A Literary And Philosophical Commentary To Seneca NQ 3

1
Overview
Although Stoicism encouraged man to live “according to Nature” (nempe
propositum nostrum est secundum naturam vivere, Sen. Ep. 5.4), the natural world often
seemed to be a chaotic, dangerous, and inhospitable place, ruled by chance more than
divine providence. Floods, earthquakes, tempests, and lightning could cause fear,
destruction, personal injury, and even death. To truly follow Nature, one had to
understand Nature, even in its most fearful aspects. Philosophers who taught about the
natural world did so, in part, to dispel such fears and encourage their readers to search for
the underlying causes of such phenomena. While these causes would differ – for
Epicureans, atoms, void and a helpful swerve, for Stoics, a providential god – authors
believed the search for truth in the physical realm would lead to ethical benefits as well.1
Seneca’s Naturales Quaestiones “Investigations into Nature” is part of a larger Greek and
Roman tradition of philosophical works aiming to explain aspects of the natural world, in
particular, meteorology. While Naturales Quaestiones Book 3 has traditionally been
numbered the third book of this work, modern scholarship suggests it is actually the first
book of the treatise, as the preface and internal references make clear.2 It discusses
terrestrial waters (springs, rivers, lakes) and offers us a glimpse of Seneca’s thoughts on
topics such as hot springs, the hydrological cycle, elemental transformation (i.e. air or
earth can transform into water), fishponds, subterranean rivers, and the deluge that will
eventually destroy humanity. Seneca continually references a larger “community of
scholars”3 and responds to previous views as part of his critical doxography, but he is
also creating his own literary work from this material. As such, he is apt to quote Ovid
1 For the Stoics, logic would complete the triad, see infra.
2 See discussion infra.
3 Hine 2006: 53-60

2
and Vergil as often as cite the views of Aristotle or Theophrastus, and he continually
exploits points of contact between scientific and literary texts. He rewards readers who
pay attention to his own thoughtful composition and his spirit of investigation infuses not
only the larger world that he describes, but also the words that he employs (and others
have previously employed).4 He is a man of letters and it is impossible to separate his
philosophical thought from its literary form. Naturales Quaestiones Book 3 hints at the
proper methodological (i.e. one must move beyond the five senses and use one’s ratio)
and hermeneutic framework for readers embarking on the work as a whole. This
introductory material provides the necessary historical, philosophical, and structural
context for readers approaching this work for the first time. This work discusses a topic,
water, which allows Seneca to draw a holistic picture of Stoic philosophy in which
humanity is part of the larger rerum natura, and questioning the workings of Nature will
help readers question their own lives and actions, and discover some important and
effective answers.
Introductory Material
1.) Seneca’s Life and Times
2.) Senecan Stoicism and Works
3.) Naturales Quaestiones: Date, Organization, Overview, and Genre
4.) Book 3: Water/Hydrology, Summary and Analysis of Specific Sections
5.) Text, Transmission, Previous Scholarship, Note on Translation
Seneca’s Life and Times
4 As Williams 2003: 30 clarifies, “If his brand of Stoicism promotes above all a form of
self-conscious vigilance in his life, his style itself requires a constant alertness to verbal
possibility, pattern and fine distinction, so that the audience is actively challenged by his
word-craft as well as by his philosophical ‘message’”.

3
Lucius Annaeus Seneca, born in Corduba (modern Córdoba) near the turn of the
millennium (c. 2 BCE), was the most important intellectual figure of the first century
CE.5 Orator, poet, politician, and philosopher, he made his mark on the Roman cultural
and intellectual world in a myriad of ways. Writers emulated him during his life and
beyond (Lucan, the writers of the Octavia and Hercules Oetaeus), so much so that
Quintilian (the most famous teacher of rhetoric in the following generation) complains
that in earlier days the books in the hands of his students were by Seneca, and only
Seneca (I.O. 10.125). As a writer, Seneca clearly left his stamp on the literature and
philosophy of the early Empire and age of Nero, and his various works, from large scale
doctrines on clemency and gift-giving (de Beneficiis), to multiple books of Epistulae and
Dialogi, to Tragoediae touch upon clear concerns of the day; the limits of “kingly” power
(de Clementia), the importance of managing one’s anger (de Ira), the mindset one must
have towards the many obstacles that stand in the way of achieving wisdom (de
Constantia Sapientis) are just a sampling of the topics. Many of these works are ethical in
nature, and Seneca’s reputation for millenia has hinged on the moral pronouncements
found in these works (the early Christian author Tertullian pointedly writes that Seneca is
“often ours” and for Dante he was “Seneca morale”).6 His works denounce wealth,
luxury and vice with particular ferocity and bite, which has led to the subsequent
disparagement of Seneca as a hypocrite of the worst sort from antiquity to the present
day.7 After all, he was an incredibly rich senator, owner of vast vineyards of particular
5 For more on Seneca’s biography, see Griffin 1974 and Griffin 1976, and the recent
biographies by Romm 2014 and Wilson 2014. Even in Cicero’s time, Corduba was
known for its poetry (Cordubae notis poetis, pingue quiddam sonantibus atque
peregrinum, Arch. 26).
6 An informative overview of his reception can be found in Star 2016: 117-69.
7 See Dio Cassius (61.10): “Although he found fault with the wealthy, he acquired a
fortune of three hundred million sesterces for himself; and although he reproached the

4
fecundity (Pliny Nat. 14.51, Col. 3.3.3), tutor to the vice-addled Nero, and then one of his
primary advisors and chief speech-writer until his voluntary retirement from Nero’s court
in the early 60s CE. Written after his retirement, the Naturales Quaestiones is also in
many ways an ethical work, but it reflects on ethical matters (the proper attitude towards
death, the importance of eliminating one’s own vices) within a larger framework of Stoic
physics. If nature is often cast as the antipode of culture in certain anthropological and
structural studies of the ancient (and modern) world, Seneca bridges this divide to show
how natura must inform any proper conception of culture (ancient or otherwise).
In spite of the multiplicity of works, Seneca very rarely discusses the details of his
own life. Most of our information of his biography and his direct involvement in the
political world of Rome comes from the Annals of Tacitus and Cassius Dio’s Roman
History, which view his role and influence with varying degrees of sympathy, suspicion,
and disgust.8 We do not know much about his early days in Corduba, but he came to
Rome as a young boy and pursued his education there under the care of his father, also
named Lucius Annaeus Seneca, and his mother, Helvia. The Elder Seneca, an eques, was
a noted historian and follower of the declamatory rhetoric of the day: his extant
Controversiae and Suasoriae detail the transition between the age of Cicero and that of
the early Empire and reveal how the quest for stylistic point, bon mots (sententiae), and
erudite argumentation led to a competitive declamatory environment filled with both
extravagances of others, he had five hundred tables made of citrus wood and ivory”. In
58 CE, Tacitus reports (Ann. 13.42-43) that P. Suillius Rufus attacked Seneca in the
courts for his lavish lifestyle, charges which de Vita Beata may be addressing.
8 One could add the pseudo-Senecan Octavia as well for information about his dealings
with Nero. In general, Tacitus appreciates Seneca’s difficult position in the court, while
Dio gives us a darker picture of Seneca’s motives, appetites, and quest for power. See
Griffin 1976: 420-44 for the prejudices and attitudes of the historians towards Seneca.

5
highly skilled speakers and highly knowledgeable audience members.9 In addition to his
traditional education, Seneca also studied philosophy under Attalus the Stoic, Fabianus
(who combined rhetorical and philosophical prowess in a way that made a deep
impression on Seneca)10 and Sotion, a Sextian philosopher with Pythagorean leanings.
Their teaching stuck with Seneca, and, in his old age, he recalls studying at their feet with
obvious nostalgia and affection (Ep. 49.2, Ep. 108.13-23). It appears he spent much of his
20s in Egypt with his aunt, whose husband (C. Galerius) was prefect of Egypt from 16-31
CE. Seneca was a sick youth, suffering from asthma and, possibly, a form of tuberculosis,
and the dry climate of Egypt was amenable to his health. In Egypt, he studied the
religious customs and topography, which informed a work that is unfortunately lost to us
(de Situ et Sacris Aegyptiorum) and influenced his descriptions of the flooding of the Nile
in the Naturales Quaestiones. After returning to Rome (and suffering a harrowing
shipwreck en route), he began his political career under Tiberius, attaining the
quaestorship around 33 CE, a relatively late start for one interested in advancing on the
cursus honorum. The rise of Caligula spelled trouble for Seneca because of Seneca’s
popularity as an orator and Caligula’s own pride in this area of study. His jealousy of
Seneca’s oratorical ability led to a sententia of his own (“[Caligula] used to say Seneca
wrote mere schoolboy exercises and that he was ‘sand without lime’” harenam esse sine
calce, Suet. Cal. 53). Dio writes that Caligula’s anger reached such a pitch that he would
have sentenced Seneca to death if he wasn’t persuaded against this action by one of his
mistresses (59.19). After Caligula’s death, Seneca quickly ran afoul of Claudius,
9 Cf. Fairweather 1981 for a judicious survey of declamatio and the works of the Elder
Seneca.
10 Ep. 100 is a spirited defense of Fabianus in light of Lucilius’ depreciation of one of his
works.

6
probably because his close relationship with one of Caligula’s sisters troubled Claudius’
wife, Messalina, and he was exiled to Corsica. If the details at times are blurry about this
period in Seneca’s life, what is clear is that he was moving in the highest levels of Roman
society and had first-hand experience with the suspicion, wrath, resentfulness, and
passions of those in power.11
Exile on Corsica, if we can trust his Consolationes, was a difficult experience, but
he claims to have found comfort in contemplating the natural world. As he writes in the
Consolatio ad Helviam:
[My mind] first seeks to know about the lands and their position, and then
the nature of the sea that surrounds them, and its alternating ebb and flow.
Then it investigates the expanse, full of frightening phenomena, that lies
between the heavens and earth – this near space that is turbulent with
thunder, lightning, wind blasts, and downfalls of rain and snow and hail.
Finally, after traversing the lower reaches, it breaks through to the heights
above and delights in the most beautiful sight of things divine; and
mindful of its own immortality, it moves freely over all that has been and
will come to be in every age across time. (Dial. 12.20.2, trans. Williams
2014)
It is worth noting that many of these phenomena are found in the Naturales Quaestiones
– a clear sign that his interest in the natural world was present throughout his life and
could act as solace during troubled times.12 In these years (41-49 CE) Seneca wrote the
Consolationes ad Helviam and ad Polybium, and possibly the de Ira (published after he
returned to Rome) as well as some of the tragedies.13 These works probably increased his
11 Herington 1966 remarks on “his presence at the edge of that tiny group of men on
which there bore down, night and day, the concentric pressure of a monstrous weight, the
post-Augustan Empire…Seneca himself lived through and witnessed, in his own person
or in the persons of those near him, almost every evil and horror that is the theme of his
writings, prose or verse. Exile, murder, incest, the threat of poverty and a hideous death,
and all the savagery of fortune were of the very texture of his career” (429-30).
12 During his exile he wrote a cosmological work entitled de forma mundi, which is lost
to us, but was part of Cassiodorus’s library (6th C. CE), see Ferrero 2014.
13 See the relative dating of the tragedies made by Fitch 1981.

7
renown in Rome. After Claudius married Agrippina, she persuaded her husband to recall
Seneca to Rome to tutor her twelve-year-old son, the future emperor Nero. While
Suetonius tells us that Agrippina instructed Seneca to focus on rhetoric and the
humanities, but exclude philosophy (Suet. Nero 52), it is possible that Seneca also
attempted to slip in philosophical instruction, through the Dialogi he wrote at this time
and, possibly, the tragedies that Nero might gravitate towards even more readily.14
Regardless, for Seneca this change in fortune must have seemed as drastic as it was
unexpected. Now a member of the imperial court, in charge of the education of the heir
apparent of the Principate, Seneca’s influence and wealth were on the rise and his exile
on Corsica was just a memory, although the lessons of such a quick change of fortune
were not lost on him.15
Claudius’ death in 54 CE was a joyous occasion for Seneca, if the satire about his
death, Apocolocyntosis, is any indication, and hopes were high for the young Nero.16
With Seneca and the praetorian prefect Burrus as advisors, the first five years of Nero’s
rule were, generally, considered to be a time of great prosperity for Rome (a.k.a. the
famous quinquennium Neronis), and Seneca’s own writings, especially the de
14 In the same section, Suetonius notes both that Seneca gave Nero his own works to read
as well as Nero’s interest in composing poetry.
15 Seneca muses on Fortuna throughout his prose and poetry, see Motto 1970: 45-49 and
the ample note of Tarrant 1978: 181-84. For Fortuna in the NQ, see notes on 3.pr.7 and
3.29.6.
16 The generic expectations for this work may have something to do with the debasement
of Claudius and the exaltation of Nero, under whose rule a new “golden age”
(aurea…saecula, Apo. 4) is expected.

8
Clementia,17 are hopeful, if admonishing at times.18 Historians such as Tacitus and Dio,
with the perspective of hindsight, find moments during these years that betray the violent
and unruly behavior of his later rule, and it is true that Nero began to chafe at the power
that his mother Agrippina possessed – his highly theatrical assassination of her points to
limitations of Seneca and Burrus’ guidance (Dio 61.13, Suet. Nero 34, Tac. Ann. 14.3-
10). The Senate chose not to censure Nero and, officially, bought the story of a
conspiracy spearheaded by Agrippina, which ultimately increased Nero’s political
power.19 Nero’s behavior becomes more autocratic after the murder, and it is difficult to
know how much influence, if any, Seneca wields at this time. Nero’s head soon was
turned by the advice of Tigellinus and others more apt to condescend to the emperor and
endorse his flights of fancy (e.g. the Neronia games, his divorce of Octavia). In 62 CE,
Burrus died of throat cancer or possibly poison administered at Nero’s orders.20 His
passing impacted Seneca’s decision to request the ability to retire from court and to give
up his vast holdings to help the imperial treasury. Although Nero refused him, Seneca
frequently absented himself from Nero and Rome by claiming illness (Tac. Ann. 14.53-
56). It was during this time that he began the Naturales Quaestiones and the Epistulae
17 See Braund 2009: 53-57 for Seneca’s teaching strategy in Clem. and the two audiences
to which he is appealing, “But Seneca is writing not only for Nero. At the same time, he
wants to display his didactic efficacy to another audience too – that consisting of the
members of the Roman elite, who are observing carefully his efforts to instill in the
young princeps a proper sense of restraint and respect toward the Senate”.
18 See Tac. Ann. 13.2 for the way Burrus and Seneca were able to guide Nero and limit
Agrippina’s influence. I write “generally” because these years also saw the wanton
behavior of Nero (if Tacitus can be trusted) and the murders of individuals such as Junius
Silanus, Britannicus, and, at the close of these years, Agrippina herself.
19 The fact that Seneca wrote the speech that offered this laughable pretense for
Agrippina’s murder causes the public to be angry at him instead of Nero (Tac. Ann.
14.11).
20 See Tac. Ann. 14.51-52 for Burrus’ death and Seneca’s reaction to it.

9
Morales as well as a lost work which discussed moral philosophy more systematically.21
If Stoicism generally encouraged political involvement, it also could be used as a means
of objecting to immoral decisions of those in power. Seneca is not one of the outspoken
“Stoic Resistance” to Nero that we hear about in the pages of Tacitus, but these works do
intimate his perception of Nero’s rule.22 While they do not overtly mention the political
turmoil in Rome and are strangely silent about certain events (e.g. the great fire in 64
CE), there are moments in which one can detect references to the emperor.23 A final
retirement from Nero occurred in 64 CE (after Seneca successfully bestowed his wealth
to the princeps) and Seneca was free to devote himself to his studies and travel among his
estates in Italy. Tacitus claims that Seneca believed he was in risk of being poisoned and
restricted himself to a diet of wild fruit plucked by his own hand and water from running
streams (Tac. Ann. 15.45). In the following year, however, he was implicated in the
Pisonian conspiracy and was forced to commit suicide, which he did in a manner
befitting his Stoic values and his many assertions about suicide and the proper attitude
towards death.24 He avowed that his followers had the imago vitae suae to follow and,
while he himself imitated the examples of Socrates and Cato, it is true that later victims
of Nero imitated Seneca, whether in seriousness (Thrasea Paetus, Tac. Ann. 16.34-35) or
21 See Ep. 56.9, 106.1-3, 108.1, Ferrero 2014: 208 for the date of the Libri moralis
philosophiae.
22 See Bartsch 2017 for more on philosophers under Nero.
23 Letters such as Ep. 56.9 which relates how his retirement was due to fear and
exhaustion and Ep. 73 discussing the relationship between philosophers and those in
power are often cited as evidence. Additionally, his observations about the political
career of Cato the Younger (Ep. 14, 24, 71, 104) may reflect his own political experience.
In the NQ, Nero is mentioned by name a number of times (1.5.6, 6.8.3, 7.17.2 – one may
question if these references are ironic), but he is often detected in mentions of Alexander
the Great (see note on 3.pr.5, cf. 6.23.2-3) and may lurk behind additional references (see
notes on, e.g., 3.pr.10, 3.19.4 in commentary).
24 See Ker 2009 for the details and reception of his death as well as the prominence of
death in his works.

10
in jest (Petronius, Tac. Ann. 16.19). If there were moments in his life in which Seneca
seemed not to live up to the high moral and ethical standards he preached, his death
revealed a man willing to act in a manner commensurate with his professed values and
principles.
Seneca’s Writings and Stoicism
Quintilian, no friend of Seneca’s, admits he was a special case in the history of
Latin letters because of the wide variety and particular power of his writings. He claims,
“[Seneca] treated almost every subject-matter; his speeches, poetry, letters and dialogues
are all celebrated” (tractavit etiam omnem fere studiorum materiam. nam et orationes
eius et poemata et epistolae et dialogi feruntur, I.O. 10.1.129). This large variety of
works and subjects provides a number of different lenses through which one can view
Seneca’s broad interests in the social, political, literary, ideological, and philosophical
issues of the day. In fact, “Seeing Seneca Whole” is one of the more productive recent
trends in Senecan scholarship.25 Helpful points of connection can be made between
various works, but it is also true that these efforts often should be considered
independently because of their genre (Apocolocyntosis), specific content and context (de
Vita Beata), and even addressee (cf. de Clementia, Consolatio ad Polybium). For
example, one should not expect that the key to understanding Senecan tragedy can be
found in the prose philosophical treatises, but there are broad concerns and issues that
overlap.26 Seneca may not be to everyone’s taste, but his voice and style are distinctive:
25 See the collection of this title by Volk and Williams 2006, Gunderson 2015, and Star
2016.
26 While not didactic in the same manner, clearly one could draw lessons from the actions of tyrants like
Atreus, or the unbridled passions of Medea and Phaedra. Topics and themes drawn from the Naturales
Quaestiones such as cosmology (Rosenmeyer 1989) and the conception of nature in Phaedra (Williams

11
his blend of brevity with expansive rhetorical catalogues, colloquial language with
elevated, poetic prose,27 moments of spiritual reverie with everyday details creates a
beguiling mélange.28 Prose and poetic style link the works more closely than themes ever
could.29 In each work one can easily identify the Senecan voice with its desire for
powerful aphorisms, wordplay, allusive indications of something more lurking for those
attuned to hear it, figures of speech, anastrophe, alliteration, and chiasmus;30 he wants his
readers to pay attention to his language and foregrounds its expressive and sonorous
qualities. In fact it is the “dangerous” nature of his style that most worried Quintilian (and
attracted young speakers). This pointed quality can be seen in the preface to this book
when he writes:
What is important? To be able to endure misfortune with a joyful mind. To
bear whatever should happen as if you wanted it to happen to you. For you
ought to have wanted it to happen, if you had known that everything
happens by god’s command: to weep, to complain, and to groan is to
disobey.
quid est praecipuum? posse laeto animo adversa tolerare, quidquid
acciderit sic ferre quasi volueris tibi accidere. debuisses enim velle si
scisses omnia ex decreto dei fieri. flere, queri et gemere desciscere est.
(3.pr.12)
The opening phrase is repeated seven times in this section and helps to structure and
redefine Seneca’s observations and teaching. The rhythm of the clausulae tend to the
2017) show that, for Seneca, the genres may encourage different answers for certain tragic situations and
themes, cf. Fischer 2014.
27 See Hine 2005.
28 For more on his prose style in the NQ in particular, see Vottero 1985 which gives
copious examples of rhetorical figures, technical exposition, variatio, dramatic effects,
and more.
29 For Seneca’s prose rhythms in the NQ and possible connections with the tragedies, see
Soubiran 1991. For his prose rhythm and utilization of clausulae more generally, see
Hijmans 1976.
30 See Summers 1910: xlii-xcv and Williams 2003: 25-32 for his prose style, and Canter
1925 for the rhetoric of his tragedies.

12
common cretic + spondee with various resolutions of the long syllables, but the
dispondee of quid est praecipuum is a rather rarer rhythm and calls attention to itself.31
Polyptoton of verbs (accidere, velle), repetition of sounds (debuisses…scisses,
fieri…queri), verbal roots linking independent concepts in unique manners (scisses,
desciscere), short powerful clauses, and asyndeton abound. Phrases such as laeto animo
not only have possible allusive force (see Horace Carm. 2.16.25), but also the application
of laeto in such adversity may be shocking.32 In addition many of these phrases echo
thoughts and phrases of his de Providentia, written contemporaneously and also
addressed to Lucilius.33 If Lucilius is the ideal reader, he will surely see the connections
between ethics and physics even more forcibly demonstrated by such parallels – the
question is whether you, dear reader, also are picking up on such similarities.
Seneca is a product of the Roman philosophical world in which he was
educated.34 He is, broadly-speaking, an orthodox Stoic, but is open to opposing
viewpoints and will often assert his independence from the party line on issues as diverse
as common ethical tenets with Epicureanism (Ep. 2, 8) to the true nature of comets (NQ
7.22.1). He is comfortable engaging with Plato (Ep. 58) and Aristotle (Ep. 65), and can
draw upon an eclectic number of sources, as he writes in de Brevitate Vitae, “We may
31 For more on these clausulae and their frequency in the NQ and Epistulae, see Soubiran
1991 and Hijmans 1976: 110-17. Seneca’s prose rhythm is important for determining
textual readings (see, especially, Alexander 1948), and for various literary effects (some
of which are noted in the commentary).
32 Although possible metathesis with tolerare might help to encourage how such
happiness is possible.
33 See commentary ad loc.
34 See Larson 1992 for the schools of philosophy during Seneca’s time, Inwood 1995 for
Seneca’s philosophical context, Reydams-Schiles 2005 for Roman Stoicism, Wildberger
2006 for the Stoic underpinnings of Seneca’s beliefs, and the collections of essays in
Wildberger and Colish 2014 and Damschen and Heil 2014 for more on particular aspects
of Seneca philosophus.

13
debate with Socrates, express doubt with Carneades, find peace with Epicurus, conquer
human nature with the Stoics, surpass it with the Cynics” (Dial. 10.14.2).35 The bulk of
his writings are dated to the period after he returned from exile and represent the most
complete expression of Stoic philosophy in Latin, even if they do not cover all facets of
Stoicism equally. Stoicism was born in Athens under Zeno (335-263 BCE) and
subsequently developed by writers such as the prolific Chrysippus of Soli (c. 280-207
BCE), who became, with Zeno, the primary proponents of the Old Stoa. Their ideas were
further cultivated and changed by Panaetius (c.185-109 BCE), Posidonius (c. 135-50
BCE), and Asclepiodotus (1st C. BCE) – these representatives of the Middle Stoa seemed
to most directly impact Stoicism’s reception in Rome and some scholars have seen their
hand behind many details of Seneca’s works.36 In Rome, Stoicism struck a chord,
especially because of its stress on political engagement and the duty of men to help their
fellow men,37 and it became the default ethical and moral stance for the civitas and was
endorsed by thinkers and statesmen such as Cato the Younger (95-46 BCE) and Marcus
Aurelius (121-180 CE).38 As a system of thought, it underwent changes and Seneca’s
own engagement with Stoicism shows his ability to draw upon writers of the Old and
Middle Stoas in order to build his own arguments and discuss the issues that concerned
him and his audience. Stoics posited the triad of ethics, physics, and logic for
35 For these letters (58, 65) in particular, see Reydams-Schils 2010a, Boys-Stones 2013,
and the commentary of Inwood 2007b. For more on Seneca’s Platonism, see Donini
1979.
36 For the Naturales Quaestiones, see the work of Hall 1977 and Setaioli 1988. For the
position of the Stoic school in Seneca’s time, see Gill 2003 and Reydams-Schils 2010b.
37 Seneca’s cosmopolitanism and conception of οἰκείωσις likewise stressed that man is
part of the whole cosmos and that philosophical theory can lead to political action, see
Dial. 8.3.5-4.2, Ep. 68.2, Vogt 2008: 65-110.
38 Some of our best information about Roman Stoic beliefs can be found in Cicero (106-
43 BCE), even if he is not an avowed Stoic.

14
understanding the natural world and, while the predominate concern in Seneca’s works
are with ethics, he can delve into physics and logic with easy familiarity and real élan.39
The three aspects inform one another and create a whole without one necessarily being
more important than the others, a common way to imagine the tripartite nature was the
Stoic egg in which logic is the shell, ethics the albumen, and physics the yolk.40 Like a
three-legged stool, all three are needed to stabilize and support the individual.41 Gone,
however, are the logical syllogisms that earlier Stoics obsessed over, metaphysics and
epistemology are primarily topics for another day; Seneca’s Stoicism repeatedly returns
to the question of living an ethical life and progressing towards the highest goal of man,
namely the life of a Stoic sage (even as he admits this is nearly impossible to achieve).42
It should not be mere theory, but theory put into the active practice of moral
39 For Seneca’s understanding of the tripartite nature of Stoicism, see Ep. 89.9: “The
greatest authors, and the greatest number of authors, have asserted that there are three
parts of philosophy: moral (moralem), natural (naturalem), and rational (rationalem)”.
For more on logic in Seneca, see Barnes 1977. For the proper exposition of physics and
logic in particular, see Reydams-Schils 2010b: “There is a right and a wrong way of
engaging in these inquiries, these authors make clear; the wrong way entails studying
them for their own sake and indulging in technical details”. While NQ at times does
indulge in such details, it also offers and interprets many differing views about the
material and is enriched by meditations on poetic, ethical, and theological matters.
40 D.L. 7.39. Cf. Cicero Fin. 3.72-74 for the way the three parts interrelate. See Hadot
1979, Hadot 1991, and Annas 1993: 159-79 for more on the interrelationship of these
three aspects.
41 Hadot 1998: 81-82 comments on the necessity to distinguish these three aspects when
teaching them, but the way they blur in practice: “In philosophy itself… physics, ethics,
and logic are mutually implicated within and interior to one another, in that act – at once
multiple and unique – which is the exercise of physical virtue, ethical virtue, and logical
virtue…Thus, logic, physics, and ethics are distinguishable when we talk about
philosophy, but not when we live it”.
42 He claims the Stoic sage is as rare as the phoenix (Ep. 42.1), but makes use of figures
like Cato the Younger and Socrates as exempla for the proficiens to follow – such rarity
should not cause despondency, but rather inspire the reader to act in an appropriately
Stoic manner.

15
improvement.43 This life is one of pure ratio (“reason”) and it is ratio that mankind
shares with god, who is pure ratio and can be identified with Zeus or Natura.44 In fact,
understanding the natural world will bring one closer to understanding god, as Seneca
writes:
The virtue which we strive for is magnificent not because it is fortunate in
itself to be free from evil, but because it liberates the mind, prepares it for
knowledge of the celestial, and makes it worthy to become a companion of
god. Then it has perfected and fulfilled the highest good of human destiny,
when it has stamped out every evil and has sought the heights and come
into the inner recesses of nature. (NQ 1.pr.6-7).45
God controls the cosmos and every action is governed by god; the rational Stoic will
grasp this and will not rage against events that appear unfair, accidental, or negative in
any way. In fact, these perceived roadblocks or traumas advance the purposes of the
universe and must be actively understood as the work of god. These are ways in which
the Stoic must demonstrate his virtus (“virtue, manliness”) and a rational life is, at its
core, a purely virtuous life – there is no room for vice of any sort.46 To live according to
nature or according to god is to live in a rational and virtuous manner; it is a tall task, but
one that Seneca and Stoics believe is the paramount task of human life.
43 For the movement from theory to practice in the Epistulae Morales and the educational
process therein dramatized, see Schafer 2011 and Wagoner 2014.
44 Stoic theology can be thorny: fine discussions are Algra 2003 for Stoicism generally,
Setaioli 2007 for Seneca’s conception, the essays in Salles 2009 for specific aspects, and
Adamson 2015: 66-72 for a very readable introduction. Long 1996: 150 writes eloquently
about this: “Life according to reason is entailed by life according to Nature; but life
according to Nature is not obligatory because it accords with reason. Nature stands to
human beings as a moral law commanding us to live by rational principles, viz. those
principles of thought and action which Nature, a perfect being, prescribes to itself and all
other rational beings”. See Rosenmeyer 2000 for more on Seneca’s view of nature, and
Boyle 1987: 22-24 for natura in Seneca’s Phaedra.
45 For more on Seneca’s belief that the highest human activity is the contemplation of
nature, cf. Dial. 11.9.3, 11.9.8, Ep. 65.16-17, Dial. 6.25-26, and Ep. 102.28.
46 In fact, the study of philosophy is identical to living the good life in orthodox Stoicism,
see Hadot 1969: 101. For the way that virtus and natura relate in Stoic thought, cf. Cic.
Off. 3.13.

16
Many of Seneca’s works encourage his audience or addressee to begin to live in a
way corresponding with Stoic strictures, even as he realizes that he himself is fallible and
the path is difficult. Written late in life, the Epistulae Morales provides a sustained
engagement with various elements of Roman life from a Stoic point view – from bathing
(Ep. 56, 86), to the amphitheater (Ep. 7), to slavery (Ep. 17, 31, 47), to the role of precept
and exempla in teaching (Ep. 6, 94, 95, 120),47 to language and rhetorical style (Ep. 75,
114), to the role of the liberal arts in the pursuit of wisdom (Ep. 88), to fame (Ep. 21), to
death (Ep. 12, 22, 26, 30, 70, 82, passim) – all in an epistolary generic form that evokes
the letters of Cicero and Epicurus as well as the poetic Epistulae of Horace.48 Epistolary
theory stresses how letters offer the most thorough image of the self,49 and Seneca often
claims how the process of writing these letters offers him a chance to dissect the various
facets of his own soul.50 Seneca acts as an affable guide as he urges his addressee,
Lucilius, to contemplate the world with a critical eye, and as he derives lessons from
subjects as diverse as e.g. heavy drinking and logical syllogisms in two adjacent letters
(Ep. 82, 83). The Dialogi address how to control passions such as anger (de Ira), how
wealth and fame should be considered “indifferent” at best by the Stoic (de Vita Beata),
and how to make the most of the time allotted in one’s life (de Brevitate Vitae). While the
Dialogi are not in a dialogue form such as Plato’s works, there are often interlocutors
present (whether the addressees or unnamed dissenters), who spur on further reflection,
47 See the work of Mayer 1991 and Roller 2018 on exemplarity in Seneca’s prose.
48 For more on the Epistuale Morales as a whole see Wilson 1987, Wilson 2001, Edwards
1997b, and Edwards 2015; for Seneca’s use of the epistolary genre, see Inwood, 2007c,
Wilcox 2012. Seneca self-consciously distinguishes between his epistolary topics and
Cicero’s at Ep. 118.1-3.
49 As Demetrios says, “everyone in writing a letter more or less composes an image of his
own soul” (σχεδòν γde Elocutione 227).
50 Cf. Edwards 1997b on how such self-scrutiny will lead to altered actions.

17
second-guess Seneca’s ideas, or offer new avenues for philosophical exploration. This is
true in the Naturales Quaestiones as well, as different voices often break in to assert
independent viewpoints and this tendency shows one of the ways that Seneca enriches his
prose works with these additional points of view.51 Such a variety of viewpoints allows
Seneca to provide different facets of the argument, and models the introspection and self-
questioning one must practice for self-improvement. The inner world of Seneca is always
foregrounded in his letters and dialogues, yet that inward turn, paradoxically, can be most
beneficially made only after the broadest outward contemplation of the cosmos.
This cosmos is mortal and is periodically destroyed in a cosmic conflagration
(ἐκπύρωσις), an important background idea for Naturales Quaestiones 3. Heavenly fire is
identified with god and during the ἐκπύρωσις the universe as we conceive of it will
become consumed in fire.52 Seneca writes about it in Consolatio Ad Marciam as follows:
The time will come when the universe will extinguish itself in order to be
born again, the heavens will smite itself with its own force, stars will run
into stars, and with everything aflame with a single fire, and what now
shines separately will burn altogether.
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. 6.21.6)
Likewise in this book, he writes about this conflagration as the moment when fire
“overtakes the universe and turns everything into itself” (qui occupet mundum et in se
cuncta convertat, 3.13.1). Seneca expects the reader will understand this concept, but he
is less interested in describing the end of the universe as the end of human, terrestrial life.
51 Gauly 2004 explores this “Dialogizität” in the NQ. One might compare the more literal
dialogue between characters in his tragedies as a correlative.
52 See Long 2006: 256-82 for more on ἐκπύρωσις; Mader 1983, Armisen-Marchetti 2006,
and Berno 2012 offer analysis of Seneca’s changes to the Stoic framework.

18
While contemplation of ἐκπύρωσις and the cosmic viewpoint will suit him elsewhere
(Dial. 6.21.1-2, De Otio, NQ 1.pr.5-13) and it underlies some of the comparisons of the
flood (e.g. 3.28.5, 3.29.1), Seneca wishes at the opening of Naturales Quaestiones to
keep the audience firmly grounded in human responses to water and the natural world.
There is ethical perspective to be gained from the end of human life as Seneca’s describes
it at the conclusion of Naturales Quaestions Book 3, and water, perhaps surprisingly for a
Stoic thinker, comes to be “better to think with” than fire for both creation and
destruction.
Seneca is, as Inwood states, “a philosopher in a hurry, as a man interested above
all else in the concrete result of making his life better, as a man with no time to lose”,53
and this comes out especially in his Epistulae and Naturales Quaestiones. Both of these
works were begun after his retirement from Nero’s court and, from the prologue of the
Naturales Quaestiones, it is clear that he looks upon his earlier life as valueless when
compared to learning about the natural world:
Old age breathes down my neck and rebukes me that I spent my life in
meaningless pursuits. Let me vigorously pursue this task all the more, let
my work redeem my lost time badly spent. Add night to day, cut back on
business concerns, get rid of anxiety over family estates lying far from
their owner; let the whole mind be free for itself and let it contemplate
itself at least near its own death. (3.pr.2)
Self-transformation is possible and encouraged (cf. Ep. 6.1) – if previous works
concentrated primarily on ethical scrutiny for such growth, now he expands the scope of
inquiry and brings in the investigation of physics and natura. Seneca’s propensity to
highlight the ability for man to contemplate his decisions, actions, and his sense of self
has led to the theory that Seneca is expressing in his corpus an “Art of Living”. This is
53 Inwood 2007b: xxi

19
true, broadly speaking, and writers such as I. Hadot, Foucault, P. Hadot, Veyne, and
Sellars have done much to illuminate the ways in which Seneca offers guidance to the
individual who is proficiens “making progress”, but not already a sage.54 One must
continually question one’s impressions, impulses, and desires and works such as de
Tranquillitate Animi or Epistle 83 display the sort of introspection and self-scrutiny
necessary for not just understanding but also molding one’s own psychological make-
up.55 Seneca’s teachings on these issues show his concern for the place of the individual
in the larger spheres of influence on his life, not just intellectual spheres such as
literature, rhetoric, and philosophy, but also the more tangible influences of family,
friends, foes, the state, the environment, and the world.56 The Stoic will continually and
creatively seek to understand how his life is part of the larger cosmos and while Seneca
may believe “it is easier to understand natura than to write about it” (facilius natura
intellegitur quam enarratur, Ep. 121.11), his larger corpus can be seen as an attempt to
do just that from his own personal perspective. As Foucault states about the Naturales
Quaestiones:
[A]ll the objectives of traditional Stoic morality are in fact not only
compatible with, but can only really be attained, can only be met and
accomplished at the cost of the knowledge of nature that is, at the same
time, knowledge of the totality of the world. We can only arrive at the self
by having passed through the great cycle of the world.57
54 Cf. Hadot 1969, Foucault 1986, 2005, Hadot 1995, Veyne 2003, and Sellars 2009.
55 Cf. de Ira 3.36.1-3 and the essay of Ker 2009b. The collection by Bartsch and Wray
2009 is especially good about conceptions of the self in his philosophical works, for the
tragedies see Fitch and MacElduff 2002. I would stress with Inwood 2009b that there is a
“literariness” involved in Seneca’s concept of the self.
56 See Reydams-Schils 2005: 15-82. For connections between the knowledge of nature
and knowledge of the self, see Foucault 2005: 278 “What is involved in this knowledge
of the self is not something like an alternative: either we know nature or we know
ourselves. In fact, we can only know ourselves properly if we have a point of view on
nature, a knowledge (connaissance), a broad and detailed knowledge (savoir) that allows
us to know not only its overall organization, but also its details”.
57 Foucault 2005: 266.

20
Seneca gives the blueprints to the natural world in the Naturales Quaestiones; these
blueprints point explicitly to man’s modest place in the rational and providential
universe, liberate him from earthly concerns, and insist that the divine spark of ratio links
and inspires man’s exploration of the secrets of natura.
Naturales Quaestiones
As we have seen, Seneca reflects upon the natural world in other works and often
features moments of reverie about how nature can be seen as an expression of god’s
beneficence (Ben. 4.23.1-25.3), how it causes religious feelings (Ep. 41.3), and how
contemplation of the natural world is part and parcel of living according to nature (Dial.
10.5.1-8).58 His treatise, Naturales Quaestiones, is his most complete discussion of the
natural world and is focused on how the knowledge of Stoic meteorology can impact the
way one lives a fulfilled life. The treatise is broadly didactic and frequently pays heed to
its addressee, Lucilius Iunior, a close friend of Seneca who is currently procurator of
Sicily.59 Lucilius stands in (at times) for the general reader and is encouraged to adjust his
way of life or muse upon the grandeur and sublimity of natura (as well as the miserable
idiocy of human error) through learning more about meteorological issues. The topics of
ancient meteorology moved well beyond discussion of the weather (although that was
often part of it), and embraced issues such as earthquakes, the tides, comets, and extreme
58 Cf. esp. Dial. 10.5.8: “Therefore I live according to nature, if I have given myself
completely to nature, if I admire and cultivate nature. Moreover, nature wanted me to do
both, both to act and to free myself for contemplation” (Ergo secundum naturam vivo, si
totum me illi dedi, si illius admirator cultorque sum. Natura autem utrum facere me
voluit, et agere et contemplationi vacare).
59 See PIR2 L 388 and my note on NQ 3.pr.1 for more on Lucilius, who is also the
addressee of Episulae Morales and de Providentia.

21
weather events. Aristotle claimed in his Meteorology that he would cover “events that
occur naturally, but less frequently than that of the primary elements of bodies, in the
region which borders closely the movements of the stars” (Mete. 338b19-21). Aristotle
looms large in Seneca’s work, but there were additional thinkers who touched upon
meteorological topics or wrote full-blown works on meteorology.60 Greek authors such as
Theophrastus, Posidonius, and Epicurus also wrote about meteorological topics, and
Seneca references their ideas on topics such as floating islands (3.25.7), earthquakes
(6.20.5), and comets (7.20.1-3). Latin authors such as Lucretius in the sixth book of De
Rerum Natura, Ovid in the first and last books of the Metamorphoses, and Manilius in his
Astronomica discuss these phenomena from a variety of angles, and Seneca, fully aware
of their works, fits his own discussion into the larger Latin literary framework.61 Graver
believes that by Seneca’s time the topic of meteorology was considered a particularly
Epicurean topos,62 if this is the case then Seneca’s response is forcefully meant to show
that the physical foundations of Epicureanism are ultimately false (not atoms and void
but the four elements), and the spontaneous or random development of the cosmos should
60 French 1994 and Taub 2003 are sure guides to the topic as a whole and Bakker 2016
recently examined Epicurean meteorology in particular. Wilson 2013 places Aristotle’s
Meteorology into its larger philosophical context and has a fine section on hydrology
(146-95).
61 Asmis argues “Lucretius seeks to shift humans from their position in the Roman social
and political order to a place in the natural order of things” (2008: 141), which is also,
broadly, one of the larger goals of Seneca’s work.
62 Graver 2000. Book 6 of Lucretius’ poem features many meteorological topics – for a
recent description of Lucretius’ meteorological investigation as fluid mechanics, see
Serres 2018: 89-124, esp. 112-13: “Nature fluctuates, physics is written in a hydraulic
language, it is a mechanics of generalized fluids. The lesson we learn here in Book 6,
which describes visible and tangible nature, confirms again the theory and the idea of the
atomic river in which turbulence is formed…Everything is formed as a flood and is
perceived as a flood”. One may wonder if Seneca’s own flood may be a response to this
impulse in Lucretius.

22
be exchanged for an intricate set of causes woven by a providential Stoic god.63 Both
schools of philosophy may help to move the reader away from the fear that such
meteorological phenomena can evoke, but do so from diametrically opposed views of the
physical world and the ethical ramifications of that world. While Lucretius may be the
most obvious source that Seneca is correcting in this work, the Naturales Quaestiones is
in no way a simple response to Lucretius’ poem. Seneca’s interest in the natural world
more broadly was manifest throughout his life,64 and this work provides a summation of
his views on this material in a creative and evocative manner that underscores the
significance of such study for living a rational and virtuous life. If he thought it was a
challenge to render such material in artistic Latin prose,65 he clarifies frankly what he
hopes the take away from such a work will be:
Something that furthers our well-being should be mixed into every matter
and every conversation. When we have gone through the secrets of nature,
when we have studied the divine, our mind must be liberated from its evils
and constantly reinforced. This is necessary even for learned men who
devote themselves solely to this activity; it is not in order to avoid the
blows of circumstance (for weapons are being hurled at us from all sides),
but in order to endure them with strength and with determination. (NQ
2.59.2).
Seneca asserts that ways that this study will help the individual; it is up the reader to take
it to heart and live accordingly.
63 He argues against Epicurean materialism at 2.6.1-7.2, and their thoughts about the
random creation of the world at 1.pr.15.
64 In addition to the book on Egypt, he also claims to have written a work on earthquakes
earlier in life (NQ 6.4.2), and Pliny mentions works of Seneca about fish and stones, see
Vottero 1998: 87-92 and Beniston 2017: 15-16. For his general identification of the
importance of natural science for the philosopher, see Ep. 117.19, Ep. 65.19-21, and for
meteorological topics elsewhere in his prose, see Dial. 1.1.2-5, 6.18.2-7, 12.20.2.
65 Inwood 2005: 200 “Seneca chose to work these ideas out in a meteorological treatise
for literary reasons. This, he must have thought, was a challenge worthy of his
considerable rhetorical talents. If could pull this off, he would have an even stronger
claim to fame as a writer, not just a philosopher.”

23
Naturales Quaestiones was written between 62-64 CE in eight books.66 The
dating is clear from references to the Campanian earthquake (62 CE) and mention of the
comet of 60 CE that had caused some consternation among Nero’s supporters at Rome.67
While the manuscripts preserve the text in three different orders, recent scholarship has
shown that the preferred order should be as follows:
Book 3: Terrestrial Waters – See infra.
Book 4a: The Nile – A fragmentary book lacking its conclusion, but it contains
the preface about flattery, and details various theories about the reason for its annual
summer flood. Moments of 4a should be read in tandem with Book 3 as the concluding
flood of NQ 3.27.1-3.30.8 is consciously evoked in Seneca’s description of the Nile in
flood and the advice about flattery is likewise tied into the findings of Book 3.68
Book 4b: Rain, Hail, and Snow (“Celestial Waters”) – A fragmentary book
missing its introduction and doxography about rain, but it preserves the concluding
epilogue about the contemporary Roman trend for snow-cooled drinks as well as a
humorous critique of the “Hail-Watchers” of Cleonae (4b.6.1-7.3).
Book 5: Wind – Definition and causes of wind. The moral excursus on mining
features an underground lake of great expanse much like the subterranean waters of
Book3, and the epilogue criticizes the way mankind has utilized nature’s gift for profit
and violent conquest.
66 Books currently numbered 4a (Nile) and 4b (precipitation) were separate books
originally.
67 While there are some questions if the earthquake was in 62 or 63 CE, see Hine 1984
and Wallace-Hadrill 2003, the general dating of the NQ to this time period is secure. For
the comet, cf. Tac. Ann. 14.22.1, and Boyle 2008: ad 231-2.
68 See Williams 2008 and commentary passim.

24
Book 6: Earthquakes – Seneca begins by reviewing the recent Campanian
earthquake before investigating possible elemental causes of earthquakes. The conclusion
focuses on diminishing one’s fear and providing remedies for the traumatic aftermath of
these natural occurrences.
Book 7: Comets – Various philosophers’ theories about comets are considered
and Seneca concludes by commenting on the reverence one must show when
investigating works of nature in contrast to the contemporary lack of interest in
philosophical education.
Book 1: Atmospheric Fires (rainbows, coronas) – The preface discusses how the
study of the natural world will lead to understanding god and Stoic theology.69 The
doxography of distorted visual phenomena in the atmosphere leads to the moral
digression about Hostius Quadra and his bedroom of magnifying mirrors before a final
epilogue on the role of mirrors in philosophy more generally.
Book 2: Lightning and Thunder – the final book is the longest of the Naturales
Quaestiones. It opens by clarifying three branches of physics – terrena, sublimia,
caelestia before detailing characteristics of air. Theories about lightning and thunder are
reviewed and Seneca offers a long explanation on the role of lightning in divination and
the concept of fate. The conclusion stresses not to fear lightning and to treat death with
brave contempt.
Internal references (e.g. Seneca writes he will devote a separate book to the Nile
after Book 3 at NQ 3.1.2), the strong language evoking the initiation of a new project
present in the prologue of Book 3, and thematic considerations convince me that this is
69 See Inwood 2005: 190-92, and his Seneca-like sententia: “Man is not the measure of
all things; god is”.

25
the original order.70 It is noteworthy that when thinking about the larger cosmos, he
immediately lands upon terrestrial waters as a natural topic to begin his discussion (as
opposed to Aristotle’s systematic analysis of the four elements before moving on to the
Milky Way, comets, etc…).71 Seneca begins with terrestrial waters because of the
fundamental importance of water in the creation of life and its ability to manifest to the
naked eye many of the elemental changes that are important for understanding the natural
world (i.e. evaporation, condensation, and solidification). Presocratic philosophers such
as Thales and Anaximander identified water as the foundational element, and Seneca
implicitly asserts his independence from traditional Stoic orthodoxy by focusing so
strongly on water (instead of fire) at this moment.72 Seneca groups books by element
(water, air, fire) as well as offering a “rising trajectory from ground level…a form of
transcendence that replicates, in the work’s structure, Seneca’s increasing distance in the
Natural Questions from the world of the here-and-now”.73 He begins close to the earth,
even venturing underground to explain the sources of terrestrial waters, before gradually
moving into the atmosphere (Books 4b, 5, 6 – because wind is the cause of earthquakes),
and then bursting into the celestial sphere (Book 7, prologue of Book 1), only to descend
once again to the stormy realm of lightning and thunder (Book 2). In addition, operative
reading strategies that Seneca espouses and models in the opening book reappear
throughout the work; thus, when Seneca claims he is “rooting out [the world’s] causes
70 For a recent evaluation of these issues, see Williams 2012: 12-14 and Hine 2010: 28-
31.
71 It is almost as if Seneca already intuited that the majority of the surface of the earth
was covered in water.
72 Stoics traditionally believed that fire was the fundamental element and was “creative”
in its purest state, Lapidge 1978: 179-83 is a cogent overview of how such πὺρ τεχνικόν
fits into the larger theory of ἐκπύρωσις and palingenesis.
73 Williams 2012: 14. Also see Waiblinger 1977: 35-37 and Gauly 2004: 68-70 for more
on the grouping of books by elements.

26
and secrets” (causas secretaque eius eruere, NQ 3.pr.1), further instances of the verb
eruere would evoke this opening and point out how such “rooting out” is part of the
reader’s task in this work.74 Seneca’s didactic strategy is not merely to report the findings
of previous scholars and synthesize the information, but also, as Hine states, “to tease out
the strengths and weaknesses of each theory with a degree of impartiality, instead of
making his own views clear at the outset”.75 In doing so, he models the creation of his
own informed perspective, urges the reader to do likewise, and stresses that there is more
to be learned about these topics.
The books broadly follow the same construction and are largely self-contained.
There is often a prologue of varying length that can touch upon larger considerations
(Book 1 on the theological pay-off for the study of physics) or ethical concerns (Book 4a
on the dangers of flattery), before delving into the critical doxography of the subject at
hand.76 The presence of prefaces in a majority of the books should remind the reader of
poetic works like Lucretius or even Vergil’s Georgics, which had proems of various
length opening its individual books. Seneca juxtaposes this prefatory material with the
doxography proper, but finds ways to unite these investigations whether through
language, imagery, or philosophical considerations.77 Critical doxography allows Seneca
to review what has been discovered by past thinkers and to contextualize their findings.
He does so with a generous spirit, recognizing that these first thinkers (possibly like the
74 See note ad loc. and Trinacty 2018b. A similar intratexual connection can be found
with the phrase circumire mundum at 3.pr.1 and 1.pr.8.
75 Hine 2010: 7.
76 Limburg 2007 offers readings of every prologue in the work.
77 One might see an analogue in Senecan tragedy with the way his choruses function
within the larger dramatic material, see Mazzoli 2014.

27
readers of Seneca’s own work) did not have all the information that Seneca currently
possesses:
First I must say that old opinions were somewhat imprecise and rough:
people were still wandering around the truth; everything was new to those
who first were attempting to understand. Later those same views were
polished, and if something has been discovered, credit ought to be granted
nevertheless to those first investigators. It is a matter of great courage to
flush out the hiding places of nature, and, not content with its exterior
appearance, to peer inside, and to descend into the secrets of the gods.
Whoever had hope that truth could be discovered made a great
contribution to its unearthing. (NQ 6.5.2)
Seneca’s doxography references a wide variety of thinkers from pre-Socratic
philosophers such as Thales (3.13.1, 6.6.1) and Anaximander (2.17.1) to Stoics like
Posidonius (6.24.6) and Zeno (7.19.1), to possible contemporaries about whom little is
known (Apollonius of Myndus, 7.17.2; Balbillus, 4a.2.13),78 to poets like Vergil (5.16.2,
passim) and Ovid (1.3.4, passim), to Nero himself (1.5.6), or his minions (6.8.3-5). These
doxographies are not exhaustive but are created by Seneca in order to give a “state of the
question”, to probe possible methodologies, and then to provide his own support for why
certain phenomena occur or what their significance might be. For example, Book 6 on
earthquakes surveys the different philosophical views of what causes an earthquake
(underground waters? fires?) before settling on wind (spiritus) as the culprit, a finding
that places him in wide agreement with Epicurus.79 If the Campanian earthquake caused
odd happenings (statues cleaved in half! flocks of sheep struck dead!), these are
contextualized and explained with a conscious ring-composition (6.1.1-3 ~ 6.27.1-31.3)
that provides consolation to the fearful survivors, as well as the shaken readers of this
78 See Hine 2006: 60-61 for their date.
79 Graver 2000: details how Seneca’s findings put him at odds with orthodox Stoicism
and questions just how “Stoic” of a work this should be considered because of his
discrepancies from Stoic physical theories.

28
book. Book 1, in contrast, surveys a variety of atmospheric fires from rainbows to rods to
parhelia to shooting stars, explaining them as distorted images before a show-stopping
excursus on the distorted sexual mores of Hostius Quadra. Such variatio in book
structure, tone (from heartfelt to outraged to jocular), length, and topics keeps the reader
from boredom and allows Seneca to explore more fully the topics that appeal to him and
that are important for the larger themes of the work (e.g. when he pauses to discuss fate at
NQ 2.35.1-38.4, it can be seen as a final word on Stoic causation for the work as a
whole).80 If Stoicism often distinguishes between theory and practice, the doxography
gives the primary theoretical background and the reader is expected, through critically
evaluating Seneca’s evidence, to put this material into practice in her own (newly
formed) opinions of such meteorological issues.81 Seneca’s scientific method is based on
his conception of science as part of philosophy and its primary concerns should be
contemplation of the universe and the way such contemplation can better one’s life.82
Another, diverse sort of practice, can be seen in the digressions that the books
feature. These digressions occur either within the body of the text or as epilogues and
80 See NQ 2.45.2-3: “Do you want to call Jupiter fate? You will not be mistaken: he it is
whom everything depends, the cause of causes. Do you want to call him providence? You
will be right: he it is by whose deliberation provision is made for this world, so that it can
advance unhindered and unfold its actions. Do you want to call him nature? You will not
be wrong: he it is from whom everything is born, by whose breath we live. Do you want
to call him the world? You are not mistaken: for he himself is all this that you see,
contained in his own parts, sustaining both himself and his creation.” (trans. adapted from
Hine 2010). Cf. Hine 1981: ad loc.
81 See Seal 2015 for more on this tension or blurring of theory and practice in Seneca’s
prose. Griffin 2007: 100-02 notes how his pedagogic strategy will often distinguish
between the doctrine (in this case the doxography) and the precepts which employ
imperatives, gerundives, and the future tense. This is on display especially in the prefaces
and conclusions of the books of Naturales Quaestiones.
82 Seneca’s scientific method is often ridiculed in earlier scholarship (cf. Stahl 1962), but
more sympathetic and nuanced explorations have done much to show how his modeling
(Roby 2014), analogies (Armisen-Marchetti 1989), and methodology aims to put
scientific learning to use in moral improvement (Parroni 2000).

29
they allow Seneca to zoom out and place his discussions into larger societal, ethical, and
political settings. These are the actions of those who are far from the Stoic ideals
pronounced elsewhere in the work, even if they impersonate some of the epistemological
or ethical concerns lauded at different times. While at times these digressions seem out of
place (and are often marked by Seneca as digressions, see NQ 3.18.1), these are passages
that Seneca clearly wished to make an impact on his reader and show him at his most
scathing, rhetorically ambitious, and witty.83 Because of the vibrancy, drama, and literary
power of these passages, scholars have often wondered if they are the true subjects of
concern with the doxographical material being marginal and ancillary, but it is clear that
their very marked nature as “purple” passages are part of Seneca’s literary strategy in this
work.84 Vice is alluring, luxury is innovative, wealth is beneficial, power is intoxicating.
To fight against such contemporary ills takes real work and the framing of such folly in
his larger work helps to dowse such passions and desires, but it is important that he
outfits these alluring vices with the glamor and flash that they deserve.85 Topics such as
the way mankind has used the wind for military exploitation instead of mere exploration
83 See Berno 2003, Gauly 2004: 87-134, Limberg 2007, Williams 2012: 54-92 for the
rich issue of connections between the moralizing digressions and the book proper. For
digressions in Seneca’s prose in general, see Grimal 1991.
84 Williams 2016: 182 makes a parallel observation about “hot” moments in Seneca’s
prose in contrast with the usual “coldness” of philosophical dialectic: “these purple
passages suggestively function as ‘hot’ moments that throw off not just the quibblings of
sophistic philosophical nicety, but perhaps also the ‘coldness’ of terrestrial normativity
and restriction – moments in which Seneca’s literary elaboration, including his
harnessing of the coefficients of sublimity, itself gives distinctive color and charisma to
the sapiens”.
85 See Leitão 1998, Berno 2003: 46-50, Bartsch 2006: 106-14, and Williams 2012: 54-92
on Hostius Quadra, especially, as a sort of anti-Stoic sapiens with his own unique
“happy-go-lucky philosophy” and form of self-knowledge. Seneca admits a self-
awareness about his style in certain digression, admitting at NQ 3.18.7 “I cannot stop
myself from using words recklessly from time to time and crossing the boundary of
propriety” before issuing a particularly biting aphorism.

30
and communication (NQ 5.18.4-16), the luxury trade of snow and ice (NQ 4b.13.1-11),
and the perverted use of mirrors for sexual deviancy instead of self-knowledge (NQ
1.16.1-17.10) return to the way that humankind distorts and corrupts the gifts of nature. If
Seneca models the wonder and gratitude one should give to god for the natural world and
the wisdom that accrues from the pursuit of knowledge, the moral excurses give voice to
how greed, luxury, and, especially, ignorance create diametrically opposed attitudes. His
contemporary society comes under the microscope and its predilections and concerns are
shown to be both petty and puny, especially in comparison with the workings of natura.86
Even the deeds of famous leaders like Alexander the Great are dismissed and those that
spend their time recording or reading about history (“what has been done” quid factum
est) should be encouraged rather to contemplate philosophy, which concentrates on “what
should be done” (quid faciendum est, 3.pr.7).87 The past is in the past, what you should
think and how you will act is what is essential. Seneca gives evidence in the doxographies
and in his own responses to these vignettes that show how the correct viewpoint should
delimit or influence the interpretation these phenomena, but mankind often will not be
persuaded because of its fecklessness, recklessness, trepidations and aspirations. If such
passions and faulty viewpoints influence the way one lives, it also bleeds into the way
one conceives of death. Death is a common concern in the work, beginning with Seneca’s
own impending death in the preface of the first book to various subsequent
manifestations (red mullet NQ 3.18.1-7, mining NQ 5.15.1-4, death of a flock of sheep
86 See NQ 1.pr.5-9. Cooper 1995 remarks on the importance of understanding cosmic
nature for ethical calculations in Stoic thought, concluding that even the loss of a child
must be accepted, “this is the very core of what ‘living in agreement with nature’ means
for them. We are not just to accept but to welcome [these losses], and welcome them not
just as what the universe needed, but as what we as parts of that universe needed too.”
(595).
87 See note ad loc.

31
during the Campanian earthquake NQ 6.1.3). The concluding epilogues of Books 2 and 6
reassure the reader that their learning will make them more courageous in the face of
death, which approaches the ethical pay-off of Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura, but from an
opposing philosophical perspective.88 Death is the law of nature (NQ 6.32.12: mors
naturae lex est), and the NQ stresses how the law of nature controls both cosmic
phenomena such as the flood (NQ 3.30.1) as well as the lives of men (3.pr.16) – if one
understands this law that the NQ seeks to clarify again and again, then one will approach
its workings without anxiety and fear.89 The work involved in attaining the proper
perspective is difficult, and Seneca at times despairs of attaining it,90 but it is a worthy
goal; indeed, it is the only goal that one should pursue because it will “inform all human
actions and…transform so-called ‘ordinary’ life from within existing social structures and
responsibilities”.91 The learning and practice stressed throughout the NQ allows the
reader to attain the proper view of the cosmos, which will lead to the proper view of
herself and her actions.92 Physics will inform ethics, and vice versa, and Seneca’s
dialectic (one of the aspect of logic that Seneca highlights at Ep. 89.9) shows the creative
dialogue between these topics and explores the tensions that can be produced by faulty
outlooks and value systems. An overview of Book 3 will help show how this is the case.
88 See, e.g. NQ 6.32.2-3 “The mind gains strength solely from liberal studies and from the contemplation of
nature…So we must challenge death with great courage…”, and NQ 2.59.1-3. For Lucretius’ work as an
extended argument against the fear of death, see Segal 1990 and for the interactions between Seneca and
Lucretius in the NQ see Williams 2016 and Tutrone 2017.
89 See NQ 6.32.6-12 and, for a parallel in his letters, Ep. 104.23-25.
90 See NQ 7.32.4: “Yet, by Hercules, if we set about the subject with all our might, if young people sobered
up and put their backs into it, if older people taught it, younger people learned it, we would hardly get to
the bottom where the truth is located; at the moment we are scraping at the surface with feeble hands in our
search for it” (trans. Hine 2010). Also see Ep. 88 for Seneca’s view on education more generally.
91 Reydams-Schils 2010b: 562.
92 This “Cosmic Viewpoint” (the title of Williams 2012) or “view from above” (Hadot
1995: 238-50) is most powerfully expressed at 1.pr.8-17, but can be seen elsewhere in the
work (e.g. the note on 3.28.4-5).

32
Water & Hydrology
But first it is important to look at the subject under consideration. In ancient
Rome, water was an essential resource. Look up aqua in the Oxford Latin Dictionary and
one will find a myriad of definitions that speaks to its importance and ubiquity in the
Roman world. Fresh water was used for drinking, in religious rituals, in medicine, in the
baths, food preparation, magic spells, and, of course, the large-scale agriculture and
viticulture of the empire. Roman “water culture” touched upon a variety of larger
concerns from the morality of fishponds to the imperial benefactions of aqueducts and
large-scale thermae.93 Water was identified with instability, but also could be seen as one
of the four foundational elements and the source of all creation.94 To deprive someone of
water and fire was to exile them from society, whereas a bride accepted fire and water in
the wedding ceremony. To demand earth and water was a token of submission. Water
was associated with time whether because of its use in water clocks (clepsydrae) or in the
common analogy that time is like a river (e.g. Ovid’s ipsa quoque adsiduo labuntur
tempora motu, / non secus ac flumen, Met. 15.179-80). Thus its polyvalence is
particularly marked: proverbially violent, pure, deep, fluid, and indistinguishable.95 Water
coursed through the city of Rome: the yellow River Tiber (prone to flood and considered
divine),96 its tributaries, the underground Cloaca Maxima, the aqueducts, lakes,
93 For an overview of Roman “water culture” see Rogers 2018.
94 This is Stoic orthodoxy, as Tielemen 2018: 688 describes: “a new world is created
when the cosmic substance turns from fire through air into water. The moisture contains
the logoi spermatikoi, the “seminal reasons” or “spermatic principles” of the world, just
as in animal semen these principles…are enveloped by moisture. From then onward the
other elements are produced through processes of condensation (earth) and rarefaction
(air, ordinary fire)”.
95 See Bachelard 1983 for similar ruminations about water.
96 Aldrete 2007 thoroughly discusses floods of the Tiber and these flood undoubtedly
influenced Seneca’s description of the flood at NQ 3.27.1-3.30.8.

33
distribution tanks, open channels, and various pipes like veins carrying this precious
resource to the homes and villas of the rich, to the reservoirs, fishponds, fountainhouses,
and fulleries.97 Strabo, comparing cities of Greece with Rome, writes how water is
brought to Rome in such a great amount that rivers run through the city and almost every
house has cisterns and fountains of their own.98 Studies of the city of Rome have often
pointed out how these water systems functioned, and recent scholarship has begun to
contemplate in a more holistic manner how Romans interacted with and understood
water.99 The sea had its own associations, as did the ocean, springs, fountains, rivers and
lakes.100 The original Muse of Latin poetry, Camena, was associated with a spring near
the Porta Capena, and the literary resonances of water can be found throughout Greek
and Roman literature.101 Springs and water sources commonly held numinous
associations, and temples and shrines proliferated around such waters; indeed Servius
states, “every spring is sacred”.102 Seneca gives us valuable insight into some of the
associations that spring from his contemplation of water and these are wide-ranging; from
97 For the way that the streams and natural drainage defined the seven hills of Rome, see
Holland 1961: 343-50, and passim. Sallares 2002: 215 claims, “according to late antique
catalogues of the feature of the fourteen regions of the city of Rome, there were no less
than 1,204 lakes within the city”. Campbell 2012 is the best source on rivers in the
Roman Empire, Walsh 2013: 68- 118 for fluvial and alluvial systems in the
Mediterranean, Rogers 2013 for waterscapes in Roman Britain, and Irby 2016 is a good
introduction to hydrology in the ancient world.
98 Strabo 5.3.8.
99 The essays in Koloski-Ostrow 2001 offer an overview of water use in Rome. For
aqueducts in particular, see Frontinus’ treatise de Aquaeductu, Hodge 1992, and Aicher
1995. Rogers 2018 makes inroads into a more holistic consideration of water.
100 An evocative tour of the springs of Greece can be found in Glover 1946: 1-29. There
were over 30 famous mythological rivers in Greece, see Brewster 1997 and Salowey
2017. For expansive views of the Mediterranean see Horden and Purcell 2000, Beaulieu
2016 offers a survey of Greek ideas about the sea, and, for riverine areas, see the essays
in Franconi 2017.
101 See Volk 2010: 188-9 for a helpful overview of such metapoetic water imagery.
102 Serv. ad Aen. 7.84. See Edlund-Berry 2006 for more on the use of water in religious
ritual and Jones 2005 for the significance of rivers in Latin literature.

34
death to life, the peaks of mountains to underground rivers, the size of the ocean to a drop
of sweat on your skin, epic poetry to comedic fodder, his book evokes and embraces the
importance and universality of water.103 Seneca’s statement about water being the most
powerful element (3.13.1) and its ability to create the world (in hoc futuri mundi spem
latere. ita ignis exitus mundi est, umor primordium, 3.13.1-2) also encourages us to
identify it as a suitable initial subject for the work. If the world begins with water, why
not begin the work with water as well?
Water was not only important for daily life, but it was also, fundamentally,
wondrous. Campbell stresses this fact:
Why did our authors find it difficult to disregard the fabulous? Modern
readers need to see this question through the eyes of the ancients. Rivers
and springs were very important for human existence; there were many
unexplained aspects, such as disappearing rivers, the sudden appearance of
streams, underground rivers, flash floods, damaging and ultimately
uncontrollable inundations in Rome, the annual miracle of the Nile
inundation, and springs of bubbling hot water, many of which did bring
about odd things. In facts, springs represented an unusual, even turbulent
part of nature that man could sometimes not control, exploit, or defend
against…104
In addition, water undergoes the most obvious elemental changes to the naked eye, and
everyone can observe this liquid become a solid or gas when cooled or heated. If water
can become “air” (steam) or a solid that looks like a rock (and Seneca believes that
hyper-cooled water becomes quartz crystal, see NQ 3.25.12), then the other elements can
likewise undergo such transformations, even if they are not as readily observable. This is
another vital reason for beginning this work with water and spilling so much ink on
elemental transformations, since this is one of the keys to understanding the natural
103 In the early third century, Athenaeus will do the same with a focus on Greek literary
and philosophical sources, see Deip. 2.40-2.46. See Strang 2004 for a modern analogue
taken from one riverine system in Dorset.
104 Campbell 2012: 341.

35
world. Authors like Vitruvius recognize the importance of water, and he devotes a book
to water because “physicists, philosophers, and priests alike believe that all things consist
of the power of water” (a physicis et philosophis et ab sacerdotibus iudicetur ex potestate
aquae omnes res constare, 8.pr.4).105 Pliny likewise mentions how “in no part of Nature
are there greater marvels” than water (Nat. 31.21) and devotes Nat. 31 to the significance
of water. Capable of travelling up a wick or below the earth, salty, sweet, hot, cold, it
appeared in a variety of forms and, while necessary for life, could also cause death. Its
unique properties led to the various stories that make up the strong paradoxographical
tradition about water, most obvious in Ovid’s Metamorphoses 15.259-360, as well as
some of the more elaborated stories in the Metamorphoses (Arethusa, Niobe,
Salmacis).106 This tradition of cataloguing wonderous waters stretches back to
Callimachus, and Seneca would be well aware of the long history of such tales.107 From
his childhood in Corduba, where the great Baetis river and its tributaries allowed for
riverine trade, to his time in Rome and Italy, to his convalescence in Egypt, to his active
interest in viticulture, Seneca would have been well-aware of some of dangers (e.g.
flooding of the Tiber), myths (Lake Avernus and the underworld landscape of the
Phlegraean Fields), wonders (the Nile in spate), and peculiarities of water.
Seneca’s understanding of the hydrological cycle, however, is compromised by
his belief that the source of terrestrial waters could not be rainfall and other precipitation
(NQ 3.7.1-4, 3.11.5). This is, ultimately, the cause of all such waters from the smallest
105 See Courrént 2004 for more on Vitruvius’ exploration of the mirabilia of water.
106 For more on this section, see Myers 1994: 133-66.
107 Additional authors who wrote about such phenomena include Philostephanus,
Antigonus, Nymphodorus, Sotion, and the collections of [Arist.] Mirabiles
Auscultationes, Paradoxographicus Vaticanus, and Paradoxigraphicus Florentius. See
Giannini 1965 for fragments, and Myers 1994, Beagon 2009: 292-94, Garani forthcoming
for further discussion.

36
spring to the mightiest river.108 Seneca thought that, in addition to moisture that the earth
exuded naturally, underground rivers and lakes existed, fed by elemental transformation
of air and earth into water, which were the source of such terrestrial waters above
ground.109 The ability for waters to disappear, move underground, and reappear is a
common feature of the karst landscapes of the Mediterranean, and Seneca utilizes myths
like Arethusa or the Tigris’s peek-a-boo behavior to stress the existence of underground
passages, the porous nature of the earth, and hidden connections.110 He models his
conception of the hydrological cycle on the human body, and his use of analogy works to
explain not only how “veins” of water and “arteries” of air might exist below the surface
of the earth (NQ 3.15.1), but also adds credence to the Stoic idea of the living cosmos.111
Analogy is a common argumentative tool in meteorology, and Seneca’s use of it helps
him not only to explain difficult phenomena, but also to link such phenomena to larger
conceptions and ideas.112 If the earth is like a human body, waters may be corrupted or
“injured” (NQ 3.15.2-4), “scars” can appear (NQ 3.15.6), and the earth itself is destined
108 See Rossi 1991 for comparison between Seneca’s view of certain hydrological
phenomena and the modern understanding of these same events. Thomas 2000 provides
more general information on the connections between hydrology, topography, and
geology.
109 Lehoux 2012: 88 sees such cyclical transformations as indicative of a larger cycle,
“cyclicality is one of the key distinguishing features of Stoic physics, and change from
one element into another is at the heart of the overall conflagration and rebirth of the
cosmos. Even the fact of rain coming from clouds is brought round to this end, insofar as
Seneca denies that cloud is moisture, insisting instead that it is air which changes to water
in the critical moment of raining” (cf. NQ 2.15 and 2.26). Seneca claims that whatever
exists on the earth’s surface can be found underground as well, NQ 3.16.4.
110 See Irby 2016: 191-92 for more on such behavior of rivers and Clendenon 2009 for
karst “hydromythology”.
111 Hahm 1977: 174 “the Stoic cosmos had a biological as well as physical side. Though
each side owed its existence to the ideas of others, the total integration of the physical
and biological sides of the cosmos resulted in a totally new cosmology, one that can only
be characterized as purely Stoic”.
112 Aristotle often utilized it more for comprehension than for proof or argumentation, see
Taub 2003: 98-102.

37
to “die” at some point as with the flood at the conclusion of Book 3. If the correct way to
understand the hydrological cycle is below:
Figure 1: Hydrological cycle (L. Haskell)
Seneca’s view is closer to this:
W
c
condensation
precipitation
transpiration
evaporation
runoff
water table
water table
spring infiltration

38
Figure 2: Seneca’s hydrological cycle (L. Haskell)
Gone are the usual drivers of atmospheric condensation and oceanic evaporation as well
as the dependence on precipitation to recharge the water table. The network of watery
veins, underground caverns (where water can be created by condensed air), earth
dissolving into water through elemental change, and subterranean bodies of water will be
sufficient. Additionally, for Seneca, the fact that water is one of the four elements should
be enough to explain the source of terrestrial waters. Because of the ubiquity and balance
of elements, one should not wonder that there are copious amounts of water (after all,
Seneca says, you do not question where the air comes from, why should you wonder
about water? NQ 3.12.1-3). Seneca’s scientific model of the nature of terrestrial waters
helps him to explain the various phenomena that he covers in the Naturales Quaestiones
with the added benefits of creating a hypothesis that will be of use to explain additional
c
Air
Water

39
phenomena (from the caverns and underground lakes uncovered by mining at NQ 5.15.1-
4 to the causes of earthquakes in NQ 6). It is notable what Seneca does not discuss in this
book: aqueducts, monumental fountain architecture, and the Tiber itself all are passed
over without a mention.113 Although certain baths, villa accoutrements, and building
projects are touched upon, Seneca does not focus on the Roman ability to manipulate and
channel water for large scale irrigation, or public works.114 This may be in part to delimit
the power of mankind over this violent and powerful element (NQ 3.13.1, 3.30.6) and
underscore how these projects are unworthy of wonder.115 Although modern hydrologists
may scoff at some of his findings, his blend of empirical observation (e.g. his experience
with viticulture at NQ 3.7.1), analogical modeling, debating with his interlocutor, and
literary and rhetorical flair allow him to construct a persuasive paradigm than can account
for the variety of topics of the book.
Summary of Naturales Quaestiones Book 3
1.) Prologue: Ethics and Physics
The book begins with a statement of intent – although he is an old man, he will
take up the immense project “to survey the world, to root out its causes and secrets, and
113 This is part of his larger strategy to marginalize Roman power, as Hine 2006 points
out: “The message is that when we have studied the whole universe in its amazing
entirety, then we shall inevitably despise the trappings both of luxury and of earthly
power and glory” (45). Some of these omissions would have struck his audience as
notable, Pliny the Elder remarks on the aqueducts, “there is nothing more worthy of
admiration throughout the whole universe” (36.123).
114 For more on the Roman ability to manipulate water for urban and rural needs, see
Hodge 1992, Thomas and Wilson 1994, Purcell 1996, and de Kleijn 2001.
115 NQ 1.pr.8: “the mind cannot scorn colonnades, and ceilings sparkling with ivory, and
topiary forests and streams channeled into houses until it has surveyed the entire world
(totum circumit mundum)”. The manipulation of nature for the sake of luxury is
denigrated throughout Seneca’s works, cf. Dial. 9.1.8-9, Ep. 122.7-9 for more on such
water displays in the homes of the rich.

40
to publish what should be learned by others” (mundum circumire constitui et causas
secretaque eius eruere atque aliis noscenda prodere, 3.pr.1). Already here in the opening
sentence, Seneca highlights the relationship between himself and his readers who have to
actively learn this material in order to gain any larger insight. Instead of offering a survey
of the subjects he will examine, Seneca proceeds to muse on the ethical ramifications for
such a course of study. A quotation of the epic poet Vagellius stresses not only the effort
that must be expended on the subject, but also the literary quality of this work; Seneca
will enrich his work with quotations and intertexts from various poets and these should be
taken as important voices that help to make up the “community of scholars” that aid in
this investigation into nature. The Vagellian quotation most likely derives from an epic
poem on Phaethon, another figure who attempted a cosmic journey, although with
troubling results.116 Time is of the essence and such research is more important than other
possible endeavors. Certainly it is better than writing history, which is for Seneca a
worthless compilation of sufferings inflicted by flawed individuals on undeserving
populations.117 An Alexander or Hannibal, even a Roman general (3.pr.10) may conquer
land, but is unable to conquer his own vices.118 More important and useful is
philosophical study which will not only inform us what we ought to do (3.pr.7), but also
clarify what is truly important in human life. Thus the very genre of historiography is
116 The quotations of Vagellius in this work hint at the sublimity that Seneca aspires to
reach, see Williams 2012: 228-30. Its position at the beginning of this book might also
lead to thoughts of a cosmic conflagratio, which Seneca will allude to elsewhere (3.28.7,
3.29.1, 3.29.2).
117 For Seneca’s critique of history and historians in the NQ, see Master 2015.
118 If Alexander had Aristotle as philosophical advisor, Nero had Seneca, and it would
seem that sections like 3.pr.10 are (not-so) veiled critiques of conquest as a sort of
overcompensation for ethical failings: “Many men have ruled nations, many have ruled
cities; only a handful have ruled themselves” (3.pr.10). For Alexander as a stand-in for
Nero, see Spencer 2002: 72-73, 109-12, Gauly 2004: 204-06, and Hine 2006: 64.

41
shown to be inadequate to the education of the reader, and if Seneca engages in his own
“historical” writing at times in the NQ,119 he is quick to point out how the exempla found
in historical accounts and even the longue durée of empire (3.pr.9) are of questionable
importance.120 The anaphora of the question “What is important?” (quid est
praecipuum?), like the refrain of a prayer, not only calls attention to the particular
answers that Seneca gives, but is indicative of his protrepic style in this section. While
critics of Seneca’s rhetoric often harp on his repetitions and inability to leave well-
enough alone,121 here it reinforces the variety of ways in which the soul/mind can benefit
from such philosophical exploration and growth. Theme and variation. He wants to keep
the reader focused on what is important and hammer home that the contemplation of this
material (in essence a way of communing with the divine, 3.pr.11) will grant the proper
perspective for more worldly issues – whether misfortune (3.pr.12) or luxury (3.pr.13).
This will give one control of their own fortune, in as much as one will understand fortune
correctly as an attitude towards nature (3.pr.15) and freedom as what is granted by the
law of nature, not Roman law (3.pr.16).122 The conclusion exemplifies the ties that bind
ethics and physics and the real benefits from such study:
In order to understand this, it will benefit us to study nature. First, we will
escape from repugnant matters. Then we will separate the very mind,
119 Seneca draws upon a variety of genres in this work, see Taub 2008: 25 “The Natural
Questions is an excellent example of a text that shows affinities with several genres used
to write about nature: question-and-answer text, letter, and treatise”. I would add that his
generic hybridity also encompasses epic and didactic poetry as well as Roman drama and
historiography.
120 A quick biography of Hannibal (3.pr.6), rife with allusions to authors like Livy, leads
to Seneca’s description of him as a senex (much like Seneca himself), who could not
survive without an enemy, and certainly did not realize the importance of philosophical
study. Seneca will stress elsewhere that all historians are liars (NQ 7.16.1-2). See
Hutchinson 1993: 15-17 for a brief discussion of Seneca’s attitude towards history.
121 Fronto complains that Seneca’s sentences “repeat the same thought, clothed in
constantly different guises, over and over again” (Orat. 1.4).
122 See French 1994: 161-63 and Lehoux 2012: 47-76 on natural law.

42
which must be elevated and great, from the body. After that our critical
thought, sharpened on such hidden matters, will be better able to handle
obvious problems. And nothing is more obvious than these remedies
which are learned to combat our wickedness and madness, vices we
disparage but do not defeat. (3.pr.18)
Critical thinking about the larger cosmos not only affords the mind a respite from the
sordid daily grind, but it also will influence the way one re-approaches that world.123
Remedies exist for the wickedness and madness that plague mankind, Seneca has just
catalogued a number of meditations that can help one’s outlook in the preceding section,
but they hinge on the understanding that philosophical contemplation grants the
individual.124 This preface acts as a challenge for the reader – as one studies terrestrial
waters and begins to understand the place of man vis-à-vis such wonders, one should find
ways to apply these findings to life’s problems.
2.) Doxography I: The Source of Water and Operative Analogies (3.1-3.16)
While the preface does an admirable job drawing the reader into the work and
explaining the wide benefits of the study of the natural world, it does not prepare the
reader for the first topic of the work. In fact, it may seem surprising that Seneca connects
the concluding sentiment of 3.pr.18 with the opening of the doxography proper:
“Therefore let us investigate terrestrial waters…” (quaeramus ergo de terrestribus aquis,
3.1.1). Inwood helpfully points out that the connective ergo indicates that such moral
improvement can even be garnered by “studying more specific phenomena, such as the
terrestres aquae of book 3”.125 The explanatory force of ergo is meant to shock the
reader into seeing that the study of these waters will likewise have a tangible ethical
123 Cf. Ep. 65.19-21 for a similar reverie about the importance of inspectio rerum
naturae.
124 For more on the connections between ethics and physics, see Hadot 1969: 111-17,
Scott 1999, and Williams 2005 for NQ 1.
125 Inwood 2005: 167n.31.

43
reward. What is more, Seneca does not offer a dry precis of the philosophical tradition
behind water, but enlivens his opening with three quotations about water, from Ovid,
Vergil, and Lucilius himself. These quotations strongly place the poetic connotations of
water at the fore, which hints at the important continuity between water in Latin poetry
and Seneca’s own concerns.126 Ovid’s still pool foreshadows the problematics of
reflection and mirroring of NQ 1, Vergil’s thundering river draws attention to the ever-
present role of water in the Aeneid, and Lucilius’s Arethusa is linked not only to his
current position in Sicily, but also Vergil’s own pastoral poetics. Poetic context and
philosophical context inform one another, broaden the scope of the investigation, and hint
that investigating literature itself will be part of this study.127 A general overview of
waters (origins, taste, temperature, benefits) grants the reader a skeleton table of contents
for the upcoming book (3.1.2-3.2.2). Seneca’s quest to understand the origin of terrestrial
waters leads to examples from Ethiopia to Germany, from the bottom of deep wells
(3.8.3) to the heights of mountains (3.8.4) – indeed, he is fulfilling his promise to “survey
the world” (mundum circumire, 3.pr.1). His argument touches upon observations that all
can experience about rainfall (3.7.4) to his own specialized knowledge about vineyards
(3.7.1). But in order to really comprehend the sheer volume of water, Seneca draws upon
the Stoic conception of the elements and elemental transformation.128 If one buys into the
premise that the world is made of four elements and that water can become air and earth
(and vice versa), there is no reason to wonder at the volume of water on the earth’s
126 Rogers 2015: 80-129 provides a synopsis of Latin literary sources on water. Seneca
also quotes Lucilius early in his Epistles (8.10) and one might see a didactic strategy in
his quotation here as well (i.e. you share your interest in this material with a number of
famous Latin authors).
127 See Trinacty 2018b for more on quotation and intertextuality in this book.
128 Hahm 1977: 91-135 and Wildberger 2006: 60-79 explain Stoic elemental
transformation more fully.

44
surface and coursing underneath, after all “nothing is wanting if it returns to itself”
(3.10.3). Such elemental exchange and ideas that “everything is in everything” (3.10.4)
approach Pythagorean tenets and allusions to Ovid’s Pythagoras in this section point to
the larger literary and philosophical ramifications for such metamorphoses. Seneca’s
conception of terrestrial waters often hearkens back to Ovid’s Metamorphoses, with the
speech of Pythagoras and the flood of Metamorphoses 1 major intertexual sources that
Seneca calls to mind in order to define his larger project. If Ovid’s use of Pythagoras is,
in part, “to carry the central theme of metamorphosis out of the realm of mythology and
into the natural sciences”,129 then it is easy to see how Seneca’s account continues this
movement and provides more grounding in elemental theory in praxis. As in Ovid’s epic,
transformation is key to Seneca’s world-view, but his prose treatise continually vies with
Ovid’s ingenious poetry to show how his explanations of this material trump Ovid’s both
in depth, intellectual acumen, and in creativity.130 If earlier sections of the doxography
rely on anonymous groups of thinkers (quidam iudicant, 3.5.1; quidam existimant, 3.6.1,
3.8.1), Seneca starts to name names with details from Theophrastus (3.11.2, 3.11.4) and
the Presocratic philosopher most identified with water, Thales (3.13.1, 3.14.1). It is
notable that he agrees and disagrees with one statement from each of these predecessors,
showing that he knows the philosophical tradition, but is willing to offer independent
views from it. His larger analogy of the earth being like a human body springs from his
personal view (“I especially support the following decree: the earth is ruled by nature,
and, indeed, in the same way as our bodies…” hoc amplius censeo: placet natura regi
129 Thibodeau 2018: 604.
130 The four elements were often attributed to Pythagoras in Latin literature (Lucr. 4.712-
721, Vitr. 2.2.1, Ovid Met. 15.237-51), but Seneca makes it firmly “ours” (i.e. Stoic) at
3.9.3 (placet nobis).

45
terram, et quidem ad nostrorum corporum exemplar, 3.15.1);131 while still drawing upon
common Stoic ideas, Seneca makes this the operative analogy for the remainder of the
book and will evoke it frequently in order to explain the workings of terrestrial waters.132
In doing so, the tenor and vehicle of the metaphor start to blur –one can start to see their
own body as representative of the world, just as the world can be represented as a
body.133 Learning about the world’s waters is analogous to learning about one’s own
body and the power of natura over both.134 Seneca augments this way of understanding
what cannot be directly observed with the premise “Believe whatever you see above to be
below” (crede infra quidquid vides supra, 3.16.4). Rivers, lakes, and huge caves exist
underground and behave much like those we can see on the surface of the earth because
they are following the laws of nature. Even the fish that teem in the brooks of the Italian
countryside can be found in bodies of water under the earth, which leads to Seneca’s
moral excursus on the contemporary “foodie” trend of watching a red mullet die before
consuming it.
3.) Red Mullet: Death and Spectacle (3.17-3.18)
Seneca begins this section by drawing attention to possible comedic responses the
reader may have to the idea that fish live underground: “At this point many things come
to your mind, which you wittily say about something unbelievable ‘Nonsense! That
someone will go fishing not with nets and rods but with a pickaxe! I expect someone else
will hunt in the sea!’” (3.17.1). Seneca signals his generic enrichment with the
131 Note the first person singular form of the verb.
132 See Armisen-Marchetti 1989: 305-6 and Williams 2012: 62, 127-28, 241-42.
133 See Richards 1936 for the tenor and vehicle of a metaphor (tenor = subject to which
attributes are given and vehicle = object whose attributes are borrowed).
134 There will be concrete applications of this during the flood when it is compared to
excessive sweating or diarrhea (3.30.4).

A Literary And Philosophical Commentary To Seneca NQ 3

A Literary And Philosophical Commentary To Seneca NQ 3

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to A Literary And Philosophical Commentary To Seneca NQ 3

Similar to A Literary And Philosophical Commentary To Seneca NQ 3 (11)

More from Andrea Porter

More from Andrea Porter (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A Literary And Philosophical Commentary To Seneca NQ 3