herd telle. Ogy. At our ladyes fette there is a precyous stone, whos name as it is nother in Greke nor Laten.  The Frenchema gaue it the name of a tode, bycause it is so like, that no man (althoghe he be conynge) can set it forthe more lyuely.  But so moche greater is || the myrakle, that the stone is litle, the fourme of the tode dothe nat apere, but it shynythe as it were enclosyd within that precyous stone. Me. Perauenture they ymagyne ye symylytude of a tode to be there, euyn as we suppose whan we cutte ye fearne stalke there to be an egle, and euyn as chyldren (whiche they see nat indede) in ye clowdes, thynke they see dragones spyttynge fyre, & hylles flammynge with fyre, & armyd me encownterynge. Ogy. No, I wold you shuld know it, there is no lyuynge tode that more euydetly dothe expresse hymselffe than it dyd there playnly apere. Me. Hetherto I haue sufferyd thy lyes, but now get the another that wyll beleue the, thy tale of a tode. Ogy. No maruayle Menedemus thogh you be so disposyd, for all the world cannot make me to beleue yt, not & all doctoures of dyuynyte wold swere || it were trewe.  But that I sawe it with myne eyes, ye with thes same eyes, dyd I proue it.  But in ye meanseson me thynke you regard naturall phylosophye but litle. Me. why so, because I wyll nat beleue ye asses flye? Ogy. An do you nat se, how nature the worker of all thynges, dothe so excell in expressynge ye fourme bewty, & coloure of thaym maruylously in other thynges, but pryncypaly in precyous stones? moreouer she hathe gyuen to ye same stones wonderouse vertu and strekthe that is almost incredyble, but that experience dothe otherwyse testyfye.  Tell me, do you beleue that a Adamand stone wold drawe vnto him stele withowt any towchynge therof, and also to be separate frome him ayen of hys owne accorde, excepte that yow had sene it with yowre eyes. Me. No verely, nat and if .x.  Arystoteles wold perswade me || to the contrarye. Ogy. Therfore bycause you shuld nat say thys were a lye, in case you here any thynge, whiche you haue not sene prouyd.  In a stone callyd Ceraunia we see ye fashon of lightnynge, in the stone Pyropo wyldfyre, Chelazia dothe expresse bothe the coldnes and the fourme of hayle, and thoghe thou cast in to the hote fyre, an Emrode, wyll expresse the clere water of the seye.  Carcinas dothe counterfayte ye shape of a crabfishe.  Echites of the serpente vyper.  But to what purpose shuld I entreat, or inuestygate the nature of suche thynges whiche be innumerable, wha there is no parte of nature nor in the elementes, nother in any lyuynge creature, other in planetes, or herbes ye nature euyn as it were all of pleasure hathe not expressyd in precyous stones?  Doo yow maruayle tha that in thys stone at owre ladies fote, || D.|| is the fourme and fashon of a tode. Me. I maruayle that nature shuld haue so moche lesure, so to counterfayt the nature of althynges. Ogy. It was but to exercyse, or occupye the curyosytye