The Works of Sir Thomas Browne, Volume 1

Acer et indomitus quo spes quoq; ira vocassetFerre manum, etc.Lucan. lib. 1.

To instance in some Particulars: with what an inconsiderable strength did he enterprize the conquest of Egypt, and afterwards went to attaque the forces of Scipio and Juba, which were ten times more than his own? after the Battle of Pharsalia, having sent his Army before into Asia, and crossing the Hellespont with one single Vessel, he there meets Lucius Cassius with ten men of War, he makes up to him, summons him to render, and he does it. In the famous and furious siege of Alexia, where he had 80,000 men to make defence against him, and an Army of one hundred and nine thousand Horse, and two hundred and forty thousand foot, all marching towards him, to raise his siege; yet for all that he would not quit the siege, but first fought with those without, and obtain'd a great Victory over them, and soon afterwards brought the besieged to his mercy.

Sect. 26. Pag. 41.

The Council of Constance condemns John Husse for an Heretick, the Stories of his own Party style him a Martyr. ] John Husse did agree with the Papists against us in the Point of Invocation of Saints, Prayers and Sacrifice for the Dead, free Will, Good Works, confession of Sins, seven Sacraments, etc. Gordon. Hunt. l. contr. 3. de Sacr. Euch. cap. 17. Yet was he condemned for maintaining certain Articles said by that Council to be heretical and seditious, and was burnt for Heresie. Now as I will not say he was an Heretick, so can I not maintain that he was a Martyr, if it be but for this one Article, which in the 15. Sess. of that Council was objected against him, which he did acknowledge, but would not recal, i. e. Nullus est Dominus civilis, dum est in peccato mortali. If that Doctrine should be believed, we shall have little obedience to Civil Magistrates; and without that, how miserable is humane condition? That which begat compassion towards Husse in those of his own Party was, that he had a safe conduct from the Emperour Sigismund; and therefore it was, say they, a violation of publick faith in the Council and Emperour in putting him to death.

That wise heathen Socrates that suffered on a fundamental point of Religion, the Unity of God. ] That Socrates suffered on this Point, divers Christian Writers do object to the Ethniques, as Justin Martyr, Apol. 2. Euseb. l. 5. de præparat. Evangelic. c. 14. Tertul. in Apolog. cap. 14. and Lactant. de justitia, cap. 15. whose words are these: Plato quidem multa de uno Deo locutus est, à quo ait constitutum esse mundum, sed nihil de Religione; somniaverat enim Deum, non cognoverat. Quod si justitiæ defensionem vel ipse vel quilibet alius implere voluisset, imprimis Deorum Religiones evertere debuit, quia contrariæ pietati. Quod quidem Socrates quia facere tentavit in carcerem conjectus est, ut jam tunc appareret quid esset futurum iis hominibus qui justitiam veram defendere Deoque singulari servire cœpissent.

I have often pitied the miserable Bishop that suffered in the cause of Antipodes. ] The suffering was, that he lost his Bishoprick for denying the Antipodes. Vid. Aventin. in Hist. Boio. Besides him, there were other Church-men of great note, that denyed Antipodes, as Lactantias, Augustin, and Bede.

Sect. 27. Pag. 43.

I hold that God can do all things: How he should work contradictions, I do not understand, yet dare not therefore deny. ] Who would not think the Author had taken this from Mr. Montaign, whose words are, Il m'a tousjours semble qu'a un homme Christien, cette sorte de parler est plein d'indiscretion et d'irreverence [Dieu ne se peut disdire,] [Dieu ne peut faire cecy ou cela]. Je ne trouve pas bon d'enfermer ainsi la puissance divine sous les loix de nostre parole. Et l'apparence qui s' offre à nous en ses propositions, il la faudroit representer plus reverement, et plus Religieusement. Liv. 2. des Ess. c. 12.

I cannot see why the Angel of God should question Esdras to recal the time past, if it were beyond his own power, or that God should pose mortality in that which he was not able to perform himself. ] Sir K. Digby in his Notes upon this place saith, There is no contradiction in this, because he saith it was but putting all things that had motion into the same state they were in at that moment, unto which time was to be reduced back, and from thence letting it travel on again by the same motions, etc. which God could do. But under favour, the contradiction remains, if this were done that he mentions; for Time depends not at all upon motion, but has a being altogether independent of it, and therefore the same revolution would not bring back the same time, for that was efflux'd before; as in the time of Joshua, when the Sun stood still, we cannot but conceive, though there were no motion of the Sun, but that there was an efflux of Time, otherwise, how could the Text have it, That there was not any day, before or after, that was so long as that? for the length of it must be understood in respect of the flux of time. The reasoning of Sir Kenelme is founded upon the opinion of Aristot. who will needs have it, that Time cannot be without mutation; he gives this for a reason, because when we have slept, and cannot perceive any mutation to have been, we do therefore use to connect the time of our sleeping and of our awaking together, and make but one of it: to which it may be answered, although some mutation be necessary, that we may mark the mix of time, it doth not therefore follow that the mutation is necessary to the flux it self.

Sect. 28. Pag. 43.

I excuse not Constantine from a fall off his Horse, or a mischief from his enemies, upon the wearing those nails, etc. ] Hac de re videatur P. Diac. hist. miscell.

Sect. 29. Pag. 44.

I wonder how the curiosity of wiser heads could pass that great and indisputable miracle, the cessation of Oracles. ] There are three opinions touching the manner how the predictions of these Oracles were perform'd: Some say by vapour, some by the intelligences, or influences, of the Heavens, and others say by the assistance of the Devils. Now the indisputable miracle the Author speaks of, is, that they ceas'd upon the coming of Christ; and it is generally so believed; and the Oracle of Delphos delivered to Augustus, mentioned by the Author in this Section, is brought to prove it, which is this:

Me puer Hebrœus divos Deus ipse gubernansCedere sede jubet, tristemq; redire sub orcum.Aris ergo dehinc tacitus discedito nostris.

But yet it is so far from being true that their cessation was miraculous, that the truth is, there never were any predictions given by those Oracles at all.

That their cessation was not upon the coming of Christ, we have luculent testimony out of Tully, in his 2. lib. de Divinat. which he writ many years before Christ was born; who tells us that they were silent (and indeed he never thought they were otherwise) long before that time, insomuch that they were come into contempt: Cur isto modo jam oracula Delphis non eduntur, non modo nostra œtate, sed jamdiu jam ut nihil possit esse contemptius. So that for that of Delphos, which was the most famous of them all, we see we have no reason to impute the cessation of it to Christ; Why therefore should we do so for any of the rest?

For their predictions, let us consider the three several ways before mentioned, whereby they are supposed to operate; and from thence see whether it be probable that any such Oracles ever were.

The first Opinion is, that it was by exhalation or vapour drawn up from the earth; and gives this for a reason of their being, that they were for a time nourished by those exhalations; and when those ceased, and were exhausted, the Oracles famish'd and died for want of their accustom'd sustenance: this is the far-fetcht reason given by Plutarch for their defect; but 'twas not devised by him, but long before, as appears, in that Tully scoffs at it, lib. de divinat. De vino aut salsamento putes loqui (saith he) quæ evanescunt vetustate. This seem'd absurd to others, who do therefore say this was not to be attributed to any power of the Earth, but to the power of the Heavens, or Intelligences Cœlestial; to certain aspects whereof, they say, the Statua's of those Oracles were so adapted, that they might divine and foretel future events. But yet to others, this way seemeth as absurd as the others; for, say they, admitting that there were an efficacy in the Heavens, more than in the Earth; yet how can it be that men should come by the skill to fit the Statua's to the Aspects or influences of the Heavens? or if at any time they had such skill, why should not the same continue the rather, because men are more skilled in the motions of the Heavens, of later than in the former time? Again, they do not see how it should be that the cause should be of less excellency than the effect; for if a man (say they) can by his industry make such Oracles, why can he not produce the same effect in another man? for if you affirm that the Heavens influence is requisite, they will tell you that Influence may happen as well to a man, as to a Statue of wood or stone. Therefore the third sort being unsatisfied, which either of the former ways conclude, that this was perform'd by the Devil; but for that it will appear as contrary to Reason and Philosophy, as either of the former; for Philosophy teacheth that things singular, or individual, are to be known only by sense, or by such an Intellect, as doth know by its Essence; and Theology teacheth that God only knoweth the heart, and that the Devil doth not know by sense, nor by essence; and since 'tis admitted by all, that most of the answers that were pretended to be given by those Oracles, were de rebus singularibus, or individuis; it is evident that these predictions were not perform'd by Devils. How then? why those predictions which the ignorant Heathen took to come from Heaven, and some Christians (not less ignorant) from the Devil, was nothing but the jugling and impostures of the Priests, who from within the Statua's gave the answers; which Princes connived at, that they might upon occasion serve their turns upon the ignorance of the people; and the learned men, for fear of their Princes, durst not speak against it. Lucian hath noted it, and so a more Authentick Author, Minut. Felix., in Octav. Authoritatem quasi præsentis numinis consequuntur dum inspirantur interim vatibus. But in process of time, the people grew less credulous of their Priests, and so the Oracles became to be silent: Cum jam (saith he) Apollo versus facere desisset, cujus tunc cautum illud et ambiguum deficit oraculum: Cum et politiores homines et minus creduli esse cæperunt. Sir H. Blount in his Levantine voyage, saith he saw the Statua of Memnon so famous of old; he saith it was hollow at top, and that he was told by the Egyptians and Jews there with him, that they had seen some enter there, and come out at the Pyramid, two Bows shoot off; then (saith he) I soon believ'd the Oracle, and believe all the rest to have been such; which indeed, is much easier to imagine than that it was perform'd by any of the three wayes before mentioned. St. Aug. hath composed a Book, where he handleth this point at large, and concludeth that the Devils can no more foretel things come, than they are able to discern the thoughts that are within us. Aug. lib. de Scientia Dæmon.

Till I laughed my self out of it with a piece of Justin, where he delivers that the Children of Israel for being scabbed were banished out of Egypt. ] These words of Justin are, Sed cum scabiem Ægyptii et pruriginem paterentur, responso moniti, eum (se. Moysen) cum ægris, ne pestis ad plures serperet, terminis Ægypti pellunt. l. 36. But he is not singular in this, for Tacitus tells us, Hist. lib. 5. Plurimi authores consentiunt orta per Ægyptum tabe quœ corpora fœduret, Regem (Ochirum) (he means Pharaoh) adito Hammonis oraculo remedium petentem purgare. Regnum et id genus hominum – alias in terras avertere jussum. Et paulo inferius, Quod ipsos scabies quondam turpaverat.

Sect. 30. Pag. 45.

I have ever believed, and do now know that there are Witches. ] What sort of Witches they were that the Author knew to be such. I cannot tell; for those which he mentions in the next Section, which proceed upon the principles of Nature, none have denyed that such there are; against such it was, that the Lex Julia de veneficiis was made, that is, those, Qui noxio poculo aut impuris medicuminibus aliquem fuerint insectati. At. ab Alex. Gen. Dier. l. 5. c. 1. But for the opinion that there are Witches which co-operate with the Devil, there are Divines of great note, and far from any suspition of being irreligious, that do oppose it. Certainly there is no ground to maintain their being from the story of Oracles, as may be seen from what hath been said on the precedent Section.

Nor have the power to be so much as Witches. Pliny saith, so it fared with Nero, who was so hot in pursuit of the Magick Arts, that he did dedicate himself wholly to it, and yet could never satisfie himself in that kind, though he got all the cunning men he could from the East, for that purpose. Plin. l. 3. Nat. Hist. c. 1.

Pag. 46.

By conjunction with the Devil. ] Though, as the Author saith, it be without a possibility of Generation, yet there are great men that hold, that such carnality is performed; as August, in Levit. Aquin. l. 2. de qu. 73. art. ad 2. and Justin Martyr, Apol. 1.

Sect. 33. Pag. 48.

It is no new opinion of the Church of Rome, but an old one of Pythagoras and Plato. ] This appears by Apuleius a Platonist, in his Book de Deo Socratis, and elsewhere. See Mede's Apostasie of the latter times, where out of this and other Authors, you shall see collected all the learning de Geniis.

Pag. 50.

I cannot with those in that great Father securely interpret the work of the first day, Fiat lux, to the creation of Angels. ] This great Father is S. Chrysost. Homil. in Genes. But yet 'tis his opinion, as also of Athanasius and Theodoret, that there is express mention of the creation of Angels, so that they need not rest upon this place, which they admit to be somewhat obscure. The place which they take to be express, is that of the 130 Psalm, where David begins to speak of the Majesty of God, in this manner: Confessionem sive majestatem et decorem induisti, amictus lumine sicut vestimento: Next he speaks of the Heavens, saying, Thou hast stretched them out over us like a Tent. Then he speaks of the Angels, Qui facis Angelos tuos spiritus. Now if it shall be objected, that this expression is onely of the time present, and without relation to the Creation: Answer is given by Divines, that the Hebrews have but three Tenses in their Verbs, the Preterperfect, Present, and Future Tense; and have not the use of the Preterimperfect, and Preterpluperfect, as the Greeks and Latines have; whence it ariseth, that the Present Tense with the Hebrews, may, as the sentence will bear it, be translated by the Preterimperfect, as also by the Preterperfect and Preterpluperfect Tense; and this (they say) is practised in this very passage, where the Phrase, as it is in Hebrew, may be rendered as well qui faciebas, as qui facis Angelos, etc. Vid. Hieronym. in Ep. ad Titum, et Thom. Aqu. 1. p. qu. 61. art. 3. The Latine Annotator saith, the Father meant by the Author, is St. Aug. and quotes him, l. II. de Civ. Dei cap. 9. which place I have perused, and find the expression there used by St. Aug. is but hypothetical; for these are his words: Cum enim dixit Fiat lux, et facta est lux, si rectè in fine luce creatio intelligitur Angelorum, etc. Where you see 'tis but with a Si, and therefore I conceive the Author intends not him, but Chrysostom.

Where it subsists alone, 'tis a Spiritual Substance, and may be an Angel. ] Epicurus was of this opinion, and St. Aug. in Euchirid. ad Laurentium.

Sect. 35. Pag. 52.

Moses decided that Question, and all is salved with the new term of Creation.] That is it which Aristotle could not understand; he had learned that ex nihilo nihil fit, and therefore when he found those that disputed that the World had a beginning, did maintain that it was generated, and he could not understand any generation, but out of matter præ-existent in infinitum, therefore he took their opinion to be absurd, and upon that ground principally, concluded the World to be eternal: whereas, if he had understood that there may be such a thing as Creation, he had not done it, for that solves his processus in infinitum. Take from Plato, that the World had a beginning, and from Aristot. that it was not generated, and you have the (true) Christian opinion.

Sect. 36. Pag. 54.

In our study of Anatomy, there is a mass of mysterious Philosophy, and such as reduced the very Heathens to Divinity. ] So it did Galen, who considering the order, use, and disposition of the parts of the body, brake forth into these words: Compono hic profecto Canticam in creatoris nostri laudem, quod ultra res suas ornare voluit melius quam ulla arte possent. Galen, 3. de usu partium.

Sect. 37. Pag. 55.

I cannot believe the wisdom of Pythagoras did ever positively, and in a literal sense, affirm his Metempsychosis. ] In this the opinion of Grotius is contrary to the Author, who saith this opinion was begotten by occasion of the opinion of other Philosophers, who in their discourses of the life that is to be after this, brought such arguments, Quæ non magis de homine quam de bestiis procedunt. And therefore, saith he, mirandum non est, si transitum animarum de hominibus in bestias, de bestiis in homines alii commenti sunt. Lib. 2. de ver. Relig. Christ. (vide etiam Annotat. ejusd.). But yet there is a shrewd objection against the opinion of Pythagoras, if he did mean it literally, which is cast in by the Sectators of Democritus and Epicurus, which Lucretius remembers in these Verses:

Præterea si immortalis natura animaïConstat, et in corpus nascentibus insinuatur,Cur super anteactam ætatem meminisse nequimus?Nec vestigia gestarum rerum ulla tenemus?Namsi tantopere 'st animi mutata potestas,Omnis ut actarum excideret retinentia rerum,Non ut opinor ea ab læto jam longiter errat.[Lib. 3.]

This Argument, 'tis true, is pro falso contra falsum, but yet holds ad hominem so far, that it is not likely (as the Author saith) but Pythagoras would observe an absurdity in the consequence of his Metempsychosis; and therefore did not mean it literally, but desired only to express the Soul to be immortal, which he, and the other Philosophers that were of that opinion, who had not heard of Creation, could not conceive, unless it must be taken for truth, that the soul were before the body; so saith Lactantius of them. Non putaverunt aliter fieri posse ut supersint animæ post corpora, nisi videntur fuisse ante corpora. De fals. Sap. c. 18.

Sect. 41. Pag. 59.

I do not envy the temper of Crows or Daws. ] As Theophrastus did, who dying, accused Nature for giving them, to whom it could not be of any concernment, so large a life; and to man, whom it much concern'd, so short a one. Cic. Tusc. quæst. l. 3. How long Daws live, see in Not. ad Sect. 41.

Sect. 42. Pag. 61.

Not upon Cicero's ground, because I have liv'd them well. ] I suppose he alludes to an expression in an Epistle of Cicero, written in his Exile, to his wife and children, where he hath these words to his wife: Quod reliquum est, te sustenta mea Terentia ut potes, honestissime viximus, floruimus. Non vitium nostrum sed virtus nos afflixit, peccatum est nullum nisi quod non unà animum cum ornamentis amisimus, l. 24, Ep. 4.

And stand in need of Eson's bath before threescore. ] Eson was the Father of Jason, and, at his request, was by Medea, by the means of this Bath, restored to his youth. Ingredients that went into it, and the description of Medea's performance, Ovid gives you, l. 7. Metam.

Interea calido positum medicamen ahenoFervet et exultat, spumisq; tumentibus albet.Illic Æmonia radices valle resectas,Seminaq; et flores, et succos incoquit atrosAdjicet extremo lapides Oriente petitos,Et quas Oceani refluum mare lavit arenas:Addidit exceptas lunæ de nocte pruinas,Et Strigis infames ipsis cum carnibus alas,Inq; virum soliti vultus mutare ferinosAmbigui prosecta lupi, nec defuit illiSquamea Cinyphei tenuis membrana Chelidri,Vivacisq; jecur cervi; quibus insuper additOra caputq; novem cornicis secula passæ.His et mille aliis, postquam sine nomine rebusPropositum instruxit mortali barbara munusArenti ramo jampridem mitis olivæOmnia confudit, summisq; immiscuit ima.Ecce vetus calido versatus stipes ahenoFit viridis primo, nec longo tempore frondesInduit, et subito gravidis oneratur olivis.At quacunq; cavo spumas ejecit ahenoIgnis, et in terram guttæ cecidere calentes,Vernat humus, floresq; et mollia pabula surgunt.Quæ simulac vidit, stricto Medea recluditEnse senis jugulum, veteremq; extare cruoremPassa replet succis, quos postquam combibit Æson,Aut ore acceptas, aut vulnere, barba comœq;Cunitie posita, nigrum rapuere colorem.Pulsa fugit macies: abeunt pallorq; situsque:Adjectoq; cavæ supplentur corpore rugæ;Membraq; luxuriant. Æson miratur, et olimAnte quater denos hunc se reminiscitur annos,Dissimilemq; animum subiit, ætate relicta.[262-293.]

Sect. 44. Pag. 62.

Extol the Suicide of Cato. ] As doth Seneca in several places; but Lactantius saith, he cast away his life, to get the reputation of a Platonick Philosopher, and not for fear of Cæsar; and 'tis very probable, he was in no great fear of death, when he slept so securely the night before his death, as the story reports of him.

Pag. 63.

Emori nolo, sed me esse mortuum, nihil curo. Were I of Cæsar's Religion. ] I doubt not, but here is a fault of the Press, and that instead of Cæsar it should be Cicero. I meet not with any such saying imputed to Cæsar, nor any thing like it, but that he preferr'd a sudden death (in which he had his option) to any other; but I meet with such a saying in Cicero quoted out of Epicharmus [Emori nolo, sed me esse mortuum nihili æstimo.] Where Cicero sustaineth the part of the Epicure that there is no hurt in being dead, since there remaineth nothing after it. Cic. 1. Thusc. qu. non procul ab initio.

Sect. 45. Pag. 64.

Or whence Lucan learn'd to say, Communis mundo superest rogus, etc.] Why, Lucan was a Stoique, and 'twas an opinion among them almost generally, that the world should perish by fire; therefore without doubt from them he learned it. Cælum quoque cum omnibus quæ in cælo continentur, ita ut cœpisset desinere, fontium dulci aqua marisve nutriri, in vim ignis abiturum. Stoicis constans opinio est, quod consumpto humore mundus hic omnis ignescat. Minutius in Octav. But Minutius should have excepted Boetius, Possidonius, Diogenes Babylonius, and Zeno Sidonius, who were Stoiques, and yet did not think the world should be destroyed by fire, nor yet by any other means.