Mind of the Church

The mind of the Church, faithfully rendered into English

Library / Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume II

Book Eleven — the things that were in the ark

SEVENTH DISPUTATION. Which kinds of animals entered the Ark; and first concerning Reptiles (creeping things)

LatineEnglish

SEVENTH DISPUTATION. Which kinds of animals entered the Ark; and first concerning Reptiles (creeping things).

SEPTIMA DISPUTATIO. Quae genera animalium in Arcam sint ingressa, et primo de Reptilibus.

EXCEPTIS tribus illis supradictis animalium generibus quae non esse in arcam recepta praecedenti quaestione ostendimus, ceterae omnes animantium species in arcam ingressae sunt. Horum autem animalium quinque genera licet distinguere: unum avium, alterum reptilium, tertium Quadrupedum carnivororum, quartum non carnivororum et magni corporis, quintum non carnivororum et quae minori corpore sunt praedita. Et avium quidem licet quam plurimae sint species, eis tamen, quia pleraeque sunt perquam exigui corporis, satis superque loci in supremo coenaculo arcae a nobis supra est assignatum. De reliquis igitur quatuor generibus explicandum est quemadmodum tot cuiusque generis species in arca contineri potuerint: quamobrem necesse est cuiuslibet quatuor supradictorum generum hic percensere omnes species, quaecumque adhuc ad notitiam hominum venerunt, vel ipso usu et experientia plerisque cognitae, vel doctorum hominum industria et diligentia deprehensae, observatae et litteris proditae.
Excepting those three aforesaid kinds of animals which we showed, in the preceding question, were not received into the ark, all the other species of living creatures entered the ark. And of these animals five kinds may be distinguished: one of birds, the second of reptiles, the third of carnivorous quadrupeds, the fourth of non-carnivorous ones of great body, the fifth of non-carnivorous ones endowed with a smaller body. And of birds, although there are very many species, yet to them — because most are of an exceedingly small body — we have above assigned room more than enough in the topmost story of the ark. Of the remaining four kinds, therefore, it must be explained how so many species of each kind could be contained in the ark; wherefore it is necessary here to review all the species of each of the four aforesaid kinds — whatsoever have hitherto come to the knowledge of men, whether known to most by use and experience itself, or detected, observed, and committed to writing by the industry and diligence of learned men.1
VISUM praeterea nobis est (quod ut faceremus, etiam a nonnullis moniti et rogati sumus) brevem quorundam animalium, quae non quibuslibet nota sunt, virium, naturae ac proprietatum expositionem, probatis ex auctoribus sumptam, hoc loco velut in transcursu tradere: quo scilicet distinctio specierum, unde numerus animalium quae in arcam ingressa sunt iniri et constitui debet, manifestior atque illustrior existeret, et sacrarum literarum studio deditus Lector compendiariam quandam, et certa ratione atque ordine digestam, praecipuorum animalium terrestrium cognitionem haberet. Nempe hac ille…
It has, moreover, seemed good to us (and to do this we were even advised and asked by some) to set forth here, as it were in passing, a brief exposition — taken from approved authors — of the powers, nature, and properties of certain animals which are not known to everyone: namely, in order that the distinction of species (from which the number of animals that entered the ark must be reckoned and established) might become more manifest and more illustrious, and that the Reader devoted to the study of sacred letters might have a certain compendious knowledge of the principal land animals, arranged by a fixed method and order. For by this he…2
…uti poterit ad multos divinae scripturae locos, quibus mirae complurium animalium proprietates indicantur, erudite ac luculenter interpretandos. Hinc praeterea licebit carpere multa, et quidem perutilia, documenta moralia, ex admirandis animalium ingeniis ac moribus apte petita similitudine: quod sane ad populares conciones ornandas et locupletandas valebit plurimum, et uberiorem ac iucundiorem suppeditabit materiam spiritualium meditationum, quae, contemplandis rebus naturalibus, ad earum omnium opificis Dei sapientiae ac providentiae admirationem ac praedicationem humanam mentem extollunt. Posuimus autem in margine nomina eorum tantum animalium quorum naturas, ut miras eoque memorandas, breviter exponimus, scilicet ea re lectoris studio ac memoriae — id est, voluptati simul atque utilitati — servientes.
…will be able to use [it] for interpreting, learnedly and clearly, many passages of divine Scripture in which the wonderful properties of very many animals are indicated. Hence, moreover, it will be possible to cull many — and indeed most useful — moral lessons, the comparison being aptly drawn from the admirable instincts and habits of animals: which will assuredly avail very much for adorning and enriching popular sermons, and will furnish richer and more pleasant material for spiritual meditations, which, by the contemplation of natural things, lift up the human mind to the admiration and proclamation of the wisdom and providence of God, the maker of them all. And we have placed in the margin the names only of those animals whose natures — as wonderful and therefore memorable — we briefly set forth, thereby serving the reader's study and memory, that is, both his pleasure and his profit at once.3
REPTILIUM igitur quae ingressa sunt in arcam — eorum nempe quae non ex putrescente materia, nec ex animalium diversae speciei mixtione, nec aliter quam ex maris et feminae commixtione suique similibus parentibus generantur — hae sunt fere adhuc cognitae species. 1. ANGUIS. Mons qui Narsingae regnum dividit a Malabaris multas alit feras, inter quas alatos angues arboribus insidentes, quos aiunt solo afflatu, vel etiam obtutu, eos qui propius accedant interficere.
Of the reptiles, then, that entered the ark — namely those generated not from putrefying matter, nor from the mixture of animals of a different species, nor otherwise than from the mingling of male and female and from parents like themselves — these are nearly the species hitherto known. 1. THE SNAKE (anguis). The mountain that divides the kingdom of Narsinga from the Malabars nourishes many wild beasts, among which winged snakes that sit in the trees, which they say kill, by their breath alone, or even by their gaze, those who approach more nearly.4
2. ASPIS. 3. VIPERA. Multa Herodotus tradit fabulosa — non ille quidem mentiendi libidine, sed nimio undique omnia carpendi et colligendi studio, non tam iudicii et prudentiae quam copiae ac diligentiae laudem quaerens. In fabulosis numerant nonnulli quod ab eo proditum est: in Viperino genere tam marem quam feminam in generando prolem interimere — marem quidem a femina, quae caput eius in coitu ore comprehendens voluptatis dulcedine arrodit; feminam vero a catulis quos utero gerit, nam cum singulos diebus singulis pariat, viginti fere numero, posteriores morae impatientes latera perrumpunt occisa parente. Ridet hoc Scaliger: Viperas, inquiens, ab impatientibus mora fetibus numerosissimis atque idcirco erumpentibus rumpi et interire, falsum esse scimus, qui in Vincentii Camerini circulatoris lignea theca vidimus enatas viperillas parente salva.
2. THE ASP. 3. THE VIPER. Herodotus hands down many fabulous things — not indeed from a lust for lying, but from too great a zeal for gathering and collecting everything from every side, seeking the praise not so much of judgment and prudence as of abundance and diligence. Among the fabulous things some reckon what is reported by him: that in the viper kind both the male and the female perish in generating offspring — the male by the female, who, gripping his head in her mouth during coitus, gnaws it off in the sweetness of pleasure; but the female by the young which she bears in her womb, for since she bears them one each day, about twenty in number, the later ones, impatient of delay, break through her sides, the parent being killed. Scaliger laughs at this, saying: “That vipers are burst and perish from their most numerous offspring being impatient of delay and therefore bursting forth, we know to be false — we who saw, in the wooden box of Vincenzo Camerino the mountebank, viperlets that had been born with the parent safe.”5
VERUM Aristoteles — ut erat in philosophando non modo doctissimus, sed etiam cautissimus atque prudentissimus — quasi sententiam Herodoti restringens et corrigens, non matricem aut latera viperae lacerari a catulis ait, sed membranas quibus illi in utero involuti erant rumpi, idque non semper sed interdum. Verba eius sic habent: Parit vipera catulos obvolutos membranis, quae tertia die rumpantur. Evenit interdum ut qui in utero adhuc sunt, abrosis membranis prorumpant. Singulos diebus singulis parit, plures quam viginti. Quamquam autem fere perexigui corporis sunt viperae, Nymphes tamen, librorum quos scripsit de Ptolemais nono, Viperas ait in Troglodytide decem et septem cubitorum existere.
But Aristotle — being in philosophizing not only most learned, but also most cautious and prudent — as if restricting and correcting the opinion of Herodotus, says that it is not the womb or the sides of the viper that are torn by the young, but the membranes in which they were wrapped in the womb that are broken, and that not always but sometimes. His words are these: “The viper bears its young wrapped in membranes, which are broken on the third day. It happens sometimes that those still in the womb burst forth, the membranes being gnawed through. She bears them one each day, more than twenty.” But although vipers are generally of a very small body, yet Nymphes, in the ninth of the books which he wrote on the Ptolemies, says that in the Troglodyte country there are vipers of seventeen cubits.6
4. BASILISCUS. De Basilisco quae hic memorari possent reperiet lector apud Plinium lib. 8 ca. 21, Solinum cap. 30, et Aelianum lib. 2 cap. 35 et lib. 3 cap. 30. Basiliscum non, ut alios serpentes, incantari, divinis testatum est litteris: Ecce ego, inquit Dominus, mittam vobis serpentes regulos, quibus non est incantatio, et mordebunt vos. Quin etiam basiliscus incantamenta discutere, et his iam captos alios serpentes solvere ac liberare, creditur. Quod autem scriptum est apud Esaiam, De radice colubri egredietur Regulus, et semen eius absorbens volucrem, sermo est non proprius sed metaphoricus et figuratus. Non enim a colubro generatur basiliscus; sed significatur Osiam regem multis quidem malis afflixisse Philisthaeos, verum ex eius tamen semine natum Ezechiam gravioribus eos calamitatibus contriturum — quemadmodum basiliscus nocentior et perniciosior est quam coluber. Dicitur autem basiliscus absorbere volucrem, propterea quod infecto a se aëre supervolantes aves interimit, ut a Solino proditur. Refert Scaliger legisse se apud recentiores, Romae, Leone Pont. Max., ad aedem Luciae sub fornice stabulatum esse basiliscum, cuius afflatu magna lue affecta Roma fuerit, eumque illico Pontificis precibus exstinctum.
4. THE BASILISK. Of the Basilisk, the things that could here be recorded the reader will find in Pliny, bk. 8, ch. 21; Solinus, ch. 30; and Aelian, bk. 2, ch. 35, and bk. 3, ch. 30. That the basilisk, unlike other serpents, cannot be charmed, is attested by the divine writings: “Behold, I,” says the Lord, “will send among you serpent-cockatrices (reguli), against which there is no charm, and they shall bite you” (Jer. 8). Nay, the basilisk is even believed to break charms, and to loose and free other serpents already caught by them. But that which is written in Isaiah, “From the root of the snake shall come forth a cockatrice, and his seed shall swallow up the bird,” is a speech not proper but metaphorical and figurative. For the basilisk is not generated from a snake; but it is signified that king Uzziah indeed afflicted the Philistines with many evils, but that Hezekiah, born from his seed, would crush them with graver calamities — just as the basilisk is more harmful and more destructive than the snake. And the basilisk is said to swallow up the bird, because, by infecting the air around it, it kills the birds flying overhead, as is reported by Solinus. Scaliger relates that he read, among more recent writers, that at Rome, under Pope Leo the Great, a basilisk was housed in a vault near the church of [St.] Lucy, by whose breath Rome was afflicted with a great plague, and that it was forthwith extinguished by the prayers of the Pope.7
SIMILIS est natura et vis pestilens ferae quam CATOBLEPAM appellant, non corporis magnitudine sed veneni potentia insignem, membris inertem, capite adeo gravi ut id aegre sustinens semper in terram deiectum ferat: non impetu morsuque noxiam, sed aspectu solo, omnibus qui eius oculos viderunt confestim expirantibus. 5. LACERTUS viridis. 6. LACERTUS minutior. 7. STELLIO. 8. TARANTULA. Hanc multi putant speciem esse stellionis: verum secus est, constat enim speciem esse Phalangii Italiae peculiarem — in orae tractu meridionalis innoxiam, sed in terra Apulia tum frequentem tum maleficam, a Tarento urbe Tarantulam nominatam. Haec, in sulcorum squalore latitans, imprudentes messores vel venatores pungit: quamobrem illi ocreolis calceati metunt.
Similar in nature is the pestilent force of the beast which they call the CATOBLEPAS, distinguished not by the size of its body but by the power of its venom; sluggish in its limbs, with a head so heavy that, scarcely supporting it, it always carries it cast down to the ground: harmful not by attack and bite, but by its gaze alone — all who have seen its eyes immediately expiring. 5. THE GREEN LIZARD. 6. THE SMALLER LIZARD. 7. THE STELLION (newt). 8. THE TARANTULA. Many think this to be a species of stellion; but it is otherwise, for it is agreed to be a species peculiar to Italy, of the Phalangium (venomous spider) — harmless in the southern coastal region, but in the land of Apulia both frequent and harmful, named “Tarantula” from the city of Tarentum. This, lurking in the squalor of furrows, stings unwary reapers or hunters: wherefore they reap shod with little greaves.8
Nec eorum qui laesi sunt a Tarantula unus est modus. Apulorum fert opinio, quot sunt in hebdomade dies, tot esse noxarum species ab hac bestia illatarum. Multi confestim sopore occupantur; nec pauci perpetuis vigiliis distrahuntur; alii fletu maerent; alii risu diffunduntur; alii currunt; nonnulli inertes desident. Sunt qui sudent, qui vomant, qui insaniant. Quapropter non defuere Philosophi qui crederent tot esse Tarantulae species quot eius malefici cernerentur effectus. Verum quemadmodum ebrietas, pro varia hominum affectione, non unius modi effectum habet (flent ebrii, rident, silent, blaterant, discursant, verberant), itidem ex huius bestiolae morsu evenire putandum est. Diversa est ab hac quae vulgo Romae Terrantula, quod sub terra lateat, nominatur: siquidem ea, lacerti facie et luteis maculosa notis cum sit, stellionis putanda est species.
Nor is there one mode [of affliction] for those harmed by the Tarantula. The opinion of the Apulians holds that there are as many kinds of harm inflicted by this beast as there are days in the week. Many are immediately seized with drowsiness; not a few are distracted by perpetual wakefulness; some grieve with weeping; others dissolve in laughter; others run; some sit sluggishly idle. There are those who sweat, who vomit, who go mad. Wherefore there have not been wanting Philosophers who believed that there are as many species of Tarantula as its harmful effects are seen to be. But just as drunkenness, according to the varied disposition of men, does not have an effect of one mode — the drunk weep, laugh, fall silent, babble, run about, strike — so likewise it must be thought to happen from the bite of this little beast. Different from this is the one commonly called at Rome “Terrantula,” because it lurks under the earth: since this, having the face of a lizard and spotted with yellow marks, is to be thought a species of stellion.9
9. CHAMAELEON. Nullius fere animalis tam copiose ac subtiliter naturam et mores descripsit Aristoteles ut Chamaeleontis, scilicet propter eius animalis multiplex miraculum. Descriptionem Aristotelis eleganti brevitate reddidit latine Plinius. Duo in primis celebrantur eius miracula: alterum, quod ipse celsus, hianti semper ore, solus animalium nec cibo nec potu alitur, nec alio quam aëris alimento; sed (quod alterum est miraculum) coloris natura mirabilior, mutat namque eum subinde, et oculis et cauda et toto corpore, redditque semper quemcunque proxime attingit, praeter rubrum candidumque. Variatio colorum, secundum Aristotelem, ei accidit sanguinis inopia metuque. Omnium, inquit, quadrupedum pedestrium tenuissimus Chamaeleon est, quippe qui omnium maxime inopia sanguinis riget; prae nimio quoque metu multiformis efficitur. Metus autem refrigeratio quaedam est per inopiam sanguinis calorisque.
9. THE CHAMELEON. Of scarcely any animal has Aristotle described the nature and habits so copiously and subtly as of the Chameleon — namely, on account of the manifold marvel of that animal. The description of Aristotle Pliny rendered into Latin with elegant brevity. Two of its marvels are especially celebrated: one, that it itself, held aloft, with mouth always agape, alone of animals is nourished neither by food nor by drink, nor by any nourishment other than that of air; but (which is the second marvel) it is more wonderful in the nature of its color, for it changes it from time to time — in its eyes and tail and whole body — and always reproduces whatever it most nearly touches, except red and white. The variation of colors, according to Aristotle, happens to it from poverty of blood and from fear. “Of all four-footed land animals,” he says, “the Chameleon is the thinnest, inasmuch as it of all is most stiff from poverty of blood; and from excessive fear too it is made multiform. Now fear is a certain cooling through poverty of blood and of heat.”10
AT enim veterem Chamaeleontis historiam certiori recentiorum narratione aliqua ex parte corrigit et emendat Scaliger, ad hunc modum scribens: De Chamaeleonte quaedam minus trita referamus. Io. Landius, in ultima Syria cum esset, ait se vidisse unum e quinque, quos emerat, Chamaeleontibus lingua repentino momentaneoque iaculatu muscam quae in eius esset pectore legisse. Propterea illius a se dissecti linguam narrabat inventam palmi longitudine, cavam, inanem, in summa tanquam acetabulum cum muco, quo praedam tolleret. Id novum sane iis qui solo vento vivere hactenus existimarunt.
But Scaliger corrects and amends in some part the old account of the Chameleon by the more certain narration of more recent [observers], writing in this manner: “Let us report some less common things about the Chameleon. John Landi, when he was in farthest Syria, says that he saw one of five Chameleons which he had bought pick off, with a sudden and momentary dart of its tongue, a fly that was on its breast. For this reason he related that the tongue of the one dissected by him was found to be a palm in length, hollow, empty, with at its tip, as it were, a little cup with mucus, by which it might take up its prey. This is indeed new to those who have hitherto thought it lives on air alone.”11
In quoslibet mutari colores verum non est. Super viridi viriditas vegetatur; super luteo temperatur ad luteum. Super caeruleo aut rubro aut albo non vincitur viriditas nativa, sed puncta caerulea et rubra et alba viridiorem validioremque sui speciem dant. Super nigro subnigrescunt, manet tamen tenor ille viredinis atro confusus. Etiam haud mutato supposito colore, mutat ipse suum, vel metu vel molestia, aut oppressus aut solutus. Quod aër illi pro cibo sit aliquandiu, ex eo patet quod et annum integrum aiunt inedia tolerare, et ubi excepit hiatu auram et occlusit malas, turget ei venter. Etiam inveni qui diceret obversum ad Solem haurire radios, eiusque conversione hiantem sequi. Venenatorum serpentum est hostis acerrimus Chamaeleo. Is ex illis unumquempiam speculatus, in umbra captantem auras aut in radiis apricantem, in eam scandit arborem quae illi imminet: unde ex ore filum demittit araneorum more, in cuius fili extremo guttula sit margaritae splendore. Ea, tactum in vertice, serpentem mori.
“That it changes into any colors whatever is not true. Upon green its greenness is quickened; upon yellow it is tempered toward yellow. Upon blue or red or white its native greenness is not overcome, but blue and red and white spots give a greener and stronger appearance of itself. Upon black they grow blackish, yet that tenor of greenness remains, confused with the black. Even when the underlying color is not changed, it changes its own, whether from fear or from annoyance, whether oppressed or relaxed. That air is for it as food for a while is plain from this: that they say it endures fasting a whole year, and that when it has taken in the breeze by its gaping and closed its jaws, its belly swells. I have even found one who said that, turned toward the Sun, it drinks in the rays, and follows it gaping with its [the Sun's] turning. The Chameleon is a most fierce enemy of the venomous serpents. Having spied out any one of them, catching the breezes in the shade or basking in the rays, it climbs into the tree that overhangs it: whence from its mouth it lets down a thread, after the manner of spiders, at the end of which thread there is a little drop, of the splendor of a pearl. By this the serpent, touched on the top of its head, dies.”12
Illud etiam admirabilius: si ad perpendiculum nequeat filum demittere, quod minus ad amussim respondeat ramus in quo est inferiori loco ubi cubat serpens, ita filum corrigere pedibus anterioribus atque eius tractum temperare, ut ad lineam quasi catheton descendat. Haec Scaliger. 10. SALAMANDRA. De hac, quae mira sunt et cognitu digna, disputavimus in libro tertio Commentariorum nostrorum in Danielem. 11. SCYTALE: serpens tanta praefulgens tergi varietate ut, notarum gratia, videntes retardet; et quoniam reptando pigrior est, quos assequi nequit, miraculo sui capiat stupentes. 12. CERASTES: praeferens quadrigemina cornua, quorum ostentatione, velut esca illice, sollicitatas aves perimit. 13. AMPHISBAENA: consurgens in caput geminum, quorum alterum in loco suo est, alterum in ea parte qua…
“This too is more wonderful: if it cannot let down the thread plumb-straight — because the branch on which it is does not exactly correspond to the lower place where the serpent lies — it so corrects the thread with its forefeet, and tempers its draught, that it descends to the line, as it were, of a plumb-line.” This [says] Scaliger. 10. THE SALAMANDER. Of this, the things that are wonderful and worthy of knowledge, we have disputed in the third book of our Commentaries on Daniel. 11. THE SCYTALE: a serpent shining with such variety of back that, by the grace of its markings, it retards those who see it; and since it is rather sluggish in crawling, those which it cannot overtake it captures by the marvel of itself as they stand amazed. 12. THE CERASTES (horned serpent): displaying fourfold horns, by the ostentation of which, as by an enticing bait, it kills the birds it has lured. 13. THE AMPHISBAENA: rising up into a twin head, of which one is in its [proper] place, the other in that part where…13
…qua cauda. 14. IACULI: qui subeunt arbores, e quibus vi maxima [iaculan]tur binati, penetrant animal quodcumque obvium. 15. DIPSAS: siti interficiens. 16. HYPNALE: somno necans, experimento Cleopatrae, idcirco ad mortem quaesita et empta. 17. EMORROIS: morsu sanguinem eliciens, et, dissolutis venarum commerciis, quicquid animae est evocans per cruorem. 18. PRAESTER: a quo percussus distenditur, enormique corpulentia necatur extuberatus. 19. SEPS: cuius ictum statim putredo sequitur. 20. AMMODYTES: serpens magnitudine quidem cubitali est, colore vero arenosus, per corpus autem maculis nigris insignitur, caudam habet praeduram, superne discussam. A quibusdam cechrias, id est, miliaris, ob caudae instar milii duritiem, appellatus est. Latiores maxillas quam vipera habet; cumque in multis aliis ei similis sit, colore magis discerni potest, vipera enim subflava est. 21. CENCHRIS: genus etiam serpentis venenosi, de quo Plinius loquens de serpyllo (domestico, adversus serpentes efficax, maxime Cenchrin), etc.
…where the tail is. 14. THE IACULUS (javelin-snake): which climb up trees, from which, paired, they hurl themselves with the greatest force, and pierce whatever animal is in their way. 15. THE DIPSAS: killing by thirst. 16. THE HYPNALE: slaying by sleep — by the experiment of Cleopatra, who therefore sought and bought it for her death. 17. THE HAEMORRHOIS: drawing out blood by its bite, and, the channels of the veins being dissolved, calling forth whatever there is of life through the gore. 18. THE PRESTER: by which one struck is distended, and, swollen out with enormous corpulence, is killed. 19. THE SEPS: whose blow putrefaction immediately follows. 20. THE AMMODYTES (sand-viper): a serpent of about a cubit in size, but sandy in color, marked through the body with black spots; it has a very hard tail, broken up at the top. By some it is called “cechrias,” that is, “miliaris,” on account of the hardness of its tail like millet (milium). It has broader jaws than the viper; and although it is similar to it in many other respects, it can rather be distinguished by color, for the viper is yellowish. 21. THE CENCHRIS: also a kind of venomous serpent, of which Pliny [speaks] when treating of wild thyme (serpyllum) — effective, in its domestic [form], against serpents, especially the Cenchris — etc.14
22. ELEPHANTIA. 23. CHERSYDROS: serpens qui tam in aquis quam in terris commoratur, non multum distans a Chelydro, fumum qua serpit emittente. Lucanus: Natus et ambigua coleret qui Syrtidos arva / Chersydros, tractique via fumante Chelydri. 24. CHAMAEDRACON. 25. HYDRUS seu HYDRA: nam Hydrus mas est et Hydra femina, quanquam hoc genus serpentium aquatile est potius quam terrestre. De hoc sic Plinius: In orbe terrarum, inquit, pulcherrimum anguium genus est quod in aqua vivit. Hydri vocantur, nullis serpentium inferiores veneno. Horum iecur servatum adversus percussos ab his auxilium est. Idem alibi memorat marinos vicenum cubitorum, a quibus classis Alexandri territa sit. Nam Hydram in Lerna palude multorum fuisse capitum, quorum aliquot excisis plures continuo renascerentur, et quae tandem ab Hercule sagittis et igne interfecta sit, poëtarum est figmentum. Sunt igitur in universum viginti quinque supradictae species Reptilium. Sed propter alias fortasse nonnullas species adhuc nobis incognitas, eum numerum usque ad triginta extendamus.
22. THE ELEPHANTIA. 23. THE CHERSYDROS: a serpent which dwells both in the waters and on land, not much different from the Chelydrus, which emits smoke where it crawls. Lucan: “And the Chersydros, born to inhabit the ambiguous fields of the Syrtis, and the track of the Chelydrus drawn along with a smoking trail.” 24. THE CHAMAEDRACON. 25. THE HYDRUS or HYDRA: for the Hydrus is the male and the Hydra the female; although this kind of serpents is aquatic rather than terrestrial. Of this Pliny [writes] thus: “In the world the most beautiful kind of snakes is that which lives in water. They are called Hydri, inferior to no serpents in venom. The liver of these, preserved, is a help against those struck by them.” The same [Pliny] elsewhere records marine ones of twenty cubits each, by which the fleet of Alexander was terrified. For that the Hydra in the marsh of Lerna had many heads, of which, when some were cut off, more were continually reborn, and that it was at last killed by Hercules with arrows and fire, is a fiction of the poets. There are, therefore, in all, the twenty-five aforesaid species of Reptiles. But on account of perhaps some other species still unknown to us, let us extend that number up to thirty.15

Translator’s notes

  1. §32. The five kinds; birds already placed in the top story, so the four remaining are catalogued. ↩
  2. §33. Pererius's rationale for the bestiary that follows. Marginal gloss: “Why the author treats the species of animals, not only by reckoning their number, but also by briefly setting forth the chief features and natures of certain of them.” Continues on p. 257. ↩
  3. Conclusion of §33. ↩
  4. §34. The reptile catalogue begins. Margins: “Of reptiles that entered the ark, 25 species”; Scaliger, Exercitationes 183; “Winged snakes.” ↩
  5. §35. On the viper's reputed self-destructive birth. Margins: “Whether the viper perishes in giving birth”; Viper; Scaliger, Exercitationes 201. ↩
  6. §36. Aristotle's correction. Margins: Aristotle, Hist. anim. bk. 5, ch. 34; Nymphes, bk. 9. ↩
  7. §37. The basilisk. Margins: Basilisk; Jer. 8; “Passage of Isaiah, ch. 14”; Scaliger, Exercitationes 246; Pliny, bk. 8, ch. 21. ↩
  8. §38. The catoblepas, lizards, stellion, and tarantula. Margins: Catoblepas; Scaliger, Exercitationes 185; Tarantula. ↩
  9. §39. The tarantula's varied effects (compared to drunkenness). ↩
  10. §40. The chameleon. Margins: Chameleon; Aristotle, Hist. anim. bk. 2, ch. 11; Pliny, bk. 8, ch. 33; Aristotle, On the Parts of Animals, bk. 4, ch. 11. Continues on p. 259. ↩
  11. §41. Scaliger's eyewitness correction (the tongue). Margins: Scaliger, Exercitationes 196; John Landi. ↩
  12. §42. The chameleon's colors and its serpent-killing thread. ↩
  13. §43. Salamander, scytale, cerastes, amphisbaena. Margins: Scytale; Solinus, ch. 30 (on the Scytale and following). Continues on p. 260. ↩
  14. §44. Continuation of the serpent catalogue (iaculus through cenchris). Margin: Pliny, bk. 20, ch. 22. ↩
  15. §45. End of the reptile list (25 species, rounded to 30). Margins: Lucan, bk. 9; Hydrus and Hydra; Pliny, bk. 29, ch. 4; same, bk. 6, ch. 23. ↩