nioft venomoiTs Animak wirhout reeeiving any harm tbere-^ 
by ; adding, that, which is adfcribed to the vertne of their 
Antidote ^ ought to be attributed to the nature of thofe kinds 
of Poyfons, which are no poyfon^ , wiien they nre (wiMovi'd^. 
( for which Doctrine he alfo alledges ff///^/ ) biuoiieiy when 
they are put into wounds. Which aifo has been noied by Lu* 
€a?7^ who introduces Cato thus fpeaking^ 
Noxm ferpentum ejl admrJIo fafjguine ppflis, 
Morlu virus habeiit^ ^ fatum dcnte ?mnanltir ^^ 
V ocxxXdi mm' te car e?it. 
And what alfo fonie Authors have aflirm'd, '^ideL That it is ^ 
mortal, to eat of theFleih of creatures killed by Vipers s or 
to drink of the V Vine wherein Vipers have been drowned;or' 
to fuck the wounds that have been nude by them, is by this 
Authourobferved to be wide of truth. For he affures, that 
many perfons have eaten Pullets and Pigeons , bitten by Vi- 
pers, without finding any alteration from it in thei^ health. 
Gn the contrary, he declares/rhaticis a foveraign Remedy 
againft the biting of Vipers^ to fuck the wound v alledging 
an Experiment, made upon a Dog, v/hich he caufed lo be 
bitten by a Viper at the nofe, who by licking his own wound 
favedhis life. Which he confirms by the example of thofe 
people^ celebrated in /^//?(?ry by the name of M^ry7and P///?^ 
whofe Employment it was, to heal thofe, that had been bitten 
by Serpents, by fucking their wounds. 
3. He addSj that although Galen and many modern 'Vhjfnu 
ans do affirm, that there is nothing, which caufeth fo much 
thirfl, as Vipers-flefli, yet he hath experimented the contrary 
and known divers perfons, who did eat the flefh of Vipers at 
all their meals, and yet did affure him^ they never were lefs dry, 
then when they obferved that kind of Diet. 
4. As for the Salt of Vipers, whereof fome Chjmi^s have 
fo 
