Bayon glyph
depicting mystery long-necked bird between rhinoceros and ox at Angkor Wat, Cambodia (public domain)
They say that beauty is in the eye
of the beholder, and the same has certainly been true of cryptids on many
occasions in the past. The following case may – or may not – constitute a
further example of this cryptozoological rule of thumb.
In terms of their current native
zoogeography, modern-day ratites all have very precise distributions on the
continental level. The ostrich is nowadays entirely confined to Africa (its contingent in Asia Minor was hunted into extinction by the
mid-20th Century), the rheas to South America, the emu to Australia, the now-extinct moas to New Zealand, the now-extinct elephant birds
to Madagascar, and the cassowaries to Australia and New Guinea. However, there are no known
modern-day ratites native to mainland Asia (nor are there any to Europe or North America either, for that matter), which
makes a certain enigmatic carving present on a famous Indochinese temple of
particular interest.
Dating from the 12th
Century and richly decorated with countless numbers of bas-relief glyphs carved
upon its numerous sandstone columns and walls, depicting a wide range of
deities and animals, Angkor Wat is a celebrated temple complex in Cambodia and constitutes the world's
largest religious monument. It also lays claim to cryptozoological fame,
courtesy of a specific glyph carved on a wall at Ta Prohm, one of the temples
in this complex, because the animal portrayed by this glyph bears a remarkable
superficial resemblance to one of the classic plate-backed stegosaurian
dinosaurs from prehistoric times. Not surprisingly, this anomalous, ostensibly
anachronistic carving has attracted considerable discussion and dissension as
to what creature it does truly depict, and I have documented it in a number of
my own publications.
However, there is also a second
glyph at Angkor Wat that, although far less famous than the 'stegosaur', is no
less intriguing from a cryptozoological viewpoint, because one identity scientifically
proposed for the notably long-necked bird that it depicts is a New Zealand moa.
This glyph can be found in a temple known as the Bayon, with the mystery bird
in question being sandwiched between a carving of a rhinoceros to its immediate
left and one of an ox (possibly a gaur) to its immediate right.
Close-up of Bayon
glyph depicting rhinoceros, mystery long-necked bird, and ox at Angkor Wat, Cambodia (public domain)
As seen in the illustration
reproduced here of this glyph's animal trio, the bird has stout legs, a
noticeably plump winged body, and an extremely long slender neck with a small
head atop. In the April 1986 issue of the German scientific periodical Natur
und Museum, Drs G.H. Ralph von Koenigswald and Joachim Steinbacher
correctly pointed out that the above morphology ruled out any of the local
heron species (the same is true of storks, because both storks and herons
possess very long, slender, bayonet-like beaks, whereas the carved bird's is
shorter, stouter, and has a hooked tip). They also noted that the glyph
carver's placing it between two such large mammals as a rhinoceros and an ox
(and with its head almost as high as theirs despite the fact that its neck was
not even upright but was being held at an angle of approximately 45°) was
probably done specifically to demonstrate just how big this bird was.
April 1986 issue of Natur
und Museum, featuring on its cover the avian subjects in the von
Koenigswald-Steinbacher paper (© Natur und Museum)
Reflecting upon these factors, the
authors suggested that perhaps the bird was a New Zealand moa, and, if so,
quite probably the sturdy, relatively short-legged coastal moa Euryapteryx
curtus (as opposed to the more famous and taller but much slimmer and
longer-legged giant Dinornis moas). The moas were not believed to have
become extinct in their native New Zealand domain until the mid-1400s
(seemingly as a result of over-hunting and habitat destruction by the Maoris),
i.e. around 250 years after the creation of Angkor Wat. Due to the
extensive trade links and maritime travel that had been occurring in the
southeast Asian-Australasian region for many centuries, the authors believed it
likely that New Zealand's mighty moas would have been known about in Indochina
at the time of Angkor Wat's creation, and that their spectacular appearance
might well have inspired a carving of one to be produced amid the many other
depictions of striking wildlife and mythological monsters present here.
Moreover, as the authors also noted,
traders throughout history have transported preserved and living specimens of
unusual, exotic-looking animals far from their native homelands to those of the
traders as curiosities for exhibition purposes. Hence it is remotely possible
that merchants travelling between Australasia and Indochina brought a preserved or perhaps
even a living moa back with them to Cambodia at some point during the
quarter-millennium spanning Angkor Wat's completion and the moas' extinction in
New Zealand.
And indeed, there are some very
pertinent precedents for transporting living ratites from Australasia to Asia, because cassowaries are known to
have been transported westwards by mariners in bygone centuries from their
native Australian and New Guinea homelands to Indonesia and China. Indeed, as the authors also
discussed in this same paper, there is even a glyph of a cassowary-like bird at
the Tjandi-Panataran, a Hindu temple not far from Wadjak in Java and dating
from around the 12th-15th Century, which may offer
further evidence of such transportations. Additional details regarding this
subject are contained in my book The Beasts That Hide From Man (2003) and also in a ShukerNature blog article on
cassowaries (click here).
Having said that, there might be
an altogether much more mundane, prosaic explanation for the long-necked
mystery bird of Angkor Wat. Namely, that its appearance may not be due so much
to any taxonomic identity as a moa but rather to the fact that there was a
space needing to be filled between the rhino and the ox, and a non-specific
long-necked bird simply made an ideal space-filler, with any perceived
similarities to Euryapteryx or any other moa being merely coincidental.
In short, the bird's morphology was moulded by the specific shape of the space
needing to be filled, nothing more.
Alongside a
life-sized statue of a giant moa Dinornis sp. at Chester Zoo, England (© Dr Karl Shuker)
Indeed, a telling suggestion that
this may well be the case is that whereas the wings of all moas were non-existent, the Angkor Wat bird has a very large, conspicuous wing readily
visible. In addition, moa beaks were not hook-tipped. Such notable
discrepancies as these would not be expected if the glyph provides as accurate
a representation of the bird as it does for the rhinoceros and the ox, both of
which are portrayed realistically and are readily recognisable.
This ShukerNature blog article is
excerpted from my latest book, A Manifestation of Monsters.
Hi Karl. Couple of points- no moa actually had wings. They are the only avian family with no remnant even of wing bones, this excludes them a priori from being depicted in this image. Also- how about it being a PNG cassowary? Closer to Cambodia, and along a known island hopping route to continental asia.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments. It's strange - I was sure that somewhere I'd read that some moa remains with tiny vestigeal wings had been found, but if so, I can't trace any reference to this now. I don't think that the Cambodian glyph represents a cassowary, as the neck is too long and the head lacks any kind of casque or wattles 9the beak is too long too), whereas the Javan glyph is certainly very cassowary-like. My own feeling is that the Cambodian bird's morphology was engineered to fit the gap between the rhino and ox, which means that we may never be sure of what exactly it was meant to represent. All the best, Karl
Deletenão é uma moa e sim uma íbis gigante
ReplyDeleteConsidering how accurately the rhino and ox are drawn, the short-legged, long-necked chubby bird squeezed between them is probably an accurate representation, too, and is most probably a swan. It even has wings and a duck-like beak. And there are swans in Cambodia. See how it compares to the geese in this photo: https://c8.alamy.com/comp/REBA16/angkor-wat-temple-reflecting-in-water-of-lotus-pond-at-sunset-ducks-on-the-foregroundsiem-reap-cambodia-REBA16.jpg
ReplyDelete