MEDIEVAL MICKEY MOUSE

Evening Star, Issue 22030, 16 May 1935, Page 11

MEDIEVAL MICKEY MOUSE

PREDECESSORS OF THE MIDDLE AGES Perhaps in the year 2500 a.d. Mr Walt Disney’s “ Silly Symphonies ” will .shelter dustily in some museum, vault, half forgotten by all except professors of primitive photography. And then some inquisitive person, taking 30 minutes off from playing with his stratosphere roclket, will rediscover for himself the Little Pigs and the whiteboarded, red-coated gnomes, and smile as he speculates upon the quaint coloured animal drawings of 600 years ago. But that will really only he history repeating itself. To-day the inquisitive can also draw back the six centuries which divide the animal tales of to-day from those of early Britain. For in the British Museum, a little obscured by the publicity given to more famous manuscripts, are kept the fascinating animal picture books called the ‘ Bestiaries,’ which depict creatures real and imaginary, with sometimes a mixture of both. And each bright colour and every group of figures tell of a time of chain and mail and castle and moat. ' Here are blue camels, pink dogs, crimson alligators, wild men with cloven hoofs, dragons and unicorns, and almost every impossible beast of almost every. impossible colour, hunting and being hunted under skies of brilliant gold find purple. They are, in reality, the Mickey Mice of the Middle Ages. For, although the pictures in the Bestiaries arc not histories of animal character?,. there , is still a very real affinity between the old and The new. The Dark Ages had their own ideas upon the subject of Brer Babbit. The tales are mostly allegorical, for even in those days Big Bad Wolf, Esquire, was regularly coming to his much-deserved end. The real difference between these two sets of animal tales lies in the histories of the days in which they were told. The Little Pigs were bred in the atmosphere of the movie palace, Hollywood, the eight-hour day, and a rather tolerant attitude toward bandits. The unicorn and the magenta lions were products of a cruder, harsher, and more serious age, an age of bold, bad barons, of dungeons, of isolation and insularity, of “ witchcraft,” and wonders. Hence the Bestiaries unfold tales of a very different and much cruder type than most fairy tales wc know to-day. Sometimes, although the morals drawn from the tales may ho perfectly all right, the tales themselves could scarcely be told in drawing rooms today. But happily those remarks refer more to the sources from which the Bestiaries’ pictures were taken than to the pictures themselves. _ The manuscripts remain infinitely delightful, and atmis"lg’ TALE STILL FAMILIAR. One tale depicted is one with which Britain is very familiar even to-day—-the story of St. George and the Dragon. But many would be a little surprised at the drawing. St. George is standing upon his vanquished foe, but not by any means in the regulation manner. The dragon is upright and the knight is standing, not very securely, in the middle of his back. What is more, St. George is quite three times the size of the dragon, which resembles a sturdy dog of unpleasant features, with wings and a scaly tail. The other stories vary from those upholding the good, to those drawing a subtle lesson from what happens to the bad. For instance, one of the main features of almost every Bestiary book is the faithfulness of the dog. The animal is portrayed not as a domestic house dog, but as a loyal guardian, taking his master’s side in any argument. After the battle the combatants’ dogs are shown keeping guard of them. In one picture a dog is fighting a group of ruffians by whom his master is being attacked. In another a gentleman inside a castle is furtively setting bis dog on (supposedly) unwanted callers. The friendship and loyalty of horses is likewise .portrayed in one drawing. In this picture two knights are engaged in swordplay. Beside thorn their horses are also grappling, seeming to be intent on keeping each other from interfering in their masters’ cause. The other moral allegories are the result of a mixture of travellers’ tales, ancient folklore, and the Hebrew Scriptures. Many of the animals themselves result from mis-spellings and incorrectly read translations. One such animal whose story is unfolded is the ant lion. This animal was conjured up in the imagination through a misunderstanding of Job iv, 11:, “ The old lion porisheth for lack of prey.” The original Hebrew word for lion in this context was “myrmex,” a lion-like animal found only on the coast of Arabia. The first translators, apparently wishing to set down a special name for this animal to distinguish it from the ordinary Hon, rendered it as “ myrmekoleon.” But subsequently commentators who did not know the original name of the animal were at a loss to explain the compound. They decided that as “ myrmex ” in Greek meant “ an ant,” the “ myrmek-o-Icon ” of the early translators must infer to an “ ant lion.” Never having .seen such an animal, nor knowing the

reason for his perishing from hunger, they invented a circumstantial tale of mixed breeding, the animal having the fore part of a lion and the hind part of an ,ant. As the lion ate only meat, and the ant only herbs, the creature perished from inanition.” ENTERTAINING READING. This unhappy . version of ‘ Jack Sprat,’ whose wife, it will be remembered, could eat no Jean, is, however, by no means typical of the Bestiaries. The crow and the turtle dove were held up as models of virture, taking only one. consort during their lives. And the eagle kept healthy by sunbathing. Consequently, to the casual reader, the Bestiaries can be most entertaining. For he can draw his own conclusions from the pictures, in fact, in many cases he must. He will discover that the unicorn was a very singular beast. When chased it ran for shelter to the lap of a maiden, where it was safe from the hunter. So that when unicorns had to be caught they could only be decoyed. The unicorn, too, had something in common with our stories about the ostrich. He is depicted, when there is no maiden about, hiding, his head in the ground, so that—in his opinion—he cannot be seen by the hunter’s dogs. The tiger, too, was a wily animal in those days. When pursued it would, apparently, gaze into a mirror to avoid meeting the eye of the hunter and to be able to wiytch the latter’s movements without seeming interested, a manoeuvre which, according to the movies, is still practised by the creature known as a “ gold-digger.” _ But whether the tiger kept his mirror in a special side pocket is not disclosed in the picture books.

But the books do show that the fox was even then known as the epitome of cunning. Too lazy to run after or stalk birds, it would lie on its back as if it had been attacked by a hunter, and catch its winged prey when they came down to see if such good news were really true. Of the winged tribe perhaps the most interesting is the griffon, which, like the “ sulch,” is neither a beast hpr a bird. This monster was believed to be half lion, half eagle. It had the tail apd hind legs of a lion, but the wings, talons, and beak of the eagle. It was so powerful that it could easily carry off a wild boar in its talons. But the griffon was not the only creature which was not a bird and still had a nest. Lions, foxes, and bears are all shown keeping their young in nests. And there are several pictures showing them watching birds building nests before going oft to imitate them. CATCHING SNAKES. One illustration shows an interesting method of catching snakes which the quick of hand might try some day. In this picture a gentleman is shown returning from'the chase. He has managed to capture his snake by tying it in a knot. Another series of illustrations shows the whole “ inside ” story of Jonah and the whale. Not 11 inside ” from a physical point of view, but because the artist apparently bad a special interview with the fish, subsequently draw* ing a picture of the fish obligingly posing for its portrait. In this version of the story Jon all and his companions in a small fishing boat bring up an immense fish when hauling in the anchor after a storm has arisen. In* the added disturbance caused by the appearance of the fish Jonah falls overboard. He waves a cheery good-bye as ho disappears inside the fish. Subsequently he is safely deposited at his destination. Other stories and pictures tell of queerer creatures than whales. The dragon varies in attributes, ns well as in size. One is obviously the ancestor of Dr Doolittle’s famous “ Pushmcpullyu,” the two-headed animal given him when be was in Africa, and which, it is recorded, led an easy life because it could always speak with' its mouth full. For this dragon in the Bestiaries has the regulation “ Pushmopullyu ” appearance, a head.at both ends. In the picture the dragon actually appears to be in the process of pushmcpulling, for its two heads appear to be having an argument ns to which way the single pair of legs shall go. But besides this portrayal of imagination there is one picture which might

will be a “ still " from a Mickey Mouse production, 'it shows a cat chasing a dog. And if the pursuit continues until (lie year 2.300 no doubt the situation will still .maintain its humorous savour.