Tradito conservationis modo, coctionis ratio explicanda sese nobis offert. Ova autem [299] diversis modis coqui, et ad cibum parari solent, aut simpliciter, aut cum aliis admistis. Ordo autem expostulare videtur de iis primum dicere, quae parantur simpliciter. Coquuntur autem haec vel in aqua, vel sub cineribus calidis, vel in sartagine. Et quanquam quovis horum modo magis, minusve liquida, et dura fiant pro coctionis modo de iis tamen, quae in aqua elixantur maxime sentiunt authores, cum sorbilia, mollia, durave, aut similibus ova nominibus appellant. Licebit autem horum proportione comparationeque de iis etiam, quae alio coquendi modo magis, minusve cocta fuerint, quid sentiendum sit iudicare.

Now, having related the manner of preserving eggs, I am given the reason of explaining how to cook them. For the eggs are usually cooked and prepared as food in different ways, or alone or mixing them with other ingredients. But it seems that reasons of orderliness require that we have firstly to speak about those prepared in a simple way. These are cooked either in water or under warm ashes, or in frying pan. And although in whatever of these ways they become more or less liquid and hard according to as much as they are cooked, nevertheless the authors express a very positive opinion about those cooked in water, and they call the eggs or sucking, or soft, or hard or by similar names. But doing analogies and comparisons it will be possible to express a judgment on what we have to think also about those more or less cooked using another manner of cooking.

Coctura ovorum, quae in aqua fit, melior est caeteris, et quae in calidis cineribus melior, quam quae in sartagine, nempe si eiusdem generis semper inter se conferas, dura duris, mollia mollibus. Nam mollia in cineribus, duris in aqua coctis oportet praeferre[1] <, Brasavolus>. Cur vero in aqua cocta ova meliora sint iis, quae in igne, non leves sunt rationes. Tostum enim ovum, ut Caelii[2] verbis utar, dissilit facile, non dissilit aqua concoctum: ignea siquidem vi, quodam ferrumine copulatur, quod inest, humectum, ampliusque calefactum, exustumque plures parit spiritus: qui {loco nati perangusto} <loca nacti perangusta>, exitum molientes testam rumpunt, demumque evaporant. Praeterea flammae vis tunicam circumsiliens putaminosam amburendo diffringit, quod et fictilibus evenire, dum torrentur, evidens est. {Quemadmodum} <Quamobrem> perfundi frigida prius solent ova: calida siquidem aqua {mollicie} <mollitie> statim humorem effundit, et raritatem relaxat, quibus adde, si placet, quod ova vel sub cineribus calidis, vel super carbones {ignotos} <ignitos> cocta tetrum odorem spirant, malae contractae qualitatis evidentissimo signo. Rursus ova elixa in aqua cum testis suis peiora sunt, quam fracta in aqua, siquidem crassos, et fumosos halitus testa cohibet: unde ex frequenti eorum esu inflatio oritur, et stomachi, ventrisque gravatio. Sine testa vero cocta, naturalem suam humiditatem servant, et odoris sui gravitatem deponunt, exuuntque; sunt tamen qui magis appetunt in testa sua cocta, quam effusa, ex quorum numero se etiam fuisse scribit Antonius Gazius. Verum quicquid isti dicant, mihi effusa magis probantur, quae proprio, eoque cotidiano ferme usu sana, et ad gustum delicata offendi, maxime si quid recentis butyri super affundatur.

To cook eggs in water is better than other manners, and in warm ashes it is better than in frying pan, obviously if you compare the eggs each other according to an identical criterion, hard with hard, soft with soft. For it is worthwhile to prefer soft eggs cooked in ashes to hard-boiled in water. So wrote Antonio Brasavola. But why eggs cooked in water are better than eggs cooked in fire, the reasons are not without importance. In fact, to use the words of Lodovico Ricchieri, the toasted egg easily breaks apart, that cooked in water doesn’t break: since because of fire energy what is inside is joined as by a glue, humid and still more heated and burnt it produces many vapors: which lying in a very narrow place, beating about for getting out, break the shell, and at last they evaporate. Furthermore the energy of the flame, attacking from everywhere the tunic of the shell, breaks it, burning it all around, and we can observe that this also happens to terracotta vases when torrefied. That's why eggs at first are usually dipped in cold water: for hot water with its less density immediately brings out the humid and broadens the pores, to which you add, if you want, that eggs cooked either under warm ashes, or over ardent charcoals, give forth an unpleasant smell, as most evident sign that they acquired a bad quality. Moreover eggs cooked in water with their shell are worse than when broken in water, since the shell retains the thick and smoky vapors: hence from frequently eating them a swelling and a heaviness of stomach and belly take origin. But cooked without shell they retain their natural hydration and lose and leave off the heaviness of their smell; nevertheless there are people more appreciating them if cooked in their shell rather than poured out, and Antonio Gazio writes that he belonged to such a cluster of people. To say the truth, whatever those people may say, I prefer those poured out, which I have found savory and of delicate taste thanks to a mine and moreover almost daily use, especially if some fresh butter is poured over them.

Ita cocta ova nostrae mulierculae, et coqui ova disperdute nuncupant, Graeci, ut recte Ornithologus coniicit, ἐξαφητά, etsi alioqui doctissimum Hermolaum[3] exapheta cum pnictis eadem facere noverim, et Brasavolus[4] quandoque absque testa, quandoque cum testa in aqua coqui dicat. Nam revera Ornithologi coniectura solidis, firmisque nititur rationibus. Ego inquit, apud Graecos scriptores <veteres[5]>, reperiri hoc nomen non puto. Lexicorum quidem scriptores, qui vocabula, vel Graece, vel Latine exposuerunt, non ponunt. Videntur autem ἐξαφητά, syllaba ultima acuta, ova appellari, quae e testis suis effusa coquuntur integra, sive in aquam calidam, ut sorbilia, vel mollia coquenda, sive aliter, ut pnicta, ut quidam putant. Nam si non integra, sed fracta, {ruptaque} <mistaque> liquoribus addendis coquuntur pnicta, non putarim exaphetà vocanda.

Our women call disperdute - scattered, dispersed - the eggs cooked in this way and the deed of cooking eggs, and the Greeks, as the Ornithologist is rightly inferring, call them exaphëtá, although on the other hand I am aware that the very learned Ermolao Barbaro considers the exaphëtá eggs identical to those cooked in a well closed pot, and Antonio Brasavola says that sometimes they are cooked in water without shell, sometimes with shell. For really the conclusion of the Ornithologist is founded on solid and strong reasons. He says: I don't think that among ancient Greek writers this term is found. For the lexicographers who reported the words in Greek or in Latin don't quote it. For it seems that are called exaphëtá, with the last syllable accented, those eggs which are cooked entire after they have been poured out of their shells both in warm water like sucking or soft-boiled eggs, and in other manner like smothered eggs, as some think. In fact if the smothered ones are cooked not entire, but broken and mixed with addition of liquids, I don't think they ought to be called exaphëtá.

Quod ad vocabuli originem, certi nihil habeo. His scriptis locum Simeonis Sethi inveni, quem aliis errandi occasionem dedisse video. Sunt autem verba haec: ἐπαινοῦνται δὲ τὰ πνικτά ὡσπερ γε καὶ τὰ ὀνομαζόμενα ἐξεφετά (Gyraldus legit ἔξεφθα, quasi ἔξω τοῦ ἰδίου κελύφους ἑψόμενα insinuans. Sed hoc nomen apud alios authores non extat. Malim ego ἐξαφετά legere, hoc est, emissa, et effusa a verbo ἀφίημι. Talia autem vocabula non usitata veteribus Graecis, nec analogice composita non pauca recentiores habent a vulgo sumpta) τὰ ἐπὶ θερμοῦ ὕδατος σκευαζόμενα, hoc est, laudantur, quae pnictà dicuntur, et exaphetà, quae in aqua calida coquuntur. Quod autem intelligat de iis, quae in aquam calidam e testa sua effunduntur, vel hinc patet, quoniam de aliis iam supra egerat, et quod haec ova ab aliis etiam, praesertim Arabibus, quos Simeon in multis sequi solet, probantur, et quod Galenus quoque meminit post pnictà, periphrastice nominans τὰ ἐπιχεόμενα ἄνωθεν ταῖς λοπάσιν, hoc est, patellis (calidam scilicet continentibus) infundi solita. Symeon autem cum caetera ex Galeno[6] mutuatus sit, hanc etiam partem non omissam ab eo credendum est.

As far as the origin of the word is concerned - is going on the Ornithologist - I have nothing certain. In these writings I have found a passage of Simeon Sethi which in my opinion has given cause to others for to be mistaken. For these words: epainoûntai dè tà pniktà høsper ge kaì tà onomazómena exephetá – those suffocated are praised like those called exephetá (Giglio Gregorio Giraldi reads éxephtha, almost insinuating that éxø toû idíou kelýphous hepsómena – cooked outwardly of their own eggshell. But this word doesn't exist among the other authors. I would prefer to read exaphetá, that is, sent forth and poured forth, from the verb aphíëmi – I sent forth. For such words are not used by ancient Greeks, and the more recent ones have composed many words by analogy inferring them from common language) and these words mean tà epì thermoû hýdatos skeuazómena, that is, they are praised the eggs called smothered and exaphetá, which are cooked in hot water. But that he want to point out eggs poured out of their shell into warm water it is also clear from this sentence, since he had already previously discoursed on the other eggs, and since these eggs are also appreciated by others, above all Arabs, whom Simeon Sethi is accustomed to follow in many points, and since also Galen mentions them after the smothered ones, quoting with a periphrasis tà epicheómena ánøthen taîs lopásin, that is, those usually poured in frying pans (which of course contain hot water). But since Simeon Sethi borrowed other things from Galen, we have to believe that by him neither this piece has been omitted.

Nostri haec vocant in wasser gefelt, in wasser geflagen, (hoc est in aquam infusa) et vel per se edenda aegris praesertim afferre solent, vel coctis panis segmentis imposita. In his parandis, inquit Galenus, similiter ut in pnictis curandum est, ne supra mediocrem substantiam incrassentur: sed cum adhuc succum suum retinent, vas ab igne submovendum. Hactenus ille.

Our people - is going on the Ornithologist - call these eggs in wasser gefelt, in wasser geflagen, (that is, poured in water), and are accustomed to give them chiefly to sick people to be eaten either alone, or placed on cooked slices of bread. In preparing them, says Galen, care must be taken, as for smothered ones, that they don’t grow too much hard: but when they still have their juice it is necessary to remove the pot from fire. Thus far the Ornithologist.

Pnicta[7] autem parantur {adhunc} <ad hunc> modum<:> conspersis, oleo, et garo, et pauco vini ovis (ita vulgaris translatio apud Galenum[8] habet) vas, quo continentur, cacabo aquam calidam habenti inditur, dein <ubi ipsum totum superne obturarint>[9] ignis substernitur, donec mediocrem nanciscantur substantiam. Quae enim supra modum crassescunt, elixis, et assis fiunt similia: mediocrem vero crassitiem adepta, et melius, quam dura concoquuntur, et alimentum corpori dant praestantius, sed verbum [300] ἀναδεύσαντες, quo Galenus[10], et Aegineta utuntur, non conspergere, sed subigere, et permiscere significat: quod miror, nec Hermolaum, nec alios (quod sciam) praeter unum Cornarium animadvertisse.

Smothered eggs are prepared in this way, after eggs have been sprinkled with oil, fish sauce and little wine (thus runs the common translation of Galen), the vessel in which are contained is introduced in a pot with warm water inside, then, after it has been covered up, fire is put beneath it until they acquire a moderate consistence. For the eggs which grow hard beyond a certain degree become similar to boiled and roasted ones: but those which reached a mediocre consistence are also better digested than those cooked hard and supply the body with a better nourishment, but the verb anadeúsantes, which Galen and Paul of Aegina use, doesn't mean to sprinkle, but to dip and to mix: I am surprised that neither Ermolao Barbaro nor others (as far as I am aware) have noticed, except Janus Cornarius alone.