Commentary on Vergil's Aeneid, Volume 1Machine readable text


Commentary on Vergil's Aeneid, Volume 1
By John Conington
London Whittaker and Co., Ave Maria Lane 1876



Perseus Documents Collection Table of Contents



INTRODUCTION.

P. VERGILI MARONIS

AENEIDOS

LIBER PRIMUS.

P. VERGILI MARONIS

AENEIDOS

LIBER SECUNDUS.

P. VERGILI MARONIS

AENEIDOS

LIBER TERTIUS.

P. VERGILI MARONIS

AENEIDOS

LIBER QUARTUS.

P. VERGILI MARONIS

AENEIDOS

LIBER QUINTUS.

P. VERGILI MARONIS

AENEIDOS

LIBER SEXTUS.
   APPENDIX.


Funded by The Annenberg CPB/Project

LIBER PRIMUS.

 
Commentary on line 2

Fato, a mixture of modal and instrum. abl., as in 4. 696., 6. 449, 466, &c. IIere it seems to go with profugus, though it might go with venit: comp. 10. 67. Perhaps the force may be profugus quidem, sed fato profugus, a glorious and heaven-sent fugitive. So Livy l. l., comp. by Weidner, Aenean ab simili clade domo profugum sed ad maiora rerum initia ducentibus fatis. For the poetic accus. ItaliamLavina litora, without the preposition, see Madv. 232, obs. 4. The MSS. are divided between Lavinaque, Laviniaque, and perhaps Lavinia. The last, however, though adopted by Burm. and Heyne, and approved by Heins., seems to rest solely on the authority of Med., which has Lavinia (corrected into Lavina), with a mark of erasure after the word. Laviniaque is found in the Verona fragm., and is supported by quotations in Terentianus Maurus and Diomedes, and in single MSS. of Priscian, Censorinus, and Servius in artem Donati. Lavinaque is found in Rom., Gud., and probably most other MSS., and is supported by quotations in Macrobius, Gellius, Marius Victorinus, Pompeius, the Schol. on Lucan, most MSS. of Priscian, and one of Censorinus. Servius mentions both readings, saying, Lavina legendum est, non Lavinia. Lavinia is supported by 4. 236: but the synizesis, though not unexampled (comp. 5. 269., 6. 33, and see on G. 4. 243), is perhaps awkward, especially in the second line of the poem, and the imitation in Prop. 3. 26. 64, Iactaque Lavinis moenia litoribus, is in favour of the form Lavina. Juv. 12. 71 has novercali sedes praelata Lavino, though there as in Prop. the quadrisyllabic form might be introduced and explained by synizesis. On the whole, I have preferred Lavinaque, believing the form to be possible in itself (comp. Campanus, Lucanus, Appulus, &c.), and more probable in this instance; the modern editors however are generally for Laviniaque. Lachmann on Lucr. 2.719 speaks doubtfully. The epithet which belonged to the place after the foundation of the city by Aeneas is given to it here, as in 4. 236, by a natural anticipation at the time of his landing.