Aeneid - Book IV

[AoM]

extemplo Libyae magnas it Fama per urbes,
Fama, malum qua non aliud velocius ullum:
mobilitate viget virisque adquirit eundo,
parva metu/initu primo, mox sese attollit in auras
ingrediturque solo et caput inter nubila condit.

Ever the rebels. I don't think I had seen it before now.

"Here we agree with Baehrens’ brilliant, paleographically plausible correction of the universally attested and apparently quite old error metu. So Conte’s Teubner editio altera (vid. further Conte 2016, viii–ix); Holzberg’s Tusculum; and Kraggerud 2017, 179–180 ("How Baehrens did away with Fama’s timidity"), contra Mynors’ OCT; Geymonat; Perret’s Budé; Goold’s Loeb; Heuzé’s Pléiade; Rivero García et al.; etc. Neither Fama nor her devotees know the slightest fear here. Baehrens’ 1887 conjecture is based on Lucretius, DRN 1.383 unde initum primum capiat res quaeque movendi, a passage that has the advantage of being relevant to the immediate context (certainly far more relevant than any notion of metus). Much critical ink has been spilled on whether Fama or her listeners experience a little fear at first, as the rumor and report is barely nascent. Kraggerud expresses surprise that neither Buscaroli nor Pease so much as cites the suggestion. “Offering a real cure for a[n] … obvious ailment … [it] has yet to be adopted wholeheartedly by a courageous editor” (Kraggerud 2017, 180, before Conte’s revised Teubner). Respectfully, the present editors think perhaps we are less courageous, because initu is vastly simpler than metu from an interpretive point of view (Gildenhard brings in Craven’s horror cinema as part of his discussion of the fear so many have read in this line; Gould and Whiteley speak of Rumor as being at first "a puny fearful creature"). The new Lucretian allusion follows on the compressed reworking of that poet’s verses on the thunderbolt. Some rumors can of course originate in fear; the present situation is rooted not so much in any anxiety, as in salacious and tawdry gossip."

 

[AoM]

tam ficti pravique tenax quam nuntia veri (188)

There seems to be some disagreement here. The subject is Fama. Should tenax be taken with nuntia (which would then govern all three genitives), or solely with its two genitives?

"Servius takes tenax with nuntia, which the rhythm and order of the line mitigate against."

I was unfamiliar with the phrase, but did they mean "militate"?

 

[AoM]

They're at it again. The metaphor of surgery is definitely accurate.

vade age, nate, voca Zephyros et labere pennis
Dardaniumque ducem, Tyria Karthagine qui nunc
exspectat fatisque datas non respicit urbes,
adloquere et celeris defer mea dicta per auras.

vade age, nate, voca Zephyros et labere pennis
Dardaniumque ducem, Tyrias Karthagine qui nunc
res spectat fatisque datas non respicit urbes,
adloquere et celeris defer mea dicta per auras.

"A paleographical and interpretive mess, on which many critics have exerted considerable textual labors. This verse offers one of the few occasions where a vexed text does not result in competing views in critical editions; everyone here prints exspectat, with 224 Tyria before it: the exploration of alternate readings has been conducted exclusively in journals and in some apparatus citations. Indeed, Austin has an uncharacteristically harsh comment here for those who would think to tinker with the text: "I prefer to accept the MSS. reading, which is not incompatible with common sense unless one is perverse." Pease also dismisses any concern over the absolute use of the verb; neither Gildenhard, nor O'Hara in his revision of Page considers the problem. Tilly and Maclennan also both unconcerned; Williams labels the use of exspectat "very unusual" (cf. Stephenson's "peculiar"), but concludes that "the innovated shade of meaning is perfectly acceptable." Sidgwick sees mere poetic variety in the choice of exspectat (a verb that certainly occurs elsewhere in this book at 134 and 430). Mackail simply states that this is a normal enough use of exspectare for Virgil, with little comment; cf. Papillon and Haigh, who consider the present instance to be but a "slight extension" of customary usage."

"At the risk of being guilty of perversion (and if so, it is a sin we share with several previous critics), we have printed the suggestion of Kraggerud 2017, 83–85 (following on the different ideas explored in his PVS 25 (2004), 161–163, and his SO 83 (2008), 59ff.). The capital manuscripts here have exspectat; perspicit is found in a number of Carolingians. Servius glossed exspectat as "moratur, deterit tempus," i.e., in an absolute sense relating to Aeneas' wasting of time at Tyrian Carthage. Critics have objected to this interpretation because of the utter lack of parallels for the absolute use of the verb..."

"Other attempts at surgery include Winbolt's earlier effort to give exspectat a direct object by reading 224 Tyrias (CR 2 (1888), 236); Campbell built on this idea by also emending exspectat to exceptat (CR 52 (1938), 161). Courtney suggested res captat (BICS 28 (1981), 21–22). Kraggerud 2004 conjectured optatas for exspectat; Kraggerud 2017 suggested combining a bit of Winbolt and a bit of Courtney with his own, newer medicine, and proposes ... Tyrias Karthagine qui nunc / res spectat fatisque non datas respicit urbes, noting in his proposed apparatus Tyrias to the credit of Winbolt 1888; res from Courtney 1981; spectat from Kraggerud 2008. "Restoration of the god’s words by lenient surgery": we agree with Kraggerud's assessment for how to repair a real problem, and happily print his suggested text. Ex Norvegia, medela."

"With this reading, res balances urbes as a frame for the verse, and res spectat anticipates the echoing respicit, as we move from what Aeneas is looking at to that which he is ignoring."

 

[AoM]

They call it "one of the more difficult passages in the book". Multiple paragraphs of notes, but here's just some of it.

tum virgam capit: hac animas ille evocat Orco
pallentis, alias sub Tartara tristia mittit,
dat somnos adimitque, et lumina morte resignat.

"Henry (in a very long and discursive note) offers the creative solution that morte here refers not to literal death (there has been enough of that already in the description to suit him), but rather to the metaphorical sleep of death. "A lock is not so easily picked which has baffled not Heyne alone, but every locksmith of the guild, myself included." Lumina morte resignat is thus taken as a characteristic Virgilian variation on what has just been said; Mercury gives sleep and he takes it away, and he unseals the eyes from death (sc., from slumber)—sleep as a type and foreshadowing of the eternal sleep of the grave."

"To sum up then, it seems impossible for lumina morte resignat to mean anything like "seals the eyes in death"; either there is a reference here to the practice of opening the eyes of the dead on their bier, or to waking from the nightly death of sleep. Sleep is a boon and bane, depending on its duration; in Mercury’s dat somnos there is the tension between the peaceful sleep of the night and the eternal sleep of death that leads one to the underworld; in adimit there is a somewhat strange notion that has not been much considered—when exactly is Mercury responsible for waking people from sleep? In the famous case of Argus, the soporific god brought sleep as well as death so as to free Io. As Henry mused, Lumina morte resignat may well refer to waking from sleep, which in the case of the dead may mean the sort of rebirth of which Anchises will speak in Elysium (i.e., the ardent wish of the hopeful who wish for new life), or the release of souls from the sleep of death to haunt the dreams of the living (i.e., what we find oftentimes in the epic, not least in this book)."

 

[Dantius]

Hmm, when I read the phrase I instinctively took it as something like "seals the eyes in death," as they say in their concluding paragraph, but I forgot that resigno means to open up or unseal. I'm inclined to take it as sort of referring to the life force that is embodied by the eyes — lumina resignat refers to Mercury releasing that life force as people die — but I'm also inclined to say that the amount of time and energy that has been expended on figuring out these three words could probably better have been spent on all sorts of other pursuits. There's plenty of phrases in modern poetry that are designed simply to sound cool and give a certain vibe and fall apart when you try to look at it too literally, and while ancient poetry generally avoids such things, I suspect Vergil simply wasn't thinking through these words in as much detail as his modern interpreters are trying to do.

 

[Pacifica]

Hmm, when I read the phrase I instinctively took it as something like "seals the eyes in death," as they say in their concluding paragraph, but I forgot that resigno means to open up or unseal.

Same here.

 

[AoM]

but I'm also inclined to say that the amount of time and energy that has been expended on figuring out these three words could probably better have been spent on all sorts of other pursuits. There's plenty of phrases in modern poetry that are designed simply to sound cool and give a certain vibe and fall apart when you try to look at it too literally, and while ancient poetry generally avoids such things, I suspect Vergil simply wasn't thinking through these words in as much detail as his modern interpreters are trying to do.

I get where you’re coming from a little bit, but this happens in every field and it’s their profession to analyze the text. I could see if they were writing a commentary for undergraduates, but it’s meant to be a deep dive. If you keep following that train of thought, all of classical studies is pointless compared to fields like medicine, programming, climate research, etc.

As for Virgil’s intentions, even putting aside death of the author, it’s worth noting that this is the only use of resignare in the whole epic, so it’s not a stretch to think that Virgil himself was emphasizing the expression.

 

[AoM]

Oh, I forgot about this bit from them (on 245 agit ventos). At least they save their lengthy notes for the difficult issues.

"It is a testament to how much a lover of Virgil can write about two words that Henry devotes almost half a dozen impassioned pages all to say that the god "urges [sc., the winds] to greater speed and at the same time directs [sc., them]." Yet the Dublin doctor is right in his sad estimation, "These are less poetic times.""

 

[AoM]

They print ad, but I really like the idea of the zeugma.

haud aliter terras inter caelumque volabat
litus harenosum ad Libyae, ventosque secabat
materno veniens ab avo Cyllenia proles.

"This much is certain: no little word other than ad will render any sense; the only question then is whether there should be a little word at all—and whether litus should be construed as an object of volabat, or with the winds as dependent on secabat. If Virgil experimented with the idea of cutting through sandy shore and winds (or if Conington is right that the point is that Mercury severs the shore and the winds by being their intermediary)—a striking zeugma—then certainly one might easily have tried to “correct” the poet by inserting something, and in that case the preposition is all that works. Sabbadini may be right to think that ad should go, in which case we would prefer to read litus harenosum Libyae ventosque secabat, with simpler punctuation. Especially with recourse to the schoolbooks, a case can be made to condemn any such zeugma (see Sidgwick on the lack of an et, and the general verdict of “fanciful”). But ad is also susceptible to criticism, and it seems likely that the poet was in some way being daring in his description of this momentous journey."

It seems this whole section of Mercury/Atlas is heavily criticized among the commentators, and they guess it wasn't revised/polished.

 

[AoM]

More of a stretch compared to the Dido one.

respice, cui regnum Italiae Romanaque tellus
debetur. tali Cyllenius ore locutus

"The first and last two letters of the verse spell out reus: Aeneas is guilty of ignoring his son’s grand destiny; the next verse will exhibit the same word painting with deus, as Mercury beings [sic] his speech to an abrupt close."

 

[Dantius]

There's got to be a pretty simple computer program one could write to take the whole Aeneid and find any line where the first two and last two letters spell out a word/name. And I'd imagine there would turn out to be plenty that seem completely coincidental.

Have you heard the theory about the opening of the poem, that if you read the first and last letters of each line in boustrophedon order, you get "a stilo M[aronis] V[ergilii]"?

Arma virumque cano, Troiae qui primus ab oriS
Italiam, fato profugus, Laviniaque veniT
Litora, multum ille et terris iactatus et altO
Vi superum saevae memorem Iunonis ob iraM...

I'm not sure whether to believe it, or any such theories. There's enough acrostics and such that have been identified in Vergil's works that I'm willing to believe it's possible (a few are especially convincing), but I just can't convince myself 100%.

Right before one of the most famous purported acrostics in the Georgics (1.429-433, where the first two letters of every other line spell out ma - ve - pu (Maro Vergilius Publius) – there's a lot more justification for believing that is intended, though, mainly that it directly translates a passage of Aratus that also has an acrostic), there's an obviously unintended acrostic (1.419-424) that spells out DUNCES in English — the universe mocking scholars for believing any of these could be intended?

 

[AoM]

I vaguely remember reading about the Aeneid one, but I didn't know about the one in the Georgics.

I don't mind it too much as long as they don't overdo it (only two in ~275 lines isn't too bad), but I kinda don't like them using it in their note on debetur like it's an established fact now.

"Mercury closes his speech on a note of emphasis about what is owed to Aeneas' son (more specifically, what Aeneas owes to his scion; again we may note the acrostic trick of reus—deus)..."

Edit: at least they used a conditional here, but they can't stop mentioning it lol.

"if indeed there is a deliberate acrostic of deus at 276, then it is appropriate that the next verse should begin with mortalis."

 

[AoM]

Cheating a little bit.

dissimulent; sese interea, quando optima Dido

"Dental alliteration frames the verse; the queen’s name is at line-end, but her name is also spelled in frame around the line, as it was at 73."

 

[AoM]

moliri vs. moliris

quin etiam hiberno moliri(s) sidere classem
et mediis properas Aquilonibus ire per altum,
crudelis?

"The infinitive is the reading of FMP and other witnesses; there is respectable attestation for moliris, especially the Wolfenbüttel γ. Moliri is preferred by Mynors' OCT; Geymonat; Conte's Teubner; Binder and Binder's Reclam; Rivero García et al.; Holzberg's Tusculum; moliris by Ribbeck; Conington; Page; Mackail; Buscaroli; Pease; Austin; Götte's Tusculum; Williams; Perret's Budé; Heuzé's Pléiaide. Moliri seems best taken as parallel to 310 ire; both infinitives complementary to 310 properas, with the infinitives elegantly placed in framing order around the main verb of haste; further, it is better to imagine that Virgil would not have written moliris sidere than to imagine that the last letter of the verb would have dropped out via some copyist's error."

-- --

_________ quid, si non arva aliena domosque
ignotas peteres, et Troia antiqua maneret,
Troia per undosum peteretur classibus aequor?

They punctuate with a question mark after quid, but I assumed it had the meaning of "for what reason".

"The interrogative of exasperation, with breathless indignation at the idea that Aeneas would leave now of all times."

 

[CSGD]

Hmm, when I read the phrase I instinctively took it as something like "seals the eyes in death," as they say in their concluding paragraph, but I forgot that resigno means to open up or unseal. I'm inclined to take it as sort of referring to the life force that is embodied by the eyes — lumina resignat refers to Mercury releasing that life force as people die — but I'm also inclined to say that the amount of time and energy that has been expended on figuring out these three words could probably better have been spent on all sorts of other pursuits.

Over here, this phrase is usually taken as "taking the seal of death off the eyes", i.e. he can save dying eyes from imminent death.

 

[AoM]

Damn, they weren't kidding.

ante fugam suboles, si quis mihi parvulus aula

For something of the verbal massacre of Virgil’s poignant moment one may compare Stanyhurst’s version: "A cockney dandiprat hopthumb / Prittye lad Aeneas."

 

[AoM]

Good use of ambiguity.

nunc etiam interpres divum Iove missus ab ipso
(testor utrumque caput) celeris mandata per auras
detulit:

Aeneas and Dido
Jupiter and Mercury
Aeneas and Ascanius
Anchises and Ascanius

They prefer the second. I like the first the most.

-- --

And because they had to...

detulit: ipse deum manifesto in lumine vidi
intrantem muros vocemque his auribus hausi.
desine meque tuis incendere teque querelis:
Italiam non sponte sequor.

"Aeneas makes clear that the gods are requiring his departure; the acrostic DI of 360–361 follows on the same at 358–359 to underscore the point."

 

[AoM]

Another "paleographically plausible emendation".

amissam classem, socios a morte reduxi.

amissae classis socios a morte reduxi.

"Ribbeck (following Bryant) deleted the verse: a radical solution to the problem posed by the apparent "radical use of the zeugma figure" (Kraggerud). Peerlkamp conjectured a flammis for amissam. Blommendaal suggested ambustam. Conington, and Stephenson (following Wagner, and ultimately Servius) argue that another verb must be supplied to govern amissam classem, since reduxi will not seem to do; the explanation offered is that Dido is, after all, speaking in a highly emotional state—true enough, and also all too easy to use to explain any apparent difficulty. Williams waxes poetic in the same vein: "As the fires of frenzy burn hotter in Dido her words become more disjointed." Buscaroli defends the use of an über-zeugma, as it were, at length. Pease is not much troubled by the passage. Mackail focuses on the sound balance effected by amissam and then a morte (cf. Austin, who is always attuned to such considerations)."

"Kraggerud is correct here in our estimation: it makes no good sense to have Dido speak (emotionally or not) about having saved or rescued the "lost fleet"; the reference rather is to the lost companions—as at 1.217 amissos longo socios sermone requirunt, where Aeneas and his men speak of the lost comrades they will see again only in Dido's Junonian temple (1.509ff.). "Dido had of course no part in their rescue from shipwreck (which was thanks to the intervention of Neptune) nor would she herself suggest anything in that direction" (Kraggerud 2017, 186)."

 

[AoM]

Obligatory acrostic (sis for si vis).

sollicitat. neque te teneo neque dicta refello:
i, sequere Italiam ventis, pete regna per undas.
spero equidem mediis, si quid pia numina possunt

"Dido dismisses Aeneas with anger and bitterness; the acrostic SIS of 380–382 may be deliberate."

 

[AoM]

sola viri mollis aditus et tempora noras/noris

For the former (inter al.): DServ. ad 4.293; Nonius Marcellus 346, 35 Lindsay; Ribbeck; Conington; Page; Götte's Tusculum; Williams; Perret's Budé; Paratore; Binder and Binder's Reclam/Binder 2019; Heuzé's Pléiade; Mackail; Pease; Mynors' OCT; Maclennan.

For the latter: Courtney 1981, 13; Conte's Teubner; Geymonat; Goold's Loeb; Rivero García et al.; Holzberg's Tusculum; Cussen 2018.

"Conte's extended Teubner apparatus note explains the basic problem: the potential perfect is needed so that the point will be that Anna will know the right time to try to confer with Aeneas on her sister's behalf..."

"The past tense would mean that Anna has already been in a state of familiarity with Aeneas—true enough, as 422 makes amply clear—but this will not accord with mollis aditus et tempora, which demands a reference to the future."

"Williams argues for noveras as a possible, subtle reference to Dido already relegating Aeneas to the past; this seems like an ingenious attempt to explain an incorrect reading. We may wonder how noras entered the tradition; paleographically it is easily enough confused with noris (and corruption from noris to noras is likelier than the reverse), and further the context may have suggested to a copyist that there was a reference here to a past state, not one concerning the future (after all, Aeneas is now leaving—without Anna, or Dido)—and so it may well have seemed more logical to transpose the sentiments of 422–423 to the past. As Courtney notes, either reading makes respectable sense; the potential perfect is simply better, and allows the infinitives of 422 to stand for original presents and not imperfects."

"Noris is to be preferred for another reason. The form recalls 33 nec dulcis natos Veneris nec praemia noris?, amid Anna's rhetorical questioning of her sister as to why she should resist succumbing to her passion for Aeneas. The present reminiscence draws together those two passages; there it was Anna who did the talking, while here it is Dido, and in a very different context. The similarity of form for the perfect subjunctive and the future perfect indicative (different only in final vowel quantity) serves to secure the reminiscence."