Two translations of Dido's wound (Aeneid 4.1–2)
A candidate preparing a prescribed passage from Aeneid 4 has to compare two translations of lines 1–2: 'at regina gravi iamdudum saucia cura / vulnus alit venis et caeco carpitur igni.' Version A: 'But the queen, long since wounded by a heavy care, feeds the wound with her veins and is consumed by a blind fire.' Version B: 'But the queen, long since wounded by a heavy care, nourishes the wound in her veins and is devoured by an unseen fire.' The candidate must write a 25-minute commentary justifying one version, but she claims the choice is arbitrary because both English versions 'say the same thing'. The teacher requires her to discuss the ablative 'venis', the force of 'alit', and the epithet 'caeco' before she can choose. The passage is worth 10 marks, and the translation comparison carries 6.
1. What are the possible syntactic values of 'venis'? Which is more likely with 'alit', and how does each translation construe it?
Read the worked answer
'Venis' is dative or ablative plural of 'vena'. With 'alit' ('feeds, nourishes'), the ablative of means is possible: 'she feeds the wound with her veins', i.e. with her own blood and veins. The ablative of place ('in her veins') is also possible, but Latin would more naturally use 'in' + ablative for place. The boldness of 'vulnus alit venis' is precisely the point: Dido nourishes the wound by means of her own veins. Version A preserves that oddity; Version B smooths it into a medical location. The examiner should prefer A as more literal, while allowing B if the commentary acknowledges the smoothing.
2. Assess 'caeco': 'blind' vs 'unseen'. What does the metaphor suggest, and which rendering better preserves it?
Read the worked answer
'Caecus' means blind, dark, unseen, hidden. Of fire, 'blind' is paradoxical: fire normally gives light, but this fire is dark, hidden, and destructive. 'Unseen' explains the paradox but weakens it. 'Blind' keeps the oxymoron and links to Dido's moral blindness. A good commentary should note that 'caeco' is transferred from a person to a fire, and that 'blind fire' is more defamiliarizing. Version A is stronger; Version B is acceptable but interpretative.
3. Write a short paragraph choosing a version and defending it, acknowledging the other.
Read the worked answer
I would choose Version A. It renders 'venis' as an ablative of means and preserves the violent image of Dido feeding the wound with her own veins and blood. 'Blind fire' keeps the oxymoron of 'caeco igni'. Version B is smoother and may be defensible if 'venis' is read as locative, but it turns a bold metaphor into a clinical statement. Since the passage is about passion as a wound, the stranger image is more faithful. I would note in the commentary that 'with her veins' is not ordinary English, but its very strangeness matches Virgil's Latin. The examiner awards marks for recognizing the ambiguity, not for choosing one version blindly.