ABSTRACT
Since 1996 I believe, however, that cogunt quisque suas is the correct reading.1 Wagner's cogunt is undoubtedly correct, having as its reference the viri inflamed for military action by Turnus. Mynors has now the support of Courtney (1981, 15) and Hardie. But I do not share their opinion about suos. Courtney sees in suas a simplification, Hardie makes quisque suos parenthetical "each [mustering] his own men". In my view suos is a complication of a straightforward enunciation for which parallels abound. In such cases quisque keeps its appositional nature. There is no reason to depart from normal Latin diction, which would be (never mind word order) object (or prepositional phrase) + verb (in this case plural) + quisque + a form of suus belonging to the noun. To cite here a typical instance from Livy: diversique ad suum quisque bellum proficiscuntur (10. 12. 3). Cf. further at random: illi exprobrabant sua quisque belli merita cicatrices acceptas (2. 27. 2); edixit ut omnes cives Romani . . . in suis quisque centuriis in campo Martio prima luce adessent (1. 44. 1); ut omnes in suam quisque civitatem ante kal. Novembres redirent (41. 9. 9); deinde in suas quisque civitates redierunt (29. 2. 18); Etruriae primum pro suis quisque facultatibus consulem adiuturos polliciti (28. 45. 15); et Gracchus ita permisit in publico epularentur omnes ante suas quisque fores (24. 16. 17). The onus of proof lies with those who want suos. Poetic language is admittedly capable of unexpected deviations from the normal and expected construction, but I for one cannot see that anything is gained by such a strained twist as implied by the masculine plural suos. This is the situation: Turnus awakens his officers to action. Each of them assembles his own lines.
