It seems almost incredible that little more than two hundred years ago this twaddle should not only have been laid before the highest representatives of science in the land, but that it should have been printed in their "Transactions" for the further delusion of posterity. Ray, in his edition of Willughby's Ornithology, published in the same year as the above, contradicted the fallacy as strongly as Gaspar Schott; and (except that he incidentally admits the possibility of spontaneous generation in some of the lower animals, as insects and frogs) in language so similar that I think he must have had Schott's work before him when he wrote. Aldrovandus[94] tells us that an Irish priest, named Octavianus, assured him with an oath on the Gospels that he had seen and handled the geese in their embryo condition; and he adds that he "would rather err with the majority than seem to pass censure on so many eminent writers who have believed the story." [94] 'Ornithologia,' lib. xix. p. 173, ed. 1603. In 1629 Count Maier (Michaelus Meyerus--these old authors when writing in Latin, latinized their names also) published a monograph 'On the Tree-bird'[95] in which he explains the process of its birth, and states that he opened a hundred of the goose-bearing shells and found the rudiments of the bird fully formed. So slow Bootes underneath him sees, In th' icy isles, those goslings hatched on trees, Whose fruitful leaves, falling into the water, Are turned, they say, to living fowls soon after; So rotten sides of broken ships do change, To barnacles, O, transformation strange! 'Twas first a green tree; then a gallant hull; Lately a mushroom; then a flying gull.[96] [95] 'De Volucri Arborea,' 1629. [96] Du Bartas' "Divine Week" p. 228. Joshua Sylvester's translation. Now, let us turn from fiction to facts. [Illustration: FIG 37.--SECTION OF A SESSILE BARNACLE. _Balanus tintinnabulum._]