More discussion following the recent posts about the Miami cannibal attack. Thanks to James Smith for his thoughtful contributions.
James Smith: Speculation being what it is, it's hard to
say--but there's certainly precedent (think the Vikings, to name just one
group) for somebody consuming some mind-altering drug or combination
thereof and believing themselves to be a wolf, bear or other dangerous
animal admired for its fighting prowess...the difference is,
ancient people did this as a function of their society, not acting
out on their own.
Gordon Grice: Hard to know how much of history is true,
but there are precedents in chronicles and myth for
"anti-social" predation on fellow humans. Sawney Beane and his
clan come to mind.
James Smith: While Sawney Beane's story is a little confused
as to exact time (probably due to confusion between James I of Scotland
or James VI of Scotland/I of England) and probably prone to some
exaggeration, there is no real reason to doubt its essential points. I
actually had a pet kingsnake named Sawney when I was a teenager (the
reason for the name is, I'm sure, obvious.) The Beanes, though, didn't
seem to be motivated (from what we can gather) by psychosis or
drugs...Sawney and his wife simply fell back on eating people during lean
times and taught their children and grandchildren that this was
normal. It has sometimes occurred to me that the legends of
werewolves and child-eating witches probably represent earlier societies'
attempts to rationalize and explain the deviant behavior of anti-social
predators, a la Albert Fish, for instance.
Gordon Grice: That's an interesting idea, James. Probably
the best evidence for it is scarcity of serial killer stories in history prior
to the Victorian era. I've heard that fact used as a basis for arguing that
serial murder is a modern phenomenon, but it seems more likely to me that myths
of ogres and the like are earlier ways of understanding aberrant murder and
cannibalism. I'm skeptical of the specifics about the Beanes, as the whole
story seems to reek of ogre-mythology. But the premise that people could
establish a cannibal custom within a society that abhors it has precedent in
well-attested cases like that of Fritz Haarman. (It also has precedent among
chimpanzees, by the way.)
Werewolves as real-life cannibals also makes sense to me.
Our friend Guy Endore implies just such a connection in his novel The Werewolf
of Paris, which plays lycanthropic variations on the case of Sgt. Bertrand. In
fact, even in Roman times it seems as if lycanthropy was an explanation, or
maybe just a metaphor, for drunkenness and rape. (There's the drug connection
again.)
I'm skeptical regarding the witchcraft part. When William
Arens reviewed the literature on cannibalism, he found it was often attributed
to a culture by its enemies, but in most cases, other evidence was lacking. I
think that's what's at work in reports of witchcraft practices. In the
Renaissance, accusations of witchcraft were frequently leveled against
heretical sects. Baby-eating was part of that slander; it was a way the Church
had of demonizing its enemies. The same accusations were made against Jews. So
I suspect those particular allegations were politically motivated, not based on
any reality. I also suspect that sort of motive behind the accusations against,
for example, Gilles de Rais, who supposedly murdered hundreds of children for
giggles.
Talking to a Panamanian friend just days ago, we got into the subject of supernatural creatures native to our respective countries. Interestingly, in Mexico we have stories about witches, werewolves (or rather, nahuales, which don´t have to change into wolves specifically), and vampires, but in Panama, it seems that the three of them have been fused together. So in Panama you get witches that suck blood, eat human flesh and shapeshift into dangerous animals. Mexican witches are simply women (or men) who practice sorcery; in Panama they seem to be a completely different beast so to speak...
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting. I think it has been the movies, more than anything else, that made these creatures into separate tropes in Western culture. For example, in Renaissance Europe, the ability to transform into animals was regarded as one proof of witchcraft; the official manual of witch-hunters, the Malleus Maleficarum, recounted incidents of this power, including, as I recall, one witch who could turn into a donkey. Even as late as the 1931 film of Dracula, there's mention of the vampire's power of turning into a wolf. It was only later that vampires began to limit their therioanthropic exploits to being bats.
ReplyDeleteYeah, the line was rather blurry in past times. In Greece, werewolves were said to turn into blood-sucking hyenas after being killed. As if turning into a werewolf alone wasn´t bad (or good, if you're into that stuff) enough...
ReplyDeletePS- In Coppola's version of Dracula from the 90s, Dracula still does turn into a wolf (as well as a bat-like demon creature).
That would be the striped hyena, I suppose? I don't think it is still found in Greece, but has been within historic times. I've read that witchcraft and were-hyenas are closely linked in parts of Africa.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of the Coppola Dracula, it's a therioanthropist's delight. I remember, besides the wolf, a transitional werewolfish form, and also Dracula being formed of many rats. (Maybe it's about time to run your article on nahuales.)
Maybe... :>
ReplyDelete