early Bigfoot report from Louisiana? or just a hairy hermit?

garuda79 · Joined: 09 Oct 2007 Posts: 39 Location: South Florida

Location. Vacherie, Louisiana
Date: 1891 Time: unknown
Local resident Frederick Kliebert who was “well known and respected in the community” reported encountering a giant in the nearby swamp forest. He was greatly surprised when he saw approaching and passing within 15 steps of him a huge man of around nine feet in height, covered by a long black beard. He wore a kind of cloak of fur of a brownish color which seemed to be attached only by a rope around the neck. The rest of his body was naked and was covered with red hair. Mr. Kliebert asked him who he was and where he was from three times but the giant gave him no response and then continued his fast walk with a sad and serious look towards the west. Tracks 23 inches long were found.

HC addendum
Source: May Ann Sternberg in “Along the River Road, Past and Present on
Louisiana’s Historic Byway” 1996 quoted in:
http://www.bigfootencounters.com
_________________
“…..and the water in your deserts will be mostly tears”

Aura Rhanes

**Skeptical** · Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:55 pm Post subject:

I have a problem putting a whole lot of stock in some of the fantastic "news" stories that appeared in 19th Century newspapers. When news got slow, especially during the summertime, reporters were well known for concocting stories just to fill print space. They referred to this as "silly season," a term which is still used today. I am not saying that is the case with this particular story but, 110 years after the fact, it's a little late to do much follow-up investigation. We are left with an intriguing but unsubstantiated story - to be added to the great mountain of other intriguing but unsubstantiated stories. Sad

S
_________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." -- Thomas Jefferson

garuda79 · Joined: 09 Oct 2007 Posts: 39 Location: South Florida

You are very correct, but it is kind of weird that they would make a story of describing a Bigfoot type creature. There are dozens of so-called "wild men" reports from the late 19th and early 20th century
_________________
“…..and the water in your deserts will be mostly tears”

Aura Rhanes

**Skeptical** · Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 3:41 pm Post subject:

It is too bad American Indians did not have a written language (besides petroglyphs). Their legends and folklore indicate that they have run across Bigfoot-like creatures for centuries. If anyone was in a position to know the difference between a bear and something else, I would say Native Americans have got to rank near the top of the list.

Ancient writings may have given us a better indication of what they truly experienced. As is it, there is a good possibility the traditional oral stories have been colored to a greater or lesser extent by modern, Western culture.

S
_________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." -- Thomas Jefferson

stareater · Joined: 26 Feb 2008 Posts: 26

I think many older sightings can be chalked up to a simple lack of knowledge that came with the time period. A mangy bear, a sick coyote, somebody pulling a prank . . . there are many reasons, along with flat-out BS, that an animal somebody is not familiar with suddenly becomes a monster. I've been reading two books lately, Monster Hunt by Tim Dinsdale and In the Wake of the Sea-Serpents by Bernard Heuvelmans, and many old "sea monster" carcass sightings have been identified as basking shark and whale corpses, or just plain hoaxes. People know more today in terms of animals and what is what, and I think that's why sightings seem to have diminished as we move forward in time. Both books are great reads, by the way.