At about 35 kilometers long, Loch Ness is the largest lake along the Great Glen, a geological
fault line that bisects Scotland. Of course it’s also known for its most infamous resident—the
Loch Ness monster. Nicknamed Nessie, the rumored creature is most often described with a small
head on a long, sinuous neck with a thick body, seal-like flippers, and a long tail.
It almost looks prehistoric.
Water-dwelling monsters have long been established in Scottish folklore. Scottish legends include
such water beasts as a giant, flesh-eating waterfowl (boobrie), the shape-shifting water
horse (kelpie), and the nine-eyed eel (buarach-bhaoi), but there are no folklore or literary records
that make mention of any of these monsters exclusively inhabiting Loch Ness—until Nessie
Who doesn’t want to believe that there is some yet undiscovered species that’s been
hiding away for all these years, or better yet, a living dinosaur?
Understanding the legend of the Loch Ness monster requires looking into hundreds of
years of lake reports, elaborate hoaxes, the life of a saint, and… King Kong?
[Monstrum intro.]
It’s worth noting that the actual Loch Ness in the Scottish Highlands is an ideal atmosphere
for monsters. Created from long-gone glaciers the lake is deep and murky--making it hard
to see anything clearly. Fog and rain are common, further obscuring views of the lake.
It’s beautiful, and mysterious.
Maybe that’s part of the reason why explanations of the creature varied dramatically over time.
A lot of theories try to explain the Loch Ness Monster. A lot. Possible explanations
include—I better take a deep breath for this—swans, geological activity that shifts
the water’s surface, odd boat wakes, giant catfish, giant sturgeon fish, some kind of
giant mammal relative to seals, sharks, whales, a dinosaur, tunnels under the lake that lead
to the sea, the supernatural, or misplaced ancient marine animal.
Nessie’s most reported form is an aquatic creature with a long neck and flippers, though
some eyewitnesses have said it resembled a sea serpent or a crocodile.
But before we get into the eyewitness accounts, and how many were ultimately disproved, we
need to go back much further in history—to the 6th century CE and the rumored life of
a saint. St. Columba was an Irish monk who traveled as a missionary to Scotland in 563
CE. Almost a century later, a biography written about his work in Scotland includes a story
of Columba encountering a “water beast” at Loch Ness in 565 CE. The tale says Columba
encountered a group of locals burning the body of a man they said had been “snatched”
and “mauled” by a “water beast” while swimming.
Some people cite this encounter as the first Loch Ness monster sighting, which would trace
the legend back 1,400 years.
Fast forward to 1817, and newspapers like the San Francisco Call and the Coventry Evening
Telegraph printed stories about “sea serpents,” with multiple reports continuing year after
year. The 19th century also saw the field of Geology flourish, and as fossils resembling
these “sightings” turned up, so did speculation that sea serpents were real-- sparking a debate
that questioned how long dinosaurs lived and if they might still linger in the present
day.
In 1822 Loch Ness became part of the Caledonian Canal, a route that opened coast to coast
travel and shipping. The canal expanded tourism dramatically - and with daily steamship traffic
there was also a rise in reports of sea serpents and other strange creatures living in Loch
Ness, solidifying this creature’s place in Scottish folklore.
These sightings likely informed later tales of the Loch Ness creature. Even back then,
one common theory to explain these sightings was the survival of a prehistoric marine creature
or its descendant. Interestingly, mentions of the Plesiosaurs were included in science
fiction of the 19th and 20th centuries as well - in stories like Jules Verne’s Journey
to the Center of the Earth and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s The Lost World. Both of these
books are about the discovery of secret worlds on Earth, worlds where ancient life has been
preserved. It’s the same appeal that makes movies like Jurassic Park so popular even
today--we want to hold on to the possibility that we could encounter living versions of
the fossils we discover.
Nessie didn’t really get global attention until the 1930s--coinciding with the Great
Depression. With morale low and reality so distressing, stories of the mysterious creature
appealed to the desire for escapism many craved.
One particular newspaper report grabbed the public’s attention.
Three anglers fishing for trout in Loch Ness reported to the Northern Chronicle in 1930
that they heard “terrible noise” and saw the water oddly moving as something approached
them in a “wriggling motion” that caused a wave to rock their boat. As far as witness
accounts go, not too significant. But, this is the first account that associated the creature
with the word “monster.” The article read, “a wave 2½ feet high caused by some unknown
monster that, presumably, inhabits Loch Ness.” Two other newspapers would later retell the
story using “monster” as well.
Following this, reports of the creature continued to increase dramatically throughout the 30’s.
In 1933, reporter Alex Campbell wrote in the Inverness Courier about a creature spotted
in Loch Ness (“Strange Spectacle on Loch Ness: What Was It?”). The story claimed
John and Aldie [Mac-eye] a “well-known businessman” and his wife, saw a creature “rolling and
plunging” in the water. They said it resembled a whale and disappeared in a “boiling mass
of foam.” Aldie Mac-eye described the creature as having two humps and a total body length
of around 6 meters.
The article stated “Loch Ness has for generations been credited with being the home of a fearsome-looking
monster.” Campbell also retold the “three angler” story from three years prior with
much more exaggerated, and quite frankly, false detail. Neither account was taken very
seriously by locals, including steamship captain John Macdonald. With over 50 years traveling
in the Loch, he said he had never seen anything strange, adding that what the couple had described
was likely “sporting salmon in a lively mood” leaping out of the water.
The first supposed photo of Nessie was taken by Hugh Gray in November of 1933. In his words,
the photo showed “an object that rose two or three feet above the surface of the water,”
and he considered it a sighting of the monster. Analysis of the photograph led people to argue
that you could possibly see the rest of the creature underwater. While the photo was believed
to be authentic, there was no way to clearly identify what was actually being pictured.
But the photo added gas to the debate of whether or not something was lurking deep in the waters
of Loch Ness. Scientific journals began publishing articles about its rumored existence. The
first of these appeared, in Nature, just a month after Gray’s photo, which the article
cites as “recent evidence,” also claiming that “several observers have ‘seen’
an eel-like monster with humps on its back, a creature with a small head and long neck
attached to an enormous body, and others something that looked like an upturned boat.” The
reporter mentions that he spent half a day on the Loch in July and saw nothing. Got to
love 1930s investigative journalism.
Nevertheless, articles of the time continued to propose explanations for the sightings,
which have been debated for decades: Let’s add even more to that list of possible explanations:
large eel, grampus, porpoise, whale-shark, seal, otter, a sunfish, crocodile, Plesiosaurus,
and the sea-serpent of the Middle Age, “an unstable mass of drifting peat,” or “a
white whale or beluga.”
When the Secretary of State for Scotland was asked what was being done about the creature
the Secretary replied he was in contact with the Chief Constable of Inverness-shire who
already had five constables stationed around the loch, none of whom had seen the monster,
emphasizing that the creature “is guaranteed protection should it appear and be threatened.”
Again that longing for wonder takes precedence--no one wants the mysterious creature to be killed,
they want the possibility to see it alive for themselves. Saving Nessie becomes more
important than trying to kill the monster for “proof”—which can’t be said for
other monsters like the Yeti or the chupacabras.
Yet the Loch Ness Monster might not have solidified its place in history without the help of another
giant beast—King Kong.
The 1933 movie King Kong made the giant ape famous, and introduced a massive, long-neck
water monster to the screen. The film opened in London on April 17, just two weeks before
Mac-eye’s famous sighting. Part of the action on screen depicts a Brontosaurus who attacks
humans in the water before chasing one up a tree and crushing it in its jaws.
Effectively, the movie reinforced the thesis that prehistoric animals could be secretly
inhabiting the earth, and Nessie was one of them.
A few months later on August 4, 1933, another monster report appeared in the Inverness Courier.
While driving along the shore of Loch Ness with his wife, a London man named George Spicer
spotted, in broad daylight, “the nearest approach to a dragon or prehistoric animal”
crossing the road.
A sketch drawn from Spicer’s description produced this image—which looks familiar…
(show King Kong clip again).
Because of George Spicer’s report and King Kong, the “plesiosaur hypothesis” became
the dominant theory of the 20thcentury. Finally, the creature had a recognizable face to its
name.
In early 1934, Nature published another article responding to the supposed evidence up to
that point claiming with “little doubt” the creature was in fact a large grey seal.
But every time a Loch Ness monster theory is “debunked,” either another appears
or someone makes an effort to reestablish doubt, making the waters murky again.
In November 1933 British naval officer and author Rupert Gould, who wrote and published
his book The Case for the Sea Serpent in 1930, went to Scotland to search for the creature.
He heard of the eyewitness accounts around Loch Ness and immediately drew a connection
between them and the other creatures he had researched. After months of gathering eyewitness
reports, he concluded there was indeed something in the water, although he was unsure what
exactly. He published his findings in The Loch Ness Monster and Others in 1934, which
was one of the first books dedicated to theories of the myth.
It is now that we arrive at what you all probably think of as “proof” that the Loch Ness
Monster exists: The “Surgeon's Photograph.”
The photo was given to newspapers by British surgeon, Colonel Robert Wilson and published
April 21, 1934. The dark wide body, thin, long neck and small head seem to come straight
from the Jurassic era—and the legend was cemented in history.
Nessie went mainstream, and began to pop up in campaigns for Scottish products, and was
given both male and female names like Sandy and Archibald.
Between the newspaper accounts, the book, the photographs, and the first Loch Ness movie,
The Secret of the Loch, the myth of the Loch Ness monster became so popular that Scotland’s
official Travel Association had to go on record denying they invented the stories to encourage
tourism…but still the legend grew.
The Linnean Society of London convened to discuss the Loch Ness monster in 1934, aiming
to assess if the myth had any basis in truth. Many thought it was a seal or cetacean [ce-tay-shen]
mammal of some kind. One scientist remained convinced it was an otter. They also believed
it was “hopeless” to compare the creature to any Mesozoic reptile due to lack of fossil
evidence.
After this, Loch Ness fervor seemed to die down until a new photograph appeared in 1951.
Forester Lachlan Stuart captured a three-humped version of the monster he said had been bobbing
its head and neck up and down in the water.
But, it didn’t take much time for him to admit the hoax. He soon admitted the image
was really of three partially covered bales of hay he placed in the water.
In 1957, Constance Whyte’s More Than a Legend proposed that the Loch Ness monster isn’t
a singular creature but multiple sightings of descendents of marine creatures that entered
the loch after the last Ice Age. Trapped in the remains of a glacier, she proposed that
the ancestors of Nessie adapted to the fresh water that over time turned the salt-water
loch into a fresh-water one.
For 20 years the legend of Nessie continued undisturbed, fascinating people and building
lore around an unknown creature.
Then in 1975, the validity of the famous “Surgeon’s Photograph” was called into question. A
man by the name of Ian Wetherell stepped forward and claimed that his father faked the famous
photograph.
Back in 1933 journalist and big-game hunter Marmaduke Wetherell was employed by the Daily
Mail to investigate the monster. He photographed what he claimed to be “Nessie footprints.”
Zoologists revealed the footprints were from the leg of a taxidermy hippopotamus.
Ian claimed his father was so upset that the Nessie footprints weren’t well received
(or believed), as an act of vengeance he created the Surgeon’s photograph. He staged the
photo using a toy submarine with a head made from wood putty constructed by Ian himself
and his step brother. He gave it to a fellow prankster who passed it along to his friend
Colonel Wilson who gave it to the press. In 1990, Ian’s step brother Christian Spurling,
confirmed the whole thing was fake.
Still, some people held onto the hope that something strange was in Loch Ness.
The debate to formally preserve Nessie’s survival began to take shape with believers
arguing that the creature should be a part of the Conservation of Wild Creatures and
Wild Plants Act of 1975. The act protected any animal whose survival is threatened—but
only if the animal has a scientific and a common name. Scientists argued that despite
no conclusive proof Nessie exists, two photographs taken in 1972 and 1975 left its existence
up for debate—so they gave the creature a formal name [show Nessiteras rhombopteryx].
Part of the name [Nessiteras] adopts the name of the lake and combines it with the Greek
word ‘teras’ - which means “marvel” or “wonder,” and is often associated with
monsters. This part [rhombopteryx] combines the Greek words for diamond and fin or wing.
So the name roughly translates to Ness monster with diamond fin.
Unsurprisingly, even with a proper scientific name, no conclusive evidence of any such creature
emerged. In fact, theories disproving the legend became more advanced as technology
evolved.
In 2019, Professor Neil Gemmell, a New Zealand geneticist led a project intended to catalogue
all the living species in Loch Ness using DNA analysis.
None of the 500 million DNA sequences from 250 samples of Loch Ness water showed any
evidence of plesiosaur or other “Jurassic reptile” and no catfish or sturgeon DNA,
which also eliminated those theories.
But he did find significant amounts of eel DNA. Although Gemmell says that their data
does not give any information about the size of the eels, he speculates there could be
giant eels in the Loch. However, locals insist eels are nothing new in the lake —meaning
they can’t be the cause of the sightings over the years. Some people also claim the
giant eel theory is unfounded since no side-to-side movement from the creature has ever been reported.
More evidence piled up that the “Jurassic” or “Plesiosaur theory” is untrue—no
fossil evidence has been found and multiple sonar scans of the lake showed no existence
of any large aquatic creatures.
Even so, on average 10 unexplained creature sightings on Loch Ness are reported every
year.
I think we want to believe that even in the midst of so much scientific discovery and
advancement that there is something unknown, something hidden in the world still. The fact
that science hasn’t ruled out the possibility entirely is what’s exciting. Amateur researchers,
monster hunters, and everyday people alike would love to be the first to prove Nessie
is real.
There’s an element of wonder and excitement that comes from believing in the impossible—so
eyewitness reports continue and stories of Nessie are shared, even as each one before
it is debunked.
The Loch Ness monster isn’t a monster that inspires fear, it inspires wonder. It’s
a legend—a series of stories told and retold to inspire astonishment and curiosity.