ABSTRACT
The context is this: Amata is on the threshold of frenzy. From 373 onwards the syntax with its artificial word order and diction is exquisite: nequiquam belongs of course not to dictis but to experta, and experiri is not 'to experience', but 'to try'. This is epic Latin diction on a high level. Vergil's competence in regard to verse and language is a constant source of joy. But further down, in lines 376–7, the poet disappoints me: tum vero infelix ingentibus excita monstris / immensam sine more furit lymphata per urbem. Vergil is describing Amata's state of mind which changes her from a relatively rational human being to a furious maenad. First, in line 373, he envisages the change in her physiological state whereby the furiale malum is spreading like a disease in her body (374b–5); then in the main clause (376) he takes up again in an emphasized manner the cause with ingentibus excita monstris and leaves us in no doubt about the nature of her state: furit lymphata is flowering frenzy: she dashes "throughout the whole immense town". A natural reaction to this is for me at least: when a queen, the first lady in the city, behaves like this in the capital itself, one is led to ask: Why does not Latinus representing the highest authority try to check her in her mad behaviour going on right in front of his eyes? Is he without authority and resolution to such an extent that he can achieve nothing? And why is this capital immensa? The usual explanation we can read in Horsfall's commentary, is that the poet wishes to heighten the grandeur of the old Latin city. I am a sceptic quoting Horace: sed nunc non erat his locus.
