- Source
- Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales, Vol 1-3. Gummere, Richard Mott, editor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, Ltd., 1917-1925.
- Translation
- AI-generated (gemini-3.5-flash) — machine translation; may contain errors
- Languages
- 日本語 · English · 简体中文 · 한국어
- CTS URN
- urn:cts:latinLit:phi1017.phi015.humanitext-lat2:121.18-121.24
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-08
Seneca argues that animals are born with an innate capacity for self-preservation and instinctive knowledge of what is harmful, utilizing examples of insects and spiders to show that this is an inherent tool from nature rather than a learned skill.
Producit fetus suos natura, non abicit. Et quia tutela certissima ex proximo est, sibi quisque commissus est.1 Itaque, ut in prioribus epistulis dixi, tenera quoque animalia et materno utero vel ovo modo effusa, quid sit infestum, ipsa protinus norunt et mortifera devitant. Umbram quoque transvolantium reformidant obnoxia avibus rapto viventibus. Nullum animal ad vitam prodit sine metu mortis.
Nature produces her offspring, she does not abandon them. And because the most certain protection comes from what is closest, each one is committed to oneself. Therefore, as I said in my earlier letters, even tender animals, just poured forth from their mother’s womb or egg, immediately know what is harmful and avoid deadly things. They even dread the shadow of those flying over them, being vulnerable to birds that live by plunder. No animal comes forth to life without fear of death.
" Quemadmodum," inquit," editum animal intellectum habere aut salutaris aut mortiferae rei potest? "Primum quaeritur, an intellegat, non quemadmodum intellegat. Esse autem illis intellectum ex eo apparet, quod nihil amplius, si intellexerint, facient.2 Quid est, quare pavonem, quare anserem gallina non fugiat, at tanto minorem et ne notum quidem sibi accipitrem? Quare pulli faelem timeant, canem non timeant? Apparet illis inesse nocituri scientiam non experimento collectam; nam antequam possint experisci, cavent.
”How,” he says, “can a newborn animal have an understanding of either a salutary or a deadly thing?” First, the question is whether they understand, not how they understand. Moreover, that they have understanding is apparent from this, that they would do nothing more if they did understand. What is the reason why a hen does not flee from a peacock or a goose, but flees from a hawk which is so much smaller and not even known to her? Why should chicks fear a cat but not a dog? It is apparent that there is in them a knowledge of what will harm them, not collected by experience; for before they can gain experience, they guard themselves.
Deinde ne hoc casu existimes fieri,3 nec metuunt alia quam debent nec umquam obliviscuntur huius tutelae et diligentiae; aequalis est illis a pernicioso fuga. Praeterea non fiunt timidiora vivendo. Ex quo quidem apparet non usu illa in hoc pervenire, sed naturali amore salutis suae. Et tardum est et varium, quod usus docet; quicquid natura tradit, et aequale omnibus est et statim.
Next, lest you should think this happens by chance, they neither fear things other than they ought, nor do they ever forget this protection and diligence; their flight from what is destructive is always constant. Furthermore, they do not become more timid by living. From which indeed it is apparent that they do not arrive at this by experience, but by a natural love of their own safety. What experience teaches is slow and variable; whatever nature hands down is both equal for all and immediate.
Si tamen exigis, dicam quomodo omne animal perniciosa intellegere conatur? Sentit se carne constare; itaque sentit, quid sit, quo secari caro, quo uri, quo opteri possit, quae sint animalia armata ad nocendum; horum speciem trahit inimicam et hostilem. Inter se ista coniuncta sunt; simul enim conciliatur saluti suae quidque et iuvantia petit, laesura formidat. Naturales ad utilia impetus, naturales a contrariis aspernationes sunt; sine ulla cogitatione, quae hoc dictet, sine consilio fit, quidquid natura praecepit.
If, however, you demand it, shall I tell you how every animal attempts to understand harmful things? It feels that it consists of flesh; therefore, it feels what can cut, burn, or crush flesh, and what animals are armed to do harm; it conceives their appearance as hostile and adversarial. These things are connected with one another; for at the same time, each thing is reconciled to its own safety and seeks what helps, while dreading what will hurt. Impulses toward useful things are natural, and turnings away from contrary things are natural; without any thought to dictate this, without deliberation, whatever nature has commanded takes place.
Non vides, quanta sit subtilitas apibus ad fingenda domicilia, quanta dividua laboris obeundi undique concordia? Non vides, quam nulli mortalium mutabilis4 illa aranei textura, quanti operis sit fila disponere, alia in rectum inmissa firmamenti loco, alia in orbem currentia ex denso rara, qua minora animalia, in quorum perniciem illa tenduntur, velut retibus implicata teneantur?
Do you not see how great is the subtlety of bees in fashioning their dwellings, how great the harmony from all sides in sharing the labor to be undergone? Do you not see how that web of the spider cannot be changed by any mortal, how great a task it is to arrange the threads, some sent straight in place of a support, others running in a circle from dense to sparse, so that the smaller animals, for whose destruction they are stretched, may be held as if entangled in nets?
Nascitur ars ista, non discitur. Itaque nullum est animal altero doctius. videbis araneorum pares telas, par in favis angulorum omnium foramen. Incertum est et inaequabile, quidquid ars tradit; ex aequo venit, quod natura distribuit. Haec nihil magis quam tutelam sui et eius peritiam tradidit, ideoque etiam simul incipiunt et discere et vivere.
That art is born, not learned. Therefore, no animal is more learned than another. You will see equal webs of spiders, and an equal opening of all angles in honeycombs. Whatever art hands down is uncertain and unequal; what nature distributes comes from equality. Nature has handed down nothing more than the protection of oneself and the skill for it, and therefore they begin both to learn and to live at the same time.
Nec est mirum cum eo nasci illa, sine quo frustra nascerentur. Primum hoc instrumentum in illa natura contulit ad permanendum, conciliationem et caritatem sui. Non poterant salva esse, nisi vellent. Nec hoc per se profuturum erat, sed sine hoc nulla res profuisset. In nullo deprendes vilitatem sui, ne neglegentiam quidem. Tacitis quoque et brutis, quamquam in cetera torpeant, ad vivendum sollertia est. videbis, quae aliis inutilia sunt, sibi ipsa non deesse. Vale.
Nor is it surprising that they are born with that without which they would be born in vain. Nature has conferred this first instrument upon them for survival: reconciliation and love of oneself. They could not be safe unless they wished to be. Nor was this to be of benefit by itself, but without this nothing would have been of benefit. In no animal will you detect a self-depreciation, nor even neglect. To the silent and dumb also, although they may be sluggish in other things, there is skill for living. You will see that those things which are useless to others are not lacking to themselves. Farewell.
- 121.18sibi quisque commissus est
The subject is 'quisque' (each one/each animal), and 'sibi' is the dative of the reflexive pronoun meaning 'to oneself'. This syntax expresses the core of the Stoic doctrine of self-preservation (oikeiosis), wherein nature commits each animal to its own care.
- 121.19quod nihil amplius, si intellexerint, facient
The conditional clause introduced by 'si intellexerint' (subjunctive perfect or future perfect indicative) carries a concessive nuance ('even if they did understand'). 'nihil amplius facient' (they would do nothing more) logically indicates that their instinctive behavior is already so perfect that even the addition of rational understanding would not enable them to act any better.
- 121.20ne hoc casu existimes fieri
The 'ne' clause is not an independent prohibition, but a purposive/preventative adverbial clause modifying the subsequent main clause (nec metuunt...). It acts as a colloquial, parenthetical ellipsis meaning 'lest you should think this happens by chance (I tell you that...)'.
- 121.22nulli mortalium mutabilis
'nulli mortalium' is a dative of agent modifying the adjective 'mutabilis' (changeable, imitable). Together they express a passive potential sense: 'unable to be imitated (or changed) by any mortal.'
