Material Object
Folio XII of the Nuremberg Chronicle (Figure 1) stands out for its images of unusual people. Most relevant to our conversation are the top two images. The left image seems to depict a person with a dog head, which is reminiscent of the bisclavret. The right image depicts a person without a nose, which mirrors the bisclavret’s wife and her daughters. Both of these people are gesturing and sitting in such a way that makes it look like they are taking part in a civilized discussion. They are also wearing clothes, further adding to their humanity. Interestingly however, despite the clean linework in the image, their clothes, among other things, are not quite coloured inside the lines. While this is likely a limitation of the process or a mistake, it makes it seem like they perhaps shouldn’t be wearing clothes like people. There is a similar issue with the dog-headed person’s tongue, which would presumably be used if he were speaking like a person.
Further, most of the figures in the folio are sitting outside in the wild. Perhaps this is meant to compare them to animals who roam outside. Most of them also look miserable, perhaps uncomfortable in this unholy state between being human and beast.
This folio comes from the Nuremberg Chronicle. This book was created in Germany around 1490. It is meant to be a universal history, detailing the story of man starting in the Old Testament of the Bible [8]. It also mentions sightings of strange people.
This includes “people with the heads of dogs, who bark when they speak. They sustain themselves by catching birds and clothe themselves in the skins of animals […] there are also people without noses, their faces flat” [9, folio XII recto]. Despite their form, these beings are called people. The fact that they talk and clothe themselves shows their humanity. And yet, the fantastical elements, such as the barking, as well as their appearance, separate them from man. Such is the pattern in the text, it humanizes, then dehumanizes these people, keeping them in a state of limbo. In one sentence, they are “miraculous people”, then in the next, they are “miraculous creatures” [9, folio XI verso]. Ironically, the dog-headed people were likely monkeys mistaken for people [9, footnote 7].
Despite this folio being created in the early modern period, they reference writings as far back as those of Augustine of Hippo [9, folio XII recto] who lived from 354 to 430 AD [10, p.55]. Although Augustine was skeptical of the existence of these strange people, he notes that “anyone born anywhere as a human, that is as a rational mortal creature, however unusual their bodily form […] appears to our notions, no one of faith may have a doubt that they derive their origin from that single progenitor” [10, pp.55-56]. That is, they still descend from Adam and are therefore human, despite their bodily form.
The image in Figure 2 depicts a scene from the Topographia Hibernica, where a priest runs into a pair of werewolves [11]. The she-wolf wished to partake in communion before her death, as she was sick. Despite their form, the priest recognized the humanity and devoutness of these werewolves and granted the she-wolf her wish [12, p.21]. Again, the idea of monstrosity being unrelated to form is on full display. After all, communion is for people, not wolves or monsters. Even in the image, the wolves are shown standing on two legs like humans.
Interestingly, some argue that this story was meant to dehumanize Irish people [12, p.21]. If this is the case, this may suggest that it is not the werewolves of fiction who are monstrous, but the real people who monstrously dehumanize others.
Across the North Sea from the previous artifact, a German illustration (Figure 3) can be found depicting an opposite type of werewolf [13]. The monster in the image has the appearance of a human being, and yet he is monstrous. He dehumanizes his victims in an extreme way, by viewing them as food rather than people. Despite his human form, he behaves as described in the opening lines of Bisclavret, being “a savage beast; \ [who] in his blood-rage, [makes] a feast \ of men, devours them, [and] does great harms” [1, lines 9-11].