Comp. θάρσος πλῆσε φρένας, Il. 17. 573. Macrob. Sat. 5. 17 and others have objected to the incident of the stag as too trivial, as if there were anything unnatural in a small spark causing a large train to explode, or as if the contrast itself were not an element of greatness. Heyne suggests that Virg. may have thought of Soph.'s story of Agamemnon and the stag at Aulis.
 Arte nova, with new arts or wiles, opp. to those which she had practised on Amata and Turnus. It is the Homeric ἔνθ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ἐνόησε. So 1. 657. Wagn. and later editors, on the suggestion of Heyne, place a full stop at ‘alis’ and a comma at ‘Iulus,’ making ‘arte nova’ refer to what follows and begin a new sentence of which ‘Cocytia virgo’ is the nom. But this is awkward, especially with regard to ‘hic.’ If there be any difficulty in ‘speculata locum,’ said of the moment when she took wing (‘se concitat alis’), it may be removed by comparing v. 289. ‘Quo litore,’ in which part of the shore, ‘litore’ being the antecedent repeated in another form. Serv. says strangely that Virg. has only used this mode of expression once. Fabricius refutes him by comparing v. 409, “muros, quam . . . urbem.” “Classem quo litore linquant” 1. 517. “Pulcher Iulus” 5. 570.
 There is apparently a confusion between the physical image of presenting an incitement, and the mental one of exciting a feeling (comp. νεῖκος ἐμβαλεῖν and similar expressions). For ‘rabiem’ see on v. 493 below.
 Contingit ut agerent: Madv. § 382 obs. 3. ‘Prima laborum caussa’ Il. 22. 116 (of the abduction of Helen) ἥτ᾽ ἔπλετο νείκεος ἀρχή. The old reading before Pierius and Heins. was ‘malorum,’ which is the second reading of Med. Probably it came from 4. 169, where again there is a variant ‘laborum.’ Virg. is fond of using ‘labor’ of sufferings in war, 2. 11, 284., 4. 78., 11. 416, like πόνος &c.
 Forma praestanti, attrib. abl., not with ‘ingens’ as Serv. thinks. “Ingentior armis” 11. 124. Gossrau remarks that the expression is a proper one here, as the height of the horns contributes to the size of the stag.
 Nutribant: Madv. § 115 b. Ribbeck restores ‘Tyrrhus’ for ‘Tyrrheus’ from all the best MSS. except perhaps fragm. Vat. (Med. has ‘Tyrrus,’ ‘Tyrridae’). The lengthening of the penult of the patronymic is supported by “Belidae” 2. 82, which however, as is there mentioned, is noted by Priscian as an exception to the rule. On the whole it seems safer to follow analogy, even in the face of the MSS., which in the case of proper names are notoriously untrustworthy. Tyrrheus seems to have been the name of the herdsman at whose house Lavinia brought forth Silvius. See Serv. on 6. 760.
 Late, Med. (second reading), Gud. (first reading), and two other of Ribbeck's cursives, ‘lati’ Rom., fragm. Vat. and Verona, Med. (first reading), Gud. (second reading). The first seems preferable in spite of its inferiority in external evidence, as more likely to have been altered. Comp. 1. 21, “late regem,” and v. 737 below, “late dicione premebat Sarrastis populos.” Serv. remarks that Tyrrheus is “saltuarius” as well as “magister pecoris.”
 Soror with reference to ‘pueri’ and ‘pater.’ ‘Adsuetus inperiis’ is a sort of paraphrase of “mansuetus,” which is expanded further v. 490 below. Serv. remarks of ‘Silvia’ “bonum puellae rusticae nomen formavit;” but the name was doubtless chosen from its connexion with early Italian history, e. g. Rea Silvia and Silvius Aeneas.
 ‘Omnicura’ with ‘ornabat,’ which governs ‘adsuetum inperiis.’ ‘Intexens cornua sertis’ explains ‘omni cura.’ But Virg. has chosen to make the position of his words confused. ‘Ornabat,’ the care specified being of an ornamental character. “Hortos quae cura colendi ornaret” G. 4. 118.
 Ferum 2. 51 note. Here it is singularly inappropriate, unless we suppose Virg. to be representing it as turned by these endearments from wild to tame.
 The connexion of the clauses by ‘que’ implies that the stag was floating and reposing on the bank alternately, leaving it uncertain which he was doing at the moment when the hounds came upon him. This approaches to the same class of cases as 6. 616, where ‘que’ couples the actions of different agents, as it does here those of the same agent at different times. ‘Aestus’ connects the sense of the two clauses.
 Curvo cornu, bending his bow. Ribbeck reads ‘derexit’ from Rom. and fragm. Vat. and Gud. originally, as in every other passage in Virg. where ‘dirigere’ occurs, except 6. 57. The testimony of the MSS. is by no means uniform in these passages, and in a case where confusion is so common (see G 2. 8 &c.) it is rather hazardous to obtrude a new word upon the dictionaries.
 Erranti, i. e. “ita ut erraret:” comp. 3. 237 and countless instances in Greek tragedy. ‘Deus’ used generally, like σὺν θεῷ Il. 9. 49 &c. ‘Afuit,’ restored by Heins. for ‘abfuit,’ is the reading of all Ribbeck's MSS. but a single cursive. Wagn. remarks that the Latins avoided the combination “abf,” saying “aufero” and “aufugio” for “abfero” and “abfugio.” Comp. 8. 147.
 Tecta, the group of buildings, or homestead: see what follows.
 ‘Lacertus’ is the upper part of the arm (opp. to “bracchium,” the lower), striking which with the hand of the other arm seems to have been an expression of grief. No other instance however is quoted but Claudian Rapt. Pros. 2. 248, “planctuque lacertos Verberat.” For the construction see on 4. 590.
 The Fury contrives that the peasants should be at hand. ‘Olli,’ Rom., Med. first reading, ‘illi,’ Med. second reading, Verona fragm., Gud. ‘Pestis’ of a Fury 12. 845. Cerda strangely supposes the sense to be that the passion for war is concealed in the rustic nature.
 Inprovisi, before Silvia looked for them. “Inprovisi aderunt” 2. 182. ‘Torre obusto’ i. q. “sudibus praeustis” v. 524, a stake with its end hardened in the fire. Comp. Il. 13. 564, ὥστε σκῶλος πυρίκαυστος. So 11. 894, “Stipitibus ferrum sudibusque imitantur obustis.”
 Quadrifidam with ‘scindebat.’ ‘Coactis,’ driven together, so as to meet in the centre. The words ‘cuneis coactis’ are used in a totally different sense 12. 457. See on 10. 396. “Cuneis scindere” 6. 181, G. 1. 144.