68 replies to this topic

[Rafterman]

La Bete Feroce, on 25 October 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:

I've presented an enormity of evidence conclusively obliterating the idea that the Beast was an ordinary wolf. It wasn't a wolf and that's a fact. Many of the confirmed "wolf" man-eaters in Europe had features suggesting wolf-dog hybridization, identified after they were killed. The Wolves of Périgord and the Wolf of Sarlat, which acted concurrent to the Beast of Gevaudan's depredations in nearby regions, were wolf-dog hybrids. Natural, 100% wolves tend to shy away from humans. It's the hybrids that stir the pot. Yes, wolf predation and aggression on humans was more intensified in earlier centures, but usually this coincided with times of war, when the wolves would scavenge the battlefields to devour the dead, in turn giving them a taste for human flesh. There was no such time of warfare prior to the events in Gevaudan in the 1770s. The Marin report, that is, the actual autopsy of the Beast, POSITIVELY identified that it was /not/ an ordinary wolf. I will quote it:







The autopsy is describing the result of wolf-dog hybridization. It had canine dentition. The lower body resembled a wolf, the front resembled a dog. Its rib cage was different than a wolf's. Its coloring was different than a wolf's. It had a squarish, more box-like head resembling a dog but an elongated snout, reminiscent of a greyhound or, in my opinion, a Charnaigre. A Charnaigre was a European hunting dog around during the time of these events. They were incredibly fast, agile, and could leap astounding distances.They pretty much disappeared around the 19th century. Here is a picture:


And here is La Bete du Gevaudan, the ferocious Beast.


See the resemblance?

The Beast was NOT a wolf. Fact. Autopsy proves that. Now which do you trust, the Marin Report suggesting a wolf-dog, or the Natural Museum of History in Paris which has a log of receiving the body of the Beast of Gevaudan in 1766, and that they identified it as a Striped Hyena? That's up to you.

It was either a.) a wolf-dog hybrid
or b.) a striped hyena.

Simple as that.

Are you familiar with Jay Smith's work?  He presents a very compelling case that the BoG was, in fact, a wolf or pack of wolves.

I'd also suggest you check out the following Monster Talk podcast on the topic.

http://www.skeptic.c...rtalk/11/09/21/

[La Bete Feroce]

I'll give it a listen. Look, I like the wolf theory, I do. It's the simplest... but it doesn't fit. Yes, wolf predation on humans was an issue in Europe for a very long time. I can cite many known, man-eating wolves. Thing is, none of them come close to achieving the level of carnage and notoriety of the Beast. I am indeed familiar with Jay Smith; I've also read Richard H. Thompson's book "Wolf-Hunting in France in the Reign of Louis XV: The Beast of the Gevaudan" which I consider one of the best English resources on the subject. He similarly believes a wolf or wolves are suspect, although he remarks quite often that he prefers the wolf-dog theory but lacks the evidence to substantiate any faith in it. Well, we have that evidence now in the form of Notary Marin's autopsy report. The skeletal measurements are conclusive: it's a wolf-dog hybrid.

If the physical evidence isn't enough, then how about the behavior? Since when has a wolf ever beheaded its victims? First off, animals don't do that. Second, wolves do not have the level of bite force required to rend off a human head. And why would a wolf straight up ignore livestock and attack only humans? That's not wolf behavior. Hungry wolves don't pass up on easy meals. The Beast was actually seen PLAYING with livestock on occassion! Yes, it would hop around and play with them. Dog-like behavior, no? But as for humans? It ripped them apart and devoured them. These are indications of a trained animal.

And you cannot train a wolf, but you can train a wolf-dog hybrid.

We have a conclusive autopsy and we have a highly culpable human suspect. It's pretty much case closed.

Edited by La Bete Feroce, 05 November 2012 - 03:18 PM.

[La Bete Feroce]

Gave the podcast a listen. It hasn't changed my mind.

[tyrant lizard]

Here's a description of the Beast from an old account.

"Much higher than a wolf, low before, and his feet are armed with talons. His hair is reddish, his head large, and the muzzle of it is shaped like that of a grey hound; his ears are small and straight; his breast is wide and grey; his back streaked with black; his large mouth is provided with sharp teeth."

From the information we have it makes a brilliant horror story, with Chastel as the shape shifting werewolf, who kills a random wolf who's corpse rots before it can be verified and then blames his son's menagerie of hyenas.

Personally I reckon Chastel was some kind of psycho, and had trained whatever it was to kill people. Which would explain why he was able to kill it and no one else was - becasue it was obedient to him

[Abramelin]

How many threads are active about this beast?

http://www.unexplain...9

Abramelin, on 06 December 2012 - 05:32 AM, said:

You bumped the wrong thread:

http://www.unexplain...ic=220324&st=15

Or better, read this member's posts::

http://www.unexplain...15#entry4514601


.

A merge would be nice,  or else we'll  keep reinventing the wheel over and over again, lol.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 06 December 2012 - 10:47 AM.

[King Fluffs]

Rafterman, on 05 January 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

Monstertalk did a great episode on the Beast back in September.

It's worth a listen:  http://www.skeptic.com/podcasts/monstertalk/11/09/21/

I was about to recommend the same link.

Well played Rafterman, well played.

[La Bete Feroce]

tyrant lizard, on 06 December 2012 - 08:28 AM, said:

Here's a description of the Beast from an old account.

"Much higher than a wolf, low before, and his feet are armed with talons. His hair is reddish, his head large, and the muzzle of it is shaped like that of a grey hound; his ears are small and straight; his breast is wide and grey; his back streaked with black; his large mouth is provided with sharp teeth."

From the information we have it makes a brilliant horror story, with Chastel as the shape shifting werewolf, who kills a random wolf who's corpse rots before it can be verified and then blames his son's menagerie of hyenas.

Personally I reckon Chastel was some kind of psycho, and had trained whatever it was to kill people. Which would explain why he was able to kill it and no one else was - becasue it was obedient to him

Chastel's beast - examined by Notary Marin - was identified as a wolf-dog hybrid by its dentition and skeletal measurements. It was no random wolf, but it was peculiarly small (and deformed, even) in stark contrast with all witness description. Moreover, the characteristic black stripe on the back was absent on this animal, although it was noted that its nape had a black line down it. I posted the full autopsy record earlier in the thread. The death of this animal brought an end to the attacks, but I have myself questioned whether the animal Chastel shot was the real Beast, or perhaps a doppelganger that he set up so to avoid killing his beloved pet.

For the record, Chastel's son(s) did not own a menagerie of hyenas. They were a family of game-keepers. They hunted wolves, and they trained dogs. Antoine Chastel, the son most implicated as the murderer behind the Beast, was employed by a local nobleman, Count De Moranges. The Count owned a menagerie of exotic animals, including hyenas. If the plot to loose a man-eating beast onto the Gevaudan originated anywhere, it was here, conspired between Antoine Chastel and Count De Moranges.

Jean Chastel's involvement is difficult to determine. Antoine Chastel seemed to be more active in the affair and the hunts. It was only after Jean Chastel's lover was killed by the Beast that he began his pursuit, and in a matter of days accomplished what the local aristocracy, Captain Duhamel and his French army dragoons, Denneval the famous wolf-hunter, and Antoine de Beauterne, Gun-Bearer to the King and Lieutenant of the Hunt, had all failed to do for three years and counting. On a hunt arranged by Jean-Joseph d'Apcher, Chastel was approached by the Beast, which paused and stood in front of him, giving him time to close the Bible that he was reading/praying with, take aim with his rifle and shoot it in the throat. The tale goes that he shot it with a silver bullet, instantly killing it. That's not what happened. The reality is that Jean Chastel shot the Beast in the neck, wounding it. Nearby hunting dogs then closed in and finished off the Beast.

As for that podcast, I dismiss it along with Jay Smith's book. He likes to rock the occam's razor approach and claim a wolf as the simplist and best explanation. Problem is, that explanation doesn't fit. At all. It's inconsistent with the autopsy, the witness description, the choice of prey, and the damage inflicted upon the victims. Show me one instance of a wolf beheading a human adult. Seriously, show me. If you can't, then it wasn't a wolf. A wolf neither would - nor could - decapitate a human being. This leaves two explanations: either there was a human agent involved, or the Beast was a striped hyena (which in and of itself necessitates human involvement). I've discussed the merits of the wolf-dog vs. hyena identification earlier in this thread. All we know for certain is the Beast of Gevaudan was no mere wolf. Fact.

And hey Abramelin, when you gonna sell me your wallet? =P

[Abramelin]

La Bete Feroce, on 31 December 2012 - 07:40 AM, said:

And hey Abramelin, when you gonna sell me your wallet? =P

LOL.






http://www.unexplain...30#entry4515639

.

Edited by Abramelin, 31 December 2012 - 09:06 AM.

[La Bete Feroce]

Show off.

My desire for that wallet is the only reason I have this acc. here. I only stoppped in on this thread to set the record straight, lol. All those "it was an extinct mesynochid, or maybe a hyenadon, or an andrewsarchus!" spiels royally p*** me off. -_- Autopsy says wolf-dog hybrid. Evidence says it had a human master. Case closed.