{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_39962/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_39962","id":"gutenberg_39962","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/39962","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christianity","Ethics","Religion and medicine"],"text":"Produced by Jonathan Ingram, KD Weeks and the Online\nDistributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This\nfile was produced from images generously made available\nby The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries.)\n\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Note\n\nThe role of marginal notes differs from text to text in this collection.\nPlease see the Transcriber's Notes for how they are rendered in this\ntext version.\n\nItalics are used freely, and have been rendered using _underscore_\ncharacters. Bold text is indicated as '=bold='. A super-imposed bar\nspanning several letters, which is a conventional mode of abbreviation,\nis denoted with '==' (eg. 'a==a'). The [oe] ligature is rendered as 'oe'.\n\nSuperscripted letters are indicated with a carat '^' as in 'K^t'. Where\nmultiple characters are superscripted, { } are used, as in 'M^{rs.}'\n\nThe text includes Greek and several instances of Hebrew, both of which\nare transliterated, and denoted with '+' delimiters as '+greek+' or\n+hebrew+.\n\nThe apothecary's symbol for 'ounce', occuring once, is rendered as [-3],\nwhich it resembles. The letter m, with a macron, is rendered as [=m].\n\nPlease consult the more detailed notes at the end of this text.\n\n\n\n\n THE ENGLISH LIBRARY\n\n THE WORKS OF\n\n SIR THOMAS BROWNE\n\n\n VOLUME III\n\n\n\n\n THE WORKS OF\n\n SIR THOMAS BROWNE\n\n\n Edited by\n\n CHARLES SAYLE\n\n\n VOLUME III\n\n\n EDINBURGH\n\n JOHN GRANT\n\n 1907\n\n\n\n\nPREFATORY NOTE\n\nIn concluding the present edition of Sir Thomas Browne's works,\nattention may be drawn to the reprint of the _Hydriotaphia_, from the\nfirst edition of 1658. The copy collated was the one preserved in the\nLibrary of Trinity College, Cambridge. In this, in addition to the\ncorrections made at the time of publication on the printed label\nattached, there are a few others made by a contemporary hand, which\ndeserve consideration. Among these is the excision of a sentence\nhitherto preserved in the text, and now relegated to the margin (p.\n205). If further sanction were needed for the change indicated, it may\nbe gathered from the inscription on the title-page, 'Ex dono Auctoris.'\nThe text of the _Christian Morals_ of 1716 has been collated with the\ncopy in the same Library.\n\nFor the account of Birds and Fishes found in Norfolk (pp. 513-539),\nProfessor Alfred Newton generously placed his annotated copy at the\ndisposal of the editor. As those actual pages were in the press,\nProfessor Newton passed away, and Death has deprived us of the pleasure\nof placing this volume in his hands. In this edition Professor Newton's\nreadings have been in the main followed, with the additional help of the\nvaluable recension, published by Mr. Thomas Southwell of Norwich, in\n1902, to which every serious student of this treatise must always refer.\n\nFor further assistance in questions of identification, I am again\nindebted to the kindness of Mr. W. Aldis Wright; and for one correction\nto Mr. A. R. Waller.\n\nSir Thomas Browne's Latin treatises and his correspondence are not\nincluded in these volumes. It was the determination of the original\npublisher of this edition that they should be omitted; and indeed they\ndo not form the most characteristic part of Sir Thomas Browne's work.\nHis erudition, and the resources from which he drew, his amazing\nindustry, his marvellous diction, and natural piety--all these are\napparent to the general reader of his English text; and it is to such\nthat the present edition of Sir Thomas Browne's works, as they\noriginally appeared, will primarily appeal.\n\n C. S.\n_16th June 1907._\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n Page\n\n PREFATORY NOTE BY THE EDITOR, v\n\n PSEUDODOXIA EPIDEMICA--\n\n THE SEVENTH BOOK:\n\n 1. Of the Forbidden Fruit, 1\n 2. That a Man hath one Rib less then a Woman, 5\n 3. Of Methuselah, 8\n 4. That there was no Rain-bow before the Flood, 11\n 5. Of Sem, Ham, and Japhet, 15\n 6. That the Tower of Babel was erected against a Second Deluge, 17\n 7. Of the Mandrakes of Leah, 19\n 8. Of the three Kings of Collein, 25\n 9. Of the food of John Baptist, Locust and Wild Honey, 27\n 10. That John Evangelist should not die, 29\n 11. More compendiously of some others, 36\n 12. Of the Cessation of Oracles, 39\n 13. Of the death of Aristotle, 42\n 14. Of the Wish of Philoxenus, 49\n 15. Of the Lake Asphaltites, 52\n 16. Of divers other Relations, 56\n 17. Of some others, 65\n 18. More briefly of some others, 74\n 19. Of some Relations whose truth we fear, 81\n\n HYDRIOTAPHIA AND THE GARDEN OF CYRUS (1658), 87\n\n Epistle to Thomas Le Gros, 89\n Epistle to Nicholas Bacon, 93\n HYDRIOTAPHIA, 97\n THE GARDEN OF CYRUS, 145\n\n The Stationer to the Reader, 211\n\n CERTAIN MISCELLANY TRACTS (1684), 213\n\n The Publisher to the Reader, 215\n\n 1. Observations upon several Plants mentioned in Scripture, 218\n 2. Of Garlands and Coronary or Garden-plants, 281\n 3. Of the Fishes eaten by Our Saviour, 286\n 4. An Answer to certain Queries relating to\n Fishes, Birds, Insects, 289\n 5. Of Hawks and Falconry, 294\n 6. Of Cymbals, etc., 301\n 7. Of Ropalic or Gradual Verses, etc., 304\n 8. Of Languages, and particularly of the Saxon Tongue, 307\n 9. Of Artificial Hills, Mounts or Burrows, 322\n 10. Of Troas, etc., 326\n 11. Of the Answers of Apollo at Delphos to Croesus, 333\n 12. A Prophecy concerning several Nations, 342\n 13. Musaeum Clausum, or Bibliotheca Abscondita, 350\n\n A LETTER TO A FRIEND (1690), 367\n\n POSTHUMOUS WORKS (1712), 395\n\n Repertorium, or some Account of the\n Tombs and Monuments in the Cathedral\n Church of Norwich in 1680, 397\n\n MISCELLANIES:\n\n 1. An Account of Island, _alias_ Ice-land, in 1662, 427\n 2. Concerning some Urnes found in Brampton-Field,\n in Norfolk, in 1667, 430\n 3. Concerning too nice Curiosity, 437\n 4. Upon reading Hudibras, 438\n\n CHRISTIAN MORALS (1716), 439\n Dedication, 441\n Preface, 442\n CHRISTIAN MORALS, 443\n\n NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS FOUND IN NORFOLK, 513\n\n NOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES AND MARINE ANIMALS FOUND\n IN NORFOLK, 526\n\n ON THE OSTRICH, 540\n\n BOULIMIA CENTENARIA, 544\n\n UPON THE DARK MIST, 27TH NOVEMBER 1674, 545\n\n ACCOUNT OF A THUNDERSTORM AT NORWICH, 1665, 548\n\n ON DREAMS, 550\n\n OBSERVATIONS ON GRAFTING, 555\n\n CORRIGENDA, 559\n\n INDEX, 561\n\n\nPLATES\n\nEN SUM QUOD DIGITIS QUINQUE, _to face page_ 97\n\nQUID QUINCUNCE SPECIOSIUS, \" 147\n\n\n\n\nTHE SEVENTH BOOK\n\nConcerning many Historical Tenents generally received, and some deduced\nfrom the history of holy Scripture.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nOf the Forbidden Fruit.\n\n\n[Sidenote: _Opinions, of what kind the forbidden fruit was._]\n\nThat the Forbidden fruit of Paradise was an Apple, is commonly believed,\nconfirmed by Tradition, perpetuated by Writings, Verses, Pictures; and\nsome have been so bad _Prosodians_, as from thence to derive the Latine\nword _malum_, because that fruit was the first occasion of evil; wherein\nnotwithstanding determinations are presumptuous, and many I perceive are\nof another belief. For some have, conceived it a Vine; in the mystery of\nwhose fruit lay the expiation of the transgression: _Goropius Becanus_\nreviving the conceit of _Barcephas_, peremptorily concludeth it to be\nthe _Indian_ Fig-tree; and by a witty Allegory labours to confirm the\nsame. Again, some fruits pass under the name of _Adams_ apples, which in\ncommon acception admit not that appellation; the one described by\n_Mathiolus_ under the name of _Pomum Adami_, a very fair fruit, and not\nunlike a Citron, but somewhat rougher, chopt and cranied, vulgarly\nconceived the marks of _Adams_ teeth. Another, the fruit of that plant\nwhich _Serapion_ termeth _Musa_, but the Eastern Christians commonly the\nApples of Paradise; not resembling an apple in figure, and in taste a\nMelon or Cowcomber. Which fruits although they have received\nappellations suitable unto the tradition, yet can we not from thence\ninfer they were this fruit in question: No more then _Arbor vitae_, so\ncommonly called, to obtain its name from the tree of life in Paradise,\nor _Arbor Judae_, to be the same which supplied the gibbet unto _Judas_.\n\nAgain, There is no determination in the Text; wherein is only\nparticulared that it was the fruit of a tree good for food, and\npleasant unto the eye, in which regards many excell the Apple; and\ntherefore learned men do wisely conceive it inexplicable; and _Philo_\nputs determination unto despair, when he affirmeth the same kind of\nfruit was never produced since. Surely were it not requisite to have\nbeen concealed, it had not passed unspecified; nor the tree revealed\nwhich concealed their nakedness, and that concealed which revealed it;\nfor in the same chapter mention is made of fig-leaves. And the like\nparticulars, although they seem uncircumstantial, are oft set down in\nholy Scripture; so is it specified that _Elias_ sat under a juniper\ntree, _Absalom_ hanged by an Oak, and _Zacheus_ got up into a Sycomore.\n\nAnd although to condemn such Indeterminables unto him that demanded on\nwhat hand _Venus_ was wounded, the Philosopher thought it a sufficient\nresolution to re-inquire upon what leg King _Philip_ halted; and the\n_Jews_ not undoubtedly resolved of the Sciatica-side of _Jacob_ [SN:\nJacobs _Sciatica_, see _Gen._ 32. 25, 31, 32.], do cautelously in their\ndiet abstain from the sinews of both: yet are there many nice\nparticulars which may be authentically determined. That _Peter_ cut off\nthe right ear of _Malchus_, is beyond all doubt. That our Saviour eat\nthe Passover in an upper room, we may determine from the Text. And some\nwe may concede which the Scripture plainly defines not. That the Dyal of\n_Ahaz_ was placed upon the West side of the Temple, we will not deny, or\ncontradict the description of _Adricomius_. That _Abrahams_ servant put\nhis hand under his right thigh, we shall not question; and that the\nThief on the right hand was saved, and the other on the left reprobated,\nto make good the Method of the last judicial dismission, we are ready to\nadmit. But surely in vain we enquire of what wood was _Moses_ rod, or\nthe tree that sweetned the waters. Or though tradition or humane\nHistory might afford some light, whether the Crown of thorns was made of\nPaliurus; Whether the cross of Christ were made of those four woods in\nthe Distick of _Durantes_ [SN: Pes ceorus est, truncus cupressus, oliva\nsupremum, palmaq; transversum Christi sunt in cruce lignum.], or only of\nOak, according unto _Lipsius_ and _Goropius_, we labour not to\ndetermine. For though hereof prudent Symbols and pious Allegories be\nmade by wiser Conceivers; yet common heads will flie unto superstitious\napplications, and hardly avoid miraculous or magical expectations.\n\nNow the ground or reason that occasioned this expression by an Apple,\nmight be the community of this fruit, and which is often taken for any\nother. So the Goddess of Gardens is termed _Pomona_; so the Proverb\nexpresseth it to give Apples unto _Alcinous; so_ the fruit which _Paris_\ndecided was called an Apple; so in the garden of _Hesperides_ (which\nmany conceive a fiction drawn from Paradise) we read of golden Apples\nguarded by the Dragon. And to speak strictly in this appellation, they\nplaced it more safely then any other; for beside the great variety of\nApples, the word in Greek comprehendeth Orenges, Lemmons, Citrons,\nQuinces; and as _Ruellius_ defineth [SN: _Ruel._ de stirpium natura.],\nsuch fruits as have no stone within, and a soft covering without;\nexcepting the Pomegranate. And will extend much farther in the acception\nof _Spigelius_ [SN: Isagoge in rem Herbariam.], who comprehendeth all\nround fruits under the name of apples, not excluding Nuts and Plumbs.\n\nIt hath been promoted in some constructions from a passage in the\n_Canticle_ [SN: _Can._ 8.], as it runs in the vulgar translation, _Sub\narbore malo suscitavi te, ibi corrupta est mater tua, ibi violata est\ngenetrix tua_; Which words notwithstanding parabolically intended, admit\nno literal inference, and are of little force in our translation, I\nraised thee under an Apple-tree, there thy mother brought thee forth,\nthere she brought thee forth that bare thee. So when from a basket of\nsummer fruits or apples, as the vulgar rendreth them, God by _Amos_\nforetold the destruction of his people, we cannot say they had any\nreference unto the fruit of Paradise, which was the destruction of man;\nbut thereby was declared the propinquity of their desolation, and that\ntheir tranquility was of no longer duration then those horary or soon\ndecaying fruits of Summer. Nor when it is said in the same translation\n[SN: Fructus horaei.], _Poma desiderii animae tuae discesserunt a te_, the\napples that thy soul lusted after are departed from thee, is there any\nallusion therein unto the fruit of Paradise. But thereby is threatned\nunto _Babylon_, that the pleasures and delights of their Palate should\nforsake them. And we read in _Pierius_, that an Apple was the\nHieroglyphick of Love, and that the Statua of _Venus_ was made with one\nin her hand. So the little Cupids in the figures of _Philostratus_ [SN:\n_Philostrat._ figur. 6. De amoribus.] do play with apples in a garden;\nand there want not some who have symbolized the Apple of Paradise unto\nsuch constructions.\n\nSince therefore after this fruit, curiosity fruitlesly enquireth, and\nconfidence blindly determineth, we shall surcease our Inquisition;\nrather troubled that it was tasted, then troubling our selves in its\ndecision; this only we observe, when things are left uncertain, men will\nassure them by determination. Which is not only verified concerning the\nfruit, but the Serpent that perswaded; many defining the kind or species\nthereof. [SN: _Opinions of what kind the Serpent was_, etc.] So\n_Bonaventure_ and _Comestor_ affirm it was a Dragon, _Eugubinus_ a\nBasilisk, _Delrio_ a Viper, and others a common snake. Wherein men still\ncontinue the delusion of the Serpent, who having deceived _Eve_ in the\nmain, sets her posterity on work to mistake in the circumstance, and\nendeavours to propagate errors at any hand. And those he surely most\ndesireth which concern either God or himself; for they dishonour God\nwho is absolute truth and goodness; but for himself, who is extreamly\nevil, and the worst we can conceive, by aberration of conceit they may\nextenuate his depravity, and ascribe some goodness unto him.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nThat a Man hath one Rib less then a Woman.\n\n\nThat a Man hath one Rib less then a Woman, is a common conceit derived\nfrom the History of _Genesis_, wherein it stands delivered, that _Eve_\nwas framed out of a Rib of _Adam_; whence 'tis concluded the sex of man\nstill wants that rib our Father lost in _Eve_. And this is not only\npassant with the many, but was urged against _Columbus_ in an Anatomy of\nhis at _Pisa_, where having prepared the Sceleton of a woman that\nchanced to have thirteen ribs on one side, there arose a party that\ncried him down, and even unto oaths affirmed, this was the rib wherein a\nwoman exceeded. Were this true, it would ocularly silence that dispute\nout of which side _Eve_ was framed; it would determine the opinion of\n_Oleaster_, that she was made out of the ribs of both sides, or such as\nfrom the expression of the Text [SN: Os ex ossibus meis.] maintain there\nwas a plurality of ribs required; and might indeed decry the parabolical\nexposition of _Origen_, _Cajetan_, and such as fearing to concede a\nmonstrosity, or mutilate the integrity of _Adam_, preventively conceive\nthe creation of thirteen ribs.\n\n[Sidenote: _How many ribs commonly in men and women._]\n\nBut this will not consist with reason or inspection. For if we survey\nthe Sceleton of both sexes, and therein the compage of bones, we shall\nreadily discover that men and women have four and twenty ribs, that is,\ntwelve on each side, seven greater annexed unto the Sternon, and five\nlesser which come short thereof. Wherein if it sometimes happen that\neither sex exceed, the conformation is irregular, deflecting from the\ncommon rate or number, and no more inferrible upon mankind, then the\nmonstrosity of the son of _Rapha_, or the vitious excess in the number\nof fingers and toes. And although some difference there be in figure and\nthe female _os inominatum_ be somewhat more protuberant, to make a\nfairer cavity for the Infant; the coccyx sometime more reflected to give\nthe easier delivery, and the ribs themselves seem a little flatter, yet\nare they equal in number. And therefore while _Aristotle_ doubteth the\nrelations made of Nations, which had but seven ribs on a side, and yet\ndelivereth, that men have generally no more than eight; as he rejecteth\ntheir history, so can we not accept of his Anatomy.\n\nAgain, Although we concede there wanted one rib in the Sceleton of\n_Adam_, yet were it repugnant unto reason and common observation that\nhis posterity should want the same. For we observe that mutilations are\nnot transmitted from father unto son; the blind begetting such as can\nsee, men with one eye children with two, and cripples mutilate in their\nown persons do come out perfect in their generations. For the seed\nconveyeth with it not only the extract and single Idea of every part,\nwhereby it transmits their perfections or infirmities; but double and\nover again; whereby sometimes it multipliciously delineates the same, as\nin Twins, in mixed and numerous generations. Parts of the seed do seem\nto contain the Idea and power of the whole; so parents deprived of\nhands, beget manual issues, and the defect of those parts is supplied by\nthe Idea of others. So in one grain of corn appearing similary and\ninsufficient for a plural germination, there lyeth dormant the\nvirtuality of many other; and from thence sometimes proceed above an\nhundred ears. And thus may be made out the cause of multiparous\nproductions; for though the seminal materials disperse and separate in\nthe matrix, the formative operator will not delineate a part, but\nendeavour the formation of the whole; effecting the same as far as the\nmatter will permit, and from dividing materials attempt entire\nformations. And therefore, though wondrous strange, it may not be\nimpossible what is confirmed at _Lausdun_ concerning the Countess of\n_Holland_, nor what _Albertus_ reports of the birth of an hundred and\nfifty. And if we consider the magnalities of generation in some things,\nwe shall not controvert its possibilities in others: nor easily question\nthat great work, whose wonders are only second unto those of the\nCreation, and a close apprehension of the one, might perhaps afford a\nglimmering light, and crepusculous glance of the other.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nOf _Methuselah_.\n\n\nWhat hath been every where opinioned by all men, and in all times, is\nmore then paradoxical to dispute; and so that _Methuselah_ was the\nlongest liver of all the posterity of _Adam_, we quietly believe: but\nthat he must needs be so, is perhaps below paralogy to deny. For hereof\nthere is no determination from the Text; wherein it is only particulared\nhe was the longest Liver of all the Patriarchs whose age is there\nexpressed; but that he out-lived all others, we cannot well conclude.\nFor of those nine whose death is mentioned before the flood, the Text\nexpresseth that _Enoch_ was the shortest Liver; who saw but three\nhundred sixty-five years. But to affirm from hence, none of the rest,\nwhose age is not expressed, did die before that time, is surely an\nillation whereto we cannot assent.\n\nAgain, Many persons there were in those days of longevity, of whose age\nnotwithstanding there is no account in Scripture; as of the race of\n_Cain_, the wives of the nine Patriarchs, with all the sons and\ndaughters that every one begat: whereof perhaps some persons might\nout-live _Methuselah_; the Text intending only the masculine line of\n_Seth_, conduceable unto the Genealogy of our Saviour, and the\nantediluvian Chronology. And therefore we must not contract the lives of\nthose which are left in silence by _Moses_; for neither is the age of\n_Abel_ expressed in the Scripture, yet is he conceived far elder then\ncommonly opinioned; and if we allow the conclusion of his Epitaph as\nmade by _Adam_, and so set down by _Salian, Posuit moerens pater, cui\na filio justius positum foret, Anno ab ortu rerum 130. Ab Abele nato\n129_, we shall not need to doubt. Which notwithstanding _Cajetan_ and\nothers confirm, nor is it improbable, if we conceive that _Abel_ was\nborn in the second year of _Adam_, and _Seth_ a year after the death of\n_Abel_: for so it being said, that _Adam_ was an hundred and thirty\nyears old when he begat _Seth_, _Abel_ must perish the year before,\nwhich was one hundred twenty nine.\n\nAnd if the account of _Cain_ extend unto the Deluge, it may not be\nimprobable that some thereof exceeded any of _Seth_. Nor is it unlikely\nin life, riches, power and temporal blessings, they might surpass them\nin this world, whose lives related unto the next. For so when the seed\nof _Jacob_ was under affliction and captivity, that of _Ismael_ and\n_Esau_ flourished and grew mighty, there proceeding from the one twelve\nPrinces, from the other no less then fourteen Dukes and eight Kings. And\nwhereas the age of _Cain_ and his posterity is not delivered in the\nText, some do salve it from the secret method of Scripture, which\nsometimes wholly omits, but seldom or never delivers the entire duration\nof wicked and faithless persons, as is observable in the history of\n_Esau_, and the Kings of _Israel_ and _Judah_. And therefore when\nmention is made that _Ismael_ lived 137 years, some conceive he adhered\nunto the faith of _Abraham_; for so did others who were not descended\nfrom _Jacob_; for _Job_ is thought to be an _Idumean_, and of the seed\nof _Esau_. [SN: _Job thought by some to be of the race of_ Esau.]\n\nLastly (although we rely not thereon) we will not omit that conceit\nurged by learned men, that _Adam_ was elder then _Methuselah_; inasmuch\nas he was created in the perfect age of man, which was in those days 50\nor 60 years, for about that time we read that they begat children; so\nthat if unto 930 we add 60 years, he will exceed _Methuselah_. And\ntherefore if not in length of days, at least in old age he surpassed\nothers; he was older then all, who was never so young as any. For though\nhe knew old age, he was never acquainted with puberty, youth or\nInfancy; and so in a strict account he begat children at one year old.\nAnd if the usual compute will hold, that men are of the same age which\nare born within compass of the same year, _Eve_ was as old as her\nhusband and parent _Adam_, and _Cain_ their son coetaneous unto both.\n\nNow that conception, that no man did ever attain unto a thousand years,\nbecause none should ever be one day old in the sight of the Lord, unto\nwhom according to that of _David_, A thousand years are but one day,\ndoth not advantage _Methuselah_. And being deduced from a popular\nexpression, which will not stand a _Metaphysical_ and strict\nexamination, is not of force to divert a serious enquirer. For unto God\na thousand years are no more then one moment, and in his sight\n_Methuselah_ lived no nearer one day then _Abel_, for all parts of time\nare alike unto him, unto whom none are referrible; and all things\npresent, unto whom nothing is past or to come. And therefore, although\nwe be measured by the Zone of time, and the flowing and continued\ninstants thereof, do weave at last a line and circle about the eldest:\nyet can we not thus commensurate the sphere of _Trismegistus_; or sum up\nthe unsuccessive and stable duration of God.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nThat there was no Rain-bow before the Flood.\n\n\nThat there shall no Rain-bow appear forty years before the end of the\nworld, and that the preceding drought unto that great flame shall\nexhaust the materials of this Meteor, was an assertion grounded upon no\nsolid reason: but that there was not any in sixteen hundred years, that\nis, before the flood, seems deduceable from holy Scripture, _Gen._ 9. I\ndo set my bow in the clouds, and it shall be for a token of a Covenant\nbetween me and the earth. From whence notwithstanding we cannot conclude\nthe nonexistence of the Rain-bow; nor is that Chronology naturally\nestablished, which computeth the antiquity of effects arising from\nphysical and setled causes, by additionall impositions from voluntary\ndeterminators. Now by the decree of reason and Philosophy, the Rain-bow\nhath its ground in Nature, as caused by the rays of the Sun, falling\nupon a roride and opposite cloud: whereof some reflected, others\nrefracted, beget that semi-circular variety we generally call the\nRain-bow; which must succeed upon concurrence of causes and subjects\naptly predisposed. And therefore, to conceive there was no Rain-bow\nbefore, because God chose this out as a token of the Covenant, is to\nconclude the existence of things from their signalities, or of what is\nobjected unto the sense, a coexistence with that which is internally\npresented unto the understanding. With equall reason we may infer there\nwas no water before the institution of Baptism, nor bread and wine\nbefore the holy Eucharist.\n\n[Sidenote: _That there is a Rain-bow of the Moon._]\n\nAgain, while men deny the antiquity of one Rain-bow, they anciently\nconcede another. For, beside the solary Iris which God shewed unto\n_Noah_, there is another Lunary, whose efficient is the Moon, visible\nonly in the night, most commonly at full Moon, and some degrees above\nthe Horizon. Now the existence hereof men do not controvert, although\neffected by a different Luminary in the same way with the other. And\nprobably appeared later, as being of rare appearance and rarer\nobservation, and many there are which think there is no such thing in\nNature. And therefore by casual spectators they are lookt upon like\nprodigies, and significations made, not signified by their natures.\n\nLastly, We shall not need to conceive God made the Rain-bow at this\ntime, if we consider that in its created and predisposed nature, it was\nmore proper for this signification then any other Meteor or celestial\nappearancy whatsoever. Thunder and lightning had too much terrour to\nhave been tokens of mercy; Comets or blazing Stars appear too seldom to\nput us in mind of a Covenant to be remembred often: and might rather\nsignifie the world should be once destroyed by fire, then never again by\nwater. The Galaxia or milky Circle had been more probable; for (beside\nthat unto the latitude of thirty, it becomes their Horizon twice in four\nand twenty hours, and unto such as live under the AEquator, in that space\nthe whole Circle appeareth) part thereof is visible unto any situation;\nbut being only discoverable in the night, and when the ayr is clear, it\nbecomes of unfrequent and comfortless signification. A fixed Star had\nnot been visible unto all the Globe, and so of too narrow a signality in\na Covenant concerning all. But Rain-bows are seen unto all the world,\nand every position of sphere. Unto our own elevation they may appear in\nthe morning, while the Sun hath attained about forty five degrees above\nthe Horizon (which is conceived the largest semi-diameter of any Iris)\nand so in the afternoon when it hath declined unto that altitude again;\nwhich height the Sun not attaining in winter, rain-bows may happen with\nus at noon or any time. Unto a right position of sphere they may appear\nthree hours after the rising of the Sun, and three before its setting;\nfor the Sun ascending fifteen degrees an hour, in three attaineth forty\nfive of altitude. Even unto a parallel sphere, and such as live under\nthe pole, for half a year some segments may appear at any time and\nunder any quarter, the Sun not setting, but walking round about them.\n\n[Sidenote: _The natural signification of the rain-bow._]\n\nBut the propriety of its Election most properly appeareth in the natural\nsignification and prognostick of it self; as containing a mixt signality\nof rain and fair weather. For being in a roride cloud and ready to drop,\nit declareth a pluvious disposure in the air; but because when it\nappears the Sun must also shine, there can be no universal showrs, and\nconsequently no Deluge. Thus when the windows of the great deep were\nopen, in vain men lookt for the Rain-bow: for at that time it could not\nbe seen, which after appeared unto _Noah_. It might be therefore\nexistent before the flood, and had in nature some ground of its\naddition. Unto that of nature God superadded an assurance of his\nPromise, that is, never to hinder its appearance, or so to replenish the\nheavens again, as that we should behold it no more. And thus without\ndisparaging the promise, it might rain at the same time when God shewed\nit unto _Noah_; thus was there more therein then the heathens\nunderstood, when they called it the _Nuncia_ of the gods, and the laugh\nof weeping Heaven [SN: Risus plorantis Olympi.]; and thus may it be\nelegantly said; I put my bow, not my arrow in the clouds, that is, in\nthe menace of rain the mercy of fair weather.\n\nCabalistical heads, who from that expression in _Esay_ [SN: _Isa._ 34.\n4.], do make a book of heaven, and read therein the great concernments\nof earth, do literally play on this, and from its semicircular figure,\nresembling the Hebrew letter +C+ Caph, whereby is signified\nthe uncomfortable number of twenty, at which years _Joseph_ was sold,\nwhich _Jacob_ lived under _Laban_, and at which men were to go to war:\ndo note a propriety in its signification; as thereby declaring the\ndismal Time of the Deluge. And Christian conceits do seem to strain as\nhigh, while from the irradiation of the Sun upon a cloud, they apprehend\nthe mysterie of the Sun of Righteousness in the obscurity of flesh; by\nthe colours green and red, the two destructions of the world by fire and\nwater; or by the colours of blood and water, the mysteries of Baptism,\nand the holy Eucharist.\n\nLaudable therefore is the custom of the _Jews_, who upon the appearance\nof the Rain-bow, do magnifie the fidelity of God in the memory of his\nCovenant; according to that of _Syracides_, look upon the Rain-bow, and\npraise him that made it. And though some pious and Christian pens have\nonly symbolized the same from the mysterie of its colours, yet are there\nother affections which might admit of Theological allusions. Nor would\nhe find a more improper subject, that should consider that the colours\nare made by refraction of Light, and the shadows that limit that light;\nthat the Center of the Sun, the Rain-bow, and the eye of the Beholder\nmust be in one right line, that the spectator must be between the Sun\nand the Rain-bow; that sometime there appear, sometime one reversed.\nWith many others, considerable in Meteorological Divinity, which would\nmore sensibly make out the Epithite of the Heathens [SN: Thaumancias.];\nand the expression of the son of _Syrach_. Very beautifull is the\nRain-bow, it compasseth the heaven about with a glorious circle, and the\nhands of the most High have bended it.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nOf _Sem_, _Ham_ and _Japhet_.\n\n\nConcerning the three sons of _Noah_, _Sem_, _Ham_ and _Japhet_, that the\norder of their nativity was according to that of numeration, and\n_Japhet_ the youngest son, as most believe, as _Austin_ and others\naccount, the sons of _Japhet_, and _Europeans_ need not grant: nor will\nit so well concord unto the letter of the Text, and its readiest\ninterpretations. For so is it said in our Translation, _Sem_ the father\nof all the sons of _Heber_ the brother of _Japhet_ the elder: so by the\nSeptuagint, and so by that of _Tremelius_. And therefore when the Vulgar\nreads it, _Fratre Japhet majore_, the mistake as _Junius_ observeth,\nmight be committed by the neglect of the Hebrew account; which\noccasioned _Jerom_ so to render it, and many after to believe it. Nor is\nthat Argument contemptible which is deduced from their Chronology: for\nprobable it is that _Noah_ had none of them before, and begat them from\nthat year when it is said he was five hundred years old, and begat\n_Sem_, _Ham_ and _Japhet_. Again it is said he was six hundred years old\nat the flood, and that two years after _Sem_ was but an hundred;\ntherefore _Sem_ must be born when _Noah_ was five hundred and two, and\nsome other before in the year of five hundred and one.\n\nNow whereas the Scripture affordeth the priority of order unto _Sem_, we\ncannot from thence infer his primogeniture. For in _Sem_ the holy line\nwas continued: and therefore however born, his genealogy was most\nremarkable. So is it not unusuall in holy Scripture to nominate the\nyounger before the elder: so is it said, That _Tarah_ begat\n_Abraham_[SN: _Gen._ 11.], _Nachor_ and _Haram_: whereas _Haram_ was the\neldest. So _Rebecca_ [SN: _Gen._ 28.] is termed the mother of _Jacob_\nand _Esau_. Nor is it strange the younger should be first in\nnomination, who have commonly had the priority in the blessings of God,\nand been first in his benediction. [SN: _In divine benedictions the\nyounger often preferred._] So _Abel_ was accepted before _Cain_, _Isaac_\nthe younger preferred before _Ishmael_ the elder, _Jacob_ before _Esau_,\n_Joseph_ was the youngest of twelve, and _David_ the eleventh son and\nminor cadet of _Jesse_.\n\nLastly, though _Japhet_ were not elder then _Sem_, yet must we not\naffirm that he was younger then _Cham_, for it is plainly delivered,\nthat after _Sem_ and _Japhet_ had covered _Noah_, he awaked, and knew\nwhat his youngest son had done unto him +hyios ho neoteros+, is the\nexpression of the Septuagint, _Filius minor_ of _Jerom_, and _minimus_\nof _Tremelius_. And upon these grounds perhaps _Josephus_ doth vary from\nthe Scripture enumeration, and nameth them _Sem_, _Japhet_ and _Cham_;\nwhich is also observed by the _Annian Berosus_; _Noah cum tribus filiis,\nSemo, Japeto, Cham_. And therefore although in the priority of _Sem_ and\n_Japhet_, there may be some difficulty, though _Cyril_, _Epiphanius_ and\n_Austin_ have accounted _Sem_ the elder, and _Salian_ the _Annalist_,\nand _Petavius_ the Chronologist contend for the same, yet _Cham_ is more\nplainly and confessedly named the youngest in the Text.\n\n[Sidenote: _That_ Noah _and_ Saturn _were the same person_.]\n\nAnd this is more conformable unto the Pagan history and Gentile account\nhereof, unto whom _Noah_ was _Saturn_, whose symbol was a ship, as\nrelating unto the Ark, and who is said to have divided the world between\nhis three sons. _Ham_ is conceived to be _Jupiter_, who was the youngest\nson: worshipped by the name of _Hamon_, which was the _Egyptian_ and\n_African_ name for _Jupiter_, who is said to have cut off the genitals\nof his father, derived from the history of _Ham_, who beheld the\nnakednes of his, and by no hard mistake might be confirmed from the Text\n[SN: _Gen._ 9. 22.], as _Bochartus_ [SN: _Reading_ Veiaggod et abscidit,\n_for_ Veiegged et nunciavit. Bochartus de Geographia sacra.] hath well\nobserved.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nThat the Tower of _Babel_ was erected against a second Deluge.\n\n\nAn opinion there is of some generality, that our fathers after the flood\nattempted the Tower of _Babel_ to secure themselves against a second\nDeluge. Which however affirmed by _Josephus_ and others, hath seemed\nimprobable unto many who have discoursed hereon. For (beside that they\ncould not be ignorant of the Promise of God never to drown the world\nagain, and had the Rain-bow before their eyes to put them in mind\nthereof) it is improbable from the nature of the Deluge; which being not\npossibly causable from natural showers above, or watery eruptions below,\nbut requiring a supernatural hand, and such as all acknowledg\nirresistible; must needs disparage their knowledg and judgment in so\nsuccesless attempts.\n\nAgain, They must probably hear, and some might know, that the waters of\nthe flood ascended fifteen cubits above the highest mountains. Now, if\nas some define, the perpendicular altitude of the highest mountains be\nfour miles; or as others, but fifteen furlongs, it is not easily\nconceived how such a structure could be effected. Although we allowed\nthe description of _Herodotus_ concerning the Tower of _Belus_; whose\nlowest story was in height and bredth one furlong, and seven more built\nupon it; abating that of the Annian _Berosus_, the traditional relation\nof _Jerom_, and fabulous account of the _Jews_. Probable it is that\nwhat they attempted was feasible, otherwise they had been amply fooled\nin fruitless success of their labours, nor needed God to have hindred\nthem, saying, Nothing will be restrained from them, which they begin to\ndo.\n\n[Sidenote: _History of the world._]\n\nIt was improbable from the place, that is a plain in the land of\n_Shinar_. And if the situation of _Babylon_ were such at first as it was\nin the days of _Herodotus_, it was rather a feat of amenity and\npleasure, than conducing unto this intention. It being in a very great\nplain, and so improper a place to provide against a general Deluge by\nTowers and eminent structures, that they were fain to make provisions\nagainst particular and annual inundations by ditches and trenches, after\nthe manner of _Egypt_. And therefore Sir _Walter Raleigh_ accordingly\nobjecteth: If the Nations which followed _Nimrod_, still doubted the\nsurprise of a second flood, according to the opinions of the ancient\n_Hebrews_, it soundeth ill to the ear of Reason, that they would have\nspent many years in that low and overflown valley of _Mesopotamia_. And\ntherefore in this situation, they chose a place more likely to have\nsecured them from the worlds destruction by fire, then another Deluge of\nwater: and as _Pierius_ observeth, some have conceived that this was\ntheir intention.\n\nLastly, The reason is delivered in the Text. Let us build us a City and\na Tower, whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name,\nlest we be scattered abroad upon the whole earth; as we have already\nbegan to wander over a part. These were the open ends proposed unto the\npeople; but the secret design of _Nimrod_ was to settle unto himself a\nplace of dominion, and rule over his Brethren, as it after succeeded,\naccording to the delivery of the Text, the beginning of his kingdom was\n_Babel_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nOf the Mandrakes of _Leah_.\n\n\nWe shall not omit the Mandrakes of _Leah_, according to the History of\n_Genesis_. And _Reuben_ went out in the daies of Wheat-harvest, and\nfound Mandrakes in the field, and brought them unto his mother _Leah_;\nthen _Rachel_ said unto _Leah_, give me, I pray thee, of thy sons\nMandrakes: and she said unto her, is it a small matter that thou hast\ntaken my husband, and wouldest thou take my sons Mandrakes also? and\n_Rachel_ said, Therefore he shall lie with thee this night for thy sons\nMandrakes. From whence hath arisen a common conceit, that _Rachel_\nrequested these plants as a medicine of fecundation, or whereby she\nmight become fruitfull. Which notwithstanding is very questionable, and\nof incertain truth.\n\nFor first from the comparison of one Text with another, whether the\nMandrakes here mentioned, be the same plant which holds that name with\nus, there is some cause to doubt. The word is used in another place of\nScripture, [SN: _Cant._ 7.] when the Church inviting her beloved into\nthe fields, among the delightfull fruits of Grapes and Pomegranates, it\nis said, The Mandrakes give a smell, and at our gates are all manner of\npleasant fruits. Now instead of a smell of Delight, our Mandrakes afford\na papaverous and unpleasant odor, whether in the leaf or apple, as is\ndiscoverable in their simplicity or mixture. The same is also dubious\nfrom the different interpretations: for though the Septuagint and\n_Josephus_ do render it the Apples of Mandrakes in this Text, yet in the\nother of the _Canticles_, the _Chaldy_ Paraphrase termeth it Balsame. R.\n_Solomon_, as _Drusius_ observeth, conceives it to be that plant the\n_Arabians_ named Jesemin. _Oleaster_, and _Georgius Venetus_, the Lilly,\nand that the word _Dudaim_ may comprehend any plant that hath a good\nsmell, resembleth a womans breast, and flourisheth in wheat harvest.\n_Tremelius_ interprets the same for any amiable flowers of a pleasant\nand delightfull odor: but the _Geneva_ Translators have been more wary\nthen any: for although they retain the word Mandrake in the Text, they\nin effect retract it in the Margin: wherein is set down the word in the\noriginal is _Dudaim_, which is a kind of fruit or Flower unknown.\n\n[Sidenote: _The vegetables in H. Scripture how variously expounded._]\n\nNor shall we wonder at the dissent of exposition, and difficulty of\ndefinition concerning this Text, if we perpend how variously the\nvegetables of Scripture are expounded, and how hard it is in many places\nto make out the _species_ determined. Thus are we at variance concerning\nthe plant that covered _Jonas_; which though the Septuagint doth render\nColocynthis, the _Spanish_ Calabaca, and ours accordingly a Gourd: yet\nthe vulgar translates it Hedera or Ivy; and as _Grotius_ observeth,\n_Jerom_ thus translated it, not as the same plant, but best apprehended\nthereby. The Italian of _Diodati_, and that of _Tremelius_ have named it\n_Ricinus_, and so hath ours in the Margin, for _palma Christi_ is the\nsame with _Ricinus_. The _Geneva_ Translators have herein been also\ncircumspect, for they have retained the Original word _Kikaion_, and\nours hath also affixed the same unto the Margin.\n\nNor are they indeed alwayes the same plants which are delivered under\nthe same name, and appellations commonly received amongst us. So when it\nis said of _Solomon_, that he writ of plants from the Cedar of Lebanus,\nunto the Hysop that groweth upon the wall, that is, from the greatest\nunto the smallest, it cannot be well conceived our common Hysop; for\nneither is that the least of vegetables, nor observed to grow upon wals;\nbut rather as _Lemnius_ well conceiveth, some kind of the capillaries,\nwhich are very small plants, and only grow upon wals and stony places.\nNor are the four species in the holy oyntment, Cinnamon, Myrrhe, Calamus\nand Cassia, nor the other in the holy perfume, Frankincense, Stacte,\nOnycha and Galbanum, so agreeably expounded unto those in use with us,\nas not to leave considerable doubts behind them. Nor must that perhaps\nbe taken for a simple unguent, which _Matthew_ only termeth a precious\noyntment; but rather a composition as _Mark_ and _John_ imply by pistick\n_Nard_ [SN: _V._ Mathioli. Epist.], that is faithfully dispensed, and\nmay be that famous composition described by _Dioscorides_, made of oyl\nof Ben, Malabathrum, Juncus Odoratus, Costus, Amomum, Myrrhe, Balsam and\nNard; which _Galen_ affirmeth to have been in use with the delicate\nDames of _Rome_; and that the best thereof was made at _Laodicea_; from\nwhence by Merchants it was conveyed unto other parts. But how to make\nout that Translation concerning the Tithe of Mint, Anise and Cumin, we\nare still to seek; for we find not a word in the Text that can properly\nbe rendred Anise; the Greek being +anethon+, which the Latines call\n_Anethum_, and is properly Englished Dill. Lastly, What meteor that was,\nthat fed the _Israelites_ so many years, they must rise again to inform\nus. Nor do they make it out [SN: _V._ Doctissimum Chrysostom. Magnenum\nde Manna.], who will have it the same with our Manna; nor will any one\nkind thereof, or hardly all kinds we read of, be able to answer the\nqualities thereof, delivered in the Scripture; that is, to fall upon the\nground, to breed worms, to melt with the Sun, to taste like fresh oyl,\nto be grounded in Mils, to be like Coriander seed, and of the colour of\nBdellium.\n\nAgain, It is not deducible from the Text or concurrent sentence of\nComments, that _Rachel_ had any such intention, and most do rest in the\ndetermination of _Austin_, that she desired them for rarity, pulchritude\nor suavity. Nor is it probable she would have resigned her bed unto\n_Leah_, when at the same time she had obtained a medicine to fructifie\nher self. And therefore _Drusius_ who hath expresly and favourable\ntreated hereof, is so far from conceding this intention, that he plainly\nconcludeth, _Hoc quo modo illis in mentem venerit conjicere nequeo_; how\nthis conceit fell into mens minds, it cannot fall into mine; for the\nScripture delivereth it not, nor can it be clearly deduced from the\nText.\n\nThirdly, If _Rachel_ had any such intention, yet had they no such\neffect, for she conceived not many years after of _Joseph_; whereas in\nthe mean time _Leah_ had three children, _Isachar_, _Zebulon_ and\n_Dinah_.\n\nLastly, Although at that time they failed of this effect, yet is it\nmainly questionable whether they had any such vertue either in the\nopinions of those times, or in their proper nature. That the opinion was\npopular in the land of _Canaan_, it is improbable, and had _Leah_\nunderstood thus much, she would not surely have parted with fruits of\nsuch a faculty; especially unto _Rachel_, who was no friend unto her. As\nfor its proper nature, the Ancients have generally esteemed in Narcotick\nor stupefactive, and it is to be found in the list of poysons, set down\nby _Dioscorides_, _Galen_, _AEtius_, _AEgineta_, and several Antidotes\ndelivered by them against it. It was I confess from good Antiquity, and\nin the days of _Theophrastus_ accounted a philtre, or plant that\nconciliates affection; and so delivered by _Dioscorides_. And this\nintent might seem most probable, had they not been the wives of holy\n_Jacob_: had _Rachel_ presented them unto him, and not requested them\nfor her self.\n\nNow what _Dioscorides_ affirmeth in favour of this effect, that the\ngrains of the apples of Mandrakes mundifie the matrix, and applied with\nSulphur, stop the fluxes of women, he overthrows again by qualities\ndestructive unto conception; affirming also that the juice thereof\npurgeth upward like Hellebore; and applied in pessaries provokes the\nmenstruous flows, and procures abortion. _Petrus Hispanus_, or Pope\n_John_ the twentieth speaks more directly in his _Thesaurus pauperum_:\nwherein among the receits of fecundation, he experimentally commendeth\nthe wine of Mandrakes given with _Triphera magna_. But the soul of the\nmedicine may lie in _Triphera magna_, an excellent composition, and for\nthis effect commended by _Nicolaus_. And whereas _Levinus Lemnius_ that\neminent Physitian doth also concede this effect, it is from manifest\ncauses and qualities elemental occasionally producing the same. For he\nimputeth the same unto the coldness of that simple, and is of opinion\nthat in hot climates, and where the uterine parts exceed in heat, by the\ncoldness hereof they may be reduced into a conceptive constitution, and\nCrasis accommodable unto generation; whereby indeed we will not deny the\ndue and frequent use may proceed unto some effect, from whence\nnotwithstanding we cannot infer a fertilitating condition or property of\nfecundation. For in this way all vegetables do make fruitful according\nunto the complexion of the Matrix; if that excel in heat, plants\nexceeding in cold do rectifie it; if it be cold, simples that are hot\nreduce it; if dry moist, if moist dry correct it; in which division all\nplants are comprehended. But to distinguish thus much is a point of Art,\nand beyond the Method of _Rachels_ or feminine Physick. Again, Whereas\nit may be thought that _Mandrakes_ may fecundate, since _Poppy_ hath\nobtained the Epithite of fruitful, and that fertility was\nHieroglyphically described by _Venus_ with an head of _Poppy_ in her\nhand; the reason hereof was the multitude of seed within it self, and no\nsuch multiplying in humane generation. And lastly, whereas they may seem\nto have this quality, since _Opium_ it self is conceived to extimulate\nunto venery, and for that intent is sometimes used by _Turks_,\n_Persians_, and most oriental Nations; although _Winclerus_ doth seem to\nfavour the conceit, yet _Amatus Lusitanus_, and _Rodericus a Castro_ are\nagainst it; _Garcias ab horto_ refutes it from experiment; and they\nspeak probably who affirm the intent and effect of eating Opium [SN:\n_Opium, of what effect in venery._], it not so much to invigorate\nthemselves in coition, as to prolong the Act, and spin out the motions\nof carnality.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII\n\nOf the three Kings of _Collein_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: _Three magi or wise men_ (Mat. 2.) _What manner of Kings they\nwere._]\n\nA common conceit there is of the three Kings of _Collein_, conceived to\nbe the wise men that travelled unto our Saviour by the direction of the\nStar, Wherein (omitting the large Discourses of _Baronius_, _Pineda_ and\n_Montacutius_,) that they might be Kings, beside the Ancient Tradition\nand Authority of many Fathers, the Scripture also implieth. The Gentiles\nshall come to thy light, and Kings to the brightness of thy rising. The\nKings of _Tharsis_ and the Isles, the Kings of _Arabia_ and _Saba_ shall\noffer gifts, which places most Christians and many _Rabbins_ interpret\nof the _Messiah_. Not that they are to be conceived potent monarchs, or\nmighty Kings; but Toparks, Kings of Cities or narrow Territories; such\nas were the Kings of _Sodom_ and _Gomorrah_, the Kings of _Jericho_ and\n_Ai_, the one and thirty which _Joshuah_ subdued, and such as some\nconceive the Friends of _Job_ to have been.\n\nBut although we grant they were Kings, yet can we not be assured they\nwere three. For the Scripture maketh no mention of any number; and the\nnumbers of their presents, Gold, Myrrhe and Frankincense, concludeth not\nthe number of their persons; for these were the commodities of their\nCountry, and such as probably the Queen of _Sheba_ in one person had\nbrought before unto _Solomon_. So did not the sons of _Jacob_ divide the\npresent unto _Joseph_, but are conceived to carry one for them all,\naccording to the expression of their Father--Take of the best fruits of\nthe land in your vessels, and carry down the man a present. And\ntherefore their number being uncertain, what credit is to be given unto\ntheir names, _Gasper_,_ Melchior_, _Balthazar_, what to the charm\nthereof against the falling sickness [SN: Gaspar fert myrrham, _etc._],\nor what unto their habits, complexions, and corporal accidents, we must\nrely on their uncertain story, and received pourtraits of _Collein_.\n\nLastly, Although we grant them Kings, and three in number, yet could we\nnot conceive that they were Kings of _Collein_. For though _Collein_\nwere the chief City of the _Ubii_, then called _Ubiopolis_, and\nafterwards _Agrippina_, yet will no History inform us there were three\nKings thereof. Beside, these being rulers in their Countries, and\nreturning home, would have probably converted their subjects: but\naccording unto _Munster_, their conversion was not wrought until seventy\nyears after by _Maternus_ a disciple of _Peter_. And lastly, it is said\nthat the wise men came from the East; but _Collein_ is seated West-ward\nfrom _Jerusalem_; for _Collein_ hath of longitude thirty four degrees,\nbut _Jerusalem_ seventy two.\n\n[Sidenote: _And why of_ Collein.]\n\nThe ground of all was this. These wise men or Kings, were probably of\n_Arabia_, and descended from _Abraham_ by _Keturah_, who apprehending\nthe mystery of this Star, either by the Spirit of God, the prophesie of\n_Balaam_, the prophesie which _Suetonius_ mentions, received and\nconstantly believed through all the East, that out of Jury one should\ncome that should rule the whole world: or the divulged expectation of\nthe _Jews_ from the expiring prediction of _Daniel_: were by the same\nconducted unto _Judea_, returned unto their Country, and were after\nbaptized by _Thomas_. From whence about three hundred years after, by\n_Helena_ the Empress their bodies were translated to _Constantinople_.\nFrom thence by _Eustatius_ unto Millane, and at last by _Renatus_ the\nBishop unto _Collein_: where they are believed at present to remain,\ntheir monuments shewn unto strangers, and having lost their _Arabian_\ntitles, are crowned Kings of _Collein_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX\n\nOf the food of _John Baptist_, Locusts and Wild-honey.\n\n\nConcerning the food of _John Baptist_ in the wilderness, Locusts and\nWild-honey, lest popular opiniatrity should arise, we will deliver the\nchief opinions. The first conceiveth the Locusts here mentioned to be\nthat fruit which the Greeks name +keration+ mentioned by _Luke_ in the\ndiet of the Prodigal son, the Latins _Siliqua_, and some _Panis Sancti\nJohannis_; included in a broad Cod, and indeed a taste almost as\npleasant as Honey. But this opinion doth not so truly impugn that of the\nLocusts: and might rather call into controversie the meaning of\nWild-honey.\n\n[Sidenote: _Opinions concerning_ +akrides+, _or the Locusts of S._ John\n_Baptist_.]\n\nThe second affirmeth that they were the tops or tender crops of trees:\nfor so _Locusta_ also signifieth: which conceit is plausible in Latin,\nbut will not hold in Greek, wherein the word is +akris+, except for\n+akrides+, we read +akrodrya+, or +akremones+, which signifie the\nextremities of trees, of which belief have divers been: more confidently\n_Isidore Peleusiota_, who in his Epistles plainly affirmeth they think\nunlearnedly who are of another belief. And this so wrought upon\n_Baronius_, that he concludeth in neutrality; _Haec cum scribat Isidorus\ndefiniendum nobis non est et totum relinquimus lectoris arbitrio; nam\nconstat Graecam dictionem_ +akrides+, _et Locustam, insecti genus, et\narborum summitates significare. Sed fallitur_, saith Montacutius, _nam\nconstat contrarium_, +Akrida+ _apud nullum authorem classicum_\n+Akrodrya+ _significare_. But above all _Paracelsus_ with most animosity\npromoteth this opinion, and in his book _de melle_, spareth not his\nFriend Erasmus. _Hoc a nonnullis ita explicatur ut dicant Locastus aut\ncicadas Johanni pro cibo fuisse; sed hi stultitiam dissimulare non\npossunt, veluti Jeronimus, Erasmus, et alii Prophetae Neoterici in\nLatinitate immortui._\n\n[Sidenote: _The more probable what._]\n\nA third affirmeth that they were properly Locusts: that is, a\nsheath-winged and six-footed insect, such as is our Grashopper. And this\nopinion seems more probable than the other. For beside the authority of\n_Origen_, _Jerom_, _Chrysostom_, _Hillary_ and _Ambrose_ to confirm it:\nthis is the proper signification of the word, thus used in Scripture by\nthe Septuagint, Greek vocabularies thus expound it. _Suidas_ on the word\n+Akris+ observes it to be that animal whereon the Baptist fed in the\ndesert; in this sense the word is used by _Aristotle_, _Dioscorides_,\n_Galen_, and several humane Authors. And lastly, there is no absurdity\nin this interpretation, or any solid reason why we should decline it, it\nbeing a food permitted unto the _Jews_, whereof four kinds are reckoned\nup among clean meats. Beside, not only the _Jews_, but many other\nNations long before and since, have made an usual food thereof. That the\n_AEthiopians_, _Mauritanians_ and _Arabians_ did commonly eat them, is\ntestified by _Diodorus_, _Strabo_, _Solinus_, _AElian_ and _Pliny_: that\nthey still feed on them is confirmed by _Leo_, _Cadamustus_ and others.\n_John_ therefore as our Saviour saith, came neither eating nor drinking:\nthat is, far from the diet of _Jerusalem_ and other Riotous places: but\nfared coursly and poorly according unto the apparel he wore, that is of\nCamels hair: the place of his abode, the wilderness; and the doctrin he\npreached, humiliation and repentance.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X\n\nThat _John_ the Evangelist should not die.\n\n\nThe conceit of the long-living, or rather not dying of _John_ the\nEvangelist, although it seem inconsiderable, and not much weightier than\nthat of _Joseph_ the wandring _Jew_: yet being deduced from Scripture,\nand abetted by Authors of all times, it shall not escape our enquiry. It\nis drawn from the speech of our Saviour unto _Peter_ after the\nprediction of his Martyrdom; _Peter_ saith unto Jesus [SN: _John_ 21.].\nLord what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he\ntarry until I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me; then went this\nsaying abroad among the brethren, that this disciple should not die.\n\nNow the belief hereof hath been received either grosly and in the\ngeneral, that is not distinguishing the manner or particular way of this\ncontinuation, in which sense probably the grosser and undiscerning party\nreceived it. Or more distinctly apprehending the manner of his\nimmortality; that is, that _John_ should never properly die, but be\ntranslated into Paradise, there to remain with _Enoch_ and _Elias_ until\nabout the coming of Christ; and should be slain with them under\nAntichrist, according to that of the Apocalyps. I will give power unto\nmy two witnesses, and they shall prophesie a thousand two hundred and\nthreescore days cloathed in sack-cloth, and when they shall have\nfinished their Testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless\npit, shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill\nthem. Hereof, as _Baronius_ observeth, within three hundred years after\nChrist, _Hippolytus_ the Martyr was the first assertor, but hath been\nmaintained by _Metaphrastes_, by _Freculphus_, but especially by\n_Georgius Trapezuntius_, who hath expresly treated upon this Text, and\nalthough he lived but in the last Century, did still affirm that _John_\nwas not yet dead.\n\nThe same is also hinted by the learned Italian Poet _Dante_, who in his\nPoetical survey of Paradise, meeting with the soul of St. _John_, and\ndesiring to see his body; received answer from him that his body was in\nearth, and there should remain with other bodys, until the number of the\nblessed were accomplished.\n\n _In terra e terra il mio corpo, et saragli\n Tanto con gli altri, che l' numero nostro\n Con l' eterno proposito s' agguagli._\n\nAs for the gross opinion that he should not die, it is sufficiently\nrefuted by that which first occasioned it, that is the Scripture it\nself, and no further off than the very subsequent verse: Yet Jesus said\nunto him, he should not die, but if I will that he tarry till I come,\nWhat is that to thee? And this was written by _John_ himself, whom the\nopinion concerned; and as is conceived many years after, when _Peter_\nhad suffered and fulfilled the prophesie of Christ.\n\nFor the particular conceit, the foundation is weak, nor can it be made\nout from the Text alledged in the Apocalyps: for beside that therein two\npersons are only named, no mention is made of _John_, a third Actor in\nthis Tragedy. [SN: _The death of St._ John _Evangelist, where and\nwhen._] The same is also overthrown by History, which recordeth not only\nthe death of _John_, but assigneth the place of his burial, that is\n_Ephesus_, a City in _Asia_ minor, whither after he had been banished\ninto _Patmos_ by _Domitian_, he returned in the reign of Nerva, there\ndeceased, and was buried in the days of _Trajan_. And this is testified\nby _Jerom_[SN: De Scriptor. Ecclesiast.], by _Tertullian_ [SN: De\nAnima.], by _Chrysostom_ and _Eusebius_, in whose days his Sepulchre was\nto be seen; and by a more ancient Testimony alleadged also by him, that\nis of _Polycrates_ Bishop of _Ephesus_, not many successions after\n_John_; whose words are these in an Epistle unto _Victor_ Bishop of\n_Rome, Johannes ille qui supra pectus Domini recumbebat, Doctor optimus,\napud Ephesum dormivit_; many of the like nature are noted by _Baronius_,\n_Jansenius_, _Estius_, _Lipellous_, and others.\n\nNow the main and primitive ground of this error, was a gross mistake in\nthe words of Christ, and a false apprehension of his meaning;\nunderstanding that positively which was but conditionally expressed, or\nreceiving that affirmatively which was but concessively delivered. For\nthe words of our Saviour run in a doubtful strain, rather reprehending\nthan satisfying the curiosity of _Peter_; as though he should have said,\nThou hast thy own doom, why enquirest thou after thy Brothers? What\nrelief unto thy affliction, will be the society of anothers? Why pryest\nthou into the secrets of Gods will? If he stay until I come, what\nconcerneth it thee, who shalt be sure to suffer before that time? And\nsuch an answer probably he returned, because he fore-knew _John_ should\nnot suffer a violent death, but go unto his grave in peace. Which had\n_Peter_ assuredly known, it might have cast some water on his flames,\nand smothered those fires which kindled after unto the honour of his\nMaster.\n\n[Sidenote: _Of all the Apostles St._ John _only is thought to have\nsuffered a natural death: And why?_]\n\nNow why among all the rest _John_ only escaped the death of a Martyr,\nthe reason is given; because all others fled away or withdrew themselves\nat his death, and he alone of the Twelve beheld his passion on the\nCross. Wherein notwithstanding, the affliction that he suffered could\nnot amount unto less than Martyrdom: for if the naked relation, at least\nthe intentive consideration of that Passion, be able still, and at this\ndisadvantage of time, to rend the hearts of pious Contemplators; surely\nthe near and sensible vision thereof must needs occasion Agonies beyond\nthe comprehension of flesh; and the trajections of such an object more\nsharply pierce the Martyred soul of _John_, than afterward did the nails\nthe crucified body of _Peter_.\n\nAgain, They were mistaken in the Emphatical apprehension, placing the\nconsideration upon the words, If I will: whereas it properly lay in\nthese, when I come. Which had they apprehended as some have since, that\nis, not for his ultimate and last return, but his coming in Judgment and\ndestruction upon the _Jews_; or such a coming, as it might be said, that\nthat generation should not pass before it was fulfilled; they needed\nnot, much less need we suppose such diuturnity. For after the death of\n_Peter_, _John_ lived to behold the same fulfilled by _Vespasian_: nor\nhad he then his _Nunc dimittis_, or went out like unto _Simeon_; but old\nin accomplisht obscurities, and having seen the expire of _Daniels_\nprediction, as some conceive, he accomplished his Revelation.\n\nBut besides this original and primary foundation, divers others have\nmade impressions according unto different ages and persons by whom they\nwere received. For some established the conceit in the disciples and\nbrethren, which were contemporary unto him, or lived about the same time\nwith him; and this was first the extraordinary affection our Saviour\nbare unto this disciple, who hath the honour to be called the disciple\nwhom Jesus loved. Now from hence they might be apt to believe their\nMaster would dispense with his death, or suffer him to live to see him\nreturn in glory, who was the only Apostle that beheld him to die in\ndishonour. Another was the belief and opinion of those times, that\nChrist would suddenly come; for they held not generally the same opinion\nwith their successors, or as descending ages after so many Centuries;\nbut conceived his coming would not be long after his passion, according\nunto several expressions of our Saviour grosly understood, and as we\nfind the same opinion not long after reprehended by St. _Paul_ [SN:\n_Thes._ 2.]: and thus conceiving his coming would not be long, they\nmight be induced to believe his favorite should live unto it. [SN:\n_Saint_ John, _how long surviving our B. Saviour._] Lastly, the long\nlife of _John_ might much advantage this opinion; for he survived the\nother twelve, he was aged 22 years when he was called by Christ, and 25\nthat is the age of Priesthood at his death, and lived 93 years, that is\n68 after his Saviour, and died not before the second year of _Trajan_.\nNow having out lived all his fellows, the world was confirmed he might\nlive still, and even unto the coming of his Master.\n\nThe grounds which promoted it in succeeding ages, were especially two.\nThe first his escape of martyrdom: for whereas all the rest suffered\nsome kind of forcible death, we have no history that he suffered any;\nand men might think he was not capable thereof: For as History\ninformeth, by the command of _Domitian_ he was cast into a Caldron of\nburning oyl, and came out again unsinged. Now future ages apprehending\nhe suffered no violent death, and finding also the means that tended\nthereto could take no place, they might be confirmed in their opinion\nthat death had no power over him, that he might live always who could\nnot be destroyed by fire, and was able to resist the fury of that\nelement which nothing shall resist. The second was a corruption crept\ninto the Latin Text, reading for _Si, Sic eum manere volo_; whereby the\nanswer of our Saviour becometh positive, or that he will have it so;\nwhich way of reading was much received in former ages, and is still\nretained in the vulgar Translation; but in the Greek and original the\nword is +ean+, signifying _Si_ or if, which is very different\nfrom +houtos+, and cannot be translated for it: and answerable\nhereunto is the translation of _Junius_, and that also annexed unto the\nGreek by the authority of _Sixtus Quintus_.\n\nThe third confirmed it in ages farther descending, and proved a\npowerfull argument unto all others following; because in his tomb at\n_Ephesus_ there was no corps or relique thereof to be found; whereupon\narose divers doubts, and many suspitious conceptions; some believing he\nwas not buried, some that he was buried but risen again, others that he\ndescended alive into his tomb, and from thence departed after. But all\nthese proceeded upon unveritable grounds, as _Baronius_ hath observed;\nwho alledgeth a letter of _Celestine_ Bishop of _Rome_, unto the Council\nof _Ephesus_, wherein he declareth the reliques of _John_ were highly\nhonoured by that City; and by a passage also of _Chrysostome_ in the\nHomilies of the Apostles, That _John_ being dead, did cures in\n_Ephesus_, as though he were still alive. And so I observe that\n_Esthius_ discussing this point concludeth hereupon, _Quod corpus ejus\nnunquam reperiatur, hoc non dicerent si veterum scripta diligenter\nperlustrassent_.\n\nNow that the first ages after Christ, those succeeding, or any other\nshould proceed into opinions so far divided from reason, as to think of\nimmortality after the fall of _Adam_, or conceit a man in these later\ntimes should out-live our fathers in the first; although it seem very\nstrange, yet is it not incredible. For the credulity of men hath been\ndeluded into the like conceits; and as _Ireneus_ and _Tertullian_\nmention, one _Menander_ a _Samaritan_ obtained belief in this very\npoint; whose doctrin it was, that death should have no power on his\ndisciples, and such as received his baptism should receive immortality\ntherewith. Twas surely an apprehension very strange; nor usually falling\neither from the absurdities of Melancholy or vanities of ambition. Some\nindeed have been so affectedly vain, as to counterfeit Immortality, and\nhave stoln their death, in a hope to be esteemed immortal; and others\nhave conceived themselves dead; but surely few or none have fallen upon\nso bold an errour, as not to think that they could die at all. The\nreason of those mighty ones, whose ambition could suffer them to be\ncalled gods, would never be flattered into immortality; but the proudest\nthereof have by the daily dictates of corruption convinced the\nimpropriety of that appellation. And surely although delusion may run\nhigh, and possible it is that for a while a man may forget his nature,\nyet cannot this be durable. For the inconcealable imperfections of our\nselves, or their daily examples in others, will hourly prompt us our\ncorruption, and loudly tell us we are the sons of earth.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI\n\nMore compendiously of some others.\n\n\nMany others there are which we resign unto Divinity, and perhaps\ndeserve not controversie. Whether _David_ were punished only for pride\nof heart in numbring the people, as most do hold, or whether as\n_Josephus_ and many maintain, he suffered also for not performing the\nCommandment of God concerning capitation; that when the people were\nnumbred, for every head they should pay unto God a shekell, we shall not\nhere contend. Surely, if it were not the occasion of this plague, we\nmust acknowledge the omission thereof was threatned with that\npunishment, according to the words of the Law [SN: Exod. 30.]. When thou\ntakest the sum of the children of _Israel_, then shall they give every\nman a ransom for his soul unto the Lord, that there be no plague amongst\nthem. Now how deeply hereby God was defrauded in the time of _David_,\nand opulent State of Israel, will easily appear by the sums of former\nlustrations. For in the first [SN: Exod. 38.], the silver of them that\nwere numbred was an hundred Talents, and a thousand seven hundred\nthree-score and fifteen shekels; a Bekah for every man, that is, half a\nshekel, after the shekel of the sanctuary; for every one from twenty\nyears old and upwards, for six hundred thousand, and three thousand and\nfive hundred and fifty men. Answerable whereto we read in _Josephus_,\n_Vespasian_ ordered that every man of the _Jews_ should bring into the\nCapital two dragms; which amounts unto fifteen pence, or a quarter of an\nounce of silver with us: and is equivalent unto a Bekah, or half a\nshekel of the Sanctuary. [SN: _What the Attick dragm is. What the\ndidrachmum and the stater_, Mat. 17. 27.] For an Attick dragm is seven\npence halfpeny or a quarter of a shekel, and a didrachmum or double\ndragm, is the word for Tribute money, or half a shekel; and a stater the\nmoney found in the fishes mouth was two Didrachmums, or an whole shekel,\nand tribute sufficient for our Saviour and for _Peter_.\n\nWe will not question the Metamorphosis of _Lots_ wife, or whether she\nwere transformed into a real statua of Salt: though some conceive that\nexpression Metaphorical, and no more thereby then a lasting and durable\ncolumn, according to the nature of Salt, which admitteth no corruption:\nin which sense the Covenant of God is termed a Covenant of Salt; and it\nis also said, God gave the Kingdom unto _David_ for ever, or by a\nCovenant of Salt.\n\nThat _Absalom_ was hanged by the hair of the head, and not caught up by\nthe neck, as _Josephus_ conceiveth, and the common argument against long\nhair affirmeth, we are not ready to deny. Although I confess a great and\nlearned party there are of another opinion; although if he had his\nMorion or Helmet on, I could not well conceive it; although the\ntranslation of _Jerom_ or _Tremelius_ do not prove it, and our own seems\nrather to overthrow it.\n\n[Sidenote: _How_ Judas _might die_.]\n\nThat _Judas_ hanged himself, much more, that he perished thereby, we\nshall not raise a doubt. Although _Jansenius_ discoursing the point,\nproduceth the testimony of _Theophylact_ and _Euthimius_, that he died\nnot by the Gallows, but under a cart wheel, and _Baronius_ also\ndelivereth, this was the opinion of the _Greeks_, and derived as high as\n_Papias_, one of the Disciples of _John_. Although also how hardly the\nexpression of _Matthew_ is reconcilable unto that of _Peter_, and that\nhe plainly hanged himself, with that, that falling head-long he burst\nasunder in the midst, with many other, the learned _Grotius_ plainly\ndoth acknowledge. And lastly, Although as he also urgeth, the word\n+apenxato+ in _Matthew_, doth not only signifie suspension or\npendulous illaqueation, as the common picture discribeth it, but also\nsuffocation, strangulation or interception of breath, which may arise\nfrom grief, despair, and deep dejection of spirit [SN: Strangulat\ninclusus dolor.], in which sense it is used in the History of _Tobit_\nconcerning _Sara_, +elypethe sphodra hoste apanxasthai+. _Ita\ntristata est ut strangulatione premeretur_, saith _Junius_; and so might\nit happen from the horrour of mind unto _Judas_. So do many of the\n_Hebrews_ affirm, that _Achitophel_ was also strangled, that is, not\nfrom the rope, but passion. For the Hebrew and Arabick word in the Text,\nnot only signifies suspension, but indignation, as _Grotius_ hath also\nobserved.\n\nMany more there are of indifferent truths, whose dubious expositions\nworthy Divines and Preachers do often draw into wholesome and sober uses\nwhereof we shall not speak; with industry we decline such Paradoxes, and\npeaceably submit unto their received acceptions.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII\n\nOf the Cessation of Oracles.\n\n\nThat Oracles ceased or grew mute at the coming of Christ, is best\nunderstood in a qualified sense, and not without all latitude, as though\nprecisely there were none after, nor any decay before. For (what we must\nconfess unto relations of Antiquity) some pre-decay is observable from\nthat of _Cicero_, urged by _Baronius_; _Cur isto modo jam oracula\nDelphis non eduntur, non modo nostra aetate, sed jam diu, ut nihil possit\nesse contemptius_. That during his life they were not altogether dumb,\nis deduceable from _Suetonius_ in the life of _Tiberius_, who attempting\nto subvert the Oracles adjoyning unto _Rome_, was deterred by the Lots\nor chances which were delivered at _Preneste_. After his death we meet\nwith many; _Suetonius_ reports, that the Oracle of _Antium_ forewarned\n_Caligula_ to beware of _Cassius_, who was one that conspired his death.\n_Plutarch_ enquiring why the Oracles of _Greece_ ceased, excepteth that\nof _Lebadia_: and in the same place _Demetrius_ affirmeth the Oracles of\n_Mopsus_ and _Amphilochus_ were much frequented in his days. In brief,\nHistories are frequent in examples, and there want not some even to the\nreign of _Julian_.\n\nWhat therefore may consist with history, by cessation of Oracles with\n_Montacutius_ we may understand their intercision, not abscission or\nconsummate desolation; their rare delivery, not total dereliction, and\nyet in regard of divers Oracles, we may speak strictly, and say there\nwas a proper cessation. Thus may we reconcile the accounts of times, and\nallow those few and broken divinations, whereof we read in story and\nundeniable Authors. For that they received this blow from Christ, and no\nother causes alledged by the heathens, from oraculous confession they\ncannot deny; whereof upon record there are some very remarkable. The\nfirst that Oracle of _Delphos_ delivered unto _Augustus_.\n\n _Me puer Hebraeus Divos Deus ipse gubernans\n Cedere sede jubet, tristemq; redire sub orcum;\n Aris ergo dehinc tacitus discedito nostris._\n\n An Hebrew child, a God all gods excelling,\n To hell again commands me from this dwelling.\n Our Altars leave in silence, and no more\n A Resolution e're from hence implore.\n\nA second recorded by _Plutarch_, of a voice that was heard to cry unto\nMariners at the sea, _Great Pan is dead_; which is a relation very\nremarkable, and may be read in his defect of Oracles. A third reported\nby _Eusebius_ in the life of his magnified _Constantine_, that about\nthat time _Apollo_ mourned, declaring his Oracles were false and that\nthe righteous upon earth did hinder him from speaking truth. And a\nfourth related by _Theodoret_, and delivered by _Apollo Daphneus_ unto\n_Julian_ upon his _Persian_ expedition, that he should remove the bodies\nabout him before he could return an answer, and not long after his\nTemple was burnt with lightning.\n\nAll which were evident and convincing acknowledgements of that Power\nwhich shut his lips, and restrained that delusion which had reigned so\nmany Centuries. But as his malice is vigilant, and the sins of men do\nstill continue a toleration of his mischiefs, he resteth not, nor will\nhe ever cease to circumvent the sons of the first deceived. [SN: _The\ndevils retreat when expelled the Oracles._] And therefore expelled from\nOracles and solemn Temples of delusion, he runs into corners, exercising\nminor trumperies, and acting his deceits in Witches, Magicians,\nDiviners, and such inferiour seducers. And yet (what is deplorable)\nwhile we apply our selves thereto, and affirming that God hath left to\nspeak by his Prophets, expect in doubtfull matters a resolution from\nsuch spirits, while we say the devil is mute, yet confess that these can\nspeak; while we deny the substance, yet practise the effect and in the\ndenied solemnity maintain the equivalent efficacy; in vain we cry that\nOracles are down; _Apollos_ Altar still doth smoak; nor is the fire of\n_Delphos_ out unto this day.\n\nImpertinent it is unto our intention to speak in general of Oracles, and\nmany have well performed it. The plainest of others was that of _Apollo\nDelphicus_ recorded by _Herodotus_, and delivered unto _Croesus_; who\nas a trial of their omniscience sent unto distant Oracles; and so\ncontrived with the Messengers, that though in several places, yet at the\nsame time they should demand what _Croesus_ was then a doing. Among\nall others the Oracle of _Delphos_ only hit it, returning answer, he was\nboyling a Lamb with a Tortoise, in a brazen vessel, with a cover of the\nsame metal. The stile is haughty in Greek, though somewhat lower in\nLatine.\n\n _AEquoris est spatium et numerus mihi notus arenae\n Mutum percipio, fantis nihil audio vocem.\n Venit ad hos sensus nidor testudinis acris,\n Quae semel agnina coquitur cum carne labete,\n Aere infra strato, et stratum cui desuper aes est._\n\n I know the space of Sea, the number of the sand,\n I hear the silent, mute I understand.\n A tender Lamb joined with Tortoise flesh,\n Thy Master King of _Lydia_ now doth dress.\n The scent thereof doth in my nostrils hover,\n From brazen pot closed with brazen cover.\n\nHereby indeed he acquired much wealth and more honour, and was reputed\nby _Croesus_ as a Diety: and yet not long after, by a vulgar fallacy\nhe deceived his favourite and greatest friend of Oracles into an\nirreparable overthrow by _Cyrus_. And surely the same success are likely\nall to have that rely or depend upon him. 'Twas the first play he\npractised on mortality; and as time hath rendred him more perfect in the\nArt, so hath the inveterateness of his malice more ready in the\nexecution. 'Tis therefore the soveraign degree of folly, and a crime not\nonly against God, but also our own reasons, to expect a favour from the\ndevil; whose mercies are more cruel than those of _Polyphemus_; for he\ndevours his favourites first, and the nearer a man approacheth, the\nsooner he is scorched by _Moloch_. In brief, his favours are deceitfull\nand double-headed, he doth apparent good, for real and convincing evil\nafter it; and exalteth us up to the top of the Temple, but to humble us\ndown from it.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII\n\nOf the death of _Aristotle_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: _What an_ Euripus _is generally_.]\n\nThat _Aristotle_ drowned himself in _Euripus_, as despairing to resolve\nthe cause of its reciprocation, or ebb and flow seven times a day, with\nthis determination, _Si quidem ego non capio te, tu capies me_, was the\nassertion of _Procopius_, _Nazianzen_, _Justin Martyr_, and is generally\nbelieved amongst us. Wherein, because we perceive men have but an\nimperfect knowledge, some conceiving _Euripus_ to be a River, others not\nknowing where or in what part to place it; we first advertise, it\ngenerally signifieth any strait, fret, or channel of the Sea, running\nbetween two shoars, as _Julius Pollux_ hath defined it; as we read of\n_Euripus Hellespontiacus_, _Pyrrhaeus_, and this whereof we treat,\n_Euripus Euboicus_ or _Chalcidicus_, that is, a narrow passage of Sea\ndividing _Attica_, and the Island of _Euboea_, now called _Golfo de\nNegroponte_, from the name of the Island and chief City thereof; famous\nin the wars of _Antiochus_, and taken from the _Venetians_ by _Mahomet_\nthe Great.\n\n[Sidenote: _Touching the death of_ Aristotle.]\n\nNow that in this _Euripe_ or fret of _Negropont_, and upon the occasion\nmentioned, _Aristotle_ drowned himself, as many affirm, and almost all\nbelieve, we have some room to doubt. For without any mention of this, we\nfind two ways delivered of his death by _Diogenes Laertius_, who\nexpresly treateth thereof; the one from _Eumolus_ and _Phavorimus_, that\nbeing accused of impiety for composing an Hymn unto _Hermias_ (upon\nwhose Concubine he begat his son _Nichomachus_) he withdrew into\n_Chalcis_, where drinking poison he died; the Hymn is extant in\n_Laertius_, and the fifteenth book of _Athenaeus_. Another by\n_Apollodorus_, that he died at _Chalcis_ of a natural death and\nlanguishment of stomach, in his sixty third, or great Climacterical\nyear; and answerable hereto is the account of _Suidas_ and _Censorinus_.\nAnd if that were clearly made out, which _Rabbi Ben Joseph_ affirmeth,\nhe found in an _Egyptian_ book of _Abraham Sapiens Perizol_; that\n_Aristotle_ acknowledged all that was written in the Law of _Moses_, and\nbecame at last a Proselyte [SN: _Licetus_ de quaesitis, epist.]; it would\nalso make improbable this received way of his death.\n\nAgain, Beside the negative of Authority, it is also deniable by reason;\nnor will it be easie to obtrude such desperate attempts upon\n_Aristotle_, from unsatisfaction of reason, who so often acknowledged\nthe imbecillity thereof. Who in matters of difficulty, and such which\nwere not without abstrusities, conceived it sufficient to deliver\nconjecturalities. And surely he that could sometimes sit down with high\nimprobabilities, that could content himself, and think to satisfie\nothers, that the variegation of Birds was from their living in the Sun,\nor erection made by deliberation of the Testicles; would not have been\ndejected unto death with this. He that was so well acquainted with +e\nhoti+, and +poteron+ _utrum_, and _An Quia_, as we observe in the\nQueries of his Problems: with +isos+ and +epi to poly+, _fortasse_ and\n_plerumque_, as is observable through all his Works: had certainly\nrested with probabilities, and glancing conjectures in this: Nor would\nhis resolutions have ever run into that mortal Antanaclasis, and\ndesperate piece of Rhetorick, to be compriz'd in that he could not\ncomprehend. Nor is it indeed to be made out that he ever endeavoured the\nparticular of _Euripus_, or so much as to resolve the ebb and flow of\nthe Sea. For, as _Vicomercatus_ and others observe, he hath made no\nmention hereof in his Works, although the occasion present it self in\nhis Meteors, wherein he disputeth the affections of the Sea: nor yet in\nhis Problems, although in the twenty-third Section, there be no less\nthan one and forty Queries of the Sea. Some mention there is indeed in a\nWork of the propriety of Elements, ascribed unto _Aristotle_: which\nnotwithstanding is not reputed genuine, and was perhaps the same whence\nthis was urged by _Plutarch_. [SN: De placitis Philosophorum.]\n\nLastly, the thing it self whereon the opinion dependeth, that is, the\nvariety of the flux and the reflux of _Euripus_, or whether the same do\nebb and flow seven times a day, is not incontrovertible. For though\n_Pomponius Mela_, and after him _Solinus_ and _Pliny_ have affirmed it,\nyet I observe _Thucydides_, who speaketh often of _Euboea_, hath\nomitted it. _Pausanias_ an ancient Writer, who hath left an exact\ndescription of _Greece_, and in as particular a way as _Leandro_ of\n_Italy_, or _Cambden_ of great _Britain_, describing not only the\nCountry Towns, and Rivers; but Hills, Springs and Houses, hath left no\nmention hereof. _AEschines_ in _Ctesiphon_ only alludeth unto it; and\n_Strabo_ that accurate Geographer speaks warily of it, that is,\n+hos phasi+, and as men commonly reported. And so doth also _Maginus,\nVelocis ac varii fluctus est mare, ubi quater in die, aut septies, ut\nalii dicunt, reciprocantur aestus. Botero_ more plainly, _Il mar cresce e\ncala con un impeto mirabile quatra volte il di, ben che communimente si\ndica sette volte_, etc. This Sea with wondrous impetuosity ebbeth and\nfloweth four times a day, although it be commonly said seven times, and\ngenerally opinioned, that _Aristotle_ despairing of the reason, drowned\nhimself therein. In which description by four times a day, it exceeds\nnot in number the motion of other Seas, taking the words properly, that\nis, twice ebbing and twice flowing in four and twenty hours. And is no\nmore than what _Thomaso Porrcacchi_ affirmeth in his description of\nfamous Islands, that twice a day it hath such an impetuous flood, as is\nnot without wonder. _Livy_ speaks more particularly, _Haud facile\ninfestior classi statio est et fretum ipsum Euripi, non septies die\n(ficut fama fert) temporibus certis reciprocat, sed temere in modum\nventi, nunc hunc nunc illuc verso mari, velut monte praecipiti devolutus\ntorrens rapitur_. There is hardly a worse harbour, the fret or channel\nof _Euripus_ not certainly ebbing or flowing seven times a day,\naccording to common report: but being uncertainly, and in the manner of\na wind carried hither and thither, is whirled away as a torrent down a\nhill. But the experimental testimony of _Gillius_ is most considerable\nof any: who having beheld the course thereof, and made enquiry of\nMillers that dwelt upon its shore, received answer, that it ebbed and\nflowed four times a day, that is, every six hours, according to the Law\nof the Ocean: but that indeed sometimes it observed not that certain\ncourse. And this irregularity, though seldom happening, together with\nits unruly and tumultuous motion, might afford a beginning unto the\ncommon opinion. Thus may the expression in _Ctesiphon_ be made out: And\nby this may _Aristotle_ be interpreted, when in his Problems he seems to\nborrow a Metaphor from _Euripus_: while in the five and twentieth\nSection he enquireth, why in the upper parts of houses the air doth\nEuripize, that is, is whirled hither and thither.\n\nA later and experimental testimony is to be found in the travels of\nMonsieur _Duloir_; who about twenty years ago, remained sometime at\n_Negroponte_, or old _Chalcis_, and also passed and repassed this\n_Euripus_; who thus expresseth himself. I wonder much at the Error\nconcerning the flux and reflux of _Euripus_; and I assure you that\nopinion is false. I gave a Boat-man a Crown, to set me in a convenient\nplace, where for a whole day I might observe the same. It ebbeth and\nfloweth by six hours, even as it doth at _Venice_, but the course\nthereof is vehement.\n\nNow that which gave life unto the assertion, might be his death at\n_Chalcis_, the chief City of _Euboea_, and seated upon _Euripus_,\nwhere 'tis confessed by all he ended his days. That he emaciated and\npined away in the too anxious enquiry of its reciprocations, although\nnot drowned therein, as _Rhodiginus_ relateth, some conceived, was a\nhalf confession thereof not justifiable from Antiquity. Surely the\nPhilosophy of flux and reflux was very imperfect of old among the Greeks\nand Latins; nor could they hold a sufficient theory thereof, who only\nobserved the Mediterranean, which in some places hath no ebb, and not\nmuch in any part. Nor can we affirm our knowledg is at the height, who\nhave now the Theory of the Ocean and narrow Seas beside. While we refer\nit unto the Moon, we give some satisfaction for the Ocean, but no\ngeneral salve for Creeks, and Seas which know no flood; nor resolve why\nit flows three or four foot at _Venice_ in the bottom of the Gulf, yet\nscarce at all at _Ancona_, _Durazzo_, or _Corcyra_, which lie but by the\nway. And therefore old abstrusities have caused new inventions; and some\nfrom the Hypotheses of _Copernicus_, or the Diurnal and annual motion of\nthe earth, endeavour to salve flows and motions of these Seas,\nillustrating the same by water in a boal, that rising or falling to\neither side, according to the motion of the vessel; the conceit is\ningenuous, salves some doubts, and is discovered at large by _Galileo_.\n[SN: Rog. Bac. doctis, Cabeus Met. 2.]\n\n[Sidenote: _How the Moon may cause the ebbing and flowing of the Sea._]\n\n[Sidenote: _Why Rivers and Lakes ebb and flow not. Why some Seas flow\nhigher than others, and continue longer._]\n\nBut whether the received principle and undeniable action of the Moon may\nnot be still retained, although in some difference of application, is\nyet to be perpended [SN: Rog. Bac. doctis, Cabeus Met. 2.]; that is, not\nby a simple operation upon the surphace or superiour parts, but\nexcitation of the nitro-sulphureous spirits, and parts disposed to\nintumescency at the bottom; not by attenuation of the upper part of the\nSea, (whereby ships would draw more water at the flow than at the ebb)\nbut inturgescencies caused first at the bottom, and carrying the upper\npart before them: subsiding and falling again, according to the Motion\nof the Moon from the Meridian, and languor of the exciting cause: and\ntherefore Rivers and Lakes who want these fermenting parts at the\nbottom, are not excited unto aestuations; and therefore some Seas flow\nhigher than others, according to the Plenty of these spirits, in their\nsubmarine constitutions. And therefore also the periods of flux and\nreflux are various, nor their increase or decrease equal: according to\nthe temper of the terreous parts at the bottom: who as they are more\nhardly or easily moved, do variously begin, continue or end their\nintumescencies.\n\n[Sidenote: _Whence the violent flows proceed in some Estuaries and\nRivers._]\n\nFrom the peculiar disposition of the earth at the bottom, wherein quick\nexcitations are made, may arise those Agars and impetuous flows in some\naestuaries and Rivers, as is observable about _Trent_ and _Humber_ in\n_England_; which may also have some effect in the boisterous tides of\n_Euripus_, not only from ebullitions at the bottom, but also from the\nsides and lateral parts, driving the streams from either side, which\narise or fall according to the motion in those parts, and the intent or\nremiss operation of the first exciting causes, which maintain their\nactivities above and below the Horizon; even as they do in the bodies of\nplants and animals, and in the commotion of _Catarrhes_.\n\nHowever therefore _Aristotle_ died, what was his end, or upon what\noccasion, although it be not altogether assured, yet that his memory and\nworthy name shall live, no man will deny, nor grateful Scholar doubt,\nand if according to the Elogy of _Solon_, a man may be only said to be\nhappy after he is dead, and ceaseth to be in the visible capacity of\nbeatitude, or if according unto his own Ethicks, sense is not essential\nunto felicity, but a man may be happy without the apprehension thereof;\nsurely in that sense he is pyramidally happy; nor can he ever perish but\nin the Euripe of Ignorance, or till the Torrent or Barbarism\noverwhelmeth all.\n\n[Sidenote: Homers _death_.]\n\nA like conceit there passeth of _Melisigenes, alias Homer_, the Father\nPoet, that he pined away upon the Riddle of the fishermen. But\n_Herodotus_ who wrote his life hath cleared this point; delivering, that\npassing from _Samos_ unto Athens, he went sick ashore upon the Island\n_Ios_, where he died, and was solemnly interred upon the Sea side; and\nso decidingly concludeth, _Ex hac aegritudine extremum diem clausit\nHomerus in Io, non, ut arbitrantur aliqui, AEnigmatis perplexitate\nenectus, sed morbo_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV\n\nOf the Wish of _Philoxenus_.\n\n\nThat Relation of _Aristotle_, and conceit generally received concerning\n_Philoxenus_, who wished the neck of a Crane, that thereby he might take\nmore pleasure in his meat, although it pass without exception, upon\nenquiry I find not only doubtful in the story, but absurd in the desire\nor reason alledged for it. For though his Wish were such as is\ndelivered, yet had it not perhaps that end, to delight his gust in\neating; but rather to obtain advantage thereby in singing, as is\ndeclared by _Mirandula_. _Aristotle_ (saith he) in his Ethicks and\nProblems, accuseth _Philoxenus_ of sensuality, for the greater pleasure\nof gust desiring the neck of a Crane; which desire of his, assenting\nunto _Aristotle_, I have formerly condemned: But since I perceive that\n_Aristotle_ for this accusation hath been accused by divers Writers. For\n_Philoxenus_ was an excellent Musician, and desired the neck of a Crane,\nnot for any pleasure at meat; but fancying thereby an advantage in\nsinging or warbling, and dividing the notes in musick. And many Writers\nthere are which mention a Musician of that name, as _Plutarch_ in his\nbook against usury, and _Aristotle_ himself in the eighth of his\nPoliticks, speaks of one _Philoxenus_ a Musician, that went off from the\nDorick Dithyrambicks unto the Phrygian Harmony.\n\nAgain, Be the story true or false, rightly applied or not, the intention\nis not reasonable, and that perhaps neither one way nor the other. For\nif we rightly consider the Organ of tast, we shall find the length of\nthe neck to conduce but little unto it. For the tongue being the\ninstrument of tast, and the tip thereof the most exact distinguisher, it\nwill not advantage the gust to have the neck extended; Wherein the\nGullet and conveying parts are only seated, which partake not of the\nnerves of gustation, or appertaining unto sapor, but receive them only\nfrom the sixth pair; whereas the nerves of tast descend from the third\nand fourth propagations, and so diffuse themselves into the tongue. And\ntherefore Cranes, Herns and Swans have no advantage in taste beyond\nHawks, Kites, and others of shorter necks.\n\nNor, if we consider it, had Nature respect unto the taste in the\ndifferent contrivance of necks, but rather unto the parts contained, the\ncomposure of the rest of the body, and the manner whereby they feed.\nThus animals of long legs, have generally long necks; that is, for the\nconveniency of feeding, as having a necessity to apply their mouths unto\nthe earth. So have Horses, Camels, Dromedaries long necks, and all tall\nanimals, except the Elephant, who in defect thereof is furnished with a\nTrunk, without which he could not attain the ground. So have Cranes,\nHerns, Storks and Shovelards long necks: and so even in Man, whose\nfigure is erect, the length of the neck followeth the proportion of\nother parts: and such as have round faces or broad chests and shoulders,\nhave very seldom long necks. For, the length of the face twice exceedeth\nthat of the neck, and the space betwixt the throat-pit and the navell,\nis equall unto the circumference thereof. Again, animals are framed with\nlong necks, according unto the course of their life or feeding: so many\nwith short legs have long necks, because they feed in the water, as\nSwans, Geese, Pelicans, and other fin-footed animals. But Hawks and\nbirds of prey have short necks and trussed leggs; for that which is long\nis weak and flexible, and a shorter figure is best accomodated unto\nthat intention. Lastly, the necks of animals do vary, according to the\nparts that are contained in them, which are the weazon and the gullet.\nSuch as have no weazon and breath not, have scarce any neck, as most\nsorts of fishes; and some none at all, as all sorts of pectinals, Soals,\nThornback, Flounders; and all crustaceous animals, as Crevises, Crabs\nand Lobsters.\n\nAll which considered, the Wish of _Philoxenus_ will hardly consist with\nreason. More excusable had it been to have wished himself an Ape, which\nif common conceit speak true, is exacter in taste then any. Rather some\nkind of granivorous bird then a Crane, for in this sense they are so\nexquisite that upon the first peck of their bill, they can distinguish\nthe qualities of hard bodies; which the sense of man discerns not\nwithout mastication. Rather some ruminating animal, that he might have\neat his meat twice over; or rather, as _Theophilus_ observed in\n_Athenaeus_, his desire had been more reasonable, had he wished himself\nan Elephant, or an Horse; for in these animals the appetite is more\nvehement, and they receive their viands in large and plenteous manner.\nAnd this indeed had been more sutable, if this were the same\n_Philoxenus_ whereof _Plutarch_ speaketh who was so uncivilly greedy,\nthat to engross the mess, he would preventively deliver his nostrils in\nthe dish.\n\nAs for the musical advantage, although it seem more reasonable, yet do\nwe not observe that Cranes and birds of long necks have any musical, but\nharsh and clangous throats. But birds that are canorous, and whose notes\nwe most commend, are of little throats and short necks, as Nightingales,\nFinches, Linnets, Canary birds and Larks. And truly, although the\nweazon, throtle and tongue be the instruments of voice, and by their\nagitations do chiefly concurr unto these delightfull modulations, yet\ncannot we distinctly and peculiarly assign the cause unto any\nparticular formation; and I perceive the best thereof, the nightingale,\nhath some disadvantage in the tongue; which is not accuminate and\npointed as in the rest, but seemeth as it were cut off, which perhaps\nmight give the hint unto the fable of _Philomela_, and the cutting off\nher tongue by _Tereus_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV\n\nOf the Lake Asphaltites.\n\n\nConcerning the Lake _Asphaltites_, the Lake of _Sodom_, or the dead Sea,\nthat heavy bodies cast therein sink not, but by reason of a salt and\nbituminous thickness in the water float and swim above, narrations\nalready made are of that variety, we can hardly from thence deduce a\nsatisfactory determination; and that not only in the story it self, but\nin the cause alledged. As for the story, men deliver it variously: some\nI fear too largely, as _Pliny_, who affirmeth that bricks will swim\ntherein. _Mandevil_ goeth farther, that Iron swimmeth, and feathers\nsink. _Munster_ in his Cosmography hath another relation, although\nperhaps derived from the Poem of _Tertullian,_ that a candle Burning\nswimmeth, but if extinguished sinketh. Some more moderately, as\n_Josephus_, and many others: affirming only that living bodies float,\nnor peremptorily averring they cannot sink, but that indeed they do not\neasily descend. Most traditionally, as _Galen_, _Pliny_, _Solinus_ and\n_Strabo_, who seems to mistake the Lake _Serbonis_ for it. Few\nexperimentally, most contenting themselves in the experiment of\n_Vespasian_, by whose command some captives bound were cast therein, and\nfound to float as though they could have swimmed: divers\ncontradictorily, or contrarily, quite overthrowing the point.\n_Aristotle_ in the second of his Meteors speaks lightly thereof, +hosper\nmythologousi+, which word is variously rendred, by some as a fabulous\naccount, by some as a common talk. _Biddulphus_ divideth the common\naccounts of _Judea_ in three parts, the one saith he, are apparent\nTruths, the second apparent falshoods, the third are dubious or between\nboth; in which form he ranketh the relation of this Lake.[SN: Biddulphi\nintinerarium Anglice.] But _Andrew Thevet_ in his Cosmography doth\nocularly overthrow it; for he affirmeth, he saw an Ass with his Saddle\ncast therein and drowned. Now of these relations so different or\ncontrary unto each other, the second is most moderate and safest to be\nembraced, which saith, that living bodies swim therein, that is, they do\nnot easily sink: and this, untill exact experiment further determine,\nmay be allowed, as best consistent with this quality, and the reasons\nalledged for it.\n\nAs for the cause of this effect, common opinion conceives it to be the\nsalt and bituminous thickness of the water. This indeed is probable, and\nmay be admitted as far as the second opinion concedeth. For certain it\nis that salt water will support a greater burden then fresh; and we see\nan egg will descend in salt water, which will swim in brine. But that\nIron should float therein, from this cause is hardly granted; for heavy\nbodies will only swim in that liquor, wherein the weight of their bulk\nexceedeth not the weight of so much water as it occupieth or taketh up.\nBut surely no water is heavy enough to answer the ponderosity of Iron,\nand therefore that metal will sink in any kind thereof, and it was a\nperfect Miracle which was wrought this way by _Elisha_. Thus we perceive\nthat bodies do swim or sink in different liquors, according unto the\ntenuity or gravity of those liquors which are to support them. So salt\nwater beareth that weight which will sink in vineger, vineger that which\nwill fall in fresh water, fresh water that which will sink in spirits of\nWine, and that will swim in spirits of Wine which will sink in clear\noyl; as we made experiment in globes of wax pierced with light sticks to\nsupport them. So that although it be conceived an hard matter to sink in\noyl, I believe a man should find it very difficult, and next to flying,\nto swim therein. And thus will Gold sink in Quick-silver, wherein Iron\nand other metals swim; for the bulk of Gold is only heavier then that\nspace of Quick-silver which it containeth: and thus also in a solution\nof one ounce of Quick-silver in two of _Aqua fortis_, the liquor will\nbear Amber, Horn, and the softer kinds of stones, as we have made triall\nin each.\n\nBut a private opinion there is which crosseth the common conceit,\nmaintained by some of late, and alleadged of old by _Strabo_, that the\nfloating of bodies in this Lake proceeds not from the thickness of the\nwater, but a bituminous ebullition from the bottom, whereby it wafts up\nbodies injected, and suffereth them not easily to sink. The verity\nthereof would be enquired by ocular exploration, for this way is also\nprobable. So we observe, it is hard to wade deep in baths where springs\narise; and thus sometime are bals made to play upon a spouting stream.\n\nAnd therefore, until judicious and ocular experiment confirm or\ndistinguish the assertion, that bodies do not sink herein at all, we do\nnot yet believe; that they not easily, or with more difficulty descend\nin this than other water, we shall readily assent. But to conclude an\nimpossibility from a difficulty, or affirm whereas things not easily\nsink, they do not drown at all; beside the fallacy, is a frequent\naddition in humane expression, and an amplification not unusual as well\nin opinions as relations; which oftentimes give indistinct accounts of\nproximities, and without restraint transcend from one another. Thus,\nforasmuch as the torrid Zone was conceived exceeding hot, and of\ndifficult habitation, the opinions of men so advanced its constitution,\nas to conceive the same unhabitable, and beyond possibility for man to\nlive therein. Thus, because there are no Wolves in _England_, nor have\nbeen observed for divers generations, common people have proceeded into\nopinions, and some wise men into affirmations, they will not live\ntherein, although brought from other Countries. Thus most men affirm,\nand few here will believe the contrary, that there be no Spiders in\n_Ireland_; but we have beheld some in that Country; and though but few,\nsome Cob-webs we behold in Irish wood in _England_. Thus the Crocodile\nfrom an egg growing up to an exceeding magnitude, common conceit, and\ndivers Writers deliver, it hath no period of encrease, but groweth as\nlong as it liveth. And thus in brief, in most apprehensions the conceits\nof men extend the considerations of things, and dilate their notions\nbeyond the propriety of their natures.\n\nIn the Mapps of the dead Sea or Lake of _Sodom_, we meet with the\ndestroyed Cities, and in divers the City of _Sodom_ placed about the\nmiddle, or far from the shore of it; but that it could not be far from\n_Segor_, which was seated under the mountains neer the side of the Lake,\nseems inferrible from the sudden arrival of _Lot_, who coming from\n_Sodom_ at day break, attained _Segor_ at Sun rising; and therefore\n_Sodom_ to be placed not many miles from it, and not in the middle of\nthe Lake, which is accounted about eighteen miles over; and so will\nleave about nine miles to be passed in too small a space of time.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI\n\nOf divers other Relations.\n\n\n1. The relation of _Averroes_, and now common in every mouth, of the\nwoman that conceived in a bath, by attracting the sperm or seminal\neffluxion of a man admitted to bath in some vicinity unto her, I have\nscarce faith to believe; and had I been of the Jury, should have hardly\nthought I had found the father in the person that stood by her. 'Tis a\nnew and unseconded way in History to fornicate at a distance, and much\noffendeth the rules of Physick, which say, there is no generation\nwithout a joynt emission, nor only a virtual, but corporal and carnal\ncontaction. And although _Aristotle_ and his adherents do cut off the\none, who conceive no effectual ejaculation in women, yet in defence of\nthe other they cannot be introduced. For, if as he believeth, the\ninordinate longitude of the organ, though in its proper recipient, may\nbe a means to inprolificate the seed; surely the distance of place, with\nthe commixture of an aqueous body, must prove an effectual impediment,\nand utterly prevent the success of a conception. And therefore that\nconceit concerning the daughters of _Lot_, that they were impregnated\nby their sleeping father, or conceived by seminal pollution received at\ndistance from him, will hardly be admitted. [SN: _Generations by the\nDevil very improbable._] And therefore what is related of devils, and\nthe contrived delusions of spirits, that they steal the seminal\nemissions of man, and transmit them into their votaries in coition, is\nmuch to be suspected; and altogether to be denied, that there ensue\nconceptions thereupon; however husbanded by Art, and the wisest menagery\nof that most subtile imposter. And therefore also that our magnified\n_Merlin_ was thus begotten by the devil, is a groundless conception; and\nas vain to think from thence to give the reason of his prophetical\nspirit. For if a generation could succeed, yet should not the issue\ninherit the faculties of the devil, who is but an auxiliary, and no\nunivocal Actor; Nor will his nature substantially concur to such\nproductions.\n\nAnd although it seems not impossible, that impregnation may succeed from\nseminal spirits, and vaporous irradiations containing the active\nprinciple, without material and gross immissions; as it happeneth\nsometimes in imperforated persons, and rare conceptions of some much\nunder pubertie or fourteen. As may be also conjectured in the coition of\nsome insects, wherein the female makes intrusion into the male; and from\nthe continued ovation in Hens, from one single tread of a cock, and\nlittle stock laid up near the vent, sufficient for durable\nprolification. And although also in humane generation the gross and\ncorpulent seminal body may return again, and the great business be acted\nby what it caryeth with it: yet will not the same suffice to support the\nstory in question, wherein no corpulent immission is acknowledged;\nanswerable unto the fable of the _Talmudists_, in the storie of\n_Benzira_, begotten in the same manner on the daughter of the Prophet\n_Jeremie_.\n\n2. The Relation of _Lucillius_, and now become common, concerning\n_Crassus_ the grand-father of _Marcus_ the wealthy _Roman_, that he\nnever laughed but once in all his life, and that was at an Ass eating\nthistles, is something strange. For, if an indifferent and unridiculous\nobject could draw his habitual austereness unto a smile, it will be hard\nto believe he could with perpetuity resist the proper motives thereof.\n[SN: _Laughter. What kind of Passion it is._] For the act of Laughter\nwhich is evidenced by a sweet contraction of the muscles of the face,\nand a pleasant agitation of the vocal Organs, is not meerly voluntary,\nor totally within the jurisdiction of our selves: but as it may be\nconstrained by corporal contaction in any, and hath been enforced in\nsome even in their death, so the new unusual or unexpected jucundities,\nwhich present themselves to any man in his life, at some time or other\nwill have activity enough to excitate the earthiest soul, and raise a\nsmile from most composed tempers. Certainly the times were dull when\nthese things happened, and the wits of those Ages short of these of\nours; when men could maintain such immutable faces, as to remain like\nstatues under the flatteries of wit and persist unalterable at all\nefforts of Jocularity. The spirits in hell, and _Pluto_ himself, whom\n_Lucian_ makes to laugh at passages upon earth, will plainly condemn\nthese Saturnines, and make ridiculous the magnified _Heraclitus_, who\nwept preposterously, and made a hell on earth; for rejecting the\nconsolations of life, he passed his days in tears, and the uncomfortable\nattendments of hell.\n\n3. The same conceit there passeth concerning our blessed Saviour, and is\nsometimes urged as an high example of gravity. And this is opinioned,\nbecause in holy Scripture it is recorded he sometimes wept, but never\nthat he laughed. Which howsoever granted, it will be hard to conceive\nhow he passed his younger years and child-hood without a smile, if as\nDivinity affirmeth, for the assurance of his humanity unto men, and the\nconcealment of his Divinity from the devil, he passed this age like\nother children, and so proceeded untill he evidenced the same. And\nsurely herein no danger there is to affirm the act or performance of\nthat, whereof we acknowledge the power and essential property; and\nwhereby indeed he most nearly convinced the doubt of his humanity. Nor\nneed we be afraid to ascribe that unto the incarnate Son, which\nsometimes is attributed unto the uncarnate Father; of whom it is said,\nHe that dwelleth in the heavens shall laugh the wicked to scorn. For a\nlaugh there is of contempt or indignation, as well as of mirth and\nJocosity; and that our Saviour was not exempted from the ground hereof,\nthat is, the passion of anger, regulated and rightly ordered by reason,\nthe schools do not deny: and besides the experience of the\nmoney-changers and Dove-sellers in the Temple, is testified by St.\n_John_, when he saith, the speech of _David_ [SN: Zelus domus tuae\ncomedit me.] was fulfilled in our Saviour.\n\nNow the Alogie of this opinion consisteth in the illation; it being not\nreasonable to conclude from Scripture negatively in points which are not\nmatters of faith, and pertaining unto salvation. And therefore although\nin the description of the creation there be no mention of fire,\nChristian Philosophy did not think it reasonable presently to annihilate\nthat element, or positively to decree there was no such thing at all.\nThus whereas in the brief narration of _Moses_ there is no record of\nwine before the flood, we cannot satisfactorily conclude that _Noah_ was\nthe first that ever tasted thereof. [SN: _Only in the vulgar Latin._\nJudg. 9. 53.] And thus because the word _Brain_ is scarce mentioned\nonce, but _Heart_ above an hundred times in holy Scripture; Physitians\nthat dispute the principality of parts are not from hence induced to\nbereave the animal Organ of its priority. Wherefore the Scriptures being\nserious, and commonly omitting such Parergies, it will be unreasonable\nfrom hence to condemn all Laughter, and from considerations\ninconsiderable to discipline a man out of his nature. For this is by a\nrustical severity to banish all urbanity; whose harmless and confined\ncondition, as it stands commended by morality, so is it consistent with\nReligion, and doth not offend Divinity.\n\n4. The custom it is of Popes to change their name at their creation; and\nthe Author thereof is commonly said to be _Bocca di porco_, or swines\nface; who therefore assumed the stile of _Sergius_ the second, as being\nashamed so foul a name should dishonour the chair of _Peter_; wherein\nnotwithstanding, from _Montacutius_ and others I find there may be some\nmistake. For _Massonius_ who writ the lives of Popes, acknowledgeth he\nwas not the first that changed his name in that Sea; nor as _Platina_\naffirmeth, have all his Successors precisely continued that custom; for\n_Adrian_ the sixt, and _Marcellus_ the second, did still retain their\nBaptismal denomination. Nor is it proved, or probable, that _Sergius_\nchanged the name of _Bocca di Porco_, for this was his sirname or\ngentilitious appellation: nor was it the custom to alter that with the\nother; but be commuted his Christian name _Peter_ for _Sergius_,\nbecause he would seem to decline the name of _Peter_ the second. A\nscruple I confess not thought considerable in other Seas, whose\nOriginals and first Patriarchs have been less disputed; nor yet perhaps\nof that reality as to prevail in points of the same nature. For the\nnames of the Apostles, Patriarchs and Prophets have been assumed even to\naffectation; the name of Jesus hath not been appropriate; but some in\nprecedent ages have born that name, and many since have not refused the\nChristian name of _Emmanuel_. Thus are there few names more frequent\nthen _Moses_ and _Abraham_ among the _Jews_; The _Turks_ without scruple\naffect the name of _Mahomet_, and with gladness receive so honourable\ncognomination.\n\nAnd truly in humane occurrences there ever have been many well directed\nintentions, whose rationalities will never bear a rigid examination, and\nthough in some way they do commend their Authors, and such as first\nbegan them, yet have they proved insufficient to perpetuate imitation in\nsuch as have succeeded them. Thus was it a worthy resolution of\n_Godfrey_, and most Christians have applauded it, That he refused to\nwear a Crown of Gold where his Saviour had worn one of thorns. Yet did\nnot his Successors durably inherit that scruple, but some were anointed,\nand solemnly accepted the Diadem of regality. Thus _Julius_, _Augustus_\nand _Tiberius_ with great humility or popularity refused the name of\n_Imperator_, but their Successors have challenged that title, and retain\nthe same even in its titularity. And thus to come nearer our subject,\nthe humility of _Gregory_ the Great would by no means admit the stile of\nuniversal Bishop; but the ambition of _Boniface_ made no scruple\nthereof, nor of more queasie resolutions have been their Successors ever\nsince.\n\n[Sidenote: Turkish _History_.]\n\n5. That _Tamerlane_ was a _Scythian_ Shepherd, from Mr. _Knolls_ and\nothers, from _Alhazen_ a learned _Arabian_ who wrote his life, and was\nSpectator of many of his exploits, we have reasons to deny. Not only\nfrom his birth, for he was of the blood of the _Tartarian_ Emperours,\nwhose father _Og_ had for his possession the Country of _Sagathy_; which\nwas no slender Territory, but comprehended all that tract wherein were\ncontained _Bactriana_, _Sogdiana_, _Margiana_, and the nation of the\n_Massagetes_, whose capital City was _Samarcand_; a place though now\ndecaid, of great esteem and trade in former ages. But from his regal\nInauguration, for it is said, that being about the age of fifteen, his\nold father resigned the Kingdom and men of war unto him. And also from\nhis education, for as the storie speaks it, he was instructed in the\n_Arabian_ learning, and afterward exercised himself therein. Now\n_Arabian_ learning was in a manner all the liberal Sciences, especially\nthe Mathematicks, and natural Philosophy; wherein not many ages before\nhim there flourished _Avicenna_, _Averroes_, _Avenzoar_, _Geber_,\n_Almanzor_ and _Alhazen_, cognominal unto him that wrote his History,\nwhose Chronology indeed, although it be obscure, yet in the opinion of\nhis Commentator, he was contemporary unto _Avicenna_, and hath left\nsixteen books of Opticks, of great esteem with ages past, and textuary\nunto our days.\n\nNow the ground of this mistake was surely that which the Turkish\nHistorian declareth. Some, saith he, of our Historians will needs have\n_Tamerlane_ to be the Son of a Shepherd. But this they have said, not\nknowing at all the custom of their Country; wherein the principal\nrevenews of the King and Nobles consisteth in cattle; who despising gold\nand silver, abound in all sorts thereof. And this was the occasion that\nsome men call them Shepherds, and also affirm this Prince descended from\nthem. Now, if it be reasonable, that great men whose possessions are\nchiefly in cattle, should bear the name of Shepherds, and fall upon so\nlow denominations; then may we say that _Abraham_ was a Shepherd,\nalthough too powerful for four Kings: that _Job_ was of that condition,\nwho beside Camels and Oxen had seven thousand Sheep: and yet is said to\nbe the greatest man in the East. Thus was _Mesha_ King of _Moab_ a\nShepherd, who annually paid unto the Crown of _Israel_ an hundred\nthousand Lambs, and as many Rams. Surely it is no dishonourable course\nof life which _Moses_ and _Jacob_ have made exemplary: 'tis a profession\nsupported upon the natural way of acquisition, and though contemned by\nthe _Egyptians_, much countenanced by the Hebrews, whose sacrifices\nrequired plenty of Sheep and Lambs. And certainly they were very\nnumerous; for, at the consecration of the Temple, beside two and twenty\nthousand Oxen, King _Solomon_ sacrificed an hundred and twenty thousand\nSheep: and the same is observable from the daily provision of his house:\nwhich was ten fat Oxen, twenty Oxen out of the pastures, and an hundred\nSheep, beside row Buck, fallow Deer, and fatted Fowls. [SN: _Description\nof the Turkish Seraglio, since printed. The daily provision of the\nSeraglio._] Wherein notwithstanding (if a punctual relation thereof do\nrightly inform us) the grand Seignior doth exceed: the daily provision\nof whose Seraglio in the reign of _Achmet_, beside Beeves, consumed two\nhundred Sheep, Lambs and Kids when they were in season one hundred,\nCalves ten, Geese fifty, Hens two hundred, Chickens one hundred, Pigeons\nan hundred pair.\n\nAnd therefore this mistake concerning the noble _Tamerlane_, was like\nthat concerning _Demosthenes_, who is said to be the Son of a\nBlack-smith, according to common conceit, and that handsome expression\nof _Juvenal_.\n\n _Quem pater ardentis massae fuligine lippus,\n A carbone et forcipibus, gladiosq; parante\n Incude, et luteo Vulcano ad Rhetora misit._\n\n _Thus Englished by Sir_ Robert _Stapleton_.\n\n Whom's Father with the smoaky forg half blind,\n From blows on sooty Vulcans anvil spent.\n In ham'ring swords, to study Rhet'rick sent.\n\nBut _Plutarch_ who writ his life hath cleared this conceit, plainly\naffirming he was most nobly descended, and that this report was raised,\nbecause his father had many slaves that wrought Smiths work, and brought\nthe profit unto him.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII\n\nOf some others.\n\n\n1. We are sad when we read the story of _Belisarius_ that worthy\nChieftain of _Justinian_; who, after his Victories over _Vandals_,\n_Goths_, _Persians_, and his Trophies in three parts of the World, had\nat last his eyes put out by the Emperour, and was reduced to that\ndistress, that he begged relief on the high-way, in that uncomfortable\npetition, _Date obolum Belisario_. And this we do not only hear in\nDiscourses, Orations and Themes, but find it also in the leaves of\n_Petrus Crinitus_, _Volaterranus_, and other worthy Writers.\n\nBut, what may somewhat consolate all men that honour vertue, we do not\ndiscover the latter Scene of his Misery in Authors of Antiquity, or such\nas have expresly delivered the stories of those times. For, _Suidas_ is\nsilent herein, _Cedrenus_ and _Zonaras_, two grave and punctual Authors,\ndelivering only the confiscation of his goods, omit the History of his\nmendication. _Paulus Diaconus_ goeth farther, not only passing over this\nact, but affirming his goods and dignities were restored. _Agathius_ who\nlived at the same time, declareth he suffered much from the envy of the\nCourt: but that he descended thus deep into affliction, is not to be\ngathered from his pen. The same is also omitted by _Procopius_ a\ncontemporary and professed enemy unto _Justinian_ and _Belisarius_, who\nhath left an opprobrious book [SN: +Anekdota+, _or_ Arcana historia.]\nagainst them both.\n\nAnd in this opinion and hopes we are not single, but _Andreas Alciatus_\nthe Civilian in his _Parerga_, and _Franciscus de Cordua_ in his\n_Didascalia_, have both declaratorily confirmed the same, which is also\nagreeable unto the judgment of _Nicolaus Alemannus_, in his notes upon\nthe bitter History of _Procopius_. Certainly sad and Tragical stories\nare seldom drawn within the circle of their verities; but as their\nRelators do either intend the hatred or pitty of the persons, so are\nthey set forth with additional amplifications. Thus have some suspected\nit hath happened unto the story of _Oedipus_; and thus do we conceive it\nhath fared with that of _Judas_, who having sinned beyond aggravation,\nand committed one villany which cannot be exasperated by all other: is\nalso charged with the murther of his reputed brother, parricide of his\nfather, and Incest with his own mother, as _Florilegus_ or _Matthew_ of\n_Westminster_ hath at large related. And thus hath it perhaps befallen\nthe noble _Belisarius_; who, upon instigation of the Empress, having\ncontrived the exile, and very hardly treated Pope _Serverius_, Latin\npens, as a judgment of God upon this fact, have set forth his future\nsufferings: and omitting nothing of amplification, they have also\ndelivered this: which notwithstanding _Johannes_ the Greek makes\ndoubtful, as may appear from his Iambicks in _Baronius_, and might be a\nmistake or misapplication, translating the affliction of one man upon\nanother, for the same befell unto _Johannes Cappadox_, contemporary unto\n_Belisarius_, and in great favour with _Justinian_; who being afterward\nbanished into _Egypt_, was fain to beg relief on the high-way. [SN:\nProcop. Bell. Persic. 1. +Arton e obolon aiteisthai+.]\n\n2. That _fluctus Decumanus_, or the tenth wave is greater and more\ndangerous than any other, some no doubt will be offended if we deny; and\nhereby we shall seem to contradict Antiquity; for, answerable unto the\nlitteral and common acception, the same is averred by many Writers, and\nplainly described by Ovid.\n\n _Qui venit hic fluctus, fluctus supereminet omnes,\n Posterior nono est, undecimoq; prior._\n\nWhich notwithstanding is evidently false; nor can it be made out by\nobservation either upon the shore or the Ocean, as we have with\ndiligence explored in both. And surely in vain we expect a regularity in\nthe waves of the Sea, or in the particular motions thereof, as we may in\nits general reciprocations whose causes are constant, and effects\ntherefore correspondent. Whereas its fluctuations are but motions\nsubservient; which winds, storms, shores, shelves, and every\ninterjacency irregulates. With semblable reason we might expect a\nregularity in the winds; whereof though some be statary, some\nanniversary, and the rest do tend to determinate points of heaven, yet\ndo the blasts and undulary breaths thereof maintain no certainty in\ntheir course; nor are they numerally feared by Navigators.\n\nOf affinity hereto is that conceit of _Ovum Decumanum_, so called,\nbecause the tenth egg is bigger than any other, according unto the\nreason alledged by _Festus, Decumana ova dicuntur, quia ovum decimum\nmajus nascitur_. For the honour we bear unto the Clergy, we cannot but\nwish this true: but herein will be found no more of verity than in the\nother: and surely few will assent hereto without an implicite credulity,\nor Pythagorical submission unto every conception of number.\n\nFor, surely the conceit is numeral, and though not in the sense\napprehended, relateth unto the number of ten, as _Franciscus Sylvius_\nhath most probably declared. For, whereas amongst simple numbers or\nDigits, the number of ten is the greatest: therefore whatsoever was the\ngreatest in every kind, might in some sense be named from this number.\nNow, because also that which was the greatest, was metaphorically by\nsome at first called _Decumanus_; therefore whatsoever passed under this\nname, was literally conceived by others to respect and make good this\nnumber.\n\nThe conceit is also Latin; for the Greeks to express the greatest wave,\ndo use the number of three, that is, the word +trikymia+, which is a\nconcurrence of three waves in one, whence arose the proverb, +trikymia\nkakon+, or a trifluctuation of evils, which _Erasmus_ doth render,\n_Malorum fluctus Decumanus_. And thus, although the terms be very\ndifferent, yet are they made to signifie the self-same thing; the number\nof ten to explain the number of three, and the single number of one wave\nthe collective concurrence of more.\n\n3. The poyson of _Parysatis_ reported from _Ctesias_ by _Plutarch_ in\nthe life of _Artaxerxes_, whereby anointing a knife on the one side, and\ntherewith dividing a bird; with the one half she poysoned _Statira_, and\nsafely fed her self on the other, was certainly a very subtile one, and\nsuch as our ignorance is well content it knows not. But surely we had\ndiscovered a poyson that would not endure _Pandoraes_ box, could we be\nsatisfied in that which for its coldness nothing could contain but an\nAsses hoof, and wherewith some report that _Alexander_ the great was\npoysoned. Had men derived so strange an effect from some occult or\nhidden qualities, they might have silenced contradiction; but ascribing\nit unto the manifest and open qualities of cold, they must pardon our\nbelief, who perceive the coldest and most Stygian waters may be included\nin glasses; and by _Aristotle_ who saith, that glass is the perfectest\nwork of Art, we understand they were not then to be invented.\n\nAnd though it be said that poyson will break a Venice glass, yet have we\nnot met with any of that nature. Were there a truth herein, it were the\nbest preservative for Princes and persons exalted unto such fears: and\nsurely far better than divers now in use. And though the best of China\ndishes, and such as the Emperour doth use, be thought by some of\ninfallible vertue unto this effect; yet will they not, I fear, be able\nto elude the mischief of such intentions. [SN: _In what sense God\nAlmighty hath created all things double._] And though also it be true,\nthat God made all things double, and that if we look upon the works of\nthe most High, there are two and two, one against another; that one\ncontrary hath another, and poyson is not without a poyson unto it self;\nyet hath the curse so far prevailed, or else our industry defected that\npoysons are better known than their Antidotes, and some thereof do\nscarce admit of any. And lastly, although unto every poyson men have\ndelivered many Antidotes, and in every one is promised an equality unto\nits adversary, yet do we often find they fail in their effects: Moly\nwill not resist a weaker cup then that of Circe; a man may be poysoned\nin a Lemnian dish; without the miracle of _John_, there is no confidence\nin the earth of _Paul_ [SN: Terra Melitea.]; and if it be meant that no\npoyson could work upon him, we doubt the story, and expect no such\nsuccess from the diet of _Mithridates_.\n\nA story there passeth of an Indian King, that sent unto _Alexander_ a\nfair woman fed with Aconites and other poysons, with this intent, either\nby converse or copulation complexionally to destroy him. For my part,\nalthough the design were true, I should have doubted the success. For,\nthough it be possible that poysons may meet with tempers whereto they\nmay become Aliments, and we observe from fowls that feed on fishes, and\nothers fed with garlick and onyons, that simple aliments are not alwayes\nconcocted beyond their vegetable qualities; and therefore that even\nafter carnall conversion, poysons may yet retain some portion of their\nnatures; yet are they so refracted, cicurated and subdued, as not to\nmake good their first and destructive malignities. And therefore the\nStork that eateth Snakes, and the Stare that feedeth upon Hemlock,\nthough no commendable aliments, are not destructive poysons. For,\nanimals that can innoxiously digest these poysons, become antidotall\nunto the poyson digested. And therefore whether their breath be\nattracted, or their flesh ingested, the poysonous reliques go still\nalong with their Antidote: whose society will not permit their malice to\nbe destructive. And therefore also animals that are not mischieved by\npoysons which destroy us, may be drawn into Antidote against them; the\nblood or flesh of Storks against the venom of Serpents, the Quail\nagainst Hellebore, and the diet of Starlings against the drought of\n_Socrates_ [SN: _Hemlock._]. Upon like grounds are some parts of Animals\nAlexipharmacall unto others; and some veins of the earth, and also whole\nregions, not only destroy the life of venemous creatures, but also\nprevent their productions. For though perhaps they contain the seminals\nof Spiders and Scorpions, and such as in other earths by suscitiation of\nthe Sun may arise unto animation; yet lying under command of their\nAntidote, without hope of emergency they are poysoned in their matrix by\npowers easily hindring the advance of their originals, whose confirmed\nforms they are able to destroy.\n\n5. The story of the wandring Jew is very strange, and will hardly obtain\nbelief; yet is there a formall account thereof set down by _Mathew\nParis_, from the report of an Armenian Bishop; who came into this\nkingdom about four hundred years ago, and had often entertained this\nwanderer at his Table. That he was then alive, was first called\n_Cartaphilus_, was keeper of the Judgement Hall, whence thrusting out\nour Saviour with expostulation of his stay, was condemned to stay untill\nhis return [SN: Vade quid moraris? Ego vado, tu autem morare donec\nvenio.]; was after baptized by _Ananias_, and by the name of _Joseph_;\nwas thirty years old in the dayes of our Saviour, remembred the Saints\nthat arised with him, the making of the Apostles Creed, and their\nseveral peregrinations. Surely were this true, he might be an happy\narbitrator in many Christian controversies; but must impardonably\ncondemn the obstinacy of the Jews, who can contemn the Rhetorick of such\nmiracles, and blindly behold so living and lasting conversions.\n\n6. Clearer confirmations must be drawn for the history of Pope _Joan_,\nwho succeeded _Leo_ the fourth, and preceeded _Benedict_ the third, then\nmany we yet discover. And since it is delivered with _aiunt_ and\n_ferunt_ by many; since the learned _Leo Allatius_ [SN: Confutatio\nfabulae de Joanna Papissa cum Nihusio.] hath discovered, that ancient\ncopies of _Martinus Polonus_, who is chiefly urged for it, had not this\nstory in it; since not only the stream of Latine Historians have omitted\nit, but _Photius_ the Patriarch, _Metrophanes Smyrnaeus_, and the\nexasperated Greeks have made no mention of it, but conceded _Benedict_\nthe third to bee Successor unto _Leo_ the fourth; he wants not grounds\nthat doubts it.\n\nMany things historicall which seem of clear concession, want not\naffirmations and negations, according to divided pens: as is notoriously\nobservable in the story of _Hildebrand_ or _Gregory_ the seventh,\nrepugnantly delivered by the Imperiall and Papal party. In such divided\nrecords partiality hath much depraved history, wherein if the equity of\nthe reader do not correct the iniquity of the writer, he will be much\nconfounded with repugnancies, and often find in the same person, _Numa_\nand _Nero_. In things of this nature moderation must intercede; and so\ncharity may hope, that Roman Readers will construe many passages in\n_Bolsech_, _Fayus_, _Schlusselberg_ and _Cochlaeus_. [SN: _Of_ Luther,\nCalvin, Beza.]\n\n7. Every ear is filled with the story of Frier _Bacon_ [SN: Rog. Bacon.\nminor ita. Oxoniensis vir doctissimus.], that made a brazen head to\nspeak these words, _Time is_, Which though there want not the like\nrelations, is surely too literally received, and was but a mystical\nfable concerning the Philosophers great work, wherein he eminently\nlaboured: implying no more by the copper head, then the vessel wherein\nit was wrought, and by the words it spake, then the opportunity to be\nwatched, about the _Tempus ortus_, or birth of the mystical child, or\nPhilosophical King of _Lullius_: the rising of the _Terra foliata_ of\n_Arnoldus_, when the earth sufficiently impregnated with the water,\nascendeth white and splendent. Which not observed, the work is\nirrecoverably lost; according to that of _Petrus Bonus [SN: Margarita\npretiosa.]. Ibi est operis perfectio aut annihilatio; quoniam ipsa die,\nimmo hora, oriuntur elementa simplicia depurata, quae egent statim\ncompositione, antequam volent ab igne._\n\nNow letting slip this critical opportunity, he missed the intended\ntreasure. Which had he obtained, he might have made out the tradition of\nmaking a brazen wall about _England_. That is, the most powerfull\ndefence, and strongest fortification which Gold could have effected.\n\n8. Who can but pitty the vertuous _Epicurus_, who is commonly conceived\nto have placed his chief felicity in pleasure and sensual delights, and\nhath therefore left an infamous name behind him? How true, let them\ndetermine who read that he lived seventy years, and wrote more books\nthen any Philosopher but _Chrysippus_, and no less then three hundred,\nwithout borrowing from any Author. That he was contented with bread and\nwater, and when he would dine with _Jove_, and pretend unto epulation,\nhe desired no other addition then a piece of _Cytheridian_ cheese. That\nshall consider the words of _Seneca, Non dico, quod pleriq; nostrorum,\nsectam Epicuri flagitiorum magistrum esse: sed illud dico, male audit\ninfamis est, et immerito_. Or shall read his life, his Epistles, his\nTestament in _Laertius_, who plainly names them Calumnies, which are\ncommonly said against them.\n\nThe ground hereof seems a mis-apprehension of his opinion, who placed\nhis Felicity not in the pleasures of the body, but the mind, and\ntranquility thereof, obtained by wisdom and vertue, as is clearly\ndetermined in his Epistle unto _Menoeceus_. Now how this opinion was\nfirst traduced by the _Stoicks_, how it afterwards became a common\nbelief, and so taken up by Authors of all ages, by _Cicero_, _Plutarch_,\n_Clemens_, _Ambrose_ and others, the learned Pen of _Gassendus_ hath\ndiscovered. [SN: De vita et moribus Epicuri.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVIII\n\nMore briefly of some others.\n\n\nOther relations there are, and those in very good Authors, which though\nwe do not positively deny, yet have they not been unquestioned by some,\nand at least as improbable truths have been received by others. Unto\nsome it hath seemed incredible what _Herodotus_ reporteth of the great\nArmy of _Xerxes_, that drank whole rivers dry. And unto the Author\nhimself it appeared wondrous strange, that they exhausted not the\nprovision of the Countrey, rather then the waters thereof. For as he\nmaketh the account, and _Budeus de Asse_ correcting the mis-compute of\n_Valla_, delivereth it; if every man of the Army had had a chenix of\nCorn a day, that is, a sextary and half; or about two pints and a\nquarter, the Army had daily expended ten hundred thousand and forty\nMedimna's, or measures containing six Bushels. Which rightly considered,\nthe _Abderites_ had reason to bless the Heavens, that _Xerxes_ eat but\none meal a day; and _Pythius_ his noble Host, might with less charge and\npossible provision entertain both him and his Army. And yet may all be\nsalved, if we take it hyperbolically, as wise men receive that\nexpression in _Job_, concerning _Behemoth_ or the Elephant; Behold, he\ndrinketh up a river and hasteth not, he trusteth that he can draw up\n_Jordan_ into his mouth.\n\n2. That _Annibal_ eat or brake through the Alps with Vinegar, may be too\ngrosly taken and the Author of his life annexed unto _Plutarch_\naffirmeth only, he used this artifice upon the tops of some of the\nhighest mountains. For as it is vulgarly understood, that he cut a\npassage for his Army through those mighty mountains, it may seem\nincredible, not only in the greatness of the effect, but the quantity of\nthe efficient and such as behold them, may think an Ocean of Vinegar too\nlittle for that effect. 'Twas a work indeed rather to be expected from\nearthquakes and inundations, then any corrosive waters, and much\ncondemneth the Judgement of _Xerxes_, that wrought through Mount _Athos_\nwith Mattocks.\n\n3. That _Archimedes_ burnt the ships of _Marcellus_, with speculums of\nparabolical figures, at three furlongs, or as some will have it, at the\ndistance of three miles, sounds hard unto reason, and artificial\nexperience: and therefore justly questioned by _Kircherus_ [SN: De luce\net umbra.], who after long enquiry could find but one made by _Manfredus\nSeptalius_ that fired at fifteen paces. And therefore more probable it\nis, that the ships were nearer the shore, or about some thirty paces: at\nwhich distance notwithstanding the effect was very great. But whereas\nmen conceive the ships were more easily set on flame by reason of the\npitch about them, it seemeth no advantage. Since burning glasses will\nmelt pitch or make it boyle, not easily set it on fire.\n\n4. The story of the _Fabii_, whereof three hundred and six marching\nagainst the _Veientes_, were all slain, and one child alone to support\nthe family remained; is surely not to be paralleld, nor easie to be\nconceived, except we can imagine, that of three hundred and six, but one\nhad children below the service of war; that the rest were all unmarried,\nor the wife but of one impregnated.\n\n5. The received story of _Milo_, who by daily lifting a Calf, attained\nan ability to carry it being a Bull, is witty conceit, and handsomly\nsets forth the efficacy of Assuefaction. But surely the account had been\nmore reasonably placed upon some person not much exceeding in strength,\nand such a one as without the assistance of custom could never have\nperformed that act; which some may presume that _Milo_ without precedent\nartifice or any other preparative, had strength enough to perform. For\nas relations declare, he was the most pancratical man of _Greece_, and\nas _Galen_ reporteth, and _Mercurialis_ in his Gymnasticks representeth,\nhe was able to persist erect upon an oyled plank, and not to be removed\nby the force or protrusion of three men. And if that be true which\n_Atheneus_ reporteth, he was little beholding to custom for this\nability. For in the Olympick games, for the space of a furlong, he\ncarried an Ox of four years upon his shoulders; and the same day he\ncarried it in his belly: for as it is there delivered he eat it up\nhimself. Surely he had been a proper guest at _Grandgousiers_ feast, and\nmight have matcht his throat that eat six pilgrims for a Salad. [SN: In\nRabelais.]\n\n6. It much disadvantageth the Panegyrick of _Synesius_ [SN: _Who writ in\nthe praise of baldness._], and is no small disparagement unto baldness,\nif it be true what is related by _AElian_ concerning _AEschilus_, whose\nbald-pate was mistaken for a rock, and so was brained by a Tortoise\nwhich an _AEagle_ let fall upon it. Certainly it was a very great mistake\nin the perspicacy of that Animal. [SN: _An argument or instance against\nthe motion of the earth._] Some men critically disposed, would from\nhence confute the opinion of _Copernicus_, never conceiving how the\nmotion of the earth below should not wave him from a knock\nperpendicularly directed from a body in the air above.\n\n7. It crosseth the Proverb, and _Rome_ might well be built in a day; if\nthat were true which is traditionally related by _Strabo_; that the\ngreat Cities _Anchiale_ and _Tarsus_, were built by _Sardanapalus_ both\nin one day, according to the inscription of his monument, _Sardanapalus\nAnacyndaraxis filius, Anchialem et Tarsum una die edificavi, Tu autem\nhospes Ede, Lude, Bibe_, etc. Which if strictly taken, that is, for the\nfinishing thereof, and not only for the beginning; for an artificial or\nnatural day, and not one of _Daniels_ weeks, that is, seven whole years;\nsurely their hands were very heavy that wasted thirteen years in the\nprivate house of _Solomon_: It may be wondred how forty years were spent\nin the erection of the Temple of _Jerusalem_, and no less than an\nhundred in that famous one of _Ephesus_. Certainly it was the greatest\nArchitecture of one day, since that great one of six; an Art quite lost\nwith our Mechanicks, a work not to be made out, but like the wals of\n_Thebes_, and such an Artificer as _Amphion_.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Syracusia or King_ Hiero's _Galleon, of what Bulk_.]\n\n8. It had been a sight only second unto the Ark to have beheld the great\n_Syracusia_, or mighty ship of _Hiero_, described in _Athenaeus_; and\nsome have thought it a very large one, wherein were to be found ten\nstables for horses, eight Towers, besides Fish-ponds, Gardens,\nTricliniums, and many fair rooms paved with Agath, and precious Stones.\nBut nothing was impossible unto _Archimedes_, the learned Contriver\nthereof; nor shall we question his removing the earth, when he finds an\nimmoveable base to place his Engine upon it.\n\n9. That the _Pamphilian_ Sea gave way unto _Alexander_ in his intended\nMarch toward _Persia_, many have been apt to credit, and _Josephus_ is\nwilling to believe, to countenance the passage of the _Israelites_\nthrough the Red Sea. But _Strabo_ who writ before him delivereth another\naccount; that the Mountain _Climax_ adjoyning to the _Pamphilian_ Sea,\nleaves a narrow passage between the Sea and it, which passage at an ebb\nand quiet Sea all men take; but _Alexander_ coming in the Winter, and\neagerly pursuing his affairs, would not wait for the reflux or return of\nthe Sea; and so was fain to pass with his Army in the water, and march\nup to the navel in it.\n\n[Sidenote: _A List of some historical Errata's in this and the following\nSections._]\n\n10. The relation of _Plutarch_ of a youth of _Sparta_, that suffered a\nFox concealed under his robe to tear out his bowels, before he would\neither by voice or countenance betray his theft; and the other of the\nSpartan Lad, that with the same resolution suffered a coal from the\nAltar to burn his arm, although defended by the Author that writes his\nlife, is I perceive mistrusted by men of Judgment, and the Author with\nan _aiunt_, is made to salve himself. Assuredly it was a noble Nation\nthat could afford an hint to such inventions of patience, and upon whom,\nif not such verities, at least such verisimilities of fortitude were\nplaced. Were the story true, they would have made the only Disciples for\n_Zeno_ and the _Stoicks_, and might perhaps have been perswaded to laugh\nin _Phaleris_ his Bull.\n\n11. If any man shall content his belief with the speech of _Balaams_\nAss, without a belief of that of _Mahomets_ Camel, or _Livies_ Ox: If\nany man make a doubt of _Giges_ ring in _Justinus_, or conceives he must\nbe a _Jew_ that believes the Sabbatical river in _Josephus._ If any man\nwill say he doth not apprehend how the tayl of an _African_ Weather\nout-weigheth the body of a good Calf, that is, an hundred pound,\naccording unto _Leo Africanus_, or desires before belief, to behold such\na creature as is the Ruck in _Paulus Venetus_, for my part I shall not\nbe angry with his incredulity.\n\n12. If any one shall receive as stretcht or fabulous accounts what is\ndelivered of _Cocles_, _Scaevola_ and _Curtius_, the sphere of\n_Archimedes_, the story of the _Amazons_, the taking of the City of\n_Babylon_, not known to some therein three days after; that the nation\nwas deaf which dwelt at the fall of _Nilus_, the laughing and weeping\nhumour of _Heraclitus_ and _Democritus_, with many more, he shall not\nwant some reason and the authority of _Lancelotti_. [SN: Farsalloni\nHistorici.]\n\n13. If any man doubt of the strange Antiquities delivered by Historians,\nas of the wonderful corps of _Antaeus_ untombed a thousand years after\nhis death by _Sertorius_. Whether there were no deceit in those\nfragments of the Ark so common to be seen in the days of _Berosus_;\nwhether the Pillar which _Josephus_ beheld long ago, _Tertullian_ long\nafter, and _Bartholomeus de Saligniaco_, and _Borchardus_ long since, be\nthe same with that of _Lots_ wife; whether this were the hand of _Paul_,\nor that which is commonly shewn the head of _Peter_, if any doubt, I\nshall not much dispute with their suspicions. If any man shall not\nbelieve the Turpentine Tree, betwixt _Jerusalem_ and _Bethlem_, under\nwhich the Virgin suckled our Saviour, as she passed between those\nCities; or the fig-tree of _Bethany_ shewed to this day, whereon\n_Zacheus_ ascended to behold our Saviour; I cannot tell how to enforce\nhis belief, nor do I think it requisite to attempt it. [SN: _To compel\nReligion, somewhat contrary to Reason._] For, as it is no reasonable\nproceeding to compel a religion, or think to enforce our own belief upon\nanother, who cannot without the concurrence of Gods spirit have any\nindubitable evidence of things that are obtruded: So is it also in\nmatters of common belief; whereunto neither can we indubitably assent,\nwithout the co-operation of our sense or reason, wherein consists the\nprinciples of perswasion. For, as the habit of Faith in Divinity is an\nArgument of things unseen, and a stable assent unto things inevident,\nupon authority of the Divine Revealer: So the belief of man which\ndepends upon humane testimony is but a staggering assent unto the\naffirmative, not without some fear of the negative. And as there is\nrequired the Word of God, or infused inclination unto the one, so must\nthe actual sensation of our senses, at least the non-opposition of our\nreasons procure our assent and acquiescence in the other. So when\n_Eusebius_ an holy Writer affirmeth, there grew a strange and unknown\nplant near the statue of Christ, erected by his Haemorrhoidal patient in\nthe Gospel, which attaining unto the hem of his vesture, acquired a\nsudden faculty to cure all diseases. Although he saith he saw the\nstatue in his days, yet hath it not found in many men so much as humane\nbelief? Some believing, others opinioning, a third suspective it might\nbe otherwise. For indeed, in matters of belief the understanding\nassenting unto the relation, either for the authority of the person, or\nthe probability of the object, although there may be a confidence of the\none, yet if there be not a satisfaction in the other, there will arise\nsuspensions; nor can we properly believe until some argument of reason,\nor of our proper sense convince or determine our dubitations.\n\nAnd thus it is also in matters of certain and experimented truth: for if\nunto one that never heard thereof, a man should undertake to perswade\nthe affections of the Load-stone, or that Jet and Amber attracteth\nstraws and light bodies, there would be little Rhetorick in the\nauthority of _Aristotle_, _Pliny_, or any other. Thus although it be\ntrue that the string of a Lute or Viol will stir upon the stroak of an\nUnison or Diapazon in another of the same kind; that Alcanna being\ngreen, will suddenly infect the nails and other parts with a durable\nred; that a Candle out of a Musket will pierce through an Inch-board, or\nan urinal force a nail through a Plank; yet can few or none believe thus\nmuch without a visible experiment. Which notwithstanding fals out more\nhappily for knowledge; for these relations leaving unsatisfaction in the\nHearers, do stir up ingenuous dubiosities unto experiment, and by an\nexploration of all, prevent delusion in any.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIX\n\nOf some Relations whose truth we fear.\n\n\nLastly, As there are many Relations whereto we cannot assent, and make\nsome doubt thereof, so there are divers others whose verities we fear,\nand heartily wish there were no truth therein.\n\n1. It is an unsufferable affront unto filiall piety, and a deep\ndiscouragement unto the expectation of all aged Parents, who shall but\nread the story of that barbarous Queen, who after she had beheld her\nroyall Parents ruin, lay yet in the arms of his assassine, and carowsed\nwith him in the skull of her father. For my part, I should have doubted\nthe operation of antimony, where such a potion would not work; 'twas an\nact me thinks beyond Anthropophagy, and a cup fit to be served up only\nat the table of _Atreus_.\n\n2. While we laugh at the story of _Pygmaleon_, and receive as a fable\nthat he fell in love with a statue; we cannot but fear it may be true,\nwhat is delivered by _Herodotus_ concerning _Egyptian_ Pollinctors, or\nsuch as annointed the dead; that some thereof were found in the act of\ncarnality with them. From wits that say 'tis more then incontinency for\n_Hylas_ to sport with _Hecuba_, and youth to flame in the frozen\nembraces of age, we require a name for this: wherein _Petronius_ or\n_Martial_ cannot relieve us. [SN: _Who tied dead and living bodies\ntogether._] The tyrannie of _Mezentius_ did never equall the vitiosity\nof this _Incubus_, that could embrace corruption, and make a Mistress of\nthe grave; that could not resist the dead provocations of beauty, whose\nquick invitements scarce excuse submission. Surely, if such depravities\nthere be yet alive, deformity need not despair; nor will the eldest\nhopes be ever superannuated, since death hath spurs, and carcasses have\nbeen courted.\n\n3. I am heartily sorry, and wish it were not true, what to the dishonour\nof Christianity is affirmed of the _Italian_, who after he had inveigled\nhis enemy to disclaim his faith for the redemption of his life, did\npresently poyniard him, to prevent repentance, and assure his eternal\ndeath. The villany of this Christian exceedeth the persecution of\nHeathens, whose malice was never so Longimanous [SN: _Long-handed._] as\nto reach the soul of their enemies; or to extend unto the exile of their\n_Elysiums._ And though the blindness of some ferities have savaged on\nthe bodies of the dead, and been so injurious unto worms, as to disinter\nthe bodies of the deceased; yet had they therein no design upon the\nsoul: and have been so far from the destruction of that, or desires of a\nperpetual death, that for the satisfaction of their revenge they wisht\nthem many souls, and were it in their power would have reduced them unto\nlife again. It is a great depravity in our natures, and surely an\naffection that somewhat savoureth of hell, to desire the society, or\ncomfort our selves in the fellowship of others that suffer with us; but\nto procure the miseries of others in those extremities, wherein we hold\nan hope to have no society our selves, is me thinks a strain above\n_Lucifer_, and a project beyond the primary seduction of hell.\n\n4. I hope it is not true, and some indeed have probably denied, what is\nrecorded of the Monk that poysoned _Henry_ the Emperour, in a draught of\nthe holy Eucharist. 'Twas a scandalous wound unto Christian Religion,\nand I hope all Pagans will forgive it, when they shall read that a\nChristian was poysoned in a cup of Christ, and received his bane in a\ndraught of his salvation. Had he believed Transubstantiation, he would\nhave doubted the effect; and surely the sin it self received an\naggravation in that opinion. It much commendeth the innocency of our\nforefathers, and the simplicity of those times, whose Laws could never\ndream so high a crime as parricide: whereas this at the least may seem\nto out-reach that fact, and to exceed the regular distinctions of\nmurder. I will not say what sin it was to act it; yet may it seem a kind\nof martyrdom to suffer by it. For, although unknowingly, he died for\nChrist his sake, and lost his life in the ordained testimony of his\ndeath. Certainly, had they known it, some noble zeales would scarcely\nhave refused it; rather adventuring their own death, then refusing the\nmemorial of his.\n\nMany other accounts like these we meet sometimes in history [SN: Hujus\nfarinae multa in historia horribili.], scandalous unto Christianity, and\neven unto humanity; whose verities not only, but whose relations honest\nminds do deprecate. For of sins heteroclital, and such as want either\nname or president, there is oft times a sin even in their histories. We\ndesire no records of such enormities; sins should be accounted new, that\nso they may be esteemed monstrous. They omit of monstrosity as they fall\nfrom their rarity; for men count it veniall to err with their\nforefathers, and foolishly conceive they divide a sin in its society.\nThe pens of men may sufficiently expatiate without these singularities\nof villany; For, as they encrease the hatred of vice in some, so do they\nenlarge the theory of wickedness in all. And this is one thing that may\nmake latter ages worse then were the former; For, the vicious examples\nof Ages past, poyson the curiosity of these present, affording a hint of\nsin unto seduceable spirits, and soliciting those unto the imitation of\nthem, whose heads were never so perversly principled as to invent them.\nIn this kind we commend the wisdom and goodness of _Galen_, who would\nnot leave unto the world too subtile a Theory of poisons; unarming\nthereby the malice of venemous spirits, whose ignorance must be\ncontented with Sublimate and Arsenick. For, surely there are subtiler\nvenenations, such as will invisibly destroy, and like the Basilisks of\nheaven. In things of this nature silence commendeth history: 'tis the\nveniable part of things lost; wherein there must never rise a\nPancirollus [SN: _Who writ_ De Antiquis deperditis, _or of inventions\nlost_.], nor remain any Register but that of hell.\n\nAnd yet, if as some Stoicks opinion, and _Seneca_ himself disputeth,\nthese unruly affections that make us sin such prodigies, and even sins\nthemselves be animals; there is an history of _Africa_ and story of\nSnakes in these. And if the transanimation of _Pythagoras_ or method\nthereof were true, that the souls of men transmigrated into species\nanswering their former natures; some men must surely live over many\nSerpents, and cannot escape that very brood whose sire Satan entered.\nAnd though the objection of _Plato_ should take place, that bodies\nsubjected unto corruption, must fail at last before the period of all\nthings, and growing fewer in number, must leave some souls apart unto\nthemselves; the spirits of many long before that time will find but\nnaked habitations: and meeting no assimilables wherein to react their\nnatures, must certainly anticipate such natural desolations.\n\n\n Lactant.\n _Primus sapientiae gradus est, falsa intelligere._\n\n =_FINIS._=\n\n\n\n\n HYDRIOTAPHIA\n\n URNE-BURIALL\n\n OR A DISCOURSE OF THE\n\n SEPULCHRALL URNES\n\n LATELY FOUND\n\n IN NORFOLK\n\n _TOGETHER WITH_\n\n THE GARDEN OF CYRUS\n\n\n\n\n TO MY WORTHY AND HONOURED FRIEND\n\n THOMAS LE GROS\n\n Of _Crostwick_ Esquire.\n\n\nWhen the Funerall pyre was out, and the last valediction over, men took\na lasting adieu of their interred Friends, little expecting the\ncuriosity of future ages should comment upon their ashes, and having no\nold experience of the duration of their Reliques, held no opinion of\nsuch after-considerations.\n\nBut who knows the fate of his bones, or how often he is to be buried?\nwho hath the Oracle of his ashes, or whether they are to be scattered?\nThe Reliques of many lie like the ruines of [A]_Pompeys_, in all parts\nof the earth; And when they arrive at your hands, these may seem to have\nwandred farre, who in a [B]direct and _Meridian_ Travell, have but few\nmiles of known Earth between your selfe and the Pole.\n\n [A] Pompeios juvenes Asia, atque Europa, sed ipsum terra tegit _Lybies_.\n\n [B] _Little directly, but Sea between your house and_ Greenland.\n\nThat the bones of _Theseus_ should be seen again [C]in _Athens_, was not\nbeyond conjecture, and hopeful expectation; but that these should arise\nso opportunely to serve your self, was an hit of fate and honour beyond\nprediction.\n\n [C] _Brought back by_ Cimon. _Plutarch._\n\nWe cannot but wish these Urnes might have the effect of Theatrical\nvessels, and great [D]_Hippodrome_ Urnes in _Rome_; to resound the\nacclamations and honour due unto you. But these are sad and sepulchral\nPitchers, which have no joyfull voices; silently expressing old\nmortality, the ruines of forgotten times, and can only speak with life,\nhow long in this corruptible frame, some parts may be uncorrupted; yet\nable to out-last bones long unborn, and noblest [E]pyle among us.\n\n [D] _The great Urnes in the_ Hippodrome _at_ Rome _conceived to resound\nthe voices of people at their shows._\n\n [E] _Worthily possessed by that true Gentleman Sir_ Horatio Townshend\n_my honored Friend_.\n\nWe present not these as any strange sight or spectacle unknown to your\neyes, who have beheld the best of Urnes, and noblest variety of Ashes;\nWho are your self no slender master of Antiquities, and can daily\ncommand the view of so many Imperiall faces; Which raiseth your thoughts\nunto old things, and consideration of times before you, when even living\nmen were Antiquities; when the living might exceed the dead, and to\ndepart this world, could not be properly said, to go unto the [F]greater\nnumber. And so run up your thoughts upon the ancient of dayes, the\nAntiquaries truest object, unto whom the eldest parcels are young, and\nearth it self an Infant; and without [G]AEgyptian account makes but small\nnoise in thousands.\n\n [F] Abiit ad plures.\n\n [G] _Which makes the world so many years old._\n\nWe were hinted by the occasion, not catched the opportunity to write of\nold things, or intrude upon the Antiquary. We are coldly drawn unto\ndiscourses of Antiquities, who have scarce time before us to comprehend\nnew things, or make out learned Novelties. But seeing they arose as\nthey lay, almost in silence among us, at least in short account suddenly\npassed over; we were very unwilling they should die again, and be buried\ntwice among us.\n\nBeside, to preserve the living, and make the dead to live, to keep men\nout of their Urnes, and discourse of humane fragments in them, is not\nimpertinent unto our profession; whose study is life and death, who\ndaily behold examples of mortality, and of all men least need artificial\n_memento's_, or coffins by our bed side, to minde us of our graves.\n\n'Tis time to observe Occurrences, and let nothing remarkable escape us;\nThe Supinity of elder dayes hath left so much in silence, or time hath\nso martyred the Records, that the most industrious[H] heads do finde no\neasie work to erect a new _Britannia_.\n\n [H] _Wherein M._ Dugdale _hath excellently well endeavoured, and worthy\nto be countenanced by ingenuous and noble persons_.\n\n'Tis opportune to look back upon old times, and contemplate our\nForefathers. Great examples grow thin, and to be fetched from the passed\nworld. Simplicity flies away, and iniquity comes at long strides upon\nus. We have enough to do to make up our selves from present and passed\ntimes, and the whole stage of things scarce serveth for our instruction.\nA compleat peece of vertue must be made up from the _Centos_ of all\nages, as all the beauties of _Greece_ could make but one handsome\n_Venus_.\n\nWhen the bones of King _Arthur_ were digged up[I], the old Race might\nthink, they beheld therein some Originals of themselves; Unto these of\nour Urnes none here can pretend relation, and can only behold the\nReliques of those persons, who in their life giving the Laws unto their\npredecessors, after long obscurity, now lye at their mercies. But\nremembring the early civility they brought upon these Countreys, and\nforgetting long passed mischiefs; We mercifully preserve their bones,\nand pisse not upon their ashes.\n\n [I] _In the time of_ Henry _the second_, Cambden.\n\nIn the offer of these Antiquities we drive not at ancient Families, so\nlong out-lasted by them; We are farre from erecting your worth upon the\npillars of your Fore-fathers, whose merits you illustrate. We honour\nyour old Virtues, conformable unto times before you, which are the\nNoblest Armoury. And having long experience of your friendly\nconversation, void of empty Formality, full of freedome, constant and\nGenerous Honesty, I look upon you as a Gemme of the Old Rock[J], and\nmust professe my self even to Urne and Ashes,\n\n [J] Adamas de rupe veteri praestantissimus.\n\n Your ever faithfull Friend,\n and Servant,\n THOMAS BROWNE.\nNorwich, May 1.\n\n\n\n\n TO MY WORTHY AND HONOURED FRIEND\n NICHOLAS BACON\n Of _Gillingham_ Esquire.\n\n_Had I not observed that [K]Purblinde men have discoursed well of sight,\nand some [L]without issue, excellently of Generation; I that was never\nmaster of any considerable garden, had not attempted this Subject. But\nthe Earth is the Garden of Nature, and each fruitfull Countrey a\nParadise. Dioscorides made most of his Observations in his march about\nwith_ Antonius; _and_ Theophrastus _raised his generalities chiefly from\nthe field_.\n\n [K] Plempius, Cabeus, _etc_.\n\n [L] _D. Harvy._\n\n_Beside, we write no Herball, nor can this Volume deceive you, who have\nhandled the [M]massiest thereof: who know that thre [N]Folio's are yet\ntoo little, and how New Herbals fly from_ America _upon us, from\npersevering Enquirers, and [O]old in those singularities, we expect such\nDescriptions. Wherein_ [P]England _is now so exact, that it yeelds not\nto other Countreys_.\n\n [M] _Besleri_ Hortus Eystetensis.\n\n [N] _Bauhini_ Theatrum Botanicum, _etc._\n\n [O] _My worthy friend M._ Goodier _an ancient and learned Botanist_.\n\n [P] _As in_ London _and divers parts, whereof we mention none, lest we\n seem to omit any_.\n\n_We pretend not to multiply vegetable divisions by Quincuncial and\nReticulate plants; or erect a new Phytology. The Field of knowledge hath\nbeen so traced, it is hard to spring any thing new. Of old things we\nwrite something new, If truth may receive addition, or envy will have\nany thing new; since the Ancients knew the late Anatomicall discoveries,\nand_ Hippocrates _the Circulation_.\n\n_You have been so long out of trite learning, that 'tis hard to finde a\nsubject proper for you; and if you have met with a Sheet upon this, we\nhave missed our intention. In this multiplicity of writing, bye and\nbarren Themes are best fitted for invention; Subjects so often\ndiscoursed confine the Imagination, and fix our conceptions unto the\nnotions of fore-writers. Beside, such Discourses allow excursions, and\nvenially admit of collaterall truths, though at some distance from their\nprincipals. Wherein if we sometimes take wide liberty, we are not\nsingle, but erre by great [Q]example._\n\n [Q] Hippocrates de superfoetatione, de dentitione.\n\n_He that will illustrate the excellency of this order, may easily fail\nupon so spruce a Subject, wherein we have not affrighted the common\nReader with any other Diagramms, then of it self; and have industriously\ndeclined illustrations from rare and unknown plants._\n\n_Your discerning judgement so well acquainted with that study, will\nexpect herein no mathematicall truths, as well understanding how few\ngeneralities and [R]Vfinita's there are in nature. How_ Scaliger _hath\nfound exceptions in most Universals of_ Aristotle _and_ Theophrastus.\n_How Botanicall Maximes must have fair allowance, and are tolerably\ncurrant, if not intolerably over-ballanced by exceptions_.\n\n [R] _Rules without exceptions_.\n\n_You have wisely ordered your vegetable delights, beyond the reach of\nexception. The Turks who passt their dayes in Gardens here, will have\nGardens also hereafter, and delighting in Flowers on earth, must have\nLillies and Roses in Heaven. In Garden Delights 'tis not easie to hold a\nMediocrity; that insinuating pleasure is seldome without some extremity.\nThe Antients venially delighted in flourishing Gardens; Many were\nFlorists that knew not the true use of a Flower; And in_ Plinies\n_dayes none had directly treated of that subject. Some commendably\naffected Plantations of venemous Vegetables, some confined their\ndelights unto single plants, and Cato seemed to dote upon Cabbadge;\nWhile the Ingenuous delight of Tulipists, stands saluted with hard\nlanguage, even by their own [S]Professors._\n\n [S] Tulipo mania, Narrencruiid, Laurenberg. Pet. Hondius. in lib.\n _Belg._\n\n_That in this Garden Discourse, we range into extraneous things, and\nmany parts of Art and Nature, we follow herein the example of old and\nnew Plantations, wherein noble spirits contented not themselves with\nTrees, but by the attendance of Aviaries, Fish-Ponds, and all variety of\nAnimals, they made their gardens the Epitome of the earth, and some\nresemblance of the secular shows of old._\n\n_That we conjoyn these parts of different Subjects, or that this should\nsucceed the other; Your judgement will admit without impute of\nincongruity; Since the delightfull World comes after death, and Paradise\nsucceeds the Grave. Since the verdant state of things is the Symbole of\nthe Resurrection, and to flourish in the state of Glory, we must first\nbe sown in corruption. Beside the ancient practise of Noble Persons, to\nconclude in Garden-Graves, and Urnes themselves of old, to be wrapt up\nflowers and garlands._\n\nNullam sine venia placuisse eloquium, _is more sensibly understood by\nWriters, then by Readers; nor well apprehended by either, till works\nhave hanged out like_ Apelles _his Pictures; wherein even common eyes\nwill finde something for emendation._\n\n_To wish all Readers of your abilities, were unreasonably to multiply\nthe number of Scholars beyond the temper of these times. But unto this\nill-judging age, we charitably desire a portion of your equity,\njudgement, candour, and ingenuity; wherein you are so rich, as not to\nlose by diffusion. And being a flourishing branch of that [T]Noble\nFamily, unto which we owe so much observance, you are not new set, but\nlong rooted in such perfection; whereof having had so lasting\nconfirmation in your worthy conversation, constant amity, and\nexpression; and knowing you a serious Student in the highest_ arcana's\n_of Nature; with much excuse we bring these low delights, and poor\nmaniples to your Treasure_.\n\n [T] _Of the most worthy Sr_ Edmund Bacon _prime Baronet, my true and\n noble Friend._\n\n _Your affectionate Friend,\n and Servant_,\n THOMAS BROWNE.\n\n_Norwich, May 1._\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration: _En sum quod digitis Quinque Levatur onus Propert_]\n\n\n\n\nHYDRIOTAPHIA: URNE BURIAL\n\nOr, a brief Discourse of the Sepulchrall Urnes lately found in Norfolk.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\n\nIn the deep discovery of the Subterranean world, a shallow part would\nsatisfie some enquirers; who, if two or three yards were open about the\nsurface, would not care to wrack the bowels of _Potosi_,[1] regions\ntowards the Centre. Nature hath furnished one part of the Earth, and man\nanother. The treasures of time lie high, in Urnes, Coynes, and\nMonuments, scarce below the roots of some vegetables. Time hath\nendlesse rarities, and shows of all varieties; which reveals old things\nin heaven, makes new discoveries in earth, and even earth it self a\ndiscovery. That great antiquity _America_ lay buried for thousands of\nyears; and a large part of the earth is still in the Urne unto us.\n\n [1] _The rich mountain of Peru._\n\nThough if _Adam_ were made out of an extract of the Earth, all parts\nmight challenge a restitution, yet few have returned their bones far\nlower then they might receive them; not affecting the graves of Giants\nunder hilly and heavy coverings, but content with lesse then their own\ndepth, have wished their bones might lie soft, and the earth be light\nupon them; Even such as hope to rise again, would not be content with\ncentral interrment, or so desperately to place their reliques as to lie\nbeyond discovery, and in no way to be seen again; which happy\ncontrivance hath made communication with our forefathers, and left unto\nour view some parts, which they never beheld themselves.\n\nThough earth hath engrossed the name yet water hath proved the smartest\ngrave; which in fourty dayes swallowed almost mankinde, and the living\ncreation; Fishes not wholly escaping, except the salt Ocean were\nhandsomly contempered by a mixture of the fresh Element.\n\nMany have taken voluminous pains to determine the state of the soul upon\ndisunion; but men have been most phantastical in the singular\ncontrivances of their corporall dissolution: whilest the soberest\nNations have rested in two wayes, of simple inhumation and burning.\n\nThat carnal interrment or burying, was of the elder date, the old\nexamples of _Abraham_ and the Patriarches are sufficient to illustrate;\nAnd were without competition, if it could be made out, that _Adam_ was\nburied near _Damascus_, or Mount _Calvary_, according to some Tradition.\nGod himself that buried but one, was pleased to make choice of this way,\ncollectible from Scripture-expression, and the hot contest between Satan\nand the Arch-Angel, about discovering the body of _Moses_. But the\npractice of Burning was also of great Antiquity, and of no slender\nextent. For (not to derive the same from _Hercules_) noble descriptions\nthere are hereof in the Grecian Funerale of _Homer_, in the formal\nObsequies of _Patroclus_, and _Achilles_; and somewhat elder in the\n_Theban_ war, and solemn combustion of _Meneceus_, and _Archemorus_,\ncontemporary unto _Jair_ the Eighth Judge of _Israel_. Confirmable also\namong the _Trojans_, from the Funeral Pyre of _Hector_, burnt before the\ngates of _Troy_, and the burning[2] of _Penthisilea_ the _Amazonian\nQueen_: and long continuance of that practice in the inward Countries of\n_Asia_; while as low as the Reign of _Julian_, we finde that the King of\n_Chionia_[3] burnt the body of his Son, and interred the ashes in a\nsilver Urne.\n\n [2] _Q. Calaber lib._ 1.\n\n [3] _Ammianus Marcellinus, Gumbrates King of_ Chionia _a Countrey near_\n Persia.\n\nThe same practice extended also far West,[4] and besides _Herulians_,\n_Getes_, and _Thracians_, was in use with most of the _Celtae_,\n_Sarmatians_, _Germans_, _Gauls_, _Danes_, _Swedes_, _Norwegians_; not\nto omit some use thereof among _Carthaginians_ and _Americans_: Of\ngreater antiquity among the _Romans_ then most opinion, or _Pliny_ seems\nto allow. For (beside the old Table Laws of burning[5] or burying within\nthe City, of making the Funeral fire with plained wood, or quenching the\nfire with wine) _Manlius_ the Consul burnt the body of his son: _Numa_\nby special clause of his will, was not burnt but buried; And _Remus_ was\nsolemnly buried, according to the description of _Ovid_.[6]\n\n [4] _Arnoldis Montanis not in_ Caes. _Commentar. L. L. Gyraldus.\n Kirkmannus._\n\n [5] _12 Tabul. part. 1 de jure sacro. Hominem mortuum in urbe ne\n sepelito, neve urito. tom. 2. Rogum ascia ne polito. to. 4 Item\n vigeneri Annottat in Livium, et Alex. ab Alex. cum Tiraquello\n Roscinus cum dempstero._\n\n [6] _Ultima prolato subditu flamma rogo. De Fast. lib. 4. cum Car.\n Neapol. anaptyxi._\n\n_Cornelius Sylla_ was not the first whose body was burned in _Rome_,\nbut of the _Cornelian_ Family, which being indifferently, not frequently\nused before; from that time spread and became the prevalent practice.\nNot totally pursued in the highest run of Cremation; For when even Crows\nwere funerally burnt, _Poppaea_ the wife of _Nero_ found a peculiar grave\nenterment. Now as all customs were founded upon some bottom of Reason,\nso there wanted not grounds for this; according to several apprehensions\nof the most rational dissolution. Some being of the opinion of _Thales_,\nthat water was the original of all things, thought it most equal to\nsubmit unto the principle of putrifaction, and conclude in a moist\nrelentment. Others conceived it most natural to end in fire, as due unto\nthe master principle in the composition, according to the doctrine of\n_Heraclitus_.\n\nAnd therefore heaped up large piles, more actively to waft them toward\nthat Element, whereby they also declined a visible degeneration into\nworms, and left a lasting parcel of their composition.\n\nSome apprehended a purifying virtue in fire, refining the grosser\ncommixture, and firing out the AEthereal particles so deeply immersed in\nit. And such as by tradition or rational conjecture held any hint of the\nfinal pyre of all things; or that this Element at last must be too hard\nfor all the rest; might conceive most naturally of the fiery\ndissolution. Others pretending no natural grounds, politickly declined\nthe malice of enemies upon their buried bodies. Which consideration led\n_Sylla_ unto this practice; who having thus served the body of _Marius_,\ncould not but fear a retaliation upon his own; entertained after in the\nCivil wars, and revengeful contentions of _Rome_.\n\nBut as many Nations embraced, and many left it indifferent, so others\ntoo much affected, or strictly declined this practice. The _Indian\nBrachmans_ seemed too great friends unto fire, who burnt themselves\nalive, and thought it the noblest way to end their dayes in fire;\naccording to the expression of the Indian, burning himself at\n_Athens_,[7] in his last words upon the pyre unto the amazed spectators,\n_Thus I make my self immortal_.\n\n [7] _And therefore the Inscription of his Tomb was made accordingly._\n Nic. Damasc.\n\nBut the _Chaldeans_ the great Idolaters of fire, abhorred the burning of\ntheir carcasses, as a polution of that Deity. The _Persian Magi_\ndeclined it upon the like scruple, and being only solicitous about their\nbones, exposed their flesh to the prey of Birds and Dogs. And the\n_Persees_ now in _India_, which expose their bodies unto Vultures, and\nendure not so much as _feretra_ or Beers of Wood; the proper Fuell of\nfire, are led on with such nicities. But whether the ancient _Germans_\nwho burned their dead, held any such fear to pollute their Deity of\n_Herthus_, or the earth, we have no Authentick conjecture.\n\nThe AEgyptians were afraid of fire, not as a Deity, but a devouring\nElement, mercilesly consuming their bodies, and leaving too little of\nthem; and therefore by precious Embalments, depositure in dry earths, or\nhandsome inclosure in glasses, contrived the notablest wayes of\nintegrall conservation. And from such AEgyptian scruples imbibed by\n_Pythagoras_, it may be conjectured that _Numa_ and the Pythagorical\nSect first waved the fiery solution.\n\nThe _Scythians_ who swore by winde and sword, that is, by life and\ndeath, were so far from burning their bodies, that they declined all\ninterrment, and made their grave in the ayr: And the _Ichthyophagi_ or\nfish-eating Nations about AEgypt, affected the Sea for their grave:\nThereby declining visible corruption, and restoring the debt of their\nbodies. Whereas the old Heroes in _Homer_, dreaded nothing more than\nwater or drowning; probably upon the old opinion of the fiery substance\nof the soul, onely extinguishable by that Element; And therfore the Poet\nemphatically implieth the total destruction in this kinde of death,\nwhich happened to _Ajax Oileus_.[8]\n\n [8] _Which_ Magius _reads_ +exapolole+.\n\nThe old _Balearians_[9] had a peculiar mode, for they used great Urnes\nand much wood, but no fire in their burials; while they bruised the\nflesh and bones of the dead, crowded them into Urnes, and laid heaps of\nwood upon them. And the _Chinois_[10] without cremation or urnal\ninterrment of their bodies, make use of trees and much burning, while\nthey plant a Pine-tree by their grave, and burn great numbers of printed\ndraughts of slaves and horses over it, civilly content with their\ncompanies in effigie, which barbarous Nations exact unto reality.\n\n [9] Diodorus Siculus.\n\n [10] Ramusius _in_ Navigat.\n\nChristians abhorred this way of obsequies, and though they stickt not to\ngive their bodies to be burnt in their lives, detested that mode after\ndeath; affecting rather a depositure than absumption, and properly\nsubmitting unto the sentence of God, to return not unto ashes but unto\ndust again, conformable unto the practice of the Patriarches, the\ninterrment of our Saviour, of _Peter_, _Paul_, and the ancient Martyrs.\nAnd so far at last declining promiscuous enterrment with Pagans, that\nsome[11] have suffered Ecclesiastical censures, for making no scruple\nthereof.\n\n [11] _Martialis the Bishop._ Cyprian.\n\nThe _Musselman_ beleevers will never admit this fiery resolution. For\nthey hold a present trial from their black and white Angels in the\ngrave; which they must have made so hollow, that they may rise upon\ntheir knees.\n\nThe Jewish Nation, though they entertained the old way of inhumation,\nyet sometimes admitted this practice. For the men of _Jabesh_ burnt the\nbody of _Saul_. And by no prohibited practice to avoid contagion or\npollution, in time of pestilence, burnt the bodies of their friends.[12]\nAnd when they burnt not their dead bodies, yet sometimes used great\nburnings near and about them, deducible from the expressions concerning\n_Jehoram_, _Sedechias_, and the sumptuous pyre of Asa; And were so\nlittle averse from Pagan[13] burning, that the Jews lamenting the death\nof _Caesar_ their friend, and revenger on _Pompey_, frequented the place\nwhere his body was burnt for many nights together. And as they raised\nnoble Monuments and _Mausolaeums_ for their own Nation,[14] so they were\nnot scrupulous in erecting some for others, according to the practice of\n_Daniel_, who left that lasting sepulchral pyle in _Echbatana_, for the\n_Median_ and _Persian_ Kings.[15]\n\n [12] _Amos_ 6. 10.\n\n [13] _Sueton. in vita._ Jul. Caes.\n\n [14] _As that magnificent sepulchral Monument erected by Simon.\n Mach. 1. 13._\n\n [15] +Kataskeuasma thaumasios pepoiemenon+, _whereof a Jewish\n Priest had alwayes the custody unto _Josephus _his dayes._ Jos.\n _Lib. 10. Antiq._\n\nBut even in times of subjection and hottest use, they conformed not unto\nthe _Romane_ practice of burning; whereby the Prophecy was secured\nconcerning the body of Christ, that it should not see corruption, or a\nbone should not be broken; which we beleeve was also providentially\nprevented, from the Souldiers spear and nailes that past by the little\nbones both in his hands and feet: Nor of ordinary contrivance, that it\nshould not corrupt on the crosse, according to the Law of _Romane_\nCrucifixion, or an hair of his head perish, though observable in Jewish\ncustomes, to cut the haires of Malefactors.\n\nNor in their long co-habitation with the AEgyptians, crept into a custome\nof their exact embalming, wherein deeply slashing the muscles, and\ntaking out the braines and entrailes, they had broken the subject of so\nentire a Resurrection, nor fully answered the tipes of _Enoch_, _Eliah_,\nor _Jonah_, which yet to prevent or restore, was of equall facility unto\nthat rising power, able to break the fasciations and bands of death, to\nget clear out of the Cere-cloth, and an hundred pounds of oyntment, and\nout of the Sepulchre before the stone was rolled from it.\n\nBut though they embraced not this practice of burning, yet entertained\nthey many ceremonies agreeable unto _Greek_ and _Romane_ obsequies, And\nhe that observeth their funeral Feasts, their Lamentations at the grave,\ntheir musick, and weeping mourners; how they closed the eyes of their\nfriends, how they washed, anointed, and kissed the dead; may easily\nconclude these were not meer Pagan Civilities. But whether that mournful\nburthen, and treble calling out after _Absalom_, had any reference unto\nthe last conclamation, and triple valediction, used by other nations, we\nhold but a wavering conjecture.\n\n_Civilians_ make sepulture but of the Law of nations, others do\nnaturally found it and discover it also in animals. They that are so\nthick skinned as still to credit the story of the _Phoenix_, may say\nsomething for animal burning: More serious conjectures finde some\nexamples of sepulture in Elephants, Cranes, the Sepulchral Cells of\nPismires and practice of Bees; which civil society carrieth out their\ndead, and hath exequies, if not interrments.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\n\nThe Solemnities, Ceremonies, Rites of their Cremation or enterrment, so\nsolemnly delivered by Authours, we shall not disparage our Reader to\nrepeat. Only the last and lasting part in their Urns, collected bones\nand Ashes, we cannot wholly omit, or decline that Subject, which\noccasion lately presented, in some discovered among us.\n\nIn a Field of old _Walsingham_, not many months past, were digged up\nbetween fourty and fifty Urnes, deposited in a dry and sandy soile, not\na yard deep, nor far from one another: Not all strictly of one figure,\nbut most answering these described; Some containing two pounds of bones,\ndistinguishable in skulls, ribs, jawes, thigh-bones, and teeth, with\nfresh impressions of their combustion. Besides the extraneous\nsubstances, like peeces of small boxes, or combs handsomely wrought,\nhandles of small brasse instruments, brazen nippers, and in one some\nkinde of _Opale_.[16]\n\n [16] _In one sent me by my worthy friend Dr._ Thomas Witherley _of_\n Walsingham.\n\nNear the same plot of ground, for about six yards compasse were digged\nup coals and incinerated substances, which begat conjecture that this\nwas the _Ustrina_ or place of burning their bodies, or some sacrificing\nplace unto the _Manes_, which was properly below the surface of the\nground, as the _Arae_ and _Altars_ unto the gods and _Heroes_ above it.\n\nThat these were the Urnes of _Romanes_ from the common custome and place\nwhere they were found, is no obscure conjecture, not far from a _Romane_\nGarrison, and but five mile from _Brancaster_, set down by ancient\nRecord under the name of _Brannodunum_. And where the adjoyning Town,\ncontaining seven Parishes, in no very different sound, but Saxon\ntermination, still retaines the Name of _Burnham_, which being an early\nstation, it is not improbable the neighbour parts were filled with\nhabitations, either of _Romanes_ themselves, or _Brittains Romanised_,\nwhich observed the _Romane_ customes.\n\nNor is it improbable that the _Romanes_ early possessed this Countrey;\nfor though we meet not with such strict particulars of these parts,\nbefore the new Institution of _Constantine_, and military charge of the\nCount of the _Saxon_ shore, and that about the _Saxon_ Invasions, the\n_Dalmatian_ Horsemen were in the Garrison of _Brancaster_: Yet in the\ntime of _Claudius Vespasian_, and _Severus_, we finde no lesse then\nthree Legions dispersed through the Province of _Brittain_. And as high\nas the Reign of _Claudius_ a great overthrow was given unto the _Iceni_,\nby the _Romane_ Lieutenant _Ostorius_. Not long after the Countrey was\nso molested, that in hope of a better state _Prasatagus_ bequeathed his\nKingdom unto _Nero_ and his Daughters; and _Boadicea_ his Queen fought\nthe last decisive Battle with _Paulinus_. After which time and Conquest\nof _Agricola_ the Lieutenant of _Vespasian_, probable it is they wholly\npossessed this Countrey, ordering it into Garrisons or Habitations, best\nsuitable with their securities. And so some _Romane_ habitations, not\nimprobable in these parts, as high as the time of _Vespasian_, where the\n_Saxons_ after seated, in whose thin-fill'd Mappes we yet finde the Name\nof _Walsingham_. Now if the _Iceni_ were but _Gammadims_, _Anconians_,\nor men that lived in an Angle wedge or Elbow of _Brittain_, according to\nthe Original Etymologie, this countrey will challenge the Emphatical\nappellation, as most properly making the Elbow or Iken of _Icenia_.\n\nThat _Britain_ was notably populous is undeniable, from that expression\nof _Caesar_[17]. That the _Romanes_ themselves were early in no small\nnumbers, Seventy Thousand with their associats slain by _Boadicea_,\naffords a sure account. And though many _Roman_ habitations are now\nunknown, yet some by old works, Rampiers, Coynes, and Urnes do testifie\ntheir Possessions. Some Urnes have been found at Castor, some also about\n_Southcreake_ and not many years past, no lesse then ten in a field at\n_Buxton_,[18] not near any recorded Garrison. Nor is it strange to finde\n_Romane_ Coynes of Copper and Silver among us; of _Vespasian_, _Trajan_,\n_Adrian_, _Commodus_, _Antoninus_, _Severus_, etc. But the greater\nnumber of _Dioclesian_, _Constantine_, _Constans_, _Valens_, with many\nof _Victorinus Posthumius_, _Tetricus_, and the thirty Tyrants in the\nReigne of _Gallienus_; and some as high as _Adrianus_ have been found\nabout _Thetford_, or _Sitomagus_, mentioned in the itinerary of\n_Antoninus_, as the way from _Venta_ or _Castor_ unto _London_[19].t the\nmost frequent discovery is made at the two _Casters_ by _Norwich_ and\n_Yarmouth_[20] _Burghcastle_ and _Brancaster_.[21]\n\n [17] Hominum infinita multitudo est, creberrimaque aedificia fere\n Gallicis consimilia. _Caes._ de bello Gal. _l._ 5.\n\n [18] _In the ground of my worthy Friend_ Rob. Jegon, _Esq., wherein\n some things contained were preserved by the most worthy Sir_\n William Paston, _Bt._\n\n [19] _From Castor to Thetford the Romans accounted thirty-two miles,\n and from thence observed not our common road to_ London, _but\n passed by_ Combretonium ad Ansam, Canonium, Caesaromagus, _etc.,\n by_ Bretenham, Coggeshall, Chelmeford, Burntwood, _etc._\n\n [20] _Most at_ Caster _by_ Yarmouth, _found in a place called_\n East-bloudyburgh furlong, _belonging to Mr._ Thomas Wood, _a\n person of civility, industry and knowledge in this way, who hath\n made observation of remarkable things about him, and from whom we\n have received divers Silver and Copper Coynes._\n\n [21] _Belonging to that Noble Gentleman, and true example of worth\n Sir_ Ralph Hare, _Baronet, my honoured Friend_.\n\nBesides, the _Norman_, _Saxon_ and _Danish_ peeces of _Cuthred_,\n_Canutus_, _William Matilda_,[22] and others, some Brittish Coynes of\ngold have been dispersedly found; And no small number of silver peeces\nneer _Norwich_[23]; with a rude head upon the obverse, and an ill formed\nhorse on the reverse, with inscriptions _Ic. Duro T._ whether implying\n_Iceni_, _Duroriges_, _Tascia_, or _Trinobantes_, we leave to higher\nconjecture. Vulgar Chronology will have _Norwich_ Castle as old as\n_Julius Caesar_, but his distance from these parts, and its _Gothick_\nform of structure, abridgeth such Antiquity. The _British_ Coyns afford\nconjecture of early habitation in these parts, though the City of\n_Norwich_ arose from the ruines of _Venta_, and though perhaps not\nwithout some habitation before, was enlarged, builded, and nominated by\nthe _Saxons_. In what bulk or populosity it stood in the old East-angle\nMonarchy, tradition and history are silent. Considerable it was in the\n_Danish_ Eruptions, when _Sueno_ burnt _Thetford_ and _Norwich_,[24] and\n_Ulfketel_ the Governour thereof was able to make some resistance, and\nafter endeavoured to burn the _Danish_ Navy.\n\n [22] _A peece of_ Maud _the Empresse said to be found in_ Buckenham\n Castle _with this inscription_, Elle n'a elle.\n\n [23] _At_ Thorpe.\n\n [24] _Brampton_ Abbas Jorvallensis.\n\nHow the _Romanes_ left so many Coynes in Countreys of their Conquests,\nseemes of hard resolution, except we consider how they buried them under\nground, when upon barbarous invasions they were fain to desert their\nhabitations in most part of their Empire, and the strictnesse of their\nlaws forbiding to transfer them to any other uses; Wherein the\n_Spartans_[25] were singular, who to make their copper money uselesse,\ncontempered it with vinegar. That the _Britains_ left any, some wonder;\nsince their money was iron, and Iron rings before _Caesar_; and those of\nafter stamp by permission, and but small in bulk and bignesse; that so\nfew of the _Saxons_ remain, because overcome by suceeding Conquerours\nupon the place, their Coynes by degrees passed into other stamps, and\nthe marks of after ages.\n\n [25] _Plut._ in vita Lycurg.\n\nThen the time of these Urnes deposited, or precise Antiquity of these\nRelicks, nothing of more uncertainty. For since the Lieutenant of\n_Claudius_ seems to have the first progresse into these parts, since\n_Boadicea_ was overthrown by the Forces of _Nero_, and _Agricola_ put a\nfull end to these Conquests; it is not probable the Country was fully\ngarrisoned or planted before; and therefore however these Urnes might be\nof later date, not likely of higher Antiquity.\n\nAnd the succeeding Emperours desisted not from their conquests in these\nand other parts; as testified by history and medal inscription yet\nextant. The Province of _Britain_ in so divided a distance from _Rome_,\nbeholding the faces of many Imperial persons, and in large account no\nfewer than _Caesar_, _Claudius_, _Britannicus_, _Vespasian_, _Titus_,\n_Adrian_, _Severus_, _Commodus_, _Geta_, and _Caracalla_.\n\nA great obscurity herein, because, no medall or Emperours coyne\nenclosed, which might denote the dates of their enterrments, observable\nin many Urnes, and found in those of _Spittle_ Fields by _London_,[26]\nwhich contained the Coynes of _Claudius_, _Vespasian_, _Commodus_,\n_Antoninus_, attended with Lacrymatories, Lamps, Bottles of Liquor, and\nother appurtenances of affectionate superstition, which in these rurall\ninterrments were wanting.\n\n [26] Stowes _Survey of_ London.\n\nSome uncertainty there is from the period or term of burning, or the\ncessation of that practise. _Macrobius_ affirmeth it was disused in his\ndayes. But most agree, though without authentick record, that it ceased\nwith the _Antonini_. Most safely to be understood after the Reigne of\nthose Emperours, which assumed the name of _Antoninus_, extending unto\n_Heliogabalus_. Not strictly after _Marcus_; For about fifty years later\nwe finde the magnificent burning, and consecration of _Severus_; and if\nwe so fix this period or cessation, these Urnes will challenge above\nthirteen hundred yeers.\n\nBut whether this practise was onely then left by Emperours and great\npersons, or generally about _Rome_, and not in other Provinces, we hold\nno authentick account. For after _Tertullian_, in the dayes of\n_Minucius_ it was obviously objected upon Christians, that they\ncondemned the practise of burning.[27] And we finde a passage in\n_Sidonius_,[28] which asserteth that practise in France unto a lower\naccount. And perhaps not fully disused till Christianity fully\nestablished, which gave the final extinction to these Sepulchral\nBonefires.\n\n [27] Execrantur rogos, et damnant ignium sepulturam. _Min. in Oct._\n\n [28] Sidon. Apollinaris.\n\nWhether they were the bones of men or women or children, no authentick\ndecision from ancient custome in distinct places of burial. Although not\nimprobably conjectured, that the double Sepulture or burying place of\n_Abraham_, had in it such intension. But from exility of bones,\nthinnesse of skulls, smallnesse of teeth, ribbes, and thigh-bones; not\nimprobable that many thereof were persons of _minor_ age, or women.\nConfirmable also from things contained in them: In most were found\nsubstances resembling Combes, Plates like Boxes, fastened with Iron\npins, and handsomely overwrought like the necks or Bridges of Musicall\nInstruments, long brasse plates overwrought like the handles of neat\nimplements, brazen nippers to pull away hair, and in one a kinde of\n_Opale_ yet maintaining a blewish colour.\n\nNow that they accustomed to burn or bury with them, things wherein they\nexcelled, delighted, or which were dear unto them, either as farewells\nunto all pleasure, or vain apprehension that they might use them in the\nother world, is testified by all Antiquity. Observable from the Gemme or\nBeril Ring upon the finger of _Cynthia_, the Mistress of _Propertius_,\nwhen after her Funeral Pyre her Ghost appeared unto him. And notably\nillustrated from the Contents of that _Roman_ Urne preserved by Cardinal\n_Farnese_,[29] wherein besides great number of Gemmes with heads of Gods\nand Goddesses, were found an Ape of _Agath_, a Grashopper, an Elephant\nof Ambre, a Crystal Ball, three glasses, two Spoons, and six Nuts of\nCrystall. And beyond the content of Urnes, in the Monument of\n_Childerick_ the first,[30] and fourth King from _Pharamond_, casually\ndiscovered three years past at _Tournay_, restoring unto the world much\ngold richly adorning his Sword, two hundred Rubies, many hundred\nImperial Coyns, three hundred Golden Bees, the bones and horseshoe of\nhis horse enterred with him, according to the barbarous magnificence of\nthose dayes in their sepulchral Obsequies. Although if we steer by the\nconjecture of many and Septuagint expression; some trace thereof may be\nfound even with the ancient Hebrews, not only from the Sepulcral\ntreasure of _David_, but the circumcision knives which _Josuah_ also\nburied.\n\n [29] Vigeneri Annot. in 4. Liv.\n\n [30] Chifflet in Anast. Childer.\n\nSome men considering the contents of these Urnes, lasting peeces and\ntoyes included in them, and the custome of burning with many other\nNations, might somewhat doubt whether all Urnes found among us, were\nproperly _Romane_ Reliques, or some not belonging unto our _Brittish_,\n_Saxon_, or _Danish_ Forefathers.\n\nIn the form of Burial among the ancient _Brittains_, the large\nDiscourses of _Caesar_, _Tacitus_, and _Strabo_ are silent: For the\ndiscovery whereof, with other particulars, we must deplore the loss of\nthat Letter which _Cicero_ expected or received from his Brother\n_Quintus_, as a resolution of _Brittish_ customes; or the account which\nmight have been made by _Scribonius Largus_ the Physician, accompanying\nthe Emperor _Claudius_, who might have also discovered that frugal\nBit[31] of the Old _Brittains_, which in the bigness of a Bean could\nsatisfie their thirst and hunger.\n\n [31] Dionis excerpta per Xiphilin. in Severo.\n\nBut that the _Druids_ and ruling Priests used to burn and bury, is\nexpressed by _Pomponius_; That _Bellinus_ the Brother of _Brennus_, and\nKing of _Brittains_ was burnt, is acknowledged by _Polydorus_, as also\nby _Amandus Zierexensis_ in _Historia_, and _Pineda_ in his _Universa\nhistoria_. Spanish. That they held that practise in _Gallia, Caesar_\nexpressly delivereth. Whether the Brittains (probably descended from\nthem, of like Religion, Language and Manners) did not sometimes make use\nof burning; or whether at least such as were after civilized unto the\n_Romane_ life and manners, conformed not unto this practise, we have no\nhistorical assertion or denial. But since from the account of _Tacitus_\nthe _Romanes_ early wrought so much civility upon the Brittish stock,\nthat they brought them to build Temples, to wear the Gown, and study the\n_Romane_ Laws and Language, that they conformed also unto their\nReligious rites and customes in burials, seems no improbable conjecture.\n\nThat burning the dead was used in _Sarmatia_, is affirmed by _Gaguinus_,\nthat the _Sueons_ and _Gothlanders_ used to burn their Princes and great\npersons, is delivered by _Saxo_ and _Olaus_; that this was the old\n_Germane_ practise, is also asserted by _Tacitus_. And though we are\nbare in historical particulars of such obsequies in this Island, or that\nthe _Saxons_, _Jutes_, and _Angles_ burnt their dead, yet came they from\nparts where 'twas of ancient practise; the _Germanes_ using it, from\nwhom they were descended. And even in _Jutland_ and _Sleswick_ in\n_Anglia Cymbrica_, Urnes with bones were found not many years before us.\n\n[Sidenote: Roisold, Brendetiide. Ild tyde.]\n\nBut the _Danish_ and Northern Nations have raised an _AEra_ or point of\ncompute from their Custome of burning their dead: Some deriving it from\n_Unguinus_, some from _Frotho_ the great; who ordained by Law, that\nPrinces and Chief Commanders should be committed unto the fire, though\nthe common sort had the common grave enterrment. So _Starkatterus_ that\nold _Heroe_ was burnt, and _Ringo_ royally burnt the body of _Harald_\nthe King slain by him.\n\nWhat time this custome generally expired in that Nation, we discern no\nassured period; whether it ceased before Christianity, or upon their\nConversion, by _Ansgurius_ the Gaul in the time of _Ludovicus Pius_ the\nSon of _Charles_ the Great, according to good computes; or whether it\nmight not be used by some persons, while for a hundred and eighty years\nPaganisme and Christianity were promiscuously embraced among them, there\nis no assured conclusion. About which times the _Danes_ were busie in\n_England_, and particularly infested this Countrey: Where many Castles\nand strong holds were built by them, or against them, and great number\nof names and Families still derived from them. But since this custome\nwas probably disused before their Invasion or Conquest, and the\n_Romanes_ confessedly practised the same, since their possession of this\nIsland, the most assured account will fall upon the _Romanes_, or\n_Brittains Romanized_.\n\nHowever certain it is, that Urnes conceived of no _Romane_ Original, are\noften digged up both in _Norway_ and _Denmark_, handsomely described,\nand graphically represented by the Learned Physician _Wormius_,[32] And\nin some parts of _Denmark_ in no ordinary number, as stands delivered by\nAuthors exactly describing those Countreys.[33] And they contained not\nonly bones, but many other substances in them, as Knives, peeces of\nIron, Brass and Wood, and one of _Norway_ a brasse guilded Jewes harp.\n\n [32] Olai Wormii monumenta et Antiquitat. Dan.\n\n [33] Adolphus Cyprius in Annal. Sleswic. urnis adeo abundabat collis,\n _etc._\n\nNor were they confused or carelesse in disposing the noblest sort, while\nthey placed large stones in circle about the Urnes, or bodies which they\ninterred: Somewhat answerable unto the Monument of _Rollrich_ stones in\n_England_,[34] or sepulcral Monument probably erected by _Rollo_, who\nafter conquered _Normandy_. Where 'tis not improbable somewhat might be\ndiscovered. Mean while to what Nation or person belonged that large Urne\nfound at _Ashburie_,[35] containing mighty bones, and a Buckler; what\nthose large Urnes found at little _Massingham_,[36] or why the\n_Anglesea_ Urnes are placed with their mouths downwards, remains yet\nundiscovered.\n\n [34] _In Oxfordshire_; Cambden.\n\n [35] _In Cheshire_, Twinus de rebus Albionicis.\n\n [36] _In Norfolk_, Hollingshead.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\n\nPlaystered and whited Sepulchres, were anciently affected in cadaverous,\nand corruptive Burials; And the rigid Jews were wont to garnish the\nSepulchres of the righteous;[37] _Ulysses_ in _Hecuba_[38] cared not how\nmeanly he lived, so he might finde a noble Tomb after death. Great\nPrinces affected great Monuments, and the fair and larger Urnes\ncontained no vulgar ashes, which makes that disparity in those which\ntime discovereth among us. The present Urnes were not of one capacity,\nthe largest containing above a gallon, Some not much above half that\nmeasure; nor all of one figure, wherein there is no strict conformity,\nin the same or different Countreys; Observable from those represented by\n_Casalius_, _Bosio_, and others, though all found in _Italy_: While many\nhave handles, ears, and long necks, but most imitate a circular figure,\nin a spherical and round composure; whether from any mystery, best\nduration or capacity, were but a conjecture. But the common form with\nnecks was a proper figure, making our last bed like our first; nor much\nunlike the Urnes of our Nativity, while we lay in the nether part of the\nEarth,[39] and inward vault of our Microcosme. Many Urnes are red, these\nbut of a black colour, somewhat smooth, and dully sounding, which begat\nsome doubt, whether they were burnt, or only baked in Oven or Sun:\nAccording to the ancient way, in many bricks, tiles, pots, and\ntestaceous works; and as the word _testa_ is properly to be taken, when\noccurring without addition: And chiefly intended by _Pliny_, when he\ncommendeth bricks and tiles of two years old, and to make them in the\nspring. Nor only these concealed peeces, but the open magnificence of\nAntiquity, ran much in the Artifice of Clay. Hereof the house of\n_Mausolus_ was built, thus old _Jupiter_ stood in the Capitol, and the\n_Statua_ of _Hercules_ made in the Reign of _Tarquinius Priscus_, was\nextant in _Plinies_ dayes. And such as declined burning or Funeral\nUrnes, affected Coffins of Clay, according to the mode of _Pythagoras_,\nand way preferred by _Varro_. But the spirit of great ones was above\nthese circumscriptions, affecting Copper, Silver, Gold, and _Porphyrie_\nUrnes, wherein _Severus_ lay, after a serious view and sentence on that\nwhich should contain him.[40] Some of these Urnes were thought to have\nbeen silvered over, from sparklings in several pots, with small Tinsel\nparcels; uncertain whether from the earth, or the first mixture in them.\n\n [37] _Matt._ 23.\n\n [38] Euripides.\n\n [39] _Psa._ 63.\n\n [40] +Choreseis ton anthropon, hon he oikoumene ouk echoresen.+\n Dion.\n\nAmong these Urnes we could obtain no good account of their coverings;\nonly one seemed arched over with some kinde of brickwork. Of those found\nat _Buxton_ some were covered with flints, some in other parts with\nTiles, those at _Yarmouth Caster_, were closed with _Romane_ bricks. And\nsome have proper earthen covers adapted and fitted to them. But in the\n_Homerical_ Urne of _Patroclus_, whatever was the solid Tegument, we\nfinde the immediate covering to be a purple peece of silk: And such as\nhad no covers might have the earth closely pressed into them, after\nwhich disposure were probably some of these, wherein we found the bones\nand ashes half mortered unto the sand and sides of the Urne; and some\nlong roots of Quich, or Dogs-grass wreathed about the bones.\n\nNo Lamps, included Liquors, Lachrymatories, or Tear-Bottles attended\nthese rural Urnes, either as sacred unto the _Manes_, or passionate\nexpressions of their surviving friends. While with rich flames, and\nhired teares they solemnized their Obsequies, and in the most lamented\nMonuments made one part of their Inscriptions.[41] Some finde sepulchral\nVessels containing liquors, which time hath incrassated into gellies.\nFor beside these Lachrymatories, notable Lamps, with Vessels of Oyles\nand Aromatical Liquors attended noble Ossuaries. And some yet retaining\na Vinosity[42] and spirit in them, which if any have tasted they have\nfar exceeded the Palats of Antiquity. Liquors not to be computed by\nyears of annual Magistrates, but by great conjunctions and the fatal\nperiods of Kingdoms.[43] The draughts of Consulary date, were but crude\nunto these, and _Opimian_[44] Wine but in the muste unto them.\n\n [41] Cum lacrymis posuere.\n\n [42] Lazius.\n\n [43] _About five hundred years._ Plato.\n\n [44] Vinum Opiminianum annorum centum. _Petron._\n\nIn sundry graves and Sepulchres, we meet with Rings, Coynes, and\nChalices; Ancient frugality was so severe, that they allowed no gold to\nattend the Corps, but onely that which served to fasten their teeth.[45]\nWhether the _Opaline_ stone in this Urne were burnt upon the finger of\nthe dead, or cast into the fire by some affectionate friend, it will\nconsist with either custome. But other incinerable substances were found\nso fresh, that they could feel no sindge from fire. These upon view were\njudged to be wood, but sinking in water and tried by the fire, we found\nthem to be bone or Ivory. In their hardnesse and yellow colour they most\nresembled Box, which in old expressions found the Epithete[46] of\nEternal, and perhaps in such conservatories might have passed\nuncorrupted.\n\n [45] 12. Tabul. _l. xi._ de Jure sacro. Neve aurum addito, ast quoi auro\n dentes vincti erunt, im cum illo sepelire et utere, se fraude esto.\n\n [46] _Plin._ 1. xvi. Inter +xyla asape+ numerat Theophrastus.\n\nThat Bay-leaves were found green in the Tomb of S. _Humbert_,[47] after\nan hundred and fifty yeers, was looked upon as miraculous. Remarkable it\nwas unto old Spectators, that the Cypresse of the Temple of _Diana_,\nlasted so many hundred years: The wood of the Ark and Olive Rod of\n_Aaron_ were older at the Captivity. But the Cypresse of the Ark of\n_Noah_, was the greatest vegetable Antiquity, if _Josephus_ were not\ndeceived, by some fragments of it in his dayes. To omit the Moore-logs,\nand Firre-trees found underground in some parts of _England_; the\nundated ruines of winds, flouds or earthquakes; and which in _Flanders_\nstill shew from what quarter they fell, as generally lying in the\nNorth-East position.[48]\n\n [47] Surius.\n\n [48] Gorop. Becanus in Niloscopio.\n\nBut though we found not these peeces to be Wood, according to first\napprehension, yet we missed not altogether of some woody substance; for\nthe bones were not so clearly pickt, but some coals were found amongst\nthem; A way to make wood perpetual, and a fit associat for metal,\nwhereon was laid the foundation of the great _Ephesian_ Temple, and\nwhich were made the lasting tests of old boundaries, and Landmarks;\nWhilest we look on these we admire not observations of Coals found\nfresh, after four hundred years.[49] In a long deserted habitation,[50]\neven Egge-shels have been found fresh, not tending to corruption.\n\n [49] _Of_ Beringuccio nella pyrotechnia.\n\n [50] _At_ Elmeham.\n\nIn the Monument of King _Childerick_, the Iron Reliques were found all\nrusty and crumbling into peeces. But our little Iron pins which fastened\nthe ivory works, held well together, and lost not their Magneticall\nquality, though wanting a tenacious moisture for the firmer union of\nparts, although it be hardly drawn into fusion, yet that metal soon\nsubmitteth unto rust and dissolution. In the brazen peeces we admired\nnot the duration but the freedom from rust, and ill savour; upon the\nhardest attrition, but now exposed unto the piercing Atomes of aire; in\nthe space of a few moneths, they begin to spot and betray their green\nentrals. We conceive not these Urns to have descended thus naked as they\nappear, or to have entred their graves without the old habit of flowers.\nThe Urne of _Philopoemen_ was so laden with flowers and ribbons, that\nit afforded no sight of it self. The rigid _Lycurgus_ allowed Olive and\nMyrtle. The _Athenians_ might fairely except against the practise of\n_Democritus_ to be buried up in honey; as fearing to embezzle a great\ncommodity of their Countrey, and the best of that kinde in _Europe_. But\n_Plato_ seemed too frugally politick, who allowed no larger monument\nthen would contain four Heroick verses, and designed the most barren\nground for sepulture: Though we cannot commend the goodnesse of that\nsepulchral ground, which was set at no higher rate then the mean salary\nof _Judas_. Though the earth had confounded the ashes of these\nOssuaries, yet the bones were so smartly burnt, that some thin plates of\nbrasse were found half melted among them: whereby we apprehended they\nwere not of the meanest carcasses, perfunctorily fired as sometimes in\nmilitary, and commonly in pestilence, burnings; or after the manner of\nabject corps, hudled forth and carelessly burnt, without the Esquiline\nPort at _Rome_; which was an affront continued upon _Tiberius_, while\nthey but half burnt his body,[51] and in the Amphitheatre, according to\nthe custome in notable Malefactors; whereas _Nero_ seemed not so much to\nfear his death, as that his head should be cut off and his body not\nburnt entire.\n\n [51] _Sueton._ in vita Tib. et in Amphitheatro semiustulandum, _not._\n Casaub.\n\nSome finding many fragments of sculs in these Urnes, suspected a\nmixture of bones; In none we searched was there cause of such\nconjecture, though sometimes they declined not that practise; The ashes\nof _Domitian_[52] were mingled with those of _Julia_, of _Achilles_ with\nthose of _Patroclus_: All Urnes contained not single ashes; Without\nconfused burnings they affectionately compounded their bones;\npassionately endeavouring to continue their living Unions. And when\ndistance of death denied such conjunctions, unsatisfied affections\nconceived some satisfaction to be neighbours in the grave, to lye Urne\nby Urne, and touch but in their names. And many were so curious to\ncontinue their living relations, that they contrived large, and family\nUrnes, wherein the Ashes of their nearest friends and kindred might\nsuccessively be received,[53] at least some parcels thereof, while their\ncollateral memorials lay in _minor_ vessels about them.\n\n [52] Sueton. in vita Domitian\n\n [53] _S. the most learned and worthy Mr._ M. Casaubon _upon_ Antoninus.\n\nAntiquity held too light thoughts from Objects of mortality, while some\ndrew provocatives of mirth from Anatomies,[54] and Juglers shewed tricks\nwith Skeletons. When Fidlers made not so pleasant mirth as Fencers, and\nmen could sit with quiet stomacks while hanging was plaied before\nthem.[55] Old considerations made few _memento's_ by sculs and bones\nupon their monuments. In the AEgyptian Obelisks and Hieroglyphical\nfigures, it is not easie to meet with bones. The sepulchral Lamps speak\nnothing lesse then sepulture; and in their literal draughts prove often\nobscene and antick peeces: Where we finde _D. M._[56] it is obvious to\nmeet with sacrificing _patera's_, and vessels of libation, upon old\nsepulchral Monuments. In the Jewish _Hypogaeum_[57] and subterranean Cell\nat _Rome_, was little observable beside the variety of Lamps, and\nfrequent draughts of the holy Candlestick. In authentick draughts of\n_Anthony_ and _Jerome_, we meet with thigh-bones and deaths heads; but\nthe cemiterial Cels of ancient Christians and Martyrs, were filled with\ndraughts of Scripture Stories; not declining the flourishes of Cypresse,\nPalms, and Olive; and the mystical Figures of Peacocks, Doves and Cocks.\nBut iterately affecting the pourtraits of _Enoch_, _Lazarus_, _Jonas_,\nand the vision of _Ezechiel_, as hopeful draughts, and hinting imagery\nof the Resurrection; which is the life of the grave, and sweetens our\nhabitations in the Land of _Moles_ and _Pismires_.\n\n [54] Sic erimus cuncti, _etc._ Ergo dum vivimus vivamus.\n\n [55] +Agchonen paizein.+ _A barbarous pastime at Feasts, when men\n stood upon a rolling Globe, with their necks in a Rope, and a\n knife in their hands, ready to cut it when the stone was rolled\n away, wherein if they failed, they lost their lives to the\n laughter of their spectators._ Athenaeus.\n\n [56] Diis manibus.\n\n [57] Bosio.\n\nGentile inscriptions precisely delivered the extent of mens lives,\nseldome the manner of their deaths, which history it self so often\nleaves obscure in the records of memorable persons. There is scarce any\nPhilosopher but dies twice or thrice in _Laertius_; Nor almost any life\nwithout two or three deaths in _Plutarch_; which makes the tragical ends\nof noble persons more favourably resented by compassionate Readers, who\nfinde some relief in the Election of such differences.\n\nThe certainty of death is attended with uncertainties, in time, manner,\nplaces. The variety of Monuments hath often obscured true graves: and\n_Cenotaphs_ confounded Sepulchres. For beside their real Tombs, many\nhave found honorary and empty Sepulchres. The variety of _Homers_\nMonuments made him of various Countreys. _Euripides_[58] had his Tomb in\n_Africa_, but his sepulture in _Macedonia_. And _Severus_[59] found his\nreal Sepulchre in _Rome_, but his empty grave in _Gallia_.\n\n [58] Pausan. in Atticis.\n\n [59] _Lamprid._ in vit. Alexand. Severi.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Commission of the_ Gothish _King_ Theodoric _for finding\nout sepulchrall treasure._ Cassiodor. Var. _l._ 4.]\n\nHe that lay in a golden Urne[60] eminently above the earth, was not like\nto finde the quiet of these bones. Many of these Urnes were broke by a\nvulgar discoverer in hope of inclosed treasure. The ashes of\n_Marcellus_[61] were lost above ground, upon the like account. Where\nprofit hath prompted, no age hath wanted such miners. For which the most\nbarbarous Expilators found the most civil Rhetorick. Gold once out of\nthe earth is no more due unto it; What was unreasonably committed to the\nground is reasonably resumed from it: Let Monuments and rich Fabricks,\nnot Riches adorn mens ashes. The commerce of the living is not to be\ntransferred unto the dead: It is no injustice to take that which none\ncomplaines to lose, and no man is wronged where no man is possessor.\n\n [60] _Trajanus._ Dion.\n\n [61] _Plut._ in vit. Marcelli.\n\nWhat virtue yet sleeps in this _terra damnata_ and aged cinders, were\npetty magick to experiment; These crumbling reliques and long-fired\nparticles superannate such expectations: Bones, hairs, nails, and teeth\nof the dead, were the treasures of old Sorcerers. In vain we revive such\npractices; Present superstition too visibly perpetuates the folly of our\nfore-fathers, wherein unto old Observation this Island was so compleat,\nthat it might have instructed _Persia_.[62]\n\n [62] Britannia hodie eam attonite celebrat tantis ceremoniis, ut dedisse\n Persis videri possit. _Plin. l. 29._\n\n_Plato's_ historian of the other world, lies twelve dayes incorrupted,\nwhile his soul was viewing the large stations of the dead. How to keep\nthe corps seven dayes from corruption by anointing and washing, without\nexenteration, were an hazardable peece of art, in our choisest practise.\nHow they made distinct separation of bones and ashes from fiery\nadmixture, hath found no historical solution. Though they seemed to make\na distinct collection, and overlooked not _Pyrrhus_ his toe. Some\nprovision they might make by fictile Vessels, Coverings, Tiles, or flat\nstones, upon and about the body. And in the same Field, not far from\nthese Urnes, many stones were found under ground, as also by careful\nseparation of extraneous matter, composing and raking up the burnt bones\nwith forks, observable in that notable lamp of _Galuanus_.\n_Martianus_,[63] who had the sight of the _Vas Ustrinum_, or vessel\nwherein they burnt the dead, found in the Esquiline Field at _Rome_,\nmight have afforded clearer solution. But their insatisfaction herein\nbegat that remarkable invention in the Funeral Pyres of some Princes, by\nincombustible sheets made with a texture of _Asbestos_, incremable flax,\nor Salamanders wool, which preserved their bones and ashes[64]\nincommixed.\n\n [63] Topographiae Roma ex Martiano. Erat et vas ustrinum appellatum quod\n in eo cadavera comburerenur. _Cap._ de Campo Esquilino.\n\n [64] _To be seen in_ Licet. de reconditis veterum lucernis.\n\nHow the bulk of a man should sink into so few pounds of bones and ashes,\nmay seem strange unto any who considers not its constitution, and how\nslender a mass will remain upon an open and urging fire of the carnal\ncomposition. Even bones themselves reduced into ashes, do abate a\nnotable proportion. And consisting much of a volatile salt, when that is\nfired out, make a light kind of cinders. Although their bulk be\ndisproportionable to their weight, when the heavy principle of Salt is\nfired out, and the Earth almost onely remaineth; Observable in sallow,\nwhich makes more Ashes then Oake; and discovers the common fraud of\nselling Ashes by measure, and not by ponderation.\n\nSome bones make best Skeletons,[65] some bodies quick and speediest\nashes: Who would expect a quick flame from Hydropical _Heraclitus_? The\npoisoned Souldier when his Belly brake, put out two pyres in\n_Plutarch_.[66] But in the plague of _Athens_,[67] one private pyre\nserved two or three Intruders; and the _Saracens_ burnt in large heaps,\nby the King of _Castile_,[68] shewed how little Fuel sufficeth. Though\nthe Funeral pyre of _Patroclus_ took up an hundred foot,[69] a peece of\nan old boat burnt _Pompey_; And if the burthen of _Isaac_ were\nsufficient for an holocaust, a man may carry his own pyre.\n\n [65] _Old bones according to_ Lyserus. _Those of young persons not tall\n nor fat according to_ Columbus.\n\n [66] In vita. _Gracc._\n\n [67] Thucydides.\n\n [68] Laurent. Valla.\n\n [69] +Hekatompedon entha e entha+.\n\nFrom animals are drawn good burning lights, and good medicines[70]\nagainst burning; Though the seminal humor seems of a contrary nature to\nfire, yet the body compleated proves a combustible lump, wherein fire\nfindes flame even from bones, and some fuel almost from all parts.\nThough the Metropolis[71] of humidity seems least disposed unto it,\nwhich might render the sculls of these Urnes less burned then other\nbones. But all flies or sinks before fire almost in all bodies. When the\ncommon ligament is dissolved, the attenuable parts ascend, the rest\nsubside in coal, calx or ashes.\n\n [70] Sperm ran. Alb. Ovor.\n\n [71] _The brain._ Hippocrates.\n\nTo burn the bones of the King of _Edom_[72] for Lyme, seems no\nirrational ferity; But to drink of the ashes of dead relations,[73] a\npassionate prodigality. He that hath the ashes of his friend, hath an\neverlasting treasure: where fire taketh leave, corruption slowly enters;\nIn bones well burnt, fire makes a wall against it self, experimented in\ncopels, and tests of metals, which consist of such ingredients. What the\nSun compoundeth, fire analyseth, not transmuteth. That devouring agent\nleaves almost alwayes a morsel for the Earth, whereof all things are but\na colony; and which, if time permits, the mother Element will have in\ntheir primitive mass again.\n\n [72] _Amos_ 2. 1.\n\n [73] _As_ Artemisia _of her Husband_ Mausolus.\n\nHe that looks for Urnes and old sepulchral reliques, must not seek them\nin the ruines of Temples: where no Religion anciently placed them. These\nwere found in a Field, according to ancient custome, in noble or private\nburial; the old practise of the _Canaanites_, the Family of _Abraham_,\nand the burying place of _Josua_, in the borders of his possessions;\nand also agreeable unto _Romane_ practise to bury by highwayes, whereby\ntheir Monuments were under eye: Memorials of themselves, and\n_memento's_ of mortality into living passengers; whom the Epitaphs of\ngreat ones were fain to beg to stay and look upon them. A language\nthough sometimes used, not so proper in Church-Inscriptions.[74] The\nsensible Rhetorick of the dead, to exemplarity of good life, first\nadmitted the bones of pious men, and Martyrs within Church-wals; which\nin succeeding ages crept into promiscuous practise. While _Constantine_\nwas peculiarly favoured to be admitted unto the Church Porch; and the\nfirst thus buried in _England_ was in the dayes of _Cuthred_.\n\n [74] Siste viator.\n\nChristians dispute how their bodies should lye in the grave.[75] In\nurnal enterrment they clearly escaped this Controversie: Though we\ndecline the Religious consideration, yet in cemiterial and narrower\nburying places, to avoid confusion and crosse position, a certain\nposture were to be admitted; which even Pagan civility observed, The\n_Persians_ lay North and South, The _Megarians_ and _Phoenicians_\nplaced their heads to the East: The _Athenians_, some think, towards the\nWest, which Christians still retain. And _Beda_ will have it to be the\nposture of our Saviour. That he was crucified with his face towards the\nWest, we will not contend with tradition and probable account; But we\napplaud not the hand of the Painter, in exalting his Cross so high above\nthose on either side; since hereof we finde no authentick account in\nhistory, and even the crosses found by _Helena_ pretend no such\ndistinction from longitude or dimension.\n\n [75] Kirckmannus de funer.\n\nTo be gnawd out of our graves, to have our sculs made drinking-bowls,\nand our bones turned into Pipes, to delight and sport our Enemies, are\nTragical abominations, escaped in burning Burials.\n\nUrnal enterrments, and burnt Reliques lye not in fear of worms, or to be\nan heritage for Serpents; In carnal sepulture, corruptions seem peculiar\nunto parts, and some speak of snakes out of the spinal marrow. But while\nwe suppose common wormes in graves, 'tis not easie to finde any there;\nfew in Church-yards above a foot deep, fewer or none in Churches, though\nin fresh decayed bodies. Teeth, bones, and hair, give the most lasting\ndefiance to corruption. In an Hydropical body ten years buried in a\nChurch yard, we met with a fat concretion, where the nitre of the Earth,\nand the salt and lixivious liquor of the body, had coagulated large\nlumps of fat, into the consistence of the hardest castle-soap; whereof\npart remaineth with us. After a battle with the _Persians_, the _Romane_\nCorps decayed in few dayes, while the _Persian_ bodies remained dry and\nuncorrupted. Bodies in the same ground do not uniformly dissolve, nor\nbones equally moulder; whereof in the opprobrious disease we expect no\nlong duration. The body of the Marquess of _Dorset_ seemed sound and\nhandsomely cereclothed, that after seventy eight years was found\nuncorrupted.[76] Common Tombs preserve not beyond powder: A firmer\nconsistence and compage of parts might be expected from Arefaction, deep\nburial or Charcoal. The greatest Antiquities of mortal bodies may remain\nin petrified bones, whereof, though we take not in the pillar of _Lots_\nwife, or Metamorphosis of _Ortelius_,[77] some may be older then\nPyramids, in the petrified Reliques of the general inundation. When\n_Alexander_ opened the Tomb of _Cyrus_, the remaining bones discovered\nhis proportion, whereof urnal fragments afford but a bad conjecture, and\nhave this disadvantage of grave enterrments, that they leave us ignorant\nof most personal discoveries. For since bones afford not only rectitude\nand stability, but figure unto the body; It is no impossible Physiognomy\nto conjecture at fleshly appendencies; and after what shape the muscles\nand carnous parts might hang in their full consistences. A full spread\n_Cariola_ shews a well-shaped horse behinde, handsome formed sculls,\ngive some analogy of flesh resemblance. A critical view of bones makes a\ngood distinction of sexes. Even colour is not beyond conjecture, since\nit is hard to be deceived in the distinction of _Negro's_ sculls.\n_Dantes_[78] Characters are to be found in sculls as well as faces.\n_Hercules_ is not onely known by his foot. Other parts make out their\ncomproportions, and inferences upon whole, or parts. And since the\ndimensions of the head measure the whole body, and the figure thereof\ngives conjecture of the principal faculties; Physiognomy out-lives our\nselves, and ends not in our graves.\n\n [76] _Of_ Thomas _Marquesse of_ Dorset, _whose body being buried\n 1530, was 1608 upon the cutting open of the Cerecloth found perfect\n and nothing corrupted, the flesh not hardened, but in colour,\n proportion, and softnesse like an ordinary corps newly to be\n interred._ Burtons _descript. of_ Leicestershire.\n\n [77] _In his Map of_ Russia.\n\n [78] _The Poet_ Dante _in his view of Purgatory, found gluttons so\n meagre, and extenuated, that he conceived them to have been in the\n siege of_ Jerusalem, _and that it was easie to have discovered_\n Homo _or_ Omo _in their faces: M being made by the two lines of\n their cheeks, arching over the Eye-brows to the nose, and their\n sunk eyes making O O which makes up_ Omo. Parean l'occhiaie\n anella senza gemme che nel viso de gli huomini legge huomo\n Ben'hauria quiui conosciuto l'emme.\n\nSevere contemplators observing these lasting reliques, may think them\ngood monuments of persons past, little advantage to future beings. And\nconsidering that power which subdueth all things unto it self, that can\nresume the scattered Atomes, or identifie out of any thing, conceive it\nsuperfluous to expect a resurrection out of Reliques. But the soul\nsubsisting, other matter clothed with due accidents, may salve the\nindividuality: Yet the Saints we observe arose from graves and\nmonuments, about the holy City. Some think the ancient Patriarchs so\nearnestly desired to lay their bones in _Canaan_, as hoping to make a\npart of that Resurrection, and though thirty miles from Mount _Calvary_,\nat least to lie in that Region, which should produce the first-fruits of\nthe dead. And if according to learned conjecture, the bodies of men\nshall rise where their greatest Reliques remain, many are not like to\nerre in the Topography of their Resurrection, though their bones or\nbodies be after translated by Angels into the field of _Ezechiels_\nvision, or as some will order it, into the Valley of Judgement, or\n_Jehosaphat_.[79]\n\n [79] Tirin. _in Ezek._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\n\nChristians have handsomely glossed the deformity of death, by careful\nconsideration of the body, and civil rites which take off brutal\nterminations. And though they conceived all reparable by a resurrection,\ncast not off all care of enterrment. And since the ashes of Sacrifices\nburnt upon the Altar of God, were carefully carried out by the Priests,\nand deposed in a clean field; since they acknowledged their bodies to be\nthe lodging of Christ, and temples of the holy Ghost, they devolved not\nall upon the sufficiency of soul existence; and therefore with long\nservices and full solemnities concluded their last Exequies, wherein[80]\nto all distinctions the Greek devotion seems most pathetically\nceremonious.\n\n [80] Rituale Graecum opera J. Goar in officio exequiarum.\n\nChristian invention hath chiefly driven at Rites, which speak hopes of\nanother life, and hints of a Resurrection. And if the ancient Gentiles\nheld not the immortality of their better part, and some subsistence\nafter death; in several rites, customes, actions and expressions, they\ncontradicted their own opinions: wherein _Democritus_ went high, even to\nthe thought of a resurrection,[81] as scoffingly recorded by _Pliny_.\nWhat can be more express than the expression of _Phocyllides_?[82] Or\nwho would expect from _Lucretius_[83] a sentence of _Ecclesiastes_?\nBefore _Plato_ could speak, the soul had wings in _Homer_, which fell\nnot, but flew out of the body into the mansions of the dead; who also\nobserved that handsome distinction of _Demas_ and _Soma_, for the body\nconjoyned to the soul and body separated from it. _Lucian_ spoke much\ntruth in jest, when he said, that part of _Hercules_ which proceeded\nfrom _Alchmena_ perished, that from _Jupiter_ remained immortal. Thus\n_Socrates_[84] was content that his friends should bury his body, so\nthey would not think they buried _Socrates_, and regarding only his\nimmortal part, was indifferent to be burnt or buried. From such\nConsiderations _Diogenes_ might contemn Sepulture. And being satisfied\nthat the soul could not perish, grow careless of corporal enterrment.\nThe _Stoicks_ who thought the souls of wise men had their habitation\nabout the _Moon_, might make slight account of subterraneous deposition;\nwhereas the _Pythagorians_ and transcorporating Philosophers, who were\nto be often buried, held great care of their enterrment. And the\nPlatonicks rejected not a due care of the grave, though they put their\nashes to unreasonable expectations, in their tedious term of return and\nlong set revolution.\n\n [81] Similis reviviscendi promissa Democrito vanitas, qui non revixit\n ipse. Quae, malum, ista dementia est; iterari vitam morte. _Plin. l.\n 7 c. 55._\n\n [82] +Kai tacha d'ek gaies elpizomen hes phaos elthein leipsan\n apoichomenon.+\n\n [83] Cedit enim retro de terra quod fuit ante In terram, _etc._\n _Lucret._\n\n [84] Plato _in_ Phaed.\n\nMen have lost their reason in nothing so much as their Religion, wherein\nstones and clouts make Martyrs; and since the Religion of one seems\nmadness unto another, to afford an account or rational of old Rites,\nrequires no rigid Reader; That they kindled the pyre aversly, or turning\ntheir face from it, was an handsome Symbole of unwilling ministration;\nThat they washed their bones with wine and milk, that the mother wrapt\nthem in Linnen, and dryed them in her bosome, the first fostering part,\nand place of their nourishment; That they opened their eyes towards\nheaven, before they kindled the fire, as the place of their hopes or\noriginal, were no improper Ceremonies. Their last valediction[85] thrice\nuttered by the attendants was also very solemn, and somewhat answered by\nChristians, who thought it too little, if they threw not the earth\nthrice upon the enterred body. That in strewing their Tombs the\n_Romanes_ affected the Rose, the Greeks _Amaranthus_ and myrtle; that\nthe Funeral pyre consisted of sweet fuel, Cypress, Firre, Larix, Yewe,\nand Trees perpetually verdant, lay silent expressions of their surviving\nhopes: Wherein Christians which deck their Coffins with Bays have found\na more elegant Embleme. For that tree seeming dead, will restore it self\nfrom the root, and its dry and exuccous leaves resume their verdure\nagain; which if we mistake not, we have also observed in Furze. Whether\nthe planting of Yewe in Churchyards, hold not its original from ancient\nFuneral Rites, or as an Embleme of Resurrection from its perpetual\nverdure, may also admit conjecture.\n\n [85] Vale, vale, vale, nos te ordine quo natura permittet sequemur.\n\nThey made use of Musick to excite or quiet the affections of their\nfriends, according to different harmonies. But the secret and symbolical\nhint was the harmonical nature of the soul; which delivered from the\nbody, went again to enjoy the primitive harmony of heaven, from whence\nit first descended; which according to its progresse traced by\nantiquity, came down by _Cancer_, and ascended by _Capricornus_.\n\nThey burnt not children before their teeth appeared, as apprehending\ntheir bodies too tender a morsel for fire, and that their gristly bones\nwould scarce leave separable reliques after the pyral combustion. That\nthey kindled not fire in their houses for some dayes after, was a strict\nmemorial of the late afflicting fire. And mourning without hope, they\nhad an happy fraud against excessive lamentation, by a common opinion\nthat deep sorrows disturbed their ghosts.[86]\n\n [86] Tu manes ne laede meos.\n\nThat they buried their dead on their backs, or in a supine position,\nseems agreeable unto profound sleep, and common posture of dying;\ncontrary to the most natural way of birth; Nor unlike our pendulous\nposture, in the doubtful state of the womb. _Diogenes_ was singular, who\npreferred a prone situation in the grave, and some Christians[87] like\nneither, who decline the figure of rest, and make choice of an erect\nposture.\n\n [87] Russians, _etc._\n\nThat they carried them out of the world with their feet forward, not\ninconsonant unto reason: As contrary unto the native posture of man, and\nhis production first into it. And also agreeable unto their opinions,\nwhile they bid adieu unto the world, not to look again upon it; whereas\n_Mahometans_ who think to return to a delightful life again, are carried\nforth with their heads forward, and looking towards their houses.\n\nThey closed their eyes as parts which first die or first discover the\nsad effects of death. But their iterated clamations to excitate their\ndying or dead friends, or revoke them unto life again, was a vanity of\naffection; as not presumably ignorant of the critical tests of death, by\napposition of feathers, glasses, and reflexion of figures, which dead\neyes represent not; which however not strictly verifiable in fresh and\nwarm _cadavers_, could hardly elude the test, in corps of four or five\ndayes.\n\nThat they suck'd in the last breath of their expiring friends, was\nsurely a practice of no medicall institution, but a loose opinion that\nthe soul passed out that way, and a fondnesse of affection from some\n_Pythagoricall_[88] foundation, that the spirit of one body passed into\nanother; which they wished might be their own.\n\n [88] Francesco Perucci Pompe funebr.\n\nThat they powred oyle upon the pyre, was a tolerable practise, while\nthe intention rested in facilitating the accension; But to place good\n_Omens_ in the quick and speedy burning, to sacrifice unto the winds for\na dispatch in this office, was a low form of superstition.\n\nThe _Archimime_ or _Jester_ attending the Funeral train, and imitating\nthe speeches, gesture, and manners of the deceased, was too light for\nsuch solemnities, contradicting their funerall Orations, and dolefull\nrites of the grave.\n\nThat they buried a peece of money with them as a Fee of the _Elysian\nFerriman_, was a practise full of folly. But the ancient custome of\nplacing coynes in considerable Urnes, and the present practice of\nburying medals in the Noble Foundations of _Europe_, are laudable wayes\nof historicall discoveries, in actions, persons, Chronologies; and\nposterity will applaud them.\n\nWe examine not the old Laws of Sepulture, exempting certain persons from\nburial or burning. But hereby we apprehend that these were not the bones\nof persons Planet-struck or burnt with fire from Heaven: No Reliques of\nTraitors to their Countrey, Self-killers, or Sacrilegious Malefactors;\nPersons in old apprehension unworthy of the _earth_; condemned unto the\n_Tartara's_ of Hell, and bottomlesse pit of _Pluto_, from whence there\nwas no redemption.\n\nNor were only many customes questionable in order to their Obsequies,\nbut also sundry practises, fictions, and conceptions, discordant or\nobscure, of their state and future beings; whether unto eight or ten\nbodies of men to adde one of a woman, as being more inflammable, and\nunctuously constituted for the better pyrall combustion, were any\nrational practise: Or whether the complaint of _Perianders_ Wife be\ntolerable, that wanting her Funerall burning she suffered intolerable\ncold in Hell, according to the constitution of the infernal house of\n_Pluto_, wherein cold makes a great part of their tortures; it cannot\npasse without some question.\n\nWhy the Female Ghosts appear unto _Ulysses_, before the _Heroes_ and\nmasculine spirits? Why the _Psyche_ or soul of _Tiresias_ is of the\nmasculine gender; who being blinde on earth sees more then all the rest\nin hell; Why the Funeral Suppers consisted of Egges, Beans, Smallage,\nand Lettuce, since the dead are made to eat _Asphodels_ about the\n_Elysian_ medows? Why since there is no Sacrifice acceptable, nor any\npropitiation for the Covenant of the grave: men set up the Deity of\n_Morta_, and fruitlesly adored Divinities without ears? it cannot escape\nsome doubt.\n\nThe dead seem all alive in the humane _Hades_ of _Homer_, yet cannot we\nspeak, prophesie, or know the living, except they drink blood, wherein\nis the life of man. And therefore the souls of _Penelope's_ Paramours\nconducted by _Mercury_ chiriped like bats, and those which followed\n_Hercules_ made a noise but like a flock of birds.\n\nThe departed spirits know things past and to come, yet are ignorant of\nthings present. _Agememnon_ fortels what should happen unto _Ulysses_,\nyet ignorantly enquires what is become of his own Son. The ghosts are\nafraid of swords in _Homer_, yet _Sybilla_ tells _AEneas_ in _Virgil_,\nthe thin habit of spirits was beyond the force of weapons. The spirits\nput off their malice with their bodies, and _Caesar_ and _Pompey_ accord\nin Latine Hell, yet _Ajax_ in _Homer_ endures not a conference with\n_Ulysses_: And _Deiphobus_ appears all mangled in _Virgils_ Ghosts, yet\nwe meet with perfect shadows among the wounded ghosts of _Homer_.\n\nSince _Charon_ in _Lucian_ applauds his condition among the dead,\nwhether it be handsomely said of _Achilles_, that living contemner of\ndeath, that he had rather be a Plowmans servant then Emperour of the\ndead? How _Hercules_ his soul is in hell, and yet in heaven, and\n_Julius_ his soul in a Star, yet seen by _AEneas_ in hell, except the\nGhosts were but images and shadows of the soul, received in higher\nmansions, according to the ancient division of body, soul, and image or\n_simulachrum_ of them both. The particulars of future beings must needs\nbe dark unto ancient Theories, which Christian Philosophy yet determines\nbut in a Cloud of opinions. A Dialogue between two Infants in the womb\nconcerning the state of this world, might handsomly illustrate our\nignorance of the next, whereof methinks we yet discourse in _Platoes_\ndenne, and are but _Embryon_ Philosophers.\n\n_Pythagoras_ escapes in the fabulous hell of _Dante_,[89] among that\nswarm of Philosophers, wherein whilest we meet with _Plato_ and\n_Socrates_, _Cato_ is to be found in no lower place then Purgatory.\nAmong all the set, _Epicurus_ is most considerable, whom men make honest\nwithout an _Elyzium_, who contemned life without encouragement of\nimmortality, and making nothing after death, yet made nothing of the\nKing of terrours.\n\n [89] Del inferno. _cant. 4._\n\nWere the happinesse of next world as closely apprehended as the\nfelicities of this, it were a martyrdome to live; and unto such as\nconsider none hereafter, it must be more then death to die, which makes\nus amazed at those audacities, that durst be nothing, and return into\ntheir _Chaos_ again. Certainly such spirits as could contemn death, when\nthey expected no better being after, would have scorned to live had they\nknown any. And therefore we applaud not the judgment of _Machiavel_,\nthat Christianity makes men cowards, or that with the confidence of but\nhalf dying, the dispised virtues of patience and humility, have abased\nthe spirits of men, which Pagan principles exalted, but rather regulated\nthe wildenesse of audacities, in the attempts, grounds, and eternal\nsequels of death; wherein men of the boldest spirits are often\nprodigiously temerarious. Nor can we extenuate valour of ancient\nMartyrs, who contemned death in the uncomfortable scene of their lives,\nand in their decrepit Martyrdomes did probably lose not many moneths of\ntheir dayes, or parted with life when it was scarce worth the living.\nFor (beside that long time past holds no consideration unto a slender\ntime to come) they had no small disadvantage from the constitution of\nold age, which naturally makes men fearful; And complexionally\nsuperannuated from the bold and couragious thoughts of youth and fervent\nyears. But the contempt of death from corporal animosity, promoteth not\nour felicity. They may set in the _Orchestra_, and noblest Seats of\nHeaven, who have held up shaking hands in the fire, and humanely\ncontended for glory.\n\nMean while _Epicurus_ lies deep in _Dante's_ hell, wherin we meet with\nTombs enclosing souls which denied their immortalities. But whether the\nvirtuous heathen, who lived better then he spake, or erring in the\nprinciples of himself, yet lived above Philosophers of more specious\nMaximes, lye so deep as he is placed; at least so low as not to rise\nagainst Christians, who beleeving or knowing that truth, have lastingly\ndenied it in their practise and conversation, were a quaery too sad to\ninsist on.\n\nBut all or most apprehensions rested in Opinions of some future being,\nwhich ignorantly or coldly beleeved, beget those perverted conceptions,\nCeremonies, Sayings, which Christians pity or laugh at. Happy are they,\nwhich live not in that disadvantage of time, when men could say little\nfor futurity, but from reason. Whereby the noblest mindes fell often\nupon doubtful deaths, and melancholly Dissolutions; With these hopes\n_Socrates_ warmed his doubtful spirits, against that cold potion, and\n_Cato_ before he durst give the fatal stroak, spent part of the night in\nreading the immortality of _Plato_, thereby confirming his wavering hand\nunto the animosity of that attempt.\n\nIt is the heaviest stone that melancholy can throw at a man, to tell him\nhe is at the end of his nature; or that there is no further state to\ncome, unto which this seemes progressional, and otherwise made in vaine;\nWithout this accomplishment the natural expectation and desire of such a\nstate, were but a fallacy in nature; unsatisfied Considerators would\nquarrel the justice of their constitutions, and rest content that _Adam_\nhad fallen lower; whereby by knowing no other Original, and deeper\nignorance of themselves, they might have enjoyed the happinesse of\ninferiour Creatures; who in tranquillity possess their Constitutions, as\nhaving not the apprehension to deplore their own natures. And being\nframed below the circumference of these hopes, or cognition of better\nbeing, the wisedom of God hath necessitated their Contentment: But the\nsuperiour ingredient and obscured part of our selves, whereto all\npresent felicities afford no resting contentment, will be able at last\nto tell us we are more then our present selves; and evacuate such hopes\nin the fruition of their own accomplishments.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\n\nNow since these dead bones have already out-lasted the living ones of\n_Methuselah_, and in a yard under ground, and thin walls of clay,\nout-worn all the strong and specious buildings above it; and quietly\nrested under the drums and tramplings of three conquests; What Prince\ncan promise such diuturnity unto his Reliques, or might not gladly say,\n\n _Sic ego componi versus in ossa velim._[90]\n\n [90] Tibullus.\n\nTime which antiquates Antiquities, and hath an art to make dust of all\nthings, hath yet spared these _minor_ Monuments. In vain we hope to be\nknown by open and visible conservatories, when to be unknown was the\nmeans of their continuation and obscurity their protection: If they dyed\nby violent hands, and were thrust into their Urnes, these bones become\nconsiderable, and some old Philosophers would honour them,[91] whose\nsoules they conceived most pure, which were thus snatched from their\nbodies; and to retain a stronger propension unto them: whereas they\nweariedly left a languishing corps, and with faint desires of reunion.\nIf they fell by long and aged decay, yet wrapt up in the bundle of time,\nthey fall into indistinction, and make but one blot with Infants. If we\nbegin to die when we live, and long life be but a prolongation of death;\nour life is a sad composition; we live with death, and die not in a\nmoment. How many pulses made up the life of _Methuselah_, were work for\n_Archimedes_: Common Counters sum up the life of _Moses_ his man.[92]\nOur dayes become considerable like petty sums by minute accumulations;\nwhere numerous fractions make up but small round numbers; and our dayes\nof a span long make not one little finger.[93]\n\n [91] Oracula Chaldaica cum scholiis Pselli et Phethonis. +Bie liponton\n soma psychai katharotatai+. Vi corpus relinquentium animae\n purissimae.\n\n [92] _In the Psalme of_ Moses.\n\n [93] _According to the ancient Arithmetick of the hand wherein the\n little finger of the right hand contracted, signified an\n hundred._ Pierius in Hieroglyph.\n\nIf the nearnesse of our last necessity, brought a nearer conformity\nunto it, there were a happinesse in hoary hairs, and no calamity in half\nsenses. But the long habit of living indisposeth us for dying; When\nAvarice makes us the sport of death; When even _David_ grew politickly\ncruel; and _Solomon_ could hardly be said to be the wisest of men. But\nmany are to early old, and before the date of age. Adversity stretcheth\nour dayes, misery makes _Alcmenas_ nights,[94] and time hath no wings\nunto it. But the most tedious being is that which can unwish it self,\ncontent to be nothing, or never to have been, which was beyond the\n_male_-content of _Job_, who cursed not the day of his life, but his\nNativity; Content to have so far been, as to have a title to future\nbeing; Although he had lived here but in an hidden state of life, and as\nit were an abortion.\n\n [94] _One night as long as three._\n\n[Sidenote: _The puzling questions of_ Tiberius _unto Grammarians.\nMarcel. Donatus in Suet._ +Klyta ethnea nekron+ Hom. Job.]\n\nWhat Song the _Syrens_ sang, or what name _Achilles_ assumed when he hid\nhimself among women, though puzling questions are not beyond all\nconjecture. What time the persons of these Ossuaries entred the famous\nNations of the dead, and slept with Princes and Counsellors, might admit\na wide solution. But who were the proprietaries of these bones, or what\nbodies these ashes made up, were a question above Antiquarism. Not to be\nresolved by man, nor easily perhaps by spirits, except we consult the\nProvincial Guardians, or tutelary Observators. Had they made as good\nprovision for their names, as they have done for their Reliques, they\nhad not so grosly erred in the art of perpetuation. But to subsist in\nbones, and be but Pyramidally extant, is a fallacy in duration. Vain\nashes, which in the oblivion of names, persons, times, and sexes, have\nfound unto themselves a fruitlesse continuation, and only arise unto\nlate posterity, as Emblemes of mortal vanities; Antidotes against pride,\nvainglory, and madding vices. Pagan vain glories which thought the world\nmight last for ever, had encouragement for ambition, and finding no\n_Atropos_ unto the immortality of their Names, were never dampt with the\nnecessity of oblivion. Even old ambitions had the advantage of ours, in\nthe attempts of their vain-glories, who acting early, and before the\nprobable Meridian of time, have by this time found great accomplishment\nof their designes, whereby the ancient _Heroes_ have already out-lasted\ntheir Monuments, and Mechanical preservations. But in this latter Scene\nof time we cannot expect such Mummies unto our memories, when ambition\nmay fear the Prophecy of _Elias_,[95] and _Charles_ the fift can never\nhope to live within two _Methusela's_ of _Hector_.[96]\n\n [95] _That the world may last but six thousand years._\n\n [96] _Hectors fame lasting above two lives of_ Methuselah, _before that\n famous Prince was extant._\n\nAnd therefore restlesse inquietude for the diuturnity of our memories\nunto present considerations, seemes a vanity almost out of date, and\nsuperannuated peece of folly. We cannot hope to live so long in our\nnames, as some have done in their persons, one face of _Janus_ holds no\nproportion to the other. 'Tis to late to be ambitious. The great\nmutations of the world are acted, or time may be too short for our\ndesignes. To extend our memories by Monuments, whose death we dayly pray\nfor, and whose duration we cannot hope, without injury to our\nexpectations, in the advent of the last day, were a contradiction to our\nbeliefs. We whose generations are ordained in this setting part of time,\nare providentially taken off from such imaginations. And being\nnecessitated to eye the remaining particle of futurity, are naturally\nconstituted unto thoughts of the next world, and cannot excusably\ndecline the consideration of that duration, which maketh Pyramids\npillars of snow, and all that's past a moment.\n\nCircles and right lines limit and close all bodies, and the mortal\nright-lined-circle[97] must conclude and shut up all. There is no\nantidote against the _Opium_ of time, which temporally considereth all\nthings; Our Fathers finde their graves in our short memories, and sadly\ntell us how we may be buried in our Survivors. Grave-stones tell truth\nscarce fourty yeers:[98] Generations passe while some trees stand, and\nold Families last not three Oakes. To be read by bare inscriptions like\nmany in _Gruter_,[99] to hope for Eternity by AEnigmatical Epithetes, or\nfirst letters of our names, to be studied by Antiquaries, who we were,\nand have new Names given us like many of the Mummies, are cold\nconsolations unto the Students of perpetuity, even by everlasting\nLanguages.\n\n [97] +Theta+ _The character of death._\n\n [98] _Old ones being taken up, and other bodies laid under them._\n\n [99] Gruteri Inscriptiones Antiquae\n\nTo be content that times to come should only know there was such a man,\nnot caring whether they knew more of him, was a frigid ambition in\n_Cardan_:[100] disparaging his horoscopal inclination and judgement of\nhimself, who cares to subsist like _Hippocrates_ Patients, or _Achilles_\nhorses in _Homer_, under naked nominations, without deserts and noble\nacts, which are the balsame of our memories, the _Entelechia_ and soul\nof our subsistences. To be namelesse in worthy deeds exceeds an infamous\nhistory. The _Canaanitish_ woman lives more happily without a name, then\n_Herodias_ with one. And who had not rather have been the good theef,\nthen _Pilate_?\n\n [100] Cuperem notum esse quod sim, non opto ut sciatur qualis sim.\n _Card._ in vita propria.\n\nBut the iniquity of oblivion blindly scattereth her poppy, and deals\nwith the memory of men without distinction to merit of perpetuity. Who\ncan but pity the founder of the Pyramids? _Herostratus_ lives that burnt\nthe Temple of _Diana_, he is almost lost that built it; Time hath spared\nthe Epitaph of _Adrians_ horse, confounded that of himself. In vain we\ncompute our felicities by the advantage of our good names, since bad\nhave equal durations; and _Thersites_ is like to live as long as\n_Agamemnon_. Who knows whether the best of men be known? or whether\nthere be not more remarkable persons forgot, then any that stand\nremembred in the known account of time? Without the favour of the\neverlasting Register the first man had been as unknown as the last, and\n_Methuselahs_ long life had been his only Chronicle.\n\nOblivion is not to be hired: The greater part must be content to be as\nthough they had not been, to be found in the register of God, not in the\nrecord of man. Twenty seven names make up the first story, and the\nrecorded names ever since contain not one living Century. The number of\nthe dead long exceedeth all that shall live. The night of time far\nsurpasseth the day, and who knows when was the AEquinox? Every houre\naddes unto that current Arithmetique, which scarce stands one moment.\nAnd since death must be the _Lucina_ of life, and even Pagans could\ndoubt whether thus to live, were to die; Since our longest Sun sets at\nright descensions, and makes but winter arches, and therefore it cannot\nbe long before we lie down in darknesse, and have our light in ashes;\nSince the brother of death daily haunts us with dying _memento's_, and\ntime that grows old it self, bids us hope no long duration: Diuturnity\nis a dream and folly of expectation.\n\nDarknesse and light divide the course of time, and oblivion shares with\nmemory, a great part even of our living beings; we slightly remember our\nfelicities, and the smartest stroaks of affliction leave but short smart\nupon us. Sense endureth no extremities, and sorrows destroy us or\nthemselves. To weep into stones are fables. Afflictions induce\ncallosities, miseries are slippery, or fall like snow upon us, which\nnotwithstanding is no stupidity. To be ignorant of evils to come, and\nforgetful of evils past, is merciful provision in nature, whereby we\ndigest the mixture of our few and evil dayes, and our delivered senses\nnot relapsing into cutting remembrances, our sorrows are not kept raw by\nthe edge of repetitions. A great part of Antiquity contented their hopes\nof subsistency with a transmigration of their souls. A good way to\ncontinue their memories, while having the advantage of plural\nsuccessions, they could not but act something remarkable in such variety\nof beings, and enjoying the fame of their passed selves, make\naccumulation of glory unto their last durations. Others rather then be\nlost in the uncomfortable night of nothing, were content to recede into\nthe common being, and make one particle of the publick soul of all\nthings, which was no more then to return into their unknown and divine\nOriginal again. AEgyptian ingenuity was more unsatisfied, contriving\ntheir bodies in sweet consistences, to attend the return of their souls.\nBut all was vanity, feeding the winde,[101] and folly. The AEgyptian\nMummies, which _Cambyses_ or time hath spared, avarice now consumeth.\nMummie is become Merchandise, _Mizraim_ cures wounds, and _Pharaoh_ is\nsold for balsoms.\n\n [101] Omnia vanitas et pastio venti, +nome anemou, boskesis+ ut olim\n Aquila et Symmachus.\n\n _V. Drus._ Eccles.\n\nIn vain do individuals hope for immortality, or any patent from\noblivion, in preservations below the Moon: Men have been deceived even\nin their flatteries above the Sun, and studied conceits to perpetuate\ntheir names in heaven. The various Cosmography of that part hath already\nvaried the names of contrived constellations; _Nimrod_ is lost in\n_Orion_, and _Osyris_ in the Dogge-starre. While we look for\nincorruption in the heavens, we finde they are but like the Earth;\nDurable in their main bodies, alterable in their parts: whereof beside\nComets and new Stars, perspectives begin to tell tales. And the spots\nthat wander about the Sun, with _Phaetons_ favour, would make clear\nconviction.\n\nThere is nothing strictly immortal, but immortality; whatever hath no\nbeginning may be confident of no end. All others have a dependent being,\nand within the reach of destruction, which is the peculiar of that\nnecessary essence that cannot destroy it self; And the highest strain of\nomnipotency to be so powerfully constituted, as not to suffer even from\nthe power of it self. But the sufficiency of Christian Immortality\nfrustrates all earthly glory, and the quality of either state after\ndeath makes a folly of posthumous memory. God who can only destroy our\nsouls, and hath assured our resurrection, either of our bodies or names\nhath directly promised no duration. Wherein there is so much of chance\nthat the boldest Expectants have found unhappy frustration; and to hold\nlong subsistence, seems but a scape in oblivion. But man is a Noble\nAnimal, splendid in ashes, and pompous in the grave, solemnizing\nNativities and Deaths with equal lustre, nor omitting Ceremonies of\nbravery, in the infamy of his nature.\n\nLife is a pure flame, and we live by an invisible Sun within us. A\nsmall fire sufficeth for life, great flames seemed too little after\ndeath, while men vainly affected precious pyres, and burn like\n_Sardanapalus_, but the wisedom of funeral Laws found the folly of\nprodigal blazes, and reduced undoing fires, unto the rule of sober\nobsequies, wherein few could be so mean as not to provide wood, pitch, a\nmourner, and an Urne.\n\nFive Languages secured not the Epitaph of _Gordianus;_ The man of God\nlives longer without a Tomb then any by one, invisibly interred by\nAngels, and adjudged to obscurity, though not without some marks\ndirecting humane discovery. _Enoch_ and _Elias_ without either tomb or\nburial, in an anomalous state of being, are the great Examples of\nperpetuity, in their long and living memory, in strict account being\nstill on this side death, and having a late part yet to act upon this\nstage of earth. If in the decretory term of the world we shall not all\ndie but be changed, according to received translation; the last day will\nmake but few graves; at least quick Resurrections will anticipate\nlasting Sepultures; Some Graves will be opened before they be quite\nclosed, and _Lazarus_ be no wonder. When many that feared to die shall\ngroan that they can die but once, the dismal state is the second and\nliving death, when life puts despair on the damned; when men shall wish\nthe coverings of Mountaines, not of Monuments, and annihilation shall be\ncourted.\n\nWhile some have studied Monuments, others have studiously declined them:\nand some have been so vainly boisterous, that they durst not acknowledge\ntheir Graves; wherein _Alaricus_[102] seems most subtle, who had a Rever\nturned to hide his bones at the bottome. Even _Sylla_ that thought\nhimself safe in his Urne, could not prevent revenging tongues, and\nstones thrown at his Monument. Happy are they whom privacy makes\ninnocent, who deal so with men in this world, that they are not afraid\nto meet them in the next, who when they die, make no commotion among the\ndead, and are not toucht with that poeticall taunt of _Isaiah_.[103]\n\n [102] Jornandes de rebus Geticis.\n\n [103] _Isa._ 14.\n\n_Pyramids_, _Arches_, _Obelisks_, were but the irregularities of\nvain-glory, and wilde enormities of ancient magnanimity. But the most\nmagnanimous resolution rests in the Christian Religion, which trampleth\nupon pride, and sets on the neck of ambition, humbly pursuing that\ninfallible perpetuity, unto which all others must diminish their\ndiameters and be poorly seen in Angles of contingency.[104]\n\n [104] Angulus contingentiae, _the least of Angles_.\n\nPious spirits who passed their dayes in raptures of futurity, made\nlittle more of this world, then the world that was before it, while they\nlay obscure in the Chaos of preordination, and night of their\nfore-beings. And if any have been so happy as truly to understand\nChristian annihilation, extasis, exolution, liquefaction,\ntransformation, the kisse of the Spouse, gustation of God, and\ningression into the divine shadow, they have already had an handsome\nanticipation of heaven; the glory of the world is surely over, and the\nearth in ashes unto them.\n\nTo subsist in lasting Monuments, to live in their productions, to exist\nin their names, and praedicament of _Chymera's_, was large satisfaction\nunto old expectations and made one part of their _Elyziums_. But all\nthis is nothing in the Metaphysicks of true belief. To live indeed is to\nbe again our selves, which being not only an hope but an evidence in\nnoble beleevers; 'Tis all one to lie in St. _Innocents_\nChurch-yard,[105] as in the Sands of _AEgypt_: Ready to be any thing, in\nthe extasie of being ever, and as content with six foot as the Moles of\n_Adrianus_.[106]\n\n [105] _In_ Paris _where bodies soon consume._\n\n [106] _A stately_ Mausoleum _or sepulchral pyle built by_ Adrianus _in_\n Rome, _where now standeth the Castle of_ St. Angelo.\n\n Lucan\n\n ----_Tabesne cadavera solvat\n An rogus haud refert._----\n\n\n\n\n THE GARDEN OF CYRUS\n OR, THE QUINCUNCIAL, LOZENGE\n OR NET-WORK PLANTATIONS OF\n THE ANCIENTS, ARTIFICIALLY\n NATURALLY, MYSTICALLY\n CONSIDERED\n\n BY\n\n THOMAS BROWN D. OF PHYSICK\n\n Printed in the Year, 1658\n\n[Illustration: _Quid Quincunce speciosius, qui, in quam cunq; partem\nspectaueris, rectus est. Quintilian;_//]\n\n\n\n\nTHE GARDEN OF CYRUS\n\nOr, The Quincuncial, Lozenge, or Net-work Plantations of the Ancients,\nArtificially, Naturally, Mystically considered.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\n\nThat _Vulcan_ gave arrows unto _Apollo_ and _Diana_ the fourth day after\ntheir Nativities, according to Gentile Theology, may passe for no blinde\napprehension of the Creation of the Sunne and Moon, in the work of the\nfourth day; When the diffused light contracted into Orbes, and shooting\nrayes, of those Luminaries. Plainer Descriptions there are from Pagan\npens, of the creatures of the fourth day; While the divine\nPhilosopher[107] unhappily omitteth the noblest part of the third; And\n_Ovid_ (whom many conceive to have borrowed his description from\n_Moses_) coldly deserting the remarkable account of the text, in three\nwords,[108] describeth this work of the third day; the vegetable\ncreation, and first ornamental Scene of nature; the primitive food of\nanimals, and first story of Physick, in Dietetical conservation.\n\n [107] Plato in Timaeo.\n\n [108] fronde tegi silvas.\n\nFor though Physick may pleade high, from the medicall act of God, in\ncasting so deep a sleep upon our first Parent; And Chirurgery[109] finde\nits whole art, in that one passage concerning the Rib of _Adam_, yet is\nthere no rivality with Garden contrivance and Herbery. For if Paradise\nwere planted the third day of the Creation, as wiser Divinity\nconcludeth, the Nativity thereof was too early for Horoscopie; Gardens\nwere before Gardiners, and but some hours after the earth.\n\n [109] +diairesis+ _in opening the flesh_. +exairesis+, _in taking\n out the rib_. +synthesis+,_ in closing up the part again_.\n\nOf deeper doubt is its Topography, and locall designation, yet being the\nprimitive garden, and without much controversie[110] seated in the East;\nit is more then probable the first curiosity, and cultivation of plants,\nmost nourished in those quarters. And since the Ark of _Noah_ first\ntoucht upon some mountains of _Armenia,_ the planting art arose again in\nthe East, and found its revolution not far from the place of its\nNativity, about the Plains of those Regions. And if _Zoroaster_ were\neither _Cham_, _Chus_, or _Mizraim_, they were early proficients\ntherein, who left (as _Pliny_ delivereth) a work of Agriculture.\n\n [110] _For some there is from the ambiguity of the word_ Mikedem,\n _whether_ ab oriente _or_ a principio.\n\nHowever the account of the Pensill or hanging gardens of _Babylon_, if\nmade by _Semiramis_, the third or fourth from _Nimrod_, is of no\nslender antiquity; which being not framed upon ordinary level of ground,\nbut raised upon pillars admitting under-passages, we cannot accept as\nthe first _Babylonian_ Gardens; But a more eminent progress and\nadvancement in that art, then any that went before it: Somewhat\nanswering or hinting the old Opinion concerning Paradise it self, with\nmany conceptions elevated above the plane of the Earth.\n\n_Nebuchodonosor_, whom some will have to be the famous _Syrian_ King of\n_Diodorus_, beautifully repaired that City; and so magnificently built\nhis hanging gardens;[111] that from succeeding Writers he had the honour\nof the first. From whence over-looking _Babylon_, and all the Region\nabout it, he found no circumscription to the eye of his ambition, till\nover-delighted with the bravery of this Paradise; in his melancholy\nmetamorphosis, he found the folly of that delight, and a proper\npunishment, in the contrary habitation, in wilde plantations and\nwandrings of the fields.\n\n [111] Josephus.\n\nThe _Persian_ Gallants who destroyed this Monarchy, maintained their\nBotanicall bravery. Unto whom we owe the very name of Paradise:\nwherewith we meet not in Scripture before the time of _Solomon_, and\nconceived originally _Persian_. The word for that disputed Garden,\nexpressing in the Hebrew no more then a Field enclosed, which from the\nsame Root is content to derive a garden and a Buckler.\n\n_Cyrus_ the elder brought up in Woods and Mountains, when time and power\nenabled, pursued the dictate of his education, and brought the treasures\nof the field into rule and circumscription, So nobly beautifying the\nhanging Gardens of _Babylon_, that he was also thought to be the authour\nthereof.\n\n_Ahasuerus_ (whom many conceive to have been _Artaxerxes Longimanus_) in\nthe Countrey and City of Flowers,[112] and in an open Garden,\nentertained his Princes and people, while _Vasthi_ more modestly treated\nthe Ladies within the Palace thereof.\n\n [112] Sushan in Susiana.\n\nBut if (as some opinion) [SN: Plutarch _in the life of_ Artaxerxes.]\nKing _Ahasuerus_ were _Artaxerxes Mnemon_, that found a life and reign\nanswerable unto his great memory, our magnified _Cyrus_ was his second\nbrother: who gave the occasion of that memorable work, and almost\nmiraculous retrait of _Xenophon_. A person of high spirit and honour,\nnaturally a King, though fatally prevented by the harmlesse chance of\n_post_-geniture: Not only a Lord of Gardens, but a manuall planter\nthereof: disposing his trees like his armies in regular ordination. So\nthat while old _Laertas_ hath found a name in _Homer_ for pruning\nhedges, and clearing away thorns and bryars; while King _Attalus_ lives\nfor his poysonous plantations of _Aconites_, Henbane, Hellebore, and\nplants hardly admitted within the walls of Paradise; While many of the\nAncients do poorly live in the single names of Vegetables; All stories\ndo look upon _Cyrus_, as the splendid and regular planter.\n\nAccording whereto _Xenophon_[113] describeth his gallant plantation at\n_Sardis_, thus rendered by _Stobaeus, Arbores pari intervallo sitas,\nrectos ordines, et omnia perpulchre in Quincuncem directa_.[114] Which\nwe shall take for granted as being accordingly rendered by the most\nelegant of the Latines;[115] and by no made term, but in use before by\n_Varro_. That is, the rows and orders so handsomely disposed; or five\ntrees so set together, that a regular angularity, and through prospect,\nwas left on every side. Owing this name not only unto the Quintuple\nnumber of Trees, but the figure declaring that number, which being\ndoubled at the angle, makes up the Letter +Chi+, that is the\nEmphatical decussation, or fundamental figure.\n\n [113] Xenophon in Oeconomico.\n\n [114] +Kala men ta dendra, di isou de ta pephyteumena, orthoi de\n hoi stichoi ton dendron, eugonea de panta kalos.+\n\n [115] Cicero iae Cat. Major.\n\nNow though in some ancient and modern practice the _area_ or decussated\nplot, might be a perfect square, answerable to a _Tuscan Pedestal_, and\nthe _Quinquernio_ or Cinque-point of a die; wherein by Diagonal lines\nthe intersection was regular; accommodable unto Plantations of large\ngrowing Trees; and we must not denie our selves the advantage of this\norder; yet shall we chiefly insist upon that of _Curtius_[116] and\n_Porta_, in their brief description hereof. Wherein the _decussis_ is\nmade within a longilateral square, with oposite angles, acute and obtuse\nat the intersection; and so upon progression making a _Rhombus_ or\nLozenge figuration, which seemeth very agreeable unto the Original\nfigure; Answerable whereunto we observe the decussated characters in\nmany consulary coynes, and even in those of _Constantine_ and his Sons,\nwhich pretend their pattern in the Sky; the crucigerous Ensigne carried\nthis figure, not transversly or rectangularly intersected, but in a\ndecussation, after the form of an _Andrean_ or _Burgundian_ cross, which\nanswereth this description.\n\n [116] Benedict Curtius de Hortis. Bapt. Portainvilla.\n\nWhere by the way we shall decline the old Theme, so traced by antiquity\nof crosses and crucifixion: Whereof some being right, and of one single\npeece without traversion or transome, do little advantage our subject.\nNor shall we take in the mystical _Tau_, or the Crosse of our blessed\nSaviour, which having in some descriptions an _Empedon_ or crossing\nfoot-stay, made not one single transversion. And since the Learned\n_Lipsius_ hath made some doubt even of the crosse of St. _Andrew_,\nsince some Martyrological Histories deliver his death by the general\nName of a crosse, and _Hippolitus_ will have him suffer by the sword; we\nshould have enough to make out the received Crosse of that Martyr. Nor\nshall we urge the _labarum_, and famous Standard of _Constantine_, or\nmake further use thereof, then as the first letters in the Name of our\nSaviour Christ, in use among Christians, before the dayes of\n_Constantine_, to be observed in Sepulchral Monuments of Martyrs,[117]\nin the Reign of _Adrian_, and _Antoninus_; and to be found in the\nAntiquities of the Gentiles, before the advent of Christ, as in the\nMedal of King _Ptolomy_, signed with the same characters, and might be\nthe beginning of some word or name, which Antiquaries have not hit on.\n\n [117] _Of_ Marius, Alexander, Roma Sotterranea.\n\nWe will not revive the mysterious crosses of _AEgypt_, with circles on\ntheir heads, in the breast of _Serapis_, and the hands of their Geniall\nspirits, not unlike the character of _Venus_, and looked on by ancient\nChristians, with relation unto Christ. Since however they first began,\nthe AEgyptians thereby expressed the processe and motion of the spirit of\nthe world, and the diffusion thereof upon the Celestiall and Elementall\nnature; implyed by a circle and right-lined intersection. A secret in\ntheir Telesmes and magicall Characters among them. Though he that\nconsidereth the plain crosse[118] upon the head of the Owl in the\nLaterane Obelisk, or the crosse[119] erected upon a pitcher diffusing\nstreams of water into two basins, with sprinkling branches in them, and\nall described upon a two-footed Altar, as in the Hieroglyphicks of the\nbrazen Table of _Bembus_: will hardly decline all thought of Christian\nsignality in them.\n\n [118] _Wherein the lower part is some what longer, as defined by_ Upton\n de studio militari, _and_ Johannes de Bado Aureo, cum comment.\n clariss. et doctiss. Bi saei.\n\n [119] Casal. de Ritibus. Bosio nella Trionfante croce.\n\nWe shall not call in the Hebrew _Tenapha_, or ceremony of their\nOblations, waved by the priest unto the four quarters of the world,\nafter the form of a cross; as in the peace-offerings. And if it were\nclearly made out what is remarkably delivered from the Traditions of\nthe Rabbins, that as the Oyle was powred coronally or circularly upon\nthe head of Kings, so the High-Priest was anointed decussatively or in\nthe form of a X; though it could not escape a typical thought of Christ,\nfrom mystical considerators; yet being the conceit is Hebrew, we should\nrather expect its verification from Analogy in that language, then to\nconfine the same unto the unconcerned Letters of _Greece_, or make it\nout by the characters of _Cadmus_ or _Palamedes_.\n\nOf this Quincuncial Ordination the Ancients practised, much discoursed\nlittle; and the Moderns have nothing enlarged; which he that more nearly\nconsidereth, in the form of its square _Rhombus_, and decussation, with\nthe several commodities, mysteries, parallelismes, and resemblances,\nboth in Art and Nature, shall easily discern the elegancy of this order.\n\nThat this was in some wayes of practice in diverse and distant Nations,\nhints or deliveries there are from no slender Antiquity. In the hanging\nGardens of _Babylon_, from _Abydenus_, _Eusebius_, and others,\n_Curtius_[120] describeth this rule of decussation. In the memorable\nGarden of _Alcinous_ anciently conceived an original phancy, from\nParadise, mention there is of well contrived order; For so hath\n_Didymus_ and _Eustachius_ expounded the emphatical word. _Diomedes_\ndescribing the Rurall possions of his Father, gives account in the same\nLanguage of Trees orderly planted. And _Ulysses_ being a boy was\npromised by his father fourty Fig-trees, and fifty rows of vines,[121]\nproducing all kind of grapes.\n\n [120] Decussatio ipsa jucundum ac peramaenum conspectum praebuit.\n _Cart._ Hortar. _l._ 6.\n\n [121] +orchoi, stichoi ampelon, phyton stichos, e kata taxin phyteia.+\n Phavorinus Philoxenus.\n\nThat the Eastern Inhabitants of _India_, made use of such order, even in\nopen Plantations, is deducible from _Theophrastus_; who describing the\ntrees whereof they made their garments, plainly delivereth that they\nwere planted +kat orchous+, and in such order that at a distance\nmen would mistake them for Vineyards. The same seems confirmed in\n_Greece_ from a singular expression in _Aristotle_[122] concerning the\norder of Vines, delivered by a military term representing the orders of\nSouldiers, which also confirmeth the antiquity of this form yet used in\nvineal plantations.\n\n [122] +systadas ampelon+. _Polit. 7._\n\nThat the same was used in Latine plantations is plainly confirmed from\nthe commending penne of _Varro_, _Quintilian_, and handsome Description\nof _Virgil_.[123]\n\n [123] Indulge ordinibus, nec secius omnis in unguem Arboribus positis,\n secto via limite quadret. _Georg. 2._\n\nThat the first Plantations not long after the Floud were disposed after\nthis manner, the generality and antiquity of this order observed in\nVineyards, and Wine Plantations, affordeth some conjecture. And since\nfrom judicious enquiry, _Saturn_ who divided the world between his three\nsonnes, who beareth a Sickle in his hand, who taught the Plantations of\nVines, the setting, grafting of trees, and the best part of Agriculture,\nis discovered to be _Noah_, whether this early dispersed Husbandry in\nVineyards, had not its Original in that Patriarch, is no such\nParalogical doubt.\n\nAnd if it were clear that this was used by _Noah_ after the Floud, I\ncould easily beleeve it was in use before it; Not willing to fix such\nancient inventions no higher original then _Noah_; Nor readily\nconceiving those aged _Heroes_, whose diet was vegetable, and only, or\nchiefly consisted in the fruits of the earth, were much deficient in\ntheir splendid cultivations; or after the experience of fifteen hundred\nyears, left much for future discovery in Botanical Agriculture. Nor\nfully perswaded that Wine was the invention of _Noah_, that fermented\nLiquors, which often make themselves, so long escaped their Luxury or\nexperience; that the first sinne of the new world was no sin of the old.\nThat _Cain_ and _Abel_ were the first that offered Sacrifice; or because\nthe Scripture is silent that _Adam_ or _Isaac_ offered none at all.\n\nWhether _Abraham_ brought up in the first planting Countrey, observed\nnot some rule hereof, when he planted a grove at _Beer-sheba_; or\nwhether at least a like ordination were not in the Garden of _Solomon_,\nprobability may contest. Answerably unto the wisedom of that eminent\nBotanologer, and orderly disposer of all his other works. Especially\nsince this was one peece of Gallantry, wherein he pursued the specious\npart of felicity, according to his own description. I made me Gardens\nand Orchards, and planted Trees in them of all kindes of fruit. I made\nme Pools of water, to water therewith the wood that bringeth forth\nTrees,[124] which was no ordinary plantation, if according to the\n_Targum_, or _Chaldee Paraphrase_, it contained all kindes of Plants,\nand some fetched as far as _India_; And the extent thereof were from the\nwall of _Jerusalem_ unto the water of _Siloah_.\n\n [124] _Eccles._ 2.\n\nAnd if _Jordan_ were but _Jaar Eden_, that is, the River of _Eden,\nGenesar_ but _Gansar_ or the prince of Gardens; and it could be made\nout, that the Plain of _Jordan_ were watered not comparatively, but\ncausally, and because it was the Paradise of God, as the learned\n_Abramas_[125] hinteth, he was not far from the Prototype and originall\nof Plantations. And since even in Paradise it self, the tree of\nknowledge was placed in the middle of the Garden, whatever was the\nambient figure; there wanted not a centre and rule of decussation.\nWhether the groves and sacred Plantations of Antiquity, were not thus\norderly placed, either by _quaternio's_, or quintuple ordinations, may\nfavourably be doubted. For since they were so methodical in the\nconstitutions of their temples, as to observe the due scituation,\naspect, manner, form, and order in Architectonicall relations, whether\nthey were not as distinct in their groves and Plantations about them, in\nform and _species_ respectively unto their Deities, is not without\nprobability of conjecture. And in their groves of the Sunne this was a\nfit number, by multiplication to denote the dayes of the year; and might\nHieroglyphically speak as much, as the mystical _Statua_ of _Janus_[126]\nin the Language of his fingers. And since they were so critical in the\nnumber of his horses, the strings of his Harp, and rayes about his head,\ndenoting the orbes of heaven, the Seasons and Moneths of the Yeare:\nwitty Idolatry would hardly be flat in other appropriations.\n\n [125] Vet. Testamenti Pharus.\n\n [126] _Which King_ Numa _set up with his fingers so disposed that they\n numerically denoted 365._ Pliny.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\n\nNor was this only a form of practise in Plantations, but found imitation\nfrom high Antiquity, in sundry artificial contrivances and manual\noperations. For to omit the position of squared stones, _cuncatim_ or\n_wedgwise_ in the walls of _Roman_ and _Gothick_ buildings; and the\n_lithostrata_ or figured pavements of the ancients, which consisted not\nall of square stones, but were divided into triquetrous segments,\nhoneycombs, and sexangular figures, according to _Vitruvius_; The\nsquared stones and bricks in ancient fabricks, were placed after this\norder. And two above or below conjoyned by a middle stone or _Plinthus_,\nobservable in the ruines of _Forum Nervae,_ the _Mausoleum_ of\n_Augustus_, the Pyramid of _Cestius_, and the sculpture draughts of the\nlarger Pyramids of AEgypt. And therefore in the draughts of eminent\nfabricks, Painters do commonly imitate this order in the lines of their\ndescription.\n\nIn the Laureat draughts of sculpture and picture, the leaves and foliate\nworks are commonly thus contrived, which is but in imitation of the\n_Pulvinaria_, and ancient pillow-work, observable in _Ionick_ peeces,\nabout columns, temples and altars. To omit many other analogies, in\nArchitectonicall draughts, which art itself is founded upon fives,[127]\nhaving its subject, and most gracefull peeces divided by this number.\n\n [127] _Of a structure five parts_, Fundamentum, parietes, Aperturae,\n Compartitio tectum, _Leo. Alberti. Five Columes_, Tuscan, Dorick,\n Ionick, Corinthian, Compound. _Five different intercolumniations_,\n Pycnostylos, dystylos, Systylos, Areostylos, Eustylos. _Vitru._\n\nThe Triumphal Oval, and Civicall Crowns of Laurel, Oake, and Myrtle,\nwhen fully made, were pleated after this order. And to omit the Crossed\nCrowns of Christian Princes; what figure that was which _Anastatius_\ndescribed upon the head of _Leo_ the third; or who first brought in the\nArched Crown; That of Charles the great, (which seems the first\nremarkably closed Crown), was framed after this manner;[128] with an\nintersection in the middle from the main crossing barres, and the\ninterspaces, unto the frontal circle, continued by handsome\nnetwork-plates, much after this order. Whereon we shall not insist,\nbecause from greater Antiquity, and practice of consecration, we meet\nwith the radiated, and starry Crown, upon the head of _Augustus_, and\nmany succeeding Emperors. Since the Armenians and Parthians had a\npeculiar royall Capp; And the Grecians from _Alexander_ another kinde of\ndiadem. And even Diadems themselves were but fasciations, and handsome\nligatures, about the heads of Princes; nor wholly omitted in the mitrall\nCrown, which common picture seems to set too upright and forward upon\nthe head of _Aaron_: Worne[129] sometimes singly, or doubly by Princes,\naccording to their Kingdomes; and no more to be expected from two Crowns\nat once, upon the head of _Ptolomy_. And so easily made out when\nhistorians tell us, some bound up wounds, some hanged themselves with\ndiadems.\n\n [128] Uti constat ex pergamena apud Chifflet; in _B. R._ Bruxelli, et\n Icon. _f._ Stradae.\n\n [129] Macc, 1. 11.\n\nThe beds of the antients were corded somewhat after this fashion: That\nis not directly, as ours at present, but obliquely, from side to side,\nand after the manner of network; whereby they strengthened the spondae or\nbedsides, and spent less cord in the work: as is demonstrated by\n_Blancanus_.[130]\n\n [130] Aristot. Mechan. Quaest.\n\nAnd as they lay in crossed beds, so they sat upon seeming crosse legg'd\nseats: in which form the noblest thereof were framed; Observable in the\ntriumphall seats, the _sella curulis_, or _AEdyle Chayres_, in the coyns\nof _Cestius_, _Sylla_, and _Julius_. That they sat also crosse legg'd\nmany noble draughts declare; and in this figure the sitting gods and\ngoddesses are drawn in medalls and medallions. And beside this kinde of\nwork in Retiarie and hanging tectures, in embroderies, and eminent\nneedle-works; the like is obvious unto every eye in glass-windows. Nor\nonly in Glassie contrivances, but also in Lattice and Stone-work,\nconceived in the Temple of _Solomon_; wherein the windows are termed\n_fenestrae reticulatae_, or lights framed like nets.[131] And agreeable\nunto the Greek expression concerning Christ in the _Canticles_,[132]\nlooking through the nets, which ours hath rendered, he looketh forth at\nthe windows, shewing himselfe through the lattesse; that is, partly seen\nand unseen, according to the visible and invisible side of his nature.\nTo omit the noble reticulate work, in the chapters of the pillars of\n_Solomon_, with Lillies, and Pomegranats upon a network ground; and the\n_Craticula_ or grate through which the ashes fell in the altar of burnt\nofferings.\n\n [131] +diktyota.+\n\n [132] _Cant._ 2.\n\nThat the networks and nets of antiquity were little different in the\nform from ours at present, is confirmable from the nets in the hands of\nthe Retiarie gladiators, the proper combatants with the secutores. To\nomit the ancient Conopeion or gnatnet of the AEgyptians, the inventors of\nthat Artifice: the rushey labyrinths of _Theocritus_; the nosegaynets,\nwhich hung from the head under the nostrils of Princes; and that uneasie\nmetaphor of _Reticulum Jecoris_, which some expound the lobe, we the\ncaule above the liver. As for that famous network[133] of _Vulcan_,\nwhich inclosed _Mars_ and _Venus_, and caused that unextinguishable\nlaugh in heaven; since the gods themselves could not discern it, we\nshall not prie into it; Although why _Vulcan_ bound them, _Neptune_\nloosed them, and _Apollo_ should first discover them, might afford no\nvulgar mythologie. Heralds have not omitted this order or imitation\nthereof, whiles they Symbollically adorn their Scuchions with Mascles,\nFusils and Saltyrs,[134] and while they disposed the figures of Ermins,\nand vaired coats in this Quincuncial method.\n\n [133] +Asbestos d ar' enorto gelos.+ Hom.\n\n [134] De armis Scaccatis, Masculatis, invectis fuselatis vide Spelm.\n Aspilog. et Upton. cum erudit. Bissaeo.\n\nThe same is not forgot by Lapidaries while they cut their gemms\npyramidally, or by aequicrural triangles. Perspective pictures, in their\nBase, Horison, and lines of distances, cannot escape these Rhomboidall\ndecussations. Sculptors in their strongest shadows, after this order doe\ndraw their double Haches. And the very _Americans_ do naturally fall\nupon it, in their neat and curious textures, which is also observed in\nthe elegant artifices of _Europe_. But this is no law unto the wool of\nthe neat _Retiarie_ Spider, which seems to weave without transversion,\nand by the union of right lines to make out a continued surface, which\nis beyond the common art of Textury, and may still nettle _Minerva_ the\ngoddesse of that mystery.[135] And he that shall hatch the little seeds,\neither found in small webs, or white round Egges, carried under the\nbellies of some Spiders, and behold how at their first production in\nboxes, they will presently fill the same with their webbs, may observe\nthe early, and untaught finger of nature, and how they are natively\nprovided with a stock, sufficient for such Texture.\n\n [135] _As in the contention between_ Minerva _and_ Arachne.\n\nThe Rurall charm against _Dodder_, _Tetter_, and strangling weeds, was\ncontrived after this order, while they placed a chalked Tile at the four\ncorners, and one in the middle of their fields, which though ridiculous\nin the intention, was rationall in the contrivance, and a good way to\ndiffuse the magick through all parts of the _Area_.\n\nSomewhat after this manner they ordered the little stones in the old\ngame of _Pentalithismus_, or casting up five stones to catch them on the\nback of their hand. And with some resemblance hereof, the _Proci_ or\nProdigal Paramours disposed their men, when they played _Penelope_.[136]\nFor being themselves an hundred and eight, they set fifty four stones on\neither side, and one in the middle, which they called _Penelope_, which\nhe that hit was Master of the game.\n\n [136] _In_ Eustachius.\n\nIn Chesse-boards and Tables we yet finde Pyramids and Squares, I wish we\nhad their true and ancient description, far different from ours, or the\n_Chet mat_ of the _Persians_, and might continue some elegant\nremarkables, as being an invention as High as _Hermes_ the Secretary of\n_Osyris_,[137] figuring the whole world, the motion of the Planets, with\nEclipses of Sunne and Moon.\n\n [137] Plato.\n\nPhysicians are not without the use of this decussation in several\noperations, in ligatures and union of dissolved continuities. Mechanicks\nmake use hereof in forcipal Organs, and Instruments of incision; wherein\nwho can but magnifie the power of decussation, inservient to contrary\nends, solution and consolidation, union, and division, illustrable from\n_Aristotle_ in the old _Nucifragium_ or Nutcraker, and the Instruments\nof Evulsion, compression or incision; which consisting of two _Vectes_\nor armes, converted towards each other, the innitency and stresse being\nmade upon the _hypomochlion_ or fulciment in the decussation, the\ngreater compression is made by the union of two impulsors.\n\n ----- ----- ----- ----- -----\n _Hast._ | | | | | | | | | |\n ----- ----- ----- ----- -----\n ----- ----- ----- -----\n _Pr._ | | | | | | | |\n ----- ----- ----- -----\n ----- ----- ----- ----- -----\n _Tr._ | | | | | | | | | |\n ----- ----- ----- ----- -----\n\nThe _Romane Batalia_[138] was ordered after this manner, whereof as\nsufficiently known _Virgil_ hath left but an hint, and obscure\nintimation. For thus were the maniples and cohorts of the _Hastiti_,\n_Principes_ and _Triarii_ placed in their bodies, wherein consisted the\nstrength of the _Romane battle_. By this Ordination they readily fell\ninto each other; the _Hastati_ being pressed, handsomely retired into\nthe intervals of the _principes_, these into that of the _Triarii_,\nwhich making as it were a new body, might joyntly renew the battle,\nwherein consisted the secret of their successes. And therefore it was\nremarkably singular[139] in the battle of _Africa_, that _Scipio_\nfearing a rout from the Elephants the Enemy, left not the _Principes_ in\ntheir alternate distances, whereby the Elephants passing the vacuities\nof the _Hastati_, might have run upon them, but drew his battle into\nright order, and leaving the passages bare, defeated the mischief\nintended by the Elephants. Out of this figure were made two remarkable\nforms of Battle, the _Cuneus_ and _Forceps_, or the Sheare and wedge\nBattles, each made of half a _Rhombus_, and but differenced by position.\nThe wedge invented to break or worke into a body, the _forceps_ to\nenviron and defeat the power thereof composed out of selectest Souldiery\nand disposed into the form of an V, wherein receiving the wedge, it\ninclosed it on both sides. After this form the famous _Narses_[140]\nordered his battle against the _Franks_, and by this figure the _Almans_\nwere enclosed, and cut in peeces.\n\n [138] _In the disposure of the Legions in the Wars of the Republike,\n before the division of the Legion into ten cohorts by the\n Emperours._ Salmas. _in his Epistle a Mounsieur de Peyresc. & de\n Re militari Romanorum_.\n\n [139] Polybius Appianus.\n\n [140] Agathius Ammianus.\n\nThe _Rhombus_ or Lozenge figure so visible in this order, was also a\nremarkable form of battle in the _Grecian_ Cavalry,[141] observed by the\n_Thessalians_, and _Philip_ King of _Macedon_, and frequently by the\n_Parthians_, As being most ready to turn every way, and best to be\ncommanded, as having its ductors, or Commanders at each Angle.\n\n [141] AElian. Tact.\n\nThe _Macedonian Phalanx_ (a long time thought invincible) consisted of a\nlong square. For though they might be sixteen in Rank and file, yet when\nthey shut close, so that the sixt pike advanced before the first, though\nthe number might be square, the figure was oblong, answerable unto the\nQuincuncial quadrate of _Curtius_. According to this square _Thucydides_\ndelivers, the _Athenians_ disposed their battle against the\n_Lacedemonians_ brickwise,[142] and by the same word the Learned\n_Guellius_ expoundeth the quadrat of _Virgil_[143] after the form of a\nbrick or tile.\n\n [142] +en plasio.+\n\n [143] Secto via limite quadret. _Comment._ in Virgil.\n\nAnd as the first station and position of trees, so was the first\nhabitation of men, not in round Cities, as of later foundation; For the\nform of _Babylon_ the first City was square, and so shall also be the\nlast, according to the description of the holy City in the Apocalyps.\nThe famous pillars of _Seth_ before the floud had also the like\nfoundation, if they were but _antidiluvian_ Obelisks, and such as _Cham_\nand his _AEgyptian_ race, imitated after the Floud.\n\nBut _Nineveh_ which Authours acknowledge to have exceeded _Babylon_, was\nof a longilaterall[144] figure, ninety five Furlongs broad, and an\nhundred and fifty long, and so making about sixty miles in circuit,\nwhich is the measure of three dayes journey, according unto military\nmarches, or castrensiall mansions. So that if _Jonas_ entred at the\nnarrower side, he found enough for one dayes walk to attain the heart of\nthe City, to make his Proclamation, And if we imagine a City extending\nfrom _Ware_ to _London_, the expression will be moderate of six score\nthousand Infants, although we allow vacuities, fields, and intervals of\nhabitation, as there needs must be when the monument of _Ninus_ took up\nno lesse then ten furlongs.\n\n [144] Diod. Sic.\n\nAnd, though none of the seven wonders, yet a noble peece of Antiquity,\nand made by a Copy exceeding all the rest, had its principal parts\ndisposed after this manner, that is, the Labyrinth of _Crete_, built\nupon a long quadrate, containing five large squares, communicating by\nright inflections, terminating in the centre of the middle square, and\nlodging of the _Minotaur_, if we conform unto the description of the\nelegant medal thereof in _Agostino_.[145] And though in many accounts we\nreckon grosly by the square, yet is that very often to be accepted as a\nlong-sided quadrate which was the figure of the Ark of the Covenant, the\ntable of the Shew-bread, and the stone wherein the names of the twelve\nTribes were engraved, that is, three in a row, naturally making a\nlongilateral Figure, the perfect quadrate being made by nine.\n\n [145] Antonio Agostino delle medaglie.\n\nWhat figure the stones themselves maintained, tradition and Scripture\nare silent, yet Lapidaries in precious stones affect a Table or long\nsquare, and in such proportion, that the two laterall, and also the\nthree inferiour Tables are equall unto the superiour, and the angles of\nthe laterall Tables, contain and constitute the _hypothenusae_, or broder\nsides subtending.\n\nThat the Tables of the Law were of this figure, general imitation and\ntradition hath confirmed; yet are we unwilling to load the shoulders of\n_Moses_ with such massie stones, as some pictures lay upon them, since\n'tis plainly delivered that he came down with them in his hand; since\nthe word strictly taken implies no such massie hewing, but cutting, and\nfashioning of them into shape and surface; since some will have them\nEmeralds, and if they were made of the materials of Mount _Sina_, not\nimprobable that they were marble: since the words were not many, the\nletters short of seven hundred, and the Tables written on both sides\nrequired no such capacity.\n\nThe beds of the Ancients were different from ours at present, which are\nalmost square, being framed oblong, and about a double unto their\nbreadth; not much unlike the _area_, or bed of this Quincuncial\nquadrate. The single beds of _Greece_ were six foot,[146] and a\nlittle more in length, three in breadth; the Giant-like bed of _Og_,\nwhich had four cubits of bredth, nine and a half in length, varied not\nmuch from this proportion. The Funeral bed of King _Cheops_, in the\ngreater Pyramid, which holds seven in length, and four foot in bredth,\nhad no great deformity from this measure; And whatsoever were the\nbredth, the length could hardly be lesse, of the tyrannical bed of\n_Procrustes_, since in a shorter measure he had not been fitted with\npersons for his cruelty of extension. But the old sepulchral bed, or\n_Amazonian_ Tomb[147] in the market-place of _Megara_, was in the form\nof a Lozenge; readily made out by the composure of the body. For the\narmes not lying fasciated or wrapt up after the _Grecian_ manner but in\na middle distention, the including lines will strictly make out that\nfigure.\n\n [146] Aristot. Mechan.\n\n [147] _Plut._ in vit. Thes.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\n\nNow although this elegant ordination of vegetables, hath found\ncoincidence or imitation in sundry works of Art, yet is it not also\ndestitute of natural examples, and though overlooked by all, was\nelegantly observable, in severall works of nature.\n\nCould we satisfie our selves in the position of the lights above, or\ndiscover the wisedom of that order so invariably maintained in the fixed\nStars of heaven; Could we have any light, why the stellary part of the\nfirst masse, separated into this order, that the Girdle of _Orion_\nshould ever maintain its line, and the two Stars in _Charles's_ Wain\nnever leave pointing at the Pole-Starre, we might abate the\n_Pythagoricall_ Musick of the Spheres, the sevenfold Pipe of _Pan_; and\nthe strange Cryptography of _Gaffarell_ in his Starrie Book of Heaven.\n\nBut not to look so high as Heaven or the single Quincunx of the\n_Hyades_ upon the neck of _Taurus_, the Triangle, and remarkable\n_Crusero_ about the foot of the _Centaur_; observable rudiments there\nare hereof in subterraneous concretions, and bodies in the Earth; in the\n_Gypsum_ or _Talcum Rhomboides_, in the Favaginites or honey-comb-stone,\nin the _Asteria_ and _Astroites_, and in the crucigerous stone of S.\n_Iago_ of _Gallicia_.\n\nThe same is observably effected in the _Julus_, _Catkins_, or pendulous\nexcrescencies of severall Trees, of Wallnuts, Alders, and Hazels, which\nhanging all the Winter, and maintaining their Net-work close, by the\nexpansion thereof are the early foretellers of the spring, discoverable\nalso in long Pepper, and elegantly in the _Julus_ of _Calamus\nAromaticus_, so plentifully growing with us in the first palms of\nWillowes, and in the flowers of Sycamore, Petasites, Asphodelus, and\n_Blattaria_, before explication. After such order stand the flowery\nBranches in our best spread _Verbascum_, and the seeds about the spicous\nhead or torch of _Tapsus Barbatus_, in as fair a regularity as the\ncircular and wreathed order will admit, which advanceth one side of the\nsquare, and makes the same Rhomboidall.\n\nIn the squamous heads of _Scabious_, _Knapweed_, and the elegant _Jacea\nPinea_, and in the Scaly composure of the Oak-Rose,[148] which some\nyears most aboundeth. After this order hath Nature planted the Leaves in\nthe Head of the common and prickled Artichoak: wherein the black and\nshining Flies do shelter themselves, when they retire from the purple\nFlower about it; The same is also found in the pricks, sockets, and\nimpressions of the seeds, in the pulp or bottome thereof; wherein do\nelegantly stick the Fathers of their Mother. To omit the Quincunciall\nSpecks on the top of the Miscle-berry, especially that which grows upon\nthe _Tilia_ or Lime-Tree. And the remarkable disposure of those yellow\nfringes about the purple Pestill of _Aaron_, and elegant clusters of\nDragons, so peculiarly secured by nature, with an _umbrella_ or\nskreening Leaf about them.\n\n [148] Capitula squammata Quercum Bauhini, _whereof though he saith_\n perraro reperiuntur bis tantum invenimus, _yet we finde them\n commonly with us and in great numbers_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Especially the_ porus cervinus Imperati, Sporosa, Alga\n+platykeros+. Bauhini.]\n\nThe Spongy leaves of some Sea-wracks, Fucus, Oaks, in their several\nkindes, found about the shoar,[149] with ejectments of the Sea, are\noverwrought with Net-work elegantly containing this order, which plainly\ndeclareth the naturality of this texture; And how the needle of nature\ndelighteth to work, even in low and doubtful vegetations.\n\n [149] Antho. Graec. inter Epigrammata +griphode endon emon metros\n lagonon echo patera+.\n\nThe _Arbustetum_ or Thicket on the head of the Teazell, may be observed\nin this order: And he that considereth that fabrick so regularly\npalisadoed, and stemm'd with flowers of the royal colour; in the house\nof the solitary maggot, may finde the Seraglio of _Solomon_. And\ncontemplating the calicular shafts, and uncous disposure of their\nextremities, so accommodable unto the office of abstersion, not condemn\nas wholly improbable the conceit of those who accept it, for the herb\n_Borith_.[150] Where by the way, we could with much inquiry never\ndiscover any transfiguration, in this abstemious insect, although we\nhave kept them long in their proper houses, and boxes. Where some wrapt\nup in their webbs, have lived upon their own bowels, from _September_\nunto _July_.\n\n [150] _Jer._ 2, 22.\n\nIn such a grove doe walk the little creepers about the head of the\nburre. And such an order is observed in the aculeous prickly plantation,\nupon the heads of several common thistles, remarkably in the notable\npalisados about the flower of the milk-thistle; And he that inquireth\ninto the little bottome of the globe-thistle, may finde that gallant\nbush arise from a scalpe of like disposure.\n\nThe white umbrella or medicall bush of Elder, is an Epitome of this\norder: arising from five main stemms Quincuncially disposed, and\ntollerably maintained in their subdivisions. To omit the lower\nobservations in the seminal spike of Mercurie weld, and Plantane.\n\nThus hath nature ranged the flowers of Santfoyne, and French honey\nsuckle; and somewhat after this manner hath ordered the bush in\n_Jupiters_ beard, or house-leek; which old superstition set on the tops\nof houses, as a defensative against lightening and thunder. The like in\nFenny Seagreen or the water Souldier;[151] which, though a military name\nfrom Greece, makes out the Roman order.\n\n [151] Stratiotes.\n\nA like ordination there is in the favaginous Sockets, and Lozenge seeds\nof the noble flower of the Sunne. Wherein in Lozenge figured boxes\nnature shuts up the seeds, and balsame which is about them.\n\nBut the Firre and Pinetree from their fruits doe naturally dictate this\nposition. The Rhomboidall protuberances in Pineapples maintaining this\nQuincuncial order unto each other, and each Rhombus in it self. Thus are\nalso disposed the triangular foliations, in the conicall fruit of the\nfirre tree, orderly shadowing and protecting the winged seeds below\nthem.\n\nThe like so often occurreth to the curiosity of observers, especially in\nspicated seeds and flowers, that we shall not need to take in the single\nQuincunx of Fuchsius in the grouth of the masle fearn, the seedie\ndisposure of Gramen Ischemon, and the trunck or neat Reticulate work in\nthe codde of the Sachell palme.\n\nFor even in very many round stalk plants, the leaves are set after a\nQuintuple ordination, the first leaf answering the fift, in lateral\ndisposition. Wherein the leaves successively rounding the stalk, in\nfoure at the furthest the compass is absolved, and the fifth leafe or\nsprout, returns to the position of the other fift before it; as in\naccounting upward is often observable in furze pellitorye, Ragweed, the\nsproutes of Oaks, and thorns upon pollards, and very remarkably in the\nregular disposure of the rugged excrescencies in the yearly shoots of\nthe Pine.\n\nBut in square stalked plants, the leaves stand respectively unto each\nother, either in crosse or decussation to those above or below them,\narising at crosse positions; whereby they shadow not each other, and\nbetter resist the force of winds, which in a parallel situation, and\nupon square stalkes would more forcibly bear upon them.\n\nAnd to omit, how leaves and sprouts which compasse not the stalk, are\noften set in a Rhomboides, and making long and short Diagonals, do stand\nlike the leggs of Quadrupeds when they goe: Nor to urge the thwart\nenclosure and furdling of flowers, and blossomes, before explication, as\nin the multiplied leaves of Pionie; And the Chiasmus in five leaved\nflowers, while one lies wrapt about the staminous beards, the other\nfoure obliquely shutting and closing upon each other; and how even\nflowers which consist of foure leaves, stand not ordinarily in three and\none, but two, and two crosse wise unto the Stilus; even the Autumnal\nbudds, which awaite the return of the Sun, doe after the winter solstice\nmultiply their calicular leaves, making little Rhombuses, and network\nfigures, as in the Sycamore and Lilac.\n\nThe like is discoverable in the original production of plants which\nfirst putting forth two leaves, those which succeed, bear not over each\nother, but shoot, obliquely or crossewise, untill the stalk appeareth;\nwhich sendeth not forth its first leaves without all order unto them;\nand he that from hence can discover in what position the two first\nleaves did arise, is no ordinary observator.\n\nWhere by the way, he that observeth the rudimental spring of seeds,\nshall finde strict rule, although not after this order. How little is\nrequired unto effectual generation, and in what deminutives the plastick\nprinciple lodgeth, is exemplified in seeds, wherein the greater mass\naffords so little comproduction. In beans the leaf and root sprout from\nthe Germen, the main sides split, and lye by, and in some pull'd up near\nthe time of blooming, we have found the pulpous sides intire or little\nwasted. In Acorns the nebb dilating splitteth the two sides, which\nsometimes lye whole, when the Oak is sprouted two handfuls. In Lupins\nthese pulpy sides do sometimes arise with the stalk in a resemblance of\ntwo fat leaves. Wheat and Rye will grow up, if after they have shot some\ntender roots, the adhering pulp be taken from them. Beanes will prosper\nthough a part be cut away, and so much set as sufficeth to contain and\nkeep the Germen close. From this superfluous pulp in unkindely, and wet\nyears, may arise that multiplicity of little insects, which infest the\nRoots and Sprouts of tender Graines and pulses.\n\nIn the little nebbe or fructifying principle, the motion is regular, and\nnot transvertible, as to make that ever the leaf, which nature intendeth\nthe root; observable from their conversion, until they attain their\nright position, if seeds be set inversedly.\n\nIn vain we expect the production of plants from different parts of the\nseed, from the same _corculum_ or little original proceed both\ngerminations; and in the power of this slender particle lye many Roots\nand Spoutings, that though the same be pull'd away, the generative\nparticle will renew them again, and proceed to a perfect plant; And malt\nmay be observed to grow, though the Cummes be fallen from it.\n\nThe seminal nebbe hath a defined and single place, and not extended unto\nboth extremes. And therefore many too vulgarly conceive that Barley and\nOats grow at both ends; For they arise from one _punctilio_ or\ngenerative nebbe, and the Speare sliding under the husk, first appeareth\nnigh the toppe. But in Wheat and Rye being bare the sprouts are seen\ntogether. If Barley unhulled would grow, both would appear at once. But\nin this and Oat-meal the nebbe is broken away, which makes them the\nmilder food, and lesse apt to raise fermentation in Decoctions.\n\nMen taking notice of what is outwardly visible, conceive a sensible\npriority in the Root. But as they begin from one part, so they seem to\nstart and set out upon one signall of nature. In Beans yet soft, in\nPease while they adhere unto the Cod, the rudimentall Leafe and Root are\ndiscoverable. In the Seeds of Rocket and Mustard, sprouting in Glasses\nof water, when the one is manifest the other is also perceptible. In\nmuddy waters apt to breed _Duckweed_, and Periwinkles, if the first and\nrudimentall stroaks of _Duckweed_ be observed, the Leaves and Root\nanticipate not each other. But in the Date-stone the first sprout is\nneither root nor leaf distinctly, but both together; For the Germination\nbeing to passe through the narrow navel and hole about the midst of the\nstone, the generative germ is faine to enlengthen it self, and shooting\nout about an inch, at that distance divideth into the ascending and\ndescending portion.\n\nAnd though it be generally thought that Seeds will root at that end,\nwhere they adhere to their Originals, and observable it is that the\nnebbe sets most often next the stalk, as in Grains, Pulses, and most\nsmall Seeds, yet is it hardly made out in many greater plants. For in\nAcornes, Almonds, Pistachios, Wallnuts, and acuminated shells, the germ\nputs forth at the remotest part of the pulp. And therefore to set Seeds\nin that posture, wherein the Leaf and Roots may shoot right without\ncontortion, or forced circumvolution, which might render them strongly\nrooted, and straighter, were a Criticisme in Agriculture. And nature\nseems to have made some provision hereof in many from their figure, that\nas they fall from the Tree they may lye in Positions agreeable to such\nadvantages.\n\nBeside the open and visible Testicles of plants, the seminall powers lie\nin great part invisible, while the Sun findes polypody in stone-wals,\nthe little stinging Nettle, and nightshade in barren sandy High-wayes,\n_Scurvy-grasse_ in _Greeneland_, and unknown plants in earth brought\nfrom remote Countries. Beside the known longevity of some Trees, what is\nthe most lasting herb, or seed, seems not easily determinable. Mandrakes\nupon known account have lived near an hundred yeares. Seeds found in\nWilde-Fowls Gizards have sprouted in the earth. The Seeds of Marjorane\nand _Stramonium_ carelessly kept, have grown after seven years. Even in\nGarden-Plots long fallow, and digged up, the seeds of _Blattaria_ and\nyellow henbane, and after twelve years burial have produced themselves\nagain.\n\nThat bodies are first spirits _Paracelsus_ could affirm, which in the\nmaturation of Seeds and fruits, seems obscurely implied by[152]\n_Aristotle_, when he delivereth, that the spirituous parts are\nconverted into water, and the water into earth, and attested by\nobservation in the maturative progresse of Seeds, wherein at first may\nbe discerned a flatuous distention of the husk, afterwards a thin\nliquor, which longer time digesteth into a pulp or kernell observable in\nAlmonds and large Nuts. And some way answered in the progressionall\nperfection of animall semination, in its spermaticall maturation, from\ncrude pubescency unto perfection. And even that seeds themselves in\ntheir rudimentall discoveries, appear in foliaceous surcles, or sprouts\nwithin their coverings, in a diaphanous gellie, before deeper\nincrassation, is also visibly verified in Cherries, Acorns, Plums.\n\n [152] In met. cum Gabeo.\n\nFrom seminall considerations, either in reference unto one mother, or\ndistinction from animall production, the holy Scripture describeth the\nvegetable creation; And while it divideth plants but into Herb and Tree,\nthough it seemeth to make but an accidental division, from magnitude, it\ntacitely containeth the naturall distinction of vegetables, observed by\nHerbarists, and comprehending the four kinds. For since the most\nnaturall distinction is made from the production of leaf or stalk, and\nplants after the two first seminall leaves, do either proceed to send\nforth more leaves, or a stalk, and the folious and stalky emission\ndistinguisheth herbs and trees, in a large acception it compriseth all\nVegetables, for the frutex and suffrutex are under the progression of\ntrees, and stand Authentically differenced, but from the accidents of\nthe stalk.\n\nThe AEquivocal production of things under undiscerned principles, makes a\nlarge part of generation, though they seem to hold a wide univocacy in\ntheir set and certain Originals, while almost every plant breeds its\npeculiar insect, most a Butterfly, moth or fly, wherein the Oak seemes\nto contain the largest seminality, while the Julus, Oak, apple, dill,\nwoolly tuft, foraminous roundles upon the leaf, and grapes under ground\nmake a Fly with some difference. The great variety of Flyes lyes in the\nvariety of their Originals, in the Seeds of Caterpillars or Cankers\nthere lyeth not only a Butterfly or Moth, but if they be sterill or\nuntimely cast, their production is often a Fly, which we have also\nobserved from corrupted and mouldred Egges, both of Hens and Fishes; To\nomit the generation of Bees out of the bodies of dead Heifers, or what\nis strange yet well attested, the production of Eeles[153] in the backs\nof living Cods and Perches.\n\n [153] Schoneveldus de Pisc.\n\nThe exiguity and smallnesse of some seeds extending to large productions\nis one of the magnalities of nature, somewhat illustrating the work of\nthe Creation, and vast production from nothing. The true seeds of\nCypresse[154] and Rampions are indistinguishable by old eyes. Of the\nseeds of Tobacco a thousand make not one grain, The disputed seeds of\nHarts tongue, and Maidenhair, require a greater number. From such\nundiscernable seminalities arise spontaneous productions. He that would\ndiscern the rudimentall stroak of a plant, may behold it in the\nOriginall of Duckweed, at the bignesse of a pins point, from convenient\nwater in glasses, wherein a watchfull eye may also discover the\npuncticular Originals of Periwincles and Gnats.\n\n [154] Doctissim. Laurenburg horr.\n\nThat seeds of some Plants are lesse then any animals, seems of no clear\ndecision; That the biggest of Vegetables exceedeth the biggest of\nAnimals, in full bulk, and all dimensions, admits exception in the\nWhale, which in length and above ground measure, will also contend with\ntall Oakes. That the richest odour of plants surpasseth that of Animals,\nmay seem of some doubt, since animall-musk, seems to excell the\nvegetable, and we finde so noble a scent in the Tulip-Fly, and\nGoat-Beetle.[155]\n\n [155] _The long and tender green_ Capricornus _rarely found, we could\n never meet with but two._\n\nNow whether seminall nebbes hold any sure proportion unto seminall\nenclosures, why the form of the germe doth not answer the figure of the\nenclosing pulp, why the nebbe is seated upon the solid, and not the\nchanneld side of the seed as in grains, why since we often meet with two\nyolks in one shell, and sometimes one Egge within another, we do not\noftener meet with two nebbes in one distinct seed: why since the Egges\nof a Hen laid at one course, do commonly outweigh the bird, and some\nmoths coming out of their cases, without assistance of food, will lay so\nmany Egges as to outweigh their bodies, trees rarely bear their fruit,\nin that gravity or proportion: Whether in the germination of seeds\naccording to _Hippocrates_, the lighter part ascendeth, and maketh the\nsprout, the heaviest tending downward frameth the root; Since we observe\nthat the first shoot of seeds in water, will sink or bow down at the\nupper and leafing end: Whether it be not more rational Epicurisme to\ncontrive whole dishes out of the nebbes and spirited particles of\nplants, then from the Gallatures and treddles of Egges; since that part\nis found to hold no seminall share in Oval Generation, are quaeries which\nmight enlarge but must conclude this digression.\n\nAnd though not in this order, yet how nature delighteth in this number,\nand what consent and coordination there is in the leaves and parts of\nflowers, it cannot escape our observation in no small number of plants.\nFor the calicular or supporting and closing leaves, do answer the number\nof the flowers, especially in such as exceed not the number of Swallows\nEgges; as in Violets, Stichwort, Blossomes, and flowers of one leaf\nhave often five divisions, answered by a like number of calicular\nleaves; as _Gentianella, Convolvulus_, Bell-flowers. In many the\nflowers, blades, or staminous shoots and leaves are all equally five, as\nin cockle, mullein and _Blattaria_; Wherein the flowers before\nexplication are pentagonally wrapped up, with some resemblance of the\n_blatta_ or moth from whence it hath its name; But the contrivance of\nnature is singular in the opening and shutting of Bindeweeds, performed\nby five inflexures, distinguishable by pyramidicall figures, and also\ndifferent colours.\n\nThe rose at first is thought to have been of five leaves, as it yet\ngroweth wilde among us; but in the most luxuriant, the calicular leaves\ndo still maintain that number. But nothing is more admired then the five\nBrethren of the Rose, and the strange disposure of the Appendices or\nBeards, in the calicular leaves thereof, which in despair of resolution\nis tolerably salved from this contrivance, best ordered and suited for\nthe free closure of them before explication. For those two which are\nsmooth, and of no beard are contrived to lye undermost, as without\nprominent parts, and fit to be smoothly covered, the other two which are\nbeset with Beards on either side, stand outward and uncovered, but the\nfifth or half-bearded leaf is covered on the bare side but on the open\nside stands free, and bearded like the other.\n\nBesides a large number of leaves have five divisions, and may be\ncircumscribed by a _Pentagon_ or figure of five Angles, made by right\nlines from the extremity of their leaves, as in Maple, Vine, Figge-Tree:\nBut five-leaved flowers are commonly disposed circularly about the\n_Stylus_; according to the higher Geometry of Nature, dividing a circle\nby five _Radii_, which concurre not to make Diameters, as in\nQuadrilaterall and sexangular Intersections.\n\nNow the number of five is remarkable in every Circle, not only as the\nfirst sphaerical Number, but the measure of sphaerical motion. For\nsphaerical bodies move by fives, and every globular Figure placed upon a\nplane, in direct volutation, returns to the first point of contaction in\nthe fift touch, accounting by the Axes of the Diameters or Cardinall\npoints of the four quarters thereof. And before it arriveth unto the\nsame point again, it maketh five circles equall unto it self, in each\nprogresse from those quarters, absolving an equall circle.\n\nBy the same number doth nature divide the circle of the Sea-starre, and\nin that order and number disposeth those elegant Semi-circles, or\ndentall sockets and egges in the Sea Hedge-hogge. And no mean\nObservations hereof there is in the Mathematicks of the neatest Retiary\nSpider, which concluding in fourty four Circles, from five Semidiameters\nbeginneth that elegant texture.\n\nAnd after this manner doth lay the foundation of the Circular branches\nof the Oak, which being five-cornered, in the tender annual sprouts, and\nmanifesting upon incision the signature of a Starre, is after made\ncircular, and swel'd into a round body: Which practice of nature is\nbecome a point of art, and makes two Problemes in _Euclide_.[156] But\nthe Bryar which sends forth shoots and prickles from its angles,\nmaintains its pentagonall figure, and the unobserved signature of a\nhandsome porch within it. To omit the five small buttons dividing the\nCircle of the Ivy-berry, and the five characters in the Winter stalk of\nthe Walnut, with many other Observables, which cannot escape the eyes of\nsignal discerners; Such as know where to finde _Ajax_ his name in\n_Gallitricum_, or _Arons_ Mitre in Henbane.\n\n [156] Elem. _li._ 4.\n\nQuincuncial forms and ordinations are also observable in animal\nfigurations. For to omit the hioides or throat bone of animals, the\n_furcula_ or _merry-thought_ in birds; which supporteth the _scapulae_,\naffording a passage for the winde-pipe and the gullet, the wings of\nFlyes, and disposure of their legges in their first formation from\nmaggots, and the position of their horns, wings and legges, in their\n_Aurelian_ cases and swadling clouts: The back of the _Cimex Arboreus_,\nfound often upon Trees and lesser plants, doth elegantly discover the\n_Burgundian_ decussation; And the like is observable in the belly of the\n_Notonecton_, or water-Beetle, which swimmeth on its back, and the\nhandsome Rhombusses of the Sea-poult, or Weazell, on either side the\nSpine.\n\nThe sexangular Cels in the Honey-combs of Bees are disposed after this\norder, much there is not of wonder in the confused Houses of Pismires;\nthough much in their busie life and actions, more in the edificial\nPalaces of Bees and Monarchical spirits; who make their combs\nsix-corner'd, declining a circle, whereof many stand not close together,\nand compleatly fill the _area_ of the place; But rather affecting a\nsix-sided figure, whereby every cell affords a common side unto six\nmore, and also a fit receptacle for the Bee it self, which gathering\ninto a Cylindrical Figure, aptly enters its sexangular house, more\nnearly approaching a circular figure, then either doth the Square or\nTriangle. And the Combes themselves so regularly contrived, that their\nmutual intersections make three Lozenges at the bottom of every Cell;\nwhich severally regarded make three Rows of neat Rhomboidall Figures,\nconnected at the angles, and so continue three several chaines\nthroughout the whole comb.\n\nAs for the _Favago_ found commonly on the Sea-shoar, though named from\nan honey-comb, it but rudely makes out the resemblance, and better\nagrees with the round Cels of humble Bees. He that would exactly discern\nthe shop of a Bees mouth, need observing eyes, and good augmenting\nglasses; wherein is discoverable one of the neatest peeces in nature,\nand must have a more piercing eye then mine; who findes out the shape of\nBuls heads, in the guts of Drones pressed out behinde, according to the\nexperiment of _Gomesius_[157]; wherein notwithstanding there seemeth\nsomewhat which might incline a pliant fancy to credulity of similitude.\n\n [157] Gom. de Sale.\n\nA resemblance hereof there is in the orderly and rarely disposed Cels,\nmade by Flyes and Insects, which we have often found fastened about\nsmall sprigs, and in those cottonary and woolly pillows, which sometimes\nwe meet with fastened unto Leaves, there is included an elegant Net-work\nTexture, out of which come many small Flies. And some resemblance there\nis of this order in the Egges of some Butterflies and moths, as they\nstick upon leaves, and other substances; which being dropped from\nbehinde, nor directed by the eye, doth neatly declare how nature\nGeometrizeth, and observeth order in all things.\n\nA like correspondency in figure is found in the skins and outward\nteguments of animals, whereof a regardable part are beautiful by this\ntexture. As the backs of several Snakes and Serpents, elegantly\nremarkable in the _Aspis_, and the Dart-snake, in the Chiasmus, and\nlarger decussations upon the back of the Rattlesnake, and in the close\nand finer texture of the _Mater formicarum_, or snake that delights in\nAnthils; whereby upon approach of outward injuries, they can raise a\nthicker Phalanx on their backs, and handsomely contrive themselves into\nall kindes of flexures: Whereas their bellies are commonly covered with\nsmooth semicircular divisions, as best accommodable unto their quick and\ngliding motion.\n\nThis way is followed by nature in the peculiar and remarkable tayl of\nthe Bever, wherein the scaly particles are disposed, somewhat after this\norder, which is the plainest resolution of the wonder of _Bellonius_,\nwhile he saith, with incredible Artifice hath Nature framed the tayl or\nOar of the Bever: where by the way we cannot but wish a model of their\nhouses, so much extolled by some Describers: wherein since they are so\nbold as to venture upon three stages, we might examine their Artifice in\nthe contignations, the rule and order in the compartitions; or whether\nthat magnified structure be any more then a rude rectangular pyle or\nmeer hovell-building.\n\nThus works the hand of nature in the feathery plantation about birds.\nObservable in the skins of the breast,[158] legs and Pinions of Turkies,\nGeese, and Ducks, and the Oars or finny feet of Water-Fowl: And such a\nnaturall net is the scaly covering of Fishes, of Mullets, Carps,\nTenches, _etc._ even in such as are excoriable and consist of smaller\nscales, as Bretts, Soals, and Flounders. The like Reticulate grain is\nobservable in some _Russia_ Leather. To omit the ruder Figures of the\nostracion, the triangular or cunny fish, or the pricks of the\nSea-Porcupine.\n\n [158] _Elegantly conspicuous on the inside of the striped skins of\n Dive-Fowl, of the cormorant, Goshonder, Weasell, Loon_, etc.\n\nThe same is also observable in some part of the skin of man, in habits\nof neat texture, and therefore not unaptly compared unto a Net: We\nshall not affirm that from such grounds, the AEgyptian Embalmers imitated\nthis texture, yet in their linnen folds the same is still observable\namong their neatest Mummies, in the figures of _Isis_ and _Osyris_, and\nthe Tutelary spirits in the Bembine Table. Nor is it to be over-looked\nhow _Orus_, the Hieroglyphick of the world is described in a Net-work\ncovering, from the shoulder to the foot. And (not to enlarge upon the\ncruciated Character of _Trismegistus_, or handed crosses, so often\noccurring in the Needles of _Pharaoh_, and Obelisks of Antiquity) the\n_Statuae Isiacae_, Teraphims, and little Idols, found about the Mummies,\ndo make a decussation or _Jacobs_ Crosse, with their armes, like that on\nthe head of _Ephraim_ and _Manasses_, and this _decussis_ is also\ngraphically described between them.\n\nThis Reticulate or Net-work was also considerable in the inward parts of\nman, not only from the first _subtegmen_ or warp of his formation, but\nin the netty _fibres_ of the veines and vessels of life; wherein\naccording to common Anatomy the right and transverse _fibres_ are\ndecussated by the oblique _fibres_; and so must frame a Reticulate and\nQuincuncial Figure by their Obliquations, Emphatically extending that\nElegant expression of Scripture. Thou hast curiously embroydered me,\nthou hast wrought me up after the finest way of texture, and as it were\nwith a Needle.\n\nNor is the same observable only in some parts, but in the whole body of\nman, which upon the extension of arms and legges, doth make out a\nsquare, whose intersection is at the genitals. To omit the phantastical\nQuincunx, in _Plato_ of the first Hermaphrodite or double man, united at\nthe Loynes, which _Jupiter_ after divided.\n\nA rudimental resemblance hereof there is in the cruciated and rugged\nfolds of the _Reticulum_, or Net-like Ventricle of ruminating horned\nanimals, which is the second in order, culinarily called the Honey-comb.\nFor many divisions there are in the stomack of severall animals; what\nnumber they maintain in the _Scarus_ and ruminating Fish, common\ndescription, or our own experiment hath made no discovery. But in the\nVentricle of _Porpuses_ there are three divisions. In many Birds a crop,\nGizard, and little receptacle before it; but in Cornigerous animals,\nwhich chew the cudd, there are no lesse then four of distinct position\nand office.\n\nThe _Reticulum_ by these crossed cels, makes a further digestion, in the\ndry and exuccous part of the Aliment received from the first Ventricle.\nFor at the bottome of the gullet there is a double Orifice; What is\nfirst received at the mouth descendeth into the first and greater\nstomack, from whence it is returned into the mouth again; and after a\nfuller mastication, and salivous mixture, what part thereof descendeth\nagain, in a moist and succulent body, it slides down the softer and more\npermeable Orifice, into the Omasus or third stomack; and from thence\nconveyed into the fourth, receives its last digestion. The other dry and\nexuccous part after rumination by the larger and stronger Orifice\nbeareth into the first stomack, from thence into the _Reticulum_, and so\nprogressively into the other divisions. And therefore in Calves newly\ncalved, there is little or no use of the two first Ventricles, for the\nmilk and liquid aliment slippeth down the softer Orifice, into the third\nstomack; where making little or no stay, it passeth into the fourth, the\nseat of the _Coagulum_, or Runnet, or that division of stomack which\nseems to bear the name of the whole, in the Greek translation of the\nPriests Fee, in the Sacrifice of Peace-offerings.\n\nAs for those Rhomboidal Figures made by the Cartilagineous parts of the\nWezon, in the Lungs of great Fishes, and other animals, as _Rondeletius_\ndiscovered, we have not found them so to answer our Figure as to be\ndrawn into illustration; Something we expected in the more discernable\ntexture of the lungs of frogs, which notwithstanding being but two\ncurious bladders not weighing above a grain, we found interwoven with\nveins, not observing any just order. More orderly situated are those\ncretaceous and chalky concretions found sometimes in the bignesse of a\nsmall fech on either side their spine; which being not agreeable unto\nour order, nor yet observed by any, we shall not here discourse on.\n\nBut had we found a better account and tolerable Anatomy of that\nprominent jowle of the _Sperma Ceti_ Whale,[159] then questuary\noperation, or the stench of the last cast upon our shoar, permitted, we\nmight have perhaps discovered some handsome order in those Net-like\nseases and sockets, made like honey-combs, containing that medicall\nmatter.\n\n [159] 1652. _described in our_ Pseudo Epidem. _Edit._ 3.\n\nLastly, The incession or locall motion of animals is made with analogy\nunto this figure, by decussative diametrals, Quincunciall Lines and\nangles. For to omit the enquiry how Butterflies and breezes move their\nfour wings, how birds and fishes in ayre and water move by joynt stroaks\nof opposite wings and Finnes, and how salient animals in jumping forward\nseem to arise and fall upon a square base; As the station of most\nQuadrupeds is made upon a long square, so in their motion they make a\nRhomboides; their common progression being performed Diametrally, by\ndecussation and crosse advancement of their legges, which not observed\nbegot that remarkable absurdity in the position of the legges of\n_Castors_ horse in the Capitoll. The Snake which moveth circularly makes\nhis spires in like order, the convex and concave spirals answering each\nother at alternate distances; In the motion of man the armes and legges\nobserve this thwarting position, but the legges alone do move\nQuincuncially by single angles with some resemblance of an V measured by\nsuccessive advancement from each foot, and the angle of indenture great\nor lesse, according to the extent or brevity of the stride.\n\nStudious Observators may discover more analogies in the orderly book of\nnature, and cannot escape the Elegancy of her hand in other\ncorrespondencies. The Figures of nails and crucifying appurtenances, are\nbut precariously made out in the _Granadilla_ or flower of Christs\npassion; And we despair to behold in these parts that handsome draught\nof crucifixion in the fruit of the _Barbado_ Pine. The seminal Spike of\n_Phalaris_, or great shaking grasse, more nearly answers the tayl of a\nRattle-Snake, then many resemblances in Porta: And if the man\n_Orchis_[160] of _Culumna_ be well made out, it excelleth all analogies.\nIn young Wall-nuts cut athwart, it is not hard to apprehend strange\ncharacters; and in those of somewhat elder growth, handsome ornamental\ndraughts about a plain crosse. In the root of _Osmond_ or Water-fern,\nevery eye may discern the form of a Half Moon, Rain-bow, or half the\ncharacter of _Pisces_. Some finde Hebrew, Arabick, Greek, and Latine\nCharacters in Plants; In a common one among us we seem to reade _Acaia_,\n_Viviu_, _Lilil_.\n\n [160] Orchis Anthropophora, Fabii Columnae.\n\nRight lines and circles make out the bulk of plants; In the parts\nthereof we finde Helicall or spirall roundles, voluta's, conicall\nSections, circular Pyramids, and frustums of _Archimedes_; And cannot\noverlook the orderly hand of nature, in the alternate succession of the\nflat and narrower sides in the tender shoots of the Ashe, or the regular\ninequality of bignesse in the five leaved flowers of Henbane, and\nsomething like in the calicular leaves of _Tutson_. How the spots of\n_Persicaria_ do manifest themselves between the sixth and tenth ribbe.\nHow the triangular capp in the stemme or _stylus_ of Tuleps doth\nconstantly point at three outward leaves. That spicated flowers do open\nfirst at the stalk. That white flowers have yellow thrums or knops. That\nthe nebbe of Beans and Pease do all look downward, and so presse not\nupon each other; And how the seeds of many pappous or downy flowers\nlockt up in sockets after a gomphosis or _mortis_-articulation, diffuse\nthemselves circularly into branches of rare order, observable in\n_Tragopogan_ or Goats-beard, conformable to the Spiders web, and the\n_Radii_ in like manner telarely inter-woven.\n\nAnd how in animall natures, even colours hold correspondencies, and\nmutuall correlations. That the colour of the Caterpillar will shew again\nin the Butterfly, with some latitude is allowable. Though the regular\nspots in their wings seem but a mealie adhesion, and such as may be\nwiped away, yet since they come in this variety, out of their cases,\nthere must be regular pores in those parts and membranes, defining such\nExudations.\n\nThat _Augustus_[161] had native notes on his body and belly, after the\norder and number in the Starre of _Charles wayne_, will not seem strange\nunto astral Physiognomy, which accordingly considereth moles in the body\nof man, or Physicall Observators, who from the position of moles in the\nface, reduce them to rule and correspondency in other parts. Whether\nafter the like method medicall conjecture may not be raised, upon parts\ninwardly affected; since parts about the lips are the criticall seats of\nPustules discharged in Agues; And scrophulous tumours about the neck do\nso often speak the like about the Mesentery, may also be considered.\n\n [161] Suet. in vit. Aug.\n\nThe russet neck in young Lambs seems but adventitious, and may owe its\ntincture to some contaction in the womb; But that if sheep have any\nblack or deep russet in their faces, they want not the same about their\nlegges and feet; That black Hounds have mealy months and feet; That\nblack Cows which have any white in their tayls, should not misse of some\nin their bellies; and if all white in their bodies, yet if\nblack-mouth'd, their ears and feet maintain the same colour, are\ncorrespondent tinctures not ordinarily failing in nature, which easily\nunites the accidents of extremities, since in some generations she\ntransmutes the parts themselves, while in the _Aurelian Metamorphosis_\nthe head of the canker becomes the Tayl of the Butterfly. Which is in\nsome way not beyond the contrivance of Art, in submersions and Inlays,\ninverting the extremes of the plant, and fetching the root from the top,\nand also imitated in handsome columnary work, in the inversion of the\nextremes; wherein the Capitel, and the Base, hold such near\ncorrespondency.\n\nIn the motive parts of animals may be discovered mutuall proportions;\nnot only in those of Quadrupeds, but in the thigh-bone, legge,\nfoot-bone, and claws of Birds. The legs of Spiders are made after a\nsesquitertian proportion, and the long legs of some locusts, double unto\nsome others. But the internodial parts of Vegetables, or spaces between\nthe joints, are contrived with more uncertainty; though the joints\nthemselves in many Plants, maintain a regular number.\n\nIn vegetable composure, the unition of prominent parts seems most to\nanswer the _Apophyses_ or processes of Animall bones, whereof they are\nthe produced parts or prominent explantations. And though in the parts\nof plants which are not ordained for motion, we do not expect\ncorrespondent Articulations; yet in the setting on of some flowers, and\nseeds in their sockets, and the lineall commissure of the pulp of\nseverall seeds, may be observed some shadow of the Harmony; some show of\nthe _Gomphosis_ or _mortis_-articulation.\n\nAs for the _Diarthrosis_ or motive Articulation, there is expected\nlittle Analogy, though long-stalked leaves doe move by long lines, and\nhave observable motions, yet are they made by outward impulsion, like\nthe motion of pendulous bodies, while the parts themselves are united by\nsome kinde of _symphysis_ unto the stock.\n\nBut standing Vegetables, void of motive-Articulations, are not without\nmany motions. For beside the motion of vegetation upward, and of\nradiation unto all quarters, that of contraction, dilatation,\ninclination, and contortion, is discoverable in many plants. To omit the\nrose of _Jericho_, the ear of Rye, which moves with change of weather,\nand the Magical spit, made of no rare plants, which windes before the\nfire, and rosts the bird without turning.\n\nEven Animals near the Classis of plants, seem to have the most restlesse\nmotions. The Summer-worm of Ponds and plashes makes a long waving\nmotion; the hair-worm seldome lies still. He that would behold a very\nanomalous motion, may observe it in the Tortile and tiring stroaks of\nGnatworms.[162]\n\n [162] _Found often in some form of redmaggot in the standing waters of\n Cisterns in the Summer._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\n\nAs for the delights, commodities, mysteries, with other concernments of\nthis order, we are unwilling to fly them over, in the short deliveries\nof _Virgil_, _Varro_, or others, and shall therefore enlarge with\nadditionall ampliations.\n\nBy this position they had a just proportion of Earth, to supply an\nequality of nourishment. The distance being ordered, thick or thin,\naccording to the magnitude or vigorous attraction of the plant, the\ngoodnesse, leannesse, or propriety of the soyl, and therefore the rule\nof _Solon_, concerning the territory of _Athens_, not extendible unto\nall; allowing the distance of six foot unto common Trees, and nine for\nthe Figge and Olive.\n\nThey had a due diffusion of their roots on all or both sides, whereby\nthey maintained some proportion to their height, in Trees of large\nradication. For that they strictly make good their profundeur or depth\nunto their height, according to common conceit, and that expression of\n_Virgil_,[163] though confirmable from the plane Tree in _Pliny_, and\nsome few examples, is not to be expected from the generation of Trees\nalmost in any kinde, either of side-spreading or tap-roots: Except we\nmeasure them by lateral and opposite diffusions; nor commonly to be\nfound in _minor_ or hearby plants; If we except Sea-holly, Liquorish,\nSea-rush, and some others.\n\n [163] Quantum vertice ad auras AEthereas, tantum radice ad tartara\n tendit.\n\nThey had a commodious radiation in their growth; and a due expansion of\ntheir branches, for shadow or delight. For trees thickly planted, do\nrunne up in height and branch with no expansion, shooting unequally or\nshort, and thinne upon the neighbouring side. And therefore Trees are\ninwardly bare, and spring, and leaf from the outward and Sunny side of\ntheir branches.\n\nWhereby they also avoided the perill of +synolethrismos+ or one tree\nperishing with another, as it happeneth ofttimes from the sick\n_effluviums_ or entanglements of the roots, falling foul with each\nother. Observable in Elmes set in hedges, where if one dieth the\nneighbouring Tree prospereth not long after.\n\nIn this situation divided into many intervals and open unto six\npassages, they had the advantage of a fair perflation from windes,\nbrushing and cleansing their surfaces; relaxing and closing their pores\nunto due perspiration. For that they afford large _effluviums_\nperceptible from odours, diffused at great distances, is observable from\nOnyons out of the Earth; which though dry, and kept until the spring, as\nthey shoot forth large and many leaves, do notably abate of their\nweight. And mint growing in glasses of water, until it arriveth unto the\nweight of an ounce, in a shady place, will sometimes exhaust a pound of\nwater.\n\nAnd as they send forth much, so may they receive somewhat in: For beside\nthe common way and road of reception by the root, there may be a\nrefection and imbibition from without; For gentle showrs refresh plants,\nthough they enter not their roots; And the good and bad _effluviums_ of\nVegetables, promote or debilitate each other. So _Epithymum_ and\n_Dodder_, rootlesse and out of the ground, maintain themselves upon\nThyme, Savory, and plants, whereon they hang. And _Ivy_ divided from the\nroot, we have observed to live some years, by the cirrous parts commonly\nconceived but as tenacles and holdfasts unto it. The stalks of mint\ncropt from the root stripped from the leaves, and set in _glasses_ with\nthe root end upward, and out of the water, we have observed to send\nforth sprouts and leaves without the aid of roots, and _scordium_ to\ngrow in like manner, the leaves set downward in water. To omit severall\nSea-plants, which grow on single roots from stones, although in very\nmany there are side-shoots _fibres_, beside the fastening root.\n\nBy this open position they were fairly exposed unto the rayes of Moon\nand Sunne, so considerable in the growth of Vegetables. For though\nPoplars, Willows, and severall Trees be made to grow about the brinks of\n_Acharon_, and dark habitations of the dead; Though some plants are\ncontent to grow in obscure Wells; wherein also old Elme pumps afford\nsometimes long bushy sprouts, not observable in any above ground: And\nlarge fields of Vegetables are able to maintain their verdure at the\nbottome and shady part of the Sea; yet the greatest number are not\ncontent without the actual rayes of the Sun, but bend, incline, and\nfollow them; As large lists of solisequious and Sun-following plants.\nAnd some observe the method of its motion in their own growth and\nconversion twining towards the West by the South, as Bryony, Hops,\nWoodbine, and several kindes of Bindeweed, which we shall more admire;\nwhen any can tell us, they observe another motion, and Twist by the\nNorth at the _Antipodes_. The same plants rooted against an erect\nNorth-wall full of holes, will finde a way through them to look upon the\nSun. And in tender plants from mustard-seed, sown in the winter, and in\na plot of earth placed inwardly against a South-window, the tender\nstalks of two leaves arose not erect, but bending towards the window,\nnor looking much higher then the Meridian Sun. And if the pot were\nturned they would work themselves into their former declinations, making\ntheir conversion by the East. That the Leaves of the Olive and some\nother Trees solstitially turn, and precisely tell us, when the Sun is\nentred _Cancer_, is scarce expectable in any Climate; and _Theophrastus_\nwarily observes it; Yet somewhat thereof is observable in our own, in\nthe leaves of Willows and Sallows, some weeks after the Solstice. But\nthe great _Convolvulus_ or white-flower'd _Bindweed_ observes both\nmotions of the Sunne, while the flower twists AEquinoctionally from the\nleft hand to the right according to the daily revolution; The stalk\ntwineth ecliptically from the right to the left, according to the annual\nconversion.\n\nSome commend the exposure of these orders unto the Western gales, as the\nmost generative and fructifying breath of heaven. But we applaud the\nHusbandry of _Solomon_, whereto agreeth the doctrine of _Theophrastus_.\nArise O North-winde, and blow thou South upon my garden, that the spices\nthereof may flow out; For the North-winde closing the pores, and\nshutting up the _effluviums_, when the South doth after open and relax\nthem; the Aromatical gummes do drop, and sweet odours fly actively from\nthem. And if his garden had the same situation, which mapps and charts\nafford it, on the East side of _Jerusalem_, and having the wall on the\nWest; these were the winds, unto which it was well exposed.\n\nBy this way of plantation they encreased the number of their trees,\nwhich they lost in _Quaternio's_, and square-orders, which is a\ncommodity insisted on by _Varro_, and one great intent of nature, in\nthis position of flowers and seeds in the elegant formation of plants,\nand the former Rules observed in naturall and artificiall Figurations.\n\nWhether in this order and one Tree in some measure breaking the cold,\nand pinching gusts of windes from the other, trees will not better\nmaintain their inward circles, and either escape or moderate their\nexcentricities, may also be considered. For the circles in Trees are\nnaturally concentricall, parallel unto the bark, and unto each other,\ntill frost and piercing windes contract and close them on the\nweatherside, the opposite semi-circle widely enlarging, and at a comely\ndistance, which hindreth oftentimes the beauty and roundnesse of Trees,\nand makes the Timber lesse serviceable; whiles the ascending juyce not\nreadily passing, settles in knots and inequalities. And therefore it is\nno new course of Agriculture, to observe the native position of Trees\naccording to North and South in their transplantations.\n\nThe same is also observable underground in the circinations and\nsphaerical rounds of Onyons, wherein the circles of the Orbes are\nofttimes larger, and the meridionall lines stand wider upon one side\nthen the other. And where the largenesse will make up the number of\nplanetical Orbes, that of _Luna_, and the lower planets excede the\ndimensions of _Saturne_, and the higher: Whether the like be not\nverified in the Circles of the large roots of Briony and Mandrake, or\nwhy in the knotts of Deale or Firre the Circles are often eccentrical,\nalthough not in a plane, but vertical and right position, deserves a\nfurther enquiry.\n\nWhether there be not some irregularity of roundnesse in most plants\naccording to their position? Whether some small compression of pores be\nnot perceptible in parts which stand against the current of waters, as\nin Reeds, Bull-rushes, and other vegetables toward the streaming\nquarter, may also be observed, and therefore such as are long and weak,\nare commonly contrived into a roundnesse of figure, whereby the water\npresseth lesse, and slippeth more smoothly from them, and even in flags\nor flat-figured leaves, the greater part obvert their sharper sides unto\nthe current in ditches.\n\nBut whether plants which float upon the surface of the water, be for the\nmost part of cooling qualities, those which shoot above it of heating\nvertues, and why? whether _Sargasso_ for many miles floating upon the\nWestern Ocean, or Sea-lettuce, and Phasganium at the bottome of our\nSeas, make good the like qualities? Why Fenny waters afford the hottest\nand sweetest plants, as Calamus, Cyperus, and Crowfoot, and mudd cast\nout of ditches most naturally produceth Arsmart? Why plants so greedy of\nwater so little regard oyl? Why since many seeds contain much oyl within\nthem, they endure it not well without, either in their growth or\nproduction? Why since Seeds shoot commonly under ground, and out of the\naire, those which are let fall in shallow glasses, upon the surface of\nthe water, will sooner sprout then those at the bottom? And if the water\nbe covered with oyle, those at the bottome will hardly sprout at all, we\nhave not room to conjecture.\n\nWhether Ivy would not lesse offend the Trees in this clean ordination,\nand well kept paths, might perhaps deserve the question. But this were a\nquaery only unto some habitations, and little concerning _Cyrus_ or the\nBabylonian territory; wherein by no industry _Harpalus_ could make Ivy\ngrow: And _Alexander_ hardly found it about those parts to imitate the\npomp of _Bacchus_. And though in these Northern Regions we are too much\nacquainted with one Ivy, we know too little of another, whereby we\napprehend not the expressions of Antiquity, the Splenetick[164] medicine\nof _Galen_, and the Emphasis of the Poet, in the beauty of the white\nIvy.[165]\n\n [164] Galen. de med. secundum loc.\n\n [165] Hedera formosior alba.\n\nThe like concerning the growth of Misseltoe, which dependeth not only\nof the _species_, or kinde of Tree, but much also of the Soil. And\ntherefore common in some places, not readily found in others, frequent\nin _France_, not so common in _Spain_, and scarce at all in the\nTerritory of _Ferrara_: Nor easily to be found where it is most required\nupon Oakes, lesse on trees continually verdant. Although in some places\nthe Olive escapeth it not, requiting its detriment, in the delightful\nview of its red Berries; as _Clusius_ observed in _Spain_, and\n_Bellonius_ about _Hierusalem_. But this Parasitical plant suffers\nnothing to grow upon it, by any way of art; nor could we ever make it\ngrow where nature had not planted it; as we have in vain attempted by\ninocculation and incision, upon its native or forreign stock, and though\nthere seem nothing improbable in the seed, it hath not succeeded by\nsation in any manner of ground, wherein we had no reason to despair\nsince we reade of vegetable horns [SN: Linschoten.], and how Rams horns\nwill root about _Goa_.\n\nBut besides these rural commodities, it cannot be meanly delectable in\nthe variety of Figures, which these orders open, and closed do make.\nWhilest every inclosure makes a _Rhombus_, the figures obliquely taken a\nRhomboides, the intervals bounded with parallel lines, and each\nintersection built upon a square, affording two Triangles or Pyramids\nvertically conjoyned; which in the strict Quincuncial order do\noppositely make acute and blunt Angles.\n\nAnd though therein we meet not with right angles, yet every Rhombus\ncontaining four Angles equal unto two right, it virtually contains two\nright in every one. Nor is this strange unto such as observe the natural\nlines of Trees, and parts disposed in them. For neither in the root doth\nnature affect this angle, which shooting downward for the stability of\nthe plant, doth best effect the same by Figures of Inclination; Nor in\nthe Branches and stalky leaves, which grow most at acute angles; as\ndeclining from their head the root, and diminishing their Angles with\ntheir altitude: Verified also in lesser Plants, whereby they better\nsupport themselves, and bear not so heavily upon the stalk: So that\nwhile near the root they often make an Angle of seventy parts, the\nsprouts near the top will often come short of thirty. Even in the nerves\nand master veines of the leaves the acute angle ruleth; the obtuse but\nseldome found, and in the backward part of the leaf, reflecting and\narching about the stalk. But why ofttimes one side of the leaf is\nunequal unto the other, as in Hazell and Oaks, why on either side the\nmaster vein the lesser and derivative channels stand not directly\nopposite, nor at equal angles, respectively unto the adverse side, but\nthose of one part do often exceed the other, as the Wallnut and many\nmore, deserves another enquiry.\n\nNow if for this order we affect coniferous and tapering Trees,\nparticularly the Cypresse, which grows in a conical figure; we have\nfound a tree not only of great Ornament, but in its Essentials of\naffinity unto this order. A solid Rhombus being made by the conversion\nof two Equicrural Cones, as _Archimedes_ hath defined. And these were\nthe common Trees about _Babylon_, and the East, whereof the Ark was\nmade; and _Alexander_ found no Trees so accommodable to build his Navy;\nAnd this we rather think to be the tree mentioned in the Canticles,\nwhich stricter Botanology will hardly allow to be Camphire.\n\nAnd if delight or ornamentall view invite a comely disposure by circular\namputations, as is elegantly performed in Hawthorns; then will they\nanswer the figures made by the conversion of a Rhombus, which maketh two\nconcentrical Circles; the greater circumference being made by the lesser\nangles, the lesser by the greater.\n\nThe Cylindrical figure of trees is virtually contained and latent in\nthis order. A Cylinder or long round being made by the conversion or\nturning of a Parallelogram, and most handsomely by a long square, which\nmakes an equal, strong, and lasting figure in trees, agreeable unto the\nbody and motive parts of animals, the greatest number of Plants, and\nalmost all roots, though their stalks be angular, and of many corners,\nwhich seem not to follow the figure of their Seeds; Since many angular\nSeeds send forth round stalks, and sphaericall seeds arise from angular\nspindles, and many rather conform unto their roots, as the round stalks\nof bulbous Roots, and in tuberous Roots stemmes of like figure. But why\nsince the largest number of Plants maintain a circular Figure, there are\nso few with teretous or long round leaves; why coniferous Trees are\ntenuifolious or narrow leafed, why Plants of few or no joynts have\ncommonly round stalks, why the greatest number of hollow stalks are\nround stalks; or why in this variety of angular stalks the quadrangular\nmost exceedeth, were too long a speculation; Mean while obvious\nexperience may finde, that in Plants of divided leaves above, nature\noften beginneth circularly in the two first leaves below, while in the\nsingular plant of Ivy, she exerciseth a contrary Geometry, and beginning\nwith angular leaves below, rounds them in the upper branches.\n\nNor can the rows in this order want delight, as carrying an aspect\nanswerable unto the _dipteros hypoethros_, or double order of columns\nopen above; the opposite ranks of Trees standing like pillars in the\n_Cavedia_ of the Courts of famous buildings, and the _Portico's_ of the\n_Templa subdialia_ of old; Somewhat imitating the _Peristylia_ or\nCloyster buildings, and the _Exedrae_ of the Ancients, wherein men\ndiscoursed, walked and exercised; For that they derived the rule of\nColumnes from trees, especially in their proportionall diminutions, is\nillustrated by _Vitruvius_ from the shafts of Firre and Pine. And though\nthe inter-arboration do imitate the _Areostylos_, or thin order, not\nstrictly answering the proportion of intercolumniations; yet in many\ntrees they will not exceed the intermission of the Columnes in the court\nof the Tabernacle; which being an hundred cubits long, and made up by\ntwenty pillars, will afford no lesse then intervals of five cubits.\n\nBeside, in this kinde of aspect the sight being not diffused but\ncircumscribed between long parallels and the +episkiasmos+ and\nadumbration from the branches, it frameth a penthouse over the eye, and\nmaketh a quiet vision: And therefore in diffused and open aspects, men\nhollow their hand above their eye, and make an artificiall brow, whereby\nthey direct the dispersed rayes of sight, and by this shade preserve a\nmoderate light in the chamber of the eye; keeping the _pupilla_ plump\nand fair, and not contracted or shrunk as in light and vagrant vision.\n\nAnd therefore providence hath arched and paved the great house of the\nworld, with colours of mediocrity, that is, blew and green, above and\nbelow the sight, moderately terminating the _acies_ of the eye. For most\nplants, though green above-ground, maintain their original white below\nit, according to the candour of their seminall pulp, and the rudimental\nleaves do first appear in that colour; observable in Seeds sprouting in\nwater upon their first foliation. Green seeming to be the first\nsupervenient, or above-ground complexion of Vegetables, separable in\nmany upon ligature or inhumation, as Succory, Endive, Artichoaks, and\nwhich is also lost upon fading in the Autumn.\n\nAnd this is also agreeable unto water it self, the alimental vehicle of\nplants, which first altereth into this colour; And containing many\nvegetable seminalities, revealeth their Seeds by greennesse; and\ntherefore soonest expected in rain or standing water, not easily found\nin distilled or water strongly boiled; wherein the seeds are\nextinguished by fire and decoction, and therefore last long and pure\nwithout such alteration, affording neither uliginous coats, gnatworms,\nAcari, hairworms, like crude and common water; And therefore most fit\nfor wholsome beverage, and with malt makes Ale and Beer without boyling.\nWhat large water-drinkers some Plants are, the Canary-tree and Birches\nin some Northern Countries, drenching the fields about them do\nsufficiently demonstrate. How water it self is able to maintain the\ngrowth of Vegetables, and without extinction of their generative or\nmedicall vertues; Beside the experiment of _Helmonts_ tree, we have\nfound in some which have lived six years in glasses. The seeds of\nScurvy-grasse growing in water-pots, have been fruitful in the Land;\nand _Asarum_ after a years space, and once casting its leaves in water\nin the second leaves, hath handsomely performed its vomiting operation.\n\nNor are only dark and green colours, but shades and shadows contrived\nthrough the great Volume of nature, and trees ordained not only to\nprotect and shadow others, but by their shades and shadowing parts, to\npreserve and cherish themselves. The whole radiation or branchings\nshadowing the stock and the root, the leaves, the branches and fruit,\ntoo much exposed to the windes and scorching Sunne. The calicular leaves\ninclose the tender flowers, and the flowers themselves lye wrapt about\nthe seeds, in their rudiment and first formations, which being advanced\nthe flowers fall away; and are therefore contrived in variety of\nFigures, best satisfying the intention; Handsomely observable in hooded\nand gaping flowers, and the Butterfly bloomes of leguminous plants, the\nlower leaf closely involving the rudimental Cod, and the alary or wingy\ndivisions embracing or hanging over it.\n\nBut Seeds themselves do lie in perpetual shades, either under the leaf,\nor shut up in coverings; and such as lye barest, have their husks,\nskins, and pulps about them, wherein the nebbe and generative particle\nlyeth moist and secured from the injury of Aire and Sunne. Darknesse and\nlight hold interchangeable dominions, and alternately rule the seminal\nstate of things. Light unto _Pluto_[166] is darknesse unto _Jupiter_.\nLegions of seminall _Idaea's_ lye in their second Chaos and _Orcus_ of\n_Hippocrates_; till putting on the habits of their forms, they shew\nthemselves upon the stage of the world, and open dominion of _Jove_.\nThey that held the Stars of heaven were but rayes and flashing glimpses\nof the Empyreall light, through holes and perforations of the upper\nheaven, took of the natural shadows of stars, while according to better\ndiscovery the poor Inhabitants of the Moon[167] have but a polary life,\nand must passe half their dayes in the shadow of that Luminary.\n\n [166] Lux orco, tenebrae Jovi, tenebrae orco, lux Jovi. _Hippocr._ de\n diaeta.\n\n [167] S. Hevelii Selenographia.\n\nLight that makes things seen, makes some things invisible, were it not\nfor darknesse and the shadow of the earth, the noblest part of the\nCreation had remained unseen, and the Stars in heaven as invisible as on\nthe fourth day, when they were created above the Horizon, with the Sun,\nor there was not an eye to behold them. The greatest mystery of Religion\nis expressed by adumbration, and in the noblest part of Jewish Types, we\nfinde the Cherubims shadowing the Mercy-seat: Life it self is but the\nshadow of death, and souls departed but the shadows of the living: All\nthings fall under this name. The Sunne it self is but the dark\n_simulachrum_, and light but the shadow of God.\n\nLastly, It is no wonder that this Quincunciall order was first and still\naffected as gratefull unto the Eye: For all things are seen\nQuincuncially; For at the eye the Pyramidal rayes from the object,\nreceive a decussation, and so strike a second base upon the _Retina_ or\nhinder coat, the proper organ of Vision; wherein the pictures from\nobjects are represented, answerable to the paper, or wall in the dark\nchamber; after the decussation of the rayes at the hole of the\nhornycoat, and their refraction upon the Christalline humour, answering\nthe _foramen_ of the window, and the _convex_ or burning-glasses, which\nrefract the rayes that enter it. And if ancient Anatomy would hold, a\nlike disposure there was of the optick or visual nerves in the brain,\nwherein Antiquity conceived a concurrence by decussation. And this not\nonly observable in the Laws of direct Vision, but in some part also\nverified in the reflected rayes of sight. For making the angle of\nincidence equal to that of reflexion, the visuall ray returneth\nQuincuncially, and after the form of a V, and the line of reflexion\nbeing continued unto the place of vision, there ariseth a\nsemi-decussation which makes the object seen in a perpendicular unto it\nself, and as farre below the reflectent, as it is from it above,\nobservable in the Sun and Moon beheld in water.\n\nAnd this is also the law of reflexion in moved bodies and sounds, which\nthough not made by decussation, observe the rule of equality between\nincidence and reflexion; whereby whispering places are framed by\nElliptical arches laid side-wise; where the voice being delivered at the\n_focus_ of one extremity, observing an equality unto the angle of\nincidence, it will reflect unto the _focus_ of the other end, and so\nescape the ears of the standers in the middle.\n\nA like rule is observed in the reflection of the vocall and sonorous\nline in Ecchoes, which cannot therefore be heard in all stations. But\nhapning in woody plantations, by waters, and able to return some words;\nif reacht by a pleasant and well-dividing voice, there may be heard the\nsoftest notes in nature.\n\nAnd this not only verified in the way of sense, but in animall and\nintellectual receptions. Things entring upon the intellect by a Pyramid\nfrom without, and thence into the memory by another from within, the\ncommon decussation being in the understanding as is delivered by\n_Bovillus_.[168] Whether the intellectual and phantastical lines be not\nthus rightly disposed, but magnified, diminished, distorted, and ill\nplaced in the Mathematicks of some brains, whereby they have irregular\napprehensions of things, perverted notions, conceptions, and incurable\nhallucinations, were no unpleasant speculation.\n\n [168] Car. Bovillus de intellectu.\n\nAnd if AEgyptian Philosophy may obtain, the scale of influences was thus\ndisposed, and the geniall spirits of both worlds, do trace their way in\nascending and descending Pyramids, mystically apprehended in the Letter\nX, and the open Bill and stradling Legges of a Stork, which was imitated\nby that Character.\n\nOf this Figure _Plato_ made choice to illustrate the motion of the soul,\nboth of the world and man; while he delivered that God divided the whole\nconjunction length-wise, according to figure of a Greek X, and then\nturning it about reflected it into a circle; By the circle implying the\nuniform motion of the first Orb, and by the right lines, the planetical\nand various motions within it. And this also with application unto the\nsoul of man, which hath a double aspect, one right, whereby it beholdeth\nthe body, and objects without; another circular and reciprocal, whereby\nit beholdeth it self. The circle declaring the motion of the indivisible\nsoul, simple, according to the divinity of its nature, and returning\ninto it self; the right lines respecting the motion pertaining unto\nsense, and vegetation, and the central decussation, the wonderous\nconnexion of the severall faculties conjointly in one substance. And so\nconjoyned the unity and duality of the soul, and made out the three\nsubstances so much considered by him; That is, the indivisible or\ndivine, the divisible or corporeal, and that third, which was the\n_Systasis_ or harmony of those two, in the mystical decussation.\n\nAnd if that were clearly made out which _Justin Martyr_ took for\ngranted, this figure hath had the honour to characterise and notifie our\nblessed Saviour, as he delivereth in that borrowed expression from\n_Plato: Decussavit eum in universo_, the hint whereof he would have\n_Plato_ derive from the figure of the brazen Serpent, and to have\nmistaken the Letter X for T, whereas it is not improbable, he learned\nthese and other mystical expressions in his Learned Observations of\nAEgypt, where he might obviously behold the Mercurial characters, the\nhanded crosses, and other mysteries not throughly understood in the\nsacred Letter X, which being derivative from the Stork, one of the ten\nsacred animals, might be originally AEgyptian, and brought into _Greece_\nby _Cadmus_ of that Countrey.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\n\nTo enlarge this contemplation unto all the mysteries and secrets,\naccommodable unto this number, were inexcusable Pythagorisme, yet cannot\nomit the ancient conceit of five surnamed the number of justice[169]; as\njustly dividing between the digits, and hanging in the centre of Nine,\ndescribed by square numeration, which angularly divided will make the\ndecussated number; and so agreeable unto the Quincunciall Ordination,\nand rowes divided by Equality, and just _decorum_, in the whole\ncomplantation; And might be the Originall of that common game among us,\nwherein the fifth place is Soveraigne, and carrieth the chief intention.\nThe Ancients wisely instructing youth, even in their recreations unto\nvirtue, that is, early to drive at the middle point and Central Seat of\njustice.\n\n [169] +dike+\n . . .\n . . .\n . . .\n\nNor can we omit how agreeable unto this number an handsome division is\nmade in Trees and Plants, since _Plutarch_ and the Ancients have named\nit the Divisive Number, justly dividing the Entities of the world, many\nremarkable things in it, and also comprehending the generall[170]\ndivision of Vegetables. And he that considers how most blossomes of\nTrees, and greatest number of Flowers, consist of five Leaves; and\ntherein doth rest the setled rule of nature; So that in those which\nexceed there is often found, or easily made a variety; may readily\ndiscover how nature rests in this number, which is indeed the first rest\nand pause of numeration in the fingers, the natural Organs thereof. Nor\nin the division of the feet of perfect animals doth nature exceed this\naccount. And even in the joynts of feet, which in birds are most\nmultiplied, surpasseth not this number; So progressionally making them\nout in many, that from five in the foreclaw she descendeth unto two in\nthe hindemost. And so in fower feet makes up the number of joynts, in\nthe five fingers or toes of man.\n\n[170] +Dendron, Thamnos, Phryganon, Poa+, Arbor, frutex, suffrutex,\n herba, _and that fifth which comprehendeth the_ fungi _and_\n tubera, _whether to be named_ +Aschion+ _or_ +gymnon+,\n _comprehending also_ conserva marina salsa, _and Sea-cords, of so\n many yards length_.\n\nNot to omit the Quintuple Section of a Cone,[171] of handsome practise\nin Ornamentall Garden-plots, and in some way discoverable in so many\nworks of Nature; In the leaves, fruits, and seeds of Vegetables, and\nscales of some Fishes, so much considerable in glasses, and the optick\ndoctrine; wherein the learned may consider the Crystalline humour of the\neye in the cuttle-fish and _Loligo_.\n\n [171] Elleipsis, parabola, Hyperbole, Circulus, Triangulum.\n\nHe that forgets not how Antiquity named this the Conjugall or wedding\nNumber, and made it the Embleme of the most remarkable conjunction, will\nconceive it duely appliable unto this handsome Oeconomy, and vegetable\ncombination; May hence apprehend the allegoricall sence of that obscure\nexpression of _Hesiod_,[172] and afford no improbable reason why _Plato_\nadmitted his Nuptiall guests by fives, in the kindred of the\nmarried[173] couple.\n\n [172] +pemptas+ id est nuptias multas. _Rhodig._\n\n [173] _Plato_ de leg. 6.\n\nAnd though a sharper mystery might be implied in the Number of the five\nwise and foolish Virgins, which were to meet the Bridegroom, yet was the\nsame agreeable unto the Conjugall Number, which ancient Numerists made\nout by two and three, the first parity and imparity, the active and\npassive digits, the materiall and formall principles in generative\nSocieties. And not discordant even from the customes of the _Romans_,\nwho admitted but five[174] Torches in their Nuptiall Solemnities.\nWhether there were any mystery or not implied, the most generative\nanimals were created on this day, and had accordingly the largest\nbenediction; And under a Quintuple consideration, wanton Antiquity\nconsidered the Circumstances of generation, while by this number of five\nthey naturally divided the Nectar of the fifth Planet.\n\n [174] Plutarch problem. Rom. 1.\n\nThe same number in the Hebrew Mysteries and Cabalistical Accounts was\nthe Character[175] of Generation; declared by the Letter _He_, the fifth\nin their Alphabet; According to that Cabalisticall _Dogma_: If _Abram_\nhad not had this Letter added unto his Name, he had remained fruitlesse,\nand without the power of Generation: Not onely because hereby the number\nof his Name attained two hundred fourty eight, the number of the\naffirmative precepts, but because as in created natures there is a male\nand female, so in divine and intelligent productions, the mother of Life\nand Fountain of souls in Cabalisticall Technology is called _Binah_;\nwhose Seal and Character was _He._ So that being sterill before, he\nreceived the power of generation from that measure and mansion in the\nArchetype; and was made conformable unto _Binah._ And upon such involved\nconsiderations, the ten[176] of _Sarai_ was exchanged into five. If any\nshall look upon this as a stable number, and fitly appropriable unto\nTrees, as Bodies of Rest and Station, he hath herein a great Foundation\nin nature, who observing much variety in legges and motive Organs of\nAnimals, as two, four, six, eight, twelve, fourteen, and more, hath\npassed over five and ten, and assigned them unto none.[177] And for the\nstability of this Number, he shall not want the sphericity of its\nnature, which multiplied in it self, will return into its own\ndenomination, and bring up the reare of the account. Which is also one\nof the Numbers that makes up the mysticall Name of God, which consisting\nof Letters denoting all the sphaericall Numbers, ten, five, and six;\nEmphatically sets forth the notion of _Trismegistus_, and that\nintelligible Sphear which is the Nature of God.\n\n [175] Archang. dog. Cabal.\n\n [176] Jod _into_ He.\n\n [177] Or very few, as the _Phalangium monstrosum Brasilianum, Clusii et\n Jac de Laet. Cur. poster. Americae, Descript._ If perfectly\n described.\n\nMany Expressions by this Number occurre in Holy Scripture, perhaps\nunjustly laden with mysticall Expositions, and little concerning our\norder. That the Israelites were forbidden to eat the fruit of their new\nplanted Trees, before the fifth yeare, was very agreeable unto the\nnaturall Rules of Husbandry; Fruits being unwholsome, and lash, before\nthe fourth, or fifth Yeare. In the second day or Feminine part of five,\nthere was added no approbation. For in the third or masculine day, the\nsame is twice repeated; and a double benediction inclosed both\nCreations, whereof the one in some part was but an accomplishment of the\nother. That the Trespasser[178] was to pay a fifth part above the head\nor principall, makes no secret in this Number, and implied no more then\none part above the principall; which being considered in four parts, the\nadditionall forfeit must bear the Name of a fift. The five golden mice\nhad plainly their determination from the number of the Princes; That\nfive should put to flight an hundred might have nothing mystically\nimplyed; considering a rank of Souldiers could scarce consist of a\nlesser number. Saint _Paul_ had rather speak five words in a known then\nten thousand in an unknown tongue: That is as little as could well be\nspoken. A simple proposition consisting of three words, and a complexed\none, not ordinarily short of five.\n\n [178] Lev. 6.\n\nMore considerable there are in this mysticall account, which we must not\ninsist on. And therefore why the radicall Letters in the Pentateuch\nshould equall the number of the Souldiery of the Tribes; Why our Saviour\nin the Wildernesse fed five thousand persons with five Barley Loaves,\nand again, but four thousand with no lesse then seven of Wheat? Why\n_Joseph_ designed five changes of Rayment unto _Benjamin_? and _David_\ntook just five pibbles[179] out of the Brook against the Pagan Champion?\nWe leave it unto Arithmeticall Divinity, and Theologicall explanation.\n\n [179] +tessara en ke+ _four and one, or five_. Scalig.\n\nYet if any delight in new Problemes, or think it worth the enquiry,\nwhether the Criticall Physician hath rightly hit the nominall notation\nof Quinque; Why the Ancients mixed five or three but not four parts of\nwater unto their Wine: And _Hippocrates_ observed a fifth proportion in\nthe mixture of water with milk, as in _Dysenteries_ and bloudy fluxes.\nUnder what abstruse foundation Astrologers do figure the good or bad\nFate from our Children, in good Fortune,[180] or the fifth house of\ntheir Celestial Schemes. Whether the AEgyptians described a Starre by a\nFigure of five points, with reference unto the five[181] Capitall\naspects, whereby they transmit their Influences, or abstruser\nConsiderations? Why the Cabalisticall Doctors, who conceive the whole\n_Sephiroth_, or divine Emanations to have guided the ten-stringed Harp\nof _David_, whereby he pacified the evil spirit of _Saul_, in strict\nnumeration doe begin with the Perihypate Meson, or ff fa ut, and so\nplace the Tiphereth answering C sol fa ut, upon the fifth string: Or\nwhether this number be oftner applied unto bad things and ends, then\ngood in holy Scripture, and why? He may meet with abstrusities of no\nready resolution.\n\n [180] +Agathe tyche+, _or_ bona fortuna _the name of the fifth house_.\n\n [181] _Conjunct, opposite, sextile, trigonal, tetragonal._\n\nIf any shall question the rationality of that Magick, in the cure of the\nblinde man by _Serapis_, commanded to place five fingers on his Altar,\nand then his hand on his Eyes? Why since the whole Comoedy is\nprimarily and naturally comprised in four[182] parts; and Antiquity\npermitted not so many persons to speak in one Scene, yet would not\ncomprehend the same in more or lesse then five acts? Why amongst\nSea-starres nature chiefly delighteth in five points? And since there\nare found some of no fewer then twelve, and some of seven and nine,\nthere are few or none discovered of six or eight? If any shall enquire\nwhy the Flowers of Rue properly consist of four Leaves, The first and\nthird Flower have five? Why since many Flowers have one leaf or\nnone,[183] as _Scaliger_ will have it, diverse three, and the greatest\nnumber consist of five divided from their bottomes; there are yet so few\nof two: or why nature generally beginning or setting out with two\nopposite leaves at the Root, doth so seldome conclude with that order\nand number at the Flower? he shall not passe his hours in vulgar\nspeculations.\n\n [182] +Protasis, epitasis, katastasis, katastrophe+.\n\n [183] Unifolium nullifolima.\n\nIf any shall further quaery why magneticall Philosophy excludeth\ndecussations, and needles transversly placed do naturally distract their\nverticities. Why Geomancers do imitate the Quintuple Figure, in their\nMother Characters of Acquisition and Amission, _etc._ somewhat answering\nthe Figures in the Lady or speckled Beetle? With what Equity,\nChiromantical conjecturers decry these decussations in the Lines and\nMounts of the hand? What that decussated Figure intendeth in the medall\nof _Alexander_ the Great? Why the Goddesses sit commonly crosse-legged\nin ancient draughts, Since _Juno_ is described in the same as a\nvenefical posture to hinder the birth of _Hercules_? If any shall doubt\nwhy at the Amphidromicall Feasts, on the fifth day after the Childe was\nborn, presents were sent from friends, of _Polipusses_, and Cuttle\nfishes? Why five must be only left in that Symbolicall mutiny among the\nmen of _Cadmus_? Why _Proteus_ in _Homer_ the Symbole of the first\nmatter, before he setled himself in the midst of his Sea-Monsters, doth\nplace them out by fives? Why the fifth years Oxe was acceptable\nSacrifice unto _Jupiter_? Or why the Noble _Antoninus_ in some sence\ndoth call the soul it self a Rhombus? He shall not fall on trite or\ntriviall disquisitions. And these we invent and propose unto acuter\nenquirers, nauseating crambe verities and questions over-queried. Flat\nand flexible truths are beat out by every hammer; But _Vulcan_ and his\nwhole forge sweat to work out _Achilles_ his armour. A large field is\nyet left unto sharper discerners to enlarge upon this order, to search\nout the _quaternio's_ and figured draughts of this nature, and\nmoderating the study of names, and meer nomenclature of plants, to erect\ngeneralities, disclose unobserved proprieties, not only in the\nvegetable shop, but the whole volume of nature; affording delightfull\nTruths, confirmable by sense and ocular Observation, which seems to me\nthe surest path, to trace the Labyrinth of truth. For though discursive\nenquiry and rationall conjecture, may leave handsome gashes and\nflesh-wounds; yet without conjunction of this expect no mortal or\ndispatching blows unto errour.\n\nBut the Quincunx[184] of Heaven runs low, and 'tis time to close the\nfive ports of knowledge; We are unwilling to spin out our awaking\nthoughts into the phantasmes of sleep, which often continueth\npraecogitations; making Cables of Cobwebbes and Wildernesses of handsome\nGroves. Beside _Hippocrates_[185] hath spoke so little and the\nOneirocriticall Masters,[186] have left such frigid Interpretations from\nplants, that there is little encouragement to dream of Paradise it self.\nNor will the sweetest delight of Gardens afford much comfort in sleep;\nwherein the dulnesse of that sense shakes hands with delectable odours;\nand though in the Bed[187] of _Cleopatra_, can hardly with any delight\nraise up the ghost of a Rose.\n\n [184] Hyades _near the Horizon about midnight, at that time._\n\n [185] De insomniis.\n\n [186] Artemodorus et Apomazar.\n\n [187] _Strewed with roses._\n\nNight, which Pagan Theology could make the daughter of _Chaos_, affords\nno advantage to the description of order: Although no lower then that\nMasse can we derive its Genealogy. All things began in order, so shall\nthey end, and so shall they begin again; according to the ordainer of\norder and mystical Mathematicks of the City of heaven.\n\nThough _Somnus_ in _Homer_ be sent to rowse up _Agamemnon_, I finde no\nsuch effects in the drowsy approaches of sleep. To keep our eyes open\nlonger were but to act our _Antipodes_. The Huntsmen are up in\n_America_, and they are already past their first sleep in _Persia_. But\nwho can be drowsie at that howr which freed us from everlasting sleep?\nor have slumbring thoughts at that time, when sleep it self must end,\nand as some conjecture all shall awake again?\n\n _FINIS_\n\n\n\n\n THE STATIONER TO THE READER\n\n\nI cannot omit to advertise, that a Book was published not long since,\nEntituled, _Natures Cabinet Unlockt_, bearing the Name of this Authour:\nIf any man have been benefited thereby this Authour is not so ambitious\nas to challenge the honour thereof, as having no hand in that Work. To\ndistinguish of true and spurious Peeces was the Originall Criticisme,\nand some were so handsomely counterfeited, that the Entitled Authours\nneeded not to disclaime them. But since it is so, that either he must\nwrite himself, or Others will write for him, I know no better Prevention\nthen to act his own part with lesse intermission of his Pen.\n\n\n\n\n CERTAIN\n\n MISCELLANY\n\n TRACTS.\n\n\n Written by\n\n _THOMAS BROWN_, K^t,\n and Doctour of Physick;\n late of _NORWICH_.\n\n\n _LONDON_,\n\n Printed for _Charles Mearne_, and are to be sold\n by _Henry Bonwick_, at the _Red Lyon_,\n in St. _Paul's_ Church-Yard,\n\n MDCLXXXIV.\n\n\n\n\n THE PUBLISHER TO THE READER\n\n\nThe Papers from which these _Tracts_ were printed, were, a while since,\ndeliver'd to me by, those worthy persons, the _Lady_ and _Son_ of the\nexcellent Authour. He himself gave no charge concerning his\n_Manuscripts_, either for the suppressing or the publishing of them.\nYet, seeing he had procured _Transcripts_ of them, and had kept those\n_Copies_ by him, it seemeth probable that He designed them for publick\nuse.\n\nThus much of his Intention being presumed, and many who had tasted of\nthe fruits of his former studies being covetous of more of the like\nkind; Also these _Tracts_ having been perused and much approv'd of by\nsome Judicious and Learned men; I was not unwilling to be instrumental\nin fitting them for the Press.\n\nTo this end, I selected them out of many disordred Papers, and dispos'd\nthem into such a method as They seem'd capable of; beginning first with\n_Plants_, going on to _Animals_, proceeding farther to things relating\nto _Men_, and concluding with _matters_ of a _various nature_.\n\nConcerning the _Plants_, I did, on purpose, forbear to range them (as\nsome advised) according to their _Tribes_ and _Families_; because, by so\ndoing, I should have represented that as a studied and formal work,\nwhich is but a Collection of _occasional Essaies_. And, indeed, both\nthis _Tract_, and those which follow, were rather the _diversions_ than\nthe _Labours_ of his Pen: and, because He did, as it were, drop down his\nThoughts of a sudden, in those little spaces of vacancy which he\nsnatch'd from those very many occasions which gave him hourly\ninterruption; If there appears, here and there, any uncorrectness in the\nstyle, a small degree of Candour sufficeth to excuse it.\n\nIf there be any such errours in the words, I'm sure the Press has not\nmade them fewer; but I do not hold my self oblig'd to answer for That\nwhich I could not perfectly govern. However, the matter is not of any\ngreat moment: such errours will not mislead a Learned Reader; and He who\nis not such in some competent degree, is not a fit Peruser of these\nLETTERS. Such these _Tracts_ are; but, for the Persons to whom they were\nwritten, I cannot well learn their _Names_ from those few obscure marks\nwhich the Authour has set at the beginning of them. And these Essaies\nbeing _Letters_, as many as take offence at some few familiar things\nwhich the Authour hath mixed with them, find fault with decence. Men are\nnot wont to set down Oracles in every line they write to their\nAcquaintance.\n\nThere, still, remain other brief Discourses written by this most Learned\nand ingenious Authour. Those, also, may come forth, when some of his\nFriends shall have sufficient leisure; and at such due distance from\nthese Tracts, that They may follow rather than stifle them.\n\nAmongst these Manuscripts there is one which gives a brief Account of\nall the _Monuments_ of the _Cathedral_ of _Norwich_. It was written\nmerely for private use: and the Relations of the Authour expect such\nJustice from those into whose hands some imperfect Copies of it are\nfallen; that, without their Consent first obtain'd, they forbear the\npublishing of It.\n\nThe truth is, matter equal to the skill of the Antiquary was not, there,\nafforded: had a fit Subject of that nature offer'd it self, He would\nscarce have been guilty of an oversight like to that of _Ausonius_, who,\nin the description of his native City of _Burdeaux_, omitted the two\nfamous Antiquities of it, _Palais de Tutele_, and, _Palais de Galien_.\n\nConcerning the _Authour himself_, I chuse to be silent, though I have\nhad the happiness to have been, for some years, known to him. There is\non foot a design of writing his _Life_: and there are, already, some\nMemorials collected by one of his ancient Friends. Till that work be\nperfected, the Reader may content himself with these present _Tracts_;\nall which commending themselves by their _Learning_, _Curiosity_ and\n_Brevity_, if He be not pleased with them, he seemeth to me to be\ndistemper'd with such a niceness of Imagination as no wise man is\nconcern'd to humour.\n\n _THO. TENISON._\n\n\n\n\n OBSERVATIONS\n\n Upon several\n\n PLANTS mention'd in SCRIPTURE.\n\n\n TRACT I\n\n\n[Sidenote: _The Introduction._]\n\nSIR,\n\nThough many ordinary Heads run smoothly over the Scripture, yet I must\nacknowledge, it is one of the hardest Books I ever met with: and\ntherefore well deserveth those numerous Comments, Expositions and\nAnnotations which make up a good part of our Libraries.\n\nHowever so affected I am therewith, that I wish there had been more of\nit: and a larger Volume of that Divine Piece which leaveth such welcome\nimpressions, and somewhat more, in the Readers, than the words and sense\nafter it. At least, who would not be glad that many things barely hinted\nwere at large delivered in it? The particulars of the Dispute between\nthe Doctours and our Saviour could not but be welcome to them, who have\nevery word in honour which proceeded from his mouth, or was otherwise\ndelivered by him: and so would be glad to be assured what he wrote with\nhis Finger on the ground: But especially to have a particular of that\ninstructing Narration or Discourse which he made unto the Disciples\nafter his resurrection, where 'tis said [SN: Luke 24. 27.]: _And\nbeginning at Moses, and all the Prophets, he expounded unto them in all\nthe Scriptures the things concerning himself._\n\nBut to omit Theological obscurities, you must needs observe that most\nSciences do seem to have something more nearly to consider in the\nexpressions of the Scripture.\n\nAstronomers find therein the Names but of few Stars, scarce so many as\nin _Achilles_ his _Buckler_ in _Homer_, and almost the very same. But in\nsome passages of the Old Testament they think they discover the Zodiacal\ncourse of the Sun: and they, also, conceive an Astronomical sense in\nthat elegant expression of S. _James_[SN: Jam. 1. 17.] concerning _the\nfather of lights, with whom there is no variableness, neither shadow of\nturning_: and therein an allowable allusion unto the tropical conversion\nof the Sun, whereby ensueth a variation of heat, light, and also of\nshadows from it. But whether the _Stellae erraticae_, or wandring Stars in\nS. _Jude_, may be referr'd to the celestial Planets, or some\nmeteorological wandring Stars, _Ignes fatui, Stellae cadentes et\nerraticae_, or had any allusion unto the Impostour _Barchochebas_, or\n_Stellae Filius_, who afterward appeared, and wandred about in the time\nof _Adrianus_, they leave unto conjecture.\n\nChirurgions may find their whole Art in that one passage, concerning the\nRib which God took out of _Adam_, that is their +diairesis+ in opening\nthe Flesh, +exairesis+ in taking out the Rib, and +synthesis+ in closing\nand healing the part again.\n\nRhetoricians and Oratours take singular notice of very many excellent\npassages, stately metaphors, noble tropes and elegant expressions, not\nto be found or parallel'd in any other Authour.\n\nMineralists look earnestly into the twenty eighth of _Job_, take special\nnotice of the early artifice in Brass and Iron under _Tubal-Cain_: And\nfind also mention of Gold, Silver, Brass, Tin, Lead, Iron; beside\nRefining, Sodering, Dross, Nitre, Saltpits, and in some manner also of\nAntimony.[188]\n\n [188] _Depinxit oculos stibio._ 2 Kings 9. 30. Jerem. 4. 30. Ezek. 23.\n 40.\n\nGemmarie Naturalists reade diligently the pretious Stones in the holy\nCity of the _Apocalypse_: examine the Breast-plate of _Aaron_, and\nvarious Gemms upon it, and think the second Row the nobler of the four:\nthey wonder to find the Art of Ingravery so ancient upon pretious Stones\nand Signets; together with the ancient use of Ear-rings and Bracelets.\nAnd are pleased to find Pearl, Coral, Amber and Crystal in those sacred\nLeaves, according to our Translation. And when they often meet with\nFlints and Marbles, cannot but take notice that there is no mention of\nthe Magnet or Loadstone, which in so many similitudes, comparisons, and\nallusions, could hardly have been omitted in the Works of _Solomon_: if\nit were true that he knew either the attractive or directive power\nthereof, as some have believed.\n\nNavigatours consider the Ark, which was pitched without and within, and\ncould endure the Ocean without Mast or Sails: They take special notice\nof the twenty seventh of _Ezekiel_; the mighty Traffick and great\nNavigation of _Tyre_, with particular mention of their Sails, their\nMasts of Cedar, Oars of Oak, their skilfull Pilots, Mariners and\nCalkers; as also of the long Voyages of the Fleets of _Solomon_; of\n_Jehosaphat's_ Ships broken at _Ezion-Geber_; of the notable Voyage and\nShipwreck of S. _Paul_, so accurately delivered in the _Acts_.\n\nOneirocritical Diviners apprehend some hints of their knowledge, even\nfrom Divine Dreams; while they take notice of the Dreams of _Joseph_,\n_Pharaoh_, _Nebuchadnezzar_, and the Angels on _Jacob's_ Ladder; and\nfind, in _Artemidorus_ and _Achmetes_, that Ladders signifie Travels,\nand the Scales thereof Preferment; and that Oxen Lean and Fat naturally\ndenote Scarcity or Plenty, and the successes of Agriculture.\n\nPhysiognomists will largely put in from very many passages of Scripture.\nAnd when they find in _Aristotle_, _quibus frons quadrangula,\ncommensurata, fortes, referuntur ad leones_, cannot but take special\nnotice of that expression concerning the Gadites; _mighty men of war,\nfit for battel, whose faces were as the faces of lyons_.\n\nGeometrical and Architectonical Artists look narrowly upon the\ndescription of the Ark, the fabrick of the Temple, and the holy City in\nthe _Apocalypse_.\n\nBut the Botanical Artist meets every where with Vegetables, and from the\nFigg Leaf in _Genesis_ to the Star Wormwood in the _Apocalypse_, are\nvariously interspersed expressions from Plants, elegantly advantaging\nthe significancy of the Text: Whereof many being delivered in a\nLanguage proper unto _Judaea_ and neighbour Countries are imperfectly\napprehended by the common Reader, and now doubtfully made out, even by\nthe Jewish Expositour.\n\nAnd even in those which are confessedly known, the elegancy is often\nlost in the apprehension of the Reader, unacquainted with such\nVegetables, or but nakedly knowing their natures: whereof holding a\npertinent apprehension, you cannot pass over such expressions without\nsome doubt or want of satisfaction in your judgment. Hereof we shall\nonely hint or discourse some few which I could not but take notice of in\nthe reading of holy Scripture.\n\nMany Plants are mention'd in Scripture which are not distinctly known in\nour Countries, or under such Names in the Original, as they are fain to\nbe rendred by analogy, or by the name of Vegetables of good affinity\nunto them, and so maintain the textual sense, though in some variation\nfrom identity.\n\n * * * * *\n\n[Sidenote: _The Observations. Kikaion._]\n\n1. The Plant which afforded a shade unto _Jonah_,[189] mention'd by the\nname of Kikaion, and still retained at least marginally in some\nTranslations, to avoid obscurity _Jerome_ rendred _Hedera_ or Ivy; which\nnotwithstanding (except in its scandent nature) agreed not fully with\nthe other, that is, to _grow up in a night_, or be consumed with a Worm;\nIvy being of no swift growth, little subject unto Worms, and a scarce\nPlant about _Babylon_.\n\n [189] Jona 4. 6. _a Gourd_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Hyssope._]\n\n2. That Hyssope is taken for that Plant which cleansed the Leper, being\na well scented, and very abstersive Simple, may well be admitted; so we\nbe not too confident, that it is strictly the same with our common\nHyssope: The Hyssope of those parts differing from that of ours; as\n_Bellonius_ hath observed in the Hyssope which grows in _Judaea_, and the\nHyssope of the Wall mention'd in the Works of _Solomon_, no kind of our\nHyssope; and may tolerably be taken for some kind of minor Capillary,\nwhich best makes out the Antithesis with the Cedar. Nor when we meet\nwith _Libanotis_, is it to be conceived our common Rosemary, which is\nrather the first kind thereof among several others, used by the\nAncients.\n\n[Sidenote: _Hemlock._ Hosea 10. 4. Amos 6. 2.]\n\n3. That it must be taken for Hemlock, which is twice so rendred in our\nTranslation, will hardly be made out, otherwise than in the intended\nsense, and implying some Plant, wherein bitterness or a poisonous\nquality is considerable.\n\n[Sidenote: Paliurus.]\n\n4. What _Tremelius_ rendreth _Spina_, and the Vulgar Translation\n_Paliurus_, and others make some kind of _Rhamnus_, is allowable in the\nsense; and we contend not about the species, since they are known Thorns\nin those Countries, and in our Fields or Gardens among us: and so common\nin _Judaea_, that men conclude the thorny Crown of our Saviour was made\neither of _Paliurus_ or _Rhamnus_.\n\n[Sidenote: Rubus.]\n\n5. Whether the Bush which burnt and consumed not, were properly a\n_Rubus_ or Bramble, was somewhat doubtfull from the Original and some\nTranslations, had not the Evangelist, and S. _Paul_ express'd the same\nby the Greek word +Batos+, which from the description of _Dioscorides_,\nHerbarists accept for _Rubus_; although the same word +Batos+ expresseth\nnot onely the _Rubus_ or kinds of Bramble, but other Thorn-bushes, and\nthe Hipp-briar is also named +Kynosbatos+, or the Dog-briar or Bramble.\n\n[Sidenote: Myrica. Cant. 1. 14.]\n\n6. That _Myrica_ is rendred, Heath, sounds instructively enough to our\nears, who behold that Plant so common in barren Plains among us: But you\ncannot but take notice that _Erica_, or our Heath is not the same Plant\nwith _Myrica_ or Tammarice, described by _Theophrastus_ and\n_Dioscorides_, and which _Bellonius_ declareth to grow so plentifully\nin the Desarts of _Judaea_ and _Arabia_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Cypress._ Cant. 1. 14.]\n\n7. That the +botrys tes Kyprou+, _botrus Cypri_, or Clusters of Cypress,\nshould have any reference to the Cypress Tree, according to the original\n_Copher_, or Clusters of the noble Vine of _Cyprus_, which might be\nplanted into _Judaea_, may seem to others allowable in some latitude. But\nthere seeming some noble Odour to be implied in this place, you may\nprobably conceive that the expression drives at the +Kypros+ of\n_Dioscorides_, some oriental kind of _Ligustrum_ or _Alcharma_, which\n_Dioscorides_ and _Pliny_ mention under the name of +Kypros+ and\n_Cyprus_, and to grow about _AEgypt_ and _Ascalon_, producing a sweet and\nodorate bush of Flowers, and out of which was made the famous _Oleum\nCyprinum_.\n\nBut why it should be rendred Camphyre your judgment cannot but doubt,\nwho know that our Camphyre was unknown unto the Ancients, and no\ningredient into any composition of great Antiquity: that learned men\nlong conceived it a bituminous and fossile Body, and our latest\nexperience discovereth it to be the resinous substance of a Tree, in\n_Borneo_ and _China_; and that the Camphyre that we use is a neat\npreparation of the same.\n\n[Sidenote: _Shittah Tree_, etc. Isa. 41. 19.]\n\n8. When 'tis said in _Isaiah 41. I will plant in the wilderness the\nCedar, the Shittah Tree, and the Myrtle and the Oil Tree, I will set in\nthe Desart, the Firre Tree, and the Pine, and the Box Tree_: Though some\ndoubt may be made of the Shittah Tree, yet all these Trees here\nmentioned being such as are ever green, you will more emphatically\napprehend the mercifull meaning of God in this mention of no fading, but\nalways verdant Trees in dry and desart places.\n\n[Sidenote: _Grapes of_ Eshcol. Num. 13. 23.]\n\n9. _And they cut down a Branch with one cluster of Grapes, and they bare\nit between two upon a Staff, and they brought Pomegranates and Figgs._\nThis cluster of Grapes brought upon a Staff by the Spies, was an\nincredible sight, in _Philo Judaeus_,[190] seem'd notable in the eyes of\nthe Israelites, but more wonderfull in our own, who look onely upon\nNorthern Vines. But herein you are like to consider, that the Cluster\nwas thus carefully carried to represent it entire, without bruising or\nbreaking; that this was not one Bunch but an extraordinary Cluster, made\nup of many depending upon one gross stalk. And however, might be\nparallel'd with the Eastern Clusters of _Margiana_ and _Caramania_, if\nwe allow but half the expressions of _Pliny_ and _Strabo_, whereof one\nwould lade a Curry or small Cart; and may be made out by the clusters of\nthe Grapes of _Rhodes_ presented unto Duke _Radzivil_[191] each\ncontaining three parts of an Ell in compass, and the Grapes as big as\nPrunes.\n\n [190] +apistos thea+. Philo.\n\n [191] Radzivil _in his Travels_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Ingred. of holy Perfume._ _Stacte_, etc. Exod. 30.34, 35.]\n\n10. Some things may be doubted in the species of the holy Ointment and\nPerfume. With Amber, Musk and Civet we meet not in the Scripture, nor\nany Odours from Animals; except we take the Onycha of that Perfume for\nthe Covercle of a Shell-fish called _Unguis Odoratus_, or _Blatta\nByzantina_, which _Dioscorides_ affirmeth to be taken from a Shell-fish\nof the Indian Lakes, which feeding upon the Aromatical Plants is\ngathered when the Lakes are drie. But whether that which we now call\n_Blatta Byzantina_, or _Unguis Odoratus_, be the same with that odorate\none of Antiquity, great doubt may be made; since _Dioscorides_ saith it\nsmelled like _Castoreum_, and that which we now have is of an\nungratefull odour.\n\nNo little doubt may be also made of Galbanum prescribed in the same\nPerfume, if we take it for Galbanum which is of common use among us,\napproaching the evil scent of _Assa Foetida_; and not rather for\nGalbanum of good odour, as the adjoining words declare, and the original\n_Chelbena_ will bear; which implies a fat or resinous substance, that\nwhich is commonly known among us being properly a gummous body and\ndissoluble also in Water.\n\nThe holy Ointment of Stacte or pure Myrrh, distilling from the Plant\nwithout expression or firing, of Cinnamon, Cassia and Calamus,\ncontaineth less questionable species, if the Cinnamon of the Ancients\nwere the same with ours, or managed after the same manner. For thereof\n_Dioscorides_ made his noble Unguent. And Cinnamon was so highly valued\nby Princes, that _Cleopatra_ carried it unto her Sepulchre with her\nJewels; which was also kept in wooden Boxes among the rarities of Kings:\nand was of such a lasting nature, that at his composing of Treacle for\nthe Emperor _Severus_, _Galen_ made use of some which had been laid up\nby _Adrianus_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Husks eaten by the Prodigal._ Luke 15. 16.]\n\n11. That the Prodigal Son desired _to eat of Husks_ given unto Swine,\nwill hardly pass in your apprehension for the Husks of Pease, Beans, or\nsuch edulious Pulses; as well understanding that the textual word\n+Keration+ or _Ceration_, properly intendeth the Fruit of the\n_Siliqua_ Tree so common in _Syria_, and fed upon by Men and Beasts;\ncalled also by some the Fruit of the Locust Tree, and _Panis Sancti\nJohannis_, as conceiving it to have been part of the Diet of the\n_Baptist_ in the Desart. The Tree and Fruit is not onely common in\n_Syria_ and the Eastern parts, but also well known in _Apuglia_, and the\nKingdom of _Naples_, growing along the _Via Appia_, from _Fundi_ unto\n_Mola_; the hard Cods or Husks making a rattling noise in windy weather,\nby beating against one another: called by the Italians _Carobe_ or\n_Carobole_, and by the French _Carouges_. With the sweet Pulp hereof\nsome conceive that the Indians preserve Ginger, Mirabolans and Nutmegs.\nOf the same (as _Pliny_ delivers) the Ancients made one kind of Wine,\nstrongly expressing the Juice thereof; and so they might after give the\nexpressed and less usefull part of the Cods, and remaining Pulp unto\ntheir Swine: which being no gustless or unsatisfying Offal, might be\nwell desired by the Prodigal in his hunger.\n\n[Sidenote: _Cucumbers_ etc. _of_ AEgypt.]\n\n12. No marvel it is that the Israelites having lived long in a well\nwatred Country, and been acquainted with the noble Water of _Nilus_,\nshould complain for Water in the dry and barren Wilderness. More\nremarkable it seems that they should extoll and linger after the\nCucumbers and Leeks, Onions and Garlick in _AEgypt_: wherein\nnotwithstanding lies a pertinent expression of the Diet of that Country\nin ancient times, even as high as the building of the Pyramids, when\n_Herodotus_ delivereth, that so many Talents were spent in Onions and\nGarlick, for the Food of Labourers and Artificers; and is also\nanswerable unto their present plentifull Diet in Cucumbers, and the\ngreat varieties thereof, as testified by _Prosper Alpinus_, who spent\nmany years in _AEgypt_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Forbidden Fruit._ Gen. 2. 17. etc.]\n\n13. What Fruit that was which our first Parents tasted in Paradise, from\nthe disputes of learned men seems yet indeterminable. More clear it is\nthat they cover'd their nakedness or secret parts with Figg Leaves;\nwhich when I reade, I cannot but call to mind the several considerations\nwhich Antiquity had of the Figg Tree, in reference unto those parts,\nparticularly how Figg Leaves by sundry Authours are described to have\nsome resemblance unto the Genitals, and so were aptly formed for such\ncontection of those parts; how also in that famous Statua of\n_Praxiteles_, concerning _Alexander_ and _Bucephalus_, the Secret Parts\nare veil'd with Figg Leaves; how this Tree was sacred unto _Priapus_,\nand how the Diseases of the Secret Parts have derived their Name from\nFiggs.\n\n[Sidenote: _Balsam. Oil._ Luke 10. 34.]\n\n14. That the good Samaritan coming from _Jericho_ used any of the Judean\nBalsam upon the wounded Traveller, is not to be made out, and we are\nunwilling to disparage his charitable Surgery in pouring Oil into a\ngreen Wound; and therefore when 'tis said he used Oil and Wine, may\nrather conceive that he made an _Oinelaeum_ or medicine of Oil and Wine\nbeaten up and mixed together, which was no improper Medicine, and is an\nArt now lately studied by some so to incorporate Wine and Oil that they\nmay lastingly hold together, which some pretend to have, and call it\n_Oleum Samaritanum_, or Samaritans Oil.\n\n[Sidenote: _Pulse of_ Daniel. Dan. 1. 12.]\n\n15. When _Daniel_ would not pollute himself with the Diet of the\nBabylonians, he probably declined Pagan commensation, or to eat of Meats\nforbidden to the Jews, though common at their Tables, or so much as to\ntaste of their Gentile Immolations, and Sacrifices abominable unto his\nPalate.\n\nBut when 'tis said that he made choice of the Diet of Pulse and Water,\nwhether he strictly confined unto a leguminous Food, according to the\nVulgar Translation, some doubt may be raised, from the original word\n_Zeragnim_, which signifies _Seminalia_, and is so set down in the\nMargin of _Arias Montanus_; and the Greek word _Spermata_, generally\nexpressing Seeds, may signifie any edulious or cerealious Grains besides\n+ospria+ or leguminous Seeds.\n\nYet if he strictly made choice of a leguminous Food, and Water instead\nof his portion from the King's Table, he handsomely declined the Diet\nwhich might have been put upon him, and particularly that which was\ncalled the _Potibasis_ of the King, which as _Athenaeus_ informeth\nimplied the Bread of the King, made of Barley, and Wheat, and the Wine\nof _Cyprus_, which he drank in an oval Cup. And therefore distinctly\nfrom that he chose plain Fare of Water, and the gross Diet of Pulse, and\nthat perhaps not made into Bread, but parched, and tempered with Water.\n\nNow that herein (beside the special benediction of God) he made choice\nof no improper Diet to keep himself fair and plump and so to excuse the\nEunuch his Keeper, Physicians will not deny, who acknowledge a very\nnutritive and impinguating faculty in Pulses, in leguminous Food, and in\nseveral sorts of Grains and Corns, is not like to be doubted by such who\nconsider that this was probably a great part of the Food of our\nForefathers before the Floud, the Diet also of _Jacob_: and that the\nRomans (called therefore _Pultifagi_) fed much on Pulse for six hundred\nyears; that they had no Bakers for that time: and their Pistours were\nsuch as, before the use of Mills, beat out and cleansed their Corn. As\nalso that the Athletick Diet was of Pulse, _Alphiton_, _Maza_, Barley\nand Water; whereby they were advantaged sometimes to an exquisite state\nof health, and such as was not without danger. And therefore though\n_Daniel_ were no Eunuch, and of a more fatning and thriving temper, as\nsome have phancied, yet was he by this kind of Diet, sufficiently\nmaintained in a fair and carnous state of Body, and accordingly his\nPicture not improperly drawn, that is, not meagre and lean, like\n_Jeremy's_, but plump and fair, answerable to the most authentick\ndraught of the _Vatican_, and the late German _Luther's_ Bible.\n\nThe Cynicks in _Athenaeus_ make iterated Courses of Lentils, and prefer\nthat Diet before the Luxury of _Seleucus_. The present AEgyptians, who\nare observed by _Alpinus_ to be the fattest Nation, and Men to have\nbreasts like Women, owe much, as he conceiveth, unto the Water of\n_Nile_, and their Diet of Rice, Pease, Lentils and white Cicers. The\nPulse-eating Cynicks and Stoicks, are all very long livers in\n_Laertius_. And _Daniel_ must not be accounted of few years, who, being\ncarried away Captive in the Reign of _Joachim_, by King\n_Nebuchadnezzar_, lived, by Scripture account, unto the first year of\n_Cyrus_.\n\n[Sidenote: Jacob's _Rods_. Gen. 30. 31.]\n\n16. _And Jacob took Rods of green Poplar, and of the Hazel and the\nChesnut Tree, and pilled white streaks in them, and made the white\nappear which was in the Rods_, etc. Men multiply the Philosophy of\n_Jacob_, who, beside the benediction of God, and the powerfull effects\nof imagination, raised in the Goats and Sheep from pilled and\nparty-coloured objects, conceive that he chose out these particular\nPlants above any other, because he understood they had a particular\nvirtue unto the intended effects, according unto the conception of\n_Georgius Venetus_.[192]\n\n [192] G. Venetus _Problem_ 200.\n\nWhereto you will hardly assent, at least till you be better satisfied\nand assured concerning the true species of the Plants intended in the\nText, or find a clearer consent and uniformity in the Translation: For\nwhat we render Poplar, Hazel and Chesnut, the Greek translateth _Virgam\nstyracinam, nucinam, plataninam_, which some also render a Pomegranate:\nand so observing this variety of interpretations concerning common and\nknown Plants among us, you may more reasonably doubt, with what\npropriety or assurance others less known be sometimes rendred unto us.\n\n[Sidenote: _Lilies of the Field._ Matt. 6. 28.]\n\n17. Whether in the Sermon of the Mount, the _Lilies of the Field_ did\npoint at the proper Lilies, or whether those Flowers grew wild in the\nplace where our Saviour preached, some doubt may be made: because\n+Krinon+ the word in that place is accounted of the same signification\nwith +Leirion+, and that in _Homer_ is taken for all manner of specious\nFlowers: so received by _Eustachius_, _Hesychius_, and the Scholiast\nupon _Apollonius Rhodius_, +Katholou ta anthe Leiria legetai+. And\n+Krinon+ is also received in the same latitude, not signifying onely\nLilies, but applied unto Daffodils, Hyacinths, Iris's, and the Flowers\nof _Colocynthis_.\n\nUnder the like latitude of acception, are many expressions in the\n_Canticles_ to be received. And when it is said _he feedeth among the\nLilies_, therein may be also implied other specious Flowers, not\nexcluding the proper Lilies. But in that expression, _the Lilies drop\nforth Myrrhe_, neither proper Lilies nor proper Myrrhe can be\napprehended, the one not proceeding from the other, but may be received\nin a Metaphorical sense: and in some latitude may be also made out from\nthe roscid and honey drops observable in the Flowers of Martagon, and\ninverted flowred Lilies, and, 'tis like, is the standing sweet Dew on\nthe white eyes of the Crown Imperial, now common among us.\n\nAnd the proper Lily may be intended in that expression of 1 _Kings_ 7.\nthat the brazen Sea was of the thickness of a hand breadth, and the brim\nlike a Lily. For the figure of that Flower being round at the bottom,\nand somewhat repandous, or inverted at the top, doth handsomely\nillustrate the comparison.\n\nBut that the Lily of the Valley, mention'd in the _Canticles_[SN: Cant.\n2.], _I am the Rose of Sharon, and the Lily of the Valleys_, is that\nVegetable which passeth under the same name with us, that is _Lilium\nconvallium_, or the _May_ Lily, you will more hardly believe, who know\nwith what insatisfaction the most learned Botanists reduce that Plant\nunto any described by the Ancients; that _Anguillara_ will have it to be\nthe _Oenanthe_ of _Athenaeus_, _Cordus_ the _Pothos_ of _Theophrastus_;\nand _Lobelius_ that the Greeks had not described it; who find not six\nLeaves in the Flower agreeably to all Lilies, but onely six small\ndivisions in the Flower, who find it also to have a single, and no\nbulbous Root, nor Leaves shooting about the bottom, nor the Stalk round,\nbut angular. And that the learned _Bauhinus_ hath not placed it in the\nClassis of Lilies, but nervifolious Plants.\n\n[Sidenote: _Fitches_, _Cummin_, &c. _in_ Isa. 28. 25]\n\n18. _Doth he not cast abroad the Fitches, and scatter the Cummin Seed,\nand cast in the principal Wheat, and the appointed Barley, and the Rye\nin their place_: Herein though the sense may hold under the names\nassigned, yet is it not so easie to determine the particular Seeds and\nGrains, where the obscure original causeth such differing Translations.\nFor in the Vulgar we meet with _Milium_ and Gith, which our Translation\ndeclineth, placing Fitches for Gith, and Rye for _Milium_ or Millet,\nwhich notwithstanding is retained by the Dutch.\n\nThat it might be _Melanthium_, _Nigella_, or Gith, may be allowably\napprehended, from the frequent use of the Seed thereof among the Jews\nand other Nations, as also from the Translation of _Tremellius_; and\nthe Original implying a black Seed, which is less than Cummin, as, out\nof _Aben Ezra_, _Buxtorfius_ hath expounded it.\n\nBut whereas _Milium_ or +Kenchros+ of the Septuagint is by ours\nrendred Rye, there is little similitude or affinity between those\nGrains; For _Milium_ is more agreeable unto _Spelta_ or Espaut, as the\nDutch and others still render it.\n\nThat we meet so often with Cummin Seed in many parts of Scripture in\nreference unto _Judaea_, a Seed so abominable at present unto our Palates\nand Nostrils, will not seem strange unto any who consider the frequent\nuse thereof among the Ancients, not onely in medical but dietetical use\nand practice: For their Dishes were filled therewith, and the noblest\nfestival preparations in _Apicius_ were not without it: And even in the\n_Polenta_, and parched Corn, the old Diet of the Romans, (as _Pliny_\nrecordeth) unto every Measure they mixed a small proportion of Lin-seed\nand Cummin-seed.\n\nAnd so Cummin is justly set down among things of vulgar and common use,\nwhen it is said in _Matthew_ 23. v. 23. _You pay Tithe of Mint, Annise\nand Cummin_: but how to make out the translation of Annise we are still\nto seek, there being no word in that Text which properly signifieth\nAnnise: the Original being +Anethon+, which the Latins call _Anethum_,\nand is properly englished Dill.\n\nThat among many expressions, allusions and illustrations made in\nScripture from Corns, there is no mention made of Oats, so usefull a\nGrain among us, will not seem very strange unto you, till you can\nclearly discover that it was a Grain of ordinary use in those parts; who\nmay also find that _Theophrastus_, who is large about other Grains,\ndelivers very little of it. That _Dioscorides_ is also very short\ntherein. And _Galen_ delivers that it was of some use in _Asia minor_,\nespecially in _Mysia_, and that rather for Beasts than Men: And _Pliny_\naffirmeth that the _Pulticula_ thereof was most in use among the\nGermans. Yet that the Jews were not without all use of this Grain seems\nconfirmable from the Rabbinical account, who reckon five Grains liable\nunto their Offerings, whereof the Cake presented might be made; that is,\nWheat, Oats, Rye, and two sorts of Barley.\n\n[Sidenote: _Ears of Corn._ Matt. 12. 1.]\n\n19. Why the Disciples being hungry pluck'd the Ears of Corn, it seems\nstrange to us, who observe that men half starved betake not themselves\nto such supply; except we consider the ancient Diet of _Alphiton_ and\n_Polenta_, the Meal of dried and parched Corn, or that which was\n+Omelysis+, or Meal of crude and unparched Corn, wherewith they being\nwell acquainted, might hope for some satisfaction from the Corn yet in\nthe Husk; that is, from the nourishing pulp or mealy part within it.\n\n[Sidenote: _Stubble of_ AEgypt Exod. 5.7, etc.]\n\n20. The inhumane oppression of the AEgyptian Task-masters, who, not\ncontent with the common tale of Brick, took also from the Children of\nIsrael their allowance of _Straw_, and forced them to gather _Stubble_\nwhere they could find it, will be more nearly apprehended, if we\nconsider how hard it was to acquire any quantity of Stubble in _AEgypt_,\nwhere the Stalk of Corn was so short, that to acquire an ordinary\nmeasure, it required more than ordinary labour; as is discoverable from\nthat account, which _Pliny_[193] hath happily left unto us. In the Corn\ngather'd in _AEgypt_ the Straw is never a Cubit long: because the Seed\nlieth very shallow, and hath no other nourishment than from the Mudd and\nSlime left by the River; For under it is nothing but Sand and Gravel.\n\n [193] _Lib. 18. Nat. Hist._\n\nSo that the expression of Scripture is more Emphatical than is commonly\napprehended, when 'tis said, _The people were scattered abroad through\nall the Land of AEgypt to gather Stubble instead of Straw_. For the\nStubble being very short, the acquist was difficult; a few Fields\nafforded it not, and they were fain to wander far to obtain a sufficient\nquantity of it.\n\n[Sidenote: _Flowers of the Vine._ Cant. 2. 13.]\n\n21. It is said in the _Song of Solomon_, that _the Vines with the tender\nGrape give a good smell_. That the Flowers of the Vine should be\nEmphatically noted to give a pleasant smell, seems hard unto our\nNorthern Nostrils, which discover not such Odours, and smell them not in\nfull Vineyards; whereas in hot Regions, and more spread and digested\nFlowers, a sweet savour may be allowed, denotable from several humane\nexpressions, and the practice of the Ancients, in putting the dried\nFlowers of the Vine into new Wine to give it a pure and flosculous race\nor spirit, which Wine was therefore called +Oinathinon+, allowing unto\nevery _Cadus_ two pounds of dried Flowers.\n\nAnd, therefore, the Vine flowering but in the Spring, it cannot but seem\nan impertinent objection of the Jews, that the Apostles were _full of\nnew Wine_ at _Pentecost_ when it was not to be found. Wherefore we may\nrather conceive that the word +Gleuky+[194] in that place implied\nnot _new Wine_ or _Must_, but some generous strong and sweet Wine,\nwherein more especially lay the power of inebriation.\n\n [194] Acts 2. 13.\n\nBut if it be to be taken for some kind of _Must_, it might be some kind\nof +Aeigleukos+, or long-lasting _Must_, which might be had at any time\nof the year, and which, as _Pliny_ delivereth, they made by hindring,\nand keeping the _Must_ from fermentation or working, and so it kept soft\nand sweet for no small time after.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Olive Leaf in_ Gen. 8. 11.]\n\n22. When the _Dove_, sent out of the Ark, return'd with _a green Olive\nLeaf_, according to the Original: how the Leaf, after ten Months, and\nunder water, should still maintain a verdure or greenness, need not much\namuse the Reader, if we consider that the Olive Tree is +Aeiphyllon+, or\ncontinually green; that the Leaves are of a bitter taste, and of a fast\nand lasting substance. Since we also find fresh and green Leaves among\nthe Olives which we receive from remote Countries; and since the Plants\nat the bottom of the Sea, and on the sides of Rocks, maintain a deep and\nfresh verdure.\n\nHow the Tree should stand so long in the Deluge under Water, may partly\nbe allowed from the uncertain determination of the Flows and Currents of\nthat time, and the qualification of the saltness of the Sea, by the\nadmixture of fresh Water, when the whole watery Element was together.\n\nAnd it may be signally illustrated from the like examples in\n_Theophrastus_[195] and _Pliny_[196] in words to this effect: Even the\nSea affordeth Shrubs and Trees; In the red Sea whole Woods do live,\nnamely of Bays and Olives bearing Fruit. The Souldiers of _Alexander_,\nwho sailed into _India_, made report, that the Tides were so high in\nsome Islands, that they overflowed, and covered the Woods, as high as\nPlane and Poplar Trees. The lower sort wholly, the greater all but the\ntops, whereto the Mariners fastned their Vessels at high Waters, and at\nthe root in the Ebb; That the Leaves of these Sea Trees while under\nwater looked green, but taken out presently dried with the heat of the\nSun. The like is delivered by _Theophrastus_, that some Oaks do grow and\nbear Acrons under the Sea.\n\n [195] Theophrast. _Hist. Lib. 4. Cap. 7. 8._\n\n [196] Plin. _lib. 13. cap. ultimo._\n\n[Sidenote: _Grain of Mustard-seed in S._ Matt 13. 31, 32.]\n\n23. _The Kingdom of Heaven is like to a grain of Mustard-seed, which a\nMan took and sowed in his Field, which indeed is the least of all Seeds;\nbut when 'tis grown is the greatest among Herbs, and becometh a Tree, so\nthat the Birds of the Air come and lodge in the Branches thereof._\n\nLuke 13. 19. _It is like a grain of Mustard-seed, which a Man took and\ncast it into his Garden, and it waxed a great Tree, and the Fowls of the\nAir lodged in the Branches thereof._\n\nThis expression by a grain of Mustard-seed, will not seem so strange\nunto you, who well consider it. That it is simply the least of Seeds,\nyou cannot apprehend, if you have beheld the Seeds of _Rapunculus_,\nMarjorane, Tobacco, and the smallest Seed of _Lunaria_.\n\nBut you may well understand it to be the smallest Seed among Herbs which\nproduce so big a Plant, or the least of herbal Plants, which arise unto\nsuch a proportion, implied in the expression; _the smallest of Seeds_,\nand _becometh the greatest of Herbs_.\n\nAnd you may also grant that it is the smallest of Seeds of Plants apt to\n+dendrizein+, _arborescere_, _fruticescere_, or to grow unto a ligneous\nsubstance, and from an herby and oleraceous Vegetable, to become a kind\nof Tree, and to be accounted among the _Dendrolachana_, or\n_Arboroleracea_; as upon strong Seed, Culture and good Ground, is\nobservable in some Cabbages, Mallows, and many more, and therefore\nexpressed by +ginetai to dendron+, and +ginetai eis to dendron+, it\nbecometh a Tree, or _arborescit_, as _Beza_ rendreth it.\n\nNor if warily considered doth the expression contain such difficulty.\nFor the Parable may not ground it self upon generals, or imply any or\nevery grain of Mustard, but point at such a grain as from its fertile\nspirit, and other concurrent advantages, hath the success to become\narboreous, shoot into such a magnitude, and acquire the like tallness.\nAnd unto such a Grain the Kingdom of Heaven is likened which from such\nslender beginnings shall find such increase and grandeur.\n\nThe expression also that it might grow into such dimensions that Birds\nmight lodge in the Branches thereof, may be literally conceived; if we\nallow the luxuriancy of plants in _Judaea_, above our Northern Regions;\nIf we accept of but half the Story taken notice of by Tremellius, from\nthe _Jerusalem Talmud_, of a Mustard Tree that was to be climbed like a\nFigg Tree; and of another, under whose shade a Potter daily wrought: and\nit may somewhat abate our doubts, if we take in the advertisement of\n_Herodotus_ concerning lesser Plants of _Milium_ and _Sesamum_ in the\nBabylonian Soil: _Milium ac Sesamum in proceritatem instar arborum\ncrescere, etsi mihi compertum, tamen memorare supersedeo, probe sciens\ncis qui nunquam Babyloniam regionem adierunt perquam incredibile visum\niri._ We may likewise consider that the word +kataskenosai+ doth\nnot necessarily signifie _making a Nest_, but rather sitting, roosting,\ncovering and resting in the Boughs, according as the same word is used\nby the _Septuagint_ in other places[197] as the Vulgar rendreth it in\nthis, _inhabitant_, as our Translation, _lodgeth_, and the Rhemish,\n_resteth_ in the Branches.\n\n [197] Dan. 4. 9. Ps. 1. 14. 12.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Rod of_ Aaron. Numb. 17. 8.]\n\n24. _And it came to pass that on the morrow Moses went into the\nTabernacle of witness, and behold the Rod of Aaron for the House of Levi\nwas budded, and brought forth Buds, and bloomed Blossomes, and yielded\nAlmonds._ In the contention of the Tribes and decision of priority and\nprimogeniture of _Aaron_, declared by the Rod, which in a night budded,\nflowred and brought forth Almonds, you cannot but apprehend a propriety\nin the Miracle from that species of Tree which leadeth in the Vernal\ngermination of the year, unto all the Classes of Trees; and so apprehend\nhow properly in a night and short space of time the Miracle arose, and\nsomewhat answerable unto its nature the Flowers and Fruit appeared in\nthis precocious Tree, and whose original Name[198] implies such speedy\nefflorescence, as in its proper nature flowering in _February_, and\nshewing its Fruit in _March_.\n\n [198] Sbacher _from_ Sbachar festinus fuit _or_ maturuit.\n\nThis consideration of that Tree maketh the expression in _Jeremy_[SN:\nJer. 1. 11.] more Emphatical, when 'tis said, _What seest thou? and he\nsaid, A Rod of an Almond Tree. Then said the Lord unto me, Thou hast\nwell seen, for I will hasten the Word to perform it._ I will be quick\nand forward like the Almond Tree, to produce the effects of my word, and\nhasten to display my judgments upon them.\n\nAnd we may hereby more easily apprehend the expression in _Ecclesiastes_\n[SN: Eccles. 12. 5.]; _When the Almond Tree shall flourish_. That is\nwhen the Head, which is the prime part, and first sheweth it self in the\nworld, shall grow white, like the Flowers of the Almond Tree, whose\nFruit, as _Athenaeus_ delivereth, was first called +Karenon+, or the\nHead, from some resemblance and covering parts of it.\n\nHow properly the priority was confirmed by a Rod or Staff, and why the\nRods and Staffs of the Princes were chosen for this decision,\nPhilologists will consider. For these were the badges, signs and\ncognisances of their places, and were a kind of Sceptre in their hands,\ndenoting their supereminencies. The Staff of Divinity is ordinarily\ndescribed in the hands of Gods and Goddesses in old draughts. Trojan and\nGrecian Princes were not without the like, whereof the Shoulders of\n_Thersites_ felt from the hands of _Ulysses_. _Achilles_ in _Homer_, as\nby a desperate Oath, swears by his wooden Sceptre, which should never\nbud nor bear Leaves again; which seeming the greatest impossibility to\nhim, advanceth the Miracle of _Aaron's_ Rod. And if it could be well\nmade out that _Homer_ had seen the Books of _Moses_, in that expression\nof _Achilles_, he might allude unto this Miracle.\n\nThat power which proposed the experiment by Blossomes in the Rod, added\nalso the Fruit of Almonds; the Text not strictly making out the Leaves,\nand so omitting the middle germination: the Leaves properly coming after\nthe Flowers, and before the Almonds. And therefore if you have well\nperused Medals, you cannot but observe how in the impress of many\nShekels, which pass among us by the name of the _Jerusalem_ Shekels, the\nRod of _Aaron_ is improperly laden with many Leaves, whereas that which\nis shewn under the name of the Samaritan Shekel seems most conformable\nunto the Text, which describeth the Fruit without Leaves.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Vine in_ Gen. 49. 11.]\n\n25. _Binding his Foal unto the Vine, and his Asses Colt unto the choice\nVine._\n\nThat Vines, which are commonly supported, should grow so large and\nbulky, as to be fit to fasten their Juments, and Beasts of labour unto\nthem, may seem a hard expression unto many: which notwithstanding may\neasily be admitted, if we consider the account of _Pliny_, that in many\nplaces out of _Italy_ Vines do grow without any stay or support: nor\nwill it be otherwise conceived of lusty Vines, if we call to mind how\nthe same Authour[199] delivereth, that the _Statua_ of _Jupiter_ was\nmade out of a Vine; and that out of one single Cyprian Vine a Scale or\nLadder was made that reached unto the Roof of the Temple of _Diana_ at\n_Ephesus_.\n\n [199] Plin. _lib. 14._\n\n[Sidenote: _Rose of_ Jericho. Ecclus. 24. 14.]\n\n26. _I was exalted as a Palm Tree in Engaddi, and as a Rose Plant in\nJericho._ That the Rose of _Jericho_, or that Plant which passeth among\nus under that denomination, was signified in this Text, you are not like\nto apprehend with some, who also name it the _Rose of S. Mary_, and\ndeliver, that it openeth the Branches, and Flowers upon the Eve of our\nSaviour's Nativity: But rather conceive it some proper kind of Rose,\nwhich thrived and prospered in _Jericho_ more than in the neighbour\nCountries. For our Rose of _Jericho_ is a very low and hard Plant, a few\ninches above the ground; one whereof brought from _Judaea_ I have kept by\nme many years, nothing resembling a Rose Tree, either in Flowers,\nBranches, Leaves or Growth; and so, improper to answer the Emphatical\nword of exaltation in the Text: growing not only about _Jericho_, but\nother parts of _Judaea_ and _Arabia_, as _Bellonius_ hath observed: which\nbeing a drie and ligneous Plant, is preserved many years, and though\ncrumpled and furdled up, yet, if infused in Water, will swell and\ndisplay its parts.\n\n[Sidenote: _Turpentine Tree in_ Ecclus. 24. 16.]\n\n27. _Quasi Terebinthus extendi ramos_, when it is said in the same\nChapter, _as a Turpentine Tree have I stretched out my Branches_: it\nwill not seem strange unto such as have either seen that Tree, or\nexamined its description: For it is a Plant that widely displayeth its\nBranches: and though in some European Countries it be but of a low and\nfruticeous growth, yet _Pliny_[200] observeth that it is great in\n_Syria_, and so allowably, or at least not improperly mentioned in the\nexpression of _Hosea_[201] according to the Vulgar Translation. _Super\ncapita montium sacrificant,_ etc. _sub quercu, populo et terebintho,\nquoniam bona est umbra ejus._ And this diffusion and spreading of its\nBranches, hath afforded the Proverb of _Terebintho stultior_, applicable\nunto arrogant or boasting persons, who spread and display their own\nacts, as _Erasmus_ hath observed.\n\n [200] Terebinthus in Macedonia fruticat, in Syria, magna est. _Lib. 13._\n Plin.\n\n [201] Hosea. 4. 13.\n\n\n[Sidenote: _Pomegranate in_ 1 Sam. 14. 2.]\n\n28. It is said in our Translation. _Saul tarried in the uppermost parts\nof Gibeah, under a Pomegranate Tree which is in Migron: and the people\nwhich were with him were about six hundred men._ And when it is said in\nsome Latin Translations, _Saul morabatur fixo tentorio sub Malogranato_,\nyou will not be ready to take in the common literal sense, who know that\na Pomegranate Tree is but low of growth, and very unfit to pitch a Tent\nunder it; and may rather apprehend it as the name of a place, or the\nRock of _Rimmon_, or Pomegranate; so named from Pomegranates which grew\nthere, and which many think to have been the same place mentioned in\n_Judges_.[202]\n\n [202] Judges 20. 45, 47. _Ch._ 21. 13.\n\n[Sidenote: _A Green Field in_ Wisd. 19. 7.]\n\n29. It is said in the Book of _Wisedom_, _Where water stood before, drie\nland appeared, and out of the red Sea a way appeared without impediment,\nand out of the violent streams a green Field_; or as the Latin renders\nit, _Campus germinans de profundo_: whereby it seems implied that the\nIsraelites passed over a green Field at the bottom of the Sea: and\nthough most would have this but a Metaphorical expression, yet may it be\nliterally tolerable; and so may be safely apprehended by those that\nsensibly know what great number of Vegetables (as the several varieties\nof _Alga's_, _Sea Lettuce_, _Phasganium_, _Conferua_, _Caulis Marina_,\n_Abies_, _Erica_, _Tamarice_, divers sorts of _Muscus_, _Fucus_,\n_Quercus Marina_ and _Corallins_) are found at the bottom of the Sea.\nSince it is also now well known, that the Western Ocean, for many\ndegrees, is covered with _Sargasso_ or _Lenticula Marina_, and found to\narise from the bottom of that Sea; since, upon the coast of _Provence_\nby the Isles of _Eres_, there is a part of the _Mediterranean Sea_,\ncalled _la Prairie_, or the _Meadowy Sea_, from the bottom thereof so\nplentifully covered with Plants: since vast heaps of Weeds are found in\nthe Bellies of some Whales taken in the Northern Ocean, and at a great\ndistance from the Shore: And since the providence of Nature hath\nprovided this shelter for minor Fishes; both for their spawn, and safety\nof their young ones. And this might be more peculiarly allowed to be\nspoken of the Red Sea, since the Hebrews named it _Suph_, or the _Weedy\nSea_: and, also, seeing _Theophrastus_ and _Pliny_, observing the growth\nof Vegetables under water, have made their chief illustrations from\nthose in the Red Sea.\n\n[Sidenote: _Sycamore._]\n\n30. You will readily discover how widely they are mistaken, who accept\nthe Sycamore mention'd in several parts of Scripture for the Sycamore,\nor Tree of that denomination, with us: which is properly but one kind or\ndifference of _Acer_, and bears no Fruit with any resemblance unto a\nFigg.\n\nBut you will rather, thereby, apprehend the true and genuine Sycamore,\nor _Sycaminus_, which is a stranger in our parts. A Tree (according to\nthe description of _Theophrastus_, _Dioscorides_ and _Galen_) resembling\na Mulberry Tree in the Leaf, but in the Fruit a Figg; which it produceth\nnot in the Twiggs but in the Trunck or greater Branches, answerable to\nthe Sycamore of _AEgypt_, the AEgyptian Figg or Giamez of the Arabians,\ndescribed by _Prosper Alpinus_, with a Leaf somewhat broader than a\nMulberry, and in its Fruit like a Figg. Insomuch that some have fancied\nit to have had its first production from a Figg Tree grafted on a\nMulberry.\n\nIt is a Tree common in _Judaea_, whereof they made frequent use in\nBuildings; and so understood, it explaineth that expression in\n_Isaiah_:[203] _Sycamori excisi sunt, Cedros substituemus. The Bricks\nare fallen down, we will build with hewen Stones: The Sycamores are cut\ndown, but we will change them into Cedars._\n\n [203] Isa. 9. 10\n\nIt is a broad spreading Tree, not onely fit for Walks, Groves and Shade,\nbut also affording profit. And therefore it is said that King\n_David_[204] appointed _Baalhanan_ to be over his Olive Trees and\nSycamores, which were in great plenty; and it is accordingly\ndelivered,[205] that _Solomon made Cedars to be as the Sycamore Trees\nthat are in the Vale for abundance_. That is, he planted many, though\nthey did not come to perfection in his days.\n\n [204] 1 Chron. 27. 28.\n\n [205] 1 King. 10. 27.\n\nAnd as it grew plentifully about the Plains, so was the Fruit good for\nFood; and, as _Bellonius_ and late accounts deliver, very refreshing\nunto Travellers in those hot and drie Countries: whereby the expression\nof _Amos_[206] becomes more intelligible, when he said he was _an\nHerdsman, and a gatherer of Sycamore Fruit_. And the expression of\n_David_[207] also becomes more Emphatical; _He destroyed their Vines\nwith Hail, and their Sycamore Trees with Frost_. That is, their\n_Sicmoth_ in the Original, a word in the sound not far from the\nSycamore.\n\n [206] Amos 7. 14.\n\n [207] Psal. 78 47.\n\nThus when it is said,[208] _If ye had Faith as a grain of Mustard-seed,\nye might say unto this Sycamine Tree, Be thou plucked up by the roots,\nand be thou placed in the Sea, and it should obey you_: it might be more\nsignificantly spoken of this Sycamore; this being described to be _Arbor\nvasta_, a large and well rooted Tree, whose removal was more difficult\nthan many others. And so the instance in that Text, is very properly\nmade in the Sycamore Tree, one of the largest and less removable Trees\namong them. A Tree so lasting and well rooted, that the Sycamore which\n_Zacheus_ ascended, is still shewn in _Judaea_ unto Travellers; as also\nthe hollow Sycamore at _Maturaea_ in _AEgypt_, where the blessed Virgin is\nsaid to have remained: which though it relisheth of the Legend, yet it\nplainly declareth what opinion they had of the lasting condition of that\nTree, to countenance the Tradition; for which they might not be without\nsome experience, since the learned describer of the _Pyramides_[209]\nobserveth, that the old AEgyptians made Coffins of this Wood, which he\nfound yet fresh and undecayed among divers of their Mummies.\n\n [208] Luk. 17. 6.\n\n [209] D. Greaves.\n\nAnd thus, also, when _Zacheus_ climbed up into a Sycamore above any\nother Tree, this being a large and fair one, it cannot be denied that he\nmade choice of a proper and advantageous Tree to look down upon our\nSaviour.\n\n[Sidenote: _Increase of Seed 100. fold in_ Matt. 13. 23.]\n\n31. Whether the expression of our Saviour in the Parable of the Sower,\nand the increase of the Seed _unto thirty, sixty and a hundred fold_,\nhad any reference unto the ages of Believers, and measures of their\nFaith, as Children, Young and Old Persons, as to beginners, well\nadvanced and strongly confirmed Christians, as learned men have hinted;\nor whether in this progressional assent there were any latent Mysteries,\nas the mystical Interpreters of Numbers may apprehend, I pretend not to\ndetermine.\n\nBut, how this multiplication may well be conceived, and in what way\napprehended, and that this centesimal increase is not naturally strange,\nyou that are no stranger in Agriculture, old and new, are not like to\nmake great doubt.\n\nThat every Grain should produce an Ear affording an hundred Grains, is\nnot like to be their conjecture who behold the growth of Corn in our\nFields, wherein a common Grain doth produce far less in number. For\nbarley consisting but of two _Versus_ or Rows, seldom exceedeth twenty\nGrains, that is, ten upon each +Stoichos+, or Row; Rye, of a square\nfigure, is very fruitfull at forty: Wheat, besides the _Frit_ and\n_Uruncus_, or imperfect Grains of the small Husks at the top and bottom\nof the Ear, is fruitfull at ten treble _Glumae_ or Husks in a Row, each\ncontaining but three Grains in breadth, if the middle Grain arriveth at\nall to perfection; and so maketh up threescore Grains in both sides.\n\nYet even this centesimal fructification may be admitted in some sorts of\n_Cerealia_, and Grains from one Ear: if we take in the _Triticum\ncentigranum_, or _fertilissimum Plinii_, Indian Wheat, and _Panicum_;\nwhich, in every Ear, containeth hundreds of Grains.\n\nBut this increase may easily be conceived of Grains in their total\nmultiplication, in good and fertile ground, since, if every Grain of\nWheat produceth but three Ears, the increase will arise above that\nnumber. Nor are we without examples of some grounds which have produced\nmany more Ears, and above this centesimal increase: As _Pliny_ hath left\nrecorded of the _Byzacian_ Field in _Africa_. _Misit ex eo loco\nProcurator ex uno quadraginta minus germina. Misit et Neroni pariter\ntercentum quadraginta stipulos, ex uno grano. Cum centessimos quidem\nLeontini Siciliae campi fundunt, aliique, et tota Boetica, et imprimis\nAEgyptus._ And even in our own Country, from one Grain of Wheat sowed in\na Garden, I have numbred many more than an hundred.\n\nAnd though many Grains are commonly lost which come not to sprouting or\nearing, yet the same is also verified in measure; as that one Bushel\nshould produce a hundred, as is exemplified by the Corn in _Gerar_;[210]\n_Then Isaac sowed in that Land, and received in that year an hundred\nfold_. That is, as the Chaldee explaineth it, _a hundred for one_, when\nhe measured it. And this _Pliny_ seems to intend, when he saith of the\nfertile Byzacian Territory before mentioned, _Ex uno centeni\nquinquaginta modii redduntur_. And may be favourably apprehended of the\nfertility of some grounds in _Poland_; wherein, after the account of\n_Gaguinus_, from Rye sowed in _August_, come thirty or forty Ears, and a\nMan on Horseback can scarce look over it. In the Sabbatical Crop of\n_Judaea_, there must be admitted a large increase, and probably not short\nof this centesimal multiplication: For it supplied part of the sixth\nyear, the whole seventh, and eighth untill the Harvest of that year.\n\n [210] Gen. 26. 12.\n\nThe _seven years of plenty in AEgypt_ must be of high increase; when, by\nstoring up but the fifth part, they supplied the whole Land, and many of\ntheir neighbours after: for it is said,[211] the Famine was in all the\nLand about them. And therefore though the causes of the Dearth in\n_AEgypt_ be made out from the defect of the overflow of _Nilus_,\naccording to the Dream of _Pharaoh_; yet was that no cause of the\nscarcity of the Land of _Canaan_, which may rather be ascribed to the\nwant of the former and latter rains, for some succeeding years, if their\nFamine held time and duration with that of _AEgypt_; as may be probably\ngather'd from that expression of _Joseph_,[212] _Come down unto me [into\nAEgypt] and tarry not, and there will I nourish you: (for yet there are\nfive years of Famine) lest thou and thy Household, and all that thou\nhast come to poverty_.\n\n [211] Gen. 41. 56.\n\n [212] Gen. 45. 9, 11.\n\nHow they preserved their Corn so long in _AEgypt_ may seem hard unto\nNorthern and moist Climates, except we consider the many ways of\npreservation practised by antiquity, and also take in that handsome\naccount of _Pliny_; What Corn soever is laid up in the Ear, it taketh no\nharm keep it as long as you will; although the best and most assured way\nto keep Corn is in Caves and Vaults under ground, according to the\npractice of _Cappadocia_ and _Thracia_.\n\nIn _AEgypt_ and _Mauritania_ above all things they look to this, that\ntheir Granaries stand on high ground; and how drie so ever their Floor\nbe, they lay a course of Chaff betwixt it and the ground. Besides, they\nput up their Corn in Granaries and Binns together with the Ear. And\n_Varro_ delivereth that Wheat laid up in that manner will last fifty\nyears; Millet an hundred; and Beans so conserved in a Cave of\n_Ambracia_, were known to last an hundred and twenty years; that is,\nfrom the time of King _Pyrrhus_, unto the Pyratick War under the conduct\nof _Pompey_.\n\nMore strange it may seem how, after seven years, the Grains conserved\nshould be fruitfull for a new production. For it is said that _Joseph\ndelivered Seed unto the AEgyptians, to sow their Land for the eighth\nyear_: and Corn after seven years is like to afford little or no\nproduction, according to _Theophrastus_;[213] _Ad Sementem semen\nanniculum optimum putatur, binum deterius et trinum; ultra sterile ferme\nest, quanquam ad usum cibarium idoneum_.\n\n [213] Theoph. _Hist. l. 8_.\n\nYet since, from former exemplifications, Corn may be made to last so\nlong, the fructifying power may well be conceived to last in some good\nproportion, according to the region and place of its conservation, as\nthe same _Theophrastus_ hath observed, and left a notable example from\n_Cappadocia_, where Corn might be kept sixty years, and remain fertile\nat forty; according to his expression thus translated; _In Cappadociae\nloco quodam petra dicto, triticum ad quadraginta annos foecundum est,\nat ad sementem percommodum durare proditum est, sexagenos aut\nseptuagenos ad usum cibarium servari posse idoneum._ The situation of\nthat Conservatory, was, as he delivereth, +hipselon, eupnoun, euauron+,\n_high, airy and exposed to several favourable winds_. And upon such\nconsideration of winds and ventilation, some conceive the AEgyptian\nGranaries were made open, the Country being free from rain. Howsoever it\nwas, that contrivance could not be without some hazard:[214] for the\ngreat Mists and Dews of that Country might dispose the Corn unto\ncorruption.\n\n [214] AEgypt +homichlodes, kai droseros+ _Vid._ Theophrastum\n\nMore plainly may they mistake, who from some analogy of name (as if\n_Pyramid_ were derived from +Pyron+, _Triticum_), conceive the\nAEgyptian Pyramids to have been built for Granaries; or look for any\nsettled Monuments about the Desarts erected for that intention; since\ntheir Store-houses were made in the great Towns, according to Scripture\nexpression,[215] _He gathered up all the Food of seven years, which was\nin the Land of AEgypt, and laid up the Food in the Cities: the Food of\nthe Field which was round about every City, laid he up in the same_.\n\n [215] Gen. 41. 48.\n\n[Sidenote: _Olive Tree in_ Rom. 11. 24.]\n\n32. _For if thou wert cut out of the Olive Tree, which is wild by\nnature, and wert grafted, contrary to nature, into a good Olive Tree,\nhow much more shall these, which be the natural Branches, be grafted\ninto their own Olive Tree?_ In which place, how answerable to the\nDoctrine of Husbandry this expression of S. _Paul_ is, you will readily\napprehend who understand the rules of insition or grafting, and that way\nof vegetable propagation; wherein that is contrary to nature, or natural\nrules which Art observeth: _viz._ to make use of a Cyons more ignoble\nthan the Stock, or to graft wild upon domestick and good Plants,\naccording as _Theophrastus_[216] hath anciently observed, and, making\ninstance in the Olive, hath left this Doctrine unto us; _Urbanum\nSylvestribus ut satis Oleastris inserere. Nam si e contrario Sylvestrem\nin Urbanos severis, etsi differentia quaedam erit, tamen[217] bonae frugis\nArbor nunquam profecto reddetur_: which is also agreeable unto our\npresent practice, who graft Pears on Thorns, and Apples upon Crabb\nStocks, not using the contrary insition. And when it is said, _How much\nmore shall these, which are the natural Branches, be grafted into their\nown natural Olive Tree?_ this is also agreeable unto the rule of the\nsame Author; +Esti de beltion enkentrismos, homoion eis homoia+,\n_Insitio melior est similium in similibus_: For the nearer consanguinity\nthere is between the Cyons and the Stock, the readier comprehension is\nmade, and the nobler fructification. According also unto the later\ncaution of _Laurenbergius_;[218] _Arbores domesticae insitioni destinatae,\nsemper anteponendae Sylvestribus_. And though the success be good, and\nmay suffice upon Stocks of the same denomination; yet, to be grafted\nupon their own and Mother Stock, is the nearest insition: which way,\nthough less practised of old, is now much imbraced, and found a notable\nway for melioration of the Fruit; and much the rather, if the Tree to be\ngrafted on be a good and generous Plant, a good and fair Olive, as the\nApostle seems to imply by a peculiar word[219] scarce to be found\nelsewhere.\n\n [216] De causis Plant. _Lib. 1. Cap. 7_.\n\n [217] +Kallikarpein ouk exei+.\n\n [218] De horticultura.\n\n [219] +Kallielaion+ Rom. 11. 42.\n\nIt must be also considered, that the _Oleaster_, or wild Olive, by\ncutting, transplanting and the best managery of Art, can be made but to\nproduce such Olives as (_Theophrastus_ saith) were particularly named\n_Phaulia_, that is, but _bad Olives_; and that it was reckon'd among\nProdigies, for the _Oleaster_ to become an Olive Tree.\n\nAnd when insition and grafting, in the Text, is applied unto the Olive\nTree, it hath an Emphatical sense, very agreeable unto that Tree which\nis best propagated this way; not at all by surculation, as\n_Theophrastus_ observeth, nor well by Seed, as hath been observed. _Omne\nsemen simile genus perficit, praeter oleam, Oleastrum enim generat, hoc\nest sylvestrem oleam, et non oleam veram._\n\n\"If, therefore, thou Roman and Gentile Branch, which wert cut from the\nwild Olive, art now, by the signal mercy of God, beyond the ordinary and\ncommonly expected way, grafted into the true Olive, the Church of God;\nif thou, which neither naturally nor by humane art canst be made to\nproduce any good Fruit, and, next to a Miracle, to be made a true Olive,\nart now by the benignity of God grafted into the proper Olive; how much\nmore shall the Jew, and natural Branch, be grafted into its genuine and\nmother Tree, wherein propinquity of nature is like, so readily and\nprosperously, to effect a coalition? And this more especially by the\nexpressed way of insition or implantation, the Olive being not\nsuccessfully propagable by Seed, nor at all by surculation.\"\n\n[Sidenote: _Stork nesting on Firre Trees in_ Psal. 104. 17.]\n\n33. _As for the Stork, the Firre Trees are her House._ This expression,\nin our Translation, which keeps close to the Original _Chasidah_, is\nsomewhat different from the Greek and Latin Translation; nor agreeable\nunto common observation, whereby they are known commonly to build upon\nChimneys, or the tops of Houses, and high Buildings, which\nnotwithstanding, the common Translation may clearly consist with\nobservation, if we consider that this is commonly affirmed of the black\nStork, and take notice of the description of _Ornithologus_ in\n_Aldrovandus_, that such Storks are often found in divers parts, and\nthat they do _in Arboribus nidulari, praesertim in abietibus_; Make their\nNests on Trees, especially upon Firre Trees. Nor wholly disagreeing unto\nthe practice of the common white Stork, according unto _Varro_,\n_nidulantur in agris_: and the concession of _Aldrovandus_ that\nsometimes they build on Trees: and the assertion of _Bellonius_,[220]\nthat men dress them Nests, and place Cradles upon high Trees, in Marish\nregions, that Storks may breed upon them: which course some observe for\nHerns and Cormorants with us. And this building of Storks upon Trees,\nmay be also answerable unto the original and natural way of building of\nStorks before the political habitations of men, and the raising of\nHouses and high Buildings; before they were invited by such conveniences\nand prepared Nests, to relinquish their natural places of nidulation. I\nsay, before or where such advantages are not ready; when Swallows found\nother places than Chimneys, and Daws found other places than holes in\nhigh Fabricks to build in.\n\n [220] Bellonius _de Avibus_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Balm, in_ Gen. 43. 11.]\n\n34. _And, therefore, Israel said carry down the man a present, a little\nBalm, a little Honey, and Myrrhe, Nuts and Almonds._ Now whether this,\nwhich _Jacob_ sent, were the proper Balsam extolled by humane Writers,\nyou cannot but make some doubt, who find the Greek Translation to be\n+Rhetine+, that is, _Resina_, and so may have some suspicion that\nit might be some pure distillation from the Turpentine Tree, which grows\nprosperously and plentifully in _Judaea_, and seems so understood by the\nArabick; and was indeed esteemed by _Theophrastus_ and _Dioscorides_,\nthe chiefest of resinous Bodies, and the word _Resina_ Emphatically used\nfor it.\n\nThat the Balsam Plant hath grown and prospered in _Judaea_ we believe\nwithout dispute. For the same is attested by _Theophrastus_, _Pliny_,\n_Justinus_, and many more; from the commendation that _Galen_ affordeth\nof the Balsam of _Syria_, and the story of _Cleopatra_, that she\nobtain'd some Plants of Balsam from _Herod_ the Great to transplant into\n_AEgypt_. But whether it was so anciently in _Judaea_ as the time of\n_Jacob_; nay, whether this Plant was here before the time of _Solomon_,\nthat great collectour of Vegetable rarities, some doubt may be made from\nthe account of _Josephus_, that the Queen of _Sheba_, a part of\n_Arabia_, among presents unto _Solomon_, brought some Plants of the\nBalsam Tree, as one of the peculiar estimables of her Country.\n\nWhether this ever had its natural growth, or were an original native\nPlant of _Judaea_, much more that it was peculiar unto that Country, a\ngreater doubt may arise: while we reade in _Pausanias_, _Strabo_ and\n_Diodorus,_ that it grows also in _Arabia_, and find in\n_Theophrastus_,[221] that it grew in two Gardens about _Jericho_ in\n_Judaea_. And more especially whiles we seriously consider that notable\ndiscourse between _Abdella_, _Abdachim_ and _Alpinus_, concluding the\nnatural and original place of this singular Plant to be in _Arabia_,\nabout _Mecha_ and _Medina_, where it still plentifully groweth, and\nMountains abound therein. From whence it hath been carefully\ntransplanted by the _Basha's_ of _Grand Cairo_, into the Garden of\n_Matarea_; where, when it dies, it is repaired again from those parts of\n_Arabia_, from whence the _Grand Signior_ yearly receiveth a present of\nBalsam from the _Xeriff_ of _Mecha_, still called by the Arabians\n_Balessan_; whence they believe arose the Greek appellation _Balsam_.\nAnd since these Balsam-plants are not now to be found in _Judaea_, and\nthough purposely cultivated, are often lost in _Judaea_, but\neverlastingly live, and naturally renew in _Arabia_; They probably\nconcluded, that those of _Judaea_ were foreign and transplanted from\nthese parts.\n\n [221] Theophrast. _l. 9. c. 6_.\n\nAll which notwithstanding, since the same Plant may grow naturally and\nspontaneously in several Countries, and either from inward or outward\ncauses be lost in one Region, while it continueth and subsisteth in\nanother, the Balsam Tree might possibly be a native of _Judaea_ as well\nas of _Arabia_; which because _de facto_ it cannot be clearly made out,\nthe ancient expressions of Scripture become doubtfull in this point. But\nsince this Plant hath not, for a long time, grown in _Judaea_, and still\nplentifully prospers in _Arabia_, that which now comes in pretious\nparcels to us, and still is called the Balsam of _Judaea_, may now\nsurrender its name, and more properly be called the Balsam of _Arabia_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Barley Flax, &c. in_ Exod. 9. 31.]\n\n35. _And the Flax and the Barley was smitten; for the Barley was in the\nEar, and the Flax was bolled, but the Wheat and the Rye was not smitten,\nfor they were not grown up._[222] How the Barley and the Flax should be\nsmitten in the plague of Hail in _AEgypt_, and the Wheat and Rye escape,\nbecause they were not yet grown up, may seem strange unto English\nobservers, who call Barley Summer Corn sown so many months after Wheat,\nand, beside _hordeum Polystichon_, or big Barley, sowe not Barley in the\nWinter, to anticipate the growth of Wheat.\n\n [222] Linum folliculos germinavit, +spermatizon+ _Septuag._ Serotina,\n _Lat._ +opsima+, _Gr._\n\nAnd the same may also seem a preposterous expression unto all who do\nnot consider the various Agriculture, and different Husbandry of\nNations, and such as was practised in _AEgypt_, and fairly proved to have\nbeen also used in _Judaea_, wherein their Barley Harvest was before that\nof Wheat; as is confirmable from that expression in _Ruth_, that she\n_came into Bethlehem at the beginning of Barley Harvest_, and staid unto\nthe end of Wheat Harvest; from the death of _Manasses_ the Father of\n_Judith_, Emphatically expressed to have happened in the Wheat Harvest,\nand more advanced heat of the Sun; and from the custom of the Jews, to\noffer the Barley Sheaf of the first fruits in _March_, and a Cake of\nWheat Flower but at the end of _Pentecost_. Consonant unto the practice\nof the AEgyptians, who (as _Theophrastus_ delivereth) sowed their Barley\nearly in reference to their first Fruits; and also the common rural\npractice, recorded by the same Authour, _Mature seritur Triticum,\nHordeum, quod etiam maturius seritur; Wheat and Barley are sowed early,\nbut Barley earlier of the two_.\n\nFlax was also an early Plant, as may be illustrated from the neighbour\nCountry of _Canaan_. For the Israelites kept the Passover in _Gilgal_ in\nthe fourteenth day of the first Month, answering unto part of our\n_March_, having newly passed _Jordan_: And the Spies which were sent\nfrom _Shittim_ unto _Jericho_, not many days before, were hid by _Rahab_\nunder the stalks of Flax, which lay drying on the top of her House;\nwhich sheweth that the Flax was already and newly gathered. For this was\nthe first preparation of Flax, and before fluviation or rotting, which,\nafter _Pliny's_ account, was after Wheat Harvest.\n\n_But the Wheat and the Rye were not smitten, for they were not grown\nup._ The Original signifies that it was _hidden_, or _dark_, the Vulgar\nand Septuagint that it was _serotinous_ or _late_, and our old\nTranslation that it was _late sown_. And so the expression and\ninterposition of _Moses_, who well understood the Husbandry of _AEgypt_,\nmight Emphatically declare the state of Wheat and Rye in that particular\nyear; and if so, the same is solvable from the time of the floud of\n_Nilus_, and the measure of its inundation. For if it were very high,\nand over-drenching the ground, they were forced to later Seed-time; and\nso the Wheat and the Rye escaped; for they were more slowly growing\nGrains, and, by reason of the greater inundation of the River, were sown\nlater than ordinary that year, especially in the Plains near the River,\nwhere the ground drieth latest.\n\nSome think the plagues of _AEgypt_ were acted in one Month, others but in\nthe compass of twelve. In the delivery of Scripture there is no account,\nof what time of the year or particular Month they fell out; but the\naccount of these grains, which were either smitten or escaped, make the\nplague of Hail to have probably hapned in _February_: This may be\ncollected from the new and old account of the Seed time and Harvest in\n_AEgypt_. For, according to the account of _Radzevil_,[223] the river\nrising in _June_, and the Banks being cut in _September_, they sow about\nS. _Andrews_, when the Floud is retired, and the moderate driness of the\nground permitteth. So that the Barley anticipating the Wheat, either in\ntime of sowing or growing, might be in Ear in _February_.\n\n [223] Radzevil's _Travels_.\n\nThe account of _Pliny_[224] is little different. They cast the Seed upon\nthe Slime and Mudd when the River is down, which commonly happeneth in\nthe beginning of _November_. They begin to reap and cut down a little\nbefore the Calends of _April_, about the middle of _March_, and in the\nMonth of _May_ their Harvest is in. So that Barley anticipating Wheat,\nit might be in Ear in _February_, and Wheat not yet grown up, at least\nto the Spindle or Ear, to be destroyed by the Hail. For they cut down\nabout the middle of _March_, at least their forward Corns, and in the\nMonth of _May_ all sorts of Corns were in.\n\n [224] Plin. _lib. 18. cap. 18_.\n\nThe _turning of the River into Bloud_ shews in what Month this happened\nnot. That is, not when the River had overflown; for it is said, _the\nAEgyptians digged round about the River for Water to drink_, which they\ncould not have done, if the River had been out, and the Fields under\nWater.\n\nIn the same Text you cannot, without some hesitation, pass over the\ntranslation of Rye, which the Original nameth _Cassumeth_, the Greek\nrendreth _Olyra_, the French and Dutch _Spelta_, the Latin _Zea_, and\nnot _Secale_ the known word for Rye. But this common Rye so well\nunderstood at present, was not distinctly described, or not well known\nfrom early Antiquity. And therefore, in this uncertainty, some have\nthought it to have been the _Typha_ of the Ancients. _Cordus_ will have\nit to be _Olyra_, and _Ruellius_ some kind of _Oryza_. But having no\nvulgar and well known name for those Grains, we warily embrace an\nappellation of near affinity, and tolerably render it _Rye_.\n\nWhile Flax, Barley, Wheat and Rye are named, some may wonder why no\nmention is made of Ryce, wherewith, at present, _AEgypt_ so much\naboundeth. But whether that Plant grew so early in that Country, some\ndoubt may be made: for Ryce is originally a Grain of _India_, and might\nnot then be transplanted into _AEgypt_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Sheaves of Grass, in_ Psal. 12. 6, 7.]\n\n36. _Let them become as the Grass growing upon the House top, which\nwithereth before it be plucked up, whereof the mower filleth not his\nhand, nor he that bindeth Sheaves his bosome._ Though the _filling of\nthe hand_, and mention of _Sheaves of Hay_, may seem strange unto us,\nwho use neither handfulls nor Sheaves in that kind of Husbandry, yet may\nit be properly taken, and you are not like to doubt thereof, who may\nfind the like expressions in the Authours _de Re rustica_, concerning\nthe old way of this Husbandry.\n\n_Columella_,[225] delivering what Works were not to be permitted upon\nthe Roman _Feriae_, or Festivals, among others sets down, that upon such\ndays, it was not lawfull to carry or bind up Hay, _nec foenum vincire\nnec vehere, per religiones Ponteficum licet_.\n\n [225] Columella _lib. 2 cap. 22_.\n\n_Marcus Varro_[226] is more particular; _Primum de pratis herbarum cum\ncrescere desiit, subsecari falcibus debet, et quoad peracescat furcillis\nversari, cum peracuit, de his manipulos fieri et vehi in villam_.\n\n [226] Varro _lib. 1. cap. 49_.\n\nAnd their course of mowing seems somewhat different from ours. For they\ncut not down clear at once, but used an after section, which they\npeculiarly called _Sicilitium_, according as the word is expounded by\n_Georgius Alexandrinus_, and _Beroaldus_ after _Pliny_; _Sicilire est\nfalcibus consectari quae foenisecae praeterierunt, aut ea secare quae\nfoenisecae praeterierunt_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Juniper Tree, in_ 1 King. 19. 5, etc.]\n\n37. When 'tis said that _Elias_ lay and slept under a Juniper Tree,\nsome may wonder how that Tree, which in our parts groweth but low and\nshrubby, should afford him shade and covering. But others know that\nthere is a lesser and a larger kind of that Vegetable; that it makes a\nTree in its proper soil and region. And may find in _Pliny_ that in the\nTemple of _Diana Saguntina_ in _Spain_, the Rafters were made of\nJuniper.\n\nIn that expression of _David_,[227] _Sharp Arrows of the mighty, with\nCoals of Juniper_; Though Juniper be left out in the last Translation,\nyet may there be an Emphatical sense from that word; since Juniper\nabounds with a piercing Oil, and makes a smart Fire. And the rather, if\nthat quality be half true, which _Pliny_ affirmeth, that the Coals of\nJuniper raked up will keep a glowing Fire for the space of a year. For\nso the expression will Emphatically imply, not onely the _smart burning,\nbut the lasting fire of their malice_.\n\n [227] Psal. 120. 4.\n\nThat passage of _Job_,[228] wherein he complains that poor and half\nfamished fellows despised him, is of greater difficulty; _For want and\nfamine they were solitary, they cut up Mallows by the Bushes, and\nJuniper roots for meat_. Wherein we might at first doubt the\nTranslation, not onely from the Greek Text but the assertion of\n_Dioscorides_, who affirmeth that the roots of Juniper are of a venomous\nquality. But _Scaliger_ hath disproved the same from the practice of the\nAfrican Physicians, who use the decoction of Juniper roots against the\nVenereal Disease. The Chaldee reads it _Genista_, or some kind of Broom,\nwhich will be also unusual and hard Diet, except thereby we understand\nthe _Orobanche_, or Broom Rape, which groweth from the roots of Broom;\nand which, according to _Dioscorides_, men used to eat raw or boiled in\nthe manner of _Asparagus_.\n\n [228] Job 30. 3, 4.\n\nAnd, therefore, this expression doth highly declare the misery, poverty\nand extremity of the persons who were now mockers of him; they being so\ncontemptible and necessitous, that they were fain to be content, not\nwith a mean Diet, but such as was no Diet at all, the roots of Trees,\nthe roots of Juniper, which none would make use of for Food, but in the\nlowest necessity, and some degree of famishing.\n\n[Sidenote: _Scarlet Tincture, in_ Gen. 38. 28. Exod. 25. 4, etc.]\n\n38. While some have disputed whether _Theophrastus_ knew the Scarlet\nBerry, others may doubt whether that noble tincture were known unto the\nHebrews, which notwithstanding seems clear from the early and iterated\nexpressions of Scripture concerning the Scarlet Tincture, and is the\nless to be doubted because the Scarlet Berry grew plentifully in the\nLand of _Canaan_, and so they were furnished with the Materials of that\nColour. For though _Dioscorides_ saith it groweth in _Armenia_ and\n_Cappadocia_, yet that it also grew in _Judaea_, seems more than probable\nfrom the account of _Bellonius_, who observed it to be so plentifull in\nthat Country, that it afforded a profitable Commodity, and great\nquantity thereof was transported by the Venetian Merchants.\n\nHow this should be fitly expressed by the word _Tolagnoth_, _Vermis_, or\n_Worm_, may be made out from _Pliny_, who calls it _Coccus Scolecius_,\nor the _Wormy Berry_; as also from the name of that Colour called\n_Vermilion_, or the _Worm Colour_; and which is also answerable unto the\ntrue nature of it. For this is no proper Berry containing the\nfructifying part, but a kind of Vessicular excrescence, adhering\ncommonly to the Leaf of the _Ilex Coccigera_, or dwarf and small kind of\nOak, whose Leaves are always green, and its proper seminal parts\nAcrons. This little Bagg containeth a red Pulp, which, if not timely\ngathered, or left to it self, produceth small red Flies, and partly a\nred powder, both serviceable unto the tincture. And therefore, to\nprevent the generation of Flies, when it is first gathered, they\nsprinkle it over with Vinegar, especially such as make use of the fresh\nPulp for the confection of _Alkermes_; which still retaineth the Arabick\nname, from the _Kermesberry_; which is agreeable unto the description of\n_Bellonius_ and _Quinqueranus_. And the same we have beheld in\n_Provence_ and _Languedock_, where it is plentifully gathered, and\ncalled _Manna Rusticorum_, from the considerable profit which the\nPeasants make by gathering of it.\n\n[Sidenote: _Oaks, in_ Gen. 35. 4, 8. Josh. 24. 26. Isa. 1. 29. Ezek. 27.\n6. Hosea. 4. 13, etc.]\n\n39. Mention is made of Oaks in divers parts of Scripture, which though\nthe Latin sometimes renders a Turpentine Tree, yet surely some kind of\nOak may be understood thereby; but whether our common Oak as is commonly\napprehended, you may well doubt; for the common Oak, which prospereth so\nwell with us, delighteth not in hot regions. And that diligent Botanist\n_Bellonius_, who took such particular notice of the Plants of _Syria_\nand _Judaea_, observed not the vulgar Oak in those parts. But he found\nthe _Ilex_, _Chesne Vert_, or Ever-green Oak, in many places; as also\nthat kind of Oak which is properly named _Esculus_: and he makes mention\nthereof in places about _Jerusalem_, and in his Journey from thence unto\n_Damascus_, where he found _Montes Ilice, et Esculo virentes_; which, in\nhis Discourse of _Lemnos_, he saith are always green. And therefore when\nit is said[229] of _Absalom_, that his _Mule went under the thick Boughs\nof a great Oak, and his Head caught hold of the Oak, and he was taken up\nbetween the Heaven and the Earth_, that Oak might be some _Ilex_, or\nrather _Esculus_. For that is a thick and bushy kind, in _Orbem comosa_,\nas _Dale-champius_; _ramis in orbem dispositis comans_, as _Renealmus_\ndescribeth it. And when it is said[230] that _Ezechias broke down the\nImages, and cut down the Groves_, they might much consist of Oaks, which\nwere sacred unto Pagan Deities, as this more particularly, according to\nthat of _Virgil_,\n\n _Nemorumque Jovi quae maxima frondet Esculus._\n\nAnd, in _Judaea_, where no hogs were eaten by the Jews, and few kept by\nothers, 'tis not unlikely that they most cherished the _Esculus_, which\nmight serve for Food of men. For the Acrons thereof are the sweetest of\nany Oak, and taste like Chesnuts; and so producing an edulious or\nesculent Fruit, is properly named _Esculus_.\n\n [229] 2 Sam. 18. 9, 14.\n\n [230] 2 King. 18. 4.\n\nThey which know the _Ilex_, or Ever-green Oak, with somewhat prickled\nleaves, named +Prinos+, will better understand the irreconcileable\nanswer of the two Elders, when the one accused _Susanna_ of incontinency\nunder a +Prinos+, or Ever-green Oak, the other under a +Schinos+,\n_Lentiscus_, or Mastick Tree, which are so different in Bigness, Boughs,\nLeaves and Fruit, the one bearing Acrons, the other Berries: And,\nwithout the knowledge hereof, will not Emphatically or distinctly\nunderstand that of the Poet,\n\n _Flavaque de viridi stillabant Ilice mella._\n\n[Sidenote: _Cedars of_ Libanus.]\n\n40. When we often meet with the Cedars of _Libanus_, that expression may\nbe used not onely because they grew in a known and neighbour Country,\nbut also because they were of the noblest and largest kind of that\nVegetable, and we find the Phoenician Cedar magnified by the Ancients.\nThe Cedar of _Libanus_ is a _coniferous_ Tree, bearing _Cones_ or\nCloggs; (not Berries) of such a vastness, that _Melchior Lussy_, a great\nTraveller, found one upon _Libanus_ as big as seven men could compass.\nSome are now so curious as to keep the Branches and _Cones_ thereof\namong their rare Collections. And, though much Cedar Wood be now brought\nfrom _America_, yet 'tis time to take notice of the true Cedar of\n_Libanus_, imployed in the Temple of _Solomon_; for they have been much\ndestroyed and neglected, and become at last but thin. _Bellonius_ could\nreckon but twenty eight, _Rowolfius_ and _Radzevil_ but twenty four, and\n_Bidulphus_ the same number. And a later account[231] of some English\nTravellers saith, that they are now but in one place, and in a small\ncompass, in _Libanus_.\n\n [231] _A journey to_ Jerusalem, 1672.\n\n[Sidenote: _Uncircumcised Fruit, in_ Levit. 19. 23.]\n\n_Quando ingressi fueritis terram, et Plantaveritis in illa ligna\nPomifera, auferetis praeputia eorum. Poma quae germinant immunda erunt\nvobis, nec edetis ex eis. Quarto autem anno, omnis fructus eorum\nsanctificabitur, laudabilis Domino. Quinto autem anno comedetis\nfructus._ By this Law they were injoyned not to eat of the Fruits of the\nTrees which they planted for the _first three years_: and, as the Vulgar\nexpresseth it, to take away the Prepuces, from such Trees, during that\ntime; the Fruits of _the fourth year being holy unto the Lord_, and\nthose of the fifth allowable unto others. Now if _auferre praeputia_ be\ntaken, as many learned men have thought, to pluck away the bearing Buds,\nbefore they proceed unto Flowers or Fruit, you will readily apprehend\nthe Metaphor, from the analogy and similitude of those Sprouts and Buds,\nwhich, shutting up the fruitfull particle, resembleth the preputial\npart.\n\nAnd you may also find herein a piece of Husbandry not mentioned in\n_Theophrastus_, or _Columella_. For by taking away of the Buds, and\nhindering fructification, the Trees become more vigorous, both in growth\nand future production. By such a way King _Pyrrhus_ got into a lusty\nrace of Beeves, and such as were desired over all _Greece_, by keeping\nthem from Generation untill the ninth year.\n\nAnd you may also discover a physical advantage of the goodness of the\nFruit, which becometh less crude and more wholsome, upon the fourth or\nfifth years production.\n\n[Sidenote: _Partition of Plants into Herb and Tree, in_ Gen. 1. 11.]\n\n41. While you reade in _Theophrastus_, or modern Herbalists, a strict\ndivision of Plants, into _Arbor_, _Frutex_, _Suffrutex et Herba_, you\ncannot but take notice of the Scriptural division at the Creation, into\n_Tree_ and _Herb_: and this may seem too narrow to comprehend the\nClassis of Vegetables; which, notwithstanding, may be sufficient, and a\nplain and intelligible division thereof. And therefore in this\ndifficulty concerning the division of Plants, the learned Botanist,\n_Caesalpinus_, thus concludeth. _Clarius agemus si altera divisione\nneglecta, duo tantum Plantarum genera substituamus, Arborem scilicet, et\nHerbam, conjungentes cum Arboribus Frutices, et cum Herba Suffrutices_;\n_Frutices_ being the lesser Trees, and _Suffrutices_ the larger, harder\nand more solid Herbs.\n\nAnd this division into Herb and Tree, may also suffice, if we take in\nthat natural ground of the division of perfect Plants, and such as grow\nfrom Seeds. For Plants, in their first production, do send forth two\nLeaves adjoining to the Seed; and then afterwards, do either produce two\nother Leaves, and so successively before any Stalk; and such go under\nthe name of +Poa, Botane+, or _Herb_; or else, after the first Leaves\nsucceeding to the Seed Leaves, they send forth a Stalk, or rudiment of a\nStalk before any other Leaves, and such fall under the Classis of\n+Dendron+, or _Tree_. So that, in this natural division, there are but\ntwo grand differences, that is, _Tree_ and _Herb_. The _Frutex_ and\n_Suffrutex_ have the way of production from the Seed, and in other\nrespects the _Suffrutices_, or _Cremia_, have a middle and participating\nnature, and referable unto Herbs.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Bay Tree, in_ Psal. 37. 35]\n\n42. _I have seen the ungodly in great power, and flourishing like a\ngreen Bay Tree._ Both Scripture and humane Writers draw frequent\nillustrations from Plants. _Scribonius Largus_ illustrates the old\nCymbals from the _Cotyledon Palustris_, or _Umbelicus Veneris_. Who\nwould expect to find _Aaron's_ Mitre in any Plant? yet _Josephus_ hath\ntaken some pains to make out the same in the seminal knop of\n_Hyoscyamus_, or Henbane. The Scripture compares the Figure of Manna\nunto the Seed of Coriander. In _Jeremy_[232] we find the expression,\n_Streight as a Palm Tree_: And here the wicked in their flourishing\nstate are likened unto a Bay Tree. Which, sufficiently answering the\nsense of the Text, we are unwilling to exclude that noble Plant from the\nhonour of having its name in Scripture. Yet we cannot but observe, that\nthe Septuagint renders it _Cedars_, and the Vulgar accordingly, _Vidi\nimpium superexaltatum, et elevatum sicut Cedros Libani_; and the\nTranslation of _Tremelius_ mentions neither Bay nor Cedar; _Sese\nexplicantem tanquam Arbor indigena virens_; which seems to have been\nfollowed by the last Low Dutch Translation. A private Translation\nrenders it like _a green self-growing[233] Laurel_, The High Dutch of\n_Luther's_ Bible, retains the word _Laurel_; and so doth the old Saxon\nand Island Translation; so also the French, Spanish; and Italian of\n_Diodati_: yet his Notes acknowledge that some think it rather a Cedar,\nand others any large Tree in a prospering and natural Soil.\n\n [232] Jer. 10. 5.\n\n [233] Ainsworth.\n\nBut however these Translations differ, the sense is allowable and\nobvious unto apprehension: when no particular Plant is named, any proper\nto the sense may be supposed; where either Cedar or Laurel is\nmentioned, if the preceding words [_exalted and elevated_] be used, they\nare more appliable unto the Cedar; where the word [_flourishing_] is\nused, it is more agreeable unto the Laurel, which, in its prosperity,\nabounds with pleasant flowers, whereas those of the Cedar are very\nlittle, and scarce perceptible, answerable to the Firre, Pine and other\nconiferous Trees.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Figg Tree, in_ S. Mark. 11. 13, etc.]\n\n43. _And in the morning, when they were come from Bethany, he was\nhungry; and seeing a Figg Tree afar off having Leaves, he came, if haply\nhe might find any thing thereon; and when he came to it, he found\nnothing but leaves: for the time of Figgs was not yet._ Singular\nconceptions have passed from learned men to make out this passage of S.\n_Mark_, which S. _Matthew_[234] so plainly delivereth; most men doubting\nwhy our Saviour should curse the Tree for bearing no Fruit, when the\ntime of Fruit was not yet come; or why it is said that _the time of\nFiggs was not yet_, when, notwithstanding, Figgs might be found at that\nseason.\n\n [234] Matt. 21. 19.\n\n_Heinsius_,[235] who thinks that _Elias_ must salve the doubt, according\nto the received Reading of the Text, undertaketh to vary the same,\nreading +hou gar en, kairos sykon+, that is, _for where he was, it was\nthe season or time of Figgs_.\n\n [235] Heinsius _in_ Nonnum.\n\nA learned Interpreter[236] of our own, without alteration of accents or\nwords, endeavours to salve all, by another interpretation of the same,\n+Hou gar kairos sykon+, _For it was not a good or seasonable year for\nFiggs_.\n\n [236] D. Hammond.\n\nBut, because men part not easily with old beliefs, or the received\nconstruction of words, we shall briefly set down what may be alledged\nfor it.\n\nAnd, first, for the better comprehension of all deductions hereupon, we\nmay consider the several differences and distinctions both of Figg Trees\nand their Fruits. _Suidas_ upon the word +Ischas+ makes four divisions\nof Figgs, +Olynthos, Phelex, Sykon+ and +Ischas+. But because +Phelex+\nmakes no considerable distinction, learned men do chiefly insist upon\nthe three others; that is, +Olynthos+, or _Grossus_, which are the\nButtons, or small sort of Figgs, either not ripe, or not ordinarily\nproceeding to ripeness, but fall away at least in the greatest part, and\nespecially in sharp Winters; which are also named +Sykades+, and\ndistinguished from the Fruit of the wild Figg, or _Caprificus_, which is\nnamed +Erineos+, and never cometh unto ripeness. The second is called\n+Sykon+, or _Ficus_, which commonly proceedeth unto ripeness in its due\nseason. A third the ripe Figg dried, which maketh the +Ischades+, or\n_Carrier_.\n\nOf Figg Trees there are also many divisions; For some are _prodromi_, or\nprecocious, which bear Fruit very early, whether they bear once, or\noftner in the year; some are _protericae_, which are the most early of\nthe precocious Trees, and bear soonest of any; some are _aestivae_, which\nbear in the common season of the Summer, and some _serotinae_ which bear\nvery late.\n\nSome are _biferous_ and _triferous_, which bear twice or thrice in the\nyear, and some are of the ordinary standing course, which make up the\nexpected season of Figgs.\n\nAgain some Figg Trees, either in their proper kind, or fertility in some\nsingle ones, do bear Fruit or rudiments of Fruit all the year long; as\nis annually observable in some kind of Figg Trees in hot and proper\nregions; and may also be observed in some Figg Trees of more temperate\nCountries, in years of no great disadvantage, wherein, when the\nSummer-ripe Figg is past, others begin to appear, and so, standing in\nButtons all the Winter, do either fall away before the Spring, or else\nproceed to ripeness.\n\nNow, according to these distinctions, we may measure the intent of the\nText, and endeavour to make out the expression. For, considering the\ndiversity of these Trees, and their several fructifications, probable or\npossible it is, that some thereof were implied, and may literally afford\na solution.\n\nAnd first, though it was not the season for Figgs, yet some Fruit might\nhave been expected, even in ordinary bearing Trees. For the _Grossi_ or\nButtons appear before the Leaves, especially before the Leaves are well\ngrown. Some might have stood during the Winter, and by this time been of\nsome growth: Though many fall off, yet some might remain on, and proceed\ntowards maturity. And we find that good Husbands had an art to make them\nhold on, as is delivered by _Theophrastus_.\n\nThe +Sykon+ or common Summer Figg was not expected; for that is\nplaced by _Galen_ among the _Fructus Horarii_, or _Horaei_, which ripen\nin that part of Summer, called +Hora+, and stands commended by\nhim above other Fruits of that season. And of this kind might be the\nFiggs which were brought unto _Cleopatra_ in a Basket together with an\nAsp, according to the time of her death on the nineteenth of _August_.\nAnd that our Saviour expected not such Figgs, but some other kind, seems\nto be implied in the indefinite expression, _if haply he might find any\nthing thereon_; which in that Country, and the variety of such Trees,\nmight not be despaired of, at this season, and very probably hoped for\nin the first precocious and early bearing Trees. And that there were\nprecocious and early bearing Trees in _Judaea_, may be illustrated from\nsome expressions in Scripture concerning precocious Figgs;[237]\n_Calathus unus habebat Ficus bonas nimis, sicut solent esse Ficus primi\ntemporis; One Basket had very good Figgs, even like the Figgs that are\nfirst ripe_. And the like might be more especially expected in this\nplace, if this remarkable Tree be rightly placed in some Mapps of\n_Jerusalem_; for it is placed, by _Adrichomius_, in or near _Bethphage_,\nwhich some conjectures will have to be the _House of Figgs_: and at this\nplace Figg Trees are still to be found, if we consult the Travels of\n_Bidulphus_.\n\n [237] Jer. 24. 2.\n\nAgain, in this great variety of Figg Trees, as precocious, proterical,\nbiferous, triferous, and always bearing Trees, something might have been\nexpected, though the time of common Figgs was not yet. For some Trees\nbear in a manner all the year; as may be illustrated from the Epistle of\nthe Emperour _Julian_, concerning his Present of _Damascus_ Figgs, which\nhe commendeth from their successive and continued growing and bearing,\nafter the manner of the Fruits which _Homer_ describeth in the Garden of\n_Alcinous_. And though it were then but about the eleventh of _March_,\nyet, in the Latitude of _Jerusalem_, the Sun at that time hath a good\npower in the day, and might advance the maturity of precocious\noften-bearing or ever-bearing Figgs. And therefore when it is said that\nS. _Peter_[238] stood and warmed himself by the Fire in the Judgment\nHall, and the reason is added [_for it was cold_[239]] that expression\nmight be interposed either to denote the coolness in the Morning,\naccording to hot Countries, or some extraordinary and unusual coldness,\nwhich happened at that time. For the same _Bidulphus_, who was at that\ntime of the year at _Jerusalem_, saith, that it was then as hot as at\n_Midsummer_ in _England_: and we find in Scripture, that the first Sheaf\nof Barley was offer'd in _March_.\n\n [238] _S._ Mark 14. 67. _S._ Luke 22. 55, 56.\n\n [239] _S._ John 18. 18.\n\nOur Saviour therefore, seeing a Figg Tree with Leaves well spread, and\nso as to be distinguished a far off, went unto it, and when he came,\nfound nothing but Leaves; he found it to be no precocious, or\nalways-bearing Tree: And though it were not the time for Summer Figgs,\nyet he found no rudiments thereof: and though he expected not common\nFiggs, yet something might happily have been expected of some other\nkind, according to different fertility, and variety of production; but,\ndiscovering nothing, he found a Tree answering the State of the Jewish\nRulers, barren unto all expectation.\n\nAnd this is consonant unto the mystery of the Story, wherein the Figg\nTree denoteth the Synagogue and Rulers of the Jews, whom God having\npeculiarly cultivated, singularly blessed and cherished, he expected\nfrom them no ordinary, slow, or customary fructification, but an\nearliness in good Works, a precocious or continued fructification, and\nwas not content with common after-bearing; and might justly have\nexpostulated with the Jews, as God by the Prophet _Micah_[240] did with\ntheir Forefathers; _Praecoquas Ficus desideravit Anima mea, My Soul\nlonged for_, (or desired) _early ripe Fruits, but ye are become as a\nVine already gathered, and there is no cluster upon you_.\n\n [240] Micah 7. 1.\n\nLastly, In this account of the Figg Tree, the mystery and symbolical\nsense is chiefly to be looked upon. Our Saviour, therefore, taking a\nhint from his hunger to go unto this specious Tree, and intending, by\nthis Tree, to declare a Judgment upon the Synagogue and people of the\nJews, he came unto the Tree, and, after the usual manner, inquired, and\nlooked about for some kind of Fruit, as he had done before in the Jews,\nbut found nothing but Leaves and specious outsides, as he had also found\nin them; and when it bore no Fruit like them, when he expected it, and\ncame to look for it, though it were not the time of ordinary Fruit, yet\nfailing when he required it, in the mysterious sense, 'twas fruitless\nlonger to expect it. For he had come unto them, and they were nothing\nfructified by it, his departure approached, and his time of preaching\nwas now at an end.\n\nNow, in this account, besides the Miracle, some things are naturally\nconsiderable. For it may be question'd how the Figg Tree, naturally a\nfruitfull Plant, became barren, for it had no shew or so much as\nrudiment of Fruit: And it was in old time, a signal Judgment of God,\nthat _the Figg Tree should bear no Fruit_: and therefore this Tree may\nnaturally be conceived to have been under some Disease indisposing it to\nsuch fructification. And this, in the Pathology of Plants, may be the\nDisease of +phyllomania emphyllismos+; or superfolliation mention'd by\n_Theophrastus_; whereby the fructifying Juice is starved by the excess\nof Leaves; which in this Tree were already so full spread, that it might\nbe known and distinguished a far off. And this was, also, a sharp\nresemblance of the hypocrisie of the Rulers, made up of specious\noutsides, and fruitless ostentation, contrary to the Fruit of the Figg\nTree, which, filled with a sweet and pleasant pulp, makes no shew\nwithout, not so much as of any Flower.\n\nSome naturals are also considerable from the propriety of this\npunishment settled upon a Figg Tree: For infertility and barrenness\nseems more intolerable in this Tree than in any, as being a Vegetable\nsingularly constituted for production; so far from bearing no Fruit that\nit may be made to bear almost any. And therefore the Ancients singled\nout this as the fittest Tree whereon to graft and propagate other\nFruits, as containing a plentifull and lively Sap, whereby other Cyons\nwould prosper: And, therefore, this Tree was also sacred unto the Deity\nof Fertility: and the _Statua_ of _Priapus_ was made of the Figg Tree.\n\n _Olim Truncus eram Ficulnus inutile Lignum._\n\nIt hath also a peculiar advantage to produce and maintain its Fruit\nabove all other Plants, as not subject to miscarry in Flowers and\nBlossomes, from accidents of Wind and Weather. For it beareth no Flowers\noutwardly, and such as it hath, are within the Coat, as the later\nexamination of Naturalists hath discovered.\n\nLastly, It was a Tree wholly constituted for Fruit, wherein if it\nfaileth, it is in a manner useless, the Wood thereof being of so little\nuse, that it affordeth proverbial expressions,\n\n _Homo Ficulneus, argumentum Ficulneum_,\n\nfor things of no validity.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Palm Tree, in_ Cant. 7. 8.]\n\n44. _I said I will go up into the Palm Tree, and take hold of the Boughs\nthereof._ This expression is more agreeable unto the Palm than is\ncommonly apprehended, for that it is a tall bare Tree bearing its Boughs\nbut at the top and upper part; so that it must be ascended before its\nBoughs or Fruit can be attained: And the going, getting or climbing up,\nmay be Emphatical in this Tree; for the Trunk or Body thereof is\nnaturally contrived for ascension, and made with advantage for getting\nup, as having many welts and eminencies, and so as it were a natural\nLadder, and Staves, by which it may be climbed, as _Pliny_[241]\nobserveth, _Palmae teretes atque proceres, densis quadratisque pollicibus\nfaciles se ad scandendum praebent_, by this way men are able to get up\ninto it. And the Figures of Indians thus climbing the same are\ngraphically described in the Travels of _Linschoten_. This Tree is often\nmentioned in Scripture, and was so remarkable in _Judaea_, that in\nafter-times it became the Emblem of that Country, as may be seen in that\nMedal of the Emperour _Titus_, with a Captive Woman sitting under a\nPalm, and the Inscription of _Judaea Capta_. And _Pliny_ confirmeth the\nsame when he saith, _Judaea Palmis inclyta_.\n\n [241] Plin. 13. _cap. 4_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Lilies, in_ Cant. 2. 1, 2, 16.]\n\n45. Many things are mention'd in Scripture, which have an Emphasis from\nthis or the neighbour Countries: For besides the Cedars, the Syrian\nLilies are taken notice of by Writers. That expression in the\n_Canticles_,[242] _Thou art fair, thou art fair, thou hast Doves eyes_,\nreceives a particular character, if we look not upon our common Pigeons,\nbut the beauteous and fine ey'd Doves of Syria.\n\n [242] Cant. 4. 1.\n\nWhen the Rump is so strictly taken notice of in the Sacrifice of the\nPeace Offering, in these words,[243] _The whole Rump, it shall be taken\noff hard by the Back-bone_, it becomes the more considerable in\nreference to this Country, where Sheep had so large Tails; which,\naccording to _Aristotle_,[244] were a Cubit broad; and so they are\nstill, as _Bellonius_ hath delivered.\n\n [243] Levit. 3. 9.\n\n [244] Aristot. _Hist. Animal. lib. 8_.\n\nWhen 'tis said in the _Canticles_,[245] _Thy Teeth are as a Flock of\nSheep, which go up from the washing, whereof every one beareth Twins,\nand there is not one barren among them_; it may seem hard unto us of\nthese parts to find whole Flocks bearing Twins, and not one barren among\nthem; yet may this be better conceived in the fertile Flocks of those\nCountries, where Sheep have so often two, sometimes three, and sometimes\nfour, and which is so frequently observed by Writers of the neighbour\nCountry of _AEgypt_. And this fecundity, and fruitfulness of their\nFlocks, is answerable unto the expression of the Psalmist,[246] _That\nour Sheep may bring forth thousands and ten thousands in our Streets_.\nAnd hereby, besides what was spent at their Tables, a good supply was\nmade for the great consumption of Sheep in their several kinds of\nSacrifices; and of so many thousand Male unblemished yearling Lambs,\nwhich were required at their Passeovers.\n\n [245] Cant. 4. 2.\n\n [246] Psal. 144. 13.\n\nNor need we wonder to find so frequent mention both of Garden and Field\nPlants; since _Syria_ was notable of old for this curiosity and variety,\naccording to _Pliny_, _Syria hortis operosissima_; and since _Bellonius_\nhath so lately observed of _Jerusalem_, that its hilly parts did so\nabound with Plants, that they might be compared unto Mount _Ida_ in\n_Crete_ or _Candia_: which is the most noted place for noble Simples yet\nknown.\n\n[Sidenote: _Trees and Herbs not expresly nam'd in Scripture._]\n\n46. Though so many Plants have their express Names in Scripture, yet\nothers are implied in some Texts which are not explicitly mention'd. In\nthe Feast of _Tabernacles_ or _Booths_, the Law was this,[247] _Thou\nshalt take unto thee Boughs of goodly Trees, Branches of the Palm, and\nthe Boughs of thick Trees, and Willows of the Brook_. Now though the\nText descendeth not unto particulars of the _goodly Trees_, and _thick\nTrees_; yet _Maimonides_ will tell us that for a _goodly Tree_ they made\nuse of the Citron Tree, which is fair and goodly to the eye, and well\nprospering in that Country: And that for the _thick Trees_ they used the\nMyrtle, which was no rare or infrequent Plant among them. And though it\ngroweth but low in our Gardens, was not a little Tree in those parts; in\nwhich Plant also the Leaves grew thick, and almost covered the Stalk.\nAnd _Curtius[248] Symphorianus_ in his description of the _Exotick_\nMyrtle, makes it, _Folio densissimo senis in ordinem versibus_. The\nPaschal Lamb was to be eaten with bitterness or bitter Herbs, not\nparticularly set down in Scripture: but the Jewish Writers declare, that\nthey made use of Succory, and wild Lettuce, which Herbs while some\nconceive they could not get down, as being very bitter, rough and\nprickly, they may consider that the time of the Passeover was in the\nSpring, when these Herbs are young and tender, and consequently less\nunpleasant: besides, according to the Jewish custom, these Herbs were\ndipped in the _Charoseth_ or Sawce made of Raisins stamped with Vinegar,\nand were also eaten with Bread; and they had four Cups of Wine allowed\nunto them; and it was sufficient to take but a pittance of Herbs, or the\nquantity of an Olive.\n\n [247] Levit. 23. 40.\n\n [248] Curtius _de Hortis._\n\n[Sidenote: _Reeds in Scripture._]\n\n47. Though the famous paper Reed of _AEgypt_, be onely particularly named\nin Scripture; yet when Reeds are so often mention'd, without special\nname or distinction, we may conceive their differences may be\ncomprehended, and that they were not all of one kind, or that the common\nReed was onely implied. For mention is made in _Ezekiel_[249] of _a\nmeasuring Reed of six Cubits_: we find that they smote our Saviour on\nthe Head with a Reed,[250] and put a Sponge with Vinegar on a Reed,\nwhich was long enough to reach to his mouth, while he was upon the\nCross; And with such differences of Reeds, _Vallatory_, _Sagittary_,\n_Scriptory_, and others, they might be furnished in _Judaea_: For we find\nin the portion of _Ephraim_,[251] _Vallis arundineti_; and so set down\nin the Mapps of _Adricomius_, and in our Translation the River _Kana_,\nor Brook of _Canes_. And _Bellonius_ tells us that the River _Jordan_\naffordeth plenty and variety of Reeds; out of some whereof the Arabs\nmake Darts, and light Lances, and out of others, Arrows; and withall\nthat there plentifully groweth the fine _Calamus, arundo Scriptoria_, or\nwriting Reed, which they gather with the greatest care, as being of\nsingular use and commodity at home and abroad; a hard Reed about the\ncompass of a Goose or Swans Quill, whereof I have seen some polished and\ncut with a Webb; which is in common use for writing throughout the\nTurkish Dominions, they using not the Quills of Birds.\n\n [249] Ezek. 40. 5.\n\n [250] _S._ Matt 27. 30, 48.\n\n [251] Josh. 16. 17.\n\nAnd whereas the same Authour with other describers of these parts\naffirmeth, that the River _Jordan_ not far from _Jerico_, is but such a\nStream as a youth may throw a Stone over it, or about eight fathoms\nbroad, it doth not diminish the account and solemnity of the miraculous\npassage of the Israelites under _Joshua_; For it must be considered,\nthat they passed it in the time of Harvest, when the River was high, and\nthe Grounds about it under Water, according to that pertinent\nparenthesis, _As the Feet of the Priests, which carried the Ark, were\ndipped in the brim of the Water, (for Jordan[252] overfloweth all its\nBanks at the time of Harvest.)_ In this consideration it was well joined\nwith the great River _Euphrates_, in that expression in\n_Ecclesiasticus_,[253] _God maketh the understanding to abound like\nEuphrates, and as Jordan in the time of Harvest_.\n\n [252] Josh. 3. 13.\n\n [253] Ecclus. 24. 26.\n\n[Sidenote: _Zizania, in S._ Matt. 13. 24, 25, etc.]\n\n48. _The Kingdom of Heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good Seed\nin his Field, but while men slept, his Enemy came and sowed Tares_ (or,\nas the Greek, _Zizania_) _among the Wheat._\n\nNow, how to render _Zizania_, and to what species of Plants to confine\nit, there is no slender doubt; for the word is not mention'd in other\nparts of Scripture, nor in any ancient Greek Writer: it is not to be\nfound in _Aristotle_, _Theophrastus_, or _Dioscorides_. Some Greek and\nLatin Fathers have made use of the same, as also _Suidas_ and\n_Phavorinus_; but probably they have all derived it from this Text.\n\nAnd therefore this obscurity might easily occasion such variety in\nTranslations and Expositions. For some retain the word _Zizania_, as the\nVulgar, that of _Beza_, of _Junius_, and also the Italian and Spanish.\nThe Low Dutch renders it _Oncruidt_, the German _Oncraut_, or _Herba\nMala_, the French _Turoye_ or _Lolium_, and the English _Tares_.\n\nBesides, this being conceived to be a Syriack word, it may still add\nunto the uncertainty of the sense. For though this Gospel were first\nwritten in Hebrew, or Syriack, yet it is not unquestionable whether the\ntrue Original be any where extant: And that Syriack Copy which we now\nhave, is conceived to be of far later time than S. _Matthew_.\n\nExpositours and Annotatours are also various. _Hugo Grotius_ hath passed\nthe word _Zizania_ without a Note. _Diodati_, retaining the word\n_Zizania_, conceives that it was some peculiar Herb growing among the\nCorn of those Countries, and not known in our Fields. But _Emanuel de\nSa_ interprets it, _Plantas semini noxias_, and so accordingly some\nothers.\n\n_Buxtorfius_, in his Rabbinical Lexicon, gives divers interpretations,\nsometimes for degenerated Corn, sometimes for the black Seeds in Wheat,\nbut withall concludes, _an haec sit eadem vox aut species, cum Zizania\napud Evangelistam, quaerant alii_. But Lexicons and Dictionaries by\n_Zizania_ do almost generally understand _Lolium_, which we call\n_Darnel_, and commonly confine the signification to that Plant:\nNotwithstanding, since _Lolium_ had a known and received Name in Greek,\nsome may be apt to doubt, why, if that Plant were particularly intended,\nthe proper Greek word was not used in the Text. For _Theophrastus_[254]\nnamed _Lolium_ +Aira+, and hath often mentioned that Plant; and in one\nplace saith that Corn doth sometimes _Loliescere_ degenerate into\n_Darnel_. _Dioscorides_, who travelled over _Judaea_, gives it the same\nname, which is also to be found in _Galen_, _AEtius_ and _AEgineta_; and\n_Pliny_ hath sometimes latinized that word into _AEra_.\n\n [254] +exairesthai+. Theophrast. _Hist. Plant. l. 8_.\n\nBesides, _Lolium_ or Darnel shews it self in the Winter, growing up with\nthe Wheat; and _Theophrastus_ observed that it was no Vernal Plant, but\ncame up in the Winter; which will not well answer the expression of the\nText, _And when the Blade came up, and brought forth Fruit_, or gave\nevidence of its Fruit, _the Zizania_ appeared. And if the Husbandry of\nthe Ancients were agreeable unto ours, they would not have been so\nearnest to weed away the Darnel; for our Husbandmen do not commonly weed\nit in the Field, but separate the Seeds after Thrashing. And therefore\n_Galen_ delivereth, that in an unseasonable year, and great scarcity of\nCorn, when they neglected to separate the Darnel, the Bread proved\ngenerally unwholsome, and had evil effects on the Head.\n\nOur old and later Translation render _Zizania_, _Tares_, which name our\nEnglish Botanists give unto _Aracus_, _Cracca_, _Vicia sylvestris_,\ncalling them Tares, and strangling Tares. And our Husbandmen by Tares\nunderstand some sorts of wild Fitches, which grow amongst Corn, and\nclasp upon it, according to the Latin Etymology, _Vicia a Vinciendo_.\nNow in this uncertainty of the Original, Tares as well as some others,\nmay make out the sense, and be also more agreeable unto the\ncircumstances of the Parable. For they come up and appear what they are,\nwhen the Blade of the Corn is come up, and also the Stalk and Fruit\ndiscoverable. They have likewise little spreading Roots, which may\nintangle or rob the good Roots, and they have also tendrils and\nclaspers, which lay hold of what grows near them, and so can hardly be\nweeded without endangering the neighbour Corn.\n\nHowever, if by _Zizania_ we understand _Herbas segeti noxias_, or _vitia\nsegetum_, as some Expositours have done, and take the word in a more\ngeneral sense, comprehending several Weeds and Vegetables offensive unto\nCorn, according as the Greek word in the plural Number may imply, and as\nthe learned _Laurenbergius_[255] hath expressed, _Runcare quod apud\nnostrates Weden dicitur, Zizanias inutiles est evellere_. If, I say, it\nbe thus taken, we shall not need to be definitive, or confine unto one\nparticular Plant, from a word which may comprehend divers: And this may\nalso prove a safer sense, in such obscurity of the Original.\n\n [255] De Horticultura.\n\nAnd therefore since in this Parable the sower of the _Zizania_ is the\nDevil, and the _Zizania_ wicked persons; if any from this larger\nacception, will take in Thistles, Darnel, Cockle, wild strangling\nFitches, Bindweed, _Tribulus_, Restharrow and other _Vitia Segetum_; he\nmay, both from the natural and symbolical qualities of those Vegetables,\nhave plenty of matter to illustrate the variety of his mischiefs, and of\nthe wicked of this world.\n\n[Sidenote: _Cockle, in_ Job 31. 40.]\n\n49. When 'tis said in _Job_, _Let Thistles grow up instead of Wheat, and\nCockle instead of Barley_, the words are intelligible, the sense\nallowable and significant to this purpose: but whether the word _Cockle_\ndoth strictly conform unto the Original, some doubt may be made from the\ndifferent Translations of it; For the Vulgar renders it _Spina_,\n_Tremelius Vitia Frugum_, and the _Geneva Turoye_ or Darnel. Besides,\nwhether Cockle were common in the ancient Agriculture of those parts, or\nwhat word they used for it, is of great uncertainty. For the Elder\nBotanical Writers have made no mention thereof, and the Moderns have\ngiven it the Name of _Pseudomelanthium_, _Nigellastrum_, _Lychnoeides\nSegetum_, names not known unto Antiquity: And therefore our Translation\nhath warily set down [_noisome Weeds_] in the Margin.\n\n\n\n\n OF GARLANDS\n and Coronary or Garden-plants.\n\n TRACT II\n\n\nSIR,\n\nThe use of flowry Crowns and Garlands is of no slender Antiquity, and\nhigher than I conceive you apprehend it. For, besides the old Greeks and\nRomans, the AEgyptians made use hereof; who, beside the bravery of their\nGarlands, had little Birds upon them to peck their Heads and Brows, and\nso to keep them sleeping at their Festival compotations. This practice\nalso extended as far as _India_: for at the Feast with the Indian King,\nit is peculiarly observed by _Philostratus_ that their custom was to\nwear Garlands, and come crowned with them unto their Feast.\n\nThe Crowns and Garlands of the Ancients were either Gestatory, such as\nthey wore about their Heads or Necks; Portatory, such as they carried at\nsolemn Festivals; Pensile or Suspensory, such as they hanged about the\nPosts of their Houses in honour of their Gods, as of _Jupiter Thyraeus_\nor _Limeneus_; or else they were Depository, such as they laid upon the\nGraves and Monuments of the dead. And these were made up after all ways\nof Art, Compactile, Sutile, Plectile; for which Work there were\n+stephanoplokoi+ or expert Persons to contrive them after the best grace\nand property.\n\nThough we yield not unto them in the beauty of flowry Garlands, yet some\nof those of Antiquity were larger than any we lately meet with: for we\nfind in _Athenaeus_ that a Myrtle Crown of one and twenty foot in compass\nwas solemnly carried about at the Hellotian Feast in _Corinth_, together\nwith the Bones of _Europa_.\n\nAnd Garlands were surely of frequent use among them; for we reade in\n_Galen_[256] that when _Hippocrates_ cured the great Plague of _Athens_\nby Fires kindled in and about the City; the fuel thereof consisted much\nof their Garlands. And they must needs be very frequent and of common\nuse, the ends thereof being many. For they were convivial, festival,\nsacrificial, nuptial, honorary, funebrial. We who propose unto our\nselves the pleasure of two Senses, and onely single out such as are of\nBeauty and good Odour, cannot strictly confine our selves unto imitation\nof them.\n\n [256] _De Theriaca ad Pisonem._\n\nFor, in their convivial Garlands, they had respect unto Plants\npreventing drunkenness, or discussing the exhalations from Wine;\nwherein, beside Roses, taking in Ivy, Vervain, Melilote, _etc._ they\nmade use of divers of small Beauty or good Odour. The solemn festival\nGarlands were made properly unto their Gods, and accordingly contrived\nfrom Plants sacred unto such Deities; and their sacrificial ones were\nselected under such considerations. Their honorary Crowns triumphal,\novary, civical, obsidional, had little of Flowers in them: and their\nfunebrial Garlands had little of beauty in them beside Roses, while they\nmade them of Myrtle, Rosemary, Apium, _etc._ under symbolical\nintimations: but our florid and purely ornamental Garlands, delightfull\nunto sight and smell, nor framed according to mystical and symbolical\nconsiderations, are of more free election, and so may be made to excell\nthose of the Ancients; we having _China_, _India_, and a new world to\nsupply us, beside the great distinction of Flowers unknown unto\nAntiquity, and the varieties thereof arising from Art and Nature.\n\nBut, beside Vernal, AEstival and Autumnal made of Flowers, the Ancients\nhad also Hyemal Garlands; contenting themselves at first with such as\nwere made of Horn died into several Colours, and shaped into the Figures\nof Flowers, and also of _AEs Coronarium_ or _Clincquant_ or Brass thinly\nwrought out into Leaves commonly known among us. But the curiosity of\nsome Emperours for such intents had Roses brought from _AEgypt_ untill\nthey had found the art to produce late Roses in _Rome_, and to make them\ngrow in the Winter, as is delivered in that handsome Epigramme of\n_Martial_,\n\n _At tu Romanae jussus jam cedere Brumae\n Mitte tuas messes, Accipe, Nile, Rosas._\n\nSome American Nations, who do much excell in Garlands, content not\nthemselves onely with Flowers, but make elegant Crowns of Feathers,\nwhereof they have some of greater radiancy and lustre than their\nFlowers: and since there is an Art to set into shapes, and curiously to\nwork in choicest Feathers, there could nothing answer the Crowns made of\nthe choicest Feathers of some _Tomineios_ and Sun Birds.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe Catalogue of Coronary Plants is not large in _Theophrastus_,\n_Pliny_, _Pollux_, or _Athenaeus_: but we may find a good enlargement in\nthe Accounts of Modern Botanists; and additions may still be made by\nsuccessive acquists of fair and specious Plants, not yet translated from\nforeign Regions or little known unto our Gardens: he that would be\ncomplete may take notice of these following,\n\n _Flos Tigridis._\n _Flos Lyncis._\n _Pinea Indica Recchi, Talama Ouiedi._\n _Herba Paradisea._\n _Volubilis Mexicanus._\n _Narcissus Indicus Serpentarius._\n _Helichrysum Mexicanum._\n _Xicama._\n _Aquilegia novae Hispaniae Cacoxochitli Recchi._\n _Aristochaea Mexicana._\n _Camaratinga sive Caragunta quarta Pisonis._\n _Maracuia Granadilla._\n _Cambay sive Myrtus Americana._\n _Flos Auriculae Flor de la Oreia._\n _Floripendio novae Hispaniae._\n _Rosa Indica._\n _Zilium Indicum._\n _Fula Magori Garciae._\n _Champe Garciae Champacca Bontii._\n _Daullontas frutex odoratus seu Chamaemelum arborescens Bontii._\n _Beidelsar Alpini._\n _Sambuc._\n _Amberboi Turcarum._\n _Nuphar AEgyptium._\n _Lilionarcissus Indicus._\n _Bamma AEgyptiacum._\n _Hiucca Canadensis horti Farnesiani._\n _Bupthalmum novae Hispaniae Alepocapath._\n _Valeriana seu Chrysanthemum Americanum Acocotlis._\n _Flos Corvinus Coronarius Americanus._\n _Capolin Cerasus dulcis Indicus Floribus racemosis._\n _Asphodelus Americanus._\n _Syringa Lutea Americana._\n _Bulbus unifolius._\n _Moly latifolium Flore luteo._\n _Conyza Americana purpurea._\n _Salvia Cretica pomifera Bellonii._\n _Lausus Serrata Odora._\n _Ornithogalus Promontorii Bonae Spei._\n _Fritallaria crassa Soldanica Promontorii Bonae Spei._\n _Sigillum Solomonis Indicum._\n _Tulipa Promontorii Bonae Spei._\n _Iris Uvaria._\n _Nopolxoch sedum elegans novae Hispaniae._\n\nMore might be added unto this List; and I have onely taken the pains to\ngive you a short Specimen of those many more which you may find in\nrespective Authours, and which time and future industry may make no\ngreat strangers in _England_. The Inhabitants of _Nova Hispania_, and a\ngreat part of _America_, Mahometans, Indians, Chineses, are eminent\npromoters of these coronary and specious Plants: and the annual tribute\nof the King of _Bisnaguer_ in _India_, arising out of Odours and\nFlowers, amounts unto many thousands of Crowns.\n\nThus, in brief, of this matter. I am, _etc._\n\n\n\n\n OF THE FISHES EATEN BY OUR SAVIOUR\n with His Disciples after His Resurrection\n from the Dead.\n\n TRACT III\n\n\nSIR,\n\nI have thought, a little, upon the Question proposed by you [viz. _What\nkind of Fishes those were of which our Saviour ate with his Disciples\nafter his Resurrection?_[257]] and I return you such an Answer, as, in\nso short time for study, and in the midst of my occasions, occurs to me.\n\n [257] _S._ Joh. 21. 9, 10, 11, 13.\n\nThe Books of Scripture (as also those which are Apocryphal) are often\nsilent, or very sparing, in the particular Names of Fishes; or in\nsetting them down in such manner as to leave the kinds of them without\nall doubt and reason for farther inquiry. For, when it declareth what\nFishes were allowed the Israelites for their Food, they are onely set\ndown in general which have Finns and Scales; whereas, in the account of\n_Quadrupeds_ and Birds, there is particular mention made of divers of\nthem. In the Book of _Tobit_ that Fish which he took out of the River is\nonely named a great Fish, and so there remains much uncertainty to\ndetermine the Species thereof. And even the Fish which swallowed\n_Jonah_, and is called a _great Fish_, and commonly thought to be a\ngreat Whale, is not received without all doubt; while some learned men\nconceive it to have been none of our Whales, but a large kind of\n_Lamia_.\n\nAnd, in this narration of S. _John_, the Fishes are onely expressed by\ntheir Bigness and Number, not their Names, and therefore it may seem\nundeterminable what they were: notwithstanding, these Fishes being taken\nin the great Lake or Sea of _Tiberias_, something may be probably stated\ntherein. For since _Bellonius_, that diligent and learned Traveller,\ninformeth us, that the Fishes of this Lake were Trouts, Pikes, Chevins\nand Tenches; it may well be conceived that either all or some thereof\nare to be understood in this Scripture. And these kind of Fishes become\nlarge and of great growth, answerable unto the expression of Scripture,\n_One hundred and fifty-three great Fishes_; that is, large in their own\nkinds, and the largest kinds in this Lake and fresh Water, wherein no\ngreat variety, and of the larger sort of Fishes, could be expected. For\nthe River _Jordan_, running through this Lake, falls into the Lake of\n_Asphaltus_, and hath no mouth into the Sea, which might admit of great\nFishes or greater variety to come up into it.\n\nAnd out of the mouth of some of these forementioned Fishes might the\n_Tribute money_ be taken, when our Saviour, at _Capernaum_, seated upon\nthe same Lake, said unto _Peter_, _Go thou to the Sea, and cast an Hook,\nand take up the Fish that first cometh; and when thou hast opened his\nmouth thou shalt find a piece of money; that take and give them for thee\nand me_.\n\nAnd this makes void that common conceit and tradition of the Fish called\n_Fabermarinus_, by some, a _Peter_ or _Penny Fish_; which having two\nremarkable round spots upon either side, these are conceived to be the\nmarks of S. _Peter's_ Fingers or signatures of the Money: for though it\nhath these marks, yet is there no probability that such a kind of Fish\nwas to be found in the Lake of _Tiberias_, _Geneserah_ or _Galilee_,\nwhich is but sixteen miles long and six broad, and hath no communication\nwith the Sea; for this is a mere Fish of the Sea and salt Water, and\n(though we meet with some thereof on our Coast) is not to be found in\nmany Seas.\n\nThus having returned no improbable Answer unto your Question, I shall\ncrave leave to ask another of your self concerning that Fish mentioned\nby _Procopius_,[258] which brought the famous King _Theodorick_ to his\nend: his words are to this effect: 'The manner of his Death was this,\n_Symmachus_ and his Son-in-law _Boethius_, just men and great relievers\nof the poor, Senatours and Consuls, had many enemies, by whose false\naccusations _Theodorick_ being perswaded that they plotted against him,\nput them to death and confiscated their Estates. Not long after his\nWaiters set before him at Supper a great Head of a Fish, which seemed to\nhim to be the Head of _Symmachus_ lately murthered; and with his Teeth\nsticking out, and fierce glaring eyes to threaten him: being frighted,\nhe grew chill, went to Bed, lamenting what he had done to _Symmachus_\nand _Boethius_; and soon after died.' What Fish do you apprehend this to\nhave been? I would learn of you; give me your thoughts about it.\n\n [258] _De Bello Gothico, lib. 1._\n\n _I am_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n AN ANSWER TO CERTAIN QUERIES\n relating to Fishes, Birds, Insects.\n\n TRACT IV\n\n\nSIR,\n\nI return the following Answers to your Queries which were these,\n\n [1. What Fishes are meant by the Names, _Halec_ and _Mugil_?\n\n 2. What is the Bird which you will receive from the Bearer? and\n what Birds are meant by the Names _Halcyon_, _Nysus_, _Ciris_,\n _Nycticorax_?\n\n 3. What Insect is meant by the word _Cicada_?]\n\n[Sidenote: _Answer to Query 1._]\n\nThe word _Halec_ we are taught to render an _Herring_, which, being an\nancient word, is not strictly appropriable unto a Fish not known or not\ndescribed by the Ancients; and which the modern Naturalists are fain to\nname _Harengus_; the word _Halecula_ being applied unto such little Fish\nout of which they were fain to make Pickle; and _Halec_ or _Alec_, taken\nfor the Liquamen or Liquor itself, according to that of the Poet,\n\n ----_Ego faecem primus et Alec\n Primus et inveni piper album_----\n\nAnd was a conditure and Sawce much affected by Antiquity, as was also\n_Muria_ and _Garum_.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIn common constructions, _Mugil_ is rendred a _Mullet_, which,\nnotwithstanding, is a different Fish from the _Mugil_ described by\nAuthours; wherein, if we mistake, we cannot so closely apprehend the\nexpression of _Juvenal_,\n\n ----_Quosdam ventres et Mugilis intrat._\n\nAnd misconceive the Fish, whereby Fornicatours were so opprobriously and\nirksomely punished; for the _Mugil_ being somewhat rough and hard\nskinned, did more exasperate the gutts of such offenders: whereas the\nMullet was a smooth Fish, and of too high esteem to be imployed in such\noffices.\n\n * * * * *\n\n[Sidenote: _Answer to Query 2._]\n\nI cannot but wonder that this Bird you sent should be a stranger unto\nyou, and unto those who had a sight thereof: for, though it be not seen\nevery day, yet we often meet with it in this Country. It is an elegant\nBird, which he that once beholdeth can hardly mistake any other for it.\nFrom the proper Note it is called an _Hoopebird_ with us; in Greek\n_Epops_, in Latin _Upupa_. We are little obliged unto our School\ninstruction, wherein we are taught to render _Upupa_, a _Lapwing_, which\nBird our natural Writers name _Vannellus_; for thereby we mistake this\nremarkable Bird, and apprehend not rightly what is delivered of it.\n\nWe apprehend not the Hieroglyphical considerations which the old\nAEgyptians made of this observable Bird; who considering therein the\norder and variety of Colours, the twenty six or twenty eight Feathers in\nits Crest, his latitancy, and mewing this handsome outside in the\nWinter; they made it an Emblem of the varieties of the World, the\nsuccession of Times and Seasons, and signal mutations in them. And\ntherefore _Orus_, the Hieroglyphick of the World, had the Head of an\nHoopebird upon the top of his Staff.\n\nHereby we may also mistake the _Duchiphath_, or Bird forbidden for Food\nin _Leviticus_ [SN: Levit. 11. 19.]; and, not knowing the Bird, may the\nless apprehend some reasons of that prohibition; that is, the magical\nvirtues ascribed unto it by the AEgyptians, and the superstitious\napprehensions which that Nation held of it, whilst they precisely\nnumbred the Feathers and Colours thereof, while they placed it on the\nHeads of their Gods, and near their Mercurial Crosses, and so highly\nmagnified this Bird in their sacred Symbols.\n\nAgain, not knowing or mistaking this Bird, we may misapprehend, or not\nclosely apprehend, that handsome expression of _Ovid_, when _Tereus_ was\nturned into an _Upupa_, or Hoopebird.\n\n _Vertitur in volucrem cui sunt pro vertice Cristae,\n Protinus immodicum surgit pro cuspide rostrum\n Nomen Epops volucri, facies armata videtur._\n\nFor, in this military shape, he is aptly phancied even still\nrevengefully to pursue his hated Wife _Progne_: in the propriety of his\nNote crying out, _Pou, pou, ubi, ubi_, or _Where are you?_\n\nNor are we singly deceived in the nominal translation of this Bird: in\nmany other Animals we commit the like mistake. So _Gracculus_ is rendred\na _Jay_, which Bird notwithstanding must be of a dark colour according\nto that of _Martial_,\n\n_Sed quandam volo nocte nigriorem\nFormica, pice, Gracculo, cicada._\n\n_Halcyon_[259] is rendred a _King-fisher_, a Bird commonly known among\nus, and by Zoographers and Naturals the same is named _Ispida_, a well\ncoloured Bird frequenting Streams and Rivers, building in holes of Pits,\nlike some Martins, about the end of the Spring; in whose Nests we have\nfound little else than innumerable small Fish Bones, and white round\nEggs of a smooth and polished surface, whereas the true _Alcyon_ is a\nSea Bird, makes an handsome Nest floating upon the Water, and breedeth\nin the Winter.\n\n [259] _See Vulg. Err. B. 3. c. 10._\n\nThat _Nysus_ should be rendred either an _Hobby_ or a _Sparrow Hawk_, in\nthe Fable of _Nysus_ and _Scylla_ in _Ovid_, because we are much to seek\nin the distinction of Hawks according to their old denominations, we\nshall not much contend, and may allow a favourable latitude therein: but\nthat the _Ciris_ or Bird into which _Scylla_ was turned should be\ntranslated a _Lark_, it can hardly be made out agreeable unto the\ndescription of _Virgil_ in his Poem of that name,\n\n _Inde alias volucres mimoque infecta rubenti\n Crura_----\n\nBut seems more agreeable unto some kind of _Haemantopus_ or Redshank; and\nso the _Nysus_ to have been some kind of Hawk, which delighteth about\nthe Sea and Marishes, where such prey most aboundeth, which sort of Hawk\nwhile _Scaliger_ determineth to be a Merlin, the French Translatour\nwarily expoundeth it to be some kind of Hawk.\n\n_Nycticorax_ we may leave unto the common and verbal translation of a\n_Night Raven_, but we know no proper kind of Raven unto which to confine\nthe same, and therefore some take the liberty to ascribe it unto some\nsort of Owls, and others unto the Bittern; which Bird in its common\nNote, which he useth out of the time of coupling and upon the Wing, so\nwell resembleth the croaking of a Raven that I have been deceived by it.\n\n * * * * *\n\n[Sidenote: _Answer to Query 3._]\n\nWhile _Cicada_ is rendred a _Grashopper_, we commonly think that which\nis so called among us to be the true _Cicada_; wherein, as we have\nelsewhere declared,[260] there is a great mistake: for we have not the\n_Cicada_ in _England_, and indeed no proper word for that Animal, which\nthe French nameth _Cigale_. That which we commonly call a Grashopper,\nand the French _Saulterelle_ being one kind of Locust, so rendred in the\nPlague of _AEgypt_, and, in old Saxon named _Gersthop_.\n\n [260] _Vulg. Err. B. 5. c. 3._\n\n * * * * *\n\nI have been the less accurate in these Answers, because the Queries are\nnot of difficult Resolution, or of great moment: however, I would not\nwholly neglect them or your satisfaction, as being, Sir,\n\n _Yours_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n OF HAWKS AND FALCONRY\n\n Ancient and Modern.\n\n TRACT V\n\n\nSIR,\n\nIn vain you expect much information, _de Re Accipitraria_, of Falconry,\nHawks or Hawking, from very ancient Greek or Latin Authours; that Art\nbeing either unknown or so little advanced among them, that it seems to\nhave proceeded no higher than the daring of Birds: which makes so little\nthereof to be found in _Aristotle_, who onely mentions some rude\npractice thereof in _Thracia_; as also in _AElian_, who speaks something\nof Hawks and Crows among the Indians; little or nothing of true Falconry\nbeing mention'd before _Julius Firmicus_, in the days of _Constantius_,\nSon to _Constantine_ the Great.\n\nYet if you consult the accounts of later Antiquity left by _Demetrius_\nthe Greek, by _Symmachus_ and _Theodosius_, and by _Albertus Magnus_,\nabout five hundred years ago, you, who have been so long acquainted with\nthis noble Recreation, may better compare the ancient and modern\npractice, and rightly observe how many things in that Art are added,\nvaried, disused or retained in the practice of these days.\n\nIn the Diet of Hawks, they allowed of divers Meats which we should\nhardly commend. For beside the Flesh of Beef, they admitted of Goat,\nHog, Deer, Whelp and Bear. And how you will approve the quantity and\nmeasure thereof, I make some doubt; while by weight they allowed half a\npound of Beef, seven ounces of Swines Flesh, five of Hare, eight ounces\nof Whelp, as much of Deer, and ten ounces of He-Goats Flesh.\n\nIn the time of _Demetrius_ they were not without the practice of\nPhlebotomy or Bleeding, which they used in the Thigh and Pounces; they\nplucked away the Feathers on the Thigh, and rubbed the part, but if the\nVein appeared not in that part, they opened the Vein of the fore Talon.\n\nIn the days of _Albertus_, they made use of Cauteries in divers places:\nto advantage their sight they seared them under the inward angle of the\neye; above the eye in distillations and diseases of the Head; in upward\npains they seared above the Joint of the Wing, and at the bottom of the\nFoot, against the Gout; and the chief time for these cauteries they made\nto be the month of _March_.\n\nIn great coldness of Hawks they made use of Fomentations, some of the\nsteam or vapour of artificial and natural Baths, some wrapt them up in\nhot Blankets, giving them Nettle Seeds and Butter.\n\nNo Clysters are mention'd, nor can they be so profitably used; but they\nmade use of many purging Medicines. They purged with Aloe, which, unto\nlarger Hawks, they gave in the bigness of a Great Bean; unto less, in\nthe quantity of a _Cicer_, which notwithstanding I should rather give\nwashed, and with a few drops of Oil of Almonds: for the Guts of flying\nFowls are tender and easily scratched by it; and upon the use of Aloe\nboth in Hawks and Cormorants I have sometimes observed bloody\nexcretions.\n\nIn phlegmatick causes they seldom omitted _Stave-saker_, but they purged\nsometimes with a Mouse, and the Food of boiled Chickens, sometimes with\ngood Oil and Honey.\n\nThey used also the Ink of Cuttle Fishes, with Smallage, Betony, Wine and\nHoney. They made use of stronger Medicines than present practice doth\nallow. For they were not afraid to give _Coccus Baphicus_; beating up\neleven of its Grains unto a Lentor, which they made up into five Pills\nwrapt up with Honey and Pepper: and, in some of their old Medicines, we\nmeet with Scammony and _Euphorbium_. Whether, in the tender Bowels of\nBirds, infusions of Rhubarb, Agaric and Mechoachan be not of safer use,\nas to take of Agary two Drachms, of Cinnamon half a Drachm, of Liquorish\na Scruple, and, infusing them in Wine, to express a part into the mouth\nof the Hawk, may be considered by present practice.\n\nFew Mineral Medicines were of inward use among them: yet sometimes we\nobserve they gave filings of Iron in the straitness of the Chest, as\nalso Lime in some of their pectoral Medicines.\n\nBut they commended Unguents of Quick-silver against the Scab: and I have\nsafely given six or eight Grains of _Mercurius Dulcis_ unto Kestrils and\nOwls, as also crude and current Quick-silver, giving the next day small\nPellets of Silver or Lead till they came away uncoloured: and this, if\nany, may probably destroy that obstinate Disease of the _Filander_ or\nBack-worm.\n\nA peculiar remedy they had against the Consumption of Hawks. For,\nfilling a Chicken with Vinegar, they closed up the Bill, and hanging it\nup untill the Flesh grew tender, they fed the Hawk therewith: and to\nrestore and well Flesh them, they commonly gave them Hogs Flesh, with\nOil, Butter and Honey; and a decoction of Cumfory to bouze.\n\nThey disallowed of salt Meats and Fat; but highly esteemed of Mice in\nmost indispositions; and in the falling Sickness had great esteem of\nboiled Batts: and in many Diseases, of the Flesh of Owls which feed upon\nthose Animals. In Epilepsies they also gave the Brain of a Kid drawn\nthorough a gold Ring; and, in Convulsions, made use of a mixture of Musk\nand _Stercus humanum aridum_.\n\nFor the better preservation of their Health they strowed Mint and Sage\nabout them; and for the speedier mewing of their Feathers, they gave\nthem the Slough of a Snake, or a Tortoise out of the Shell, or a green\nLizard cut in pieces.\n\nIf a Hawk were unquiet, they hooded him, and placed him in a Smith's\nShop for some time, where, accustomed to the continual noise of\nhammering, he became more gentle and tractable.\n\nThey used few terms of Art, plainly and intelligibly expressing the\nparts affected, their Diseases and Remedies. This heap of artificial\nterms first entring with the French Artists: who seem to have been the\nfirst and noblest Falconers in the Western part of _Europe_; although,\nin their Language, they have no word which in general expresseth an\nHawk.\n\nThey carried their Hawks in the left hand, and let them flie from the\nright. They used a Bell, and took great care that their Jesses should\nnot be red, lest Eagles should flie at them. Though they used Hoods, we\nhave no clear description of them, and little account of their Lures.\n\nThe ancient Writers left no account of the swiftness of Hawks or measure\nof their flight: but _Heresbachius_[261] delivers that _William_ Duke of\n_Cleve_ had an Hawk which, in one day, made a flight out of _Westphalia_\ninto _Prussia_. And, upon good account, an Hawk in this Country of\n_Norfolk_, made a flight at a Woodcock near thirty miles in one hour.\nHow far the Hawks, Merlins and wild Fowl which come unto us with a\nNorth-west wind in the Autumn, flie in a day, there is no clear account;\nbut coming over Sea their flight hath been long, or very speedy. For I\nhave known them to light so weary on the coast, that many have been\ntaken with Dogs, and some knock'd down with Staves and Stones.\n\n [261] _De Re Accipitraria, in 3 Books._\n\nTheir Perches seem not so large as ours; for they made them of such a\nbigness that their Talons might almost meet: and they chose to make them\nof Sallow, Poplar or Lime Tree.\n\nThey used great clamours and hollowing in their flight, which they made\nby these words, _ou loi, la, la, la_; and to raise the Fowls, made use\nof the sound of a Cymbal.\n\nTheir recreation seemed more sober and solemn than ours at present, so\nimproperly attended with Oaths and Imprecations. For they called on God\nat their setting out, according to the account of _Demetrius_, +ton Theon\nepikalesantes+, _in the first place calling upon God_.\n\nThe learned _Rigaltius_ thinketh, that if the Romans had well known this\nairy Chase, they would have left or less regarded their Circensial\nRecreations. The Greeks understood Hunting early, but little or nothing\nof our Falconry. If _Alexander_ had known it, we might have found\nsomething of it and more of Hawks in _Aristotle_; who was so\nunacquainted with that way, that he thought that Hawks would not feed\nupon the Heart of Birds. Though he hath mention'd divers Hawks, yet\n_Julius Scaliger_, an expert Falconer, despaired to reconcile them unto\nours. And 'tis well if, among them, you can clearly make out a Lanner, a\nSparrow Hawk and a Kestril, but must not hope to find your Gier Falcon\nthere, which is the noble Hawk; and I wish you one no worse than that of\n_Henry_ King of _Navarre_; which, _Scaliger_ saith, he saw strike down a\nBuzzard, two wild Geese, divers Kites, a Crane and a Swan.\n\nNor must you expect from high Antiquity the distinctions of Eyess and\nRamage Hawks, of Sores and Entermewers, of Hawks of the Lure and the\nFist; nor that material distinction into short and long winged Hawks;\nfrom whence arise such differences in their taking down of Stones; in\ntheir flight, their striking down or seizing of their Prey, in the\nstrength of their Talons, either in the Heel and fore-Talon, or the\nmiddle and the Heel: nor yet what Eggs produce the different Hawks, or\nwhen they lay three Eggs, that the first produceth a Female and large\nHawk, the second of a midler sort, and the third a smaller Bird\nTercellene or Tassel of the Masle Sex; which Hawks being onely observed\nabroad by the Ancients, were looked upon as Hawks of different kinds and\nnot of the same Eyrie or Nest. As for what _Aristotle_ affirmeth that\nHawks and Birds of prey drink not; although you know that it will not\nstrictly hold, yet I kept an Eagle two years, which fed upon Kats,\nKittlings, Whelps and Ratts, without one drop of Water.\n\nIf any thing may add unto your knowledge in this noble Art, you must\npick it out of later Writers than those you enquire of. You may peruse\nthe two Books of Falconry writ by that renowned Emperour _Frederick_ the\nSecond; as also the Works of the noble Duke _Belisarius_, of _Tardiffe_,\n_Francherius_, of _Francisco Sforzino_ of _Vicensa_; and may not a\nlittle inform or recreate your self with that elegant Poem of\n_Thuanus_.[262] I leave you to divert your self by the perusal of it,\nhaving, at present, no more to say but that I am, _etc._\n\n [262] _De Re Rustica._\n\n\n\n\n OF CYMBALS, Etc.\n\n TRACT VI\n\n\nSIR,\n\nWith what difficulty, if possibility, you may expect satisfaction\nconcerning the Musick, or Musical Instruments of the Hebrews, you will\neasily discover if you consult the attempts of learned men upon that\nSubject: but for Cymbals, of whose Figure you enquire, you may find some\ndescribed in _Bayfius_, in the Comment of _Rhodius_ upon _Scribonius\nLargus_, and others.\n\nAs for +Kymbalon alalazon+ mentioned by S. _Paul_,[263] and rendred a\n_Tinckling Cymbal_, whether the translation be not too soft and\ndiminutive some question may be made: for the word +alalazon+ implieth\nno small sound, but a strained and lofty vociferation, or some kind of\nhollowing sound, according to the Exposition of _Hesychius_, +Alalaxate\nenypsosate ten phonen+. A word drawn from the lusty shout of Souldiers,\ncrying +Alala+ at the first charge upon their Enemies, according to the\ncustom of Eastern Nations, and used by Trojans in _Homer_; and is also\nthe Note of the Chorus in _Aristophanes_ +Alalai ie paion+. In other\nparts of Scripture we reade of loud and high sounding Cymbals; and in\n_Clemens Alexandrinus_ that the Arabians made use of Cymbals in their\nWars instead of other military Musick; and _Polyaenus_ in his\n_Stratagemes_ affirmeth that _Bacchus_ gave the signal of Battel unto\nhis numerous Army not with Trumpets but with Tympans and Cymbals.\n\n [263] Cor. 13. 1\n\nAnd now I take the opportunity to thank you for the new Book sent me\ncontaining the Anthems sung in our Cathedral and Collegiate Churches:\n'tis probable there will be additions, the Masters of Musick being now\nactive in that affair. Beside my naked thanks I have yet nothing to\nreturn you but this enclosed, which may be somewhat rare unto you, and\nthat is a Turkish Hymn translated into French out of the Turkish Metre,\nwhich I thus render unto you.\n\n _O what praise doth he deserve, and how great is that Lord, all\n whose Slaves are as so many Kings!_\n\n _Whosoever shall rub his Eyes with the dust of his Feet, shall\n behold such admirable things that he shall fall into an ecstasie._\n\n _He that shall drink one drop of his Beverage, shall have his\n Bosome like the Ocean filled with Gems and pretious Liquours._\n\n _Let not loose the Reins unto thy Passions in this world: he that\n represseth them shall become a true Solomon in the Faith._\n\n _Amuse not thy self to adore Riches, nor to build great Houses and\n Palaces._\n\n _The end of what thou shall build is but ruine._\n\n _Pamper not thy Body with delicacies and dainties; it may come to\n pass one day that this Body may be in Hell._\n\n _Imagine not that he who findeth Riches findeth Happiness; he that\n findeth Happiness is he that findeth God._\n\n _All who prostrating themselves in humility shall this day believe\n in_ Vele,[264] _if they were Poor shall be Rich, and if Rich shall\n become Kings._\n\n [264] Vele _the Founder of the Convent_.\n\nAfter the Sermon ended which was made upon a Verse in the Alcoran\ncontaining much Morality, the _Deruices_ in a Gallery apart sung this\nHymn, accompanied with Instrumental Musick, which so affected the Ears\nof Monsieur _du Loyr_, that he would not omit to set it down, together\nwith the Musical Notes, to be found in his first Letter unto Monsieur\n_Bouliau_, Prior of _Magny_.\n\n * * * * *\n\nExcuse my brevity: I can say but little where I understand but little.\n\n _I am_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n OF ROPALIC\n or Gradual Verses, Etc.\n\n _Mens mea sublimes rationes praemeditatur._\n\n TRACT VII\n\n\nSIR,\n\nThough I may justly allow a good intention in this Poem presented unto\nyou, yet I must needs confess, I have no affection for it; as being\nutterly averse from all affectation in Poetry, which either restrains\nthe phancy, or fetters the invention to any strict disposure of words. A\npoem of this nature is to be found in _Ausonius_ beginning thus,\n\n _Spes Deus aeternae stationis conciliator._\n\nThese are Verses _Ropalici_ or _Clavales_, arising gradually like the\nKnots in a +Rhopale+ or Clubb; named also _Fistulares_ by _Priscianus_,\nas _Elias Vinetus_[265] hath noted. They consist properly of five\nwords, each thereof encreasing by one syllable. They admit not of a\n_Spondee_ in the fifth place, nor can a Golden or Silver Verse be made\nthis way. They run smoothly both in Latin and Greek, and some are\nscatteringly to be found in _Homer_; as,\n\n +O makar Atreide moiregenes olbiodaimon+,\n\n _Libere dicam sed in aurem, ego versibus hujusmodi Ropalicis, longo\n syrmate protractis, Ceraunium affigo._\n\n [265] El Vinet. _in_ Auson.\n\nHe that affecteth such restrained Poetry, may peruse the Long Poem of\n_Hugbaldus_ the Monk, wherein every word beginneth with a C penned in\nthe praise of _Calvities_ or Baldness, to the honour of _Carolus Calvus_\nKing of _France_,\n\n _Carmina clarisonae calvis cantate Camaenae._\n\nThe rest may be seen at large in the _adversaria_ of _Barthius_: or if\nhe delighteth in odd contrived phancies may he please himself with\n_Antistrophes_, _Counterpetories_, _Retrogrades_, _Rebusses_, _Leonine_\nVerses, etc. to be found in _Sieur des Accords_. But these and the like\nare to be look'd upon, not pursued, odd works might be made by such\nways; and for your recreation I propose these few lines unto you,\n\n _Arcu paratur quod arcui sufficit._\n\n _Misellorum clamoribus accurrere non tam humanum quam sulphureum est._\n\n _Asino teratur quae Asino teritur._\n\n _Ne Asphodelos comedas, phoenices manduca._\n\n _Coelum aliquid potest, sed quae mira praestat Papilio est._\n\nNot to put you unto endless amusement, the Key hereof is the homonomy of\nthe Greek made use of in the Latin words, which rendreth all plain. More\naenigmatical and dark expressions might be made if any one would speak or\ncompose them out of the numerical Characters or characteristical Numbers\nset down by _Robertus de Fluctibus_.[266]\n\n [266] _Tract 2. Part lib. 1._\n\nAs for your question concerning the contrary expressions of the Italian\nand Spaniards in their common affirmative answers, the Spaniard\nanswering _cy Sennor_, the Italian _Signior cy_, you must be content\nwith this Distich,\n\n _Why saith the Italian Signior cy, the Spaniard cy Sennor?\n Because the one puts that behind, the other puts before._\n\nAnd because you are so happy in some Translations, I pray return me\nthese two verses in English,\n\n _Occidit heu tandem multos quae occidit amantes,\n Et cinis est hodie quae fuit ignis heri._\n\nMy occasions make me to take off my Pen. I am, _etc._\n\n\n\n\n OF LANGUAGES\n\n And particularly of the Saxon Tongue.\n\n TRACT VIII\n\n\nSIR,\n\nThe last Discourse we had of the Saxon Tongue recalled to my mind some\nforgotten considerations. Though the Earth were widely peopled before\nthe Flood, (as many learned men conceive) yet whether after a large\ndispersion, and the space of sixteen hundred years, men maintained so\nuniform a Language in all parts, as to be strictly of one Tongue, and\nreadily to understand each other, may very well be doubted. For though\nthe World preserved in the Family of _Noah_ before the confusion of\nTongues might be said to be of one Lip, yet even permitted to themselves\ntheir humours, inventions, necessities, and new objects, without the\nmiracle of Confusion at first, in so long a tract of time, there had\nprobably been a Babel. For whether _America_ were first peopled by one\nor several Nations, yet cannot that number of different planting\nNations, answer the multiplicity of their present different Languages,\nof no affinity unto each other; and even in their Northern Nations and\nincommunicating Angles, their Languages are widely differing. A native\nInterpreter brought from _California_ proved of no use unto the\nSpaniards upon the neighbour Shore. From _Chiapa_, to _Guatemala_, _S.\nSalvador_, _Honduras_, there are at least eighteen several languages;\nand so numerous are they both in the Peruvian and Mexican Regions, that\nthe great Princes are fain to have one common Language, which besides\ntheir vernaculous and Mother Tongues, may serve for commerce between\nthem.\n\nAnd since the confusion of Tongues at first fell onely upon those which\nwere present in _Sinaar_ at the work of _Babel_, whether the primitive\nLanguage from _Noah_ were onely preserved in the Family of _Heber_, and\nnot also in divers others, which might be absent at the same, whether\nall came away and many might not be left behind in their first\nPlantations about the foot of the Hills, whereabout the Ark rested and\n_Noah_ became an Husbandman, is not absurdly doubted.\n\nFor so the primitive Tongue might in time branch out into several parts\nof _Europe_ and _Asia_, and thereby the first or Hebrew Tongue which\nseems to be ingredient into so many Languages, might have larger\noriginals and grounds of its communication and traduction than from the\nFamily of _Abraham_, the Country of _Canaan_ and words contained in the\nBible which come short of the full of that Language. And this would\nbecome more probable from the Septuagint or Greek Chronology strenuously\nasserted by _Vossius_; for making five hundred years between the Deluge\nand the days of _Peleg_, there ariseth a large latitude of\nmultiplication and dispersion of People into several parts, before the\ndescent of that Body which followed _Nimrod_ unto _Sinaar_ from the\nEast.\n\nThey who derive the bulk of European Tongues from the Scythian and the\nGreek, though they may speak probably in many points, yet must needs\nallow vast difference or corruptions from so few originals, which\nhowever might be tolerably made out in the old Saxon, yet hath time much\nconfounded the clearer derivations. And as the knowledge thereof now\nstands in reference unto our selves, I find many words totally lost,\ndivers of harsh sound disused or refined in the pronunciation, and many\nwords we have also in common use not to be found in that Tongue, or\nvenially derivable from any other from whence we have largely borrowed,\nand yet so much still remaineth with us that it maketh the gross of our\nLanguage.\n\nThe religious obligation unto the Hebrew Language hath so notably\ncontinued the same, that it might still be understood by _Abraham_,\nwhereas by the _Mazorite_ Points and Chaldee Character the old Letter\nstands so transformed, that if _Moses_ were alive again, he must be\ntaught to reade his own Law.\n\nThe Chinoys, who live at the bounds of the Earth, who have admitted\nlittle communication, and suffered successive incursions from one\nNation, may possibly give account of a very ancient Language; but\nconsisting of many Nations and Tongues; confusion, admixtion and\ncorruption in length of time might probably so have crept in as without\nthe virtue of a common Character, and lasting Letter of things, they\ncould never probably make out those strange memorials which they\npretend, while they still make use of the Works of their great\n_Confutius_ many hundred years before Christ, and in a series ascend as\nhigh as _Poncuus_, who is conceived our _Noah_.\n\nThe present Welch, and remnant of the old Britanes, hold so much of that\nancient Language, that they make a shift to understand the Poems of\n_Merlin_, _Enerin_, _Telesin_, a thousand years ago, whereas the\nHerulian _Pater Noster_, set down by _Wolfgangus Lazius_, is not without\nmuch criticism made out, and but in some words; and the present\nParisians can hardly hack out those few lines of the League between\n_Charles_ and _Lewis_, the Sons of _Ludovicus Pius_, yet remaining in\nold French.\n\nThe Spaniards, in their corruptive traduction and Romance, have so\nhappily retained the terminations from the Latin, that notwithstanding\nthe Gothick and Moorish intrusion of words, they are able to make a\nDiscourse completely consisting of Grammatical Latin and Spanish,\nwherein the Italians and French will be very much to seek.\n\nThe learned _Casaubon_ conceiveth that a Dialogue might be composed in\nSaxon onely of such words as are derivable from the Greek, which surely\nmight be effected, and so as the learned might not uneasily find it out.\n_Verstegan_ made no doubt that he could contrive a Letter which might be\nunderstood by the English, Dutch and East Frislander, which, as the\npresent confusion standeth, might have proved no very clear Piece, and\nhardly to be hammer'd out: yet so much of the Saxon still remaineth in\nour English, as may admit an orderly discourse and series of good sense,\nsuch as not onely the present English, but _AElfric_, _Bede_ and _Alured_\nmight understand after so many hundred years.\n\nNations that live promiscuously, under the Power and Laws of Conquest,\ndo seldom escape the loss of their Language with their Liberties,\nwherein the Romans were so strict that the Grecians were fain to conform\nin their judicial Processes; which made the Jews loose more in seventy\nyears dispersion in the Provinces of _Babylon_, than in many hundred in\ntheir distinct habitation in _AEgypt_; and the English which dwelt\ndispersedly to loose their Language in _Ireland_, whereas more tolerable\nreliques there are thereof in _Fingall_, where they were closely and\nalmost solely planted; and the Moors which were most huddled together\nand united about _Granada_, have yet left their _Arvirage_ among the\nGranadian Spaniards.\n\nBut shut up in Angles and inaccessible corners, divided by Laws and\nManners, they often continue long with little mixture, which hath\nafforded that lasting life unto the Cantabrian and British Tongue,\nwherein the Britanes are remarkable, who, having lived four hundred\nyears together with the Romans, retained so much of the British as it\nmay be esteemed a Language; which either they resolutely maintained in\ntheir cohabitation with them in Britane, or retiring after in the time\nof the Saxons into Countries and parts less civiliz'd and conversant\nwith the Romans, they found the People distinct, the Language more\nintire, and so fell into it again.\n\nBut surely no Languages have been so straitly lock'd up as not to admit\nof commixture. The Irish, although they retain a kind of a Saxon\nCharacter, yet have admitted many words of Latin and English. In the\nWelch are found many words from Latin, some from Greek and Saxon. In\nwhat parity and incommixture the Language of that People stood which\nwere casually discovered in the heart of _Spain_, between the Mountains\nof _Castile_, no longer ago than in the time of Duke _D' Alva_, we have\nnot met with a good account any farther than that their words were\nBasquish or Cantabrian: but the present Basquensa one of the minor\nMother Tongues of _Europe_, is not without commixture of Latin and\nCastilian, while we meet with _Santifica_, _tentationeten_, _Glaria_,\n_puissanea_, and four more in the short Form of the Lord's Prayer, set\ndown by _Paulus Merula_: but although in this brief Form we may find\nsuch commixture, yet the bulk of their Language seems more distinct,\nconsisting of words of no affinity unto others, of numerals totally\ndifferent, of differing Grammatical Rule, as may be observed in the\nDictionary and short _Basquensa_ Grammar, composed by _Raphael\nNicoleta_, a Priest of _Bilboa_.\n\nAnd if they use the auxiliary Verbs of _Equin_ and _Ysan_, answerable\nunto _Hazer_ and _Ser_, to Have, and Be, in the Spanish, which Forms\ncame in with the Northern Nations into the Italian, Spanish and French,\nand if that Form were used by them before, and crept not in from\nimitation of their neighbours, it may shew some ancienter traduction\nfrom Northern Nations, or else must seem very strange; since the\nSouthern Nations had it not of old, and I know not whether any such mode\nbe found in the Languages of any part of _America_.\n\nThe Romans, who made the great commixture and alteration of Languages in\nthe World, effected the same, not onely by their proper Language, but\nthose also of their military Forces, employed in several Provinces, as\nholding a standing _Militia_ in all Countries, and commonly of strange\nNations; so while the cohorts and Forces of the Britanes were quartered\nin _AEgypt_, _Armenia_, _Spain_, _Illyria_, etc. the Stablaesians and\nDalmatians here, the Gauls, Spaniards and Germans in other Countries,\nand other Nations in theirs, they could not but leave many words behind\nthem, and carry away many with them, which might make that in many words\nof very distinct Nations some may still remain of very unknown and\ndoubtfull Genealogy.\n\nAnd if, as the learned _Buxhornius_ contendeth, the Scythian Language as\nthe Mother Tongue runs through the Nations of _Europe_, and even as far\nas _Persia_, the community in many words between so many Nations, hath a\nmore reasonable original traduction, and were rather derivable from the\ncommon Tongue diffused through them all, than from any particular\nNation, which hath also borrowed and holdeth but at second hand.\n\nThe Saxons settling over all _England_, maintained an uniform Language,\nonely diversified in Dialect, Idioms, and minor differences, according\nto their different Nations which came in to the common Conquest, which\nmay yet be a cause of the variation in the speech and words of several\nparts of _England_, where different Nations most abode or settled, and\nhaving expelled the Britanes, their Wars were chiefly among themselves,\nwith little action with foreign Nations untill the union of the\nHeptarchy under _Egbert_; after which time although the Danes infested\nthis Land and scarce left any part free, yet their incursions made more\nhavock in Buildings, Churches and Cities, than the Language of the\nCountry, because their Language was in effect the same, and such as\nwhereby they might easily understand one another.\n\nAnd if the Normans, which came into _Neustria_ or _Normandy_ with\n_Rollo_ the Dane, had preserved their Language in their new acquists,\nthe succeeding Conquest of _England_, by Duke _William_ of his race, had\nnot begot among us such notable alterations; but having lost their\nLanguage in their abode in _Normandy_ before they adventured upon\n_England_, they confounded the English with their French, and made the\ngrand mutation, which was successively encreased by our possessions in\n_Normandy_, _Guien_ and _Aquitain_, by our long Wars in France, by\nfrequent resort of the French, who to the number of some thousands came\nover with _Isabel_ Queen to _Edward_ the Second, and the several Matches\nof _England_ with the Daughters of _France_ before and since that time.\n\nBut this commixture, though sufficient to confuse, proved not of ability\nto abolish the Saxon words; for from the French we have borrowed many\nSubstantives, Adjectives and some Verbs, but the great Body of Numerals,\nauxiliary Verbs, Articles, Pronouns, Adverbs, Conjunctions and\nPrepositions, which are the distinguishing and lasting part of a\nLanguage, remain with us from the Saxon, which, having suffered no great\nalteration for many hundred years, may probably still remain, though the\nEnglish swell with the inmates of Italian, French and Latin. An Example\nwhereof may be observ'd in this following.\n\n\n _English_ I.\n\n The first and formost step to all good Works is the dread and fear\n of the Lord of Heaven and Earth, which thorough the Holy Ghost\n enlightneth the blindness of our sinfull hearts to tread the ways\n of wisedom, and leads our feet into the Land of Blessing.\n\n _Saxon_ I.\n\n The erst and fyrmost staep to eal gode Weorka is the draed and feurt\n of the Lauord of Heofan and Eorth, whilc thurh the Heilig Gast\n onlihtneth the blindnesse of ure sinfull heorte to traed the waeg of\n wisdome, and thone laed ure fet into the Land of Blessung.\n\n _English_ II.\n\n For to forget his Law is the Door, the Gate and Key to let in all\n unrighteousness, making our Eyes, Ears and Mouths to answer the\n lust of Sin, our Brains dull to good Thoughts, our Lips dumb to his\n Praise, our Ears deaf to his Gospel, and our Eyes dim to behold his\n Wonders, which witness against us that we have not well learned the\n word of God, that we are the Children of wrath, unworthy of the\n love and manifold gifts of God, greedily following after the ways\n of the Devil and witchcraft of the World, doing nothing to free and\n keep our selves from the burning fire of Hell, till we be buried in\n Sin and swallowed in Death, not to arise again in any hope of\n Christ's Kingdom.\n\n _Saxon_ II.\n\n\n For to fuorgytan his Laga is the Dure, the Gat and Caeg to let in\n eal unrightwisnysse, makend ure Eyge, Eore and Muth to answare the\n lust of Sin, ure Braegan dole to gode Theoht, ure Lippan dumb to his\n Preys, ure Earen deaf to his Gospel, and ure Eyge dim to behealden\n his Wundra, whilc ge witnysse ongen us that wee oef noht wel\n gelaered the weord of God, that wee are the Cilda of ured, unwyrthe\n of the lufe and maenigfeald gift of God, grediglice felygend aefter\n the waegen of the Deoful and wiccraft of the Weorld, doend nothing\n to fry and caep ure saula from the byrnend fyr of Hell, till we be\n geburied in Synne and swolgen in Death not to arise agen in aenig\n hope of Christes Kynedome.\n\n _English_ III.\n\n Which draw from above the bitter doom of the Almighty of Hunger,\n Sword, Sickness, and brings more sad plagues than those of Hail,\n Storms, Thunder, Bloud, Frogs, swarms of Gnats and Grashoppers,\n which ate the Corn, Grass and Leaves of the Trees in _AEgypt_.\n\n _Saxon_ III.\n\n Whilc drag from buf the bitter dome of the Almagan of Hunger,\n Sweorde, Seoknesse, and bring mere sad plag, thone they of Hagal,\n Storme, Thunner, Blode, Frog, swearme of Gnaet and Gaersupper, whilc\n eaten the Corn, Gaers and Leaf of the Treowen in _AEgypt_.\n\n _English_ IV.\n\n If we reade his Book and holy Writ, these among many others, we\n shall find to be the tokens of his hate, which gathered together\n might mind us of his will, and teach us when his wrath beginneth,\n which sometimes comes in open strength and full sail, oft steals\n like a Thief in the night, like Shafts shot from a Bow at midnight,\n before we think upon them.\n\n _Saxon_ IV.\n\n Gyf we raed his Boc and heilig Gewrit, these gemong maenig othern, we\n sceall findan the tacna of his hatung whilc gegatherod together\n miht gemind us of his willan, and teac us whone his ured onginneth,\n whilc sometima come in open strength and fill seyle, oft stael gelyc\n a Theof in the niht, gelyc Sceaft scoten fram a Boge at midneoht,\n beforan we thinck uppen them.\n\n _English_ V.\n\n And though they were a deal less, and rather short than beyond our\n sins, yet do we not a whit withstand or forbear them, we are wedded\n to, not weary of our misdeeds, we seldom look upward, and are not\n ashamed under sin, we cleanse not our selves from the blackness and\n deep hue of our guilt; we want tears and sorrow, we weep not, fast\n not, we crave not forgiveness from the mildness, sweetness and\n goodness of God, and with all livelihood and stedfastness to our\n uttermost will hunt after the evil of guile, pride, cursing,\n swearing, drunkenness, overeating, uncleanness, all idle lust of\n the flesh, yes many uncouth and nameless sins, hid in our inmost\n Breast and Bosomes, which stand betwixt our forgiveness, and keep\n God and Man asunder.\n\n _Saxon_ V.\n\n And theow they waere a dael lesse, and reither scort thone begond\n oure sinnan, get do we naht a whit withstand and forbeare them, we\n eare bewudded to, noht werig of ure agen misdeed, we seldon loc\n upweard, and ear not ofschaemod under sinne, we cleans noht ure\n selvan from the blacnesse and daep hue of ure guilt; we wan teare\n and sara, we weope noht, faest noht, we craf noht foregyfnesse fram\n the mildnesse, sweetnesse and goodnesse of God, and mit eal\n lifelyhood and stedfastnesse to ure uttermost witt hunt aefter the\n ufel of guile, pride, cursung, swearung, druncennesse, overeat,\n uncleannesse and eal idle lust of the flaesc, vis maenig uncuth and\n nameleas sinnan, hid in ure inmaest Brist and Bosome, whilc stand\n betwixt ure foregyfnesse, and caep God and Man asynder.\n\n _English_ VI.\n\n Thus are we far beneath and also worse than the rest of God's\n Works; for the Sun and Moon, the King and Queen of Stars, Snow,\n Ice, Rain, Frost, Dew, Mist, Wind, fourfooted and creeping things,\n Fishes and feathered Birds, and Fowls either of Sea or Land do all\n hold the Laws of his will.\n\n _Saxon_ VI.\n\n Thus eare we far beneoth and ealso wyrse thone the rest of Gods\n Weorka; for the Sune and Mone, the Cyng and Cquen of Stearran,\n Snaw, Ise, Ren, Frost, Deaw, Miste, Wind, feower fet and crypend\n dinga, Fix yefetherod Brid, and Faelan auther in Sae or Land do eal\n heold the Lag of his willan.\n\nThus have you seen in few words how near the Saxon and English meet.\n\n * * * * *\n\nNow of this account the French will be able to make nothing; the modern\nDanes and Germans, though from several words they may conjecture at the\nmeaning, yet will they be much to seek in the orderly sense and\ncontinued construction thereof, whether the Danes can continue such a\nseries of sense out of their present Language and the old Runick, as to\nbe intelligible unto present and ancient times, some doubt may well be\nmade; and if the present French would attempt a Discourse in words\ncommon unto their present Tongue and the old _Romana Rustica_ spoken in\nElder times, or in the old Language of the Francks, which came to be in\nuse some successions after _Pharamond_, it might prove a Work of some\ntrouble to effect.\n\nIt were not impossible to make an Original reduction of many words of no\ngeneral reception in _England_ but of common use in _Norfolk_, or\npeculiar to the East Angle Countries; as, _Bawnd_, _Bunny_, _Thurck_,\n_Enemmis_, _Sammodithee_, _Mawther_, _Kedge_, _Seele_, _Straft_,\n_Clever_, _Matchly_, _Dere_, _Nicked_, _Stingy_, _Noneare_, _Feft_,\n_Thepes_, _Gosgood_, _Kamp_, _Sibrit_, _Fangast_, _Sap_, _Cothish_,\n_Thokish_, _Bide owe_, _Paxwax_: of these and some others of no easie\noriginals, when time will permit, the resolution may be attempted; which\nto effect, the Danish Language new and more ancient may prove of good\nadvantage: which Nation remained here fifty years upon agreement, and\nhave left many Families in it, and the Language of these parts had\nsurely been more commixed and perplex, if the Fleet of _Hugo de Bones_\nhad not been cast away, wherein threescore thousand Souldiers out of\n_Britany_ and _Flanders_ were to be wafted over, and were by King\n_John's_ appointment to have a settled habitation in the Counties of\n_Norfolk_ and _Suffolk_.\n\nBut beside your laudable endeavours in the Saxon, you are not like to\nrepent you of your studies in the other European and Western Languages,\nfor therein are delivered many excellent Historical, Moral and\nPhilosophical Discourses, wherein men merely versed in the learned\nLanguages are often at a loss: but although you are so well accomplished\nin the French, you will not surely conceive that you are master of all\nthe Languages in _France_, for to omit the Briton, Britonant or old\nBritish, yet retained in some part of _Britany_, I shall onely propose\nthis unto your construction.\n\n * * * * *\n\n_Chavalisco d' aquestes Boemes chems an freitado lou cap cun taules\nJargonades, ero necy chi voluiget bouta sin tens embe aquelles. Anin a\nlous occells, che dizen tat prou ben en ein voz L' ome nosap\ncomochodochi yen ay jes de plazer, d' ausir la mitat de paraulles en el\nmon._\n\nThis is a part of that Language which _Scaliger_ nameth _Idiotismus\nTectosagicus_, or _Langue d' oc_, counterdistinguishing it unto the\n_Idiotismus Francicus_, or _Langue d'ouy_, not understood in a petty\ncorner or between a few Mountains, but in parts of early civility, in\n_Languedoc_, _Provence_ and _Catalonia_, which put together will make\nlittle less than _England_.\n\nWithout some knowledge herein you cannot exactly understand the Works of\n_Rablais_: by this the French themselves are fain to make out that\npreserved relique of old French, containing the League between _Charles_\nand _Lewis_ the Sons of _Ludovicus Pius_. Hereby may tolerably be\nunderstood the several Tracts written in the Catalonian Tongue; and in\nthis is published the Tract of Falconry written by _Theodosius_ and\n_Symmachus_: in this is yet conserved the Poem _Vilhuardine_ concerning\nthe French expedition in the Holy War, and the taking of\n_Constantinople_, among the Works of _Marius AEquicola_ an Italian Poet.\nYou may find, in this Language, a pleasant Dialogue of Love: this,\nabout an hundred years ago, was in high esteem, when many Italian Wits\nflocked into _Provence_; and the famous _Petrarcha_ wrote many of his\nPoems in _Vaucluse_ in that Country.\n\n * * * * *\n\nFor the word [_Dread_] in the Royal Title [_Dread Sovereign_] of which\nyou desire to know the meaning, I return answer unto your question\nbriefly thus.\n\n * * * * *\n\nMost men do vulgarly understand this word _Dread_ after the common and\nEnglish acception, as implying _Fear_, _Awe_ or _Dread_.\n\nOthers may think to expound it from the French word _Droit_ or _Droyt_.\nFor, whereas in elder times, the _Presidents_ and _Supremes_ of Courts\nwere termed _Sovereigns_, men might conceive this a distinctive Title\nand proper unto the King as eminently and by right the Sovereign.\n\nA third exposition may be made from some Saxon Original, particularly\nfrom _Driht_, _Domine_, or _Drihten_, _Dominus_, in the Saxon Language,\nthe word for _Dominus_ throughout the Saxon Psalms, and used in the\nexpression of the year of our Lord in the Decretal Epistle of Pope\n_Agatho_ unto _Athelred_ King of the Mercians, _Anno_, 680.\n\n_Verstegan_ would have this term _Drihten_ appropriate unto God. Yet, in\nthe Constitutions of _Withred[267] King of Kent_, we find the same word\nused for a Lord or Master, _Si in vespera praecedente solem servus ex\nmandato Domini aliquod opus servile egerit, Dominus (Drihten) 80 solidis\nluito_. However therefore, though _Driht_, _Domine_, might be most\neminently applied unto the Lord of Heaven, yet might it be also\ntransferred unto Potentates and Gods on Earth, unto whom fealty is given\nor due, according unto the Feudist term _Ligeus a Ligando_ unto whom\nthey were bound in fealty. And therefore from _Driht_, _Domine_, _Dread\nSovereign_, may, probably, owe its Original.\n\n [267] V. Cl. Spelmanni _Concil._\n\n * * * * *\n\nI have not time to enlarge upon this Subject: 'Pray let this pass,\nas it is, for a Letter and not for a Treatise. I am\n\n _Yours_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n OF ARTIFICIAL HILLS, MOUNTS OR BURROWS\n\n In many parts of England.\n\n What they are, to what end raised, and by what Nations.\n\n TRACT IX\n\n\nMy honoured Friend Mr. _E. D._[268] his _Quaere_.\n\n'In my last Summer's Journey through _Marshland_, _Holland_ and a great\npart of the _Fenns_, I observed divers artificial heaps of Earth of a\nvery large magnitude, and I hear of many others which are in other parts\nof those Countries, some of them are at least twenty foot in direct\nheight from the level whereon they stand. I would gladly know your\nopinion of them, and whether you think not that they were raised by the\nRomans or Saxons to cover the Bones or Ashes of some eminent persons?'\n\n [268] [Sir William Dugdale.--ED.]\n\nMy Answer.\n\n_Worthy Sir_,\n\nConcerning artificial Mounts and Hills, raised without Fortifications\nattending them, in most parts of _England_, the most considerable\nthereof I conceive to be of two kinds; that is, either Signal Boundaries\nand Land-Marks, or else sepulchral Monuments or Hills of Interrment for\nremarkable and eminent persons, especially such as died in the Wars.\n\nAs for such which are sepulchral Monuments, upon bare and naked view\nthey are not appropriable unto any of the three Nations of the Romans,\nSaxons or Danes, who, after the Britaines, have possessed this Land;\nbecause upon strict account, they may be appliable unto them all.\n\nFor that the Romans used such hilly Sepultures, beside many other\ntestimonies, seems confirmable from the practice of _Germanicus_, who\nthus interred the unburied Bones of the slain Souldiers of _Varus_; and\nthat expression of _Virgil_, of high antiquity among the Latins,\n\n --_facit ingens monte sub alto_\n _Regis Dercenni terreno ex aggere Bustum._\n\nThat the Saxons made use of this way is collectible from several\nRecords, and that pertinent expression of _Lelandus_,[269] _Saxones gens\nChristi ignara, in hortis amoenis, si domi forte aegroti moriebantur;\nsin foris et bello occisi, in egestis per campos terrae tumulis (quos\nBurgos appellabant) sepulti sunt_.\n\n [269] Leland. _in Assertione Regis_ Arthuri.\n\nThat the Danes observed this practice, their own Antiquities do\nfrequently confirm, and it stands precisely delivered by _Adolphus\nCyprius_, as the learned _Wormius_[270] hath observed. _Dani olim in\nmemoriam Regum et Heroum, ex terra coacervata ingentes moles, Montium\ninstar eminentes, erexisse, credibile omnino ac probabile est, atque\nillis in locis ut plurimum, quo saepe homines commearent, atque iter\nhaberent, ut in viis publicis posteritati memoriam consecrarent, et\nquodammodo immortalitati mandarent._ And the like Monuments are yet to\nbe observed in _Norway_ and _Denmark_ in no small numbers.\n\n [270] Wormius _in Monumentis Danicis_.\n\nSo that upon a single view and outward observation they may be the\nMonuments of any of these three Nations: Although the greatest number,\nnot improbably, of the Saxons; who fought many Battels with the\nBritaines and Danes, and also between their own Nations, and left the\nproper name of Burrows for these Hills still retained in many of them,\nas the seven Burrows upon _Salisbury_ Plain, and in many other parts of\n_England_.\n\nBut of these and the like Hills there can be no clear and assured\ndecision without an ocular exploration, and subterraneous enquiry by\ncutting through one of them either directly or crosswise. For so with\nlesser charge discovery may be made what is under them, and consequently\nthe intention of their erection.\n\nFor if they were raised for remarkable and eminent Boundaries, then\nabout their bottom will be found the lasting substances of burnt Bones\nof Beasts, of Ashes, Bricks, Lime or Coals.\n\nIf Urns be found, they might be erected by the Romans before the term of\nUrn-burying or custom of burning the dead expired: but if raised by the\nRomans after that period; Inscriptions, Swords, Shields, and Arms after\nthe Roman mode, may afford a good distinction.\n\nBut if these Hills were made by Saxons or Danes, discovery may be made\nfrom the fashion of their Arms, Bones of their Horses, and other\ndistinguishing substances buried with them.\n\nAnd for such an attempt there wanteth not encouragement. For a like\nMount or Burrow was opened in the days of King _Henry_ the Eighth upon\n_Barham_ Down in _Kent_, by the care of Mr. _Thomas Digges_ and charge\nof Sir _Christopher Hales_; and a large Urn with Ashes was found under\nit, as is delivered by _Thomas Twinus De Rebus Albionicis_, a learned\nMan of that Country, _Sub incredibili Terrae acervo, Urna cinere ossium\nmagnorum fragmentis plena, cum galeis, clypeis aeneis et ferreis rubigine\nfere consumptis, inusitatae magnitudinis, eruta est: sed nulla inscriptio\nnomen, nullum testimonium tempus, aut fortunam exponebant_: and not very\nlong ago, as _Cambden_[271] delivereth, in one of the Mounts of\n_Barklow_ Hills in _Essex_, being levelled there were found three\nTroughs, containing broken Bones, conceived to have been of Danes: and\nin later time we find, that a Burrow was opened in the Isle of _Man_,\nwherein fourteen Urns were found with burnt Bones in them; and one more\nneat than the rest, placed in a Bed of fine white Sand, containing\nnothing but a few brittle Bones, as having passed the Fire; according to\nthe particular account thereof in the description[272] of the Isle of\n_Man_. Surely many noble Bones and Ashes have been contented with such\nhilly Tombs; which neither admitting Ornament, Epitaph or Inscription,\nmay, if Earthquakes spare them, out last all other Monuments. _Suae sunt\nMetis metae._ Obelisks have their term, and Pyramids will tumble, but\nthese mountainous Monuments may stand, and are like to have the same\nperiod with the Earth.\n\n [271] Cambd. Brit. _p. 326_.\n\n [272] _Published_ 1656, by Dan. King.\n\n\n * * * * *\n\nMore might be said, but my business, of another nature, makes me take\noff my hand. I am\n\n _Yours_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n OF TROAS\n\n What place is meant by that Name.\n\n Also, of the situations of _Sodom_, _Gomorrha_,\n _Admah_, _Zeboim_, in the dead Sea.\n\n TRACT X\n\n\nSIR,\n\n_To your Geographical Queries, I answer as follows._\n\nIn sundry passages of the new Testament, in the _Acts of the Apostles_,\nand Epistles of S. _Paul_, we meet with the word _Troas_; how he went\nfrom _Troas_ to _Philippi_ in _Macedonia_, from thence unto _Troas_\nagain: how he remained seven days in that place; from thence on foot to\n_Assos_, whither the Disciples had sailed from _Troas_, and there,\ntaking him in, made their Voyage unto _Caesarea_.\n\nNow, whether this _Troas_ be the name of a City or a certain Region\nseems no groundless doubt of yours: for that 'twas sometimes taken in\nthe signification of some Country, is acknowledged by _Ortelius_,\n_Stephanus_ and _Grotius_; and it is plainly set down by _Strabo_, that\na Region of _Phrygia_ in _Asia minor_ was so taken in ancient times; and\nthat, at the Trojan War, all the Territory which comprehended the nine\nPrincipalities subject unto the King of _Ilium_, +Troie legomene+, was\ncalled by the name of _Troja_. And this might seem sufficiently to salve\nthe intention of the description, when he came or went from _Troas_,\nthat is, some part of that Region; and will otherwise seem strange unto\nmany how he should be said to go or come from that City which all\nWriters had laid in the Ashes about a thousand years before.\n\nAll which notwithstanding, since we reade in the Text a particular abode\nof seven days, and such particulars as leaving of his Cloak, Books and\nParchments at _Troas_: And that S. _Luke_ seems to have been taken in to\nthe Travels of S. _Paul_ in this place, where he begins in the _Acts_ to\nwrite in the first person, this may rather seem to have been some City\nor special Habitation, than any Province or Region without such\nlimitation.\n\nNow that such a City there was, and that of no mean note, is easily\nverified from historical observation. For though old _Ilium_ was\nanciently destroyed, yet was there another raised by the relicts of that\npeople, not in the same place, but about thirty Furlongs westward, as is\nto be learned from _Strabo_.\n\nOf this place _Alexander_ in his expedition against _Darius_ took\nespecial notice, endowing it with sundry Immunities, with promise of\ngreater matters at his return from _Persia_; inclined hereunto from the\nhonour he bore unto _Homer_, whose earnest Reader he was, and upon whose\nPoems, by the help of _Anaxarchus_ and _Callisthenes_, he made some\nobservations. As also much moved hereto upon the account of his\ncognation with the _AEacides_ and Kings of _Molossus_, whereof\n_Andromache_ the Wife of _Hector_ was Queen. After the death of\n_Alexander_, _Lysimachus_ surrounded it with a Wall, and brought the\ninhabitants of the neighbour Towns unto it, and so it bore the name of\n_Alexandria_; which, from _Antigonus_, was also called _Antigonia_,\naccording to the inscription of that famous Medal in _Goltsius_,\n_Colonia Troas Antigonia Alexandrea, Legio vicesima prima_.\n\nWhen the Romans first went into _Asia_ against _Antiochus_ 'twas but a\n+Komopolis+ and no great City; but, upon the Peace concluded, the\nRomans much advanced the same. _Fimbria_, the rebellious Roman, spoiled\nit in the Mithridatick War, boasting that he had subdued _Troy_ in\neleven days which the Grecians could not take in almost as many years.\nBut it was again rebuilt and countenanced by the Romans, and became a\nRoman Colony, with great immunities conferred on it; and accordingly it\nis so set down by _Ptolomy_. For the Romans, deriving themselves from\nthe Trojans, thought no favour too great for it; especially _Julius\nCaesar_, who, both in imitation of _Alexander_, and for his own descent\nfrom _Julus_, of the posterity of _AEneas_, with much passion affected\nit, and, in a discontented humour,[273] was once in mind to translate\nthe Roman wealth unto it; so that it became a very remarkable place, and\nwas, in _Strabo's_ time, +ellogimon poleon+, one of the noble\nCities of _Asia_.\n\n [273] Sueton.\n\nAnd, if they understood the prediction of _Homer_ in reference unto the\nRomans, as some expound it in _Strabo_, it might much promote their\naffection unto that place; which being a remarkable prophecy, and scarce\nto be parallel'd in Pagan story, made before _Rome_ was built, and\nconcerning the lasting Reign of the progeny of _AEneas_, they could not\nbut take especial notice of it. For thus is _Neptune_ made to speak,\nwhen he saved _AEneas_ from the fury of _Achilles_.\n\n _Verum agite hunc subito praesenti a morte trahamus\n Ne Cronides ira flammet si fortis Achilles\n Hunc mactet, fati quem Lex evadere jussit.\n Ne genus intereat de laeto semine totum\n Dardani ab excelso prae cunctis prolibus olim,\n Dilecti quos e mortali stirpe creavit,\n Nunc etiam Priami stirpem Saturnius odit,\n Trojugenum posthaec AEneas sceptra tenebit\n Et nati natorum et qui nascentur ab illis._\n\nThe Roman favours were also continued unto S. _Paul's_ days; for\n_Claudius_,[274] producing an ancient Letter of the Romans unto King\n_Seleucus_ concerning the Trojan Privileges, made a Release of their\nTributes; and _Nero_ [SN: Tacit. _l. 13_.] elegantly pleaded for their\nImmunities, and remitted all Tributes unto them.\n\n [274] Sueton.\n\nAnd, therefore, there being so remarkable a City in this Territory, it\nmay seem too hard to loose the same in the general name of the Country;\nand since it was so eminently favoured by Emperours, enjoying so many\nImmunities, and full of Roman Privileges, it was probably very populous,\nand a fit abode for S. _Paul_, who being a Roman Citizen, might live\nmore quietly himself, and have no small number of faithfull well-wishers\nin it.\n\nYet must we not conceive that this was the old _Troy_, or re-built in\nthe same place with it: for _Troas_ was placed about thirty Furlongs\nWest, and upon the Sea shore; so that, to hold a clearer apprehension\nhereof than is commonly delivered in the Discourses of the Ruines of\n_Troy_, we may consider one Inland _Troy_ or old _Ilium_, which was\nbuilt farther within the Land, and so was removed from the Port where\nthe Grecian Fleet lay in _Homer_; and another Maritime _Troy_, which was\nupon the Sea Coast placed in the Maps of _Ptolomy_, between _Lectum_ and\n_Sigaeum_ or Port _Janizam_, Southwest from the old City, which was this\nof S. _Paul_, and whereunto are appliable the particular accounts of\n_Bellonius_, when, not an hundred years ago, he described the Ruines of\n_Troy_ with their Baths, Aqueducts, Walls and Towers, to be seen from\nthe Sea as he sailed between it and _Tenedos_; and where, upon nearer\nview, he observed some signs and impressions of his conversion in the\nruines of Churches, Crosses, and Inscriptions upon Stones.\n\nNor was this onely a famous City in the days of S. _Paul_, but\nconsiderable long after. For, upon the Letter of _Adrianus_ [SN:\nPhilostrat. _in Vita_ Herodis Attici.], _Herodes Atticus_, at a great\ncharge, repaired their Baths, contrived Aqueducts and noble\nWater-courses in it. As is also collectible from the Medals of\n_Caracalla_, of _Severus_, and _Crispina_; with Inscriptions, _Colonia\nAlexandria Troas_, bearing on the Reverse either an Horse, a Temple, or\na Woman; denoting their destruction by an Horse, their prayers for the\nEmperour's safety, and, as some conjecture, the memory of _Sibylla_,\n_Phrygia_ or _Hellespontica_.\n\nNor wanted this City the favour of Christian Princes, but was made a\nBishop's See under the Archbishop of _Cyzicum_; but in succeeding\ndiscords was destroyed and ruined, and the nobler Stones translated to\n_Constantinople_ by the Turks to beautifie their Mosques and other\nBuildings.\n\n\n_Concerning the Dead Sea, accept of these few Remarks._\n\nIn the Map of the Dead Sea we meet with the Figure of the Cities which\nwere destroyed: of _Sodom_, _Gomorrha_, _Admah_ and _Zeboim_; but with\nno uniformity; men placing them variously, and, from the uncertainty of\ntheir situation, taking a fair liberty to set them where they please.\n\nFor _Admah_, _Zeboim_ and _Gomorrha_, there is no light from the Text to\ndefine their situation. But, that _Sodom_ could not be far from _Segor_\nwhich was seated under the Mountains near the side of the Lake, seems\ninferrible from the sudden arrival of _Lot_, who, coming from _Sodom_ at\nday break, attained to _Segor_ at Sun rising; and therefore _Sodom_ is\nto be placed not many miles from it, not in the middle of the Lake,\nwhich against that place is about eighteen miles over, and so will leave\nnine miles to be gone in so small a space of time.\n\nThe Valley being large, the Lake now in length about seventy English\nmiles, the River _Jordan_ and divers others running over the Plain, 'tis\nprobable the best Cities were seated upon those Streams: but how the\n_Jordan_ passed or winded, or where it took in the other Streams, is a\npoint too old for Geography to determine.\n\nFor, that the River gave the fruitfulness unto this Valley by over\nwatring that low Region, seems plain from that expression in the\nText,[275] that it was watered, _sicut Paradisus et AEgyptus_, like\n_Eden_ and the Plains of _Mesopotamia_, where _Euphrates_ yearly\noverfloweth; or like _AEgypt_ where _Nilus_ doth the like: and seems\nprobable also from the same course of the River not far above this\nValley where the Israelites passed _Jordan_, where 'tis said that\n_Jordan overfloweth its Banks in the time of Harvest_.\n\n [275] Gen. 13. 10.\n\nThat it must have had some passage under ground in the compass of this\nValley before the creation of this Lake, seems necessary from the great\ncurrent of _Jordan_, and from the Rivers _Arnon_, _Cedron_, _Zaeth_,\nwhich empty into this Valley; but where to place that concurrence of\nWaters or place of its absorbition, there is no authentick decision.\n\nThe probablest place may be set somewhat Southward, below the Rivers\nthat run into it on the East or Western Shore: and somewhat agreeable\nunto the account which _Brocardus_ received from the Sarazens which\nlived near it, _Jordanem ingredi Mare Mortuum et rursum egredi, sed post\nexiguum intervallum a Terra absorberi_.\n\n_Strabo_ speaks naturally of this Lake, that it was first caused by\nEarthquakes, by sulphureous and bituminous eruptions, arising from the\nEarth. But the Scripture makes it plain to have been from a miraculous\nhand, and by a remarkable expression, _pluit Dominus ignem et Sulphur a\nDomino_. See also _Deut. 29. in ardore Salis_: burning the Cities and\ndestroying all things about the Plain, destroying the vegetable nature\nof Plants and all living things, salting and making barren the whole\nSoil, and, by these fiery Showers, kindling and setting loose the body\nof the bituminous Mines, which shewed their lower Veins before but in\nsome few Pits and openings, swallowing up the Foundation of their\nCities; opening the bituminous Treasures below, and making a smoak like\na Furnace able to be discerned by _Abraham_ at a good distance from it.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIf this little may give you satisfaction, I shall be glad, as being,\nSir,\n\n_Yours_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n OF THE ANSWERS\n of the Oracle of Apollo at Delphos to\n Croesus King of Lydia\n\n TRACT XI\n\n\nSIR,\n\nAmong the Oracles[276] of _Appollo_ there are none more celebrated than\nthose which he delivered unto _Croesus_ King of _Lydia_,[277] who\nseems of all Princes to have held the greatest dependence on them. But\nmost considerable are his plain and intelligible replies which he made\nunto the same King, when he sent his Chains of Captivity unto _Delphos_,\nafter his overthrow by _Cyrus_, with sad expostulations why he\nencouraged him unto that fatal War by his Oracle, saying,[278]\nCroesus, _if he Wars against the Persians, shall dissolve a great\nEmpire_. Why, at least, he prevented not that sad infelicity of his\ndevoted and bountifull Servant, and whether it were fair or honourable\nfor the Gods of _Greece_ to be ingratefull: which being a plain and open\ndelivery of _Delphos_, and scarce to be parallel'd in any ancient story,\nit may well deserve your farther consideration.\n\n [276] _See_ Vulg. Err. _l._ 7. c. 12.\n\n [277] Herod. _l._ 1. 46, 47, etc. 90, 91.\n\n [278] +Prolegousai Kroiso, en strateuetai epi Persas, megalen archen\n min katalysein.+ Herod. _Ibid._ 54.\n\n1. His first reply was, _That_ Croesus _suffered not for himself_;\nbut paid the transgression of his fifth predecessour, who kill'd his\nMaster and usurp'd the dignity unto which he held no title.\n\nNow whether _Croesus_ suffered upon this account or not, hereby he\nplainly betrayed his insufficiency to protect him; and also obliquely\ndiscovered he had a knowledge of his misfortune; for knowing that wicked\nact lay yet unpunished, he might well divine some of his successours\nmight smart for it: and also understanding he was like to be the last of\nthat race, he might justly fear and conclude this infelicity upon him.\n\nHereby he also acknowledged the inevitable justice of God; that though\nRevenge lay dormant, it would not always sleep; and consequently\nconfessed the just hand of God punishing unto the third and fourth\ngeneration, nor suffering such iniquities to pass for ever unrevenged.\n\nHereby he flatteringly encouraged him in the opinion of his own merits,\nand that he onely suffered for other mens transgressions: mean while he\nconcealed _Croesus_ his pride, elation of mind and secure conceit of\nhis own unparallel'd felicity, together with the vanity, pride and\nheight of luxury of the Lydian Nation, which the Spirit of _Delphos_\nknew well to be ripe and ready for destruction.\n\n\n2. A Second excuse was, _That it is not in the power of God to hinder\nthe Decree of Fate_. A general evasion for any falsified prediction\nfounded upon the common opinion of Fate, which impiously subjecteth the\npower of Heaven unto it; widely discovering the folly of such as repair\nunto him concerning future events: which, according unto this rule, must\ngo on as the Fates have ordered, beyond his power to prevent or theirs\nto avoid; and consequently teaching that his Oracles had onely this use\nto render men more miserable by foreknowing their misfortunes; whereof\n_Croesus_ himself had a sensible experience in that Daemoniacal Dream\nconcerning his eldest Son, _That he should be killed by a Spear_, which,\nafter all care and caution, he found inevitably to befall him.\n\n\n3. In his Third Apology he assured him that he endeavoured to transfer\nthe evil Fate and to pass it upon his Children; and did however\nprocrastinate his infelicity, and deferred the destruction of _Sardis_\nand his own Captivity three years longer than was fatally decreed upon\nit.\n\nWherein while he wipes off the stain of Ingratitude, he leaves no small\ndoubt whether, it being out of his power to contradict or transfer the\nFates of his Servants, it be not also beyond it to defer such signal\nevents, and whereon the Fates of whole Nations do depend.\n\nAs also, whether he intended or endeavoured to bring to pass what he\npretended, some question might be made. For that he should attempt or\nthink he could translate his infelicity upon his Sons, it could not\nconsist with his judgment, which attempts not impossibles or things\nbeyond his power; nor with his knowledge of future things, and the Fates\nof succeeding Generations: for he understood that Monarchy was to expire\nin himself, and could particularly foretell the infelicity of his Sons,\nand hath also made remote predictions unto others concerning the\nfortunes of many succeeding descents; as appears in that answer unto\n_Attalus_,\n\n _Be of good courage,_ Attalus, _thou shalt reign\n And thy Sons Sons, but not their Sons again._\n\nAs also unto _Cypselus_ King of Corinth.\n\n _Happy is the Man who at my Altar stands,\n Great_ Cypselus _who_ Corinth _now commands.\n Happy is he, his Sons shall happy be,\n But for their Sons, unhappy days they'll see._\n\nNow, being able to have so large a prospect of future things, and of the\nfate of many Generations, it might well be granted he was not ignorant\nof the Fate of _Croesus_ his Sons, and well understood it was in vain\nto think to translate his misery upon them.\n\n\n4. In the Fourth part of his reply, he clears himself of Ingratitude\nwhich Hell it self cannot hear of; alledging that he had saved his life\nwhen he was ready to be burnt, by sending a mighty Showre, in a fair and\ncloudless day, to quench the Fire already kindled, which all the\nServants of _Cyrus_ could not doe. Though this Shower might well be\ngranted, as much concerning his honour, and not beyond his power; yet\nwhether this mercifull Showre fell not out contingently or were not\ncontrived by an higher power, which hath often pity upon Pagans, and\nrewardeth their vertues sometimes with extraordinary temporal favours;\nalso, in no unlike case, who was the authour of those few fair minutes,\nwhich, in a showry day, gave onely time enough for the burning of\n_Sylla's_ Body, some question might be made.\n\n\n5. The last excuse devolveth the errour and miscarriage of the business\nupon _Croesus_, and that he deceived himself by an inconsiderate\nmisconstruction of his Oracle, that if he had doubted, he should not\nhave passed it over in silence, but consulted again for an exposition of\nit. Besides, he had neither discussed, nor well perpended his Oracle\nconcerning _Cyrus_, whereby he might have understood not to engage\nagainst him.\n\nWherein, to speak indifferently, the deception and miscarriage seems\nchiefly to lie at _Croesus_ his door, who, if not infatuated with\nconfidence and security, might justly have doubted the construction:\nbesides, he had received two Oracles before, which clearly hinted an\nunhappy time unto him: the first concerning _Cyrus_.\n\n _When ever a Mule shall o'er the Medians reign,\n Stay not, but unto_ Hermus _fly amain._\n\nHerein though he understood not the _Median Mule_ of _Cyrus_, that is,\nof his mixed descent, and from Assyrian and Median Parents, yet he could\nnot but apprehend some misfortune from that quarter.\n\nThough this prediction seemed a notable piece of Divination, yet did it\nnot so highly magnifie his natural sagacity or knowledge of future\nevents as was by many esteemed; he having no small assistance herein\nfrom the Prophecy of _Daniel_ concerning the Persian Monarchy, and the\nProphecy of _Jeremiah_ and _Isaiah_, wherein he might reade the name of\n_Cyrus_ who should restore the Captivity of the Jews, and must,\ntherefore, be the great Monarch and Lord of all those Nations.\n\nThe same misfortune was also foretold when he demanded of _Apollo_ if\never he should hear his dumb Son speak.\n\n _O foolish_ Croesus _who hast made this choice,\n To know when thou shalt hear thy dumb Son's voice;\n Better he still were mute, would nothing say,\n When he first speaks, look for a dismal day._\n\nThis, if he contrived not the time and the means of his recovery, was no\nordinary divination: yet how to make out the verity of the story some\ndoubt may yet remain. For though the causes of deafness and dumbness\nwere removed, yet since words are attained by hearing, and men speak not\nwithout instruction, how he should be able immediately to utter such apt\nand significant words, as +Anthrope, me kteine Kroison+,[279]\n_O Man slay not_ Croesus, it cannot escape some doubt, since the Story\nalso delivers, that he was deaf and dumb, that he then first began to\nspeak, and spake all his life after.\n\n [279] Herod. _l._ 1. 85.\n\nNow, if _Croesus_ had consulted again for a clearer exposition of what\nwas doubtfully delivered, whether the Oracle would have spake out the\nsecond time or afforded a clearer answer, some question might be made\nfrom the examples of his practice upon the like demands.\n\nSo when the Spartans had often fought with ill success against the\n_Tegeates_, they consulted the Oracle what God they should appease, to\nbecome victorious over them. The answer was, _that they should remove\nthe Bones of_ Orestes. Though the words were plain, yet the thing was\nobscure, and like finding out the Body of _Moses_. And therefore they\nonce more demanded in what place they should find the same; unto whom he\nreturned this answer,\n\n _When in the Tegean Plains a place thou find'st\n Where blasts are made by two impetuous Winds,\n Where that that strikes is struck, blows follow blows,\n There doth the Earth_ Orestes _Bones enclose._\n\nWhich obscure reply the wisest of _Sparta_ could not make out, and was\ncasually unriddled by one talking with a Smith who had found large Bones\nof a Man buried about his House; the Oracle importing no more than a\nSmith's Forge, expressed by a Double Bellows, the Hammer and Anvil\ntherein.\n\nNow, why the Oracle should place such consideration upon the Bones of\n_Orestes_ the Son of _Agamemnon_, a mad man and a murtherer, if not to\npromote the idolatry of the Heathens, and maintain a superstitious\nveneration of things of no activity, it may leave no small obscurity.\n\nOr why, in a business so clear in his knowledge, he should affect so\nobscure expressions it may also be wondred; if it were not to maintain\nthe wary and evasive method in his answers: for, speaking obscurely in\nthings beyond doubt within his knowledge, he might be more tolerably\ndark in matters beyond his prescience.\n\nThough =EI= were inscribed over the Gate of _Delphos_, yet was there no\nuniformity in his deliveries. Sometimes with that _obscurity_ as argued\na fearfull prophecy; sometimes so _plainly_ as might confirm a spirit\nof divinity; sometimes _morally_, deterring from vice and villany;\nanother time _vitiously_, and in the spirit of bloud and cruelty:\nobservably modest in his civil enigma and periphrasis of that part which\nold _Numa_ would plainly name,[280] and _Medea_ would not understand,\nwhen he advised _AEgeus_ not to draw out his foot before, untill he\narriv'd upon the Athenian ground; whereas another time he seemed too\nliteral in that unseemly epithet unto _Cyanus_ King of _Cyprus_,[281]\nand put a beastly trouble upon all _AEgypt_ to find out the Urine of a\ntrue Virgin. Sometimes, more beholding unto memory than invention, he\ndelighted to express himself in the bare Verses of _Homer_. But that he\nprincipally affected Poetry, and that the Priest not onely or always\ncomposed his prosal raptures into Verse, seems plain from his\nnecromantical Prophecies, whilst the dead Head in _Phlegon_ delivers a\nlong Prediction in Verse; and at the raising of the Ghost of _Commodus_\nunto _Caracalla_, when none of his Ancestours would speak, the divining\nSpirit versified his infelicities; corresponding herein to the\napprehensions of elder times, who conceived not onely a Majesty but\nsomething of Divinity in Poetry, and as in ancient times the old\nTheologians delivered their inventions.\n\n [280] Plut. _in_ Thes.\n\n [281] _V._ Herod.\n\nSome critical Readers might expect in his oraculous Poems a more than\nordinary strain and true spirit of _Apollo_; not contented to find that\nSpirits make Verses like Men, beating upon the filling Epithet, and\ntaking the licence of dialects and lower helps, common to humane Poetry;\nwherein, since _Scaliger_, who hath spared none of the Greeks, hath\nthought it wisedom to be silent, we shall make no excursion.\n\nOthers may wonder how the curiosity of elder times, having this\nopportunity of his Answers, omitted Natural Questions; or how the old\nMagicians discovered no more Philosophy; and if they had the assistance\nof Spirits, could rest content with the bare assertions of things,\nwithout the knowledge of their causes; whereby they had made their Acts\niterable by sober hands, and a standing part of Philosophy. Many wise\nDivines hold a reality in the wonders of the AEgyptian Magicians, and\nthat those _magnalia_ which they performed before _Pharaoh_ were not\nmere delusions of Sense. Rightly to understand how they made Serpents\nout of Rods; Froggs and Bloud of Water, were worth half _Porta's_\nMagick.\n\n_Hermolaus Barbarus_ was scarce in his wits, when, upon conference with\na Spirit, he would demand no other question than the explication of\n_Aristotle's Entelecheia_. _Appion_ the Grammarian, that would raise the\nGhost of _Homer_ to decide the Controversie of his Country, made a\nfrivolous and pedantick use of Necromancy. _Philostratus_ did as little,\nthat call'd up the Ghost of _Achilles_ for a particular of the Story of\n_Troy_. Smarter curiosities would have been at the great Elixir, the\nFlux and Reflux of the Sea, with other noble obscurities in Nature; but\nprobably all in vain: in matters cognoscible and framed for our\ndisquisition, our Industry must be our Oracle, and Reason our _Apollo_.\n\nNot to know things without the Arch of our intellectuals, or what\nSpirits apprehend, is the imperfection of our nature not our knowledge,\nand rather inscience than ignorance in man. Revelation might render a\ngreat part of the Creation easie which now seems beyond the stretch of\nhumane indagation, and welcome no doubt from good hands might be a true\n_Almagest_, and great celestial construction: a clear Systeme of the\nplanetical Bodies of the invisible and seeming useless Stars unto us, of\nthe many Suns in the eighth Sphere, what they are, what they contain and\nto what more immediately those Stupendous Bodies are serviceable. But\nbeing not hinted in the authentick Revelation of God, nor known how far\ntheir discoveries are stinted; if they should come unto us from the\nmouth of evil Spirits, the belief thereof might be as unsafe as the\nenquiry.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThis is a copious Subject; but, having exceeded the bounds of a letter,\nI will not, now, pursue it farther. I am\n\n _Yours_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n A PROPHECY\n\n Concerning the future state of several Nations,\n\n In a Letter written upon occasion of an old\n Prophecy sent to the Authour from a Friend,\n with a Request that he would consider it.\n\n TRACT XII\n\n\nSIR,\n\nI take no pleasure in Prophecies so hardly intelligible, and pointing at\nfuture things from a pretended spirit of Divination; of which sort this\nseems to be which came unto your hand, and you were pleased to send unto\nme. And therefore, for your easier apprehension, divertisement and\nconsideration, I present you with a very different kind of prediction:\nnot positively or peremptorily telling you what shall come to pass; yet\npointing at things not without all reason or probability of their\nevents; not built upon fatal decrees, or inevitable designations, but\nupon conjectural foundations, whereby things wished may be promoted, and\nsuch as are feared, may more probably be prevented.\n\n\n THE PROPHECY\n\n _When_ New England _shall trouble_ New Spain.\n _When_ Jamaica _shall be Lady of the Isles and the Main._\n _When_ Spain _shall be in_ America _hid,_\n _And_ Mexico _shall prove a_ Madrid._\n _When_ Mahomet's _Ships on the_ Baltick _shall ride,_\n _And Turks shall labour to have Ports on that side._\n _When_ Africa _shall no more sell out their Blacks_\n _To make Slaves and Drudges to the American Tracts_.\n _When_ Batavia _the Old shall be contemn'd by the New_.\n _When a new Drove of Tartars shall_ China _subdue._\n _When_ America _shall cease to send out its Treasure,_\n _But employ it at home in American Pleasure._\n _When the new World shall the old invade,_\n _Nor count them their Lords but their fellows in Trade._\n _When Men shall almost pass to_ Venice _by Land,_\n _Not in deep Water but from Sand to Sand._\n _When_ Nova Zembla _shall be no stay_\n _Unto those who pass to or from_ Cathay._\n _Then think strange things are come to light,_\n _Whereof but few have had a foresight._\n\n\nTHE EXPOSITION OF THE PROPHECY\n\n _When_ New England _shall trouble_ New Spain.\n\nThat is, When that thriving Colony, which hath so much encreased in our\ndays, and in the space of about fifty years, that they can, as they\nreport, raise between twenty and thirty thousand men upon an exigency,\nshall in process of time be so advanced, as to be able to send forth\nShips and Fleets, as to infest the American Spanish Ports and Maritime\nDominions by depredations or assaults; for which attempts they are not\nlike to be unprovided, as abounding in the Materials for Shipping, Oak\nand Firre. And when length of time shall so far encrease that\nindustrious people, that the neighbouring Country will not contain them,\nthey will range still farther and be able, in time, to set forth great\nArmies, seek for new possessions, or make considerable and conjoined\nmigrations, according to the custom of swarming Northern Nations;\nwherein it is not likely that they will move Northward, but toward the\nSouthern and richer Countries, which are either in the Dominions or\nFrontiers of the Spaniards: and may not improbably erect new Dominions\nin places not yet thought of, and yet, for some Centuries, beyond their\npower or Ambition.\n\n _When_ Jamaica _shall be Lady of the Isles and the Main._\n\nThat is, When that advantageous Island shall be well peopled, it may\nbecome so strong and potent as to over-power the neighbouring Isles, and\nalso a part of the main Land, especially the Maritime parts. And already\nin their infancy they have given testimony of their power and courage in\ntheir bold attempts upon _Campeche_ and _Santa Martha_; and in that\nnotable attempt upon _Panama_ on the Western side of _America_:\nespecially considering this Island is sufficiently large to contain a\nnumerous people, of a Northern and warlike descent, addicted to martial\naffairs both by Sea and Land, and advantageously seated to infest their\nneighbours both of the Isles and the Continent, and like to be a\nreceptacle for Colonies of the same originals from _Barbadoes_ and the\nneighbour Isles.\n\n_When_ Spain _shall be in_ America _hid;\nAnd_ Mexico _shall prove a_ Madrid.\n\nThat is, When _Spain_, either by unexpected disasters, or continued\nemissions of people into _America_, which have already thinned the\nCountry, shall be farther exhausted at home: or when, in process of\ntime, their Colonies shall grow by many accessions more than their\nOriginals, then _Mexico_ may become a _Madrid_, and as considerable in\npeople, wealth and splendour; wherein that place is already so well\nadvanced, that accounts scarce credible are given of it. And it is so\nadvantageously seated, that, by _Acapulco_ and other Ports on the South\nSea, they may maintain a communication and commerce with the Indian\nIsles and Territories, and with _China_ and _Japan_, and on this side,\nby _Porto Belo_ and others, hold correspondence with _Europe_ and\n_Africa_.\n\n\n_When_ Mahomet's _Ships in the Baltick shall ride._\n\nOf this we cannot be out of all fear; for, if the Turk should master\n_Poland_, he would be soon at this Sea. And from the odd constitution of\nthe Polish Government, the divisions among themselves, jealousies\nbetween their Kingdom and Republick; vicinity of the Tartars, treachery\nof the Cossacks, and the method of Turkish Policy, to be at Peace with\nthe Emperour of _Germany_ when he is at War with the Poles, there may be\ncause to fear that this may come to pass. And then he would soon\nendeavour to have Ports upon that Sea, as not wanting Materials for\nShipping. And, having a new acquist of stout and warlike men, may be a\nterrour unto the confiners on that Sea, and to Nations which now\nconceive themselves safe from such an Enemy.\n\n_When_ Africa _shall no more sell out their Blacks._\n\nThat is, When African Countries shall no longer make it a common Trade\nto sell away the people to serve in the drudgery of American\nPlantations. And that may come to pass when ever they shall be well\ncivilized, and acquainted with Arts and Affairs sufficient to employ\npeople in their Countries: if also they should be converted to\nChristianity, but especially unto Mahometism; for then they would never\nsell those of their Religion to be Slaves unto Christians.\n\n\n_When_ Batavia _the Old shall be contemn'd by the New._\n\nWhen the Plantations of the Hollanders at _Batavia_ in the _East\nIndies_, and other places in the _East Indies_, shall, by their\nconquests and advancements, become so powerfull in the Indian\nTerritories; Then their Original Countries and States of _Holland_ are\nlike to be contemned by them, and obeyed onely as they please. And they\nseem to be in a way unto it at present by their several Plantations, new\nacquists and enlargements: and they have lately discovered a part of the\nSouthern Continent, and several places which may be serviceable unto\nthem, when ever time shall enlarge them unto such necessities.\n\n\n_And a new Drove of Tartars shall_ China _subdue._\n\nWhich is no strange thing if we consult the Histories of _China_, and\nsuccessive Inundations made by Tartarian Nations. For when the Invaders,\nin process of time, have degenerated into the effeminacy and softness of\nthe Chineses, then they themselves have suffered a new Tartarian\nConquest and Inundation. And this hath happened from time beyond our\nHistories: for, according to their account, the famous Wall of _China_,\nbuilt against the irruptions of the Tartars, was begun above a hundred\nyears before the Incarnation.\n\n_When_ America _shall cease to send forth its treasure,\nBut employ it at home for American Pleasure._\n\nThat is, When _America_ shall be better civilized, new policied and\ndivided between great Princes, it may come to pass that they will no\nlonger suffer their Treasure of Gold and Silver to be sent out to\nmaintain the Luxury of _Europe_ and other parts: but rather employ it to\ntheir own advantages, in great Exploits and Undertakings, magnificent\nStructures, Wars or Expeditions of their own.\n\n_When the new World shall the old invade._\n\nThat is, When _America_ shall be so well peopled, civilized and divided\ninto Kingdoms, they are like to have so little regard of their\nOriginals, as to acknowledge no subjection unto them: they may also have\na distinct commerce between themselves, or but independently with those\nof _Europe_, and may hostilely and pyratically assault them, even as the\nGreek and Roman Colonies after a long time dealt with their Original\nCountries.\n\n_When Men shall almost pass to_ Venice _by Land,\nNot in deep Waters but from Sand to Sand._\n\nThat is, When, in long process of time, the Silt and Sands shall so\nchoak and shallow the Sea in and about it. And this hath considerably\ncome to pass within these fourscore years; and is like to encrease from\nseveral causes, especially by the turning of the River _Brenta_, as the\nlearned _Castelli_ hath declared.\n\n_When_ Nova Zembla _shall be no stay\nUnto those who pass to or from_ Cathay.\n\nThat is, When ever that often sought for Northeast passage unto _China_\nand _Japan_ shall be discovered; the hindrance whereof was imputed to\n_Nova Zembla_; for this was conceived to be an excursion of Land\nshooting out directly, and so far Northward into the Sea that it\ndiscouraged from all Navigation about it. And therefore Adventurers took\nin at the Southern part at a strait by _Waygatz_ next the Tartarian\nShore: and, sailing forward they found that Sea frozen and full of Ice,\nand so gave over the attempt. But of late years, by the diligent enquiry\nof some Moscovites, a better discovery is made of these parts, and a Map\nor Chart made of them. Thereby _Nova Zembla_ is found to be no Island\nextending very far Northward; but, winding Eastward, it joineth to the\nTartarian Continent, and so makes a _Peninsula_: and the Sea between it\nwhich they entred at _Waygatz_, is found to be but a large Bay, apt to\nbe frozen by reason of the great River of _Oby_, and other fresh Waters,\nentring into it: whereas the main Sea doth not freez upon the North of\n_Zembla_ except near unto Shores; so that if the Moscovites were\nskilfull Navigatours they might, with less difficulties, discover this\npassage unto _China_: but however the English, Dutch and Danes are now\nlike to attempt it again.\n\n * * * * *\n\nBut this is Conjecture, and not Prophecy: and so (I know) you will take\nit. I am,\n\n _Sir_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n MUSAEUM CLAUSUM\n\n or\n\n Bibliotheca Abscondita:\n\n Containing some remarkable Books, Antiquities,\n Pictures and Rarities of several kinds, scarce\n or never seen by any man now living.\n\n TRACT XIII\n\n\nSIR,\n\nWith many thanks I return that noble Catalogue of Books, Rarities and\nSingularities of Art and Nature, which you were pleased to communicate\nunto me. There are many Collections of this kind in _Europe_. And,\nbesides the printed accounts of the _Musaeum Aldrovandi_,\n_Calceolarianum_, _Moscardi_, _Wormianum_; the _Casa Abbellitta_ at\n_Loretto_, and _Threasor_ of S. _Dennis_, the _Repository_ of the Duke\nof _Tuscany_, that of the Duke of _Saxony_, and that noble one of the\nEmperour at _Vienna_, and many more are of singular note. Of what in\nthis kind I have by me I shall make no repetition, and you having\nalready had a view thereof, I am bold to present you with the List of a\nCollection, which I may justly say you have not seen before.\n\n\nThe Title is, as above,\n\n_Musaeum Clausum_, or _Bibliotheca Abscondita: containing some remarkable\nBooks, Antiquities, Pictures and Rarities of several kinds, scarce or\nnever seen by any man now living_.\n\n\n1. Rare and generally unknown Books.\n\nA poem of _Ovidius Naso_, written in the Getick Language,[282] during\nhis exile at _Tomos_, found wrapt up in Wax at _Sabaria_, on the\nFrontiers of _Hungary_, where there remains a tradition that he died, in\nhis return towards _Rome_ from _Tomos_, either after his pardon or the\ndeath of _Augustus_.\n\n [282] _Ah pudet et scripsi Getico sermone Libellum._\n\n2. The Letter of _Quintus Cicero_, which he wrote in answer to that of\nhis Brother _Marcus Tullius_, desiring of him an account of _Britany_,\nwherein are described the Country, State and Manners of the Britains of\nthat Age.\n\n\n3. An Ancient British Herbal, or description of divers Plants of this\nIsland, observed by that famous Physician _Scribonius Largus_, when he\nattended the Emperour _Claudius_ in his expedition into _Britany_.\n\n\n4. An exact account of the Life and Death of _Avicenna_ confirming the\naccount of his Death by taking nine Clysters together in a fit of the\nColick; and not as _Marius_ the Italian Poet delivereth, by being broken\nupon the Wheel; left with other Pieces by _Benjamin Tudelensis_, as he\ntravelled from _Saragossa_ to _Jerusalem_, in the hands of _Abraham\nJarchi_, a famous Rabbi of _Lunet_ near _Montpelier_, and found in a\nVault when the Walls of that City were demolished by _Lewis_ the\nThirteenth.\n\n\n5. A punctual relation of _Hannibal's_ march out of _Spain_ into\n_Italy_, and far more particular than that of _Livy_, where about he\npassed the River _Rhodanus_ or _Rhosne_; at what place he crossed the\n_Isura_ or _L'isere_; when he marched up toward the confluence of the\n_Sone_ and the _Rhone_, or the place where the City _Lyons_ was\nafterward built; how wisely he decided the difference between King\n_Brancus_ and his Brother, at what place he passed the _Alpes_, what\nVinegar he used, and where he obtained such quantity to break and\ncalcine the Rocks made hot with Fire.\n\n\n6. A learned Comment upon the _Periplus_ of _Hanno_ the Carthaginian, or\nhis Navigation upon the Western Coast of _Africa_, with the several\nplaces he landed at; what Colonies he settled, what Ships were scattered\nfrom his Fleet near the AEquinoctial Line, which were not afterward heard\nof, and which probably fell into the Trade Winds, and were carried over\ninto the Coast of _America_.\n\n\n7. A particular Narration of that famous Expedition of the English into\n_Barbary_ in the ninety fourth year of the _Hegira_, so shortly touched\nby _Leo Africanus_, whither called by the Goths they besieged, took and\nburnt the City of _Arzilla_ possessed by the Mahometans, and lately the\nseat of _Gayland_; with many other exploits delivered at large in\nArabick, lost in the Ship of Books and Rarities which the King of\n_Spain_ took from _Siddy Hamet_ King of _Fez_, whereof a great part were\ncarried into the _Escurial_, and conceived to be gathered out of the\nrelations of _Hibnu Nachu_, the best Historian of the African Affairs.\n\n\n8. A Fragment of _Pythaeas_ that ancient Traveller of _Marseille_; which\nwe suspect not to be spurious, because, in the description of the\nNorthern Countries, we find that passage of _Pythaeas_ mentioned by\n_Strabo_, that all the Air beyond _Thule_ is thick, condensed and\ngellied, looking just like Sea Lungs.\n\n\n9. A _Sub Marine_ Herbal, describing the several Vegetables found on the\nRocks, Hills, Valleys, Meadows at the bottom of the Sea, with many sorts\nof _Alga_, _Fucus_, _Quercus_, _Polygonum_, _Gramens_ and others not yet\ndescribed.\n\n\n10. Some Manuscripts and Rarities brought from the Libraries of\n_AEthiopia_, by _Zaga Zaba_, and afterward transported to _Rome_, and\nscattered by the Souldiers of the Duke of _Bourbon_, when they\nbarbarously sacked that City.\n\n\n11. Some Pieces of _Julius Scaliger_, which he complains to have been\nstoln from him, sold to the Bishop of _Mende_ in _Languedock_, and\nafterward taken away and sold in the Civil Wars under the Duke of\n_Rohan_.\n\n\n12. A Comment of _Dioscorides_ upon _Hyppocrates_, procured from\n_Constantinople_ by _Amatus Lusitanus_, and left in the hands of a Jew\nof _Ragusa_.\n\n\n13. _Marcus Tullius Cicero_ his Geography; as also a part of that\nmagnified Piece of his _De Republica_, very little answering the great\nexpectation of it, and short of Pieces under the same name by _Bodinus_\nand _Tholosanus_.\n\n\n14. King _Mithridates_ his _Oneirocritica_.\n\nAristotle de _Precationibus_.\n\nDemocritus _de his quae fiunt apud Orcum, et Oceani circumnavigatio_.\n\nEpicurus _de Pietate_.\n\nA Tragedy of _Thyestes_, and another of _Medea_, writ by _Diogenes_ the\nCynick.\n\nKing _Alfred_ upon _Aristotle de Plantis_.\n\n_Seneca's_ Epistles to S. _Paul_.\n\nKing _Solomon de Umbris Idaearum_, which _Chicus Asculaenus_, in his\nComment upon _Johannes de Sacrobosco_, would make us believe he saw in\nthe Library of the Duke of _Bavaria_.\n\n\n15. Artemidori _Oneirocritici Geographia_.\n\nPythagoras _de Mari Rubro_.\n\nThe Works of _Confutius_ the famous Philosopher of _China_, translated\ninto Spanish.\n\n\n16. _Josephus_ in Hebrew, written by himself.\n\n\n17. The Commentaries of _Sylla_ the Dictatour.\n\n\n18. A Commentary of _Galen_ upon the Plague of _Athens_ described by\n_Thucydides_.\n\n\n19. _Duo Caesaris Anti-Catones_, or the two notable Books writ by _Julius\nCaesar_ against _Cato_; mentioned by _Livy_, _Salustius_ and _Juvenal_;\nwhich the Cardinal of _Liege_ told _Ludovicus Vives_ were in an old\nLibrary of that City.\n\n_Mazhapha Einok_, or, the Prophecy of _Enoch_, which _AEgidius\nLochiensis_, a learned Eastern Traveller, told _Peireschius_ that he had\nfound in an old Library at _Alexandria_ containing eight thousand\nVolumes.\n\n\n20. A Collection of Hebrew Epistles, which passed between the two\nlearned Women of our age _Maria Molinea_ of _Sedan_, and _Maria\nSchurman_ of _Utrecht_.\n\nA wondrous Collection of some Writings of _Ludovica Saracenica_,\nDaughter of _Philibertus Saracenicus_ a Physician of _Lyons_, who at\neight years of age had made a good progress in the Hebrew, Greek and\nLatin Tongues.\n\n\n2. Rarities in Pictures.\n\n\n1. A picture of the three remarkable Steeples or Towers in _Europe_\nbuilt purposely awry and so as they seem falling. _Torre Pisana_ at\n_Pisa_, _Torre Garisenda_ in _Bononia_, and that other in the City of\n_Colein_.\n\n\n2. A Draught of all sorts of Sistrums, Crotaloes, Cymbals, Tympans,\n_etc._ in use among the Ancients.\n\n\n3. Large _Submarine_ Pieces, well delineating the bottom of the\nMediterranean Sea, the Prerie or large Sea-meadow upon the Coast of\n_Provence_, the Coral Fishing, the gathering of Sponges, the Mountains,\nValleys and Desarts, the Subterraneous Vents and Passages at the bottom\nof that Sea. Together with a lively Draught of _Cola Pesce_, or the\nfamous Sicilian Swimmer, diving into the _Voragos_ and broken Rocks by\n_Charybdis_, to fetch up the Golden Cup, which _Frederick_, King of\n_Sicily_, had purposely thrown into that Sea.\n\n\n4. A Moon Piece, describing that notable Battel between _Axalla_,\nGeneral of _Tamerlane_, and _Camares_ the Persian, fought by the light\nof the Moon.\n\n\n5. Another remarkable Fight of _Inghimmi_ the Florentine with the\nTurkish Galleys by Moon-light, who being for three hours grappled with\nthe _Basha_ Galley, concluded with a signal Victory.\n\n\n6. A delineation of the great Fair of _Almachara_ in _Arabia_, which, to\navoid the great heat of the Sun, is kept in the Night, and by the light\nof the Moon.\n\n\n7. A Snow Piece, of Land and Trees covered with Snow and Ice, and\nMountains of Ice floating in the Sea, with Bears, Seals, Foxes, and\nvariety of rare Fowls upon them.\n\n\n8. An Ice Piece describing the notable Battel between the Jaziges and\nthe Romans, fought upon the frozen _Danubius_, the Romans settling one\nfoot upon their Targets to hinder them from slipping, their fighting\nwith the Jaziges when they were fallen, and their advantages therein by\ntheir art in volutation and rolling contention or wrastling, according\nto the description of _Dion_.\n\n\n9. _Socia_, or a Draught of three persons notably resembling each other.\nOf King _Henry_ the Fourth of _France_, and a Miller of _Languedock_; of\n_Sforza_ Duke of _Milain_ and a Souldier; of _Malatesta_ Duke of\n_Rimini_ and _Marchesinus_ the Jester.\n\n\n10. A Picture of the great Fire which happened at _Constantinople_ in\nthe Reign of _Sultan Achmet_. The Janizaries in the mean time plundring\nthe best Houses, _Nassa Bassa_ the Vizier riding about with a Cimetre in\none hand and a Janizary's Head in the other to deter them; and the\nPriests attempting to quench the Fire, by Pieces of _Mahomet's_ Shirt\ndipped in holy Water and thrown into it.\n\n\n11. A Night Piece of the dismal Supper and strange Entertain of the\nSenatours by _Domitian_, according to the description of _Dion_.\n\n\n12. A Vestal Sinner in the Cave with a Table and a Candle.\n\n\n13. An Elephant dancing upon the Ropes with a _Negro_ Dwarf upon his\nBack.\n\n\n14. Another describing the mighty Stone falling from the Clouds into\n_AEgospotamos_ or the Goats River in _Greece_, which Antiquity could\nbelieve that _Anaxagoras_ was able to foretell half a year before.\n\n\n15. Three noble Pieces; of _Vercingetorix_ the Gaul submitting his\nperson unto _Julius Caesar_; of _Tigranes_ King of _Armenia_ humbly\npresenting himself unto _Pompey_; and of _Tamerlane_ ascending his\nHorse from the Neck of _Bajazet_.\n\n\n16. Draughts of three passionate Looks; of _Thyestes_ when he was told\nat the Table that he had eaten a piece of his own Son; of _Bajazet_ when\nhe went into the Iron Cage; of _Oedipus_ when he first came to know that\nhe had killed his Father, and married his own Mother.\n\n\n17. Of the Cymbrian Mother in _Plutarch_ who, after the overthrow by\n_Marius_, hanged her self and her two Children at her feet.\n\n\n18. Some Pieces delineating singular inhumanities in Tortures. The\n_Scaphismus_ of the Persians. The living truncation of the Turks. The\nhanging Sport at the Feasts of the Thracians. The exact method of\nflaying men alive, beginning between the Shoulders, according to the\ndescription of _Thomas Minadoi_, in his Persian War. Together with the\nstudied tortures of the French Traitours at _Pappa_ in _Hungaria_: as\nalso the wild and enormous torment invented by _Tiberius_, designed\naccording unto the description of _Suetonius_. _Excogitaverunt inter\ngenera cruciatus, ut larga meri potione per fallaciam oneratos repente\nveretris deligatis fidicularum simul urinaeque tormento distenderet._\n\n\n19. A Picture describing how _Hannibal_ forced his passage over the\nRiver _Rhosne_ with his Elephants, Baggage and mixed Army; with the Army\nof the Gauls opposing him on the contrary Shore, and _Hanno_ passing\nover with his Horse much above to fall upon the Rere of the Gauls.\n\n\n20. A neat Piece describing the Sack of _Fundi_ by the Fleet and\nSouldiers of _Barbarossa_ the Turkish Admiral, the confusion of the\npeople and their flying up to the Mountains, and _Julia Gonzaga_ the\nbeauty of _Italy_ flying away with her Ladies half naked on Horseback\nover the Hills.\n\n\n21. A noble Head of _Franciscus Gonzaga_, who, being imprisoned for\nTreason, grew grey in one night, with this Inscription,\n\n _O nox quam longa est quae facit una senem._\n\n22. A large Picture describing the Siege of _Vienna_ by _Solyman_ the\nMagnificent, and at the same time the Siege of _Florence_ by the\nEmperour _Charles_ the Fifth and Pope _Clement_ the Seventh, with this\nSubscription,\n\n _Tum vacui capitis populum_ Phaeaca _putares?_\n\n\n23. An exquisite Piece properly delineating the first course of\n_Metellus_ his Pontificial Supper, according to the description of\n_Macrobius_; together with a Dish of _Pisces Fossiles_, garnished about\nwith the little Eels taken out of the backs of Cods and Perches; as also\nwith the Shell Fishes found in Stones about _Ancona_.\n\n\n24. A Picture of the noble Entertain and Feast of the Duke of _Chausue_\nat the Treaty of _Collen_, 1673, when in a very large Room, with all the\nWindows open, and at a very large Table he sate himself, with many great\npersons and Ladies; next about the Table stood a row of Waiters, then a\nrow of Musicians, then a row of Musketiers.\n\n\n25. _Miltiades_, who overthrew the Persians at the Battel of _Marathon_\nand delivered _Greece_, looking out of a Prison Grate in _Athens_,\nwherein he died, with this Inscription,\n\n _Non hoc terribiles Cymbri non Britones unquam,\n Sauromataeve truces aut immanes Agathyrsi._\n\n\n26. A fair English Lady drawn _Al Negro_, or in the AEthiopian hue\nexcelling the original White and Red Beauty, with this Subscription,\n\n _Sed quondam volo nocte Nigriorem._\n\n27. Pieces and Draughts in _Caricatura_, of Princes, Cardinals and\nfamous men; wherein, among others, the Painter hath singularly hit the\nsignatures of a Lion and a Fox in the face of Pope _Leo_ the Tenth.\n\n\n28. Some Pieces _A la ventura_, or Rare Chance Pieces, either drawn at\nrandom, and happening to be like some person, or drawn for some and\nhappening to be more like another; while the Face, mistaken by the\nPainter, proves a tolerable Picture of one he never saw.\n\n\n29. A Draught of famous Dwarfs with this Inscription,\n\n _Nos facimus Bruti puerum nos Lagona vivum._\n\n\n30. An exact and proper delineation of all sorts of Dogs upon occasion\nof the practice of _Sultan Achmet_; who in a great Plague at\n_Constantinople_ transported all the Dogs therein unto _Pera_, and from\nthence into a little Island, where they perished at last by Famine: as\nalso the manner of the Priests curing of mad Dogs by burning them in the\nforehead with Saint _Bellin's Key_.\n\n\n31. A noble Picture of _Thorismund_ King of the Goths as he was killed\nin his Palace at _Tholouze_, who being let bloud by a Surgeon, while he\nwas bleeding, a stander by took the advantage to stab him.\n\n\n32. A Picture of rare Fruits with this Inscription,\n\n _Credere quae possis surrepta sororibus Afris._\n\n\n33. An handsome Piece of Deformity expressed in a notable hard Face,\nwith this Inscription,\n\n ----_Ora\n Julius in Satyris qualia Rufus habet._\n\n\n34. A noble Picture of the famous Duel between _Paul Manessi_ and\n_Caragusa_ the Turk in the time of _Amurath_ the Second; the Turkish\nArmy and that of _Scanderbeg_ looking on; wherein _Manessi_ slew the\nTurk, cut off his Head and carried away the Spoils of his Body.\n\n\n3. Antiquities and Rarities of several sorts.\n\n\n1. Certain ancient Medals with Greek and Roman Inscriptions, found about\n_Crim Tartary_; conceived to be left in those parts by the Souldiers of\n_Mithridates_, when overcome by _Pompey_, he marched round about the\nNorth of the _Euxine_ to come about into _Thracia_.\n\n\n2. Some ancient Ivory and Copper Crosses found with many others in\n_China_; conceived to have been brought and left there by the Greek\nSouldiers who served under _Tamerlane_ in his Expedition and Conquest of\nthat Country.\n\n\n3. Stones of strange and illegible Inscriptions, found about the great\nruines which _Vincent le Blanc_ describeth about _Cephala_ in _Africa_,\nwhere he opinion'd that the Hebrews raised some Buildings of old, and\nthat _Solomon_ brought from thereabout a good part of his Gold.\n\n\n4. Some handsome Engraveries and Medals, of _Justinus_ and\n_Justinianus_, found in the custody of a Bannyan in the remote parts of\n_India_, conjectured to have been left there by the Friers mentioned in\n_Procopius_, who travelled those parts in the reign of _Justinianus_,\nand brought back into _Europe_ the discovery of Silk and Silk Worms.\n\n\n5. An original Medal of _Petrus Aretinus_, who was called _Flagellum\nPrincipum_, wherein he made his own Figure on the Obverse part with this\nInscription,\n\n _Il Divino Aretino._\n\nOn the Reverse sitting on a Throne, and at his Feet Ambassadours of\nKings and Princes bringing presents unto him, with this Inscription,\n\n _I Principi tributati da i Popoli tributano il Servitor loro._\n\n\n6. _Mummia Tholosana_; or, The complete Head and Body of Father\n_Crispin_, buried long ago in the Vault of the Cordeliers at _Tholouse_,\nwhere the Skins of the dead so drie and parch up without corrupting that\ntheir persons may be known very long after, with this Inscription,\n\n _Ecce iterum Crispinus._\n\n\n7. A noble _Quandros_ or Stone taken out of a Vulture's Head.\n\n\n8. A large _Ostridges_ Egg, whereon is neatly and fully wrought that\nfamous Battel of _Alcazar_, in which three Kings lost their lives.\n\n\n9. An _Etiudros Alberti_ or Stone that is apt to be always moist:\nusefull unto drie tempers, and to be held in the hand in Fevers instead\nof Crystal, Eggs, Limmons, Cucumbers.\n\n\n10. A small Viol of Water taken out of the Stones therefore called\n_Enhydri_, which naturally include a little Water in them, in like\nmanner as the _AEtites_ or _Aegle_ Stone doth another Stone.\n\n\n11. A neat painted and gilded Cup made out of the _Confiti di Tivoli_\nand formed up with powder'd Egg-shells; as _Nero_ is conceived to have\nmade his _Piscina admirabilis_, singular against Fluxes to drink often\ntherein.\n\n\n12. The Skin of a Snake bred out of the Spinal Marrow of a Man.\n\n\n13. Vegetable Horns mentioned by _Linschoten_, which set in the ground\ngrow up like Plants about _Goa_.\n\n\n14. An extract of the Inck of Cuttle Fishes reviving the old remedy of\n_Hippocrates_ in Hysterical Passions.\n\n\n15. Spirits and Salt of _Sargasso_ made in the Western Ocean covered\nwith that Vegetable; excellent against the Scurvy.\n\n\n16. An extract of _Cachunde_ or _Liberans_ that famous and highly\nmagnified Composition in the _East Indies_ against Melancholy.\n\n\n17. _Diarhizon mirificum_; or an unparallel'd Composition of the most\neffectual and wonderfull Roots in Nature.\n\n Rx _Rad. Butuae Cuamensis.\n Rad. Moniche Cuamensis.\n Rad. Mongus Bazainensis.\n Rad. Casei Baizanensis.\n Rad. Columbae Mozambiguensis.\n Gim Sem Sinicae.\n Fo Lim lac Tigridis dictae.\n Fo seu.\n Cort. Rad. Soldae.\n Rad. Ligni Solorani.\n Rad. Malacensis madrededios dictae an._ [-3]ij.\n\n_M. fiat pulvis, qui cum gelatina Cornu cervi Moschati Chinensis\nformetur in massas oviformes._\n\n\n18. A transcendent Perfume made of the richest Odorates of both the\n_Indies_, kept in a Box made of the Muschie Stone of _Niarienburg_, with\nthis Inscription,\n\n ----_Deos rogato\n Totum ut te faciant, Fabulle, Nasum._\n\n\n19. A _Clepselaea_, or Oil Hour-glass, as the Ancients used those of\nWater.\n\n\n20. A Ring found in a Fishes Belly taken about _Gorro_; conceived to be\nthe same wherewith the Duke of _Venice_ had wedded the Sea.\n\n\n21. A neat Crucifix made out of the cross Bone of a Frogs Head.\n\n\n22. A large Agath containing a various and careless Figure, which looked\nupon by a Cylinder representeth a perfect Centaur. By some such\nadvantages King _Pyrrhus_ might find out _Apollo_ and the nine Muses in\nthose Agaths of his whereof _Pliny_ maketh mention.\n\n\n23. _Batrachomyomachia_, or the Homerican Battel between Frogs and Mice,\nneatly described upon the Chizel Bone of a large Pike's Jaw.\n\n\n24. _Pyxis Pandorae_, or a Box which held the _Unguentum Pestiferum_,\nwhich by anointing the Garments of several persons begat the great and\nhorrible Plague of _Milan_.\n\n\n25. A Glass of Spirits made of AEthereal Salt, Hermetically sealed up,\nkept continually in Quick-silver; of so volatile a nature that it will\nscarce endure the Light, and therefore onely to be shown in Winter, or\nby the light of a Carbuncle, or Bononian Stone.\n\n * * * * *\n\nHe who knows where all this Treasure now is, is a great _Apollo_. I'm\nsure I am not He. However, I am,\n\n _Sir, Yours_, etc.\n\n\n\n\n A\n LETTER\n to a\n FRIEND\n upon occasion of the\n DEATH\n OF HIS\n Intimate Friend\n 1690\n\n\n\n\n A LETTER TO A FRIEND,\n Upon Occasion of the\n Death of his Intimate Friend.\n\n\nGive me leave to wonder that News of this Nature should have such heavy\nWings that you should hear so little concerning your dearest Friend, and\nthat I must make that unwilling Repetition to tell you, _Ad portam\nrigidos calces extendit_, that he is Dead and Buried, and by this time\nno Puny among the mighty Nations of the Dead; for tho' he left this\nWorld not very many Days past, yet every Hour you know largely addeth\nunto that dark Society; and considering the incessant Mortality of\nMankind, you cannot conceive there dieth in the whole Earth so few as a\nthousand an Hour.\n\nAltho' at this distance you had no early Account or Particular of his\nDeath; yet your Affection may cease to wonder that you had not some\nsecret Sense or Intimation thereof by Dreams, thoughtful Whisperings,\nMercurisms, Airy Nuncio's, or sympathetical Insinuations, which many\nseem to have had at the Death of their dearest Friends: for since we\nfind in that famous Story, that Spirits themselves were fain to tell\ntheir Fellows at a distance, that the great _Antonio_ was dead; we have\na sufficient Excuse for our Ignorance in such Particulars, and must rest\ncontent with the common Road, and _Appian_ way of Knowledge by\nInformation. Tho' the uncertainty of the End of this World hath\nconfounded all Human Predictions; yet they who shall live to see the Sun\nand Moon darkned, and the Stars to fall from Heaven, will hardly be\ndeceiv'd in the Advent of the last Day; and therefore strange it is,\nthat the common Fallacy of consumptive Persons, who feel not themselves\ndying, and therefore still hope to live, should also reach their Friends\nin perfect Health and Judgment. That you should be so little acquainted\nwith _Plautus's_ sick Complexion, or that almost an _Hippocratical_ Face\nshould not alarum you to higher fears, or rather despair of his\nContinuation in such an emaciated State, wherein medical Predictions\nfail not, as sometimes in acute Diseases, and wherein 'tis as dangerous\nto be sentenc'd by a Physician as a Judge.\n\nUpon my first Visit I was bold to tell them who had not let fall all\nHopes of his Recovery, that in my sad Opinion he was not like to behold\na Grashopper, much less to pluck another Fig; and in no long time after\nseem'd to discover that odd mortal Symptom in him not mention'd by\n_Hippocrates_, that is, to lose his own Face, and look like some of his\nnear Relations; for he maintain'd not his proper Countenance, but look'd\nlike his Uncle, the Lines of whose Face lay deep and invisible in his\nhealthful Visage before: For as from our beginning we run through\nVariety of Looks, before we come to consistent and setled Faces; so\nbefore our End, by sick and languishing alterations, we put on new\nVisages: and in our Retreat to Earth, may fall upon such Looks which\nfrom Community of seminal Originals were before latent in us.\n\nHe was fruitlesly put in hope of advantage by change of Air, and\nimbibing the pure Aerial Nitre of these Parts; and therefore being so\nfar spent, he quickly found _Sardinia_ in _Tivoli_,[283] and the most\nhealthful Air of little effect, where Death had set her broad Arrow; for\nhe lived not unto the middle of _May_, and confirmed the Observation of\n_Hippocrates_[284] of that mortal time of the Year when the Leaves of\nthe Fig-tree resemble a Daw's Claw. He is happily seated who lives in\nPlaces whose Air, Earth and Water, promote not the Infirmities of his\nweaker Parts, or is early removed into Regions that correct them. He\nthat is tabidly inclin'd, were unwise to pass his Days in _Portugal_:\nCholical Persons will find little Comfort in _Austria_ or _Vienna_: He\nthat is weak-legg'd must not be in Love with _Rome_, nor an infirm Head\nwith _Venice_ or _Paris_. Death hath not only particular Stars in\nHeaven, but malevolent Places on Earth, which single out our\nInfirmities, and strike at our weaker Parts; in which Concern, passager\nand migrant Birds have the great Advantages; who are naturally\nconstituted for distant Habitations, whom no Seas nor Places limit, but\nin their appointed Seasons will visit us from _Greenland_ and Mount\n_Atlas_, and as some think, even from the _Antipodes_.[285]\n\n [283] _Cum mors venerit, in medio Tibure Sardinia est._\n\n [284] In the King's Forests they set the Figure of a broad Arrow upon\n Trees that are to be cut down. _Hippoc. Epidem._\n\n [285] Bellonius _de Avibus_.\n\nTho' we could not have his Life, yet we missed not our desires in his\nsoft Departure, which was scarce an Expiration; and his End not unlike\nhis Beginning, when the salient Point scarce affords a sensible Motion,\nand his Departure so like unto Sleep, that he scarce needed the civil\nCeremony of closing his Eyes; contrary unto the common way wherein Death\ndraws up, Sleep let fall the Eye-lids. With what Strift and Pains we\ncame into the World we know not; but 'tis commonly no easie matter to\nget out of it: yet if it could be made out, that such who have easie\nNativities have commonly hard Deaths, and contrarily; his Departure was\nso easie, that we might justly suspect his Birth was of another nature,\nand that some _Juno_ sat cross-legg'd at his Nativity.\n\nBesides his soft Death, the incurable state of his Disease might\nsomewhat extenuate your Sorrow, who know that Monsters[286] but seldom\nhappen, Miracles more rarely, in Physick. _Angelus Victorius_[287] gives\na serious Account of a Consumptive, Hectical, Pthysical Woman, who was\nsuddenly cured by the Intercession of _Ignatius_. We read not of any in\nScripture who in this case applied unto our Saviour, tho' some may be\ncontain'd in that large Expression, that he went about _Galilee_ healing\nall manner of Sickness, and all manner of Diseases. Amulets, Spells,\nSigils and Incantations, practised in other Diseases, are seldom\npretended in this; and we find no Sigil in the Archidoxis of\n_Paracelsus_ to cure an extreme Consumption or _Marasmus_, which if\nother Diseases fail, will put a period unto long Livers, and at last\nmakes Dust of all. And therefore the _Stoicks_ could not but think that\nthe fiery Principle would wear out all the rest, and at last make an end\nof the World, which notwithstanding without such a lingring period the\nCreator may effect at his Pleasure: and to make an end of all things on\nEarth, and our Planetical System of the World, he need but put out the\nSun.\n\n [286] _Monstra contingunt in Medicina Hippoc._\n\n [287] Strange and rare Escapes there happen sometimes in Physick.\n _Angeli Victorii Consultationes._ Matth. iv. 25.\n\nI was not so curious to entitle the Stars unto any Concern of his Death,\nyet could not but take notice that he died when the Moon was in motion\nfrom the Meridian; at which time, an old _Italian_ long ago would\nperswade me that the greatest Part of Men died: but herein I confess I\ncould never satisfie my Curiosity; altho' from the time of Tides in\nPlaces upon or near the Sea, there may be considerable Deductions; and\n_Pliny_[288] hath an odd and remarkable Passage concerning the Death of\nMen and Animals upon the Recess or Ebb of the Sea. However, certain it\nis he died in the dead and deep part of the Night, when _Nox_ might be\nmost apprehensibly said to be the Daughter of _Chaos_, the Mother of\nSleep and Death, according to old Genealogy; and so went out of this\nWorld about that hour when our blessed Saviour entred it, and about what\ntime many conceive he will return again unto it. _Cardan_[289] hath a\npeculiar and no hard Observation from a Man's Hand to know whether he\nwas born in the Day or Night, which I confess holdeth in my own. And\n_Scaliger_ to that purpose hath another from the tip of the Ear: Most\nMen are begotten in the Night, Animals in the Day; but whether more\nPersons have been born in the Night or the Day, were a Curiosity\nundecidable, tho' more have perished by violent Deaths in the Day; yet\nin natural Dissolutions both Times may hold an Indifferency, at least\nbut contingent Inequality. The whole Course of Time runs out in the\nNativity and Death of Things; which whether they happen by Succession or\nCoincidence, are best computed by the natural not artificial Day.\n\n [288] _Aristoteles nullum animal nisi aestu recedente expirare affirmat:\n observatum id multum in Gallico Oceano et duntaxat in Homine\n comertum_, lib. 2. cap. 101.\n\n [289] _Auris pars pendula Lobus dicitur, non omnibus ea pars est\n auribus; non enim iis qui noctu nati sunt, sed qui interdiu,\n maxima ex parte. Com. in Aristot. de Animal._ lib. 1.\n\nThat _Charles_ the Vth was crown'd upon the Day of his Nativity, it\nbeing in his own Power so to order it, makes no singular Animadversion;\nbut that he should also take King _Francis_ Prisoner upon that Day, was\nan unexpected Coincidence, which made the same remarkable. _Antipater_\nwho had an Anniversary Fever every Year upon his Birth-day, needed no\nAstrological Revolution to know what Day he should dye on. When the\nfixed Stars have made a Revolution unto the Points from whence they\nfirst set out, some of the Ancients thought the World would have an end;\nwhich was a kind of dying upon the Day of its Nativity. Now the Disease\nprevailing and swiftly advancing about the time of his Nativity, some\nwere of Opinion that he would leave the World on the Day he entred into\nit: but this being a lingring Disease, and creeping softly on, nothing\ncritical was found or expected, and he died not before fifteen Days\nafter. Nothing is more common with Infants than to die on the Day of\ntheir Nativity, to behold the worldly Hours, and but the Fractions\nthereof; and even to perish before their Nativity in the hidden World of\nthe Womb, and before their good Angel is conceived to undertake them.\nBut in Persons who out-live many Years, and when there are no less than\nthree hundred sixty five days to determine their Lives in every Year;\nthat the first day should make the last, that the Tail of the Snake\nshould return into its Mouth precisely at that time, and they should\nwind up upon the day of their Nativity,[290] is indeed a remarkable\nCoincidence, which, tho' Astrology hath taken witty Pains to salve, yet\nhath it been very wary in making Predictions of it.\n\n[290] According to the _Egyptian_ Hieroglyphick.\n\nIn this consumptive Condition and remarkable Extenuation he came to be\nalmost half himself, and left a great Part behind him which he carried\nnot to the Grave. And tho' that Story of Duke _John Ernestus\nMansfield_[291] be not so easily swallow'd, that at his Death his Heart\nwas found not to be so big as a Nut; yet if the Bones of a good Skeleton\nweigh little more than twenty Pounds, his Inwards and Flesh remaining\ncould make no Bouffage, but a light Bit for the Grave. I never more\nlively beheld the starved Characters of _Dante_[292] in any living Face;\nan _Aruspex_ might have read a Lecture upon him without Exenteration,\nhis Flesh being so consumed, that he might, in a manner, have discerned\nhis Bowels without opening of him: so that to be carried _sexta\ncervice_, to the Grave, was but a civil Unnecessity; and the Complements\nof the Coffin might out-weigh the Subject of it.\n\n [291] _Turkish_ History.\n\n [292] In the Poet _Dante_ his Discription.\n\n_Omnibonus Ferrarius_[293] in mortal Dysenteries of Children looks for\na Spot behind the Ear; in consumptive Diseases some eye the Complexion\nof Moles; _Cardan_ eagerly views the Nails, some the Lines of the Hand,\nthe Thenar or Muscle of the Thumb; some are so curious as to observe the\ndepth of the Throat-pit, how the Proportion varieth of the Small of the\nLegs unto the Calf, or the compass of the Neck unto the Circumference of\nthe Head: but all these, with many more, were so drown'd in a mortal\nVisage, and last Face of _Hippocrates_, that a weak Physiognomist might\nsay at first Eye, This was a Face of Earth, and that _Morta_[294] had\nset her hard Seal upon his Temples, easily perceiving what\n_Caricatura_[295] Draughts Death makes upon pined Faces, and unto what\nan unknown degree a Man may live backward.\n\n [293] _De Morbis Puerorum._\n\n [294] _Morta_, the Deity of Death or Fate.\n\n [295] When Men's Faces are drawn with Resemblance to some other Animals,\n the _Italians_ call it, to be drawn in _Caricatura_.\n\nTho' the Beard be only made a Distinction of Sex, and Sign of masculine\nHeat by _Ulmus_, yet the Precocity and early Growth thereof in him, was\nnot to be liked in reference unto long Life. _Lewis_, that virtuous but\nunfortunate King of _Hungary_, who lost his Life at the Battle of\n_Mohacz_, was said to be born without a Skin, to have bearded at\nfifteen,[296] and to have shewn some grey Hairs about twenty; from\nwhence the Diviners conjectur'd, that he would be spoiled of his\nKingdom, and have but a short Life: But Hairs make fallible\nPredictions, and many Temples early grey have out-liv'd the Psalmist's\nPeriod.[297] Hairs which have most amused me have not been in the Face\nor Head, but on the Back, and not in Men but Children, as I long ago\nobserved in that Endemial Distemper of little Children in _Languedock_,\ncall'd the _Morgellons_,[298] wherein they critically break out with\nharsh Hairs on their Backs, which takes off the unquiet Symptoms of the\nDisease, and delivers them from Coughs and Convulsions.\n\n [296] _Ulmus de usu barbae humanae._\n\n [297] The Life of a Man is threescore and ten.\n\n [298] See _Picotus de Rheumatismo_.\n\nThe _Egyptian_ Mummies that I have seen, have had their Mouths open, and\nsomewhat gaping, which affordeth a good Opportunity to view and observe\ntheir Teeth, wherein 'tis not easie to find any wanting or decay'd; and\ntherefore in _Egypt_, where one Man practised but one Operation, or the\nDiseases but of single Parts, it must needs be a barren Profession to\nconfine unto that of drawing of Teeth, and little better than to have\nbeen Tooth-drawer unto King _Pyrrhus_,[299] who had but two in his Head.\nHow the _Bannyans_ of _India_ maintain the Integrity of those Parts, I\nfind not particularly observed; who notwithstanding have an Advantage of\ntheir Preservation by abstaining from all Flesh, and employing their\nTeeth in such Food unto which they may seem at first framed, from their\nFigure and Conformation: but sharp and corroding Rheums had so early\nmouldred those Rocks and hardest parts of his Fabrick, that a Man might\nwell conceive that his Years were never like to double or twice tell\nover his Teeth.[300] Corruption had dealt more severely with them than\nsepulchral Fires and smart Flames with those of burnt Bodies of old; for\nin the burnt Fragments of Urnes which I have enquired into, altho' I\nseem to find few Incisors or Shearers, yet the Dog Teeth and Grinders do\nnotably resist those Fires.\n\n [299] His upper and lower Jaw being solid, and without distinct Rows of\n Teeth.\n\n [300] Twice tell over his Teeth, never live to threescore Years.\n\nIn the Years of his Childhood he had languish'd under the Disease of\nhis Country, the Rickets; after which notwithstanding many have been\nbecome strong and active Men; but whether any have attain'd unto very\ngreat Years, the Disease is scarce so old as to afford good Observation.\nWhether the Children of the _English_ Plantations be subject unto the\nsame Infirmity, may be worth the Observing. Whether Lameness and Halting\ndo still encrease among the Inhabitants of _Rovigno_ in _Istria_, I know\nnot; yet scarce twenty Years ago Monsieur _du Loyr_ observed, that a\nthird part of that People halted: but too certain it is, that the\nRickets encreaseth among us; the Small-Pox grows more pernicious than\nthe Great: the King's Purse knows that the King's Evil grows more\ncommon. _Quartan_ Agues are become no Strangers in _Ireland_; more\ncommon and mortal in _England_: and tho' the Ancients gave that\nDisease[301] very good Words, yet now that Bell makes no strange sound\nwhich rings out for the Effects thereof.\n\n [301] +Asphalestatos kai rheistos+, _securissima et facillima_.\n Hippoc. Pro Febre quartana raro sonat campana.\n\nSome think there were few Consumptions in the Old World, when Men lived\nmuch upon Milk; and that the ancient Inhabitants of this Island were\nless troubled with Coughs when they went naked, and slept in Caves and\nWoods, than Men now in Chambers and Feather-beds. _Plato_ will tell us,\nthat there was no such Disease as a Catarrh in _Homer's_ time, and that\nit was but new in _Greece_ in his Age. _Polydore Virgil_ delivereth\nthat Pleurisies were rare in _England_, who lived but in the Days of\n_Henry_ the Eighth. Some will allow no Diseases to be new, others think\nthat many old ones are ceased and that such which are esteem'd new, will\nhave but their time: However, the Mercy of God hath scatter'd the Great\nHeap of Diseases, and not loaded any one Country with all: some may be\nnew in one Country which have been old in another. New Discoveries of\nthe Earth discover new Diseases: for besides the common Swarm, there are\nendemial and local Infirmities proper unto certain Regions, which in the\nwhole Earth make no small Number: and if _Asia_, _Africa_, and _America_\nshould bring in their List, _Pandora's_ Box would swell, and there must\nbe a strange Pathology.\n\nMost Men expected to find a consumed Kell, empty and bladder-like Guts,\nlivid and marbled Lungs, and a wither'd _Pericardium_ in this exuccous\nCorps: but some seemed too much to wonder that two Lobes of his Lungs\nadher'd unto his Side; for the like I had often found in Bodies of no\nsuspected Consumptions or difficulty of Respiration. And the same more\noften happeneth in Men than other Animals; and some think in Women than\nin Men; but the most remarkable I have met with, was in a Man, after a\nCough of almost fifty Years, in whom all the Lobes adhered unto the\nPleura,[302] and each Lobe unto another; who having also been much\ntroubled with the Gout, brake the Rule of _Cardan_,[303] and died of the\nStone in the Bladder. _Aristotle_ makes a Query, Why some Animals\ncough, as Man; some not, as Oxen. If Coughing be taken as it consisteth\nof a natural and voluntary motion, including Expectoration and spitting\nout, it may be as proper unto Man as bleeding at the Nose; otherwise we\nfind that _Vegetius_ and rural Writers have not left so many Medicines\nin vain against the Coughs of Cattel; and Men who perish by Coughs die\nthe Death of Sheep, Cats and Lions: and tho' Birds have no Midriff, yet\nwe meet with divers Remedies in _Arrianus_ against the Coughs of Hawks.\nAnd tho' it might be thought that all Animals who have Lungs do cough;\nyet in cetaceous Fishes, who have large and strong Lungs, the same is\nnot observed; nor yet in oviparous Quadrupeds: and in the greatest\nthereof, the Crocodile, altho' we read much of their Tears, we find\nnothing of that Motion.\n\n [302] So _A. F._\n\n [303] _Cardan_ in his _Encomium Podagrae_ reckoneth this among the _Dona\n Podagrae_, that they are deliver'd thereby from the Phthysis and\n Stone in the Bladder.\n\nFrom the Thoughts of Sleep, when the Soul was conceived nearest unto\nDivinity, the Ancients erected an Art of Divination, wherein while they\ntoo widely expatiated in loose and inconsequent Conjectures,\n_Hippocrates_[304] wisely considered Dreams as they presaged Alterations\nin the Body, and so afforded hints toward the Preservation of Health,\nand prevention of Diseases; and therein was so serious as to advise\nAlteration of Diet, Exercise, Sweating, Bathing and Vomiting; and also\nso religious, as to order Prayers and Supplications unto respective\nDeities, in good Dreams unto _Sol_, _Jupiter coelestis_, _Jupiter\nopulentus_, _Minerva_, _Mercurius_ and _Apollo_; in bad unto _Tellus_\nand the Heroes.\n\n [304] _Hippoc. de Insomniis._\n\nAnd therefore I could not but take notice how his Female Friends were\nirrationally curious so strictly to examine his Dreams, and in this low\nState to hope for the Fantasms of Health. He was now past the healthful\nDreams of the Sun, Moon and Stars, in their Clarity and proper Courses.\n'Twas too late to dream of Flying, of Limpid Fountains, smooth Waters,\nwhite Vestments, and fruitful green Trees, which are the Visions of\nhealthful Sleeps, and at good Distance from the Grave.\n\nAnd they were also too deeply dejected that he should dream of his dead\nFriends, inconsequently divining, that he would not be long from them;\nfor strange it was not that he should sometimes dream of the dead, whose\nThoughts run always upon Death; beside, to dream of the dead, so they\nappear not in dark Habits, and take nothing away from us, in\n_Hippocrates_ his Sense was of good Signification: for we live by the\ndead, and every thing is or must be so before it becomes our\nNourishment. And _Cardan_, who dream'd that he discoursed with his dead\nFather in the Moon, made thereof no mortal Interpretation: and even to\ndream that we are dead, was no condemnable Fantasm in old\n_Oneirocriticism_, as having a Signification of Liberty, vacuity from\nCares, Exemption and Freedom from Troubles unknown unto the dead.\n\nSome Dreams I confess may admit of easie and feminine Exposition; he who\ndream'd that he could not see his right Shoulder, might easily fear to\nlose the Sight of his right Eye; he that before a Journey dream'd that\nhis Feet were cut off, had a plain Warning not to undertake his intended\nJourney. But why to dream of Lettuce should presage some ensuing\nDisease, why to eat Figs should signifie foolish Talk, why to eat Eggs\ngreat Trouble, and to dream of Blindness should be so highly commended,\naccording to the _Oneirocritical_ Verses of _Astrampsychus_ and\n_Nicephorus_, I shall leave unto your Divination.\n\nHe was willing to quit the World alone and altogether, leaving no\nEarnest behind him for Corruption or After-grave, having small content\nin that common Satisfaction to survive or live in another, but amply\nsatisfied that his Disease should die with himself, nor revive in a\nPosterity to puzzle Physick, and make sad _Memento's_ of their Parent\nhereditary. Leprosie awakes not sometimes before forty, the Gout and\nStone often later; but consumptive and tabid[305] Roots sprout more\nearly, and at the fairest make seventeen Years of our Life doubtful\nbefore that Age. They that enter the World with original Diseases as\nwell as Sin, have not only common Mortality but sick Traductions to\ndestroy them, make commonly short Courses, and live not at length but in\nFigures; so that a sound _Caesarean_[306] nativity may out-last a Natural\nBirth, and a Knife may sometimes make Way for a more lasting Fruit than\na Midwife; which makes so few Infants now able to endure the old Test of\nthe River,[307] and many to have feeble Children who could scarce have\nbeen married at _Sparta_, and those provident States who studied strong\nand healthful Generations; which happen but contingently in mere\n_pecuniary_ Matches, or Marriages made by the Candle, wherein\nnotwithstanding there is little redress to be hoped from an Astrologer\nor a Lawyer, and a good discerning Physician were like to prove the most\nsuccessful Counsellor.\n\n [305] _Tabes maxime contingunt ab anno decimo octavo ad trigesimum\n quintum_, Hippoc.\n\n [306] A sound Child cut out of the Body of the Mother.\n\n [307] _Natos ad flumina primum deserimus saevoque gelu duramus et undis._\n\n_Julius Scaliger_, who in a sleepless Fit of the Gout could make two\nhundred Verses in a Night, would have but five[308] plain Words upon his\nTomb. And this serious Person, tho' no _minor_ Wit, left the Poetry of\nhis Epitaph unto others; either unwilling to commend himself, or to be\njudg'd by a Distich, and perhaps considering how unhappy great Poets\nhave been in versifying their own Epitaphs: wherein _Petrarcha_,\n_Dante_, and _Ariosto_, have so unhappily failed, that if their Tombs\nshould outlast their Works, Posterity would find so little of _Apollo_\non them, as to mistake them for _Ciceronian_ Poets.\n\n [308] _Julii Caesaris Scaligeri, quod fuit._ Joseph. Scaliger in vita\n patris.\n\nIn this deliberate and creeping Progress unto the Grave, he was somewhat\ntoo young, and of too noble a Mind, to fall upon that stupid Symptom\nobservable in divers Persons near their Journey's End, and which may be\nreckoned among the mortal Symptoms of their last Disease; that is, to\nbecome more narrow minded, miserable and tenacious, unready to part with\nany thing, when they are ready to part with all, and afraid to want when\nthey have no Time to spend; mean while Physicians, who know that many\nare mad but in a single depraved Imagination, and one prevalent\nDecipiency; and that beside and out of such single Deliriums a Man may\nmeet with sober Actions and good Sense in _Bedlam_; cannot but smile to\nsee the Heirs and concern'd Relations, gratulating themselves in the\nsober Departure of their Friends; and tho' they behold such mad covetous\nPassages, content to think they die in good Understanding, and in their\nsober Senses.\n\nAvarice, which is not only Infidelity but Idolatry, either from covetous\nProgeny or questuary Education, had no Root in his Breast, who made good\nWorks the Expression of his Faith, and was big with Desires unto publick\nand lasting Charities; and surely where good Wishes and charitable\nIntentions exceed Abilities, Theorical Beneficency may be more than a\nDream. They build not Castles in the Air who would build Churches on\nEarth; and tho' they leave no such Structures here, may lay good\nFoundations in Heaven. In brief, his Life and Death were such, that I\ncould not blame them who wished the like, and almost to have been\nhimself; almost, I say; for tho' we may wish the prosperous\nAppurtenances of others, or to be an other in his happy Accidents; yet\nso intrinsecal is every Man unto himself, that some doubt may be made,\nwhether any would exchange his Being, or substantially become another\nMan.\n\nHe had wisely seen the World at home and abroad, and thereby observed\nunder what variety Men are deluded in the pursuit of that which is not\nhere to be found. And altho' he had no Opinion of reputed Felicities\nbelow, and apprehended Men widely out in the Estimate of such Happiness;\nyet his sober Contempt of the World wrought no _Democratism_ or\n_Cynicism_, no laughing or snarling at it, as well understanding there\nare not Felicities in this World to satisfy a serious Mind; and\ntherefore to soften the Stream of our Lives, we are fain to take in the\nreputed Contentations of this World, to unite with the Crowd in their\nBeatitudes, and to make ourselves happy by Consortion, Opinion, or\nCo-existimation: for strictly to separate from received and customary\nFelicities, and to confine unto the Rigor of Realities, were to contract\nthe Consolation of our Beings unto too uncomfortable Circumscriptions.\n\nNot to fear Death,[309] nor Desire it, was short of his Resolution: to\nbe dissolved, and be with Christ, was his dying Ditty. He conceived his\nThred long, in no long course of Years, and when he had scarce out-liv'd\nthe second Life of _Lazarus_;[310] esteeming it enough to approach the\nYears of his Saviour, who so order'd his own human State, as not to be\nold upon Earth.\n\n [309] _Summum nec metuas diem nec optes._\n\n [310] Who upon some Accounts, and Tradition, is said to have lived 30\n Years after he was raised by our Saviour. _Baronius._\n\nBut to be content with Death may be better than to desire it: a\nmiserable Life may make us wish for Death, but a virtuous one to rest in\nit; which is the Advantage of those resolved Christians, who looking on\nDeath not only as the Sting, but the Period and End of Sin, the Horizon\nand Isthmus between this Life and a better, and the Death of this World\nbut as Nativity of another, do contentedly submit unto the common\nNecessity, and envy not _Enoch_ or _Elias_.\n\nNot to be content with Life is the unsatisfactory State of those which\ndestroy themselves;[311] who being afraid to live, run blindly upon\ntheir own Death, which no Man fears by Experience: And the Stoicks had a\nnotable Doctrine to take away the Fear thereof; that is, in such\nExtremities, to desire that which is not to be avoided, and wish what\nmight be feared; and so made Evils voluntary, and to suit with their own\nDesires, which took off the Terror of them.\n\n [311] In the Speech of _Vulteius in Lucan_, animating his Souldiers\n in a great Struggle to kill one another. _Decernite Lethum et\n metus omnis abest, cupias quodcunque necesse est._ All Fear is\n over, do but resolve to die, and make your Desires meet Necessity.\n\nBut the ancient Martyrs were not encouraged by such Fallacies; who,\ntho' they feared not Death, were afraid to be their own Executioners;\nand therefore thought it more Wisdom to crucify their Lusts than their\nBodies, to circumcise than stab their Hearts, and to mortify than kill\nthemselves.\n\nHis Willingness to leave this World about that Age, when most men think\nthey may best enjoy it, tho' paradoxical unto worldly Ears, was not\nstrange unto mine, who have so often observed, that many, tho' old, oft\nstick fast unto the World, and seem to be drawn like _Cacus's_ Oxen,\nbackward, with great Struggling and Reluctancy unto the Grave. The long\nHabit of Living makes meer men more hardly to part with Life, and All to\nbe Nothing, but what is to come. To live at the rate of the old World,\nwhen some could scarce remember themselves young, may afford no better\ndigested Death than a more moderate Period. Many would have thought it\nan Happiness to have had their Lot of Life in some notable Conjunctures\nof Ages past; but the Uncertainty of future Times hath tempted few to\nmake a Part in Ages to come. And surely, he that hath taken the true\nAltitude of things, and rightly calculated the degenerate State of this\nAge, is not like to envy those that shall live in the next, much less\nthree or four hundred Years hence, when no Man can comfortably imagine\nwhat Face this World will carry: And therefore since every Age makes a\nStep unto the End of all things, and the Scripture affords so hard a\nCharacter of the last Times; quiet Minds will be content with their\nGenerations, and rather bless Ages past, than be ambitious of those to\ncome.\n\nTho' Age had set no Seal upon his Face, yet a dim Eye might clearly\ndiscover Fifty in his Actions; and therefore since Wisdom is the grey\nHair, and an unspotted Life old Age; altho' his Years came short he\nmight have been said to have held up with longer Livers, and to have\nbeen _Solomon's_[312] Old Man. And surely if we deduct all those Days of\nour Life which we might wish unliv'd, and which abate the Comfort of\nthose we now live; if we reckon up only those Days which God hath\naccepted of our Lives, a Life of good Years will hardly be a Span long:\nthe Son in this Sense may out-live the Father, and none be\nclimacterically old. He that early arriveth unto the Parts and Prudence\nof Age, is happily old without the uncomfortable Attendants of it; and\n'tis superfluous to live unto grey Hairs, when in a precocious Temper we\nanticipate the Virtues of them. In brief, he cannot be accounted young\nwho out-liveth the old Man. He that hath early arrived unto the measure\nof a perfect Stature in Christ, hath already fulfilled the prime and\nlongest Intention of his Being: and one Day lived after the perfect Rule\nof Piety, is to be preferr'd before sinning Immortality.\n\n [312] _Wisdom_, cap. iv.\n\nAltho' he attain'd not unto the Years of his Predecessors, yet he wanted\nnot those preserving Virtues which confirm the Thread of weaker\nConstitutions. Cautelous Chastity and crafty Sobriety were far from him;\nthose Jewels were Paragon, without Flaw, Hair, Ice, or Cloud in him:\nwhich affords me an Hint to proceed in these good Wishes, and few\n_Memento's_ unto you.\n\nTread softly and circumspectly in this funambulous Track, and narrow\nPath of Goodness: pursue Virtue virtuously; be sober and temperate, not\nto preserve your Body in a sufficiency to wanton Ends; not to spare\nyour Purse; not to be free from the Infamy of common Transgressors that\nway, and thereby to ballance or palliate obscure and closer Vices; nor\nsimply to enjoy Health: By all which you may leaven good Actions, and\nrender Virtues disputable: but in one Word, that you may truly serve\nGod; which every Sickness will tell you, you cannot well do without\nhealth. The sick Man's Sacrifice is but a lame Oblation. Pious Treasures\nlaid up in healthful Days, excuse the Defect of sick Non-performances;\nwithout which we must needs look back with Anxiety upon the lost\nOpportunities of Health; and may have cause rather to envy than pity the\nEnds of penitent Malefactors, who go with clear Parts unto the last Act\nof their Lives; and in the Integrity of their Faculties return their\nSpirit unto God that gave it.\n\nConsider whereabout thou art in _Cebes_ his Table, or that old\nphilosophical Pinax of the Life of Man; whether thou art still in the\nRoad of Uncertainties; whether thou hast yet entred the narrow Gate, got\nup the Hill and asperous Way which leadeth unto the House of Sanity, or\ntaken that purifying Potion from the Hand of sincere Erudition, which\nmay send the clear and pure away unto a virtuous and happy Life.\n\nIn this virtuous voyage let not Disappointment cause Despondency, nor\nDifficulty Despair: Think not that you are sailing from _Lima_[313] to\n_Manillia_, wherein thou may'st tye up the Rudder, and sleep before the\nWind; but expect rough Seas, Flaws, and contrary Blasts; and 'tis well\nif by many cross Tacks and Veerings thou arrivest at thy Port. Sit not\ndown in the popular Seats, and common Level of Virtues, but endeavour to\nmake them Heroical. Offer not only Peace-Offerings but Holocausts unto\nGod. To serve him singly to serve our selves, were too partial a Piece\nof Piety, nor likely to place us in the highest Mansions of Glory.\n\n [313] Through the Pacifick Sea, with a constant Gale from the East.\n\nHe that is chaste and continent, not to impair his Strength, or\nterrified by Contagion, will hardly be heroically virtuous. Adjourn not\nthat Virtue unto those Years when _Cato_ could lend out his Wife, and\nimpotent _Satyrs_ write Satyrs against Lust: but be chaste in thy\nflaming Days, when _Alexander_ dared not trust his Eyes upon the fair\nDaughters of _Darius_, and when so many Men think there is no other Way\nbut _Origen's_.[314]\n\n [314] Who is said to have castrated himself.\n\nBe charitable before Wealth makes thee covetous, and lose not the Glory\nof the Mitre. If Riches increase, let thy Mind hold Pace with them; and\nthink it not enough to be liberal, but munificent. Tho' a Cup of cold\nWater from some hand may not be without its Reward; yet stick not thou\nfor Wine and Oyl for the Wounds of the distressed: and treat the poor as\nour Saviour did the Multitude, to the Relicks of some Baskets.\n\nTrust not to the Omnipotency of Gold, or say unto it, Thou art my\nConfidence: kiss not thy Hand when thou beholdest that terrestrial Sun,\nnor bore thy Ear unto its Servitude. A Slave unto Mammon makes no\nServant unto God: Covetousness cracks the Sinews of Faith, numbs the\nApprehension of any thing above Sense, and only affected with the\nCertainty of Things present, makes a Peradventure of things to come;\nlives but unto one World, nor hopes but fears another; makes our own\nDeath sweet unto others, bitter unto our selves; gives a dry Funeral,\nScenical Mourning, and no wet Eyes at the Grave.\n\nIf Avarice be thy Vice, yet make it not thy Punishment: Miserable Men\ncommiserate not themselves, bowelless unto themselves, and merciless\nunto their own Bowels. Let the Fruition of things bless the Possession\nof them, and take no Satisfaction in dying but living rich: for since\nthy good Works, not thy Goods, will follow thee; since Riches are an\nAppurtenance of Life, and no dead Man is rich, to famish in Plenty, and\nlive poorly to die rich, were a multiplying Improvement in Madness, and\nUse upon Use in Folly.\n\nPersons lightly dip'd, not grain'd in generous Honesty, are but pale in\nGoodness, and faint hued in Sincerity: but be thou what thou virtuously\nart, and let not the Ocean wash away thy Tincture: stand magnetically\nupon that Axis where prudent Simplicity hath fix'd thee, and let no\nTemptation invert the Poles of thy Honesty: and that Vice may be\nuneasie, and even monstrous unto thee, let iterated good Acts, and long\nconfirm'd Habits make Vertue natural, or a second Nature in thee. And\nsince few or none prove eminently vertuous but from some advantageous\nFoundations in their Temper, and natural Inclinations; study thy self\nbetimes, and early find what Nature bids thee to be, or tells thee what\nthou may'st be. They who thus timely descend into themselves,\ncultivating the good Seeds which Nature hath set in them, and improving\ntheir prevalent Inclinations to Perfection, become not Shrubs, but\nCedars in their Generation; and to be in the form of the best of the\nBad, or the worst of the Good, will be no Satisfaction unto them.\n\nLet not the Law of thy Country be the _non ultra_ of thy Honesty, nor\nthink that always good enough which the Law will make good. Narrow not\nthe Law of Charity, Equity, Mercy; joyn Gospel Righteousness with Legal\nRight; be not a meer _Gamaliel_ in the Faith; but let the Sermon in the\nMount be thy _Targum_ unto the Law of _Sinai_.\n\nMake not the Consequences of Vertue the Ends thereof: be not beneficent\nfor a Name or Cymbal of Applause, nor exact and punctual in Commerce,\nfor the Advantages of Trust and Credit which attend the Reputation of\njust and true Dealing; for such Rewards, tho' unsought for, plain Vertue\nwill bring with her, whom all Men honour, tho' they pursue not. To have\nother bye Ends in good Actions, sowers laudable Performances, which must\nhave deeper Roots, Motions, and Instigations, to give them the Stamp of\nVertues.\n\nTho' human Infirmity may betray thy heedless Days into the popular Ways\nof Extravagancy, yet let not thine own Depravity, or the Torrent of\nvicious Times, carry thee into desperate Enormities in Opinions,\nManners, or Actions: if thou hast dip'd thy Foot in the River, yet\nventure not over _Rubicon_; run not into Extremities from whence there\nis no Regression, nor be ever so closely shut up within the Holds of\nVice and Iniquity, as not to find some Escape by a Postern of\nResipiscency.\n\nOwe not thy Humility unto Humiliation by Adversity, but look humbly down\nin that State when others look upward upon thee: be patient in the Age\nof Pride and Days of Will and Impatiency, when Men live but by Intervals\nof Reason, under the Sovereignty of Humor and Passion, when 'tis in the\nPower of every one to transform thee out of thy self, and put thee into\nthe short Madness. If you cannot imitate _Job_, yet come not short of\n_Socrates_,[315] and those patient Pagans, who tir'd the Tongues of\ntheir Enemies while they perceiv'd they spet their Malice at brazen\nWalls and Statues.\n\n [315] _Ira furor brevis est._\n\nLet Age, not Envy, draw Wrinkles on thy Cheeks: be content to be envied,\nbut envy not. Emulation may be plausible, and Indignation allowable; but\nadmit no Treaty with that Passion which no Circumstance can make good. A\nDisplacency at the Good of others, because they enjoy it, altho' we do\nnot want it, is an absurd Depravity, sticking fast unto human Nature\nfrom its primitive Corruption; which he that can well subdue, were a\nChristian of the first Magnitude, and for ought I know, may have one\nFoot already in Heaven.\n\nWhile thou so hotly disclaim'st the Devil, be not guilty of Diabolism;\nfall not into one Name with that unclean Spirit, nor act his Nature whom\nthou so much abhorrest; that is, to accuse, calumniate, backbite,\nwhisper, detract, or sinistrously interpret others; degenerous\nDepravities and narrow-minded Vices, not only below S. _Paul's_ noble\nChristian, but _Aristotle's_[316] true Gentleman. Trust not with some,\nthat the Epistle of S. _James_ is Apocryphal, and so read with less Fear\nthat Stabbing Truth, that in company with this Vice thy Religion is in\nvain. _Moses_ broke the Tables without breaking of the Law; but where\nCharity is broke the Law it self is shatter'd, which cannot be whole\nwithout Love, that is the fulfilling of it. Look humbly upon thy\nVertues, and tho' thou art rich in some, yet think thy self poor and\nnaked, without that crowning Grace, which thinketh no Evil, which\nenvieth not, which beareth, believeth, hopeth, endureth all things. With\nthese sure Graces, while busie Tongues are crying out for a Drop of cold\nWater, Mutes may be in Happiness, and sing the _Trisagium_[317] in\nHeaven.\n\n [316] See _Arist. Ethicks_ Chapt. of Magnanimity.\n\n [317] Holy, Holy, Holy.\n\nLet not the Sun in _Capricorn_ go down upon thy Wrath, but Write thy\nWrongs in Water: draw the Curtain of Night upon Injuries; shut them up\nin the Tower of Oblivion,[318] and let them be as tho' they had not\nbeen. Forgive thine Enemies totally, and without any Reserve of Hope,\nthat however, God will revenge thee.\n\n [318] Even when the Days are shortest; alluding to the Tower of\n _Oblivion_ mentioned by _Procopius_, which was the Name of a\n Tower of Imprisonment among the _Persians_: whosoever was put\n therein he was as it were buried alive, and it was Death for any\n but to name it.\n\nBe substantially great in thy self, and more than thou appearest unto\nothers; and let the World be deceived in thee, as they are in the Lights\nof Heaven. Hang early Plummets upon the Heels of Pride, and let Ambition\nhave but an Epicyche or narrow Circuit in thee. Measure not thy self by\nthy Morning Shadow, but by the Extent of thy Grave; and reckon thy self\nabove the Earth by the Line thou must be contented with under it. Spread\nnot into boundless Expansions either to Designs or Desires. Think not\nthat Mankind liveth but for a few, and that the rest are born but to\nserve the Ambition of those, who make but Flies of Men, and Wildernesses\nof whole Nations. Swell not into Actions which embroil and confound the\nEarth; but be one of those violent ones which _force the Kingdom of\nHeaven_.[319] If thou must needs reign, be _Zeno_, King, and enjoy that\nEmpire which every Man gives himself. Certainly, the iterated\nInjunctions of Christ unto Humility, Meekness, Patience, and that\ndespised Train of Vertues, cannot but make pathetical Impressions upon\nthose who have well consider'd the Affairs of all Ages, wherein Pride,\nAmbition, and Vain glory, have led up the worst of Actions, and\nwhereunto Confusion, Tragedies, and Acts denying all Religion, do owe\ntheir Originals.\n\n [319] _Matthew_ xi.\n\nRest not in an Ovation,[320] but a Triumph over thy Passions; chain up\nthe unruly Legion of thy Breast; behold thy Trophies within thee, not\nwithout thee: Lead thine own Captivity captive, and be _Caesar_ unto thy\nself.\n\n [320] _Ovation_, a petty and minor kind of Triumph.\n\nGive no quarter unto those Vices which are of thine inward Family; and\nhaving a Root in thy Temper, plead a Right and Property in thee. Examine\nwell thy complexional Inclinations. Raise early Batteries against those\nstrong Holds built upon the Rock of Nature, and make this a great Part\nof the Militia of thy Life. The politick Nature of Vice must be oppos'd\nby Policy, and therefore wiser Honesties project and plot against Sin;\nwherein notwithstanding we are not to rest in Generals, or the trite\nStratagems of Art: that may succeed with one Temper which may prove\nsuccessless with another. There is no Community or Common-wealth of\nVirtue; every Man must study his own Oeconomy, and erect these Rules\nunto the Figure of himself.\n\nLastly, If Length of Days be thy Portion, make it not thy Expectation:\nReckon not upon long Life, but live always beyond thy Account. He that\nso often surviveth his Expectation, lives many Lives, and will hardly\ncomplain of the Shortness of his Days. Time past is gone like a Shadow;\nmake Times to come present; conceive that near which may be far off;\napproximate thy last Times by present Apprehensions of them: Live like a\nNeighbour unto Death, and think there is but little to come. And since\nthere is something in us that must still live on, join both Lives\ntogether; unite them in thy Thoughts and Actions, and live in one but\nfor the other. He who thus ordereth the Purposes of this Life, will\nnever be far from the next, and is in some manner already in it, by an\nhappy Conformity, and close Apprehension of it.\n\n\n _FINIS_\n\n\n\n\n POSTHUMOUS WORKS\n\n 1712\n\n\n\n\nREPERTORIUM:\n\nOr, some Account of the Tombs and Monuments in the Cathedral Church of\nNorwich, in 1680.\n\n\nIn the Time of the late Civil Wars, there were about an hundred Brass\nInscriptions stol'n and taken away from Grave-Stones, and Tombs, in the\nCathedral Church of _Norwich_; as I was inform'd by _John Wright_, one\nof the Clerks, above Eighty Years old, and Mr. _John Sandlin_, one of\nthe Choir, who lived Eighty nine Years; and, as I remember, told me that\nhe was a Chorister in the Reign of Queen _Elizabeth_.\n\nHereby the distinct Places of the Burials of many noble and considerable\nPersons become unknown; and, lest they should be quite buried in\nOblivion, I shall, of so many, set down only these following that are\nmost noted to Passengers, with some that have been erected since those\nunhappy Times.\n\nFirst, in the Body of the Church, between the Pillars of the South Isle,\nstands a Tomb, cover'd with a kind of Touch-stone; which is the Monument\nof MILES SPENCER, LL.D. and Chancellor of _Norwich_, who lived unto\nNinety Years. The Top Stone was entire, but now quite broken, split, and\ndepress'd by Blows: There was more special Notice taken of this Stone,\nbecause Men used to try their Money upon it; and that the Chapter\ndemanded certain Rents to be paid on it. He was Lord of the Mannor of\n_Bowthorp_ and _Colney_, which came unto the _Yaxley's_ from him; also\nOwner of _Chappel_, in the Field.\n\nThe next Monument is that of Bishop RICHARD NICKS, _alias_ Nix, or the\nBlind Bishop, being quite dark many Years before he died. He sat in this\n_See_ Thirty Six Years, in the Reigns of King _Henry_ VII. and _Henry_\nVIII. The Arches are beautified above and beside it, where are to be\nseen the Arms of the _See_ of _Norwich_, _impaling_ his own, _viz._ a\n_Chevron_ between three _Leopards_ Heads. The same Coat of Arms is on\nthe Roof of the _North_ and _South Cross Isle_; which Roofs he either\nrebuilt, or repair'd. The Tomb is low, and broad, and 'tis said there\nwas an Altar at the bottom of the Eastern Pillar: The Iron-work, whereon\nthe Bell hung, is yet visible on the Side of the Western Pillar.\n\nThen the Tomb of Bishop JOHN PARKHURST, with a legible Inscription on\nthe Pillar, set up by Dean _Gardiner_, running thus.\n\n Johannes Parkhurst, _Theol. Professor_, Guilfordiae _natus_,\n Oxoniae _educatus, temporibus_ Mariae _Reginae pro\n Nitida conscientia tuenda_ Tigurinae _vixit exul\n Voluntarius: Postea presul factus, sanctissime\n Hanc rexit Ecclesiam per 16 an. Obiit secundo die_\n Febr. 1574.\n\nA Person he was of great Esteem and Veneration in the Reign of Queen\n_Elizabeth_. His Coat of Arms is on the Pillars, visible, at the going\nout of the Bishop's Hall.\n\nBetween the two uppermost Pillars, on the same Side, stood a handsom\nMonument of Bishop EDMUND SCAMLER, thus.\n\n _Natus apud_ Gressingham, _in Com._ Lanc. SS. _Theol. Prof.\n apud_ Cantabrigienses. _Obiit AEtat._ 85. _an._ 1594 _nonis_ Maii.\n\nHe was Houshold Chaplain to the Archbishop of _Canterbury_, and died\n1594. The Monument was above a yard and half high, with his Effigies in\nAlabaster, and all enclosed with a high Iron Grate. In the late Times\nthe Grate was taken away, the Statue broken, and the Free-stone pulled\ndown as far as the inward Brick-work; which being unsightly, was\nafterwards taken away, and the Space between the Pillars left void, as\nit now remaineth.\n\nIn the South-side of this Isle, according as the Inscription denoteth,\nwas buried GEORGE GARDINER, sometime Dean.\n\n Georgius Gardiner Barvici _natus_, Cantabrigiae _educatus,\n Primo minor Canonicus, secundo Praebendarius, tertio Archidiaconus_.\n Nordovici, _et demum_ 28 Nov. _An._ 1573. _factus est Sacellanus\n Dominae Reginae, et Decanus hujus Ecclesiae, in quo loco per 16\n Annos rexit_.\n\nSomewhat higher is a Monument for Dr. EDMUND PORTER, a learned\nPrebendary, sometime of this Church.\n\nBetween two Pillars of the North Isle in the Body of the Church, stands\nthe Monument of Sir JAMES HOBART, Attorney-General to King _Henry_ VII.\nand VIII. He built _Loddon_ Church, St. _Olave's_ Bridge, and made the\nCauseway adjoining upon the South-side. On the upper Part is the\nAtchievement of the _Hobarts_, and below are their Arms; as also of the\n_Nantons_, _viz._ (_three Martlets_) his second Lady being of that\nFamily. It is a close Monument, made up of handsom Stone-work: And this\nEnclosure might have been employ'd as an Oratory. Some of the Family of\nthe _Hobarts_ have been buried near this Monument; as Mr. _James Hobart_\nof _Holt_. On the South-side, two young Sons, and a Daughter of Dean\n_Herbert Astley_, who married _Barbara_, Daughter of _John_, only Son of\nSir _John Hobart_ of _Hales_.\n\nIn the Middle Isle, under a very large Stone, almost over which a Branch\nfor Lights hangeth, was buried Sir FRANCIS SOUTHWELL, descended from\nthose of great Name and Estate in _Norfolk_, who formerly possessed\n_Woodrising_.\n\nUnder a fair Stone, by Bishop _Parkhurst's_ Tomb, was buried Dr.\nMASTERS, Chancellor.\n\n Gul. Maister, _LL. Doctor Curiae Cons. Ep==atus_ Norwicen.\n _Officialis principalis. Obiit 2 Feb. 1589._\n\nAt the upper End of the Middle Isle, under a large Stone, was buried\nBishop WALTER _de_ HART, _alias le_ HART, or LYGHARD. He was Bishop 26\nYears, in the Times of _Henry_ VI. and _Edward_ IV. He built the\nTransverse Stone Partition, or Rood Loft, on which the great Crucifix\nwas placed, beautified the Roof of the Body of the Church, and paved it.\nTowards the North-side of the Partition-Wall are his Arms the _Bull_ and\ntowards the South-side, _a Hart in Water_, as a _Rebus_ of his Name,\n_Walter Hart_. Upon the Door, under the Rood Loft, was a Plate of Brass,\ncontaining these Verses.\n\n _Hic jacet absconsus sub marmore presul honestus\n Anno milleno C quater cum septuageno\n Annexis binis instabat ei prope finis\n Septima cum decima lux Maij sit numerata\n Ipsius est anima de corpore tunc separata._\n\nBetween this Partition and the Choir on the North-side, is the Monument\nof Dame ELIZABETH CALTHORPE, Wife of Sir _Francis Calthorpe_, and\nafterwards Wife of _John Colepepper_, Esq.\n\nIn the same Partition, behind the Dean's Stall, was buried JOHN CROFTS,\nlately Dean, Son of Sir _Henry Crofts_ of _Suffolk_, and Brother to the\nLord _William Crofts_. He was sometime Fellow of _All-Souls_ College in\n_Oxford_, and the first Dean after the Restauration of his Majesty King\n_Charles_ II. whose Predecessor, Dr. _John Hassal_, who was Dean many\nYears, was not buried in this Church, but in that of _Creek_. He was of\n_New_ College in _Oxford_, and Chaplain to the Lady _Elizabeth_, Queen\nof _Bohemia_, who obtain'd this Deanry for him.\n\nOn the South-side of the Choir, between two Pillars, stands the Monument\nof Bishop JAMES GOLDWELL, Dean of Salisbury, and Secretary to King\n_Edward_ IV. who sat in this _See_ Twenty five Years. His Effigies is\nin Stone, with a _Lion_ at his Feet, which was his Arms, as appears on\nhis Coat above the Tomb. On the Choir Side, his Arms are also to be seen\nin the sixth Escocheon, in the West-side over the Choir; as also in S.\n_Andrew's_ Church, at the Deanry in a Window; at _Trowes_,\n_Newton-Hall_, and at _Charta-magna_ in _Kent_, the Place of his\nNativity; where he also built, or repair'd the Chappel. He is said to\nhave much repair'd the East End of this Church; did many good Works,\nlived in great Esteem, and died _Ann._ 1498 or 1499.\n\nNext above Bishop _Goldwell_, where the Iron Grates yet stand, Bishop\nJOHN WAKERING is said to have been buried. He was Bishop in the Reign of\nKing _Henry_ V. and was sent to the Council of _Constance_: He is said\nalso to have built the Cloister in the Bishop's Palace, which led into\nit from the Church Door, which was cover'd with a handsom Roof, before\nthe late Civil War. Also reported to have built the Chapter-house, which\nbeing ruinous, is now demolish'd, and the decay'd Parts above and about\nit handsomly repair'd, or new built. The Arms of the _See_ impaling his\nown Coat, the Three _Fleur des Lys_, are yet visible upon the Wall by\nthe Door. He lived in great Reputation, and died 1426, and is said to\nhave been buried before S. _George's_ Altar.\n\nOn the North-side of the Choir, between the two Arches, next to Queen\n_Elizabeth's_ Seat, were buried Sir THOMAS ERPINGHAM, and his Wives the\nLady JOAN, _etc._ whose Pictures were in the Painted-Glass Windows, next\nunto this Place, with the Arms of the _Erpingham's_. The Insides of both\nthe Pillars were painted in red Colours, with divers Figures and\nInscriptions, from the top almost to the bottom, which are now washed\nout by the late whiting of the Pillars. He was a Knight of the Garter in\nthe Time of _Hen._ IV. and some Part of _Hen._ V. and I find his Name in\nthe List of the Lord Wardens of the Cinque-Ports. He is said to have\nbuilt the _Black Friars_ Church, or Steeple, or both, now called\n_New-Hall Steeple_. His Arms are often on the Steeple, which are an\nEscocheon within an _Orle of Martlets_, and also upon the out-side of\nthe Gate, next the School-House. There was a long Brass Inscription\nabout the Tomb-stone, which was torn away in the late Times, and the\nName of _Erpingham_ only remaining. _Johannes Dominus de Erpingham\nMiles_, was buried in the Parish Church of _Erpingham_, as the\nInscription still declareth.\n\nIn the North Isle, near to the Door, leading towards _Jesus Chappel_,\nwas buried Sir WILLIAM DENNY, Recorder of _Norwich_, and one of the\nCounsellors at Law to King _Charles_ I.\n\nIn _Jesus Chappel_ stands a large Tomb (which is said to have been\ntranslated from our Ladies Chappel, when that grew ruinous, and was\ntaken down) whereof the Brass Inscription about it is taken away; but\nold Mr. _Spendlow_, who was a Prebendary 50 Years, and Mr. _Sandlin_,\nused to say, that it was the Tombstone of the _Windham's_; and in all\nProbability, might have belonged to Sir _Thomas Windham_, one of King\n_Henry_ VIII.'s Counsellors, of his Guard, and Vice-Admiral; for I find\nthat there hath been such an Inscription upon the Tomb of a _Windham_ in\nthis Church.\n\n _Orate pro a==a_ Thome Windham, _militis_, Elianore, _et Domine_\n Elizabethe, _uxorum ejus, etc. qui quidem_ Thomas _fuit unus\n consiliariorum_\n\n _Regis_ Henrici VIII. _et unus militum pro corpore, ejusdem Domini,\n nec non Vice-Admirallus_.\n\nAnd according to the Number of the Three Persons in the Inscription,\nthere are Three Figures upon the Tomb.\n\nOn the North Wall of _Jesus Chappel_ there is a legible Brass\nInscription in Latin Verses; and at the last Line _Pater Noster_. This\nwas the Monument of _Randulfus Pulvertoft custos caronelle_. Above the\nInscription was his Coat of Arms, _viz. Six Ears of Wheat with a\nBorder of Cinque-foils_; but now washed out, since the Wall was\nwhiten'd.\n\nAt the Entrance of St. _Luke's Chappel_, on the Left Hand, is an arched\nMonument, said to belong to one of the Family of the _Bosvile's_ or\n_Boswill_, sometime Prior of the Convent. At the East End of the\nMonument are the Arms of the Church (_the Cross_) and on the West End\nanother (_three Bolt Arrows_,) which is supposed to be his Paternal\nCoat. The same Coat is to be seen in the sixth Escocheon of the\nSouth-side, under the Belfry. Some Inscriptions upon this Monument were\nwashed out when the Church was lately whiten'd; as among the rest, _O\nmorieris! O morieris! O morieris!_ The _three Bolts_ are the known Arms\nof the _Bosomes_, an ancient Family in _Norfolk_; but whether of the\n_Bosviles_, or no, I am uncertain.\n\nNext unto it is the Monument of RICHARD BROME, Esq. whose Arms thereon\nare _Ermyns_; and for the Crest, _a Bunch or Branch of Broom with Golden\nFlowers_. This might be _Richard Brome_, Esq. whose Daughter married the\nHeir of the _Yaxley's of Yaxley_, in the Time of _Henry_ VII. And one of\nthe same Name founded a Chappel in the Field in _Norwich_.\n\nThere are also in St. _Luke's Chappel_, amongst the Seats on the\nSouth-side, two substantial Marble and cross'd Tombs, very ancient, said\nto be two Priors of this Convent.\n\nAt the Entrance into the Cloister, by the upper Door on the Right Hand,\nnext the Stairs, was a handsom Monument on the Wall, which was pulled\ndown in the late Times, and a Void Place still remaineth. Upon this\nStone were the Figures of two Persons in a praying Posture, on their\nKnees. I was told by Mr. _Sandlin_, that it was said to be the Monument\nfor one of the _Bigots_, who built or beautified that Arch by it, which\nleadeth into the Church.\n\nIn the Choir towards the high Altar, and below the Ascents, there is an\nold Tomb, which hath been generally said to have been the Monument of\nBishop WILLIAM HERBERT, Founder of the Church, and commonly known by the\nName of the Founder's Tomb. This was above an Ell high; but when the\nPulpit, in the late Confusion, was placed at the Pillar, where Bishop\n_Overall's_ Monument now is, and the Aldermen's Seats were at the East\nEnd, and the Mayor's Seat in the middle at the high Altar, the height of\nthe Tomb being a Hindrance unto the People, it was taken down to such a\nLowness as it now remains in. He was born at _Oxford_, in good Favour\nwith King _William Rufus_, and King _Henry_ I. removed the Episcopal\n_See_ from _Thetford_ to _Norwich_, built the Priory for 60 Monks, the\nCathedral Church, the Bishop's Palace, the Church of S. _Leonard_, whose\nRuins still remain upon the Brow of _Mushold-Hill_; the Church of S.\n_Nicolas_ at _Yarmouth_, of S. _Margaret_ at _Lynn_, of S. _Mary_ at\n_Elmham_, and instituted the _Cluniack_ Monks at _Thetford_. _Malmsbury_\nsaith he was, _Vir pecuniosus_, which his great Works declare, and had\nalways this good Saying of S. _Hierom_ in his Mouth, _Erravimus juvenes,\nemendemus senes_.\n\nMany Bishops of old might be buried about, or not far from the Founder,\nas _William Turbus_, a _Norman_, the third Bishop of _Norwich_, and\n_John_ of _Oxford_ the fourth, accounted among the learned Men of his\nTime, who built _Trinity_ Church in _Ipswich_, and died in the Reign of\nKing _John_; and it is deliver'd, that these two Bishops were buried\nnear to Bishop _Herbert_, the Founder.\n\nIn the same Row, or not far off, was buried Bishop HENRY _le_ SPENCER,\nas lost Brass Inscriptions have declar'd. And Mr. _Sandlin_ told me,\nthat he had seen an Inscription on a Gravestone thereabouts, with the\nName of _Henricus de_, or _le Spencer_: He came young unto the _See_,\nand sat longer in it than any before or after him: But his Time might\nhave been shorter, if he had not escaped in the Fray at _Lennam_, (a\nTown of which he was Lord) where forcing the Magistrate's Tipstaff to be\ncarried before him, the People with Staves, Stones, and Arrows, wounded,\nand put his Servants to Flight. He was also wounded, and left alone, as\n_John Fox_ hath set it down out of the Chronicle of S. _Albans_.\n\nIn the same Row, of late Times, was buried Bishop RICHARD MONTAGUE, as\nthe Inscription, _Depositum Montacutii Episcopi_, doth declare.\n\nFor his eminent Knowledge in the _Greek_ Language, he was much\ncountenanc'd by Sir _Henry Savile_, Provost of _Eaton_ College, and\nsettled in a Fellowship thereof: Afterwards made Bishop of\n_Chichester_; thence translated unto _Norwich_, where he lived about\nthree Years. He came unto _Norwich_ with the evil Effects of a quartan\nAgue, which he had about a Year before, and which accompany'd him to his\nGrave; yet he studied, and writ very much, had an excellent Library of\nBooks, and Heaps of Papers, fairly written with his own Hand, concerning\nthe Ecclesiastical History. His Books were sent to _London_; and, as it\nwas said, his Papers against _Baronius_, and others transmitted to\n_Rome_; from whence they were never return'd.\n\nOn the other Side was buried Bishop JOHN OVERALL, Fellow of _Trinity_\nCollege in _Cambridge_, Master of _Katherine_ Hall, _Regius_ Professor,\nand Dean of St. _Pauls_; and had the Honour to be nominated one of the\nfirst Governours of _Sutton_ Hospital, by the Founder himself, a Person\nhighly reverenc'd and belov'd; who being buried without any Inscription,\nhad a Monument lately erected for him by Dr. _Cosin_, Lord Bishop of\n_Durham_, upon the next Pillar.\n\nUnder the large Sandy-colour'd Stone was buried Bishop RICHARD CORBET, a\nPerson of singular Wit, and an eloquent Preacher, who lived Bishop of\nthis _See_ but three Years, being before Dean of _Christ_ Church, then\nBishop of _Oxford_. The Inscription is as follows:\n\n Richardus Corbet _Theologiae Doctor,\n Ecclesiae Cathedralis Christi Oxoniensis\n Primum alumnus inde Decanus, exinde\n Episcopus, illinc huc translatus, et\n Hinc in coelum_, Jul. 28. _Ann._ 1635.\n\nThe Arms on it, are the _See_ of _Norwich_, impaling, _Or a Raven sab._\nCorbet.\n\nTowards the upper End of the Choir, and on the South-side, under a fair\nlarge Stone, was interred Sir WILLIAM BOLEYN, or BULLEN, Great\nGrandfather to Queen _Elizabeth_. The Inscription hath been long lost,\nwhich was this:\n\n _Hic jacet corpus_ Willelmi Boleyn, _militis,\n Qui obiit_ x _Octobris, Ann. Dom._ MCCCCCV.\n\nAnd I find in a good Manuscript of the Ancient Gentry of _Norfolk_ and\n_Suffolk_ these Words. _Sir_ William Boleyn, _Heir unto Sir_ Tho.\nBoleyn, _who married_ Margaret, _Daughter and Heir of_ Tho. Butler,\n_Earl of_ Ormond, _died in the Year_ 1505, _and was buried on the\nSouth-side of the Chancel of Christ Church in_ Norwich. And surely the\nArms of few Families have been more often found in any Church, than\nthose of the _Boleyn's_, on the Walls, and in the Windows of the East\nPart of this Church. Many others of this noble Family were buried in\n_Bleckling_ Church.\n\nMany other Bishops might be buried in this Church, as we find it so\nasserted by some Historical Accounts; but no History or Tradition\nremaining of the Place of their Interment, in vain we endeavour to\ndesign and point out the same.\n\nAs of Bishop JOHANNES _de_ GRAY, who, as it is delivered, was interr'd\nin this Church, was a Favourite of King _John_, and sent by him to the\nPope: He was also Lord Deputy of _Ireland_, and a Person of great\nReputation, and built _Gaywood Hall_ by _Lynn_.\n\nAs also of Bishop ROGER SKEREWYNG, in whose Time happened that bloody\nContention between the Monks and Citizens, begun at a Fair kept before\nthe Gate, when the Church was fir'd: To compose which King _Henry_ III.\ncame to _Norwich_, and _William de Brunham_, Prior, was much to blame.\nSee _Holingshead, etc._\n\nOr, of Bishop WILLIAM MIDDLETON, who succeeded him, and was buried in\nthis Church; in whose Time the Church that was burnt while _Skerewyng_\nsat was repair'd and consecrated, in the Presence of King _Edward_ I.\n\nOr, of Bishop JOHN SALMON, sometime Lord Chancellor of _England_, who\ndied 1325, and was here interr'd, his Works were noble. He built the\ngreat Hall in the Bishop's Palace; the Bishop's long Chappel on the\nEast-side of the Palace, which was no ordinary Fabrick; and a strong\nhandsom Chappel at the West End of the Church, and appointed four\nPriests for the daily Service therein: Unto which great Works he was the\nbetter enabled, by obtaining a Grant of the first Fruits from Pope\n_Clement_.\n\nOr, of Bishop THOMAS PERCY, Brother to the Earl of _Northumberland_, in\nthe reign of _Richard_ II. who gave unto a Chantry the Lands about\n_Carlton_, _Kimberly_, and _Wicklewood_; in whose Time the Steeple and\nBelfry were blown down, and rebuilt by him, and a Contribution from the\nClergy.\n\nOr, of Bishop ANTHONY _de_ BECK, a Person of an unquiet Spirit, very\nmuch hated, and poison'd by his Servants.\n\nOr likewise, of Bishop THOMAS BROWNE, who being Bishop of _Rochester_,\nwas chosen Bishop of _Norwich_, while he was at the Council of _Basil_,\nin the reign of King _Henry_ VI. was a strenuous Assertor of the Rights\nof the Church against the Citizens.\n\nOr, of Bishop WILLIAM RUGGE, in whose last Year happen'd _Kett's_\nRebellion, in the Reign of _Edward_ VI. I find his Name, _Guil.\nNorwicensis_, among the Bishops, who subscribed unto a Declaration\nagainst the Pope's Supremacy, in the Time of _Henry_ VIII.\n\nOr, of Bishop JOHN HOPTON, who was Bishop in the Time of Queen _Mary_,\nand died the same Year with her. He is often mentioned, together with\nhis Chancellor _Dunning_, by _John Fox_ in his Martyrology.\n\nOr lastly, of Bishop WILLIAM REDMAN, of _Trinity College_ in\n_Cambridge_, who was Archdeacon of _Canterbury_. His Arms are upon a\nBoard on the North-side of the Choir, near to the Pulpit.\n\nOf the four Bishops in Queen _Elizabeth's_ Reign, _Parkhurst_, _Freake_,\n_Scamler_ and _Redman_, Sir _John Harrington_, in his _History of the\nBishops_ in her Time, writeth thus; _For the four Bishops in the Queen's\nDays, they liv'd as Bishops should do, and were not Warriours like\nBishop_ Spencer, _their Predecessor_.\n\nSome Bishops were buried neither in the Body of the Church, nor in the\nChoir; but in our Ladies Chappel, at the East End of the Church, built\nby Bishop WALTER _de_ SUTHFEILD, (in the Reign of _Henry_ III.) wherein\nhe was buried, and Miracles said to be wrought at his Tomb, he being a\nPerson of great Charity and Piety.\n\nWherein also was buried Bishop SIMON _de_ WANTON, _vel_ WALTON, and\nBishop _Alexander_, who had been Prior of the Convent; and also, as some\nthink, Bishop _Roger Skerewyng_, and probably other Bishops, and Persons\nof Quality, whose Tombs and Monuments we now in vain enquire after in\nthe Church.\n\nThis was a handsom Chappel; and there was a fair Entrance into it out of\nthe Church, of a considerable Height also, as may be seen by the\nout-side, where it adjoined unto the Wall of the Church. But being\nruinous, it was, as I have heard, demolished in the Time of Dean\n_Gardiner_: But what became of the Tombs, Monuments, and Grave-stones,\nwe have no Account: In this Chappel, the Bishop's Consistory, or Court,\nmight be kept in old Time, for we find in _Fox's Martyrology_, that\ndivers Persons accused of Heresy were examined by the Bishop, or his\nChancellor, in St. _Mary's_ Chappel. This famous Bishop, _Walter de\nSuthfeild_, who built this Chappel, is also said to have built the\nHospital not far off.\n\nAgain, divers Bishops sat in this _See_, who left not their Bones in\nthis Church; for some died not here, but at distant Places; some were\ntranslated to other Bishopricks; and some, tho' they lived and died\nhere, were not buried in this Church.\n\nSome died at distant Places; as Bishop Richard Courtney, Chancellor of\n_Oxford_, and in great Favour with King _Henry_ V. by whom he was sent\nunto the King of _France_, to challenge his Right unto that Crown; but\nhe dying in _France_, his Body was brought into _England_, and interr'd\nin _Westminster-Abbey_ among the Kings.\n\nBishop WILLIAM BATEMAN, LL.D. born in _Norwich_, who founded\n_Trinity-Hall_, in _Cambridge_, and persuaded _Gonvil_ to build\n_Gonvil-College_, died at _Avignon_ in _France_, being sent by the King\nto _Rome_, and was buried in that City.\n\nBishop WILLIAM AYERMIN died near _London_.\n\nBishop THOMAS THIRLBY, Doctor of Law, died in Archbishop _Matthew\nParker's_ House, and was buried at _Lambeth_, with this inscription:\n\n [_Hic jacet_ Thomas Thirlby, _olim Episcopus Eliensis,\n qui obiit 26 die Augusti, Anno Domini, 1570_.]\n\nBishop THOMAS JANN, who was Prior of _Ely_, died at _Folkston-Abbey_,\nnear _Dover_ in _Kent_.\n\nSome were translated unto other Bishopricks; as Bishop WILLIAM RALEGH\nwas remov'd unto _Winchester_, by King _Henry_ III.\n\nBishop RALPH _de_ WALPOLE was translated to _Ely_, in the time of\n_Edward_ I. He is said to have begun the building of the Cloister, which\nis esteemed the fairest in _England_.\n\nBishop WILLIAM ALNWICK built the Church Gates at the West End of the\nChurch, and the great Window, and was translated to _Lincoln_, in the\nReign of _Henry_ VI.\n\nAnd of later time, Bishop EDMUND FREAKE, who succeeded Bishop\n_Parkhurst_, was removed unto _Worcester_, and there lieth entomb'd.\n\nBishop SAMUEL HARSNET, Master of _Pembroke-Hall_, in _Cambridge_, and\nBishop of _Chichester_, was thence translated to _York_.\n\nBishop FRANCIS WHITE, Almoner unto the King, formerly Bishop of\n_Carlisle_, translated unto _Ely_.\n\nBishop MATTHEW WREN, Dean of the Chappel, translated also to _Ely_, and\nwas not buried here.\n\nBishop JOHN JEGON, who died 1617, was buried at _Aylesham_, near\n_Norwich_. He was Master of _Bennet College_, and Dean of _Norwich_,\nwhose Arms, _Two Chevrons with an Eagle on a Canton_, are yet to be seen\non the West Side of the Bishop's Throne.\n\nMy honour'd Friend Bishop JOSEPH HALL, Dean of _Worcester_, and Bishop\nof _Exon_, translated to _Norwich_, was buried at _Heigham_, near\n_Norwich_, where he hath a Monument. When the Revenues of the Church\nwere alienated, he retired unto that Suburbian Parish, and there ended\nhis Days, being above 80 Years of Age. A Person of singular Humility,\nPatience, and Piety; his own Works are the best Monument and Character\nof himself, which was also very lively drawn in his excellent Funeral\nSermon, preach'd by my learned and faithful old Friend, _John\nWhitefoot_, Rector of _Heigham_, a very deserving Clerk of the\nConvocation of _Norwich_. His Arms in the Register Office of _Norwich_\nare, _Sable three Talbots Heads erased Argent_.\n\nMy honour'd Friend also, Bishop EDWARD REYNOLDS, was not buried in the\nChurch but in the Bishop's Chappel; which was built by himself. He was\nborn at _Southampton_, brought up at _Merton Colledge_ in _Oxford_, and\nthe first Bishop of _Norwich_ after the King's Restauration: A Person\nmuch of the Temper of his Predecessor, Dr. _Joseph Hall_, of singular\nAffability, Meekness and Humility; of great Learning; a frequent\nPreacher, and constant Resident: He sat in this _See_ about 17 Years;\nand though buried in his private Chappel, yet his Funeral Sermon was\npreached in the Cathedral, by Mr. _Benedict Rively_, now Minister of S.\n_Andrews_: He was succeeded by Dr. _Anthony Sparrow_, our worthy and\nhonoured Diocesan.\n\nIt is thought that some Bishops were buried in the old Bishops Chappel,\nsaid to be built by Bishop _John Salmon_ [demolish'd in the Time of the\nlate War] for therein were many Gravestones, and some plain Monuments.\nThis old Chappel was higher, broader, and much larger than the said new\nChappel built by Bishop _Reynolds_; but being covered with Lead, the\nLead was sold, and taken away in the late rebellious Times; and the\nFabrick growing ruinous and useless, it was taken down, and some of the\nStones partly made use of in the building of the new Chappel.\n\nNow, whereas there have been so many noble and ancient Families in these\nParts, yet we find not more of them to have been buried in this the\nMother Church. It may be consider'd, that no small numbers of them were\ninterred in the Churches and Chappels of the Monasteries and religious\nHouses of this City, especially in three thereof; the _Austin-Fryars_,\nthe _Black-Fryars_, the _Carmelite,_ or _White Fryars_; for therein were\nburied many Persons of both Sexes, of great and good Families, whereof\nthere are few or no Memorials in the Cathedral. And in the best\npreserved Registers of such Interments of old, from Monuments and\nInscriptions, we find the Names of Men and Women of many ancient\nFamilies; as of _Ufford_, _Hastings_, _Radcliffe_, _Morley_, _Windham_,\n_Geney_, _Clifton_, _Pigot_, _Hengrave_, _Garney_, _Howell_, _Ferris_,\n_Bacon_, _Boys_, _Wichingham_, _Soterley_; of _Falstolph_, _Ingham_,\n_Felbrigge_, _Talbot_, _Harsick_, _Pagrave_, _Berney_, _Woodhowse_,\n_Howldich_; of _Argenton_, _Somerton_, _Gros_, _Benhall_, _Banyard_,\n_Paston_, _Crunthorpe_, _Withe_, _Colet_, _Gerbrigge_, _Berry_,\n_Calthorpe_, _Everard_, _Hetherset_, _Wachesham_: All Lords, Knights,\nand Esquires, with divers others. Beside the great and noble Families of\nthe _Bigots_, _Mowbrays_, _Howards_, were the most part interr'd at\n_Thetford_, in the Religious Houses of which they were Founders, or\nBenefactors. The _Mortimers_ were buried at _Attleburgh_; the _Aubeneys_\nat _Windham_, in the Priory or Abbey founded by them. And _Camden_ says,\n_That a great part of the Nobility and Gentry of those Parts were buried\nat Pentney_ Abbey: Many others were buried dispersedly in Churches, or\nReligious Houses, founded or endowed by themselves; and therefore it is\nthe less to be wonder'd at, that so many great and considerable Persons\nof this Country were not interr'd in this Church.\n\nThere are Twenty-four Escocheons, _viz._ six on a Side on the inside of\nthe Steeple over the Choir, with several Coats of Arms, most whereof are\nMemorials of Things, Persons, and Families, Well-wishers, Patrons,\nBenefactors, or such as were in special Veneration, Honour, and Respect,\nfrom the Church. As particularly the Arms of _England_, of _Edward_ the\nConfessor; an Hieroglyphical Escocheon of the Trinity, unto which this\nChurch was dedicated. _Three Cups within a Wreath of Thorns_, the Arms\nof _Ely_, the Arms of the _See_ of _Canterbury_, quartered with the Coat\nof the famous and magnified _John Morton_, Archbishop of _Canterbury_,\nwho was Bishop of _Ely_ before; of Bishop _James Goldwell_, that\nhonoured Bishop of _Norwich_. _The three Lions of_ England, S.\n_George's_ Cross, the Arms of the Church impaled with Prior _Bosviles_\nCoat, the Arms of the Church impaled with the private Coats of three\nPriors, the Arms of the City of _Norwich_.\n\nThere are here likewise the Coats of some great and worthy Families; as\nof _Vere_, _Stanley_, _De la Pole_, _Wingfield_, _Heyden_, _Townshend_,\n_Bedingfield_, _Bruce_, _Clere_; which being little taken notice of, and\nTime being still like to obscure, and make them past Knowledge, I would\nnot omit to have a Draught thereof set down, which I keep by me.\n\nThere are also many Coats of Arms on the Walls, and in the Windows of\nthe East End of the Church; but none so often as those of the _Boleyns_,\n_viz._ in a Field _Arg. a Chev. Gul. between three Bulls Heads couped\nsab. armed or_; whereof some are quartered with the Arms of noble\nFamilies. As also about the Church, the Arms of _Hastings_, _De la\nPole_, _Heyden_, _Stapleton_, _Windham_, _Wichingham_, _Clifton_,\n_Heveningham_, _Bokenham_, _Inglos_.\n\nIn the North Window of _Jesus_ Chappel are the Arms of _Radcliff_ and\n_Cecil_; and in the East Window of the same Chappel the Coats of\n_Branch_, and of _Beale_.\n\nThere are several Escocheon Boards fastened to the upper Seats of the\nChoir: Upon the three lowest on the South-side are the Arms of Bishop\n_Jegon_, of the _Pastons_, and of the _Hobarts_; and in one above the\nArms of the _Howards_. On the Board on the North-side are the Arms of\nBishop _Redmayn_; and of the _Howards_.\n\nUpon the outside of the Gate, next to the School, are the Escocheons and\nArms of _Erpingham_, being an Escocheon within an _Orle of Martlets_;\nimpaled with the Coats of _Clopton_ and _Bavent_, or such Families who\nmarried with the _Erpinghams_ who built the Gates. The Word, _Poena_,\noften upon the Gates, shews it to have been built upon Pennance.\n\nAt the West End of the Church are chiefly observable the Figure of King\n_William Rufus_, or King _Henry_ I. and a Bishop on his Knees receiving\nthe Charter from him: Or else of King _Henry_ VI. in whose Reign this\nGate and fair Window was built. Also the maimed Statues of Bishops,\nwhose Copes are garnished and charged with a Cross _Moline_: And at\ntheir Feet, Escocheons, with the Arms of the Church; and also Escocheons\nwith Crosses _Molines_. That these, or some of them, were the Statues of\nBishop _William Alnwyck_, seems more than probable; for he built the\nthree Gates, and the great Window at the West End of the Church; and\nwhere the Arms of the _See_ are in a Roundele, are these Words,--_Orate\npro anima Domini Willelmi Alnwyk_.--Also in another Escocheon, charged\nwith Cross _Molines_, there is the same Motto round about it.\n\nUpon the wooden Door on the outside, there are also the _Three Miters_,\nwhich are the Arms of the _See_ upon one Leaf, and a Cross _Moline_ on\nthe other.\n\nUpon the outside of the End of the North Cross Isle, there is a Statue\nof an old Person; which, being formerly covered and obscured by Plaister\nand Mortar over it, was discovered upon the late Reparation, or\nwhitening of that End of the Isle. This may probably be the Statue of\nBishop _Richard Nicks_, or the blind Bishop; for he built the Isle, or\nthat Part thereof; and also the Roof, where his Arms are to be seen, _A\nChevron_ between _three Leopards Heads Gules_.\n\nThe Roof of the Church is noble, and adorn'd with Figures. In the Roof\nof the Body of the Church there are no Coats of Arms, but\nRepresentations from Scripture Story, as the Story of _Pharaoh_; of\n_Sampson_ towards the East End. Figures of the last Supper, and of our\nSaviour on the Cross, towards the West End; besides others of Foliage,\nand the like ornamental Figures.\n\nThe North Wall of the Cloister was handsomly beautified, with the Arms\nof some of the Nobility in their proper Colours, with their Crests,\n_Mantlings_, _Supporters_, and the whole Atchivement quartered with the\nseveral Coats of their Matches, drawn very large from the upper Part of\nthe Wall, and took up about half of the Wall. They are Eleven in Number;\nparticularly these. 1. An empty Escocheon. 2. The Atchievement of\n_Howard_, Duke of _Norfolk_. 3. Of _Clinton_. 4. _Russel._ 5. _Cheyney._\n6. The Queen's Atchievement. 7. _Hastings._ 8. _Dudley._ 9. _Cecill._\n10. _Carey._ 11. _Hatton._\n\nThey were made soon after Queen _Elizabeth_ came to _Norwich_, _Ann.\n1578_, where she remained a Week, and lodged at the Bishop's Palace in\nthe Time of Bishop _Freake_, attended by many of the Nobility; and\nparticularly by those, whose Arms are here set down.\n\nThey made a very handsome Show, especially at that Time, when the\nCloister Windows were painted unto the Cross-Bars. The Figures of those\nCoats, in their distinguishable and discernable Colours, are not beyond\nmy Remembrance. But in the late Times, when the Lead was faulty, and the\nStone-work decayed, the Rain falling upon the Wall, washed them away.\n\nThe Pavement also of the Cloister on the same Side was broken, and the\nStones taken away, a Floor of Dust remaining: But that Side is now\nhandsomly paved by the Beneficence of my worthy Friend _William\nBurleigh_, Esq.\n\nAt the Stone Cistern in the Cloister, there yet perceivable _a Lyon\nRampant, Argent, in a field Sable_, which Coat is now quartered in the\nArms of the _Howards_.\n\nIn the Painted Glass in the Cloister, which hath been above the\nCross-Bars, there are several Coats. And I find by an Account taken\nthereof, and set down in their proper Colours, that here were these\nfollowing, _viz._ the Arms of _Morley_, _Shelton_, _Scales_,\n_Erpingham_, _Gournay_, _Mowbray_, _Savage_, now _Rivers_, three Coats\nof _Thorpe's_, and one of _a Lyon Rampant, Gules in a Field Or_, not\nwell known to what Family it belongeth.\n\nBetween the lately demolish'd Chapter-House and S. _Luke's_ Chappel,\nthere is an handsom Chappel, wherein the Consistory, or Bishop's Court\nis kept, with a noble Gilded Roof. This goeth under no Name, but may\nwell be call'd _Beauchampe's_ Chappel, or the Chappel of our _Lady_ and\n_All-Saints_, as being built by _William Beauchampe_, according to this\nInscription. _In honore Beate Marie Virginis, et omnium sanctorum_\nWillelmus Beauchampe _capellam hanc ordinavit, et ex propriis sumptibus\nconstruxit_. This Inscription is in old Letters on the outside of the\nWall, at the South-side of the Chappel, and almost obliterated; He was\nburied under an Arch in the Wall, which was richly gilded; and some part\nof the Gilding is yet to be perceived, tho' obscured and blinded by the\nBench on the inside. I have heard there is a Vault below gilded like the\nRoof of the Chappel. The Founder of this Chappel, _William Beauchampe_,\nor _de Bello Campo_, might be one of the _Beauchampe's_, who were Lords\nof _Abergevenny_; for _William_ Lord _Abergevenny_ had Lands and Mannors\nin this Country. And in the Register of Institutions it is to be seen,\nthat _William Beauchampe_, Lord of _Abergevenny_ was Lord Patron of\n_Berg cum Apton_, five Miles distant from _Norwich_, and presented\nClerks to that Living, 1406, and afterward: So that, if he lived a few\nYears after, he might be buried in the latter End of _Henry_ IV. or in\nthe Reign of _Henry_ V. or in the Beginning of _Henry_ VI. Where to find\n_Heydon's_ Chappel is more obscure, if not altogether unknown; for such\na Place there was, and known by the Name of _Heydon's_ Chappel, as I\nfind in a Manuscript concerning some ancient Families of _Norfolk_, in\nthese Words, _John Heydon of Baconsthorpe, Esq.; died in the Reign of_\nEdward IV. _Ann. 1479. He built a Chappel on the South side of the\nCathedral Church of_ Norwich, _where he was buried. He was in great\nFavour with King_ Henry VI. _and took part with the House of_ Lancaster\n_against that of_ York.\n\nHEN. HEYDON, Kt. his Heir, built the Church of _Salthouse_, and made the\nCausey between _Thursford_ and _Walsingham_ at his own Charge: He died\nin the Time of _Henry_ VII. and was buried in _Heydon's_ Chappel,\njoining to the Cathedral aforesaid. The Arms of the _Heydon's_ are\nQuarterly _Argent_, and _Gules a Cross engrailed counter-changed_, make\nthe third Escocheon in the North-Row over the Choir, and are in several\nPlaces in the Glass-Windows, especially on the South-side, and once in\nthe Deanry.\n\nThere was a Chappel to the South-side of the Goal, or Prison, into which\nthere is one Door out of the Entry of the Cloister; and there was\nanother out of the Cloister itself, which is now made up of Brickwork:\nThe Stone-work which remaineth on the inside is strong and handsom. This\nseems to have been a much frequented Chappel of the Priory by the\nwearing of the Steppings unto it, which are on the Cloister Side.\n\nMany other Chappels there were within the Walls and Circuit of the\nPriory; as of S. _Mary_ of the _Marsh_; of S. _Ethelbert_, and others.\nBut a strong and handsom Fabrick of one is still remaining, which is the\nChappel of St. _John_ the Evangelist, said to have been founded by\nBishop _John Salmon_, who died _Ann._ 1325, and four Priests were\nentertained for the daily Service therein: That which was properly the\nChappel, is now the Free-School: The adjoining Buildings made up the\nRefectory, Chambers, and Offices of the Society.\n\nUnder the Chappel, there was a Charnell-House, which was a remarkable\none in former Times, and the Name is still retained. In an old\nManuscript of a Sacrist of the Church, communicated to me by my worthy\nFriend Mr. _John Burton_, the Learned, and very deserving Master of the\nFree-School, I find that the Priests had a Provisional Allowance from\nthe Rectory of _Westhall_ in _Suffolk_. And of the Charnell-House it is\ndelivered, that with the Leave of the Sacrist, the Bones of such as were\nburied in _Norwich_ might be brought into it. _In carnario subtus dictam\ncapellam sancti Johannis constituto, ossa humana in civitate_ Norwici\n_humata, de licentia sacristae, qui dicti carnarii clavem et custodiam\nhabebit specialem utusque ad resurrectionem generalem honeste\nconserventur a carnibus integre demulata reponi volumus et obsignari._\nProbably the Bones were piled in good Order, the Sculls, Arms, and\nLeg-Bones, in their distinct Rows and Courses, as in many\nCharnell-Houses. How these Bones were afterwards disposed of, we have no\nAccount; or whether they had not the like Removal with those in the\nCharnell-House of S. _Paul_ kept under a Chappel on the North-side of S.\n_Paul's_ Church-yard: For when the Chappel was demolish'd, the Bones\nwhich lay in the Vault, amounting to more than a Thousand Cart-Loads,\nwere conveyed into _Finnesbury_ Fields, and there laid in a moorish\nPlace, with so much Soil to cover them, as raised the Ground for three\nWind-mills to stand on, which have since been built there, according as\n_John Stow_ hath delivered, in his Survey of _London_.\n\nThere was formerly a fair and large, but plain Organ in the Church, and\nin the same Place with this at present. (It was agreed in a Chapter by\nthe Dean and Prebends, that a new Organ be made, and Timber fitted to\nmake a Loft for it, _June 6. Ann. 1607_. repaired 1626. and 10_l._ which\n_Abel Colls_ gave to the Church, was bestowed upon it.) That in the late\ntumultuous Time was pulled down, broken, sold, and made away. But since\nhis Majesty's Restauration, another fair, well-tuned, plain Organ, was\nset up by Dean _Crofts_ and the Chapter, and afterwards painted, and\nbeautifully adorned, by the Care and Cost of my honoured Friend Dr.\n_Herbert Astley_, the present worthy Dean. There were also five or six\nCopes belonging to the Church; which, tho' they look'd somewhat old,\nwere richly embroider'd. These were formerly carried into the\nMarket-Place; some blowing the Organ-pipes before them, and were cast\ninto a Fire provided for that purpose, with shouting and rejoicing: So\nthat, at present, there is but one Cope belonging to the Church, which\nwas presented thereunto by _Philip Harbord_, Esq. the present High\nSheriff of _Norfolk_, my honoured Friend.\n\nBefore the late Times, the Combination Sermons were preached in the\nSummer Time at the Cross in the Green-Yard, where there was a good\nAccommodation for the Auditors. The Mayor, Aldermen, with their Wives\nand Officers, had a well-contriv'd Place built against the Wall of the\nBishop's Palace, cover'd with Lead; so that they were not offended by\nRain. Upon the North-side of the Church, Places were built Gallery-wise,\none above another; where the Dean, Prebends, and their Wives, Gentlemen,\nand the better Sort, very well heard the Sermon: The rest either stood,\nor sat in the Green, upon long Forms provided for them, paying a Penny,\nor Halfpenny apiece, as they did at S. _Paul's_ Cross in _London_. The\nBishop and Chancellor heard the Sermons at the Windows of the Bishop's\nPalace: The Pulpit had a large Covering of Lead over it, and a Cross\nupon it; and there were eight or ten Stairs of Stone about it, upon\nwhich the Hospital-Boys and others stood. The Preacher had his Face to\nthe South, and there was a painted Board, of a Foot and a half broad,\nand about a Yard and a half long, hanging over his Head before, upon\nwhich were painted the Arms of the Benefactors towards the Combination\nSermon, which he particularly commemorated in his Prayer, and they were\nthese; Sir _John Suckling_, Sir _John Pettus_, _Edward Nuttel_, _Henry\nFasset_, _John Myngay_. But when the Church was sequester'd, and the\nService put down, this Pulpit was taken down, and placed in _New-Hall_\nGreen, which had been the Artillery-Yard, and the Public Sermon was\nthere preached. But the Heirs of the Benefactors denying to pay the\nwonted Beneficence for any Sermon out of _Christ_-Church, (the Cathedral\nbeing now commonly so call'd) some other Ways were found to provide a\nMinister, at a yearly Sallary, to preach every Sunday, either in that\nPulpit in the Summer, or elsewhere in the Winter.\n\nI must not omit to say something of the Shaft, or Spire of this Church,\ncommonly called the Pinacle, as being a handsom and well proportioned\nFabrick, and one of the highest in _England_, higher than the noted\nSpires of _Litchfield_, _Chichester_, or _Grantham_, but lower than that\nat _Salisbury_, [at a general Chapter, holden _June 4. 1633_, it was\nagreed that the Steeple should be mended] for that Spire being raised\nupon a very high Tower, becomes higher from the Ground; but this Spire,\nconsidered by itself, seems, at least, to equal that. It is an Hundred\nand five Yards and two Foot from the Top of the Pinacle unto the\nPavement of the Choir under it. The Spire is very strongly built, tho'\nthe Inside be of Brick. The upper Aperture, or Window, is the highest\nAscent inwardly; out of which, sometimes a long Streamer hath been\nhanged, upon the Guild, or Mayor's Day. But at His Majesty's\nRestauration, when the Top was to be mended, and a new gilded\nWeather-Cock was to be placed upon it, there were Stayings made at the\nupper Window, and divers Persons went up to the Top of the Pinacle. They\nfirst went up into the Belfry, and then by eight Ladders, on the Inside\nof the Spire, till they came to the upper Hole, or Window; then went out\nunto the Outside, where a Staying was set, and so ascended up unto the\nTop-Stone, on which the Weather-Cock standeth.\n\nThe Cock is three quarters of a Yard high, and one Yard and two Inches\nlong; as is also the Cross-Bar, and Top-Stone of the Spire, which is not\nflat, but consists of a half Globe, and Channel about it; and from\nthence are eight Leaves of Stone spreading outward, under which begin\nthe eight Rows of Crockets, which go down the Spire at five Foot\ndistance.\n\nFrom the Top there is a Prospect all about the Country. _Mourshold-Hill_\nseems low, and flat Ground. The _Castle-Hill_, and high Buildings, do\nvery much diminish. The River looks like a Ditch. The City, with the\nStreets, make a pleasant Show, like a Garden with several Walks in it.\n\nTho' this Church, for its Spire, may compare, in a manner, with any in\n_England_, yet in its Tombs and Monuments it is exceeded by many.\n\nNo Kings have honour'd the same with their Ashes, and but few with their\nPresence. And it is not without some Wonder, that _Norwich_ having been\nfor a long Time so considerable a Place, so few Kings have visited it:\nOf which Number, among so many Monarchs since the Conquest, we find but\nFour, _viz._ King _Henry_ III. _Edward_ I. Queen _Elizabeth_, and our\nGracious Sovereign now reigning; King _Charles_ II. of which I had\nparticular Reason to take Notice.[321]\n\n [321] Sir _Thomas_ being then Knighted.\n\nThe Castle was taken by the Forces of King _William_ the Conqueror; but\nwe find not, that he was here. King _Henry_ VII. by the Way of\n_Cambridge_, made a Pilgrimage unto _Walsingham_; but Records tell us\nnot, that he was at _Norwich_. King _James_ I. came sometimes to\n_Thetford_ for his Hunting Recreation, but never vouchsafed to advance\ntwenty Miles farther.\n\nNot long after the writing of these Papers, Dean _Herbert Astley_ died,\na civil, generous, and public-minded Person, who had travell'd in\n_France_, _Italy_, and _Turkey_, and was interr'd near the Monument of\nSir _James Hobart_: Unto whom succeeded my honoured Friend Dr. _John\nSharpe_, a Prebend of this Church, and Rector of St. _Giles's_ in the\nFields, _London_; a Person of singular Worth, and deserv'd Estimation,\nthe Honour and Love of all Men; in the first Year of whose Deanery,\n1681, the Prebends were these:\n\n Mr. _Joseph Loveland_, } { Dr. _William Smith_,\n Dr. _Hezekiah Burton_, } { Mr. _Nathaniel Hodges_,\n Dr. _William Hawkins_, } { Mr. _Humphrey Prideaux_.\n\n(But Dr. _Burton_ dying in that Year, Mr. _Richard Kidder_ succeeded,)\nworthy Persons, learned Men, and very good Preachers.\n\n\n_ADDENDA_\n\nI have by me the Picture of Chancellor SPENCER, drawn when he was Ninety\nYears old, as the Inscription doth declare, which was sent unto me from\n_Colney_.\n\nTho' Bishop NIX sat long in the _See_ of _Norwich_, yet is not there\nmuch deliver'd of him: _Fox_ in his _Martyrology_ hath said something of\nhim in the Story of THOMAS BILNEY, who was burnt in _Lollard's_ Pit\nwithout _Bishopgate_, in his Time.\n\nBishop SPENCER lived in the Reign of RICHARD II. and HENRY IV. sat in\nthe _See_ of _Norwich_ 37 Years: Of a Soldier made a Bishop, and\nsometimes exercising the Life of a Soldier in his Episcopacy; for he led\nan Army into _Flanders_ on the Behalf of Pope _Urban_ VI. in Opposition\nto _Clement_ the Anti-Pope; and also over-came the Rebellious Forces of\n_Litster_ the _Dyer_, in _Norfolk_, by _North-Walsham_, in the Reign of\nKing RICHARD II.\n\nThose that would know the Names of the Citizens who were chief Actors in\nthe Tumult in Bishop SKEREWYNG'S Time, may find 'em set down in the Bull\nof Pope _Gregory_ XI.\n\nSome Bishops, tho' they liv'd and died here, might not be buried in this\nChurch, as some Bishops probably of old, more certainly of later Time.\n\n * * * * *\n\nHERE CONCLUDES SIR Thomas Browne's _MS._\n\n\n\n\n MISCELLANIES\n\n An Account of Island, alias Ice-land,\n In the Year 1662.\n\n\nGreat Store of Drift-wood, or Float-wood, is every Year cast up on their\nShores, brought down by the Northern Winds, which serveth them for\nFewel, and other Uses, the greatest Part whereof is _Firr_.\n\nOf _Bears_ there are none in the Country, but sometimes they are brought\ndown from the North upon Ice, while they follow _Seales_, and so are\ncarried away. Two in this Manner came over, and landed in the North of\n_Island_ this last Year, 1662.\n\nNo _Conies_, or _Hares_, but of _Foxes_ great Plenty, whose White Skins\nare much desired, and brought over into this Country.\n\nThe last Winter, 1662, so cold, and lasting with us in _England_, was\nthe mildest they have had for many Years in _Island_.\n\nTwo new Eruptions with Slime and Smoak, were observed the last Year in\nsome Mountains about Mount _Hecla_.[322]\n\n [322] _A Burning Mountain in_ Island.\n\nSome hot Mineral Springs they have, and very effectual, but they make\nbut rude Use thereof.\n\nThe Rivers are large, swift, and rapid, but have many Falls, which\nrender them less Commodious; they chiefly abound with _Salmons_.\n\nThey sow no Corn, but receive it from Abroad.\n\nThey have a kind of large _Lichen_, which dried, becometh hard and\nsticky, growing very plentifully in many Places; whereof they make use\nfor Food, either in Decoction, or Powder, some whereof I have by me,\ndifferent from any with us.\n\nIn one Part of the Country, and not near the Sea, there is a large black\nRock, which Polished, resembleth Touchstone, as I have seen in Pieces\nthereof, of various Figures.\n\nThere is also a Rock, whereof I received one Fragment, which seems to\nmake it one kind of _Pisolithes_, or rather _Orobites_, as made up of\nsmall Pebbles, in the Bigness and Shape of the Seeds of _Eruum_, or\n_Orobus_.\n\nThey have some large Well-grained White Pebbles, and some kind of White\n_Cornelian_, or _Agath_ Pebbles, on the Shore, which Polish well. Old\nSir _Edmund Bacon_, of these Parts, made Use thereof in his peculiar Art\nof Tinging and Colouring of Stones.\n\nFor Shells found on the Sea-shore, such as have been brought unto me are\nbut coarse, nor of many Kinds, as ordinary _Turbines_, _Chamas_,\n_Aspers_, _Laves_, _etc._\n\nI have received divers Kinds of Teeth, and Bones of Cetaceous Fishes,\nunto which they could assign no Name.\n\nAn exceeding fine Russet Downe is sometimes brought unto us, which their\ngreat Number of Fowls afford, and sometimes store of Feathers,\nconsisting of the Feathers of small Birds.\n\nBeside _Shocks_, and little Hairy _Dogs_, they bring another sort over,\nHeaded like a _Fox_, which they say are bred betwixt _Dogs_ and _Foxes_;\nthese are desired by the Shepherds of this Country.\n\nGreen _Plovers_, which are Plentiful here in the Winter, are found to\nbreed there in the beginning of Summer.\n\nSome _Sheep_ have been brought over, but of coarse Wooll, and some\n_Horses_ of mean Stature, but strong and Hardy: one whereof kept in the\nPastures by _Yarmouth_, in the Summer, would often take the Sea,\nswimming a great Way, a Mile or Two, and return the same, when its\nProvision fail'd in the Ship wherein it was brought, for many Days fed\nupon Hoops and Cask; nor at the Land would, for many Months, be brought\nto feed upon Oats.\n\nThese Accounts I received from a Native of _Island_, who comes Yearly\ninto _England_; and by Reason of my long Acquaintance, and Directions I\nsend unto some of his Friends against the _Elephantiasis_, (_Leprosie_,)\nconstantly visits me before his Return; and is ready to perform for me\nwhat I shall desire in his Country; wherein, as in other Ways, I shall\nbe very Ambitious to serve the Noble Society, whose most Honouring\nServant I am,\n\n THOMAS BROWNE.\n_Norwich, Jan.\n 15, 1663._\n\n\n\n\n Concerning some Urnes found in\n Brampton-Field, in Norfolk,\n Ann. 1667.\n\n\nI thought I had taken Leave of URNES, when I had some Years past given a\nshort Account of those found at _Walsingham_,[323] but a New Discovery\nbeing made, I readily obey your Commands in a brief Description thereof.\n\n [323] _See_ Hydriotaphia, _Urne-Burial: or, A Discourse of the\n Sepulchral Urnes lately found in_ Norfolk, _8vo._ Lond. _printed_\n 1658.\n\nIn a large Arable Field, lying between _Buxton_ and _Brampton_, but\nbelonging to _Brampton_, and not much more than a Furlong from _Oxnead\nPark_, divers _Urnes_ were found. A Part of the Field being designed to\nbe inclosed, while the Workmen made several Ditches, they fell upon\ndivers _Urnes_, but earnestly, and carelesly digging, they broke all\nthey met with, and finding nothing but Ashes, or burnt Cinders, they\nscattered what they found. Upon Notice given unto me, I went unto the\nPlace, and though I used all Care with the Workmen, yet they were broken\nin the taking out, but many, without doubt, are still remaining in that\nGround.\n\nOf these Pots none were found above Three Quarters of a Yard in the\nGround, whereby it appeareth, that in all this Time the Earth hath\nlittle varied its Surface, though this Ground hath been Plowed to the\nutmost Memory of Man. Whereby it may be also conjectured, that this hath\nnot been a _Wood-Land_, as some conceive all this Part to have been; for\nin such Lands they usually made no common Burying-places, except for\nsome special Persons in Graves, and likewise that there hath been an\nAncient Habitation about these Parts; for at _Buxton_ also, not a Mile\noff, _Urnes_ have been found in my Memory, but in their Magnitude,\nFigure, Colour, Posture, _etc._ there was no small Variety, some were\nlarge and capacious, able to contain above Two Gallons, some of a\nmiddle, others of a smaller Size; the great ones probably belonging to\ngreater Persons, or might be Family _Urnes_, fit to receive the Ashes\nsuccessively of their Kindred and Relations, and therefore of these,\nsome had Coverings of the same Matter, either fitted to them, or a thin\nflat Stone, like a Grave Slate, laid over them; and therefore also great\nOnes were but thinly found, but others in good Number; some were of\nlarge wide Mouths, and Bellies proportionable, with short Necks, and\nbottoms of Three Inches _Diameter_, and near an Inch thick; some small,\nwith Necks like Juggs, and about that Bigness; the Mouths of some few\nwere not round, but after the Figure of a Circle compressed; though\nsome had small, yet none had pointed Bottoms, according to the Figures\nof those which are to be seen in _Roma Soteranea_, _Viginerus_, or\n_Mascardus_.\n\nIn the Colours also there was great Variety, some were Whitish, some\nBlackish, and inclining to a Blue, others Yellowish, or dark Red,\narguing the Variety of their Materials. Some Fragments, and especially\nBottoms of Vessels, which seem'd to be handsome neat Pans, were also\nfound of a fine _Coral_-like Red, somewhat like _Portugal_ Vessels, as\ntho' they had been made out of some fine _Bolary_ Earth, and very\nsmooth; but the like had been found in divers Places, as Dr. _Casaubon_\nhath observed about the Pots found at _Newington_ in _Kent_, and as\nother Pieces do yet testifie, which are to be found at _Burrow_ Castle,\nan Old _Roman_ Station, not far from _Yarmouth_.\n\nOf the _Urnes_, those of the larger Sort, such as had Coverings, were\nfound with their Mouths placed upwards, but great Numbers of the others\nwere, as they informed me, (and One I saw my self,) placed with their\nMouths downward, which were probably such as were not to be opened\nagain, or receive the Ashes of any other Person; though some wonder'd at\nthis Position, yet I saw no Inconveniency in it; for the Earth being\nclosely pressed, and especially in _Minor_ Mouth'd Pots, they stand in a\nPosture as like to continue as the other, as being less subject to have\nthe Earth fall in, or the Rain to soak into them; and the same Posture\nhas been observed in some found in other Places, as _Holingshead_\ndelivers, of divers found in _Anglesea_.\n\nSome had Inscriptions, the greatest Part none; those with Inscriptions\nwere of the largest Sort, which were upon the reverted Verges thereof;\nthe greatest part of those which I could obtain were somewhat\nobliterated; yet some of the Letters to be made out: The Letters were\nbetween Lines, either Single or Double, and the Letters of some few\nafter a fair _Roman_ Stroke, others more rudely and illegibly drawn,\nwherein there seemed no great Variety. _NUON_ being upon very many of\nthem; only upon the inside of the bottom of a small Red Pan-like Vessel,\nwere legibly set down in embossed Letters, _CRACUNA. F._ which might\nimply _Cracuna figuli_, or the Name of the Manufactor, for Inscriptions\ncommonly signified the Name of the Person interr'd, the Names of\nServants Official to such Provisions, or the Name of the Artificer, or\nManufactor of such Vessels; all which are particularly exemplified by\nthe Learned _Licetus_,[324] where the same inscription is often found,\nit is probably, of the Artificer, or where the Name also is in the\n_Genitive_ Case, as he also observeth.\n\n [324] Vid. _Licet._ de Lucernis.\n\nOut of one was brought unto me a Silver _Denarius_, with the Head of\n_Diva Faustina_ on the Obverse side, on the Reverse the Figures of the\nEmperor and Empress joining their Right Hands, with this Inscription,\n_Concordia_; the same is to be seen in _Augustino_; I also received from\nsome Men and Women then present Coins of _Posthumus_, and _Tetricus_,\nTwo of the Thirty Tyrants in the Reign of _Gallienus_, which being of\nmuch later Date, begat an Inference, that _Urne-Burial_ lasted longer,\nat least in this Country, than is commonly supposed. Good Authors\nconceive, that this Custom ended with the Reigns of the _Antonini_,\nwhereof the last was _Antoninus Heliogabalus_, yet these Coins extend\nabout Fourscore Years lower; and since the Head of _Tetricus_ is made\nwith a radiated Crown, it must be conceived to have been made after his\nDeath, and not before his Consecration, which as the Learned _Tristan_\nConjectures, was most probably in the Reign of the Emperor _Tacitus_,\nand the Coin not made, or at least not issued Abroad, before the Time of\nthe Emperor _Probus_, for _Tacitus_ Reigned but Six Months and an Half,\nhis Brother _Florianus_ but Two Months, unto whom _Probus_ succeeding,\nReigned Five Years.\n\nThere were also found some pieces of Glass, and finer Vessels, which\nmight contain such Liquors as they often Buried in, or by, the _Urnes_;\ndivers Pieces of Brass, of several Figures; and in one _Urne_ was found\na Nail Two Inches long; whither to declare the Trade or Occupation of\nthe Person, is uncertain. But upon the Monuments of _Smiths_ in\n_Gruter_, we meet with the Figures of _Hammers_, _Pincers_, and the\nlike; and we find the Figure of a _Cobler's_ Awl on the Tomb of one of\nthat Trade, which was in the Custody of _Berini_, as _Argulus_ hath set\nit down in his Notes upon ONUPHRIUS, _Of the Antiquities of_ VERONA.\n\nNow, though _Urnes_ have been often discovered in former Ages, many\nthink it strange there should be many still found, yet assuredly there\nmay be great Numbers still concealed. For tho' we should not reckon upon\nany who were thus buried before the Time of the _Romans_, [altho' that\nthe _Druids_ were thus buried, it may be probable, and we read of the\n_Urne of Chindonactes_, a _Druid_, found near _Dijon_ in _Burgundy_,\nlargely discoursed of by _Licetus_,] and tho, I say, we take not in any\nInfant which was _Minor igne rogi_, before Seven Months, or Appearance\nof Teeth, nor should account this Practice of burning among the\n_Britains_ higher than _Vespasian_, when it is said by Tacitus, that\nthey conformed unto the Manners and Customs of the _Romans_, and so\nboth Nations might have one Way of Burial: yet from his Days, to the\nDates of these _Urnes_, were about Two Hundred Years. And therefore if\nwe fall so low, as to conceive there were buried in this Nation but\nTwenty Thousand Persons, the Account of the buried Persons would amount\nunto Four Millions, and consequently so great a Number of _Urnes_\ndispersed through the Land, as may still satisfy the Curiosity of\nsucceeding Times, and arise unto all Ages.\n\nThe Bodies, whose Reliques these _Urnes_ contained, seemed thoroughly\nburned; for beside pieces of Teeth, there were found few Fragments of\nBones, but rather Ashes in hard Lumps, and pieces of Coals, which were\noften so fresh, that one sufficed to make a good Draught of its _Urne_,\nwhich still remaineth with me.\n\nSome Persons digging at a little Distance from the _Urne_ Places, in\nhopes to find something of Value, after they had digged about Three\nQuarters of a Yard deep, fell upon an observable Piece of Work, whose\nDescription this Figure affordeth. The Work was Square, about Two Yards\nand a Quarter on each Side. The Wall, or outward Part, a Foot thick, in\nColour Red, and looked like Brick; but it was solid, without any Mortar\nor Cement, or figur'd Brick in it, but of an whole Piece, so that it\nseemed to be Framed and Burnt in the same Place where it was found. In\nthis kind of Brick-work were Thirty-two Holes, of about Two Inches and\nan Half _Diameter_, and Two above a Quarter of a Circle in the East and\nWest Sides. Upon Two of these Holes, on the East Side, were placed Two\nPots, with their Mouths downward; putting in their Arms they found the\nWork hollow below, and the Earth being clear'd off, much Water was found\nbelow them, to the Quantity of a Barrel, which was conceived to have\nbeen the Rain-water which soaked in through the Earth above them.\n\nThe upper Part of the Work being broke, and opened, they found a Floor\nabout Two Foot below, and then digging onward, Three Floors successively\nunder one another, at the Distance of a Foot and Half, the Stones being\nof a Slatty, not Bricky, substance; in these Partitions some Pots were\nfound, but broke by the Workmen, being necessitated to use hard Blows\nfor the breaking of the Stones; and in the last Partition but one, a\nlarge Pot was found of a very narrow Mouth, short Ears, of the Capacity\nof Fourteen Pints, which lay in an enclining Posture, close by, and\nsomewhat under a kind of Arch in the solid Wall, and by the great Care\nof my worthy Friend, Mr. _William Masham_, who employed the Workmen, was\ntaken up whole, almost full of Water, clean, and without Smell, and\ninsipid, which being poured out, there still remains in the Pot a great\nLump of an heavy crusty Substance. What Work this was we must as yet\nreserve unto better Conjecture. Mean while we find in _Gruter_ that some\nMonuments of the Dead had divers Holes successively to let in the Ashes\nof their Relations, but Holes in such a great Number to that Intent, we\nhave not anywhere met with.\n\nAbout Three Months after, my Noble and Honoured Friend, Sir _Robert\nPaston_, had the Curiosity to open a Piece of Ground in his Park at\n_Oxnead_, which adjoined unto the former Field, where Fragments of Pots\nwere found, and upon one the Figure of a well-made Face; but probably\nthis Ground had been opened and digged before, though out of the Memory\nof Man, for we found divers small Pieces of Pots, _Sheeps_ Bones,\nsometimes an _Oyster_-shell a Yard deep in the Earth, an unusual _Coin_\nof the Emperor _Volusianus_, having on the Obverse the Head of the\nEmperor, with a Radiated Crown, and this Inscription, _Imp. Caes. C.\nVolusiano Aug._ that is, _Imperatori Caesari Caio Vibio Volusiano\nAugusto_. On the Reverse an Human Figure, with the Arms somewhat\nextended, and at the Right Foot an Altar, with the Inscription,\n_Pietas_. This Emperor was Son unto _Caius Vibius Tribonianus Gallus_,\nwith whom he jointly reigned after the _Decii_, about the Year 254; both\nhe, himself, and his Father, were slain by the Emperor _AEmilianus_. By\nthe Radiated Crown this Piece should be Coined after his Death and\nConsecration, but in whose Time it is not clear in History.\n\n\n\n\n Concerning the too nice Curiosity of\n censuring the Present, or judging\n into Future Dispensations.\n\n\nWe have enough to do rightly to apprehend and consider things as they\nare, or have been, without amusing our selves how they might have been\notherwise, or what Variations, Consequences and Differences might have\notherwise arose upon a different Face of things, if they had otherwise\nfallen out in the State or Actions of the World.\n\nIf SCANDERBERG had joined his Forces with HUNNIADES, as might have been\nexpected before the Battel in the Plains of _Cossoan_, in good\nprobability they might have ruin'd MAHOMET, if not the _Turkish_\nEmpire.\n\nIf ALEXANDER had march'd Westward, and warr'd with the _Romans_, whether\nhe had been able to subdue that little but valiant People, is an\nuncertainty: We are sure he overcame _Persia_; Histories attest, and\nProphecies foretel the same. It was decreed that the _Persians_ should\nbe conquered by ALEXANDER, and his Successors by the _Romans_, in whom\nProvidence had determin'd to settle the fourth Monarchy, which neither\nPYRRHUS nor HANNIBAL must prevent; tho' HANNIBAL came so near it, that\nhe seem'd to miss it by fatal Infatuation: which if he had effected,\nthere had been such a traverse and confusion of Affairs, as no Oracle\ncould have predicted. But the _Romans_ must reign, and the Course of\nThings was then moving towards the Advent of CHRIST, and blessed\nDiscovery of the Gospel: Our Saviour must suffer at _Jerusalem_, and be\nsentenc'd by a _Roman_ Judge; St. PAUL, a _Roman_ Citizen, must preach\nin the _Roman_ Provinces, and St. PETER be Bishop of _Rome_, and not of\n_Carthage_.\n\n\n\n\nUpon Reading Hudibras.\n\n\nThe way of _Burlesque_ POEMS is very Ancient, for there was a ludicrous\nmock way of transferring Verses of Famous Poets into a Jocose Sense and\nArgument, and they were call'd +Odeai+ or _Parodiae_; divers\nExamples of which are to be found in ATHENAEUS.\n\nThe first Inventer hereof was HIPPONACTES, but HEGEMON SOPATER and many\nmore pursu'd the same Vein; so that the _Parodies_ of OVID'S _Buffoon\nMetamorphoses Burlesques, Le Eneiade Travastito_, are no new Inventions,\nbut old Fancies reviv'd.\n\nAn Excellent _Parodie_ there is of both the SCALIGERS upon an Epigram of\nCATULLUS, which STEPHENS hath set down in his _Discourse of Parodies_: a\nremarkable one among the _Greeks_ is that of MATRON, in the Words and\nEpithites of HOMER describing the Feast of XENOCLES the _Athenian_\nRhetorician, to be found in the fourth Book of _Athenaeus_, pag. 134.\nEdit. _Casaub._\n\n\n\n\n CHRISTIAN\n\n MORALS,\n\n BY\n\n S^R THOMAS BROWN,\n\n OF NORWICH, _M.D._\n\n And AUTHOR of\n RELIGIO MEDICI\n\n\n Published from the Original and Correct\n Manuscript of the Author;\n by _JOHN JEFFERY_, D.D.\n ARCH-DEACON of NORWICH.\n\n\n _CAMBRIDGE_\n\n Printed at the UNIVERSITY-PRESS,\n For _Cornelius Crownfield_, Printer to the UNIVERSITY;\n And are to be sold by Mr. _Knapton_ at the Crown\n in St. _Paul's_ Churchyard; and Mr. _Morphew_ near\n Stationers-Hall, _LONDON_, 1716.\n\n\n\n\n _TO THE RIGHT_ HONOURABLE\n\n DAVID EARL OF BUCHAN.\n\n VISCOUNT AUCHTERHOUSE, LORD CARDROSS\n AND GLENDOVACHIE,\n ONE OF THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS OF POLICE, AND LORD\n LIEUTENANT OF THE COUNTIES OF STIRLING\n AND CLACKMANNAN IN NORTH-BRITTAIN.\n\n\nMY LORD,\n\nThe Honour you have done our Family Obligeth us to make all just\nAcknowledgments of it: and there is no Form of Acknowledgment in our\npower, more worthy of Your Lordship's Acceptance, than this Dedication\nof the last Work of our Honoured and Learned Father. Encouraged\nhereunto by the Knowledge we have of Your Lordship's Judicious Relish of\nuniversal Learning, and sublime Virtue, we beg the Favour of Your\nAcceptance of it, which will very much Oblige our Family in general, and\nHer in particular, who is,\n\n MY LORD,\n\n _Your Lordship's_\n\n _most humble Servant_,\n\n ELIZABETH LITTELTON.\n\n\n\n\nTHE PREFACE\n\n\n_If any One, after he has read_ Religio Medici, _and the ensuing\nDiscourse, can make Doubt, whether the same Person was the Author of\nthem both, he may be Assured by the Testimony of Mrs._ LITTELTON, _Sr._\nTHOMAS BROWN'S _Daughter, who Lived with her Father when it was composed\nby Him; and who, at the time, read it written by his own Hand: and also\nby the Testimony of Others (of whom I am One), who read the MS. of the\nAuthor, immediately after his Death, and who have since Read the Same;\nfrom which it hath been faithfully and exactly Transcribed for the\nPress. The Reason why it was not Printed sooner is, because it was\nunhappily Lost, by being Mislay'd among Other MSS. for which Search was\nlately made in the Presence of the Lord Arch-bishop of Canterbury, of\nwhich his Grace, by Letter, Informed M^{rs.}_ LITTELTON, _when he sent\nthe MS to Her. There is nothing printed in the Discourse, or in the\nshort notes, but what is found in the original MS of the Author, except\nonly where an Oversight had made the Addition or transposition of some\nwords necessary._\n\n JOHN JEFFERY\n Arch-Deacon\n of Norwich.\n\n\n\n\n CHRISTIAN MORALS\n\n\n\n\n PART I\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 1]\n\nTread softly and circumspectly in this funambulatory Track and narrow\nPath of Goodness: Pursue Virtue virtuously: Leven not good Actions, nor\nrender Virtues disputable. Stain not fair Acts with foul Intentions:\nMaim not Uprightness by halting Concomitances, nor circumstantially\ndeprave substantial Goodness.\n\nConsider whereabout thou art in _Cebes's_ Table, or that old\nPhilosophical Pinax of the Life of Man: whether thou art yet in the Road\nof uncertainties; whether thou hast yet entred the narrow Gate, got up\nthe Hill and asperous way, which leadeth unto the House of Sanity; or\ntaken that purifying Potion from the hand of sincere Erudition, which\nmay send Thee clear and pure away unto a virtuous and happy Life.\n\nIn this virtuous Voyage of thy Life hall not about like the Ark, without\nthe use of Rudder, Mast, or Sail, and bound for no Port. Let not\nDisappointment cause Despondency, nor difficulty despair. Think not that\nyou are Sailing from _Lima_ to _Manillia_, when you may fasten up the\nRudder, and sleep before the Wind; but expect rough Seas, Flaws, and\ncontrary Blasts: and 'tis well, if by many cross Tacks and Veerings you\narrive at the Port; for we sleep in Lyons Skins in our Progress unto\nVirtue, and we slide not, but climb unto it.\n\nSit not down in the popular Forms and common Level of Virtues. Offer not\nonly Peace Offerings but Holocausts unto God: where all is due make no\nreserve, and cut not a Cummin Seed with the Almighty: To serve Him\nsingly to serve ourselves were too partial a piece of Piety; not like to\nplace us in the illustrious Mansions of Glory.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 2]\n\nRest not in an Ovation[325] but a Triumph over thy Passions. Let Anger\nwalk hanging down the head; Let Malice go Manicled, and Envy fetter'd\nafter thee. Behold within thee the long train of thy Trophies not\nwithout thee. Make the quarrelling Lapithytes sleep, and Centaurs within\nlye quiet. Chain up the unruly Legion of thy breast. Lead thine own\ncaptivity captive, and be _Caesar_ within thy self.\n\n [325] Ovation, a petty and minor kind of Triumph.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 3]\n\nHe that is Chast and Continent not to impair his strength, or honest for\nfear of Contagion, will hardly be Heroically virtuous. Adjourn not this\nvirtue untill that temper, when _Cato_ could lend out his Wife, and\nimpotent Satyrs write Satyrs upon Lust: But be chast in thy flaming\nDays, when _Alexander_ dar'd not trust his eyes upon the fair sisters of\n_Darius_, and when so many think there is no other way but\n_Origen's_.[326]\n\n [326] Who is said to have Castrated himself.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 4]\n\nShow thy Art in Honesty, and loose not thy Virtue by the bad Managery of\nit. Be Temperate and Sober, not to preserve your body in an ability for\nwanton ends; not to avoid the infamy of common transgressors that way,\nand thereby to hope to expiate or palliate obscure and closer vices; not\nto spare your purse, nor simply to enjoy health: but in one word, that\nthereby you may truly serve God, which every sickness will tell you you\ncannot well do without health. The sick Man's Sacrifice is but a lame\nOblation. Pious Treasures lay'd up in healthful days plead for sick\nnon-performances: without which we must needs look back with anxiety\nupon the lost opportunities of health; and may have cause rather to envy\nthan pity the ends of penitent publick Sufferers, who go with healthful\nprayers unto the last Scene of their lives, and in the Integrity of\ntheir faculties return their Spirit unto God that gave it.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 5]\n\nBe charitable before wealth make thee covetous, and loose not the glory\nof the Mite. If Riches encrease let thy mind hold pace with them; and\nthink it not enough to be Liberal, but Munificent. Though a Cup of cold\nwater from some hand may not be without it's reward, yet stick not thou\nfor Wine and Oyl for the Wounds of the Distressed, and treat the poor,\nas our Saviour did the Multitude, to the reliques of some baskets.\nDiffuse thy beneficence early, and while thy Treasures call thee Master:\nthere may be an Atropos of thy Fortunes before that of thy Life, and thy\nwealth cut off before that hour, when all Men shall be poor; for the\nJustice of Death looks equally upon the dead, and _Charon_ expects no\nmore from _Alexander_ than from _Irus_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 6]\n\nGive not only unto seven, but also unto eight,[327] that is, unto more\nthan many. Though to give unto every one that asketh may seem severe\nadvice,[328] yet give thou also before asking; that is, where want is\nsilently clamorous, and mens Necessities not their Tongues do loudly\ncall for thy Mercies. For though sometimes necessitousness be dumb, or\nmisery speak not out, yet true Charity is sagacious, and will find out\nhints for beneficence. Acquaint thyself with the Physiognomy of Want,\nand let the Dead colours and first lines of necessity suffice to tell\nthee there is an object for thy bounty. Spare not where thou canst not\neasily be prodigal, and fear not to be undone by mercy. For since he who\nhath pity on the poor lendeth unto the Almighty Rewarder, who observes\nno Ides but every day for his payments; Charity becomes pious Usury,\nChristian Liberality the most thriving industry; and what we adventure\nin a Cockboat may return in a Carrack unto us. He who thus casts his\nbread upon the Water shall surely find it again; for though it falleth\nto the bottom, it sinks but like the Ax of the Prophet, to rise again\nunto him.\n\n [327] Ecclesiasticus.\n\n [328] Luke.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 7]\n\nIf Avarice be thy Vice, yet make it not thy Punishment. Miserable men\ncommiserate not themselves, bowelless unto others, and merciless unto\ntheir own bowels. Let the fruition of things bless the possession of\nthem, and think it more satisfaction to live richly than dye rich. For\nsince thy good works, not thy goods, will follow thee; since wealth is\nan appertinance of life, and no dead Man is Rich; to famish in Plenty,\nand live poorly, to dye Rich, were a multiplying improvement in Madness,\nand use upon use in Folly.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 8]\n\nTrust not to the Omnipotency of Gold, and say not unto it Thou art my\nConfidence. Kiss not thy hand to that Terrestrial Sun, nor bore thy ear\nunto its servitude. A Slave unto Mammon makes no servant unto God.\nCovetousness cracks the sinews of Faith; nummes the apprehension of any\nthing above sense; and only affected with the certainty of things\npresent, makes a peradventure of things to come; lives but unto one\nWorld, nor hopes but fears another; makes their own death sweet unto\nothers, bitter unto themselves; brings formal sadness, scenical\nmourning, and no wet eyes at the grave.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 9]\n\nPersons lightly dipt, not grain'd in generous Honesty, are but pale in\nGoodness, and faint hued in Integrity. But be thou what thou vertuously\nart, and let not the Ocean wash away thy Tincture. Stand magnetically\nupon that Axis, when prudent simplicity hath fixt there; and let no\nattraction invert the Poles of thy Honesty. That Vice may be uneasy and\neven monstrous unto thee, let iterated good Acts and long confirmed\nhabits make Virtue almost natural, or a second nature in thee. Since\nvirtuous superstructions have commonly generous foundations, dive into\nthy inclinations, and early discover what nature bids thee to be, or\ntells thee thou may'st be. They who thus timely descend into themselves,\nand cultivate the good seeds which nature hath set in them, prove not\nshrubs but Cedars in their generation. And to be in the form of the best\nof the Bad, or the worst of the Good,[329] will be no satisfaction unto\nthem.\n\n [329] Optimi malorum pessimi bonorum.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 10]\n\nMake not the consequence of Virtue the ends thereof. Be not beneficent\nfor a name or Cymbal of applause, nor exact and just in Commerce for the\nadvantages of Trust and Credit, which attend the reputation of true and\npunctual dealing. For these Rewards, though unsought for, plain Virtue\nwill bring with her. To have other by-ends in good actions sowers\nLaudable performances, which must have deeper roots, motives, and\ninstigations, to give them the stamp of Virtues.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 11]\n\nLet not the Law of thy Country be the non ultra of thy Honesty; nor\nthink that always good enough which the law will make good. Narrow not\nthe Law of Charity, Equity, Mercy. Joyn Gospel Righteousness with Legal\nRight. Be not a mere _Gamaliel_ in the Faith, but let the Sermon in the\nMount be thy _Targum_ unto the law of _Sinah_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 12]\n\nLive by old Ethicks and the classical Rules of Honesty. Put no new names\nor notions upon Authentick Virtues and Vices. Think not that Morality is\nAmbulatory; that Vices in one age are not Vices in another; or that\nVirtues, which are under the everlasting Seal of right Reason, may be\nStamped by Opinion. And therefore though vicious times invert the\nopinions of things, and set up a new Ethicks against Virtue, yet hold\nthou unto old Morality; and rather than follow a multitude to do evil,\nstand like _Pompey's_ pillar conspicuous by thyself, and single in\nIntegrity. And since the worst of times afford imitable Examples of\nVirtue; since no Deluge of Vice is like to be so general but more than\neight will escape; Eye well those Heroes who have held their Heads above\nWater, who have touched Pitch, and not been defiled, and in the common\nContagion have remained uncorrupted.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 13]\n\nLet Age not Envy draw wrinkles on thy cheeks, be content to be envy'd,\nbut envy not. Emulation may be plausible and Indignation allowable, but\nadmit no treaty with that passion which no circumstance can make good. A\ndisplacency at the good of others because they enjoy it, though not\nunworthy of it, is an absurd depravity, sticking fast unto corrupted\nnature, and often too hard for Humility and Charity, the great\nSuppressors of Envy. This surely is a Lyon not to be strangled but by\n_Hercules_ himself, or the highest stress of our minds, and an Atom of\nthat power which subdueth all things unto it self.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 14]\n\nOwe not thy Humility unto humiliation from adversity, but look humbly\ndown in that State when others look upwards upon thee. Think not thy own\nshadow longer than that of others, nor delight to take the Altitude of\nthyself. Be patient in the age of Pride, when Men live by short\nintervals of Reason under the dominion of Humor and Passion, when it's\nin the Power of every one to transform thee out of thy self, and run\nthee into the short madness. If you cannot imitate _Job_, yet come not\nshort of _Socrates_, and those patient Pagans who tired the Tongues of\ntheir Enemies, while they perceived they spit their malice at brazen\nWalls and Statues.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 15]\n\nLet not the Sun in Capricorn[330] go down upon thy wrath, but write thy\nwrongs in Ashes. Draw the Curtain of night upon injuries, shut them up\nin the Tower of Oblivion[331] and let them be as though they had not\nbeen. To forgive our Enemies, yet hope that God will punish them, is not\nto forgive enough. To forgive them our selves, and not to pray God to\nforgive them, is a partial piece of Charity. Forgive thine enemies\ntotally, and without any reserve that however God will revenge thee.\n\n [330] Even when the Days are shortest.\n\n [331] Alluding unto the Tower of Oblivion mentioned by _Procopius_,\n which was the name of a Tower of Imprisonment among the\n _Persians_: whoever was put therein was as it were buried alive,\n and it was death for any but to name him.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 16]\n\nWhile thou so hotly disclaimest the Devil, be not guilty of Diabolism.\nFall not into one name with that unclean Spirit, nor act his nature whom\nthou so much abhorrest; that is to Accuse, Calumniate, Backbite,\nWhisper, Detract, or sinistrously interpret others. Degenerous\ndepravities, and narrow minded vices! not only below St. _Paul's_ noble\nChristian but _Aristotle's_ true Gentleman.[332] Trust not with some\nthat the Epistle of St. _James_ is Apocryphal, and so read with less\nfear that Stabbing Truth, that in company with this vice thy religion is\nin vain. _Moses_ broke the Tables without breaking of the Law; but where\nCharity is broke, the Law it self is shattered, which cannot be whole\nwithout Love, which is the fulfilling of it. Look humbly upon thy\nVirtues, and though thou art Rich in some, yet think thyself Poor and\nNaked without that Crowning Grace, which thinketh no evil, which envieth\nnot, which beareth, hopeth, believeth, endureth all things. With these\nsure Graces, while busy Tongues are crying out for a drop of cold Water,\nmutes may be in happiness, and sing the _Trisagion_[333] in heaven.\n\n [332] See _Aristotle's_ Ethicks, chapter of Magnanimity.\n\n [333] Holy, holy, holy.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 17]\n\nHowever thy understanding may waver in the Theories of True and False,\nyet fasten the Rudder of thy Will, steer strait unto good and fall not\nfoul on evil. Imagination is apt to rove, and conjecture to keep no\nbounds. Some have run out so far, as to fancy the Stars might be but the\nlight of the Crystalline Heaven shot through perforations on the bodies\nof the Orbs. Others more Ingeniously doubt whether there hath not been a\nvast tract of land in the _Atlantick_ ocean, which Earthquakes and\nviolent causes have long ago devoured. Speculative Misapprehensions may\nbe innocuous, but immorality pernicious; Theorical mistakes and Physical\nDeviations may condemn our Judgments, not lead us into Judgment. But\nperversity of Will, immoral and sinfull enormities walk with _Adraste_\nand _Nemesis_ at their Backs, pursue us unto Judgment, and leave us\nviciously miserable.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 18]\n\nBid early defiance unto those Vices which are of thine inward Family,\nand having a root in thy Temper plead a right and propriety in thee.\nRaise timely batteries against those strong holds built upon the Rock of\nNature, and make this a great part of the Militia of thy life. Delude\nnot thyself into iniquities from participation or community, which abate\nthe sense but not the obliquity of them. To conceive sins less, or less\nof sins, because others also Transgress, were Morally to commit that\nnatural fallacy of Man, to take comfort from Society, and think\nadversities less, because others also suffer them. The politick nature\nof Vice must be opposed by Policy; and therefore wiser Honesties project\nand plot against it. Wherein notwithstanding we are not to rest in\ngenerals, or the trite Stratagems of Art. That may succeed with one\nwhich may prove successless with another: There is no community or\ncommonweal of Virtue: Every man must study his own oeconomy, and adapt\nsuch rules unto the figure of himself.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 19]\n\nBe substantially great in thy self, and more than thou appearest unto\nothers; and let the World be deceived in thee, as they are in the Lights\nof Heaven. Hang early plummets upon the heels of Pride, and let Ambition\nhave but an Epicycle and narrow circuit in thee. Measure not thy self by\nthy morning shadow, but by the extent of thy grave, and Reckon thy self\nabove the Earth by the line thou must be contented with under it. Spread\nnot into boundless Expansions either of designs or desires. Think not\nthat mankind liveth but for a few, and that the rest are born but to\nserve those Ambitions, which make but flies of Men and wildernesses of\nwhole Nations. Swell not into vehement actions which imbroil and\nconfound the Earth; but be one of those violent ones which force the\nKingdom of Heaven.[334] If thou must needs Rule, be _Zeno's_ king, and\nenjoy that empire which every Man gives himself. He who is thus his own\nMonarch contentedly sways the Scepter of himself, not envying the Glory\nof Crowned Heads and Elohims of the Earth. Could the World unite in the\npractise of that despised train of Virtues, which the Divine Ethicks of\nour Saviour hath so inculcated upon us, the furious face of things must\ndisappear, Eden would be yet to be found, and the Angels might look down\nnot with pity, but Joy upon us.\n\n [334] Matthew xi.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 20]\n\nThough the Quickness of thine Ear were able to reach the noise of the\nMoon, which some think it maketh in it's rapid revolution; though the\nnumber of thy Ears should equal _Argus_ his Eyes; yet stop them all with\nthe wise man's wax, and be deaf unto the suggestions of Tale-bearers,\nCalumniators, Pickthank or Malevolent Delators, who while quiet Men\nsleep, sowing the Tares of discord and division, distract the\ntranquillity of Charity and all friendly Society. These are the Tongues\nthat set the world on fire, cankers of reputation, and, like that of\n_Jonas_ his gourd, wither a good name in a night. Evil Spirits may sit\nstill, while these Spirits walk about, and perform the business of Hell.\nTo speak more strictly, our corrupted hearts are the Factories of the\nDevil, which may be at work without his presence. For when that\ncircumventing Spirit hath drawn Malice, Envy, and all unrighteousness\nunto well rooted habits in his disciples, iniquity then goes on upon its\nown legs, and if the gate of Hell were shut up for a time, Vice would\nstill be fertile and produce the fruits of Hell. Thus when God forsakes\nus, Satan also leaves us. For such offenders he looks upon as sure and\nsealed up, and his temptations then needless unto them.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 21]\n\nAnnihilate not the Mercies of God by the Oblivion of Ingratitude. For\nOblivion is a kind of Annihilation, and for things to be as though they\nhad not been, is like unto never being. Make not thy Head a Grave, but a\nRepository of God's Mercies. Though thou hadst the Memory of _Seneca_,\nor _Simonides_, and Conscience, the punctual Memorist within us, yet\ntrust not to thy Remembrance in things which need Phylacteries. Register\nnot only strange but merciful occurrences: Let _Ephemerides_ not\n_Olympiads_ give thee account of his mercies. Let thy Diaries stand\nthick with dutiful Mementos and Asterisks of acknowledgment. And to be\ncompleat and forget nothing, date not his mercy from thy nativity, Look\nbeyond the World, and before the _AEara_ of _Adam_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 22]\n\nPaint not the Sepulcher of thy self, and strive not to beautify thy\ncorruption. Be not an Advocate for thy Vices, nor call for many\nHour-Glasses to justify thy imperfections. Think not that always good\nwhich thou thinkest thou canst always make good, nor that concealed\nwhich the Sun doth not behold. That which the Sun doth not now see, will\nbe visible when the Sun is out, and the Stars are fallen from Heaven.\nMean while there is no darkness unto Conscience; which can see without\nLight, and in the deepest obscurity give a clear Draught of things,\nwhich the Cloud of dissimulation hath conceal'd from all eyes. There is\na natural standing Court within us, examining, acquitting, and\ncondemning at the Tribunal of ourselves, wherein iniquities have their\nnatural Theta's and no nocent is absolved by the verdict of himself. And\ntherefore although our transgressions shall be tryed at the last bar,\nthe process need not be long: for the Judge of all knoweth all, and\nevery Man will nakedly know himself. And when so few are like to plead\nnot Guilty, the Assize must soon have an end.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 23]\n\nComply with some humours, bear with others, but serve none. Civil\ncomplacency consists with decent honesty: Flattery is a Juggler, and no\nKin unto Sincerity. But while thou maintainest the plain path, and\nscornest to flatter others, fall not into self Adulation, and become not\nthine own Parasite. Be deaf unto thy self, and be not betrayed at home.\nSelf-credulity, pride, and levity lead unto self-Idolatry. There is no\n_Damocles_ like unto self opinion, nor any _Siren_ to our own fawning\nConceptions. To magnify our minor things, or hug ourselves in our\napparitions; to afford a credulous Ear unto the clawing suggestions of\nfancy; to pass our days in painted mistakes of our selves; and though we\nbehold our own blood, to think ourselves the sons of _Jupiter_;[335] are\nblandishments of self love, worse than outward delusion. By this\nImposture Wise Men sometimes are Mistaken in their Elevation, and look\nabove themselves. And Fools, which are Antipodes unto the Wise, conceive\nthemselves to be but their _Perioeci_, and in the same parallel with\nthem.\n\n [335] As _Alexander_ the Great did.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 24]\n\nBe not a _Hercules furens_ abroad, and a Poltron within thy self. To\nchase our Enemies out of the Field, and be led captive by our Vices; to\nbeat down our Foes, and fall down to our Concupiscences; are Solecisms\nin Moral Schools, and no Laurel attends them. To well manage our\nAffections, and wild Horses of _Plato_, are the highest Circenses; and\nthe noblest Digladiation is in the Theater of our selves; for therein\nour inward Antagonists, not only like common Gladiators, with ordinary\nWeapons and down right Blows make at us, but also like Retiary and\nLaqueary Combatants, with Nets, Frauds, and Entanglements, fall upon us.\nWeapons for such combats are not to be forged at _Lipara_: _Vulcan's_\nArt doth nothing in this internal Militia; wherein not the Armour of\n_Achilles_, but the Armature of _St. Paul_, gives the Glorious day, and\nTriumphs not Leading up into Capitols, but up into the highest Heavens.\nAnd therefore while so many think it the only valour to command and\nmaster others, study thou the Dominion of thy self, and quiet thine own\nCommotions. Let Right Reason be thy _Lycurgus_, and lift up thy hand\nunto the Law of it; move by the Intelligences of the superiour\nFaculties, not by the Rapt of Passion, nor merely by that of Temper and\nConstitution. They who are merely carried on by the Wheel of such\nInclinations, without the Hand and Guidance of Sovereign Reason, are but\nthe Automatous part of mankind, rather lived than living, or at least\nunder-living themselves.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 25]\n\nLet not Fortune, which hath no name in Scripture, have any in thy\nDivinity. Let Providence, not Chance, have the honour of thy\nacknowledgments, and be thy _OEdipus_ in Contingences. Mark well the\nPaths and winding Ways thereof; but be not too wise in the Construction,\nor sudden in the Application. The Hand of Providence writes often by\nAbbreviatures, Hieroglyphicks or short Characters, which, like the\nLaconism on the Wall, are not to be made out but by a Hint or Key from\nthat Spirit which indited them. Leave future occurrences to their\nuncertainties, think that which is present thy own; And since 'tis\neasier to foretell an Eclipse, than a foul Day at some distance, Look\nfor little Regular below. Attend with patience the uncertainty of\nThings, and what lieth yet unexerted in the Chaos of Futurity. The\nuncertainty and ignorance of Things to come makes the World new unto us\nby unexpected Emergences; whereby we pass not our days in the trite road\nof affairs affording no Novity; for the novellizing Spirit of Man lives\nby variety, and the new Faces of Things.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 26]\n\nThough a contented Mind enlargeth the dimension of little things; and\nunto some 'tis Wealth enough not to be Poor; and others are well\ncontent, if they be but Rich enough to be Honest, and to give every Man\nhis due: yet fall not into that obsolete Affectation of Bravery to throw\naway thy Money, and to reject all Honours or Honourable stations in this\ncourtly and splendid World. Old Generosity is superannuated, and such\ncontempt of the World out of date. No Man is now like to refuse the\nfavour of great ones, or be content to say unto Princes, stand out of my\nSun. And if any there be of such antiquated Resolutions, they are not\nlike to be tempted out of them by great ones; and 'tis fair if they\nescape the name of Hypocondriacks from the Genius of latter times, unto\nwhom contempt of the World is the most contemptible opinion, and to be\nable, like _Bias_, to carry all they have about them were to be the\neighth Wise-man. However, the old tetrick Philosophers look'd always\nwith Indignation upon such a Face of Things; and observing the unnatural\ncurrent of Riches, Power, and Honour in the World, and withal the\nimperfection and demerit of persons often advanced unto them, were\ntempted into angry Opinions, that Affairs were ordered more by Stars\nthan Reason, and that things went on rather by Lottery, than Election.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 27]\n\nIf thy Vessel be but small in the Ocean of this World, if Meanness of\nPossessions be thy allotment upon Earth, forget not those Virtues which\nthe great disposer of all bids thee to entertain from thy Quality and\nCondition, that is, Submission, Humility, Content of mind, and Industry.\nContent may dwell in all Stations. To be low, but above contempt, may be\nhigh enough to be Happy. But many of low Degree may be higher than\ncomputed, and some Cubits above the common Commensuration; for in all\nStates Virtue gives Qualifications, and Allowances, which make out\ndefects. Rough Diamonds are sometimes mistaken for Pebbles, and Meanness\nmay be Rich in Accomplishments, which Riches in vain desire. If our\nmerits be above our Stations, if our intrinsecal Value be greater than\nwhat we go for, or our Value than our Valuation, and if we stand higher\nin God's, than in the Censor's Book; it may make some equitable balance\nin the inequalities of this World, and there may be no such vast Chasm\nor Gulf between disparities as common Measures determine. The Divine Eye\nlooks upon high and low differently from that of Man. They who seem to\nstand upon _Olympus_, and high mounted unto our eyes, may be but in the\nValleys, and low Ground unto his; for he looks upon those as highest who\nnearest approach his Divinity, and upon those as lowest who are farthest\nfrom it.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 28]\n\nWhen thou lookest upon the Imperfections of others, allow one Eye for\nwhat is Laudable in them, and the balance they have from some\nexcellency, which may render them considerable. While we look with fear\nor hatred upon the Teeth of the Viper, we may behold his Eye with love.\nIn venemous Natures something may be amiable: Poysons afford\nAntipoysons: nothing is totally, or altogether uselessly bad. Notable\nVirtues are sometimes dashed with notorious Vices, and in some vicious\ntempers have been found illustrious Acts of Virtue; which makes such\nobservable worth in some actions of king _Demetrius_, _Antonius_, and\n_Ahab_, as are not to be found in the same kind in _Aristides_, _Numa_,\nor _David_. Constancy, Generosity, Clemency, and Liberality, have been\nhighly conspicuous in some Persons not markt out in other concerns for\nExample or Imitation. But since Goodness is exemplary in all, if others\nhave not our Virtues, let us not be wanting in theirs, nor scorning them\nfor their Vices whereof we are free, be condemned by their Virtues,\nwherein we are deficient. There is Dross, Alloy, and Embasement in all\nhuman Temper; and he flieth without Wings, who thinks to find Ophyr or\npure Metal in any. For perfection is not like Light center'd in any one\nbody, but like the dispersed Seminalities of Vegetables at the Creation\nscattered through the whole Mass of the Earth, no place producing all\nand almost all some. So that 'tis well, if a perfect Man can be made out\nof many Men, and to the Perfect Eye of God even out of Mankind. Time,\nwhich perfects some Things, imperfects also others. Could we intimately\napprehend the Ideated Man, and as he stood in the intellect of God upon\nthe first exertion by Creation, we might more narrowly comprehend our\npresent Degeneration, and how widely we are fallen from the pure\nExemplar and Idea of our Nature: for after this corruptive Elongation\nfrom a primitive and pure Creation, we are almost lost in Degeneration;\nand _Adam_ hath not only fallen from his Creator, but we ourselves from\n_Adam_, our Tycho and primary Generator.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 29]\n\nQuarrel not rashly with Adversities not yet understood; and overlook not\nthe Mercies often bound up in them. For we consider not sufficiently the\ngood of Evils, nor fairly compute the Mercies of Providence in things\nafflictive at first hand. The famous _Andreas Doria_ being invited to a\nfeast by _Aloysio Fieschi_ with design to Kill him, just the night\nbefore, fell mercifully into a fit of the Gout and so escaped that\nmischief. When _Cato_ intended to Kill himself, from a blow which he\ngave his servant, who would not reach his Sword unto him, his Hand so\nswell'd that he had much ado to Effect his design. Hereby any one but a\nresolved Stoick might have taken a fair hint of consideration, and that\nsome merciful Genius would have contrived his preservation. To be\nsagacious in such intercurrences is not Superstition, but wary and pious\nDiscretion: and to contemn such hints were to be deaf unto the speaking\nhand of God, wherein _Socrates_ and _Cardan_ would hardly have been\nmistaken.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 30]\n\nBreak not open the gate of Destruction, and make no haste or bustle unto\nRuin. Post not heedlessly on unto the _non ultra_ of Folly, or precipice\nof Perdition. Let vicious ways have their Tropicks and Deflexions, and\nswim in the Waters of Sin but as in the _Asphaltick_ Lake, though\nsmeared and defiled, not to sink to the bottom. If thou hast dipt thy\nfoot in the Brink, yet venture not over _Rubicon_. Run not into\nExtremities from whence there is no regression. In the vicious ways of\nthe World it mercifully falleth out that we become not extempore wicked,\nbut it taketh some time and pains to undo ourselves. We fall not from\nVirtue, like _Vulcan_ from Heaven, in a day. Bad Dispositions require\nsome time to grow into bad Habits, bad Habits must undermine good, and\noften repeated acts make us habitually evil: so that by gradual\ndepravations, and while we are but staggeringly evil, we are not left\nwithout Parentheses of considerations, thoughtful rebukes, and merciful\ninterventions, to recal us unto ourselves. For the Wisdom of God hath\nmethodiz'd the course of things unto the best advantage of goodness, and\nthinking Considerators overlook not the tract thereof.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Sect. 31]\n\nSince Men and Women have their proper Virtues and Vices, and even Twins\nof different sexes have not only distinct coverings in the Womb, but\ndiffering qualities and Virtuous Habits after; transplace not their\nProprieties, and confound not their Distinctions. Let Masculine and\nfeminine accomplishments shine in their proper Orbs, and adorn their\nRespective subjects. However unite not the Vices of both Sexes in one;\nbe not Monstrous in Iniquity, nor Hermaphroditically Vitious.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Sect. 32]\n\nIf generous Honesty, Valour, and plain Dealing, be the Cognisance of\nthy Family or Characteristick of thy Country, hold fast such\ninclinations suckt in with thy first Breath, and which lay in the Cradle\nwith thee. Fall not into transforming degenerations, which under the old\nname create a new Nation. Be not an Alien in thine own Nation; bring not\n_Orontes_ into _Tiber_; learn the Virtues not the Vices of thy foreign\nNeighbours, and make thy imitation by discretion not contagion. Feel\nsomething of thyself in the noble Acts of thy Ancestors, and find in\nthine own Genius that of thy Predecessors. Rest not under the Expired\nmerits of others, shine by those of thy own. Flame not like the central\nfire which enlightneth no Eyes, which no Man seeth, and most men think\nthere's no such thing to be seen. Add one Ray unto the common Lustre;\nadd not only to the Number but the Note of thy Generation; and prove not\na Cloud but an Asterisk in thy Region.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 33]\n\nSince thou hast an Alarum in thy Breast, which tells thee thou hast a\nLiving Spirit in thee above two thousand times in an hour; dull not away\nthy Days in sloathful supinity and the tediousness of doing nothing. To\nstrenuous Minds there is an inquietude in overquietness, and no\nlaboriousness in labour; and to tread a mile after the slow pace of a\nSnail, or the heavy measures of the Lazy of Brazilia, were a most tiring\nPennance, and worse than a race of some furlongs at the Olympicks. The\nrapid courses of the heavenly bodies are rather imitable by our\nThoughts, than our corporeal Motions; yet the solemn motions of our\nlives amount unto a greater measure than is commonly apprehended. Some\nfew men have surrounded the Globe of the Earth; yet many in the set\nLocomotions and movements of their days have measured the circuit of it,\nand twenty thousand miles have been exceeded by them. Move circumspectly\nnot meticulously, and rather carefully sollicitous than anxiously\nsollicitudinous. Think not there is a Lyon in the way, nor walk with\nLeaden Sandals in the paths of Goodness; but in all Virtuous motions let\nPrudence determine thy measures. Strive not to run like _Hercules_ a\nfurlong in a breath: Festination may prove Precipitation; Deliberating\ndelay may be wise cunctation, and slowness no sloathfulness.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 34]\n\nSince virtuous actions have their own Trumpets, and without any noise\nfrom thy self will have their resound abroad; busy not thy best Member\nin the Encomium of thy self. Praise is a debt we owe unto the Virtues of\nothers, and due unto our own from all, whom Malice hath not made Mutes,\nor Envy struck Dumb. Fall not however into the common prevaricating way\nof self commendation and boasting, by denoting the imperfections of\nothers. He who discommendeth others obliquely commendeth himself. He who\nwhispers their infirmities proclaims his own Exemption from them; and\nconsequently says, I am not as this Publican, or _Hic Niger_,[336] whom\nI talk of. Open ostentation and loud vain-glory is more tolerable than\nthis obliquity, as but containing some Froath, no Ink, as but consisting\nof a personal piece of folly, nor complicated with uncharitableness.\nSuperfluously we seek a precarious applause abroad: every good Man hath\nhis plaudite within himself; and though his Tongue be silent, is not\nwithout loud Cymbals in his Breast. Conscience will become his\nPanegyrist, and never forget to crown and extol him unto himself.\n\n [336] Hic niger est, hunc tu Romane caveto. _Horace._\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 35]\n\nBless not thy self only that thou wert born in _Athens_;[337] but among\nthy multiplyed acknowledgments lift up one hand unto Heaven, that thou\nwert born of Honest Parents, that Modesty, Humility, Patience, and\nVeracity lay in the same Egg, and came into the World with thee. From\nsuch foundations thou may'st be Happy in a Virtuous precocity, and make\nan early and long walk in Goodness; so may'st thou more naturally feel\nthe contrariety of Vice unto Nature, and resist some by the Antidote of\nthy Temper. As Charity covers, so Modesty preventeth a multitude of\nsins; withholding from noon day Vices and brazen-brow'd Iniquities, from\nsinning on the house-top, and painting our follies with the rays of the\nSun. Where this Virtue reigneth, though Vice may show its Head, it\ncannot be in its Glory: where shame of sin sets, look not for Virtue to\narise; for when Modesty taketh Wing, _Astraea_[338] goes soon after.\n\n [337] As _Socrates_ did. _Athens_ a place of Learning and Civility.\n\n [338] _Astraea_ Goddess of justice and consequently of all virtue.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 36]\n\nThe Heroical vein of Mankind runs much in the Souldiery, and couragious\npart of the World; and in that form we oftenest find Men above Men.\nHistory is full of the gallantry of that Tribe; and when we read their\nnotable Acts, we easily find what a difference there is between a Life\nin _Plutarch_ and in _Laertius_. Where true Fortitude dwells, Loyalty,\nBounty, Friendship, and Fidelity, may be found. A man may confide in\npersons constituted for noble ends, who dare do and suffer, and who have\na Hand to burn for their Country and their Friend. Small and creeping\nthings are the product of petty Souls. He is like to be mistaken, who\nmakes choice of a covetous Man for a Friend, or relieth upon the Reed of\nnarrow and poltron Friendship. Pityful things are only to be found in\nthe cottages of such Breasts; but bright Thoughts, clear Deeds,\nConstancy, Fidelity, Bounty, and generous Honesty are the Gems of noble\nMinds; wherein, to derogate from none, the true Heroick English\nGentleman hath no Peer.\n\n\n\n\nPART II\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 1]\n\nPunish not thy self with Pleasure; Glut not thy sense with palative\nDelights; nor revenge the contempt of Temperance by the penalty of\nSatiety. Were there an Age of delight or any pleasure durable, who would\nnot honour _Volupia_? but the Race of Delight is short, and Pleasures have\nmutable faces. The pleasures of one age are not pleasures in another, and\ntheir Lives fall short of our own. Even in our sensual days, the strength\nof delight is in its seldomness or rarity, and sting in its satiety:\nMediocrity is its Life, and immoderacy its Confusion. The Luxurious\nEmperors of old inconsiderately satiated themselves with the dainties of\nSea and Land, till, wearied through all varieties, their refections became\na study unto them, and they were fain to feed by Invention. Novices in\ntrue Epicurism! which by mediocrity, paucity, quick and healthful\nAppetite, makes delights smartly acceptable; whereby _Epicurus_ himself\nfound _Jupiter's_ brain[339] in a piece of Cytheridian Cheese, and the\nTongues of Nightingals in a dish of Onyons. Hereby healthful and temperate\npoverty hath the start of nauseating Luxury; unto whose clear and naked\nappetite every meal is a feast, and in one single dish the first course of\n_Metellus_;[340] who are cheaply hungry, and never loose their hunger, or\nadvantage of a craving appetite, because obvious food contents it; while\n_Nero_,[341] half famish'd, could not feed upon a piece of Bread, and\nlingring after his snowed water, hardly got down an ordinary cup of\nCalda.[342] By such circumscriptions of pleasure the contemned\nPhilosophers reserved unto themselves the secret of Delight, which the\n_Helluo's_ of those days lost in their exorbitances. In vain we study\nDelight: It is at the command of every sober Mind, and in every sense born\nwith us: but Nature, who teacheth us the rule of pleasure, instructeth\nalso in the bounds thereof, and where its line expireth. And therefore\nTemperate Minds, not pressing their pleasures until the sting appeareth,\nenjoy their contentations contentedly, and without regret, and so escape\nthe folly of excess, to be pleased unto displacency.\n\n [339] _Cerebrum Jovis_, for a delicious bit.\n\n [340] _Metellus_ his riotous Pontifical Supper, the great variety\n whereat is to be seen in _Macrobius_.\n\n [341] _Nero_ in his flight. _Sueton._\n\n [342] _Caldae gelidaeque minister._\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 2]\n\nBring candid Eyes unto the perusal of mens works, and let not _Zoilism_\nor Detraction blast well intended labours. He that endureth no faults in\nmens writings must only read his own, wherein for the most part all\nappeareth White. Quotation mistakes, inadvertency, expedition, and human\nLapses may make not only Moles but Warts in Learned Authors, who\nnotwithstanding being judged by the capital matter admit not of\ndisparagement. I should unwillingly affirm that Cicero was but slightly\nversed in _Homer_, because in his work _de Gloria_ he ascribed those\nverses unto _Ajax_, which were delivered by _Hector_. What if _Plautus_\nin the account of _Hercules_ mistaketh nativity for conception? Who\nwould have mean thoughts of _Apollinaris Sidonius_, who seems to mistake\nthe river _Tigris_ for _Euphrates_; and though a good Historian and\nlearned Bishop of _Auvergne_ had the misfortune to be out in the Story\nof _David_, making mention of him when the Ark was sent back by the\n_Philistins_ upon a Cart; which was before his time. Though I have no\ngreat opinion of _Machiavel's_ learning, yet I shall not presently say,\nthat he was but a Novice in Roman History, because he was mistaken in\nplacing _Commodus_ after the Emperour _Severus_. Capital Truths are to\nbe narrowly eyed, collateral Lapses and circumstantial deliveries not to\nbe too strictly sifted. And if the substantial subject be well forged\nout, we need not examine the sparks, which irregularly fly from it.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 3]\n\nLet well weighed Considerations, not stiff and peremptory Assumptions,\nguide thy discourses, Pen, and Actions. To begin or continue our works\nlike _Trismegistus_ of old, _verum certe verum atque verissimum\nest_,[343] would sound arrogantly unto present Ears in this strict\nenquiring Age, wherein, for the most part, Probably, and Perhaps, will\nhardly serve to mollify the Spirit of captious Contradictors. If\n_Cardan_ saith that a Parrot is a beautiful Bird, _Scaliger_ will set\nhis Wits o' work to prove it a deformed Animal. The Compage of all\nPhysical Truths is not so closely jointed, but opposition may find\nintrusion, nor always so closely maintained, as not to suffer attrition.\nMany Positions seem quodlibetically constituted, and like a _Delphian_\nblade will cut on both sides. Some Truths seem almost Falshoods, and\nsome Falshoods almost Truths; wherein Falshood and Truth seem almost\naequilibriously stated, and but a few grains of distinction to bear down\nthe ballance. Some have digged deep, yet glanced by the Royal Vein; and\na man may come unto the _Pericardium_, but not the Heart of Truth.\nBesides, many things are known, as some are seen, that is by Parallaxis,\nor at some distance from their true and proper beings, the superficial\nregard of things having a different aspect from their true and central\nNatures. And this moves sober Pens unto suspensory and timorous\nassertions, nor presently to obtrude them as _Sibyls_ leaves, which\nafter considerations may find to be but folious apparances, and not the\ncentral and vital interiors of truth.\n\n [343] _In Tabula Smaragdina._\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 4]\n\nValue the Judicious, and let not mere acquests in minor parts of\nLearning gain thy preexistimation. 'Tis an unjust way of compute to\nmagnify a weak Head for some Latin abilities, and to undervalue a solid\nJudgment, because he knows not the genealogy of _Hector_. When that\nnotable King of _France_[344] would have his son to know but one\nsentence in Latin, had it been a good one, perhaps it had been enough.\nNatural parts and good Judgments rule the World. States are not governed\nby Ergotisms. Many have Ruled well who could not perhaps define a\nCommonwealth, and they who understand not the Globe of the Earth command\na great part of it. Where natural Logick prevails not, Artificial too\noften faileth. Where Nature fills the Sails, the Vessel goes smoothly\non, and when Judgment is the Pilot, the Ensurance need not be high. When\nIndustry builds upon Nature, we may expect Pyramids: where that\nfoundation is wanting, the structure must be low. They do most by Books,\nwho could do much without them; and he that chiefly ows himself unto\nhimself is the substantial Man.\n\n [344] Lewis the Eleventh. _Qui nescit dissimulare nescit Regnare._\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 5]\n\nLet thy Studies be as free as thy Thoughts and Contemplations: but fly\nnot only upon the wings of Imagination; Joyn Sense unto Reason, and\nExperiment unto Speculation, and so give life unto Embryon Truths, and\nVerities yet in their Chaos. There is nothing more acceptable unto the\nIngenious World, than this noble Eluctation of Truth; wherein, against\nthe tenacity of Prejudice and Prescription, this Century now prevaileth.\nWhat Libraries of new Volumes aftertimes will behold, and in what a new\nWorld of Knowledge the eyes of our posterity may be happy, a few Ages\nmay joyfully declare; and is but a cold thought unto those, who cannot\nhope to behold this Exantlation of Truth, or that obscured Virgin half\nout of the Pit. Which might make some content with a commutation of the\ntime of their lives, and to commend the Fancy of the _Pythagorean_\nmetempsychosis; whereby they might hope to enjoy this happiness in their\nthird or fourth selves, and behold that in _Pythagoras_, which they now\nbut foresee in _Euphorbus_.[345] The World, which took but six days to\nmake, is like to take six thousand to make out: mean while old Truths\nvoted down begin to resume their places, and new ones arise upon us;\nwherein there is no comfort in the happiness of _Tully's_ Elizium[346],\nany satisfaction from the Ghosts of the Ancients, who knew so little of\nwhat is now well known. Men disparage not Antiquity, who prudently exalt\nnew Enquiries, and make not them the Judges of Truth, who were but\nfellow Enquirers of it. Who can but magnify the Endeavors of\n_Aristotle_, and the noble start which Learning had under him; or less\nthan pitty the slender progression made upon such advantages? While many\nCenturies were lost in repetitions and transcriptions sealing up the\nBook of Knowledge. And therefore rather than to swell the leaves of\nLearning by fruitless Repetitions, to sing the same Song in all Ages,\nnor adventure at Essays beyond the attempt of others, many would be\ncontent that some would write like _Helmont_ and _Paracelsus_; and be\nwilling to endure the monstrosity of some opinions, for divers singular\nnotions requiting such aberrations.\n\n [345] _Ipse ego, nam memini, Trojani in tempore belli\n Panthoides Euphorbus eram._\n\n [346] Who comforted himself that he should there converse with the old\n Philosophers.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 6]\n\nDespise not the obliquities of younger ways, nor despair of better\nthings whereof there is yet no prospect. Who would imagine that\n_Diogenes_, who in his younger days was a falsifier of Money, should in\nthe after course of his life be so great a contemner of Metal? Some\nNegros who believe the Resurrection, think that they shall Rise\nwhite.[347] Even in this life Regeneration may imitate Resurrection, our\nblack and vitious tinctures may wear off, and goodness cloath us with\ncandour. Good admonitions Knock not always in vain. There will be signal\nExamples of God's mercy, and the Angels must not want their charitable\nRejoyces for the conversion of lost Sinners. Figures of most Angles do\nnearest approach unto Circles, which have no Angles at all. Some may be\nnear unto goodness, who are conceived far from it, and many things\nhappen, not likely to ensue from any promises of Antecedencies. Culpable\nbeginnings have found commendable conclusions, and infamous courses\npious retractations. Detestable Sinners have proved exemplary Converts\non Earth, and may be Glorious in the Apartment of _Mary Magdalen_ in\nHeaven. Men are not the same through all divisions of their Ages. Time,\nExperience, self Reflexions, and God's mercies make in some\nwell-temper'd minds a kind of translation before Death, and Men to\ndiffer from themselves as well as from other Persons. Hereof the old\nWorld afforded many Examples to the infamy of latter Ages, wherein Men\ntoo often live by the rule of their inclinations; so that, without any\nastral prediction, the first day gives the last,[348] Men are commonly\nas they were, or rather, as bad dispositions run into worser habits, the\nEvening doth not crown, but sowerly conclude the Day.\n\n [347] Mandelslo.\n\n [348] _Primusque dies dedit extremum._\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 7]\n\nIf the Almighty will not spare us according to his merciful capitulation\nat _Sodom_, if his Goodness please not to pass over a great deal of Bad\nfor a small pittance of Good, or to look upon us in the Lump; there is\nslender hope for Mercy, or sound presumption of fulfilling half his\nWill, either in Persons or Nations: they who excel in some Virtues being\nso often defective in others; few Men driving at the extent and\namplitude of Goodness, but computing themselves by their best parts, and\nothers by their worst, are content to rest in those Virtues, which\nothers commonly want. Which makes this speckled Face of Honesty in the\nWorld; and which was the imperfection of the old Philosophers and great\npretenders unto Virtue, who well declining the gaping Vices of\nIntemperance, Incontinency, Violence and Oppression, were yet blindly\npeccant in iniquities of closer faces, were envious, malicious,\ncontemners, scoffers, censurers, and stufft with Vizard Vices, no less\ndepraving the Ethereal particle and diviner portion of Man. For Envy,\nMalice, Hatred, are the qualities of _Satan_, close and dark like\nhimself; and where such brands smoak the Soul cannot be White. Vice may\nbe had at all prices; expensive and costly iniquities, which make the\nnoise, cannot be every Man's sins: but the soul may be foully inquinated\nat a very low rate, and a Man may be cheaply vitious, to the perdition\nof himself.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 8]\n\nOpinion rides upon the neck of Reason, and Men are Happy, Wise, or\nLearned, according as that Empress shall set them down in the Register\nof Reputation. However weigh not thyself in the scales of thy own\nopinion, but let the Judgment of the Judicious be the Standard of thy\nMerit. Self-estimation is a flatterer too readily intitling us unto\nKnowledge and Abilities, which others sollicitously labour after, and\ndoubtfully think they attain. Surely such confident tempers do pass\ntheir days in best tranquility, who, resting in the opinion of their own\nabilities, are happily gull'd by such contentation; wherein Pride,\nSelf-conceit, Confidence, and Opiniatrity will hardly suffer any to\ncomplain of imperfection. To think themselves in the right, or all that\nright, or only that, which they do or think, is a fallacy of high\ncontent; though others laugh in their sleeves, and look upon them as in\na deluded state of Judgment. Wherein notwithstanding 'twere but a civil\npiece of complacency to suffer them to sleep who would not wake, to let\nthem rest in their securities, nor by dissent or opposition to stagger\ntheir contentments.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 9]\n\nSince the Brow speaks often true, since Eyes and Noses have Tongues, and\nthe countenance proclaims the Heart and inclinations; let observation so\nfar instruct thee in Physiognomical lines, as to be some Rule for thy\ndistinction, and Guide for thy affection unto such as look most like\nMen. Mankind, methinks, is comprehended in a few Faces, if we exclude\nall Visages, which any way participate of Symmetries and Schemes of Look\ncommon unto other Animals. For as though Man were the extract of the\nWorld, in whom all were _in coagulato_, which in their forms were _in\nsoluto_, and at Extension; we often observe that Men do most act those\nCreatures, whose constitution, parts, and complexion do most predominate\nin their mixtures. This is a corner-stone in Physiognomy, and holds some\nTruth not only in particular Persons but also in whole Nations. There\nare therefore Provincial Faces, National Lips and Noses, which testify\nnot only the Natures of those Countries, but of those which have them\nelsewhere. Thus we may make _England_ the whole Earth, dividing it not\nonly into _Europe_, _Asia_, _Africa_, but the particular Regions\nthereof, and may in some latitude affirm, that there are _AEgyptians_,\n_Scythians_, _Indians_ among us; who though born in _England_, yet carry\nthe Faces and Air of those Countries, and are also agreeable and\ncorrespondent unto their Natures. Faces look uniformly unto our Eyes:\nHow they appear unto some Animals of a more piercing or differing sight,\nwho are able to discover the inequalities, rubbs, and hairiness of the\nSkin, is not without good doubt. And therefore in reference unto Man,\n_Cupid_ is said to be blind. Affection should not be too sharp-Eyed, and\nLove is not to be made by magnifying Glasses. If things were seen as\nthey truly are, the beauty of bodies would be much abridged. And\ntherefore the wise Contriver hath drawn the pictures and outsides of\nthings softly and amiably unto the natural Edge of our Eyes, not leaving\nthem able to discover those uncomely asperities, which make\nOyster-shells in good Faces, and Hedghoggs even in _Venus's_ moles.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 10]\n\nCourt not Felicity too far, and weary not the favorable hand of Fortune.\nGlorious actions have their times, extent, and _non ultra's_. To put no\nend unto Attempts were to make prescription of Successes, and to bespeak\nunhappiness at the last. For the Line of our Lives is drawn with white\nand black vicissitudes, wherein the extremes hold seldom one complexion.\nThat _Pompey_ should obtain the sirname of Great at twenty five years,\nthat Men in their young and active days should be fortunate and perform\nnotable things, is no observation of deep wonder, they having the\nstrength of their fates before them, nor yet acted their parts in the\nWorld, for which they were brought into it: whereas Men of years,\nmatured for counsels and designs, seem to be beyond the vigour of their\nactive fortunes, and high exploits of life, providentially ordained unto\nAges best agreeable unto them. And therefore many brave men finding\ntheir fortune grow faint, and feeling its declination, have timely\nwithdrawn themselves from great attempts, and so escaped the ends of\nmighty Men, disproportionable to their beginnings. But magnanimous\nthoughts have so dimmed the Eyes of many, that forgetting the very\nessence of Fortune, and the vicissitude of good and evil, they apprehend\nno bottom in felicity; and so have been still tempted on unto mighty\nActions, reserved for their destructions. For Fortune lays the Plot of\nour Adversities in the foundation of our Felicities, blessing us in the\nfirst quadrate, to blast us more sharply in the last. And since in the\nhighest felicities there lieth a capacity of the lowest miseries, she\nhath this advantage from our happiness to make us truly miserable. For\nto become acutely miserable we are to be first happy. Affliction smarts\nmost in the most happy state, as having somewhat in it of _Bellisarius_\nat Beggers bush, or _Bajazet_ in the grate. And this the fallen Angels\nseverely understand, who having acted their first part in Heaven, are\nmade sharply miserable by transition, and more afflictively feel the\ncontrary state of Hell.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 11]\n\nCarry no careless Eye upon the unexpected scenes of things; but ponder\nthe acts of Providence in the publick ends of great and notable Men, set\nout unto the view of all for no common _memorandums_. The Tragical Exits\nand unexpected periods of some eminent Persons cannot but amuse\nconsiderate Observators; wherein notwithstanding most men seem to see by\nextramission, without reception or self-reflexion, and conceive\nthemselves unconcerned by the fallacy of their own Exemption: Whereas\nthe Mercy of God hath singled out but few to be the signals of his\nJustice, leaving the generality of Mankind to the paedagogy of Example.\nBut the inadvertency of our Natures not well apprehending this favorable\nmethod and merciful decimation, and that he sheweth in some what others\nalso deserve; they entertain no sense of his Hand beyond the stroak of\nthemselves. Whereupon the whole becomes necessarily punished, and the\ncontracted Hand of God extended unto universal Judgments: from whence\nnevertheless the stupidity of our tempers receives but faint\nimpressions, and in the most Tragical state of times holds but starts of\ngood motions. So that to continue us in goodness there must be iterated\nreturns of misery, and a circulation in afflictions is necessary. And\nsince we cannot be wise by warnings, since Plagues are insignificant,\nexcept we be personally plagued, since also we cannot be punish'd unto\nAmendment by proxy or commutation, nor by vicinity, but contaction;\nthere is an unhappy necessity that we must smart in our own Skins, and\nthe provoked arm of the Almighty must fall upon ourselves. The capital\nsufferings of others are rather our monitions than acquitments. There is\nbut one who died salvifically for us, and able to say unto Death,\nhitherto shalt thou go and no farther; only one enlivening Death, which\nmakes Gardens of Graves, and that which was sowed in Corruption to arise\nand flourish in Glory: when Death it self shall dye, and living shall\nhave no Period, when the damned shall mourn at the funeral of Death,\nwhen Life not Death shall be the wages of sin, when the second Death\nshall prove a miserable Life, and destruction shall be courted.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 12]\n\nAlthough their Thoughts may seem too severe, who think that few ill\nnatur'd Men go to heaven; yet it may be acknowledged that good natur'd\nPersons are best founded for that place; who enter the World with good\nDispositions, and natural Graces, more ready to be advanced by\nimpressions from above, and christianized unto pieties; who carry about\nthem plain and down right dealing Minds, Humility, Mercy, Charity, and\nVirtues acceptable unto God and Man. But whatever success they may have\nas to Heaven, they are the acceptable Men on Earth, and happy is he who\nhath his quiver full of them for his Friends. These are not the Dens\nwherein Falshood lurks, and Hypocrisy hides its Head, wherein\nFrowardness makes its Nest, or where Malice, Hard-heartedness, and\nOppression love to dwell; not those by whom the Poor get little, and the\nRich some time loose all; Men not of retracted Looks, but who carry\ntheir Hearts in their Faces, and need not to be look'd upon with\nperspectives; not sordidly or mischievously ingrateful; who cannot learn\nto ride upon the neck of the afflicted, nor load the heavy laden, but\nwho keep the temple of _Janus_ shut by peaceable and quiet tempers; who\nmake not only the best Friends, but the best Enemies, as easier to\nforgive than offend, and ready to pass by the second offence, before\nthey avenge the first; who make natural Royalists, obedient Subjects,\nkind and merciful Princes, verified in our own, one of the best natur'd\nKings of this Throne. Of the old Roman Emperours the best were the best\nnatur'd; though they made but a small number, and might be writ in a\nRing. Many of the rest were as bad Men as Princes; Humorists rather than\nof good humors, and of good natural parts, rather than of good natures:\nwhich did but arm their bad inclinations, and make them wittily wicked.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 13]\n\nWith what shift and pains we come into the World we remember not; but\n'tis commonly found no easy matter to get out of it. Many have studied\nto exasperate the ways of Death, but fewer hours have been spent to\nsoften that necessity. That the smoothest way unto the grave is made by\nbleeding, as common opinion presumeth, beside the sick and fainting\nLanguors which accompany that effusion, the experiment in _Lucan_ and\n_Seneca_ will make us doubt; under which the noble Stoick so deeply\nlaboured, that, to conceal his affliction, he was fain to retire from\nthe sight of his Wife, and not ashamed to implore the merciful hand of\nhis Physician to shorten his misery therein. _Ovid_,[349] the old\nHeroes, and the Stoicks, who were so afraid of drowning, as dreading\nthereby the extinction of their Soul, which they conceived to be a Fire,\nstood probably in fear of an easier way of Death; wherein the Water,\nentring the possessions of Air, makes a temperate suffocation, and kills\nas it were without a fever. Surely many, who have had the Spirit to\ndestroy themselves, have not been ingenious in the contrivance thereof.\n'Twas a dull way practised by _Themistocles_[350], overwhelm himself\nwith Bulls-blood, who, being an _Athenian_, might have held an easier\nTheory of Death from the state potion of his Country; from which\n_Socrates_ in _Plato_ seemed not to suffer much more than from the fit\nof an Ague. _Cato_ is much to be pitied, who mangled himself with\npoyniards; and _Hannibal_ seems more subtle, who carried his delivery,\nnot in the point but the pummel[351] of his Sword.\n\n [349] _Demito naufragium, mors mihi munus erit._\n\n [350] _Plutarch._\n\n [351] Pummel, wherein he is said to have carried something, whereby\n upon a struggle or despair he might deliver himself from all\n misfortunes.\n\nThe _Egyptians_ were merciful contrivers, who destroyed their\nmalefactors by Asps, charming their senses into an invincible sleep, and\nkilling as it were with _Hermes_ his Rod. The Turkish Emperour,[352]\nodious for other Cruelty, was herein a remarkable Master of Mercy,\nkilling his Favorite in his sleep, and sending him from the shade into\nthe house of darkness. He who had been thus destroyed would hardly have\nbled at the presence of his destroyer; when Men are already dead by\nmetaphor, and pass but from one sleep unto another, wanting herein the\neminent part of severity, to feel themselves to dye, and escaping the\nsharpest attendant of Death, the lively apprehension thereof. But to\nlearn to dye is better than to study the ways of dying. Death will find\nsome ways to unty or cut the most Gordian Knots of Life, and make men's\nmiseries as mortal as themselves: whereas evil Spirits, as undying\nSubstances, are unseparable from their calamities; and therefore they\neverlastingly struggle under their _Angustia's_, and bound up with\nimmortality can never get out of themselves.\n\n [352] _Solyman._ Turkish history.\n\n\n\n\nPART III\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 1]\n\n'Tis hard to find a whole Age to imitate, or what Century to propose for\nExample. Some have been far more approveable than others: but Virtue and\nVice, Panegyricks and Satyrs, scatteringly to be found in all. History\nsets down not only things laudable, but abominable; things which should\nnever have been, or never have been known: So that noble patterns must\nbe fetched here and there from single Persons, rather than whole\nNations, and from all Nations, rather than any one. The World was early\nbad, and the first sin the most deplorable of any. The younger World\nafforded the oldest Men, and perhaps the Best and the Worst, when length\nof days made virtuous habits Heroical and immoveable, vitious,\ninveterate, and irreclaimable. And since 'tis said the imaginations of\ntheir hearts were evil, only evil, and continually evil; it may be\nfeared that their sins held pace with their lives; and their Longevity\nswelling their Impieties, the Longanimity of God would no longer endure\nsuch vivacious abominations. Their Impieties were surely of a deep dye,\nwhich required the whole Element of Water to wash them away, and\noverwhelmed their memories with themselves; and so shut up the first\nWindows of Time, leaving no Histories of those longevous generations,\nwhen Men might have been properly Historians, when _Adam_ might have\nread long Lectures unto _Methuselah_, and _Methuselah_ unto _Noah_. For\nhad we been happy in just Historical accounts of that unparallel'd\nWorld, we might have been acquainted with Wonders; and have understood\nnot a little of the Acts and undertakings of _Moses_ his mighty Men, and\nMen of renown of old; which might have enlarged our Thoughts, and made\nthe World older unto us. For the unknown part of time shortens the\nestimation, if not the compute of it. What hath escaped our Knowledge\nfalls not under our Consideration, and what is and will be latent is\nlittle better than non existent.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 2]\n\nSome things are dictated for our Instruction, some acted for our\nImitation, wherein 'tis best to ascend unto the highest conformity, and\nto the honour of the Exemplar. He honours God who imitates him. For what\nwe virtuously imitate we approve and Admire; and since we delight not to\nimitate Inferiors, we aggrandize and magnify those we imitate; since\nalso we are most apt to imitate those we love, we testify our affection\nin our imitation of the Inimitable. To affect to be like may be no\nimitation. To act, and not to be what we pretend to imitate, is but a\nmimical conformation, and carrieth no Virtue in it. _Lucifer_ imitated\nnot God, when he said he would be like the Highest, and he imitated not\n_Jupiter_, who counterfeited Thunder. Where Imitation can go no farther,\nlet Admiration step on, whereof there is no end in the wisest form of\nMen. Even Angels and Spirits have enough to admire in their sublimer\nNatures, Admiration being the act of the Creature and not of God, who\ndoth not Admire himself. Created Natures allow of swelling Hyperboles;\nnothing can be said Hyperbolically of God, nor will his Attributes admit\nof expressions above their own Exuperances. _Trismegistus_ his Circle,\nwhose center is every where, and circumference no where, was no\nHyperbole. Words cannot exceed, where they cannot express enough. Even\nthe most winged Thoughts fall at the setting out, and reach not the\nportal of Divinity.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 3]\n\nIn Bivious Theorems, and _Janus_-faced Doctrines, let Virtuous\nconsiderations state the determination. Look upon Opinions as thou dost\nupon the Moon, and chuse not the dark hemisphere for thy contemplation.\nEmbrace not the opacous and blind side of Opinions, but that which looks\nmost Luciferously or influentially unto Goodness. 'Tis better to think\nthat there are Guardian Spirits, than that there are no Spirits to Guard\nus; that vicious Persons are Slaves, than that there is any servitude in\nVirtue; that times past have been better than times present, than that\ntimes were always bad, and that to be Men it sufficeth to be no better\nthan Men in all Ages, and so promiscuously to swim down the turbid\nstream, and make up the grand confusion. Sow not thy understanding with\nOpinions, which make nothing of Iniquities, and fallaciously extenuate\nTransgressions. Look upon Vices and vicious Objects with Hyperbolical\nEyes, and rather enlarge their dimensions, that their unseen Deformities\nmay not escape thy sense, and their Poysonous parts and stings may\nappear massy and monstrous unto thee; for the undiscerned Particles and\nAtoms of Evil deceive us, and we are undone by the Invisibles of seeming\nGoodness. We are only deceived in what is not discerned, and to Err is\nbut to be Blind or Dim-sighted as to some Perceptions.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 4]\n\nTo be Honest in a right Line,[353] and Virtuous by Epitome, be firm unto\nsuch Principles of Goodness, as carry in them Volumes of instruction and\nmay abridge thy Labour. And since instructions are many, hold close unto\nthose, whereon the rest depend. So may we have all in a few, and the Law\nand the Prophets in a Rule, the Sacred Writ in Stenography, and the\nScripture in a Nut-Shell. To pursue the osseous and solid part of\nGoodness, which gives Stability and Rectitude to all the rest; To settle\non fundamental Virtues, and bid early defiance unto Mother-vices, which\ncarry in their Bowels the seminals of other Iniquities, makes a short\ncut in Goodness, and strikes not off an Head but the whole Neck of\n_Hydra_. For we are carried into the dark Lake, like the _AEgyptian_\nRiver into the Sea, by seven principal Ostiaries. The Mother-Sins of\nthat number are the Deadly engins of Evil Spirits that undo us, and even\nevil Spirits themselves, and he who is under the Chains thereof is not\nwithout a possession. _Mary Magdalene_ had more than seven Devils, if\nthese with their Imps were in her, and he who is thus possessed, may\nliterally be named _Legion_. Where such Plants grow and prosper, look\nfor no Champain or Region void of Thorns, but productions like the Tree\nof _Goa_,[354] and Forrests of abomination.\n\n [353] _Linea recta brevissima._\n\n [354] _Arbor Goa de Ruyz_, or _ficus Indica_, whose branches send down\n shoots which root in the ground, from whence there successively\n rise others, till one Tree becomes a wood.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 5]\n\nGuide not the Hand of God, nor order the Finger of the Almighty, unto\nthy will and pleasure; but sit quiet in the soft showers of Providence,\nand Favourable distributions in this World, either to thyself or others.\nAnd since not only Judgments have their Errands, but Mercies their\nCommissions; snatch not at every Favour, nor think thy self passed by if\nthey fall upon thy Neighbour. Rake not up envious displacences at things\nsuccessful unto others, which the wise Disposer of all thinks not fit\nfor thy self. Reconcile the events of things unto both beings, that is,\nof this World and the next: So will there not seem so many Riddles in\nProvidence, nor various inequalities in the dispensation of things\nbelow. If thou dost not anoint thy Face, yet put not on sackcloth at the\nfelicities of others. Repining at the Good draws on rejoicing at the\nevils of others, and so falls into that inhumane Vice,[355] for which so\nfew Languages have a name. The blessed Spirits above rejoice at our\nhappiness below: but to be glad at the evils of one another, is beyond\nthe malignity of Hell, and falls not on evil Spirits, who, though they\nrejoice at our unhappiness, take no pleasure at the afflictions of their\nown Society or of their fellow Natures. Degenerous Heads! who must be\nfain to learn from such Examples, and to be Taught from the School of\nHell.\n\n [355] +Epichairekakia+.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 6]\n\nGrain not thy vicious stains, nor deepen those swart Tinctures, which\nTemper, Infirmity, or ill habits have set upon thee; and fix not by\niterated depravations what time might Efface, or Virtuous washes\nexpunge. He, who thus still advanceth in Iniquity deepneth his deformed\nhue; turns a Shadow into Night, and makes himself a _Negro_ in the black\nJaundice; and so becomes one of those Lost ones, the disproportionate\npores of whose Brains afford no entrance unto good Motions, but reflect\nand frustrate all Counsels, Deaf unto the Thunder of the Laws, and Rocks\nunto the Cries of charitable Commiserators. He who hath had the Patience\nof _Diogenes_, to make Orations unto Statues, may more sensibly\napprehend how all Words fall to the Ground, spent upon such a surd and\nEarless Generation of Men, stupid unto all Instruction, and rather\nrequiring an Exorcist, than an Orator for their Conversion.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 7]\n\nBurden not the back of _Aries_, _Leo_, or _Taurus,_ with thy faults; nor\nmake _Saturn_, _Mars_, or _Venus_, guilty of thy Follies. Think not to\nfasten thy imperfections on the Stars, and so despairingly conceive thy\nself under a fatality of being evil. Calculate thy self within, seek not\nthy self in the Moon, but in thine own Orb or Microcosmical\nCircumference. Let celestial aspects admonish and advertise, not\nconclude and determine thy ways. For since good and bad stars moralize\nnot our Actions, and neither excuse or commend, acquit or condemn our\nGood or Bad Deeds at the present or last Bar, since some are\nAstrologically well disposed who are morally highly vicious; not\nCelestial Figures, but Virtuous Schemes must denominate and state our\nActions. If we rightly understood the Names whereby God calleth the\nStars, if we knew his Name for the Dog-Star, or by what appellation\n_Jupiter_, _Mars_, and _Saturn_ obey his Will; it might be a welcome\naccession unto Astrology, which speaks great things, and is fain to make\nuse of appellations from Greek and Barbarick Systems. Whatever\nInfluences, Impulsions, or Inclinations there be from the Lights above,\nit were a piece of wisdom to make one of those Wise men who overrule\ntheir Stars,[356] and with their own Militia contend with the Host of\nHeaven. Unto which attempt there want not Auxiliaries from the whole\nstrength of Morality, supplies from Christian Ethicks, influences also\nand illuminations from above, more powerfull than the Lights of Heaven.\n\n [356] _Sapiens dominabitur Astris._\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 8]\n\nConfound not the distinctions of thy Life which Nature hath divided:\nthat is, Youth, Adolescence, Manhood, and old Age, nor in these divided\nPeriods, wherein thou art in a manner Four, conceive thyself but One.\nLet every division be happy in its proper Virtues, nor one Vice run\nthrough all. Let each distinction have its salutary transition, and\ncritically deliver thee from the imperfections of the former, so\nordering the whole, that Prudence and Virtue may have the largest\nsection. Do as a Child but when thou art a Child, and ride not on a Reed\nat twenty. He who hath not taken leave of the follies of his Youth, and\nin his maturer state scarce got out of that division, disproportionately\ndivideth his Days, crowds up the latter part of his Life, and leaves too\nnarrow a corner for the Age of Wisdom, and so hath room to be a Man\nscarce longer than he hath been a Youth. Rather than to make this\nconfusion, anticipate the Virtues of Age, and live long without the\ninfirmities of it. So may'st thou count up thy Days as some do\n_Adams_,[357] that is, by anticipation; so may'st thou be coetaneous\nunto thy Elders, and a Father unto thy contemporaries.\n\n [357] _Adam_ thought to be created in the State of Man, about thirty\n years Old.\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 9]\n\nWhile others are curious in the choice of good Air, and chiefly\nsollicitous for healthful habitations, Study thou Conversation, and be\ncritical in thy Consortion. The aspects, conjunctions, and\nconfigurations of the Stars, which mutually diversify, intend, or\nqualify their influences, are but the varieties of their nearer or\nfarther conversation with one another, and like the Consortion of Men,\nwhereby they become better or worse, and even Exchange their Natures.\nSince men live by Examples, and will be imitating something; order thy\nimitation to thy Improvement, not thy Ruin. Look not for Roses in\n_Attalus_[358] His Garden, or wholesome Flowers in a venemous\nPlantation. And since there is scarce any one bad, but some others are\nthe worse for him; tempt not Contagion by proximity, and hazard not thy\nself in the shadow of Corruption. He who hath not early suffered this\nShipwrack, and in his Younger Days escaped this _Charybdis_, may make a\nhappy Voyage, and not come in with black Sails into the port. Self\nconversation, or to be alone, is better than such Consortion. Some\nSchool-men tell us, that he is properly alone, with whom in the same\nplace there is no other of the same Species. _Nabuchodonozor_ was alone,\nthough among the Beasts of the field; and a Wise Man may be tolerably\nsaid to be alone though with a Rabble of People, little better than\nBeasts about him. Unthinking Heads, who have not learn'd to be alone,\nare in a Prison to themselves, if they be not also with others: Whereas\non the contrary, they whose thoughts are in a fair, and hurry within,\nare sometimes fain to retire into Company, to be out of the crowd of\nthemselves. He who must needs have Company, must needs have sometimes\nbad Company. Be able to be alone. Loose not the advantage of Solitude,\nand the Society of thy self, nor be only content, but delight to be\nalone and single with Omnipresency. He who is thus prepared, the Day is\nnot uneasy nor the Night black unto him. Darkness may bound his Eyes,\nnot his Imagination. In his Bed he may ly, like _Pompey_[359] and his\nSons, in all quarters of the Earth, may speculate the Universe, and\nenjoy the whole World in the Hermitage of himself. Thus the old\n_Ascetick_ Christians found a Paradise in a Desert, and with little\nconverse on Earth held a conversation in Heaven; thus they Astronomiz'd\nin Caves, and though they beheld not the Stars, had the Glory of Heaven\nbefore them.\n\n [358] _Attalus_ made a Garden which contained only venemous plants.\n\n [359] _Pompeios Juvenes Asia atque Europa, sed ipsum Terra tegit\n Libyes._\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 10]\n\nLet the Characters of good things stand indelibly in thy Mind, and thy\nThoughts be active on them. Trust not too much unto suggestions from\nReminiscential Amulets, or artificial _Memorandums_. Let the mortifying\n_Janus_ of _Covarrubias_[360] be in thy daily Thoughts, not only on thy\nHand and Signets. Rely not alone upon silent and dumb remembrances.\nBehold not Death's Heads till thou doest not see them, nor look upon\nmortifying Objects till thou overlook'st them. Forget not how\nassuefaction unto any thing minorates the passion from it, how constant\nObjects loose their hints, and steal an inadvertisement upon us. There\nis no excuse to forget what every thing prompts unto us. To thoughtful\nObservators the whole World is a Phylactery, and every thing we see an\nItem of the Wisdom, Power, or Goodness of God. Happy are they who verify\ntheir Amulets, and make their Phylacteries speak in their Lives and\nActions. To run on in despight of the Revulsions and Pul-backs of such\nRemora's aggravates our transgressions. When Death's Heads on our Hands\nhave no influence upon our Heads, and fleshless Cadavers abate not the\nexorbitances of the Flesh; when Crucifixes upon Mens Hearts suppress not\ntheir bad commotions, and his Image who was murdered for us with-holds\nnot from Blood and Murder; Phylacteries prove but formalities, and their\ndespised hints sharpen our condemnations.\n\n [360] _Don Sebastian de Covarrubias_, writ 3 Centuries of moral Emblems\n in _Spanish_. In the 88th of the second Century he sets down two\n Faces averse, and conjoined _Janus_-like; the one a Gallant\n Beautiful Face, the other a Death's-Head Face, with this Motto out\n of _Ovid's Metamorphosis_, _Quid fuerim quid simque vide_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 11]\n\nLook not for _Whales_ in the _Euxine_ Sea, or expect great matters where\nthey are not to be found. Seek not for Profundity in Shallowness, or\nFertility in a Wilderness. Place not the expectation of great Happiness\nhere below, or think to find Heaven on Earth; wherein we must be content\nwith Embryon-felicities, and fruitions of doubtful Faces. For the Circle\nof our felicities makes but short Arches. In every clime we are in a\nperiscian state, and with our Light our Shadow and Darkness walk about\nus. Our Contentments stand upon the tops of Pyramids ready to fall off,\nand the insecurity of their enjoyments abrupteth our Tranquillities.\nWhat we magnify is Magnificent, but like to the _Colossus_, noble\nwithout, stuft with rubbidge and coarse Metal within. Even the Sun,\nwhose Glorious outside we behold, may have dark and smoaky Entrails. In\nvain we admire the Lustre of any thing seen: that which is truly\nglorious is invisible. _Paradise_ was but a part of the Earth, lost not\nonly to our Fruition but our Knowledge. And if, according to old\nDictates, no Man can be said to be happy before Death, the happiness of\nthis Life goes for nothing before it be over, and while we think\nourselves happy we do but usurp that Name. Certainly true Beatitude\ngroweth not on Earth, nor hath this World in it the Expectations we have\nof it. He Swims in Oyl, and can hardly avoid sinking, who hath such\nlight Foundations to support him. 'Tis therefore happy that we have two\nWorlds to hold on. To enjoy true happiness we must travel into a very\nfar Countrey, and even out of our selves; for the Pearl we seek for is\nnot to be found in the _Indian_, but in the _Empyrean_ Ocean.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 12]\n\nAnswer not the Spur of Fury, and be not prodigal or prodigious in\nRevenge. Make not one in the _Historia Horribilis_;[361] Flay not thy\nServant for a broken Glass, nor pound him in a Mortar who offendeth\nthee; supererogate not in the worst sense, and overdo not the\nnecessities of evil; humour not the injustice of Revenge. Be not\nStoically mistaken in the equality of sins, nor commutatively iniquous\nin the valuation of transgressions; but weigh them in the Scales of\nHeaven, and by the weights of righteous Reason. Think that Revenge too\nhigh, which is but level with the offence. Let thy Arrows of Revenge fly\nshort, or be aimed like those of _Jonathan_, to fall beside the mark.\nToo many there be to whom a Dead Enemy smells well, and who find Musk\nand Amber in Revenge. The ferity of such minds holds no rule in\nRetaliations, requiring too often a Head for a Tooth, and the Supreme\nrevenge for trespasses which a night's rest should obliterate. But\npatient Meekness takes injuries like Pills, not chewing but swallowing\nthem down, Laconically suffering, and silently passing them over, while\nangered Pride makes a noise, like _Homerican Mars_[362], at every\nscratch of offences. Since Women do most delight in Revenge, it may seem\nbut feminine manhood to be vindicative. If thou must needs have thy\nRevenge of thine Enemy, with a soft Tongue break his Bones,[363] heap\nCoals of Fire on his Head, forgive him, and enjoy it. To forgive our\nEnemies is a charming way of Revenge, and a short _Caesarian_ Conquest\novercoming without a blow; laying our Enemies at our Feet, under sorrow,\nshame, and repentance; leaving our Foes our Friends, and solicitously\ninclined to grateful Retaliations. Thus to Return upon our Adversaries\nis a healing way of Revenge, and to do good for evil a soft and melting\nultion, a method Taught from Heaven to keep all smooth on Earth. Common\nforceable ways make not an end of Evil, but leave Hatred and Malice\nbehind them. An Enemy thus reconciled is little to be trusted, as\nwanting the foundation of Love and Charity, and but for a time\nrestrained by disadvantage or inability. If thou hast not Mercy for\nothers, yet be not Cruel unto thy self. To ruminate upon evils, to make\ncritical notes upon injuries, and be too acute in their apprehensions,\nis to add unto our own Tortures, to feather the Arrows of our Enemies,\nto lash our selves with the Scorpions of our Foes, and to resolve to\nsleep no more. For injuries long dreamt on take away at last all rest;\nand he sleeps but like _Regulus_, who busieth his Head about them.\n\n [361] A Book so intitled wherein are sundry horrid accounts.\n\n [362] _Tu miser exclamas, ut Stentora vincere possis,\n Vel potius quantum Gradivus Homericus._ Juvenal.\n\n [363] A soft tongue breaketh the bones. _Proverbs_ 25. 15.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 13]\n\nAmuse not thyself about the Riddles of future things. Study Prophecies\nwhen they are become Histories, and past hovering in their causes. Eye\nwell things past and present, and let conjectural sagacity suffice for\nthings to come. There is a sober Latitude for prescience in contingences\nof discoverable Tempers, whereby discerning Heads see sometimes beyond\ntheir Eyes, and Wise Men become Prophetical. Leave Cloudy predictions to\ntheir Periods, and let appointed Seasons have the lot of their\naccomplishments. 'Tis too early to study such Prophecies before they\nhave been long made, before some train of their causes have already\ntaken Fire, laying open in part what lay obscure and before buryed unto\nus. For the voice of Prophecies is like that of Whispering-places: They\nwho are near or at a little distance hear nothing, those at the farthest\nextremity will understand all. But a Retrograde cognition of times past,\nand things which have already been, is more satisfactory than a\nsuspended Knowledge of what is yet unexistent. And the Greatest part of\ntime being already wrapt up in things behind us; it's now somewhat late\nto bait after things before us; for futurity still shortens, and time\npresent sucks in time to come. What is Prophetical in one Age proves\nHistorical in another, and so must hold on unto the last of time; when\nthere will be no room for Prediction, when _Janus_ shall loose one Face,\nand the long beard of time shall look like those of _David's_ Servants,\nshorn away upon one side, and when, if the expected _Elias_ should\nappear, he might say much of what is past, not much of what's to come.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 14]\n\nLive unto the Dignity of thy Nature, and leave it not disputable at\nlast, whether thou hast been a Man, or since thou art a composition of\nMan and Beast, how thou hast predominantly passed thy days, to state the\ndenomination. Un-man not therefore thy self by a Beastial\ntransformation, nor realize old Fables. Expose not thy self by\nfour-footed manners unto monstrous draughts, and _Caricatura_\nrepresentations. Think not after the old _Pythagorean_ conceit, what\nBeast thou may'st be after death. Be not under any Brutal\n_metempsychosis_ while thou livest, and walkest about erectly under the\nscheme of Man. In thine own circumference, as in that of the Earth, let\nthe Rational Horizon be larger than the sensible, and the Circle of\nReason than of Sense. Let the Divine part be upward, and the Region of\nBeast below. Otherwise, 'tis but to live invertedly, and with thy Head\nunto the Heels of thy _Antipodes_. Desert not thy title to a Divine\nparticle and union with invisibles. Let true Knowledge and Virtue tell\nthe lower World thou art a part of the higher. Let thy Thoughts be of\nthings which have not entred into the Hearts of Beasts: Think of things\nlong past, and long to come: Acquaint thy self with the _Choragium_ of\nthe Stars, and consider the vast expansion beyond them. Let Intellectual\nTubes give thee a glance of things, which visive Organs reach not. Have\na glimpse of incomprehensibles, and Thoughts of things, which Thoughts\nbut tenderly touch. Lodge immaterials in thy Head: ascend unto\ninvisibles: fill thy Spirit with Spirituals, with the mysteries of\nFaith, the magnalities of Religion, and thy Life with the Honour of God;\nwithout which, though Giants in Wealth and Dignity, we are but Dwarfs\nand Pygmies in Humanity, and may hold a pitiful rank in that triple\ndivision of mankind into Heroes, Men, and Beasts. For though human Souls\nare said to be equal, yet is there no small inequality in their\noperations; some maintain the allowable Station of Men; many are far\nbelow it; and some have been so divine, as to approach the _Apogeum_ of\ntheir Natures, and to be in the _Confinium_ of Spirits.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 15]\n\nBehold thy self by inward Opticks and the Crystalline of thy Soul.\nStrange it is that in the most perfect sense there should be so many\nfallacies, that we are fain to make a doctrine, and often to see by Art.\nBut the greatest imperfection is in our inward sight, that is, to be\nGhosts unto our own Eyes, and while we are so sharp sighted as to look\nthorough others, to be invisible unto our selves; for the inward Eyes\nare more fallacious than the outward. The Vices we scoff at in others\nlaugh at us within our selves. Avarice, Pride, Falshood lye undiscerned\nand blindly in us, even to the Age of blindness: and therefore to see\nour selves interiourly, we are fain to borrow other Mens Eyes; wherein\ntrue Friends are good Informers, and Censurers no bad Friends.\nConscience only, that can see without Light, sits in the _Areopagy_ and\ndark Tribunal of our Hearts, surveying our Thoughts and condemning their\nobliquities. Happy is that State of Vision that can see without Light,\nthough all should look as before the Creation, when there was not an Eye\nto see, or Light to actuate a Vision: wherein notwithstanding obscurity\nis only imaginable respectively unto Eyes; for unto God there was none,\nEternal Light was ever, created Light was for the creation, not himself,\nand as he saw before the Sun, may still also see without it. In the City\nof the new _Jerusalem_ there is neither Sun nor Moon; where glorifyed\nEyes must see by the _Archetypal_ Sun, or the Light of God, able to\nilluminate Intellectual Eyes, and make unknown Visions. Intuitive\nperceptions in Spiritual beings may perhaps hold some Analogy unto\nVision: but yet how they see us, or one another, what Eye, what Light,\nor what perception is required unto their intuition, is yet dark unto\nour apprehension; and even how they see God, or how unto our glorified\nEyes the Beatifical Vision will be celebrated, another World must tell\nus, when perceptions will be new, and we may hope to behold invisibles.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 16]\n\nWhen all looks fair about, and thou seest not a cloud so big as a Hand\nto threaten thee, forget not the Wheel of things: Think of sullen\nvicissitudes, but beat not thy brains to fore-know them. Be armed\nagainst such obscurities, rather by submission than fore-knowledge. The\nKnowledge of future evils mortifies present felicities, and there is\nmore content in the uncertainty or ignorance of them. This favour our\nSaviour vouchsafed unto _Peter_, when he fore-told not his Death in\nplain terms, and so by an ambiguous and cloudy delivery dampt not the\nSpirit of his Disciples. But in the assured fore-knowledge of the\ndeluge, _Noah_ lived many Years under the affliction of a Flood; and\n_Jerusalem_ was taken unto _Jeremy_, before it was besieged. And\ntherefore the Wisdom of Astrologers, who speak of future things, hath\nwisely softned the severity of their Doctrines; and even in their sad\npredictions, while they tell us of inclination not coaction from the\nStars, they Kill us not with _Stygian_ oaths and merciless necessity,\nbut leave us hopes of evasion.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 17]\n\nIf thou hast the brow to endure the Name of Traytor, Perjur'd, or\nOppressor, yet cover thy Face when Ingratitude is thrown at thee. If\nthat degenerous Vice possess thee, hide thy self in the shadow of thy\nshame, and pollute not noble society. Grateful Ingenuities are content\nto be obliged within some compass of Retribution, and being depressed by\nthe weight of iterated favours may so labour under their inabilities of\nRequital, as to abate the content from Kindnesses. But narrow self-ended\nSouls make prescription of good Offices, and obliged by often favours\nthink others still due unto them: whereas, if they but once fail, they\nprove so perversely ungrateful, as to make nothing of common courtesies,\nand to bury all that's past. Such tempers pervert the generous course of\nthings; for they discourage the inclinations of noble minds, and make\nBeneficency cool unto acts of obligation, whereby the grateful World\nshould subsist, and have their consolation. Common gratitude must be\nkept alive by the additionary fewel of new courtesies: but generous\nGratitudes, though but once well obliged, without quickening repetitions\nor expectation of new Favours, have thankful minds for ever; for they\nwrite not their obligations in sandy but marble memories, which wear not\nout but with themselves.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 18]\n\nThink not Silence the wisdom of Fools, but, if rightly timed, the honour\nof Wise Men, who have not the Infirmity, but the Virtue of Taciturnity,\nand speak not out of the abundance, but the well weighted thoughts of\ntheir Hearts. Such silence may be Eloquence, and speak thy worth above\nthe power of Words. Make such a one thy friend, in whom Princes may be\nhappy, and great Councels successful. Let him have the Key of thy Heart,\nwho hath the Lock of his own, which no Temptation can open; where thy\nSecrets may lastingly ly, like the lamp in _Olybius_ his Urn,[364]\nalive, and light, but close and invisible.\n\n [364] Which after many hundred years was found burning under ground, and\n went out as soon as the air came to it.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 19]\n\nLet thy Oaths be sacred, and Promises be made upon the Altar of thy\nHeart. Call not _Jove_[365] to witness with a Stone in one Hand, and a\nStraw in another, and so make Chaff and Stubble of thy Vows. Worldly\nSpirits, whose interest is their belief, make Cobwebs of Obligations,\nand, if they can find ways to elude the Urn of the _Praetor_, will trust\nthe Thunderbolt of _Jupiter_: And therefore if they should as deeply\nswear as _Osman_ to _Bethlem Gabor_:[366] yet whether they would be\nbound by those chains, and not find ways to cut such _Gordian_ Knots, we\ncould have no just assurance. But Honest Mens Words are _Stygian_ Oaths,\nand Promises inviolable. These are not the Men for whom the fetters of\nLaw were first forged: they needed not the solemness of Oaths; by\nkeeping their Faith they swear,[367] and evacuate such confirmations.\n\n [365] _Jovem lapidem jurare._\n\n [366] See the oath of _Sultan Osman_ in his life, in the addition to\n _Knolls_ his Turkish history.\n\n [367] _Colendo fidem jurant._--Curtius.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 20]\n\nThough the World be Histrionical, and most Men live Ironically, yet be\nthou what thou singly art, and personate only thy self. Swim smoothly in\nthe stream of thy Nature, and live but one Man. To single Hearts\ndoubling is discruciating: such tempers must sweat to dissemble, and\nprove but hypocritical Hypocrites. Simulation must be short: Men do not\neasily continue a counterfeiting Life, or dissemble unto Death. He who\ncounterfeiteth, acts a part; and is as it were out of himself: which, if\nlong, proves so irksome, that Men are glad to pull of their Vizards, and\nresume themselves again; no practice being able to naturalize such\nunnaturals, or make a Man rest content not to be himself. And therefore\nsince Sincerity is thy Temper, let veracity be thy Virtue in Words,\nManners, and Actions. To offer at iniquities, which have so little\nfoundations in thee, were to be vitious up hill, and strain for thy\ncondemnation. Persons vitiously inclined, want no Wheels to make them\nactively vitious, as having the Elater and Spring of their own Natures\nto facilitate their Iniquities. And therefore so many, who are\nsinistrous unto Good Actions, are Ambi-dexterous unto bad; and _Vulcans_\nin virtuous paths, _Achilleses_ in vitious motions.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 21]\n\nRest not in the high strain'd Paradoxes of old Philosophy supported by\nnaked Reason, and the reward of mortal Felicity, but labour in the\nEthicks of Faith, built upon Heavenly assistance, and the happiness of\nboth beings. Understand the Rules, but swear not unto the doctrines of\n_Zeno_ or _Epicurus_. Look beyond _Antoninus_, and terminate not thy\nmorals in _Seneca_ or _Epictetus_. Let not the twelve, but the two\nTables be thy Law: Let _Pythagoras_ be thy Remembrancer, not thy\ntextuary and final Instructer; and learn the Vanity of the World rather\nfrom _Solomon_ than _Phocylides_. Sleep not in the Dogma's of the\n_Peripatus_, Academy, or _Porticus_. Be a moralist of the Mount, an\n_Epictetus_ in the _Faith_, and christianize thy Notions.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 22]\n\nIn seventy or eighty years a Man may have a deep Gust of the World, Know\nwhat it is, what it can afford, and what 'tis to have been a Man. Such a\nlatitude of years may hold a considerable corner in the general Map of\nTime; and a Man may have a curt Epitome of the whole course thereof in\nthe days of his own life, may clearly see he hath but acted over his\nFore-fathers; what it was to live in Ages past, and what living will be\nin all ages to come.\n\nHe is like to be the best judge of Time who hath lived to see about the\nsixtieth part thereof. Persons of short times may Know what 'tis to\nlive, but not the life of Man, who, having little behind them, are but\n_Januses_ of one face, and Know not singularities enough to raise Axioms\nof this World: but such a compass of Years will shew new Examples of old\nThings, Parallelisms of occurrences through the whole course of Time,\nand nothing be monstrous unto him; who may in that time understand not\nonly the varieties of Men, but the variation of himself, and how many\nMen he hath been in that extent of time.\n\nHe may have a close apprehension what it is to be forgotten, while he\nhath lived to find none who could remember his Father, or scarce the\nfriends of his youth, and may sensibly see with what a face in no long\ntime oblivion will look upon himself. His Progeny may never be his\nPosterity; he may go out of the World less related than he came into it;\nand considering the frequent mortality in Friends and Relations, in such\na Term of Time, he may pass away divers years in sorrow and black\nhabits, and leave none to mourn for himself; Orbity may be his\ninheritance, and Riches his Repentance.\n\nIn such a thred of Time, and long observation of Men, he may acquire a\n_Physiognomical_ intuitive Knowledge, Judge the interiors by the\noutside, and raise conjectures at first sight; and knowing what Men have\nbeen, what they are, what Children probably will be, may in the present\nAge behold a good part, and the temper of the next; and since so many\nlive by the Rules of Constitution, and so few overcome their\ntemperamental Inclinations, make no improbable predictions.\n\nSuch a portion of Time will afford a large prospect backward, and\nAuthentick Reflections how far he hath performed the great intention of\nhis Being, in the Honour of his Maker; whether he hath made good the\nPrinciples of his Nature, and what he was made to be; what\nCharacteristick and special Mark he hath left, to be observable in his\nGeneration; whether he hath Lived to purpose or in vain, and what he\nhath added, acted, or performed, that might considerably speak him a\nMan.\n\nIn such an Age Delights will be undelightful and Pleasures grow stale\nunto him; Antiquated Theorems will revive, and _Solomon's_ Maxims be\nDemonstrations unto him; Hopes or presumptions be over, and despair grow\nup of any satisfaction below. And having been long tossed in the Ocean\nof this World, he will by that time feel the In-draught of another, unto\nwhich this seems but preparatory, and without it of no high value. He\nwill experimentally find the Emptiness of all things, and the nothing of\nwhat is past; and wisely grounding upon true Christian Expectations,\nfinding so much past, will wholly fix upon what is to come. He will long\nfor Perpetuity, and live as though he made haste to be happy. The last\nmay prove the prime part of his Life, and those his best days which he\nlived nearest Heaven.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 23]\n\nLive happy in the _Elizium_ of a virtuously composed Mind, and let\nIntellectual Contents exceed the Delights wherein mere Pleasurists place\ntheir Paradise. Bear not too slack reins upon Pleasure, nor let\ncomplexion or contagion betray thee unto the exorbitancy of Delight.\nMake Pleasure thy Recreation or intermissive Relaxation, not thy\n_Diana_, Life and Profession. Voluptuousness is as insatiable as\nCovetousness. Tranquillity is better than Jollity, and to appease pain\nthan to invent pleasure. Our hard entrance into the world, our miserable\ngoing out of it, our sicknesses, disturbances, and sad Rencounters in\nit, do clamorously tell us we come not into the World to run a Race of\nDelight, but to perform the sober Acts and serious purposes of Man;\nwhich to omit were foully to miscarry in the advantage of humanity, to\nplay away an uniterable Life, and to have lived in vain. Forget not the\ncapital end, and frustrate not the opportunity of once Living. Dream not\nof any kind of _Metempsychosis_ or transanimation, but into thine own\nbody, and that after a long time, and then also unto wail or bliss,\naccording to thy first and fundamental Life. Upon a curricle in this\nWorld depends a long course of the next, and upon a narrow Scene here an\nendless expansion hereafter. In vain some think to have an end of their\nBeings with their Lives. Things cannot get out of their natures, or be\nor not be in despite of their constitutions. Rational existences in\nHeaven perish not at all, and but partially on Earth: That which is thus\nonce will in some way be always: The first Living human Soul is still\nalive, and all _Adam_ hath found no Period.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 24]\n\nSince the Stars of Heaven do differ in Glory; since it hath pleased the\nAlmighty hand to honour the North Pole with Lights above the South;\nsince there are some Stars so bright that they can hardly be looked on,\nsome so dim that they can scarce be seen, and vast numbers not to be\nseen at all even by Artificial Eyes; Read thou the Earth in Heaven, and\nthings below from above. Look contentedly upon the scattered difference\nof things, and expect not equality in lustre, dignity, or perfection,\nin Regions or Persons below; where numerous numbers must be content to\nstand like _Lacteous_ or _Nebulous_ Stars, little taken notice of, or\ndim in their generations. All which may be contentedly allowable in the\naffairs and ends of this World, and in suspension unto what will be in\nthe order of things hereafter, and the new Systeme of Mankind which will\nbe in the World to come; when the last may be the first and the first\nthe last; when _Lazarus_ may sit above _Caesar_, and the just obscure on\nEarth shall shine like the Sun in Heaven; when personations shall cease,\nand Histrionism of happiness be over; when Reality shall rule, and all\nshall be as they shall be for ever.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 25]\n\nWhen the _Stoick_ said that life would not be accepted if it were\noffered unto such as knew it,[368] he spoke too meanly of that state of\nbeing which placeth us in the form of Men. It more depreciates the value\nof this life, that Men would not live it over again; for although they\nwould still live on, yet few or none can endure to think of being twice\nthe same Men upon Earth, and some had rather never have lived than to\ntread over their days once more. _Cicero_ in a prosperous state had not\nthe patience to think of beginning in a cradle again. _Job_ would not\nonly curse the day of his Nativity, but also of his Renascency, if he\nwere to act over his Disasters, and the miseries of the Dunghil. But the\ngreatest under-weening of this Life is to undervalue that, unto which\nthis is but Exordial or a Passage leading unto it. The great advantage\nof this mean life is thereby to stand in a capacity of a better; for\nthe Colonies of Heaven must be drawn from Earth, and the Sons of the\nfirst _Adam_ are only heirs unto the second. Thus _Adam_ came into this\nWorld with the power also of another, nor only to replenish the Earth,\nbut the everlasting Mansions of Heaven. Where we were when the\nfoundations of the earth were lay'd, when the morning Stars sang\ntogether,[369] and all the Sons of God shouted for Joy, He must answer\nwho asked it; who understands Entities of preordination, and beings yet\nunbeing; who hath in his Intellect the Ideal Existences of things, and\nEntities before their Extances. Though it looks but like an imaginary\nkind of existency to be before we are; yet since we are under the decree\nor prescience of a sure and Omnipotent Power, it may be somewhat more\nthan a non-entity to be in that mind, unto which all things are present.\n\n [368] _Vitam nemo acciperet si daretur scientibus._--Seneca.\n\n [369] Job 38.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 26]\n\nIf the end of the World shall have the same foregoing Signs, as the\nperiod of Empires, States, and Dominions in it, that is, Corruption of\nManners, inhuman degenerations, and deluge of iniquities; it may be\ndoubted whether that final time be so far of, of whose day and hour\nthere can be no prescience. But while all men doubt, and none can\ndetermine how long the World shall last, some may wonder that it hath\nspun out so long and unto our days. For if the Almighty had not\ndetermin'd a fixed duration unto it, according to his mighty and\nmerciful designments in it, if he had not said unto it, as he did unto a\npart of it, hitherto shalt thou go and no farther; if we consider the\nincessant and cutting provocations from the Earth, it is not without\namazement how his patience hath permitted so long a continuance unto\nit, how he, who cursed the Earth in the first days of the first Man, and\ndrowned it in the tenth Generation after, should thus lastingly contend\nwith Flesh and yet defer the last flames. For since he is sharply\nprovoked every moment, yet punisheth to pardon, and forgives to forgive\nagain; what patience could be content to act over such vicissitudes, or\naccept of repentances which must have after penitences, his goodness can\nonly tell us. And surely if the patience of Heaven were not\nproportionable unto the provocations from Earth; there needed an\nIntercessor not only for the sins, but the duration of this World, and\nto lead it up unto the present computation. Without such a merciful\nLonganimity, the Heavens would never be so aged as to grow old like a\nGarment; it were in vain to infer from the Doctrine of the Sphere, that\nthe time might come when _Capella_, a noble Northern Star, would have\nits motion in the _AEquator_, that the Northern _Zodiacal_ Signs would at\nlength be the Southern, the Southern the Northern, and _Capricorn_\nbecome our _Cancer_. However therefore the Wisdom of the Creator hath\nordered the duration of the World, yet since the end thereof brings the\naccomplishment of our happiness, since some would be content that it\nshould have no end, since Evil Men and Spirits do fear it may be too\nshort, since Good Men hope it may not be too long; the prayer of the\nSaints under the Altar will be the supplication of the Righteous World.\nThat his mercy would abridge their languishing Expectation and hasten\nthe accomplishment of their happy state to come.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 27]\n\nThough Good Men are often taken away from the Evil to come, though some\nin evil days have been glad that they were old, nor long to behold the\niniquities of a wicked World, or Judgments threatened by them; yet is it\nno small satisfaction unto honest minds to leave the World in virtuous\nwell temper'd times, under a prospect of good to come, and continuation\nof worthy ways acceptable unto God and Man. Men who dye in deplorable\ndays, which they regretfully behold, have not their Eyes closed with the\nlike content; while they cannot avoid the thoughts of proceeding or\ngrowing enormities, displeasing unto that Spirit unto whom they are then\ngoing, whose honour they desire in all times and throughout all\ngenerations. If _Lucifer_ could be freed from his dismal place, he would\nlittle care though the rest were left behind. Too many there may be of\n_Nero's_ mind, who, if their own turn were served, would not regard what\nbecame of others, and, when they dye themselves, care not if all perish.\nBut good Mens wishes extend beyond their lives, for the happiness of\ntimes to come, and never to be known unto them. And therefore while so\nmany question prayers for the dead, they charitably pray for those who\nare not yet alive; they are not so enviously ambitious to go to Heaven\nby themselves: they cannot but humbly wish, that the little Flock might\nbe greater, the narrow Gate wider, and that, as many are called, so not\na few might be chosen.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 28]\n\nThat a greater number of Angels remained in Heaven, than fell from it,\nthe School-men will tell us; that the number of blessed Souls will not\ncome short of that vast number of fallen Spirits, we have the favorable\ncalculation of others. What Age or Century hath sent most Souls unto\nHeaven, he can tell who vouchsafeth that honour unto them. Though the\nNumber of the blessed must be compleat before the World can pass away,\nyet since the World it self seems in the wane, and we have no such\ncomfortable prognosticks of Latter times, since a greater part of time\nis spun than is to come, and the blessed Roll already much replenished;\nhappy are those pieties, which solicitously look about, and hasten to\nmake one of that already much filled and abbreviated List to come.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 29]\n\nThink not thy time short in this World since the World it self is not\nlong. The created World is but a small _Parenthesis_ in Eternity; and a\nshort interposition for a time between such a state of duration, as was\nbefore it and may be after it. And if we should allow of the old\nTradition that the world should last Six Thousand years, it could scarce\nhave the name of old, since the first Man lived near a sixth part\nthereof, and seven _Methusela's_ would exceed its whole duration.\nHowever, to palliate the shortness of our Lives, and somewhat to\ncompensate our brief term in this World, it's good to know as much as we\ncan of it; and also, so far as possibly in us lieth, to hold such a\n_Theory_ of times past, as though we had seen the same. He who hath thus\nconsidered the World, as also how therein things long past have been\nanswered by things present, how matters in one Age have been acted over\nin another, and how there is nothing new under the Sun, may conceive\nhimself in some manner to have lived from the beginning, and to be as\nold as the World; and if he should still live on 'twould be but the same\nthing.\n\n\n[Sidenote: SECT. 30]\n\nLastly, if length of Days be thy Portion, make it not thy Expectation.\nReckon not upon long Life: think every day the last, and live always\nbeyond thy account. He that so often surviveth his Expectation lives\nmany Lives, and will scarce complain of the shortness of his days. Time\npast is gone like a Shadow; make time to come present. Approximate thy\nlatter times by present apprehensions of them: be like a neighbour unto\nthe Grave, and think there is but little to come. And since there is\nsomething of us that will still live on, join both lives together, and\nlive in one but for the other. He who thus ordereth the purposes of this\nLife will never be far from the next, and is in some manner already in\nit, by a happy conformity, and close apprehension of it. And if, as we\nhave elsewhere declared, any have been so happy as personally to\nunderstand Christian Annihilation, Extasy, Exolution, Transformation,\nthe Kiss of the Spouse, and Ingression into the Divine Shadow, according\nto Mystical Theology, they have already had an handsome Anticipation of\nHeaven; the World is in a manner over, and the Earth in Ashes unto them.\n\n\n\n\n NOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS\n AND FISHES FOUND IN\n NORFOLK\n\n\n\n\nNOTES ON CERTAIN BIRDS FOUND IN NORFOLK.\n\n\nI willingly obey your commands in setting down such birds fishes and\nother animals which for many years I have observed in Norfolk.\n\nBeside the ordinarie birds which keep constantly in the country many are\ndiscouerable both in winter and summer which are of a migrant nature and\nexchange their seats according to the season. Those which come in the\nspring coming for the most part from the southward those which come in\nthe Autumn or winter from the northward. So that they are obserued to\ncome in great flocks with a north east wind and to depart with a south\nwest. Nor to come only in flocks of one kind butt teals woodcocks\nfelfars thrushes and small birds to come and light together, for the\nmost part some hawkes and birds of pray attending them.\n\nThe great and noble kind of Agle calld Aquila Gesneri I have not seen in\nthis country but one I met with in this country brought from Ireland\nwhich I kept 2 yeares, feeding it with whelpes cattes ratts and the\nlike, in all that while not giving it any water which I afterwards\npresented unto my worthy friend Dr Scarburgh.\n\nOf other sorts of Agles there are severall kinds especially of the\nHalyaetus or fenne Agles some of 3 yards and a quarter from the\nextremitie of the wings, whereof one being taken aliue grewe so tame\nthat it went about the yard feeding on fish redherrings flesh and any\noffells without the least trouble.\n\nThere is also a lesser sort of Agle called an ospray which houers about\nthe fennes and broads and will dippe his claws and take up a fish\noftimes for which his foote is made of an extraordinarie roughnesse for\nthe better fastening and holding of it and the like they will do unto\ncootes.\n\nAldrovandus takes particular notice of the great number of Kites about\nLondon and about the Thames. Wee are not without them heare though not\nin such numbers. There are also the gray and bald Buzzard of all which\nthe great number of broad waters and warrens makes no small number and\nmore than in woodland counties.\n\nCranes are often seen here in hard winters especially about the champian\nand feildie part it seems they have been more plentifull for in a bill\nof fare when the maior entertaind the duke of norfolk I meet with\nCranes in a dish.\n\nIn hard winters elkes a kind of wild swan are seen in no small numbers,\nin whom and not in common swans is remarkable that strange recurvation\nof the windpipe through the sternon, and the same is also obseruable in\ncranes. Tis probable they come very farre for all the northern\ndiscouerers have obserued them in the remotest parts and like diuers\nother northern birds if the winter bee mild they commonly come no\nfurther southward then Scotland; if very hard they go lower and seeke\nmore southern places. Which is the cause that sometimes wee see them not\nbefore christmas or the hardest time of winter.\n\nA white large and strong billd fowle called a Ganet which seemes to bee\nthe greater sort of Larus, whereof I met with one kild by a greyhound\nneere Swaffam another in marshland while it fought and would not bee\nforced to take wing, another intangled in an herring net which taken\naliue was fed with herrings for a while. It may be named Larus maior\nLeucophaeopterus as being white and the top of the wings browne.\n\nIn hard winters I have also met with that large and strong billd fowle\nwhich Clusius describeth by the name of Skua Hoyeri sent him from the\nFaro Island by Hoierus a physitian, one whereof was shot at Hickling\nwhile 2 thereof were feeding upon a dead horse.\n\nAs also that large and strong billd fowle spotted like a starling which\nClusius nameth Mergus maior farroensis as frequently the Faro islands\nseated above Shetland, one whereof I sent unto my worthy friend Dr\nScarburgh.\n\nHere is also the pica marina or seapye, many sorts of Lari, seamewes and\ncobs; the Larus maior in great abundance in herring time about Yarmouth.\n\nLarus alba or puets in such plentie about Horsey that they sometimes\nbring them in carts to Norwich and sell them at small rates, and the\ncountry people make use of their egges in puddings and otherwise. Great\nplentie thereof haue bred about Scoulton meere, and from thence sent to\nLondon.\n\nLarus cinereus greater and smaller, butt a coars meat; commonly called\nsternes.\n\nHirundo marina or sea swallowe a neat white and forked tayle bird butt\nlonger then a swallowe.\n\nThe ciconia or stork I have seen in the fennes and some haue been shot\nin the marshes between this and Yarmouth.\n\nThe platea or shouelard, which build upon the topps of high trees. They\nhaue formerly built in the Hernerie at Claxton and Reedham now at\nTrimley in Suffolk. They come in March and are shot by fowlers not for\ntheir meat butt the handsomenesse of the same, remarkable in their white\ncolour copped crowne and spoone or spatule like bill.\n\nCorvus marinus, cormorants, building at Reedham upon trees from whence\nKing Charles the first was wont to bee supplyed. Beside the Rock\ncormorant which breedeth in the rocks in northerne countries and cometh\nto us in the winter, somewhat differing from the other in largenesse and\nwhitenesse under the wings.\n\nA sea fowl called a shearwater, somewhat billed like a cormorant butt\nmuch lesser a strong and feirce fowle houering about shipps when they\ncleanse their fish. 2 were kept 6 weekes cramming them with fish which\nthey would not feed on of themselues. The seamen told mee they had kept\nthem 3 weekes without meat, and I giuing ouer to feed them found they\nliued 16 dayes without taking any thing.\n\nBarnacles Brants Branta are common sheldrakes sheledracus jonstoni.\n\nBarganders a noble coloured fowle vulpanser which breed in cunny\nburrowes about Norrold and other places.\n\nWild geese Anser ferus.\n\nScoch goose Anser scoticus.\n\nGoshander. merganser.\n\nMergus acutirostris speciosus or Loone an handsome and specious fowle\ncristated and with diuided finne feet placed very backward and after the\nmanner of all such which the Duch call Arsvoote. They haue a peculiar\nformation in the leggebone which hath a long and sharpe processe\nextending aboue the thigh bone. They come about April and breed in the\nbroad waters so making their nest on the water that their egges are\nseldom drye while they are sett on.\n\nMergus acutarostris cinereus which seemeth to bee a difference of the\nformer.\n\nMergus minor the smaller diuers or dabchicks in riuers and broade\nwaters.\n\nMergus serratus the saw billd diuer bigger and longer than a duck\ndistinguished from other diuers by a notable sawe bill to retaine its\nslipperie pray as liuing much upon eeles whereof we haue seldome fayled\nto find some in their bellies.\n\nDiuers other sorts of diuefowle more remarkable the mustela fusca and\nmustela variegata the graye dunne and the variegated or partie coloured\nwesell so called from the resemblance it beareth vnto a wesell in the\nhead.\n\nMany sorts of wild ducks which passe under names well knowne unto the\nfowlers though of no great signification as smee widgeon Arts ankers\nnoblets.\n\nThe most remarkable are Anas platyrinchos a remarkably broad bild duck.\n\nAnd the sea phaysant holding some resemblance unto that bird in some\nfethers in the tayle.\n\nTeale Querquedula, wherein scarce any place more abounding, the\ncondition of the country and the very many decoys especially between\nNorwich and the sea making this place very much to abound in wild fowle.\n\nFulicae cottae cootes in very great flocks upon the broad waters. Upon the\nappearance of a Kite or buzzard I have seen them vnite from all parts of\nthe shoare in strange numbers when if the Kite stoopes neare them they\nwill fling up spred such a flash of water up with there wings that they\nwill endanger the Kite, and so keepe him of agayne and agayne in open\nopposition, and an handsome prouision they make about their nest agaynst\nthe same bird of praye by bending and twining the rushes and reedes so\nabout them that they cannot stoope at their yong ones or the damme while\nshe setteth.\n\nGallinula aquatica more hens.\n\nAnd a kind of Ralla aquatica or water Rayle.\n\nAn onocrotalus or pelican shott upon Horsey fenne 1663 May 22 which\nstuffed and cleansed I yet retaine. It was 3 yards and half between the\nextremities of the wings the chowle and beake answering the vsuall\ndescription the extremities of the wings for a spanne deepe browne the\nrest of the body white, a fowle which none could remember upon this\ncoast. About the same time I heard one of the kings pellicans was lost\nat St James', perhaps this might bee the same.\n\nAnas Arctica clusii which though hee placeth about the Faro Islands is\nthe same wee call a puffin common about Anglisea in Wales and sometimes\ntaken upon our seas not sufficiently described by the name of puffinus\nthe bill being so remarkably differing from other ducks and not\nhorizontally butt meridionally formed to feed in the clefts of the rocks\nof insecks, shell-fish and others.\n\nThe great number of riuers riuulets and plashes of water makes hernes\nand herneries to abound in these parts, yong hensies being esteemed a\nfestiuall dish and much desired by some palates.\n\nThe Ardea stellaris botaurus, or bitour is also common and esteemed the\nbetter dish. In the belly of one I found a frog in an hard frost at\nchristmas. another I kept in a garden 2 yeares feeding it with fish mice\nand frogges, in defect whereof making a scrape for sparrowes and small\nbirds, the bitour made shifft to maintaine herself upon them.\n\nBistardae or Bustards are not vnfrequent in the champain and feildie part\nof this country a large Bird accounted a dayntie dish, obseruable in the\nstrength of the brest bone and short heele layes an egge much larger\nthen a Turkey.\n\nMorinellus or Dotterell about Thetford and the champain which comes vnto\nus in September and March staying not long, and is an excellent dish.\n\nThere is also a sea dotterell somewhat lesse butt better coloured then\nthe former.\n\nGodwyts taken chiefly in marshland, though other parts not without them\naccounted the dayntiest dish in England and I think for the bignesse, of\nthe biggest price.\n\nGnats or Knots a small bird which taken with netts grow excessively\nfatt. If being mewed and fed with corne a candle lighted in the roome\nthey feed day and night, and when they are at their hight of fattnesse\nthey beginne to grow lame and are then killed or as at their prime and\napt to decline.\n\nErythropus or Redshanck a bird common in the marshes and of common food\nbutt no dayntie dish.\n\nA may chitt a small dark gray bird litle bigger then a stint of fatnesse\nbeyond any. It comes in May into marshland and other parts and abides\nnot aboue a moneth or 6 weekes.\n\nAnother small bird somewhat larger than a stint called a churre and is\ncommonly taken amongst them.\n\nStints in great numbers about the seashore and marshes about Stifkey\nBurnham and other parts.\n\nPluuialis or plouer green and graye in great plentie about Thetford and\nmany other heaths. They breed not with us butt in some parts of\nScotland, and plentifully in Island [Iceland].\n\nThe lapwing or vannellus common ouer all the heaths.\n\nCuccowes of 2 sorts the one farre exceeding the other in bignesse. Some\nhave attempted to keepe them in warme roomes all the winter butt it hath\nnot succeeded. In their migration they range very farre northward for in\nthe summer they are to bee found as high as Island.\n\nAvis pugnax. Ruffes a marsh bird of the greatest varietie of colours\neuery one therein somewhat varying from other. The female is called a\nReeve without any ruffe about the neck, lesser then the other and hardly\nto bee got. They are almost all cocks and putt together fight and\ndestroy each other, and prepare themselues to fight like cocks though\nthey seeme to haue no other offensive part butt the bill. They loose\ntheire Ruffes about the Autumne or beginning of winter as wee haue\nobserued keeping them in a garden from may till the next spring. They\nmost abound in Marshland butt are also in good number in the marshes\nbetween Norwich and Yarmouth.\n\nOf picus martius or woodspeck many kinds. The green the Red the\nLeucomelanus or neatly marked black and white and the cinereus or dunne\ncalld little [bird calld] a nuthack, remarkable in the larger are the\nhardnesse of the bill and skull and the long nerues which tend vnto the\ntongue whereby it strecheth out the tongue aboue an inch out of the\nmouth and so licks up insecks. They make the holes in trees without any\nconsideration of the winds or quarters of heauen butt as the rottenesse\nthereof best affordeth conuenience.\n\nBlack heron black on both sides the bottom of the neck white gray on the\noutside spotted all along with black on the inside a black coppe of\nsmall feathers some a spanne long, bill poynted and yallowe 3 inches\nlong.\n\nBack heron coloured intermixed with long white fethers.\n\nThe flying fethers black.\n\nThe brest black and white most black.\n\nThe legges and feet not green but an ordinarie dark cork colour.\n\nThe number of riuulets becks and streames whose banks are beset with\nwillowes and Alders which giue occasion of easier fishing and slooping\nto the water makes that handsome coulered bird abound which is calld\nAlcedo Ispida or the King fisher. They bild in holes about grauell pitts\nwherein is to bee found great quantitie of small fish bones. and lay\nvery handsome round and as it were polished egges.\n\nAn Hobby bird so calld becaus it comes in ether with or a litle before\nthe Hobbies in the spring, of the bignesse of a Thrush coloured and\npaned like an hawke maruellously subiet to the vertigo and are\nsometimes taken in those fitts.\n\nUpupa or Hoopebird so named from its note a gallant marked bird which I\nhave often seen and tis not hard to shoote them.\n\nRinglestones a small white and black bird like a wagtayle and seemes to\nbee some kind of motacilla marina common about Yarmouth sands. They lay\ntheir egges in the sand and shingle about June and as the eryngo diggers\ntell mee not sett them flat butt upright like egges in salt.\n\nThe Arcuata or curlewe frequent about the sea coast.\n\nThere is also an handsome tall bird Remarkably eyed and with a bill not\naboue 2 inches long commonly calld a stone curlewe butt the note thereof\nmore resembleth that of a green plouer and breeds about Thetford about\nthe stones and shingle of the Riuers.\n\nAuoseta calld shoohinghorne a tall black and white bird with a bill\nsemicircularly reclining or bowed upward so that it is not easie to\nconceiue how it can feed answerable vnto the Auoseta Italorum in\nAldrovandus a summer marsh bird and not unfrequent in Marshland.\n\nA yarwhelp so thought to bee named from its note a gray bird\nintermingled with some whitish fethers somewhat long legged and the bill\nabout an inch and half. Esteemed a dayntie dish.\n\nLoxias or curuirostra a bird a litle bigger than a Thrush of fine\ncolours and prittie note differently from other birds, the upper and\nlower bill crossing each other, of a very tame nature, comes about the\nbeginning of summer. I have known them kept in cages butt not to outliue\nthe winter.\n\nA kind of coccothraustes calld a coble bird bigger than a Thrush,\nfinely coloured and shaped like a Bunting it is chiefly seen in su[=m]er\nabout cherrie time.\n\nA small bird of prey calld a birdcatcher about the bignesse of a Thrush\nand linnet coloured with a longish white bill and sharpe of a very\nfeirce and wild nature though kept in a cage and fed with flesh. A kind\nof Lanius.\n\nA Dorhawke or kind of Accipiter muscarius conceiued to haue its name\nfrom feeding upon flies and beetles, of a woodcock colour but paned like\nan Hawke a very litle poynted bill, large throat, breedeth with us and\nlayes a maruellous handsome spotted egge. Though I haue opened many I\ncould neuer find anything considerable in their mawes. Caprimulgus.\n\nAuis Trogloditica or Chock a small bird mixed of black and white and\nbreeding in cony borrouges whereof the warrens are full from April to\nSeptember, at which time they leaue the country. They are taken with an\nHobby and a net and are a very good dish.\n\nSpermologus. Rookes which by reason of the great quantitie of corn\nfeilds and Rooke groues are in great plentie the yong ones are commonly\neaten sometimes sold in Norwich market and many are killd for their\nLiuers in order to cure of the Rickets.\n\nCrowes as euerywhere and also the coruus variegatus or pyed crowe with\ndunne and black interchangeably, they come in the winter and depart in\nthe summer and seeme to bee the same which Clusius discribeth in the\nFaro Islands from whence perhaps these come, and I have seen them very\ncommon in Ireland, butt not known in many parts of England.\n\nCoruus maior Rauens in good plentie about the citty which makes so few\nKites to bee seen hereabout, they build in woods very early and lay\negges in Februarie.\n\nAmong the many monedulas or Jackdawes I could neuer in these parts\nobserue the pyrrhocorax or cornish chough with red leggs and bill to bee\ncommonly seen in Cornwall, and though there bee heere very great store\nof partridges yet the french Red legged partridge is not to bee met\nwith. The Ralla or Rayle wee haue counted a dayntie dish, as also no\nsmall number of Quayles. The Heathpoult common in the north is vnknown\nheere as also the Grous, though I haue heard some haue been seen about\nLynne. The calandrier or great great crested lark Galerita I haue not\nmet with heere though with 3 other sorts of Larkes the ground lark\nwoodlark and titlark.\n\nStares or starlings in great numbers, most remarkable in their numerous\nflocks which I haue obserued about the Autumne when they roost at night\nin the marshes in safe places upon reeds and alders, which to obserue I\nwent to the marshes about sunne set, where standing by their vsuall\nplace of resort I obserued very many flocks flying from all quarters,\nwhich in lesse than an howers space came all in and settled in\ninnumerable numbers in a small compasse.\n\nGreat varietie of finches and other small birds whereof one very small\ncalld a whinne bird marked with fine yellow spotts and lesser than a\nwren. There is also a small bird called a chipper somewhat resembling\nthe former which comes in the spring and feeds upon the first buddings\nof birches and other early trees.\n\nA kind of Anthus Goldfinch or fooles coat commonly calld a drawe water,\nfinely marked with red and yellowe and a white bill, which they take\nwith trap cages in Norwich gardens and fastning a chaine about them\ntyed to a box of water it makes a shift with bill and legge to draw up\nthe water unto it from the litle pot hanging by the chaine about a foote\nbelowe.\n\nOn the xiiii of May 1664 a very rare bird was sent mee kild about\nCrostwick which seemed to bee some kind of Jay. The bill was black\nstrong and bigger then a Jayes somewhat yellowe clawes tippd black, 3\nbefore and one clawe behind the whole bird not so bigge as a Jaye.\n\nThe head neck and throat of a violet colour the back upper parts of the\nwing of a russet yellowe the fore and part of the wing azure succeeded\ndownward by a greenish blewe then on the flying feathers bright blewe\nthe lower parts of the wing outwardly of a browne inwardly of a merry\nblewe the belly a light faynt blewe the back toward the tayle of a\npurple blewe the tayle eleuen fethers of a greenish coulour the\nextremities of the outward fethers thereof white wth an eye of greene.\nGarrulus Argentoratensis.\n\n\n\n\nNOTES ON CERTAIN FISHES AND MARINE ANIMALS FOUND IN NORFOLK.\n\n\nIt may well seeme no easie matter to giue any considerable account of\nfishes and animals of the sea wherein tis sayd that there are things\ncreeping innumerable both small and great beasts because they liue in an\nelement wherein they are not so easely discouerable. Notwithstanding\nprobable it is that after this long nauigation search of the ocean bayes\ncreeks Estuaries and riuers there is scarce any fish butt hath been seen\nby some man, for the large and breathing sort thereof do sometimes\ndiscouer themselues aboue water and the other are in such numbers that\nsome at one time or other they are discouered and taken, euen the most\nbarbarous nations being much addicted to fishing: and in America and the\nnew discouered world the people were well acquantd with fishes of sea\nand rivers, and the fishes thereof haue been since described by\nindustrious writers.\n\nPliny seemes to short in the estimate of their number in the ocean, who\nrecons up butt one hundred and seventie six species; butt the seas being\nnow farther known and searched Bellonius much enlargeth, and in his\nbooke of Birds thus deliuereth himself allthough I think it impossible\nto reduce the same vnto a certain number yet I may freelie say that tis\nbeyond the power of man to find out more than fiue hundred sorts of\nfishes, three hundred sorts of birds, more than three hundred sorts of\nfourfoted animalls and fortie diversities of serpents.\n\nOf fishes sometimes the larger sort are taken or come ashoar. A\nspermaceti whale of 62 foote long neere Welles, another of the same kind\n20 yeares before at Hunstanton, and not farre of 8 or nine came ashoare\nand 2 had yong ones after they were forsaken by ye water.\n\nA grampus aboue 16 foot long taken at Yarmouth 4 yeares agoe.\n\nThe Tursio or porpose is common, the Dolphin more rare though sometimes\ntaken which many confound with the porpose, butt it hath a more waued\nline along the skinne sharper toward ye tayle the head longer and nose\nmore extended which maketh good the figure of Rondeletius; the flesh\nmore red and well cooked of very good taste to most palates and\nexceedeth that of porpose.\n\nThe vitulus marinus seacalf or seale which is often taken sleeping on\nthe shoare. 5 yeares agoe one was shot in the riuer of Norwich about\nSurlingham ferry having continued in the riuer for diuers moneths before\nbeing an Amphibious animal it may bee caryed about aliue and kept long\nif it can bee brought to feed. Some haue been kept many moneths in\nponds. The pizzell the bladder the cartilago ensiformis the figure of\nthe Throttle the clusterd and racemous forme of the kidneys the flat and\ncompressed heart are remarkable in it. In stomaks of all that I have\nopened I have found many wormes.\n\nI haue also obserued a scolopendra cetacea of about ten foot long\nanswering to the figure in Rondeletius which the mariners told me was\ntaken in these seas.\n\nA pristes or serra saw fish taken about Lynne commonly mistaken for a\nsword fish and answers the figure in Rondeletius.\n\nA sword fish or Xiphias or Gladius intangled in the Herring netts at\nYarmouth agreable unto the Icon in Johnstonus with a smooth sword not\nvnlike the Gladius of Rondeletius about a yard and half long, no teeth,\neyes very remarkable enclosed in an hard cartilaginous couercle about ye\nbignesse of a good apple. ye vitreous humor plentifull the crystalline\nlarger then a nutmegge remaining cleare sweet and vntainted when the\nrest of the eye was vnder a deepe corruption wch wee kept clear and\nlimpid many moneths vntill an hard frost split it and manifested the\nfoliations thereof.\n\nIt is not vnusuall to take seuerall sorts of canis or doggefishes great\nand small which pursue the shoale of herrings and other fish, butt this\nyeare 1662 one was taken intangled in the Herring netts about 9 foot in\nlength, answering the last figure of Johnstonus lib 7 vnder the name of\n_canis carcherias alter_ and was by the teeth and 5 gills one kind of\nshark particularly remarkable in the vastnesse of the optick nerves and\n3 conicall hard pillars which supported the extraordinarie elevated nose\nwhich wee haue reserued with the scull; the seamen called this kind a\nscrape.\n\nSturio or Sturgeon so common on the other side of the sea about the\nmouth of the Elbe come seldome into our creekes though some haue been\ntaken at Yarmouth and more in the great Owse by Lynne butt their heads\nnot so sharpe as represented in the Icons of Rondeletius and Johnstonus.\n\nSometimes wee meet with a mola or moonefish so called from some\nresemblance it hath of a crescent in the extreme part of the body from\none finne unto another one being taken neere the shoare at Yarmouth\nbefore breake of day seemed to shiuer and grunt like an hogge as Authors\ndeliuer of it, the flesh being hard and neruous it is not like to afford\na good dish butt from the Liuer which is large white and tender somewhat\nmay bee expected; the gills of these fishes wee found thick beset with a\nkind of sea-lowse. In the yeare 1667 a mola was taken at Monsley which\nweighed 2 hundred pound.\n\nThe Rana piscatrix or frogge fish is sometimes found in a very large\nmagnitude and wee haue taken the care to haue them clend and stuffed,\nwherein wee obserued all the appendices whereby they cach fishes butt\nmuch larger then are discribed in the Icons of Johnstonus tab xi fig 8.\n\nThe sea wolf or Lupus nostras of Schoneueldus remarkable for its spotted\nskinne and notable teeth incisors Dogteeth and grinders the dogteeth\nboth in the jawes and palate scarce answerable by any fish of that bulk\nfor the like disposure strength and soliditie.\n\nMustela marina called by some a wesell ling which salted and dryed\nbecomes a good Lenten dish.\n\nA Lump or Lumpus Anglorum so named by Aldrouandus by some esteemed a\nfestiuall dish though it affordeth butt a glutinous jellie and the\nskinne is beset with stony knobs after no certaine order. Ours most\nanswereth the first figure in the xiii table of Johnstonus butt seemes\nmore round and arcuated then that figure makes it.\n\nBefore the herrings there commonly cometh a fish about a foot long by\nthe fishman called an horse resembling in all poynts the Trachurus of\nRondeletius of a mixed shape between a mackerell and an herring,\nobseruable from its greene eyes rarely skye colored back after it is\nkept a day, and an oblique bony line running on ye outside from the\ngills vnto ye tayle. A drye and hard dish butt makes an handsome\npicture.\n\nThe Rubelliones or Rochets butt thinly met with on this coast, the\ngornart cuculus or Lyrae species more often which they seldome eat butt\nbending the back and spredding the finnes into a liuely posture do hang\nup in their howses.\n\nBeside the common mullus or mullet there is another not vnfrequent which\nsome call a cunny fish butt rather a red muellett of a flosculous redde\nand somewhat rough on the scales answering the discription of Icon of\nRondeletius vnder the name of mullus ruber asper butt not the tast of\nthe vsually knowne mullet as affording butt a drye and leane bitt.\n\nSeuerall sorts of fishes there are which do or may beare the names of\nseawoodcocks as the Acus maior scolopax and saurus. The saurus wee\nsometimes meet with yonge. Rondeletius confesseth it a very rare fish\nsomewhat resembling the Acus or needlefish before and a makerell\nbehind. Wee have kept one dryed many yeares agoe.\n\nThe Acus maior calld by some a garfish and greenback answering the\nfigure of Rondeletius under the name of Acus prima species remarkable\nfor its quadrangular figure and verdigreece green back bone.\n\nA lesser sort of Acus maior or primae specaeei wee meet with much shorter\nthen the common garfish and in taking out the spine wee found it not\ngreen as in the greater and much answering the saurus of Rondeletius.\n\nA scolopax or sea woodcock of Rondeletius was giuen mee by a seaman of\nthese seas, about 3 inches long and seemes to bee one kind of Acus or\nneedlefish answering the discription of Rondeletius.\n\nThe Acus of Aristotle lesser thinner corticated and sexangular by diuers\ncalld an addercock and somewhat resembling a snake ours more plainly\nfinned then Rondeletius discribeth it.\n\nA little corticated fish about 3 or 4 inches long, ours answering that\nwhich is named piscis octangularis by Wormius, cataphractus by\nSchoneueldeus; octagonius versus caput, versus caudam hexagonius.\n\nThe faber marinus sometimes found very large answering the figure of\nRondeletius, which though hee mentioneth as a rare fish and to be found\nin the Atlantick and Gaditane ocean yet wee often meet with it in these\nseas commonly calld a peterfish hauing one black spot on ether side the\nbody conceued the perpetuall signature from the impression of St Peters\nfingers or to resemble the 2 peeces of money which St Peter tooke out of\nthis fish remarkable also from its disproportionable mouth and many hard\nprickles about other parts.\n\nA kind of scorpius marinus a rough prickly and monstrous headed fish 6 8\nor 12 inches long answerable vnto the figure of Schoneueldeus.\n\nA sting fish wiuer or kind of ophidion or Araneus slender, narrowe\nheaded about 4 inches long with a sharpe small prickly finne along the\nback which often venemouslv pricketh the hands of fishermen.\n\nAphia cobites marina or sea Loche.\n\nBlennus a sea millars thumb.\n\nFunduli marini sea gogions.\n\nAlosae or chads to bee met with about Lynne.\n\nSpinachus or smelt in greatest plentie about Lynne butt where they haue\nalso a small fish calld a primme answering in tast and shape a smelt and\nperhaps are butt the yonger sort thereof.\n\nAselli or cods of seuerall sorts. Asellus albus or whitings in great\nplentie. Asellus niger carbonarius or coale fish. Asellus minor\nSchoneueldei, callarias Pliny, or Haydocks with many more also a weed\nfish somewhat like an haydock butt larger and dryer meat. A Basse also\nmuch resembling a flatter kind of Cod.\n\nScombri are makerells in greate plentie a dish much desired butt if as\nRondeletius affirmeth they feed upon sea starres and squalders there may\nbee some doubt whether their flesh bee without some ill qualitie.\nSometimes they are of a very large size and one was taken this yeare\n1668 which was by measure an ell long and of the length of a good\nsalmon, at Lestoffe.\n\nHerrings departed sprats or sardae not long after succeed in great\nplentie which are taken with smaller nets and smoakd and dryed like\nherrings become a sapid bitt and vendible abroad.\n\nAmong these are found Bleakes or bliccae a thinne herring like fishe\nwhich some will also think to bee young herrings. And though the sea\naboundeth not with pilchards, yet they are commonly taken among\nherrings, butt few esteeme thereof or eat them.\n\nCongers are not so common on these coasts as on many seas about England,\nbutt are often found upon the north coast of Norfolk, and in frostie\nwether left in pulks and plashes upon the ebbe of the sea.\n\nThe sand eels Anglorum of Aldrouandus, or Tobianus of Schoneueldeus\ncommonly called smoulds taken out of the sea sands with forks and rakes\nabout Blakeney and Burnham a small round slender fish about 3 or 4\ninches long as bigge as a small Tobacco pipe a very dayntie dish.\n\nPungitius marinus or sea bausticle hauing a prickle one each side the\nsmallest fish of the sea about an inch long sometimes drawne ashoare\nwith netts together with weeds and pargaments of the sea.\n\nMany sorts of flat fishes. The pastinaca oxyrinchus with a long and\nstrong aculeus in the tayle conceued of speciall venome and virtues.\n\nSeverall sorts of Raia's skates and Thornebacks the Raia clauata\noxyrinchus, raia oculata, aspera, spinosa fullonica.\n\nThe great Rhombus or Turbot aculeatus and leuis.\n\nThe passer or place.\n\nButts of various kinds.\n\nThe passer squamosus Bret Bretcock and skulls comparable in taste and\ndelicacy vnto the soale.\n\nThe Buglossus solea or soale plana and oculata as also the Lingula or\nsmall soale all in very great plentie.\n\nSometimes a fish aboue half a yard long like a butt or soale called\nasprage which I haue known taken about Cromer.\n\nSepia or cuttle fish and great plentie of the bone or shellie substance\nwhich sustaineth the whole bulk of that soft fishe found commonly on the\nshoare.\n\nThe Loligo sleue or calamar found often upon the shoare from head to\ntayle sometimes aboue an ell long, remarkable for its parretlike bill,\nthe gladiolus or calamus along the back and the notable crystallyne of\nthe eye which equalleth if not exceedeth the lustre of orientall pearle.\n\nA polypus another kind of the mollia sometimes wee haue met with.\n\nLobsters in great number about Sheringham and Cromer from whence all the\ncountry is supplyed.\n\nAstacus marinus pediculi marini facie found also in that place, with the\naduantage of ye long foreclawes about 4 inches long.\n\nCrabs large and well tasted found also in the same coast.\n\nAnother kind of crab taken for cancer fluuiatilis litle slender and of a\nvery quick motion found in the Riuer running through Yarmouth, and in\nBliburgh riuer.\n\nOysters exceeding large about Burnham and Hunstanton like those of Poole\nSt Mallowes or Ciuita Vechia whereof many are eaten rawe the shells\nbeing broakin with cleuers the greater part pickled and sent weekly to\nLondon and other parts.\n\nMituli or muscles in great quantitie as also chams or cochles about\nStiskay and the northwest coast.\n\nPectines pectunculi varij or scallops of the lesser sort.\n\nTurbines or smaller wilks, leues, striati, as also Trochi, Trochili, or\nscaloppes finely variegated and pearly. Lewise purpurae minores,\nnerites, cochleae, Tellinae.\n\nLepades, patellae Limpets, of an vniualue shell wherein an animal like a\nsnayle cleauing fast unto the rocks.\n\nSolenes cappe lunge venetorum commonly a razor fish the shell thereof\ndentalia.\n\nDentalia by some called pinpaches because pinmeat thereof is taken out\nwith a pinne or needle.\n\nCancellus Turbinum et neritis Barnard the Hermite of Rondeletius a kind\nof crab or astacus liuing in a forsaken wilk or nerites.\n\nEchinus echinometrites sea hedghogge whose neat shells are common on the\nshoare the fish aliue often taken by the dragges among the oysters.\n\nBalani a smaller sort of vniualue growing commonly in clusters, the\nsmaller kinds thereof to bee found oftimes upon oysters wilks and\nlobsters.\n\nConcha anatifera or Ansifera or Barnicleshell whereof about 4 yeares\npast were found upon the shoare no small number by Yarmouth hanging by\nslender strings of a kind of Alga vnto seuerall splinters or cleauings\nof firre boards vnto which they were seuerally fastned and hanged like\nropes of onyons: their shell flat and of a peculiar forme differing from\nother shelles, this being of four diuisions, containing a small\nimperfect animal at the lower part diuided into many shootes or streames\nwhich prepossed spectators fancy to bee the rudiment of the tayle of\nsome goose or duck to bee produced from it; some whereof in ye shell and\nsome taken out and spred upon paper we shall keepe by us.\n\nStellae marinae or sea starres in great plentie especially about\nYarmouth. Whether they bee bred out of the vrticae squalders or sea\ngellies as many report wee cannot confirme butt the squalderes in the\nmiddle seeme to haue some lines or first draughts not unlike. Our\nstarres exceed not 5 poynts though I haue heard that some with more haue\nbeen found about Hunstanton and Burnham, where are also found stellae\nmarinae testacae or handsome crusted and brittle sea starres much lesse.\n\nThe pediculus and culex marinus the sea lowse and flie are also no\nstrangeres.\n\nPhyssalus Rondeletij or eruca marina physsaloides according to the icon\nof Rondeletius of very orient green and purple bristles.\n\nUrtica marina of diuers kinds some whereof called squalderes, of a\nburning and stinging qualitie if rubbed in the hand; the water thereof\nmay afford a good cosmetick.\n\nAnother elegant sort that is often found cast up by shoare in great\nnumbers about the bignesse of a button cleere and welted and may bee\ncalled fibula marina crystallina.\n\nHirudines marini or sea Leaches.\n\nVermes marini very large wormes digged a yarde deepe out of the sands at\nthe ebbe for bayt. Tis known where they are to be found by a litle flat\nouer them on the surface of the sand; as also vermes in tubulis\ntestacei. Also Tethya or sea dugges some whereof resemble fritters the\nvesicaria marina also and fanago sometimes very large conceaued to\nproceed from some testaceous animals, and particularly from the purpura\nbutt ours more probably from other testaceous wee hauing not met with\nany large purpura upon this coast.\n\nMany riuer fishes also and animals. Salmon no common fish in our riuers\nthough many are taken in the Owse, in the Bure or north riuer, in ye\nWaueney or south riuer, in ye Norwich river butt seldome and in the\nwinter butt 4 yeares ago 15 were taken at Trowes mill in Xtmas, whose\nmouths were stuck with small wormes or horsleaches no bigger than fine\nthreads. Some of these I kept in water 3 moneths: if a few drops of\nblood were putt to the water they would in a litle time looke red. They\nsensibly grewe bigger then I first found them and were killed by an hard\nfroast freezing the water. Most of our Salmons haue a recurued peece of\nflesh in the end of the lower iawe which when they shutt there mouths\ndeepely enters the upper, as Scaliger hath noted in some.\n\nThe Riuers lakes and broads abound in the Lucius or pikes of very large\nsize where also is found the Brama or Breme large and well tasted the\nTinca or Tench the Rubecula Roach as also Rowds and Dare or Dace perca\nor pearch great and small: whereof such as are in Braden on this side\nYarmouth in the mixed water make a dish very dayntie and I think scarce\nto bee bettered in England. Butt the Blea[k] the chubbe the barbell to\nbee found in diuers other Riuers in England I haue not obserued in\nthese. As also fewer mennowes then in many other riuers.\n\nThe Trutta or trout the Gammarus or crawfish butt scarce in our riuers\nbutt frequently taken in the Bure or north riuer and in the seuerall\nbranches thereof, and very remarkable large crawfishes to bee found in\nthe riuer which runnes by Castleaker and Nerford.\n\nThe Aspredo perca minor and probably the cernua of Cardan commonly\ncalled a Ruffe in great plentie in Norwich Riuers and euen in the\nstreame of the citty, which though Camden appropriates vnto this citty\nyet they are also found in the riuers of Oxforde and Cambridge.\n\nLampetra Lampries great and small found plentifully in Norwich riuer and\neuen in the Citty about May whereof some are very large and well cooked\nare counted a dayntie bitt collard up butt especially in pyes.\n\nMustela fluuiatilis or eele poult to bee had in Norwich riuer and\nbetween it and Yarmouth as also in the riuers of marshland resembling an\neele and a cod, a very good dish and the Liuer thereof well answers the\ncommendations of the Ancients.\n\nGodgions or funduli fluuiatiles, many whereof may bee taken within the\nRiuer in the citty.\n\nCapitones fluuiatilis or millers thumbs, pungitius fluuiatilis or\nstanticles. Aphia cobites fluuiatilis or Loches. In Norwich riuers in\nthe runnes about Heueningham heath in the north riuer and streames\nthereof.\n\nOf eeles the common eele and the glot which hath somewhat a different\nshape in the bignesse of the head and is affirmed to have yong ones\noften found within it, and wee haue found a vterus in the same somewhat\nanswering the icon thereof in Senesinus.\n\nCarpiones carpes plentifull in ponds and sometimes large ones in broads:\n2 the largest I euer beheld were taken in Norwich Riuer.\n\nThough the woods and dryelands abound with adders and vipers yet there\nare few snakes about our riuers or meadowes, more to bee found in Marsh\nland; butt ponds and plashes abound in Lizards or swifts.\n\nThe Gryllotalpa or fencricket common in fenny places butt wee haue met\nwith them also in dry places dung-hills and church yards of this citty.\n\nBeside horseleaches and periwinkles in plashes and standing waters we\nhaue met with vermes setacei or hardwormes butt could neuer conuert\nhorsehayres into them by laying them in water: as also the great\nHydrocantharus or black shining water Beetle the forficula, sqilla,\ncorculum and notonecton that swimmeth on its back.\n\nCamden reports that in former time there haue been Beuers in the Riuer\nof Cardigan in Wales. This wee are to sure of that the Riuers great\nBroads and carres afford great store of otters with us, a great\ndestroyer of fish as feeding butt from ye vent downewards, not free from\nbeing a prey it self for their yong ones haue been found in Buzzards\nnests. They are accounted no bad dish by many, are to bee made very tame\nand in some howses haue serued for turnespitts.\n\n\n\n\nON THE OSTRICH.\n\n\nThe ostrich hath a compounded name in Greek and\nLatin--_Struthio-Camelus_, borrowed from a bird and a beast, as being a\nfeathered and biped animal, yet in some ways like a camel; somewhat in\nthe long neck; somewhat in the foot; and, as some imagine, from a\ncamel-like position in the part of generation.\n\nIt is accounted the largest and tallest of any winged and feathered\nfowl; taller than the gruen or cassowary. This ostrich, though a female,\nwas about seven feet high, and some of the males were higher, either\nexceeding or answerable unto the stature of the great porter unto king\nCharles the First. The weight was a[370] [ ] in grocer's scales.\n\n [370] Undecipherable in the original.\n\nWhosoever shall compare or consider together the ostrich and the\ntomineio, or humbird, not weighing twelve grains, may easily discover\nunder what compass or latitude the creation of birds hath been ordained.\n\nThe head is not large, but little in proportion to the whole body. And,\ntherefore, Julius Scaliger, when he mentioned birds of large heads\n(comparatively unto their bodies), named the sparrow, the owl, and the\nwoodpecker; and, reckoning up birds of small heads, instanceth in the\nhen, the peacock, and the ostrich.\n\nThe head is looked upon by discerning spectators to resemble that of a\ngoose rather than any kind of +strouthos+, or _passer_: and so\nmay be more properly called _cheno-camelus_, or _ansero-camelus_.\n\nThere is a handsome figure of an ostrich in Mr. Willoughby's and Ray's\n_Ornithologia_: another in Aldrovandus and Jonstonus, and Bellonius; but\nthe heads not exactly agreeing. 'Rostrum habet exiguum, sed acutum,'\nsaith Jonstoun; 'un long bec et poinctu,' saith Bellonius; men\ndescribing such as they have an opportunity to see, and perhaps some the\nostriches of very different countries, wherein, as in some other birds,\nthere may be some variety.\n\nIn Africa, where some eat elephants, it is no wonder that some also feed\nupon ostriches. They flay them with their feathers on, which they sell,\nand eat the flesh. But Galen and physicians have condemned that flesh,\nas hard and indigestible. The emperor Heliogabalus had a fancy for the\nbrains, when he brought six hundred ostriches' heads to one supper, only\nfor the brains' sake; yet Leo Africanus saith that he ate of young\nostriches among the Numidians with a good gust; and, perhaps, boiled,\nand well cooked, after the art of Apicius, with peppermint, dates, and\nother good things, they might go down with some stomachs.\n\nI do not find that the strongest eagles, or best-spirited hawks, will\noffer at these birds; yet, if there were such gyrfalcons as Julius\nScaliger saith the duke of Savoy and Henry, king of Navarre, had, it is\nlike they would strike at them, and, making at the head, would spoil\nthem, or so disable them, that they might be taken.\n\nIf these had been brought over in June, it is, perhaps, likely we might\nhave met with eggs in some of their bellies, whereof they lay very many:\nbut they are the worst of eggs for food, yet serviceable unto many other\nuses in their country; for, being cut transversely, they serve for\ndrinking cups and skull-caps; and, as I have seen, there are large\ncircles of them, and some painted and gilded, which hang up in Turkish\nmosques, and also in Greek churches. They are preserved with us for\nrarities; and, as they come to be common, some use will be found of them\nin physic, even as of other eggshells and other such substances.\n\nWhen it first came into my garden, it soon ate up all the gilliflowers,\ntulip-leaves, and fed greedily upon what was green, as lettuce, endive,\nsorrell; it would feed on oats, barley, peas, beans; swallow onions; eat\nsheep's lights and livers.--Then you mention what you know more.\n\nWhen it took down a large onion, it stuck awhile in the gullet, and did\nnot descend directly, but wound backward behind the neck; whereby I\nmight perceive that the gullet turned much; but this is not peculiar\nunto the ostrich; but the same hath been observed in the stork, when it\nswallows down frogs and pretty big bits.\n\nIt made sometimes a strange noise; had a very odd note, especially in\nthe morning, and, perhaps, when hungry.\n\nAccording to Aldrovandus, some hold that there is an antipathy between\nit and a horse, which an ostrich will not endure to see or be near; but,\nwhile I kept it, I could not confirm this opinion; which might, perhaps,\nbe raised because a common way of hunting and taking them is by swift\nhorses.\n\nIt is much that Cardanus should be mistaken with a great part of men,\nthat the coloured and dyed feathers of ostriches were natural; as red,\nblue, yellow, and green; whereas, the natural colours in this bird were\nwhite and greyish. Of the fashion of wearing feathers in battles or wars\nby men, and women, see Scaliger, _Contra Cardan. Exercitat. 220_.\n\nIf wearing of feather-fans should come up again, it might much increase\nthe trade of plumage from Barbary. Bellonius saith he saw two hundred\nskins with the feathers on in one shop of Alexandria.\n\n\n\n\nBOULIMIA CENTENARIA.\n\n\nThere is a woman now living in Yarmouth, named Elizabeth Michell, an\nhundred and two years old; a person of four feet and half high, very\nlean, very poor, and living in a mean room with pitiful accommodation.\nShe had a son after she was past fifty. Though she answers well enough\nunto ordinary questions, yet she apprehends her eldest daughter to be\nher mother; but what is most remarkable concerning her is a kind of\n_boulimia_ or dog-appetite; she greedily eating day and night what her\nallowance, friends, and charitable persons afford her, drinking beer or\nwater, and making little distinction or refusal of any food, either of\nbroths, flesh, fish, apples, pears, and any coarse food, which she\neateth in no small quantity, insomuch that the overseers of the poor\nhave of late been fain to augment her weekly allowance. She sleeps\nindifferently well, till hunger awakes her; then she must have no\nordinary supply whether in the day or night. She vomits not, nor is very\nlaxative. This is the oldest example of the _sal esurinum chymicorum_,\nwhich I have taken notice of; though I am ready to afford my charity\nunto her, yet I should be loth to spend a piece of ambergris I have upon\nher, and to allow six grains to every dose till I found some effect in\nmoderating her appetite: though that be esteemed a great specific in her\ncondition.\n\n\n\n\nUPON THE DARK THICK MIST HAPPENING ON THE 27TH OF NOVEMBER, 1674.\n\n\nThough it be not strange to see frequent mists, clouds, and rains, in\nEngland, as many ancient describers of this country have noted, yet I\ncould not but take notice of a very great mist which happened upon the\n27th of the last November, and from thence have taken this occasion to\npropose something of mists, clouds, and rains, unto your candid\nconsiderations.\n\nHerein mists may well deserve the first place, as being, if not the\nfirst in nature, yet the first meteor mentioned in Scripture, and soon\nafter the creation, for it is said, Gen. ii. that 'God had not yet\ncaused it to rain upon the earth, but a mist went up from the earth, and\nwatered the whole face of the ground,' for it might take a longer time\nfor the elevation of vapours sufficient to make a congregation of clouds\nable to afford any store of showers and rain in so early days of the\nworld.\n\nThick vapours, not ascending high but hanging about the earth and\ncovering the surface of it, are commonly called mists; if they ascend\nhigh they are called clouds. They remain upon the earth till they either\nfall down or are attenuated, rarified, and scattered.\n\nThe great mist was not only observable about London, but in remote parts\nof England, and as we hear, in Holland, so that it was of larger extent\nthan mists are commonly apprehended to be; most men conceiving that they\nreach not much beyond the places where they behold them. Mists make an\nobscure air, but they beget not darkness, for the atoms and particles\nthereof admit the light, but if the matter thereof be very thick, close,\nand condensed, the mist grows considerably obscure and like a cloud, so\nthe miraculous and palpable darkness of Egypt is conceived to have been\neffected by an extraordinary dense and dark mist or a kind of cloud\nspread over the land of Egypt, and also miraculously restrained from the\nneighbour land of Goshen.\n\nMists and fogs, containing commonly vegetable spirits, when they\ndissolve and return upon the earth, may fecundate and add some fertility\nunto it, but they may be more unwholesome in great cities than in\ncountry habitations: for they consist of vapours not only elevated from\nsimple watery and humid places, but also the exhalations of draughts,\ncommon sewers, and foetid places, and decoctions used by unwholesome\nand sordid manufactures: and also hindering the sea-coal smoke from\nascending and passing away, it is conjoined with the mist and drawn in\nby the breath, all which may produce bad effects, inquinate the blood,\nand produce catarrhs and coughs. Sereins, well known in hot countries,\ncause headache, toothache, and swelled faces; but they seem to have\ntheir original from subtle, invisible, nitrous, and piercing\nexhalations, caused by a strong heat of the sun, which falling after\nsunset produce the effects mentioned.\n\nThere may be also subterraneous mists, when heat in the bowels of the\nearth, working upon humid parts, makes an attenuation thereof and\nconsequently nebulous bodies in the cavities of it.\n\nThere is a kind of a continued mist in the bodies of animals,\nespecially in the cavous parts, as may be observed in bodies opened\npresently after death, and some think that in sleep there is a kind of\nmist in the brain; and upon exceeding motion some animals cast out a\nmist about them.\n\nWhen the cuttle fish, polypus, or loligo, make themselves invisible by\nobscuring the water about them; they do it not by any vaporous emission,\nbut by a black humour ejected, which makes the water black and dark near\nthem: but upon excessive motion some animals are able to afford a mist\nabout them, when the air is cool and fit to condense it, as horses after\na race, so that they become scarce visible.\n\n\n\n\nACCOUNT OF A THUNDER STORM AT NORWICH, 1665.\n\n\n_June 28, 1665._\n\nAfter seven o'clock in the evening there was almost a continued thunder\nuntil eight, wherein the _tonitru_ and _fulgur_, the noise and\nlightning, were so terrible, that they put the whole city into an\namazement, and most unto their prayers. The clouds went low, and the\ncracks seemed near over our heads during the most part of the thunder.\nAbout eight o'clock, an _ignis fulmineus_, _pila ignea fulminans_,\n_telum igneum fulmineum_, or fire-ball, hit against the little wooden\npinnacle of the high leucome window of my house, toward the\nmarket-place, broke the flue boards, and carried pieces thereof a\nstone's cast off; whereupon many of the tiles fell into the street, and\nthe windows in adjoining houses were broken. At the same time either a\npart of that close-bound fire, or another of the same nature, fell into\nthe court-yard, and whereof no notice was taken till we began to examine\nthe house, and then we found a freestone on the outside of the wall of\nthe entry leading to the kitchen, half a foot from the ground, fallen\nfrom the wall; a hole as big as a foot-ball bored through the wall,\nwhich is about a foot thick, and a chest which stood against it, on the\ninside, split and carried about a foot from the wall. The wall also,\nbehind the leaden cistern, at five yards distance from it, broken on the\ninside and outside; the middle seeming entire. The lead on the edges of\nthe cistern turned a little up; and a great washing-bowl, that stood by\nit, to recover the rain, turned upside down, and split quite through.\nSome chimneys and tiles were struck down in other parts of the city. A\nfire-ball also struck down the wall in the market-place. And all this,\nGod be thanked! without mischief unto any person. The greatest terror\nwas from the noise, answerable unto two or three cannon. The smell it\nleft was strong, like that after the discharge of a cannon. The balls\nthat flew were not like fire in the flame, but the coal; and the people\nsaid it was like the sun. It was _discutiens, terebrans_, but not\n_urens_. It burnt nothing, nor any thing it touched smelt of fire; nor\nmelted any lead of window or cistern, as I found it do in the great\nstorm, about nine years ago, at Melton-hall, four miles off, at that\ntime when the hail broke three thousand pounds worth of glass in\nNorwich, in half-a-quarter of an hour. About four days after, the like\nfulminous fire killed a man in Erpingham church, by Aylsham, upon whom\nit broke, and beat down divers which were within the wind of it. One\nalso went off in Sir John Hobart's gallery, at Blickling. He was so near\nthat his arm and thigh were numbed about an hour after. Two or three\ndays after, a woman and horse were killed near Bungay; her hat so\nshivered that no piece remained bigger than a groat, whereof I had some\npieces sent unto me. Granades, crackers, and squibs, do much resemble\nthe discharge, and _aurum fulminans_ the fury thereof. Of other\nthunderbolts or _lapides fulminei_, I have little opinion. Some I have\nby me under that name, but they are _e genere fossilium_.\n\n THOMAS BROWNE.\n_Norwich_, 1665.\n\n\n\n\nON DREAMS.\n\n\nHalf our days we pass in the shadow of the earth; and the brother of\ndeath exacteth a third part of our lives. A good part of our sleep is\npeered out with visions and fantastical objects, wherein we are\nconfessedly deceived. The day supplieth us with truths; the night with\nfictions and falsehoods, which uncomfortably divide the natural account\nof our beings. And, therefore, having passed the day in sober labours\nand rational enquiries of truth, we are fain to betake ourselves unto\nsuch a state of being, wherein the soberest heads have acted all the\nmonstrosities of melancholy, and which unto open eyes are no better than\nfolly and madness.\n\nHappy are they that go to bed with grand music, like Pythagoras, or have\nways to compose the fantastical spirit, whose unruly wanderings take off\ninward sleep, filling our heads with St. Anthony's visions, and the\ndreams of Lipara in the sober chambers of rest.\n\nVirtuous thoughts of the day lay up good treasures for the night;\nwhereby the impressions of imaginary forms arise into sober similitudes,\nacceptable unto our slumbering selves and preparatory unto divine\nimpressions. Hereby Solomon's sleep was happy. Thus prepared, Jacob\nmight well dream of angels upon a pillow of stone. And the best sleep of\nAdam might be the best of any after.\n\nThat there should be divine dreams seems unreasonably doubted by\nAristotle. That there are demoniacal dreams we have little reason to\ndoubt. Why may there not be angelical? If there be guardian spirits,\nthey may not be inactively about us in sleep; but may sometimes order\nour dreams: and many strange hints, instigations, or discourses, which\nare so amazing unto us, may arise from such foundations.\n\nBut the phantasms of sleep do commonly walk in the great road of natural\nand animal dreams, wherein the thoughts or actions of the day are acted\nover and echoed in the night. Who can therefore wonder that Chrysostom\nshould dream of St. Paul, who daily read his epistles; or that Cardan,\nwhose head was so taken up about the stars, should dream that his soul\nwas in the moon! Pious persons, whose thoughts are daily busied about\nheaven, and the blessed state thereof, can hardly escape the nightly\nphantasms of it, which though sometimes taken for illuminations, or\ndivine dreams, yet rightly perpended may prove but animal visions, and\nnatural night-scenes of their awaking contemplations.\n\nMany dreams are made out by sagacious exposition, and from the signature\nof their subjects; carrying their interpretation in their fundamental\nsense and mystery of similitude, whereby, he that understands upon what\nnatural fundamental every notion dependeth, may, by symbolical\nadaptation, hold a ready way to read the characters of Morpheus. In\ndreams of such a nature, Artemidorus, Achmet, and Astrampsichus, from\nGreek, Egyptian, and Arabian oneirocriticism, may hint some\ninterpretation: who, while we read of a ladder in Jacob's dream, will\ntell us that ladders and scalary ascents signify preferment; and while\nwe consider the dream of Pharaoh, do teach us that rivers overflowing\nspeak plenty, lean oxen, famine and scarcity; and therefore it was but\nreasonable in Pharaoh to demand the interpretation from his magicians,\nwho, being Egyptians, should have been well versed in symbols and the\nhieroglyphical notions of things. The greatest tyrant in such\ndivinations was Nabuchodonosor, while, besides the interpretation, he\ndemanded the dream itself; which being probably determined by divine\nimmission, might escape the common road of phantasms, that might have\nbeen traced by Satan.\n\nWhen Alexander, going to besiege Tyre, dreamt of a Satyr, it was no hard\nexposition for a Grecian to say, 'Tyre will be thine.' He that dreamed\nthat he saw his father washed by Jupiter and anointed by the sun, had\ncause to fear that he might be crucified, whereby his body would be\nwashed by the rain, and drop by the heat of the sun. The dream of\nVespasian was of harder exposition; as also that of the emperor\nMauritius, concerning his successor Phocas. And a man might have been\nhard put to it, to interpret the language of AEsculapius, when to a\nconsumptive person he held forth his fingers; implying thereby that his\ncure lay in dates, from the homonomy of the Greek, which signifies\ndates and fingers.\n\nWe owe unto dreams that Galen was a physician, Dion an historian, and\nthat the world hath seen some notable pieces of Cardan; yet, he that\nshould order his affairs by dreams, or make the night a rule unto the\nday, might be ridiculously deluded; wherein Cicero is much to be pitied,\nwho having excellently discoursed of the vanity of dreams, was yet\nundone by the flattery of his own, which urged him to apply himself unto\nAugustus.\n\nHowever dreams may be fallacious concerning outward events, yet may they\nbe truly significant at home; and whereby we may more sensibly\nunderstand ourselves. Men act in sleep with some conformity unto their\nawaked senses; and consolations or discouragements may be drawn from\ndreams which intimately tell us ourselves. Luther was not like to fear a\nspirit in the night, when such an apparition would not terrify him in\nthe day. Alexander would hardly have run away in the sharpest combats of\nsleep, nor Demosthenes have stood stoutly to it, who was scarce able to\ndo it in his prepared senses. Persons of radical integrity will not\neasily be perverted in their dreams, nor noble minds do pitiful things\nin sleep. Crassus would have hardly been bountiful in a dream, whose\nfist was so close awake. But a man might have lived all his life upon\nthe sleeping hand of Antonius.\n\nThere is an art to make dreams, as well as their interpretation; and\nphysicians will tell us that some food makes turbulent, some gives\nquiet, dreams. Cato, who doated upon cabbage, might find the crude\neffects thereof in his sleep; wherein the Egyptians might find some\nadvantage by their superstitious abstinence from onions. Pythagoras\nmight have calmer sleeps, if he totally abstained from beans. Even\nDaniel, the great interpreter of dreams, in his leguminous diet, seems\nto have chosen no advantageous food for quiet sleeps, according to\nGrecian physic.\n\nTo add unto the delusion of dreams, the fantastical objects seem greater\nthan they are; and being beheld in the vaporous state of sleep, enlarge\ntheir diameters unto us; whereby it may prove more easy to dream of\ngiants than pigmies. Democritus might seldom dream of atoms, who so\noften thought of them. He almost might dream himself a bubble extending\nunto the eighth sphere. A little water makes a sea; a small puff of wind\na tempest. A grain of sulphur kindled in the blood may make a flame like\nAEtna; and a small spark in the bowels of Olympias a lightning over all\nthe chamber.\n\nBut, beside these innocent delusions, there is a sinful state of dreams.\nDeath alone, not sleep, is able to put an end unto sin; and there may be\na night-book of our iniquities; for beside the transgressions of the\nday, casuists will tell us of mortal sins in dreams, arising from evil\nprecogitations; meanwhile human law regards not noctambulos; and if a\nnight-walker should break his neck, or kill a man, takes no notice of\nit.\n\nDionysius was absurdly tyrannical to kill a man for dreaming that he had\nkilled him; and really to take away his life, who had but fantastically\ntaken away his. Lamia was ridiculously unjust to sue a young man for a\nreward, who had confessed that pleasure from her in a dream which she\nhad denied unto his awaking senses: conceiving that she had merited\nsomewhat from his fantastical fruition and shadow of herself. If there\nbe such debts, we owe deeply unto sympathies; but the common spirit of\nthe world must be ready in such arrearages.\n\nIf some have swooned, they may also have died in dreams, since death is\nbut a confirmed swooning. Whether Plato died in a dream, as some\ndeliver, he must rise again to inform us. That some have never dreamed,\nis as improbable as that some have never laughed. That children dream\nnot the first half-year; that men dream not in some countries, with many\nmore, are unto me sick men's dreams; dreams out of the ivory gate, and\nvisions before midnight.\n\n\n\n\nOBSERVATIONS ON GRAFTING.\n\n\nIn the doctrine of all insitions, those are esteemed most successful\nwhich are practised under these rules:--\n\nThat there be some consent or similitude of parts and nature between the\nplants conjoined.\n\nThat insition be made between trees not of very different barks; nor\nvery differing fruits or forms of fructification; nor of widely\ndifferent ages.\n\nThat the scions or buds be taken from the south or east part of the\ntree.\n\nThat a rectitude and due position be observed; not to insert the south\npart of the scions unto the northern side of the stock, but according to\nthe position of the scions upon his first matrix.\n\nNow, though these rules be considerable in the usual and practised\ncourse of insitions, yet were it but reasonable for searching spirits to\nurge the operations of nature by conjoining plants of very different\nnatures in parts, barks, lateness, and precocities, nor to rest in the\nexperiments of hortensial plants in whom we chiefly intend the\nexaltation or variety of their fruit and flowers, but in all sorts of\nshrubs and trees applicable unto physic and mechanical uses, whereby we\nmight alter their tempers, moderate or promote their virtues, exchange\ntheir softness, hardness, and colour, and so render them considerable\nbeyond their known and trite employments.\n\nTo which intent curiosity may take some rule or hint from these or the\nlike following, according to the various ways of propagation:--\n\nColutea upon anagris--arbor judae upon anagris--cassia poetica upon\ncytisus--cytisus upon periclymenum rectum--woodbine upon jasmine--cystus\nupon rosemary--rosemary upon ivy--sage or rosemary upon cystus--myrtle\nupon gall or rhus myrtifolia--whortleberry upon gall, heath, or\nmyrtle--coccygeia upon alaternus--mezereon upon an almond--gooseberry\nand currants upon mezereon, barberry, or blackthorn--barberry upon a\ncurrant tree--bramble upon gooseberry or raspberry--yellow rose upon\nsweetbrier--phyllerea upon broom--broom upon furze--anonis lutea upon\nfurze--holly upon box--bay upon holly--holly upon pyracantha--a fig\nupon chestnut--a fig upon mulberry--peach upon mulberry--mulberry upon\nbuckthorn--walnut upon chesnut--savin upon juniper--vine upon oleaster,\nrosemary, ivy--an arbutus upon a fig--a peach upon a fig--white poplar\nupon black poplar--asp upon white poplar--wych elm upon common\nelm--hazel upon elm--sycamore upon wych elm--cinnamon rose upon\nhipberry--a whitethorn upon a blackthorn--hipberry upon a sloe, or\nskeye, or bullace--apricot upon a mulberry--arbutus upon a\nmulberry--cherry upon a peach--oak upon a chesnut--katherine peach upon\na quince--a warden upon a quince--a chesnut upon a beech--a beech upon a\nchesnut--an hornbeam upon a beech--a maple upon an hornbeam--a sycamore\nupon a maple--a medlar upon a service tree--a sumack upon a quince or\nmedlar--an hawthorn upon a service tree--a quicken tree upon an ash--an\nash upon an asp--an oak upon an ilex--a poplar upon an elm--a black\ncherry tree upon a tilea or lime tree--tilea upon beech--alder upon\nbirch or poplar--a filbert upon an almond--an almond upon a willow--a\nnux vesicaria upon an almond or pistachio--a cerasus avium upon a nux\nvesicaria--a cornelian upon a cherry tree--a cherry tree upon a\ncornelian--an hazel upon a willow or sallow--a lilac upon a sage tree--a\nsyringa upon lilac or tree-mallow--a rose elder upon syringa--a water\nelder upon rose elder--buckthorn upon elder--frangula upon\nbuckthorn--hirga sanguinea upon privet--phyllerea upon vitex--vitex upon\nevonymus--evonymus upon viburnum--ruscus upon pyracantha--paleurus upon\nhawthorn--tamarisk upon birch--erica upon tamarisk--polemonium upon\ngenista hispanica--genista hispanica upon colutea.\n\nNor are we to rest in the frustrated success of some single experiments,\nbut to proceed in attempts in the most unlikely unto iterated and\ncertain conclusions, and to pursue the way of ablactation or inarching.\nWhereby we might determine whether, according to the ancients, no fir,\npine, or picea, would admit of any incision upon them; whether yew will\nhold society with none; whether walnut, mulberry, and cornel cannot be\npropagated by insition, or the fig and quince admit almost of any, with\nmany others of doubtful truths in the propagations.\n\nAnd while we seek for varieties in stocks and scions, we are not to\nadmit the ready practice of the scion upon its own tree. Whereby, having\na sufficient number of good plants, we may improve their fruits without\ntranslative conjunction, that is, by insition of the scion upon his own\nmother, whereby an handsome variety or melioration seldom faileth--we\nmight be still advanced by iterated insitions in proper boughs and\npositions. Insition is also made not only with scions and buds, but\nseeds, by inserting them in cabbage stalks, turnips, onions, etc., and\nalso in ligneous plants.\n\nWithin a mile of this city of Norwich, an oak groweth upon the head of a\npollard willow, taller than the stock, and about half a foot in\ndiameter, probably by some acorn falling or fastening upon it. I could\nshow you a branch of the same willow which shoots forth near the stock\nwhich beareth both willow and oak twigs and leaves upon it. In a meadow\nI use in Norwich, beset with willows and sallows, I have observed these\nplants to grow upon their heads; bylders, currants, gooseberries,\n_cynocrambe_, or dog's mercury, barberries, bittersweet, elder,\nhawthorn.\n\n\n\n\nCORRIGENDA\n\n\nVol. I. Page 4, line 24. _For_ than _read_ that.\n 97, \" 10. _For_ fell in love _read_ carnal'd.\n 227, \" 4. _For_ Capio _read_ Capo.\n 300, \" 8. _For_ Apicus _read_ a Picus.\n 301, \" 30. _For_ Caterpillaries _read_ capillaries.\n II. 111, \" 14. _Prega, Dio_ omit comma.\n 206, \" 1. _For_ Tarus and Fulius _read_ Varus and Julius.\n\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\n Aaron, i. 282, 284;\n ii. 123.\n\n Aaron's breastplate, i. 138.\n\n ---- mitre, iii. 264.\n\n ---- (rod), ii. 279;\n iii. 238.\n\n Abdachim, iii, 253.\n\n Abdella, iii. 253.\n\n Abderites, iii. 74.\n\n Abecedary, i. 250.\n\n Abel, i. 61, 92, 124, 131;\n ii. 13, 77, 323;\n iii. 9.\n\n Aben-Ezra, ii. 168, 232;\n iii. 232.\n\n Abergevenny (Lord), iii. 419.\n\n Abortion, i. 171, 235, 282;\n ii. 260.\n\n Abraham, i. 19, 27, 70, 187;\n ii. 277, 332, 382-3; iii. 205.\n\n Absalom, iii. 2, 37.\n\n Absyrtus, i. 315, 323.\n\n Abydenus, iii. 153.\n\n Academics, i. 99.\n\n Acapulco, iii. 345.\n\n Achilles, i. 93, 230;\n ii. 270;\n iii. 132, 137, 239.\n\n Achilles's horse, i. 313.\n\n Achilles Tatius, i. 246.\n\n Achitophel, iii. 38.\n\n Achmet, iii. 551.\n\n Aconite, i. 281, 290;\n iii. 69.\n\n Acorns, i. 116;\n iii. 170-1, 260-1.\n\n Acosta, ii. 354.\n\n Acteon, i. 158.\n\n Actium, ii. 362.\n\n Actius, i. xlix, 89.\n\n _Acus_, ii. 30.\n\n Adam, i. 34, 35, 55-7, 61, 68, 76, 81, 86, 92, 102, 107, 122-5,\n 127-8, 135, 182, 290;\n ii. 10, 13, 37, 75, 130, 137, 210-12, 285;\n iii. 5.\n\n Adamant, i. 236.\n\n Adder, i. 337;\n ii. 256.\n\n Addercock, iii. 531.\n\n Admah, iii. 326.\n\n Ado of Vienna, ii. 321.\n\n Adrian, Emperor, i. 165;\n iii. 106, 144.\n\n Adricomius, iii. 3, 268, 275.\n\n Adultery, i. 325.\n\n AEacides, iii. 327.\n\n AEgineta. _See_ Paulus.\n\n AElfric, iii. 310.\n\n AElian, i. 34, 155, 172, 174-5, 189, 291, 313, 321, 328, 332, 344;\n ii. 1, 19, 22, 26, 51, 63, 66-8, 71, 89, 159, 202, 234, 254,\n 259, 277;\n iii. 76.\n\n AEmilianus, iii. 436.\n\n AEneas, i. 344;\n ii. 333;\n iii. 132.\n\n AEneas Sylvius, ii. 396.\n\n AEolian magnets, i. 254.\n\n AEolus, i. 252;\n ii. 272.\n\n AEquicola (M.), iii. 320.\n\n AEschines, iii. 45.\n\n AEschylus, iii. 76.\n\n AEsculapius, i. 188, 347;\n ii. 106;\n iii. 552.\n\n AEson, i. xliii, 61.\n\n AEsop, i. 134, 138, 321-2.\n\n AEthiopia, ii. 7.\n\n AEthiopis, i. 297.\n\n AEtites, i. 235, 282.\n\n AEtius, i. 156, 171, 245-6, 325, 332;\n ii. 99, 197-8, 208.\n\n Affection, i. 94.\n\n Africa, i. 25, 78, 227, 230, 235, 344;\n ii. 145, 280, 334, 352-3.\n\n Africans, i. 305.\n\n Agades, ii. 372.\n\n Agamemnon, ii. 243;\n iii. 132, 139.\n\n Agaric, iii. 296.\n\n Agars, iii. 48.\n\n Agary, iii. 296.\n\n Agate, i. 208, 256, 284.\n\n Agathius, iii. 65.\n\n Age (old), i. 116, 342.\n\n Agesilaus, ii. 320.\n\n _Agnus Castus_, i. 171.\n\n Agostino (A.), iii. 163.\n\n Agricola, Emperor, iii. 108.\n\n ---- (Georg), i. 203, 211-12;\n ii. 278.\n\n Agriculture, ii. 307-8.\n\n Agrippina, i. xlvii.\n\n Ague, i. 166-7;\n ii. 282;\n iii. 378.\n\n Agullas, ii. 349.\n\n Ahasuerus, iii. 149.\n\n Ahaz, iii. 3.\n\n Ainsworth, ii. 262;\n iii. 265.\n\n Ajax, i. 318;\n iii. 132.\n\n Alabaster, i. 256.\n\n Alanes, ii. 280.\n\n Alaric, iii. 143.\n\n Albertus Magnus, i. xxvii, 167, 175, 202, 231, 235, 249, 262-3,\n 284, 288, 326, 351;\n ii. 1, 42, 63, 67-8, 82, 99, 156;\n iii. 7, 294-5.\n\n Albricus, ii, 257.\n\n Albuquerque, ii. 365.\n\n Alcala de Henares, ii. 28.\n\n Alcanna, iii. 80.\n\n Alcharma, iii. 224.\n\n Alciati, i. xii, 166;\n iii. 65.\n\n Alcinous, iii. 3, 153, 269.\n\n Alcmena, ii. 39, 268.\n\n Alcmena's nights, iii. 136.\n\n Alcoran, i. xxxii, 37, 146, 148.\n\n Alder, i. 271, 274.\n\n Aldrovandus, i. 210, 223, 289, 322, 326, 329, 333, 345;\n ii. 1, 6, 15-16, 24-5, 42, 63, 74-5, 85, 89-92, 156, 205,\n 207, 254;\n iii. 251-2, 529, 541.\n\n Aleazar, i. 284.\n\n Alemannus (Nic), iii. 66.\n\n Alexander, i. xxxvi, xlvi, 40, 77, 78, 188, 231, 243, 305, 343;\n ii. 148, 237, 264, 357, 366;\n iii. 68, 77-8, 125.\n\n ---- his boy, ii. 58.\n\n ---- (Pope), ii. 21.\n\n ---- (Bp.), iii. 410.\n\n Alexandria, i. 243;\n ii. 360;\n iii. 327, 543.\n\n ---- Library, i. 38.\n\n Alexandro (Alexander ab), i. xviii, xli;\n ii. 117, 120.\n\n Alexia, i. xxxvii.\n\n Alexis Pedimontanus, i. 176.\n\n Alfonso, Duke of Ferrara, i. 274-5.\n\n Algiers, ii. 280.\n\n Alhazen, i. 335;\n iii. 62.\n\n Alkermes, iii. 260.\n\n Allatius (Leo), iii. 71.\n\n Allegories, i. 143.\n\n Almanzor, i. 148.\n\n Almond, ii. 335.\n\n ---- trees, i. 293;\n iii. 239.\n\n ---- bitter, i. 298.\n\n Alnwick (Will.), Bp., iii. 411.\n\n Aloe, i. 256;\n ii. 197;\n iii. 295-6.\n\n Alphonso, ii. 349.\n\n Alpinus (Prosper), ii. 360.\n\n Alps, ii. 355;\n iii. 74.\n\n Alum, i. 204, 255, 256;\n ii. 391, 394.\n\n _Alumen plumosum_, ii. 21.\n\n Alured, iii. 310.\n\n Alva (Duke of), iii. 311.\n\n Alvarez (Fr.), i. 230;\n ii. 356.\n\n Amandus Zierexensis, iii. 111.\n\n Amaranth, iii. 128.\n\n Amasis, ii. 5.\n\n Amatus Lusitanus, i. 324;\n ii. 19, 28;\n iii. 24.\n\n Amazons, ii. 123;\n iii. 79.\n\n Amber, i. 255, 257, 259, 260;\n ii. 268;\n iii. 54.\n\n Ambergris, i. 165;\n ii. 88.\n\n Ambidexters, ii. 125, 130.\n\n Ambition, iii. 138, 452.\n\n Ambracia, iii. 248.\n\n Ambrose, i. 175, 254, 308;\n ii. 259.\n\n ---- Hexameron, ii. 4.\n\n Ambuscado, i. 190.\n\n America, i. 36, 227-8, 231, 235, 240, 294, 322;\n ii. 25, 61, 81, 83, 137, 274, 339, 341, 354, 357, 367, 371, 378;\n iii. 307, 312, 347.\n\n Americus, i. 229.\n\n Amethyst, i. 210, 255, 284-5.\n\n Ammianus Marcellinus, i. xxxiii;\n ii. 153.\n\n Ammon, i. 188.\n\n Ammonia, ii. 394.\n\n Ammoniac, i. 204-5.\n\n Ammonites, ii. 280.\n\n Amomum, i. 296.\n\n Amorites, ii. 381.\n\n Amos, iii. 4.\n\n Amphibium, i. 51.\n\n Amphibologie, i. 141.\n\n Amphilochus, iii. 39.\n\n Amphion, iii. 77.\n\n Amphisbaena, ii. 22.\n\n Amphitryon, ii. 39.\n\n Amulets, i. 195, 198, 269.\n\n Anabaptists, i. xvii.\n\n Anacreon, ii. 143.\n\n Anania, i. 328.\n\n Ananias, iii. 71.\n\n Anastasius Sinaita, i. xxx;\n iii. 157.\n\n Anatiferous trees, ii. 11.\n\n Anatomy, i. xlii, 54.\n\n Anaxagoras, i. xlvi, 73, 163, 199, 217.\n\n Anaxarchus, i. xlvi.\n\n Anaximander, i. 163.\n\n Anaximenes, ii. 252.\n\n Anchiale, iii. 77.\n\n Anchor, ii. 206.\n\n Anchovy, i. 320.\n\n Ancona, iii. 47.\n\n Anconians, iii. 106.\n\n Andes, ii. 355.\n\n Andirons, i. 221.\n\n Andreas, i. 118.\n\n Andromeda, ii. 193, 250, 375.\n\n Angelo, ii. 212.\n\n Angels, i. xli, xlii, 37, 123, 189, 190, 192;\n ii. 378;\n iii. 508.\n\n ---- Good, i. 47, 48.\n\n _Angelus doce mihi jus_, i. 240.\n\n Anglerius (P. M.), i. 322.\n\n Angles (people), iii. 112.\n\n Anglesea, iii. 113, 432, 518.\n\n Anglia Cymbrica, iii. 112.\n\n Anguillara, iii. 231.\n\n Animadversions, i. 1.\n\n Animals, i. 308;\n ii. 11.\n\n Anime. _See_ Gum Anime.\n\n Annihilation, i. 72.\n\n Anomaei, i. xxiii.\n\n Annius of Viterbo, ii. 333, 380.\n\n Answers of the Oracle, iii. 332.\n\n Antaeus, iii. 79.\n\n Antemon, i. xlix.\n\n Anthem Book, iii. 302.\n\n Anthology (Greek), ii. 145.\n\n Anthony, i. 194, 245, 350;\n ii. 275, 358;\n iii. 119.\n\n Anthropophagi, i. 55.\n\n Anthropophagy, i. 158;\n ii. 378.\n\n Anticera, i. 149.\n\n Antichrist, i. 12, 46, 66.\n\n Anticks, i. 60.\n\n Antidotes, iii. 69.\n\n Antigonus, i. 170;\n iii. 328.\n\n Antimony, i. 209, 255-6, 261, 269, 277;\n ii. 141.\n\n Antiochus, i. xxxi, xlix;\n ii. 255;\n iii. 43.\n\n Antipater, iii. 374.\n\n Antipathies, i. 62, 83.\n\n Antipodes, i. xxxviii, 41, 161, 164, 199;\n ii. 301, 339.\n\n Antiquity, i. 152.\n\n Antlers, i. 343.\n\n Antoeci, i. 252;\n ii. 301.\n\n Antonini, iii. 433.\n\n Antoninus, i. 174, 196;\n ii. 273;\n iii. 106.\n\n Antonius, i. xxvii, 171;\n ii. 216.\n\n Ants, i. 24.\n\n Anvils, i. 263.\n\n Antwerp, i. 226;\n ii. 38, 68.\n\n Anubis, ii. 185.\n\n Ape, i. 312;\n ii. 41, 156.\n\n Apelles, i. xxix.\n\n Aper, i. 196.\n\n Apicius, iii. 233, 541.\n\n _Apicus_. _See_ Picus.\n\n Apis, ii. 376.\n\n Apollinaris, i. 192.\n\n Apollo, ii. 4, 89, 118, 272, 362;\n iii. 40-1.\n\n Apollodorus, i. 241;\n iii. 43.\n\n Apollonius Thyaneus, i. xlviii, 160, 170;\n ii. 28.\n\n Aponensis, ii. 93.\n\n Apostles, i. 78.\n\n ---- names, i. 303.\n\n Appion, iii. 341.\n\n Apple, i. 293;\n ii. 392.\n\n ---- of Paradise, iii. 2.\n\n April, ii. 180.\n\n Apuleius, i. xv, xxvii, xxxiii, xli, 155;\n ii. 144, 268.\n\n Apulia, iii. 226.\n\n _Aqua fortis_, i. 204, 206, 215, 221, 237, 257, 261, 279, 277;\n ii. 64.\n\n Aquapendente, ii. 103.\n\n _Aqua Regis_, i. 277-8.\n\n _Aqua vitae_, i. 207, 261.\n\n Aqueducts, ii. 268-9.\n\n Aquila, ii. 157, 293.\n\n Aquitaine, iii. 314.\n\n Arabia, i. 32, 243;\n ii. 6, 7, 81, 332, 346, 378, 380-2.\n\n Arabians, i. 14, 148.\n\n Arabic writers, i. 176.\n\n Ararat, i. 36;\n ii. 348.\n\n Aratus, i. 156, 344;\n ii. 164, 305.\n\n Arcadians, ii. 180, 288.\n\n Archangelus, ii. 115.\n\n Archelaus, ii. 33.\n\n Archemorus, iii. 99.\n\n Archidoxes, i. 32.\n\n Archigenes, ii. 167.\n\n Archilochus, ii. 320.\n\n Archimedes, i. 179, 307;\n ii. 253;\n iii. 75, 77, 79, 136.\n\n Archimime, iii. 130.\n\n Arcotas, ii. 253.\n\n Arcturus, ii. 303, 400.\n\n Arden, i. 138.\n\n Ardoynus, i. 174, 332.\n\n Aremboldus, i. xvi.\n\n Arethusa, i. xix, 13.\n\n Aretius, ii. 333.\n\n Arginusa, ii, 377.\n\n Argol, ii. 394.\n\n Argonauts, ii. 332.\n\n Argos, ii. 332.\n\n Argulus, iii. 434.\n\n Argus, i. 307;\n ii. 46, 49, 279.\n\n Arians, i. 15.\n\n Aries, ii. 191, 303.\n\n Arimanius, i. 198.\n\n Arimaspi, ii. 3.\n\n Ariminum, i. 223.\n\n Ariolation, i. 137.\n\n Arion, ii. 205.\n\n Ariosto, ii. 59;\n iii. 382.\n\n Aristeas, ii. 293.\n\n Aristeus, ii. 3.\n\n Aristobulus, ii. 369, 375.\n\n Ariston, i. 156.\n\n Aristophanes, iii. 301.\n\n Aristotle, _passim_.\n\n ---- his death, iii. 42.\n\n Aristoxenus, i. 142;\n ii. 81.\n\n Arithmetic, i. 162.\n\n Ark, i. 34-5;\n ii. 9, 79, 131, 330, 348, 378;\n iii. 79.\n\n Arkites, ii. 383.\n\n Armado, i. 28.\n\n Armenia, ii. 332;\n iii. 148, 260.\n\n Armenian bishop, iii. 71.\n\n Arnoldus, iii. 72.\n\n Arphaxad, ii. 294.\n\n Arrianus, ii. 237, 353;\n iii. 379.\n\n Arrius, i. 191.\n\n Arrow, i. 276.\n\n ---- divining, ii. 280.\n\n _Ars longa_, i. 167.\n\n Arsenic, i. 255-6, 261, 277, 281, 290.\n\n Arsinoe, i. 243.\n\n Artaxerxes, i. 169;\n ii. 6, 261;\n iii. 68.\n\n ---- Longimanus, ii. 195;\n iii. 149.\n\n ---- Mnemon, iii. 149.\n\n Artemidorus, ii. 133;\n iii. 221, 551.\n\n Artemisia, iii. 123.\n\n Artephius, i. 340.\n\n Artergates, ii. 254.\n\n Arthur (King), iii. 91.\n\n Artichoke, ii. 392;\n iii. 166.\n\n Artificial Hills, Of, iii. 322.\n\n Artillery, i. xxxiii.\n\n Arvadites, ii. 383.\n\n Arvirage, iii. 311.\n\n Asa, ii. 382.\n\n Asafoetida, iii. 225.\n\n Asclepiades, i. xx;\n ii. 78.\n\n Asbeston, ii. 21.\n\n Ascendent, ii. 343.\n\n Ash, i. 293.\n\n Ash-tree, i. 306.\n\n Ashbury, iii. 113.\n\n Ashes, i. 270.\n\n Asia, i. 78, 227-8.\n\n Asmodeus, i. 189.\n\n Asp, i. 337-8;\n ii. 236.\n\n Asparagus, iii. 259.\n\n Asphaltites (Lake), iii. 52.\n\n Asphaltus, i. 257.\n\n Asphodels, iii. 132.\n\n Asprage, iii. 533.\n\n Ass, Asses, i. 154, 166, 346;\n ii. 81, 386-7.\n\n ---- (Indian), ii. 67, 68, 71.\n\n Assur, ii. 149, 331.\n\n Assyria, ii. 332, 335.\n\n Asteria, i. 210;\n ii. 15.\n\n Asteropaeus, ii. 130.\n\n Astipalaea, ii. 324.\n\n Astley (Herbert), iii. 421.\n\n _Astomi_, ii. 59.\n\n Astraea, iii. 465.\n\n Astrampsychus, iii. 381, 551.\n\n Astrology, i. 59, 138;\n ii. 182, 199, 200, 281, 343;\n iii. 486.\n\n Astronomers, i. 162;\n iii. 219.\n\n Astronomy, i. 98, 212.\n\n Athanasius, i. xli, 353;\n ii. 358.\n\n Atheism, i. 32, 184.\n\n Atheists, i. 67, 108.\n\n Athenaeus, i. 118, 155, 173;\n ii. 89, 118, 156, 158-9, 215, 221, 267, 277, 324;\n iii. 43, 51, 76-7, 119.\n\n Athenians, i. 143, 147, 339;\n ii. 285.\n\n Athens, i. 142, 162;\n ii. 332.\n\n Athos, iii. 75.\n\n Atlantic, iii. 531.\n\n Atomist, i. 79.\n\n Atoms, i. 258.\n\n Atropos, i. 92.\n\n Attalus, iii. 150, 335, 488.\n\n Attila, ii. 228.\n\n Augspurg, i. 247.\n\n Auguries, i. 194.\n\n Augurs, ii. 132.\n\n Augustine, St., _passim_.\n\n Augustus, i. xxvii, xl, 159, 194, 298, 336;\n ii. 171, 252;\n iii. 40, 185.\n\n Aurelius Victor, i. xxxiii.\n\n Aurichalcum, i. 255.\n\n _Aurum fulminans_, i. 277.\n\n Ausgurius, iii. 112.\n\n Ausonius, i. 344;\n ii. 261;\n iii. 217, 304.\n\n Authority, i. 161.\n\n Authors, i. 168.\n\n Autochthons, ii. 285.\n\n Autumn, i. xxix, 35;\n ii. 300-303.\n\n Auvergne (Bp. of), iii. 468.\n\n Avarice, i, 77, 108;\n iii. 389, 446.\n\n Ave-Mary Bell, i. 9.\n\n Aventinus, i. xxxix;\n ii. 395-6.\n\n Averroes, ii. 273;\n iii. 56.\n\n Avicenna, i. 148, 165, 332;\n ii. 140, 146, 177, 273-4, 310.\n\n Avignon, iii. 411.\n\n Ayermin (Will.), Bp., iii. 411.\n\n Aylsham, iii. 412, 549.\n\n Azores, i. 226-7;\n ii. 349, 398.\n\n Azotus, i. 49.\n\n\n Baal Seder, ii. 289.\n\n Baaras, i. 189, 291.\n\n Babel, i. 37, 98;\n ii. 178, 378;\n iii. 17.\n\n Babylon, i. 321;\n ii. 104, 287, 331, 383;\n iii. 18, 79, 148-9, 153, 162.\n\n Bacchinus, ii. 38.\n\n Bacchus, ii. 229.\n\n Back-worm, iii. 296.\n\n Bacon (Sir Edmund), iii. 96, 428.\n\n ---- (Francis), i. xv, 294;\n ii. 56, 141.\n\n ---- (Nicholas), iii. 93.\n\n ---- (Roger), iii. 47, 72.\n\n Baconsthorpe, iii. 419.\n\n Bactriana, iii. 62.\n\n Bactrians, ii. 325, 332, 336, 378.\n\n Badger, i. 326.\n\n Bainbrigge ( ), ii. 188-9.\n\n Bairros (Johannes de), ii. 365.\n\n Bajazet, iii. 476.\n\n Balaam's Ass, iii. 78.\n\n _Balaustium_, ii. 391.\n\n Baldness, iii. 76.\n\n Baldwin, King of Jerusalem, i. 44.\n\n Balearians, iii. 101.\n\n Balm, iii. 252.\n\n Balsam, iii. 252-4.\n\n Balsam Oil, iii. 227.\n\n Balsomes, i. 103.\n\n Baltic, ii. 396;\n iii. 345-6.\n\n Banda, i. 293.\n\n Banyans, ii. 78;\n iii. 377.\n\n Baptism, ii. 364;\n iii. 12, 14.\n\n _Barbara_, i. 134, 166.\n\n ---- name, i. 304.\n\n Barbarie, i. 279.\n\n Barbel, iii. 537.\n\n Barbosa (Odoard), i. 280.\n\n Barcephas, ii. 210.\n\n Barham Down, iii. 325.\n\n Barklow, iii. 325.\n\n Barley, i. 265, 288;\n ii. 35, 102;\n iii. 245, 254.\n\n Barnabas, i. 136.\n\n Barnacles, ii. 11, 107;\n iii. 516, 535.\n\n Baronius, i. xv, xxxii;\n ii. 247, 250;\n iii. 25, 28, 39, 66, 406.\n\n Barthius, iii. 305.\n\n Bartholanus, ii. 335.\n\n Bartholinus (T.), ii. 70.\n\n Bartholomeus Anglicus, i. 176.\n\n Bartlow Hills, Essex, iii. 325.\n\n Basaltes, i. 210.\n\n Basel (Council of), iii. 409.\n\n Basil, i. 166, 175, 202, 259, 260, 305;\n ii. 26, 259, 379.\n\n Basilicus, ii. 189.\n\n Basilides, i. 192.\n\n Basilisco, i. 90.\n\n Basilisk, i. 178, 331.\n\n Basque, iii. 311-12.\n\n Bass (fish), iii. 532.\n\n Bat, ii. 2, 52.\n\n Batavia, i. 280;\n iii. 346.\n\n Bateman (William), Bp., iii. 411.\n\n +Batrachomuomachia+, i. 89.\n\n Bauhinus, ii. 115;\n iii. 93.\n\n Bavaria, ii. 96.\n\n Bayfius, iii. 301.\n\n Bay-trees, i. 298;\n iii. 116, 128, 264.\n\n Bdellium, i. 206.\n\n Beach, ii. 373.\n\n Beans, i. 141.\n\n Bear, i. 26, 38, 179, 328;\n ii. 376.\n\n ---- (fish), ii. 75.\n\n Beauty, ii. 381, 384-5.\n\n Beaver, i. 179, 321;\n ii. 40;\n iii. 179, 538.\n\n Becanus (Goropius), iii. 1.\n\n Beck (Anthony de), Bp., iii. 409.\n\n Beckher (Daniel), i. 247, 249.\n\n Beda, i. xxxi, xxxix, 241, 243, 317;\n ii. 5, 210, 290, 386;\n iii. 310.\n\n Beds, i. 239;\n iii. 157, 164.\n\n Bee, i. 24, 289;\n ii. 97-8, 107.\n\n Beef, ii. 282, 324.\n\n Beer, i. 298.\n\n Beetle, i. 137, 327;\n ii. 22, 45, 67.\n\n Befler, iii, 93.\n\n Beggars, i. 110.\n\n Beguinus (Joh.), i. 278.\n\n Behemoth, iii. 74.\n\n Belemnites, i. 210, 283.\n\n Belisarius, iii. 65, 300, 476.\n\n Bell (Passing), i. 95.\n\n Bells, i. 9.\n\n Bellabonus, i. 262.\n\n Bellarmine, i. xx, xlviii.\n\n Bellermontanus, i. xxxv.\n\n Bellerophon's horse, i. 243.\n\n Bellinus, iii. 111.\n\n Bellonius, i. 295-6, 307, 322, 324;\n ii. 51, 89, 92, 206, 351, 365, 390, 396;\n iii. 179, 222, 252, 261, 526.\n\n Belomancy, ii. 280.\n\n Belus, i. 145;\n ii. 331;\n iii. 18.\n\n Bembine tables, i. 338.\n\n Bembus, iii. 152.\n\n Benedict, Pope, i. xx.\n\n Benedict III., Pope, iii. 71.\n\n Benjamin, i. 255-6.\n\n Benjamites, ii. 124.\n\n Benzira, iii. 58.\n\n Bergamo, i. 211.\n\n Berg cum Apton, iii. 419.\n\n Bergomas (Philippus), ii. 396.\n\n Beringuccio, i. 274-5;\n iii. 117.\n\n Bernard (St.), i. xxxi;\n ii. 175.\n\n Beroaldus, ii. 165;\n iii. 258.\n\n Berosus, ii. 320, 331, 334, 380;\n iii. 16, 18, 79.\n\n Beryls, i. 206, 212, 255, 284-5.\n\n Bethany, iii. 79.\n\n Betony, i. 304;\n iii. 296.\n\n Bevis, i. 34.\n\n Beza (Th.), i. xvi.;\n iii. 277.\n\n _Bezo las Manos_, i. 27.\n\n Bezoar, i. 165, 256, 284;\n ii. 71, 73.\n\n Biarmia, i. 241.\n\n BIBLE, _passim_.\n\n Bible (Translations), iii. 265.\n\n Bibliotheca Abscondita, iii. 350.\n\n Biddulph, iii. 53, 262, 269.\n\n Bigot family, iii. 405.\n\n Bilboa, iii. 312.\n\n Bilney (Thomas), iii. 425.\n\n Bindweed, iii. 279.\n\n Bird of Paradise, ii. 6, 61.\n\n Birdcatcher, iii. 522.\n\n Birdlime, i. 261, 295.\n\n Birds, i. 146, 230, 303;\n ii. 111-12;\n iii. 3, 290-2.\n\n Birds and Fishes in Norfolk, iii. 511.\n\n Bisciola (Laelius), i. 240.\n\n Bishop, Universal, iii. 62.\n\n Bisnaguer, iii. 285.\n\n Bistorte, ii. 391.\n\n Bittern, iii. 292.\n\n Bittor, ii. 92, 113;\n iii. 518.\n\n Bitumen, i. 32, 189, 257.\n\n Blackberry, ii. 393.\n\n Blackbird (white), ii. 384.\n\n Blackness, ii. 367-9, 395.\n\n Bladder, i. 263-4;\n ii. 141.\n\n Blakeney, iii. 532.\n\n Blancanus, iii. 157.\n\n Blatta Byzantina, iii. 225.\n\n Bleaks, iii. 532.\n\n Blickling, iii. 408, 549.\n\n Blindness, ii. 42-5.\n\n Blochwitius, i. 306.\n\n Blood-stones, i. 284.\n\n Blount (Sir H.), i. xx, xli.\n\n Blue, ii. 395.\n\n Blunt (Sir H.), ii. 152.\n\n Blyburgh river, iii. 534.\n\n Boadicea, iii. 106.\n\n Boar, i. 344, 346.\n\n Bocatius, ii. 175.\n\n _Bocca di porco_, iii. 60, 61.\n\n Boccatius, ii. 254.\n\n Boccace, i. 111.\n\n Bochartus, ii. 335, 364;\n iii. 17.\n\n Bodine, ii. 174-5, 179, 275, 288.\n\n Bodinus Subicus, ii. 239.\n\n Boeotia, ii. 375.\n\n Boethius (A. M. T. S.), i. xxii, xxiv, xlv;\n iii. 288.\n\n Boetius. _See_ Boot.\n\n Bohemia, ii. 396.\n\n Boio, i. xxxix.\n\n Boissardus, ii. 234.\n\n Bolary earth, iii. 431.\n\n Boleyn (Sir W.), iii. 407.\n\n Bologna, i. 315, 329.\n\n Bolsech, iii. 72.\n\n Bonatus (G.), ii. 177.\n\n Bonaventura, iii. 5.\n\n Boniface, Pope, iii. 62.\n\n Bononian stone, i. 282;\n ii. 100.\n\n Bontius (Jacobus), ii. 107.\n\n Bonus (Petrus), iii. 72.\n\n Books (rarities), iii. 352.\n\n Boot (Boetius, de), i. 203, 208, 212, 241, 261, 278, 282;\n ii. 15, 16, 69, 75, 341.\n\n Bootes, ii. 303.\n\n Boramez, ii. 106.\n\n Borax, i. 274.\n\n Borchardus, iii. 79.\n\n Bordeaux, iii. 217.\n\n Boreas, ii. 272.\n\n Borith, iii. 167.\n\n Borneo, iii. 224.\n\n Bosio, iii. 114, 119.\n\n _Bos in lingua_, i. 339.\n\n _Bos marinus_, ii. 75.\n\n Bosphorus, ii. 186.\n\n Bosvile family, iii. 404.\n\n Botanists, iii. 221.\n\n Botero, ii. 328, 356;\n iii. 45.\n\n Boulian, iii. 303.\n\n _Boulimia Centenaria_, iii. 544.\n\n Bovillus (C.), iii. 201.\n\n Box, i. 257;\n iii. 116.\n\n Bracelets, ii. 385.\n\n Brachmans, iii. 100.\n\n Braden, iii. 537.\n\n Brahe (Tycho), ii. 298.\n\n Brain, ii. 115;\n iii. 60.\n\n Brake Fern, i. 171, 221, 238, 302.\n\n Brampton, iii. 108, 430.\n\n Brancaster, iii. 105, 107.\n\n Brannodunum, iii. 105.\n\n Brass (Corinthian), i. 255.\n\n Brassavolus, i. 202, 212, 262, 267, 274-5, 293, 295;\n ii. 15, 20.\n\n Brazil, i. 227-8;\n ii. 371-3;\n iii. 463.\n\n Bream, iii. 537.\n\n Brennus, iii. 111.\n\n Briar, wild, i. 301.\n\n Briareus, i. 158.\n\n Bricks, i. 221, 279;\n iii. 114.\n\n Briggs (W.), i. 226.\n\n Brimstone, i. 189, 271-2.\n\n Briony, i. 286, 288, 289, 296.\n\n Bristol-stone, i. 255.\n\n Britain, i. 240;\n ii. 335, 397.\n\n Brixia, ii. 6.\n\n Brocardus, iii. 332.\n\n Brock, i. 326.\n\n Brome (Richard), iii. 404.\n\n Broom Rape, iii. 259.\n\n Broth (black), ii. 80.\n\n Browne (Thomas), Bp., iii. 409.\n\n Brunham (W. de), iii. 408.\n\n Brutus, i. 143, 191, 194.\n\n Bucephalus, i. 305;\n iii. 227.\n\n Buchan (David, Earl of), iii. 451.\n\n Buchanan (G.), i. xviii;\n ii. 24.\n\n Buckingham Castle, iii. 108.\n\n Budeus, iii. 74.\n\n Bulgaria, ii. 396.\n\n Bullets, i. 276.\n\n Bull-rush, i. 304.\n\n Bure, iii. 536-7.\n\n Burgh Castle, iii. 107, 432.\n\n Burgundy, order of, ii. 251.\n\n Burnham, iii. 195, 533-5.\n\n Burstcow, ii. 99.\n\n Burton (John), iii. 420.\n\n Busbequius, i. xxxv, xlviii.\n\n Bustamantinus (Franciscus), ii. 28.\n\n Bustard, iii. 519.\n\n Butt (fish), iii. 533.\n\n Butter, i. 264, 274.\n\n Butterflies, ii. 11, 22, 45.\n\n Buxhornius, iii. 313.\n\n Buxton, iii. 106, 115, 430-1.\n\n Buxtorf, ii. 145;\n iii. 277.\n\n Buzzard, ii. 22, 105;\n iii. 517, 539.\n\n Byzacian field, iii. 246-7.\n\n\n Cabala, i. 138, 211, 230, 231, 233, 235, 255, 257;\n ii. 398.\n\n Cabbage, ii. 10;\n iii. 95.\n\n Cabeus, i. 257;\n ii. 430;\n iii. 47, 93.\n\n Cabot (Sebast.), i. 228.\n\n Cacus, iii. 385.\n\n Cadamustus, i. 313;\n iii. 29.\n\n Cades, i. 296.\n\n Cadesh, ii. 382.\n\n Cadmus, i. xxxiv, 289;\n iii. 152.\n\n Caeciliae, ii. 45.\n\n Caesalpinus, iii. 264.\n\n Caesar, i. 111.\n\n Caesaria, ii. 335.\n\n Caesarian conquest, iii. 493.\n\n ---- cut, iii. 382.\n\n Caesius (Bernardus), i. 203, 240.\n\n ---- (Fred.), i. 302.\n\n Cain, i. 81, 92, 124, 129, 133-1;\n ii. 13, 77.\n\n Cainan, ii. 204.\n\n Cairo, ii. 355, 360, 362, 396;\n iii. 253.\n\n Caistor, iii. 106, 115.\n\n Caius the blind, i. 196.\n\n Cajetan, i. xvi;\n iii. 6, 9.\n\n Calabria, i. 32;\n ii. 136.\n\n Calbanum, i. 256.\n\n Calceolarianum, iii. 350.\n\n Caldron, i. 142.\n\n Calendar, ii. 311.\n\n Calf (Golden), i. 71, 137.\n\n California, iii. 308.\n\n Caligula, i. 1;\n ii. 217.\n\n Calisthenes, ii. 287, 359.\n\n _Callipygae_, ii. 137.\n\n Callyonimus, i. 320.\n\n Calthorpe (Eliz.), iii. 401.\n\n Calvary, ii. 333.\n\n Calvin, i. 11.\n\n Calvisius, ii. 302.\n\n Cambogia, ii. 371.\n\n Cambridge, i. liv;\n iii. 409, 411-12, 537.\n\n Cambyses, iii. 141.\n\n Camden (W.), iii. 45, 113, 325, 538.\n\n Camel, i. 24, 312, 341, 346;\n ii. 65, 74, 324, 370, 378.\n\n Cameleon, ii. 361.\n\n Camerarius, i. 169;\n ii. 26.\n\n Camoys nose, ii. 377.\n\n Campanel, i. lii.\n\n Campegius, ii. 154.\n\n Camphire, i. 205, 257, 272, 276, 303;\n ii. 87, 389;\n iii. 224.\n\n Cana, i. 42.\n\n Canaan, ii. 332, 381, 383.\n\n Canaries, ii. 334, 357, 398.\n\n Canary Isles, ii. 349, 355, 398-9.\n\n Cancer, ii. 372-3.\n\n Candace, ii. 382.\n\n Candia, iii. 274.\n\n Candie, ii. 29.\n\n Candish, i. 231.\n\n Candy, ii. 373.\n\n Candle, candles, ii. 278;\n iii. 81.\n\n Candlemas, ii. 311.\n\n Candlestick, Golden, ii. 282.\n\n _Canis levis_, ii. 61.\n\n Cannibals, i. 55;\n ii. 378.\n\n Canutus, iii. 107.\n\n Cap Verde Isles, ii. 399.\n\n Cape of Good Hope, ii. 67, 373.\n\n Capel, i. xix.\n\n Capella (Martianus), ii. 234;\n iii. 507.\n\n Capillaries, i. 294, 301.\n\n Capo de las Agullas, i. 227, 229;\n ii. 349.\n\n ---- Frio, i. 227, 235.\n\n ---- Negro, ii. 372.\n\n Cappadocia, ii. 248, 260.\n\n Cappadox (Johannes), iii. 66.\n\n Capriceps, i. 319.\n\n Capricorn, ii. 372-3.\n\n Caracalla, i. 188;\n ii. 239;\n iii. 108.\n\n Caramania, i. 211;\n ii. 366;\n iii. 225.\n\n Caranna, i. 255.\n\n Carbuncles, i. 255, 281.\n\n Cardanus (Hier.), i. 176, 203, 250, 262, 273-4;\n ii. 36, 38, 82, 91, 99, 148, 156, 253, 276, 342, 354;\n iii. 132, 373, 379, 381, 468, 537, 551.\n\n Cardigan, iii. 538.\n\n Carians, ii. 180.\n\n Caricatura, iii. 376, 494.\n\n Cariola, iii. 125.\n\n Carion, ii. 321.\n\n Carlton, iii. 409.\n\n Carobe, iii. 226.\n\n Carolostadius, i. xix.\n\n Carp, ii. 14;\n iii. 538.\n\n Carpenter (Nat.), i. xxiv, xxv.\n\n Carpocras, i. 192.\n\n Carrots, i. 286.\n\n Cartaphilus, iii. 71.\n\n Carthage, i. 297;\n ii. 334.\n\n Casalius, ii. 222, 224;\n iii. 114.\n\n Casaubon, i. 173;\n ii. 159, 222, 267;\n iii. 119, 310, 432.\n\n Casements, i. 222.\n\n Cassia, ii. 197.\n\n Cassiodorus, i. 308;\n iii. 120.\n\n Cassius (L.), i. xxxvii, 191, 194.\n\n ---- Severus, i. xlix.\n\n Castellanus, ii. 82.\n\n Castellionaeus (A.), ii. 248.\n\n Castellus, i. 325.\n\n Castile, iii. 311.\n\n ---- arms of, ii. 255.\n\n Castilia del Oro, ii. 372.\n\n Castle-soap, iii. 124.\n\n Castor, i. 159, 336;\n ii. 40;\n iii. 107.\n\n Castoreum, i. 323, 325;\n iii. 225.\n\n Castro (Leo de), i. xxxii.\n\n ---- (Rodericus a), iii. 24.\n\n Cat, i. 137, 314, 341;\n ii. 107, 135.\n\n Cataneo, i. 276.\n\n Catapucia, i. 305.\n\n Catarrh, i. 306.\n\n Caterpillars, i. 301.\n\n Cathay, iii. 348.\n\n Cathedrals, i. 109.\n\n Catkins, iii. 165.\n\n Cato, i. 62;\n ii. 80, 274, 305, 320, 380;\n iii. 95, 133-4, 388.\n\n Catoblepas, i. 332.\n\n Catullus, iii. 438.\n\n Caucasus, i. 310.\n\n Causanus (Nicolaus), ii. 175.\n\n Cebes, iii. 388, 433.\n\n Cecrops, ii. 332.\n\n Cedar, i. xxvi, 257;\n iii. 224, 262.\n\n Cedrenus, ii. 279;\n iii. 65.\n\n Cefala, ii. 372.\n\n Cellers, i. 271.\n\n Ceneus, i. 298.\n\n Cenotaphs, iii. 120.\n\n Censorius (M. Messala), i. xlix, 1;\n ii. 171, 174, 179, 288;\n iii. 43.\n\n Centaurs, i. 141, 174.\n\n Centipedes, ii. 22.\n\n _Cerastes_, ii. 31.\n\n Cerautus, i. 211.\n\n Cerberus, i. 158;\n ii. 386.\n\n Ceres, ii. 254.\n\n CERTAIN MISCELLANY TRACTS, iii. 213.\n\n Cestius, iii. 156.\n\n Cevalerius, ii. 249.\n\n Chad, iii. 531.\n\n Chairs, iii. 158.\n\n Chalcis, iii. 43, 46.\n\n Chaldea, Chaldeans, ii. 287, 320-1, 350, 396;\n iii. 100.\n\n Chali, i. 206, 238.\n\n Chalk pits, i. 283.\n\n Chalybeates, i. 245.\n\n _Chalybs praeparatus_, i. 231.\n\n Cham, ii. 333, 368, 380-1, 383;\n iii. 148, 534.\n\n Chamberpot, i. 143.\n\n Chameleon, ii. 20, 50.\n\n Changelings, i. 45.\n\n Chaos, i. 27.\n\n Characters, i. 195.\n\n Charcoal, ii. 388.\n\n Chariot, ii. 238.\n\n Charity, i. 83, 90, 93, 110.\n\n Charlatans, i. 138.\n\n Charles the Great, iii. 157.\n\n Charles V., ii. 253, 367;\n iii. 138, 374.\n\n Charles the Bald, King of France, iii. 305.\n\n Charles I., King, iii. 516.\n\n ---- his porter, iii. 540.\n\n Charms, i. 195, 198.\n\n Charon, i. 158;\n iii. 132.\n\n Charta Magna, co. Kent, iii. 401.\n\n Cheapside, i. 99.\n\n Cheek burn, ii. 266.\n\n Cheese, ii. 348;\n iii. 73.\n\n Chelbena, iii. 225.\n\n Chemistry, i. 208.\n\n Chemists, i. 167.\n\n Cheops, i. 239;\n iii. 164\n\n Cheremon, i. 180.\n\n Cherinthus, i. 192.\n\n Cherry, ii. 393-4.\n\n Cherry-stone, ii. 65.\n\n Cherubim, ii. 256, 333.\n\n Cheshire, iii. 113.\n\n Chess, i. 32;\n iii. 160.\n\n Chestnut, i. 293.\n\n Chiamsi, i. 280.\n\n Chiapa, iii. 308.\n\n Chicken, i. 195;\n ii. 103, 138.\n\n Chifflet, iii. 110, 157.\n\n Child, children, i. 111;\n ii. 276-7;\n iii. 487.\n\n ---- dead, ii. 282.\n\n Childeric I., iii. 110, 117.\n\n Chili, i. 228;\n ii. 372.\n\n Chimaera, ii. 1.\n\n China, Chinese, i. xxxiii, 280;\n ii. 339, 355, 362, 377;\n iii. 102, 224, 347.\n\n ---- Emperor of, i. 281.\n\n ---- dishes, i. 255, 279-81;\n iii. 69.\n\n Chindonactes, iii. 434.\n\n Chioccus (Andr.), i. 282.\n\n Chipper, iii. 524.\n\n Chiromancy, i. 87;\n ii. 276.\n\n Chiron, i. 78.\n\n Chit, iii. 519.\n\n Chock, iii. 523.\n\n Choler, i. 316.\n\n Chomer, ii. 398.\n\n Chough, ii. 377;\n iii. 523.\n\n Choughs, i. 340, 344.\n\n CHRISTIAN MORALS, iii. 439.\n\n Christmas Eve, i. 295.\n\n Christopher (St.), ii. 247.\n\n Chrysippus, ii. 175;\n iii. 73.\n\n Chrysolites, i. 69.\n\n Chrysoprase, i. 284.\n\n Chrysostom, i. xxxi, xli;\n ii. 221, 289.\n\n Chub, iii. 537.\n\n Church-Music, i. 101.\n\n Church of God, i. 78.\n\n Chus, ii. 381;\n iii. 148.\n\n Ciaconius, ii. 216.\n\n Cicada, ii. 207;\n iii. 289, 293.\n\n Cicero, i. xviii, xix, xxvii, xl, xliii, xliv, 38, 61, 101, 159, 160,\n 168;\n ii. 57, 175, 181;\n iii. 150, 552.\n\n _Cicilia_, ii. 31.\n\n Cinders, i. 239.\n\n Cinaber, ii. 394.\n\n Cinnamomus, ii. 6.\n\n Cinnamon, i. 292;\n ii. 6;\n iii. 21, 226.\n\n Cinnamulgus, ii. 6.\n\n Circaea, i. 291.\n\n Circe, i. 290;\n ii. 165, 279.\n\n Ciris, iii. 289, 292.\n\n Citron, i. 148.\n\n ---- Tree, iii. 274.\n\n Civet Cat, i. 325;\n ii. 148.\n\n ---- (Western), i. 239.\n\n Civita Vecchia, iii. 534.\n\n Claudian, i. 202, 247;\n ii. 7.\n\n Claudius, Emperor, i. xxxiii, xlvi, xlix, 299;\n ii. 6;\n iii. 105-6.\n\n Claudius Pulcher, i. 195.\n\n Clave (De), ii. 141.\n\n Claxton, iii. 516.\n\n Clemens Alexandrinus, i. 156;\n ii. 290, 298;\n iii. 301.\n\n Clement VIII., ii. 245.\n\n Cleobulus, i. 159.\n\n Cleopas, ii. 2.\n\n Cleopatra, i. 245;\n ii. 216, 235, 359, 362;\n iii. 253, 268.\n\n Clepsammia, ii. 251.\n\n Clepsydra, ii. 251.\n\n Cleve (William, Duke of), iii. 298.\n\n Climacter, i. 44.\n\n Climacterical year, ii. 160.\n\n Climate, i. 84.\n\n Climax, Mt., iii. 77.\n\n Clocks, i. xxxv;\n ii. 251-2.\n\n Clouds, i. 273.\n\n Clove, i. 292.\n\n Cloven hoof, ii. 275.\n\n Cluniac monks, Thetford, iii. 405.\n\n Clusius, ii. 71, 85-6.\n\n Cneoron, i. 246.\n\n Coal-fish, iii. 532.\n\n Coble bird, iii. 522.\n\n _Coccus Baphicus_, iii. 296.\n\n Cochlaeus, iii. 72.\n\n Cock, i. 303, 320, 341;\n ii. 96.\n\n ---- (white), i. 196.\n\n Cocks-comb, ii. 81.\n\n Cock's egg, i. 335.\n\n Cockatrice, i. 331-3, 337.\n\n Cockle (weed), iii. 279.\n\n ---- (shell), iii. 534.\n\n Cocles, iii. 79.\n\n Cod, ii. 14, 84;\n iii. 532.\n\n Cods (vegetable), iii. 226.\n\n Codignus, ii. 145, 356, 382.\n\n Codronchus (B.), ii. 171.\n\n Codrus, i. 62.\n\n Coffins, iii. 115.\n\n Coins, ii. 205;\n iii. 106-7.\n\n Coition, i. 100, 148;\n ii. 260.\n\n Colcagninus (Coelius), i. 230.\n\n Colcothar, ii. 392.\n\n Colein, Queen of, i. 263.\n\n Colepepper (John), iii. 401.\n\n Colls (Abel), iii. 421.\n\n Collyrium, i. 167, 196.\n\n Colocynthis, i. 197;\n ii. 197;\n iii. 231.\n\n Cologne, Three Kings of, iii. 25.\n\n Colossus, i. 24.\n\n Colour, ii. 367, 384.\n\n Columbaries, i. 318.\n\n Columbus, i. 228-9;\n ii. 372;\n iii. 6.\n\n ---- of Sicily, ii. 239.\n\n Columella, i. 155, 288;\n ii. 305, 344;\n iii. 258.\n\n Columna (F.), iii. 184.\n\n Comestor, i. xxii;\n iii. 5.\n\n Comets, ii. 400.\n\n Commodus, ii. 290;\n iii. 106, 468.\n\n Company, iii. 489.\n\n Compass, i. 226, 231.\n\n Comphosis, iii. 185-6.\n\n Conception, i. 171;\n ii. 127, 273.\n\n Conchis (Gul. de), i. 176.\n\n Confucius, iii. 309.\n\n Conger, iii. 532.\n\n Congor, i. 213.\n\n Coniah, ii. 117.\n\n Conies, i. 341;\n ii. 324.\n\n ---- (place), ii. 335.\n\n Conimbricenses, i. xxiii.\n\n Conscience, i. 96.\n\n Consortion, iii. 488.\n\n Constance, Council, i. xxxvii, 41;\n iii. 402.\n\n Constans, iii. 106.\n\n Constantine, Emperor, i. xxxix, 43, 315;\n ii. 256;\n iii. 40, 123, 151.\n\n ---- writer, ii. 305.\n\n Constantinople, i. 80;\n ii. 149, 328.\n\n Constantius, iii. 294.\n\n Consumption, iii. 296, 378.\n\n Continency, i. 142.\n\n Controversies, i. 89.\n\n Conversation, i. 103;\n iii. 488.\n\n Cony, ii. 80.\n\n Coote, iii. 517.\n\n Copernicus, i. 111;\n ii. 318;\n iii. 47, 76.\n\n Copher, iii. 223.\n\n Copper, i. 232.\n\n Coperose, i. 232;\n ii. 390-1.\n\n ---- of Mars, i. 232.\n\n Copulation, i. 148, 284.\n\n Coquaeus, i. xx, xxviii.\n\n _Cor scorpii_, ii. 400.\n\n Coral, i. 208, 278-9, 284;\n ii. 278, 365.\n\n Corbet (Richard), Bp., iii. 407.\n\n Corcyra, iii. 47.\n\n Cordova (Fernandius de), ii. 365-6, 396;\n iii. 66.\n\n Cordus, iii. 231, 257.\n\n Corinth, ii. 362;\n iii. 282.\n\n Corinthian brass, i. 255.\n\n Cork, i. 224.\n\n Cormorant, iii. 252, 516.\n\n Corn, ii. 102,\n\n Corn-cockle, ii. 35.\n\n Cornelians, i. 206, 256, 284.\n\n Cornelius, ii. 157.\n\n Cornerius, ii. 59.\n\n Cornu Ammonis, i. 210.\n\n Cornwall, iii. 523.\n\n Coronary Plants, iii. 281.\n\n Corsalius (Andreas), ii. 363, 365.\n\n Corvinus, ii. 233.\n\n Cosin (John), Bp., iii. 407.\n\n Cosmography, ii. 283.\n\n Costa (Christoph. a), i. 313.\n\n Cough, i. 154;\n iii. 378-9.\n\n Courtney (Richard), Pp., iii. 418.\n\n Covarrubias (S. de), iii. 490.\n\n Cow, i. 154, 295;\n ii. 40.\n\n Crab, ii. 16, 25, 75, 129;\n iii. 534.\n\n Crab's eye, i. 264.\n\n Crab-apples, i. 293.\n\n 'Cracuna' inscr., iii. 432.\n\n Cranes, ii. 155;\n iii. 514.\n\n Crantsius, ii. 396.\n\n Crassus, i. xxvii;\n ii. 264;\n iii. 58, 553.\n\n Crateras, i. 171.\n\n Crawfish, iii. 537.\n\n Credulity, i. 140, 147.\n\n Creek, iii. 401.\n\n Creta, Cretans, i. 2, 90;\n ii. 81, 357;\n iii. 163, 274.\n\n Creusa, ii. 58.\n\n Crevise, ii. 41.\n\n Crinitus (Petrus), iii. 65.\n\n Crocodile, i. 312, 350;\n ii. 20, 80, 357;\n iii. 56.\n\n _Crocus Martis_, i. 231-2.\n\n ---- _Metallorum_, i. 256, 277.\n\n Croesus, i. 188;\n ii. 118;\n iii. 41-2, 333.\n\n Crofts (John), Dean, iii. 401, 421.\n\n Crollins, i. 277, 286.\n\n Cromer, iii. 533-4.\n\n Cross, the, ii. 256.\n\n ---- True, i. 43.\n\n ---- Sign, i. 190.\n\n ---- Andrean, iii. 151.\n\n ---- Burgundian, iii. 151.\n\n Cross-legged, ii. 267.\n\n Crostwick, iii. 89, 524.\n\n Crow, i. xliii, 59, 317, 323, 340, 344-5;\n ii. 14, 377;\n iii. 523.\n\n ---- White, ii. 370, 384.\n\n Crown, iii. 157.\n\n ---- of Thorns, iii. 3.\n\n Crucius, ii. 198.\n\n ---- Alsarius, ii. 154.\n\n Crusius, Martinus, ii. 291.\n\n Cryptography, i. 253.\n\n Crysolite, i. 285.\n\n Crystal, i. 202, 255.\n\n Ctesias, i. 169, 170, 173, 174;\n ii. 159;\n iii. 68.\n\n Cuba, i. 228.\n\n Cubs, i. 174.\n\n Cuckoo, iii. 520.\n\n ---- spittle, ii. 208.\n\n Cucumber, i. 305;\n iii. 227.\n\n Cummin, iii. 232-3.\n\n Cunaeus, i. xxxv.\n\n Cuneus, iii. 161.\n\n Cunnyfish, iii. 530.\n\n Cupid, i. 100.\n\n Curiosity, concerning too nice, iii. 437.\n\n Curlew, iii. 521.\n\n Curry cart, iii. 225.\n\n Curtius (L.), iii. 150, 153.\n\n ---- (Q.), i. 62, 311;\n ii. 237, 363, 366;\n iii. 79.\n\n Cusanus, i. 234.\n\n Cuthred, iii. 107, 123.\n\n Cuttlefish, ii. 41, 393;\n iii. 296, 533, 547.\n\n _Cyceon_ ii. 82.\n\n Cyclades, ii. 324.\n\n Cymbals, iii. 301.\n\n Cynospastus, i. 189, 291.\n\n Cypress, iii. 195, 223.\n\n ---- wood, iii. 116.\n\n Cyprian, i. xix, 262, 317.\n\n Cyprius (A.), iii. 113, 323.\n\n Cyprus, i. 211;\n ii. 21.\n\n Cypselus, iii. 336.\n\n Cyril, ii. 4, 212;\n iii. 17.\n\n CYRUS, GARDEN OF, iii. 145.\n\n Cyrus, i. 321;\n iii. 42, 125, 149.\n\n Cyrus the Younger, ii. 144.\n\n\n Dace, iii. 537.\n\n Daedalus, i. 158.\n\n Dagon, ii. 254.\n\n Dalechamp, ii. 6, 51, 173, 266;\n iii. 261.\n\n Damascus, i. 197.\n\n Damiata, ii. 360.\n\n Damon, i. 93.\n\n Dan, i. 46, 282.\n\n Danaeus, i. xxiii.\n\n Danes, iii. 107, 112.\n\n Daniel, i. 44, 265;\n iii. 228.\n\n ---- (S.), i. xxxiii.\n\n Dante, iii. 30, 125, 133-4, 375, 382.\n\n Dantzig, i. 262.\n\n Dares Phrygius, ii. 321.\n\n Darius, ii. 361.\n\n ---- Histaspes, ii. 297.\n\n Darnel, ii. 35;\n iii. 277-8.\n\n Dart-stone, i. 283.\n\n Date (fruit), ii. 8;\n iii. 552.\n\n David, iii. 36.\n\n Daws, i. xliii, 59.\n\n Day, ii. 167-8, 309.\n\n Dead Sea, iii. 330.\n\n Dead-watch, i. 299.\n\n Death, i. 41, 62-3, 107, 299;\n iii. 479.\n\n Dedan, ii. 381.\n\n Dee (John), ii. 253.\n\n Deer, i. 312, 340;\n ii. 40, 72, 377.\n\n _Defenda me Dios de me_, i. 103.\n\n Deformity, ii. 260.\n\n Deiphobus, iii. 132.\n\n Delos, ii. 313.\n\n Delphi, i. xl. 21, 65, 143, 199;\n ii. 324;\n iii. 40-1, 333.\n\n Delrio, i. xxii, 3, 5.\n\n Delusion, i. 46.\n\n Demetrius, silversmith, i. 136.\n\n ---- Phalereus, i. xxxii;\n iii. 39, 294-5, 298.\n\n Democritus, i. xliii, 89, 91, 136, 188, 190, 217;\n iii. 79, 553.\n\n Demons, ii. 96.\n\n Demosthenes, i. 188;\n iii. 64.\n\n Denarius, ii. 223;\n iii. 433.\n\n Denmark, iii. 113.\n\n Denny (Sir W.), iii. 403.\n\n Derceto, ii. 242, 254.\n\n Des Accords, iii. 305.\n\n Des Cartes (R.), i. 218, 233, 259.\n\n Detraction, iii. 467.\n\n Deucalion, i. xxix, 35;\n ii. 7, 319.\n\n _Deuteroproton_, ii. 307.\n\n Deuteroscopy, i. 134.\n\n Devil, i. xli, 32, 73, 182;\n ii. 275.\n\n ---- (White), ii. 384.\n\n Diabolism, iii. 392, 450.\n\n Dials, i. 260;\n ii. 251.\n\n Diamond, i. 203, 208, 212-13, 236, 240, 255, 262-3, 266, 268, 282, 284-5.\n\n Diana, i. 136;\n ii. 272.\n\n ---- Temple of, iii. 130.\n\n ---- Saguntina, iii. 258.\n\n Diapalma, ii. 122.\n\n Diaphoenicon, ii. 8, 198.\n\n Diatesseron, ii. 280.\n\n Dickinson (Ed.), ii. 364.\n\n Dictys Cretensis, ii. 321.\n\n Dido, ii. 78.\n\n Didymus, iii. 153.\n\n Diet, ii. 76.\n\n Digby (Sir K.), i. xi, xiv, xxxix, xlvi, 218, 258-9.\n\n Digges (T), iii. 325.\n\n Dijon (Burgundy), iii. 434.\n\n Dill, iii. 22.\n\n Dinocrates, i. 243.\n\n Dio. i. 266.\n\n Dion Cassius, ii. 280, 363.\n\n Diocles, ii. 177.\n\n Diocletian, i. 191.\n\n Diodati, iii. 21, 265, 277.\n\n Diodorus Siculus, i. 155, 158, 169, 203, 308, 336;\n ii. 123, 180, 233, 238, 286, 320-1, 325, 331-3, 336,\n 356-7;\n iii. 148.\n\n Diogenes, i. 13, 59, 77;\n ii. 174;\n iii. 129, 486.\n\n ---- Babylonius, i. xlv.\n\n ---- Cynicus, ii. 174, 256.\n\n ---- Laertius, i. xxviii, li, 159, 231;\n ii. 174, 193;\n iii. 43.\n\n Diomedes, i. 158;\n iii. 153.\n\n Dionysius Afer, ii. 366, 397.\n\n ---- Halicarnasseus, i. 168;\n ii. 333, 380.\n\n ---- Heracleoticus, ii. 174.\n\n ---- Perregetes, ii. 185.\n\n Dioscorides, i. 155, 157, 165, 171, 174, 203, 211, 245, 249, 278, 291,\n 296, 320, 322, 325, 328, 332;\n ii. 19, 21, 28, 99, 107, 391;\n iii. 22-3.\n\n Dives, i. 70.\n\n Dock, i. 304;\n ii. 368.\n\n Dodder, iii. 159, 189.\n\n Dodona, ii. 211.\n\n Dog, i. 155, 158, 264, 303, 306, 312, 314, 339;\n ii. 65, 83, 185, 378.\n\n Dog-briar, iii. 223.\n\n Dog-days, ii. 183.\n\n Dog-fish, ii. 74-5;\n iii. 528.\n\n Dog's-grass, iii. 115.\n\n Dog-star, ii. 183, 357-8, 373;\n iii. 141.\n\n Dog-stones, i. 326.\n\n Dolphin, i. 346;\n ii. 205;\n iii. 527.\n\n Dominicans, i. xvi.\n\n Domitian, i. xxxiii, 158;\n iii. 118.\n\n Domitius, ii. 74.\n\n Doomsday, ii. 301.\n\n Doradoes, i. 84.\n\n Dorhawk, iii. 522.\n\n Doria (Andreas), iii. 460.\n\n Dorpius, i. xv.\n\n Dorrs, ii. 22.\n\n Dorset, Marquis of, iii. 125.\n\n Dort Synod, i. 11.\n\n Dotterell, iii. 519.\n\n Dove, i. 317, 320.\n\n ---- houses, i. 271, 318.\n\n ---- (Syrian), iii. 273.\n\n Dragon, i. 215, 265.\n\n Drake, i. 231.\n\n Drawater, iii. 524.\n\n Dreams, i. 105-6, 187;\n iii. 221, 380-1;\n (Tract), iii. 550.\n\n Drink, ii. 142.\n\n Droggotoshen, i. xxxi.\n\n Dromedaries, i. 24.\n\n Dropsies, i. 245.\n\n Drowning, ii. 135.\n\n Druids, i. 295;\n iii. 111, 434.\n\n Drums, i. 174.\n\n Drunkenness, ii. 273.\n\n Drusius, i. 288;\n iii. 20, 22.\n\n Dryinus, i. 332.\n\n Du Bartas, i. xxv, xxvi.\n\n Ducks, i. 336-7;\n iii. 517.\n\n Dugdale (Sir W.), iii. 91, 322.\n\n Duina, ii. 356.\n\n Du Loyr, iii. 46, 303, 378.\n\n Dunning (Chancellor), iii. 409.\n\n Durante, iii. 3.\n\n Duretus, i. 267.\n\n Durazzo, iii. 47.\n\n Dust, i. 186.\n\n Dutch, i. 83.\n\n ---- Ambassadors, i. 280.\n\n Dyers, ii. 394.\n\n Dysentery, i. 281.\n\n\n Eagle, i. 283, 298;\n ii. 3, 45, 313;\n iii. 513.\n\n Eaglestone, i. 235, 282.\n\n Ear tingling, ii. 266.\n\n Earth, i. 133, 162-4, 186, 259.\n\n Earthquakes, i. 148, 273.\n\n Earwig, ii. 96.\n\n East, ii. 338.\n\n East Indies, i. 293;\n ii. 107, 362.\n\n Easter Day, ii. 272.\n\n Ebion, i. 191-2.\n\n Ebony, i. 257.\n\n Ebusus, ii. 357.\n\n Echbatana, iii. 103.\n\n Echinites, i. 210, 283.\n\n Echinometrites, i. 210, 283.\n\n Echo, i. 314;\n iii. 201.\n\n Eckius, i. xvi.\n\n Eclipses, i. 193.\n\n Ecliptic, ii. 314.\n\n Edom, ii. 364;\n iii. 122.\n\n Eel, ii. 10, 135;\n iii. 532, 538.\n\n ---- poult, iii. 537.\n\n Egg, i. 159, 204;\n ii. 104, 214.\n\n ---- white of, i. 261;\n ii. 19.\n\n ---- shells, i. 279;\n ii. 265;\n iii. 117.\n\n Egypt, i. 137, 159, 350;\n ii. 6, 7, 81, 89, 92, 158, 286, 332, 350-62, 376, 395-6;\n iii. 80 _et passim_.\n\n E'i (Delphi), iii. 339.\n\n Ejaculation, i. 324.\n\n Elaterium, ii. 197.\n\n Elba, i. 242.\n\n Elder, i. 171.\n\n Elderberry, i. 306.\n\n Eleazer, i. xxxii.\n\n Elect, i. 79.\n\n Electrical bodies, i. 254.\n\n Electrum, i. 255.\n\n Electuary, ii. 8.\n\n Elephant, i. 24, 26, 170, 308, 326, 341;\n ii. 65, 255, 325, 370;\n iii. 237.\n\n ---- teeth, i. 256.\n\n Elephantina, ii. 81.\n\n Elf-locks, ii. 268.\n\n Elias, i. xxviii, xlv, 32, 65;\n ii. 62, 378;\n iii. 2, 138.\n\n Elias, Rabbi, ii, 291.\n\n ---- Venetus, iii. 304.\n\n Elisha, i. 197;\n ii. 280;\n iii. 54.\n\n Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, iii. 401.\n\n Elk, ii. 72, 90.\n\n ---- hoofs, i. 256.\n\n Elm, i. 293.\n\n Elmham, iii. 117.\n\n ---- St. Mary, iii. 405.\n\n Elves' spurs, i. 283.\n\n Ely Priory, iii. 411.\n\n Emanuel, King of Portugal, i. 311-12.\n\n Emblematists, i. 180.\n\n Emeralds, i. 69, 256, 284-5.\n\n Emery, i. 214, 239, 262.\n\n Emission, i. 341.\n\n Emmanuel, iii. 61.\n\n Empedocles, i. xxvi, 142, 163, 198, 287, 335;\n ii. 34.\n\n Emperors, i. 59.\n\n Emplastra, i. 247.\n\n Empyreal, i. 70.\n\n Enerin, iii. 310.\n\n Engaddi, i. 296;\n iii. 240.\n\n England, i. 81, 84, 228-9;\n ii. 149.\n\n ---- Church of, i. 11.\n\n ---- (Midlands), ii. 285.\n\n English language, i. 117.\n\n Englishmen, i. 90.\n\n Ennius, i. 230.\n\n Enoch, i. xxxiii, 3, 8, 119.\n\n Enoch's Pillars, i. 38.\n\n Enos, ii. 320.\n\n Ent (Sir George), ii. 16.\n\n Entelechia, i. xx, xxi.\n\n Enthymemes, i. 178.\n\n Envy, iii. 449.\n\n Ephod, i. 284.\n\n Ephesus, Ephesians, i. 136;\n iii. 77, 139.\n\n Ephraim, i. 320;\n ii. 122.\n\n Epicureans, i. xxvi, 186.\n\n Epicurus, i. xxiii, xxv, xxviii, xlii, xliii, xlvi, 33, 190, 234;\n ii. 284;\n iii. 73, 133;\n _et passim_.\n\n Epidaurus, ii. 106.\n\n Epilepsy, ii. 72.\n\n Epimenides, i. 2.\n\n Epiphanius, i. xx, 144, 175;\n ii. 4, 8;\n iii. 17.\n\n Epithymum, iii. 189.\n\n Epius, i. 180.\n\n Equator, i. 217-18;\n ii. 314-15.\n\n Equivocation, i. 141.\n\n Erasmus, i. xv, xxx, xlix, 159;\n ii. 175, 362;\n iii. 128, 241.\n\n Erastus, i. 267.\n\n Erathius, ii. 320.\n\n Eratosthenes, i. 155;\n ii. 142, 350.\n\n Eremites, Friars, i. xvi.\n\n Erica, iii. 223.\n\n Eringium, i. 290.\n\n Erithra, ii. 364.\n\n Erpingham, iii. 403, 549.\n\n ---- (Sir T.), iii. 402.\n\n Error, i. 121.\n\n Erythrus, ii. 363, 366.\n\n Esau, iii, 9.\n\n _Esculus_, iii. 261.\n\n Escutcheons, ii. 229.\n\n Esdras, i. xxxix, 43.\n\n Esther, i. 44.\n\n Estius, ii. 228, 280;\n iii. 35.\n\n Eternity, i. 19, 338.\n\n Ethiopia, i. 350;\n ii. 332, 356, 358, 369, 370-1, 379, 382.\n\n Etna, ii. 357.\n\n Etymology, i. 286-7.\n\n Eucharist, i. 145;\n iii. 12, 14.\n\n Eucherius, ii. 203.\n\n Euclid, i. 160, 185, 335;\n ii. 253.\n\n Eudorus, i. 156.\n\n Eudoxus, ii. 164.\n\n Eugubinus. _See_ Steuchus.\n\n Eumolus, iii. 43.\n\n Eunuchs, i. 342.\n\n Euphorbium, ii. 197.\n\n Euphorbus, iii. 470.\n\n Euphrantides, ii. 147.\n\n Euphrates, ii. 270, 350, 365.\n\n Eupolis, ii. 142.\n\n Euripides, i. 67;\n ii. 142, 221;\n iii. 120.\n\n ---- _Hecuba_, iii. 114.\n\n Euripus, i. li, 99;\n iii. 42, 44-6.\n\n Europa, i. 339;\n iii. 282.\n\n Europe, i. 78, 194, 227-8.\n\n Eusebius, i. xx, xxxvii;\n ii. 290, 321;\n iii. 40, 80.\n\n Eustachius, iii. 153, 160.\n\n Eustathius, ii. 142, 147, 156.\n\n Euthymius, i. xxxi.\n\n Euxine, ii. 366;\n iii. 490.\n\n Evander, ii. 333.\n\n Evangelists, ii. 232.\n\n Evax, i. 171, 284.\n\n Eve, i. 15, 34, 81, 122-5, 129, 140, 143-4, 314;\n ii. 13, 137, 209, 212, 285;\n iii. 5-6, 10.\n\n Evisa, ii. 357.\n\n Exantlation, i. 150.\n\n Eye, i. 167;\n ii. 42-7;\n iii. 200.\n\n Eye-lid, ii. 111-12.\n\n Ezechias. _See_ Hezekiah.\n\n Ezekiel, i. 69.\n\n Ezion-Geber, i. 231;\n iii. 220.\n\n\n Faber (Joh.), i. 302;\n ii. 24-5.\n\n Fabermarinus, iii. 288.\n\n Fabii, iii. 75.\n\n Fabius Pictor, ii. 320.\n\n Fables, i. 157.\n\n Fabritius Paduantus, ii. 281.\n\n Fagius (Paulus), ii. 227, 231.\n\n Fairy stones, i. 283.\n\n Faith, i. 81, 96.\n\n Falconry, iii. 294.\n\n Fallacy, i. 140, 141, 144.\n\n Falling sickness, i. 188.\n\n Fallopius, ii. 125.\n\n Familist, i. 79.\n\n Famine, i. 300.\n\n Farnese (Cardinal), iii. 110.\n\n Faroe Island, iii. 515, 518, 523.\n\n Farriers, i. 314.\n\n Farselloni, iii. 79.\n\n Fascination, i. 334.\n\n Fat, i. 265.\n\n Faustina, iii. 433.\n\n Favago, iii. 178.\n\n Faventia, i. 281.\n\n Fawn, i. 188.\n\n Fayus, iii. 72.\n\n Fazelli (Thomas), ii. 333.\n\n Fecundity, ii. 259.\n\n Feet, ii. 269, 270.\n\n Felicity, iii. 475.\n\n Fen-cricket, iii. 538.\n\n Ferdinandus (Ant.), ii. 356.\n\n Fern, i. 171, 206, 221, 264, 301.\n\n Fernelius, ii. 54, 63.\n\n Ferrara, i. 293;\n iii. 193.\n\n ---- (Alphonso, Duke of), i. 274-5.\n\n Ferrarius (Omnibonus), iii. 375.\n\n _Ferrum equinum_, i. 297.\n\n Ferryman (Elysian), iii. 130.\n\n Fertility, iii. 271.\n\n Festus, ii. 235.\n\n Fiaroumti, i. 279.\n\n Fienus (Thomas), ii. 375.\n\n Fieschi (Aloysio), iii. 461.\n\n Figs, i. 197.\n\n Fig tree, i. 298.\n\n ---- ---- (Parable), iii. 266.\n\n Filander, iii. 296.\n\n Finch, iii. 524.\n\n Fingal, iii. 311.\n\n Finger, Fingers, iii. 552.\n\n ---- pectinated, ii. 267.\n\n ---- (ring), ii. 117.\n\n Finsbury, iii. 421.\n\n Fioravanti (L.), i. 166.\n\n Fir tree, iii. 251.\n\n Fire, i. 47, 71;\n ii. 56-7.\n\n ---- shovel, i. 221.\n\n Firmicus (Julius), iii. 294.\n\n Fish, ii. 74, 112, 151;\n iii. 527.\n\n Fishes eaten by Our Saviour, iii. 286.\n\n Fishes and Birds in Norfolk, iii. 511.\n\n Fitches, iii. 232, 278.\n\n Five, iii. 203-4.\n\n Flags (plant), i. 290.\n\n Flamen, i. 316.\n\n Flanders, iii. 117.\n\n Flax, i. 274;\n iii. 254-5.\n\n Fleece, Golden, Order, ii. 251.\n\n Flesh, cutting of, ii. 77-8.\n\n Fleur-de-lis, ii. 256.\n\n Flints, i. 206, 208, 256, 272;\n ii. 56.\n\n Floating, ii. 134.\n\n Flood, i. 132;\n ii. 78, 319.\n\n Flood (Robert), iii. 305.\n\n Florianus, iii. 433.\n\n Florilegus, iii. 66.\n\n Florus, i. xxvii.\n\n Flos Africanus, i. 306.\n\n Flowers, iii. 117.\n\n Fluellen, i. 304,\n\n Flux, ii. 282.\n\n ---- of the sea, i. 24.\n\n Fly, i. 24, 262, 300-1.\n\n Folkestone Abbey, iii. 411.\n\n Forbidden fruit, iii. 1, 227.\n\n Forceps, iii. 161.\n\n Forerius, ii. 157.\n\n Forestus, ii. 119.\n\n Fortunate Islands, ii. 398.\n\n Fortune, i. 30.\n\n Fortune-tellers, i. 139.\n\n Fougade, i. 28.\n\n Fox, i. 155;\n ii. 82, 264, 370, 377.\n\n Fox (fish), ii. 74.\n\n Fox-stones, i. 326.\n\n Fox (John), iii. 406, 409, 410.\n\n Fracastorius, i. 241.\n\n France, i. 33, 226, 228;\n ii. 92, 149.\n\n Francherius, iii. 300.\n\n Francis I., iii. 374.\n\n Franciscan opponent, i. 37.\n\n Frankincense, i. 205;\n iii. 21.\n\n Franks, iii. 161.\n\n Freake (Edmund), B., iii. 409, 411.\n\n Freculphus, iii. 30.\n\n Frederick II., i. xxviii;\n iii. 300.\n\n French, i. 83, 90.\n\n Friends, i. 94-5, 105.\n\n Friendship, i. 93;\n ii. 265.\n\n Frobisher, ii. 70.\n\n Frogs, i. xlix, 83, 312, 327;\n ii. 11, 13, 19, 20, 113, 134, 379.\n\n Frog-fish, ii. 74;\n iii. 529.\n\n Frotho, iii. 112.\n\n Fuchsius, iii. 168.\n\n Fuenca, i. 281.\n\n _Fuga Daemonis_, i. 189.\n\n Fulgentius, ii. 257.\n\n Fuller (Tho.), ii. 157.\n\n Fundi, iii. 226.\n\n _Fungus sambucinus_, i. 304.\n\n Fury, iii. 492.\n\n Furze, i. 297;\n iii. 129.\n\n\n Gabriel Sionita, i. 243.\n\n Gaditane ocean, iii. 531.\n\n Gaffarel, iii. 165.\n\n Gaguinus, iii. 112, 247.\n\n Galaxia, iii. 12.\n\n Galba, i. 310.\n\n Galbanum, iii. 225.\n\n GALEN, _passim_.\n\n Galileo, ii. 164;\n iii. 47.\n\n Gall, i. 194, 197, 210, 314-15, 317, 345-6.\n\n Gallicia, iii. 165.\n\n Gallienus, iii. 107, 433.\n\n Gallows, i. 289.\n\n Galuanus Martianus, iii. 121.\n\n Gama (Stephanus de), ii. 365.\n\n Gammadims, iii. 106.\n\n Ganet, iii. 515.\n\n Ganges, ii. 158, 353, 357.\n\n Ganivetus, ii. 177.\n\n Gans, i. 279.\n\n Garagantua, i. 34.\n\n Garamantes, ii. 372.\n\n Garcias. _See_ Horto.\n\n GARDEN OF CYRUS, iii. 145.\n\n Gardeners, ii. 93;\n iii. 148.\n\n Gardens, i. 307;\n iii. 148.\n\n Gardiner (George), iii. 398-9, 410.\n\n Garfish, iii. 530.\n\n Garlands, iii. 281.\n\n Garlick, i. 235-6;\n ii. 331, 368.\n\n Garrulus Argentoratensis, iii. 525.\n\n Garum, iii. 290.\n\n Gascons, i. 90.\n\n Gaspar, iii. 26.\n\n Gassendus, i. xxiii;\n iii. 73.\n\n Gasserus, i. 231.\n\n Gaudentinus, ii. 99.\n\n Gaudentius Brixiensis, i. xxx.\n\n Gauricus (L.), ii. 168, 198.\n\n Gaywood Hall, iii. 408.\n\n Gaza, ii. 31, 43.\n\n Gazela, ii. 148.\n\n Geber, i. 148;\n iii. 63.\n\n Gellius (A.), i. xi, li, 142;\n ii. 81, 117, 234.\n\n Gemini, ii. 191.\n\n Geminus, ii. 164, 184, 187, 189.\n\n Gems, i. 208, 241.\n\n ---- (artificial), i. 206.\n\n Genebrard, i. xx, xxviii;\n ii. 396.\n\n Generation, ii. 10, 127;\n iii. 57.\n\n Geneva, i. 11.\n\n Genoese, i. 44.\n\n Gentianella, ii. 395.\n\n Gentleman (English), iii. 465.\n\n Geodes, i. 283.\n\n Geoffrey of Monmouth, ii. 335.\n\n Geomancers, i. 139.\n\n Geometry, i. 162.\n\n George (David), i. 138.\n\n George (St.), ii. 249.\n\n Georgius Alexandrinus, iii. 258.\n\n ---- Venetus, iii. 230.\n\n Gerar, ii. 382.\n\n Gergazites, ii. 381.\n\n Gerion, i. 158;\n ii. 334.\n\n Germanicus, i. xlvi, 311;\n ii. 21, 240;\n iii. 323.\n\n Germany, i. 38, 90, 228;\n ii. 16, 69, 208, 280, 396;\n iii. 101.\n\n ---- Maid of, i. 46.\n\n Gersom, ii. 288.\n\n Geryon, ii. 23.\n\n Gesner (C.), i. 279, 322, 324;\n ii. 15, 74, 85, 205-6.\n\n Geta, iii. 108.\n\n Ghosts, i. 187.\n\n Gianat, Oriental, i. 285.\n\n Gibbartas, ii. 86.\n\n Gibeonites, ii. 262.\n\n Giges, ii. 50.\n\n Gihon, ii. 350.\n\n Gilbert, ii. 349.\n\n ---- (W.), ii. 220, 223-4, 227, 229, 233, 240, 247, 255, 259, 292.\n\n Gillingham, iii. 93.\n\n Gillius, iii. 46.\n\n Ginger, i. 292.\n\n Gipsies, ii. 395-7.\n\n Giraldus, ii. 335, 386.\n\n Girdle, ii. 269.\n\n Gith, iii. 232.\n\n Glanvile (B.). _See_ Bartholomeus.\n\n Glass, i. 206, 214, 238, 255-6, 259, 266.\n\n ---- poison, i. 264.\n\n ---- (Venice), i. 209;\n iii. 69.\n\n Glasswort, i. 238, 264.\n\n Glastonbury, i. 297.\n\n Glister, i. 299, 316.\n\n Glory, ii. 228.\n\n Glow-worms, i. 349;\n ii. 99.\n\n Gnat, i. 301.\n\n Gnat-net, 158.\n\n Gnat-worms, iii. 187.\n\n Goa, ii. 325;\n iii. 194.\n\n ---- (tree of), iii. 484.\n\n Goaga, ii. 372.\n\n Goat, i. 263, 289, 341, 346;\n ii. 259, 275.\n\n ---- blood of, i. 262-3.\n\n ---- beetle, iii. 174.\n\n ---- stones, i. 326.\n\n Goat's head, i. 188.\n\n God, i. 19, 72, 74, 110, 126-7, 183;\n ii. 270;\n iii. 206, 483.\n\n Godfrey, iii. 61.\n\n Godwin (F.), i. 253.\n\n Godwits, iii. 519.\n\n Goes (Damianus a), ii. 382.\n\n Gold, i. 50, 71, 230, 239, 240, 250, 255, 266-7, 284;\n ii. 118;\n iii. 54, 389, 447.\n\n ---- (potable), ii. 12, 64.\n\n ---- powder of, i. 277.\n\n ---- sulphur of, i. 278.\n\n Goldfinch, iii. 524.\n\n Goldwell (James), Bp., iii. 401.\n\n Goliah, ii. 158.\n\n Goltzius, ii. 205;\n iii. 328.\n\n Gomorrah, i. 32;\n iii. 326.\n\n Goodier, iii. 93.\n\n Goose, ii. 82;\n iii. 516.\n\n Goose-tree, ii. 107.\n\n Gordianus, Emperor, ii. 279;\n iii. 142.\n\n Gordon-Huntly, i. xxvii.\n\n Gornart, iii. 530.\n\n Goropius Becanus, ii. 68-9;\n iii. 1, 3, 117.\n\n Gorraeus, i. 174.\n\n Gothlanders, iii. 112.\n\n Gourd, i. 197;\n iii. 21, 222.\n\n Gout, i. 188, 246;\n ii. 117, 121, 133;\n iii. 379, 381, 461.\n\n Gracchus, i. 195.\n\n Gracculus, iii. 291.\n\n Gradual Verses, iii. 304.\n\n GRAFTING, iii. 555.\n\n Grammarians, i. 89, 98, 311.\n\n Grampus, iii. 527.\n\n Granada, iii. 311.\n\n Granate, i. 214.\n\n Grand signiours, i. 59;\n ii. 371, 397.\n\n Grandgousier, iii. 76.\n\n Grapes, iii. 224.\n\n Grass, ii. 368.\n\n Grasshoppers, i. 83, 327;\n ii. 207;\n iii. 28, 293.\n\n Gravel, to, i. 33.\n\n Gray (John de), Bp., iii. 408.\n\n Greaves (John), i. 238;\n ii. 360;\n iii. 245.\n\n Greece, i. 155, 159.\n\n Greek language, iii. 406.\n\n Greeks, ii. 9, 332, 339, 398.\n\n Green, ii. 368.\n\n Greenback, iii. 530.\n\n Greenland, i. 217;\n ii. 70, 86-7, 158, 190;\n iii. 89.\n\n Greffarel, ii. 398.\n\n Gregory the Great, i. 203;\n iii. 62.\n\n Gregorius I., ii. 144.\n\n ---- VII., iii. 72.\n\n ---- Turonensis, ii. 250, 279.\n\n Grevinus, i. 174, 266, 332.\n\n Grey hair, i. 155.\n\n Griffins, i. 181;\n ii. 1, 258.\n\n Grotius, i. xlii, xlvi, 164;\n ii. 77;\n iii. 277.\n\n Grouse, iii. 523.\n\n Grummel, i. 304.\n\n Grumwell, ii. 71.\n\n Gruter, iii. 139, 434, 436.\n\n Gryps, ii. 2.\n\n Gualata, ii. 372.\n\n Guascus (Laurent), i. 250.\n\n Guatemala, iii. 308.\n\n Gudgeon, iii. 538.\n\n Guellius, iii. 162.\n\n Guevara (A.), i. 160.\n\n Guienne, iii. 314.\n\n Guinea, i. 226;\n ii. 377, 383.\n\n Gulielmus de Conchis, i. 176.\n\n Gulielmus Parisiensis, i. 254,\n\n ---- Tyrius, ii. 351.\n\n Gum, i. 205.\n\n ---- Anime, i. 255-7.\n\n ---- Arabick, i. 205.\n\n ---- Elemi, i. 255.\n\n ---- Guiaci, i. 255.\n\n Gunpowder, i. xxxiii, 271.\n\n Guns, i. 230-1.\n\n Gyges, iii. 78.\n\n Gypsum, i. 255, 279;\n iii. 165.\n\n Gyrinus, ii. 17.\n\n\n Habbakuk, i. 49.\n\n Haddock, iii. 532.\n\n Hadrian, Emperor, ii. 149, 263.\n\n Haematites, i. 235, 245.\n\n Hail, i. 205, 210.\n\n Hair, i. 157, 265.\n\n ---- (grey), i. 155.\n\n Haircutting, ii. 268.\n\n Halcyon, i. 350;\n iii. 289, 291.\n\n Halec, iii. 289.\n\n Hales, iii. 400.\n\n ---- (Sir C.), iii. 325.\n\n Halicarnasseus. _See_ Dionysus.\n\n Halo, ii. 228.\n\n Hall (Joseph), Bp., iii. 412.\n\n Haly, ii. 177.\n\n Ham, iii. 15.\n\n Haman, ii. 260.\n\n Hamathites, ii. 383.\n\n Hammers, i. 263.\n\n Hammond, iii. 266.\n\n Hamon, iii. 17.\n\n Hands, i. 86;\n ii. 122.\n\n Hanging, ii. 260-1;\n iii. 119.\n\n Hannibal, ii. 133;\n iii. 74, 80.\n\n Hanno, i. 230.\n\n Happiness, i. 63, 111.\n\n Harbord (Philip), iii. 421.\n\n Hardworm, iii. 538.\n\n Hare, i. 341;\n ii. 29, 33, 49, 80, 264, 370.\n\n ---- (Indian), ii. 378.\n\n ---- (Sir Ralph), iii. 108.\n\n Harmony, i. 100, 101.\n\n Harold, iii. 112.\n\n Harp (Jew's), iii. 113.\n\n Harpies, i. 181;\n ii. 1.\n\n Harpocrates, ii. 267.\n\n Harpocration, i. 176.\n\n Harrington (Sir John), iii. 409.\n\n Harsnet (Samuel), Bp., iii. 412.\n\n Hart (Walter), Bp., iii. 400.\n\n Harts-horn, i. 256;\n ii. 69, 70.\n\n Harts-tongue, i. 301-2.\n\n Harvey (Wm.), Dr., ii. 65, 104;\n iii. 93.\n\n Hassal (John), iii. 401.\n\n Hastati, iii. 161.\n\n Havilah, ii. 381.\n\n Hawk, i. 289, 320, 339, 344;\n ii. 4, 82, 376;\n iii. 292.\n\n ---- talons, i. 256.\n\n Hawks and Falconry ancient and modern, iii. 294.\n\n Hazel, i. 272, 274, 293.\n\n 'He' letter, iii. 205.\n\n Headache, i. 246;\n ii. 12.\n\n Heart, ii. 113;\n iii. 60.\n\n Heath (plant), iii. 223.\n\n Heathpoult, iii. 523.\n\n Heaven, i. 69, 70, 73.\n\n Hebrew language, i. xlii;\n ii. 277.\n\n Hecatombs, ii. 2.\n\n Hecatonchiria, i. 158.\n\n Hector, ii. 238.\n\n Hecuba, iii. 82.\n\n Hedgehog, i. 167, 326, 348;\n ii. 41, 74, 133.\n\n ---- (sea), i. 283,\n\n Heel, ii. 270.\n\n Hefronita. _See_ Hesronita.\n\n Heigham, iii. 412.\n\n Heinsius, ii. 44;\n iii. 266.\n\n Helen, i. 159, 336.\n\n Helena (St.), i. 43;\n iii. 27.\n\n Helenus, i. 250.\n\n Heliodorus, ii. 375.\n\n Heliogabalus, ii. 12, 81;\n iii. 109, 433.\n\n Heliopolis, ii. 5.\n\n Heliotropes, i. 208, 256, 284.\n\n Helix, i. 29.\n\n Hell, i. 69, 71, 73, 74;\n ii. 272.\n\n Hellanicus, i. 170;\n ii. 320.\n\n Helmont, i. 234, 238, 261, 264, 300;\n iii. 471.\n\n Helvicus, ii. 290, 302.\n\n Hemlock, iii. 70, 222.\n\n Hen, i. 289, 303, 335.\n\n ---- (gold), i. 268.\n\n Henares (Alcala de), ii. 28.\n\n Henbane, iii. 265.\n\n Henry the Emperor, iii. 83.\n\n ---- King of Navarre, iii. 541.\n\n ---- II., of England, iii. 91.\n\n ---- III., i. 312;\n iii. 408.\n\n ---- VIII., i. xviii, 11.\n\n Hepatica, i. 304.\n\n Hephaestus, ii. 133.\n\n Heraclitus, i. 91, 199;\n iii. 59, 79.\n\n Heraclius, ii. 279.\n\n Heraiscus, i. 180.\n\n Heraldry, i. 85, 333;\n ii. 3, 203, 206;\n iii. 414-17.\n\n ---- (England), ii. 254.\n\n Heralds, i. 180.\n\n _Herba Trinitatis_, i. 304.\n\n Herbalists, i. 287, 303.\n\n Herbals, i. 326.\n\n Herbert (William), Bp., iii. 405.\n\n Hercules, i. 158;\n ii. 39, 159, 257, 334;\n iii. 132.\n\n ---- (statue), iii. 114.\n\n ---- pillars, i. 251, 309.\n\n Heresbach, iii. 298.\n\n Heresies, i. 15, 143.\n\n Hermaphroditus, i. 35;\n ii. 10, 34. 38.\n\n Hermes, i. 17, 20.\n\n Hermias, iii. 43.\n\n Hermippus, ii. 174.\n\n Hermit (crab), iii. 534.\n\n Hermolaus, ii. 66;\n iii. 340.\n\n Hernandez, ii. 25.\n\n Hernias, i. 245, 247.\n\n Hero, ii. 118.\n\n Herod, i. 138;\n ii. 243.\n\n Herodias, iii. 139.\n\n Herodotus, i. 44, 155, 165, 168, 170, 174;\n ii. 1, 3, 5, 6, 26, 28, 38, 80, 83, 155, 172, 179, 286-7, 321,\n 331, 336, 350-1, 357, 379;\n iii. 18, 41, 49, 340.\n\n Heron, i. 320;\n iii. 518.\n\n Herostratus, iii. 139.\n\n Herring, iii. 289.\n\n Herthus, iii. 101.\n\n Hesiod, i. xx, 156, 170, 174, 344-5;\n ii. 305-6, 320-1.\n\n Hesperides, ii. 399;\n iii. 3.\n\n Hesronita (Joannes), i. 243.\n\n Hester. _See_ Esther.\n\n Hesychius, ii. 42, 294;\n iii. 301.\n\n Heurnius, ii. 259.\n\n Hevelius, ii. 398-9.\n\n Heveningham Heath, iii. 538.\n\n Hexameter, i. 101.\n\n Heydon family, iii. 419.\n\n ---- (Sir H.), iii. 419.\n\n ---- (John), iii. 419.\n\n Heylyn (Dr.), ii. 249.\n\n Hezekiah, i. 197, 337.\n\n Hiarchas, i. 160.\n\n Hicket, ii. 146.\n\n Hickling, iii. 515.\n\n Hiero, iii. 77.\n\n Hieroglyphs, i. 51, 180, 317-19, 321-2, 325, 328, 333, 338, 344;\n ii. 1, 3, 7, 18, 26, 32, 89, 121, 185, 202-3, 258, 270-1.\n\n Hildebrand, iii. 72.\n\n Hills, ii. 355.\n\n Hinges, i. 222.\n\n Hip-briar, iii. 223.\n\n Hipparchus, i. 335;\n ii. 298.\n\n Hippocrates, i. xxi, li. 153, 156, 165, 167, 234, 246;\n ii. 39, 55, 61, 70, 74, 82-3, 130, 143, 146, 163-4, 166,\n 172, 177, 194-5, 198, 303-4, 375-6, 310;\n iii. 94.\n\n _Hippolapathum_, i. 304.\n\n Hippolytus, i. 347;\n iii. 151.\n\n Hippomanes, i. 323.\n\n Hipponactes, iii. 438.\n\n Hippophae, i. 246.\n\n _Hippuris corulloides_, i. 279.\n\n Hirpini, ii. 20.\n\n Hispaniola, ii. 341, 372.\n\n _Historia tripartita_, ii. 321.\n\n History, i. 163.\n\n Hitterdal, i. 283.\n\n Hivites, ii. 381.\n\n Hoang, i. 281.\n\n Hobart (Sir James), iii. 399.\n\n ---- (Sir John), iii. 549.\n\n Hobbes, i. xxi, xxvii.\n\n Hobby, iii. 292, 523.\n\n ---- bird, iii. 521\n\n Hofmann, ii. 85.\n\n Hogs, i. 289, 346;\n ii. 379.\n\n Hoierus, iii. 515.\n\n Holinshed, iii. 113, 408, 432.\n\n Holland, i. 28.\n\n ---- Countess of, iii. 7.\n\n Hollanders, ii. 312.\n\n Hollerius, i. 305.\n\n Holly, i. 293.\n\n Holt, iii. 400.\n\n Holy Ghost, i. 102, 317.\n\n Homer, i. li, 30, 99, 156, 167, 170, 174, 236, 291, 301, 313;\n ii. 130, 146-7, 155, 164-5, 321, 333, 335, 350, 386;\n iii. 49.\n\n ---- _Odyssey_, ii. 82.\n\n ---- _Batracomyomachia_, ii. 60.\n\n Hondius, ii. 352.\n\n ---- (Pet.), iii. 95.\n\n Honduras, iii. 308.\n\n Honey, i. 196, 245;\n iii. 27.\n\n Honey-comb stone, iii. 165.\n\n Hoopoe, iii. 290, 521.\n\n Hopton (John), Bp., iii. 409.\n\n Horace, i. xiv, l, 98, 154;\n ii. 30, 165, 253.\n\n Horizon, ii. 399.\n\n Horn (substance), ii. 69.\n\n Hornets, i. 289;\n ii. 29.\n\n Horns, i. 214, 342-3.\n\n Horse, i. 36, 45, 100, 154-5, 158, 289, 312, 314, 340, 346;\n ii. 40, 65, 138.\n\n ---- (fish), iii. 529.\n\n ---- dung, i. 204.\n\n ---- flesh, ii. 83.\n\n ---- leech, iii. 538.\n\n ---- mint, i. 304.\n\n ---- radish, i. 304.\n\n ---- shoe, i. 298.\n\n Horses' eyes, i. 283.\n\n Horsey, iii. 515, 518.\n\n Horto (Garcias ab), i. 246, 292-3, 313;\n ii. 67, 325;\n iii. 25.\n\n _Hortus Sanitatis_, i. 176.\n\n Hospitals, i. 109.\n\n Hoties, i. 176.\n\n Hours, ii. 281.\n\n Hucherius, ii. 154.\n\n Hudibras (upon reading), iii 438.\n\n Hues (Robert), ii. 399.\n\n Hugbaldus, iii. 305.\n\n Hugo, i. 313.\n\n Hulsius (L.), ii. 205.\n\n Humber, iii. 48.\n\n Humbert (St.), iii. 116.\n\n Humbird, ii. 355;\n iii. 540.\n\n Humility, iii. 449.\n\n Humming, ii. 97.\n\n Hungary, ii. 396.\n\n Hunstanton, ii. 85;\n iii. 527, 534-5.\n\n Huntsmen, iii. 210.\n\n Hus (John), i. xxxvii, 41.\n\n Husks, iii. 226.\n\n Hyacinth, ii. 72.\n\n Hyades, iii. 165.\n\n HYDRIOTAPHIA, iii. 87.\n\n Hydrophobia, ii. 200.\n\n Hyena, i. 174, 325, 339;\n ii. 40, 74.\n\n Hyeres, iii. 242.\n\n Hyginus, ii. 254.\n\n Hylas, iii. 82.\n\n Hymn (Turkish), iii. 302.\n\n Hyoscyamus, iii. 265.\n\n Hypericon, i. 189.\n\n Hypostasis, i. 49.\n\n Hyrcania, ii. 332.\n\n Hyssop, i. 307;\n iii. 21, 222.\n\n\n Iago(S.), of Gallicia, iii. 165.\n\n Iberians, ii. 180.\n\n Ibis, i. 336.\n\n Icarus, i. 158.\n\n Ice, i. 202, 204-6, 211-12.\n\n Iceland, i. 283;\n ii. 69, 70, 357;\n iii. 265, 427, 520.\n\n Iceni, iii. 106.\n\n Ichthyophagi, iii. 101.\n\n Ida (Mt.), iii. 274.\n\n Idolatry, i. 134, 145, 148.\n\n Idumean Sea, ii. 364.\n\n Ignatius, i. xxxi.\n\n Ignorance, i. 88, 99, 100.\n\n Ilex, iii. 261-2.\n\n Illyria, ii. 379.\n\n Ilva, i. 242.\n\n Immaturity, i. 61.\n\n Immortality, i. 63;\n iii. 142.\n\n _Imperator_, iii. 62.\n\n Imperatus (Ferdinandus), ii. 28.\n\n Impostors, Three, i. xxviii, 33.\n\n Impurity, ii. 81.\n\n Incontinency, i. 167, 249, 284.\n\n Incredulity, i. 148.\n\n India, i. 169, 242, 292. 294;\n ii. 7, 61, 81, 149, 332, 338, 341;\n iii. 256.\n\n Indian cocks, i. 333.\n\n ---- stone, i. 282.\n\n ---- wheat, iii. 246.\n\n Indies, i. 42, 228, 231, 239, 241.\n\n Indico, i. 281.\n\n Inebriation, i. 284, 299.\n\n Ingrassias, ii. 239.\n\n Ingratitude, iii. 454, 497.\n\n Injury, i. 96.\n\n Ink, ii. 390.\n\n Insects, i. 299, 301;\n ii. 11.\n\n Invocation of Saints, i. 50.\n\n Ios, iii. 49.\n\n Iphicles, ii. 39.\n\n Iphigenia, ii. 243.\n\n Ipswich, Trinity Church, iii. 405.\n\n Ireland, i. 226;\n ii. 29, 154, 335, 357, 386;\n iii. 36, 311, 378.\n\n Irenaeus, ii. 298.\n\n Iris, i. 212, 255.\n\n Iron, i. 219, 220, 223, 276;\n ii. 21, 63, 140.\n\n Isaac, ii. 226.\n\n Isabel, _Queen of England_, iii. 314.\n\n Isaiah, iii. 143.\n\n Ishmael, iii. 9.\n\n Isidore, i. 175, 202, 262-3, 270, 317;\n ii. 26, 31, 53, 208, 259;\n iii. 28.\n\n Isle of Man, iii. 325.\n\n Israelites, i. 45;\n ii. 178, 229.\n\n Isthmus, ii. 362-3.\n\n Istria, iii. 378.\n\n Italy, i. 33, 83, 90, 95, 281, 294, 338;\n ii. 333, 339, 381, 397.\n\n Ivory, i. 347;\n ii. 70.\n\n Ivy, i. 297, 350;\n iii. 193, 222.\n\n ---- berries, i. 303.\n\n ---- cup, i. 306.\n\n Ixion, i. 310.\n\n\n Jackdaw, iii. 523.\n\n Jacob, i. 39;\n ii. 45, 145, 375;\n iii. 2.\n\n Jacob's Rods, iii. 230.\n\n Jacobites, i. xxiii.\n\n Jacynth, i. 285.\n\n Jaffarel, ii. 281.\n\n Jamaica, i. 228;\n iii. 344.\n\n James (name), i. 303.\n\n Janellus, ii. 253.\n\n Janissaries, ii. 6.\n\n Jann (Tho.) Bp., iii. 411.\n\n Jansenius, i. 317;\n ii. 32, 225.\n\n Janus, i. 99;\n ii. 333;\n iii. 155, 489, 490.\n\n Japan, ii. 158.\n\n Japhet, ii. 335;\n iii. 15.\n\n Jarchi (Solomon), ii. 347.\n\n Jargon, i. 98.\n\n Jason, i. xliii.\n\n Jasper, i. 256, 284, 285.\n\n Jaundice, i. 316;\n ii. 376.\n\n ---- (Black), iii. 486.\n\n Java, ii. 107, 371.\n\n Javan, ii. 398.\n\n Jay, iii. 291.\n\n Jebusites, ii. 381.\n\n Jeffery, (John), iii. 439, 442.\n\n Jegon (John), Bp., iii. 412.\n\n ---- (Rob.), iii. 106.\n\n Jehovah, i. 190.\n\n Jephthah, ii. 241.\n\n Jericho, i. 197;\n iii. 25.\n\n ---- Rose of, i. 295.\n\n Jerome, i. xx, xxxii, xlvi, 203;\n ii. 26, 45, 53, 158, 203, 251, 289, 293;\n iii. 119.\n\n Jeronimus Egyptius, ii. 320.\n\n Jerusalem, ii. 265, 280.\n\n ---- Temple, iii. 77.\n\n Jesuits, i. 42.\n\n Jesus Christ, i. 75, 81, 125, 130, 141, 192.\n\n ---- Blood, i. 262.\n\n ---- Sepulchre, i. 17.\n\n Jet, i. 255, 257, 259.\n\n Jethro, ii. 382.\n\n Jew, Jews, i. 40, 239;\n ii. 79, 147, 345.\n\n ---- (Wandering), iii. 71.\n\n ---- (odorous), ii. 386.\n\n Jew's-ear, i. 304.\n\n Jew's harp, iii. 113.\n\n Joan (Pope), iii. 71.\n\n Joash, ii. 280.\n\n Job, i. 62, 93, 130, 136;\n iii. 10.\n\n Johannes, i. 313.\n\n ---- Abp. of Upsala, i. 241.\n\n ---- Hesronita, i. 243.\n\n John the Baptist, i. 443;\n ii. 243, 245;\n iii. 27.\n\n John (St.), evangelist, i. 69, 141, 343;\n ii. 29.\n\n ---- XX. (Pope), iii. 23.\n\n ---- XXII., i. xx.\n\n ---- of Oxford, Bp., iii. 405.\n\n ---- of Salisbury, i. 1.\n\n ---- (name), i. 303.\n\n Johnson (Thomas), i. 279.\n\n Johnstonus (I.), ii. 86;\n iii. 528, 529, 541.\n\n Jonah, Jonas, i. 230;\n ii. 86, 114, 235;\n iii. 21, 119.\n\n Jonah's Gourd, iii. 222.\n\n Jonas (Theod.), i. 283.\n\n Jonathan, i. 123.\n\n Jordan, i. 197;\n ii. 356;\n iii. 331.\n\n Jorden (Dr.), ii. 56, 57, 390.\n\n Jorvalensis, Abbas, iii. 108.\n\n Joseph, iii. 14.\n\n ---- (Patriarch), i. 27.\n\n ---- (St.), i. 192.\n\n ---- (name), i. 303.\n\n ---- (Rabbi Ben), iii. 43.\n\n Josephus, i. xxxiii, 32, 38, 291, 318;\n ii. 217, 288, 293, 320, 333, 382;\n iii. 17, 53, 77.\n\n Joshua, i. xxxix, 44.\n\n Joubertus (Laurentius), i. 118.\n\n Jovinianus, i. 192.\n\n Jovius (Paul), i. 171;\n ii. 71, 158, 175.\n\n Jubilee, ii. 169.\n\n Judaea, i. 257.\n\n Judas, i. xxx, 36, 131, 191, 304;\n iii. 2, 37.\n\n ---- Maccabeus, ii. 237.\n\n Jugglers, i. 139.\n\n Juli, ii. 22.\n\n Julia, i. xlvi;\n ii. 39;\n iii. 118.\n\n ---- Pia, ii. 268.\n\n Julian, i. 67, 135, 191, 196, 305;\n ii. 212;\n iii. 40, 269.\n\n Juliel (Aben), i. 304.\n\n Julius Africanus, ii. 290, 321.\n\n ---- Alexandrinus, i. 318.\n\n ---- Caesar, i. xviii, xxvii, xxxiii, 41, 63, 240;\n ii. 81, 237, 285;\n iii. 132.\n\n ---- Rusticus, ii. 397.\n\n ---- Pope, i. lii.\n\n ---- III., ii. 71.\n\n Juments, i. 154.\n\n Junctinus, ii. 178, 398.\n\n Jungermannus, i. 155.\n\n Juniper, iii. 2.\n\n ---- tree, iii. 258.\n\n ---- oil of, i. 261.\n\n Junius, i. 215;\n iii. 277.\n\n Juno, ii. 268.\n\n Jupiter, i. 89, 136, 185, 289, 298, 336;\n ii. 39, 81, 313, 357.\n\n ---- statue, iii. 240.\n\n ---- (planet), i. 30.\n\n ---- Ammon, ii. 229.\n\n ---- Soter, ii. 145.\n\n Justinian, i. 165.\n\n Justinus, ii. 331, 336;\n iii. 253.\n\n ---- martyr, i. xxxiii, xxxvii, xli, 44, 155;\n iii. 42.\n\n Jutes, iii. 112.\n\n Jutland, iii. 112.\n\n Juvenal, i. 154, 321, 345;\n ii. 121, 156, 201, 217-8, 256, 331;\n iii. 290.\n\n Juvencus, i. xxxi.\n\n\n Kent, ii, 154;\n iii. 325.\n\n Kermesberry, iii. 260.\n\n Kestril, ii. 105;\n iii. 299.\n\n Kett's rebellion, iii. 409.\n\n Kimberley, iii. 409.\n\n King (Dan), iii. 325.\n\n Kidney, i. 261, 264.\n\n Kings of Europe, i. 59.\n\n King's Evil, iii. 378.\n\n King-fisher, i. 348;\n iii. 291, 521.\n\n Kiranides, i. 167, 176;\n ii. 133.\n\n Kircherus (A.), i. 181, 229, 234, 237, 254, 288, 351;\n ii. 4, 106, 398;\n iii. 75.\n\n Kirchmannus, iii. 123.\n\n Kites, i. 320;\n ii. 14, 105, 376;\n iii. 514, 517.\n\n Kitten, ii. 138.\n\n Knee, i. 311.\n\n Knollys, iii. 62.\n\n Knot, lover's, ii. 266.\n\n Knots (bird), iii. 519.\n\n Knowledge, i. 115.\n\n\n L. N. M. E. N., i. xi.\n\n _Labarum_, iii. 151.\n\n Labyrinth, iii. 163.\n\n Lacca, i. 256.\n\n Lacedaemonians, i. 159;\n ii. 118.\n\n Lacrymatories, iii. 108, 115.\n\n Lactantius, i. xix, xxviii, xxxvii, xxxix, xliv-xlvi, 164;\n ii. 7.\n\n Lacuna, ii. 28.\n\n Laertas, iii. 150.\n\n Lago (Rodoriges de), ii. 349.\n\n Lais, i. 167;\n ii. 228.\n\n Laish, i. 282.\n\n Lakes, i. 204.\n\n Lamb (vegetable), ii. 106.\n\n Lambeth, iii. 411.\n\n Lambskin, i. 174.\n\n Lamech, i. 131.\n\n Lameness, iii. 377-8.\n\n Lamia, ii. 86;\n iii. 287.\n\n Lamprey, ii. 46;\n iii. 537.\n\n Lampridius, ii. 12.\n\n Lamps, iii. 115.\n\n Lancelotti, iii. 79.\n\n Landius (Joh.), ii. 51.\n\n Langius (J.), i. 235;\n ii. 62, 65, 208.\n\n Language, Languages, ii. 277;\n iii. 307-21.\n\n Language (English), i. 117.\n\n ---- (Latin), i. 117.\n\n Languedoc, iii. 260, 320, 376.\n\n Languedony, iii. 320.\n\n Lanner, iii. 299.\n\n Laodice, i. xlix.\n\n Lapidaries, i. 263;\n ii. 15;\n iii. 159.\n\n Lapis Anguinus, i. 210.\n\n ---- Ceratites, ii. 69.\n\n ---- _Judaicus_, i. 210, 284.\n\n ---- Lazuli, i. 284.\n\n ---- _stellaria_, i. 210;\n ii. 15.\n\n Lapwing, iii. 520.\n\n Larissaea, ii. 39.\n\n Lark, iii. 292, 523.\n\n Larus, iii. 515.\n\n Latin language, i. 117;\n iii. 469.\n\n Latins, i. 155.\n\n Lattice-work, iii. 158.\n\n Laud (W.), i. xvii.\n\n Laudanum, i. 108.\n\n Laughter, iii. 58.\n\n Laurel, iii. 265.\n\n Laurenberg, iii. 95, 279.\n\n Laurentius, i. xxii, 173;\n ii. 239.\n\n Laureola, ii. 197.\n\n Laurus (Jacobus), ii. 237, 252.\n\n Lausdun, iii. 7.\n\n Lavender, ii. 208.\n\n Law, i. 163, 164.\n\n Lawyer, i. 125.\n\n Lazarus, i. 34, 70, 88;\n iii. 119, 143, 384.\n\n Lazius (W.), iii. 116, 310.\n\n Lazy (the), iii. 463.\n\n Lead, i. 155, 211.\n\n Leah, iii. 19.\n\n Leandro, ii. 380;\n iii. 45.\n\n Leather (Russia), iii. 180.\n\n Lebadia, iii. 39.\n\n Lecher, i. 97.\n\n Leda, i. 336.\n\n Leech, i. 265, 309;\n ii. 25.\n\n ---- (horse), ii. 60.\n\n Left-handed, ii. 130.\n\n Legion, i. 73.\n\n Le Gros (T.), iii. 89.\n\n Legs, crossed, ii. 267.\n\n Leland, iii. 323.\n\n Lemnius (Levin.), i. 230, 259;\n ii. 117, 121, 171, 267;\n iii. 21, 24.\n\n Lemnos, iii. 261.\n\n Lemon, ii. 392, 394.\n\n Lenity, i. 319.\n\n Lennam, iii. 406.\n\n Lentulus, ii. 224.\n\n Leo (constellation), ii. 4, 189.\n\n Leo Africanus, ii. 63, 80, 99, 374;\n iii. 78.\n\n Leo III., iii. 157.\n\n ---- IV., i. 332;\n iii. 71.\n\n ---- X., i. xvi, xxviii, 311-12.\n\n ---- (Marcus), ii. 37, 291, 384.\n\n Leonine verses, iii. 305.\n\n Lepanto, i. 96.\n\n Lepidus, i. xxvii.\n\n Leprosy, ii. 81;\n iii. 381, 429.\n\n Lerius, ii. 83.\n\n Letter to a Friend (1690), iii. 367.\n\n Letters, i. 87;\n ii. 133.\n\n Lettuce, ii. 391.\n\n Lewis, King of Hungary, iii. 376.\n\n Leyden, i. 138, 247.\n\n Libanotis, iii. 222.\n\n Libavius, i. 247.\n\n Liberality, i. 88.\n\n Lice, i. 186, 289;\n ii. 11.\n\n Licetus (F.), i. 234, 282;\n ii. 51, 61, 208;\n iii. 43, 433-4.\n\n Liege, i. 170.\n\n Life, i. 61.\n\n Ligatures, i. 195.\n\n Light, iii. 199.\n\n Lightning, i. 298.\n\n Lignum vitae, i. 257.\n\n Ligustrum, iii. 224.\n\n Lily, Lilies, iii. 231, 273.\n\n ---- of the Valley, iii. 231.\n\n Lilies of the Field, iii. 230.\n\n Lima, iii. 388, 443.\n\n Lime, ii. 72.\n\n ---- tree, i. 293.\n\n Limpet, iii. 534.\n\n Linacre (T.), ii. 175.\n\n Linen, i. 257, 276.\n\n Linschoten, i. 280;\n iii. 194, 272.\n\n _Linum vivum_, ii. 21.\n\n Linus, ii. 321.\n\n Lion, ii. 4, 29. 49, 96, 370, 377.\n\n ---- fish, ii. 74.\n\n Lipara, iii. 456.\n\n Lipellous, ii. 247-8, 250.\n\n Lipsius, i. xxviii, xxxii, xxxiii, xlvii;\n ii. 216, 239, 263;\n iii. 3, 151.\n\n Liquorish, i. 290.\n\n Lithomancy, i. 250.\n\n Lithophyton, i. 278.\n\n Lithospermum, i, 304;\n ii. 71.\n\n Littleton (Elizabeth), iii. 441, 442.\n\n Liver, i. 318-19.\n\n ---- wort, i. 304.\n\n Livia, i. 336.\n\n Livonia, ii. 356.\n\n Livius, i. xlix;\n ii. 234, 333, 397;\n iii. 45.\n\n Lixivium, ii. 392.\n\n Lizard, i. 83, 137, 312;\n ii. 20, 24, 29, 60-1;\n iii. 538.\n\n ---- (water), ii. 19.\n\n Loadstone, i. 189, 216, 233, 305;\n ii. 392;\n iii. 380.\n\n Lobelius, i. 292;\n iii. 231.\n\n Lobster, i. 327;\n ii. 25, 41, 45, 74, 129, 379;\n iii. 534.\n\n ---- shells, i. 279.\n\n _Lobus Echinatus_, ii. 71.\n\n Loche, iii. 538.\n\n Locust, i. 83, 327;\n ii. 45, 80, 207;\n iii. 27.\n\n ---- tree, iii. 226.\n\n Loddon Church, iii. 399.\n\n Logic, i. 134.\n\n Logicians, i. 144.\n\n _Loligo_, ii. 88;\n iii. 204.\n\n _Lolium_, iii. 277-8.\n\n Lombard, ii. 212.\n\n London, i. 226, 228-9;\n ii. 305;\n iii. 163, 534.\n\n ---- St. Paul's Churchyard, iii. 420-1.\n\n ---- Spitalfields, iii. 108.\n\n Longinus (C.), i. 176.\n\n Longomontanus, ii. 298.\n\n Lopez (Ed.), i. 313;\n ii. 325, 371.\n\n Loretto, Casa Abellitta, iii. 350.\n\n Lot, ii. 274.\n\n Lot's wife, i. 55;\n iii. 37, 79.\n\n Louis VIII. or IX., 311.\n\n Louis XI., iii. 469.\n\n Love, ii. 384.\n\n Lover's knot, ii. 266.\n\n Lowestoft, iii. 532.\n\n Loxias, iii. 522.\n\n Lubym, ii. 382.\n\n Lucanus, i. xxvii, xxxvi, xlv, liv, 59, 62, 64, 107;\n ii. 51;\n iii. 144, 385.\n\n Lucerium, ii. 333.\n\n Lucian, i. xli, li. 33, 67, 89, 155, 170;\n iii. 59, 132.\n\n ---- Martyr, ii. 294.\n\n Lucifer, i. 15, 73.\n\n Lucilius, iii. 58.\n\n Lucius, i. 195.\n\n Lucius Pratensis, i. 155.\n\n Lucretius, i. xxv, xxviii, xxix, xliii, 252;\n iii. 127.\n\n Ludovicus, ii. 159.\n\n Ludovicus Pius, iii. 112.\n\n Lullius, iii. 72.\n\n Lump (fish), iii. 529.\n\n Lunar rainbow, iii. 12.\n\n Lunaria, i. 297, 301;\n iii. 237.\n\n Lupa, i. 339.\n\n _Lupus Marinus_, ii. 16.\n\n Lusitania, ii. 335.\n\n Lussy (M.), iii. 262.\n\n Lustrations, i. 198.\n\n Lute, iii. 80.\n\n Luther, i. xv, xvi, 11;\n ii. 175.\n\n Lybia, ii. 374.\n\n Lycosthenes, i. 159;\n ii. 208.\n\n Lycurgus, ii. 118;\n iii. 117.\n\n Lycus, i. 339.\n\n Lye, ii. 392.\n\n Lyghard. _See_ Hart.\n\n Lynn, iii. 523, 531.\n\n ---- Gaywood Hall, iii. 408.\n\n ---- St. Margaret, iii. 405.\n\n Lyra (N. de), i. xlviii, 216;\n ii. 157.\n\n Lystrians, i. 136.\n\n\n M., iii. 125.\n\n Mace, i. 292-3.\n\n Machiavelli, i. lii, 33;\n iii. 133, 468.\n\n Mackerel, ii. 84, 532.\n\n Macrobius, i. 156, 159, 335;\n ii. 117, 120, 142, 165, 229, 254, 380;\n iii. 109, 466.\n\n Macrocephali, ii. 376.\n\n Madagascar, ii. 371-2.\n\n Madness, i. 303.\n\n Madrid, iii. 345.\n\n Maeotis, ii. 350.\n\n Maffeus, ii. 354.\n\n Magdalene, i. 73.\n\n Magdaleon, i. 248.\n\n Magellan, i. 227-8, 235.\n\n ---- Straits, ii. 111.\n\n Magellanica, i. 217.\n\n Maggot, i. 188, 300-1;\n ii. 11.\n\n Magic, i. 46, 140, 189.\n\n Maginus, ii. 351-2. 354, 379;\n iii. 45.\n\n Magnus Carneus, i. 235.\n\n Magnet, i. 216.\n\n Magnus (Olaus), i. 171, 241, 322;\n ii. 67-8, 158, 370;\n iii. 112.\n\n Magny, iii. 303.\n\n Mahomet, i. xxviii, 40, 73, 135, 138, 146, 241, 243;\n iii. 43.\n\n ---- his camel, iii. 78.\n\n ---- ships, iii. 345.\n\n Mahometans, ii. 345-6, 363.\n\n Maids (fish), i. 333.\n\n Maimonides, i. 319;\n ii. 154, 220, 262, 264, 292;\n iii. 274.\n\n Maiolus, i. 284;\n ii. 21.\n\n Majorca, ii. 357.\n\n Malaca, i. 231.\n\n Malaspina, i. 111.\n\n Malavar, i. 313.\n\n Malchus, iii. 3.\n\n Mallard, ii. 394.\n\n Mallow, ii. 391;\n iii. 259.\n\n Malmsbury (William of), iii. 405.\n\n Malt, ii. 102.\n\n Man, i. 100;\n ii. 109.\n\n Manasses, ii. 122, 268.\n\n Mandelslo, iii. 471.\n\n Mandeville (Sir J.), i. 170;\n iii. 53.\n\n Mandinga, ii. 383.\n\n Mandrakes, i. 285;\n iii. 19.\n\n Manes, i. 191-2, 198.\n\n Manetho, ii. 287, 320.\n\n Manganes, i. 238.\n\n Manichees, i. xxiii, xxvi.\n\n Manilius, ii. 189, 305.\n\n Manilla, iii. 388, 443.\n\n Manna, i. 32;\n ii. 197;\n iii. 22.\n\n Mansfield (Duke John Ern.), iii. 375.\n\n _Mantis_, ii. 111.\n\n Mantuan, ii. 7.\n\n Mantuanus, ii. 156.\n\n ---- (Adam), ii. 235.\n\n Manucodiata, ii. 6, 61.\n\n Maple, i. 293.\n\n Mar Vermeio, ii. 367.\n\n Marble, i. 208, 256.\n\n Marbodeus, i. 249, 284.\n\n Marcellus, i. 171;\n iii. 75, 120.\n\n ---- Empiricus, i. 156, 246.\n\n Marcion, i. 191.\n\n Mare, Mares, ii. 38, 138.\n\n ---- (Spanish), i. 321;\n ii. 59.\n\n Margiana, iii. 62, 225.\n\n Marianus Scotus, ii. 321.\n\n Marjoram, iii. 237.\n\n Markham (G.), i. 316.\n\n Marlpits, i. 283.\n\n Maronites, i. 243.\n\n Marriage, i. 100.\n\n Martegres, ii. 259.\n\n Martial, i. xlix, l, 262;\n ii. 80, 153, 216;\n iii. 283.\n\n Martialis (S.), i. xxxi;\n iii. 102.\n\n Martyr (Peter). _See_ Anglerius.\n\n Martyrs, i. 41, 78, 303.\n\n Mary, _B. V._, i. 192, 198, 296;\n ii. 396.\n\n ---- name, i. 304.\n\n Mascardus, iii. 431.\n\n Maseus of Damascus, ii. 320.\n\n Masham (W.), iii. 436.\n\n Masius, ii. 261.\n\n Massagetes, iii. 62.\n\n Massingham, iii. 113.\n\n Massonius, iii. 61.\n\n Masters (Will.), iii. 400.\n\n Mastic, i. 205, 255.\n\n ---- tree, iii. 262.\n\n Mataerea, Maturaea, ii. 396;\n iii. 244, 253.\n\n Maternus, iii. 26.\n\n Mathematics, i. 162.\n\n Matthew of Westminster, iii. 66.\n\n Matthiolus, i. 203, 212, 235, 288, 297, 322, 324, 328;\n ii. 13, 19, 74, 87, 207;\n iii. 1.\n\n Mauritania, ii. 334, 382;\n iii. 248.\n\n Mauritius (Emperor), iii. 552.\n\n Maurolycus, ii. 349.\n\n Mausolus, iii. 114, 123.\n\n Maximilian, ii. 79.\n\n Maximinus, i. 191.\n\n Maximus, ii. 291.\n\n May, ii. 180.\n\n Measles, ii. 152.\n\n Meat, ii. 142.\n\n Mecca, ii. 67, 346;\n iii. 253.\n\n Mecenas, ii. 81.\n\n Mechoachan, iii. 296.\n\n Medals, ii. 123;\n iii. 361.\n\n Medal, Titus, iii. 273.\n\n Mede, i. xli.\n\n Medea, i. xliii, 157, 318, 323.\n\n Medina Talnabi, i. 243;\n ii. 346.\n\n Mediterranean, i. 230.\n\n Medlar, ii. 394.\n\n Medusa (Constell.), ii. 398.\n\n Meekness, i. 317, 319.\n\n Megara, iii. 164.\n\n Megasthenes, i. 44.\n\n Mela, ii. 1. 155;\n iii. 45.\n\n Melancholy, i. 46, 318.\n\n Melanchthon, ii. 175.\n\n Melanthium, iii. 232.\n\n Melchisedec, i. 192.\n\n Meleguette, ii. 383.\n\n Melisegenes, iii. 49.\n\n Melissus, i. 163.\n\n Melita, ii. 26.\n\n Mellichius, i. 262.\n\n Melpomene, ii. 254.\n\n Melton Hall, iii. 549.\n\n Memnon, i. xli.\n\n Memphis, i. 159.\n\n Menan, ii. 356.\n\n Menander, a Samaritan, iii. 35.\n\n Mendacity, i. 157.\n\n Mendoza (J. G. de), i. xxxiii, 280.\n\n Menecles, ii. 158.\n\n Meneceus, iii. 98.\n\n Menelaus, ii. 82, 335.\n\n Menippus, i. 250.\n\n Menogenes, i. xlix.\n\n Mercator, ii. 70.\n\n Mercurialis, _Gymn._, i. 310;\n ii. 216;\n iii. 76.\n\n Mercurius, i. 136, 289.\n\n Mercury (Scipio), i. 118.\n\n ---- (god), ii. 279.\n\n ---- (mineral), i. 68, 236, 281;\n ii. 367.\n\n ---- (planet), i. 30.\n\n ---- (plant), i. 171.\n\n ---- water, ii. 72.\n\n Mergus, iii. 516-17.\n\n ---- major, ii. 111.\n\n Merlin, iii. 57, 292, 310.\n\n Mermaids, ii. 253.\n\n Merryweather (J.), i. xi, xiv, xvii.\n\n Merula (P.), iii. 312.\n\n Meseraics, i. 268.\n\n Mesopotamia, ii. 302;\n iii. 19.\n\n Messahallach, ii. 177.\n\n Messalina, i. xlvii.\n\n Messias, i. 138, 141, 200.\n\n Metals, i. 206, 207, 209.\n\n Metaphors, i. 143.\n\n Metaphrastes, ii. 250;\n iii. 30.\n\n Metellus, iii. 466.\n\n Metempsychosis, i. xlii, 13.\n\n Meteors, i. 193, 211, 273.\n\n Methusaleh, i. xxx, 36, 60, 340;\n ii. 326, 328;\n iii. 8, 135.\n\n Meton, ii. 191.\n\n Metrophanes Smyrnaeus, iii. 71.\n\n Meursius, i. 170.\n\n Mexico, iii. 308.\n\n Mexico, Bay of, i. 228.\n\n Mezentius, iii. 82.\n\n Micah, iii. 270.\n\n Michelangelo, ii. 235.\n\n Michell (Elizabeth), iii. 544.\n\n Michovius(Math.), ii. 1, 3, 370.\n\n Microcosm, i. 103-105.\n\n Microscopes, i. 302.\n\n Midas, i. 268.\n\n Middleton (William), iii. 408.\n\n Midianites, i. 81.\n\n Milan, i. 176;\n iii. 27.\n\n Milium, iii. 238.\n\n ---- Solis, i. 304.\n\n Milius, i. 281.\n\n Milk, i. 204;\n ii. 348;\n iii. 378.\n\n Milky Way, iii. 12.\n\n Millers Thumb, iii. 538.\n\n Millet, i. 288;\n iii. 232, 248.\n\n Milo, iii. 75-6.\n\n Mineralogists, i. 210;\n iii. 220.\n\n Minerals, i. 202, 208, 213, 259, 262;\n ii. 75.\n\n Minerva, i. 185;\n ii. 21, 386.\n\n Minia, i. 248.\n\n Minnow, iii. 537.\n\n Minos, i. 158.\n\n Minos (C.), i. xii.\n\n Minotaur, i. 158;\n iii. 163.\n\n Mint, iii. 22.\n\n Minucius, iii. 109.\n\n Minutius, i. xv, xix, xxxvi, xli, xlv;\n ii. 272.\n\n Mirabolans, iii. 226.\n\n Miracles, i. 42.\n\n Mirandula (Pico), i. li;\n ii. 171;\n iii. 49.\n\n Mirmello, i. xlix.\n\n MISCELLANIES, iii. 427.\n\n Missel-thrush, i. 294.\n\n Misseltoe, i. 293, 295;\n iii. 193.\n\n Mist (27 Nov. 1674), iii. 545.\n\n Mite, i. 109.\n\n Mizaldus (Ant.), i. 176;\n ii. 99.\n\n Mizraim, ii. 287, 332-3;\n iii. 141, 148.\n\n Moderatus (Caesar), i. 223.\n\n Mogul, ii. 269.\n\n Mohacz, iii. 376.\n\n Mola, iii. 226.\n\n Mole, ii. 42, 276, 282.\n\n Moles on the face, ii. 268,\n\n Moloch, iii. 42.\n\n Molossus, iii. 327.\n\n Moluccas, i. 292;\n ii. 6, 158.\n\n Moly, i. 236, 291;\n ii. 368.\n\n Monkey, i. 312;\n ii. 148.\n\n Monomotapa, ii. 145.\n\n Montacutius, iii. 25, 39, 61.\n\n Montague (Richard), Bp., iii. 406.\n\n Montaigne, i. xviii, xix, xxii, xxv, xxvii, xxxix, lii, lv.\n\n Montanus, i. 192;\n ii. 140.\n\n Month, ii. 166-7.\n\n Moon, i. 133, 166, 179, 183, 186, 194, 197;\n ii. 165, 271, 398, 399.\n\n ---- Mountains of the, ii. 355.\n\n ---- fish, ii. 73;\n iii. 528.\n\n Moor, Moors, ii. 369, 371, 377;\n iii. 311.\n\n Moorhen, iii. 518.\n\n Mopsus, ii. 3;\n iii. 39.\n\n Moptha, ii, 4.\n\n Moralist, i. 125.\n\n Morality, i. 163.\n\n More (Sir T.), i. xv.\n\n Morgellons, iii. 376.\n\n Morinus, ii. 292, 294.\n\n Morison (Henry), i. liv.\n\n ---- (Fines), i. liv.\n\n Morn, iii. 47.\n\n Morpheus, i. 106.\n\n Morse, ii. 70, 74.\n\n Morta, iii. 132, 376.\n\n Moses, i. xxviii-xxx, xlii, 19, 21, 27, 32, 39, 45, 51-2, 70-1, 127,\n 135-6, 179, 186, 213, 294, 319, 343;\n ii. 2, 79, 106, 122, 227, 229, 378, etc.\n\n ---- (rod), ii. 278-9.\n\n Mosques, iii. 541.\n\n Motes, i. 258.\n\n Moths, i. 351;\n ii. 22.\n\n Mountains, i. 241-2.\n\n ---- of the Moon, ii. 374.\n\n Mountebanks, i. 138.\n\n Mouse, Mice, i. 265;\n ii. 135, 139.\n\n Muffetus, ii. 25, 67, 99, 102, 207-8.\n\n Mugil, iii. 289, 290.\n\n Mulatto, ii. 379.\n\n Mulberry tree, iii. 243.\n\n Mule, i. 167, 343, 346.\n\n Mullen, AEthiopian, i. 297.\n\n Mullet, iii. 290, 530.\n\n Mummia, i. 257.\n\n Mummies, i. 238;\n iii. 141.\n\n Mundesley, iii. 529.\n\n Munster (S.), ii. 395-6;\n iii. 26, 53.\n\n Murder, i. 130.\n\n Murena, i. 174.\n\n Muria, iii. 290.\n\n Murrey, i. 210.\n\n _Mus Araneus_, ii. 44.\n\n Musa, iii. 2.\n\n _Musaeum Clausum_, iii. 350.\n\n Musaeus, ii. 321.\n\n Mushroom, i. xlix.\n\n Music, i. 100, 311;\n ii. 106;\n iii. 129.\n\n ---- Church, i. 101.\n\n ---- Tavern, i. 101.\n\n Musk, i. 324-5;\n ii. 88, 148.\n\n Mussle, iii. 534.\n\n Mussulmen, iii. 102.\n\n Must, iii. 235.\n\n Mustard-seed, iii. 236.\n\n Mylius, i. 284.\n\n Myndius, ii. 89.\n\n Myrica, iii. 223.\n\n Myrobolans, ii. 391.\n\n Myrrh, i. 206;\n iii. 225.\n\n Myrtle, iii. 274.\n\n _Myrtus Brabsutica_, ii. 391.\n\n\n Naaman, i. 197.\n\n Nabonasser, ii. 287.\n\n Nails, paring, ii. 268.\n\n ---- (spots in), ii. 276.\n\n Napellus, i. 290.\n\n Naphtha, i. 32;\n ii. 57-8.\n\n Naples, iii. 226.\n\n Narcissus, i. xlvii.\n\n Narses, iii. 161.\n\n Narwhale, ii. 70.\n\n Nassom, ii. 288.\n\n Natural Philosophy, i. 163.\n\n Navarre (Henry, King of), iii. 299.\n\n Navel, i. liii;\n ii. 212.\n\n Navigators, iii. 220.\n\n Nazarene, ii. 225.\n\n Nazarite, ii. 224-5.\n\n Nazianzene, ii. 266;\n iii. 42.\n\n Neanthes, ii. 174.\n\n Nearchus, i. 243;\n ii. 366.\n\n Nebros, i. 188.\n\n Nebuchodonosor, i. 55;\n ii. 279;\n iii. 148, 489, 552.\n\n Necks, iii. 50.\n\n Necromancy, i. 187.\n\n Needle, i. 80, 265.\n\n ---- (magnetic), i. 24, 68.\n\n ---- fish, ii. 30;\n iii. 531.\n\n Negro-land, i. 213.\n\n Negroes, ii. 367-87.\n\n Negroponte, iii. 43, 46.\n\n Neptune, i. 289.\n\n Nereides, ii. 254.\n\n Nero, i. xli, xliv, xlvii, l, li, 90, 97, 310;\n ii. 21, 38.\n\n Nerva, ii. 222.\n\n Nestor, i. 340, 343;\n ii. 121.\n\n New England, iii. 344.\n\n New Spain, iii. 285, 344.\n\n Newington, co. Kent, iii. 432.\n\n Newts, ii. 19.\n\n Nicander, i. 173;\n ii. 19, 22, 25, 26, 29, 44.\n\n Nicaragua, ii. 372.\n\n Nicephorus, i. xx;\n ii. 290, 359;\n iii. 381.\n\n Nicholaus, i. 192.\n\n Nicias, i. 193.\n\n Nicolai Emplastrum, i. 247.\n\n ---- Pulvis, i. 264.\n\n Nicole (J. B. de), i. 278.\n\n Nicoleta (R.), iii. 312.\n\n Nictomachus, iii. 43.\n\n Nierembergius (E.), i. 171, 239;\n ii. 86.\n\n Nigella, iii. 232.\n\n Nigellastrum, iii. 280.\n\n Niger River, ii. 353, 355, 374.\n\n Nightingale, i. 166.\n\n Nightmare, ii. 282.\n\n Night Raven, iii. 292.\n\n Nile, i. 24, 166;\n ii. 70, 74, 185-6, 269, 349-362;\n iii. 79.\n\n Nimrod, ii. 331, 381, 383;\n iii. 141.\n\n Nine, ii. 160-1;\n iii. 203.\n\n Nine Worthies, ii. 237.\n\n Nineveh, ii. 295, 331;\n iii. 162.\n\n Ninus, i. xxxiii;\n ii. 325, 331, 334, 336.\n\n Niobe, i. 158.\n\n Niphus, ii. 51.\n\n Nitre, i. 275.\n\n Nix (Richard), Bp., iii. 398, 416, 425.\n\n Noah, i. xxix. 35-6;\n ii. 9, 78, 131, 274, 381;\n iii. 154.\n\n Noah's Ark, ii. 11;\n iii. 148.\n\n Nobility, i. 85.\n\n Noctambuloes, i. 106.\n\n Nonnus, ii. 44, 82, 221;\n iii. 266.\n\n Norfolk, ii. 85.\n\n ---- Notes on birds and fishes, iii. 511.\n\n ---- words, iii. 319.\n\n Normans, iii. 313.\n\n Norrold, iii. 516.\n\n North Star, i. 98.\n\n Northern Passage, i. 228.\n\n Norway, iii. 113.\n\n Norwich, iii. 107, 408, 537.\n\n ---- Free School, iii. 420.\n\n ---- gardens, iii. 524.\n\n ---- market, iii. 523.\n\n ---- Mousehold Hill, iii. 405, 424.\n\n ---- thunderstorm (1665), iii. 548.\n\n Norwich Cathedral, Beauchamp Chapel, iii. 418.\n\n ---- chapter-house, iii. 418.\n\n ---- charnel-house, iii. 420.\n\n ---- cloisters, iii. 411, 417.\n\n ---- combination sermons, iii. 421.\n\n ---- Heydon's Chapel, iii. 419.\n\n ---- organ, iii. 421.\n\n ---- spire, iii. 423,\n\n ---- tombs and monuments, iii. 397.\n\n ---- weathercock, iii. 423.\n\n Nose, i. 347;\n ii. 385.\n\n ---- (flat), ii. 377.\n\n Nosegay-net, iii. 158.\n\n NOTES on Birds and Fishes in Norfolk, iii. 511.\n\n Notonecton, iii. 178.\n\n Nova Hispania. _See_ New Spain.\n\n Nova Zembla, ii. 190;\n iii. 348.\n\n Nubia, ii. 99.\n\n ---- poison, i. 290.\n\n Numa, ii. 180;\n iii. 99.\n\n Numatianus, ii. 397.\n\n Numbers, ii. 161-2.\n\n Numismatic shell, ii. 107.\n\n Nuncius Inanimatus, i. 253.\n\n 'Nuon' inscr., iii. 432.\n\n Nuremberg, i. xxv, xxvi, liv.\n\n Nutcracker, iii. 160.\n\n Nutgalls, i. 301;\n ii. 391.\n\n Nuthack, iii. 520.\n\n Nutmeg, i. 292.\n\n Nycticorax, iii. 289, 292.\n\n Nysa, ii. 3.\n\n Nysus, iii. 289, 292.\n\n\n O, iii. 126.\n\n Oak, i. 116, 293, 295, 301.\n\n ---- apple, i. 300.\n\n ---- tree, iii. 261.\n\n Oaths, iii. 499.\n\n Oats, ii. 35, 102.\n\n Oberon, ii. 159.\n\n Obi, iii. 349.\n\n Oblivion, iii. 140.\n\n Observations upon Plants in Scripture, iii. 218.\n\n Obstinacy, i. 39.\n\n Oceanus, ii. 78.\n\n Ocellus, ii. 51.\n\n Ochinus, i. xxviii.\n\n Ochirus, i. xli.\n\n Octavius, Duke of Parma, i. 211.\n\n Ocymum, i. 259.\n\n Oecumenius, i. xxxi.\n\n Oedipus, ii. 4;\n iii. 66.\n\n Og, iii. 62, 164.\n\n Ogyges, ii. 319, 320, 329.\n\n Oil, i. 204, 259.\n\n ---- of Mars, i. 237.\n\n Olaus. _See_ Magnus.\n\n Oldcastle (Sir J.), ii. 255.\n\n Oleaster, iii. 5, 20, 250.\n\n _Oleum Cyprinum_, iii. 224.\n\n Olive, iii. 117.\n\n ---- leaf, iii. 235.\n\n ---- oil of, i. 261.\n\n ---- tree, iii. 249.\n\n Olybius, ii. 57;\n iii. 499.\n\n Olympiads, iii. 454.\n\n Olympus (Mt.), ii. 355.\n\n Omen, i. 299.\n\n Omneity, i. 52.\n\n Oneirocriticism, iii. 551.\n\n Onions, ii. 331, 379.\n\n Onkelus, ii. 231.\n\n Onuphrius, iii. 434.\n\n +Hoon+, i. 159.\n\n Opals, i. 255;\n iii. 105.\n\n Ophir, i. 230-1.\n\n Opimian Wine, iii. 116.\n\n Opinion, iii. 473.\n\n Opium, i. 256, 275, 334, 349;\n iii. 24, 25, 138.\n\n Opodeldoch, i. 247.\n\n Oppianus, i. 174, 313, 345;\n ii. 42, 62, 156.\n\n Oracle of Apollo, iii. 333.\n\n Oracles, i. xxxix, 44, 187.\n\n ---- cessation of, iii. 39.\n\n Orange-pills, i. 276.\n\n Orbis (bird), i. 351.\n\n Orchis (man), i. 288.\n\n Ordure, ii. 88.\n\n ---- (Human), i. 239.\n\n Oregliana, ii. 354.\n\n Orestes, i. 136;\n iii. 338.\n\n Organs, i. xxxv.\n\n Orgasm, ii. 30.\n\n Oribasius, i. 156, 171, 245, 305.\n\n Origen, i. xx, xxix, 14;\n ii. 2, 294;\n iii. 5, 389.\n\n Orion, i. 289;\n iii. 141, 165.\n\n Ormonde (T. Butler, Earl of), iii. 407.\n\n Ornithologus, iii. 251.\n\n Orobanche, iii. 259.\n\n Oroetes, ii. 261.\n\n Oromasdes, i. 198.\n\n Orontes, iii. 462.\n\n Orosius, ii. 290, 321.\n\n Orpement, i. 277.\n\n Orpheus, i. 157, 250, 309;\n ii. 89.\n\n ---- (poet), ii. 321.\n\n Ortelius, ii. 352-3, 365, 369;\n iii. 125.\n\n Orthragoriscus, ii. 73.\n\n Ortilius, ii. 396.\n\n Orus Apollo Niliacus, i. 180;\n ii. 32, 259.\n\n Oryx, ii. 67, 187.\n\n Osiris, ii. 4, 185, 332-3;\n iii. 141.\n\n Osorius, i. 311.\n\n Ossifrage, ii. 2.\n\n Ostorius, iii. 106.\n\n Ostrich, ii. 62, 82, 370;\n iii. 540.\n\n Otter, i. 325;\n iii. 539.\n\n Ouse (Great), iii. 528.\n\n Overall (John), Bp., iii. 405-6.\n\n Ovid, i. xxix, xliii, 156, 160, 328;\n ii. 7, 50, 132, 205, 254, 288;\n iii. 67, 147, 291-2, 438.\n\n Owl, ii. 80, 264;\n iii. 292.\n\n Ox, i. 154, 289;\n ii. 80, 376, 378.\n\n ---- (Indian), ii. 67.\n\n ---- (Money), i. 339.\n\n Oxford, ii. 189;\n iii. 537.\n\n Oxfordshire, iii. 113.\n\n Oxnead, iii. 436.\n\n ---- Park, iii. 430.\n\n Oxycroceum, i. 255.\n\n Oyster, ii. 74;\n iii. 534.\n\n\n Padua, ii. 57.\n\n Paduanius (Fabrotius), ii. 174.\n\n Paeony, ii. 379.\n\n Pagans, i. 184.\n\n Pagolus (J.), i. liii.\n\n Painters, i. 181.\n\n Palamedes, iii. 152.\n\n Palephatus, i. 157.\n\n Palermo, ii. 334.\n\n Paliurus, iii, 3, 223.\n\n Palladius, ii. 305, 344.\n\n Pallas, i. xlvii;\n ii. 279.\n\n Palm-tree, ii. 8;\n iii. 272.\n\n Palmistry, ii. 276.\n\n Palsy, ii. 129.\n\n Pamphilian Sea, iii. 77-8.\n\n Pamphilus, i. 171, 177.\n\n Pamphlets, i. 177.\n\n Pan, ii. 229;\n iii. 40.\n\n Panama, ii. 362.\n\n Pancirollus (G.), i. 230, 255, 279;\n ii. 21, 238, 251;\n iii. 84.\n\n Pandora, i. xxxiv.\n\n Pantagruel, i. 35.\n\n Pantalones, i. 60.\n\n Pantarbes, i. 241.\n\n Panthers, i. 36;\n ii. 41, 74.\n\n Paper, i. 276.\n\n Paper (oiled), i. 214.\n\n Parables, i. 134, 143.\n\n Parable of the Sower, iii. 245.\n\n Paracelsus, i. 46, 53, 165, 204, 208, 236, 239, 247, 266, 303;\n ii. 7, 12, 88, 158;\n iii. 28, 471.\n\n Paradise, i. 81;\n ii. 333;\n iii. 148.\n\n ---- Bird of, ii. 6.\n\n Parasite, ii. 267.\n\n Parchment, i. 276.\n\n Pard, ii. 148.\n\n Pareus, i. 247;\n ii. 86.\n\n Pargitaus, ii. 286.\n\n Parham, co. Suffolk, i. 297.\n\n Paris (myth), i. 318;\n ii. 385;\n iii. 3.\n\n ---- Notre Dame, ii. 247.\n\n ---- Pont Neuf, i. 138.\n\n ---- St. Innocents, iii. 144.\n\n ---- (Matthew), iii. 71.\n\n Parker (Matt.), Abp., iii. 411.\n\n Parkhurst (John), Bp., iii. 398, 409.\n\n Parma (O., Duke of), i. 211.\n\n Parmenides, i. xxi.\n\n Parricides, ii. 26.\n\n Parrot, ii. 123;\n iii. 468.\n\n Parsees, iii. 101.\n\n Parsnips, i. 286, 290.\n\n Parthenius Chius, i. 156.\n\n Parthenopaeus, ii. 130.\n\n Parthia, ii. 332.\n\n Partridges, i. 336, 341;\n ii. 158-9, 370;\n iii. 523.\n\n Parysatis, ii. 6, 261;\n iii. 68.\n\n Pasiphae, i. 158.\n\n Passion, i. 31, 96.\n\n ---- flower, iii. 184.\n\n Passover, ii. 215, 223, 307.\n\n Paston (Sir Robert), iii. 436.\n\n ---- (Sir Will.), ii. 360;\n iii. 106.\n\n Patois, i. 98.\n\n Patriarchs' names, i. 303.\n\n Patrick (St.), ii. 154, 386.\n\n Patroclus, i. 93, iii. 115, 122.\n\n Paul (St.), i. 1, 58, 70, 76, 81, 90, 136, 146;\n ii. 26;\n iii. 551.\n\n Paul V., i. xviii.\n\n Paulina, i. xlvii.\n\n Paulus AEgineta, i. 156, 245, 304, 325.\n\n ---- Diaconus, iii. 65.\n\n ---- Samosatenus, i. 192.\n\n ---- Venetus, i. 171, 231;\n ii. 21, 67;\n iii. 78.\n\n Pausanias, ii. 21;\n iii. 45.\n\n Peacock, ii. 91, 394.\n\n ---- (white), ii. 376.\n\n Pea-hens, i. 337.\n\n Peach, i. 293.\n\n Pearl, i. 256;\n ii. 73.\n\n Pebbles, i. 206.\n\n Pegasus (constell.), ii. 193.\n\n Peiresc, ii. 51;\n iii. 160.\n\n Pelagians, i. 129.\n\n Peleg, ii. 331.\n\n Pelican, i. 178;\n ii. 202;\n iii. 518.\n\n Pellitory of the wall, i. 166.\n\n Pelops, i. 347.\n\n Pembel, i. xix.\n\n Penates, i. 140.\n\n Penelope, iii. 132.\n\n ---- (game), i. 160.\n\n Pengin, ii. 111.\n\n Pennius, ii. 96.\n\n Penny fish, iii. 288.\n\n Pentagon, iii. 176.\n\n Pentangle, i. 190.\n\n Pentalithismus, iii. 160.\n\n Pentateuch, i. 39.\n\n Penthesilea, iii. 99.\n\n People, i. 132.\n\n Peplum, ii. 197.\n\n Peppercorns, i. 302.\n\n Pera, ii. 397.\n\n Perch, ii. 14, 83.\n\n Percy (Tho.), Bp., iii. 409.\n\n Peregrinus (Petrus), i. 231.\n\n Perer, i. xxix.\n\n Periander's wife, iii. 131.\n\n Periocci, ii. 301.\n\n Peripatetics, i. xxiii, 99.\n\n Periwinkle, iii. 538.\n\n Perizol, iii. 43.\n\n Perpenna, ii. 218-9.\n\n Perseus, ii. 250.\n\n Persia, i. 169, 321;\n ii. 61, 83, 92, 123, 332, 339;\n iii. 77.\n\n Persian Gulf, ii. 365.\n\n ---- Sea, ii. 350.\n\n Persians, iii. 100.\n\n Persicaria, iii. 184.\n\n Persius, i. 154;\n ii. 114, 252.\n\n Peru, i. 109, 228;\n ii. 355, 368, 372-3;\n iii. 97, 308.\n\n Perucci (F.), iii. 130.\n\n Pestilence, i. 300-1.\n\n Petravius (D.), ii. 185, 187, 196, 290, 292, 298, 302, 328.\n\n Peter (St.), i. 19, 37, 79, 137, 141;\n iii. 3.\n\n ---- name, i. 303.\n\n ---- Fish, ii. 288, 531.\n\n Petrarch, ii. 24;\n iii. 320, 382.\n\n Petronius, i. ix, xxvii, l, 266;\n ii. 118, 144.\n\n Petroselmum, i. 263.\n\n Petrucius, ii. 326.\n\n Petrus Diaconus, i. xxxix.\n\n ---- Hispanus, iii. 23.\n\n Phaethon, ii. 7, 369.\n\n ---- his sisters, i. 261.\n\n Phalanx, iii. 162.\n\n Phalaris, i. 77;\n iii. 78.\n\n Pharamond, iii. 318.\n\n Pharaoh, i. xli;\n iii. 141.\n\n Pharsalia, i. xxxvii, 194.\n\n Phavorinus, iii. 43, 270.\n\n Pheasants, i. 320.\n\n Phidias, i. 330.\n\n Philadelphus, ii. 362.\n\n Philarcus, i. 168.\n\n Philelphus (Fr.), ii. 239.\n\n Philes, i. 174;\n ii. 259.\n\n Philetas, ii. 159.\n\n Philip (St.), i. 49.\n\n ---- the Deacon, ii. 382.\n\n ---- King, iii. 2.\n\n Philip II. of Spain, i. 28, 280.\n\n Philippi (Henrico), ii. 302.\n\n Philippus, i. 181.\n\n Philistines, i. 282.\n\n Philo, i. 38;\n ii. 161, 163-4, 288, 293, 321;\n iii. 2.\n\n Philologers, i. 118.\n\n Philomela, iii. 52.\n\n Philopoemen, iii. 117.\n\n Philos (Valerian de), ii. 313.\n\n Philosopher, i. 163.\n\n Philosopher's stone, i. 58, 66;\n ii. 12.\n\n Philostratus, i. 170, 241;\n ii. 33, 155, 158, 363, 365;\n iii. 4, 281.\n\n Philoxenus, iii. 49.\n\n Philtres, i. 195, 247.\n\n Phlebotomy, ii. 119, 195;\n iii. 295.\n\n Phlegm, i. 318.\n\n Phlegon Trallianus, i. 170;\n iii. 340.\n\n Phocas, iii. 552.\n\n Phocylides, iii. 127.\n\n Phoenicia, ii. 277, 335, 364.\n\n Phoenicians, i. 230;\n ii. 81, 254, 334.\n\n Phoenicopterus, ii. 12.\n\n Phoenigmus, i. 318.\n\n Phoenix, i. 178, 181;\n ii. 4, 6;\n iii. 104.\n\n Phornutus, ii. 257.\n\n Phosphorus, i. 282.\n\n Photinus, i. 192.\n\n Photius, iii. 71.\n\n Phrygia, ii. 366.\n\n Phut, ii. 382.\n\n Physiognomists, iii. 221.\n\n Physiognomy, i. 86-7;\n iii. 474.\n\n Phyllon, i. 171.\n\n Phytognomy, i. 86, 286.\n\n Picciolus, ii. 276.\n\n Picot, iii. 376.\n\n Pictorius, i. 250,\n\n Pictures, i. 100;\n ii. 202, 215, 224, 249;\n iii. 355.\n\n Picus Martius, i. 300.\n\n Pierius, i. 166, 180, 317, 333;\n ii. 19, 117, 121, 203, 210, 248, 275;\n iii. 4, 19.\n\n Pig, ii. 81.\n\n Pigafetta, ii. 158.\n\n Pigeon, i. 34, 317-8, 320-1;\n ii. 65, 80.\n\n Pigmies, ii. 155.\n\n Pignorius, ii. 16.\n\n Pike, ii. 83;\n iii. 537.\n\n Pilate, iii. 139.\n\n Pilchard, iii. 532.\n\n Pine, i. 261, 293.\n\n ---- apple, iii. 168.\n\n ---- nuts, i. 196.\n\n ---- tree, iii. 168.\n\n Pineda, i. 88, 230;\n ii. 321;\n iii. 25, 111.\n\n Pinpach, iii. 534.\n\n Pins, i. 265.\n\n Pinto, ii. 145.\n\n Pisander, i. 156.\n\n Pismire, i. 262;\n ii. 102;\n iii. 119.\n\n Piso, i. xlvii.\n\n Piss, i. 143.\n\n Pistol, i. 276.\n\n Pitch, i. 189, 205, 265.\n\n Pittacus, i. 159.\n\n Pix Hispanica, i. 255.\n\n Pizzle, ii. 40, 52.\n\n Plagiarism, i. 155-6.\n\n Plaice, iii. 533.\n\n Plancius (Q.), ii. 6.\n\n Plancus (C.), i. xlix.\n\n Planets, ii. 280.\n\n Plants, i. 99, 285, 301, 307.\n\n Plants in Scripture, iii. 218.\n\n Plaster _Gratia Dei_, i. 255.\n\n Plate River, ii. 354.\n\n Platina, iii. 61.\n\n Plato, i. xxi-xxii, xxiv, xxvi, xli-xlii, 47, 99, 101, 115, 160, 173,\n 185, 335, 347;\n ii. 37, 82, 89, 112, 129, 142, 161, 171, 174, 179.\n\n Plautus, i. 230;\n ii. 39.\n\n Play, i. 92.\n\n Pleasure, iii. 466.\n\n Pleiades, ii. 256, 303, 306.\n\n Plempius, ii. 112, 393.\n\n Pleurisy, ii. 116;\n iii. 378.\n\n PLINY, _passim_.\n\n Plotinus, ii. 376.\n\n Plover, iii. 519.\n\n PLUTARCH, _passim_.\n\n Pluto, iii. 131.\n\n Podocaterus, ii. 21.\n\n Poets, i. 181.\n\n Pointers, i. 98.\n\n Poisons, i. liii, 212, 246, 264-5, 284, 333;\n ii. 71;\n iii. 69.\n\n Poland, iii. 247.\n\n Pole (North), i. 241.\n\n ---- (North and South), ii. 340.\n\n Polenta, iii. 233.\n\n Polibianus, i. l.\n\n Politicians, i. 139.\n\n Polities, i. 85.\n\n Pollinctors, i. l;\n iii. 81.\n\n Pollux (Julius), ii. 118, 240;\n iii. 43.\n\n Polonus (Martin), iii. 71.\n\n Polyaenus, iii. 302.\n\n Polybius, i. 168;\n ii. 239.\n\n Polycrates, i. xlviii;\n ii. 261.\n\n Polygamy, i. 100.\n\n Polydorus, iii. 111.\n\n Polyphemus, ii. 46, 49;\n iii. 42.\n\n Polypody, i. 294, 302.\n\n Polypus, iii. 534.\n\n Polytheism, i. 104-5.\n\n Pomegranate, ii. 394.\n\n ---- tree, iii. 241.\n\n Pomona, iii. 3.\n\n Pompeius, i. xxvii, xlix, 146, 168, 194;\n iii. 89, 475, 489.\n\n Pompeys, iii. 89.\n\n Pomponius, iii. 111.\n\n Pontanus, i. lv.\n\n Pontus, i. 325.\n\n Poole, iii. 534.\n\n Popes, i. 59.\n\n Poplar, i. 261.\n\n Poppaea, iii. 99.\n\n Poppius (Hamerus), ii. 141.\n\n Poppy, iii. 24.\n\n Porcacchi (T.), iii. 45.\n\n Porcelain, i. 279-81.\n\n Porcupine, ii. 41.\n\n Porphyrius, i. 49;\n ii. 78, 370.\n\n Porpoises, i. 346;\n ii. 88;\n iii. 527.\n\n Porret, ii. 368.\n\n Porta (Bapt.), i. 176, 240, 244, 253, 274-5, 286, 298;\n ii. 15;\n iii. 150.\n\n Porter (Edm.), iii. 399.\n\n Portugal, ii. 335, 364.\n\n Porus, i. 311;\n ii. 237.\n\n Porwigle, ii. 17, 215, 380.\n\n Posidonius, i. xlv;\n ii. 216.\n\n Posterity, i. 111.\n\n Posthumous Works, iii. 394.\n\n Posthumus, iii. 433.\n\n Postillers, i. 317.\n\n Pot, i. 270.\n\n Potosi, iii. 97.\n\n Powder, i. 230.\n\n ---- plot, i. 28.\n\n Pox, ii. 152;\n iii. 378.\n\n Prague, i. liv.\n\n Prastagus, iii. 106.\n\n Prateolus, i. 144.\n\n Praxiteles, i. l;\n ii. 74;\n iii. 227.\n\n Prayers for the dead, i. 14.\n\n Prester John, ii. 379.\n\n Priapus, iii. 227, 271.\n\n Pride, i. 98.\n\n Prierius, i. xvi.\n\n Priests, i. 137.\n\n Primrose, Dr., i. 118.\n\n Principes, iii. 161.\n\n Printer, ii. 159.\n\n Printing, i. xxxiii, 156, 231.\n\n Priscian, i. 89;\n iii. 304.\n\n Priscillian, i. 192.\n\n Probus, iii. 433.\n\n Proclus, i. 335;\n ii. 96, 145, 164.\n\n Proconesus, ii. 3.\n\n Procopius, ii. 334;\n iii. 42, 65, 288, 450.\n\n Procrustes, iii. 164.\n\n Prodigies, i. 303.\n\n Professions, i. 152.\n\n Prometheus, ii. 118.\n\n Prongs, i. 221.\n\n Propertius, iii. 110.\n\n Prophecies, iii. 493.\n\n Prophecy concerning Nations, iii. 342.\n\n Prosper Alpinus, iii. 227.\n\n Protagoras, i. xxiii.\n\n Proteus, ii. 335.\n\n Provence, ii. 111;\n iii. 242, 260, 320.\n\n Proverbs, i. 29, 134, 295.\n\n Prussian knife, i. 247.\n\n Psammitichus, ii. 286.\n\n Psellus, i. xlvi, 284.\n\n PSEUDODOXIA EPIDEMICA, i. 113.\n\n Pseudomelanthium, iii. 280.\n\n Psylls, i. liii.\n\n Ptolemaeus Lagi, i. xxxii.\n\n ---- Philadelphia, i. xxxii-xxxiii;\n ii. 293.\n\n Ptolemy III., ii. 5.\n\n ---- (Cl.), i. 37, 162, 179, 235;\n ii. 171, 287, 336, 351, 352, 374, 378, 382, 398-9.\n\n Pubescence, ii. 359.\n\n Puffin, iii. 518.\n\n Pulse (food), iii. 228-9.\n\n Pulvertoft (Randolph), iii. 403.\n\n Pulvinaria, iii. 156.\n\n Pumice, ii. 140.\n\n Purchas, iii. 70, 86.\n\n Purgative, i. 245;\n ii. 195-7.\n\n Purgatory, i. 71.\n\n Purge, i. 305.\n\n Purple, ii. 41.\n\n Puteus (Cassianus), ii. 24-5.\n\n Pygmaleon, ii. 78;\n iii. 81.\n\n Pyramids, ii. 360;\n iii. 139, 249.\n\n Pyres, funeral, iii. 98, _seq._\n\n Pyrrhus, ii. 21.\n\n Pythagoras, i. xli-xliii, 20, 55, 142, 186, 198, 252, 288, 335;\n ii. 54, 78, 80-2, 129, 161, 177, 256;\n iii. 115.\n\n ---- (Letter), ii. 114.\n\n Pythia, i. 188.\n\n Pythias, i. 93.\n\n Pythius, iii. 74.\n\n\n Quacksalvers, i. 138.\n\n Quadrupeds, iii. 527.\n\n Quail, ii. 82;\n iii. 70, 523.\n\n Quartan Agues, iii. 378.\n\n Quaternity, i. 192.\n\n Quich, iii. 115.\n\n Quicksilver, i. 155, 204, 207, 221, 236, 239, 275;\n iii. 54.\n\n Quince, ii. 392, 394.\n\n Quincunx, iii. 150.\n\n Quinsay, ii. 355.\n\n Quinsies, i. 304, 318.\n\n Quinqueranus, iii. 260.\n\n Quintilian, iii. 153.\n\n\n Raamah, ii. 381.\n\n Rabbins, i. 131;\n ii. 9, 33, 37.\n\n Rabelais, i. 35;\n iii. 76, 320.\n\n Rabican, ii. 59.\n\n Rachel, iii. 19.\n\n Radzivil, iii. 225, 256, 262.\n\n Rahab, ii. 228;\n iii. 255.\n\n Raia. _See_ Ray-fish.\n\n Rail, iii. 518, 523.\n\n Rain, ii. 360.\n\n Rainbow, iii. 11.\n\n ---- (lunar), i. 193.\n\n Ralegh (William), Bp., iii. 141.\n\n Raleigh (Sir W.), ii. 238, 321, 348, 364;\n iii. 18.\n\n Ram, ii. 158-9.\n\n Ram's horn, iii. 194.\n\n Ramists, i. xxiv.\n\n Ramuzius, i. 280;\n iii. 102.\n\n Ranny, ii. 45.\n\n _Ranunculus viridis_, ii. 17.\n\n Ranzanus, ii. 333.\n\n Ranzovius (H.), ii. 171.\n\n Raphael Urbino, ii. 212, 222.\n\n Rapunculus, iii. 237.\n\n Rat, i. 265;\n ii. 65.\n\n ---- (water), ii. 44.\n\n Ratisbon, i. 175.\n\n Rattlesnake, iii. 179.\n\n Raven, ii. 264;\n iii. 292, 523.\n\n Ray (Mr.), iii. 541.\n\n Ray-fish, ii. 74;\n iii. 533.\n\n Razor-fish, iii. 534.\n\n Reason, i. 31, 89, 96;\n iii. 473.\n\n Rebecca, iii. 16.\n\n Red Sea, i. xx, 17, 231;\n ii. 361, 363-7;\n iii. 77, 242-3.\n\n Redi (Francisco), ii. 32.\n\n Redman (William), Bp., iii. 409.\n\n Redshank, iii. 292, 519.\n\n Reedham, iii. 516.\n\n Reeds, iii. 275.\n\n Regio-Montanus, i. xxv, 24.\n\n Regulus, i. xxxvi.\n\n Relics, i. 43, 44.\n\n _Religio Laici_, i. xxviii.\n\n Remora, i. 250;\n ii. 107.\n\n Remus, i. 339;\n iii. 99.\n\n Renatus, iii. 27.\n\n Renealmus, iii. 261.\n\n REPERTORIUM, iii. 397.\n\n Resen, ii. 331.\n\n Restharrow, iii. 279.\n\n Resurrection, i. 67;\n ii. 7.\n\n Reuben, iii. 19.\n\n Revenge, i. 96;\n iii. 492.\n\n Reynolds (Edward), Bp., iii. 412-13.\n\n Rhabdomancy, ii. 278-9.\n\n Rhadamanthus, i. 64.\n\n Rhamnus, iii. 223.\n\n Rhetoric, i, 134, 163.\n\n Rhinoceros, i. 174;\n ii. 67, 69.\n\n Rhodes, ii. 361;\n iii. 225.\n\n Rhodians, ii. 82, 278.\n\n Rhodiginus (C.), i. 203;\n ii. 25, 62, 125, 136-7, 144, 146, 162, 165, 171, 312;\n iii. 47.\n\n Rhodius, iii. 301.\n\n Rhodomanus, i. 169.\n\n Rhombus, iii. 161.\n\n Rhubarb, i. 165, 349;\n ii. 197, 368.\n\n Rhyntace, ii. 6, 61.\n\n Rice, iii. 257.\n\n Ricius, ii. 233.\n\n Rickets, iii. 377-8.\n\n Riding, i. 171.\n\n Ridley, i. 226, 233.\n\n Rigaltius, iii. 298.\n\n Rimini, i. 223.\n\n Ring, ii. 117, 385-6.\n\n Ring-doves, i. 293.\n\n Ring-finger, ii. 117.\n\n Ringlestone, iii. 521.\n\n Ringo, iii. 112.\n\n Riolanus, i. 338;\n ii. 63.\n\n Ripa, ii. 265.\n\n Ritterhusius, i. 174.\n\n Rituale Graecum, iii. 127.\n\n Rively (B.), iii. 413.\n\n River, i. 204.\n\n River-dog, i. 325.\n\n Rochet (fish), iii. 530.\n\n Rock, rocks, i. 241-2.\n\n Rock-allum, i. 255.\n\n Rod, divining, ii. 278.\n\n Rodulphus, i. 282.\n\n Rodulphus II., i. 241.\n\n Roisold, iii. 111.\n\n Rollrich, iii. 113.\n\n Rollo, iii. 113.\n\n Roma Soteranea, iii. 151, 431.\n\n Romans, i. 90, 339.\n\n Rome, i. 139, 165, 194, 226, 228, 283, 316, 332, 339;\n ii. 6. 354;\n iii. 76, 118.\n\n ---- _Campus Martius_, ii. 252.\n\n ---- Church of, i. 37, 79.\n\n ---- English College, ii. 249.\n\n ---- Lateran Obelisk, iii. 152.\n\n ---- Mausoleum of Augustus, iii. 156.\n\n ---- St. Angelo, iii. 144.\n\n ---- St. Peter's, ii. 4.\n\n ---- Vatican Library, i. 38.\n\n Romulus, i. 339.\n\n Rondelet, i. 267, 324-5;\n ii. 74, 85-6, 100, 205;\n iii. 182, 527-8, 530.\n\n Rooks, iii. 523.\n\n Ropalic Verses, iii. 304.\n\n Ros-solis, i. 306.\n\n Rose, i. 44.\n\n ---- Under the, ii. 266.\n\n ---- (Five Brethren of the), iii. 176.\n\n ---- of Jericho, i. 295;\n iii. 240.\n\n Rosemary, ii. 208;\n iii. 222.\n\n Rosin, i. 255.\n\n Rosse (A.), i. xi.\n\n Rovigno, iii. 378.\n\n Rowolfius, iii. 262.\n\n Rubrius, i. xlix.\n\n Rubus, iii. 223.\n\n Ruby, i. 281, 285.\n\n Ruck, iii. 78.\n\n Ruellius, iii. 4.\n\n Rueus (F.), i. 235, 241, 259, 278, 284.\n\n Ruff, iii. 520, 537.\n\n Ruffinus, i. 243.\n\n Rugge (William), Bp., iii. 409.\n\n Ruini (Carlo), i. 315.\n\n Rupertus, i. 317,\n\n Ruptures, i. 245, 247.\n\n Rushes, i. 274.\n\n Russia, Emperor of, i. 233.\n\n Russians, iii. 129.\n\n _Rustici auctores_, ii. 305.\n\n Ruth, ii. 274.\n\n Rye, i. 260, 265;\n ii. 102;\n iii. 232, 245, 247.\n\n\n S, i. xlix, 89.\n\n +S+, i. xlix;\n ii. 216.\n\n Sa (Emanuel de), iii. 277.\n\n Sabellicus, ii. 363.\n\n Sabellius, i. 192.\n\n Sabtacha, ii. 381.\n\n Sabtah, ii. 381.\n\n Sacro Bosco (J. de), ii. 178, 398.\n\n Saddles, i. 171.\n\n Sadducees, i. 190.\n\n Sagapenum, i. 256.\n\n Sagathy, iii. 62.\n\n Saguntium, iii. 258.\n\n St. Denis, ii. 68;\n iii. 350.\n\n ---- John's Wort, i. 189.\n\n ---- Malo, iii. 534.\n\n ---- Michael islands, i. 227;\n ii. 349, 398.\n\n ---- Olave's Bridge, iii. 399.\n\n Saints, i. 41, 80.\n\n ---- names, i. 303.\n\n Sal Ammoniac, i. 275, 277.\n\n Sal-gemma, i. 255-6.\n\n Sal prunellae, i. 277.\n\n Salah, ii. 294.\n\n Salamander, i. 83, 178;\n ii. 18.\n\n Salian, ii. 321;\n iii. 9.\n\n Saligniaco (B. de), iii. 79.\n\n Salisbury Plain, iii. 324.\n\n Sallow, i. 271, 293.\n\n Sallust, ii. 218.\n\n Salmanasser, ii. 149, 287.\n\n Salmasius, i. 173, 203;\n ii. 182, 216, 218, 234, 257;\n iii. 160.\n\n Salmon, iii. 536.\n\n ---- (John), Bp., iii. 408, 413, 419, 420.\n\n Salmuth, ii. 21.\n\n Salt, i. 155, 205-7;\n ii. 154, 265, 367.\n\n Salt of steel, i. 232.\n\n Salt-petre, i. 204-5, 271-2, 276-7, 318;\n ii. 394.\n\n Salthouse, iii. 419.\n\n Saltimbancoes, i. 138.\n\n Salvation, i. 75, 78-9, 80, 95.\n\n Salvino, i. 211.\n\n Samarcand, iii. 62.\n\n Samaria, i. 318.\n\n Samaritans, i. 39;\n ii. 289.\n\n Sammonicus, i. 167;\n ii. 44.\n\n Samos, iii. 49.\n\n Samson, i. 34, 282.\n\n Samuel, i. 187.\n\n San Salvador, iii. 308.\n\n Sanctius (F.), i. 166.\n\n Sanctorius, i. 266;\n ii. 139.\n\n Sand, i. 206, 264.\n\n Sandaraca, i. 255, 277.\n\n Sandlin (John), iii. 397, 403-4.\n\n Sandys (George), ii. 153, 351.\n\n _Sanguis draconis_, i. 215, 256.\n\n Sanity, ii. 106.\n\n Sap, i. 302-3.\n\n Sapphires, i. 213-14, 255, 268, 284-5.\n\n Saracens, ii. 149.\n\n Sardanapalus, iii. 77.\n\n Sardinos, ii. 86.\n\n Sardis, iii. 150.\n\n Sardius, i. 285.\n\n Sardonix, i. 285.\n\n Sarenus Sammonicus, ii. 19.\n\n Sargasso, iii. 192.\n\n Sarmatia, iii. 112.\n\n Sarsenet, i. 257.\n\n Satan, i. 121, 123, 130, 143, 182.\n\n Saturn, i. 59, 106, 191;\n ii. 78, 182.\n\n ---- Temple of, ii. 254.\n\n Saturnus Egyptius, ii. 333.\n\n Saul, i. 195;\n iii. 241.\n\n Saulterelle, iii. 293.\n\n Saurus, iii. 530.\n\n Savile (Sir H.), i. xlviii;\n iii. 406.\n\n Savine, i. 171.\n\n Savourie, i. 307;\n iii. 189.\n\n Saxony (Duke of), iii. 541.\n\n Saw-fish, iii. 528.\n\n Saxo, i. 241;\n iii. 112.\n\n Saxon language, iii. 307.\n\n Saxons, iii. 112.\n\n Saxony, Elector of, ii. 68.\n\n Scaevola, i. xxxvi, 62;\n ii. 124;\n iii. 79.\n\n Scaliger (J. C. and J. J.), _passim_.\n\n Scallops, iii. 534.\n\n Scamler (Edm.), Bp., iii. 399, 409.\n\n Scammony, i. 275, 349;\n ii. 197.\n\n Scanderberg, iii. 437.\n\n Scape-goat, i. 262.\n\n Scarborough (Dr.), iii. 515.\n\n Scarlet tincture, iii. 259.\n\n Scepticism, i. 148.\n\n Sceptics, i. 77, 99.\n\n Schlusselberg, iii. 72.\n\n Scholars, i. 89, 90.\n\n Schoolman, i. 125.\n\n Scipio, i. 297.\n\n Sclavonia, ii. 396.\n\n Schoneveld, iii. 173, 529, 531-2.\n\n Sciatica, iii. 2.\n\n Scolopax, iii. 530.\n\n Scolopendrae, ii. 22, 25;\n iii. 528.\n\n Scombri, ii. 358.\n\n Scorpion, i. 83, 166, 301, 305.\n\n Scorpius (constellation), i. 106;\n ii. 189.\n\n ---- marinus, i. 320.\n\n Scortia (Baptista), ii. 354.\n\n Scotchmen, i. 90.\n\n Scrape (fish), iii. 528.\n\n Scribonius Largus, i. 156;\n iii. 111, 264, 301.\n\n Scythia, ii. 332, 335.\n\n Scythian language, iii. 313.\n\n Scythians, ii. 280, 286;\n iii. 101, 309.\n\n Sea, i. 24, 163.\n\n ---- bansticle, iii. 533.\n\n ---- calf, iii. 527.\n\n ---- cole, i. 257.\n\n ---- dug, iii. 536.\n\n ---- hedgehog, iii. 535.\n\n ---- horse, i. 256;\n ii. 70, 74.\n\n ---- leech, iii. 536.\n\n ---- loch, iii. 531.\n\n ---- louse, iii. 535.\n\n ---- Miller's Thumb, iii. 531.\n\n ---- serpent, ii. 74.\n\n ---- stars, iii. 535.\n\n ---- swallow, i. 351, 515.\n\n ---- tortoises, ii. 60.\n\n ---- woodcock, iii. 530.\n\n ---- wolf, iii. 529.\n\n Seal (animal), iii. 527.\n\n ---- skin, i. 298.\n\n Seasons, ii. 300, 314, 318.\n\n Sebund (Raymond), i. 164.\n\n Securidaca, i. 297.\n\n Seed, i. 301.\n\n ---- (human), i. 204.\n\n Seed-time, ii. 306.\n\n Selenus, i. 253.\n\n Seleucus, iii. 229, 329.\n\n Self-love, i. 92.\n\n Selimus, ii. 354.\n\n Sem, iii. 15.\n\n Semenda, ii. 6.\n\n Semiramis, i. 321;\n ii. 324-5, 332, 336;\n iii. 148.\n\n Sempronius (Gygas), ii. 91.\n\n Senaga, ii. 369.\n\n Seneca, i. xi, xiv, xix, xliv-xlv, liv, 33, 67, 107, 174, 202,\n 219, 274, 288, 298, 356-7, 359, 366.\n\n Senesinus, iii. 538.\n\n Senna, i. 165, 349;\n ii. 197.\n\n Sennertus, i. 203, 247, 278.\n\n Septalius (Manfred), iii. 75.\n\n Septuagint, ii. 293.\n\n Serapion, i. 171, 242, 284, 304;\n iii. 2.\n\n Serapis, i. 243;\n iii. 152.\n\n Serbonis, iii. 53.\n\n Sergius II., iii. 60, 61.\n\n Serpent, i. xxi, 18, 33, 122-3, 129, 166, 299, 309, 314, 332, 337;\n ii. 13, 22, 24, 81;\n iii. 527.\n\n ---- (Bibl.), ii. 209.\n\n ---- (Brazen), i. 32.\n\n Serpents' teeth, i. 289.\n\n Serpoile, ii. 35.\n\n Sertorius, ii. 218-19;\n iii. 79.\n\n Serverius (Pope), iii. 66.\n\n Servius, i. 141;\n ii. 234, 254, 306.\n\n Sesamum, iii. 238.\n\n Sesostris, ii. 5, 361.\n\n Seth, Sethians, i. 192;\n ii. 77, 82;\n iii. 9, 23.\n\n Seven, ii. 160-1.\n\n Severinus (Aurelius), ii. 28, 35.\n\n Severus, Emperor, ii. 279;\n iii. 105, 106, 120, 468.\n\n Seville, i. 175\n\n Sextius, physician, ii. 19.\n\n Sferra Cavallo, i. 297.\n\n Sforzino (F.), iii. 300.\n\n Shark, iii. 528.\n\n Shearwater, iii. 516.\n\n Sheba, ii. 381-2.\n\n ---- Queen of, iii. 26.\n\n Sheep, i. 289, 312, 341;\n ii. 80.\n\n ---- rot, i. 306\n\n Sheldrake, iii. 516.\n\n Shell, ii. 107-8.\n\n Shepherds, i. 306\n\n Sheringham, iii. 534.\n\n Shew-bread, iii. 163.\n\n Shilo, ii. 299.\n\n Shinar, i. 37;\n iii. 18.\n\n Shittah tree, iii. 224.\n\n Shoeing-horn, iii. 522.\n\n Shovelards, iii. 51, 516.\n\n Showers of wheat, i. 303.\n\n Shrew, ii. 44.\n\n Shrimp, ii. 41,\n\n Siberis, ii. 375.\n\n Sibyl, i. 64;\n ii. 233.\n\n _Sicilitium_, iii. 258.\n\n Sicily, ii. 333, 373.\n\n Sicyonians, ii. 332.\n\n Sidonians, ii. 381, 383.\n\n Sidonius, iii. 109, 468.\n\n Sigismund, i. xxxvii;\n ii. 395.\n\n Sigma, ii. 216.\n\n Signor, Grand, ii. 362.\n\n Sigonius (C.), i. 332;\n ii. 144.\n\n Silence, ii. 266-7;\n iii. 498.\n\n _Siler montanum_, i. 263.\n\n Silhon (de), i. xxxv.\n\n Siliqua, iii. 226.\n\n Silkworms, i. 58, 336;\n ii. 11.\n\n Silly-how, ii. 272.\n\n Silver, i. 239, 240, 255.\n\n ---- foliate, i. 257.\n\n Silvester II., Pope, i. xv.\n\n Simeon, ii. 82.\n\n Simocrates, i. 155.\n\n Simples, i. 157, 165.\n\n Simplicius, i. 335;\n ii. 287.\n\n Simulation, iii. 500.\n\n Sin, i. 60, 61, 77.\n\n Sinai, ii. 347.\n\n Sinites, ii. 383.\n\n Sinon, i. 156.\n\n Sion, ii. 325.\n\n Sirius, ii. 183.\n\n Sisyphus, i. 310.\n\n Sitomagus, iii. 107.\n\n Six, ii. 121.\n\n Sixtus V., ii. 245.\n\n Sixty-three, ii. 160.\n\n Skate, i. 333;\n ii. 75;\n iii. 533.\n\n Skerewyng (Roger), Bp., iii. 408, 410.\n\n Sleep, i. 105-7, 187;\n iii. 380.\n\n Sleswick, iii. 112-13.\n\n Sloe, ii. 394.\n\n Slow-worm, ii. 31, 45.\n\n Smallage, iii. 296.\n\n Small-coal, i. 271-2, 274, 276.\n\n Small-pox, iii. 378.\n\n Smelt, iii. 531.\n\n Smiths' cinders, i. 239.\n\n Smoke, ii. 267.\n\n Smyris, i. 239.\n\n Snails, i. xlix, 83;\n ii. 14-15, 19, 48, 61.\n\n Snake, i. 306;\n ii. 61, 105, 107;\n iii. 179.\n\n Sneezing, ii. 144.\n\n Snellius, ii. 273.\n\n Snipe, ii. 115.\n\n Snow, i. 108, 163, 199, 202, 205, 211, 214.\n\n Soap, i. 261.\n\n Socrates, i. xxxvii, 41, 99, 185, 217;\n iii. 127.\n\n Sodom, i. xxviii, 32;\n iii. 52, 326, 330, 372.\n\n ---- lake of, iii. 56.\n\n Sogdiana, iii. 62.\n\n Sole, iii. 533.\n\n Solel, i. 304.\n\n Solinus (J.), i. xlix, 155, 173, 203, 235, 262-3, 278, 308, 321,\n 328, 330, 332;\n ii. 1, 50, 67, 81, 131, 137, 155, 202, 234,\n 329. 363-4;\n iii. 45.\n\n Solitude, i. 104.\n\n Solomon, i. 21, 24, 38, 79, 80, 99, 111, 179, 190, 230;\n ii. 47, 345;\n iii. 21, 77.\n\n Solon, ii. 172-3;\n iii. 48.\n\n Solstice, i. 44;\n ii. 309, 310.\n\n Solyman, iii. 480.\n\n Soot, ii. 388.\n\n Soothsayers, i. 146.\n\n Soothsaying, i. 137.\n\n Sophocles, ii. 221.\n\n Sorceries, i. 46.\n\n Sorites, i. 30.\n\n _Sortes_, ii. 279.\n\n Soul of Man, i. 70.\n\n Southampton, iii. 412.\n\n Southcreek, iii. 106.\n\n Southwell (Sir F.), iii. 400.\n\n Sow, ii. 81.\n\n Sow-thistles, ii. 102.\n\n Sozomen, ii. 359.\n\n Spadoes, i. 342.\n\n Spain, i. 226, 228, 239, 280;\n ii. 59, 149, 305, 334-5, 339, 341, 373, 397.\n\n Spaniards, i. 83, 90;\n iii. 310.\n\n Spanish mares, i. 321.\n\n Sparrow, i. 317, 341;\n ii. 115.\n\n ---- (Anth.), Bp., iii. 413.\n\n ---- (fish), ii. 274.\n\n Sparrow-camel, ii. 62.\n\n Sparrow-hawk, iii. 292.\n\n Spartans, i. 188;\n ii. 80;\n iii. 78, 338.\n\n Spartianus, ii. 239, 273.\n\n Speedwell, i. 304.\n\n Spelman, iii. 321.\n\n Spelta, iii. 232.\n\n Spencer (Henry), Bp., iii. 406, 410, 425.\n\n ---- (Chancellor), iii. 425.\n\n ---- (Miles), iii. 397.\n\n Spendlow (Mr.), iii. 403.\n\n Sperma Coeti, i. 215;\n ii. 85.\n\n Sphere (Eighth), i. 160.\n\n Sphinx, ii. 1.\n\n Spider, i. 24, 300-1, 327;\n ii. 46, 95, 99;\n iii. 56.\n\n ---- (Phalangium), ii. 249.\n\n ---- (Retiary), ii. 255;\n iii. 159, 177.\n\n Spigelius, ii. 16, 273;\n iii. 4.\n\n _Spina_, iii. 223.\n\n Spintrian, i. li, 97.\n\n Spirito Santo, ii. 355.\n\n ---- ---- river, ii. 374.\n\n Spirits, i. 45, 200.\n\n ---- (apparition), ii. 278.\n\n Sponge, i. 265, 270.\n\n Sprat, iii. 532.\n\n Spring, i. xxix, 35;\n ii. 300-3.\n\n Spruceland, i. 247.\n\n Spunk, i. 274.\n\n Spurge, i. 305.\n\n Squalder, iii. 532, 535-6.\n\n Square, i. 162.\n\n Squirrel, i. 312;\n ii. 123, 377.\n\n Stables, i. 271.\n\n Stacte, iii. 225.\n\n Stampalia, ii. 324.\n\n Stanticle, iii. 538.\n\n Stapleton (Sir R.), iii. 64.\n\n Star (North), i. 166.\n\n Star, Stars, i. 133, 193, 197, 230;\n ii. 163-4.\n\n Stare, iii. 70.\n\n Starkatterus, iii. 112.\n\n Starling, iii. 524.\n\n Statira, iii. 68.\n\n Statists, i. 139.\n\n Statius, ii. 130.\n\n Staurobates, ii. 336.\n\n Stavesaker, iii. 296.\n\n Steel, i. 208, 214, 219, 223, 231, 262.\n\n Steganography, i. 253.\n\n Stephanus, i. 169.\n\n Stephens ( ), iii. 438.\n\n _Sternophthalmi_, ii. 47.\n\n Steuchus (A.), i. xxii;\n ii. 210;\n iii. 5.\n\n Stews, ii. 397.\n\n Stibadion, ii. 216.\n\n Stibium, i. 209, 255, 269.\n\n Stiffskay, iii. 534.\n\n Sting-fish, iii. 531.\n\n Stint, iii. 519.\n\n Stirrops, ii. 238.\n\n Stobaeus, ii. 51;\n iii. 150.\n\n Stode, i. liv.\n\n Stoics, i. xxvi, 77, 99, 186.\n\n Stone (disease), i. 167, 210, 212, 261, 263-4;\n iii. 379, 381.\n\n ---- (hollow), ii. 282.\n\n ---- (philosophers'), i. 230.\n\n Stones, i. 206.\n\n ---- (precious), i. 69;\n iii. 220.\n\n Storax, i. 206.\n\n Stork, i. 337;\n ii. 81, 92, 202;\n iii. 70, 251, 515.\n\n Stow (John), iii. 421.\n\n Strabo, i. xxviii, xlviii, 78, 156, 170, 308;\n ii. 156, 165, 236, 287, 334-5, 348, 350, 356, 364-6, 369, 375,\n 378, 397;\n iii. 45, 53, 55, 77.\n\n Strada (Famianus), i. 252.\n\n Strangers, ii. 278.\n\n Strangulation, i. 304.\n\n Stratiotes, iii. 167.\n\n Strebaeus, iii. 150.\n\n Stubble, iii. 234.\n\n Sturgeon, iii. 528.\n\n Sturmius (J.), ii. 175.\n\n Styrax Liquida, i. 255.\n\n Styx, i. 298.\n\n Suama, ii. 355, 374.\n\n Suarez, i. xxiii, 24.\n\n Sub-reformists, i. 79.\n\n Succory, iii. 274.\n\n Sueno, iii. 107.\n\n Sueons, iii. 111-12.\n\n Suetonius, i. xxxiii, l, li, 172, 310;\n ii. 21, 180, 217, 240;\n iii. 26, 39.\n\n Suez, ii. 362, 365.\n\n Suffolk, i. 297;\n iii. 516.\n\n Sugar, i. 205, 207, 270.\n\n Suidas, ii. 174, 234, 254, 365-6;\n iii. 28, 43, 65.\n\n Sulphur, i. 231, 240, 255, 261, 272, 276;\n ii. 367, 388-9.\n\n ---- Vive, i. 271, 276.\n\n Summer, i. xxix. 35;\n ii. 303.\n\n Sun, i. 48, 133, 162, 179, 194, 197, 258;\n ii. 4, 7, 271, 283, 313, 372-3, 399.\n\n Sun-flowers, iii. 168.\n\n Sunshine, i. 79.\n\n Sundevogis (Michael), i. 240.\n\n Superlatives, ii. 354.\n\n Superstition, i. 9, 142;\n ii. 265.\n\n Supinity, i. 140, 147.\n\n Supporters (heraldic), ii. 254.\n\n Surgeons, iii. 219.\n\n Surius, iii. 116.\n\n Surlingham Ferry, iii. 527.\n\n Susanna, iii. 262.\n\n Susians, ii. 332.\n\n Suthfield (Walter de), Bp., iii. 410.\n\n Sutton Hospital, iii. 407.\n\n Swallows, i. 142, 317;\n ii. 277.\n\n ---- (sea), i. 351.\n\n Swan, ii. 89, 370;\n iii. 514.\n\n Swickardus, i. 247.\n\n Swift (lizard), iii. 538.\n\n Swimming, ii. 134.\n\n Swine, i. 313;\n ii. 80, 324.\n\n Swords, i. 44.\n\n Swordfish, i. 256;\n ii. 69;\n iii. 528.\n\n Sycomore, iii. 2, 243-5.\n\n Sylla (Cornelius), iii. 99, 100, 143.\n\n Syllogism, i. 134.\n\n Sylvius (F.), ii. 175;\n iii. 67.\n\n Symmachus, i. 192;\n ii. 157, 293;\n iii. 288, 294.\n\n Symmetry, ii. 386.\n\n Symphorianus (C.), iii. 274.\n\n Synesius, iii. 76.\n\n Syrach, iii. 15.\n\n Syracides, iii. 14.\n\n Syracusia, iii. 77.\n\n Syrens, ii. 89, 253.\n\n Syrens' song, iii. 137.\n\n Syria, ii. 280;\n iii. 274.\n\n Syrians, ii. 80-1, 396.\n\n Syrups, i. 258.\n\n\n T, i. xlix, 89.\n\n Tables (Twelve), iii. 500.\n\n Taciturnity, iii. 498.\n\n Tacitus, i. xlii, xlvii, 101;\n ii. 5, 81, 238. 348, 3971;\n iii. 111-12.\n\n ---- Emperor, iii. 433.\n\n Tadpole, ii. 17, 18, 380.\n\n Tainct, ii. 98.\n\n Talc, Talcum, i. 255-6.\n\n Taliacotius, i. 252, 347.\n\n Tamarind, ii. 197.\n\n Tamarisk, iii. 223.\n\n Tammarice, iii. 223.\n\n Tamerlane, iii. 62.\n\n Tanais, ii. 332, 350.\n\n Tantalus, i. 310.\n\n Taprobana, i. 231.\n\n Tarantula, ii. 106.\n\n Tardiffe, iii. 300.\n\n Targum, i. 285;\n iii. 155.\n\n Tarquinius Priscus, i. xlix, 143.\n\n Tarranta (Valescus de), i. 286.\n\n Tarsus, iii. 77.\n\n Tartar, i. 204, 206;\n ii. 394.\n\n Tartar, oil of, i. 277.\n\n ---- salt of, i. 270.\n\n Tartaretus, i. 35.\n\n Tartars, ii. 83, 354;\n iii. 347.\n\n Tartarus, iii. 131.\n\n Tartary, ii. 21, 106, 190, 396.\n\n ---- Emperor of, ii. 21.\n\n Tau, iii. 151.\n\n Taurus, i. 158;\n iii. 165.\n\n ---- ship, i. 339.\n\n ---- (constellation), ii. 256, 303.\n\n Tavern-music, i. 101.\n\n Teale, iii. 517.\n\n Tear-bottles, iii. 115.\n\n Teazel, iii. 167.\n\n Teeth, iii. 377.\n\n Tekel, i. xvi.\n\n Telesin, iii. 310.\n\n Tempest, i. 284.\n\n Tenapha, iii. 152.\n\n Tenby, ii. 390.\n\n Tench, iii. 537.\n\n Teneriffe, ii. 355, 357.\n\n Tenison (T.), iii. 217.\n\n Tenth wave and egg, iii. 66-7.\n\n _Terebinthus_, iii. 241.\n\n Tereus, iii. 52, 291.\n\n Terra Lemnia, i. 235.\n\n Terrella, i. 225.\n\n Tertullian, i. xix, xxxvii, 16;\n ii. 4, 5, 8, 289, 298;\n iii. 53.\n\n Testicles, i. 142, 321-6.\n\n Tetragrammaton, i. 190;\n ii. 233.\n\n Tetricus, iii. 107, 433.\n\n Tetter, iii. 159.\n\n +Theta+, iii. 138.\n\n Thales, i. xx, 159, 217;\n ii. 163.\n\n Thalmudist, i. 125.\n\n Thames, ii. 90;\n iii. 514.\n\n Thargum, i. 123.\n\n Thebes, ii. 162, 332;\n iii. 77.\n\n Themison, ii. 201.\n\n Themistocles, i. 107;\n ii. 147;\n iii. 480.\n\n Theocritus, i. 156, 338-9;\n ii. 146.\n\n Theodoret, i. xxxi, xli;\n ii. 295;\n iii. 40.\n\n Theodoric, iii. 120, 288.\n\n Theodorus, ii. 358.\n\n Theodosius, i. 180;\n ii. 293, 359;\n iii. 294, 320.\n\n Theodotian, ii. 157.\n\n Theodoius, i. 192.\n\n Theon, i. 344.\n\n Theophanes, ii. 290.\n\n Theophilus, Antioch., ii. 290.\n\n Theophrastus, i. xliii, 259. 291, 345;\n ii. 26, 30, 59, 148;\n iii. 153, 243, 248.\n\n Theophylact, ii. 221-2.\n\n Thermometer, ii. 193.\n\n Thersites, ii. 385;\n iii. 139.\n\n Theseus, iii. 89.\n\n Thessalians, i. 141;\n ii. 81, 92.\n\n Thetford, iii. 107, 405, 519, 520.\n\n ---- Cluniacs, iii. 405.\n\n Thetis, ii. 78.\n\n Theudas, i. 137.\n\n Thevet (A.), ii. 67;\n iii. 53.\n\n Thievery, i. 249.\n\n Thieves, i. 167.\n\n Thirlby (Tho.), Bp., iii. 411.\n\n Tholouse, i. 164.\n\n Thomas Aquinas, i. xlv, 234;\n ii. 37.\n\n ---- (St.), i. 191.\n\n ---- (Will.), i. xlviii.\n\n Thora, i. 290.\n\n Thornbacks, i. 333;\n ii. 75;\n iii. 533.\n\n Thorpe, iii. 108.\n\n Thrace, iii. 248.\n\n Throats, sore, i. 304.\n\n Thrushes, i. 293-4.\n\n Thuanus, i. xvi, 282;\n iii. 300.\n\n Thucydides, i. 142, 168-9;\n ii. 321, 336;\n iii. 45, 122.\n\n Thunder, i. 273, 298.\n\n Thunderstorm (Norwich, 1665), iii. 548.\n\n Thunni, ii. 358.\n\n Thursford, iii. 419.\n\n Thyme, i. 307.\n\n Thymelaea, i. 246.\n\n Tiberius, i. li, 266, 298;\n iii. 118, 137.\n\n Tibullus, iii. 135.\n\n Tides, iii. 47.\n\n Tiffinies, ii. 389.\n\n Tiger, i. 36;\n ii. 41, 83, 107, 370.\n\n Tigris, ii. 365.\n\n Tiles, i. 221;\n iii. 114.\n\n Time, iii. 138.\n\n Timon, i. 13.\n\n Timotheus de Insulis, i. 155.\n\n Tin, i. 155, 261.\n\n Tinder, i. 272, 274.\n\n Tiresias, ii. 34;\n iii. 131.\n\n Tithymallus, ii. 197.\n\n Titius, i. 310.\n\n Titus (Emperor), ii. 149.\n\n Toad, i. 26, 83, 335-6;\n ii. 13, 29, 45, 60, 95.\n\n Toad-stone, ii. 13.\n\n Toad-stools, i. xlix, 83;\n ii. 102.\n\n Tobacco, iii. 237.\n\n Tobias, i. 189, 320.\n\n Tobit, i. 197.\n\n Toledo, ii. 305.\n\n Toll, i. 95.\n\n Tomineio, ii. 355;\n iii. 283, 540.\n\n Tongs, i. 221.\n\n Tonumbeus, ii. 354.\n\n Tooth (Golden), ii. 138.\n\n Topaz, i. 214, 285.\n\n Torpedo, i. 334, 349;\n ii. 74, 100.\n\n Tortoise, ii. 14, 20;\n iii. 76.\n\n ---- (sea), ii. 61.\n\n Tortoise-shell, i. 256.\n\n Tostatus, i. 166;\n ii. 212.\n\n Touchstone, i. 256.\n\n Touchwood, i. 274.\n\n Tournai, iii. 110.\n\n Townshend (Sir Horatio), iii. 90.\n\n Tragacanth, i. 205.\n\n Trajan, i. 172;\n iii. 106, 120.\n\n Trallianus, i. 171.\n\n Transmigration, i. 186.\n\n Trapezuntius (Georgius), iii. 30.\n\n Travellers, i. 338.\n\n Tree of Knowledge, i. 123-5, 128.\n\n Tree of Life, i. 126.\n\n Trees, i. 261, 302.\n\n Tremellius, i. 215, 337;\n ii. 2, 8, 45, 157, 241, 254, 275, 347;\n iii. 15, 265.\n\n Trent, i. 11, 328;\n ii. 63.\n\n ---- River, iii. 48.\n\n Triangle, i. 162.\n\n Triarii, iii. 161.\n\n Tribes of Israel, ii. 229-31.\n\n ---- (lost), ii. 149.\n\n Tribonianus, iii. 436.\n\n Tribute money, iii. 287.\n\n Tricarina, i. 158.\n\n Tricassus, ii. 276.\n\n Triclinium, i. 311;\n ii. 218.\n\n Trimley, iii. 516.\n\n Trinity, i. 192.\n\n _Trinum Magicum_, i. 176.\n\n Trismegistus, i. 128;\n iii. 11, 206, 468, 483.\n\n Trithemius, i. 253.\n\n Tritons, ii. 254.\n\n Triumvirates, i. xxvii.\n\n Troas, iii. 326.\n\n Trogus Pompeius, i. 155;\n ii. 321.\n\n _Trophaeum_, ii. 2.\n\n Tropics, ii. 303.\n\n Trout, iii. 537.\n\n Trowse, iii. 401, 536.\n\n Troy, i. 250;\n ii. 332.\n\n Tubal, ii. 334.\n\n Tubal-Cain, iii. 220.\n\n Tulip, ii. 368.\n\n Tulip-fly, iii. 174.\n\n Tulipists, iii. 95.\n\n Tullia, ii. 57.\n\n Tumbler, ii. 124.\n\n Tunis, i. 278.\n\n Tunny, ii. 187.\n\n Turbot, iii. 533.\n\n Turbus (William), Bp., iii. 405.\n\n _Turdus sibi malum_, i. 294.\n\n Turkey, ii. 92, 397.\n\n Turkeys, i. 320;\n ii. 64.\n\n Turkish Hymn, iii. 302.\n\n Turks, i. 37, 40;\n ii. 6, 280.\n\n Turnebus, i. 230;\n ii. 266.\n\n Turonensis. _See_ Gregorius.\n\n Turpentine, i. 205, 209, 255.\n\n Turpentine-tree, iii. 79, 241, 261.\n\n Turquoise, i. 214.\n\n Tuscans, i. 194.\n\n Tuscan Sea, i. 242.\n\n Twilight, ii. 301.\n\n Twine (Th.), iii. 113, 325.\n\n Tyre, iii. 220, 552.\n\n Tzetzes (J.), i. 174, 250;\n ii. 148, 259.\n\n Typographers, i. xxxv, 39.\n\n Typography, i. 230-1. _See_ Printing.\n\n\n Ulfketel, iii. 107.\n\n Ulmus, iii. 376.\n\n Ulysses, i. 230, 236;\n ii. 253, 279;\n iii. 113, 131, 132.\n\n ---- his dog, i. 343.\n\n Umbra, ii. 218.\n\n Uncircumcised fruit, iii. 263.\n\n Unguentum Armarium, i. 253.\n\n Unguinus, iii. 112.\n\n _Unguis Odoratus_, iii. 225.\n\n Unicorn, i. 165;\n ii. 67, 73;\n iii. 253.\n\n ---- horn, i. 256;\n ii. 66.\n\n ---- (sea), ii. 68.\n\n Universities, i. 135, 146, 151.\n\n Upsala, i. 241.\n\n Upupa, iii. 290.\n\n _Uranoscopus_, ii. 112.\n\n Urbin. _See_ Raphael.\n\n Urias Bellanii, ii. 111.\n\n Urinals, i. lv, 108.\n\n Urine, i. 116, 209, 261, 264, 284;\n ii. 13.\n\n Urns, iii. 430-7.\n\n URN-BURIAL, iii. 97.\n\n Uroscopy, i. 116.\n\n Ursa Major, ii, 342.\n\n Urspergensis, ii. 321.\n\n _Utinam_, i. 39, 184.\n\n Utopia, ii. 7.\n\n Utyches, i. 192.\n\n Uzziah, i. 337.\n\n\n Valens, iii. 106.\n\n Valentinianus, ii. 239.\n\n Valentinus, i. 191-2.\n\n Valla (L.), iii. 74, 122.\n\n Varro (M.), ii. 172, 180, 233, 305, 320, 344;\n iii. 150, 153, 248, 258.\n\n Vartomannus, ii. 67, 255.\n\n Varus, iii. 323.\n\n Vashti, iii. 149.\n\n Vatablus, ii. 157.\n\n Vaucluse, iii. 320.\n\n Vegetables, i. 285.\n\n Vegetius, ii. 240.\n\n Veientes, iii. 75.\n\n Veiento, ii. 222.\n\n Venereal disease, ii, 378;\n iii. 259.\n\n Venetus (Georgius), iii. 20.\n\n Venice, i. xviii, 11;\n ii. 21;\n iii. 46-7, 348.\n\n ---- Doge of, i. xlviii, 77.\n\n ---- glass, i. 209;\n iii. 69.\n\n ---- Piazza, i. 138.\n\n Venice, St. Mark's, ii. 68.\n\n Venison, i. 344.\n\n Venta, iii. 107,\n\n Venus, i. 247, 319;\n ii. 267-8;\n iii. 2, 4, 152.\n\n Verdigris, ii. 392.\n\n Vergil, i. xv, xviii, xxix, 156, 293, 338;\n ii. 3, 164, 234, 240, 279, 306;\n iii. 132, 153, 261, 292, 323.\n\n ---- (Polydore), i. 311;\n ii. 238, 251, 396;\n iii. 378.\n\n Verona, i. 172;\n iii. 434.\n\n Verstegan, iii. 310.\n\n Verus (Lucius), emperor, ii. 217.\n\n Vervain, iii. 282.\n\n Vespasian, i. 172, 199;\n ii. 88, 149, 222;\n iii. 53, 105-6, 434, 552.\n\n Veterinarians, i. 314.\n\n Via Appia, iii. 226.\n\n Vibius, i. xlix.\n\n Vice, i. 60, 77, 91, 154.\n\n Vicissitude, iii. 497.\n\n Vicomercatus, i. 298;\n iii. 44.\n\n Victorinus Posthumius, iii. 106.\n\n Victorius (Petrus), ii. 236, 238-9, 257, 267.\n\n Vida, ii. 248.\n\n Vienna, iii. 350.\n\n ---- Library, ii. 262.\n\n Viginerus, iii. 431.\n\n Vincentius, ii. 24.\n\n ---- Belluacensis, i. 176.\n\n ---- Camerinus, ii. 28.\n\n Vine, iii, 240.\n\n Vinegar, i. 231, 237, 276;\n iii. 74.\n\n Viol, iii. 80.\n\n Violet (white), i. 296.\n\n Viper, i. 83, 174, 179, 301, 337;\n ii. 26, 45, 105, 256.\n\n Virginity, i. 138.\n\n Virgo, ii. 191.\n\n Virtue, i. 67, 77, 91.\n\n _Virtute nil praestantius_, i. 160.\n\n Viscus Arboreus, i. 293.\n\n Vitello, i. 335.\n\n Vitex, i. 171.\n\n Vitrification, i. 72, 209.\n\n Vitriol, i. 204, 206, 221, 232, 257, 392-3.\n\n Vitruvius, iii. 150.\n\n Vives, ii. 21.\n\n Vizzanius (E.), ii. 51.\n\n Volaterranus, iii. 65.\n\n Volupia, iii. 466.\n\n Volusianus, iii. 436.\n\n Vomit, i. 305.\n\n Voragine (J. de), ii. 249.\n\n Vossius (I.), i. 243;\n ii. 230, 293.\n\n Vulcan, ii. 133, 138;\n iii. 147, 158-9.\n\n Vulteius, iii. 385.\n\n Vulture, ii. 259.\n\n\n Wakering (John), Bp., iii. 402.\n\n Wales, boats, i. 240.\n\n Wallachia, ii. 396.\n\n Walnut, ii. 393.\n\n Walpole (Ralph de), Bp., iii. 411.\n\n Walsingham, iii. 419, 430.\n\n ---- (old), iii. 104, 105.\n\n Wandering Jew, iii. 71.\n\n Wanton or Walton (Simon de), Bp., iii. 410.\n\n War, i. 300-1.\n\n Ware, co. Herts, iii. 163.\n\n Wart, ii. 282.\n\n Wasp, ii. 29.\n\n Water, i. 306;\n ii. 58;\n iii. 198.\n\n ---- (Holy), i. 190.\n\n Water-beetle, iii. 538.\n\n Water-rat, ii. 44.\n\n Wave (tenth), iii. 66.\n\n Waveney, iii. 536.\n\n Wax, i. 255-7, 260, 276.\n\n Wealth, iii. 389.\n\n Weasel, i. 167.\n\n Weather-cocks, i. 348.\n\n Wecker, i. 247.\n\n Weight, ii. 138.\n\n Welts, co. Norfolk, ii. 85;\n iii. 527.\n\n Wendlerus, i. 268.\n\n Wesell ling, iii. 529.\n\n West, ii. 338.\n\n Westhall, iii. 420.\n\n Westminster Abbey, iii. 411.\n\n Westphalia, iii. 298.\n\n Wether, African, iii. 78.\n\n Whales, i. 24, 215;\n ii. 255.\n\n ---- (Spermaceti), ii. 85;\n iii. 183, 527.\n\n Wheat, i. 260, 303;\n ii. 102.\n\n Whelks, iii. 534.\n\n Whelp, ii. 94, 138, 359;\n iii. 265.\n\n Whin bird, iii. 524.\n\n White, i, xx, xxii.\n\n ---- (Francis), Bp., iii. 412.\n\n Whitefoot (John), iii. 412.\n\n White-thorn, i. 293.\n\n Whitherley (Thomas), iii. 105.\n\n Whiting, ii. 84;\n iii. 532.\n\n Whores, i. 171.\n\n Wicklewood, iii. 409.\n\n Willoughby (Francis), iii. 541.\n\n Willow, i. 271, 274;\n iii. 274.\n\n Winclerus, iii. 24.\n\n Wind, i. 348-9;\n ii. 272.\n\n ---- (west), ii. 59.\n\n Wind-guns, i. 275.\n\n Windham (Sir T.), iii. 403.\n\n Windows, i. 222.\n\n Windsor, ii. 70.\n\n Wine, i. 146, 204, 298, 306;\n iii. 60.\n\n ---- (spirits of), i. 205, 207, 209, 257, 260.\n\n Winter, ii. 303.\n\n Witchcraft, ii. 265.\n\n Witches, i. 45, 314.\n\n Withred, iii. 321.\n\n Wolf, i. 338.\n\n Wolf-skin, i. 174.\n\n Woman, i. 100.\n\n Wood, i. 256.\n\n Woodcock, ii. 115.\n\n Woodpecker, i. 300;\n iii. 520.\n\n Woodsear, ii. 208.\n\n Wool-comber, ii. 87.\n\n Worcester Cathedral, iii. 411.\n\n Worm, i. 309;\n ii. 25, 97.\n\n Wormius (Olaus), ii. 270;\n iii. 113, 323, 531.\n\n Worthies, ii. 237.\n\n Wounds, i. 250.\n\n Wren, ii. 355.\n\n ---- (Matthew), Bp., iii. 412.\n\n Wright (John), iii. 397.\n\n Writing-dust, i. 239.\n\n Wyvern, ii. 259.\n\n\n X, ii. 256;\n iii. 201-2.\n\n ---- (Chi), iii. 150.\n\n Xanthus river, ii. 366.\n\n Xenocrates, ii. 174.\n\n Xenophanes, i. 199, 217.\n\n Xenophon, ii. 180, 320-1, 329;\n iii. 149, 150.\n\n Xerisanus, ii. 248.\n\n Xerxes, ii. 147, 326;\n iii. 74-5.\n\n Xilander, i. 170.\n\n Xiphilinus, i. 310.\n\n\n Y, ii. 256.\n\n Yarmouth, iii. 107, 432, 515, 527-9, 535, 544.\n\n ---- St. Nicholas, iii. 405.\n\n Yarwhelp, iii. 522.\n\n Yaxley, iii, 404.\n\n Year, ii. 160-83, 359.\n\n ---- (commencement), ii. 181-2.\n\n Yew, i. 306;\n iii. 129.\n\n Youth, i. 246;\n iii. 487.\n\n\n Zacheus, iii. 2, 79, 244-5.\n\n Zaire, ii. 355, 374.\n\n Zamberius (P.), ii. 262.\n\n Zanzibar, ii. 374.\n\n Zeboim, iii. 326.\n\n Zeilan, i. 246, 292.\n\n Zemerites, ii. 383.\n\n Zeno (Sidonius?), i. xlv, 62, 149;\n iii. 78, 393, 453.\n\n Zerah, ii. 382.\n\n Zerubabel, ii. 149.\n\n Zibavius, ii. 59.\n\n Zibeta Occidentalis, i. 239.\n\n Zizania, iii. 276-9.\n\n Zodiack, ii. 283, 300, 398.\n\n Zoilism, iii. 467.\n\n Zonaras, iii. 65.\n\n Zone (Torrid), i. 160.\n\n Zoroaster, i. xxxiii, 38, 198;\n iii. 148.\n\n Zur, ii. 382.\n\n Zwingli, i. xix.\n\n\n Printed by T. and A. CONSTABLE, Printers to His Majesty\n at the Edinburgh University Press\n\n\n\n\n Transcriber's Notes:\n\n Marginal notes are used for multiple purposes in this edition, and\n somewhat differently in each of Browne's works. Generally speaking,\n those notes which serve as paragraph descriptions, at or near the\n head of a paragraph, precede that paragraph. Those which serve to\n annotate specific points are inserted parenthetically as [SN:\n notes].\n\n Pseudodoxia Epidemica: Footnotes and section headers were both\n printed in the margins. For this text version, numbered marginal\n footnotes have been moved to the end of their paragraphs. The\n headers have been moved to appear on a separate line at the\n beginning of each section. Redundant sidenotes merely indicating\n Part and Section numbers have been removed.\n\n Hydriotaphia: Both lettered and numbered sidenotes are presented,\n at the end of each chapter as traditional footnotes.\n\n Garden of Cyrus: Nearly all marginal notes are numbered, and are\n move to the end of each chapter. Any remaining notes are inserted\n as [SN: notes].\n\n Certain Miscellany Tracts: There are both numbered and unnumbered\n marginal notes. Since several of the tracts are lengthy, numbered\n notes have been moved only to the end of the paragraph where they\n appear. Notes appearing at the head of a numbered section are\n retained on a separate line as [Sidenote: Topic]. Mid-paragraph\n notes are inserted parenthetically as [SN: notes].\n\n Christian Morals: The marginal entries are either section numbers\n or footnotes. The latter have been moved to the end of each\n section.\n\n Spelling varies considerably, and the text as printed is nearly\n always retained.\n\n The table below summarizes any changes that were made, as well as\n any variants which have not been changed, but are particularly\n problematic.\n\n The yogh-like character following a final q in many Latin words is\n a scribal abbreviation for 'ue', \"quinq;\"; and was frequently\n printed as a semicolon (;) In the script that appears as a caption\n to the \"quincunce\" preceding p. 147, the character appears as a\n yogh. For this text version, the semicolon is used here as well.\n\n Trivial inconsistencies in punctuation, particularly in\n abbreviations appearing in footnotes or sidenotes, as well as the\n Index, have been silently resolved. Index entries reference\n all three volumes, using 'i', 'ii', 'iii'. Any volume references\n which are redundant have been removed.\n\n In the text of FOUND IN NORWALK, punctuation and capitalization\n seems haphazard, and has been left as printed.\n\n\n The following entries indicate where minor printer's errors were\n made. With few exceptions, Latin passages are allowed to stand as\n printed, except where noted below.\n\n p. 99 not in Caes. Comme[n]tar. |added 'n'\n |\n p. 101 The AEgy[p]tians were afraid of fire |added 'p'\n |\n p. 139 we compute o[u]r felicities |added 'u'.\n |\n p. 153 poss[ess]ions of his father |added 'ess'\n |\n p. 164 Greec[e] |added 'e'\n |\n p. 258 note Psal. 120. 4. |marginal note number\n | added to match\n | anchor\n |\n p. 279 De Horti[-]cultura. |hyphen missing, joined\n |\n p. 291 Note 1: _[S]ee Vulg. Err.... |added 'S'\n |\n p. 333 s[t]rateuetai |added 't'\n |\n p. 411 [h/H]e is said to have begun |changed to uppercase 'H'\n |\n p. 423 holden _June 4. 1633_[./,] it was |\n agreed |changed to . to ,\n |\n p. 538 and a cod[./,] a very good dish | '.' corrected to ','\n |\n p. 573 Ear-wig, [296./ii. 96.] |'ii. 96' rather than\n |'296'\n |\n p. 573 Electrical bodies, [i.] 254. |added missing volume\n |\n p. 574 Eve ... iii. [v./5-6, 10.] |corrected roman number\n | and added actual Vol.\n | III references\n |\n p. 576 Gnat-net, [iii.] 158. |added missing volume\n | reference\n |\n p. 590 Pigeon, i. 34, 317-8, 320-[11/1]; |remove extraneous '1'\n |\n p. 590 ---- tree, [iii.] 198 |added missing volume\n | reference\n |\n p. 592 Purchas, [iii/ii.] 70, 86. |wrong volume reference\n |\n p. 593 Saligniaco (B. de), [379/iii. 79.] |corrected volume\n | reference\n |\n p. 595 Silhon ([]de), i. xxxv. |removed leading blanks\n |","title":"The Works of Sir Thomas Browne, Volume 3","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":170046}