SECT. LXXXII.—ON ANIMALS; AND, FIRST, OF FOWLS.
The nourishment derived from fowls is less than that from beasts, and more especially swine, but they are of easier digestion, particularly the partridge, godwit, pigeon, hen, and pheasant. That from thrushes, blackbirds, and small sparrows (among which are those called pyrgitæ) is harder; and still more so the turtle, wood-pigeon, and duck. But the peacock is still more indigestible, harder, and more stringy. The flesh of geese and ostriches is excrementitious, and more indigestible than any of the afore-mentioned; except their wings, which are not less wholesome than the same parts in other animals. The flesh of the crane is stringy and hard. In general, the young are more juicy, digestible, and nutritious than the aged, and are more readily evacuated by the belly. The boiled are superior to the roasted and fricasseed; and those that live on dry and mountainous places are more digestible and less excrementitious than those which live in marshy places.
Commentary. Hippocrates states that fowls in general are drier than quadrupeds. The driest, he adds, are, first, the wood-pigeon, then the common pigeon, and, thirdly, the partridge, cock, and turtle. The most humid or juicy, he says, are geese. Those which live on seeds are drier than the others. The flesh of ducks, and of all fowls which live in marshes, or in water, is of a more humid nature. (De Diæta, ii, 17.) In another place, he calls the flesh of fowls one of the lightest kinds of food. (De Affect. 46.)
Their general characters are thus stated by Celsus: “Ex iis avibus, quæ in media specie sunt, valentiores eæ, quæ pedibus, quam quæ volatu magis nituntur: et ex iis, quæ volatu fidunt, firmiores quæ grandiores aves, quam quæ minutæ sunt; ut ficedula et turdus. Atque eæ quoque quæ in aqua degunt leviorem cibum præstant, quam quæ natandi scientiam non habent.” The character here given of water fowls has drawn upon the author the animadversions of Dr. Cullen. But rather than suspect Celsus of such a mistake, we are inclined to believe that the text must be corrupt, and that we ought to read leniorem instead of leviorem. We are confirmed in this conjecture from all the other authorities, as for example, Hippocrates, Galen, Aëtius, Rhases, and Haly Abbas, having stated that the flesh of water fowls is more excrementitious than that of land fowls.
Our author takes his account of fowls from Galen, or perhaps direct from Oribasius. Actuarius states that fowls are much lighter, but not so nutritious as quadrupeds; that they are drier, more fibrous, and form thinner blood; and that water fowls are the more juicy and fleshy.
Having thus stated the general characters of fowls as articles of food, we shall now briefly notice a few of those which were in most esteem with the bons vivans of antiquity.
The partridge was accounted a rare delicacy at the tables of luxurious Romans. See Martial (xiii, 65.) Simeon Seth says that it is easily digested, but ought not to be eaten the day it is killed. According to Rhases, it contains thick juices, is astringent, but very nutritious. Psellus calls it savoury, nutritious, and digestible. Apicius directs it to be dressed with pepper, lovage, mint, the seed of rue, pickle, wine, and oil. As at the present day it was eaten at the dessert. (Deip. xiv, 73.) Athenæus describes distinctly two species of the partridge, which seem clearly referrible to the tetrao perdix and tetrao rufus. The latter, or red-legged partridge, is still the common species in Italy.
Galen ranks the pigeon next to the partridge in excellence. The Arabians, however, and, in imitation of them, Simeon Seth, calls the flesh of the pigeon heating and excrementitious.
The attagen Ionicus has been celebrated by the muses of Horace and Martial. Porphyron, one of the ancient commentators on Horace, calls it “avis Asiatica inter noblissimas habita.” Harduin, who is deservedly reckoned a high authority in these matters, supposes it to have been the gelinotte du bois, or wood-hen. Altogether we incline to the opinion that it was the scolopax ægocephala, or godwit, a water-bird still much esteemed by the epicures of the East. We further think that the scolopax rasticula, or woodcock, is the scolopax of the ancients. It is well described by the poet Nemesitanius. Athenæus quotes Aristophanes as calling the attagen a most delicious bird. Galen, Aëtius, and Oribasius speak of it in the same terms as Paulus. Apicius directs us to dress it like the partridge.
Galen says of the starling that its flesh is allied to that of the attagen. (Diæta. iv.) It is also mentioned as an article of food by Athenæus. (ii, 24.)