Nor will (I fear) the attest or prescript of Philosophers and Physitians, be a sufficient ground to confirm or warrant common practice, as is deducible from ancient Writers, from _Hippocrates_, _Galen_, _Simeon_, _Sethi_: and the later tracts of _Nonnus_ [SN: _Non_ de re cibaria.] and _Castellanus_. [SN: _Cast._ de esu carnium.] So _Aristotle_ and _Albertus_ commend the flesh of young Hawks: _Galen_ [SN: _Gal._ Alim. fac. lib. 3.] when they feed on Grapes: but condemneth Quails, and ranketh Geese but with Ostriches; which notwithstanding, present practice and every table extolleth. Men think they have fared hardly, if in times of extremity they have descended so low as Dogs: but _Galen_ delivereth [SN: _Gal._ Simpl. fac. lib. 3.] were the food of many Nations: and _Hippocrates_ [SN: _Hip._ de morbis de superfit.] ranketh the flesh of Whelps with that of Birds: who also commends them against the Spleen, and to promote conception. The opinion in _Galens_ time, which _Pliny_ also followeth, deeply condemned Horse-flesh, and conceived the very blood thereof destructive; but no diet is more common among the _Tartars_, who also drink their blood. And though this may only seem an adventure of _Northern_ stomacks, yet as _Herodotus_ tells us, in the hotter clime of _Persia_, the same was a convivial dish, and solemnly eaten at the feasts of their nativities: whereat they dressed whole Horses, Camels and Asses; contemning the Poverty of _Grecian_ feasts, as unfurnish'd of dishes sufficient to fill the bellies of their guests. Again, While we confine our diet in several places, all things almost are eaten, if we take in the whole earth: for that which is refused in one country, is accepted in another, and in the collective judgment of the world, particular distinctions are overthrown. Thus were it not hard to shew, that Tigers, Elephants, Camels, Mice, Bats and others, are the food of several countries; and _Lerius_ with others delivers, that some _Americans_ eat of all kinds, not refraining Toads and Serpents: and some have run so high, as not to spare the flesh of man: a practise inexcusable, nor to be drawn into example, a diet beyond the rule and largest indulgence of God. As for the objection against beasts and birds of prey, it acquitteth not our practice, who observe not this distinction in fishes: nor regard the same in our diet of Pikes, Perches and Eels; Nor are we excused herein, if we examine the stomacks of Mackerels, Cods, and Whitings. Nor is the foulness of food sufficient to justifie our choice; for (beside that their natural heat is able to convert the same into laudable aliment) we refuse not many whose diet is more impure then some which we reject; as may be considered in hogs, ducks, puets, and many more.