A specimen of some animadversions upon a book entituled, Plus ultra, or, Modern improvements of useful knowledge writtten by Mr. Joseph Glanvill, a member of the Royal Society.

A specimen of some animadversions upon a book entituled, Plus ultra, or, Modern improvements of useful knowledge writtten by Mr. Joseph Glanvill, a member of the Royal Society.

Table of contents

Title page

§

TO THE Reader.

Of the Antiquity and Use of Chymical Physique.

Of Anatomical Improvements.

Of Transfusion of Blood—into Animals.

Experiments upon the mixture of Liquors, with the warm blood of Animals, taken out by Phlebotomy.

Being not well at Warwick, by reason of a violent defluxion into the Glandules of the Throat, I caused my self to bleed Octob. 20.

Miscellaneous Additions by way of Postscript.

A REVIEW of the precedent Discourse against Mr. GLANVILL.

§

§

[Page]

A SPECIMEN OF SOME Animadversions upon a Book, Entituled, PLUS ULTRA, OR, Modern Improvements of Useful Knowledge. Written by Mr. JOSEPH GLANVILL, a Member of the ROYAL SOCIETY.

Fr. Bacon de Verul. in Dedie. Sap. Veter. ad Cantabrigienses.

Aequum est tamen omnia vobis attribui, atque in vestrum honorem cedere, cum Accessiones quaeque principiis magna ex parte debeantur.

Mr. Sprat. Hist. R. S. pag. 317.

It is but Reasonable, that the Original Invention should be ascribed to the true Author, rather than to Finishers.

Hor. ep. l. 2. ep. 1.

Ut primùm positis nugari Graecia bellis

Caepit, & in vitium fortuna labier aequa,

Nunc Athletarum studiis, nunc arsit equorum,

Marmoris aut eboris fabros aut aeris amavat.

Suspendit picta vultum mentemque tab [...]lla:

Nunc tibicinibus, nunc est gavisa tragoedis.

LONDON, Printed in the Year 1670.

§

[Page]

THe favorable Censure of the Reader is craved for what Errors have happ'ned in Printing, which the Authors leisure hath neither permitted him to prevent nor correct: However I am to desire that these two may be thus read, viz. In the 2 Pag. of the Dedication, line the 11. for (your Supporters) read (their Supporters) and pag. 105. lin. ult. read Libavius.

N. H.

[Page]

[...]

TO THE Reader.

[Page]

[Page]

THE Discourse of Mr. Glanvill, was the first occasion of my writing about the Royal Society, the provocation which it gave to all sorts of men, of different Professions were such, that it might stir up any publick spirit, to support so common a cause. I was sensible of the injuries he doth unto the dead, the affronts he puts upon the living, the contempt wherewith he decries that University Learning, and those Studies by which Christianity hath been supported against the Arrians, the Jews, the Mahometans, and of late the Papists and Socinians: and which if they be relinquished, I profess, that I think that the Christian Religion must inevitably fall without the aid of a Miracle. It is a kind of Apostacy from the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds to slight Metaphysicks. The distinction of the Trinity, of Essence and Personality, the Hypostatical Union of the two Natures in our Saviour, and the meritoriousness of his death, (which depends thereon,) are undermined with School-Divinity; and whosoever hath any sense or value for the benefits we derive from Controversial-Divinity, either as to the quieting of his Conscience, or convincing of his Adversaries, must detest this Enterprise of Mr. Glanvill. And methinks that whosoever doth but call to mind that variety of foolish Sects, which gave the Church so much trouble in its first Infancy, and of late years, and considers that they had their Original from want of Logick, should not condemn that Art, by which men argue rightly from sound Principles. It was no less strange to me to finde the names of Reverend, Sage, Grave, Disputer and Logician, perverted into terms of Contumely; yet had not all those Motives prevailed with me, but that he had so defamed the Ancient and Modern Physicians, until those late Innovators, that many importuned me [Page] to revenge my Faculty upon this Insolent Man. Besides, I had been much troubled with impertinent discourses of some, who to excuse their Ignorance in the Prognostick and Therape [...]tick parts of Medicine, indulged themselves in the vilifying all the ancient learning and reading, and asserting out of the Writings of the Society, the necessity and conveniency of new methods, in curing and abbreviating diseases. I soon espied my advantages over Mr. Glanvill. But perceiving his Defence so complicated, with the History of the Royal Society, that I could not well meddle with the one without reflecting upon the other; I set my self to peruse that also, and found the Errors therein so numerous and gross, and the tendency of it so dangerous, that it seemed but an easie, yet necessary work, to the Universities, and all Learning, as well as the profession of Methodical Physick, to write against these new-fashion'd Philosophers; I remarked so many defaults in both books, that I was at last weary of taking notice of them, there being still Plus ultra. I resolve to give my Studies no further diversion in pursuing Mr. Glanvill; but to leave him to the scorn of some more common Pens, who being at the Universities may have more leisure then I have at present. After all this Ostentation of Learning, the things he talks and writes of are such, as he is utterly unacquainted with: the Authors he mentions he never saw, and all his discourse about the Mathematicks, and Mathematicians, procured him no other acknowledgements from a Learned and Reverend Prelate, (to whom he sent one of his Books) than a Reprimand for intermedling with what he understood not. Who can choose but smile when he reads how Apuleius improved the Mathematicks a [...] [...]clide? who [...]ver heard of such men as Maximus Palanudes, Achazen and Orentius? Plus Ultra. pag. 23. I suppose this last should have been Orontius, and he is so famous a Geometrician, that when Sir H. Savill (as I remember) was to seek for an instance of a pitiful fellow; this was the man he fixed upon; He tells us that the most learned [...] of all so [...]ts and professions; Mathematicians, Page [...]. Chymists, [...]ns, [...]natomists, Antiquaries, and Philosophers, [Page] make up the Royal Society: but one would not guess so by their History! He tells us, that the former Methods of Science for so many Centuries, never brought the world so much practical beneficial knowledge, as would help towards the Cure of a Cut Finger, which he says is a palpable Plus Ultra Pag. 7. and 8. Argument, that they were fundamental mistakes, and that the way was not right. Can any one that hath heard of Podalirius and Machaon in Homer prate thus? Quos tamen Homerus non in pestilentia, neque in variis Corn. Celsus in Pra [...]at. generibus morborum aliquid attulisse auxilii, sed vulneribus tantummodo ferro & medicamentis mederi solitos esse proposuit. Ex quo apparet has partes medicinae solas ab his esse tentatas, easque esse vetustatissimas. Had our Virtuoso but known how Hippocrates had writ about Wounds and Ulcers, and thatDieg. Laert. in vita Arist. Suidas in Nicomacho, & Ammonius in vita Arist. Vide notas Menagii in Diog. Laert. l. 5. Aristotle himself was descended of the line of Aesculapius, and that his Ancestor Nicomachus was Physician to Amyntas King of Macedon, And that Aristotle also was a Physician, and writ several books (besides his Anatomy of Man) in that Science, and was upon that account valued by Alexander the Great, as Plutarch saith. And how little the Ancients stood in need of modern discoveries and aids to cure Cut Fingers, any man may judge, that knows what Scribonius Largus, and Galen (in his books de Compos. Medicam. sec. genera) have written: and how this last Author (upon Philosophical deductions) compounds several Medicaments to that purpose. In the Augustane Dispensatory, to this day his Tripharmacon, his Diapalma, his Diadictamnum, and others are recorded. And if any thing rendred Paracelsus justly famous, it was the cure of inveterate Ulcers, not green Wounds: and that therein he did out-doe the ancient Physicians, is a question, I cannot grant, and have not leisure to dispute.

He reckons up Five Instruments by which the latter Ages Plus Ultra. Page 10. have improved Knowledge above Antiquity. ‘The MICROSCOPE, TELESCOPE, THERMOMETER, BAROMETER, and the AIR-PUMP. Some of which were first invented, all of them exceedingly improved by the ROYAL SOCIETY. But as for the Telescope, he confesses [Page] that to have been invented by Metius and Galilaeo.’ Which Confession of his, although it take from the Society all pretences to the invention thereof; yet it is unbecoming an inquisitive person, who might upon better Intelligence from Borellus, in his book about the Inventor of Telescopes, published in 1656. He might have learned thence that Adrianus Metius of Alkmaer did not invent them, but one Zacharias Joannides of Middleburgh in Zeland, (though perhaps Baptista Porta had obscurely proposed it) and that he who may most justly come in for a second share in the glory of that invention is one Joannes Lapreius of the same Town. And whereas 'tis generally written, that Galilaeo was the first who applied those tubes to the contemplation of Celestial Objects, even that appears to be false, seeing that the first Inventor, even Zacharias Joannides, (together with his son Joannes Borel de vero invent. Telescop. c. 12. Zacharides) did make use of them to discover several new Phaenomena in the Moon and Heavens. Which mistake is unpardonable in our Virtuoso (and his Assistants) because that a more particular Enquiry hath been made of late years hereinto, then ever before. The Barometer he allows to have been first invented by Torricellius, not to try the gravitation of the Aire, but to prove a vacuum; Afterwards, the different ascent of the Quicksilver, being tried on the top and at the bottom of Hills in France, the opinion of the rising of the Quicksilver from the pressure of the Air, was introduced and illustrated. But nether is the gravitation, or pressure of the Air, a new opinion; it is as old as Aristotle, it isPecquet. Exper [...]m 2. in Diss [...]at. p. 54. Ed raris. 1651. his, and he essayed to weigh the Air, in his book de coelo l. 4. sect. 29, 30, 39. He proves the Air to ponderate, because a bladder full of Air weighs heavier then one that is empty. Concerning which Experiment I shall adde the words of Scipi Claramontius, that learned Writer, the truth of it havingScipio Claramont de universo l 14. c 3. been questioned, ‘Possum tamen testari observationem Aristotelis dicto faventem, fuitque diligens observatio, & à diligentissimo pensatore, exactusque stateris & lancibus peracta, me praesente & adsistente, cum pluribus veritatis cupidis viris: pensit avimus ergo primum follem novum penitusque vacuum, primo statera quae solum unciarum differentiam indicabat, invenimusque [Page] unciarum decemnovem, & totidem reperimus eundem follem diligenter inflatum, & solo spiritu nulloque humore immisso: ac postea usi sumus lance, quae semuncias quoque indicabat, tumque follem inflatum unciarum decemnovem & & semis invenimus, adeo tamen ut ibi libra in aequilibrio absque tractu (ut vocant nostri) adamussim permaneret: at idem vacuus non amplius in eodem signo sine tractu, sed cum tractu perstabat.’ Quocirca verum dicit Aristoteles. So that whether we consider the gravitation of the Aire, or its being weighed, (which Mr. Glanvill in his Plus ultra thinks so strange of, as he expresses, ‘To have said in elder Time, That Plus Ultra p 59. c 8. Mankind should light upon an Invention, whereby those Bodies might be weigh'd, would certainly have appeared very wilde and extravigant; and it will be so accounted for some time yet, till men have been longer, and are better acquainted Many Peripa [...]icks (as Claramontius) [...] impure Air of [...]or Atmosphear doth gra [...]itate, [...] deny it as to the pure Elemental Air. with this Instrument, &c.’ The opinion it self, and the attempt to weight it, is Aristotles: Nor is this Discourse casually proposed once in Aristotle; but sundry times he avows the gravitation of the Air in his Problems, viz. sect. 11. probl 45. sect. 21. probl. 18. sect. 25. probl. 12, 13. From hence we may judge how well Mr. Glanvill is acquainted with the tenets of Aristotle, and how well read he is in him whom he condemns. He and his Philosophick friends dealt only in some pitiful Compendium of Physics, and from thence learned that which was the opinion of Themistius, Simplicius, and o [...]her eminent Peripatetics, as if it had been the avowed doctrine of their great Master; and thereupon they thus deliver themselves. ‘And on this occasion, Sir, I observe the incompetency of their Mr. Glanvill, p. 122. judgments, who are Enemies to the real Experimental Philosophy, in that they do not (as I intimated at all, or very little, understand what they condemn. This I have some reason to say, since in the whole Compass of my Acquaintance, which is not very narrow, I profess I know not one who opposeth the Modern way, that is not almost totally unacquainted with it. And on the other side, upon the most careful turn of my thoughts among my Philosophick friends, I cannot light on one of all those that are for the free and experimental procedure, but who hath been very well instructed in the Peripatetick [Page] doctrines, which they have deserted, and most of them much Pecquet. Exper. Physico-Math. de Va [...]uo. pag. 10, &c. Parit 1651. Mersenni Phaenomena Pneumat. pag. 140. Par. 1644. better than those who are yet zealous Contenders for them.’ I might tell our Divine, that the Gravitation of the Air seems proposed in Job 28. 25. Qui fecit ventis pondus, God is said to make weight for the winde: indeed neither the gravitation of the Atmosphear, nor the notion of Aerial cylinders, pressing upon subjacent bodies, were any News in the world when the Society was first established. But the News of the Barometer is so pleasant, that I will insert the whole passage.

‘But (IV.) The BAROMETER is another late Instrument, very helpful to useful Knowledge. That there is gravity even in the Air it self, and that that Element is only Plus Ultra cap. 8. pag. 59. comparatively light, is now made evident and palpahle by Experience, though Aristotle and his Schools held a different Theory: And by the help of Quicksilver in a Tube, the way is found to measure all the degrees of Compression in the Atmosphere, and to estimate exactly any accession of weight, which the Air receives from Winds, Clouds, or Vapors. To have said in elder Times, that Mankind should light upon an Invention whereby those bodies might be weigh'd, would certainly have appeared very wilde and extravigant; and it will be so accounted for some time yet, till men have been longer, and are better acquainted with this Instrument. For we have no reason to believe it should have better luck than the Doctrine of the Circulation, the Theory of Antipodes, and all great Discoveries in their first Proposals. 'Tis impossible to perswade some of the Indians that live near the heats of the Line, that there is any such thing as Ice in the World; but if you talk to them of Water made hard and consistent by Cold, they'l laugh at you as a notorious Romancer. And those will appear as ridiculous among the most of us, who shall affirm it possible to determine any thing of the Weight of the Wind or Clouds. But Experience turns the laugh upon the confident incredulity of the Scoffer; and he that will not believe, needs no more for his Conviction, then the labour of a Trial. Let him then fill a Tube of Glass, of some Feet in length, with Quicksilver; [Page] and having sealed one end, let him stop the other with his Finger, and immerge that which is so stop'd into a vessel of Mercury, the Tube being perpendicularly erected; let him then substract his Finger, and he will perceive the Quicksilver to descend from the Tube into the subjacent vessel, till it comes to 29 Digits or thereabouts; there, after some Vibrations, it ordinarily rests. The reason that this remainder of the Mercury doth not descend also, is, because such a Mercurial Cylinder is just equiponderant to one of the incumbent Atmosphere that leans upon the Quicksilver in the Vessel, and so hinders a further descent. It is concluded therfore, That such a Cylinder of the Air, as presses upon the Mercury in the Vessel is of equal weight to about 29 Digits of that ponderous Body in the Tube. Thus it is when the Air is in its ordinary temper: but Vapours, Winds, and Clouds alter the Standard; so that the Quicksilver sometimes falls, sometimes rises in the Glass, proportionably to the greater or less accession of Gravity and compression of the Air hath received from any of those alterations; and the Degree of increase beyond the Standard, is the measure of the additionable gravity.—’

There is something so charming and so divertive in this discourse, that I cannot yet dismiss it, notwithstanding what I have said out of Aristotle and Claramontius. That there isAverroes adheres to Aristotle, and holds the Air doth gravitate. gravity even in the Air it self, and that that Element is only comparatively light, was of old made evident by the Man of Stagira: nor did the Schools hold a different tenet, if you take Air for this impure mixture and Sphaera vaporosa about the Earth, which we breath, and in a special manner have to do with: as appears from Claramontius in his Book of the Universe, and Septalius upon Aristotle's Problems. But Mr. Glanvill neither understands what he opposeth, nor what he Asserts. For in the beginning he speaks of the gravitation of the Element of the Air; whereas that Instrument called a Barometer proposeth only a way to measure the degrees of compression in the Atmosphear, in which Region I believe no man ever denied but that the Aqueous and Terrestrial corpuscles interspersed had their weight and pressure: Thus the ordinary temper of this Air (which is never pure) the alterations [Page] of it by vapors, winds, clouds, are the subject of those contemplations, as any man knows that reads Mr. Boyle, or even Mr. Glanvill. Thus all the flourish of Rhetorick comes to nothing, the wonder is ceased, and we come to try only a more particular way of examining the weight of a body, which no man in his wits ever denied to be ponderous. And here I must tell our Virtnoso, that his reading or consideration extends not so far as to the writings of Mr. Boyle, and the experiment in him. For it appears out of Him thatF eri [...] ▪ Phy [...]c-Mechan. E▪ per. 7. the Mercurial Cylinder riseth and falls in the Magdeburgical Air-Pump, according to the lessening or vigorating of the Spring of the Air: and that upon putting in the Barometer, and closing the Engine, there appeared not any change in the height of the Mercurial Cylinder, no more then if the interposed Glass-Receiver did not hinder the immediateBesides, the difference in Quicksilver is such, that all Writers take notice of it, and I am apt to believe the Phaenomenon may be much varyed in the Cylinder, according to that.pressure of the ambient Atmosphear upon the inclosed Air; which hereby appears to bear upon the Mercury, rather by vertue of its Spring then of its weight. And if this Phaenomenon proved such in a greater and less Receiver, with a greater or less cylinder of Mercury (it being indifferent which is used,) I doubt this Barometer will not determine the strength of the Spring of the Air, much less its weight. For the Elasticity is a distinct consideration from the weight of the Air: as when some Experimentators went about to weigh the Pike, the Flownce or Spring of the Pike was no part of the weight of the Pike, though it might turn the Scales. This sole consideration destroys all the great promises we have from the Barometer, for if the Spring of the Air cannot be exactly known, that we must be for ever ignorant of the nature of those other bodies which influence and press upon our Air, and compress the Spring of the Air, and may have many operations upon it which we know not, neither can comprehend; If the height of the Atmosphear cannot be determined, (which I make a postulatum of) the alterations in the higher Regions are unsearchable, and the mechanismes of those corpuscular combinations incomprehensible, I shall not doubt to say, that there is not yet found out a way to measure ALL THE degrees of Compression in the Atmosphear: nay, 'tis far [Page] from that exactness; for the body of the Quicksilver varies not upon insensible variations in the Air: the intercepted Air in it takes off from the Nicenesse of the Experiment: and since even heat, (and perhaps other circumstances) adds to the Spring of the Air, it cannot give us that account pretended, about vapours, winds and clouds.

The Essay by Tubes and Quicksilver, as ingenious as it is, yields the Society no further glory, then to have illustrated it, and perhaps to have made some further Experiments in it then those had done, to whom, as the first Inventor, (by the concession of the Historian) appertains all or most of the Honour which ariseth from such accessionals. It is true, our Virtuosi fixed on it the name of Barometer, but they had done better to have called [...], or [...], or Gas, or Blas, or Diaceltateston, or some such unintelligible name, rather then have termed it thus: the Appellation signifying no more an instrument to measure the gravity of the Air, then an instrument to weigh a parcel of Tarre, or indefinitely a pair of Stillyards. The Aerometer might have been a little more Emphatical; especially considering that [...] and [...] are Synonimous. Had not Aeroscopium been accommodated to the Thermometer, it would not have been much incongruous. But I conceive, that Aerobaricon or Aerostaticon would have fitted the Experiment as well as any name I can now think upon. The Barometer was invented by Torricellius to prove a Vacuum, and in Mersennus's Cogitata Physico-Mathematica, you may find it applied to the examining the difference of the Air in several places. The Air-Pump was found out at Magdeburgh, and not in England; it was first published by Schottus, under the name of Instrumentum Magdeburgicum. Mr. Boyle amended it, and prosecuted many ingenious Experiments in it, for which all Philosophers are redevable to him, but cannot proclaim him the Inventor of the Instrument, no, nor of the (notion of the Elasticity Hen. Reg. Philos Nat. l. 2 c. 12. p. [...]4. & l. 2 c. 3 p. 173. ed. 1661. of the Air, which was proposed first to the world by Henricus Regius, under the name of the spontaneous dilatation of the Air: and illustrated by Pecquetus, who first, (that I know of,) spoke of the Elater, Pecquetus pag. 19 (quem elaterem [Page] nuncupo). The Microscope was invented by the aforesaidBorel ubi supra c. 12. p. 26. Blancanus de mundi fabr. part. 3. c 2. Zacharias Joannides: The Thermometer, or Thermoscopium was first the invention of Sanctorius; so Blancanus saith, Audivi Doctorem quendam medicum Patavii degentem, qui Sanctorius cognominatur, hujus esse inventorem And now I demand of our Virtuoso, which of these Five Instruments for the Improvement of knowledge have been found out by the Royal Society: The Thermometer is the discovery of a Galenical Physician; but as to our Virtuosi nothing appears but the pretension to other mens discoveries, and the improving of them.

‘By the Benefit indeed of one of these Instruments,the Telescope, we are put in hopes to find a sure way to determine those mighty Questions, Whether the Earth move? or, The Planets be inhabited? And who knows which way the Conclusion may fall?’—I perceive hereby that Mr. Glanvill is not altogether convinced that the Earth moves; and I am as little satisfied, that the solution of those Questions is so mighty and important a thing; for if the Earth stand still, then things will be as they are now: and if it be determined otherwise, yet shall we not need to fear that the Revolution of the Earth in its Diurnal motion, either shake our houses about our ears, or shake us off by the tangent line: and as for those inhabitants of the Planets, in case all our other trading should be lost, we shall not finde out any gainful commerce with them; nor need we dread that they will piss out our Eyes as we look up. So that let their Telescopes be brought to that unimaginable perfection, whereby to discover the inhabitants of the Planets as plainly as mites in Cheese, and let the Conclusion fall which way it will, things will fall out no otherwise than they do.

He inveigheth bitterly against Aristotle for his Heathen-Notions, and in his Preface to the Clergy of B. & W. wishes that the devoted Admirers of Aristotle would study his Rhetorick, History of Animals, and Mechanicks. I wonder he did not recommend unto them the perusal of his Ethicks. Certainly they deserve as much to be read in these days, as any Piece. [Page] And perhaps his Politicks might contribute something to the instruction of a Nation. But how dare herecommend any book of that man of Stagira to be read, if those motives that swayed him to Anti-Aristotelism, be of any validity: Alas! he is troubled at his Heathen-Notions! Oh! rare Puritanism! But my dear Brother Scruple, ought any one to be offended at every thing that is of Heathen-Original, though it contain nothing of Gentilisme in it? Represent your adversary as you please to his Diocesan, nothing hath more of the Presbyterian and Fanatick then this Topick. Moreover, what do you think of those Atoms and Corpuscles? are they not Heathen-Notions, and decried by the Fathers? what do you think of the terms used by the Mathematicians? what of the Languages, such as are not Sacred? what of the months, days of the year, and the names of the Stars, Constellations, &c. Must every thing be reformed according to the Coelum Stellatum Christianum of Julius Schillerus? Besides, these words in Theology, of Unity and Trinity, have as much of Heathenism in them, as they have of Platonism. I shall here take further notice of his exceptions against Aristotle, as they are Recapitulated here (though they are more largely proposed by him in his Letter against Aristotle, which I have fully answered in a distinct Treatise) the generall censure whereof is, That they are nothing but Lies, and such as no man that is acquainted with any thing of ancient Literature could have uttered. I protest in the Presence of Almighty God, that if there be not great care taken, we may be in a little time reduced to that pass, as to believe the story of Tom Thumb, and all the Legends or falsifications of History, which the Papists obtrude upon us! This Philosophy fairly disposeth us therevnto, by taking us off from the Pedantism of Philology, and ancient reading, and by accustoming us to believe the forgeries they obtrude upon us. Methinks herein he is one as absurd as that Romish Monk was in the Pulpit. Heresbachius I. C. citante Taubmanno,J [...] H [...]n H [...]ttingerus in [...]. Oriental l. 1. c. 2. p. 2 audivi, inquit, Monachum in Ecclesia declamantem, qui, nova, inquiebat, jam reperta est Lingua, quae vocatur Graeca, ab hac sedulò cavendum: Haec enim est quae parit omnes [Page] omnes istas heraeses. Ea lingua est liber proditus, in manibus passim habetur & vocatur N. T. Plenus hic liber rubetis, & viperis. Alia etiam oriturlingua, quam vocant Hebraeam, hanc qui discunt, efficiuntur Hebraei. We are running on as fast as we can to this condition of ignorance, and shall be so inured to Historical untruths, magisterially imposed upon us, and disused from inquiring into them, as to beleeve any thing. He tells us the Aristotelian Philosophy aims at no more, than the instructing men in Notion and Dispute, that its Design was mean, and its Principles at the best uncertain and precarious,——One may guess how well our Virtuoso understands the Old Philosophy, to ascribe that unto it all in general as its aim, which is but the intendment (and that a necessary one too) of the Dialectick and Metaphysical parts. In Natural Philosophy their designs were the same that our Moderns boast of, if they miscarried in the main, let us pity their misfortunes, but not blame their intentions. Did Aristotle in his books of Animals, or Theophrastus about Plants, instruct men only to Dispute? Had his Anatomy, and his Problems nothing but Notion? Must we cast off all Notions? Or ought we to endeavour after the gaining of clear notions of things? If men hitherto did proceed no further, and yet pretended to be Peripateticks, blame the abuse, but condemn not the Philosophy, which hath nothing in it that puts a stop to Enquiries and Curiosity. Nor do I find that those Physicians, and others, who advanced the several parts of Natural Philosophy and Physick, did thereby act contrary to the rules of their Master or Tutors. It is true, that their Schools did meddle but with few points mainly, and those were such as related to Divinity, as the Eternity of the World, the Nature of the First and Second Causes, of the Soul and its Faculties, &c. as to an exact natural Philosophy, they did not much trouble themselves, nor had we had what we have, but that Averroes and the Physicians befriended us. But must Scaliger and such like suffer under these Imputations, which particularly relate unto their School-Divines? and must they also be blamed for not teaching nor putting men upon further Enquiries than were necessary to that Christianity, which they were [Page] to support against the Mahometans and Jews? He that knows the end of their first institution by Charlemaigne, can best judge how prudential it was, and how they answered expectation. But our Illiterati know nothing of that, and are always reviling them where they are not faulty, and would have had them nglected that part which was necessary to the Education of all that were to live under and support Christianity, to pursue Studies that contribute little thereto, and such as were never essential to the being of a State, but have been often exploded as prejudicial thereunto. The same Apology may serve the present Universities, who do enough in breeding up men to be fitly qualified for Employments in Church and State, and instruct them in so much Philosophy as is necessary for the explaining and defending of our Religion against Atheists, Papists, and Socinians: and whosoever shall put the accurate debate of these Points, the Art of reasoning, the Validity of Consequences, the unfolding of crytical Syllogisms and Fallacies, the general doctrine of Topicks, the Moral Philosophy, and Foundations of Civil Prudence, (besides Civil and Ecclesiastical History and Languages) which are taught there, or ought to be by their Constitution, into the Scales on one hand, and the Mechanical Education (recommended with all the advantages that ariseth from Aphorisms of Cider, planting of Orchards, making of Optick Glasses, magnetick andS [...]e Mr Sprat, p. 329. hortulane Curiosities) on the other hand, will be able to judge easily which Studies deserve the most encouragement by the publick, and which are most useful and requisite. Having said thus much in behalf of our University-Learning (which is now contradistinguished from the Mechanical Education) I shall adde thus much in favour of our Ancestors, who gave solemn encouragement to Archery, Cudgel-playing, Foot-ballplaying, and other Exercises, that prepared the Vulgar to Military Performances; as the more Academical did the Gentry to State-affairs: whereas they gave little countenance to the Experimental Philosophers and Naturalists: that the practice is justified by Vegetius l. 3. c. 10. Quis autem dubitat artem bellicam rebus omnibus esse potiorem, per quam libertas retinetur, & dignitas propagatur, provinciae conservantur & [Page] Imperium? Hanc quondam relictis doctrinis omnibus Lacedemonii, & post coluere Romani. Hanc solam hodieque Barbari putant esse servandam: caetera aut in hac arte consistere, aut per hanc artem assequi se posse considunt. Haec dimicaturis est necessaria▪ per quam vitam retineant & victoriam consequantur. But to return to our Virtuoso! Are not the principles of Des Cartes, and the figured Atoms of Gassendus as precarious as those of Aristotle, and less subjected to sense? Have [...] si ac [...]piantur h [...]c Chymicorum p [...]ij [...] assent▪ [...] [...]s p [...]ss [...]mus, ita ut pro Mercurio aqua ponatur, Sulphure ignis & [...]er, S le ter [...]a. Analogiá negatâ negatur omnia eo abire Ex aqua & terra sac li [...]um viscidum▪ & hunc cu [...]ae conglutinari & con [...]rescere in [...]apidem: quemadmodum naturā [...] videmus. Si hic resolvatur in ultima non in Mercurium. Sulphur, & Salem, sed in vulgata & Physica resolvetur principia▪ M. Ruland. Progyn [...]n. Alchym Qu [...]. not the Chymical Principles so much of uncertainty, as they have of Equivocation? Are not they precarious too, and suspicious? Are there any of those that agree amongst themselves? and do not they as little agree with Nature as those of the Peripatetick way? I will not doubt to maintain that as far as Physick is concerned in the debates; The ancient Philosophy better agrees with the Phaenomena of Nature, and carries us on with more assurance to work (as they phrase it) then any other, and that the diligent reading of Vallesius, Mercatus, Saxonia, Claudinus, &c. shall produce better Physicians then Sylvius, Helmont, or Odorode. And whosoever resolves any of the other Questions in the Negative, whatever he pretend, hath never considerately studied the Points. Give therefore the Aristotelians leave to hold an Hypothesis, which is accommodated to the polity of our Nation) at least as revocable, till a better be introduced; and do not proceed in an exterminative way, till something else be ready to be substituted.

If Notions might be rejected for being first proposed and used by Heathens, then is not Aristotle in a worse condition then Epicurus, Democritus, Plato, or Pythagoras; If Impiety in the Teacher may authorize us to reject doctrines not impious, I think the condition of our Stagirite not to be worse then that of other ancient Philosophers, and better then some of the New. That there is impiety enough in Gassendus's Answer to Des Cartes, any Christian will grant, especially if he be a Protestant. And the life of Des-Cartes [Page] had but little of the Saint: this isI cannot finde any ground to conclude Aristotle so wicked. If we indemnifie him for having an hand in poisoning Alexander, (which perhaps is not true). In his last Will, there is much generosity: in his life, many testimonies of a singular vertue: [...]n his discourses much wit and worth. He writ an Apologie for Piety; got the walls of his destroyed Country to be rebuilt, and made excellent Laws for it. Philip chose him to breed up Alexander. And those are greater assurances that he was not so wicked, as he is reported by his adversaries▪ They repeat nothing but old lies, such as Apellicon refuted: and Aristocles saith, [...]. Se [...] Casaubon upon Diog. Lart. manifest. And I desire Mr. Glanvill to acquit Paracelsus from being impious in his life, and many of his doctrines. If he was a Corrupter of the Wisdom of the Ancients, for mis-citing, and misrepresenting their opinions; and must therefore be condemned and rejected: who can approve of Mr. Sprat, Mr. Glanvill, and their Adherents? He saith, that Aristotle was of no such superlative Account in the wisest times. But he tells us not which those most wise times were, when he was in disesteem. I have not read of any more wise people, then Greece, Rome, and the Mahometans, under their first Caliphs and King Almansor. And yet all these admired him at several times. He that chargeth Philip of Macedon, Alexander the Great, and his Successors, (particularly the Ptolomyes of Egypt,) with Folly: and Sylla, Tully, and those other Romans that admired him, with want of wisdom; Or, who thinks that the Empire of the Moors, and their Academies at Bagdod, Fez, and Cordula, were composed of a sort of Simpletons, may go seek for the wise and the prudent in Gotam Colledge. And perhaps those Christians that celebrated Aristotle, and advanced him to that repute in their Kingdoms and Universities, were not Idiots or Changlings. That He was much opposed and slighted by the first Fathers, is an Objection that hath some truth in it, but not much to the particular prejudice of our Stagirite. For at first they hated and detested all humane Learning, and Philosophy; and when they came any of them to admit of those Sciences, then they divided into the Aristotelians and Platonists, as they did into Arians and Catholicks: That the Arians were Aristotelians, is to me as evident, as that Mahomet taking the advantage of that faction, and of the brutal lives and ignorance of the Catholiques depending upon the Patriarch of Constantinople, did advance the Sect of Christians, called Mahometans; and his Successors the Caliphs, did [Page] wholly employ themselves to improve [...] that the Virtuosi would enquire after the Peripatetick Philosophy, at Alexandria after the Ptolomies and not at Athens. And when they have done that, and studied the condition of Christianity, during the time of the Arrians, and enquired into the rise of Mahomet, the circumstances that advanced him, and contributed to the spreading of his doctrine, and increase of that Empire under the Caliphs, then they will be able to judge of the truth of what their Historian, and Mr Glanvill writes in the books animadverted on, and in his Letter concerning Aristotle. the doctrines of Aristotle and the Peripateticks. So that Aristotelism, Arianism, and Mahometanism issued out of the same parts of the world, viz. Alexandria, and the adjacent Countreys: Nor was it Chance or the black ignorance of the Age, but great prudence in Charlemaine and his Successors in the West, that brought in Aristotle: as any man will say that understands the circumstances of those dayes. But so much History is above the reach of my Experimental Philosopher: To supply that defect, Christians must be once more told, that since their minds are enlightned with the rays of the glorious Gospel, they have less reason to bow down to the Dictates of an Idolater and an Heathen. And so farewel to the Rhetorick and other works of Aristotle, which our Virtuoso a little while agoe recommended unto us. Let us shake hands with Seneca, and Epictetus, and Plato: and joyn with Tertullian in that saying. Nobis Philosophia opus non est post Jesum Christum, nec Aristotele post Evangelium. Having said thus much to these grand accusations against Aristotle, with which Mr. Glanvill was so perplexed, I suppose he may think that a more devout Admirer of Aristotle then I am, with more time, may say enough to convince him, that it was his fault, and not the Peripateticks, that he benefited so little by them. And I pray what language did Epicurus, Pythagoras, and Philolaus make use of? He writ better about divine things than Plato, as Vossius witnesseth, Quanquam multa de Deo scripta sunt a Platone, accuratius tamen apertiusque de iis egit Aristoteles. He cites a passage of Plato, [...], and adds, that the Universe must be known by the Art, by which it was made. If it be not to be known any other way, it is unintelligible. Let him answer Dr. More's Dialogues upon that point, where he explodes the Mechanism of Nature: and reckons upon Des-Cartes as the most prodigious Fool that ever was, for holding that opinion. I shall adde, that Geometricians [Page] are commonly a sort of men, that being once got out of their Science, they are far from being elevated and improved thereby: And the reason is, because that the severe procedure of Mathematical demonstrations, and their ways they take to demonstrate things appertaining to their Science, these do not qualifie a man at all for those argumentations which sway and guide in Metaphysicks, Ethicks, Politicks Arist Eth. l. 6. c. 8. and Religion it self. Upon this account Aristotle observed, that a child might become a Mathematician, but not a Politician, or Moralist. Hence it is, that Geometricians, (except their studies have particularly acquainted them with those Dialecticks, which regulate the generality of Mankinde in such discourses,) seldom, if ever, prove Metaphysicians, Religieuse, or otherwise of tolerable ratiocination: either rejecting as false, frivolous, and demonstrable those reasonings and studies, according to which humane affairs are regulated; or else ignorantly, running into Whimseys, and phantastical ways of arguing. Neither is this more manifest, then I think these two Conclusions are, which I deduce from thence in opposition to some Comical Wits in their History, viz.

That by how much more general as to publike and private use and emolument in order to domestick affairs, or Civil Prudence and the preservation of Humane Society and Government those things are, which depend upon perswasive Arguments, and those topicks and methods of ratiocination which are laid down by Aristotle, not Euclide: by so much those courses ought to be pursued, upheld and encouraged by understanding Statesmen which are subservient thereunto, above the less necessary and utile Mathematicks.

Next, That the Mechanical Education, or that wherebyHist of the R▪ [...]. p. 319. Youth are inured at first to vigorous demonstrations, and necessary deductions from evident Principles, and a Philosophy that is purely Corpuscularian, ought not to be premised or preferred to other studies in order to the fitting men for humane life: seeing either accidentally, (yet so, as in regard of our depraved nature it is almost unavoidable) or intrinsecally those courses dispose mens minds afterwards to Atheism, or an indifference in Religion, and inhabilitate them towards those more [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] important, but less delightful studies of Law, Policy, and Religion, with their several dependencies.

I finde that Aristotle hath complained of some, that in their Explications of Nature made too much use of Geometry. Magnenus hath complained also of them; and Conringius, Bullialdus, and Ricciolus, of Kepler; and Bodinus, in hisV de Ricciol [...]m in Alma [...]st no [...]. l. 4. p 278. Theatrum Naturae l. 5. and all Physicians almost of Des-Cartes his ridiculous book de Homine. And if Plato was so solicitous, that none but Geometricians should come into his School, yet he sent them very fools out, if they allowedSee Mr. Parkers censure of the Platonick Philosophy. of his Logick and Physiology. I shall leave the further defence of Aristotle to others; only I must tell him, that Vossius in his account of Geometricians allows of Aristotle for no mean one. And we find that he supposeth his Scholars not ignorant in Geometry, since without that knowledge they couldVide Blancanum in loca Mathematica Aristotelis. not understand his Analyticks, nor that part of his Ethicks, where he illustrates Justice by the Arithmetical and Geometrical proportions. And as for his Ethnical opinions, it is ridiculous to upbraid the University-Learning Epicurus Mathesin insuper habuit: unde ut Plutarch, ait libro contra Epicurum. Philosophum quendam nomine Apellem, co nomine laudabat, quod ab adolescentia nunquam esset contaminatus disciplinis Mathematicis. Vossius de Philos. sect. c 8 sect. 7. with them, since they are not taught, but solidly refuted there, However if Aristotle must suffer on this Account, let not Epicurus triumph. He tells us that Archytas, that great Geometrician was scared from Mechanical and Organical Methods to the great hinderance of beneficial Improvements that way, so that he kept himself up in Abstractive Contemplations. I cannot finde any such thing in his life written by Diog. Laertius, but the contrary, [...].Diog. Laert. l. 8. in vit. Archytae. He made a Pidgeon of wood artificially to flie. So Favorinus. [...]. [...]llius x. 12. I wonder oftentimes how He did to commit so many mistakes; and I cannot believe that He or his Philosophick friends were ever well instructed in the Peripatetick doctrines, who are so ill taught in all manner of Humane Learning. I resign him up [Page] to be the scorn and entertainment of others henceforth. Nor will I engage particularly in the dispute betwixt him and Mr. Cross. I am informed, that the Relation is very false; and I profess I have no mind to believe this Virtuoso in any thing he says. It is easie for him to misreport a private discourse; His great and admired friend Mr. Sprat relates general Encounters salse; He tells us, ‘Of a mischance that befel the Christian Army in Egypt in the time of the Hist. of the R. S. Pag. 412. Holy Warre. Their strength was great and irresistible, if they had only understood that which every Egyptian could have taught them, the course and the time of the overflowing of the Nile. For the want of that slender knowledge, the bravest men of all Christendome, were led up to the Neck in the River, and were forced to yield to the Enemies conditions without striking a stroke. This was occasioned by the stupidity of the Cardinal who commanded them. If he had been less skilful in the Schoolmen and more in Nature, that dreadful disaster had never happened.—’ Such an untruth as the Historian tells here, such perhaps is the Narrative of what passed betwixt him and Mr. Cross. I cannot finde any such Story in Fullers Holy Warre, but the contrary, viz. ‘EgyptFallers Holy War, l. 3. c▪ 27. is a low level Countrey except some few advantages, which the Egyptians had fortified for themselves. Through the midst of the Land runs the River Nilus, whose streams they had so bridled with banks and sluces, that they could keep it to be their own servant, and make it their Enemies Master at pleasure. The Christians confidently marched on, and the Turks perceiving the Game was come within the wile, pierced their banks, and unmuzling the River, let it run open mouth upon them, yet so that at the first they drowned them but up to the middle—not to the neck.’ There is no body charges the Cardinal Pelagius, who was Legate, and commanded the Army there, for invading Egypt in an unseasonable time, nor with being ignorant of the time when Nile did overflow. The Christians were not ignorant of that, who had discovered and invaded Egypt before in 1218, and this was but two years after in 1220. The Egyptians, 'tis true, dammed up the River (which was now low) and upon the approach of [Page] the Cardinal cut their banks, and so gained the victory. That the Cardinal was no Souldier, and unacquainted with Stratagems of war, I grant; and for this Historians▪ condemn him, but not for being ignorant of that part of Natural Philosophy. A Member of the Royal Society published lately an account of the Original of Nile. The Description had nothing of News in it to any Scholar, that was material. But they should have procured an account of the manner of the inundation of Nile, for the Historian is more ignorant then the Gardinal of it. Had it been the time of the beginning of the overflowing of Nile, they might have retired easily toProsper. Alpin. de Medic. Aegypt. l 1. c. 8. Damiata without damage; for it never exceeds in rising above ten inches each day, sometimes it ariseth not eight inches. Just such an Account, I fear, doth

I know not what Logick Mr Glanvill read at Oxford, but 'tis Ignoratio Elenchi in him, to oppose what Mr. Cross might say about Asia as 'twas of old named, and bounded▪ and travelled over, with the new discoveries of China, Japan, &c. which rather constitute a fifth part of the world, then are included in Asia. That is Asia, which they imported that gave it the name, not what others affix to it. By the same Sophistry it may be said that the former Kings were not Kings of France, because late Conquests have enlarged the borders.

Nor was Aristotle implicitly guided by the relations of those Hunters, &c. he diligently inquired into their reports, and oftentimes refutes the vulgar stories. See this particularly asserted by Federicus Bonaventura de partu Octomestri l. 5. c. 60.

Mr. Glanvill give of Mr. Cross's discourses, whom report speaks so advantagiously of, that we must give the Lie to general fame, or believe him a very learned Person, as well as pious. Perhaps he, as well as my Lord Eacon might suspect the truth of those Telescopes. And perhaps also he might be mistaken in saying that Aristotle did travel all over Asia: yet, however that, that Jonssius (de Script Philos. l. 1. c. 18.) disproves that opinion▪ yet no less man then Josephus l. 1. adv. Apionem, was deceived as well as Mr. Cross. Solinus also c. 14▪ and Ammonius in the life of Aristotle say, that Aristotle did accompany Alexander in his Asiatick▪ Expedition. And I prosess my self in an errour as well as Mr. Cross, if it be not true, that Aristotle had sundry advantages to pen his History of Animals which our Virtuosi want. Pliny Nat. Hist l. 8. c. 16. saith▪ Alexandro Magno rege inflammato cupidine animalium naturas noscendi, delegataque hac commentatione Aristoteli, summo in omni doctrina viro, aliquot millia hominum in totius Asiae, Greciae que tractu parere jussa, omnium quos venatus, aucupia, piscatusque alebant: quibusque vivaria, armenta, [Page] alvearia, piscinae, aviaria in cura erant: nequid usquam gentium ignoraretur ab eo: quos percontando, quinquaginta fermò volumina illa praeclara de animalibus condidit.

Let a man now consider the greatness of Alexander, the impatience he had to effect his purposes, how generous he was in acknowledging Services, and how vindicative when neglected, and how understanding to know what was done and omitted: Let any man consider this, and he will think that the Society have not a Patron that interesseth himself so much as Alexander did for Aristotle. He had several thousands commanded to give him intelligence: their number transcends any that ours can pretend to: their quality is such as the R. Society wisheth for, viz. Intelligence from the constant and unerring use of Experienced men, of the most unaffected Mr. Sprat. p. 257. and most unartificial kinds of life. And if notwithstanding all these circumstances Aristotle were abused or mistaken, or defective in his Narrations, I am confident there is less credit to be placed in the Narrations of some of our Virtuosi, who have been so mistaken in their Accounts of Cider and Salt-Peter, domestick Enquiries; what man will give himself the trouble to inform them, either at home, or abroad? with what negligence and imperfectness will they register things? how un-philosophical will their memoires be? How will they be able by intreaty to procure a second information? That there are more parts of the world discovered and sailed unto then in Aristotles time, I grant. But what certainty shall we have of Narratives picked up from negligent, or un-accurate Merchants and Seamen? What judgement have these men of no reading, whereby to rectify or enlarge their Enquiries? Mr. Glanvill doth not so much as know who writ well upon the several subjects, in which he pretends that the Moderns have out-done the Ancients. As Improvers of the History of Bathes (by the way we are far inferiour to them in the practice of Bathing) he reckons Savananla for one: he might as well have recounted Bayrus, Gordonius and Gatinaria: or any of the barbarous Physicians, for advancers of the practick: He might have told us of a Volume of Writers de balneis: But why did he omit Solinander [Page] de thermis, Libavius, and our Dr. Jordan (who lived at our Bathe) and Bauhinus de fonte Bollensi, and the other Writers about particular Bathes? Alas! He knew them not: nor did I ever hear any man commend Blanchellus upon that subject. About Minerals, could he not have named Encelius, Caesalpinus, Fallopius, and Lazarus Erkerus, whom I find by some to be preferred before Agricola? In his Account of remote Histories of Nature, could he remember the Author of the Caribby-History, and pass by Carolus Piso, Burggravius, and Bontius about Brasile and the East Indies. So where he speaks of discoveries made by Microscopes (pag. 57.) by naming only Dr. Power and Mr. Hooke, ingenious Mechanicks, Members of the Royal Society; he seems to intimate, as if none but the Virtuosi had proceeded in that adventure, whereas Petrus Borellus, Physician in ordinary to the King of Erance, published a Century of Microscopical observations An. Dom. 1656. such as have (if true) more of utility then those of Mr. Hooke, though less of curiosity, and destitute of Cuts; and Kircher after many years employed in those contemplations, per exquisitissima Microscopia, didKerch. de Pest sect. 1. c. 7. publish several Experiments of that kinde, in his book de Peste; and Nicolaus Zucchius about the same time (1656.)Nic. Zucchius Philos. op [...]ic. part. 2. [...]. 3. c. 7. sect. 4. p. 348. published a short account of Microscopical observations, about a Lowse, a Flea, the feathers of a Peacocks tail, &c. encouraging others to prosecute the work. He tells us, (pag. 56.) ‘that the discoveries by Telescopes may inform us of the Longitudes: upon which must needs ensue yet greater improvements of Navigation, and perhaps the discovery of the North-west passage, and yet unknown South.’ I grant that the invention of Longitudes will be extreamly beneficial to man-kinde in point of sailing: and the R. S. have made great boasts how that it shall be atchieved by their Members; and thereupon caused some projects to be rejected, which yet perhaps would have proved as unfeasible as the attempt of Galileo's▪ to calculate it by the Medicean Starrs. I desire much to see the happy result of our Virtuosi, though the consequences here affixed to it, as Improvements was very defective. I shall propose some Scruples about the North-west passage, [Page] and [...]he utility of its discovery, as also of the hopes of finding out the Southern Tracts.

First, I say that the story about the streights of Aman See Mr. Gardiner in his description of America c. 25. where he professeth to write nothing but what his own knowledge, or good intelligence perswaded him unto, he having lived long in the remote parts of America: the loss of whose large Account thereof we may deplore. is very improbable, if not certainly a Fiction. It hath been so thorowly search'd into by our Nation, that there is no encouragement to a further trial: and this Streight of the Northwest passage, is indeed nothing but a narrow difficult passage to Button's Bay, the entrance being properly called Hudson's Streight, in regard of his first finding it; the mouth whereof lies in 62 degrees. But were there such a passage, it would much more concern the Portugals, and the Spaniards, and Dutch, then it doth the English; for their trade is to the North-part of the East-Indies, and ours to the South: theirs to the Moluccoes, Philippinas, Japan, and China; whereas we seldom pass beyond Bant am in Java.

Secondly, were there a passage that way, yet it were not to be chosen before the other: for, could a man sail in a strait line, first from England to the Streight, and thence from the Streight to the East-Indies, it would prove a further way then the other by the Cape of good Hope. But those that know any thing of those Seas, know that the Sea-Course to any part of North-America, is as low as 23, 24, 25, or 30 the highest by reason of the winde which bloweth in the South-sea East and West▪ as well as in the North, that is to say, for the most part West without the Tropicks, and almost constantly East within them. Wherefore you must go out of your way as well from the North-part of America to the East-Indies, as from England to this supposed Streight: and there is as much difference in relation to pleasantness in the Voyages, as between Summer and Winter. For when one is clear of the Bay of Biscay, in all the Voyage by the Cape you find no cold weather till you return to the same place again: but on the contrary, it is so cold and Icy about the Streight in the middle of Summer, that there is no makingJudge hence what hopes there is of making discoveries in the Southerne Tracts. way without much difficulty and trouble. And in the South-Sea, where the Sunne keeps the same course as in the North in June; Sir Francis Drake in compassing the world, found so much cold in thirty eight degrees of North-latitude, [Page] that he was forced into a Southerly course. Besides, if we may take a conjecture from the windes, which have blown when the Undertakers for that discovery passed into those Streights, one would guess by their great coldness, that they did blow from the Land, and consequently that there is no Sea to the North of America, but that the Land of this New World reacheth by the North parts, even to the Northwardly Provinces of Tartary, &c.

I am surprized to finde, that Mr. Glanvill doth not make the Moderns to surpass the Ancients, in Architecture, Sculpture, Picture, and several other Arts of ingenious Luxury. That he doth not advance the glory of our Mathematical burning-Glasses, above the Specula Ustoria of Proclus; and the Artificial Fires of our Virtuosi above those invented by Callinicus, when he burned the Saracens Fleet.

But not to upbraid him with what he hath omitted: I shall resume the discourse about Telescopes, and their fallaciousness, wherein if Mr. Cross was a little doubtful, yet Mr. Glanvill is so assured, that he makes an ample recital of the contest, and the advantages he gained in it. I shall set down his words, the better to divert my Reader, and to shew how insupportable such kind of men are in all judicious and intelligent company.

‘To my Discourse about the Dioptrick Tubes, the Telescope Mr. Glanvills Plus Ultra. c. 9 p. 65. and Microscope,’ the Reverend Disputer replied,

[That our Glasses were all deceitful and fallacious] Which Answer minds me of the good Woman, who when her Husband urged in an occasion of difference, [I saw it, and shall I not believe my own Eyes?] Replied briskly, Will you believe your own Eyes before your own Dear Wife? And it seems this Gentleman thinks it unreasonable we should believe ours▪ before his own dear Aristotle.

For an assurance of the credit of those Glasses, I told him he might try them upon objects near, and easily visible by the unassisted sight; and if he made the trial, he would finde they altered the objects in nothing but their proportions▪ which are represented larger for the advantage of vision in things small and remote; and we have all the like reasons to [Page] distrust our Eyes, as these Glasses (for their informations are the same in all things, but the mentioned difference) and there is no man so much a fool as not to make allowances for that. Never was any yet so grosly deceived by the Microscope, as to be perswaded that a Flea is as big as a Lobster; nor did the Telescope ever make any one believe that the Moon was at the end of his Tube: But if the former represents that little Creature as bristled and jamar'd, and the other makes the Planet mountanous and uneven, we have no reason to believe but that their reports are sincere, though our unaided Senses are too gross to perceive either the one or other; since, if the mentioned bristles and jamars are in the Glass, and not in the Animal, they would appear in like manner in all the small Creatures which in the same light and position are look't on through the Microscope: And if the ruggedness of surface were in it, and not in the Moon, the same would be seen upon all other distant Objects, that are view'd through the other Optick Instrument. And if there be deceit in those Glasses, Seamen had need beware how they trust them, since the Flags which appear to be those of their Friends in the Perspective, may be really the Colours of their Enemies.

Upon these Accounts, Sir, which afford plain and sensible evidence, I wondred much at the Disputers strange suspicion, which had been scarce pardonable in a vulgar head; and I know not what to call it in one, that would be thought a Philosopher: But the wary man gave a reason, which made me as much wonder at his Argument, as his Doubt. And to this attend Ye Philosophers of the ROYAL COLLEDGE, and prepare your selves to answer a Demonstration from Experience against your Glasses; Raise your Expectations for a wonderful, convictive Experiment; Let the Mountains travel, and the Birth will follow. [Take two Spectacles (saith the Experimental Sage) use them at the same time, and you will not see so well as with one singly.] therefore your Microscopes and Telescopes are Impostors. This man, Sir, is a Logician, and no doubt you perceive so. O how I admire this rare faculty of arguing! How dull are [Page] our Wits, to those subtile, Eagle-ey'd Schoolmen, who see Conclusions so far off, through the more unerring Telescopes of their own piercing Understandings? Did ever old man before make this use of his Spectacles? But to leave wondring, let's endeavour to understand this Philosophy of Chue. How a man may see by Spectacles, that Perspectives are deceitful. [We can see better through one pair, than two] saith the deep Philosopher. Most sagely observ'd! The Argument begins strongly: But in the name of Aristotle, whence comes the Consequence? Therefore Perspectives are fallacious.

"One Proposition for Sence,

"And th' other for Convenience.

This fits his purpose to discredit new Discoveries, 'tis no matter how it follows. This Gentleman, you must know, Sir, useth to have his word taken among his admiring Neighbours, and so is not wont to be put to the trouble of proving: but I was so unmannerly as to expect it, chusing rather to see with mine own Eyes, than his infallible Spectacles. We can see better—saith the Disputer. How doth he know that? If Perspectives deceive us, though naked sense witness for them, Why may not his single Spectacles be as deceitful as they? These represent things bigger than they are to the unaided sight; and the Philosophical Glasses do but the same thing, in a higher degree of magnifying the Object. But we allow him the benefit of his single Spectacles, though he will not be so courteous to our Glasses, and confess his Reverend Experiment of the use of two, but are inquisitive about the Consequence. The Reason of which certainly must be, (if any be intended in it) that our Telescopes and Microscopes have a Glass at each end, which the Man of S [...]p [...]ence thinks answers the two pair of Spectacles, and therefore must render the Representation deceitful. If this Philosopher had [...] of those thoughts to the profitable doctrine of Opticks, which he hath spent upon Genus and Species, we had [...]ever heard [Page] of this Objection, which is as much a reason against the credit of all Perspective Glasses whatsoever, as the Philosophical ones he would discredit. And without more Opticks than those of natural Understanding, he might, if it had pleased him, have known, that we see better through the two Glasses in Perspectives, then any single one; because they are so fashioned and ordered, that the visive rays are better gathered and united by them for the advantage of sight: But in the two Spectacles, the case is contrary. These things I suggested, and some others from the Dioptricks, in which this Sage Person was pleased then to conceal his Knowledge; and how great that was in these matters, will appear by the Learned Problem he proposed at this period of our Discourse, [Why we cannot see with two pair of Spepectacles better than with one [...]ngly? For, saith the Man of AXioms, Vis unita fortior?]

A pleasant piece of Philosophy this; And I'le shew the Disputer how strongly he infers from his Maxim, by another Question like it. Why cannot he write better with two Pens then with a single one, since Vis unita fortior? When he hath answered this Quaere, he hath resolved his own. I said in the Discourse, That the reason he gave why one would expect it should be so, is the reason why 'tis not; and this is plain enough to sense, from the confusion of Vision, which shews, that the rays are not united after the way requisite for the aiding the sight (as I just now intimated) and how that should be, I had here shewn, but that I am ashamed to adde more in earnest about a [...]ve foolery.

Upon this Discourse, the first Remark I shall make is, That Mr. Glanvill hath little or no insight into Opticks, and is in a manner as ignorant in that profitable Science, as he represents his Adversary to be. It is something for a Man to be able to give an account how he spent his time, though about Genus and Species; rather then to appear to have idly pass'd it away, without acquiring any knowledge at all. The Solution of Mr. Cross's fallacy, if it were his) by that Intergatory, Why cannot he write better with two Pens, then with a s [...]ngle one? is ridiculous, since there is no vis unita there: [Page] and in one sort of Tubes, though theVitrum Sphaericè earum, dilatando radios per ipsum transmissos amplificat nota [...]lit [...]r imaginem si in debitâ distantiâ constituatur post Sphaericè convexum. Zucchius phil. o [...]t part. 2. [...]. [...]. c. 7 sect. 5. pag. 360, 3 [...], 362. How it is in Telescopes made up of all convex-Glass [...]s, the same Author shews there: and so doth Kepler in his Dioptricks. rays be united in the first convex-Glass, and brought to a Convergency, yet: must the Sphaerical Cavity of the next Glass dilate again, and dispose them sittingly to effect the expected vision in the Retina: and besides this, it is requisite that the Tube be so fitted unto the eye (not to speak of the fitting it differently according as the Medium is) as to exclude all other impressions and radiations, thatZucchius philos. opt. p [...]t. [...]. t [...]. 3. c. 7. s [...]ct. 5. p. 358. may divert and impede the sight, viz. Ad consulendum sufficienti determinationi potentiae per languidiorem & angustiorem impressionem à remotioribus, multum prodest, si ex forma instrumenti & ejus applicatione ad Oculum vel ex conditione loci è quo per instrumentum remotiora, & in minori amplitudine apparentia prospectamus, impediuntur radiationes aliunde intra oculum simul & semel diffusae, praesertim validae.

As to what Mr. Cross is said to have argued against Telescopes, that the addition of one Glass to another must hinder rather then improve vision, because that the superadding of one pair of Spectacles to another, rather weakens then amends the sight. I must say, that whosoever understands the forming of an Argument cannot except against the form of that, nor do the Propositions cohere so ill together, as that one should be as it were for sence, and other, for convenience. All that excursion of our Virtuoso shews his Ignorance, not Mr. Cross's. 'Tis one thing to except against the form, another thing to except against the matter of a Syllogism. I confess there is reason enough for to do the latter; but now for the other procedure. I believe such a dispute was never heard of since the declining of Arcadia, as this was: If Mr. Cross did urge this otherwise then to try the Intellectuals of Mr. Glanvill, (concerning whose inhability he might be well satisfied) there is no defence to be made for him, otherwise then that he was unacquainted with a sort of knowledge which is unnecessary in a Divine, and not expected from him; whose credit is better supported by those Qualifications which represent him as a man of godly Conversation, faithful and able [Page] in the discharge of his Gospel-Ministry. But that Mr. Glanvill as little understood the subject of a knowledge he pretends unto, it is manifest from hence; that he might easily have denied the Assertion of the Spectacles, that two pair did not impede, but amend the sight in some eyes that are very weak. I know a young Gentlewoman that hath two Cataracts breeding in her eyes, which reads and works with two pair of Spectacles, whereas she cannot with one pair. There is also an old Gentlewoman of my acquaintance who useth the same helps. I am ashamed to debate these fooleries (as our Virtuoso calls them,) but if Mr. Cross did call in question the integrity of the Telescopes, I shall assume the liberty of a digression about that Point, which perhaps may not seem unseasonable in this Age, and which will abate the pride, and evince the great ignorance of Mr. Glanvill.

Either my Memory doth very much deceive me, or else the Lord Bacon did suspect these Telescopes, that they might impose upon our Senses: and I am sure Mr Boyle is in the same Errour with Mr. Cross, for he complains that when He went about to examine those appearances in the Sunne called Maculae, and Faculae solares, he could not make the least discoveryTentam. Physi [...]log. pag. 144. 145, 146. of them in many months, which yet other Observators pretend to see every day: yet doth Mr. Boyle profess, that He neither wanted the conveniency of excellent Telescopes, nor omitted any circumstance requisite to the Enquiry. BesidesVide Ricciol. Almagest. nov. l. 8. sect. 1. c. 16. these, Scipio Claramontius, he that baffled Tycho about the Comets in the judgement of most men, and gained advantages enough against Kepler and Galilaeo to make himself glorious, and to shew that instead of Mathematical demonstrations they proceeded upon uncertain Topicks Scipio Claramontius in defensione Anti-Tychoni [...], & libri de novis stellis à se con [...]ripti Italico idiomate edit [...], multis contendit Telescopium in repraesentatione objectorum fallax esse, Part. 2 c. 15. ex quibus insert c. 16. ei qui velit apparentias coelestium per illnd exceptas ratas haberi, necessariò ostendendum esse [...] nulla aberrationum, quibus illud obnoxium est, [...]jusmodi nitiatas esse. Quare cum ex una parte assumi nequeat, quasi universaliter verum quicquid per Telescopium repraesentatur; ex alia parte non possit talis propositio universalis restringi ad apparentias [...]oelestium, sine manifestâ petitione principii cum hoc ipsum [...]it quod [...]o [...]trovertitur; an fallaci de se instrumento observata in [...]lectibus pro certis habenda sint? manifest sequitur nihil ex usu Telescopii [...]stirui posse de dispositione [...]oelestium. Zucchius Philos. opt. part. 1. c. 17. sect. 2. p. 175. and Probabilities: this learned and inquisitive person doth avowedly suspect the Telescopes as fallacious more then once, and that there are more then He of that judgement, is a thing unquestionable by any but Superficial Scholars: nor do I apprehend any other reason then this to be in their [Page] heads, who have till this day employed their thoughts here to contrive new Glasses, and amend defects in the former. Our Virtuosi have complained of an Iris in their Glasses, and gone about to correct that by Turning of them; but a friend of mine writes, that he imagines it was after that Eustachio Divini at Rome had given them an hint of it: and then they found it out. A little more modesty in Assertions of this kinde would become our Wits, considering that affairs of this nature (it is the opinion of Archimedes, and refers to all Mechanismes) admit not demonstration. Cum neque visus, neque manus, neque instrument a per quae experiri oportet, satis habeant fidei ad exquisit am demonstrationem.—Archimed. in libro de Arena.

I shall not so far engage in the controversie, as to repeat the Arguments and Replies on both sides. It seems strange, that the Telescopes should so magnifie thirty, fourty, or one hundred times objects on earth, and yet lessen those of the fixed Stars in Heaven, viz. Stellas primae magnitudinis, Caniculam,Scipio Claramont. de univer so l. 9. c. xxi. &c. Jovem, Saturnum minores repraesentat multo, quam oculo libero appareant: & idem instrumentum stellas nusquam apparentes, ut Jovis Satellites justae magnitudinis repraesentat, & paulo minores repraesentato Jove, imo tantas facit, ut possint pius apparere▪ quam queant apparere stellae primae magnitudinis,—at quid? in Octava Sphaera stellas nihil apparentes magnas facit, Nebulosas scilicet, & Galaxiae formatrices.—This is granted all by Galileo to be true, but he solves by an imaginary irradiation, the fancie whereof he advanced upon some weak Experiments, most whereof he deserted himself, and theVide Scip. C [...]m▪ de u [...]iverso 9 c. 19. 18▪ 1 [...]. 2 [...] Zucchius ph [...]. opr par 1. c. [...] sect 6 p. 111. Id. ib p. 216. rest are excellently refuted by Zucchius, who introduceth another Salvo from the configuration of the Eye, and that part of it called Uvea: which perhaps may be discovered to be as false as any of the other hereafter: but he adds, Ex quo est, ut in facilitate detrahendae circumfusae sideribus radiationis sit notable discrimen inter Planetas collatos inter se, & inter stellas fix [...] invicem, & aliquas earum cum aliquibus eorum comparatas. [Page] Thus the Objection in its full force is granted by all (except Sorsius deny it) only the cause of the Phaenomenon was not till Zucchius (if then) sufficiently explicated; SureZucchius phil. op [...]. part. 1. c. 1 [...]. sect▪ 5. p 159, 200. I am that he in another place avows, that long Telescopes rightly made do not lessen Jupiter, but represent him greater then He appears to the naked Eye: insomuch that his Tube of 23 feet-long did represent Jupiter as big as the Moon is when at full, and looked upon without any Telescope: so that He says the Objection holds only in Telescopiis brevioribus, in quibus pariter evenit inspiciendo lucida inferiora.

Besides, were there such certainty in the Telescopes, how comes it to pass that there is such a variety of opinions amongst those Observators, whose diligence can be as little suspected as their learning? Claramontius did set two persons to observe the Spots of the Sunne, (both were inclined to Novelties) they were not 40 miles distant, yet did not their Schemes agree as to number, or scituation. Nor is this a figment of that partial Peripatetick: any man that readsRicciol Almag. nov▪ [...] 3. c 3 Zucchius phil. opr. par 1. c 7. sect 8. p. 233. See this point of the variety about the sp [...] [...] in the Sun, particularly handled by Schottus [...]n his N [...]res upon Kircher [...]'s [...]er ex [...]. [...]i▪ cum [...]oelest▪ [...] [...]er▪ 1. dialog. [...]. p 183. And [...]ow different the observations of Galilaeo and Scheiner were you may see in a Synopsis [...]n the R [...] U [...] l. [...]. c. 4. & [...]ib. c 10. Ricciolus, and Zucchius, will see that they cannot agree about the number, the motion, the scituation, or so much as colour of them. The words of this last Writer are very remarkable in reference to Mr. Glanvill, and that certainty which he asserts unto the Telescopes, viz. Neque obstat discrepantia numeri, vel figurae macularum in observationibus plurium, circa idem tempus captatis: tum quia longiores Telescopii in ampliori disco plures exhibent, quae spectantem breviore Telescopio, angustiori disco latent: immo eodem Telescopio, ad exactam mensuram suae extensionis redacto, notabiles fiunt aliquae, ante inobservatae: & facillimum est in tali mensura minus exercitatos decipi; cum tam pauci ex observatoribus, nec nisi monente Scheinero, didicerint ad exacte consignandam Solis imaginem, & in ea maculas, per trajectionem radiorum Telescopio in planum directe oppositum, necessariam esse mutationem extensionis Tubi, eo not abiliter magis producto in hyeme, correpto in aestate: Tum quia sicut facilis est, ex allatis varietas in numero macularum, ita in terminatione, quae facilius mutari potest ex iisdem capitibus in illis, quae in pluribus observationibus consignantur, & ex modo consignandi. Less do they agree [Page] about the nature of them: one Joannes Jarde named them Astra Borbonia: and Malapertius, Mastrius, Rheita, do hold them to be Starrs: of this opinion was Scheinerus once, but he afterwards assented to that of Galilaeo, Kepler, Bullialdus and Blancanus, that they were not Starrs, but fuliginous exhalations arising out of the furnace of the Solar Globe, which he conceives to be a fire. Kircher and others are of the same judgement; but Ricciolus distrusts it, being notVide Schottum ub [...] supra, p. 184. Ricciol. Almag. nov. l. 3. c. 3 P. 7. able to comprehend how fuliginous vapours should arise in such a number, so constantly, so permanently as to keep a motion about, or with the Sunne, of about 27 days.

The like uncertainty there is in the Observations about Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, &c. what controversies do they raiseGalilaeo [...]n e [...]. ad Velserum, citante [...]a [...]amontio de univers. l. 9. c. 9. Ricciolus Almag. nov. l 7. sect. 1. c. 2. p. 487, 488. Schottus in Kircher. iter exstat. coeleste p. 301, 302. Christ. Hugenius ap [...] B [...] r [...]llum de con [...]pici [...]is, p. 63. and how contradictious are their Relations? Galilaeo doth represent Saturn in one figure, Sch [...] in another▪ the former saith, that the oblong shape in Saturn ariseth from a defect in the Telescope, or Eye, that could not distinguish the Comites Saturni from the Planet it self▪ But Ricciolus and others dissent from him in that point▪ and Christi [...]s Hugenius made observations about Saturn, such as neither Antonius de Rheita▪ nor Hevelius did ever see; and represents the ansulae of Saturn, differently from what Fontana and the Dantiscan Selenographer do write. The words of Hugenius I shall propose to Mr. Glanvill's consideration, Expectamus ut sub finem Aprilis, si non antea, brachia Saturno renascantur, non curva illa, cujusmodi a Francisco Fontana, & Hevelio depicta cer [...]untur, sed secundùm lineam rectam utrinque prominentia, siquis melioris notae perspicillo intueatur. Nam vulgaria si adhibeat binos orbiculos referent, sicuti Galilaeo primum se obtulere. Nostram quo Saturni asseclam reperimus, quinquagies diametrum rei visae multiplicat, duodenos pedes aequans; cui postea duplum longitudine constriximus, multiplicatione centupla. Cum autem longiora etiam hisce Telescopia, utpote triginta & quadraginta pedum ab aliis fabricari dicantur, aliquid aut vitris vitii inesse, aut haec eadem non debita proportione mutuo respordere credibile est. Neque enim alius hucusque aciem eorum effugisset novus Saturni Satelles. Being to speak of Saturn, I must not forget Zucchius, who [Page] after thirty five years diligent observation with variety of the best Telescopes, represents this Planet differently fromZucchius philos. opt. part. 1. c. 17. sect [...]. p. 00, 201. what any others write, viz. Assero Saturnum multorum annorum spatio figura passim oblonga, & in oppositione ad Solem, not abiliter majorem apparuisse, in apparentiae medio visum esse album illustre tumidum, aliquo modo ad rotunditatem vergens, accedentibus hinc inde ad illud duabus velut nigris notis, quas altum illustre, totam apparentiam ad apices terminans ita includit, ut ad apices illius multo sit crassius, ubi vero eas notas complectendo ad medium extenditur, gracilescat.

Assertio est facti, in quo a multis jam, annis conveniunt accuratiores, ex variis Provinciis observatores longioribus Telescopiis instructi.

Scio a prioribus vulgatum, tres a se stellas in loco Saturni spectatas, media multo majori, quae simul mutantes in coelo situm, a fixis aperte distinguerentur, & Saturni duobus Planetis minoribus stipati apparentium exhiberent, qui postea, illis a tali situ motis spectatus sit figura rotunda. Verum triginta quinque ut minimum, anni sunt, quibus figura semper oblonga, cum dispositione in assertione assignata, a me spectatus est pluries quotannis, pro vario ad Solem situ, acutioribus, minus acutis, cavis, convexisque lentibus ad oculum proxime in Telescopio adhibitis apparentia eadem, semper magis distincta, & majori, in oppositione ad Solem, etiamsi meliorem vitiorum [...]laborationem in multo longioribus Telescopiis postremo D. D. Evangelistae Torricellii, & Eustachii Divini artificio, & beneficio singulari consecutus sim.—Quare in hoc priorum observationes, qui brevioribus, minusque perfectis Telescopiis, ut omnino ratas admittere non audeo.

Concerning Jupiter, and his Satellites, and their number, Vide Schottum in Kirch. iter exstaticum coeleste p. 268, 269. &c. Ricciol. in Almag. nov. l. 7. sect. 1. p. 486. taking in the Urban Octavian Starrs, I finde a great variety, even when two men observed at the same time, as de Rheita and Gassendus: that both of them were in the right, cannot be said: which of them were in the wrong, I know not. In summe, the observations about Jupiter and his Attendants are so various, Aliter enim apparuerunt Simoni Mario, aliter Apelli, aliter Galilaeo, that Claramontius takes this advantage of it. Ego igitur argumentum ex ejusmodi diversitate alicio [Page] contra veritatem objecti, non contra observationum diligentiam, Scipio Claramonti [...]s de universo l. [...]. c. 8. cum observatio ejusmodi non sit nisi pura per tubum transpectio, eaque defixa: ii etiam viri perfectum instrumentum habebant, es [...]que id verisimile, cum in eam rem toti incumberent, instrumentum etiam exactum paravisse: oculorum etiam & visus acumen, cur demam Apelli & ejus in observando sociis, potius Galilaeo demerem, qui se fatetur oculum minus perfectum habere

Neither are they better agreed about Mars and his Figure, the umbo or spot in him. Gassendus denies that ever he saw it, though he used the Tube of Galilaeo; others avow it: as you may see in Schottus and Ricciolus. In fine, as toScott [...]s in Kircher. [...]ter exstat. [...]oe [...] p 242▪ &c. Ricciolus Al mag nov. l. 7. [...]ct. [...]. p 486. Zucchius [...]hil opt. part 1 c. 17. sect 4 P. 193. the new Phaenomena about Mars, Venus, and Mercury, to desend them Zucchius is forced to complain of the Telescopes, and protests thus. Interim te, amice Lector, provoco Spectatorem, bono & longiore Telescopio instructum, cujus Lens superior ad obtinendam siguram apparentiarum bene praecisam, juxta dicta, maxima ex parte contecta sit, modico ad medium aperto for amine.

I am tired with the further prosecution of this subject; and therefore shall confine the rest of my discourse to the Observations about the Moon: the contemplation whereof, as it is more facile, so it hath been more pursued then any other of that kinde. There is none of our Comicall Wits doubt that it is a World, divided into Hills, Valleys, Seas, Lakes, Rivers, and even peopled as this Terraqueous Globe of ours But it is remarkable, that the use of the Telescope hath not convinced some, that the Moon hath an unequal surface, but that the Phaenomena of the spots may be solved by the conceit that some parts of it are more Diaphanous, some more opake. Who hath not heard how Scheiner looked on the Moon in an Eclipse, and did conceive it was fistulous, (atBerigardus C [...]. P. [...] de Luna. id. [...] least translucid in part) and so did transmit the light thorough several Cavities in some places, whilst others, not directly subject to the Sunne, are obscure. They cannot agree whether the Spots of the Moon be more bright, or obscure in an Eclipse. The observations and descriptions of the Moon, made by Galilaeo, Scheiner, Fontana, Schottus upon Kircher, [Page] &c. are so defective, that we must repute them but as the first rudiments of an intended Science. And as for the descriptions of the Phases of the Moon, made by Langrenus and Hevelius, however there by many things in which they all agree: yet the Telescopes of Ricciolus (made by a Bavarian Artist) and of Franciscus Maria Grimaldi, either rectified the mistakes, or represented many Phaenomena different from those delineated by Galilaeo, Fontana, Torricellius, and Manzini, viz. Lunaris faciei partes omnes magnas, mediocres, ac Ricciolus Almag. nov. l. 4. c. 7. minimas singillatim Telescopio intuens Grimaldus, easque statim cum Langreni & Hevelii Schematibus comparans, deprehendit multa quidem egregie ab iis peracta, non pauca tamen superesse, quae aut addenda, aut quoad situm, magnitudinem, siguram, symmetriam, nigroris aut claritatis differentiam corrigenda forent. Such as reject the exact Sphericalness of the Moon, introduce Asperities and inequalities in the surface of it, which some explain by Mountains, Valleys, and Waters: but concerning the parts of the Moon, which might be Water, and which Land, our Observators did differ. Galilaeo Glailaeo sy [...]m. co [...]mic. p. 131. edit. Lonain. Kepler. Astronom. Optic. c. 6. sect. 9. believes the spots or obscure parts to be water. Kepler held the contrary, that the bright parts were water, and pretends to demonstrate it out of Opticks. though afterwards he changed his opinion for that of Galilaeo's, which is generally received. As to those asperities in the surface of the Moon, whether they extend to the Limbus, or utmost circumference, or no, is a doubt amongst them: Galilaeo Ricciolus Almag nov. l. 4. c. 8. qu 2. denies it; Kepler, Ricciolus, and others affirming it: and the latter gives this reason why they are less frequently observed there: Vera causa cur raro asperitas illa Limborum videatur, est partim imperfectio Telescopii, &c. Neither are they better satisfied about the Atmosphear of the Moon: that there is one, Galilaeo, Kircher. iter exstat. coe [...]est. p 48. Ricciolus Almag. nov. l. 4. c [...]. sect. 8. Kepler, Antonius Maria de Rheita, Kircher, Cysatus, Scheiner, with others do avow: and Langrenus saith, that we may observe it with a Telescope: eandem Tubo▪ specillis conspici affirmat Michael Florentius Langrenus. But others deny it as peremptorily. [Page] Interim mihi (faith Ricciolus) nondum quocunque Telescopio adhibito Ricciol. Almag. nov. l. 4. c. a. sect. 3. aer hic ita patuit, ut illum potius prope ac circa Lunam, quam in aere nostro, in quo & Halones siunt, cogar agnoscere. And Zucchius at large proveth this Corollary, Non elevantur Zucchius phil. optic part. 1. c. 17. sect. 9. p. 2 [...]4. vi luminis Solis vapores e Luna, sicut elevantur ex Globo e terra & aqua integrato: Neque datur circa Lunam Sphaera vaporosa ulla, qualis circa dictum Globum deprehenditur.

Having proceeded thus far, I shall take notice of some extravagant opinions that possess many of our Comical wits, and their Associates or Admirers, which are extended to the prejudice of Christianity, and the growth of Atheism in this Age, viz. That the resemblance betwixt the Moon and the Earth is such, that it is a Terraqueous Globe inhabited by men, and they hereupon concern themselves about their Progeny, Salvation, &c. I shall from hence take occasion to instruct those phantastical persons, that even Hevelius, who accommodated the Terrestrial Geography to the Lunar Globe, and seems to conclude that the illuminated part is earth, the darker is water: yet did it only because He knew no fitter comparison amongst sublunary bodies.—Non est autem quod quispiam ideo existimet Lunam ex ejusmodi sabulo, luto, aut lapide esse compositam, ut haec terra nostra, siquidem fortassis ex alia poterit constare materia, ab imaginatione nostra prorsus Joan. Hevelius Selenograph. p. 148. diversa, & modo adhuc incomprehensibili.—Minime etiam hasce Lunares aquas nostris [...] similes assero, sed quod nihil quicquam similius, propter magnam utrarumque affinitatem hic in terra habeamus, cum quo illas comparare valeamus. It was indiscreetly done of Kepler, Kircher, Hevelius, and such Writers to carry on the comparison so far, the resemblance betwixt the two Globes being so little as the most unprejudic'd Ricciolus Almag. nov. l. 4 c. 7. p. 203. persons findit to be. Hevelius perinde acsi Luna esset altera tellus, Geographica nostratis Telluris nomina in Lunam transtulit: licet quoad figuram, situm, symmetriam, &c. nulla fere sit Analogia inter utriusque superficiem. The truth whereof will further appear from those considerations which the inquisitive Zucchius after thirty five years use of all manner Zucchius▪ phil. opt. hart. a. c. 17. sect. 9. corol. 7. p. 266. of Telescopes at length fixed upon, viz. That the discrepancy of Parts in the illuminated Moon may be explained without [Page] attributing thereunto any variety of colours: yea, it ought to be so explained. The first part of which Assertion he proves thus: because in Opace bodies the difference of a greater and lesser Obliquity in their scituation towards the body that shines upon them doth cause a diverse manner of illustration. Thus the same wall, of one uniform colour, according as it is differently illuminated, seems in some parts to be white, in others pale, in others dark-coloured, and black: besides that, a greater or lesser asperity or inequality of the superficies may cause an intermixture of the enlightned and over-shadowed parts, and so create different appearances of light and opacity in their most observable parts.

The second part He proves thus: because that the face of the Moon being looked on with a Tube of an extraordinary length, with Glasses excellently polished (such as He used for many years) appears all of it like a great Tract of Land covered over with Snow, which the Sunne variously illuminates accordingly as the parts are differently framed and scituated. Where there is any change of scituation in the parts illuminated in reference to the body that irradiates them, then do such parts abate of their whiteness: and although they still continue in such a position that his beams may in some degree and manner reach them, yet by reason of the unequal surface of the Moon (in which some parts are more elevated then others) some parts are directly opposite to the Sunne, others are glanced upon with an oblique ray, and this mixture of shades and brightness occasions those spots which we so talk of. Thus upon the libration of the body of Jupiter, the girdle, which otherwise seems remarkably black above the other adjacent parts of the Planet, becomes like unto the rest of the body in whiteness, and so disappears.

As to the distinction of the Moon into Sea and Land, consisting of Mountains and Valleys; although the Analogy mayExistimo materiam globi lunaris non constare terra & aqua Galilaeo system. cosmic p. 132. seem allowable by reason of the Asperities in the surface of the Moon, (which is a thing not to be denied: albeit that the calculation of the heighth of those more elevated parts are ridiculous, except the nature of the Cavities were better [Page] to be discovered, as Zucchius shews) yet the imaginationZucchias phil. opt. part. 1. c. 17. sect. 9 p 260, 261. of Seas and Lakes therein, or any thing of that Nature, except what borders upon the Peninsula deli [...]orum in the Lunar Chart of Ricciolus, 'tis all an improbable phancie. For, that the more pale and obscure spots are not water, appears hence, that those spots keep the same Phasis or appearance for many days, though the Site of the Moon, both in respect of the Sunne, and of us the Spectators, do vary much in that time: whereas when the Sunne casts his beams upon Seas or great waters on Earth, the Phaenomena differ according as the Sunne, or the beholder vary their station: And this alone might convince us, but that I finde now in Zucchius, viz Similiter transitum successiv [...]m radiis Solis Zucchius [...] supra p. 263. ad fundum usque ad magnis maculis intra margines illustriores contentis praebent (ut diximus in apparentiis, pag. 239.) quod non evenit in liquido profundo instar aquae, ut in aquis e [...] perimur etiam in multa vicinitate illustratis, quando not abilem habent profunditatem: tum quia constantem inaequalitatem illustrationis exhibent in horizonte Lunari, & quidem, juxta dicta in Apparentiis (num. 3.) secundum magnam extensionem illustratam, intra reliquas partes nondum Solis radiis perfusas; imo aliquae, Soli proximiores, alias sequentes in eadem majori macula inumbrabant: hujusmodi autem convenire non possunt corpori Galilaeo pro [...]eth, that in the Moon the [...] is no [...]in; no clouds there thick [...]n [...]e a [...]. Long [...]s ac diligentious observationibus nunquam id ant [...]nadvertere p [...]t [...]i, ac semper unisormem purissimamque serenitatem ibi deprehendi. Galilaeo. system. comic. p. 133. Zucchius ub [...] supra. p. 264▪ inconsistenti, & liquido aquam referenti, quae tamen certum est convenire aliqu [...]bus Lunae partibus, ab omnibus inter maculas computatis. I must confess I think these reasons convincing to any persons not prepossessed; and they are much more inforced by him with a discourse concerning e [...] halations and an Atmosphear about the Moon, which he denies absolutely: yet considering the proportion of the imaginary Waters to the Land in the Moon, and the heat and continuance of the Sunne-beams thereupon, common reason would tell us▪ that the vaporous exhalatious would proportionably exceed those about the Earth here, and produce an Atmosphear that should be observable, whereas the most accurate inspection at most opportune times with the best Telescopes could not satisfie Zucchius, that there was any such thing at all.

[Page] Kepler (and his Master Moestlinus) did believe that theKepler Astronom. Optic▪ c. 6. sect. 9. Moon was a World consisting of Sea and Land, making up one entire Globe, as the Earth does; and that the Mountains there were much higher and bigger comparatively then those of the Earth: and adds by way of jocundry, that since the Men and other Animals commonly

Ga [...]ilaeo system. Gosmic. p. 13 [...]. Existim [...] matertam Glo [...]i Lunaris non constare [...]e [...]ra & aqua. Quaeres un [...] ad generationes [...]ltet [...]onesque nostris [...] tollendas [...]. [...]untamen etiams [...] concede [...]etur [...] ibi [...]erramque da [...]i; non tamen plantae & [...] nostris similia nas [...]eren [...]ur, [...] [...] [...]s praecipue rationes: p [...]imo qu [...] ad nost [...]s generationes aspectu [...] Solis var [...]s [...]d [...] necessaria est, ut sine illis esse nul [...]ae [...]. Ja [...] autem ha [...]itudines [...] ad Te [...]ram, ab [...] quae sunt ad Lunam, [...]ald [...] diffe [...]unt. N [...] quoad illumin [...]tionem diar [...]am, in majo [...] parte terrae, singulis h [...]rarum viginti quatuor peri [...]dis noctis atque [...]iei [...] experimur, quae in Luna men▪ ru [...] [...]emum spati [...] absolvitur. Item ille Solis in Z [...]dta [...]o d [...] scens [...]s & ascensus annuus, qui hie [...]s aestatisque [...] & di [...]rum ac noctium inaequalitatem producit▪ in Luna uni [...]o mense finitur: Cumque S [...]l apud nos si [...] elevetur ao deprimatur, ut inter maximam ac minimam altitudinem intercedat differentia gradum, 4 [...] ▪ qu [...]nta [...] est distantia ab uno tropi [...] ad alterum; in Luna non nisi 10 gradibus aut paulo amplius illa differentia constat▪ quanta scilicet est maxima latitudo Draconis ultra citraque Ecli [...]ticam Nunc consideretur qualis operatio sit futura Solis in Zona torrida, si per quindeci [...] die [...] continuos radiis suis eam ferire pergeret. Per se enim intelligetur, omnes plantas, herbas & animalia possum itura▪ Quod si vel maxime generationes ibi fierent, illae tamen ab herbis, plantis, & animalitus nostratibus diversissimae sorent.

Secundo persu asissimum est mihi, nullas in Luna pluvias esse. Nam si qua parte nubes ibi cong [...]gearentur, ut fit in terra, videremus utique rerum illarum aliquid abs [...]ondi, quas ope telescopii in Luna conspicimus: & in summa, in particula aliqua nobis variaretur aspectus. Id quod longis ac diligentibus observationibus nunquam animadvertere potui, ac semper uniformem purissimamque serenitatem ibi depre [...]endi▪

participate of the nature of the soyl and climate they dwell in, that the inhabitants of the Moon must be of a greater stature, and more robust constitution then those of the Earth: The Day there making up fifteen days of ours: and the Hea [...]s seem so scorching, and so unexpressible by reason of the Suns being vertical to them so long. In fine, he thinks it no absurd opinion of the Gentiles, that made the Moon a kinde of Purgatory for departed Souls.

Upon the most serious consideration of all circumstances, whereunto I could ever engage my thoughts; when I reflected upon the great difference betwixt the Days here and there; the different influence which the Sunne must have here and there through the Diversity of his Aspects, (whereupon depend Terrestrial productions) that there is no rain, no clouds there; no Atmosphear (like ours) proportioned to such respiration and life: no intermixture of earth and water: no innate diversity of colours, which occasion the Phaenomena that perplex our over-curious Mortals: and that all the Enquiries hitherto made, have so little of evidence, that 'tis more clear that the [Page] Moon is a Cheese, (not fat, for then it would melt) odly figured and made with Asperities in its Superficies ▪and perhaps a little vinnyed in some parts▪ then an Earth resembling ours: I could not but condemn those our Comical and Atheistical Wits, who use so little of modesty or scrupulousness in their discourses about this so uncertain subject. They are men of so little reading and inquisitiveness (whatever they pretend unto; as if this Nation produced no persons equal to them for Learning and Ab [...]lities) that they never examined these debates; but the opinions which they take up and transform into Assertions, are onely the raillery or casual and imperfect pieces of conversation betwixt more intelligent persons, or some Coffee house-talk, which they confidently obtrude and impose upon speculative or more considerate Gentlemen, and render themselves insupportable in any Society.

A young Gentleman, a friend of mine, who was not a little valued in the world, who was no stranger to the Mathematicks, and whose wit and learning far transcended any thing I can observe in a droll and Comediantes of these times, entertain'd me with a discourse once of this nature; Having spoken of the Celestial Phaenomena, how differently they were represented by sundry men, he was more prone to suspect their dioptrick Tubes, then their in [...]egrity: He thoughtTuius lentibus duabus constans dici potest o [...]uius mere artifi [...]i [...]us [...] [...] ne [...] Ro [...]. Ursi [...]. l 2. c. [...]7 quem vide [...]b. a c. 23. usque ad c. 30. our Eyes were Telescopes of God Almighty's making, and the model by which the others were regulated and amended: and that any man who regarded the daily Occurrents in vision, could never believe it possible▪ that any certainty could be derived from Telescopes, about such Phaenomena as we could employ only one sense about, and that not in a due distance, and with such circumstances as legitimate the judgement thereof: That we were to look through their different mediums (granting that our Air makes but one Diaphanum) and those not contrived dioptrically, that we know, and that since every medium, thicker or thinner, (besides the intercurrencies of irregular and unknown particles, like to moats in and uponTam ra [...]it [...]s quam densitas potest esse causa r [...]fractionis. Me [...]senn▪ a Glass) did cause a different Refraction, and that neither the constitution of our Atmosphear (as not proportionate to our sensible enquiries) and air, nor the intermundial Aether, [Page] nor the Sphaera vaporosa of the Planets could ever be accurately and satisfactorily searched into; no man could particularly know what he beheld, and deduce with prudence any theoremes and conclusions from such infirm hypotheses. He added, that our senses and the daily objects we converse with on earth, did prejudicate rather then qualifie us for these speculations: that we might easily observe what mistakes arise from the contemplation of resemblances: that similitudes, though very slender, engage the unwary, (and some that are cautious too) to conclude an identity in objects: that it would be impossible for any man without the aid of a nearer approach, and even of his other senses, to conclude whether a stick lying part in, part out of the water were streight or crooked▪ by reason of the refraction in the different mediums of Air and Water: and that a Glow-worm, or an Indian fire-Fly would create strange disputes and contests amongst mankind, had they no other helps to discover the Phaenomenon then a Telescope, magnifying the object and its parts thirty, fourty, or one hundred times. He admired that saying of Aristotle, [...]:Arist meteor. [...] ▪ [...] 4. sect. 2. These are the words, and this the judgment of Galilaeo Syst. Cosm p. 7 [...] [...] Hypo [...] ▪ de vet med. s [...] 3. and commended him, that in his doctrine of Meteors he pretended not to arise higher then a low degree of probability. That it was possible to imagine such things to our selves as were not really in the Moon, but not such as were there, except in a very general and indefinite manner. Posse quidem excogitari nonnulla, quae in Luna neque sunt, neque esse possunt: nihil autem eorum quae ibi sunt aut esse possunt, nisi largissima generalitate. That the appearance of an Earth, did not infer the inhabitation of men, much less Animals and Plants like ours: that our own Geography might undeceive us herein, some parts of this Globe being not peopled, and the animals, and plants, and nature of the soyle, differing so much from our European productions, as we could not have conceived, had not our Eyes and authentick testimonies gained us to a belief of it. That the most clear Eyes have in this case a kinde of a suffusion, and the most unbiassed persons their Intellectuals prejudicated, and had no reason to condemn the opinion of that Peasant, who imaginer [Page] the Grandeur of Rome to be like unto his Village, or the Scot who represented London to be such another town as Edinburgh. It is an opinion wherein the Peripateticks andGalilaeo system c [...]smic. p 77. Lyncei are agreed: Quicquid sub nostram cadit imaginationem, id aut jam ante viderimus oportet, aut ex rebus rerur [...]ve partibus jam ante visis compositum sit, quales sunt Sphynges, Sirenes, Chimerae, Centauri, &c. He smiled at those who thought they had much improved solid knowledge, by telling men of Quasi-terra, Quasi-mare, Quasi-sylvae, which he suppposed to be as insignificant termes as the Canting of Chymists, or the Quasi-corpus, and Quasi sanguis, in the gods of Epicurus: that it was intolerable in a Philosopher to phrase it thus, however a Poet might say,

[...]

But nothing created in him a greater laughter, then the Proposals some made of flying to the World in the Moon: this design he thought superlatively ridiculous, though the contrivance of wings for mankind were then but projecting at Wadham-Colledge: It did not appear to him then that this World was no Magnet: he wished that first these Opiniatours would go to both Poles, and placing themselves there try the Observations of Des-Cartes with some dust of Iron: that they would consider whether the more remote Air would bear up their wings and weight, (perhaps there might be that difference in Air that there is in water▪ where those Ships which sail in salt-water do sink in fresh streams) and how it might agree with their respiration, since the Air upon the tops of Andes of Peru is so sharp, that those Mountains are as difficultVide P Alph Ovag [...]ium [...] [...] Chilensi [...] ▪ [...]. Ricciol Almag nov. in append. ad part. primam tomi primi, P. 730. to pass, or live upon, as Aristotle represents Olympus to have been, where men are forced to breath through Sponges: whether that inhability of the Air for men to breath in it did arise from the real nature of so elevated a place, or that it was occasioned by some destructive exhalations (since Mount Athos is reputed higher then Olympus) he knew not: but he thought they might enquire well into this particular, and into those regions (which are different) wherein storms, [Page] thunder, and snow are generated; what tempests might arise therein (of which we are not sensible here below) what provision there is against them before one arrives at the twelve Celestial houses: what accommodation of meat and drink, what money currant in those parts, all which oughtConcerning a voyage to the Wo [...]ld of the Moon, the difficulties of the passage and of the air, water, and other circumstances the [...]e, read Kircher his [...]ter exs [...]at. unto the Moon; and you will find how just a ca [...]at I give here. to be regarded lest our Experimentators should come off as ill as the Knight of the Mancha did, when he had not wherewithal to defray the expence of his Inne: besides that, he was much afraid, that at their arrival, agreeably to what Kepler saith, they might finde their lodging too hot for them.

Having said these things, that great young man, (who died before that Ignorance and the Virtuosi grew prevalent) presented me with the works of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, published by D. Meric Casaubon, opening it at that place where that understanding Emperour acknowledgeth it to have been the special favour of the Gods, that he never troubled himself about these Meteorologies and extravagant speculations, whereunto nothing humane can reach: He added, that in these kind of speculations he knew enough that was secured from superstition, that for a man to desert those Studies which qualifie him for a sociable life, and were of importance to the preservation of the Government and Countrey he lived in, this was a kinde of salvagenesse, had more of the A [...]chorete, then of Civil Prudence, and was to be encouraged in a Cloyster, or in the deserts of Thebais, then to be made a practice among wise Statesmen.

I have somtimes entertained my self with the remembrance of this Gentleman, and guessed how he would have sported vt that passage of Mr. Glanvill, in his Scepsis Scientifica, where he complements the R. Society, to whom that book is Addressed.

We expect greater things from Neoterick Endeavors.Scepsi Scien [...]. p. 13 [...], 134 The Cartesian Philosophy in this regard hath shewn the World the way to be happy. And me thinks this Age seems resolved to bequeath Posterity somewhat to remember it. The glorious Undertakers, [Page] wherewith Heaven hath blest our days, will leave the World better provided then they found it. And whereas in former times such generous free-spirited Worthies were as the Rare newly observed Stars, a single one the wonder of an Age: In ours they are like the Lights of the greater size, that twinkle in the Starry Firmament: And this last Century can glory in numerous Constellations. Should those Heroes go on as they have happily begun, they'll fill the World with Wonders. And I doubt not but Posterity will find many things, that are now but Rumours, verified into (God [...]orbid.) practical Realities. It may be some Ages hence, a Voyage to the ('Tis very cold going thither, if you believe Sir Fr. Drak [...]; as I have shewed afore in my discourse of the Northwest-passage..) Southern unknown Tracts, yea, possiblie the Moon, will not be more strange then one to (Yes a little more; the Ancients had been there before; besides, the difficulties ingoing to the Moon are more insuperable.) America. To them that come after us, it may be as ordinarie to buy a payr of Wings to flie into Remotest Regions; (Pacole [...]'s Horse; Fortunatus's wishing-Cap; the skill of Medea in restoring youth, all ancient and modern fables shall be really atchieved!) as now a pair of Boots to ride a Journey. And to conferre at the distance of the Indies by Sympathetick conveyances, may be as usual to future times, as to us in a literary correspondence. The restauration of Gray hairs to Juvenility, and renewing the exhausted marrow, may at length be effected without a Miracle. And the turning the now comparative desert World into a Paradise, may not improbablie be expected from late Agriculture.

Now those that judge-by the narrowness of former Principles and Successes, will smile at these (They that do not so, laugh at you, and think such expectations thence paradoxical.) Paradoxical Expectations: But questionless, those great inventions, which have in these latter Ages altered the [Page] face of all things, in their [...]aked Propo [...]alls, and meer Suppositions, (Prove that they ever did think of them: if they did not, they could not be ridiculous [...]o them.) were to former times as ridiculous. To have talked of a New Earth to have been disco vered, had been a (Et q [...]i [...]e into the Navigations of Antiquity and then [...]ay this.) Romance to Antiquity: And to sail without sight of Stars or Shoars by the guidance of a Mineral, a storie more absurd then the H [...]g [...]t of Daedalus. That men should speak after their tongues were ashes, or communicate with each other in differing Hemi phears, before the invention of Letters, could not but have been thought a Fiction. Antiquity would not have believed the almost incredible force of our (The stran [...]eness lies more in the incredible force of the powder: had they known that, they would not have thought the other strange.) Canons; and would as coldlie have entertained the wonders of the Telescope. In these we all condemn (I know not any that condemns the an [...]nts [...] [...] incredulity about such matters as were never proposed unto them, but [...]or the credulity of th [...]s Age, expect scorn rather then pity.) antique incredulity, and 'tis likelie Posterity will have as much cause to pity ours. But yet notwithstanding this streightnesse of shallow Observers, there are a set of (Tis a pretty philosophy indeed, it is all ▪ invention.) enlarged Souls that are more judiciously credulous, and those who are acquainted with the fecunditie of (Not of the Paracea, not of the [...]hilosophers stone, n [...]r any thing in Ovids Metamorphesis, Atlantis, o [...] Utopia. [...]lus ultra, Page 66.) Cartesian Principles, and the diligent and ingenious Endeavours of so many true Philosophers, will despair of (m) nothing.

This is a most extraordinary Flourish: Yet I finde the Rhetorick defective in the suiting of the Antitheses and Antapodoses: but I shall not take notice of that fault now, it is so general in our Comical Wits. I shall now quit my Digression, and resume the controversie betwixt the two Disputants. Mr. Glanvill, for the credit of those Dioptrick Glasses, told Mr. Cross, ‘That he might try them upon Objects near, and easily visible, by the unassisted sight; and if he made triall, he would finde they altered the Objects in nothing but their proportions, which are represented larger for the advantage [Page] of vision in things small and remote; and we have all the like reasons to distrust our Eyes, as these Glasses (for their informations are the same in all things, but the mentioned difference) and there is no man such a fool as not to make allowance for that.—’ I see Mr. Glanvill is not only ignorant of the Opticks, but altogether unacquainted with Telescopes: for first there are some made by Mr Smithwick (a very ingenious and worthy man)Duobus vitiis convexis instructo Telescopio, habetur simul & semel objecti medoocris, vel multarum partium grandioris repraesentatio, sed inversa: si debite addatur tertium convexum, multiplicatis adhuc refractionibus, una unius obtinetur apparentia, & in situ conformis Objecto. Zucchius phil. opt. part. [...]. c. 17 sect. 2. p. 180. which represent the Phases of the Moon very well, and yet invert all Objects, but that is no default or impediment where the thing looked on is round. These convex Telescopes a [...]ter the Object in some thing else besides their proportions: nor doth any such thing happen in a welldisposed Eye upon vision Secondly, he might have known this further difference betwixt an un-assisted sight, and what is performed by the best and longest Telescopes abo [...]t ordinary Objects, that the Dioptrick Tubes do represent the light and colours of bodies more d [...]lute and remiss then they appear toZucchius ubi supra p. [...]81. the naked Eye. Per Telescopia, praesertim longiora, objecta spectantur luce & colore dilutiora, quam libero oculo. This is granted by Zucchius and others; and the reason is given by Zucchius, because that so great an expa [...]on o [...] amplification of the Object, and [...] of itsExpansion [...]m repraesentativorum aequ [...] valere remissioni, & densationem corum intensioni, & utramque non à medio, sed a propria conditione propagationis radiorum pendere. id ib. Si Telescopium sit extraordinariae longitudinis, ex nimia expansione, quae a quivalet remissioni qualitatis visibilis, apparet nimis dilutum: ut minus in eo varietas partium internosci possit▪ Zucchius phil opt. p 2. tr. 3. c. 7. sect. 5. p. 366. Zucchius phil. opt. part 1 c. 17. sect. 6 p. 204 parts one from the other, is equivalent to a remission of those qualities therein. But to shew Mr. Glanvill a little more of his ignorance in Telescopes, I shall shew him some further differences betwixt the naked sight, and what is performed by those Glasses. For some of them represent some Objects greater then they appear to the naked eye: Some (in the shorter Tubes) are represented no bigger, or rather less then they otherwise seem: Some Objects in the longer Telescopes are magnified indeed, but nothing so much as other Objects are by the same Glasses. The Experiments [Page] are obvious: place a candle in the dark at some considerable distance, and the flame will appear round and encompassed with rays: then take a short Telescope fitly made and placed, and look through it, and you will see the irradiation taken off, and the flame represented as oblong, not round, and rather seemingly less then greater then it appeared before to the naked Eye. Then turn your eye unto any coloured Object, and take notice how big it seems: assume the same Telescope, and you shall find that to be magnified above what it seemed to the naked eye by much. After this, take a long Telescope, and view the aforesaid candle through that; and at the same distance view some other coloured Object, and you shall see that this last Telescope will represent both Objects much magnified; but the Candle less of the two by far.

But I shall adde further, that it is not to be doubted but that the Telescopes of Galilaeo, Scheiner, Rheita, Gassendus, Grimaldi, Eustachio Divini, Hevelius, Hugenius, Ricciolus, and Zucchius, were good in their kind, and that they did represent Objects as truly here on earth, asSi Lunares discos, post tot inspectores, & inspectiones▪ publicatos videas, neque▪ numero, neque conformatione si [...]i correspondent: quam multae partes vel prae aliis circumpositis illustriores interjectae & saa multo mino [...]i illustrationis exhibitione illas interrumpentes, aliquos latuerunt, & in angustioribus, vel minus accuratè expressis. Discis omissae, q [...]ae verè internoscibiles sunt in luna, & ab alii [...] consignantur? quantum totius Disci lunaris terminatio▪ & insigniorum in ea partium, variata? Zucchius phil opt. part. 1. c. 17. sect 8. p 2 [...]3. any could; yet when they come to be applied to the Celestial Phaenomena, what difference is there in their Observations? How do they complain either of the default of the Telescopes, or want of care or skill, each in the other? Simon Marius boasts of his accurateness: Scheiner in his Apelles tells us, Observationes omnes factae sunt summo studio coelo serenissimo, semper cum observatum est, & obscurissimo, plerumque Vide Scipion. Claramont. de Univers. l. 3. c. 8. in absentia videlicet Lunae: talis vero variis & excellentissimis, quorum uno meliorem adhuc ad stellas non vidi. But enough may be collected to this purpose out of the foregoing discourse, so that I need not repeat it over again: out of all which as I would not be understood totally to discredit the use of Telescopes in celestial discoveries, (I do not [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] deny but some things and some motions are observed by them, which a naked Eye cannot discern; but this knowledge arrives to a slender degree of certainty, when the Phaenomena come to be particularly explicated; and theoremes or assertions framed thence) so I would not have them too much relied on, nor men be too confident in principles and Conclusions which have no surer Foundation then those probabilities: and I do herein joyn with Claramontius in that Epiphonema, In tanta diversitate, quid certi ex tubo Optico habemus? If I must suspect the skill or accurateness of Galilaeo, Scheiner, Gassendus, Hevelius, Fontana, Ricciolus, and Zucchius, and such like; pardon me, if I know not whom to believe.

I have been the more large in this Point because of the insolence with which Mr. Glanvill persecutes that Reverend, and otherwise learned person, whom he represents to the world as He pleaseth, and accordingly treats him with that contempt and scorn which is less allowable towards a Divine, and such a one as is, and always hath been in that Countrey very much esteemed by several honourable Families, as well as others. However God hath so providentially ordered the dispute, thereby to check the pride of our Virtuoso, that The Man of Words cannot triumph over the Man of Axiomes. And if it be true, that our Aristotelean was amazed at the hard words of Dioptrick Tubes, &c. as if there had been Magick in them: I doubt not to Justifie Him in it; for the insolent Virtuoso made use of them, not as became a knowing person, but as Conjurers use strange termes, and of an uncouth sound, though perhaps really Hebrew, Latine, or Arabique.

Besides all this, perhaps Mr. Cross seems to have been offended at something in that mixt discourse or dispute, that might derogate from the Authority of the Scripture: many sayings are not innocent, but as they are worded or uttered. To say the Scripture was written to mens fancies is an expression very unwary in a Divine: although a convenient interpretation may excuse it. To say it is not written according to vulgar Methods may so be spoken, that the action may render the words culpable. And in another Age they might [Page] have passed better then now, when men are prone to vilifie the Scripture, especially the little Wits. I perceive Mr. Sprat is not over-tender of the dignity of the Scripture: for although there be an ancient Canon of the Church against the applying the Sacred Word of God ad scurrilia & adulatoria (which Canon is authorised even by the Council of Trent) yet doth he encourage men to apply it to ordinary Raillery. ‘The Wit that may be borrowed from the Bible is magnificent, Plus ultra Page 4 4. and as all the other Treasures of knowledg it contains, inexhaustible. This may be used and allowed without any danger of prophanenesse. The Ancient Heathens did the same. They made their Divine Ceremonies, the chief subjects of their phansies: But this practice of theirs was the ruine of their Religion, as any man may judg who sees what use Clemens [...]lexand [...]inus and Lictantius make of it against Paganism. And the Greeks thought so when they punished on [...], [...] by that means their Religions had a more awful impression, became more popular, and lasted longer in force then else they would have done, And why may not Christianity admit the same thing, if it be practised with Sobriety and Reverence. What irreligion can there be in applying some Scripture-expressions to Natural things? Why are not the one rather exalted and purified, then the other defiled by such Applications?—’ The Case is clear Gentlemen, Hath not the Lord said, What hast thou to do to take my words into thy mouth since thou hatest to be reformed? Besides, methinks our Divine might have remembred the feast of Belshazzar, and the resentment that the Lord expressed upon the applying of the consecrated vessels to the serving in a festival banquet, though to a Prince. He might have called to minde the hand-writing upon the wall, and very probably have inferred with himself, that if God was so concerned at the misapplication and abuse of those Temple-Vessels, he would much more severely interess himself where that Word of his, which he hath so many ways hallowed and recommended to our Veneration, is abused to raillery: This Humour is no part of the words or works in which the Man of God is to be perfected by reading of the Holy Scripture. I fear the great Judge will one day say unto these Drolls, Ye are weighed in the ballance, and found too light. To conclude, the generality of Raillery amounts to no more but so many idle words, and they become doubly criminal by being profane.

Of the Antiquity and Use of Chymical Physique.

[Page]

‘CHymistry hath indeed a pretence of the great Hermes for Plus ultra, Page▪ c [...]1. its Author, (how truly I will not dispute.) From him 'tis said to have come to the Egyptians, and from them to the Arabians; Among these it was infinitely mingled with vanity and superstitious devices: but it doth not appear at all in use with Aristotle and his Sectators: Nor doth it appear that the Grecians, or the disputing Ages, were conversant in these useful and luciferous Processes.—’

Our Virtuoso is not willing to dispute whether Hermes were the Author of Chymistry, or not: It had become one that is encharged with the Cure of Souls very well, to have declined all these other disputes, as being remote from those Studies, by which he ought to qualifie himself for a be fitting discharge of the Ministry. But to tell him further, what I am sure he is ignorant of, the Egyptians did never attribute to Hermes the Invention of Physick, or any part of it, but to Apis and Aesculapius; and as for that Chymistry which they practised, which consisted in melting down and improving of Metalls, or making of Gold: Chemiae nomine olim haud [...] [...]vi [...] aliud significatum▪ quam [...] aut vero [...] [...]am quae viliorum metallorum la pdumque in melius commutationem pollicetur Ne q [...]i dem legere est, vel medicamentis praeparandis operam aliquam impendisse primos Chemiae professores. Con [...]ng. de Med. Herm. c. 3. p. 15. the Egyptians did never reckon the discovery of that Art amongst the praises of their Hermes, though they were very forward to magnifie him, and to ascribe unto him a great many Elogies. Nay, when they do recount the Authors of their Chymistry, though they do not agree about them, yet there is none that transfers that honour upon this Trismegistus. But whether Aesculapius, or the wicked Angels, (to both which the Invention is attributed) were the discoverers of Chymistry, I think I may allow the Egyptians to have been the first Practisers of it, and that there wanted not [Page] those who did mention Hermes amongst them that used that Art, and were esteemed Philosophers. Nor is the Egyptian Chymistry of any great Antiquity, there being no mention of it in any Greek or Latine Writer, till almost theVide Coming. c. 3 p. 28. fourth Century after Christ. Neither is the name only of Chemia or Chemistry of so modern a date: but there is not any record of any book In the time of Constantine A. D. 320. Firmicus is s [...]id to be the first that is recorded to have named A ch [...]mia; he saith, that S [...]turn disposeth to [...]chimy. Whence Libavius argues that it was then an Art, and had been long practis [...]d, or else how comes it under Astrological Prediction? But there is no consequence in that reason of his it being usual for Astrologers to accommodate the Stars so as to have an influence upon noveliny [...]ions. Under Theodasiv [...] the Great, A. D 38. He [...]odorus writ a book to the Emperour about the Chrysopoeia; and something about that [...] to er [...]lius, as Cedrenus witnesseth. Libav in Exam censur. P [...]. written, or work performed, that imports any such thing. Yet have the Alchymists (it is true) pretended to a greater Antiquity, entitling several spurious books to Hermes, Moses, (and Miriam his Sister) Democritus, Plato, Aristotle; and made as if their Art were intimated in the fable of the Golden Fleece, the H [...]sperian Orchards, and the Song of Solomon. In which I cannot but take notice of the different procedure of those Chymists, and our Experimental Philosophers: the one attributed all glorious discoveries to the Ancients, their Predecessors; these will not allow them those praises which indisputably belong unto them. But however, that I may grant our Virtuoso, that Chymistry did flourish in Egypt in such manner and at such time, as I have declared out of Conringius, (to whom I refer the inquisitive Reader) yet I must not gratifie him with this other concession, that from them it came to the Arabians, the followers of Aristotle not being at all acquainted with it, nor the Grecians, or those disputing Ages, being at all conversant with it. For it is made eviden [...] by Conringius, (c. 26. p, 368.) that it passed from the Egyptians to the Greeks. There are of Greek Writers, Zosimus▪ Panopolita, Olympiodorus, Stephanus, Synesius, Michael Several of these Greek Writers were seen by Salmasius in the King of France his Library, and by Reynesius, (vide var. lection l. 2. c. 5 p. 5 [...].) who transcribes this passage [...]s the Conclusion of one of them. [...] lest any one should think that by [...] were meant our Wits, and Poets, and inventors. I must adde, that it is a name long ago fixed upon the Chymists and Chrysipporeticks, as Reynesius declares. Psellus, Blemmydas, and many others, which are instanced in by the same Author, and deduced through the several Centuries anteceding the Saracen Empire. The very name of [...] or [...], [Page] is Greek, as Vossius observes, de Philos. c. 9. The Moorish particle Al being prefixed. Nor is the word Alembex of any other original, being compounded of the said [...], a term used by Dioscorides to signifie a vessel, not much unlike our Limbecks. Diosc. l. 5. c. 64. vid. Conring. & Voss. ubi supra. From the Greeks together with other Learning, even Chymistry was transmitted: and Geber himself (as Leo Afer relates it, lib. 3. pag. 136.) was but an Apostate Grecian. This Geber is the most ancient of Arabian Alchymists, their Idol, and styled Magister Magistrorum. I am not ignorant that Conradus Gesnerus (in praef. ad Evon.) and some othersGeberus quem volunt circa annum Portus virginei sexcentissimum in vivis fuisse Libav exam. censur. Prisiens. have reckoned upon Geber as if he had been originally a Saracen, and the Nephew of one Mahomet: some say he was the Grandchild of the Impostor Mahomet: but their credit is not equal to that of Leo Afer, who appears a most learned person, and inquisitive even to Curiosity into the Lives as well as Customs of the Moors, his Countreymen. Habent Fessani Arabes multa Chemicae artis opuscula a viris Aser Hist. Afric [...] l. 3. doctis conscripta, inter quos potiorem locum habet Geber, qui centum annis post Mahometen vixit, quem natione Gidum aiunt fidem abjurasse.—Gesner cannot tell at what time he lived, but he saith he was not the Inventor, but Illustrator of the Art of Distillation.—Quanquam non illum primum hujus Artis Inventorem, sed Illustratorem fuisse existimo. Hoc in opere quod summae perfectionis inscribitur, de distillatione in Gener Conrad Ges [...] [...] praes. ad E [...] onym. Multa pulchre disserens, varios distillandi modos fere omnibus notos esse scribit: nimirum ut vetus quoddam suo seculo, non recens quoddam inventum.

But though the Greeks were not free of the Metallurgical part of Chymistry, yet did they not prepare any Medicines Chymically (that I know of,) except it were the Alcalisate Salts, and Ecchylomata, or Juices formed into Extracts, and Oyls drawn per descensum. This seems manifest in that Oribasius, Aetius, Paulus Aegineta, Alexander Trachcanius, PAULUS & JOANNES Jatrosophistae [Page] of Alexandria, Simeon Sethus, Actuarius, Nonus, Conringius c. 26. p 370. Gesner, in praesat. ad Euonym. and others mention no such Medicaments: no, nor Michael Psellus, though he writ a peculiar Tract about Chemistry. Neither hath Nicolaus Myrepsus (though a modern Grecian) any Chymical Preparation.

The Arabians seem the first that ever accommodated Chymistry in an eminent manner to Physick; if it be true, as Libavius imagines; that Abulchasis did live in the time of Muhauia the Saracen, that setled their Empire at Damascus Anno Dom▪ 660. Chymistry then seems to have been regulated into an Art; He writ a Book of Physick called Servitor, Libav in exam. sent. Paris. which principally treats of Medicines Chymically prepared, and useth the terms of reverberation, calcination, coagulation, distillation per ascensum & descensum: and many such like expressions, together with Processes purely Chymical. It was then that Alchymie was called Perfectum Magisterium; and that which we call Oyle of Bricks, did bear the name of Oleum Sapientiae & Perfecti Magisterii.

So Avicenna speaks not only of Rose-water distilled: but of Mercury and Arsenick sublimed: after him Joannes Mesues shews how to make several Chymical Conring. ubi supra, p 374. Oyls, as of Amber, Wheat, Oleum Philosophorum, &c. Neither is it to be doubted, but that there were an infinite number of Chymical Processes latent in the hands of particular Artists, since Joannes Mesues refers us unto them, viz. de quibus loquuntur, qui quae Vid. Conring. ubi supra. sunt occulta in rebus manifestant & detegunt. Hos quoque aggredere rei hujus cupidus tam famosae apud illos. After that the Western Christians were civilized and instructed in the Sciences by the Moors inhabiting Spain, Reade Libavius more fully upon this [...] subject in E▪ am. censur. Parisiens. and that Physick superstructed upon the principles of Galen, Avicenna, and Averroes, was derived unto them, those Sectators of the ancient Philosophy improved Chymical Pharmacy very much. [Page] nor were Albertus Magnus, Aponensis, Gentilis de Fulgineo, Arnoldus de villa nova, Raymundus Lullius, or Joannes de Rupescissa, or Isaacus Hollandus, or Basilius Valentinus, or Antonius Conring. ubi supra, c. 27. p. 379. 380, &c. Guainerius, or Michael Savonorola, or Montagnana, or Hieronymus Schallerus, and Magenbuchius (Chymical Physicians at Norimbergh before Paracelsus) or Guilielmus Varigana, or Antonius Fumanellus, or Wolfgangus Talhenserus, or Hieronymus Brunsvigus (the first that writ of Chymistry in the German tongue) any other then Pretenders to the ancient Physick and Philosophy. There was no faction betwixt the Physicians in those days; nor did they undervalue or decry each other; They rather represented themselves to be Adherents and Sectators of Aristotle, then his Enemies; and chose rather to sophisticate his fourth book of Meteors, toConring. ibid. c [...]8. p. 387. Erastus de metall. p 34. shew that great Man knew all things, then condemn all his other works, as if he knew nothing. Nor were they only followers of the PERIPATETICKS, but I finde the Chymists that did precede Paracelsus to be accounted Hippocratical Physicians: witness this passage in Caspar Bravo, who inquired more into them then I have had leisure to doe.

Caspar Bravo Resolut. Medic. part. 1. disp. 1. sect. 1. resol. 3. sect. 2.

Resolvendum, artem Spagiricam veterum Spagiricorum, quam Avicenna, Geberus, Rhasis, Arnoldus de villa nova, Raymundus Lullius, Blemmydas, Braceseus, Virceanus, Joannes Augustinus, Panterus, Isaachus Monachus, Morienus, Zosymus, & alii Hippocratis Sectatores professi sunt diversam esse a Secta Paracelsistica. With this agrees that passage of Conringius de Med. Herm. c. 28. Certe ante Paracelsum haud est observare With him agrees Libavius in the forecited Treatise. in Chemicorum scriptis singularem aliquam sive Hermeticam, sive Chemicam Medicinam. Observata autem est plerumque medendi illa via quam Hippocrates, Galenus, horumque Sectatores cum Graeci tum Arabes, inter (que) eos Avicenna calcaverant: quod unum Arnoldum Villanovanum legenti non potest non Sole videri clarius. So Primrose de vulg. Error. l. 4. [Page] c. 1. Haec medicamenta praeparandi ratio non a Paracelso inventa est: sed multis ante Paracelsum natum seculis exculta fuit ab iis etiam Meditis qui Galeni doctrinam sectabantur, ut Raym. Lullio, Villanovano, &c.

But when Paracelsus was seised with the same spirit that seems to sway some of the Virtuosi: then did he begin to decry the study of Languages, as loss of time; our Wits call it Pedantry. He vilified Logick as that which caused endless disputes, and darkned rather then discovered Nature: He calls it matrem odii, rixarum & litium; He prohibited the reading of other good and Ancient Authors. He seemed to be of no Religion; and if for any, it was to be without Metaphysicks, without the mixture of Glosses and Interpretations, Solum textum Scripturae legendum, interpretationem nullam adhibendam. He calls upon all Universities and Countreys to resort unto him, to follow him and his new discoveries, his real Philosophy, his Essential Anatomies, all other performances being but empty and verbose.

Because I observe som resemblance betwixt the invitations of Mr. Sprat and his, I will set one of his passages down in the Preface of his Paragranum, viz. Me sequimini; Non ego vos sequar. Me, me, inquam, sequimini, Avicenna, Galen, Rhases, Montagnana, Mesue. Me sequimini; non ego vos sequar, Parisienses, Monpelienses, Suevi, Misnici, Colonienses, Viennenses, qui Danubium & Rhenum accolitis. Vos item Insulae marinae, Italia, Sed in primo de pestilitate tractatu primo, ubi d [...] Chelidoniae contra imaginationes Magicas amuleto disserit, adeo non rejicit Galeni & Hippocratis decreta, ut etiam amplius vider velit Galeni- i cus, quàm omnium sc [...]o [...]a [...] Dalmatia, Athenae, Graeci, Arabes, Israelitae, me sequimini, non ego vos sequar. Mea enim Monarchia. Hereby any one may see that He was as conceited of himself, and as great a contemner of all ancient Learning, and of Aristotle, and Galen, &c. as some of the Virtuosi: and as ignorant of Latin and other tongues; and as false and imperfect in his relations; as variable in his hypotheses, as if he held nothing but with the power of revoking it, which is a great qualification of a modern Philosopher. He was not for the particular methods in vogue, but for a general Enquiry into the Experiments of old Women, Mountebanks, Hangmen, Husbandmen, &c. He could make use of the writings and inventions of others, concealing their [...], and [...] [Page] as becomes a modish Experimentator. To evince this last assertion, I shall set down some passages of Crato, and others, to shew that the disputing Ages were not so ignorant of Chymistry as Mr. Glanvill pretends. Crato in a Letter to Erastus writes thus; Remedia quibus aliquando usus esse dicitur, Erastus part. 4. p. 300. non illius esse ex eo certus sum, quod librum vidi ante ducentos fere annos a Monacho quodam Ulmae scriptum, in quo eadem medicamenta, quae ille frustillatim, nunc in has nunc in illas chartas sparsit, perspicue sunt scripta.—And elsewhere,P [...]ae [...] ad Exercit. Scaliger. Hartman & Crollius published no new medicines. Caeterum ne (que) Crollium neq me aliquid nov [...] protulis [...]e libenter satemur, ne (que) ea unquam utrius (que) nostrum mens fuit. Hartman▪ in not▪ ad Croll. p. 138. Libavius ubi supra. Fuit in bibliotheca viri optimi & integerrimi Marci Singmoseri Sacratissimi Impp. Consilii a Secretis primi, liber ante ducentos annos a Monacho quodam exaratus. Eo multis mensibus usus sum, & omnia quae isti (Paracelsici) tanquam in Eleusiniis sacris mussitant, tam evidenter tradita, ut neminem fallere possent animadverti. He himself confesseth who were his teachers in Chimistry, and that he was far from being the first Inventour of it. ‘Theophrastus Paracelsus natus anno Christi 1493. mortuus 1541. Hic non erubuit confiteri seremedia in Chymicis accepisse, & his ipsis Scientiam Artis Chymiae debere. Antiqui Philosophi (ait in [...]. parte Chirurgiae mag. tractat. 3. c. 1.) studiosi indagandarum longae vitae causarum (recitamus breviter sententiam) destituti vero perfecta praeparandorum componendorumque medicamentorum scientia ab Alchymistis eam petere non sunt veriti, atque sic utronemque laboribus conjunctis genuina praeparandorum remediorum Scientia exorta, & variis Chemicis experimentis in medicinam transfusis est aucta, maxime vero tincturis & floribus metallicis, quarum tincturarum quant a fuerit efficacia, antiqui ea de re Codices testantur, quos diu a Pseudomedicorum turba suppressos, nos publicos facere non dubitavimus. Remedia nostra ex Chymicorum Schola prodiisse non dubito fateri: & quoniam Chymica ars infinitis erroribus scatere visa est, illud quoque Augiae stabulum repurgandi laborem sumpsimus: in quo felicius mihi versari licuit, quod ob ineunte aetate magnae Artis studio captus summa diligentia sub excellentissimis praeceptoribus Arti huic studuerim. Praeceptores enim fuerunt Wilhelmus Hohenheimius Pater, & alii infiniti: praeter hos quoque scriptis adjutus sum Setthagii Episcopi, [Page] Erhardi Laventalii, Nicolai Hipponensis Episcopi, Matthai Sohechtii Suffraganei Treisingensis, Abbatis Spanheimii, aliorumque doctissimorum Chemistarum: Quin & variis corum experimentis factus sum locupletior, inter quos honoris causa nominandus mihi venit nobilissimus vir Sigismundus Fueger Schwathensis, qui magnis sumptibus pluribus ministris sustentatis Chemicam accessione locupletavit. Haec ibi Paracelsus. Neque vero falsa scribere est putandus, quandoquidem seculum istum & exercitiis Chymicis & voluminibus scatuit, cum jam plures tractatus typis publicis sint impressi, nihilominus cernimus, subinde ex tenebris prodire plures, ita ut ne Thesauri quidem multi videantur sufficere cupiendis, nec Theatra.’

His followers confess, that he borrowed much out of Basilius Valentinus, and more out of Isaacus Hollandus, as Penottus declares, Cum incidissem in Isaaci librum de opere vegetabili, De dena [...] ▪ medic. reperi de verbo ad verbum doctrinam de tribus principiis, & de separatione quatuor Elementorum ab eo desumptam, Unde constat illum praecipua sua Opera suffuratum fuisse, atque hinc inde expiscatum: ut de gradationibus medicinarum ab Arnoldo, Vide Conring. de med. Herm. c. 2 [...]. p. 252▪ 253. Archidoxa a Raymundo Lullio ex sua Arte operativa: de Arcanis a Rupescissa; nihil prorsus a seipso praeter convitia: & maledicta: a Trithemio varia.—The same is confessed by Quercetan somwhere as I remember, and he himself intimates it by adding to many preparations the words, Ex nostra correctione, ex mea emendatione. Out of all which it is evident, that neither the Grecians, nor the disputing Ages were so ignorant of Chymistry, as Mr. Glanvill asserts; as it is certain that the Arabians as well as the Grecians were disputers and followers of Aristotle and Galen, and that particularly Albertus Magnus and Roger Bacon were Schoolmen. Nor can any man doubt the same of those other Bishops and Monks, who knows with what perfect Veneration, in those days Aristotle was regarded. How useful and how luciferous their Processes were, it is not for Mr. Glanvill to judge, who is ignorant of them: but any one will allow them, both the one and the other, recommmendation, who considers that their Chymical Processes which passed amongst them gave occasion [Page] to all, and make a great part of the improvements in Chymistry, in Dioptricks and other Subjects, wherein our Virtuosi pride themselves. Particularly as to Chymistry, it is as clear that the disputing Ages and followers of Aristotle were acquainted with it, and eminent for it, as that there were Monks and Schoolmen. Those men whom Mr. Glanvill so explodes, and with whom the Historian disports himself, had of late years before Paracelsus, in a manner, solely the knowledge of this Art by which Nature is unwound, &c. This Sennertus De Cons. Chym. c. 3. granteth. Proximis seculis fere inter Monachos latuit Chymia, quorum non pauci illud, quo abundabant, otium post sacras meditationes & orationes, arti huic praestantissimae honeste tribuerunt: inter quos fuerunt Raymundus Lullius, Albertus Magnus, Joannes de Rupescissa, Savanarola, Morienus, Rogerius, Trithemius, & Frater Basilius Valentinus: quorum scripta multa hoc seculo in lucem edita sunt, & multa adhuc manuscripta passim latent. I hope there is no exception against Sennertus, how partial soever Erastus or Crato may seem. And to affront our Virtuoso a little more, it was a follower of Aristotle, and those Disputers, a pitiful School-Divine that discovered the making of Gun-Powder, which single invention out-does all that our Collegiates boast of. In the year 1354. Bertholdus Schwarz a Benedictine Monk discovered it, and I dare warrant him in those days no enemy to the man of Stagyra, the Idol of disputers; A very anc [...] ent Manuscript gives him this Character. Bertholdus Schwarz Goslariensis Monachus ordinis Sancti Benedicti, cum mire Chymicis delectaretur, atque eorum peritia jam magnam sili nominis existimationem acquisiisset, &c. Any one may read the rest in Kirchers Mundus subterraneus l. 12. sect. 5. part. 4.

I shall relate some particular processes in Chymistry, V [...]ssi [...]s de philosoph c. 1 [...]. sect 12. Gesn. in prae [...] [...] E [...]ny [...]n. Vossius▪ [...] philo c 13▪ [...]ring de med. Herm▪ c. 26 p. 371. which are mentioned by such as were not Arabians, but of a much more ancient date. In the time of Julianus and Valentinianus Emperours lived Aetius Amidenus; he and Nicolaus Myrepsus (who is indeed later then Mesue) do mention the distillation of Oyls per descensum, as Gesner shews; and Vossius together with Conringius avow— [Page] Nicolaus Myrepsus (or Praepositus)—in quo illud miror nullam ab eo aquarum oleorumve Chymisticis instrumentis paratorum mentionem fieri. Capnistum tantum oleum, quod per descensum distilletur, describit, ut Aetius quoque. As to the ways of making Chymical Extracts, let any man judge whether the Grecians were ignorant of them, by these passages, as they areObscr [...]at & paradox. chym. l. 1 c. 2. p. [...]2. cited by Gunterus Billichius, viz. Chylismata extrahuntur aut exprimuntur. Extrahendi nec ars nova est, nec novus modus, quanquam Heurnio ita visum sit Method. ad praxin. lib. 1. & lib. 2. c. 25. Rationem ejus a Dioscoride accipe, verbis interpretis Ruellii lib. 3. c. de Gentiana. Contusa, inquit, radix quinque diebus aqua maceratur, postea in eadem tantisper decoquitur, dum extent radices, & ubi refrixit aqua, linteo excolatur: mox discoquitur, dum mellis crassitudo, fiat fic [...]ilique reconditur. Similia cap. 9. ejusdem libri de Centaurio minore habet. Dioscorides i [...]ed in the days o [...] [...]leopa [...]ra and [...]a [...]c. Anton. whose Physician he was a so lower of Herophilus, and consequently of [...]ppocrates and Aristotle, Vide Vess d [...] philos. c. 11. sect. [...]0. & Jonsium de script. hist. & phil. l. 2. c. 6. p. 145. Dabo tibi ipsissima Dioscoridis verba; [...]. Nequid ad plenitudinem artificii deesset, subjungit; Quod siquid concretum faucibus vasis adhaerescat, deradunt, reliquoque humori permiscent. Item haec; Quae autem siccis radicibus aut herbis liquamenta exprimuntur, decocta (ut in Gentianae mentione retulimus▪ praeparantur. Ita Lycium & Abscynthium, hypocistis, & consimilia coguntur. De Lycio vide cap. 135. lib. 1. de hypocistide libri ejusdem cap. 128. Chylismatis denique absynthini, cap. 26. meminit. Nec aliter Extractum Melampodii clarissimus Raymundus Mindeserus concinnavit, quod in Pharmacopoeia Augustana inter Ecchylismata▪Cathortica locum non postremum reperit. Ut [...]iqueat, extrahendi artificium, dignum omnino fuisse, quod & erudita antiquitas inveniret, & non degener posteritas imitaretur. Nec quicquam Chymia novi, praeter liquorem attulit.

[Page]Concerning fixed and Alcalisate Salts, the Chymists and Chymical Physicians make a great noise: and undoubtedly the Invention is very extraordinary, and their use very singugular in Medicine. Yet bothSee the antiquity of the use of Alcalisate and other Salts by the Ancients, largely proved by M. Ru [...]andus progymn. alchym. qu. 14, 15. Vide Galen. de Theriaca sub finem, & Pharmacop. Augustan. in append. ad an [...]idot. class. de Salib. Theriacal. G. Bellichius observat. & paradox. chym. l. 1. c. 2. p. 30. & in Thessalo chymicum. c. 7. p. 90. the preparation and the use of them is set down by Dioscorides, Galen, and Aetius, in their discourses about Theriacal Salts; Though latter days have reformed the preparation, as Galen endeavoured to do that which he found in use in his time. Besides, I observe out of Gunterus Bellichius, that Aristotle was not ignorant of it. Aristoteles auctor est, Umbros cinerem harundinis & junci decoquere aqua solitos, donec exiguum superesset humoris: qui ubi refrixisset, salis copiam fecerit, lib. 2. meteor. cap. 3. Hoc se apud Theophrastum invenire Plinius testatur, lib. 31. cap. 7. Idemque non harundinei tantum juncique salis meminit, sed colurni insuper, & querni. Amborum autoritate (nam de Theophracto nihil mihi constat) Chymicorum castigabitur temeritas, quae suis inventis salem cineritum an [...] merare ausa est.

The preparation of Salt-peter with Sulphur, in order to the making of what the Chymical Physicians call Sal prunellae, was known to Hippocrates, and others of the ancients, and they used it in Squinonsyes in Gargarismes for the tongue and throat. Desinant in posterum Chymici de lapide Prunellae magnifice gloriari. Nam & apud Hippocratem [...] G Bellichius obsciv. chym. l. 1. c. 5. p 49. quater invenimus. Semel quidem in tertio de morbis: bis in de internis affectionibus: denique semel in lib. de morb. mulier. Ac ne dubites erudite antiquitati cognitum eum lapidem fuisse, Plinius auctor est, nitrum frequenter liquatum cum Sulphure coqui in carbonibus, sulphuri concoctum in lapidem verti. Haec recognosce ex lib. 31. cap. 10. And the same Author saith elsewhere, Prae aliis omnibus inclaruit [...] Hippocratis G Bellichius [...] l. 2. c. [...]. p 119. seu lapis Plinii nitrarius, dictus a barbarorum pruna se [...] angina, cui singulariter mederi perhibetur. Nec nova est quaecunque ea laus. Nam & Hippocrates abstergendae Salivae & muco, ac facilit andae exscreationi nitrum anginosis obtulit, indiditque [Page] [...]llationibus Oris. Lib. 2. de morbis, sect. 49.

Neither is the way of subliming Flowers of Benzoin, any thing else then the imitation of that way which the Ancients had of condensing Soot. So Bellichius informs me, Fuligo, Id ib. l. 1. c. 2. p. 31. definiente Scaligero, cujusque rei pinguis crematilis pars est, ac demum aliarum rerum fumus condensatus, Exerc. 56. Modus conficiendae ejus, siquid artificii subest, apud Dioscoriden extat, lib. 1. c. 85, 86, 94, 97. imitatio apud Beguinum, quando Benzoinum defloravit, l. 2. c. 18.

It may perhaps be granted by most intelligent persons, that the making of Extracts, and fixed Salts, and such instances of Vegetables being prepared as I have given, and the glory of those inventions cannot justly be denied unto those disputing Ages; but that the preparation of Minerals, and the medicinal use of them inwardly, is a discovery the ancient times were not acquainted with. And this is the judgment of many learned men. But in refutation of it, seeing that the inward use of Antimony, as it is several ways prepared, refers to Basilius Valentinus, and before his days; since that, sundry preparations of Mercury are more ancient then the humour of Novellism; since Paracelsus, Hartman, Crollius did but publish the processes of Aristoteleans, Avicennists, and such like Monks and Physicians; all that our Virtuoso can derive from this Plea is, that the Arabians, adherents to the old Philosophy and their followers, did improve the extent of Chymistry, and added thereunto as they did in the other practice of Physick, the use of Rhubarb, Cassia, Manna, Tamarinds, and other benign medicines: and this demonstrates that Philosophy and those notions not to be so steril, as they are represented in comparison of the Fecundity of the Cartesian Principles, from whence Physick hath received little (if any) benefit or advantage. But to raise this Enquiry beyond the times of the Saracen Empire, it is manifest out of Pliny, that mineral-waters were drunk in those ancient times: and that the Stomoma or rust of iron, as also that drinks in which Iron was quenched, was given in the time of Dioscorides and Galen. That Brimstone was given inwardlyDiosc. l. 5. [...]. 53. Galen. l. 1. de cuporist. c. 17. by Hippocrates to asthmatick persons. That the Squamma [Page] aeris was given inwardly, as a purge and vomit by Hippocrares, Hippocr. de vict. in morb. acut. Vide Doring. de medicina, p. 217. Ruland▪ progymn. qu. 20. Brassavol. de me [...]. purg. p. 177. [...]oterius. Pharmacop. Spagir, l. 2. c 6. Galen, Dioscorides and Gelsus: and the Experiment happily tried by Brassavolus, that great Experimentator again of later years. So the giving of Sandaracha, or Orpiment inwardly for old coughs; and the suffiment made out of it, are recorded by Dioscorides: the trochises of it recommended anew by Mesue, and the more modern trials in Riverius. Even Chalcitis is an ingredient in the ancient Treacle of Andromachus. I shall conclude all with the passage of Doringius in the place already cited, Praeter Sandarachum Isidorus, Athenaeus, Idius, Eubulus, Heras, Gemellus, Agathius, Nicostratus, Doring. de medic. & med. p. [...]19. Vide & Ruland. progymn. Alch. qu. 20. Menander, Thanyros, Deletius Epagathus, Asclepiades, & alii: Alumen scissum, Auripigmentum, Aeris squammam, Aes ustum, Calcem vivam, Sulphur vivum, faeces unde ustas, Cadmiam, Cerussam, Gypsum, Stibium sive Antimonium in pastillos redacta dysentericis praescripserunt: quorum praeparandi rationem & utendi modum vide apud Galenum lib. 9. de compos. med. sec. loc. c. 5. Out of which passages any Reader will guels what President later Authors had out of the more remote Ancients for the giving minerals inwardly; and if we are just to the Arabians and their followers, we shall scarcely allow them any further honour, then to have found out some new ways to serve up o [...]d dishes.

I shall adde, that in Egypt, at such time as the repute of the Egyptian Priests, and their phantastical Philosophy had given way to the followers of Hippocrates, Aristotle, Herophilus, and others, that introduced the Grecian Learning there, that is, in, and somewhat before the days of Dioclesian, the Egyptians were Masters of that Secret of making Gold, which our inquisitive Moderns have so vainly sought after. Before that Age there is no mention of it, and then it is said they had such knowledge of the Art of making Gold, that thereby they were enriched and impowered to make War upon the Romans; and being overcome by the Emperour Dioclesian, he burned all the books which they had, containing the Mysteries of that Art, to prevent any future commotions of that Nature. So Suidas in the word [...] ▪ [Page] [...]. And in the word [...] he says, [...]. The renown of this Story is not questioned by the Chymists, and I finde the learned Joannes Langius to give creditJoan. Langii Ep. med. l. 1. ep. [...]3. de Orig. Alchym. But Or [...]s. and Paulus Diaconus were credulous Writers, and of little reput [...]. Libavius in exam. censur. Parisiens. Rolfincius chym. Art. [...] redact l. 1 10 & Con ring. dem. Herm. c 3. 21. Erastus de metallis, p. 103. unto it, quoting for the truth of it in his margin, besides Suidas; Orosius l. 7. c. 16. And Paulus Diaconus in tho life of Diocletian: Neither doth Libavius or Rolfincius elevate the authority thereof, though he mention the passage of Suidas. And to give a further colour unto this relation, I am informed that Aeneas Gazaeus, who lived in the latter end of the fifth Century, when Zeno and Anastasius were Emperours, treating of the Resurrection, hath this passage, [...]. But these Narrations are rejected by such as deny that other metalls may be transmuted into Gold: It is replied by Erastus, that either those Egyptian books contained nothing but the Art of melting down of metalls, and separating the latent Gold therefrom: or that Suidas being a late writer, living but 500 years ago, about 800 years or more after Diocletian, might have been imposed upon by the Chymists of those times (in Greece, and during the disputing Ages! mark that Mr. Glanvill)Conring de med. Herm. c. 3 p. 23. who even then might have feigned some such stories as that (and the Allegorising of the Golden Fleece) just as they have within the last Centuries counterfeited the Works of Moses and Solomon, and entitle them unto their Fictions. There are an infinity of stories in Suidas, which render his Assertions suspected: and in this he hath not the countenance of any ancient Writer to second him. It seems strange, that the Romans having so long ruled in Egypt absolutely, and their Governours, they not being to be supposed free from all desires of gain, how they should never apprehend the Artifice, nor have the least mention of it in their Writers [Page] (Greek or Latine) till the end of the fourth Century: and that so remarkable a passage as this is should be omitted by those ancient Writers, who relate both the war and actings of Diocletian Id ib p. 22. after his victory. As for that saying of Aenaeas Gazaeus, it is replied that he speaks by hear-say, rather then certain knowledge of the operation: that there have not wanted many learned persons, who have with a great deal of confidence, De plant. resuscit. vide Bellich. Thessal, [...]ed. v. c. 7. Rolfinc. art. chym. l. 6. c. 3. & l. 7. c. 19. illustrated the Resurrection by contemplations of the Phoenix, and of the forms of Plants resuscitated in their several Salts, as if both were realities: yet is there no such thing as either the one or the other.

Out of all which it is evident that Chymistry was a practice known and in use among the Sectators of Aristotle: and that the Grecian and disputing Ages were not unacquainted with those Processes, though these latter times have been more various and inquisitive, and have reduced that Art into better Method, and enlarged the Practice of Physick, with an infinity of Medicines: and indeed we must confess our selves very much obliged by the labours of ingenious Chymists, and that they have afforded multitudes of Experiments, such as contribute to the delight of all Philosophical heads, and to the Cure of many that being sick, have either better opinion of Chymical Medicines then of others, or are pleased with their small, and commonly more pleasant dose.

But that those parts into which Chymists reduce things, [...]ee this largly disputed by Libavias in exam. censur. Parisiens. are latent in the compound body, otherwise then by the Aristotelean distinction of formaliter and materialiter (so much laughed at by Mr. Glanvill, pag. 119.) This is an Assertion which doth not become any man that pretends to have read Mr. Boyle in his Sceptical Chymist, where that Point is too amply debated to be here transcribed. or ever (I think) refuted. Vide Kerger. de fermentat. sect 1. c. 3. p. 10. & Rolfinc▪ chym. in ar. red. l. 1. c. 19. Conring. de med. Hermet. c 22. Having denied Mr. Glanvill, that by those useful and luciferous processes, Nature is unwound and resolved into the minute Rudiments of its composition. Which Rudiments were not made use of at the first Creation, when one Fiat created those compound bodies, which Artful Fires sometimes (and but sometimes) analyse into several parts, as Salts, Oyle, or Sulphur and Spirit, and those grosser Elements of Earth [Page] and water. All which are not found in many bodies, (and when they are, it is with a great discrepancy betwixt those of one Concrete, and those of another) nor any of them to beDe serment. c 1. p. 4. separated from Gold. Which Libavius, no, nor Dr. Willis doth not make to be the last unmixt, and simple Constituents of natural bodies, sed ejusmodi tantum substantias, in quas veluti partes ultimo sensibiles res Physicae resolvuntur: Substances into which natural bodies are resolved finally as far as sense can judge, and when the Analysis is prosecuted in one sort of procedure: for another method, different Solvents, and different Fires discover different parts, and those sensible too from what the usual Chymistry builds upon. Having denied him this, I must further tell him, that when the Countreywoman sets her Eggs to be hatched, she produceth by those means such bodies as no Chymical fires with their vexatious Analysis ever would discover: so she doth when she doth brew and churms her butter. Nor is this more evident, then it is clear that the Chymical principles, when they come to be accommodated to the solving of the Phaenomena in nature, or in diseases, have as much of darkness and dissatisfaction in them, as occurs in the Peripatetick way: so that now we are more dubious, not more knowing, then before: and this any man that hath considered how the Chymical Physicians disagree about the causes of diseases, and even about the common Phaenomena of Nature, will easily grant me: nor will it appear less manifest, that if the Chymical hypotheses do take place, that it will subject the Mechanick Philosophy, and establish that of Anaximander, revived by the ingenious Berigardus.

But Mr. Glanvill adds, ‘That Chymistry directs Medicines Plus ultra, p. 11. less lothsom, and far more vigorous, and freeth the spirits and purer parts from the clogging and noxious appendices of grosser matter, which not only hinder and disable the operation, but leave hurtful dregs in the body behind them.—’ This Plea for the preferring CHYMICAL Medicines before those commonly called Galenical, is much insisted on by Beguinus, Quercetanus, and others of that way. Yet, first it is observable, that whether we regard taste or [Page] smell, those very Authors recommend as odious medicaments, and as loathsom, as ever Coerdus or Foesius in their Dispensatories, if not worse. Will any man in his Wits condemn Wormwood and Centory because of their bitter taste, or Castoreum for the smell? Secondly, every thing is not the better for being extracted. [...]reictag. nect. med. c. 75. p. 325. See Mr. Boyle of the usefulness of Philos. part 2 p. 148, &c. Thus the Extract of Rhubarb, though quickned with its Salt, is not so efficacious as plain Rhubarb, except it be sophisticated with Diagridium. Nor is Cynnamom improved by Extraction. Their being more vigorous and freed from grosser parts is not always a commendation, and sometimes it carries danger with it. That those grosser parts, and those natural vehicles are requisite, seems even thence clear, that their spirits & essences must be tempered and mixed often with other gross bodies before they be given. Those appendices of grosser See this point fully debated in the Vulgar Errors of Primrose, l. 4. c 3. which I desire Mr. Glanvill to read. In Pharmacop▪ August. De CC philosophice calcinat. p. 805. matter are not always noxious to Nature, since in our meats we finde none to be able to live on Chymical viands, but good Kitchin-Preparations. How many ways are there of preparing Harts-horn, yet is there not one that equalls the crude Horn. I shall set down Zwelfers words, whose credit no Chymist almost will extenuate. Licet ex cornibus vel ossibus it a Philosophice calcinatis distillationi subjectis de spiritu sale volatili, & oleo ipsorum foetido nonnihil eliciatur, non tamen propterea existimandum ipsa adhuc iisdem quibus crudum cornu pollere viribus vel majoribus etiam (prout nonnulli sibi imaginantur & asserunt) vel etiam, ut alii arbitrantur, hac calcinatione nihil aliud peractum fuisse quam quod friabilia, ad pulverandum aptiora, & magis pura reddita sunt: Neutiquam, Quippe, qui ambo cornua, tam crudum quam Philosophice calcinatum, examini ignis subjiciet, reipsa deprehendet multum de nativa sua humiditate, de sale volatili & oleo huic cornis Philosophice calcinato detractum esse, & eorundem vix parte quarta adhuc gaudere, ut propterea & hanc calcinationem Philosophicam, licet totali exustione aliquanto meliorem, approbare In prosecution of this point let any man consider, that Chymical oyle of Anniseeds is not so effectual as the powder. Heurn. meth. adv. l. 1. c. 5. Nor doth the like oyle of Camomile equal the infusion, as Simon Pauls Cl. quadrip. p. [...]55. practically observed. So the common Pillute de succino and Franckfort-pills transcend the minute doses of divers and the most famed Panchymagoga. This is an▪ observation so common with all practitioners, that none but Mountebanks and Quacks can deny it. Crato, Steeghius, Hofman, and others, generally taking notice of it. nequeam: e contra vero ipsum crudum cervi cornu subtiliter & minutim raspatum pluris aestimem, quod tamen diversimode [Page] parari, inque virtutibus suis exaltari potest. Ut vel in substantia, forma nimirum pulveris, vel in aqua decoctum & in mucilaginem vel gelatinam conversam tuto & sine nausea propinari possit. Nor is this more true in Harts-horn than in Vipers, which are more effectual being eaten as Eeles, or by a common infusion in wine, or given in powder (plain powder) then when reduced to volatile Salt and Essences. It is also false, that Chymical preparation always amends, or doth not render some things worse: The ingredients of sublimated Mercury are not poison; the result is. How much is the nature of Antimony and Mercury altered by preparing, so that a few grains prove mortal to the taker, who might without prejudice devour great quantities of either of them unprepared, Hydrargyrus, Antimonium M. Ruland. progymn. Alchym. qu. 33. crudum larga saepius porriguntur: The infusion of crude Antimony, (a pound in four Gallons of Ale) often rectifies all impurities of the blood, as well any viper-wine: and Mercury, which being crude is not only given in Pills by sundry Physicians, but drunk without any hurt in greater or lesserPoterius Pharmacop. Spagir. l. 1. p. 352. This experiment is not down in the two Treatis: sof the Vit [...]osi about the sophistication of wines: but in short, those▪ pieces (as much as they are famed before they came out) have been laughed at by all knowing persons and Wine-coopers. quantities in several cases. Non desunt qui Mercurium crudum in dolioli fundo detinent, ferunt vinum ne arescat, aut vaporem contrahat, aut pendulum fiat, ea ratione fieri. Nos tale vinum ad ventris lumbricos plurimum valere certo scimus. As for the hurtful dregs which the Galenical Medicaments are said to leave behind: I am confident, that whosoever shall enquire into the ill consequences of the two Pharmaceutics, will say, that if the Galenical be not always the most efficacious, it is always the most safe and innocent: and any man will be more apt to dread the violent impressions which the powerful spirits and minerals may make upon the membranes of the Stomach (which may introduce an irrelievable distemper in the torenus of that part, whereupon depends the nutriment, health, and vigour of the whole body) then any noxious faeces or little and remediable hurt from the generality of the Galenical Medicaments. Qui Deum credit malefactorum vindicem ultoremque, is a noxiis medicamentis, cum ad manum sunt alia, diligenter abstinebit: ne quando homicidii, [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] accusant [...] conscìentìa, reus fiat, parum profuerit novendecim curasse periculoso curationis genere, quo vigesimus, aut trigesimus sit necatus. Erastus disp. de propr. medic. c. 65. And there is this to be said in Justification of that Course—that those who have most decried it, and raised their repute upon a different way, yet have practised with it. In ipsius Paracelsi scriptis Conring. de med. Herm. c. 21. p 2 [...]9. Paludan. epist. [...] H. Sme [...]. Ea habetur in Bartholini cista med in vita Severini. p. 127. passim laudantur remedia morborum vulgari modo & composita & praeparata. Etiam Petrus Severinus teste Paludano, Medicamentis Paracelsicis non semper us [...]s est, verum & compositionibus Galenicis saepe. Nor are Paracelsus & Petrus Severinus Danus singular in this action: it is the common usage of Quercetan, Crollius, and Hartman; not to mention Dr. Willis: I shall adde, that Chymical medicines have n [...] ver or very seldom answered their expectation, which men raise of them: and whosoever shall inquire into the credit which Paracelsus, Petrus Severinus, Vide Conring. de med. Herm. c. 25 p. 358. &c. de Paracelso, de Phedrone, & Pharmacis Paracelsicis vide Bernardum Dissenniam Croneburgium in def med. veter. c. 40, 41, &c. & de Petro Severino Dano. Vide epistolam Palu dani, ubi supra. De Scheunemanno vide Rolfinc chym. l. 1. c. [...]8. p. 51. Phedro, or Scheunemannus, or Helmont gained by these refined Medicaments, he shall observe that either they are infamous for their destructive courses of Physick, or at best atchieved nothing beyond other Mortals, except by Chance. In fine, though I have seen very good success of many Chymical Medicines; yet dare I not express so great an admiration for them as Mr. Glanvill declares: and if he in all the number of his Philosophick friends, had but one understanding Physician, or two, they would tell him, That there are some diseases in themselves, or by accident incurable; that men will die under the most able Physicians, and that the most best and innocent Physick will sometimes have effects different Nec Paracelsi sectatores probo, qui medicina dogmatica explosa & relicta, [...]lixir vitae. quintas essentias▪ Axungiam Solis & Lunae, &c. & a [...]ia perniciosa & deterrima pharmaca in parva dosi, magno cum supercilio exhibere solent, aegrorum palato consulere volentes: cum hoc titulo tenus saltem medicamenta sin [...], ipsorum quidem opinione singularia, revera autem mortis fercula & pocula, quibus plerumque corpus humanum vehementer exagitatur, & magna cum jactatione satigatur, & ita debilitatur, ut aut ae [...]e aut nunquam amplius, pristinas vires recuperet. [...]abelchover. Cent. 6. hist. 7. in annot. p. 24. from the wishes and hopes of the Doctor: and he would finde that by ordinary medicaments not purged from their dregs,, nor exalted into spirits and essences, as great Cures are done by Countrey-Physicians and [Page] Countrey. Gentlewomen oftentimes, as any ever were wrought by Chymistry. The Physick which is celebrated in the Scripture, that which St. Luke, St. James, Cosmas and Damianus, Joannes Damascenus, and others followed, was that which our Divine scruples, at least it leaves dregs in the body.

I confess that among the Egyptians, and Arabians, and Paracelsians, and some other Moderns, Chymistry was very fantastick, unintelligible and delusive; and the boasts, vanity, and canting of those Spagyrists brought a scandal upon the Art, and exposed it to suspicion and contempt: but what the Society have done in order to its improvement, I understand not so well as Mr. Glanvill seems to do: the Treatise of Dr. Willis about Fermentation was writ before he was of that number: and I know not how he hath improved Chymistry much since. And in that famed Piece, all is not to be reckoned upon as invented (muchHis notion of Fermentation, as thereby he expresseth the natural and praeternatural occurrences in our bodies, is taken from Bellich. defermentat sect. 89. His notion of the fire in the heart it very near related to the doctrine of Conringius de calid [...]; and the comparison of the bloud with wi [...]e is derived from Carolus [...]i [...]o. so that those things which are the principal in his book) [...]em rather illustrated excellently well, then new discoveries and dypotheses. less is improved) that is written. Those that have improved it most, and made it intelligible, are Beguinus, Crollius, Quercetan, Hartman, Angelus Sala, Schroder, Zwelfer, Sennertus, Glauber, and others, that never conversed with the Society, whose Improvements are not mentioned by Mr. Glanvill, though so great, that (considering what men now write or do, is but by their Example, and after they had removed away all difficulties) all that our Inventors have done, doth not deserve to be mentioned.

I shall adde, that we owe not only the invention, and rude improvement of Chymistry to the Disputative followers of Hippocrates, Aristotle, Galen, those superstitious Porers upon the Writings of the Ancients, those ridiculous Schoolmen, and Monks, and Physicians, but even the present credit and esteem which it hath in the world, and upon which it hath so farre advanced it self. It was not Paracelsus with all his noise and Insolence, but the Dogmatical Physicians, who observing the benefit thereof in Pharmacy gave it fame, and introduced [Page] it into the Shops, and Cabinets of Princes, and the use of serious and considerate Persons. Crato introduced itCra [...]o medicin. [...]p 137. Erast. ad [...]. Para [...]s. part. 4 p. 285. & de metall. p. 8. into the Emperours Court at Vienna: not a Chymical Oyle, or Extract was prepared there, till he gave Encouragement to the thing. So did Erastus, a greater enemy to Paracelsus than to Chymical Physick: as appears by that saying which he uttered in the midst of his Disputes and animosities against the Paracelsians. Equidem ne absoluta est Ars nostra sine distillatoria. And had not Langius, Auder [...]acus, Gesuerus, Fernelius, Zwingerus, Schegkius, Augenius, Sennert de cons. chym. [...]. 2. Minadous, Matthiolus, Libavius, and many other Physicians of the Hippocratical way introduced the sober and honest practice of it, and rendred it helpful to common life, perhaps our Virtuosi had never medled with it, at least not have been able to give it any esteem in the world. But now that the Galenists and Aristoteleans, (as they are commonly called) have refined it from its dross, and cast off the Chrysopoietick and delusory designs, and magical intermixtures, and Rosicrucian vapours and superstitions, all which they effected; and gave Mr. Glanvill the opportunity of this Cant, with which I conclude this discourse.

‘I confess, Sir, that among the Egyptians, and Arabians,Mr. Glanvill, p. 12. and Paracelsians, and some other Moderns, Chymistry was very phantastick, and unintelligible, and delusive: and the boasts, vanity, and cantings of those Spagyrists brought a Scandal upon the Art, and exposed it to suspicion and contempt.Perhaps not so delusory as Mr. Glanvill thinks: but I am sure the projects some go upon are delusory, have much of the Rosicrusan humour in them: and [...]he design of introducing a sensible Philosophy is the pretence of Crollius, and of the Rosi [...]rusive Order. But its late Cultivators, and particularly the ROYALL SOCIETY have refined it from its dross, and made it honest, sober, and intelligible, an excellent Interpreter to Philosophy, and help to common life. For they have laid aside the Chrysopoietick, and delusory designs, and vain transmutations, and Rosicrucian vapors, Magical Charms and superstitious suggestions, and formed it into an instrument to know the Depths and Efficacies of Nature.—’All this without dispute the Society hath done; and without disputing. And hereupon I do agree with our Virtuoso, that they have no small advantage above the old Philosophers of the Notional way.

Of Anatomical Improvements.

[Page]

‘VVE have another advantage above the Ancients in the study, use, and vast Improvements of Anatomy,Plus ultr [...] ▪ p. 12. which we find as needful to be known among us, as 'tis wonderful 'twas known so little among the Ancients, whom a fond Superstition deterr'd from dissections. For the Anatomising the bodies of men was counted barbarous and inhumane in elder Times: And I observe from a learned man of our own, that the Romans held it unlawful to look on the Entrails. And Tertullian severely censur [...]s an inquisitive Physician of his time for this practice, saying, That he hated man, that he might know him. Yea, one of the Popes (I take it 'twas Boniface 8.) threatens to excommunicate those that should do any thing of this then-abominable nature. And Democritus was fain to excuse his dissection of Beasts, even to the great Hippocrates. Nor does it appear by any thing extant in the writings of Galen, that that other Father of Physicians ever made any Anatomy of humane bodies. Thus shy and unacquainted was Antiquity with this excellent Art, which is one of the most useful in humane life, and tends mightily to the eviscerating of Nature, and disclosure of the Springs of its Motion.’

I have set down without any interruption the words of this English Bravo and Hector of our Modern Philosophers, that my Reader might come with a greater expectation to the perusal of my Animadversions: so high a charge of ignorance upon the Ancients, such useful discoveries of the Moderns render the former to be contemptible fellows▪ [Page] and the latter a very beneficial and important p [...]r [...]y in this Age. But if it do appear that the Moderns have not as yet convinced us by their works and great performances in Physick, that the knowledge of these new inventions is so necessary to Physicians, and so advantageous to mankind, but that those which either slight or ignore their discoveries, acquire a greater repute, are more employed and possessed of a more honourable and gainful practice, and, in fine, do greater Cures in general, then our Braggadochios; then is there no such reason for this Triumph of Mr. Glanvill, as he imagines. The better to judge hereof, I desire all considering men to look back upon the several Physicians, who have flourished in Greece, Rome and Barbary, and to view the present state of Physick in Italy, Spain, and France, and try his most severe judgement if it be possible for him to condemn that Physick as imperfect and pitifully deficient, which gave that credit to Hippocrates, Galen, Rhases, Avicenne, Fernelius, Lacuna, Mercatus, Vallesius, Christophorus, and Thomas a Veiga, Claudinus, Massarius, Septalius, Rondeletius, Hollerius, Ballonius, Rodericus a Castro, Fonseca, Saxonia, Sennertus, Crato, Prosper Alpinus, Antonius Musa Basavola, Hofman, and many others whom I shall not name; as indeed I name these without any order) which they now enjoy. Let him set his most ambitious thoughts on work, and see if he can propose to his desires greater things then they attained unto, and atchieved. Let him employ all his envy, and yet condemn their Diagnosticks, Prognosticks, or that Secretorum Secretissimum, their method of curing, and their Medicines. If there be little or no fault in these parts, it signifies not much what principles they went upon in Philosophy, nor whether they did mistake or ignòre some things in Anatomy, as long as they were not such as hindred a Physician from the obtaining of that end which is designed by his Art: And as to the improvement of the Therapeutick part of Physick, by new Medicaments, or new and more pleasant preparations of old Medicaments, if they be no more efficacious then the former, we pay to the Inventors those acknowledgements, which we do to the introducers of new garbs and fashions of clothes, the [Page] best contrivances whereof, howsoever they may excel in conveniency, cannot be endeared unto us by the representations of being necessary. I have named practical Physicians; I shall now instance in Chirurgery: What man is there in this Age, that would not be content with the repute of Ingrassias, Vesalius, Fallopius, Carcanus, Aquapendens, Spigelius, Marchettis, Severinus Paraeus, Chalmetaeus, Pigraeus, Guillemeau, Hildanus, &c? or what man is there in this inquisitive Age, that any sober man would compare with them, much less prefer before them? If the Posture of Physick be such, and that the value we ought to place on every thing be to be regulated by its subserviency and conduciveness to some end, (finis conciliat mediis gratiam) it is easie to judge what certain esteem we are to put upon the modern Improvements of Knowledge in order to Physick, and how far we may justly censure the Ancients, and such as either slight or are ignorant of them. I profess my self not to know what disease it is that the Virtuosi cure better, or with more certainty then those that follow those other of the Dogmatical way. If it were done, there would not want such as should cry such performances up; besides the interest of the Novellists, the sence of their great Cures, would gain them all the practice that is now in the hands of such as vary not from the ancient Method, and Rules of that Art. I shall adde, that I could demonstrate by undeniable testimonies, and such as are confirmed by modern trials, that the introducing of new Medicines, either Chymical, or otherwise, and the neglect of a diffused reading, hath occasioned the dis-use and ignorance of several Medicines for Consumptions, the Gout, Plague, and other grievous diseases, which might be attempted with much more assurance, then is to be placed upon the later Methods. To prosecute this point further, I shall tell you, that Physicians hitherto looked with a great indifference upon the Principles of natural Philosophy, whether they were true, or no; so that they did but serve as convenient Memorials to regulate them in their practice, and that they did guide them to their wished end with such certainty, as if they were true. All disputes about Natural Philosophy that did not refer to [Page] practice, they looked upon as Curiosities, going beyond their Art, and about which they would not contend, so as that the Method of curing were not undermined thereby. Upon this account they did allow of two sorts of Truth, the one in Physick, the other in Natural Philosophy, and that what was such in one, might not be such in the other. This President they derived from their great Master, Hippocrates, who in his discourses sometimes proceeds upon the Doctrine of the four Elements, as if that were true: Sometimes he goes upon the doctrine of Atomes, as if he regulated his Cures thereby: sometimes he seems to favour the Tenets of the Chymists; See Otto Tachenius's Hippocrates redivivus▪ and his Clavis Medic. Hippocr. Devet. medic § 24 Concerning the meaning of which place see Erastus adv. P [...] rac. p. 3. pag. [...]6 & Con [...]ing. de Hermet. med. c. 16 p▪ 191. and he cries out as Mr. Boyle, and other Chymists cite him, Non calidum, frigidum, humidum, siccum esse quod maximam vim agendi habet in corpore, verum amarum, & falsum, & dulce, & acidum, &c. Somtimes he proceeds as it were upon the principles of the old Methodists, and ascribes the origin of diseases to the altering of the texture of the body, to the different conformation of parts, the different configuration of pores, &c. This was the course that Great Man took: he was willing to observe in all diseases the motions and the course Nature took; to take those for ill signs and symptoms, which he found to be such from that great Instructor; however [...], those ways whereby Nature did usually terminate diseases, were the ways he thought they ought to be terminated by; and he made that the scope to be aimed at in the curing of diseases: those evacuations that had helped naturally to cure, he endeavoured to promote artificially, by such Medicines as Experience shewed to be serviceable to those ends, when administred at due times and seasons. In short, he made himself absolutely the slave of Nature, attended on her motions, sometimes gently leading her on, as it were a Gentleman-Usher; sometimes following her, as a Page, never pretending to command her by his Medicines: So cautious he was, that he would not adventure to do good unseasonably, and at other houres then his Teacher directed him, lest he should do harm: he would not adventure to shorten a disease, lest he should shorten his Patients life. As if he had foreseen the truth of that observation▪ which Vallesius, and others in these days experiment, Celerior [Page] quam pro morbi longitudine curatio, detrahens plus virium quam Consultius esse nullus nescit tempore paulo longiore & tuto curari, quam paulo breviore cum certo vitae periculo sanari. Erastus disput. de propriet. med. c. 65. sub finem. pro morbi ratione, facit in tempore curandos ante tempus mori. Agreeable to this Method of Hippocrates, was that counsel which Dr. Bathurst (of Black-friers) gave me, when I first seriously set my self to study and observe his practice in Physick, viz. Nunquam ille Medicus magnus erit, quisquis patitur sese principiis Philosophicis alligari atque constringi. It is impossible for any person to be a great Physician, who ties up himself to one sort of Natural Philosophy, as if it were really true and certain: the operation of Medicaments is oftentimes such as answers not the Principles of any Philosophy, and the digestions of Nature are so different from those of Chymistry, her fires, her solvents, her filters, her furnaces & vessels, her mixtures and degrees of heat so discrepant, that there is no arguing from the one to the other: nor is there any thing to be relied upon in Physick, but an exact knowledge of medicinal Phisiology (founded upon observation, not principles) semeiotics, method of curing, and tried, (not excogitated, not commanding) medicines: where this course fails (as somtimes it will) we then try uncertain Medicines, rather then abandon the Patient to those Prognosticks, which are seldom so fatal as to destroy all hope; and where Skill is at a loss, we frequently behold Chance to be successful. And this last is the Mystress of our Reforming Physicians, it is under her conduct that they will enrich our Therapeutick part of Medicine, and alter our Method. I shal not enlarge further hereupon, being content to have shewed what esteem Physicians have had Philosophy in, and how they have had as little regard to the truth of their principles in natural Philosophy, as a man ought to have to the hand of a Dial, or which points out the way to any place: It is not requisite that it be a real hand, whatever men call it; nor would we endure the impertinencies of any that should go about to perswade us out of our way, because they that cald that an hand, were mistaken: In sum, so the way be good and certain, I am content to be one of those whom the Italian Proverb commends, for going that way which the Mules go. Ito qua Muli eunt. In this opinion I have amongst late Writers the learned Hofman, whose words are these. Quae enim necessitas est Instit▪ med l. 2 c. [...]. 11▪ 1▪ &c. & [...]. Medicum semper loqui cum Physico, siquidem usus, a quo pendet ars nostra, aliud velit, vel certe permittat? Quid enim ibi VERIT AS est, hic UTILITAS est.

[Page]Nor will it be amiss to propose the Judgment of the learned Practitioner Joannes Antonides Vander Linden, which heJo. Ant. Vander Linden de circuitu sanguin. exercit. 1. sub finem. passed not long before his death at Leiden A. D. 1659 after a mature consideration of all the new speculations in Natural Philosophy, which this last Age had produced and acquainted him with. ‘Physici ab imaginariis incipiunt, per ratiocinia pergunt, & in frivola desinunt. Cordatos obtestor, an apud se non [...]? Ad quid igitur Physica, ut nunc constituta est, Medico? Etiam quae nunc docetur optima (praeter quod Principiis nitatur non necessariis, & ob id certa non sit) quid ad medendum, si scitur, utile; aut, si nescitur, noxii confert? Etiam, si extaret, quae absolute certis principiis & perfectis regulis constaret, tamen Medicina: non esset, nisi Institoria, non Institutoria. Institoria, inquam; nam id Medicis est Physica, quod Fabris omne genus taberna mercium Novicarum. Instituriam Medicinae qui volunt, nae illi sciunt, quid velit detritissimum, ubi desinit Physicus, ibi incipit Medicus. Medicina non habet opus aliena; nedum a Physicis ficta & emendicata principia: habet sua, & certa, & ausa stare contra omnem dubitationis impetum. Qua fiducia concludo: Physica hodierna optima Medicinae parum aut nihil utilis est. Qui habet aures ad audiendum audiat, mentemque sanam in corpore sano habeat. Saltem vos, vos iterum alloquor [...], sapite; & ab ea quae Medicinae larva se tegit, Physica cavete; & hoc agite, ut quam aliquando salutis humanae praesidem Artem in bona conscientia vultis facere, eam ante cum certo fructu regia via velitis discere.’

Upon this account I often laugh at our modern Virtuosi, when they dilate themselves with a great deal of ostentation and confidence, about the qualities and correctives of Opium, whether it be hot or cold? which controversie how great soever, hath no influence upon practice, because both agree pretty well in the cases in which it is to be used, and man [...] of the modern preparations and corrections are foolish, and make it worse; And as to that Laudanum of Helmonts amongst the Virtuosi; I have seen much more simple preparations stupifie less, and produce greater Cures, then that did [Page] when made by the hands of one of the Society, and given by another of it: whilst the best of Modern Chymists, Pharmacop. August incons. Archigenis. Zwelfer; bestows this commendation upon that old medicine of Archigenes and Mesues— Erit sic rite praeparata opiata, quae merito Laudani opiati, multarumque aliarum Opiatarum vices supplere posset. I could enlarge here, but that Mr. Glanvill will think I have forgot him.

Having made this general Apology for Physicians, which is sufficient to justifie them, both as to their care of their Patients, and their skill; I shall come to apply my discourse particularly to Mr. Glanvill. It is hard to reconcile the necessity of Anatomy, with the Mosaical Constitutions, it seeming strange that God should make it so unclean a thing for any one to touch a dead body, and yet the knowledge of Sceletons should be so necessary. To supply this, the Jewish Rabbins say, that God Almighty did reveal unto Moses the accurate knowledge of Anatomy: and when we consider how they embalmed their dead, and that embalming doth infer a knowledge of dissection, and of the Entrails; when we observe (out of Buxtorfs Synagoga) that artifice with which the Jews kill all Animals, thereby to let out the blood exactly: when we consider that the multiplicity of accidents in war, or otherwise, would render the knowledge of the inward and outward parts necessary to them, and experience acquaint them with their nature (not to mention some Jewish relations about theVid. Riolan. Anthropog [...]. ph. l. 1. c. 3. opening of the Os pubis and the partus Caesareus) I am apt to think that the ancient Jews were not ignorant of useful Anatomy, nor so superstitious as totally to avoid the practice of it; nor dare I say (with our Virtuoso) such Superstition is fond, which is ascribed to God as its immediate Author.

As for the Greeks, the study of Anatomy was very ancient amongst them, since it is attributed to Alcmaeon▪ that ancient Physician (a Scholar of Pythagoras) as the first Author of it, if we will believe Chalcidius upon the Timaeus of Plato. From him it was derived to posterity by tradition and manual operation, children being bred up unto it, such as were to be Physicians, as also Philosophers. So Democritus, Hippocrates, [Page] and many others came to be acquainted with it. But none of the Ancients, until the time of Diocles Garystius, didHieron. Mercurialis Var. Lect. l. 1. c. 10▪ write any thing about it: which notwithstanding, that Science seems to have been in neverThese Anatomical o [...]erations of the Youth were called [...], which Hofman thinks may be rendred fitly in▪ a [...]n [...], Exercitia Anatomica. Adding, Didiceram enim ex ejus operis (apud Galenum) l. 2. initio has [...] ab ipso artis incunabulo suisse puerorum [...]a Asclepiadea, alto▪ rum ad factitandam medicinam. Sciebam etiam aliunde, longe alium fuisse tum Anatomiae rationem, quam nunc est, seorsim inquam fuisse traditam historiam partium ipsarum, semperq▪ fultam oculari inspectione. Vide Hofman Var. Lect. l. 2. c. 13. The same is avowed by Vesalius in his Preface to Charles V. the worse condition, as Mercurialis thinks. Anatomen etsi a nullo veterum usque ad Dioclis aetatem Scriptis mandatam referat Galen. in 2. de anat. admin. melius tamen sic conservatam & amplificatam inde intelligere possumus, quod tunc homines a primis annis Anatomen (ut caeteras artes,) non ex scriptis sed ex Parentum sermonibus ipsaque exercitatione addiscebant; sicque melius ipsam comparantes, non modo tenacius in animis servabant, verum etiam assiduis studiis augebant. But to put this question more out of doubt, I shall appeal to Galen, who could give a better account of what they did in the elder times then Mr. Glanvill. I have not his Works by me; but Lacuna in his Epitome thus expresseth him. "Quod veteres nihil scripserint de Lacunae Epit. Galeni de anatom. admin. l. 2. consectionibus administrandis, vertendum illis vitio non est: quandoquidem erat iis tum frequens tamque in communi usu ipsa Anatome, ut domi apud Parentes etiam ab ipsa pueritia, in illa omnes olim exercerentur. Postea vero tam praeclaro illo exercitio intermisso, opus certe nobis fuit Commentariis, quae Anatomicam disciplinam Chirurgicae medendi rationi maxime necessariam, integram conservarent. That Aristotle did dissect the bodies of men is manifest out of his Hist. Anim. l. 3. where he informs us how he made an inquiry into the nature and series Vide Riolan. Anthr. p [...] g [...]aph. l. 1. [...]4. of the veins in humane bodies: and as to his anatomizing of other creatures, beasts, birds, I would not be understood to justifie every passage in Aristotle relating to Anatomy: he hath many gross errours opere in longo: but have not also Harvey, Highmore, Silvius, and others, so many as may excuse his incogitancy sometimes? fishes, insects, (and how he had some thousands employed under him to that purpose) no man can doubt who reads Riolanus and Pliny l. 8. c. 18. How accurate he was (however his brevity doth not represent every circumstance, nor fully describe things) [Page] we may judge by this that there are few of the new inventions, but are ascribed unto him; and Dr. Harvey is knownD [...] ▪ Pearsoni [...] Dedic. Laertii ad Carol. II. commonly to have said, Nihil fere unquam in ipsis Naturae penetralibus invenisse se▪ quin cum Aristotelem suum pensiculatius evolveret idem ab illo, aut explicatum, aut saltem cognitum reperiret. After Diocles, I find these other reckoned as notable Anatomists by Volcherus, Coiter, viz. Polybius, Erasistratus, Callistus, all Scholars of. Aristotle: And after them Marinus, and Lycus, Vol. Coiter intro. inanat. c. 6 Galen in his Coment upon Hippocrates de nat. hum. reckons up above [...]0 eminent Ana [...] mists of the ancients. Vide Riolan. Anthropogr. the Master of Galen, and Satyrus, and Pelops, and Numesianus, besides several others at Alexandria all which Galen went to converse with. But I must not pass by Herophilus without an especial Character, who did not only correct the mistakes in Anatomy which his Master Praxagoras fell into, but by his industry and skill acquired a repute so great, that his name is equal to the most famous that ever were before, or since his time: This great man is preferred by Vesalius before Galen: And it was an usual saying of Fallopius, that any man might as easily contradict the Gospel, as contradictMoebius fundam. med. c. 1. p. 10. & V [...]ssius de philos. c. [...]1. sect. 2. Herophilus in Anatomy. Contradicere Herophilo in Anatomicis est contradicere Evangelio. This man is that inquisitive Physician, of whom Mr. Glanvill speaks, and who is blamed by Tertullian not for dissecting humane bodies, but for dissecting them alive, which he terms Butchery. Because, I think Mr. Glanvill never read him, and because I will make it evident that one of the Ancients did dissect more bodies of men, then all the Society put together, and that with an extraordinary caution. I shall set down the words of Tertullian, andTert [...]llian. de anima. c. 10. Gagr [...]us, Mercurialis, & Vossius read it se, ringentos exsecuit. they are these,——Herophilus ille Medicus aut Lanius, qui sexcentos eexecuit ut naturam scrutaretur, qui hominem odiit ut nosset, nescio an omnia ejus interna liquido explorarit; ipsa morte mutante q quaevixerant, & morte non simplici, sed ipsa inter artificia exectionis errante. Upon which passage, Philip le prieur notes thus, Anatomia quae & celebris magnoque in precio fuit apud Ethnicos, a veteribus Christianis odio quam maximo afficiebatur. Quamvis hic dictum Lanium Herophilum constet, quod vivos homines dissecaret▪ Id autem facere solitos Erasistratum, Dioclem, & Herophilum docet Claudius Galennus 8. de plac. & 2. anatom. administr. Agreeable to [Page] of Tertullian, is that passage of Cornelius Celsus in his Preface.Celsus l. 1. in prooemio. Necessarium ergo esse incidere corpora mortuorum, eorum (que) viscera atque intestina scrutari, longeque optime fecisse Herophilam & Erasistratum, qui nocentes homines a regibus ex carcere acceptos, vivos inciderint, considerarintque etiam Spiritu remanente, ea quae Natura clausisset, eorumque posituram, colorem, figuram, magnitudinem, ordinem, duriciem, molliciem, laevorem▪ contactum: processus deinde singulorum & recessus, & sive quia inseritur alteri, sive quid partem alterius in se recipit. This Herophilus was undoubtedly a person of vast parts, great learning and curiosity. He brought the Hippocratical Physick to its heighth and perfection, compleating the Anatomical part, and illustrating the Doctrine of the Pulses. His followers had a School not far from Laodicea, as Strabo saith, wherein it is not to be doubted but that Anatomy was taught, and so in that other School of Erasistratus at Smyrna. [...] Strabo Geograph. in fine lib 12. citante Mercuriali Var. Lect. l. 2. c. 12. From whence it is clear, that in the Reign of Augustus Caesar (when Strabo lived) Anatomy in the East was in great request, and that the Physicians and followers of Herophilus had a great Academy betwixt Laodicea and Garura. And that before those times at Smyrna, Erasistratus that was a great Dissector of men (even alive) had another Academy of his followers: whose worksVesalius de rad. Chinae, p. 163. though they are lost, yet Vesalius saith, that one may conjecture out of the passages in Galen that relate to them, that they were very accurate Anatomists.—Veteribus dissectionum proceribus, quos ex Galeni libris in corporum anatome sedulo versatus esse nobis persuasum est.—Not much unlike this character of Vesalius is that Elogy which Veslingius bestows upon the Ancients in an Epistle of his to C. Hofman, enquiring whether the venae lacteae of Asellius were a part of the portavena known so long ago? Sic habeas, incertum mihi esse quid primi illi qui ante Dioclis Carystii aevum privatis a [...]ffectionibus in corporis humani partes inquirebant hic viderint, [Page] cum nihil eorum quae cognorant scriptis divulgarint. Vixere fortes ante Agamemnona multi, ait Lyricus: & proculdubio ante Herophilum eximii, & in hoc dissectionum studio exercitatissimi, quos ob monumentorum defectum longa nocte oblivio premit. Veslingius Ep. 20. edit. per Bartholin.

I shall conclude this discourse of Herophilus, with an observation about the time when he lived; which was not in the days of Tertullian, though Mr. Glanvill represents them as Contemporaries: but many Centuries before, in the time of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, and he is famed for his raillery upon Diodorus Cronus, who denied there was any motion, yet had his shoulder dislocated. See Conring. de medic. Hermet. c. 9. p. 83. Some make him more ancient, but none ever brought him so low as our Virtuoso. Vide Voss. de Philos. c. 11. Jonsium de Script. Philos. l. 1. c. 15.

As to the Romans, and their skill in Anatomy, I cannot say much of it, except it be to their disparagement. They were a military sort of people, rough-hewen, and thought all that below their studies or serious thoughts, which our Experimental Philosophers boast of, and recommend unto our care with so much vanity. All the Mechanick, I had almost said the Liberal Sciences, they thought to be excellent qualifications in their slaves, not in themselves: And they who gave Laws to all the world, scorned to be instructed by their vassals, and a conquered Nation. Upon this account, not onely in the time of Tully, but afterwards to the days of Quintilian and Tacitus, (I know not which writ the Book De Oratoribus) it is evident, that however many Gentlemen did inform themselves of the several parts of ingenious Learning, yet did that haughty people behold those persons with indignation, and some thoughts of hatred, in so much as that those who were best versed in it, pretended ignorance and scorn of it. Things being in this condition, and the Romans having no other Physicians then their Slaves, it is not to be wondered if they were not eminent for Anatomy. Cato had banished the Physicians long ago, and after-ages gave them little encouragement. [Page] I do not at present remember any Physician, whose name hath any thing of the Roman till Cornelius Celsus, and after him Vectius Valens. Pliny saith, that even to his time, in the reign of Titus Vespasian, the Romans did not care to profess and practise Physick. Solam hanc artium Graecorum nondum exercet Romana gravitas in tanto fructu: paucissimi Quiritum attigere, & ipsi statim ad Graecos transfugae: imo vero autoritas aliter quam Graece eam tractantibus, etiam apud imperitos expertesque linguae, non est. Nat. hist. l. 29. c. 1. In the time of Augustus Caesar, his [...]reed man Artorius Musa, and his brother Euphorbus gave some credit to Physick, and afterwardsIdeo d [...]se [...] ta est haec discipli [...] qu [...]a [...]ecess [...]c [...] in [...]. several eminent Greeks are said to have flourished; but whether it were that the Romans were impatient to learn so much as was requisite (or thought to be so) to make a man eminent in the Hippocratical and Herophilian way; or whether they thought it more becoming their grandeur, rather to learn (with all the world) a new Method of Physick, then seem to have been so long as it were brutish and ignorant in comparison of the Greeks; orDuring the flourishing of the Roman Empire, the study of Physick was principally pursued at Alexandria in Egypt. There Herophilus and his Scholars had given it credit, and the Empiricks and Methodists had their Academies. and the Jacrosophistaes were endowed professors The repute of Alexandria being such▪even in the da [...]s of Valentinian, that it was cre [...]it enough for any Physician to say he had been b [...]ed these. Ammian. Ma [...] cell. lib. 23. whether that the new principles and method were more agreeable to that Empirical way, they had been accustomed unto (See Plin. nat. hist. l. 26. c. 3.) and so more easily received by the populac [...] then that of Hippocrates made up of a Grecian dyet, and medicaments; whatever was the reason, I finde that the Romans did generally incline to that Sect of Physicians, called the Methodici, begun by Asclepiades and Themison in the time of the Triumvirate, or Vectius Valens, and compleated by Thessalus in the time of Nero: This Sect seems to have had the advantage over all other the Physicians amongst the Romans from the time of Augustus, to the reign of Severus, which is near three hundred years. Pliny calls Themison, Summum authorem, [...] 14. c. 17. and by that place in Juvenal one would guess him to have been a man of great notice and general practice in the days he lived.

[Page]

Morborum omne genus, quorum si nomine quaeras,

Promptius expediam quot amaverit Hippia moechos,

Quot Themison aegros autumno occiderit uno.

Thessalus, against whom Galen and Pliny inveigh was certainly a man▪ not only of great Eloquence, but also of extraordinary Learning and Judgement, as we may guess by those parcels and fragments of that excellent man, which are all that remains of him, and they preserved in the works of others. His Books de Communitatibus & Syncriticis are peeces whose losses I much lament. The Memory of his Tombe is not lost upon which he inscribed himself, [...], or, The Conquerour of Physicians. His Letter to Nero had something of a gallant confidence in it, which may become Heroes, and is justified in men of great Learning. Cum novam sectam condiderim, & quae sola vera sit, propterea quod qui ante me fuerunt omnes nihil utile prodiderunt, vel ad sanitatem tuendam, vel ad mor bos propulsandos—. The generality of his followers seem to have been excellent Physicians, as Dionysius, Proculus, Archigenes, Soranus, Attalus, Julianus, and others. I shall not insist upon a particular relation of their tenets, Prosp Alpin. de medic. methodica. which one may see excellently illustrated by Prosper Alpinus. This sect of Physicians seems to have left impressionsQuintilian being to describe Physick, renders an a [...] count of it agreeable to the Methodists. In declam. 8. Gemini Languentes. of its method and principles, in all places where the Roman Empire swayed. They placed littleThey called Gallen▪ when he put himself [...]orth in the world by the ostentation of Anatomy and Philosophy, Logiater: Logiatri autem nomen sui tempori: medici Romae Galeno per contemptum imponchant; ut ita eum traducerent, quasi non reipsa, nec usu▪ & [...]xercitio artis peritus esset: Sed ad loquacit▪ tem d [...]ntaxat & disserendum de iis quae ad a [...]tem pertinent comparatus. Gesner. in Schol [...]is ad Cassium P. 57. value upon the exact knowledge of Anatomy, being content with a general skill therein, and enquiring no further than was necessary. They knew that the Romans had formerly banished the Physicians (as Archagathus) from amongst them, for using their Patients with much cruelty, cutting and burning them; and understood the humour of the people so well, how they disliked the dissections of humane [Page] bodies, especially alive, and therefore they closed with that popular prejudice, and turned it to their advantage; neither dissecting of bodies, nor tormenting them with those odious or cruel methods of Cure, which were practised by the followers of Herophilus. Nor do I doubt that those objections in Celsus against Anatomy, were put into his mouth by the Methodists, as well as Empirics, viz. that all Anatomy of bodies was a nasty performance; but to dissect the living, most barbarous and cruel: that as much of Anatomy as would instruct one sufficiently, might be learned in a Camp, where the Physician need not make wounds, but learn at once and practice Cures. Hence it was that the study of Anatomy was so much out of request at Rome in Galens time, that I think he mentions not one curious Anatomist there, though he tell how Satyrus taught him at Pergamus, and Pelops at Smyrna, and Numesianus at Corinth, and others. There were some that were excellent Ostrologists at Alexandria. And I am apt to think, that even he durst not for fear of publick odium, dissect any living men there, because, as Celsus saith, most people held it to be cruelty, and perhaps would not have thought well of him, who should have dissected any dead men. Whereupon he set up with Apes, dissecting them, as being nearest to men in resemblance,Vesalius in his Treatise de [...]ad. Chinae sheweth bow Ga en dissected Apes, and was thereby led into sun dry mistak [...]s But even such as did blame Galen were themselves faulty, as Vesalius and Columbus; which appears by what they say about the kidneys; which they describe out of brutes, not men, as Piccolomineus and Beverovicus observe [...]everovic. dc calculo, p 3 Read also Fallopius Observations and imagining the fabrick of their bodies to have as great an affinity with the parts of men, as their shapes had; that this was the cause of many mistakes in him, is certain; and demonstrated by Vesalius. But that he never made any Anatomies of humane bodies, or considered any as they came in his way, is a calumny which might be refuted by sundry instancesVesalius in ded [...]c. lib. de sabric. corp. hum. ad Carol V. Imper. In the same place [...]e cals Galen, dissectionis professorum facile primariam. out of his Works, and some thereof are to be seen in Riolanus Anthopogr. l. [...]. c. 12.

Vesalius never raised his imputations to this heighth; all that he saith of this nature, is, Nobis modo ex renata dissectionis arte, diligentique Galeni librorum praelectione, & in plerisque locis eorundem non poenitenda restitutione constat, nunquam [Page] ipsum nuper mortuum corpus humanum resecuisse. At vero suis deceptum Simiis (licet ipsi arida, ac veluti ad ossium inspectionem parata hominum cadavera occurrerint) crebro veteres Medicos, qui hominum consectionibus se exercu [...]rant, Galen. l. 3. sec, gen. c. 2. immerito arguere. Nay, it is evident out of Galen, that the Roman Physicians which were in the Army of Antoninus did dissect the Germans that were killed by him in battel. As for that Learned man of our own, out of whom he tells us, That the Romans held it unlawful to look on the Entrails: I know not who it should be. Mr. Boyle indeed doth say, that in Galens time it was thought little less then irreligious, if not barbarous, to mangle the bodies of men: which how far it is true, one may guess out of what I have said; But that Honourable Person speaks in such a manner as gives us little of exception; Mr. Glanvill is so peremptory, that I wonder that he did not deny, that the Romans did not use any Augury from the inspection of the bowels, heart, and liver of beasts; or that they did not eat the Livers of Geese, and other Guts of several Animals. This is so well known to every School boy that hath read Martial, or Horace, or Virgil, that I need not speak of it. Had the Romans held it so unlawful a thing to behold the Entrails of Animals, I wonder they gave the name of Visceratio to those distributions of flesh which they publikely used: to such unlawful customs, Virgil would not have alluded, when he brings in Dido her self,

—Pecudumque reclusis▪

Pectoribus i [...]hians spirantia consulit exta.

Aeneid. l. 4. v. 64. & Georgic. l. 1. v. 484.

Tristibus aut Extis fibrae apparere minaces.

Nay, they carried the bodies of beasts open with their Entrails displayed to be sold publickly, as Mart. shews l. 6. ep. 64.

N [...] valeam, si non multo sapit altius istud,

Quod cum panticibus laxis, & cum pede grandi

Et rubro palmone vetus, nasisque timendum,

Omnia crudelis Lanius, per compita portar.

But perhaps he will confine his discourse to the Entrails of men, why then did not he speak more plainly? And even in this case, that some superstitious persons might hold it impious and unlawful is possible▪ [Page] and that others out of enmity to the Anatomical Physicians, (as Pliny l. 28. c. 1.) Aspici humana exta nefas habetur, might▪ [...] that pla [...]e in Pliny relates onely [...]o Argu [...]y, that i [...] was not lawful amongst m [...]n t [...] make use of humane bodies, and search their bowels to th [...]se ends: this was ne [...]as: but nothing else. call it so, I deny not. But what Law was there against it? How comes it to pass, that Celsus in his debate about the lawfulness of Anatomizing even living bodies, saith (or maketh others to say) that it is only cruel, or nasty and abominable; not impiety or a breach of Religion? Besides, how could any Physician in those days have dressed such wounds in which their Entrails either gushed out, or were hurt, in case it had been unlawful to look upon them? It is manifest that Celsus saith, a prudent Physician may from such accidents learn Anatomy; Ita sedem, positum, ordinem, & figuram, similiaque alia cognoscere prudentem medicum, and adviseth him to improve the occasion: And he was a Person learned not only in the Physick, but Civil Laws of his Countrey.

To convince our Virtuoso a little more, out of Schoolbooks, in which he ought to be conversant. Is there not a controversie agitated in Seneca, Controvers. l. x. contr. 6. about Parrhasius the Painter? how he brought an old Olynthian, and dissected him alive, thereby to draw the picture of Prometheus with a vulture preying upon his Liver! Is it not agitated pro and Con, by Romans and Grecians? Is there any one that saith it was unlawful for him to behold the Entrails? Nay, is it not said in the midst of Rome, that it was always LAWFUL? In argumentis dixit, quantum semper Artibus LICUISSET, Medicos ut vim ignoratam morbi cognoscerent, viscera rescidisse HODIE cadaverum artus rescindi, ut nervorum articulorumque positio cognoscipossit. In Quintilian is there not a Declamation Declam. 8. (Gemini languentes) in which the Mother accuseth the Father for permitting the Physician to dissect one of the sick twins, thereby to discover the disease of the other! Doth not the Mother there bid him dissect the bowels of the dead youth? Differ saltem, pater, hanc calamitatem: quicquid ex filio facis, facies ex cadavere. Si deprehendi potest languor dum occidit, facilius cum occiderit. Doth she not describe the cruelty of that Anatomy very tragical [...]y? Passus est miser discurrentem per omnia reserati pectoris improbum vagae artis errorem. [Page] Contentum fuisse medicum toto homine discurrentem primo putatis aspectu? Egesta saepe vitalia, pertractata, diducta sunt: fecerunt manus plura, quam ferrum. Stat juxta medicum pater apertis visceribus inhians, stillantem animae sedem cruentis manibus agitantem: ne festinet, hortatur; jubet altius diligentiusque scrutari: Interrogat, dubitat, contendit, affirmat, & accepit de filii morte rationem—Inter haec reficiebatur miser haustibus, detinebatur alloquiis, comprimebatur residuus cruor, claudebantur aperta vitalia. Nemo unquam tam nova pertulit commenta [...]evitiae, tanquam sanaretur occisus est—Vos tunc putatis illius tantum languoris medicum quaesiisse causas? quaesivit quicquid nesciebat, & usus occasione rarissima in omnem voluit proficere novitatem. After this she tells in what manner she gathered up his bowels, and by closing up his Corps fitted him for the Funeral. Corpus quod medicus, quod reliquerat pater, hoc sinu misera collegi, ac vacuum pectus frigidis abjectisque visceribus rursus implevi, sparsos artus amplexibus junxi, membra diducta composui. If any one can imagine, that this great Oratour in so solemn a Declamation would have omitted so important an objection as the unlawfulness and impiety of beholding the entrails of the youth, certainly he thinks too meanly of the judgment of Quintilian, and too well of his own. It appears out of that Oration, that they had seldom opportunities of dissecting men alive, and therefore he calls it rarissimam occasionem. And that they were not ignorant of Anatomy and the inward fabrick of humane bodies, it is evident further out of that Oration, where the Mother says the Physicians must needs already have learned that part of their Art. Sufficit quod aliquando jam facta How could they behold the Ludi Circenses, the Gladiators fighting in the Theatre, and at the tombs of the deceased; or those s [...]d spectacles described by Martial? I profess I think it as gross a mistake to say they held it unlawful to behold the entrails▪of men, a [...] to deny the Augury by beasls. ex unius hominis inspectione, ad totius intellectum naturae medicina pr [...]fecit. Quid allaturus huic aegroto es, quod non tot seculorum, tot languentium experimenta deprehenderint?

As for what Mr. Glanvill saith about Democritus, that he was fain to excuse himself to Hippocrates for dissecting of beasts; this is as true as all the rest. Never was there a fitter second [Page] for Mr. Sprat, then Mr. Glanvill. They do not cite, but invent stories, and that with so much confidence, that a man must be assured by his own reading, before he can suspect theirs. That Hippocrates was a diligent Anatomist, is a thing every one must confess who either knows the manner of their education then, or hath looked into his Anatomical books de locis in homine, de fracturis, and sundry other pieces of his. That he not only contemplated the seat and action of parts in the dead, but living, appears by this passage, De Articulis sect 43▪ where he speaks about the setting of the Sphondyles of the back; Itaque si tale contingat, palam Pag. 800. [...]om. 2. edit. Vander Linden. est quod neque concutiendo, neque alio quodam modo reponi possit, nisi qui dissecto homine & manu in ventrem injecta, inquisitionem faciat, ut ex interna parte ad externam manu retrudat: atque haec in mortuo quidem facere possent, in vivo autem non ita. But I shall give an account of the Anatomy of Hippocrates, in the words of the learned Riolanus Anthropograph. l 1. c. 2. Testatur Galenus Comment. in lib. 3. de artic. Hippocratem potissimum rationi corporum incidendorum sedislam operam dedisse, cum Anatomen mirum in modum ad artem medicam conferre sciret, quod nunc aperte docet cum spinae naturam intelligi voluit, quam Empirici non secus atque caeterarum partium contemplationem inutilem esse dicunt. Ipsemet Hippocrates lib. 3. de artic. Commentarios de venis & arteriis pollicetur, quos nunquam videre potuit Galenus. Praeterea librum de dissectione conscripsit, quem imperfectum habemus. Ipsemet Galenus libros de Anatome, secundum Hippocratis doctrinam composuerat, quorum deploranda est jactura. Hippocrates canes dissecuit ut pulmones observaret. lib. de corde. Ibidem monet quod dissectio accurata hujus partis non est opus cujusvis, sed periti artificis, & appellat istud opus Chirurgian. l. 6. Epidem, scribit hominem habere cola intestina cani similia. Idem lib. de intern. affect. testatur se in bove, in cane, & s [...]e, quod impedibus dissectis tubercula in pulmone aqua referta invenisse, unde natus fuerat hydrops thoracis. Idem testatur se ex hominis ossibus ossa descripsisse: primus spinae admirabilem figuram descripsit: primus vesiculas seminarias, earumque situm, omenti usum, valvulas venarum, ortum nervorum, lienis [Page] actionem, uteri oonformationem. Atque ut extaret aliquod monumentum aeternum & immutabile suae diligentiae, laborisque in hoc fludio exantlati, sceletum aere fabricatum Apollini Delphico consecravit: ut Author est Pausanias lib. 10. And is it credible that ever Democritus should be forced to excuse himself to Hippocrates for cutting up of Animals, as if it were so uncouth and strange to him? I cannot answer for the Intellectuals of our Virtuoso, but no man of an higher capacity can believe it. The pleasantest part of this Narrative is, that there appears no such thing upon record. First of all the story of Democritus, how Hippocrates came and found him busie in dissecting of Animals, is called in question by Cortesius in Miscellaneis, as Riolanus tells me. And indeed I cannot perswade my self that those Letters in the end of Hippocrates works are genuine. But to pass by this exception. All that Hippocrates writes in his second Letter to Damagetus amounts to this. That at the request of the people of Abdera, he came to cure Democritus of his supposed madness, that being conducted to his house, he found him sitting under a Plantanus tree in a garb not much differing from a madman, and postures that had something of the same humor: Ipse Democritus sub ampla & humillima plantano sedebat, in veste crassa citra humeros desinente, solus, discalceatus, super lapidea sede, valde pallidus ac macilentus, promissa barba——Ipse vero cum inculto ornatu, super genibus, librum habebat, sed & alii quidam ex utraque parte adjace [...]ant. Accumulata etiam erant Animalia multa per totum resecta. Et ipse quidem aliquando concitate incumbens scribebat, aliquando quiescebat, diu multumque se continens, & in seipso m [...]ditans. Deinde non longe post, his peractis, exurgens deambulabat, & viscera animalium inspiciebat, & depositis ipsis digressus, rursus desidebat.—When Hippocrates approched near him, he was busie writing, and even then his deportment had something odde and Enthusiastical in it. [...] After the first complements (which arr great [...] usual in those days) Hippocrates demand [...] of him [...] [...]e was writing? He replied about [...] [Page] about that, said the great Physician? To which he answers again thus. [...]. Quid enim, inquit, aliud quam quid sit, & quomodo in hominibus generetur, & quomodo allevetur. Nam animalia haec, quae vides, inquit, hujus gratia reseco, non quod odio habeam opera Dei, sed bilis naturam ac sedem quaerens. How much this and the whole passage of that E [...] terview makes for Mr. Glanvill's purpose, I see not. Hippocrates doth not blame him for anatomizing of animals, nor is surprized at the novelty, nor troubled at the impiety of the action. Democritus knowing what apprehension the people had of him, and fearing lest the garb and posture he was in might confirm to Hippocrates, the truth of the report tells him how he employed his thoughts, and that the Animals that lay there upon the ground, were not slaughtered by him in a frantick rage, out of hatred to the creatures of God; but cut up Anatomically by him, thereby to discover the seat and nature of the gall, and the effects it had upon Maniacks. Whereupon Hippocrates was wonderfully pleased with the testimony he gave of the soundness of his judgment, and after some other prudential discourses, departed, satisfied about the good condition of his Patient. But if Democritus were not out of his Wits, I believe Mr. Glanvill was to alledge such an impertinent story. But idle persons, that would upon easie termes acquire the repute of Learning, by citing quotations, are often thus imposed upon, and liable to mistakes. And perhaps there may be some person in the world that I know not of, who may have abused our Virtuoso in this case: but He should have minded the Text better.

What Pope Boniface the Eighth did, I know not. But I am apt to suspect a person that hath told me so many untruths. The place in the Canon-Law, which I am apt to beleeve Mr. Glanvill never saw: It is lib. 3. Extravag. titulo de Anthropogr. l. 1. c. 12. sepultura. And Riolanus, whom I had rather credit, gives this account of it; Inter Christianos Papa Bonifacius octavus barbarum [Page] & inhumanum judicavit, peregre mortuorum corpora exenterare, carnibusque spoliare, ut ossa le [...]ta & tersa in locum sepulturae, quem vivi delegerant, commode perferri possent. It seems that Pope thought it an inhumane and barbarous thing not to dissect bodies for information sake; but to embowel them, and reduce them into Sceletons, and so to carry their bones to distant places to be buried according to the desire of the deceased. I am apt to think this Canon was never applied to Anatomy, and perhaps there is nothing of Excommunication in it, since Riolanus doth not mention it.

As for the gross errours in Anatomy which Galen is charged with, I know not one that incommodates a man in point of Practice, but that the Method he took (however founded on false principles) was secure and good. Upon which it happenedHinc [Galeno] universi fidem dedere, ut nullus repertus sit medicus, qui in Galeni Anatomicis voluminibus vel levissimum quidem Japsum deprehensum esse, multoque minus deprehendi posse censuerint. Vesalius in dedic. lib. de Fabric hum. that all his followers implicitly submitted to his Anatomical relations without further Enquiry, and taught his Errours for truths: And perhaps a certain vanity seised Galen to contradict the famous Herophilus out of dissected Apes, thereby to raise his own credit. However it was, from him arose most of the mistakes in Anatomy, that were translated to the Moors, and from them to our Ancestors. The Moors are said by their Religion, to forbid the medling with dead bodies: Which Assertion, how true it is, I know not, because that Avicenne and Albucasis commend the study of Anatomy, as necessary in a peculiar manner to Chirurgeons. They practised sundry Chirurgical operations in Cauteries, and opening Arteries, which seemed to require an Experimental skill in dissections; and which were their own inventions. In fine, Averroes pleads not any scruples of Religion for his ignorance in Anatomy, but laments the Civil Wars of the Moors, which hindred him from inquiring by dissection into those controversies betwixt Galen and Aristotle, which he had occasion to debate. Yet did Averroes at all adventures, assert the credit of Aristotle against Galen, out of an emulation against Avicenne who was a Galenist. From these two great men amongst the Moors, as the knowledge of Physick and Philosophy, happened to be imparted to the barbarous Christians of the West, so was there a [...]eud propagated betwixt the Philosophers, [Page] and the Physicians▪ and the controversies were the more intricate, because the Sciences had not been so well translated out of Greek into Arabick, as was requisite; and they were worse put into Latine. After the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, when some learned men had fled thence into Italy, they began to impart unto the world new books, to acquaint the West with the Greek tongue, and with the Greek Works of Hippocrates, Aristotle, and Galen; and thereby multiplied many Controversies in the practice of Physick, about Phlebotomy, and Purging, and the like; especially about bleeding in a Plurisy, on which side it should be done. The contention was fierce, and some proofs being fetcht out of Anatomy, some persons were excited to enquire into humane bodies dissection, thereby to determine this controversy, and also the others betwixt Aristotle, Galen, and others. Amongst these Vesalius was (I had almost said) the first and principal, and by his indefatigable pains prevented much the industry of others. After him Fallopius and Eusiachius were the most remarkable; though many others came in with their little inventions to make up the cry, and failed not to supply the inutility of their discoveries with excessive clamor. What Apologies were made for Galen by Sylvius, and others, would be tedious to relate;Yet neither are all the exceptions made by Vesalius against Galen allowable. Ga [...]num aliquando in verbis potius quam in [...]ententiis carpit, aliquando mutilum (quod sacere debuerat) minime excusat▪ ac saepe indignius, quam Anatomieum▪ Philosophum, ac Medicum tam insignem [...]eceret, carpit at accusat. Fallopius observat. ana [...]om. p 3. they being so ridiculous, and repugnant to common sense, that nothing could stop the growing glory of Vesalius and his followers. The issue of all was, that as Hippocrates lost no credit by an ingenious confession of his mistake about the Sutures in the head of Autonomus; small errors being not observable in great Authors: So Galen still retained a great repute in the world, his other Works having advanced him above the effects of petty calumnies, or defaults. And the great Guinterus And [...]maeus, a competent Judge of old and new discoveries in Physick and Anatomy, gives this censure upon those curious Disquisitions:De vet. & nova med comment. 8. dial. 5. p. 261. Multa in rerum natura extant, quorum notitia non quidem Medicum aptiorem▪ facit, sed medicinae tantum profectum reddit, [Page] Sic nulli ob accuratam illam, ne dicam curiosam nimis, partium corporis perscrutationem Medici excellentiores, sed ob curationes dextre sentatas absolutasque censentur. Ideo etiam Hippocrates, Galenus, Erasistratus, & plures id genus alii, tantum ex rerum natura & corporis humani fabricatione scrutarivoluerunt, quantum ad medicinam probe exercendam ex usu esse putarunt. Non eadem enim semper omnibus similem ob causam conducunt. Sic Anatome aliter physicis inseruit, qui disciplinas ipsas propter se amant; alterii, qui illam non adeo affectant, sed nihil temere a natura factum esse demonstrant: aliter his qui argumenta (ut ille ait) ad actionem quandam vel naturalem vel animalem cognoscendam, ex partium humani corporis historia adferre nituntur: aliter medico qui manum aculeis, telonumque cuspidibus probe exprimendis vel alicui parti apte excidendae vel sinubus & fistulis & abscessibus incidendis adhibiturus est; quo Anatomes usu nihil aeque est necessarium.

Certainly it had been an action of greater ingenuity in our Novelists to have acknowledged the many excellent things that are in Galen, which are so advantageous to Physick, then to endeavour to render a man multi ingenii multaque nihilominus habiturum, contemptible by the representation of a few defects in him, relating to things not much material to his profession. It must always be said of Galen, that he was the man who by his dextrous wit, happy practice, and great eloquence, as well as universal learning, did restore the glory of the Hippocratical Physick, which was in a manner extinct in his days. He again brought Anatomy into request, which had been slighted and dis-used so long: he himself dissected bodies privately, and publickly in the Temple of Peace; and amongst other Discoveries of his own, it is observable that he found out the use of recurrent nerves, whoseVide Columbum Anat. l. 14 & Vesalium de fabrica corp. hum. l. 4 c. [...]. influence upon the voice is such, that as they are pressed or cut into two, so a Dog becomes perpetually mute, or onely howls, never barks. Had that curiosity been but the discovery of some Novelists, what a noise would they have made? what boastings should we have had? But all that is good in Galen is passed by, and to make way for the glory of our new [Page] Inventors, Vesalius, Fallopius, Carcanus, Eustachius, Ingrassias, Columbus, Arantius, Varolius, are not so much as mentioned by Mr. Glanvill; to the end that we may (if we will) believe that it is the genius of this Age alone, which puts men upon discoveries, and that before them there were none that had merited this remark.

‘I instance in the most remarkable of their discoveriesPlus ultra, pag. 13. Riolanus asserts the first invention of the Valves in the veins to Hippocrates. Anthropogr. l 5. c. 49. briefly: and those I take notice of are, The valves of the veins, discovered by Fabricius ab Aqua pendente: The valve at the entrance of the Gut Colon, found as is generally thought by Bauhinus.—’ I cannot think these to be so remarkable discoveries, but that he might have found out many more, since the time of Vesalius, I shall name one wo gave a great light to the Circulation of bloud, and that is the discovery which Realdus Columbus made, that the blood did pass through the Lungs out of the right ventricle into the left, and so into the Aorta, and all the body. As for the valves in the veins, I believe there are few that think that Fabricius ab Aquapendente, was the first discoverer of them: for they were shewed to Fabricius by father Paul, that famous Venetian Monk, as appears in his life written by Fulgentio, and extant in English. Neither indeed was Father Paul the first Inventour of them, for they are described before by Jacobus Sylvius, Professor of Physick at Paris, as Riolanus, andRiolanus Anthropogr. l. 5. c. 49. Marquard. Slegel. de circul. sangu. l. [...]. p. 7. Bartholin. in libello de venis c. [...]. Varolius Anat. l. 3. c. 3. Riolan. Anthropogr. l. 2. c. 14. Bartholin, Anat. [...]es. l. [...]. c. 11. Plus ultra, pag. 14. Slegelius, and Bartholinns do inform the world. And as to the valve in the beginning of the Colon-gut (if there be such a one, and that it be not rather a protuberant circle, arising from the joyning of the Ileon and Colon, as Pavius, Falcoburgius, and Riolanus hold) whatsoever it be, it was discovered by Varolius, and called the Operculum Ilei, before that ever Bauhinus was born, as Riolanus doth demonstrate: there are two others that may as justly pretend to it, to better merit the credit then Bauhinus, and those are Solomon Albertus, whom Bartholin inclines unto: and Joannes Posthius of Montpelier, whom Riolanus also favours.

‘The Sinus of the veins, and their use found out by Dr. Willis—’ I wonder Mr. Glanvill should not acquaint us with those particular Sinus which Dr. Willis should finde out; for [Page] since in common discourse, when we speak undeterminately of the Sinus, we understand those of the brain, it did become him to tell us which others he meant: lest a man that knew his skill, should apprehend him so ignorant as to think that Dr. Willis had newly found out those Sinus, one whereof hath for above two thousand years born the name of Herophilus, and was called Torcular Herophili, in Greek [...]. But I shallDr. Willis de cerebro c [...]. p. 82, 83. be so favourable as to think that these are not the Sinus he meant, Dr. Willis having tried nothing more in prosecution of them, then to pursue the Circulation of the blood there by the injecting of Inkish liquor, whereas Wepferus used a tincture Jo. Jac. Wepferus Apoplex. p 116. Bartholin. Anat. l. 3. c. 7. of Saffron; and Bartholin evidenced the same thing by a pair of bellows, or tube and winde insufflated. I do beleeve that He, or they that suggested this to him, did mean the Sinus or venae vertebrales, which are described exactly in the Doctors Book, in the thirteenth Table. But I must tell him, that whatsoever there is in that Piece, which is Anatomical, the glory thereof belongs to Dr. Lower, whose indefatigable industry produced that elaborate Treatise; and any man that knows the great practice of that other Doctor, will grant, that although he could not want abilities, yet he wanted leisure to attend to such painful and tedeous inquiries. Dr. Willis indeed candidly doth relinquish this honour to Dr. Lower, and his pains deserved your commendation (Mr. Glanvill) if that be of any value, so much more then those other inventions that are celebrated by the Virtuosi, by how much the subject was more minute and subtile which he was to trace. All that Dr. Willis contributed, that I hear, was the discourses and conjectures upon the Anatomical deductions of Dr. Lower, which as ingenuous as they are, I am sure neither are, nor ever will pass all for inventions. But in the case I now mention, I am confident that Dr. Lower is so ingenuous, asto acknowledge that what He exhibits there, is taken out of the Cuts of Varolius, as far as where they empty themselves into the subclavian veins: but I think that as to the Synus, or veins, and arteries all along the Spine, as there is not any Cut of them extant before that I hear of, so I allow them to pass as his invention: but the accurateness of his Neurology equals to the best Inventors.

[Page]But if Mr. Glanvill injur'd Dr. Lower in attributing what he invented unto Dr. Willis, he will [...]l his own discoveries, you shall see what a Divine can d [...] in Physick. 'St. St"! I adde the origination of the Nerves, which were of old supposed to arise out of the substance of the brain, but are found by late Anatomists to proceed from the medulla oblongata. This is such an Addition as becometh our Novellists, most that they pretend unto being no more then▪ Mr. Glanvill here boasts of; and which is so pitiful an accessional in Anatomy, that none ever bragged of it, or upbraided the Ancients about it, that I remember, except Bartholin may be said to do it. As to the late Anatomists, unto whom he ascribes this invention, I would he had told their names. The difference betwixt the cerebrum, cerebellum, and medulla oblongata, is a modern (but not very late) distinction. Some have made the medulla oblongata and the spinal marrow to be but productions of the brain and cerebellum, from whence it raiseth it self by four foundations or roots: the discrepancy betwixt that and the other parts whence it is originated, not being such as to justifie any great contest about it: since it is the usual course of Nature in its progress from the union of two different bodies, to produce an intermediate substance, participating of the nature of both. Spinalis medulla ortus principium rectius cerebro atque cerebello Vol. Coiter. observ. anatom miscel. Ex substantia cerebri & cerebelli quatuor radicibus oritur primum troncus insignis, Medulla spinalis appellatus, ex quo multi emergunt surculi, nomine nervorum insig [...]iti. Varolius Anatom▪ l 1. c. 13. [...] 12. acceptum fertur, unde non immerito caudex, sive processus, sive soboles cerebri appellatur: nam vix in ullo, nisi in duritie (est enim cerebro aliquanto solidior & firmior) videtur a cerebro differre. Some have made the brain & cerebellum to be productions of the spinal marrow, which enlargeth it self within the skull, and generateth those two Apophyses called the cerebrum & cerebellum. In fine, it doth not appear that the Ancients mistook much the place of the origination of nerves, if you reckon amongst them Vesalius and Fallopius: but they said they rose all from the brain, understanding by that word all that which is included within the skull, and termed that to be the spinal marrow, which was without the skull, and whence those other paria nervorum [Page] seem to rise, which Anatomists describe. And this subtilty of Mr. Glanvill is so little regarded by late Anatomists, that Moebius (a man of as great note as most are) slights it Moebius fundament med. c. de usu nervor. p 606. Caspar Hofman. ins [...]t. med. l 2. c. 65. sect. 1. by the example of Hofman, whose sense I shall here report: Monendi sunt adolescentiores, ne forte morentur illos qui neglecta veteri distinctione dicunt, Omnes nervi sunt a medulla, sed alii ex illa, antequam cranio excidat, alii ex eadem, cum jam in spinam delapsa est, & Spinalis dicitur. Quid enim hoc aliud est, quam frustranea nominum So Dr. Charlton in his Discourse to the Royal Society concerning the Brain, takes the liberty to understand by the Cerebrum as well as others, totum illud corp [...] quod Calvariae concavo continetur (pag. 67. de Propr. cerebri humani) though afterwards, when he comes to speak more accurately, he treats of the Medulla oblongata thus: Cerebro proxime subjicitur alma nervorum ad sensus spectantium mater, & funis argentei (sicut Sapiens in Ecclesiaste eleganti sed obscu [...]a Allegoria vocat Medull [...]m spinalem) principium Medulla scilicet intra cranium oblongata. Behold the addition of Mr. Glanvill! novatio? Cum dico me de nervis ex cerebro ortis acturum, intelligo totum id quod cranio continetur. There is another Origination of the nerves, which is as ancient as Aristotle, and which Hofman and Vander Linden assert, wherby they are deduced immediately and formally from the brain, but immediately and materially from the heart; for so much as they hold each nerve to be an Artery vested with the membranes of the brain, and so issuing to several parts. This opinion is very agreeable to the observations that occurre in the practice of Physick, and their arguments seem to me so plausible, that I am so averse with Mr. Glanvill to proclaim a new origination of the nerves, that I much doubt whether the followers of Galen were not deceived, and the Peripateticks in the right. See Vander Linden Disp. 38. de vasis & nervis, and Hofman de partib. similar. in thes. de orig. nerv. sec. Aristot.

It is clear now that Mr. Glanvil [...]s new addition amounts onely to this, that the Ancients did some of them hold that the nerves had their original from the brain; others deducedVide Varolium l. 1. c. 3. them from the heart. Some (perhaps before Varolius) did subdivide the brain into several parts,If Varolius found it out, as I believe be did, by a peculiar way of dissecting the head, what is it that Mr. Glanvill then [...]DDS? I am sure that Fracassatus saith, Varolius primus principium spinalis medullae vel intra cranium sobolescere in nervos, quorum origo olim á cerebro petebatur, docuit. and said that the nerves had their origination from the medulla oblongata, and not from the cerebrum and cerebellum. This nicety Dr. Willis makes some use of, but since he explicates nothing [Page] of the brain with a mechanical accurateness; I shall only subjoyn, that whosoever shall view or eat that which they call Medulla oblongata & spinalis, and compare it with the marrow that is in the bones otherwise, he will think it a less impropriety of speech, to say the Medulla oblongata is a part of the brain, then to term it a Medullary substance.

‘And though the Succus Nutritius be not yet fully agreed upon by Physicians, yet it hath so much to say for it self, that it may not unreasonably be mentioned amongst the new Inventions—’ It's strange Mr. Glanvill should entitle this opinion about the Succus Nutritius to so great a degree of probability, as he doth. Physicians are so far from being fully agreed upon it, that, excepting Dr. Glisson, Dr. Charleton, and perhaps one or two more, the rest do generally reject it.Highmore de affect. hypochondr. c. 4. Willis in Anatome cerebri c 20. Bartholin spicileg. 1. c. 3. Dr. Highmore, Dr. Willis, and Bartholine have written against: it; and so hath Deusingius writ a particular discourse against: it. Nor do I doubt, but whosoever peruseth those Authors which I refer unto, will be so far from imagining it reasonable to ascribe the Succus Nutritius to the number of modern Inventions, that he will term it at best but an ingenious Paradox, which when the first surprise is over, vanisheth with the appearance of being ridiculous. How much doth our Virtnoso, and Bartholine differ? Prodeat Herophilus, ex Bartholin. spicileg. 1. de vasis lymphat p. 23. autro educatur Democritus, advocentur prosectores cujuscunque sortis & aetatis, si in dissectis corporum nervis ullum invenerint liquorem nutritioni opportunum, nolim inter eos locum mereri.

‘But of all Modern Discoveries, Wit and Industry havePlus ultra, pag. 15. made in the Oeconomy of humane nature, the noblest is that of the Circulation of the blood, which was the invention of our deservedly famous Harvey. 'Tis true, the envy of malicious Contemporaries would have robb'd him of the Glory of this Discovery, and pretend it was known to Hippocrates, Plato, Aristotle, and others among the Ancients; but whoever considers the expressious of those Authors, which are said to respect the Circulation, who finde that those who form the inference, do it by a faculty that makes all kind of Compositions and Deductions, and the same that assists [Page] the Enthusiasts of our days, to see so clearly all our alterations of State and Religion, to the minutest particulars in the Revelation of Saint John. And I think it may be as well concluded from the first chapter of Genesis, as from the remains of those Ancients, who if they had known this great and general Theory, how chance they speak no more of a thing, which no doubt they had frequent occasions to mention? How came it to be lost without Memory amongst their followers, who were such superstitious Porers upon their Writings? How chance it was not shewn to be lodged in those Authors before the days of Dr. Harvey, when Envy hed impregnated and determined the Imaginations of those who were not willing any thing should be found anew, of which themselves were not the Inventours? But 'tis not only the remotest Ancients, whom time hath consecrated, and distance made venerable, whose Ashes those fond men would honour with this discovery; but even much later Authors have had the glory fastned upon them. For the Invention is by some ascribed to Paulus Venetus; by others to Prosper Alpinus; and a third sort give it to Andraeas Gaesalpinus. For these, though either of them should be acknowledged to be the Author, it will make as much for the design of my discourse, as if Harvey had the credit: and therefore here I am no otherwise concerned, but to have justice for that excellent man: and the World hath now done right to his Memory, Death having overcome that Envy which Dogs living vertue to the Grave; and his Name rests quietly in the Armes of Glory, while the Pretensions of his Rivals are creeping into darkness and oblivion.’

Whether those that have gone about to deprive Dr. Harvey have been incited by Envy and Malice, it is hard for any considerate man to judge; since those which first proposed the doubt about the Author, were great friends to the Theoreme; such as Walaus, who first mentioned it; [Page] Riolanus, Nardius, Fracassarus, and Joannes Antonides Vander Linden: All of them pay a great respect to Dr. Harvey's Performances; All of them concur with him generally in his Assertions, saving that Riolanus made some variation therein, and perhaps his passion might blinde his candour; though I do not think so, because I finde him zealously vindicating of Dr. Harvey from those imputations by which Walaeus endeavoured to transfer the credit of the invention upon Father Paul.

Another thing I must take notice of is, that Mr. Glanvill speaks very peremptorily about a thing he hath not enquired into, for it is evident that he never read the passages out of the Ancients, which are cited by Walaeus and Riolanus, to to shew they were not altogether ignorant of that motion of the bloud which is called Circulation. He thinks it may be as well concluded from the first chapter of Genesis, as from the remains of the Ancients. And why so? Is there any thing mentioned in the first chapter of Genesis, that sounds like the Circulation of the blood, or any words that can be applied unto this late discovery? not one. But any man that understands Greek, must confess that the words [...], and [...]. in Hippocrates (whatever he meant by them) do most emphatically signifie the Circulation of the blood, as it is now proposed. If I merit not to be believed herein, take the judgement of Julius Caesar, Scaliger upon Aristotle de insoma. xiij. 1444. [...]. I shall not from this place deduce the mystery of the Circulation of the blood, by saying that rivers circulate under ground thorough that sandy earth, which those that dig in Wells, when they come unto, they can descend no further: (which Helmont in the Brabant Dialect calls Quellem, other Dutch-men name Well-ground and Well-sand, and after return unto the Sea again by open Channels: But whatever the intent of the Philosopher was, that [...], properly imports such a thing, and that we have the name given it by Aristotle, this Scaliger confesseth, Ejus ad apotelesma xxxi. haec sunt verba.. [...] motum; ut infebribus accessionem. Circuitum [Page] Calvus cum dicit, fideliter, non pleno explicat. Neque enim. circumducitur sanguis, ut [...] impleat significationem Nam in febribus idcirco dicitur [...], quia revertitur paroxysmus: quasi circumductus ob diem parum & vacuum a morbo. From which it is evident, that if Scaliger had known that the blood had circulated, he would have granted it to have been properly expressed here in the Text: which is more then He would say of any Apocalyptical discoveries, or deductions of that opinion out of the first Chapter of Genesis. And if the word [...] be so significant, it is hard to deny that Hippocrates did not set down the thing it self in this passage, [...],Hippocrates de oss. nat. t. 17. [...]. Venae per corpus fusae spiritum, & fluxum, & motum praestant. Ab una multae propagantur: sed illa una unde incipiat, aut ubi desinat, non scio. Circulo enim ducto, principium non invenitur. And in that other; [...]-E [...] lib. de alim. t. 4. 1 [...]. [...]. In pilos alimentum [id est, sanguis nutriens] & in ungues, atque extremam superficiem intus advenit: faeris alimentum ab extrema superficie intime revertitur. Corrivatio una, conspiratio una, consentientia omnia. Certe quod ad communem naturam omnia: in quavis parte partes ad opus. Principium magnum [id est Cor, per transmissos spiritus & sanguinem] ad extremam partem pervenit: ab extrema parte ad principium magnum revertitur. There are more passages in the same Authour which seem to import the same thing, though his usual brevity and obscurity is such, that had not Harvey and others dilucidated the point, we had never, I believe, fixed this explication upon him, which amounts to no more then a new gloss upon an old Text: which yet is sufficient to check the largeness of Mr. Glanvills assertion. The [...] of Plato, and his making the Heart to be the original [Page] of the veins, [...];Plato in Timaeo. these are something more then is to be found in the first of Genesis. And that passage of Aristotle de Gen. Anim. l. 4. c. ult. is so unlike any thing of Moses's, and so like to the doctrine of Harvey, that any man must blame Mr. Glanvill, for rashness of what he says. The words are thus set down by Riolanus, and I have not the Original by me to consult: Cum coelestia corpora circulariter moveantur, inseriora' corpora motum illum imitari debent, cumque Oceanus fluxu & refluxu moveatur ab influxu Lunari, similiter humores talem motum habere necessum est. Which words seem clear enough, so as to justific the Epiphonema of my Author, in opposition to our Virtuoso. Quid ista significant nisi sanguinis Circulationem. He that would be informed more fully about the judgement of the Ancients, whether there be any thing in them that discovers the Circulation of the blood, to have been known unto them; or that they were not totally-ignorant, and without any apprehensions of it: let him reade the first letter of Walaeus, and the several Pieces of Joannes Riolanus about the Circulation of the blood, and the disputations of Vander Linden about the Circulation of the blood, in which he vindicates it in a prolixe discours unto Hippocrates. I wil not trouble my self to transcribe them: It is evident that all men do give unto Harvey the credit of having so explicated it, and Anatomically proved it, that he may as well be termed the Author of it, as Epicurus and others the Authors of that Philosophy which they derived from Pythogoras, Democritus, Leucippus, and Ocellus Lucanus. Nor hath Harvey any other Plea and Right to the Invention, then that he did more fully and perspicuously declare it, and in the most judicious and solid manner assert what others had but hinted at, or fainily insisted on.

Nor is Mr. Glanvill any better acquainted with the notions of the Modern Writers, then he is with those of the Ancients. He saith, that some have ascribed the Circulation of the blood to Paulus Venetus. I must inform the Reader (who may easily mistake, if he be one of the ordinary Comical Wirs) that it is not to be ascribed to Paulus Venetus, the great Traveller, [Page] who is generally understood, when that name is mentioned; none can say that he brought it from the Kingdom of Cathay. But Pater Paulus Sarpa (or Serpa) or Father Paul, the famous Venetian Monk, of the order of the Servi; who signatised himself during the time that Venice was interdicted. He was a Student at Padoa at the same time that Harvey was there, and discovered to Aqua pendens the valves in the veins, which discovery that great Anatomist appropriated to himself; and so Harvey was thought to have abused the same Father. But since Fulgentio in the life ofVide Slegel. de motu Sanguin c. 2. & Riolan. in not. ad ep. Walaei. Padre Paolo doth not challenge Harvey for this Cheat, as he doth Fabricius for that other; and since Marquardus Slegelius could not hear of any such thing upon a strict Enquiry at Venice and Padua, I know not any since Walaeus and Franciscus Ulmus, that have ascribed the invention to Paulus Venetus Servita.

Neither did I ever reade of any man that attributed it to Prosper Alpinus: nor is it credible that any ever did so. For that great Physician established his glory by being an excellent Practitioner, and not by any Anatomical curiosities, which he rather contemned, then pursued: and till I know what Author Mr. Glanvill follows, I believe the mentioning of him was occasioned by that way of discoutse which is common to the Wits of this Age, to blunder out any thing: and by laughing at improbabilities (of their own suggestion) to explode substantial truths, or represent them as forgeries. But if any did deceive the world in attributing the Circulation of the blood to Padre Paolo and Prosper Alpinus, it doth not follow but that Andreas Caesalpinus was the first Inventor of it, and proposed it to the world in his Medical and Peripatetical Questions, thought not in any Set Discourse, but as it casually falls into the discussion of other Problems: Whereupon it was little regarded, and not enquired after; the book being also scarce, and he being of that faction of Physicians which adheres to Aristotle against Galen, whence it hapned that few read his Paradoxes, and one of the bravest men of the latter Age hath been almost buried in oblivion. However, an ingenious Florentine, call'd Joannes Nardius, [Page] hath asserted the repute of Andraeas Caesalpinus, for precedency to Harvey in the Discovery; nor doth the same Author doubt, but that Erasistratus was of the same opinion: but he saith of Caesalpinus this: Foelix cui contigit post mortem nancisci clarissimum Patronum Guglielmum Harveium Regium Medicum, nobisque per charum, qui abortivam illam opinionem excoluit adeo, ut nihil cultius nostro seculo, nilque mirabilius occurrerit curiosis & amaenarum literarum amatoribus. To decide this question▪ and to put an end to those disputes which trouble some of our Virtuosi so much, by reason of that little converse they have with Books, I shall draw out the opinion of Caesalpinus, as he expresseth himself in his Disputations.

As a great abettour of Aristotle, he avows that the Heart isAndraeas Caesalpinus Qu. peripatet. [...]. 5. qu. 3. the principal part in man, and the original of the veins, arteries, and nerves; which is the opinion of Hofman, Van der Linden, and other Aristotelian Physicians.

He describes the Fabrick of the Heart as exactly as any of the Circulators in reference to the Valves, so much talked Ib. qu. 4. of; but he declares not their shape: Vasorum in Cor desinentium quaedam intromittunt contentam in ipsis substantiam, ut vena Cava in d [...]tro ventriculo, & arteria venalis in sinistro: quadam educu [...] ut arteria aorta in sinistro ventriculo, & vena arterialis pulmonem nutriens iu dextro: omnibus autem membranule sunt appositae & officio delegatae, ut oscula intromittentia non educant, & educentia non intromittant.

And for the account of the Vena arteriosa, and Arteria venosa in the Lungs, Harvey is not more perspicuous, then he is afterwards, where he makes the one to be an Artery, the other a veine, viz. Putaverunt autem Medici usum hunc non videntes commutatae fuisse vasa in pulmone, ut Arteria quidem similis esset venae, vena autem similis Arteriae: appellantes venas vasa omnia quae in dextrum ventriculum desinunt, Arterias autem, quae in sinistrum: figmenta multa & absurditates excogitantes ut usum invenirent. Pulsat igitur in pulmone vas dextri ventriculi, haec enim e corde recipit, ut Arteria magna, & similiter fabricatum est ejus corpus. Vas autem sinistri ventriculi [Page] non pulsat, quia introducit tantum, & ejus corpus simile est reliquis venis.

He holds that the motion of the Heart and Arteries depends not upon any pelsifick Faculty, but that it ariseth from the [...], ebullition, or effervescency of the blood in the Ventricles; and that the Heart and Arteries are dilated at the same time, the blood dilating the Heart, and issuing out thorough the valves of the Aorta and Pulmonique Artery at the same instant, which is pure Cartesianism.

He holds that the Blood comes up from the veins to the Heart, and there acquires the last Perfection, and becomes vital and spirituous: in the mention of the Arterious Blood, he useth indifferently the termes of Blood, spirit, and natural heat, which I desire may be observed, lest the proofs seem not full enough, and he be construed to speak of nothing but spirits and natural heat in the Arteries. He saith, that this Blood having acquired its Perfection in its passage through both the ventricles, is distributed through all the parts of the body, for its nutriment by the Arteries, in which Arteries there is such a constant quantity of Blood, that the effervency of that in the Heart impells the whole continuation of the Arteries, so that they beat all at once. Cum enim pulsatio Cordis & Arteriarum sit accidens quoddam quod ex necessitate insequitur humoris in corde effervescentiam, qua sanguinis generatio per ficitur, ut in caeteris quae igne elixantur, accidit. lib. de vita & mort. c. [...]. intumescente corde necesse est simul omnes Arterias dilatari, in quas derivatur fervor: non enim repleri potest una pars, quin totum fiat majus: ubi non omni ex parte vasa quae continua sunt fuerint exinanita. Nam nullo intus existente corpore, non contingit simul repleri principium & extrema, cum motus non fiat in instanti: existente autem per totos canales aliquo spiritu, simul ac in principio alius fuerit genitus, necesse est totum simul dilatari, unum enim sit spiritus accedens cum toto. Cum ergo totum reddatur majus simul ac accesserit pars, non potest una pars dilatari, quin eodem tempore dilatetur totum. [Page] Est autem veluti totum quoddam Arteriae omnes cum corde; Mark this, where he makes the Heart and Arteries to be one continued recepracle of perfect blood: by which you must explain what he says in some p [...]aces, as it only spirits or natural heat went into the Arteries, or returned by the veins. Continuum enim est vas sanguinis perfecti. Spiritu autem efflante inhabitum corporis, & distributo particulis sanguine, necesse est tumorem vasorum desidere, quae est pulsus contractio. Continue autem hoc fit, quia continua est partium nutritio, & continua sanguinis generatio in corde. Elevatio igitur Spiritus a calore fit, non tamen temere, sed alicujus gratia. Nam sine hujusmodi amplificatione non fieret distributio alimenti in omnes partes.

He plants a kind of Flammula cordis, or fire in the heart, which causeth the ebullition, and imprints a spirituousness in the blood that issueth out into the Arteries. Hujusmodi loc [...]s Cor est in quo secundum Naturam elementum praeparatum ardere possit, & fieri spiritus: venae alimentum suppeditant, Arteriae flammae spiritum recipiunt.

He saith, that the Blood moves towards the Heart, as the Oyle to the flame of the burning Lamp, and that the Valves as the orifice of the Vena Gava which immit the blood, are placed there to moderate the source of the blood, lest it should fall in too fast, & extinguish the vital fire: and that the valves at the entrance of the Aorta do flie open upon the effervescency of the blood, by the pressure of it every way, to get more room: it finding no out-let but by those yielding valves, which were so placed, lest upon any accident, or viclent passion, the arterious blood should regurgitate into the Heart, Motus fit ex venis in Cor caliditate alimentum trabente, ex corde autem in arterias, quia hac solum patet iter propter membranarum positionem, positae autem sunt hoc modo membranae, ne unquam contingeret contrarium motum fieri, quod accidere posset in vehementibus animi perturbationibus, aut aliis causis, a quibus sanguinis retractio fit ad Cor: Obsistunt enim huic motui membranae. Nam si hoc modo condite non essent, ignis cordis vel levi causa extingueretur. Si enim metus fieret contrarius simile esset, ac si flamma compingeretur deorsum ad alimentum, quod cum minime sit praeparatum, aut cepiosius quam oportet, ignem suffocat. Oportet enim alimentum praeparari, & paulatim dispensari ad locum flammae.

He saith that this arterious blood, or spirit, is distributed [Page] into all parts of the body, with great celerity, and that it is that which nourisheth the parts: and that upon its diffusion into the habit of the body, the spirits are very much exhausted, and the corpulent part of the aliment doth remain, being coagulated partly by heat, and partly by cold.

He saith, that the variety of the pulse, as to strength or debility, celerity and slowness, depends upon the nature of the vital fire, the nature of the aliment with which it is fed, and sometimes upon the particular Fabrick, or conformation of the Heart, in which that Fire is seated.

He placeth Anastomoses betwixt the veins and arteries every where in the body. Osculorum communio est non solum in corde, sed etiam per totum venerum & arteriarum ductum,

He saith that the blood is never extravasated, but where it is aggregated to any part by way of nourishment, or else it putrifies: he doth not understand how it should not coagulate if once extravasated; nor can he comprehend how it should be reassumed into the veins in such a case. Venam continuam esse oportet, usque ad cordis ventriculos, ut inde omnis virtus descendat: nec ullibi contingit disjunctam esse; sanguis enim calore cordis destitutus concrescit, & tandem putrescit.

He makes the Blood to pass betwixt the right and left ventricle of the Heart; partly by the Lungs, and partly by the Septum Cordis. Pulchre igitur condita sunt omnia. Cum enim fervere oporteret in corde sanguinem, ut fieret alimenti perfectio: primo quidem in dextro ventriculo, in quo crassior adhuc continetur sanguis, deinde autem in sinistro, ubi sincerior sanguis est: partim per medium septum, partim per medios pulmones refrigerationis gratia ex dextro in sinistrum mittitur. Interim autem pulmo abunde nutriri potest: totum enim eum sanguinem absumere, quem recipit, egreditur fines rationis. Non enim rara esset ejus substantia & levis, ut videtur si tantum alimenti, vim in suam naturam converteret. This he thus further explains. Pulmo per venam arteriis similem ex dextro cordis ventriculo fervidum hauriens sanguinem, eumque per anastomosin arteriae venali reddens quae in sinistrum cordis ventriculum tendit, transmisso [Page] interim aere frigido per asperae arteriae canales, qui juxta arteriam venalem protenduntur, non tamen osculis communicantes, ut putavit Galenus solo tactu temperat. Huic Sanguinis Circulationi ex dextro cordis ventriculo, per pulmones in sinistrum ejusdem ventriculum optime respondent ea quae ex dissectione apparent. Nam duo sunt vasa in dextrum ventriculum desinentia, duo etiam in sinistrum. Duorum autem unum intromittit tantum, alterum educit, membranis eo ingenio constructis. Vas igitur intromittens, vena est magna quidem in dextro, quae cava appellatur: parva autem in sinistro, ex pulmone introducens, cujus unica est tunica, ut caeterarum venarum. Vas autem educens Arteria, est magna quidem in sinistro, quae Aorta appellatur, parva autem in dextro ad pulmones derivans, cujus similiter duae sunt tunicae, ut in caeteris arteriis.

He holds that the spirituous or arterious blood is cast ou [...], and diffused vigorously into the habit of the body, that the veins and arteries being continuous by Anastomosis, it returns to the Heart again, vigorating the blood of the vena peria and Cava as it returns: which is sufficiently intimated in that he deduces all the vigour and vitality of the blood from the Heart, and that this vigour or natural hear is carried over the body by the Arteries alone, and that it is necessary that the whole venous Systeme, or contexture of Arteries and veins be continuous, lest the blood in the veins, being destitute of the cordial heat, should coagulate and putrifie. He holds that this motion, or Circulation of the blood is without intermission: and that the swelling▪ of the veins upon the Ligature is a sufficient proof of it. But he holds, that the recourse of the blood by the veins is greater in the sleep, then when we awake; which he proves thus, in that the veins are more full and tumid during sleep, then waking: and the pulse weaker, and more slow; as any man may observe. From whence he concludes, that the natural heat (which is the Arterious blood, as I observed before, to prevent all possible mistakes) which was otherwise in great part expended upon the nerves and sensories, doth in sleep return: and fill the veins more visibly (that exhaustion ceasing) then when we are not asleep.

[Page] His opinion will be best set down in his own words; and I think it necessary to do it, because Nardius hath done it so imperfectly, that one would attribute as little to his allegations, as to those which are cited out of the Ancients; and if I had not read Caesalpinus long before, I should have thought the Florentine to have intitled Caesalpinus to the opinion out of envy to Harvey, or out of a partial desire to advance the glory of the Tuscan Academy at Pisa, when Caesalpinus was Professour. Thus that learned man writ about the year 1590. or a little after.

‘

Andraeas Caesalpinus Quest▪ Medic. l. 2. Qu. 17. edit. venetae secunda in 4to. A. D. 1593. fol. 234. col. 1.

Sed illud speculatione dignum videtur, Propter quod intumescunt venae ultra locum apprehensum, non citra: quod experimento sciunt qui vena secant: vinculum enim adhibent citra locum sectionis, non ultra: quia tument venae ultra vinculum, non citra. Debuisset autem opposito modo contingere, si motus sanguinis & spiritus a visceribus fit in totum corpus: intercepto enim meatu, non ultra datur progressus: tumor igitur venarum citra vinculum debuisset fieri. An folvitur dubitatio ex eo quod scribit Aristoteles, de Som c. 3. ubi inquit, Necesse enim quod evaporatur aliquousque impelli: deinde converti & permutari, sicut Euripum: calidum enim cujusque animalium ad superiora natum est ferri: cum autem in superioribus locis fuerit, multum simul iterum revertitur, ferturque deorsum. Haec Aristoteles. [Page] Pro cujus loci explicatione illud sciendum est: Cordis meatus ita a natura paratos esse, ut ex vena Cava intromissio fiat in Cordis ventriculum dextrum, unde patet exitus in pulmonem: ex pulmone praeterea alium ingressum esse in Cordis ventriculum sinistrum, ex quotandem patet exitus in Arteriam Aortam, membranis quibusdam ad ostia vasorum appositis, ut impediant retrocessum: Sic enim perpetuus quidam motus est ex vena cava per Cor & pulmones in Arteriam Aortam: ut in Quaestionibus Peripateticis explicavimus. Cum autem in vigilia motus caloris nativi fiat extra, scilicet ad sensoria: in Somno autem intra, scilicet ad Cor: putandum est in vigilia multum spiritus & sanguinis ferri ad arterias, inde enim in nervos iter est. In somno autem eundem calorem per venas reverti ad Cor, non per Arteriam. Judicio sunt pulsus, qui expergicentibus fiunt magni, vehementes, celeres, & crebri, cum quadam vibratione: in somno autem parvi, languidi, tardi & rari notante Galeno. 3. de caus. pul. 9, 10. Num in Somno calor nativus minus vergit in arterias: in casdem erumpit vehementius cum expergiscuntur. Venae autem contrario se modo habent: nam in somno fiunt tumidiores, in vigilia exiliores, ut patet intuenti eas quae in manu sunt. Transit enim in somno calor nativus ex arteriis in venas per osculorum communionem, quam Anastomosin vocant, & inde ad Cor. Ut autem sanguinis exundatio ad superiora, & retrocessus ad inferiora ad instar Euripi manifesta est in somno & vigilia, sic[Page]non obscurus est hujusmodi motus in quacunque parte corporis vinculum adhibeatur, aut alia ratione occludantur venae. Cum enim tollitur permeatio, intumescunt rivuli qua parte fluere solent.’

From hence it is clear that He held that the blood did circulate continually, falling into the Heart by the vena Cava, and issuing out by the Aorta into all parts of the body: that this motion of the blood was perceivable by the Ligatures at any time, but most manifest in the intumescence of the veins in sleep: at what time also the blood or natural heat (which is all one to him) did pass by way of Anastomosis out of the arteries into the veins, as well as at other times. So that we are not to imagine any interrupted circulation in him, but that it did constantly flow night and day, sleeping and waking, though with unequal celerity. In letting of blood he tells us, that the blood which first issues out is venous, and blacker then that which follows, and comes more immediately Qu. Med. l. 2. qu 5 fol. 212. col. 1. lit. [...]. out of the Arteries.—Venas cum Arteriis adeo copulari osculis, ut vena secta primum exeat sanguis venalis nigrior; deinde succedat arterialis flavior, quod plerumque contingit. AndQu. Med. l. 2. qu. 15. fol▪ 230. col. 1. l. c. he explains the motion of the blood, and natural heat thus, to prevent all ambiguity. At instabit quis in somno nequaquam prohiberi calorem in cerebro & sensoriis: pulsant enim arteriae in toto corpore etiam in somno. At praesente calore innato debuisset duci in actum facultas animalis. An calor innatus in somno viget in venis & arteriis, non in nervis sine quibus, non sit sensus & motus? Extra igitur ferri est nervos petere, intra autem non solum ad viscera, sed in omnes venas & arterias; unde operationes naturales magis perficiuntur in toto corpore.

I hope I have now determined the Question which hath occasioned so many heats in the world concerning the Circulation of the blood, who was the first Inventor of it? I have demonstrated that Andraeas Caesalpinus, a rigid Peripatetick upon sensible Experiments & Mechanical considerations, not notional apprehensions, did not only discover this motion of the blood [Page] (even through the Lungs) but gave it the name of CIRCULATIO SANGUINIS; which name is not so proper in it self, considering the Fabrick of the veins and arteries, and the Labyrinth in which the blood moves universally, describing a Line no way circular, as that a man would have pitched upon it in any other Age then when Caesalpinus lived, when the knowledge of the Learned Languages was less general then now, and such a barbarous stile in fashion, as our Inventour used. But it was not so in the days of Dr. Harvey, who published his Treatise in 4to. at Francfourt in the year (as I take it) 1628. I must confess I am apt to think upon▪ this consideration, that Dr. Harvey (who was a Peripatetique Physician, and in whose time at Padoa, those Physicians did flourish with the greatest repute of Learning and skill in Anatomy, as well as Philosophy) did take up this opinion from my Author. And although there wanted not occasion by reason of what Walaeus, Riolanus, Slegelius, and others had said upon the point, for him to declare the original of the discovery, yet in his two Answers to Riolanus, and his Book of Generation, He no where asserts the Invention so to himself, as to deny that he had the intimation or notion from Caesalpinus; but leaves the Controversy in the dark: which silence of his I take for a tacite Confession. His Ambition of Glory made him willing to be thought the Authour of a Paradox he had so illustrated, and brought upon the Stage, when it lay unregarded, and in all probability buried in oblivion. Yet such was his Modesty, as not to vindicate it to himself by telling a Lie. And such his Prudence, as rather to avoid the debate, then resolve it to his prejudice. Had Dr. Harvey been a Chymist, I should have guessed that he might have fixed upon the word Circulation, upon other reasons, and those congruous enough to his Hypotheses: but since (especially in the days when he writ) those Studies wereNarravit mih. Nobiliss. & Ampliss. Nicolaus Oudart, illustrissimi Principis Auria [...]i Consi [...]iarius, meminisse se audire ipsum Harveium profitentem se revera primam circuitus sanguinis n [...]titiam, & in eum sectione viventium inquirendi occasionem ex Herioto▪ accepisse. Fuit▪ is serenissimi quondam Regis Jacobi gemm [...]rius, & Matheseos peri [...]s, eoque nomine Londini celebris.—Si verum hoc, verisi milius quoque est, vel ipsum, vel Sarpium, vel Heriotum, a Caes [...]lpino accepisse. Nemo enim mihi persuaserit, ab corum nemine visum suisse scriptum [venetiis impressum] quod vel titulo se, nedum eruditionis varietate atque sublimitate commendet. Jo. Arter▪ Vander Linden disput, de circuit. sangu exercit. 9. sect. 196. & exercit. 16. sect▪ 582. unknown to him, and not valued by him, I am inclined to think that He did receive his first Iutelligence from this Professour at Pisa (where Harvey also was) and so improved those hints, [Page] that in the divulging of his Opinion, they are as little to be seen, as the first indeclines which Painters draw in Pictures that are lost, when the Pourtraict is finished: or as in the first Appearances of Plants above-ground, where those leaves and buds, which often give growth to the succeeding stemme, flower, and fruit, are lost, or altered so as not to be known. Let it suffice, that Dr. Harvey had parts and industry enough to have discovered it, had he not been prevented therein. And I should have imagined that our Countreyman had found it out, without any communication with those other books (a thing possible enough, and of which we have instance in the case of Rudbek, Bartholine, and Jolice) but that the reasons I have alledged render the case suspicious. Had Caesalpinus writ a distinct Treatise, I doubt not but much of the Glory had been his: since there are as great differences between one Circulator, and another, and greater, then betwixt him and Harvey: but his notions being confusedly laid down here and there in his Peripatetick and Medicinal Questions, and he being not ambitious to pretend to any new discoveries, only to illustrate Aristotles tenets. I shall allow Harvey the possession of his present repute: nor do I give my self this trouble of collecting up into a method these confused assertions of Caesalpinus out of any envy to the dead, but out of animosity to Pretenders to Wit and Learning, that brave it thus amongst us; yet if to be ignorant of what hath passed in the world heretofore, be an argument of childishness, there is not any thing more puerile then this sort of Virtuosi.

I might not dismiss my Reader, but that the great noise which this Circulation of blood makes in the World, enforceth me to speak a little more about the utility of this discovery, which our Authour describes to be the most noble of all those discoveries in the Oeconomy of humane nature, which Wit and Industry have made. I do confess I think the Arguments for it to be such as admit of no Answer in general; [Page] but when we come to debate how it passeth through the Lungs▪ (which Riolanus almost invincibly disproves) or through the Septum Cordis, (which Riolan and Bartholin asserts, but Harvey, Slegelius, Vander Linden, and others, reject it o [...] good grounds) what it is that causeth the pulsation of the Heart? what continues on the motion of the blood in the veins, even when a Ligature is made betwixt the antecedent and subsequent blood. Whether the blood be diffused into the habit of the body, and reimbibed by capillary veins, or conveyed on by Anastomoses? whether there be any difference betwixt the venous and Arterious blood? How the Phaenomena (which undeniably are observed) about the pulse can be made out▪ and particularly how some have lived without any Pulse, others (which I have known) in the palpitation of the Heart, suffer no change in their Pulse? How upon dissection or wounds somtimes both ends of the veine divided do bleed? How some bleed at the arme without any Ligature; some upon a double Ligature? These, and many other questions, when I come to dispute with my self, methinks I am forced to constrain my judgement in the assent I give to that Probleme: and what I am ashamed to deny, I finde I cannot own without some reluctancy, which is daily encreased in me by scruples arising from the Practick Part of Physick; nor do I blush to declare my self an Abettour only of such Tenets, as are consistent with, and illustrated by Practical Physick: it was thought at first that this Circulation of blood would overthrow all the usual Methods of Physick, and introduce new and beneficial discoveries in that part of Medicine which is Therapeutick. But Harvey denieth that it varieth the Medicine of the Ancients; and Slegelius asserts the same opinion, avowing it to be rather an happy illustration, then [...] subversion of the former praxis, though it alter the Theory much. In fine, those little advantages and Diorismes, which we derive from that Invention merit not our notice; nay, any man shall with more assurance bleed in many diseases in sundry manners and different places, upon diverse indications upon the old observations and rules, then on the new hypotheses, wherein as to the use of parts, and nature of humors, there [Page] is as little of clearness and certainty; as there is efficacy it▪ that practice▪ which is regulated most thereby.

I had forgot to take notice of the venae lacteae ascribed toNardiu [...]. noct G [...]al. 4. p 412. Asellius, the invention of them is thought a great discovery, and such as signatiseth a man in this Age. Yet even those vessels were known to Galen, as Nardius proveth out of his book against Erasistratus, c. 5. and out of the last chapter of his Anatomical Administrations. It is true, he calls them Arteries; he saith they were in the Mesentery filled with Milk, and that he observed them in young Kids. And Hofman in his Variae Lectiones doth produce out of Galen, de usu part. l. 4. sect. 19. a place so evidently shewing that Galen and Herophilus did recover those Venae lacteae; that Veslingius cries out in a Letter to him, Existimo aut nihil cum Herophilo Galenum vidisse, aut has [...], hos Epist xxi. ipsos ductus esse, quos lacteos cum Asellio nominamus. Quae ad Pancreatis [...] (ex multarum enim glandularum compage constructum videtur) pertinent. The place in [...]. H [...]sman v [...]r lect. l. 2. [...] c. 2. Galen is this, as Hofman represents it. [...]. Which proof as it is perspicuous enough to ruine the discovery of the Venae Lacteae, and the deducing of them unto the Glandules of the Mesentery (beyond which Herophilus and Galen did never trace the journey of the Chyle, but imagined those veins to nourish the Mesentery) so I think that the invention of the Ductus Thoracius belongs to Andr. Vesalius, and Barthol. Eustachius: the one more obscurely proposeth it, the other more openly.

Andr. Vesalius de fabrica corporis humani l. 3. c 7.Jo Ant. Vander [...]ird [...]n [...]e circuitsangu. [...]xerc. 9 p. 291. Edit. Venet. 1568.

—Adeo ut mihi etiam persuasum sit quamvis id nunquam viderim; interdum a sinistro coenae caudicis latere, ubi jugulum contingit, venam depromi, quae secundum sinistrum vertebrarum latus declivis ducta, sinistris cos [...]is samos offerat: illa quam sine pari nuncupamus, dextras costas alente. Atque hujusmodi venae ortum, non tantum a jugulo primum posse▪ fieri, [Page] sed paulo infernis, etiam agnus attestatur: in quo tale aliquid semel observavi.

Viden' venisse in rem, & quasi in manu jam habuisse illud Ariadnae filum, quod secutus penetrare in naturae Labyrinthum, majoremque sibi gloriam comparare potuisset? sed quo fructu? Audi sis, & disce, quam homini scientias sectanti, necessarium sit, etiam in naturalibus eum, qui sui juris & muneris fecit, docere homines scientias & artes, Ps 94. v. 10. Jer. 28. v. 26, precari, Revela oculos meos ut cernam mirabilia in operibus tuis, ex Ps. 119. v. 18.

Verum, inquit, ejuscemodi non nisi rarissime occurrentes venarum series, anatomes fludioso non aliter expendendas putarim, quam si interdum sextus in manu digitus, aliud ne monstruosum se spectandum offerret. Adeo ut siquando in publicis sectionibus haec observo, ea tanquam non essent, tacite praetereamne artis candidati in omnibus corporibus haec observari arbitrentur.

Quanto egregius, & propter hoc non unam atque immortalem laudem meritus Barth. Eustachius: qui no [...] solum candide exponit, quod vidit; sed et praemisso, quod res merebatur, praeloquio conatus est posteriorem studia excitare ad ulteriorem inquisitionem et perfectiorem cognitionem. Neque enim ignorabat, rei quidem inventionem, [...] munus esse: at vero ejus plenam cognitionem [...] opus esse. Sed audiamus ipsum.

Ad hanc naturae providentiam quandam equorum venam alias pertinere credidi: quae cum artificii & admirationis plena sit, nec delectatione ac fructu careat: quamvis minime sit ad Thorac [...]m alendum instituta: operae pretium est [...]t exponetur. Ita (que) in illis animantibus, pergit ab hoc ipso insigni trunco sinistri juguli, qua posterior sedes radicis venae internae jugularis spectat, magna quaedam propago germinat: quae praeterquam quod in ejus origine ostiolum semi-circulare habet, est etiam ALBA ET AQUEI HUMORIS PLENA; nec longe ab ortu in duas partes scinditur; paulo post rursus coeuntes in unam: quae nullos ramos diffundens, juxta sinistrum vert: brarum latus, penetrato septo transverso, deorsum ad medium us (que) lumborum fertur: quo latior efferta, magnam (que) arteriano circumplexa, obscurissimum finem, nihil (que) adhuc non bene perceptum, obtinet.

[Page]Since the writing hereof, I have met with a book containing certain Letters of Márcellus Malpighius, and Carolus Fracassatus; in which it is observable that Fracassatus (the Anatomy-Professour at Pisa) doth ascribe the Invention of the Circulation of the blood to Caesalpinus; and of the ductus Thoracius to Eustachius: His words are these: ‘Adeo oscitantia Autorum quaedam tam male praeponuntur, ac tanguntur, ut oporteat alios eadem repetere, ac ditare novis elucubrationibus, ac si nunquam fuissent. Sanguinis Circulatio, Galaxia in Microcosmo humano, scilicet via Chyli Cor, nonne Caesalpinum agnoscit Authorem, ac Eustachium de vena sine pari? Et tamen soles in Scholis Autores crepant Anglos Harvaeus, & Di [...]penses Pecquetos: non tamen spernendi, qui verum rudimenta ponunt, etiamsi infecto nec absoluto opere cessaverint: qui invenit anticipavit laborem & curam quaerendi: Fracassatus de cerebro. p. 202. & ad minora vocatur, si quaestionis solicitudo & jactatio tollatur: par tamen decus manet & illum, qui primum invenit, & qui postremum perfecit, nescio enim an praestet invenisse, an ditasse.’

Having said thus much, I leave Mr. Glanvill, to answer those little quillets of his, which can convince none but Shallow-brain'd and Comical Wits.—‘If they knew these grand Theories formerly; how chanceth it that they speak no more of things, which no doubt they had frequent occasions to mention? How come they to be left without memory among their followers, who were such superstitious porers upon their writings? How chanceth it not to have been shewn to be lodged in those Authors before the days of Dr. Harvey, &c. when Envy had impregnated and determined their imaginations? Let illiterate persons and Mathematicians be swayed against plain proof by these Arguments.’ I think in stead of Temples and Altars to be erected to these Inventors, there is more need of a Schoolmaster and an Antiquary, the one to teach them humane learning, the other to instruct them in past discoveries; least, with much trouble and pains our new Philosophers should finde out again the Art of Printing, or Etching: the use of Gunpowder, or the Load-stone.

Of Transfusion of Blood—into Animals.

[Page]

THus, Sir, I have done with Instances of AnatomicalPlus Ultra. pag. 17. Advancements, unless I should hitherto referre the late noble Experiment of Transfusion of the Blood, from one living Animal into another, which I think very fit to be mentioned; and I suppose it is not improper for this place: Or however, I shall rather venture the danger of impropriety and misplacing, then omit the taking notice of so excellent a Discovery, which no doubt future Ingenuity and Practice will improve to Purposes not yet thought of; and we have very great likelihood of advantages from it in present Prospect.

For it is concluded, That the greatest part of our diseases, arise either from the scarcity, or malignant tempers and corruptions of our Blood; in which cases Transfusion is an obvious Remedy; and in the way of this Operation the peccant blood may be drawn out, without the danger of too much enfeebling Nature, which is the grand inconvenience of meer Phlebotomies. So that this Experiment may be of excellent use, when Custom and Acquaintance have hardned men to permit the Practice in Pleurisies, Cancers, Leprosies, Madness, Ulcers, Small-Pox, Dotage, and all such like Distempers. And I know not why that of injecting prepared Medicines immediately into the blood, may not be better and more efficacious then the ordinary course of Practice: Since this will prevent all the danger of frustration from the loathings of the Stomach, and the disabling, clogging mixtures and alterations they meet with there, and in the intestines, in which no doubt much of the spirit and virtue is lost. But in the way of immediate injection they are kept intire, all those inconveniences are avoided, and the Operation is like to be more speedy and successful. Both these noble Experiments are the late Inventions of the ROYAL SOCIETY, [Page] who have attested the reality of the former, that of Transfusion of Blood by numerous trials on several sorts of brute Animals, Indeed the French made the Experiment first upon humane Bodies, of which we have a good account from Mounsieur Dennis. But it hath been practised also with fair and encouraging success by our Philosophical Society. The other of injection, if it may be mentioned as a different invention, was also the Product of some generous Inventors; though indeed more forward Forreigners have endeavoured to usurp the Credit of both▪ This latter likewise hath succeeded to considerable good effects in some new Trials that have been made of it in Dantzick, as appears in a Letter written from Dr. Fabricius of that City, and Printed in the Philosophical Translations.

I shall not quarrel with Mr. Glanvill for misplacing thisThose Forreigners will rectifie hereafter their mistakes, and not attribute the injecting of Medicaments to their [...]nvention: as Caspar Schottus in Mirab. Art. l. xi. c. 21. p. 891. & Phil. Jac. Sacks in Ocean Micromicrocosm. sect. 155 have donc, unjustly magnifying Solertissimam Industriam & Experientiam of these Pretenders Andr. Libav. desens. Syntagm arcanor. adv. Henning Scheunemem act 2. c. pag 8 edit. Francos [...]uit. A [...] 615. discourse about the Transfusion▪ of Blood, but I think all the World will condemn him for ascribing either the invention of Transfusing blood, or of injecting Medicaments into the veins, unto the Society. That the latter was a thing much practised by Dr. Wren and others in Oxford, before the Restoration of his Majesty, and before that ever the SOCIETY was thought upon, is a thing known to all that were at those days in that University. I saw my self in those days the Dog into whose veins there was injected a Solution of Opium, at the Lodgings of the Honourable Robert Boyle, of which he makes mention in his second discourse of the Usefulness of Natural Philosophy, and Borrichius in his Letters to Bartholinus.

As for that other of Transfusing the blood out of one Animal into another, if the Question be who first proposed it into the World to be tried, it is certain that Libavius first did that, at least I know not any more ancient then He. That Learned man above Fifty years ago, so plainly describes the Transsusion, that one can hardly discourse of it with more clearness, then there is done in these words. Adsit Juvenis robustus, sanus, sanguine spirituoso plenus: Adslet exhaustus viribus, tenuis, macilentus, vix animam trahens. Magister Artis habeat tubulos argenteos inter se congruentes, aperiat arteriam robusti & [Page] tubulum inserat, muniatque mox & aegroti arteriam findat▪ & tubulum foemineum infigat: jam duos tubulos sibi mutuo applicet, & ex sano sanguis arterialis calens & spirituosus saliev in aegrotum, unaque vitae fontem afferet, omnemque languorem vellet. This allegation was made use of by an Italian Philosopher, and silenceth all those in England, or France, that pretendPhilos. Transact. Numb. 37. p. 740. By his leave it infers only the mention of it to be more ancient, not [...]e Operation▪ Libavius proposeth it out of some Paracelsian Magical Writer, and not from his own Fancy: adding that the Physician who practisethths Transfusion, deservs Helleborc himself. See Mr. J. Denny's Letter in the Transact. numb. [...]7. [...]. num. 28. to the Glory of having first proposed: So that the Authour of the Philosophical Transactions confesseth it in these words▪. This indeed is clear enough, and obligeth us to averre a greater Antiquity of this operation, then before we were aware of, though 'tis true, Libavius did not propose it, but only to mock at it (which is the common fate of new Inventions in their Cradle) besides that, He contrives it with great danger both to the Recipient and Emittent, by proposing to open Arteries in both, which indeed may be practised upon Brutes, but ought by no means upon Man. Till that learned Italian had instructed the Virtuosi in the point, there had been a great Controversie agitated between the French and English Societies about the Invention. The former pretended, that it was mentioned first amongst them about eleven years ago, at the Assembly, in the house of Mounsieur de Montmor, and that the publick is beholding to that Monsieur for this discovery, and the benefits and advantages that shall be reaped thereby. But about the person that should first mention the design, the French vary. Monsieur de Gury fathers it upon the Abbot Bourdelot: but the Author of their Journals upon a Benedictine Friar. Our Society having given the world occasion to take notice of it publikely, and having otherwise long before pursued the Oxford-Invention of injecting Liquors into the veins, thought themselves injured in this, that the French should usurp the Credit of such a discovery as had its first birth in England, upon a pretence that it was conceived in France: it being notorious, the French took occasion to try it by the Example of the English Virtuosi: and there being no publick record cited, declaring the time and place of the Invention proposed the Method to practise it▪ and the success of the Execution, Thereupon began a Paper-scuffle betwixt the Gazettiers o. [Page] the Curiense which any man may reade with some pleasure, because they had on both sides such little Logick, as to argue from the mentioning of a design, to the effecting it. If the way of Argumentation be good and solid, then Aristotle, and such of the Ancients, as proposed the squaring of the Circle, must not be denied the glory of being Inventors of it: So they which first proposed a perpetual motion, or the Northwest Passage, may go for Inventors of them: yet are none of these things yet discovered. Oh! new Correlates, and worthy of our Inventors! Long ago Aristotle and the Common Dialecticks told us, Datur scibile de quo non datur Scientia. But none like our Anti-Logicians-ever taught, there were a sort of Inventors whose Inventions were yet to seek. All that our Inventors did, was, that after Dr. Lower had first discovered and practised the Transfusion at Oxford in February 1665. They on the seventeenth of May followingSee Transact. Num. 28. pag. 5 [...]4. 1665. gave order that there should be trials made for transfusing the blood: but their trials proving lame for want of a fit Apparatus, and a well continued Method of Operation: the▪ Dr. sent them a convenient Method for effecting the thing. Before this, there never was any mention or proposal made at the Society concerning the Transfusion, as I am certainly informed by one of their Number, who hath examined their Journal▪ Books, in which such Proposals and Experiments are recorded. Nay, they were so far from pretending to it at first, that when it was mentioned unto them by Mr. Boyle, there were some as well severe as ingenuous Critick's, who thought it somewhat strange and bold for him to affirm that the Dr. had made it succeed. And besides, I observe that Mr. Boyle in his Letter to Dr. Lower (who hath vindicated the Invention to himself in his late Book de Corde) doth not say that ever the Society had thought of or attempted, or designed to attempt the thing. He calls it insolitum & insperatum conamen. June 26. 1666. and desires He would acquaint the Society with the manner how he atchieved it. Now since that neither was Dr. Lower then of the Society, nor any way entitles them unto it, but himself, and that in a Treatise wherein he doth not so much as call himself [Page] a Member of that Assembly, set anyIn the Transactions numb. 37. pag. 371. The Gazettier affirms, that upon further investigation it was by good proof (which is in his hands) proved▪ that the invention had been known to some Ingenious persons in England thirty years ago. If so, then is not the Society the Inventors of it, except we will say, that Societies as well as individual [...]o [...]'s do pre-exist! But may not a man ask our Gazettier▪ where is the publike record of this Invention? what Account is there of the Method with which it was practised? with what success? How comes all this to be concealed till after Dr. Lower atchieves it, and the French pre [...]end to it? would any man have concealed their claim to the Discovery, after that it was become the talk of Europe, the Darling of the Society and worthy to be disputed for by the French? why did they not put in their Claim, being within hearing, till about three years after. man judge with how much truth this other Discovery is ascribed to these NEW EXPERIMENTATORS, by our Virtuoso. But least I should seem to deal too severely and maliciously with them, rather then it shall be said That they invented nothing, I grant, that They invented a LYE; and shall conclude the Debate by representing the words out of their Transactions, by which they assume to themselves the Credit of the Invention, and by a dubious wording and pointing of the Period, insinuate as if Dr. Lower as well as Dr. King had been encouraged to the Attempt by the Society.

Philosoph. Transact. Numb. 27. pag. 490. How long soever that Experiment may have been conceived in other parts (which is needless to contest) it is notorious that it had its Birth first of all in England; some ingenious persons of the Royal Society, having first started it there, several years ago, (as appears by their Journal) and that dextrous Anatomist, Dr. Lower, reduced it into practice, both by contriving a Method for the Operation, and by successfully executing the same, wherein he was soon overtaken by several happy Trials of the skilful hand of Dr. Edmund King, and others encouraged thereunto, by the said Society, which being notified to the World Numb. 6. 19. & 20. of these Transactions printed Novemb. 19. & Decemb. 17. 1666. the Experiment was soon after that time heard of to have been tried in forreign Parts, without hearing any thing of its having been conceived ten years ago.

In which relation, I must take notice that it doth not really appear in their Journal-books, that ever any such thing was started by any persons how ingenious soever of their Society; Dr. Lower being not then, nor long after in the History of the Royal Society reckoned as a Member of it. Nextthat [Page] the interpunction of the period is so equivocally placed and ponned, that the unwary Reader may think that Dr. Lower, as well as the others was encouraged to the trial by the Society. Whereas he was not, whatever the others were. Again, it is disingeniously said, that he was soon overtaken by several happy Trials of Dr. Edmund King, and others, encouraged thereto by the Society. Since it appears by the letter of Mr. Boyle, that the Society knew not how to do the thing in June, which Dr. Lower had effected in February, and the fame thereof at that time was spread over England. In July Dr. Lower acquainted the Society with the manner of the Transfusion, whereof Dr. Wallis had given the Society an imperfect account a little before of what he had seen Dr. Lower do at Oxford. So that for at least four or five months, the Members of the Society did not overtake Dr. Lower. But after they were acquainted with the contrivance, they invented it very clearly.

From hence it is easie for any man to judge with how much right Mr. Glanvill doth say, that both the injecting of Medicines, and transfusing blood into the veins of Animals, those Noble Experiments were the late Inventions of the SOCIETY. I shall now proceed to inquire into the Utility▪ of them; thereby to discover how noble and excellent they are, and what advantages we may hope to derive from them hereafter.

Because this Transfunding of blood hath hitherto been looked on as the primary Invention, and the most famed of any the Society were ever intitled unto: and that they themselves have particularly concerned themselves in asserting it to be their discovery, to the end that every Reader may the better be able to judge of the Controversie, without being forced to go seek out amongst the scattered transactions and elsewhere, several Histories that are material to the passing a right judgement; I shall crave pardon if I do relate particularly the matter of fact, and what hath been sundry times performed by the English, Italian and French Virtuosi, with every circumstance, both as to injecting of Medicines, and of blood into the veins.

[Page]As to the injecting of Medicaments into the veins, it is an Experiment that I am apt to think was first tried by the English, and as a curiosity, it was not unpleasant; but that it should be so advantageous a discovery as Mr. Glanvill represents it is like to be, I do not beleeve. There was a time when men had regard to their Consciences, and what could not be administred but upon prudential hopes of advantage to the Patient, no approved Physician durst, or would give to any sick person: but in this Age▪ such as ought to protest against it, are as forward as any to forget these considerations, and prompt men on to practices without either regarding whether the effect be not Murther in the Physicians, besides the ill consequences to the diseased. In the injecting of Medicaments, I must complain that neither the Operation of Medicaments immediately injected into the blood and veins is known, nor the dose; and consequently the Project not like to improve Physick at all, unless our Magistrates will licence men to try so many Experiments, even to the apparent hazard or certain death of the parties, and may regulate and authenticate the practice in such manner as becomes a Baconical Experiment: and to encourage Rational men to this procedure, there ought to be a greater deficiency in Physick, then yet appears, and a more hopeful success then any man can yet expect, supposed by this way. A Paynim told us,

Nulla unquam de morte hominis cunctatio longa est.

A sober Physician will look upon the act to be as indiscreet, as the Comedian describes love to be▪ Quaeres in se neque consilium, neque modum habet ullum, eam consilio regere non potes. That there is no probability that this way of Medicine can ever amount to any thing, appears from this consideration, that Liquors immediately injected into the blood, have a different Operation there, then when taken in by the Stomach: and that the mixtures of Liquors with blood upon Phlebotomy in a Pottinger, gives no light to the Experiment. As I shall now shew.

Seignior Fracassati Professor of Anatomy at Pisa tried [Page] these Experiments by injecting Medicaments.

1. Having injected into the jugular and crural veins of aTransact. num. 2 [...]. p. 490 491. Dog some Aqua fortis diluted, the Animal died presently: and being opened, all the blood in the vessels was coagulated and fixed: but that which was in the Viscera (which I dare not English Guts, but take it to denote the Heart, Liver, C [...]r. Fracassar. Ep, Anat. de cerebro. p. 252▪ 253▪ [...]54. Lungs, Spleen, where the blood passes extravasated through: though the Transactions render it Guts, and destroy the antithesis betwixt vasa and viscera) did not so easily coagulate. It was also observed that the great vessels were burst, or as it were cut asunder, yet have I known who hath put Aqua fortis into cooling▪ Juleps in Fevers, as others do spirit of Vitriol without any harm.

2. There was also infused into another Dog, some spirit of Vitriol, which had not so present an effect: for the Animal complained a great while, and foamed like Epilepticks, and had its respiration very thick: and observing the beating of his breast, one might easily judge, the Dog suffered much: who dying at last, his blood was found fixed in the veins, and grumous, resembling Soot: whereas in the Experiment with Aqua fortis (which may as easily be given inwardly as spirit of Nitre) the blood is not said to have been changed in its colour from other coagulated blood. It was also observable (though the Transactions minde it not) that the blood in this last Dog was not upon coagulation continuous in the veins, but broken and severed into parcels.

3. There was also injected into the jugular of another dog, some oyle of Sulphur per campanam, but he died not of it, though this infusion was several times tried on him. And the wound being closed, and the dog let go, he went into all the corners of the room, searching for meat, and having found some bones, he fell to gnawing them with a strange avidity, as if this Liquor had caused in him a great appetite.

4. Another dog, into whose veins some Oyle of Tartar per deliquium was injected, did not escape so well: for he complained much, and was altogether swoln; and then died: Being opened, the Spectators were surprised to finde his [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] blood not curdled, but on the contrary more thin and florid then ordinary.

5. Dr. Lower having extracted half a pound of blood outDr. Lower de motu Cordis pag. 1. 9. of the crural urine of a Mastiff dog, did inject the like quantity of warm milk into him; within half an hour the dog became very sick, breathed with difficulty, and seemed to labour much with his heart and diaphragme, and after to palpitate, tremble and sigh grievously, and at length miserably died. Upon dissection he found the vena cava, the ventricles of the heart, the vessels of the Lungs, and the Aorta full of blood and milk coagulated together, and the concretion was soTransact. num. 27. pag. 49 [...]. hard, that it was not easie to part it. This he tried but once. But Monsieur Dennys the French Physician saith, he tried it with a different success. For having syringed about a quarter of a pint of milk into the veins of an Animal (he tells not what) and having opened the same some time after, he found the milk so perfectly mixed with the blood, that there was not any place in which appeared the least footstep of tho whiteness of the milk, and all the blood was generally more liquid, and less apt to coagulate.

6. I received an account of some Experiments, from one much versed in these injections (which he may one day acquaint the world with) to this effect. That the infusion of Crocus Metallorum, injected in a less quantity then otherwise (viz., ℥ β) will work by vomit in a dog▪ almost presently, and very strangely, and make him grievously sick. Yet Dr.Mr. Boyle of the Usefulness of Nat. Philos. part. 2. p. 54, 55. Wren informs Mr. Boyle, that a moderate dose of the infusion of Crocus Metallorum did not much move the dog that he injected it into: but a large dose of two ounces or more wrought soon, and so violently, that he vomited up life and all. That a dog will take two drams of Opium into his Stomack, and seem never the worse, if you keep him from lying down half an hour after; but two drams of Poppy-seeds made into an Emulsion, and injected into his veins, will kill him presently.

7. Mr. Boyle saith, that he conveyed a small dose of theVid. supra p. 53, 54 tincture of Opium into a dog this way, which began to work so speedily upon the brain, that he was scarce untied before [Page] the Opium began to disclose its Narcotick quality; and almost as soon as he was upon his feet, he began to nod with his head, and reel and faulter in his place; but being kept awake, and in motion, by whipping up and down the Garden, after some time he came to himself again, and not only recovered but began to grow fat so manifestly, that'twas admired.

8. A certain German Count coming into England, relatesPhil. Jac. Sachs in Ocean▪ macromicrocosm. sect 155. an Experiment, which he saw in the presence of Pr. Rupert. After some blood taken from a dog, there was injected into him a small quantity (portiuncula) of Spanish wine; within sometime after the dog was perfectly drunk, being giddy, performing sundry ridiculous actions, then vomiting with a profound sleep.

9 Dr. Fabricius Physician to the City of Dantzick injectedTransact. numb. 30. pag. 564, 565. purgatives into humane bodies, with this effect. A strong bodied Souldier being dangerously infected with the Pox, and having grievous protuberations of the bones in his armes, two drams of a purgative liquor were injected: he presently complained of great pains in his elbows, and the little valves of his arm did swell so visibly, that it was necessary by a great compression on's fingers to stroke up that swelling towards the Patients shoulders. Some four hours after it began to work, not very troublesomely; and so it did the next day, in so much that the man had five good stools with it. Without any other remedies those protuberances were gone, nor are there any footsteps of the disease left. Two other trials were made upon women, the one a married woman of 35, the other a Servant-maid of 20 years old: both from the birth had been grievously troubled with Epileptick Fits, so that there was little hopes of curing them. There was injected into their veins a laxative rosin, dissolved in an Antiepileptical spirit; the first of these had gentle stools, some hours after the injection; and the next day the Fits recurred now and then, but much milder; and are since quite vanished. The Maid, she went the same day to stool four times, and several times the next: but by going into the Air, and taking cold, and not observing any diet, cast her self away. 'Tis remarkable, that it was common to all three, to vomit soon after the injection, and that extreamly, and frequently.

[Page]I have not time to adde any more of these kind of trials: but from hence it is evident, that things operate (where they do operate in the same manner) in a lesser dose, then when taken into the Stomach, and withVulgo hactenus a non [...]ucis sp [...]itus Vitrioli, & Sulphuris pro diversis r [...]b [...]s habiti sunt: adeo quidem ut nonnulli flores sulphuris & acidum ad c [...]sdem pulmonis merb [...]s exhiberent: sed valde imp [...]ite cum ac [...]a omnj [...] sin [...] pectori inimica, & spiritus Sulphuris & Vitri [...]i ess [...]ntia null [...] modo differant▪ sed ex cadem re generent [...]r, & parentu [...]. Etenim spiritus Vitrioli & Sulphuris eundem s [...]por [...]m, colorem & omnino easdem qualitates & [...]ff [...]ctus habent, & ad [...]osdem u [...]us in medicina adhibentur: nondumque inventus est, [...]ui pecu [...]iarem aliquam, seu manifestum seu occultam qualitatem in spiritu Sulphuris monstrare potuerit, quae non etiam in spiritu Vitrioli sit. Senne [...]t. in Paralipomen. ad institut. l. 5 part. 3 sect. 3 c. 5. more violence. That oftentimes such things as are innocently taken into the Stomach, are mortal when injected immediately into the blood. That although learned Physicians have made little or no difference betwixt the operation of Oyle of Sulphur, and that of Vitriol, yet by this Experiment there is found to be a quite different effect. So the Salt of Tartar (which is as innocent as Salt of Wormwood, or any such Salt) had a pernicious effect upon the dog, though discrepant from the others.

As to the Experiments of Dr. Fabritius, they do not give much of Encouragement to the Trial, for the one died which had the most of youth; and though her death be attributed to other circumstances and neglect;, yet either those are trivial, or for some (unknown) length of time there must be greater care then ordinarily after Physick, otherwise small accidents become mortal. And the extreme and frequent vomitings (which here happen from the sufferings of the Heart, and not the Stomack) render the course more hazardous to tender Stomachs, and weak Constitutions, then Mr. Glanvill suggests. So that the loathings of the Stomach are not prevented by this way, nor the success very inviting (how speedy soever) upon those Experiments any more then from the Churlish Physiek of the ancient and moderate Chymists of Mr. Odored's party, which wise-men will not imitate. I wonder the laxative Solutions were not set down that we might judge of their strength: and that the way of dieting and ordering of them afterwards was omitted: whereas the knowledge thereof might avail to prevent the ill consequence which befel the Maid.

I shall now consider the effects which the several Liquors [Page] have upon a mixture with the blood, when taken warm in a Pottinger, and those affused to it. This is a Practice which the Honourable Mr. Robert Boyle imparted to the Royal Society in December 1664. and thinks that Fracassati may have taken his hint from it, to inject those Liquors: but I finde a Letter from Leyden sent to Bartholinus, Dated Jan. 9. 1662. in which there are several Experiments of that kind, which I shall set down presently. If I placed any great value upon the Experiment, I could put in for the Practiser of it at Stratford upon Avon in 1660. and prove that I made some Solutions of Salt of Ash, Salt of Wormwood, and Salt of Tartar, and received the blood of sheep into the glasses in which they were, to try the differences betwixt those Salts, whether they were of the same nature (so that it was indifferent whether one used Salt of Wormwood, Carduus Benedictus, Yarrow, or Mugwort) or that there were any difference. Which last Angela Sala denies, though otherAngelus Sal [...] Tartaralog. sect. 3 c 2. p. 133. Chymists affirm it. But after that I had enquired into that Controversie by several ways, I went to Jamaica and neglected the Experiment. But since that I see that every unprofitable trifle, becomes a famous and noble Experiment, and if it bring no present Emolument, yet at least it becomes Luciferous, and (as they say) puts us in the Prospect of several great advantages; at least, more and greater things will be disclosed by it, when future ingenuity and diligence hath improved and perfected the invention. Since that time I have made many Essays about the mixture of sundry Liquors, with the blood of Sheep, Lambs, Calves, Cows, Oxen, Hogs, Poultry, and that in several manners.

I have received the blood of several creatures upon warm solutions of sundry Salts, of Allom, impure Salt-peter, Sal Prunellae, Salt of Nitre, upon solution of the several Vitriols; upon Steel-wine, Vomitive wine, Sack, French wine, and Malaga, upon spirit of wine, spirit of Cider, and spirit of the grounds of Beer; upon warm Urine, upon mixtures with spirit of Vitriol, and oyl of Sulphur, and Juice of Lemons, and Oranges, upon the rare liquor os Salt-peter; upon it, after it hath passed the Ashes, and upon the Mothers of it, and many other trials with oyle of Wormwood, Amber, &c. dissolved in spirit of wine.

[Page]I have also poured upon the Mass, after it hath coagulated several acid spirits, before and after the Serum was separated from it.

I have also taken the separated Serum, and affused spirit of Vitriol to some; to others spirits of Harts-horn, and other spirituous waters, and I have affused to those that had a mixture of the spirit of Harts-horn some acid spirits, and other liquors to see the changes.

I shall not now set down the several Phaenomena, and observations I made, not having leisure to digest them all, nor being willing to dismember a discourse I intend about the nature of blood and Phlebotomy, in which I shall not only treat of all these things, but adde many other observations, from the burning of blood, and the Serum, which any man may do, without feeling any thing by sympathy, notwithstanding the whimseys of Helmont, and that great Virtuoso Sir Kenelme Digby. I have done it fourty times in Men, Women, and Children, to observe those varieties in blood, which never entred into the heads of our Experimentators Though Dr. Walter Needham, my learned School-fellow, a Member of the Society, deny that blood will burn, Carbonibus injectus Disqui [...]it, de soetu. pag. 130. sanguis flammam non facile concipit, sed potius torretur in grumum. Yet if any one please but to take a piece of the coagulated Mass of blood, and lay it on a Fire shovell, and so place it in an hot fire, that the coales arch round about it, but touch it not: after he hath observed the great variety of its intumescence, and the crackling of divers salts, as it were decrepitating, it will take flame commonly when dry, and burn with a great variety of Phaenomena: some will not flame at all, though brought to ignition: there will be also variety in the remaining Cinis, as to its saltness. In the like manner set the Serum to coagulate on the coals, and then burn it. I have also burned the blood and Serum, after it hath been mixed with acid liquors. By this trial will appear more then can be imagined as to the differences of the blood of Animals, and of young and old Animals, I will endeavour to finish that Tractate, wherein there will be observations about the colour of blood, and melancholique, and [Page] pituitous, and crimson parts; and a certain pellicle which generates by the Air on the top of most blood, if it stand 24 houres; which sometimes is as firme as those tunicles that encompass the Liver, or Kidneys. Observations upon that, and upon the turning of the coagulated Mass, and its becoming red again, though not so floridly. Trials upon that in vessels cover'd, that it is not from the air, in opposition to the Fracassati.

I will not mention any thing hereof now, but having imparted some observations to some, and knowing what plagiaries some men are, I thought fitting to publish thus much, that they might not pretend to the inventions, each whereof were enough to make one of them proud, and fill the Transactions. Yet I will say this, That I never had put my self upon these trials, but out of envy and indignation against them, and the Transfusion of blood, about which they made such ado every where. I shall promise one thing, that Mr. Boyle is very much mistaken in, imagining that there is a great difference betwixt the effects of Medicaments, when mixed with the warm blood of an Animal out of the veins and in them, as will appear by the mixture of milk already specified, and that of the Salt of Tartar, which will follow out of the Letter of Borrichius.

Experiments upon the mixture of Liquors, with the warm blood of Animals, taken out by Phlebotomy.

1. By putting into the warm blood, as it came from Animals, Transact. numb. 29. p. 552. a little Aqua fortis, or Oyle of Vitriol, or spirit of Salt, (these being the most usual and acid menstruums) Mr. Boyle observed, that the blood not only would presently lose its pure colour, and become of a dirty one, but in a trice also be coagulated; whereas some, if fine urinous spirit, such as the spirit of Sal Armoniack, were mingled with the warm blood, it would not only not curdle it, or imbase its colour, but make it look rather more florid then before, and both keep it fluid, and preserve it from putrefaction for a long time.

[Page]2. The Learned and Inquisitive Man Olaus Borrichius, havingTho. Bartholin. cp. Centur. 3 cp. 97. pag. 421, 4 [...]2 cut up a dog alive, made these observations. He took five glasses, and placed them in order, putting into the one spirit of vinegar, into another oyl of Tartar per deliquium, into a third a Solution of Allom, into a fourth spirit of Salt Armoniack, into a fifth spirit of wine; into each of the Glasses, he suffered the blood of the Crural Artery to run. After some time he come to look upon his Glasses, but the next day the observation was most perspicuous. That Glass which had the spirit of vinegar in it, itInsp [...]ximus post intervallum & plenius postridie omnia: Observavimus sanguinem, [...]ui affusus erat spiritus aceti, redditum nigricantem instar sanguinis Melancholicorum, sedimento crasso, copioso, atro, supernatantem liquorem, paene etiam atrum. Cui affusum oleum salis tartari, redditum coloris sic satis floridi, sed turbidiorem liquorem. sedimentum nullum, ramenta tantum fibrillarum instar hinc inde conspicua. Cui affusa solutio aluminis, redditum instar putidae & subcineritiae put [...]ilaginis, omni sanguinis colore pror [...]us abolito. Cui affusus spiritus v [...]ni, redditum turbidiorem, quam cui oleum salis tartari. Cui spiritus salis Armoniaci, redditum omnium elegantissimum, colore floridum, tenuem substantia, in [...]undo sedimentum diaphanum instar Galatinae ri [...]ium. was become black like to the blood of Melancholique persons, with a thick and copious black sediment, and that liquor which was on the top, was blackish.

Where the Oyl of Tartar was, the colour was pretty florid, but the liquor more turbid, no sediment at all, only some filements, like little fibres floated in it conspicuously, here and there.

Where the Solution of Allom was, there all seemed like a subcineritious or dirty-coloured putrilage, there being no reliques of the crimson colour of blood to be seen.

Where the spirit of wine was, there the liquor was more turbid then that which had the Oyl of Tartar in it.

Where the spirit of salt Armoniack was, that was of the most beautiful colour of all, being very florid, of a thin consistence, with a diaphanous sediment like to the gelly of currants.

This observation he also tells Bartholinus, that he had in like manner made the preceding Summer.

Out of all which it most evidently appears how nice a thing the blood is, and how small mixtures alter the colour and texture of it: and what consequences may follow upon such alteration of its consistence, and particular texture, no man knows; but that they may be very bad (even where innocent, and wholesom Medicaments are affused) is evident out of what I have set down.

[Page]It is also as manifest, that there are in the bodies of men and women solutions or liquors imbued with sundry salts, as aluminous, acid, and vitriolate, &c. which when they shall mix with the injected blood, what the issue may be, I leave the Prudent to conjecture. Certain it is, that for these considerations specified (reserving my own Experiments to my self) none but inconsiderate Quacksalvers would put a Patient upon the trial of injecting of Medicaments, or transfusing of blood. It is a course Nature (whose Servants and Imitators Physicians hitherto were) never prompted us unto: Having taken so many courses whereby blood might at any time of need issue out of the veins and arteries in sundry parts of the body: But especially provided that nothing might immediately come into the veins. Whatever comes into the veins by the Stomach, suffers a great alteration first, and whatsoever is noxious, either separates from it there and in the guts, or is mortified, or mitigated so as to be innocent, and agreeable to the nature of the veins. Which particular nature of the sanguiferous vessels, is that which in the dead keeps its own blood fluid, and in the living contributes soVide ep. Walaei de motu [...]angu. much to the motion of it, that if you make a stop and intercept the impulse of the subsequent blood, yet will the other continue its course. But what will the effect be of Heterogeneous blood? For undoubtedly the nature of the veins is agreeable to the blood, and communicates its impurities and vertue, as the cask doth to the wine. But further, since the blood is to pass through the porosities of the Liver and Lungs, and capillary veins and arteries, how will they agree with the new blood. (it being evident upon mixture of Liquors, and upon burning, that there is a difference in the fibrosity of the bloods, and consistence of the several Serums) or how will that circulate which results from the mixture, I know not, but certain it is, that the ill consequence is almost, if not absolutely past remedy.

In fine, what is it that is aimed at in this Transfusion? is it the rectifying the mass of blood (suppose seventeen pound in a body) with the affusion of a few ounces, or a pound of Lambs blood? [Page] They may as soon rectifie as much vinegar, or decayed wine, with the like proportion of good wine? would they amend the impurities of the vessels? there is the same difficulty as before. That which they transfuse is not a Chymical spirit, but an impure, and heterogeneous mixture, fitted by different digestions and ferments to a different nourishment of another Animal, with different excrements resulting from it. It is in the Stomach and first digestion where food is so concocted by the Humane heat, or Acidity, as to turn to a chyle adequate to the nourishment of man, and generating such blood, and such excrements, as are the result of such a concoction as is agreeable to the nature of man. And so it is in all creatures: Thus we see, that in different Animals different Excrements are generated, nor is it to be doubted but that the concoctive principle differs as much in a dog, or cat, as do those excrements which differ much from those of men, though bothOtto Tachenius Hippocr. med. clavis c. 9. p. 201. eat the same meat. Sicut acidus spiritus quilibet animam inseparabiliter in ventre suo portat, atque in illud corpus, cu [...]infunditur, dominium suscipit, illudque confestim juxta sui naturam format: hinc spiritus salis in Alcali Tartari fusus statim sibi format corpus salinum propriae naturae consentaneum, & fit sal: & aceti spiritus, vel acetum distillatum in eodem Alcali tartari sibi format corpus adaequatum suae propriae naturae, & fit tartarus vini, & sic de vitriolo, & reliquis acidis: Ita quoque acidum Stomachi humani, cum apprehendit panem, vel quicquam alibile, in quod dominari possit, illud convertit & commutat in chylum, & exinde in carnem humanam: & eundem panem Acidum Stomachi canini convertit & transmutat in carnem caninam: uti & de reliquis viventibus quotidie docemur, eo quod natura in omnibus iisdem instrumentis operatur. If the Case be such, and that the blood transfused hath received those impregnations of vitality which are agreeable to the nature of the Animal whence it is transfused, and is qualified to generate such nourishment, and such excrements as are the consequences of those digestive characters (if I may so call them) and impressions; How can we imagine that such blood being immediately transfused into [Page] our veins, without those previous alimental sigillations and digestions, produce those effects which are to be expected in humane bodies, and are (though irrationally) in this case wished for.

But perhaps they think to atchieve their design, by introducing a new texture in the vitiated blood, and vessels, or fermentation, whereupon should ensue the amendment. II had an intention to have set down at large all the Stories relating to the Transfusion of blood, with remarks upon them: but I was so much pressed to conclude, and had so little leisure to dispatch it in that manner at that time, that the Reader must be cont [...]nt with this brief, but I think substantial [...]eply to all that hath yet been said. perceive indeed by their stories a new fermentation, that the dogs piss blood (no desirable or trivial accident!) But what a little time is there for the blood to pass unto the heart, and mix with those other Liquors, and ascending blood, and so to pass into the Heart and Lungs? How do they know that the blood they transfuse is good? Upon burning they shall finde a difference in blood of beasts; and a different taste and coagulation in the Serum. Besides, that the blood of young Animals is generally less balsamical and inflammable, of another texture and colour, the Serum very saline; and in a word, exceeding different from what is in men and women of years. And in the blood of men and women, there are often defects not to be perceived but by coagulating and burning of the Serum and blood. I have taken the Serum of a Maid seemingly healthful, only pained at Stomach, and abounding in blood, it coagulated and looked like tallow, and would not burn at all, and smelt noisomely after coagulation, not before. I have several strange instances of this kind. If there be such indiscernable causes of distempers, and mixtures in blood of persons that are not well, if they neither know what they aim at in transfusing in, nor what they transfuse, Let Mr. Glanvill talk of great Advantages to be expected, and let them try it for me. Sure I am that the Transactions reportSee the Stories in the Philosophical Transactions. an Untruth, in saying that Coga was ever the better for it: I am told his Arm was strangely ill after it, and difficultly cured: and if all the great likelihood of Advantages from Transfusion that are in their present Prospect, arise from no other grounds, they are very improbable. The Parliament of Paris have forbid it to be prosecuted but by the allowance of the Parisian Faculty of Physicians. A [Page] Swedish Baron died upon it: and to argue from the cures of Madmen, orI remember they say that it is not expressed, how the Transfusion was practised upon the Baron Bond, nor after how long time it was repeated, when he died But this is no excuse for them; for they have fixed no r [...]les or circumstances whereby to regulate the opera [...]i [...]n▪ those are to be learned by frequent Experiments, and▪ It may be, th [...] death of more Patients. Next, it is not to be doubted, but that He that did it might act as cautiously as they, for his own credit, and the credit [...]f the trial, and the quality of the Person. It concerns them to procure an Authentick Narration of the th [...]ng▪ and what appeared upon his being embowell [...]d from what they suffer without hurt, is not for a Physician, but for one that deserves to be sent to Bedlam: for mad people endures a thousand ills, and strong Physick, such as others cannot endure: and if they find any amendment sometimes by uncouth means, it is by accident, as it makes them ill, which sometimes prove their recovery.

As for dogs, they cannot declare what they suffer: but I am in haste, and refer my Reader to the perusal of the Histories in the Transactions: in which what I last objected, is all confessed: and if after all I have said, he find encouragement to try a remedy, that hath sometimes proved not unfortunate, (but is always rash) let him do it for me.

I am satisfied, That the operation carries more of terror (and many swoon upon bleeding) then a potion, or Galenical Physick; and that the greatest part of our distempers do not arise from the scarcity, or malignant tempers, and corruption of our blood, is as manifest as can be; more arise from the depraved motion, and redundancy of the blood, and serosities in and about the brain, and the laxity and strictness of the habit and pores of the body; and in these cases Transfusion is no remedy; much less in malignant diseases, in which to let blood is often mortal, commonly dangerous; and it always must be antecedent to Transfusion, excepting only the scarcity of blood; in which case what strength is there to assimilate, or ferment with the new blood.

As to the Transfusion of blood in Pleurisies, the attempt is very ridiculous, considering what an Ebullition and Inflammation of the blood there is then in the Lungs, whither the transfused blood immediately flows: what extravasated serosities do afflict those parts? how unfit are they for any seasonable fermentation? And in the Small Pox, how few are [Page] they in England which allow of Phlebotomy in that disease at all? and how irrational must that Transfusion seem, which disturbs and diverts nature in her present work? what hazard must the Patient run amidst a Fever, and that violent commotion of humors which afflicts his head, back, heart and lungs at that time, should he besides all other accidents fall into pissing of blood, a symptom so dangerous in that disease, and so usual a consequent of this Operation.

Having dispatched these papers thus far: the length of time since they were sent to London to be transcribed, perused, and several insertions made, according as my memory, amidst a constant employment, suggested any thing new unto me, and the delay of the Printing till Michaelmass-Tearm, gives me an opportunity to relate some Observations I made at Bath, during my stay there this Summer: As famous as the Bathes are, and of as general an use as they are (there being no better Remedy in the world for the Scurvey them the Cross-Bath regularly pursued, and as it might be, I cannot say is commonly practised) yet have not our Experimental Philosophers made any Inquiries into its nature and qualiti [...]s: not a man of them ever so much as tried the mixing of several liquors and spirits with the water: as I did, and found no change upon the mixture of Acid spirits: but the urinous and volatile spirits of Sal Armoniack (drawn the Leiden-way) and Harts-horn did change the water of the Pump in the Cross-Bath (which ariseth from the hot Bath) into a lacteous colour and opacity, insomuch that it represented an Almond-milk, and after a time there precipitated to the bottom an insipid Magistery resembling Burnt Harts-horn finely powdered: the precipitated powder was more copious in the affusion of the spirit of Sal Armoniack, then that of spirit of Harts-horn: and the former in that mixture lost its urinous smell, (and made no unpleasant, but an unctuous, soft, emulsion-like drink) which the other retained.

Not a man of them ever tried whether the several Bath-water would coagulate milk: which I tried first, and found that the Kings-Bath-water makes Posset with a soft curd, and whitish posset-drink, which will not become clear: the Cross-Bath [Page] makes an hard eurd, a clean but whitish-posset-drink: the Pump-water of the Cross-Bath (which ariseth from the neighbouring hot Bath) yields an hard curd, a clear and very green posset-drink; which being drunk by a woman that gave suck bred a great deal of milk (more then fennel posset-drink) and made her break abundance of winde, which those usually do that drink the Bath-waters. And I believe this way of giving the Bath-waters might be no small improvement of Physick, were those courses taken there, and that method which those that understnad the ancient and modern Bathes, and waters that are drunk, might easily pitch upon: but this is above the reading of our Comical Wits.

I could find no grounds to believe there was any sulphur, or bitumen in the Baths: but rather

Mr. Ch Hotham, when I shewed him some of the extracted Salt, did conceive it to be a mixture of common Salt, and vitriol of Iron.

When I was there, a Spring of the Cross-Bath being lost, they digg'd for it▪ I tasted the Earth, but could finde nothing nitrous in it: opening the gutter by which that Bath emp [...]ies it self, we found the passage crusted very thick, with a white lapideous concretion, rough and unequal in the surface, with several crystals fixed in it, resembling those of cream of Tartar: to taste, it was insipid, an [...] of substance like to what precipitates with [...]rinous spirits in the water: but after it had [...]en on the tongue a while, some p [...]eces discovered a taste exactly like cream of Tartar, others an adstriction somewhat vitrio [...]ine. I brought some away, and intend to examine it further.

some odd Alcali mixed with the vitriol of Iron: I extracted the Salts by evaporation of two gallons of the Cross-Bath-water; and having reduced them to three quarts I set it to shoot; but there was no appearance of salt-peter at all: then I evaporated it to three-pints, but still neither salt-peter, or any other salt appeared: then I evaporated it quite away; and then I had about two ounces of a dark▪ coloured salt, which at first resembled cream of Tartar somewhat in taste; but having lien longer on the tongue, it resembled very much the Vitriolum Mortis, with some more Alcalisate taste: I performed the Operation both in Iron and Glass vessels with little difference of the taste, or quantity of salt: some of the said salt dissolving into a moisture in the air did eat off the writing upon such papers as it fell, and turned the paper yellow all over, and rotted it. I made a Lixivium with the Cross-Bath water, and evaporated that, thinking that if there were any unctuous matter in the water, it might hinder the discovery of the Nitre in its shooting; but neither could▪ I finde any thing of Nitre this way: [Page] but still there was a taste of the Vitriolum Mortis in the salt: and one Mr. Berenclaw a Practitioner there assured me, that he had known the Bath-water drunk, and to have tinged the Excrements black, but I cannot avow the truth of that.

I inquired about the truth of what Dr. Mearn had writ about the Stone he took up, upon Lands-down, which being infused in water produced a resembling heat and taste to what is in the Bath: But Dr. Maplet, an inquisitive and learned Physician there, who was with Dr. Mearn then, and had some of the mineral stone, assured me it was a lime-stone: so did Mr. Chapman an observing Apothecary there, who likewise saw the Stone, and tasted the infusion. In fine, where Dr. Me [...]ra took up that Stone, any man may take up a thousand, they not being cast out of the Earth, but dropped out of the lime-carts which pass that way into Bathe, the Kills being thereabouts.

The stones in the bottom of the Cross-Bath, many are of reddish rusty colour, others green: but concerning the Bathe, I may next Summer, during my stay there, in the midst of June and July (if God give me life and health) make a further Narrative: I only mention this to prevent the Virtuosi from usurping upon my discoveries and intendments. Yet to do them some justice, I was told that in some of their Transactions, ▪they have this observation about Bathe, that if any person that is drunk go in there, the Bath will make him sober: If any that is in the Bath drink freely there, it will cause him to be presently drunk, with less drink by far then if he were cut of it. This report is worthy of our Philosophers, and advanceth their intelligence above the credit that Aristotle and his Hunters deserve. The first part is defective, for it should have been added that the drunk person must sit still, and sweat soundly: if he stir up and down or swim, he shall be more sick then if he had never come in. The second part is notoriously f [...]lse, and all the Bath-Guides and others that have tried it▪ avow, that 'tis usual for the Townsmen to sit some hours and drink in the Parlour of the Queens-Bath, and never be drunk: and they say, a man that sweats there shall bear much more drink, then if he were out of the Bath: which I thought rational and agreeable to what I had observ'd in the Indies, where men sweat and have more drink then in England, and stronger.

[Page]But I come now to that Case, for which I adde this Discourse, and that is, Observations upon the mixture of the Bath-water and other Liquors with blood, and the Phaenomena thereupon, which, though I might reserve for that other discourse of mine about Phlebotomy, yet I will oblige my Reader with some of those Curiosities here, especially since it will give him occasion to reflect how facile it is to multiply such Experiments, and how negligent they are who pretend to be the grand Observators of this Age.

When I went to make use of the Bath, amongst other Preparatives thereto (which are better taken upon the place, then at a distance) I caused my self to be let blood, and being willing to improve that occasion as well for my instruction, as health, I caused several Venice-Glasses to be filled with several liquors, each liquor amounting to some three ounces, and into each glass I suffered to run as much as half an ounce of blood, or little more; taking no other measure, then that the whole liquor seemed of a deep blood red. The Phaenomena thereupon were these ensuing, being observed presently after I had bound up my arm, and was in condition to write.

1. That Glass which contained the spirit of Sal Armoniack (drawn the Leiden-way) kept of an equal consistence from top to bottom, being of a deep red, and not transparent, like Tent-wine.

2. Into two several Glasses I had dissolved the Salts of Ash and Wormwood, half a dram in three ounces of water; the solutions of these two Salts shewed no difference at all; the top, after some space, was of a florid red, (such as is visible in watrish blood) for about a quarter of an inch: the bottom was of a more dark red, and resembled Tent-wine.

3. A foutth Glass held Oleum Tartari per deliquium: the blood and that liquor did not first mix, but were as two distinct liquors, notwithstanding that the blood had streamed into the Glass: After a while the blood and oyle mixed together, and it all became of a deep red from top to bottom; the surface only was transparent, and of a brighter red, as that of the other Alcalisate Liquors, but not so far downwards: the rest was as Tent-wine.

[Page]4. I dissolved half a dram of Allom in three ounces of water, and upon bleeding thereupon, all the crimson of the blood was immediately destroyed, and it became almost as black as Ink: after a little space towards the surface it cleared up: there were certain bubbles on the top that continued the redness.

5. Another Glass held a quantity of the Kings-Bath water, the blood that did stream into it, appeared of a dark red, but transparent, as deep Bourdeaux wine shews: a little below the surface it was deeply red, not transparent, but like Tent wine.

6. The Cross-Bath altered little from the Kings-Bath, saving that the transparency of the surface extended it self downwards to a greater profundity then the other.

7. A Solution of half a dram of Sal prunellae, yielded a blood on the surface like to that of Salt of Wormwood, but not to so deep a descent: otherwise it was of the colour and consistence of Tent wine.

After they had stood in the window about five houres, I returned and observed these Phaenomena.

1. That with the spirit of Sal Armoniack continued like Tent-wine, only the uppermost part of it to the thickness of a barley-corn, was diaphanous as deep Bourdeaux-wine.

2. That with the Sal prunellae coagulated into a Mass, shrunk from the sides of the Glass, and sunk to the bottom, leaving them super-natant water of a pale citrine colour; the Mass it self being of a florid red on the surface, and of a deep red, not blackish, to the bottom, that I could perceive.

3. That with the Cross-Bath water changed not, but seemed thick as Tent-wine, the upper part being diaphanous, and like deep Bourdeaux-wine?

4. That with the Kings-Bath water changed not; only the diaphanous surface extended not it self downwards so far as the other Bath-water did.

5. The Solution of Allom continued all fluid and black; no coagulated mass therein: but the bubbles had lost [Page] their crimson-colour, and were become cineritious▪

6. That with the Salt of Wormwood resembled deep Bourdeaux wine, but was less diaphanous a little below the surface: The surface extended downwards to the length of a barley corn with a perfect transparency.

7. That wherein was the Sal fraxini was diaphanous to the bottom; no innatant filaments or coagulated mass in it: But the surface to the length of a barley-corn was like decayed Claret made with a mixture of white and red wine: the residue was deeper like that of Bourdeaux.

8. That with the oleum Tartari per deliquium was diaphanous to the length of a barley-corn, and of the colour of Bourdeaux wine: the lower part un-coagulated, and like Tent wine.

9. It is to be noted, that the reflexion of the Glasses in all the Liquors, they being held up to the light, (except the spirit of Sal Armoniack) did create a corona of several colours, mixt with green, blew, and so as not one resembled the other. That with the oleum Tartari per deliquium resembled the blew in Bourdeaux wine, with an eye of green.

I had forgot to relate how I kept some of the blood in a separate Pottinger; and it seemed excellently well coloured; when it coagulated, the top was of a due red, the bottom blackish red; the serum of a due transparency and proportion, and not tinged to citrine colour: and coagulated all as the white of an egge over a gentle fire.

I poured also upon the blood in two other Pottingers; upon the one spirit of Harts-horn; on the other spirit of Sal Armoniack, but not much: perhaps a dram or more: that with the spirit of Harts-horn at first seemed more florid, then that with the spirit of Sal Armoniack: both coagulated into Masses after a while, and were then both of one colour on the surface: but that with the spirit of Sal Armoniack coagulated its Mass so as to break from the sides: that with the spirit of Harts-horn did not break from the sides; whether the blood of one, and the other might differ, I know not; but both immediately followed one the other. That blood which had nothing mixed with it, after coagulation, differed [Page] not from the other two, though they were covered over with the spirits as soon as they were taken, and that exposed only to the Air.

After a while upon the surface of that with the Kings-Bath-water, there was a kind of fatty cremor which covered the whole surface; and so on that with the Queens-Bath-water: the others had none at all.

On Munday after dinner, the next day after I had bled, I came to observe again; and found,

1. That with the Sal fraxini to be more and more diaphanous, resembling Bourdeaux wine: that with the Sal abscynthii less diaphanous, but red still.

2. I observed the Solution of Allom, and however it looked black, yet being held in a clear light, one might discover in it visible appearances of a deep red. I poured on it some spirit of Sal Armoniack, to see if it would restore the colour: but in stead of that the liquor coagulated presently into little massulae or flakes, resembling raw flesh when the blood is washed out.

3. There was no alteration in that with the spirit of Sal Armoniack.

4. That with the Queens-Bath-water continued more diaphanously red towards the top: but that with the Kings-Bath water, did not lose its redness, though it were not diaphanous near the surface.

5. Of the two Pottingers in which were the spirits of Harts horn, and Sal Armoniack, though both were coagulated, yet that with the spirit of Sal Armoniack was the most florid.

6. That with the Oleum Tartari▪ per deliquium continued red, but lost its diaphaneity at the top almost quite.

7. That with the Sal prunellae after the coagulated Mass had subsided, had on the top of it in the middle of the Glass, to the bredth of six-pence, a concrete gelly, exactly resembling that of the clearest Harts-horn, not boyled up to its greatest heighth; [Page] from hence protended certain filaments, with which it was fastned to the mass of blood, which was buoyed up thereby, so that it touched not the bottom; the jelly was insipid and stuck to my finger, when I touched it: whether that little which did so adhere took off from the equipollency of the two bodies; or whether I broke casually some of the protended filaments, or from what other cause I know not; but after a while the Mass sunk quite to the bottom, and drew the gelatine below the surface of the water.

8. Upon the pouring out of the blood, that with the Queens-Bath water happened to seem of a pure Claret, like Bourdeaux wine, no setling, or floating filaments, but something red, which resembled exactly the flying Lee in bo [...]led Claret.

9. That of the Kings-Bath-water appeared as the former, only at the latter end, as it was poured out, there was a certain gelutine mixed with it, and sticking to the sides, that for colour and consistence exactly resembled the jelly of red currants.

10. That with the spirit of Sal Armoniack upon effus [...]on, appeared like deep Bourdeaux wine, and so from top to bottom without any alteration.

11. Upon the effusion of that with the salt of Wormwood, it appeared also like to Bourdeaux wine; but towards the bottom there was Gelatine red, like that of red currants, more tenacious and in greater quantity then was in that mixture with the Kings-Bath-water.

12. That with the sal fraxini poured out like common or less deep Claret: at the bottom there was no Gelatine, but it ran a little thicker like to Tent wine.

13. That with the Oleum Tartari per deliquium, upon its first effusion ran like Claret a little decayed: but the most of it dropped, as if it were a weak Gelatine, and so continued to the last, being almost of as deep colour as a ripe Mulberry; I poured upon some of the said jelly almost as much of the spirit of Sal Armoniack, and it immediately dissolved all the jelly, and made it fluid, yet so as that the bloody crassam [...]nt appeared unequally mixed, some parts being more deep and opacous then others.

[Page]14. I took the Pottinger in which was the blood with the spirit of Harts-horn affused to it, having separated the mass from the sides of it, I poured out the Serum, which was as black as common Ink: the surface was red, but not so florid as that with the affused spirit of Sal Armoniack: most of the melancholy blood seemed dissolved into that black Serum, the super-incumbent mass being thin.

15. That blood on which the spirit of Sal Armoniack was poured in the Pottinger, appeared from top to bottom red, only in the bottom there were some little spots of a blackish and darker red then the other parts: on the surface there was a Gelatinous pellicle generated: the Serum was of a citrine colour: the consistence of the coagulated mass of blood here was more tenacious and fibrous then in that other Pottinger with the affused spirit of Harts-horn: There was no pellicle discoverable upon that with the spirit of Harts-horn; upon that with the spirit of Sal Armoniack so tough an one, that it would bear up a little way in your hand the whole mass of blood adhering to it.

16. The blood which was kept in a Pottinger without any mixture, being placed in an arched fire on a fire-shovel burned with a bright and continued flame, as if it had been Turpentine, but crackled like a green bay-leaf cast into the fire: and so it did being cast immediately into the fire, but the crackling was less durable, by reason of the vivid fire into which it was cast. It is to be noted that this pottinger having been removed into the Sunne, all the Serum was exhaled or incorporated into the mass, which was grown to the bottom of the Pottinger, and dried there, so that I scraped it off: whether that might adde to the Phaenomena I know not.

17. The blood in that Pottinger where the spirit of Hartshorn was affused, being taken out and placed in an arched fire, rose up with an equal intumescence, as a cake doth in an Oven; it crackled much less then the unmixed mass of blood: It burned slowly, with a continual but not vivid flame, and in such a manner as if the mass had never taken fire, but only the smoke issuing from it; for one might easily see an interstice betwixt the mass and hovering flame all the [Page] while, till it came to a perfect Ignition.

18. The mass which had spirit of Sal Armoniack affused unto it, being placed in an arched fire, did rise with an equal intumescence, but greater then that with the spirit of Harts-horn: it crackled less then that with spirit of Hartshorn: the flame at first resembled that of the other; afterwards instead of hovering about, it seemed to issue immediately from the blood, and not to appear like a smoke that took fire within the arch; the flame then was vivid, and continued.

19. The fire being an exceeding quick fire, I poured some of the serous blood that was in the Pottinger, impregnated with the affusion of the spirit of Sal Armoniack, and as it dried it took fire presently, the flame resembled that of the former mass, only it wasted faster then that, being cast upon so quick a fire: The black Serum of the coagulated mass with affused spirit of Harts-horn, though cast into the same fire, would scarce burn at all.

20. I took some of the mass that was impregnated with the Sal prunellae, and placed it in an arched fire (the Serum or Solution poured off from it was insipid) it rose with an unequal intumescence copling, like a loaf, in the midst: I brought it to a perfect ignition and coale, yet did it not crackle at all, neither burn till the last, and then but a little, and with an interrupted flame which seised now on this, now on that part: nay, there was but very little sign of any Sal prunellae in it to sputter as it burned.

21. I told you how I poured some spirit of Sal Armoniack, upon the mixture of blood and a Solution of Allom, and of the odd coagulation that hapned thereupon into white massulae which seemed like flesh when the blood is wasted out of it: I took of those incoherent flakes or massulae, and putting them to burn in an arched fire upon the fire-shovell, it run all off, upon a great ebullition, into the fire: I took the red hot fire-shovell, and placed some more upon it, which seemed to burn as Allom doth in the like case, and so stayed on it: but being put into the arched fire, and brought to ignition, it would neither flame, nor crackle, nor left any visible quantity [Page] of coale or ashes behinde it, as if it had almost all evaporated.

22. These were the Phaenomena which I had opportunity to take notice of at that time: but I also left a Solution of the Alcali of Nitre of about three ounces with the Apothecary, if any else came to bleed there in my absence: upon bleeding, an healthy young man that was somewhat indisposed, some was suffered to stream into that Solution: at first it was of a florid red, but paler then blood usually is, resembling a bastard-scarlet: after some days standing I found it of a deeper red from top to bottom: one half of it was transparent like to the duller and more decayed sort of Claret: the other half seemed like Tent-wine, not diaphanous: on the surface there was a cremor which extended it self almost all over it: Upon pouring it out, it appeared all to be of a blood-red, only that which ran last was of a deeper dye: at the bottom there was a kinde of Gelatine like to that of red Currants, which rendred the one half of it opacous: it was no way dis-coloured, nor unequally mixt: the spirit of Sal Armoniack being poured on it, did render it fluid presently and transparent.

Having occasion after some weeks stay at the Bath, to ride in extream hot weather above 200 miles in a few days, and being tired with watching and the journey, and being wet very much with a great shower of rain at my return, I went immediately into the Cross-Bath for half an hour, to prevent any inconveniences that might befal me upon such travel: but at my coming out of the Bath I felt so violent a defluxion into my throat, and the adjacent Glandules, that I apprehended some danger of a Squinoncy, which yet I avoided by bleeding, purging, and other means together, with the use of the same Bath after all: when I was to bleed, I was willing to try some further Experiments in Liquers, different from the former, and the Observations I made were these.

1. I caused two veins to be opened in the left arm at once, and received one Pottinger out of the Mediana, and the other out of the Cephalica: my intent in that was to observe (as I had done once before in my self) whether the blood of two veins in the same arm would yield different blood: if so, then I thought that it might not be indifferent in what vein a man bleeds, though they all arise from one trunk of the vena cava; and that we might justly have regard to those cautions of our observing Ancestors, not to bleed those veins promiscuously, but some in one case, and some in another. I was confirmed in those sentiments by the Phaenomena I met with a second time in the trial, as other observations have satisfied me about the doctrine of revulsion, and its truth. Having taken one Pottinger out of the Mediane, and another out of the Cephalica, I stopped the Mediane, and continued to bleed into the liquors out of the Cephalick. In the first, issuing out of the two bloods, I could finde no difference in the colour or consistence; but after standing three or four houres, that of the Mediane had much less of Serum in it: the Serum thereof seemed Limpid in the Pottinger: but that of the Cephalick was citrine-coloured: that of the Mediane somewhat of a volatile saline pungency upon the tongue, different from the taste, which the other Serum had, that being very salt: that of the Mediane had a blewish Gelatine gathered upon the top of the condensed mass of blood; the other had none, but was of a florid red on the top. After two days I came to look on them again, and upon turning the coagulated mass of blood in the pottinger, that of the Mediana had much more of black towards the bottom, then the other: and also a thinner surface of red then that of the Cephalick.

2. To carry on the Experiment of mixing several liquors with blood, I bled into some ounces of Aqua mirabilis, which grew deep coloured almost unto the top, which was transparent and of the colour of Mant-wine almost: after some houres the Liquor became of a bright beautiful Claret-colour almost unto the bottom, where there was an opacous, darkned setling, with an enaeorema of contexed filaments pretended [Page] to the top. The Wasps flocked to that glass in great numbers, and drowned themselves in it, not medling with any other of the subsequent glasses. After two days was little changed, only the beautiful Claret was somewhat darkned.

3. I bled upon some ounces of Treacle-water, which turned as black as Ink presently, but continued the blood perfectly fluid: The red was so destroyed, that the Aluminous Solution did not equal it; there not being upon inclination of the glass the least sign of any incarnadine; and so it continued for two days, no variation happening.

4. I bled upon some ounces of Cinnamon-water, which turned of a pale red; i [...] I held up the glass to the light, it seemed almost to the top opacously red as Tent wine; but, if viewed otherwise it seemed of a paler red, approaching to bastardscarlet. After a while it seemed as if all the blood were coagulated into one mass from top to bottom, subsiding a little within the tinged Cinnamon-water. Upon agitation and stirring with a knife, it appeared that the fibres of the blood were so destroyed, that this mass was no coherent thing, but broken into little massulae, or parcels of a pale red, such as the subsiding curds are in whey. After two days I viewed it, and found the Phaenomenon of the whole Glass to look cherrycoloured, but the incoherent massulae were of a pale red.

5. I bled into some ounces of Aqua Bezoarticae, that did coagulate with the blood, so that it all fell in one incoherent mass towards the bottom: but whether there hapned to be a greater proportion of blood in the glass, or for some other cause, the coagulated blood filled almost all the water, much beyond what we observed in the Cinnamon-water: the consistence of the one, and the other massulae were like the curds in whey; these were of a pale red retaining to whitishness; and so it continued two days; the small quantity of water appearing in it giving no opportunity for further Observations.

6. I bled upon some ounces of Nantes-Brandy, it gave us a more tenacious curd then the former, of a pale red: but the mass and liquour was opacous towards the bottom, so as to [Page] appear like Tent-wine, in what light soever I placed it. After two days that of the Brandy which was fluid, (the curd not being answerable to the Aqua Bezoartica) was of a pretty florid red, the coagulated mass was of a brick colour.

7. I bled upon some ounces of Anise seed water drawn from the grounds of beer, it yielded a mixture of a deep blood red from top to bottom, somewhat transparent. The mass coagulated from top to bottom, the curd was of a deeper red then the others, and of such a tenaciousness as is to be sound in the soft curd of possets. After two days it turned blackish, the coherent curd being of a little lighter red.

8. My indisposition, and other cares permitted me not to prosecute these Experiments as I did the other: but one curiosity more possessed me, to put two drams of spirit of Harts-horn into a pottinger, and to bleed thereupon, to see if it would alter the Phaenomenon from what it is, if the spirit of Harts-horn be poured on the blood: I did so, and [...] found at this time that it kept my blood from coagulating into such masses as otherwise it would, but the blood turned blackishly-red, and in it there was observed a crimson gelatine, which run off the knife as jelly of red currants would, when beginning to cool. After two days it continued still fluid, but blackish. I have sundry times tried that way of putting spirit of Harts-horn into the pottinger first, and then caused them to bleed upon it with this success, that immediately it spoiles the red, giving it a more dirty colour, and casts up a mucous phlegme, (such as I never saw in any blood upon other Essays) just like what many spit and blow out of their noses in catarrhs: this covers all the pottinger, without any mixture of blood in it, and would be white, but that the subjacent blood gives it another muddy colour. The blood under it was always fluid, and unequally mixed with parts of a bright and blackish red. Whether my journey, or distemper prevented that appearance in my blood, I know not.

9. I had a Patient there which had unknowingly taken much of Mercurius dulcis in pills at Lo [...]o [...], to [Page] her great prejudice several ways: and though she had taken golden-bullets, and used other means to discharge her body of that troublesome Inmate, yet found little benefit: At the Bath I let her blood, and to try an Experiment I cast a Guinny into one of the middle Pottingers as she bled: I could observe no difference betwixt the blood preceding, and that therein: but in the afternoon I came and went to that pottinger which had the most florid and best coloured blood, and searching there found my gold, and that stained with white spots from the Mercury on the lower side. Whether the separation of the Mercury, or some other efficacy in the Gold (of whose power in such cases I can give good instances) caused that difference in the bloods, I cannot tell, having never tried it since.

Being not well at Warwick, by reason of a violent defluxion into the Glandules of the Throat, I caused my self to bleed Octob. 20.

1. I took six drams of spirit of Harts horn, not very well rectified, nor clear of colour, and put it into a crystal-glass; and bled thereupon about half an ounce of blood; it turned of a dark red presently, inclining much to black, though, as it stood, or as it was held on one side, you might perceive a lighter, but not florid red at the sides. It seemed fluid for two dayes; but as I poured it out it appeared to be very Gelatinous, and of colour like that which is become sanious, and degenerated into blackishness with keeping.

2. I bled upon the same liquor of Salt-peter, about half an ounce of blood, upon four ounces of liquor, at first the blood did turn on the surface to a bastard-scarlet (which is an effect every thing of Nitre mixt with blood so produceth) [Page] afterwards the whole blood sunk to the bottom, the upper part being all of one colour and consistence, such as is observed in the Serum of the blood sometimes, when the supernatancy is whitish, and not transparent. Being poured from the blood, I found that coagulated into a mass, which was all of a very natural red all over, only spotted in many places underneath with black spots. The concretion was so brittle, that it would not hang together, nor endure any light-pressure, but as it were melted, and seemed gelatinous.

3. I bled upon a Solution of the Alcali of Nitre; it appeared upon the first mixture like bastard-scarlet; then the blood sunk to the bottom, the top being transparent, yet of the colour of High-countrey-white-wine: the bottom seemed redder then that of t [...]e former; the limpid liquor being poured out, seemed all gelatinous, and had incorporated with it the serous part of the blood: the red at the bottom was fluid and not tenacious, but of the consistence that blood is of when it is hot, and newly received in a vessel out of the veins.

N. B. After I had poured out the blood and mixtures out of the several glasses, and that the glasses had stood a while, I observed that that of the raw Liquor of Nitre, which remained in the bottom, did turn of a most beautiful red, as ever I saw in any thing: but that with the spirit of Hartshorn, or Solution of Alcali, &c. did not vary: after two days all the remains of blood in the several glasses turned blackish and sanious, only that with the raw liquour altered not.

4. I bled upon the liquors of Salt-peter which had passed the ashes, and on that which had never passed the ashes: both were of the same blackish and sanious colour (after the first bastard-scarlet was past) both had on the top a certain cremor, which being cast into the fire discovered it self to be nitrous: both of them, though they were of such a dirty red inclining to black, yet were they of one consistence from top to bottom all fluid, nothing gelatinous, nor any one part blacker, or redder then the other. Which is very much, considering the difference of the two Liquors.

5. I bled upon the unctuous Mothers of Salt-peter, which turned at first to a bastard-scarlet: the blood did never mix [Page] with the Mothers, nor otherwise ting their colour, then as it cast a shadow by its innating on the surface of them. It coagulated on the top of the Mothers, being of colour all thorough exactly like to Ocher: the concretion was a quarter of an inch thick, a firm mass to se [...] to, like so much bees wax cast into a cake: I took it up in one mass with my knife but trying its tenaciousness, I found it as brittle as most short cakes are. Upon the surface, there was an appearance of certain striae, which might be saline. All the blood did not coagulate so, but underneath there was a quantity which in the glass was of equal dimensions with the other mass, it was of the colour of Oker, and fluid, and would not mix with the Mothers at all: I took of the mass, and tried to burn it in an arched fire twice or thrice, it boyled and bubled up upon the fire-shovel, like impure Niter, and so burned with a flashing, as if it had been most of it Peter, it never came to flame as blood doth usually; only one blaze as it were always hovered over it for a moment or two, not being continued to the body, otherwise then by a parcel of smoke issuing out them.

6. I took also two pottingers of blood, the first and the last of the blood I took away: there was no difference in the blood of one and the other; the coagulated mass well-coloured, of a good consistence, less of that black or melancholick crastament then is commonly found: the Serum well coloured, of tast brinish: I placed it in an arched fire, it rose up with a globous intumescence (but crackled not so much as at Bathe; though very much, and like a bay-leaf) it burned with a continued, vivid, and lasting flame.

I suffered a pottinger of the same blood with which this last Experiment was made, to stand ten days or more, in which time it was quite dried up into a hard fryable mass, the top of which was almost as black as Ink, the bottom having somewhat of a dark red in it. I cast a piece of it into a quick coal-fire; therein it crackled like unto a bay-leaf, but burned with a short and weak flame. I placed another part of it upon a fire-shovel in an arched and quick fire, where it crackled as much as the other did (and more then that part [Page] of the same blood which was burned in the fore-going Experiment of blood newly congealed, and separated from the Serum, which was in this last case dried into the mass) and it did burn with a vivid and continued flame presently. Which accident I take notice of, to shew the different Phaenomena upon the diverse way of burning the blood. I took a third portion of the said congealed and firm mass of blood, and put it to some cold water in a Glass, and it dissolved most of it therein, and tinged the water of as beautiful a red as any claret, though otherwise the mass were blackish, and had nothing of red but what was in the extimous crust of the bottom, which seemed of a most deep red inclining to black.

I suffered two or three spoonfuls of Hogs-blood to run into a large Venice-Glass, in which was halfe a pint of the Mothers of Peter; I suffered it to stand some days, and comeing then to see it, I observed that the Mothers were become opacous almost to the bottom, on the top was a mass of coagulated blood exactly resembling the colour of Oker; it was so firm, that I took it with my knife in one entire piece, but I found the top and bottom of the mass (which was pretty thick) to be very soft, but not as it were fibrous; the middle was more firm: I put some of it upon a fire-shovell in an arched and quick fire, when it boyled up, and ran about, and by its sputtering discovered a mixture of Salt-peter: but it did not flame at all, though I brought it to ignition. Examineing the remaining Mothers, I found a sanguine mixture to float in, and stain the liquor of an Oker-colour, and some of it was aggregated into little masses or lumps, whose particles did not cohere by any tenacious fibres (indeed I have not been able to observe any tenaciously-fibrous coagulations in the blood of Hogs hitherto) but upon the least touch of my warn [...] hand, they dissolved or yielded unto the least pressure. Out of all which I intend to deduce, that some common Experiments may shew that, which no Chymical Fires give any light unto. That there is a great diversity betwixt the blood of other Animals, and that of Men: because that upon the same Liquors they disclose different Phaenomena; and consequently that the Transfusion is a rash and unsafe attempt.

[Page]I shall conclude with this intimation, that neither is the lood of several Animals, nor the blood of the same kinde of Animals the same; but in taste and colour of the Serum there will be often a sensible difference, and it is rational to think the like of the blood it self: nor do they burn or coagulate alike, or with the like Phaenomena: nor is the blood of the same Men always the same, though he continue within the latitude of Health; and in diseases Epidemical let two bleed, and there shall often be no affinityThe other day coming into my Apothecaries Shop, and finding one (not otherwise very ill) going to bleed, I sent for a bottle of that Lixivium of Salt-peter which had passed the ashes, and into the first pottinger which he bled, which seemed to have little of crimson in it, but a Serum of a darkblew colour; I poured a little of it, and it turned black, though it continued fluid: Into the third pottinger which seemed better blood, with a red colour, I poured some of the same liquor, and it improved the colour, and kept it from coagula [...]ion awhile; what hapned afterwards I had not leisure to observe. in the colour of their blood, or in the Serum, the one being white and turbid, the other Limpid, the Serum of the third citrine-coloured. And if so, what regulations shall we have for this operation: shall a transfuse he knows not what, to correct he knows not what, God knows how? This may become indeed that sort of men, being the worst and most irrational Empirics the Sun ever shined upon, as I demonstrate more fully in my Letter to a Physician, in a Parallel betwixt them and the ancient Empirics.

Let them from these Observations draw their sophistical Conclusions for and against spirit of Harts horn; for, and against spirit of Sal Armoniack; against Allom, and Treaclewater, and such like; till all the world come to admire them as much as I: And that there be a new History penned to render them as contemptible as this magnifies, by a Rhetorick that hath more of the nature of the Microscope, then of Truth.

Miscellaneous Additions by way of Postscript.

VVHatever may seem to be said from hence in favour of the spirit of Harts-horn, is not so valid as may be imagined: for I have mixed a little of the Solution of the Alcali of Nitre (which turned Syrup of Violets green, [Page] and rendred it less fluid) upon the blood of a man, which was blackish, waterish, and ill-coloured, after it began somewhat to coagulate, and I brought it to a new fluidity, and as vivid a red as ever I saw: and so it continued for 24 hours; at my return after two days, I found the blood in the Pottinger, (by reason of the Sun on the window) all coagulated, and become friable; but even that it had visible signs of a remaining redness, which the other blood that had nothing effused retained not. Oyl of vitriol affused to the Serum of blood, tinged with the crimson part, doth improve the red for an instant or two, but then it turns black and coagulates into a soft mass, that admits the least impression; the fibres being destroyed: but yet it burns rather better, brighter, and quicker then otherwise; being poured on the surface of coagulated blood, on the top whereof was tough pellicle generated; it did not eat the pellicle, but in one night reduced the Mass, almost to the bottom, into a consistence like to Bees wax, which burnt well.

In January last 1669. I had another occasion to bleed, but though the Phaenomena of my blood upon the Mothers of Salt peter were the same as at first; yet in the other mixture with Salt-peter-liquors, they were not: the blood separately taken seemed not to differ from the former, only the Serum was a little yellower: it did burn as well as before, but crackled much less. At the same time I caused an old man to be let blood for a catarrh and pain in his shoulder, which he used to ease with bleeding; the blood seemed very good and well-coloured; after it had stood a while I had the leisure to view it, and upon one pottinger of coagulated blood, I poured twenty drops of spirit of Vitriol, whereupon immediately all the top turned as white as milk, even the bubbles which seemed of blood before: whereupon I took another pottinger, and separated half the blood from the Serum, and poured on the blood and Serum som spirit of Vitriol as before: presently all the Serum became of colour and consistence like milk: the blood turned black, and hardened into a substance that cut like white-washed-wax: the other, at my return, I found of the consistence and colour of a common custard. The vitriolated [Page] Serum would not flame: the vitriolated blood did burn with a brisk but short flame: the simple blood would scarce burn at all, but with an hovering and discontinued flame.

I took also some of the pure citrine Serum of my blood, which tasted not very salt; I set it in the window for some time: during the frost it coagulated into a body of the consistence of butter in the heat of Summer: it gathered no Ice at all: the colour became less citrine; but still pellucid. I set it after some days to thaw; which it did immediately before the fire, but came not to its former fluidity, but like oyle: after that, it coagulated with the warmth before the fire, and seemed exactly like to boyled Turpentine, but that it wanted the smell: it would not flame at all (though crackled much, as salt) yet I brought it to ignition.

I did also take some Hogs blood again, and poured on the Mothers of Peter, it mixed not; only after some days some filamentary corpuscles subsided unto the middle of the liquor: the colour at first was a pale bastard scarlet: but after a day it turned to a darkish red, and so continued many days; and in its primitive fluidity, it suffering not any alteration, but being as fluid as when it first issued from the veins: it stood in the window all the frost, not changing or freezing at all. No more did another pottinger of my blood that was mixed with the liquor of Peter which had past the ashes: but that last blood turned very blackish.

In fire, notwithstanding any thing I have done or purposed about the nature of blood, I do now desist from the Enquiry: the result of my thoughts being this, that there is a continual vatiation in the blood upon every disease, and often without it, during a state of health: that the blood of Individuals of the same kinde differs not only from it self, but in each other individual: that no man can by reason of this consideration know what he would transfuse; nor what it is he would rectifie. In a word, that 'tis most prudential to insist upon Experienced Methods in Physick, and that all phancies about spirit, salt, sulphur, fermentative fires in the heart, occasioned by heterogeneous mixtures, and the explications [Page] of the operations of Medicaments by the n [...]w Philosophers, either Chymical or others, are all vain, and cannot be allowed as a ground of practice, till justified by successful trials; seeing that not only the suppositions are false, but whilst the blood is sub diminio animae, effects upon it are different from what when it is separate: and I think I may thence conclude rationally, that 'tis not conceivable that the fabrick of our bodies is purely Mechanical: for the liquors would have the same effect on the blood in the body, and without: which they have not.

A REVIEW of the precedent Discourse against Mr. GLANVILL.

[Page]

AFter I had written the present Discourse, I was so unwilling to give any offence to the world, and so apprehensive lest my just indignation for the affront Mr. Glanvill had put upon my Faculty, should transport me beyond all fitting moderation, that I desired a Friend, (without further advising with me) to blot out whatever he might in prudence think equitable; by reason of his great cautiousness, as well as thorough that great haste and continual interruptions wherein the Treatise was penned; I finde several passages either omitted totally, or not sufficiently explained; so as that I could not acquiesce in the publication thereof, without some few additions, partly to prevent som [...] cavills that might (though weakly) be raised against it, and partly to put every thing past dispute hereafter; that so I might not have any further occasion to write against our Virtuoso, nor his Abettors have any thing to do but to call in his Libell against the Physicians, and do some reasonable justice to those he had so arrogantly and injuriously insulted over. I desire my Reader to pardon me, if I have not in some circumstantial embellishmeats and regularity of procedure answered his expectation, since in the main I am sure I have out-done it.

Whereas I charge Mr. Glanvill (page 2.) with not having read the Authors which he mentions. These words, Who can chuse but smile, when he reads how Apuleius improved the Mathematicks after Euclide? the whole passage should have run thus; Who can choose but smile when he reads how Apuleius improved Arithmetick? All that Apuleius did was to to translate something about Arithmetick into Latine, at such time as the Latines had no other Numerals then L▪. M. D. C, [Page] &c. And by reason of this performance of his doth Vossius give him a place amongst the Authors, not improvers of Arithmetick: and takes notice of him as the first that ever writ in Latine about that subject. Upon which account itVossius de Scient. Math [...]. [...]. 51. sect 1. was judiciously done of Vossius to mention him there; but Mr. Glanvill is grosly mistaken here to name him, where he treats of such as advanced useful knowledge; which a bare Translation doth not. It is true, Vossius saith of Apuleius, Primus Arithmeticam Latinis literis Apuleius Arithmeticam Nicomachi Geras [...]ni Pythagorici Latine transtulit teste Cassiod [...]r [...] de mathem. discipl. cap. de Arithm. & Isidor [...] Hisp. Orig. iij. [...] Jonss. de script. Hist. phil. l. 3. c. 13. p. 280. illustravit: which words import no more then I say; and 'tis manifest, that what He did was but a Translatio [...] of Nichomachus. So Cassiodorus d [...] mathem. disciplinis. cap. de Arithmetica. Reliquae disciplinae indigent Arithmetica disciplina, quam apud Graecos Nicomachos diligenter exposuit. Hunc primum Madaurensis Apuleiu [...], deinde magnificus vir Boethius Latino sermone translatu [...] Romanis contulit lectitandum. The same is asserted by Isidorus Hispalensis. This might our Virtuoso have observed inVossius de s [...]i [...]n [...] [...]th [...]m. c 10 s [...]t [...]. Blancanus Mathem. Ch [...] nol▪ se [...]ul. 15 Vossius, when he read him: and what Apuleius performed is so meanly thought of by Blancnaus, that in his Chronicles of Mathematicians he affords him no place, though he mention the Arithmetical work of Boethius, The imputation I fix upon Mr. Glanvill, for not understanding what the Authors he mentions had writ, and about his not having ever seen them, is manifest to any man that shall not only trace him by Vossius, Vossius de sci [...]. Mathem▪ Mr. Glanvill p. 47, 4 [...], &c. [...] but consider the ridiculous characters he fixeth upon the Writers alledged, viz. Ptolomy of Alexandra made considerable improvements in Optics: and Alhazenus the Arabian is famous for what he did in it. From these Vitellio drew his, and advanced the Science by his own wit and their helps. S. Stevinus both invented and writ such in all parts of the pure and practical Mathematicks, in Geography, Geometry, Navigation, Mechanicks, &c. that never did [...]y one, no, nor all the Virtu [...]si in England or Europe, ever equalled, or pursued: From hence 'tis [...]pp [...]rent Mr. Glanvill, and his Abettors never read him: he was the first Proposer I know of, and before my Lard Bacon, of a Society to carry on Exper ments in order to the rectifying many [...] [...]o [...]s, [...]nd impr [...]ving many known truths▪ an Admirer of the Ancients, and th [...] learning. Stevinus corrected Euclid, Achazen, and Vitellio, in some fundamental Propositions that were mistakes; and in the room substituted considerable inventions of his own. Roger Bacon writ acutely of Opticks.—Any man will grant, that he who gave so lame [Page] an account of these Authors, never was acquainted with them, nor understood particularly what they writ, or added of their own invention: whether new theoremes, or different and new demonstrations of old known truths. Whereas he saith that Roger Bacon was accused of Magick to Pope Clement the fourth, and thereupon imprisoned: but the accusation was founded on nothing but his skill in Mathematicks, and the ignorance of his Accusers.—Assertions of this nature are not so easily passed by, so many learned and judicious persons having reckoned him in the number of Magicians; such are Joannes Wierus J [...]. Wierus de praest [...]daem. l. 2. c. 2. and other Daemonographers. That the said Writer might declaim against Magick, or deny the possibility of it, and yet practise it, is an usual procedure with Vide Bodin. in prae [...]. ad daemonomaniam. that sort of people: and that his works have in them sundry Propositions that are superstitious and magical is granted by Delcio; such haply was that which Franciscus Se [...] Gabr: Naudaeus his History of Magick ch. 17. Picus says he had read in his book of the sixth Science, where he affirms, that a man may become a Prophet, and foretel things to come by the means of the Glass Almucheti, composed according to the rules of perspective, provided he made use of it under a good constellation, and had before-hand made his body very even, and put it into a good temper by Chymistry.

As to what I say about Orontius, I adde the words of Sir H. Savile in his Lectures, p. 71. Josephus Scaliger—hom [...] omnium mortalium, ne Orontio quidem excepto, [...].

Whereas I say (p. 3.) that the ancient Physicians did not only cure cut-fingers, and invented Diapalma and and other Medicaments in order thereunto. I adde (what I know not how was omitted) that it is notorious how all our Herbals and Druggists have explained the nature and use of Medicaments according to the Doctrine of the Elements, and qualities either arising therfrom, or from the peculiar mixture of the parts: and whosoever hath acted, or shall proceed according to those notions in compliance with the Ancients, shall not stand in need of [Page] any novel Method from the Virtuosi to salve a cut-finger.

What I have said in the first and second sheet concerning the Barometer (as they call it) that it doth not determine exactly, neither the weight nor pressure of the aire, winde, or clouds, is an opinion which the more I think upon, the more I am confirmed in; nor do I doubt that others will be as scrupulous as I in their assent to our dogmatizing Virtuoso, when they shall seriously consider what follows, and accommodate it to the Elasticity and gravity of the Atmosphear.

First, when our Virtuoso speaks of the Elasticity of the Air, he understands thereby a body whose constituent particles are of a peculiar configuration and texture, distinct from what can be ascribed to earth, water, or fire? ‘That the Air near the earth is such an heap of little bodies lying one upon another, as may be resembled to a fleece of wooll; for this (to omit other likenesses betwixt them) consists of many slender flexible hairs; each of which may indeed like a little Spring, be easily bent or rouled up; but will also, like a Spring, be still endeavouring to stretch it self out again. For, though both these Hairs, and the Aerial corpuscles to which we like them, do easily yield to external pressures; yet each of them (by vertue of its structure) is endowed with a powe [...] Mr. Boyle in his first part of Experiments of the Aire: Experim. 1. I desire my Reader to take notice about the Elasticity of the Air, that the very names of Elater and Elasticity are of a more ancient mention then the being of the Society: Regius and Pecquetus use the terms: and that as to the expansive motion of the Air, 'tis proposed by several Cartesians, and before them by Kircher de maynet. l. 2. part. 1. progymn. 3. See also Mersenn. and Schottuss mechanic pneumat. hydraul: So that the Society can pretend to nothing but the similitude of a fleece of wooll, and the explicating it by that way. or principle of self-dilatation; by vertue whereof, though the Hairs may by a mans hand be bent and crowded closer together, and into a narrower room then suits best with the nature of the body: yet whilst the compression lasts, there is in the fleece they compose or endeavour outwards, whereby it continually thrusts against the hand that opposes its expansion. And upon the removal of the external pressure by opening the hand more or less, the compressed wooll does as it were spontaneously Page 59. expand or display it self towards the recovery of i [...]s former loose and free condition, till the fleece have either regain'd its former dimensions, or at least, approved them as near as the compressing hand, (perchance not quite opened) will [Page] permit.’—Against this I except not only that this supposition is far from a sensible Philosophy; but that whosoever would weigh the Air exactly, and estimate the accession of weight which the Air receives from winds, clouds, or vapors (the thing Mr. Glanvill promiseth us) must weigh the Air singly first, and in its utmost degree of expansion, otherwise he can never tell what its gravity is, or what accessional it receives by its Elasticity, by exhalations and different mixtures: But this is not done by the Barometer (however it be essayed in the experiment of Aristotle very judiciously) but only an imaginary column or Cylinder of Air, and its pressure upon the Mercury is considered: which procedure seems to me as ridiculous, as if a man should lay a fleece of wooll, or any other body upon any thing, and there being above that an incumbent body of lead (or the like) bearing thereon, yet should he proceed to say that he weighed the fleece of wooll and not the incumbent lead: for as yet no discoveries have acquainted the world with the nature of that Aether which is above the Atmosphere, whether it gravitate or press upon the subjacent Thus the Moon according to the Cartesian [...] by its pressure upon the waters, causeth the Tides on Farth. Air (which a very subtile but rapid body may do) nor what effects the Libration of the Moon and other Planets may have by way of pressure upon the contiguous bodies, which pressure may be communicated to the terrestrial Air: and without the determination hereof▪ it is as vain to pretend to weigh the Air by this Barometer, as to determine of the weight of a board that presseth a Cheese in the Vat, without considering the superin [...]mbent stone. Neither are we informed sufficiently what the Figure of the Aether is, whether it make a con [...] and so encompass the Atmosphear; or also be interspersed with, and differently move therein; nor what effects those motions and agitations of it have upon the grosser corpuscles of the Atmosphere, (not only in abating of their gravity somtimes, but adding to them a levitation: nor is it explicated yet what effects the corpuscular rays of the fixed Stars and Planets may have in or upon the Atmosphere, adding to its gravity, (as tis just to imagine, since that eminent Virtuoso, the Pliny of our Age for lying, but a Virtuoso! could wash his hands in the beams of the Moon) or Elasticity, [Page] of which those intercurrent corpuscles seem not void (thoughSir K. D of Simp. p. 43. Charlton de fulm [...]ne. not Aiery) which constitute Thunder, Lightning, &c. or diminishing them both in order to the Phaenomena, which occurre daily.

Secondly, it doth not yet appear by any thing alledged by our Experimental Philosophers, that for certain the Air which encompasseth the Earth is a distinct body of a different structure from the Earth and Water that compose the Terraqueous Globe. Isaac Vossius doth think the Air to be nothingIs. Voss de motu mar. & vent. c. 21 p. 94. else but watrish exhalations drawn up by the Sunne.—‘Credimus Aerem esse Aquam seu humorem dilatatum, ad legem aequilibrii quaquaversum se extendentem.’ If it be so, it is a vain supposition which attributes suchAeris elementum juxta sacra eloquia nihil aliud est quam humidi: quaedam perpetuò occuperantis subtlissimae & spirabilis substantia. Kircher. Iter ecstat. 2 dial. 2. c. 3. a structure to the Air, as is repugnant: to the water: Others there are which make the Atmosphere to be an aggregate of heterogeneous particles exhaledThe Air seems nothing else but a kinde of tincture or solution of terrestrial and aqueous particles dissolved into the Aether, and agitated by it, just as the tincture of Coch [...]neel is nothing but some finer dissoluble parts of that concrete lick'd up or dissolved by the fluid water. Mr. Hook Microgr. obs [...]. p. 13. Atmosphaeram ex halitibus terrestribus & [...]aperibus aqueis actione [...]olis & reliquorum Astrorum concitari, inter doctos con [...]enit. Hanc eandem Atmosphaeram, ob Solis & reliquorum Astrorum conversiones variae mutari & attemperari apud eisdem indubitatum est. Scheiner ros vagin l. [...]. p. [...]. ex. from this Globe, whose structure must be as discrepant as the vapours are: and what a difference there is in them we may guess by the infinite variety of Meteors, Rains, Snows, Hail, Winds, Dews, &c. and their component corpuscles. If this latter be true, (as 'tis probable that it is; at least that there is no more besides but an intercurrent Aether or materia subtilis of the Cartesians) what becomes of this Elasticity, or pressure of this Springy Air so much talked of?

Thirdly, 'tis necessary to distinguish betwixt the pressure and weight of bodies: for, suppose were a man pressed under a bended stick, or other springy body compressed, he shall feel a great oppression upon him, and be kept down to his great pain, not with the weight but spring of the said stick, or other springy body: and whosoever by the violence of the compression would judge of the weight of the incumbent body, would expose himself to laughter.

Fourthly, 'tis possible for a body without any springiness [Page] or accessional gravity, to press downwardsAcus omnino parallela horizonti, qua s [...]bito atque magneti aff [...]icatur, nullo modo fit gravior, tamen deprimitur, perinde ac si magnes esset acul subjectus. Finge nunc aliquem, qui haec a magnete fieri nesciat, is prosectò credet cum Aristotele acum tendere ad centrum mundi. Berigard. de terra: circulo 6. part. 3. above its weight: thus a needle touched with a Loadstone declines from that line in which it hung parallel to the Horizon, without any addition of weight: which is demonstrable from the variety of its declination and restitution: and 'tis as indubitable that such declination of it carries with it something of pressure.

Fifthly, we are to consider the nature of the Earth, whether that be a Magnet, or no: for if it be such, (however the Magnetism be explained▪ whether according to the Cartesian Hypothesis, or that of Berigardus) instead of weighing the Air, we deceive our selves as grosly as if we took the impulse with which Iron runs to the Loadstone for its weight: and thus in some cases we shall weigh things by their ascent, which is inconsistent with the common notion of weighing things.

Sixthly, to wave the unestablished notions of Gravity and Lenity, and to abstract from all the preceding considerations, I say, that even so this opinion of the Aerial Column pressing down upon the Mercury is false: since in a body so unequally mixed as the Air is often (and it cannot be disproved that 'tis ever otherwise) it is impossible to imagine that the pressure or gravitation is by way of a Column or Cylinder. Imagine the Experiment to be tried by six or more weights pressing at one time upon the Mercury, would any man in his wits say, that this joint pressure were cylindrical? consider but the variety of mixtures in the Air, (and the separate pressures that are consequential thereunto▪ which the contemplation of the clouds will lead us into, and 'tis the same thing. Were a man swimming in that concourse of water in Hungary, where the unmixed rivers flow in one channel, and his body so placed that part of it were in one stream, and part in another,) would you say that the incumbent water did press upon him in a Column or Cylinder? But to proceed further, if it be true that the superiour part of the Air or Atmosphere, which transcends the mountainous asperities of the Earth, hath another motion or lation then that which is more low, [Page] (explain it either the Aristotelian way, or according to Galilaeo, Vide Galilae [...]n system. [...]sm dial. 4. [...] [...] ▪ 32 [...]. edit. in 410. and agreeably to the motion of the Earth) if this be true, (as I take it to be now) how can we determine of the Gravity of the neighbouring Air by this Experiment? and how vain is this notion of a Cylinder? for in a fluid agitated with different motions as the subject Air is by repercussion from the Hills and Plains, (which begets vibrations and undulations God knows what it suffers upon the generation and motions of Meteors; and where the superior part hath a motion different oftentimes from the other, of whose rapidity we are as uncertain as of its structure, and texture, (and we see that the rapidity or swift motion of an heavy body takes it from its pressure and gravity how can any man talk of Aerial columns, much less pretend to weigh the Air incumbent, and to determine exactly of any accession of weight, as M. Glanvill professeth to do? Besides, if heavy bodies do not gravitate in a streight line, but describe the circumference of a Circle, or some such line, (as new Philosophers hold in opposition to Aristotle) and if the Atmosphere be toVide Galilaeum de system. mundi dial. 2. pag. 119. edit. in 410. Sectatoribus Copernici opus est dicere (quippe qui ponunt orbem magnum circulo ferri) morum gravis deorsum esse per lineam curvam vel instar quadratricis Nicomedis, vel circulari ut Galilaeus contendit. Scipio Claramont. de univers. l. xij. c. 20. be reckon'd amongst the bodies that gravitate, how can we imagine this gravitation to be performed by way of a column or cylinder? Moreover, this Atmosphere can no way be considered to press cylindrically▪ if we consider that in every part of it there are continued exhalations, and smoke ascending through it, so that the weight of it must needs be abated by the ascent of those [...]apors [...] and what we experiment here is not the weight of the A [...] properly, but the super-ponderancy or over-weight of it. The Atmosphere seems to me constantly to resemble a Glass in which water is poured on wine, and the wine is ascending thorough each part of the water indeterminately; if it be thus, and that the ascending vapours carry a great force with them, (which any man will grant who considers the weight Vide Sanctorii medic. static. Hanc Aeris con [...]tionem demonstrat vel ipsa saliva ex alto demissa, quae dilaceratur prope terram in quam conciratus aer impingens ad salivam redit, eamque discerpit. Berigard. circ. Pisar. part. 3. circ. 6. de terra. of the smoke, in comparison to what remains of the wood and coal that is burnt: and who statically [Page] regards the steams transpiring from our bodies: and how that spittle, which in an entire body issues from our mouths▪ descends till near the ground it be dissipated and distended) I cannot imagine how it can be said that we thus measure all the degrees of compression in the Atmosphere, and estimate exactly any accession of weight which the Air receives from winds, clouds, or vapors. To conclude, if the Air do thus press upon the Mercury, how comes it to pass that there is no difference when the Experiment is tried in a chamber (where the incumbent column is less then abroad) and in the open Air of the same levell? Why doth it not press up water (or other liquors) in theWhy doth not this Cylinder of Air which so presseth upon the Mercury, depress a leaf of Gold, but suffers it to flie up and down? like Syphon to an heighth as different as is the disproportion betwixt the gravity of Mercury and water: which I have not heard it doth; yet the proportion betwixt Mercury and water in gravity is 1 [...]. 134 / [...]. In fine, how is that true which Mr. Hooke saith, viz. Mr. Hooke in the Preface to his Micrography. ‘That he contrived an instrument to shew all the minute-variations in the pressure of the Air: by which he constantly found, that before and during the time of rainy weather, the pressure of the Air is less, and in dry weather, but especially when an Eastern winde, (which having past over vast tracts of Land, is heavy with earthy particles) blows, it is much more: though these changes are varied according to very odd Laws.’ If this be true, (as I am apt to believe it is) with what face can our Virtuoso tell us, ‘It is concluded, that such a Cylinder Page 61. of the Air as presses upon the Mercury in the vessel, is of equal weight to about 29 digits of that ponderous body in the Tube. Thus it is when the Air is in its ordinary temper: but vapours, winds and clouds alter the Standard, so that the Quicksilver somtimes falls, somtimesIf you would see how true Mr Glanvill speaks, reade Mr. Boyle his eighteenth Experiment, and the defence of it against Linus: there you will finde that the Mercurial Cylinder did in winter somtimes correspond with the weather Glass and somtimes vary: and the reason Mr. Boyle gives, is such as takes off from the certainty of Mr. Glanvill's CONCLUSION. rises in the Glass, proportionably to the greater or less accession of gravity and compression the Air hath received from any of those alterations: and the degree of increase beyond the Standard, is the measure of the additional gravity.’ Is not this prettily [Page] said by a man that writes a year after Mr. Hook, and more after Mr. Boyle? How unacquainted is He and his Assistants, even with the Writings of their fellow-Virtuosi? And if we may be allowed to transfer the Fool's Cap from the Ancients for concluding too soon, may we no [...] crown the heads of our Virtuosi now therewith? And how careful the R. S. is in making good their promise to Olaus Borrichius, that what their Members should write, the whole Society would be responsible, let any man judge that considers how Mr. Hooke, and Mr. Glanvill (I beg Mr. Hook's pardon for the unequal comparison) disagree; and Dr. Henshaw (another Virtuoso) differs also from Mr. Glanvill, saying, That the Quicksilver Tube will not give so exact an account of every small difference in the pressing Air, as the THERMOMETER! what confusion shall we be reduced unto in time, should these contradictious Experimentators proceed as they have done! I shall here adde, that I do conceive that this notion of an Aerial column gravitating upon the Earth, or subjacent body, was framed in imitation of the Hypothesis of Simon Stevinus, the Teacher of Mathematicks to Grave Maurice of N [...]ssau, in his fourth book of Hydrostaticks, where he insists much upon this Aqueous Column; but 'tis observable that that judicious person, the better to make out his Theoremes, presupposeth such things as give some repute to my objections about the Aerial Cylinder or Column, viz.

1. Aquam omnibus partibus esse ponderitatis Homogeneae.

2. Cujusvis aqua superficiem planam & horizonti parallelam esse.

3. Aquae fundo horizonti parallelo tantum insidet pondus, quantum est Aqueae Columnae cujus basis fando, altitudo perpendiculari ab aquae superficie summa adimam demissae sit aequalis.

Out of this last Proposition, and the demonstration and consectaries thereof in him; 'tis manifest, that he supposed not one of his assertions would hold (though the Phaenomena were the same in nature) as he worded and explained them, [Page] if that he did not free his aqueous Column from any oblique S Stevinus hydrostat Elem. l 4 Theoorem 8. pressures, and make it rectangular. And as for his Postulatum, that the surface of the water is plain, flat and level; he confesses it is not so really, viz. Quatenus pars est sphaericae sive mundanae superficiei; mundanam autem superficiem dicimus sphaerae cujusvis mundo concentricae: he only professeth to assume it as true, because in hydrostatics, things happen as if it really were so; whereupon he scruples not to make use of a supposition, which is really, confessedly, and demonstrably false, as long as it conduceth to practice, and serves his turn as if it were true, without pursuing a more tedious, and not more useful Hypothesis agreeable to Archimedes. WhichId. ib. postulat. 6. I take notice of by way of Apology for my self, and those who think fit to acquiesce in, or not to blame such Methods as are effectual, though otherwise vain and groundless. Another thing is, that He supposeth there that the Earth is theId. ib. postul. 7 Et profecto tam receptum fuerit haec ipsa non admittere, quam postulantibus Astrologis terram esse mundi centrum. fidem deregare▪ Center of the world. Out of all which I am more and more satisfied of the validity of my former doubts against this so much concluded upon Aerial Column, to the explanation whereof I finde no such cautions, or previous suppositions used, to take off the edge and force of such objections: neither indeed have I yet met with any thing of that subject proposed in a Scientifical way; and therefore much how it comes to be concluded upon so as Mr. Glanvill represents it to be.

Whereas I have said, that the gravitation of the Air (even Elementary) is an opinion of Aristotles, and that his Experiment was tried by Claramontius; I adde, that the verity of that trial (though indeed it extend only to the impure Atmosphere) is attested by Ricciolus in these words, ‘Duo Ricciol. Almag [...]nov l. 2. c. 5 sect. 4. quarto Aquam, & Aerem nostrum habere aliquid levitatis gravitati admistum, ut vi illius adscendant, ut sint supra id quod est ipsis gravius; & vi hujus descendant. Hinc fit ut folles lusorii, & Aere addensato bene inflati, etiam sine farinulae ac vim infusione, plus ponderent, quam flaccidi: ut exquisita trutina deprehendes: immo ego expendi vesicam bovinam, quae flaccida erat scrupulorum 4. & granorum quatuor, esse inflatam scrup. 4. grav. 6. quaere Aer additus per inflationem appendebat grana duo.’ Thus the incomparable [Page] Ricciolus, whom I may as well reckon amongst the Peripateticks, as Mr. Against Hobs c. 3. Boyle doth Schottus: and how true that Aristotelean Experiment is Mr. Boyle demonstrates in his Experiments of Air. Exper. 6. and against Hobs c. 3. pneumatick discourses. And though the works of Galilaeo, Kepler, Mersennus, Gassendus, Pecquetus, Paschal, were lost, and were as ignorant as some Virtuosi of their trials about the weight of the Air; yet would not the Assertion have seemed so strange and incredible as Mr. Glanvill represents it to be; for though Maynenus deny it, yet he brings in this Objection. ‘Aer est gravis, &c. go. probatur primo Democrit. revivisc disp. 1. c. 3. p. [...]4. in 4 [...]. a Mathematicis, qui de Acris pondere scripserunt, inven [...] runtque ejus ponderis momenta. 2. A Francisco Mendoza▪ qui in suo viridario problema instituit, An in Aere navigari▪ possit? 3. A descensu▪ lapidum & aliorum gravium, qua Aeris pondere praegrammata urgent suum descensum, & velocius in fine quam in principio moventur. 4. Experimento adducto a Bassone, qui follem inflatum citius descendere ai [...] quam Aere vacuum, ob additum Aeris pondus. l. de motu. intent.Circul. Pisa [...]. part. 6. circ. 7. de nutritione. 1. art. 3.’ Berigardus also asserts the gravity of the Air, and justifies it by this Barometer, and the unequal ascent of the Mercury on the top, and at the foot of a mountain. I shall summe up all, that may take off from the novelty of the thing, and deprive the R. S. of the glory of pretending to any interest in the discovery in the words of Thomas Bartholinus de pulmon. sect. 3. p. 60. ‘Ingeniosus Sanctorius in inveniendis ☞ Sanctorius was a Galenist. instrumentis Medicis, inter alia Com. in 1 Fen. Avic. Stateram ponit, qua ventorum vim & impetum ponderat. Inventis aliquid addam. Vitream phialam lanci nostrae impone, & leni halitu inflato videbis quam parum ponderi accreverit. In instrumento Magdeburgico testatur Otho G [...] riche Consul Magdeburgensis & inventor ejus, ponderari posse Aerem hoc pacto; quanto levius est vitrum post Aerem extractum, tantum ponderabat Aer antea in eo contentus. Varios modos alios Aeris levitatem bilance expendendi tradit Caspar Ens Thaumat. Mathemat. Probl. 93. c. 15. Vesicam bovinam se expendisse ait Joannes Bapt. Ricciolus Tom. 1. Almag. nov. l. 2. c. 5. num. 4. quae flaccida erat scrupulorum quatuor & granorum quatuor: & deprehendisse eandem inflatum scrupulorum [Page] 4. & granorum 6. Marcius Mersennus in Phaenom. Propos. 29. asserit se Geometris praesentibus & adjuvantibus ponder asse bilance Aeolipilam aeneam satis calefactam, & propemodum candentem, omnique humore destitutam & quam minimum Aeris continentem; deprehendisseque pondus fuisse unciarum quatuor, drachmarum 6. & granorum 15. postquam vero naturaliter refrixisset Aeolipila, & Aer antea rarefactus rediisset ad pristinum ac naturalem suum statum, iterum ponderasse ipsam, & invenisse pondus praecedente pondere majus fuisse quatuor gravis. Plura in hanc rem congessit. cl. Casp. Schottus in Mechan. p. 1. protheor. 4. c. 6.’

I have not Schottus by me at present; neither is there need of any further Inquiries; for I have sufficiently demonstrated that the Gravitation of the Air is an opinion of Aristotle, Averroes, and other Peripateticks, though not generally received by that sort of Peilosophers: and that it was truly and experimentally demonstrated by them, especially as far as the Atmosphear is concerned in the Question. I have also made it apparent, that the Barometer, or Mercurial Experiment doth not discover the weight of the Air with any certainty; much less, all the degrees of it: That the pressure of the Air is not by way of a Cylinder or Column; and that the Barometer had not its original but denomination from the R. S. they were, as I may term them, the God-fathers, not Parents. The World may justly say of the Honourable Mr. Boyle, that he hath improved the Experiments of his Predecessors, and represented them more accurately; and of Mr. Glanvill and his Assistants what it pleaseth.

In the marginal note (page 15.) where I say, that perhaps it is not true that Aristotle had any hand in, or was privy to the impoisoning of Alexander; I adde that Pausanias after he had spoke of the Stygian water, and its strange property, doubts whether Alexander were made away by such means, or no: [...]. This he says (in Arcadic) without reflecting any way upon Aristotle as one concerned in the report. And Arrianus who writ the life of Alexander, out of the Memoires of Ptolomaeus Lagides [Page] (who was present when that great Prince died) avows, that he died of a surfet: yet he relates sundry rumors about his death, one whereof is, that Aristotle (being fearful of Alexander after the death of Calisthenes) should prepare the poison for Antipater, to be sent him: but concludes thus, [...]. Arrian. de expedit. Alexandr. l. 7.

Whereas I reflect (page 16.) upon that passage of Plato, [...], and what Mr. Glanvill saith, ‘That without Geometry we cannot in any good degree understand Mr. Glanvill p. 25. the Artifice of the Omnisoient Architect in the composure of the great World and our selves: and that the Universe must be known by the Art whereby it was made.—’ There should have been a Chasme made for some passages, I know not why omitted. I adde therefore, that it is not revealed unto us that God made the Universe according to that Art, and it seems an Additional to the first Fiat, or let there be—in Genesis, to say his commands were regulated by the rules of Geometry, and his powerful and omnipotent word confined thereunto. Had Mr. Glanvill been pleased to consult the fathers, he would have found that this Tenet of his is no primitive notion: and that particularly Eusebius hath refutedEuseb. de praep. Evang l. 14 c. 4. it, denying that God in his Works is obliged to Geometrical numbers; and that Socrates (whose authority is greater then Plato's) did place no great value on those Sciences: that the first Christians did slight the knowledge of them as useless to Piety and knowledge of God; because my opinion about these things is agreeable to that of the first Christians, and of Socrates; I shall insert the whole passage, as it is translated into Latine in the Paris Edition.

Euseb. praep. Evangelicae. l. 14. c. 10, 11. edit. Paris. 1628.

Primum tamen quoniam Mathematica illa sua tantopere jactare solent, prorsusque necessarium esse dictitant, ut quisquis comprehendendi veri studio tenebitur, Astronomiam, Arithmetriam, Geometriam, Musicam, illa nimirum ipsa, quae ad eos a Barbaris profecta esse jam ostendimus, persequatur: [Page] (his enim qui carebit, doctum perfectumque Philosophum esse neminem, imo rerum veritatem ne primoribus quidem labris digustare posse, nisi qui harum ante rerum animo cognitionem impresserit:) deinde hanc suarum artium peritiam magnificentius ostentantes, aethere sese medio sublimi [...]s propemodum incidere, numerisque suis ipsum quoque Deum circumferre arbitrantur: nos vero qui similium disciplinarum amore non flagremus, nihil a pecudibus abesse existimant, deique propterea nunquàm nunquam reipaulo gravioris notitiam percepturos esse pronunciant: Age, hoc ipsum quam pravum sit atque distortum, vera laminis loco ratione proposita, sic tanquam ad libellam & regulam exigamus. Erit ea quidem ejusmodi, quae Graecos, innumerabiles, infinitosque Barbaros complexa; alios tametsi his artibus doctrinisque paratos, nec Deum unquam, nec honestae vitae rationes, nec omnino praeclarum & utile quid percepisse; alios, ut ab omnium disciplinarum studio destituti essent, religiosissimos tamen ac sapientissimos extitisse demonstret. Enimvero quaenam hoc in genere Socratis illius, qui ab istis omnibus tantopere celebratur, sententia fuerit, e Xenophonte intelliges, si modo ei suis in Memorabilibus haec scribente fidem adhibebis.

Docebat, inquit ille, praeterea, quatenus cujusque rei peritum esse hominem bene institute oporteret: principio Geometricae dandam eatenus operam esse dicebat, ut siquando res pasceret, dimensam rite terram vel accipere ab alio, vel alii tradere, vel eam dividere, vel opus aliquod designare posset. Id porro tam esse ad discendum facile, ut qui dimensionem attendere voluerit, idem simul & quanta sit terrae magnitudo assequi possit, & quaenam ejus metiendae ratio breviter admodum expediteque cognoscere. At ejusdem in Geometricae studio, ad illas usque descriptiones intellectu difficiliores quenquam progredi, Socrati non placebat. Cui enim bono futurae illae essent, videre se, tametsi ne illarum quidem imperitus esset, rogabat. Enimvero, ad exhauriendam hòminis vitam cum satis illas esse, tum aliarum interim & plurimum & utiliorum doctrinarum studia impedire.

Astronomiam similiter eatenus complecti [Page] solum jubebat, ut noctis, mensis, a [...]nique tempora cognosceres, atque hujus cognitionis ope, siquando vel iter, vel navigatio suscipienda esset, vel agendae forent excubiae, vel in aliud quidlibet quod noctis, mensis, aunique spatio fieri solet, incumbendum, signis ad ea omnia suis quaeque temporibus obeunda, certioribus uterere. Atqui haec nihilo difficilius tam ex nocturnis venatoribus, quam ex navium gubernatoribus, & aliis quamplurimis resciri posse, a quibus eorum peritiam suae cujusque partes officiumque deposcat. At eandem artem eo usque persequi, dum ea quae non codem motu circumferantur, stellasque simul errantes & vagas distinguere noveris, adeoque in earum abs terra intervallis, conversionibus causisque rimandis aetatem viresque consumere, id vero graviter imprimis ac serio prohibebat, quod multum hujus etiam opere pretium videret, tametsi ne in istis quidem rebus hospes ipse ac peregrinus esset. Addebat, conficiendae hominis vitae illas quaeque satis futuras, quae interim a pluribus utilioribusque studiis avocarent. Postremo quibus coelestia quaeque rationibus Numen moderetur, investigari nolebat, quod cum eo ab hominibus aspirari non posse, tum minus cum diis probari existimaret, qui quae prompta notaque esse noluissent, inquireret. Nec minus illi, quem ea vehementius cura destineret, insaniae periculum imminer [...] dicebat, quam Anaxagorae, qui explicatus a se deorum Machinas tantopere gloriabatur.

I shall adde, that if God Almighty be regulated by the rules of Geometry, and mechanical motion in the management of this world, and that the fabrick of things is necessarily established upon those Hypotheses, I cannot any way comprehend how God can do any miracles: how the Sun should stand still at the command of Joshuah, or the shadow go back on the dial of Ahaz: or how there could be a general deluge; or such an Eclipse as is related at the death of our Saviour: or that the fire should not burn, or destroy the three children: in which, and other cases, if God were not tied up to this Art, I do want proof (till he declare it) that at other times he acts altogether agreeably to it. This opinion [Page] of mine hath been hitherto the most Christian Assertion, and held most consonant to Piety, and hath been amply maintained of late by Dr. Henry More, in opposition to what the Royal Society lays down in their History; ‘That Generation, Corruption, Alteration, and Mr. Sprat pag. 312. I wonder that such effects should be attributed by them to the bare concourse and meeting of corpuscles of differing figures, magnitudes and velocities; without taking notice of that alteration of texture, and of the figures of the concurrent particles, without which Cartesianism, nor the other Mechanical Philosophies can subsist: and not so without allowing the constant assistance of God, directing and ordering lay-Mechanism. So des Cartes Princ. Philos part. 2. Deu [...] materiam simul cum motu & qui [...]te in principio ereavit; jamque per Solem suum concursum ordinarium tantundem motus & quietis in ea t [...]ra, quantum tunc posuit conservet. Oh! rare and sensible explication of things! God Almighty in a peculiar matter agitates matter! must we thus explain the secondary and mediate creation of the world in six days, whereas the like productions have not hapned in so many thousand years as are lapsed since! Besides, whatever our Virtuoso thinks of the Eternal Generation and Incarnation of the Son of God; He doth not except in this Assertion the Generation of mankinde in the ordinary and natural way. all the vicissitudes of Nature, are nothing else but the effects arising from the meeting of little bodies, of differing figures, magnitudes and velocities.’ Then which opinion there can be nothing more pestilent and pernicious; and Dr. More, albeit a Member of this Society heretofore, (for he allows nothing to it now) yet a pious one, professeth that this Mechanical Philosophy doth incline to Atheism: neither would he approve of those deductions as necessary, but ridiculous, when I upbraided him lately with that non-sensical and illiterate History, Mr. Sprat p. 348. ‘'Tis true, his, [viz. The Experimental Philosophers] employment is about material things. But this is so far from drawing him to oppose invisible Beings, that it rather puts his thoughts into an excellent good capacity to believe them. In every work of Nature that he handles, he knows that there is not only a gross substance, which presents it self to all mens Eyes; but an infinite subtilty of parts, which come not into the sharpest sense. So that what the Scripture relates of the purity of God, of the spirituality of his Nature, and that of Angles, and the souls of men, cannot seem incredible to him, when he perceives the numberless particles that move in every mans Blood, and the prodigious streams that continually flow unseen from every body: having found that his own senses have been so far assisted by the Instruments of Art, he may sooner admit that his minde ought to be raised higher by an Heavenly light [Page] in those things wherein his senses do fall short. If (as the Apostle says) the invisible things of God are manifested by the visible: then how much stronger Arguments has he for his belief, in the eternal Power and Godhead, from the vast number of creatures that are invisible to others, but are exposed to his view by the help of his Experiments?’ My censure upon this place is, that if his Experimentator have any skill in Logick or the ways of arguing, though from the Rules of Mechanism, and the contemplation of visible bodies, he may proceed to the allowance of invisible and insensible corpuscles, yet shall he still confine his progress and ascent within the nature of matter and corpuscles, and never apprehend (upon those grounds) the being and operations of an immaterial, omnipresent Deity acting by the Word of his Power and Will: nor the incorporeal nature of the soul of man. Such a Transition ad genus a genere, or [...], he that owns those principles cannot assent unto, if he understands himself, and argue not so as to alledge,

One Proposition for sence,

The other for convenience.

Where I speak of Archytas (pag. 18.) that he was a practical and Mechanical Philosopher, contrary to what Mr. Glanvill asserts (pag. 27.) I shall adde his life; As it is briefly written in Ricciolus thus. ‘Archytas Tarentinus Pythagoreus nobilis, Mathematicarum peritissimus. quem ut Ricciolus in Chronic part. 2. praefixo ad Almag [...]st. nov. in Archytas. una cum Timaeo cognosceret Plato, in Italiam navigavit, ut ait Cicero. In Mechanicis excelluit, & vi illarum quinquies vicit hostes in praeli [...], ut nihil dicam de columba lignea, quam libramentis ad violatum compulit; sed in Cosmographia at Geometria practica excelluisse indicat illud Horatii lib. 1. odorum.’

Te maris ac terrae numeroque carentis arenae, Mensorem cohibent Archyta.

[Page]Neither is Mr. Glanvill mistaken there in reference toBlancanus saith of Archytas, that he was Mechanic [...] Inventor, in Chronol. mathem. secul. 5. A [...]d Will [...] Snelliu [...] in his Preface to the Hypomn. mathem. o [...] S. Stevinus, doth reckon upon Archytas and Eudoxus as c [...]nent for practical Mechanicks. Mr. Hook micrograph. p. [...]10. Zucchiu [...] p [...]ilos. op [...]. part. 2. cap. [...]. sect. 2. p. 3 [...]. Archytas only: what he saith about Eudoxus Gnidius is false: who was a Mechanician also, and amongst other discoveries, ‘Invenit etiam Arachnen, horologium videlicet solar [...], in quo line [...] borariae, & arcus signorum in modum ara [...] se secant.

Blanoan. in Chronol. Mathemat. Sevil. 5.

’

Whereas I say (page 22.) that the Royal Society were not the first that applied themselves to the observing the formes of Animals, &c. by the Microscope: I adde that Zucchius did not only precede them in the attempt, but seems to have had hetter glasses to that purpose then they: for whereas Mr. Hooke in his description of a Flea says of the Eyes only this, that the head is on either side beautified with a quick and round black eye: the more accurate Zucchius saith, ‘Novissims Microscopio parato ab excellentissimo Vitrorum in omnes formas ad propo [...]itos usus formatore D. Eitstachi [...] Divinio Septempedano, spectavi meis oculis senescentibus Oculum pulicis, distinctis in eo albescente Sclerotide Cornea, & per corneam Iride oculi.’ And in the description of the feet of a Fly, and the feather of a Peacock, I observe that there is such a difference betwixt those two Writers, that as one of them must needs be in an errour, so I am apt to think that our Virtuoso is the person: see Mr. Hooke p. 167, 168, 169, 170. and Zucchius Philos. opt. part. 2. tr. 3. c. 7. sect. 4. pag. 349, 350. If England do yield better Microscopes then those of Eustachius Divinius, then I am ready to change my judgement.

Where Mr. Glanvill speaks of going to the World of the Moon, and I animadvert upon the difficulties of the journey▪ and that his lodging will be too hot for him; adde in the Text these words page 43.

Besides the other difficulties of the journey, 'tis further considerable, that from the Centre of the Earth to the Moon, according to the calculation of Tycho Brahe, there is near 56 semidiameters of the Earth, which is about 192416Van. E [...]ens Mathem recreations pag. 220, 221. miles: and admit it be supposed that Mr. Glanvill flie 20 miles every day in ascending towards that world, he should be above 15 years before he could come to the Orbe of the Moon.

[Page]Where I speak against the accommodating of Scripture to common railing, p. 49. I adde, that not only the Council of Trent (—fas est & ab hoste doceri) hath prohibited Sess. 4. that any should apply the holy Scripture ad scurritia, fabulosa, vana, adulationes; but also that the first Council at Millain, forbids the using it ad [...]jocum, ostentationem, contumeliam, superstitionem, impietatem. And, to upbraid our Divine-Railleurs a little more, an ancient African-Council decrees, Si Clericus, aut Monachus verba scurritia, jocularia risumque moventia loquitur, acerrime corripiatur. The words of which Canon, (viz. Scurritia & jocularia) are by a learned Frenchman rendred raillery.— ‘Nous avons le Canon d' un ancient Concile d' Afrique, qui parle en ces termes: Si quelqu' un du Clerge ou si un Religieuse dit des paroles de raillerie, des choses plaisantes & enjouces, qu' il soit chastie tres severement. Qu' eussent dit a vostre avis ces bons Peres si ces railleries eussent este terees de l' Escriture?’ This Question hath been agitated with much wit and address in French, betwixt Mr. de Girac and Mr. Costar in sundry books, wherein any man of common reason and piety, will give the advantage to adversary of Voiture, who is justified by the concurrent opinion of Balzac in his remarks sur les deux sonnets: and to these Writers I refer our Virtuosi, such as reckon upon all other learning as Pedantry, may inform themselves thence as out of Writers which transcend not their breeding and studies.

Whereas (pag. 58.) I speak somewhat in commendation of the ancient Aristotelean Monks, I finde that their esteem is much advanced by the learned Gabriel Naudaeus in these words. ‘After the last taking of Constantinople, Learning began to creep out of Monasteries, which for all the time before Gabr. Naudaeus Hist. of Magick c. 7. had been (as it w [...]re) publike Christian Schools, where not only youth, but also such men as would apply themselves that way, were instructed in all manner of Disciplines, Sciences, and Morality, and that to such an height, that not content with that so famous Quadrivium of the Mathematicks, which, besides all that is now shewn in Colledges, was then taught, Medicine both as to Theory and Practice, was so well cultivated, that we need no more to convince us how expert they were therein, then the Writings of Aegidius, Constantine, [Page] and Damascene, Joannitius, Peter of Spain, and Turisanus.’ So that it were easie for me to answer them who charge them with illiterature and ignorance.

Where I speak out of G. Hofman and others, that it is sufficient for a Physician that he proceed upon such rules and methods as may most commodiously guide him in his practice, without being solicitous whether they be rigorously and philosophically true: pag. 75. I adde, that there are others as eminent as any that ever pretended to cure, which concurre with me in this opinion. As Avicenna and Riolanus; the words of the latter in his Examen of Harvey, c. [...]9. are these. ‘—Quapropter cum Avicenna doctr. 6. cap. distinguo sermonem utilem a vero; Medicus qua Medicus, inquit ille, non curat, quid in veritate sit, sed contentus est Phaenomenis quibusdam, quae sunt satis illi in curatione morborum.’

I adde unto the passages (pag. 97.) which relate unto the diligence of the Ancients in Dissections, this: That the Ancients, and particularly the Peripateticks were very curious and inquisitive into Anatomy appears by this passage out of Chalcidius, in his discourse upon the Timaeus of Plato; he lived about one thousand one hundred and seventy years ago, and the passage (which relates to the Platonick notion about vision) in the Latin Edition of Meursius, (pag. 340) runs thus. Quare faciendum ut ad certam explorationem Platonici dogmatis. commentum vetus advocetur medicorum, & item Physicorum, illustrium sane virorum, qui, ad comprehendendam sanae naturae solertiam, actus humani corporis, facta membrorum exsectione, rimati sunt: qui existimabant, ita demum se suspicionibus, atque opinionibus certiores futuros, si tam rationi visus, quam visui ratio concineret. Demonstranda igitur oculi natura est: de qua cum plerique alii, tum Alcmaeus Crotoniensis, in Physicis exercitatus, quique primus exsectionem aggredi est ausus; & Callisthenes, Aristotelis auditor; & Herophilus, multa, & praeclara in lucem protulerunt. Out of which it is manifest that the Ancients (especially the Aristotelians; for such were Calisthenes and Herophilus) did with some curiosity examine the Phaenomena of nature, and regulated their opinions by sensible experiments; and that this was the practice of most of the eminent Physicians and Naturalists of old.

[Page]The Letter of Hippocrates to Damagetas mentioned pag. 89. (though cited as genuine by Galen) is suspected by Jo. Baptista Cartes. miscell. medic. dec. 1. c. 4. ‘Caeterum & hac Epistola, quae sub nomine▪ Hippocratis circumfe [...]tur, suspecta est mihi, primum quia▪ Diogenes Laertius lib. 9. in vita Democriti scribit illum nequaquam ridentem, quanquam concedat ab Hippocrate fuisse visitatum (non quidem ut ipsum sanaret) quo tempore jam Democritus erat decrepitus, nec amplius aptus sectioni cadaveram: nam Hippocrates 436 annos ante Christum natus; Democritus vero 492 ita ut ita ut Democritum nativitate secutus sit Hippocrates 56 annis: & tum sive ad videndum, sive ad sanandum eum conveniret, vigesimum quintum annum attigisse verisimile videtur: cum tunc temporis Hippocrates medici famam adoptus esset, quod non poterat nisi per longum temporis cursum & varia experimenta in Medicina facta sibi comparare.—Sed probandam provectiorem Hippocratis aetatem, & majorem senectam Democriti, ejusdem Laertii testimonium extat dicentis; Ultimum, quod in vita Democriti legitur dictum, aut factum, fuisse illam cum Hippocrate collocutionem: atque annum agentem 109.’ ab hujus vitae Statione decessisse. I finde also that Menagius suspects those Letters, though he confess Menag. in Di [...]. Laert. l. 9. p. 238. them to be very ancient. Extant hodie Hippocratis de sua ad Democritum profectione Epistolae, sed supposititiae, licet perantiquae.

Whereas I say pag. 114. that I have observed in some that their pulses have suffered no alteration, at least kept no time, or palpitated as did their hearts. I shall illustrate this with an observation in a young Lady, which I had too fatal an opportunity lately to make: she died of a very malignant Feaver joyned with the Measils: two nights before she died I watched with her, and frequently observing the variety of her pulse, I determined to minde whether there were any such alteration in the beating of the Heart, as I then observed in her Arteries: I laid my hand upon her Breast, and I found that her heart did not beat as usually it doth, the b [...]e erecting it self, and impelling the left side, but it seemed like a great bullet (transcending any proportion that is natural [Page] to the Heart) as it rolled in the Thorax from the right to the left side (as much one way as the other) with an uniform and equable revolution, and thus it continued to do for an houre; during which time I observed all the varieties almost that are recorded about evil pulses: as quick, slow; great, small; unequal, deficient, dicrotus, &c. Nor is this new; for Riolanus saith in Exam. Harvey c. 3. Notavi multoties in palpitationibus cordis vehementibus arterias non sequi motum Cordis, sed bis terve pulsare Cor pro una diastole Arteriarum: quod indicat Arterias in sanis & aegris corporibus, non semper sequi motus cordis. So doth Mercatus teach, Fit interdum palpitatio cordis nihil mutatis pulsibus. Tom. 2. de Philos. differ. l. 2. tr. 1. c. 28. & tom. 3. l. 2. c. xj.

Since the writing hereof, being casually in the shop where an old man was blooded, who upon the healing up of an old sore in his leg, was very ill: I observed his blood to have very little of what was crimson in it: but it seemed all a fluid Serum to the bottom, (which was pellucid, not of a turbid white,) in some Pottingers: in one Pottinger that ran last, it was coagulated into a thicker mass, on the top whereof was coagulated a translucid gelatine over most of the Pottinger, the rest being of a fluid Serum like to the other: I took some spirit of Vitriol, and poured a pretty quantity, (viz. about 20 drops) on that which was partly coagulated upwards, partly not: and all that part which was not blood, did coagulate into a mass like unto the white of an Egge when hardened by the fire, but without that smell which is usual to it when coagulated upon a gentle fire: the blood under it coagulated into a consistence much like wax: but of a dark red inclining to black: into another Pottinger I poured some of the salt-peter-liquor that had passed the Ashes; but this latter caused no change at all: I then poured on the same some spirit of Vitriol, as in the other, and it did immediately turn lacteous, and coagulated into a mass like to that of ordinary custards: and the blood under, which seemed but very little, and scarce coagulated, appeared thereupon as a large quantity, equalling three parts of the Pottinger, upon which all the Serum was thus coagulated. I went to b [...]n these: [Page] that blood which had only spirit of Vitriol did not crackle, and scarce burn: though a little it did: the pure coagulated Serum did not burn at all, yet crackled like decrepitating Salt, a little: that with the spirit of Vitriol and Lixivium of Nitre, did burn with a vivid and lasting flame a long time.

I think my self obliged to adde one thing more where I speak as if Dr. Willis had had little to do in the discoveries of Dr. Lower about Anatomy: that although that great Physician had not leisure to attend the Anatomical Inquiries, yet did he propose new matter for improving the discoveries, and put Dr. Lower upon continual investigation, thereby to see if Nature and his Suppositions did accord: and although that many things did occur beyond his apprehension, yet was the grand occasion of that work, and in much the Author. This Intelligence doth not cross what I related before from good testimony; yet I thought my self obliged to declare the whole truth, and such I beleeve this to be. I must also profess that I think the Sinus venarum vertebrales, whose invention I ascribe to Dr. Lower, may without considerable injury be ascribed unto Fallopius in his Anatomical Observations pag. 193. edit. Coloniens. 1562. in 80. Thus much I thought fitting to annex, lest the Virtuosi should censure me as partial to my old School-fellow Dr. Lower, or swayed by any regard then that of Truth.

The Hogs-blood which I last mentioned as poured upon the Mothers of Salt-peter; after it had stood above three weeks unmixed, did at last cast down about half of it self below the Mothers, it continuing in that place it turned crimson: that on the top did not change its colour, but on the surface there gathered a crust or mass, not very thick (as before) nor of so solid a coasistence.

FINIS.

§

[Page]

To divert my Reader after so tedious a discourse, I shall here adde the Letter of Coga their Patient, that they may see how efficacious the Transfusion hath been on him, and what returnes he makes for his Cure.

To the Royal Society the VIRTUOSI, and all the Honourable Members of it, the Humble Address of AGNUS COGA.

YOur Creature (for he was his own man till your Experiment transform'd him into another species) amongst those many alterations he finds in his condition, which he thinks himself oblig'd to represent them, finds a decay in his purse as well as his body, and to recruit his spirits is forc't to forfeit his nerves, for so is money as well in peace as warre. 'Tis very miserable, that the want of natural heat should rob him of his artificial too: But such is his case; to repair his own ruines, (yours, because made by you) he pawns his cloaths, and dearly purchases your sheeps blood with the loss of his own wooll. In this sheepwrack't vessel of his, like that of Argos, he addresses himself to you for the Golden Fleece. For he thinks it requisite to your Honours, as perfect Metaplasts, to transform him without as well as within. If you oblige him in this, he hath more blood still at your service, provided it may be his own, that it may be the nobler sacrifice.

The meanest of your Flock, AGNUS COGA.

Information about this book

Title statement

A specimen of some animadversions upon a book entituled, Plus ultra, or, Modern improvements of useful knowledge writtten by Mr. Joseph Glanvill, a member of the Royal Society.

Stubbe, Henry, 1632-1676.

Edition statement

1670

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2005-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A61896

ID [STC]

Wing S6067

ID [STC]

ESTC R24632

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

08256156

ID [OCLC]

ocm 08256156

ID [VID]

41240

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A61896)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 41240)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1241:19)

Source

— A specimen of some animadversions upon a book entituled, Plus ultra, or, Modern improvements of useful knowledge writtten by Mr. Joseph Glanvill, a member of the Royal Society., Stubbe, Henry, 1632-1676..

Extent

179 p.

[s.n.],. London :: Printed in the year 1670.. (Reproduction of original in the British Library.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.