(Feb. 1st, 2010) One solution to the loss of biodiversity on Earth might be the creation of new life forms, at least on paper. Historically, mankind has invented all sorts of mythical creatures, but could these animals really have lived? A distinguished biology professor has now analysed the biology behind the myths. Jeremy Garwood reports on his findings.
Roger Wotton, Professor of Genetics, Evolution and Environment at University College London, has been fascinated by the variety of mythological creatures that mankind has invented and portrayed in art, religion and fiction. Several human creations share the power of flight, but just how good were their designers at imposing working flight models from Nature? In his article, “Angels, Putti, Dragons and fairies: believing the impossible” (Opticon1826 vol. 1-7), Wotton systematically approaches four groups of mythological animal with the trained eye of a comparative zoologist.
Angels
Closely resembling man, the angels are the most obviously religious in their origins. They appeared in Jewish texts that formed the Old Testament of the Bible, and passed on into Islam. As portrayed in paintings and films, angels appear to be humans with two large bird-like wings emerging from their upper backs. Angels even have sub-species – seraphim and cherubim, angels and archangels - but all appear to have large feathered bird wings. Well, says Wotton, if they have the wings of birds, they must presumably have a similar apparatus to activate the wings.
In birds, wing movement is brought about by the interplay of two muscles running from the wings across the chest to the breastbone – the pectoralis major (for downstrokes) and the supracoracoideus (pulling the wing back up). However, in addition, it should be noted that in birds, the wings are the forelimbs, whereas in angels, there are both arms and wings, requiring a whole new arrangement of muscles and attachment points. How are the wings attached to angels’ shoulders, and where are the powerful flight muscles attached? Also, in birds, there has been a reduction of body weight to facilitate flight – angels display no such weight reduction.
Okay, then, perhaps there has been a long-running misunderstanding – in fact, when people say that angels ‘fly’, could they be mistaking a gliding movement for flight? Here, Wotton lacks sufficient data to assess angel’s gliding capacities: “How are the angel wings folded, unfolded and held rigid?” More observations are required.
Putti – Cherubs and cupids
‘Putti’ (the plural of ‘putto’) fair little better. These rather chubby little children with tiny wings are often shown hovering above scenes of physical love in Renaissance paintings and sculpture. Obviously, with smaller wings, little sign of body weight reduction, and no pronounced musculature, their claims to flight are even less convincing than the angels.
Dragons
Perhaps dragons do better. At least they look like animals, albeit wild and ferocious ones. However, not all dragons are the same: “In Eastern culture, dragons are not winged and more closely resemble caterpillars with ornate heads.” Well, Western dragons have wings. Could they fly?
For a start, their wings have skin stretched out over a framework of digits, resembling pterosaurs and bats. Yet, we’re faced once more with the question of six limbs instead of four, because flying dragons are invariably portrayed with both forelimbs and wings. As for angels, this requires an entirely original arrangement of flight muscles and anchorage points, and the flight muscles would need to be huge to support such creatures. Although Wotton thinks it most unlikely that they could ever fly, he says they might be able to glide using a technique similar to flying squirrels, who have large skin flaps on either side of their outstretched body to slow descent and facilitate rapid forward movements in forests. However to glide, flying squirrels must first run up trees to gain height before leaping. Wotton shakes his head: “It is inconceivable that dragons show this behaviour.” What, not even small dragons?
Fairies
Not all fairies have wings but, those that do, have insect wings that resemble damselflies or butterflies. Now, insect wings are very different to those of birds and bats, principally because they derive from an exoskeleton. Insect wings are exoskeletal extensions from two thoracic segments, that have both legs and wings in flying insects. However, fairies appear to possess endoskeletons, so “how did fairies acquire such wings?”
Furthermore, insect flight machinery is more complex than for birds – damselfly wings are flapped by muscles inserted on the wing base and stretching across the thorax, “avoiding lungs and other vital organs.” Meanwhile the flapping of butterfly wings requires distortions of the exoskeleton of the thorax to trigger sudden releases of tension – a ‘click’ mechanism. Sadly, Wotton notes that: “The distortion of the thorax needed for flight in fairies with butterfly wings would be exceedingly uncomfortable.” Unless fairies have a different notion of comfort?
Dreams of Flight
Avoiding the question as to why man has been so bad at designing airworthy flying creatures, Wotton is more interested to know why mankind has such an affinity for flight in the first place. His main conclusion is that flying has been perceived as an almost mystical mechanism by which these mythical creatures can credibly pass between Earth and other worlds. At least, in creating animals, they showed an awareness of living Nature, albeit with gross physiological errors. Unfortunately, the modern industrial equivalent probably looks more like a spaceship.