ABSTRACT
When I dealt with these lines in my 1998 article1 I was right, as I still believe, in rejecting the comma after satis in line 141. I might even have used stronger words of disapproval: this comma is a (luckily rare) instance of a misleading comma in the text of Vergil by severing what needs to be understood as a syntactical unity owing to the long span between the emphatic infinitive peccare and the participle at the end of 141. Goold (2000), Geymonat (2008) and Conte (2009) repeated the comma whereas the Spanish editors seem to have honoured my objection to it.
