data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/22efd/22efdfab287498546a8eb61b942d1c16fd027b94" alt=""
My personal con
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/11738/1173846eb174cc75db376442605adaf7ebee85bf" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dabe6/dabe65f7c3b77b8a9f364c7bfb96ab361ab48cf3" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/db176/db1763fe2a4199df72fc4dbff8bcaa2fcbb8f15f" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6e002/6e002358df9f072de53e1ae34b43eb573f3926ff" alt=""
The same description is mentioned as the characteristic description of the mono rei or king monkey in the 2001 book The Monster of the Madidi by Simon Chapman. From this it seems the mono rei and the mono grande (big monkey) are two distinctly different things. That would seem to correspond to the reported footprints since the mono grande's 'Hand-like' tracks do not agree with the 'Bottle foot.'
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b77c7/b77c75c7c0eab24b573245b1466afbcdaa07bf2c" alt=""
There has been much discussion of the theory that the Mapinguari represents a surviving ground sloth in more recent years. The giant ground sloth does seem to correspond to a cryptid reported in those same areas, but the key difference is that the Mapinguari types are described as being tailless monkeys or apes, often walking upright. The part about them being tailless probably invalidates the suspected ground sloth candidacy. On the other hand, the clawed yehos or yahos ('Devils') of the West Indies could possibly be smallish surviving ground sloths, about chimp-sized.
Going back to the theory that the Mapinguaris are usually arboreal apes that leave ring-shaped (orangutan-like) footprints on the ground, it is noteworthy to look at some traditional depictions of them as posted on the internet (the photos come from internet sources and no attempt to defraud the owners is intended. The reproduction of the photos as educational materials is protected under international copyright law).
It seems that the Mapinguari is regularly depicted as a cyclops and furthermore that the head is barely distinct from the body. Furthermore, the mouth is large and fanged but does not seem to bear any direct placement on the head. It arises from below
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4938f/4938fee70aa99ac441b77137933607e9c79b0228" alt=""
Looking at an orangutan's head it is possible to see how some of these descriptions might come about. First of all the head of an orangutan is rather bizzare and in some cases barely presents any aspect that would normally register as a face. The mouth area is distinct from the rest of the face and a beard sometimes accentuates the distinction. The eyes are set very close together and the eyelids can be lighter than the rest of the face. In several higher primates this is a warning sign; the mouth is opened and the eyelids dropped as a threat. Looking at the close-set eyes with pale lids and the darker strip between them, it is possible to see how that might look like a single eye from a distance. And the stances and limb proportions are shown as being pretty much like an o
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a97b8/a97b81f2682a974bc48ab2671b266328888b1f6b" alt=""
I also include Ivan Sanderson's reproduction of the orangutan foot extended and the track, and the adjoining footprint by contrast would be more like the 'Hand-like' track of the mono grande (as opposed to the mono rei).
So this brings us to the map that explains the hypothesis. Most apes do not have much of an identifiable fossil ancestry. Orangutans are an exception, 'pongo' (orangutan) fossils are well known from mainland Asia, especially in China. But this brings up another problem. The fossils clearly belong to larger ground-living apes and modern orangutans of the proper genus pongo have a large number of very specific and very peculiar adaptations to life in the trees. They cannot be the same. Therefore I had proposed the name 'protopongo' for the fossil ground-living ancestors to the modern tree-living pongo. There follows the suggestion (including by Heuvelmans) that the classical abominable snowman or yeti represents a survival of these fossil apes, and a fur
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b30ad/b30ad352f41c10f5cfc9e6596687f90e6ee8fa9c" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8fe5f/8fe5fb5d382009fa56efb794f706a8363c410bb3" alt=""
And so there remains the possibility as indicated on the chart that the South American forms described as Mapinguari are parallel-evolved arboreal apes descended from the same generalised ground-living ancestors. At the time in question there was very much demonstrable faunal exchange between East Asia, North America and then South America in turn. And in order to indicate the possibility that the South American apes are separate parallel-evolved arboreal forms out of the same ground-living ancestors, I have given them the tenative name 'parapongo' ('Like an orangutan'). I
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d77ee/d77eee477f212c3c3221d43ffe79ceea515f3a47" alt=""
And of course any professional anthropologists or primatologists can feel free to say that the whole idea is daft up until such a time that actually happens.
In part this material was submitted to the SITU for publication in 1990-91, together with several other articles of a similar nature. Unfortunately, the journal PURSUIT folded shortly after that point.