Does “man” here refer to “a human being” or does it refer to “a male human”?
You’ll understand when you see him.”
“But shall we see him?” asked Susan.
“Why, Daughter of Eve, that’s what I brought you here for. I’m to lead you where you shall meet him,” said Mr. Beaver.
“Is—is he a man?” asked Lucy.
“Aslan a man!” said Mr. Beaver sternly. “Certainly not. I tell you he is the King of the wood and the son of the great Emperor-beyond-the-Sea. Don’t you know who is the King of Beasts? Aslan is a lion—the Lion, the great Lion.”
The context is a story with a lot of different creatures. So in this context it means human, not male.
Beaver’s reference to Aslan, the great lion, as ‘him’ created the confusion.
Beaver kept Susan in suspense.
Lucy was curious to know whether the ‘him’ mentioned by Beaver was a man or, perhaps, a beast. (Beaver’s exclamation ‘Aslan a man!’ and his assertion support this view since Aslan was a lion).
So, man, here, would mean a human or human being, for gender has no significance in this conversation.
In archaic English ‘man’ is synonym to ‘human’ or ‘human being’ as in the following poem:
Mind is the Master power that moulds and makes,
And Man is Mind, and evermore he takes
The tool of Thought, and, shaping what he wills,
Brings forth a thousand joys, a thousand ills: —
He thinks in secret, and it comes to pass:
Environment is but his looking-glass.
Also, we still say ‘mankind’ when referring to all human beings collectively which is rather strange and outdated.