Kitobni o'qish: «The Works of Sir Thomas Browne, Volume 1», sahifa 24

CHAPTER V
Of the Badger

That a Brock or Badger hath the legs on one side shorter then of the other, though an opinion perhaps not very ancient, is yet very general; received not only by Theorists and unexperienced believers, but assented unto by most who have the opportunity to behold and hunt them daily. Which notwithstanding upon enquiry I find repugnant unto the three Determinators of Truth, Authority, Sense, and Reason. For first, Albertus Magnus speaks dubiously, confessing he could not confirm the verity hereof; but Aldrovandus plainly affirmeth, there can be no such inequality observed. And for my own part, upon indifferent enquiry, I cannot discover this difference, although the regardable side be defined, and the brevity by most imputed unto the left.

Again, It seems no easie affront unto Reason, and generally repugnant unto the course of Nature; for if we survey the total set of Animals, we may in their legs, or Organs of progression, observe an equality of length, and parity of Numeration; that is, not any to have an odd legg, or the supporters and movers of one side not exactly answered by the other. Although the hinder may be unequal unto the fore and middle legs, as in Frogs, Locusts, and Grasshoppers; or both unto the middle, as in some Beetles and Spiders, as is determined by Aristotle, De incessu Animalium. De incessu Animalium. Perfect and viviparous quadrupeds, so standing in their position of proneness, that the opposite joints of Neighbour-legs consist in the same plane; and a line descending from their Navel intersects at right angles the axis of the Earth. It happeneth often I confess that a Lobster hath the Chely or great claw of one side longer then the other; but this is not properly their leg, but a part of apprehension, and whereby they hold or seiz upon their prey; for the legs and proper parts of progression are inverted backward, and stand in a position opposite unto these.

Lastly, The Monstrosity is ill contrived, and with some disadvantage; the shortness being affixed unto the legs of one side, which might have been more tolerably placed upon the thwart or Diagonial Movers. Diagonion, a line drawn from the cross angles. For the progression of quadrupeds being performed per Diametrum, that is the cross legs moving or resting together, so that two are always in motion, and two in station at the same time; the brevity had been more tolerable in the cross legs. For then the Motion and station had been performed by equal legs; whereas herein they are both performed by unequal Organs, and the imperfection becomes discoverable at every hand.

CHAPTER VI
Of the Bear

That a Bear brings forth her young informous and unshapen, which she fashioneth after by licking them over, is an opinion not only vulgar, and common with us at present: but hath been of old delivered by ancient Writers. Upon this foundation it was an Hieroglyphick with the Egyptians: Aristotle seems to countenance it; Solinus, Pliny, and Ælian directly affirm it, and Ovid smoothly delivereth it:

 
Nec catulus partu quem reddidit ursa recenti
Sed male viva caro est, lambendo mater in artus
Ducit, et in formam qualem cupit ipsa reducit.
 

Which notwithstanding is not only repugnant unto the sense of every one that shall enquire into it, but the exact and deliberate experiment of three Authentick Philosophers. The first of Mathiolus in his Comment on Dioscorides, whose words are to this effect. In the Valley of Anania about Trent, in a Bear which the Hunters eventerated or opened, I beheld the young ones with all their parts distinct: and not without shape, as many conceive; giving more credit unto Aristotle and Pliny, then experience and their proper senses. Of the same assurance was Julius Scaliger in his Exercitations, Ursam fœtus informes potius ejicere, quam parere, si vera dicunt, quos postea linctu effingat: Quid hujusce fabulæ authoribus fidei habendum ex hac historia cognosces; In nostris Alpibus venatores fætum Ursam cepere, dissecta ea fætus plane formatus intus inventus est. And lastly, Aldrovandus who from the testimony of his own eyes affirmeth, that in the Cabinet of the Senate of Bononia, there was preserved in a Glass a Cub taken out of a Bear perfectly formed, and compleat in every part.

It is moreover injurious unto Reason, and much impugneth the course and providence of Nature, to conceive a birth should be ordained before there is a formation. For the conformation of parts is necessarily required, not onely unto the pre-requisites and previous conditions of birth, as Motion and Animation: but also unto the parturition or very birth it self: Wherein not only the Dam, but the younglings play their parts; and the cause and act of exclusion proceedeth from them both. For the exclusion of Animals is not meerly passive like that of Eggs, nor the total action of delivery to be imputed unto the Mother: but the first attempt beginneth from the Infant: which at the accomplished period attempteth to change his Mansion: and strugling to come forth, dilacerates and breaks those parts which restrained him before.

Beside (what few take notice of) Men hereby do in an high measure vilifie the works of God, imputing that unto the tongue of a Beast, which is the strangest Artifice in all the acts of Nature; that is the formation of the infant in the Womb, not only in Mankind, but all viviparous Animals. Formation in the Matrix, the admirable work of Nature. Wherein the plastick or formative faculty, from matter appearing Homogeneous, and of a similary substance, erecteth Bones, Membranes, Veins, and Arteries: and out of these contriveth every part in number, place, and figure, according to the law of its species. Which is so far from being fashioned by any outward agent, that once omitted or perverted by a slip of the inward Phidias, it is not reducible by any other whatsoever. And therefore Mirè me plasmaverunt manus tuæ, though it originally respected the generation of Man, yet is it appliable unto that of other Animals; who entring the Womb in bare and simple Materials, return with distinction of parts, and the perfect breath of life. He that shall consider these alterations without, must needs conceive there have been strange operations within; which to behold, it were a spectacle almost worth ones beeing, a sight beyond all; except that Man had been created first, and might have seen the shew of five dayes after.

Now as the opinion is repugnant both unto sense and Reason, so hath it probably been occasioned from some slight ground in either. Thus in regard the Cub comes forth involved in the Chorion, a thick and tough Membrane obscuring the formation, and which the Dam doth after bite and tear asunder; the beholder at first sight conceives it a rude and informous lump of flesh, and imputes the ensuing shape unto the Mouthing of the Dam; which addeth nothing thereunto, but only draws the curtain, and takes away the vail which concealed the Piece before. And thus have some endeavoured to enforce the same from Reason; that is, the small and slender time of the Bears gestation, or going with her young; which lasting but few days (a Month some say) the exclusion becomes precipitous, and the young ones consequently informous; according to that of Solinus, Trigesimus dies uterum liberat ursæ; unde evenit ut præcipitata fæcunditas informes creet partus. But this will overthrow the general Method of Nature in the works of generation. For therein the conformation is not only antecedent, but proportional unto the exclusion; and if the period of the birth be short, the term of conformation will be as sudden also. There may I confess from this narrow time of gestation ensue a Minority or smalness in the exclusion; but this however inferreth no informity, and it still receiveth the Name of a natural and legitimate birth; whereas if we affirm a total informity, it cannot admit so forward a term as an Abortment, for that supposeth conformation. So we must call this constant and intended act of Nature, a slip or effluxion Ἔκρυσις., that is an exclusion before conformation: before the birth can bear the name of the Parent, or be so much as properly called an Embryon.

CHAPTER VII
Of the Basilisk

Many Opinions are passant concerning the Basilisk or little King of Serpents, commonly called the Cockatrice: some affirming, others denying, most doubting the relations made hereof. What therefore in these incertainties we may more safely determine: that such an Animal there is, if we evade not the testimony of Scripture and humane Writers, we cannot safely deny. So it is said Psalm 91. Super Aspidem et Basiliscum ambulabis, wherein the Vulgar Translation retaineth the Word of the Septuagint, using in other places the Latine expression Regulus, as Proverbs 23. Mordebit ut coluber, et sicut Regulus venena diffundet: and Jeremy 8. Ecce ego mittam vobis serpentes Regulos, etc. That is, as ours translate it, Behold I will send Serpents, Cockatrices among you which will not be charmed, and they shall bite you. And as for humane Authors, or such as have discoursed of Animals, or Poisons, it is to be found almost in all: in Dioscorides, Galen, Pliny, Solinus, Ælian, Ætius, Avicen, Ardoynus, Grevinus, and many more. In Aristotle I confess we find no mention thereof, but Scaliger in his Comment and enumeration of Serpents, hath made supply; and in his Exercitations delivereth that a Basilisk was found in Rome, in the days of Leo the fourth. The like is reported by Sigonius; and some are so far from denying one, that they have made several kinds thereof: for such is the Catoblepas of Pliny conceived to be by some, and the Dryinus of Ætius by others.

But although we deny not the existence of the Basilisk, yet whether we do not commonly mistake in the conception hereof, and call that a Basilisk which is none at all, is surely to be questioned. For certainly that which from the conceit of its generation we vulgarly call a Cockatrice, and wherein (but under a different name) we intend a formal Identity and adequate conception with the Basilisk; is not the Basilisk of the Ancients, whereof such wonders are delivered. For this of ours is generally described with legs, wings, a Serpentine and winding tail, and a crist or comb somewhat like a Cock. But the Basilisk of elder times was a proper kind of Serpent, not above three palms long, as some account; and differenced from other Serpents by advancing his head, and some white marks or coronary spots upon the crown, as all authentick Writers have delivered.

Nor is this Cockatrice only unlike the Basilisk, but of no real shape in Nature; and rather an Hieroglyphical fansie, to express different intentions, set forth in different fashions. Sometimes with the head of a Man, sometime with the head of an Hawk, as Pierius hath delivered; and as with addition of legs the Heralds and Painters still describe it. Nor was it only of old a symbolical and allowable invention, but is now become a manual contrivance of Art, and artificial imposure; whereof besides others, Scaliger hath taken notice: Basilici formam mentiti sunt vulgo Gallinacco similem, et pedibus binis; neque enim absimiles sunt cæteris serpentibus, nisi macula quasi in vertice candida, unde illi nomen Regium; that is, men commonly counterfeit the form of a Basilisk with another like a Cock, and with two feet; whereas they differ not from other serpents, but in a white speck upon their Crown. Now although in some manner it might be counterfeited in Indian Cocks, and flying Serpents, yet is it commonly contrived out of the skins of Thornbacks, Scaits, or Maids, as Aldrovand hath observed, By way of figure.] and also graphically described in his excellent Book of Fishes; and for satisfaction of my own curiosity I have caused some to be thus contrived out of the same Fishes.

Nor is onely the existency of this animal considerable, but many things delivered thereof, particularly its poison and its generation. Concerning the first, according to the doctrine of the Ancients, men still affirm, that it killeth at a distance, that it poisoneth by the eye, and by priority of vision. Destructive. Now that deleterious it may be at some distance, and destructive without corporal contaction, what uncertainty soever there be in the effect, there is no high improbability in the relation. For if Plagues or pestilential Atoms have been conveyed in the Air from different Regions, if men at a distance have infected each other, if the shadows of some trees be noxious, if Torpedoes deliver their opium at a distance, and stupifie beyond themselves; we cannot reasonably deny, that (beside our gross and restrained poisons requiring contiguity unto their actions) there may proceed from subtiller seeds, more agile emanations, which contemn those Laws, and invade at distance unexpected.

That this venenation shooteth from the eye, and that this way a Basilisk may empoison, although thus much be not agreed upon by Authors, some imputing it unto the breath, others unto the bite, it is not a thing impossible. For eyes receive offensive impressions from their objects, and may have influences destructive to each other. Effluxion of corporeal species. For the visible species of things strike not our senses immaterially, but streaming in corporal raies, do carry with them the qualities of the object from whence they flow, and the medium through which they pass. How the Basilisk kills at distance. Thus through a green or red Glass all things we behold appear of the same colours; thus sore eyes affect those which are sound, and themselves also by reflection, as will happen to an inflamed eye that beholds it self long in a Glass; thus is fascination made out, and thus also it is not impossible, what is affirmed of this animal, the visible rayes of their eyes carrying forth the subtilest portion of their poison, which received by the eye of man or beast, infecteth first the brain, and is from thence communicated unto the heart.

But lastly, That this destruction should be the effect of the first beholder, or depend upon priority of aspection, is a point not easily to be granted, and very hardly to be made out upon the principles of Aristotle, Alhazen, Vitello, and others, who hold that sight is made by Reception, and not by extramission; by receiving the raies of the object into the eye, and not by sending any out. For hereby although he behold a man first, the Basilisk should rather be destroyed, in regard he first receiveth the rayes of his Antipathy, and venomous emissions which objectively move his sense; but how powerful soever his own poison be, it invadeth not the sense of man, in regard he beholdeth him not. And therefore this conceit was probably begot by such as held the opinion of sight by extramission; as did Pythagoras, Plato, Empedocles, Hipparrchus, Galen, Macrobius, Proclus, Simplicius, with most of the Ancients, and is the postulate of Euclide in his Opticks, but now sufficiently convicted from observations of the Dark Chamber.

The generation of the Cocks egg.

As for the generation of the Basilisk, that it proceedeth from a Cocks egg hatched under a Toad or Serpent, it is a conceit as monstrous as the brood it self. For if we should grant that Cocks growing old, and unable for emission, amass within themselves some seminal matter, which may after conglobate into the form of an egg, yet will this substance be unfruitful. As wanting one principle of generation, and a commixture of both sexes, which is required unto production, as may be observed in the eggs of Hens not trodden; and as we have made trial in some which are termed Cocks eggs. Ovum Centeninum, or the last egg which is a very little one. It is not indeed impossible that from the sperm of a Cock, Hen, or other Animal, being once in putrescence, either from incubation or otherwise, some generation may ensue, not univocal and of the same species, but some imperfect or monstrous production, even as in the body of man from putrid humours, and peculiar ways of corruption, there have succeeded strange and unseconded shapes of worms; whereof we have beheld some our selves, and read of others in medical observations. And so may strange and venomous Serpents be several ways engendered; but that this generation should be regular, and alway produce a Basilisk, is beyond our affirmation, and we have good reason to doubt.

Again, It is unreasonable to ascribe the equivocacy of this form unto the hatching of a Toad, or imagine that diversifies the production. For Incubation alters not the species, nor if we observe it, so much as concurs either to the sex or colour: as appears in the eggs of Ducks or Partridges hatched under a Hen, there being required unto their exclusion only a gentle and continued heat: and that not particular or confined unto the species or parent. So have I known the seed of Silk-worms hatched on the bodies of women: and Pliny reports that Livia the wife of Augustus hatched an egg in her bosome. Nor is only an animal heat required hereto, but an elemental and artificial warmth will suffice: for as Diodorus delivereth, the Ægyptians were wont to hatch their eggs in Ovens, and many eye-witnesses confirm that practice unto this day. And therefore this generation of the Basilisk, seems like that of Castor and Helena; he that can credit the one, may easily believe the other: that is, that these two were hatched out of the egg which Jupiter in the form of a Swan, begat on his Mistress Leda.

The occasion of this conceit might be an Ægyptian tradition concerning the Bird Ibis: which after became transferred unto Cocks. For an opinion it was of that Nation, that the Ibis feeding upon Serpents, that venomous food so inquinated their oval conceptions, or eggs within their bodies, that they sometimes came forth in Serpentine shapes, and therefore they always brake their eggs, nor would they endure the Bird to sit upon them. But how causeless their fear was herein, the daily incubation of Ducks, Pea-hens, and many other testifie, and the Stork might have informed them; which Bird they honoured and cherished, to destroy their Serpents.

That which much promoted it, was a misapprehension of holy Scripture upon the Latine translation in Esa. 51, Ova aspidum ruperunt et telas Arenearum texuerunt, qui comedent de ovis corum morietur, et quod confotum est, erumpet in Regulum. From whence notwithstanding, beside the generation of Serpents from eggs, there can be nothing concluded; and what kind of Serpents are meant, not easie to be determined, for Translations are here very different: Tremellius rendering the Asp Hæmorrhous, and the Regulus or Basilisk a Viper, and our translation for the Asp sets down a Cockatrice in the Text, and an Adder in the margin.

Another place of Esay doth also seem to countenance it, Chap. 14. Ne læteris Philistæa quoniam diminuta est virga percussoris tui, de radice enim colubri egredietur Regulus, et semen ejus absorbens volucrem, which ours somewhat favourably rendereth: Out of the Serpents Root shall come forth a Cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying Serpent. But Tremellius, è radice Serpentis prodit Hæmorrhous, et fructus illius præster volans; wherein the words are different, but the sense is still the same; for therein are figuratively intended Uzziah and Ezechias; for though the Philistines had escaped the minor Serpent Uzziah, yet from his stock a fiercer Snake should arise, that would more terribly sting them, and that was Ezeckias.

But the greatest promotion it hath received from a misunderstanding of the Hieroglyphical intention. For being conceived to be the Lord and King of Serpents, to aw all others, nor to be destroyed by any; the Ægyptians hereby implied Eternity, and the awful power of the supreme Deitie: and therefore described a crowned Asp or Basilisk upon the heads of their gods. As may be observed in the Bembine Table, and other Ægyptian Monuments.

CHAPTER VIII
Of the Wolf

Such a Story as the Basilisk is that of the Wolf concerning priority of vision, that a man becomes hoarse or dumb, if a Wolf have the advantage first to eye him. And this is a plain language affirmed by Plyny: In Italia ut creditur, Luporum visus est noxius, vocemque homini, quem prius contemplatur adimere; so is it made out what is delivered by Theocritus, and after him by Virgil:

 
– Vox quoque Mœrim
Jam fugit ipsa, Lupi Mœrim videre priores.
 

Thus is the Proverb to be understood, when during the discourse, if the party or subject interveneth, and there ensueth a sudden silence, it is usually said, Lupus est in fabula. Which conceit being already convicted, not only by Scaliger, Riolanus, and others; but daily confutable almost every where out of England, we shall not further refute.

The ground or occasional original hereof, was probably the amazement and sudden silence the unexpected appearance of Wolves do often put upon Travellers; not by a supposed vapour, or venomous emanation, but a vehement fear which naturally produceth obmutescence; and sometimes irrecoverable silence. Thus Birds are silent in presence of an Hawk, and Pliny saith that Dogs are mute in the shadow of an Hiæna. But thus could not the mouths of worthy Martyrs be silenced, who being exposed not onely unto the eyes, but the merciless teeth of Wolves, gave loud expressions of their faith, and their holy clamours were heard as high as Heaven.

That which much promoted it beside the common Proverb, was an expression in Theocritus, a very ancient Poet, ού φθέγξη λύκον εἴδες Edere non poteris vocem, Lycus est tibi visus; which Lycus was Rival unto another, and suddenly appearing stopped the mouth of his Corrival: now Lycus signifying also a Wolf, occasioned this apprehension; men taking that appellatively, which was to be understood properly, and translating the genuine acception. Which is a fallacy of Æquivocation, and in some opinions begat the like conceit concerning Romulus and Remus, that they were fostered by a Wolf, the name of the Nurse being Lupa; and founded the fable of Europa, and her carriage over Sea by a Bull, because the Ship or Pilots name was Taurus. And thus have some been startled at the Proverb, Bos in lingua, confusedly apprehending how a man should be said to have an Oxe in his tongue, that would not speak his mind; which was no more then that a piece of money had silenced him: for by the Oxe was onely implied a piece of coin stamped with that figure, first currant with the Athenians, and after among the Romans.