It is intended specially for the use of higher Forms in Public Schools. Most teachers are agreed that Vergil, the most difficult, in point of language, of all Latin poets, cannot be profitably read in lower Forms. At the same time it will, I hope, be found to satisfy the requirements of all except the most advanced class of classical students.

The text is founded on Ribbeck's larger edition (Leipzig, 1860), and is, if I am not mistaken, an advance on previous school editions. I have, however, exercised my own judgment in weighing the evidence of MSS. by help of the materials which Ribbeck has so admirably supplied, and have generally rejected his emendations and transpositions when unsupported by the authority of any MS. The various readings of the Aeneid are so few that they may be discussed even in a school edition.

In orthography I have followed the MSS. even at the sacrifice of uniformity. It is surely time that such barbarisms as coelum, quum, solatium, which still deform the Oxford text, should be eliminated. Such innovations as are likely to perplex a boy, if met with for the first time, I have mentioned in a note. The restoration of i for j will be found rather a help than a hindrance to those a daily increasing majority, as I trust—who adopt the new pronunciation of Latin. In writing Vergil I have preferred to incur the charge of pedantry rather than be guilty of the obvious inconsistency of letting Vergilius on one page face Virgil on the next.

In the commentary I have studied compression throughout. As a rule, I have restricted myself to the one interpretation for which there seemed to me to be

the best authority. On the other hand, I have dwelt at greater length than Conington on points of syntax and prosody, on the primitive meanings and Vergilian uses of words.

In spite of M. Benoist's admonition1 I have indulged, though sparingly, in some attempt at literary criticism. To bring home to a boy the excellencies of an ancient poet, to make him take the same interest in Vergil that he does in Scott or Tennyson, to make him feel that the Aeneid is a work of art, and not merely a medium for imparting a modicum of Latin, or a bank on which he can draw for tags for Latin verse, is at once the highest and the most difficult part of a master's task, and one in which commentators give him the least assistance. For instance, most editors of Vergil are content to point out the parallel passages in Homer. I think that it is at least as important for an English schoolboy to know the parallel passages in Milton. A reference to Lessing's Laocoon is perhaps more valuable than a discussion of the sources whence Vergil drew the story.

I have not scrupled to give free help in rendering lines and phrases. To judge from my own experience, no author presents to boys such difficulties in translation as Vergil, and in no branch of scholarship are direction and example more needed. By putting the notes at the end of each Book I have obviated the principal objection to such helps.

1 'Avant tout, et en quelque endroit et de quelque manière qu'elle soit présentée, une appréciation littéraire doit être faite d'une manière absolument supérieure et de main de maître, sous peine de devenir insupportable.'

Lastly, I have added a very full index to the notes. The favourable reception which my edition of Books XI. XII. met with has encouraged me to undertake an entire edition of the Aeneid, of which this is the first instalment. But in order that each volume may be complete in itself, I have, at the cost of some repetition, abstained from referring to the previous volume.

viii

NOTE ON THE MSS. OF VERGIL

(FROM RIBBECK).

WE possess seven MSS. of Vergil written in capitals. The date of these is very uncertain; the oldest is probably of the third century, but they must all be older than the end of the fifth century, as this form of writing was then generally abandoned. They are of very different extent; some are nearly complete, others consist of only a few leaves. They are thus lettered by Ribbeck, being arranged in order of age—

A. Codex Augusteus.

F. Codex Vaticanus.

(Consists of a few leaves, partly at

Rome, partly at Berlin.)

(In the Vatican Library. Contains only fragments of the Georgics and Aeneid.)

G. Codex Sangallensis. (In the St. Gall Library. Consists of

M. Codex Mediceus.

P.

Codex Palatinus.

R. Codex Romanus.
V. Codex Veronensis.

leaves which have been used for binding.)

(In the Laurentine Library. Complete after Ecl. vi. 48.)

(In the Vatican. Considerable
lacunae.)

(In the Vatican. Also defective.)
(At Verona.
A palimpsest, very
fragmentary.)

As to their respective values, P. stands highest, but in passages they contain F. and V. are of nearly equal authority. M., though akin to P., is inferior. R. is the least trustworthy of all. A. and G. are too defective to be of much service.

The Cursives are of much later date; the oldest, Codex Gudianus, belongs to the ninth century. It is from them that we derive the lines (Aen. ii. 567-588) which are wanting in all the old MSS.

NOTE ON ORTHOGRAPHY OF VERGIL.

THE following are the principal deviations from the conventional orthography :

1. harena-harundo-aena-anchora-ei (for hei)-umerus

umor-umidus.

2. clupeus or clipeus-inclutus or inclitus-lacrima or lacruma -libet or lubet-maximus or maxumus.

proelium-saepe-obscenus.

4. genetrix-protenus or protinus-Vergilius.

5. condicio-dicio-nuntius-setius-solacium.

6. adicere-proicere, and so with other compounds of iacere. 7. autumnus-hiemps-conubium-coniunx.

8. causa or caussa-bacatus-litus-milia-paulum—religio -reliquiae.

9. Iuppiter-littera-loquella-querella-sollemnis.

cumque―umquam—numquam—nequiquam.

II. aput or apud-haud or haut-sed or set.

12. supter (for subter)-opstipui (for obstipui)-optulit (for obtulit).

13. The combination of the letters vu is generally avoided. Thus we have volnus-voltus-divom-ecus or equos (not equus) -cum or quom (not quum).

14. In accusatives plurals of substantives and adjectives with i-stems, -is and -es are indifferently used, but is is most common.