, BERNACLE. 373 



I saw lying upon the shore, a cut of a large fir tree, 

 of about two feet and a half in diameter, and nine or 

 ten feet long, which had lain so long out of the 

 water, that it was very dry ; and most of the shells 

 that had formerly covered it were worn or rubbed off. 

 Only on the parts that lay next the ground, there 

 still hung multitudes of little shells, that were of the 

 colour and consistence of mussel shells. This bar- 

 nacle-shell is thin about the edges, and about half as 

 thick as broad. Every one of the shells hath some 

 cross-seams or sutures, which, as I remember, 

 divide it into five parts. These parts are fastened 

 one to another, with such a film as mussel-shells 

 have. These shells are hung 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 for the growth and 

 vegetation of the shell, and little bird within it. In 

 every shell that I opened I found a perfect sea-fowl : 

 the little bill, like that of a goose, the eyes marked; 

 the head, neck, breast, wings, tail, and feet formed ; 

 the feathers everywhere perfectly shaped, and blackish 

 coloured ; and the feet like those of other water- 

 fowl, to my best remembrance*.'* 



Long before the days, however, of these credulous 

 authors whom we have quoted, the celebrated Al- 

 bertus Magnus (who died at Cologne in 1280) ex- 

 pressly says that the stones about the tree-geese 

 (Baumg'dns) are " altogether absurd/' and for the best 

 possible reason, " as I myself/' he adds, *' and many 

 of my friends along with me, have seen them pair, 

 lay eggs, and nurse their young t" He subjoins an 

 excellent description of the bird, such as Linnaeus 



* Philosophical Transactions. 

 f Hist. Anim. xxiii. editio, Venetiis, 1495. 



2K 



