from other serpents by advancing his head, and some white marks or coronary spots upon the crown, as all authentic writers have delivered.

Nor is this cockatrice only unlike the basilisk, but of no real shape in nature, and rather an hieroglyphical fancy, to express different intentions, set forth in different fashions.

by modern naturalists; it seems most probabie that the former was intended to denote the naja or cobra capello of the Portuguese.

Under the name of basilisk is at present designated a genus of reptiles, of the saurian order, which exhibit many affinities with the iguanes and monitors. No animal, perhaps, has been the subject of so great a number of prejudices as the one now under consideration. The most ancient authors have spoken of the basilisk as of a serpent which had the power of striking its victim dead by a single glance. Others have pretended that it could not exercise this faculty, unless it first perceived the object of its vengeance before it was itself perceived by it. It was also most absurdly imagined to proceed from the eggs of old cocks. Aldrovandus, and several other writers, have given figures of it. They have represented it with eight feet, a crown on the head, and a hooked and recurved beak. Pliny assures us that the serpent, named basilisk, has a voice so terrible, that it strikes terror into all other species-that it thus chases them from the spot which it inhabits, and of which it retains the sole and undisputed dominion. The name indeed, basilisk, in Greek, signifies royal. The fantastic forms and fabulous properties thus attributed to an animal which, most probably, never had an existence, rendered this name too celebrated for naturalists not to endeavour to apply it to another species, which accordingly they did. Seba figured a species of lizard, whose head is surmounted with projecting lines, and the back furnished with a broad vertical crest, which extends as far as over the tail, and which that author believed to be intended for the purposes of flight. He has designated it under the name of basilisk, or dragon of America, a flying amphibious animal. This is the animal which has subsequently been described in all works of natural history, under the name of basilisk.-Cuvier's Animal Kingdom, vol. ix. p. 226.

1 an hieroglyphical fancy, &c.] This is also from Pierius (175, a.) The Bembine, or Isiac table, Dr. Young has shown to be the work of a Roman sculptor, imitating only the general style of the separate delineations of the Egyptian tablets. The inscriptions neither have any relation to the figures over which they are placed, nor form any connected sense of their own. It may be concluded, therefore, that although (presuming the imitation to be accurate) the Isiac table may be regarded as second-rate authority for the delineation of the separate figures and hieroglyphics it contains, it is devoid of all authority as showing their collocation.-EGYPT, in Sup. to Ency. Brit. 74. Isis is sometimes personi fied as a basilisk.-16. 58. Mneuis, as a basilisk and a tear.—Ib. 59, D. The asp and basilisk are both employed as the symbol of divinity.— 16. 55.

Sometimes with the head of a man, sometimes with the head of an hawk, as Pierius hath delivered, and as with addition of legs, the heralds and painters still describe it. Nor was it only of old a symbolical and allowable invention, but is now become a manual contrivance of art and artificial imposture;

The ibis, mentioned in this chapter, is the hieroglyphic of the Egyptian god, Thoth, or Hermes, the secretary of Osiris.-Ib. 11.

In

With the exception of the basilisk, and perhaps the deer, not one of the animals named by Sir Thomas, as used hieroglyphically, is mentioned as an Egyptian hieroglyphic in Dr. Young's article, Egypt. deed, in my opinion, the others have the character of a spurious origin, having probably arisen towards the dark ages, when significations were invented for the ancient fables.

Nor are they, if we add to the exceptions "le lézard" (as the salamander), les quadrupèdes à tête d'oiseau (as the griffin), and "le vipère,” either mentioned or figured by Champollion; but as the hieroglyphic texts present images of all kinds of natural objects, including mammalia, birds, reptiles, amphibia, fishes, and insects; and of the second class" une foule" (Champollion enumerating, among the eight hundred and sixty-four characters contained in those texts, thirty-four quadrupeds and fifty birds and their parts), it is probable that the real animals may have been used among the objects hieroglyphically employed; but the alleged grounds of their respective use are most likely erroneous. I should rather doubt, however, the use of the beaver, an animal scarcely likely to have been known to the Egyptians.

The bear may possibly be in the same predicament, especially as there appears to be no name for that animal in Egyptian for Champollion informs us, that the name for lion in that language (labo, laboi, or lifôi), is a compound word, meaning valde hirsutus, "et que c'est dans ce sens qu'on aurait aussi quelquefois appliqué ce nom à l'ours, dans la version Egyptienne des livres saints; Apocalypse, xiii. 2." This indicates that there was no name for the bear in Egyptian, as above noted, and if that were the case, it is clear there could be no hieroglyphic of it.

Browne's authority for the alleged Egyptian hieroglyphics he mentions in this book, are-Horapollo and Pierius-but principally the latFrom looking over Pierius, his explanations appear to be, perhaps always, fallacious; being founded on the misconception, before noted, as arising in the dark ages.

ter.

With respect to Horapollo, the following extract, from Dr. Young's Discoveries in Hieroglyphical Literature, will show the degree of reliance to be placed in him. After speaking of the traditional record of the true sense of the handled cross, he proceeds :-"We also find some imperfect hints of a partial knowledge of the sense of the hieroglyphics in the puerile work of Horapollo, which is much more like a collection of conceits and enigmas, than an explanation of a real system of serious literature; and while such scattered truths were confounded with a multitude of false assertions, it was impossible to profit by any of them, without some clue to assist us in the selection."

whereof, besides others, Scaliger hath taken notice: Basilisci formam mentiti sunt vulgò gallinaceo similem, et pedibus binis; neque enim absimiles sunt cæteris serpentibus, nisi macula quasi in vertice candida, unde illi nomen regium; that is, "men commonly counterfeit the form of a basilisk with another like a cock and with two feet; whereas, they differ not from other serpents, but in a white speck upon their crown." Now, although in some manner it might be counterfeited in Indian cocks and flying serpents, yet is it commonly contrived out of the skins of thornbacks, skaits, or maids, as Aldrovand hath observed, and also graphically described in his excellent book of fishes, and for satisfaction of my own curiosity, I have caused some to be thus contrived out of the same fishes.

Nor is only the existency of this animal considerable, but many things delivered thereof, particularly its poison and its generation. Concerning the first, according to the doctrine of the ancients, men still affirm, that it killeth at a distance, that it poisoneth by the eye, and by priority of vision. Now, that deleterious it may be at some distance, and destructive without corporal contaction, what uncertainty soever there be in the effect, there is no high improbability in the relation. For if plagues or pestilential atoms have been conveyed in the air from different regions-if men at a distance have infected each other-if the shadows of some trees be noxious 3 -if torpedos deliver their opium at a distance, and stupify beyond themselves, we cannot reasonably deny, that (beside

2

pedibus binis.] As was that kept in the physick schooles in Oxon, of a most elegant forme, and as it seemes of a dusky, but transparent, substance, like glew, and as if shaped in a molde.—Wr.

3 if the shadows of some trees, &c.] Later investigation has proved that the awful stories put forth in the latter end of the eighteenth century, of the poisonous character of the upas-tree, were impudent forgeries. For the assertion to which this passage alludes, viz., that its shadow is poisonous, there is certainly no foundation. In the island of Java, there are two trees which produce a very deadly poison; but the birds, nevertheless, perch on their branches in safety, and the natives collect their poisonous juices with impunity, and even wear a coarse stuff prepared from their bark.

4 at a distance, &c.] The electrical shock of the torpedo, although it may be received without actual contact, cannot be communicated from a distance but by means of some conducting medium. Indeed, it is found that both the gymnote and torpedo are limited to precisely the

our gross and restrained poisons requiring contiguity unto their actions), there may proceed, from subtiler seeds, more agile emanations, which contemn those laws, and invade at distance unexpected.

That this venenation shooteth from the eye,5 and that this

same conducting and non-conducting mediums as are met with in common electricity.

5 That this venenation, &c.] Cuvier, on this point, makes the following observation in reference to the rattlesnake :-"It was for a long time believed it had the power of torpifying by its breath, and even of fascinating, that is, of forcing its prey, by its glance alone, to precipitate themselves into its mouth. It appears, however, that it is enabled to seize them only during those irregular movements which the fear of its aspect causes them to make."-See Burton's Memoir on the Faculty of Fascination attributed to the Rattle-snake: Philadel. 1796. But the subject is more fully adverted to in the following passage, in the supplementary observations on the Ophidians.

"It has been almost universally believed, that by certain special emanations, by the fear which they inspire, or even by a sort of magnetic or magic power, the serpents can stupify and fascinate the prey which they are desirous to obtain. Pliny attributes this kind of asphyxia to a nauseous vapour proceeding from these animals; an opinion which seems to receive confirmation from the facility with which, by the assistance of smell alone, the negroes and native Indians can discover serpents in the savannahs of America. Count de Lacépède seems inclined to adopt this notion in his History of Serpents.

"P. Kalm assures us, that being fixedly regarded by a serpent hissing, and darting its forked tongue out of its mouth, the squirrels are, as it were, constrained to fall from the summit of the trees into the mouth of the reptile, which swallows them up. According to the report of many travellers, one would think that by the effect of some charm, the durissus and boïquira, those redoubtable rulers of the steppes of America, possess the power of forcing their prey into their mouths. At their aspect, it is said, that hares, rats, frogs, and other reptiles, seem petrified with terror, and far from attempting to fly, will precipitate themselves upon the fate which awaits them. Even at a sufficient distance for escape, they are paralyzed by the sight of their tremendous foe, and deprived of all their faculties in a manner that appears wholly supernatural.

"But this fact, which is so interesting in animal physiology, is not only far from being clearly explained, but even far enough from being sufficiently demonstrated. Notwithstanding the ingenious conjectures of Sir Hans Sloane on this subject, the observations of Kalm, whose assertions were implicitly received by Linnæus; those of Lawson, Catesby, Brickel, Beverley, Bancroft, and Bartram ; notwithstanding a work published ex professo on the matter, by Dr. Burton, of Philadelphia, and notwithstanding some recent accounts by Major Gordon, of this stupifying power in the serpents, which he attributes both to

way a basilisk may empoison-although thus much be n agreed upon by authors, some imputing it unto the breat others unto the bite-it is not a thing impossible. For ey receive offensive impressions from their objects, and ma have influences destructive to each other. For the visibl species of things strike not our senses immaterially, bu streaming in corporal rays, do carry with them the qualitie of the object from whence they flow, and the mediu through which they pass. Thus, through a green or re glass, all things we behold appear of the same colours; thu sore eyes affect those which are sound, and themselves als by reflection, as will happen to an inflamed eye that beholds itself long in a glass; thus is fascination made out, and thus also it is not impossible, what is affirmed of this animal, the visible rays of their eyes carrying forth the subtilest portion of their poison, which received by the eye of man or beast, infecteth first the brain, and is from thence communicated unto the heart.7

But lastly, that this destruction should be the effect of the first beholder, or depend upon priority of aspection, is a point not easily to be granted, and very hardly to be made

the terror which they inspire, and to certain narcotic emanations from their bodies at particular times, it must be confessed that this subject is still liable to controversy, and still involved in a considerable degree of obscurity."-Griffith's Cuvier, ix. 311, 312. There is a very interesting lecture on this subject, in Dr. Good's Book of Nature, vol. ii. lec. 6.

6 brain.] And why not by the smel rather, and from thence to the braine, as for the most part happens by contagion in time of the plague. Soe the poysonous breath of the basiliske, spreading far through the aire in those hot countryes of Africa, may easily surprise those that unawares come neer his denn.—Wr.

heart.] But yf by the serpent's priority of vision, how comes itt to effect the eye first, but that coming unawares within the contagion of his deadly breath, a man is infected before he sees his mischeef. And which is most likely? by the poyson some smel immediately drawne to the harte with the pestilent air in those burning countryes; or by the eye into the braine, and thence to the harte, whereof noe man can justify the trueth, and may more justly bee denyed then granted, being farther fetcht, only infered by way of consequence to make good their assertion. Yf, then, the infection bee not receaved by the eye, as heere the learned Dr. [seems?] to opine, by what other way can it bee possibly received, but by the infected ayre immediately drawne into the heart? which I suppose the following discourse will cleere.- Wr.

not easily, &c.] This velitation will [be] needles, yf as before, and

e.