H.J.
Oppenheim's bronze Chinese sculpture of a mysterious beast resembling a giant
hyrax (public domain)
On 30 November 1935, a British magazine called The
Field published an article by F. Martin Duncan entitled 'A Chinese Noah's Ark', which
surveyed a selection of Chinese works of art from an exhibition that was being
staged by London's Royal Academy. Duncan's article
included photographs of several exhibits - one of which (its photo opening this
present ShukerNature article) was a small bronze statuette of an exceedingly
strange animal.
The statuette
was owned at that time by H.J. Oppenheim, and as can be seen here, the creature that it
portrays bears little resemblance to any modern-day species - which presumably
explains why it was referred to in the exhibition as a mythical animal. Overlooked
by cryptozoology, moreover, the bronze was soon forgotten beyond the perimeters
of the art world. Today, it is housed in the collections of the British Museum, London, to whom it was bequeathed in 1947 by Oppenheim.
During the early
1980s, however, an article in the magazine Smithsonian concerning the
Warring States period in China (480-222 BC)
included a photograph of a near-identical bronze statuette. It was one of 151
items in an exhibition of Chinese art from the Warring States Period on display
at the Smithsonian Institution's Freer Gallery of Art. This statuette and several others of the same type, representing the same animal, had been found in 1923 near the village of Li-yu, in northern China's Shanxi province.
This time, the
animal was called a "fanciful tapir-like beast" (despite the fact that
it looks nothing like a tapir - lacking the latter's characteristic nasal trunk, and possessing very much shorter yet proportionately sturdier limbs, disproportionately large ears, hooves that were circular rather than claw-like, and scaly skin), with the comment that it seemed to have no
practical or ritual function. Not long afterwards, Brown University ungulate expert
Dr Christine Janis serendipitously came upon the article - while browsing
through some magazines in her doctor's waiting room! (And during the mid-1980s
I sent her a copy of the photograph from The Field article.) Moreover,
while visiting Sydney, Australia, she was able to purchase a life-sized replica
of one of these bronze beast statuettes – quite possibly of the Freer specimen as it
closely resembles this particular one, and the Freer Gallery has indeed made
available for purchasing purposes official replicas of theirs, produced by
New York's Alva Studios.
Christine's
replica specimen of one of the bronze Chinese mystery beast statuettes (© Dr
Christine Janis)
A photograph of
the original Freer statuette can be accessed on this gallery's official website
(click here). It is stated there to be
from the Middle Eastern Zhou dynasty (existing during the Warring States Period),
and, more specifically, to date from the early 5th Century BC. Its
dimensions are given as: height, 11.2 cm; length, 18.3
cm; diameter, 6.3 cm. The following
details are also included:
"This quadruped was crafted with
considerable detail, especially in the modeling of the animal's face, its
short, hoofed legs, and its scaled rotund body. Despite the clear features, the
identity of the animal remains obscure, as does the precise function of the
bronze figure. The collar of cowrie shells, twisted rope bands, striations, and
scale patterns suggest that this animal was also produced in the Houma workshops in southern Shanxi Province."
Christine had no
problem in classifying its mysterious 'tapir' - due not only to her specialised
knowledge of ungulates, but also to the fact that she had actually kept smaller
modern-day versions as pets.
The beast of the
bronzes was a hyrax - one of those superficially rabbit-like creatures also
termed conies or dassies, but supplied with small hooves and an anatomy that
unmasks them as diminutive relatives of the proboscideans (elephants, mammoths,
and mastodonts). However, this particular example appeared to be far from diminutive.
Indeed, as she subsequently
explained in a paper published in 1987 by the now-defunct International Society
of Cryptozoology's scientific journal, Cryptozoology, Christine became
convinced that it was meant to represent a certain giant form of hyrax from
China's late Pliocene (and possibly early Pleistocene too). This pig-sized
creature was Pliohyrax, currently known to have been represented by at
least three different species. If Christine is correct, then Pliohyrax
must have persisted into historic times. (Incidentally, there were some even
bigger, earlier species of hyrax, belonging to the aptly-named genus Titanohyrax,
that are estimated to have been as big as rhinoceroses!)
The head of the
bronze beasts closely compares to those of modern-day species of hyrax - and so
did that of Pliohyrax. In contrast, their body is hippopotamus-like -
but although no post-cranial remains of Pliohyrax are presently known, Christine
noted that the high position of the eye sockets in its skull (comparable to
those of the hippo) indicates that it might have been semi-aquatic like the
hippo. It may therefore have possessed a similar body shape too, as fossil
ungulates with hippo-shaped bodies tend to have these elevated eyes.
Nevertheless,
there was one notable problem when attempting to reconcile the bronze beasts
with any type of hyrax - whereas the latter have several hooves on each foot,
the feet of the bronze beasts have only one hoof apiece. Christine, however,
has proposed that this discrepancy indicates that the animal was one known from
mythology rather than one personally seen by the sculptor. Presumably,
therefore, the giant hyrax had indeed survived long beyond the Pliocene, and
had once been well-known to mankind in China, becoming incorporated into their
mythology, but had died out prior to the Warring States Period.
There is also an
equally plausible alternative to this possibility, as proffered once again by Christine.
A hyrax the size of Pliohyrax would be much heavier than today's notably
smaller species, and may therefore have evolved a more compact type of foot
structure with a pad underlying the foot - resembling the feet of pigs and
hippos. Perhaps this is what the sculptor was attempting to convey when
producing the bronze statuettes - hence Pliohyrax may have lingered into
the Warring States Period after all. As there is no evidence of its survival
today, however, we must assume that it subsequently became extinct - or
perhaps, like many other large, sluggish, inoffensive beasts with succulent
flesh, it was exterminated by hunters.
Finally: While researching this fascinating subject,
I discovered a beautiful life-sized replica of the Freer Gallery's bronze beast
statuette on the website of an auction house called Invaluable. Produced by
Alva Studios, the statuette was sold on 28 September 2013 for US$ 100, but its listing remains on the auction
house's site (click here).
In addition to the description of the original statuette given in the Freer
gallery, Invaluable's listing also includes the following details:
"Losses to the ears on this replica
piece. Labeled 'Authentic Copyrighted Replica Made From the Original At the
Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, By Alva Studios, Inc., New York'."
Its listing contains several photographs too,
including this one:
Official replica of the Freer
Gallery's bronze giant hyrax-like statuette, sold by Invaluable in 2013 (© Invaluable)
This ShukerNature blog article is a
greatly-expanded, updated excerpt from my book In Search of Prehistoric Survivors.
I wonder if a speciment of Pliohyrax was found preserved in ice, like the mammoths of Siberia. That would explain the accurate anatomy (so far as we can verify) without imagining scholars of 2300 years ago understood as much as today's paleontologists.
ReplyDeleteInteresting idea! Woolly mammoths and woolly rhinoceroses, plus, more recently, cave lion cubs, are what we normally think of re ice-embedded prehistoric fauna, but who can say whether specimens of additional species preserved in this manner are still awaiting discovery somewhere?
DeleteIt could be *Postschizotherium*, that species survived into the early Pleistocene in Russia and China. Maybe like the giant beaver *Trogonotherium* it survived much later than the current fossil record suggests.
ReplyDelete