Early this morning a shadow passed over me while I was in my garden, hands and knees in the soil. The shade was silent, sudden and dense. As I was focused upon some particularly insidious clover, I didn't really notice the shadow as much as I reacted to it. Without thinking, and certainly without expecting anything in particular, I rolled my head around to discover the source of the darkness and saw that just a few feet away and closing fast, the flaming granddaughter of King Herod the Great, with her six-foot span of wings fully spread, was braking… preparing to set down where I was kneeling.
Shock doesn't fully explain my reaction of Fear, Delight, Confusion, Fascination, Awe, Doubt and Joy. Wagner began to play in my head. I actually lost my breath. It was probably the last thing in all of my experience and imagination that I expected to see. I'm talking about the Great Blue Heron and I'd never before seen one in Lake County.
Clearly the bird was startled too. It backed it's wind and veered away climbing. I watched it too long (as I could do nothing else until it dipped below the line of cattails ringing the pond some distance away). It was out of sight but not gone. With the energy of a ten-year-old I dashed inside to find a camera, almost to prove to myself that the whole thing had actually happened.
While I am not particularly self-aware, I do know that I am not a photographer and I try never to miss an opportunity to prove it. I did not disappoint myself in this regard today. I inadvertently flushed the bird upon parting the cattails and immediately (desperately) captured several shots of the water, the sky, some trees and the cattails themselves. I saw the bird launch but I failed to see (much less snap a shot of) the path she took through the overhanging willows. And then, in a silent instant, she was so high and far away that it defied reason. It is from this distant perspective that I snapped the only photo of the day with a bird - any bird - actually in it. (The original photo is almost entirely of sky, but thankfully the resolution was such that easily 95% of the photo could be cropped revealing a rather hazy, yet typically bent-necked, Great Blue beauty). The only good thing about this photo (and the reason it is posted here) is that it shows a bent neck in flight, which is one of the key determining factors differentiating herons from storks, ibises and spoonbills (which fly with outstretched necks).
My ignorance is a rich and constant source for my own amusement. I was sure it was a heron and it looked to be a Great Blue but I'd just assumed that herons and all heron-like birds (Egrets, Bitterns, etc) lived only in subtropical coastal and wetland areas. I've seen hundreds in Florida and such places and I'd assumed that herons were warm climate birds. I never imagined that I'd see any here, in rural Lake County. And while it is not my intention to divulge where exactly MY Lake County is actually located (because it doesn't matter) suffice it to say that it snows here. A lot.
Curious, the first thing to do was to look up the Great Blue and verify that it was even possible that I had seen it. Do herons even come to Lake County? In fact, they do.
The range of these magnificent birds is enormous across North America and beyond. In fact, the Great Blue also breeds on the Galapagos Islands and stragglers have been recorded on the Hawaiian chain.
Figure: Breeding, nonbreeding, and year-round ranges of the Great Blue Heron. The species is rare in winter in the northern parts of its range. From Birds of North America, a fantastic site from the Cornell Lab of Ornithology (it requires a subscription but is well worth it).
It seems that it is very common for the Great Blue Heron to "go adventuring" after the breeding season is done. I can understand this. Sometimes you need to get away. Sure, everyone goes to Cabo but sometimes we feel like Mackinaw Island or Skytop Lodge (my favorite place)! We shouldn't be surprised that the Great Blues beat the blues by getting out of the nest and stretching their wings. They go almost anywhere from the sub-arctic to the tropics. These birds get around. Therefore I should not have been so stunned to see one... or should I have been?
After all, just because the Great Blue beauties are likely travel around a bit doesn't mean that they are densely distributed. Think about it this way: while it might not be unusual to meet a New Yorker in Dallas, the best place to find one is in South Florida. (I don't think there are any New Yorkers in New York anymore.) Another example: yours truly has been spotted in some fairly strange places in my life: in nuclear reactor auxiliary compartments, in the Amazon jungle and even in some rather disreputable establishments in Amsterdam, but if you want to find me, your best bet would be to come to Lake County. In other words, Great Blue Herons have clearly been to Lake County before and they'll be here again. Some might even stay here year round. But there are other places to find them in larger numbers. Range is not the same thing as density. I think a density map is much more interesting (though all I could find was a Winter Density map).
Figure: WINTER DENSITY. Median number of Great Blue Herons per region in Christmas Bird Counts (CBC) reporting > 1 heron, winter 1991, U.S. and Canada. From Birds of North America.
Now THIS MAP is intriguing to me. My Lake County is in the lightest blue, but look at the dark blue regions! I expected to see the Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Gulf Coasts highlighted but was pleasantly surprised to see the Pacific Northwest is deep blue too. And THAT little morsel of information sent me to the Seattle Audubon Society site where I learned that not only are the Great Blues all over Seattle, but they are Seattle's Official City Bird. (It is a beautiful site and a spectacular city to which I am growing a stronger affinity every day.) No doubt I saw Great Blues while last in Seattle - I cannot imagine that I didn't notice them - but it is a testament to the city that I did not readily recall them. Seattle is simply an orgy of beauty with too much to retain. It is a wonderful place.
(Interestingly, the Great Blue Herons agree with me as for some reason, unlike all the other Great Blue Herons, the Pacific Northwest birds are not migratory.)
Now I was hooked. That little search, like so many before it, launched a journey that would span centuries, religions and cultures. And like so many of my aimless searches, I started with my old friend Linnaeus.
I should note the obvious (because that is what I do) and indicate that Carolus Linnæus has been dead for over two hundred years. Therefore, since he died almost exactly 190 years before my birth, he isn't actually my old friend. We've never met. I use the phrase "my old friend" as a term of affection for his work. Seems like I recall some kind of hypothetical proposition "out there" where one invites people throughout history to a dinner party. The idea is to gather your own preferred collection of people without regard to language or time and "assemble an ultimate conversation." Linnæus would be the second invitation I'd send... because I have some questions.
First on the list would be my wife (or ex-wife or whatever the lawyers say today) because as long as "language" is not a barrier we ought to have a nice time. (She speaks exclusively female English while sadly I only speak the male dialect. The two are not compatible.)
I digress.
Linnaeus was "The Man" (in my opinion). He was a Swedish botanist, physician and zoologist who laid the foundations for the modern scheme of scientific nomenclature. He is considered one of the fathers of modern ecology and THE "father of modern taxonomy." I've written a bit about his botanical schemes in another essay "The Language of The Dirt," but for today, I'm more interested in his zoological work. From wikipedia, "Taxonomy, sometimes alpha taxonomy, is the science of finding, describing and naming organisms."
So what's the big deal about naming organisms? Language, that's what! Words are thoughts and I believe language is a tool for thinking. Language shapes the ideas we conceive... and there is history and culture in the words we use. Perhaps more important is the relationship of "Taxonomy" with "Systematics."
Again, from wikipedia, "the words "taxonomy" and "systematics" have a similar history and similar meanings: over time these have been used as synonyms, as overlapping or as completely complementary. In today's usage, Taxonomy (as a science) deals with finding, describing and naming organisms. This science is supported by institutions holding collections of these organisms, with relevant data, carefully curated: such institutes include Natural History Museums, Herbaria and Botanical Gardens. Systematics (as a science) deals with the relationships between taxa, especially at the higher levels. These days systematics is greatly influenced by data derived from DNA."
Simply put, the way we name the things around us is a reflection of what we understand them to be. The names are ideas. The organization of those names represents systems of ideas. We classify Plants differently from Animals, therefore, using the word "plant" means something different to us than "Animal." And then we sub-organize: not just "Animal" but "Dog," not just "Dog" but "Terrier," not just "Terrier" but "Cairn Terrier." It is precisely because we know the words AND UNDERSTAND THE SCHEME that "Cairn Terrier" means anything at all. Once we know the scheme, the number of words we understand is directly related to the number of distinct ideas we understand.
For example, rent a movie. You know generally what you want to see but there are many choices, all movies. So you reference your system of movie ideas and search the categories that interest you: Drama, Comedy, Action and so forth. The categories might be the actors too. Without a firm understanding of the categories, you simply can't find what you want. You'd have to watch every movie. And then, when you found something you liked, you wouldn't be able to explain why. You need an organizational scheme for your ideas. Taxonomy is exactly the same thing...
...with a twist: it isn't OUR scheme. It is Carolus Linnæus'.
It is HIS head you have to get inside, not your own. After all, most taxonomy today is based upon Carolus Linnæus' great work: the Systema Naturae. This was published in the Netherlands in 1735 as an eleven page essay. By the time it reached its 10th edition in 1758, it classified 4,400 species of animals and 7,700 species of plants. The 1758 work is the foundational work for all zoological nomenclature. It all started with Carolus.
The full title makes my point: Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis or translated: "System of nature through the three kingdoms of nature, according to classes, orders, genera and species, with [generic] characters, [specific] differences, synonyms, locations." The three kingdoms he specified were the the animal kingdom (Regnum animale), the plant kingdom (Regnum vegetabile) and the "mineral kingdom" (Regnum lappideum).
Image: A cover of the tenth edition of the Systema Naturae
The point is that Carolus set forth a system of the world and then named everything based upon his (not inconsiderable) understanding of it at the time. But we've learned things since then. This is what I find particularly interesting. Very often, in looking at Linnæus' work, we can:
- Glimpse at the popular culture of the day,
- Learn about historical perceptions of the time,
- And even smile at humorous leftovers of outdated ideas.
In other words, I like to wonder why old Carolus did the things he did. There is often mystery here.
For example, take the human race: Homo sapiens. Linnæus named things in ways that personally struck him as common-sensical. For Carolus, it made sense to designate our species after the word "sapience" - the ability of an organism or entity to act with judgment. See where I'm going? The system of ideas is based upon the caprice and logic of Linnæus. In earlier editions of his work, Linnæus had given humans the species name of diurnis, meaning "man of the day." But he later decided that the dominating feature of humans, in being cognizant of God, was wisdom, hence application of the name sapiens.
Importantly, he never considered humans to be just another kind of animal. He held the deep religious convictions of the day that man was a product of special creation and his giving a biological name was intended to emphasize man's uniqueness and separation from the rest of the animal kingdom.
The question is: What was Carolus Linnæus thinking when he named the Great Blue Heron?
Furthermore, as the science of systematics advances, we discover that we are wrong about things. When we consider what we've learned since 1758, some Linnæun concepts strike as as bizzare... and we have to figure out what Linnæus knew in order to make things make sense. Systemics is the culprit. In other words, "molecular systematics is doing well, likely at the expense of taxonomy (Wheeler, 2004)." Both disciplines interest me.
Carolus knew he had this problem even then. He kept changing things around as subsequent editions of Systema Naturae came out. In the 10th edition, for example, he moved the whales from the fishes to the mammals. The final and thirteenth edition (1770) contains three thousand pages.
Just as new understanding requires new language, old language requires an old understanding.
So what did Carolus have to say about the Great Blue Heron? (Or more to the point, how did he think of it, how did he understand it?)
Linnaeus designated all the large "old and new world" herons into the genus Ardea. I'm not sure why. (And I've spend HOURS trying to find out.) Rather, knowing Carolus, I am absolutely certain that there was a reason, I just don't have a clue what the reason was.
(Linnaeus' binary names consist of the name of a "genus" and an epithet - usually a genus and a species. It isn't necessary to get into what a "Genus" or a "Species" is, though it may be good to know that one (the species) is a subset of the other. Within a Genus there are many species. Each of these "levels" is a "taxon" - ergo the name taxonomy.)
First stop: Ancient Italy.
I've read many accounts of how "ardea" is the Latin word for "heron" but I have run across no verifiable evidence to this effect. (It seems to work thusly: The heron is named ardea because ardea means heron in Latin. We know this because the heron is named ardea.) No help. Does anyone know Latin well enough to answer this?
The only meaning/information I can find about the word is a reference to the ancient Latium town of Ardea (home of the Rutuli people). It was located on the coast of what is modern day Italy. The Ardean harbor (Castrum Inui) lay at the mouth of the stream now known as Fosso dell' Incastro. It was founded, according to legend, either by a son of Odysseus and Circe, or by Danae, the mother of Perseus. It was one of the oldest of the coast cities of Latium, and "a place of considerable importance." It was the capital of Turnus, the opponent of Aeneas and was conquered by Tarquinius Superbus. It appears as a Roman possession in the treaty with Carthage of 509 B.C. Later it was one of the thirty cities of the Latin League. It was later devastated (burned?) by the Samnites and then rebuilt. It eventually declined.
The question is twofold. First, would Linnæus have known about this place? Second, are herons there? The answer to both: I don't know (though, being classically educated, I supsect Carolus would have known about the town).
Further, it strikes me that Ardea is quite similiar to "Ardeo." Ardeo, ardere, arsi and arsus are all Latin verbs means "to burn, be on fire." They come from aridus ("dry, parched"), from arer. The words ardor, ardent and arson come from these roots. Could the appelation "Ardea" come from this association? If so, why? Are the large herons firebirds of some sort? What the heck was Linnæus thinking? Once again, I don't know what this means.
Is it significant that the town of Ardea burned?
One thing is certain: there are herons all over Italy (all over Europe for that matter). They aren't the Great Blues as the Blues are a New World bird, but there are plenty of other varieties... particularly the Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea). Maybe Linnæus associated the ancient town as a central location for herons?
Image: An Italian bird stamp showing the Grey Heron. There is an interesting birds-of-the-world/stamps-of-the-world site here.
I have no idea why Carolus designated herons in general as Ardea, but it gets even more mysterious when we look at the Great Blue Herons specifically. There are several heron species and most of them are named in a way that makes prima facie sense.
And then we come to the Great Blue Heron: Ardea herodias. The Great Blue is hard to categorize... ...get ready for a ten dollar paragraph from Birds of North America:
"The Great Blue Heron has two close relatives, the South American Cocoi Heron and the Old World Grey Heron. These three taxa are highly similar morphologically, behaviorally, and genetically, suggesting that they constitute a single species. Because they do not overlap in distribution, however, these taxa are usually considered to be semispecies constituting a superspecies. Such a classification permits each of the semispecies to be divided into subspecies."
WOWZA. Semispecies, Superspecies, Subspecies. I'd bet Linnæus never saw that coming. (It kind defeats the purpose of categorization, no?) The bird I saw was Ardea herodias herodias: Species herodias. Subspecies herodias. In other words, it wasn't white.
So what does herodias mean? The right question isn't what, but who!
Herodias (c. 15 BC - after 39 AD) was a Jewish princess. (She was the grandaugher and also the neice of Herod the Great... and the wife of her uncle, Herod's son). Deservedly or not, Herodias has quite a bad reputation throughout history. The Gospels of Mark and Matthew implicate her in a twisted scheme that resulted in the beheading of John the Baptist. The essence of the story is this: While at or hosting some kind of feast with her husband Antipas, who was a sort of king, Herodias arranged things so that their daughter danced before Antipas and his party guests. Antipas didn't know it was her daughter and was so well pleased by the performance that he offered the dancer (his daughter) any reward. At this point, the girl, coached by her mother Herodias, asked for the head of John the Baptist (who was in one of his prisons). Antipas complied and sent a messenger to kill John and bring back his head. So it is said to have happened that John the Baptist was executed.
The historic accuracy of this story has been questioned by most modern historians and biblical experts. Moreover, according to the ancient historian, Josephus, John the Baptist was put to death for political reasons as Antipas feared seditious influences.
There is a somewhat famous painting of Herodias by the French painter Hippolyte (Paul) Delaroche (left). The head of John the Baptist is in the bucket. She is portrayed as a "non-European" (code) cold hearted beauty.
(Of course, Delaroche lived 1800 years after Herodias, so the woman in the painting is not an accurate representation of Herodias herself.) He painted many historical characters (as was the mode of the day), and it has been said that his "point of view of the historical characters which he treated is not always just." Though some of his insight into humanity have been called "perfect."
From wikipedia on Delaroche: ""Cromwell lifting the Coffin-lid and looking at the Body of Charles" is an incident only to be excused by an improbable tradition; but "The King in the Guard-Room, with villainous roundhead soldiers blowing tobacco smoke in his patient face," is a libel on the Puritans; and "Queen Elizabeth dying on the Ground, like a she-dragon no one dares to touch, is sensational; while "The Execution of Lady Jane Grey" is represented as taking place in a dungeon. Nothing can be more incorrect than this last as a reading of English history, yet we forget the inaccuracy in admiration of the treatment which represents Lady Jane, with bandaged sight, feeling for the block, her maids covering their faces, and none with their eyes visible among the many figures.
I can't help but look at the painting of Herodias and wonder what Delaroche was trying to tell me.
The subject wasn't new. Three hundred years earlier Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (1571-1610) addressed the subject with his "Salome with the Head of John the Baptist." Salome was the dancer/daughter of Herodias. Salome has escaped the bulk of history's blame as Herodias is cast as the nefarious one.
The focus of Caravaggio's painting is the beheaded John. I'm not sure if the woman behind Salome is Herodias or not. Does anyone know?
About a hundred years later (in 1630) Francesco del Cairo knocked the world on its ear when he painted “Herodias with Head of John the Baptist.” It was a blockbuster... a sensation. But it takes a decidedly different approach: we are asked to consider Herodias and not John.
This painting blows me away. Herodias has the head of John the Baptist in her lap. She is deeply affected and holds his tongue. Is she going to caress his hair? What are we being told by this highly emotional scene?
(Make no mistake, the del Cairo painting is about the only sympathetic thing I've ever seen regarding Herodias. In fact, Herodias seems to have become a strong, Christian (anti-Jewish) symbol of evil through the dark ages and Renaissance.)
In fact, The Cult of Herodias, in medieval folklore, was a coven of witches worshiping the Roman goddess Diana and the Biblical character Herodias. This cult, according to the story, was mainly intended for women, preferably lesbian, as many considered Diana a lesbian goddess. This strange association between the Jewish Queen Herodias and the Roman goddess is resolved in the long-standing theory that the nocturnal goddess was originally Hera-Diana or Herodiana, and was later conflated with Herodias, a name that lent itself to a particularly negative Christian interpretation. - from the wiki entry.
John of Salisbury, Bishop of Chartres, France, made a comment on these fables in his book Policraticus, naming the goddess Herodias and Noctiluca, queen of the night (12th century). He considered the existence of this cult to be a fable at best.
Much later, even after Delaroche, Richard Wagner wrote an opera (Parsifal, opera, WWV 111) wherein there is a main character (Kundry) said to be based upon Herodias as a female Ahasuerus... the fabled "Wandering Jew." In fact Herodias is often directly mentioned in the libretto:
Klingsor, one of the characters in the opera, says "Your master calls you, nameless one... ...Primeval devil-woman! Rose of Hell! You were Herodias, and who else? Gundryggia there, Kundry here!"
IMAGE: the Wandering Jew by Paul Gustave Doré (January 6, 1832 – January 23, 1883) French artist, engraver, and illustrator.
It is quite interesting (if overtly anti-Jewish). Ahasuerus - from Christian folklore - was/is a Jewish man who taunted Jesus on the way to the Crucifixion and was therefore cursed to walk the earth until the Second Coming. Like all folklore, the nature of the wanderer's crimes vary (as do other details). Some interpreters see the "Wandering Jew" as a metaphorical personification of the Jewish diaspora, the subtext that links the two is that the destruction of Jerusalem was in retribution for Jewish responsibility for the Crucifixion. A more allegorical view claims instead that the "Wandering Jew" personifies any individual who has been made to see the error of his or her wickedness.
Wagner's Parsifal is the "story of a young man whose virtue and compassion become the salvation of the Knights of the Holy Grail (who are Christian). He wards off temptation and danger to regain the spear with which Christ's side was pierced on the cross; in the process he heals the king, Amfortas, of a cursed wound, and relieves the fallen woman, Kundry, (who is based on a Jewish character) from her eternal wandering." - from the pasifal site above, parenthetical staements are mine.
My interest (in this post) has little to do with the value of such anti-Semitic rhetoric and more to do the existence of it. Herodias had, in the better part of two thousand years, been transformed into a Jewish witch... a fallen woman... evil... and the Herodias legend had, by comparatively modern times, been completely converted to the following (as summarized by Löffler): Herodias burned with love for John the Baptist, a love which he did not return; when she covers the head carried on the plate with her tears and kisses...
Wow.
Wagner then converted the offense against John the Baptist into an offense against the Saviour.
The point is that Herodias would have been a well known character to Linnaeus. The subject was prominent in art and poetry (and later music). As an educated man, he would have been exposed to the story (and variants). Moreover, as a non-Jewish Northern European, there is no telling what he believed. As a devout Christian of the day, it is likely that he agreed with pro-Christian/anti-Herodias sentiment.
And it was Linnæus who designated the Great Blue Heron as: Ardea herodias. The big question remains: why did he name the Great Blue Heron for such a character? It is almost certainly not complementary. Perhaps it is a reference to the wandering aspect of the Wandering Jew (the exotic New World range)?
I have no idea. It is but another Linnæun mystery to ponder every time you see the beautiful Great Blue take wing.
Two great blues have been cruising up and down the shoreline below our Seattle home (Belltown) for the last few weeks. I watched them fly by, barely over the water, this morning.
It's a good thing I read this a bit later. I'd still be staring out the window.
Oh, I've been wondering how *I* could be the man if *you're* the man. Now I don't have to worry. How can *you* be the man if Linnaeus is the man?
Posted by: Bruce | August 20, 2006 at 01:30 PM
Thanks for pointing out my error. Linnaeus is NOT, in fact, the "man." Linnaeus is the Homo sapiens. You are still the man.
Posted by: The County Clerk | August 21, 2006 at 04:23 PM
Your article on the Blue Heron is very interesting. My 32 year old daughter died 5 years ago. Before she died I asked her to send me a sign. She was able to do this and sent me an entire Summer in 2003 of Blue Herons-more than you can possibly imagine. The Blue Heron had significance to both of us as we regularly saw one of the Hawaiian "vagrants" when on vacation there. Now I am writing a paper on rites of passage, in this case death and symbol and found your article insightful. Thankyou.
Posted by: Heather | February 01, 2008 at 03:33 PM
The Greek word for heron is "erodios". Also, I have found several etymological connections to "ardea", and this play on words with "burn" seems to be very ancient, much older than Ovid's mention of this.
Posted by: Greg | February 22, 2008 at 12:20 AM
Heather: I am sorry to learn of your loss. Yes, these great Blue's are spectacular creatures. What a wonderful sign to get.
Greg: Thank you for this MISSING clue. Damn. I'd say that rather explains it. Sort of. Herodias. Erodios. But begs even more questions. I'd love learn about the "ardea" connections too. Thank you again. Please feel free to come back and clue me in ANY TIME.
Posted by: The County Clerk | February 23, 2008 at 06:39 PM
i had a blue heron visit this morning, on my back fence in inner southeast Portland. It was scary and exciting. For some reason I have an inkling that the ardea name, and it's concept of fire, refers to the heron being related to the mythical phoenix, but I can't back that up.
Posted by: Tim | May 19, 2008 at 02:28 PM
i had a blue heron visit this morning, on my back fence in inner southeast Portland. It was scary and exciting. For some reason I have an inkling that the ardea name, and it's concept of fire, refers to the heron being related to the mythical phoenix, but I can't back that up.
Posted by: Tim | May 19, 2008 at 02:29 PM
Apparently ancient egyptian identified herons with the phoenix, just a hint ;-).
Posted by: Katy | May 26, 2008 at 09:04 AM
We have had two great blue herons at the edge of the lagoon in front of our house, facing each other with their bills straight up in the air. Seen them do this a couple of times. Is this some sort of courtship ritual? Or what?
Posted by: Dave | May 15, 2009 at 10:48 AM