[3.1.1] The formal quaestio “inquiry” begins now, announcing the topic – terrestrial waters – and a series of questions. Water, for the Stoics, was one of the four elements: water, fire, air, and earth (Wildberger 2006: 60-79 for the elements in Stoic thought and Seneca in particular). Some of these questions had been asked by Aristotle in his Meteorologica (349b1-15 on rivers, 350b30-351a18 on underground waters, consistent volume of the water of the sea 357a3-b21), Lucretius (DRN 6.712-37 on the Nile, 6.738-839 on deadly lakes, 6.840-905 on wondrous springs) and Vitruvius (Book 8 of de Architectura discusses terrestrial waters in general). Pliny the Elder’s Nat. 2.224-35, and 31.1-61 covers much of the same material as Seneca. Setaioli 1988: 432-41 reviews the Greek tradition underlying much of Seneca’s doxography.
Why should Seneca begin with water? Aristotle reports, in his Metaphysics, that Thales first posited water as the ἀρχή (Metaph. 983b6-21), and Seneca follows this to a certain degree when he quotes Thales as saying, “water is the strongest element” (valentissimum elementum est, NQ 3.13.1). He also stresses that moisture is the “beginning of the world” (primordium [mundi], NQ 3.13.2), so it is fitting that it is the first element discussed. In addition, Lapidge postulates that Zeno conceived of the precosmic chaos as water, so Seneca may be following in his footsteps (1978: 165). Berno sees a connection with the preface: “Seneca’s insistence on the unpredictable nature of destiny and the vanity of human ambitions paves the way for his treatment of earthly waters, a very unstable element, which will be rounded off by the grandiose final description of the deluge” (2015: 88). In his preface to Book 8, Vitruvius considers the opinions of “physicists, philosophers and priests” (a physicis et philosophis et ab sacerdotibus, 8.pr.4) that everything consists of water and, therefore, wishes to devote a book to discussing water collection, its sources, and testing it. The tone and style of Seneca’s doxography is notably different than the preface. Matter-of-fact statements, discussions of previous thinkers, classifications, definitions, and catalogues lack many of his rhetorical flourishes and the insistency that characterize the preface. For more on rivers in Roman culture, cf. Jones 2005 (especially for their role in the Aeneid), Campbell 2012 and Purcell 2012 (for their political potential); Purcell remarks, “Rivers were among the extraordinary manifestations of Nature, and took their place in Antiquity in the thaumatic geography through which Nature was comprehended” (375).
Quaeramus: Seneca begins the book proper with a verb that he has already stressed in the preface, cf. note on 3.pr.10 supra. The hortatory subjunctive (A&G 439) encourages the reader to be a collaborator in this investigation.
ergo de terrestribus aquis: These “terrestrial waters” are to be differentiated from “celestial” waters (caelestes, NQ 3.23) that originate in the clouds and are the subject of NQ 4b. Ultimately, Seneca devotes most of this book to a discussion of rivers, springs, and lakes, which he believes do not derive their primary water source from precipitation. Hippocrates’s Aër 7.1-100 deals with spring waters and their corollary diseases, Aristotle’s Meteorologica 349b2-351a18 discusses rivers. See Frisinger 1973 for the reception of Aristotle’s meteorological views. His use of ergo here has occasioned some comment as he seems to be stressing the transition between his preface and the doxography, see Inwood 2005: 167n.31, Parroni 2012: 26-27, and Rosenmeyer 2000: 109 “It might seem that Seneca is almost desperately looking for ways to integrate scientific study with moral instruction. But I prefer to think that the frictions merely show us a writer who is trying to produce a peri phuseos, but will not get away from the mode of writing that is his specialty”. Seneca’s limited understanding of the water cycle underlies many of his hypotheses (cf. Rossi 1991).
investigemus: Seneca uses this verb 4 times in the NQ and it stands in for the discoveries of previous natural philosophers at 7.32.4 (ex his quae parum investigata antiqui reliquerunt). At Ep. 90.34 it defines the work of the sapiens: quid sapiens investigaverit, quid in lucem protraxerit quaeris? Primum verum naturamque, quam non ut cetera animalia oculis secutus est, tardis ad divina. The root meaning of the verb is to “find by following a trail, track down” (OLD 1), which relates to the opening hunting imagery of 3.pr.1: consequar, colligam.
qua ratione fiant: Seneca uses the phrase qua ratione 9 times in his surviving works. It appears near the conclusion of this book (3.28.7) when discussing the flood. Is there a hint of the Stoic importance given to ratio here?
ut ait Ovidius: It is very surprising that he first quotes a poetic source, as opposed to Posidonius, Aristotle, or another philosopher. In the opening of his book on water, Vitruvius begins by mentioning Thales, Pythagoras, Empedocles, Epicharmos, among others (8.pref.1). Ovid is quoted first, perhaps because of Lucilius’ affinity for his poetry (cf. NQ 4a2.2), but also because of his prominence at the book’s conclusion. Such a strong literary opening of the doxography reminds the reader of the importance of fountains as “monuments that functioned not only as sources of water but as reservoirs of myth and collective memory” (Robinson 2017: 202).
fons erat illimis nitidis argenteus undis: This line is the opening of Ovid’s ecphrasis of the locus amoeneus where Narcissus will meet his demise (Met. 3.407). There is little about the original Ovidian context that would explain why Seneca would think of this moment of the Metamorphoses, but the adjective illimis (a hapax) may have made this line stand out. The use of fons may also imply the “source, origin, fount” (OLD 4) here at the opening of the discussion. One might have expected Seneca to use this quote later in the NQ when discussing mirrors (1.17.5), but he chooses to quote from Vergil there instead (Ecl. 2.25-6). For more on waters in Ovid, cf. Fantham 2009: 97-132. Smith 1922 offers an exhaustive account of all the springs and wells found in Greek and Roman literature.
Vergilius: Seneca’s favorite poet to quote (cf. Mazzoli 1970: 231, Maguinness 1956), featured over 100 times in his prose works. Seneca’s use of Vergil is polyvalent and often shades of Vergil’s context or mood impact Seneca’s quotations, cf. Trinacty 2014: 26-61. Here, Seneca has discovered the Vergilian moment most germane to the subject of this book that acts as a bridge between the clear, still water of Ovid’s fons and the underground travels of the following description of Arethusa. If Ovid’s line was notable for its sibiliance and stillness, Vergil’s scene is an alliterative tour de force.
unde…sonanti: Vergil’s famous description of the fast-flowing Timavus river (Aen. 1.245-6), whose fons (1.244) Antenor was able to navigate. Both Strabo, who names various sources including Posidonius and Polybius (5.1.8), and Pliny (Nat. 2.225) describe the Timavus as a geographical phenomenon because it travels underground for much of its course (a spectacle that Seneca discusses later in Book 3) and emerges with great force close to the sea. As Austin 1971: 94 elucidates, “Virgil’s fons, which Antenor ‘sailed past’, is the river itself in its final course, from the point of its emergence to its debouchment in the sea, so close to each other that ‘spring’ and exit are poetically integrated”. The river was described by locals as the “source and mother of the seas” (Strabo 5.1.8), and its brackish water may influence Seneca’s decision to include it here because of the question of the relationship between the rivers and the seas (discussed at NQ 3.4-5). It is notable that Vergil’s lines stress the Timavus emerging from the “mountain” (vasto cum murmure montis) and Aristotle’s belief that mountains are the source of most rivers (Mete.350a2-350b34).
apud te…invenio: apud here means “in the writings of” (OLD 6). Lucilius’ poetic fragments are collected in Courtney 1993: 348-9. This line probably derives from his lost work on Sicily, and note how Seneca encourages him to write about Sicily at Ep. 79.5-10. In spite of the fact that Ovid, Vergil, and Cornelius have discussed Aetna, Seneca knows there are discoveries still to be found (inventuris inventa non obstant, Ep. 79.6). Seneca may be setting up Sicily as a land of marvels (see his description of Syracuse at Dial. 6.17.2-6), since many of the example in Book 3 derive from Sicily (e.g. Arethusa, Mylae) and Lucilius is the procurator of Sicily (note the preface of 4a). Seneca places his friend in exalted company by having his line culminate the quotations of Ovid and Vergil. Mazzoli 1970: 260-3 discusses Lucilius’ poetry.
Iunior carissime: Seneca’s choice to refer to Lucilius by his cognomen, Iunior, here “enhances Seneca’s recognition of his own age” (Ker 2009a: 153), a marked issue in the preface. While it is uncertain how much younger Lucilius is (Mazzoli 1989: 1853-5), his similar interests and characteristics make him appear to be a proxy figure for Seneca himself here as well as in his Epistulae (cf. Ker 2009a: 152-5). Seneca uses carissimus of of Lucilius often in the Epistulae (Ep. 23.6, 32.3, 53.7, 63.16). This same address of Lucilius is found later in Book 3 to tie the current passage with his discussion of the spring Arethusa, and a Vergilian quotation, there (3.26.6). That sort of ring-composition will encourage the reader to reflect upon the composition of this work and the learning that has taken place.
Eleus Siculis de fontibus exilit amnis: Lucilius’ line alludes to Arethusa, a spring in Sicily that originated in the river Alpheus in the Peloponnese, near Elis (cf. Pliny Nat. 2.106.225). Nisbet and Rudd 2004: 358 remark, “amnis tends to be a grandiose word,” citing TLL 1.1943.5 ff. Eleus is found at Ag. 918, Her. F. 840, and is a probable emendation of ZH’s elisus. Cf. Hine 1996: 42-3 for discussion of the textual problems in this passage. This large river famously is thought to travel below ground from the Peloponnese to Sicily and thus provides evidence for the existence of underground water (NQ 3.8.1-3.10.5) that travels in conduits much like the veins of the human body (NQ 3.15.3). The Alpheus itself often disappears in its course from Arcadia to Elis, see the extensive description in Smith 1870: 111 and Brewster 1997: 80-87. Both Vergil and Ovid deliberate this topic (Met. 5.572-641, Aen. 3.694-6), and Vergil incorporates an Alexandrian footnote (fama est) to nod to the extensive poetic tradition of this river, cf. Connors and Clendenon 2016: 160. Arethusa was an important symbol of colonization (cf. Dougherty 1993: 68-9), and is symbolic for pastoral poetry in the Eclogues (cf. Ecl. 10.1), cf. Jones 2005: 51-64 for more on the poetics of rivers in Vergil. While we do not know the full context of Lucilius’ line, it evokes Manilius 2.51 about Helicon: et iam confusi manant de fontibus amnes and his complaints about current poetry. Lucilius may be arguing for his own poetic originality and utilizing Arethusa as opposed to Helicon as his source of inspiration. Gowers 2011: 189-90 connects this line to the unnamed citation at Ep. 77.2: alta procelloso speculator vertice Pallas and finds the address of Iunior carissime in NQ is necessary “perhaps in a Sicilian context Seneca particularly needs to rule out any potential confusion with the other [Republican satirist] Lucilius”.
si qua ratio aquas subministrat: That the manuscripts’ si qua ratio aquas subministraret needs emendation is certain (Gercke 1907, Parroni 2002: ad loc., Hine 1996: 43), and this line follows the sequence of options outlined in the quotations of Ovid, Vergil, and Lucilius (“or some other cause supplies water”). Seneca is searching after such rationes, and thus Hine’s emendation is persuasive. Note that Seneca uses alia ratione at NQ 2.32.4 and 6.14.1.
quomodo: Beginning a new inquiry about the volume of water necessary to supply the rivers at all times, as opposed to the source of the rivers.
tot flumina ingentia: Seneca will recall this at NQ 5.15.1, when discussing the spelunking party of Philip of Macedon and the huge caverns below the earth where they saw flumina ingentia et conceptus aquarum inertium vastos. Seneca reminds his reader of the veracity of his theory of underground waters by including this intratextual reference.
per diem noctemque: Cf. note on 3.pr.16 and per diem ac noctem there. This variatio of that phrase is found also at NQ 2.5.2 (about the earth nourishing heavenly bodies day and night) and 7.8.2 (about the distance covered by a comet).
decurrant: Seneca uses this verb of rivers that are particularly large and navigable (De Ben. 3.8.3) and it is common in his prose to describe rivers (Ben. 4.6.1, NQ 6.7.1) and perennial waters (Ep. 74.25). Vergil coins its use with streams and rivers at Ecl. 5.84: saxosas inter decurrunt flumina vallis.
hibernis aquis intumescant: Seneca’s language describing the flooding of rivers because of the the rainy winter months is picked up by Lucan (4.16, 8.828-9, 10.228-9). Seneca himself may be influenced by Ovid Fast. 2.390 of the Albula river: hibernis forte tumebat aquis. Seneca will use intumescere to describe the rivers flooding at the end of the book (3.28.1) as well as the flooding of the Nile (4a.2.19). At NQ 3.3.1 Seneca describes how hiberni…torrentes do not affect the appearance of the Fucine Lake.
in defectu ceterorum amnium: defectus here indicates “the process of growing less, diminution” (OLD 3). Seneca uses this word to describe eclipses of the sun and moon (Ep. 94.56) in a passage that goes on to catalogue celestial phenomena that he covers in the NQ. In the summer months when other rivers are waning, some crest, most notably the Nile.
[3.1.2] Nilum: The Nile is the subject of 4a and was a source of wonder and speculation for philosophers (Anaxagoras, Aristotle, Lucretius), poets (Hesiod first mentions it by name at Th. 338, for Homer it is the “Egyptian river” at Ody. 4.477, 581; see Lucan 10.172-333 as well who draws extensively on Seneca's account), and historians (Herodotus Book 2). For more on the Nile’s flooding in general, cf. Bonneau 1964. For connections between Book 3 and 4a, cf. Williams 2008 who reads the concluding destructive flood of Book 3 against the helpful flooding of the Nile, but also finds “the transition to Lucilius in Sicily at the opening of 4a indeed brings us down to earth as we return from the sublime to the mundane” (229). For more on Seneca’s study of the Nile, cf. Waiblinger 1977: 53-9, Gross 1989: 148-83, Berno 2003: 111-44, and Merrills 2017: 162-74.
seponemus a turba: The language used to separate the Nile from the rest of the rivers is similar to the language Seneca employs when digressing to criticize luxury later in the book: permitte mihi quaestione seposita castigare luxuriam, 3.18.1. At other points in his prose works Seneca mentions the need to put topics aside (Ep. 102.5), demands Lucilius to remove himself from the crowd: a turba te, quantum potes, separa (NQ 4a.pr.3, Ep. 7.1-2), and celebrates Nature’s variatio: alia velociora aliis fecit, alia validiora, alia temperatiora; quaedam eduxit a turba (NQ 7.27.5).
propriae naturae ac singularis: This genitive of description (Woodcock 65-8) has a near causal sense “because of its individual and unique nature”. The Nile is the outlier and deserves its own treatment because of its distinct nature. singularis natura is also found at Ben. 4.19.4 and Ep. 104.15 (note how Reynolds introduces this supplement to explain the Nile in that letter).
illi suum diem dabimus: While the expression is idiomatic (Ep. 94.52: huic quaestioni suum diem dabimus), Seneca has emphasized time and the importance of making the most of one’s day in the preface (cf. note supra at 3.pr.2). One may consider the Vagellius quote as indicating that the day is beginning at the start of this book, and will end with the flood at the close of the book (as G. Williams suggests per litteras). Thus, the discussion of the Nile in 4a will be a new day/book. Comets, likewise, have their own day (illos ad suum diem certus ordo producat, NQ 7.3.1). Hine remarks on the legal contexts of the phrase as well, which could continue the legal feeling of this quaestio (2006: 55n.53).
vulgares aquas persequamur: This parallels the desire in the preface (consequar, perspiciam, 3.pr.1). Seneca is fond of using this verb to denote his investigation (cf. NQ 5.14.4, 6.5.2, 7.11.1), although it can also be applied to an actual hunt (4a.2.15). Cf. Vottero 1989: 149 for reading persequamur as opposed to prosequamur. The phrase “common waters” is original to Seneca and befits these rivers and springs that were previously denoted by turba.
tam frigidas quam calentes: tam…quam here indicating “cold as well as hot” (cf. Tarrant 1985: ad 207).
in quibus: Referring to the hot waters. Most manuscripts include the unnecessary gloss calentibus after quibus.
calidae nascantur an fiant: He will do so in section 24 of this book. The contrast between being born a certain way and becoming that way (nature vs. nuture?) can be seen at Thy. 313-4 (ne mali fiant times? / nascuntur) and Seneca utilizes this contrast elsewhere (Dial. 4.10.6: quia scit neminem nasci sapientem sed fieri…; Ep. 23.3; NQ 2.55.2).
disseremus: Seneca has this construction (disserere de) elsewhere (Cl. 1.20.1, Ep. 117.6, NQ 1.17.1), possibly influenced by the famous Lucretian phrase: nam tibi de summa caeli ratione deumque / disserere incipiam et rerum primordia pandam (1.54-5), which Seneca quotes at Ep. 95.11.
insignes: This adjective appears later in the book to describe massive rivers such as the Nile and the Hister (3.22.1), in book 4a of the Nile Cataracts (4a.2.4), and in book 7 about particular comets (7.20.2, 7.27.6).
sapor: Pliny (Nat. 15.105) and Aristotle (De sensu 441b19-23) postulated that water is tasteless in its pure state, but acts as the medium for additional flavors. Seneca will provide the reasons for the different tastes of water at NQ 3.20.1-2. Cf. Polansky 2010: 313-16 for more on Aristotle’s view of taste, Wilkins and Hill 2006: passim for more on taste in ancient food, and Eglund-Berry 2006 for the different tastes of water in Roman religious rituals.
aliqua reddit utilitas: The various medicinal qualities of water are mentioned here, and the causes of certain qualities will be discussed at NQ 3.20 and 3.21. Pliny Nat. 31.6-17 discusses the large variety of benefits waters can bestow: from curing psoriasis (31.11) to bestowing a “tuneful voice” (canorae voces, 31.15). For a sampling of how nymphs associated with healing waters were venerated, cf. Fantham 2009: 12-15 and for spas and springs as loci of medical “tourism,” cf. Israelowich 2015: 117-23. Later in this work, Seneca will pessimistically explain that the usefulness of natural occurrences have been twisted into vice by men (NQ 5.18.15: nihil invenies tam manifestae utilitatis quod non in contrarium transeat culpa). This is in stark contrast with his view of the good, which unites public and individual usefulness (bonum omne in easdem cadit leges; iuncta est privata et publica utilitas, Ep. 66.10). Hydrotherapy and balneotherapy were common in the ancient world in general, cf. Rawson 1982 for Asclepiades of Bithynia (who introduced many hydrotherapeutic “cures”), Allen 1998, Larson 2001: 158-59, 174-77, 197-97 for nymphs associated with particular healing waters, and Clark and Johnston 2002 for a survey of papers on balneology in ancient Rome.
oculos: The first in a series of curative properties. For more on waters that help the eyes, cf. Pliny Nat. 31.6-8, which features a poem by Tullius Laurea about a spring dedicated to Cicero that helped the eye complaints. The sense of sight is instrumental to many of the theories propounded in the NQ, but can be perverted (cf. 3.17.3 and 3.18.7 below).
nervos: Vitruvius reports: sulphurosi fontes nervorum labores reficiunt percalefaciendo exurendoque caloribus e corporibus umores vitiosos (8.3.4). Pliny likewise mentions waters nervis prosunt (Nat. 31.6).
inveterata et desperata a medicis vitia percurant: Seneca modifies vitia with inveterata at Ep. 75.11 and 85.10 of moral “vices” (OLD 4) such as greed and excessive ambition. The connection between the work of philosophy as medicine for the soul and the work of doctors to cure the body is common in Seneca (see Seal 2015). The idea of doctors despairing seems to derive from the rhetorical schools (Quint. Inst. 7.2.17, Decl. Mai. 8.13; Sen. Cont. 4.5.pr.4), but Seneca believes a good doctor will not despair: mali medici est desperare, ne curet (Cl. 1.17.2 and Braund 2009: ad loc. for the construction). Here, Seneca writes of bodily disorders (OLD 2b), but elsewhere Seneca will write how philosophy must percurare mentem aegram et vitiis liberare, aut vacantem quidem, sed ad peiora pronam praeoccupare (Ep. 94.13).
medentur ulceribus: medeor + dat. also found in discussing the curative properities of waters at Vitr. 8.3.4. Later in the book, such wounds (ulceri) are metaphorically applied to the lands affected by flood water (3.29.7). Seneca will also use the word ulcus in a more metaphysical manner: quid in otio facio? ulcus meum curo (Ep. 68.8).
interiora potu fovent: Those waters that help by being ingested (potu) as opposed to the previous waters which were topically applied. The verb itself originally was used medically to indicate treating the wound “with soothing application (originally warm, later also cold)” (OLD 3), cf. Cato Agr. 157.4; Verg. Aen. 12.420: fovit ea vulnus lympha.
pulmonis ac viscerum querelas: The interiora now given further definition as the lungs and internal organs. The most famous case of water being used to cure intestinal distress was Antonius Musa’s cold-water cure of Augustus in 23 BCE (Suet. Aug. 59), during which Augustus bathed and drank the cold waters from the mineral springs of Chianciano Terme (probably, cf. Soren and Romer 1999) to cure his intestinal disorder.
supprimunt sanguinem: supprimere meaning “to check the flow of (liquids, etc.)” (OLD 4a) can be found of tears (Prop. 3.10.8, Sen. Dial. 12.1.1), blood (Cels. 4.9.2, 7.10.1) and urine (Cels. 8.14.2).
