The Book of Beasts: Being a Translation from a Latin Bestiary of the 12th Century

by T.H. White (Translator)

If a serpent swallows the spittle of a fasting man, it dies. Trees felled in the wrong season breed termites. If eels are drowned in wine, those who drink it get a loathing for liquor.
These and similar flights of fancy were articles of faith in the twelfth century — the era of the fascinating Latin prose bestiary translated in this volume. The translator is T. H. White, author of The Once and Future King and outstanding medievalist. Of The Book of Beasts, White writes: "No Latin prose bestiary has ever before been printed, even in Latin. This is the first and only English translation in print."
The bestiary was a bestseller in the Middle Ages, a kind of natural history cum-zoological survey that presumed to describe the animals of the world and to point out the human traits they exemplified. Combining the surprisingly accurate with the endearingly phantasmagorical, the bestiarists came up with a bewildering array of real and exotic creatures. The behavior or attributes of the animals often functioned as a metaphor for teaching religious, moral, and political precepts.
In addition to a multitude of real mammals, birds, reptiles, and fish, described here with varying degrees of zoological accuracy, the bestiarist introduces a swarm of fanciful denizens thought to haunt the Dark Ages: manticore, a creature with a man's face, a lion's body, and a ravenous appetite for human flesh; dragon or draco, the biggest serpent and the embodiment of the Devil; amphivia, a fish that could walk on land and swim in the sea; jaculus, a flying serpent; the familiar phoenix; the griffin; and other exotic fauna.Much of the charm of this edition lies in the copious footnotes compiled by T. H. White. With immense erudition, wit, grace, and a singular lack of condescension, the author illuminates literary, scientific, historical, linguistic, and other aspects of the bestiarist's catalog. He further enhances the volume with informative discussions of the history of the bestiary from its origins in remote oral traditions; through Herodotus, Pliny and Aristotle; during the medieval period and the Renaissance; and up to Sir Thomas Browne's Vulgar Errors (1646). Both amusing and amazing, The Book of Beasts is not only a rich survey of the proto-zoology on which much of our later science is based, but also a revealing, illustrated examination of how pre-scientific man perceived the earth's creatures.

Genres: Mythology, History, Nonfiction, Medieval, Classics, Reference, Folklore

296 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1125

About the author

Born in Bombay to English parents, Terence Hanbury White was educated at Cambridge and taught for some time at Stowe before deciding to write full-time. White moved to Ireland in 1939 as a conscientious objector to WWII, and lived out his years there. White is best known for his sequence of Arthurian novels, The Once and Future King, first published together in 1958.

Reviews

[Mike · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting literary translation of the ancient transcriptions of historical myth and facts about animals and beasts. Filled with notes in regard to Greek and Latin terminology relating to the descriptions and annotations to explain the derivative description of a real world species or how the myth of a beast might have developed. The book of beasts is not a story, nor is it a linear form of text but rather a compilation of information broken down into categories of a few chapters and Greek, Latin or English names of Animals and Beasts from reality and fiction. A great read for anyone interested in animals or creatures, as it provides a great deal of information that could lend itself to creativity in art or a good source of knowledge for literature.

[Douglas Summers-Stay · Rating 4 out of 5]

There is really only one Bestiary; everybody who wrote one copied liberally from everyone else. T.H. White's translation is accompanied by numerous footnotes and a long essay at the end. The footnotes often try to figure out what real animal the book could be referring to. The entry on the dragon, for instance, is clearly describing a boa constrictor in this version. The monk who wrote it clearly liked and identified with bees-- how they all did their jobs, and lived in little cells, and worked for the good if the community. If you've never read a bestiary, you really should at least once: otherwise you're missing a lot of allusions in Shakespeare and other literature from the 1200s though the 1800s. Every animal has its moral lesson. It's like zoology by way of Sunday School.

[Catherine Alber · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating and, since the field of zoology has come a long way since the 12th century, unintentionally funny, like this description of the hyena:
"This is an animal called the YENA, which is accustomed to live in the sepulchres of the dead and to devour their bodies. Its nature is that at one moment it is masculine and at another moment feminine, and hence it is a dirty brute" (White 31).

Or this one:
"There is an animal called an ELEPHANT, which has no desire to copulate" (24).

Enhanced by charmingly inaccurate illustrations from the original manuscript and White's humorous footnotes.

[Jack · Rating 5 out of 5]

I truly loved reading this and learning about 12th century mythology. It's very poignant to glimpse into a sort of primeval human mysticism and be perplexed by what one reads about. Along with the very real creatures such as panthers (although they preface the panther by stating its main natural enemy is a dragon) there are countless fabled creatures such as satyrs and manticores.

As I mentioned with the panther they also believed that some of the animals possessed rather unique traits such as the humble mouse who's liver 'gets bigger at full moon, just as certain seashores rise and fall under a waning moon'. Erroneously suggesting that the way the moon controls the tides, somehow also causes a deflation or expansion of the mouse's organ. Such concocted attributes which we certainly know today to be absolute fiction would've been popular debated topics between scholars during the 12th century.

One must also consider the contemporary context of the book. Writings like this would've most likely have been written by people who would've never seen such creatures. They would've subsequently sort of profiled them according to fantastical tales heard from faraway lands or gossiping travellers. However, it is within that sort of preemptive hyperbolic categorising that I find the book's most fascinating aspects. I would recommend this to anyone that wants to glean some light into late Middle age postulations.

[Stephen Simpson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Certainly interesting from an historical perspective ... particularly the bat-crap crazy and wholly inaccurate explanations/natural histories of the critters.

[LobsterQuadrille · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very interesting book to read for a number of reasons. Not only is it an interesting glimpse into the culture of the Middle Ages, but it can also be very entertaining to read about the bizarre things people believed about various animals all those centuries ago. There are even a few mythical animals featured. T.H. White enhances the experience with his insightful and often humorous footnotes, which not only provide extra information, but add a personal element as well. The original illustrations depicting the animals range from the faithfully rendered to the comically inaccurate(as in the case of the crocodile and the elephant), but all are quite elegant in their distinctly medieval style.

I think T.H. White's translation of the bestiary is an overlooked classic that deserves much more recognition than it seems to get. It was a very enjoyable read for me, and would probably be enjoyed by fans of classics, history buffs, and anyone interested in the strange and fantastical.

[Nilsson · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the better books I've read on magical beasts. I was thankful there was a mention of fire stones for once. Interesting to compare with my other books on fantastical creatures. I'm still comparing notes though, it's always so hard to find reliable sources.

[Susanna Paul]

This was picked for book group.
From the Appendix:
"A Bestiary is a serious work of natural history, and one of the bases upon which our own knowledge of biology is founded, however much we may have advanced since it was written.
"There is no particular author of a bestiary. It is a compilation, a kind of naturalist's scrapbook, which has grown with the additions of several hands. Its sources go back to the most distant past, to the Father of the Church, to Rome, to Greece, to Egypt, to mythology, ultimately to oral tradition which mush have been contemporary with the caves of Cromagnon. Its influence has extended throughout literature, and, as has been seen in the Notes, country people are still repeating some of its saws.
"The meaning of symbolism was so important to the medieval mind that St Augustine stated in so many words that it did not matter whether certain animals existed; what did matter was that they meant."

This Beastiary was quite humorous and bizarre, simple and quick to read. It is a curious look into the Medieval mind and how they viewed nature (everything has a meaning!). This is the type of text that Tolkien and Lewis would've been steeped in; also I saw bits that Rowling drew from directly.

[Samantha]

Took me way longer than I expected to read this one but it’s definitely one of those reads that needed to be for me.

Not sure I’ll read this front to back again but it will definitely be a great reference for looking at how different beasts can symbolically work in literature.

[Baal Of · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a peculiar book, due to the mix of mythology, misinformation, and moralizing. The author even spent a good deal of time shaking his finger at anyone who might dare criticize the lack of accuracy as being condescending, and justified the moralizing. That's all fine and good, I still found it annoying. However, the insights into the kinds of ideas people had about various creatures are interesting. White calls this a science book, but that seems a bit of a stretch, since it is more a collection of claims, and doesn't really provide any kind of theoretical framework. Worth reading from a historical perspective.

[Katherine Sas · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful peak into the medieval mind and imagination. This translation of 12th century Latin bestiary, providing first-hand exposure to one of the most fascinating literary genres of its age, combining biology, fantasy, mythology, and theology into one seamless whole. TH White's erudite and witty commentary, as ever, further elevates the whole thing.

[Michael McGrath · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have thoroghly enjoyed T.H. White's "The Once and Future King," "Mistress Masham's Repose," "The Goshawk" and even his out of print short collection "The Maharajah." White is the type of gifted writer that I come across less and less these days. He can lecture you about medieval topics from falconry to medieval bestiaries and you will never feel like you are being lectured. Rather seamlessly, he weaves his observation and anecdotal cross references from other literatures into his narratives and in this case, his wonderful translation of a 12th century Bestiary. He includes copious and fascinating footnotes that are as fascinating as the text itself and line drawn fascmilies out of the text itself. He preserved the medieval flavor and preachy flair to the work, making this a unique compendium on medieval religion and biology. The Bestiary's richness lies in that it draws from a fountain of Greek, Roman, Hebrew and Celtic creatures, real and imagined, and somehow expounds on their characteristics by relating them to the medieval faith.

Love this book and I recommend savoring it in small chunks, making it into a daily meditative habit. I think it also helped that at the time of my reading, i was also immersing myself on two other medieval themed books, Eco's "The Name of the Rose" and "The Medieval Mind of C.S. Lewis."

[Madison · Rating 3 out of 5]

You need to be fully prepared when going into this anthology that it is nonsensical and you will learn close to nothing. The only thing I learned was just how out of pocket some ideas were. This book will give you a big laugh, but really its only use now is to be a written landmark to how far science and taxonomy has come. The ideas in it are wholly representative of the time and religious influence.

If you don't want to read how an animal is either Jesus or the Devil, then skip this one. If you want to read that the beaver got its scientific name from castration, then give it a shot.

[LordSlaw · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a spectacular book. The translated bestiary itself is absolutely fascinating, providing many curious details about many strange and wonderful creatures, plus a moral lesson that can be drawn from the behaviors of each one. It's an intriguing glimpse into a 12th-Century mind. T.H. White's footnotes and appendix are scholarly, insightful, witty, and sympathetic, as much fun to read as the text he translated.

[Carolyn Page · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wonder what the middle-ages would make of a modern biology textbook? Witchcraft, most likely. This is a book of science, as far as they knew, with helpful hints and medicinal know-how. Nowadays, we'd be more likely to call THAT witchcraft!

[Tabitha Merritt · Rating 4 out of 5]

This translation of a 12th century book about beasts from that time and what they represented sheds lots of light on medieval literature and how they wrote symbolism into their animal choices. Super fascinating standalone, but also a great companion for tracking with any medieval literature.

[Suellen Rubira · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is an indispensable reading for those who try to understand the bestiary universe and the relationship between humans and nature.

[Aaron ! · Rating 5 out of 5]

I love this book so much.

[Document Of Books · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating look into the history of the Bestiary

[Vladimir Baydin · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great insight into how our ancestors see the world through mythical beasts.

[Molly Cooper Willis]

Genuinely laughed out loud at a couple of T.H. White’s footnotes

[Mark Harris · Rating 3 out of 5]

A translation of Ms. II.4.26 held the University Library, Cambridge, which is a 12th century prose beastiary written in Latin. A facsimile edition was printed in 1928, which White presumably used.

[Abbey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent. Humanity knew so many more interesting things before the 12th century.

I'm shelving this as both fiction and nonfiction because they tried so hard and got so little right.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Entertaining read

[Lulu]

Very early 13th century. The style of these drawings is linked to those in the Guthlac Roll c. 1175-1215 (or c. 1210-20) + the text is similar to a bestiary of c. 1170 (London, British Library, MS Add. 11283), which seems to be the earliest manuscript to have more or less the same order of texts.

CUL MS Ii.4.26 https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-II...

T.H. White was a Latinist and amateur zoologist whose rather free translation of CUL MS Ii.4.26 was first published in 1954. This was the first English translation of a bestiary and was for many years the only widely-accessible bestiary text in any language. In his appendix White went to great lengths to show that 'A Bestiary is a serious work of natural history, and is one of the bases upon which our own knowledge of biology is founded...' White was reacting to earlier patronising attitudes in his insistence that the bestiary was an impressive attempt at a biology text and not an amusing collection of moralisations. Indeed, White nearly omitted all of the religious or symbolic passages from his edition, initially viewing them with 'boredom,' but left them in because he was ultimately overcome by their 'charm.'S That he contemplated this emphasises his belief that the religious aspect of the bestiary was subservient to its function as natural history, although he did acknowledge the pervasive religious symbolism of the medieval world view.

[Laura · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is full of Medievil drawings of all animals and creaters they believed exsisted from A-Z. Unicorns, dragons, deer and dog. Need I go on? Yes, they also describe the animals quilities as they thought fit. Weirdos.

[Bryce · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Bestiary is a fascinating peek into the Medieval mind. The contents of this book represent how even the "learned" saw their world, and suggests the "logic" behind the thought of the pre-Rennaissance world.

[Igor · Rating 2 out of 5]

The way of thinking of the 12th century towards animal is needless to say completely outdated. It is interesting to know how they thought, but it is much more interesting because it made me ask myself if what we know today for truth or fact is really that.

[Sal · Rating 5 out of 5]

White brings out-- or just matches, himself-- the wackiness of the Middle Ages.

[Sarah Sammis · Rating 3 out of 5]

I remember reading this at UCLA but my book diary tells me that's not possible. I was already done with school by the time I read it.