First Documented Ohio Bigfoot Sighting

Article: Fight with a Wild Man

  Date: January 1869
Publisher: Hillsdale Standard, Hillsdale Michigan
                 Minnesota Weekly Record

Gallipolis [Ohio] is excited over a wild man, who is reported to haunt the woods near that city. He goes naked, is covered with hair, is gigantic in height, and "his eyes start from their sockets." A carriage, containing a man and daughter, was attacked by him a few days ago. He is said to have bounded at the father, catch- ing him in a grip like that of a vice, hurling him to the earth, falling on him and endeavoring to bite and to scratch like a wild animal. The struggle was long and fearful, rolling and wallowing in the deep mud, have suffocated, sometimes beneath his adversary, whose burning and maniac eyes glared into his own with murderous and savage intensity. Just as he was about to become exhausted from his exertions, his daughter, taking courage at the imminent danger of her parent, snatched up a rock and hurling it at the head of her father's would be murderer, was fortunate enough to put an end to the struggle by striking him somewhere about the ear. The creature was not stunned, but feeling unequal to further exertion, slowly got up and retired into the neighboring copse that skirted the road.

Great Medicine and Bigfoot

There is an epic tale within the Cheyenne Indian culture. It tells the story of the creation of their people and their early history. It combines many tales and stories into one epic.

It can be read in its entirety here: http://pyramidmesa.com/chey10.htm
However for the purpose of this blog I will highlight the Bigfooty parts.

"The Great Spirit created three kinds of human beings: first, those who had hair all over their bodies; second, white men who had hair all over their heads and faces and on their legs; third, red men who had very long hair on their heads only. The hairy people were strong and active. The white people with the long beards were in a class with the wolf, for both were the trickiest and most cunning creatures in that beautiful world. The red people were good runners, agile and swift, whom the Great Medicine taught to catch and eat fish at a time when none of the other people knew about eating meat".

- - Very interesting that in this epic neither the hairy men nor white men knew of catching and eating fish.

"After a while the hairy people left the north country and went south, where all the land was barren. Then the red people prepared to follow the hairy people into the south. Before they left the beautiful land, however, the Great Medicine called them together. On this occasion, the first time the red people had all assembled in one place, the Great Medicine blessed them and gave them some medicine spirit to awaken their dormant minds. From that time on they seemed to possess intelligence and know what to do".

- - This section appears to indicate that the Great Medicine gave the red man intelligence that he did not give the hairy man, suggesting the hairy man stayed more primitive.

"The hairy people remained naked, but the red people clothed themselves because the Great Medicine had told them to. When the red men arrived in the south, they found that the hairy men had scattered and made homes inside of hills and in caves high up in the mountains. They seldom saw the hairy men, for the hairy ones were afraid and went inside their caves when the red men came. The hairy people had pottery and flint tools like those of the red men, and in the caves they slept on beds made out of leaves and skins". .."For some reason they decreased in numbers until they finally disappeared entirely, and today the red men cannot tell what became of them".

-- Although the hairy people disappeared completely they were smart enough to make tools and pottery.

This can of course be taken several ways:

• Bigfoot
• Neanderthal
• Just a story

Despite many tales of Bigfoot in Native American culture this appears to be a case of very primitive man. While there is scientific evidence of tools and pottery in early humans it is not the case with Bigfoot even now in modern times.

Cannibal Bigfoot

 

In 1847 painter and explorer Paul Kane was in the Pacific Northwest making scetches of both nature and Native Americans to take back home to Toronto and turn into paintings. Kane also kept a journal describing his travels and scetching subjects. It is in this journal that we first learn of the Skookums.

March 27, 1847:
"When we arrived at the mouth of the Kattlepoutal River, 26 miles from Vancouver, I stopped to make a sketch of the volcano, Mt. St. Helens, distant I suppose, about 30 or 40 miles. This mountain has never ben visited by either whites or Indians; the latter assert that it is inhabited by a race of beings of a different species, who are cannibals, and who they hold in great dread...these superstitions are taken from a man they say went in to the mountains with another, and escaped the fate of his companion, who was eaten by the 'skookums', or 'evil genii'. I offered a considerable bribe to any Indian who would accompany me in its exploration but could not find one hardly enough to venture there".

It is very interesting to note that this is the only early reference to Bigfoot being a cannibal. This doesn't mean it is a cute cuddly creature however. In fact, Native Americans of the Pacific Northwest were often afraid to settle  on certain lands because they feared the Bigfoots would attack them. My personal feeling is that this would not be cannibal related but more of a territorial issue. Animals kill others commonly for encroaching onto lands that are "theirs".

This is also the first telling of a Bigfoot story that adds the element of them being more supernatural than a bipedal ape-like creature living in the woods.

The First Bigfoot Track

Like this on Facebook!
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sasquatch-and-Bigfoot/578109098915752

Before you start shouting things at your screen like:

• "snow melting distorts prints"
• "you have no idea how long they were there" and
• "the Tooth Fairy isn't real either"!

Just take a deep breath, listen to the story, and take back what you said about the tooth fairy...

In 1811 explorer, fur trader, map maker, and surveyor David Thompson was crossing the Rocky Mountains near what is now known as Jasper, Alberta. He began his life long career of surveyor and map maker when he was 14 years old and left England for the British Columbia region under employment of the Hudson Bay Company.  Throughout his life he kept a journal detailing his travels throughout the region. It is from these journals that we find the first documented footprint in the region.

"I saw the track of a large animal, has four toes about 3 to 4" long, small nail, ball of foot sank in about 3" deeper than his toes, the hinder part of his foot did not mark well, the length 14" by 8" and resembled a large bear track".
David Thompson journal entry: January 7th, 1811

I know that is not the most compelling description of a bigfoot track...but just wait it gets better!

Later on in life, about 40 years later, Thompson penned the "Narrative" a book based on his travels and journals. In this he recounts the track and experience again:

"the Men and Indians would have it to be a young mammouth and I held it to be the track of a large old grizzly bear; yet the shortness of the nails, the ball of the foot, and it's great size was not that of a bear, otherwise that of a very large old bear, his claws worn away, the Indians would not allow".

Later on in the book he tell of another time he and his group came upon similar tracks:

"as the snow was about 6"in depth the track was well defined and we could see it for a full hundred yards from us, the animal was heading north to south. We did not attempt to follow it, we had not time for it, and the hunters, eager as they are to follow and shoot every animal, made no attempt to follow this beast, for what could the balls of our fowling guns do against such an animal?"

 

I know that this is for some, conclusive proof. While there does seem to be discrepancy that this was not the track of a large grizzly bear there is no part of the story that leans toward it being Bigfoot either. After doing some research and discovering a large part of his parties were made up of Native Americans from the region there is not one recording in his journals or books that this was a beast of their legends that dwells in the forests. Given Thompson's descriptions of the lands it seems that if he was told of something with that much significance, especially after viewing a footprint, he would have reported it since he penned descriptions of other legends from the region.

 

 



Matlox was a Bigfoot

José Mariano Mociño was an important guy in Bigfoot history. Although his name isn't highly recognizable he did contriute history to the phenomenon. He was a naturalist from New Spain and in 1792 he was part of an exploration and scientific expedition to the area today we know as the Pacific Northwest and British Columbia. From his travels throughout the region he penned one of the most significant books on nature of his time Noticias de Nutka: An Account of Nootka Sound in 1792.

He noted in his book on exploration that the native people of the Pacific Northwest were scared of a creature who lived in the woods. They referred to it as Matlox.

José states: "I do not know what to say about Matlox, inhabitant of the mountainous district, of who all have an unbelievable terror. They imagine his body as very monstrous, all covered with stiff black bristles; a head similar to a human one, but with much greater, sharper, and stronger fangs than those of the bear; extremely long arms; and toes and fingers armed with long curved claws. His shouts alone (they say) force those who hear them to the ground, and any unfortunate body he slaps is broken into a thousand pieces."

As with any description involving an unknown creature we try to catergorize it and explain it as other "suspects". Lucky for us, in his description José has ruled out several of the usual suspects in Sasquatch sightings. People and bears.

• stronger fangs than those of the bear
• head similar to a human one

It seems what we are left with is a description of an ape-like creature. Long arms, distinct toes and fingers, plus the hair and fangs. Unfortunately this is all we have to go on. José didn't witness the creatures personally nor does he mention them again as part of any other nature descriptions in his book. While this doesn't hurt or take away from his description of the creature, it also provides no clues as to habits or where this creature would have fit in his ideas about the nature systems of the area. From this account the name "Matlox" has been associated with Bigfoots in the Pacific Northwest and more specifically the Nootka Indians also used a variation of "Matlose".

And so the mystery continues....






 

Viking + Bigfoot = Myth

Some will argue that the earliest documented Bigfoot sighting was recorded when Leif Erickson visited the new world in 986 A.D. Many base this off of Samuel Morison's account of the Viking travels in his book The European Discovery of America - The Northern Voyages. (1971. Oxford University Press) In this account Erickson describes creatures as "monsters that were horribly ugly, hairy, swarthy and with great black eyes".  Also attributed to the creature is a horrible sounding howl or screech. Sounds convincing at first glance right?

 And although I do love the subject of Sasquatch I also believe in history and historical evidence. The sagas of Erickson are actually easy to read and understand. Since I wanted to know more about the first "American" Bigfoot encounter I read up on them.

As it turns out the term Skrelling (or Skellring) is used when talking directly about the native people. The Skrelling trade pelts, use weapons, speak native dialect, and build both boats and dwellings. I don't personally think these things combined are very sasquatch-ish.

When it comes to the physical descriptions of hairy creatures, both the original translations as well as Internet translation sources translate that phrase as "bad hair on their heads" and later on "ill looking and dark skinned". Other words taken directly from the sagas show what the Vikings thought, that the natives were quite ugly to them.

When I read the sagas I looked for wildlife references and found very few. Salmon are noted by name and said to be large. Other than that wildlife is virtually left out all together. In fact there is only one English translation that leads to the conclusion of a possible Sasquatch which translates to Skrelling being of course hair. In the other versions I read the translations all are very clear that Erickson is talking about the native people.

“People say they love truth, but in reality they want to believe that which they love is true."
 
Robert J. Ringer

Bigfoot as a Wodewose

Beginning in the 12th Century,  Medieval Europe saw the Wodewose rise to fame in literature and art. From this time through the 16th Century the running theme of a wild man carrying a club was prevalent in tales and stories. Nowadays the debate over this creature seems to have three sides to it. Was it real? If so is it a Bigfoot? Or maybe a neanderthal?

The term derives from an Anglo-Saxon definition meaning "wood man" and later "man of the woods". While brought into popularity during the 12th Century the origins appear to lie within Spain in the 9th Century. Written in a book is the story of a goddess who dresses like a wild man and participates in dances. This would appear to be the beginning of wild-man festivals  (masquerades) which grew in popularity in the Middle Ages.

There are a couple curious clues about these Wodewose:

• They are never described as animals. No references to being ape-like or having more noticeable primate features. They are described as human. With more hair and not as sophisticated, but a man nonetheless.
• They were seen as people living on the fringes of society and just beyond the boundaries of civilization. In more ancient text it was written that wild men were at one with the nature of the forests they lived in. However this is not the case with Wodewose. They were described almost as outcasts or not permitted to be within the mainstream.
• They were depicted as capable of using tools such as clubs and spears
• They also had families which, when described, were given only human characteristics. Wild women and wild children were also seen as human.

One of the most popular encounters with a Wodewose can be found in a book from Norway around 1250 titled "King's Mirror".

"It once happened in that country (and this seems indeed strange) that a living creature was caught in the forest as to which no one could say definitely whether it was a man or some other animal; for no one could get a word from it or be sure that it understood human speech. It had the human shape, however, in every detail, both as to hands and face and feet; but the entire body was covered with hair as the beasts are, and down the back it had a long coarse mane like that of a horse, which fell to both sides and trailed along the ground when the creature stooped in walking."

The most interesting thing about the Wodewose is the fact that in Medieval Europe not one reference is made about them in Historical documents. Nothing in letters, records, census reports, or other important documents. This leads some to speculate that they are completely fictional. However the flip side would be that if they were already described as man then there would be no need to mention how much hair one had on their body in official documents.

Theories about the Wodewose include:

1. They were people who shunned society and through years of living in the forests grew extra hair for survival against the elements.
2. They are Bigfoot's cousin in Europe
3. They are neanderthals
4. They are the last remaining hunter/gatherer tribes in Europe
5. They are purely fictional