The Pelican. 
285 
coloured, and they will eat exceedingly. They hunt for fishes, they fly 
slowly, and they stay long under water when they dive, their hills are 
made tootli-ways, as mower’s sickles, and with those they hold fast 
slippery fish, chiefly eels.” 
Shakspeare’s references to the cormorant are only as 
an emblem of insatiable appetite. 
The Pelican might almost be ranked among the fabu¬ 
lous birds, so strange and unnatural were the Pelica 
qualities attributed to it by the older writers. 
The principal myth concerning the pelican was that the 
parent bird, if unable to procure food for her offspring, 
pierced her flesh, and thus provided an impromptu repast 
for the little ones. This bird was therefore chosen by 
artists as an emblem of charity, and a pelican, “ in her 
piety,” was a favourite heraldic emblazonment. There are 
several modern explanations of this theory; unlike most 
myths, the fable is not derived from classical authority, 
but in all probability owes its origin to the passages 
referring to the pelican in the Scriptures, and to the notes 
of the commentators thereon. Chester quotes one of 
these learned authorities in his account of the bird :— 
“ The pellican, the wonder of our age, 
As Jerome saith, revives her tender yong, 
And with her purest blood she doth asswage 
Her yong ones thirst, with poisonous adder|stung. 
And those that were supposed three dayes dead, 
She gives them life once more being nourished.” 
(Love’s Martyr , p. 122.) 
Shakspeare has been accused of maligning the cha¬ 
racter of the juvenile members of the pelican family, 
when he calls Regan and Goneril ec pelican daughters.” If 
it be true that the parent bird, when provisions ran short, 
supplied temporary nourishment by giving herself, Portia- 
like, a voluntary wound, it would be hard to blame the 
young birds for accepting the sacrifice. The more usual 
