[3.11.1] This section offers an explanation for the periodic drying up of various rivers and springs as well as the appearance of new water sources. This was a topic of some interest for earlier philosophers (Aristotle Mete. 352b1-16, Strabo 3.5.7-8 reporting Posidonius’ view) and Ovid’s Pythagoras lectures on this issue (hic fontes natura novos emisit, at illic / clausit, et aut imis commota tremoribus orbis / flumina prosiliunt, aut exsiccata residunt, Met. 15.270-72). See Myers 1994: 147-59 and Bömer 1969-86: ad loc. for more on Ovid’s sources.
inquit: The interlocutor would seem to seize on a logical inconsistency. Usually Seneca keeps to the second person, but he repeats this formulation quid ergo, inquit at NQ 2.55.3.
si perpetuae sunt causae: Picking up the language of NQ 3.9.2. The importance of rivers that were not subject to seasonal change is important in Roman law (Cassius Digest 43.12.1.1-3, cf. Campbell 2012: 87 and passim) and Seneca uses perpetuus of rivers at NQ 6.7.1.
flumina oriuntur ac fontes: This is traditional language for discussing a river’s source, e.g. Sal. Iug. 48.3.2, Pliny Nat. 6.13.1, Vitr. 8.3.17.
aliquando siccantur: Because small rivers often dried up in summer, Pausanias and Strabo wrote often about the source and course of the various rivers they cataloged, cf. Campbell 2012: 70-74. In addition, Campbell writes about how common such seasonal fluctuation is, “Local rivers tend to have narrow valleys with small catchment areas and uncertain volume; storms and winter rain and snow melt produce rapid run-off and torrential streams, which fade away in the summer drought. Perennial streams are particularly valuable” (2012: 9). Strabo is particularly interested in riverine hydrology (Strabo 8.8.4, 9.2.16, 12.2.4).
motu terrarum itinera turbantur: motus terrae or motus terrarum are a common way to refer to earthquakes (s.v. OLD 1c). The relationship between earthquakes and water is a topic that he will return to in NQ 6.6.1-6.8.2. His use of turbantur recalls turbata at 3.10.3. iter is typical for the channel of a river (s.v. OLD 5c), cf. NQ 6.8.2: cum vides interruptum Tigrim in medio itinere siccari. Here, it is important to note that these channels are underground, cf. note on 3.5.1 supra and NQ 6.7.2-5. Leonardo Da Vinci mentions the appearance of a spring after an earthquake: “this happened in a mountain in Savoy where certain woods sank in and left a very deep abyss, and about four miles from there the ground opened on the slope of a mountain, and threw out suddenly an immense flood of water which swept through a whole little valley of the tilled fields, vineyards, and houses, and did irreparable damage wherever it spread” (Codex Leicester 11 verso, MacCurdy 2004: 341).
ruina interscindit cursum aquis: Seneca will employ ruina to discuss earthquakes often in NQ 6, e.g. 6.1.5, 6.1.7, 6.1.11 and mentions how such underground “collapse” can influence rivers at 6.4.1: nunc amnes magnitudinis notae convertat introrsum, nunc novos exprimat.
quae retentae novos exitus quaerunt: The checked waters seek new outlets. Seneca uses this formulation elsewhere about wind (per haec loca cum se exitum quaerens spiritus torsit, NQ 5.14.4, cf. 6.20.4), fire (exitum quaerens, NQ 6.9.1), and the soul leaving the body (Ep. 92.34). During the great flood, such waters find no exit and rather form a great lake (ut malign ostio retenta restagnat et agros in formam unius laci redigit, NQ 3.27.10).
impetum faciunt: Military language used of the water, (s.v. impetus OLD 2c “to make an attack, charge”). Such light personification can be found in the flood narrative as well, e.g. NQ 3.27.13, 3.28.1. If before impetus was used benignly to discuss the winds (lato impetu, NQ 3.10.2), it gradually becomes more violent and destructive, cf. NQ 3.27.2: subito ad ruinam toto impetu venit. impetum is not uncommon to describe water, TLL 7.1.604.56-79.
aliunde alio transferuntur: The waters may be moved “from one place to another” by the upheaval. Seneca will use similar language to speak of vices at Ep. 123.8: hi sunt qui vitia tradunt et alio aliunde transferunt.
[3.11.2]apud nos solet evenire: Elsewhere in the NQ, it can mean “among us [Romans]” in contrast with the Greeks (5.16.4, 5.16.6), or to contrast what happens on earth (apud nos) with sublime regions (2.22.1: videamus quemadmodum ignis fieri soleat apud nos; eadem enim ratione et spra fiet). Here there seems to be a more personal “in my experience”, cf. NQ 3.8.1 and one wonders not only about Seneca’s experience at wine-making, but also as an active observer of the natural world in his own right. Also implied is the idea, made manifest later, that what happens above ground also happens below (cf. 3.16.4) so Seneca’s observation of rivers and streams will also apply to the waters underground. A similar use of solet+evenire occurs at NQ 5.13.1.
ut amisso canali suo flumina primum refundantur: canalis is used of river channels elsewhere in the book at 3.20.4 and 3.27.8. ut here introduces a conditional relative clause (A&G 542) = “[whenever] rivers first are forced to flow backward”.
quia perdiderunt viam faciant: Having lost their way, these streams are able to make a new path. Cf. Amphitruo’s claims about Hercules’ anabasis to the upper world, inveniet viam / aut faciet, Herc. F. 276-77.
Theophrastus: Peripatetic philosopher from Lesbos (c. 371 – 287 BCE) and Aristotle’s successor at the Lyceum. He wrote numerous works of natural philosophy and meteorology as well as a work on water (Περὶ ὕδατος), of which only fragments survive, cf. Fortenbaugh et al. 1992: 376-97 for his writings on water (this is frag. 216) and Sharples 1998: ad loc. for commentary on the fragments. The predominant topics in the surviving fragments of his Meteorology are thunderbolts and winds, and his doxographical style also incorporates multiple causes, a shift from Aristotle, but a tendency that Seneca also exploits (note the flood or even the various waters underground). The stories mentioned in the following section are repeated in Pliny Nat. 31.53-56 in a catalogue of phenomena regarding water. Theophrastus is also cited elsewhere in this book (3.11.4 3.16.5, 3.25.4, 3.25.7, 3.26.1), and mentioned in the NQ for his theory of the Nile’s flood (4a.2.16), earthquakes (6.13.1, also characterizing his style as dulcis), and comets (7.28.3). See Taub 2003: 115-24 for a summary of Theophrastus’ meteorological innovations and influence, Steinmetz 1964: 217-98 for Theophrastus’ hydrology, and Setaioli 2000: 434-35 for Seneca’s possible use of an intermediary source.
in Coryco monte: Mt. Corycus is in Cilicia and gives its name to the town and harbor. It is possible that Theophrastus is referring to the Corycian cave (modern Cennet and Cehennem), about twenty stadia inland, two expansive sinkholes which not only produced a great amount of saffron, but also were know for an underground stream (Strabo 14.5.5, Mela 1.13). Because of Seneca’s interest in such environments, this may be the area he has in mind. For more on this area, cf. Rojas 2015: 201.
post terrarum tremorem nova vis fontium emersit: Seneca uses tremor often in book 6 to signify earthquakes (e.g. 6.22.2, 6.30.4, where it produces mira spectacula), whereas his tragedies only use tremor of the human body (e.g. Herc. F. 61, Tr. 168). Cf. Pliny Nat. 31.54: terrae quoque motus profundunt sorbentque aquas…sic et in Coryco monte amnis erupit posteaque coeptus est coli. The use of nova vis may be indebted to Lucretius 2.306 or Ovid Met. 7.19: sed trahit invitam nova vis, aliudque cupido / mens aliud suadet… (Medea’s monologue, a speech that Seneca knows quite well).
[3.11.3] sicut: I am unconvinced by Axelson’s emendation [sunt] qui (1933: 49-52), followed by Hine 1996. Do we want other views here, or is Seneca continuing to report Theophrastus’ findings? It is possible that Theophrastus himself wrote about the views of others, as that seems to be part and parcel with his own doxographical style. However, I think that sicut (attested inA B) is more likely. “Likewise he thinks” (opinatur).
quae aut revocent aquas: Vottero’s conjecture (cf. Vottero 1980: 347-48). Elsewhere, Seneca uses revocare of water at Ben. 7.1.5 and he will use it at this book’s conclusion of the new age brought back into existence after the flood, cf. 3.30.7.
cursu suo deiciant et avertant: Seneca uses this expression elsewhere of the cosmos, non semper tenebit hunc ordinem, sed illum ex hoc cursu aliquis dies deiciet (Ep. 71.13), and of the spiritus of the body, cum frigore inhibetur aut sub accessionem cursu suo deicitur (NQ 6.18.6).
aquarum inops: Used by Curtius (9.10.6) and Pliny the Edler (Nat. 6.167) to discuss the Arabian and Egyptian deserts. Rather hyperbolic for Thrace. From a hydrological standpoint, this range is notable for its waterfalls and acts as the watershed divide for the Danube to the north and the Aegean Sea to the south.
Haemus: Mt. Haemus is a peak in Thrace. The name is usually associated with the Balkan range as a whole (see Talbert 2000: map 22), and the Greek etymology might signify that they were snow-covered much of the year (χειμών, cf. Hor. C. 1.12.6; gelido in Haemo). The alternative Greek etymology (αἷμα) associates Thrace with bloody killings (Orpheus) and savagery. Seneca writes of the floods that issue from its peak in the spring at Med. 590 and NQ 4a.2.20, and he uses it as the boundary of Thrace at NQ 1.pr.9.
Gallorum gens a Cassandro obsessa: Probably in 310 BCE, when Cassander was de facto king of Macedonia, cf. Shipley 2000: 119-20 for overview of Cassander’s reign as king of Macedonia (306 – 297 BCE). Some have used this to date Theophrastus’ On Waters after that year, cf. Sharples 1998: ad loc. The “Gauls” were actually Celts who took advantage of the weakening of Macedonia for their eventual invasion (280-79 BCE), cf. Austin 2006: 129.
silvas cecidisset: To make a rampart, as Pliny clarifies (valli gratia), Nat. 31.53.
ingens aquarum copia apparuit: Seneca elsewhere has the formulation ingens…copia at Dial. 9.11.8 and Ben. 2.34.2. Seneca will go on to dispute the claim that the roots of trees draw upon the same sources as rivers and springs, although one wonders if clearing the forest merely exposed an unknown spring or pool. Pliny seems to believe this is plausible, cf. Rackham and Moody 1996: 42. Of course, the roots of plants do draw away a certain amount of moisture, as Campbell 2012: clarifies about the hydrological cycle, “Some [precipitation] by evaporation returns to the air; some is absorbed into plant roots and returned to the atmosphere by the process of transpiration or evapo-transpiration” (5).
in alimentum suum nemora ducebant: Steinmetz 1964: 247 notes that Theophrastus’ view is actually correct and that trees do need a great amount of water for their nourishment. Seneca, of course, knows the importance of roots for the trees, Ep. 95.64, NQ 3.11.4, 3.27.5, 7.5.1.
quibus eversis: This sounds like the trees have been completely eradicated, whereas later in this section, he will claim that the trees will be able to grow again. For a similar phrase, cf. Seneca’s description of a storm-damaged field at Dial. 6.16.7: eversis arboribus.
[3.11.4] idem ait et circa Magnesiam accidisse: According to Pliny, what happened there was that the water temperature changed from hot to cold (Nat. 31.54 – mentioned directly after the events on Mt. Corycus). Was this possibly from another passage of Theophrastus’ work? This is the only mention of Magnesia in Seneca’s works but there are two possible candidates. Magnesia ad Sipylum suffered from an earthquake during the reign of Tiberius and is notable for its waters and the natural rock foundation called “Niobe of Sipylus” (see Rojas 2015:196). Magnesia ad Maeander, a more important city, is the other candidate and is notable, according to Strabo for the territory “is liable to earthquakes and is undermined by fire and water” (12.8.17, trans. Roller 2014).
pace Theophrasti dixisse liceat: A polite way of objecting, pace+gen. = “with all due respect to” (s.v. OLD 3). Also found in Quint. Inst. 1.6.9: pace dicere hominis eruditissimi liceat, and Pliny Nat. 34.108, 35.8. Such dissent may be part of his source material or may be of his own devising (I tend towards the latter).
non est hoc simile veri: Seneca reverses the usual order of veri similis here and elsewhere in his works when it will improve the rhythm, cf. NQ 2.53.1 and Hine 1981: ad loc.
fere aquosissima sunt quaecumque umbrosissima: Seneca often likes to group two or more superlatives, cf. Dial. 1.3.4, 1.5.3, 6.3.3, passim), but this is the only time either one of these superlatives appear in his work, with umbrosissimus only repeated in Pliny Nat. 16.113. Shade and water are associated in Latin writers from Cato (De Agri Cultura 9.1, 34.1: locus frigidissimus aquosissimusque erit) to Seneca. For Vitruvius, shade trees are an indication that one can find water nearby (Vitr. 8.1.3). In coupling shade and water earlier in this book (3.9.1, 3.9.2), Seneca may be working up to this moment. Seneca often pairs the two in his tragic loci horridi (Oed. 547-47, Thy. 665-67), see Schiesaro 2006: 430-36 for more on these moments.
quod non eveniret si aquas arbusta siccarent: His evidence, derived from his own observations of the natural world. In Seneca’s estimation, this would prove that additional sources of water exist to feed the rivers, streams, and lakes and that the trees do not consume all of the water. Seneca will use siccare later in NQ to discuss why certain wells go dry (4a.2.26) and the Tigris disappears in its course (6.8.2).
quibus alimentum ex proximo est: The water for trees must be close by and, as Seneca stated earlier (NQ 3.7.1), he believes that rainwater penetrates only a short distance into the earth. This must be the primary alimentum for flora.
fluminum vero vis ex intimo manat: fluminum…vis to mirror vis fontium at 3.11.2. ex intimo responds to ex proximo and elsewhere Seneca will indicate that the Nile floods in part from waters deep within the earth: e terra illum erumpere et augeri non supernis aquis sed ex intimo redditis (6.8.3) and he writes about the power of that river as vis fluminis (6.8.4), cf. 6.20.3. He will repeat ex intimo later in this book when discussing certain springs and the sea which eject filth from their depths (3.26.6, 3.26.8).
ultraque concipitur quam radicibus evagari licet: ultra+quam = “further than/beyond”. The question of where waters originate (using concipere) also can be found at 3.7.4, 3.9.3 supra, and the verb is first found in this treatise to evoke critical thought (see note at 3.pr.9 supra). For evagari as a verb of mental exploration, see Ep. 117.19, and of broader learning Ep. 88.3.
succisae arbores plus umoris desiderant: If the trees are completely felled, this seems like an odd statement. Some have suspected a lacuna or textual problems, cf. Vottero 1989: 151. Seneca’s argument would make more sense for those that have been recently pruned (surely not what the Gauls did on Mt. Haemus). Vergil, however, implies a similar regenerative possibility for trees that have not been harmed by fire, “when cut down these trees are not able to be revived or grown green again from the earth’s depth” (caesaeque verti / possunt atque ima similes revirescere terra, G. 2.312-13). plus umoris will return in the flood passage (3.29.5).
Non enim tantum id quo vivant, sed quo crescant trahunt: The activity of growing requires more water for Seneca. Seneca does not make this contrast elsewhere, but he will stress at the opening of the flood passage (3.27.2) that the growth of forests, cities, even the human body, can be destroyed in a moment.
[3.11.5] idem ait circa Arcadiam fontes et rivos substitisse: The remains of ancient Arcadia, on the western slope of the Lasithi mountains, are unimpressive and it would appear that its institutions, even at its height, were underdeveloped, cf. Willetts 2014: passim. This story is also mentioned in Pliny Nat. 31.30. Chaniotis 1999: 187-88 remarks “This story probably alludes to the erosion which inevitably occurs when agricultural activities are interrupted and the terraces are not being attended to by the farmers.” It is possible that this story also reflects the personality of the plains of the Lasithi mountain, cf. Rackham and Moody 1996: 27-8, “The river of the Lassithi disappears into a great cave, the Khonos, in the hillside at the north-west corner. With the other plains the water disappears into one or more swallow-holes in the floor…An unfortunate pussy-cat, we are told, was once cast into the main swallow-hole of the Askyphou Plain, and emerged in the great spring of Vrysses, 9 km. away”.
quia desierit coli terra diruta urbe: The idea that cultivating the land actually causes water to appear or disappear is refuted by Seneca, although one can see how the active terracing and trenching of various crops would seem to encourage/cause waters to appear or disappear. Karstic landscapes can be subject to great volatility and one wonders if the destruction of a city and the spring likely associated with it could lead to the water disappearing or appearing elsewhere, with a little clearing of rubble, cf. the story reported by Rackham and Moody 1996: 42 of the seven springs associated with St. Nicholas the Kourtaliote. diruta urbs is a common way of writing about a city’s destruction by war, cf. Livy 28.19, 42.63, Sen. Ben. 3.33.3.
postea vero quam cultores receperit, aquas quoque recepisse: In Pliny’s telling, this was six years later. Seneca’s parallelism receperit/recepisse highlights the supposed cause and effect.
causam siccitatis: Seneca also uses siccitas to discuss farming at Ben. 4.14.2: beneficium damus arbustis, quae colimus, ne siccitate aut inmoti et neclecti soli duritia laborent? and at NQ 2.10.2, 4a.2.1 in considering humidity and climate, respectively.
obduruerit constricta tellus: obdurere only used elsewhere by Seneca of certain waters who cause the internal organs to harden, cf. note on NQ 3.20.3 infra. constringere only used of tellus here, but Columella has constricta terra (5.9.8) when discussing the creation of a root-ball when transplanting young trees. It will also be used to discuss the harmful effects of the Styx at 3.25.1.
nec potuerit imbres inagitata transmittere: The declaimer Moscus used inagitatus of the unexplored ocean (inagitata remigio vastitas), as Seneca the Elder reports (Suas. 1.2.16). Otherwise uncommon before Seneca. Columella uses transmittere+imbres to discuss the soil at 3.7.3, 3.12.3. Seneca has already dismissed the idea that rainfall causes rivers and springs at NQ 3.6.1 - 3.7.4 supra.
in locis desertissimis: The formulation may derive from a lost speech of Cicero, from which Rutilius quotes: qui fuit lucus religiosissimus, nunc erit locus desertissimus (1.3.7) – note Seneca’s own use of superlatives in this section (aquosissima, umbrosissima, vastissima). The chance finding of a spring in a wild and uninhabited location would have been a source of delight for travelers and possibly evoke a sense of the divine, see the continuity of cult surrounding sacred springs in Glover 1946: 20-21.
[3.11.6] plura denique invenimus: Echoing the plurimos videmus in the previous sentence and stressing Seneca’s own research (invenimus) into the water supply of various settlements.
propter aquas coli coeperunt: One of the givens for most colonies or settlements, as stressed by Crouch 1993: passim. Seneca may be recalling the poetic temple that Vergil claims he will build for Octavian (templum de marmore ponam / propter aquam, G. 3.13-14). For colere with forms of coepi, cf. Caes. B.G. 5.12.2, Varro Ling.Lat. 5.36.4 (where he explains that the hills of Rome were first called colles from colere), and Ovid Fast. 3.146, 6.728 to refer to worshipping gods for the first time. Seneca’s rhetorical style in this sentence stresses these verbs so it is possible that he is encouraging his reader to remember previous expressions.
non esse enim pluvialem hanc: Seneca picks up on the idea from the previous section that rainwater (imbres/pluvialem) might cause springs and rivers but denies it is possible. For this opening accusative/infinitive construction one should supply intellegas licet, but Seneca also provide an alternative construction for the second half of the sentence, ex hoc…quod.
vastissima flumina: By immediately invoking the largest rivers, Seneca aims to demolish any connection between rainwater and rivers. Columella uses this phrase to discuss Homer’s “most vast rivers of eloquence” (vastissimis fluminibus facundiae, 1.pr.30). Seneca only employs this superlative one other time, Ep. 60.3.
a fonte statim magnis apta navigîs defert: Does Seneca have a specific river in mind? It is worth remembering his home town’s position on the Baetis and, at Corduba, “the river became navigable and also had numerous tributaries such as the Singilis and the Maenuba, which were navigable and provided access to the interior” (Campbell 2012: 205). At NQ 6.7.1, he utilizes similar language to describe the Nile, Danube and Rhine: aliubi perpetui amnes, quorum navigabilis etiam sine adiutorio imbrium magnitudo est. He describes great rivers from their source to their mouth (ad ostium a fonte) at Ep. 89.20. The text has been helped by conjectures of Skutsch and acceptance of apta. Seneca has magna navigia of riverine transport at Ben. 6.7.3. Pliny often mentions what types of ships a river can support, e.g. Nat. 4.14, 6.64-65, 6.99. For more on riverine navigation, cf. Campbell 2012: 200-208, 246-329, esp. 405-10, and the essays in Franconi 2017.
ex hoc…quod: Seneca often employs the anticipatory hoc or illud, cf. Bennett 264.2.
per hiemem aestatemque: Cf. Dial. 4.27.2, 6.18.2, Ben.7.31.4, NQ 2.11.2 for a similar pairing of this language. It is important for Seneca that such sources supply water no matter what season for these rivers. He will stress the flood itself is part of a natural cycle (NQ 3.29.3: in his fuit inundatio, quae non secus quam hiems, quam aestas, lege mundi venit).
par est a capite deiectus: deiectus for “outpouring” or “steady flow” (with par) of water. Ovid, appropriating this prosaic word for his poetry, applies it to the Peneus river’s rough falls (Met. 1.571: deiectuque gravi) and Seneca has it of a waterfall (deiectum aquae, Ep. 56.3). Because of its association with waterfalls, one may think of the cascades at Tibur and Rome’s dependence on the Anio river valley for a number of their aqueducts (Aqua Anio Vetus, Aqua Anio Novus and Aqua Claudia). This is his only use of a capite in the NQ and his only use of this phrase to describe a source of water.
torrentem: Cf. note supra 3.3.1. The distinction here between perennial rivers and streams and momentary floods was also present in Roman religion and the auspicia perennia which had to be done when crossing rivers, but not “mere lines of surface drainage with intermittent flow” (Holland 1961: 18-19).
amnem aequali inter ripas suas tenore labentem: aequalis tenor is praiseworthy for Seneca, whether referring to life (Dial. 8.1.1: tunc potest vita aequali et uno tenore procedere, quam propositis diversissimis scindimus), the soul (Ep. 59.14), or one’s beneficence (Ben. 7.31.4: aequali tenore bona sua per gentes populosque distribuunt).
non faciunt imbres sed incitant: I can find no other contrast between facere and incitare elsewhere. Livy does use incitare to describe a river in spate: hibernis idem incitatus pluviis (44.8.6) and Seneca will elsewhere use the verb to describe the effect of spiritus on water (NQ 2.6.4) and winds on the Nile (NQ 4a.2.23).
******
******
_and_10_Greek_Islands_-_Geographicus_-_CandiaInsula-ortelius-1584.jpg){kind=link}