Earliest Documented Bigfoot sighting

[hamellr]

What is the earliest documented Bigfoot sighting you know of? I was looking through the archives of one of our local news papers and found a story about a sighting (that turned out to be a hoax,) July 15th, 1924 near Hoquiam Washington.

But the interesting part in conjunction with this story is that Native Americans of the Clallam, Lummi and Quinault tribes all talked about a race of "Hairy Indians" called the Seeahtik who were exactly as described.

You can read the entire story from the original newspaper articles here:

[Q-C]

in searching the word Seeahtik the first three pages were all bigfoot related and there is no Seeahtik tribe entry on wiki

"canibalistic giants, who stole women and babies, used hypnotic powers, had superhuman strength, hairy ape-men"

I'm not a historian, but is it unusual for cultures from around the world to have some sort of superhuman giants in their legends?

Edited October 17, 2013 by QuiteContrary

[Mike G]

Native Americans, and long ago enough for these stories to be well entrenched in their folklore.

[Ravinoff]

in searching the word Seeahtik the first three pages were all bigfoot related and there is no Seeahtik tribe entry on wiki

"canibalistic giants, who stole women and babies, used hypnotic powers, had superhuman strength, hairy ape-men"

I'm not a historian, but is it unusual for cultures from around the world to have some sort of superhuman giants in their legends?

It's not uncommon in the sense that it doesn't happen, but it's rather confusing. Much like dragons, giants show up in the mythology of cultures from the British Isles to Central America. The question here is why. Discussion on it would be more suited to the ancient mysteries board than cryptozoology, but it bears examination.

[BettyTheYeti]

Technically, the earliest sighting was thousands of years ago, just after the human and Sasquatch evolutionary paths split.

[stereologist]

Technically, the earliest sighting was thousands of years ago, just after the human and Sasquatch evolutionary paths split.

Technically? BF is at best a rumor. Humans and BF share a direct common ancestor? Where on Earth did that come from?

[Likely Guy]

What is the earliest documented Bigfoot sighting you know of? I was looking through the archives of one of our local news papers and found a story about a sighting (that turned out to be a hoax,) July 15th, 1924 near Hoquiam Washington.

But the interesting part in conjunction with this story is that Native Americans of the Clallam, Lummi and Quinault tribes all talked about a race of "Hairy Indians" called the Seeahtik who were exactly as described.

You can read the entire story from the original newspaper articles here:

If I can find the article (Victoria British Colonist, I believe) there was another 'documented' encounter with a Bigfoot here in British Columbia, in the 1860's or 70's I believe.It turned out to be a hoax as well.

[BettyTheYeti]

It is not a matter of whether Bigfoot is real, or how closely we are related to him. It is a question of how many are left today. With the logging industry, urban expansion and the like, Bigfoot has been pushed to the brink of extinction (hence the sightings are becoming less and less frequent).

Edited October 17, 2013 by BettyTheYeti

[stereologist]

It is not a matter of whether Bigfoot is real, or how closely we are related to him.

You are saying it doesn't matter whether or Bigfoot is imaginary?

You've already suggested that Bigfoot and humans shared a direct common ancestor. Now you suggest that Bigfoot might not be real.

[Rafterman]

Native Americans, and long ago enough for these stories to be well entrenched in their folklore.

Proof of this? Or is this simply a post hoc creation of the Bigfooting comunity?

There are wildmen legends worldwide. Every culture has them. But is the Native American folklore truly describing Bigfoot or have those tales been twisted by Bigfooters over the past few decades to provide evidence for an historical link that simply doesn't exist?

[keninsc]

You haven't tried very hard. Here's one from 1811.

http://unmuseum.mus.pa.us/bigfoot.htm

When you sat "documented" what do you mean? If you're only talking about since the white man came to North America then that discounts the Native American culture entirely.

Also, something to consider. In many NA legends they talk about Bigfoots or creatures like them being plentiful or abundant, almost common to the point of being a nuisance. Now consider this, when the Spanish came they introduced all manner of diseases to the indigenous populations, killing many of them. Whole cultures were wiped out. Could this have done the same the the Bigfoot population? Could this be why there are so few of them now and why they stay away from humans?

[Rafterman]

You haven't tried very hard. Here's one from 1811.

http://unmuseum.mus.pa.us/bigfoot.htm

When you sat "documented" what do you mean? If you're only talking about since the white man came to North America then that discounts the Native American culture entirely.

Also, something to consider. In many NA legends they talk about Bigfoots or creatures like them being plentiful or abundant, almost common to the point of being a nuisance. Now consider this, when the Spanish came they introduced all manner of diseases to the indigenous populations, killing many of them. Whole cultures were wiped out. Could this have done the same the the Bigfoot population? Could this be why there are so few of them now and why they stay away from humans?

That's not really a "sighting". He reported some footprints in the snow. We all know what happens to prints in snow.

Frankly, none of the stories (and that's really all they are) on that site seem any more valid than anything we hear today.

[keninsc]

That's what I meant when I was asking the question what he meant by "documented".

Most encounters were experienced by men who didn't read or write back in the earlier part of the occupation by the white man and were told word of mouth......which calls into question to accuracy of those stories. However, people today report finding giant footprints and everyone swoons in unbridled ecstasy over them.........but read an account from 1811 and you want to throw it out the window.

What's that all about?

Like it or not it's a report, how valid? Don't know, but this was back before all the hoopla now, so that makes it......what?.......less significant?

Edited October 17, 2013 by keninsc

[Rafterman]

That's what I meant when I was asking the question what he meant by "documented".

Most encounters were experienced by men who didn't read or write back in the earlier part of the occupation by the white man and were told word of mouth......which calls into question to accuracy of those stories. However, people today report finding giant footprints and everyone swoons in unbridled ecstasy over them.........but read an account from 1811 and you want to throw it out the window.

What's that all about?

Like it or not it's a report, how valid? Don't know, but this was back before all the hoopla now, so that makes it......what?.......less significant?

I'm not a swooner over footprints - folks should know that by now. Now put it in a black 5" stiletto and then I'll swoon.

Your point is well taken about the people reporting these stories. Add to that, the desire by many back then to spin fanciful yarns - hunters, loggers, railroad types, the Old West is replete with tales from people like this.

I wouldn't say they were less significant. They're as significant as the tales and stories from today in my opinion.

[msmike1]

I'm not a swooner over footprints - folks should know that by now. Now put it in a black 5" stiletto and then I'll swoon.

Your point is well taken about the people reporting these stories. Add to that, the desire by many back then to spin fanciful yarns - hunters, loggers, railroad types, the Old West is replete with tales from people like this.

I wouldn't say they were less significant. They're as significant as the tales and stories from today in my opinion.

Are you saying bigfoot wears 5" stilettos?

Mike

[keninsc]

I'm not a swooner over footprints - folks should know that by now. Now put it in a black 5" stiletto and then I'll swoon.

Your point is well taken about the people reporting these stories. Add to that, the desire by many back then to spin fanciful yarns - hunters, loggers, railroad types, the Old West is replete with tales from people like this.

I wouldn't say they were less significant. They're as significant as the tales and stories from today in my opinion.

No, no, no......those are the Amazon women in South America that wear the 5" stilettos. Of course, back in the day I dated a German girl for a while. Didn't shave her pits, legs..........and I can't mention what else was au natural. Once I got her cleaned up and using deodorant she dumped me. I'm sorry......what were we talking about?

Oh yes.....Bigfoot. Now I have the opposite opinion on these older reports. They didn't know about all the BS that is rampant on the web now, they just reported what they saw. I guess that just depends on how you see it. I'm just more skeptical of anyone reporting prints now than I am about those same reports made way back when.

[Rafterman]

No, no, no......those are the Amazon women in South America that wear the 5" stilettos. Of course, back in the day I dated a German girl for a while. Didn't shave her pits, legs..........and I can't mention what else was au natural. Once I got her cleaned up and using deodorant she dumped me. I'm sorry......what were we talking about?

Oh yes.....Bigfoot. Now I have the opposite opinion on these older reports. They didn't know about all the BS that is rampant on the web now, they just reported what they saw. I guess that just depends on how you see it. I'm just more skeptical of anyone reporting prints now than I am about those same reports made way back when.

Ken, down with the Frauleins - who knew?

I don't know, I think BS was just as rampant back in those days as it is now. They just didn't have the internet to fuel it like we do today.

[Q-C]

What is the earliest documented Bigfoot sighting you know of? I was looking through the archives of one of our local news papers and found a story about a sighting (that turned out to be a hoax,) July 15th, 1924 near Hoquiam Washington.

But the interesting part in conjunction with this story is that Native Americans of the Clallam, Lummi and Quinault tribes all talked about a race of "Hairy Indians" called the Seeahtik who were exactly as described.

You can read the entire story from the original newspaper articles here:

http://watchermeet-up.forumotion.com/t1743-stilt-walker-on-the-trail-of-the-nephilim-by-lamarzulli

[Q-C]

I thought this was interesting. Interpret as you will.

"Walking on stilts was a popular activity among Indians long before the arrival of non-Indians.

McCaskill (1936) reported that stilt walking was popular throughout the continent..." American Indian Sports Heritage by Joseph B. Oxendine

I'm having trouble finding any images or historical renderings of NA on stilts.

[Q-C]

Shoemaker's (Strange Magazine 1990) attempt to deconstruct the historical bigfoot limited his case studies to pre-1900 reports. He claimed because

modern bigfoot accounts are tainted by 1) influence on bigfoot description and behavior 2) are more sophisticated as to what is plausible in science and 3) provide more opportunities to make money on a hoax."

Chad Arment in his book "The Historical Bigfoot" argues "These same "modern" influences were very much present before 1900"... "We certainly can't say that hoax opportunities were fewer in the nineteenth century. Far from it. Extravagant stories were bread-and-butter for showmen to lure a crowd. Thus, there's little reason for limiting an examination of the historical bigfoot to just nineteenth century cases."

(Arment also counters points 1) and 2) by Shoemaker) page 11

Edited October 17, 2013 by QuiteContrary

[keninsc]

Strangely enough, stilt walking in NA culture I have heard of before......if memory serves, it was in reference to the hairy giants. Or something like that. I was told about it in Nam by one of the guys in my Platoon who was a Ute, well he claimed to be a Ute but his mother was a Shoshone and his father was a Ute. He said it went back to the "time before time" or the "mist time".......I have to confess that a lot of what he told me I didn't follow too well. I was never a huge follower of Native American lore.

[hamellr]

Also, something to consider. In many NA legends they talk about Bigfoots or creatures like them being plentiful or abundant, almost common to the point of being a nuisance. Now consider this, when the Spanish came they introduced all manner of diseases to the indigenous populations, killing many of them. Whole cultures were wiped out. Could this have done the same the the Bigfoot population? Could this be why there are so few of them now and why they stay away from humans?

This is what I'm curious about. The Nez Pierce Indians specifically have several legends about hunting for these creatures and going to war with them. They would live at night in fright that they'd be attacked. Women were stolen, Children Eaten. When one was sighted the entire tribe - men, women, children would follow it in an attempt to kill - at a minimum drive it away.

Are there any other legends of such things outside of the Pacific Northwest?

[freetoroam]

It is not a matter of whether Bigfoot is real, or how closely we are related to him. It is a question of how many are left today. With the logging industry, urban expansion and the like, Bigfoot has been pushed to the brink of extinction (hence the sightings are becoming less and less frequent).

You seem to have forgotten a couple of things...if "bigfoot" had been pushed out of his natural inhabitant because of the loggers and urban expansion, then the chances are some evidence of him being in that region would have been found.

You say how many are left, indicating more than one, indicating a family of them and yet I have yet to see anyone say they have spotted more than one at a time.

I also find it strange that with all the alleged sightings, no one seems to have tried to follow him to see where he goes, if there is a family, he would more than likely go back to them to protect them if he saw you.

It is hard to believe that if you say the first sightings were thousands of years ago, that with all the big foot seekers, no remains have been found.

[keninsc]

This is what I'm curious about. The Nez Pierce Indians specifically have several legends about hunting for these creatures and going to war with them. They would live at night in fright that they'd be attacked. Women were stolen, Children Eaten. When one was sighted the entire tribe - men, women, children would follow it in an attempt to kill - at a minimum drive it away.

Are there any other legends of such things outside of the Pacific Northwest?

I understand there are, as I mentioned earlier, I'm not an expert on NA lore, however there are numerous web sights put up by many NA tribes and they talk about their own lore and have contacts available. I'm sure they would be willing to help you out with that.

You know it wasn't until many years after Desoto that white men came into those areas only to find mounds and tales of the peoples who once lived there. Could the same be true of Bigfoot?

[Macroramphosis]

You say how many are left, indicating more than one, indicating a family of them and yet I have yet to see anyone say they have spotted more than one at a time.

There are plenty of "sightings" of multiple BF, including what have been called immature specimens and even family groups.

also find it strange that with all the alleged sightings, no one seems to have tried to follow him to see where he goes

Serious researchers, of whom probably none post on this website, spend weeks in the field tracking and collecting evidence.

Just saying..........

PS: are you an alien by any chance ? You seem to have very strange ears.....

Edited October 22, 2013 by Macroramphosis