Those who would follow Christ must neither be unduly frightened by what is involved, nor rush into commitments which they will be unable to fulfil. - Edward Allworthy Armstrong

A rich store of Christian s appeared throughout the centuries before the time of Saint Francis, and he was by no means the first saint to show compassion for animals; but the blossoming of Christian compassion for nature in the thirteenth century and the , taken for granted by most writers, require explanation. Prior to his appearance, Italy had not been fertile in stories, true or apocryphal, telling of men and animals on friendly terms with one another, nor were Italians then any more renowned than they are now for their kindly treatment of birds and beasts. Why, then, should there have accumulated in connexion with a humble n friar a galaxy of stories of this kind?

... All large sociable birds make noticeable preparations when about to take wing, and some of these initiating movements have no apparent usefulness so far as rising from the ground or water is concerned. ... It is of great advantage to birds which migrate in flocks, such as geese, to take flight so far as possible simultaneously, and thus range themselves without delay into orderly squadrons. Moreover, the movements serve as a quiet hint of danger to neighbors when a bird sights a suspicious object. They have, in fact, a contagious effect. Large gaggles of geese in which one or other of the birds is constantly initiating flight in this way fly up much more often than small parties.

There is nothing in Shakespeare's writings to suggest that he knew the . In his day the word "chough" was synonymous with . Looking over the Dover cliffs he might have seen jackdaws, but is not likely to have seen crows. A close study of his ornithology has convinced me that personal observation played a very minor part, while traditional symbolism and folk-lore bulked large in his imagination. Incidentally, there is no indication of a personal acquaintance with any sea-bird. He mentions the but only as the symbol of greed. For what it is worth this negative evidence suggests that, contrary to the speculations of and other writers, Shakespeare had not much knowledge of the sea.