Physical science in the time of Nero : $b being a translation of the Quaestiones naturales of SenecaSeneca, Lucius Annaeus
Philosophy
Physical science in the time of Nero : $b being a translation of the Quaestiones naturales of Seneca
Seneca, Lucius Annaeus
Comets; Earthquakes; Meteorology -- Early works to 1800
There are, Caecina says, three kinds of lightning--the counselling, 1
the authoritative, and what is called the ordinary. The counselling
occurs before an event, but after the design is formed. When something
is simmering in one’s mind, the lightning stroke either urges it or
deters from it. The authoritative one succeeds an event, indicating
its outcome as good or ill fortune. In the ordinary case, people 2
are busied neither with action nor design when the lightning suddenly
occurs. The flash conveys either threat, promise, or warning. The
last form is indeed called admonitory: I am disposed to think it is
identical with the counselling mentioned above. One who warns at
the same time counsels. Yet there is a distinction between them.
Therefore they are put in different classes. The one applies suasion
or dissuasion, the other is restricted to warning how to avoid
an impending danger; as, for example, fire, or deception from 3
neighbours, or a plot by slaves. Besides, I can perceive another
difference between the two kinds: if one has a design, then the
lightning that occurs counsels; but if one has no such design, it
warns. Each situation has its own peculiar features. In deliberation
advice is appropriate, but a warning comes unsought.
XL
On the face of it, one’s comment on this view would be that these 1
are so many kinds of prognostications and not of lightning. Of the
latter the kinds are the boring, the splitting, and the scorching.
The first has a subtle flame, which from its unalloyed purity can win
escape through the tiniest aperture. The second, which scatters to the
winds what it strikes, is massed fire with an admixture of condensed
tempestuous wind. So the first kind escapes again by the opening by
which it entered. The second spreads wide the effects of its violence,
it bursts what it strikes, and does not perforate it. The third kind
mentioned, the scorching, has much earthiness in its composition, 2
and contains fire rather than flame. It therefore leaves deep scars of
fire, which will be branded in what it has struck. No lightning, it is
true, that comes to earth is fireless, but this kind is distinctively
called fiery, because it imprints the marks of fire so manifestly, by
either scorching or staining. It scorches in three different ways,
that is, it either breathes on its object, so to speak, inflicting
slight injury, or burns it right up, or sets it on fire. All those
are methods of what I have called scorching, differing, however, in
character and degree. Whatever is, for example, burnt up is necessarily
scorched as well. But [the converse is not equally true], everything 3
that is scorched is not necessarily burnt up. And so with what is set
on fire; it is not necessarily consumed, the fire may merely have
scorched it in passing. Everybody knows that things may be scorched
without breaking out into fire, but that nothing can break out into
fire without being scorched.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account