Chapter 9

FIG. 35.—THE BARNACLE GOOSE TREE. After Aldrovandus.

In marked and disgraceful contrast with this careful and philosophical investigation and its author's just deductions from it, is 'A Relation concerning Barnacles by Sir Robert Moray, lately one of His Majesty's Council for the Kingdom of Scotland,' read before the Royal Society, and published in the 'Philosophical Transactions,' No. 137, January and February, 1677-8.

FIG. 36.—DEVELOPMENT OF BARNACLES INTO GEESE. After Aldrovandus.

Describing "a cut of a large Firr-tree of about two and a half feet diameter, and nine or ten feet long," which he saw on the shore in the Western Islands of Scotland, and which had become so dry that many of the Barnacle shells with which it had been covered had been rubbed off, he says:—

"Only on the parts that lay next the ground there still hung multitudes of little Shells, having within them little Birds, perfectly shap'd, supposed to be Barnacles. The Shells hung very thick and close one by another, and were of different sizes. Of the colour and consistence of Muscle-Shells, and the sides and joynts of them joyned with such a kind of film as Muscle-Shells are, which serves them for a Hing to move upon, when they open and shut.... The Shells hang at the Tree by a Neck longer than the Shell, of a kind of Filmy substance, round, and hollow, and creased, not unlike the Wind-pipe of a chicken, spreading out broadest where it is fastened to the Tree, from which it seems to draw and convey the matter which serves forthe growth and vegetation of the Shell and the little Bird within it. This Bird in every Shell that I opened, as well the least as the biggest, I found so curiously and compleatly formed, that there appeared nothing wanting as to internal parts, for making up a perfect Seafowl: every little part appearing so distinctly that the whole looked like a large Bird seen through a concave or diminishing glass, colour and feature being everywhere so clear and neat. The little Bill, like that of a Goose; the eyes marked; the Head, Neck, Breast, Wings, Tail, and Feet formed, the Feathers everywhere perfectly shap'd, and blackish coloured; and the Feet like those of other Water-fowl, to my best remembrance. All being dead and dry, I did not look after the internal parts of them. Nor did I ever see any of the little Birds alive, nor met with anybody that did. Only some credible persons have assured me they have seen some as big as their fist."

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."

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]

Now, let us turn from fiction to facts.

FIG 37.—SECTION OF A SESSILE BARNACLE. Balanus tintinnabulum.

Almost every one is acquainted with at least one kind of the Barnacle shells which were supposed to enclose the embryo of a goose, namely the small white conical hillocks which are found, in tens of thousands, adhering to stones, rocks, and old timber such as the piles of piers, and may be seen affixed to the shells of oysters and mussels in any fishmonger's shop. The little animals which secrete andinhabit these shells belong to a sub-class and order of the Crustacea, called theCirrhopoda, because their feet (poda), which in the crab and lobster terminate in claws, are modified into tufts of curled hairs (cirri), or feathers. When the animal is alive and active under water, a crater may be seen to open on the summit of the little shelly mountain, and, as if from the mouth of a miniature volcano, there issue from this aperture, from between two inner shells, thecirriin the form of a feathery hand, which clutches at the water within its reach, and is then quickly retracted within the shell. During this movement the hair-fringed fingers have filtered from the water and conveyed towards the mouth within the shell, for their owner's nutriment, some minute solid particles or animalcules, and this action of the casting-net alternately shot forth and retracted continues for hours incessantly, as the water flows over its resting-place. The animal can live for a long time out of water, and in some situations thus passes half its life. Under such circumstances, the shells, containing a reserve of moisture, remain firmly closed until the return of the tide brings a fresh supply of water and food. These are the "acorn-barnacles," thebalani, commonly known in some localities as "chitters."

Barnacles of another kind are those furnished with a long stem, or peduncle, which Sir Robert Moray described as "round, hollow, and creased, and not unlike the wind-pipe of a chicken." The stem has, in fact, the ringed formation of the annelids, or worms. The shelly valves are thin, flat, and in shape somewhat like a mitre. They are composed of five pieces, two on each side, and one, a kind of rounded keel along the back of the valves, by which these are united. The shells are delicately tinted with lavender or pale blue varied with white, and the edges are frequently of a bright chrome yellow or orange colour.

It is not an uncommon occurrence for a large plank entirely covered with these "necked barnacles" to be found floating at sea and brought ashore for exhibition at some watering-place; and I have more than once sent portions of such planks to the Aquaria at Brighton, and the Crystal Palace.

FIG. 38.—PEDUNCULATED BARNACLES. (Lepas anatifera.)

It is most interesting to watch a dense mass of living cirripedes so closely packed together that not a speck of the surface of the wood is left uncovered by them; their fleshy stalks overhanging each other, and often attached in clusters to those of some larger individuals; their plumose casting-nets ever gathering in the food that comes within their reach, and carrying towards the mouth any solid particles suitable for their sustenance. How much of insoluble matter barnacles will eliminate from the water is shown by the rapidity with which they will render turbid sea water clear and transparent. Themost common species of these "necked barnacles" bears the name of "Lepas anatifera," "the duck-bearingLepas." It was so entitled by Linnæus, in recognition of its having been connected with the fable, which, of course, met with no credit from him.

Fig. 39 represents the figure-head of a ship, partly covered with barnacles, which was picked up about thirty miles off Lowestoft on the 22nd of October, 1857. It was described in theIllustrated London News, and the proprietors of that paper have kindly given me a copy of the block from which its portrait was printed.

FIG. 39.—A SHIP'S FIGURE-HEAD WITH BARNACLES ATTACHED TO IT.

Others of the barnacles affix themselves to the bottoms of ships, or parasitically upon whales and sharks, and those of the latter kind often burrow deeply into the skin of their host. Fig. 40 is a portrait of aCoronula diademataken from the nose of a whale stranded at Kintradwell, in the north of Scotland, in 1866, and sent to the late Mr. Frank Buckland. Growing on thisCoronulaare three of the curious eared barnacles,Conchoderma aurita; theLepasauritaof Linnæus. The species of the whale from which these Barnacles were taken was not mentioned, but it was probably the "hunch-backed" whale,Megaptera longimana, which is generally infested with thisCoronula. This very illustrative specimen was, and I hope still is, in Mr. Buckland's Museum at South Kensington. It was described by him inLand and Water, of May 19th, 1866, and I amindebted to the proprietors of that paper for the accompanying portrait of it.

FIG. 40.—WHALE BARNACLE (Coronula diadema), WITH THREE Conchoderma aurita ATTACHED TO IT.

FIG. 41.—A YOUNG BARNACLE. (Larva of Chthamalus stellatus.)

The young Barnacle when just extruded from the shell of its parent is a very different being from that which it will be in its mature condition. It begins its life in a form exactly like that of an entomostracous crustacean, and, like a Cyclops, has one large eye in the middle of its forehead. In this state it swims freely, and with great activity. It undergoes three moults, each time altering its figure, until at the third exuviation it has become enclosed in a bivalve shell, and has acquired a second eye. It is now ready to attach itself to its abiding-place; so, selecting its future residence, it presses itself against the wood, or whatever the substance may be, pours out from its two antennæ a glutinous cement, which hardens in water, and thus fastens itself by the front of its head, is henceforth a fixture for life, and assumes the adult form in which most persons know it best.[97]

It is unnecessary for me to describe more minutely the anatomy of the Cirripedes; I have said enough to showthe nature of the plumose appurtenances which, hanging from the dead shells, were supposed to be the feathers of a little bird within; but it is difficult to understand how any one could have seen in the natural occupant of the shell, "the little bill, like that of a goose, the eyes, head, neck, breast, wings, tail, and feet, like those of other water-fowl," so precisely and categorically detailed by Sir Robert Moray. As Pontoppidan, who denounced the whole story, as being "without the least foundation," very truly says, "One must take the force of imagination to help to make it look so!"

As to the origin of the myth, I venture to differ entirely from philologists who attribute it to "language," and "a similarity of names," for, although, as Professor Max Müller observes in one of his lectures, "words without definite meanings are at the bottom of nearly all our philosophical and religious controversies," it certainly is not applicable in this instance. Every quotation here given shows that the mistake arose from the supposed resemblance of the plumes of the cirrhopod, and the feathers of a bird, and the fallacious deductions derived therefrom. The statements of Maier (p. 112), Gerard (p. 106), Sir Robert Moray (p. 110), &c., prove that this fanciful misconception sprang from erroneous observation. The love of the marvellous inherent in mankind, and especially prevalent in times of ignorance and superstition, favoured its reception and adoption, and I believe that it would have been as widely circulated, and have met with equal credence, if the names of the cirripede and of the goose that was supposed to be its offspring had been far more dissimilar than, at first, they really were.

Setting aside several ingenious and far-fetched derivations that have been proposed, I think we may safelyregard the word "barnacle," as applied to the cirrhopod, as a corruption ofpernacula, the diminutive ofperna, a bivalve mollusk, so-called from the similarity in shape of its shell to that of a ham—pernaculabeing changed tobernacula. In some old Glossariespernais actually speltberna.

To arrive at the origin of the word "barnacle," or "bernicle," as applied to the goose, we must understand that this bird,Anser leucopsis, was formerly called the "brent," "brant," or "bran" goose, and was supposed to be identical with the species,Anser torquatus, which is now known by that name. The Scottish word for "goose" is "clake," or "clakis,"[98]and I think that the suggestion made long ago to Gesner[99](1558), by his correspondent, Joannes Caius, is correct, that the word "barnacle" comes from "branclakis," or "barnclake," "the dark-coloured goose."

Professor Max Müller is of the opinion that its Latin name may have been derived fromHibernicæ,Hiberniculæ,Berniculæ, as it was against the Irish bishops that Geraldus wrote, but I must say that this does not commend itself to me; for the nameBerniculawas not used in the early times to denote these birds. Giraldus himself described them asBernacæ, but they were variously known, also, asBarliates,Bernestas,Barnetas,Barbates, etc.

I agree with Dr. John Hill,[100]that "the whole matter that gave origin to the story is that the 'shell-fish' (cirripedes), supposed to have this wonderful production usually adhere to old wood, and that they have a kind of fibres hanging out of them, which, in some degree, resemble feathers ofsome bird. From this slight origin arose the story that they contained real birds: what grew on trees people soon asserted to be the fruit of trees, and, from step to step, the story gained credit with the hearers," till, at length, Gerard had the audacity to say that he had witnessed the transformation.

The Barnacle Goose is only a winter visitor of Great Britain. It breeds in the far north, in Greenland, Iceland, Spitzbergen, and Nova Zembla, and probably, also, along the shores of the White Sea. There are generally some specimens of this prettily-marked goose in the gardens of the Zoological Society in the Regent's Park, London; and they thrive there, and become very tame. In the months of December and January these geese may often be seen hanging for sale in poulterers' shops; and he who has tasted one well cooked may be pardoned if the suspicion cross his mind that the "monks of old," and "the bare-footed friars," as well as the laity, may not have been unwilling to sustain the fiction in order that they might conserve the privilege of having on their tables during the long fast of Lent so agreeable and succulent a "vegetable" or "fish" as a Barnacle Goose.

THE END.

LONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.

[1]'Natural History of Norway.' A.D. 1751.

[2]Born 1643; died 1712.

[3]Olaus Magnus has sometimes been mistaken for his brother and predecessor in the archiepiscopal see, Johan Magnus, author of a book entitled 'Gothorum, Suevorumque Historia.' Olaus was the last Roman Catholic archbishop of the Swedish church, and when the Reformation, supported by Gustavus Vasa, gained the ascendancy in Sweden, he remained true to his faith, and retired to Rome, where he wrote his work, 'Historia de Gentibus Septentrionalibus,' Romæ, 1555. An English translation of this book was published by J. Streater, in 1658. It does not contain the illustrations.

[4]'Natural History of Norway,' vol. ii., p. 210.

[5]From the Greek wordscephale, the head; andpoda, feet.

[6]Fromocto, eight; andpous(poda), feet.

[7]See an excellent article in theField, Sept. 2, 1876, on the 'Ten Footed Cuttle' (Sepia officinalis), by the late Mr. W. A. Lloyd, an earnest and accomplished aquatic zoologist; eccentric, but in all that relates to the construction and management of an aquarium a master of his craft. It was his wish that in any future edition of my little book on the Octopus, or other writings on the cephalopods, I should use the woodcuts which illustrated his articles on Sepia and Octopus. By the kind permission of the proprietors of theField, I reproduce them in suitable size for these pages.

[8]See 'The Octopus; or, the Devil-fish of Fiction and of Fact.' 1873. Chapman and Hall.

[9]This carving was figured in illustration of an interesting paper by Professor Owen, C.B., F.R.S., &c., "On some new and rare Cephalopoda," in the Transactions of the Zoological Society, April 20, 1880.

[10]'Histoire Naturelle générale et particulière des Mollusques,' vol. ii., p. 256.

[11]'Conchyliologie Systématique.'

[12]'Hist. Nat. des Moll.,' vol. ii., pp. 358 to 368.

[13]Leisure Hour, October, 1875, p. 636.

[14]'Voyage aux Iles Malouines.'

[15]'Voyage de Découvertes aux Terres Australes.'

[16]'Voyage de l'Uranie: Zoologie,' vol. i., part 2, p. 411. 1824.

[17]'Manuel des Mollusques,' p. 86.

[18]'British Conchology,' vol. v., p. 124.

[19]In the accompanying illustration, the size of the squid is exaggerated, but not so much as has been supposed.

[20]'Sitzungsberichte der Gesellschaft naturforschender Freunde zu Berlin,' pp. 65-67, quoted by Professor Owen,op. cit.

[21]'Comptes Rendus,' t. 80, 1875, p. 998.

[22]'History of Animals,' book 8, chap. 28.

[23]'Naturalis Historiæ,' Lib. vi., cap. 23.

[24]'De Factis, Dictisque Memorabilibus,' Lib. i., cap. 8, 1st century.

[25]'Historia de Gentibus Septentrionalibus,' Lib. xxi. cap. 43.

[26]"Coils itself in spherical convolutions" is a better translation of the original Latin.

[27]Six hundred feet.

[28]'Des alten Grönlands neue Perlustration,' 8vo., Frankfurt, 1730, and 'Det Gamle Grönlands nye perlustratione eller Naturel Historie.' 4to., Copenhagen, 1741.

[29]Jardine's Naturalists' Library: 'Marine Amphibia,' p. 314.

[30]Hitherto erroneously printed "Deinboll."

[31]See illustration, p. 67.

[32]It must be noted, however, that in almost every case, except that of theOsborne, the paddles weresupposed, notseen, and were invented to account for an animal of great length progressing at the surface of the water at the rate of twelve to fifteen miles an hour without its being possible to perceive, upon the closest and most attentive inspection, any undulatory movement to which its rapid advance could be ascribed. As the great calamaries were unknown, their mode of swift retrograde motion, by means of an outflowing current of water, was of course unsuspected.

[33]Dr. Gray wrote in his 'Synopsis of Genera of Reptiles,' in the Annals of Philosophy, 1825: "There is every reason to believe from general structure that there exists an affinity between the tortoises and the snakes; but the genus that exactly unites them is at present unknown to European naturalists; which is not astonishing when we consider the immense number of undescribed animals which are daily occurring. If I may be allowed to speculate from the peculiarities of structure which I have observed, I am inclined to think that the union will most probably take place by some newly discovered genera allied to the marine or fluviatile soft-skinned turtles and the marine serpent."

[34]Berosus, lib. i. p. 48.

[35]Nahum iii. 8.

[36]1 Samuel v. 4.

[37]'Paradise Lost,' Book i. l. 462.

[38]Some writers are of the opinion that the legend of Oannes contains an allusion to the rising and setting of the sun, and that his semi-piscine form was the expression of the idea that half his time was spent above ground, and half below the waves. The same commentators also regard all the "civilizing" gods and goddesses as, respectively, solar and lunar deities. The attributes symbolized in the worship of Noah and the sun are so nearly alike that the two interpretations are not incompatible.

[39]'Opera Omnia,' tom. ii. p. 884, edit. Bened. de Dea. Syr.

[40]Lib. i. cap. cv.

[41]It is worthy of note that the fish was also adopted as an emblem by the early Christians, and was frequently sculptured on their tombs as a private mark or sign of the faith in which the person there interred had died. It alluded to the letters which composed the Greek word [Greek: Ichthys] ("a fish") forming an anagram, the initials of words which conveyed the following sentiment: [Greek: Iêsous], Jesus; [Greek: Christos], Christ; [Greek: Theou], of God; [Greek: gios], Son; [Greek: Sôtêr], Saviour. But it doubtless bore, also, the older meaning of "preservation" and "reproduction," of which the fish was the symbol, and betokened a belief in a future resurrection, as Noah was preserved to dwell in, and populate, a new world. In 'Sea Monsters Unmasked,'page 55, I gave a figure, copied by permission from theIllustrated London News, of a rough sculpture in the Roman catacombs, of Jonah being disgorged by a sea-monster. Near to it was found, on another Christian tomb, one of these designs of the "fish;" and it is not a little curious that, whereas the animal depicted as casting forth Jonah is not a whale, but a sea-serpent, or dragon, theichtheusin this instance is apparently not a fish, but a seal.FIG. 11.—CHRISTIAN SYMBOL. From the Catacombs at Rome.The article referred to appeared in theIllustrated London Newsof February 3rd, 1872, and the woodcut (fig. 11), an electrotype of which was most kindly presented to me by the proprietors of that paper, was one of the sketches that accompanied it.

FIG. 11.—CHRISTIAN SYMBOL. From the Catacombs at Rome.

The article referred to appeared in theIllustrated London Newsof February 3rd, 1872, and the woodcut (fig. 11), an electrotype of which was most kindly presented to me by the proprietors of that paper, was one of the sketches that accompanied it.

[42]Naturalis Historia, Lib. ix. cap. v.

[43]De Naturâ Animalium, Lib. xvi. cap. xviii.

[44]"Forfices," literally "shears," or "nippers," like the claws of a lobster.

[45]Lib. xiii. cap. xxi.

[46]One of the Dutch spice-islands in the Banda Sea, between Celebes and Papua.

[47]Beschrijving van Oud en Nieuw Oost-Indien, etc., 5 vols. folio, Dordrecht and Amsterdam, 1727, vol. iii. p. 330.

[48]Itinerarium Indicum, Berne, 1669.

[49]With the permission and assistance of Messrs. Longman, the accompanying wood-cut of this picture, and that of the Dugong, onpage 43, are copied from Sir J. Emerson Tennent's book published in 1861.

[50]Whitbourne's 'Discourse of Newfoundland.'

[51]Glover's 'Account of Virginia,' ap. Phil. Trans. vol. xi. p. 625.

[52]Historia rerum Norvegicarum.

[53]Voyage en Islande, tom. iii. p. 223.

[54]'Natural History of Norway,' vol. ii. p. 190.

[55]Feroa Reserata, or Description of the Faroe Islands. 8vo. Copenhagen, 1673.

[56]John Leyden.

[57]Third Series, vol. ii. p. 134, 2nd ed.

[58]Naturalist's Library, Marine Amphibiæ, p. 291.

[59]John Leyden.

[60]The Ettrick Shepherd.

[61]Tom Hood. 'The Mermaid at Margate.'

[62]John Leyden.

[63]'Romances and Drolls of the West of England.' London: Hotten, 1871.

[64]Vol. xiii. p. 336.

[65]The "Cornish Vicar" was, evidently, the Rev. Robert Stephen Hawker, M.A., Vicar of Morwenstow, and author of 'Echoes from Old Cornwall,' 'Footprints of Former Men in Cornwall,' etc.

[66]'Geography and Distribution of Animals.'

[67]'Romance of Natural History,' 2nd Series.

[68]Almost all that is known of the living rytina is from an account published in 1751, in St. Petersburg, by Steller, who was one of an exploring party wrecked on Behring's Island in 1741. During the ten months the crew remained on the island they pursued this easily-captured animal so persistently, for food, that it was all but annihilated at the time. The last one there was killed in 1768.

[69]For a full description of the habits of this animal in captivity, see an article by the present writer in the 'Leisure Hour' of September 28, 1878; from which the illustration,Fig. 17, is borrowed by the kind consent of the Editor of that publication.

[70]Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. August, 1857.

[71]The octopus is still called the "preke" in some parts of England, notably in Sussex. The translation of Oppian's 'Halieutics,' from which this passage and others are quoted is that by Messrs. Jones and Diaper, of Baliol College, Oxford, and was published in 1722.

[72]Homer's 'Odyssey,' Pope's Translation, Book XII.

[73]'Historia de Gentibus Septentrionalibus,' lib. xxi. cap. vi.A.D.1555.

[74]'Natural History of the Sperm Whale.' Van Voorst, 1839.

[75]The octopus.

Back to Index Next