“Talia iactabam” 2. 588. ‘Talia iactantem dictis’ is a variety for “talia iactantem dicta.” ‘Dira canentem:’ Remulus' words were words of ill omen, and his speech might be called a denunciation. ‘Canentem’ probably includes the notions of imprecation and measured utterance. Comp. 11. 399.
 Non tulit 2. 407. ‘Obversus:’ Ascanius is said to have turned towards the string, the meaning being that he drew the string towards himself. But ‘nervo’ may be abl. instr. with ‘contendit.’ ‘Nervo equino’ is from Attius, Phil. fr. 9, “Reciproca tendens nervo equino concita tela,” as Serv. remarks. It is doubted whether ‘equino’ means of horsehair (Cerda comp. Hesych., ἱππικὴ τάσις, ἡ νευρὰ τοῦ τόξου, διὰ τὸ ἐξ ἱππείων γίγνεσθαι τριχῶν) or of the hide or intestines of the horse. The description is elaborated after Il. 4. 116 foll., the fulness of detail being justified, as Heyne remarks, by the importance of the occasion.
 Contendit Med., Rom., ‘intendit’ Pal., Gud. Heins. introduced the latter, and so Ribbeck: but the former, which Wagn. prefers, has greater MS. support, Pal. and Gud. apparently belonging to some extent to the same recension; and ‘intendit’ may have been introduced from v. 590 above. For ‘contendit’ see on 5. 513. ‘Diversa’ with ‘ducens.’ Heyne comp. Apoll. R. 3. 283, “ἀμφοτέρῃσι διασχόμενος παλάμῃσιν”.
 Ipse, as Wagn. remarks, has a sort of adversative force. ‘Do thou hear me: I will offer.’ Serv. thinks the point is that Ascanius will sacrifice for the first time on his own account. “Ipse . . dona feram” G. 3. 22.
 Perhaps a hendiadys with the preceding verse. The line may be an imitation of Od. 3. 382 foll., where σοὶ δ᾽ αὖ ἐγώ is parallel to ‘ipse.’ ‘Statuam’ a sacrificial term like “constituam” 5. 237 &c. For the sacrifice of bullocks with gilded horns comp. Od. 3. 432 foll.
 Repeated from E. 3. 87, where see note.
 For thunder in a clear sky comp. G. 1. 487 &c.
 “Intonuit laevum” 2. 693, where as here it is a good omen. ‘Una:’ the bow twanged as the thunder rumbled. This and the next line are from Il. 4. 125, λίγξε βιός, νευρὴ δὲ μέγ᾽ ἴαχεν, ἆλτο δ᾽ ὀϊστός. Pal., Gud., and two other of Ribbeck's cursives have ‘letifer,’ the reading before Heins., a recollection of 10. 169.
 Pal., Rom., and Gud. corrected have ‘et fugit,’ which Ribbeck explains as ‘et fugit,’ the original reading of one of his cursives. Serv. notices both ‘et fugit’ and ‘effugit,’ preferring the latter. Heyne inclined to ‘et fugit,’ taking ‘et’ with ‘una:’ but this, as Wagn. remarks, is to mistake the sense: see on the preceding line. ‘Adducta’ expresses the condition of the arrow before its flight, and so implies rapid motion. Pal. and Gud. have ‘adlapsa,’ probably from v. 578 above: and this seems to have led to ‘elapsa,’ the reading before Heins., found in two of Ribbeck's cursives. With ‘horrendum stridens’ Heyne comp. Il. 1. 49, δεινὴ δὲ κλαγγὴ γένετ᾽ ἀργυρέοιο βιοῖο.
 The reading of the first word in this line is doubtful. ‘Traiicit,’ the common reading, is found in Med., and substantially in Gud. corrected and three other of Ribbeck's cursives: Pal. has ‘transigit’ altered into ‘transiit,’ which seems to have been the original word in Gud.; Rom. has ‘transadigit,’ omitting ‘i,’ which is left out in some other copies, including Med. originally. On the whole ‘transigit’ seems to account best for the different varieties, so that Ribbeck is right in restoring it. This use of the word is common in post-Augustan writers: see Forc. ‘I’ followed by another imperative, with a sarcastic force 7. 425, 426. Comp. E. 1. 73 note. The jingle ‘verbis —superbis’ is in the taste of the earlier Latin poetry, and was doubtless intended. Elsewhere in Virg. ‘inludere’ takes a dative.