CHAPTER VII

Of some Insects, and the properties of several Plants.

1. Few ears have escaped the noise of the Dead-watch, that is, the

little clickling sound heard often in many rooms, somewhat resembling

that of a Watch; and this is conceived to be of an evil omen or

prediction of some persons death: wherein notwithstanding there is

nothing of rational presage or just cause of terrour unto melancholy and

meticulous heads. For this noise is made by a little sheath-winged gray

Insect found often in Wainscot, Benches, and Wood-work, in the Summer.

We have taken many thereof, and kept them in thin boxes, wherein I have

heard and seen them work and knack with a little _proboscis_ or trunk

against the side of the box, like _Apicus Martius_, or Woodpecker

against a tree. It worketh best in warm weather, and for the most part

giveth not over under nine or eleven stroaks at a time. He that could

extinguish the terrifying apprehensions hereof, might prevent the

passions of the heart, and many cold sweats in Grandmothers and Nurses,

who in the sickness of children, are so startled with these noises.

2. The presage of the year succeeding, which is commonly made from

Insects or little Animals in Oak apples, according to the kinds thereof,

either Maggot, Fly, or Spider; that is, of Famine, War, or Pestilence;

whether we mean that woody excrescence, which shooteth from the branch

about _May_, or that round and Apple-like accretion which groweth under

the leaf about the latter end of Summer, is I doubt too distinct, nor

verifiable from event.

For Flies and Maggots are found every year, very seldom Spiders: And

_Helmont_ affirmeth he could never find the Spider and the Fly upon the

same Trees, that is the signs of War and Pestilence, which often go

together: Beside, that the Flies found were at first Maggots, experience

hath informed us; for keeping these excrescencies, we have observed

their conversions, beholding in Magnifying Glasses the daily progression

thereof. As may be also observed in other Vegetable excretions, whose

Maggots do terminate in Flies of constant shapes; as in the Nutgalls of

the Out-landish Oak, and the Mossie tuft of the wild Briar; which having

gathered in _November_ we have found the little Maggots which lodged in

wooden Cells all _Winter_, to turn into Flies in _June_.

[Sidenote: _Abundance of Flies, Maggots, etc., what may they naturally

signifie._]

We confess the opinion may hold some verity in the Analogy, or

Emblematical phansie. For Pestilence is properly signified by the

Spider, whereof some kinds are of a very venemous Nature. Famine by

Maggots, which destroy the fruits of the Earth. And War not improperly

by the Fly; if we rest in the phansie of _Homer_, who compares the

valiant _Grecian_ unto a Fly.

Some verity it may also have in it self, as truly declaring the

corruptive constitution in the present sap and nutrimental juice of the

Tree; and may consequently discover the disposition of that year,

according to the plenty or kinds of these productions. For if the

putrifying juices of bodies bring forth plenty of Flies and Maggots,

they give forth testimony of common corruption, and declare that the

Elements are full of the seeds of putrifaction, as the great number of

Caterpillars, Gnats, and ordinary Insects do also declare. If they run

into Spiders, they give signs of higher putrifaction, as plenty of

Vipers and Scorpions are confessed to do; the putrifying Materials

producing Animals of higher mischiefs, according to the advance and

higher strain of corruption.

3. Whether all Plants have seed, were more easily determinable, if we

could conclude concerning Harts-tongue, Fern, the Caterpillaries,

Lunaria, and some others. But whether those little dusty particles, upon

the lower side of the leaves, be seeds and seminal parts; or rather, as

it is commonly conceived, excremental separations, we have not as yet

been able to determine by any germination or univocal production from

them when they have been sowed on purpose: but having set the roots of

Harts tongue in a garden, a year or two after there came up three or

four of the same Plants, about two yards distance from the first. Thus

much we observe, that they seem to renew yearly, and come not fully out

till the Plant be in his vigour: and by the help of Magnifying Glasses

we find these dusty Atoms to be round at first, and fully representing

seeds, out of which at last proceed little Mites almost invisible; so

that such as are old stand open, as being emptied of some bodies

formerly included; which though discernable in Harts-tongue, is more

notoriously discoverable in some differencies of Brake or Fern.

But exquisite Microscopes and Magnifying Glasses have at last cleared

this doubt, whereby also long ago the noble _Fredericus Cæsius_ beheld

the dusts of Polypody as bigg as Pepper corns; and as _Johannes Faber_

testifieth, made draughts on Paper of such kind of seeds, as bigg as his

Glasses represented them: and set down such Plants under the Classis of

_Herbæ Tergifætæ_, as may be observed in his notable Botanical Tables.

4. Whether the sap of Trees runs down to the roots in Winter, whereby

they become naked and grow not; or whether they do not cease to draw any

more, and reserve so much as sufficeth for conservation, is not a point

indubitable. For we observe, that most Trees, as though they would be

perpetually green, do bud at the Fall of the leaf, although they sprout

not much forward untill the Spring, and warmer weather approacheth; and

many Trees maintain their leaves all Winter, although they seem to

receive very small advantage in their growth. But that the sap doth

powerfully rise in the Spring, to repair that moisture whereby they

barely subsisted in the Winter, and also to put the Plant in a capacity

of fructification: he that hath beheld how many gallons of water may in

a small time be drawn from a Birch-tree in the Spring, hath slender

reason to doubt.

5. That _Camphire_ Eunuchates, or begets in Men an impotency unto

Venery, observation will hardly confirm; and we have found it to fail in

Cocks and Hens, though given for many days; which was a more favourable

trial then that of _Scaliger_, when he gave it unto a Bitch that was

proud. For the instant turgescence is not to be taken off, but by

Medicines of higher Natures; and with any certainty but one way that we

know, which notwithstanding, by suppressing that natural evacuation, may

encline unto Madness, if taken in the Summer.

6. In the History of Prodigies we meet with many showrs of Wheat; how

true or probable, we have not room to debate. Only thus much we shall

not omit to inform, That what was this year found in many places, and

almost preached for Wheat rained from the clouds, was but the seed of

Ivy-berries, which somewhat represent it; and though it were found in

Steeples and high places, might be conveyed thither, or muted out by

Birds: for many feed thereon, and in the crops of some we have found no

less then three ounces.

7. That every plant might receive a Name according unto the disease it

cureth, was the wish of _Paracelsus_. A way more likely to multiply

Empiricks then Herbalists; yet what is practised by many is advantagious

unto neither; that is, relinquishing their proper appellations to

re-baptize them by the name of Saints, Apostles, Patriarchs, and

Martyrs, to call this the herb of _John_, that of _Peter_, this of

_James_, or _Joseph_, that of _Mary_ or _Barbara_. For hereby

apprehensions are made additional unto their proper Natures; whereon

superstitious practices ensue, and stories are framed accordingly to

make good their foundations.

8. We cannot omit to declare the gross mistake of many in the Nominal

apprehension of Plants; to instance but in few. An herb there is

commonly called _Betonica Pauli_, or _Pauls Betony_; hereof the People

have some conceit in reference to St. _Paul_; whereas indeed that name

is derived from _Paulus Ægineta_, an ancient Physitian of _Ægina_, and

is no more then Speed-well, or _Fluellen_. The like expectations are

raised from _Herba Trinitatis_; which notwithstanding obtaineth that

name from the figure of its leaves, and is one kind of Liverwort, or

_Hepatica_. In _Milium Solis_, the Epithete of the Sun hath enlarged its

opinion; which hath indeed no reference thereunto, it being no more then

_Lithospermon_, or _Grummel_, or rather _Milium Soler_; which as

_Serapion_ from _Aben Juliel_ hath taught us, because it grew

plentifully in the Mountains of _Soler_, received that appellation. [SN:

_Why the Jews ear is used for sore Throats._] In Jews-ears something is

conceived extraordinary from the Name, which is in propriety but _Fungus

sambucinus_, or an excrescence about the Roots of Elder, and concerneth

not the Nation of the _Jews_, but _Judas Iscariot_, upon a conceit, he

hanged on this Tree; and is become a famous Medicine in Quinsies, sore

Throats, and strangulations ever since. And so are they deceived in the

name of Horse-Raddish, Horse-Mint, Bull-rush, and many more: conceiving

therein some prenominal consideration, whereas indeed that expression is

but a Grecism, by the prefix of _Hippos_ and _Bous_, that is, Horse and

Bull, intending no more then Great. According whereto the great Dock is

called _Hippolapathum_; and he that calls the Horse of _Alexander_,

_Great-head_, expresseth the same which the _Greeks_ do in _Bucephalus_.

9. Lastly, Many things are delivered and believed of other Plants,

wherein at least we cannot but suspend. That there is a property in

_Basil_ to propagate Scorpions, and that by the smell thereof they are

bred in the brains of men, is much advanced by _Hollerius_, who found

this Insect in the brains of a man that delighted much in this smell.

Wherein beside that we find no way to conjoin the effect unto the cause

assigned; herein the Moderns speak but timorously, and some of the

Ancients quite contrarily. For, according unto _Oribasius_, Physitian

unto _Julian_, The _Affricans_, Men best experienced in poisons, affirm,

whosoever hath eaten _Basil_, although he be stung with a Scorpion,

shall feel no pain thereby: which is a very different effect, and rather

antidotally destroying, then seminally promoting its production.

That the leaves of _Catapucia_ or Spurge, being plucked upward or

downward, respectively perform their operations by Purge or Vomit, as

some have written, and old wives still do preach, is a strange conceit,

ascribing unto Plants positional operations, and after the manner of the

Loadstone; upon the Pole whereof if a Knife be drawn from the handle

unto the point, it will take up a Needle; but if drawn again from the

point to the handle, it will attract it no more.

That Cucumbers are no commendable fruits, that being very waterish, they

fill the veins with crude and windy serosities; that containing little

Salt or spirit, they may also debilitate the vital acidity, and

fermental faculty of the Stomach, we readily concede. But that they

should be so cold, as be almost poison by that quality, it will be hard

to allow, without the contradiction of _Galen_ [SN: _In his Anatomia

Sambuci._]: who accounteth them cold but in the second degree, and in

that Classis have most Physitians placed them.

That Elder Berries are poison, as we are taught by tradition, experience

will unteach us. And beside the promises of _Blochwitius_, the healthful

effects thereof daily observed will convict us.

That an Ivy Cup will separate Wine from Water, if filled with both, the

Wine soaking through, but the Water still remaining, as after _Pliny_

many have averred, we know not how to affirm; who making trial thereof,

found both the liquors to soak indistinctly through the bowl.

That Sheep do often get the Rot, by feeding in boggy grounds where

_Ros-solis_ groweth, seems beyond dispute. That this herb is the cause

thereof, Shepherds affirm and deny; whether it hath a cordial vertue by

sudden refection, sensible experiment doth hardly confirm, but that it

may have a Balsamical and resumptive Vertue, whereby it becomes a good

Medicine in Catarrhes and Consumptive dispositions, Practice and Reason

conclude. That the lentous drops upon it are not extraneous, and rather

an exudation from it self, then a rorid concretion from without, beside

other grounds, we have reason to conceive; for having kept the Roots

moist and earthed in close chambers, they have, though in lesser plenty,

sent out these drops as before.

That _Flos Affricanus_ is poison, and destroyeth Dogs, in two

experiments we have not found.

That Yew and the Berries thereof are harmless, we know.

That a Snake will not endure the shade of an Ash, we can deny. Nor is it

inconsiderable what is affirmed by _Bellonius_ [SN: Lib. 1 observat.];

for if his Assertion be true, our apprehension is oftentimes wide in

ordinary simples, and in common use we mistake one for another. We know

not the true Thyme; the Savourie in our Gardens is not that commended of

old; and that kind of Hysop the Ancients used, is unknown unto us, who

make great use of another.

We omit to recite the many Vertues, and endless faculties ascribed unto

Plants, which sometime occur in grave and serious Authors; and we shall

make a bad transaction for truth to concede a verity in half. To reckon

up all, it were employment for _Archimedes_, who undertook to write the

number of the Sands. Swarms of others there are, some whereof our future

endeavours may discover; common reason I hope will save us a labour in

many: Whose absurdities stand naked unto every eye; Errours not able to

deceive the Embleme of Justice, and need no _Argus_ to descry them.

Herein there surely wants expurgatory animadversions, whereby we might

strike out great numbers of hidden qualities; and having once a serious

and conceded list, we might with more encouragement and safety attempt

their Reasons.

THE THIRD BOOK

Of divers popular and received Tenets concerning Animals, which

examined, prove either false or dubious.

CHAPTER I

Of the Elephant.

The first shall be of the Elephant, whereof there generally passeth an

opinion it hath no joints; and this absurdity is seconded with another,

that being unable to lie down, it sleepeth against a Tree; which the

Hunters observing, do saw it almost asunder; whereon the Beast relying,

by the fall of the Tree, falls also down it self, and is able to rise no

more. Which conceit is not the daughter of later times, but an old and

gray-headed error, even in the days of _Aristotle_, as he delivereth in

his Book, _De incessu Animalium_, and stands successively related by

several other authors: by _Diodorus Siculus_, _Strabo_, _Ambrose_,

_Cassiodore_, _Solinus_, and many more. Now herein methinks men much

forget themselves, not well considering the absurdity of such

assertions.

[Sidenote: _How progression is made in animals._]

For first, they affirm it hath no joints, and yet concede it walks and

moves about; whereby they conceive there may be a progression or

advancement made in Motion without inflexion of parts. Now all

progression or Animals locomotion being (as _Aristotle_ teacheth)

performed _tractu et pulsu_; that is, by drawing on, or impelling

forward some part which was before in station, or at quiet; where there

are no joints or flexures, neither can there be these actions. And this

is true, not onely in Quadrupedes, Volatils, and Fishes, which have

distinct and prominent Organs of Motion, Legs, Wings, and Fins; but in

such also as perform their progression by the Trunk, as Serpents, Worms,

and Leeches. [SN: _Joint-like parts._] Whereof though some want bones,

and all extended articulations, yet have they arthritical Analogies, and

by the motion of fibrous and musculous parts, are able to make

progression. Which to conceive in bodies inflexible, and without all

protrusion of parts, were to expect a Race from _Hercules_ his pillars;

or hope to behold the effects of _Orpheus_ his Harp, when trees found

joints, and danced after his Musick.

Again, While men conceive they never lie down, and enjoy not the

position of rest, ordained unto all pedestrious Animals, hereby they

imagine (what reason cannot conceive) that an Animal of the vastest

dimension and longest duration, should live in a continual motion,

without that alternity and vicissitude of rest whereby all others

continue; and yet must thus much come to pass, if we opinion they lye

not down and enjoy no decumbence at all. [SN: _Extensive or Tonical

Motion, what?_] For station is properly no rest, but one kind of motion,

relating unto that which Physitians (from _Galen_) do name extensive or

tonical; that is, an extension of the muscles and organs of motion

maintaining the body at length or in its proper figure.

Wherein although it seem to be unmoved, it is not without all Motion;

for in this position the muscles are sensibly extended, and labour to

support the body; which permitted unto its proper gravity, would

suddenly subside and fall unto the earth; as it happeneth in sleep,

diseases, and death. From which occult action and invisible motion of

the muscles in station (as _Galen_ declareth) proceed more offensive

lassitudes then from ambulation. And therefore the Tyranny of some have

tormented men with long and enforced station, and though _Ixion_ and

_Sisiphus_ which always moved, do seem to have the hardest measure; yet

was not _Titius_ favoured, that lay extended upon _Caucasus_; and

_Tantalus_ suffered somewhat more then thirst, that stood perpetually in

Hell. Thus _Mercurialis_ in his Gymnasticks justly makes standing one

kind of exercise; and _Galen_ when we lie down, commends unto us middle

figures, that is, not to lye directly, or at length, but somewhat

inflected, that the muscles may be at rest; for such as he termeth

_Hypobolemaioi_ or figures, of excess, either shrinking up or stretching

out, are wearisome positions, and such as perturb the quiet of those

parts. Now various parts do variously discover these indolent and quiet

positions, some in right lines, as the wrists: some at right angles, as

the cubit: others at oblique angles, as the fingers and the knees: all

resting satisfied in postures of moderation, and none enduring the

extremity of flexure or extension.

Moreover men herein do strangely forget the obvious relations of

history, affirming they have no joints, whereas they dayly read of

several actions which are not performable without them. They forget what

is delivered by _Xiphilinus_, and also by _Suetonius_ in the lives of

_Nero_ and _Galba_, that Elephants have been instructed to walk on

ropes, in publick shews before the people. Which is not easily

performed by man, and requireth not only a broad foot, but a pliable

flexure of joints, and commandible disposure of all parts of

progression. They pass by that memorable place in _Curtius_, concerning

the Elephant of King _Porus, Indus qui Elephantem regebat, descendere

eum ratus, more solito procumbere jussit in genua cæteri quoque (ita

enim instituti erant) demisere corpora in terram_. [SN: De rebus gestis

Emanuelis.] They remember not the expression of _Osorius_, when he

speaks of the Elephant presented to _Leo_ the tenth, _Pontificem ter

genibus flexis, et demisso corporis habitu venerabundus salutavit_. But

above all, they call not to mind that memorable shew of _Germanicus_,

wherein twelve Elephants danced unto the sound of Musick, and after laid

them down in the _Tricliniums_, or places of festival Recumbency.

They forget the Etymologie of the Knee, approved by some Grammarians.

[SN: {~GREEK CAPITAL LETTER GAMMA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON~} _from_ {~GREEK SMALL LETTER GAMMA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMEGA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA~}.] They disturb the position of

the young ones in the womb: which upon extension of legs is not easily

conceivable; and contrary unto the general contrivance of Nature. Nor do

they consider the impossible exclusion thereof, upon extension and

rigour of the legs.

Lastly, they forget or consult not experience, whereof not many years

past, we have had the advantage in _England_, by an Elephant shewn in

many parts thereof, not only in the posture of standing, but kneeling

and lying down. Whereby although the opinion at present be well

suppressed, yet from some strings of tradition, and fruitful recurrence

of errour, it is not improbable it may revive in the next generation

again. This being not the first that hath been seen in _England_; for

(besides some others) as _Polydore Virgil_ relateth, _Lewis_ the French

King sent one to Henry the third, and _Emanuel_ of _Portugal_ another to

_Leo_ the tenth into _Italy_, where notwithstanding the errour is still

alive and epidemical, as with us.

[Sidenote: _Round, Pillar-like._]

The hint and ground of this opinion might be the gross and somewhat

Cylindrical composure of the legs, the equality and less perceptible

disposure of the joints, especially in the former legs of this Animal;

they appearing when he standeth, like Pillars of flesh, without any

evidence of articulation. The different flexure and order of the joints

might also countenance the same, being not disposed in the Elephant, as

they are in other quadrupedes, but carry a nearer conformity unto those

of Man; that is, the bought of the fore-legs, not directly backward, but

laterally and somewhat inward; but the hough or suffraginous flexure

behind rather outward. Somewhat different unto many other quadrupedes,

as Horses, Camels, Deer, Sheep, and Dogs; for their fore-legs bend like

our legs, and their hinder legs like our arms, when we move them to our

shoulders. But quadrupedes oviparous, as Frogs, Lizards, Crocodiles,

have their joints and motive flexures more analogously framed unto ours;

and some among viviparous, that is, such thereof as can bring their

fore-feet and meat therein unto their mouths, as most can do that have

the clavicles or coller-bones: whereby their brests are broader, and

their shoulders more asunder, as the Ape, the Monkey, the Squirrel and

some others. If therefore any shall affirm the joints of Elephants are

differently framed from most of other quadrupedes, and more obscurely

and grosly almost then any, he doth herein no injury unto truth. But if

_à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter_, he affirmeth also they

have no articulations at all, he incurs the controulment of reason, and

cannot avoide the contradiction also of sense.

As for the manner of their venation, if we consult historical

experience, we shall find it to be otherwise then as is commonly

presumed, by sawing away of Trees. The accounts whereof are to be seen

at large in _Johannes_, _Hugo_, _Edwardus Lopez_, _Garcias ab horto_,

_Cadamustus_, and many more.

Other concernments there are of the Elephant, which might admit of

discourse; and if we should question the teeth of Elephants, that is,

whether they be properly so termed, or might not rather be called horns:

it were no new enquiry of mine, but a Paradox as old as _Oppianus_ [SN:

Cyneget. lib. 2.]. Whether as _Pliny_ and divers since affirm it, that

Elephants are terrified, and make away upon the grunting of Swine,

_Garcias ab horto_ may decide, who affirmeth upon experience, they enter

their stalls, and live promiscuously in the Woods of _Malavar_. That the

situation of the genitals is averse, and their copulation like that

which some believe of Camels, as _Pliny_ hath also delivered, is not to

be received; for we have beheld that part in a different position; and

their coition is made by supersaliency, like that of horses, as we are

informed by some who have beheld them in that act. That some Elephants

have not only written whole sentences, as _Ælian_ ocularly testifieth,

but have also spoken, as _Oppianus_ delivereth, and _Christophorus à

Costa_ particularly relateth; although it sound like that of _Achilles_

Horse in _Homer_, we do not conceive impossible. [SN: _Some_ Brutes

_tolerably well organized for speech and approaching to reason_.] Nor

beside the affinity of reason in this Animal any such intollerable

incapacity in the organs of divers quadrupedes, whereby they might not

be taught to speak, or become imitators of speech like Birds. Strange it

is how the curiosity of men that have been active in the instruction of

Beasts, have never fallen upon this artifice; and among those, many

paradoxical and unheard of imitations, should not attempt to make one

speak. The Serpent that spake unto _Eve_, the Dogs and Cats that usually

speak unto Witches, might afford some encouragement. And since broad and

thick chops are required in Birds that speak, since lips and teeth are

also organs of speech; from these there is also an advantage in

quadrupedes, and a proximity of reason in Elephants and Apes above them

all. Since also an Echo will speak without any mouth at all,

articulately returning the voice of man, by only ordering the vocal

spirit in concave and hollow places; whether the musculous and motive

parts about the hollow mouths of Beasts, may not dispose the passing

spirit into some articulate notes, seems a query of no great doubt.

CHAPTER II

Of the Horse.

The second Assertion, that an Horse hath no gall, is very general, nor

only swallowed by the people, and common Farriers, but also received by

good _Veterinarians_, [SN: Veterinarians _or Farriers_.] and some who

have laudably discoursed upon Horses. It seemeth also very ancient;

for it is plainly set down by _Aristotle_, an Horse and all solid

ungulous or whole hoofed animals have no gall; and the same is also

delivered by _Pliny_, which notwithstanding we find repugnant unto

experience and reason. For first, it calls in question the providence

or wise provision of Nature; who not abounding in superfluities, is

neither deficient in necessities. Wherein nevertheless there would be a

main defect, and her improvision justly accusable, if such a feeding

Animal, and so subject unto diseases from bilious causes, should want a

proper conveyance for choler; or have no other receptacle for that

humour then the Veins, and general mass of bloud.

It is again controllable by experience, for we have made some search and

enquiry herein; encouraged by _Absyrtus_ a Greek Author, in the time of

_Constantine_, who in his Hippiatricks [SN: Medicina equaria.],

obscurely assigneth the gall a place in the liver; but more especially

by _Carlo Ruini_ the _Bononian_, who in his _Anatomia del Cavallo_, hath

more plainly described it, and in a manner as I found it. For in the

particular enquiry into that part, in the concave or simous part of the

Liver, whereabout the Gall is usually seated in quadrupedes, I discover

an hollow, long and membranous substance, of a pale colour without, and

lined with Choler and Gall within; which part is by branches diffused

into the lobes and several parcels of the Liver; from whence receiving

the fiery superfluity, or cholerick remainder, by a manifest and open

passage, it conveyeth it into the _duodenum_ or upper gut, thence into

the lower bowels; which is the manner of its derivation in Man and other

Animals. And therefore although there be no eminent and circular

follicle, no round bag or vesicle which long containeth this humour: yet

is there a manifest receptacle and passage of choler from the Liver into

the Guts: which being not so shut up, or at least not so long detained,

as it is in other Animals: procures that frequent excretion, and

occasions the Horse to dung more often then many other, which

considering the plentiful feeding, the largeness of the guts, and their

various circumvolution, was prudently contrived by providence in this

Animal. [SN: _Choler the natural glister._] For choler is the natural

Glister, or one excretion whereby Nature excludeth another; which

descending daily into the bowels, extimulates those parts, and excites

them unto expulsion. And therefore when this humour aboundeth or

corrupteth, there succeeds oft-times a _cholerica passio_, that is, a

sudden and vehement Purgation upward and downward: and when the passage

of gall becomes obstructed, the body grows costive, and the excrements

of the belly white; as it happeneth in the Jaundice.

If any therefore affirm an Horse hath no gall, that is, no receptacle,

or part ordained for the separation of Choler, or not that humour at

all; he hath both sense and reason to oppose him. But if he saith it

hath no bladder of Gall, and such as is observed in many other Animals,

we shall oppose our sense, if we gain-say him. Thus must _Aristotle_ be

made out when he denieth this part, by this distinction we may relieve

_Pliny_ of a contradiction, who in one place affirming an Horse hath no

gall, delivereth yet in another, that the gall of an Horse was accounted

poison; and therefore at the sacrifices of Horses in _Rome_, it was

unlawful for the _Flamen_ [SN: _Priest._] to touch it. But with more

difficulty, or hardly at all is that reconcileable which is delivered by

our Countryman, and received _Veterinarian_; whose words in his

Master-piece, and Chapter of diseases from the Gall, are somewhat too

strict, and scarce admit a Reconciliation. The fallacie therefore of

this conceit is not unlike the former; _A dicto secundum quid ad dictum

simpliciter_. Because they have not a bladder of gall, like those we

usually observe in others, they have no gall at all. Which is a

Paralogism not admittible; a fallacy that dwels not in a cloud, and

needs not the Sun to scatter it.

CHAPTER III

Of the Dove.

The third assertion is somewhat like the second, that a Dove or Pigeon

hath no gall; which is affirmed from very great antiquity; for as

_Pierius_ observeth, from this consideration the Egyptians did make it

the Hieroglyphick of Meekness. It hath been averred by many holy

Writers, commonly delivered by _Postillers_ and _Commentators_, who from

the frequent mention of the Dove in the _Canticles_, the precept of our

Saviour, to be wise as Serpents, and innocent as Doves: and especially

the appearance of the Holy Ghost in the similitude of this Animal, have

taken occasion to set down many affections of the Dove, and what doth

most commend it, is, that it hath no gall. And hereof have made use not

only Minor Divines, but _Cyprian_, _Austin_, _Isidore_, _Beda_,

_Rupertus_, _Jansenius_, and many more.

Whereto notwithstanding we know not how to assent, it being repugnant

unto the Authority and positive determination of ancient Philosophy. The

affirmative of _Aristotle_ in his History of Animals is very plain, _Fel

aliis ventri, aliis intestino jungitur_: Some have the gall adjoined to

the guts, as the Crow, the Swallow, Sparrow, and the Dove; the same is

also attested by _Pliny_, and not without some passion by _Galen_, who

in his Book _De Atra bile_, accounts him ridiculous that denies it.

It is not agreeable to the constitution of this Animal, nor can we so

reasonably conceive there wants a Gall: that is, the hot and fiery

humour in a body so hot of temper, which Phlegm or Melancholy could not

effect. [SN: Salubrium, 31°] Now of what complexion it is,

_Julius Alexandrinus_ declareth, when he affirmeth that some upon the

use thereof, have fallen into Feavers and Quinsies. The temper of their

Dung and intestinal Excretions do also confirm the same; which Topically

applied become a _Phænigmus_ or Rubifying Medicine, and are of such

fiery parts, that as we read in _Galen_, they have of themselves

conceived fire, and burnt a house about them. And therefore when in the

famine of _Samaria_ (wherein the fourth part of a Cab of Pigeons dung

was sold for five pieces of silver,) it is delivered by _Josephus_, that

men made use hereof in stead of common Salt: although the exposition

seem strange, it is more probable then many other. For that it

containeth very much Salt, as beside the effects before expressed, is

discernable by taste, and the earth of Columbaries or Dove-houses, so

much desired in the artifice of Salt-petre. And to speak generally, the

Excrement of Birds hath more of Salt and acrimony, then that of other

pissing animals. Now if because the Dove is of a mild and gentle nature,

we cannot conceive it should be of an hot temper; our apprehensions are

not distinct in the measure of constitutions, and the several parts

which evidence such conditions. [SN: _Whence the irascible, whence

the concupiscible Passions do most arise._] For the Irascible passions

do follow the temper of the heart, but the concupiscible distractions

the crasis of the liver. Now many have hot livers, which have but cool

and temperate hearts; and this was probably the temper of _Paris_, a

contrary constitution to that of _Ajax_, and both but short of _Medea_,

who seemed to exceed in either.

Lastly, it is repugnant to experience, for Anatomical enquiry

discovereth in them a gall: and that according to the determination of

_Aristotle_, not annexed unto the liver, but adhering unto the guts: nor

is the humour contained in smaller veins, or obscurer capillations, but

in a vescicle, or little bladder, though some affirm it hath no bag at

all. And therefore the Hieroglyphick of the Ægyptians, though allowable

in the sense, is weak in the foundation: who expressing meekness and

lenity by the portract of a Dove with a tail erected, affirmed it had no

gall in the inward parts, but only in the rump, and as it were out of

the body. And therefore also if they conceived their gods were pleased

with the sacrifice of this Animal, as being without gall, the ancient

Heathens were surely mistaken in the reason, and in the very oblation.

Whereas in the holocaust or burnt offering of _Moses_, the gall was cast

away: for as _Ben Maimon_ instructeth [SN: Levit. 1.], the inwards

whereto the gall adhereth were taken out with the crop, according unto

the Law: which the Priest did not burn, but cast unto the East, that is,

behind his back, and readiest place to be carried out of the Sanctuary.

[SN: _Doves, the Birds of_ Venus, _why?_] And if they also conceived

that for this reason they were the Birds of _Venus_, and wanting the

furious and discording part, were more acceptable unto the Deity of

Love, they surely added unto the conceit, which was at first venereal:

and in this Animal may be sufficiently made out from that conception.

The ground of this conceit is partly like the former, the obscure

situation of the gall, and out of the liver, wherein it is commonly

enquired. But this is a very injust illation, not well considering with

what variety this part is seated in Birds. In some both at the stomach

and the liver, as in the Capriceps; in some at the liver only, as in

Cocks, Turkeys, and Pheasants; in others at the guts and liver, as in

Hawks and Kites, in some at the guts alone, as Crows, Doves, and many

more. And these perhaps may take up all the ways of situation, not only

in Birds, but also other Animals; for what is said of the Anchovie, that

answerable unto its name, [SN: {~GREEK CAPITAL LETTER EPSILON WITH PSILI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER GAMMA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER KAPPA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER RHO~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER SIGMA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER CHI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER LAMDA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~}] it carrieth the

gall in the head, is farther to be enquired. And though the discoloured

particles in the skin of an Heron be commonly termed Galls, yet is not

this Animal deficient in that part, but containeth it in the Liver. And

thus when it is conceived that the eyes of _Tobias_ were cured by the

gall of the fish _Callyonimus_, or _Scorpius marinus_, commended to that

effect by _Dioscorides_, although that part were not in the liver, yet

there were no reason to doubt that probability. And whatsoever Animal it

was, it may be received without exception, when it's delivered, the

married couple as a testimony of future concord, did cast the gall of

the sacrifice behind the Altar.

A strict and literal acception of a loose and tropical expression was a

second ground hereof. For while some affirmed it had no gall, intending

only thereby no evidence of anger or fury; others have construed it

anatomically, and denied that part at all. By which illation we may

infer, and that from sacred Text, a Pigeon hath no heart; according to

that expression, [SN: _Hosea 7._] _Factus est Ephraim sicut Columba

seducta non habens Cor_. And so from the letter of the Scripture we may

conclude it is no mild, but a fiery and furious animal, according to

that of _Jeremy_, [SN: _Cap. 25._] _Facta est terra in desolationem à

facie iræ Columbæ_: and again, _Revertamur ad terram nativitatis nostræ

à facie gladii Columbæ_. [SN: _Cap. 46._] Where notwithstanding the Dove

is not literally intended; but thereby may be implied the

_Babylonians_, whose Queen _Semiramis_ was called by that name, and

whose successors did bear the Dove in their Standard. So is it

proverbially said, _Formicæ sua bilis inest, habet et musca splenem_;

whereas we know Philosophy doubteth these parts, nor hath _Anatomy_ so

clearly discovered them in those insects.

If therefore any affirm a Pigeon hath no gall, implying no more thereby

then the lenity of this Animal, we shall not controvert his affirmation.

Thus may we make out the assertions of Ancient Writers, and safely

receive the expressions of Divines and worthy Fathers. But if by a

transition from Rhetorick to Logick, he shall contend, it hath no such

part or humour, he committeth an open fallacy, and such as was probably

first committed concerning _Spanish_ Mares, whose swiftness tropically

expressed from their generation by the wind; might after be grosly

taken, and a real truth conceived in that conception.

CHAPTER IV

Of the Bever.

That a Bever to escape the Hunter, bites off his testicles or stones, is

a Tenet very ancient; and hath had thereby advantage of propagation.

[SN: _Æsops Apologues, of what antiquity._] For the same we find in the

Hieroglyphicks of the Egyptians in the Apologue of _Æsop_, an Author of

great Antiquity, who lived in the beginning of the _Persian_ Monarchy,

and in the time of _Cyrus_: the same is touched by _Aristotle_ in his

Ethicks, but seriously delivered by _Ælian_, _Pliny_, and _Solinus_: the

same we meet with in _Juvenal_, who by an handsome and Metrical

expression more welcomly engrafts it in our junior Memories:

_----imitatus Castora, qui se

Eunuchum ipse facit, cupiens evadere damno

Testiculorum, adeo medicatum intelligit inguen._

It hath been propagated by Emblems: and some have been so bad

Grammarians as to be deceived by the Name, deriving _Castor à

castrando_, whereas the proper Latine word is _Fiber_, and _Castor_ but

borrowed from the Greek, so called _quasi_ {~GREEK SMALL LETTER GAMMA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER SIGMA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER TAU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMEGA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER RHO~}, that is, _Animal

ventricosum_, from his swaggy and prominent belly.

Herein therefore to speak compendiously, we first presume to affirm that

from strict enquiry, we cannot maintain the evulsion or biting off any

parts, and this is declarable from the best and most professed Writers:

for though some have made use hereof in a Moral or Tropical way, yet

have the professed Discoursers by silence deserted, or by experience

rejected this assertion. Thus was it in ancient times discovered, and

experimentally refuted by one _Sestius_ a Physitian, as it stands

related by _Pliny_; by _Dioscorides_, who plainly affirms that this

tradition is false; by the discoveries of Modern Authors, who have

expressly discoursed hereon, as _Aldrovandus_, _Mathiolus_, _Gesnerus_,

_Bellonius_; by _Olaus Magnus_, _Peter Martyr_, and others, who have

described the manner of their Venations in _America_; they generally

omitting this way of their escape, and have delivered several other, by

which they are daily taken.

The original of the conceit was probably Hieroglyphical, which after

became Mythological unto the Greeks, and so set down by _Æsop_; and by

process of tradition, stole into a total verity, which was but partially

true, that is in its covert sense and Morality. Now why they placed

this invention upon the Bever (beside the Medicable and Merchantable

commodity of _Castoreum_, or parts conceived to be bitten away) might be

the sagacity and wisdom of that Animal, which from the works it

performs, and especially its Artifice in building, is very strange, and

surely not to be matched by any other. Omitted by _Plutarch_, _De

solertia Animalium_, but might have much advantaged the drift of that

Discourse.

If therefore any affirm a wise man should demean himself like the Bever,

who to escape with his life, contemneth the loss of his genitals, that

is in case of extremity, not strictly to endeavour the preservation of

all, but to sit down in the enjoyment of the greater good, though with

the detriment and hazard of the lesser; we may hereby apprehend a real

and useful Truth. In this latitude of belief, we are content to receive

the Fable of _Hippomanes_, who redeemed his life with the loss of a

Golden Ball; and whether true or false, we reject not the Tragoedy of

_Absyrtus_, and the dispersion of his Members by _Medea_, to perplex the

pursuit of her Father. But if any shall positively affirm this act, and

cannot believe the Moral, unless he also credit the Fable; he is surely

greedy of delusion, and will hardly avoid deception in theories of this

Nature. The Error therefore and Alogy in this opinion, is worse then in

the last; that is, not to receive Figures for Realities, but expect a

verity in Apologues; and believe, as serious affirmations, confessed and

studied Fables.

Again, If this were true, and that the Bever in chase makes some

divulsion of parts, as that which we call _Castoreum_; yet are not the

same to be termed Testicles or Stones; for these Cods or Follicles are

found in both Sexes, though somewhat more protuberant in the Male.

There is hereto no derivation of the seminal parts, nor any passage from

hence, unto the Vessels of Ejaculation: some perforations onely in the

part it self, through which the humour included doth exudate: as may be

observed in such as are fresh, and not much dried with age. And lastly,

The Testicles properly so called, are of a lesser magnitude, and seated

inwardly upon the loins: and therefore it were not only a fruitless

attempt, but impossible act, to Eunuchate or castrate themselves: and

might be an hazardous practice of Art, if at all attempted by others.

Now all this is confirmed from the experimental Testimony of five very

memorable Authors: _Bellonius_, _Gesnerus_, _Amatus_, _Rondeletius_, and

_Mathiolus_: who receiving the hint hereof from _Rondeletius_ in the

Anatomy of two Bevers, did find all true that had been delivered by him,

whose words are these in his learned Book _De Piscibus_: _Fibri in

inguinibus geminos tumores habent, utrinque vnicum, ovi Auscrini

magnitudine, inter hos est mentula in maribus, in fæminis pudendum, hi

tumores testes non sunt, sed folliculi membrana contecti, in quorum

medio sunguli sunt meatus è quibus exudat liquor pinguis et cerosus,

quem ipse Castor sæpe admoto ore lambit et exugit, postea veluti oleo,

corporis partes oblinit: Hos tumores testes non esse hinc maxime

colligitur, quod ab illus nulla est ad mentulam via neque ductus quo

humor in mentulæ meatum derivitur, et foras emittatur; præterea quod

testes intus reperiuntur, eosdem tumores Moscho animali inesse puto, è

quibus odoratum illud plus emanat._ Then which words there can be no

plainer, nor more evidently discovering the impropriety of this

appellation. That which is included in the cod or visible bag about the

groin, being not the Testicle, or any spermatical part; but rather a

collection of some superfluous matter deflowing from the body,

especially the parts of nutrition as unto their proper emunctories; and

as it doth in Musk and Civet Cats, though in a different and offensive

odour; proceeding partly from its food, that being especially Fish;

whereof this humour may be a garous excretion and olidous separation.

Most therefore of the Moderns before _Rondeletius_, and all the Ancients

excepting _Sestius_, have misunderstood this part, conceiving

_Castoreum_ the Testicles of the _Bever_; as _Dioscorides_, _Galen_,

_Ægineta_, _Ætius_, and others have pleased to name it. The Egyptians

also failed in the ground of their Hieroglyphick, when they expressed

the punishment of Adultery by the Bever depriving himself of his

testicles, which was amongst them the penalty of such incontinency. Nor

is _Ætius_ perhaps, too strictly to be observed, when he prescribeth the

stones of the Otter, or River-dog, as succedaneous unto _Castoreum_. But

most inexcusable of all is _Pliny_, who having before him in one place

the experiment of _Sestius_ against it, sets down in another, that the

_Bevers_ of _Pontus_ bite off their testicles: and in the same place

affirmeth the like of the _Hyena_. Which was indeed well joined with the

Bever, as having also a bag in those parts; if thereby we understand the

_Hyena odorata_, or Civet Cat, as is delivered and graphically described

by _Castellus_. [SN: Castellus de Hyena odorifera.]

Now the ground of this mistake might be the resemblance and situation of

these tumours about those parts, wherein we observe the testicles in

other animals. Which notwithstanding is no well founded illation, for

the testicles are defined by their office, and not determined by place

or situation; they having one office in all, but different seats in

many. For beside that, no Serpent, or Fishes oviparous, that neither

biped nor quadruped oviparous have testicles exteriourly, or prominent

in the groin; some also that are viviparous contain these parts within,

as beside this Animal, the Elephant and the Hedg-hog.

If any therefore shall term these testicles, intending metaphorically,

and in no strict acception; his language is tolerable, and offends our

ears no more then the Tropical names of Plants: when we read in Herbals,

of Dogs, Fox, and Goat-stones. But if he insisteth thereon, and

maintaineth a propriety in this language: our discourse hath overthrown

his assertion, nor will Logic permit his illation; that is, from things

alike, to conclude a thing the same; and from an accidental convenience,

that is a similitude in place or figure, to infer a specifical congruity

or substantial concurrence in Nature.

CHAPTER V

Of the Badger.

That a Brock or Badger hath the legs on one side shorter then of the

other, though an opinion perhaps not very ancient, is yet very general;

received not only by Theorists and unexperienced believers, but assented

unto by most who have the opportunity to behold and hunt them daily.

Which notwithstanding upon enquiry I find repugnant unto the three

Determinators of Truth, Authority, Sense, and Reason. For first,

_Albertus Magnus_ speaks dubiously, confessing he could not confirm the

verity hereof; but _Aldrovandus_ plainly affirmeth, there can be no

such inequality observed. And for my own part, upon indifferent enquiry,

I cannot discover this difference, although the regardable side be

defined, and the brevity by most imputed unto the left.

Again, It seems no easie affront unto Reason, and generally repugnant

unto the course of Nature; for if we survey the total set of Animals, we

may in their legs, or Organs of progression, observe an equality of

length, and parity of Numeration; that is, not any to have an odd legg,

or the supporters and movers of one side not exactly answered by the

other. Although the hinder may be unequal unto the fore and middle legs,

as in Frogs, Locusts, and Grasshoppers; or both unto the middle, as in

some Beetles and Spiders, as is determined by _Aristotle_, _De incessu

Animalium_. [SN: De incessu Animalium.] Perfect and viviparous

quadrupeds, so standing in their position of proneness, that the

opposite joints of Neighbour-legs consist in the same plane; and a line

descending from their Navel intersects at right angles the axis of the

Earth. It happeneth often I confess that a Lobster hath the Chely or

great claw of one side longer then the other; but this is not properly

their leg, but a part of apprehension, and whereby they hold or seiz

upon their prey; for the legs and proper parts of progression are

inverted backward, and stand in a position opposite unto these.

Lastly, The Monstrosity is ill contrived, and with some disadvantage;

the shortness being affixed unto the legs of one side, which might have

been more tolerably placed upon the thwart or Diagonial Movers. [SN:

_Diagonion, a line drawn from the cross angles._] For the progression of

quadrupeds being performed _per Diametrum_, that is the cross legs

moving or resting together, so that two are always in motion, and two

in station at the same time; the brevity had been more tolerable in the

cross legs. For then the Motion and station had been performed by equal

legs; whereas herein they are both performed by unequal Organs, and the

imperfection becomes discoverable at every hand.

CHAPTER VI

Of the Bear.

That a Bear brings forth her young informous and unshapen, which she

fashioneth after by licking them over, is an opinion not only vulgar,

and common with us at present: but hath been of old delivered by ancient

Writers. Upon this foundation it was an Hieroglyphick with the

Egyptians: _Aristotle_ seems to countenance it; _Solinus_, _Pliny_, and

_Ælian_ directly affirm it, and _Ovid_ smoothly delivereth it:

_Nec catulus partu quem reddidit ursa recenti_

_Sed male viva caro est, lambendo mater in artus_

_Ducit, et in formam qualem cupit ipsa reducit._

Which notwithstanding is not only repugnant unto the sense of every one

that shall enquire into it, but the exact and deliberate experiment of

three Authentick Philosophers. The first of _Mathiolus_ in his Comment

on _Dioscorides_, whose words are to this effect. In the Valley of

_Anania_ about _Trent_, in a Bear which the Hunters eventerated or

opened, I beheld the young ones with all their parts distinct: and not

without shape, as many conceive; giving more credit unto _Aristotle_ and

_Pliny_, then experience and their proper senses. Of the same assurance

was _Julius Scaliger_ in his Exercitations, _Ursam foetus informes

potius ejicere, quam parere, si vera dicunt, quos postea linctu

effingat: Quid hujusce fabulæ authoribus fidei habendum ex hac historia

cognosces; In nostris Alpibus venatores fætum Ursam cepere, dissecta ea

fætus plane formatus intus inventus est_. And lastly, Aldrovandus who

from the testimony of his own eyes affirmeth, that in the Cabinet of the

Senate of _Bononia_, there was preserved in a Glass a Cub taken out of a

Bear perfectly formed, and compleat in every part.

It is moreover injurious unto Reason, and much impugneth the course and

providence of Nature, to conceive a birth should be ordained before

there is a formation. For the conformation of parts is necessarily

required, not onely unto the pre-requisites and previous conditions of

birth, as Motion and Animation: but also unto the parturition or very

birth it self: Wherein not only the Dam, but the younglings play their

parts; and the cause and act of exclusion proceedeth from them both. For

the exclusion of Animals is not meerly passive like that of Eggs, nor

the total action of delivery to be imputed unto the Mother: but the

first attempt beginneth from the Infant: which at the accomplished

period attempteth to change his Mansion: and strugling to come forth,

dilacerates and breaks those parts which restrained him before.

Beside (what few take notice of) Men hereby do in an high measure

vilifie the works of God, imputing that unto the tongue of a Beast,

which is the strangest Artifice in all the acts of Nature; that is the

formation of the infant in the Womb, not only in Mankind, but all

viviparous Animals. [SN: _Formation in the Matrix, the admirable work of

Nature._] Wherein the plastick or formative faculty, from matter

appearing Homogeneous, and of a similary substance, erecteth Bones,

Membranes, Veins, and Arteries: and out of these contriveth every part

in number, place, and figure, according to the law of its species. Which

is so far from being fashioned by any outward agent, that once omitted

or perverted by a slip of the inward _Phidias_, it is not reducible by

any other whatsoever. And therefore _Mirè me plasmaverunt manus tuæ_,

though it originally respected the generation of Man, yet is it

appliable unto that of other Animals; who entring the Womb in bare and

simple Materials, return with distinction of parts, and the perfect

breath of life. He that shall consider these alterations without, must

needs conceive there have been strange operations within; which to

behold, it were a spectacle almost worth ones beeing, a sight beyond

all; except that Man had been created first, and might have seen the

shew of five dayes after.

Now as the opinion is repugnant both unto sense and Reason, so hath it

probably been occasioned from some slight ground in either. Thus in

regard the Cub comes forth involved in the Chorion, a thick and tough

Membrane obscuring the formation, and which the Dam doth after bite and

tear asunder; the beholder at first sight conceives it a rude and

informous lump of flesh, and imputes the ensuing shape unto the Mouthing

of the Dam; which addeth nothing thereunto, but only draws the curtain,

and takes away the vail which concealed the Piece before. And thus have

some endeavoured to enforce the same from Reason; that is, the small and

slender time of the Bears gestation, or going with her young; which

lasting but few days (a Month some say) the exclusion becomes

precipitous, and the young ones consequently informous; according to

that of _Solinus_, _Trigesimus dies uterum liberat ursæ; unde evenit ut

præcipitata fæcunditas informes creet partus_. But this will overthrow

the general Method of Nature in the works of generation. For therein the

conformation is not only antecedent, but proportional unto the

exclusion; and if the period of the birth be short, the term of

conformation will be as sudden also. There may I confess from this

narrow time of gestation ensue a Minority or smalness in the exclusion;

but this however inferreth no informity, and it still receiveth the Name

of a natural and legitimate birth; whereas if we affirm a total

informity, it cannot admit so forward a term as an Abortment, for that

supposeth conformation. So we must call this constant and intended act

of Nature, a slip or effluxion [SN: {~GREEK CAPITAL LETTER EPSILON WITH PSILI AND OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER KAPPA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER RHO~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER SIGMA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~}.], that is an exclusion

before conformation: before the birth can bear the name of the Parent,

or be so much as properly called an _Embryon_.

CHAPTER VII

Of the Basilisk

Many Opinions are passant concerning the Basilisk or little King of

Serpents, commonly called the Cockatrice: some affirming, others

denying, most doubting the relations made hereof. What therefore in

these incertainties we may more safely determine: that such an Animal

there is, if we evade not the testimony of Scripture and humane Writers,

we cannot safely deny. So it is said _Psalm_ 91. _Super Aspidem et

Basiliscum ambulabis_, wherein the Vulgar Translation retaineth the Word

of the Septuagint, using in other places the Latine expression

_Regulus_, as _Proverbs_ 23. _Mordebit ut coluber, et sicut Regulus

venena diffundet_: and _Jeremy_ 8. _Ecce ego mittam vobis serpentes

Regulos, etc._ That is, as ours translate it, _Behold I will send

Serpents, Cockatrices among you which will not be charmed, and they

shall bite you_. And as for humane Authors, or such as have discoursed

of Animals, or Poisons, it is to be found almost in all: in

_Dioscorides_, _Galen_, _Pliny_, _Solinus_, _Ælian_, _Ætius_, _Avicen_,

_Ardoynus_, _Grevinus_, and many more. In _Aristotle_ I confess we find

no mention thereof, but _Scaliger_ in his Comment and enumeration of

Serpents, hath made supply; and in his Exercitations delivereth that a

Basilisk was found in _Rome_, in the days of _Leo_ the fourth. The like

is reported by _Sigonius_; and some are so far from denying one, that

they have made several kinds thereof: for such is the _Catoblepas_ of

_Pliny_ conceived to be by some, and the _Dryinus_ of _Ætius_ by others.

But although we deny not the existence of the Basilisk, yet whether we

do not commonly mistake in the conception hereof, and call that a

Basilisk which is none at all, is surely to be questioned. For certainly

that which from the conceit of its generation we vulgarly call a

Cockatrice, and wherein (but under a different name) we intend a formal

Identity and adequate conception with the Basilisk; is not the Basilisk

of the Ancients, whereof such wonders are delivered. For this of ours is

generally described with legs, wings, a Serpentine and winding tail, and

a crist or comb somewhat like a Cock. But the Basilisk of elder times

was a proper kind of Serpent, not above three palms long, as some

account; and differenced from other Serpents by advancing his head, and

some white marks or coronary spots upon the crown, as all authentick

Writers have delivered.

Nor is this Cockatrice only unlike the Basilisk, but of no real shape in

Nature; and rather an Hieroglyphical fansie, to express different

intentions, set forth in different fashions. Sometimes with the head of

a Man, sometime with the head of an Hawk, as _Pierius_ hath delivered;

and as with addition of legs the Heralds and Painters still describe it.

Nor was it only of old a symbolical and allowable invention, but is now

become a manual contrivance of Art, and artificial imposure; whereof

besides others, _Scaliger_ hath taken notice: _Basilici formam mentiti

sunt vulgo Gallinacco similem, et pedibus binis; neque enim absimiles

sunt cæteris serpentibus, nisi macula quasi in vertice candida, unde

illi nomen Regium_; that is, men commonly counterfeit the form of a

Basilisk with another like a Cock, and with two feet; whereas they

differ not from other serpents, but in a white speck upon their Crown.

Now although in some manner it might be counterfeited in _Indian_ Cocks,

and flying Serpents, yet is it commonly contrived out of the skins of

Thornbacks, Scaits, or Maids, as _Aldrovand_ hath observed, [SN: _By way

of figure._] and also graphically described in his excellent Book of

Fishes; and for satisfaction of my own curiosity I have caused some to

be thus contrived out of the same Fishes.

Nor is onely the existency of this animal considerable, but many things

delivered thereof, particularly its poison and its generation.

Concerning the first, according to the doctrine of the Ancients, men

still affirm, that it killeth at a distance, that it poisoneth by the

eye, and by priority of vision. [SN: _Destructive._] Now that

deleterious it may be at some distance, and destructive without corporal

contaction, what uncertainty soever there be in the effect, there is no

high improbability in the relation. For if Plagues or pestilential Atoms

have been conveyed in the Air from different Regions, if men at a

distance have infected each other, if the shadows of some trees be

noxious, if _Torpedoes_ deliver their opium at a distance, and stupifie

beyond themselves; we cannot reasonably deny, that (beside our gross and

restrained poisons requiring contiguity unto their actions) there may

proceed from subtiller seeds, more agile emanations, which contemn those

Laws, and invade at distance unexpected.

That this venenation shooteth from the eye, and that this way a Basilisk

may empoison, although thus much be not agreed upon by Authors, some

imputing it unto the breath, others unto the bite, it is not a thing

impossible. For eyes receive offensive impressions from their objects,

and may have influences destructive to each other. [SN: _Effluxion of

corporeal species._] For the visible species of things strike not our

senses immaterially, but streaming in corporal raies, do carry with them

the qualities of the object from whence they flow, and the medium

through which they pass. [SN: _How the Basilisk kills at distance._]

Thus through a green or red Glass all things we behold appear of the

same colours; thus sore eyes affect those which are sound, and

themselves also by reflection, as will happen to an inflamed eye that

beholds it self long in a Glass; thus is fascination made out, and thus

also it is not impossible, what is affirmed of this animal, the visible

rayes of their eyes carrying forth the subtilest portion of their

poison, which received by the eye of man or beast, infecteth first the

brain, and is from thence communicated unto the heart.

But lastly, That this destruction should be the effect of the first

beholder, or depend upon priority of aspection, is a point not easily to

be granted, and very hardly to be made out upon the principles of

_Aristotle_, _Alhazen_, _Vitello_, and others, who hold that sight is

made by Reception, and not by extramission; by receiving the raies of

the object into the eye, and not by sending any out. For hereby although

he behold a man first, the Basilisk should rather be destroyed, in

regard he first receiveth the rayes of his Antipathy, and venomous

emissions which objectively move his sense; but how powerful soever his

own poison be, it invadeth not the sense of man, in regard he beholdeth

him not. And therefore this conceit was probably begot by such as held

the opinion of sight by extramission; as did _Pythagoras_, _Plato_,

_Empedocles_, _Hipparrchus_, _Galen_, _Macrobius_, _Proclus_,

_Simplicius_, with most of the Ancients, and is the postulate of

_Euclide_ in his Opticks, but now sufficiently convicted from

observations of the Dark Chamber.

[Sidenote: _The generation of the Cocks egg._]

As for the generation of the Basilisk, that it proceedeth from a Cocks

egg hatched under a Toad or Serpent, it is a conceit as monstrous as the

brood it self. For if we should grant that Cocks growing old, and unable

for emission, amass within themselves some seminal matter, which may

after conglobate into the form of an egg, yet will this substance be

unfruitful. As wanting one principle of generation, and a commixture of

both sexes, which is required unto production, as may be observed in the

eggs of Hens not trodden; and as we have made trial in some which are

termed Cocks eggs. [SN: Ovum Centeninum, _or the last egg which is a

very little one._] It is not indeed impossible that from the sperm of a

Cock, Hen, or other Animal, being once in putrescence, either from

incubation or otherwise, some generation may ensue, not univocal and of

the same species, but some imperfect or monstrous production, even as in

the body of man from putrid humours, and peculiar ways of corruption,

there have succeeded strange and unseconded shapes of worms; whereof we

have beheld some our selves, and read of others in medical observations.

And so may strange and venomous Serpents be several ways engendered; but

that this generation should be regular, and alway produce a Basilisk, is

beyond our affirmation, and we have good reason to doubt.

Again, It is unreasonable to ascribe the equivocacy of this form unto

the hatching of a Toad, or imagine that diversifies the production. For

Incubation alters not the species, nor if we observe it, so much as

concurs either to the sex or colour: as appears in the eggs of Ducks or

Partridges hatched under a Hen, there being required unto their

exclusion only a gentle and continued heat: and that not particular or

confined unto the species or parent. So have I known the seed of

Silk-worms hatched on the bodies of women: and _Pliny_ reports that

_Livia_ the wife of _Augustus_ hatched an egg in her bosome. Nor is only

an animal heat required hereto, but an elemental and artificial warmth

will suffice: for as _Diodorus_ delivereth, the Ægyptians were wont to

hatch their eggs in Ovens, and many eye-witnesses confirm that practice

unto this day. And therefore this generation of the Basilisk, seems like

that of _Castor_ and _Helena_; he that can credit the one, may easily

believe the other: that is, that these two were hatched out of the egg

which _Jupiter_ in the form of a Swan, begat on his Mistress _Leda_.

The occasion of this conceit might be an Ægyptian tradition concerning

the Bird _Ibis_: which after became transferred unto Cocks. For an

opinion it was of that Nation, that the _Ibis_ feeding upon Serpents,

that venomous food so inquinated their oval conceptions, or eggs within

their bodies, that they sometimes came forth in Serpentine shapes, and

therefore they always brake their eggs, nor would they endure the Bird

to sit upon them. But how causeless their fear was herein, the daily

incubation of Ducks, Pea-hens, and many other testifie, and the Stork

might have informed them; which Bird they honoured and cherished, to

destroy their Serpents.

That which much promoted it, was a misapprehension of holy Scripture

upon the Latine translation in _Esa._ 51, _Ova aspidum ruperunt et telas

Arenearum texuerunt, qui comedent de ovis corum morietur, et quod

confotum est, erumpet in Regulum_. From whence notwithstanding, beside

the generation of Serpents from eggs, there can be nothing concluded;

and what kind of Serpents are meant, not easie to be determined, for

Translations are here very different: _Tremellius_ rendering the Asp

Hæmorrhous, and the Regulus or Basilisk a Viper, and our translation for

the Asp sets down a Cockatrice in the Text, and an Adder in the margin.

Another place of _Esay_ doth also seem to countenance it, Chap. 14. _Ne

læteris Philistæa quoniam diminuta est virga percussoris tui, de radice

enim colubri egredietur Regulus, et semen ejus absorbens volucrem_,

which ours somewhat favourably rendereth: _Out of the Serpents Root

shall come forth a Cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying

Serpent_. But _Tremellius_, _è radice Serpentis prodit Hæmorrhous, et

fructus illius præster volans_; wherein the words are different, but the

sense is still the same; for therein are figuratively intended _Uzziah_

and _Ezechias_; for though the Philistines had escaped the minor Serpent

_Uzziah_, yet from his stock a fiercer Snake should arise, that would

more terribly sting them, and that was _Ezeckias_.

But the greatest promotion it hath received from a misunderstanding of

the Hieroglyphical intention. For being conceived to be the Lord and

King of Serpents, to aw all others, nor to be destroyed _by any_; the

Ægyptians hereby implied Eternity, and the awful power of the supreme

Deitie: and therefore described a crowned Asp or Basilisk upon the heads

of their gods. As may be observed in the Bembine Table, and other

Ægyptian Monuments.

CHAPTER VIII

Of the Wolf.

Such a Story as the Basilisk is that of the Wolf concerning priority of

vision, that a man becomes hoarse or dumb, if a Wolf have the advantage

first to eye him. And this is a plain language affirmed by _Plyny_: _In

Italia ut creditur, Luporum visus est noxius, vocemque homini, quem

prius contemplatur adimere_; so is it made out what is delivered by

_Theocritus_, and after him by _Virgil_:

_----Vox quoque Moerim

Jam fugit ipsa, Lupi Moerim videre priores._

Thus is the Proverb to be understood, when during the discourse, if the

party or subject interveneth, and there ensueth a sudden silence, it is

usually said, _Lupus est in fabula_. Which conceit being already

convicted, not only by _Scaliger_, _Riolanus_, and others; but daily

confutable almost every where out of _England_, we shall not further

refute.

The ground or occasional original hereof, was probably the amazement and

sudden silence the unexpected appearance of Wolves do often put upon

Travellers; not by a supposed vapour, or venomous emanation, but a

vehement fear which naturally produceth obmutescence; and sometimes

irrecoverable silence. Thus Birds are silent in presence of an Hawk, and

_Pliny_ saith that Dogs are mute in the shadow of an Hiæna. But thus

could not the mouths of worthy Martyrs be silenced, who being exposed

not onely unto the eyes, but the merciless teeth of Wolves, gave loud

expressions of their faith, and their holy clamours were heard as high

as Heaven.

That which much promoted it beside the common Proverb, was an expression

in _Theocritus_, a very ancient Poet, {~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON WITH OXIA~} {~GREEK SMALL LETTER PHI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER THETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER GAMMA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER XI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ETA~} {~GREEK SMALL LETTER LAMDA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER KAPPA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~} {~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA WITH PSILI AND OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER DELTA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~}

_Edere non poteris vocem, Lycus est tibi visus_; which _Lycus_ was Rival

unto another, and suddenly appearing stopped the mouth of his Corrival:

now _Lycus_ signifying also a Wolf, occasioned this apprehension; men

taking that appellatively, which was to be understood properly, and

translating the genuine acception. Which is a fallacy of Æquivocation,

and in some opinions begat the like conceit concerning _Romulus_ and

_Remus_, that they were fostered by a Wolf, the name of the Nurse being

_Lupa_; and founded the fable of _Europa_, and her carriage over Sea by

a Bull, because the Ship or Pilots name was _Taurus_. And thus have some

been startled at the Proverb, _Bos in lingua_, confusedly apprehending

how a man should be said to have an Oxe in his tongue, that would not

speak his mind; which was no more then that a piece of money had

silenced him: for by the Oxe was onely implied a piece of coin stamped

with that figure, first currant with the _Athenians_, and after among

the _Romans_.

CHAPTER IX

Of the Deer.

The common Opinion concerning the long life of Animals, is very ancient,

especially of Crows, Choughs and Deer; in moderate accounts exceeding

the age of man, in some the days of _Nestor_, and in others surmounting

the years of _Artephius_ or _Methuselah_. From whence Antiquity hath

raised proverbial expressions, and the real conception of their

duration, hath been the Hyperbolical expression of many others. From all

the rest we shall single out the Deer, upon concession a long-lived

Animal, and in longævity by many conceived to attain unto hundreds;

wherein permitting every man his own belief, we shall our selves crave

liberty to doubt, and our reasons are these ensuing.

The first is that of _Aristotle_, drawn from the increment and gestation

of this Animal, that is, its sudden arrivance unto growth and maturity,

and the small time of its remainder in the Womb. His words in the

translation of _Scaliger_ are these, _De ejus vitæ longitudine

fabulantur; neque enim aut gestatio aut incrementum hinnulorum ejusmodi

sunt ut præstent argumentum longævi animalis_; that is, Fables are

raised concerning the vivacity of Deer; for neither are their gestation

or increment, such as may afford an argument of long life. And these,

saith _Scaliger_, are good Mediums conjunctively taken, that is, not one

without the other. For of Animals viviparous such as live long, go long

with young, and attain but slowly to their maturity and stature. So the

Horse that liveth above thirty, arriveth unto his stature about six

years, and remaineth above ten moneths in the womb: so the Camel that

liveth unto fifty, goeth with young no less then ten moneths, and

ceaseth not to grow before seven; and so the Elephant that liveth an

hundred, beareth its young above a year, and arriveth unto perfection at

twenty. On the contrary, the Sheep and Goat, which live but eight or ten

years, go but five moneths, and attain to their perfection at two years;

and the like proportion is observable in Cats, Hares, and Conies. And so

the Deer that endureth the womb but eight moneths, and is compleat at

six years, from the course of Nature, we cannot expect to live an

hundred; nor in any proportional allowance much more then thirty. As

having already passed two general motions observable in all animations,

that is, its beginning and encrease; and having but two more to run

thorow, that is, its state and declination; which are proportionally set

out by Nature in every kind: and naturally proceeding admit of inference

from each other.

The other ground that brings its long life into question, is the

immoderate salacity, and almost unparallel'd excess of venery, which

every _September_ may be observed in this Animal: and is supposed to

shorten the lives of Cocks, Partridges, and Sparrows. Certainly a

confessed and undeniable enemy unto longævity, and that not only as a

sign in the complexional desire and impetuosity, but also as a cause in

the frequent act, or iterated performance thereof. For though we consent

not with that Philosopher, who thinks a spermatical emission unto the

weight of one drachm, is æquivalent unto the effusion of sixty ounces of

bloud; yet considering the exolution and languor ensuing that act in

some, the extenuation and marcour in others, and the visible

acceleration it maketh of age in most: we cannot but think it much

abridgeth our days. Although we also concede that this exclusion is

natural, that Nature it self will find a way hereto without either act

or object: And although it be placed among the six Non-naturals, that

is, such as neither naturally constitutive, nor meerly destructive, do

preserve or destroy according unto circumstance: yet do we sensibly

observe an impotency or total privation thereof, prolongeth life: and

they live longest in every kind that exercise it not at all. [SN:

_Eunuchs and gelded creatures generally longer lived._] And this is true

not only in Eunuchs by Nature, but Spadoes by Art: for castrated Animals

in every species are longer lived then they which retain their

virilities. For the generation of bodies is not meerly effected as some

conceive, of souls, that is, by Irradiation, or answerably unto the

propagation of light, without its proper diminution: but therein a

transmission is made materially from some parts, with the Idea of every

one: and the propagation of one, is in a strict acception, some

minoration of another. [SN: _From the parts of generation._] And

therefore also that axiom in Philosophy, that the generation of one

thing, is the corruption of another: although it be substantially true

concerning the form and matter, is also dispositively verified in the

efficient or producer.

As for more sensible arguments, and such as relate unto experiment: from

these we have also reason to doubt its age, and presumed vivacity: for

where long life is natural, the marks of age are late: and when they

appear, the journey unto death cannot be long. Now the age of Deer (as

_Aristotle_ not long ago observed) is best conjectured, by view of the

horns and teeth. From the horns there is a particular and annual account

unto six years: they arising first plain, and so successively branching:

after which the judgment of their years by particular marks becomes

uncertain. But when they grow old, they grow less branched, and first

do lose their {~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA WITH PSILI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER MU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER TAU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ETA WITH PERISPOMENI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER RHO~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~} or _propugnacula_; that is, their brow-antlers,

or lowest furcations next the head, which _Aristotle_ saith the young

ones use in fight: and the old as needless, have them not at all. The

same may be also collected from the loss of their Teeth, whereof in old

age they have few or none before in either jaw. Now these are infallible

marks of age, and when they appear, we must confess a declination: which

notwithstanding (as men inform us in _England_, where observations may

well be made), will happen between twenty and thirty. As for the bone,

or rather induration of the Roots of the arterial vein and great artery,

which is thought to be found only in the heart of an old Deer, and

therefore becomes more precious in its Rarity; it is often found in Deer

much under thirty, and we have known some affirm they have found it in

one of half that age. And therefore in that account of _Pliny_, of a

Deer with a Collar about his neck, put on by _Alexander_ the Great, and

taken alive an hundred years after, with other relations of this nature,

we much suspect imposture or mistake. And if we grant their verity, they

are but single relations, and very rare contingencies in individuals,

not affording a regular deduction upon the species. For though _Ulysses_

his Dog lived unto twenty, and the _Athenian_ Mule unto fourscore, yet

do we not measure their days by those years, or usually say, they live

thus long. Nor can the three hundred years of _John_ of times [SN:

_Psalm_ 90.], or _Nestor_, overthrow the assertion of _Moses_, or afford

a reasonable encouragement beyond his septuagenary determination.

The ground and authority of this conceit was first Hierogliphical, the

_Ægyptians_ expressing longævity by this Animal; but upon what

uncertainties, and also convincible falsities they often erected such

Emblems, we have elsewhere delivered. And if that were true which

_Aristotle_ delivers of his time [SN: Histor. animal. lib. 8.], and

_Pliny_ was not afraid to take up long after, the _Ægyptians_ could make

but weak observations herein; for though it be said that _Æneas_ feasted

his followers with Venison, yet _Aristotle_ affirms that neither Deer

nor Boar were to be found in _Africa_. And how far they miscounted the

lives and duration of Animals, is evident from their conceit of the

Crow, which they presume to live five hundred years; and from the lives

of Hawks, which (as _Ælian_ delivereth) the _Ægyptians_ do reckon no

less then at seven hundred.

The second which led the conceit unto the _Grecians_, and probably

descended from the Egyptians was Poetical; and that was a passage of

_Hesiod_, thus rendered by _Ausonius_.

_Ter binos deciesque novem super exit in annos,

Justa senescentum quos implet vita virorum.

Hos novies superat vivendo gorrula cornix,

Et quater egreditur cornicis sæcula cervus,

Alipidem cervum ter vincit corvus.----_

To ninety six the life of man ascendeth,

Nine times as long that of the Chough extendeth,

Four times beyond the life of Deer doth go,

And thrice is that surpassed by the Crow.

So that according to this account, allowing ninety six for the age of

Man, the life of a Deer amounts unto three thousand four hundred fifty

six. A conceit so hard to be made out, that many have deserted the

common and literal construction. So _Theon_ in _Aratus_ would have the

number of nine not taken strictly, but for many years. In other

opinions the compute so far exceedeth the truth, that they have thought

it more probable to take the word _Genea_, that is, a generation

consisting of many years, but for one year, or a single revolution of

the Sun; which is the remarkable measure of time, and within the compass

whereof we receive our perfection in the womb. So that by this

construction, the years of a Deer should be but thirty six, as is

discoursed at large in that Tract of _Plutarch_, concerning the

cessation of Oracles; and whereto in his discourse of the Crow,

_Aldrovandus_ also inclineth. Others not able to make it out, have

rejected the whole account, as may be observed from the words of

_Pliny_, _Hesiodus qui primus aliquid de longævitate vitæ prodidit,

fabulose (reor) multa de hominum ævo referens, cornici novem nostras

attribuit ætates, quadruplum ejus cervis, id triplicatum corvis, et

reliqua fabulosius de Phoenice et nymphis_. And this how slender

soever, was probably the strongest ground Antiquity had for this

longævity of Animals; that made _Theophrastus_ expostulate with Nature

concerning the long life of Crows; that begat that Epithete of Deer [SN:

{~GREEK SMALL LETTER TAU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER TAU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER RHO~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER KAPPA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER RHO~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMEGA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~}.] in _Oppianus_, and that expression of _Juvenal_,

_----Longa et cervina senectus._

The third ground was Philosophical, and founded upon a probable Reason

in Nature, that is, the defect of a Gall, which part (in the opinion of

_Aristotle_ and _Pliny_) this Animal wanted, and was conceived a cause

and reason of their long life: according (say they) as it happeneth unto

some few men, who have not this part at all. But this assertion is first

defective in the verity concerning the Animal alledged: for though it be

true, a Deer hath no Gall in the Liver like many other Animals, yet

hath it that part in the Guts, as is discoverable by taste and colour:

and therefore _Pliny_ doth well correct himself, when having affirmed

before it had no Gall, he after saith, some hold it to be in the guts;

and that for their bitterness, dogs will refuse to eat them. The

assertion is also deficient in the verity of the Induction or

connumeration of other Animals conjoined herewith, as having also no

Gall; that is, as _Pliny_ accounteth, _Equi_, _Muli_, etc. Horses,

Mules, Asses, Deer, Goats, Boars, Camels, Dolphins, have no Gall. In

Dolphins and Porpoces I confess I could find no Gall. But concerning

Horses, what truth there is herein we have declared before; as for Goats

we find not them without it; what Gall the Camel hath, _Aristotle_

declareth: that Hogs also have it, we can affirm; and that not in any

obscure place, but in the Liver, even as it is seated in man.

That therefore the Deer is no short-lived Animal, we will acknowledge:

that comparatively, and in some sense long-lived we will concede; and

thus much we shall grant if we commonly account its days by thirty six

or forty: for thereby it will exceed all other cornigerous Animals. But

that it attaineth unto hundreds, or the years delivered by Authors,

since we have no authentick experience for it, since we have reason and

common experience against it, since the grounds are false and fabulous

which do establish it: we know no ground to assent.

Concerning Deer there also passeth another opinion, that the Males

thereof do yearly lose their pizzel. For men observing the decidence of

their horns, do fall upon the like conceit of this part, that it

annually rotteth away, and successively reneweth again. Now the ground

hereof was surely the observation of this {~GREEK CAPITAL LETTER ALPHA WITH DASIA~}{~GREEK CAPITAL LETTER ALPHA WITH PSILI~}

part in Deer after immoderate

venery, and about the end of their Rut, which sometimes becomes so

relaxed and pendulous, it cannot be quite retracted: and being often

beset with flies, it is conceived to rot, and at last to fall from the

body. But herein experience will contradict us: for Deer which either

die or are killed at that time, or any other, are always found to have

that part entire. And reason will also correct us: for spermatical

parts, or such as are framed from the seminal principles of parents,

although homogeneous or similary, will not admit a Regeneration, much

less will they receive an integral restauration, which being organical

and instrumental members, consist of many of those. Now this part, or

Animal of _Plato_, containeth not only sanguineous and reparable

particles: but is made up of veins, nerves, arteries, and in some

Animals, of bones: whose reparation is beyond its own fertility, and a

fruit not to be expected from the fructifying part it self. Which

faculty were it communicated unto Animals, whose originals are double,

as well as unto Plants, whose seed is within themselves: we might abate

the Art of _Taliacotius_, and the new in-arching of Noses. And therefore

the fancies of Poets have been so modest, as not to set down such

renovations, even from the powers of their deities: for the mutilated

shoulder of _Pelops_ was pieced out with Ivory, and that the limbs of

_Hippolitus_ were set together, not regenerated by _Æsculapius_, is the

utmost assertion of Poetry.

CHAPTER X

Of the King-fisher.

That a King-fisher hanged by the bill, sheweth in what quarter the wind

is by an occult and secret propriety, converting the breast to that

point of the Horizon from whence the wind doth blow, is a received

opinion, and very strange; introducing natural Weather-cocks, and

extending Magnetical positions as far as Animal Natures. A conceit

supported chiefly by present practice, yet not made out by Reason or

Experience.

[Sidenote: _Whence it is, that some creatures presage the weather._]

Unto Reason it seemeth very repugnant, that a carcass or body

disanimated, should be so affected with every wind, as to carry a

conformable respect and constant habitude thereto. For although in

sundry Animals we deny not a kind of natural Meteorology or innate

presention both of wind and weather, yet that proceeding from sense

receiving impressions from the first mutation of the air, they cannot in

reason retain that apprehension after death, as being affections which

depend on life, and depart upon disanimation. And therefore with more

favourable Reason may we draw the same effect or sympathie upon the

Hedg-hog, whose presention of winds is so exact, that it stoppeth the

North or Southern hole of its nest, according to the prenotion of these

winds ensuing: which some men observing, have been able to make

predictions which way the wind would turn, and been esteemed hereby wise

men in point of weather. Now this proceeding from sense in the creature

alive, it were not reasonable to hang up an Hedg-hogs head, and to

expect a conformable motion unto its living conversion. And though in

sundry Plants their vertues do live after death, and we know that

Scammony, Rhubarb and Senna will purge without any vital assistance; yet

in Animals and sensible creatures, many actions are mixt, and depend

upon their living form, as well as that of mistion; and though they

wholly seem to retain unto the body, depart upon disunion. Thus

Glow-worms alive, project a lustre in the dark, which fulgour

notwithstanding ceaseth after death; and thus the Torpedo which being

alive stupifies at a distance, applied after death, produceth no such

effect; which had they retained in places where they abound, they might

have supplied Opium, and served as frontals in Phrensies.

As for experiment, we cannot make it out by any we have attempted; for

if a single King-fisher be hanged up with untwisted silk in an open

room, and where the air is free, it observes not a constant respect unto

the mouth of the wind, but variously converting, doth seldom breast it

right. If two be suspended in the same room, they will not regularly

conform their breasts, but oft-times respect the opposite points of

Heaven. And if we conceive that for exact exploration, they should be

suspended where the air is quiet and unmoved, that clear of impediments,

they may more freely convert upon their natural verticity; we have also

made this way of inquisition, suspending them in large and capacious

glasses closely stopped; wherein nevertheless we observed a casual

station, and that they rested irregularly upon conversion. Wheresoever

they rested, remaining inconverted, and possessing one point of the

Compass, whilst the wind perhaps had passed the two and thirty.

[Sidenote: _Commonly mistaken for the true Halcion, ours being rather

the Ispida._]

The ground of this popular practice might be the common opinion

concerning the vertue prognostick of these Birds; as also the natural

regard they have unto the winds, and they unto them again; more

especially remarkable in the time of their nidulation, and bringing

forth their young. For at that time, which happeneth about the brumal

Solstice, it hath been observed even unto a proverb, that the Sea is

calm, and the winds do cease, till the young ones are excluded; and

forsake their nest which floateth upon the Sea, and by the roughness of

winds might otherwise be overwhelmed. But how far hereby to magnifie

their prediction we have no certain rule; for whether out of any

particular prenotion they chuse to sit at this time, or whether it be

thus contrived by concurrence of causes and providence of Nature,

securing every species in their production, is not yet determined.

Surely many things fall out by the design of the general motor, and

undreamt of contrivance of Nature, which are not imputable unto the

intention or knowledge of the particular Actor. So though the seminality

of Ivy be almost in every earth, yet that it ariseth and groweth not,

but where it may be supported; we cannot ascribe the same unto the

distinction of the seed, or conceive any science therein which suspends

and conditionates its eruption. So if, as _Pliny_ and _Plutarch_ report,

the Crocodiles of _Ægypt_ so aptly lay their Eggs, that the Natives

thereby are able to know how high the floud will attain; it will be hard

to make out, how they should divine the extent of the inundation

depending on causes so many miles remote; that is, the measure of

showers in _Æthiopia_; and whereof, as _Athanasius_ in the life of

_Anthony_ delivers, the Devil himself upon demand could make no clear

prediction. So are there likewise many things in Nature, which are the

fore runners or signs of future effects, whereto they neither concur in

causality or prenotion, but are secretly ordered by the providence of

causes, and concurrence of actions collateral to their signations.

It was also a custome of old to keep these Birds in chests, upon opinion

that they prevented Moths; whether it were not first hanged up in Rooms

to such effects, is not beyond all doubt. Or whether we mistake not the

posture of suspension, hanging it by the bill, whereas we should do it

by the back; that by the bill it might point out the quarters of the

wind; for so hath _Kircherus_ described the Orbis and the Sea Swallow.

But the eldest custome of hanging up these birds was founded upon a

tradition that they would renew their feathers every year as though they

were alive: In expectation whereof four hundred years ago _Albertus

Magnus_ was deceived.

* * * * *

Printed by T. and A. CONSTABLE, Printers to His Majesty

at the Edinburgh University Press

Transcriber's End Notes

Spelling has been left as it stands in the printed original from which

this text was prepared. Archaicisms are therefore retained, including

any variant spellings. The word 'then', for instance, is frequently

used in lieu of the modern 'than'.

In the Latin citations in the Annotator's notes, the semicolon is used

as an abbreviation for 'que', as "ingeniumq;". Though the semicolon

is printed closer to the preceding letter than in normal usage, no

attempt is made here to render it differently.

On occasion, the modern 'itself' and 'myself' are broken across a line

end without hyphenation (e.g., "it / self" on p. 335).

Obvious printing errors, including missing characters, that have been

corrected, are noted here:

Errors corrected:

p. xxii | _...l. 1, des Ess._ c. 14. | 'c' is italicized

| elsewhere.

p. 76 [ti]tle | missing letters supplied |

from context. |