THE ORIGINS OF LYCANTHROPY.

Part Two: The Origins of Animal Lore.

Written by Utlah.

One thing that humans strive for is power, it's in their nature. Unfortunately, the human body is not born with incredible strength, nor with sharp claws or ripping teeth. So as far as raw physical power goes, humans were not doing so well in the animal kingdom. For example, in a one-on-one fight between a tiger and a human, it was probably the tiger who would be coming home with the take-away meal. So to survive, humans had to learn to rely on their knowledge as well as their strength. It was this knowledge that allowed humans to create the spear, and thus gain the ability for tiger takeaway every once in a while.

This quest for knowledge continued and as humans became more aware of their surroundings, the more they wanted to know about them. But at the time humans could only travel short distances, so they could only experience a small part of their surroundings. This meant that there was still a lot of the world they did not understand or had directly experienced. So most of their information was second or third hand from either travellers or sailors who were not the most reliable of sources. Because humans did not like the idea of the unknown they decided that something was better than nothing, so they'd make something up to fill in the gaps. The most obvious indications of this are the various maps drawn for early mariners in the seventeenth century. Where little or nothing was known about a location, the map-makers were tempted to draw monsters or fanciful creatures. This was later satirized by Swift in the following passage;

"So geographers, in Afric maps,
With savage pictures fill their gaps,
And o'er inhabitable downs,
Place elephants instead of towns."

It is tempting to think that today we, the human race, with our advanced technology and superior intellect are above such follies and wild reverie. But this is most certainly not the case, instead of sea monsters and werewolves we have aliens and UFOs, ESP and the paranormal. Because we have no knowledge to dismiss such modern day myths, they have as much credibility as Werewolves did in the fifteenth century. While there is the possibility of their existence, no matter how remote, then humans will always argue that they may exist. Mythology is still as strong as it was five or ten centuries ago, we simply choose to call it by another name.

One scope of knowledge that was of particular interest to humans was that of the animals around them. Herodotus in the fifth century B.C. was perhaps the first person to collect data on the animal kingdom, and could be considered the first zoologist. He was not particularly well travelled however, and most of his accounts are second hand, especially when it came to such creatures as the phoenix. Aristotle continued this research with the "Historia Animalium", which turned out to be more from personal accounts and more reliable sources than Herodotus. This book was acknowledged as the best zoological source well into the Middle Ages. However, this book was to be superseded by books written by the less discriminating Pliny and Milton, and it was these which proved more popular. As the popularity of books increased in the seventh and eight centuries, so they were translated and expanded upon by other writers. Then the increase of foreign travel in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries also helped to spur on the thirst for knowledge, with various "specimens" (not all of them authentic) being brought back from foreign shores. It was the book "Historia Animalium" written by Konrad von Gesner in 1551 that can be considered the beginning of modern zoology, which was based more on observation than hearsay. This was expanded upon in 1607 by Edward Topsell in "The Historie of foure-footed beastes", who unfortunately based more of his research on misconceptions and naive drawings than on actual observations.

It was between the twelfth and fifteenth centuries that "Bestiaries" became popular, books containing information about various animals. As these books were translated or copied, they were adapted to meet the vogues or needs at the time. Therefore, Bestiaries became more religious in their content and descriptions became moral tales rather than an accurate depiction. However, this anthropomorphism flowed both ways. For example, Jesus was likened to the Panther. The Panther was said to attract prey with it’s belch, which was sweet smelling no animal could resist it’s draw. Jesus’ ability to draw crowds of people was compared to the panther’s belch.

It's a misconception that the bawdy text and "erotic" pictures in these Bestiaries are pornographic. They were in fact created by pious monks for their own moral benefit and enlightenment of others. The sexual aspect of some of the descriptions were in fact a moral and religious treatise, and like most of the animals were given various human attributes to put across various religious and ethical considerations. The source for most of these bestiaries was an anonymous book called "Physiologus" (The Naturalist) written around the third century A.D. Some of the later Bestiaries did appear to have bawdy content however, one example being Topsell’s "Lamia" in "The Historie of foure-footed beastes". This was a creature that was half human and half lion. The Lamia consisted of a lion’s body, with a female human head and breasts, yet it had male genitalia. This trend was reflected in various creatures in Topsell’s book, yet the reason for this we are unfortunately left to speculate. The Bestiaries lost popularity once the age of printing began in the seventeenth century. Only one made it into print, "Libellus de natura animalium" by Vincento Berruerio de Piedmont.

References and Further Reading:-

Beasts and Bawdy - Anne Clark

Medicine and Biology

The Aberdeen Bestiary Project