Misnomer
Who named the animals is no mystery
It was father Adam, we know from history.
By and large and for the most part
I find little fault in his tedious art.
Most were labeled exactly
With names chosen most aptly.
Adam's appellation samples
Certainly match it's creature, for examples:

'Elephant'
Is certainly relevant,
As is 'Aardvark,'
'Hippopotamus' and 'Lark.'
A 'Cow' of course
Is more itself than a 'Horse'
Which takes its fame
From a flowing mane.

'Lion' is fi-on
For that great fe-lion,
And, oh, gorgeous 'Jaguar'
That's exactly what you are!
And what better name than 'Crocodile'
For that prehistoric repotile?
Then 'Deer,' 'Bison,' 'Elk,' and 'Moose' all clearly relate
To that great clan called ungulate.

What better than 'Goose' describes those fowls
Famed for their overactive bowels?
And isn't the term for they that squirm
Quite properly 'Worm?'
But there is one name that seems singularly uninspired.
Perhaps our father Adam was overly tired
When it came time
To name the prickly 'Porcupine.'

No, no it cannot be.
It sounds half pig and half tree.
The pig part is fine
So did he really mean to call it 'Porcu-spine?'
That seems a more appropriate name
Considering the animal's spiny fame.
Perhaps spelling changes
Over the time of ages.

With all that, I pray you'll find this box sublime
Despite the fact 'tis made from the ill-famed,
And ill-named
Lowly 'Porcupine!'


(Every Christmas Francis writes his lovely wife a poem to accompany her gifts. This is one of those memorable poems!)