[3.29.1] quidam existimant terram quoque concuti: Earthquakes that accompany the flood open up new sources of water, as Fabianus argued at NQ 3.27.3 supra. Plato in his Politicus 273a writes of a great earthquake accompanying the end of a “Great Year”. Seneca earlier addressed how earthquakes can often create new springs (3.11.2) or change underground channels (3.11.1) and this information will reappear when he writes of earthquakes, esp. 6.6.2-4. Seneca will go on to argue that such a massive extinction event will require rain, sea, and earthquakes at 3.29.4 infra. concutere was used of earthquakes by Livy (3.10.6) and will be used often in NQ 6 (6.1.4, 6.22.1, 6.23.1, 6.29.1).
dirupto solo nova fluminum capita detegere, quae amplius ut e pleno profundant: The earth, burst asunder, reveals new sources of rivers, which flow abundantly. de/ex pleno = “from an abundant source, copiously” (OLD 5b, cf. Sen. Dial. 7.24.3, Dial. 10.3.4). For the subterranean waters that can supply these rivers, cf. NQ 6.7.2: deinde tot fontes, tot capita fluminum subitos et ex occulto amnes vomentia…
Berosos, qui Belum interpretatus est, ait ista cursu siderum fieri: Beros[s]us was a writer of Chaldean history at the time of Alexander the Great’s death. He was a priest of Bel/Marduk and we should probably make him an explicator of the ideology and thought of Bel, not just a translator (contra OLD 6, see Drews 1975: 51). His work offered not only geographical and military history of Babylon, but also an account of the Flood. Jacoby had separated the fragments of the historian with those dealing with astrological predictions and cosmology surrounding his school on Cos, but these fragments are most likely by the same author. His astrological renown is apparent in the Latin sources and Pliny mentions that the temple of Jupiter Belus in Babylon was still standing and that Belus discovered the science of astrology (Nat. 6.121), cf. Pliny Nat. 7.123, Vitr. 9.6.2. Berosus, thus, becomes a useful mouthpiece for various revelations, see Momigliano 1975: 148. The particulars of this work have been well-discussed in Dillery 2015 with 242-46 particularly pertinent to this moment of the NQ. Van Noorden 2017: 116 makes the point that Pausanias claims Sibyl was the daughter of Berossus (10.12) and argues that “the influence of Sibylline Oracles was a transformative element” in Seneca’s flood. This section is rather intrusive – note how 3.29.2 picks up with the multiple causes, whereas Berosus’ contribution is more about the timing of the flood and the alternation of fire and water as destructive elements in this “Great Year”, see van der Sluijs 2006: 58-60 for Platonic elements here (Tim. 22c-d, 39c-e). Elsewhere in his work, “the movement of the stars/planets” (cursus siderum) marks the regularity of time, Ben. 7.31.4: siderum cursu notant tempora, influences winds on earth (NQ 2.11.2), and marks the limits of our understanding (NQ 7.3.2: nondum comprehensis quinque siderum cursibus). Seneca may be using Berosus as the sort of sage figure who is able to comprehend the cosmic viewpoint that he espouses elsewhere, while also transcending tradition historical writing. Because of Berosus’ connections with Alexander the Great, there are possible political ramifications, “If implicit in the treatment of past kings are lessons for the current ones, particularly models for how not to rule that can be gleaned through becoming familiar with the misdeeds of old rulers (the proto-apocalyptic element), to imagine an ‘end-time’ that will witness the destruction of the world to be followed by the establishment of a new one (an apocalyptic element) clearly has enormous potential for articulating a political stance” (Dillery 2015: 246 and Gauly 2004: 253-67 for the political reading of Seneca’s flood).
adeo quidem adfirmat ut conflagrationi atque diluvio aeque tempus adsignet: adeo sets up the result clause (A&G 537). While many ancient historians tried to date the flood (see Moyer 2011: 111), Berosus also gives a date for the future conflagration and additional floods. Dillery (2015: 245) believes these are not the cosmic conflagrations (ἐκπύρωσις) of the Stoics, but rather destructions of the world by fire (as when Phaethon burns and desiccates much of the earth, but does not completely destroy it at Met. 2.150-328). Seneca would seem to be adopting Berosus as an authority to the astronomical element of cyclical destruction/regeneration that he endorses, even though the particulars do not match (i.e. Berosus is not a Stoic philosopher). When Seneca discusses ἐκπύρωσις, he often mentions the falling of stars and their general confusion (et cum tempus advenerit, quo se mundus renovaturus extinguat, viribus ista se suis caedent et sidera sideribus incurrent et omni flagrante materia uno igni quicquid nunc ex disposito lucet ardebit, Dial. 6.26.6, cf. Dial. 11.1.2), which is not mentioned in Berosus’s account – rather it is a special pull of the stars lining up together (almost like the moon’s influence on the tide) that leads to the flood.
arsura enim terrena contendit quandoque omnia sidera quae nunc diversos agunt cursus in Cancrum convenerint: terrena connects this with aqua et ignis terrenis dominantur at NQ 3.28.7. The fact that it is only “earthly things” that will burn may help the reader see this moment as a world-end and not the end of the universe per se. Note how the changes of terrena are preprogrammed at the birth of the universe at 3.29.3 infra and the flood will submerge terrena at 3.30.1. The sidera which “pursue separate paths” are the planets, cf. Dial. 6.18.3: videbis quinque sidera diversas agentia vias, NQ 2.32.7 (with reference to Chaldean astronomy), NQ 7.13.1, 7.14.4, 7.24.3, 7.25.1, and 7.25.5. While at times he will mention the importance of their movement for actions on earth (e.g. Dial. 6.18.3: ex horum levissimis motibus fortunae populorum dependent et maxima ac minima proinde formantur, prout aequum iniquumve sidus incessit) at other times, he denies the importance of astrology for the practice of virtue (Ep. 88.14-17). The sign of Cancer (June 21 – July 22) rises on the first day of summer and is considered to be at variance with Capricorn (Man. 3.229-34). The Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn (i.e. “the most northerly and most southerly points on either horizon at which the sun set and rose”) were the traditional way to determine the solstices, see Aratus 480-510 and the commentary of Kidd 1997: ad loc. For more on astrometeorology in general, see Lehoux 2007. Elsewhere, Seneca associates Cancer with heat and as one of the constellations that is disrupted in the Thyestes (Thy. 854, Phaed. 287: ferventi…cancro). The chorus of Thyestes (848-66) shows Seneca’s familiarity with the zodiac and his ability to write about these constellations with erudition and point.
sic sub eodem postia vestigio ut recta linea exire per orbes omnium possit: For vestigium as a path or orbit of heavenly body, see NQ 7.12.3 and OLD 5b; although here it would seem to indicate a particular point of their orbit. exire = “to extend upwards” (OLD 10a). This sort of observation anticipates moments of NQ 7 and the study of the heavens encouraged there, cf. 7.12.3: et Saturnus aliquando supra Iovem est et Mars Venerem aut Mercurium recta linea despicit… Conjunctions of all five planets (with the moon and sun, often considered among the sidera, cf. Corcoran 1971: ad loc.) are rare, see De Meis and Meeus 1994 for the astronomy behind this and these occurrences in the historical record. For the sophistication of Roman astrology, see the introduction to Goold’s Loeb, for Stoic views of astrology, see Volk 2009: 226-34 and for its place in Roman society and knowledge networks, see Green 2014.
inundationem futuram cum eadem siderum turba in Capricornum convenerit: This is Seneca’s only mention of Capricorn (Dec. 22 – Jan. 19). For the larger Mesopotamian context of Berosus’ deluge, see Campion 1994: 64-79.
illic solstitium, hic bruma conficitur, magnae potentiae signa, quando maxima in ipsa mutatione anni momenta sunt: illic…hic = “in the former…in the latter” with solstitium and bruma the technical terms for the first days of summer and winter, respectively. The passive use of conficere= “to take place (in time)” (OLD 11c). For signum as a sign of the zodiac, s.v. OLD 13b and, in Seneca, e.g. Dial. 12.6.7, Ep. 90.42, Herc. F. 129, and Wildberger 2006: 487 n.120. These “signs of great power” may contrast with the signa that generals set up on foreign shores (3.pr.10) and the “great power” that even Roman generals will lose because of fortune (4a.pr.22). These moments are “the most important moments in the very alternation of the year”. The stress on mutatio throughout this book (e.g. mutatio aëris imbrem facit 3.9.2, autumni verisque, unde solet, facta mutatio est, 3.16.3) helps to place the flood as part of a larger cosmic cycle that can be appreciated in seasonal and elemental changes – note 3.29.4 infra (cf. Sambursky 1959: 106-8 for the way that time and the Great Year is also part of the “material state of the Whole”).
[3.29.2] Et istas ego receperim causas: recipere = “to accept as credible (a belief, theory, etc.)” (OLD 7b), cf. Sen. Ep. 87.23: necesse est recipiat sacrilegium…bonum…esse. The potential subjunctive (A&G 447) conveys that this idea is conceivable, and Seneca will elaborate further on the reason why. It is traditional that the cosmic cycle ended with a variety of natural disasters (SVF 1.98, 497, 2.596, 618, 619).
(neque enim ex uno est tanta pernicies): Seneca blends the language of NQ 3.27.1 (an non sit una tanto malo causa sed omnis ratio consentiat) and NQ 3.28.2 (ubi instat illa pernicies) to add to the multiple causes of this ruin. pernicies in the NQ is large-scale destruction, such as that brought on by earthquakes (6.2.6), and war (6.32.7, 5.18.4). ex uno = “from one source”.
illam quae in conflagratio nostris placet hoc quoque transferendam puto: The explanation that the Stoics (nostris) give for the ἐκπύρωσις can be applied to the deluge, namely that the world is a living body that contains its beginning and end and must change as it “grows up”. transferre can also be used of the process of metaphor and the extended simile following this assertion would seem to draw on the reader’s ability to make these sorts of comparisons (see Bartsch 2009 and Armisen-Marchetti 2015 for more on Seneca’s use of metaphor). Here it is notable that the reader would already have to be experienced in the particulars of Stoic ἐκπύρωσις to apply it to the flood. Although some scholars have wanted, therefore, to equate ἐκπύρωσις and inundatio as ends of a cosmic cycle, that is not warranted by the analogy being made (see Wildberger 2006: 57 and 566n.344, and Williams 2012: 125-26).
sive animal est mundus: Although the codices read anima, animal is preferable (Cudworth 1678: III.26), and this is a probable intertext with Ovid Met. 15.343-43: sive est animal tellus et vivit habetque /spiramenta, where the speech of Pythagoras endorses the idea of the earth as an animal. For the Stoic idea that the cosmos is a living being and should be conceived of in this matter, see the concluding comments about “God, fire, cosmic cycle” in Long and Sedley 1987: 279 “On materialist foundations the Stoics offer a theory of events which seeks to unify the different explanatory forces of optimistic theology, goal-directed rational processes, a biological model of change, and a rigorous causal nexus”. Wildberger 2006: 495n.135 gives extensive references and Tutrone 2012: 278-80 discusses the biological ramifications for this earth/animal analogy.
sive corpus natura gubernabile ut arbores ut sata: Earlier Seneca wrote placet natura regi terram (NQ 3.15.1) and he reasserts this idea, but now with the comparison of the mundus as a body (corpus). corpus also can be a technical term for matter in general (Wildberger 2006: 452-54 n.24-26), which god manages, cf. Ep. 107.10: Iovem, duius gubernaculo moles ista derigitur; Seneca spends some time in Ep. 58.10-11 ruminating about the difference between living things (animalia) and substance (corpus). It may be apposite that gubernator in Seneca is most often used of a helmsman in a stormy sea (e.g. Ep. 85.31, Ep. 14.8) – what would such a helmsman do during the deluge? For the comparison with arbores, cf. Ep. 93.4: quomodo dicuntur arbores vivere and Wildberger 2006: 761 n. 1010-1011. Seneca will underscore the idea of the living earth when writing about its own pneuma which gives it a vital heat, cf. illo spiritu, qui omnibus animalibus arbustisque ac satis calidus est; nihil enim viveret sine calore (NQ 2.10.3).
ab initio eius usque ad exitum quidquid facere quidquid pati debeat inclusum est: The idea of the life-cycle, including all a living thing will do (facere) or suffer (pati), being intrinsic from day 1 is close to a pre-determined fate, as at Dial. 1.5.6-7: scio omnia certa et in aeternum dicta lege decurrere. Fata nos ducunt et quantum cuique temporis restat prima nascentium hora disposuit, see Wildberger 2006: 248-52 for ample discussion. Forms of debere appear three times in this chapter (3.29.5, 3.29.6). There is some room for human responsibility and choice, cf. NQ 2.35-38 and the remarks of Inwood 2005: 234 “Humans, on the Stoic doctrine, are left with all the choice they need, since (in accordance with the familiar doctrine of confatalia) their actions are part of the pattern of fate laid up from all eternity”. Seneca will contrast facere with pati elsewhere in his works, NQ 2.11.3, Dial. 5.12.3, Tr. 256-57: noscere hoc primum decet, / quid facere victor debeat, victus pati, and this contrast between ποιοῦν and πάσχον (the active and passive principles of Stoicism) is something known to Seneca (see Setaioli 2007: 339). Seneca writes about the circles of time with similar language at Ep. 12.7, see Richardson-Hay 2006: ad loc.
[3.29.3] ut in semine omnis futuri hominis ratio comprensa est: ratio is what makes mankind distinctive (Ep. 76.10: quid est in homine proprium? ratio: haec recta et consummata felicitatem hominis implevit, Ep. 66.39, Ep. 41.8: rationale enim animal est homo), although here the sense of omnis futuri hominis ratio is the full intellectual and moral growth of the future adult that is present at birth. To achieve one’s full human potential is to realize the bonum, cf. Ep. 124.11-14. Cf. Cic. Div. 1.128: atque ut in seminibus vis inest earum rerum, N.D. 2.58 and the notes of Pease 1958: ad loc. with Wildberger 2006: 754 n.989. Seneca utilizes seeds to make an analogy with the expression of ratio at Ep. 38.2. The Stoics did much to advance the idea of σπερματικοὶ λόγοι, see Zeno’s idea that fire is “as it were a seed, possessing the logoi of all things and the causes of events, past, present, and future” (SVF 1.98) and Hahm 1977: 60-90. Roby expands upon this model, “As above, so below: the growth of the human, orderly but mysterious, is analogically linked to the great cycle of earthly cataclysm and rebirth, which is quantitatively predetermined by laws inaccessible to us” (2014: 176).
legem barbae canorumque nondum natus infans habet: While calling the propensity for growing a beard or going grey a lex may be slightly comical, Seneca does so to prepare the reader for larger considerations of the lex mundi. As Inwood states, “the key point here is that the [flood] is part of a law … like that which governs the variation of seasons and the growth and development of living things” (2005: 173). Even the baby in utero has its future development pre-programmed. alia est aetas infantis, pueri, adulescentis, senis; ego tamen idem sum qui et infans fui et puer et adulscens, Ep. 121.16. Cf. Ep. 22.15-17 for the way that we often die worse than we were born (a point picked up, large-scale, at the conclusion of Book 3). Seneca writes about about how skills are inborn and god draws forth our inborn talents at Ben. 4.6.6: neque enim nostra ista, quae invenimus, dixeris, non magis, quam quod crescimus, quam quod ad constitutum temporum sua corpori officia respondent: nunc puerilium dentium lapsus, nunc ad surgentem iam aetatem et in robustiorem gradum transeuntem pubertas et ultimus ille dens surgenti iuventae terminum ponens. insita sunt nobis omnium aetatum, omnium artium semina, magisterque ex occulto deus producit ingenia, and Griffin 2013: 236.
(totius enim corporis et sequentis auctus in parvo occultoque liniamenta sunt): I prefer Z’s liniamenta (Ep. 95.72), but believe Busche’s auctus is better than the manuscripts’ actus (cf. Busche 1915: 577-78, Vottero 1989: 162-63, Wildberger 2006: 754 n.990) as this seems to be more about growth than actions per se (cf. Ep. 38.2: [semen]… ex minimo in maximos auctus diffunditur). Future features are present either in miniature (in parvo) or hidden (occulto). in parvo is not used absolutely by Seneca elsewhere, see 3.14.3 supra for in occulto and references to what is hidden recalls 3.pr.1: quando tam multa consequar, tam sparsa colligam, tam occulta perspiciam? Is there some wordplay with the proverbial idea “to follow nature” (Ep. 66.39, Ben. 4.25.1: propositum est nobis secundum naturam vivere et deorum exemplum sequi, Dial. 8.5.1) and the “future growth” (sequentis auctus)?
sic origo mundi non minus solem et lunam et vices siderum et animalium ortus quam quibus mutarentur terrena continuit: The comparison of the origo mundi to the human semen necessitates that the beginning of the universe also has preordained its constituent parts (stars, moon, sun), life on earth, and the forces of change and renewal (see Cleanthes’ comparison at SVF 1.497). For Lucretius, anxiety over whether the world had a “birthday” (mundi genitalis origo, 5.1212) and its mortality leads to belief in the gods (5.1204-17), and Ovid writes of the divine creator as ille opifex rerum, mundi melioris origo, Met. 1.79. An antecedent for quibus is missing, but can be easily supplied by the context (e.g. causas). Seneca will go on to define the study of the universe as divided between caelesia, sublimia, terrena (NQ 2.1.1) and the forces that change life on earth is part of this study, including floods, conflagration, earthquakes, etc...
in his fuit inundatio, quae non secus quam hiems, quam aestas lege mundi venit: The flood should be viewed as having its own time, just as winter and summer (a common pairing in Seneca, e.g. NQ 3.16.3, Ben. 4.28.1). Here the flood is not so much destruction writ large as a force of change. Lucan will use lex mundi (10.201) when discussing the flood of the Nile – a section that owes much to his uncle’s work (Manolaraki 2013: 96-102) – and Seneca has variations of it at Sen. Ag. 814, Med. 757 (lege confusa aetheris) and NQ 7.28.2 (cf. Man. 3.237). For the “law of the universe” and its connections to natural law more broadly, cf. Wildberger 2006: 251, 837-38 n. 1224, Kullmann 2005, and Inwood 2005: 223-48, “Law, not chance, underlies Stoic cosmology” (232).
[3.29.4] itaque non pluvia istud fiet sed pluvia quoque: This event (istud) will happen not only by rainfall, but by a host of other natural incidents as well. The repetition of non…sed…quoque structures the sentence and is a variation on the more common non tamen…sed etiam (s.v. sed OLD 9), e.g. Ben. 1.12.1, Ep. 76.30, Ep. 102.4. The various causes have all been elaborated more fully in the previous chapters of the flood description.
non incursu maris maris quoque incursu: incursus is found elsewhere of an “influx” of water (OLD 2), but Seneca coins this phrase and employs it of a ship that is strong enough to withstand incursum maris (Ep. 76.13). Statius will pick it up at Theb. 5.307. Seneca will pick up this language about the tide in a similar way at NQ 3.30.2: non vides ut fluctus in litora…incurrat?
non terrae motu sed terrae quoque motu: Returning to the opening of this section (NQ 3.29.1 supra) and anticipating the topic of NQ 6. The readings of Z and L2 continue with non concussione which Hine completes, but this seems to be an interpolation (see Parroni 2002: ad loc. and Bravo Díaz 2013: ad loc.). concussio mundi, in general, is a synonym of terrae motus, and its mention at NQ 3.27.3 supra is not enough to justify its inclusion here.
omnia adiuvabunt naturam ut naturae constituta peragantur: For constituta “decrees”, see the note on NQ 3.16.3 above: naturam per constituta procedere. These decrees of nature are implemented much like fate itself, cf. NQ 2.35.2: fata aequaliter ius suum peragunt, but there is some ambiguity whether there is a decision made by nature or if it happens in a preordained way, cf. 3.30.1: [natura] facere constituit, and the comments of Inwood 2005: 173, 228-35. As Cooper writes: “That law consists in Zeus’s or nature’s rational determination to think whatever thought he or nature is going to think in causing the bodies to behave in the ways that we may (or may not) observe them to behave” (2004: 226).
maximam tamen causam ad se inundandam terra ipsa praestabit, quam diximus esse mutabilem et solui in umorem: The earth itself, in its ability to transform into water, is the primary reason for the deluge. Seneca restates previous findings, cf. 3.10.5: ipsa quoque mutabilis est in umorem; natura sua utitur and 3.26.1: maxime in umorem mutabilis terra sit. For his use of solvi, cf. 3.15.7: saepe terra, si facilis est in tabem, ipsa solvitur et umescit. Seneca wants his reader to notice such repetitions and the applicability of the learning offered in this book. Berno 2012 stresses how water’s mutability leads to the flood and highlights the way this passage (and the book) recalls the speech of Pythagoras in Ovid Met. 15, especially 15.244-46, and 15.262-63.
[3.29.5] ergo quandoque erit terminus rebus humanis: Now the end is less about a cosmic cycle or period and more about the destruction of human affairs. Here near the end of the work, the use of rebus humanis may also recall NQ 3.pr.11: quid praecipuum in rebus humanis. Seneca will write about the absurd nature of human termini at 1.pr.9, but those are territorial boundaries, whereas this is “the end” (OLD 4) of humanity.
partes eius interire debuerint abolerique funditus totae: One must supply an antecedent of terra for eius. Seneca’s personification highlights how earth’s parts must “die” (interire). debuerint parallels the necessity of debeat at NQ 3.29.2. The hyperbolic nature of the flood and its devastation continue as both the parts (partes) and the whole (totae) must be completely (funditus) destroyed.
ut de integro rudes innoxiique generentur nec supersit in deteriora praeceptor: For the reading of Z here (rudes innoxiique), cf. Hine 1996: 66. The focus is strongly on mankind, which needs to be created again in a pure way and without any teachers of vice (in deteriora praeceptor). de integro = “anew, afresh” (OLD 3a), cf. Ben. 4.35.2, Ep. 10.4. He does not pair rudis and innoxius elsewhere and he may derive in deteriora from Lucr. 2.508-9: cedere item retro possent in deteriores / omnis sic partis (but this pessimism can be found similarly expressed at Dial. 6.23.1: omne futurum incertum est et ad deteriora certius, Ep. 97.10, Ep. 108.26, NQ 1.17.6). Note how he does not believe that such innocence equates to virtue at Ep. 90.46: ignorantia rerum innocentes erant; multum autem interest utrum peccare aliquis nolit an nesciat. Deerat illis iustitia, deerat prudentia, deerat temperantia ac fortitudo. Omnibus his virtutibus habebat similia quaedam rudis vita: virtus non contingit animo nisi instituto et edocto et ad summum adsidua exercitatione perducto (for this passage, see Hine 1995: 95-98). praeceptor usually has positive connotations in Senecan prose, as teachers from a philosophical school (e.g. NQ 2.21.1, 7.32.2), or teachers more generally (e.g. Cl. 1.16.3, Ep. 38.2). Here, however, we can see Seneca tying this flood into the larger moral turpitude of his day and the need to start over with a “primitive and innocent” population. Seneca will write of this new race in more detail at 3.30.8, where this new “Golden” race is quickly debased (and does not need a teacher to do so, since sine magistro vitia discuntur). For more on the Golden Age in Latin poetry more generally see Brisson 1992, and, in Senecan tragedy, see Segal 1983. Seneca writes of the innocent habits of primitive man at Phaed. 483-64, Ep. 90 passim (with Van Nuffelen and Van Hoof 2013), and NQ 1.17.5-10. In Stoic thought, human beings, because of their ratio, have the potential for the good, but are often led astray because of the influence of others (in deteriora praeceptor), see Diogenes Laertius 7.89, SVF 3.229, Ep. 31.2, Ep. 60.1, Ep. 94.53-55, and Ep. 115.11. Within the context of the flood, the creation of a new age of humankind also recalls Ovid’s Met. 1.381-415 and his own expansion of the Hesiodic system, cf. Van Noorden 2015: 204-60.
plus umoris quam semper fuit fiet: The addition of semper stresses the magnitude of water that will be produced.
nunc enim elementa ad id quod debetur pensa sunt: The elements are currently in a state of equilibrium (pendere, OLD 1b). Seneca earlier wrote about the correct proportion of the elements and the language of this passage is meant to recall 3.10.3: natura partes suas velut in ponderibus constitutas examinat, ne portionum aequitate turbata mundus praeponderet.
aliquid oportet alteri accedat, ut quae libramento stant inaequalitas turbet: accedere = “to be added to” (OLD 15), cf. Ep. 90.22: cum pervenit in ventrem…tunc demum corpori, and NQ 3.pr.2 supra. Usually nature stands in a state of equipoise (libramento), see Ben. 6.22.1: opportunis libramentis mundum ex aequo temperantia, Dial. 1.1.2. Usually such inaequalitas defines mortal concerns: mortalia minuuntur, cadunt, deteruntur, crescunt, exhauriuntur, inplentur; itaque illis in tam incerta sorte inaequalitas est: divinorum una natura est (Ep. 66.12), but certain natural phenomena, such as whirwinds are caused by inaequalitas (NQ 5.12.1, cf. NQ 1.3.1).
nunc enim habet quo ambiat terras, non quo obruat; quidquid illi adieceris, necesse est in alienum locum exundet: Water already encircles the earth; any addition will inevitably encroach upon the land. See 3.27.1 supra for obruere in this passage, and 3.28.3 for a use of in alieno and 3.29.8 for alienos menses. Lucretius writes about how similar imbalances in fire and water led to the destructiveness of Phaethon’s flight and the flood (5.380-415). The sea’s position around the land was part of Ovid’s creation myth at Met. 1.36-37 and Fast. 5.82: [Tethys] qui terram liquidis, qua patet, ambit aquis. Seneca has forms of alienus locus to describe natural wonders at Dial. 1.1.3 and heavenly fire on earth at Dial. 8.5.6.
[3.29.6] vide ergo ne terra quoque debeat minui, ut validiori infirma succumbat: vide ne here in the sense of “perhaps, also” (OLD 17a), which suggests a possibility in contrast to the previous sentence. Additional water will certainly cause the seas to rise, but Seneca also claims that the land itself will start to decrease both because of elemental transformation and because of erosion (likened to decay and evoking the world-body analogy). In this way, land (now weaker) will succumb to the strength of water. Seneca’s only other pairing of validus and infirmus appears at Ep. 90.5. infirmus often describes the sick, and the land will be likened to a sick patient infra. Water is stronger here in the sense that there is more of it, but it is also known for its ability to damage and carve stone (cf. NQ 4b.3.4). For the power of water to destroy, cf McEwen 2003: 88 “Romans certainly made every effort to contain, channel, direct, and control water, whose flow Heraclitus made the phenomenal analogue for the ever-changing flux of lived experience. Water, Vitruvius stresses, is the source of life itself. But in book 2 where he discusses how the elements combine in bodies and in building materials, it is water, the enemy of coherence, that more than any of the other elements dissolves good bonds. Profoundly ambiguous archetype of preliterate, mythical memory and forgetfulness, water is also the enemy of mnemonic schematization. You cannot chisel IMP. CAESAR onto water”. Seneca, of course, endorses Thales’ idea that it is the most powerful element (3.13.1).
incipiet ergo putrescere, dehinc laxata ire in umorem et adsidua tabe defluere: See the note on NQ 3.15.3 supra for putrescere of liquids made from a combination of water and earth and 3.15.7 for tabes. The land will begin to rot, much like a human body, which eventually wastes away (cf. Ovid Met. 15.156 for a similar use of tabes in the speech of Pythagoras). The loosening (laxata) of the earth causes it to turn into water as stated above solvi in umorem (3.29.4, cf. 3.9.3).
tunc exilient sub montibus flumina, ipsosque impetu quatient: Seneca subverts even the stability and safety of high mountains and shows how new rivers bursting forth under mountains causes them to quake and fall. sub montibus only appears elsewhere in Vergil (A. 7.563) and Ovid (Met. 1.689, 2.703). For the importance of impetus to the flood section, see the notes on 3.27.2 and 3.27.13 supra.
[3.29.7] inde arva tacta manabunt; solum omne aquas reddet; summi scaturient montes: The various lands will turn to water, whether fields (arva), plains (solum), or the tops of mountains (summi montes). For arva instead of the manuscripts’ aura, cf. Axelson 1933: 5 n.11. manare almost has the sense of “dissolve into water” such as the unfortunate vicitim of one of Lucan’s snakes: manant umeri fortesque lacerti, / colla caputque fluunt (9.780-81). scatur[r]ire = “to gush forth, bubble up”; this is Seneca’s only use of this verb. If before, the highest mountains were capped by the tide (3.28.6), now those mountains themselves provide the water.
quemadmodum in morbum transeunt sana et ulceri vicina consentiunt: The medical imagery here stresses how ulceration and infection can spread, which makes the flood like a plague that will kill off humanity. Healthy tissue is transformed into sick, much like the elements (see note on transire above 3.10.3). Seneca pairs forms of sanus and morbus elsewhere in his prose, e.g. Dial. 9.7.4: initium morbi est aegris sana miscere, Ep. 72.6, Ep. 85.4. For the spread of sores to neighboring areas, cf. Dial. 10.4.6. Von Albrecht notes, “Medical imagery is paramount in Seneca’s prose, but much rarer in his dramas (248:14 instances)…this is indicative of an artistic choice” (2014: 709). NQ 3.15.5-6 also exploits such medical imagery. Lucretius also uses morbus to indicate floods and natural disasters, which he may have picked up from Theophrastus (see Sedley 1998: 173).
ut quaeque proxima terris fluentibus fuerint, ipsa solventur stillabuntque, deinde decurrent: Neighboring land will first dissolve (solventur, cf. 3.29.4) and begin to trickle (stillabunt), and then rapidly flow away (decurrent). stillare is usually paired with gore and infection in Seneca, cf. Oed. 188, Med. 838, Thy. 766, but at Ep. 40.3 he uses it of a speaker’s style: aeque stillare illum nolo quam currere; nec extendat aures nec obruat. In Seneca, decurrere is common of rivers (see note on 3.1.1 supra), and now the lands themselves are to be seen as a river. For this analogy cf. Roby 2014: 176. “Here the emphasis is not on a steady, regular process like the growth of a human being, but on a breakdown made all the more terrifying by its swift and unpredictable spread. The troubling incalculability of the factors that might make one thing or another crumble first is given a more palpable edge of fear through comparison to a chaotic process of bodily decay”.
et hiante pluribus locis saxo per fretum salient et inter se maria component: hiante saxo is collective of rocky areas, now rent and producing water, cf. Phoen. 70: hic scissa tellus faucibus ruptis hiat, Dial. 6.26.6, NQ 3.30.4 infra and note on 3.16.4 supra. These new waters move through this (newly-hewn) strait, erode the land further, and join the various seas together. The “composition” of this new sea will destroy the names and stories of previous bodies of water.
nihil erunt Hadria, nihil Siculi aequoris fauces, nihil Charybdis, nihil Scylla: The repetitions of nihil here are reminiscent of Tr. 397: post mortem nihil est ipsaque mors nihil, and the cataclysm of Thy. 813-14: solitae mundi periere vices. / nihil occasus, nihil ortus erit. Seneca mentions the Adriatic sea elsewhere at Ep. 89.20 and Thy. 361-62 with the remarks of Tarrant 1985: ad loc. about its fame. The Straits of Messenia, Charybdis, and Scylla are all associated with travel to Sicily, where Lucilius currently serves. By using fauces, Seneca makes the straits into a sort of monster to match Scylla and Charybdis (and the normal way of referring to the Straits of Messenia is fretum Siculum). The flood acts to erase traditional boundaries, titles, and stories. Scylla and Charybdis appear relatively frequently in Seneca’s works (e.g. Ep. 14.8, 31.9, 45.2, 79.1, 92.9, Dial. 6.17.2, Med. 408-10). At 6.30.1 Seneca endorses the view that an earthquake split Sicily from Italy, in essence making the sort of fretum that would join seas. For more on Scylla in particular, see Hopman 2012.
omnes novum mare fabulas obruet: The stories of Charybdis and Scylla common from Homer’s time (Ody. 12.85-97, 234-43) are famous for Seneca (fabulosam, Dial. 6.17.2, Ep. 45.2), but all such tales will be wiped out by this new sea. Vernant writes eloquently about the associations of water with memory and forgetting, as well as rebirth, “The water of oblivion is now the symbol not of death but of a return to life and to existence in time” (2006: 124). See Ep. 77.20 and Ep. 115.15 for fabula associated with tragedy, and Ep. 90.31 for fabula in a Homeric context. Cf. Berno 2003: 68-70 for his use of fabula in the NQ, e.g. NQ 3.17.1, 3.17.3, 3.26.7 supra. The newly created sea is also one of Seneca’s own composition and there is a sense that he is attempting to transcend (and obliterate) his literary sources with his flood, cf. Trinacty 2018b.
hic qui terras cingit oceanus, extrema sortitus, veniet in medium: For the ocean’s tradition position as encircling the land, cf. Dial. 6.18.6: vinculum terrarum oceanus, continuationem gentium triplici sinu scindens et ingenti licentia exaestuans, Phaed. 331: terra salo cingitur alto, Thy. 833: iterum terras et mare cingens. With the land dissipating, the ocean can come “to the middle” (namely the area surrounding the Mediterranean sea) without any difficulty. If the ocean was allotted (sortitus) the edges of the earth (extrema), it brings to mind the way that Jupiter, Neptune, and Hades were allotted different regions of the world. sortior can be used of inanimate objects, such as rivers (Ov. Met. 2.241: nec sortita loco distantes flumina ripas / tuta manent).
quid ergo est?: A common question in Senca’s prose works (25 times). This is its only appearance in the NQ. “What is next?” or “Then what?” are possible translations.
[3.29.8] nihilo minus tenebit alienos menses hiems, aestas prohibebitur: nihilo minus here = “likewise, as well” (OLD 2) or possibly ironic, as Alexander 1948: 292 explains “we can see that ‘less by nothing’ implies not merely something static, but a change in the plus direction, namely, more winter less summer. Nihilominus is then practically ironic”. The seasons will lose their own order in the chaos of the flood and invade times “alien” to it, much like the water above at 3.29.5. While this would give the sense that the flood would take place over a period of at least a couple months, elsewhere in his description it is over in a mere day(s) (fatalis diluvia dies, 3.27.1-3, 3.30.6). Vergil writes of in his praise of Italy: hic ver adsiduum atque alienis mensibus aestas (G. 2.149), but such a picture is subverted here.
quodcumque terras sidus exsiccat, compresso ardore cessabit: Sirius is usually identified as the star responsible for such heat and drought, Hesiod Erga 587, Alcaeus L-P 347a, Verg. G. 4.425-26: iam rapidus torrens sitientis Sirius Indos ardebat caelo, A. 3.141, A. 10.273: Sirius ardor / ille sitim morbosque ferens mortalibus aegris; Sen. Oed. 39-43. ardor often is used of the sun, cf. Lucr. 2.212, 5.1099, Sen. Ep. 90.17.
peribunt tot nomina: The names will die, and then every boundary (peribit omne discrimen). There is no need for such distinctions when the whole earth is water. The following bodies of water vary in degree of size, fame, and importance, but Cocoran sees a method to Seneca’s choices: “Seneca starts with the final catastrophe tracing the sequence of events backwards from the merging of the waters of the Caspian and the Red Sea (in the northern and southern parts of the known world – Seneca probably shared in an erroneous belief that the Caspian was a gulf or inlet of a ‘northern sea’), preceded by the lesser catastrophe of the joining of the Ambracian Gulf and the Cretan gulf (cutting north-west to south-east diagonally across Greece), preceded by the flowing together of the adjacent Propontis and Pontus” (1971: 292n.1).
Caspium et Rubrum mare: Seneca writes of the Caspium Sea elsewhere only in his tragedies, Herc. F. 1206, Tr. 1105, Thy. 374. For the Red Sea, see the note on NQ 3.pr.10 supra.
Ambracii et Cretici sinus: The entrance to the Ambracian Gulf in Greece features Actium on the south and would recall the famous battle of Actium. This is the only mention of it in Seneca’s works. The Cretan Sea lies to the north of Crete. This collocation (Cretici sinus) is unattested elsewhere in Latin literature, but Seneca has Creticum…fretum (Phaed. 661) and uses fretum and sinus relatively interchangeably.
Propontis et Pontus: The Sea of Marmora (Propontis) leads to the Black Sea (Pontus). He mentions the Black Sea at Med. 44, 212, and NQ 4a.2.29.
cum vies illa omnibus rebus unum aequor induxerit: See Hine 1980: 191-92 for a defense of this line, only found in Z. This would be a subsequent step to the joining of various seas as the flood “conveys (a supply of water into a place)” (OLD 4b) one sea over everything. In addition to the fitting clausula, it features a play on omnis/unus, which Seneca exploits elsewhere, e.g. Dial. 7.20.3, Tr. 572: unum quaeris: ego quaero omnia, and which is then revised by peribit omne discrimen.
peribit omne discrimen: Another intertext with Ovid’s flood description. Ovid had iamque mare et tellus nullum discrimen habebant: / omnia pontus erat, derant quoque litora ponto, Met. 1.291-92. The second line was quoted at 3.27.13 and Seneca revisits it here to continue his aemulatio of the Ovidian passage. discrimina were important earlier in the book to divide the various waters (3.2.2, cf. 5.17.4 for discrimina of winds), but now all such classifications are moot. Barkan 1986 saw in Ovid's flood an echo of the general theme of transformation: "The flood is an act of metamorphosis because it erases distinctions...[he quotes Met. 1.293-4, 302-5]...The vignette is frivolous and a bit grotesque, but it is precisely the grotesquerie of cosmological metamorphosis. Again land, sea, and air are confounded, and species are transformed by being twisted into the wrong habitat" (28-29).
confundetur quidquid in suas partes natura digessit: Nature had arranged the world, but now there is a return to a state of chaos. Seneca writes later how an attempt to group all the various flashes of lightning would be an endless task: Haec si digerere in partes suas voluero, quid postea faciam? In immensa procedam. Tarrant 2002: 351 points out the various resonances of Chaos in Ovid and later poets and suggests, “The verb confundimur is especially noteworthy, suggesting the collapse of boundaries keeping the realms of the cosmos distinct” (of Ovid Met. 2.298-99: si freta, si terrae pereunt, si regia caeli, / in chaos antiquum confundimur). Earlier the flood was notable for its confusio (3.27.14) and note the literary feel of confundere as at Ep. 84.5. Seneca writes how natural events that appear confusa et incerta (such as earthquakes, lightning, and the tides) are worthy topics of study at Dial. 1.1.3 and note Dial. 8.5.5, Ep. 65.19, Ben. 6.22.1, and NQ 3.27.14 supra.
non muri quemquam, non turres tuebuntur: Adding a human element again to the flood as fortifications are unable to protect anyone. This is leading up to 3.29.9: unus human genus dies condet. Although no city is mentioned, should the high walls and summits of Rome’s seven hills be visualized? At NQ 3.27.14, Seneca quoted Ovid Met. 1.290: pressaeque latent sub gurgite turres. The alliteration of m and t sounds is notable.
non proderunt templa supplicibus nec urbium summa: Religion and the physical salvation sought in temples will not assist suppliants. This is the law of fate, essentially, and gods are not able to change fate (NQ 2.36.1: quid enim intellegis fatum? Existimo necessitate rereum omnium actionumque quam nulla vis rumpat. Hanc si sacrificiis aut capite niveae agnae exorari iudicas, divina non nosti, and 1.pr.3 with the note of Vottero 1989: ad loc.). In a similar vein, Seneca writes that earthquakes are not the fault of the gods (NQ 6.3.1). For urbium summa, e.g. Verg. A. 7.171, Liv. 3.10.7.
quippe fugientes unda praeveniet, et ex ipsis arcibus deferet: The quippe is rather ironic here (“don’t even think about running away from the flood”). praevenire is uncommon in Seneca, cf. Ben. 2.2.2 and NQ 2.59.10: male scilicet actum erit tecum si sensum mortis tuae celeritas infinita praeveniet. One can not outrun the deluge and the high citadels will offer no protection. arces (OLD 5) can signify the seven hills of Rome.
alia ab occasu, alia ab oriente concurrent: alia (aequora)…alia (aequora) = “some water…other water” will flow together from the west and east. The temporal sequence seems to be broken again, if in the previous section there was unum aequor that covered the entire earth. Earlier in the book (3.18.6), people came together (concurritur) to observe the death of a mullet, now their own deaths are highlighted by the same verb. ab occasu and ab oriente here indicate direction, but the reader is reminded of their temporal significance in the following clause. As this section has been coming to a close, Seneca is stressing the insignificance of human achievements, from the architecture of cities (muri, turres), to the words of poets (fabulas), and political achievements infra.
unus humanum genum dies condet: When writing about the fire of Lyon, Seneca has a similar collocation: quidquid longa series multis laboribus, multa deum indulgentia struxit, id unus dies spargit ac dissipat, Ep. 91.6. Seneca elsewhere writes how time will bury one who is cast out, quem saevitia proiecerit, dies condet, Ep. 92.35. Here condere has the double sense of “bury” (OLD 7) and “cause the death of” (OLD 4). For humanum genum in this section, see the note on 3.27.1 supra. This sentiment is meant to recall Lucr. 5.95-96: [maria terras caelum] una dies dabit exitio, multosque per annos / sustentata ruet moles et machina mundi. That line also inspired Ovid and, when he writes about Lucretius, he alludes to this line: carmina sublimis tunc sunt peritura Lucreti, / exitio terras cum dabit una dies, Am. 1.15.23-24. Given the strong Ovidian flavor to the flood narrative (and the frequent use of perire above), Seneca seems to be creating a double allusion to Lucretius and Ovid, while attempting to surpass their works. In addition, at the conclusion of Book 2 (i.e. the end of the work), Seneca features an intratext to the line that acts to parallel for the reader the experience of the flood with the death of the individual: totum hunc quem vides populum, totumque quem usquam cogitas esse, cito natura revocabit et condet, nec de re sed de die quaeritur, eodem citius tardius veniendum est.
quidquid tam longa fortunae indulgentia excoluit: Seneca likes to pair indulgentia with fortuna, cf. Dial. 3.16.6, 7.16.3, Ep. 66.44. For the danger of such indulgence on human perspective, cf. NQ 5.18.12: unde scio an nunc aliquis magnae gentis in abdito dominus, fortunae indulgentia tumens, non contineant intra terminos arma, an paret classes ignota moliens? Seneca had clustered mentions of fortuna in the preface of this book, 3.pr.7, 3.pr.11, 3.pr.13 and now returns to the subject. Seneca will often write about how the gifts of fortune are fleeting and prone to destruction and this moment is no different, e.g. Ep. 42.9, 46.3, 72.7, 120.18, Ag. 57-59 with the extensive note of Tarrant 1978: 181-84, Thy. 615-22, Phaed. 978-80. Williams 2003: ad Dial. 8.5.7 (quod natura constituit fortuna concutiat) mentions the word play between fortuna/natura and Seneca will equate how knowledge of natura will affect one’s perspective on fortuna.
quidquid supra ceteros extulit: extulit with excoluit stress the height (both literal and figurative) of such kingdoms. Ben. 6.3.2: omnia ista, quae vox tumidos et supra humana elatos oblivisci cogunt vestrae fragilitatis… Seneca writes about Caligula’s desire for glory: Quid C. Caesarem in sua fata pariter ac publica inmisit? Gloria et ambitio et nullus supra ceteros eminendi modus, Ep. 94.65. Of course, the flood will overtop even the highest features on earth, cf. NQ 3.28.6: nec antequam supra cacumina eorum quos perfusurus est montium crevit devolvitur.
nobilia pariter atque adornata, magnarumque gentium regna pessum dabit: Seneca does not pair nobilius and adornatus elsewhere, but at NQ 6.1.7 the nobilissimas urbes are destroyed by earthquakes and luxury mirrors are described as adornata at 1.17.8. pessum dare literally means “to sink to the bottom” but also, figuratively “to destroy” and both are operative here. Seneca uses it elsewhere at Ep. 14.13: iam non agitur de libertate: olim pessum data est, cf. Ag. 137 and the instances of pessum at NQ 3.25.5, and 3.25.7 supra. Earthquakes will likewise destroy the greatest cities at Dial. 6.26.5: ruritura regna. Even the famous and decorated empires will fall – again we might read this as a warning to Rome itself, cf. Hine 2006: 43-47. By placing the growth of such kingdoms in the hands of Fortune, Seneca takes away human agency and, in some way, erases the very nomen of Rome (3.29.8 supra). Lucan’s storm at sea may echo this moment, see 5.615-17: a quotiens frustra pulsatos aequore montes / obruit illa dies! quam celsa cacumina pessum / tellus victa dedit.
******
******
