#12daysofcryptids — Public Fediverse posts

Fearsome cryptid creatures

In the era of reality TV and social media, the 21st-century version of cryptids evolved rapidly, fueled by a society-wide search for fun weird stuff, enchantment, and a connection to something bigger than oneself. “Cryptids” generally became more well-known and popular. They were readily fictionalized, exaggerated, and artistically distributed worldwide, beyond their original scope. The loosely defined concept of the cryptid as an unknown animal to be discovered (to replace “monster”, as coined in 1983) broadened in popular culture to include all kinds of mysterious creatures. While this expansion created consternation for the old school cryptozoology scene (and does TO THIS DAY for prickly Redditors), it is what it is. Language evolves. Time and context changes our views about mysterious creatures.

The “sharp line” fallacy of cryptids

Contrary to several outspoken cryptozoologists, there is no “sharp line” between mythical creatures, fantastical beasts, folklore creatures, and modern cryptids. They blend into one another through time and across the globe. At one time, even to today, some folks believed that various fantastical creatures, like unicorns, mermaids and dragons, are real animals that did once or still do exist. If witnesses say they see them, aren’t they potential “cryptids” (as ‘ethnoknown’ creatures)? If the cryptozoologist argues that they don’t represent real animals, how do they know? What if a real animal was the basis for the tale? The definitions in cryptozoology are “squishy” and imprecise for many reasons. The “sharp line” defining proper cryptids is a fallacy.

There are the critters that are very obviously supernatural or fiction: most cultures have legends of the undead, shapeshifters, spirit creatures, giants, or witches. We also have tall tales and stories that are meant to serve a social purpose, where the story about someone encountering strange things are held as “true” usually for a brief time (as a child, on a dark night, or as a warning or joke) before we recognize them as fiction. Here’s where we come to Fearsome Creatures.

William Cox’s Fearsome Creatures of the Lumberwoods (1910) is a collection of tales told by lumber workers or hunter-trappers in the northern woods (“with a few desert and mountain beasts”) of the US and Canada. In the same vein, Henry Tryon’s Fearsome Critters (1939) has some overlap with Cox’s but includes a few new entries. These volumes gave us the Hodag, Squonk, Snallygaster, Slide-Rock Bolter, Hidebehind, Wampus Cat, Hoop Snake, and many more outrageous creations meant to be viewed as entertainment, not real beings.

If we go by Wall’s proposed definition of cryptid of 1983, which was “a living thing having the quality of being hidden or unknown” – then Fearsome Creatures qualify. (In order to have an operational definition that everyone can clearly understand and follow, you had better be precise, or else.)

Thanks to the re-popularization of Fearsome Creatures/Critters in the Internet/Pop Cryptid age, you will find people saying that one of these is their “favorite cryptid”. The line has been crossed. There is no going back.

Proponents of zoo-cryptids (i.e., belief that the cryptid represents a real, undiscovered animal) reject (most) fearsome or mythological creature tales for obvious reasons – they do not represent real animals. However, this relies on the “sharp line” fallacy mentioned above. If a “cryptid” is believed by some people to be real but rejected by most others, how many people need to believe it real before we count it? Who is the judge?

Zoo-cryptids vs fearsome creatures

Ok, I hear you argue that everyone knows Fearsome Creatures were not intended to be taken as factual. Fair enough. But cultural interpretations are complex things. There are countless native stories of spirit creatures, like Japanese Yokai and Oni, and religious-based beings (angels, demons, etc.), that are respected as culturally “real” and valuable. Some people see hairy wildmen (like Bigfoot) and lake monsters this way, while others accept them as genuine hidden animals. The interpretation is subjective and variable. Part of the goal for early cryptozoologists was to demythify the tales of mystery creatures for zoological sake (zoo-cryptids). By in the 2000s, however, the myths clearly became more important than the zoology in mainstream culture. We now have para-cryptids (that have predominantly paranormal characteristics, also can be considered “zoo-form phenomena” if they appear superficially as animals), and folklore-cryptids (based on myths or folklore, like black dogs, unicorns, mermaids and fearsome creatures).

If we consider all the sub-categories of cryptids, this would allow for unrestricted study into the entire history of each creature, fiction and nonfiction, which is important for understanding. Maybe they represent real animals, spiritual beliefs, cultural fears, or all of them together. Those who are well-versed in cryptozoology should consider how indigenous lore about Cannibal giants, water cats, and little people have been used to justify the possibility of real cryptids. Are the antecedents of today’s purported zoo-cryptids cryptids themselves? It’s complex. Recognizing that complexity opens up new areas of research and understanding.

A modern bestiary

The presentation of Fearsome Creatures is not far removed from what was in the medieval bestiaries. These collections of marvelous creatures were popular in the 14th to 16th century, when we had little credible knowledge of what existed in other lands. The creatures described were absurd. We know that now – but to one who is ignorant of the natural world, how would they have known? Honestly, we see stunning levels of ignorance of nature now. People are prone to believe outrageous things.

Audiences have loved accounts of the strange throughout history. Marvelous creatures were part of the storytelling and art in each time period, often including humor along with reverence, and maybe an underlying ethical lesson or warning.

The proliferation of cryptid tales, and the resurgence of old ones back into the mainstream are evidence that we adore these creature tales and don’t care if they are real or not – it’s fun to just imagine.

Accepting fearsome creatures as cryptids

I’ve been following the growth of cryptid town festivals for several years now. In many instances, the creatures that are celebrated as the mascot or icon is not considered a legitimately real creature, but is still respected as a story that embodies the town history, even if often not in the most respectable light. Here are some infamous examples:

Hodag – Rhinelander, Wisconsin’s infamous legend is commemorated by a statue at the Chamber of Commerce. It’s been the official town mascot since 1918. Modernly depicted as a stocky, aggressive, green-black, feline-frog-dinosaur mash-up with red eyes, huge claws, a spiny-ridged back, and fearsome saber-teeth, the Hodag’s origin is obscure. But it was part of Cox’s original Fearsome Creatures book. The Hodag legend was reimagined, and solidified, by storyteller and jokester Gene Shepard in the closing decade of the 1800s. Shepard brought various bits together from tall tales and Ojibwa legends, and, using wood, ox hide, and some accomplices, created a wondrous hoax. Everyone played along. It has its own town festival, but the Hodag traveling store can be found as a vendor at other cryptid town festivals. For more, see Wisconsin’s Homegrown and Beloved Monster.

Squonk – It’s the hideous Pennsylvania critter that is so ugly, it disintegrates into a puddle of its own tears. The Squonk was in both Cox’s and Tryon’s books. This ridiculous tale is so popular, the Squonk has its own Squonkapalooza in Johnstown, PA – a town which, like Point Pleasant, had its share of disasters. You can find the squonk regularly labeled as a “favorite cryptid” by many who take pity on its dreadful existence.

Snallygaster – A creature from Maryland described as a one-eyed flying reptile with both a beak and teeth, as well as face tentacles, it rocketed to popularity in association with the Jersey Devil appearances in 1909. Some colorful local characters reported that the creature was back on the hunt. The local newspaper played along, warning that it might swoop down to carry off its victims, usually children, and drain their blood. The accepted origin story is that the creature derived from tales from German immigrants to South Mountain, around Frederick, MD. This creature, also from Cox’s tales, has a scandalous history featuring political slanders and violent racism. Yet, it’s got a museum, and is considered a cryptid favorite lately. For more, see this Pop Cryptid Spectator piece.

Conclusion

If someone says a fantastic creature is a cryptid, we can’t stop them. It is not possible to gatekeep popular language. There are many reasons why the term cryptid no longer applies in a narrow zoo-cryptid sense.

I’m inclined to accept an umbrella term of cryptids as encompassing zoo-cryptids, para-cryptids, and fearsome, folklore, fantastical and legendary creatures. In other words, to include anything people claim exists that isn’t officially recognized as genuine. As I explained, it’s too difficult to draw the line about what isn’t and isn’t a cryptid because people say they see or believe in all sorts of weird creatures for all kinds of reasons. Cryptids can be really weird, no one is suitable to judge what is too weird. I don’t, however, accept that the cryptid label is useful to describe mystery animals with the end goal of scientifically identifying them because you cannot know what they are until you find them.

The point I’m trying to make with the controversial inclusion of Fearsome Creatures in a cryptid framing is to recognize the importance of imagination, creativity, changeability, and ultimate cultural value of mysterious creatures (no matter what the explanation is). Technically, with none of the established/infamous cryptids discovered and “realized” in the 21st century, cryptids ONLY value has been cultural – in our stories, our art, as local symbols, commercial icons, or as social themes. In the cultural framing, the impact has been huge. We have a lot to gain to accept and study all cryptids, no matter your definition, in a cultural frame. No one is preventing research and opinions on how these creatures translate to zoological interests, or historic, or social, or psychological, etc. And it’s fine to keep referring to Fearsome Creatures as tall tales. The cultural evolution, and their increasing popularity, is out of our control.

This is part 9 of the 12 Days of Cryptids.

#12DaysOfCryptids #cryptids #fearsomeCreatures #fearsomeCritters #Hodag #snallygaster #Squonk #tallTales

Fearsome cryptid creatures

In the era of reality TV and social media, the 21st-century version of cryptids evolved rapidly, fueled by a society-wide search for fun weird stuff, enchantment, and a connection to something bigger than oneself. “Cryptids” generally became more well-known and popular. They were readily fictionalized, exaggerated, and artistically distributed worldwide, beyond their original scope. The loosely defined concept of the cryptid as an unknown animal to be discovered (to replace “monster”, as coined in 1983) broadened in popular culture to include all kinds of mysterious creatures. While this expansion created consternation for the old school cryptozoology scene (and does TO THIS DAY for prickly Redditors), it is what it is. Language evolves. Time and context changes our views about mysterious creatures.

The “sharp line” fallacy of cryptids

Contrary to several outspoken cryptozoologists, there is no “sharp line” between mythical creatures, fantastical beasts, folklore creatures, and modern cryptids. They blend into one another through time and across the globe. At one time, even to today, some folks believed that various fantastical creatures, like unicorns, mermaids and dragons, are real animals that did once or still do exist. If witnesses say they see them, aren’t they potential “cryptids” (as ‘ethnoknown’ creatures)? If the cryptozoologist argues that they don’t represent real animals, how do they know? What if a real animal was the basis for the tale? The definitions in cryptozoology are “squishy” and imprecise for many reasons. The “sharp line” defining proper cryptids is a fallacy.

There are the critters that are very obviously supernatural or fiction: most cultures have legends of the undead, shapeshifters, spirit creatures, giants, or witches. We also have tall tales and stories that are meant to serve a social purpose, where the story about someone encountering strange things are held as “true” usually for a brief time (as a child, on a dark night, or as a warning or joke) before we recognize them as fiction. Here’s where we come to Fearsome Creatures.

William Cox’s Fearsome Creatures of the Lumberwoods (1910) is a collection of tales told by lumber workers or hunter-trappers in the northern woods (“with a few desert and mountain beasts”) of the US and Canada. In the same vein, Henry Tryon’s Fearsome Critters (1939) has some overlap with Cox’s but includes a few new entries. These volumes gave us the Hodag, Squonk, Snallygaster, Slide-Rock Bolter, Hidebehind, Wampus Cat, Hoop Snake, and many more outrageous creations meant to be viewed as entertainment, not real beings.

If we go by Wall’s proposed definition of cryptid of 1983, which was “a living thing having the quality of being hidden or unknown” – then Fearsome Creatures qualify. (In order to have an operational definition that everyone can clearly understand and follow, you had better be precise, or else.)

Thanks to the re-popularization of Fearsome Creatures/Critters in the Internet/Pop Cryptid age, you will find people saying that one of these is their “favorite cryptid”. The line has been crossed. There is no going back.

Proponents of zoo-cryptids (i.e., belief that the cryptid represents a real, undiscovered animal) reject (most) fearsome or mythological creature tales for obvious reasons – they do not represent real animals. However, this relies on the “sharp line” fallacy mentioned above. If a “cryptid” is believed by some people to be real but rejected by most others, how many people need to believe it real before we count it? Who is the judge?

Zoo-cryptids vs fearsome creatures

Ok, I hear you argue that everyone knows Fearsome Creatures were not intended to be taken as factual. Fair enough. But cultural interpretations are complex things. There are countless native stories of spirit creatures, like Japanese Yokai and Oni, and religious-based beings (angels, demons, etc.), that are respected as culturally “real” and valuable. Some people see hairy wildmen (like Bigfoot) and lake monsters this way, while others accept them as genuine hidden animals. The interpretation is subjective and variable. Part of the goal for early cryptozoologists was to demythify the tales of mystery creatures for zoological sake (zoo-cryptids). By in the 2000s, however, the myths clearly became more important than the zoology in mainstream culture. We now have para-cryptids (that have predominantly paranormal characteristics, also can be considered “zoo-form phenomena” if they appear superficially as animals), and folklore-cryptids (based on myths or folklore, like black dogs, unicorns, mermaids and fearsome creatures).

If we consider all the sub-categories of cryptids, this would allow for unrestricted study into the entire history of each creature, fiction and nonfiction, which is important for understanding. Maybe they represent real animals, spiritual beliefs, cultural fears, or all of them together. Those who are well-versed in cryptozoology should consider how indigenous lore about Cannibal giants, water cats, and little people have been used to justify the possibility of real cryptids. Are the antecedents of today’s purported zoo-cryptids cryptids themselves? It’s complex. Recognizing that complexity opens up new areas of research and understanding.

A modern bestiary

The presentation of Fearsome Creatures is not far removed from what was in the medieval bestiaries. These collections of marvelous creatures were popular in the 14th to 16th century, when we had little credible knowledge of what existed in other lands. The creatures described were absurd. We know that now – but to one who is ignorant of the natural world, how would they have known? Honestly, we see stunning levels of ignorance of nature now. People are prone to believe outrageous things.

Audiences have loved accounts of the strange throughout history. Marvelous creatures were part of the storytelling and art in each time period, often including humor along with reverence, and maybe an underlying ethical lesson or warning.

The proliferation of cryptid tales, and the resurgence of old ones back into the mainstream are evidence that we adore these creature tales and don’t care if they are real or not – it’s fun to just imagine.

Accepting fearsome creatures as cryptids

I’ve been following the growth of cryptid town festivals for several years now. In many instances, the creatures that are celebrated as the mascot or icon is not considered a legitimately real creature, but is still respected as a story that embodies the town history, even if often not in the most respectable light. Here are some infamous examples:

Hodag – Rhinelander, Wisconsin’s infamous legend is commemorated by a statue at the Chamber of Commerce. It’s been the official town mascot since 1918. Modernly depicted as a stocky, aggressive, green-black, feline-frog-dinosaur mash-up with red eyes, huge claws, a spiny-ridged back, and fearsome saber-teeth, the Hodag’s origin is obscure. But it was part of Cox’s original Fearsome Creatures book. The Hodag legend was reimagined, and solidified, by storyteller and jokester Gene Shepard in the closing decade of the 1800s. Shepard brought various bits together from tall tales and Ojibwa legends, and, using wood, ox hide, and some accomplices, created a wondrous hoax. Everyone played along. It has its own town festival, but the Hodag traveling store can be found as a vendor at other cryptid town festivals. For more, see Wisconsin’s Homegrown and Beloved Monster.

Squonk – It’s the hideous Pennsylvania critter that is so ugly, it disintegrates into a puddle of its own tears. The Squonk was in both Cox’s and Tryon’s books. This ridiculous tale is so popular, the Squonk has its own Squonkapalooza in Johnstown, PA – a town which, like Point Pleasant, had its share of disasters. You can find the squonk regularly labeled as a “favorite cryptid” by many who take pity on its dreadful existence.

Snallygaster – A creature from Maryland described as a one-eyed flying reptile with both a beak and teeth, as well as face tentacles, it rocketed to popularity in association with the Jersey Devil appearances in 1909. Some colorful local characters reported that the creature was back on the hunt. The local newspaper played along, warning that it might swoop down to carry off its victims, usually children, and drain their blood. The accepted origin story is that the creature derived from tales from German immigrants to South Mountain, around Frederick, MD. This creature, also from Cox’s tales, has a scandalous history featuring political slanders and violent racism. Yet, it’s got a museum, and is considered a cryptid favorite lately. For more, see this Pop Cryptid Spectator piece.

Conclusion

If someone says a fantastic creature is a cryptid, we can’t stop them. It is not possible to gatekeep popular language. There are many reasons why the term cryptid no longer applies in a narrow zoo-cryptid sense.

I’m inclined to accept an umbrella term of cryptids as encompassing zoo-cryptids, para-cryptids, and fearsome, folklore, fantastical and legendary creatures. In other words, to include anything people claim exists that isn’t officially recognized as genuine. As I explained, it’s too difficult to draw the line about what isn’t and isn’t a cryptid because people say they see or believe in all sorts of weird creatures for all kinds of reasons. Cryptids can be really weird, no one is suitable to judge what is too weird. I don’t, however, accept that the cryptid label is useful to describe mystery animals with the end goal of scientifically identifying them because you cannot know what they are until you find them.

The point I’m trying to make with the controversial inclusion of Fearsome Creatures in a cryptid framing is to recognize the importance of imagination, creativity, changeability, and ultimate cultural value of mysterious creatures (no matter what the explanation is). Technically, with none of the established/infamous cryptids discovered and “realized” in the 21st century, cryptids ONLY value has been cultural – in our stories, our art, as local symbols, commercial icons, or as social themes. In the cultural framing, the impact has been huge. We have a lot to gain to accept and study all cryptids, no matter your definition, in a cultural frame. No one is preventing research and opinions on how these creatures translate to zoological interests, or historic, or social, or psychological, etc. And it’s fine to keep referring to Fearsome Creatures as tall tales. The cultural evolution, and their increasing popularity, is out of our control.

This is part 9 of the 12 Days of Cryptids.

#12DaysOfCryptids #cryptids #fearsomeCreatures #fearsomeCritters #Hodag #snallygaster #Squonk #tallTales

Chud, Chuchunaa, and Hidden Others

I am not a fan of modern monster horror. But even I have heard of C.H.U.D. – Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller, a 1984 movie. In modern slang, ‘chud’ has become a derisive insult for persons with less than redeemable qualities, such as incels and online extremist groups. Why is this topic included in this cryptid context? Because the term “chud” is part of a collection of words that has a long history and refers to the idea of “the other”. Tales circulate that these secret people still appear on occasion. Partly because of the lack of written records, the real mystery of the chud has not been unravelled.

Those who have seen the horror movie likely have no idea that this was a real term referring to an “underground” people of the Russian Arctic. I didn’t dig into the origin of that film, but I would bet the writers knew this term.

I came across the term while looking up legends of legendary creatures of the mines (Kobolds, Knockers, etc.). I found a chapter in the Darnell and Gleach (editors) volume Recovering ancestors in Anthropological Traditions called “Rooting in the Subterranean” by Dmitry V. Arzyutov. I was shocked that I hadn’t heard of the connection between C.H.U.D. and “chud” before. But, clearly, there is a language barrier, and the context gets very complicated fast.

Cultural barriers are a known hazard for researching folklore topics. Not only do we miss or misunderstand the translations, we lack the important context to make sense out of why the stories arose and how they were used. Context is critical. Many a cryptid has been appropriated and in media in ways that are misleading and insulting to the original peoples. Actually, I’m a bit hesitant to attempt to present information from a foreign culture because I know I can’t do it justice. So I’m doing this one with a disclaimer that this is a difficult subject to distill into a general info post – a lot gets left out. Apologies if I mess up or overstep.

Hidden people

I have always struggled with the term “hidden” as applied to cryptozoology. To be hidden implies that the hiding is deliberate and for a reason. It suggests purpose (as opposed to “unknown”, which implies blameless ignorance). Animals may be hiding because they are afraid; they are not hiding because they don’t want to be identified as new species. Adrian Shine, famed Loch Ness research, once noted that “hidden” animals require “hidden” worlds. (Monster Talk podcast S04E26). People have the intelligence to deliberately hide because others DO know about them and intend for their existence to remain secret.

The chud story, in this context, takes two forms. The first refers to an enigmatic tribe of people that was listed as an ethnic group in early Russian historical documents (11th century). The consensus seems to be that these people were historical Finnic people of the Baltic area. The term may have been applied to many different tribes, representing “the others”, all who weren’t those of the dominant culture. Linguists suggest the word was derived from a Proto-Germanic word meaning people. Over time, it developed connotations of the other. It’s a short step between “othering” and mythologizing the other.

The second discussion of chud is about the cultural legends about mystery underground dwellers common to peoples of the Arctic islands and circumpolar regions. This is where things get weird.

Legendary Underground People

These tales of underground people evolved to depict them as a mythic and magical race that vanished into the earth. Remnants of past activities were attributed to the chud. Earthworks and mine shafts discovered by explorers were seen as evidence of the chud. Siberian metal ore mines were known among the Russian colonizers as chudski kopi – mines of the chud. The mounds they found were said to be “graves of the chud”.

Arzyutov’s work, mentioned above, describes the shared idea among the Russian Arctic indigenous peoples of a lost underground nation, with similar legends but different names.

The Nenets, a Samoyedic indigenous group, who are shorter in stature, have a legend that their arrival in the Russian Arctic drove the preceding dwarf people underground, where they still reside. Occasionally, this lost tribe, known as siirtja (I cannot reproduce the proper Cyrillic lettering) make their presence known with above ground traces or encounters. The people joke that some in the community have similar physical features as these dwarfs.

These legends tell of the tribe as afraid of sunlight, who produced and wore knives and other metal items. In the ancient past, they harnessed mammoths.

Anthropologists realized the similarity between the siirtja and chud, and similar legends from different peoples, and concluded that such legends must be deeply rooted in the human history of the circumpolar regions, but there was no written evidence to find a common origin.

The Komi people of northeastern Russia tell of chud as short and white-eyed with an uncanny appearance. They were miners that lived primitively but hoarded great wealth. In this version of their disappearance, they hid to avoid being taxed.

In other areas of Russian, the chud either buried themselves alive or entombed themselves underground to avoid being overtaken by Slavic invaders and converted to Christianity.

I’ve seen a more modern mention of the rumors that the treasures of the chud still remain hidden underground, possibly behind a secret gate. This version has a very dubious “Mines of Moria” Tolkien vibe. Modern ideas of the chud seemed to blend with concepts of nefarious forest spirits, where the hidden people became more like ghosts that people claimed to encounter.

Trying to unravel and explain the varieties of myths in this category is best left to experts. The most important thing I’ve learned in this attempt to find out more is that seeking to understand the nuanced and highly complex history of legends and how they have been translated to modern times, is not for the amateur.

Chuchunaa – the Siberian Wildman Legend

Chuchunaa of modern cryptid lore is a version of the wildman from northeastern Siberia. The word, from the Yakut dialect, means “outcast” or “fugitive” and is related to “chud”. Russian researchers who took cryptozoology seriously were inspired by stories of the chuchunaa from ethnographers. Some of these researchers speculated that the chuchunaa is a relict human, possibly Neanderthal.

Encounters with the chuchunaa clearly described them as humans, as they are noted as using fire, wearing clothes, and interacting with people. But their reputation is typically negative; they are seen as dangerous “man-eaters”. Often considered one of the collection of worldwide “hairy hominids”, they connect to this idea of a hidden tribe of “others”. Perhaps cryptid writers should be more careful in presenting the idea that the chuchunaa represents a Bigfoot-like cryptid.

To conclude, cryptids are frequently linked to folklore or indigenous legends, with amateur “cryptozoologists” making leaps of logic and using facts too loosely to push their own preferred narrative. When fact and fiction mesh and evolve into something new, relevant complexities get overlooked. The result is often a hopelessly messed up interpretation of a modern cryptid with a weak basis in reality. This piece was my small effort to illuminate some of the those problems and discourage them.

This was post 5 of the 12 Days of Cryptids.

#12DaysOfCryptids #chuchunaa #Chud #cryptid #UndergroundPeople

Chud, Chuchunaa, and Hidden Others

I am not a fan of modern monster horror. But even I have heard of C.H.U.D. – Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller, a 1984 movie. In modern slang, ‘chud’ has become a derisive insult for persons with less than redeemable qualities, such as incels and online extremist groups. Why is this topic included in this cryptid context? Because the term “chud” is part of a collection of words that has a long history and refers to the idea of “the other”. Tales circulate that these secret people still appear on occasion. Partly because of the lack of written records, the real mystery of the chud has not been unravelled.

Those who have seen the horror movie likely have no idea that this was a real term referring to an “underground” people of the Russian Arctic. I didn’t dig into the origin of that film, but I would bet the writers knew this term.

I came across the term while looking up legends of legendary creatures of the mines (Kobolds, Knockers, etc.). I found a chapter in the Darnell and Gleach (editors) volume Recovering ancestors in Anthropological Traditions called “Rooting in the Subterranean” by Dmitry V. Arzyutov. I was shocked that I hadn’t heard of the connection between C.H.U.D. and “chud” before. But, clearly, there is a language barrier, and the context gets very complicated fast.

Cultural barriers are a known hazard for researching folklore topics. Not only do we miss or misunderstand the translations, we lack the important context to make sense out of why the stories arose and how they were used. Context is critical. Many a cryptid has been appropriated and in media in ways that are misleading and insulting to the original peoples. Actually, I’m a bit hesitant to attempt to present information from a foreign culture because I know I can’t do it justice. So I’m doing this one with a disclaimer that this is a difficult subject to distill into a general info post – a lot gets left out. Apologies if I mess up or overstep.

Hidden people

I have always struggled with the term “hidden” as applied to cryptozoology. To be hidden implies that the hiding is deliberate and for a reason. It suggests purpose (as opposed to “unknown”, which implies blameless ignorance). Animals may be hiding because they are afraid; they are not hiding because they don’t want to be identified as new species. Adrian Shine, famed Loch Ness research, once noted that “hidden” animals require “hidden” worlds. (Monster Talk podcast S04E26). People have the intelligence to deliberately hide because others DO know about them and intend for their existence to remain secret.

The chud story, in this context, takes two forms. The first refers to an enigmatic tribe of people that was listed as an ethnic group in early Russian historical documents (11th century). The consensus seems to be that these people were historical Finnic people of the Baltic area. The term may have been applied to many different tribes, representing “the others”, all who weren’t those of the dominant culture. Linguists suggest the word was derived from a Proto-Germanic word meaning people. Over time, it developed connotations of the other. It’s a short step between “othering” and mythologizing the other.

The second discussion of chud is about the cultural legends about mystery underground dwellers common to peoples of the Arctic islands and circumpolar regions. This is where things get weird.

Legendary Underground People

These tales of underground people evolved to depict them as a mythic and magical race that vanished into the earth. Remnants of past activities were attributed to the chud. Earthworks and mine shafts discovered by explorers were seen as evidence of the chud. Siberian metal ore mines were known among the Russian colonizers as chudski kopi – mines of the chud. The mounds they found were said to be “graves of the chud”.

Arzyutov’s work, mentioned above, describes the shared idea among the Russian Arctic indigenous peoples of a lost underground nation, with similar legends but different names.

The Nenets, a Samoyedic indigenous group, who are shorter in stature, have a legend that their arrival in the Russian Arctic drove the preceding dwarf people underground, where they still reside. Occasionally, this lost tribe, known as siirtja (I cannot reproduce the proper Cyrillic lettering) make their presence known with above ground traces or encounters. The people joke that some in the community have similar physical features as these dwarfs.

These legends tell of the tribe as afraid of sunlight, who produced and wore knives and other metal items. In the ancient past, they harnessed mammoths.

Anthropologists realized the similarity between the siirtja and chud, and similar legends from different peoples, and concluded that such legends must be deeply rooted in the human history of the circumpolar regions, but there was no written evidence to find a common origin.

The Komi people of northeastern Russia tell of chud as short and white-eyed with an uncanny appearance. They were miners that lived primitively but hoarded great wealth. In this version of their disappearance, they hid to avoid being taxed.

In other areas of Russian, the chud either buried themselves alive or entombed themselves underground to avoid being overtaken by Slavic invaders and converted to Christianity.

I’ve seen a more modern mention of the rumors that the treasures of the chud still remain hidden underground, possibly behind a secret gate. This version has a very dubious “Mines of Moria” Tolkien vibe. Modern ideas of the chud seemed to blend with concepts of nefarious forest spirits, where the hidden people became more like ghosts that people claimed to encounter.

Trying to unravel and explain the varieties of myths in this category is best left to experts. The most important thing I’ve learned in this attempt to find out more is that seeking to understand the nuanced and highly complex history of legends and how they have been translated to modern times, is not for the amateur.

Chuchunaa – the Siberian Wildman Legend

Chuchunaa of modern cryptid lore is a version of the wildman from northeastern Siberia. The word, from the Yakut dialect, means “outcast” or “fugitive” and is related to “chud”. Russian researchers who took cryptozoology seriously were inspired by stories of the chuchunaa from ethnographers. Some of these researchers speculated that the chuchunaa is a relict human, possibly Neanderthal.

Encounters with the chuchunaa clearly described them as humans, as they are noted as using fire, wearing clothes, and interacting with people. But their reputation is typically negative; they are seen as dangerous “man-eaters”. Often considered one of the collection of worldwide “hairy hominids”, they connect to this idea of a hidden tribe of “others”. Perhaps cryptid writers should be more careful in presenting the idea that the chuchunaa represents a Bigfoot-like cryptid.

To conclude, cryptids are frequently linked to folklore or indigenous legends, with amateur “cryptozoologists” making leaps of logic and using facts too loosely to push their own preferred narrative. When fact and fiction mesh and evolve into something new, relevant complexities get overlooked. The result is often a hopelessly messed up interpretation of a modern cryptid with a weak basis in reality. This piece was my small effort to illuminate some of the those problems and discourage them.

This was post 5 of the 12 Days of Cryptids.

#12DaysOfCryptids #chuchunaa #Chud #cryptid #UndergroundPeople

Chud, Chuchunaa, and Hidden Others

I am not a fan of modern monster horror. But even I have heard of C.H.U.D. – Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller, a 1984 movie. In modern slang, ‘chud’ has become a derisive insult for persons with less than redeemable qualities, such as incels and online extremist groups. Why is this topic included in this cryptid context? Because the term “chud” is part of a collection of words that has a long history and refers to the idea of “the other”. Tales circulate that these secret people still appear on occasion. Partly because of the lack of written records, the real mystery of the chud has not been unravelled.

Those who have seen the horror movie likely have no idea that this was a real term referring to an “underground” people of the Russian Arctic. I didn’t dig into the origin of that film, but I would bet the writers knew this term.

I came across the term while looking up legends of legendary creatures of the mines (Kobolds, Knockers, etc.). I found a chapter in the Darnell and Gleach (editors) volume Recovering ancestors in Anthropological Traditions called “Rooting in the Subterranean” by Dmitry V. Arzyutov. I was shocked that I hadn’t heard of the connection between C.H.U.D. and “chud” before. But, clearly, there is a language barrier, and the context gets very complicated fast.

Cultural barriers are a known hazard for researching folklore topics. Not only do we miss or misunderstand the translations, we lack the important context to make sense out of why the stories arose and how they were used. Context is critical. Many a cryptid has been appropriated and in media in ways that are misleading and insulting to the original peoples. Actually, I’m a bit hesitant to attempt to present information from a foreign culture because I know I can’t do it justice. So I’m doing this one with a disclaimer that this is a difficult subject to distill into a general info post – a lot gets left out. Apologies if I mess up or overstep.

Hidden people

I have always struggled with the term “hidden” as applied to cryptozoology. To be hidden implies that the hiding is deliberate and for a reason. It suggests purpose (as opposed to “unknown”, which implies blameless ignorance). Animals may be hiding because they are afraid; they are not hiding because they don’t want to be identified as new species. Adrian Shine, famed Loch Ness research, once noted that “hidden” animals require “hidden” worlds. (Monster Talk podcast S04E26). People have the intelligence to deliberately hide because others DO know about them and intend for their existence to remain secret.

The chud story, in this context, takes two forms. The first refers to an enigmatic tribe of people that was listed as an ethnic group in early Russian historical documents (11th century). The consensus seems to be that these people were historical Finnic people of the Baltic area. The term may have been applied to many different tribes, representing “the others”, all who weren’t those of the dominant culture. Linguists suggest the word was derived from a Proto-Germanic word meaning people. Over time, it developed connotations of the other. It’s a short step between “othering” and mythologizing the other.

The second discussion of chud is about the cultural legends about mystery underground dwellers common to peoples of the Arctic islands and circumpolar regions. This is where things get weird.

Legendary Underground People

These tales of underground people evolved to depict them as a mythic and magical race that vanished into the earth. Remnants of past activities were attributed to the chud. Earthworks and mine shafts discovered by explorers were seen as evidence of the chud. Siberian metal ore mines were known among the Russian colonizers as chudski kopi – mines of the chud. The mounds they found were said to be “graves of the chud”.

Arzyutov’s work, mentioned above, describes the shared idea among the Russian Arctic indigenous peoples of a lost underground nation, with similar legends but different names.

The Nenets, a Samoyedic indigenous group, who are shorter in stature, have a legend that their arrival in the Russian Arctic drove the preceding dwarf people underground, where they still reside. Occasionally, this lost tribe, known as siirtja (I cannot reproduce the proper Cyrillic lettering) make their presence known with above ground traces or encounters. The people joke that some in the community have similar physical features as these dwarfs.

These legends tell of the tribe as afraid of sunlight, who produced and wore knives and other metal items. In the ancient past, they harnessed mammoths.

Anthropologists realized the similarity between the siirtja and chud, and similar legends from different peoples, and concluded that such legends must be deeply rooted in the human history of the circumpolar regions, but there was no written evidence to find a common origin.

The Komi people of northeastern Russia tell of chud as short and white-eyed with an uncanny appearance. They were miners that lived primitively but hoarded great wealth. In this version of their disappearance, they hid to avoid being taxed.

In other areas of Russian, the chud either buried themselves alive or entombed themselves underground to avoid being overtaken by Slavic invaders and converted to Christianity.

I’ve seen a more modern mention of the rumors that the treasures of the chud still remain hidden underground, possibly behind a secret gate. This version has a very dubious “Mines of Moria” Tolkien vibe. Modern ideas of the chud seemed to blend with concepts of nefarious forest spirits, where the hidden people became more like ghosts that people claimed to encounter.

Trying to unravel and explain the varieties of myths in this category is best left to experts. The most important thing I’ve learned in this attempt to find out more is that seeking to understand the nuanced and highly complex history of legends and how they have been translated to modern times, is not for the amateur.

Chuchunaa – the Siberian Wildman Legend

Chuchunaa of modern cryptid lore is a version of the wildman from northeastern Siberia. The word, from the Yakut dialect, means “outcast” or “fugitive” and is related to “chud”. Russian researchers who took cryptozoology seriously were inspired by stories of the chuchunaa from ethnographers. Some of these researchers speculated that the chuchunaa is a relict human, possibly Neanderthal.

Encounters with the chuchunaa clearly described them as humans, as they are noted as using fire, wearing clothes, and interacting with people. But their reputation is typically negative; they are seen as dangerous “man-eaters”. Often considered one of the collection of worldwide “hairy hominids”, they connect to this idea of a hidden tribe of “others”. Perhaps cryptid writers should be more careful in presenting the idea that the chuchunaa represents a Bigfoot-like cryptid.

To conclude, cryptids are frequently linked to folklore or indigenous legends, with amateur “cryptozoologists” making leaps of logic and using facts too loosely to push their own preferred narrative. When fact and fiction mesh and evolve into something new, relevant complexities get overlooked. The result is often a hopelessly messed up interpretation of a modern cryptid with a weak basis in reality. This piece was my small effort to illuminate some of the those problems and discourage them.

This was post 5 of the 12 Days of Cryptids.

#12DaysOfCryptids #chuchunaa #Chud #cryptid #UndergroundPeople

Chud, Chuchunaa, and Hidden Others

I am not a fan of modern monster horror. But even I have heard of C.H.U.D. – Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller, a 1984 movie. In modern slang, ‘chud’ has become a derisive insult for persons with less than redeemable qualities, such as incels and online extremist groups. Why is this topic included in this cryptid context? Because the term “chud” is part of a collection of words that has a long history and refers to the idea of “the other”. Tales circulate that these secret people still appear on occasion. Partly because of the lack of written records, the real mystery of the chud has not been unravelled.

Those who have seen the horror movie likely have no idea that this was a real term referring to an “underground” people of the Russian Arctic. I didn’t dig into the origin of that film, but I would bet the writers knew this term.

I came across the term while looking up legends of legendary creatures of the mines (Kobolds, Knockers, etc.). I found a chapter in the Darnell and Gleach (editors) volume Recovering ancestors in Anthropological Traditions called “Rooting in the Subterranean” by Dmitry V. Arzyutov. I was shocked that I hadn’t heard of the connection between C.H.U.D. and “chud” before. But, clearly, there is a language barrier, and the context gets very complicated fast.

Cultural barriers are a known hazard for researching folklore topics. Not only do we miss or misunderstand the translations, we lack the important context to make sense out of why the stories arose and how they were used. Context is critical. Many a cryptid has been appropriated and in media in ways that are misleading and insulting to the original peoples. Actually, I’m a bit hesitant to attempt to present information from a foreign culture because I know I can’t do it justice. So I’m doing this one with a disclaimer that this is a difficult subject to distill into a general info post – a lot gets left out. Apologies if I mess up or overstep.

Hidden people

I have always struggled with the term “hidden” as applied to cryptozoology. To be hidden implies that the hiding is deliberate and for a reason. It suggests purpose (as opposed to “unknown”, which implies blameless ignorance). Animals may be hiding because they are afraid; they are not hiding because they don’t want to be identified as new species. Adrian Shine, famed Loch Ness research, once noted that “hidden” animals require “hidden” worlds. (Monster Talk podcast S04E26). People have the intelligence to deliberately hide because others DO know about them and intend for their existence to remain secret.

The chud story, in this context, takes two forms. The first refers to an enigmatic tribe of people that was listed as an ethnic group in early Russian historical documents (11th century). The consensus seems to be that these people were historical Finnic people of the Baltic area. The term may have been applied to many different tribes, representing “the others”, all who weren’t those of the dominant culture. Linguists suggest the word was derived from a Proto-Germanic word meaning people. Over time, it developed connotations of the other. It’s a short step between “othering” and mythologizing the other.

The second discussion of chud is about the cultural legends about mystery underground dwellers common to peoples of the Arctic islands and circumpolar regions. This is where things get weird.

Legendary Underground People

These tales of underground people evolved to depict them as a mythic and magical race that vanished into the earth. Remnants of past activities were attributed to the chud. Earthworks and mine shafts discovered by explorers were seen as evidence of the chud. Siberian metal ore mines were known among the Russian colonizers as chudski kopi – mines of the chud. The mounds they found were said to be “graves of the chud”.

Arzyutov’s work, mentioned above, describes the shared idea among the Russian Arctic indigenous peoples of a lost underground nation, with similar legends but different names.

The Nenets, a Samoyedic indigenous group, who are shorter in stature, have a legend that their arrival in the Russian Arctic drove the preceding dwarf people underground, where they still reside. Occasionally, this lost tribe, known as siirtja (I cannot reproduce the proper Cyrillic lettering) make their presence known with above ground traces or encounters. The people joke that some in the community have similar physical features as these dwarfs.

These legends tell of the tribe as afraid of sunlight, who produced and wore knives and other metal items. In the ancient past, they harnessed mammoths.

Anthropologists realized the similarity between the siirtja and chud, and similar legends from different peoples, and concluded that such legends must be deeply rooted in the human history of the circumpolar regions, but there was no written evidence to find a common origin.

The Komi people of northeastern Russia tell of chud as short and white-eyed with an uncanny appearance. They were miners that lived primitively but hoarded great wealth. In this version of their disappearance, they hid to avoid being taxed.

In other areas of Russian, the chud either buried themselves alive or entombed themselves underground to avoid being overtaken by Slavic invaders and converted to Christianity.

I’ve seen a more modern mention of the rumors that the treasures of the chud still remain hidden underground, possibly behind a secret gate. This version has a very dubious “Mines of Moria” Tolkien vibe. Modern ideas of the chud seemed to blend with concepts of nefarious forest spirits, where the hidden people became more like ghosts that people claimed to encounter.

Trying to unravel and explain the varieties of myths in this category is best left to experts. The most important thing I’ve learned in this attempt to find out more is that seeking to understand the nuanced and highly complex history of legends and how they have been translated to modern times, is not for the amateur.

Chuchunaa – the Siberian Wildman Legend

Chuchunaa of modern cryptid lore is a version of the wildman from northeastern Siberia. The word, from the Yakut dialect, means “outcast” or “fugitive” and is related to “chud”. Russian researchers who took cryptozoology seriously were inspired by stories of the chuchunaa from ethnographers. Some of these researchers speculated that the chuchunaa is a relict human, possibly Neanderthal.

Encounters with the chuchunaa clearly described them as humans, as they are noted as using fire, wearing clothes, and interacting with people. But their reputation is typically negative; they are seen as dangerous “man-eaters”. Often considered one of the collection of worldwide “hairy hominids”, they connect to this idea of a hidden tribe of “others”. Perhaps cryptid writers should be more careful in presenting the idea that the chuchunaa represents a Bigfoot-like cryptid.

To conclude, cryptids are frequently linked to folklore or indigenous legends, with amateur “cryptozoologists” making leaps of logic and using facts too loosely to push their own preferred narrative. When fact and fiction mesh and evolve into something new, relevant complexities get overlooked. The result is often a hopelessly messed up interpretation of a modern cryptid with a weak basis in reality. This piece was my small effort to illuminate some of the those problems and discourage them.

This was post 5 of the 12 Days of Cryptids.

#12DaysOfCryptids #chuchunaa #Chud #cryptid #UndergroundPeople

Chud, Chuchunaa, and Hidden Others

I am not a fan of modern monster horror. But even I have heard of C.H.U.D. – Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller, a 1984 movie. In modern slang, ‘chud’ has become a derisive insult for persons with less than redeemable qualities, such as incels and online extremist groups. Why is this topic included in this cryptid context? Because the term “chud” is part of a collection of words that has a long history and refers to the idea of “the other”. Tales circulate that these secret people still appear on occasion. Partly because of the lack of written records, the real mystery of the chud has not been unravelled.

Those who have seen the horror movie likely have no idea that this was a real term referring to an “underground” people of the Russian Arctic. I didn’t dig into the origin of that film, but I would bet the writers knew this term.

I came across the term while looking up legends of legendary creatures of the mines (Kobolds, Knockers, etc.). I found a chapter in the Darnell and Gleach (editors) volume Recovering ancestors in Anthropological Traditions called “Rooting in the Subterranean” by Dmitry V. Arzyutov. I was shocked that I hadn’t heard of the connection between C.H.U.D. and “chud” before. But, clearly, there is a language barrier, and the context gets very complicated fast.

Cultural barriers are a known hazard for researching folklore topics. Not only do we miss or misunderstand the translations, we lack the important context to make sense out of why the stories arose and how they were used. Context is critical. Many a cryptid has been appropriated and in media in ways that are misleading and insulting to the original peoples. Actually, I’m a bit hesitant to attempt to present information from a foreign culture because I know I can’t do it justice. So I’m doing this one with a disclaimer that this is a difficult subject to distill into a general info post – a lot gets left out. Apologies if I mess up or overstep.

Hidden people

I have always struggled with the term “hidden” as applied to cryptozoology. To be hidden implies that the hiding is deliberate and for a reason. It suggests purpose (as opposed to “unknown”, which implies blameless ignorance). Animals may be hiding because they are afraid; they are not hiding because they don’t want to be identified as new species. Adrian Shine, famed Loch Ness research, once noted that “hidden” animals require “hidden” worlds. (Monster Talk podcast S04E26). People have the intelligence to deliberately hide because others DO know about them and intend for their existence to remain secret.

The chud story, in this context, takes two forms. The first refers to an enigmatic tribe of people that was listed as an ethnic group in early Russian historical documents (11th century). The consensus seems to be that these people were historical Finnic people of the Baltic area. The term may have been applied to many different tribes, representing “the others”, all who weren’t those of the dominant culture. Linguists suggest the word was derived from a Proto-Germanic word meaning people. Over time, it developed connotations of the other. It’s a short step between “othering” and mythologizing the other.

The second discussion of chud is about the cultural legends about mystery underground dwellers common to peoples of the Arctic islands and circumpolar regions. This is where things get weird.

Legendary Underground People

These tales of underground people evolved to depict them as a mythic and magical race that vanished into the earth. Remnants of past activities were attributed to the chud. Earthworks and mine shafts discovered by explorers were seen as evidence of the chud. Siberian metal ore mines were known among the Russian colonizers as chudski kopi – mines of the chud. The mounds they found were said to be “graves of the chud”.

Arzyutov’s work, mentioned above, describes the shared idea among the Russian Arctic indigenous peoples of a lost underground nation, with similar legends but different names.

The Nenets, a Samoyedic indigenous group, who are shorter in stature, have a legend that their arrival in the Russian Arctic drove the preceding dwarf people underground, where they still reside. Occasionally, this lost tribe, known as siirtja (I cannot reproduce the proper Cyrillic lettering) make their presence known with above ground traces or encounters. The people joke that some in the community have similar physical features as these dwarfs.

These legends tell of the tribe as afraid of sunlight, who produced and wore knives and other metal items. In the ancient past, they harnessed mammoths.

Anthropologists realized the similarity between the siirtja and chud, and similar legends from different peoples, and concluded that such legends must be deeply rooted in the human history of the circumpolar regions, but there was no written evidence to find a common origin.

The Komi people of northeastern Russia tell of chud as short and white-eyed with an uncanny appearance. They were miners that lived primitively but hoarded great wealth. In this version of their disappearance, they hid to avoid being taxed.

In other areas of Russian, the chud either buried themselves alive or entombed themselves underground to avoid being overtaken by Slavic invaders and converted to Christianity.

I’ve seen a more modern mention of the rumors that the treasures of the chud still remain hidden underground, possibly behind a secret gate. This version has a very dubious “Mines of Moria” Tolkien vibe. Modern ideas of the chud seemed to blend with concepts of nefarious forest spirits, where the hidden people became more like ghosts that people claimed to encounter.

Trying to unravel and explain the varieties of myths in this category is best left to experts. The most important thing I’ve learned in this attempt to find out more is that seeking to understand the nuanced and highly complex history of legends and how they have been translated to modern times, is not for the amateur.

Chuchunaa – the Siberian Wildman Legend

Chuchunaa of modern cryptid lore is a version of the wildman from northeastern Siberia. The word, from the Yakut dialect, means “outcast” or “fugitive” and is related to “chud”. Russian researchers who took cryptozoology seriously were inspired by stories of the chuchunaa from ethnographers. Some of these researchers speculated that the chuchunaa is a relict human, possibly Neanderthal.

Encounters with the chuchunaa clearly described them as humans, as they are noted as using fire, wearing clothes, and interacting with people. But their reputation is typically negative; they are seen as dangerous “man-eaters”. Often considered one of the collection of worldwide “hairy hominids”, they connect to this idea of a hidden tribe of “others”. Perhaps cryptid writers should be more careful in presenting the idea that the chuchunaa represents a Bigfoot-like cryptid.

To conclude, cryptids are frequently linked to folklore or indigenous legends, with amateur “cryptozoologists” making leaps of logic and using facts too loosely to push their own preferred narrative. When fact and fiction mesh and evolve into something new, relevant complexities get overlooked. The result is often a hopelessly messed up interpretation of a modern cryptid with a weak basis in reality. This piece was my small effort to illuminate some of the those problems and discourage them.

This was post 5 of the 12 Days of Cryptids.

#12DaysOfCryptids #chuchunaa #Chud #cryptid #UndergroundPeople

Black Panthers – Rare and Everywhere

Tales of black panthers are widespread and repeated from the US and Canada to Europe. A cryptid conundrum arises from the fact that there are no documented populations of these melanistic cats in those places. Yet people see them, report them, and insist that they are around. The black panther phenomenon is so entrenched in cryptid content that many suggest they are not regular animals but zooform phenomenon – paranormal beings in animal shape, unable to be tracked and caught.

Real big black cats

Melanistic variants of large cats include the jaguar and leopard, both of which produce a genetic combination that result in a black coat color. In both cases, the typical coat color is tan with spots or “rosettes”. The excess of dark pigment overwhelms the spotted pattern, even though the spots are visible on the black background in certain lighting up close.

A common assertion from witnesses or those repeating local accounts is that the animal seen was a black mountain lion/puma. Melanistic mountain lions are not recognized as biological possibilities. Hunted for centuries and rendered extinct in the northeastern states, there has never been an example of a black puma. A logical conclusion is that the species Puma concolor does not carry the mutation to account for melanism, so it cannot naturally appear. Therefore, it’s not reasonable to accept this explanation for a big black cat. Even if, one day, a black puma is found (or close to it), it will not be reasonable to conclude that this one-off individual could account for the extensive sightings. So what can account for sightings?

This recent video does a fine job of presenting all the possible explanations for reports. However, EVERY media post about the mystery inevitably includes comments cluttered with unverified (and unverifiable) stories from people who claim to have seen them, regardless of the impossible odds that such a creature exists, particularly in that area.

Black jaguars are a possibility in the southern US. While still a rare variation, individual jaguars can cross into Arizona and may range far enough for people to occasionally spot them. With the rarity of individuals and the additional rarity of the black coat color, the odds just don’t favor black jaguars.

With black leopards only native to Africa, the next reasonable guess is that imported, kept cats have escaped. Escaped kept cats are also a low-odds, but not impossible, option. However, missing animals usually are recovered fairly quickly or end up dead.

In the UK, where the idea of “alien big cats” has a long and exciting history from the early 1900s, certain areas were said to be home to their own named large cat, often described as black. These include the Beast of Exmoor, Surrey Puma, Beast of Bodmin, Norfolk Panther, Cotwolds Big Cat, Beast of Dartmoor, Galloway Puma, and Beast of Buchan. In 2020, Spain was the center of a black panther flap. Like in the U.S., there is a serious problem with no known animals upon which to pin the sightings. But the option of released or escaped animals remains a commonly suggested, though infrequently confirmed, solution.

Photos and hoaxes

Several photographic examples exist from people claiming to have encountered black panthers. The photos often lack scale, or a follow-up to determine scale isn’t done. The black coloration obscures details that allow us to accurately judge size and characteristics. Wildlife experts can tell if the animal is proportioned like a big cat or a regular house cat. In most cases, it’s obvious that the animal is Felis catus (domestic cat), which can get pretty hefty.

Black jaguars have been caught on game cameras in Panama. Even in remote areas, rare snow leopards have been caught on camera in Northern Pakistan. Yet, with the multitude of game cameras everywhere in the US, no black panthers have been discovered. The negative evidence suggests they really aren’t there.

Hoaxed photos abound. Every so often, a real photo of a black leopard or jaguar will be promoted as taken from a local camera. Or, as is more frequent, a photo has been manipulated or created. Some examples are used so often, reappearing every few years, commenters joke about how the same cat really gets around.

My favorite “hoaxes” are those involving stuffed animal toys that people mistake as real animals.

The black panther mascots

A curious observation I have made is the multitude of school and sports mascots that are black panthers. A big fearsome cat is a common icon to use, and often it is depicted as black even though the location can’t claim any large representative native cats. Pop culture images of black panthers are now so well-known that people have a frame of reference and may assume that the presence of a “black mountain lion” isn’t as far-fetched as it actually is.

The repeated imagery and stories of black panthers are influential in interpreting sightings. Witnesses may have no idea that such large cats are not plausible in their area. If they see a glimpse of a large, sleek dog in low light, or a bulky tom cat in the distance, they can easily jump to the wrong conclusions.

We are primed to see what our culture suggests we could see. The black panther image is ubiquitous. We will always fear the large, dangerous predator that might be in the forest, no matter how rare (or impossible) scientists say they are.

This post is part 2 of the 12 days of Cryptids.

#12DaysOfCryptids #alienBigCats #bigCats #BlackPanthers #blackPumas #cryptid #mysteryCats

The 12 Days of Cryptids

Happy Holidays!

Join me in a special blog event to explore a cryptid theme every day for 12 days. Follow along at Modern Cryptozoology or Substack as I present info from my notes, files, and opinions that perhaps you haven’t heard before. Please subscribe to one of these sources so you get the links or content straight to your email inbox.

The traditional twelve days of Christmas begins on December 25 and ends on January 5. That’s quite a marathon to produce a cryptid-themed post every day. It’s possible that life will get in the way, and I’ll not meet the schedule, but I’ll complete the series for sure.

Each day will be a surprise theme that I will gather in the list below as they are published. Sharing the post to your own favorite social media site or reblogging is much appreciated.

Cryptid are more popular than ever before thanks to the Internet web pages, groups, forums, email groups, and social media platforms. Cryptid lore can tell us about our relationship with nature, our fears, and our cultural influences. Modern cryptid interest is still zoological for some, but for most, it is cultural – we hear the stories, see the depictions, and find value in ideas about mysterious creatures. I think you will see in my examples exactly what I mean by Pop Cryptids. For more on cryptids in popular culture, check out Pop Goes the Cryptid.

Here’s to a new year of contemporary legends and mystery animals!

1. Coming Dec 25
2. Coming Dec 26
3. Coming Dec 27
4. Coming Dec 28
5. Coming Dec 29
6. Coming Dec 30
7. Coming Dec 31
8. Coming Jan 1
9. Coming Jan 2
10. Coming Jan 3
11. Coming Jan 4
12. Coming Jan 5

#12DaysOfCryptids #cryptid #Cryptozoology #mysteriousCreatures #popCryptids

The 12 Days of Cryptids

Happy Holidays!

Join me in a special blog event to explore a cryptid theme every day for 12 days. Follow along at Modern Cryptozoology or Substack as I present info from my notes, files, and opinions that perhaps you haven’t heard before. Please subscribe to one of these sources so you get the links or content straight to your email inbox.

The traditional twelve days of Christmas begins on December 25 and ends on January 5. That’s quite a marathon to produce a cryptid-themed post every day. It’s possible that life will get in the way, and I’ll not meet the schedule, but I’ll complete the series for sure.

Each day will be a surprise theme that I will gather in the list below as they are published. Sharing the post to your own favorite social media site or reblogging is much appreciated.

Cryptid are more popular than ever before thanks to the Internet web pages, groups, forums, email groups, and social media platforms. Cryptid lore can tell us about our relationship with nature, our fears, and our cultural influences. Modern cryptid interest is still zoological for some, but for most, it is cultural – we hear the stories, see the depictions, and find value in ideas about mysterious creatures. I think you will see in my examples exactly what I mean by Pop Cryptids. For more on cryptids in popular culture, check out Pop Goes the Cryptid.

Here’s to a new year of contemporary legends and mystery animals!

1. Coming Dec 25
2. Coming Dec 26
3. Coming Dec 27
4. Coming Dec 28
5. Coming Dec 29
6. Coming Dec 30
7. Coming Dec 31
8. Coming Jan 1
9. Coming Jan 2
10. Coming Jan 3
11. Coming Jan 4
12. Coming Jan 5

#12DaysOfCryptids #cryptid #Cryptozoology #mysteriousCreatures #popCryptids

The 12 Days of Cryptids

Happy Holidays!

Join me in a special blog event to explore a cryptid theme every day for 12 days. Follow along at Modern Cryptozoology or Substack as I present info from my notes, files, and opinions that perhaps you haven’t heard before. Please subscribe to one of these sources so you get the links or content straight to your email inbox.

The traditional twelve days of Christmas begins on December 25 and ends on January 5. That’s quite a marathon to produce a cryptid-themed post every day. It’s possible that life will get in the way, and I’ll not meet the schedule, but I’ll complete the series for sure.

Each day will be a surprise theme that I will gather in the list below as they are published. Sharing the post to your own favorite social media site or reblogging is much appreciated.

Cryptid are more popular than ever before thanks to the Internet web pages, groups, forums, email groups, and social media platforms. Cryptid lore can tell us about our relationship with nature, our fears, and our cultural influences. Modern cryptid interest is still zoological for some, but for most, it is cultural – we hear the stories, see the depictions, and find value in ideas about mysterious creatures. I think you will see in my examples exactly what I mean by Pop Cryptids. For more on cryptids in popular culture, check out Pop Goes the Cryptid.

Here’s to a new year of contemporary legends and mystery animals!

1. Chupacabra Rises and Evolves
2. Black Panthers – Rare and Everywhere
3. Goatman – Tripping on a Legend
4. Winged Humanoids
5. Chud, Chuchunaa, and Hidden Others
6. Loup-Garou Ballyhoo
7. We need to talk about Dogman
8. The Tragedy of the Cryptids
9. Fearsome cryptid creatures
10. Effects of AI on cryptozoology
11. Catch-all cryptids
12. 21st Century Cryptozoology

#12DaysOfCryptids #cryptid #Cryptozoology #mysteriousCreatures #popCryptids