Guy Shares Examples Of Medieval Painters’ Attempts To Paint Animals Without Having Seen Them, And It’s Hilarious (17 Pics)
InterviewMedieval art is a treasure trove of weirdness. And we’re not the only ones to think so. Daniel Holland created a Twitter thread about medieval animals in paintings that look nothing like real animals because the artist hadn’t actually seen them. The thread went viral and loads of people are now experiencing the joys of drawings in bestiaries based on hearsay, unbridled imagination, and interesting stylistic choices.
Upvote your fave peculiar medieval beats, dear Pandas, and let us know which illustrations you loved the most and why. When you’re done enjoying these paintings, check out our posts about unexpected and creative medieval art right here, here, and here.
Daniel told Bored Panda that he was inspired to create the thread after seeing a segment in the TV show ‘Horrible Histories’ about inaccurate medieval art. This got him thinking what other examples were out there. Daniel was pleasantly surprised by the amount of attention the pictures got. Read on for the rest of his insights.
More info: Twitter | Instagram | DannyDutch.com
This post may include affiliate links.
How can he have never seen a snail? His name is Dutch or Flemish, i.e. rain.
While it’s easy to scoff at artists for not knowing how crocodiles, elephants, and tigers look, imagine having to draw them from memory. Better yet, try describing the animal to someone else and have them draw it! Or imagine how well we’d do if we had to draw an alien species when we only had overexaggerated tales from adventurers to go by.
However, there might be other reasons why medieval artists drew animals this way and it might not just be because of bad descriptions—it could have been a stylistic decision.
“I’ve been educated by a lot of replies I’ve had that these pictures were often painted in this style for a myriad of reasons, not necessarily because of poor descriptions received by the artists,” Daniel pointed out. “I’d assume if artists were given descriptions today without seeing animals and asked to paint them the only difference would be technical ability and materials used, they’d likely look just as inaccurate.”
Bored Panda previously spoke about medieval illustrations with Dr. Catherine Harding from the University of Victoria and Professor Claire LaBrecque from the University of Winnipeg. According to them, medieval scribes and artists enjoyed creating rich and deep networks of meaning for their audiences with their paintings, sometimes with hidden meanings for their audiences to puzzle out. Also, they weren’t strangers to playfulness in their art.
How long each illustration took varied wildly depending on a lot of factors: from the size of the book to how complex the drawings were. Simple pen-and-wash illustrations could be done in minutes while more serious drawings required gold and precious pigments.
Owls are nocturnal, so it is not that easy to spot them and it must be very hard to see any details in dark.
Load More Replies...How many other birds have eyes that face the front? The owl is the only one I can think of.
What are they trying to convey? That the owl was bullied by all other birds?
Well, there are much better drawn owls and by 14th century you can even distinguish between species, provided the artist was good. Few people could afford services of such a person, yet books were as wide-spread as possible for something as complex as a handwritten book. My guess (I am a medievalist, but not an art historian) is that the weirdness occurred on upper end of the mid-price range - one could afford a big book, but only a dodgy artist.
“We have all these stereotyped ideas about how religious medieval people were. But the research shows over and over again how creative, playful and resilient they were,” Dr. Harding told Bored Panda. “There is strong evidence for people who thought outside of the box as in the case of a medieval heretic, who created their own mental world that runs counter to the culture. I love their mental agility and their passion for questioning. They made medieval Christianity over and over again in so many ways. That is the creative part.”
Professor LaBrecque said that, in her opinion, we’re living in a world that’s strange but not stranger than it was in medieval times. “It was just different, and unexpected, and super creative.”
This is not a beaver, it's a weaselfish. Trust me, they do not make good pets.
"And his balls, man... his balls were big!" - "And you say he was wearing a trenchcoat?" - "Yeah, totally."
I remember from my history class that much of this was created with word of mouth. The artists were never near any of these creatures and only heard stories (usually second or third hand) of them.
Yes because it was uneasy to travel and nearly impossible to travel far enough to get a chance to see most of these animals in wild.
Load More Replies...I have 2 books with pictures like this. One is full with birds that look like they are drawn by someone on crack.
Would you give the names of the books, please? I would like to check them out, they sound like fun. :D
Load More Replies...I wonder if some were intended to be something other than what we think, ex. Snails could've been pangolins or armadillos, an animal that curls up like a snail
These are creatures that never got accepted to bring into life by god. 😂
This is one of the most stupidest thing I've ever come across. These painting are not "hilarious attempts" but rather extremely well-done art from the Middle Ages. It's got nothing to do with what the obviously mentally disabled authors of this post frame it as. Anyone who has any perception of art would know that there's a genuine, intelligent and very interesting background to all of these paintings. What, you look at these ones and frown and laugh, but Damien Hirst can go on with his a*s-laden diamond art? Gee, you guys have no f*ing clue.
I'ma give them full props for doing the best they could with just people's descriptions. They didn't have photography, much less Google, and just had to go by how people described the beasts. Can you imagine trying to draw something you'd never seen before, completely outside the realm of your experience, based on someone telling you what it looked like? You'd draw on what you already knew (pun partially intended), and just do the best you could. Silly to make fun of them.
I've heard that people in medieval times knew to draw cats but intentionally drew them ugly. Cats were worshipped in majority of religions as gods and thus Christianity demonised cats in order to over power them with their only true God? Or something along those lines...
I remember from my history class that much of this was created with word of mouth. The artists were never near any of these creatures and only heard stories (usually second or third hand) of them.
Yes because it was uneasy to travel and nearly impossible to travel far enough to get a chance to see most of these animals in wild.
Load More Replies...I have 2 books with pictures like this. One is full with birds that look like they are drawn by someone on crack.
Would you give the names of the books, please? I would like to check them out, they sound like fun. :D
Load More Replies...I wonder if some were intended to be something other than what we think, ex. Snails could've been pangolins or armadillos, an animal that curls up like a snail
These are creatures that never got accepted to bring into life by god. 😂
This is one of the most stupidest thing I've ever come across. These painting are not "hilarious attempts" but rather extremely well-done art from the Middle Ages. It's got nothing to do with what the obviously mentally disabled authors of this post frame it as. Anyone who has any perception of art would know that there's a genuine, intelligent and very interesting background to all of these paintings. What, you look at these ones and frown and laugh, but Damien Hirst can go on with his a*s-laden diamond art? Gee, you guys have no f*ing clue.
I'ma give them full props for doing the best they could with just people's descriptions. They didn't have photography, much less Google, and just had to go by how people described the beasts. Can you imagine trying to draw something you'd never seen before, completely outside the realm of your experience, based on someone telling you what it looked like? You'd draw on what you already knew (pun partially intended), and just do the best you could. Silly to make fun of them.
I've heard that people in medieval times knew to draw cats but intentionally drew them ugly. Cats were worshipped in majority of religions as gods and thus Christianity demonised cats in order to over power them with their only true God? Or something along those lines...