Abstract
The habitat of the four extant hyena species covers all of Africa and large parts of Asia. Hyenas living in this enormous area have been described by local and western observers for more than 2000 years. Many names have been given to the hyenas in the wide range of languages in which they have been described and several legends and wrong ideas about hyenas have also been spread.
In the present study we want to retrace how the wrong perceptions about the hyena, the “histoires absurdes” as Comte de Buffon has called them, developed and how they were overcome by several scholars in a protracted process. Due to their research work we know today that the mysterious animal “hyaena” comprises four species which together build up the Hyaenidae family. We will start by introducing these species shortly (chap. 2).
Thereafter we return to the beginning of the hyena history and outline the classical Greco-Roman reports on the hyena and how until the Renaissance and beyond these modelled the occidental perceptions of this animal (chap. 3). Then we examine how the single members of the Hyaenidae family were discovered, described and named by later naturalists and zoologists. In chronological order these were the striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena), the spotted hyena (Crocuta crocuta), the brown hyena (Parahyaena brunnea) and finally the aardwolf (Proteles cristatus) (chap. 4 and 5).
Special attention is paid to the first zoological description of the striped hyena by the traveller and naturalist Engelbert Kaempfer from the end of the 17th century. The value of this widely unknown report lies in the fact that it actually made the breakthrough to overcome the confused and puzzling ideas about the hyena which had prevailed up to that time (chap. 4).
We conclude our survey with a chapter on “imaginary” hyenas in which we deal with animals that have been mistaken for real hyenas. In one of these cases the imagined hyena was apparently nothing but a fantasy creature, comprising nevertheless characteristic traits of two real hyena species (chap. 6).
The descriptions of the discovery, naming and localisation of the hyena species are followed by two appendices which contain extensive original source texts (some of which are available in translation for the first time) and pictorial material.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 The systematic status of the hyena today
3 Confusion – the hyena in the older zoological discourse
3.1 The zoological basics (Gesner, Aldrovandi)
3.2 Hyena descriptions from antiquity to Renaissance
4 Breakthrough – Engelbert Kaempfer’s report on the Persian hyena (1712)
4.1 The locality
4.2 The report
4.3 Linné’s adaption of Kaempfer’s report
5 Completion – The ascertainment of the entire Hyaenidae family
5.1 The protracted discovery of the spotted hyena (1681-1777)
5.2 C. P. Thunberg’s primary description of the brown hyena (1820)
5.3 The discovery and classification of the aardwolf (1783-1882)
6 Imaginary hyenas
6.1 Papio
6.2 Lupus marinus
Objectives and Topics
The study aims to retrace the protracted historical process of overcoming misconceptions and "histoires absurdes" regarding the hyena, ultimately clarifying the taxonomical structure of the Hyaenidae family and the origins of their scientific nomenclature.
- Evolution of historical perceptions and demonization of the hyena from antiquity to the Renaissance.
- The breakthrough in empirical zoological research through Engelbert Kaempfer’s reports.
- Taxonomic classification and the discovery of the four distinct hyena species.
- Linguistic analysis of the origins and semantic ambiguities behind hyena names.
- Critical evaluation of the influence of ancient authorities like Pliny the Elder on later naturalists.
Auszug aus dem Buch
The perception of the hyena
Gus Mills and Heribert Hofer have pointed out another aspect in their standard work on hyenas. According to them the four hyena species have often been confused because they have very similar or identical names in different languages. The authors then continue:
“There has been no systematic effort to assess whether such linguistic ambiguities influence people’s perception of and attitudes towards a species. Are differences in the behaviour and ecology of each species recognised, especially behaviours and activities likely to bring a predator into conflict with humans?”
The question posed by Mills and Hofer targets the hyena designations in the numerous languages spoken in Southwest Asia and Africa which they, Rookmaaker and Shortridge collected. A multitude of specialists would be necessary to answer the question, for a single person would hardly be able to achieve this. Our study tries to contribute to this answer by asking for the linguistic perception of the first European observers in Greek antiquity as well as those of the later colonists and naturalists in Africa. In concentrating on this linguistic perception, two aspects which are closely connected attract attention: first, newly discovered animals are usually named after well-known animals; and second, they are judged according to the alleged or real benefit or disadvantage for humans. To express it from a linguistic angle, the human attitude towards an animal is often predetermined by the way in which it is named (or renamed) – and vice versa.
Chapter Summaries
1 Introduction: Provides the historical context of hyena research, highlighting the confusion caused by ancient writers and outlining the study's goal to retrace the scientific breakthrough.
2 The systematic status of the hyena today: Details the classification of the four extant hyena species within the Hyaenidae family and their biological characteristics.
3 Confusion – the hyena in the older zoological discourse: Examines the legacy of classical antiquity, the impact of Renaissance naturalists like Gesner and Aldrovandi, and the flawed image of the hyena.
4 Breakthrough – Engelbert Kaempfer’s report on the Persian hyena (1712): Analyzes Kaempfer’s empirical observations in Persia as the turning point for modern, fact-based hyena research.
5 Completion – The ascertainment of the entire Hyaenidae family: Chronicles the chronological discovery and naming process of the spotted hyena, brown hyena, and aardwolf.
6 Imaginary hyenas: Discusses mythical creatures like Papio and Lupus marinus that were historically confused with real hyena species.
Keywords
Hyena, Hyaenidae, Zoology, Taxonomy, History of Science, Engelbert Kaempfer, Carl von Linné, Aristotle, Pliny the Elder, Historical Zoogeography, Persian hyena, Spotted hyena, Brown hyena, Aardwolf, Scientific Nomenclature
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this work?
The work documents the historical struggle to scientifically identify and classify the four species of the Hyaenidae family, moving from ancient folklore and misconceptions to modern zoological understanding.
Which historical periods are primarily examined?
The study covers a vast timeframe, starting from classical antiquity (Greek/Roman reports), through the Renaissance era, up to the 19th-century scientific consolidations.
What is the primary goal of the author?
The main goal is to demonstrate how inaccurate naming conventions and reliance on non-empirical authorities (like Pliny) delayed scientific clarity and to explain how this was eventually resolved through field observations.
Which scientific methodology is central to the text?
The author employs a comparative, philological, and historical approach, analyzing primary sources and original reports from early naturalists to highlight the shift towards empirical observation.
What topics dominate the main part of the book?
The main part focuses on the "breakthrough" reports by Engelbert Kaempfer, the gradual identification of specific species like the spotted and brown hyena, and the history of naming "imaginary" creatures as hyenas.
Which keywords define the research?
The research is defined by key terms such as Hyaenidae, taxonomy, history of science, empiricism, and the influence of early encyclopaedists.
What is the role of the 'Papio' in this research?
The 'Papio' serves as a classic example of linguistic ambiguity, showing how a term originally used to describe a hyena-like predator was mistakenly conflated with baboons by Renaissance naturalists.
Why are the source texts in the appendix significant?
The original source texts are crucial because they allow readers to trace the primary, often flawed, historical accounts and see firsthand how later researchers interpreted or misinterpreted their predecessors.
- Citation du texte
- Holger Funk (Auteur), 2010, Hyaena. On the naming and localisation of an enigmatic animal, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/155971
