|
|
Post by whitefeather on Oct 18, 2019 1:28:34 GMT
youtu.be/_-5RZBKBl_AInteresting bit of lore that I haven't heard of before now. Possibly documented anecdotal evidence of Dogman from the ninth century. I'm wondering how well known this is, so were you familiar with it already?
|
|
Eoin
Full Member
Organising credible sightings in Washington. Collecting data and forwarding to National.
Posts: 190
|
Post by Eoin on Oct 18, 2019 16:10:32 GMT
youtu.be/_-5RZBKBl_AInteresting bit of lore that I haven't heard of before now. Possibly documented anecdotal evidence of Dogman from the ninth century. I'm wondering how well known this is, so were you familiar with it already? It’s very prominent in reports going back to the time of Marco Polo. He was asked on his death bed if it was true and responded that he had not provide a fraction of what he knew in general from his experiences. They were not considered “civilised”, but did an amount of bartering. It was considered best not to have contact with them. There are LOADS of information regarding the Cynocephaly and other “dog headed” peoples. |
|
|
|
Post by whitefeather on Oct 20, 2019 14:54:51 GMT
I just looked and Marco Polo lived in the 13th and 14th centuries. From the video I linked and what Eoin wrote, I gather there are a substantial number of historical references to "dog-headed" people occurring between the 9th and 14th centuries at least.
Do these accounts continue beyond the 14th century with the same frequency? If so, for how long? At some point I imagine reports of them began to decline and I'm curious to know when that happened.
|
|
Eoin
Full Member
Organising credible sightings in Washington. Collecting data and forwarding to National.
Posts: 190
|
Post by Eoin on Oct 21, 2019 0:08:11 GMT
I just looked and Marco Polo lived in the 13th and 14th centuries. From the video I linked and what Eoin wrote, I gather there are a substantial number of historical references to "dog-headed" people occurring between the 9th and 14th centuries at least. Do these accounts continue beyond the 14th century with the same frequency? If so, for how long? At some point I imagine reports of them began to decline and I'm curious to know when that happened. My understanding is that in Western Europe mention dies out after the Middle Ages, in India maybe a bit later, in other parts of the world i couldn’t speak to it with any certainty. My understanding is that specifics were always sparse and that what we know of what those in earlier ages thought of the race is very finite. |
|
|
|
Post by whitefeather on Oct 21, 2019 15:36:22 GMT
Thanks Eoin,
As far as I understand it then, historical reports of encounters with "dog-headed" human (?) beings occur with some regularity between the 9th and 15th centuries approximately.
Their existence, at least as part of the common knowledge, disappears following the 15th century.
We can't speak with any confidence to the time prior to the 9th century, presumably due to lack of surviving written documents.
If this is reasonably correct, it appears to resemble the evolutionary arc of a biological species in decline.
Aside from giving an indication of Dogman being a flesh and blood creature, there are at least superficial evolutionary parallels between Dogman and earlier human species.
Of course this is all conjecture, but still, it is interesting to consider.
|
|
|
|
Post by hellbentholler on Oct 21, 2019 18:05:28 GMT
It actually goes back to 8th century B.C.
The Kynokephaloi are mentioned that far back, along with accounts of Hemikunes (Hemicynes) or Half-Dog Men.
The usual excuse for these accounts are early sightings of baboons.
|
|
Eoin
Full Member
Organising credible sightings in Washington. Collecting data and forwarding to National.
Posts: 190
|
Post by Eoin on Oct 21, 2019 22:06:52 GMT
It actually goes back to 8th century B.C. The Kynokephaloi are mentioned that far back, along with accounts of Hemikunes (Hemicynes) or Half-Dog Men. The usual excuse for these accounts are early sightings of baboons. When studying the Greeks or even accounts into the present day, one must consider that many writings in the guise of “history” were and still are greatly embellished if not absurdly non factual. Persons did and still do act positively to a good story, vs. the historic and factual, which can be much more bland. |
|
|
|
Post by hellbentholler on Oct 21, 2019 22:57:41 GMT
Not much different than 90% of what I'd written today.
|
|
