Recently reading (an admittedly rather childish) hardback titled, Mysteries of the World, I came across a photograph of an Ancient coin, onto which was carved a multi-oared boat atop a strange depiction of a mer-horse, which had a detailed mane, frontal flippers and a distinctive fluked tail. Interestingly, the coin is shown in a subsection titled, "What did ancient civilisations know about the Earth?", and is captioned only with, "This ancient Phoenician silver coin shows a galley with its many rowers - and a seahorse". Had I a working scanner, I would upload this picture from the book for all here to see - although until such time I am afraid you will have to go on my rather poor description of it.

I was immediately stunned not only by the detail of the representation of the "seahorse" but by the realisation that is so closely resembles modern accounts of the North American/Canadian creature dubbed "Cadoborosaurus", or, in more famililiar nomenclature, "Caddy".

It struck me that perhaps Caddy is a remnant from a species or subspecies which was known to the ancients - and perhaps simply taken for granted (note that the creature in the coin is highly detailed, from the fins and mane to the fluked tail). Through examining various other accounts of "shaggy" sea serpents, and assessing the worth of older accounts of Nessie and her ilk, it occurred to me that there may be isolated populations of these strange creatures, individuals from which may periodically become trapped in inland lakes. It is worth nothing that for hundreds of years, Scottish "sea kelpies" were often described as "water-horses" - a name which resonates to this day; and comports quite nicely with the maned 'sea-horse' creature shown on the coin; a creature, furthermore, that is markedly larger than the galley under which it is shown. In addition, both sea serpents and lake monsters are commonly described as having horse or giraffe-like heads. I freely admit, however, that there are equally numerous accounts which do not indicate the creature shown on the coin, with only "Caddy" forming a near-exact match.

My basic theory, therefore, is that the seagoing ancients had a reasonably good knowledge of large, horse-like sea creatures. I also hypothesise that sparse populations of such creatures may have survived to the present day, known to the cryptozoological world as the "Cadborosaurus" breed of sea serpents. I would further suggest that it is rogue members of this type of creature that have been responsible for several lake monster sightings, becoming trapped as they do in inland areas. Naturally, this theory is only that, and fails to take into account fresh and seawater environments, breeding populations, or lack of fossil records. As such, do feel free to shoot me down in flames. All discussion, thoughts and opinions warmly welcomed.

Any good book on sea serpents contain many accounts of the maned water horse. There are actually two types depicted by the ancient, the type that is simply a horse with a fishtail is pure fantasy, but the type called a Ketos looks remarkably like a long necked reptile with clawed feet and wings. You can see a very good sculpture of one on the Augustus Peace monument in Rome. Even boat loads of scientists have seen what were clearly reptilian sea monsters with their own eyes. The Daedelus incident is a good example.

Yes, the ancients believed they were very real. and some were apparently dangerous to shipping according to some accounts. Early Christians of the classical world immediately identified the 'great fish' of the book of Jonah with their familiar 'sea dragon' the Ketos. In fact, besides the Augustus monument, in which Nereids ride on the monster's back, most ancient depictions of this creature are in the act of swallowing Jonah. Even Jesus calls the animal a Ketos/sea dragon instead of a 'big fish' according to the New Testament..

Many thanks for your reply.

The coin-image to which I refer does indeed show 'wings' as well as a dorsal fin - although I admit that I neglected to include these points in my original post, as they seem to repudiate the common image of the 'sea serpent'. Certainly, 'Caddy' (of which I am a firm believer) does not appear to have appendages other than the two frontal flippers, and I suspect that the 'wings' may be artistic embellishments or misrepresentations as to the purpose of other body parts. I am glad that you raised the issue of the Daedalus incident, which has always fascinated me. It is one of a select few accounts which I believe to be utterly without mainstream explanation. In short, the crew assuredly saw something unknown to science.

I am afraid that, once more, I confess myself no expert on biblical, classical or ancient accounts of mysterious creatures, and so cannot form any solid opinion on many of the fascinating points you have raised. However, I lift my hat to those more versed in such interesting and enigmatic mythology.

Nevertheless, I do maintain a stalwart belief that the ancients encountered sea-creatures unknown to us; and am enchanted by the possibility that there may be remnant populations of these animals (Caddy being a plausible candidate) which continue to elude an incredulous and cynical modern world.

whats the daedalus inncident?

Shamelessly purloined from the much-maligned Wikipedia :

HMS Daedalus was a nineteenth century warship of the Royal Navy.

She was launched as a fifth-rate frigate of 46 guns in 1826, reduced to 20 guns in 1840.

In August 1848, Captain McQuhae of the Daedalus and several of his officers and crew (en route to St Helena) saw a sea serpent which was subsequently reported (and debated) in the Times of London. The vessel sighted what they named as an enormous serpent between the Cape of Good Hope and St Helena. The Serpent was witnessed to have been swimming with four feet of its head above he water and they believed that there was another sixty feet of the creature in the sea. Captain McQuahoe also said that "[The creature] passed rapidly, but so close under our lee quarter, that had it been a man of my acquaintance I should have easily have recognised his features with the naked eye." According to seven members of the crew it remained in view for around twenty minutes. Another officer wrote that the creature was more of a lizard than a serpent.

When the Royal Naval Air Service, Training Establishment, Cranwell (now RAF Cranwell) was born, on 1 April 1918, the naval personnel were held on the books of HMS Daedalus, which by this time was just a hulk moored on the River Medway.


An account as compelling as the highly-detailed reports from respected witnesses such as Hans Egede and E. G. B. Meade-Waldo; two other sea-serpent accounts with rather unsatisfactory explanations.

Hmm ,credible reports from multiple eye-witnesses fascinating thank you

You're very welcome.

The problem with these theories, though, is that they never seem to take into account the propensity of human beings to simply make things up. Hundreds of years from now there will be a burning debate on whether or not a giant lizard indeed trashed Tokyo on several occasions. There will be the skeptic's camp, and of course the true believers. If any of us were still around, we'd be laughing our balls off.

While sailors around the world are famous for the telling of wild sea stories, things work a bit differently for naval officers. In a career where the slightest mistake, or impropriety can ruin one's career, the deliberate falsification of a naval log just to impress one's mates seems unlikely.

There are certainly a few things that will probably never be really explained, that goes without saying. However people will also always lie, even Naval officers. That's the thing that bugs me. Sure, the truth is out there, but there's also a lot of horsesh**.

Dude hundreds of years from now people will know what movies are unless theres some cataclysmic event and humanity reverts to the bronze age. In which case people will tell stories of the great lost super civilization and they will be accused of hogwash