[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sut,—Your correspondent's criticism of
the popular belief that the ostrich puts. his head in the sand in order to hide himself is -most entertaining. But what is his authority for stating that it has been universally accepted by Europeans for at least• two thousand years ? Do writers, travellers and naturalists seriously record this strange habit ? When we read or hear the story, is it not invariably by way of illus- tration or playful metaphor. just as we may speak of the ashes of the Phoenix, or a crocodile's tears ? Has it not already passed from " the region of natural history " into the delightful realm of " parable " ?
Neither Herodotus nor Pliny can be held accountable for the story in its present form. The latter in describing ostriches (Nat.' Hist. X., 1) says, " Their stupidity is remark- able. for notwithstanding their enormous height, they hide their, necks in a bush (Lat. frutice), and imagine they cannot be seen." To hide in.'s bush is not an utter act of folly, like hiding the head in-the sand, but a sensible and useful habit. It is easy to see how in an age of credulity and fertile fancy the - plain bush of natural fact would be converted into the golden sand of fable. After all, the ostrich is probably the best judge of the measures_ conducive to its own safety, and Pliny's statement is confirmed by Darwin's observation, who in his travels in Patagonia " saw several ostriches enter a bed of rushes, where they squealed concealed; till quite closely approached " (" Beagle," ch. IV.).—I am,
Previous page
