[3.28.1] Nunc ad propositum revertamur: The literary criticism of Ovid is pronounced to be over, but he will still include Ovidian quotations (3.28.2 infra) as well as intertexts to his work. See note on 3.19.1 supra for the phrase ad propositum revertamur. He will now ruminate on the way the seas will add to the power of the flood waters.
sunt qui existiment inmodicis imbribus vexari terras posse, non obrui: Here, Seneca responds to his previous description of Fabianus’ flood with its inmodici imbres (3.27.4 supra). Even after the florid, clever, and extensive illustration of the world ending by rain, Seneca admits that some don’t think this is enough to truly destroy the world. Seneca shows his ability to give another version of the flood with a different series of causes. This section often harps upon the difference between merely damaging (vexari) and overwhelming (obrui) the earth, cf. 3.28.2: non laedi terrae debent sed abscondi. It is possible that obrui here draws upon Seneca’s Troades and the description of destruction there (Tr. 263, 1031). Martial 3.100.3 evokes this line: imbribus inmodicis caelum non forte ruebat.
magno impetu magna ferienda sunt: The resonance of impetus continues here and, if Ovid was unable to match the heights of tantum impetum ingenii et materiae 3.27.13, Seneca will try to sustain the sublimity of his material. Seneca has forms of magnus impetus to mark the first rush of anger at Dial. 3.17.5, the singular virtuous deed at Ep. 120.9, and various natural phenomena at NQ 2.8.1, 2.20.2, 6.21.1 and even a philosophical school at NQ 7.32.2. The anaphora of magno…magna and the passive periphrastic construction with the gerundive (A&G 194b) hint at the necessity for forces beyond the expected precipitation. Forms of feriendus appear at Herc. F. 1113, Dial. 2.18.1, Dial. 4.34.5, Ben. 5.23.1 and NQ 2.46.1 (for this see Fontecedro 2000: 183-85).
faciet pluvia segetes malas: Seneca begins to mark harm done from precipitation with the implication that these are not enough in themselves to constitute the magno impetu needed for the great flood. Seneca increases the size of object damaged from grain to fruit to even rivers, but these, in themselves, are not magna. This crop damage is one stage of Fabianus’ flood (3.27.4 supra). For the transient nature of this sort of damage, cf. Ep. 81.1: post malam segetem serendum est; saepe quicquid perierat adsidua infelicis soli sterilitate, unius anni restituit ubertas.
fructum grando decutiet: Seneca will go on to discuss hail extensively in Book 4b, including the foolhardy rituals meant to protect crops from hail (4b.6.1-7.3). The language of these two descriptions of precipitation may be derived from Ovid’s Fast. 5.322-24 where Flora mentions what happens to the crops she does not protect: florebant segetes, grandine laesa seges. / in spe vitis erat, caelum nigrescit ab Austris / et subita frondes decutiuntur aqua.
intumescent nimbis flumina, sed resident: For nimbis instead of rivis, cf. Hine 1996: 65, accepting the conjecture of Müller 1894. If the previous clauses give results from precipitation, so this should as well, and it shows how rivers may rise because of storms, but will always, eventually, recede. See Seneca’s comments on NQ 3.11.6 supra for the effect of rain on rivers.
[3.28.2] quibusdam placet moveri mare et illinc causam tantae cladis accersere: Aristotle Mete. 352a19-352b16 mentions how the sea encroaches on different areas during periods of cyclic catastrophes. The language does hearken back to Lucretius’ description of the flood where rivers and precipitation were bad enough, but si tristior incubuisset / causa, darent late cladem magnasque ruinas, 5.346-47. Is the sea to be considered the tristior causa? The phrase tanta clades is found in Seneca’s tragedies, Herc. F. 1182, Tr. 229, Tr. 917-18 (with causa), and once elsewhere in his prose, Dial. 3.11.2: Quid Cimbrorum Teutonorumque tot milia superfusa Alpibus ita sustulit ut tantae cladis notitiam ad suos non nuntius sed fama pertulerit, nisi quod erat illis ira pro virtute? accersere = “to derive” (OLD 3c). For the ways that sea-level change and marine erosion can influence flooding in the Mediterranean, cf. Horden and Purcell 2000: 310-12
non potest torrentium aut imbrium aut fluminum iniuria fieri tam grande naufragium: The damage of these natural forces, which Seneca detailed at NQ 3.27, is thought to be insufficient for such annihilation. naufragium picks up its mention at 3.27.7 supra and Seneca blends the figurative and literal meanings at this moment, especially since it will be the sea that is causing the destruction. For this use of iniuria, cf. TLL 7.1.1675.56-1676.15.
ubi instat illa pernicies: Seneca will refer to the flood as pernicies again at NQ 3.29.2 and, when picturing the soul after death at NQ 6.32.7, remarks that one will not fear shipwrecks (non naufragiorum classes totas sorbentium) or armies bent on mutual destruction (in mutuam perniciem multorum milium par furor). Elsewhere in Seneca it is used e.g. of Medea’s revenge, pavet animus, horret: magna pernicies adest (Med. 670), of death (Ag. 229), and of sickness (Dial. 1.3.2). The phrasing may recall Phaedrus’ fable 1.30 (Ranae Metuentes Taurorum Praelia): Rana in palude pugnam taurorum intuens: / “Heu quanta nobis instat pernicies!” ait, 1.30.2-3.
mutarique humanum genus placuit: By placing mutari at the opening position of the clause, Seneca stresses that such changes have been a major topic of Book 3, from elemental change (cf. 3.9.3: placet nobis terram esse mutabilem, 3.8-10) to changes in the taste (3.20) or the temperature (3.24) of water, let alone the most dramatic changes catalogued at 3.25-26. The physics underlying such changes anticipates the change that must occur due to the moral depravity of humankind (this is foregrounded in Ovid’s telling of the flood, but Seneca does not address it as openly until 3.30.7). Here such a change must be “pleasing” to natura = deus (cf. 3.28.7: cum deo visum est ordiri meliora, vetera finiri), but often in historical tenses placere is used of political decisions, such as those decreed by the the Senate (OLD 5b). In Ovid’s Metamorphoses the destruction of the human race was a matter of grief for some of the gods, who wondered who would maintain their religious rites (1.246), but was endorsed by Jupiter himself. Seneca’s allusion to this passage would seem to indicate that the mores of his contemporary time are equivalent to those of Lycaon, see Tarrant 2006: 3-4. Because of the references to Ovid’s Pythagoras elsewhere in this book, it is possible that this line may recall a moment of his speech (sunt qui…mutari credant humanas angue medullas, Met. 15.389-90). For more on humanum genus, see the note on 3.27.1 supra.
fluere adsiduos imbres et non esse pluviis modum concesserim: The move to the first person endorses that this is Seneca’s view and that he sees such celestial waters working in tandem with the sea as well. This, of course, returns to what he said early in the flood description at 3.27.1-2 Seneca may hint at the work of Lucretius in this “concession”: ex imbribus assiduis exisse rapaces / per terras amnes atque oppida coperuisse, cf. Lucr. 5.341-42.
suppressis aquilonibus et flatu sicciore, austris, nubes et amnes abundare: For the problems of the transmitted text, cf. Hine 1996: 65 and Bravo Díaz 2013: 213n.151. Aquilo (Gr. Βορέας) is the NNE wind and is known to be a dry wind, cf. Ov. Tr. 3.10.53: siccis Aquilonibus. In Ovid’s flood description it is imprisoned (protinus Aeoliis Aquilonem claudit in antris / et quaecumque fugant inductas flamina nubes, Met. 1.262-63). Auster (Gr. Νότος), was notably damp and Ovid lets this wind loose and strongly personifies it at Met. 1.264-67. Vitr. 8.2.5 remarks on the relative dryness of the Aquilo and wetness of Auster and NQ 5.16.1-6 shows Seneca’s wide knowledge of these winds, their characteristics, and their appearance in Ovid and Vergil. Lucretius connects the abundance (and size) of clouds with their ability to raise rivers and flood the earth at 6.266-68: nec tanti possent venientes opprimere imbres, / flumina abundare ut facerent camposque natare, / si non extructis foret alte nubibus aether.
sed adhuc in damna profectum est: sternuntur…anni: Another quotation from Ovid’s flood description (Met. 1.272-73, see Bömer 1969-86: ad loc.). proficere is commonly used in the impersonal passive (“to achieve something, to be successful, makes a profit” OLD 1b) and damna here indicate mere “losses/damages” of the sort that the farmers lament in the Ovidian quotation. At Ep. 91.6 Seneca writes nunc incrementa lente exeunt, festinatur in damnum. Seneca will use Ovid’s labor inritus to describe the work of the Danaids in the Underworld at Med. 748, and echo sternuntur segetes in a description of war: segetesque adultas sternis (Phoen. 561).
[3.28.3] non laedi terrae debent sed abscondi: The repetition of debere here from NQ 3.27.15 indicates that such damages are not enough for the correct view of the flood. Cf. Luc. 9.687: Pallas frugiferas iussit non laedere terras. abscondere reappears to describe both the effects of earthquakes (6.1.9, 6.24.5) as well as the hidden waters inside the earth (6.8.1), and cities already hidden by the sea (Helice and Buris, 7.5.3: Burin et Helicen mare absconderet).
itaque cum per ista prolusum est: There is a sense that both natura and Seneca the author have merely been “practicing” or “rehearsing” (proludere, cf. Ep. 102.23) with the description and damage thus far and that something greater is coming. Seneca has proludere often in descriptions that evoke literary antecedents (cf. Phaed. 1061~ Verg. A. 12.106; Med. 907 and the literary tradition behind her youthful crimes, cf. Trinacty 2014: 120-24) and at this point he leaves quotations of Ovid behind.
crescunt maria, sed super solitum: Elsewhere Seneca writes of the reasons the seas do not rise, see NQ 3.5.1 supra and Ep. 79.8: maria non crescent; mundus eundum habitum ac modum servat. Here such a rise is to be imagined as a high tide or storm surge. Seneca coins super solitum (cf. Ben. 6.36.1 about an eruption of Aetna) and it is picked up by Tacitus (Germ. 32.2) and, in the NQ, has a similar praeter solitum of lightning (2.13.3) and comets (7.11.3).
fluctum ultra extremum tempestatis maximae vestigium mittunt: fluctum here is a collective singular “waves” (OLD 1b). The hyperbolic description of storms in Latin poetry have the waves touching the heavens (e.g. Verg. A. 1.103: fluctusque ad sidera tollit, Ov. Tr. 1.2.19-20, Sen. Ag. 471: in asta pontus tollitur) so the extremum vestigium must be high indeed! Although the connotations are different, it is possible Seneca was influenced by Vergil’s famous description of Iustitia leaving her extrema vestigia on earth at G. 2.473-74. Seneca writes of the “very great storms” that accompanied a comet at NQ 7.28.3, cf. Dial. 6.17.4.
deinde a tergo ventis surgentibus ingens aequor evoluunt: The winds of Aeneas’ storm, vastos volvunt ad litora fluctus (A. 1.86), leading to the ingens…pontus that destroys Orontes’ ship (A. 1.114). a tergo recalls its use at NQ 3.pr.2 supra and will be used of the effects of wind and water at NQ 6.14.3, 6.17.2, 6.23.4, and 2.20.3. For ventis surgentibus, cf. Verg. G. 1.356, A. 3.130, Sen. Dial. 3.17.4. The ingens aequor may recall the final words of Hor. C. 1.7: cras ingens iterabimus aequor (32).
quod longe a conspectu antiqui litoris frangitur: As in tsunamis which effect the shoreline and storm surges which push the waves far inland, so the waves from this flood will break on ground far from the old shoreline. Seneca has longe a conspectu in an address to Lucilius at Ep. 19.5: tulit te longe a conspectu vitae salubris rapida felicitas, provincia et procuratio et quidquid ab istis promittitur… and at Ep. 91.11 he writes of terrestrial and hydrological changes in a similar manner: iuga montium diffluunt, totae desedere regiones, operta sunt fluctibus quae procul a conspectu maris stabant. See Papadopoulos 2009 for the effects of historical tsunamis in the Mediterranean and Guidoboni and Ebel 2009 for historical tsunami and earthquake data.
ubi litus bis terque prolatum est, et pelagus in alieno constitit: proferre can mean “to advance (a boundary)” (OLD 8c) and there is military or imperial expansion behind Seneca’s language (see NQ 6.23.3). His only other use of bis terque appears at Thy. 701-2: regium capiti decus / bis terque lapsum est. alienum = “foreign territory/soil” (cf. Cic. Mil. 74, Sen. Ep. 88.28, Ep. 120.17, on which the sea has “taken up a position” (s.v. consto OLD 1a).
velut amota mole comminus procurrit aestus ex imo recessu maris: The two or three opening advances lead to the rout of water. For amota mole, see Degl’Innocenti Pierini 1984: 159-60, who sees this as an emulation of Ovid Met. 1.279-80: aperite domos ac mole remota / fluminibus vestris totas inmittite habenas, and note Tarrant 1985: ad 459-60 about the luxurious practice of Romans to build into the sea by means of such moles. Seneca will pick up this language below at 3.28.5. Shackleton Bailey 1979: 452 remarks on how comminus “suggests a military metaphor” and see Seneca’s use of procurrere at Cl. 1.4.1 to support this idea. The particular sources for the tides of the sea were addressed at NQ 3.14.3 supra and will be evoked below. The general feel of a war of the elements, with water now defeating earth can be paralleled at Lucr. 5.380-415 and elsewhere in the NQ, cf. 3.30.2 where the normal tides are mere “practice” for this advance, 6.10.1, and 2.26.7.
[3.28.4] nam ut aëris, ut aetheris, sic huius elementi larga materia est: In addition to naming two elements there is also a movement upwards; whereas we have just been thinking of the “depths” of the sea, so now we move through the air to the aether, which is the purest fire that surrounds the earth, cf. NQ 2.13.4-2.14.1 with Hine 1982: 123 and ad loc. In a different context, Seneca uses the collocation larga materia: omnis agedum mortalis circumspice, larga ubique flendi et adsidua materia est…(Dial. 11.4.2). The prevalence of water as an element has been important throughout this book, see 3.12.1-13.2 supra.
multoque in abdito plenior: The hidden supply of water is all the more plentiful than what we can observe. Seneca will return to these hidden supplies at NQ 3.30.3, 6.7.5, and 6.27.3, but alludes to them also at Ep. 91.12: sive torrentium impetus in abdito vastior obstantia effregerit. Seneca likes the phrase in abdito (e.g. Dial. 3.1.5, NQ 1.14.1) and it often evokes a certain challenge to the reader to try to understand what is happening beyond the normal senses, cf. Ep. 95.64 where Seneca writes of precepts: idem dicere de praeceptis possum: aperta sunt, decreta vero sapientiae in abdito, or in far-off regions, cf. NQ 5.18.12. The NQ in large part hopes to provoke the reader to come to understand (or at the very least consider) what is happening beyond the senses and to employ the ratio to get at those heights/depths.
haec fatis mota, non aestu (nam aestus fati ministerium est): Here Seneca distinguishes between the normal movement of the tide and the exceptional movement of this flood, which is caused by fate. The tide is merely the servant of fate, much like the diviner at NQ 2.38.4: hoc prodest quod fati minister est, but this flood should not be looked at as some byproduct of the tides alone. Everything is enslaved to fate, see NQ 6.1.14: non homines tantum, qui brevis et caduca res nascimur – urbes oraeque terrarum et litora et ipsum mare in servitutem fati venit. Seneca writes extensively about fate in NQ 2, cf. 2.32.1-2.51.1, especially 2.36.1, cf. Wildberger 2006: 331-48. Posidonius offers the most explicit Stoic explanation of the tides, which stresses their reliance on the celestial cycle, see Kidd 1988: ad Frag 17, and White 2007: 67-76 and his comment on how Posidonius’ work on the tides “also forms part of theology, and not only in the trivial sense that Stoic pantheism makes all natural science a study of god…Posidonius located the divine mind in ‘heaven’, by which he apparently meant the entire region above the moon’s orbital sphere…His project of establishing and systematically articulating the regularity, organic unity, and universal consistency, harmony, and ‘sympathetic’ interaction of discrete componenets of the cosmos in both its celestrial and its terrestrial realms was in effect an attempt to read and write the very mind of god in its providential operation” (75-76).
attollit vasto sinu fretum agitque ante se: The tide lifts up the strait “in a huge curl” and drives the sea before it. The first attested use of vasto sinu is of Aristaeus’ katabasis to his mother’s realm (where he will see various underground rivers): curvata in montis faciem circumstetit unda / accepitque sinu vasto misitque sub amnem (Verg. G. 361-62), but Seneca will use sinus of the great wave that brings the bull-from-the-sea in his Phaedra (nescioquid onerato sinu / gravis unda portat, 1019-20, cf. Phaed. 1204-05) and have variations of it at NQ 6.1.9, and 6.7.5. agere + ante se is not uncommon in Seneca, cf. Ep. 87.9, 94.61, NQ 3.27.11 and 2.20.3.
in miram altitudinem erigitur et illis tutis hominum receptaculis superest: If erigere can be used humans building or erecting a permanent structure (OLD 4), the work of nature will be well above any refuge (built or not) of man. Elsewhere Seneca writes of generals such as Alexander the Great qui aequum arcibus aggerem attollant et muros in miram altitudinem eductos arietibus ac machinis quassent (Ep. 94.61). At NQ 6.1.4 in discussing the fear caused by earthquakes, Seneca writes: quod corpora receptaculum invenient, quo sollicita confugient, si ab imo metus nascitur et funditus trahitur? If mankind has regressed into a primal state from the earlier conditions of the flood (cf. NQ 3.27.5), their shelters may resemble those of the primitive man that Seneca writes about at Ep. 90.9 and 90.41.
nec id aquis arduum est, quoniam aequo terris fastigio ascendunt: Seneca plays with the two senses of arduum here as both “difficult” and “high”. In some sense this is not difficult for water, just as it is not difficult for nature to create this flood (NQ 3.27.2, 3.30.1), but Seneca will go on to show how what we think of as “high” is not really the case when one “zooms out” and sees the earth as spherical. Seneca may be deriving his language from that of Curtius Rufus and the siege works of Alexander the Great (e.g. 4.2.19, 8.10.31) and his description of the tide of the Indian Ocean (9.9.19: utcumque inaequale terrae fastigium occupaverant undae). For ascendere of water (or other elements) rising or reaching a certain height (usually with ad+acc.), see TLL 2.4.756.61-81, cf. NQ 4a.2.16, 6.8.5, and 2.9.2. fastigium simply means “level” or “elevation” (OLD 6), but cf. 3.pr.9 supra.
[3.28.5] si quis excelsa perlibret, maria paria sunt: perlibrare is used of measuring or “to take the level of” (OLD 1, cf. Vitr. 8.5.2), but how can it be the case that the highest points are equal to the seas? Seneca will go on to say that the various elevations are miniscule when one considers the size and shape of the earth as a whole. This is a point he will revisit and stress at NQ 4b.11.1-5 where he compares the difference between mountain peaks and valleys to be like comparing the thickness of two hairs (4b.11.5). The anticipation of that section here stresses how Seneca will reiterate the cosmic viewpoint that he expects his readers to adopt (also see 1.pr.3-5, 9-17). The parasyllabic rhyme maria paria concretely makes the seas equal and Seneca discusses various virtues in a similar manner, cf. Ep. 66.13: aeque reliqua quoque inter se paria sunt, tranquillitas, simplicitas, liberalitas, constantia, aequanimitas, tolerantia. omnibus enim istis una virtus subest, quae animum rectum et indeclinabilem praestat, cf. Ep. 79.8.
nam par undique sibi ipsa tellus est: As Seneca will say about the globe of the earth, par sibi ab omni parte dicatur, NQ 4b11.3 and Manilius stressed about not only the earth, but also the gods at 1.206-214 (similis toto ore sibi perque omnia par est, 1.213). The spherical nature of the earth was a constant in Stoic thought and the uniformity of its surface important for calculations of the size of the earth, see White 2007: 62-67 for Posidonius’ work in this area.
cava eius et plana eius exiguo interiora sunt editis: See Hine 1996: 65-66 for the textual difficulties. The anaphora of eius is awkward, but may be meant to keep with the sense of equality and uniformity. Even the caves and plains are just a little lower than the mountains. See NQ 3.8.1, 6.24.5 for additional uses of interior in the sense of “lower”, but it is rare with exiguo (TLL 5.2.1478.68-70). Seneca has editum “high, lofty” in a figurative expression at Ep. 111.3: in edito stat [philosophus] admirabilis and note his description of “lofty mountains” at 4b.11.3: sic ne in universo quidem orbe terrarum editi montes, quorum magnitudo totius mundi collatione consumitur. He has already shown waters lapping at the highest peaks where humanity has made its last stand at 3.27.12 supra (editissimis quibusque adhaerebant reliquiae generis humani).
adeo in rotundum orbis aequatus est: “The world has been made even all around very much like a globe”. For a similar use of in rotundum see NQ 4b.3.3: foliis si quae guttae adhaeserunt, in rotundum iacent, and Seneca’s comic take on the Stoic god who, in the words of Varro is rotundus…sine capite, sine praeputio, Apo. 8.1. orbis here stands for the world as a whole (OLD 12b) with aequare indicating “to make smooth/even/level” (TLL 1.5.1018.12-44). This statement plays on aequor as a word for the sea (OLD 3 and 3.28.3 supra), as does aequalitas and aequale in this section.
in parte autem eius et maria sunt: The seas already make up a large part of the world with parte…eius recalling the previous sentence.
quae in unius aequalitatem pilae coeunt: Here the seas unite to help create the “uniformity of shape or structure” (OLD 4a) of a single ball, which Seneca also mentions at NQ 4b.11.3: pilae proprietas est cum aequalitate quadam rotunditas. Elsewhere Seneca will use aequalitas to mention evenness or smoothness and he uses it of the surface of the sea, Ep. 53.2: aequalitas illa [maris]. Of course, in the flood, there will be such smoothness as all will be water. Seneca will use a ball in other comparisons: Ben. 5.8.4: ut in orbe ac pila nihil imum est, nihil summum, nihil extremum, nihil primum…, NQ 1.4.3, 2.1.4, 4b.11.2-3: nisi esset, non diceremus totum orbem terrarum pilam esse. The repetitions of such formulations in the work help to show how these various points of physics and natural philosophy are related and part of a larger whole, see NQ 2.21.4 where Seneca defends his tendency of saying the same thing as part of his teaching strategy, although Hine finds Seneca makes his point “not altogether convincingly” (Hine 2010: 15). Plato also compared the earth to a ball at Phaedo 110b: “the real earth, viewed from above, is supposed to look like one of these balls made of twelve pieces of skin…” and at Tim. 33b discusses its spherical shape. Aristotle also understood the earth as spherical in part because of southern constellations and the shadow of the earth on the moon during a lunar eclipse is curved (Cael. 297b31-298a10) and he believed, as did most Greek philosophers, in the spherical shape of the cosmos (see Lehoux 2011: 41-44).
quemadmodum campos intuentem quae paulatim devexa sunt fallunt: The gradually sloping plain does not seem to lose elevation to the casual viewer. These sorts of optical illusions will become very important for Seneca’s later discussion of the rainbow and atmospheric fires and it is important not to be misled by one’s sense perceptions (the NQ stresses that “there is nothing more fallable than our sight” (nihil esse acie nostra fallacius, NQ 1.3.9, cf 1.pr.1, 7.25.7: (on the motion of comets) natura viarum circulorumque sic positorum ut certo tempore intuentes fallant, Ep. 66.30-32 stresses how ratio is the best guide, and Hankinson 2003 on Stoic epistemology more generally). See Lehoux 2012: 83-90 for quemadmodum arguments in the NQ and the way they may be “much closer to the Stoic heart…more partisan than they may at first seem” (87).
sic non intellegimus curvaturas maris, et videtur planum quidquid apparet: Seneca only has curvatura twice elsewhere, to describe an arch (Ep. 90.32) and when citing Ovid Met. 2.107-8: aurea summae / curatura rotae at Ep. 115.13. A fragment of Cicero’s Academica states: quid tam planum videtur quam mare; e quo etiam aequor illud poetae vocant (Nonius 65). Strabo 1.1.20 gives various proofs (most derived from seafaring) that the earth is round, and uses this example to distinguish between “sense perception or common knowledge”.
at illud aequale terris est: illud = mare. aequalis = “level with, flush with” (OLD 5), but also “the same height as” (OLD 5b, cf. Thy. 885: aequalis astris gradior). Both senses may be contrary to the reader’s everyday observations (the Alps certainly seem higher than the Mediterranean), but it is part of Seneca’s rejiggering of the reader’s perspective that he is able to explain the flood in this way.
ideoque ut effluat non magna mole tollendum est: “And for this reason it must be no great effort to raise it enough to flow forth over the earth”. tollendum est is the reading of Z and should be adopted here over the se tollet dum of most other manuscripts. For magna mole in a quasi-adverbial sense (ablative of manner, A&G 412), see Oed. 829: magnum esse magna mole quod petitur scias and Töchterle 1994: ad loc.
satis est illi, ut supra paria veniat, leviter exsurgere: exsurgere is reminiscent of 3.27.1 supra and of Seneca’s description of a stormy sea at Phaed. 1012. leviter, like non magna mole, stresses the lack of effort involved in this flood (from the standpoint of natura).
nec a litore, ubi inferius est, sed a medio, ubi ille cumulus est, defluit: As when one looks out at the sea and it seems to higher on the horizon, Seneca focuses on this “swell” (cumulus) as the region from which the waters flood down. This in itself is an optical illusion, but unlike other false impressions that Seneca acts to dispel, he utilizes this one to help prove his point. Ovid’s description of a great wave (which Seneca knew well, cf. Phaed. 1007-34) writes of the water as a “swell” (cum mare surrexit, cumulusque inmanis aquarum / in montis speciem curvari, Met. 15.508-9). It is true that the oceans (and certain other bodies of water) have different heights (e.g. the absolute water level height is higher on the west coast of the United States than on the east coast), and this idea led to some ancient water projects being abandoned (e.g. worries that cutting the Corinthian canal would drain the Gulf of Corinth and flood the islands of the Saronic Gulf, cf. Werner 1997: 114-16 for more on this project). Seneca moves from the slight effort that would be necessary for waters to rise in order to flow forth (effluat) to an even easier, and proven method of the waters flowing down (defluit), as they do by nature (NQ 2.9.2).
[3.28.6] Ergo ut solet aestus aequinoctialis sub ipsum lunae solisque coitum omnibus aliis maior undare: Seneca only uses aequinoctialis in the NQ (5.16.3, 5.16.4, 5.16.5, 5.17.2, 7.15.2, cf. 3.16.3 supra), and the idea that the highest tides happened during the conjunction of sun and moon (i.e. the new moon, cf. Ben. 5.6.4) is found in the fragments of Posidonius (F 217, see Kidd 1988: ad loc. for full discussion and Plin. Nat. 2.212-19). It is true that the greatest annual tides occur at the equinox. Seneca writes of the tides elsewhere at Ben. 7.1.5 (where it is among worthy natural topics of investigation) and Dial. 1.1.4 where he believes they are influenced primarily by the moon: prout illas lunare sidus elicuit, ad cuius arbitrium oceanus exundat. For a brief overview of tidal theory in Greek science, cf. Rihll 1999: 97-98. For extensive ancient sources, see Vottero 1989: ad loc. The tides have both a monthly and annual cycle and can be fit into the larger patterns that define so many of these naturales quaestiones as well as the great flood itself.
sic hic qui ad occupandas terras emittitur: ad + gerund/gerundive for purpose (A&G 506). For one with knowledge of the customary cycle of tides, this flood will follow a similar pattern, only with amplified size, volume, and destruction. occupare commonly indicates military and political expansion (OLD 3), cf. Hor. C. 3.24.3-4, Sen. Ep. 91.17, Ep. 82.22: dux ille Romanus, qui ad occupandum locum milites missos, cum per ingentem hostium exercitum ituri essent, sic adlocutus est…; but it is also used of inanimate phenomena that “cover, seize, invade” (OLD 4a), cf. Sen. Ag. 527 of the great storm at sea: nec plura possunt: occupat vocem mare. Earlier in the book, the sea was said to have a hidden source of power: tantum ex illa quantum semper fluere possit emittitur (3.14.3) and form of this verb will be used again in the following section (3.28.7: sic in nos mare inmittitur desuper).
solitis maximisque violentior plus aquarum trahit: The arrangement of comparatives (violentior, plus) with superlative (maximis) stresses the excessive violence and volume of these tidal movements, while still placing them in the context of observable accustomed phenomena (solitis maximis). This would be, in modern terms, the tidal range (the vertical difference between high and low tide) and can span from over 50 feet (Bay of Fundy, Canada) to the small ranges of the Mediterranean. Seneca will revisit this sentiment from an ethical standpoint at NQ 6.2.5: extimescam emotum sedibus suis mare et ne aestus maiore quam solet cursu plus aquarum trahens superveniat, cum quosdam strangulaverit potio male lapsa per fauces? The intratext helps to create the informed perspective that Seneca urges his reader to adopt vis-à-vis death and shows how physics and ethics can inform one another.
nec antequam supra cacumina eorum quos perfusurus est montium crevit devolvitur: devolvere in the passive indicates “to sink or fall back” (OLD 2b) and this tide will not do so until it swamps the peaks of mountains. crescere is often used of tides rising (cf. Verg. A. 10.292: sed mare inoffensum crescenti adlabitur aestu, Plin. Nat. 2.229). perfundere was the verb Seneca used to describe the inundatio in the preface of this book, see note on 3.pr.5 supra, cf. Thy. 476-78.
per centena milia quibusqum locis aestus excurrit innoxius, et ordinem servat: The tide in certain places ordinarily travels 100 Roman miles (~90 miles) without causing any damage. Posidonius mentions the great distance that tidal bores make in Spain and it is possible Seneca knows this from first-hand experience (F. 218 and Kidd 1988: ad loc). In the NQ, Seneca stresses that it is only when the order is disturbed that mankind pays attention to the natural world (7.1.4: haec tamen non adnotamus, quamdiu ordo servatur. Si quid turbatum est aut praeter consuetudinem emicuit, spectamus interrogamus ostendimus). For other examples of the phrase in Seneca, cf. Thy. 689, Ep. 63.15, and Ep. 92.3.
ad mensuram enim crescit iterumque decrescit: Seneca has ad mensuram at Dial. 10.19.1 and NQ 4a.2.9 and at 4a.1.2 he has mensura about the rising of the Nile. The tides, like the Nile, usually obey their natural cycle of rise and fall. The proper perspective that Seneca stresses in the NQ often hinges on recognizing the true “measure” of mankind (cf. 1.pr.10 and its perversion at 1.16.2 and 1.16.3 with Hostius Quadra). For the repetition of crescere and decrescere, cf. Tr. 1048 and Ep. 24.20: cotidie morimur; cotidie enim demitur aliqua pars vitae, et tunc quoque cum crescimus vita decrescit. The pairing of crescere/decrescere here acts as variation for crescere/devolvere above.
[3.28.7] at illo tempore solutus legibus sine modo fertur: During the flood, the tide “not bound by laws” is carried forth “without restraint”. The only other use of sine modo in Seneca is at Ep. 51.13 when he urges Lucilius to confront vice: persequere sine modo, sine fine; nam illis quoque nec finis est nec modus. That same letter writes how luxury is not bound by laws, Ep. 51.4: soluta legibus luxuria non tantum peccat sed publicat…, cf. Ben. 7.27.1. These “laws” must be thought of as the normal bounds, as the flood itself is part of the law of nature (see Limburg 2007: 174-82), see his subsequent comparison and the notes on 3.30.1, 3.30.6 infra. For the way nature follows her own laws, cf. Dial. 10.10.4-5, Dial. 12.6.8, 12.13.2.
‘qua ratione?’ inquis: See the note on 3.1.1 supra, but this interjection shows the expected level of engagement of the reader. It also allows Seneca the opportunity to make the comparison with the conflagratio/ἐκπύρωσις that will end the universe at a future time.
eadem qua conflagratio futura est: Orthodox Stoicism insists on the periodic destruction of the universe by ἐκπύρωσις and subsequent regeneration. Then the cosmic cycle will begin again and, for some thinkers (influenced by Pythagoreanism), proceed in the same order with the same people, animals, decisions, etc…, because everything happens according to the plan of god. The eternal recurrence is being textually evoked by the repetitions of flood language (as in the quotations of Ovid), the intertext with Vergil’s Eclogues at 3.30.5 (see note infra), and the various repetitions of language both within the flood section and intratexts from earlier in the book. Seneca writes about ἐκπύρωσις elsewhere at Dial. 6.21.2, 6.26.5-7, Dial. 11.1.2-4, Ep. 9.16, 36.10-11, 71.11-16, 110.9, and Ben. 4.8.1. The various intertexts and quotations of Pythagoras’ speech as well as the repetition of language here that appeared at the beginning of the book (note qua ratione) may help the reader understand the cyclical nature and ideological bent of Seneca’s view, see Berno 2012 and Trinacty 2018a. For discussion of the cosmic cycle, its discontents, and its ramifications more broadly, cf. Hahm 1977: 185-99 and Long 2006: 256-82.
utrumque fit cum deo visum est ordiri meliora, vetera finiri: Each event – whether flood or conflagration – occurs at the will of god to destroy the old and begin a better world. While this would seem to indicate the active intervention of god (as in Ovid’s Metamorphoses, for the Stoic Zeus at this moment, cf. Bénatouïl 2009: 28-31), it could also be part of a larger cosmic cycle, as expressed in the theory of Berosos considered in 3.29.1 infra and by Stoic thinkers such as Diogenes of Babylon who computed the “great year” (SVF 3 Diogenes, 28). Long 2006: 268 states, “we should expect to find the conflagration and everlasting recurrence strongly attached to the life and providence of god” (cf. Long and Sedley 1987: 308-13 for the primary texts about Stoic everlasting recurrence). Note how Seneca renews his past language about ἐκπύρωσις at this moment, cum deo visum erit iterum ista moliri, Dial. 6.26.7. For Seneca the ἐκπύρωσις is to be thought of as both catharsis as well as the establishment of a better (ordiri meliora) state of affairs on earth (cf. Luc. 1.72-80 for a similar view and Lapidge 1979 for more on Stoic cosmology in the Pharsalia). For ordiri in the sense of “bring into being”, cf. Sen. Suas. 2.2: ex inbecilla enim nos materia deus orsus est. The chiastic word order (ordiri meliora, vetera finiri) stresses that for a better age to be brought into being, the old order must die. In Stoic thought, god will create the identical world post-ἐκπύρωσις, but this would necessarily be better than the depraved contemporary world, cf. Mansfield 1979 for ἐκπύρωσις as the perfect state of the cosmos (which Long 2006: 256-82 refutes), Salles 2005 for more on how the destruction and recreation can be thought of as providential, and Ware 2017 for Senecan eschatology compared with that of Paul. Seneca would, like Long, appear to be more optimistic about the goodness of the cosmic state (ordiri meliora), while also recognizing that it is quickly tarnished (see 3.30.8 infra).
aqua et ignis terrenis dominantur: Cf. Hine 1996: 66 for the reading and Phaed. 185: potensque tota mente dominator deus. The language here and in the following sentence (esp. res novae) has political resonance. If water and fire have power over earthly things, they exercise that power primarily in destruction, cf. Hahm 1977: 186 “The Stoics…interpret the cataclysms as parts of the cosmic cycle. Thus at one time there is a tremendous fire that destroys the entire cosmos; at another time this fire changes to a flood of water. Only between the watery stage and the next fiery stage does the present state of cosmic organization arise”.
ex his ortus, ex his interitus est: Cicero will also use ortus and interitus when writing about the universe’s creation and destruction (N.D. 1.42, 1.68, 1.73). For the use of interitus, cf. Ep. 91.9 and Dial. 11.1.2 with Degli’Innocenti Pierini 1999: 11-22. Cicero N.D. 2.118 on fire as the end of the world (relinqui nihil praeter ignem) with Pease 1958: ad loc. for additional ancient sources. For most ancient sources, the flood was something that had happened (e.g. the Flood is toward the beginning of the Marmor Parium, cf. Dillery 2015: 117-18) and the destruction by fire was a future event (cf. Ov. Met. 1.256-58, Campion 1994: 64-75). See note on 3.13.1 supra for fire and water as the Stoic beginning/end of the world and 5.5.2-5.6.1 for the vital power of water and fire.
ergo quandoque placuere res novae mundo: The mundus now stands in for natura or deus. For the conflation of god and universe, cf. Dial. 4.16.2, 7.8.4 with the note of Basore 1932: ad loc., and NQ 7.30.4. The use of res novae, a common expression for revolution, (s.v. novus OLD 10) points out how this can be seen as a political event in some way. In Ovid’s Met. Jupiter’s assembly to discuss the destruction of the human race is fashioned in a political manner, see esp. Met. 1.199-206. It must be said that Seneca, if he is endorsing revolution, is doing so in a careful and controlled manner that would allow him to argue that he is simply giving Stoic orthodoxy and put the onus on the reader/interpreter who finds these passages revolutionary. For more on the political ramifications of this moment, see Star: forthcoming.
sic in nos mare inmittitur desuper, ut fervor ignisque: The tidal swell is so high it can seem to be sent against us “from above” (desuper) as will fire and heat during the ἐκπύρωσις. Seneca’s characters wonder if an eclipse is the end of the world also in the Thyestes where the chorus state: in nos aetas ultima venit? (878, cf. NQ 3.27.1 supra). See Volk 2006 for further connections. For fervor as a word to define “different types of heat and fire … distinguished by the philosophers”, see Pease 1958: ad 2.30.
cum aliud genus exiti placuit: A probably reminiscence of Ovid Met. 1.260-61 where Jupiter thinks about whether to use flood or fire (lightning-bolt) to destroy the human race: poena placet diversa, genus mortale sub undis / perdere et ex omni nimbos demittere caelo.
******
******
