Some Observations of Vipers

Some Observations of Vipers. A curious Italian, called Francesco Redi, having lately had an opportunity, by the great number of Vipers, brought to the Grand Duke of Tuscany for the composing of Theriac or Treacle, to examine what is vulgarly delivered and believed concerning the Poyson of those Creatures, hath, (according to the account, given of it in the French Journal des Scavans, printed January 4. 1665) performed his undertaking with much exactness, and publish'd in an Italian tract, not yet come into England, these Observations. 1. He hath observed, that the poyson of Vipers is neither in their Teeth, nor in their Tail, nor in their Galls; but in the two Vesicles or Bladders, which cover their teeth, and which coming to be compressed, when the Vipers bite, do emit a certain yellowish Liquor, that runs along the teeth and poisons the wound. Whereof he gives this proof, that he hath rub'd the wounds of many Animals with the Gall of Vipers, and pricked them with their Teeth, and yet no considerable ill accident follow'd upon it, but that as often as he rubbed the wounds with the said yellow Liquor, not one of them escaped. 2 Whereas commonly it hath hitherto been believed, that the poyson of Vipers being swallowed, was present death; this Author, after many reiterated Experiments, is said to have observed, that in Vipers there is neither Humour, nor Excrement, nor any part, nor the Gall itself, that, being taken into the Body, kills. And he assures, that he hath seen men eat, and hath often made Bruit Animals swallow all that is esteem'd most poisonous in a Viper, yet without the least mischief to them. Whence he shews, that it needs not so much to be wondered at, that certain Empiricks swallow the juice of the most most venomous Animals without receiving any harm thereby; adding, that, which is ascribed to the virtue of their Antidote, ought to be attributed to the nature of those kinds of Poisons, which are no poisons, when they are swallow'd, (for which Doctrine he also alleges Celsus) but only when they are put into wounds. Which also has been noted by Lucan, who introduces Cato thus speaking; \[ \text{Noxia serpentum est admissa sanguine pestis,} \\ \text{Morsu virus habent, fatum dente minantur;} \\ \text{Pocula morte carent.} \] And what also some Authors have affirm'd, videl. That it is mortal, to eat of the Flesh of creatures killed by Vipers; or to drink of the Wine wherein Vipers have been drowned or to suck the wounds that have been made by them, is by this Author observed to be wide of truth. For he assures, that many persons have eaten Pullets and Pigeons, bitten by Vipers, without finding any alteration from it in their health. On the contrary, he declares, That it is a sovereign Remedy against the biting of Vipers, to suck the wound; alledging an Experiment, made upon a Dog, which he caused to be bitten by a Viper at the nose, who by licking his own wound saved his life. Which he confirms by the example of those people, celebrated in History by the name of Marisi and Psilli, whose Employment it was, to heal those, that had been bitten by Serpents, by sucking their wounds. 3. He adds, that although Galen and many modern Physicians do affirm, that there is nothing, which causeth so much thirst, as Vipers-flesh, yet he hath experimented the contrary and known divers persons, who did eat the flesh of Vipers at all their meals, and yet did assure him, they never were less dry, then when they observed that kind of Diet. 4. As for the Salt of Vipers, whereof some Chymists have so so great esteem, he faith, that it hath no Purging vertue at all in it; adding that even of All Salts, none hath more vertue than another, as he pretends to have shew'd in an other Book of his, De natura salium; which also hath not been yet transmited into these parts. 5. He denies, what Aristotle affiures, and what Galen faith to have often tryed, that the Spittle of a Fasting person kills Vipers, and he laughs at many other particulars, that have been delivered concerning the Antipathy of Vipers unto certain things; and their manner of Conception and Generation, and several other properties, commonly ascribed to them; which the alledged French Author affirms to be refuted by so many experiments made by this Italian Philosopher, that it seems to him, there is no place left for doubting, after so authentick a testimony. Advertisement. The Reader of these Translations is desired to correct these Errata in Number 8. viz. page. 132. line. penult. read Wine for Lime; and page 133. line 10. read Thresher for Trespber, as some Copies have it; and page 136. line ult. read purifie for putrifie. LONDON, Printed for John Martyn and James Allestree, Printers to the Royal Society, 1666,