Dr KARL SHUKER

Zoologist, media consultant, and science writer, Dr Karl Shuker is also one of the best known cryptozoologists in the world. He is the author of such seminal works as Mystery Cats of the World (1989), The Lost Ark: New and Rediscovered Animals of the 20th Century (1993; greatly expanded in 2012 as The Encyclopaedia of New and Rediscovered Animals), Dragons: A Natural History (1995), In Search of Prehistoric Survivors (1995), The Unexplained (1996), From Flying Toads To Snakes With Wings (1997), Mysteries of Planet Earth (1999), The Hidden Powers of Animals (2001), The Beasts That Hide From Man (2003), Extraordinary Animals Revisited (2007), Dr Shuker's Casebook (2008), Karl Shuker's Alien Zoo: From the Pages of Fortean Times (2010), Cats of Magic, Mythology, and Mystery (2012), Mirabilis: A Carnival of Cryptozoology and Unnatural History (2013), Dragons in Zoology, Cryptozoology, and Culture (2013), The Menagerie of Marvels (2014), A Manifestation of Monsters (2015), Here's Nessie! (2016), and what is widely considered to be his cryptozoological magnum opus, Still In Search Of Prehistoric Survivors (2016) - plus, very excitingly, his four long-awaited, much-requested ShukerNature blog books (2019-2024).

Dr Karl Shuker's Official Website - http://www.karlshuker.com/index.htm

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my ShukerNature blog's articles (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my published books (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my Eclectarium blog's articles (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my Starsteeds blog's poetry and other lyrical writings (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my Shuker In MovieLand blog's articles (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

IMPORTANT: To view a complete, regularly-updated listing of my RebelBikerDude's AI Biker Art blog's thematic text & picture galleries (each one instantly clickable), please click HERE!

Search This Blog


PLEASE COME IN, I'VE BEEN EXPECTING YOU...

PLEASE COME IN, I'VE BEEN EXPECTING YOU...
WELCOME TO SHUKERNATURE - ENJOY YOUR VISIT - BEWARE OF THE RAPTOR!


Friday, 28 February 2025

THE TANTALISING TWO-TONGUES IDENTIFIED AFTER ALMOST A CENTURY?

 
A representation of what a two-tongues may have looked like based solely upon the original report's verbal description of this mystery mammal, created by me using Magic Studio

Just over a year ago, in my Alien Zoo column for the British monthly magazine Fortean Times, I introduced readers to a cryptozoological conundrum that had been puzzling me ever since I first encountered it during the 1990s, and which dated back a further six decades, to a 1930s news report from the periodical Modern Wonder.

In December 2024, moreover, I also documented it on ShukerNature (click here to read my blog article) The report, dated 27 May 1939, claimed that some mysterious beasts had been captured by a photographer in the jungles of Malaya (now Malaysia) and had been shown to some officials in Manila, capital of the Philippines, but that no-one had been able to identify them.

They were each said to be quadrupedal and to weigh approximately 200 lb, to possess a raccoon-like head (masked?), a furry mole-like pelage (dense and/or dark?), a pair of owl-like eyes (very large and indicating a nocturnal lifestyle?), an odd dentition combining human-like teeth with cat-like teeth, a fondness for bananas, and – by far their most bizarre feature – each animal possessed two tongues! (Hence I have dubbed their mystifying species the two-tongues.)

 
Native to Malaysia and Indonesia, a Sunda slow loris Nycticebus coucang – note the distinctive black mask-like markins encircling its extremely large eyes and its very dense fur (© David Haring. Duke Lemur Center. North Carolina/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 3.0 licence)

I'd speculated in AZ and on ShukerNature that were it not for their substantial weight and, needless to say, their extraordinary twin-tongued condition, these cryptids might conceivably have been Malaysian tarsiers, as those very small and single-tongued but decidedly goblinesque creatures always arouse considerable curiosity from observers unfamiliar with them.

Having documented this mystifying case in various of my writings without eliciting any opinions from readers as to what these animals may be, I now hoped that AZ and ShuikerNature aficionados might prove more forthcoming. And sure enough, at long last I have received a suggestion, made by two different ShukerNature readers wholly independently of each other, that may finally have solved this tantalising riddle.

One reader gave his name as Lars Dietz, the other chose to remain anonymous, but both brought to my attention in December 2024 the fascinating fact that lorises – those big-eyed, nocturnal, densely-furred, fruit-eating, Asian relatives of Africa's pottos and bushbabies, as well as Madagascar's lemurs – possess a veritable second tongue, the sublingua. Consisting of a relatively large, muscular tongue-like structure positioned beneath the primary tongue, and also possessed by the lorises' above-named African and Madagascan relatives, and by the tarsiers too, it lacks taste buds, its function instead being to keep clean another dental characteristic of such creatures, the toothcomb, which is used in oral grooming. Outwardly, however, the sublingua does look like a second genuine tongue.

 
In this close-up photograph of a slow loris's face, its pale, pointed sublingua can be clearly seen projecting out of its mouth beneath its longer, pink-coloured primary tongue (© David Haring. Duke Lemur Center. North Carolina/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 3.0 licence)

Consequently, it is easy to understand how a loris – or a tarsier – may have been described as a two-tongued creature by anyone with no previous experience of it. Having said that: as lorises and tarsiers exist in the Philippines as well as in Malaysia it seems strange that they would not have been recognised by officials there.

Also, of course, there is the not inconsiderable matter of the two-tongues' claimed weight of 200 lb to explain, which is far greater than that of lorises and tarsiers – unless the report had been garbled during its documentation in Modern Wonder, with the animals' true weight having been 200 g, not 200 lb. This would compare well with that of lorises and also that of the heaviest tarsiers.

In view of the sublingua's evident anatomical relevance to this crypto-case (not to mention the black mask-like circles of fur encircling the extremely large eyes of slow lorises, plus their bodies' very dense fur), I feel that some such confusion between the metric and imperial systems of weights may well have occurred, thereby causing the true taxonomic identity of the two-tongues as either lorises (most probably) or tarsiers to become obscured.

 
Tarsiers are nothing if not goblinesque, even otherworldly, in appearance, especially to anyone unfamiliar with these curious yet harmless creatures (© LDC Inc Foundation/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 3.0 licence / (© Pieere Fidenci/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 2.0 licence)

Moreover, perhaps the officials who saw these creatures simply weren't well-versed in their country's native fauna anyway. It certainly wouldn't be the first time that this situation has been true!

My sincere thanks to those two ShukerNature readers for steering me in what I feel sure is the right direction in resolving this curious cryptozoological puzzle after almost a century.

And be sure to click here to read my previous ShukerNature article on this subject.

 
Another of my most probably now-obsolete (but still visually-engaging) two-tongues reconstructions, based solely upon the Modern Wonders report's verbal description of these creatures, and created by me using Magic Studio

 

Wednesday, 26 February 2025

"BRING ME THE HEAD OF KING KONG!" – A SHUKERNATURE PICTURE OF THE DAY

 
Vintage photograph of a man-made pantomime stage prop in the form of a giant primate head (but NOT derived from a real, dead animal) (public domain/Wikipedia)

It’s been quite a while since I last posted a 'ShukerNature Picture of the Day', but this particular photograph seemed an ideal candidate for such a role, especially as it's one that I've been meaning to blog about for ages, so here it is, together with what I've managed to uncover concerning its nothing if not visually striking subject.

Needless to say, had I encountered this picture recently I would probably have simply assumed it to be an AI-generated image and therefore may not have investigated it, as the head was certainly far too big to be from any type of anatomically-feasible primate, even one of the cryptozoological kind.

In reality, however, I first encountered it online some years ago (on Wikipedia, if memory serves me correctly), and its arresting appearance was such that I decided to do whatever I could to identify exactly what it depicted and where it had originated. Here is what I discovered.

As indicated by this present ShukerNature post's tongue-in-cheek title, parodying the biblical Salome's imperious demand to King Herod Antipas for John the Baptist's head (served on a platter, which it duly was!), I had initially wondered whether this public-domain photo may have been in some way related to the original, classic King Kong monster movie released by RKO Radio Pictures in spring 1933, directed by Marian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack, and starring Fay Wray alongside this movie's titular stop-motion mega-star created by celebrated animator Willis H. O'Brien. Perhaps it was a spare giant ape head for close-up shots, or used for publicity purposes?

Although that idea ultimately proved false, I suspect that it nonetheless contains an element of relevance to the latter movie. For what I finally found out was that the object in this photo is actually a gaff, in this instance specifically a stage prop that had featured in a major pantomime performed just a few months after the release of King Kong, so it seems possible that the prop was inspired by this film, which had proved such a massive hit worldwide earlier that same year.

 
Publicity photo-still of American actress Fay Wray promoting the 1933 film King Kong (public domain)

According to an unidentified, tantalizingly-brief newspaper report published on 11 December 1933 that had contained the photo, what it depicted was a 4.5-ft-tall giant ape or monkey head made from cardboard and paper (NOT from the remains of any real, dead animal) that had been specially constructed by a stage props company for a pantomime staged in Glasgow, Scotland, during the winter 1933/34 pantomime season.

Sadly, the report gave no further details, not even naming the pantomime in question or the theatre where it was staged. According to the Panto Archive website's comprehensive listing of Glasgow pantomime venues and productions (click here to view the entire list), the only pantomime staged in Glasgow during the 1933/34 season was 'Babes In The Wood', at the Theatre Royal, and featuring veteran Scottish music hall comedian Tommy Lorne (1890-1935) as its principal star.

Perhaps, therefore, the giant monkey/ape head had appeared in it in the capacity of a guardian to the babes abandoned in the wood, or possibly as a comic bogeyman-type character. This is only speculation on my part, however, as I have been unable to discover any further information concerning either the head itself or the pantomime in which it appeared, but I did succeed in locating a second newspaper photo of it. Dating from the same period, but this time showing the head of a man inside the prop's gaping mouth and a woman standing alongside it, this second photo can be accessed here. I wonder if this eyecatching effigy still survives somewhere, stored away, perhaps, in the vaults of some theatre or stage props provider?

At any rate, we can all be reassured now by the comforting knowledge that somewhere deep within the cloud-shrouded Skull Island of make-believe movie-land, the real King Kong is still striding majestically through his stop-motion domain with his huge head held high, still firmly attached to his mighty neck and shoulders, whereas, tragically, the same cannot be said for John the Baptist's.

Speaking of Skull Island: be sure to click here to read my full review of the more recent King Kong-starring monster movie Kong: Skull Island in my film review blog, Shuker In MovieLand.

 
Me with a gargantuan statue of King Kong at Wookey Hole's Dinosaur Valley in Somerset, southwest England, on 29 August 2010 (© Dr Karl Shuker)


 

Saturday, 22 February 2025

PRESENTING THE PYRALLIS - BORN (AND BORNE) WITHIN THE FIERY FURNACES OF ANCIENT CYPRUS

 
Is this what the fire-sustained pyrallis is said to have looked like in ancient Cyprus? This is #1 of ten original pyrallis representations included by me in this article.

The classical mythology of ancient Greece is plentifully populated by all manner of famous legendary beasts – from centaurs, satyrs, gorgons, and Stymphalian birds to harpies, sirens, the minotaur, and much more. There are also some far less familiar but no less fascinating examples, including the diminutive but thought-provoking fusion of herpetology and entomology presented here now – namely, the pyrallis of ancient Cyprus.

Also known variously as the pyrausta, pyragones, or pyrotocon, the pyrallis derives all of its names from the Greek word 'pyr', which translates as 'fire', because it is intimately associated with this traditional fundamental element. According to traditional classical Greek legend, the pyrallis was a tiny incandescent beast resembling a winged, four-limbed, golden insect but in more recent times it is often represented with a scaly reptilian body and the head of a fire-breathing dragon too.

 
A 16th-Century woodcut engraving of a basic copper-smelting furnace like those in ancient Cyprus (public domain)

Moreover, not only was it born in but also spent its entire life flitting amongst the coruscating flames of copper-smelting furnaces in Cyprus, living amid these blazing domains in great swarms resembling gleaming showers of glowing sparks, borne upon the furnaces' billowing heat and smoke. Should any of these minute insectoids fly beyond the confines of their infernal abode for even a split-second, however, they would instantly turn to ash and die.

In that respect, the pyrallis, although entirely different in form and size, is reminiscent of another creature from Greek fable, the fire-inhabiting salamander, after which real-life salamanders are named (even though they certainly do not inhabit fire!).

 
Image of the fire-inhabiting mythical salamander, created by me using Magic Studio

Needless to say, it was long assumed that such a fanciful animal as the pyrallis was indeed entirely fabulous, with no basis in reality. However, as will now be revealed here, although attracting scant scientific attention even at the time of its original presentation in a published article, and nowadays, 75 years later, having been all but forgotten, there is one compelling line of speculation that seeks to identify this mythical mini-beast with a certain bona fide species, one whose own intimate association with fire may have genuinely inspired the pyrallis legend.

The earliest record relating unequivocally to the pyrallis as described by me above is a brief passage that can be found in Chapter 36 (not 42 as sometimes incorrectly claimed) of Book #11 from Naturalis Historia (The Natural History). This is the  encyclopaedic magnum opus produced by the eminent 1st-Century Roman scholar/naturalist Pliny the Elder (23/24 AD to 79 AD), which consists of 37 books contained within ten volumes.

 
Portrait engraving of Pliny The Elder (public domain)

In the 1855 English translation of Naturalis Historia prepared by Dr John Bostock, the relevant passage reads as follows:

That element [fire], also, which is so destructive to matter, produces certain animals; for in the copper-smelting furnaces of Cyprus, in the very midst of the fire, there is to be seen flying about a four-footed animal with wings, the size of a large fly: this creature is called the "pyrallis," and by some the "pyrausta." So long as it remains in the fire it will live, but if it comes out and flies a little distance from it, it will instantly die.

 
Pyrallis #2

True, it was not the first pyrallis mention. In his comprehensive work History of Animals, celebrated Greek scholar Aristotle (384-322 BC) stated that the turtle dove was at war with the pyrallis. However, he seemingly considered the latter creature to be merely some form of unspectacular bird, as this mention was contained within a paragraph devoted entirely to warfare between different types of familiar bird, such as the owl, crow, raven, kite, green woodpecker, gull, tern, and buzzard. Consequently, it would appear to have no relevance to the fire-sustaining insect-dragon under investigation by me here. (Indeed, various Aristotlean researchers have identified this avian pyrallis as a type of pigeon, the pygmy dove.)

Conversely, and also confusingly, elsewhere in his same work Aristotle described in some detail a creature that he did not name but which is evidently one and the same as the pyrallis that would be named and documented by Pliny three centuries later.

 
Aristotle bust, a marble, Roman copy after a Greek bronze original by Lysippos from 330 BC (public domain)

Here is Aristotle's account of his unnamed version:

Living animals are found in substances that are usually supposed to be incapable of putrefaction…In Cyprus, in places where copper-ore is smelted, with heaps of the ore piled on day after day, an animal is engendered in the fire, somewhat larger than a blue bottle fly, furnished with wings, which can hop or crawl through the fire. And…perish when you keep the one away from the fire…Now the salamander is a clear case in point, to show us that animals do actually exist that fire cannot destroy; for this creature, so the story goes, not only walks through the fire but puts it out in doing so…Such is the mode of generation of the insects above enumerated.

 
Pyrallis #3

It is clear that this passage by Aristotle describing an unnamed blue bottle-sized fire-inhabiting creature was the primary source utilized by Pliny for his own version, in which said creature was referred to by him by name, as the pyrallis (or pyrocausta), and also that Aristotle deemed it to be some type of insect. Less clear, meanwhile, is why Aristotle applied that very same name, pyrallis, to an entirely different, wholly unrelated creature, a kind of bird. All very strange, and bewildering!

Anyway, one subsequent early work also documented the pyrallis, albeit not by that name. This work was Book 2 of De Natura Animalium, a 17-book collection of brief accounts and anecdotes concerning natural history, written by Roman author Aelian, aka Claudius Aelianus (c175-c235 AD), with a particular emphasis upon extraordinary or fabulous cases.

 
A vintage claimed likeness of Aelian (public domain)

Here is the short passage that he wrote about creatures that he termed fire-flies but which obviously referred to the pyrallis:

That living creatures should be born upon the mountains, in the air, and in the sea, is no great marvel [I'd beg to differ regarding creatures being born in the air!], since matter, food, and nature are the cause. But that there should spring from fire winged creatures which men call 'Fire-flies,' and that these should live and flourish in it, flying to and fro about it, is a startling fact. And what is more extraordinary, when these creatures stray outside the range of the heat to which they are accustomed and take in cold air, they at once perish. And why they should be born in the fire and die in the air others must explain.

 
Pyrallis #4

Notwithstanding Aelian's naming of them as fire-flies, these mythical entities' fire-generated, fire-inhabiting lifestyle sets them wholly apart from the real-life insects known to us today as fire-flies, which are bioluminescent lampyrid beetles, and also include the familiar glow-worms. For their only connection to fire is the fiery light that they emit. Perhaps, therefore, Alien had somehow conflated the legendary pyrallis with the genuine fire-flies and glow-worms.

Whatever the explanation for his nomenclatural confusion, however, Aelian certainly seemed to believe in the authenticity of the pyrallis, so might there be a real-life insect known to him that gave rise to this legendary mini-monster? Such a fascinating notion was put forward as a very plausible possibility in 1950 by Emile Janssens, via a fascinating yet little-known paper published in French by the scientific journal Latomus, in turn published by the Société d'Études Latines de Bruxelles, in Belgium.

 
A smoke fly, Microsania sp., greatly enlarged (public domain)

As Janssens noted in his paper, pyrophilic or pyrophilous (fire-loving) insects are far from unknown. Take, for example, the aptly-dubbed smoke flies of the genus Microsania, belonging to the taxonomic family Platypezidae, the flat-footed flies. Just a few millimeters long at most, typically hump-backed in appearance, and of global distribution, these diminutive dipterans seem to appear from nowhere wherever there is a fire and smoke, and swarm amidst the fire like motes of black ash, then vanish as swiftly as they appeared once the fire dies and the smoke dissipates.

Their attraction to fire was first scientifically recorded by Belgian entomologist G. Severin via a 1921 paper, in which he revealed how, after having sought in vain for any Microsania specimens for 20 years within a particular area of Belgium, he unexpectedly observed numerous individuals dancing in swarms amidst the smoke generated by a heath fire in that very same locality, but that was not all. Not one specimen could be found more than a few feet (1 m) beyond the perimeter of the fire and its smoke; and once the fire had ceased and its embers had cooled, every last fly disappeared, not a single one remaining in the area.

 
The common blue bottle fly Calliphora vomitoria (© Shiv's fotografia/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 4.0 licence)

This scenario bears much more than a passing resemblance to that of the pyrallis legend, as Janssens commented in his paper. Nevertheless, he dismissed these flies as the likely identity for the latter entity on account of how tiny they are, in stark contrast to the classical writers quoted by me earlier here all stating that the pyrallis was the size of a large blue bottle fly, i.e. Calliphora vomitoria, a very familiar species of blow fly, which measures 1-1.5 cm long and is therefore considerably bigger than a Microsania fly.

Although far from unknown as noted earlier, out of the more than 1 million insect species currently described by science (and with countless more still awaiting description) only around 50-60 of them are pyrophilic. Of these, moreover, the vast majority are beetles, plus ten dipterans (true flies), eight hemipteran bugs, one wasp, and one moth. Two of the best-known pyrophilic beetles are a pair of European carabid (ground beetle) species – Sericoda quadripunctata (attracted to severe burning outbreaks) and Pterostichus quadrifoleolatus (to weak burnings).

 
Sericoda quadripunctata, a European species of pyrophilic carabid (ground beetle) (©Yves Bousquet/Wikipedia – CC BY 3.0 licence)

By far the most famous and best-studied pyrophilic beetle species, however, and which was favoured above all other real-life creatures by Janssens as the identity of (or at least the inspiration for) the pyrallis, is a certain European species of buprestid wood-boring beetle. Despite its sombre black colouration, Melanophila acuminata is colloquially known as the fire beetle or fire bug, due to its decidedly fiery lifestyle, in every sense.

For just like the smoke flies, this insect species is irresistibly drawn to fire (hence yet another name for it, the fire-chaser beetle) – so much so that whenever there is a forest fire and all other creatures are fleeing away from it, these beetles are seen fleeing towards it! Indeed, rural fire fighters are often greatly hindered by large swarms of them while trying to extinguish such blazes, to the extent that they often have to wear special beekeeper attire in order to prevent these beetles from penetrating their clothes and biting them!

 
An adult fire beetle Melanophila acuminata (© AG Prof. Schmitz/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 2.5 licence)

Several studies of this bizarre beetle, which is approximately 1 cm long, the size of a blue bottle fly, have uncovered the reason for its obsession with fire and the various anatomical accessories that it has evolved to assist it in locating conflagrations. As is so often true in so many disparate walks of life, it all has its basis in sex!

The fire beetle has evolved to copulate specifically upon the still-burning wood of newly-scorched trees, especially conifers, and to lay its eggs beneath the charred bark of such trees, which then serves as food for this beetle's white maggot-like larvae once hatched. Even its feet have evolved an asbestos-like resistance to high temperatures that enables it to scuttle around unharmed on smoldering wood and sizzling embers too hot for a human hand to dare touch.

 
Melanophila acuminata larva on Pinus sylvestris, the Scots pine (© Gilles San Martin/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 2.0 licence)

But how do fire beetles sense the presence of a fire? Examinations of their micro-anatomy have revealed that just like certain heat-sensing snakes such as pit vipers and rattlesnakes, these beetles possess a pair of thermal infra-red receptors, resembling tiny pits. These sensory organs are present on their thorax's undersurface, each containing a small water droplet that expands when heat is detected, triggering a nervous system response to follow the heat source.

They are extraordinarily sensitive to heat, enabling the beetles to home in on a fire from very considerable distances. In fact, one study whose results were published in 2012 estimated via the use of modeling that this particular species could detect a fire from as far away as 80 miles (roughly 130 km)!

 
Pyrallis #5

In addition, there are olfactory organs on the antennae of this species that some researchers believe may detect smoke and thereby further assist it in its fire-sensing needs. No doubt such organs explain instances in which these insects have been known to swarm en masse at American football stadiums during a game, lured there by the thick haze of tobacco smoke resulting from the game's numerous smoking spectators.

Bearing in mind, however, as I've revealed earlier here, that the fire beetle is not the only known European species of pyrophilic beetle, why did Janssens favour it above all of the others as a possible explanation for the pyrallis legend?

 
Pyrallis #6

After referring briefly to one of those others, here is what he stated in his paper:

But there is better. We know, thanks to the English entomologist W[illiam]. E. Sharp, the extraordinary habits of a Buprestid beetle which flies with the vivacity of a fly and which has the size required by the indications of ancient authors. It is Melanophila acuminata.

 
Pyrallis #7

He then quoted a very pertinent excerpt concerning Sharp that had appeared in a 1934 scientific account written by fellow entomologist A. Collart and published in the Société Entomologiquede Belgique's Bulletin. Knowing that this species could be found on charred pine tree trunks, Sharp had set about seeking specimens of it in a Berkshire pine forest where a fire had recently broken out. As documented by Collart:

It was only after a long search that a single specimen of Melanophila was caught on a charred stump of Pine; this was a meagre harvest, when, guided by a distant smoke, Mr. Sharp and the friend who accompanied him arrived at a place where the fire was still active. Immediately several specimens of Melanophila were captured; some were running on ground too hot for the hand to be able to rest on it. Others were installed, often in copula on burning pine stumps or, under a bright August sun, flew through puffs of acrid smoke released by the burning peat; and, grilled by the peaty materials on fire, blinded by a suffocating smoke, the two researchers made a painful but very fruitful hunt for the Melanophila!

 
Pyrallis #8

As Janssens judiciously pointed out, the above description certainly parallels that of Aelian (as well as Pliny's and Aristotle's) for the pyrallis. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that the fuel used in the copper ore furnaces of Cyprus long ago consisted mainly of resinous pine wood.

And whereas fire beetles do not actually die when they eventually depart from the fire and smoke that initially attracted them, they do disappear back into their rural surroundings with extraordinary rapidity, plus their dark colouration makes them difficult to observe when no longer illuminated by the bright glow of a fire. So again it is not unreasonable to assume that ancient Cypriot observers assumed that they had simply turned to ash and died.

 
Pyrallis #9

Consequently, I certainly feel that Janssens's proposal that the pyrallis myth was inspired by sightings of fire beetles swarming and flying amidst the burning, smoking pine wood fuel in copper ore furnaces to be a tenable one, and it is a great shame that it did not receive the scientific attention and further investigation that it so richly deserved.

NB – All pyrallis illustrations included here were created by me using Magic Studio, and represent this legendary beast in a variety of different forms, including insect-headed, dragon-headed, four-limbed, and six-limbed, all of which are descriptions that have been attributed to it by various authors down through the ages.

 
Pyrallis #10