What came first, the drawings or the model? That is a contentious question of whodunnit that is still debated in the scientific literature of today, with some arguing that it was neither von Guericke nor Leibniz: Just as the bones confounded 17th-century naturalists, the origination of the reconstruction, both in a 3D version and in print, continues to perplex scientists today. Michael Buchwitz/ The Beef Behind All Possible Pasts One such image was reproduced by Leibniz and published in his 1749 book.ģD model of the Guericke-Einhorn on display at the Museum für Naturkunde (Natural History Museum) in Magdeburg, Germany. The drawing published in 'Protogaea' had originally been printed in 1704 by Michael Bernhard, who drew it from notes and sketches by von Guericke and descriptions by Johann Mayer. But the horn, united with the head and some ribs, as well as the backbone and some bones, were brought to the abbess of the place” This skeleton was broken and extracted by pieces, because of the ignorance and the carelessness of the diggers. Since it has been demonstrated by Bartholin that unicorns (once one of the most curious and rarest ornaments of natural history cabinets but now surrendered to the people’s admiration) come from fish from the Northern ocean, we are allowed to think that the unicorn fossil found in our countryside has the same origin. The book was the philosopher’s attempt to develop “the seeds of a new science called natural geography”- unicorns included.įound within the chapter, “Concerning the horn of the unicorn and the monstrous animal dug up at Quedlinbury,” is a brief mention of the Magdeburg Unicorn: The Quedlinburg monster was described in chapter 35 of Leibniz’ book 'Protogaea,' which was a posthumously published treatise on earth sciences that debuted in 1749.

What we would call mathematical sciences today, Leibniz referred to as the “philosophy of imaginable things.” After all, science 400 years ago was a different era of understanding and tended to lean more on the philosophical side. He also had a reputation for not always being forthcoming with his views and was known to change his perception based on his audience. Some of his work was called into question in the 20th-century scientific literature and he has been described as a “sober, cautious, interpreter, a skeptic one might say, but one who is prepared to concede the possibility of many strange phenomena.”īut Leibniz also believed there was a place “among the natural curiosities” of the world for “ fringe phenomena” and “various monsters” such as talking dogs, genies, prophets and, naturally, the unicorn. Like von Guericke, Leibniz was a scientist of his time who held both legitimate and fantastical theories.

Public Domain What Came First: The Drawings or the Model?

Composite of Guericke (left) and Leibniz (right).

Prehistoric rhinoceros fossil