¹ Hardie (1993), 101–5 ‘Poetic succession’; epic underworlds are a conventional place for the poet to explore his own traditions: Most, G., ‘Il poeta nell’Ade: catabasi, epico e teoria dell “epos” tra Omero e Virgilio’, SIFC 85 (1992), 1014-26Google Scholar. Memory is a central function of epic (the Muses are daughters of Mnemosyne ‘Memory’); on the role of memory in the Aeneid see Henry (1989).

² Augustus occupies a central section in the Parade (6.791-805), the main part of which concludes with a famous quotation from Ennius, 6.846 unus qui nobis cumiando restituis rem (cf. Enn. Ann. 363 Skutsch). Ennius and Virgil: Norden (1976), 365–75; Norden, E., Ennius und Vergilius. Kriegsbilder aus Roms grosser Zeit (Leipzig and Berlin, 1915)Google Scholar; Wigodsky (1972), 40–79. On earlier Latin epic see Goldberg (1995).

³ Skutsch (1985), 153–67.

⁴ Austin on 6.724-51 ‘The manner is constantly and pointedly Lucretian; the matter would have excited Lucretius’ disdain.’ On Virgil’s use of the Ennian and Lucretian models in this passage see Hardie (1986), 69–83; in general on Virgil’s imitation in the Aeneid of Lucretius, at once reverential and antagonistic, see ibid. ch.5. The Georgics had already explored the continuities between hexameter didactic and heroic hexameter epic; see pp. 40–2 above. For other examples of the miniature summary, a device that allows Virgil both to refer to the epic traditions on which he draws and to advertise, by contrast, the novelty of his own epic project, see the Shield of Aeneas at Aen. 8.626-728, a visual version of an Ennian historical epic, and the scenes in the temple of Juno at Aen. 1.453-93, an encapsulation of the hackneyed matter of the Epic Cycle: see Barchiesi, A., A&A 40 (1994), 117-18Google Scholar; in general see Kopff, E. C., ‘Virgil and the cyclic epics’, ANRWW 31.2 (1981), 919-47Google Scholar. In a sense the whole of the Aeneid, a monumental twelve-book epic, is at the same time an exquisite miniaturization of the whole of the Greco-Roman literary tradition.

⁵ On Virgil’s use of Homer Knauer (1964a) is indispensable, not least for his line-by-line tables of correspondences between the Homeric and Virgilian epics; his general conclusions are summarized in Knauer (1964b); Otis (1964) is still essential, if now somewhat dated, reading on the literary-historical background to Virgil’s audacious decision to confront Homer head-on, with chapters on ‘The Odyssean Aeneid’ (ch. 6) and ‘The Iliadic Aeneid’ (ch. 7). See also Camps (1969), ch. 8; for a sophisticated discussion of the literary effects of Virgil’s Homeric imitation see Barchiesi (1984).

⁶ In antiquity the Iliad was regarded as the more sublime of the two Homeric epics: [Longinus] De Sublimitate 9.11-15 (with Russell ad loc).

⁷ On the proem of Aen. 1 see Anderson (1969), ch. 1; Buchheit (1963), 13–58.

⁸ For a convenient overview of the situation see Knauer (1964a), folding chart 5; for an analysis of the compilation of Homeric episodes within a single book see Hardie (1994), 6–10. Cairns (1989), ch. 8 presents an interesting, if overstated, argument for the greater importance of the Odyssey than the Iliad as a model for the Aeneid. On Virgil’s use of each Homeric epic see Williams, R. D., ‘Virgil and the Odyssey ’, Phoenix 17 (1963), 266-74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gransden (1984).

⁹ A particular type of the more general use of what Knauer calls ‘Kontamination’, i.e. the combination of more than one Homeric model in a single Virgilian passage; inversely, by ‘dédoublement’ a single Homeric model may be divided between two Virgilian episodes: for example the person of Patroclus feeds into the characters and exploits of both Pallas and Camilla.

¹⁰ The most influential work in modern studies of allusion is Conte (1986); for discussions of allusion see also ch. II n. 12.

¹¹ See Anderson (1957); Mackay, L. A., ‘Achilles as model for Aeneas’, TAPA 88 (1957), 11–16 Google Scholar; West, D., ‘The deaths of Hector and Tumus’, in McAuslan, and Walcot, (1990), 14–23 Google Scholar; van Nortwick, T., ‘Aeneas, Tumus, and Achilles’, TAPA 110 (1980), 303-14Google Scholar.

¹² Harrison, E. L., ‘Vergil and the Homeric tradition’, PLLS 3 (1981), 209-25Google Scholar, at 215 with n. 10.

¹³ Schlunk (1974), 15–17.

¹⁴ Feeney (1991), 149–50.

¹⁵ Knauer (1964a), 168 n. 1; Hardie (1986), 62–3; Farrell (1991), 258–60. Hardie (1986), ch. 8 interprets the Shield of Aeneas in Aen. 8 as a symbol of the cosmic pretensions of Roman power, reflecting an allegorization of the Shield of Achilles in Iliad 18 as a symbol of the physical universe. On allegory in the Aeneid see also p. 94 below.

¹⁶ For a statement by a later Latin epic poet, who himself almost literally worshipped Virgil, see Sil. Ital. Pun. 13.786-9 (the Sibyl on the ghost of Homer) ‘meruit deus esse uiden, | et fuit in tanto non paruum pectore numen. | carmine complexus terram, mare, sidera, manes | et cantu Musas et Phoebum aequauit honore’. Ptolemy IV erected a shrine to Homer, the Homereion, in Alexandria, with which the relief in the British Museum by Archelaus of Priene of the ‘Apotheosis of Homer’ may be connected. See Brink, C. O., ‘Ennius and the Hellenistic worship of Homer’, AJP 93 (1972), 547-67Google Scholar; Hardie (1986), 22–5. A representative account of the universal Homer is [Plutarch] On the life and poetry of Homer: see Keaney, J. J. and Lamberton, R. (eds.), Essay on the Life and Poetry of Homer (Plutarch) (Atlanta, 1996)Google Scholar.

¹⁷ On the late antique and medieval pictures of the divinely omniscient and wonder-working Virgil see Comparetti (1895). The tradition of the universal Virgil finds its latest apologists in Eliot, T. S., who elevated the Aeneid to the status of the European classic (What is a Classic? [London, 1945])Google Scholar, and in the once influential book by Haecker, T., Vergil, Vater des Abendlandes (Leipzig, 1931)Google Scholar (tr. Wheen, A. W., Virgil, Father of the West [London, 1934]Google Scholar).

¹⁸ See p. 41 above.

¹⁹ On the Aeneid’s receptivity to non-epic genres see Jackson Knight (1966), 159–78; later epic in the classical tradition is also self-conscious about its generic inclusivity: see Lewalski, B. K., Paradise Lost and the Rhetoric of Literary Forms (Princeton, 1985), ch. 1 Google Scholar ‘Paradise Lost as an encyclopedic epic’.

²⁰ Hinds (1987), 19. Hinds’ book is central for the study of the dynamics of generic play in Augustan poetry; see also Conte, G. B., Genres and Readers: Lucretius, Love Elegy, Pliny’s Encyclopedia (Baltimore and London, 1994)Google Scholar; Farrell, J., ‘Dialogue of genres in Ovid’s “Lovesong of Polyphemus” (Metamorphoses 13.719-897)’, AJP 113 (1992), 235-68Google Scholar. On paradox as a constituent feature of Virgilian poetics see Hardie, P. R., ‘Virgil: a paradoxical poet?’, PELS 9 (1996), 103-21Google Scholar.

²¹ On the inseparability of generic analysis from the wider meaning and ideology of texts see Hinds, S., ‘ Arma in Ovid’s Fasti ,’ Arethusa 25 (1992), 81–153 Google Scholar.

²² Conte (1986), 32–9.

²³ Catullus and Virgil (see also ch. III n. 77); Rand, E. K., ‘Catullus and the Augustans’, HSCP 17 (1906), 15–30 Google Scholar; Boerma, R. E. H. Westendorp, ‘Vergil’s debt to Catullus’, Acta Classica 1 (1958), 51–63 Google Scholar; Harrison, E. L., ‘Cleverness in Virgilian imitation’, in Harrison, (1990), 445-8Google Scholar [on Cat. 66.39 and Aen. 6.460]; Ferguson, J., ‘Catullus and Virgil’, PKS 11 (1971/72), 25–47 Google Scholar; Griffith, R. Drew, ‘Catullus’ Coma Berenices and Aeneas’ farewell to Dido’, TAPA 125 (1995), 47–59 Google Scholar; Putnam, M. C. J., ‘The lyric genius of the Aeneid ,’ Arion 3.2 (1995), 81–101 Google Scholar; Wills (1996), 26–30 [on Ariadne’s lament and the speeches of Dido in Aen. 4]; Lyne (n. 197); Petrini (n. 71).

²⁴ Hunter, R. L., Apollonius of Rhodes: Argonautica Book III (Cambridge, 1989), 32–8 Google Scholar. For an analysis of the use of Apollonius in Catullus 64 see Clare, R. J., ‘Catullus 64 and the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius: allusion and exemplarity’, PCPS 42 (1996), 60–88 Google Scholar.

²⁵ There are many valuable observations in Clausen (1987), but it is far from being a comprehensive study of its subject. See also Hollis, A. S., ‘Hellenistic colouring in Virgil’s Aeneid ,’ HSCP 94 (1992), 269-85Google Scholar.

²⁶ See the massive study by Nelis, D., The Aeneidand the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius (Leeds, 1998)Google Scholar; Feeney, D. C., ‘Following after Hercules, in Virgil and Apollonius’, PVS 18 (1986), 47–85 Google Scholar.

²⁷ Kyrialddis, S., ‘ Invocano adMusam (Aen. 7.37)’, MD 33 (1994), 197–206 Google Scholar, with bibliography at 197 n. 2.

²⁸ Hardie, P. R., ‘Ships and ship-names in the Aeneid ,’ in Whitby, , Hardie, , and Whitby, (1987), 163-71, at 163, 170Google Scholar.

²⁹ Hunter, R. L., The Argonautica of Apollonius (Cambridge, 1993), ch. 7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar ‘Argonautica and Aeneid.’ On the Argonautica’s relationship to its literary past see Goldhill (1991), ch. 5.

³⁰ George, E. V., Aeneid VIII and the Aitia of Callimachus (Leiden, 1974)Google Scholar.

³¹ Gransden (1976), 26. For examples of detailed allusion to Callimachus in the Aeneid see Heyworth, S. J., ‘Deceitful Crete: Aeneid 3.84 and the Hymns of Callimachus’, CQ 43 (1993), 255-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Barchiesi, A., ‘Immovable Delos: Aeneid 3.73-98 and the Hymns of Callimachus’, CQ 44 (1994), 438-43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³² On bucolic’s epic origins see Halperin (ch. II n. 5).

³³ Pace Jenkyns, R., ‘Virgil and Arcadia’, JRS 79 (1989), 26–39 Google Scholar. See Wimmel, W., ‘Hirtenkrieg’ und arkadisches Rom: Reduktionsmedien in Vergib Aeneis (Munich, 1973)Google Scholar; Rosenberg, D. M., Oaten Reeds and Trumpets: Pastoral and Epic in Virgil, Spenser, and Milton (Lewisburg, 1981), 51-3Google Scholar on Evander.

³⁴ Silvia’s stag: Vance, E., ‘Sylvia’s pet stag: wildness and domesticity in Virgil’s Aeneid ,’ Arethusa 14 (1981), 127-38Google Scholar; Putnam, M. C. J., ‘Silvia’s stag and Virgilian ekphrasis’, MD 34 (1995), 107-33Google Scholar.

³⁵ On allusion to the Georgics in the Aeneid see Briggs (1980).

³⁶ Anderson, W. S., ‘ Pastor Aeneas: on pastoral themes in the Aeneid ,’, tapa 99 (1968), 1–17 Google Scholar.

³⁷ For this concept see Fowler, A., Kinds of Literature: An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes (Oxford, 1982), ch. 12 Google Scholar ‘Hierarchy of genres and canons of literature’.

³⁸ See Pease on 4.86.

³⁹ On the schetliastic propemptikon see Cairns (1972), 7. Cairns (1989), ch. 6 takes the case for the influence of love elegy on the Aeneid as far as it can go.

⁴⁰ culpa at 4.19, 172 may be meant to put us in mind of the Aristotelian άμαρτία; see Rudd, N., ‘Dido’s culpa ’, in Lines of Enquiry: Studies in Latin Poetry (Cambridge, 1976), 32–53 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Moles, J. L., ‘Aristotle and Dido’s hamartia ’ in McAuslan, and Walcot, (1990), 142-8Google Scholar; id., ‘The tragedy and guilt of Dido’, in Whitby, Hardie, and Whitby (1987), 153–61. In general see Pease (1935), 8–11; De Witt, N. W., ‘The Dido episode as tragedy’, CJ 2 (1907), 283-8Google Scholar; Quinn, K., ‘Virgil’s tragic queen’, in Latin Explorations: Critical Studies in Roman Literature (London, 1963), 29–58 Google Scholar; id. (1968), 323–49 ‘The contribution of tragedy’; Muecke, F., ‘Foreshadowing and dramatic irony in the story of Dido’, AJP 104 (1983), 134-55Google Scholar.

⁴¹ I have already pointed to the models of Catullus’ Ariadne and, possibly, love elegy for Dido’s speeches. Virgil looks back to the tragic models that underlie the hexameter narratives of Catullus 64 and Apollonius Argonautica 3, producing a tissue of quite extraordinary complexity, even by Virgil’s standards. Dido is one of the most densely allusive of all Virgilian characters: see recently the convincing demonstration that Penelope is another important model by Polk, G. C., ‘Vergil’s Penelope: the Diana simile in Aeneid 1.498-502’, Vergilius 42 (1996), 38-9Google Scholar.

⁴² E.g. Wlosok, A., ‘Vergils Didotragödie. Ein Beitrag zum Problem des Tragischen in der Aeneis’, in Görgemanns, H. and Schmidt, E. A. (eds.), Studien zum antiken Epos (Meisenheim, 1976), 228-50Google Scholar.

⁴³ See Harrison, E. L., ‘Why did Venus wear boots? Some reflections on Aeneid 1.314 f.’, PVS 12 (1972/73), 10–25 Google Scholar.

⁴⁴ For the argument see Hardie in Martindale (1997), ch. 20.

⁴⁵ Note especially the infernal Lyssa (‘madness’) used by Hera to drive Herakles mad in Eur. Herc. Fur. 822ff. On Allecto see Heinze (1993), 148–50; Pòschl (1962), 28–33; Fraenkel, E., ‘Some aspects of the structure of Aeneid VII’, in Harrison, (1990), 253-76, at 258–65Google Scholar; Lyne (1987), 13–19 24–7. The generic change in Aen. 7 may thus be understood also as one from pastoral to tragedy: cf. Milton Paradise Lost 9.1-7 ‘No more of talk where God or angel guest | With man, as with his friend, familiar used | To sit indulgent, and with him partake | Rural repast, permitting him the while | Venial discourse unblamed: I now must change | Those notes to tragic; foul distrust, and breach | Disloyal on the part of man . . .’

⁴⁶ E.g. Garstang, J. B., ‘The tragedy of Turnus’, Phoenix 9 (1950), 47–58 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; von Albrecht, M., ‘Zur Tragik von Vergils Turnusgestalt: Aristotelisches in der Aeneis ’, in von Albrecht, M. and Heck, E. (eds.), Silvae: Festschrift für E. Zinn (Tübingen, 1970), 1–5 Google Scholar. Recent book-length studies of Turnus: Schenk, P., Die Gestalt des Turnus in Vergib Aeneis (Königstein, 1984)Google Scholar; Renger, C., Aeneas und Turnus: Analyse einer Feindschaft (Frankfurt, 1985)Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ See Austin on 1.44, 87, 88, 90, 102. Given the fragmentary state of the evidence, it is easy to overlook the importance of Roman tragic models for the Aeneid: see Stabryla, S., Latin Tragedy in VirgiVs Poetry (Wroclaw, 1970)Google Scholar; Wigodsky (1972), 18–21, 76–97. Mezentius has the features of an Accian stage tyrant: see Penna, A. La, ‘Mezenzio: una tragedia della tirannia e del titanismo antico’, Maia 32 (1980), 3–30 Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ On the Aeneid as foundation-poem see Horsfall, N. M., ‘Aeneas the colonist’, Vergilius 35 (1989), 8–27 Google Scholar; see also id., ‘Virgil and the poetry of explanations’, G&R 38 (1991), 203–11. The first sentence of the poem, after the opening arma uirumque cano, outlines a journey between two cities Troiae . . . Romae.

⁴⁹ See Perret, J., Les Origines de la légende troyenne de Rome (281-31) (Paris, 1942)Google Scholar; Galinsky, G. K., Aeneas, Sicily and Rome (Princeton, 1969)Google Scholar; Horsfall, N. M., in Bremmer, J. N. and Horsfall, N. M., Roman Myth and Mythography (London, 1987), 12–24 Google Scholar; Cornell, T. J., The Beginnings of Rome, Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c. 1000–264 B.C.) (London and New York, 1995), 63-8Google Scholar; Gruen, E. S., Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome (London, 1992), 6–51 Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ Particularly contentious is the question of whether Virgil invented the story of Dido’s love for Aeneas: for the evidence see Pease (1935), 14–21.

⁵¹ 1.288 Iulius, a magno demissum nomen lulo. See Weinstock, S., Divus Julius (Oxford, 1971), 5–12 Google Scholar.

⁵² The scholar and antiquarian Varro, an important source for the Aeneid, wrote a work De familiis Troianis; see Wiseman, T. P., ‘Legendary genealogies in late-Republican Rome’, G&R 21 (1974), 153-64Google Scholar.

⁵³ The keenest modern investigator of Virgil’s expertise as scholar and antiquarian is Horsfall, N. M. in many articles and a book, Virgilio: L’epopea in alambicco (Naples, 1991)Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ Comparetti (1895), ch. 5; Kaster, R. A., Guardians of Language: The Grammarians and Society in Late Antiquity (Berkeley, etc., 1988), ch. 5 Google Scholar ‘Servius’.

⁵⁵ See Rose, H. J., Aeneas Pontifex (London, 1948)Google Scholar; the sacral mission of the Julian gens is stressed by Norden, E., ‘Vergils Aeneis im Lichte ihrer Zeit’, in Kleine Schriften (Berlin, 1966), 358–421, at 393–6Google Scholar; in general on religion in the Aeneid see Bailey (1935).

⁵⁶ Austin on 2.691; Heinze (1993), 32–4.

⁵⁷ Williams on 3.405.

⁵⁸ See Gransden on 8.187. On the historical and antiquarian allusions in Aen. 8 see Binder (1971).

⁵⁹ Fowler, W. Warde, Virgi’s Gathering of the Clans, 2nd edn. (Oxford, 1918)Google Scholar; Rehm, B., Das geographische Bild des alten Italiens in Vergils Aeneis (Philol. Suppl. 24.2, 1932)Google Scholar; Fordyce on 7.641 ff., with further bibliography; Saylor, C. F., ‘The magnificent fifteen: Vergil’s catalogues of the Latin and Etruscan forces’, CP 69 (1974), 249-57Google Scholar; Basson, W. P., Pivotal Catalogues in the Aeneid (Amsterdam, 1975), 117-56Google Scholar. On the shorter Catalogue of Etruscans at 10.163-214 see Harrison (1991), 106–11.

⁶⁰ Virgilian etymology is now treated exhaustively in O’Hara (1996), with an introduction placing Virgi’s practice within the whole history of ancient etymology (see in particular 102–11 ‘The poetic function of Vergilian etymologizing’), and a comprehensive catalogue of individual Virgilian etymologies (erring deliberately on the side of caution as to what counts as an etymology); for a more speculative study of the etymological associations of proper names see Paschalis, M., Virgi’s Aeneid: Semantic Relations and Proper Names (Oxford, 1997)Google Scholar.

⁶¹ The Roman sense of national identity seems bound up with myths of exile and outlawry (as in the case of the foundation story of Romulus; the first Romans are emphatically not autochthonous); see Edwards, C., Writing Rome: Textual Approaches to the City (Cambridge, 1996), ch. 5 Google Scholar ‘The city of exiles’.

⁶² Edwards (n. 61), 30–43, 52–63. For other examples of the contrast between humble past and mighty present see Prop. 4.1; Tib. 2.5; Ovid, Fasti 1.509-36.

⁶³ On this imperative see Hardie (1993), 3–10. The wrath of Juno at the beginning of the poem has as its correlate not a quarrel between human heroes, but one between the cities of Carthage and Rome for world-empire (1.12-22); within the narrative the aition for the Punic Wars is the wrath of the slighted Dido.

⁶⁴ See Quint (1993), ch. 2; Hardie (1993), 15–17; Bettini, M., ‘Ghosts of exile: doubles and nostalgia in Vergil’s parva Troia (Aeneid 3.294ff.)’, CSCA 16 (1997), 8–33 Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Pointedly called an urbs on several occasions: Hardie (1994), 10–11. Jupiter foretells the sequence of foundations at 1.261-77. On the theme of cities in the Aeneid see Morwood, J., ‘Aeneas, Augustus, and the theme of the city’, G&R 38 (1991), 212-23Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ Modelled in part on Ennius’ account of the sack of Alba Longa: see Austin on 2.313, 486 ff. On the epic and historiographical set-piece of the sacking of a city see Paul, G. M., ‘ Urbs capta: sketch of an ancient literary motif,’ Phoenix 36 (1982), 144-55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁷ The subject of Lee’s, M. O. stimulating Fathers and Sons in Virgi’s Aeneid (Albany, N.Y., 1979)Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ On the importance of family traditions see Griffin, J., ‘The creation of characters in the Aeneid ,’ in Griffin, (1985), 183-97Google Scholar. As pater patriae Augustus becomes the ideal father of all the Romans— and perhaps the ideal son of all the great Romans of the past, a relationship given visual expression both at the funeral of Augustus, accompanied by the imagines of all the Roman great men of the past, not just members of the Julian gens (Dio 56.34), and in the Forum of Augustus, with its galleries of statues both of members of the Julian gens and of other great Romans, with the statue of Augustus as pater patriae in the centre of the Forum. The statue galleries have often been compared with the Parade of Heroes in Aen. 6: e.g. Rowell, H. T., ‘Vergil and the Forum of Augustus’, AJP 62 (1941), 261-76Google Scholar; although a direct connection is questioned by De Grassi, A., ‘Virgilio e il Foro di Augusto’, Epigraphica 7 (1945), 88–103 Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ The connection between the comet of 44 B.C., taken as a sign of Julius’ apotheosis, and Acestes’ flaming arrow (5.522-8) was denied by Heinze (1993), 133, but is convincingly defended by West, D., ‘On serial narration and on the Julian star’, PVS 21 (1993), 1–16 Google Scholar; see also Drew (1927), ch. 2. For other contemporary resonances of the games m Aen. 5 see Feldherr, A., ‘Ships of state: Aeneid 5 and Augustan circus spectacle’, CA 14 (1995), 245-65Google Scholar.

⁷⁰ See Hardie on 9.621-71.

⁷¹ This scene is given a more pessimistic reading by Lyne (1987), ch. 4 ‘The hero and his son’. On Ascanius see also Moseley, N., Characters and Epithets. A Study of VergiVs Aeneid (New Haven, 1926), 47–67 Google Scholar. See also Petrini, M., The Child and the Hero: Coming of Age in Catullus and Vergil (Ann Arbor, 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷² See Hardie (1994), 23–34 (with bibliography); Farron (1993), 155–64 ‘Recent interpretations of the Nisus-Euryalus episode’.

⁷³ For the Sack of Troy in Aen. 2 as an allegory of the downfall of the Republic (Priam as Pompey) see Bowie, A., ‘The death of Priam: allegory and history in the Aeneid ,’ CQ 40 (1990), 470-81CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For further discussion of historical allegory in the Aeneid see pp. 92–3 below.

⁷⁴ To use the title of Syme’s classic book (1939), still valuable background reading for the student of the Aeneid, even if ch. 30 on the ‘Organization of opinion’ is now dated.

⁷⁵ On the Golden Age see ch. II n. 57 and ch. III n. 48.

⁷⁶ See Gransden (1976), 36–41; Thomas (1982), ch. 4. On Virgil’s picture of Italy see also Tilly, B., Vergil’s Latium (Oxford, 1947)Google Scholar; Schweizer, H. J., Vergil und Italien: Interpretationen zu den italischen Gestalten der Aeneis (Aarau, 1967)Google Scholar; McKay, A. G., Vergi’s Italy (Greenwich, Conn., and Bath, 1970)Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ See Hardie on 9.598-620, with further bibliography (esp. Horsfall, N. M., ‘Numanus Remulus: ethnography and propaganda in Aen. 9.598 ff.’, in Harrison, (1990), 305-15Google Scholar). ‘Harvard School’ readers are tempted to take Numanus’ speech at face value: Thomas (1982), 98–100.

⁷⁸ Cornell (n. 49), 65.

⁷⁹ See Gruen (n. 49); Galinsky (1996), 332–63 ‘Greek and Roman’.

⁸⁰ Drawing on a persistent strain in the post-Homeric reception of the figure of Odysseus: Stanford (1963), chs. 7, 8, 10. It is worth noting that we only hear of Ulysses in the Aeneid through the words of characters with a parti pris (cf. also 9.602 fandi fictor Ulixes [Numanus]). On the developing image of the Greeks see Rengakos, A., ‘Zum Griechenbild in Vergib Aeneas’, A&A 39 (1993), 112-24Google Scholar.

⁸¹ Hine, H., ‘Aeneas and the arts (Vergil, Aeneid 6.847-50)’, in Whitby, , Hardie, , and Whitby, (1987), 173-83Google Scholar.

⁸² On the distinction between the story and the way that it is told see Chatman, S., Story and Discourse (Ithaca, 1978)Google Scholar. Introductory works on narratology: Genette, G., Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method (Ithaca, 1980)Google Scholar; Bal, M., Narratology (Toronto, 1985)Google Scholar. On Virgilian narratology see D. Fowler in Martindale (1997), 259–70.

⁸³ The events of the poem are squeezed into about twenty days, separated by longer or shorter intervals: Heinze (1993), 265–6.

⁸⁴ Heinze (1993), 348–69.

⁸⁵ The phrase in medias res comes from Horace Ars Poetica 148 (see Brink ad loc). On the Storm and its functions as a beginning to the poem see Pöschl (1962), 13–24 (using the musical analogy of an ‘overture’ to analyse the Storm’s introductory presentation of major themes in the epic); Otis (1964), 227–35; Williams, R. D., ‘The opening scenes of the Aeneid ,’, PVS 5 (1965/66), 14–23 Google Scholar. See also Nuttall, A. D., Openings: Narrative Beginnings from the Epic to the Novel (Oxford, 1992), ch. 1 Google Scholar (focusing mostly on the first eleven lines of the poem). In general on the issues connected with literary beginnings see Dunn, F. M. and Cole, T. (eds.), Beginnings in Classical Literature, YCS 29 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Said, E. W., Beginnings: Intention and Method (New York, 1975)Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ See Ogilvie on Livy 1.19.1-4; Williams (1968), 426–8. On the Belli Portae in the Aen. see Fowler, D., ‘Opening the gates of war (Aen. 7.601-40)’, in Stahl, (1998), 155-74Google Scholar.

⁸⁷ Feeney (1991), 137–8; Hershkowitz, D., The Madness of Epic: Reading Insanity from Homer to Statius (Oxford, 1998), ch. 2 Google Scholar.

⁸⁸ On the closural devices of the Aen. see Hardie, P. R., ‘Closure in Latin epic’, in Roberts, D. H., Dunn, F. M., and Fowler, D. (eds.), Classical Closure (Princeton, 1997), 139-62Google Scholar; Mitchell-Boyask, R. N., ‘ Sine fine: Virgil’s masterplot’, AJP 117 (1996), 289–307 Google Scholar. In general on the theoretical issues involved see Fowler, D. P., ‘First thoughts on closure: problems and prospects’, MD 23 (1989), 75–122 Google Scholar; id., ‘Second thoughts on closure’, in D. H. Roberts et al, Classical Closure, 3–22. On the death of Turnus see also pp. 99–101 below.

⁸⁹ Allecto and Storm: Otis (1964), 233–4, 328; Pöschl (1962), 71–85; Buchheit (1963), 59–85.

⁹⁰ Feeney, D. C., ‘The reconciliations of Juno’, in Harrison, (1990), 339-62Google Scholar.

⁹¹ Quint, D., ‘Repetition and ideology in the Aeneid ,’, MD 24 (1991), 9–54 Google Scholar; see also Hardie (1993), 14–18. Quint, like other recent analysts of epic narrative, draws on the psychoanalytic narrative theory of Brooks, P., Reading for the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative (New York, 1985)Google Scholar.

⁹² Quint (1993), 31–41; see also Burrow, C., Epic Romance. Homer to Milton (Oxford, 1993), ch. 2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar on Virgil. For reflections on the Aeneid’s attempt to arrest the mutability of historical process see Hardie, P. R., ‘Augustan poets and the mutability of Rome’, in Powell, A. (ed.), Roman Poetry and Propaganda in the Age of Augustus (Bristol, 1992), 59–82 Google Scholar.

⁹³ For the idea of conflicting sets of fates see Bailey (1935), 212–13; Potscher, W., Vergil und die göttlichen Mächte: Aspekte seiner Weltanschauung (Hildesheim and New York, 1977), 63-6Google Scholar.

⁹⁴ The conflict between ‘winners’ stories’ and ‘losers’ stories’ in epic texts is a central concern of Quint (1993).

⁹⁵ Heinze (1993), 370–3.

⁹⁶ Otis (1964), ch. 3, ‘The subjective style’. Otis, however, drew too sharp a distinction between Virgil’s ‘subjective’ and Homer’s Objective’ style; recent narratological analyses of Homer have exploded the idea of a totally impartial and detached Homeric narrator: see De Jong, I. J. F., Narrators and Focalizers: The Presentation of the Story in the Iliad (Amsterdam, 1987)Google Scholar. Farron (1993) argues that the Aeneid’s chief aim is to work on the reader’s emotions, rather than to convey messages.

⁹⁷ On issues connected with focalization see Fowler, D. P., ‘Deviant focalisation in Virgil’s Aeneid ,’, PCPS 36 (1990), 42–63 Google Scholar; Bonfanti, M., Punto di vista e modi della narrazione nell’Eneide (Pisa, 1985)Google Scholar; Conte (1986), 152–4.

⁹⁸ Ecphrasis has been the subject of intense theoretical attention in recent years, as a privileged locus for the study of the relationship between text and image: see Fowler, D., ‘Narrate and describe: the problem of ekphrasis’, JRS 81 (1991), 25–35 Google Scholar; Laird, A., ‘Sounding out ecphrasis: art and text in Catullus 64’, JRS 83 (1993), 18–30 Google Scholar; Elsner, J., Art and Text in Roman Culture (Cambridge, 1996)Google Scholar; A. Barchiesi in Martindale (1997), 271–81.

⁹⁹ Williams, R. D., ‘The pictures on Dido’s temple (Aen. 1.446-93)’, CQ 10 (1960), 145-51CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Clay, D., ‘The archeology of the temple to Juno in Carthage’, CP 83 (1988), 195–205 Google Scholar; Barchiesi, A., ‘Rappresentazioni del dolore e interpretazione nell’Eneide’, A&A 40 (1994), 109-24Google Scholar; M. C. J. Putnam, ‘Dido’s murals and Virgilian ekphrasis’, HSCP forthcoming.

¹⁰⁰ Fitzgerald, W., ‘Aeneas, Daedalus, and the labyrinth’, Arethusa 17 (1984), 51–65 Google Scholar; Paschalis, M., ‘The unifying theme of Daedalus’ sculptures on the temple of Apollo Cumanus (Aen. 6.20-33)’, Vergilius 32 (1986), 33–41 Google Scholar; Putnam (1995), ch. 4; Casali, S., ‘Aeneas and the doors of the Temple of Apollo’, CJ 91 (1995), 1–9 Google Scholar.

¹⁰¹ West, D., ‘ Cernere eraf: the Shield of Aeneas’, in Harrison, (1990), 295–304 Google Scholar; Hardie (1986), ch. 8; Quint (1993), ch. 1; Gurval (1995), ch. 5.

¹⁰² Conte (1986), 185–95; Putnam, M. C. J., ‘Virgil’s Danaid ekphrasis’, ICS 19 (1994), 171-89Google Scholar.

¹⁰³ Foreshadowing and irony are already found in Homer, but intensified in the Aeneid through Virgil’s use of tragic models: Duckworth, G. E., Foreshadowing and Suspense in the Epics of Homer, Apollonius and Vergil (Princeton, 1933)Google Scholar; Muecke (n. 40); Quinn (1968), 330–9, ‘Tragic irony and insight’; Reckford, K. J., ‘Latent tragedy in Aeneid VII.1-285’, AJP 82 (1961), 252-69Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁴ The play of different ‘voices’ (the ‘authorial’ and the ‘participatory’) and of points of view in Aen. 1 is the subject of the suggestive article by Segal, C., ‘Art and the hero: participation, detachment, and narrative point of view in Aeneid 1’, Arethusa 14 (1981), 67–83 Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁵ On the divine point of view in the Aeneid see Block, E., The Effects of Divine Manifestation on the Reader’s Perspective in Vergil’s Aeneid (New York, 1981)Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁶ See Lewis, R. W. B., ‘On translating the Aeneid ,’, in Commager, (1966), 41–52, at 50–2Google Scholar; Williams (1983), 68–9; Conte (1986), 194–5.

¹⁰⁷ For another example of a simile that may be focalized through one of the characters rather than through the narrator see Williams (1983), 180 on Aen. 10.565-70 (is it the Italians who perceive Aeneas as like the monstrous Aegaeon?). The bee simile of the busy Carthaginians at 1.430-6 and the ant simile of the Trojans at 4.402-7 are focalized very literally through the eyes of the characters, respectively Aeneas and Dido, who in each passage are watching the scene from a high vantage point, so that people look small.

¹⁰⁸ For another example of a character in the text undertaking an act of interpretation analogous to that of the reader see O’Hara, J. J., ‘Dido as “interpreting character” at Aeneid 4.56-66’, Arethusa 26 (1993), 99–114 Google Scholar, developing an argument in O’Hara (1990) that the interpretation of omens and prophecies by characters in the poem bears an analogy to the reading and interpretation of ambiguous works of literature such as the Aeneid. The reference to preexisting mythological or narrative models or examples (‘exemplarity’) on the part of both characters and readers in an allusive narrative such as Virgil’s becomes the object of parody in what Conte calls the ‘mythomaniac heroes’ of Petronius’ Satyricon, unable to rise above their constant temptation to see the sordid reality of their lives in terms of romantic mythical models: Conte, G. B.,The Hidden Author. An Interpretation of Petronius’ Satyricon (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1996), ch. 1 Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁹ The notion of’creating a character’ through the careful layering of diverse models is indebted to Griffin’s, J. excellent essay ‘The creation of characters in the Aeneid ,’ in Griffin, (1985), 183-97Google Scholar.

¹¹⁰ The approach of Otis (1964). In general on the character of Aeneas see Camps (1969), ch. 3; Mackie (1988). For differing versions of the ‘spiritual development’ approach to the character of Aeneas see Sullivan S. J., F. A., ‘The spiritual itinerary of Virgil’s Aeneas’, AJP 80 (1959), 150–61 Google Scholar (the religious hero); van Nortwick, T., Somewhere I have Never Travelled: The Second Self and the Hero’s Journey in Ancient Epic (New York and Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar (using psychoanalytic models).

¹¹¹ In general on the issues of character and selfhood in antiquity see Peiling, C. B. (ed.), Characterization and Individuality in Greek Literature (Oxford, 1990)Google Scholar; Gill, C., Personality in Greek Epic, Tragedy, and Philosophy. The Self in Dialogue (Oxford, 1996)Google Scholar.

¹¹² For a comparison of Homeric and Republican values see Thornton (1976), 1–12. The question of anachronistic modes of heroism in the Aeneid may be illuminated by recent work on Attic tragedy’s exploration of the obsolescence of aristocratic values in a democratic society: see Vernant, J. P., ‘The historical moment of tragedy in Greece’, in Vernant, J. P. and Vidal-Naquet, P., Myth and Tragedy in Ancient Greece (New York, 1988), 23–8 Google Scholar.

¹¹³ On the problems of the Iliadic hero see esp. Redfield, J. M., Nature and Culture in the Iliad: The Tragedy of Hector (Chicago and London, 1975)Google Scholar; Gill (n. Ill), ch. 2.

¹¹⁴ Many read the Odyssey as implicitly reexamining and criticizing the models of heroism in the Iliad: see Rutherford, R., Homer (Oxford, 1996), 58-9Google Scholar. For the later tradition see Steadman, J. M., Milton’s Epic Characters (Chapel Hill, 1968)Google Scholar; Kates, J. A., ‘The revaluation of the classical heroic in Tasso and Milton’, Comp. Lit. 26 (1974), 299–317 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹¹⁵ Diomedes excuses his refusal to support the Latins with his memory (rather exaggerated!) of Aeneas’ prowess in the Iliadic fighting, 11.283 experto credite.

¹¹⁶ See above n. 11.

¹¹⁷ See Nelis (n. 26); Levy, B. E., ‘Homer, Apollonius and the origins of Aeneas’, Vergilius 7 (1961), 25-9Google Scholar.

¹¹⁸ Cairns (1989), chs. 2 and 3.

¹¹⁹ Nisbet, R. G. M., ‘ Aeneas Imperator. Roman generalship in an epic context’, in Harrison, (1990), 378-89Google Scholar.

¹²⁰ Feeney, in Harrison (1990), 187–9.

¹²¹ Stanford (1963), chs. 7 and 9; in the Aeneid Aeneas has some of the features of this version of Odysseus, whereas the Virgilian Ulysses stands in another tradition of judging Odysseus as the unscrupulous trickster (Stanford (1963), ch. 10). A typical example of this way of reading Homer is Horace Epistles 1.2, where the heroes of the Iliad are taken as examples of the bad effects of the passions, while Ulixes is ‘a useful example of the power of virtue and wisdom’ (Ep. 1.2.17-18).

¹²² E.g. his assurance to the Sibyl at 6.105 that no future ordeal can surprise him, omnia praecepi atque animo mecum ante peregi (see Norden and Austin ad loc).

¹²² Aeneas as a Stoic proficiens: Heinze (1993), 227; Bowra, C. M., ‘Aeneas and the Stoic ideal’, G&R 3 (1933/34), 8–21 Google Scholar; Edwards, M. W., ‘The expression of Stoic ideas in the Aeneid ,’ Phoenix 14 (1960), 151-65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; on Aeneas and the Cynic-Stoic ideal of the good king see Cairns (1989), 34–7.

¹²⁴ Griffin, J., Homer on Life and Death (Oxford, 1980)Google Scholar; Thalmann, W. G., Conventions of Form and Thought in Early Greek Poetry (Baltimore and London, 1984)Google Scholar, index s.v. ‘Gods and Men’.

¹²⁵ On the image of death in battle as defloration see Fowler, D. P., ‘Vergil on killing virgins’, in Whitby, , Hardie, , and Whitby, (1987), 185-98Google Scholar.

¹²⁶ Barchiesi (1984), 16–30.

¹²⁷ Aeneas’ story is already marked as ‘Herculean’ by the word labores at 1.10, ‘labours’ inflicted on him as on Hercules by a persecuting Juno. On the role of the Virgilian Hercules and the model that he holds up to Aeneas, see Galinsky, G. K., The Herakles Theme (Oxford, 1972), 131-52Google Scholar; Gransden (1976), 17–20; see also Zarker, J. W., ‘The Hercules theme in the Aeneid ’, Vergilius 18 (1972), 34–48 Google Scholar; Feeney (n. 26); id. (1991), 156–61; Hardie (1993), 66–7. Otis, in his cheerfully optimistic reading of the poem, labels Aeneas a theios aner ‘divine man’ (Otis [1964], 219–22). See also De Witt, N. W., ‘The influence of the saviour sentiment upon Virgil’, TAPA 54 (1923), 39–50 Google Scholar.

¹²⁸ In general on ruler-cult see Taylor, L. R., The Divinity of the Roman Emperor (Middletown, 1931)Google Scholar; Weinstock, S., Divus Julius (Oxford, 1971)Google Scholar; Price, S. R. F., Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (Cambridge, 1984)Google Scholar.

¹²⁹ Lyne (1987), 114–25 [a shorter version of Lyne in McAuslan and Walcot (1990), 157–66]. Cairns (1989), ch. 7 argues unconvincingly that Lavinia’s self-effacement itself marks her as the typical maiden of Greek choral lyric.

¹³⁰ On Amata see Zarker, J. W., ‘Amata. Vergil’s other tragic queen’, Vergilius 15 (1969), 2–24 Google Scholar; Penna, A. La, ‘Amata e Didone’, Maia 19 (1967), 309-18Google Scholar.

¹³¹ Andromache’s marriage in exile to Helenus is a throwback to the Trojan wedded households disrupted by the war; at the same time she is inseparably ‘wedded’ to the cenotaph of her first husband Hector. There are strong hints that Andromache exists in a kind of shadow land (see n. 64); on the episode see Grimm, R. E., ‘Aeneas and Andromache in Aeneid 3’, AJP 88 (1967), 151-62Google Scholar; West, G. S., ‘Andromache and Dido’, AJP 104 (1983), 257-67Google Scholar; Quint (1993), ch. 2.

¹³² See now the excellent discussion by E. Oliensis, in Martindale (1997), 303–11.

¹³³ Camilla: Gransden (1991), 20–5; DeWitt, N. W., ‘Vergil’s tragedy of maidenhood’, CW 18 (1924/25), 107-8Google Scholar; Basson, W. P., ‘Vergil’s Camilla: a paradoxical character’, Acta Classica 29 (1986), 57–68 Google Scholar; West, G. S., ‘Chloreus and Camilla’, Vergilius 31 (1985), 22-9Google Scholar; Boyd, B. W., ‘Virgil’s Camilla and the traditions of catalogue and ecphrasis (Aeneid 7.803-17)’, AJP 113 (1992), 213-34Google Scholar.

¹³⁴ On Roman representations of Cleopatra see Wyke, M., ‘Augustan Cleopatras: female power and poetic authority’, in Powell, A. (ed.), Roman Poetry and Propaganda in the Age of Augustus (Bristol, 1992), 98–140 Google Scholar.

¹³⁵ But the homoeroticism of the Aeneid stands in need of further study: for some thoughts see Hardie (1994), 33–4 (on the love of Nisus and Euryalus); Putnam (1995), 27–49 (suggesting a homoerotic charge to the relationship of Aeneas and Pallas).

¹³⁶ For further bibliography see Hardie on 9.77-122; add Harrison, E. L., ‘The metamorphosis of the ships (Aeneid 9.77-122)’, PLLS 8 (1995), 143-64Google Scholar.

¹³⁷ On the Magna Mater in Virgil and Augustan Rome see Wilhelm, R. M., ‘Cybele: the Great Mother of Augustan order’, Vergilius 34 (1988), 77–101 Google Scholar; Wiseman, T. P., ‘Cybele, Virgil and Augustus’, in Woodman, and West, (1984), 117-28Google Scholar.

¹³⁸ Venus in the Aeneid: Wlosok, A., Die Göttin Venus in Vergib Aeneis (Heidelberg, 1967)Google Scholar.

¹³⁹ Perkell, C. G., ‘On Creusa, Dido, and the quality of victory in Virgil’s Aeneid ,’, in Foley, H. P. (ed.), Reflections of Women in Antiquity (New York etc., 1981), 355-77Google Scholar; Wiltshire, S. F., Public and Private in Vergil’s Aeneid (Amherst, 1989), ch. 2 Google Scholar ‘Grieving mothers and the costs of attachment’; Georgia Nugent, S., ‘Vergil’s “voice of the women” in Aeneid V’, Arethusa 25 (1992), 255-92Google Scholar; Sullivan, J. P., ‘Dido and the representation of women in Vergil’s Aeneid ,’, in Wilhelm, R. M. and Jones, H. (eds.), The Two Worlds of the Poet: New Perspectives on Vergil (Detroit, 1992), 64–73 Google Scholar. Books on women in Roman epic are under way by S. Georgia Nugent and A. Keith.

¹⁴⁰ On structural patterns in Homer see e.g. Schein, S. L., The Mortal Hero: An Introduction to Homer’s Iliad (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1984), 30-3Google Scholar; Silk, M. S., Homer: The Iliad (Cambridge, 1987), 37–46 Google Scholar; Taplin, O., Homeric Soundings: The Shaping of the Iliad (Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar; Macleod, C. W., Homer: Iliad XXIV (Cambridge, 1982), 16–35 Google Scholar.

¹⁴¹ For accounts of Homeric repetition that seek to go beyond the mechanical approach of the oral school see Silk (n. 140), 67, 101–5; Kahane, A., The Interpretation of Order: A Study in the Poetics of Homeric Repetition (Oxford, 1994)Google Scholar.

¹⁴² On Virgilian repetition see Moskalew (1982); and for a study in an older style see Sparrow, J., Half-lines and Repetitions in Virgil (Oxford, 1931)Google Scholar; for a case-study see Segal, C. P., ‘Vanishing shades: Virgil and Homeric repetitions’, Eranos 72 (1974), 34–52 Google Scholar (on 2.790-5, 5.738-45, 6.703-6, 12.952).

¹⁴³ Moskalew (1982), 136–9; Henry (1989), 115–21; Harrison on 10.261-2. My comments in fact touch only a few of the interconnections triggered by this phrase in the vast echo-chamber of the Aeneid, and which through the fire imagery of 8.680-1 and 10.261-2, 270–5 would take us on a tour of the fire imagery of Aen. 2 and its interaction with the theme of destruction and rebirth.

¹⁴⁴ On which see Hardie (1986), 177–80. On ring-composition see Moskalew (1982), 116–22.

¹⁴⁵ On this passage see von Albrecht, M., ‘Die Kunst der Spiegelung in Vergils Aeneis’, Hermes 93 (1965), 54–64 Google Scholar; see also Hardie (1986), index s.v. ‘inversion’.

¹⁴⁶ See Hardie, P. R., PLLS 9 (1996), 107-8, 113–14Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁷ Camps (1969), ch. 6 ‘Principles of structure: continuity and symmetry’; Otis (1964), Appendix 9; Perret (1965), 113–21, ‘L’architecture de l’Énéide’; Lesueur, R., L’Énéide de Virgile: Étude sur la composition rythmique d’une épopée (Toulouse, 1975), 21–46 Google Scholar contains a useful survey of earlier schemes.

¹⁴⁸ Duckworth, G. E., ‘The architecture of the Aeneid ,’, AJP 77 (1954), 1–15 Google Scholar. On the parallels between 1 and 7 see n. 89 above.

¹⁴⁹ The clarity of this division into halves is complicated by the postponement of the invocation to Erato at the beginning of Aen. 7 until after the further narration of the Trojans’ journey from Caieta, past the eerie island of Circe, to the mouth of the Tiber: on aspects of Virgil’s transitional strategy here see Hardie, P. R., in Powell, A. (ed.), Roman Poetry and Propaganda in the Age of Augustus (Bristol, 1992), 66-9Google Scholar. In general on Virgil’s use of book-divisions see Harrison, E. L., ‘The structure of the Aeneid: observations on the links between books’, ANRW ll 31.1 (1980), 359-93Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁰ Duckworth, G. E., ‘The Aeneid as a trilogy’, TAPA 88 (1957), 17–30 Google Scholar; Camps, W. A., ‘A note on the structure of the Aeneid ,’, CQ 4 (1954), 214-15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; id., ‘A second note on the structure of the Aeneid,’ CQ 9 (1959), 53–6, on the central place of the temple/council-chamber of Latinus. There is interesting comparative material in Fowler, A., Triumphal Forms: Structural Patterns in Elizabethan Poetry (Cambridge, 1970)Google Scholar, on ‘triumphal patterns involving significant central points’, and the ‘numerology of the centre’. Symbolic centres in Virgil: Thomas, R. F., ‘Virgil’s ecphrastic centrepieces’, HSCP 87 (1983), 175-84Google Scholar.

¹⁵¹ Heinze (1993), 363–4; Conway, R. S., ‘The architecture of the epic’, in Harvard Lectures on the Vergilian Age (Cambridge, Mass., 1928), 129-49CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pöschl (1962), 165–73.

¹⁵² Otis (1964), 217. Little support has been found for the numerological analysis of Duckworth, G. E., Structural Patterns and Proportions in Vergil’s Aeneid: A Study in Mathematical Composition (Ann Arbor, 1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, according to whom the whole poem is structured on the Golden Section, and Virgil is a Pythagorean.

¹⁵³ Knox, B. M. W., ‘The serpent and the flame: the imagery of the second book of the Aeneid ,’ AJP 71 (1950), 379–400 Google Scholar = Commager (1966), 124–42. Other explorations of the image structure of the Aen. that have worn well include Newton, F. L., ‘Recurrent imagery in Aeneid 4’, TAPA 88 (1957), 31–43 Google Scholar; Fenik, B., ‘Parallelism of theme and imagery in Aeneid 2 and 4’, AJP 80 (1959), 1–24 Google Scholar. For an example of imagistic structures operating over a larger span of the poem see Hunt, J. W., Forms of Glory. Structure and Sense in Vergi’s Aeneid (Carbondale and Edwardsville, 1973), 84–95 Google Scholar on the parallel imagery linking Dido and Turnus, paired structurally as the chief obstacles to Aeneas in respectively the first four and last four books of the poem.

¹⁵⁴ The term is West’s, D. A., in ‘Multiple-correspondence similes in the Aeneid. ,’ in Harrison, (1990), 429-44Google Scholar; id., ‘Virgilian multiple-correspondence similes and their antecedents’, Philologus 114 (1970), 262–75. On similes see also Hornsby, R. A., Patterns of Action in the Aeneid: An Interpretation of Vergi’s Epic Similes (Iowa City, 1970)Google Scholar; Rieks, R., ‘Die Gleichnisse Vergils’, ANRW II 31.2 (1981), 1011–1110 Google Scholar; Coffey, M., ‘The subject matter of Virgil’s similes’, BICS 8 (1961), 63–75 Google Scholar; Lyne (1989), 63–99.

¹⁵⁵ Seen. 107.

¹⁵⁶ See Lyne (1989), 77–9; see also index s.w. ‘narrative through imagery’.

¹⁵⁷ Ferguson, J., ‘Fire and wound. The imagery of Aeneid 4.1 ff.’, PKS 10 (1970/71), 57–63 Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁸ Hunting: Dunkle, J. R., ‘The hunter and hunting in the Aeneid ,’, Ramus 2 (1973), 127-42CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Other central images worked out in literal and figurative forms throughout the poem include Knox’s flame and serpent, the storm, the mountain (on which see Morwood, J. H. W., ‘Aeneas and mount Atlas’, JRS 75 (1985), 51-9Google Scholar); for other aspects of fire-imagery see Miller, P. A., ‘The minotaur within: fire, the labyrinth, and strategies of containment in Aeneid 5 and 6’, CP 90 (1995), 225-40Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁹ For an earlier study of Virgilian symbolism see Cruttwell, R. W., Virgil’s Mind at Work: An Analysis of the Symbolism of the Aeneid (Oxford, 1946)Google Scholar.

¹⁶⁰ Hardie, P. R., ‘The Aeneid and the Oresteia ,’ PVS 20 (1991), 29–45, at 31–4Google Scholar.

¹⁶¹ On Lucretian analogy see Schiesaro, A., Simulacrum et imago: gli argomenti analogici nel De rerum natura (Pisa, 1990)Google Scholar; on the affinities between Virgilian and Lucretian imagistic practice see West (n. 154 [1970]); Hardie (1986), 232–3.

¹⁶² This is the imaginative process discussed in Lowes’, J. Livingston study of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, The Road to Xanadu: A Study in the Ways of the Imagination (London, 1927)Google Scholar; the parallel between Virgil and Livingston Lowes’ account of Coleridge has been drawn by several Virgilian critics, e.g. Jackson Knight (1966), 102–3.

¹⁶³ Cic. Or. 94 cum fluxerunt continuo plures translations, alia plane fit oratio; itaque genus hoc Graeci appellant άλληγορίαν. In general on ancient allegory, and Virgilian allegory in particular, see Whitman, J., Allegory: The Dynamics of an Ancient and Medieval Technique (Oxford, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Buffière, F., Les Mythes d’Homère et la pensée grecque (Paris, 1956)Google Scholar; Thornton (1976); Wlosok, A., ‘ Gemina doctrina: on allegorical interpretation’, PLLS 5 (1986), 75–84 Google Scholar; Hardie (1986), 29–32; Farrell (1991), 257–72. On personification allegory: Lewis, C. S., The Allegory of Love (Oxford, 1936)Google Scholar; Feeney (1991), s.v. ‘personifications’. See also pp. 56–7 above.

¹⁶⁴ On the statesman simile see Pöschl (1962), 20–3; Otis (1964), 229–30; Harrison, S. J., ‘Vergil on kingship: the first simile of the Aeneid ,’, PCPS 34 (1988), 55-9Google Scholar.

¹⁶⁵ Hercules and Cacus: Galinsky, G. K., ‘The Hercules-Cacus episode in Aeneid VIII’, AJP 87 (1966), 18–51 Google Scholar; Buchheit (1963), 116–33; Hardie (1986), 110–18.

¹⁶⁶ See Gransden on 8.285.

¹⁶⁷ Drew (1927), ch. 1; Camps (1969), ch. 10 ‘Echoes of history’; Binder (1971), a massively detailed study of the historical allusions in book 8. Drew argues for historical allegory in Aen. 5 also; for other examples of historical allegory cf. e.g. Horsfall, N. M., ‘ Turnus ad portas ’, Latomus 33 (1974), 80-6Google Scholar (Turnus at 9.47-53 prefigures Hannibal at the gates of Rome); Austin on 2.486ff. (the sack of Troy probably modelled on the Ennian sack of Alba Longa); A. Bowie (n. 73). On reflections of Cleopatra in that other African queen Dido see Pease (1935), 24–8; Camps (1969), 95–6; on Dido as prefiguring later Carthaginian perfidy see Horsfall, N. M., ‘Dido in the light of history’, in Harrison, (1990), 127-44Google Scholar. The way in which the legendary narrative of the Aeneid prefigures later historical events has sometimes been compared to typology, the practice of Biblical interpreters of reading Old Testament events as ‘types’ of events in the New Testament (e.g. Jonah in the belly of the whale as a type of Christ’s descent to Hell); see K. Gransden (1976), 14–20; id., ‘Typology, symbolism and allegory in the Aeneid,’, PVS 13 (1973/4), 14–27; Thompson, D., ‘Allegory and typology in the Aeneid ,’, Arethusa 3 (1970), 147-53Google Scholar; note the qualifications of Griffin (1985), 184–93.

¹⁶⁸ Gigantomachic allusion: Hardie (1986), chs. 3 and 4; 90–7 on the Storm.

¹⁶⁹ A strong sense of the cosmic aspect of the poem informs the books by Pöschl (1962), Thornton (1976) (for whom the plot of the poem concerns the ‘coherence of the universe’), and Hardie (1986).

¹⁷⁰ Epic’s inherent expansiveness: Hardie (1993), 3–10.

¹⁷¹ In general on ‘European’ and ‘Harvard’ schools of Virgilian criticism see the stimulating discussion in Johnson (1976), ch. 1; and S. J. Harrison’s ‘Introduction’ to Harrison (1990). W. Clausen’s own reflections on his part in the foundation of the ‘Harvard’ school (the seminal article is Clausen [1964a]) are printed at Horsfall (1995), 313–14. Notable examples of the ‘European’ school include Klingner, Pöschl, Buchheit, Cairns, Galinsky; of the ‘Harvard’ school Clausen, Adam Parry, Putnam, R. F. Thomas, Boyle, Lyne.

¹⁷² Feeney (1991), 113–14, 140–1. Feeney’s chapter 4 is a very stimulating account of the divine machinery of the Aeneid working as part of a poetic text. For general introductions to the gods and religion in the Aeneid see Camps (1969), ch. 5; Bailey (1935); Boyancé, P., La Religion de Virgile (Paris, 1963)Google Scholar; Heinze (1993), 235–50; Coleman, R., ‘The gods in the Aeneid ,’, G&R 29 (1982), 143-68Google Scholar; Kühn, W., Götterszenen bei Vergil (Heidelberg, 1971)Google Scholar. On Fate see Potscher (n. 93). On the role of Jupiter see Wlosok, A., ‘Vergil als Theologe: Iuppiter—pater omnipotens’, Gymn. 90 (1983), 187–202 = Res Humanae—Res Divinae: Kleine Schriften (Heidelberg, 1990), 368-83Google Scholar.

¹⁷³ On the etymology of fatum from fan see O’Hara (1996), 121.

¹⁷⁴ O’Hara (1990), 132–63.

¹⁷⁵ For two very different ways of dealing with this contradiction see Heinze (1993), 278 n. 43 and Lyne (1987), 78–81.

¹⁷⁶ On speeches and rhetoric in the Aeneid see Heinze (1993), 314–32; Highet (1972); Lynch, J. P., ‘Laocoon and Sinon: Virgil Aeneid 2.40-198’, in McAuslan, and Walcot, (1990), 112-20Google Scholar. The most searching examination of the place of rhetoric in the Aeneid is in Feeney, D. C., ‘The taciturnity of Aeneas’, in Harrison, (1990), 167-90Google Scholar; Feeney’s conclusion that the Aeneid is able comfortably to separate words used rhetorically and words used as a transparent medium for truth is questioned by Hardie, P. R., ‘Fame and defamation in the Aeneid: the Council of Latins (Aen. 11.225-467)’, in Stahl, (1998), 243-70Google Scholar.

¹⁷⁷ Feeney (n. 90). On the interview between Jupiter and Juno see also Buchheit (1963), 133–50; on the (typically Homeric) ‘sublime frivolity’ of the scene, with its overtones of domestic comedy see West, D., ‘The end and the meaning (Am. 12.791-842)’, in Stahl, (1998), 303-18Google Scholar.

¹⁷⁸ So Feeney, D. C., ‘History and revelation in Vergil’s Underworld’, POPS 32 (1986), 1–24 Google Scholar; for the contrary view that the Parade of Heroes is ‘whole-hearted and successful panegyric’ see West, D., ‘The pageant of the heroes as panegyric (Virgil, Aen. 6.760-886)’, in Jocelyn, H. D. (ed.), Tria Lustra (Liverpool, 1993), 283-96Google Scholar. On the Parade of Heroes see also Williams, R. D., ‘The sixth book of the Aeneid ,’, G&R 11 (1964), 48–63 Google Scholar; von Albrecht, M., ‘Vergils Geschichtsauffassung in der “Heldenschau”’, WS 80 (1967), 156-82Google Scholar; Horsfall, N. M., ‘The structure and purpose of Vergil’s Parade of Heroes’, Ancient Society (Macquarie), 12 (1982), 12–18 Google Scholar.

¹⁷⁹ Mysteries (see also ch. III n. 87); Luck, G., ‘Virgil and the mystery religions’, AJP 94 (1973), 147-66Google Scholar. In general on Aeneas’ journey to the Underworld see Zetzel, J. E. G., ‘ Romane memento: justice and judgment in Aeneid 6’, TAPA 119 (1989), 263-84Google Scholar; Clark, R. J., Catabasis: Vergil and the Wisdom-Tradition (Amsterdam, 1979)Google Scholar.

¹⁸⁰ Brooks, R. A., ‘ Discolor aura. Reflections on the golden bough’, AJP 74 (1953), 260-80Google Scholar [= Commager (1966), 143–66] (an article often regarded as an important landmark in the ‘Harvard’ school of interpretation); Segal, C. P., ‘ Aeternum per saecula nomen. The Golden Bough and the tragedy of history’, Arion 4 (1965), 617-57Google Scholar; 5 (1966), 34–72 (using the Golden Bough as a key to the wider antitheses in the Aeneid that define the ‘tragic fate’ of the world); West, D. A., The Bough and the Gate (Exeter, 1987)Google Scholar; Weber, C., ‘The allegory of the Golden Bough’, Vergilius 41 (1995), 3–34 Google Scholar.

¹⁸¹ See recendy Tarrant, R. J., ‘Aeneas and the Gates of Sleep’, CP 77 (1982), 51-5Google Scholar; Molyviati-Toptsis, U., ‘ Sed falsa ad caelum mittunt insomnia Manes (Aeneid 6.896)’, AJP 116 (1995), 639-52Google Scholar.

¹⁸² See Quint (1993), ch. 1; Gurval (1995), ch. 5. In general on the Shield see n. 101.

¹⁸³ Vulcan may represent the pretensions of the epic poet to a demiurgic status: Hardie, P. R., ‘Cosmological patterns in the Aeneid ,’ PLLS 5 (1986), 85–97 Google Scholar.

¹⁸⁴ Feeney (1991), 151–5; in general on the issues of fictionality see Feeney, D. C,, ‘Towards an account of the ancient world’s concepts of fictive belief’ in Gill, C. and Wiseman, T. P. (eds.), Lies and Fiction in the Ancient World (Exeter, 1993), 230-44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁸⁵ Feeney (1991), 168–72. Approaches to the gods as psychological allegories: Quinn (1968), 316–20 ‘Parallel divine and psychological motivation’; Williams (1983), 20–35 ‘The gods as a trope for human motivation’; Lyne (1987), 66–71 ‘Working with’.

¹⁸⁶ Skutsch (1985), 147–67.

¹⁸⁷ Vita Donati 35.

¹⁸⁸ Hardie (1986), 52–66. On the Song of Iopas see also Segal, C. P., ‘The song of Iopas in the Aeneid ,’, Hermes 99 (1971), 336-49Google Scholar; Brown, R. D., ‘The structural function of the Song of Iopas’, HSCP 93 (1990), 315-34Google Scholar.

¹⁸⁹ Habinek, T. N., ‘Science and tradition in Aeneid 6’, HSCP 92 (1989), 223-55Google Scholar discusses the tensions within Aen. 6 between scientific cosmology and the traditional exhortations of funeral speeches, and argues that the two discourses are in fact compatible, in line with the Romans’ self-defining belief that they were well qualified to unite science and tradition.

¹⁹⁰ Galinsky, G. K., ‘The anger of Aeneas’, AJP 109 (1988), 321-48Google Scholar; id., ‘How to be philosophical about the end of the Aeneid,’, ICS 19 (1994), 191–201. Putnam’s meditations on the end of the poem go back to Putnam (1965), 151–201; his recent collection of essays, Putnam (1995), circles repeatedly around the issues: see esp. chs. 8 and 10. Optimist’ readers of the end of the poem include Cairns (1989), 82–4; Stahl, H.-P., ‘Aeneas—an unheroic hero?’, Arethusa 14 (1981), 157-86Google Scholar; id., ‘The death of Turnus: Augustan Vergil and the political rival’, in K. A. Raaflaub and M. Toher (eds.), Between Republic and Empire. Interpretations of Augustus and his Principáte (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1990), 174–211. The ‘pessimists’, these days in the majority, include Beare, R., ‘Invidious success. Some thoughts on the end of the Aeneid ,’, PVS 4 (1964/5), 18–30 Google Scholar; Poe, J. P., ‘Success and failure in the mission of Aeneas’, TAPhA 96 (1965), 321-36Google Scholar; Johnson (1976), 114–34; Lyne (1987), 85–99, 186–8.

¹⁹¹ Hardie (1986), 147–54, 177–80.

¹⁹² Barchiesi (1984), 111–18.

¹⁹³ On Virgil’s theological dualism and its contusion see Johnson (1976), 114–34; Hardie (1993), ch. 3; on the parallel between Juno’s and Aeneas’ anger see Putnam (1995), 4. Attempts to make a sharp distinction between Dirae and Furiae, or between furor and Aeneas’ final furiae (Cairns [1989], 82–4, criticized by Thomas, R. F., AJP 112 [1991], 261 Google Scholar) are unpersuasive.

¹⁹⁴ Parry (1963).

¹⁹⁵ Conte (1986), 153.

¹⁹⁶ For a brilliant study of the critical history of ambiguity in Virgil interpretation see Martindale, C., ‘Descent into Hell: reading ambiguity, or Virgil and the critics’, PVS 21 (1993), 111-50Google Scholar; see also Perkell, C., ‘Ambiguity and irony: the last resort?’, Helios 21 (1994), 63–74 Google Scholar.

¹⁹⁷ On the effects of allusion in complicating interpretation see Lyne, R. O. A. M., ‘Vergil’s Aeneid: subversion by intertextuality. Catullus 66.39-40 and other examples’, G&R 41 (1994), 187–204 Google Scholar.