Commentary Inf III 31

A much-debated verse. Here our translation follows Petrocchi (Petr.1966.1), pp. 168-69, who reads (error and not orror), even though we agree with Giorgio Brugnoli (Brug.1982.1) that this is a likely echo of Aeneid II.559: 'At me tum primum saevus circumstetit horror' (But then I was enclosed by savage horror [the sight of Priam, his butchered father]). There are detailed discussions of the debate over the verse in Mazzoni (Mazz.1967.1), pp. 352-355; in Petrocchi (Petr.1966.1, pp. 168-69; Petr.1966.2, pp. 42-43); and in M. Simonelli (Simo.1993.1), pp. 27-30. As Petrocchi says, both readings are acceptable: there is not so much at stake here. Nonetheless, the view of Taaffe is worth noting (Taaf.1822.1, p. 171): '...I tend to accept [orror] without reserve, not because it is the most intelligible and poetical... on what I take to be the very best possible authority -- that of Boccaccio.' (The recovery of Taaffe's all-but-forgotten English commentary to the first eight cantos is a bonus found in Simonelli's discussion.) We acknowledge here again that our translation always follows the text established by Petrocchi, even when we are in disagreement with him.