Most therefore of the Moderns before _Rondeletius_, and all the Ancients excepting _Sestius_, have misunderstood this part, conceiving _Castoreum_ the Testicles of the _Bever_; as _Dioscorides_, _Galen_, _Ægineta_, _Ætius_, and others have pleased to name it. The Egyptians also failed in the ground of their Hieroglyphick, when they expressed the punishment of Adultery by the Bever depriving himself of his testicles, which was amongst them the penalty of such incontinency. Nor is _Ætius_ perhaps, too strictly to be observed, when he prescribeth the stones of the Otter, or River-dog, as succedaneous unto _Castoreum_. But most inexcusable of all is _Pliny_, who having before him in one place the experiment of _Sestius_ against it, sets down in another, that the _Bevers_ of _Pontus_ bite off their testicles: and in the same place affirmeth the like of the _Hyena_. Which was indeed well joined with the Bever, as having also a bag in those parts; if thereby we understand the _Hyena odorata_, or Civet Cat, as is delivered and graphically described by _Castellus_. [SN: Castellus de Hyena odorifera.] Now the ground of this mistake might be the resemblance and situation of these tumours about those parts, wherein we observe the testicles in other animals. Which notwithstanding is no well founded illation, for the testicles are defined by their office, and not determined by place or situation; they having one office in all, but different seats in many. For beside that, no Serpent, or Fishes oviparous, that neither biped nor quadruped oviparous have testicles exteriourly, or prominent in the groin; some also that are viviparous contain these parts within, as beside this Animal, the Elephant and the Hedg-hog. If any therefore shall term these testicles, intending metaphorically, and in no strict acception; his language is tolerable, and offends our ears no more then the Tropical names of Plants: when we read in Herbals, of Dogs, Fox, and Goat-stones. But if he insisteth thereon, and maintaineth a propriety in this language: our discourse hath overthrown his assertion, nor will Logic permit his illation; that is, from things alike, to conclude a thing the same; and from an accidental convenience, that is a similitude in place or figure, to infer a specifical congruity or substantial concurrence in Nature. CHAPTER V Of the Badger.