Stronsay Beast: 200 Year Update Promised
Posted by: Loren Coleman on September 4th, 2008
Dr. Geoff Swinney (below), Curator of Lower Vertebrates, Fish, Amphibians and Reptiles, National Museums of Scotland, examines the vertebrae of the Beast of Stronsay, from the carcass of the beast found on an Orkney island beach in 1808. Swinney, who is the resident cryptozoologist, in 1987, confirmed the vertebrae was from a basking shark, and not a Sea Serpent. Not everyone exactly agrees with him that it was merely a normal shark.
The Stronsay was described this way:
~ 55 feet long, as measured by three witnesses (one was a carpenter and the other two were farmers);
~ 4 feet wide and had a circumference of approximately 10 feet;
~ three pairs of ‘paws’ or ‘wings’;
~ skin that was smooth when stroked head to tail and rough when stroked tail to head;
~ fins were edged with bristles and it had a ‘mane’ of bristles all down its back;
~ bristles glowed in the dark when wet, and
~ stomach contents were red.
Dr. Yvonne Simpson
The BBC News is reporting the following:
Fresh clues have been found to help a scientist in her efforts to identify a mystery creature found on Orkney.
Geneticist Dr Yvonne Simpson has researched the Stronsay Beast and will reveal her latest discoveries at the Orkney International Science Festival.
The creature’s carcass, which some said was that of a basking shark, was found off Stronsay in 1808.
Dr Simpson has said the descriptions of its long neck were along the lines of those of the Loch Ness Monster.
Festival director Howie Firth said few tissue samples had survived, but through her studies the geneticist had found several other items recovered from the remains.
The festival opens on Thursday [September 4, 2008] and Dr Simpson will give her talk on Friday [September 5] - the 200th anniversary of the day the creature was found.
Last year, she gave a joint talk with Loch Ness expert Adrian Shine during the Highlands Science Festival.
The Stronsay Beast was first sighted in September 1808 on rocks at Rothiesholm Head, on the south east of the island, by a local fisherman.
Sworn testimonies
Various others saw the carcass and fragments of it are preserved at the Royal Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh.
Some people suggested it was a basking shark or a large unidentified shark.
Orcadian Dr Simpson, who has a degree in evolutionary, environmental and biomedical genetics from the University of St Andrews and a PhD in the field of DNA damage repair from Edinburgh’s pathology department, is fascinated by the stories.
Of her research comparing the two “monsters”, she told the BBC Scotland news website last year: “Based on an analysis of eye-witness descriptions, Nessie and the Stronsay Beast are both massive aquatic creatures.
“The drawings of the Stronsay Beast carcass are strikingly similar in shape and size to the popular image of Nessie.”
During her studies of the Orkney creature, Dr Simpson was impressed by the wealth of eye witness accounts and sworn testimonies given to justices of the peace.
The Stronsay Beast, above, a Long-Necked Sea Monster, was first sighted in September 1808, lying on rocks at Rothiesholm Head, in the southeast of Orkney island. See The Field Guide to Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents, and Other Mystery Denizens of the Deep, for context.
Random Posts
- Similar Phenomena:
This is an intriguing one, there are a few items that could possibly be explained by a dead, decaying basking shark, but the length, 3 sets of flippers, and the glowing bristles of hair aren’t easily explained away. I’ve heard of plankton glowing when wet, but seems like if it was out of the water for quite a while it would die and wouldn’t glow on the carcass if water was applied, but not sure about that one though. I have to wonder though if the creature had a head, or if one was just drawn? Because if they could save some of the vertebrae, they just as well could have saved the head if they knew that they might have found an unknown creature…
The vertebrae in the jar say shark.
Abnormal length? Post mortem damge to the body or mismeasurement.
3 sets of limbs? No, 2 sets of limbs & 1 set of claspers.
Glowing fibers? Luminescent bacteria.
Sorry but it was just a rotten shark.
lol busterggi, points in that direction, but I wonder what evidence leads this other doc to believe otherwise if she examined and ran DNA (or whatever) tests on the vertebrae? I read an article about the luminescent bacteria that showed a great pic of a decomposing basking shark, posed some good arguments. I just have to wonder at what point someone decided to draw in the little doggy head on their illustration? LOL. If it did indeed have such a head why wouldn’t that be in a jar as well? I guess one could argue that the head had become detatched from the rest of the carcass and washed away, thus for the need for the anatomical extrapolation in the illustration.
Interesting, but I agree with Basking Shark. Decomposition and the elements can do strange things to a body, but the vertebrae doesn’t seem to lie.
Sounds like Cadborosaurus to me.
Glowing fibers sound like something from the deep…
…something rarly seen.
Caddy!
just a old stinky shark, surprising how many of the wash up, but not other sharks….hmmm….
“The vertebrae in the jar say shark.”
I don’t know how someone can be so sure that the vertebrae in the jar say shark. They are as clear as a blobsquatch. In fact, if anything, they don’t look anything like the picture results from Googling ‘vertebra basking shark’ under Images.
Richard888 - maybe the photo above isn’t very clear but I’ve seen many other better ones. They are definately shark.
Today was the day…any updates?
IT may well be a basking shark…however, there is a strong history of people seeing what they want to see and that includes the scientific community. While we have one person saying it was indeed basking shark, I no more trust one perspective…it could just as easily have been a person looking at the vertebrae going into the lab thinking it was probably shark and finding it as shark.
My point? That those who do not believe in the possibility of sea cryptids are more likely not to see sea cryptids even if they come across their lab table…human beings being basically lazy are more than willing to toss something into a known category rather than do extra work to find out what something is that may be new but similar to something else….I know I’m stretching here, but in the early days of the 19th and 20th century there was not a lot of openmindedness for things like sea serpents and those who were open to the possibility were vastly out numbered.
Just as you can’t always trust the believer, you have to take the same grain of salt with the professed non-believer…as some of our skoftics are so fond of pointing out—people try to rationalize things and make mistakes or misinterpret things…the same can be applied to scientists who enter into an investigation with a pre-conceived idea about the world around them.
Perhaps it was an Oarfish they found? The drawing instantly made me think of one. They are extremely long, they have a red ‘mane’ along their back and they are not very well known because they only come to the surface when sick or dying. When sailors would see them come to the surface or they were found washed up on shore they could easily be called a sea serpent. Not everything in the description fits an Oarfish but perhaps that is what this mystery creature is?