Nec tanti apud me ponderis Avicennae patrocinium est, ut non potius Aristoteli gravissimo in naturae arcanis authori adhaerere velim: nec denique me movet ratio illa, quam, citante Caelio Albertus adducit, nimirum virtutis perfectionem in masculinis ovis aequaliter ambire, extremaque continere, in faemininis vero a centro, in quo sit vitalis calor, materiam longius abire. Quinim<m>o contra evenire arbitror. Quis enim non videat in rotundis calorem magis diffundi, in oblongis ab una potiorique parte conglobari? Nec est, quod experientiam eius magni faciamus, eam enim in multis aliis obtrudit, quae aeque falsa sunt, et minus verisimilia. Igitur, ut parerga istaec concludamus, sensit Aristoteles, et scripsit ex rotundis progenerari faeminas, ex acuminatis mares. Nunc vero in textu Aristotelis tam Graeco, quam Latino legitur, prout Albertus correxit, vel potius corrupit. Vetus vero Aristotelica lectio est illa, quam vitiatam ille dicit. Caeterum nunquid modo, ex oblongis mares, ut vetus lectio habet, et ex rotundis faeminae, vel contra procreentur, Gallinarius super hoc esset consulendus. Ego priorem lectionem, ut dixi, libenter amplector, gaudeoque me cum Aristotele in ea {haeresi} <haerese> esse, ut ex acutis ovis mares gigni credam, eoque magis cum Plinium Aristotelicum, et Columellam omnis villicationis consultissimum comites erroris, si error fuerit, habeam. Mulieres medius fidius nostrae ex acutis mares, et contra ex rotundis faeminas procreari asserunt.

And the support of Avicenna does not weigh so heavily with me that I should not wish rather to agree with Aristotle, the most imposing source about the secrets of nature: nor lastly is moving me that reason which Albertus adduces, as Lodovico Ricchieri reports, and precisely that in masculine eggs the perfection of the force wraps up evenly, and contains the deeper portions, while in feminine eggs the matter goes away much more from the center, where the vital heat is located. On the contrary I think that it happens the opposite. For who does not see that in round eggs the heat is more spreading, and that in oblong ones is gathering preferably only in a place? Nor should we give much importance to Albertus’ own experience, for he imposes this on us in many other matters which are equally false and not quite akin to the truth. Therefore, to conclude this digression - Sex of the chick and shape of the egg, Aristotle felt and wrote that females are generated from round eggs, males from pointed ones. Now in the text of Aristotle, both Greek and Latin, we read as Albertus corrected it, or rather corrupted it. But the old Aristotelian reading is that one he says is corrupted. On the other hand on this subject, that is, as the ancient reading is reporting, whether really males come from oblong eggs, and females from round ones, or contrariwise, a chicken raiser should be consulted. I willingly accept the earlier reading, as I said, and I am glad to be in company of Aristotle in that current of thought, since I believe males are born from pointed eggs, all the more because I have the Aristotelian Pliny and Columella, very learned in any kind of husbandry, as companions in my error, if error it has been. Take it from me: our women affirm that males are procreated from pointed eggs, females from round ones.

Ornithologus[1] ex suorum relatione tradit, ova, ut ex eorum singulis omnibus faeminae generentur subijci oportere, dum Luna plena est, eaque ad hoc praeferri, quae in plenilunio etiam nata sunt, item ita observandam temporis rationem, ut in plenilunio etiam excludantur. Verum arduum fuerit ova in plenilunio nata, in plenilunio rursus excludere. Nam si illa aliquot diebus reserves, antequam supponas facile evanescunt, ut in his, et conchiliis etiam fieri paulo ante[2] diximus: sin mox supponas, in plenilunio non excludes. Solent enim viginti plerunque diebus incubationis tempus absolvere. Excludunt tamen celerius, teste Aristotele[3], aestate, quam hyeme: aestate nempe duodevigesimo, (undevigesimo habet Plinius[4]) hyeme aliquando vigesimo quinto die. Sed forte id de locis calidioribus intelligendum est. Nam Albertus hyeme vigesimonono die exire pullos dixit.

The Ornithologist reports, from what his fellows countrymen are saying, that in order to generate females from each egg the eggs should be placed under the hen when the moon is full, and that for this purpose are to be preferred eggs laid during full moon too, and that at the same time one should take account of the time, so that eggs may also be hatched during the fullness of the moon. But it would be difficult for eggs laid during full moon to be hatching out once more during full moon. For if you keep them a few days before placing them under the hen they easily evaporate, as a little earlier I said to happen in them as well as in shellfish: but if you set the eggs immediately you will not hatch them out during full moon. For they usually achieve the incubation phase within twenty days. But, as Aristotle testifies, they hatch more quickly in summer than in winter: exactly within eighteen days (Pliny has nineteen) in summer, in winter sometimes at twenty-fifth day. But perhaps this is to be understood for warmer places. For Albertus said the chicks hatch on the twenty-ninth day in winter.

Discrimen tamen etiam avium est, ut idem Aristoteles[5] author est, quod aliae magis fungi officio incubandi possunt. Sunt qui asserant, idque in libello quodam Germanico manuscripto se legisse Ornithologus[6] prodidit, pullos eo colore nasci, quo ova incubanda tincta fuerint. Alii iubent, ut aviaria, seu caveae, quibus includuntur, congrediuntur, pariunt, incubant, et excludunt, susque deque et ex omni parte albis velaminibus obtendantur, ut in Phasiani historia etiam diximus.

There is also a difference in birds, as Aristotle says, because some can better perform the task of incubation. There are those who assert, and the Ornithologist reported he read it in some German manuscript, that chicks are born of that color with which the eggs for incubation have been dyed. Others urge that the aviaries, or pens, in which they are shut up, where they mate, lay eggs, incubate and hatch, should be covered evenly and on every side with white curtains, as I said also in my description of the pheasant.

Si quis vero pullos cupiat excludere visu iucundissimos, Palumbum marem cum Gallina coire curabit, aut Perdicem, vel Phasianum. Cuius coitus modum in Phasiano diximus, et hic sponte omittimus. Perdices copia libidinis gaudent, et cum diversis salacioris generis avibus commiscentur, coeuntque inter se, et sobolem suscipiunt, ut in Gallinis, unde ex Gallina, et Perdice, et primi foetus communi generis utriusque specie generantur, sed tempore procedente, diversi ex diversis provenientes, demum forma faeminae instituti evadunt. Haec ex Aristotele[7] scribit Io. Baptista Porta[8]. Quo loco etiam dicit ex Gallina, et Columbo si misceantur, pullum procreari commistum ex utroque. Sit, inquit Columbus iuvenis, tunc enim temporis fervet in eo ardor coeundi, et seminis superfluitas. Senex enim coire non potest. Omni enim tempore coeunt Columbae, et foetant aestate, et hyeme. Erant nobis domi Columbus caelebs, et Gallina vidua: Columbus satis amplo corpore, et salax: Gallina parva, {sine} <sive> nana: una versabantur, unde tempore veris Columbus Gallinam supervenit, quae suo tempore ova dedit ab ea incubata exclusa sunt, pullosque ex utroque mistos nobis protulit ab utroque genitore retinentes effigiem. Magnitudo corporis, capitis forma, et rostri erat Columbi, pedes Gallinae, pluma quam albissima, et crispa, pedes pennis operti; atque ut Columbus pipiebat, qui maximi nobis fuit oblectamenti, et iucunditatis quique non alibi quam in cubili, aut mulierum sinu quiescebat.

However, if someone wishes to hatch chicks very easy on the eye, he should bustle so that a male pigeon, or a partridge, or a pheasant do mate with a hen. I spoke of this kind of coitus in discussing the pheasant, and I omit it here deliberately. Partridges enjoy a good deal of sexual appetite, and they mingle with more lustful different birds, and do mate each other, and they have offspring, as it happens among hens, hence from a hen and a partridge also the first products of conception are generated with an appearance which is common to both genera, but as time goes on, since dissimilar subjects come from different parents, at last they turn out endowed with the appearance of a female. Those things are written by Giambattista Della Porta drawing them from Aristotle. In the same passage he also says that if subjects belonging to the hen and to the male dove are mingled each other, a chick is generated that is mixed from each parent. He says that the male dove must be young, for at that time the ardor for coitus is burning in him as well as the glut of semen. For when aged he cannot mate. For the doves copulate at any season, and lay eggs both in summer and winter. I had in my house a single male dove and a widowed hen: the dove was rather stout and lustful: the hen was small, or dwarf: they lived together, hence in the spring the dove copulated with the hen, and the eggs she laid at the proper time and then incubated, hatched out, and she gave us chicks, hybrids from both and having the appearance of both parents. The size of body, the shape of the head and the beak were of the dove, the legs of the hen, with plumage as white as possible, and curly, the feet covered with feathers; and that one, which for me has been a very great pleasure and cheerfulness, peeped like a dove, and which did not sleep anywhere else except in the bed, or on the lap of the women.

Docet item alibi ex Aristotele[9], quonam modo pullus Gallinaceus quaternis alis nascatur, quaternisque pedibus. Ova {illi} <illa>, inquit[10], seligito, quae {bina} <binos> comperies habere {boleta} <boletos - βωλήτας>, pellicula quadam non tenui intercursante, sed albumina {continentia} <continuentur>, quae foecundiores {fere} <saepe> Gallinae assolent parere: ex magnitudine cognosces: patetque {iutuentibus} <intuentibus> Soli exponendo, exuperante {etiam} <iam> materia productum, {et} <ex> plurium seminum commixtu, semenque habeat pullorum<,> glocienti Gallinae iam supponas excubanda, ut suo insessu foveat ea: elapso iam debito tempore tales excludet foetus, pedibus, alisque quaternis, curabis ut commode educentur. Si autem membrana disterminabitur, gemini discreti pulli generantur, sine ulla supervacua parte.

In another passage, basing himself on Aristotle, he tells how a gallinaceous chick may be born with four wings and four legs. He says: choose those eggs which you find to have two yolks, without a thin membrane running between them, but with continuous albumens, and which often the more fertile hens are accustomed to lay: you will recognize such eggs by their largeness: and this is clear for those who carefully look at them holding them up to the sun, as they are the product of superabundant matter, resulting from the mixture of many semens, and it must have the embryo of chicks: place at once these eggs under a clucking hen for incubation, so that she may warm them by sitting on them: when the due time has elapsed, she will hatch out such foetus, that is, with four wings and legs, and you shall then see that they are raised properly. But if a membrane will separate the yolks, separated twin chicks are generated, without any unnecessary part.