(Vol. iv., pp. 24. 88.)
Permit me to make a few remarks on the passage of Virgil, "Viridesque
secant," &c., and its attempted elucidation, Vol. iv., pp. 88, 89.
It is stated that the translation is not correct, and also that Servius
was a very illiterate, ignorant, and narrow-minded man, &c.
In the short notice of Servius and his works in the _Penny Cyclopædia_,
we have a very different character of him. Which is to be believed, for
both cannot be right?
Harles, in his _Introd. in Notitiam Lit. Rom._, speaks thus of the
_Commentaries of Servius_:
"Quæ in libris Virgilii sub nomine Servii circumferuntur Scholia,
eorum minima pars pertinet ad illum; sed farrago est ex
antiquioribus commentariis Cornuti, Donati, &c., et aliorum; immo
vero ex recentioris ætatis interpretibus multa adjecta sunt et
interpolata."
Thus condemning the interpolations, but leaving intact the matter really
belonging to Servius.
For a refutation of the impertinent comparison with a Yorkshire hedge
schoolmaster, and the erroneous appreciation of the _Commentaries_, I
must refer to the above-mentioned notice in the _Penny Cyclopædia_.
In the next place, with respect to the meaning of the passage:--the word
_seco_, when applied to the movements of ships, is usually rendered by
"sulco;" _e.g._:
"Jamque fretum Minyæ Pegasæâ puppe secabant."
Ovid, _Met._ vii. 1.
See also lib. xi. 479. "Travel along" would be insufficient to express
the meaning in these instances; and _sulco_ agrees with the modern
phrase, "ploughing the deep," &c.
Moreover, I submit that the interpretation of _seco_ is governed by the
context, inasmuch as its application to both land and water travelling
demands a different construction in the two cases. If this be allowed,
then comparison cannot be made between the line in question and "viam
secat ad naves;" for this refers to Æneas's leaving the infernals, after
his visit there; or "secuit sub nubibus arcum," which refers to cleaving
the air. Heyne's note is "secuit ... arcum; secando aerem fecit arcum;
incessit per arcum."
The clearness or muddiness of the river has no connexion with the
translation; for the words "placido æquore" clearly and definitely
express the state of the _surface_ of the river, and it is such as is
required to favour the reflection of the trees, through whose images the
ships ploughed their way; and, to make the sense perfect, the words
"variis teguntur arboribus" are all that is required as showing the
position of the trees with respect to the river.
P.S. I have not alluded to the special meaning of active verbs
with accusative (Qy. objective) cases after them, &c.
[Hebrew: A. T.]
The Query of your correspondent ERYX has elicited two conflicting
opinions as to the meaning of the words "Viridesque secant placido
æquore silvas." Perhaps the following suggestion may help to set the
matter at rest.
If by these words is meant the cleaving of the shadows on the water, how
could they, with any propriety, be applied to a voyage that was
prosecuted during the darkness of the night as well as by the light of
day?
"Olli remigio _noctemque_ diemque fatigant."