The Augustan Virgil, firmly established in the ancient, medieval and early modern reception of Virgil, was inherited by the nascent science of classical philology in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. In many ways the classical philologist is merely an updated Servius, and whatever the specialized title, grammarian, humanist, translator, textual critic or commentator, this figure has functioned as the agent in the assertion of the Augustan Virgil, confident in his ability to establish the true Virgil through the “objective” and “scientific” process of emendation. The hermeneutic circle is evidenced by universal faith in the validity of the “Servian default,” holding that the purpose of the Aeneid was “to imitate Homer and to praise Augustus through his ancestors.” The attitude spilled over into treatments of the Eclogues and Georgics. The mission of the editor followed as a necessary consequence of this condition, and its effects are still with us today, indeed they are resurgent, as we shall see. The Georgics must be made to celebrate the glory of toil, the Aeneid that of Augustus – anything that interferes with the clarity of such messages will need attention. The Augustan philologist proceeds on one of two fronts, though from a single base which may be articulated as follows: “It is Virgil's intention to have meant A; he therefore cannot have written B, which is at odds with A; he therefore must have written C. ”