The Mysterious Mermaids of Buckland & Barnum

n

n                    In August 1858, Professor Richard Owen wrote to Frank Buckland asking him to examine a specimen of a mermaid andnto report his findings back to him. Buckland was delighted at this request fromnsuch an eminent scientist and duly made his way to the back parlour of thenWhite Hart in Spitalfields, London where he found, displayed in a glass case onna deal board, the figure of a merman (rather than a mermaid). The cooperativenlandlady removed the glass case and Buckland began his examination – thencreature was about three or four feet in length, and was composed of the head,narms and trunk of a monkey sewn onto what Buckland suspected was a common haken(“Such a thing as a merman or mermaid of course never really existed,” wrotenthe perspicacious naturalist). 

n

nThe head, with its parchment-like ears, snubnnose and ghastly grin – the teeth of the hake had been transferred to thenmonkey’s jaw, together with one human incisor and a gap for another -nparticularly impressed him. The head had once been covered in hair, butnsouvenir hunters had plucked this wig almost bare, and the eyes were circles ofnleather with the pupils added in black paint. The overall impression, wrotenBuckland, was  “…of a disagreeablenold man, who was trying not to laugh.” The thing was cleverly donenand neatly sewn, and it was likely that it had been made to be seen mountednupright. The current owners had bought it at the sale of old furniturenbelonging to an old Mr Ellis, who had bought and sold goods for the East IndianCompany, “…but whether he bought and sold tea, silk, or mermaids, I couldnnot ascertain.”  

n

n

nOn further investigation, Buckland learned that the mermannhad been ‘London-made’ by a local taxidermist, and was one of a pair, so he setnoff to track down the merman’s ‘wife’. In a curiosity shop to the west ofnHungerford market, he found a glass dome containing the mermaid – half the sizenof the merman and nowhere near as well made – she had doll’s glass eyes, nonteeth and a bullet-shaped head. The owner thought that she had come from America,nand had once been exhibited at the Egyptian Hall. The rumour was that twonItalian brothers had bought her for $40,000 and one brother had tried tonprevent the other from putting the mermaid on public display, which resulted inna protracted legal dispute. In 1866, Buckland received news of another mermaidnthat belonged to Captain Cuming R.N., who had brought it back with him fromnYokohama. There was a flourishing cottage industry in Japan producing mermaidsnfor the tourist trade, and the Japanese made mermaids for the Buddhist cult ofnthe Ningyo Shinko, wherein mummified mermaids were venerated. Describing thisnmermaid, Buckland wrote, 

n

n

nBuckland went on to write about Phineas T Barnum’s Feegee Mermaid, maybenthe most famous of all the mermaids. In 1842, Mr Moses Kimball brought thenmermaid to Barnum, and the two entered into an agreement whereby Kimballnretained ownership but Barnum paid $12.50 a week for the lease. Barnum had tennthousand advertising leaflets printed and distributed in New York, and had anpainting done of three beautiful mermaidens, disporting themselves in the wavesnwhilst onlookers observed them from a nearby boat. Buckland notes that Barnum’sndisplay earned him the magnificent sum of eight hundred and sixty-eight dollarsnin the first four weeks. 

n

n

nBuckland wonders what Barnum might have done with hisn‘Nondescript’ – a specimen he bought from a Mr Wareham of Leicester Square, andnwhich he describes thus: – “The Nondescript is about as big as a baby threenmonths old, and. as a crusty bachelor friend of mine once said, “nreally very much like one.”” The Nondescript was a variant of the mermaidn– made from animal parts, wood and papier-mâché – most probably made in Japan,nand was promoted as a sea-devil which had been caught in the nets of anfisherman. 

n

n

nIt was roughly human-like, with demonic hands and feet, scrawny armsnand legs, and formidable claws. Its head was about as big as an apple, withneyes like a codfish, fierce fangs, and topped off with a shock of woolly hair “…anpoliceman would be justified in taking him up on suspicion alone.” Bucklandnadds with a tongue in his cheek that he was ‘rather offended’ whennfriends and visitors came to see his private collection and their attention wasndiverted by the sight of his Nondescript, rather than his other exhibits whichnwere, in his opinion, more interesting or more valuable.

n

n