Portray of a griffin, a lion-raptor chimera, alongside the fossils of Protoceratops, a horned dinosaur. The latter are stated to have knowledgeable the lore and look of the previous, however our research means that there isn’t a compelling connection between dinosaurs and griffins. Credit score: Dr Mark WittonA new research refutes the idea that griffin myths had been impressed by Protoceratops dinosaur fossils, revealing inconsistencies within the geographical and historic proof and advocating for a return to conventional interpretations of those mythological creatures.A brand new research challenges the favored and widely-promoted declare that dinosaur fossils impressed the legend of the griffin, the mythological creature with the top and wings of a raptor chicken and the physique of a lion.The particular hyperlink between dinosaur fossils and griffin mythology was proposed over 30 years in the past in a sequence of papers and books written by folklorist Adrienne Mayor. These began with the 1989 Cryptozoology paper entitled ‘Paleocryptozoology: a name for collaboration between classicists and cryptozoologists’, and had been cemented within the seminal 2000 e-book ‘The First Fossil Hunters. The thought turned a staple of books, documentaries and museum displays.It means that an early horned dinosaur of Mongolia and China, Protoceratops, was found by historical nomads prospecting for gold in Central Asia. Tales of Protoceratops bones then traveled southwest on commerce routes to encourage, or not less than affect, tales and artwork of the griffin.Griffins are a number of the oldest mythological creatures, first showing in Egyptian and Center Jap artwork in the course of the 4th millennium BC, earlier than changing into common in historical Greece in the course of the eighth century BC.Protoceratops was a small (round 2 meters lengthy) dinosaur that lived in Mongolia and northern China in the course of the Cretaceous interval (75-71 million years in the past). They belong to the horned dinosaur group, making it a relative of Triceratops, though they really lack facial horns. Like griffins, Protoceratops stood on 4 legs, had beaks, and had frill-like extensions of their skulls that, it’s been argued, could possibly be interpreted as wings.Vital Reevaluation by ScientistsIn the primary detailed evaluation of the claims, research authors Dr Mark Witton and Richard Hing, paleontologists on the College of Portsmouth, re-evaluated historic fossil data, the distribution and nature of Protoceratops fossils, and classical sources linking the griffin with the Protoceratops, consulting with historians and archeologists to completely perceive the traditional, non-fossil primarily based view of griffin origins. In the end, they discovered that not one of the arguments withstood scrutiny.Concepts that Protoceratops could be found by nomads prospecting for gold, as an illustration, are unlikely when Protoceratops fossils happen a whole bunch of kilometers away from historical gold websites. Within the century since Protoceratops was found, no gold has been reported alongside them. It additionally appears uncertain that nomads would have seen a lot of Protoceratops skeletons, even when they prospected for gold the place their fossils happen.Comparisons between the skeleton of Protoceratops and historical griffin artwork. The griffins are all very clearly primarily based on huge cats, from their musculature and lengthy, versatile tails to the manes (indicated by coiled “hair” on the neck), and birds, and differ from Protoceratops in just about all measures of proportion and kind. Picture compiled from illustrations in Witton and Hing (2024). Credit score: Dr Mark Witton“There’s an assumption that dinosaur skeletons are found half-exposed, mendacity round nearly just like the stays of not too long ago deceased animals,” stated Dr Witton. “However usually talking, only a fraction of an eroding dinosaur skeleton will likely be seen to the bare eye, unnoticed to all aside from sharp-eyed fossil hunters.“That’s nearly actually how historical peoples wandering round Mongolia encountered Protoceratops. In the event that they wished to see extra, as they’d must in the event that they had been forming myths about these animals, they’d must extract the fossil from the encompassing rock. That’s no small activity, even with trendy instruments, glues, protecting wrapping, and preparatory methods. It appears extra possible that Protoceratops stays, by and huge, went unnoticed — if the gold prospectors had been even there to see them.”Different Explanations for Griffin ImagerySimilarly, the geographic unfold of griffin artwork by means of historical past doesn’t align with the situation of griffin lore starting with Central Asian fossils after which spreading west. There are additionally no unambiguous references to Protoceratops fossils in historical literature.Protoceratops is simply griffin-like in being a four-limbed animal with a beak. There aren’t any particulars in griffin artwork suggesting that their fossils had been referenced however, conversely, many griffins had been clearly composed from options of dwelling cats and birds.Dr Witton added: “Every thing about griffin origins is according to their conventional interpretation as imaginary beasts, simply as their look is totally defined by them being chimeras of massive cats and raptorial birds. Invoking a job for dinosaurs in griffin lore, particularly species from distant lands like Protoceratops, not solely introduces pointless complexity and inconsistencies to their origins, but in addition depends on interpretations and proposals that don’t face up to scrutiny.”The authors are eager to emphasize that there’s glorious proof of fossils being culturally necessary all through human historical past, and innumerable cases of fossils inspiring folklore around the globe, known as ‘geomyths’.Richard Hing stated: “It is very important distinguish between fossil folklore with a factual foundation — that’s, connections between fossils and fantasy evidenced by archaeological discoveries or compelling references in literature and art work — and speculated connections primarily based on instinct.“There’s nothing inherently unsuitable with the concept that historical peoples discovered dinosaur bones and included them into their mythology, however we have to root such proposals in realities of historical past, geography, and paleontology. In any other case, they’re simply hypothesis.”Dr Witton added: “Not all mythological creatures demand explanations by means of fossils. Among the hottest geomyths — Protoceratops and griffins, fossil elephants and cyclopes, and dragons and dinosaurs — don’t have any evidential foundation and are totally speculative. We promote these tales as a result of they’re thrilling and appear intuitively believable, however doing so ignores our rising data of fossil geomyths grounded actually and proof. These are simply as attention-grabbing as their conjectural counterparts, and doubtless deserve extra consideration than totally speculated geomythological situations.”Reference: “Did the horned dinosaur Protoceratops encourage the griffin?” by Mark P. Witton and Richard A. Hing, 19 June 2024, Interdisciplinary Science Critiques.DOI: 10.1177/03080188241255543