[236] Quorum verborum sensum, atque vim, nemo, quod sciam, omnium quotquot in Plautum commentati sunt, hactenus {assequutus} <assecutus> est. Audio autem apud Hollandos eiusmodi loquendi modum frequentissimum esse, ut videlicet scriptionem parum legibilem Hennescrapsel, hoc est, Gallinarum ruspationem vocent. Hetrusci pro ruspare dicunt sparnazzare, et metaphorice utuntur in prodigos sua abijcientes inutiliter.

No one, so far as I know, has thus far fairly understood the sense and force of these words among all those who have commented upon the works of Plautus. But I hear that among Dutch this manner of speaking is very common, so that they call a handwriting that is not very legible Hennescrapsel, that is, hens scratching. The people of Tuscany say sparnazzare for scratching and use it metaphorically for wastrels who uselessly throw away their own things.

MAGNANIMITAS. PUGNA.

COURAGE - FIGHTING

Laus item Gallo maxima in animo plus< >quam regio, adeo ut Oppianus[1] avium omnium pugnacissimum vocare non sit veritus: cuius nimirum tam excelsus animus est, tanta animi constantia, ut non vitae, quae omnibus animalibus carissima est, pericula tantum subire, sed perdere etiam eam malit, quam alterius imperium, iugumque vel ad unicum tantummodo temporis momentum pati. Scivit hoc Themistocles[2], sciverunt maiores nostri, qui anniversariis {solennibusque} <sollemnibusque> Gallorum pugnis {solenni} <sollemni> ritu institutis perpetuos nos esse voluerunt Gallorum imitatores. Aiunt vero non Leonem modo ad eorum cantum, sed basiliscum etiam expavescere: quod an verum sit, ut parvi refert, ita certum est nullum animal maiori animo, et excelsiori vel caput cristatum, et caudam erectam falcatamque gerere, vel certamen inire, in quo frequenter ante moritur, quam adversario cedat. Quare iure merito Marti bellorum, pugnarumque Deo sacer habitus fuerit, et proverbialiter Ἄρεως νεοττός, hoc est Martis pullus[3] vocatur: quasi ad bella, pugnasque magnopere propensus.

The greatest praise likewise belongs to the rooster for a spirit more than royal, so much so that Oppian of Apamea did not hesitate to call him the most pugnacious of all birds: his courage is just so huge, so great is his strength of mind that he not only prefers to undergo to perils for life, which is very dear to all animals, but even to lose it rather than to endure the rule and the yoke of someone else for only so much as one moment of time. Themistocles knew this, our ancestors knew this, who by the institution in a solemn rite of annual cockfights desired that we should be perpetual imitators of the roosters. For they say that not only the lion but the basilisk itself is frightened at their crowing: as it doesn’t matter whether this statement is true, as much it is certain that there is no animal with greater and loftier courage either bearing a combed head and an erect and sickle shaped tail, or entering battle, where he often dies rather than yield to an adversary. Therefore rightly he will have been regarded as sacred to Mars, the god of wars and battles, and proverbially he is called Áreøs neottós, that is, chick of Mars as if greatly inclined toward wars and battles.

Verum non in pugna tantum animositas maxima eius elucescit, sed in coitu etiam: a quo (taceo modo, quod salacissimus sit, et unus multis uxoribus satisfaciens) cum omne animal tristari soleat, solus ipse exhilarescit, et cantu alacritatem spiritus attestatur: et Plato[4] author est, Gallum degenerem ignavumque antequam vicerit, canere. Nec fere ob aliam causam, quam propter uxorem pugnam init, veritus ne alius amplexus earum illi clam suffuretur: unde scribit Athenaeus Gallinaceum alteri mari cum Gallina coitum absque pugna non permittere: quare Alberto neutiquam crediderim, Gallos scribenti, si multi sint, nimio coitu Gallinas enecare. Haud tamen interim inficias iverim eas a diversis Gallis iniri: nam id furtim fieri putaverim: simul vero degere, vel saltem simul cum Gallinis coire, quod ille supponit, nunquam crediderim: quinim<m>o illud ego ex inspectione didici Gallum unicum semper in uno loco imperium habere, et in alios, si forte clam, ut dixi, cum uxorum suarum aliqua coierint, vel coire tentaverint, acriter animadvertere: unde item adagium extat satis triviale, Gallus in suo sterquilinio plurimum potest, quod scriptum est in ludicro Senecae[5]: videtur autem innuere quemlibet in alieno solo timidiorem esse, et in suo regno ferociorem, et animosiorem. In quo pariter sensu et illud notum est: Domi pugnans more Galli[6] in illos, qui domi rixantur, quum foris sint placidissimis moribus: unde dicebat Plinius[7]: Imperitant suo generi, et regnum in quacunque domo sunt, exercent. Dimicatione {pariter} <paritur> hoc {quoque} inter ipsos velut ideo tela agnata cruribus suis intelligentes, nec finis saepe {nisi} <com>morientibus. Quod vero ait sapientissimus virorum Salamon: Gallus ambulans inter Gallinas laetus: id pariter Eucherius imperii significationem esse dicit.

In actual fact not only in battle does his exceeding courage shine forth but also in copulation: after which (I slightly point to the fact that he is most lustful and just one satisfies many females), although every animal is accustomed to droop in sadness, he alone cheers up and attests, by crowing, his ardor of spirit. Also Plato the comedy writer is author of the statement that a pusillanimous and coward rooster sings before he won. Nor for almost any other cause than for his female does he enter battle, fearing lest he is without knowledge robbed of another mating with their partners. Hence Athenaeus writes that a rooster will allow no other male to copulate with a hen without a fight. Therefore I did not quite believe Albertus when he writes that when there are many roosters they kill the hens with too much copulation. By no means, however, I am not inclined to deny that hens are trodden by different roosters, for I would think this is done furtively; but that they live together or at any rate copulate with hens together, as Albertus adds, I could never believe, but on the contrary I learned by observation that only one rooster always holds the rule in just one place, and that he fiercely punishes other roosters if perchance in secret, as I said, they copulated or tried to copulate with anyone of his females. Hence equally arises a rather common adage, A rooster is extremely powerful in his own dunghill, which was written in the satire of Lucius Annaeus Seneca, since he seems to hint that whoever is more timid on alien ground, but more fierce and courageous in his kingdom. In the same meaning is also known that other one adage: Fighting at home in the fashion of a rooster, addressed to those are scuffling at their home, while outdoor are behaving very quietly: whence Pliny said: They rule over the animals of their genus and exercise, in whatever home they are, a sort of dominion. This sovereignty is obtained by dueling among themselves, as though they are aware of the weapons grown upon their legs, nor the fighting has an end since often they die together. This is what Solomon, wisest of men, says: The rooster walking joyfully among hens: which Saint Eucherius also says is a signification of ruling.

Hoc item ceu magnificentiam, animique celsitudinem arguit, quod nunquam sui ineundi copiam faciat absque atrocissimo certamine, ut Athenaeus[8] author est. Denique et illud quod idem author ibidem testatum reliquit, et quotidiana experientia comprobat, quod scilicet quascunque aedium fores ingressurus, cristam submittat. Quod ab Aeliano[9] fortassis mutuatus Athenaeus fuerit, quia ita scribit: Illud item in eo mirificum, cum limen intrat, tametsi superum altissimum existit, is tamen sese inclinat: quod quidem ipsum superbia inductus facere videtur, ne scilicet crista uspiam offendatur.

He too shows, so to say, nobility and generosity of spirit because he never gives the possibility to be mounted without a very fierce fighting, as Athenaeus says. Finally, also what the same author has left testified in the same work, and daily experience proves, that is, he lowers his comb when he is on the point of enter through whatever door of a building. This statement Athenaeus probably borrowed from Aelian because the latter writes thus: Likewise in him a thing is extraordinary, when he enters a doorway, nevertheless the top is very high, however he bows: but it seems that he does so led by haughtiness, that is, in order that the comb is not damaged in some point.

His, si placet, adde, quod pro caris uxoribus, pignoribusque suis adversus serpentes, Milvos, mustelas, et eiuscemodi feras alias, viriliter decertet, et nos ad simile certamen, ubi sese occasio offerat, invitet. Hieronymus Cardanus[10] Gallum ideo decantatissimo illi parricidarum culeo, una cum serpente, cane, et simia inseri a Romanis existimabat, quod superbissimus sit, vel ob gentis similitudinem: quod ipsum Scaliger[11] ex inscitia historiarum credidisse tradit, quoniam Gallis nondum notis illa lex scripta fuisset: sed nec hic rem acu tetigit. Quomodo enim Gallum includere potuere Romani nondum notum? Quare ego post suo loco[12] veram, ni fallor, eius rationem assignabo.

To these characteristics add, if you like, the fact that he bravely fights for his dear wives and sons against serpents, kites, beech martens and other beasts of this sort, and invites us to a similar combat when the opportunity arises. Gerolamo Cardano therefore thought the rooster was shut up by Romans into that very renowned leather bag of the parricides - culleus - together with the snake, the dog and the monkey, because he is very haughty or because of his similarity to the Gallic people: the latter view Giulio Cesare Scaligero reports as believed on account of ancient ignorance of history, since that law had been written before the Gauls were known. But even he did not touch on a sore point. For how could Romans have shut up a Gaul when he was not yet known? Therefore, I shall assign, if I am not mistaken, the true reason of this later on.

Quod vero ad pugnam Gallorum attinet, ad quam vel imago eorum in speculo tantum conspecta eos invitat, teste Athenaeo[13], ea singulari non caret artificio.

As far as roosters’ fighting is concerned, to which invites them as an image of themselves seen only in a mirror, according to Athenaeus, it does not lack a singular ability.