| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: The Works of Sir Thomas Browne, Volume 2
Author: Browne, Thomas, Sir, 1605-1682
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Works of Sir Thomas Browne, Volume 2" ***
Transcriber's Note
Marginal notes are used for multiple purposes in this edition. Footnotes
and section headers were both printed in the margins. For this text
version, numbered marginal footnotes have been moved to the end of their
paragraphs. The headers have been moved to appear on a separate line at
the beginning of each section. Redundant sidenotes merely indicating
Part and Section numbers have been removed.
Those notes which serve as paragraph descriptions, at or near
the head of a paragraph, precede that paragraph. Those which serve to
annotate specific points are inserted parenthetically as [SN: notes].
Italics are used freely, and have been rendered using _underscore_
characters. Superscripted characters are rendered as {x}.
Please consult the more detailed notes at the end of this text.
THE ENGLISH LIBRARY
THE WORKS OF
SIR THOMAS BROWNE
VOLUME II
[Illustration: Sir Thomas Browne's Skull]
THE WORKS OF
SIR THOMAS BROWNE
Edited by
CHARLES SAYLE
VOLUME II
LONDON
GRANT RICHARDS
1904
Edinburgh T. and A. CONSTABLE, Printers to His Majesty
PREFATORY NOTE
The frontispiece to this volume is reproduced from a photograph kindly
lent to me for the purpose by Mr. Charles Williams, F.R.C.S.E., of
Norwich, whose note upon the measurements of Sir Thomas Browne's skull
appeared as Appendix II. in the edition of Browne's _Hydriotaphia_ and
_Garden of Cyrus_, published in the 'Golden Treasury Series,' by Messrs.
Macmillan and Co., in 1896.
The identification of the author quoted in the margin of page 233 (Book
v. Chapter x.). I owe to Mr. W. Aldis Wright.
C.S.
_May 1, 1904._
CONTENTS
PAGE
PSEUDODOXIA EPIDEMICA
THE THIRD BOOK (_continued_):
11. Of Griffins, 1
12. Of the Phœnix, 4
13. Of Frogs, Toads, and Toad-stone, 13
14. Of the Salamander, 18
15. Of the Amphisbæna, 22
16. Of the Viper, 26
17. Of Hares, 33
18. Of Moles, or Molls, 42
19. Of Lampries, 46
20. Of Snayls, 48
21. Of the Chameleon, 50
22. Of the Ostrich, 62
23. Of Unicorns Horn, 66
24. That all animals of the Land, are in their kind in the Sea, 73
25. Concerning the common course of Diet, in making choice of
some Animals, and abstaining from eating others, 76
26. Of Sperma-Ceti, and the Sperma-Ceti Whale, 85
27. Compendiously of Sundry Tenents concerning other Animals,
which examined, prove either false or dubious, 89
28. Of some others, 103
THE FOURTH BOOK:
1. Of the Erectness of Man, 109
2. Of the Heart, 113
3. Of Pleurisies, 116
4. Of the Ring-finger, 117
5. Of the right and left Hand, 122
6. Of Swimming and Floating, 134
7. Concerning Weight, 138
8. Of the passage of Meat and Drink, 142
9. Of Sneezing, 144
10. Of the Jews, 147
11. Of Pigmies, 155
12. Of the great Climacterical year, that is, Sixty-three, 160
13. Of the Canicular or Dog daies, 183
THE FIFTH BOOK:
1. Of the Picture of the Pelecan, 202
2. Of the Picture of Dolphins, 205
3. Of the Picture of a Grashopper, 207
4. Of the Picture of the Serpent tempting Eve, 209
5. Of the Picture of Adam and Eve with Navels, 212
6. Of the Pictures of Eastern Nations, and the Jews at
their Feasts, especially our Saviour at the Passover, 215
7. Of the Picture of our Saviour with long hair, 224
8. Of the Picture of Abraham sacrificing Isaac, 226
9. Of the Picture of Moses with horns, 227
10. Of the Scutcheons of the Tribes of Israel, 229
11. Of the Pictures of the Sibyls, 233
12. Of the Picture describing the death of Cleopatra, 235
13. Of the Pictures of the Nine Worthies, 237
14. Of the Picture of Jephthah sacryficing his daughter, 241
15. Of the Picture of John the Baptist, 245
16. Of the Picture of St. Christopher, 247
17. Of the Picture of St. George, 249
18. Of the Picture of Jerom, 251
19. Of the Pictures of Mermaids, Unicorns, and some others, 253
20. Of the Hieroglyphical Pictures of the Egyptians, 258
21. Of the Picture of Haman hanged, 260
22. Compendiously of many questionable Customs, Opinions,
Pictures, Practices, and Popular Observations, 264
23. Of some others, 276
THE SIXTH BOOK:
1. Concerning the beginning of the World, 283
2. Of mens Enquiries in what season or Point of the
Zodiack it began, 300
3. Of the Divisions of the seasons and four Quarters
of the year, 302
4. Of some computation of days and deductions of one part
of the year unto another, 309
5. A Digression of the wisdom of God in the site and
motion of the Sun, 313
6. Concerning the vulgar opinion, that the Earth was
slenderly peopled before the Flood, 319
7. Of East and West, 338
8. Of the River Nilus, 349
9. Of the Red Sea, 363
10. Of the Blackness of Negroes, 367
11. Of the same, 380
12. A Digression concerning Blackness, 387
13. Of Gypsies, 395
14. Of some others, 397
PSEUDODOXIA EPIDEMICA
THE THIRD BOOK--_continued_
CHAPTER XI
Of Griffins.
That there are Griffins in Nature, that is a mixt and dubious Animal, in
the fore-part resembling an Eagle, and behind, the shape of a Lion, with
erected ears, four feet and a long tail, many affirm, and most, I
perceive, deny not. The same is averred by _Ælian_, _Solinus_, _Mela_,
and _Herodotus_, countenanced by the Name sometimes found in Scripture,
and was an Hieroglyphick of the Egyptians.
Notwithstanding we find most diligent enquirers to be of a contrary
assertion. For beside that _Albertus_ and _Pliny_ have disallowed it,
the learned _Aldrovandus_ hath in a large discourse rejected it;
_Mathias Michovius_ who writ of those Northern parts wherein men place
these Griffins, hath positively concluded against it; and if examined by
the Doctrine of Animals, the invention is monstrous, nor much inferiour
unto the figment of Sphynx, Chimæra, and Harpies, for though there be
some flying Animals of mixed and participating Natures, that is, between
Bird and quadruped, yet are their wings and legs so set together, that
they seem to make each other; there being a commixtion of both, rather
then an adaptation or cement of prominent parts unto each other, as is
observable in the Bat, whose wings and fore-legs are contrived in each
other. For though some species there be of middle and participating
Natures, that is, of Bird and Beast, as Bats and some few others, yet
are their parts so conformed and set together, that we cannot define the
beginning or end of either; there being a commixtion of both in the
whole, rather then an adaptation or cement of the one unto the other.
Now for the word γρὺπς or _Gryps_, sometimes mentioned in Scripture [SN:
_Levit. 11._], and frequently in humane Authors, properly understood, it
signifies some kind of Eagle or Vulture, from whence the Epithete
_Grypus_ for an hooked or Aquiline Nose. Thus when the Septuagint makes
use of this word, _Tremellius_ and our Translation hath rendred it the
Ossifrage, which is one kind of Eagle. And although the Vulgar
Translation, and that annexed unto the Septuagint, retain the word
_Gryps_, which in ordinary and school construction is commonly rendred a
Griffin, yet cannot the Latine assume any other sense then the Greek,
from whence it is borrowed. And though the Latine _Gryphes_ be altered
somewhat by the addition of an _h_, or aspiration of the letter π, yet
is not this unusual; so what the Greeks call τρόπαιον, the Latine will
call _Trophæum_; and that person which in the Gospel is named Κλέοπας,
the Latines will render _Cleophas_. And therefore the quarrel of
_Origen_ was unjust, and his conception erroneous, when he conceived the
food of Griffins forbidden by the law of _Moses_: that is, Poetical
Animals, and things of no existence. And therefore when in the Hecatombs
and mighty Oblations of the Gentiles, it is delivered they sacrificed
Gryphes or Griffins; hereby we may understand some stronger sort of
Eagles. And therefore also when its said in _Virgil_ of an improper
Match, or _Mopsus_ marrying _Nysa_, _Jungentur jam gryphes equis_; we
need not hunt after other sense, then that strange unions shall be made,
and different Natures be conjoined together.
As for the testimonies of ancient Writers, they are but derivative, and
terminate all in one _Aristeus_ a Poet of _Proconesus_; who affirmed
that near the _Arimaspi_, or one-eyed Nation, Griffins defended the
Mines of Gold. But this, as _Herodotus_ delivereth, he wrote by
hear-say; and _Michovius_ who hath expresly written of those parts,
plainly affirmeth, there is neither Gold nor Griffins in that Country,
nor any such Animal extant; for so doth he conclude, _Ego vero contra
veteres authores, Gryphes nec in illa septentrionis, nec in aliis orbis
partibus inveniri affirmarim_.
Lastly, Concerning the Hieroglyphical authority, although it nearest
approach the truth, it doth not infer its existency. The conceit of the
_Griffin_ properly taken being but a symbolical phansie, in so
intollerable a shape including allowable morality. So doth it well make
out the properties of a _Guardian_, or any person entrusted; the ears
implying attention, the wings celerity of execution, the Lion-like
shape, courage and audacity, the hooked bill, reservance and tenacity.
It is also an Emblem of valour and magnanimity, as being compounded of
the Eagle and Lion, the noblest Animals in their kinds; and so is it
appliable unto Princes, Presidents, Generals, and all heroick
Commanders; and so is it also born in the Coat-arms of many noble
Families of _Europe_.
But the original invention seems to be Hieroglyphical, derived from the
Egyptians, and of an higher signification. By the mystical conjunction
of Hawk and Lion, implying either the Genial or the sydereous Sun, the
great celerity thereof, and the strength and vigour in its operations.
And therefore under such Hieroglyphicks _Osyris_ was described; and in
ancient Coins we meet with Gryphins conjointly with _Apollo's_,
_Tripodes_ and Chariot wheels; and the marble Gryphins at Saint _Peters_
in _Rome_, as learned men conjecture, were first translated from the
Temple of _Apollo_. Whether hereby were not also mystically implied the
activity of the Sun in Leo, the power of God in the Sun, or the
influence of the Cœlestial _Osyris_, by _Moptha_ the Genius of Nilus,
might also be considered. And then the learned _Kircherus_, no man were
likely to be a better _Oedipus_.
CHAPTER XII
Of the Phœnix.
That there is but one Phœnix in the World, which after many hundred
years burneth it self, and from the ashes thereof ariseth up another, is
a conceit not new or altogether popular, but of great Antiquity; not
only delivered by humane Authors, but frequently expressed also by holy
Writers; by _Cyril_, _Epiphanius_, and others, by _Ambrose_ in his
Hexameron, and _Tertullian_ in his Poem _De Judicio Domini_; but more
agreeably unto the present sense, in his excellent Tract, _De
Resurrectione carnis_. _Illum dico alitem orientis peculiarem, de
singularitate famosum, de posteritate monstruosum; qui semetipsum
libenter funerans renovat, natali fine decedens, atque succedens iterum
Phœnix. Ubi jam nemo, iterum ipse; quia non jam, alius idem._ The
Scripture also seems to favour it, particularly that of _Job_ 21. In the
interpretation of _Beda_, _Dicebam in nidulo meo moriar, et sicut Phœnix
multiplicabo dies_: and _Psal._ 31. δίκαιος ὥσπερ φοῖνιξ ἀνθήσει, _vir
justus ut Phœnix florebit_, as _Tertullian_ renders it, and so also
expounds it in his Book before alledged.
[Sidenote: _Against the story of the Phœnix._]
All which notwithstanding, we cannot presume the existence of this
Animal; nor dare we affirm there is any Phœnix in Nature. For, first
there wants herein the definitive confirmator and test of things
uncertain, that is, the sense of man. For though many Writers have much
enlarged hereon, yet is there not any ocular describer, or such as
presumeth to confirm it upon aspection. And therefore _Herodotus_ that
led the story unto the _Greeks_, plainly saith, he never attained the
sight of any, but only in the picture.
Again, Primitive Authors, and from whom the stream of relations is
derivative, deliver themselves very dubiously; and either by a doubtful
parenthesis, or a timorous conclusion overthrow the whole relation. Thus
_Herodotus_ in his _Euterpe_, delivering the story hereof, presently
interposeth, ἐμοὶ μὲν οὐ πίστα λέγοντες; that is, which account seems to
me improbable. _Tacitus_ in his annals affordeth a larger story, how the
Phœnix was first seen at _Heliopolis_ in the reign of _Sesostris_, then
in the reign of _Amasis_, after in the days of _Ptolomy_, the third of
the _Macedonian_ race; but at last thus determineth, _Sed Antiquitas
obscura, et nonnulli falsum esse hunc Phœnicem neque Arabum è terris
credidere_. _Pliny_ makes yet a fairer story, that the Phœnix flew into
_Egypt_ in the Consulship of _Quintus Plancius_, that it was brought to
Rome in the Censorship of _Claudius_, in the eight hundred year of the
City, and testified also in their records; but after all concludeth,
_Sed quæ falsa nemo dubitabit_, As we read it in the fair and ancient
impression of _Brixia_; as _Aldrovandus_ hath quoted it, and as it is
found in the manuscript Copy, as _Dalechampius_ hath also noted.
Moreover, Such as have naturally discoursed hereon, have so diversly,
contrarily, or contradictorily delivered themselves, that no affirmative
from thence can reasonably be deduced. For most have positively denied
it, and they which affirm and believe it, assign this name unto many,
and mistake two or three in one. So hath that bird been taken for the
Phœnix which liveth in _Arabia_, and buildeth its nest with Cinnamon;
by _Herodotus_ called _Cinnamulgus_, and by _Aristotle_, _Cinnamomus_;
and as a fabulous conceit is censured by _Scaliger_. Some have conceived
that bird to be the Phœnix, which by a _Persian_ name with the
_Greeks_ is called _Rhyntace_; but how they made this good we find
occasion of doubt; whilest we read in the life of _Artaxerxes_, that
this is a little bird brought often to their Tables, and wherewith
_Parysatis_ cunningly poisoned the Queen. The _Manucodiata_ or Bird of
Paradise, hath had the honour of this name, and their feathers brought
from the _Molucca's_ do pass for those of the Phœnix. Which though
promoted by rarity with us, the _Eastern_ Travellers will hardly admit;
who know they are common in those parts, and the ordinary plume of
_Janizaries_ among the _Turks_. And lastly, the Bird _Semenda_ hath
found the same appellation, for so hath _Scaliger_ observed and refuted;
nor will the solitude of the Phœnix allow this denomination; for
many there are of that species, and whose trifistulary bill and crany we
have beheld our selves. Nor are men only at variance in regard of the
Phœnix it self, but very disagreeing in the accidents ascribed
thereto: for some affirm it liveth three hundred, some five, others six,
some a thousand, others no less then fifteen hundred years; some say it
liveth in _Æthiopia_, others in _Arabia_, some in _Egypt_, others in
_India_, and some in _Utopia_; for such a one must that be which is
described by _Lactantius_; that is, which neither was singed in the
combustion of _Phaeton_, or overwhelmed by the innundation of
_Deucalion_.
Lastly, Many Authors who have discoursed hereof, have so delivered
themselves, and with such intentions, that we cannot from thence deduce
a confirmation. For some have written Poetically, as _Ovid_, _Mantuan_,
_Lactantius_, _Claudian_, and others: Some have written mystically, as
_Paracelsus_ in his Book _De Azoth_, or _De ligno et linea vitæ_; and as
several Hermetical Philosophers, involving therein the secret of their
Elixir, and enigmatically expressing the nature of their great work.
Some have written Rhetorically, and concessively, not controverting, but
assuming the question, which taken as granted, advantaged the illation.
So have holy men made use hereof as far as thereby to confirm the
Resurrection; for discoursing with Heathens who granted the story of the
Phœnix, they induced the Resurrection from principles of their own,
and positions received among themselves. Others have spoken
Emblematically and Hieroglyphically; and so did the _Egyptians_, unto
whom the Phœnix was the Hieroglyphick of the Sun. And this was
probably the ground of the whole relation; succeeding Ages adding
fabulous accounts, which laid together built up this singularity, which
every Pen proclaimeth.
As for the Texts of Scripture, which seem to confirm the conceit, duly
perpended, they add not thereunto. For whereas in that of _Job_,
according to the Septuagint or Greek Translation we find the word
Phœnix, yet can it have no animal signification; for therein it is not
expressed φοῖνιξ, but στέλεχoς φοίνικος, the trunk of the Palm-tree,
which is also called Phœnix; and therefore the construction will be very
hard, if not applied unto some vegetable nature. Nor can we safely
insist upon the Greek expression at all; for though the Vulgar
translates it _Palma_, and some retain the word Phœnix, others do render
it by a word of a different sense; for so hath _Tremellius_ delivered
it: _Dicebam quod apud nidum meum expirabo, et sicut arena multiplicabo
dies_; so hath the _Geneva_ and ours translated it, _I said I shall die
in my Nest, and shall multiply my days as the sand._ As for that in the
Book of Psalms, _Vir justus ut Phœnix florebit_, as _Epiphanius_ and
_Tertullian_ render it, it was only a mistake upon the Homonymy of the
Greek word Pœnix, which signifies also a Palm-tree. [SN: Consent of
names.] Which is a fallacy of equivocation, from a community in name
inferring a common nature; and whereby we may as firmly conclude, that
Diaphœnicon a purging Electuary hath some part of the Phœnix for its
ingredient; which receiveth that name from Dates, or the fruit of the
Palm-tree, from whence, as _Pliny_ delivers, the Phœnix had its name.
Nor do we only arraign the existence of this Animal, but many things are
questionable which are ascribed thereto, especially its unity, long
life, and generation. As for its unity or conceit there should be but
one in nature, it seemeth not only repugnant unto Philosophy, but also
holy Scripture; which plainly affirms, there went of every sort two at
least into the Ark of _Noah_, according to the Text, [SN: _Gen. 7._]
_Every Fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort, they went into the
Ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein there is the breath of life, and
they that went in, went in both male and female of all flesh._ It
infringeth the benediction of God concerning multiplication. God blessed
them, saying, [SN: _Gen. 1._] _Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the
waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth:_ And again, [SN:
_Chap. 8._] _Bring forth with thee every living thing, that they may
breed abundantly in the earth, and be fruitful and multiply upon the
earth:_ which terms are not appliable unto the Phœnix, whereof there
is but one in the world, and no more now living then at the first
benediction. For the production of one, being the destruction of
another, although they produce and generate, they encrease not; and must
not be said to multiply, who do not transcend an unity.
As for longævity, that it liveth a thousand years or more; beside that
from imperfect observations and rarity of appearance, no confirmation
can be made; there may be probable a mistake in the compute. For the
tradition being very ancient and probably Egyptian, the _Greeks_ who
dispersed the Fable, might summ up the account by their own numeration
of years; whereas the conceit might have its original in times of
shorter compute. For if we suppose our present calculation, the
Phœnix now in nature will be the sixth from the Creation, but in the
middle of its years; and if the _Rabbins_ Prophecie [SN: _That the World
should last but six thousand years._] succeed, shall conclude its days
not in his own but the last and general flames, without all hope of
Reviviction.
Concerning its generation, that without all conjunction it begets and
reseminates it self, hereby we introduce a vegetable production in
Animals, and unto sensible natures, transfer the propriety of Plants;
that is, to multiply within themselves, according to the Law of the
Creation [SN: _Gen. 1._], _Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb
yielding seed, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed is in it self_.
Which is indeed the natural way of Plants, who having no distinction of
sex, and the power of the species contained in every _individuum_, beget
and propagate themselves without commixtion; and therefore their fruits
proceeding from simpler roots, are not so unlike, or distinguishable
from each other, as are the off-springs of sensible creatures and
prolifications descending from double originals. But Animal generation
is accomplished by more, and the concurrence of two sexes is required to
the constitution of one. And therefore such as have no distinction of
sex, engender not at all, as _Aristotle_ conceives of Eels, and
testaceous animals. And though Plant-animals do multiply, they do it not
by copulation, but in a way analogous unto Plants. So _Hermaphrodites_
although they include the parts of both sexes, and may be sufficiently
potent in either; yet unto a conception require a separated sex, and
cannot impregnate themselves. And so also though _Adam_ included all
humane nature, or was (as some opinion) an _Hermaphrodite_, yet had he
no power to propagate himself; and therefore God said, _It is not good
that man should be alone, let us make him an help meet for him_; that
is, an help unto generation; for as for any other help, it had been
fitter to have made another man.
Now whereas some affirm that from one Phœnix there doth not
immediately proceed another, but the first corrupteth into a worm, which
after becometh a Phœnix, it will not make probable this production.
[SN: _Irregularities._] For hereby they confound the generation of
perfect animals with imperfect, sanguineous with exanguious, vermiparous
with oviparous, and erect Anomalies, disturbing the laws of Nature. Nor
will this corruptive production be easily made out in most imperfect
generations; for although we deny not that many animals are vermiparous,
begetting themselves at a distance, and as it were at the second hand
(as generally Insects, and more remarkably Butter-flies and Silkworms)
yet proceeds not this generation from a corruption of themselves, but
rather a specifical and seminal diffusion, retaining still the Idea of
themselves, though it act that part a while in other shapes. And this
will also hold in generations equivocal, and such as are not begotten
from Parents like themselves; so from Frogs corrupting, proceed not
Frogs again; so if there be anatiferous Trees, whose corruption breaks
forth into Bernacles, yet if they corrupt, they degenerate into Maggots,
which produce not them again. For this were a confusion of corruptive
and seminal production, and a frustration of that seminal power
committed to animals at the Creation. The problem might have been
spared, _Why we love not our lice as well as our children?_ _Noah's_ Ark
had been needless, the graves of Animals would be the fruitful'st wombs;
for death would not destroy, but empeople the world again.
Since therefore we have so slender grounds to confirm the existence of
the Phœnix, since there is no ocular witness of it, since as we have
declared, by Authors from whom the story is derived, it rather stands
rejected; since they who have seriously discoursed hereof, have
delivered themselves negatively, diversly, or contrarily; since many
others cannot be drawn into Argument, as writing Poetically,
Rhetorically, Enigmatically, Hieroglyphically; since holy Scripture
alledged for it duly perpended, doth not advantage it; and lastly, since
so strange a generation, unity and long life, hath neither experience
nor reason to confirm it, how far to rely on this tradition, we refer
unto consideration.
But surely they were not well-wishers unto parable Physick [SN:
εὐπόριστα.], or remedies easily acquired, who derived medicines from
the Phœnix; as some have done, and are justly condemned by _Pliny_;
_Irridere est vitæ remedia post millesimum annum reditura monstrare_; It
is a folly to find out remedies that are not recoverable under a
thousand years; or propose the prolonging of life by that which the
twentieth generation may never behold. More veniable is a dependance
upon the Philosophers stone, potable gold, or any of those Arcana's
whereby _Paracelsus_ that died himself at forty-seven, gloried that he
could make other men immortal. Which, although extreamly difficult, and
_tantum non_ infesible, yet are they not impossible, nor do they
(rightly understood) impose any violence on Nature. And therefore if
strictly taken for the Phœnix, very strange is that which is delivered
by _Plutarch_ [SN: De sanitate tuenda.], That the brain thereof is a
pleasant bit, but that it causeth the head-ach. Which notwithstanding
the luxurious Emperour [SN: Heliogabalus.] could never taste, though he
had at his Table many a Phœnicopterus, yet had he not one Phœnix; for
though he expected and attempted it, we read not in _Lampridius_ that he
performed it; and considering the unity thereof, it was a vain design,
that is, to destroy any species, or mutilate the great accomplishment of
six days. And although some conceive, and it may seem true, that there
is in man a natural possibility to destroy the world in one generation,
that is, by a general conspire to know no woman themselves, and disable
all others also: yet will this never be effected. And therefore _Cain_
after he had killed _Abel_, were there no other woman living, could not
have also destroyed _Eve_: which although he had a natural power to
effect, yet the execution thereof, the providence of God would have
resisted: for that would have imposed another creation upon him, and to
have animated a second Rib of _Adam_.
CHAPTER XIII
Of Frogs, Toads, and Toad-stone.
Concerning the venomous Urine of Toads, of the stone in the Toads head,
and of the generation of Frogs, conceptions are entertained which
require consideration. And first, that a Toad pisseth, and this way
diffuseth its venome, is generally received, not only with us, but also
in other parts; for so hath _Scaliger_ observed in his Comment, _Aversum
urinam reddere ob oculos persecutoris perniciosam ruricolis persuasum
est_; and _Mathiolus_ hath also a passage, that a Toad communicates its
venome, not only by Urine, but by the humidity and slaver of its mouth;
which notwithstanding strictly understood, may admit of examination: for
some doubt may be made whether a Toad properly pisseth, that is
distinctly and separately voideth the serous excretion: for though not
only birds, but oviparous quadrupeds and Serpents have kidneys and
ureters, and some Fishes also bladders: yet for the moist and dry
excretion they seem at last to have but one vent and common place of
exclusion: and with the same propriety of language, we may ascribe that
action unto Crows and Kites. And this not onely in Frogs and Toads, but
may be enquired in Tortoyses: that is, whether that be strictly true, or
to be taken for a distinct and separate miction, when _Aristotle_
affirmeth, that no oviparous animal, that is, which either spawneth or
layeth Eggs, doth Urine except the Tortois.
The ground or occasion of this expression might from hence arise, that
Toads are sometimes observed to exclude or spit out a dark and liquid
matter behind: which we have observed to be true, and a venomous
condition there may be perhaps therein, but some doubt there may be,
whether this is to be called their urine: not because it is emitted
aversly or backward, by both sexes, but because it is confounded with
the intestinal excretions and egestions of the belly: and this way is
ordinarily observed, although possible it is that the liquid excretion
may sometimes be excluded without the other.
As for the stone commonly called a Toad-stone, which is presumed to be
found in the head of that animal, we first conceive it not a thing
impossible: nor is there any substantial reason why in a Toad there may
not be found such hard and lapideous concretions. For the like we daily
observe in the heads of Fishes, as Cods, Carps, and Pearches: the like
also in Snails, a soft and exosseous animal, whereof in the naked and
greater sort, as though she would requite the defect of a shell on their
back, Nature near the head hath placed a flat white stone, or rather
testaceous concretion. Which though _Aldrovandus_ affirms, that after
dissection of many, he found but in some few: yet of the great gray
Snails, I have not met with any that wanted it: and the same indeed so
palpable, that without dissection it is discoverable by the hand.
Again, though it be not impossible, yet it is surely very rare: as we
are induced to believe from some enquiry of our own, from the trial of
many who have been deceived, and the frustrated search of _Porta_, who
upon the explorement of many, could scarce find one. Nor is it only of
rarity, but may be doubted whether it be of existencie, or really any
such stone in the head of a Toad at all. For although _Lapidaries_ and
questuary enquirers affirm it, yet the Writers of Minerals and natural
speculators, are of another belief: conceiving the stones which bear
this name, to be a Mineral concretion; not to be found in animals, but
in fields. And therefore _Bœtius_ refers it to _Asteria_ or some kind
of _Lapis stellaris_, and plainly concludeth, _reperiuntur in agris,
quos tamen alii in annosis ac qui diu in Arundinetis inter rubos
sentesque delituerunt bufonis capitibus generari pertinaciter
affirmant_.
Lastly, If any such thing there be, yet must it not, for ought I see, be
taken as we receive it, for a loose and moveable stone, but rather a
concretion or induration of the crany it self; for being of an earthy
temper, living in the earth, and as some say feeding thereon, such
indurations may sometimes happen. Thus when _Brassavolus_ after a long
search had discovered one, he affirms it was rather the forehead bone
petrified, then a stone within the crany; and of this belief was
_Gesner_. Which is also much confirmed from what is delivered in
_Aldrovandus_, upon experiment of very many Toads, whose cranies or
sculs in time grew hard, and almost of a stony substance. All which
considered, we must with circumspection receive those stones which
commonly bear this name, much less believe the traditions, that in envy
to mankind they are cast out, or swallowed down by the Toad; which
cannot consist with _Anatomy_, and with the rest, enforced this censure
from _Bœtius_, _Ab eo tempore pro nugis habui quod de Bufonio lapide,
ejusque origine traditur._
What therefore best reconcileth these divided determinations, may be a
middle opinion; that of these stones some may be mineral, and to be
found in the earth; some animal, to be met with in Toads, at least by
the induration of their cranies. The first are many and manifold, to be
found in _Germany_ and other parts; the last are fewer in number, and in
substance not unlike the stones in Crabs heads. This is agreeable unto
the determination of _Aldrovandus_[SN: De Mineral. lib. 4. Musæi
Calceolariani, Sect. 3.], and is also the judgment of learned
_Spigelius_ in his Epistle unto _Pignorius_.
But these Toadstones, at least very many thereof, which are esteemed
among us, are at last found to be taken not out of Toads heads, but out
of a Fishes mouth, being handsomely contrived out of the teeth of the
_Lupus Marinus_, a Fish often taken in our Northern Seas, as was
publickly declared by an eminent and learned Physitian. [SN: Sir _George
Ent_.] But because men are unwilling to conceive so low of their
Toadstones which they so highly value, they may make some trial thereof
by a candentorned hot Iron applied unto the hollow and unpolished part
thereof, whereupon if they be true stones they will not be apt to burn
or afford a burnt odour, which they may be apt to do, if contrived out
of animal parts or the teeth of fishes.
Concerning the generation of Frogs, we shall briefly deliver that
account which observation hath taught us. By Frogs I understand not such
as arising from putrefaction, are bred without copulation, and because
they subsist not long, are called _Temporariæ_; nor do I mean the little
Frog of an excellent Parrat green, that usually sits on Trees and
Bushes, and is therefore called _Ranunculus viridis_, or _arboreus_; but
hereby I understand the aquatile or Water-Frog, whereof in ditches and
standing plashes we may behold many millions every Spring in _England_.
Now these do not as _Pliny_ conceiveth, exclude black pieces of flesh,
which after become Frogs; but they let fall their spawn in the water, of
excellent use in Physick, and scarce unknown unto any. In this spawn of
a lentous and transparent body, are to be discerned many specks, or
little conglobulations, which in a small time become of deep black, a
substance more compacted and terrestrious then the other; for it riseth
not in distillation, and affords a powder when the white and aqueous
part is exhaled. Now of this black or dusky substance is the Frog at
last formed; as we have beheld, including the spawn with water in a
glass, and exposing it unto the Sun. For that black and round substance,
in a few days began to dilate and grow longer, after a while the head,
the eyes, the tail to be discernable, and at last to become that which
the Ancients called _Gyrinus_, we a _Porwigle_ or Tadpole. This in some
weeks after becomes a perfect Frog, the legs growing out before, and the
tail wearing away, to supply the other behind; as may be observed in
some which have newly forsaken the water; for in such, some part of the
tail will be seen, but curtailed and short, not long and finny as
before. A part provided them a while to swim and move in the water, that
is, untill such time as Nature excluded legs, whereby they might be
provided not only to swim in the water, but move upon the land,
according to the amphibious [SN: _Amphibious Animals, such as live in
both elements of land and water._] and mixt intention of Nature, that
is, to live in both. So that whoever observeth the first progression of
the seed before motion, or shall take notice of the strange
indistinction of parts in the Tadpole, even when it moveth about, and
how successively the inward parts do seem to discover themselves, until
their last perfection; may easily discern the high curiosity of Nature
in these inferiour animals, and what a long line is run to make a Frog.
And because many affirm, and some deliver, that in regard it hath lungs
and breatheth, a Frog may be easily drowned; though the reason be
probable, I find not the experiment answerable; for fastning one about a
span under water, it lived almost six days. Nor is it only hard to
destroy one in water, but difficult also at land: for it will live long
after the lungs and heart be out; how long it will live in the seed, or
whether the spawn of this year being preserved, will not arise into
Frogs in the next, might also be enquired: and we are prepared to trie.
CHAPTER XIV
Of the Salamander.
That a Salamander is able to live in flames, to endure and put out fire,
is an assertion, not only of great antiquity, but confirmed by frequent,
and not contemptible testimony. The _Egyptians_ have drawn it into their
Hieroglyphicks, _Aristotle_ seemeth to embrace it; more plainly
_Nicander_, _Sarenus Sammonicus_, _Ælian_ and _Pliny_, who assigns the
cause of this effect: An Animal (saith he) so cold that it extinguisheth
the fire like Ice. All which notwithstanding, there is on the negative,
Authority and Experience; _Sextius_ a Physitian, as _Pliny_ delivereth,
denied this effect; _Dioscorides_ affirmed it a point of folly to
believe it; _Galen_ that it endureth the fire a while, but in
continuance is consumed therein. For experimental conviction,
_Mathiolus_ affirmeth, he saw a Salamander burnt in a very short time;
and of the like assertion is _Amatus Lusitanus_; and most plainly
_Pierius_, whose words in his Hieroglyphicks are these: _Whereas it is
commonly said that a Salamander extinguisheth fire, we have found by
experience, that it is so far from quenching hot coals, that it dieth
immediately therein._ As for the contrary assertion of _Aristotle_, it
is but by hear say, as common opinion believeth, _Hæc enim (ut aiunt)
ignem ingrediens, eum extinguit_; and therefore there was no absurdity
in _Galen_, when as a Septical medicine [SN: _A corruptive Medicine
destroying the parts like Arsenike._] he commended the ashes of a
Salamander; and _Magicians_ in vain from the power of this Tradition, at
the burning of Towns or Houses expect a relief from Salamanders.
The ground of this opinion, might be some sensible resistance of fire
observed in the Salamander: which being, as _Galen_ determineth, cold in
the fourth, and moist in the third degree, and having also a mucous
humidity above and under the skin, by vertue thereof it may a while
endure the flame: which being consumed, it can resist no more. Such an
humidity there is observed in Newtes, or Water-Lizards, especially if
their skins be perforated or pricked. Thus will Frogs and Snails endure
the Flame: thus will whites of Eggs, vitreous or glassie flegm
extinguish a coal: thus are unguents made which protect a while from the
fire: and thus beside the _Hirpini_ there are later stories of men that
have passed untoucht through the fire. And therefore some truth we allow
in the tradition: truth according unto _Galen_, that it may for a time
resist a flame, or as _Scaliger_ avers, extinguish or put out a coal:
for thus much will many humid bodies perform: but that it perseveres and
lives in that destructive element, is a fallacious enlargement. Nor do
we reasonably conclude, because for a time it endureth fire, it subdueth
and extinguisheth the same, because by a cold and aluminous moisture, it
is able a while to resist it: from a peculiarity of Nature it subsisteth
and liveth in it.
It hath been much promoted by Stories of incombustible napkins and
textures which endure the fire, whose materials are called by the name
of Salamanders wool. Which many too literally apprehending, conceive
some investing part, or tegument of the Salamander: wherein beside that
they mistake the condition of this Animal (which is a kind of Lizard, a
quadruped corticated and depilous, that is, without wool, fur, or hair)
they observe not the method and general rule of nature; whereby all
Quadrupeds oviparous, as Lizards, Frogs, Tortois, Chamelions,
Crocodiles, are without hair, and have no covering part or hairy
investment at all. And if they conceive that from the skin of the
Salamander, these incremable pieces are composed; beside the experiments
made upon the living, that of _Brassavolus_ will step in, who in the
search of this truth, did burn the skin of one dead.
Nor is this Salamanders wooll desumed from any Animal, but a Mineral
substance Metaphorically so called from this received opinion. For
beside _Germanicus_ his heart, [SN: Suetonius.] and _Pyrrhus_ his great
Toe, [SN: Plutarch.] which would not burn with the rest of their bodies,
there are in the number of Minerals some bodies incombustible; more
remarkably that which the ancients named _Asbeston_, and _Pancirollus_
treats of in the Chapter of _Linum vivum_. Whereof by art were weaved
Napkins, Shirts, and Coats, inconsumable by fire; and wherein in ancient
times to preserve their ashes pure, and without commixture, they burnt
the bodies of Kings. A Napkin hereof _Pliny_ reports that _Nero_ had,
and the like saith _Paulus Venetus_ the Emperour of _Tartary_ sent unto
Pope _Alexander_; and also affirms that in some part of _Tartary_ there
were Mines of Iron whose filaments were weaved into incombustible cloth.
Which rare Manufacture, although delivered for lost by _Pancirollus_,
yet _Salmuth_ his Commentator affirmeth, that one _Podocaterus_ a
Cyprian, had shewed the same at _Venice_; and his materials were from
_Cyprus_, where indeed _Dioscorides_ placeth them; the same is also
ocularly confirmed by _Vives_ upon _Austin_, and _Maiolus_ in his
Colloquies. And thus in our days do men practise to make long-lasting
Snasts for Lamps out of Alumen plumosum; and by the same we read in
_Pausanius_, that there always burnt a Lamp before the Image of
_Minerva_.
CHAPTER XV
Of the Amphisbæna.
That the Amphisbæna, that is, a smaller kind of Serpent, which moveth
forward and backward, hath two heads, or one at either extream, was
affirmed first by _Nicander_, and after by many others, by the Author of
the Book _De Theriaca ad Pisonem_, ascribed unto _Galen_; more plainly
_Pliny_, _Geminum habet caput, tanquam parum esset uno ore effundi
venenum_: but _Ælian_ most confidently, who referring the conceit of
_Chimera_ and _Hydra_ unto Fables, hath set down this as an undeniable
truth.
Whereunto while men assent, and can believe a bicipitous conformation in
any continued species, they admit a gemination of principle parts, not
naturally discovered in any Animal. True it is that other parts in
Animals are not equal; for some make their progression with many legs,
even to the number of an hundred, as _Juli_, _Scolopendræ_; or such as
are termed _Centipedes_: some fly with two wings, as Birds and many
Insects, some with four, as all farinaceous or mealy-winged Animals, as
Butterflies, and Moths: all vaginipennous or sheath-winged Insects, as
Beetles and Dorrs. Some have three Testicles, as _Aristotle_ speaks of
the Buzzard; and some have four stomachs, as horned and ruminating
Animals; but for the principle parts, the Liver, Heart, and especially
the brains; regularly they are but one in any kind or species
whatsoever.
And were there any such species or natural kind of animal, it would be
hard to make good those six positions of body, which according to the
three dimensions are ascribed unto every Animal: that is, _infra_,
_supra_, _ante_, _retro_, _dextrosum_, _sinistrosum_: for if (as it is
determined) that be the anterior and upper part, wherein the senses are
placed, and that the posterior and lower part which is opposite
thereunto, there is no inferiour or former part in this Animal; for the
senses being placed at both extreams, doth make both ends anterior,
which is impossible; the terms being Relative, which mutually subsist,
and are not without each other. And therefore this duplicity was ill
contrived to place one head at both extreams, and had been more
tolerable to have setled three or four at one. And therefore also Poets
have been more reasonable then Philosophers, and _Geryon_ or _Cerberus_
less monstrous than _Amphisbæna_.
Again, if any such thing there were, it were not to be obtruded by the
name of _Amphisbæna_, or as an Animal of one denomination; for properly
that Animal is not one, but multiplicious or many, which hath a
duplicity or gemination of principal parts. And this doth _Aristotle_
define, when he affirmeth a monster is to be esteemed one or many,
according to its principle, which he conceived the heart, whence he
derived the original of Nerves, and thereto ascribed many acts which
Physitians assign unto the brain: and therefore if it cannot be called
one, which hath a duplicity of hearts in his sense, it cannot receive
that appellation with a plurality of heads in ours. And this the
practice of Christians hath acknowledged, who have baptized these
geminous births, and double connascencies with several names, as
conceiving in them a distinction of souls, upon the divided execution of
their functions; that is, while one wept, the other laughing; while one
was silent, the other speaking; while one awaked, the other sleeping; as
is declared by three remarkable examples in _Petrarch_, _Vincentius_ and
the _Scottish_ History of _Buchanan_.
It is not denied there have been bicipitous Serpents with the head at
each extream, for an example hereof we find in _Aristotle_, and of the
like form in _Aldrovandus_ we meet with the Icon of a Lizzard; and of
this kind perhaps might that _Amphisbæna_ be, the picture whereof
_Cassianus Puteus_ shewed unto the learned _Faber_. Which double
formations do often happen unto multiparous generations, more especially
that of Serpents; whose productions being numerous, and their Eggs in
chains or links together (which sometime conjoin and inoculate into each
other) they may unite into various shapes and come out in mixed
formations. But these are monstrous productions, beside the intention of
Nature, and the statutes of generation, neither begotten of like
parents, nor begetting the like again, but irregularly produced, do
stand as Anomalies in the general Book of Nature. Which being shifts and
forced pieces, rather then genuine and proper effects, they afford us no
illation; nor is it reasonable to conclude, from a monstrosity unto a
species, or from accidental effects, unto the regular works of Nature.
Lastly, The ground of the conceit was the figure of this Animal, and
motion oft-times both ways; for described it is to be like a worm, and
so equally framed at both extreams, that at an ordinary distance it is
no easie matter to determine which is the head; and therefore some
observing them to move both ways, have given the appellation of heads
unto both extreams, which is no proper and warrantable denomination; for
many Animals with one head, do ordinarily perform both different and
contrary Motions; Crabs move sideling, Lobsters will swim swiftly
backward, Worms and Leeches will move both ways; and so will most of
those Animals, whose bodies consist of round and annulary fibers, and
move by undulation; that is, like the waves of the Sea, the one
protruding the other, by inversion whereof they make a backward Motion.
Upon the same ground hath arisen the same mistake concerning the
Scolopendra or hundred-footed Insect, as is delivered by _Rhodiginus_
from the Scholiast of _Nicander_: _Dicitur à Nicandro_, ἀμφικαρὴς, _id
est dicephalus aut biceps fictum vero, quoniam retrorsum_ (_ut scribit
Aristoteles), arrepit_, observed by _Aldrovandus_, but most plainly by
_Muffetus_, who thus concludeth upon the Text of _Nicander_: _Tamen pace
tanti authoris dixerim, unicum illi duntaxat caput licet pari
facilitate, prorsum capite, retrorsum ducente cauda, incedat, quod
Nicandro aliisque imposuisse dubito_: that is, under favour of so great
an Author, the Scopolendra hath but one head, although with equal
facility it moveth forward and backward, which I suspect deceived
_Nicander_, and others.
And therefore we must crave leave to doubt of this double-headed Serpent
until we have the advantage to behold or have an iterated ocular
testimony concerning such as are sometimes mentioned by _American_
relators; and also such as _Cassianus Puteus_ shewed in a picture to
_Johannes Faber_; and that which is set down under the name of
_Amphisbæna Europæa_ in his learned discourse upon _Hernandez_ his
History of _America_.
CHAPTER XVI
Of the Viper.
That the young Vipers force their way through the bowels of their Dam,
or that the female Viper in the act of generation bites off the head of
the male, in revenge whereof the young ones eat through the womb and
belly of the female, is a very ancient tradition. In this sense
entertained in the Hieroglyphicks of the _Egyptians_; affirmed by
_Herodotus_, _Nicander_, _Pliny_, _Plutarch_, _Ælian_, _Jerome_,
_Basil_, _Isidore_, seems countenanced by _Aristotle_, and his Scholar
_Theophrastus_: from hence is commonly assigned the reason why the
_Romans_ punished _Parricides_ by drowning them in a Sack with a Viper.
And so perhaps upon the same opinion the men of _Melita_ when they saw a
Viper upon the hand of _Paul_, said presently without conceit of any
other sin, _No doubt this man is a murderer, who though he have escaped
the Sea, yet vengeance suffereth him not to live_: that is, he is now
paid in his own way, the parricidous Animal and punishment of murderers
is upon him. And though the tradition were currant among the Greeks, to
confirm the same the Latine name is introduced, _Vipera quasi vi
pariat_; That passage also in the Gospel, _O ye generation of Vipers!_
hath found expositions which countenance this conceit. Notwithstanding
which authorities, transcribed relations and conjectures, upon enquiry
we find the same repugnant unto experience and reason.
And first, it seems not only injurious unto the providence of Nature, to
ordain a way of production which should destroy the producer, or
contrive the continuation of the species by the destruction of the
Continuator; but it overthrows and frustrates the great Benediction of
God, [SN: Gen. 1.] _God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply._
Now if it be so ordained that some must regularly perish by
multiplication, and these be the fruits of fructifying in the Viper; it
cannot be said that God did bless, but curse this Animal: _Upon thy
belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all thy life_, was not so
great a punishment unto the Serpent after the fall, as _encrease, be
fruitful and multiply_, was before. This were to confound the
Maledictions of God, and translate the curse of the Woman upon the
Serpent: that is, _in dolore paries_, _in sorrow shalt thou bring
forth_; which being proper unto the Woman, is verified best in the
Viper, whose delivery is not only accompanied with pain, but also with
death it self. And lastly, it overthrows the careful course, and
parental provision of Nature, whereby the young ones newly excluded are
sustained by the Dam, and protected until they grow up to a sufficiency
for themselves. All which is perverted in this eruptive generation: for
the Dam being destroyed, the younglings are left to their own
protection: which is not conceivable they can at all perform, and
whereof they afford us a remarkable continuance many days after birth.
For the young one supposed to break through the belly of the Dam, will
upon any fright for protection run into it; for then the old one
receives them in at her mouth, which way the fright being past, they
will return again, which is a peculiar way of refuge; and although it
seem strange, is avowed by frequent experience and undeniable testimony.
As for the experiment, although we have thrice attempted it, it hath not
well succeeded; for though we fed them with Milk, Bran, Cheese, etc.,
the females always died before the young ones were mature for this
eruption; but rest sufficiently confirmed in the experiments of worthy
enquirers. Wherein to omit the ancient conviction of _Apollonius_, we
shall set down some few of Modern Writers. [SN: _That Vipers exclude
their young ones by an ordinary passage, as other viviparous
creatures._] The first, of _Amatus Lusitanus_ in his Comment upon
_Dioscorides_, _Vidimus nos viperas prægnantes inclusas pixidibus
parere, quæ inde ex partu nec mortuæ, nec visceribus perforatæ
manserunt._ The second is that of _Scaliger_, _Viperas ab impatientibus
moræ fœtibus numerosissimis rumpi atque interire falsum esse scimus,
qui in Vincentii Camerini circulatoris lignea theca vidimus, enatas
viperellas, parente salva._ The last and most plain of _Franciscus
Bustamantinus_, a _Spanish_ Physitian of _Alcala de Henares_, whose
words in his third _de Animantibus Scripturæ_, are these: _Cum vero per
me et per alios hæc ipsa disquisissem servata Viperina progenie, etc._:
that is, when by my self and others I had enquired the truth hereof,
including Vipers in a glass, and feeding them with Cheese and Bran, I
undoubtedly found that the Viper was not delivered by the tearing of her
bowels; but I beheld the young ones excluded by the passage of
generation, near the orifice of the seidge. Whereto we might also add
the ocular confirmation of _Lacuna_ upon _Dioscorides_, _Ferdinandus
Imperatus_, and that learned Physician of _Naples_, _Aurelius
Severinus_.
Now although the Tradition be untrue, there wanted not many grounds
which made it plausibly received. The first was a favourable indulgence
and special contrivance of Nature; which was the conceit of _Herodotus_,
who thus delivereth himself. Fearful Animals, and such as serve for
food, Nature hath made more fruitful; but upon the offensive and
noxious kind, she hath not conferred fertility. So the Hare that
becometh a prey unto Man, unto Beasts, and Fowls of the air, is fruitful
even to superfætation; but the Lion, a fierce and ferocious Animal hath
young ones but seldom, and also but one at a time; Vipers indeed
although destructive are fruitful; but lest their number should
increase, Providence hath contrived another way to abate it: for in
copulation the female bites off the head of the male, and the young ones
destroy the mother. But this will not consist with reason, as we have
declared before. And if we more nearly consider the condition of Vipers
and noxious Animals we shall discover an higher provision of Nature: how
although in their paucity she hath not abridged their malignity, yet
hath she notoriously effected it by their secession or latitancy. For
not only offensive insects, as Hornets, Wasps, and the like; but
sanguineous corticated Animals, as Serpents, Toads and Lizzards, do lie
hid and betake themselves to coverts in the Winter. Whereby most
Countries enjoying the immunity of _Ireland_ and _Candie_, there ariseth
a temporal security from their venoms; and an intermission of their
mischiefs, mercifully requiting the time of their activities.
A second ground of this effect, was conceived the justice of Nature,
whereby she compensates the death of the father by the matricide or
murder of the mother: and this was the expression of _Nicander_. But the
cause hereof is as improbable as the effect; and were indeed an
improvident revenge in the young ones, whereby in consequence, and upon
defect of provision they must destroy themselves. And whereas he
expresseth this decollation of the male by so full a term as
ἀποκόπτειν, that is, to cut or lop off, the act is hardly conceiveable;
for the Viper hath but two considerable teeth, and those so disposed, so
slender and needle-pointed, that they are apter for puncture then any
act of incision. And if any like action there be, it may be only some
fast retention or sudden compression in the _Orgasmus_ or fury of their
lust; according as that expression of _Horace_ is construed concerning
_Lydia_ and _Telephus_.
----_Sive puer furens,
Impressit memorem dente labris notam._
Others ascribe this effect unto the numerous conception of the Viper;
and this was the opinion of _Theophrastus_. Who though he denieth the
exesion or forcing through the belly, conceiveth nevertheless that upon
a full and plentiful impletion there may perhaps succeed a disruption of
the matrix, as it happeneth sometimes in the long and slender fish
_Acus_. [SN: _Needle-fish, found sometimes upon the Sea-shore,
consisting of four lines unto the vent, and six from thence unto the
head._] Now although in hot Countries, and very numerous conceptions, in
the Viper or other Animals, there may sometimes ensue a dilaceration of
the genital parts; yet is this a rare and contingent effect, and not a
natural and constant way of exclusion. For the wise Creator hath formed
the organs of Animals unto their operations, and in whom he ordaineth a
numerous conception, in them he hath prepared convenient receptacles,
and a sutable way of exclusion.
Others do ground this disruption upon their continued or protracted time
of delivery, presumed to last twenty days; whereat excluding but one a
day, the latter brood impatient, by a forcible proruption anticipate
their period of exclusion; and this was the assertion of _Pliny_,
_Cæteri tarditatis impatientes prorumpunt latera, occisâ parente_;
which was occasioned upon a mistake of the Greek Text in _Aristotle_,
τίκτει δὲ ἐν μία ἠμέρα καθʼ ἐν, τίκτει δὲ πλείω ἢε εἴκοσιν, which are
literally thus translated, _Parit autem una die secundum unum, parit
autem plures quam viginti_, and may be thus Englished, _She bringeth
forth in one day, one by one, and sometimes more than twenty_: and so
hath _Scaliger_ rendered it, _Sigillatim parit absolvit, una die,
interdum plures quam viginti_: But _Pliny_, whom _Gaza_ followeth, hath
differently translated it, _Singulos diebus singulis parit, numero ferè
viginti_; whereby he extends the exclusion unto twenty days, which in
the textuary sense is fully accomplished in one.
But what hath most advanced it, is a mistake in another text of
_Aristotle_, which seemeth directly to determine this disruption,
τίκτει μικρὰ ἐχίδια ἐν ὑμέσιν, ἁι περιρρήγνυνται τριταῖοι,
ἐνίοτε δὲ καὶ ἔσωθεν διαφαγόντα αὐτὰ ἐξέρχεται, which _Gaza_ hath
thus translated, _Purit catulos abvolutos membranis quæ tertio die
rumpuntur, evenit interdum ut qui in utero adhuc sunt abrosis membranis
prorumpant._ Now herein probably _Pliny_, and many since have been
mistaken; for the disruption of the membranes or skins, which include
the young ones, conceiving a dilaceration of the matrix and belly of the
Viper: and concluding from a casual dilaceration, a regular and constant
disruption.
As for the Latine word _Vipera_, which in the Etymologie of _Isidore_
promoteth this conceit; more properly it may imply _vivipera_. For
whereas other Serpents lay Eggs, the Viper excludeth living Animals; and
though the _Cerastes_ be also viviparous, and we have found formed
Snakes in the belly of the _Cicilia_ or Slow-worm; yet may the Viper
emphatically bear the name. For the notation or Etymology is not of
necessity adequate unto the name; and therefore though animal be deduced
from _anima_, yet are there many animations beside, and Plants will
challenge a right therein as well as sensible Creatures.
As touching the Text of Scripture, and compellation of the _Pharisees_,
by Generation of Vipers, although constructions be made hereof
conformable to this Tradition; and it may be plausibly expounded, that
out of a viperous condition, they conspired against their Prophets, and
destroyed their spiritual parents; yet (as _Jansenius_ observeth)
_Gregory_ and _Jerome_, do make another construction; apprehending
thereby what is usually implied by that Proverb, _Mali corvi, malum
ovum_; that is, of evil parents, an evil generation, a posterity not
unlike their majority; of mischievous progenitors, a venomous and
destructive progeny.
And lastly, Concerning the Hieroglyphical account, according to the
Vulgar conception set down by _Orus Apollo_, the Authority thereof is
only Emblematical; for were the conception true or false, to their
apprehensions, it expressed filial impiety. Which strictly taken, and
totally received for truth, might perhaps begin, but surely promote this
conception.
More doubtful assertions have been raised of no Animal then the Viper,
as we have dispersedly noted: and _Francisco Redi_ hath amply discovered
in his noble observations of Vipers; from good reasons and iterated
experiments affirming, that a Viper containeth no humour, excrement, or
part which either dranke or eat, is able to kill any: that the
_remorsores_ or dog-teeth, are not more than two in either sex: that
these teeth are hollow, and though they bite and prick therewith, yet
are they not venomous, but only open a way and entrance unto the poyson,
which notwithstanding is not poysonous except it touch or attain unto
the bloud. And that there is no other poison in this Animal, but only
that almost insipid liquor like oyl of Almonds, which stagnates in the
sheaths and cases that cover the teeth; and that this proceeds not from
the bladder of gall, but is rather generated in the head, and perhaps
demitted and sent from thence into these cases by salival conducts and
passages, which the head communicateth unto them.
CHAPTER XVII
Of Hares.
The double sex of single Hares, or that every Hare is both male and
female, beside the vulgar opinion, was the affirmative of _Archelaus_,
of _Plutarch_, _Philostratus_, and many more. Of the same belief have
been the Jewish _Rabbins_; The same is likewise confirmed from the
Hebrew word; [SN: Arnabeth.] which, as though there were no single males
of that kind, hath only obtained a name of the feminine gender. As also
from the symbolical foundation of its prohibition in the law, [SN:
_Levit._ 11.] and what vices therein are figured; that is, not only
pusillanimity and timidity from its temper, feneration or usury from its
fœcundity and superfetation; but from this mixture of sexes,
unnatural venery and degenerous effemination. Nor are there hardly any
who either treat of mutation or mixtion of sexes, who have not left some
mention of this point; some speaking positively, others dubiously, and
most resigning it unto the enquiry of the Reader. Now hereof to speak
distinctly, they must be male and female by mutation and succession of
sexes; or else by composition, mixture or union thereof.
[Sidenote: _Transmutation of Sexes_, viz. _of Women into Men, granted_.]
As for the mutation of sexes, or transition into one another, we cannot
deny it in Hares, it being observable in Man. For hereof beside
_Empedocles_ or _Tiresias_, there are not a few examples: and though
very few, or rather none which have emasculated or turned women, yet
very many who from an esteem or reality of being Women have infallibly
proved Men. Some at the first point of their menstruous eruptions, some
in the day of their marriage, others many years after: which occasioned
disputes at Law, and contestations concerning a restore of the dowry.
And that not only mankind, but many other Animals may suffer this
transexion, we will not deny, or hold it at all impossible: although I
confess by reason of the postick and backward position of the feminine
parts in quadrupedes, they can hardly admit the substitution of a
protrusion, effectual unto masculine generation; except it be in
Retromingents, and such as couple backward.
Nor shall we only concede the succession of sexes in some, but shall not
dispute the transition of reputed species in others; that is, a
transmutation, or (as _Paracelsians_ term it) Transplantation of one
into another. Hereof in perfect Animals of a congenerous seed, or near
affinity of natures, examples are not unfrequent, as in Horses, Asses,
Dogs, Foxes, Pheasants, Cocks, etc. but in imperfect kinds, and such
where the discrimination of sexes is obscure, these transformations are
more common; and in some within themselves without commixtion, as
particularly in Caterpillars or Silkworms, wherein there is a visible
and triple transfiguration. But in Plants, wherein there is no
distinction of sex, these transplantations are conceived more obvious
then any; as that of Barley into Oats, of Wheat into Darnel; and those
grains which generally arise among Corn, as Cockle, Aracus, Ægilops, and
other degenerations; which come up in unexpected shapes, when they want
the support and maintenance of the primary and master-forms. And the
same do some affirm concerning other Plants in less analogy of figures;
as the mutation of Mint into Cresses, Basil into Serpoile, and Turneps
into Radishes. In all which, as _Severinus_ conceiveth, [SN: In Idea
Medicinæ Philosophicæ.] there may be equivocal seeds and
Hermaphroditical principles, which contain the radicality and power of
different forms; thus in the seed of Wheat there lieth obscurely the
seminality of Darnel, although in a secondary or inferiour way, and at
some distance of production; which nevertheless if it meet with
convenient promotion, or a conflux and conspiration of causes more
powerful then the other, it then beginneth to edifie in chief, and
contemning the superintendent form, produceth the signatures of its
self.
Now therefore although we deny not these several mutations, and do allow
that Hares may exchange their sex, yet this we conceive doth come to
pass but sometimes, and not in that vicissitude or annual alteration as
is presumed. That is, from imperfection to perfection, from perfection
to imperfection; from female unto male, from male to female again, and
so in a circle to both without a permansion in either. For beside the
inconceivable mutation of temper, which should yearly alternate the sex,
this is injurious unto the order of nature, whose operations do rest in
the perfection of their intents; which having once attained, they
maintain their accomplished ends, and relapse not again into their
progressional imperfections. So if in the minority of natural vigor,
the parts of seminality take place; when upon the encrease or growth
thereof the masculine appear, the first design of nature is atchieved,
and those parts are after maintained.
But surely it much impeacheth this iterated transexion of Hares, if that
be true which _Cardan_ and other Physicians affirm, that Transmutation
of sex is only so in opinion; and that these transfeminated persons were
really men at first; although succeeding years produced the manifesto or
evidence of their virilities. Which although intended and formed, was
not at first excluded: and that the examples hereof have undergone no
real or new transexion, but were Androgynally born, and under some kind
of _Hermaphrodites_. For though _Galen_ do favour the opinion, that the
distinctive parts of sexes are only different in Position, that is,
inversion or protrusion; yet will this hardly be made out from the
Anatomy of those parts. The testicles being so seated in the female,
that they admit not of protrusion; and the neck of the matrix wanting
those parts which are discoverable in the organ of virility.
The second and most received acception, is, that Hares are male and
female by conjunction of both sexes; and such as are found in mankind,
Poetically called Hermaphrodites; supposed to be formed from the
equality, or _non victorie_ of either seed; carrying about them the
parts of Man and Woman; although with great variety in perfection, site
and ability; not only as _Aristotle_ conceived, with a constant
impotency in one; but as later observers affirm, sometimes with ability
of either venery. And therefore the providence of some Laws have thought
good, that at the years of maturity they should elect one sex, and the
errors in the other should suffer a severer punishment. Whereby
endeavouring to prevent incontinency, they unawares enjoyned perpetual
chastity; for being executive in both parts, and confined unto one, they
restrained a natural power, and ordained a partial virginity. _Plato_
and some of the Rabbins proceeded higher; who conceived the first Man an
Hermaphrodite; and _Marcus Leo_ the learned _Jew_, in some sense hath
allowed it; affirming that _Adam_ in one suppositum without division,
contained both Male and Female. And therefore whereas it is said in the
text, That God created man in his own Image, in the Image of God created
he him, male and female created he them: applying the singular and
plural unto _Adam_, it might denote, that in one substance, and in
himself he included both sexes, which was after divided, and the female
called Woman. The opinion of _Aristotle_ extendeth farther, from whose
assertion all men should be Hermaphrodites; for affirming that Women do
not spermatize, and confer a place or receptacle rather then essential
principles of generation, he deductively includes both sexes in mankind;
for from the father proceed not only males and females, but from him
also must Hermaphroditical and masculo-feminine generations be derived,
and a commixtion of both sexes arise from the seed of one. But the
Schoolmen have dealt with that sex more hardly then any other; who
though they have not much disputed their generation, yet have they
controverted their Resurrection, and raisen a querie, whether any at the
last day should arise in the sex of Women; as may be observed in the
supplement of _Aquinas_.
Now as we must acknowledge this Androgynal condition in Man [SN:
_Consisting of man and woman._], so can we not deny the like doth
happen in beasts. Thus do we read in _Pliny_, that _Neroes_ Chariot was
drawn by four Hermaphroditical Mares, and _Cardan_ affirms he also
beheld one at _Antwerp_. And thus may we also concede, that Hares have
been of both sexes, and some have ocularly confirmed it; but that the
whole species or kind should be bisexous or double-sexed, we cannot
affirm, who have found the parts of male and female respectively
distinct and single in any wherein we have enquired: And the like
success had _Bacchinus_[SN: Bacch. De Hermaphroditis.] in such as he
dissected. And whereas it is conceived, that being an harmless Animal
and delectable food unto man, nature hath made them with double sexes,
that actively and passively performing they might more numerously
increase; we forget an higher providence of nature whereby she
especially promotes the multiplication of Hares, which is by
superfetation; that is, a conception upon a conception, or an
improvement of a second fruit before the first be excluded; preventing
hereby the usual intermission and vacant time of generation; which is
very common and frequently observable in Hares, mentioned long ago by
_Aristotle_, _Herodotus_, and _Pliny_; and we have often observed, that
after the first cast, there remain successive conceptions, and other
younglings very immature, and far from their term of exclusion.
[Sidenote: _Superfetation possible in women, and that unto a perfect
birth._]
Nor need any man to question this in Hares, for the same we observe doth
sometime happen in Women; for although it be true, that upon conception
the inward orifice of the matrix exactly closeth, so that it commonly
admitteth nothing after; yet falleth it out sometime, that in the act of
coition, the avidity of that part dilateth it self, and receiveth a
second burden; which if it happen to be near in time unto the first,
they do commonly both proceed unto perfection, and have legitimate
exclusions, periodically succeeding each other. But if the superfetation
be made with considerable intermission, the latter most commonly proves
abortive; for the first being confirmed, engrosseth the aliment from the
other. However therefore the project of _Julia_ seem very plausible, and
that way infallible, when she received not her passengers, before she
had taken in her lading, yet was there a fallibility therein: nor indeed
any absolute security in the policy of adultery after conception. For
the Matrix (which some have called another Animal within us, and which
is not subjected unto the law of our will) after reception of its proper
Tenant, may yet receive a strange and spurious inmate. As is confirmable
by many examples in _Pliny_; by _Larissæa_ in _Hippocrates_ and that
merry one in _Plautus_ urged also by _Aristotle_: that is, of _Iphicles_
and _Hercules_, the one begat by _Jupiter_, the other by _Amphitryon_
upon _Alemæna_ as also in those super-conceptions, where one child was
like the father, the other like the adulterer, the one favoured the
servant, the other resembled the master.
Now the grounds that begat, or much promoted the opinion of a double sex
in Hares, might be some little bags or tumours, at first glance
representing stones or Testicles, to be found in both sexes about the
parts of generation; which men observing in either sex, were induced to
believe a masculine sex in both. But to speak properly, these are no
Testicles or parts official unto generation, but glandulous substances
that seem to hold the nature of Emunctories. For herein may be perceived
slender perforations, at which may be expressed a black and fæculent
matter. If therefore from these we shall conceive a mixtion of sexes in
Hares, with fairer reason we may conclude it in Bevers; whereof both
sexes contain a double bag or Tumour in the groin, commonly called the
Cod of _Castor_, as we have delivered before.
Another ground were certain holes or cavities observable about the
siedge; which being perceived in Males, made some conceive there might
be also a fœminine nature in them. And upon this very ground, the
same opinion hath passed upon the Hyæna, and is declared by _Aristotle_,
and thus translated by _Scaliger_; _Quod autem aiunt utriusque sexus
habere genitalia, falsum est, quod videtur esse fœmineum sub cauda
est simile figura fœminino, verum pervium non est_; and thus is it
also in Hares, in whom these holes, although they seem to make a deep
cavity, yet do they not perforate the skin, nor hold a community with
any part of generation: but were (as _Pliny_ delivereth) esteemed the
marks of their age, the number of those deciding their number of years.
In which opinion what truth there is we shall not contend; for if in
other Animals there be authentick notations, if the characters of years
be found in the horns of Cows, or in the Antlers of Deer; if we
conjecture the age of Horses from joints in their docks, and undeniably
presume it from their teeth; we cannot affirm, there is in this conceit,
any affront unto nature; although who ever enquireth shall find no
assurance therein.
The last foundation was Retromingency or pissing backward; for men
observing both sexes to urine backward, or aversly between their legs,
they might conceive there was a fœminine part in both; wherein they
are deceived by the ignorance of the just and proper site of the Pizzel,
or part designed unto the Excretion of urine; which in the Hare holds
not the common position, but is aversly seated, and in its distention
enclines unto the Coccix or Scut. Now from the nature of this position,
there ensueth a necessity of Retrocopulation, which also promoteth the
conceit: for some observing them to couple without ascension, have not
been able to judge of male or female, or to determine the proper sex in
either. And to speak generally, this way of copulation is not
appropriate unto Hares, nor is there one, but many ways of coition:
according to divers shapes and different conformations. For some couple
laterally or sidewise, as Worms: some circularly or by complication, as
Serpents: some pronely, that is, by contaction of the ventral parts in
both, as Apes, Porcupines, Hedgehogs, and such as are termed Mollia, as
the Cuttle-fish and the Purple; some mixtly, that is, the male ascending
the female, or by application of the ventral parts of the one, unto the
postick parts of the other, as most Quadrupeds: Some aversly, as all
Crustaceous Animals, Lobsters, Shrimps, and Crevises, and also
Retromingents, as Panthers, Tygers, and Hares. This is the constant Law
of their Coition, this they observe and transgress not: onely the
vitiosity of man hath acted the varieties hereof; nor content with a
digression from sex or species, hath in his own kind run thorow the
Anomalies of venery; and been so bold, not only to act, but represent to
view, the irregular ways of Lust.
CHAPTER XVIII
Of Moles, or Molls.
That Moles are blind and have no eyes, though a common opinion, is
received with much variety; some affirming only they have no sight, as
_Oppianus_, the Proverb _Talpa Cæcior_, and the word σπαλαχία, or
_Talpitas_, which in _Hesychius_ is made the same with _Cæcitas_: some
that they have eyes, but no sight, as the text of _Aristotle_ seems to
imply; some neither eyes nor sight, as _Albertus_, _Pliny_, and the
vulgar opinion; some both eyes and sight, as _Scaliger_, _Aldrovandus_,
and some others. Of which opinions the last with some restriction, is
most consonant unto truth: for that they have eyes in their head is
manifest unto any, that wants them not in his own: and are discoverable,
not only in old ones, but as we have observed in young and naked
conceptions, taken out of the belly of the Dam. And he that exactly
enquires into the cavity of their cranies, may perhaps discover some
propagation of nerves communicated unto these parts. But that the
humours together with their coats are also distinct (though _Galen_ seem
to affirm it) transcendeth our discovery; for separating these little
Orbs, and including them in magnifying Glasses, we discerned no more
then _Aristotle_ mentions, τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν μέλαινα, that is, a black
humour, nor any more if they be broken. That therefore they have eyes we
must of necessity affirm; but that they be comparatively incomplete we
need not to deny: So _Galen_ affirms the parts of generation in women
are imperfect, in respect of those of men, as the eyes of Moles in
regard of other Animals; So _Aristotle_ terms them πηρουμένους, which
_Gaza_ translates _Oblæsos_, and _Scaliger_ by a word of imperfection
_inchoatos_.
Now as that they have eyes is manifest unto sense, so that they have
sight not incongruous unto reason; if we call not in question the
providence of this provision, that is, to assign the Organs, and yet
deny the Office, to grant them eyes and withhold all manner of vision.
For as the inference is fair, affirmatively deduced from the action to
the Organ, that they have eyes because they see; so is it also from the
organ to the action, that they have eyes, therefore some sight designed,
if we take the intention of Nature in every species, and except the
casual impediments, or morbosities in individuals. But as their eyes are
more imperfect then others, so do we conceive of their sight or act of
vision, for they will run against things, and hudling forwards fall from
high places. So that they are not blind, nor yet distinctly see; there
is in them no Cecity, yet more then a Cecutiency; they have sight enough
to discern the light, though not perhaps to distinguish of objects or
colours; so are they not exactly blind, for light is one object of
vision. And this (as _Scaliger_ observeth) might be as full a sight as
Nature first intended, for living in darkness under the earth, they had
no further need of eyes then to avoid the light; and to be sensible when
ever they lost that darkness of earth, which was their natural
confinement. And therefore however Translators do render the word of
_Aristotle_ or _Galen_, that is, _imperfectos oblæsos_ or _inchoatos_,
it is not much considerable; for their eyes are sufficiently begun to
finish this action, and competently perfect for this imperfect Vision.
And lastly, although they had neither eyes nor sight, yet could they not
be termed blind. For blindness being a privative term unto sight, this
appellation is not admittible in propriety of speech, and will overthrow
the doctrine of privations; which presuppose positive forms or habits,
and are not indefinite negations, denying in all subjects, but such
alone wherein the positive habits are in their proper Nature, and placed
without repugnancy. So do we improperly say a Mole is blind, if we deny
it the Organs or a capacity of vision from its created Nature; so when
the text of _John_ had said, that person was blind from his nativity,
whose cecity our Saviour cured, it was not warrantable in _Nonnus_ to
say he had no eyes at all, as in the judgment of _Heinsius_, he
describeth in his paraphrase; and as some ancient Fathers affirm, that
by this miracle they were created in him. And so though the sense may be
accepted, that Proverb must be candidly interpreted, which maketh fishes
Mute; and calls them silent which have no voice in Nature.
Now this conceit is erected upon a misapprehension or mistake in the
symtomes of vision; men confounding abolishment, diminution and
depravement, and naming that an abolition of sight, which indeed is but
an abatement. For if vision be abolished, it is called _cæcitas_, or
blindness; if depraved and receive its objects erroneously,
Hallucination; if diminished, _hebetudo visus_, _caligatio_, or dimness.
Now instead of a diminution or imperfect vision in the Mole, we affirm
an abolition or total privation; instead of a caligation or dimness, we
conclude a cecity or blindness. Which hath been frequently inferred
concerning other Animals; so some affirm the Water-Rat is blind, so
_Sammonicus_ and _Nicander_ do call the Mus-Araneus the shrew or Ranny,
blind: And because darkness was before light, the _Ægyptians_ worshipped
the same. So are _Cæciliæ_ or Slow-worms accounted blind, and the like
we affirm proverbially of the Beetle; although their eyes be evident,
and they will flye against lights, like many other Insects, and though
also _Aristotle_ determines, that the eyes are apparent in all flying
Insects, though other senses be obscure, and not perceptible at all. And
if from a diminution we may infer a total privation, or affirm that
other Animals are blind which do not acutely see, or comparatively unto
others, we shall condemn unto blindness many not so esteemed; for such
as have corneous or horney eyes, as Lobsters and crustaceous Animals,
are generally dim-sighted; all Insects that have _antennæ_, or long
horns to feel out their way, as Butterflyes and Locusts; or their
forelegs so disposed, that they much advance before their heads, as may
be observed in Spiders; and if the Eagle were judge, we might be blind
our selves. The expression therefore of Scripture in the story of
_Jacob_ is surely with circumspection: And it came to pass when _Jacob_
was old, and his eyes were dim, _quando caligarunt oculi_, saith
_Jerome_ and _Tremellius_, which are expressions of diminution, and not
of absolute privation.
Other concerns there are of Molls, which though not commonly opinioned
are not commonly enough considered: As the peculiar formation of their
feet, the slender _ossa Iugalia_, and Dogteeth, and how hard it is to
keep them alive out of the Earth: As also the ferity and voracity of
these animals; for though they be contented with Roots, and stringy
parts of Plants, or Wormes under ground, yet when they are above it will
sometimes tear and eat one another, and in a large glass wherein a Moll,
a Toad, and a Viper were inclosed, we have known the Moll to dispatch
them and to devour a good part of them both.
CHAPTER XIX
Of Lampries.
Whether Lampries have nine eyes, as is received, we durst refer it unto
_Polyphemus_, who had but one, to judge it. An error concerning eyes,
occasioned by the error of eyes; deduced from the appearance of diverse
cavities or holes on either side, which some call eyes that carelessly
behold them; and is not only refutable by experience, but also repugnant
unto Reason. For beside the monstrosity they fasten unto Nature, in
contriving many eyes, who hath made but two unto any Animal, that is,
one of each side, according to the division of the brain; it were a
superfluous inartificial act to place and settle so many in one plane;
for the two extreams would sufficiently perform the office of sight
without the help of the intermediate eyes, and behold as much as all
seven joyned together. For the visible base of the object would be
defined by these two; and the middle eyes, although they behold the same
thing, yet could they not behold so much thereof as these; so were it no
advantage unto man to have a third eye between those two he hath
already; and the fiction of _Argus_ seems more reasonable then this; for
though he had many eyes, yet were they placed in circumference and
positions of advantage, and so are they placed in several lines in
Spiders.
Again, These cavities which men call eyes are seated out of the head,
and where the Gils of other fish are placed; containing no Organs of
sight, nor having any Communication with the brain. [SN: _All
sense is from the brain._] Now all sense proceeding from the brain, and
that being placed (as _Galen_ observeth) in the upper part of the body,
for the fitter situation of the eyes, and conveniency required unto
sight; it is not reasonable to imagine that they are any where else, or
deserve that name which are seated in other parts. And therefore we
relinquish as fabulous what is delivered of _Sternopthalmi_, or men with
eyes in their breast, and when it is said by _Solomon_, A wise mans eyes
are in his head, it is to be taken in a second sense, and affordeth no
objection. True it is that the eyes of Animals are seated with some
difference, but in sanguineous animals in the head, and that more
forward then the ear or hole of hearing. In quadrupedes, in regard of
the figure of their heads, they are placed at some distance; in
latirostrous and flat-bill'd birds they are more laterally seated, and
therefore when they look intently they turn one eye upon the object, and
can convert their heads to see before and behind, and to behold two
opposite points at once. But at a more easie distance are they situated
in man, and in the same circumference with the ear; for if one foot of
the compass be placed upon the Crown, a circle described thereby will
intersect, or pass over both the ears.
[Sidenote: _To what use the nine eyes in a Lamprie do serve._]
The error in this conceit consists in the ignorance of these cavities,
and their proper use in nature; for this is a particular disposure of
parts, and a peculiar conformation whereby these holes and sluces supply
the defect of Gils, and are assisted by the conduit in the head; for
like cetaceous Animals and Whales, the Lamprie hath a fistula, spout or
pipe at the back part of the head, whereat it spurts out water. Nor is
it only singular in this formation, but also in many other; as in defect
of bones, whereof it hath not one; and for the spine or backbone, a
cartilaginous substance without any spondyles, processes or protuberance
whatsoever. As also in the provision which Nature hath made for the
heart; which in this Animal is very strangely secured, and lies immured
in a cartilage or gristly substance. And lastly, in the colour of the
liver: which is in the Male of an excellent grass-green: but of a deeper
colour in the Female, and will communicate a fresh and durable verdure.
CHAPTER XX
Of Snayls.
Whether _Snayls_ have eyes some Learned men have doubted. For _Scaliger_
terms them but imitations of eyes; and _Aristotle_ upon consequence
denyeth them, when he affirms that _Testaceous_ Animals have no eyes.
But this now seems sufficiently asserted by the help of exquisite
Glasses, which discover those black and atramentous spots or globales to
be their eyes.
That they have two eyes is the common opinion, but if they have two
eyes, we may grant them to have no less than four, that is, two in the
larger extensions above, and two in the shorter and lesser horns below,
and this number may be allowed in these inferiour and exanguious
animals; since we may observe the articulate and latticed eyes in Flies,
and nine in some Spiders: And in the great _Phalangium_ Spider of
_America_, we plainly number eight.
But in sanguineous animals, quadrupeds, bipeds, or man, no such number
can be regularly verified, or multiplicity of eyes confirmed. And
therefore what hath been under this kind delivered, concerning the
plurality, paucity or anomalous situation of eyes, is either monstrous,
fabulous, or under things never seen includes good sense or meaning. And
so may we receive the figment of _Argus_, who was an Hieroglyphick of
heaven, in those centuries of eyes expressing the stars; and their
alternate wakings, the vicissitude of day and night. Which strictly
taken cannot be admitted; for the subject of sleep is not the eye, but
the common sense, which once asleep, all eyes must be at rest. And
therefore what is delivered as an Embleme of vigilancy, that the Hare
and Lion do sleep with one eye open, doth not evince they are any more
awake then if they were both closed. For the open eye beholds in sleep
no more then that which is closed; and no more one eye in them then two
in other Animals that sleep with both open; as some by disease, and
others naturally which have no eye-lids at all.
[Sidenote: _How things happen to be seen as double._]
As for Polyphemus, although the story be fabulous, the monstrosity is
not impossible. For the act of Vision may be performed with one eye; and
in the deception and fallacy of sight, hath this advantage of two, that
it beholds not objects double, or sees two things for one. For this doth
happen when the axis of the visive cones, diffused from the object, fall
not upon the same plane; but that which is conveyed into one eye, is
more depressed or elevated then that which enters the other. So if
beholding a Candle, we protrude either upward or downward the pupill of
one eye, the object will appear double; but if we shut the other eye,
and behold it with one, it will their appear but single; and if we
abduce the eye unto either corner, the object will not duplicate: for in
that position the axis of the cones remain in the same plane, as is
demonstrated in the opticks, and delivered by _Galen_, in his tenth _De
usu partium_.
Relations also there are of men that could make themselves invisible,
which belongs not to this discourse: but may serve as notable
expressions of wise and prudent men, who so contrive their affairs, that
although their actions be manifest, their designs are not discoverable.
In this acception there is nothing left of doubt, and _Giges_ Ring
remaineth still amongst us: for vulgar eyes behold no more of wise men
then doth the Sun: they may discover their exteriour and outward ways,
but their interiour and inward pieces he only sees, that sees into their
beings.
CHAPTER XXI
Of the Chameleon.
Concerning the _Chameleon_ there generally passeth an opinion that it
liveth only upon air, and is sustained by no other aliment: Thus much is
in plain terms affirmed by _Solinus_, _Pliny_, and others, and by this
periphrasis is the same described by _Ovid_. All which notwithstanding,
upon enquiry I find the assertion mainly controvertible, and very much
to fail in the three inducements of belief.
And first for its verity, although asserted by some, and traditionally
delivered by others, yet is it very questionable. For beside _Ælian_,
who is seldom defective in these accounts; _Aristotle_ distinctly
treating hereof, hath made no mention of this remarkable propriety:
which either suspecting its verity, or presuming its falsity, he surely
omitted: for that he remained ignorant of this account it is not easily
conceiveable: it being the common opinion, and generally received by all
men. Some have positively denied it, as _Augustinus_, _Niphus_,
_Stobæus_, _Dalechampius_, _Fortunius Licetus_, with many more; others
have experimentally refuted it, as namely _Johannes Landius_, who in the
relation of _Scaliger_, observed a _Chameleon_ to lick up a fly from his
breast: But _Bellonius_ [SN: _Comment. in Ocell._ Lucan.] hath
been more satisfactorily experimental, not only affirming they feed on
Flies, Caterpillars, Beetles and other Insects, but upon exenteration he
found these Animals in their bellies: whereto we might also add the
experimental decisions of the worthy _Peireschius_ and learned _Emanuel
Vizzanius_, in that _Chameleon_ which had been often observed to drink
water, and delight to feed on Meal-worms. And although we have not had
the advantage of our own observation, yet have we received the like
confirmation from many ocular spectators.
As touching the verisimility or probable truth of this relation, several
reasons there are which seem to overthrow it. For first, there are found
in this Animal, the guts, the stomack, and other parts official unto
nutrition; which were its aliment the empty reception of air, their
provisions had been superfluous. Now the wisdom of nature abhorring
superfluities, and effecting nothing in vain, unto the intention of
these operations, respectively contriveth the Organs; and therefore
where we find such Instruments, we may with strictness expect their
actions; and where we discover them not, we may with safety conclude the
non-intention of their operations. So when we perceive that Bats have
teats, it is not unreasonable to infer they suckle their younglings with
milk; but whereas no other flying Animal hath these parts, we cannot
from them expect a viviparous exclusion; but either a generation of
eggs, or some vermiparous separation, whose navel is within it self at
first, and its nutrition after not connexedly depending of its original.
Again, Nature is so far from leaving any one part without its proper
action, that she oft-times imposeth two or three labours upon one, so
the Pizel in Animals is both official unto Urine and to generation, but
the first and primary use is generation; for some creatures enjoy that
part which urine not. So the nostrils are useful both for respiration
and smelling, but the principal use is smelling; for many have nostrils
which have no lungs, as fishes, but none have lungs or respiration,
which have not some shew, or some analogy of nostrils. [SN: _Nature
provides no part without its proper function or office._] Thus we
perceive the providence of Nature, that is, the wisdom of God, which
disposeth of no part in vain, and some parts unto two or three uses,
will not provide any without the execution of its proper office, nor
where there is no digestion to be made, make any parts inservient to
that intention.
Beside the remarkable teeth, the tongue of this animal is a second
argument to overthrow this airy nutrication: and that not only in its
proper nature, but also its peculiar figure. For of this part properly
taken there are two ends; that is, the formation of the voice, and the
execution of tast; for the voice, it can have no office in _Chameleons_,
for they are mute Animals; as beside fishes, are most other sorts of
Lizards. As for their tast, if their nutriment be air, neither can it be
an Instrument thereof; for the body of that element is ingustible, void
of all sapidity, and without any action of the tongue, is by the rough
artery or wezon conducted into the lungs. And therefore _Pliny_ much
forgets the strictness of his assertion, when he alloweth excrements
unto that Animal, that feedeth only upon Air; which notwithstanding with
the urine of an Ass, he commends as a magicall Medicine upon our
enemies.
The figure of the tongue seems also to overthrow the presumption of this
aliment, which according to exact delineation, is in this Animal
peculiar, and seemeth contrived for prey. For in so little a creature it
is at the least a palm long, and being it self very slow in motion, hath
in this part a very great agility; withall its food being flies and such
as suddenly escape, it hath in the tongue a mucous and slimy extremity,
whereby upon a sudden emission it inviscates and tangleth those Insects.
And therefore some have thought its name not unsuitable unto its nature;
the nomination in Greek is a little Lion [SN: χαιμαιλέων.]; not so much
for the resemblance of shape, as affinity of condition; that is for
vigilancy in its prey, and sudden rapacity thereof, which it performeth
not like the Lion with its teeth, but a sudden and unexpected
ejaculation of the tongue. This exposition is favoured by some,
especially the old gloss upon _Leviticus_, whereby in the Translation of
_Jerome_ and the Septuagint, this Animal is forbidden; what ever it be,
it seems as reasonable as that of _Isidore_, who derives this name _à
Camelo et Leone_, as presuming herein resemblance with a Camell.
As for the possibility hereof, it is not also unquestionable; and wise
men are of opinion, the bodies of Animals cannot receive a proper
aliment from air; for beside that tast being (as _Aristotle_ terms it) a
kind of touch; it is required the aliment should be tangible, and fall
under the palpable affections of touch; beside also that there is some
sapor in all aliments, as being to be distinguished and judged by the
gust; which cannot be admitted in air: Beside these, I say, if we
consider the nature of aliment, and the proper use of air in
respiration, it will very hardly fall under the name hereof, or properly
attain the act of nutrication.
[Sidenote: _Requisites unto Nutrition._]
And first concerning its nature, to make a perfect nutrition into the
body nourished, there is required a transmutation of the nutriment, now
where this conversion or aggeneration is made, there is also required in
the aliment a familiarity of matter, and such a community or vicinity
unto a living nature, as by one act of the soul may be converted into
the body of the living, and enjoy one common soul. Which cannot be
effected by air, it concurring only with our flesh in common principles,
which are at the largest distance from life, and common also unto
inanimated constitutions. And therefore when it is said by _Fernelius_,
and asserted by divers others, that we are only nourished by living
bodies, and such as are some way proceeding from them, that is, the
fruits, effects, parts, or seeds thereof; they have laid out an object
very agreeable unto assimulation; for these indeed are fit to receive a
quick and immediate conversion, as holding some community with our
selves, and containing approximate dispositions unto animation.
Secondly, (as is argued by _Aristotle_ against the _Pythagoreans_)
whatsoever properly nourisheth before its assimulation, by the action of
natural heat it receiveth a corpulency or incrassation progressional
unto its conversion; which notwithstanding cannot be effected upon air;
for the action of heat doth not condense but rarifie that body, and by
attenuation, rather then for nutrition, disposeth it for expulsion.
Thirdly, (which is the argument of _Hippocrates_) all aliment received
into the body, must be therein a considerable space retained, and not
immediately expelled. Now air but momentally remaining in our bodies, it
hath no proportionable space for its conversion; only of length enough
to refrigerate the heart; which having once performed, lest being it
self heated again, it should suffocate that part, it maketh no stay, but
hasteth back the same way it passed in.
Fourthly, The use of air attracted by the lungs, and without which there
is no durable continuation in life, is not the nutrition of parts, but
the contemperation and ventilation of that fire always maintained in the
forge of life; whereby although in some manner it concurreth unto
nutrition, yet can it not receive the proper name of nutriment. And
therefore by _Hippocrates_[SN: De Alimento.] it is termed _Alimentum
non Alimentum_, a nourishment and no nourishment. That is, in a large
acception, but not in propriety of language; conserving the body, not
nourishing the same; nor repairing it by assimulation, but preserving it
by ventilation; for thereby the natural flame is preserved from
extinction, and so the individuum supported in some way like nutrition.
And though the air so entreth the Lungs, that by its nitrous Spirit doth
affect the heart, and several ways qualifie the blood; and though it be
also admitted into other parts, even by the meat we chew, yet that it
affordeth a proper nutriment alone, it is not easily made out.
Again, Some are so far from affirming the air to afford any nutriment,
that they plainly deny it to be any Element, or that it entreth into
mixt bodies as any principle in their compositions, but performeth other
offices in the Universe; as to fill all vacuities about the earth or
beneath it, to convey the heat of the sun, to maintain fires and flames,
to serve for the flight of volatils, respiration of breathing Animals,
and refrigeration of others. And although we receive it as an Element,
yet since the transmutation of Elements and simple bodies, is not beyond
great question, since also it is no easie matter to demonstrate that air
is so much as convertible into water [SN: _Wherein Vapour is commonly
mistaken for air._]; how transmutable it is into flesh, may be of deeper
doubt.
And although the air attracted may be conceived to nourish the invisible
flame of life, in as much as common and culinary flames are nourished by
the air about them; we make some doubt whether air is the pabulous
supply of fire, much less that flame is properly air kindled. And the
same before us, hath been denied by the Lord of _Verulam_, in his Tract
of Life and Death, and also by Dr. _Jorden_ in his book of Mineral
waters. [SN: _What the matter of Culinary or Kitchin fire is._] For that
which substantially maintaineth the fire, is the combustible matter in
the kindled body, and not the ambient air, which affordeth exhalation to
its fuliginous atomes; nor that which causeth the flame properly to be
termed air, but rather as he expresseth it, the accension of fuliginous
exhalations, which contain an unctuosity in them, and arise from the
matter of fuel, which opinion will salve many doubts, whereof the common
conceit affordeth no solution.
As first, How fire is stricken out of flints? that is, not by kindling
the air from the collision of two hard bodies; for then Diamonds should
do the like better than Flints: but rather from sulphureous inflamed and
even vitrified effluviums and particles, as hath been observed of late.
The like saith _Jorden_ we observe in canes and woods, that are unctuous
and full of oyl, which will yield fire by frication, or collision, not
by kindling the air about them, but the inflamable oyl within them. [SN:
_Why fire goes out commonly wanting air, and why sometimes continued
many ages in flame without fuel._] Why the fire goes out without air?
that is, because the fuliginous exhalations wanting evaporation recoil
upon the flame and choak it, as is evident in cupping glasses; and the
artifice of charcoals, where if the air be altogether excluded, the fire
goes out. Why some lamps included in those bodies have burned many
hundred years, as that discovered in the Sepulchre of _Tullia_, the
sister of _Cicero_, and that of _Olibius_ many years after, near
_Padua_? because whatever was their matter, either a preparation of
gold, or _Naptha_, the duration proceeded from the purity of their oyl
which yielded no fuliginous exhalations to suffocate the fire; For if
air had nourished the flame, it had not continued many minutes, for it
would have been spent and wasted by the fire. Why a piece of flax will
kindle, though it touch not the flame? because the fire extendeth
further, then indeed it is visible, being at some distance from the
week, a pellucide and transparent body, and thinner then the air it
self. Why Mettals in their liquation, although they intensly heat the
air above their surface, arise not yet into a flame, nor kindle the air
about them? because their sulphur is more fixed, and they emit not
inflamable exhalations. And lastly, why a lamp or candle burneth only in
the air about it, and inflameth not the air at a distance from it?
because the flame extendeth not beyond the inflamable effluence, but
closely adheres unto the original of its inflamation; and therefore it
only warmeth, not kindleth the air about it. Which notwithstanding it
will do, if the ambient air be impregnate with subtile inflamabilities,
and such as are of quick accension; as experiment is made in a close
room; upon an evaporation of spirits of wine and Camphire; as
subterraneous fires do sometimes happen, and as _Creusa_ and
_Alexanders_ boy in the bath were set on fire by _Naptha_.
Lastly, The Element of air is so far from nourishing the body, that some
have questioned the power of water; many conceiving it enters not the
body in the power of aliment, or that from thence there proceeds a
substantial supply. For beside that some creatures drink not at all;
Even unto our selves, and more perfect Animals, though many ways
assistent thereto, it performs no substantial nutrition, serving for
refrigeration, dilution of solid aliment, and its elixation in the
stomack; which from thence as a vehicle it conveys through less
accessible cavities, and so in a rorid substance through the capillary
cavities, into every part; which having performed, it is afterward
excluded by Urine, sweat and serous separations. And this opinion surely
possessed the Ancients; for when they so highly commended that water
which is suddenly hot and cold, which is without all savour, the
lightest, the thinnest, and which will soonest boil Beans or Pease, they
had no consideration of nutrition; whereunto had they had respect, they
would have surely commended gross and turbid streams, in whose confusion
at least, there might be contained some nutriment; and not jejune or
limped water, nearer the simplicity of its Element. Although, I confess,
our clearest waters and such as seem simple unto sense, are much
compounded unto reason, as may be observed in the evaporation of large
quantities of water; wherein beside a terreous residence some salt is
also found, as is also observable in rain water; which appearing pure
and empty, is full of seminal principles, and carrieth vital atomes of
plants and Animals in it, which have not perished in the great
circulation of nature; as may be discovered from several Insects
generated in rain water, from the prevalent fructification of plants
thereby; and (beside the real plant of _Cornerius_ [SN: _A seed of
plants and animals contained in rain-water._ Zibavius, _tom. 4_. Chym.])
from vegetable figurations, upon the sides of glasses, so rarely
delineated in frosts.
All which considered, severer heads will be apt enough to conceive the
opinion of this Animal, not much unlike that of the Astomi, or men
without mouths, in _Pliny_; sutable unto the relation of the Mares in
_Spain_, and their subventaneous conceptions, from the Western wind; and
in some way more unreasonable then the figment of _Rabican_ the famous
horse in _Ariosto_, which being conceived by flame and wind, never
tasted grass, or fed on any grosser provender then air; for this way of
nutrition was answerable unto the principles of his generation. Which
being not airy, but gross and seminal in the _Chameleon_; unto its
conservation there is required a solid pasture, and a food congenerous
unto the principles of its nature.
The grounds of this opinion are many; the first observed by
_Theophrastus_, was the inflation or swelling of the body, made in this
Animal upon inspiration or drawing in its breath; which people
observing, have thought it to feed upon air. But this effect is rather
occasioned upon the greatness of its lungs, which in this Animal are
very large, and by their backward situation, afford a more observable
dilation; and though their lungs be less, the like inflation is also
observable in Toads, but especially in Sentortoises.
A second is the continual hiation or holding open its mouth, which men
observing, conceive the intention thereof to receive the aliment of air;
but this is also occasioned by the greatness of its lungs; for repletion
whereof not having a sufficient or ready supply by its nostrils; it is
enforced to dilate and hold open the jaws.
The third is the paucity of blood observed in this Animal, scarce at all
to be found but in the eye, and about the heart; which defect being
observed, inclined some into thoughts, that the air was a sufficient
maintenance for these exanguious parts. But this defect or rather
paucity of blood, is also agreeable unto many other Animals, whose solid
nutriment we do not controvert; as may be observed in other sorts of
Lizards, in Frogs and divers Fishes; and therefore an Horse-leech will
not readily fasten upon every fish; and we do not read of much blood
that was drawn from Frogs by Mice, in that famous battel of _Homer_.
The last and most common ground which begat or promoted this opinion, is
the long continuation hereof without any visible food, which some
observing, precipitously conclude they eat not at all. It cannot be
denied it is (if not the most of any) a very abstemious Animal, and such
as by reason of its frigidity, paucity of blood, and latitancy in the
winter (about which time the observations are often made) will long
subsist without a visible sustentation. But a like condition may be also
observed in many other Animals; for Lizards and Leeches, as we have made
trial, will live some months without sustenance; and we have included
Snails in glasses all winter, which have returned to feed again in the
spring. Now these notwithstanding, are not conceived to pass all their
lives without food; for so to argue is fallacious, and is moreover
sufficiently convicted by experience. And therefore probably other
relations are of the same verity, which are of the like affinity; as is
the conceit of the _Rhintace_ in _Persia_, the _Canis Levis_ of
_America_, and the _Manucodiata_ or bird of Paradise in _India_.
To assign a reason of this abstinence in Animals, or declare how without
a supply there ensueth no destructive exhaustion, exceedeth the limits
and intention of my discourse. _Fortunius Licetus_ in his excellent
Tract, _de his qui diu vivunt sine alimento_, hath very ingeniously
attempted it; deducing the cause hereof from an equal conformity of
natural heat and moisture, at least no considerable exuperancy in
either; which concurring in an unactive proportion, the natural heat
consumeth not the moisture (whereby ensueth no exhaustion) and the
condition of natural moisture is able to resist the slender action of
heat (whereby it needeth no reparation) and this is evident in Snakes,
Lizards, Snails, and divers Insects latitant many months in the year;
which being cold creatures, containing a weak heat in a crass or copious
humidity, do long subsist without nutrition. For the activity of the
agent, being not able to overmaster the resistance of the patient, there
will ensue no deperdition. And upon the like grounds it is, that cold
and phlegmatick bodies, and (as _Hippocrates_ determineth) that old men
will best endure fasting. Now the same harmony and stationary
constitution, as it happeneth in many species, so doth it fall out
sometime in Individuals. For we read of many who have lived long without
aliment; and beside deceits and impostures, there may be veritable
Relations of some, who without a miracle, and by peculiarity of temper,
have far out fasted _Elias_. Which notwithstanding doth not take off the
miracle; for that may be miraculously effected in one, which is
naturally causable in another. Some naturally living unto an hundred;
unto which age, others notwithstanding could not attain without a
miracle.
CHAPTER XXII
Of the Ostrich.
The common opinion of the _Ostrich_, _Struthiocamelus_ or
_Sparrow-Camel_ conceives that it digesteth Iron; and this is confirmed
by the affirmations of many; beside swarms of others, _Rhodiginus_ in
his prelections taketh it for granted, _Johannes Langius_ in his
Epistles pleadeth experiment for it; the common picture also confirmeth
it, which usually describeth this Animal with an horshoe in its mouth.
Notwithstanding upon enquiry we find it very questionable, and the
negative seems most reasonably entertained; whose verity indeed we do
the rather desire, because hereby we shall relieve our ignorance of one
occult quality; for in the list thereof it is accounted, and in that
notion imperiously obtruded upon us. For my part, although I have had
the sight of this Animal, I have not had the opportunity of its
experiment, but have received great occasion of doubt, from learned
discourses thereon.
For _Aristotle_ and _Oppianus_ who have particularly treated hereof are
silent in this singularity; either omitting it as dubious, or as the
Comment saith, rejecting it as fabulous. _Pliny_ speaketh generally,
affirming only, the digestion is wonderful in this Animal; _Ælian_
delivereth, that it digesteth stones without any mention of Iron; _Leo
Africanus_, who lived in those Countries wherein they most abound,
speaketh diminutively, and but half way into this assertion: _Surdum ac
simplex animal est, quicquid invenit, absque delectu, usque ad ferrum
devorat_: _Fernelius_ in his second _De abditis rerum causis_,
extenuates it, and _Riolanus_ in his Comment thereof positively denies
it. Some have experimentally refuted it, as _Albertus Magnus_; and most
plainly _Ulysses Aldrovandus_, whose words are these: _Ego ferri frusta
devorare, dum Tridenti essem, observavi, sed quæ incocta rursus
excerneret_, that is, at my being at Trent, I observed the _Ostrich_ to
swallow Iron, but yet to exclude it undigested again.
Now beside experiment, it is in vain to attempt against it by
Philosophical argument, it being an occult quality, which contemns the
law of Reason, and defends it self by admitting no reason at all. [SN:
_How_ (_possibly_) _the stomack of the_ Ostrich _may alter Iron_.] As
for its possibility we shall not at present dispute; nor will we affirm
that Iron ingested, receiveth in the stomack of the _Ostrich_ no
alteration at all; but if any such there be, we suspect this effect
rather from some way of corrosion, then any of digestion; not any liquid
reduction or tendance to chilification by the power of natural heat, but
rather some attrition from an acide and vitriolous humidity in the
stomack, which may absterse and shave the scorious parts thereof. So
rusty Iron crammed down the throat of a Cock, will become terse and
clear again in its gizzard: So the Counter which according to the
relation of _Amatus_ remained a whole year in the body of a youth, and
came out much consumed at last; might suffer this diminution, rather
from sharp and acide humours, then the strength of natural heat, as he
supposeth. So silver swallowed and retained some time in the body, will
turn black, as if it had been dipped in _Aqua fortis_, or some corrosive
water, but Lead will remain unaltered; for that mettal containeth in it
a sweet salt or sugar, whereby it resisteth ordinary corrosion, and will
not easily dissolve even in _Aqua fortis_. So when for medical uses, we
take down the filings of Iron or Steel, we must not conceive it passeth
unaltered from us; for though the grosser parts be excluded again, yet
are the dissoluble parts extracted, whereby it becomes effectual in
deopilations; and therefore for speedier operation we make extinctions,
infusions, and the like, whereby we extract the salt and active parts of
the Medicine; which being in solution, more easily enter the veins. [SN:
_What the Chymists would have by their_ Aurum Potabile.] And this is
that the Chymists mainly drive at in the attempt of their _Aurum
Potabile_; that is, to reduce that indigestible substance into such a
form as may not be ejected by siege, but enter the cavities, and less
accessible parts of the body, without corrosion.
The ground of this conceit is its swallowing down fragments of Iron,
which men observing, by a froward illation, have therefore conceived it
digesteth them; which is an inference not to be admitted, as being a
fallacy of the consequent, that is, concluding a position of the
consequent, from the position of the antecedent. For many things are
swallowed by Animals, rather for condiment, gust or medicament, then any
substantial nutriment. So Poultrey, and especially the Turkey, do of
themselves take down stones; and we have found at one time in the
gizzard of a Turkey no less then seven hundred. Now these rather concur
unto digestion, then are themselves digested; for we have found them
also in the guts and excrements; but their descent is very slow, for we
have given them stones and small pieces of Iron, which eighteen days
after we have found remaining in the gizzard. And therefore the
experiment of _Langius_ and others might be fallible, whilst after the
taking they expected it should come down within a day or two after. [SN:
_How Cherry-stones may be thought to prevent surfets upon eating
Cherries._] Thus also we swallow Cherry-stones, but void them
unconcocted, and we usually say they preserve us from surfet; for being
hard bodies they conceive a strong and durable heat in the stomack, and
so prevent the crudities of their fruit: And upon the like reason do
culinary operators observe, that flesh boiles best, when the bones are
boiled with it. Thus dogs will eat grass, which they digest not: Thus
Camels to make the water sapid, do raise the mud with their feet: Thus
horses will knable at walls, Pigeons delight in salt stones. Rats will
gnaw iron, and _Aristotle_ saith the Elephant swalloweth stones. And
thus may also the _Ostrich_ swallow Iron; not as his proper aliment, but
for the ends above expressed, and even as we observe the like in other
Animals.
And whether these fragments of Iron and hard substances swallowed by the
_Ostrich_, have not also that use in their stomacks, which they have in
other birds; that is, in some way to supply the use of teeth, by
commolition, grinding and compression of their proper aliment, upon the
action of the strongly conformed muscles of the stomack; as the honor'd
Dr. _Harvey_ discourseth, may also be considered.
What effect therefore may be expected from the stomack of an _Ostrich_
by application alone to further digestion in ours, beside the
experimental refute of _Galen_, we refer it unto considerations above
alledged; Or whether there be any more credit to be given unto the
Medicine of _Ælian_, who affirms the stones they swallow have a peculiar
vertue for the eyes, then that of _Hermolaus_ and _Pliny_ drawn from the
urine of this Animal; let them determine who can swallow so strange a
transmission of qualities, or believe that any Bird or flying Animal
doth separately and distinctly urine beside the Bat.
That therefore an _Ostrich_ will swallow and take down Iron, is easily
to be granted: that oftimes it pass entire away, if we admit of ocular
testimony not to be denied. And though some experiment may also plead,
that sometimes they are so altered, as not to be found or excluded in
any discernable parcels: yet whether this be not effected by some way of
corrosion, from sharp and dissolving humidities, rather then any proper
digestion, chilifactive mutation, or alimental conversion, is with good
reason doubted.
CHAPTER XXIII
Of Unicorns Horn.
Great account and much profit is made of _Unicorns horn_, at least of
that which beareth the name thereof; wherein notwithstanding, many I
perceive suspect an Imposture, and some conceive there is no such Animal
extant. Herein therefore to draw up our determinations; beside the
several places of Scripture mentioning this Animal (which some may well
contend to be only meant of the Rhinoceros [SN: _Some doubt to be made
what_ ראם _signifieth in Scripture_.]) we are so far from denying there
is any _Unicorn_ at all, that we affirm there are many kinds thereof. In
the number of Quadrupedes, we will concede no less then five; that is,
the _Indian_ Ox, the _Indian_ Ass, the Rhinoceros, the Oryx, and that
which is more eminently termed _Monoceros_, or _Unicornis_. Some of the
list of fishes; as that described by _Olaus_, _Albertus_ and others: and
some Unicorns we will allow even among Insects; as those four kinds of
nasicornous Beetles described by _Muffetus_.
Secondly, Although we concede there may be many _Unicorns_, yet are we
still to seek; for whereunto to affix this Horn in question, or to
determine from which thereof we receive this magnified Medicine, we have
no assurance, or any satisfactory decision. For although we single out
one, and eminently thereto assign the name of the _Unicorn_; yet can we
not be secure what creature is meant thereby; what constant shape it
holdeth, or in what number to be received. For as far as our endeavours
discover, this animal is not uniformly described, but differently set
forth by those that undertake it. [SN: _The Unicorn, how variously
reported by Authors._] _Pliny_ affirmeth it is a fierce and terrible
creature; _Vartomannus_ a tame and mansuete Animal: those which _Garcias
ab Horto_ described about the cape of good hope, were beheld with heads
like horses; those which _Vartomannus_ beheld, he described with the
head of a Deer; _Pliny_, _Ælian_, _Solinus_, and after these from ocular
assurance, _Paulus Venetus_ affirmeth, the feet of the _Unicorn_ are
undivided, and like the Elephants: But those two which _Vartomannus_
beheld at _Mecha_, were as he describeth, footed like a Goat. As _Ælian_
describeth, it is in the bigness of an Horse, as _Vartomannus_, of a
Colt; that which _Thevet_ speaketh of was not so big as an Heifer; but
_Paulus Venetus_ affirmeth, they are but little less then Elephants.
Which are discriminations very material, and plainly declare, that under
the same name Authors describe not the same Animal: so that the
_Unicorns_ Horn of one, is not that of another, although we proclaim an
equal vertue in all.
Thirdly, Although we were agreed what Animal this was, or differed not
in its description, yet would this also afford but little satisfaction;
for the Horn we commonly extol, is not the same with that of the
Ancients. For that in the description of _Ælian_ and _Pliny_ was black:
this which is shewed amongst us is commonly white, none black; and of
those five which _Scaliger_ beheld, though one spadiceous, or of a light
red, and two enclining to red, yet was there not any of this complexion
among them.
Fourthly, What Horns soever they be which pass amongst us, they are not
surely the Horns of any one kind of Animal, but must proceed from
several sorts of _Unicorns_. For some are wreathed, some not: That
famous one which is preserved at St. _Dennis_ near _Paris_, hath wreathy
spires, and chocleary turnings about it, which agreeth with the
description of the _Unicorns_ Horn in _Ælian_. Those two in the treasure
of St. _Mark_ are plain, and best accord with those of the _Indian_ Ass,
or the descriptions of other _Unicorns_: That in the Repository of the
electour of Saxone is plain and not hollow, and is believed to be a true
Land _Unicorns_ Horn. _Albertus Magnus_ describeth one ten foot long,
and at the base about thirteen inches compass: And that of _Antwerp_
which _Goropius Becanus_ describeth, is not much inferiour unto it;
which best agree unto the descriptions of the _Sea-Unicorns_; for these,
as _Olaus_ affirmeth, are of that strength and bigness, as able to
penetrate the ribs of ships. The same is more probable, because it was
brought from Island, from whence, as _Becanus_ affirmeth, three other
were brought in his days: And we have heard of some which have been
found by the Sea-side, and brought unto us from _America_. So that while
we commend the _Unicorns_ Horn, and conceive it peculiar but unto one
animal; under apprehension of the same vertue, we use very many; and
commend that effect from all, which every one confineth unto some one he
hath either seen or described.
Fifthly, Although there be many _Unicorns_, and consequently many Horns,
yet many there are which bear that name, and currantly pass among us,
which are no Horns at all. Such are those fragments and pieces of _Lapis
Ceratites_, commonly termed _Cornu fossile_, whereof _Bœtius_ had no
less than twenty several sorts presented him for _Unicorns_ Horn. Hereof
in subterraneous cavities, and under the earth there are many to be
found in several parts of _Germany_; which are but the lapidescencies
and petrifactive mutations of hard bodies; sometimes of Horn, of teeth,
of bones, and branches of trees, whereof there are some so imperfectly
converted, as to retain the odor and qualities of their originals; as he
relateth of pieces of Ash and Walnut. Again, in most, if not all which
pass amongst us, and are extolled for precious Horns, we discover not an
affection common unto other Horns; that is, they mollifie not with fire,
they soften not upon decoction or infusion, nor will they afford a
jelly, or mucilaginous concretion in either; which notwithstanding we
may effect in Goats horns, Sheeps, Cows and Harts-horn, in the Horn of
the _Rhinoceros_, the horn of the Pristis or Sword fish. Nor do they
become friable or easily powderable by Philosophical calcination, that
is, from the vapor or steam of water, but split and rift contrary to
others horns. [SN: Unicorns _Horn commonly used in_ England, _what it
is_.] Briefly, many of those commonly received, and whereof there be so
many fragments preserved in _England_, are not only no Horn, but a
substance harder then a bone, that is, parts of the tooth of a Morse or
Sea-horse; in the midst of the solider part contained a curdled grain,
which is not to be found in Ivory. This in Northern Regions is of
frequent use for hafts of knives or hilts of swords, and being burnt
becomes a good remedy for fluxes: but Antidotally used, and exposed for
_Unicorns_ Horn, it is an insufferable delusion; and with more veniable
deceit, it might have been practised in Harts-horn.
The like deceit may be practised in the teeth of other Sea-animals; in
the teeth also of the _Hippopotamus_, or great Animal which frequenteth
the River _Nilus_: For we read that the same was anciently used instead
of Ivory or Elephants tooth. Nor is it to be omitted, what hath been
formerly suspected, but now confirmed by _Olaus Wormius_, and _Thomas
Bartholinus_ and others, that those long Horns preserved as pretious
rarities in many places, are but the teeth of Narhwales, to be found
about Island, Greenland and other Northern regions; of many feet long,
commonly wreathed, very deeply fastned in the upper jaw, and standing
directly forward, graphically described in _Bartholinus_[SN: De
Unicornu.], according unto one sent from a Bishop of Island, not
separated from the crany. Hereof _Mercator_ hath taken notice in his
description of Island: some relations hereof there seem to be in
_Purchas_, who also delivereth that the Horn at _Windsor_, was in his
second voyage brought hither by _Frobisher_. These before the Northern
discoveries, as unknown rarities, were carried by Merchants into all
parts of _Europe_; and though found on the Sea-shore, were sold at very
high rates; but are now become more common, and probably in time will
prove of little esteem; and the bargain of _Julius_ the third, be
accounted a very hard one, who stuck not to give many thousand crowns
for one.
Nor is it great wonder we may be so deceived in this, being daily gulled
in the brother Antidote Bezoar; whereof though many be false, yet one
there passeth amongst us of more intollerable delusion; somewhat paler
then the true stone, and given by women in the extremity of great
diseases, which notwithstanding is no stone, but seems to be the stony
seed of some Lithospermum or greater Grumwell; or the Lobus Echinatus of
_Clusius_, called also the Bezoar Nut; for being broken, it discovereth
a kernel of a leguminous smell and tast, bitter like a Lupine, and will
swell and sprout if set in the ground, and therefore more serviceable
for issues, then dangerous and virulent diseases.
Sixthly, Although we were satisfied we had the _Unicorns_ Horn, yet were
it no injury unto reason to question the efficacy thereof, or whether
those vertues pretended do properly belong unto it. For what we observe,
(and it escaped not the observation of _Paulus Jovius_ many years past)
none of the Ancients ascribed any medicinal or antidotal vertue unto the
_Unicorns_ Horn; and that which _Ælian_ extolleth, who was the first and
only man of the Ancients who spake of the medical vertue of any
_Unicorn_, was the Horn of the _Indian_ Ass; whereof, saith he, the
Princes of those parts make bowls and drink therein, as preservatives
against Poyson, Convulsions, and the Falling-sickness. Now the
description of that Horn is not agreeable unto that we commend; for
that (saith he) is red above, white below, and black in the middle;
which is very different from ours, or any to be seen amongst us. And
thus, though the description of the _Unicorn_ be very ancient, yet was
there of old no vertue ascribed unto it; and although this amongst us
receive the opinion of the same vertue, yet is it not the same Horn
whereunto the Antients ascribed it.
Lastly, Although we allow it an Antidotal efficacy, and such as the
Ancients commended, yet are there some vertues ascribed thereto by
Moderns not easily to be received; and it hath surely faln out in this,
as other magnified medicines, whose operations effectual in some
diseases, are presently extended unto all. That some Antidotal quality
it may have, we have no reason to deny; for since Elks Hoofs and Horns
are magnified for Epilepsies, since not only the bone in the heart, but
the Horn of a Deer is Alexipharmacal, and ingredient into the confection
of Hyacinth, and the Electuary of Maximilian; we cannot without
prejudice except against the efficacy of this. [SN: _Expulsive of
Poisons._] But when we affirm it is not only Antidotal to proper venoms,
and substances destructive by qualities we cannot express; but that it
resisteth also Sublimate, Arsenick, and poysons which kill by second
qualities, that is, by corrosion of parts; I doubt we exceed the
properties of its nature, and the promises of experiment will not secure
the adventure. And therefore in such extremities, whether there be not
more probable relief from fat oyly substances, which are the open
tyrants over salt and corrosive bodies, then precious and cordial
medicines which operate by secret and disputable proprieties; or whether
he that swallowed Lime, and drank down Mercury water, did not more
reasonably place his cure in milk, butter or oyl, then if he had
recurred unto Pearl and Bezoar, common reason at all times, and
necessity in the like case would easily determine.
Since therefore there be many _Unicorns_; since that whereto we
appropriate a Horn is so variously described, that it seemeth either
never to have been seen by two persons, or not to have been one animal;
Since though they agreed in the description of the animal, yet is not
the Horn we extol the same with that of the Ancients; Since what Horns
soever they be that pass among us, they are not the Horns of one, but
several animals; Since many in common use and high esteem are no Horns
at all; Since if there were true Horns, yet might their vertues be
questioned; Since though we allowed some vertues, yet were not others to
be received; with what security a man may rely on this remedy, the
mistress of fools hath already instructed some, and to wisdom (which is
never to wise to learn) it is not too late to consider.
CHAPTER XXIV
That all Animals of the Land, are in their kind in the Sea.
That all Animals of the Land, are in their kind in the Sea, although
received as a principle, is a tenent very questionable, and will admit
of restraint. For some in the Sea are not to be matcht by any enquiry at
Land, and hold those shapes which terrestrious forms approach not; as
may be observed in the Moon-fish, or Orthragoriscus, the several sorts
of Raia's, Torpedo's, Oysters, and many more, and some there are in the
Land which were never maintained to be in the Sea, as Panthers, Hyæna's,
Camels, Sheep, Molls, and others, which carry no name in Icthyology [SN:
_History of fishes._], nor are to be found in the exact descriptions of
_Rondoletius_, _Gesner_, or _Aldrovandus_.
Again, Though many there be which make out their nominations, as the
Hedg-hog, Sea-serpents and others; yet are there also very many that
bear the name of animals at Land, which hold no resemblance in corporal
configuration; in which account we compute _Vulpecula_, _Canis_, _Rana_,
_Passer_, _Cuculus_, _Asellus_, _Turdus_, _Lepus_, etc. Wherein while
some are called the Fox, the Dog, the Sparrow or Frog-fish: and are
known by common names with those at Land; yet as their describers
attest, they receive not these appellations from a total similitude in
figure, but any concurrence in common accidents, in colour, condition or
single conformation. As for Sea-horses which much confirm this
assertion; in their common descriptions, they are but Crotesco
deliniations which fill up empty spaces in Maps, and meer pictorial
inventions, not any Physical shapes: sutable unto those which (as
_Pliny_ delivereth) _Praxiteles_ long ago set out in the Temple of
_Domitius_. For that which is commonly called a Sea-horse, is properly
called a Morse, and makes not out that shape. That which the Ancients
named _Hippocampus_ is a little animal about six inches long, and not
preferred beyond the classis of Insects. That which they termed
_Hippopotamus_ an amphibious animal, about the River _Nile_, so little
resembleth an horse, that as _Mathiolus_ observeth, in all except the
feet, it better makes out a swine. That which they termed a Lion, was
but a kind of Lobster: that which they called the Bear, was but one
kind of Crab: and that which they named _Bos marinus_, was not as we
conceive a fish resembling an Ox, but a Skait or Thornback, so named
from its bigness, expressed by the Greek word _Bous_, which is a prefix
of augmentation to many words in that language.
And therefore although it be not denied that some in the water do carry
a justifiable resemblance to some at Land, yet are the major part which
bear their names unlike; nor do they otherwise resemble the creatures on
earth, then they on earth the constellations which pass under animal
names in heaven: nor the Dog fish at Sea much more make out the Dog of
the Land, then that his cognominal or name-sake in the heavens. Now if
from a similitude in some, it be reasonable to infer a correspondence in
all, we may draw this analogy of animals upon plants; for vegetables
there are which carry a near and allowable similitude unto animals. [SN:
Fab. column. de stirp. rarioribus, Orchis, Cercopithecophora,
Anthropophora.] We might also conclude that animal shapes were generally
made out in minerals: for several stones there are that bear their names
in relation to animals or their parts, as _Lapis anguinus_, _Conchites_,
_Echinites_, _Encephalites, Ægopthalmus_, and many more; as will appear
in the Writers of Minerals, and especially in _Bœtius_ and
_Aldrovandus_.
Moreover if we concede, that the animals of one Element, might bear the
names of those in the other, yet in strict reason the watery productions
should have the prenomination: and they of the land rather derive their
names, then nominate those of the Sea. For the watery plantations were
first existent, and as they enjoyed a priority in form, had also in
nature precedent denominations: but falling not under that Nomenclature
of _Adam_, which unto terrestrious animals assigned a name appropriate
unto their natures: from succeeding spectators they received arbitrary
appellations: and were respectively denominated unto creatures known at
Land; who in themselves had independent names and not to be called after
them, which were created before them.
Lastly, By this assertion we restrain the hand of God, and abridge the
variety of the creation; making the creatures of one Element, but an
acting over those of another, and conjoyning as it were the species of
things which stood at distance in the intellect of God; and though
united in the Chaos, had several seeds of their creation. For although
in that indistinguisht mass, all things seemed one; yet separated by the
voice of God, according to their species, they came out in
incommunicated varieties, and irrelative seminalities, as well as
divided places; and so although we say the world was made in six days,
yet was there as it were a world in every one; that is, a distinct
creation of distinguisht creatures; a distinction in time of creatures
divided in nature, and a several approbation and survey in every one.
CHAPTER XXV
Concerning the common course of Diet, in making choice
of some Animals, and abstaining from eating others.
Why we confine our food unto certain Animals, and totally reject some
others; how these distinctions crept into several Nations; and whether
this practice be built upon solid reason, or chiefly supported by
custom or opinion; may admit consideration.
For first there is no absolute necessity to feed on any; and if we
resist not the stream of Authority, and several diductions from holy
Scripture: there was no _Sarcophagie_ before the flood; [SN: _Eating of
Flesh._] and without the eating of flesh, our fathers from vegetable
aliments, preserved themselves unto longer lives, then their posterity
by any other. For whereas it is plainly said, [SN: Gen. 1. 29.] I have
given you every herb which is upon the face of all the earth, and every
tree, to you it shall be for meat; [SN: _The natural vertue of
vegetables impaired by the deluge._] presently after the deluge, when
the same had destroyed or infirmed the nature of vegetables, by an
expression of enlargement, it is again delivered: [SN: Gen. 9. 3.] Every
moving thing that liveth, shall be meat for you, even as the green herb,
have I given you all things.
And therefore although it be said that _Abel_ was a Shepherd, and it be
not readily conceived, the first men would keep sheep, except they made
food thereof: great Expositors will tell us, that it was partly for
their skins, wherewith they were cloathed, partly for their milk,
whereby they were sustained; and partly for Sacrifices, which they also
offered.
And though it may seem improbable, that they offered flesh, yet eat not
thereof; and _Abel_ can hardly be said to offer the firstlings of his
flock, and the fat or acceptable part, if men used not to tast the same,
whereby to raise such distinctions: some will confine the eating of
flesh unto the line of _Cain_, who extended their luxury, and confined
not unto the rule of God. That if at any time the line of _Seth_ eat
flesh, it was extraordinary, and only at their sacrifices; or else (as
_Grotius_ hinteth) if any such practice there were, it was not from the
beginning; but from that time when the waies of men were corrupted, and
whereof it is said, that the wickedness of mans heart was great; the
more righteous part of mankind probably conforming unto the diet
prescribed in Paradise, and the state of innocency. [SN: _Eating
of Flesh (probably) not so common before the flood._] And yet however
the practice of men conformed, this was the injunction of God, and might
be therefore sufficient, without the food of flesh.
That they fed not on flesh, at least the faithful party before the
flood, may become more probable, because they refrained the same for
some time after. For so was it generally delivered of the golden age and
reign of _Saturn_; which is conceived the time of _Noah_, before the
building of _Babel_. And he that considereth how agreeable this is unto
the traditions of the _Gentiles_; that that age was of one tongue: that
_Saturn_ devoured all his sons but three; that he was the son of
_Oceanus_ and _Thetis_; that a Ship was his Symbole; that he taught the
culture of vineyards, and the art of husbandry, and was therefore
described with a sickle, may well conceive, these traditions had their
original in _Noah_. Nor did this practice terminate in him, but was
continued at least in many after: as (beside the _Pythagoreans_ of old,
_Bannyans_ now in _India_, who upon single opinions refrain the food of
flesh) ancient records do hint or plainly deliver. Although we descend
not so low, as that of _Æsclepiades_ delivered by _Porphyrius_ [SN:
περὶ ἀποχῆς.], that men began to feed on flesh in the raign of
_Pygmaleon_ brother of _Dido_, who invented several torments, to punish
the eaters of flesh.
Nor did men only refrain from the flesh of beasts at first, but as some
will have it, beasts from one another. And if we should believe very
grave conjecturers, carnivorous animals now, were not flesh devourers
then, according to the expression of the divine provision for them. [SN:
Gen. 1. 36.] To every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air,
I have given every green herb for meat, and it was so. As is also
collected from the store laid up in the Ark; wherein there seems to have
been no fleshly provision for carnivorous Animals. For of every kind of
unclean beast there went but two into the Ark: and therefore no stock of
flesh to sustain them many days, much less almost a year.
But when ever it be acknowledged that men began to feed on flesh, yet
how they betook themselves after to particular kinds thereof, with
rejection of many others, is a point not clearly determined. As for the
distinction of clean and unclean beasts, the original is obscure, and
salveth not our practice. For no Animal is naturally unclean, or hath
this character in nature; and therefore whether in this distinction
there were not some mystical intention: [SN: _How_ Moses _might
distinguish beasts into clean and unclean before the flood_.] whether
_Moses_ after the distinction made of unclean beasts, did not name these
so before the flood by anticipation: whether this distinction before the
flood, were not only in regard of sacrifices, as that delivered after
was in regard of food: (for many were clean for food, which were unclean
for sacrifice) or whether the denomination were but comparative, and of
beasts less commodious for food, although not simply bad, is not yet
resolved.
And as for the same distinction in the time of _Moses_, long after the
flood, from thence we hold no restriction, as being no rule unto Nations
beside the _Jews_ in dietetical consideration, or natural choice of
diet, they being enjoyned or prohibited certain foods upon remote and
secret intentions. Especially thereby to avoid community with the
Gentiles upon promiscuous commensality: or to divert them from the
Idolatry of _Egypt_ whence they came, they were enjoyned to eat the
Gods of _Egypt_ in the food of Sheep and Oxen. Withall in this
distinction of Animals the consideration was hieroglyphical; in the
bosom and inward sense implying an abstinence from certain vices
symbolically intimated from the nature of those animals; as may be well
made out in the prohibited meat of Swine, Cony, Owl, and many more.
At least the intention was not medical, or such as might oblige unto
conformity or imitation; For some we refrain which that Law alloweth, as
Locusts and many others; and some it prohibiteth, which are accounted
good meat in strict and Medical censure: as (beside many fishes which
have not finns and scales,) the Swine, Cony and Hare, a dainty dish with
the Ancients; as is delivered by _Galen_, testified by _Martial_ [SN:
Inter quadrupedes mattya prima Lepus.], as the popular opinion implied,
that men grew fair by the flesh thereof: by the diet of _Cato_, that is
Hare and Cabbage; and the _Jus nigrum_, or Black broath of the
_Spartans_, which was made with the blood and bowels of an Hare.
And if we take a view of other Nations, we shall discover that they
refrained many meats upon the like considerations. For in some the
abstinence was symbolical; so _Pythagoras_ enjoyned abstinence from
fish: that is, luxurious and dainty dishes; So according to _Herodotus_,
some _Egyptians_ refrained swines flesh, as an impure and sordid animal:
which whoever but touched, was fain to wash himself.
Some abstained superstitiously or upon religious consideration: So the
_Syrians_ refrained Fish and Pigeons; the _Egyptians_ of old, Dogs,
Eeles and Crocodiles; though _Leo Africanus_ delivers, that many of
late, do eat them with good gust: and _Herodotus_ also affirmeth, that
the _Egyptians_ of _Elephantina_ (unto whom they were not sacred,) did
eat thereof in elder times: and Writers testify, that they are eaten at
this day in _India_ and _America_. And so, as _Cæsar_ reports, [SN: Lib.
3. de bello Gall.] unto the ancient _Britains_ it was piaculous to tast
a Goose, which dish at present no table is without.
Unto some Nations the abstinence was political and for some civil
advantage: So the _Thessalians_ refrained Storks, because they destroyed
their Serpents; and the like in sundry animals is observable in other
Nations.
And under all these considerations were some animals refrained: so the
_Jews_ abstained from swine at first symbolically, as an Emblem of
impurity; and not for fear of the Leprosie, as _Tacitus_ would put upon
them. The _Cretians_ superstitiously, upon tradition that _Jupiter_ was
suckled in that countrey by a Sow. Some _Egyptians_ politically, because
they supplyed the labour of plowing by rooting up the ground. And upon
like considerations perhaps the _Phœnicians_ and _Syrians_ fed not on
this Animal: and as _Solinus_ reports, the _Arabians_ also and
_Indians_. A great part of mankind refraining one of the best foods, and
such as _Pythagoras_ himself would eat; who, as _Aristoxenus_ records
[SN: _Aul. Gell._ lib. 4.], refused not to feed on Pigs.
[Sidenote: _Certain dishes in great request with the Ancients, not so
much esteemed now._]
Moreover while we single out several dishes and reject others, the
selection seems but arbitrary, or upon opinion; for many are commended
and cryed up in one age, which are decryed and nauseated in another.
Thus in the dayes of _Mecenas_, no flesh was preferred before young
Asses; which notwithstanding became abominable unto succeeding
appetites. At the table of _Heliogabalus_ the combs of Cocks were an
esteemed service; which country stomacks will not admit at ours. The
Sumen or belly and dugs of swine with Pig, and sometimes beaten and
bruised unto death: the womb of the same Animal, especially that was
barren, or else had cast her young ones, though a tough and membranous
part, was magnified by Roman Palats; whereunto nevertheless we cannot
perswade our stomacks. How _Alec_, _Muria_, and _Garum_, would humour
our gust I know not; but surely few there are that could delight in
their _Cyceon_; that is, the common draught of Honey, Cheese, parcht
Barley-flower, Oyl and Wine; which notwithstanding was commended
mixture, and in high esteem among them. We mortifie our selves with the
diet of fish, and think we fare coursly if we refrain from the flesh of
other animals. But antiquity held another opinion hereof: When
_Pythagoras_ in prevention of luxury advised, not so much as to tast on
fish. Since the _Rhodians_ were wont to call them clowns that eat flesh:
and since _Plato_ to evidence the temperance of the noble _Greeks_
before _Troy_, observed, that it was not found they fed on fish, though
they lay so long near the _Hellespont_[SN: Odyss. 4⁰.]; and was only
observed in the companions of _Menelaus_, that being almost starved,
betook themselves to fishing about _Pharos_.
Nor will (I fear) the attest or prescript of Philosophers and
Physitians, be a sufficient ground to confirm or warrant common
practice, as is deducible from ancient Writers, from _Hippocrates_,
_Galen_, _Simeon_, _Sethi_: and the later tracts of _Nonnus_ [SN: _Non_
de re cibaria.] and _Castellanus_. [SN: _Cast._ de esu carnium.] So
_Aristotle_ and _Albertus_ commend the flesh of young Hawks:
_Galen_ [SN: _Gal._ Alim. fac. lib. 3.] when they feed on Grapes: but
condemneth Quails, and ranketh Geese but with Ostriches; which
notwithstanding, present practice and every table extolleth. Men think
they have fared hardly, if in times of extremity they have descended so
low as Dogs: but _Galen_ delivereth [SN: _Gal._ Simpl. fac. lib. 3.] were
the food of many Nations: and _Hippocrates_ [SN: _Hip._ de morbis de
superfit.] ranketh the flesh of Whelps with that of Birds: who also
commends them against the Spleen, and to promote conception. The opinion
in _Galens_ time, which _Pliny_ also followeth, deeply condemned
Horse-flesh, and conceived the very blood thereof destructive; but no
diet is more common among the _Tartars_, who also drink their blood. And
though this may only seem an adventure of _Northern_ stomacks, yet as
_Herodotus_ tells us, in the hotter clime of _Persia_, the same was a
convivial dish, and solemnly eaten at the feasts of their nativities:
whereat they dressed whole Horses, Camels and Asses; contemning the
Poverty of _Grecian_ feasts, as unfurnish'd of dishes sufficient to fill
the bellies of their guests.
Again, While we confine our diet in several places, all things almost
are eaten, if we take in the whole earth: for that which is refused in
one country, is accepted in another, and in the collective judgment of
the world, particular distinctions are overthrown. Thus were it not hard
to shew, that Tigers, Elephants, Camels, Mice, Bats and others, are the
food of several countries; and _Lerius_ with others delivers, that some
_Americans_ eat of all kinds, not refraining Toads and Serpents: and
some have run so high, as not to spare the flesh of man: a practise
inexcusable, nor to be drawn into example, a diet beyond the rule and
largest indulgence of God.
As for the objection against beasts and birds of prey, it acquitteth not
our practice, who observe not this distinction in fishes: nor regard the
same in our diet of Pikes, Perches and Eels; Nor are we excused herein,
if we examine the stomacks of Mackerels, Cods, and Whitings. Nor is the
foulness of food sufficient to justifie our choice; for (beside that
their natural heat is able to convert the same into laudable aliment) we
refuse not many whose diet is more impure then some which we reject; as
may be considered in hogs, ducks, puets, and many more.
Thus we perceive the practice of diet doth hold no certain course, nor
solid rule of selection or confinement; Some in an indistinct voracity
eating almost any, others out of a timorous pre-opinion, refraining very
many. Wherein indeed necessity, reason and Physick, are the best
determinators. Surely many animals may be fed on, like many plants;
though not in alimental, yet medical considerations: Whereas having
raised Antipathies by prejudgement or education, we often nauseate
proper meats, and abhor that diet which disease or temper requireth.
[Sidenote: _A problem._ ]
Now whether it were not best to conform unto the simple diet of our
fore-fathers; whether pure and simple waters were not more healthfull
then fermented liquors; whether there be not an ample sufficiency
without all flesh, in the food of honey, oyl, and the several parts of
milk: in the variety of grains, pulses, and all sorts of fruits; since
either bread or beverage may be made almost of all? whether nations have
rightly confined unto several meats? or whether the common food of one
countrey be not more agreeable unto another? how indistinctly all
tempers apply unto the same, and how the diet of youth and old age is
confounded: were considerations much concerning health, and might
prolong our days, but must not this discourse.
CHAPTER XXVI
Of Sperma-Ceti, and the Sperma-Ceti Whale.
What Sperma-Ceti is, men might justly doubt, since the learned
_Hofmannus_ in his work of Thirty years, [SN: De medicamentis officin.]
saith plainly, _Nescio quid sit_. And therefore need not wonder at the
variety of opinions; while some conceived it to be _flos maris_, and
many, a bituminous substance floating upon the sea.
That it was not the spawn of the Whale, according to vulgar conceit, or
nominal appellation Phylosophers have always doubted, not easily
conceiving the Seminal humour of Animals, should be inflamable; or of a
floating nature.
That it proceedeth from a Whale, beside the relation of _Clusius_ and
other learned observers, was indubitably determined, not many years
since by a Sperma-Ceti Whale, cast on our coast of _Norfolk_ [SN: _Near_
Wells.]. Which, to lead on further inquiry, we cannot omit to inform. It
contained no less then sixty foot in length, the head somewhat peculiar,
with a large prominency over the mouth; teeth only in the lower Jaw,
received into fleshly sockets in the upper. The Weight of the largest
about two pound: No gristly substances in the mouth, commonly called
Whale-bones; Only two short finns seated forwardly on the back; the eyes
but small, the pizell large, and prominent. A lesser Whale of this kind
above twenty years ago, was cast upon the same shore. [SN: _Near_
Hunstanton.]
The discription of this Whale seems omitted by _Gesner_, _Rondeletius_,
and the first Editions of _Aldrovandus_; but describeth the latin
impression of _Pareus_, in the Exoticks of _Clusius_, and the natural
history of _Nirembergius_; but more amply in Icons and figures of
_Johnstonus_.
Mariners (who are not the best Nomenclators) called it a _Jubartas_, or
rather _Gibbartas_. Of the same appellation we meet with one in
_Rondeletius_, called by the _French_ Gibbar, from its round and Gibbous
back. The name _Gibbarta_ we find also given unto one kind of
_Greenland_ Whales: But this of ours seemed not to answer the Whale of
that denomination; but was more agreeable unto the _Trumpa_ or
Sperma-Ceti Whale: according to the account of our _Greenland_
describers in _Purchas_. And maketh the third among the eight remarkable
Whales of that Coast.
Out of the head of this Whale, having been dead divers days, and under
putrifaction, flowed streams of oyl and Sperma-Ceti; which was carefully
taken up and preserved by the Coasters. But upon breaking up, the
Magazin of Sperma-Ceti, was found in the head lying in folds and
courses, in the bigness of goose eggs, encompassed with large flakie
substances, as large as a mans head, in form of hony-combs, very white
and full of oyl.
Some resemblance or trace hereof there seems to be in the _Physiter_ or
_Capidolio_ of _Rondeletius_; while he delivers, that a fatness more
liquid then oyl, runs from the brain of that animal; which being out,
the Reliques are like the scales of _Sardinos_ pressed into a mass;
which melting with heat, are again concreted by cold. And this many
conceive to have been the fish which swallowed _Jonas_. Although for the
largeness of the mouth, and frequency in those seas, it may possibly be
the _Lamia_.
Some part of the Sperma-Ceti found on the shore was pure, and needed
little depuration; a great part mixed with fetid oyl, needing good
preparation, and frequent expression, to bring it to a flakie
consistency. And not only the head, but other parts contained it. For
the carnous parts being roasted, the oyl dropped out, an axungious and
thicker parts subsiding; the oyl it self contained also much in it, and
still after many years some is obtained from it.
_Greenland_ Enquirers seldom meet with a Whale of this kind: and
therefore it is but a contingent Commodity, not reparable from any
other. It flameth white and candent like Camphire, but dissolveth not in
_aqua fortis_, like it. Some lumps containing about two ounces, kept
ever since in water, afford a fresh and flosculous smell. Well prepared
and separated from the oyl, it is of a substance unlikely to decay, and
may out last the oyl required in the Composition of _Mathiolus_.
Of the large quantity of oyl, what first came forth by expression from
the Sperma-Ceti, grew very white and clear, like that of Almonds or Ben.
What came by decoction was red. It was found to spend much in the
vessels which contained it: It freezeth or coagulateth quickly with
cold, and the newer soonest. It seems different from the oyl of any
other animal, and very much frustrated the expectation of our
soap-boylers, as not incorporating or mingling with their lyes. But it
mixeth well with painting Colours, though hardly drieth at all. Combers
of wooll made use hereof, and Country people for cuts, aches and hard
tumors. It may prove of good Medical use; and serve for a ground in
compounded oyls and Balsams. Distilled, it affords a strong oyl, with a
quick and piercing water. Upon Evaporation it gives a balsame, which is
better performed with Turpentine distilled with Sperma-Ceti.
Had the abominable scent permitted, enquiry had been made into that
strange composure of the head, and hillock of flesh about it. Since the
Work-men affirmed, they met with _Sperma-Ceti_ before they came to the
bone, and the head yet preserved, seems to confirm the same. The
Sphincters inserving unto the Fistula or spout, might have been
examined, since they are so notably contrived in other cetaceous
Animals; as also the Larynx or Throtle, whether answerable unto that of
Dolphins and Porposes in the strange composure and figure which it
maketh. What figure the stomack maintained in this Animal of one jaw of
teeth, since in Porposes, which abound in both, the ventricle is trebly
divided, and since in that formerly taken nothing was found but Weeds
and a Loligo. The heart, lungs, and kidneys had not escaped; wherein are
remarkable differences from Animals of the land, likewise what humor the
bladder contained, but especially the seminal parts, which might have
determined the difference of that humour; from this which beareth its
name.
In vain it was to rake for Ambergreece in the panch of this _Leviathan_,
as _Greenland_ discoverers, and attests of experience dictate, that they
sometimes swallow great lumps thereof in the Sea; insufferable fetour
denying that enquiry. And yet if, as _Paracelsus_ encourageth, Ordure
makes the best Musk, and from the most fetid substances may be drawn the
most odoriferous Essences; all that had not _Vespasians_ Nose [SN: Cui
dulcis odor lucri ex re qualibet.], might boldly swear, here was a
subject fit for such extractions.
CHAPTER XXVII
Compendiously of sundry Tenents concerning
other Animals, which examined, prove
either false or dubious.
1. And first from great Antiquity, and before the Melody of _Syrens_,
the Musical note of Swans hath been commended, and that they sing most
sweetly before their death. For thus we read in _Plato_, that from the
opinion of _Metempsuchosis_, or transmigration of the souls of men into
the bodies of beasts most sutable unto their humane condition, after his
death, _Orpheus_ the Musician became a Swan. Thus was it the bird of
_Apollo_ the god of Musick by the _Greeks_; and an Hieroglyphick of
musick among the _Egyptians_, from whom the _Greeks_ derived the
conception; hath been the affirmation of many Latines, and hath not
wanted assertors almost from every Nation.
[Sidenote: _Of swans, and their singing before death._]
All which notwithstanding, we find this relation doubtfully received by
_Ælian_, as an hear-say account by _Bellonius_, as a false one by
_Pliny_, expresly refuted by _Myndius_ in _Athenæus_; and severely
rejected by _Scaliger_; whose words unto _Cardan_ are these: _De Cygni
vero cantu suavissimo quem cum parente mendaciorum Græcia jactare ausus
est, ad Luciani tribunal, apud quem novi aliquid dicas, statuo._ Authors
also that countenance it, speak not satisfactorily of it. Some affirming
they sing not till they die; some that they sing, yet die not. Some
speak generally, as though this note were in all; some but particularly,
as though it were only in some; some in places remote, and where we can
have no trial of it; others in places where every experience can refute
it; as _Aldrovandus_ upon relation delivered, concerning the Musick of
the Swans on the river of _Thames_ near _London_.
[Sidenote: _The figuration to be found in Elks, and not in common
Swans._]
Now that which countenanceth, and probably confirmeth this opinion, is
the strange and unusual conformation of the wind pipe, or vocal organ in
this animal; observed first by _Aldrovandus_, and conceived by some
contrived for this intention. For in its length it far exceedeth the
gullet; and hath in the chest a sinuous revolution, that is, when it
ariseth from the lungs, it ascendeth not directly unto the throat, but
descending first into a capsulary reception of the breast bone; by a
Serpentine and Trumpet recurvation it ascendeth again into the neck; and
so by the length thereof a great quantity of air is received, and by the
figure thereof a Musical modulation effected. But to speak
indifferently, this formation of the Weazon, is not peculiar unto the
Swan, but common also unto the Platea or Shovelard, a bird of no Musical
throat; And as _Aldrovandus_ confesseth, may thus be contrived in the
Swan to contain a larger stock of air, whereby being to feed on weeds at
the bottom, they might the longer space detain their heads under water.
But were this formation peculiar, or had they unto this effect an
advantage from this part: yet have they a known and open disadvantage
from another; that is, a flat bill. For no Latirostrous animal (whereof
nevertheless there are no slender numbers) were ever commended for there
note, or accounted among those animals which have been instructed to
speak.
When therefore we consider the dissention of Authors, the falsity of
relations, the indisposition of the Organs, and the immusical note of
all we ever beheld or heard of; if generally taken and comprehending all
Swans, or of all places, we cannot assent thereto. Surely he that is
bit with a Tarantula, shall never be cured by this Musick; and with the
same hopes we expect to hear the harmony of the Spheres.
[Sidenote: _Of the Peacock._]
2. That there is a special propriety in the flesh of Peacocks, roast or
boiled, to preserve a long time incorrupted, hath been the assertion of
many; stands yet confirmed by _Austin_, _De Civitate Dei_; by _Gygas
Sempronius_, in _Aldrovandus_; and the same experiment we can confirm
our selves, in the brawn or fleshly parts of Peacoks so hanged up with
thred, that they touch no place whereby to contract a moisture; and
hereof we have made trial both in summer and winter. The reason, some, I
perceive, attempt to make out from the siccity and driness of its flesh,
and some are content to rest in a secret propriety thereof. As for the
siccity of the flesh, it is more remarkable in other animals, as Eagles,
Hawks, and birds of prey; That it is a propriety or agreeable unto none
other, we cannot with reason admit: for the same preservation, or rather
incorruption we have observed in the flesh of Turkeys, Capons, Hares,
Partridge, Venison, suspended freely in the air, and after a year and a
half, dogs have not refused to eat them.
As for the other conceit, that a Peacok is ashamed when he looks on his
legs, as is commonly held, and also delivered by _Cardan_; beside what
hath been said against it by _Scaliger_; let them believe that hold
specificial deformities; or that any part can seem unhandsome to their
eyes, which hath appeared good and beautiful unto their makers. The
occasion of this conceit, might first arise from a common observation,
that when they are in their pride, that is, advance their train, if they
decline their neck to the ground, they presently demit, and let fall the
same: which indeed they cannot otherwise do; for contracting their
body, and being forced to draw in their foreparts to establish the
hinder in the elevation of the train; if the foreparts depart and
incline to the ground, the hinder grow too weak, and suffer the train to
fall. And the same in some degree is also observable in Turkeys.
[Sidenote: _Of the Stork._]
3. That Storks are to be found, and will only live in Republikes or free
States, is a petty conceit to advance the opinion of popular policies,
and from Antipathies in nature, to disparage Monarchical government. But
how far agreeable unto truth, let them consider who read in _Pliny_,
that among the _Thessalians_ who were governed by Kings, and much
abounded with Serpents, it was no less then capital to kill a Stork.
That the Ancient _Egyptians_ honoured them, whose government was from
all times Monarchical. That _Bellonius_ affirmeth, men make them nests
in _France_. That relations make them common in _Persia_, and the
dominions of the great _Turk_. And lastly, how _Jeremy_ the Prophet
delivered himself [SN: Ier. 8. 7.] unto his countreymen, whose
government was at that time Monarchical. The Stork in the heaven knowing
her appointed time, the Turtle, Crane and Swallow observe the time of
their coming, but my people know not the judgment of the Lord. Wherein
to exprobate their stupidity, he induceth the providence of Storks. Now
if the bird had been unknown, the illustration had been obscure, and the
exprobation not so proper.
[Sidenote: _Of the Bittor._]
4. That a Bittor maketh that mugient noise, or as we term it Bumping, by
putting its bill into a reed as most believe, or as _Bellonius_ and
_Aldrovandus_ conceive, by putting the same in water or mud, and after a
while retaining the air by suddenly excluding it again, is not so easily
made out. For my own part, though after diligent enquiry, I could never
behold them in this motion; Notwithstanding by others whose
observations we have expressly requested, we are informed, that some
have beheld them making this noise on the shore, their bills being far
enough removed from reed or water; that is, first strongly attracting
the air, and unto a manifest distention of the neck, and presently after
with great contention and violence excluding the same again. As for what
others affirm of putting their bill in water or mud, it is also hard to
make out. For what may be observed from any that walketh the Fens, there
is little intermission, nor any observable pawse, between the drawing in
and sending forth of their breath. And the expiration or breathing forth
doth not only produce a noise, but the inspiration or hailing in of the
air, affordeth a sound that may be heard almost a flight-shot.
Now the reason of this strange and peculiar noise, is deduced from the
conformation of the wind-pipe, which in this bird is different from
other volatiles. For at the upper extream it hath no fit Larinx, or
throttle to qualify the sound, and at the other end, by two branches
deriveth it self into the lungs. Which division consisteth only of
Semicircular fibers, and such as attain but half way round the part; By
which formation they are dilatable into larger capacities, and are able
to contain a fuller proportion of air; which being with violence sent up
the weazon, and finding no resistance by the Larinx, it issueth forth in
a sound like that from caverns, and such as sometimes subterraneous
eruptions, from hollow rocks afford. As _Aristotle_ observeth in a
Problem, [SN: _Sect. 15._] and is observable in pitchers, bottles, and
that instrument which _Aponensis_ upon that Problem describeth,
wherewith in _Aristotles_ time Gardiners affrighted birds.
Whether the large perforations of the extremities of the weazon, in the
_abdomen_, admitting large quantity of ayr within the cavity of its
membrans, as it doth in Frogs; may not much assist this mugiency or
boation, may also be considered. For such as have beheld them making
this noise out of the water, observe a large distention in their bodies;
and their ordinary note is but like that of a Raven.
[Sidenote: _Of Whelps._]
5. That whelps are blind nine days and then begin to see, is the common
opinion of all, and some will be apt enough to descend unto oaths upon
it. But this I find not answerable unto experience, for upon a strict
observation of many, I have scarce found any that see the ninth day, few
before the twelfth, and the eyes of some not open before the fourteenth
day. And this is agreeable unto the determination of _Aristotle_: who
computeth the time of their anopsie or non-vision by that of their
gestation. For some, saith he, do go with their young the sixt part of a
year, two days over or under, that is, about sixty days or nine weeks;
and the whelps of these see not till twelve days. Some go the fifth part
of a year, that is, seventy-one days, and these, saith he, see not
before the fourteenth day. Others do go the fourth part of the year,
that is, three whole months, and these, saith he, are without sight no
less then seventeen days. Wherein although the accounts be different,
yet doth the least thereof exceed the term of nine days, which is so
generally received. And this compute of _Aristotle_ doth generally
overthrow the common cause alleadged for this effect, that is, a
precipitation or over-hasty exclusion before the birth be perfect,
according unto the vulgar Adage, _Festinans canis cæcos parit catulos_:
for herein the whelps of longest gestation, are also the latest in
vision. The manner hereof is this. At the first littering, their eyes
are fastly closed, that is, by coalition or joining together of the
eyelids, and so continue untill about the twelfth day; at which time
they begin to separate, and may be easily divelled or parted asunder;
they open at the inward Canthis or greater Angle of the eye, and so by
degrees dilate themselves quite open. An effect very strange, and the
cause of much obscurity, wherein as yet mens enquiries are blind, and
satisfaction not easily acquirable. What ever it be, thus much may we
observe, those animals are only excluded without sight, which are
multiparous and multifidous, that is, which have many at a litter, and
have also their feet divided into many portions. For the Swine, although
multiparous, yet being bisulcous, and only cloven hoofed, is not
excluded in this manner, but farrowed with open eyes, as other bisulcous
animals.
[Sidenote: _Of a Toad and a Spider._]
6. The Antipathy between a Toad and a Spider, and that they poisonously
destroy each other, is very famous, and solemn stories have been written
of their combats; wherein most commonly the victory is given unto the
Spider. Of what Toads and Spiders it is to be understood would be
considered. For the Phalangium and deadly Spiders, are different from
those we generally behold in _England_. However the verity hereof, as
also of many others, we cannot but desire; for hereby we might be surely
provided of proper Antidotes in cases which require them; But what we
have observed herein, we cannot in reason conceal; who having in a Glass
included a Toad with several Spiders, we beheld the Spiders without
resistance to sit upon his head and pass over all his body; which at
last upon advantage he swallowed down, and that in few hours, unto the
number of seven. And in the like manner will Toads also serve Bees, and
are accounted enemies unto their Hives.
[Sidenote: _Of a Lion and a Cock._]
7. Whether a Lion be also afraid of a Cock, as is related by many, and
believed by most, were very easie in some places to make trial. Although
how far they stand in fear of that animal, we may sufficiently
understand, from what is delivered by _Camerarius_, whose words in his
Symbola are these: _Nostris temporibus in Aula serenissimi Principis
Bavariæ, unus ex Leonibus miris saltibus in vicinam cujusdam domus aream
sese dimisit, ubi Gallinaceorum cantum aut clamores nihil reformidans,
ipsos unà cum plurimis gallinis devoravit._ That is, In our time in the
Court of the Prince of _Bavaria_, one of the Lions leaped down into a
Neighbours yard, where nothing regarding the crowing or noise of the
Cocks, he eat them up with many other Hens. And therefore a very unsafe
defensative it is against the fury of this animal (and surely no better
then Virginity or bloud Royal) which _Pliny_[SN: De sacrificiis et
magia.] doth place in Cock broth: For herewith, saith he, whoever is
anointed (especially if Garlick be boiled therein) no Lion or Panther
will touch him. But of an higher nature it were, and more exalted
Antipathy, if that were certain which _Proclus_ delivers, that solary
_Dæmons_, and such as appear in the shape of Lions, will disappear and
vanish, if a Cock be presented upon them.
8. It is generally conceived, an Ear-wig hath no Wings, and is reckoned
amongst impennous insects by many; but he that shall narrowly observe
them, or shall with a needle put aside the short and sheathy cases on
their back, may extend and draw forth two wings of a proportionable
length for flight, and larger then in many flies. The experiment of
_Pennius_ is yet more perfect, who with a Rush or Bristle so pricked
them as to make them flie.
[Sidenote: _Of Worms._]
9. That Worms are exanguious Animals, and such as have no bloud at all,
is the determination of Philosophy, the general opinion of Scholars, and
I know not well to dissent from thence my self. If so, surely we want a
proper term whereby to express that humour in them which so strictly
resembleth bloud: and we refer it unto the discernment of others what to
determine of that red and sanguineous humor, found more plentifully
about the Torquis or carneous Circle of great Worms in the Spring,
affording in Linnen or Paper an indiscernable tincture from bloud. Or
wherein that differeth from a vein, which in an apparent blew runneth
along the body, and if dexterously pricked with a lancet, emitteth a red
drop, which pricked on either side it will not readily afford.
In the upper parts of Worms, there are likewise found certain white and
oval Glandulosities, which Authors term Eggs, and in magnifying Glasses,
they also represent them; how properly, may also be enquired; since if
in them there be distinction of Sexes, these Eggs are to be found in
both. For in that which is presumed to be their coition, that is, their
usual complication, or lateral adhesion above the ground, dividing
suddenly with two Knives the adhering parts of both, I have found these
Eggs in either.
10. That Flies, Bees, etc. do make that noise or humming sound by their
mouth, or as many believe with their wings only, would be more warily
asserted, if we consulted the determination of _Aristotle_, who as in
sundry other places, so more expresly in his book of respiration,
affirmeth this sound to be made by the illision of an inward spirit upon
a pellicle or little membrane about the precinct or pectoral division
of their body. If we also consider that a Bee or Flie, so it be able to
move the body, will buz, though its head be off; that it will do the
like if deprived of wings, reserving the head, whereby the body may be
the better moved. And that some also which are big and lively will hum
without either head or wing.
Nor is it only the beating upon this little membrane, by the inward and
con-natural spirit as _Aristotle_ determines, or the outward air as
_Scaliger_ conceiveth, which affordeth this humming noise, but most of
the other parts may also concur hereto; as will be manifest, if while
they hum we lay our finger on the back or other parts; for thereupon
will be felt a serrous or jarring motion like that which happeneth while
we blow on the teeth of a comb through paper; and so if the head or
other parts of the trunk be touched with oyl, the sound will be much
impaired, if not destroyed: for those being also dry and membranous
parts, by attrition of the spirit do help to advance the noise: And
therefore also the sound is strongest in dry weather, and very weak in
rainy season, and toward winter; for then the air is moist, and the
inward spirit growing weak, makes a languid and dumb allision upon the
parts.
[Sidenote: _Of a Tainct._]
11. There is found in the Summer a kind of Spider called a Tainct, of a
red colour, and so little of body that ten of the largest will hardly
outway a grain; this by Country people is accounted a deadly poison unto
Cows and Horses; who, if they suddenly die, and swell thereon, ascribe
their death hereto, and will commonly say, they have licked a Tainct.
Now to satisfie the doubts of men we have called this tradition unto
experiment; we have given hereof unto Dogs, Chickens, Calves and
Horses, and not in the singular number; yet never could find the least
disturbance ensue. There must be therefore other causes enquired of the
sudden death and swelling of cattle; and perhaps this insect is
mistaken, and unjustly accused for some other. For some there are which
from elder times have been observed pernicious unto cattle, as the
Buprestis or Burstcow, the Pityocampe or Eruca Pinuum, by _Dioscorides,
Galen_ and _Ætius_, the Staphilinus described by _Aristotle_ and others,
or those red Phalangious Spiders like Cantharides mentioned by
_Muffetas_. Now although the animal may be mistaken and the opinion also
false, yet in the ground and reason which makes men most to doubt the
verity hereof, there may be truth enough, that is, the inconsiderable
quantity of this insect. For that a poison cannot destroy in so small a
bulk, we have no reason to affirm. For if, as _Leo Africanus_ reporteth,
the tenth part of a grain of the poison of _Nubia_[SN: granum Nubiæ.],
will dispatch a man in two hours; if the bite of a Viper and sting of a
Scorpion, is not conceived to impart so much; if the bite of an Asp will
kill within an hour, yet the impression scarce visible, and the poison
communicated not ponderable; we cannot as impossible reject this way of
destruction; or deny the power of death in so narrow a circumscription.
[Sidenote: _Of the Glow-worm_.]
12. Wondrous things are promised from the Glow-worm; from thence
perpetual lights are pretended, and waters said to be distilled which
afford a lustre in the night; and this is asserted by _Cardan, Albertus,
Gaudentinus, Mizaldus_, and many more. But hereto we cannot with reason
assent: for the light made by this animal depends much upon its life.
For when they are dead they shine not, nor alwaies while they live; but
are obscure or light, according to the protrusion of their luminous
parts, as observation will instruct us. For this flammeous light is not
over all the body, but only visible on the inward side; in a small white
part near the tail. When this is full and seemeth protruded, there
ariseth a flame of a circular figure and Emerald green colour; which is
discernable in any dark place in the day; but when it falleth and
seemeth contracted, the light disappeareth, and the colour of the part
only remaineth. Now this light, as it appeareth and disappeareth in
their life, so doth it go quite out at their death. As we have observed
in some, which preserved in fresh grass have lived and shined eighteen
days; but as they declined, and the luminous humor dryed, their light
grew languid, and at last went out with their lives. Thus also the
_Torpedo_, which alive hath a power to stupifie at a distance, hath none
upon contaction being dead, as _Galen_ and _Rondeletius_ particularly
experimented. And this hath also disappointed the mischief of those
intentions, which study the advancement of poisons; and fancy
destructive compositions from Asps or Vipers teeth, from Scorpions or
Hornet stings. For these omit their efficacy in the death of the
individual, and act but dependantly on their forms. And thus far also
those Philosophers concur with us, which held the Sun and Stars were
living creatures, for they conceived their lustre depended on their
lives; but if they ever died, their light must also perish.
It were a Notable piece of Art to translate the light from the
_Bononian_ Stone into another Body; he that would attempt to make a
shining Water from _Glow-worms_, must make trial when the Splendent part
is fresh and turgid. For even from the great _American Glow-worms_, and
Flaming _Flies_, the light declineth as the luminous humor dryeth.
Now whether the light of animals, which do not occasionally shine from
contingent causes, be of Kin unto the light of Heaven; whether the
invisible flame of life received in a convenient matter, may not become
visible, and the diffused ætherial light make little Stars by
conglobation in idoneous parts of the compositum: whether also it may
not have some original in the seed and spirit analogous unto the Element
of Stars, whereof some glympse is observable in the little refulgent
humor, at the first attempts of formation: Philosophy may yet enquire.
True it is, that a Glow-worm will afford a faint light, almost a days
space when many will conceive it dead; but this is a mistake in the
compute of death, and term of disanimation; for indeed, it is not then
dead, but if it be distended will slowly contract it self again, which
when it cannot do, it ceaseth to shine any more. And to speak strictly,
it is no easie matter to determine the point of death in Insects and
Creatures who have not their vitalities radically confined unto one
part; for they are not dead when they cease to move or afford the
visible evidences of life; as may be observed in Flies, who when they
appear even desperate and quite forsaken of their forms; by vertue of
the Sun or warm ashes will be revoked unto life, and perform its
functions again.
Now whether this lustre, a while remaining after death, dependeth not
still upon the first impression, and light communicated or raised from
an inward spirit, subsisting a while in a moist and apt recipient, nor
long continuing in this, or the more remarkable _Indian_ Glow-worm; or
whether it be of another Nature, and proceedeth from different causes
of illumination; yet since it confessedly subsisteth so little a while
after their lives, how to make perpetual lights, and sublunary moons
thereof as is pretended, we rationally doubt, though not so sharply
deny, with _Scaliger_ and _Muffetus_.
13. The wisdom of the Pismire is magnified by all, and in the
Panegyricks of their providence we alwaies meet with this, that to
prevent the growth of Corn which they store up, they bite off the end
thereof: And some have conceived that from hence they have their name in
Hebrew [SN: Nemalah à Namal circumcidit.]: From whence ariseth a conceit
that Corn will not grow if the extreams be cut or broken. But herein we
find no security to prevent its germination; as having made trial in
grains, whose ends cut off have notwithstanding suddenly sprouted, and
accordingly to the Law of their kinds; that is, the roots of barley and
oats at contrary ends, of wheat and rye at the same. And therefore some
have delivered that after rainy weather they dry these grains in the
Sun; which if effectual, we must conceive to be made in a high degree
and above the progression of Malt; for that Malt will grow, this year
hath informed us, and that unto a perfect ear.
[Sidenote: _A natural vicissitude of generation in Homogeneous things._]
And if that be true which is delivered by many, and we shall further
experiment, that a decoction of Toad-stools if poured upon earth, will
produce the same again: If Sow-thistles will abound in places manured
with dung of Hogs, which feeds much upon that plant: If Horse-dung
reproduceth oats: If winds and rains will transport the seminals of
plants; it will not be easie to determine where the power of generation
ceaseth. The forms of things may lie deeper then we conceive them;
seminal principles may not be dead in the divided atoms of plants: but
wandering in the ocean of nature, when they hit upon proportionable
materials, may unite, and return to their visible selves again.
But the prudence of this Animal is by knawing, piercing, or otherwise,
to destroy the little nebbe or principle of germination. Which
notwithstanding is not easily discoverable; it being no ready business
to meet with such grains in Ant-hils; and he must dig deep, that will
seek them in the Winter.
CHAPTER XXVIII
Of some others.
[Sidenote: _Of the Chicken._]
That a Chicken is formed out of the yelk of the Egg, was the opinion of
some Ancient Philosophers. Whether it be not the nutriment of the
Pullet, may also be considered: Since umbilical vessels are carried unto
it: Since much of the yelk remaineth after the Chicken is formed: Since
in a Chicken newly hatched, the stomack is tincted yellow, and the belly
full of yelk, which is drawn in at the navel or vessels towards the
vent, as may be discerned in Chickens within a day or two before
exclusion.
Whether the Chicken be made out of the white, or that be not also its
aliment, is likewise very questionable: Since an umbilical vessel is
derived unto it: Since after the formation and perfect shape of the
Chicken, much of the white remaineth.
Whether it be not made out of the grando, gallature, germ or tred of the
Egg, as, _Aquapendente_ informeth us, seemed to many of doubt: for at
the blunter end it is not discovered after the Chicken is formed; by
this also the yelk and white are continued, whereby it may conveniently
receive its nutriment from them both.
Now that from such slender materials, nature should effect this
production it is no more then is observed in other animals; and even in
grains and kernels, the greatest part is but the nutriment of that
generative particle, so disproportionable unto it.
[Sidenote: _Of Eggs._]
A greater difficulty in the doctrine of Eggs, is, how the sperm of the
Cock prolificates and makes the oval conception fruitful, or how it
attaineth unto every Egg, since the vitellary or place of the yelk is
very high: Since the ovary or part where the white involveth it, is in
the second region of the matrix, which is somewhat long and inverted:
Since also a Cock will in one day fertilate the whole racemation or
cluster of Eggs, which are not excluded in many weeks after.
But these at last, and how in the Cicatricula or little pale circle
formation first beginneth, how the Grando or tredle, are but the poles
and establishing particles of the tender membrans, firmly conserving the
floating parts, in their proper places, with many other observables,
that ocular Philosopher, and singular discloser of truth, Dr. _Harvey_
hath discovered, in that excellent discourse of Generation; So strongly
erected upon the two great pillars of truth, experience and solid
reason.
That the sex is discernable from the figure of Eggs, or that Cocks or
Hens proceed from long or round ones, as many contend, experiment will
easily frustrate.
The _Ægyptians_ observed a better way to hatch their Eggs in Ovens, then
the _Babylonians_ to roast them at the bottom of a sling, by swinging
them round about, till heat from motion had concocted them; for that
confuseth all parts without any such effect.
Though slight distinction be made between boiled and roasted Eggs, yet
is there no slender difference, for the one is much drier then the
other: the Egg expiring less in the elixation or boiling; whereas in the
assation or roasting, it will sometimes abate a dragm; that is,
threescore grains in weight. So a new laid Egg will not so easily be
boiled hard, because it contains a greater stock of humid parts; which
must be evaporated, before the heat can bring the inexhalable parts into
consistence.
Why the Hen hatcheth not the Egg in her belly, or maketh not at least
some rudiment thereof within her self, by the natural heat of inward
parts, since the same is performed by incubation from an outward warmth
after? Why the Egg is thinner at one extream? Why there is some cavity
or emptiness at the blunter end? Why we open them at that part? Why the
greater end is first excluded? Why some Eggs are all red, as the
Kestrils; some only red at one end, as those of Kites and Buzzards? why
some Eggs are not Oval but Round, as those of fishes? etc. are problems,
whose decisions would too much enlarge this discourse.
[Sidenote: _Of Snakes, etc._]
That Snakes and Vipers do sting or transmit their mischief by the tail,
is a common expression not easily to be justified; and a determination
of their venoms unto a part, wherein we could never find it; the poison
lying about the teeth, and communicated by bite, in such are
destructive. And therefore when biting Serpents are mentioned in the
Scripture, they are not differentially set down from such as mischief
by stings; nor can conclusions be made conformable to this opinion,
because when the Rod of _Moses_ was turned into a Serpent, God
determinately commanded him to take up the same by the tail.
Nor are all Snakes of such empoisoning qualities, as common opinion
presumeth; as is confirmable from the ordinary green Snake with us, from
several histories of domestick Snakes, from Ophiophagous nations, and
such as feed upon Serpents.
Surely the destructive delusion of Satan in this shape, hath much
enlarged the opinion of their mischief. Which notwithstanding was not so
high with the heathens, in whom the Devil had wrought a better opinion
of this animal, it being sacred unto the _Egyptians_, _Greeks_ and
_Romans_, and the common symbole of sanity. In the shape whereof
_Æsculapius_ the God of health appeared unto the _Romans_, accompanied
their Embassadors to _Rome_ from _Epidaurus_; and the same did stand in
the _Tiberine_ Isle upon the Temple of _Æsculapius_.
Some doubt many have of the Tarantula, or poisonous Spider of
_Calabria_, and that magical cure of the bite thereof by Musick. But
since we observe that many attest it from experience: Since the learned
_Kircherius_ hath positively averred it, and set down the songs and
tunes solemnly used for it; Since some also affirm the Tarantula it self
will dance upon certain stroaks, whereby they set their instruments
against its poison; we shall not at all question it.
Much wonder is made of the Boramez, that strange plant-animal or
vegetable Lamb of _Tartary_, which Wolves delight to feed on, which hath
the shape of a Lamb, affordeth a bloody juyce upon breaking, and liveth
while the plants be consumed about it. And yet if all this be no more,
then the shape of a Lamb in the flower or seed, upon the top of the
stalk, as we meet with the forms of Bees, Flies and Dogs in some others;
he hath seen nothing that shall much wonder at it.
It may seem too hard to question the swiftness of Tigers, which hath
therefore given names unto Horses, Ships and Rivers, nor can we deny
what all have thus affirmed; yet cannot but observe, that _Jacobus
Bontius_ late Physitian at _Java_ in the East _Indies_, as an ocular and
frequent witness is not afraid to deny it; to condemn _Pliny_ who
affirmeth it, and that indeed it is but a slow and tardigradous animal,
preying upon advantage, and otherwise may be escaped.
Many more there are whose serious enquiries we must request of others,
and shall only awake considerations, Whether that common opinion that
Snakes do breed out of the back or spinal marrow of man, doth build upon
any constant root or seed in nature; or did not arise from contingent
generation, in some single bodies remembred by _Pliny_ or others, and
might be paralleld since in living corruptions of the guts and other
parts; which regularly proceed not to putrifactions of that nature.
Whether the Story of the Remora be not unreasonably amplified; whether
that of Bernacles and Goose-trees be not too much enlarged; whether the
common history of Bees will hold, as large accounts have delivered;
whether the brains of Cats be attended with such destructive
malignities, as _Dioscorides_ and others put upon them.
As also whether there be not some additional help of Art, unto the
Numismatical and Musical shells, which we sometimes meet with in
conchylious collections among us?
Whether the fasting spittle of man be poison unto Snakes and Vipers, as
experience hath made us doubt? Whether the Nightingals setting with her
breast against a thorn, be any more then that she placeth some prickels
on the outside of her nest, or roosteth in thorny and prickly places,
where Serpents may least approach her? Whether Mice may be bred by
putrifaction as well as univocall production, as may be easily believed,
if that receit to make Mice out of wheat will hold, which _Helmont_ hath
delivered. [SN: Helm. Imago fermenti, _etc._] Whether Quails from any
idiosyncracy or peculiarity of constitution, do innocuously feed upon
Hellebore, or rather sometime but medically use the same; because we
perceive that Stares, which are commonly said harmlessly to feed on
Hemlock, do not make good the tradition; and he that observes what
vertigoes, cramps and convulsions follow thereon in these animals, will
be of our belief.
THE FOURTH BOOK
Of many popular and received Tenents
concerning Man, which examined,
prove either false or dubious.
CHAPTER I
Of the Erectness of Man.
[Sidenote: _What figure in animals is properly erect._]
That only _Man_ hath an Erect figure, and for to behold and look up
toward heaven, according to that of the Poet,
_Pronaque cum spectant animalia cætera terram,
Os homini sublime dedit, cælumque tueri
Jussit, et erectos ad sydera tollere vultus,_
is a double assertion, whose first part may be true, if we take
Erectness strictly, and so as _Galen_ hath defined it; for they only,
saith he, have an Erect figure, whose spine and thigh-bone are carried
in right lines; and so indeed of any we yet know, _Man_ only is Erect.
For the thighs of other animals do stand at Angles with their spine, and
have rectangular positions in Birds, and perfect Quadrupeds. Nor doth
the Frog, though stretched out, or swimming, attain the rectitude of
_Man_, or carry its thigh without all angularity. [SN: _What seiante or
sitting._] And thus is it also true, that Man only sitteth, if we
define sitting to be a firmation of the body upon the _Ischias_:
wherein if the position be just and natural, the Thigh-bone lieth at
right angles to the Spine, and the Leg-bone or Tibia to the Thigh. For
others when they seem to sit, as _Dogs_, _Cats_, or _Lions_, do make
unto their Spine acute angles with their Thigh, and acute to the Thigh
with their Shank. Thus is it likewise true, what _Aristotle_ alledgeth
in that Problem; why _Man_ alone suffereth pollutions in the Night [SN:
ἐξονειρωκτικός.], because _Man_ only lyeth upon his Back; if we
define not the same by every supine position, but when the Spine is in
rectitude with the Thigh, and both with the arms lie parallel to the
_Horizon_: so that a line through their Navel will pass through the
Zenith and Centre of the Earth. And so cannot other Animals lie upon
their Backs: for though the Spine lie parallel with the _Horizon_, yet
will their Legs incline, and lie at angles unto it. And upon these three
divers positions in _Man_, wherein the Spine can only be at right lines
with the Thigh, arise those remarkable postures, prone, supine and
erect; which are but differenced in situation, or in angular postures
upon the Back, the Belly and the Feet.
But if Erectness be popularly taken, and as it is largely opposed unto
proneness, or the posture of animals looking downwards, carrying their
venters or opposite part to the Spine, directly towards the Earth, it
may admit of question. For though in _Serpents_ and _Lizards_ we may
truly allow a proneness, yet _Galen_ acknowledgeth that perfect
Quadrupeds, as _Horses_, _Oxen_ and _Camels_, are but partly prone, and
have some part of Erectness. And _Birds_ or flying Animals, are so far
from this kind of proneness, that they are almost Erect; advancing the
Head and Breast in their progression, and only prone in the Act of
volitation or flying. And if that be true which is delivered of the
_Pengin_ or _Anser Magellanicus_, often described in Maps about those
_Straits_, that they go Erect like _Men_, and with their Breast and
Belly do make one line perpendicular unto the axis of the Earth; it will
almost make up the exact Erectness of _Man_ [SN: _Observe also the_
Vrias Bellanii _and_ Mergus major.]. Nor will that Insect come very
short which we have often beheld, that is, one kind of Locust which
stands not prone, or a little inclining upward, but in a large
Erectness, elevating alwaies the two fore Legs, and sustaining it self
in the middle of the other four: by _Zoographers_ [SN: _Describers of
animals._] called _Mantis_, and by the common people of _Provence_,
_Prega_, _Dio_, the Prophet and praying Locust; as being generally found
in the posture of supplication, or such as resembleth ours, when we lift
up our hands to Heaven.
As for the end of this Erection; to look up toward Heaven; though
confirmed by several testimonies, and the _Greek_ Etymology of _Man_, it
is not so readily to be admitted; and as a popular and vain conceit was
Anciently rejected by _Galen_; who in his third, _De usu partium_,
determines, that _Man_ is Erect, because he was made with hands, and was
therewith to exercise all Arts, which in any other figure he could not
have performed; as he excellently declareth in that place, where he also
proves that _Man_ could have been made neither Quadruped nor Centaur.
And for the accomplishment of this intention, that is, to look up and
behold the Heavens, _Man_ hath a notable disadvantage in the Eye lid;
whereof the upper is far greater than the lower, which abridgeth the
sight upwards; contrary to those of _Birds_, who herein have the
advantage of _Man_: Insomuch that the Learned _Plempius_[SN: Plemp.
Ophthalmographia.] is bold to affirm, that if he had had the formation
of the Eye-lids, he would have contrived them quite otherwise.
The ground and occasion of this conceit was a literal apprehension of a
figurative expression in _Plato_, as _Galen_ thus delivers; To opinion
that _Man_ is Erect to look up and behold the Heavens, is a conceit only
fit for those that never saw the _Fish_ Uranoscopus, that is, the
Beholder of Heaven; which hath its Eyes so placed, that it looks up
directly to Heaven; which _Man_ doth not, except he recline, or bend his
head backward: and thus to look up to Heaven, agreeth not only unto
_Men_, but _Asses_; to omit _Birds_ with long necks, which look not only
upwards, but round about at pleasure. And therefore _Men_ of this
opinion understood not _Plato_ when he said that _Man_ doth _Sursum
aspicere_; for thereby was not meant to gape, or look upward with the
Eye, but to have his thoughts sublime; and not only to behold, but
speculate their Nature, with the Eye of the understanding.
Now although _Galen_ in this place makes instance but in one, yet are
the other fishes, whose Eyes regard the Heavens, as Plane, and
Cartilagineous _Fishes_; as _Pectinals_, or such as have their bones
made laterally like a Comb; for when they apply themselves to sleep or
rest upon the white side, their Eyes on the other side look upward
toward Heaven. For _Birds_, they generally carry their heads Erectly
like _Man_, and have advantage in their upper Eye-lid; and many that
have long necks, and bear their heads somewhat backward, behold far more
of the Heavens, and seem to look above the æquinoxial Circle. And so
also in many Quadrupeds, although their progression be partly prone, yet
is the sight of their Eye direct, not respecting the Earth but Heaven;
and make an higher Arch of altitude then our own. The position of a
_Frog_ with his head above water exceedeth these; for therein he seems
to behold a large part of the Heavens, and the acies of his Eye to
ascend as high as the Tropick; but he that hath beheld the posture of a
_Bittor_, will not deny that it beholds almost the very _Zenith_. [SN:
_Point of heaven over our heads._]
CHAPTER II
Of the Heart.
[Sidenote: _How a Mans heart is placed in his Body._]
That the _Heart_ of Man is seated in the left side, is an asseveration,
which strictly taken, is refutable by inspection, whereby it appears the
base and centre thereof is in the midst of the chest; true it is, that
the Mucro or Point thereof inclineth unto the left; for by this position
it giveth way unto the ascension of the midriff, and by reason of the
hollow vein could not commodiously deflect unto the right. From which
diversion, nevertheless we cannot so properly say tis placed in the
left, as that it consisteth in the middle, that is, where its centre
resteth; for so do we usually say a Gnomon or Needle is in the middle of
a Dial, although the extreams may respect the North or South, and
approach the circumference thereof.
The ground of this mistake is a general observation from the pulse or
motion of the _Heart_, which is more sensible on this side; but the
reason hereof is not to be drawn from the situation of the _Heart_, but
the site of the left ventricle wherein the vital Spirits are laboured;
and also the great Artery that conveieth them out; both which are
situated on the left. Upon this reason Epithems or cordial Applications
are justly applied unto the left Breast; and the Wounds under the fifth
Rib may be more suddenly destructive if made on the sinister side, and
the Spear of the Souldier that peirced our Saviour, is not improperly
described, when Painters direct it a little towards the left.
The other ground is more particular and upon inspection; for in dead
Bodies especially lying upon the Spine, the _Heart_ doth seem to incline
unto the left. Which happeneth not from its proper site; but besides its
sinistrous gravity, is drawn that way by the great Artery, which then
subsideth and haleth the _Heart_ unto it. And therefore strictly taken,
the _Heart_ is seated in the middle of the Chest; but after a careless
and inconsiderate aspection, or according to the readiest sense of
pulsation, we shall not quarrel, if any affirm it is seated toward the
left. And in these considerations must _Aristotle_ be salved, when he
affirmeth the _Heart_ of Man is placed in the left side, and thus in a
popular acception may we receive the Periphrasis of _Persius_[SN:
----Leva in parte mamillæ.]; when he taketh the part under the left Pap
for the _Heart_; and if rightly apprehended, it concerneth not this
controversie, when it is said in _Ecclesiastes_: The _Heart_ of a wise
Man is in the right side, but that of a Fool in the left, for thereby
may be implied, that the _Heart_ of a wise Man delighteth in the right
way, or in the path of Vertue; that of a Fool in the left or road of
Vice; according to the mystery of the Letter of _Pythagoras_, or that
expression in _Jonah_, concerning sixscore thousand, that could not
discern between their right hand and their left, or knew not good from
evil.
That assertion also that Man proportionally hath the largest brain, I
did I confess somewhat doubt; and conceived it might have failed in
Birds, especially such as having little Bodies, have yet large Cranies,
and seem to contain much Brain, as _Snipes_, _Woodcocks_, etc. But upon
trial I find it very true. The Brains of a Man, _Archangelus_ and
_Bauhinus_ observe, to weigh four pound, and sometime five and a half.
If therefore a Man weigh one hundred and fourty pounds, and his Brain
but five, his Weight is 27. times as much as his brain, deducting the
weight of that five pound which is allowed for it. Now in a Snipe, which
weighed four ounces two dragms, I find the Brains to weigh but half a
dragm; so that the weight of the Body (allowing for the Brain) exceeded
the weight of the Brain, sixty seven times and an half.
More controvertible it seemeth in the Brains of Sparrows, whose Cranies
are rounder, and so of larger capacity: and most of all in the Heads of
Birds, upon the first formation in the Egg, wherein the Head seems
larger then all the Body, and the very Eyes almost as big as either. A
Sparrow in the total we found to weigh seven dragms and four and twenty
grans; whereof the Head a dragm, but the Brain not fifteen grains; which
answereth not fully the proportion of the brain of Man. And therefore it
is to be taken of the whole Head with the Brains, when _Scaliger_[SN:
Histor. Animal. _lib._ 1.] objecteth that the Head of a Man is the
fifteenth part of his Body; that of a Sparrow, scarce the fifth.
CHAPTER III
Of Pleurisies.
[Sidenote: _What a Pleurisie is._]
That _Pleurisies_ are only on the left side, is a popular Tenent not
only absurd but dangerous. From the misapprehension hereof, men omitting
the opportunity of remedies, which otherwise they would not neglect.
Chiefly occasioned by the Ignorance of _Anatomy_ and the extent of the
part affected; which in an exquisite _Pleurisie_ is determined to be the
skin or membrane which invested the Ribs, for so it is defined,
_Inflammatio membranæ costas succingentis_; An Inflammation, either
simple, consisting only of an hot and sanguineous affluxion; or else
denominable from other humours, according to the predominancy of
melancholy, flegm, or choler. The membrane thus inflamed, is properly
called _Pleura_; from whence the disease hath its name; and this
investeth not only one side, but overspreadeth the cavity of the chest,
and affordeth a common coat unto the parts contained therein.
Now therefore the _Pleura_ being common unto both sides, it is not
reasonable to confine the inflammation unto one, nor strictly to
determine it is alwaies in the side; but sometimes before and behind,
that is, inclining to the Spine or Breast-bone; for thither this Coat
extendeth; and therefore with equal propriety we may affirm, that ulcers
of the lungs, or Apostems of the brain do happen only in the left side;
or that Ruptures are confinable unto one side, whereas the Peritoneum or
Rib of the Belly may be broke, or its perforations relaxed in either.
CHAPTER IV
Of the Ring-finger.
An opinion there is, which magnifies the fourth _Finger_ of the left
Hand; presuming therein a cordial relation, that a particular vessel,
nerve, vein or artery is conferred thereto from the heart, and therefore
that especially hath the honour to bear our Rings. Which was not only
the Christian practice in Nuptial contracts, but observed by Heathens,
as _Alexander ab Alexandro_, _Gellius_, _Macrobius_ and _Pierius_ have
delivered, as _Levinus Lemnius_ hath confirmed, who affirms this
peculiar vessel to be an artery, and not a Nerve, as Antiquity hath
conceived it; adding moreover that _Rings_ hereon peculiarly affect the
Heart; that in Lipothymies or swoundings he used the frication of this
_Finger_ with saffron and gold: that the ancient Physitians mixed up
their Medicines herewith; that this is seldom or last of all affected
with the Gout, and when that becometh nodous, Men continue not long
after. Notwithstanding all which we remain unsatisfied, nor can we think
the reasons alleadged sufficiently establish the preheminency of this
_Finger_.
For first, Concerning the practice of Antiquity, the custom was not
general to wear their _Rings_ either on this hand or _Finger_; for it is
said, and that emphatically in _Jeremiah_, _Si fuerit Jeconias filius
Joachim regis Judæ annulus in manu dextrâ meâ, inde evallam eum_: Though
_Coniah_ the son of _Joachim_ King of _Judah_, were the signet on my
right Hand, yet would I pluck thee thence. So is it observed by _Pliny_,
that in the portraits of their Gods, the _Rings_ were worn on the
_Finger_ next the _Thumb_; that the _Romans_ wore them also upon their
little Finger, as _Hero_ is described in _Petronius_; some wore them on
the middle _Finger_, as the ancient _Gaules_ and _Britans_; and some
upon the fore-_Finger_, as is deduceable from _Julius Pollux_: who names
that _Ring_ Corionos.
[Sidenote: _Rings anciently of Iron._]
Again, That the practice of the ancients, had any such respect of
cordiality or reference unto the Heart, will much be doubted, if we
consider their Rings were made of iron; such was that of _Prometheus_,
who is conceived the first that brought them in use. So, as _Pliny_
affirmeth, for many years the _Senators_ of _Rome_ did not wear any
Rings of Gold; but the slaves wore generally Iron Rings until their
manumission or preferment to some dignity. That the _Lacedemonians_
continued their Iron Rings unto his daies, _Pliny_ also delivereth, and
surely they used few of Gold; for beside that _Lycurgus_ prohibited that
mettal, we read in _Athenæus_, that having a desire to guild the face of
_Apollo_, they enquired of the Oracle where they might purchase so much
Gold; and were directed unto _Crœsus_ King of _Lydia_.
Moreover whether the Ancients had any such intention, the grounds which
they conceived in Vein, Nerve or Artery, are not to be justified, nor
will inspection confirm a peculiar vessel in this Finger. For as
_Anatomy_ informeth, the Basilica vein dividing into two branches below
the cubit, the outward sendeth two surcles unto the thumb, two unto the
fore-finger, and one unto the middle finger in the inward side; the
other branch of the Basilica sendeth one surcle unto the outside of the
middle finger, two unto the Ring, and as many unto the little fingers;
so that they all proceed from the Basilica, and are in equal numbers
derived unto every one. In the same manner are the branches of the
axillary artery distributed into the Hand; for below the cubit it
divideth into two parts, the one running along the _Radius_, and passing
by the wrest or place of the pulse, is at the _Fingers_ subdivided into
three Branches; whereof the first conveyeth two surcles unto the
_Thumb_, the second as many to the fore-_Finger_, and the third one unto
the middle _Finger_; the other or lower division of the artery
descendeth by the ulna, and furnisheth the other _Fingers_; that is the
middle with one surcle, and the _Ring_ and little _Fingers_ with two.
[SN: _Whence the Nerves proceed._] As for the Nerves, they are disposed
much after the same manner, and have their original from the Brain, and
not the Heart, as many of the Ancients conceived; which is so far from
affording Nerves unto other parts, that it receiveth very few it self
from the sixth conjugation, or pair of Nerves in the Brain.
Lastly, These propagations being communicated unto both Hands, we have
no greater reason to wear our _Rings_ on the left, then on the right;
nor are there cordial considerations in the one, more then the other.
And therefore when _Forestus_ for the stanching of blood makes use of
Medical applications unto the fourth _Finger_, he confines not that
practice unto the left, but varieth the side according to the nostril
bleeding. So in Feavers, where the Heart primarily suffereth, we apply
Medicines unto the wrests of either arm; so we touch the pulse of both,
and judge of the affections of the Heart by the one as well as the
other. And although in indispositions of Liver or Spleen, considerations
are made in _Phlebotomy_ respectively to their situation; yet when the
Heart is affected, Men have thought it as effectual to bleed on the
right as the left; and although also it may be thought, a nearer respect
is to be had of the left, because the great artery proceeds from the
left ventricle, and so is nearer that arm; it admits not that
consideration. For under the channel bones the artery divideth into two
great branches, from which trunk or point of division, the distance unto
either Hand is equal, and the consideration also answerable.
All which with many respective Niceties, in order unto parts, sides, and
veines, are now become of less consideration, by the new and noble
doctrine of the circulation of the blood.
And therefore _Macrobius_ discussing the point, hath alleadged another
reason; affirming that the gestation of _Rings_ upon this Hand and
_Finger_, might rather be used for their conveniency and preservation,
then any cordial relation. For at first (saith he) it was both free and
usual to wear _Rings_ on either Hand; but after that luxury encreased,
when pretious gems and rich insculptures were added, the custom of
wearing them on the right Hand was translated unto the left; for that
Hand being less imployed, thereby they were best preserved. And for the
same reason they placed them on this _Finger_; for the _Thumb_ was too
active a _Finger_, and is commonly imployed with either of the rest: the
Index or fore-_Finger_ was too naked whereto to commit their
pretiosities, and hath the tuition of the _Thumb_ scarce unto the second
joint: the middle and little _Finger_ they rejected as extreams, and too
big or too little for their _Rings_, and of all chose out the fourth, as
being least used of any, as being guarded on either side, and having in
most this peculiar condition, that it cannot be extended alone and by
itself, but will be accompanied by some _Finger_ on either side. And to
this opinion assenteth _Alexander ab Alexandro_, _Annulum nuptialem
prior ætas in sinistrâ ferebat, crediderim ne attereretur_.
Now that which begat or promoted the common opinion, was the common
conceit that the Heart was seated on the left side; but how far this is
verified, we have before declared. The _Egyptian_ practice hath much
advanced the same, who unto this _Finger_ derived a Nerve from the
Heart; and therefore the Priest anointed the same with precious oyls
before the Altar. But how weak _Anatomists_ they were, which were so
good Embalmers, we have already shewed. And though this reason took most
place, yet had they another which more commended that practice: and that
was the number whereof this _Finger_ was an Hieroglyphick. For by
holding down the fourth _Finger_ of the left Hand, while the rest were
extended, they signified the perfect and magnified number of six. For as
_Pierius_ hath graphically declared, Antiquity expressed numbers by the
_Fingers_ of either Hand: on the left they accounted their digits and
articulate numbers unto an hundred; on the right Hand hundreds and
thousands; the depressing this _Finger_, which in the left Hand implied
but six, in the right indigitated six hundred. In this way of
numeration, may we construe that of _Juvenal_ concerning _Nestor_,
----_Qui per tot sæcula mortem
Distulit, atque suos jam dextrâ computat annos._
And however it were intended, in this sense it will be very elegant what
is delivered of Wisdom, _Prov._ 3. Length of daies is in her right Hand,
and in her left Hand riches and honour.
[Sidenote: _Hand-Gouty persons._]
As for the observation of _Lemnius_ an eminent Physitian, concerning the
Gout; however it happened in his Country, we may observe it otherwise in
ours; that is, that chiragrical persons do suffer in this _Finger_ as
well as in the rest, and sometimes first of all, and sometimes no where
else. And for the mixing up medicines herewith; it is rather an argument
of opinion, then any considerable effect; and we as highly conceive of
the practice in _Diapalma_, that is, in the making of that plaister, to
stir it with the stick of a Palm.
CHAPTER V
Of the right and left Hand.
It is also suspicious, and not with that certainty to be received, what
is generally believed concerning the right and left hand; that Men
naturally make use of the right, and that the use of the other is a
digression or aberration from that way which nature generally intendeth.
We do not deny that almost all Nations have used this hand, and ascribed
a preheminence thereto: hereof a remarkable passage there is in the 48.
of _Genesis_, And _Joseph_ took them both, _Ephraim_ in his right hand
towards _Israels_ left hand, and _Manasses_ in his left hand towards
_Israels_ right hand, and _Israel_ stretched out his right hand and laid
it upon _Ephraims_ head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon
_Manasses_ head, guiding his hands wittingly, for _Manasses_ was the
first-born; and when _Joseph_ saw that his father laid his right hand
upon the head of _Ephraim_, it displeased him, and he held up his
fathers hand to remove it from _Ephraims_ head unto _Manasses_ head, and
_Joseph_ said, Not so my father, for this is the first-born, put thy
right hand upon his head: The like appeareth from the ordinance of
_Moses_ in the consecration of their Priests, Then shalt thou kill the
Ram, and take of his blood, and put it upon the tip of the right ear of
_Aaron_, and upon the tip of the right ear of his sons, and upon the
thumb of the right hand, and upon the great toe of the right foot, and
sprinkle the blood on the Altar round about. That the _Persians_ were
wont herewith to plight their faith, is testified by _Diodorus_: That
the _Greeks_ and _Romans_ made use hereof, beside the testimony of
divers Authors, is evident from their custom of discumbency at their
meals, which was upon their left side, for so their right hand was free,
and ready for all service. As also from the conjunction of the right
hands and not the left observable in the _Roman_ medals of concord. Nor
was this only in use with divers Nations of Men, but was the custom of
whole Nations of Women; as is deduceable from the Amazones in the
amputation of their right breast, whereby they had the freer use of
their bow. All which do seem to declare a natural preferment of the one
unto motion before the other; wherein notwithstanding in submission to
future information, we are unsatisfied unto great dubitation.
For first, if there were a determinate prepotency in the right, and such
as ariseth from a constant root in nature, we might expect the same in
other animals, whose parts are also differenced by dextrality; wherein
notwithstanding we cannot discover a distinct and complying account; for
we find not that _Horses_, _Buls_, or _Mules_, are generally stronger on
this side. As for Animals whose forelegs more sensibly supply the use of
arms, they hold, if not an equality in both, a prevalency oft-times in
the other, as _Squirrels_, _Apes_, and _Monkies_; the same is also
discernable in _Parrets_, who feed themselves more commonly by the
left-leg, and Men observe that the Eye of a Tumbler is biggest, not
constantly in one, but in the bearing side.
[Sidenote: _Whence the dextral activity in men proceeds._]
That there is also in Men a natural prepotency in the right, we cannot
with constancy affirm, if we make observation in children; who permitted
the freedom of both, do oft-times confine unto the left, and are not
without great difficulty restrained from it. And therefore this
prevalency is either uncertainly placed in the laterality, or custom
determines its differency. Which is the resolution of _Aristotle_ in
that Problem, which enquires why the right side being better then the
left, is equal in the senses? because, saith he, the right and left do
differ by use and custom, which have no place in the senses. For right
and left as parts inservient unto the motive faculty, are differenced by
degrees from use and assuefaction, according whereto the one grows
stronger and oft-times bigger then the other. But in the senses it is
otherwise; for they acquire not their perfection by use or custom, but
at the first we equally hear and see with one Eye, as well as with
another. And therefore, were this indifferency permitted, or did not
constitution, but nature determine dextrality, there would be many more
Scevolaes then are delivered in story; nor needed we to draw examples of
the left, from the sons of the right hand [SN: Benjamin filius dextræ.];
as we read of seven thousand in the Army of the _Benjamites_. True it
is, that although there be an indifferency in either, or a prevalency
indifferent in one, yet is it most reasonable for uniformity, and sundry
respective uses, that Men should apply themselves to the constant use of
one; for there will otherwise arise anomalous disturbances in manual
actions, not only in civil and artificial, but also in Military affairs,
and the several actions of war.
Secondly, The grounds and reasons alleadged for the right, are not
satisfactory, and afford no rest in their decision. _Scaliger_ finding a
defect in the reason of _Aristotle_, introduceth one of no less
deficiency himself; _Ratio materialis_ (saith he) _sanguinis crassitudo
simul et multitudo_; that is, the reason of the vigour of this side, is
the crassitude and plenty of blood; but this is not sufficient; for the
crassitude or thickness of blood affordeth no reason why one arm should
be enabled before the other, and the plenty thereof, why both not
enabled equally. _Fallopius_ is of another conceit, deducing the reason
from the Azygos or _vena sine pari_, a large and considerable vein
arising out of the _cava_ or hollow vein, before it enters the right
ventricle of the Heart, and placed only in the right side. But neither
is this perswasory; for the Azygos communicates no branches unto the
arms or legs on either side, but disperseth into the Ribs on both, and
in its descent doth furnish the left Emulgent with one vein, and the
first vein of the loins on the right side with another; which manner of
derivation doth not confer a peculiar addition unto either. _Cælius
Rodiginus_ undertaking to give a reason of Ambidexters and _Left-handed_
Men, delivereth a third opinion: Men, saith he, are Ambidexters, and use
both _Hands_ alike, when the heat of the Heart doth plentifully disperse
into the left side, and that of the Liver into the right, and the spleen
be also much dilated; but Men are _Left-handed_ when ever it happeneth
that the Heart and Liver are seated on the left-side; or when the Liver
is on the right side, yet so obducted and covered with thick skins, that
it cannot diffuse its vertue into the right. Which reasons are no way
satisfactory; for herein the spleen is injustly introduced to invigorate
the sinister side, which being dilated it would rather infirm and
debilitate. As for any tunicles or skins which should hinder the Liver
from enabling dextral parts; we must not conceive it diffuseth its
vertue by meer irradiation, but by its veins and proper vessels, which
common skins and teguments cannot impede. And for the seat of the Heart
and Liver in one side, whereby Men become _Left-handed_, it happeneth
too rarely to countenance an effect so common; for the seat of the Liver
on the left side is monstrous, and rarely to be met with in the
observations of Physitians. Others not considering ambidextrous and
_Left-handed_ Men, do totally submit unto the efficacy of the Liver;
which though seated on the right side, yet by the subclavian division
doth equidistantly communicate its activity unto either Arm; nor will it
salve the doubts of observation; for many are _Right-handed_ whose
Livers are weakly constituted, and many use the left, in whom that part
is strongest; and we observe in Apes, and other animals, whose Liver is
in the right, no regular prevalence therein.
And therefore the brain, especially the spinal marrow, which is but the
brain prolonged, hath a fairer plea hereto; for these are the principles
of motion, wherein dextrality consists; and are divided within and
without the Crany. By which division transmitting Nerves respectively
unto either side; according to the indifferency, or original and native
prepotency, there ariseth an equality in both, or prevalency on either
side. And so may it be made out, what many may wonder at, why some most
actively use the contrary Arm and Leg; for the vigour of the one
dependeth upon the upper part of the spine, but the other upon the
lower.
And therefore many things are Philosophically delivered concerning
right and left, which admit of some suspension. That a Woman upon a
masculine conception advanceth her right Leg, will not be found to
answer strick observation. That males are conceived in the right side of
the womb, females in the left, though generally delivered, and supported
by ancient testimony, will make no infallible account; it happening oft
times that males and females do lie upon both sides, and Hermaphrodites
for ought we know on either. It is also suspitious what is delivered
concerning the right and left testicle, that males are begotten from the
one, and females from the other. For though the left seminal vein
proceedeth from the emulgent, and is therefore conceived to carry down a
serous and feminine matter; yet the seminal Arteries which send forth
the active materials, are both derived from the great Artery. Beside
this original of the left vein was thus contrived, to avoid the
pulsation of the great Artery, over which it must have passed to attain
unto the testicle. Nor can we easily infer such different effects from
the divers situation of parts which have one end and office; for in the
kidneys which have one office, the right is seated lower then the left,
whereby it lieth free, and giveth way unto the Liver. And therefore also
that way which is delivered for masculine generation, to make a strait
ligature about the left testicle, thereby to intercept the evacuation of
that part, deserveth consideration. For one sufficeth unto generation,
as hath been observed in semicastration, and oft times in carnous
ruptures. [SN: _How an Horse or Bull may generate after they be gelt._]
Beside, the seminal ejaculation proceeds not immediately from the
testicle, but from the spermatick glandules; and therefore _Aristotle_
affirms (and reason cannot deny) that although there be nothing diffused
from the testicles, an _Horse_ or _Bull_ may generate after castration;
that is, from the stock and remainder of seminal matter, already
prepared and stored up in the Prostates or grandules of generation.
Thirdly, Although we should concede a right and left in Nature, yet in
this common and received account we may err from the proper acception;
mistaking one side for another; calling that in Man and other animals
the right which is the left, and that the left which is the right, and
that in some things right and left, which is not properly either.
For first the right and left, are not defined by Phylosophers according
to common acception, that is, respectively from one Man unto another, or
any constant site in each; as though that should be the right in one,
which upon confront or facing, stands athwart or diagonally unto the
other; but were distinguished according to the activity and predominant
locomotion upon either side. Thus _Aristotle_ in his excellent Tract _de
incessu animalium_, ascribeth six positions unto Animals, answering the
three dimensions; which he determineth not by site or position unto the
Heavens, but by their faculties and functions; and these are _Imum
_, _Ante Retro_, _Dextra et Sinistra_: that is, the superiour
part, where the aliment is received, that the lower extream, where it is
last expelled; so he termeth a Man a plant inverted; for he supposeth
the root of a Tree the head or upper part thereof, whereby it receiveth
its aliment, although therewith it respects the Center of the Earth, but
with the other the Zenith; and this position is answerable unto
longitude. Those parts are anteriour and measure profundity, where the
senses, especially the Eyes are placed, and those posterior which are
opposite hereunto. The dextrous and sinistrous parts of the body make
up the latitude; and are not certain and inalterable like the other; for
that, saith he, is the right side, from whence the motion of the body
beginneth, that is, the active or moving side; but that the sinister
which is the weaker or more quiescent part. Of the same determination
were the _Platonicks_ and _Pythagoreans_ before him; who conceiving the
heavens an animated body, named the _East_, the right or dextrous part,
from whence began their motion: and thus the _Greeks_, from whence the
_Latins_ have borrowed their appellation, have named this hand
δέξια, denominating it not from the site, but office, from
δέχομαι _capio_, that is, the hand which receiveth, or is usually
implied in that action.
Now upon these grounds we are most commonly mistaken, defining that by
situation which they determined by motion; and giving the term of right
hand to that which doth not properly admit it. For first, Many in their
Infancy are sinistrously disposed, and divers continue all their life
Ἀριστεροί, that is, left handed, and have but weak and imperfect use of
the right; now unto these, that hand is properly the right, and not the
other esteemed so by situation. Thus may _Aristotle_ be made out, when
he affirmeth the right claw of _Crabs_ and _Lobsters_ is biggest, if we
take the right for the most vigorous side, and not regard the relative
situation: for the one is generally bigger then the other, yet not
alwayes upon the same side. So may it be verified what is delivered by
_Scaliger_ in his Comment, that Palsies do oftnest happen upon the left
side, if understood in this sense; the most vigorous part protecting it
self, and protruding the matter upon the weaker and less resistive side.
And thus the Law of Common-Weals, that cut off the right hand of
Malefactors, if Philosophically executed, is impartial; otherwise the
amputation not equally punisheth all.
Some are Ἀμφιδέξιοι, that is, ambidextrous or right handed on both
sides; which happeneth only unto strong and Athletical bodies, whose
heat and spirits are able to afford an ability unto both. [SN: _Apt for
contention._] And therefore _Hippocrates_ saith, that Women are not
ambidextrous, that is, not so often as Men; for some are found, which
indifferently make use of both. And so may _Aristotle_ say, that only
Men are ambidexterous; of this constitution was _Asteropæus_ in _Homer_,
and _Parthenopeus_ the _Theban_ Captain in _Statius_: and of the same,
do some conceive our Father _Adam_ to have been, as being perfectly
framed, and in a constitution admitting least defect. Now in these Men
the right hand is on both sides, and that is not the left which is
opposite unto the right, according to common acception.
Again, Some are Ἀμφαριστεροὶ, as _Galen_ hath expressed it; that is,
ambilevous or left-handed on both sides; such as with agility and vigour
have not the use of either: who are not gymnastically [SN: _Strongly or
fit for corporal exercise._] composed: nor actively use those parts. Now
in these there is no right hand: of this constitution are many Women,
and some Men, who though they accustom themselves unto either hand, do
dexterously make use of neither. And therefore although the Political
advice of _Aristotle_ be very good, that Men should accustom themselves
to the command of either hand: yet cannot the execution or performance
thereof be general: for though there be many found that can use both,
yet will there divers remain that can strenuously make use of neither.
Lastly, These lateralities in Man are not only fallible, if relatively
determined unto each other, but made in reference unto the heavens and
quarters of the Globe: for those parts are not capable of these
conditions in themselves, nor with any certainty respectively derived
from us, nor from them to us again. And first in regard of their proper
nature, the heavens admit not these sinister and dexter respects; there
being in them no diversity or difference, but a simplicity of parts, and
equiformity in motion continually succeeding each other; so that from
what point soever we compute, the account will be common unto the whole
circularity. And therefore though it be plausible, it is not of
consequence hereto what is delivered by _Solinus_. That Man was
therefore a Microcosm or little World, because the dimensions of his
positions were answerable unto the greater. For as in the Heavens the
distance of the North and Southern pole, which are esteemed the
superiour and inferiour points, is equal unto the space between the East
and West, accounted the dextrous and sinistrous parts thereof; so is it
also in Man, for the extent of his fathome or distance betwixt the
extremity of the fingers of either hand upon expansion, is equal unto
the space between the sole of the foot and the crown. But this doth but
petionarily infer a dextrality in the Heavens, and we may as reasonably
conclude a right and left laterality in the Ark or naval edifice of
_Noah_. For the length thereof was thirty cubits, the breadth fifty, and
the height or profundity thirty; which well agreeth unto the proportion
of Man, whose length, that is, a perpendicular from the vertex unto the
sole of the foot is sextuple unto his breadth, or a right line drawn
from the ribs of one side to another; and decuble unto his profundity;
that is, a direct line between the breast bone and the spine.
Again, They receive not these conditions with any assurance or
stability from our selves. For the relative foundations and points of
denomination, are not fixed and certain, but variously designed
according to imagination. The Philosopher accounts that East from whence
the Heavens begin their motion. The Astronomer regarding the South and
Meridian Sun, calls that the dextrous part of Heaven which respecteth
his right hand; and that is the West. Poets respecting the West, assign
the name of right unto the North, which regardeth their right hand; and
so must that of _Ovid_ be explained _utque duæ dextrâ Zonæ totidemquæ
sinistrâ_. [SN: _Declarable from the original expression_, Psalm 89.
13.] But Augurs or Southsayers turning their face to the East, did make
the right in the South; which was also observed by the _Hebrews_ and
_Chaldeans_. Now if we name the quarters of Heaven respectively unto our
sides, it will be no certain or invariable denomination. For if we call
that the right side of Heaven which is seated Easterly unto us, when we
regard the Meridian Sun; the inhabitants beyond the Æquator and Southern
Tropick when they face us, regarding the Meridian, will contrarily
define it; for unto them, the opposite part of Heaven will respect the
left, and the Sun arise to their right.
And thus have we at large declared that although the right be most
commonly used, yet hath it no regular or certain root in nature. Since
it is not confirmable from other Animals: Since in Children it seems
either indifferent or more favourable in the other; but more reasonable
for uniformity in action, that Men accustom unto one: Since the grounds
and reasons urged for it, do not sufficiently support it: Since if there
be a right and stronger side in nature, yet may we mistake in its
denomination; calling that the right which is the left, and the left
which is the right. Since some have one right, some both, some neither.
And lastly, Since these affections in Man are not only fallible in
relation unto one another, but made also in reference unto the Heavens,
they being not capable of these conditions in themselves, nor with any
certainty from us, nor we from them again.
And therefore what admission we ow unto many conceptions concerning
right and left, requireth circumspection. That is, how far we ought to
rely upon the remedy in _Kiranides_, that is, the left eye of an
_Hedg-hog_ fried in oyl to procure sleep, and the right foot of a _Frog_
in a _Dears_ skin for the _Gout_; or that to dream of the loss of right
or left tooth, presageth the death of male or female kindred, according
to the doctrine of _Artemidorus_. What verity there is in that numeral
conceit in the lateral division of Man by even and odd, ascribing the
odd unto the right side, and even unto the left; and so by parity or
imparity of letters in Mens names to determine misfortunes on either
side of their bodies; by which account in Greek numeration, _Hephæstus_
or _Vulcan_ was lame in the right foot, and _Anibal_ lost his right eye.
And lastly, what substance there is in that Auspicial principle, and
fundamental doctrine of Ariolation, that the left hand is ominous, and
that good things do pass sinistrously upon us, because the left hand of
man respected the right hand of the Gods, which handed their favours
unto us.
CHAPTER VI
Of Swimming and Floating.
That Men swim naturally, if not disturbed by fear; that Men being
drowned and sunk, do float the ninth day when their gall breaketh; that
Women drowned, swim prone, but Men supine, or upon their backs; are
popular affirmations, whereto we cannot assent. And first, that Man
should swim naturally, because we observe it is no lesson unto other
Animals, we are not forward to conclude; for other Animals swim in the
same manner as they go, and need no other way of motion for natation in
the water, then for progression upon the land. And this is true whether
they move _per latera_, that is, two legs of one side together, which is
Tollutation or ambling; or _per diametrum_, lifting one foot before, and
the cross foot behind, which is succussation or trotting; or whether
_per frontem_ or _quadratum_, as _Scaliger_ terms it, upon a square
base, the legs of both sides moving together, as _Frogs_ and salient
Animals, which is properly called leaping. For by these motions they are
able to support and impel themselves in the water, without alteration in
the stroak of their legs, or position of their bodies.
But with Man it is performed otherwise; for in regard of site he alters
his natural posture and swimmeth prone; whereas he walketh erect. Again,
in progression the arms move parallel to the legs, and the arms and legs
unto each other; but in natation they intersect and make all sorts of
angles. And lastly, in progressive motion, the arms and legs do move
successively, but in natation both together; all which aptly to
perform, and so as to support and advance the body, is a point of Art,
and such as some in their young and docile years could never attain. But
although swimming be acquired by art, yet is there somewhat more of
nature in it then we observe in other habits, nor will it strictly fall
under that definition; for once obtained, it is not to be removed; nor
is there any who from disuse did ever yet forget it.
Secondly, That persons drowned arise and float the ninth day when their
gall breaketh, is a questionable determination both in the time and
cause. For the time of floating, it is uncertain according to the time
of putrefaction, which shall retard or accelerate according to the
subject and season of the year; for as we observed, _Cats_ and _Mice_
will arise unequally, and at different times, though drowned at the
same. Such as are fat do commonly float soonest, for their bodies
soonest ferment, and that substance approacheth nearest unto air: and
this is one of _Aristotles_ reasons why dead _Eels_ will not float,
because saith he, they have but slender bellies, and little fat.
[Sidenote: _Why drowned bodies float after a time._]
As for the cause, it is not so reasonably imputed unto the breaking of
the gall as the putrefaction or corruptive firmentation of the body,
whereby the unnatural heat prevailing, the putrifying parts do suffer a
turgescence and inflation, and becoming aery and spumous affect to
approach the air, and ascend unto the surface of the water. And this is
also evidenced in Eggs, whereof the sound ones sink, and such as are
addled swim, as do also those which are termed hypenemia or wind-eggs;
and this is also a way to separate seeds, whereof such as are corrupted
and steril, swim; and this agreeth not only unto the seed of plants
lockt up and capsulated in their husks, but also unto the sperm and
seminal humour of Man; for such a passage hath _Aristotle_ upon the
Inquisition and test of its fertility.
That the breaking of the gall is not the cause hereof, experience hath
informed us. For opening the _abdomen_, and taking out the gall in
_Cats_ and _Mice_, they did notwithstanding arise. And because we had
read in _Rhodiginus_ of a Tyrant, who to prevent the emergency of
murdered bodies, did use to cut off their lungs, and found Mens minds
possessed with this reason; we committed some unto the water without
lungs, which notwithstanding floated with the others. And to compleat
the experiment, although we took out the guts and bladder, and also
perforated the Cranium, yet would they arise, though in a longer time.
From these observations in other Animals, it may not be unreasonable to
conclude the same in Man, who is too noble a subject on whom to make
them expressly, and the casual opportunity to rare almost to make any.
Now if any should ground this effect from gall or choler, because it is
the highest humour and will be above the rest; or being the fiery humour
will readiest surmount the water, we must confess in the common
putrescence it may promote elevation, which the breaking of the bladder
of gall, so small a part in Man, cannot considerably advantage.
Lastly, That Women drowned float prone, that is, with their bellies
downward, but Men supine or upward, is an assertion wherein the _hoti_
or point it self is dubious; and were it true, the reason alledged for
it, is of no validity. The reason yet currant was first expressed by
_Pliny_, _veluti pudori defunctorum parcente naturâ_, nature modestly
ordaining this position to conceal the shame of the dead; which hath
been taken up by _Solinus_, _Rhodiginus_, and many more. This indeed (as
_Scaliger_ termeth it) is _ratio civilis non philosophica_, strong
enough for morality of Rhetoricks, not for Philosophy or Physicks. For
first, in nature the concealment of secret parts is the same in both
sexes, and the shame of their reveal equal: so _Adam_ upon the tast of
the fruit was ashamed of his nakedness as well as _Eve_. And so likewise
in _America_ and Countries unacquainted with habits, where modesty
conceals these parts in one sex, it doth it also in the other; and
therefore had this been the intention of nature, not only Women but Men
also had swimmed downwards; the posture in reason being common unto
both, where the intent is also common.
Again, While herein we commend the modesty, we condemn the wisdom of
nature: for that prone position we make her contrive unto the Woman,
were best agreeable unto the Man, in whom the secret parts are very
anteriour and more discoverable in a supine and upward posture. And
therefore _Scaliger_ declining this reason, hath recurred unto another
from the difference of parts in both sexes; _Quod ventre vasto sunt
mulieres plenoque intestinis, itaque minus impletur et subsidet, inanior
maribus quibus nates præponderant_: If so, then Men with great bellies
will float downward, and only _Callipygæ_, and Women largely composed
behind, upward. But _Anatomists_ observe, that to make the larger cavity
for the Infant, the hanch bones in Women, and consequently the parts
appendant are more protuberant then they are in Men. They who ascribe
the cause unto the breasts of Women, take not away the doubt; for they
resolve not why children float downward, who are included in that sex,
though not in the reason alleadged. But hereof we cease to discourse,
lest we undertake to afford a reason of the [1]golden tooth, that is, to
invent or assign a cause when we remain unsatisfied or unassured of the
effect.
[1] _Of the cause whereof much dispute was made, and at last proved an
imposture._
That a _Mare_ will sooner drown then a _Horse_, though commonly
opinion'd, is not I fear experienced: nor is the same observed, in the
drowning of _Whelps_ and _Kitlins_. But that a Man cannot shut or open
his eyes under water, easie experiment may convict. Whether Cripples and
mutilated Persons, who have lost the greatest part of their thighs, will
not sink but float, their lungs being abler to waft up their bodies,
which are in others overpoised by the hinder legs; we have not made
experiment. Thus much we observe, that Animals drown downwards, and the
same is observable in _Frogs_, when the hinder legs are cut off. But in
the air most seem to perish headlong from high places; however _Vulcan_
thrown from Heaven, be made to fall on his feet.
CHAPTER VII
Concerning Weight.
That Men weigh heavier dead then alive, if experiment hath not failed
us, we cannot reasonably grant. For though the trial hereof cannot so
well be made on the body of Man, nor will the difference be sensible in
the abate of scruples and dragms, yet can we not confirm the same in
lesser Animals, from whence the inference is good; and the affirmative
of _Pliny_ saith, that it is true in all. For exactly weighing and
strangling a _Chicken_ in the Scales; upon an immediate ponderation, we
could discover no sensible difference in weight; but suffering it to
lie eight or ten hours, untill it grew perfectly cold, it weighed most
sensibly lighter; the like we attempted, and verified in _Mice_, and
performed their trials in Scales, that would turn upon the eighth or
tenth part of a grain.
Now whereas some alledge that spirits are lighter substances, and
naturally ascending, do elevate and waft the body upward, whereof dead
bodies being destitute, contract a greater gravity; although we concede
that spirits are light, comparatively unto the body, yet that they are
absolutely so, or have no weight at all, we cannot readily allow. For
since Philosophy affirmeth, that spirits are middle substances between
the soul and body, they must admit of some corporiety, which supposeth
weight or gravity. Beside, in carcasses warm, and bodies newly
disanimated, while transpiration remaineth, there do exhale and breath
out vaporous and fluid parts, which carry away some power of
gravitation. Which though we allow, we do not make answerable unto
living expiration; and therefore the _Chicken_ or _Mice_ were not so
light being dead, as they would have been after ten hours kept alive;
for in that space a man abateth many ounces. Nor if it had slept, for in
that space of sleep, a Man will sometimes abate fourty ounces; nor if it
had been in the middle of summer, for then a Man weigheth some pounds
less, then in the height of winter; according to experience, and the
statick Aphorisms of _Sanctorius_.
Again, Whereas Men affirm they perceive an addition of ponderosity in
dead bodies, comparing them usually unto blocks and stones, whensoever
they lift or carry them; this accessional preponderancy is rather in
appearance then reality. For being destitute of any motion, they confer
no relief unto the Agents, or Elevators; which makes us meet with the
same complaints of gravity in animated and living bodies, where the
Nerves subside, and the faculty locomotive seems abolished; as may be
observed in the lifting or supporting of persons inebriated,
Apoplectical, or in Lypothymies and swoundings.
Many are also of opinion, and some learned Men maintain, that Men are
lighter after meals then before, and that by a supply and addition of
spirits obscuring the gross ponderosity of the aliment ingested; but the
contrary hereof we have found in the trial of sundry persons in
different sex and ages. And we conceive Men may mistake if they
distinguish not the sense of levity unto themselves, and in regard of
the scale or decision of trutination. For after a draught of wine, a Man
may seem lighter in himself from sudden refection, although he be
heavier in the balance, from a corporal and ponderous addition; but a
Man in the morning is lighter in the scale, because in sleep some pounds
have perspired; and is also lighter unto himself, because he is
refected.
And to speak strictly, a Man that holds his breath is weightier while
his lungs are full, then upon expiration. For a bladder blown is
weightier then one empty, and if it contain a quart, expressed and
emptied it will abate about a quarter of a grain. And therefore we
somewhat mistrust the experiment of a pumice stone taken up by
_Montanus_, in his Comment upon _Avicenna_, where declaring how the
rarity of parts, and numerosity of pores, occasioneth a lightness in
bodies, he affirms that a pumice-stone powdered, is lighter then one
entire; which is an experiment beyond our satisfaction; for beside that
abatement can hardly be avoided in the Trituration; if a bladder of good
capacity will scarce include a grain of air, a pumice of three or four
dragms, cannot be presumed to contain the hundred part thereof; which
will not be sensible upon the exactest beams we use. Nor is it to be
taken strictly which is delivered by the learned Lord _Verulam_, and
referred unto further experiment; That a dissolution of Iron in _aqua
fortis_, will bear as good weight as their bodies did before,
notwithstanding a great deal of waste by a thick vapour that issueth
during the working; for we cannot find it to hold neither in Iron nor
Copper, which is dissolved with less ebullition; and hereof we made
trial in Scales of good exactness: wherein if there be a defect, or such
as will not turn upon quarter grains, there may be frequent mistakes in
experiments of this nature. That also may be considered which is
delivered by _Hamerus Poppius_[SN: Basilica Antimonii.], that
_Antimony_ calcin'd or reduced to ashes by a burning glass, although it
emit a gross and ponderous exhalation, doth rather exceed then abate its
former gravity. Nevertheless, strange it is; how very little and almost
insensible abatement there will be sometimes in such operations, or
rather some encrease, as in the refining of metals, in the test of bone
ashes, according to experience: and in a burnt brick, as _Monsieur de
Clave_[SN: Des Pierres.] affirmeth. Mistake may be made in this way of
trial, when the _Antimony_ is not weighed immediately upon the
calcination; but permitted the air, it imbibeth the humidity thereof,
and so repaireth its gravity.
CHAPTER VIII
Of the passage of Meat and Drink.
That there are different passages for Meat and Drink, the Meat or dry
aliment descending by the one, the Drink or moistening vehicle by the
other, is a popular Tenent in our daies, but was the assertion of
learned men of old. For the same was affirmed by _Plato_, maintained by
_Eustathius_ in _Macrobius_, and is deducible from _Eratosthenes_,
_Eupolis_ and _Euripides_. Now herein Men contradict experience, not
well understanding _Anatomy_, and the use of parts. For at the Throat
there are two cavities or conducting parts; the one the Oesophagus or
Gullet, seated next the spine, a part official unto nutrition, and
whereby the aliment both wet and dry is conveied unto the stomack; the
other (by which tis conceived the Drink doth pass) is the weazon, rough
artery, or wind-pipe, a part inservient to voice and respiration; for
thereby the air descendeth into the lungs, and is communicated unto the
heart. And therefore all Animals that breath or have lungs, have also
the weazon; but many have the gullet or feeding channel, which have no
lungs or wind-pipe; as fishes which have gils, whereby the heart is
refrigerated; for such thereof as have lungs and respiration, are not
without the weazon, as Whales and cetaceous Animals.
Again, Beside these parts destin'd to divers offices, there is a
peculiar provision for the wind-pipe, that is, a cartilagineous flap
upon the opening of the Larinx or Throttle, which hath an open cavity
for the admission of the air; but lest thereby either meat or drink
should descend, Providence hath placed the _Epiglottis_, _Ligula_, or
flap like an Ivy leaf, which alwaies closeth when we swallow, or when
the meat and drink passeth over it into the gullet. Which part although
all have not that breath, as all cetaceous and oviparous Animals, yet is
the weazon secured some other way; and therefore in Whales that breath,
least the water should get into the lungs, an ejection thereof is
contrived by a Fistula or spout at the head. And therefore also though
birds have no Epiglottis, yet can they so contract the rim or chink of
their Larinx, as to prevent the admission of wet or dry ingested; either
whereof getting in, occasioneth a cough, until it be ejected. [SN: _Why
a man cannot drink and breath at once._] And this is the reason why a
Man cannot drink and breath at the same time; why, if we laugh while we
drink, the drink flies out at the nostrils; why, when the water enters
the weazon, Men are suddenly drowned; and thus must it be understood,
when we read [SN: Anacreon _the Poet, if the story be taken literally_.]
of one that died by the seed of a Grape, and another by an hair in milk.
Now if any shall still affirm, that some truth there is in the
assertion, upon the experiment of _Hippocrates_, who killing an Hog
after a red potion, found the tincture thereof in the Larinx; if any
will urge the same from medical practice, because in affections both of
Lungs and weazon, Physitians make use of syrupes, and lambitive
medicines; we are not averse to acknowledge, that some may distil and
insinuate into the wind-pipe, and medicines may creep down, as well as
the rheum before them; yet to conclude from hence, that air and water
have both one common passage, were to state the question upon the weaker
side of the distinction, and from a partial or guttulous irrigation, to
conclude a total descension.
CHAPTER IX
Of Sneezing.
Concerning Sternutation or Sneezing, and the custom of saluting or
blessing upon that motion, it is pretended, and generally believed to
derive its original from a disease, wherein Sternutation proved mortal,
and such as Sneezed, died. And this may seem to be proved from _Carolus
Sigonius_, who in his History of _Italy_, makes mention of a Pestilence
in the time of _Gregory_ the Great, that proved pernitious and deadly to
those that Sneezed. Which notwithstanding will not sufficiently
determine the grounds hereof: that custom having an elder _Æra_, then
this Chronology affordeth.
For although the age of _Gregory_ extend above a thousand, yet is this
custom mentioned by _Apuleius_, in the Fable of the Fullers wife, who
lived three hundred years before; by _Pliny_ in that Problem of his,
_Cur Sternutantes salutantur_; and there are also reports that
_Tiberius_ the Emperour, otherwise a very sower Man, would perform this
rite most punctually unto others, and expect the same from others, unto
himself. _Petronius Arbiter_, who lived before them both, and was
Proconsul of _Bythinia_ in the raign of _Nero_, hath mentioned it in
these words, _Gyton collectione spiritus plenus, ter continuo ita
sternutavit ut grabatum concuteret, ad quem motum Eumolpus conversus,
Salvere Gytona jubet._ _Cælius Rhodiginus_ hath an example hereof among
the _Greeks_, far antienter than these, that is, in the time of _Cyrus_
the younger; when consulting about their retreat, it chanced that one
among them Sneezed; at the noise whereof, the rest of the Souldiers
called upon _Jupiter Soter_. There is also in the Greek Anthology [SN:
_A Collection of Greek Epigrams_, Titulo εἰς δυσειδεῖς.], a remarkable
mention hereof in an Epigram, upon one _Proclus_; the Latin whereof we
shall deliver, as we find it often translated.
_Non potis est Proclus digitis emungere nasum,
Namq; est pro nasi mole pusilla manus:
Non vocat ille Jovem sternutans, quippe, nec audit
Sternutamentum, tam procul aure sonat._
_Proclus_ with his hand his nose can never wipe,
His hand too little is his nose to gripe;
He Sneezing calls not _Jove_, for why? he hears
Himself not Sneeze, the sound's so far from's ears.
Nor was this only an ancient custom among the _Greeks_ and _Romans_, and
is still in force with us, but is received at this day in remotest parts
of _Africa_. For so we read in _Codignus_[SN: De rebus Abassinorum];
that upon a Sneeze of the Emperour of _Monomotapa_, there passed
acclamations successively through the City. And as remarkable an example
there is of the same custom, in the remotest parts of the East, recorded
in the travels of _Pinto_[SN: Buxt. Lex. Chald.].
But the history will run much higher, if we should take in the
_Rabinical_ account hereof; that Sneezing was a mortal sign even from
the first Man; until it was taken off by the special supplication of
_Jacob_. From whence, as a thankful acknowledgment, this salutation
first began; and was after continued by the expression of _Tobim
Chaiim_, or _vita bona_, by standers by, upon all occasion of Sneezing.
[Sidenote: _Whence Sternutation or Sneezing proceeds._]
Now the ground of this ancient custom was probably the opinion the
ancients held of sternutation, which they generally conceived, to be a
good sign or a bad, and so upon this motion accordingly used, a Salve or
Ζεῦ σῶσον, as a gratulation for the one, and a deprecation for the
other. Now of the waies whereby they enquired and determined its
signality; the first was natural, arising from Physical causes, and
consequences oftentimes naturally succeeding this motion; and so it
might be justly esteemed a good sign. For Sneezing being properly a
motion of the brain, suddenly expelling through the nostrils what is
offensive unto it, it cannot but afford some evidence of its vigour; and
therefore saith _Aristotle_[SN: _Problem Sect. 33._], they that hear it,
προσκυνοῦσιν ὡς ἵερον, honour it as somewhat sacred, and a sign of
Sanity in the diviner part; and this he illustrates from the practice of
Physitians, who in persons near death, do use Sternutatories, or such
medicines as provoke unto Sneezing; when if the faculty awaketh, and
Sternutation ensueth, they conceive hopes of life, and with gratulation
receive the signs of safety. [SN: _In what cases a sign of good._] And so
is it also of good signality, according to that of _Hippocrates_, that
Sneezing cureth the hicket, and is profitable unto Women in hard labour;
and so is it good in Lethargies, Apoplexies, Catalepsies, and Coma's
[SN: _2. King 4. 35._]. [SN: _In what of bad._] And in this natural way
it is sometime likewise of bad effects or signs, and may give hints of
deprecation; as in diseases of the chest; for therein _Hippocrates_
condemneth it as too much exagitating: in the beginning of _Catarrhs_
according unto _Avicenna_, as hindering concoction, in new and tender
conceptions (as _Pliny_ observeth) for then it endangers abortion.
The second way was superstitious and Augurial, as _Cælius Rhodiginus_
hath illustrated in testimonies, as ancient as _Theocritus_ and _Homer_:
as appears from the _Athenian_ Master, who would have retired, because a
Boat-man Sneezed; and the testimony of _Austin_, that the Ancients were
wont to go to bed again if they Sneezed while they put on their shoe.
And in this way it was also of good and bad signification; so
_Aristotle_ hath a Problem, why Sneezing from noon unto midnight was
good, but from night to noon unlucky? So _Eustathius_ upon _Homer_
observes, that Sneezing to the left hand was unlucky, but prosperous
unto the right; so, as _Plutarch_ relateth, when _Themistocles_
sacrificed in his galley before the battle of _Xerxes_, and one of the
assistants upon the right hand sneezed; _Euphrantides_ the Southsayer,
presaged the victory of the _Greeks_, and the overthrow of the
_Persians_.
Thus we may perceive the custom is more ancient then commonly conceived;
and these opinions hereof in all ages, not any one disease to have been
the occasion of this salute and deprecation. Arising at first from this
vehement and affrighting motion of the brain, inevitably observable unto
the standers by; from whence some finding dependent effects to ensue;
others ascribing hereto as a cause what perhaps but casually or
inconnexedly succeeded; they might proceed unto forms of speeches,
felicitating the good, or deprecating the evil to follow.
CHAPTER X
Of the Jews.
That _Jews_ stink naturally, that is, that in their race and nation
there is an evil savour, is a received opinion we know not how to admit;
although concede many questionable points, and dispute not the verity of
sundry opinions which are of affinity hereto. We will acknowledg that
certain odours attend on animals, no less then certain colours; that
pleasant smels are not confined unto vegetables, but found in divers
animals, and some more richly then in plants. And though the Problem of
_Aristotle_ enquire why no animal smels sweet beside the Parde? yet
later discoveries add divers sorts of _Monkeys_, the _Civet Cat_ and
_Gazela_, from which our Musk proceedeth. We confess that beside the
smell of the species, there may be individual odours, and every Man may
have a proper and peculiar savour; which although not perceptible unto
Man, who hath this sense, but weak, yet sensible unto _Dogs_, who hereby
can single out their masters in the dark. We will not deny that
particular Men have sent forth a pleasant savour, as _Theophrastus_ and
_Plutarch_ report of _Alexander_ the great, and _Tzetzes_ and _Cardan_
do testifie of themselves. That some may also emit an unsavory odour, we
have no reason to deny; for this may happen from the quality of what
they have taken; the Fætor whereof may discover it self by sweat and
urine, as being unmasterable by the natural heat of Man, not to be
dulcified by concoction beyond an unsavory condition: the like may come
to pass from putrid humours, as is often discoverable in putrid and
malignant feavers. And sometime also in gross and humid bodies even in
the latitude of sanity; the natural heat of the parts being insufficient
for a perfect and through digestion, and the errors of one concoction
not rectifiable by another. But that an unsavory odour is gentilitious
or national unto the _Jews_, if rightly understood, we cannot well
concede; nor will the information of reason or sence induce it.
For first, Upon consult of reason, there will be found no easie
assurance to fasten a material or temperamental propriety upon any
nation; there being scarce any condition (but what depends upon clime)
which is not exhausted or obscured from the commixture of introvenient
nations either by commerce or conquest; much more will it be difficult
to make out this affection in the _Jews_; whose race however pretended
to be pure, must needs have suffered inseparable commixtures with
nations of all sorts; not only in regard of their proselytes, but their
universal dispersion; some being posted from several parts of the earth,
others quite lost, and swallowed up in those nations where they planted.
For the tribes of _Reuben_, _Gad_, part of _Manasses_ and _Naphthali_,
which were taken by _Assur_, and the rest at the Sacking of _Samaria_,
which were led away by _Salmanasser_ into _Assyria_, and after a year
and half arrived at _Arsereth_, as is delivered in _Esdras_; these I say
never returned, and are by the _Jews_ as vainly expected as their
_Messias_. Of those of the tribe of _Judah_ and _Benjamin_, which were
led captive into _Babylon_ by _Nebuchadnezzar_, many returned under
_Zorobabel_; the rest remained, and from thence long after upon invasion
of the _Saracens_, fled as far as _India_; where yet they are said to
remain, but with little difference from the _Gentiles_.
The Tribes that returned to _Judea_, were afterward widely dispersed;
for beside sixteen thousand which _Titus_ sent to _Rome_ unto the
triumph of his father _Vespasian_, he sold no less then an hundred
thousand for slaves. Not many years after, _Adrian_ the Emperour, who
ruined the whole Countrey, transplanted many thousands into _Spain_,
from whence they dispersed into divers Countreys, as into _France_ and
_England_, but were banished after from both. From _Spain_ they
dispersed into _Africa_, _Italy_, _Constantinople_, and the Dominions of
the _Turk_, where they remain as yet in very great numbers. And if
(according to good relations) where they may freely speak it, they
forbear not to boast that there are at present many thousand _Jews_ in
_Spane_, _France_ and _England_, and some dispensed withall even to the
degree of Priesthood; it is a matter very considerable, and could they
be smelled out, would much advantage, not only the Church of Christ, but
also the coffers of Princes.
Now having thus lived in several Countries, and alwaies in subjection,
they must needs have suffered many commixtures; and we are sure they are
not exempted from the common contagion of Venery contracted first from
Christians. Nor as fornications unfrequent between them both; there
commonly passing opinions of invitement, that their Women desire
copulation with them rather then their own Nation, and affect Christian
carnality above circumcised venery. It being therefore acknowledged,
that some are lost, evident that others are mixed, and not assured that
any are distinct, it will be hard to establish this quality upon the
_Jews_, unless we also transfer the same unto those whose generations
are mixed, whose genealogies are _Jewish_, and naturally derived from
them.
Again, if we concede a National unsavouriness in any people, yet shall
we find the _Jews_ less subject hereto then any, and that in those
regards which most powerfully concur to such effects, that is, their
diet and generation. [SN: _The Jews generally very temperate._] As for
their diet whether in obedience unto the precepts of reason, or the
injunctions of parsimony, therein they are very temperate; seldom
offending in ebriety or excess of drink, nor erring in gulosity or
superfluity of meats; whereby they prevent indigestion and crudities,
and consequently putrescence of humors. They have in abomination all
flesh maimed, or the inwards any way vitiated; and therefore eat no
meat but of their own killing. They observe not only fasts at certain
times, but are restrained unto very few dishes at all times; so few,
that whereas St. _Peters_ sheet will hardly cover our Tables, their Law
doth scarce permit them to set forth a Lordly feast; nor any way to
answer the luxury of our times, or those of our fore-fathers. For of
flesh their Law restrains them many sorts, and such as compleat our
feasts: That Animal, _Propter convivia natum_ [SN: Quanta est gula, quæ
sibi totos ponit Apros! Animal propter convivia natum.], they touch not,
nor any of its preparations, or parts so much in respect at _Roman_
Tables, nor admit they unto their board, _Hares_, _Conies_, _Herons_,
_Plovers_ or _Swans_. Of _Fishes_ they only taste of such as have both
fins and scales; which are comparatively but few in number, such only,
saith _Aristotle_, whose Egg or spawn is arenaceous; whereby are
excluded all cetaceous and cartilagious _Fishes_; many pectinal, whose
ribs are rectilineal; many costal, which have their ribs embowed; all
spinal, or such as have no ribs, but only a back bone, or somewhat
analogous thereto, as _Eels_, _Congers_, _Lampries_; all that are
testaceous, as _Oysters_, _Cocles_, _Wilks_, _Scollops_, _Muscles_; and
likewise all crustaceous, as _Crabs_, _Shrimps_ and _Lobsters_. So that
observing a spare and simple diet, whereby they prevent the generation
of crudities; and fasting often whereby they might also digest them;
they must be less inclinable unto this infirmity then any other Nation,
whose proceedings are not so reasonable to avoid it.
As for their generations and conceptions (which are the purer from good
diet,) they become more pure and perfect by the strict observation of
their Law; upon the injunctions whereof, they severely observe the times
of Purification, and avoid all copulation, either in the uncleanness of
themselves, or impurity of their Women. A Rule, I fear, not so well
observed by Christians; whereby not only conceptions are prevented, but
if they proceed, so vitiated and defiled, that durable inquinations
remain upon the birth. [SN: _The original or material causes of the Pox
and Meazels._] Which, when the conception meets with these impurities,
must needs be very potent; since in the purest and most fair
conceptions, learned Men derive the cause of _Pox_ and _Meazels_, from
principles of that nature; that is, the menstrous impurities in the
Mothers blood, and virulent tinctures contracted by the Infant, in the
nutriment of the womb.
Lastly, Experience will convict it; for this offensive odor is no way
discoverable in their Synagogues where many are, and by reason of their
number could not be concealed: nor is the same discernable in commerce
or conversation with such as are cleanly in Apparel, and decent in their
Houses. Surely the Viziars and _Turkish_ Basha's are not of this
opinion; who as Sir _Henry Blunt_ informeth, do generally keep a _Jew_
of their private Counsel. And were this true, the _Jews_ themselves do
not strictly make out the intention of their Law, for in vain do they
scruple to approach the dead, who livingly are cadaverous, or fear any
outward pollution, whose temper pollutes themselves. And lastly, were
this true, yet our opinion is not impartial; for unto converted _Jews_
who are of the same seed, no Man imputeth this unsavoury odor; as though
Aromatized by their conversion, they lost their scent with their
Religion, and smelt no longer then they savoured of the _Jew_.
Now the ground that begat or propagated this assertion, might be the
distasteful aversness of the Christian from the _Jew_, upon the villany
of that fact, which made them abominable and stink in the nostrils of
all Men. Which real practise, and metaphorical expression, did after
proceed into a literal construction; but was a fraudulent illation; for
such an evil savour their father _Jacob_ acknowledged in himself, [SN:
Gen. 34.] when he said, his sons had made him stink in the land, that
is, to be abominable unto the inhabitants thereof. Now how dangerous it
is in sensible things to use metaphorical expressions unto the people,
and what absurd conceits they will swallow in their literals; an
impatient example we have in our profession; who having called an eaten
_ulcer_ by the name of a _Wolf_, common apprehension conceives a reality
therein; and against our selves, ocular affirmations are pretended to
confirm it.
The nastiness of that Nation, and sluttish course of life hath much
promoted the opinion, occasioned by their servile condition at first,
and inferiour ways of parsimony ever since; as is delivered by Mr.
_Sandys_. They are generally fat, saith he, and rank of the savours
which attend upon sluttish corpulency. The _Epithetes_ assigned them by
ancient times, have also advanced the same; for _Ammianus Marcellinus_
describeth them in such language; and _Martial_ more ancient, in such a
relative expression sets forth unsavoury _Bassa_.
_Quod jejunia Sabbatoriorum.
Mallem, quam quod oles, olere Bassa._
From whence notwithstanding we cannot infer an inward imperfection in
the temper of that Nation; it being but an effect in the breath from
outward observation, in their strict and tedious fasting; and was a
common effect in the breaths of other Nations, became a Proverb [SN:
Νηστείας ὄζειν. Iejunia olere.] among the _Greeks_, and the reason
thereof begot a Problem in _Aristotle_.
Lastly, If all were true, and were this savour conceded, yet are the
reasons alleadged for it no way satisfactory. _Hucherius_[SN: De
sterilitate], and after him _Alsarius Crucius_[SN: Cruc. Med. Epist.],
imputes this effect unto their abstinence from salt or salt meats; which
how to make good in the present diet of the _Jews_, we know not; nor
shall we conceive it was observed of old, if we consider they seasoned
every Sacrifice, and all oblations whatsoever; whereof we cannot deny a
great part was eaten by the Priests. And if the offering were of flesh,
it was salted no less than thrice, that is, once in the common chamber
of salt, at the foot-step of the Altar, and upon the top thereof, as is
at large delivered by _Maimonides_. Nor if they refrained all salt, is
the illation very urgent; for many there are, not noted for ill odours,
which eat no salt at all; as all carnivorous Animals, most Children,
many whole Nations, and probably our Fathers after the Creation; there
being indeed in every thing we eat, a natural and concealed salt, which
is separated by digestions, as doth appear in our tears, sweat and
urines, although we refrain all salt, or what doth seem to contain it.
Another cause is urged by _Campegius_, and much received by Christians;
that this ill savour is a curse derived upon them by Christ, and stands,
as a badge or brand of a generation that crucified their _Salvator_. But
this is a conceit without all warrant; and an easie way to take off
dispute in what point of obscurity soever. A method of many Writers,
which much depreciates the esteem and value of miracles; that is,
therewith to salve not only real verities, but also nonexistencies. Thus
have elder times not only ascribed the immunity of _Ireland_ from any
venemous beast, unto the staff or rod of _Patrick_; but the long tails
of _Kent_, unto the malediction of _Austin_. Thus therefore, although
we concede that many opinions are true which hold some conformity unto
this, yet in assenting hereto, many difficulties must arise: it being a
dangerous point to annex a constant property unto any Nation, and much
more this unto the _Jew_; since this quality is not verifiable by
observation; since the grounds are feeble that should establish it; and
lastly, since if all were true, yet are the reasons alleadged for it, of
no sufficiency to maintain it.
CHAPTER XI
Of Pigmies.
By _Pigmies_ we understand a dwarfish race of people, or lowest
diminution of mankind, comprehended in one cubit, or as some will have
it, in two foot or three spans; not taking them single, but nationally
considering them, and as they make up an aggregated habitation. Whereof
although affirmations be many, and testimonies more frequent then in any
other point which wise men have cast into the list of fables, yet that
there is, or ever was such a race or Nation, upon exact and confirmed
testimonies, our strictest enquiry receives no satisfaction.
I say, exact testimonies, first, In regard of the Authors, from whom we
derive the account, for though we meet herewith in _Herodotus_,
_Philostratus_, _Mela_, _Pliny_, _Solinus_, and many more; yet were they
derivative Relators, and the primitive Author was _Homer_; who, using
often similies, as well to delight the ear, as to illustrate his matter,
in the third of his Iliads, compareth the _Trojans_ unto _Cranes_, when
they descend against the _Pigmies_; which was more largely set out by
_Oppian_, _Juvenal_, _Mantuan_, and many Poets since, and being only a
pleasant figment in the fountain, became a solemn story in the stream,
and current still among us.
Again, Many professed enquirers have rejected it; _Strabo_ an exact and
judicious Geographer, hath largely condemned it as a fabulous story,
_Julius Scaliger_ a diligent enquirer, accounts thereof, but as a
Poetical fiction; _Ulysses Aldrovandus_ a most exact Zoographer in an
express discourse hereon, concludes the story fabulous, and a Poetical
account of _Homer_; and the same was formerly conceived by _Eustathius_,
his excellent Commentator. _Albertus Magnus_ a man ofttimes too
credulous, herein was more then dubious; for he affirmeth, if any such
dwarfs were ever extant, they were surely some kind of _Apes_: which is
a conceit allowed by _Cardan_, and not esteemed improbable by many
others.
There are I confess two testimonies, which from their authority admit of
consideration. The first of _Aristotle_[SN: _Hist. animal. lib. 3._],
whose words are these, ἐστὶ dὲ ὁ τόπος, etc. That is, _Hic locus est
quem incolunt Pygmæi, non enim id fabula est, sed pusillum genus ut
aiunt._ Wherein indeed _Aristotle_ plaies the _Aristotle_, that is, the
wary and evading assertor; For though with _non est fabula_, he seems at
first to confirm it, yet at the last he claps in _Sciunt aiunt_, and
shakes the belief he put before upon it. And therefore I observe
_Scaliger_ hath not translated the first; perhaps supposing it
surreptitious or unworthy so great an assertor. And truly for those
books of animals, or work of eight hundred talents, as _Athenæus_ terms
it, although ever to be admired, as containing most excellent truths;
yet are many things therein delivered upon relation, and some repugnant
unto the history of our senses; as we are able to make out in some, and
_Scaliger_ hath observed in many more, as he hath freely declared in his
Comment upon that piece.
The second testimony is deduced from holy Scripture; [SN: Ezek. 27. 12.]
thus rendered in the vulgar translation, _Sed et Pygmæi qui erant in
turribus tuis, pharetras suas suspenderunt in muris tuis per gyrum_:
from whence notwithstanding we cannot infer this assertion, for first
the Translators accord not, and the Hebrew word _Gammadim_ is very
variously rendered. Though _Aquila_, _Vetablus_ and _Lyra_ will have it
_Pygmæi_, yet in the Septuagint, it is no more then Watchmen; and so in
the _Arabick_ and high _Dutch_. In the _Chalde_, _Cappadocians_, in
_Symmachus_, _Medes_, and in the _French_, those of _Gamad_.
_Theodotian_ of old, and _Tremellius_ of late, have retained the
Textuary word; and so have the _Italian_, Low _Dutch_ and _English_
Translators, that is, the Men of _Arvad_ were upon thy walls round
about, and the _Gammadims_ were in thy Towers.
Nor do men only dissent in the Translation of the word, but in the
Exposition of the sense and meaning thereof; for some by _Gammadims_
understand a people of _Syria_, so called from the City _Gamala_; some
hereby understand the _Cappadocians_, many the _Medes_ [SN: _See Mr._
Fullers _excellent description of_ Palestine.]: and hereof _Forerius_
hath a singular Exposition, conceiving the Watchmen of _Tyre_ might well
be called _Pigmies_, the Towers of that City being so high, that unto
Men below, they appeared in a cubital stature. Others expounded it quite
contrary to common acception, that is not Men of the least, but of the
largest size; so doth _Cornelius_ construe _Pygmæi_, or _viri
cubitales_, that is, not Men of a cubit high, but of the largest
stature, whose height like that of Giants, is rather to be taken by the
cubit then the foot; in which phrase we read the measure of _Goliah_,
whose height is said to be six cubits and a span. Of affinity hereto is
also the Exposition of _Jerom_; not taking _Pigmies_ for dwarfs, but
stout and valiant Champions; not taking the sense of πυγμὴ, which
signifies the cubit measure, but that which expresseth Pugils; that is,
Men fit for combat and the exercise of the fist. Thus can there be no
satisfying illation from this Text, the diversity or rather contrariety
of Expositions and interpretations, distracting more then confirming the
truth of the story.
Again, I say, exact testimonies; in reference unto circumstantial
relations so diversly or contrarily delivered. Thus the Relation of
_Aristotle_ placeth them above _Egypt_ towards the head of _Nyle_ in
_Africa_; _Philostratus_ affirms they are about _Ganges_ in _Asia_, and
_Pliny_ in a third place, that is, _Gerania_ in _Scythia_: some write
they fight with Cranes, but _Menecles_ in _Athenæus_ affirms they fight
with _Partridges_, some say they ride on _Partridges_, and some on the
backs of _Rams_.
Lastly, I say, confirmed testimonies; for though _Paulus Jovius_
delivers there are _Pigmies_ beyond _Japan_; _Pigafeta_, about the
_Molucca's_; and _Olaus Magnus_ placeth them in _Greenland_; yet wanting
frequent confirmation in a matter so confirmable, their affirmation
carrieth but slow perswasion;[2] and wise men may think there is as much
reality in the [3]_Pigmies_ of _Paracelsus_; that is, his non-Adamical
men, or middle natures betwixt men and spirits.
There being thus no sufficient confirmation of their verity, some doubt
may arise concerning their possibility, wherein, since it is not
defined in what dimensions the soul may exercise her faculties, we shall
not conclude impossibility; or that there might not be a race of
_Pigmies_, as there is sometimes of Giants. So may we take in the
opinion of _Austin_, and his Comment _Ludovicus_, but to believe they
should be in the stature of a foot or span, requires the preaspection of
such a one as _Philetas_ the Poet in _Athenæus_: who was fain to fasten
lead unto his feet lest the wind should blow him away. Or that other in
the same Author, who was so little _ut ad obolum accederet_; a story so
strange, that we might herein excuse the PRINTER, did not the account of
_Ælian_ accord unto it, as _Causabone_ hath observed in his learned
Animadversions.
Lastly, If any such Nation there were, yet is it ridiculous what Men
have delivered of them; that they fight with _Cranes_ upon the backs of
_Rams_ or _Partridges_: or what is delivered by _Ctesias_, that they are
_Negroes_ in the middest of _India_; whereof the King of that Country
entertaineth three thousand Archers for his guard. Which is a relation
below the tale of _Oberon_; nor could they better defend him, then the
Emblem saith, they offended _Hercules_ whilest he slept; that is, to
wound him no deeper, then to awake him.
[2] _The story of Pigmies rejected._
[3] _By Pigmies intending Fairies and other spirits about the earth as
by Nymphs and Salamanders, spirits of fire and water._ Lib. De
Pigmæis, Nymphis, _etc._
CHAPTER XII
Of the great Climacterical year, that is,
Sixty three.
Certainly the Eyes of the understanding, and those of the sense are
differently deceived in their greatest objects; the sense apprehending
them in lesser magnitudes then their dimensions require; so it beholdeth
the Sun, the Stars, and the Earth it self. But the understanding quite
otherwise: for that ascribeth unto many things far larger horizons then
their due circumscriptions require: and receiveth them with
amplifications which their reality will not admit. Thus hath it fared
with many Heroes and most worthy persons, who being sufficiently
commendable from true and unquestionable merits, have received
advancement from falshood and the fruitful stock of Fables. Thus hath it
happened unto the Stars, and Luminaries of heaven: who being
sufficiently admirable in themselves, have been set out by effects, no
way dependent on their efficiencies, and advanced by amplifications to
the questioning of their true endowments. Thus is it not improbable it
hath also fared with number, which though wonderful in it self, and
sufficiently magnifiable from its demonstrable affections, hath yet
received adjections from the multiplying conceits of men, and stands
laden with additions, which its equity will not admit.
And so perhaps hath it happened unto the number, 7 and 9, which
multiplied into themselves do make up Sixty three, commonly esteemed the
great Climacterical of our lives. For the daies of men are usually cast
up by Septenaries, and every seventh year conceived to carry some
altering character with it, either in the temper of body, mind, or both.
But among all other, three are most remarkable, that is, 7 times 7 or
fourty nine, 9 times 9 or eighty one, and 7 times 9 or the year of Sixty
three; which is conceived to carry with it the most considerable
fatality; and consisting of both the other numbers was apprehended to
comprise the vertue of either: is therefore expected and entertained
with fear, and esteemed a favour of fate to pass it over. [SN: _The
great Climacterical, Sixty-three, no such dangerous year._] Which
notwithstanding many suspect to be but a Panick terrour, and men to fear
they justly know not what: and to speak indifferently, I find no
satisfaction: nor any sufficiency in the received grounds to establish a
rational fear.
Now herein to omit Astrological considerations (which are but rarely
introduced) the popular foundation whereby it hath continued, is first,
the extraordinary power and secret virtue conceived to attend these
numbers: whereof we must confess there have not wanted not only especial
commendations, but very singular conceptions. Among Philosophers,
_Pythagoras_ seems to have played the leading part; which was long after
continued by his disciples, and the _Italick_ School. The Philosophy of
_Plato_, and most of the _Platonists_ abounds in numeral considerations:
above all, _Philo_ the learned _Jew_, hath acted this part even to
superstition; bestowing divers pages in summing up every thing, which
might advantage this number. Which notwithstanding, when a serious
Reader shall perpend, he will hardly find any thing that may convince
his judgment, or any further perswade, then the lenity of his belief, or
prejudgment of reason inclineth.
For first, Not only the number of 7 and 9 from considerations abstruse,
have been extolled by most, but all or most of the other digits have
been as mystically applauded. For the number of One and Three have not
been only admired by the Heathens, but from adorable grounds, the unity
of God, and mystery of the Trinity admired by many Christians. The
number of four stands much admired, not only in the quaternity of the
Elements, which are the principles of bodies, but in the letters of the
Name of God, which in the _Greek_, _Arabian_, _Persian_, _Hebrew_, and
_Egyptian_, consisteth of that number; and was so venerable among the
_Pythagoreans_, that they swore by the number four. That of six hath
found many leaves in its favour; not only for the daies of the Creation,
but its natural consideration, as being a perfect number, and the first
that is compleated by its parts; that is, the sixt, the half, and the
third, 1. 2. 3. Which drawn into a sum, make six. The number of Ten hath
been as highly extolled, as containing even, odd, long, plain, quadrate
and cubical numbers; and _Aristotle_ observed with admiration, that
_Barbarians_ as well as _Greeks_, did use numeration unto Ten, which
being so general, was not to be judged casual, but to have a foundation
in nature. So that not only 7 and 9, but all the rest have had their
Elogies, as may be observed at large in _Rhodiginus_, and in several
Writers since: every one extolling number, according to his subject, and
as it advantaged the present discourse in hand.
Again, They have been commended not only from pretended grounds in
nature, but from artificial, casual or fabulous foundations: so have
some endeavoured to advance their admiration, from the 9 Muses, from the
7 Wonders of the World, from the 7 Gates of _Thebes_: in that 7 Cities
contended for _Homer_, in that there are 7 Stars in _Ursa minor_, and 7
in Charles wayn, or Plaustrum of _Ursa major_. Wherein indeed although
the ground be natural, yet either from constellations or their
remarkable parts, there is the like occasion to commend any other
number, the number 5 from the stars in _Sagitta_, 3 from the girdle of
_Orion_, and 4 from _Equiculus_, _Crusero_, or the feet of the Centaur:
yet are such as these clapt in by very good Authors, and some not
omitted by _Philo_.
Nor are they only extolled from Arbitrary and Poetical grounds, but from
foundations and principles, false or dubious. That Women are menstruant,
and Men pubescent at the year of twice seven is accounted a punctual
truth; which period nevertheless we dare not precisely determine, as
having observed a variation and latitude in most, agreeable unto the
heat of clime or temper; Men arising variously unto virility, according
to the activity of causes that promote it. _Sanguis menstruosus ad diem,
ut plurimum, septimum durat_, saith _Philo_. Which notwithstanding is
repugnant unto experience, and the doctrine of _Hippocrates_, who in his
book, _de diæta_, plainly affirmeth, it is thus but with few women, and
only such as abound with pituitous and watery humours.
It is further conceived to receive addition, in that there are 7 heads
of _Nyle_, but we have made manifest elsewhere, that by the description
of Geographers, they have been sometime more, and are at present fewer.
In that there were 7 Wise men of _Greece_, which though generally
received, yet having enquired into the verity thereof we cannot so
readily determine it, for in the life of _Thales_, who was accounted in
that number, _Diogenes Laertius_ plainly saith, _Magna de eorum numero
discordia est_; some holding but four, some ten, others twelve, and none
agreeth in their names, though according in their number.
In that there are just 7 Planets or errant Stars in the lower orbs of
Heaven, but it is now demonstrable unto sense, that there are many more;
as _Galileo_[SN: Nuncius Sydereus.] hath declared, that is, two more in
the orb of Saturn, and no less then four more in the sphere of Jupiter.
And the like may be said of the _Pleiades_ or 7 Stars, which are also
introduced to magnifie this number, for whereas scarce discerning six,
we account them 7, by his relation, there are no less then fourty.
That the Heavens are encompassed with 7 Circles, is also the allegation
of _Philo_; which are in his account, the Arctick, Antarctick, the
Summer and Winter Tropicks, the Æquator, Zodiack, and the Milky circle;
whereas by Astronomers they are received in greater number. For though
we leave out the Lacteous circle (which _Aratus_, _Geminus_, and
_Proclus_, out of him hath numbred among the rest) yet are there more by
four then _Philo_ mentions; that is, the Horizon, Meridian and both the
Colures; circles very considerable, and generally delivered, not only by
_Ptolomie_, and the Astronomers since his time, but such as flourished
long before, as _Hipparchus_ and _Eudoxus_. So that for ought I know, if
it make for our purpose, or advance the theme in hand, with equal
liberty, we may affirm there were 7 Sybils, or but 7 signs in the
Zodiack circle of Heaven.
That verse in _Virgil_ translated out of _Homer_ [SN: Τρὶς
μάκαρες Δαναοὶ καὶ τετράχις.], _O terque quaterque beati_; that is as
men will have it, 7 times happy, hath much advanced this number in
critical apprehensions; yet is not this construction so indubitably to
be received, as not at all to be questioned: for though _Rhodiginus_,
_Beroaldus_, and others from the authority of _Macrobius_ so interpret
it, yet _Servius_ his ancient commentator conceives no more thereby then
a finite number for indefinite, and that no more is implied then often
happy. _Strabo_[SN: Lib. 10.] the ancientest of them all, conceives no
more by this in _Homer_, then a full and excessive expression; whereas
in common phrase and received language, he should have termed them
thrice happy; herein exceeding that number, he called them four times
happy, that is, more then thrice. And this he illustrates by the like
expression of _Homer_, in the speech of _Circe_; who to express the
dread and terrour of the Ocean, sticks not unto the common form of
speech in the strict account of its reciprocations, but largely
speaking, saith, it ebbs and flows no less then thrice a day, _terque
die revomit fluctus iterumque resorbet_. And so when it is said by
_Horace_, _fælices ter et amplius_, the exposition is sufficient, if we
conceive no more then the letter fairly beareth, that is, four times, or
indefinitely more then thrice.
But the main considerations which most set of this number, are
observations drawn from the motions of the Moon, supposed to be measured
by sevens; and the critical or decretory daies dependent on that number.
As for the motion of the Moon, though we grant it to be measured by
sevens, yet will not this advance the same before its fellow numbers;
for hereby the motion of other Stars are not measured, the fixed Stars
by many thousand years, the Sun by 365 daies, the superiour Planets by
more, the inferiour by somewhat less. And if we consider the revolution
of the first Movable, and the daily motion from East to West, common
unto all the Orbs, we shall find it measured by another number, for
being performed in four and twenty hours, it is made up of 4 times 6:
and this is the measure and standard of other parts of time, of months,
of years, Olympiades, Lustres, Indictions of Cycles, Jubilies, etc.
[Sidenote: _What a Solary month is._]
Again, Months are not only Lunary, and measured by the Moon, but also
Solary, and determined by the motion of the Sun; that is, the space
wherein the Sun doth pass 30 degrees of the Ecliptick. By this month
_Hippocrates_[SN: De octomestri partu.] computed the time of the
Infants gestation in the womb; for 9 times 30, that is, 270 daies, or
compleat 9 months, make up forty weeks, the common compute of women. And
this is to be understood, when he saith, 2 daies makes the fifteenth,
and 3 the tenth part of a mouth. This was the month of the ancient
_Hebrews_ before their departure out of _Egypt_: and hereby the compute
will fall out right, and the account concur, when in one place it is
said, the waters of the flood prevailed an hundred and fifty daies, and
in another it is delivered, that they prevailed from the seventeenth day
of the second month, unto the seventeenth day of the seventh. As for
hebdomadal periods or weeks, although in regard of their Sabbaths, they
were observed by the _Hebrews_, yet it is not apparent the ancient
_Greeks_ or _Romans_ used any: but had another division of their months
into Ides, Nones and Calends.
Moreover, Moneths howsoever taken, are not exactly divisible into
septenaries or weeks, which fully contain seven daies: whereof four
times do make compleatly twenty eight. For, beside the usual or
Calendary month, there are but four considerable: the month of
Peragration, of Apparition, of Consecution, and the medical or
Decretorial month; whereof some come short, others exceed this account.
A month of Peragration, is the time of the Moons revolution from any
part of the Zodiack, unto the same again; and this containeth but 27
daies, and about 8 hours: which cometh short to compleat the septenary
account. The month of Consecution, or as some will term it, of
progression, is the space between one conjunction of the Moon with the
Sun, unto another: and this containeth 29 daies and an half: for the
Moon returning unto the same point wherein it was kindled by the Sun,
and not finding it there again (for in the mean time, by its proper
motion it hath passed through 2 signs) it followeth after, and attains
the Sun in the space of 2 daies and 4 hours more, which added unto the
account of Peragration, makes 29 daies and an half: so that this month
exceedeth the latitude of Septenaries, and the fourth part comprehendeth
more then 7 daies. A month of Apparition, is the space wherein the Moon
appeareth (deducting three daies wherein it commonly disappeareth; and
being in combustion with the Sun, is presumed of less activity,) and
this containeth but 26 daies and 12 hours. The medical month, not much
exceedeth this, consisting of 26 daies and 22 hours, and is made up out
of all the other months. For if out of 29 and an half, the month of
Consecution, we deduct 3 daies of disappearance, there will remain the
month of Apparition 26 daies and 12 hours: whereto if we add 27 daies
and 8 hours, the month of Peragration, there will arise 53 daies and 10
hours, which divided by 2, makes 26 daies and 22 hours: called by
Physitians the medical month: introduced by _Galen_ against
_Archigenes_, for the better compute of Decretory or Critical daies.
[Sidenote: _What a Critical day is._]
As for the Critical daies (such I mean wherein upon a decertation
between the disease and nature, there ensueth a sensible alteration,
either to life or death,) the reasons thereof are rather deduced from
Astrology, then Arithmetick: for accounting from the beginning of the
disease, and reckoning on unto the seventh day, the Moon will be in a
Tetragonal or Quadrate aspect, that is, 4 signs removed from that
wherein the disease began: in the fourteenth day it will be in an
opposite aspect: and at the end of the third septenary, Tetragonal
again: as will most graphically appear in the figures of Astrologers,
especially _Lucas Gauricus_, _De diebus decretoriis_.
Again, (Beside that computing by the Medical month, the first hebdomade
or septenary consists of 6 daies, seventeen hours and an half, the
second happeneth in 13 daies and eleven hours, and the third but in the
twentieth natural day) what _Galen_ first, and _Aben-Ezra_ since
observed in his Tract of Critical daies, in regard of Eccentricity and
the Epicycle or lesser orb wherein it moveth, the motion of the Moon is
various and unequal; whereby the Critical account must also vary. For
though its middle motion be equal, and of 13 degrees, yet in the other
it moveth sometimes fifteen, sometimes less then twelve. For moving in
the upper part of its orb, it performeth its motion more slowly then in
the lower; insomuch that being at the height, it arriveth at the
Tetragonal and opposite signs sooner, and the Critical day will be in 6
and 13; and being at the lowest, the critical account will be out of the
latitude of 7, nor happen before the eighth or ninth day. Which are
considerations not to be neglected in the compute of decretory daies,
and manifestly declare that other numbers must have a respect herein as
well as 7 and fourteen.
Lastly, Some things to this intent are deduced from holy Scripture; thus
is the year of _Jubile_ introduced to magnifie this number, as being a
year made out of 7 times 7; wherein notwithstanding there may be a
misapprehension; for this ariseth not from 7 times 7, that is, 49; but
was observed the fiftieth year, as is expressed, [SN: Levit. 25.] And
you shall hallow the fiftieth year, a _Jubile_ shall that fiftieth year
be unto you. Answerable whereto is the Exposition of the _Jews_
themselves, as is delivered by _Ben-Maimon_; that is, the year of
_Jubile_, cometh not into the account of the years of 7, but the fourty
ninth is the Release, and the fiftieth the year of _Jubile_. Thus is it
also esteemed no small advancement unto this number, that the Genealogy
of our Saviour is summed up by 14, that is, this number doubled;
according as is expressed. [SN: Mat. 1.] So all the generations from
_Abraham_ to _David_ are fourteen generations, and from _David_ unto the
carrying away into _Babylon_, are fourteen generations; and from the
carrying away into _Babylon_ unto _Christ_, are fourteen generations.
Which nevertheless must not be strictly understood as numeral relations
require; for from _David_ unto _Jeconiah_ are accounted by _Matthew_ but
14 generations; whereas according to the exact account in the History of
Kings, there were at least 17; and 3 in this account, that is,
_Ahazias_, _Joas_ and _Amazias_ are left out. For so it is delivered by
the Evangelist: And _Joram_ begat _Ozias_: whereas in the regal
Genealogy there are 3 successions between: for _Ozias_ or _Uzziah_ was
the son of _Amazias_, _Amazias_ of _Joas_, _Joas_ of _Azariah_, and
_Azariah_ of _Joram_: so that in strict account, _Joram_ was the
_Abavus_ or Grand-father twice removed, and not the Father of _Ozias_.
And these second omitted descents made a very considerable measure of
time, in the Royal chronology of _Judah_: for though _Azariah_ reigned
but one year, yet _Joas_ reigned fourty, and _Amazias_ no less then nine
and twenty. However therefore these were delivered by the Evangelist,
and carry (no doubt) an incontroulable conformity unto the intention of
his delivery: yet are they not appliable unto precise numerality, nor
strictly to be drawn unto the rigid test of numbers.
Lastly, Though many things have been delivered by Authors concerning
number, and they transferred unto the advantage of their nature, yet are
they oft-times otherwise to be understood, then as they are vulgarly
received in active and causal considerations; they being many times
delivered Hieroglyphically, Metaphorically, Illustratively, and not with
reference unto action or causality. True it is, that God made all things
in number, weight and measure, yet nothing by them or through the
efficacy of either. Indeed our daies, actions and motions being measured
by time (which is but motion measured) what ever is observable in any,
falls under the account of some number; which notwithstanding cannot be
denominated the cause of those events. So do we injustly assign the
power of Action even unto Time it self; nor do they speak properly who
say that Time consumeth all things; for Time is not effective, nor are
bodies destroyed by it, but from the action and passion of their
Elements in it; whose account it only affordeth: and measuring out their
motion, informs us in the periods and terms of their duration, rather
then effecteth or physically produceth the same.
A second consideration which promoteth this opinion, are confirmations
drawn from Writers, who have made observations, or set down favourable
reasons for this Climacterical year; so have _Henricus Ranzovius_,
_Baptista Codronchus_[SN: De annis Climactericis.], and _Levinus
Lemnius_[SN: De occultis naturæ miraculis.] much confirmed the same;
but above all, that memorable Letter of _Augustus_ [SN: Bel. lib.
5.] sent unto his Nephew _Caius_, wherein he encourageth him to
celebrate his nativity, for he had now escaped Sixty three, the great
Climacterical and dangerous year unto man: which notwithstanding rightly
perpended, it can be no singularity to question it, nor any new Paradox
to deny it.
For first, It is implicitely, and upon consequence denied by _Aristotle_
in his Politicks, in that discourse against _Plato_, who measured the
vicissitude and mutation of States, by a periodical fatality of number.
_Ptolomie_ that famous Mathematician plainly saith, he will not deliver
his doctrines by parts and numbers which are ineffectual, and have not
the nature of causes; now by these numbers saith _Rhodiginus_ and
_Mirandula_, he implieth Climacterical years, that is, septenaries, and
novenaries set down by the bare observation of numbers. _Censorinus_ an
Author of great authority, and sufficient antiquity, speaks yet more
amply in his book _De die Natali_, wherein expresly treating of
Climacterical daies, he thus delivereth himself. Some maintain that 7
times 7, that is, fourty nine, is most dangerous of any other, and this
is the most general opinion; others unto 7 times 7, add 9 times 9, that
is, the year of eighty one, both which consisting of square and quadrate
numbers, were thought by _Plato_ and others to be of great
consideration; as for this year of Sixty three or 7 times 9, though some
esteem it of most danger, yet do I conceive it less dangerous then the
other; for though it containeth both numbers above named, that is, 7 and
9, yet neither of them square or quadrate; and as it is different from
them both, so is it not potent in either. Nor is this year remarkable in
the death of many famous men. I find indeed that _Aristotle_ died this
year, but he by the vigour of his mind, a long time sustained a natural
infirmity of stomack; so that it was a greater wonder he attained unto
Sixty three, then that he lived no longer. The Psalm of _Moses_ hath
mentioned a year of danger differing from all these: and that is ten
times 7 or seventy; for so it is said, The daies of Man are threescore
and ten. And the very same is affirmed by _Solon_, as _Herodotus_
relates in a speech of his unto _Crœsus_, _Ego annis septuaginta
humanæ vitæ modum definio_: and surely that year must be of greatest
danger, which is the Period of all the rest; and fewest safely pass
thorow that, which is set as a bound for few or none to pass. And
therefore the consent of elder times, setling their conceits upon
Climacters, not only differing from this of ours, but one another;
though several Nations and Ages do fancy unto themselves different years
of danger, yet every one expects the same event, and constant verity in
each.
Again, Though _Varro_ divided the daies of man into five proportions,
_Hippocrates_ into 7, and _Solon_ into 10; yet probably their divisions
were to be received with latitude, and their considerations not strictly
to be confined unto their last unities. So when _Varro_ extendeth
_Puertia_ unto 15. _Adolescentia_ unto 30. _Juventus_ unto 35. There is
a latitude between the terms or Periods of compute, and the verity holds
good in the accidents of any years between them. So when _Hippocrates_
divideth our life into 7 degrees or stages, and maketh the end of the
first 7. Of the second 14. Of the third 28. Of the fourth 35. Of the
fift 47. Of the sixt 56. And of the seventh, the last year when ever it
happeneth; herein we may observe, he maketh not his divisions precisely
by 7 and 9, and omits the great Climacterical; beside there is between
every one at least the latitude of 7 years, in which space or interval,
that is either in the third or fourth year, what ever falleth out is
equally verified of the whole degree, as though it had happened in the
seventh. _Solon_ divided it into ten Septenaries, because in every one
thereof, a man received some sensible mutation; in the first is
Dedention or falling of teeth; in the second Pubescence; in the third
the beard groweth; in the fourth strength prevails; in the fift maturity
for issue; in the sixt moderation of appetite; in the seventh prudence,
etc. Now herein there is a tolerable latitude, and though the division
proceed by 7, yet is not the total verity to be restrained unto the last
year; nor constantly to be expected the beard should be compleat at 21.
or wisdom acquired just in 49. and thus also though 7 times 9 contain
one of those septenaries, and doth also happen in our declining years;
yet might the events thereof be imputed unto the whole septenary; and be
more reasonably entertained with some latitude, then strictly reduced
unto the last number, or all the accidents from 56. imputed unto Sixty
three.
Thirdly, Although this opinion may seem confirmed by observation, and
men may say it hath been so observed, yet we speak also upon experience,
and do believe that men from observation will collect no satisfaction.
That other years may be taken against it, especially if they have the
advantage to precede it; as sixty against sixty three, and sixty three
against sixty six. For fewer attain to the latter then the former; and
so surely in the first septenary do most die, and probably also in the
very first year; for all that ever lived were in the account of that
year; beside the infirmities that attend it are so many, and the body
that receives them so tender and inconfirmed, we scarce count any alive
that is not past it.
_Fabritius Paduanius_[SN: De catena temporis.] discoursing of the great
Climacterical, attempts a numeration of eminent men, who died in that
year; but in so small a number, as not sufficient to make a considerable
Induction. He mentioneth but four, _Diogenes Cynicus_, _Dyonysius
Heracleoticus_, _Xenocrates Platonicus_, and _Plato_. As for
_Dionysius_, as _Censorinus_ witnesseth, he famished himself in the 82
year of his life; _Xenocrates_ by the testimony of _Laertius_ fell into
a cauldron, and died the same year, and _Diogenes_ the _Cynick_, by the
same testimony lived almost unto ninety. The date of _Plato's_ death is
not exactly agreed on, but all dissent from this which he determineth:
_Neanthes_ in _Laertius_ extendeth his daies unto 84. _Suidas_ unto 82.
But _Hermippus_ defineth his death in 81. And this account seemeth most
exact; for if, as he delivereth, _Plato_ was born in the 88 Olympiade,
and died in the first year of the 108, the account will not surpass the
year of 81, and so in his death he verified the opinion of his life, and
of the life of man, whose period, as _Censorinus_ recordeth, he placeth
in the Quadrate of 9, or 9 times 9, that is, eighty one: and therefore
as _Seneca_ delivereth, the _Magicians_ at _Athens_ did sacrifice unto
him, as declaring in his death somewhat above humanity; because he died
in the day of his nativity, and without deduction justly accomplished
the year of eighty one. _Bodine_ I confess, delivers a larger list of
men that died in this year, [SN: _Method_. Hist.] _Moriuntur
innumerabiles anno sexagesimo tertio, Aristoteles, Chrysippus,
Bocatius, Bernardus, Erasmus, Lutherus, Melancthon, Sylvius, Alexander,
Jacobus Sturmius, Nicolaus Causanus, Thomas Linacer, eodem anno Cicero
cæsus est._ Wherein beside that it were not difficult to make a larger
Catalogue of memorable persons that died in other years, we cannot but
doubt the verity of his Induction. As for _Sylvius_ and _Alexander_,
which of that name he meaneth I know not; but for _Chrysippus_, by the
testimony of _Laertius_, he died in the 73 year, _Bocatius_ in the 62,
_Linacer_ the 64, and _Erasmus_ exceedeth 70, as _Paulus Jovius_ hath
delivered in his Elogy of learned men. And as for _Cicero_, as
_Plutarch_ in his life affirmeth, he was slain in the year of 64; and
therefore sure the question is hard set, and we have no easie reason to
doubt, when great and entire Authors shall introduce injustifiable
examples, and authorize their assertions by what is not authentical.
Fourthly, They which proceed upon strict numerations, and will by such
regular and determined waies measure out the lives of men, and
periodically define the alterations of their tempers; conceive a
regularity in mutations, with an equality in constitutions, and forget
that variety, which Physitians therein discover. [SN: _Cholerick men
commonly shorter lived._] For seeing we affirm that women do naturally
grow old before men, that the cholerick fall short in longævity of the
sanguine, that there is _senium ante senectum_, and many grow old before
they arrive at age, we cannot affix unto them all one common point of
danger, but should rather assign a respective fatality unto each. Which
is concordant unto the doctrine of the numerists, and such as maintain
this opinion: for they affirm that one number respecteth Men, another
Women, as _Bodin_ explaineth that of _Seneca Septimus quisque annus
ætati signum imprimit_, subjoins _Hoc de maribus dictum oportuit, hoc
primum intueri licet, perfectum numerum, id est, sextum fæminas
septenarium mares immutare._
Fiftly, Since we esteem this opinion to have some ground in nature, and
that nine times seven revolutions of the Sun, imprints a dangerous
Character on such as arrive unto it; it will have some doubt behind, in
what subjection hereunto were the lives of our fore-fathers presently
after the flood, and more especially before it; who attaining unto 8 or
900 years, had not their Climacters Computable by digits, or as we do
account them; for the great Climacterical was past unto them before they
begat Children, or gave any Testimony of their virility; for we read not
that any begat children before the age of sixty five. And this may also
afford a hint to enquire, what are the Climacters of other animated
creatures; whereof the lives of some attain not so far as this of ours,
and that of others extend a considerable space beyond it.
Lastly, The imperfect accounts that Men have kept of time, and the
difference thereof both in the same and divers common Wealths, will much
distract the certainty of this assertion. For though there were a
fatality in this year, yet divers were, and others might be out in their
account, aberring several waies from the true and just compute, and
calling that one year, which perhaps might be another.
For first, They might be out in the commencement or beginning of their
account; for every man is many months elder then he computeth. For
although we begin the same from our nativity, and conceive that no
arbitrary, but natural term of compute, yet for the duration of life or
existence, we are liable in the Womb unto the usual distinctions of
time; and are not to be exempted from the account of age and life, where
we are subject to diseases, and often suffer death. And therefore
_Pythagoras_, _Hippocrates_, _Diocles_, _Avicenna_ and others, have set
upon us numeral relations and temporal considerations in the womb; not
only affirming the birth of the seventh month to be vital, that of the
eighth mortal, but the progression thereto to be measured by rule, and
to hold a proportion unto motion and formation. As what receiveth motion
in the seventh, to be perfected in the Triplicities; that is, the time
of conformation unto motion is double, and that from motion unto the
birth, treble; So what is formed the 35 day, is moved the seventy, and
born the 210 day. And therefore if any invisible causality there be,
that after so many years doth evidence it self as Sixty three, it will
be questionable whether its activity only set out at our nativity, and
begin not rather in the womb, wherein we place the like considerations.
Which doth not only entangle this assertion, but hath already embroiled
the endeavours of Astrology in the erection of Schemes, and the judgment
of death or diseases; for being not incontroulably determined, at what
time to begin, whether at conception, animation or exclusion (it being
indifferent unto the influence of Heaven to begin at either) they have
invented another way, that is, to begin _ab Hora quæstionis_, as _Haly_,
_Messahallach_, _Ganivetus_, and _Guido Bonatus_ have delivered.
Again, In regard of the measure of time by months and years, there will
be no small difficulty; and if we shall strictly consider it, many have
been and still may be mistaken. For neither the motion of the Moon,
whereby months are computed; nor of the Sun, whereby years are
accounted, consisteth of whole numbers, but admits of fractions, and
broken parts, as we have already declared concerning the Moon. That of
the Sun consisteth of 365 daies, and almost 6 hours, that is, wanting
eleven minutes; which 6 hours omitted, or not taken notice of, will in
process of time largely deprave the compute; and this is the occasion of
the Bissextile or leap-year, which was not observed in all times, nor
punctually in all Common-Wealths; so that in Sixty three years there may
be lost almost 18 daies, omitting the intercalation of one day every
fourth year, allowed for this quadrant, or 6 hours supernumerary. And
though the same were observed, yet to speak strictly a man may be
somewhat out in the account of his age at Sixty three, for although
every fourth year we insert one day, and so fetch up the quadrant, yet
those eleven minutes whereby the year comes short of perfect 6 hours,
will in the circuit of those years arise unto certain hours; and in a
larger progression of time unto certain daies. Whereof at present we
find experience in the Calender we observe. For the _Julian_ year of 365
daies being eleven minutes larger then the annual revolution of the Sun,
there will arise an anticipation in the Æquinoxes; and as _Junctinus_
[SN: Comment. in Sphæram Ioh. de Sacro bosco.] computeth, in every 136
year they will anticipate almost one day. And therefore those ancient
men and Nestors of old times, which yearly observed their nativities,
might be mistaken in the day; nor that to be construed without a grain
of Salt, which is delivered by _Moses_; At the end of four hundred
years, even the self same day, all the host of _Israel_ went out of the
land of _Egypt_. For in that space of time the Æquinoxes had
anticipated, and the eleven minutes had amounted far above a day. And
this compute rightly considered will fall fouler on them who cast up
the lives of Kingdoms, and sum up their duration by particular numbers;
as _Plato_ first began, and some have endeavoured since by perfect and
spherical numbers, by the square and cube of 7 and 9 and 12, the great
number of _Plato_. Wherein indeed _Bodine_[SN: Mat. Histor.] hath
attempted a particular enumeration; but (beside the mistakes committible
in the solary compute of years) the difference of Chronology disturbs
the satisfaction and quiet of his computes; some adding, others
detracting, and few punctually according in any one year; whereby indeed
such accounts should be made up; for the variation in an unite destroys
the total illation.
Thirdly, The compute may be unjust not only in a strict acception, of
few daies or hours, but in the latitude also of some years; and this may
happen from the different compute of years in divers Nations, and even
such as did maintain the most probable way of account: their year being
not only different from one another, but the civil and common account
disagreeing much from the natural year, whereon the consideration is
founded. Thus from the testimony of _Herodotus_, _Censorinus_ and
others, the _Greeks_ observed the Lunary year [SN: _The Lunary year
what._], that is, twelve revolutions of the Moon, 354 daies; but the
_Egyptians_, and many others adhered unto the Solary account [SN: _The
Solary year what._], that is, 365 daies, that is, eleven daies longer.
Now hereby the account of the one would very much exceed the other: A
man in the one would account himself 63, when one in the other would
think himself but 61; and so although their nativities were under the
same hour, yet did they at different years believe the verity of that
which both esteemed affixed and certain unto one. The like mistake there
is in a tradition of our daies; men conceiving a peculiar danger in the
beginning daies of _May_, set out as a fatal period unto consumptions
and Chronical diseases; wherein notwithstanding we compute by Calenders,
not only different from our ancestors, but one another; the compute of
the one anticipating that of the other; so that while we are in _April_,
others begin _May_, and the danger is past unto one, while it beginneth
with another.
Fourthly, Men were not only out in the number of some daies, the
latitude of a few years, but might be wide by whole Olympiades and
divers Decades of years. [SN: _The different account or measure of a
year._] For as _Censorinus_ relateth, the ancient _Arcadians_ observed a
year of three months, the _Carians_ of six, the _Iberians_ of four; and
as _Diodorus_ and _Xenophon de Æquivocis_ alleadgeth, the ancient
_Egyptians_ have used a year of three, two, and one moneth: so that the
Climacterical was not only different unto those Nations, but
unreasonably distant from ours; for Sixty three will pass in their
account, before they arrive so high as ten in ours.
Nor if we survey the account of _Rome_ it self, may we doubt they were
mistaken; and if they feared Climacterical years, might err in their
numeration. For the civil year whereof the people took notice, did
sometimes come short, and sometimes exceed the natural. For according to
_Varro_, _Suctoninus_ and _Censorinus_, their year consisted first of
ten months; which comprehended but 304 daies, that is, 61 less than ours
containeth; after by _Numa_ or _Tarquine_ from a superstitious conceit
of imparity were added 51 daies, which made 355, one day more then
twelve revolutions of the Moon. And thus a long time it continued, the
civil compute exceeding the natural; the correction whereof, and the
due ordering of the Leap year was referred unto the Pontifices; who
either upon favour or malice, that some might continue their offices a
longer or shorter time; or from the magnitude of the year that men might
be advantaged, or endamaged in their contracts, by arbitrary
intercalations depraved the whole account. Of this abuse _Cicero_
accused _Verres_, which at last proceeded so far, that when _Julius
Cæsar_ came unto that office, before the redress hereof he was fain to
insert two intercalary months unto _November_ and _December_, when he
had already inserted 23 daies unto _February_; so that the year
consisted of 445 daies; a quarter of a year longer then that we observe;
and though at the last the year was reformed, yet in the mean time they
might be out wherein they summed up Climacterical observations.
Lastly, One way more there may be of mistake, and that not unusual among
us, grounded upon a double compute of the year; the one beginning from
the 25 of _March_, the other from the day of our birth, unto the same
again which is the natural account. Now hereupon many men frequently
miscast their daies; for in their age they deduce the account not from
the day of their birth, but the year of our Lord, wherein they were
born. So a man that was born in _January_ 1582, if he live to fall sick
in the latter end of _March_ 1645, will sum up his age, and say I am now
Sixty three, and in my Climacterical and dangerous year; for I was born
in the year 1582, and now it is 1645, whereas indeed he wanteth many
months of that year, considering the true and natural account unto his
birth; and accounteth two months for a year: and though the length of
time and accumulation of years do render the mistake insensible; yet is
it all one, as if one born in _January_ 1644, should be accounted a
year old the 25 of _March_ 1645.
All which perpended, it may be easily perceived with what insecurity of
truth we adhere unto this opinion; ascribing not only effects depending
on the natural period of time unto arbitrary calculations, and such as
vary at pleasure; but confirming our tenets by the uncertain account of
others and our selves. There being no positive or indisputable ground
where to begin our compute; that if there were, men have been several
waies mistaken; the best in some latitude, others in greater, according
to the different compute of divers states, the short and irreconcilable
years of some, the exceeding error in the natural frame of others, and
the lapses and false deductions of ordinary accountants in most.
Which duly considered, together with a strict account and critical
examen of reason, will also distract the witty determinations of
Astrology. That Saturn the enemy of life, comes almost every seventh
year, unto the quadrate or malevolent place; that as the Moon about
every seventh day arriveth unto a contrary sign, so Saturn, which
remaineth about as many years, as the Moon doth daies in one sign, and
holdeth the same consideration in years as the Moon in daies; doth cause
these periculous periods. Which together with other Planets, and
profection of the Horoscope, unto the seventh house, or opposite signs
every seventh year; oppresseth living natures, and causeth observable
mutations, in the state of sublunary things.
Further satisfaction may yet be had from the learned discourse of
_Salmasius_ lately published, [SN: _De annis Climactericis._] if any
desire to be informed how different the present observations are from
those of the ancients; how every one hath different Climactericals;
with many other observables, impugning the present opinion.
CHAPTER XIII
Of the Canicular or Dog daies.
Whereof to speak distinctly: among the Southern constellations two there
are which bear the name of the Dog; the one in 16 degrees of latitude,
containing on the left thigh a Star of the first magnitude, usually
called Procyon or Anticanis, because say some it riseth before the
other; which if truly understood, must be restrained unto those
habitations, who have elevation of pole above thirty two degrees.
Mention thereof there is in _Horace_[SN: Iam Procyon fuerit et stella
vesani Leonis.], who seems to mistake or confound the one with the
other; and after him in _Galen_, who is willing, the remarkablest Star
of the other should be called by this name; because it is the first that
ariseth in the constellation; which notwithstanding, to speak strictly,
it is not; unless we except one of the third magnitude in the right paw
in his own and our elevation, and two more on his head in and beyond the
degree of Sixty. [SN: _What the Dog-star is._] A second and more
considerable one there is, and neighbour unto the other, in 40 degrees
of latitude, containing 18 Stars, whereof that in his mouth of the first
magnitude, the _Greeks_ call Σείριος, the _Latines canis
major_, and we emphatically the Dog-Star.
Now from the rising of this Star, not cosmically, that is, with the Sun,
but Heliacally, that is, its emersion from the raies of the Sun, the
Ancients computed their canicular daies; concerning which there
generally passeth an opinion, that during those daies, all medication or
use of physick is to be declined; and the cure committed unto nature.
And therefore as though there were any feriation in nature, or
justitiums imaginable in professions, whose subject is natural, and
under no intermissive, but constant way of mutation; this season is
commonly termed the Physitians vacation, and stands so received by most
men. Which conceit however general, is not only erroneous, but
unnatural, and subsisting upon foundations either false, uncertain,
mistaken or misapplied, deserves not of mankind that indubitable assent
it findeth.
For first, which seems to be the ground of this assertion, and not to be
drawn into question, that is, the magnified quality of this Star
conceived to cause, or intend the heat of this season whereby these
daies become more observable then the rest: We find that wiser Antiquity
was not of this opinion. For, seventeen hundred years ago it was as a
vulgar error rejected by _Geminus_, a learned Mathematician in his
Elements of Astronomy; wherein he plainly affirmeth, that common opinion
made that a cause, which was at first observed but as a sign. The rising
and setting both of this Star and others being observed by the Ancients,
to denote and testifie certain points of mutation rather then conceived
to induce or effect the same. For our fore-fathers, saith he, observing
the course of the Sun, and marking certain mutations to happen in his
progress through particular parts of the Zodiack, they registred and set
them down in their Parapegmes, or Astronomical Canons; and being not
able to design these times by daies, months or years (the compute
thereof, and the beginning of the year being different, according unto
different Nations) they thought best to settle a general account unto
all; and to determine these alterations by some known and invariable
signs; and such did they conceive the rising and setting of the fixed
Stars; not ascribing thereto any part of causality, but notice and
signification. And thus much seems implied in that expression of
_Homer_, when speaking of the Dog Star, he concludeth----κακὸν δέ τε
σῆμα τέτυκται, _Malum autem signum est_; The same, as _Petavius_
observeth, is implied in the word of _Ptolomy_, and the Ancients, περὶ
ἐπισημασιῶν, that is, of the signification of Stars. The term of
Scripture also favours it, as that of _Isaiah_, _Nolite timere à signis
cœli_; and that in _Genesis_, _Ut sint in signa et tempora_: Let there
be lights in the firmament, and let them be for signs and for seasons.
The Primative and leading magnifiers of this Star, were the _Egyptians_,
the great admirers of Dogs in Earth and Heaven. [SN: Dionysius
Periegesi.] Wherein they worshipped _Anubis_ or _Mercurius_, the Scribe
of _Saturn_, and Counseller of _Osyris_, the great inventor of their
religious rites, and Promoter of good unto _Egypt_. Who was therefore
translated into this Star; by the _Egyptians_ called _Sothis_, and
_Siris_ by the _Ethiopians_; from whence that _Sirius_ or the Dog-star
had its name, is by some conjectured.
And this they looked upon, not with reference unto heat, but
cœlestial influence upon the faculties of man, in order to religion
and all sagacious invention; and from hence derived the abundance and
great fertility of _Egypt_, the overflow of _Nilus_ happening about the
ascent hereof. And therefore in hieroglyphical monuments, _Anubis_ is
described with a Dogs-head, with a Crocodile between his legs, with a
sphere in his hand, with two Stars, and a water Pot standing by him;
implying thereby, the rising and setting of the Dog-star, and the
inundation of the River _Nilus_.
But if all were silent, _Galen_ hath explained this point unto the life;
who expounding the reason why _Hippocrates_ declared the affections of
the year by the rising and setting of Stars; it was saith he, because he
would proceed on signs and principles best known unto all Nations. And
upon his words in the first of the Epidemicks, _In Thaso Autumno circa
Equinoxium et sub virgilias pluviæ erant multæ_, he thus enlargeth. If
(saith he) the same compute of times and months were observed by all
Nations, _Hippocrates_ had never made any mention either of Arcturus,
Pleiades or the Dog-star; but would have plainly said, in _Macedonia_,
in the month Dion, thus or thus was the air disposed. But for as much as
the month Dion is only known unto the _Macedonians_, but obscure unto
the _Athenians_ and other Nations, he found more general distinctions of
time, and instead of naming months, would usually say, at the Æquinox,
the rising of the Pleiades, or the Dog-star. [SN: _How the Ancients
divided the seasons of the year._] And by this way did the Ancients
divide the seasons of the year, the Autumn, Winter, Spring, and Summer.
By the rising of the Pleiades, denoting the beginning of Summer, and by
that of the Dog-star, the declination thereof. By this way _Aristotle_
through all his books of Animals, distinguishing their times of
generation, latitancy, migration, sanity and venation. And this were an
allowable way of compute, and still to be retained, were the site of the
Stars as inalterable, and their ascents as invariable as primitive
Astronomy conceived them. And therefore though _Aristotle_ frequently
mentioneth this Star, and particularly affirmeth that Fishes in the
Bosphorus are best catched from the arise of the Dog-star, we must not
conceive the same a meer effect thereof. Nor though _Scaliger_ from
hence be willing to infer the efficacy of this Star, are we induced
hereto; except because the same Philosopher affirmeth, that Tunny is fat
about the rising of the Pleiades, and departs upon Arcturus, or that
most insects are latent, from the setting of the 7 Stars; except, I say,
he give us also leave to infer that these particular effects and
alterations proceed from those Stars; which were indeed but designations
of such quarters and portions of the year, wherein the same were
observed. Now what _Pliny_ affirmeth of the Orix, that it seemeth to
adore this Star, and taketh notice thereof by voice and sternutation;
until we be better assured of its verity, we shall not salve the
sympathy.
Secondly, What slender opinion the Ancients held of the efficacy of this
Star, is declarable from their compute. For as _Geminus_ affirmeth, and
_Petavius_ his learned Commentator proveth, they began their account
from its Heliacal emersion, and not its cosmical ascent. [SN: _What the
Cosmical._] The cosmical ascention of a Star we term that, when it
ariseth together with the Sun, or the same degree of the Ecliptick
wherein the Sun abideth: [SN: _What the Heliacal ascent of Star is._]
and that the Heliacal, when a Star which before for the vicinity of the
Sun was not visible, being further removed, beginning to appear. For the
annual motion of the Sun from West to East being far swifter then that
of the fixed Stars, he must of necessity leave them on the East while he
hasteneth forward, and obscureth others to the West: and so the Moon who
performs its motion swifter then the Sun (as may be observed in their
Conjunctions and Eclipses) gets Eastward out of his raies; and appears
when the Sun is set. If therefore the Dog-star had this effectual heat
which is ascribed unto it, it would afford best evidence thereof, and
the season would be most fervent, when it ariseth in the probablest
place of its activity, that is, the cosmical ascent; for therein it
ariseth with the Sun, and is included in the same irradiation. But the
time observed by the Ancients was long after this ascent, and in the
Heliacal emersion; when it becomes at greatest distance from the Sun,
neither rising with it nor near it. And therefore had they conceived any
more then a bare signality in this Star, or ascribed the heat of the
season therunto, they would not have computed from its Heliacal ascent,
which was of inferiour efficacy; nor imputed the vehemency of heat unto
those points wherein it was more remiss, and where with less probability
they might make out its action.
Thirdly, Although we derive the authority of these daies from
observations of the Ancients, yet are our computes very different, and
such as confirm not each other. For whereas they observed it Heliacally,
we seem to observe it Cosmically; for before it ariseth Heliacally unto
our latitude, the Summer is even at an end. Again, we compute not only
from different ascents, but also from divers Stars; they from the
greater Dog-star, we from the lesser; they from _Orions_ we from
_Cephalus_ his Dog; they from _Seirius_, we from _Procyon_; for the
beginning of the Dog-daies with us is set down the 19 of _July_, about
which time the lesser Dog-star ariseth with the Sun; whereas the Star of
the greater Dog ascendeth not until after that month. And this mistake
will yet be larger, if the compute be made stricter, and as Dr.
_Bainbrigge_ late professor of Astronomy in Oxford, hath set it down
[SN: Bainb. Canicularis.]. Who in the year 1629 computed, that in the
Horizon of _Oxford_ the Dog-star arose not before the fifteenth day of
_August_; when in our Almanack accounts, those daies are almost ended.
So that the common and received time not answering the true compute, it
frustrates the observations of our selves. And being also different from
the calculations of the Ancients, their observations confirm not ours,
nor ours theirs, but rather confute each other.
Nor will the computes of the Ancients be so Authentick unto those, who
shall take notice, how commonly they applied the celestial descriptions
of other climes unto their own; wherein the learned _Bainbrigius_ justly
reprehendeth _Manilius_, who transferred the _Ægyptian_ descriptions
unto the _Roman_ account; confounding the observation of the _Greek_ and
_Barbarick_ Spheres.
Fourthly, (which is the Argument of _Geminus_) were there any such
effectual heat in this Star, yet could it but weakly evidence the same
in Summer; it being about 40 degrees distant from the Sun: and should
rather manifest its warming power in the Winter, when it remains
conjoyned with the Sun in its Hybernal conversion. For about the 29 of
_October_, and in the 16 of _Scorpius_ and so again in _January_, the
Sun performs his revolution in the same parallel with the Dog-star.
Again, If we should impute the heat of this season, unto the
co-operation of any Stars with the Sun, it seems more favourable for our
times, to ascribe the same unto the constellation of _Leo_. Where
besides that the Sun is in his proper house, it is conjoyned with many
Stars; whereof two of the first magnitude; and in the 8{th} of _August_
is corporally conjoyned with _Basilicus_; a Star of eminent name in
Astrology, and seated almost in the Ecliptick.
Fifthly, If all were granted, that observation and reason were also for
it, and were it an undeniable truth, that an effectual fervour proceeded
from this Star; yet would not the same determine the opinion now in
question; it necessarily suffering such restrictions as take off general
illations. For first in regard of different latitudes, unto some the
canicular daies are in the Winter; as unto such as have no latitude, but
live in a right Sphere, that is, under the Equinoctial line; for unto
them it ariseth when the Sun is about the Tropick of Cancer; which
season unto them is Winter, and the Sun remotest from them. Nor hath the
same position in the Summer, that is, in the Equinoctial points, any
advantage from it; for in the one point the Sun is at the Meridian,
before the Dog-star ariseth; in the other the Star is at the Meridian,
before the sun ascendeth.
[Sidenote: _What latitudes have no Dog-daies at all._]
Some latitudes have no canicular daies at all; as namely all those which
have more then 73 degrees of Northern Elevation; as the territory of
_Nova Zembla_, part of _Greenland_ and _Tartary_; for unto that
habitation the Dog-star is invisible, and appeareth not above the
Horizon.
Unto such latitudes wherein it ariseth, it carrieth a various and very
different respect; unto some it ascendeth when Summer is over, whether
we compute Heliacally or Cosmically; for though unto _Alexandria_ it
ariseth in Cancer; yet it ariseth not unto Biarmia Cosmically before it
be in Virgo, and Heliacally about the Autumnal Equinox. Even unto the
latitude of 52, the efficacy thereof is not much considerable, whether
we consider its ascent, Meridian, altitude or abode above the Horizon.
For it ariseth very late in the year, about the eighteenth of _Leo_,
that is, the 31 of _July_. Of Meridian Altitude it hath but 23 degrees,
so that it plaies but obliquely upon us, and as the Sun doth about the
23 of _January_. And lastly, his abode above the Horizon is not great;
for in the eighteenth of _Leo_, the 31 of _July_, although they arise
together; yet doth it set above 5 hours before the Sun, that is, before
two of the clock, after which time we are more sensible of heat, then
all the day before.
Secondly, In regard of the variation of the longitude of the Stars, we
are to consider (what the Ancients observed not) that the site of the
fixed Stars is alterable, and that since elder times they have suffered
a large and considerable variation of their longitudes. [SN: _What the
longitude of a Star is._] The longitude of a Star, to speak plainly, is
its distance from the first point of numeration toward the East; which
first point unto the Ancients was the vernal æquinox. Now by reason of
their motion from West to East, they have very much varied from this
point: The first Star of Aries in the time of _Meton_ the _Athenian_ was
placed in the very intersection, which is now elongated and removed
Eastward 28 degrees; insomuch that now the sign of Aries possesseth the
place of Taurus, and Taurus that of Gemini. Which variation of longitude
must very much distract the opinion of the Dog star; not only in our
daies, but in times before and after; for since the World began it hath
arisen in Taurus, and if the World last, may have its ascent in Virgo;
so that we must place the canicular daies, that is, the hottest time of
the year in the Spring in the first age, and in the Autumn in Ages to
come.
Thirdly, The Stars have not only varied their longitudes, whereby their
ascents have altered; but have also changed their declinations, whereby
their rising at all, that is, their appearing hath varied. [SN: _What
the declination of a Star is._] The declination of a Star we call its
distance from the Equator. Now though the Poles of the world and the
Equator be immovable, yet because the Stars in their proper motions from
West to East, do move upon the poles of the Ecliptick, distant 23
degrees and an half from the Poles of the Equator, and describe circles
parallel not unto the Equator, but the Ecliptick; they must be therefore
sometimes nearer, sometimes removed further from the Equator. All Stars
that have their distance from the Ecliptick Northward not more then 23
degrees and an half (which is the greatest distance of the Ecliptick
from the Equator) may in progression of time have declination Southward,
and move beyond the Equator: but if any Star hath just this distance of
23 and an half (as hath Capella on the back of Ericthonius) it may
hereafter move under the Equinoctial; and the same will happen
respectively unto Stars which have declination Southward. And therefore
many Stars may be visible in our Hemisphere, which are not so at
present; and many which are at present, shall take leave of our Horizon,
and appear unto Southern habitations. And therefore the time may come
that the Dog star may not be visible in our Horizon, and the time hath
been, when it hath not shewed it self unto our neighbour latitudes. So
that canicular daies there have been none, nor shall be; yet certainly
in all times some season of the year more notably hot then other.
Lastly, We multiply causes in vain; and for the reason hereof, we need
not have recourse unto any Star but the Sun, and continuity of its
action. For the Sun ascending into the Northern signs, begetteth first a
temperate heat in the air; which by his approach unto the solstice he
intendeth; and by continuation increaseth the same even upon
declination. [SN: _Why the Dog-daies be so hot._] For running over the
same degrees again, that is, in Leo, which he hath done in Taurus, in
_July_ which he did in _May_; he augmenteth the heat in the latter which
he began in the first; and easily intendeth the same by continuation
which was well promoted before. So it is observed, that they which dwell
between the Tropicks and the Equator, have their second summer hotter
and more maturative of fruits then the former. So we observe in the day
(which is a short year) the greatest heat about two in the afternoon,
when the Sun is past the Meridian (which is his diurnal solstice) and
the same is evident from the Thermometer or observations of the
weather-glass. So are the colds of the night sharper in the Summer about
two or three after midnight, and the frosts in Winter stronger about
those hours. So likewise in the year we observe the cold to augment,
when the daies begin to increase, though the Sun be then ascensive, and
returning from the Winter Tropick. And therefore if we rest not in this
reason for the heat in the declining part of Summer, we must discover
freezing Stars that may resolve the latter colds of Winter; which
whoever desires to invent, let him study the Stars of _Andromeda_, or
the nearer constellation of _Pegasus_, which are about that time
ascendent.
It cannot therefore seem strange, or savour of singularity that we have
examined this point; since the same hath been already denied by some,
since the authority and observations of the Ancients rightly understood,
do not confirm it, since our present computes are different from those
of the Ancients, whereon notwithstanding they depend; since there is
reason against it, and if all were granted, yet must it be maintained
with manifold restraints, far otherwise then is received. And lastly,
since from plain and natural principles, the doubt may be fairly
salved, and not clapt up from petitionary foundations and principles
unestablished.
But that which chiefly promoted the consideration of these daies, and
medically advanced the same, was the doctrin of _Hippocrates_; a
Physitian of such repute, that he received a testimony from a Christian,
that might have been given unto Christ. [SN: Qui nec fallere potest nec
falli.] The first in his book, _de Acre, Aquis, et locis_. _Syderum
ortus_, etc. That is, we are to observe the rising of Stars, especially
the Dog-star, Arcturus, and the setting of the Pleiades or seven Stars.
From whence notwithstanding we cannot infer the general efficacy of
these Stars, or co-efficacy particular in medications. Probably
expressing no more hereby then if he should have plainly said, especial
notice we are to take of the hottest time in Summer, of the beginning of
Autumn and Winter; for by the rising and setting of those Stars were
these times and seasons defined. [SN: _Diseases commonly determined, by
what seasons._] And therefore subjoyns this reason, _Quoniam his
temporibus morbi finiuntur_, because at these times diseases have their
ends; as Physitians well known, and he elsewhere affirmeth, that seasons
determine diseases, beginning in their contraries; as the Spring the
diseases of Autumn, and the Summer those of Winter. Now (what is very
remarkable) whereas in the some place he adviseth to observe the times
of notable mutations, as the Equinoxes, and the Solstices, and to
decline Medication ten daies before and after; how precisely soever
canicular cautions be considered, this is not observed by Physitians,
nor taken notice of by the people. And indeed should we blindly obey the
restraints both of Physitians and Astrologers, we should contract the
liberty of our prescriptions, and confine the utility of Physick unto a
very few daies. For observing the Dog-daies, and as is expressed, some
daies before, likewise ten daies before and after the Equinoctial and
Solsticial points; by this observation alone are exempted an hundred
daies. Whereunto if we add the two _Egyptian_ daies in every month, the
interlunary and plenilunary exemptions, the Eclipses of Sun and Moon,
conjunctions and oppositions Planetical, the houses of Planets, and the
site of the Luminaries under the signs (wherein some would induce a
restraint of Purgation or Phlebotomy) there would arise above an hundred
more; so that of the whole year the use of Physick would not be secure
much above a quarter. Now as we do not strictly observe these daies, so
need we not the other; and although consideration be made hereof, yet
must we prefer the nearer indications before those which are drawn from
the time of the year; or other cælestial relations.
The second Testimony is taken out of the last piece of his Age, and
after the experience (as some think) of no less then an hundred years,
that is, his book of Aphorisms, or short and definitive determinations
in Physick. The Aphorism alleadged is this, _Sub Cane et ante Canem
difficiles sunt purgationes._ _Sub Cane et Anticane_, say some including
both the Dog-stars; but that cannot consist with the Greek: ὑπὸ κύνα καὶ
πρὸ κυνὸς, nor had that Criticism been ever omitted by _Galen_. Now how
true this sentence was in the mouth of _Hippocrates_, and with what
restraint it must be understood by us, will readily appear from the
difference between us both, in circumstantial relations.
And first, Concerning his time and Chronology: [SN: _When_ Hippocrates
_lived_.] he lived in the reign of _Artaxerxes Longimanus_, about the 82
Olympiade, 450 years before Christ; and from our times above two
thousand. Now since that time (as we have already declared) the Stars
have varied their longitudes; and having made large progressions from
West to East, the time of the Dog-stars ascent must also very much
alter. For it ariseth later now in the year, then it formerly did in the
same latitude; and far later unto us who have a greater elevation; for
in the daies of _Hippocrates_ this Star ascended in Cancer, which now
ariseth in Leo: and will in progression of time arise in Virgo. And
therefore in regard of the time wherein he lived, the Aphorism was more
considerable in his daies then in ours, and in times far past then
present, and in his Countrey then ours.
The place of his nativity was _Coos_, an Island in the _Myrtoan_ Sea,
not far from _Rhodes_, described in Maps by the name of _Lango_, and
called by the _Turks_ who are Masters thereof, _Stancora_; according
unto _Ptolomy_ of Northern latitude 36 degrees. That he lived and writ
in these parts, is not improbably collected from the Epistles that
passed betwixt him and _Artaxerxes_; as also between the Citizens of
_Abdera_, and _Coos_, in the behalf of _Democritus_. Which place being
seated from our latitude of 52, 16 degrees Southward, there will arise a
different consideration; and we may much deceive our selves if we
conform the ascent of Stars in one place unto another, or conceive they
arise the same day of the month in _Coos_ and in _England_. For as
_Petavius_ computes in the first _Julian_ year, at _Alexandria_ of
latitude 31, the Star arose cosmically in the twelfth degree of Cancer,
Heliacally the 26, by the compute of _Geminus_ about this time at
_Rhodes_ of latitude 37, it ascended cosmically the 16 of Cancer,
Heliacally the first of Leo; and about that time at _Rome_ of latitude
42, cosmically the 22 of Cancer, and Heliacally the first of Leo. For
unto places of greater latitude it ariseth ever later; so that in some
latitudes the cosmical ascent happeneth not before the twentieth degree
of Virgo, ten daies before the Autumnal Equinox, and if they compute
Heliacally, after it, in Libra.
Again, Should we allow all, and only compute unto the latitude of
_Coos_; yet would it not impose a total omission of Physick. For if in
the hottest season of that clime, all Physick were to be declined, then
surely in many other none were to be used at any time whatsoever; for
unto many parts, not only in the Spring and Autumn, but also in the
Winter, the Sun is nearer, then unto the clime of _Coos_ in the Summer.
The third consideration concerneth purging medicines, which are at
present far different from those implied in this Aphorism, and such as
were commonly used by _Hippocrates_. [SN: _Three degrees of
purgations._] For three degrees we make of purgative medicines: The
first thereof is very benign, nor far removed from the nature of
Aliment, into which, upon defect of working, it is oft-times converted;
and in this form do we account _Manna_, _Cassia_, _Tamarindes_, and many
more; whereof we find no mention in _Hippocrates_. This second is also
gentle having a familiarity with some humor, into which it is but
converted if it fail of its operation: of this sort are _Aloe_,
_Rhabarb_, _Senna_, etc. Whereof also few or none were known unto
_Hippocrates_. The third is of a violent and venemous quality, which
frustrate of its action, assumes as it were the nature of poison; such
as are Scammoneum, Colocynthis, Elaterium, Euphorbium, Tithymallus,
Laureola, Peplum, etc. Of this sort _Hippocrates_ made use, even in
Fevers, Pleurisies and Quinsies; and that composition is very remarkable
which is ascribed unto _Diogenes_ in _Ætius_[SN: Tetrab. lib. 1. Serm.
3.]; that is, of Pepper, Sal Armoniac, Euphorbium, of each an ounce,
the Dosis whereof four scruples and an half; which whosoever should
take, would find in his bowels more then a canicular heat, though in the
depth of Winter; many of the like nature may be observed in _Ætius_, or
in the book _De Dinamidiis_, ascribed unto _Galen_, which is the same
_verbatim_ with the other.
Now in regard of the second, and especially the first degree of
Purgatives, the Aphorism is not of force; but we may safely use them,
they being benign and of innoxious qualities. And therefore _Lucas
Gauricus_, who hath endeavoured with many testimonies to advance this
consideration, at length concedeth that lenitive Physick may be used,
especially when the Moon is well affected in Cancer or in the watery
signs. But in regard of the third degree the Aphorism is considerable:
purgations may be dangerous; and a memorable example there is in the
medical Epistles of _Crucius_, of a _Roman_ Prince that died upon an
ounce of Diaphænicon, taken in this season. From the use whereof we
refrain not only in hot seasons, but warily exhibit it at all times in
hot diseases. Which when necessity requires, we can perform more safely
then the Ancients, as having better waies of preparation and correction;
that is, not only by addition of other bodies, but separation of noxious
parts from their own.
But beside these differences between _Hippocrates_ and us, the
Physitians of these times and those of Antiquity; the condition of the
disease, and the intention of the Physitian, hold a main consideration
in what time and place soever. For Physick is either curative or
preventive; Preventive we call that which by purging noxious humors, and
the causes of diseases, preventeth sickness in the healthy, or the
recourse thereof in the valetudinary; this is of common use at the
spring and fall, and we commend not the same at this season.
Therapeutick or curative Physick, we term that, which restoreth the
Patient unto Sanity, and taketh away diseases actually affecting. [SN:
_Diseases Chronical and Acute what they be._] Now of diseases some are
cronical and of long duration, as quartane Agues, Scurvy, etc. Wherein
because they admit of delay we defer the cure to more advantagious
seasons; Others we term acute, that is, of short duration and danger, as
Fevers, Pleurisies, etc. In which, because delay is dangerous, and they
arise unto their state before the Dog-daies determine, we apply present
remedies according unto Indications; respecting rather the acuteness of
the disease, and precipitancy of occasion, then the rising or setting of
Stars; the effects of the one being disputable, of the other assured and
inevitable.
And although Astrology may here put in, and plead the secret influence
of this Star; yet _Galen_ in his Comment, makes no such consideration;
confirming the truth of the Aphorism from the heat of the year; and the
operation of Medicines exhibited. [SN: _Strong purgations not so well
given in the heat of summer, and why._] In regard that bodies being
heated by the Summer, cannot so well endure the acrimony of purging
Medicines; and because upon purgations contrary motions ensue, the heat
of the air attracting the humours outward, and the action of the
Medicine retracting the same inward. But these are readily salved in the
distinctions before alleadged; and particularly in the constitution of
our climate and divers others, wherein the air makes no such exhaustion
of spirits. And in the benignity of our Medicines; whereof some in their
own natures, others well prepared, agitate not the humors, or make
sensible perturbation.
[Sidenote: _A Problem._]
Nor do we hereby reject or condemn a sober and regulated Astrology; we
hold there is more truth therein then in Astrologers; in some more then
many allow, yet in none so much as some pretend. We deny not the
influence of the Stars, but often suspect the due application thereof;
for though we should affirm that all things were in all things; that
heaven were but earth celestified, and earth but heaven terrestrified,
or that each part above had an influence upon its divided affinity
below; yet how to single out these relations, and duly to apply their
actions is a work oft times to be effected by some revelation, and
_Cabala_ from above, rather then any Philosophy, or speculation here
below. What power soever they have upon our bodies, it is not requisite
they should destroy our reasons, that is, to make us rely on the
strength of Nature, when she is least able to relieve us; and when we
conceive the heaven against us, to refuse the assistance of the earth
created for us. [SN: _Upon the biting of a mad Dog there ensues an
hydrophobia or fear of water._] This were to suffer from the mouth of
the Dog above, what others do from the teeth of Dogs below; that is, to
be afraid of their proper remedy, and refuse to approach any water,
though that hath often proved a cure unto their disease. There is in
wise men a power beyond the Stars; and _Ptolomy_ encourageth us, that by
foreknowledge, we may evade their actions; for, being but universal
causes, they are determined by particular agents; which being inclined,
not constrained, contain within themselves the casting act, and a power
to command the conclusion.
Lastly, If all be conceded, and were there in this Aphorism an
unrestrained truth, yet were it not reasonable from a caution to inferr
a non-usance or abolition, from a thing to be used with discretion, not
to be used at all. Because the Apostle bids us beware of Philosophy,
heads of extremity will have none at all; an usual fallacy in vulgar and
less distinctive brains, who having once overshot the mean, run
violently on, and find no rest but in the extreams.
Now hereon we have the longer insisted, because the error is material,
and concerns oft-times the life of man; an error to be taken notice of
by State, and provided against by Princes, who are of the opinion of
_Solomon_, that their riches consists in the multitude of their
subjects. An error worse then some reputed _Heresies_; and of greater
danger to the body, then they unto the soul; which whosoever is able to
reclaim, he shall salve more in one summer then _Themison_[SN: _A
Physitian._ Quot Themison ægros Autumno occiderit uno. _Juvenal._]
destroyed in any Autumn; he shall introduce a new way of cure,
preserving by Theory, as well as practice, and men not only from death,
but from destroying themselves.
THE FIFTH BOOK
Of many things questionable as they are
commonly described in Pictures.
CHAPTER I
Of the Picture of the Pelecan.
And first in every place we meet with the picture of the Pelecan,
opening her breast with her bill, and feeding her young ones with the
blood distilling from her. Thus is it set forth not only in common
Signs, but in the Crest and Schucheon of many Noble families; hath been
asserted by many holy Writers, and was an Hierogliphick of piety and
pitty among the _Ægyptians_; on which consideration, they spared them at
their tables.
Notwithstanding upon enquiry we find no mention hereof in Ancient
Zodiographers, and such as have particularly discoursed upon Animals, as
_Aristotle_, _Ælian_, _Pliny_, _Solinus_ and many more; who seldom
forget proprieties of such a nature, and have been very punctual in less
considerable Records. Some ground hereof I confess we may allow, nor
need we deny a remarkable affection in Pelecans toward their young; for
_Ælian_ discoursing of Storks, and their affection toward their brood,
whom they instruct to fly, and unto whom they re-deliver up the
provision of their Bellies, concludeth at last, that Herons and Pelecans
do the like.
As for the testimonies of Ancient Fathers, and Ecclesiastical Writers,
we may more safely conceive therein some Emblematical than any real
Story: so doth _Eucherius_ confess it to be the Emblem of Christ. And we
are unwilling literally to receive that account of _Jerom_, that
perceiving her young ones destroyed by Serpents, she openeth her side
with her bill, by the blood whereof they revive and return unto life
again. By which relation they might indeed illustrate the destruction of
man by the old Serpent, and his restorement by the blood of Christ: and
in this sense we shall not dispute the like relations of _Austine_,
_Isidore_, _Albertus_, and many more: and under an Emblematical
intention, we accept it in coat-armour.
As for the Hieroglyphick of the _Egyptians_, they erected the same upon
another consideration, which was parental affection; manifested in the
protection of her young ones, when her nest was set on fire. For as for
letting out her blood, it was not the assertion of the _Egyptians_, but
seems translated unto the Pelecan from the Vulture, as _Pierius_ hath
plainly delivered. _Sed quod Pelicanum (ut etiam aliis plerisque
persuasum est) rostro pectus dissecantem pingunt, ita ut suo sanguine
filios alat, ab Ægyptiorum historiâ valde alienum est, illi enim
vulturem tantum id facere tradiderunt._
And lastly, as concerning the picture, if naturally examined, and not
Hierogliphically conceived, it containeth many improprieties,
disagreeing almost in all things from the true and proper description.
For, whereas it is commonly set forth green or yellow, in its proper
colour, it is inclining to white; excepting the extremities or tops of
the wing feathers, which are brown. [SN: _The bigness of a Pelecan._]
It is described in the bigness of a Hen, whereas it approacheth and
sometimes exceedeth the magnitude of a Swan. It is commonly painted with
a short bill; whereas that of the Pelecan attaineth sometimes the length
of two spans. The bill is made acute or pointed at the end; whereas it
is flat and broad, though somewhat inverted at the extream. It is
described like fissipedes, or birds which have their feet or claws
divided; whereas it is palmipedous, or fin-footed like Swans and Geese;
according to the method of nature, in latirostrous or flat-bild birds;
which being generally swimmers, the organ is wisely contrived unto the
action, and they are framed with fins or oars upon their feet; and
therefore they neither light, nor build on trees, if we except
Cormorants, who make their nests like Herons. [SN: _Of her Crop._]
Lastly, there is one part omitted more remarkable than any other, that
is, the chowle or crop adhering unto the lower side of the bill, and so
descending by the throat: a bag or sachel very observable, and of a
capacity almost beyond credit; which notwithstanding, this animal could
not want; for therein it receiveth Oysters, Cochels, Scollops, and other
testaceous animals; which being not able to break, it retains them until
they open, and vomiting them up, takes out the meat contained. This is
that part preserved for a rarity and wherein (as _Sanctius_ delivers) in
one dissected, a _Negro_ child was found.
A possibility there may be of opening and bleeding their breast; for
this may be done by the uncous and pointed extremity of their bill: and
some probability also that they sometimes do it, for their own relief,
though not for their young ones; that is by nibling and biting
themselves on their itching part of their breast, upon fullness or
acrimony of blood. And the same may be better made out; if (as some
relate) their feathers on that part are sometimes observed to be red and
tincted with blood.
CHAPTER II
Of the Picture of Dolphins.
That Dolphins are crooked, is not only affirmed by the hand of the
Painter, but commonly conceived their natural and proper figure; which
is not only the opinion of our times, but seems the belief of elder
times before us. For, beside the expressions of _Ovid_ and _Pliny_,
their Pourtraicts in some ancient Coyns are framed in this figure, as
will appear in some thereof in _Gesner_, others in _Goltsius_, and
_Lævinus Hulsius_ in his discription of Coyns, from _Julius Cæsar_ unto
_Rhodulphus_ the second.
Notwithstanding, to speak strictly in their natural figure they are
streight, nor have their spine convexed, or more considerably embowed,
than Sharks, Porposes, Whales, and other Cetaceous animals, as
_Scaliger_ plainly affirmeth: _Corpus habet non magis curvum quam
reliqui pisces._ As ocular enquiry informeth; and as unto such as have
not had the opportunity to behold them, their proper pourtraicts will
discover in _Rondeletius_, _Gesner_, and _Aldrovandus_. And as indeed is
deducible from pictures themselves; for though they be drawn repandous,
or convexedly crooked in one piece, yet the Dolphin that carrieth Arion
is concavously inverted, and hath its spine depressed in another. And
answerably hereto may we behold them differently bowed in medalls, and
the Dolphins of _Tarus_ and _Fulius_ do make another flexure from that
of _Commodus_ and _Agrippa_.
And therefore what is delivered of their incurvity, must either be taken
Emphatically, that is, not really but in appearance; which happeneth,
when they leap above water, and suddenly shoot down again; which is a
fallacy in vision, whereby straight bodies in a sudden motion protruded
obliquely downward, appear unto the eye crooked; and this is the
construction of _Bellonius_. Or if it be taken really, it must not
universally and perpetually; that is, not when they swim and remain in
their proper figures, but only when they leap, or impetuously whirl
their bodies any way; and this is the opinion of _Gesnerus_. Or lastly,
It may be taken neither really nor emphatically, but only
Emblematically: for being the Hieroglyphick of celerity, and swifter
than other animals, men best expressed their velocity by incurvity, and
under some figure of a bow: and in this sense probably do Heralds also
receive it, when from a Dolphin extended, they distinguish a Dolphin
embowed.
And thus also must that picture be taken of a Dolphin clasping an
Anchor: that is, not really, as is by most conceived out of affection
unto man, conveighing the Anchor unto the ground: but emblematically,
according as _Pierius_ hath expressed it, The swiftest animal conjoyned
with that heavy body, implying that common moral, _Festina lentè_: and
that celerity should always be contempered with cunctation.
CHAPTER III
Of the Picture of a Grashopper.
There is also among us a common description and picture of a Grashopper,
as may be observed in the pictures of Emblematists, in the coats of
several families, and as the word _Cicada_ is usually translated in
Dictionaries. Wherein to speak strictly, if by this word Grashopper, we
understand that animal which is implied by τέττιξ with the
_Greeks_, and by _Cicada_ with the _Latines_; we may with safety affirm
the picture is widely mistaken, and that for ought enquiry can inform,
there is no such insect in _England_. Which how paradoxical soever, upon
a strict enquiry, will prove undeniable truth.
For first, That animal which the _French_ term _Sauterelle_, we a
Grashopper, and which under this name is commonly described by us, is
named Ἄκρις by the _Greeks_, by the _Latines Locusta_, and by our
selves in proper speech a Locust; as in the diet of John _Baptist_, and
in our Translation [SN: Prov. 30.], the _Locusts_ have no King, yet go
they forth all of them by bands. Again, Between the _Cicada_ and that we
call a Grashopper, the differences are very many, as may be observed in
themselves, or their descriptions in _Matthiolus_, _Aldrovandus_ and
_Muffetus_. For first, They are differently cucullated or capuched upon
the head and back, and in the _Cicada_ the eyes are more prominent: the
Locusts have _Antennæ_: or long horns before, with a long falcation or
forcipated tail behind; and being ordained for saltation, their hinder
legs do far exceed the other. The Locust or our Grashopper hath teeth,
the _Cicada_ none at all; nor any mouth according unto _Aristotle_: the
_Cicada_ is most upon trees; and lastly, the fritinnitus or proper note
thereof, is far more shril than that of the Locust; and its life so
short in Summer, that for provision it needs not have recourse unto the
providence of the Pismire in Winter.
And therefore where the _Cicada_ must be understood, the pictures of
Heralds and Emblematists are not exact, nor is it safe to adhere unto
the interpretation of Dictionaries; and we must with candour make out
our own Translations: for in the Plague of _Ægypt_, _Exodus_ 10. the
word Ἄκρις is translated a Locust, but in the same sense and subject,
_Wisdom_ 16. it is translated a Grashopper; For them the bitings of
Grashoppers and flies killed: whereas we have declared before, the
_Cicada_ hath no teeth, but is conceived to live upon dew; and the
possibility of its subsistence is disputed by _Licetus_. Hereof I
perceive _Muffetus_ hath taken notice, dissenting from _Langius_ and
_Lycostenes_, while they deliver, the _Cicada's_ destroyed the fruits in
_Germany_, where that insect is not found; and therefore concludeth,
_Tam ipsos quam alios deceptos fuisse autumo, dum locustas cicadas esse
vulgari errore crederent._
And hereby there may be some mistake in the due dispensation of
Medicines desumed from this animal; particularly of Diatettigon
commended by _Ætius_ in the affections of the kidnies. It must be
likewise understood with some restriction what hath been affirmed by
_Isidore_, and yet delivered by many, that Cicades are bred out of
Cuccow spittle or Woodsear; that is, that spumous, frothy dew or
exudation, or both, found upon Plants, especially about the joints of
Lavender and Rosemary, observable with us about the latter end of May.
For here the true _Cicada_ is not bred, but certain it is, that out of
this, some kind of Locust doth proceed; for herein may be discovered a
little insect of a festucine or pale green, resembling in all parts a
Locust, or what we call a Grashopper.
Lastly, The word it self is improper, and the term of Grashopper not
appliable unto the _Cicada_; for therein the organs of motion are not
contrived for saltation, nor are the hinder legs of such extension, as
is observable in salient animals, and such as move by leaping. Whereto
the Locust is very well conformed; for therein the legs behind are
longer than all the body, and make at the second joynt acute angles, at
a considerable advancement above their backs.
The mistake therefore with us might have its original from a defect in
our language; for having not the insect with us, we have not fallen upon
its proper name, and so make use of a term common unto it and the
Locust; whereas other countries have proper expressions for it. So the
_Italian_ calls it _Cicada_, the _Spaniard Cigarra_, and the _French
Cigale_; all which appellations conform unto the original, and properly
express this animal. Whereas our word is borrowed from the Saxon
Gærsthopp, which our forefathers, who never beheld the _Cicada_, used
for that insect which we yet call a Grashopper.
CHAPTER IV
Of the Picture of the Serpent tempting Eve.
In the Picture of Paradise, and delusion of our first Parents, the
Serpent is often described with humane visage; not unlike unto _Cadmus_
or his wife, in the act of their Metamorphosis. Which is not a meer
pictorial contrivance or invention of the Picturer, but an ancient
tradition and conceived reality, as it stands delivered by _Beda_ and
Authors of some antiquity; that is, that Sathan appeared not unto _Eve_
in the naked form of a Serpent, but with a Virgins head, that thereby he
might become more acceptable, and his temptation find the easier
entertainment. Which nevertheless is a conceit not to be admitted, and
the plain and received figure, is with better reason embraced.
For first, as _Pierius_ observeth from _Barcephas_, the assumption of
humane shape had proved a disadvantage unto Sathan; affording not only a
suspicious amazement in _Eve_, before the fact, in beholding a third
humanity beside her self and _Adam_; but leaving some excuse unto the
woman, which afterward the man took up with lesser reason; that is, to
have been deceived by another like her self.
Again, There was no inconvenience in the shape assumed, or any
considerable impediment that might disturb that performance in the
common form of a Serpent. For whereas it is conceived the woman must
needs be afraid thereof, and rather flie than approach it; it was not
agreeable unto the condition of Paradise and state of innocency therein;
if in that place as most determine, no creature was hurtful or terrible
unto man, and those destructive effects they now discover succeeded the
curse, and came in with thorns and briars. And therefore _Eugubinus_
(who affirmeth this Serpent was a Basilisk) incurreth no absurdity, nor
need we infer that _Eve_ should be destroyed immediately upon that
Vision. For noxious animals could offend them no more in the Garden,
than _Noah_ in the Ark: as they peaceably received their names, so they
friendly possessed their natures: and were their conditions destructive
unto each other, they were not so unto man, whose constitutions then
were antidotes, and needed not fear poisons. And if (as most conceive)
there were but two created of every kind, they could not at that time
destroy either man or themselves; for this had frustrated the command of
multiplication, destroyed a species, and imperfected the Creation. And
therefore also if Cain were the first man born, with him entred not only
the act, but the first power of murther; for before that time neither
could the Serpent nor _Adam_ destroy _Eve_; nor _Adam_ and _Eve_ each
other; for that had overthrown the intention of the world, and put its
Creator to act the sixt day over again.
Moreover, Whereas in regard of speech, and vocal conference with _Eve_,
it may be thought he would rather assume an humane shape and organs,
then the improper form of a serpent; it implies no material impediment.
Nor need we to wonder how he contrived a voice out of the mouth of a
Serpent, who hath done the like out of the belly of a Pythonissa, and
the trunk of an Oak; as he did for many years at _Dodona_.
[Sidenote: _Why_ Eve _wondered not at the serpents speaking_.]
Lastly, Whereas it might be conceived that an humane shape was fitter
for this enterprise; it being more than probable she would be amazed to
hear a Serpent speak; some conceive she might not yet be certain that
only man was priviledged with speech; and being in the novity of the
Creation, and inexperience of all things, might not be affrighted to
hear a Serpent speak. Beside she might be ignorant of their natures, who
was not versed in their names, as being not present at the general
survey of Animals, when _Adam_ assigned unto every one a name
concordant unto its nature. Nor is this my opinion, but the
determination of _Lombard_ and _Tostatus_; and also the reply of _Cyril_
unto the objection of _Julian_, who compared this story unto the fables
of the _Greeks_.
CHAPTER V
Of the Picture of _Adam_ and _Eve_ with Navels.
Another mistake there may be in the Picture of our first Parents, who
after the manner of their posterity are both delineated with a Navel.
And this is observable not only in ordinary and stained pieces, but in
the Authentick draughts of _Urbin_, _Angelo_ and others. Which
notwithstanding cannot be allowed, except we impute that unto the first
cause, which we impose not on the second; or what we deny unto nature,
we impute unto Naturity it self; that is, that in the first and most
accomplished piece, the Creator affected superfluities, or ordained
parts without use or office.
[Sidenote: _What the Navel is, and for what use._]
For the use of the Navel is to continue the Infant unto the Mother, and
by the vessels thereof to convey its aliment and sustentation. The
vessels whereof it consisteth, are the umbilical vein, which is a branch
of the Porta, and implanted in the Liver of the Infant; two Arteries
likewise arising from the Iliacal branches, by which the Infant
receiveth the purer portion of blood and spirits from the mother; and
lastly, the Urachos or ligamental passage derived from the bottom of the
bladder, whereby it dischargeth the waterish and urinary part of its
aliment. Now upon the birth, when the Infant forsaketh the womb,
although it dilacerate, and break the involving membranes, yet do these
vessels hold, and by the mediation thereof the Infant is connected unto
the womb, not only before, but a while also after the birth. These
therefore the midwife cutteth off, contriving them into a knot close
unto the body of the Infant; from whence ensueth that tortuosity or
complicated modosity we usually call the Navel; occasioned by the
colligation of vessels before mentioned. [SN: _That_ Adam _and_ Eve _had
not Navels_.] Now the Navel being a part, not precedent, but subsequent
unto generation, nativity or parturition, it cannot be well imagined at
the creation or extraordinary formation of _Adam_, who immediately
issued from the Artifice of God; nor also that of _Eve_; who was not
solemnly begotten, but suddenly framed, and anomalously proceeded from
_Adam_.
And if we be led into conclusions that _Adam_ had also this part,
because we behold the same in our selves, the inference is not
reasonable; for if we conceive the way of his formation, or of the first
animals, did carry in all points a strict conformity unto succeeding
productions, we might fall into imaginations that _Adam_ was made
without Teeth; or that he ran through those notable alterations in the
vessels of the heart, which the Infant suffereth after birth: we need
not dispute whether the egg or bird were first; and might conceive that
Dogs were created blind, because we observe they are littered so with
us. Which to affirm, is to confound, at least to regulate creation unto
generation, the first Acts of God, unto the second of Nature; which were
determined in that general indulgence, Encrease and Multiply, produce or
propagate each other; that is, not answerably in all points, but in a
prolonged method according to seminal progression. For the formation of
things at first was different from their generation after; and although
it had nothing to precede it, was aptly contrived for that which should
succeed it. And therefore though _Adam_ were framed without this part,
as having no other womb than that of his proper principles, yet was not
his posterity without the same: for the seminality of his fabrick
contained the power thereof; and was endued with the science of those
parts whose predestinations upon succession it did accomplish.
All the Navel therefore and conjunctive part we can suppose in _Adam_,
was his dependency on his Maker, and the connexion he must needs have
unto heaven, who was the Son of God. For holding no dependence on any
preceding efficient but God; in the act of his production there may be
conceived some connexion, and _Adam_ to have been in a momental Navel
with his Maker. And although from his carnality and corporal existence,
the conjunction seemeth no nearer than of causality and effect; yet in
his immortal and diviner part he seemed to hold a nearer coherence, and
an umbilicality even with God himself. And so indeed although the
propriety of this part be found but in some animals, and many species
there are which have no Navel at all; yet is there one link and common
connexion, one general ligament, and necessary obligation of all what
ever unto God. Whereby although they act themselves at distance, and
seem to be at loose; yet do they hold a continuity with their Maker.
Which catenation or conserving union when ever his pleasure shall
divide, let go, or separate, they shall fall from their existence,
essence, and operations: in brief, they must retire unto their primitive
nothing, and shrink into their Chaos again.
They who hold the egg was before the Bird, prevent this doubt in many
other animals, which also extendeth unto them: For birds are nourished
by umbilical vessels, and the Navel is manifest sometimes a day or two
after exclusion. The same is probable in oviparous exclusions, if the
lesser part of eggs must serve for the formation, the greater part for
nutriment. The same is made out in the eggs of Snakes; and is not
improbable in the generation of Porwiggles or Tadpoles, and may be also
true in some vermiparous exclusions: although (as we have observed in
the daily progress in some) the whole Maggot is little enough to make a
Fly, without any part remaining.
CHAPTER VI
Of the Pictures of Eastern Nations, and the
_Jews_ at their Feasts, especially our
_Saviour_ at the Passover.
Concerning the Pictures of the _Jews_, and Eastern Nations at their
Feasts, concerning the gesture of our Saviour at the Passover, who is
usually described sitting upon a stool or bench at a square table, in
the middest of the twelve, many make great doubt; and (though they
concede a table-gesture) will hardly allow this usual way of Session.
Wherein restraining no mans enquiry, it will appear that accubation, or
lying down at meals was a gesture used by very many Nations. That the
_Persians_ used it, beside the testimony of humane Writers, is deducible
from that passage in _Esther_[SN: Esther 7.]. That when the King
returned into the place of the banquet of wine, _Haman_ was fallen upon
the bed whereon _Esther_ was. That the _Parthians_ used it, is evident
from _Athenæus_, who delivereth out of _Possidonius_, that their King
lay down at meals, on an higher bed than others. That _Cleopatra_ thus
entertained _Anthony_, the same Author manifesteth when he saith, she
prepared twelve Tricliniums. That it was in use among the _Greeks_, the
word Triclinium implieth, and the same is also declarable from many
places in the Symposiacks of _Plutarch_. That it was not out of fashion
in the days of _Aristotle_, he declareth in his politicks; when among
the Institutionary rules of youth, he adviseth they might not be
permitted to hear Iambicks and Tragedies before they were admitted unto
discumbency or lying along with others at their meals. That the _Romans_
used this gesture at repast, beside many more, is evident from
_Lipsius_, _Mercurialis_, _Salmasius_ and _Ciaconius_, who have expresly
and distinctly treated hereof.
Now of their accumbing places, the one was called Stibadion and Sigma,
carrying the figure of an half Moon, and of an uncertain capacity,
whereupon it received the name of Hexaclinon, Octoclinon, according unto
that of _Martial_,
_Accipe Lunata scriptum testudine Sigma:
Octo capit, veniat quisquis amicus erit._
Hereat in several ages the left and right horn were the principal
places, and the most honorable person, if he were not master of the
feast, possessed one of those rooms. The other was termed Triclinium,
that is, Three beds about a table, as may be seen in the figures
thereof, and particularly in the _Rhamnusian_ Triclinium, set down by
_Mercurialis_[SN: Merc. De Arte Gymnastica.]. The customary use hereof
was probably deduced from the frequent use of bathing, after which they
commonly retired to bed, and refected themselves with repast; and so
that custom by degrees changed their cubiculary beds into discubitory,
and introduced a fashion to go from the bathes unto these.
[Sidenote: _The ancient gesture or position of the body at feasts._]
As for their gesture or position, the men lay down leaning on their left
elbow, their back being advanced by some pillow or soft substance: the
second lay so with his back towards the first, that his head attained
about his bosome; and the rest in the same order. For women, they sat
sometimes distinctly with their sex, sometime promiscuously with men,
according to affection or favour, as is delivered by _Juvenal_,
_Gremio jacuit nova nupta mariti._
And by _Suetonius_ of _Caligula_, that at his feasts he placed his
sisters, with whom he had been incontinent, successively in order below
him.
Again, As their beds were three, so the guests did not usually exceed
that number in every one; according to the ancient Laws, and proverbial
observations to begin with the Graces, and make up their feasts with the
Muses. And therefore it was remarkable in the Emperour _Lucius Verus_,
that he lay down with twelve: which was, saith _Julius Capitolinus,
præter exempla majorum_, not according to the custom of his
Predecessors, except it were at publick and nuptial suppers. The regular
number was also exceeded in this last supper, whereat there were no less
than thirteen, and in no place fewer than ten, for, as _Josephus_
delivereth, it was not lawful to celebrate the Passover with fewer than
that number.
Lastly, For the disposing and ordering of the persons: The first and
middle beds were for the guests, the third and lowest for the Master of
the house and his family; he always lying in the first place of the last
bed, that is, next the middle bed; but if the wife or children were
absent, their rooms were supplied by the Umbræ, or hangers on, according
to that of _Juvenal_ [SN: _Who the Umbræ were at banquets._]----_Locus
est et pluribus Umbris._ For the guests, the honourablest place in every
bed was the first, excepting the middle or second bed; wherein the most
honourable Guest of the feast was placed in the last place, because by
that position he might be next the Master of the feast [SN: _Iul.
Scalig. familiarium exercitationum Problema 1._]. For the Master lying
in the first of the last bed, and the principal Guest in the last place
of the second, they must needs be next each other; as this figure doth
plainly declare, and whereby we may apprehend the feast of _Perpenna_
made unto _Sertorius_, described by _Salustius_, whose words we shall
thus read with _Salmasius_: _Igitur discubuere, Sertorius inferior in
medio lecto, supra Fabius; Antonius in summo; Infra Scriba Sertorii
Versius; alter scriba Mæcenas in Imo, medius inter Tarquitium et Dominum
Perpennam._
Ultimus
Honoratissimus Locus Summus
Infra Medius Supra
+--------------------------------+
|L. Fabius Locus Vacuus Sertorius|
| Medius Lectus |
+----------+--------------------------------+------------+
L | | | |
o S | | | | U
c e | | | |I l
u u S| | | |n t
s u|Perpenna | |Versinis |f i
D p|Dominus | | |r m
S o r| | | |a u
u m a| | | | s
m i | | | |
m n | | | |
u i | | | |
s | | | |
| | | |
M| | | |M
e| | |Locus |e
d|Mæcenas | |Vacuus |d
i|Imus | |Summus |i
u|Lectus | |Lectus |u
s| | | |s
| | | |
| | | | P
U| | | | S r
l| | | | e i
t| | | |S u m
i|Tarquitius| | Antonius |u u
m| | | |p S s
u| | | |r u
s| | | |a m L
| | | | m o
| | | | u c
| | | | s u
| | | | s
At this feast there were but seven; the middle places of the highest and
middle bed being vacant; and hereat was _Sertorius_ the General and
principal guest slain. And so may we make out what is delivered by
_Plutarch_ in his life, that lying on his back, and raising himself up,
_Perpenna_ cast himself upon his stomack; which he might very well do,
being Master of the feast, and lying next unto him. And thus also from
this Tricliniary disposure, we may illustrate that obscure expression of
_Seneca_; That the Northwind was in the middle, the North-East on the
higher side, and the North-West on the lower. For as appeareth in the
circle of the winds, the North-East will answer the bed of _Antonius_,
and the North-West that of _Perpenna_.
That the custom of feasting upon beds was in use among the _Hebrews_,
many deduce from _Ezekiel_[SN: Ezek. 23.]. Thou sattest upon a stately
bed, and a table prepared before it. The custom of Discalceation or
putting off their shoes at meals, is conceived to confirm the same; as
by that means keeping their beds clean; and therefore they had a
peculiar charge to eat the Passover with their shooes on; which
Injunction were needless, if they used not to put them off. However it
were in times of high antiquity, probable it is that in after ages they
conformed unto the fashions of the _Assyrians_ and Eastern Nations, and
lastly of the _Romans_, being reduced by _Pompey_ unto a Provincial
subjection.
That this discumbency at meals was in use in the days of our Saviour, is
conceived probable from several speeches of his expressed in that
phrase, even unto common Auditors, as _Luke_ 14. _Cum invitatus fueris
ad nuptias, non discumbas in primo loco_, and besides many more,
_Matthew_ 23. When reprehending the _Scribes_ and _Pharises_, he saith,
_Amant protoclisias, id est, primos recubitus in cænis, et
protocathedrias, sive, primas cathedras, in Synagogis_: wherein the
terms are very distinct, and by an Antithesis do plainly distinguish the
posture of sitting, from this of lying on beds. The consent of the
_Jews_ with the _Romans_ in other ceremonies and rites of feasting,
makes probable their conformity in this. The _Romans_ washed, were
anointed, and wore a cenatory garment: and that the same was practised
by the _Jews_, is deduceable from that expostulation of our Saviour with
_Simon_[SN: Luke 7.], that he washed not his feet, nor anointed his head
with oyl; the common civilities at festival entertainments; and that
expression of his concerning the cenatory or wedding garment [SN: Matth.
22.]; and as some conceive of the linnen garment of the young man or St.
_John_; which might be the same he wore the night before at the last
Supper.
That they used this gesture at the Passover, is more than probable from
the testimony of _Jewish_ Writers, and particularly of _Ben-maimon_
recorded by _Scaliger De emendatione temporum_. After the second cup
according to the Institution. [SN: Exod. 12.] The Son asketh, what
meaneth this service? Then he that maketh the declaration, saith, How
different is this night from all other nights? for all other nights we
wash but once but this night twice; all other we eat leavened or
unleavened bread, but this only leavened; all other we eat flesh
roasted, boyled or baked, but this only roasted, all other nights we eat
together lying or sitting, but this only lying along. And this posture
they used as a token of rest and security which they enjoyed, far
different from that at the eating of the Passover in _Ægypt_.
That this gesture was used when our Saviour eat the Passover, is not
conceived improbable from the words whereby the Evangelists express the
same, that is, ἀναπίπτειν, ἀνακεῖσθαι, κατακεῖσθαι, ἀνακλειθῆναι, which
terms do properly signifie this Gesture in _Aristotle_, _Athenæus_,
_Euripides_, _Sophocles_, and all humane Authors; and the like we meet
with in the paraphrastical expression of _Nonnus_.
Lastly, If it be not fully conceded, that this gesture was used at the
Passover, yet that it was observed at the last supper, seems almost
incontrovertible: for at this feast or cenatory convention, learned men
make more than one supper, or at least many parts thereof. The first was
that Legal one of the Passover, or eating of the Paschal Lamb with
bitter herbs, and ceremonies described by _Moses_. Of this it is
said, [SN: Matth. 26.] then when the even was come he sat down with the
twelve. This is supposed when it is said, [SN: John 13.] that the supper
being ended, our Saviour arose, took a towel and washed the disciples
feet. The second was common and Domestical, consisting of ordinary and
undefined provisions; of this it may be said, that our Saviour took his
garment, and sat down again, after he had washed the Disciples feet, and
performed the preparative civilities of suppers; at this 'tis conceived
the sop was given unto _Judas_, the Original word implying some broath
or decoction, not used at the Passover. The third or latter part was
Eucharistical, which began at the breaking and blessing of the bread,
according to that of _Matthew_, And as they were eating, Jesus took
bread and blessed it.
Now although at the Passover or first supper, many have doubted this
Reclining posture, and some have affirmed that our Saviour stood; yet
that he lay down at the other, the same men have acknowledged, as
_Chrysostom_, _Theophylact_, _Austin_, and many more. And if the
tradition will hold, the position is unquestionable; for the very
Triclinium is to be seen at _Rome_, brought thither by _Vespasian_, and
graphically set forth by _Casalius_[SN: De veterum ritibus.].
Thus may it properly be made out; what is delivered, _John_ 13. _Erat
recumbens unus ex Discipulis ejus in sinu Jesu quem diligebat_; Now
there was leaning on Jesus bosom one of his Disciples whom Jesus loved;
which gesture will not so well agree unto the position of sitting, but
is natural, and cannot be avoided in the Laws of accubation. And the
very same expression is to be found in _Pliny_, concerning the Emperour
_Nerva_ and _Veiento_ whom he favoured; _Cœnabat Nerva cum paucis,
Veiento recumbebat proprius atque etiam in sinu_; and from this custom
arose the word ἐπιστήθιος, that is, a near and bosom friend. And
therefore _Causabon_ [SN: _Not_ in Evan.] justly rejecteth
_Theophylact_; who not considering the ancient manner of decumbency,
imputed this gesture of the beloved Disciple unto Rusticity, or an act
of incivility. And thus also have some conceived, it may be more plainly
made out what is delivered of _Mary Magdalen_[SN: Luke 7.]. That she
stood at Christs feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet
with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head. Which actions,
if our Saviour sat, she could not perform standing, and had rather stood
behind his back, than at his feet. And therefore it is not allowable,
what is observable in many pieces, and even of _Raphael Urbin_; wherein
_Mary Magdalen_ is pictured before our Saviour, washing his feet on her
knees; which will not consist with the strict description and letter of
the Text.
Now whereas this position may seem to be discountenanced by our
Translation, which usually renders it sitting, it cannot have that
illation, for the _French_ and _Italian_ Translations expressing neither
position of session or recubation, do only say that he placed himself
at the table; and when ours expresseth the same by sitting, it is in
relation unto our custom, time, and apprehension. The like upon occasion
is not unusual: so when it is said, _Luke_ 4. πτύξας τὸ βιβλίον, and the
Vulgar renders it, _Cum plicasset librum_, ours translateth it, he shut
or closed the book; which is an expression proper unto the paginal books
of our times, but not so agreeable unto volumes or rolling books in use
among the _Jews_, not only in elder times, but even unto this day. [SN:
_What_ Denarius, _or the penny in the Gospel is_.] So when it is said,
the _Samaritan_ delivered unto the host two pence for the provision of
the _Levite_; and when our Saviour agreed with the Labourers for a penny
a day, in strict translation it should be seven pence half penny; and is
not to be conceived our common penny, the sixtieth part of an ounce. For
the word in the Original is δηνάριον, in Latine, _Denarius_, and with
the _Romans_ did value the eight part of an ounce, which after five
shillings the ounce amounteth unto seven pence half penny of our money.
Lastly, Whereas it might be conceived that they eat the Passover
standing rather than sitting, or lying down, according to the
Institution, _Exod._ 12. [SN: _Ceremonies of the Passover omitted._]
Thus shall you eat, with your loins girded, your shooes on your feet,
and your staff in your hand; the _Jews_ themselves reply, this was not
required of succeeding generations, and was not observed, but in the
Passover of _Ægypt_. And so also many other injunctions were afterward
omitted, as the taking up of the Paschal Lamb, from the tenth day, the
eating of it in their houses dispersed; the striking of the blood on the
door posts, and the eating thereof in hast. Solemnities and Ceremonies
primitively enjoyned, afterward omitted; as was also this of station,
for the occasion ceasing, and being in security, they applied
themselves unto gestures in use among them.
Now in what order of recumbancy Christ and the Disciples were disposed,
is not so easily determined. _Casalius_ from the Lateran Triclinium will
tell us, that there being thirteen, five lay down in the first bed, five
in the last, and three in the middle bed; and that our Saviour possessed
the upper place thereof. That _John_ lay in the same bed seems plain,
because he leaned on our Saviours bosom. That _Peter_ made the third in
that bed, conjecture is made, because he beckened unto _John_, as being
next to him, to ask of Christ, who it was that should betray him. That
_Judas_ was not far off seems probable, not only because he dipped in
the same dish, but because he was so near, that our Saviour could hand
the sop unto him.
CHAPTER VII
Of the Picture of our Saviour with long hair.
Another Picture there is of our Saviour described with long hair,
according to the custom of the _Jews_, and his description sent by
_Lentulus_ unto the Senate. Wherein indeed the hand of the Painter is
not accusable, but the judgement of the common Spectator; conceiving he
observed this fashion of his hair; because he was a _Nazarite_, and
confounding a _Nazarite_ by vow, with those by birth or education.
The _Nazarite_ by vow is declared, _Numb._ 6. And was to refrain three
things, drinking of Wine, cutting the hair, and approaching unto the
dead; and such a one was _Sampson_. Now that our Saviour was a
_Nazarite_ after this kind, we have no reason to determine; for he drank
Wine, and was therefore called by the _Pharisees_, a Wine-bibber; he
approached also the dead, as when he raised from death _Lazarus_, and
the daughter of _Jairus_.
The other _Nazarite_ was a Topical appellation, and appliable unto such
as were born in _Nazareth_, a City of _Galilee_, and in the Tribe of
_Napthali_. Neither if strictly taken was our Saviour in this sense a
_Nazarite_; for he was born in _Bethlehem_ in the Tribe of _Judah_; but
might receive that name, because he abode in that City; and was not only
conceived therein, but there also passed the silent part of his life,
after his return from _Ægypt_; as is delivered by _Matthew_, And he came
and dwelt in a City called _Nazareth_, that it might be fulfilled which
was spoken by the Prophet, He shall be called a _Nazarene_. Both which
kinds of _Nazarites_, as they are distinguishable by _Zain_, and _Tsade_
in the Hebrew, so in the Greek, by _Alpha_ and _Omega_; for as
_Jansenius_ observeth, [SN: Ians. Concordia Evangelica.] where the
votary _Nazarite_ is mentioned, it is written, Ναζαραῖός, as _Levit._ 6.
and _Lament._ 4. Where it is spoken of our Saviour, we read it,
Ναζωρεῖος, as in _Matthew_, _Luke_ and _John_; only _Mark_ who writ his
Gospel at _Rome_, did Latinize, and wrote it Ναζαρηνός.
CHAPTER VIII
Of the Picture of _Abraham_ sacrificing _Isaac_.
In the Picture of the Immolation of _Isaac_, or _Abraham_ sacrificing
his son, _Isaac_ is described as a little boy; which notwithstanding is
not consentaneous unto the authority of Expositors, or the circumstance
of the Text. For therein it is delivered that _Isaac_ carried on his
back the wood for the sacrifice; which being an holocaust or burnt
offering to be consumed unto ashes, we cannot well conceive a burthen
for a boy; but such a one unto _Isaac_, as that which it typified was
unto Christ, that is, the wood or cross whereon he suffered; which was
too heavy a load for his shoulders, and was fain to be relieved therein
by _Simon_ of _Cyrene_.
Again, He was so far from a boy, that he was a man grown, and at his
full stature, if we believe _Josephus_, who placeth him in the last of
_Adolescency_, and makes him twenty five years old. And whereas in the
Vulgar Translation he is termed _puer_, it must not be strictly
apprehended (for that age properly endeth in puberty, and extendeth but
unto fourteen) but respectively unto _Abraham_, who was at that time
above sixscore. And therefore also herein he was not unlike unto him,
who was after led dumb unto the slaughter, and commanded by others, who
had legions at command; that is, in meekness and humble submission. For
had he resisted, it had not been in the power of his aged parent to have
enforced; and many at his years have performed such acts, as few besides
at any. [SN: _Men of eminent fame and prowess at 25._] _David_ was too
strong for a Lion and a Bear; _Pompey_ had deserved the name of Great;
_Alexander_ of the same cognomination was _Generalissimo_ of _Greece_;
and _Anibal_ but one year after, succeeded _Asdruball_ in that memorable
war against the _Romans_.
CHAPTER IX
Of the Picture of _Moses_ with horns.
In many pieces, and some of ancient Bibles, _Moses_ is described with
horns. The same description we find in a silver Medal; that is, upon one
side _Moses_ horned, and on the reverse the commandment against
sculptile Images. Which is conceived to be a coynage of some _Jews_, in
derision of Christians, who first began that Pourtract.
The ground of this absurdity, was surely a mistake of the Hebrew Text,
in the history of _Moses_ when he descended from the Mount; [SN: Exod.
34.29, 35.] upon the affinity of _Kæren_ and _Karan_, that is, an horn,
and to shine, which is one quality of horn: The Vulgar Translation
conforming unto the former. _Ignorabat quod cornuta esset facies ejus.
Qui videbant faciem Mosis esse cornutam._ But the _Chaldee_ paraphrase,
translated by _Paulus Fagius_, hath otherwise expressed it. _Moses
nesciebat quod multus esset splendor gloriæ vultus ejus. Et viderunt
filii Israel quod multa esset claritas gloriæ faciei Moses._ The
expression of the Septuagint is as large, δεδόξασται ἡ ὄψις τοῦ χρώματος
τοῦ προσώπου, _Glorificatus est aspectus cutis, seu coloris faciei._
And this passage of the Old Testament, is well explained by another of
the New [SN: 2 Cor. 3.]; wherein it is delivered, that they could not
stedfastly behold the face of _Moses_, Διὰ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ προσώπου; that
is, for the glory of his countenance. And surely the exposition of one
Text is best performed by another; men vainly interposing their
constructions, where the Scripture decideth the controversie. And
therefore some have seemed too active in their expositions, who in the
story of _Rahab_ the harlot, have given notice that the word also
signifieth an Hostess; for in the Epistle to the _Hebrews_, she is
plainly termed πὁρνη, which signifies not an Hostess, but a pecuniary
and prostituting Harlot [SN: _What kind of Harlot she was, read_ Camar.
De vita Eliæ.]; a term applied unto _Lais_ by the _Greeks_, and
distinguished from ἕταιρα, or _amica_, as may appear in the thirteenth
of _Athenæus_.
And therefore more allowable is the Translation of _Tremellius, Quod
splendida facta esset cutis facici ejus_; or as _Estius_ hath
interpreted it, _facies ejus erat radiosa_, his face was radiant, and
dispersing beams like many horns and cones about his head; which is also
consonant unto the original signification, and yet observed in the
pieces of our Saviour, and the Virgin _Mary_, who are commonly drawn
with scintillations, or radient Halo's about their head; which after the
_French_ expression are usually termed, the Glory.
Now if besides this occasional mistake, any man shall contend a
propriety in this picture, and that no injury is done unto Truth by this
description, because an horn is the Hieroglyphick of authority, power
and dignity, and in this Metaphor is often used in Scripture; the piece
I confess in this acception is harmless and agreeable unto _Moses_: and
under such emblematical constructions, we find that _Alexander_ the
Great, and _Attila_ King of _Hunnes_, in ancient Medals are described
with horns. But if from the common mistake, or any solary consideration
we persist in this description, we vilify the mystery of the
irradiation, and authorize a dangerous piece conformable unto that of
_Jupiter Hammon_; which was the Sun, and therefore described with horns;
as is delivered by _Macrobius; Hammonem quem Deum solem occidentem
Lybies existimant, arietinis cornibus fingunt, quibus id animal valet,
sicut radiis sol_. We herein also imitate the Picture of _Pan_, and
_Pagan_ emblem of Nature. And if (as _Macrobius_ and very good Authors
concede) _Bacchus_, (who is also described with horns) be the same Deity
with the Sun; and if (as _Vossius_ well contendeth) [SN: Moses _and_
Bacchus _supposed to be the same person_, De origine Idolatriæ.]
_Moses_ and _Bacchus_ were the same person; their descriptions must be
relative, or the Tauricornous picture of the one, perhaps the same with
the other.
CHAPTER X
Of the Scutcheons of the Tribes of Israel.
We will not pass over the Scutcheons of the Tribes of _Israel_, as they
are usually described in the Maps of _Canaan_ and several other pieces;
generally conceived to be the proper coats, and distinctive badges of
their several Tribes. So _Reuben_ is conceived to bear three Bars wave,
_Judah_ a Lyon Rampant, _Dan_ a Serpent nowed, _Simeon_ a sword inpale
the point erected, etc. The ground whereof is the last Benediction of
_Jacob_[SN: Gen. 49.], wherein he respectively draweth comparisons from
things here represented.
Now herein although we allow a considerable measure of truth, yet
whether as they are usually described, these were the proper
cognizances, and coat-arms of the Tribes; whether in this manner
applyed, and upon the grounds presumed, material doubts remain.
For first, They are not strictly made out, from the Prophetical blessing
of _Jacob_; for _Simeon_ and _Levi_ have distinct coats, that is, a
Sword, and the two Tables, yet are they by _Jacob_ included in one
Prophesie, _Simeon_ and _Levi_ are brethren, Instruments of cruelties
are in their habitations. So _Joseph_ beareth an Ox, whereof
notwithstanding there is no mention in this Prophesie; for therein it is
said _Joseph_ is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; by
which repitition are intimated the two Tribes descending from him,
_Ephraim_ and _Manasses_; whereof notwithstanding _Ephraim_ only beareth
an Ox: True it is, that many years after in the benediction of _Moses_,
it is said of _Joseph_[SN: Deut. 33.], His glory is like the firstlings
of his Bullock: and so we may concede, what _Vossius_ learnedly
declareth, that the _Ægyptians_ represented _Joseph_, in the Symbole of
an Ox; for thereby was best implied the dream of _Pharoah_, which he
interpreted, the benefit by Agriculture, and provident provision of corn
which he performed; and therefore did _Serapis_ bear a bushel upon his
head.
Again, If we take these two benedictions together, the resemblances are
not appropriate, and _Moses_ therein conforms not unto _Jacob_: for that
which in the Prophesie of _Jacob_ is appropriated unto one, is in the
blessing of _Moses_ made common unto others. So whereas _Judah_ is
compared unto a Lion by _Jacob_, _Judah_ is a Lions whelp, the same is
applied unto _Dan_ by _Moses_, _Dan_ is a Lions whelp, he shall leap
from _Bashan_, and also unto _Gad_; he dwelleth as a Lion.
Thirdly, If a lion were the proper coat of _Judah_, yet were it not
probably a Lion Rampant, as it is commonly described, but rather
couchant or dormant, as some _Heralds_ and _Rabbins_ do determine;
according to the letter of the Text, _Recumbens dormisti ut Leo_, He
couched as a Lion, and as a young Lion, who shall rouse him?
Lastly, when it is said, [SN: Num. 2.] Every man of the Children of
_Israel_ shall pitch by his own standard with the Ensign of their
fathers house; upon enquiry what these standards and ensigns were there
is no small incertainty; and men conform not unto the Prophesie of
_Jacob_. Christian expositors are fain herein to rely upon the
_Rabbins_, who notwithstanding are various in their traditions, and
confirm not these common descriptions. For as for inferiour ensigns,
either of particular bands or houses, they determine nothing at all; and
of the four principal or Legionary standards, that is, of _Judah_,
_Reuben_, _Ephraim_, and _Dan_ (under every one whereof marched three
Tribes) they explain them very variously. _Jonathan_ who compiled the
Thargum conceives the colours of these banners to answer the precious
stones in the breast-plate, and upon which the names of the Tribes were
engraven. [SN: _The like also_ P. Fagius _upon the Thargum or_ Chaldie
_Paraphrase of_ Onkelus. Num. 1.] So the standard for the Camp of
_Judah_ was of three colours, according unto the stones, Chalcedony,
Saphir and Sardonix; and therein were expressed the names of the three
Tribes, [SN: Num. 10.] _Judah_, _Isachar_, and _Zabulon_, and in the
middest thereof was written, Rise up Lord, and let thy enemies be
scattered, and let them that hate thee flee before thee; in it was also
the pourtrait of a Lion. The standard of _Reuben_ was also of three
colours, Sardine, Topaz, and Amethyst; therein were expressed the names
of _Reuben_, _Simeon_, and _Gad_, in the middest was written, [SN: Deut.
6.] Hear, O _Israel_, The Lord our God, the Lord is one: Therein was
also the pourtraiture of a Hart. But _Abenezra_ and others, beside the
colours of the field, do set down other charges, in _Reubens_ the form
of a man or mandrake, in that of _Judah_ a Lion, in _Ephraims_ an Ox, in
_Dan's_ the figure of an Eagle.
And thus indeed the four figures in the banners of the principal
squadrons of _Israel_ are answerable unto the Cherubins in the vision of
_Ezekiel_[SN: Ezek. 1.]; every one carrying the form of all these. As
for the likeness of their faces, they four had the likeness of the face
of a Man, and the face of a Lion on the right side, and they four had
the face of an Ox on the left side, they four had also the face of an
Eagle. [SN: _The common Pictures of the 4 Evangelists explicated._] And
conformable hereunto the pictures of the Evangelists (whose Gospels are
the Christian banners) are set forth with the addition of a man or
Angel, an Ox, a Lion, and a Eagle. And these symbolically represent the
office of Angels, and Ministers of Gods Will; in whom is required
understanding as in a man, courage and vivacity as in the Lion, service
and ministerial officiousness, as in the Ox, expedition or celerity of
execution, as in the Eagle.
From hence therefore we may observe that these descriptions, the most
authentick of any, are neither agreeable unto one another, nor unto the
Scutcheons in question. For though they agree in _Ephraim_ and _Judah_,
that is, the Ox and the Lion, yet do they differ in those of _Dan_, and
_Reuben_, as far as an Eagle is different from a Serpent, and the figure
of a Man, Hart, or Mandrake, from three Bars wave. [SN: _The Antiquity
of bearing Scutcheons._] Wherein notwithstanding we rather declare the
incertainty of Arms in this particular, than any way question their
antiquity; for hereof more ancient examples there are, than the
Scutcheons of the Tribes, if _Osyris_, _Mizraim_ or _Jupiter_ the Just,
were the Son of _Cham_; for of his two Sons, as _Diodorus_ delivereth,
the one for his Device gave a Dog, the other a Wolf. And, beside the
shield of _Achilles_, and many ancient _Greeks_: if we receive the
conjecture of _Vossius_, that the Crow upon _Corvinus_ his head, was but
the figure of that Animal upon his helmet, it is an example of Antiquity
among the _Romans_.
But more widely must we walk, if we follow the doctrine of the
_Cabalists_[SN: _Ricius_[4] de cœlesti Agricultura, lib. 4.], who in
each of the four banners inscribe a letter of the Tetragrammaton, or
quadriliteral name of God: and mysterizing their ensigns, do make the
particular ones of the twelve Tribes, accommodable unto the twelve signs
in the Zodiack, and twelve moneths in the year: but the Tetrarchical or
general banners, of _Judah_, _Reuben_, _Ephraim_, and _Dan_, unto the
signs of Aries, Cancer, Libra and Capricornus: that is, the four
cardinal parts of the Zodiack, and seasons of the year.
[4] _Recius_, 1650, 1658, 1669, 1672, 1686.
CHAPTER XI
Of the Pictures of the _Sibyls_.
The Pictures of the _Sibyls_ are very common, and for their Prophesies
of Christ in high esteem with Christians; described commonly with
youthful faces, and in a defined number. Common pieces making twelve,
and many precisely ten; observing therein the account of _Varro_, that
is, _Sibylla_, _Delphica_, _Erythræa_, _Samia_, _Cumana_, _Cumæa_, or
_Cimmeria_, _Hellespontiaca_, _Lybica_, _Phrygia_, _Tiburtina_,
_Persica_. In which enumeration I perceive learned men are not
satisfied, and many conclude an irreconcilable incertainty; some making
more, others fewer, and not this certain number. For _Suidas_, though he
affirm that in divers ages there were ten, yet the same denomination he
affordeth unto more; _Boysardus_ in his Tract of Divination hath set
forth the Icons of these Ten, yet addeth two others, _Epirotica_, and
_Ægyptia_; and some affirm that Prophesying women were generally named
_Sibyls_.
Others make them fewer: _Martianus Capella_ two; _Pliny_ and _Solinus_
three; _Ælian_ four; and _Salmasius_ in effect but seven. For
discoursing hereof in his _Plinian_ Exercitations, he thus determineth;
_Ridere licet hodiernos Pictores, qui tabulas proponunt Cumanæ, Cumeæ,
et Erythrææ, quasi trium diversarum Sibyllarum; cum una cademque fuerit
Cumana, Cumæa, et Erythræa, ex plurium et doctissimorum Authorum
sententia._ _Boysardus_ gives us leave to opinion there was no more than
one; for so doth he conclude, _In tanta Scriptorum varietate liberum
relinquimus Lectori credere, an una et eadem in diversis regionibus
peregrinata, cognomen sortita sit ab iis locis ubi oracula reddidisse
comperitur, an plures extiterint_: And therefore not discovering a
resolution of their number from pens of the best Writers, we have no
reason to determine the same from the hand and pencil of Painters.
As touching their age, that they are generally described as young women,
History will not allow; for the Sibyl whereof _Virgil_ speaketh is
termed by him _longæva sacerdos_, and _Servius_ in his Comment
amplifieth the same. The other that sold the books unto _Tarquin_, and
whose History is plainer than any, by _Livie_ and _Gellius_ is termed
_Anus_; that is, properly no woman of ordinary age, but full of years,
and in the dayes of dotage, according to the Etymology of _Festus_[SN:
Anus, quasi Ἀnoῦs, sine mente.]; and consonant unto the History; wherein
it is said, that _Tarquin_ thought she doted with old age. Which duly
perpended, the _Licentia pictoria_ is very large; with the same reason
they may delineate old _Nestor_ like _Adonis_, _Hecuba_ with _Helens_
face, and Time with _Absolons_ head. But this absurdity that eminent
Artist _Michael Angelo_ hath avoided, in the Pictures of the _Cumean_
and _Persian_ Sibyls, as they stand described from the printed
sculptures of _Adam Mantuanus_.
CHAPTER XII
Of the Picture describing the death of
_Cleopatra_.
The Picture concerning the death of _Cleopatra_ with two Asps or
venemous Serpents unto her arms, or breasts, or both, requires
consideration: for therein (beside that this variety is not excusable)
the thing it self is questionable; nor is it indisputably certain what
manner of death she died. _Plutarch_ in the life of _Antony_ plainly
delivereth, that no man knew the manner of her death; for some affirmed
she perished by poison, which she alwayes carried in a little hollow
comb, and wore it in her hair. Beside, there were never any Asps
discovered in the place of her death, although two of her maids perished
also with her; only it was said, two small and almost insensible pricks
were found upon her arm; which was all the ground that _Cæsar_ had to
presume the manner of her death. _Galen_ who was contemporary unto
_Plutarch_, delivereth two wayes of her death: that she killed her self
by the bite of an Asp, or bit an hole in her arm, and poured poison
therein. _Strabo_ that lived before them both hath also two opinions;
that she died by the bite of an Asp, or else a poisonous ointment.
We might question the length of the Asps, which are sometimes described
exceeding short; whereas the Chersæa or land-Asp which most conceive she
used, is above four cubits long. Their number is not unquestionable; for
whereas there are generally two described, _Augustus_ (as _Plutarch_
relateth) did carry in his triumph the Image of _Cleopatra_ but with one
Asp under her arm. As for the two pricks, or little spots in her arm,
they infer not their plurality: for like the Viper, the Asp hath two
teeth; whereby it left this impression, or double puncture behind it.
And lastly, We might question the place; for some apply them unto her
breast, which notwithstanding will not consist with the History; and
_Petrus Victorius_ hath well observed the same. But herein the mistake
was easie; it being the custom in capital malefactors to apply them unto
the breast, as the Author _De Theriaca ad Pisonem_, an eye witness
hereof in _Alexandria_, where _Cleopatra_ died, determineth: I beheld,
saith he, in _Alexandria_, how suddenly these Serpents bereave a man of
life; for when any one is condemned to this kind of death, if they
intend to use him favourably, that is, to dispatch him suddenly, they
fasten an Asp unto his breast; and bidding him walk about, he presently
perisheth thereby.
CHAPTER XIII
Of the Pictures of the Nine Worthies.
The Pictures of the nine Worthies are not unquestionable, and to
critical spectators may seem to contain sundry improprieties. Some will
enquire why _Alexander_ the Great is described upon an Elephant: for, we
do not find he used that animal in his armies, much less in his own
person; but his horse is famous in History, and its name alive to this
day. Beside, he fought but one remarkable battel, wherein there were any
Elephants, and that was with _Porus_ King of _India_; in which
notwithstanding, as _Curtius_, _Arrianus_, and _Plutarch_ report, he was
on Horseback himself. And if because he fought against Elephants, he is
with propriety set upon their backs; with no less or greater reason is
the same description agreeable unto _Judas Maccabeus_, as may be
observed from the history of the _Maccabees_; and also unto _Julius
Cæsar_, whose triumph was honoured with captive Elephants, as may be
observed in the order thereof, set forth by _Jacobus Laurus_[SN: In
splendere urbis Antiquæ.]. And if also we should admit this description
upon an Elephant, yet were not the manner thereof unquestionable, that
is, in his ruling the beast alone; for beside the Champion upon their
back, there was also a guide or ruler, which sat more forward to command
or guide the beast. Thus did King _Porus_ ride when he was overthrown by
_Alexander_; and thus are also the towred Elephants described, _Maccab._
2. 6. Upon the beasts there were strong towers of wood, which covered
every one of them, and were girt fast unto them by devices: there were
also upon every one of them thirty two strong men, beside the _Indian_
that ruled them.
Others will demand, not only why _Alexander_ upon an Elephant, but
_Hector_ upon an Horse: whereas his manner of fighting, or presenting
himself in battel, was in a Chariot, as did the other noble _Trojans_,
who as _Pliny_ affirmeth were the first inventers thereof. The same way
of fight is testified by _Diodorus_, and thus delivered by Sir _Walter
Rawleigh_. Of the vulgar little reckoning was made, for they fought all
on foot, slightly armed, and commonly followed the success of their
Captains; who rode not upon horses, but in Chariots drawn by two or
three Horses. And this was also the ancient way of fight among the
_Britains_, as is delivered by _Diodorus_, _Cæsar_, and _Tacitus_; and
there want not some who have taken advantage hereof, and made it one
argument of their original from _Troy_.
[Sidenote: _The use of stirrops not ancient._]
Lastly, By any man versed in Antiquity, the question can hardly be
avoided, why the Horses of these Worthies, especially of _Cæsar_, are
described with the furniture of great saddles, and stirrops; for saddles
largely taken, though some defence there may be, yet that they had not
the use of stirrops, seemeth of lesser doubt; as _Pancirollus_ hath
observed, as _Polydore Virgil_, and _Petrus Victorius_ have
confirmed, [SN: De inventione rerum, variæ Lectiones.] expresly
discoursing hereon; as is observable from _Pliny_, and cannot escape our
eyes in the ancient monuments, medals and Triumphant arches of the
_Romans_. Nor is there any ancient classical word in Latine to express
them. For _Staphia_, _Stapes_ or _Stapeda_ is not to be found in Authors
of this Antiquity. And divers words which may be urged of this
signification, are either later, or signified not thus much in the time
of _Cæsar_. And therefore as _Lipsius_ observeth, lest a thing of common
use should want a common word, _Franciscus Philelphus_ named them
_Stapedas_, and _Bodinus Subicus_ Pedaneos. And whereas the name might
promise some Antiquity, because among the three small bones in the
Auditory Organ, by Physitians termed _Incus_, _Malleus_ and _stapes_,
one thereof from some resemblance doth bear this name; these bones were
not observed, much less named by _Hippocrates_, _Galen_, or any ancient
Physitian. But as _Laurentius_ observeth, concerning the invention of
the stapes or stirrop bone, there is some contention between _Columbus_
and _Ingrassias_; the one of _Sicilia_, the other of _Cremona_, and both
within the compass of this Century.
The same is also deduceable from very approved Authors: _Polybius_
speaking of the way which _Anibal_ marched into _Italy_, useth the word
βεβημάτισται, that is, saith _Petrus Victorius_, it was stored with
devices for men to get upon their horses, which ascents were termed
_Bemata_, and in the life of _Caius Gracchus_, _Plutarch_ expresseth as
much. For endevouring to ingratiate himself with the people, besides the
placing of stones at every miles end, he made at nearer distances
certain elevated places, and Scalary ascents, that by the help thereof
they might with better ease ascend or mount their Horses. Now if we
demand how Cavaliers then destitute of stirrops did usually mount their
Horses; as _Lipsius_ informeth the unable and softer sort of men had
their ἀναβολεῖς, or Stratores, which helped them up on horse back, as in
the practice of _Crassus_ in _Plutarch_, and _Caracalla_ in
_Spartianus_, and the later example of _Valentinianus_, who because his
horse rised before that he could not be setled on his back, cut off the
right hand of his Strator. But how the active and hardy persons mounted,
_Vegetius_ [SN: De re Milit.] resolves us, that they used to vault or
leap up, and therefore they had wooden horses in their houses and
abroad: that thereby young men might enable themselves in this action:
wherein by instruction and practice they grew so perfect, that they
could vault up on the right or left, and that with their sword in hand,
according to that of _Virgil_
_Poscit equos atque arma simul, saltuque superbus
Emicat._
And again:
_Infrænant alii currus et corpora saltu
Injiciunt in equos._
So _Julius Pollux_ adviseth to teach horses to incline, dimit, and bow
down their bodies, that their riders may with better ease ascend them.
And thus may it more causally be made out, what _Hippocrates_ affirmeth
of the _Scythians_, that using continual riding, they were generally
molested with the Sciatica or hip-gout. Or what _Suetonius_ delivereth
of _Germanicus_, that he had slender legs, but encreased them by riding
after meals; that is, the humours descending upon their pendulosity,
they having no support or suppedaneous stability.
Now if any shall say that these are petty errors and minor lapses, not
considerably injurious unto truth, yet is it neither reasonable nor fair
to contemn inferiour falsities; but rather as between falshood and truth
there is no medium, so should they be maintained in their distances: nor
the contagion of the one, approach the sincerity of the other.
CHAPTER XIV
Of the Picture of _Jephthah_ sacryficing
his daughter.
[Sidenote: _That_ Jephthah _did not kill his daughter_.]
The hand of the Painter confidently setteth forth the Picture of
_Jephthah_ in the posture of _Abraham_, sacrificing his only daughter:
Thus is it commonly received, and hath had the attest of many worthy
Writers. Notwithstanding upon enquiry we find the matter doubtful, and
many upon probable grounds to have been of another opinion: conceiving
in this oblation not a natural but a civil kind of death, and a
separation only unto the Lord. For that he pursued not his vow unto a
literal oblation, there want not arguments both from the Text. [SN: Judg.
11.39] and reason.
For first, It is evident that she deplored her Virginity, and not her
death; Let me go up and down the mountains, and bewail my Virginity, I
and my fellows.
Secondly, When it is said, that _Jephthah_ did unto her according unto
his vow, it is immediately subjoyned, _Et non cognovit virum_, and she
knew no man; which as immediate in words, was probably most near in
sense unto the vow.
Thirdly, It is said in the Text, that the daughters of _Israel_ went
yearly to talk with the daughter of _Jephthah_ four dayes in the year;
which had she been sacrificed, they could not have done: For whereas the
word is sometime translated to lament, yet doth it also signifie to talk
or have conference with one, and by _Tremellius_, who was well able to
Judge of the Original, it is in this sense translated: _Ibant filii
Israelitarum, ad confabulandum cum filia Jephthaci, quatuor diebus
quotannis_: And so it is also set down in the marginal notes of our
Translation. And from this annual concourse of the daughters of
_Israel_, it is not improbable in future Ages, the daughter of
_Jephthah_ came to be worshipped as a Deity; and had by the _Samaritans_
an annual festivity observed unto her honour, as _Epiphanius_ hath left
recorded in the Heresie of the _Melchidecians_.
It is also repugnant unto reason; for the offering of mankind was
against the Law of God, who so abhorred humane sacrifice, that he
omitted not the oblation of unclean beasts, and confined his Altars but
unto few kinds of Animals, the Ox, the Goat, the Sheep, the Pigeon and
its kinds: In the cleansing of the Leper, there is I confess, mention
made of the Sparrow; but great dispute may be made whether it be
properly rendered. And therefore the Scripture with indignation
oft-times makes mention of humane sacrifice among the _Gentiles_; whose
oblations scarce made scruple of any Animal, sacrificing not only Man,
but Horses, Lions, Ægles; and though they come not into holocausts, yet
do we read the _Syrians_ did make oblations of fishes unto the goddess
_Derceto_. It being therefore a sacrifice so abominable unto God,
although he had pursued it, it is not probable the Priests and Wisdom of
_Israel_ would have permitted it; and that not only in regard of the
subject or sacrifice it self, but also the sacrificator, which the
Picture makes to be _Jephthah_; who was neither Priest, nor capable of
that Office: for he was a _Gileadite_, and as the Text affirmeth, the
son also of an harlot. And how hardly the Priesthood would endure
encroachment upon their function, a notable example there is in the
story of _Ozias_.
Secondly, The offering up of his daughter was not only unlawful, and
entrenched upon his Religion, but had been a course that had much
condemned his discretion; that is, to have punished himself in the
strictest observance of his vow, when as the Law of God had allowed an
evasion; that is, by way of commutation or redemption, according as is
determined, _Levit._ 27. Whereby if she were between the age of five and
twenty, she was to be estimated but at ten shekels, and if between
twenty and sixty, not above thirty. A sum that could never discourage an
indulgent Parent; it being but the value of servant slain; the
inconsiderable Salary of _Judas_; and will make no greater noise than
three pound fifteen shillings with us. And therefore their conceit is
not to be exploded, who say that from the story of _Jephthah_
sacrificing his own daughter, might spring the fable of _Agamemnon_,
delivering unto sacrifice his daughter _Iphigenia_, who was also
contemporary unto _Jephthah_: wherein to answer the ground that hinted
it, _Iphigenia_ was not sacrificed her self, but redeemed with an Hart,
which _Diana_ accepted for her.
Lastly, Although his vow run generally for the words, Whatsoever shall
come forth, etc. Yet might it be restrained in the sense, for whatsoever
was sacrificable, and justly subject to lawful immolation: and so would
not have sacrificed either Horse or Dog, if they had come out upon him.
Nor was he obliged by oath unto a strict observation of that which
promissorily was unlawful; or could he be qualified by vow to commit a
fact which naturally was abominable. Which doctrine had _Herod_
understood, it might have saved _John Baptists_ head; when he promised
by oath to give unto _Herodias_ whatsoever she would ask; that is, if
it were in the compass of things, which he could lawfully grant. For his
oath made not that lawful which was illegal before: and if it were
unjust to murther _John_, the supervenient Oath did not extenuate the
fact, or oblige the Juror unto it.
Now the ground at least which much promoted the opinion, might be the
dubious words of the text, which contain the sense of his vow; most men
adhering unto their common and obvious acception. Whatsoever shall come
forth of the doors of my house shall surely be the Lords, and I will
offer it up for a burnt offering. Now whereas it is said, _Erit Jehovæ,
et offeram illud holocaustum_, the word signifying both _et_ and _aut_,
it may be taken disjunctively; _aut offeram_, that is, it shall either
be the Lords by separation, or else, an holocaust by common oblation;
even as our marginal translation advertiseth; and as _Tremellius_
rendreth it, _Erit inquam Jehovæ, aut offeram illud holocaustum_: and
for the vulgar translation, it useth often _et_, where _aut_ must be
presumed, as _Exod._ 21. _Si quis percusserit patrem et matrem_, that
is, not both, but either. There being therefore two waies to dispose of
her, either to separate her unto the Lord, or offer her as a sacrifice,
it is of no necessity the later should be necessary; and surely less
derogatory unto the sacred text and history of the people of God, must
be the former.
CHAPTER XV
Of the Picture of _John_ the Baptist.
The Picture of _John_ the Baptist, in a Camels skin is very
questionable, and many I perceive have condemned it. The ground or
occasion of this description are the words of the holy Scripture,
especially of _Matthew_ and _Mark_, for _Luke_ and _John_ are silent
herein; by them it is delivered, his garment was of Camels hair, and had
a leather girdle about his loins. Now here it seems the Camels hair is
taken by Painters for the skin or pelt with the hair upon it. But this
Exposition will not so well consist with the strict acceptation of the
words; for _Mark_ 1. It is said, he was, ἐνδεδυμένος τρίχας καμήλου, and
_Matthew_ 3. εἶχε τὸ ἔνδυμα ἀπὸ τριχῶν καμήλου, that is, as the vulgar
translation, that of _Beza_, that of _Sixtus Quintus_, and _Clement_ the
eight hath rendred it, _vestimentum habebat è pilis camelinis_; which is
as ours translateth it, a garment of Camels hair; that is, made of some
texture of that hair, a course garment; a cilicious or sackcloth habit;
sutable to the austerity of his life; the severity of his Doctrine,
Repentance; and the place thereof, the wilderness, his food and diet,
locusts and wild hony. Agreeable unto the example of _Elias_ [SN: 2
Kings 3. 18.], who is said to be _vir pilosus_, that is, as _Tremellius_
interprets, _Veste villosa[5] cinctus_, answerable unto the habit of the
ancient Prophets, according to that of _Zachary_ [SN: Zach. 13.]. In
that day the Prophets shall be ashamed, neither shall they wear a rough
garment to deceive; and sutable to the Cilicious and hairy Vests of the
strictest Orders of Fryers, who derive the institution of their
Monastick life from the example of _John_ and _Elias_.
[5] _villoso_, 1646, 1650, 1658, 1669, 1672.
As for the wearing of skins, where that is properly intended, the
expression of the Scripture is plain; so it is said, _Heb._ 11. They
wandered about ἐν αἰγείοις δέρμασιν, that is, in Goats skins; and so it
is said of our first Parents, _Gen._ 3. That God made them χιτῶνας
δερματίνους, _Vestes pelliceas_, or coats of skins; which though a
natural habit unto all, before the invention of Texture, was something
more unto _Adam_, who had newly learned to die; for unto him a garment
from the dead, was but a dictate of death, and an habit of mortality.
Now if any man will say this habit of _John_ was neither of Camels skin,
nor any course Texture of its hair, but rather some finer Weave of
Camelot, Grograin or the like, in as much as these stuffs are supposed
to be made of the hair of that Animal, or because that _Ælian_
affirmeth, that Camels hair of _Persia_, is as fine as _Milesian_ wool,
wherewith the great ones of that place were cloathed; they have
discovered an habit, not only unsutable unto his leathern cincture, and
the coarseness of his life; but not consistent with the words of our
Saviour, when reasoning with the people concerning _John_, he saith,
What went you out into the wilderness to see? a man clothed in soft
raiment? Behold, they that wear soft raiment, are in Kings houses.
CHAPTER XVI
Of the Picture of St. _Christopher_.
The Picture of St. _Christopher_, that is, a man of a Giantlike stature,
bearing upon his shoulders our Saviour Christ, and with a staff in his
hand, wading thorow the water, is known unto Children, common over all
_Europe_, not only as a sign unto houses, but is described in many
Churches, and stands _Colossus_ like in the entrance of _Nostre Dame_ in
_Paris_.
Now from hence, common eyes conceive an history sutable unto this
description, that he carried our Saviour in his Minority over some river
or water: which notwithstanding we cannot at all make out. For we read
not thus much in any good Author, nor of any remarkable _Christopher_,
before the reign of _Decius_: who lived 250 years after Christ. This man
indeed according unto History suffered as a Martyr in the second year of
that Emperour, and in the _Roman_ Calendar takes up the 21 of _July_.
The ground that begat or promoted this opinion, was, first the fabulous
adjections of succeeding ages unto the veritable acts of this Martyr,
who in the most probable accounts was remarkable for his staff, and a
man of a goodly stature.
The second might be a mistake or misapprehension of the Picture, most
men conceiving that an History which was contrived at first but as an
Emblem or Symbolical fancy: as from the Annotations of _Baronius_ upon
the _Roman_ Martyrologie, _Lipellous_[SN: _Lip._ De vitis Sanctorum.] in
the life of St. _Christopher_ hath observed in these words; _Acta S.
Christopheri à multis depravata inveniuntur: quod quidem non aliunde
originem sumpsisse certum est, quam quod symbolicas figuras imperiti ad
veritatem successu temporis transtulerint: itaque cuncta illa de Sancto
Christophero pingi consueta, symbola potius, quam historiæ alicujus
existimandum est esse expressam imaginem_; that is, The Acts of St.
_Christopher_ are depraved by many: which surely began from no other
ground, then, that in process of time, unskilful men translated
symbolical figures unto real verities: and therefore what is usually
described in the Picture of St. _Christopher_, is rather to be received
as an Emblem, or Symbolical description, then any real History. Now what
Emblem this was, or what its signification, conjectures are many;
_Pierius_ hath set down one, that is, of the Disciple of Christ; for he
that will carry Christ upon his shoulders, must rely upon the staff of
his direction, whereon if he firmeth himself, he may be able to overcome
the billows of resistance, and in the vertue of this staff, like that of
_Jacob_, pass over the waters of _Jordan_. Or otherwise thus; He that
will submit shoulders unto Christ, shall by the concurrence of his power
encrease into the strength of a Giant; and being supported by the staff
of his holy Spirit, shall not be overwhelmed by the waves of the world,
but wade through all resistance.
Add also the mystical reasons of this pourtract alleadged by _Vida_ and
_Xerisanus_: and the recorded story of _Christopher_, that before his
Martyrdom he requested of God, that where ever his body were, the places
should be freed from pestilence and mischiefs, from infection. [SN:
Anton. Castellionæi antiquitates Mediolanenses.] And therefore his
picture or pourtract, was usually placed in publick wayes, and at the
entrance of Towns and Churches, according to the received Distich
_Christophorum videas, postea tutus eris._
CHAPTER XVII
Of the Picture of St. _George_.
The Picture of St. _George_ killing the Dragon, and, as most ancient
draughts do run, with the daughter of a King standing by, is famous
amongst Christians. And upon this description dependeth a solemn story,
how by this atchievement he redeemed a Kings daughter: which is more
especially believed by the _English_, whose Protector he is: and in
which form and history, according to his description in the _English_
Colledge at _Rome_, he is set forth in the Icons or Cuts of Martyrs by
_Cevalerius_: and all this according to the _Historia Lombardica_, or
golden legend of _Jacobus de Voragine_. Now of what authority soever
this piece be amongst us, it is I perceive received with different
beliefs: for some believe the person and the story; some the person, but
not the story; and others deny both.
That such a person there was, we shall not contend: for besides others,
Dr. _Heilin_ hath clearly asserted it in his History of St. _George_.
The indistinction of many in the community of name, or the
misapplication of the acts of one unto another, hath made some doubt
thereof. For of this name we meet with more then one in History, and no
less then two conceived of _Cappadocia_. The one an _Arrian_, who was
slain by the _Alexandrians_ in the time of _Julian_; the other a
valiant Souldier and Christian Martyr, beheaded in the reign of
_Dioclesian_. This is the _George_ conceived in this Picture, who hath
his day in the _Roman_ Calender, on whom so many fables are delivered,
whose story is set forth by _Metaphrastes_, and his miracles by
_Turonensis_.
As for the story depending hereon, some conceive as lightly thereof, as
of that of _Persius_ and _Andromeda_; conjecturing the one to be the
father of the other; and some too highly assert it. Others with better
moderation, do either entertain the same as a fabulous addition unto the
true and authentick story of St. _George_; or else conceive the literal
acception to be a misconstruction of the symbolical expression;
apprehending a veritable History, in an Emblem or piece of Christian
Poesie. And this Emblematical construction hath been received by men not
forward to extenuate the acts of Saints: as from _Baronius_, _Lipellous_
the _Carthusian_ hath delivered in the life of St. _George_; _Picturam
illam St._ Georgii _quâ effingitur eques armatus, qui hastæ cuspide
hostem interficit, juxta quam etiam virgo posita manus supplices tendens
ejus explorat auxilium, Symboli potius quam historiæ alicujus censenda
expressa imago. Consuevit quidem ut equestris militiæ miles equestri
imagine referri_: that is, The Picture of St. _George_, wherein he is
described like a Curassier or horseman compleatly armed, etc. Is rather
a symbolical image, then any proper figure.
Now in the Picture of this Saint and Souldier, might be implied the
Christian Souldier and true Champion of Christ. A horseman armed _Cap a
pe_, intimating the _Panoplia_ or compleat armour of a Christian;
combating with the Dragon, that is, with the Devil; in defence of the
Kings daughter, that is, the Church of God. And therefore although the
history be not made out, it doth not disparage the Knights and Noble
order of St. _George_: whose cognisance is honourable in the Emblem of
the Souldier of Christ, and is a worthy memorial to conform unto its
mystery. Nor, were there no such person at all, had they more reason to
be ashamed, then the Noble order of _Burgundy_, and Knights of the
Golden Fleece; whose badge is a confessed fable.
CHAPTER XVIII
Of the Picture of _Jerom_.
[Sidenote: _Clocks no very ancient invention._]
The Picture of _Jerom_ usually described at his study, with a Clock
hanging by, is not to be omitted; for though the meaning be allowable,
and probable it is that industrious Father did not let slip his time
without account; yet must not perhaps that Clock be set down to have
been his measure thereof. For Clocks or Automatous organs, whereby we
now distinguish of time, have found no mention in any ancient Writers
but are of late invention, as _Pancirollus_ observeth. And _Polydore
Virgil_ discoursing of new inventions whereof the authors are not known,
makes instance in Clocks and Guns. Now _Jerom_ is no late Writer, but
one of the ancient Fathers, and lived in the fourth Century, in the
reign of _Theodosius_ the first.
It is not to be denied that before the daies of _Jerom_ there were
Horologies, and several accounts of time; for they measured the hours
not only by drops of water in glasses called Clepsydræ, but also by sand
in glasses called Clepsammia. There were also from great antiquity,
Scioterical or Sun Dials, by the shadow of a stile or gnomon denoting
the hours of the day: an invention ascribed unto _Anaximines_ by
_Pliny_. Hereof a memorable one there was in _Campus Martius_, from an
obelisk erected, and golden figures placed horozontally about it; which
was brought out of _Egypt_ by _Augustus_, and described by _Jacobus
Laurus_. And another of great antiquity we meet with in the story of
_Ezechias_; for so it is delivered in _King._ 2. 20. That the Lord
brought the shadow backward ten degrees by which it had gone down in the
dial of Ahaz. [SN: _A peculiar description and particular construction
hereof out of_ R. Chomer, _is set down_, Curios de Caffarel. chap. 9.]
That is, say some, ten degrees, not lines; for the hours were denoted by
certain divisions or steps in the Dial, which others distinguished by
lines, according to that of _Persius_
_Stertimus indomitum quod despumare Falernum
Sufficiat, quintâ dum linea tangitur umbra._
That is, the line next the Meridian, or within an hour of noon.
[Sidenote: _Doctrine of circular motions._]
Of later years there succeeded new inventions, and horologies composed
by Trochilick or the artifice of wheels; whereof some are kept in motion
by weight, others perform without it. Now as one age instructs another,
and time that brings all things to ruin, perfects also every thing; so
are these indeed of more general and ready use then any that went before
them. By the Water-glasses the account was not regular: for from
attenuation and condensation, whereby that Element is altered, the hours
were shorter in hot weather then in cold, and in Summer then in Winter.
As for Scioterical Dials, whether of the Sun or Moon, they are only of
use in the actual radiation of those Luminaries, and are of little
advantage unto those inhabitants, which for many months enjoy not the
Lustre of the Sun.
It is I confess no easie wonder how the horometry of Antiquity
discovered not this Artifice, how _Architas_ that contrived the moving
Dove, or rather the _Helicosophie_ of _Archimedes_, fell not upon this
way. Surely as in many things, so in this particular, the present age
hath far surpassed Antiquity; whose ingenuity hath been so bold not only
to proceed below the account of minutes, but to attempt perpetual
motions, and engines whose revolutions (could their substance answer the
design) might out-last the exemplary mobility, and out measure time it
self. For such a one is that mentioned by _John Dee_, whose words are
these in his learned Preface unto _Euclide_: By Wheels strange works and
incredible are done: A wondrous example was seen in my time in a certain
Instrument, which by the Inventer and Artificer was sold for twenty
talents of gold; and then by chance had received some injury, and one
_Janellus_ of _Cremona_ did mend the same, and presented it unto the
Emperor _Charles_ the fift. _Jeronimus Cardanus_ can be my witness, that
therein was one Wheel that moved at such a rate, that in seven thousand
years his own period should be finished; a thing almost incredible, but
how far I keep within my bounds, many men yet alive can tell.
CHAPTER XIX
Of the Pictures of _Mermaids_, _Unicorns_,
and some others.
Few eyes have escaped the Picture of _Mermaids_: that is, according to
_Horace_ his Monster, with womans head above, and fishy extremity below;
and these are conceived to answer the shape of the ancient _Syrens_ that
attempted upon _Ulysses_. Which notwithstanding were of another
description, containing no fishy composure, but made up of Man and Bird;
the humane mediety variously placed not only above, but below; according
unto _Ælian_, _Suidas_, _Servius_, _Boccatius_, and _Aldrovandus_, who
hath referred their description unto the story of fabulous Birds;
according to the description of Ovid, and the account thereof in
Hyginus, that they were the daughters of _Melpomene_, and metamorphosed
into the shape of man and bird by _Ceres_.
And therefore these pieces so common among us, do rather derive their
original, or are indeed the very description of _Dagon_[SN: _Dagon the
Idol, of what form._]; which was made with human figure above, and fishy
shape below; whose stump, or as _Tremellius_ and our margin renders it,
whose fishy part only remained, when the hands and upper part fell
before the Ark. [SN: 1 Sam. 5.] Of the shape of _Artergates_, or
_Derceto_ with the _Phœnitians_; in whose fishy and feminine mixture,
as some conceive, were implied the Moon and the Sea, or the Deity of the
waters; and therefore, in their sacrifices, they made oblations of
fishes. From whence were probably occasioned the Pictures of _Nereides_
and _Tritons_ among the _Grecians_, and such as we read in _Macrobius_,
to have been placed on the top of the Temple of _Saturn_.
We are unwilling to question the Royal Supporters of _England_, that is,
the approved descriptions of the Lion and the Unicorn. Although, if in
the Lion, the position of the pizel be proper, and that the natural
situation; it will be hard to make out their retro-copulation, or their
coupling and pissing backward, according to the determination of
_Aristotle_; All that urine backward do copulate πυγηδὸν _clunatim_, or
aversly, as Lions, Hares, Linxes.
As for the Unicorn, if it have the head of a Deer, and the tail of a
Boar, as _Vartomannus_ describeth it, how agreeable it is to this
picture every eye may discern. If it be made bisulcous or cloven footed,
it agreeth unto the description of _Vartommanus_, but scarce of any
other; and _Aristotle_ supposeth that such as divide the hoof, do also
double the horn; they being both of the same nature, and admitting
division together. And lastly if the horn have this situation and be so
forwardly affixed, as is described, it will not be easily conceived, how
it can feed from the ground; and therefore we observe, that Nature in
other cornigerous animals, hath placed the horns higher and reclining,
as in Bucks; in some inverted upwards, as in the Rhinoceros, the
_Indian_ Ass, and Unicornous Beetles; and thus have some affirmed it is
seated in this animal.
We cannot but observe that in the Picture of _Jonah_ and others, Whales
are described with two prominent spouts on their heads; whereas indeed
they have but one in the forehead, and terminating over the wind-pipe.
Nor can we overlook the Picture of Elephants with Castles on their
backs, made in the form of land Castles, or stationary fortifications,
and answerable unto the Arms of _Castile_, or Sir _John_ Old Castle;
whereas the towers they bore were made of wood, and girt unto their
bodies; as is delivered in the books of _Maccabees_, and as they were
appointed in the Army of _Antiochus_.
We will not dispute the Pictures of Retiary Spiders, and their position
in the web, which is commonly made lateral, and regarding the Horizon;
although, if observed, we shall commonly find it downward, and their
heads respecting the Center. [SN: _Where the seven Stars be situated._]
We will not controvert the Picture of the seven Stars; although if
thereby be meant the Pleiades, or subconstellation upon the back of
Taurus, with what congruity they are described, either in site or
magnitude, in a clear night an ordinary eye may discover, from July unto
April. We will not question the tongues of Adders and Vipers, described
like an Anchor; nor the Picture of the Flower _de Luce_: though how far
they agree unto their natural draughts, let every spectator determine.
Whether the Cherubims about the Ark be rightly described in the common
Picture, that is, only in humane heads, with two wings; or rather in the
shape of Angels or young men, or somewhat at least with feet, as the
Scripture seems to imply. [SN: 2 Chron. 3. 13.] Whether the Cross seen
in the air by _Constantine_, were of that figure wherein we represent
it; or rather made out of Χ and Ρ, the two first letters of χριστός.
Whether the Cross of Christ did answer the common figure; whether so far
advanced above his head; whether the feet were so disposed, that is, one
upon another, or separately nailed, as some with reason describe it: we
shall not at all contend. Much less whether the house of _Diogenes_ were
a Tub framed of wood, and after the manner of ours, or rather made of
earth, as learned men conceive, and so more clearly make out that
expression of _Juvenal_ [SN: ----Dolia magni non ardent Cynici, etc.].
We should be too critical to question the letter Y, or bicornous element
of _Pythagoras_, that is, the making of the horns equal: or the left
less then the right, and so destroying the Symbolical intent of the
figure; confounding the narrow line of Vertue, with the larger road of
Vice; answerable unto the narrow door of Heaven, and the ample gates of
Hell, expressed by our Saviour, and not forgotten by _Homer_, in that
Epithete of _Pluto's_ house. [SN: Εὐρυπυλής.]
Many more there are whereof our pen shall take no notice, nor shall we
urge their enquiry; we shall not enlarge with what incongruity, and how
dissenting from the pieces of Antiquity, the Pictures of their gods and
goddesses are described, and how hereby their symbolical sense is lost;
although herein it were not hard to be informed from _Phornutus_[SN:
Phornut. De natura deorum.], _Fulgentius_[SN: Fulg. mytho. Logia], and
_Albricus_[SN: Albric. De deorum imaginibus.]. Whether _Hercules_ be
more properly described strangling than tearing the Lion, as _Victorius_
hath disputed; nor how the characters and figures of the Signs and
Planets be now perverted, as _Salmasius_ hath learnedly declared. We
will dispence with Bears with long tails, such as are described in the
figures of heaven; We shall tolerate flying Horses, black Swans,
Hydra's, Centaur's, Harpies and Satyrs; for these are monstrosities,
rarities, or else Poetical fancies, whose shadowed moralities requite
their substantial falsities. Wherein indeed we must not deny a liberty;
nor is the hand of the Painter more restrainable than the Poet. But
where the real works of Nature, or veritable acts of storie are to be
described, digressions are aberrations; and Art being but the imitator
or secondary representor, it must not vary from the verity of the
example; or describe things otherwise than they truly are or have been.
For hereby introducing false Idea's of things it perverts and deforms
the face and symmetry of truth.
CHAPTER XX
Of the Hieroglyphical Pictures of the
_Egyptians_.
Certainly of all men that suffered from the confusion of _Babel_, the
_Ægyptians_ found the best evasion; for, though words were confounded,
they invented a language of things, and spake unto each other by common
notions in Nature. Whereby they discoursed in silence, and were
intuitively understood from the theory of their Expresses. For they
assumed the shapes of animals common unto all eyes; and by their
conjunctions and compositions were able to communicate their
conceptions, unto any that co-apprehended the Syntaxis of their Natures.
This many conceive to have been the primitive way of writing, and of
greater antiquity than letters; and this indeed might _Adam_ well have
spoken, who understanding the nature of things, had the advantage of
natural expressions. Which the _Egyptians_ but taking upon trust, upon
their own or common opinion; from conceded mistakes they authentically
promoted errors; describing in their Hieroglyphicks creatures of their
own invention; or from known and conceded animals, erecting
significations not inferrible from their natures.
And first, Although there were more things in Nature than words which
did express them; yet even in these mute and silent discourses, to
express complexed significations, they took a liberty to compound and
piece together creatures of allowable forms into mixtures inexistent.
Thus began the descriptions of Griphins, Basilicks, Phœnix, and many
more; which Emblematists and Heralds have entertained with
significations answering their institutions; Hieroglyphically adding
Martegres, Wivernes, Lion fishes, with divers others. Pieces of good and
allowable invention unto the prudent Spectator, but are lookt on by
vulgar eyes as literal truths, or absurd impossibilities; whereas
indeed, they are commendable inventions, and of laudable significations.
Again, Beside these pieces fictitiously set down, and having no Copy in
Nature; they had many unquestionable drawn, of inconsequent
signification, nor naturally verifying their intention. We shall
instance but in few, as they stand recorded by _Orus_. The male sex they
expressed by a Vulture, because of Vultures all are females, and
impregnated by the wind; which authentically transmitted hath passed
many pens, and became the assertion of _Ælian_, _Ambrose_, _Basil_,
_Isidore_, _Tzetzes_, _Philes_, and others. Wherein notwithstanding what
injury is offered unto the Creation in this confinement of sex, and what
disturbance unto Philosophy in the concession of windy conceptions, we
shall not here declare. By two dragms they thought it sufficient to
signifie an heart; because the heart at one year weigheth two dragms,
that is, a quarter of an ounce, and unto fifty years annually encreaseth
the weight of one dragm, after which in the same proportion it yearly
decreaseth; so that the life of a man doth not naturally extend above an
hundred. And this was not only a popular conceit, but consentaneous unto
their Physical principles, as _Heurnius_ hath accounted it. [SN: _In
his_ Philosophia Barbarica.]
A Woman that hath but one Child, they express by a Lioness; for that
conceiveth but once. Fecundity they set forth by a Goat, because but
seven daies old, it beginneth to use coition. The abortion of a Woman
they describe by an Horse kicking a Wolf; because a Mare will cast her
foal if she tread in the track of that animal. Deformity they signifie
by a Bear; and an unstable Man by an Hyæna, because that animal yearly
exchangeth its sex. A Woman delivered of a female Child, they imply by a
Bull looking over his left shoulder; because if in coition a Bull part
from a Cow on that side, the Calf will prove a female.
All which, with many more, how far they consent with truth, we shall not
disparage our Reader to dispute; and though some way allowable unto
wiser conceits, who could distinctly receive their significations: yet
carrying the majesty of Hieroglyphicks, and so transmitted by Authors:
they crept into a belief with many, and favourable doubt with most. And
thus, I fear, it hath fared with the Hieroglyphical Symboles of
Scripture: which excellently intended in the species of things
sacrificed, in the prohibited meats, in the dreams of _Pharoah_,
_Joseph_, and many other passages: are oft-times wrackt beyond their
symbolizations, and inlarg'd into constructions disparaging their true
intentions.
CHAPTER XXI
Of the Picture of _Haman_ hanged.
In common draughts, _Haman_ is hanged by the Neck upon an high Gibbet,
after the usual and now practised way of suspension, but whether this
description truly answereth the Original, Learned pens consent not, and
good grounds there are to doubt. For it is not easily made out that this
was an ancient way of Execution, in the publick punishment of
Malefactors among the _Persians_; but we often read of Crucifixion in
their Stories. So we find that _Oroetes_[6] a _Persian_ Governour
crucified _Polycrates_ the _Samian_ Tyrant. And hereof we have an
example in the life of _Artaxerxes_ King of _Persia_; (whom some will
have to be _Ahasuerus_ in this Story) that his Mother _Parysatis_ flead
and crucified her _Eunuch_. The same also seems implied in the letters
patent of King _Cyrus_. [SN: _In_ Ezra 6.] _Omnis qui hanc mutaverit
jussionem, tollatur lignum de domo ejus, et erigatur et configatur in
eo._
[6] _Oroetes_, 1672, 1686, etc.
The same kind of punishment was in use among the _Romans_, _Syrians_,
_Egyptians_, _Carthaginians_ and _Grecians_. For though we find in
_Homer_, that _Ulysses_ in a fury hanged the strumpets of those who
courted _Penelope_, yet is it not so easie to discover, that this was
the publick practice or open course of justice among the _Greeks_.
And even that the _Hebrews_ used this present way of hanging, by
illaqueation or pendulous suffocation in publick justice and executions;
the expressions and examples in scripture conclude not beyond good
doubt.
That the King of _Hai_ was hanged, or destroyed by the common way of
suspension, is not conceded by the learned _Masius_ in his comment upon
that text; who conceiveth thereby rather some kind of crucifixion; at
least some patibulary affixion after he was slain; and so represented
unto the people untill toward the evening.
Though we read in our translation, that _Pharaoh_ hanged the chief
Baker, yet learned expositors understand hereby some kind of
crucifixion, according to the mode of _Egypt_, whereby he exemplarily
hanged out till the fowls of the air fed on his head or face, the first
part of their prey being the eyes. And perhaps according to the signal
draught hereof in a very old manuscript of _Genesis_, now kept in the
Emperors Library at _Vienna_; and accordingly set down by the learned
_Petrus Zamberius_, in the second Tome of the description of that
Library.
When the _Gibeonites_ hanged the bodies of those of the house of _Saul_,
thereby was intended some kind of crucifying, according unto good
expositors, and the vulgar translation: _crucifixerunt eos in monte
coram domino_; many both in Scripture and humane writers might be said
to be crucified, though they did not perish immediately by crucifixion:
But however otherwise destroyed, their bodies might be afterward
appended or fastned unto some elevated engine, as exemplary objects unto
the eyes of the people: So sometimes we read of the crucifixion of only
some part, as of the Heads of _Julianus_ and _Albinus_, though their
bodies were cast away.
That legal Text [SN: Deut. 21.] which seems to countenance the common way
of hanging, if a man hath committed a sin worthy of Death, and they hang
him on a Tree; is not so received by Christian and Jewish expositors.
And as a good Annotator of ours [SN: Ainsworth.] delivereth, out of
_Maimonides_: The _Hebrews_ understand not this of putting him to death
by hanging, but of hanging of a Man after he was stoned to death; and
the manner is thus described. After he is stoned to death, they fasten a
piece of timber in the Earth, and out of it there commeth a piece of
wood, and then they tye both his hands one to another, and hang him unto
the setting of the Sun.
Beside, the original word _Hakany_ determineth not the doubt. For that
by _Lexicographers_ or _Dictionarie_ interpreters, is rendred
suspension and crucifixion; there being no _Hebrew_ word peculiarly and
fully expressing the proper word of crucifixion, as it was used by the
_Romans_; nor easie to prove it the custom of the _Jewish_ Nation to
nail them by distinct parts unto a Cross, after the manner of our
SAVIOUR crucified: wherein it was a special favour indulged unto
_Joseph_ to take down the Body.
_Lipsius_[7] lets fall a good caution to take off doubts about
suspension delivered by ancient Authors, and also the ambiguous sence of
κρεμάσαι among the _Greeks_. _Tale apud Latinos ipsum suspendere, quod
in crucem referendum moneo juventutem_, as that also may be understood
of _Seneca_. _Latrocinium fecit aliquis, quid ergo meruit? ut
suspendatur._ And this way of crucifying he conceiveth to have been in
general use among the _Romans_, until the latter daies of _Constantine_,
who in reverence unto our SAVIOUR abrogated that opprobrious and
infamous way of crucifixion. Whereupon succeeded the common and now
practised way of suspension.
But long before this abrogation of the Cross, the _Jewish_ Nation had
known the true sense of crucifixion; whereof no Nation had a sharper
apprehension, while _Adrian_ crucified five hundred of them every day,
until Wood was wanting for that service. So that they which had nothing
but _crucifie_ in their mouths, were therewith paid home in their own
bodies: Early suffering the reward of their imprecations, and properly
in the same kind.
[7] _Zipsias_, 1672.
CHAPTER XXII
Compendiously of many questionable Customs,
Opinions, Pictures, Practices, and Popular
Observations.
[Sidenote: _The ground of many vain observations._]
1. If an Hare cross the high way, there are few above threescore years
that are not perplexed thereat: which notwithstanding is but an Augurial
terror, according to that received expression, _Inauspicatum dat iter
oblatus Lepus._ And the ground of the conceit was probably no greater
than this, that a fearful animal passing by us, portended unto us some
thing to be feared: as upon the like consideration, the meeting of a Fox
presaged some future imposture; which was a superstitious observation
prohibited unto the _Jews_, as is expressed in the Idolatry of
_Maimonides_, and is referred unto the sin of an observer of Fortunes,
or one that abuseth events unto good or bad signs; forbidden by the Law
of _Moses_[SN: Deut. 18.]; which notwithstanding sometimes succeeding,
according to fears or desires, have left impressions and timerous
expectations in credulous minds for ever.
[Sidenote: _The Emblem of superstition._]
2. That Owls and Ravens are ominous appearers, and pre-signifying
unlucky events, as Christians yet conceit, was also an Augurial
conception. Because many Ravens were seen when _Alexander_ entred
_Babylon_, they were thought to pre-ominate his death; and because an
Owl appeared before the battle, it presaged the ruin of _Crassus_. Which
though decrepite superstitions, and such as had their nativity in times
beyond all history, are fresh in the observation of many heads, and by
the credulous and feminine party still in some Majesty among us. And
therefore the Emblem of Superstition was well set out by _Ripa_[SN:
Iconologia de Cæsare Ripa.], in the picture of an Owl, an Hare, and an
Old Woman. And it no way confirmeth the Augurial consideration, that an
Owl is a forbidden food in the Law of _Moses_; or that _Jerusalem_ was
threatned by the Raven and the Owl, in that expression of _Esay_ 34.
That it should be a court for Owls, that the Cormorant and the Bittern
should possess it, and the Owl and the Raven dwell in it. For thereby
was only implied their ensuing desolation, as is expounded in the words
succeeding; He shall draw upon it the line of confusion, and the stones
of emptiness.
3. The falling of Salt is an authentick presagement of ill luck, nor can
every temper contemn it; from whence notwithstanding nothing can be
naturally feared: nor was the same a general prognostick of future evil
among the Ancients, but a particular omination concerning the breach of
friendship. For Salt as incorruptible, was the Symbole of friendship,
and before the other service was offered unto their guests; which if it
casually fell, was accounted ominous, and their amity of no duration.
But whether Salt were not only a Symbole of friendship with man, but
also a figure of amity and reconciliation with God, and was therefore
observed in sacrifices, is an higher speculation.
4. To break the egg shell after the meat is out, we are taught in our
childhood, and practise it all our lives; which nevertheless is but a
superstitious relict, according to the judgment of _Pliny_, _Huc
pertinet ovorum, ut exorbuerit quisq; calices protinus frangi, aut
eosdem coclearibus perforari_; and the intent hereof was to prevent
witchcraft; for lest witches should draw or prick their names therein,
and veneficiously mischief their persons, they broke the shell, as
_Dalecampius_ hath observed.
5. The true Lovers knot is very much magnified, and still retained in
presents of Love among us; which though in all points it doth not make
out, had perhaps its original from the _Nodus Herculanus_, or that which
was called _Hercules_ his knot, resembling the snaky complication in the
caduceus or rod of _Hermes_; and in which form the Zone or woollen
girdle of the Bride was fastned, as _Turnebus_ observeth in his
_Adversaria_.
6. When our cheek burneth or ear tingleth, we usually say that some body
is talking of us, which is an ancient conceit, and ranked among
superstitious opinions by _Pliny_. _Absentes tinnitu aurium præsentire
sermones de se receptum est_, according to that distick noted by
_Dalecampius_.
_Garrula quid totis resonas mihi noctibus auris?
Nescio quem dicis nunc meminisse mei._
Which is a conceit hardly to be made out without the concession of a
signifying _Genius_, or universal _Mercury_; conducting sounds unto
their distant subjects, and teaching us to hear by touch.
[Sidenote: _The original of the proverb_, Under the Rose be it, _etc._]
7. When we desire to confine our words, we commonly say they are spoken
under the Rose; which expression is commendable, if the Rose from any
natural property may be the Symbole of silence, as _Nazianzene_ seems to
imply in these translated verses:
_Utq; latet Rosa Verna suo putamine clausa,
Sic os vincla ferat, validisq; arctetur habenis,
Indicatq; suis prolixa silentia labris:_
And is also tolerable, if by desiring a secrecy to words spoke under
the Rose, we only mean in society and compotation, from the ancient
custom in Symposiack meetings, to wear chaplets of Roses about their
heads: and so we condemn not the _German_ custom, which over the Table
describeth a Rose in the cieling. But more considerable it is, if the
original were such as _Lemnius_, and others have recorded; that the Rose
was the flower of _Venus_, which _Cupid_ consecrated unto _Harpocrates_
the God of silence, and was therefore an Emblem thereof, to conceal the
pranks of Venery; as is declared in this Tetrastick;
_Est Rosa flos veneris, cujus quo facta laterent,
Harpocrati matris, dona dicavit Amor;
Inde Rosam mensis hospes suspendit Amicis.
Convivæ ut sub eâ dicta tacenda sciant._
8. That smoak doth follow the fairest, is an usual saying with us, and
in many parts of _Europe_; whereof although there seem no natural
ground, yet it is the continuation of a very ancient opinion, as _Petrus
Victorius_ and _Causabon_ have observed from a passage in _Athenæus_:
wherein a _Parasite_ thus describeth himself:
_To every Table first I come,
Whence Porridge I am cal'd by some:
A Capaneus at Stares I am,
To enter any Room a Ram;
Like whips and thongs to all I ply,
Like smoake unto the Fair I fly._
9. To sit cross leg'd, or with our fingers pectinated or shut together,
is accounted bad, and friends will perswade us from it. The same conceit
religiously possessed the Ancients, as is observable from _Pliny_.
_Poplites alternis genibus imponere nefas olim_; and also from
_Athenæus_, that it was an old veneficious practice, and _Juno_ is made
in this posture to hinder the delivery of _Alcmena_. And therefore, as
_Pierius_ observeth, in the Medal of _Julia Pia_, the right hand of
_Venus_ was made extended with the inscription of _Venus, Genetrix_; for
the complication or pectination of the fingers was an Hieroglyphick of
impediment, as in that place he declareth.
10. The set and statary times of pairing of nails, and cutting of hair,
is thought by many a point of consideration; which is perhaps but the
continuation of an ancient superstition. For piaculous it was unto the
_Romans_ to pare their nails upon the Nundinæ, observed every ninth day;
and was also feared by others in certain daies of the week; according to
that of _Ausonius_, _Ungues Mercurio_, _Barbam Jove_, _Cypride Crines_;
and was one part of the wickedness that filled up the measure of
_Manasses_, when 'tis delivered that he observed times. [SN: 2 Chron.
33.]
11. A common fashion it is to nourish hair upon the mouls of the face;
which is the perpetuation of a very ancient custom; and though
innocently practised among us, may have a superstitious original,
according to that of _Pliny_, _Nævos in facie tondere religiosum habent
nunc multi._ From the like might proceed the fears of poling Elvelocks
or complicated hairs of the head, and also of locks longer than the
other hair; they being votary at first, and dedicated upon occasion;
preserved with great care, and accordingly esteemed by others, as
appears by that of _Apuleius, Adjuro per dulcem capilli tui nodulum._
12. A custom there is in most parts of _Europe_ to adorn Aqueducts,
spouts and Cisterns with Lions heads: which though no illaudable
ornament, is of an _Egyptian_ genealogy,[8] who practised the same under
a symbolical illation. For because the Sun being in Leo, the flood of
_Nilus_ was at the full, and water became conveyed into every part, they
made the spouts of their Aqueducts through the head of a Lion. And upon
some cœlestial respects it is not improbable the great Mogul or
_Indian_ King doth bear for his Arms a Lion and the Sun.
[8] geneologie, 1658, 1669, geneology, 1672.
[Sidenote: _Symbolical significations of the girdle._]
13. Many conceive there is somewhat amiss, and that as we usually say,
they are unblest until they put on their girdle. Wherein (although most
know not what they say) there are involved unknown considerations. For
by a girdle or cincture are symbolically implied Truth, Resolution, and
Readiness unto action, which are parts and vertues required in the
service of God. According whereto we find that the _Israelites_ did eat
the Paschal Lamb with their loins girded; and the Almighty challenging
_Job_, bids him gird up his loins like a man. So runneth the expression
of _Peter_, Gird up the loins of your minds, be sober and hope to the
end: so the high Priest was girt with the girdle of fine linnen: so is
it part of the holy habit to have our lines girt about with truth; and
so is it also said concerning our Saviour, Righteousness shall be the
girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins. [SN: Isa.
11.]
Moreover by the girdle, the heart and parts which God requires are
divided from the inferior and concupiscential organs; implying thereby a
memento unto purification and cleanness of heart, which is commonly
denied from the concupiscence and affection of those parts; and
therefore unto this day the _Jews_ do bless themselves when they put on
their zone or cincture. And thus may we make out the doctrin of
_Pythagoras_, to offer sacrifice with our feet naked, that is, that our
inferiour parts and farthest removed from reason might be free, and of
no impediment unto us. Thus _Achilles_, though dipped in Styx, yet
having his heel untouched by that water; although he were fortified
elsewhere, he was slain in that part, as only vulnerable in the
inferiour and brutal part of Man. This is that part of _Eve_ and her
posterity the devil still doth bruise, that is, that part of the soul
which adhereth unto earth, and walks in the paths thereof. And in this
secundary and symbolical sense it may be also understood, when the
Priests in the Law washed their feet before the sacrifice; when our
Saviour washed the feet of his Disciples, and said unto _Peter_, If I
wash not thy feet thou hast no part in me. And thus is it symbolically
explainable, and implyeth purification and cleanness, when in the burnt
offerings the Priest is commanded to wash the inwards and legs thereof
in water; and in the peace and sin-offerings, to burn the two kidneys,
the fat which is about the flanks, and as we translate it, the Caul
above the Liver. But whether the _Jews_ when they blessed themselves,
had any eye unto the words of _Jeremy_[SN: Jer. 13.], wherein God makes
them his Girdle; or had therein any reference unto the Girdle, which the
Prophet was commanded to hide in the hole of the rock of _Euphrates_,
and which was the type of their captivity, we leave unto higher
conjecture.
[Sidenote: _Certain_ Hereticks _who ascribed humane figure unto God,
after which they conceived he created man in his likeness._]
14. The Picture of the Creator, or God the Father in the shape of an old
Man, is a dangerous piece, and in this Fecundity of sects may revive the
Anthropomorphites. Which although maintained from the expression of
_Daniel_, I beheld where the Ancient of dayes did sit, whose hair of his
head was like the pure wool; yet may it be also derivative from the
Hieroglyphical description of the _Ægyptians_; who to express their
Eneph, or Creator of the world, described an old man in a blew mantle,
with an egg in his mouth; which was the Emblem of the world. Surely
those heathens, that notwithstanding the exemplary advantage in heaven,
would endure no pictures of Sun or Moon, as being visible unto all the
world, and needing no representation; do evidently accuse the practice
of those pencils, that will describe invisibles. And he that challenged
the boldest hand unto the picture of an Echo, must laugh at this
attempt, not only in the description of invisibility, but
circumscription of Ubiquity, and fetching under lines incomprehensible
circularity.
The Pictures of the _Ægyptians_ were more tolerable, and in their sacred
letters more veniably expressed the apprehension of Divinity. For though
they implied the same by an eye upon a Scepter, by an Ægles head, a
Crocodile, and the like: yet did these manual descriptions pretend no
corporal representations; nor could the people misconceive the same unto
real correspondencies. So though the Cherub carried some apprehension of
Divinity, yet was it not conceived to be the shape thereof: and so
perhaps because it is metaphorically predicated of God, that he is a
consuming fire, he may be harmlessly described by a flaming
representation; Yet if, as some will have it, all mediocrity of folly is
foolish, and because an unrequitable evil may ensue, an indifferent
convenience must be omitted; we shall not urge such representments; we
could spare the holy Lamb for the picture of our Saviour, and the Dove
or fiery Tongues to represent the holy Ghost.
15. The Sun and Moon are usually described with humane faces; whether
herein there be not a _Pagan_ imitation, and those visages at first
implied _Apollo_ and _Diana_, we may make some doubt; and we find the
statua of the Sun was framed with raies about the head, which were the
indiciduous and unshaven locks of _Apollo_. We should be too
Iconomical [SN: _Or quarrelsom with Pictures._] to question the pictures
of the winds, as commonly drawn in humane heads, and with their cheeks
distended; which notwithstanding we find condemned by _Minutius_, as
answering poetical fancies, and the gentile description of _Æolus_,
_Boreas_, and the feigned Deities of winds.
16. We shall not, I hope, disparage the Resurrection of our Redeemer, if
we say the Sun doth not dance on Easter day. And though we would
willingly assent unto any sympathetical exultation, yet cannot conceive
therein any more than a Tropical expression. Whether any such motion
there were in that day wherein Christ arised, Scripture hath not
revealed, which hath been punctual in other records concerning solary
miracles: and the Areopagite [SN: _Dion._ Ep. 7. _a._ ad Policar. et Pet.
Hall not. in vit. S. Dionys.] that was amazed at the Eclipse, took no
notice of this. And if metaphorical expressions go so far, we may be
bold to affirm, not only that one Sun danced, but two arose that day:
That light appeared at his nativity, and darkness at his death, and yet
a light at both; for even that darkness was a light unto the _Gentiles_,
illuminated by that obscurity. That 'twas the first time the Sun set
above the Horizon; that although there were darkness above the earth,
there was light beneath it, nor dare we say that hell was dark if he
were in it.
17. Great conceits are raised of the involution or membranous covering,
commonly called the Silly-how, that sometimes is found about the heads
of children upon their birth; and is therefore preserved with great
care, not only as medical in diseases, but effectual in success,
concerning the Infant and others; which is surely no more than a
continued superstition. For hereof we read in the life of _Antoninus_
delivered by _Spartianus_, that children are born sometimes with this
natural cap; which Midwives were wont to sell unto credulous Lawyers,
who had an opinion it advantaged their promotion.
But to speak strictly, the effect is natural, and thus may be conceived:
Animal conceptions have largely taken three teguments, or membranous
films which cover them in the womb, that is, the Corion, Amnios, and
Allantois; the Corion is the outward membrance wherein are implanted the
Veins, Arteries and umbilical vessels, whereby its nourishment is
conveyed: the Allantois a thin coat seated under the Corion, wherein are
received the watery separations conveyed by the Urachus, that the
acrimony thereof should not offend the skin. [SN: De formato fœtu.] The
Amnios is a general investment, containing the sudorus or thin serosity
perspirable through the skin. Now about the time when the Infant
breaketh these coverings, it sometimes carrieth with it about the head a
part of the Amnios or nearest coat; which saith _Spiegelius_, either
proceedeth from the toughness of the membrance or weakness of the Infant
that cannot get clear thereof. And therefore herein significations are
natural and concluding upon the Infant, but not to be extended unto
magical signalities, or any other person.
18. That 'tis good to be drunk once a moneth, is a common flattery of
sensuality, supporting it self upon Physick, and the healthful effects
of inebriation. This indeed seems plainly affirmed by _Avicenna_, a
Physitian of great authority, and whose religion prohibiting Wine, could
less extenuate ebriety. But _Averroes_ a man of his own faith was of
another belief; restraining his ebriety unto hilarity, and in effect
making no more thereof than _Seneca_ commendeth, and was allowable in
_Cato_; that is, a sober incalescence and regulated æstuation from wine;
or what may be conceived between _Joseph_ and his brethren, when the
text expresseth they were merry, or drank largely, and whereby indeed
the commodities set down by _Avicenna_, that is, alleviation of spirits,
resolution of superfluities, provocation of sweat and urine may also
ensue. But as for dementation, sopition of reason, and the diviner
particle from drink; though _American_ religion approve, and _Pagan_
piety of old hath practised it, even at their sacrifices; Christian
morality and the doctrine of Christ will not allow. And surely that
religion which excuseth the fact of _Noah_, in the aged surprizal of six
hundred years, and unexpected inebriation from the unknown effects of
wine, will neither acquit ebriosity nor ebriety, in their known and
intended perversions.
And indeed, although sometimes effects succeed which may relieve the
body, yet if they carry mischief or peril unto the soul, we are therein
restrainable by Divinity, which circumscribeth Physick, and
circumstantially determines the use thereof. From natural
considerations, Physick commendeth the use of venery; and happily,
incest, adultery, or stupration may prove as Physically advantagious, as
conjugal copulation; which notwithstanding must not be drawn into
practise. And truly effects, consequents, or events which we commend,
arise oft-times from wayes which we all condemn. Thus from the fact of
_Lot_, we derive the generation of _Ruth_, and blessed Nativity of our
Saviour; which notwithstanding did not extenuate the incestuous ebriety
of the generator. And if, as is commonly urged, we think to extenuate
ebriety from the benefit of vomit oft succeeding, _Egyptian_ sobriety
will condemn us, which purged both wayes twice a moneth, without this
perturbation: and we foolishly contemn the liberal hand of God, and
ample field of medicines which sobriety produce that action.
[Sidenote: _Why the devil is commonly said to appear with a cloven
foot._]
19. A conceit there is, that the Devil commonly appeareth with a cloven
hoof; wherein although it seem excessively ridiculous, there may be
somewhat of truth; and the ground thereof at first might be his frequent
appearing in the shape of a Goat, which answers that description. This
was the opinion of ancient Christians concerning the apparition of
Panites, Fauns and Satyres; and in this form we read of one that
appeared unto _Antony_ in the wilderness. The same is also continued
from expositions of holy Scripture; for whereas it is said, [SN: Levit.
17.] Thou shalt not offer unto Devils, the Original word is
_Seghnirim_, that is, rough and hairy Goats, because in that shape the
Devil most often appeared; as is expounded by the _Rabbins_, as
_Tremellius_ hath also explained; and as the word _Ascimah_, the god of
_Emath_ is by some conceived. Nor did he only assume this shape in elder
times, but commonly in later dayes, especially in the place of his
worship, if there be any truth in the confession of Witches, and as in
many stories it stands confirmed by _Bodinus_[SN: _In his_
Dæmonomania.]. And therefore a Goat is not improperly made the
Hieroglyphick of the devil, as _Pierius_ hath expressed it. So might it
be the Emblem of sin, as it was in the sin-offering; and so likewise of
wicked and sinful men, according to the expression of Scripture in the
method of the last distribution; when our Saviour shall separate the
Sheep from the Goats, that is, the Sons of the Lamb from the children of
the devil.
CHAPTER XXIII
Of some others.
1. That temperamental dignotions, and conjecture of prevalent humours,
may be collected from spots in our nails, we are not averse to concede.
But yet not ready to admit sundry divinations, vulgarly raised upon
them. Nor do we observe it verified in others, what _Cardan_[SN: De
varietate rerum.] discovered as a property in himself: to have found
therein some signs of most events that ever happened unto him. Or that
there is much considerable in that doctrine of Cheiromancy, that spots
in the top of the nails do signifie things past; in the middle, things
present; and at the bottom, events to come. That white specks presage
our felicity, blew ones our misfortunes. That those in the nail of the
thumb have significations of honour, those in the forefinger, of riches,
and so respectively in other fingers, (according to Planetical
relations, from whence they receive their names) as _Tricassus_ hath
taken up, and _Picciolus_[SN: De inspectione manus.] well rejecteth.
We shall not proceed to querie, what truth there is in Palmistry, or
divination from those lines in our hands, of high denomination. Although
if any thing be therein, it seems not confinable unto man; but other
creatures are also considerable; as is the fore-foot of the Moll, and
especially of the Monkey; wherein we have observed the table line, that
of life, and of the liver.
2. That Children committed unto the school of Nature, without
institution would naturally speak the primitive language of the world,
was the opinion of ancient heathens, and continued since by Christians:
who will have it our _Hebrew_ tongue, as being the language of _Adam_.
That this were true, were much to be desired, not only for the easie
attainment of that useful tongue, but to determine the true and
primitive Hebrew. For whether the present Hebrew, be the unconfounded
language of _Babel_, and that which remaining in _Heber_ was continued
by _Abraham_ and his posterity, or rather the language of _Phœnicia_
and _Canaan_, wherein he lived, some learned men I perceive do yet
remain unsatisfied. Although I confess probability stands fairest for
the former: nor are they without all reason, who think that at the
confusion of tongues, there was no constitution of a new speech in every
family: but a variation and permutation of the old; out of one common
language raising several Dialects: the primitive tongue remaining still
intire. Which they who retained, might make a shift to understand most
of the rest. [SN: _How_ Abraham _might understand the language of
several Nations._] By vertue whereof in those primitive times and
greener confusions, _Abraham_ of the family of _Heber_ was able to
converse with the _Chaldeans_, to understand _Mesopotamians_,
_Cananites_, _Philistins_, and _Egyptians_: whose several Dialects he
could reduce unto the Original and primitive tongue, and so be able to
understand them.
3. Though useless unto us, and rather of molestation, we commonly
refrain from killing Swallows, and esteem it unlucky to destroy them:
whether herein there be not a _Pagan_ relique, we have some reason to
doubt. For we read in _Ælian_, that these birds were sacred unto the
_Penates_ or houshold gods of the ancients, and therefore were
preserved. The same they also honoured as the nuncio's of the spring;
and we find in _Athenæus_[SN: _The same is extant in the_ 8th _of_
Athenæus.] that the _Rhodians_ had a solemn song to welcome in the
Swallow.
[Sidenote: _Why candles may burn blew, before the apparition of a
spirit._]
4. That Candles and Lights burn dim and blew at apparition of spirits,
may be true, if the ambient ayr be full of sulphurious spirits, as it
happeneth oft-times in mines; where damps and acide exhalations are able
to extinguish them. And may be also verified, when spirits do make
themselves visible by bodies of such effluviums. But of lower
consideration is the common foretelling of strangers, from the fungous
parcels about the weeks of Candles: which only signifieth a moist and
pluvious ayr about them, hindering the avolation of the light and
favillous particles: whereupon they are forced to settle upon the Snast.
5. Though Coral doth properly preserve and fasten the Teeth in men, yet
is it used in Children to make an easier passage for them: and for that
intent is worn about their necks. But whether this custom were not
superstitiously founded, as presumed an amulet or defensative against
fascination, is not beyond all doubt. For the same is delivered by
_Pliny_[SN: Lib. 32.]. _Aruspices religiosum Coralli gestamen amoliendis
periculis arbitrantur; et surculi infantiæ alligati, tutelam habere
creduntur._
6. A strange kind of exploration and peculiar way of Rhabdomancy is that
which is used in mineral discoveries; that is, with a forked hazel,
commonly called _Moses_ his Rod, which freely held forth, will stir and
play if any mine be under it. And though many there are who have
attempted to make it good, yet until better information, we are of
opinion with _Agricola_[SN: De re metallica, lib. 2.], that in it self
it is a fruitless exploration, strongly scenting of _Pagan_ derivation,
and the _virgula Divina_, proverbially magnified of old. The ground
whereof were the Magical rods in Poets that of _Pallas_ in _Homer_, that
of _Mercury_ that charmed _Argus_, and that of _Circe_ which transformed
the followers of _Ulysses_. Too boldly usurping the name of _Moses_ rod,
from which notwithstanding, and that of _Aaron_, were probably
occasioned the fables of all the rest. For that of _Moses_ must needs be
famous unto the _Ægyptians_; and that of _Aaron_ unto many other
Nations, as being preserved in the Ark, until the destruction of the
Temple built by _Solomon_.
7. A practise there is among us to determine doubtful matters, by the
opening of a book, and letting fall a staff; which notwithstanding are
ancient fragments of _Pagan_ divinations. The first an imitation of
_Sortes Homericæ_; or _Virgilianæ_, drawing determinations from verses
casually occurring. The same was practised by _Severus_, who entertained
ominous hopes of the Empire, from that verse in _Virgil_, _Tu regere
imperio populos, Romane, memento_; and _Cordianus_ who reigned but few
dayes was discouraged by another, that is, _Ostendunt terris hunc tantum
fata, nec ultra esse sinunt._ Nor was this only performed in heathen
Authors, but upon the sacred text of Scripture, as _Gregorius
Turonensis_ hath left some account, and as the practise of the Emperour
_Heraclius_, before his Expedition into _Asia_ minor, is delivered by
_Cedrenus_.
As for the Divination or decision from the staff; it is an Augurial
relique, and the practise thereof is accused by God himself; [SN: Hosea
4.] My people ask counsel of their stocks, and their staff declareth
unto them. Of this kind of Rhabdomancy was that practised by
_Nabuchadonozor_ in that _Caldean_ miscellany, delivered by
_Ezekiel_[SN: Ezek. 24.]; the king of _Babylon_ stood at the parting of
the way, at the head of two wayes to use divination, he made his arrows
bright, he consulted with Images, he looked in the Liver; at the right
hand were the divinations of _Jerusalem_. That is, as _Estius_ expounded
it, the left way leading unto _Rabbah_, the chief City of the
_Ammonites_, and the right unto _Jerusalem_, he consulted _Idols_ and
entrails, he threw up a bundle of arrows to see which way they would
light; and falling on the right hand he marched towards _Jerusalem_. A
like way of Belomancy or Divination by arrows hath been in request with
_Scythians_, _Alanes_, _Germans_, with the _Africans_ and _Turks_ of
_Algier_. But of another nature was that which was practised by
_Elisha_[SN: 2 King. 13.15.], when by an arrow shot from an Eastern
window, he pre-signified the destruction of _Syria_; or when according
unto the three stroaks of _Joash_, with an arrow upon the ground, he
foretold the number of his victories. For thereby the spirit of God
particular'd the same; and determined the stroaks of the King unto
three, which the hopes of the Prophet expected in twice that number.
8. We cannot omit to observe the tenacity of ancient customs, in the
nominal observation of the several dayes of the week, according to
_Gentile_ and _Pagan_ appellations [SN: Dion. Cassii. lib. 37.]: for the
Original is very high, and as old as the ancient _Ægyptians_, who named
the same according to the seven Planets, the admired stars of heaven,
and reputed Deities among them. Unto every one assigning a several day;
not according to their cœlestial order, or as they are disposed in
heaven; but after a diatesseron or musical fourth. For beginning
Saturday with Saturn, the supremest Planet, they accounted by Jupiter
and Mars unto Sol, making Sunday. From Sol in like manner by Venus and
Mercury unto Luna, making Munday; and so through all the rest. And the
same order they confirmed by numbering the hours of the day unto twenty
four, according to the natural order of the Planets. For beginning to
account from Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, and so about unto twenty four, the
next day will fall unto Sol; whence accounting twenty four, the next
will happen unto Luna, making Munday. And so with the rest, according to
the account and order observed still among us.
The _Jews_ themselves in their Astrological considerations, concerning
Nativities, and Planetary hours, observe the same order, upon as witty
foundations. Because by an equal interval, they make seven triangles,
the bases whereof are the seven sides of a septilateral figure,
described within a circle. That is, If a figure of seven sides be
described in a circle, and at the angles thereof the names of the
Planets be placed in their natural order on it: if we begin with Saturn,
and successively draw lines from angle to angle, until seven equicrural
triangles be described, whose bases are the seven sides of the
septilateral figure; the triangles will be made by this order. The first
being made by Saturn, Sol and Luna, that is, Saturday, Sunday, and
Munday; and so the rest in the order still retained. [SN: Cujus Icon
apud doct. Iaffarel. chap. 11. Et Fabrit. Paduantum.]
But thus much is observable, that however in cœlestial considerations
they embraced the received order of the Planets, yet did they not retain
either characters, or names in common use amongst us; but declining
humane denominations, they assigned them names from some remarkable
qualities; as is very observable in their red and splendent Planets,
that is, of Mars [SN: Maadim.] and Venus. [SN: Nogah.] But the change of
their names disparaged not the consideration of their natures; nor did
they thereby reject all memory of these remarkable Stars; which God
himself admitted in his Tabernacle, if conjecture will hold concerning
the Golden Candlestick, whose shaft resembled the Sun, and six branches
the Planets about it.
9. We are unwilling to enlarge concerning many other; only referring
unto sober examination, what natural effects can reasonably be expected,
when to prevent the Ephialtes or night-Mare we hang up an hollow stone
in our stables; when for amulets against Agues we use the chips of
Gallows and places of execution. When for Warts we rub our hands before
the Moon, or commit any maculated part unto the touch of the dead. What
truth there is in those common female Doctrines, that the first Rib of
Roast Beef powdered is a peculiar remedy against Fluxes. That to urine
upon earth newly cast up by a Moll, bringeth down the menses in Women.
That if a Child dieth, and the neck becommeth not stiff, but for many
howers remaineth Lythe and Flaccid, some other in the same house will
dye not long after. That if a woman with child looketh upon a dead body,
her child will be of a pale complexion, our learned Philosophers and
critical Philosophers might illustrate, whose exacter performances our
adventures do but solicite; mean while, I hope, they will plausibly
receive our attempts, or candidly correct our misconjectures.
_Disce, sed ira cadat naso, rugosaque sanna,
Dum veteres avias tibi de pulmone recello._
THE SIXTH BOOK
Of sundry common opinions Cosmographical and Historical
_The first Discourse comprehended in several Chapters._
CHAPTER I
Concerning the beginning of the World, that the time thereof is not
precisely to be known, as men generally suppose: Of mens
enquiries in what season or point of the Zodiack it began. That
as they are generally made they are in vain, and as particularly
applied uncertain. Of the division of the seasons and four
quarters of the year, according to Astronomers and Physitians.
That the common compute of the Ancients, and which is yet
retained by most, is unreasonable and erroneous. Of some
Divinations and ridiculous diductions from one part of the year
to another. And of the Providence and Wisdom of God in the site
and motion of the Sun.
[Sidenote: _The age of the world not certainly determinable._]
Concerning the World and its temporal circumscriptions, who ever shall
strictly examine both extreams, will easily perceive there is not only
obscurity in its end, but its beginning; that as its period is
inscrutable, so is its nativity indeterminable: That as it is
presumption to enquire after the one, so is there no rest or
satisfactory decision in the other. And hereunto we shall more readily
assent, if we examine the informations, and take a view of the several
difficulties in this point; which we shall more easily do, if we
consider the different conceits of men, and duly perpend the
imperfections of their discoveries.
And first, The histories of the _Gentiles_ afford us slender
satisfaction, nor can they relate any story, or affix a probable point
to its beginning. For some thereof (and those of the wisest amongst
them) are so far from determining its beginning, that they opinion and
maintain it never had any at all; as the doctrin of _Epicurus_ implieth,
and more positively _Aristotle_ in his books _De Cœlo_ declareth.
Endeavouring to confirm it with arguments of reason, and those
appearingly demonstrative; wherein his labours are rational, and
uncontroulable upon the grounds assumed, that is, of Physical
generation, and a Primary or first matter, beyond which no other hand
was apprehended. But herein we remain sufficiently satisfied from
_Moses_, and the Doctrin delivered of the Creation; that is, a
production of all things out of nothing, a formation not only of matter,
but of form, and a materiation even of matter it self.
Others are so far from defining the Original of the World or of mankind,
that they have held opinions not only repugnant unto Chronology, but
Philosophy; that is, that they had their beginning in the soil where
they inhabited; assuming or receiving appellations conformable unto such
conceits. [SN: _Why the_ Athenians _did wear a golden Insect upon their
head._] So did the _Athenians_, term themselves αὐτοχθόνες or
_Aborigines_, and in testimony thereof did wear a golden Insect on their
heads: the same name is also given unto the Inlanders, or _Midland_
inhabitants of this Island by _Cæsar_. But this is a conceit answerable
unto the generation of the Giants; not admittable in Philosophy, much
less in Divinity, which distinctly informeth we are all the seed of
_Adam_, that the whole world perished unto eight persons before the
flood, and was after peopled by the _Colonies_ of the sons of _Noah_.
There was therefore never any _Autochthon_, or man arising from the
earth but _Adam_; for the Woman being formed out of the rib, was once
removed from earth, and framed from that Element under incarnation. And
so although her production were not by copulation, yet was it in a
manner seminal: For if in every part from whence the seed doth flow,
there be contained the Idea of the whole; there was a seminality and
contracted _Adam_ in the rib, which by the information of a soul, was
individuated into _Eve_. And therefore this conceit applied unto the
Original of man, and the beginning of the world, is more justly
appropriable unto its end. For then indeed men shall rise out of the
earth: the graves shall shoot up their concealed seeds, and in that
great Autumn, men shall spring up, and awake from their Chaos again.
Others have been so blind in deducing the Original of things, or
delivering their own beginnings, that when it hath fallen into
controversie, they have not recurred unto Chronologie or the Records of
time: but betaken themselves unto probabilities, and the
conjecturalities of Philosophy. Thus when the two ancient Nations,
_Egyptians_ and _Scythians_, contended for antiquity, the _Egyptians_
pleaded their antiquity from the fertility of their soil, [SN: Diodor.
Justin.] inferring that men there first inhabited, where they were with
most facility sustained; and such a land did they conceive was _Egypt_.
The _Scythians_, although a cold and heavier Nation urged more acutely,
deducing their arguments from the two active Elements and Principles of
all things, Fire and Water. For if of all things there was first an
union, and that Fire over-ruled the rest: surely that part of earth
which was coldest, would first get free, and afford a place of
habitation. But if all the earth were first involved in Water, those
parts would surely first appear, which were most high, and of most
elevated situation, and such was theirs. These reasons carried indeed
the antiquity from the _Egyptians_, but confirmed it not in the
_Scythians_: for as _Herodotus_ relateth from _Pargitaus_, their first
King unto _Darius_, they accounted but two thousand years.
[Sidenote: _That men speak not by natural instinct, but by instruction
and imitation._]
As for the _Egyptians_ they invented another way of trial; for as the
same Author relateth, _Psammitichus_ their King attempted this decision
by a new and unknown experiment, bringing up two Infants with Goats, and
where they never heard the voice of man; concluding that to be the
ancientest Nation, whose language they should first deliver. But herein
he forgot that speech was by instruction not instinct, by imitation, not
by nature, that men do speak in some kind but like Parrets, and as they
are instructed, that is, in simple terms and words, expressing the open
notions of things; which the second act of Reason compoundeth into
propositions, and the last into Syllogisms and Forms of ratiocination.
And howsoever the account of _Manethon_ the _Egyptian_ Priest run very
high, and it be evident that _Mizraim_ peopled that Country (whose name
with the _Hebrews_ it beareth unto this day) and there be many things of
great antiquity related in Holy Scripture, yet was their exact account
not very ancient; for _Ptolomy_ their Country-man beginning his
Astronomical compute no higher than _Nabonasser_, who is conceived by
some the same with _Salmanasser_. As for the argument deduced from the
Fertility of the soil, duly enquired, it rather overthroweth than
promoteth their antiquity; if that Country whose Fertility they so
advance, was in ancient times no firm or open land, but some vast lake
or part of the Sea, and became a gained ground by the mud and limous
matter brought down by the River _Nilus_, which setled by degrees into a
firm land. According as is expressed by _Strabo_, and more at large by
_Herodotus_, both from the _Egyptian_ tradition and probable inducements
from reason, called therefore _fluvii donum_, an accession of earth, or
tract of land acquired by the River.
Lastly, Some indeed there are, who have kept Records of time, and a
considerable duration, yet do the exactest thereof afford no
satisfaction concerning the beginning of the world, or any way point out
the time of its creation. The most authentick Records and best approved
antiquity are those of the _Chaldeans_; yet in the time of _Alexander_
the Great, they attained not so high as the flood. For as _Simplicius_
relateth, _Aristotle_ required of _Calisthenes_, who accompanied that
Worthy in his Expedition, that at his arrive at _Babylon_, he would
enquire of the antiquity of their Records; and those upon compute he
found to amount unto 1903 years; which account notwithstanding ariseth
no higher than 95 years after the flood. The _Arcadians_ I confess, were
esteemed of great antiquity, and it was usually said they were before
the Moon, according unto that of _Seneca_, _Sydus post veteres Arcades
editum_; and that of _Ovid_, _Lunâ gens prior illa fuit._ But this as
_Censorinus_ observeth, must not be taken grosly, as though they were
existent before that Luminary; but were so esteemed, because they
observed a set course of year, before the _Greeks_ conformed their year
unto the course and motion of the Moon.
Thus the Heathens affording no satisfaction herein, they are most likely
to manifest this truth, who have been acquainted with Holy Scripture,
and the sacred Chronology delivered by _Moses_, who distinctly sets down
this account, computing by certain intervails, by memorable _Æras_,
_Epoches_, or terms of time. As from the Creation unto the flood, from
thence unto _Abraham_, from _Abraham_ unto the departure from _Egypt_,
etc. Now in this number have only been _Samaritans_, _Jews_ and
_Christians_. [SN: _Different accounts upon Scripture concerning the Age
of the World._] For the _Jews_ they agree not in their accounts, as
_Bodine_ in his method of History hath observed out of _Baal Seder_,
_Rabbi Nassom_, _Gersom_, and others; in whose compute the age of the
World is not yet 5400 years. The same is more evidently observable from
the two most learned _Jews_, _Philo_ and _Josephus_; who very much
differ in the accounts of time, and variously sum up these Intervails
assented unto by all. Thus _Philo_ from the departure out of _Egypt_
unto the building of the Temple, accounts but 920 years, but _Josephus_
sets down 1062. _Philo_ from the building of the Temple to its
destruction 440. _Josephus_ 470. _Philo_ from the Creation to the
Destruction of the Temple 3373, but _Josephus_ 3513. _Philo_ from the
Deluge to the Destruction of the Temple 1718, but _Josephus_ 1913. In
which Computes there are manifest disparities, and such as much divide
the concordance and harmony of times.
For the _Samaritans_; their account is different from these or any
others; for they account from the Creation to the Deluge, but 1302
years; which cometh to pass upon the different account of the ages of
the Patriarks set down when they begat children. For whereas the
_Hebrew_, _Greek_ and _Latin_ texts account _Jared_ 162 when he begat
_Enoch_, they account but 62, and so in others. Now the _Samaritans_
were no incompetent Judges of times and the Chronology thereof; for they
embraced the five books of _Moses_, and as it seemeth, preserved the
Text with far more integrity then the _Jews_; who as _Tertullian_,
_Chrysostom_, and others observe, did several wayes corrupt the same,
especially in passages concerning the prophesies of Christ; So that as
_Jerom_ professeth, in his translation he was fain sometime to relieve
himself by the _Samaritan_ Pentateuch; as amongst others in that Text,
_Deuteronomy_ 27. _Maledictus omnis qui non permanserit in omnibus quæ
scripta sunt in libro Legis._ From hence Saint _Paul_ [SN: Gal. 3.]
inferreth there is no justification by the Law, and urgeth the Text
according to the Septuagint. Now the Jews to afford a latitude unto
themselves, in their copies expunged the word בל or Syncategorematical
term _omnis_: wherein lieth the strength of the Law, and of the Apostles
argument; but the _Samaritan_ Bible retained it right, and answerable
unto what the Apostle had urged.
As for Christians from whom we should expect the exactest and most
concurring account, there is also in them a manifest disagreement, and
such as is not easily reconciled. For first, the Latins accord not in
their account: to omit the calculation of the Ancients, of _Austin_,
_Bede_, and others, the Chronology of the Moderns doth manifestly
dissent. _Josephus Scaliger_, whom _Helvicus_ seems to follow, accounts
the Creation in 765 of the _Julian_ period; and from thence unto the
Nativity of our Saviour alloweth 3947 years; but _Dionysius Petavius_ a
learned Chronologer dissenteth from this compute almost 40 years;
placing the Creation in the 730 of the _Julian_ period, and from thence
unto the Incarnation accounteth 3983 years.
For the Greeks; their accounts are more anomalous: for if we recur unto
ancient computes, we shall find that _Clemens Alexandrinus_, an ancient
Father and _Præceptor_ unto _Origen_, accounted from the Creation unto
our Saviour, 5664 years; for in the first of his Stromaticks, he
collecteth the time from _Adam_ unto the death of _Commodus_ to be 5858
years; now the death of _Commodus_ he placeth in the year after Christ
194, which number deducted from the former, there remaineth 5664.
_Theophilus_ Bishop of _Antioch_ accounteth unto the Nativity of Christ
5515, deduceable from the like way of compute, for in his first book _ad
Autolychum_, he accounteth from _Adam_ unto _Aurelius Verus_ 5695 years;
now that Emperour died in the year of our Lord 180, which deducted from
the former sum, there remaineth 5515. _Julius Africanus_, an ancient
Chronologer, accounteth somewhat less, that is, 5500. _Eusebius_,
_Orosius_ and others dissent not much from this, but all exceed five
thousand.
The latter compute of the Greeks, as _Petavius_ observeth, hath been
reduced unto two or three accounts. The first accounts unto our Saviour
5501, and this hath been observed by _Nicephorus_, _Theophanes_, and
_Maximus_. [SN: _By what account the world hath lasted 7154 years._] The
other accounts 5509; and this of all at present is generally received by
the Church of _Constantinople_, observed also by the _Moscovite_, as I
have seen in the date of the Emperors letters; wherein this year of ours
1645 is from the year of the world 7154, which doth exactly agree unto
this last account 5509, for if unto that sum be added 1645, the product
will be 7154, by this Chronology are many Greek Authors to be
understood; and thus is _Martinus Crusius_ to be made out, when in his
Turcogrecian history he delivers, the City of _Constantinople_ was taken
by the Turks in the year ϛϠξα; that is, 6961. Now according unto these
Chronologists, the Prophecy of _Elias_ the Rabbin, so much in request
with the Jews, and in some credit also with Christians, that the world
should last but six thousand years; unto these I say, it hath been long
and out of memory disproved, for the Sabbatical and 7000 year wherein
the world should end (as did the Creation on the seventh day) unto them
is long ago expired; they are proceeding in the eight thousand year, and
numbers exceeding those days which men have made the types and shadows
of these. But certainly what _Marcus Leo_ the Jew conceiveth of the end
of the heavens, exceedeth the account of all that ever shall be; for
though he conceiveth the Elemental frame shall end in the Seventh or
Sabbatical Millenary, yet cannot he opinion the heavens and more durable
part of the Creation shall perish before seven times seven, or 49, that
is, the Quadrant of the other seven, and perfect Jubilee of thousands.
Thus may we observe the difference and wide dissent of mens opinions,
and thereby the great incertainty in this establishment. The Hebrews not
only dissenting from the Samaritans, the Latins from the Greeks, but
every one from another. Insomuch that all can be in the right it is
impossible; that any one is so, not with assurance determinable. And
therefore as _Petavius_ confesseth, to effect the same exactly without
inspiration it is impossible, and beyond the Arithmetick of any but God
himself. And therefore also what satisfaction may be obtained from those
violent disputes, and eager enquirers in what day of the month the world
began either of March or October; likewise in what face or position of
the Moon, whether at the prime or full, or soon after, let our second
and serious considerations determine.
[Sidenote: _The cause of so different accounts about the age of the
world._]
Now the reason and ground of this dissent, is the unhappy difference
between the Greek and Hebrew Editions of the Bible, for unto these two
Languages have all translations conformed; the holy Scripture being
first delivered in Hebrew, and first translated into Greek. For the
Hebrew; it seems the primitive and surest text to rely on, and to
preserve the same entire and uncorrupt there hath been used the highest
caution humanity could invent. For as _R. Ben. Maimon_ hath declared, if
in the copying thereof one letter were written twice, or if one letter
but touched another, that copy was not admitted into their Synagogues,
but only allowable to be read in Schools and private families. Neither
were they careful only in the exact number of their Sections of the Law,
but had also the curiosity to number every word, and affixed the account
unto their several books. [SN: _Corruption even in the Hebrew Text of
the Bible._] Notwithstanding all which, divers corruptions ensued, and
several depravations slipt in, arising from many and manifest grounds,
as hath been exactly noted by _Morinus_ in his preface unto the
Septuagint.
As for the Septuagint, it is the first and most ancient Translation; and
of greater antiquity than the Chaldee version; occasioned by the request
of _Ptolomeus Philadelphus_, King of _Egypt_, for the ornament of his
memorable Library; unto whom the high Priest addressed six Jews out of
every Tribe, which amounteth unto 72; and by these was effected that
Translation we usually term the Septuagint, or Translation of seventy.
[SN: _The Credit of the Septuagint translation._] Which name, however it
obtain from the number of their persons, yet in respect of one common
Spirit, it was the Translation but as it were of one man; if as the
story relateth, although they were set apart and severed from each
other, yet were their Translations found to agree in every point,
according as is related by _Philo_ and _Josephus_; although we find not
the same in _Aristæas_ [Sidenote: Aristeas ad Philocratorem de 72
interpretibus.], who hath expresly treated thereof. But of the Greek
compute there have passed some learned dissertations not many years ago,
wherein the learned _Isacius Vossius_ makes the nativity of the world to
anticipate the common account one thousand four hundred and forty years.
This Translation in ancient times was of great authority, by this many
of the Heathens received some notions of the Creation and the mighty
works of God; This in express terms is often followed by the
Evangelists, by the Apostles, and by our Saviour himself in the
quotations of the Old Testament. This for many years was used by the
Jews themselves, that is, such as did Hellenize and dispersedly dwelt
out of Palestine with the Greeks; and this also the succeeding
Christians and ancient Fathers observed; although there succeeded other
Greek versions, that is, of _Aquila_, _Theodosius_ and _Symmachus_; for
the Latin translation of _Jerom_, called now the Vulgar, was about 800
years after the Septuagint; although there was also a Latin translation
before, called the Italick version. Which was after lost upon the
general reception of the translation of Saint _Jerom_ [SN: Præfat. in
Paralipom.]. Which notwithstanding (as he himself acknowledgeth) had
been needless, if the Septuagint copys had remained pure, and as they
were first translated. But, (beside that different copys were used, that
_Alexandria_ and _Egypt_ followed the copy of _Hesychius_, _Antioch_ and
_Constantinople_ that of _Lucian_ the Martyr, and others that of
_Origen_) the Septuagint was much depraved, not only from the errors of
Scribes, and the emergent corruptions of time, but malicious contrivance
of the Jews; as _Justin Martyr_ hath declared, in his learned dialogue
_Tryphon_, and _Morinus_ hath learnedly shewn from many confirmations.
[Sidenote: De Hebræi et Græci textus sinceritate.]
Whatsoever Interpretations there have been since, have been especially
effected with reference unto these, that is, the Greek and Hebrew text,
the Translators sometimes following the one, sometimes adhering unto the
other, according as they found them consonant unto truth, or most
correspondent unto the rules of faith. Now however it cometh to pass,
these two are very different in the enumeration of Genealogies, and
particular accounts of time; for in the second intervail, that is,
between the Flood and _Abraham_, there is by the Septuagint introduced
one _Cainan_ to be the son of _Arphaxad_ and father of _Salah_; whereas
in the Hebrew there is no mention of such a person, but _Arphaxad_ is
set down to be the father of _Salah_. But in the first intervail, that
is, from the Creation unto the Flood, their disagreement is more
considerable; for therein the Greek exceedeth the Hebrew, and common
account almost 600 years. And 'tis indeed a thing not very strange, to
be at the difference of a third part, in so large and collective an
account, if we consider how differently they are set forth in minor and
less mistakable numbers. So in the Prophesie of _Jonah_, both in the
Hebrew and Latin text, it is said, Yet forty dayes and _Ninevy_ shall be
overthrown: But the Septuagint saith plainly, and that in letters at
length, τρεῖς ἡμέρας that is, yet three dayes and _Ninevy_ shall be
destroyed. Which is a difference not newly crept in, but an observation
very ancient, discussed by _Austin_ and _Theodoret_, and was conceived
an error committed by the Scribe. Men therefore have raised different
computes of time, according as they have followed their different texts;
and so have left the history of times far more perplexed than Chronology
hath reduced.
Again, However the texts were plain, and might in their numerations
agree, yet were there no small difficulty to set down a determinable
Chronology, or establish from whence any fixed point of time. For the
doubts concerning the time of the Judges are inexplicable; that of the
Reigns and succession of Kings is as perplexed; it being uncertain
whether the years both of their lives and reigns ought to be taken as
compleat, or in their beginning and but currant accounts. Nor is it
unreasonable to make some doubt whether in the first ages and long lives
of our fathers, _Moses_ doth not sometime account by full and round
numbers, whereas strictly taken they might be some few years above or
under; as in the age of _Noah_, it is delivered to be just five hundred
when he begat _Sem_; whereas perhaps he might be somewhat above or below
that round and compleat number. For the same way of speech is usual in
divers other expressions: Thus do we say the Septuagint, and using the
full and articulate number, do write the Translation of Seventy;
whereas we have shewn before, the precise number was Seventy two. So is
it said that Christ was three days in the grave; according to that of
_Mathew_, as _Jonas_ was three days and three nights in the Whales
belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the
heart of the earth: which notwithstanding must be taken Synecdochically;
or by understanding a part for an whole day; for he remained but two
nights in the grave; for he was buried in the afternoon of the first
day, and arose very early in the morning on the third; that is, he was
interred in the eve of the Sabbath, and arose in the morning after it.
Moreover although the number of years be determined and rightly
understood, and there be without doubt a certain truth herein; yet the
text speaking obscurely or dubiously, there is oft-times no slender
difficulty at what point to begin or terminate the account. So when it
is said _Exod._ 12. the sojourning of the children of _Israel_ who dwelt
in _Egypt_ was 430 years, it cannot be taken strictly, and from their
first arrival into Egypt, for their habitation in that land was far
less; but the account must begin from the Covenant of God with
_Abraham_, and must also comprehend their sojourn in the land of
_Canaan_, according as is expressed, _Gal._ 3. The Covenant that was
confirmed before of God in Christ, the Law which was 430 years after
cannot disanul. Thus hath it also happened in the account of the 70
years of their captivity, according to that of _Jeremy_ [SN: _Chap._
20.], This whole land shall be a desolation, and these nations shall
serve the King of _Babylon_ 70 years. Now where to begin or end this
compute, ariseth no small difficulties; for there were three remarkable
captivities and deportations of the Jews. The first was in the third or
fourth year of _Joachim_, and first of _Nabuchodonozor_, when _Daniel_
was carried away; the second in the reign of _Ieconiah_, and the eighth
year of the same King; the third and most deplorable to the reign of
_Zedechias_ and in the nineteenth year of _Nabuchodonozor_, whereat both
the Temple and City were burned. Now such is the different conceit of
these times, that men have computed from all; but the probablest account
and most concordant unto the intention of _Ieremy_, is from the first of
_Nabuchodonozor_ unto the first of King _Cyrus_ over _Babylon_; although
the Prophet _Zachary_ [SN: _Chap._ 1. 12.] accounteth from the last. O
Lord of hosts, How Long! Wilt thou not have mercy on _Ierusalem_,
against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?
for he maketh this expostulation in the second year of _Darius
Histaspes_, wherein he prophesied, which is about eighteen years in
account after the other.
[Sidenote: _The difficulties of_ Daniels _70 Weeks_.]
Thus also although there be a certain truth therein, yet is there no
easie doubt concerning the seventy weeks, or seventy times seven years
of _Daniel_; whether they have reference unto the nativity or passion of
our Saviour, and especially from whence, or what point of time they are
to be computed. For thus is it delivered by the Angel _Gabriel_: Seventy
weeks are determined upon the people; and again in the following verse:
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the
Commandment to restore and to build _Ierusalem_ unto the Messias the
Prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks, the street
shall be built again, and the wall even in troublesome times; and after
threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off. Now the going out of
the Commandment to build the City, being the point from whence to
compute, there is no slender controversie when to begin. For there are
no less than four several Edicts to this effect, the one in the first
year of _Cyrus_, the other in the second of _Darius_, the third and
fourth in the seventh, and in the twentieth of _Artaxerxes Longimanus_;
although as _Petavius_ accounteth, it best accordeth unto the twenty
year of _Artaxerxes_, from whence _Nehemiah_ deriveth his Commission.
[SN: _Of our Bless. Saviours age at his Passion._] Now that computes are
made uncertainly with reference unto Christ, it is no wonder, since I
perceive the time of his Nativity is in controversie, and no less his
age at his Passion. For _Clemens_ and _Tertullian_ conceive he suffered
at thirty; but _Irenæus_ a Father neerer his time, is further off in his
account, that is, between forty and fifty.
_Longomontanus_ a late Astronomer, endeavours to discover this secret
from Astronomical grounds, that is, the Apogeum of the Sun; conceiving
the Excentricity invariable, and the Apogeum yearly to move one scruple,
two seconds, fifty thirds, etc. Wherefore if in the time of
_Hipparchus_, that is, in the year of the _Iulian_ period 4557 it was in
the fifth degree of _Gemini_, and in the daies of _Tycho Brahe_, that is
in the year of our Lord 1588, or of the world 5554, the same was removed
unto the fift degree of _Cancer_; by the proportion of its motion, it
was at the Creation first in the beginning of _Aries_, and the Perigeum
or nearest point in _Libra_. But this conceit how ingenious or subtile
soever, is not of satisfaction; it being not determinable, or yet agreed
in what time precisely the Apogeum absolveth one degree, as _Petavius_
[SN: De Doctrina temporum 1.4.] hath also delivered.
Lastly, However these or other difficulties intervene, and that we
cannot satisfie our selves in the exact compute of time, yet may we sit
down with the common and usual account; nor are these differences
derogatory unto the Advent or Passion of Christ, unto which indeed they
all do seem to point, for the Prophecies concerning our Saviour were
indefinitely delivered before that of _Daniel_; so was that pronounced
unto _Eve_ in paradise, that after of _Balaam_, those of _Isaiah_ and
the Prophets, and that memorable one of _Iacob_, the Scepter shall not
depart from _Israel_ untill _Shilo_ come; which time notwithstanding it
did not define at all. In what year therefore soever, either from the
destruction of the Temple, from the re-edifying thereof, from the flood,
or from the Creation he appeared, certain it is, that in the fulness of
time he came. When he therefore came is not so considerable, as that he
is come: in the one there is consolation, in the other no satisfaction.
The greater Quere is, when he will come again; and yet indeed it is no
Quere at all: for that is never to be known, and therefore vainly
enquired: 'tis a professed and authentick obscurity, unknown to all but
to the omniscience of the Almighty. Certainly the ends of things are
wrapt up in the hands of God, he that undertakes the knowledge thereof,
forgets his own beginning, and disclaims his principles of earth. No man
knows the end of the world, nor assuredly of any thing in it: God sees
it, because unto his Eternity it is present; he knoweth the ends of us,
but not of himself: and because he knows not this, he knoweth all
things, and his knowledge is endless, even in the object of himself.
CHAPTER II
Of mens Enquiries in what season or Point of the Zodiack it began,
that as they are generally made, they are in vain, and as
particularly, uncertain.
[Sidenote: _The world began in all the four quarters of the year._]
Concerning the Seasons, that is, the quarters of the year, some are
ready to enquire, others to determine, in what season, whether in the
Autumn, Spring, Winter or Summer the World had its beginning. Wherein we
affirm, that as the question is generally, and in respect of the whole
earth proposed, it is with manifest injury unto reason in any particular
determined; because when ever the world had its beginning it was created
in all these four. For, as we have elsewhere delivered, whatsoever sign
the Sun possesseth (whose recess or vicinity defineth the quarters of
the year) those four seasons were actually existent; it being the nature
of that Luminary to distinguish the several seasons of the year; all
which it maketh at one time in the whole earth, and successively in any
part thereof. Thus if we suppose the Sun created in Libra, in which sign
unto some it maketh Autumn; at the same time it had been Winter unto the
Northern-pole, for unto them at that time the Sun beginneth to be
invisible, and to shew it self again unto the Pole of the South. Unto
the position of a right Sphere or directly under the Æquator, it had
been Summer; for unto that situation the Sun is at that time vertical.
Unto the latitude of Capricorn, or the Winter Solstice it had been
Spring; for unto that position it had been in a middle point, and that
of ascent, or approximation, but unto the latitude of Cancer or the
Summer Solstice it had been Autumn; for then had it been placed in a
middle point, and that of descent, or elongation.
And if we shall take it literally what _Moses_ described popularly, this
was also the constitution of the first day. For when it was evening unto
one longitude, it was morning unto another; when night unto one, day
unto another. And therefore that question, whether our Saviour shall
come again in the twilight (as is conceived he arose) or whether he
shall come upon us in the night, according to the comparison of a thief,
or the _Jewish_ tradition, that he will come about the time of their
departure out of _Ægypt_, when they eat the Passover, and the Angel
passed by the doors of their houses; this Quere I say needeth not
further dispute. For if the earth be almost every where inhabited, and
his coming (as Divinity affirmed) must needs be unto all; then must the
time of his appearance be both in the day and night. For if unto
_Jerusalem_, or what part of the world soever he shall appear in the
night, at the same time unto the _Antipodes_, it must be day; if
twilight unto them, broad day unto the _Indians_; if noon unto them, yet
night unto the _Americans_: and so with variety according unto various
habitations, or different positions of the Sphere, as will be easily
conceived by those who understand the affections of different
habitations, and the conditions of _Antæci_, _Periæci_, and _Antipodes_.
And so although he appear in the night, yet may the day of Judgement or
Dooms-day well retain that name; for that implieth one revolution of the
Sun, which maketh the day and night, and that one natural day. [SN:
Νυχθήμερον] And yet to speak strictly, if (as the Apostle affirmeth) we
shall be changed in the twinckling of an eye (and as the Schools
determine) the destruction of the world shall not be successive but in
an instant; we cannot properly apply thereto the usual distinctions of
time; called that twelve hours, which admits not the parts thereof, or
use at all the name of time, when the nature thereof shall perish.
But if the enquiry be made unto a particular place, and the question
determined unto some certain Meridian; as namely, unto _Mesopotamia_
wherein the seat of paradice is presumed, the Query becomes more
reasonable, and is indeed in nature also determinable. Yet positively to
define that season, there is no slender difficulty; for some contend
that it began in the Spring; as (beside _Eusebius_, _Ambrose_, _Bede_,
and _Theodoret_) some few years past _Henrico Philippi_ in his
Chronology of the Scripture. Others are altogether for Autumn; and from
hence do our Chronologers commence their compute; as may be observed in
_Helvicus_, _Jo. Scaliger_, _Calvisius_, and _Petavius_.
CHAPTER III
Of the Divisions of the seasons and four Quarters of the year,
according unto Astronomers and Physitians; that the common
compute of the Ancients, and which is still retained by some is
very questionable.
As for the divisions of the year, and the quartering out this remarkable
standard of time, there have passed especially two distinctions; the
first in frequent use with Astronomers, according to the cardinal
intersections of the Zodiack, that is, the two Æquinoctials and both
the Solstitial points; defining that time to be the Spring of the year,
wherein the Sun doth pass from the Æquinox of Aries unto the Solstice of
Cancer; the time between the Solstice and the Æquinox of Libra, Summer;
from thence unto the Solstice of Capricornus, Autumn; and from thence
unto the Æquinox of Aries again, Winter. Now this division although it
be regular and equal, is not universal; for it includeth not those
latitudes which have the seasons of the year double; as have the
inhabitants under the Equator, or else between the Tropicks. [SN:
_Between the Tropicks two Summers in a year._] For unto them the Sun is
vertical twice a year, making two distinct Summers in the different
points of verticality. So unto those which live under the Æquator, when
the sun is in the Æquinox it is Summer, in which points it maketh Spring
or Autumn unto us; and unto them it is also Winter when the Sun is in
either Tropick; whereas unto us it maketh always Summer in the one. And
the like will happen unto those habitations, which are between the
Tropicks and the Æquator.
A second and more sensible division there is observed by _Hippocrates_,
and most of the ancient _Greeks_, according to the rising and setting of
divers stars; dividing the year, and establishing the account of seasons
from usual alterations, and sensible mutations in the air, discovered
upon the rising and setting of those stars, accounting the Spring from
the Æquinoxial point of Aries; from the rising of the Pleiades, or the
several stars on the back of Taurus, Summer; from the rising of
Arcturus, a star between the thighs of Bootes, Autumn; and from the
setting of the Pleiades, Winter. Of these divisions because they were
unequal, they were fain to subdivide the two larger portions, that is of
the Summer and Winter quarters; the first part of the Summer they named
θέρος, the second unto the rising of the Dog-star, ὤρα, from thence unto
the setting of Arcturus, ὀπώρα. The Winter they divided also into three
parts; the first part, or that of seed time they named σπόρετον, the
middle or proper Winter, χειμὼν, the last, which was their planting or
grafting time φυταλίαν. This way of division was in former ages
received, is very often mentioned in Poets, translated from one Nation
to another; from the _Greeks_ unto the _Latines_ as is received by good
Authors; and delivered by Physitians, even unto our times.
Now of these two, although the first in some latitude may be retained,
yet is not the other in any to be admitted. For in regard of time (as we
elsewhere declare) the stars do vary their longitudes, and consequently
the times of their ascension and descension. That star which is the term
of numeration, or point from whence we commence the account, altering
his site and longitude in process of time, and removing from West to
East, almost one degree in the space of 72 years, so that the same star,
since the age of _Hippocrates_ who used this account, is removed in
_consequentia_ about 27 degrees. Which difference of their longitudes,
doth much diversifie the times of their ascents, and rendereth the
account unstable which shall proceed thereby.
Again, In regard of different latitudes, this cannot be a setled rule,
or reasonably applied unto many Nations. For whereas the setting of the
Pleiades or seven stars, is designed the term of Autumn, and the
beginning of Winter; unto some latitudes these stars do never set, as
unto all beyond 67 degrees. And if in several and far distant latitudes
we observe the same star as a common term of account unto both, we
shall fall upon an unexpected, but an unsufferable absurdity; and by the
same account it will be Summer unto us in the North, before it be so
unto those, which unto us are Southward, and many degrees approaching
nearer the Sun. For if we consult the Doctrine of the sphere, and
observe the ascension of the Pleiades, which maketh the beginning of
Summer, we shall discover that in the latitude of 40, these stars arise
in the 16 degree of Taurus; but in the latitude of 50, they ascend in
the eleventh degree of the same sign, that is, 5 dayes sooner; so shall
it be Summer unto _London_, before it be unto _Toledo_, and begin to
scorch in _England_, before it grow hot in _Spain_.
This is therefore no general way of compute, nor reasonable to be
derived from one Nation unto another; the defect of which consideration
hath caused divers errors in Latine poets, translating these expressions
from the _Greeks_; and many difficulties even in the _Greeks_
themselves; which living in divers latitudes, yet observed the same
compute. So that to make them out, we are fain to use distinctions;
sometime computing cosmically what they intended heliacally: and
sometime in the same expression accounting the rising heliacally, the
setting cosmically. Otherwise it will be hardly made out, what is
delivered by approved Authors; and is an observation very considerable
unto those which meet with such expressions, as they are very frequent
in the poets of elder times, especially _Hesiod_, _Aratus_, _Virgil_,
_Ovid_, _Manilius_; and Authors Geoponical, or which have treated _de re
rustica_, as _Constantine_, _Marcus Cato_, _Columella_, _Palladius_ and
_Varro_.
Lastly, The absurdity in making common unto many Nations those
considerations whose verity is but particular unto some, will more
evidently appear, if we examine the Rules and Precepts of some one
climate, and fall upon consideration with what incongruity they are
transferrible unto others. Thus is it advised by _Hesiod_.
_Pleiadibus Atlante natis orientibus
Incipe messem, Arationem vero occidentibus._
Implying hereby the Heliacal ascent and Cosmical descent of those stars.
Now herein he setteth down a rule to begin harvest at the arise of the
Pleiades; which in his time was in the beginning of _May_. This indeed
was consonant unto the clime wherein he lived, and their harvest began
about that season: but is not appliable unto our own, for therein we are
so far from expecting an harvest, that our Barley-seed is not ended.
Again, correspondent unto the rule of _Hesiod_, _Virgil_ affordeth
another,
_Ante tibi Eoæ Atlantides abscondantur,
Debita quam sulcis committas semina._
Understanding hereby their Cosmical descent, or their setting when the
Sun ariseth, and not their Heliacal obscuration, or their inclusion in
the lustre of the Sun, as _Servius_ upon this place would have it; for
at that time these stars are many signs removed from that luminary. Now
herein he strictly adviseth, not to begin to sow before the setting of
these stars; which notwithstanding without injury to agriculture, cannot
be observed in _England_; for they set unto us about the 12 of November,
when our Seed-time is almost ended.
And this diversity of clime and cœlestial observations, precisely
observed unto certain stars and moneths, hath not only overthrown the
deductions of one Nation to another, but hath perturbed the observation
of festivities and statary Solemnities, even with the _Jews_ themselves.
For unto them it was commanded that at their entrance into the land of
_Canaan_, in the fourteenth of the first moneth (that is _Abib_ or
_Nisan_ which is Spring with us) they should observe the celebration of
the Passover; and on the morrow after, which is the fifteenth day, the
feast of unleavened bread; and in the sixteenth of the same moneth, that
they should offer the first sheaf of the harvest. Now all this was
feasible and of an easie possibility in the land of _Canaan_, or
latitude of _Jerusalem_; for so it is observed by several Authors in
later times; and is also testified by holy Scripture in times very far
before. For when the children of _Israel_ passed the river _Jordan_ [SN:
Josh. 3.], it is delivered by way of parenthesis, that the river
overfloweth its banks in the time of harvest; which is conceived the
time wherein they passed; and it is after delivered [SN: Josh. 5.], that
in the fourteenth day they celebrated the Passover: which according to
the Law of _Moses_ was to be observed in the first moneth, or moneth of
_Abib_.
And therefore it is no wonder, what is related by _Luke_, that the
Disciples upon the _Deuteroproton_, as they passed by, plucked the ears
of corn. [SN: _What the Sabbaton Deuteroproton_, Luk. 6. _was_.] For the
_Deuteroproton_ or second first Sabbath, was the first Sabbath after the
Deutera or second of the Passover, which was the sixteenth of _Nisan_ or
_Abib_. And this is also evidenced from the received construction of the
first and latter rain. I will give you the rain of your land in his due
season, the first rain and the latter rain. [SN: _Deut._ 11.] For the
first rain fell upon the seed-time about October, and was to make the
seed to root, the latter was to fill the ear, and fell in Abib or March,
the first moneth: according as is expressed. [SN: _Joel_ 2.] And he will
cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain and the latter
rain in the first moneth; that is the moneth of _Abib_ wherein the
Passover was observed. This was the Law of _Moses_, and this in the land
of _Canaan_ was well observed, according to the first institution: but
since their dispersion and habitation in Countries, whose constitutions
admit not such tempestivity of harvests; and many not before the latter
end of Summer; notwithstanding the advantage of their Lunary account,
and intercalary moneth Veader, affixed unto the beginning of the year,
there will be found a great disparity in their observations; nor can
they strictly and at the same season with their forefathers observe the
commands of God.
To add yet further, those Geoponical rules and precepts of Agriculture
which are delivered by divers Authors, are not to be generally received;
but respectively understood unto climes whereto they are determined. For
whereas one adviseth to sow this or that grain at one season, a second
to set this or that at another, it must be conceived relatively, and
every Nation must have its Country Farm; for herein we may observe a
manifest and visible difference, not only in the seasons of harvest, but
in the grains themselves. For with us Barley-harvest is made after
wheat-harvest, but with the _Israelites_ and _Ægyptians_ it was
otherwise; so is it expressed by way of priority, _Ruth_ the 2. So
_Ruth_ kept fast by the maidens of _Boaz_ to glean unto the end of
Barley-harvest and of Wheat-harvest, which in the plague of hayl in
_Ægypt_ is more plainly delivered, _Exod._ 9. And the Flax and the
Barley were smitten, for the Barley was in the ear and the Flax was
bolled, but the Wheat and the Rye were not smitten, for they were not
grown up.
And thus we see the account established upon the arise or descent of the
stars can be no reasonable rule unto distant Nations at all, and by
reason of their retrogression but temporary unto any one. Nor must these
respective expressions be entertained in absolute considerations; for so
distinct is the relation, and so artificial the habitude of this
inferiour globe unto the superiour, and even of one thing in each unto
the other, that general rules are dangerous, and applications most safe
that run with security of circumstance. Which rightly to effect, is
beyond the subtlety of sense, and requires the artifice of reason.
CHAPTER IV
Of some computation of days and deductions of one part of the year
unto another.
[Sidenote: _That the days decrease and increase unequally._]
Fourthly, There are certain vulgar opinions concerning days of the year,
and conclusions popularly deduced from certain days of the moneth: men
commonly believing the days increase and decrease equally in the whole
year: which notwithstanding is very repugnant unto truth. For they
increase in the moneth of March, almost as much as in the two moneths of
January and February: and decrease as much in September, as they do in
July and August. For the days increase or decrease according to the
declination of the Sun, that is, its deviation Northward or Southward
from the Æquator. Now this digression is not equal but near the
Æquinoxial intersections, it is right and greater, near the Solstices
more oblique and lesser. So from the eleventh of March the vernal
Æquinox, unto the eleventh of April the Sun declineth to the North
twelve degrees; from the eleventh of April unto the eleventh of May but
eight, from thence unto the fifteenth of June, or the Summer Solstice
but three and a half: all which make twenty two degrees and an half, the
greatest declination of the Sun.
[Sidenote: _The natural proportion of humane growth_, etc.]
And this inequality in the declination of the Sun in the Zodiack or line
of life, is correspondent unto the growth or declination of man. For
setting out from infancy we increase not equally, or regularly attain to
our state or perfection: nor when we descend from our state, is our
declination equal, or carrieth us with even paces unto the grave. For as
_Hippocrates_ affirmeth, a man is hottest in the first day of his life,
and coldest in the last: his natural heat setteth forth most vigorously
at first, and declineth most sensibly at last. [SN: _In the world,_] And
so though the growth of man end not perhaps until twenty one, yet is his
stature more advanced in the first septenary than in the second, and in
the second, more than in the third, and more indeed in the first seven
years, than in the fourteen succeeding; for what stature we attain unto
at seven years, we do sometimes but double, most times come short of at
one and twenty. And so do we decline again: For in the latter age upon
the Tropick and first descension from our solstice, we are scarce
sensible of declination: but declining further, our decrement
accelerates, we set apace, and in our last days precipitate into our
graves. [SN: _and in the womb._] And thus are also our progressions in
the womb, that is, our formation, motion, our birth or exclusion. For
our formation is quickly effected, our motion appeareth later, and our
exclusion very long after: if that be true which _Hippocrates_ and
_Avicenna_ have declared, that the time of our motion is double unto
that of formation, and that of exclusion treble unto that of motion. As
if the Infant be formed at thirty five days, it moveth at seventy, and
is born the two hundred and tenth day, that is, the seventh month; or if
it receives not formation before forty five days, it moveth the
ninetieth day, and is excluded in the two hundred and seventy, that is,
the ninth month.
There are also certain popular prognosticks drawn from festivals in the
Calender, and conceived opinions of certain days in months; so is there
a general tradition in most parts of _Europe_, that inferreth the
coldness of succeeding winter from the shining of the Sun upon
_Candlemas_ day, or the Purification of the Virgin _Mary_, according to
the proverbial distich,
_Si Sol splendescat Mariâ purificante,
Major erit glacies post festum quam fuit ante._
So is it usual among us to qualifie and conditionate the twelve months
of the year, answerably unto the temper of the twelve days in
_Christmas_; and to ascribe unto March certain borrowed days from April;
all which men seem to believe upon annual experience of their own, and
the received traditions of their fore-fathers.
Now it is manifest, and most men likewise know, that the Calenders of
these computers, and the accounts of these days are very different; the
Greeks dissenting from the Latins, and the Latins from each other; the
one observing the _Julian_ or ancient account, as great _Britain_ and
part of _Germany_; the other adhering to the _Gregorian_ or new account,
as _Italy_, _France_, _Spain_, and the united Provinces of the
Netherlands. Now this later account by ten days at least anticipateth
the other; so that before the one beginneth the account, the other is
past it; yet in the several calculations, the same events seem true, and
men with equal opinion of verity, expect and confess a confirmation from
them all. Whereby is evident the Oraculous authority of tradition, and
the easie seduction of men, neither enquiring into the verity of the
substance, nor reforming upon repugnance of circumstance.
And thus may divers easily be mistaken who superstitiously observe
certain times, or set down unto themselves an observation of unfortunate
months, or dayes, or hours; As did the _Egyptians_, two in every month,
and the _Romans_, the days after the Nones, Ides and Calends. And thus
the Rules of Navigators must often fail, setting down, as _Rhodiginus_
observeth, suspected and ominous days in every month, as the first and
seventh of March, the fift and sixt of April, the sixt, the twelfth and
fifteenth of February. For the accounts hereof in these months are very
different in our days, and were different with several Nations in Ages
past; and how strictly soever the account be made, and even by the
self-same Calender, yet is it possible that Navigators may be out. For
so were the Hollanders, who passing Westward through _fretum le Mayre_,
and compassing the Globe, upon their return into their own Country,
found that they had lost a day. For if two men at the same time travel
from the same place, the one Eastward, the other Westward round about
the earth, and meet in the same place from whence the first set forth;
it will so fall out, that he which hath moved Eastward against the
diurnal motion of the Sun, by anticipating dayly something of its circle
with his own motion, will gaine one day; but he that travelleth
Westward, with the motion of the Sun, by seconding its revolution,
shall lose or come short a day. And therefore also upon these grounds
that _Delos_ was seated in the middle of the earth, it was no exact
decision, because two Eagles let fly East and West by _Jupiter_, their
meeting fell out just in the Island _Delos_.
CHAPTER V
A Digression of the wisdom of God in the site and motion of the Sun.
Having thus beheld the ignorance of man in some things, his error and
blindness in others, that is, in the measure of duration both of years
and seasons, let us a while admire the Wisdom of God in this
distinguisher of times, and visible Deity (as some have termed it) the
Sun. Which though some from its glory adore, and all for its benefits
admire, we shall advance from other considerations, and such as
illustrate the artifice of its Maker. Nor do we think we can excuse the
duty of our knowledge, if we only bestow the flourish of Poetry hereon,
or those commendatory conceits which popularly set forth the eminency of
this creature; except we ascend unto subtiler considerations, and such
as rightly understood, convincingly declare the wisdom of the Creator.
Which since a Spanish Physitian [SN: Valerius de Philos. _Sacr._] hath
begun, we will enlarge with our deductions; and this we shall endeavour
from two considerations; its proper situation, and wisely ordered
motion.
And first we cannot pass over his providence, in that it moveth at all;
for had it stood still, and were it fixed like the earth, there had been
then no distinction of times, either of day or year, of Spring, of
Autumn, of Summer, or of Winter; for these seasons are defined by the
motions of the Sun; when that approacheth neare our Zenith, or vertical
Point, we call it Summer, when furthest off, Winter, when in the middle
spaces, Spring or Autumn, whereas remaining in one place these
distinctions had ceased, and consequently the generation of all things
depending on their vicissitudes; making in one hemisphere a perpetual
Summer, in the other a deplorable and comfortless Winter. [SN: _What the
natural day is._] And thus had it also been continual day unto some, and
perpetual night unto others; for the day is defined by the abode of the
Sun above the Horizon, and the night by its continuance below; so should
we have needed another Sun, one to illustrate our Hemisphere, a second
to enlighten the other; which inconvenience will ensue in what site
soever we place it, whether in the Poles, or the Æquator, or between
them both; no spherical body of what bigness soever illuminating the
whole sphere of another, although it illuminate something more than half
of a lesser, according unto the doctrine of the Opticks.
[Sidenote: _Every part of the Earth habitable._]
His wisdom is again discernable, not only in that it moveth at all, and
in its bare motion, but wonderful in contriving the line of its
revolution; which is so prudently effected, that by a vicissitude in one
body and light it sufficeth the whole earth, affording thereby a
possible or pleasurable habitation in every part thereof; and this is
the line Ecliptick; all which to effect by any other circle it had been
impossible. For first, if we imagine the Sun to make his course out of
the Ecliptick, and upon a line without any obliquity, let it be
conceived within that Circle, that is either on the Æquator, or else on
either side: (For if we should place it either in the Meridian or
Colures, beside the subversion of its course from East to West, there
would ensue the like incommodities.) Now if we conceive the sun to move
between the obliquity of this Ecliptick in a line upon one side of the
Æquator, then would the Sun be visible but unto one pole, that is the
same which was nearest unto it. So that unto the one it would be
perpetual day; unto the other perpetual night; the one would be
oppressed with constant heat, the other with insufferable cold; and so
the defect of alternation would utterly impugn the generation of all
things; which naturally require a vicissitude of heat to their
production, and no less to their increase and conservation.
But if we conceive it to move in the Æquator; first unto a parallel
sphere, or such as have the pole for their Zenith, it would have made
neither perfect day nor night. For being in the Æquator it would
intersect their Horizon, and be half above and half beneath it: or
rather it would have made perpetual night to both; for though in regard
of the rational Horizon, which bisecteth the Globe into equal parts, the
Sun in the Æquator would intersect the Horizon: yet in respect of the
sensible Horizon (which is defined by the eye) the Sun would be visible
unto neither. For if as ocular witnesses report, and some also write, by
reason of the convexity of the Earth, the eye of man under the Æquator
cannot discover both the poles; neither would the eye under the poles
discover the Sun in the Æquator. Thus would there nothing fructifie
either near or under them: The Sun being Horizontal to the poles, and of
no considerable altitude unto parts a reasonable distance from them.
Again, unto a right sphere, or such as dwell under the Æquator,
although it made a difference in day and night, yet would it not make
any distinction of seasons: for unto them it would be constant Summer,
it being alwaies vertical, and never deflecting from them: So had there
been no fructification at all, and the Countries subjected would be as
uninhabitable, as indeed antiquity conceived them.
Lastly, It moving thus upon the Æquator, unto what position soever,
although it had made a day, yet could it have made no year: for it could
not have had those two motions now ascribed unto it, that is, from East
to West, whereby it makes the day, and likewise from West to East,
whereby the year is computed. For according to received Astronomy, the
poles of the Æquator are the same with those of the _Primum Mobile_. Now
it is impossible that on the same circle, having the same poles, both
these motions from opposite terms should be at the same time performed;
all which is salved, if we allow an obliquity in his annual motion, and
conceive him to move upon the Poles of the Zodiack, distant from these
of the world 23 degrees and an half. Thus may we discern the necessity
of its obliquity, and how inconvenient its motion had been upon a circle
parallel to the Æquator, or upon the Æquator it self.
Now with what Providence this obliquity is determined, we shall perceive
upon the ensuing inconveniences from any deviation. For first, if its
obliquity had been less (as instead of twenty three degrees, twelve or
the half thereof) the vicissitude of seasons appointed for the
generation of all things, would surely have been too short; for
different seasons would have hudled upon each other; and unto some it
had not been much better than if it had moved on the Æquator.
But had the obliquity been greater than now it is, as double, or of 40
degrees; several parts of the earth had not been able to endure the
disproportionable differences of seasons, occasioned by the great
recess, and distance of the Sun. For unto some habitations the Summer
would have been extream hot, and the Winter extream cold; likewise the
Summer temperate unto some, but excessive and in extremity unto others,
as unto those who should dwell under the Tropick of Cancer, as then
would do some part of _Spain_, or ten degrees beyond, as _Germany_, and
some part of _England_; who would have Summers as now the _Moors_ of
_Africa_. For the Sun would sometime be vertical unto them: but they
would have Winters like those beyond the Artick Circle; for in that
season the Sun would be removed above 80 degrees from them. Again, it
would be temperate to some habitations in the Summer, but very extream
in the Winter: temperate to those in two or three degrees beyond the
Artick Circle, as now it is unto us; for they would be equidistant from
that Tropick, even as we are from this at present. But the Winter would
be extream, the Sun being removed above an hundred degrees, and so
consequently would not be visible in their Horizon, no position of
sphere discovering any star distant above 90 degrees, which is the
distance of every Zenith from the Horizon. And thus if the obliquity of
this Circle had been less, the vicissitude of seasons had been so small
as not to be distinguished; if greater, so large and disproportionable
as not to be endured.
[Sidenote: _A competent distinction of seasons necessary, and why._]
Now for its situation, although it held this Ecliptick line, yet had it
been seated in any other Orb, inconveniences would ensue of condition
like the former; for had it been placed in the lowest sphere of the
Moon, the year would have consisted but of one month; for in that space
of time it would have passed through every part of the Ecliptick: so
would there have been no reasonable distinction of seasons required for
the generation and fructifying of all things; contrary seasons which
destroy the effects of one another, so suddenly succeeding. Besides by
this vicinity unto the earth, its heat had been intollerable; for if (as
many affirm) there is a different sense of heat from the different
points of its proper Orb, and that in the Apogeum or highest point
(which happeneth in Cancer) it is not so hot under that Tropick, on this
side the Æquator, as unto the other side in the Perigeum or lowest part
of the Eccentrick (which happeneth in Capricornus) surely being placed
in an Orb far lower, its heat would be unsufferable, nor needed we a
fable to set the world on fire.
But had it been placed in the highest Orb, or that of the eighth sphere,
there had been none but _Platoes_ year, and a far less distinction of
seasons; for one year had then been many, and according unto the slow
revolution of that Orb which absolveth not his course in many thousand
years, no man had lived to attain the account thereof. These are the
inconveniences ensuing upon its situation in the extream orbs, and had
it been placed in the middle orbs of the Planets, there would have
ensued absurdities of a middle nature unto them.
Now whether we adhere unto the hypothesis of _Copernicus_, affirming the
earth to move, and the Sun to stand still; or whether we hold, as some
of late have concluded, from the spots in the Sun, which appear and
disappear again; that besides the revolution it maketh with its Orbs, it
hath also a dinetical motion, and rowls upon its own Poles, whether I
say we affirm these or no, the illations before mentioned are not
thereby infringed. We therefore conclude this contemplation, and are not
afraid to believe, it may be literally said of the wisdom of God, what
men will have but figuratively spoken of the works of Christ; that if
the wonders thereof were duly described, the whole world, that is, all
within the last circumference, would not contain them. For as his Wisdom
is infinite, so cannot the due expressions thereof be finite, and if the
world comprise him not, neither can it comprehend the story of him.
CHAPTER VI
Concerning the vulgar opinion, that the Earth was slenderly peopled
before the Flood.
Beside the slender consideration men of latter times do hold of the
first ages, it is commonly opinioned, and at first thought generally
imagined, that the earth was thinly inhabited, at least not remotely
planted before the flood; whereof there being two opinions, which seem
to be of some extremity, the one too largely extending, the other too
narrowly contracting the populosity of those times; we shall not pass
over this point without some enquiry into it.
Now for the true enquiry thereof, the means are as obscure as the
matter, which being naturally to be explored by History, Humane or
Divine, receiveth thereby no small addition of obscurity. For as for
humane relations, they are so fabulous in _Deucalions_ flood, that they
are of little credit about _Ogyges_ and _Noahs_. For the Heathens (as
_Varro_ accounteth) make three distinctions of time: the first from the
beginning of the world unto the general Deluge of _Ogyges_, they term
_Adelon_, that is, a time not much unlike that which was before time,
immanifest and unknown; because thereof there is almost nothing or very
obscurely delivered: for though divers Authors have made some mention of
the Deluge, as _Manethon_ the _Egyptian_ Priest, _Xenophon_ de
æquivocis, _Fabius Pictor_ de Aureo seculo, _Mar. Cato_ de originibus,
and _Archilochus_ the Greek, who introduceth also the Testimony of
_Moses_ in his fragment _de temporibus_: yet have they delivered no
account of what preceded or went before. _Josephus_ I confess in his
Discourse against _Appion_ induceth the antiquity of the _Jews_ unto the
flood, and before from the testimony of humane Writers; insisting
especially upon _Maseus_ of _Damascus_, _Jeronimus Ægyptius_, and
_Berosus_; and confirming the long duration of their lives, not only
from these, but the authority of _Hesiod_, _Erathius_, _Hellanicus_ and
_Agesilaus_. _Berosus_ the _Chaldean_ Priest, writes most plainly,
mentioning the city of _Enos_, the name of _Noah_ and his Sons, the
building of the Ark, and also the place of its landing. And _Diodorus
Siculus_ hath in his third book a passage, which examined, advanceth as
high as _Adam_: for the _Chaldeans_, saith he, derive the Original of
their Astronomy and letters forty three thousand years before the
Monarchy of _Alexander_ the Great: now the years whereby they computed
the antiquity of their letters, being as _Xenophon_ interprets to be
accounted Lunary: the compute will arise unto the time of _Adam_. For
forty three thousand Lunary years make about three thousand six hundred
thirty four years, which answereth the Chronology of time from the
beginning of the world unto the reign of _Alexander_, as _Annius_ of
_Viterbo_ computeth in his Comment upon _Berosus_.
The second space or interval of time is accounted from the flood unto
the first Olympiad, that is, the year of the world 3174, which extendeth
unto the days of _Isaiah_ the Prophet, and some twenty years before the
foundation of _Rome_: this they term _Mythicon_ or fabulous, because the
account thereof, especially of the first part, is fabulously or
imperfectly delivered. Hereof some things have been briefly related by
the Authors above mentioned: more particularly by _Dares Phrygius_,
_Dictys Cretensis_, _Herodotus_, _Diodorus Siculus_, and _Trogus
Pompeius_; the most famous _Greek_ Poets lived also in this interval, as
_Orpheus_, _Linus_, _Musæus_, _Homer_, _Hesiod_; and herein are
comprehended the grounds and first inventions of Poetical fables, which
were also taken up by historical Writers, perturbing the _Chaldean_ and
_Egyptian_ Records with fabulous additions; and confounding their names
and stories, with their own inventions.
The third time succeeding until their present ages, they term
_Historicon_, that is, such wherein matters have been more truly
historified, and may therefore be believed. Of these times also have
been written _Herodotus_, _Thucydides_, _Xenophon_, _Diodorus_; and both
of these and the other preceding such as have delivered universal
Histories or Chronologies; as (to omit _Philo_, whose Narrations concern
the _Hebrews_) _Eusebius_, _Julius Africanus_, _Orosius_, _Ado_ of
_Vienna_, _Marianus Scotus_, _Historia tripartita_, _Urspergensis_,
_Carion_, _Pineda_, _Salian_, and with us Sir _Walter Raleigh_.
Now from the first hereof that most concerneth us, we have little or no
assistance; the fragments and broken records hereof inforcing not at
all our purpose. And although some things not usually observed, may be
from thence collected, yet do they not advantage our discourse, nor any
way make evident the point in hand. For the second, though it directly
concerns us not, yet in regard of our last medium and some illustrations
therein, we shall be constrained to make some use thereof. As for the
last, it concerns us not at all; for treating of times far below us, it
can no way advantage us. And though divers in this last Age have also
written of the first, as all that have delivered the general accounts of
time, yet are their Tractates little auxiliary unto ours, nor afford us
any light to detenebrate and clear this Truth.
As for holy Scripture and divine revelation, there may also seem therein
but slender information, there being only left a brief narration hereof
by _Moses_, and such as affords no positive determination. For the Text
delivereth but two genealogies, that is, of _Cain_ and _Seth_; in the
line of _Seth_ there are only ten descents, in that of _Cain_ but seven,
and those in a right line with mention of father and son; excepting that
of _Lamech_, where is also mention of wives, sons, and a daughter.
Notwithstanding if we seriously consider what is delivered therein, and
what is also deducible, it will be probably declared what is by us
intended, that is, the populous and ample habitation of the earth before
the flood. Which we shall labour to induce not from postulates and
entreated Maxims, but undeniable Principles declared in holy Scripture;
that is, the length of mens lives before the flood, and the large extent
of time from Creation thereunto.
We shall only first crave notice, that although in the relation of
_Moses_ there be very few persons mentioned, yet are there many more to
be presumed; nor when the Scripture in the line of _Seth_ nominates but
ten persons, are they to be conceived all that were of this generation:
The Scripture singly delivering the holy line, wherein the world was to
be preserved, first in _Noah_, and afterward in our Saviour. For in this
line it is manifest there were many more born than are named, for it is
said of them all, that they begat sons and daughters. And whereas it is
very late before it is said they begat those persons which are named in
the Scripture, the soonest at 65, it must not be understood that they
had none before; but not any in whom it pleased God the holy line should
be continued. And although the expression that they begat sons and
daughters be not determined to be before or after the mention of these,
yet must it be before in some; for before it is said that _Adam_ begat
_Seth_ at the 130 year, it is plainly affirmed that _Cain_ knew his
wife, and had a son; which must be one of the daughters of _Adam_, one
of those whereof it is after said, he begat sons and daughters. And so
for ought can be disproved there might be more persons upon earth then
are commonly supposed, when _Cain_ slew _Abel_; nor the fact so
hainously to be aggravated in the circumstance of the fourth person
living. And whereas it is said upon the nativity of _Seth_, God hath
appointed me another seed instead of _Abel_, it doth not imply he had no
other all this while; but not any of that expectation, or appointed (as
his name applies) to make a progression in the holy line; in whom the
world was to be saved, and from whom he should be born, that was
mystically slain in _Abel_.
Now our first ground to induce the numerosity of people before the
flood, is the long duration of their lives, beyond 7, 8, and 9, hundred
years. Which how it conduceth unto populosity we shall make but little
doubt, if we consider there are two main causes of numerosity in any
kind or species, that is, a frequent and multiparous way of breeding,
whereby they fill the world with others, though they exist not long
themselves; or a long duration and subsistence, whereby they do not only
replenish the world with a new annumeration of others, but also maintain
the former account in themselves. From the first cause we may observe
examples in creatures oviparous, as Birds and Fishes; in vermiparous, as
Flies, Locusts, and Gnats; in animals also viviparous, as Swine and
Conies. Of the first there is a great example in the herd of Swine in
_Galilee_; although an unclean beast, and forbidden unto the _Jews_. Of
the other a remarkable one in _Athenus_, in the Isle _Astipalea_, one of
the Cyclades now called _Stampalia_, wherein from two that were
imported, the number so increased, that the Inhabitants were constrained
to have recourse unto the Oracle _Delphos_, for an invention how to
destroy them.
Others there are which make good the paucity of their breed with the
length and duration of their daies, whereof there want not examples in
animals uniparous: [SN: _A Million of Beeves yearly killed in England._]
First, in bisulcous or cloven-hooft, as Camels, and Beeves, whereof
there is above a million annually slain in _England_. It is also said of
_Job_, that he had a thousand yoak of Oxen, and six thousand Camels; and
of the children of _Israel_ passing into the land of _Canaan_, that they
took from the _Midianites_ threescore and ten thousand Beeves; and of
the Army of _Semiramis_, that there were therein one hundred thousand
Camels. For Solipeds or firm-hoofed animals, as Horses, Asses, Mules,
etc., they are also in mighty numbers, so it is delivered that _Job_
had a thousand she Asses: that the _Midianites_ lost sixty one thousand
Asses. For Horses it is affirmed by _Diodorus_, that _Ninus_ brought
against the _Bactrians_ two hundred eighty thousand Horses; after him
_Semiramis_ five hundred thousand Horses, and Chariots one hundred
thousand. Even in creatures steril and such as do not generate, the
length of life conduceth much unto the multiplicity of the species; for
the number of Mules which live far longer then their Dams or Sires, in
Countries where they are bred, is very remarkable, and far more common
then Horses.
For Animals multifidous, or such as are digitated or have several
divisions in their feet, there are but two that are uniparous, that is,
Men and Elephants; who though their productions be but single, are
notwithstanding very numerous. The Elephant (as _Aristotle_ affirmeth)
carrieth the young two years, and conceiveth not again (as _Edvardus
Lopez_ affirmeth) in many after, yet doth their age requite this
disadvantage; they living commonly one hundred, sometime two hundred
years. Now although they be rare with us in _Europe_, and altogether
unknown unto _America_, yet in the two other parts of the world they are
in great abundance, as appears by the relation of _Gorcias ab Horto_,
Physitian to the Viceroy at _Goa_, who relates that at one venation the
King of _Sion_ took four thousand; and is of opinion they are in other
parts in greater number then herds of Beeves in _Europe_. And though
this delivered from a _Spaniard_ unacquainted with our Northern droves,
may seem very far to exceed; yet must we conceive them very numerous, if
we consider the number of teeth transported from one Country to another;
they having only two great teeth, and those not falling or renewing.
As for man, the disadvantage in his single issue is the same with these,
and in the lateness of his generation somewhat greater then any; yet in
the continual and not interrupted time thereof, and the extent of his
days, he becomes at present, if not then any other species, at least
more numerous then these before mentioned. Now being thus numerous at
present, and in the measure of threescore, fourscore or an hundred
years, if their dayes extended unto six, seven, or eight hundred, their
generations would be proportionably multiplied; their times of
generation being not only multiplied, but their subsistence continued.
For though the great Grand-child went on, the _Petrucius_ [SN: _The term
for that person from whom consanguineal relations are accounted, as in
the_ Arbor civilis.] and first Original would subsist and make one of
the world; though he outlived all the terms of consanguinity, and became
a stranger unto his proper progeny. So by compute of Scripture _Adam_
lived unto the ninth generation, unto the days of _Lamech_ the Father of
_Noah_; _Methuselah_ unto the year of the flood; and _Noah_ was
contemporary unto all from _Enoch_ unto _Abraham_. So that although some
died, the father beholding so many descents, the number of Survivers
must still be very great; for if half the men were now alive, which
lived in the last Century, the earth would scarce contain their number.
Whereas in our abridged and Septuagesimal Ages, it is very rare, and
deserves a Distick [SN: Mater ait natæ dic natæ filia, etc.] to behold
the fourth generation. _Xerxes_ complaint still remaining; and what he
lamented in his Army, being almost deplorable in the whole world: men
seldom arriving unto those years whereby _Methuselah_ exceeded nine
hundred, and what _Adam_ came short of a thousand, was defined long ago
to be the age of man.
Now although the length of days conduceth mainly unto the numerosity of
mankind, and it be manifest from Scripture they lived very long, yet is
not the period of their lives determinable, and some might be longer
livers, than we account that any were. For (to omit that conceit of
some, that _Adam_ was the oldest man, in as much as he is conceived to
be created in the maturity of mankind, that is, at 60, (for in that age
it is set down they begat children) so that adding this number unto his
930, he was 21 years older than any of his posterity) that even
_Methuselah_ was the longest liver of all the children of _Adam_, we
need not grant; nor is it definitively set down by _Moses_. Indeed of
those ten mentioned in Scripture, with their severall ages it must be
true; but whether those seven of the line of _Cain_ and their progeny,
or any of the sons or daughters posterity after them out-lived those, is
not expressed in holy Scripture; and it will seem more probable, that of
the line of _Cain_ some were longer lived than any of _Seth_; if we
concede that seven generations of the one lived as long as nine of the
other. As for what is commonly alledged, that God would not permit the
life of any unto a thousand, because (alluding unto that of _David_) no
man should live one day in the sight of the Lord; although it be urged
by divers, yet is it methinks an inference somewhat Rabbinicall; and not
of power to perswade a serious examinator.
Having thus declared how powerfully the length of lives conduced unto
populosity of those times, it will yet be easier acknowledged if we
descend to particularities, and consider how many in seven hundred years
might descend from one man; wherein considering the length of their
dayes, we may conceive the greatest number to have been alive together.
And this that no reasonable spirit may contradict, we will declare with
manifest disadvantage; for whereas the duration of the world unto the
flood was above 1600 years, we will make our compute in less then half
that time. Nor will we begin with the first man, but allow the earth to
be provided of women fit for marriage the second or third first
Centuries; and will only take as granted, that they might beget children
at sixty, and at an hundred years have twenty, allowing for that number
forty years. Nor will we herein single out _Methuselah_, or account from
the longest livers, but make choice of the shortest of any we find
recorded in the Text, excepting _Enoch_; who after he had lived as many
years as there be days in the year, was translated at 365. And thus from
one stock of seven hundred years, multiplying still by twenty, we shall
find the product to be one thousand, three hundred forty seven millions,
three hundred sixty eight thousand, four hundred and twenty.
{1} 20.
{2} 400.
{3} 8000.
{4} 160,000.
Century {5} 3,200,000.
{6} 46,000,000.
{7} 1,280,000,000.
{-----------------}
Product { 1,347,368,420.}
Now if this account of the learned _Petavius_ will be allowed, it will
make an unexpected encrease, and a larger number than may be found in
_Asia_, _Africa_ and _Europe_; especially if in _Constantinople_, the
greatest City thereof, there be no more of Europe than _Botero_
accounteth, seven hundred thousand souls. Which duly considered, we
shall rather admire how the earth contained its inhabitants, then doubt
its inhabitation; and might conceive the deluge not simply penall, but
in some way also necessary, as many have conceived of translations, if
_Adam_ had not sinned, and the race of man had remained upon earth
immortal.
Now whereas some to make good their longevity, have imagined that the
years of their compute were Lunary; unto these we must reply: That if by
a Lunary year they understand twelve revolutions of the Moon, that is
354 days, eleven fewer then in the Solary year; there will be no great
difference; at least not sufficient to convince or extenuate the
question. But if by a Lunary year they mean one revolution of the Moon,
that is, a moneth, they first introduce a year never used by the Hebrews
in their Civil accompts; and what is delivered before of the Chaldean
years (as _Xenophon_ gives a caution) was only received in the
Chronology of their Arts. Secondly, they contradict the Scripture, which
makes a plain enumeration of many moneths in the account of the Deluge;
for so is it expressed in the Text. In the tenth moneth, in the first
day of the moneth were the tops of the mountains seen: Concordant
whereunto is the relation of humane Authors, _Inundationes plures fuere,
prima novimestris inundatio terrarum sub prisco Ogyge. [SN: Xenophon de
Æquivocis.] Meminisse hoc loco par est post primum diluvium Ogygi
temporibus notatum, cum novem et amplius mensibus diem continua nox
inumbrasset, Delon ante omnes terras radiis solis illuminatum
sortitumque ex eo nomen._ [SN: Solinus.] And lastly, they fall upon an
absurdity, for they make _Enoch_ to beget children about six years of
age. For whereas it is said he begat _Methuselah_ at 65, if we shall
account every moneth a year, he was at that time some six years and an
half, for so many moneths are contained in that space of time.
Having thus declared how much the length of mens lives conduced unto the
populosity of their kind, our second foundation must be the large extent
of time, from the Creation unto the Deluge, that is (according unto
received computes about 1655 years) almost as long a time as hath passed
since the nativity of our Saviour: and this we cannot but conceive
sufficient for a very large increase, if we do but affirm what
reasonable enquirers will not deny: That the earth might be as populous
in that number of years before the flood, as we can manifest it was in
the same number after. And whereas there may be conceived some
disadvantage, in regard that at the Creation the original of mankind was
in two persons, but after the flood their propagation issued at least
from six; against this we might very well set the length of their lives
before the flood, which were abbreviated after, and in half this space
contracted into hundreds and threescores. Notwithstanding to equalize
accounts, we will allow three hundred years, and so long a time as we
can manifest from the Scripture. There were four men at least that begat
children, _Adam_, _Cain_, _Seth_, and _Enos_; So shall we fairly and
favourably proceed, if we affirm the world to have been as populous in
sixteen hundred and fifty before the flood, as it was in thirteen
hundred after. Now how populous and largely inhabited it was within this
period of time, we shall declare from probabilities, and several
testimonies of Scripture and humane Authors.
And first, To manifest the same neer those parts of the earth where the
Ark is presumed to have rested, we have the relation of holy Scripture
accounting the genealogy of _Japhet_, _Cham_ and _Sem_, and in this
last, four descents unto the division of the earth in the days of
_Peleg_, which time although it were not upon common compute much above
an hundred years, yet were men at this time mightily increased. Nor can
we well conceive it otherwise, if we consider they began already to
wander from their first habitation, and were able to attempt so mighty a
work as the building of a City and a Tower, whose top should reach unto
the heavens. Whereunto there was required no slender number of persons,
if we consider the magnitude thereof, expressed by some, and conceived
to be _Turris Beli_ in _Herodotus_; and the multitudes of people
recorded at the erecting of the like or inferiour structures: for at the
building of _Solomons_ Temple there were threescore and ten thousand
that carried burdens, and fourscore thousand hewers in the mountains,
beside the chief of his officers three thousand and three hundred; and
at the erecting of the Piramids in the reign of King _Cheops_, as
_Herodotus_ reports, there were _decem myriads_, that is an hundred
thousand _men_. And though it be said of the _Egyptians_, _Porrum et
cæpe nefas violare et frangere morsu_ [SN: Juvenal.]; yet did the summes
expended in Garlick and Onyons amount unto no less then one thousand six
hundred Talents.
[Sidenote: _Who_ Nimrod _and_ Assur _were._]
The first Monarchy or Kingdom of _Babylon_ is mentioned in Scripture
under the foundation of _Nimrod_, which is also recorded in humane
history; as beside _Berosus_, in _Diodorus_ and _Justine_, for _Nimrod_
of the Scriptures is _Belus_ of the Gentiles, and _Assur_ the same with
_Ninus_ his successour. There is also mention of divers Cities,
particularly of _Ninivey_ and _Resen_ expressed emphatically in the Text
to be a great City.
That other Countries round about were also peopled, appears by the Wars
of the Monarchs of _Assyria_ with the _Bactrians_, _Indians_,
_Scythians_, _Ethiopians_, _Armenians_, _Hyrcanians_, _Parthians_,
_Persians_, _Susians_; they vanquishing (as _Diodorus_ relateth)
_Egypt_, _Syria_, and all _Asia_ minor, even from _Bosphorus_ unto
_Tanais_. And it is said, that _Semiramis_ in her expedition against the
_Indians_ brought along with her the King of _Arabia_. About the same
time of the _Assyrian_ Monarchy, do Authors place that of the
_Sycionians_ in _Greece_, and soon after that of the _Argives_, and not
very long after, that of the _Athenians_ under _Cecrops_; and within our
period assumed are historified many memorable actions of the Greeks, as
the expedition of the _Argonautes_, with the most famous Wars of
_Thebes_ and _Troy_.
That _Canaan_ also and _Egypt_ were well peopled far within this period,
besides their plantation by _Canaan_ and _Misraim_, appeareth from the
history of _Abraham_, who in less then 400 years after the Flood,
journied from _Mesopotamia_ unto _Canaan_ and _Egypt_, both which he
found well peopled and policied into Kingdoms: wherein also in 430
years, from threescore and ten persons which came with _Jacob_ into
_Egypt_, he became a mighty Nation; for it is said, at their departure,
there journeyed from _Rhamesis_ to _Succoth_ about six hundred thousand
on foot, that were men, besides children. Now how populous the land from
whence they came was, may be collected not only from their ability in
commanding such subjections and mighty powers under them, but from the
several accounts of that Kingdom delivered by _Herodotus_. And how soon
it was peopled, is evidenced from the pillar of their King _Osyris_,
with this inscription in _Diodorus_; _Mihi pater est Saturnus deorum
junior, sum vero Osyris rex qui totum peragravi orbem usq; ad Indorum
fines, ad eos quoq; sum profectus qui septentrioni subjacent usq; ad
Istri fontes, et alias partes usq; ad Occanum._ [SN: _Who_ Osyris _and_
Saturnus Ægyptius _were_.] Now according unto the best determinations
_Osyris_ was _Misraim_, and _Saturnus Egyptius_ the same with _Cham_;
after whose name _Egypt_ is not only called in Scripture the laud of
_Ham_, but thus much is also testified by _Plutarch_; for in his
Treatise _de Osyride_, he delivereth that _Egypt_ was called _Chamia a
Chamo Noe filio_, that is from _Cham_ the son of _Noah_. And if
according to the consent of ancient Fathers, _Adam_ was buried in the
same place where Christ was crucified, that is Mount _Calvary_, the
first man ranged far before the Flood, and laid his bones many miles
from that place, where its presumed he received them. And this migration
was the greater, if as the text expresseth, he was cast out of the
East-side of Paradise to till the ground; and as the Position of the
Cherubines implieth, who were placed at the east end of the garden to
keep him from the tree of life.
That the remoter parts of the earth were in this time inhabited is also
induceable from the like testimonies; for (omitting the numeration of
_Josephus_, and the genealogies of the Sons of _Noah_) that _Italy_ was
inhabited, appeareth from the Records of _Livie_, and _Dionysius
Halicarnasscus_, the story of _Æneas_, _Evander_ and _Janus_, whom
_Annius_ of _Viterbo_, and the Chorographers of _Italy_, do make to be
the same with _Noah_. That _Sicily_ was also peopled, is made out from
the frequent mention thereof in _Homer_, the Records of _Diodorus_ and
others; but especially from a remarkable passage touched by _Aretius_
and _Ranzanus_ Bishop of _Lucerium_, but fully explained by _Thomas
Fazelli_ in his accurate History of _Sicily_; that is, from an ancient
inscription in a stone at _Panormo_, expressed by him in its proper
characters, and by a _Syrian_ thus translated, _Non est alius Deus
præter unum Deum, non est alius potens præter eundem Deum, neq; est
alius victor præter eundem quem colimus Deum: Hujus turris præfectus
est_ Sapha _filius_ Eliphat, _filii_ Esau, _fratris_ Jacob, _filii_
Isaac, _filii_ Abraham: _et turri quidem ipsi nomen est_ Baych, _sed
turri huic proximæ nomen est_ Pharath. The antiquity of the inhabitation
of _Spain_ is also confirmable, not only from _Berosus_ in the
plantation of _Tubal_, and a City continuing yet in his name, but the
story of _Gerion_, the travels of _Hercules_ and his pillars: and
especially a passage in _Strabo_, which advanceth unto the time of
_Ninus_, thus delivered in his fourth book. The _Spaniards_ (saith he)
affirm that they have had Laws and Letters above six thousand years. Now
the _Spaniards_ or _Iberians_ observing (as _Xenophon_ hath delivered)
_Annum quadrimestrem_, four moneths unto a year, this compute will make
up 2000 solary years, which is about the space of time from _Strabo_,
who lived in the days of _Augustus_, unto the reign of _Ninus_.
That _Mauritania_ and the coast of _Africa_ were peopled very soon, is
the conjecture of many wise men, and that by the _Phœnicians_, who
left their Country upon the invasion of _Canaan_ by the _Israelites_.
For beside the conformity of the _Punick_ or _Carthaginian_ language
with that of _Phœnicia_, there is a pregnant and very remarkable
testimony hereof in _Procopius_, who in his second _de bello Vandalico_,
recordeth, that in a town of _Mauritania Tingitana_, there was to be
seen upon two white Columns in the _Phœnician_ language these ensuing
words; _Nos Maurici sumus qui fugimus a facie Jehoschua filii Nunis
prædatoris_. The fortunate Islands or _Canaries_ were not unknown; for
so doth _Strabo_ interpret that speech in _Homer_ of _Proteus_ unto
_Menelaus_,
_Sed te qua terræ postremus terminus extat,
Elysium in Campum cœlestia numina ducunt._
The like might we affirm from credible histories both of _France_ and
_Germany_, and perhaps also of our own Country. For omitting the
fabulous and _Trojan_ original delivered by _Jeofrey_ of _Monmouth_, and
the express text of Scripture; that the race of _Japhet_ did people the
Isles of the _Gentiles_; the _Brittish_ Original was so obscure in
_Cæsars_ time, that he affirmeth the Inland inhabitants were
_Aborigines_, that is, such as reported that they had their beginning in
the Island. That _Ireland_ our neighbour Island was not long time
without Inhabitants, may be made probable by sundry accounts; although
we abate the Traditions of _Bartholanus_ the _Scythian_, who arrived
there three hundred years after the flood, or the relation of
_Giraldus_; that _Cæsaria_ the daughter of _Noah_ dwelt there before.
Now should we call in the learned account of _Bochartus_ [SN: Bochart.
Geog. _Sacr. part. 2._], deducing the ancient names of Countries from
_Phœnicians_, who by their plantations, discoveries, and sea
negotiations, have left unto very many Countries, _Phœnician_
denominations; the enquiry would be much shorter, and if _Spain_ in the
_Phœnician_ Original, be but the region of _Conies_, _Lusitania_, or
_Portugal_ the Countrey of Almonds, if _Brittanica_ were at first
_Baratanaca_, or the land of Tin, and _Ibernia_ or _Ireland_, were but
_Ibernae_, or the farthest habitation; and these names imposed and
dispersed by _Phœnician_ Colonies in their several navigations; the
Antiquity of habitations might be more clearly advanced.
Thus though we have declared how largely the world was inhabited within
the space of 1300 years, yet must it be conceived more populous then can
be clearly evinced; for a greater part of the earth hath ever been
peopled, then hath been known or described by Geographers, as will
appear by the discoveries of all Ages. For neither in _Herodotus_ or
_Thucydides_ do we find any mention of _Rome_, nor in _Ptolomy_ of many
parts of _Europe_, _Asia_ or _Africa_. And because many places we have
declared of long plantations of whose populosity notwithstanding or
memorable actions we have no ancient story; if we may conjecture of
these by what we find related of others, we shall not need many words,
nor assume the half of 1300 years. And this we might illustrate from the
mighty acts of the _Assyrians_ performed not long after the flood;
recorded by _Justine_ and _Diodorus_; who makes relation of expeditions
by Armies more numerous then have been ever since. For _Ninus_ King of
_Assyria_ brought against the _Bactrians_ 700000 foot, 200000 horse,
10600 Chariots. _Semiramis_ his successor led against the _Indians_
1300000 foot, 500000 horse, 100000 Chariots, and as many upon Camels:
And it is said, _Staurobates_ the _Indian_ King, met her with greater
forces then she brought against him. All which was performed within less
then four hundred years after the flood.
Now if any imagine the unity of their language did hinder their
dispersion before the flood, we confess it some hindrance at first, but
not much afterward. For though it might restrain their dispersion, it
could not their populosity; which necessarily requireth transmigration
and emission of Colonies; as we read of _Romans_, _Greeks_,
_Phœnicians_ in ages past, and have beheld examples thereof in our
days. We may also observe that after the flood before the confusion of
tongues, men began to disperse: for it is said, they journeyed towards
the East: and the Scripture it self expresseth a necessity conceived of
their dispersion, for the intent of erecting the Tower is so delivered
in the text, Lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth.
[Sidenote: _Whether any Islands before the Flood._]
Again, If any apprehend the plantation of the earth more easie in regard
of Navigation and shipping discovered since the flood, whereby the
Islands and divided parts of the earth are now inhabited; he must
consider, that whether there were Islands or no before the flood, is not
yet determined, and is with probability denied by very learned Authors.
Lastly, If we shall fall into apprehension that it was less inhabited,
because it is said in the sixt of _Genesis_ about a 120 years before the
flood, and it came to pass that when men began to multiply upon the face
of the earth. Beside that this may be only meant of the race of _Cain_,
it will not import they were not multiplied before, but that they were
at that time plentifully encreased; for so is the same word used in
other parts of Scripture. And so is it afterward in the 9 Chapter said,
that _Noah_ began to be an husbandman, that is, he was so, or earnestly
performed the Acts thereof; so it is said of our Saviour, that he began
to cast them out that bought and sold in the Temple, that is, he
actually cast them out, or with alacrity effected it.
Thus have I declared some private and probable conceptions in the
enquiry of this truth; but the certainty hereof let the Arithmetick of
the last day determine; and therefore expect no further belief than
probability and reason induce. Only desire men would not swallow
dubiosities for certainties, and receive as Principles points mainly
controvertible; for we are to adhere unto things doubtful in a dubious
and opinative way. It being reasonable for every man to vary his opinion
according to the variance of his reason, and to affirm one day what he
denied another. Wherein although at last we miss of truth; we die
notwithstanding in harmless and inoffensive errors; because we adhere
unto that, whereunto the examen of our reasons, and honest enquiries
induce us.
CHAPTER VII
Of East, and West.
The next shall be of East and West; that is, the proprieties and
conditions ascribed unto Regions respectively unto those situations;
which hath been the obvious conception of Philosophers and Geographers,
magnifying the condition of _India_, and the Eastern Countries, above
the setting and occidental Climates, some ascribing hereto the
generation of gold, precious stones and spices, others the civility and
natural endowments of men; conceiving the bodies of this situation to
receive a special impression from the first salutes of the Sun, and some
appropriate influence from his ascendent and oriental radiations. But
these proprieties affixed unto bodies, upon considerations deduced from
East, West, or those observable points of the sphere, how specious and
plausible so ever, will not upon enquiry be justified from such
foundations.
For to speak strictly, there is no East and West in nature, nor are
those absolute and invariable, but respective and mutable points,
according unto different longitudes, or distant parts of habitation,
whereby they suffer many and considerable variations. For first, unto
some the same part will be East or West in respect of one another, that
is, unto such as inhabit the same parallel, or differently dwell from
East to West. Thus as unto _Spain_, _Italy_ lyeth East, unto _Italy_
_Greece_, unto _Greece_ _Persia_, and unto _Persia_ _China_; so again
unto the Country of _China_, _Persia_ lyeth West, unto _Persia_
_Greece_, unto _Greece_ _Italy_, and unto _Italy_ _Spain_. So that the
same Countrey is sometimes East and sometimes West; and _Persia_ though
East unto _Greece_, yet is it West unto _China_.
Unto other habitations the same point will be both East and West; as
unto those that are _Antipodes_ or seated in points of the Globe
diametrically opposed. So the _Americans_ are Antipodal unto the
_Indians_, and some part of _India_ is both East and West unto
_America_, according as it shall be regarded from one side or the other,
to the right or to the left; and setting out from any middle point,
either by East or West, the distance unto the place intended is equal,
and in the same space of time in nature also performable.
To a third that have the Poles for their vertex, or dwell in the
position of a parallel sphere, there will be neither East nor West, at
least the greatest part of the year. For if (as the name _Oriental_
implyeth) they shall account that part to be East where ever the Sun
ariseth, or that West where the Sun is occidental or setteth: almost
half the year they have neither the one nor the other. For half the year
it is below their Horizon, and the other half it is continually above
it, and circling round about them intersecting not the Horizon, nor
leaveth any part for this compute. And if (which will seem very
reasonable) that part should be termed the Eastern point, where the Sun
at Æquinox, and but once in the year ariseth, yet will this also disturb
the cardinal accounts, nor will it with propriety admit that
appellation. For that surely cannot be accounted East which hath the
South on both sides; which notwithstanding this position must have. For
if unto such as live under the Pole, that he only North which is above
them, that must be Southerly which is below them, which is all the other
portion of the by Globe, beside that part possessed them. And thus these
points of East and West being not absolute in any, respective in some,
and not at all relating unto others; we cannot hereon establish so
general considerations, nor reasonably erect such immutable assertions,
upon so unstable foundations.
Now the ground that begat or promoted this conceit, was first a mistake
in the apprehension of East and West, considering thereof as of the
North and South, and computing by these as invariably as by the other;
but herein, upon second thoughts there is a great disparity. [SN: _What
the Northern and Southern Poles be._] For the North and Southern Pole,
are the invariable terms of that Axis whereon the heavens do move; and
are therefore incommunicable and fixed points; wherof the one is not
apprehensible in the other. But with East and West it is quite
otherwise: for the revolution of the Orbs being made upon the Poles of
North and South, all other points about the Axis are mutable; and
wheresoever therein the East point be determined, by succession of parts
in one revolution every point becometh East. And so if where the Sun
ariseth, that part be termed East, every habitation differing in
longitude, will have this point also different; in as much as the Sun
successively ariseth unto every one.
The second ground, although it depend upon the former, approacheth
nearer the effect; and that is the efficacy of the Sun, set out and
divided according to priority of ascent; whereby his influence is
conceived more favourable unto one Countrey than another, and to
felicitate _India_ more than any after. But hereby we cannot avoid
absurdities, and such as infer effects controulable by our senses. For
first, by the same reason that we affirm the _Indian_ richer than the
_American_, the _American_ will also be more plentiful than the
_Indian_, and _England_ or _Spain_ more fruitful than _Hispaniola_ or
golden Castle: in as much as the Sun ariseth unto the one sooner than
the other: and so accountably unto any Nation subjected unto the same
parallel, or with a considerable diversity of longitude from each other.
Secondly, An unsufferable absurdity will ensue: for thereby a Country
may be more fruitful than it self: For _India_ is more fertile than
_Spain_, because more East, and that the Sun ariseth first unto it:
_Spain_, likewise by the same reason more fruitful than _America_, and
_America_ than _India_: so that _Spain_ is less fruitful than that
Countrey, which a less fertile Country than it self excelleth.
Lastly, If we conceive the Sun hath any advantage by priority of ascent,
or makes thereby one Country more happy than another, we introduce
injustifiable determinations, and impose a natural partiality on that
Luminary, which being equidistant from the earth, and equally removed in
the East as in the West, his Power and Efficacy in both places must be
equal, as _Boetius_ hath taken notice, and _Scaliger_ [SN: De gemmis
exercitat.] hath graphically declared. Some have therefore forsaken this
refuge of the Sun, and to salve the effect have recurred unto the
influence of the Stars, making their activities National, and
appropriating their Powers unto particular regions. So _Cardan_
conceiveth the tail of _Ursa Major_ peculiarly respecteth _Europe_:
whereas indeed once in 24 hours it also absolveth its course over _Asia_
and _America_. And therefore it will not be easie to apprehend those
stars peculiarly glance on us, who must of necessity carry a common eye
and regard unto all Countries, unto whom their revolution and verticity
is also common.
The effects therefore or different productions in several Countries,
which we impute unto the action of the Sun, must surely have nearer and
more immediate causes than that Luminary. And these if we place in the
propriety of clime, or condition of soil wherein they are produced, we
shall more reasonably proceed, than they who ascribe them unto the
activity of the Sun. Whose revolution being regular, it hath no power
nor efficacy peculiar from its orientality, but equally disperseth his
beams unto all, which equally, and in the same restriction, receive his
lustre. And being an universal and indefinite agent, the effects or
productions we behold, receive not their circle from his causality, but
are determined by the principles of the place, or qualities of that
region which admits them. And this is evident not only in gemms,
minerals, and mettals, but observable in plants and animals; whereof
some are common unto many Countries, some peculiar unto one, some not
communicable unto another. [SN: _Whence proceed the different
commodities of several Countries._] For the hand of God that first
created the earth, hath with variety disposed the principles of all
things; wisely contriving them in their proper seminaries, and where
they best maintain the intention of their species; whereof if they have
not a concurrence, and be not lodged in a convenient matrix, they are
not excited by the efficacy of the Sun; or failing in particular causes,
receive a relief or sufficient promotion from the universal. For
although superiour powers co-operate with inferiour activities, and may
(as some conceive) carry a stroke in the plastick and formative draught
of all things, yet do their determinations belong unto particular
agents, and are defined from their proper principles. Thus the Sun which
with us is fruitful in the generation of Frogs, Toads and Serpents, to
this effect proves impotent in our neighbour Island; wherein as in all
other carrying a common aspect, it concurreth but unto predisposed
effects; and only suscitates those forms, whose determinations are
seminal, and proceed from the _Idea_ of themselves.
[Sidenote: _Why Astrological judgments upon Nativities be taken from the
Ascendent._]
Now whereas there be many observations concerning East, and divers
considerations of Art which seem to extol the quality of that point, if
rightly understood they do not really promote it. That the Astrologer
takes account of nativities from the Ascendent, that is, the first house
of the heavens, whose beginning is toward the East, it doth not
advantage the conceit. For, he establisheth not his Judgment upon the
orientality thereof, but considereth therein his first ascent above the
Horizon; at which time its efficacy becomes observable, and is conceived
to have the signification of life, and to respect the condition of all
things, which at the same time arise from their causes, and ascend to
their Horizon with it. Now this ascension indeed falls out respectively
in the East: but as we have delivered before, in some positions there is
no Eastern point from whence to compute these ascentions. So is it in a
parallel sphere: for unto them six houses are continually depressed, and
six never elevated: and the planets themselves, whose revolutions are
of more speed, and influences of higher consideration, must find in that
place a very imperfect regard; for half their period they absolve above,
and half beneath the Horizon. And so for six years, no man can have the
happiness to be born under _Jupiter_: and for fifteen together all must
escape the ascendent dominion of _Saturn_.
That _Aristotle_ in his Politicks, commends the situation of a City
which is open towards the East, and admitteth the raies of the rising
Sun, thereby is implied no more particular efficacy than in the West:
But that position is commended, in regard the damps and vaporous
exhalations ingendered in the absence of the Sun, are by his returning
raies the sooner dispelled; and men thereby more early enjoy a clear and
healthy habitation. Upon the like considerations it is, that _Marcus
Varro_ [SN: De re Rustica.] commendeth the same situation, and exposeth
his farm unto the equinoxial ascent of the Sun, and that _Palladius_
adviseth the front of his edifice should so respect the South, that in
the first angle it receive the rising raies of the Winter Sun, and
decline a little from the Winter setting thereof. And concordant
hereunto is the instruction of _Columella De positione villæ_: which he
contriveth into Summer and Winter habitations, ordering that the Winter
lodgings regard the Winter ascent of the Sun, that is South-East; and
the rooms of repast at supper, the Æquinoxial setting thereof, that is
the West: that the Summer lodgings regard the Æquinoxial Meridian: but
the rooms of cænation in the Summer, he obverts unto the Winter ascent,
that is, South-East; and the Balnearies or bathing places, that they may
remain under the Sun until evening, he exposeth unto the Summer
setting, that is, North-West, in all which although the Cardinal points
be introduced, yet is the consideration Solary, and only determined unto
the aspect or visible reception of the Sun.
_Jews_ and _Mahometans_ in these and our neighbour parts are observed to
use some gestures towards the East, as at their benediction, and the
killing of their meat. And though many ignorant spectators, and not a
few of the Actors conceive some Magick or Mysterie therein, yet is the
Ceremony only Topical, and in a memorial relation unto a place they
honour. So the _Jews_ do carry a respect and cast an eye upon
_Jerusalem_: for which practice they are not without the example of
their fore-fathers, and the encouragement of their wise King; For so it
is said that _Daniel_ [SN: _Dan._ 6.] went into his house, and his
windows being opened towards _Jerusalem_, he kneeled upon his knees
three times a day, and prayed. So is it expressed in the prayer of
_Solomon_, what prayer or supplication soever be made by any man, which
shall spread forth his hands towards this house: if thy people go out to
battle, and shall pray unto the Lord towards the City which thou hast
chosen, and towards the house which I have chosen to build for thy Name,
then hear thou in heaven their prayer and their supplication, and
maintain their cause. Now the observation hereof, unto the Jews that are
dispersed Westward, and such as most converse with us, directeth their
regard unto the East: But the words of _Solomon_ are appliable unto all
quarters of Heaven: and by the Jews of the East and South must be
regarded in a contrary position. So _Daniel_ in _Babylon_ looking toward
_Jerusalem_ had his face toward the West. So the Jews in their own land
looked upon it from all quarters. For the Tribe of _Judah_ beheld it to
the North: _Manasses_, _Zabulon_, and _Napthali_ unto the South:
_Reuben_ and _Gad_ unto the West; only the Tribe of _Dan_ regarded it
directly or to the due East. So when it is said [SN: _Luke_ 12.], when
you see a cloud rise out of the West, you say there cometh a shower, and
so it is: the observation was respective unto _Judea_: nor is this a
reasonable illation in all other Nations whatsoever: For the Sea lay
West unto that Country, and the winds brought rain from that quarter;
But this consideration cannot be transferred unto _India_ or _China_,
which have a vast Sea Eastward, and a vaster Continent toward the West.
So likewise when it is said [SN: _Job._] in the vulgar Translation, Gold
cometh out of the North, it is no reasonable inducement unto us and many
other Countries, from some particular mines septentrional unto his
situation, to search after that mettal in cold and Northern regions,
which we most plentifully discover in hot and Southern habitations.
For the _Mahometans_, as they partake with all Religions in something,
so they imitate the _Jew_ in this. For in their observed gestures, they
hold a regard unto _Mecha_ and _Medina Talnabi_, two Cities in _Arabia
fælix_, where their Prophet was born and buried; whither they perform
their pilgrimages: and from whence they expect he should return again.
And therefore they direct their faces unto these parts, which unto the
_Mahometans_ of _Barbary_ and _Egypt_ lie East, and are in some point
thereof unto many other parts of _Turkie_. Wherein notwithstanding there
is no Oriental respect; for with the same devotion on the other side
they regard these parts toward the West, and so with variety wheresover
they are seated, conforming unto the ground of their conception.
Fourthly, Whereas in the ordering of the Camp of _Israel_, the East
quarter is appointed unto the noblest Tribe, that is the Tribe of
_Judah_, according to the command of God [SN: _Num. 3._], in the
East-side toward the rising of the Sun shall the Standard of the Tribe
of _Judah_ pitch: it doth not peculiarly extol that point. For herein
the East is not to be taken strictly, but as it signifieth or implieth
the foremost place; for _Judah_ had the Van, and many Countries through
which they passed were seated Easterly unto them. Thus much is implied
by the Original, and expressed by Translations which strictly conform
thereto: So _Tremelius_, _Castra habentium ab anteriore parte Orientem
versus, vexillum esto castrorum Judæ_; so hath _R. Solomon Jarchi_
expounded it, the foremost or before, is the East quarter, and the West
is called behind. And upon this interpretation may all be salved that is
alleageable against it. For if the Tribe of _Judah_ were to pitch before
the Tabernacle at the East, and yet to march first, as is commanded,
_Numb._ 10. there must ensue a disorder in the Camp, nor could they
conveniently observe the execution thereof: For when they set out from
_Mount Sinah_ where the Command was delivered, they made Northward unto
_Rithmah_; from _Rissah_ unto _Eziongaber_ about fourteen stations they
marched South: From _Almon Diblathaim_ through the mountains of
_Yabarim_ and plains of _Moab_ towards _Jordan_ the face of their march
was West: So that if _Judah_ were strictly to pitch in the East of the
Tabernacle, every night he encamped in the Rear: and if (as some
conceive) the whole Camp could not be less than twelve miles long, it
had been preposterous for him to have marched foremost; or set out first
who was most remote from the place to be approached.
Fiftly, That Learning, Civility and Arts had their beginning in the
East, it is not imputable either to the action of the Sun, or its
Orientality, but the first plantation of Man in those parts, which unto
_Europe_ do carry the respect of East. [SN: _Where the Ark rested as
some think._] For on the mountains of _Ararat_, that is part of the hill
_Taurus_, between the _East Indies_ and _Scythia_, as Sir _W. Raleigh_
accounts it, the Ark of _Noah_ rested; from the East they travelled that
built the Tower of _Babel_: from thence they were dispersed and
successively enlarged, and Learning, good Arts, and all Civility
communicated. The progression whereof was very sensible; and if we
consider the distance of time between the confusion of _Babel_, and the
Civility of many parts now eminent therein, it travelled late and slowly
into our quarters. For notwithstanding the learning of _Bardes_ and
_Druides_ of elder times, he that shall peruse that work of _Tacitus de
moribus Germanorum_, may easily discern how little Civility two thousand
years had wrought upon that Nation: the like he may observe concerning
our selves, from the same Author in the life of _Agricola_, and more
directly from _Strabo_; who to the dishonour of our Predecessors, and
the disparagement of those that glory in the Antiquity of their
Ancestors, affirmeth the _Britains_ were so simple, that though they
abounded in Milk, they had not the Artifice of Cheese.
Lastly, That the Globe it self is by Cosmographers divided into East and
West, accounting from the first Meridian, it doth not establish this
conceit. For that division is not naturally founded, but artificially
set down, and by agreement; as the aptest terms to define or
commensurate the longitude of places. Thus the ancient Cosmographers do
place the division of the East and Western Hemisphere, that is the first
term of longitude in the Canary or fortunate Islands; conceiving these
parts the extreamest habitations Westward: But the Moderns have altered
that term, and translated it unto the Azores or Islands of St.
_Michael_; and that upon a plausible conceit of the small or insensible
variation of the Compass in those parts, wherein nevertheless, and
though upon second invention, they proceed upon a common and no
appropriate foundation; for even in that Meridian farther North or South
the Compass observably varieth; and there are also other places wherein
it varieth not, as _Alphonso_ and _Rodoriges de Lago_ will have it about
_Capo de las Agullas_ in _Africa_; as _Maurolycus_ affirmeth in the
shore of _Peleponesus_ in _Europe_: and as _Gilbertus_ averreth, in the
midst of great regions, in most parts of the earth.
CHAPTER VIII
Of the River _Nilus_.
Hereof uncontroulably and under general consent many opinions are
passant, which notwithstanding upon due examination, do admit of doubt
or restriction. It is generally esteemed, and by most unto our days
received, that the River of _Nilus_ hath seven ostiaries; that is, by
seven Channels disburdeneth it self into the Sea. Wherein
notwithstanding, beside that we find no concurrent determination of ages
past, and a positive and undeniable refute of these present, the
affirmative is mutable, and must not be received without all limitation.
For some, from whom we receive the greatest illustrations of Antiquity,
have made no mention hereof: So _Homer_ hath given no number of its
Channels, nor so much as the name thereof in use with all Historians.
_Eratosthenes_ in his description of _Egypt_ hath likewise passed them
over. [SN: How Egypt first became firm land.] _Aristotle_ is so
indistinct in their names and numbers, that in the first _of Meteors_ he
plainly affirmeth the Region of _Egypt_ (which we esteem the ancientest
Nation in the world) was a meer gained ground, and that by the setling
of mud and limous matter brought down by the River _Nilus_, that which
was at first a continued Sea, was raised at last into a firm and
habitable Country. The like opinion he held of _Mæotis Palus_, that by
the floods of _Tanais_ and earth brought down thereby, it grew
observably shallower in his days, and would in process of time become a
firm land. And though his conjecture be not as yet fulfilled, yet is the
like observable in the River _Gihon_, a branch of _Euphrates_ and River
of Paradise; which having in former Ages discharged it self into the
_Persian_ Sea, doth at present fall short; being lost in the lakes of
_Chaldea_, and hath left between the Sea, a large and considerable part
of dry land.
Others expresly treating hereof, have diversly delivered themselves;
_Herodotus_ in his Euterpe makes mention of seven; but carelesly of two
thereof; that is _Bolbitinum_, and _Bucolicum_; for these, saith he,
were not the natural currents, but made by Art for some occasional
convenience. _Strabo_ in his Geography naming but two, _Peleusiacum_ and
_Canopicum_, plainly affirmeth there were many more than seven; _Inter
hæc alia quinque_, etc. There are (saith he) many remarkable towns
within the currents of Nile, especially such which have given the names
unto the ostiaries thereof, not unto all, for they are eleven, and four
besides, but unto seven and most considerable; that is _Canopicum_,
_Bolbitinum_, _Selenneticum_, _Sebenneticum_, _Pharniticum_,
_Mendesium_, _Taniticum_ and _Pelusium_: wherein to make up the number,
one of the artificial chanels of _Herodotus_ is accounted. _Ptolomy_ an
_Egyptian_, and born at the _Pelusian_ mouth of _Nile_, in his Geography
maketh nine: and in the third Map of _Africa_, hath unto their mouths
prefixed their several names; _Heracleoticum_, _Bolbitinum_,
_Sebenneticum_, _Pineptum_, _Diolcos_, _Pathmeticum_, _Mendesium_,
_Taniticum_, _Peleusiacum_: wherein notwithstanding there are no less
then three different names from those delivered by _Pliny_. All which
considered, we may easily discern that Authors accord not either in name
or number; and must needs confirm the Judgement of _Maginus_, _de
Ostiorum Nili numero et nominibus, valde antiqui scriptores discordant_.
Modern Geographers and travellers do much abate of this number, for as
_Maginus_ and others observe, there are now but three or four mouths
thereof; as _Gulielmus Tyrius_ long ago, and _Bellonius_ since, both
ocular enquirers, with others have attested. For below _Cairo_, the
River divides it self into four branches, whereof two make the chief and
navigable streams, the one running to _Pelusium_ of the Ancients, and
now _Damiata_; the other unto _Canopium_, and now _Roscetta_; the other
two, saith Mr. _Sandys_ [SN: Sand. Relation.], do run between these; but
poor in water. Of those seven mentioned by _Herodotus_, and those nine
by _Ptolomy_, these are all I could either see or hear of. Which much
confirmeth the testimony of the Bishop of _Tyre_ a diligent and ocular
Enquirer; who in his holy war doth thus deliver himself. We wonder much
at the Ancients, who assigned seven mouths unto _Nilus_; which we can no
otherwise salve, then that by process of time, the face of places is
altered, and the river hath lost his chanels; or that our fore-fathers
did never obtain a true account thereof.
And therefore when it is said in holy Scripture [SN: _Isa._ 11. 15,
16.], The Lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the _Egyptian_ sea,
and with his mighty wind he shall shake his hand over the river, and
shall smite it in the seven streams, and make men go over dry-shod. If
this expression concerneth the river _Nilus_, it must only respect the
seven principal streams. But the place is very obscure, and whether
thereby be not meant the river _Euphrates_, is not without some
controversie; as is collectible from the subsequent words; And there
shall be an high way for the remnant of his people, that shall be left
from _Assyria_; and also from the bare name _River_, emphatically
signifying _Euphrates_, and thereby the division of the _Assyrian_
Empire into many fractions, which might facilitate their return: as
_Grotius_ hath observed [SN: Gr. Not in Isaiam.]; and is more plainly
made out, if the _Apocrypha_ of _Esdras_ [SN: _Esdr._ 2. 13, 43, 47.],
and that of the _Apocalyps_[SN: _Apoc._ 16. 12.] have any relation
hereto.
Lastly, Whatever was or is their number, the contrivers of Cards and
Maps afford us no assurance or constant description therein. For whereas
_Ptolemy_ hath set forth nine, _Hondius_ in his Map of _Africa_ makes
but eight, and in that of _Europe_ ten. _Ortelius_ in the Map of the
_Turkish_ Empire, setteth down eight, in that of _Egypt_ eleven; and
_Maginus_ in his Map of that Country hath observed the same number. And
if we enquire farther, we shall find the same diversity and discord in
divers others.
Thus may we perceive that this account was differently related by the
Ancients, that it is undeniably rejected by the Moderns, and must be
warily received by any. For if we receive them all into account, they
were more then seven, if only the natural sluces, they were fewer; and
however we receive them, there is no agreeable and constant description
thereof. And therefore how reasonable it is to draw continual and
durable deductions from alterable and uncertain foundations; let them
consider who make the gates of _Thebes_, and the mouths of this River a
constant and continued periphrasis for this number, and in their
Poetical expressions do give the River that Epithite unto this day.
The same River is also accounted the greatest of the earth, called
therefore _Fluviorum pater_, and _totius Orbis maximus_, by _Ortelius_:
If this be true, many Maps must be corrected, or the relations of divers
good Authors renounced.
For first, In the deliniations of many Maps of _Africa_, the River
_Niger_ exceedeth it about ten degrees in length, that is, no less then
six hundred miles. For arising beyond the Æquator it maketh Northward
almost 15 degrees, and deflecting after Westward, without Meanders,
continueth a strait course about 40 degrees; and at length with many
great currents disburdeneth it self into the Occidental Ocean. Again, if
we credit the descriptions of good Authors, other Rivers excell it in
length, or breadth, or both. _Arrianus_ in his history of _Alexander_,
assigneth the first place unto the River _Ganges_; which truly according
unto latter relations, if not in length, yet in breadth and depth may be
granted to excell it. For the magnitude of _Nilus_ consisteth in the
dimension of longitude, and is inconsiderable in the other; what stream
it maintaineth beyond _Syene_ or _Asna_, and so forward unto its
original, relations are very imperfect; but below these places, and
farther removed from the head, the current is but narrow, and we read in
the History of the _Turks_, the _Tartar_ horsemen of _Selimus_ swam over
the _Nile_ from _Cairo_, to meet the forces of _Tonumbeus_. Baptista
Scortia expresly treating hereof, [SN: _De natura et incremento Nili._]
preferreth the River of _Plate_ in _America_; for that as _Maffeus_ hath
delivered, falleth into the Ocean in the latitude of forty leagues; and
with that source and plenty that men at Sea do tast fresh water, before
they approach so near as to discover the land. So is it exceeded by that
which by _Cardan_ is termed the greatest in the world, that is the River
_Oregliana_ in the same continent; which as _Maginus_ delivereth, hath
been navigated 6000 miles; and opens in a chanel of ninety leagues
broad; so that, as _Acosta_, an ocular witness recordeth, they that sail
in the middle, can make no land of either side.
Now the ground of this assertion was surely the magnifying esteem of the
Ancients, arising from the indiscovery of its head. For as things
unknown seem greater then they are, and are usually received with
amplifications above their nature; so might it also be with this River,
whose head being unknown and drawn to a proverbial obscurity, the
opinion thereof became without bounds; and men must needs conceit a
large extent of that to which the discovery of no man had set a period.
And this an usual way to give the superlative unto things of eminency in
any kind; and when a thing is very great, presently to define it to be
the greatest of all. Whereas indeed Superlatives are difficult; whereof
there being but one in every kind, their determinations are dangerous,
and must not be made without great circumspection. [SN: _The greatest
Cities of the World._] So the City of Rome is magnified by the _Latines_
to be the greatest of the earth; but time and Geography informs _us_,
that _Cairo_ is bigger, and _Quinsay_ in _China_ far exceedeth both.
[SN: The highest Hills.] So is _Olympus_ extolled by the _Greeks_, as an
hill attaining unto heaven; but the enlarged Geography of aftertimes
makes slight account hereof, when they discourse of _Andes_ in _Peru_,
or _Teneriffa_ in the _Canaries_. And we understand by a person who hath
lately had a fair opportunity to behold the magnified mount _Olympus_,
that it is exceeded by some peakes of the _Alpes_. So have all Ages
conceived, and most are still ready to swear, the Wren is the least of
Birds; yet the discoveries of _America_, and even of our own Plantations
have shewed us one far less; that is, the Humbird [SN: Tomineio.], not
much exceeding a Beetle. And truly, for the least and greatest, the
highest and the lowest of every kind, as it is very difficult to define
them in visible things, so is it to understand in things invisible. Thus
is it no easie lesson to comprehend the first matter, and the affections
of that which is next neighbour unto nothing, but impossible truly to
comprehend God, who indeed is all in all. For things as they arise unto
perfection, and approach unto God, or descend to imperfection, and draw
nearer unto nothing, fall both imperfectly into our apprehensions; the
one being too weak for our conceptions, our conceptions too weak for the
other.
Thirdly, Divers conceptions there are concerning its increment or
inundation. The first unwarily opinions, that this encrease or annual
overflowing is proper unto _Nile_, and not agreeable unto any other
River; which notwithstanding is common unto many Currents of _Africa_.
For about the same time the River _Niger_ and _Zaire_ do overflow; and
so do the Rivers beyond the mountains of the Moon, as _Suama_, and
_Spirito Santo_. And not only these in _Africa_, but some also in
_Europe_ and _Asia_; for so it is reported of _Menan_ in _India_, and so
doth _Botero_ report of _Duina_ in _Livonia_; and the same is also
observable in the River _Jordan_ in _Judea_; for so is it delivered,
that _Jordan_ overfloweth all his banks in the time of harvest.
The effect indeed is wonderful in all, and the causes surely best
resolvable from observations made in the Countries themselves, the parts
through which they pass, or whence they take their Original. That of
_Nilus_ hath been attempted by Many, and by some to that despair of
resolution, that they have only referred it unto the Providence of God,
and his secret manuduction of all things unto their ends. [SN: The cause
of the overflowing of Nilus.] But divers have attained the truth, and
the cause alledged by _Diodorus_, _Seneca_, _Strabo_, and others, is
allowable; that the inundation of _Nilus_ in _Egypt_ proceeded from the
rains in _Æthiopia_, and the mighty source of waters falling towards the
fountains thereof. For this inundation unto the _Egyptians_ happeneth
when it is winter unto the _Æthiopians_; which habitations, although
they have no cold Winter (the Sun being no farther removed from them in
Cancer, then unto us in Taurus) yet is the fervour of the air so well
remitted, as it admits a sufficient generation of vapors, and plenty of
showers ensuing thereupon. This Theory of the Ancients is since
confirmed by experience of the Moderns; by _Franciscus Alvarez_, who
lived long in those parts, and left a description of _Æthiopia_;
affirming that from the middle of June unto September, there fell in his
time continual rains. As also _Antonius Ferdinandus_, who in an Epistle
written from thence, and noted by _Codignus_, affirmeth, that during the
winter, in those Countries there passed no day without rain.
Now this is also usual, to translate a remarkable quality into a
propriety, and where we admire an effect in one, to opinion there is not
the like in any other. With these conceits do common apprehensions
entertain the antidotal and wondrous condition of _Ireland_; conceiving
only in that land an immunity from venemous creatures: but unto him that
shall further enquire, the same will be affirmed of _Creta_, memorable
in ancient stories, even unto fabulous causes, and benediction from the
birth of _Jupiter_. The same is also found in _Ebusus_ or _Evisa_, an
Island near _Majorca_ upon the coast of _Spain_. With these
apprehensions do the eyes of neighbour Spectators behold _Ætna_, the
flaming mountain in _Sicilia_; but Navigators tell us there is a burning
mountain in Island, a more remarkable one in _Teneriffa_ of the
_Canaries_, and many Vulcano's or fiery Hils elsewhere. Thus Crocodiles
were thought to be peculiar unto _Nile_, and the opinion so possessed
_Alexander_, that when he had discovered some in _Ganges_, he fell upon
a conceit he had found the head of _Nilus_; but later discoveries affirm
they are not only in _Asia_ and _Africa_, but very frequent in some
rivers of _America_.
Another opinion confineth its Inundation, and positively affirmeth, it
constantly encreaseth the seventeenth day of June; wherein perhaps a
larger form of speech were safer, then that which punctually prefixeth a
constant day thereto. For this expression is different from that of the
Ancients, as _Herodotus_, _Diodorus_, _Seneca_, etc. delivering only
that it happeneth about the entrance of the Sun into Cancer; wherein
they warily deliver themselves, and reserve a reasonable latitude. So
when _Hippocrates_ saith, _Sub Cane et ante Canem difficiles sunt
purgationes_: There is a latitude of days comprised therein; for under
the Dog-star he containeth not only the day of its ascent, but many
following, and some ten days preceeding. So _Aristotle_ delivers the
affections of animals: with the wary terms of _Circa, et magna ex
parte_: and when _Theodorus_ translateth that part of his, _Coeunt
Thunni et Scombri mense Februario post Idus, pariunt Junio ante Nonas_:
_Scaliger_ for _ante Nonas_, renders it _Junii initio_; because that
exposition affordeth the latitude of divers days: For affirming it
happeneth before the Nones, he alloweth but one day; that is the
Calends; for in the _Roman_ account, the second day is the fourth of the
Nones of June.
Again, Were the day definitive, it had prevented the delusion of the
devil, nor could he have gained applause by its prediction; who
notwithstanding (as _Athanasius_ in the life of _Anthony_ relateth) to
magnifie his knowledge in things to come, when he perceived the rains to
fall in _Æthiopia_, would presage unto the _Egyptians_ the day of its
inundation. And this would also make useless that natural experiment
observed in earth or sand about the River; by the weight whereof (as
good Authors report) they have unto this day a knowledge of its
encrease.
Lastly, It is not reasonable from variable and unstable causes, to
derive a fixed and constant effect, and such are the causes of this
inundation, which cannot indeed be regular, and therefore their effects
not prognosticable like Eclipses. For depending upon the clouds and
descent of showers in _Æthiopia_, which have their generation from
vaporous exhalations, they must submit their existence unto
contingencies, and endure anticipation and recession from the movable
condition of their causes. And therefore some years there hath been no
encrease at all, as some conceive in the years of Famin under _Pharaoh_,
as _Seneca_, and divers relate of the eleventh year of _Cleopatra_; nor
nine years together, as is testified by _Calisthenes_. Some years it
hath also retarded, and came far later then usually it was expected, as
according to _Sozomen_ and _Nicephorus_ it happened in the days of
_Theodosius_; whereat the people were ready to mutiny, because they
might not sacrifice unto the River, according to the custom of their
Predecessors.
Now this is also an usual way of mistake, and many are deceived who too
strictly construe the temporal considerations of things. Thus books will
tell us, and we are made to believe that the fourteenth year males are
seminifical and pubescent; but he that shall enquire into the
generality, will rather adhere unto the cautelous assertion of
_Aristotle_, that is, _bis septem annis exactis_, and then but _magna ex
parte_. That Whelps are blind nine days, and then begin to see, is
generally believed, but as we have elsewhere declared, it is exceeding
rare, nor do their eye-lids usually open until the twelfth, and
sometimes not before the fourteenth day. And to speak strictly, an
hazardable determination it is unto fluctuating and indifferent effects,
to affix a positive Type or Period. For in effects of far more regular
causalities, difficulties do often arise, and even in time it self,
which measureth all things, we use allowance in its commensuration. Thus
while we conceive we have the account of a year in 365 days, exact
enquirers and Computists will tell us, that we escape 6 hours, that is a
quarter of a day. And so in a day which every one accounts 24 hours, or
one revolution of the Sun, in strict account we must allow the addition
of such a part as the Sun doth make in his proper motion, from West to
East, whereby in one day he describeth not a perfect Circle.
Fourthly, It is affirmed by many, and received by most, that it never
raineth in _Egypt_, the river supplying that defect, and bountifully
requiting it in its inundation: but this must also be received in a
qualified sense, that is, that it rains but seldom at any time in the
Summer, and very rarely in the Winter. [SN: _That_ Egypt _hath rain_.]
But that great showers do sometimes fall upon that Region, beside the
Assertion of many Writers, [SN: _Sir_ William Paston _Baronet_.] we can
confirm from honourable and ocular testimony, and that not many years
past, it rained in Grand _Cairo_ divers days together.
The same is also attested concerning other parts of _Egypt_, by _Prosper
Alpinus_, who lived long in that Country, and hath left an accurate
Treaty of the medical practise thereof. _Cayri raro decidunt pluviæ,
Alexandriæ, Pelusiiq; et in omnibus locis mari adjacentibus, pluit
largissime et sæpe_; that is, it raineth seldom at _Cairo_, but at
_Alexandria_, _Damiata_, and places near the Sea, it raineth plentifully
and often. Whereto we might add the latter testimony of Learned Mr.
_Greaves_, in his accurate description of the _Pyramids_.
Beside, Men hereby forget the relation of holy Scripture. [SN: _Exod._
9.] _Behold I will cause it to rain a very great hail, such as hath not
been in_ Egypt _since the foundation thereof, even untill now_. Wherein
God threatning such a rain as had not happened, it must be presumed they
had been acquainted with some before, and were not ignorant of the
substance, the menace being made in the circumstance. The same
concerning hail is inferrible from _Prosper Alpinus. Rarissime nix,
grando_, it seldom snoweth or haileth. Where by we must concede that
snow and hail do sometimes fall, because they happen seldom.
Now this mistake ariseth from a misapplication of the bounds or limits
of time, and an undue transition from one unto another; which to avoid,
we must observe the punctual differences of time, and so distinguish
thereof, as not to confound or lose the one in the other. For things may
come to pass, _Semper, Plerumq; Sæpe, aut Nunquam, Aliquando, Raro_;
that is, Always, or Never, For the most part, or Sometimes, Ofttimes, or
Seldom. Now the deception is usual which is made by the mis-application
of these; men presently concluding that to happen often, which happeneth
but sometimes: that never, which happeneth but seldom; and that alway,
which happeneth for the most part. So is it said, the Sun shines every
day in Rhodes, because for the most part it faileth not. So we say and
believe that a Camelion never eateth, but liveth only upon air, whereas
indeed it is seen to eat very seldom, but many there are who have beheld
it to feed on Flyes. And so it is said, that children born in the eighth
moneth live not, that is, for the most part, but not to be concluded
alwaies: nor it seems in former ages in all places: for it is otherwise
recorded by _Aristotle_ concerning the births of _Egypt_.
Lastly, It is commonly conceived that divers Princes hath attempted to
cut the Isthmus or tract of land [SN: Lingua maris Ægyptii. _Isa. 11.
15._] which parteth the _Arabian_ and _Mediterranean_ Sea: but upon
enquiry I find some difficulty concerning the place attempted; many with
good authority affirming, that the intent was not immediately to unite
these Seas, but to make a navigable chanel between the Red Sea and the
Nile, the marks whereof are extant to this day; it was first attempted
by _Sesostris_, after by _Darius_, and in a fear to drown the Country,
deserted by them both; but was long after re-attempted and in some
manner effected by _Philadelphus_. And so the grand Signior who is Lord
of the Country, conveyeth his Gallies into the Red Sea by the Nile; for
he bringeth them down to Grand _Cairo_ where they are taken in pieces,
carried upon Camels backs, and rejoyned together at Sues, his port and
Naval station for that Sea; whereby in effect he acts the design of
_Cleopatra_, who after the battle of _Actium_ in a different way would
have conveyed her Gallies into the Red Sea.
And therefore that proverb to cut an Isthmus [SN: Isthmum perfodere.],
that is, to take great pains, and effect nothing, alludeth not unto this
attempt; but is by _Erasmus_ applyed unto several other, as that
undertaking of the Cnidians to cut their Isthmus, but especially that of
_Corinth_ so unsuccessfully attempted by many Emperours. The Cnidians
were deterred by the peremptory disswasion of _Apollo_, plainly
commanding them to desist; for if God had thought it fit, he would have
made that Country an Island at first. But this perhaps will not be
thought a reasonable discouragement unto the activity of those spirits
which endeavour to advantage nature by Art, and upon good grounds to
promote any part of the universe; nor will the ill success of some be
made a sufficient determent unto others; who know that many learned men
affirm, that Islands were not from the beginning, that many have been
made since by Art, that some Isthmus have been eat through by the Sea,
and others cut by the spade: And if policy would permit, that of
_Panama_ in _America_ were most worthy the attempt: it being but few
miles over, and would open a shorter cut unto the East Indies and
China.
CHAPTER IX
Of the Red Sea.
Contrary apprehensions are made of the Erythræan or Red Sea; most
apprehending a material redness therein, from whence they derive its
common denomination; and some so lightly conceiving hereof, as if it had
no redness at all, are fain to recur unto other originals of its
appellation. [SN: _What the Red Sea is._] Wherein to deliver a distinct
account, we first observe that without consideration of colour it is
named the _Arabian Gulph_: The Hebrews who had best reason to remember
it, do call it _Zuph_, or the weedy Sea; because it was full of sedge,
or they found it so in their passage; the _Mahometans_ who are now lords
thereof do know it by no other name then the _Gulph_ of _Mecha_ a City
of _Arabia_.
The stream of Antiquity deriveth its name from King _Erythrus_; so
sleightly conceiving of the nominal deduction from Redness, that they
plainly deny there is any such accident in it. The words of _Curtius_
are plain beyond Evasion, _Ab Erythro rege inditum est nomen, propter
quod ignari rubere aquas credunt_: Of no more obscurity are the words of
_Philostratus_, and of later times, _Sabellicus; Stulte persuasam est
vulgo rubras alicubi esse maris aquas, quin ab Erythro rege nomen pelago
inditum_. Of this opinion was _Andræas Corsalius_, _Pliny_, _Solinus_,
_Dio Cassius_, who although they denied not all redness, yet did they
rely upon the original from King _Erythrus_. [SN: _More exactly hereof_
Bochartus _and Mr._ Dickinson.]
Others have fallen upon the like, or perhaps the same conceit under
another appellation; deducing its name not from King _Erythrus_, but
_Esau_ or _Edom_, whose habitation was upon the coasts thereof. Now
_Edom_ is as much as _Erythrus_, and the red Sea no more then the
_Idumean_; from whence the posterity of _Edom_ removing towards the
Mediterranean coast, according to their former nomination by the Greeks
were called Phœnicians or red men: and from a plantation and colony
of theirs, an Island near Spain was by the Greek describers termed
_Erithra_, as is declared by _Strabo_ and _Solinus_.
Very many omitting the nominal derivation, do rest in the gross and
literal conception thereof, apprehending a real redness and constant
colour of parts. Of which opinion are also they which hold the Sea
receiveth a red and minious tincture from springs, wells, and currents
that fall into it; and of the same belief are probably many Christians,
who conceiving the passage of the _Israelites_ through this Sea to have
been the type of Baptism, according to that of the Apostle [SN: 1 _Cor._
10. 2.], All were baptized unto _Moses_ in the cloud, and in the Sea:
for the better resemblance of the blood of Christ, they willingly
received it in the apprehension of redness, and a colour agreeable unto
its mystery: according unto that of _Austin_, _Significat mare illud
rubrum Baptismum Christi; unde nobis Baptismus Christi nisi sanguine
Christi consecratus_? [SN: Aug. in Johannem.]
But divers Moderns not considering these conceptions, and appealing unto
the Testimony of sense, have at last determined the point: concluding a
redness herein, but not in the sense received. Sir _Walter Raleigh_ from
his own and _Portugal_ observations, doth place the redness of the Sea
in the reflection from red Islands, and the redness of the earth at the
bottom: wherein Coral grows very plentifully, and from whence in great
abundance it is transported into _Europe_. The observations of
_Alberquerque_ and _Stephanus de Gama_ (as from _Johannes de Bairros_,
_Fernandius de Cordova_ relateth) derive this redness from the colour of
the sand and argillous earth at the bottom; for being a shallow Sea,
while it rowleth to and fro, there appeareth a redness upon the water,
which is most discernable in sunny and windy weather. But that this is
no more than a seeming redness, he confirmeth by an experiment; for in
the reddest part taking up a vessel of water, it differed not from the
complexion of other Seas. Nor is this colour discoverable in every place
of that Sea, for as he also observeth, in some places it is very green,
in others white and yellow, according to the colour of the earth or sand
at the bottom. And so may _Philostratus_ be made out, when he saith,
this Sea is blew; or _Bellonius_ denying this redness, because he beheld
not that colour about Sues; or when _Corsalius_ at the mouth thereof
could not discover the same.
Now although we have enquired the ground of redness in this Sea, yet are
we not fully satisfied: for what is forgot by many, and known by few,
there is another Red Sea whose name we pretend not to make out from
these principles; that is, the _Persian_ Gulph or Bay, which divideth
the _Arabian_ and _Persian_ shore, as _Pliny_ hath described it. _Mare
rubrum in duos dividitur sinus, is qui ab Oriente est, Persicus
appellatur_; or as _Solinus_ expresseth it, _Qui ab Oriente est Persicus
appellatur, ex adverso unde Arabia est, Arabicus_: whereto assenteth
_Suidas_, _Ortelius_, and many more. And therefore there is no absurdity
in _Strabo_ when he delivereth that _Tigris_ and _Euphrates_ do fall
into the Red Sea, and _Fernandius de Cordova_ justly defendeth his
Countryman _Seneca_ in that expression;
_Et qui renatum prorsus excipiens diem
Tepidum Rubenti Tigrin immiscet freto._
Nor hath only the _Persian_ Sea received the same name with the
_Arabian_, but what is strange, and much confounds the distinction, the
name thereof is also derived from King _Erythrus_; who was conceived to
be buried in an Island of this Sea, as _Dionysius Afer_, _Curtius_ and
_Suidas_ do deliver. Which were of no less probability than the other,
if (as with the same authors _Strabo_ affirmeth) he was buried neer
_Caramania_ bordering upon the _Persian_ Gulph. And if his Tomb was seen
by _Nearchus_, it was not so likely to be in the _Arabian_ Gulph; for we
read that from the River _Indus_ he came unto _Alexander_ at _Babylon_,
some few days before his death. Now _Babylon_ was seated upon the River
_Euphrates_, which runs into the _Persian_ Gulph. And therefore however
the Latin expresseth it in _Strabo_, that _Nearchus_ suffered much in
the _Arabian Sinus_, yet is the original, that is, the Gulf of
_Persia_.
That therefore the Red Sea or _Arabian_ Gulph received its name from
personal derivation, though probable, is but uncertain; that both the
Seas of one name should have one common denominator, less probable; that
there is a gross and material redness in either, not to be affirmed:
that there is an emphatical or appearing redness in one, not well to be
denied. And this is sufficient to make good the Allegory of the
Christians: and in this distinction may we justifie the name of the
Black Sea, given unto _Pontus Euxinus:_ the name of _Xanthus_, or the
yellow River of _Phrygia_: and the name of _Mar Vermeio_, or the Red
Sea in _America_.
CHAPTER X
Of the Blackness of _Negroes_.
It is evident not only in the general frame of Nature, that things most
manifest unto sense, have proved obscure unto the understanding: But
even in proper and appropriate Objects, wherein we affirm the sense
cannot err, the faculties of reason most often fail us. Thus of colours
in general, under whose gloss and vernish all things are seen, few or
none have yet beheld the true nature; or positively set down their
incontroulable causes. Which while some ascribe unto the mixture of the
Elements, others to the graduality of Opacity and Light; they have left
our endeavours to grope them out by twi-light, and by darkness almost to
discover that whose existence is evidenced by Light. [SN: _The
Principles of Colour according to the_ Chymists.] The _Chymists_ have
laudably reduced their causes unto Sal, Sulphur, and Mercury; and had
they made it out so well in this, as in the objects of smell and taste,
their endeavours had been more acceptable: For whereas they refer Sapor
unto Salt, and Odor unto Sulphur, they vary much concerning colour; some
reducing it unto Mercury, some to Sulphur; others unto Salt. Wherein
indeed the last conceit doth not oppress the former; and though Sulphur
seem to carry the master-stroak, yet Salt may have a strong
co-operation. For beside the fixed and terrestrious Salt, there is in
natural bodies a _Sal niter_ referring unto Sulphur; there is also a
volatile or Amnoniack Salt, retaining unto Mercury; by which Salts the
colours of bodies are sensibly qualified, and receive degrees of lustre
or obscurity, superficiality or profundity, fixation or volatility.
Their general or first Natures being thus obscure, there will be greater
difficulties in their particular discoveries; for being farther removed
from their simplicities, they fall into more complexed considerations;
and so require a subtiler act of reason to distinguish and call forth
their natures. Thus although a man understood the general nature of
colours, yet were it no easie Problem to resolve, Why Grass is green?
Why Garlick, Molyes, and Porrets have white roots, deep green leaves,
and black seeds? Why several docks and sorts of Rhubarb with yellow
roots, send forth purple flowers? Why also from Lactary or milky plants
which have a white and lacteous juyce dispersed through every part,
there arise flowers blew and yellow? Moreover, beside the specifical and
first digressions ordained from the Creation, which might be urged to
salve the variety in every species; Why shall the marvail of _Peru_
produce its flowers of different colours, and that not once, or
constantly, but every day, and variously? Why Tulips of one colour
produce some of another, and running through almost all, should still
escape a blew? And lastly, Why some men, yea and they a mighty and
considerable part of mankind, should first acquire and still retain the
gloss and tincture of blackness? Which whoever strictly enquires, shall
find no less of darkness in the cause, than in the effect it self; there
arising unto examination no such satisfactory and unquarrelable reasons,
as may confirm the causes generally received; which are but two in
number. The heat and scorch of the Sun; or the curse of God on _Cham_
and his Posterity.
The first was generally received by the Ancients, who in obscurities had
no higher recourse than unto Nature, as may appear by a Discourse
concerning this point in _Strabo_. By _Aristotle_ it seems to be implied
in those Problems which enquire why the Sun makes men black, and not the
fire? Why it whitens wax, yet blacks the skin? By the word _Æthiops_ it
self, applied to the memorablest Nations of _Negroes_, that is of a burnt
and torrid countenance. The fancy of the Fable infers also the Antiquity
of the opinion; which deriveth this complexion from the deviation of the
Sun, and the conflagration of all things under _Phaeton_. But this opinion
though generally embraced, was I perceive rejected by _Aristobulus_ a very
ancient Geographer; as is discovered by _Strabo_. It hath been doubted by
several modern Writers, particularly by _Ortelius_; but amply and
satisfactorily discussed as we know by no man. We shall therfore endeavour
a full delivery hereof, declaring the grounds of doubt, and reasons of
denial, which rightly understood, may, if not overthrow, yet shrewdly
shake the security of this Assertion.
And first, Many which countenance the opinion in this reason, do tacitly
and upon consequence overthrow it in another. For whilst they make the
River _Senaga_ to divide and bound the _Moors_, so that on the South
side they are black, on the other only tawny; they imply a secret
causality herein from the air, place or river; and seem not to derive it
from the Sun. The effects of whose activity are not precipitously
abrupted, but gradually proceed to their cessations.
Secondly, If we affirm that this effect proceeded, or as we will not be
backward to concede, it may be advanced and fomented from the fervour of
the Sun; yet do we not hereby discover a principle sufficient to decide
the question concerning other animals; nor doth he that affirmeth the
heat makes man black, afford a reason why other animals in the same
habitations maintain a constant and agreeable hue unto those in other
parts, as Lions, Elephants, Camels, Swans, Tigers, Estriges. Which
though in _Æthiopia_, in the disadvantage of two Summers, and
perpendicular Rayes of the Sun, do yet make good the complexion of their
species, and hold a colourable correspondence unto those in milder
regions. Now did this complexion proceed from heat in man, the same
would be communicated unto other animals which equally participate the
Influence of the common Agent. For thus it is in the effects of cold, in
Regions far removed from the Sun; for therein men are not only of fair
complexions, gray-eyed, and of light hair; but many creatures exposed to
the air, deflect in extremity from their natural colours; from brown,
russet and black, receiving the complexion of Winter, and turning
perfect white. Thus _Olaus Magnus_ relates, that after the Autumnal
Æquinox, Foxes begin to grow white; thus _Michovius_ reporteth, and we
want not ocular confirmation, that Hares and Partridges turn white in
the Winter; and thus a white Crow, a proverbial rarity with us, is none
unto them; but that inseparable accident of _Porphyrie_ is separated in
many hundreds.
Thirdly, If the fervour of the Sun, or intemperate heat of clime did
solely occasion this complexion, surely a migration or change thereof
might cause a sensible, if not a total mutation; which notwithstanding
experience will not admit. For _Negroes_ transplanted, although into
cold and phlegmatick habitations, continue their hue both in themselves,
and also their generations; except they mix with different complexions;
whereby notwithstanding there only succeeds a remission of their
tinctures; there remaining unto many descents a strong shadow of their
Originals; and if they preserve their copulations entire, they still
maintain their complexions. As is very remarkable in the dominions of
the Grand Signior, and most observable in the _Moors_ in _Brasilia_,
which transplanted about an hundred years past, continue the tinctures
of their fathers unto this day. And so likewise fair or white people
translated in hotter Countries receive not impressions amounting to this
complexion, as hath been observed in many _Europeans_ who have lived in
the land of _Negroes_: and as _Edvardus Lopes_ testifieth of the
_Spanish_ plantations, that they retained their native complexions unto
his days.
Fourthly, If the fervour of the Sun were the sole cause hereof in
_Ethiopia_ or any land of _Negroes_, it were also reasonable that
inhabitants of the same latitude, subjected unto the same vicinity of
the Sun, the same diurnal arch, and direction of its rayes, should also
partake of the same hue and complexion, which notwithstanding they do
not. For the Inhabitants of the same latitude in _Asia_ are of a
different complexion, as are the Inhabitants of _Cambogia_ and _Java_,
insomuch that some conceive the _Negro_ is properly a native of
_Africa_, and that those places in _Asia_ inhabited now by _Moors_, are
but the intrusions of _Negroes_ arriving first from _Africa_, as we
generally conceive of _Madagascar_, and the adjoyning Islands, who
retain the same complexion unto this day. But this defect is more
remarkable in _America_; which although subjected unto both the
Tropicks, yet are not the Inhabitants black between, or near, or under
either; neither to the Southward in _Brasilia_, _Chili_, or _Peru_; nor
yet to the Northward in _Hispaniola_, _Castilia_, _del Oro_, or
_Nicaragua_. And although in many parts thereof there be at present
swarms of _Negroes_ serving under the _Spaniard_, yet were they all
transported from _Africa_, since the discovery of _Columbus_; and are
not indigenous or proper natives of _America_.
Fifthly, We cannot conclude this complexion in Nations from the vicinity
or habitude they hold unto the Sun; for even in _Africa_ they be
_Negroes_ under the Southern Tropick, but are not all of this hue either
under or near the Northern. So the people of _Gualata_, _Agades_,
_Garamantes_, and of _Goaga_, all within the Northern Tropicks are not
_Negroes_; but on the other side about _Capo Negro_, _Cefala_, and
_Madagascar_, they are of a jetty black.
Now if to salve this Anomaly we say the heat of the Sun is more powerful
in the Southern Tropick, because in the sign of Capricorn fals out the
Perigeum or lowest place of the Sun in his Excentrick, whereby he
becomes nearer unto them than unto the other in Cancer, we shall not
absolve the doubt. And if any insist upon such niceties, and will
presume a different effect of the Sun, from such a difference of place
or vicinity, we shall ballance the same with the concernment of its
motion, and time of revolution, and say he is more powerful in the
Northern Hemisphere, and in the Apogeum; for therein his motion is
slower, and so his heat respectively unto those habitations, as of
duration, so also of more effect. For, though he absolve his revolution
in 365 days, odd hours and minutes, yet by reason of Excentricity, his
motion is unequal, and his course far longer in the Northern Semicircle,
than in the Southern; for the latter he passeth in a 178 days, but the
other takes him a 187, that is, eleven days more. So is his presence
more continued unto the Northern Inhabitants; and the longer day in
Cancer is longer unto us, than that in Capricorn unto the Southern
Habitator. Beside, hereby we only infer an inequality of heat in
different Tropicks, but not an equality of effects in other parts
subjected to the same. For, in the same degree, and as near the earth he
makes his revolution unto the _American_, whose Inhabitants
notwithstanding partake not of the same effect. And if herein we seek a
relief from the Dog-star, we shall introduce an effect proper unto a
few, from a cause common unto many; for upon the same grounds that Star
should have as forcible a power upon _America_ and _Asia_; and although
it be not vertical unto any part of _Asia_, but only passeth by _Beach_,
_in terra incognita_; yet is it so unto _America_, and vertically
passeth over the habitations of _Peru_ and _Brasilia_.
Sixthly, And which is very considerable, there are _Negroes_ in _Africa_
beyond the Southern Tropick, and some so far removed from it, as
Geographically the clime is not intemperate, that is, near the Cape of
good Hope, in 36 of the Southern Latitude. Whereas in the same elevation
Northward, the Inhabitants of _America_ are fair; and they of _Europe_
in _Candy_, _Sicily_, and some parts of _Spain_, deserve not properly so
low a name as _Tawny_.
Lastly, Whereas the _Africans_ are conceived to be more peculiarly
scorched and torrified from the Sun, by addition of driness from the
soil, from want and defect of water, it will not excuse the doubt. For
the parts which the _Negroes_ possess, are not so void of Rivers and
moisture, as is presumed; for on the other side the mountains of the
Moon, in that great tract called _Zanzibar_, there are the mighty Rivers
of _Suama_ and _Spirito Santo_; on this side, the great River _Zaire_,
the mighty _Nile_ and _Niger_; which do not only moisten and
contemperate the air by their exhalations, but refresh and humectate the
earth by their annual Inundations. Beside, in that part of _Africa_,
which with all disadvantage is most dry, that is, in situation between
the Tropicks, defect of Rivers and inundations, as also abundance of
Sands, the people are not esteemed _Negroes_; and that is _Lybia_, which
with the _Greeks_ carries the name of all _Africa_. A region so desert,
dry and sandy, that Travellers (as _Leo_ reports) are fain to carry
water on their Camels; whereof they find not a drop sometime in six or
seven days. Yet is this Country accounted by Geographers no part of
_terra Nigritarum_, and _Ptolomy_ placeth herein the _Leuco Æthiops_, or
pale and Tawny _Moors_.
Now the ground of this opinion might be the visible quality of Blackness
observably produced by heat, fire and smoak; but especially with the
Ancients the violent esteem they held of the heat of the Sun, in the hot
or torrid Zone; conceiving that part unhabitable, and therefore that
people in the vicinities or frontiers thereof, could not escape without
this change of their complexions. But how far they were mistaken in this
apprehension, modern Geography hath discovered: And as we have declared,
there are many within this Zone whose complexions descend not so low as
unto blackness. And if we should strictly insist hereon, the possibility
might fall into question; that is, whether the heat of the Sun, whose
fervour may swart a living part, and even black a dead or dissolving
flesh, can yet in animals, whose parts are successive and in continual
flux, produce this deep and perfect gloss of Blackness.
[Sidenote: _The particular causes of the Negroes blackness probably._]
Thus having evinced, at least made dubious, the Sun is not the Author of
this Blackness, how, and when this tincture first began is yet a Riddle,
and positively to determine, it surpasseth my presumption. Seeing
therefore we cannot discover what did effect it, it may afford some
piece of satisfaction to know what might procure it. It may be therefore
considered, whether the inward use of certain waters or fountains of
peculiar operations, might not at first produce the effect in question.
For, of the like we have records in _Aristotle, Strabo_ and _Pliny_, who
hath made a collection hereof, as of two fountains in _Bœotia_, the
one making Sheep white, the other black; of the water of _Siberis_ which
made Oxen black, and the like effect it had also upon men, dying not
only the skin, but making their hairs black and curled. This was the
conceit of _Aristobulus_, who received so little satisfaction from the
other, or that it might be caused by heat, or any kind of fire, that he
conceived it as reasonable to impute the effect unto water.
Secondly, It may be perpended whether it might not fall out the same way
that _Jacobs_ cattle became speckled, spotted and ring-straked, that is,
by the Power and Efficacy of Imagination; which produceth effects in the
conception correspondent unto the phancy of the Agents in generation;
and sometimes assimilates the Idea of the Generator into a reality in
the thing ingendred. For, hereof there pass for current many indisputed
examples; so in _Hippocrates_ we read of one, that from an intent view
of a Picture conceived a _Negro_; And in the History of _Heliodore_ of a
Moorish Queen, who upon aspection of the Picture of _Andromeda_,
conceived and brought forth a fair one. [SN: Vide plura apud _Tho.
Fienum_, de viribus imaginationis.] And thus perhaps might some say was
the beginning of this complexion: induced first by Imagination, which
having once impregnated the seed, found afterward concurrent
co-operation, which were continued by Climes, whose constitution
advantaged the first impression. [SN: _Why Beares_ etc. _white in some
places._] Thus _Plotinus_ conceiveth white Peacocks first came in. Thus
many opinion that from aspection of the Snow, which lieth long in
Northern Regions, and high mountains. Hawks, Kites, Beares, and other
creatures become white; and by this way _Austin_ conceiveth the devil
provided, they never wanted a white spotted Ox in _Egypt_; for such an
one they worshipped, and called _Apis_.
Thirdly, It is not indisputable whether it might not proceed from such a
cause and the like foundation of Tincture, as doth the black Jaundise,
which meeting with congenerous causes might settle durable inclinations,
and advance their generations unto that hue, which were naturally before
but a degree or two below it. And this transmission we shall the easier
admit in colour, if we remember the like hath been effected in organical
parts and figures; the Symmetry whereof being casually or purposely
perverted; their morbosities have vigorously descended to their
posterities, and that in durable deformities. This was the beginning of
_Macrocephali_, or people with long heads, whereof _Hippocrates_ [SN: De
Aere, Aquis, et Locis.] hath clearly delivered himself: _Cum primum
editus est Infans, caput ejus tenellum manibus effingunt, et in
longitudine adolescere cogunt; hoc institutum primum hujusmodi, naturæ
dedit vitium, successu vero temporis in naturam abiit, ut proinde
instituto nihil amplius opus esset; semen enim genitale ex omnibus
corporis partibus provenit, ex sanis quidem sanum, ex morbosis
morbosum. Si igitur ex calvis calvi, ex cæciis cæcii, et ex distortis,
ut plurimum, distorti gignuntur, eademque in cæteris formis valet ratio,
quid prohibet cur non ex macrocephalis macrocephali gignantur?_ Thus as
_Aristotle_ observeth, the Deers of _Arginusa_ had their ears divided;
occasioned at first by slitting the ears of Deers. Thus have the
_Chineses_ little feet, most _Negroes_ great Lips and flat Noses; And
thus many _Spaniards_, and _Mediterranean_ Inhabitants, which are of the
Race of _Barbary Moors_ (although after frequent commixture) have not
worn out the _Camoys_ Nose [SN: Flat Nose.] unto this day.
Artificial _Negroes_, or _Gypsies_ acquire their complexion by anointing
their bodies with Bacon and fat substances, and so exposing them to the
Sun. In _Guiny Moors_ and others, it hath been observed, that they
frequently moisten their skins with fat and oyly materials, to temper
the irksom driness thereof from the parching rayes of the Sun. Whether
this practise at first had not some efficacy toward this complexion, may
also be considered.
[Sidenote: _How sundry kinds of Animals come to be found in Islands._]
Lastly, If we still be urged to particularities, and such as declare
how, and when the seed of _Adam_ did first receive this tincture; we may
say that men became black in the same manner that some Foxes, Squirrels,
Lions, first turned of this complexion, whereof there are a constant
sort in divers Countries; that some Chaughs came to have red Legs and
Bils, that Crows became pyed: All which mutations however they began,
depend on durable foundations; and such as may continue for ever. And if
as yet we must farther define the cause and manner of this mutation, we
must confess, in matters of Antiquity, and such as are decided by
History, if their Originals and first beginnings escape a due relation,
they fall into great obscurities, and such as future Ages seldom reduce
unto a resolution. Thus if you deduct the administration of Angels, and
that they dispersed the creatures into all parts after the flood, as
they had congregated them into _Noahs_ Ark before; it will be no easie
question to resolve, how several sorts of animals were first dispersed
into Islands, and almost how any into _America_: How the venereal
Contagion began in that part of the earth, since history is silent, is
not easily resolved by Philosophy. For whereas it is imputed unto
Anthropophagy, or the eating of mans flesh; that cause hath been common
unto many other Countries, and there have been Canibals or men eaters in
the three other parts of the world, if we credit the relations of
_Ptolomy_, _Strabo_ and _Pliny_. And thus if the favourable pen of
_Moses_ had not revealed the confusion of tongues, and positively
declared their division at _Babel_, our disputes concerning their
beginning had been without end; and I fear we must have left the hopes
of that decision unto _Elias_. [SN: Elias cum venerit solvet dubium.]
And if any will yet insist, and urge the question farther still upon me,
I shall be enforced unto divers of the like nature, wherein perhaps I
shall receive no greater satisfaction. I shall demand how the Camels of
_Bactria_ came to have two bunches on their backs, whereas the Camels of
_Arabia_ in all relations have but one? How Oxen in some Countries began
and continue gibbous or bunch-back'd? what way those many different
shapes, colours, hairs, and natures of Dogs came in? how they of some
Countries became depilous, and without any hair at all, whereas some
sorts in excess abound therewith? How the Indian Hare came to have a
long tail, whereas that part in others attains no higher than a scut?
How the hogs of _Illyria_ which _Aristotle_ speaks of, became solipedes
or whole-hoofed, whereas in other parts they are bisulcous, and
described cloven-hoofed by God himself? All which with many others must
needs seem strange unto those that hold there were but two of the
unclean sort in the ark; and are forced to reduce these varieties to
unknown originals.
[Sidenote: _How the complexion of the Negroes may be propagated._]
However therefore this complexion was first acquired, it is evidently
maintained by generation, and by the tincture of the skin as a
spermatical part traduced from father unto Son; so that they which are
strangers contract it not, and the Natives which transmigrate, omit it
not without commixture, and that after divers generations. And this
affection (if the story were true) might wonderfully be confirmed, by
what _Maginus_ and others relate of the Emperour of _Æthiopia_, or
_Prester John_, who derived from _Solomon_ is not yet descended into the
hue of his Country, but remains a _Mulatto_, that is, of a Mongril
complexion unto this day. Now although we conceive this blackness to be
seminal, yet are we not of _Herodotus_ conceit, that their seed is
black. An opinion long ago rejected by _Aristotle_, and since by sense
and enquiry. His assertion against the Historian was probable, that all
seed was white; that is without great controversie in viviparous
Animals, and such as have Testicles, or preparing vessels wherein it
receives a manifest dealbation. And not only in them, but (for ought I
know) in Fishes not abating the seed of Plants; whereof at least in most
though the skin and covering be black, yet is the seed and fructifying
part not so; as may be observed in the seeds of _Onyons_, _Pyonie_ and
_Basil_. Most controvertible it seems in the spawn of Frogs, and
Lobsters, whereof notwithstanding at the very first the spawn is white,
contracting by degrees a blackness, answerable in the one unto the
colour of the shell, in the other unto the Porwigle or Tadpole; that is
that Animall which first proceedeth from it. And thus may it also be in
the generation and sperm of Negroes; that being first and in its
naturals white, but upon separation of parts, accidents before invisible
become apparent; there arising a shadow or dark efflorescence in the
outside; whereby not only their legitimate and timely births, but their
abortions are also dusky, before they have felt the scorch and fervor of
the Sun.
CHAPTER XI
Of the same.
A Second opinion there is, that this complexion was first a curse of God
derived unto them from _Cham_, upon whom it was inflicted for
discovering the nakedness of _Noah_. Which notwithstanding is sooner
affirmed then proved, and carrieth with it sundry improbabilities. For
first, if we derive the curse on _Cham_, or in general upon his
posterity, we shall denigrate a greater part of the earth then was ever
so conceived; and not only paint the Æthiopians and reputed sons of
_Cush_, but the people also of _Egypt_, _Arabia_, _Assyria_ and
_Chaldea_; for by this race were these Countries also peopled. And if
concordantly unto _Berosus_, the fragment of _Cato de Originibus_, some
things of _Halicarnasseus_, _Macrobius_, and out of them of _Leandro_
and _Annius_, we shall conceive of the travels of _Camese_ or _Cham_; we
may introduce a generation of _Negroes_ as high as _Italy_; which part
was never culpable of deformity, but hath produced the magnified
examples of beauty.
Secondly, The curse mentioned in Scripture was not denounced upon
_Cham_, but _Canaan_ his youngest son, and the reasons thereof are
divers. The first, from the Jewish Tradition, whereby it is conceived
that _Canaan_ made the discovery of the nakedness of _Noah_, and
notified it unto _Cham_. Secondly, to have cursed _Cham_ had been to
curse all his posterity, whereof but one was guilty of the fact. And
lastly, he spared _Cham_, because he had blessed him before. [SN: Cap.
9.] Now if we confine this curse unto _Canaan_, and think the same
fulfilled in his posterity; then do we induce this complexion on the
Sidonians, then was the promised land a tract of Negroes; For from
_Canaan_ were descended the _Canaanites_, _Jebusites_, _Amorites_,
_Gergazites_ and _Hivites_, which were possessed of that land.
Thirdly, Although we should place the original of this curse upon one of
the sons of _Cham_, yet were it not known from which of them to derive
it. For the particularity of their descents is imperfectly set down by
accountants, nor is it distinctly determinable from whom thereof the
_Æthiopians_ are proceeded. For whereas these of _Africa_ are generally
esteemed to be the Issue of _Chus_, the elder son of _Cham_, it is not
so easily made out. For the land of _Chus_, which the Septuagint
translates _Æthiopia_, makes no part of _Africa_, nor is it the
habitation of Blackmores, but the Country of _Arabia_, especially the
Happy and Stony possessions and Colonies of all the sons of _Chus_,
excepting _Nimrod_ and _Havilah_: possessed and planted wholly by the
children of _Chus_, that is, by _Sabtah_ and _Raamah_, _Sabtacha_, and
the sons of _Raamah_, _Dedan_, and _Sheba_, according unto whose names
the Nations of those parts have received their denominations, as may be
collected from _Pliny_ and _Ptolemy_; and as we are informed by credible
Authors, they hold a fair Analogy in their names, even unto our days. So
the wife of _Moses_ translated in Scripture an _Æthiopian_, and so
confirmed by the fabulous relation of _Josephus_, was none of the
daughters of _Africa_, nor any Negroe of _Æthiopia_, but the daughter of
_Jethro_, Prince and Priest of _Madian_, which was a part of _Arabia_
the stony, bordering upon the Red Sea. So the Queen of _Sheba_ came not
unto _Solomon_ out of _Æthiopia_, but from _Arabia_, and that part
thereof which bore the name of the first planter, the son of _Chus_. So
whether the Eunuch which _Philip_ the Deacon baptised, were servant unto
_Candace_ Queen of the _African Æthiopia_ (although _Damianus a Goes,
Codignus_, and the Æthiopick relations averr) is yet by many, and with
strong suspitions doubted. So that Army of a million, which _Zerah_ King
of _Æthiopia_ is said to bring against _Asa_, was drawn out of _Arabia_,
and the plantations of _Chus_; not out of _Æthiopia_, and the remote
habitations of the Moors. For it is said that _Asa_ pursuing his
victory, took from him the City _Gerar_; now _Gerar_ was no City in or
near _Æthiopia_, but a place between _Cadesh_ and _Zur_, where _Abraham_
formerly sojourned. Since thereof these _African Æthiopians_ are not
convinced by the common acception to be the sons of _Chus_, whether they
be not the posterity of _Phut_ or _Mizraim_, or both, it is not
assuredly determined. For _Mizraim_, he possessed _Egypt_, and the East
parts of _Africa_. From _Lubym_ his son came the _Lybians_, and perhaps
from them the _Æthiopians_. _Phut_ possessed _Mauritania_, and the
Western parts of _Africa_, and from these perhaps descended the Moors
of the West, of _Mandinga_, _Meleguette_ and _Guinie_. But from
_Canaan_, upon whom the curse was pronounced, none of these had their
originall; for he was restrained unto _Canaan_ and _Syria_; although in
after Ages many Colonies dispersed, and some thereof upon the coasts of
_Africa_, and prepossessions of his elder brothers.
Fourthly, To take away all doubt or any probable divarication, the curse
is plainly specified in the Text, nor need we dispute it, like the mark
of _Cain_; _Servus servorum erit fratribus suis_, Cursed be _Canaan_, a
servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren; which was after
fulfilled in the conquest of _Canaan_, subdued by the _Israelites_, the
posterity of _Sem_. Which Prophecy _Abraham_ well understanding, took an
oath of his servant not to take a wife for his son _Isaac_ out of the
daughters of the _Canaanites_; and the like was performed by _Isaac_ in
the behalf of his Son _Jacob_. As for _Cham_ and his other sons, this
curse attained them not; for _Nimrod_ the son of _Chus_ set up his
kingdom in _Babylon_, and erected the first great Empire; _Mizraim_ and
his posterity grew mighty Monarchs in _Egypt_; and the Empire of the
_Æthiopians_ hath been as large as either. Nor did the curse descend in
generall upon the posterity of _Canaan_: for the _Sidonians_, _Arkites_,
_Hamathites_, _Sinites_, _Arvadites_, and _Zemerites_ seem exempted. But
why there being eleven Sons, five only were condemned and six escaped
the malediction, is a secret beyond discovery.
Lastly, Whereas men affirm this colour was a Curse, I cannot make out
the propriety of that name, it neither seeming so to them, nor
reasonably unto us; for they take so much content therein, that they
esteem deformity by other colours, describing the Devil, and terrible
objects, white. And if we seriously consult the definitions of beauty,
and exactly perpend what wise men determine thereof, we shall not
apprehend a curse, or any deformity therein. For first, some place the
essence thereof in the proportion of parts, conceiving it to consist in
a comely commensurability of the whole unto the parts, and the parts
between themselves: which is the determination of the best and learned
Writers. Now hereby the Moors are not excluded from beauty: there being
in this description no consideration of colours, but an apt connexion
and frame of parts and the whole. Others there be, and those most in
number, which place it not only in proportion of parts, but also in
grace of colour. But to make Colour essential unto Beauty, there will
arise no slender difficulty: For _Aristotle_ in two definitions of
pulchritude, and _Galen_ in one, have made no mention of colour. Neither
will it agree unto the Beauty of Animals: wherein notwithstanding there
is an approved pulchritude. Thus horses are handsome under any colour,
and the symmetry of parts obscures the consideration of complexions.
Thus in concolour animals and such as are confined unto one colour, we
measure not their Beauty thereby: For if a Crow or Black-bird grow
white, we generally account it more pretty; and in almost a monstrosity
descend not to opinion of deformity. By this way likewise the Moors
escape the curse of deformity: there concurring no stationary colour,
and sometimes not any unto Beauty.
The Platonick contemplators reject both these descriptions founded upon
parts and colours, or either: as _M. Leo_ the Jew hath excellently
discoursed in his Genealogy of Love, defining beauty a formal grace,
which delights and moves them to love which comprehend it. This grace
say they, discoverable outwardly, is the resplendor and Ray of some
interiour and invisible Beauty, and proceedeth from the forms of
compositions amiable. Whose faculties if they can aptly contrive their
matter, they beget in the subject an agreeable and pleasing beauty; if
over-ruled thereby, they evidence not their perfections, but run into
deformity. For seeing that out of the same materials, _Thersites_ and
_Paris_, Beauty and monstrosity may be contrived; the forms and
operative faculties introduce and determine their perfections. Which in
natural bodies receive exactness in every kind, according to the first
_Idea_ of the Creator, and in contrived bodies the phancy of the
Artificer. And by this consideration of Beauty, the Moors also are not
excluded, but hold a common share therein with all mankind.
Lastly, In whatsoever its _Theory_ consisteth, or if in the general, we
allow the common conceit of symmetry and of colour, yet to descend unto
singularities, or determine in what symmetry or colour it consisted,
were a slippery designation. For Beauty is determined by opinion, and
seems to have no essence that holds one notion with all; that seeming
beauteous unto one, which hath no favour with another; and that unto
every one, according as custome hath made it natural, or sympathy and
conformity of minds shall make it seem agreeable. Thus flat noses seem
comely unto the Moor, an Aquiline or hawked one unto the _Persian_, a
large and prominent nose unto the Romane; but none of all these are
acceptable in our opinion. Thus some think it most ornamental to wear
their Bracelets on their Wrests, others say it is better to have them
about their Ancles; some think it most comely to wear their Rings and
Jewels in the Ear, others will have them about their Privities; a third
will not think they are compleat except they hang them in their lips,
cheeks, or noses. Thus _Homer_ to set off _Minerva_, calleth her
γλαυκῶπις, that is, gray or light-blew eyed: now this unto us seems far
less amiable then the black. Thus we that are of contrary complexions
accuse the blackness of the Moors as ugly: But the Spouse in the
_Canticles_ excuseth this conceit, in that description of hers, I am
black, but comely. And howsoever _Cerberus_, and the furies of hell be
described by the Poets under this complexion, yet in the beauty of our
Saviour blackness is commended, when it is said, his locks are bushie
and black as a Raven. So that to inferr this as a curse, or to reason it
as a deformity, is no way reasonable; the two foundations of beauty,
Symmetry and complexion receiving such various apprehensions, that no
deviation will be expounded so high as a curse or undeniable deformity,
without a manifest and confessed degree of monstrosity.
Lastly, It is a very injurious method unto Philosophy, and a perpetual
promotion of ignorance, in points of obscurity; nor open unto easie
considerations, to fall upon a present refuge unto Miracles; or recurr
unto immediate contrivance, from the insearchable hands of God. Thus in
the conceit of the evil odor of the Jews, Christians without a further
research into the verity of the thing, or inquiry into the cause, draw
up a judgement upon them from the passion of their Saviour. Thus in the
wondrous effects of the clime of _Ireland_, and the freedom from all
venemous creatures, the credulity of common conceit imputes this
immunity unto the benediction of S. _Patrick_, as _Beda_ and _Gyraldus_
have left recorded. Thus the Ass having a peculiar mark of a cross made
by a black list down his back, and another athwart, or at right angles
down his shoulders; common opinion ascribes this figure unto a peculiar
signation; since that beast had the honour to bear our Saviour on his
back. Certainly this is a course more desperate then Antipathies,
Sympathies, or occult qualities; wherein by a final and satisfactive
discernment of faith, we lay the last and particular effects upon the
first and general cause of all things; whereas in the other, we do but
palliate our determinations, untill our advanced endeavours do totally
reject, or partially salve their evasions.
CHAPTER XII
A Digression concerning Blackness.
There being therefore two opinions repugnant unto each other, it may not
be presumptive or skeptical to doubt of both. And because we remain
imperfect in the general Theory of colours, we shall deliver at present
a short discovery of blackness; wherein although perhaps we afford no
greater satisfaction then others, yet shall we Emperically and sensibly
discourse hereof; deducing the causes of Blackness from such Originals
in nature, as we do generally observe things are denigrated by Art. And
herein I hope our progression will not be thought unreasonable, for Art
being the imitation of Nature, or Nature at the second hand, it is but a
sensible expression of effects dependant on the same, though more
removed causes: and therefore the works of the one may serve to discover
the other. And though colours of bodies may arise according to the
receptions, refraction, or modification of Light; yet are there certain
materialls which may dispose them unto such qualities.
And first, Things become black by a sooty and fuliginous matter
proceeding from the Sulphur of bodies torrified; not taking _fuligo_
strictly, but in opposition unto ἀτμὸς, that is any kind of vaporous or
madefying excretion; and comprehending ἀναθυμίασις, that is as
_Aristotle_ defines it, a separation of moist and dry parts made by the
action of heat or fire, and colouring bodies objected. Hereof in his
Meteors, from the qualities of the subject he raiseth three kinds; the
exhalations from ligneous and lean bodies, as bones, hair, and the like
he calleth κάπνος, _fumus_, from fat bodies, and such as have not their
fatness conspicuous or separated he termeth λίγνυς, _fuligo_, as wax,
rosin, pitch, or turpentine; that from unctuous bodies, and such whose
oyliness is evident, he named κνίση or _nidor_. Now everyone of these do
black bodies objected unto them, and are to be conceived in the sooty
and fuliginous matter expressed.
I say, proceeding from the sulphur of bodies torrified, that is the
oylie fat, and unctuous parts wherein consist the principles of
flammability. Not pure and refined sulphur, as in the Spirits of wine
often rectified; but containing terrestrious parts, and carrying with it
the volatile salt of the body, and such as is distinguishable by taste
in soot; nor vulgar and usual sulphur, for that leaves none or very
little blackness, except a metalline body receive the exhalation.
I say, torrified, sindged, or suffering some impression from fire; thus
are bodies casually or artificially denigrated, which in their naturals
are of another complexion; thus are Charcoals made black by an
infection of their own suffitus, so is it true what is affirmed of
combustible bodies. _Adusta nigra_, _perusta alba_; black at first from
the fuliginous tincture, which being exhaled they become white, as is
perceptible in ashes. And so doth fire cleanse and purifie bodies,
because it consumes the sulphureous parts, which before did make them
foul: and therefore refines those bodies which will never be mundified
by water. Thus Camphire of a white substance, by its _fuligo_ affordeth
a deep black. So is pitch black, although it proceed from the same tree
with Rosin, the one distilling forth, the other forced by fire. So of
the suffitus of a torch, do Painters make a velvet black: so is
lamp-black made: so of burnt Harts-horn a sable; so is Bacon denigrated
in chimnies: so in Feavers and hot distempers from choler adust is
caused a blackness in our tongues, teeth and excretions: so are
ustilago, brant corn and trees black by blasting; so parts cauterized,
gangrenated, siderated and mortified, become black, the radical
moisture, or vital sulphur suffering an extinction, and smothered in the
part effected. So not only actual but potential fire: not burning fire,
but also corroding water will induce a blackness. [SN: _Why the smoak of
pure Sulphur blacks not._] So are Chimnies and Furnaces generally black,
except they receive a clear and manifest sulphur: for the smoak of
sulphur will not black a paper, and is commonly used by women to whiten
Tiffinies, which it performeth by an acide vitriolous, and penetrating
spirit ascending from it, by reason whereof it is not apt to kindle any
thing nor will it easily light a Candle, untill that spirit be spent,
and the flame approacheth the match. This is that acide and piercing
spirit which with such activity and compunction invadeth the brains and
nostrils of those that receive it. And thus when _Bellonius_ affirmeth
that Charcoals made out of the wood of Oxycedar are white, Dr. _Jordan_
in his judicious Discourse of mineral waters yeeldeth the reason,
because their vapors are rather sulphureous then of any other
combustible substance. So we see that _Tinby_ coals will not black
linnen being hanged in the smoak thereof, but rather whiten it, by
reason of the drying and penetrating quality of sulphur, which will make
Red roses white. And therefore to conceive a general blackness in Hell,
and yet therein the pure and refined flames of sulphur, is no
Philosophical conception, nor will it well consist with the real effects
of its nature.
These are the advenient and artificial wayes of denigration, answerably
whereto may be the natural progress. These are the wayes whereby
culinary and common fires do operate, and correspondent hereunto may be
the effects of fire elemental. So may Bitumen, Coals, Jet, Black-lead,
and divers mineral earths become black; being either fuliginous
concretions in the earth, or suffering a scorch from denigrating
Principles in their formation. So men and other animals receive
different tinctures from constitution and complexional efflorescences,
and descend still lower, as they partake of the fuliginous and
denigrating humour. And so may the _Æthiopians_ or _Negroes_ become
coal-black, from fuliginous efflorescences and complexional tinctures
arising from such probabilities, as we have declared before.
The second way whereby bodies become black, is an Atramentous condition
or mixture, that is a vitriolate or copperose quality conjoyning with a
terrestrious and astringent humidity; for so is _Atramentum
Scriptorium_, or writing Ink commonly made by copperose cast upon a
decoction or infusion of galls. I say a vitriolous or copperous quality;
for vitriol is the active or chief ingredient in Ink, and no other salt
that I know will strike the colour with galls; neither Alom, Sal-gem,
Nitre, nor Armoniack. [SN: _What the common Copperose is._] Now
artificial copperose, and such as we commonly use, is a rough and
acrimonious kind of salt drawn out of ferreous and eruginous earths,
partaking chiefly of Iron and Copper; the blew of Copper, the green most
of Iron: Nor is it unusual to dissolve fragments of Iron in the liquor
thereof, for advantage in the concretion. I say, a terrestrious or
astringent humidity; for without this there will ensue no tincture; for
Copperose in a decoction of Lettuce or Mallows affords no black, which
with an astringent mixture it will do, though it be made up with oyl, as
in printing and painting Ink. But whereas in this composition we use
only Nut-gals, that is an excrescence from the Oak, therein we follow
and beat upon the old receit; for any plant of austere and stiptick
parts will suffice, as I have experimented in _Bistorte_, _Myrobolans_,
_Myrtus Brabantica_, _Balaustium_ and Red Roses. And indeed, most
decoctions of astringent plants, of what colour soever, do leave in the
Liquor a deep and Muscadine red: which by addition of vitriol descends
into a black: and so _Dioscorides_ in his receit of Ink, leaves out
gall, and with copperose makes use of soot.
Now if we enquire in what part of vitriol this Atramental and
denigrating condition lodgeth, it will seem especially to lie in the
more fixed salt thereof; for the phlegm or aqueous evaporation will not
denigrate; nor yet spirits of vitriol, which carry with them volatile
and nimbler Salt: For if upon a decoction of Copperose and gall, be
poured the spirits or oyl of vitriol, the liquor will relinquish his
blackness; the gall and parts of the copperose precipitate unto the
bottom, and the Ink grow clear again; which it will not so easily do in
common Ink, because that gum is dissolved therein which hindereth the
separation. But Colcothar or vitriol burnt, though unto a redness
containing the fixed salt, will make good Ink; and so will the Lixivium,
or Lye made thereof with warm water; but the Terra or Insipid earth
remaining, affords no black at all, but serves in many things for a
gross and useful red. And though Spirits of vitriol, projected upon a
decoction of gals, will not raise a black, yet if these spirits be any
way fixed, or return into vitriol again, the same will act their former
parts and denigrate as before.
And if we yet make a more exact enquiry, by what this salt of vitriol
more peculiarly gives this colour, we shall find it to be from a
metalline condition, and especially an Iron Property or ferreous
participation. For blew Copperose which deeply partakes of the copper
will do it but weakly, Verdigrise which is made of Copper will not do it
at all, but the filings of Iron infused in vinegar, will with a
decoction of gals make good Ink, without any Copperose at all; and so
will infusion of Load-stone; which is of affinity with Iron. And though
more conspicuously in iron, yet such a Calcanthous or Atramentous
quality, we will not wholly reject in other mettals; whereby we often
observe black tinctures in their solutions. Thus a Lemmon, Quince or
sharp Apple cut with a knife becomes immediately black: And from the
like cause, Artichokes; so sublimate beat up with whites of eggs, if
touched with a knife, becomes incontinently black. So _Aqua fortis_,
whose ingredient is vitriol, will make white bodies black. So leather
dressed with the bark of Oak, is easily made black by a bare solution of
Copperose. So divers Mineral waters and such as participate of Iron,
upon an infusion of gals, become of a dark colour, and entering upon
black. So steel infused, makes not only the liquor duskie, but in bodies
wherein it concurs with proportionable tinctures makes also the
excretions black. And so also from this vitriolous quality _Mercurius
dulcis_, and vitriol vomitive occasion black ejections. But whether this
denigrating quality in Copperose proceedeth from an Iron participation,
or rather in Iron from a vitriolous communication; or whether black
tinctures from metallical bodies be not from vitriolous parts contained
in their sulphur, since common sulphur containeth also much vitriol, may
admit consideration. However in this way of tincture, it seemeth plain,
that Iron and Vitriol are the powerful Denigrators.
Such a condition there is naturally in some living creatures. Thus that
black humour by _Aristotle_ named θόλos, and commonly
translated _Atramentum_, may be occasioned in the Cuttle-fish. Such a
condition there is naturally in some Plants, as Black-berries,
Walnut-rinds, Black-cherries; whereby they extinguish inflammations,
corroborate the stomack, and are esteemed specifical in the Epilepsie.
Such an atramentous condition there is to be found sometime in the
blood, when that which some call _Acetum_, others _Vitriolum_, concurs
with parts prepared for this tincture. And so from these conditions the
Moors might possibly become Negroes, receiving Atramentous impressions
in some of those wayes, whose possibility is by us declared.
[Sidenote: _How a vitriolous quality may be in living bodies._]
Nor is it strange that we affirm there are vitriolous parts, qualities,
and even at some distance Vitriol it self in living bodies; for there is
a sower stiptick salt diffused through the Earth, which passing a
concoction in plants, becometh milder and more agreeable unto the sense,
and this is that vegetable vitriol, whereby divers plants contain a
gratefull sharpness, as Lemmons, Pomegranats, Cherries, or an austere
and inconcocted roughness, as Sloes, Medlars and Quinces. And that not
only vitriol is a cause of blackness, but that the salts of natural
bodies do carry a powerfull stroke in the tincture and vernish of all
things, we shall not deny, if we contradict not experience, and the
visible art of Dyars; who advance and graduate their colours with Salts.
For the decoctions of simples which bear the visible colours of bodies
decocted, are dead and evanid, without the commixtion of Alum, Argol,
and the like. And this is also apparent in Chymical preparations. So
Cinaber becomes red by the acide exhalation of sulphur, which otherwise
presents a pure and niveous white. So spirits of Salt upon a blew paper
make an orient red. So Tartar or vitriol upon an infusion of violets
affords a delightfull crimson. [SN: _Whence the colours of Plants, etc.
may arise._] Thus it is wonderful what variety of colours the spirits of
Saltpeter, and especially, if they be kept in a glass while they pierce
the sides thereof; I say, what Orient greens they will project: from the
like spirits in the earth the plants thereof perhaps acquire their
verdure. And from such salary irradiations may those wondrous varieties
arise, which are observable in Animals, as Mallards heads, and Peacocks
feathers, receiving intention or alteration according as they are
presented unto the light. Thus Saltpeter, Ammoniack and Mineral spirits
emit delectable and various colours; and common _Aqua fortis_ will in
some green and narrow mouthed glasses, about the verges thereof, send
forth a deep and Gentianella blew.
Thus have we at last drawn our conjectures unto a period; wherein if our
contemplations afford no satisfaction unto others, I hope our attempts
will bring no condemnation on our selves (for besides that adventures in
knowledge are laudable, and the assayes of weaker heads afford
oftentimes improveable hints unto better) although in this long journey
we miss the intended end; yet are there many things of truth disclosed
by the way; and the collaterall verity may unto reasonable speculations
some what requite the capital indiscovery.
CHAPTER XIII
Of Gypsies.
Great wonder it is not we are to seek in the original of _Æthiopians_
and natural Negroes, being also at a loss concerning the Original of
Gypsies and counterfeit Moors, observable in many parts of _Europe_,
_Asia_, and _Africa_.
[Sidenote: _Opinions concerning the original of Gypsies._]
Common opinion deriveth them from _Egypt_, and from thence they derive
themselves, according to their own account hereof, as _Munster_
discovered in the letters and pass which they obtained from _Sigismund_
the Emperour; that they first came out of lesser _Egypt_, that having
defected from the Christian rule, and relapsed unto Pagan rites, some of
every family were enjoyned this penance to wander about the world; or as
_Aventinus_ delivereth, they pretend for this vagabond course, a
judgement of God upon their fore-fathers, who refused to entertain the
Virgin _Mary_ and Jesus, when she fled into their Country.
Which account notwithstanding is of little probability: for the generall
stream of writers, who enquire into their originall, insist not upon
this; and are so little satisfied in their descent from _Egypt_, that
they deduce them from several other nations [SN: _Fernand. de Cordua
didascal. multipl._]: _Polydore Virgil_ accounting them originally
_Syrians_, _Philippus Bergomas_ fetcheth them from _Chaldæa_, _Æneas
Sylvius_ from some part of _Tartary_, _Bellonius_ no further then
_Walachia_ and _Bulgaria_, nor _Aventinus_ then the confines of
_Hungaria_.
That they are no _Egyptians_, _Bellonius_ [SN: Observat. l. 2.] maketh
evident: who met great droves of Gypsies in _Egypt_, about Gran Cairo,
Matærea, and the villages on the banks of _Nilus_, who notwithstanding
were accounted strangers unto that Nation, and wanderers from foreign
parts, even as they are esteemed with us.
[Sidenote: _Gypsies first known in Germany._]
That they came not out of _Egypt_ is also probable, because their first
appearance was in _Germany_, since the year 1400, nor were they observed
before in other parts of _Europe_, as is deducible from _Munster_,
_Genebrard_, _Crantsius_ and _Ortilius_.
But that they first set out not far from _Germany_, is also probable
from their language, which was the Sclavonian tongue; and when they
wandred afterward into _France_, they were commonly called _Bohemians_,
which name is still retained for Gypsies. And therefore when _Crantsius_
delivereth, they first appeared about the Baltick Sea, when _Bellonius_
deriveth them from _Bulgaria_ and _Walachia_, and others from about
_Hungaria_, they speak not repugnantly hereto: for the language of those
Nations was Sclavonian, at least some dialect thereof.
[Sidenote: _What use the Grand Signior maketh of Gypsies._]
But of what nation soever they were at first, they are now almost of
all; associating unto them some of every country where they wander: when
they will be lost, or whether at all again, is not without some doubt:
for unsetled nations have out-lasted others of fixed habitations: and
though Gypsies have been banished by most Christian Princes, yet have
they found some countenance from the great Turk, who suffereth them to
live and maintain publick Stews near the Imperial City in _Pera_ [SN:
Bellon. observat. l. 2.], of whom he often maketh a politick advantage,
imploying them as spies into other nations, under which title they were
banished by _Charles_ the fift.
CHAPTER XIV
Of some others.
We commonly accuse the phancies of elder times in the improper figures
of heaven assigned unto Constellations, which do not seem to answer
them, either in Greek or Barbarick Spheres: yet equall incongruities
have been commonly committed by Geographers and Historians, in the
figurall resemblances of several regions on earth; While by _Livy_ and
_Julius, Rusticus_ the Island of _Britain_ is made to resemble a long
dish or two-edged ax; _Italy_ by _Numatianus_ to be like an Oak-leaf:
and _Spain_ an Ox-hide; while the phancy of _Strabo_ makes the habitated
earth like a cloak, and _Dionysius Afer_ will have it like a sling: with
many others observable in good writers [SN: Tacit. de vita Jul. Agric.],
yet not made out from the letter or signification; acquitting Astronomy
in their figures of the Zodiack: wherein they are not justified unto
strict resemblances, but rather made out from the effects of Sun or Moon
in these several portions of heaven, or from peculiar influences of
those constellations, which some way make good their names. [SN:
Junctin. in Sph. l. de Sacro bosco cap. 2.]
Which notwithstanding being now authentick by prescription, may be
retained in their naked acceptions, and names translated from substances
known on earth. And therefore the learned _Hevelius_ in his accurate
Selenography, or description of the Moon, hath well translated the known
appellations of Regions, Seas and Mountains, unto the parts of that
Luminary: and rather then use invented names or humane denominations,
with witty congruity hath placed _Mount Sinai_, _Taurus_, _Mæotis
Palus_, the Mediterranean Sea, _Mauritania_, _Sicily_ and _Asia_ Minor
in the Moon.
More hardly can we find the Hebrew letters in the heavens, made out of
the greater and lesser Stars which put together do make up words,
wherein Cabalisticall Speculators conceive they read the events of
future things [SN: _The Cabala of the Stars._]; and how from the Stars
in the head of _Medusa_, to make out the word _Charab_; and thereby
desolation presignified unto _Greece_ or _Javan_, numerally
characterized in that word, requireth no rigid reader. [SN: Greffarel
_out of R._ Chomer.]
It is not easie to reconcile the different accounts of longitude, while
in modern tables the hundred and eighty degree is more then thirty
degrees beyond that part, where _Ptolomy_ placeth an 180. Nor will the
wider and more Western term of Longitude, from whence the Moderns begin
their commensuration, sufficiently salve the difference. [SN: Athan.
Kircher. in proœmio.] The ancients began the measure of Longitude
from the fortunate Islands or Canaries, the Moderns from the Azores or
Islands of S. _Michael_; but since the Azores are but fifteen degrees
more West, why the Moderns should reckon 180, where _Ptolomy_ accounteth
above 220, or though they take in 15 degrees at the West, why they
should reckon 30 at the East, beyond the same measure, is yet to be
determined; nor would it be much advantaged, if we should conceive that
the compute of _Ptolomy_ were not so agreeable unto the Canaries, as the
Hesperides or Islands of _Cabo Verde_. [SN: Robertus Hues de globis.]
[Sidenote: _When the Moon will be seen on the first day of the change._]
[Sidenote: _Why the Sun is seen after it is set, or naturally under the
Horizon._]
Whether the compute of moneths from the first appearance of the Moon,
which divers nations have followed, be not a more perturbed way, then
that which accounts from the conjunction, may seem of reasonable doubt
[SN: Hevel. Selenog. cap. 9.]; not only from the uncertainty of its
appearance in foul and cloudy weather, but unequal time in any; that is
sooner or later, according as the Moon shall be in the signs of long
descention, as _Pisces_, _Aries_, _Taurus_, in the Perigeum or swiftest
motion, and in the Northern Latitude: whereby sometimes it may be seen
the very day of the change, as will observably happen 1654, in the
moneths of April and May? or whether also the compute of the day be
exactly made, from the visible arising or setting of the Sun, because
the Sun is sometimes naturally set, and under the Horizon, when visibly
it is above it; from the causes of refraction, and such as make us
behold a piece of silver in a basin, when water is put upon it, which we
could not discover before, as under the verge thereof.
Whether the globe of the earth be but a point, in respect of the Stars
and Firmament, or how if the rayes thereof do fall upon a point, they
are received in such variety of Angles, appearing greater or lesser from
differences of refraction?
[Sidenote: _To what the motion of the Heavens serveth_, Met. Lib.]
Whether if the motion of the Heavens should cease a while, all things
would instantly perish? and whether this assertion doth not make the
frame of sublunary things to hold too loose a dependency upon the first
and conserving cause? at least impute too much unto the motion of the
heavens, whose eminent activities are by heat, light and influence, the
motion it self being barren, or chiefly serving for the due application
of celestial virtues unto sublunary bodies as _Cabeus_ hath learnedly
observed?
Whether Comets or blazing Stars be generally of such terrible effects,
as elder times have conceived them; for since it is found that many,
from whence these predictions are drawn, have been above the Moon; why
they may not be qualified from their positions, and aspects which they
hold with stars of favourable natures; or why since they may be
conceived to arise from the effluviums of other Stars, they may not
retain the benignity of their Originals; or since the natures of the
fixed Stars are astrologically differenced by the Planets, and are
esteemed Martial or Jovial, according to the colours whereby they answer
these Planets; why although the red Comets do carry the portensions of
Mars, the brightly-white should not be of the Influence of Jupiter or
Venus, answerably unto _Cor Scorpii_ and Arcturus, is not absurd to
doubt.
* * * * *
Printed by T. and A. CONSTABLE, Printers to His Majesty
at the Edinburgh University Press
TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES:
Contemporary spellings are variable (e.g., than/then, there/their,
current/currant) and are retained. See p. 90: "were ever commended
for there note".
The modern 'itself' and 'myself', etc. were printed as separate
words (e.g., "our selves" on p. 132.) This is retained.
The following errors have been corrected, or noted:
p. 25 (_ut scribit Aristoteles[)]_ ) | added )
|
p. 57 Why some lamps include[d] in those | added 'd'
bodies |
|
p. 70 the teeth of [Narhwales] | sic
|
p. 148 the information of reason or [f/s]ence | isolated instance
| of 's' as 'f'
| -- changed.
|
p. 220 [by/but] this only roasted | corrected
|
p. 256 Based on Juvenal's Satires, line 305, |
where we see: "Dolia >nudi< non ardent |
Cynici;" rather than >magni<. | sic
|
p. 272 The marginal note "_Dion._ Ep. 7. ... | replaced '3'
in vit. [3/S] Dionys." was misplaced. | with 'S'
The numeral '3' is also a misprint for |
'S'. |
|
p. 290 in the [] 730 of the _Julian_ period | sic
|
p. 376 lo[n]gitudine | 'n' added
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Works of Sir Thomas Browne, Volume 2" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.