Keythong

 

The keythong is a gryphon like beast, which is supposed to have come from heraldry, but it’s history is more complicated than that. It looks like a gryphon, but without wings. It has spikes on various parts of its body, often on its legs, back, and a fan of spikes on its shoulders where the wings should be. It also have a pair of swept back horns on its head.

I say its history is complicated, because while both the name and appearance of the keythong appeared historically used in heraldry, they didn’t come together to mean the same creature until modern times when the internet took interest in the creature.

The name keythong appears to have been created as late as the 19^th century. It comes from J R Planche’s Pursuivant Of Arms, he describes the coat of arms for the Earl of Ormonde as having rampant keythong on the right. However, what is actually shown on the arms is a wingless gryphon with flames, no horns or spikes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_of_Ormond_%28Ireland%29#/media/File:Bookplate-Ormonde.jpg

This was a trend in the 19^th century to give every little variation of heraldic and mythical beasts different names. This was likely spurred on by the contemporary discovery and classifications of multitudes of natural species separated by only small traits. The keythong wasn’t the only gryphon variant to receive its own name. Around the same time gryphons with lion’s front paws started being called opinicus.

Before this gryphons were highly variable in heraldic art, and still referred to as gryohons. For instance it was common for gryphons to have either eagle or lion front legs, or for them to have or lack ears, to have or lack a lion’s main and so forth. Having the addition of horns or spikes would be odd, but not completely unexpected, as we can see the Earl of Ormond had flames on his gryphon.

Notably, gryphons could also lack wings. However this is confusion surrounding this subject too, which has made its way into modern keythong lore. It’s often stated that a keythong is just a male gryphon, and the more familiar form of gryphon are females. This is something that is only ever stated in relation to the keythong, when considering gryphons alone they’re always considered to have similar looking males and females. The confusion on this subject originates from John Stanbridge’s 1667 book Vulgaria, a renaissance school textbook on multiple subjects. Here, and nowhere else ever, its said that wingless gryphons are male and the winged ones are female. It’s unknown why he wrote this. Maybe he meant it as a joke, or a test of his students to think critically. Either way, this was not a view that was held by anyone else at the time. Both winged and non-winged gryphons could be depicted with either genitalia in heraldic art, and they were widely considered to have similar looking males and females. Honestly not much thought was put into the sexes of gryphons outside Stanbridge’s lone statement.

It’s unknown were the horns and spikes came from, but they don’t appear in historic heraldic art, and are likely a modern addition. Highly stylized heraldic art is difficult to interpret by the modern viewer. Often fur can look like spikes, or canine like noses can look hooked like a beak. I’ve been mistaken in these ways myself quite a few times. So it appears the keythong as we know it is a modern invention.