Natural History 129Hence the justifi cation for the study of animals had to be sought else-
where, and in particular, in the religious and moral sphere.
One traditional reason for being acquainted with the characteristics
of animals was that it assisted in the interpretation of scripture. Wolf-
gang Franz informed readers of his Animalium historia sacra (1653) that
the treatise should be of use and benefi t “not only to physicians, but
also to all scholars, and more especially to Divines,” for “many places
in Scripture cannot be interpreted without the knowledge of Animals.”^56
Plants could also serve as aids to biblical exegesis. Ralph Austen (d. 1676)
spoke of “the frequent use of Similitudes betweene the Church of God and
Fruit- trees, and betweene our Saviour and Fruit- trees,” allusions best un-
derstood through familiarity with these trees and their fruits.^57 With the
gradual demise of allegorical readings of scripture and the gradual fading
of the emblematic view of the natural world, the idea that each creature
was a divinely instituted symbol became increasingly unsustainable. How-
ever, it was strongly argued that animals still taught important moral and
theological lessons. The ancients—Aelian, Plutarch, and Pliny in partic-
ular—had sought moral lessons in the characteristics of animals, so it is
not surprising that their latter- day imitators followed suit. Gesner wrote
that “there want not instructions out of beasts, by imitation of whose
examples, the lives and manners of men are to be framed to another and
better practise.”^58 English experimental philosopher Robert Boyle (1627–
1691) thought that animals were both “doctors of divinity” and “teachers
of ethics.”^59 All creatures were thought to serve both moral and practical
uses. Dogs, for example, were models of love and faithfulness, elephants
of meekness, bees of justice, turtles of chastity.^60 While animals were no
longer symbols of eternal verities they were still living object lessons in
morality, and indeed claims that natural history could play an important
role in the moral formation of those who studied it were not uncommon
even in the nineteenth century.^61
Finally, and perhaps most important of all, natural histories came to
be thought of as vital components of natural theology. It was thought
that truths about God could be discovered through the study of either of
his “two books”—the book of scripture and the book of nature. Natural
theology was concerned with the latter. Topsell claimed that nature is
“that Chronicale which was made by God himself, every living beast a
word, every kind being a sentence, and all of them together, a large His-
tory.”^62 John Johnston, in his Nature of Four- Footed Beasts, spoke likewise of
“Natures book, wherein we may behold the supreme power,” going so far
as to say that God “is comprehended under the title of natural history.”^63
Somewhat confusingly, these works often contain an explicit denial that