The
skull of a common hippopotamus Hippopotamus
amphibius, revealing just how huge its lower canine and incisor teeth are
in proportion to the rest of it (public domain)
During the past three-and-a-half decades,
I have investigated countless previously unexplained or unexamined cryptozoological
mysteries, and more often than not I have sooner or later succeeded in solving
the riddles posed by them. Every now and then, however, I have encountered one
that has defied all of my attempts to elucidate it, and the hitherto-obscure
case presented below on ShukerNature is a prime example. I've been
intermittently seeking information concerning it for well over 20 years now,
yet all to no avail – but by duly revealing its sparse details here, I am
fervently hoping that these will trigger memories with, and/or elicit
information from, my readers that will at last enable its mystery to be conclusively
resolved. In the meantime, I shall present my own thoughts regarding this
enigmatic entity, and then await, gentle readers, your own.
During the 1990s, Fortean
writer/researcher Janet Bord (who has co-authored with her husband Colin
numerous classic, bestselling books on mysteries of Britain and also overseas)
kindly sent me some photocopied pages of cryptozoological content from a short
but exceedingly hard-to-find book written by famous British mysteries author
Harold T. Wilkins and published in 1947. For a book of only 30 pages, it had a
disproportionately long (albeit comprehensive) title – Monsters and Mysteries of America, the Jungles, the Tropics, and the
Arctic Wastes – and contained some fascinating reports of mystery beasts that
were previously unknown to me.
These reports included the following
example, whose all-too-brief relevant portion I am quoting here in full:
FIND MADE NEAR PYRAMID IN BURIED
EGYPTIAN BOAT
Another
reminder of strange and unknown monsters which ancient Africa once
possessed…was the discovery in May, 1935, by the Egyptian professor, Selim
Hassan, of "day and night boats" used by the ancient Pharaohs in
rites connected with the Egyptian underworld of the dead, or solar
ceremonialism. Close to the pyramid of Chephren, Professor Selim Hassan found a
boat in which was the head of a gigantic animal with huge teeth. Its identity
has not been established. The boat was found buried north of the temple of the
ancient pyramid.
Intrigued by this report, and owning
several other books authored by Wilkins, I carefully checked through all of them,
and found the following, very similar snippet in Secret Cities of Old South America (1952):
Again,
in 1935, Professor Selim Hassan, when excavating round the pyramid of Chephren,
found some ancient boats in one of which was the head of a gigantic animal with
huge teeth, whose identity no one could establish.
Also known as the Pyramid of Khafre or
Khafra, the Pyramid of Chephren is the second-tallest pyramid of the famous
ancient Egyptian pyramids at Giza, and constitutes the tomb of the
Fourth-Dynasty pharaoh Chephren (aka Khafre/Khafra), who ruled c.2558-2532 BC. Prof.
Selim Hassan (1886-1961) was a leading Egyptologist, who supervised the
excavation of many ancient Egyptian tombs on behalf of Cairo University. He was
also the author of the definitive 16-volume Encyclopedia
of Ancient Egypt. And solar boats were boats constructed as representations
of the mythical day boat that according to traditional ancient Egyptian lore
the sun god Amen-Ra navigated through the sky and also through the underworld,
which were buried with deceased kings to enable them to do the same. So far, so
good.
The Pyramid
of Chephren aka Khafre and the Great Sphinx at Giza (© Hamish2k/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 3.0 licence)
After deciding to seek out further
information concerning the body-bereft head of this mystifying Beast in the Boat (which is what I shall be calling it hereafter for ease of reference purposes),
my first action was to check whether there were any source references to it in
the respective bibliographies of Wilkins's two above-cited books.
Unfortunately, however, the first, short book did not contain a bibliography at
all, and although the second, longer book did have one, it did not contain any
references that seemed likely to be the source(s) of this case.
With the coming of the internet and its
ever-expanding content, however, I was eventually able to conduct online a far
more comprehensive search for Wilkins's source material than I'd ever have been
able to do in physical libraries, and it was not long before I uncovered a
publication that I felt certain would contain the precious information that I'd
been looking for. Published in 1946 by the Government Press in Cairo, and written
by Prof. Hassan, the 341-page treatise in question was entitled Excavations at Giza: The Solar-Boats of
Khafra, Their Origin and Development, together with the Mythology of the
Universe which they are supposed to traverse. Vol. VI – Part 1: 1934-1935.
Yes indeed, if the information concerning
the giant animal head found inside a solar-boat by Hassan in 1935 near the
pyramid of Chephren/Khafra was to be contained anywhere, surely it would be
contained in this publication. And so I painstakingly scanned through it, read
through it, and used likely search words to seek out the required details – but
found nothing, not even the barest, briefest of mentions of such a find
anywhere within this extensive, immensely comprehensive document
- a document, moreover, that was concerned specifically with not only
the precise location and the precise year but also the precise structures
(solar boats) and the precise researcher included in Wilkins's report. In other
words, if this treatise didn't contain anything of relevance to the Beast in
the Boat (which it didn't), then what publication ever would? And indeed,
despite several subsequent online searches spaced out across the 23 years since
I first went online way back in 1997, and taking into account the enormous and
continuing expansion of information that has been added to the Net during that extremely
long time period, I have still not found any data relating to this most
mystifying report in Wilkins's books.
In the absence of such material,
therefore, all that I can do is speculate on what the bodiless Beast in the Boat
may have been, based upon the minimal morphological details of its head as provided
by Wilkins – and always assuming, of course, that his report was both genuine
and accurate. Four very different identities, but all sharing toothy infamy,
come readily to mind – the Nile crocodile Crocodylus
niloticus, the common hippopotamus Hippopotamus
amphibius, the African bush elephant Loxodonta
africana, and any one in a wide taxonomic range of large fossil species with
very sizeable teeth.
Artistic
representation of Sebek, ancient Egypt's crocodile-headed god of fertility and
military might (© Jeff Dahl/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 4.0 licence)
In ancient Egyptian times, the Nile crocodile
was very common in this country, frequenting the River Nile from Upper Egypt and
the Delta northward to the Mediterranean coast. It was also venerated - among
the extensive pantheon of animal-headed deities worshipped in ancient Egypt was
the crocodile-headed god Sebek (=Sobek), associated with fertility, power, and
military strength, and invoked to provide protection from the dangers of the Nile
itself. Many mummified crocodiles dedicated to Sebek have been unearthed during
excavations of ancient Egyptian temples and other sites. Yet in spite of its
exalted position in this ancient culture, the Nile crocodile was also
extensively hunted, millennium after millennium, until by the 1950s it was
virtually extinct in Egypt, nowadays existing in this country only within Lake
Nasser and the lands directly to the south of it, having been exterminated in
Lower Egypt following the building of the Aswan Dam during the 1960s.
The Nile crocodile typically measures
11-12 ft long in total, but exceptional specimens more than 19 ft long have
been documented, and the largest Nile crocodile skulls on record are up to 27
in long, with a mandibular (lower jaw) length of up to 34 in. Yet if just the
head of one were discovered, entirely without body, would the size of the
entire animal if estimated by extrapolating from just the head really be big
enough to warrant being described as gigantic? I'm by no means convinced that
it would. Equally, by no stretch of the imagination can a Nile crocodile's
teeth, which number 60-64, be described as huge – big, certainly, but huge?
Personally, I don't think so.
The second identity on offer here is the common
hippopotamus. Just like the Nile crocodile, this massively large aquatic mammal
was very common in ancient Egypt, was represented in the pantheon of animal-headed
deities – this time by Taueret, the ferocious hippo-headed goddess of pregnancy
and childbirth – and was also extensively hunted. Apparently, this species
could still be found along the Damietta branch (an eastern tributary of the
Nile Delta) after the Arab conquest in 639 AD, but eventually it became
entirely extinct in Egypt.
Exceeded in overall stature only by the
elephants and white rhinoceros among modern-day mammals, the common
hippopotamus attains a total length of up to 17 ft, and a head length of 3-4 ft (with an amazing 4-5-ft vertical mouth gape!). Most spectacular of all,
however, are its teeth, particularly its greatly enlarged lower canines (tusks) and
lower incisors, the former measuring as much as 20 in and the latter as much as
16 in.
Consequently, in my opinion the preserved
head or skull of a sizeable hippopotamus specimen containing such huge teeth as
these provides a very plausible identity for the big-toothed mystery beast head
found by Hassan in an ancient Egyptian solar boat. And because the hippopotamus
was a species venerated in this culture, the presence of such a specimen in
such a boat would by no means be inexplicable or even unexpected. Indeed, the
only mystifying aspect that is not readily explained by such a solution is why
the specimen's identity as the head – or skull – of a creature as zoologically
familiar in modern times as the hippopotamus was not swiftly established. But
perhaps it was, unbeknownst to Wilkins?
Incidentally, the reason why I have
included here the alternative possibility that what Wilkins described as a head
was in reality merely a skull is that if it were truly a head, how had it been
preserved so as to survive intact for more than four millennia? There is no
mention of it being mummified. To my mind, therefore, it makes far more sense
for this specimen to have been a skull, which, with no covering of skin, would
also fully expose its teeth and therefore make them look even more dramatic,
especially if the skull were that of a common hippo.
Artistic
representation of Taueret – ancient Egypt's hippo-headed goddess of pregnancy
and childbirth (© Jeff Dahl/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 4.0 licence)
Moving on to the third identity
contender, I wonder if the head (or skull) might conceivably be from some
exotic, non-Egyptian species, perhaps a gift from a wealthy visiting potentate
in ancient times, explaining why it had been preserved and clearly deemed
significant enough to have been placed inside one of the solar boats. The skull
of an African bush elephant Loxodonta
africana with tusks retained, possibly? Having said that, this species did
actually exist in ancient Egypt as a native species some 6000 years ago, during
pre-dynastic times, before being hunted to extinction there, after which
specimens were imported for military purposes and as exotic pets. Such a skull
could certainly lend itself to yielding via extrapolation a complete animal
fully deserving of being described (accurately) as gigantic, and its tusks
described as huge teeth.
Moreover, as publicly revealed in January
2019, skull fragments from a young elephant were found in a rubbish dump within
a 2300-year-old Egyptian fortress on the Red Sea coast. This confirms that such
creatures were being maintained in Egypt at least two millennia after the time of Chephren. Equally,
within the ancient cemetery of Hierakonpolis, dating back over 5000 years and
therefore preceding the time of
Chephren, excavations made public in 2015 revealed the skeletons of several
exotic animal specimens, including two elephants. These twin discoveries in
turn lend support to the prospect of elephants being kept in Egypt during Chephren's reign. Once again,
however, if the Beast in the Boat head/skull had truly been that of an
elephant, in the 1930s such a specimen – most especially one that possessed
tusks – would surely have been swiftly identified, more so even than a hippo
skull, in fact.
The fourth – but in my view the least
likely – of the four identity contenders proffered here for consideration is a
fossil skull from some large to very large prehistoric mammal or reptile that
sported sizeable teeth, e.g. some species of mammoth or other long-vanished
proboscidean, a mosasaur, a theropod dinosaur. There are some notable
precedents for such specimens having attracted significant attention in bygone
times, as documented by me in a number of my previous writings. Created in
1590, the famous lindworm-shaped fountain in Klagenfurt, Austria, for instance,
was based upon a supposed dragon skull, but when scientifically examined in
modern times it proved to be the fossilized skull of an Ice Age woolly
rhinoceros. An ancient Corinthian vase depicting the Homeric legend of Greek hero
Heracles rescuing Hesione from a giant sea beast dubbed the Monster of Troy seemingly
used a skull of the prehistoric giraffid Samotherium
as a model for the monster's head. And from
an illustration prepared of it in 1673 by Johannes Hain, an alleged dragon skull
discovered in a cave in eastern Europe's Carpathian Mountains is readily
identifiable as that of the extinct cave bear Ursus spelaeus.
Consequently,
it is not beyond the realms of possibility that a fossilized skull of some such
beast was gifted to Chephren on the assumption that it was from a mighty
monster, and was subsequently retained for posterity by being placed in a solar
boat. Moreover, as prehistoric animal species are by no means as easy to
identify by non-specialists as are modern-day ones, if the head was a skull
from a somewhat obscure fossil creature this could even explain why its
zoological identity allegedly had not been established following Hassan's
discovery of the head in the solar boat during 1935.
How I wish that I could trace some
additional documentation of the Beast in the Boat head, and even, perhaps, its
current location, as I naturally assume that it was preserved after having been
uncovered by Hassan. Yet if so, why does his definitive account of his excavations
in the very same location where (and also in the very same year when) Wilkins
stated this tantalizingly elusive specimen was found contain not the merest
mention of it?
As I said at the beginning of the present
ShukerNature article, perhaps someone reading this has information concerning
the specimen that they are willing to share with me, and, in so doing, enable
me at last to get ahead (pun intended!) with this mystery. Over to you – or, to
put it another way (and speaking figuratively here, not literally, obviously) –
bring me the head of the Beast in the Boat!
Alongside
a statue of a common hippopotamus at Marwell Zoo in Hampshire, England (© Dr
Karl Shuker)
Please feel free to post any thoughts, information, etc concerning this crypto-case in the comments section below this ShukerNature blog article, or email them to me directly. Many thanks indeed!
Meanwhile, and as is true with all cryptozoological cases based solely upon anecdotal evidence, especially when only a single source currently appears to exist concerning it, there is always the sad possibility that this one is a hoax, an invention on Wilkins's part, with little or no substance to it - hence my "always assuming" caveat included earlier. However, as Wilkins specifically named a real, and very notable, person, i.e. the highly-renowned Egyptologist Prof. Selim Hassan, within his report, and included that report in two separate books, at a time when Hassan was still very much alive and working upon precisely the same subjects, Pyramid of Chephren-sited solar boats, in precisely the same year, 1935, as given in that selfsame report, Wilkins would have been taking a great risk of exposing himself to claims of libel by Hassan if his report had been false. If, conversely, Wilkins had not named any real, still-living person in his report, I would have been much more inclined to deem its claims as being false - but he did name a real, still-living person, Hassan! Tragically, however, as both Wilkins and Hassan are now deceased, we may never know the truth - unless there is someone out there reading this article of mine who can prove me wrong!
Mom and I in Giza, 2006, with the Great Sphinx and (partly visible behind it) the Pyramid of Chephren aka Khafre (© Dr Karl Shuker)
Boy howdy do hippopotamus skulls look weird! I can very much believe that someone who found it but had never seen a live specimen, or for that matter could connect it to what a hippopotamus looked like when alive, would conclude the skull belonged to a dragon or some other monstrous creature.
ReplyDeleteOn a related note: Have you seen those illustrations humourously poking fun at how future palaeontologists might get reconstruction of modern day fauna horribly wrong? One includes a hippopotamus reconstructed as some terrible fanged reptilian dragon-like creature...
Hi Simon, Yes I've seen them, very intriguing and instructive too, and you certainly have a point as to how a hippo skull looks very different from what you'd expect it to look like if basing youe expectation solely upon the external appearance of a hippo's head.
DeleteI wondered if it might be in another volume, but I see Hassan only titled one part after the solar boats. Once upon a time, I might have enjoyed reading the whole work to find out, but I'm too tired and confused these days.
ReplyDelete----
I ought to look up more of the illustrations Simon mentions. A hippo skull is indeed quite horrific—how (asks the future paleontologist) can it not belong to a violent monster? :D Of course, hippos do kill more people than lions...
I recently saw a picture in a historical magazine of a Roman fresco depicting the Nile river and animals/wildlife living there. Somehow I wondered if there could be some cryptid material. Some of the animals might have roamed the historical Egypt Nile area in Roman times but diappeared some I could not identify (iam a layman) even the creatures had been relatively depicted accurate.
ReplyDeleteInteresting! Do you recall what the magazine was called and which issue the picture was in? I'd be intrigued to see the picture.
DeleteWouldn’t a crocodile skull have been identified right away?
ReplyDeleteI'd expect so, but in view of its pertinent size, toothiness, and presence in this area, it was necessary to include the crocodile here for the sake of comprehensiveness.
Delete