[650] Memorans here, as in other passages (v. 75, 1. 327 &c.) seems to be simply = “dicens,” a use which may be accounted for perhaps by Virg.'s artificial style, which probably led him, as similar causes led our post-Restoration poets, to give a conventional and poetical sense to certain words. The Greek μεμνῆσθαι is used rather loosely, though not with the same latitude. ‘Perstabat memorans’ seems to be on the analogy of λέγων διετέλει. The more usual Latin construction is with an infinitive, or with “in” and an ablative. ‘Fixus’ seems better taken with Donatus “inmobilis sententia” than with Heyne “affixus loco, non discedens domo.”
[651] Effusi lacrimis: ‘poured out in respect of tears,’ or as we should say ‘in tears,’ like “studio effusae matres” 12. 130, though ‘studio’ there may be an instrum. abl. ‘Effusi in lacrimas’ would be a more common expression. ‘Effusis lacrimis’ is the reading of five inferior MSS., but is much less Virgilian. Comp. “caesariem effusae” G. 4. 337 note.
[652] Ne vellet seems best taken as a sort of oratio obliqua, like 1. 645 (note), a verb of speaking being assumed from the context. ‘Vertere,’ 1. 20.
[653] ‘To lend his weight to the destiny that was bearing us down.’ Forb. comp. Livy 3. 16, “id prope unum maxime inclinatis rebus incubuit.” Serv. says, “simile est, ut currentem incitare, praecipitantem inpellere.”
[654] Inceptoque et sedibus haeret in isdem is one of those plays on similar applications of different words of which Ovid is so fond (comp. M. 2. 146 “consiliis, non curribus utere nostris”), but in which Virg. does not often indulge so unmistakably as here, though on v. 378 above we have seen that he is not wholly free from them. Wund. comp. Cic. in Cat. 2. 5 “si et in urbe et in eadem mente permanent,” which he calls “eadem compositionis suavitas.” With the position of the preposition Weidner comp. 5. 512 “Illa notos atque atra volans in nubila fugit,” 6. 416 “Informi limo glaucaque exponit in ulva.”
[655-670] ‘Maddened at his refusal, I resolve to plunge into the battle again. What else could I do? not leave him to die. No; if that must be, let Pyrrhus come and despatch us both. And was it for this that my mother brought me home? I will return whence she took me.’
[656] “Quasi vetuerit regina audito ‘mortemque miserrimus opto,’ responderet Aeneas, ‘Nam quod consilium aut quae iam fortuna dabatur?’” Serv. Aeneas is talking partly to himself, partly to his father, and his thoughts in the next verse assume the form of a regular address. ‘Fortuna’ nearly as in G. 3. 452. Some MSS. leave out ‘iam,’ and Heins. thought the hiatus thus produced preferable to the present reading.
[657] Efferre pedem like “gressum extuleram” v. 753.
[658] “Bene excusat patrem dicendo ‘excidit,’ et ipsam temperat obiurgationem.” Serv. See on 6. 686. Virg. was probably thinking of the Homeric ποῖόν σε ἔπος φύγεν ἕρκος ὀδόντων;
[660] Sedet of a fixed resolution 4. 15., 5. 418 &c., sometimes with ‘animo,’ sometimes with a dative of the person, sometimes without a case. With the thought, rather than the expression of ‘periturae addere Troiae teque tuosque’ comp. 4. 606 “memet super ipsa dedissem.”
[661] For ‘isti’ many MSS. give ‘istic.’ Serv. takes ‘isti’ as an adv., and so Weidner, referring to Ritschl Opusc. 2. 453. See on G. 1. 54. ‘Isti’ naturally refers to what immediately precedes, “that death you covet so.” “Leti ianua” and similar expressions occur repeatedly in Lucr., e. g. 5. 373, “Haud igitur leti praeclusa est ianua caelo.” Virg. has perhaps varied the image a little, though it is not clear whether he means the door that leads to death, or, as the dative would rather suggest, the door through which death may come. For a similar doubt about a similar expression comp. note on G. 3. 482. The latter interpretation is favoured by two passages which Henry quotes, “Illa ianuam famae patefecit,” Pliny Ep. 1. 18, and “Quantam fenestram ad nequitiam patefeceris!” Ter. Heaut. 3. 1. 72.
[662] ‘Pyrrhus will be here in a moment, fresh from bathing in Priam's blood, Pyrrhus, who butchers the son before the father's face, who butchers the father at the altar.’ Heyne well observes, that Aeneas refers to the words “miserebitur hostis” v. 645, drawing the same picture of death by an enemy's hand in utterly different colours. He also remarks on the discriminating choice of the epithet ‘multo.’ Lady Macbeth's “Who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him?” may be compared, though not exactly similar in feeling.
[663] Serv. seems right (in spite of Wagn.'s denial) in explaining ‘obtruncat’ “obtruncare consuevit.” It was Pyrrhus' only act of the kind; but it agreed so thoroughly with his nature that it would stamp him ever afterwards. He is the butcher of son and father, says Aeneas: therefore doubt not that he will butcher us. ‘Obtruncet,’ the original reading of the Mentelian MS. which Heins. thinks more Virgilian, would give a different sense. ‘Ad aras’ is meant to deepen the horror as well as ‘ante ora patris.’ For ‘patrem qui’ Med. and others give ‘patremque,’ clearly a false reading, though supported by Jahn. Med. also gives the spelling ‘gnatum,’ which I have followed Wagn. in restoring, though with some hesitation, as I have no confidence in his notion that Virg. used the archaic form in grander and more solemn passages, the modern in an ordinary context.
[664] Hoc erat &c. ‘was this thy deliverance of me, that I might see’ &c. ‘Quod eripis’ is the subject, ‘hoc’ the predicate, and ‘ut cernam’ depends on ‘hoc.’ Taubmann comp. Prop. 3. 18. 1, “Hoc erat in primis quod me gaudere iubebas?” ‘Quod’ is an adverbial or cognate accusative: see on v. 141. The tenses are confused, ‘ut cernam’ depending on ‘hoc erat,’ a change doubtless favoured by the use of ‘eripis’ immediately preceding the dependent clause: or we may say with Jahn that there is a mixture of constructions, “hoc erat quod me eripuisti ut cernerem” and “hoc igitur consilio me eripis ut cernam.” ‘Hoc erat’ may throw some light on such expressions as “tempus erat” Hor. 1 Od. 37. 4, “nunc non erat his locus” Id. A. P. 19. Priscian pp. 948, 958 says that the oldest copies of Virg. in his time had ‘hocc erat,’ which is his way of accounting for the lengthening of ‘hoc’ before a vowel.
[665] “Medium in penetralibus hostem” v. 508.
[667] A reference to the circumstances of Priam's death, v. 551.
[668] We are meant to suppose, as Serv. remarks, that he had taken off his armour on returning home. ‘Lux ultima’ like “summa dies” v. 324. ‘The call of the day of death rings in the ears of the conquered.’
[669] Instaurata seems to be proleptic. The fight had not been, so far as the Trojans generally were concerned, renewed, as it had never been suspended: but it would be renewed in his case by his return to it.
[670] Numquam hodie E. 3. 49 note. ‘Omnes:’ ‘if my father dooms himself and the rest of the family to an unresisting death, I will not share it.’ Heyne comp. Hector's words when he finds himself betrayed to death by Pallas Il. 22. 304, μὴ μὰν ἀσπουδί γε καὶ ἀκλειῶς ἀπολοίμην, Ἀλλὰ μέγα ῥέξας τι καὶ ἐσσομένοισι πυθέσθαι.
[671-678] ‘I was arming and sallying forth, when my wife fell at my feet with my child in her arms, begging me, if I merely rushed on death, to take them with me; if I thought of resistance, to stay and defend my home.’
