Contextualizing the indelible footprint of Virgil is not an easy task. Far from a footnote or soupçon, Virgil's influence is only slight in comparison to the mainstream currents of a post-Socratic society. However, if you combine the 15 instances of Homer with the 23 of Virgil you do indeed have a powerful force that predates Socrates. The flaw with this statement is that Virgil was born and died after Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Alexander the Great. Just seeing if you were paying attention.
It's important to point out that the references to Virgil are cumulative but also combinatory. Virgil was not only a post-socratic poet also Dante's guide Through Hell and Halfway House.
The self-deconstruction of the Aeneid comes only from within the author. Is the creative process culturally chauvinistic? Do earlier iterations somehow become illegitimate with the nouveau? The constructs of Tinguely's kinetic art embody the same praxis of destruction only romanticized two thousand years later. "It would be best not to be", is a chilling yet axiomatic statement, especially if your personal ontology posits the premise that we are fragile language animals living on a hostile planet. Nietzschean nihilism?