The essay surveys historical and natural-history writings about the unicorn, weighing ancient testimonies, later compilers, and travelers' accounts. It analyzes how descriptions were copied, embellished, and tied to exotic sources, and questions the reliability of vague eyewitness reports. By comparing anatomical claims, reported habits, and claimed localities, the author critiques accumulated scholarly conjecture and argues that the unicorn functions more as a rational construct than a demonstrably observed species. The piece concludes by urging closer local observation and critical scrutiny of authorities to resolve such natural-history controversies.