“Gravis annis” Hor. 1 S. 1. 4. ‘Animi maturus’ like “aevi maturus” 5. 73. Comp. also “animi dubius” G. 3. 289, “victus animi” ib. 4. 491. Rom. has ‘animis,’ which would mean spirits or courage. “Grandaevus Aletes” 1. 121.
 Cum tulistis: Madv. § 358. obs. 2. With ‘animos tulistis’ comp. 1. 605, “quae te tam laeta tulerunt Saecula?” ‘Certa pectora’ like “certus homo” for a trustworthy man: see Forc. The old reading was “talis animos iuvenum, tam certa.” Heyne says “‘Et’ e codd. intulit Heins. secundum Pierium: Scilicet si iam ante receptum offendisset, hoc egisset ut iterum tolleret,” a very unjust criticism, as if Heins. had reformed the text arbitrarily, not in obedience to MSS. All Ribbeck's MSS. insert ‘et.’
 Sic memorans—rigabat is parenthetical, and is doubtless introduced in this manner to show that Aletes' words were interrupted by his emotion. “Sic memorans, largo fletu simul ora rigabat” 6. 699. ‘Humeros dextrasque tenebat,’ he threw his arms round their necks and grasped their hands.
 Pro talibus ausis, the reading before Heins., is found in Gud. as a second reading and in two other of Ribbeck's cursives, in one of them in an erasure. It probably came from 2. 535 or 12. 351, though if the authority for ‘pro laudibus istis’ were less, the latter might be traced in its turn to 10. 825. Serv. read ‘laudibus.’ ‘Laudibus’ of praiseworthy deeds 8. 273.
 Comp. 1. 603, “Di tibi . . . praemia digna ferant.” ‘Mores vestri:’ Serv. comp. Cic. 2 Phil. 44, “Satis in ipsa conscientia pulcherrimi facti fructus,” which he says is “tractum de philosophis.” See note on 1. 604.
 Actutum is a favourite word with the comic writers, but occurs also in Cic. and Livy: see Forc. “Integer aevi” 2. 638: see on v. 246 above. Serv. says that Ennius applied the expression to the gods. The youth of Ascanius is mentioned, as Donatus remarks, “ut diuturnior res sit.”
 See on 5. 744. Assaracus is not himself the Lar, as Cerda thinks, but is doubtless mentioned merely as one of those ancestors by whom the Lar was worshipped.
 Ascanius says that he entrusts his whole fortune and hope to them, meaning, as the context shows, that his whole dependence is on the return of his father, which he relies on them to bring about. ‘Fides’ = “fiducia,” and so nearly i. q. “spes.”
 Arisbe was one of the places that sent allies to Troy, Il. 2. 836, so that the conquest by Aeneas, if it took place at all, must have happened before the Trojan war. Serv., who suggests this interpretation, mentions another, that the capture was by Achilles (a circumstance not mentioned in Hom.), from whom the spoils passed to Pyrrhus, and eventually through Helenus to Aeneas, “‘quae cepit’ pro ‘quae accepit,’” which is of course out of the question. Whether Virg. followed any tradition at all may be doubted: he had called Nisus ‘Hyrtacides,’ probably borrowing the patronymic from Il. 2. 837, Ἄσιος Ὑρτακίδης, and now, wanting a town to specify, he would naturally borrow the name of the place from which the Homeric son of Hyrtacus came. We know that Virg. made a copious and indiscriminate use of Homeric materials; and perhaps in our ignorance of the bulk of post-Homeric legends we may be led to imagine that he is borrowing from them when he is really indebted only to the Iliad and his own ingenuity. Those who think he is referring to an actual legendary event may appeal to a third suggestion of Serv., who says, that Abas was said to tation, related in his “Troica” that after was by abandonment of Troy by the Greeks Astyanax was made king there, that Antenor attacked him with the help of the neighbouring cities, Arisbe among the number, and that Aeneas came to his assistance and overcame the invaders, on which occasion he may have taken Arisbe. If this story existed, it is possible that Virg. may have alluded to it without adopting it (see on 4. 427): but the other supposition seems simpler.
 ‘Tripodas’ 5. 110. ‘Magna talenta’ 5. 248. The writer in Dict. A. ‘Pondera’) says that the silver talent was called ‘magnum’ in comParison of the gold, which was equal only to six Attic drachmae, and that it is this small gold talent which is “perhaps connected with the small talent which is the only one that occurs in Homer.” In that case Virg. must be charged either with ignorance or with great exaggeration. Two talents of gold are among the prizes at the games Il. 23. 269. For the asyndeton following the conjunction comp. 8. 132.
 There seems to be no other explanation of ‘dat’ than that it is substituted for “dedit” for metrical convenience, as Pope in his Homer and other poets use the present for the perf. for similar reasons. Wagn. thinks ‘quem dat Dido’ = “quem possideo donatum a Didone,” a gift being a thing enduring. It would be more reasonable to explain it “quem acceptum referetis Didoni;” but the notion of any such obligation to Dido would be far-fetched. In 1. 79, which Gossrau on 4. 228 comp., the act of giving is really permanent, as the gift might be withdrawn. For v. 360., 11. 172, see notes there. Peerlkamp, who thinks the line spurious, asks how the ‘crater’ could be divided between two. But though the other gifts are in pairs, it does not follow that each pair was to be simply divided, as there might be a partition of the whole quantity of presents; or the gifts may be intended for the two friends in common. At the same time we need not shrink from admitting that there are some things in this whole passage which Virg. might have reconsidered.
 Ascanius says ‘victori’ generally rather than “mihi,” doubtless from modesty. ‘Dicere’ Med., Pal., Gud. originally, ‘ducere’ Rom., Gud. corrected, and three other of Ribbeck's cursives. Serv. mentions both, along with a tertium quid, ‘deicere’ (comp. “deiectam sortem” 5. 490). ‘Dicere’ seems best, ‘dicere sortem’ being explained “statuere,” with Serv., like “praemia dicit” 5. 486, “multam dicere” &c. Heins. approved it, and Wagn. and most recent editors have adopted it. ‘Praedae’ is probably dative.
 Imitated from Il. 10. 322, where Dolon asks for the horses of Achilles. There may be also a reminiscence of Il. 8. 191 foll., where Hector is describing the golden shield of Nestor. Gossrau, who thinks Ascanius far too forward and extravagant in his promises, complains of his undertaking here what is not in his power. But he obviously makes the engagement in his father's name, in his character of “rex,” v. 223. The construction is “vidisti equum quo ibat, amna in quibus ibat:” see on G. 4. 150. ‘Ibat’ refers to Turnus' appearance the day before (v. 49), which would naturally be in the mind of all. ‘Ibat equo’ like “navibus ibant” 10. 213. ‘Ibat in armis’ like “stabat in armis” v. 581. The preposition might have been omitted: comp. 1. 751.
 Aureus is explained by ‘quibus in armis:’ comp. v. 163 above. Perhaps we may comp. ‘aureum ire’ of marching in golden armour with “aureum stare” of having a golden statue. ‘Ipsum illum’ of the horse, ‘clipeum cristasque’ standing for the armour. ‘Rubentis’ of a crest: see above vv. 50, 163. Rom. has ‘comantis’ from 3. 468.
 Matrum corpora G. 3. 51: comp. A. 2. 18., 7. 650. Here the periphrasis is accounted for when we remember that slaves are spoken of. ‘Matrum’ seems to mean females with children. It is not easy to say whether ‘bis sex’ is meant to cover the whole, ‘matrum corpora captivosque,’ as Heyne thinks, or whether it is to be repeated with ‘captivos,’ which is the view of Serv. It would seem that these promises, like that in the previous verse, are made to Nisus alone, Euryalus being compensated with the offer of Ascanius' friendship vv. 275 foll.: but the case is not clear.
 For ‘insuper’ with abl. see Forc. Ascanius promises Nisus the domain (τέμενος） of Latinus. Gossrau complains that Latinus ought not to be mulcted, not being really the author of the war, and that if the royal possession go to Nisus, nothing will be left for Aeneas. But though Aeneas is more considerate of the rights of Latinus (12. 190 foll.), Ascanius might naturally regard the king of Latium as the chief of the confederacy; and it is only in consonance with Virg.'s habit elsewhere that he should regard the royal domain in the light of later times, as forming only a part of the royal revenue. The constructions ‘insuper his’ and ‘campi quod’ have led to much confusion in the MSS. Med. reads ‘insuper is campi quos,’ Pal. corrected, Gud., and a correction in another of Ribbeck's cursives also have ‘quos,’ Rom. has ‘his campis;’ there are also found ‘id campi,’ which was once common in the editions, ‘hi campi quos,’ and ‘campos quos.’ Ladewig adopts ‘is’ from Med., understanding it of Aeneas, while Lachm. on Lucr. 4.933 thinks it may stand for ‘iis,’ which is monosyllabic in the MSS. of Lucr. Serv. apparently found ‘his,’ which he explains as dative.
 The comParison of life to a racecourse is too common to need illustration. We have the metaphor again 10. 472. Ascanius means that his own years are not so far behind Euryalus'.
 Cerda, in a copious note, explains ‘venerande’ of Euryalus' beauty: but it is doubtless meant to form a sort of contrast to ‘puer,’ the deeds of Euryalus having entitled him to that veneration which properly attends advanced years. ‘Pectore accipio’ like “toro accipit” 8. 178, as we should say ‘I welcome you to my heart.’ Comp. also 4. 530. With ‘pectore toto’ Serv. comp. Cic. Legg. 1. 18, “Si non ipse amicus per se amatur toto pectore, ut dicitur:” Virg.'s meaning however is somewhat more physical, and may be illustrated by “tota veste vocantem” 8. 712.
 Casus in omnis seems to be constructed partly with ‘comitem,’ partly with the sentence generally. For the first comp. Lucan 8. 588, “An tantum in fluctus placeo comes?” for the second Sil. 1. 76, “Et se participem casus sociarat in omnis,” cited by Forb. and Gossrau.
 It is difficult to say whether ‘seu pacem seu bella geram’ should be coupled, as Jahn once thought, with what precedes, or, as the editors generally have done, with what follows: but perhaps the latter is better. It is not settled, as Wagn. thinks, by the supposed correspondence of ‘verborum’ to ‘pacem,’ ‘rerum’ to ‘bella,’ which is more than doubtful, the simpler view being that ‘rerum verborumque’ is simply an exhaustive division of life, actions and words. With ‘pacem— garam’ comp. 7. 444, “Bella viri pacemque gerent.” ‘Tibi maxuma rerum Verborumque fides’ seems to mean “tibi maxume credam et facta et verba,” not, I will entrust you with things to be done and said, but I will communicate to you my words and actions, a description of friendship.
 ‘I will never fall short of this act of courage.’ We might have expected ‘orsis,’ which would be neater.
 The force of ‘arguerit’ seems to be ‘you shall never have cause to say that time has proved.’ See on 6. 89. With ‘dies arguerit’ comp. Catull. 62 (64). 322, “Carmine, perfidiae quod post nulla arguet aetas.” The difficulty of the following words is well known. If we read ‘Aut adversa’ v. 283, as Serv. prefers to do, with Gud. corrected and two other of Ribbeck's cursives, we must either take ‘tantum’ by itself, “tantum de me polliceri audeo,” as Heyne gives it, which would be very harsh and abrupt, and is not sufficiently supported by 2. 690 “hoc tantum,” or connect ‘dissimilem tantum,’ as in Hor. 2 S. 3. 313 (see Bentley's note), unlike to that extent, where ‘tantum,’ separated from ‘dissimilem’ and put last in the sentence, would be weak. It seems better then to read ‘Haud adversa,’ which is also mentioned by Serv., and is found in Med., Pal., and Rom., joining ‘tantum’ with what follows: “Let but fortune be prosperous, not adverse;” a natural condition to throw in when he is making a promise about his future life, yet does not know whether this very expedition may not be fatal to him. ‘Haud adversa,’ which Heyne thinks would be weak after ‘secunda,’ is sufficiently accounted for by Euryalus' tendency under such circumstances to contemplate the possibility of an unfavourable issue.
 Mecum excedentem in prose would be “quin mecum excederet:” but Virg. has expressed himself as if Euryalus' mother was actually departing while Troy and Acesta strove to keep her back. ‘Moenia Acestae’ v. 218.
 Pal., Rom., and originally one of Ribbeck's cursives omit ‘est;’ but this would create ambiguity, as ‘huius’ might conceivably go with ‘pericli.’ For ‘huius quodcumque pericli est’ comp. 1. 78 note. Here the form of expression indicates uncertainty, ‘this peril, be it great or small.’
 In making Euryalus leave his mother without bidding her farewell, Virg. may have thought of Telemachus' departure from Ithaca Od. 1. 373 foll., as Germ. remarks. For the tmesis Serv. comp. “inutilis inque ligatus” 10. 794, which however is not quite the same, as there ‘in’ has a meaning in its separate state, here it has none. Ennius, as is well known, carried the practice further still, breaking up non-compound words, as “saxo cere comminuit brum,” a pardonable act of violence in the first writer of Latin hexameters. For instances of tmesis in Lucretius see Munro on Lucr. 1.452. With the oath that follows comp. 4. 492.
 Quod nequeam is generally taken as dependent on ‘testis:’ but Madv. Opuse. 2. 237 is right in connecting it with ‘linquo’ and making ‘Nox—dextera’ parenthetical. There is still a question about the subj. ‘nequeam,’ as Euryalus is stating his own reason for his conduct, and so would naturally employ the ind.: but “possim” and “nequeam” are used elsewhere in cases where we should expect “possum,” “nequeo:” see Munro on Lucr. 1.808, to whose instances add Sen. Here. F. 1261, “Nemo polluto queat Animo mederi.” We might also explain the subj. here as conditional: “I leave her without greeting, because, if I were to say farewell, I should be unable,” &c.
 Some copies, including one of Ribbeck's cursives, read ‘hanc’ for ‘at,’ apparently from a confusion with the next line.
 Ferre, to carry with me on my expedition. The hiatus is accounted for by the pause, perhaps indicating that Euryalus' utterance was broken.
 Perculsa, the reading before Pierius and Heins., is found as a correction in Gud. ‘Dare lacrimas’ 4. 370. Wagn. restores ‘dedere’ from Med., but his reasons for the preference (Q. V. 5) seem fanciful, and ‘dederunt’ is found in Pal., Rom., Gud., and apparently the bulk of MSS.
 “Ante omnis pulcher Iulus” 5. 570, where ‘ante omnis’ is constructed with ‘pulcher;’ one of many proofs that parallel passages cannot be quoted with confidence in support of a particular construction.
 Nearly repeated 10. 824. ‘Imago’ may be merely the sight, as in 2. 369; but it is perhaps better to take it of the resemblance. Ascanius was reminded of his own affection for his father. ‘Strinxit,’ crossed, a metaphor from grazing a thing lightly (5. 163), as we should say, flashed across his mind (comp. Claudian Ruf. 2. 336, “Iam summum radiis stringebat Lucifer Haemum”). No instance of this metaphorical use of the word earlier than Virg. is given by Forc. With the sentiment Heyne comp. Il. 19. 339.
 Sponde, which was restored by Wagn., is the reading of all Ribbeck's MSS, except two cursives, and is recagnized by Donatus: “Quidquid scis, ait, convenire meritis tuis, quidquid arbitratus fueris te dignum, ante ipsam petitionem tu tibi spondere ne dubites, atque ita, ut iam te accepisse confidas.” Strictly speaking of course it is Ascanius who makes the promise: but Virg. for the sake of variety represents him as authorizing Euryalus to make the promise to his own mind. Peerlkamp rightly points out that ‘sponde’ is supported by the next line, as otherwise ‘namque’ would introduce not a reason for what has been said, but simply a repetition of it (see however on G. 2. 398). If ‘spondeo’ were read, it would have to be pronounced as a dissyllable, as Virg. does not shorten the final ‘o’ in verbs except in the case of “scio” and “nescio,” which are perhaps themselves instances of synizesis (see on E. 8. 44). ‘Ingentibus coeptis’ 10. 461.
 “Namque erit ille mihi semper deus” E. 1. 7. Here ‘ista’ has its proper sense, that mother of yours. ‘Nomen—defuerit,’ she shall be Creusa in all but the name: i. e. she shall be treated in all respects like my mother.
 Manet, is in store for. “Si modo quod memoras factum fortuna sequatur” 4. 109. Here Pal. and one of Ribback's cursives have ‘sequetur,’ some other MSS. ‘sequuntur,’ which Heins. restored and Heyne retains: but Wagn. rightly defends the future from 2. 709., 12. 203.
 Aeneas was wont to swear by the head of Ascanius, and so Ascanius, in memory of his father, swears by his own. For the custom of swearing by the head comp. 4. 357. For a father swearing by his son Gossrau comp. Dem. in Conon. p. 1268, φασὶ γὰρ παραστησάμενον τοὺς παῖδας αὐτὸν κατὰ τούτων ὁμεῖσθαι, καὶ ἀράς τινας δεινὰς καὶ χαλεπὰς ἐπαράσεσθαι. Serv., among other fancies, mentions an interpretation of ‘ante,’ before he became chief pontiff, chief pontiffs only swearing by the gods.301. Comp. Cic. Phil. 14. 13, “Qui ex iis quibus illa [praemia] promissa sunt pro patria occiderunt, eorum parentibus, liberis, coniugibus, fratribus eadem tribuenda censeo.”
 Manere with dat. 10. 629, where however “rata” is added. As Wagn. remarks, it differs from ‘manere’ with acc., the latter meaning to await, the former to be continued to or belong to in perpetuum.
 Ὣς φάτο δακρυχέων Il. 1. 357. Canon. and another MS. have ‘Sic ait, et lacrimans.’ The gifts of armour to the warriors at starting are from Il. 10. 255 foll., where perhaps the object is disguise as well as compliment. For the connexion of the sword and the shoulder see on 8. 459.
 Auratum seems to refer to the decorations of the hilt.
 Gnosian javelins are mentioned 5. 306: comp. also the workmanship of Daedalus, who was a Cretan. The ivory scabbard is doubtless from Od. 8. 404, where the Phaeacian Euryalus gives a sword to Ulysses (comp. ib. 416 with “humero exuit,” ib. 403, 406 with “auratum”). ‘Habilem’ apparently goes with ‘aptarat,’ fitted neatly or fitted for carrying. So perhaps 1. 318, “habilem suspenderat arcum,” in spite of the note there.
 In Hom. helmets are given both to Diomed and Ulysses. ‘Permutat’ with Nisus' helmet.
 Protinus may either be of time or place; but the former seems more likely. Hom. has βάν ῤ̔ ἰέναι Il. 10. 273. ‘Armati’ may mean not merely that they put on the arms given them, but that they put on their arms, being comparatively unarmed before: comp. Il. 10. 254. “Quos omnis euntis” 5. 554.
 Λιπέτην δὲ κατ᾽ αὐτόθι πάντας ἀρίστους Il. 10. 273. Nothing is said of prayers in Hom.; but an omen is sent to them on starting. “Primores Argivorum viros” Catull. 66 (68). 87. ‘Iuvenumque senumque’ apposition to ‘primorum.’
 “Prosequitur dietis” 6. 898.
 Ante annos: Gossrau comp. Ov. A. A. 1. 184, “Caesaribus virtus contigit ante diem. Ingenium caeleste suis velocius annis Surgit.” ‘Animum gerens virilem’ is from the lines quoted Cic. Off. 1. 18, “Vos etenim, iuvenes, animum geritis muliebrem, Illa virago viri,” where, as here, ‘gerere’ may indicate that the character is not natural: see on 1. 315. ‘Curam gerere’ for “curare” occurs 12. 48.
 Mandata dabat portanda is the order in all Ribbeck's MSS. Heyne retained the old reading ‘portanda dabat mandata.’ ‘Mandata dabat’ occurs in the same place in the line 6. 116. Here the imperf. seems to be used to denote frequency, as if Ascanius had not done when Nisus and Euryalus departed. Mr. Nettleship suggests that it denotes incompleteness, indicating that the message was never delivered.
 From Catull. 62 (64). 142, “Quae cuncta aerii discerpunt inrita venti,” as Cerda remarks. Forb. comp. id. 28 (30). 9, “tua dicta omnia factaque Ventos inrita ferre et nebulas aerias sinis.” It may be observed that in Od. 8. 408, the context of which has been quoted on v. 305, occur the words (spoken as an apology to Ulysses by Euryalus), Ἔπος δ᾽ εἴπερ τι βέβακται Δεινον, ἄφαρ τὸ φέροιεν ἀναρπάξασαι ἄελλαι. For ‘inrita’ Rom. has ‘inlita.’
[314-367] ‘They enter the camp of the enemy and kill many sleeping. At last Nisus warns Euryalus that daybreak is approaching, and they depart with many spoils, including the helmet of Messapus.’