Man-made

And yet, if we look closely, Androvandi’s description and presentation of the dragon tells us he was well aware of the true nature of this thing, and what it really was. And maybe you’ll know too, once you compare it to the image above.

Every single one of Adrovandi’s dragons was included, not just in his work on dragons and snakes, but in his book on fish and whales, De piscius et de cetis. Published posthumously in 1623. This might seem a bit unexpected at first: what’s the connection between dragons and fish and water creatures?

The explanation is simple and the description in the book itself is short but sweet. The reader is informed, via the text above the image, that what we are dealing with here is a “draco effictus ex raia”, or: a dragon made from a ray. So, a fish. But how did Aldrovandi know he was dealing with a fish? Was that general knowledge at the time?

Probably, but if it was it was only common knowledge among scholars, and it hadn’t been for that long. Aldrovandi was very well-read and corresponded with all the important natural history scholars of his time. He often referred to the work of his colleagues. When it came to dragons, and the unmasking of them as fake objects, two of them were especially important. First, French naturalist scholar Pierre Belon (1517-15-64), and second, Swiss scholar Conrad Gessner (1516-1565).