« PredošláPokračovať »
paradoxical soever, upon a strict enquiry, will prove undeniable truth.
For first, that animal which the French term sauterelle, we a grasshopper, and which under this name is commonly described by us, is named "Akpıç by the Greeks, by the Latins locusta, and by ourselves in proper speech a locust; as in the diet of John Baptist, and in our translation, the locusts have no king, yet go they forth all of them by bands."* Again, between the cicada and that we call a grasshopper, the differences are very many, as may be observed in themselves, or their descriptions in Matthiolus, Aldrovandus, and Muffetus. For first, they are differently cucullated or capuched upon the head and back, and in the cicade the eyes are more prominent: the locusts have antenna or long horns before, with a long faleation or forcipated tail behind : and being ordained for saltation, their hinder legs do far exceed the other. The locust or our grasshopper hath teeth, the cicada none at all; nor any mouth, according unto Aristotle.3 The cicada is most upon trees; and lastly, the frittinnitus, or proper note thereof, is far more shrill than that of the locust, and its life so short in summer, that for provision it needs not have recourse unto the providence of the pismire in winter.
* Proverbs xxx. many valuable insects from time to time, and at length, to my surprise and great satisfaction, a pair of CICADA! Mr. John Curtis (since deservedly well known as the author of British Entomology) was then residing with me as draughtsman; and no doubt our united examinations were diligently bestowed to find the little stranger among the described species of the continent; but in vain. I quite forget whether we bestowed a MS. name; probably not; as scarcely hoping that the first species discovered to be indigenous, would also prove to be peculiar to our country, and be distinguished by the national appellation of Cicada ANGLICA. Yet so it has proved: Mr. Samouelle, I believe, first gave it that name; and Mr. Curtis has given an exquisite figure, and full description of it, in the 9th vol. of his British Entomology, No. 392. I cannot however speak in so high terms of his account of its original discovery. I cannot understand why he has thus drily noticed it : “C. Anglica was first discovered in the New Forest about twenty years ago.” I should have supposed that it might have given him some pleasure to attach to his narrative the name of an old friend, from whom he had received early and valuable assistance, and to whom he was indebted for his acquaintance with the art he has so long and so successfully pursued. At all events he ought to have recorded the name of the poor man by whose industry and perseverance the discovery was effected.
3 The locust, &c.] Both the locustce and cicade are furnished with teeth-if by that term we are to understand mandibulæ and maxilla. But in cicade they are not so obvious; being enclosed in the labium. This conformation probably led Aristotle to say they had no mouth.
And therefore where the cicada must be understood, the pictures of heralds and emblematists are not exact, nor is it safe to adhere unto the interpretation of dictionaries, and we must with candour make out our own translations; for in the plague of Egypt, Exodus x., the word "Akpic is translated a locust, but in the same sense and subject, Wisdom xvi., it is translated a grasshopper; " for them the bitings of grasshoppers and flies. killed;" whereas we have declared before the cicada hath no teeth, but is conceived to live upon dew; and the possibility of its subsistence is disputed by Licetus. Hereof I perceive Muffetus hath taken notice, dissenting from Langius and Lycosthenes, while they deliver the cicade destroyed the fruits in Germany, where that insect is not found, and therefore concludeth, Tam ipsos quàm alios deceptos fuisse autumo, dum locustas cicadas esse vulgari errore crederent.
And hereby there may be some mistake in the due dispensation of medicines desumed from this animal, particularly of diatettigon, commended by Ætius, in the affections of the kidneys. It must be likewise understood with some restriction what hath been affirmed by Isidore, and yet delivered by many, that cicades are bred out of cuckoo-spittle or woodsear, that is, that spumous frothy dew or exudation, or both, found upon plants, especially about the joints of lavender and rosemary, observable with us about the latter end of May. For here the true cicada is not bred; but certain it is, that out of this, some kind of locust doth proceed, for herein
may be discovered a little insect of a festucine or pale green, resembling in all parts a locust, or what we call a grasshopper.4
4 cicades are bred, dc.] Here is another error. The froth spoken of is always found to contain the larva of a little skipping insect, frequently mis-called a cicada, but properly cercopis ; allied in form to cicada, and of the same order, viz., homoptera, but very distinct in generic character, and especially without the power of sound. It has no great resemblance to locustce, which belong to a distinct order, viz., orthoptera.
Lastly, the word itself is improper, and the term grasshopper not appliable unto the cicada; for therein the organs of motion are not contrived for saltation, nor have the hinder legs of such extension, as is observable in salient animals, and such as move by leaping. Whereto the locust is very well conformed, for therein the legs behind are longer than all the body, and make at the second joint acute angles, at a considerable advancement above their backs.
The mistake therefore with us might have its original from a defect in our language, for having not the insect with us, we have not fallen upon its proper name, and so make use of a term common unto it and the locust; whereas other countries have proper expressions for it. So the Italian calls it cicada, the Spaniard cigarra, and the French cigale; all which appellations conform unto the original, and properly express this animal. Whereas our word is borrowed from the Saxon gærsthoop, which our forefathers, who never beheld the cicada, used for that insect which we yet call a grasshopper.
CHAPTER IV. Of the Picture of the Serpent tempting Eve. In the picture of paradise, and delusion of our first parents, the serpent is often described with human visage, not unlike unto Cadmus or his wife in the act of their metamorphosis. Which is not a mere pictorial contrivance or invention of the picturer, but an ancient tradition and conceived reality, as it stands delivered by Beda and authors of some antiquity,
* Whereas our word, &c.] This sentence was first added in 6th edition.
6 visage.] See Munster's Hebrew Bible, where in the letter which begins the first y the serpent is made with a Virgin's face.— Wr.
In Munster's Hebrew and Latin Bible (Basil, 1535, ex Off. Bebeliana), at the commencement of the Psalms, is the initial letter B, which is a wood-cut of Adam, Eve, and the serpent between them, with the face of a virgin.
antiquity.] See vol. i. p. 57, where he quotes Basil saying, that the serpent went upright and spake. 'Tis probable (and thwarteth noe truth) that the serpent spake to Eve. Does not the text expressly saye soe? The devil had as much power then as now, and yf now he can take upon him the forme of an angel of light, why not then the face of a humane creature as well as the voice of man ?- Wr.
that is, that Satan appeared not unto Eve in the naked form of a serpent, but with a virgin's head, that thereby he might become more acceptable, and his temptation find the easier entertainment. Which nevertheless is a conceit not to be admitted, and the plain and received figure is with better reason embraced.
For first, as Pierius observeth from Barcephas, the assumption of human shape had proved a disadvantage unto Satan, affording not only a suspicious amazement in Eve,8 before the fact, in beholding a third humanity beside herself and Adam, but leaving some excuse unto the woman, which afterward the man took up with lesser reason, that is, to have been deceived by another like herself.
Again, there is no inconvenience in the shape assumed, or any considerable impediment that it might disturb that performance in the common form of a serpent. For whereas it is conceived the woman must needs be afraid thereof, and rather fly than approach it, it was not agreeable unto the condition of paradise and state of innocency therein; if in that place, as most determine, no creature was hurtful or terrible unto man, and those destructive effects they now discover succeeded the curse, and came in with thorns and briars; and therefore Eugubinus (who affirmeth this serpent was a basilisk) incurreth no absurdity, nor need we infer that Eve should be destroyed immediately upon that vision. For noxious animals could offend them no more in the garden than Noah in the ark; as they peaceably received their names, so they friendly possessed their natures, and were their conditions destructive unto each other, they were not so unto man, whose constitutions then were antidotes, and needed not fear poisons; and if (as most conceive) there
Eve.] Eve might easier entertaine a suspicious amazement to heare a serpent speake in a humane voyce, than to heare a humane voyce in a humane shape ; nor was itt more wonder for Sathan to assume one than both. It suited better with his crafte to deliver his wile by a face suitable to the voice of man, and since we believe the one, we may without error believe the other. But itt is safest to believe what we finde recorded of the human voyce, and leave the other to Him who thought not fit to reveale any more. Wee see the fathers differ in opinion, and there is enough on either side to refute the scorne of Julian, who payd deare inoughe for his atheistical, or rather anti-theisticall' blasphemye.- Wr.
were but two created of every kind, they could not at that time destroy either man or themselves, for this had frustrated the command of multiplication, destroyed a species, and imperfected the creation; and therefore also if Cain were the first man born, with him entered, not only the act, but the first power of murder, for before that time neither could the serpent nor Adam destroy Eve, nor Adam and Eve each other, for that had overthrown the intention of the world, and put its creator to act the sixth day over again.
Moreover, whereas in regard of speech, and vocal conference with Eve, it may be thought he would rather assume an human shape and organs, than the improper form of a serpent, it implies no material impediment. Nor need we to wonder how he contrived a voice out of the mouth of a serpent, who hath done the like out of the belly of a Pythonissa, and the trunk of an oak, as he did for many years at Dodona.
Lastly, whereas it might be conceived that an human
O conceived.] Itt might wel bee conceived (and soe it seemes itt was) by St. Basil, that a virgin's head (hee does not saye a humane shape) was fittest for this intention of speakinge, itt being most probable Eve would be more amazed to heare such a creature as a serpent speake with a humane voyee, then to heare a human voyce passe through the mouth of a virgin face. To hear a voice without a head must needs (as the subtile serpent knew full well) have started in Eve either the supposition of a causeles miracle, or the suspition of an imposture ; therefore to cut off those scruples, which might have prevented and frustrated his ayme, 'tis most probable the subtile tempter assumed the face as well as the voice of a virgin to conveigh that temptation which he supposed Eve would greedily entertain.
Julius Scaliger, that magazin of all various learninge, in his 183rd exercitation and 4th section, speaking of certaine strange kinds of serpents, reports that in Malabar, there are serpents 8 foote long, of a horrible aspect, but harmless unless they bee provoked. These he cals boy-lovers (pæderotas) for that they will for manye houres together stand bolt upright gazing on the boyes at their sportes, never offring to hurte any of them.
These, saithe he, while they glide on the ground are like other serpents or eeles (like conger eeles), but raising themselves upright they spread themselves into such a corpulent breadthe, that had they feet they would seeme to be men, and therefore he cals them by a coigned name, évxedav pórovs, eele-like men, though hee might more properly call them oglavėpórovs, dragon-like men. Now though we can yeeld noe greater beleefe to this story then the Portuguez that traffique thither deserve, yet bycause the world owes many excellent discoveryes