FRONTIERS OF ZOOLOGY Dale A. Drinnon has been a researcher in the field of Cryptozoology for the past 30+ years and has corresponded with Bernard Heuvelmans and Ivan T. Sanderson. He has a degree in Anthropology from Indiana University and is a freelance artist and writer. Motto: "I would rather be right and entirely alone than wrong in the company with all the rest of the world"--Ambroise Pare', "the father of modern surgery", in his refutation of fake unicorn horns.
http://hyrotrioskjan.deviantart.com/art/Bunyip-Version-3-263073757
"A few days ago I was searching in my archives for a sketch when I found my two first versions [link] of the Bunyip (on the base of Naomi Noviks description)
I thought it was time for a new one"[this is a fictional Bunyip although still based on tradition-DD]
The "Big Goanna" Bunyip is sometimes said to stand up and walk on its hind legs, at which times it can be twice as tall as a regular human being.
Dirawong
The first Dreamtime creature to appear on this list, the Dirawong is a goanna (an Australian monitor lizard) Creator Being that departed knowledge and protection to the Bundjalung Nation. Comprised of 15 Aboriginal tribes, the Bundjalung believe that the Dirawong shared with them the knowledge of medicine, bush foods, astronomy, law, and cultural traditions such as dances, head gear, body designs, and songs. The Dirawong is supposed to resemble a Megalania prisca, a 7-10 meters long [~20 to 30 feet long] goanna that [supposedly] went extinct around 40,000 years ago. In addition to teaching the Bundjalung how to live and survive, the Dirawong is eternally engaged in a battle with the Creator Being known as the Rainbow Snake. The Dirawong once engaged in an epic battle with the Rainbow Snake when it had misbehaved. The resulting struggle resulted in the creation of parts of the Richmond River, Snake Island, and Pelican Island. At the end of the struggle, the Rainbow Snake made it to the ocean and became an island, supposedly New Zealand. When the Dirawong caught up with the Rainbow Snake, he laid down facing the sea to guard against its return. The Goanna Headland at Evans Head, New South Wales is believed to be the Dirawong’s physical body. The Dirawong is also believed to be associated with rain. In the Goanna Headland there is a rain cave where the Elders of the Bundjalung Nation used to go and conduct ceremonies for rain. The Dirawong continues to this day to be an important influence to the Bundjalung people. In 1985, sixteen hectares of the Goanna Headland became the first aboriginal land grant in New South Wales. The legend and history of the Dirawong is a fascinating one and can be further explored. http://www.multilingualarchive.com/ma/enwiki/en/Dirawong/1
Dirawong
In the mythology of Bundjalung
Nation (represented by 13 tribes), the Dirawong is a goanna that taught the
people the laws by which they should live. It is known as a benevolent protector
of its people (the Bundjalung Nation) from the Rainbow Snake.
Goanna Headland, at Evans Head in New South
Wales (one of the most easterly point's on mainland Australia), is believed to
be the body of the mythical Dirawong
Tradition
Bundjalung Nation tradition tells the
story about the creation of Snake Island (in the Evans River) and Goanna
Headland as a fight between the Dirawong and the Rainbow Snake.
According to the legend, the Rainbow Snake
had been very bad. What he did is a secret, and cannot be revealed, but it was
so bad that a Weeum (or clever man) called on the Dirawong to help protect a
Bird from the Waugal (or Rainbow Snake).
Only Dirawong was powerful enough to deal
with Rainbow Snake. Dirawong chased Rainbow Snake down towards the coast and as
they went they formed parts of the Richmond River. At Woodburn they left the
Richmond River and kept on going east. Half-way down the Evans River, Dirawong
caught Rainbow Snake, the Snake turned around and bit Goanna on the head,
Dirawong then withdrew from the battle in order to eat some herbs to recover (heal) from the snakebite, when he felt
better he resumed his chase.
Meanwhile, Rainbow Snake had reached Evans
Head. Rainbow Snake looked around. Dirawong was nowhere to be seen, so Rainbow
Snake decided to go back west. The Rainbow Snake then went into the river and
coiled itself around and created Snake Island. As he
turned his body made another small island in the river, now known as Pelican Island.
When Rainbow Snake spotted Dirawong heading
towards him, Rainbow Snake quickly turned, and this time Rainbow Snake kept
going until he reached the Ocean, and made himself
into an Island (Possibly the
Country of New Zealand) so
Dirawong wouldn't recognise Rainbow Snake.
Dirawong reached the Coast. Dirawong then
laid down next to the coast facing the Sea, waiting for
Rainbow Snake to come back. And you can still hear Rainbow Snake and see Goanna
today at Evans Head.
Physical identity of the
Rainbow Snake
The Snake was quite possibly a "Wonambi naracoortensis (a non-venomous snake of
five to six metres in length, or a Liasis
sp., (Bluff Downs Giant
Python), which grew up to ten metres long, and is the largest Australian
snake known"
Physical identity of the
Dirawong
The Dirawong was quite possibly a "Megalania prisca" (a
carnivorous, goanna-like lizard, at least seven metres long, maybe ten metres
long, and weighing up to 600 kilograms, that become extinct around 40,000 years
ago.)
Physical identity of the
Bird
The Bird was quite possibly a Dromornis
stirtoni, (Stirton's Thunder Bird, Miocene epoch) was a flightless bird three
metres tall that weighed half a tonne. It is one of the largest birds so far
discovered. It inhabited subtropical open woodlands and may have been
carnivorous. It was heavier than the Moa and taller than the Aepyornis.
[Dromornis might also be the origin of especially birdlike "Bunyips" when they were sighted lurking around waterholes.
Example from Eberhart: Gauarge
Mythical Freshwater Monster of Australia.
Etymology: Australian word.
Physical description: Like a featherless [Giant, not necessarily featherless-DD] emu.
Behavior: Drags bathers down into a
whirlpool. Habitat: Water holes.
Possible explanation: Folk memory or extrapolation based on fossils of an Australian theropod dinosaur such as Kakuru, which lived in the Early Cretaceous, 110 million years ago, in South Australia.[A living animal is more likely than a native reconstruction and the fossil is from the wrong part of Australia-DD]
Sources: Gilbert Whitley, “Mystery Animals of Australia,” Australian Museum Magazine
(1940): 132–139; Bernard Heuvelmans, On the Track of Unknown Animals (New York:
Hill and Wang, 1958), pp. 193–194.]
Interpretation of the
creation myth
Why did the
Dirawong withdraw from the battle with Rainbow Snake in order to
recover?
"As Socrates explains in the Laches,
standing firm in battle cannot be courage, for sometimes
standing firm in battle is simply a foolish
endurance that puts oneself and others at needless risk. The courageous
person can recognize when it is reasonable to stand one's ground in battle and
when it isn't."
What
virtuous traits of character is the Dirawong showing when it withdrew from the
battle with Rainbow Snake in order to recover?
The Dirawong is showing in its action of
withdrawing, that having (from a spiritual and psychological perspective) the
right motives, aims, concerns, and perspective is more important then the
tactical battle.
The Dirawong's motives were: to get help
for its wounds (survive), to survey (location) where the rainbow snake went,
concern for the bird (family); it knew that the Rainbow Snake may have won that
day's battle, and in the future they will work together to create more land and
rivers on other planets.
See also
Australian Giant Monitor
Unknown LIZARD of Australia.
Variant names: Burrunjor (in Northern Terri-
tory), Mungoon-galli, Murra murri (in the Blue
Mountains), Whowie (in Riverina).
Physical description: Length, 20–30 feet or
more.
Behavior: Attacks cattle.
Distribution: Northern New South Wales;
Arnhem Land, Northern Territory; Cape York,
Queensland.
Significant sightings: In 1975, a group of
bushwalkers found large tracks and tail marks at
the edge of the Wallangambe Wilderness in the
Blue Mountains of New South Wales.
On December 27, 1975, a farmer near Cess-
nock, New South Wales, saw a bulky, 30-foot
monitor lizard moving through scrub brush. It
was mottled gray in color, with dark stripes
along the back and tail, and stood 3 feet off the
ground.
In early 1979, herpetologist Frank Gordon
was driving his Land Rover in the Wattagan
Mountains in New South Wales south of Can-
berra when he saw a reptile 27–30 feet long by
the side of the road. It rose up and ran away on
all four legs into the neighboring woods.
In July 1979, cryptozoologist Rex Gilroy was
called to a freshly plowed field by a farmer.
Across the field were thirty or so tracks that
seemed to have been made by an enormous
lizard. While most of the tracks had been ruined
by rain, Gilroy was able to make a plaster cast of
one that had been preserved.
Possible explanations:
(1) The Perentie (Varanus giganteus), Aus-
tralia’s largest lizard, grows to 8 feet long;
some individuals might attain 10 feet. It is
cream-colored, with dark-brown speckles,
and it occurs from western Queensland to
the coast of Western Australia.
(2) Surviving "Megalania prisca" [Invalid name-DD], a 15- to 21-
foot lizard that lived in central Australia in
foot lizard that lived in central Australia in
the Pliocene and Pleistocene (2 mil-
lion–20,000 years ago). At 1,300 pounds, it
weighed ten times as much as the Komodo
dragon (Varanus komodoensis) and was prob-
ably an active predator and scavenger. Its
teeth were nearly 1 inch long. At least some
specimens had a sagittal crest.[However the same structure is on the head of the smaller and related Perentie lizard-but it is not visable externaly on the living animal's head-DD]
Sources: Rex Gilroy, “Cessnock’s Fantastic
30 Ft. Lizard Monsters,” Strange Phenomena
and Psychic Australian, March 1979, at
http://www.internetezy.com.au/~mj129/
strangephenomenonr.html; Rex Gilroy,
“Australia’s Lizard Monsters,” Fortean Times,
no. 37 (Spring 1982): 32–33; Rex Gilroy,
“Giant Lizards of the Australian Bush,”
Australasian Ufologist 4, no. 4 (2000):
17-20.
A LIVING FOSSIL? In Australia, locals speak of a giant, prehistoric lizard that continues to roam the rainforests some 40,000 years after it's said to have gone extinct. Cryptozoologists say this creature, the so-called "Devil Dragon," is a living fossil known to science as Megalania prisca, the largest ground-dwelling lizard that's ever lived. Megalania was at least twice the size of today's Komodo dragon. With large, serrated teeth that bend inward and sharp claws for ripping through flesh, Megalania was likely a fearsome predator.
THE EVIDENCE: Over the last three decades, several reports of unexplained and mysterious human disappearances in Australia have been associated with strange animal imprints. Some witnesses speak of giant, fallen tree logs that scamper away when startled. Though a complete fossil skeleton of Megalania has never been found, a farmer in Queensland, Australia found bones of this prehistoric creature on his farm. They tested to be only 300 years old. Whether or not Megalania continues to roam the Australian rainforests today, it surely did encounter humans when Aborigines arrived on the continent 40,000 to 125,000 years ago.
The Canvey Island Monster is the name given to an unusual creature whose carcass washed up on the shores of Canvey Island, England, in November, 1954. A second, more intact, carcass was discovered in August, 1955.
The 1954 specimen was described as being 76cm (2.4ft) long with thick reddish brown skin, bulging eyes and
gills. It was also described as having hind legs with five-toed horseshoe-shaped feet with concave arches - which appeared to be suited for bipedal locomotion - but no forelimbs. Its remains were cremated after a cursory inspection by zoologists who said that it posed no danger to the public. The 1955 specimen was
Photo of the Cavney Island Monster washed up on Cavney Beach
described as being similar to the first but much larger, being 120cm (3.9 ft) long and weighing approximately 11.3kg (25lb). It was sufficiently fresh for its eyes, nostrils and teeth to be studied though no official explanation was given at the time as to what it was or what happened to the carcass. http://cryptozoologycryptids.wikia.com/wiki/Cryptid http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canvey_Island_Monster
Some have speculated that the specimens may have been some type of anglerfish, whose fins had been mistaken for feet, while others have come to a more likely conclusion, that the specimens may have been frogfish, which do in fact walk on leg-like fins, have bulging eyes, and take on a variety of colours including reddish brown.[citation needed]
In 1999, Fortean journalist Nicholas Warren carried out an investigation into the 1953-54 sightings. He was unable to locate any official records at the Plymouth Marine Biology Association Laboratory or the National Rivers Authority identifying the creature as being a known or unknown specimen, but was able to find accounts from locals who believed the creature was an anglerfish. [2] This determination was later seconded by Alwyne Wheeler, former ichthyologist for the Department of Zoology at the British Natural History Museum, who put forward that the creature was an anglerfish whose pronounced fins had been incorrectly described as being hind legs. [2]
References
^ ab Edwards, Frank (1959) "Stranger than Science", L. Stuart, ISBN 0806508507 (1983 reprint)
^ abcd Warren Nick (02-1999), The Fortean Times, #119
The point is moot as both frogfish and monkfish (another candidate) are actually also anglerfishes and the identification as an "Anglerfish" actually covers all bets. Best Wishes, Dale D.
Frogfish include a pink phase
Monkfish, various views
From Monster Hunt (The Leviathans, Tim Dinsdale, 1966 and 1976) in Chapter 4, "monster, Mystery or Mermaid", "Oddity No. 2" on page 144 includes the following case:
Early July 1833
In the presence of Arthur Nicholson of Lochend, J.P. --
William Manson, Daniel Manson, John Henderson, residing in Cullivoe in the
parish of North Yell, who being sworn deposit -- That, in the beginning of July
last, they at the deep-sea fishing from 30 to 60 miles from land, and about
midnight took up a creature attached by the back of the neck to a hook, which
was about 3 feet long, and bout 30 inches in circumference at tje broadest part,
which was across the shoulders. From the navel upwards it resembled a human
being -- had breasts as large as those of a woman.
Attached to the side were arms about 9 inches long, with
wrists and hands like those of a human being, except that there were webs
between the fingers for about half their length. The fingers were in number and
shape, like those of a man. The little arms were close on the outsides of the
breasts and on the corner of each shoulder was placed a fin of a round form
which, when extended, covered both the breasts and the arms.
The animal had a short neck, on which rested a head, about
the length of a man's but not nearly so round; and somewhat pointed at the top.
It had eyebrows without hair, and eyelids covering two small blue eyes, somewhat
like those of a human being -- not like those of a fish. It had no nose, but two
orifices for blowing through. It had a mouth so large that when opened wide it
would admit a man's fist. It had lips rather thicker than a man's of a pure
white color. There was no chin, but they think the lower jaw projected a little
further than the upper ones. There were no ears.
The whole front of the animal was covered with skin, white as
linen, the back with skin of a light-grey color, like a fish. From the breasts
the shape sloped towards the tail close to which was only about 4 inches in
circumference. The tail was flat, and consisted of two lobes which, when
extended, might be 6 inches together in breadth, and were set at right angles
with the face of the creature; it resembled the face of a halibut.
The animal was very nearly round at the shoulders. It
appeared to have shoulder bones and a hollow space between them. The diminution
of size increased most rapidly from the navel, which might be 9 inches below the
breasts. There was between the nostrils a thing that appeared to be a piece of
gristle about 9 inches long, and which resembled a thick bristle. There was a
similar one on each side of the head, but not so long, which the animal had the
power of moving backwards and forwards, and could make them meet on top of the
skull.
When the men spoke the animal answered, and moved these
bristles, which led them to suppose that the creature heard by means of them.
They did not observe what sort of teeth the creature had, nor the parts of
generation. There was no hair upon any part of its body which was soft and
slimy.
There is an old opinion among fishermen that it is unlucky to
kill a mermaid and therefore, after having kept it in the boat for some time,
they slipped it.
All of which is the truth, so help me God."
A man who interviewed the boat's skipper as well as the
crewmen forwarded an account to Edinburgh University's Natural History
Department:
"Not one of the six men dreamed of a doubt of its being a
mermaid, and it could not be suggested that they were infulenced by their fears,
for the mermaid is not an object of terror to fishermen, it is rather a wecome
guest, and danger is apprehended from its experiencing bad treatment. . . . The
usual resources of scepticism that the seals and other sea-animals appearing
under certain circumstances operating upon an excited imagination and so
producing ocular illusion, cannot avail here. It is quite impossible that six
Shetland fishermen could commit such a mistake."
--This is once again a Monkfish or a similar anglerfish, which will be quite apparent if you try to take all of the measurements together and make a composite drawing of it. These fish are also called "headfish" because of their supposed resemblance to a human head, only this one has a nasty big wide mouth, wide enough to stick a fist into. I wish I could have a view of the underside of a Monkfish to show, but evidently they have two large rounded protrusions around the "Jowly" area underneath, and also underneath two smaller, thinner, delicate pelvic fins which the fishermen described as arms with webbed hands. The "Gristly bristles" on top are the Anglerfish "Lures" and the creature is basically only the big head part and a smaller cylindrical, tapering tail following. The description is worded such that the creature's true nature is not apparent, but the creature is about three feet long and ten inches across, with the "Wing" fins nine inches long. Where the tail began was about three inches thick, and the tail had two fins vertically placed which resembled the tail of a halibut. close to the tail was little more than an inch in breadth but the tail fins could together spread perhaps six inches. While handling it the fishermen observed no hair but only a soft slimy skin, grey on top and white on the belly. Actually the only reason to call it a "Mermaid" was because of the round "Humanlike" head and the two rounded protrusions underneath (no nipples are mentioned, either)
Best Wishes, Dale D.
This is an illustration of the Honey Island Swamp Monster said to be taken from a newspaper article. I only just turned it up on a photo search I was doing.I am currently tracking down whatever information might go with it. I am adding it here because the illustration is Kappa-like and conforms very well to Tyler Stone's interpretation of the Swamp Monster in question. Best Wishes, Dale D.
LATER ADDITION: Here is a version as posted on Haunted America Tours. It would seem all the illustrations are made after 2000. You will notice the illustration was printed in lateral compression: the one I ran had the lateral compression effect removed:
SWAMP MONSTER DESCRIPTION
Long to short hair on the head. Shorter hair all over the body. At times head
hair forming bangs some what over the eyes. Hair color is dingy gray. 5- 8 feet
tall and weight 300 or 350 pounds, with long, orange-brown gray or black hair
and big, wide-set orange amber eyes.
These animals are sometimes described as having a "mane" of hair, large broad
shouldered. The face is said to be rather flat. The most prominent feature
described by Ford and others, is the size and color of the eyes. They appear to
be disproportionately large, and of an amber color.
Mr. Ford stated that this gave the animal a "sinister" look.
Honey Island swamp is unique because it's one of the least-altered river
swamps in the country. It's pretty much in its original condition, almost a
pristine wilderness. Take a personalized narrated nature tour into the
250-square-mile Honey Island Swamp. Nearly 70,000 acres of it is a
permanently-protected wildlife area--the Nature Conservancy's First Louisiana
Nature Preserve. People from all over the world now explore this wildlife
sanctuary with him.
Honey Island earned its name because of the honeybees once seen on a nearby
island. A tract of bottomland timber lying between the East Pearl and West Pearl
rivers, Honey Island is between three and seven miles wide and 15 to 20 miles
long. It is located 50 minutes from New Orleans in Southeast Louisiana.
Honey Island has become one of the most well-known swamps because of the real
or imagined presence of a creature similar to what others have called Big
Foot.
The tracks , left by the animal, appear to be somewhat similar to an
Alligator's rear foot. Upon close examination, however, it becomes clear, that
this is something different.
In 1974, zoologists from Louisiana State University (LSU) met with Harlan
Ford to study the plaster casts of the creature's four-toed footprints.
Crypotozoologist from Washington also arrived in Louisiana to inspect the
unusual casts. Harlan said, "That thing stood eye level with me. The thing that
startled me the most, we're it's large amber eyes." Harlan was later interviewed
in a documentary called "In Search Of" which still airs periodically on The
Discovery Channel and other television networks. Harlan's own personal sighting
has been documented in a book, "Monsters of North America"
This is a real plaster cast of the impression of the footprint of
the Honey Island Swamp Monster. This cast was donated to the Abita Mystery House
by Dana Holyfield, grand-daughter of Harlan E. Ford, the hunter who found and
cast the tracks. He was the first man to report a sighting of the creature and
he was also the first and only man to my knowledge who poured plaster paris
casts of it's tracks found deep in the swamp. The Honey Island Swamp is about 25
miles East of the Abita Mystery House. There are several swamp tours of the
area.
There are four toes visible. There are three heavily clawed toes , with
prominent knuckles , underneath the foot. Then... there is the bizarre thumb
like small toe . About an inch and a half on the cast that I have. These toes
show clearly , that this animal can grasp with the toes. The three large toes ,
are long and slender , with tendons visible in the prints. The claws are turned
down , and backwards to grip the loose soil , sand , and mud. This is
reminiscent of a cat like trait. The skin appears to be thin on the bottom of
the foot , with tendons showing. In the hostile environment of the island , thin
skin under the foot would indicate that it didn't spend a lot of time on the
ground.
IN SEARCH OF ST. TAMMANY, PARISH BIGFOOT
In 1978 the Alan Lamdsburg Company, producers of the popular TV program,
IN SEARCH OF did a segment on the Honey island Swamp Monster. This catapulted
the monster into International fame. Since then there have been many reports and
the program has become a reference for information on the creature.
Dana Holyfield, grand-daughter of Harlan Ford, has made a documentary film
about the Honey Island Swamp Monster. The documentary also includes footage of a
swamp trek that Dana took into an area where there had been sightings of the
creature. She found tracks, and shot video of the tracks. Also included in the
documentary is footage shot by Harlan Ford years ago in the swamp. There are a
few seconds of footage of a bipedal, hairy being that is walking behind some
trees.
This book documents sightings of a mysterious man-like creature that
roams the dense foliage of the Louisiana Honey Island Swamp, where few men have
ever ventured. Evidence found (as seen on Discovery Channel's In Search Of) was
studied by reputable crypto zoologists who claimed that is was not a hoax.
About the Author
Dana Holyfield grew up in Slidell, Louisiana. She wrote
this book because it was her grandfather, Harlan Ford, who first reported the
sighting of the legendary Swamp Monster after he poured plaster paris tracks.
She has authored many books such as Swamp Cooking With The River People, More
Swamp Cooking, New Orleans Mardi Gras Recipes, Cajun Sexy Cooking, Swamp Tour A
Way Of Life On The Bayou, Mermaid Bayou Legend Of The Fresh Water Lady Fish,
Sexy & Lean Bayou Cuisine.
These tracks and casts were circulated in the mid-1970s and popularised on the TV show In Search Of...: the "Creature" sightings were supposed to have been made in 1963, more than a decade earlier. So no direct connection-EXCEPT that the witness cited for the 1963 sighting was also one of the ones providing the hoaxed tracks. Perhaps the need to produce solid evidence was too great of a temptation. However, when the news came out, ALL OTHER "Swamp Monster" tracks from the Eastern USA immediately came under suspicion (The alligator-foot-boot tracks are very much smaller than the "Frogfoot" ones, however, since "Frogfoot" tracks can be as much as 24 inches long)
And the same artist made the face close-up also shown on a different version of the Haunted America Tours page. In the meantime, Cryptomundo posted advertisements for a reimagining of the Louisiana Swamp Monster as more of a Kappa type creature:
Bunyip http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-australian-mythical-creatures.php One of the most famous Australian monsters is the Bunyip, a creature that lives in or near bodies of water such as creeks, pools, and swamps. There are supposedly as many as nine regional variations of bunyips scattered throughout Aboriginal Australia. Because it is so widely known in so many different cultures, there is no real consensus concerning what a bunyip looks like. But some common characteristics include tusks, flippers, and a horse-like tail. It is believed that they come out at night to feast on animals, young children, and women. It supposedly makes a loud bellow when approached. It is sometimes argued that they harbor supernatural powers. Originally, they were punishing spirits derived from the Aboriginal Dreamtime. But today they have been toned down and are included in literature for children and even make appearances in television commercials. There is a long list of supposed sightings of bunyips. Some of the most recent and concentrated sightings were during the 1930s in the midst of the Depression. One possible theory for the existence of the bunyip is that they are diprotodon, which went extinct about 20,000 years ago
[It is important to remember that in Australia the actual strata relating to the extinction event are mostly missing from the period which would be the Upper Paleolithic in Europe. The dates for extinctions are mostly only the best-guess estimates-DD]
The dogfaced Bunyip featured in many sightings. Several sightings feature a hairy eared seal that is probably some sort of a fur seal, but there is a series of these reports featuring very shaggy creatures with horse's tails and large lop ears.The features are exaggerated enough to take the creatures out of the seal category, BUT we might still be taliking about the young of the larger "Bellowing Bullock" Bunyip since the "Dogfaced" ones average about five feet long and the bigger Bunyips average about 10-15 feet long
This is Megan Anderson's reconstruction of this kind of Bunyip and it is so "Normal" looking that I wondered if it was not possible that we might have a strain of longhaired amphibious dogs derived out of mostly a retriever dog ancestry. However in this case also the smaller animal also shares several of the traits of the larger ones. These are striking enough that I feel I must make some sort of a list here:
The creatures have an overall bearlike build, even something like a polar bear, tapering generally from the rather elongated head and neck to the thick and heavy rump section. The tail is bushy and often compared to a horse's tail. The fur is thick enough to bristle up on the back in the water and hang down from the belly on land. The feet are sometimes represented as webbed but are in any event generally big and floppy, and rather shapeless.
A reconstruction for Diprotodon, showing how smaller cubs and larger adults could account for both the smaller-sized and larger-sized series of reports. Below, a rock-art depiction of a four-legged Bunyip that also shows some of these distinctive traits such as the descriptions and the reconstruction here, including the elongated forepart and heavy rump.
Skeleton of a diprotodon: ten to fifteen feet from the snout to the hip joint would be just about right.
A famous collected Aboriginal tale about some hunters that took a baby Bunyip away from its mother. In this account,we definitely have a description of both the larger and smaller sizes, and the definite statement that the creature is the young of the larger type.
A more elaborate, later illustration of the same scene, zooming in on only the mother creatu're's face. There is perhaps too much of the Western idea of the Devil being shown here, but also perhaps still some glimmerings of the original Diprotodon lingering through.
Many reports make mention of
the whiskers on the snout and the large tusks in the mouth: if it is a Diprotodon, the teeth would be protruding rodent-like incisors rather than sharp canines. Diprotodons are missing the canine teeth.in this case the ears could be what were being represented as horns in the artwork.
Yowies, Alternative Explanation
(5) An unknown apelike marsupial. One
fossil candidate is the Mountain
diprotodont (Hulitherium thomasetti), a
Late Pleistocene marsupial with a domed
head and short muzzle discovered in Papua
New Guinea in 1986. Its mobile limbs may
have allowed it to stand upright or walk on
its hind legs like a bear. Some Cryptozoologists theorize that the traditional Yahoo or Yowie was this bearlike marsupial and then the more Bigfoot-like creature was a myth of modern times. To this I would say, this theory in no way agrees with any of the older depictions made for the creature, but the suggestion does have some merit in explaining some reports. I would imagine the Marsupial Panda has been wiped out in the twentieth century in any event.
Eberhart Mysterious Creatures Article on the Bunyip
Mystery Marsupialof Australia.
Etymology: Probably derived from the Aus-
tralian Banib. A “monster of Aboriginal legend,
supposed to haunt water-holes; any freak or im-
postor,” according to G. A. Wilkes, Dictionary of
Australian Colloquialisms, 3d ed. (Sydney, Aus-
tralia: Sydney University Press, 1990). The form
Bahnyip appeared in the Sydney Gazette in 1812.
Bernard Heuvelmans thought the word derived
from Bunjil, the supreme being of the Victorian
Aborigines. The name is widely used in Victoria
and New South Wales and was first heard by
whites in the Sydney area. By 1852, the word
had become a synonym for “impostor” or “hum-
bug” in Sydney. The term bunyip aristocracy
refers to snobbish Australian conservatives.
Variant names: Banib, Bunnyar (in Western
Australia), Bunyup, Burley beast, Dongus (in
New South Wales), Gu-ru-ngaty (Thurawal/
Australian, New South Wales), Kajanprati,
Katenpai, Kianpraty (in Victoria), Kine praty,
Kineprà tia, Kuddimudra, Mirree-ulla (Wirad-
huri/Australian, New South Wales), Mochel
Mochel, Moolgewanke, Munni munni (in
Queensland), Toor-roo-don (in Victoria), Tum-
bata (in Victoria), Tunatpan, Waa-Wee, Wan-
gul (in Western Australia), Wouwai (near Lake
Macquarie, New South Wales).
Physical description: According to Tony Healy
and Paul Cropper, about 60 percent of the sight-
ings resemble seals or swimming dogs, and 20
percent are long-necked creatures with small
heads. (The remainder are too ambiguous to
categorize.)
Seal-dog variety—Seal-like. Length, 4–6 feet.
Shaggy, black or brown hair. Round head and
whiskers like a seal’s, otter’s, or bulldog’s. Shin-
ing eyes. Prominent ears. No tail.
Long-necked variety—Length, 5–15 feet.
Black or brown fur. Head like a horse’s or an
emu’s. Large ears. Small tusks. Elongated,
maned neck about 3 feet long, with many folds
of skin. Four legs. Three toes. Horselike tail.
Behavior: Amphibious. Nocturnal. Swims
swiftly with fins or flippers. Loud, roaring call.
Eats crayfish. Lays eggs in platypus nests in un-
derwater burrows. Said by the Aborigines to be
a guardian water spirit that eats women and
children and causes sickness.
Tracks:Three-toed. Emulike.[Emph. added.Traditionally, the tracks are "Old 3-Toes" tracks again-DD]
Habitat: Lakes, rivers, and swamps.
Distribution:Traditions range throughout the
continent, with sightings centered in Victoria,
southern New South Wales, and eastern South
Australia.
Geologist E. J. Dunn observed several ani-
mals swimming in the flooded Murrumbidgee
River near Gundagai in 1850.
A naturalist named Stocqueler reported
“freshwater seals” in the Goulburn and Murray
Rivers, New South Wales, in 1857.
Horsemen saw a whitish, dog-sized animal in
1886 along the River Molonglo, Australian
Capital Territory.
On September 8, 1949, L. Keegan and his
wife reported they had seen a 4-foot animal with
shaggy ears several times over the past two weeks
in the Lauriston Reservoir, Victoria. They
claimed it used its ears in swimming through
the water at tremendous speed.
In the 1960s, Jack Mitchell collected many re-
ports by Aborigines, farmers, and tourists of a
seal-dog Bunyip in the Macquarie River between
Wellington and Warren, New South Wales.
A roaring animal that splattered mud around
the bank of the Nerang River was heard near
Gilston, Queensland, in 1965.
supernatural being by the Aborigines of south-
eastern Australia at the time of white settlement.
There are few modern sightings, and most are
vague or fanciful. The long-necked variety of
Bunyip has not been reported since the nine-
teenth century and may be extinct.
Possible explanations:
(1) Australian fur seals (Arctocephalus pusillus
doriferus) or Australian sea lions (Neophoca
cinerea) that stray inland through the river
systems might explain some sightings of the
seal-dog Bunyip. In the nineteenth century,
these were known to travel many miles up
the Murray, Shoalhaven, and Murrumbidgee
Rivers. Elephant seals (Mirounga leonina)
were also known along the coast. Either of
these animals seen unexpectedly in an un-
usual habitat could be misidentified.
(2) An unknown form of freshwater seal
endemic to southeastern Australia.
(3) Booming calls of the Brown bittern
(Botaurus poiciloptilus) of Victoria and New
South Wales have been attributed to the Bun-
yip. One of its nicknames is the “bunyip
bird.”
(4) The Musk duck (Biziura lobata) was re-
sponsible for one report in Sydney in 1960.
(5) Some reports may have involved large
Murray cod (Maccullochella peelii peelii),
which grow to more than 5 feet.
(6) The Saltwater crocodile (Crocodylus
porosus), the largest living reptile, is found in
northern Australia, but it may have been
known to Aborigines in the south in pre-
colonial times, forming the basis for a Bun-
yip legend. Mature males average 14–16 feet
long and are generally dark, with lighter tan
or gray areas.
(7) An Australian version of the long-necked
Freshwater Monster.
(8) Aboriginal legends of surviving Quater-
nary marsupials. Two candidates are the ter-
restrial, herbivorous, tapir-snouted Palor-
chestes, suggested by Tim Flannery and
Michael Archer, said to have been the size of
a bull, or Diprotodon optatum, the largest
known marsupial, about 10 feet long with a
3-foot skull, suggested by C. W. Anderson
and Karl Shuker. Neither were amphibious,
however.[A suggestion has been made that the amphibious adaptation was not original but was adopted under stress from hunters and from drought conditions-DD]
(9) An unknown species of otterlike marsupial.
Sources: “The Bunyip, or Kine pratie,” Sydney
Morning Herald, January 21, 1847, p. 2; William
H. Hovell, “The Apocryphal Animal of the
Interior of New South Wales,” Sydney Morning
Herald,February 9, 1847; William Sharp
Macleay, “On the Skull Now Exhibited at the
Colonial Museum of Sydney, As That of the
‘Bunyip,’” Sydney Morning Herald,July 14,
1847; William Westgarth, Australia Felix
(Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1848); Ronald C.
Gunn, “On the ‘Bunyip’ of Australia Felix,”
Tasmanian Journal of Natural Science3 (1849):
147–149; John Morgan, The Life and Adventures
of William Buckley (Hobart, Tasm., Australia: A.
Macdougall, 1852), pp. 48, 108–109; Moreton
Bay (Queensl.) Free Press, April 15, 1857, p. 3;
Charles Gould, “Large Aquatic Animals,” Papers
and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania,
1872, pp. 32–41; Robert Brough Smyth, The
Aborigines of Victoria (Melbourne, Australia:
Government Printer, 1878); William Hardy
Wilson,The Cow Pasture Road(William Hardy
Wilson, 1920), p. 19; C. W. Anderson, “The
Largest Marsupial,”Australian Museum
Magazine2 (1924): 113–116; John Gale,
Canberra: History and Legends(Queanbeyan,
N.S.W., Australia: A. M. Fallick, 1927); Charles
Fenner, Bunyips and Billabongs(Sydney,
Australia: Angus and Robertson, 1933); Gilbert
Whitley, “Mystery Animals of Australia,”
Australian Museum Magazine7 (1940):
132–139; Charles Barrett, The Bunyip and Other
Mythical Monsters and Legends(Melbourne,
Australia: Reed and Harris, 1946), pp. 7–30;
Alan Marshall, “Bunyips Never Whistle,”
Melbourne Argus Magazine,December 14, 1951;
K.G. Dugan, “Darwin and Diprotodon:The
Wellington Cave Fossils and the Law of
Succession,” Proceedings of the Linnaean Society
of New South Wales104 (1980): 265–272;
Patricia Vickers-Rich and Gerard Van Tets, eds.,
Kadimakara: Extinct Vertebrates of Australia
(Lilydale, Vic., Australia: Pioneer Design Studio,
1985), pp. 17, 234–244; W. S. Ramson, ed.,
The Australian National Dictionary (Melbourne,
Australia: Oxford University Press, 1988), pp.
109–110; Christopher Smith, “A Second Look
at the Bunyip,” INFO Journal,no. 64 (October
1991): 11–13, 37; Tony Healy and Paul
Cropper, Out of the Shadows: Mystery Animals of
Australia(Chippendale, N.S.W., Australia:
Ironbark, 1994), pp. 161–180; Malcolm Smith,
Bunyips and Bigfoots(Alexandria, N.S.W.,
Australia: Millennium Books, 1996), pp. 1–24;
Robert Holden and Nicholas Holden, Bunyips:
Australia’s Folklore of Fear(Canberra: National
Library of Australia, 2001).
I realised after the fact that I had done my global-view range maps and comparitive-sized reconstructions for Wildme and Heuvelmans' "Petit Yeti" and "Grand Yeti" but not also for Tyler Stone's freshwater monkeys, of which the Kappas are the best-defined representatives. At left is a Kappa illustration from Wikipedia, and it has an "Angry monkey" face plus webbed hands and feet which are four webbed toes and a thumb apiece, which we are going to say is the true value
And at left here is my rough world range map, an adaptation of the less specific range map I posted in an earlier blog on the European water Sprites. The usual terms for such creatures worldwide is "Water-Children" or "Little People that live in the Water" and I have a strong feeling that they are also the basis for some of the Native tradidions called "Devil Mokeys" (which are an extremely heterogenous collection otherwise)
And below is my scale comparison, this time also incorporating the eyes for each type. It turns out the eyes for Wildmen and Sasquatch are about the same absolute size in either case, but proportionately very much smaller in the faces of the Giants. The "Water-Goblins" were something I had added on a similar chart I drew while at SITU HQs in the mid-1970s. I thought from the eyes they might be a type of lemur, and they were indicated by a series of the "Little Hairy Men of the Delta" reports off of John Keel's listings for sightings in the Eastern USA. Shortly thereafter, I dropped the category as sounding too "Far Out" But now I can see what is going on with those reports better, since Tyler Stone articulated the theory to me over again in a clearer way. I had also included the Kelly-Hopkinsville "Goblins" on the theory the big head could have been the effect of a large mane of hair on the head, and asuming there was no real connection to any UFO report then. The hands and feet of the Kappa are meant to represent webbed fingers and toes and yes, the category is now intended to include Loveland "Frogs" (Now reconfigured as "Loveland Kappas")
Although all of these Amphibious "Little Men" reports are treated as individual and mutually exclusive, they all could be describing the same thing with poor lighting, only partial observations being made and faulty memories afterwards. The policeman in the second Loveland Frog report did mention that the creature could have had wet hair slicked down giving the appearance of a reflective leathery skin and in fact the creatures seem to have a longer "Cape" of hairs on the back that often gives a matted appearance (like a turtle's shell) or which can be partially dry and have the locks of hair form "Spikes." A monkeylike face is indicated in the last two photos and big monkeylike ears standing out in the Hopkinsville case. The large goggle eyes set off to the sides of the head are common to all cases, and the only possible "UFO" seen in any of these cases was elsewhere identified as a meteor (in the Hopkinsville case). The way the hands and feet grip is similar in all cases, and the Evansville case specifies that the fingers are webbed. We can forgive the other observers for missing out on that point.
Best Wishes, Dale D.
PS, the mane could also be less extensive in females, accounting for some sightings seeming to have less less covering over the ears, for example. The mane could also lie flatter when wet and slicked-down. Wetter hides ARE remarked on as being very reflective in some cases and the creatures can look greenish when covered in algae or duckweed. They ARE "Goebelins" in Europe as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goblin
'Goblins were described as 2–3 feet tall, thin, and brown. Most were bald and "if there were females among the group they could not be distinguished from the males".' From which it seems that the sex organs are unclear to humans and the females do not have prominent breasts: "Most were bald" means they have an apparent bald spot on the tops of their heads, the same as the Kappas do. They seem to have prominent ischial callosities and also cheek pouches to store food in. And incidentally they would seem to maintain a pecking order by males mounting subordinate males, same as in ordinary macaques: there are many stories of goblins attempting buggery of human males.
For the record also, here is my former map for "Improbable Giant Frogs" of the Loveland variety. Thetis Lake is indicated on the map and should be removed--but oddly enough such creatures are also reported at Lake Okanagon, the Ogopogo lake, and represented on Petroglyphs on the shores of the lake there.
I found it interesting because it depicts the kappa as being covered in hair. And I think it can be identified as a freshwater macaque monkey by the hair on its. The distinctive "afro" and beard look very similar to the mane of a lion-tailed macaque.
And now that I look at it, I think the "dish" that kappas are described as having may simply be an area of short hair at the top of the head, exactly like the lion-tailed macaque.
Best regards,
Tyler Stone
And my reply was:
Brilliant solution. Talk about the most parsimonious hypothesis! you have my thanks and my admiration for coming up with that angle.
Best Wishes, Dale D.
I should also note that Kappas and all similar water sprites have the diagnostic feature of having very thin arms and legs like a monkey would have and not necessarily what an ape or human would have.
Tyler has adjusted my opinion on the Kappas and Gambo since he has started posting, and since he has started posting I have also started revising my opinion about the supposed Pterosaurian sightings: I now think that many reports are actually Pelagornithids which still persist in the warmer regions of the globe as the most parsimonuious hypothesis for some of those reports: but the creatures with a diamond-shaped body and long thin trailing tail has still got to be based on mistaken visual impressions of manta rays. It is also possible that some excited witnesses have confused sightings of the two different creatures. But Pelagornathids do not have tails and could not be construed as having such: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelagornithidae
On the other hand, some birds like the Great blue herons do fly with their legs sticking straight out at back and looking like a long thin tail.
That makes three things that I have changed my mind on as better information came to me.
The bunyip was rarely found in
traditional Aboriginal art. Surely this omission is highly
significant?
It is surprising to find that the
bunyip has almost no established image in Aboriginal art. Perhaps this is
because it was so rarely seen and so terrible to approach? Aboriginal belief in
the evocative power of such an image may also have discouraged them from drawing
any outline of their fears.
There is one major exception. At an
unknown period in the Dreaming, a creature which the local Aboriginal people
believed to be a bunyip died on the banks of Fiery Creek near Ararat in
Victoria.
The experience was so remarkable that
the Djapwurrong people constructed an outline around the carcass in order to
preserve its shape. Spears were dug into the ground around it and the turf was
later removed to create a sacred site. The Djapwurrong people returned each year
to renew this outline.
It was there in 1840 when white
settlers arrived and was first sketched in the mid-nineteenth century. By this
time the outline was about nine metres long and its shape had become distorted
and rather enigmatic. Viewed from one direction it looked like an emu; from
another, it looked like a seal.
It was named the Challicum bunyip
after a nearby station. The area finally returned to nature and the outline of
the bunyip faded from sight
In this case I think it is self-evident the Bunyip had been a large seal much like an elephant seal:
More on Bunyips later, I think I am going to run a mini-series on them.
Also recognisably a bigmouthed elephant seal with "Dog teeth"
The elephant seal's drooping nose is sometimes described as a beak and the eyes of the seal can glow green like a dog's eyes do in certain lights. Bunyip image from Karl Shuker.
Added by Azelf5000
This is an illustration of the Honey Island Swamp Monster said to be taken from a newspaper article. I only just turned it up on a photo search I was doing.I am currently tracking down whatever information might go with it. I am adding it here because the illustration is Kappa-like and conforms very well to Tyler Stone's interpretation of the Swamp Monster in question. Best Wishes, Dale D.
I realised after the fact that I had done my global-view range maps and comparitive-sized reconstructions for Wildme and Heuvelmans' "Petit Yeti" and "Grand Yeti" but not also for Tyler Stone's freshwater monkeys, of which the Kappas are the best-defined representatives. At left is a Kappa illustration from Wikipedia, and it has an "Angry monkey" face plus webbed hands and feet which are four webbed toes and a thumb apiece, which we are going to say is the true value
For the record also, here is my former map for "Improbable Giant Frogs" of the Loveland variety. Thetis Lake is indicated on the map and should be removed--but oddly enough such creatures are also reported at Lake Okanagon, the Ogopogo lake, and represented on Petroglyphs on the shores of the lake there.
