Morten St George Theory

[-JKP-]

...The animal depicted on page 80v shows no signs of having a very long tail and consequently is far more likely to be an armadillo than a pangolin....

That statement doesn't hold water in the context of medieval critter drawings. Someone else will say: "An armadillo has plates and a pangolin has scales, so it's much more likely to be a pangolin" and another person will come along and say it's a bumpy-wooled ram (there are bumpy-wool varieties of sheep), so it's more likely to be a ram than a pangolin or armadillo".


I've already linked my blog on how medieval illustrators drew animals, but in case you didn't read it, here it is again.

You really should look at the pictures before you interpret the "pangolin/armadillo/sheep/aardvark" critter too literally:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


There are also threads on this forum investigating the little dragony critter that's nibbling or smelling a leaf. There's no agreement at all on either this critter or the "pangolin" critter even after very capable researchers spent months collecting medieval drawings and discussing them.