Comp. 7. 540, which generally resembles this line. In commencing the book with a particle which refers back to the preceding narrative Virg. imitates Hom., e. g. Il. 9. 1. Val. F. begins his 4th book with ‘atque.’ ‘Penitus’ with ‘diversa,’ as with “divisos” E. 1. 67. The mention of utter separation is in point, as it is the entire removal of Aeneas from the scene which makes his camp in danger. The transactions referred to are all those at Pallanteum.
 Repeated from 5. 606, where as here ‘dum’ with the present is followed by a past. See Madv. § 336. obs. 2.
 Urbe, the camp-settlement, as in v. 48.
 ‘Seeptra,’ the sign of authority, for the place over which authority is exercised. ‘Palatini’ is, as Serv. observes, a prolepsis; but it is also intended to remind us of Pallanteum, as if ‘Palatium’ were a cognate form of Pallanteum. It is doubtful whether ‘petit’ is present, the last syll. being lengthened by caesura, or perf. contracted. The latter is the view of Lachm. on Lucr. 3.1042, where several passages are collected from Ov. and Lucan, in which the syll. is similarly lengthened: in one of them however, Lucan 5. 522, it would perhaps be more natural to regard ‘petit’ as a present. The nearest parallel to the lengthening of a short syllable in this part of the verse is “gravidus auctumno” G. 2. 5, as in 7. 398 the initial letter of “hymenaeos” may probably account for the quantity of the last syll. of “canit.” ‘Petivit’ was early introduced as a metrical alteration by ignorant transcribers, being found in two or three of Ribbeck's cursives and in Rom. from a correction.
 Nec (id) satis (est), a noticeable ellipse, as there is nothing in the structure of the sentence to suggest the pronoun, which has to be inferred from the context. We might resolve it into ‘nec satis (fecit hoc faciendo),’ but the difficulty would be the same. The meaning is that Aeneas has not only got the alliance of Evander and the Arcadians, but of the Etruscans; and this is expressed rhetorically, as if Aeneas went far to seek for the Etruscan alliance instead of having it offered him. ‘Corythi’ 3. 170., 7. 209. “Penetravit ad urbes” 7. 207, where, as here, there is the notion of difficulty and distance.
 Lydorum 8. 479. The reading before Heins., ‘collectosque,’ is found, according to Ribbeck, in Parrhas., a MS. known for its interpolations. Rom., Med., and Pal. omit the copula, the latter, with some other copies, reading ‘manus.’ One of Ribbeck's cursives has ‘manum et,’ a reading of which there are traces in Gud.; and this would seem the best if, as Jahn, Peerlkamp, and Forb. think, the copula is needed. The argument for the copula is that ‘Lydorum manum’ naturally refers to the town population (‘urbes’ v. 10), who are distinguished from the ‘agrestes.’ But this is to import a needless exactness of expression into Virg., who need not have intended a sharp antithesis between the town and country people, but may have brought in ‘agrestis’ as an afterthought, perhaps to enforce the notion that Aeneas is seeking aid from all quarters.
 Serv. gives a choice of interpretations, “aut arripe et turba, aut turbata invade, per absentiam Aeneae inordinata.” Forb. rightly prefers the former, the confusion being attributed to the surprise, comparing 12. 556, “subita turbaret clade Latinos.” ‘Arripere’ of rapid occupation 11. 531. There was an unmetrical reading in the early editions, ‘turbataque arripe.’
[14, 15] 5. 657, 658.
 1. 93.
 From Il. 18. 182, Ἶρι θεά, τίς γάπ σε θεῶν ἐμοὶ ἄγγελον ἧκεν ; Turnus' question is less clearly expressed, and does not, like Achilles', meet with an answer. With ‘decus caeli’ Forb. comp. Hor. Carm. Saec. 2. ‘Nubibus actam’ 10. 38, driven along or from the sky: comp. 10. 73, “demissave nubibus Iris.”
 Detulit, as if Iris were conveyed by the physical instrumentality of another. “Liquidissima caeli tempestas” Lucr. 4. 168. The meaning apparently is, Why is there this sudden brightness in the sky?
 The image is apparently from Il. 8. 568, οὐρανόθεν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπερράγη ἄσπετος αἰθήρ, Πάντα δέ τ᾽ εἴδεται ἄστρα, where however the conditions are different, as it is a night scene. Serv. refers to the books of the Augurs for the expression “caelum discessisse,” as if the rent in the sky was a recognized portent, and Cic. De Div. 1. 43 has “Caelum discessisse visum est, atque in eo animadversi globi,” a parallel which may also illustrate ‘palantis stellas.’ But for this, it might be suggested that Virg.'s notion is that a flash of light, such as that which seems to have accompanied the appearance of Iris, is really a parting of the clouds and a glimpse of the heaven beyond (comp. 8. 392 note), as if the stars and the abode of the gods were concealed by a veil of cloud. For the expression comp. also G. 3. 24, “scaena ut versis discedat frontibus.” Two of Ribbeck's cursives have ‘discindere,’ to which, or to mother reading ‘descendere,’ a correction in Gud. points. In Rom. the second syll. of ‘discedere’ is written over an erasure.
 “Bene ‘palantis,’ quasi in alienum tempus errore venientis,” Serv. The speaker in fact transfers his own sense of irregularity to that which he sees. Lucr. 2.1031 has “Quaeque in se cohibet (caelum) palantia sidera passim,” where there seems a twofold reference, partly to the planets, partly to the supposed effect of the sky in keeping in those who would otherwise expatiate too widely. For ‘sequor’ Med. and some others have ‘sequar:’ but ‘sequor’ is confirmed by the parallel “Sequimur te, sancte deorum, Quisquis es” 4. 576.
 Quisquis in arma vocas: for the doubt expressed see on 4. 577. It must be owned however that the present passage would rather suggest that Turnus' doubt refers not to the identity of Iris but to the god whose bidding she does (comp. v. 18): and so Serv. “vel Iuno vel Iuppiter.” Possibly in 4. 1. c. the doubt may be the same, referring not to Mercury but to the god who sent him, it being assumed that he would not have come of his own motion: but there the context favours the explanation given in the note. ‘Et’ has been questioned by Heyne and Ribbeck, but it is similarly used 6. 53., 10. 495: comp. also v. 52 below.
 Turnus takes up water in his hands to cleanse them before offering his prayer. Comp. 8. 70, where however more may be meant. It was a Roman custom to make vows before a battle and to wash the hands before making them, Turneb. V. L. 25. 30. Serv. says that if a person after seeing an omen came to running water, he took up some in his hands and made vows, that the stream might not break the omen. The notion is curiously like the belief that running water dissolved a magical spell, which the readers of the Lay of the Last Minstrel will remember: it is not however likely that Virg., with all his love of antiquarian allusion, can have referred to it, as Turnus is not met by the river, but goes to it deliberately.
 Oneravitque aethera votis was thought superfluous by Heyne, but is defended by Weichert as a piece of epic redundance. If anything can be said against it, it is that it seems too artificial for a passage of ordinary description, though it would suit an impassioned passage like 11. 50. Some inferior copies omit ‘que,’ a reading which the early critics tried to render metrical either by lengthening the last syllable of ‘oneravit’ or by scanning ‘aethera’ as a quadrisyllable by diaeresis.
[25-76] ‘The Rutulians advance to the attack: the Trojans refuse to come out: Turnus prepares to burn their fleet.’