Supplement to Harvesting Ants and Trap-Door Spiders

by John Traherne Moggridge; Octavius Pickard-Cambridge

The explanation is that these writers lived on the shores of the Mediterranean, where these two species—Atta barbara and structor—are extremely common objects, both on account of their abundance and their habits. The long trains of harvesters remain exposed to view for hours together, and structor seeks the neighbourhood or even the interior of towns, so that these ants arrest the attention even of the unobservant, and often become familiar as the sparrows.

There can be little doubt that these two ants display the same habits throughout all the warmer districts which they inhabit, but whether they do so in Switzerland, Germany, Northern France, and the other colder portions of their range, remains one of the many interesting questions which still await investigation.

Mr. F. Smith has recorded the presence of Atta barbara in Palestine, and I have lately obtained some curious evidence which goes to show that harvesting ants not only carried on their operations in times past in that country, but that their seed-stores were on a much larger scale than any I have observed on the Riviera.

I am indebted to Dr. F. A. Pratt for the information that mention was made of ants and their stores in the Misna, that codification of the traditionary and unwritten laws of the Jews, which was commenced after the birth of Christ under the presidency of Hillel, and which has at least the merit of serving as a record of a multitude of very ancient customs and observances which, but for it, would probably have long ago been forgotten.

Now it so happens that the very first section of the Misna is called Zeraim, and has to do with seeds and crops, and I was thus enabled, without any very prolonged search, to light upon one of the passages in question.[114] It occurs in a chapter entitled De Angulo in the Latin version, treating of the corner of the fields bearing crops which should be set aside for the poor, and of the rights of the gleaners, and may be freely rendered as follows: "The granaries of ants (Formicarum cavernulæ), which may be found in the midst of a growing crop of corn, shall belong to the owner of the crop; but, if these granaries are found after the reapers have passed, the upper part (of each heap contained in these granaries) shall go to the poor and the lower to the proprietor." And then is added: "The Rabbi Meir is of opinion that the whole should go to the poor, because whenever any doubt arises about a question of gleaning the doubt is to be given in favour of the gleaner."

[114] "Formicarum cavernulæ in media segete proprietarii censentur; pone messores superiore parte pauperum, inferiore proprietarii. R. Meir totum pauperum esse censet, quia quod dubium est in spicelegio, spicilegium est." And to this the following explanatory note is appended: "Formicarum cavernulæ, Frumentum inibi repertum." Misna, Sect. I. Zeraim. Cap. IV. p. 25. Latine vertit et commentario illustravit Gulielmus Guisius. Accedit Mosis Maimonidis Præfatio in Misnam, Edo. Pocockio Interprete, Oxoniæ A.D. 1690.

The intention of this very quaint bit of legislation, or rather of the ancient custom which gave rise to it, appears to have been the following; it was to settle once and for all a nice point of conscience with reference to the claims of the poor upon these ant stores. If the heaps of grain were found among the standing corn before the reapers reached the spot or while they were still at work, the proprietor might claim them without any hesitation; but, if they were discovered after the passing of the reapers, then it was conceivable that the ants, which during the whole time had never ceased their labours, might have collected some of the grain from the fallen ears of corn which lay upon the ground, and were the property of the gleaners. These grains would be those which the ants had collected most recently, and would therefore lie on the surface of each granary heap. Thus it was settled that the upper portion of each heap should belong to the poor, and the lower, that collected from the standing crop, to the proprietor.

We may perhaps laugh at the notion of critically discussing and legislating upon such a subject, and think that such a pitiful matter might have been allowed to pass among those minima about which even the Jewish law need not care.

Be this as it may, it is interesting for us to learn that a custom of the kind had its place among the recognised traditions of the people, and that the harvesting ants of Syria had earned a place in these records by amassing stores of sufficient size, and so disposed as to make them worth collecting.

This reminds us of what M. Germain de St. Pierre has related (Ants and Spiders, p. 29) of the extent of the depredations made among the corn crops at Hyères by these ants; and doubtless other observers who have opportunities for watching the ants during the summer months might supply further confirmation.