Just as in some species of the order of Pinnipeds, there seem to exist
indeed some individual variations with regard to the colour of the
sea-serpent.
Just as in the dark specimens of the Pinnipeds, the colour of the
sea-serpent becomes lighter in drying; i. e. the real colour of the
animal comes to light. Properly we should say: their colour is light,
but, when wet, it becomes a dark one. It is evident that the real
colour of the sea-serpent, being dried by the sunshine, is grey (9, 61,
64), a light ash-colour (25), grey and yellow (147), pale yellowish
(146), or yellow (71).
Just as in Pinnipeds, the colour of a wet individual appears much
lighter when it is very close to us, than when we see it at some
distance. Three times the colour is called grey (65, 66, p. 138),
though not a single fact is mentioned, from which it may be made
out, whether the animal was very near or far off. The colour of an
individual which was so close that it could be struck with a handspike
was greyish (72), that of one a few yards distant, light fawn coloured
(122), at about thirty feet distance the colour seemed to be a very
dark grey (102), still farther a greyish brown (79).
Though some persons call the colour only dark, or brown, or black, it
is noteworthy that those who describe it more minutely, agree that the
backpart of the head, the neck, the trunk and the tail are dark, and
that the under part of the head and the neck is light coloured. With
regard to the colour, the animal is evidently longitudinally divided
into a dark one above and a light one beneath.
The dark colour of the upper part seems to vary a little, as may be
seen from the following appellations: dark (41, 48, 51, 63, 67, 80, 85,
103, 115, 131, 152 A, 154), very dark (42, 48), somewhat dark (95),
dark dull (130), evidently a chocolate brown, or mahogany brown, or
chestnut brown, for it was compared with a red snake (36), chocolate
colour (44), dark chocolate colour (48), colour of a pilot fish (151),
old mahogany brown (92), dirty brown (121), brown (43, 81, 92, 144),
deep brown (34), dark brown (p. 131, 39, 44, 46, 56, 69, 97, 115, 117,
118, 135), blackish brown (91), approaching to black (63), nearly black
(41, 95, 97) almost black (48), blackish (65, 94, 117), black (34, 42,
60, 85, 114, 120, 126, 138, 149, 150, 152, 155), as black as coal-tar
(152). The tints of the figures also evidently represent a dark colour
(figg. 28, 29, 30, 41, 45, 46). By some witnesses the colour of the
head is observed to be darker than that of the body; we may safely read
for “body” the “neck”. Once the colour of the shoulders is reported to
be much darker than the rest of the body (122).
On this dark upperpart spots, stripes, streaks etc. of a lighter hue
are observed more than once: the colour was that of a conger eel,
consequently brown with lighter streaks (144), spotted, and with light
flames, or maculated, with distinctly visible light spots like a turtle
or a lackered table (p. 131), apparently shaded with light colours
(41), streaked with white in irregular streaks (97), on an under ground
of fawn colour there were large brown spots behind the shoulders (122),
maculated with large white spots (130), covered with several white
spots (131), brown with black spots (162). See also figg. 37 and 38.
In some individuals there is a black ring round the eye (p. 131, 29),
and the region of the mouth is also black, so that they resemble those
horses which we call moorish heads or blackfaces (p. 131, 9).
The sides of the underjaw seem to be very light coloured: white (34,
41, 126, figg. 28, 29, 30), as is also the throat: whitish (p. 138,
117, figg. 28, 29, 30), yellow (25), muddy white (56), yellowish white
(118), brownish white (118), light coloured (126), white (69, 144),
“the underpart of its head appeared nearly white” (41), “several feet
of its belly” (read throat) “which were visible appeared nearly white”
(41); very remarkable is the supposition of Mr. MATTHEW GAFFNEY: “I
suppose and do believe that the whole of his belly was nearly white”
(41), this really seems to be the case, for we read in 106 A that the
tail is longitudinally divided into two sections, white and black, and
in n^o. 144 that the whole animal was longitudinally divided into two
sections, white and black. Of course in both cases the black side was
the back-side, as was very well supposed by Captain Drevar in n^o. 144.
I am of course unable to decide in how far the problematic dark stripe,
curved downwards, on each side behind the underjaw, and as long as the
head, delineated in figg. 28 and 29, will ever be found to come up to
reality.
The representation of the colours in fig. 31 is very bad, as the
animal’s back is drawn lighter than the underpart, and I believe that
such alternating broad bands of a light and dark colour don’t exist in
reality, but are here the result of drawing with a pencil.