← Back to context

Comment by HiPhish

6 hours ago

I find it very hard to believe that people in the middle ages (or before or after) looked at birds and actually thought that they really spawned from trees or barnacles. After all, birds can fly, you observe large flocks of birds in the sky right before they vanish, you know that there are warmer regions in the south, so it's not a big stretch to imagine that birds could perhaps migrate southwards. You cannot prove it, but it's a good enough guess.

I think illustrations or stories from the middle ages are to be taken as symbolic or allegorical rather than factual like a biology book would be today. They wrote down a story not because they necessarily believed it be factually true, but because it taught a different kind of truth. For example, no one has ever believed that Red Riding Hood actually happened or that you can cut open a wolf's stomach to pull out a living person.

3 comments

HiPhish

Reply
dudefeliciano  2 hours ago

It took until the 1800s for us to finally understand where the hell birds go in the winter, we had all kinds of crazy theories before then. We finally realized birds migrate to Africa, with proof, when a stork arrived in Germany after surviving being shot by an arrow in Africa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfeilstorch

throwup238  4 hours ago

> You cannot prove it, but it's a good enough guess.

You can guess that now in the 21st century, but we're talking about illiterate peasants who never traveled past their nearest market center. It's naive to assume we can even possibly empathize with their epistemological outlook.

For example, just look at the medieval sources about barnacle geese from the 13th century (from the educated class):

> Barliates, as Aristotle says, grow from wood, and are birds which the common people call 'barnesques', having a similar nature. [1] (I chose a short quote to make a point but please read the rest of the source, it's hardly an allegorical text)

They didn't have the concept of falsifiability or anything even remotely resembling the scientific process (or critical thinking, for the most part). The literate were obsessed with the classics and just took Aristotles and Ptolemy's word for everything, until Copernicus and Kepler had their way. Anything resembling scientific knowledge filtered down to the peasants or came from old wives tails entirely.

Even now with almost universal literacy we have a significant fraction (if not majority) of the population believing in ridiculously stupid nonsense like astrology. I don't find it hard to believe that people thought that geese's life cycle included barnacles.

[1] https://www.medievalbestiary.bestiary.ca/beasts/beastsource1...