to which a note is appended in Southey's edition, p. 609, that such
fowls were "Barnacles, a bird breeding upon old ships." A bunch of the
shells attached to the ship, or to a piece of floating timber, at a
distance appears like flowers in bloom; the foot of the animal has a
similitude to the stalk of a plant growing from the ship's sides, the
shell resembles a calyx, and the flower consists of the tentacula, or
fingers, of the shell-fish. The ancient error was to mistake the foot
for the neck of a goose, the shell for its head, and the tentacula for
feathers. As to the body, _non est inventus_.
Sir Kenelm Digby was soundly laughed at for relating to a party at
the castle of the Governor of Calais, that "the Barnacle, a bird in
Jersey, was first a shell-fish to appearance, and, from that striking
upon old wood, became in time a bird." In 1807, there was exhibited in
Spring-gardens, London, a "Wonderful natural curiosity, called the Goose
Tree, Barnacle Tree, or Tree bearing Geese," taken up at sea on January
12th, and more than twenty men could raise out of the water.[26]
Sir J. Emerson Tennent asks whether the ready acceptance and general
credence given to so obvious a fable may not have been derived from
giving too literal a construction to the text of the passage in the
first chapter of Genesis:--
"And God said, Let the _waters bring forth abundantly_ the
moving creature that hath life, and the _fowl_ that may fly in the
open firmament of heaven."
The Barnacle Goose is a well-known bird, and is eaten on fast-days in
France, by virtue of this old belief in its marine origin. The belief
in the barnacle origin of the bird still prevails on the west coast of
Ireland, and in the Western Highlands of Scotland.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account