[480] Arduus, rising to the stroke Comp. v. 443 note. Rom. omits ‘in,’ an omission approved by one or two earlier critics, and adopted by Ladewig after Fleckeisen in Jahn's Jahrb. 61, p. 32. Comp. v. 167, where the omission of ‘et’ after ‘revocabat’ rests on the same authority, is approved by nearly the same critics, and must be vindicated on the same grounds, as likely to have been altered by those who did not understand the metrical licence. Here however, putting aside the question of accidental omission, which probably after all may be the true account, there is the counter probability that ‘in’ may have been left out by some one who did not understand the construction ‘inlisit caestus in ossa.’ For other instances of ‘inlidere in’ see Forc. ‘Effracto cerebro’ breaking into the skull and scattering the brains. Those who omit ‘in’ I suppose take ‘cerebro’ as dative, ‘dashed the bones upon the brain.’
This text is part of:
John Conington. P. Vergili Maronis opera. P. Vergili Maronis Opera. The works of Virgil, with a Commentary by John Conington, M.A. Late Corpus Professor of Latin in the University of Oxford. London. Whittaker and Co., Ave Maria Lane. 1876.
The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.