More Longneck Reconstruction Comparisons 2

water_horse_by_giniwolf-d4sazyp

Traditionally the Water Horse is an animal found near the water that looks like a horse. It looks pretty much EXACTLY like a horse but a little "Off" or "Deformed" and it can have such features as "Devilish" cloven hooves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Horse
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelpie

The Water Horse from Wikipedia

It is my contention that the legend of the Water Horse was merely and Naturalistically a description of the moose (or elk in Europe) in suppost of this I have shown clear illustrations  of moose or elk from Scotland n the 700s and in the 1700s. It is also my contention that the symbolic "Pictish Beast" also shows a moose. Later on as the elk got rarer the stories took on more of a mystic and mythological slant, but reports of the creature continued in tradition on into modern times. At present there are some parts of the world where elk are still called "water horse" and "water cow"

 

 

 

The Long-necked Plesiosaur is a different creature and has a different mythology, as a "water Dragon", but more especially as a "sea serpent." It might seem that there is too great of a difference between the two for there to be any confusion, but in fact, a big moose has a body that is nearly comparable in size to a moderate-sized Plesiosaur such as the reports describe: 

 

But it is because we have a tradition in Cryptozoology that conflates the two, many authors have created a composite category for Freshwater monsters that they call Water Horses. Below is the illustration from Loren Coleman and Patrick Huyghe's book The Field Guide to Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents, and Other Mystery Denizens of the Deep(2003) under the heading "Water Horse":

 

(The female is supposed to be above and the male below)

However, the sizes given are extracted from sightings at sea (and they admittedly include accounts where the wake was not distinguished from the creature making the wake and so the estimated length as given is really the length of the wake in such estimates. In freshwater accounts the creatures are makedly smaller and Peter Costello's In Search of Lake Monsters suggests that the estimated length sould be shortened to up to 20 feet long for females and up to 30 feet long for males: Roy Mackal in The Monsters of Loch Ness similarly downsizes the size estimates to comparable lengths. These estimates for the length can be commonly downsized to 15 to 20 feet long as given by some authors and as specified in several sightings, especially those seen on land. At that point, the size estimates are low enough to plausibly be comparable to the sizes for elk or moose. Hence the comparison below. More importantly, the specifications of the head are that it is precisely the size and shape of a moose's head, and with several features specific to moose anatomy that are not found in seals.

 

 

 

In the case of Jay Cooney's Water horse illustration at Bizarre Zoology, the equivalent of Colemans' model  is  the creature in the artwork posted below:

 

 

The skull of the animal featured has some freatures which are shared with the skulls of moose and NOT with seals, and these include complete bony eye sockets and long low nostrils  projecting in front of where the teeth are (The front part of both jaws would be broken off). Both features are completely different from seals and in fact they ARE features as specified in the reports. The eyes are supposed to be situated high up on the head with definite bony sockets projecting around them, and the nostrils are at the tip of the long and overhanging snout, with the nostrils being very large and round when they are open. Furthermore this is the type of Sea serpent snout that is stated to have whiskers on it: this is stated by Pontoppidian and carried forward by Oudemans, who repeats him

(The Great Sea Serpent 1892, pages 135 for Pontoppidian and 141 for Oudemans)

 

 

 

 

This is essential the same comparison for Coleman's Water Horse and the moose as repeated for Cooney's version (The artist is Thomas Finlay, who does excellent work, and in this case he is merely illustrating what he has been told to illustrate) 

 

Below some of the characteristically mooselike features of the reports are pointed out, and this includes the ears and nostrils of an ungulate-basically belonging to a land animal and not well adapted to life at sea. The hump on the back at shoulders and hips is indicated, the upper parts of the limbs are alsi indicated, and the rear edge of the rear "Flipper" has the contour of the moose's hind leg": the end of the flipper also resembles a cloven hoof (Costello said "3-pronged" but he definitely included reports of cloven hooves when he said that) The tail is even somewhat indicative of a moose's tail and the "Beard" is indicated as part of the moustache when in the reports (such as in the case of Ogopogo) the beard definitely means the bell at the moose's throat. Several reports also include moose antlers, but most often the initial antler spikes in velvet.

 

 

As regards the length of the neck, the reconstruction which Cooney has is nowhere near as long as the reports Heuvelmans says are specifically Longnecks  but instead the length of the neck is comparable to the Merhorse category, which he considered to be separate. See the comparisons above and below

 

 

 

 

The length of the Longnecks neck is its most outstanding characteristic and it is comparably long in the presumably male Longnecked "Merhorse" (In the illustration below the mane is recognized as a fleshy material and it is called a "fin") In these cases, when the neck is in a vertical aspect to the water, the body is NOT stretched out horizontally behind it but it is presumably held at some angle approaching vertical in the water. In such cases the degree of underwater drag of the creature holding it in place relative to the wave action at surface is also noted "As if it was dragging a sea-anchor"

 

 

I have recently left some remarks pertaining to these matters at Jay Cooney's blog:

http://bizarrezoology.blogspot.com/2013/12/scott-mardis-plesiosaur-paradigm-and.html?spref=fb

 

The portions underwater are inferable from indications at the surface and for the most part these proportions are consistent with one another over the past 250 years or more, and at scattered locations the whole world over, in many reports made independently from one another

 In this case the proportions of the Cuba Sea Serpent are compared to the general composite model. The Cuba SS was seen briefly all out of the water at one time when it breached.

 

Umfuli SS, after Captain Cringle

http://www.futilitycloset.com/2010/03/06/strange-encounter/ 

And I had also remarked that the proportions of the Umfuli SS wre also about the normal proportions with the head+ neck and the trunk each being about 15 feet long (NB some reproductions of the Captain's drawing also indicate specifically Plesiosaurian features of the head)

Cooney's model for Longnecks + Merhorses is compared below to the sections from the Cuba SS sighting specifically. This does not indicate the limbs although the witness noted that the creature's anatomy indicated where the foreflippers and hindflippers would be situated. I consider the neck profile drawn by the Captain in this case to be very much exemplary as showing the features of all the best and most accurate descriptions, and the head neck and body as shown to be well streamlined .

 

Below once again is my general-overall reconstruction identikit for the Longnecked Sea Serpents or Water Dragons generally, and with the specific Water Horse (Moose) reports subtracted. This is the outcome of several local statistical surveys based on In The Lake of The Sea Serpents and In Search of Lake Monsters done in the 1970s and I consider this model to be in good agreement with the creature models proposed by Dinsdale and Sanderson, and somewhat less to Gould's and Mackal's  versions of the Loch Ness Monsters and in the general ball park of agreeing with Oudemans' and Heuvelmans' models with allowances. When you get to the point of comparing Oudemans' and Heuvelmans' reconstructed models there are some very obvious conflicts in the reconstructions which are not in agreement with the reports and must needs be accounted for. This is all summarized from earlier blog postings which have discussed the matter before.

The tail is seen when diving and is then described as being divided into three  parts the third "Lobe" being the actual tail itself, or possibly only two "Prongs" will be reported" Costello has reports in either category and the "Snollygaster" (Among others) is also said to have this three-lobed tail.

 

 

 

 

And, just for good measure, here is that Plesiosaur illustration again, shown to scale with the Scottish version of the Master-Otter for scale

(Presumably the same as Burton's Monster otter. Illustration by Tim Morris on Deviant Art)

Early Merhorse Art by Thomas Finley, and Longnecked Seals in General

"Merhorse" by Thomas Finley 2013.
Thomas Finley said when he made this illustration:
 "This painting captures an elusive Merhorse both above and below the waves and gives a special over all view of the size of the creature. This is a special request for the Bizarre Zoology Blog Series."
I then objected that Bernard Heuvelmans had made several specifications about the Merhorse, including that it was supposed to have enormous eyes. After some discussion (and submissions of competing artworks by both of us), Thomas Finley developed what we thought was a good and authoritative  Merhorse ex Heuvelmans.
However it seems Jay Cooney had originally intended this painting to represent a more generic giant pinniped which could account for reports contained in the Merhorse category. We can perhaps equate this to Peter Costello's version of the Longnecked Seal theory more than Heuvelmans' version per se (There is a good reason for saying so and we shall be getting to it directly)

 

 This is an image of Bernard Heuvelmans' Merhorse. It comes from a

 series of such illustrations as added in the next blog...

 

Thought to be a head-on view of a Merhorse by Heuvelmans. This could just possibly be an attempt to represent a sighting of the Hoy Island 1919 SS type head-on, assuming this face goes with that type. I feel pretty definitely this is a pinniped at least.

 

 

biomarginalia (Presumably Cameron McCormick) writes:
[Regarding]Bernard Heuvelmans’ “Long-Necked" sea serpents: the Hoy “sea serpent" is fascinating, although rather than evidence for a long-necked species of pinniped, I wonder if it was an encounter with a very very wayward (and exaggerated) eared seal. As for the others, it is within the realm of possibility for mirages to create the impression of a long-necked creature (I’ll have to track down that diagram). Confusingly, it is not explained why the Tonny and Orme’s Head encounters are classified unambiguously into this category (and not, say as Super Otters or Many-Humped); amazingly the Orme’s Head sighting was published in the rather improbable venue of Nature. It may be a bit more difficult to publish a sea serpent report there today. [These drawings were published in the recent blog on Longnecked reports in general-DD]
http://www.tumblr.com/liked/by/astronomy-to-zoology/page/4

Bernard Heuvelmans' version of the Long-necked giant Sea lion, his "Megalotaria"

 

Reconstituted J Mackintosh Bell sighting creature, seen off the island of Hoy in the Orkneys, 1919.

This would presumably be a female. Length from nose to tail would be 13-14 feet, the size of a walrus but of course with the neck being more elongated.

 

This would be the hypothetical male and female of the species

As a sort of "Northern Bunyip" it is possible that the male would have a mane of thick hair all over the neck and not just a stripe of hair along the spine: the female's neck would be hairy too, but that would perhaps not be so obvious. The male might be up to 18-20 feet long maximum, the size of an elephant seal, although once again not built the same way and not weighing as much.

 

There is an earlier blog entry giving good reasons why this model is to be preferred to something more closely similar to the original drawings produced to illustrate the sighting.

 

In the version below, taken from Heuvelmans, the reader is led to believe the witness produced these drawings himself. In fact when checking Rupert T. Gould's retelling of the original report, it is clear that Bell had difficulty in making a good representation of the creature and these drawings were made by his wife. the drawing is decidedly amateurish and with wavering uncertainty of the outline

 

The measurements which were specified are actually in conflict with this drawing. The length of the neck is just about equal to the width of the back: the length of the body is about twice as long as the length of the back. The rear flippers are again about the length of the back. The whole length of the creature is about seven times the length of the head, the neck being twice and the body being four times the length of the head, plus the length of the head for itself. The corrected proportions are as redrawn above.  Length including the tail flippers for the male is 20-25 feet long and for the female is 15-18 feet long

 

The head and neck was made under the impression that it resembled the 1893 Lochalsh sighting by Farquahar Matheson out of the illustrations which Gould provided for reference.

 In his account, J. Mackintosh Bell had stated that the neck above water was as thick as an elephant's foreleg and all rough looking. An elephant's foreleg is a much thicker object than is shown in the original drawing and an attempt to make an appropriate corresponding thickness of neck is what is shown in the above paste-up.

There is one good Scientific account and illustration of a longnecked seal, made in the late 1700s and evidently making reference to a creature sighted around the British isles and not actually seen by the artist himself. This is nonetheless the only really substantial documentation of the allegation. In this case, a young male was said to measure 7 1/2 feet long and the projected size of an adult male would then be between 20 and 25 feet long (Pehaps 30 feet long counting the outstretched rear flippers)
(The adult male sea lion is about three times as long as the pup, a statement affirmed by Heuvelmans)

This information was provided by Darren Naish:

 James Parson wrote a paper in 1751 in which he described five “species” of Phoca, among them he mentioned a Dr. Grew’s “long neck’d seal” from an unknown locality. This peculiar seal was actually part of the Royal Society’s Museum, and as such it was included in a Catalog published in 1681, where it was described as follows:From his nose end to his fore-feet, and from thence to his tail, are of the same measure [4]

Heuvelmans' composite is not a good match for the Long-necked Sea lion:

But it IS just possibly a good match for the J Mackintosh Bell/ 1919 Hoy SS, allowing that neither drawing was going to be precisely accurate:

And as a final check, matching the full reconstruction to the Hoy SS proportions, we see there is a severe difference in proportions. The heads, flippers and bodies are not so much different in relative size, but the neck is actually drastically shorter. and that is the major difference, the actual Longnecks have a Plesiosaur-like neck which typically measures 10-20 feet in adults (Estimating a total length of 28 to 55 feet going by Oudemans' charts and reducing the tail lengths appropriately: the average 15 foot long neck belongs to a 40 foot long adult)

The lengths given by Peter Costello for his big eared model of the long necked seal are a minimum of about 18 feet for females and a maximum of about 30 feet for the males.(In Search of Lake Monsters p 288) This is no way comparable to the basic Longnecks (including the averages of such sightings as alleged at Loch Ness) but is a pretty exact match for the predictions based on the Hoy SS redrawn model. The drawing made at the top of the page by Thomas Finley is a pretty decent portrayal of the type: BUT the big ears in this artwork and as specified by Costello do not go with this type, they go with the Master-Otter and other kinds of Water-Monsters. This model would NOT account for the majority of reports in Loch Ness, Lake Okanagan, Lake Champlain or Lake Storsjon, BUT they might do well to account for SOME of the Irish reports and some of the "Long-Necked Seal" Bunyips that are explicitly described as such (ibid pp 273-276)(at a total estimated length of 5-15 feet long, which I consider a fair match, and not measuring the rear flippers in with the length)

As I had said it before, I prefer to refer to the Long necked Sea Serpent reports collected by Heuvelmans as "Megalotaria longicollis" to represent two types, the majority being the Longneck longicollis but this series as typified by the 1919 Hoy Sea Serpent retaining the genus name Megalotaria (Big Sea lion). I would have preferred to retain the name Megophias preferred by Oudemans for the Longicollis creature, but I have heard some very persuasive arguments why that name should not be maintained. Incidentally the colloquial term "Long-neck" as a reference to the long-necked plesiosaurs (and as distinguished from the short-necked plesiosaurs) runs back as far as the middle 1800s (the middle of the 19th century, and old enough for the term to be understood since before the American Civil War. References to Oudemans' composite creature as a Long-neck or a Long-necked seal were not merely descriptive, they were making a direct acknowledgement that his Megophias looked like a long necked Plesiosaur) Thus the uses for Long Necked seal and Long Necked Plesiosaur are almost equally as old as each other: it cannot be objected that the term is a modern one or that Heuvelmans made it up.