tam egregium prosternere moenia molli Structa lyra?” ‘Forti:’ strength would imply speed. The alliteration ‘femina forti fidis’ is probably intentional, giving point to the expression.
 Fugam is used somewhat boldly for means of flight. ‘Te aequo crede solo:’ comp. 9. 42, “credere campo,” ib. 56, “aequo dare se campo.” ‘Aequo’ here refers to fairness for combat rather than to physical levelness; but there may be a contrast between level ground and horseback, as there is in 9. 56 between the plain and the ramparts.
 Iam nosces like γνώσει τάχα, τάχ᾽ εἴσεται. ‘Fraudem’ Rom., Med. a m. p., ‘laudem’ Pal. corrected (the first letter was an erasure), Med. a m. s. Gud. is differently reported, as having ‘laudem’ or ‘poenam.’ Serv. mentions both ‘fraudem’ and ‘laudem,’ preferring the former as “vera et antiqua lectio,” and explaining it by “poenam.” The merits of the two are very nearly balanced, and Virg. himself may very conceivably have doubted between them. ‘Ferre laudem’ is the commonest expression, v. 791 below (comp. 4. 93., 12. 321. Cic. Att. 7. 26 however has “quod multo rectius fuit, id mihi fraudem tulit”), and so may have been introduced by a transcriber: on the other hand, the mention of stratagem in the context may have suggested ‘fraudem.’ Heyne thinks ‘fraudem’ suits better with ‘ventosa,’ as boasting naturally brings punishment. Wagn. retorts, that vainglory is more likely to flatter a person with the hopes of victory. It seems obvious that either might stand: the son of Aunus taunts Camilla as being confident in a prowess which she really owes to her horse; and says that if she will fight on equal ground she will soon see who is the true warrior and who is the impostor—the two notions, ‘whom battle favours,’ and ‘who is the boaster,’ being mixed up. As a choice must be made, it seems safer, with Ribbeck, to follow the testimony of Serv. to the “antiqua lectio.” Some have proposed to make ‘ventosa’ voc. “Ventosa lingua” above, v. 390. ‘Gloria’ = boasting, as in Horace's “tollens vacuum plus nimio gloria verticem.”
 Resistit stands against him, though ‘re’ might denote the change from sitting on horseback to standing on the ground. One of Ribbeck's cursives has ‘assistit,’ the reading before Heins. ‘Paribus armis’ 6. 826. The meaning seems to be, that she lays her other weapons aside, and takes those which would be appropriate for a fair fight on foot. See on 9. 548, from which the next line is partially repeated.
 Pura, unemblazoned, like “argentum purum,” “toga pura” (see Forc.). See on 9. 548. Serv. observes that Camilla had never been in battle before (“tunc enim primum in bella descenderat”), and so would have no cognizance. This is consistent with v. 585 and the context of that passage, but scarcely with 7. 806. Probably Virg. had forgotten what he wrote in the latter. The Laud MS. of Servius in the Bodleian Library (10th century) gives “tunc enim primum in parma descenderat.” Perhaps “parma” is a mistake for ‘arma.’
 Vicisse, not to have conquered, but to have gained his end. Comp. 5. 196 note. The reflexive pronoun is omitted as in 12. 654 (note). ‘Ipse’ seems to mean ‘for his part;’ that was the way in which he dealt with his share of the bargain.
 Ferrata calce: the use of spurs instead of a goad or whip is post-heroic. The grammarians note that Virg. makes ‘calx’ fem.; some inferior MSS., however, have ‘ferrato.’ Wakef. on Lucr. 1.996 constructs ‘citum’ as a part. with ‘calce’ (see on 8. 642); but it is more probably to be taken proleptically with ‘fatigat.’ “Iuvencum Terga fatigamus hasta” 9. 610.
 Perferre of reaching a journey's end 1. 389.
 Ignea of speed, v. 746 below.
 She outruns the horse, like Harpalyce (1. 316), crosses its path, and stops it.
 Partly from a simile Il. 22. 139 foll., partly from a description Od. 15. 525 foll. ‘Facile,’ ῥηϊδίως Il. l. c. ‘Sacer ales’ is explained by Od. l. c. κίρκος, Ἀπόλλωνος ταχὺς ἄγγελος, referring to its ungenial character. Serv. thinks, not improbably, that Virg. may have thought of the etymology of the Greek, ἵραξ. Pimpontius ap. Taubm. endeavours to improve on this, saying that ἵραξ is from ἵεσθαι ῥᾷον, and that Virg. alludes to the derivation in ‘facile consequitur.’ ‘Saxo ab alto,’ ὄρεσφιν Il. l. c.
 Consequitur pennis i. q. “consequitur volando.” “Sublimis in aere” G. 1. 404. “Nigra figit sub nube columbam” 5. 516: from ὑπὸ νεφέων εἶδε τρήρωνα πέλειαν Il. 23. 874. Can Virg. have misunderstood ὕπαιθα in Il. 22. 141?
[723, 724] ἐν δὲ πόδεσσιν Τίλλε πέλειαν ἔχων, κατὰ δὲ πτερὰ χεῦεν ἔραζε, Od. l. c. “Pedibus uncis” 5. 255. “‘Eviscerat:’ ne vulgari verbo et Graeco uteretur dicens ‘exenterat,’ ait ‘pedibusque eviscerat’” Serv. Ennius, however, has “evisceratus” (Thyest. fr. 16, Vahlen).
[725-759] ‘Jupiter prompts Tarchon to vigorous action. Having upbraided his troops, he rides against one of the enemy, and seizing him in his arms, carries him off on his horse.’