No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 April 2021
In Quaestiones naturales 4b.4.2 Seneca states that in early spring the weather drastically changes: in the warmer sky larger water droplets are formed and cause rain. The description of this ‘greater change’ (maior inclinatio) is linked in the manuscript tradition to two different controversial readings, temporis and aeris, which are irregularly distributed. Most recent editors have printed the first reading, but H.M. Hine is probably right to accept aeris. A careful linguistic, stemmatic and stylistic examination shows that temporis is likely to be a Medieval Latin gloss of aeris: the equivalence of both words would be difficult to justify in Classical Latin, but in Late Latin and in Medieval Latin tempus developed a climatological meaning which is explicitly found in medieval writers and glossaries and is also very widespread in Romance languages. The presence of this gloss in the hyparchetype Ψ, which is ultimately the source for most medieval copies, accounts for the irregular distribution of both readings in the manuscript tradition; this hypothesis is particularly consistent with Hine's suggestion that Ψ probably had interlinear or marginal readings. This historical investigation on the meaning of tempus is also relevant to the end of the same passage, where stylistic and linguistic evidence supports the reading tepore rather than tempore.
For helpful discussion and feedback on earlier versions of this paper I am most grateful to C. Codoñer, H.M. Hine, D. Kiss, J. Román Bravo, M. Querejeta and the anonymous referee of CQ. This paper is part of the Research Project ‘El género consolatorio en época tardoantigua: estudio y edición crítica del De consolatione in aduersis (y otros textos tardíos y altomedievales)’, Programa ‘Logos’ – Fundación BBVA de Ayudas a la Investigación en el Área de Estudios Clásicos, 2019.
1 Lucii Annaei Senecae Naturalium quaestionum libros recognouit H.M. Hine (Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1996), 192–3.
2 Hine, H.M. (transl.), Lucius Annaeus Seneca Natural Questions (Chicago, 2010), 66Google Scholar.
3 An outline of the textual tradition has been provided by Hine, H.M. himself in ‘The manuscript tradition of Seneca's Natural Questions’, CQ 30 (1980), 183–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar; he has also offered briefer descriptions in L.D. Reynolds (ed.), Text and Transmission. A Survey of the Latin Classics (Oxford, 1983), 376–8 and in the preface to the Teubner edition (Hine [n. 1], V–XXI). At this point the readings of π can be restored from its descendants ρ (P = Par. lat. 6628, twelfth/thirteenth century; and R = El Escorial O.III.2, thirteenth century) and U (Munich Clm 11049, fifteenth century). The word was omitted by the scribe of W (Venice, Lat. Z.268 [1548], fourteenth century), a sister manuscript to U (a subsequent hand inserted temporis).
4 Three independent descendants of δ are identified by Hine: A = Leiden Voss. Lat. O.55, twelfth century; B = Bamberg Class. 1 (M.IV.16), twelfth century (second half); and V = Vat. Pal. lat. 1579, thirteenth/fourteenth century. Between δ and Ψ there was an intermediate α, but it is not relevant in this passage. The text of θ can be restored through the agreement of F = Oxford, Merton College, 250, twelfth century (second half) and H = Par. lat. 8624-I, twelfth century (second half).
5 This hyparchetype λ is the source of Oxford, St. John's College, 36, twelfth/thirteenth century; Cambrai 555 (513)-I, twelfth century (second half); Trier, Priesterseminar 66 (R.IV.2), twelfth/thirteenth century; Leiden Voss. Lat. F.69, twelfth century (second half); Leiden, B. P. L. 199, thirteenth century (second half). The excerpta transmitted in the twelfth-century Florilegium Gallicum also derive from λ; see Hine (n. 1), XX. The λ family was already identified by A. Gercke in L. Annaei Senecae Naturalium quaestionum libros VIII edidit A. Gercke (Leipzig, 1907), XXVIII–XXIX.
6 This is the stemma codicum for this part of the work. The reconstruction of an ancestor of Z (ζ) in other sections of the Quaestiones naturales was criticized by Reeve, M.D., ‘Cuius in usum? Recent and future editing’, JRS 90 (2000), 196–206, at 201Google Scholar; Reeve's observation was accepted by Hine, H.M., ‘Seneca's Naturales Quaestiones 1960–2005 (Part 1)’, Lustrum 51 (2009), 253–329, at 274Google Scholar.
7 Hine (n. 3 [1980]), 196–8.
8 Hine (n. 3 [1980]), 200–1.
9 Haase, F. (ed.), L. Annaei Senecae opera quae supersunt, 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1884), 2.155–318Google Scholar; Gercke (n. 5); P. Oltramare (ed.), Sénèque. Questions naturelles, 2 vols. (Paris, 1929, 19612); C. Cardó (ed.), L.A. Sèneca. Qüestions naturals, 3 vols. (Barcelona, 1956–9); T.H. Corcoran (ed.), Seneca. Naturales quaestiones, 2 vols. (London and Cambridge, MA, 1971–2); C. Codoñer (ed.), Séneca. Cuestiones naturales, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1979); D. Vottero (ed.), Questioni naturali di Lucio Annaeo Seneca (Turin, 1989); M.F.A. Brok (ed.), L. Annaeus Seneca. Naturales quaestiones (Darmstadt, 1995); Brok follows Oltramare's Latin text.
10 K.R. Fickert (ed.), L. Annaei Senecae Dialogi IX, Naturalium quaestionum libri VII, Ludus de morte Claudii (Leipzig, 1845). However, as is noted by Hine (n. 3), 197, in that case one would rather expect in teporem.
11 However, Professor C. Codoñer (personal communication) now finds both variants unsatisfactory and suggests to me the possibility of reading caeli instead of aeris (for the use of inclinatio caeli, see Gell. NA 14.1.8, Hyg. Poet. astr. 4.11, Vitr. De arch. 1.1.10, 1.6.9, 6.1.12). Note that in QNat. 1.1.5 (interim illud existimo, eiusmodi ignes existere aere uehementius trito, cum inclinatio eius in alteram partem facta est) Gercke (n. 5) in the apparatus criticus suggested caeli (as well as celerius and citius) instead of eius, referring to aere, but aere is probably right. Hine (n. 3 [1980]), 197 rightly emphasizes that inclinatio aeris here refers to spatial motion, not to change. I would like to point out the parallel of the comparative of uehemens in both texts (uehementius aere trito and uehementior mutatio … aeris).
12 From Muret (Rome, 1593) to Koeler (Göttingen, 1819). See Hine (n. 3 [1980]), 197.
13 Richard, F. and Richard, P. (edd.), Recherches sur la nature (Questions naturelles) (Paris, 1935)Google Scholar.
14 Parroni, P. (ed.), Seneca. Ricerche sulla natura (Milan, 2002)Google Scholar.
15 Hine (n. 3 [1980]), 197.
16 Corcoran (n. 9), 2.51; see Hine (n. 3 [1980]), 197.
17 On aer and caelum particularly in Seneca's Quaestiones naturales, see Díaz, R. Bravo, ‘Aer, aether, caelum, sublimis: estudio del vocabulario técnico utilizado para designar el “cielo” en las Naturales quaestiones de Séneca y otros escritores científicos’, Voces 6 (1995), 9–39Google Scholar. I have checked all the occurrences of tempus in Seneca's Quaestiones naturales. Of course, tempus can be used with aestiuus (QNat. 1.8.7 temporibus aestiuis, 3.26.1 tempore aestiuo), uernus (QNat. 4a.2.19 uernis temporibus) or hibernus (QNat. 6.12.2 or 6.13.3 hiberno tempore), but in these cases it means ‘summer time’, ‘spring time’ or ‘winter time’ (rather than ‘summer weather’, etc.). These cases are parallel to matutino tempore (QNat. 1.8.6), meaning ‘early morning’, not ‘morning weather’. A tricky passage on this topic is QNat. 5.3.2 atqui nullum tempus magis quam nebulosum caret uento. Here tempus does not mean ‘weather’ but ‘period’ or generically ‘conditions’. It refers to the period described by Seneca at the beginning of this chapter (5.3.1 tunc minime uentus est cum aer nubilo grauis est); tempus … nubilum takes up cum aer nubilo grauis est. Hine (n. 2), 74 rightly translates it as ‘conditions’. See also the difference at QNat. 3.16.3 hiems numquam aberrauit; aestas suo tempore incaluit (‘Winter never goes astray; summer heats up at the right time’, as translated by Hine [n. 2], 35).
18 See also Norwegian and Swedish tid (‘time’) vs Norwegian vær and Swedish väder (‘weather’).
19 See OLD s.v. tempus 11b.
20 Apart from the combination with caeli, OLD lists only one Classical example of this meaning related to weather: Ov. Tr. 1.9a.6 (tempora si fuerint nubila). However, this is a metaphorical expression: tempora does not refer to ‘climate’ or ‘weather’ but to ‘situation’, ‘circumstances’—indeed, it constitutes the opposite of donec eris sospes in the previous line—and nubila figuratively means ‘gloomy’, ‘sad’, ‘adverse’. These metaphoric tempora nubila are parallel to the more common tempora dura (Prop. 1.7.8; Hor. Epist. 2.2.46; Ov. Tr. 5.10.12). Indeed, this climatological meaning is not recorded by Lewis and Short nor by Gaffiot.
21 On this well-known polysemy in Romance, see Wandruszka, M., Sprachen, vergleichbar und unvergleichlich (Munich, 1969), 42–5Google Scholar. Wandruszka rightly indicates that lexical ambiguity exists only in the singular; plural forms (Sp. tiempos, It. tempi, etc.) always mean ‘time’, not ‘weather’. This topic still lacks a comprehensive study; interesting remarks are found in W. von Wartburg, Französisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Eine Darstellung des galloromanischen Sprachschatzes, 25 vols. (Basel, 1966–7), 13.185–91; M. Cortelazzo and P. Zolli, Dizionario etimologico della lingua italiana, 5 vols. (Bologna, 1979–88), 5.1325; J. Coromines and Pascual, J.A., Diccionario crítico etimológico castellano e hispánico, 6 vols. (Madrid, 1980–91), 5.486–7Google Scholar; Coromines, J., Diccionari etimològic i complementari de la llengua catalana, 9 vols. (Barcelona, 1980–91), 8.390–4Google Scholar; B. Bon, ‘De nouvelles (co)occurrences pour le Nouum Glossarium Mediae Latinitatis. Le traitement d'un mot fréquent : l'exemple de tempus’, in C. Giraud and D. Poirel (edd.), La rigueur et la passion. Mélanges en l'honneur de Pascale Bourgain (Turnhout, 2016), 909–20.
22 So Coromines (n. 21), 8.390.
23 The origin of this semantic shift has not been elucidated and many factors could be involved. The use of tempora as generic ‘conditions’ could have left room for it. Some contexts and sequences, such as tempus aestiuum, are potentially ambiguous: it could be reinterpreted as ‘summer weather’, not as ‘summer time’. Together with the restriction of aer as ‘air’, tempestas was progressively specialized as ‘storm’ (Fr. tempête, Sp. tempestad, Port. tempestade) and not as ‘weather’, and tempus could assume this sense. Besides, some aspects of the evolution of aer in Romance are very complex. The origin of the phraseological meaning ‘facial expression’ in Romance (cf. Fr. ‘avoir l'air d’être …’, Sp. ‘darse un aire a …’, etc.) is particularly controversial; see Cortelazzo and Zolli (n. 21), 1.72; Coromines and Pascual (n. 21), 1.90–1; Coromines (n. 21), 1.101–4.
24 Coromines and Pascual (n. 21), 5.487; Coromines (n. 21), 8.390.
25 This is, for example, the interpretation of maior inclinatio aeris in Parroni (n. 14), 285: ‘il tempo [= weather] cambia più facilmente’.
26 Mommsen, T. and Krueger, P. (edd.), Digesta Iustiniani Augusti, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1870), 1.375, lines 7–9Google Scholar.
27 Another interesting example appears in a letter written by the Gallo-Roman writer Ruricius, bishop of Limoges († 507/10): sed quid illic primum laudandum sit aut mirandum, ubi etiam temporis intemperies temperatur? siquidem inibi torridae feruor aestatis tam umbrarum quam undarum rigore depellitur, hiemis uero in tantum non sentitur asperitas, ut intra eadem positis tepor aeris et cantus auium ueris reddat effigiem (Ep. 1.11, in R. Demeulenaere [ed.], Ruricii Lemouicensis Epistolarum libri duo [Turnhout, 1985], 325, lines 17–21). However, temporis intemperies is ambiguous: it can refer to weather (see below, feruor, rigore, asperitas, tepor, etc.), but it could also be taken as the classical meaning ‘season’, with reference to aestas, hiems or uer, in the texts that follow. This kind of example shows the ambiguous contexts in which the semantic shift could take place.
28 C. du Fresne du Cange et al., Glossarium Mediae et Infimae Latinitatis, augmented edition by L. Favre, 10 vols. (Niort, 1883–7), 8.54a. Digital version at <http://ducange.enc.sorbonne.fr/TEMPUS> (checked 19/12/2020).
29 R.K. Ashdowne, Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources, fasc. 17 (Oxford, 2013), 3393. The climatological meaning is also recorded by Blaise, A., Lexicon Latinitatis Medii Aeui (Turnhout, 1975), 906Google Scholar and Niermeyer, M., Mediae Latinitatis Lexicon Minus (Leiden, 1976), 1016Google Scholar.
30 J.P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Latina, 217 vols. (Paris, 1844–55), 171.972B.
31 Chibnall, M. (ed.), The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, 6 vols. (Oxford, 1969–80), 6.228Google Scholar.
32 M. Lefébure (ed.), St Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologiae, Volume 38 (2a2ae. 63–79): Injustice (Cambridge, 2006), 134. Note that here tempus nubilosum refers to weather and has to be taken literally, whereas Ovid's tempora nubila, discussed above, did not refer to weather but to times of adversity.
33 Torraca, F. (ed.), Petri Cantinelli Chronicon (Città del Castello, 1902), 90Google Scholar.
34 The search is not always easy, because some of the examples can be ambiguous or very subtle. Such could be the case of a passage in Hugo de Folieto's De medicina animae (twelfth century), chapter 4: solet autem hoc tempus inconstans esse, modo pluuiosum ex uicinitate hiemis, modo siccum ex uicinitate aestatis, modo eadem ratione frigidum, modo calidum (Migne [n. 30], 176.1188B). At this point the author describes the characteristics of the spring and hoc tempus could be then understood as ‘this season’. However, what constantly changes (inconstans) is not the season but its climate, and consequently hoc tempus should be better taken as ‘this weather’ (rainy or dry).
35 Migne (n. 30), 210.968A.
36 B. Merrilees and W. Edwards (edd.), Firmini Verris dictionarius. Dictionnaire latin-français de Firmin Le Ver (Turnhout, 1994), 494, lines 73–7.
37 The codex Nicotianus was very similar to A, belonging to the δ group (see n. 4 above and Hine [n. 3 (1980)], 217 n. 78). Both are in all likelihood medieval emendations, independently made by Pc and the codex Nicotianus.
38 This intentional synonymic structure continues: the next sentence, ob hoc nimbi graues magis uastique quam pertinaces deferuntur (in particular, nimbi graues magis … deferuntur) is obviously parallel to maiora fiunt stillicidia in the quoted passage here.
39 As Hine noted, Corcoran wrongly translated tempore as ‘climate’. Some Romance translators are probably misguided by the climatological meaning found in Romance languages. Oltramare's translation is only partially consistent with Classical Latin (Oltramare [n. 9], 198): ‘secondée par la chaleur même de la saison’ (‘helped by the warmth of the season’). He edits tempore (French saison), but la chaleur même (?) corresponds to ipso tepore as well. The same false friend has affected the Catalan version by Cardó (n. 9), 2.82, who renders tempore adiuuante as ‘ajudat per la mateixa calor del temps’ (‘helped by the warmth of the weather’); this translation is suspiciously similar to Oltramare's. Parroni (n. 14), 285 is consistent with Classical Latin: ‘col favore della stagione’.
40 Indeed, temporis uel aeris in λ could arise from a mechanical collation of two manuscripts, but it could also suggest that this use of temporis surprised a clever medieval scholar, who wisely looked for an alternative, better reading: ‘Studii et diligentiae philologorum saeculorum fere X/XI–XII/XIII testimonia haec sunt pulchra neque satis hodie aestimanda’ (Gercke [n. 5], XLII).
41 Hine (n. 3 [1980]), 200.
42 Segre, C., ‘Critique textuelle, théorie des ensembles et diasystèmes’, BAB 62 (1976), 279–92, at 285–6Google Scholar.