[3.19.1] Sed ut ad propositum revertar: Seneca will employ a similar phrase at NQ 3.28.1: nunc ad propositum revertamur and 4b.12.1 (cf. Ben. 1.14.1, Ben. 4.27.4, Ep. 9.8.1, Ep. 59.4.7, and Ep. 65.23.1 for additional uses). This “topic” was also highlighted at 3.pr.4: crescit animus, quotiens coepti magnitudinem attendit et cogitat quantum proposito, non quantum sibi supersit. He has finished his castigation, but some of the ways in which he described the spectators and his general concern with death will continue to shade this section.
accipe argumentum magnam vim aquarum in subterraneis occuli: The use of occuli not only looks back to previous descriptions of water (NQ 3.14.3, 3.5.1), but also the aims of the NQ as a whole (3.pr.1, 3.pr.18). accipe argumentum has a legal feel, cf. Cic. Ver. 2.2.18. subterraneis [locis, vel sim.] would recall the subterranean mice Seneca was depicting previous to the digression (3.16.5: subterranei mures). Kroonenberg 2011 surveys the abundant life underground and concludes: “And anyone who thinks that there is only life in the upper layer of the Earth’s surface is gravely mistaken. Caves can go as deep as 2 kilometres underground, and they all contain life: blind fish, blind lizards, blind frogs and a whole spectrum of small fry that no one has yet set eyes on” (203).
fertilem foedorum situ piscium: fertilis + genitive (“rich, abounding in” OLD 2a). These fish are foul because of their idleness (situ) and the stagnation of their environment. Seneca is playing with the word situ which can mean “inactivity” but an identical word means “location,” while the adjective is commonly used in burial epitaphs (hic situs est…). Seneca writes how humans are apt to decay from situ et otio (Dial. 6.11.3). This passage recalls 3.16.5 supra and will be drawn upon to explain pestilential winds and water at 6.27.2-3.
si quando erupit: This happens especially in connection with earthquakes, cf. NQ 6.6.2, 6.6.4: at quare aquae erumpunt? Seneca writes about the Roman veneration of springs, subita ex abdito vasti amnis eruptio aras habet, Ep. 41.3.
effert secum inmensam animalium turbam: For turba used of a “throng” of animals in Seneca, cf. Oed. 569: latravit Hecates turba. There is notable ‘m’ alliteration here and one might wonder if Seneca could also be playing on wordplay with in+mensam (i.e. “for the table”) with these fish that will be eaten.
horridam aspici et turpem ac noxiam gustu: Seneca employs the adjective horridus often in his works, especially his tragedies (19 times). In this book noxius will appear of air (3.20.3) and water (3.25.2). These fish are antipodes to the beautiful (and tasty) red mullets, ugly to look upon and deadly to eat, cf. Berno 2003: 79-80. For a survey of troglobites (cave-dwelling animals), see Crane and Fletcher 2015: 45-65.
[3.19.2] in Caria circa Idymum urbem talis exiluisset unda: This idea seems to originate in Theophrastus (fr. 171.11, Wimmer), but Seneca has made these fish ugly and lethal to highlight his points about lethargy and environmental differentiation. Setaioli believes this detail must come from a different source (1988: 436-37), which is possible, but it is also possible that Seneca transforms his source to fit the mood of this passage. In Theophrastus, these fish were delicious, cf. Pliny Nat. 9.178. Idymos was on the coast of Caria, at the far eastern edge of the Sinus Ceramicus, cf. RE 9.919.
perierunt quicumque illos ederant pisces: For poisonous fish in antiquity, cf. Pliny Nat. 9.155. Apul. Apo. 29-41 is a humorous defense of his collection and study of fish (with the implication that he was doing so for magical purposes).
quos ignoto ante eam diem caelo novus amnis ostendit: ostendere can be used of “to exhibit as a spectacle, put on a show” (OLD 1c), making these fish similar to the mullets. Their shadowy existence makes these fish similar to Lucan’s description of the witch Erictho: caeloque ignota sereno / terribilis Stygio facies pallore gravatur…5.516-17.
nec id mirum: Because of their environment and way of life, their poisonous nature should not be surprising. Pliny also understands that, in the case of nature, truth can sometimes be stranger than fiction, cf. Nat. 11.6: nam mihi contuenti semper suasit rerum natura nihil incredibile existimare de ea, and the remarks of Beagon 1992: 9-10 for this as a possible topos of the first century.
pinguia et differta ut ex longo otio corpora: Seneca’s only additional use of differtus denotes animals force-fed for the table of the rich man (Dial. 12.11.3: iumentorum corpora differta et coacta pinguescere). Elsewhere, Seneca pairs pingue otium (Dial. 2.3.4, Ep. 73.10), but in a positive sense. This elaborates what Seneca wrote in NQ 3.16.5: tarda et informia ut in aëre caeco pinguique concepta et aquis torpentibus situ. The phrase longo otio may come from a fragment of Cornelius Severus: luxuriantur opes atque otia longa gravantur (Frag. 12). These fish, raised in darkness and unaccustomed to the light are reminiscent of Ep. 122.4 where the bodies of the all-night revelers are described, “The bodies are compared at length to the kinds of luxury foods they themselves consume at their decadent banquets – birds, whose only purpose in life is to be eaten by people who are not hungry. They are bloated, pallid, inert. This self-consciously disgusting comparison brings a suggestion, at the very least, of cannibalism” (Edwards 2007: 174).
ceterum inexercitata et tenebris saginata et lucis expertia: The bodies of these fish are like the subterranean conditions, cf. NQ 3.9.2: frigus aeternum, inexercitata densitas. Their bodies are like those who have not been tested by adversity: languent per inertiam saginata [corpora] nec labore tantum sed motu et ipso sui onere deficiunt, Dial. 1.2.6. For Seneca’s belief that “you are what you eat”, cf. Ep. 95.25: illa ostrea, inertissimam carnem caeno saginatam, nihil existimas limosae gravitatis inferre?
ex qua salubritas ducitur: Seneca elsewhere writes about the sun’s ability “to nourish our bodies” (corpora alit, Ben. 7.31.3). See Purcell 1987: 194 for the idea that open spaces full of sunlight would aid health. Varro writes of salubritas given to an area from the land and the sky, ita enim salubritas, quae ducitur e caelo ac terra, non est in nostra potestate, sed in naturae (R. 1.4.4, cf. Col. 1.3.1: salubritatem caeli). For Pliny, Campania was the region most blessed, in part, because of its perennis salubritas (Nat. 3.41.1). The wholesomeness of waters was mentioned at NQ 3.2.2 supra and will be further discussed.
in illo terrarum profundo sit indicium: For a similar construction, cf. NQ 6.24.3: huius indicium est quod altitudinis profundae maria iactantur, motis scilicet his supra quae fusa sunt…Cf. Dial. 6.25.2: et in profunda terrarum permittere aciem . indicium has a legal feel (OLD 4b “proof”).
quod anguillae latebrosis locis nascuntur: anguillae “eels” are the fish most often mentioned in relation to fishponds (Higginbotham 1997: 43-46; Mart. 12.31.5: quaeque natat clusis anguilla domestica lymphis) and Columella writes that they liked shady nooks (8.17.2). For the nitty-gritty of eel aquaculture, cf. Marzano 2013: 200-10. Most eels burrow into sand or mud or near rocks. They are said by Pliny to rub against rocks in order to reproduce (Nat. 9.160 and he writes that they are found in slime, limus, Nat. 31.36). Strabo writes of "dug mullets" found in the marshes near Narbo, which were caught by digging a hole and then spearing the mud "one can spit a fish that is notable for its magnitude, and it feeds on mud just like eels do" (4.1.6). Eels were notable for Aristotle (HA 592a) and Theophrastus because of their ability to live for some time out of water, see Sharples 1992: 372-73. Aristotle (HA 570a16-19) believed eels spring up spontaneously from clay and damp earth, cf. Opp. Hal. 1.513-21, Athen. 298c, 299d and LeHoux 2017: 38-39. For more on the eel in ancient Greece and Rome in general, see Thompson 1947: 58-61. It took until 1922 for Johannes Schmidt to finally discover that eels mate in the Sargasso Sea, cf. Leroi 2014: 230-32. I think the use of latebrosis may sonically evoke the Epicurean idea of lathe biosas as well to hammer home that this is an "Epicruean" food.
gravis et ipsae cibus ob ignaviam: ipsae refers to anguillae: They are a “food that weighs upon the stomach” (s.v. gravis OLD 5b) and the recipes found in Giacosa 1992: 127-28 stress how oily these eels tend to be. Juvenal expresses disappointment at being fed anguilla (5.103), although it was approved elsewhere, cf. Braund 1996: ad loc. ignavia is used of the sloth and lethargy associated with luxury at Ben. 4.13.1. Such stories about fishponds and raising eels may bring up the story of Vedius Pollio in the mind of the Roman reader, cf. Purcell 1995a: 140 “In the much better-known story of the vile Vedius Pollio and the murenae to which he fed errant slaves, it is not just a question of depriving the poor of their food, but actually feeding the fish on the human resource itself (Seneca De Ira 3.40.2; De Clementia 1.18; Pliny Nat. 9.77; 167; Dio 54.23). The cruelty of death by fish and the shock of including people in the piscine food-chain are something that we have already considered, and the theme of saevitia (savagery) is undoubtedly central to this much told tale, but it is also connected more directly with the calibration of truphe, and excessive indulgence in the creation of conditions for the rearing of fish out of their natural element (Pliny Nat. 9.77 also stresses saevitia)”. However, it should be noted, that anguillae and murenae are from different families altogether. Here the eels act as an intermediary between the underground fish, exposed to no light at all (and, subsequently, deadly to eat), and those fish that are healthy to eat.
utique si altitudo illas luti penitus abscondit: utique si = “especially if” (OLD 6). The word-order sandwiches/hides the eels (illas) between the depth of mud (altitudo…luti). The idea that these creatures, raised in the darkness of the mud, will be especially difficult to digest implies that the “heaviness” of their environment (3.9.2, 3.10.1) impacts how palatable they will be. altitudo “depth/height” is an important word for the NQ, in that Seneca has to explore these extremes and put them in their proper “cosmic” contexts (4b.11.1, 4b.11.3), and events like the flood (3.27.11, 3.28.4) or earthquakes (6.2.8, 6.25.1) force men to comprehend their own insignificance.
[3.19.4] habet ergo non tantum venas aquarum terra: His various detours complete, Seneca feels he has proven (ergo) the copious amounts of water underground. He will go on to elaborate the various underground rivers that could exist, cf. Hine 1996: 55-6 for discussion of the passage and its textual problems. venas aquarum returns to the nomenclature of NQ 3.15.1 and helps to resituate the reader in the doxographical setting. This is a continuation of 3.16.5 where Seneca has been explaining the idea, crede infra quidquid vides supra, cf. NQ 3.16.4. It is important to keep in mind that all of the following descriptions of streams and rivers are happening underground.
ex quibus conrivatis flumina effici possint: The rare verb conrivare = “to lead (water) into the same channel, to collect”. The veins of water can combine to create streams.
sed amnes magnitudinis vastae: Seneca will call the Danube and Nile vastos amnes, NQ 3.22.1. For more on magnitudo in the NQ, cf. note 3.pr.4 supra. Lucan is also interested in such hydrological matters when describing the environment around Capua: fontibus hic vastis inmensos concipit amnes / fluminaque in gemini spargit divortia ponti, 2.403-4. Thus, there are both streams and huge rivers underground, just as above ground.
quorum aliis semper in occulto cursus est: Some of these rivers will always be hidden underground. See notes on NQ 3.pr.1 and 3.14.3 for Seneca’s use of in occulto. Hine and Gercke believe there must be a lacuna because the following donec appears to make little sense of waters already underground, cf. Hine 1996: 55-56 for discussion. However, the point is that these rivers act in a similar way to those above ground and thus can disappear into holes (which Seneca will discuss more at 3.26.3-4). This moment anticipates that discussion and shows the reciprocal relationship: crede supra quidquid scis infra.
donec aliquo terrae sinu devorentur: Seneca stressed that below the ground there were specus vasti, recessus and abrupti hiatus (NQ 3.16.4). So rivers traveling below ground could also fall into holes and clefts in the earth (terrae sinu). Alexander 1948: 286 and Vottero 1989: 155-56 point out that Aetna 123-27 describes two types of rivers and the possible translation of terrae sinu as “a subterranean sea or ocean that absorbs them” (Alexander 1948: 286). This translation may be too specific here, but it does inform a latter section of this work, cf. NQ 6.7.5 “if people do not believe that the gulfs of a huge sea are hidden within the earth (qui non credit esse in abdito terrae sinus maris vasti), they are relying too much on their eyesight, and do not know how to let their minds advance beyond it” (trans. Hine 2010). This moment is one in which Seneca is testing his reader to move beyond what he can directly see. Elsewhere in the NQ, terrarum sinu is an abyss opened by an earthquake (6.1.9), and he describes the underworld at Oed. 582-3: subito dehiscit terra et immenso sinu laxata patuit, cf. Herc. F. 679. One would expect the same sort of holes to swallow certain visible rivers and Seneca describes exactly that phenomenon (a common topos in hydrological paradoxography), see 3.26.3-4 (and note infra), 6.8.1-2. The only subsequent use of devorare is in the flood, 3.27.14: non est res satis sobria lascivire devorato orbe terrarum.
alii sub aliquo lacu emergunt: For underground sources feeding lakes, see NQ 3.3.1 on the Fucine lake.
nam quis ignorat esse quaedam stagna sine fundo?: For bottomless lakes as possible sources of the Nile, cf. Hdt. 2.28, for a bottomless lake near Cutilia, cf. D.H. 1.15; for bottomless lakes in Gaul, cf. D.S. 5.25.3; Aristotle thought the Caspian Sea was bottomless (Mete. 351a9-14, cf. Pliny Nat. 2.224). Nero is said to have visited the “bottomless” Lake Alcyon in the Peloponnesus in 67 CE and made experimental soundings (see Alcock 1994: 101-104 for Nero’s interest in waters). It is clear these were commonly thought to exist. For such lakes as sacred spaces in Roman thought, cf. Edmondson 2009: 279-80.
quorsus hoc pertinet?: cf. Dial. 4.2.1, Dial. 5.5.1, Ep. 66.27 for similar expressions and responses. quorsus = “to what condition, action, point of reference?” (OLD 2).
ut appareat hanc aquam magnis amnibus aeternam esse materiam: The impersonal use of apparere = “it is clear, plain, or evident” (OLD 11), but it is interesting to note how this was “proved” by appeals knowledge or common sense such as Theophrastus’ claims about underground fish, various bottomless lakes, and the larger world-as-body analogy (for more on this, cf. Williams 2005a: 157-58). materia is an important word for the NQ appearing 44 times as we might expect from the Stoic materialist cosmos. Part of the purpose for making such a quaestio is to understand quae universi materia sit (1.pr.3), and Seneca will appeal to the large stores of hidden water for the flood: nam, ut aeris, ut aetheris, sic huius elementi larga materia est multoque in abdito plenior, NQ 3.28.4. This seems to conclude his argument that underground water is the everlasting material for great rivers (earlier described as amnes magnitudinis vastae).
cuius non tanguntur extrema: tangere here probably is not appealing to actual touch as much as “to reach, to attain” (OLD 7), cf. Ep. 26.1: inter decrepitos me numera et extrema tangentis. extrema here means “bottom/depths”. See Hine 1996: 56 for discussion of this difficult final line.
sicut fluminum fontes: The contrast between the great rivers and streams, whose sources can not be reached, and those that can sometimes run dry (supply tanguntur). If great rivers like the Nile and Danube will never diminish, other streams can (part of the larger point of NQ 3.16.1: supervacuum est nominare singular flumina quae certis mensibus magna, certis angusta sunt, to which this chapter offers the conclusion). Alexander 1948: 286 in arguing for an incorrect interpretation hit upon the truth “The sources of rivers are, in fact, known at times to be severely drawn upon, even to the point of exhaustion”. There is both the sense that the underground depth/supply of water for great rivers will never run out, while other smaller rivers can diminish or even stop running, and that the source of many rivers are known (see, for instance, the inscription at the source of the Angitis river in Drama, Greece in Talianis and Rouskas 1997).
******
******
