Loch Ness monster evidence in a medieval MS

[Big Les]

I thought this was interesting;

http://britishlibrary.typepad.co.uk...ch-ness-monster-found-at-british-library.html

A supposed medieval manuscript account and illustration of a Loch Ness monster - not necessarily THE Loch Ness monster, but a monster nonetheless.

The drawing does look rather bear-like, but the fire sparkling from the eyes? I can't help thinking it's just as likely to have been a medieval mushroom trip as it is an actual survival of British bear. Then again, it's only two centuries after they were made extinct, so it's certainly plausible if we ignore the magic eyes.

It's also interesting to see the British Library referencing a Cryptozoology journal.

What do people think? Particularly those with knowledge of/access to said journal, as I can't find anything about it online.

 

[StankApe]

Kinda looks like a griffon, or some sort of chimera. Part bear, with dragon's breath.

Could have been based on a whale or a big seal seen somewhere and then embellished over the years....

 

[paulhutch]

Science writer and Palaeozoologist Darren Naish wrote a review of volume one of the journal for his blog at SciAm.

Based on my reading the review, it appears that The Journal of Cryptozoology is holding to scientific standards at least in volume one.

 

[Dinwar]

Given the absurdity of many Medieval manuscript illustrations, I'd be amazed if we COULDN'T find something like this. They include everything from killer rabbits to tenticle porn. The "fire-out-of-the-eyes" thing is something I've seen a few times, but can't recall where off-hand. I know they were manuscriptes, but I'm not sure which. they had some weird ideas back then of how to draw things.

 

[The Shrike]

The article identifies the creature as a bear (I agree) but makes statements about it being a "gigantic" bear. It doesn't look to me to be any bigger than a run of the mill bear.

 

[Pope130]

Date of article: 1 April 2013.

 

[Big Les]

Date of article: 1 April 2013.

Damn it, sorry. I received the link as part of a discussion list on April 7, and was completely out of April Fool's awareness mode by then.

I should have known though, because last year the BL did an MS based gag about a recipe book containing recipes for unicorn!

And the reason I couldn't find anything on the journal is that it doesn't exist - the journal Naish reviewed is something else (that I had heard about).

 

[Baffled]

It's clearly a sea pig.

True Facts about the Sea Pig

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The article identifies the creature as a bear (I agree) but makes statements about it being a "gigantic" bear. It doesn't look to me to be any bigger than a run of the mill bear.

Must be a drop bear then.

 

[Mike!]

Is the guy standing in space watching his friend in the boat be capsized by the Loch Ness Monster Sea Pig Giant-curly-tailed-bear-thing-with-vision-problems, holding the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch? Why isn't he using it to save his friend? Can't he count to four five three?

 

[Damien Evans]

Must be a drop bear then.

Which in turn would revolutionise our view of either European Exploration or greatly expand the known range of the Drop Bear! An exciting discovery indeed!

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Which in turn would revolutionise our view of either European Exploration or greatly expand the known range of the Drop Bear! An exciting discovery indeed!

Not really, that's just as far as they've gotten since they got off the Ark. Walking back to Australia takes a while whether you're real or not.