Orang Pendek / Orang Dalam / Sedapa [South-East Asia]

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
Nittaewo and Ebo Gogo -- and Orang Pendek, maybe still around today -- I feel ready to accept as possibly simply-flesh-and-blood. Anything bigger -- and especially in Oceania, for reason given -- ??; cultural, as you say; or, ????
 

Analis

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
1,620
Likes
353
Points
99
oldrover said:
A few French language ones from a quick search using the French for ‘wild man beast Vietnam Cambodia Laos’, and a few English ones too.

http://centredetudeparanormal.e-monsite ... 64238.html

http://coombs.anu.edu.au/~vern/wildman.html

http://cryptozoologie.fr.gd/Hommes-sauvages.htm

http://www.strangeark.com/craig/MMPapers_Aust.pdf

http://initial.bipedalism.pagesperso-orange.fr/4.htm

One of them shows a problem for man beast believers, accounting for the sheer amount of areas where these reports come from including New Zealand and Guadalcanal.

The picture is got at times, that the French have tended to regard the British as a bunch of overgrown schoolboys, with childish preoccupations;
I think you're right there, I remember watching a documentary on spontaneous combustion featuring a French case, in which the attending pathologist sneered at the suggestion of any bizarre saying that 'only people in Britain and America believe that sort of thing'.
I concur. Although after the Along Bay sea serpents sightings, from multiple military witnesses, a number of French zoologists had come to support their existence in the early 20th century.
Relating to the links you post, I found no mention of reports in French Indochina. Personnaly, I am not aware of any. I read a book from cryptozoologist Jean-Jacques BARLOY, he spoke at lenght of man-beasts in various parts of the worlds, but again no mentions of reports in colonial Indochina. I don't remember that Heuvelmans (a Belgian) reported any cases either, but his books are not easy to find.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
If I might break in -- the "strangeark" link -- "Myths and Monsters 2001 -- Conference Papers", in its paper "Would the real Orang-Utan...?", by Helmut Loofs-Wissowa, mentions a book (non-fiction), published 1912, "Les Jungles Moi" by one Hend Maitre; telling of reddish ape-men in the Vietnamese Highlands -- well-known to the local mountain tribesmen, to whom they were apparently more prey, than a source of terror. Also, the "coombs" link gives a brief Indochina account from 1947.

Heuvelmans -- whose book, "On the Track of Unknown Animals", I have -- said book is informative, but somewhat patchy as regards global coverage: he indeed does not mention Indochina in it. Ivan T. Sanderson's work "Abominable Snowmen" (originally published circa 1960) which I read long ago but do not possess, relayed if I recall correctly, accounts of "mysterious hairy bipeds" in varuous parts of continental south-east Asia, including Indochina. I have to admit to harbouring some doubts about Sanderson, who -- I get the impression -- was rather liable to believe "anything and everything" about cryptids, in a purely-flesh-and-blood context.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
Les Jungles Moi, can be downloaded or viewed here;

http://www.rhinoresourcecenter.com/inde ... 1165241503

No good to me unfortunately I don't speak French.

Isn't there a Moi or a Loi mentioned in 'On the track...'

Analis am I right in thinking you are French, if so the fact that you can't find any references is a bit off putting. The French would have had lots more time than the Americans to encounter them. But then the Americans already had a cultural reference in Bigfoot to start with.

Another point would be to find out whether other nationalities in the later war such as S Koreans and Australians ever encountered anything. Saying that though even if there were, a lack of French reports is still very disheartening.

I have to admit to harbouring some doubts about Sanderson, who -- I get the impression -- was rather liable to believe "anything and everything" about cryptids, in a purely-flesh-and-blood context.
Agreed.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
oldrover said:
Analis am I right in thinking you are French, if so the fact that you can't find any references is a bit off putting. The French would have had lots more time than the Americans to encounter them. But then the Americans already had a cultural reference in Bigfoot to start with.

Another point would be to find out whether other nationalities in the later war such as S Koreans and Australians ever encountered anything.
Some interesting stuff recently on “bigfootforum.com”, touching on “MHB in Indochina”, which prompted me to fetch this thread up in the first place. As mentioned in my post here of May 25th, some experiences of “our side” in the Vietnam war suggested the presence in those parts, then, of two different types of mysterious primates: what the soldiery called “rock apes” (approx. baboon-or chimp-size), and the bigger, less often encountered, Nguoi Rung. Quoting a post on “bigfootforums.com” concerning the “rock apes” (admittedly, by a chap who appears to be overall, on the credulous side):

“There were a heck of a lot of reports from GIs about these rock apes. They even killed some of them on occasion. Reports of a rock ape tied up on a US base, on and on. The GIs had no idea what they were and they’d never heard the native stories. The GIs thought they were ‘orangutans’. Korean soldiers reportedly captured a couple of them and took them back to Korea or whatever.”

I find the last sentence, not encouraging. Things seem so frustrating for people who want to research these matters – you just never catch a lucky break, all possible “leads” seem to fade away or sink without trace. South Korea is not somewhere “off the planet” – if homegoing Korean troops did thus take their “friends” with them, no chance that they might as a result, have become known to science – oh, no...

Saying that though even if there were, a lack of French reports is still very disheartening.
Perhaps desperately clutching at straws: I wonder whether great scarcity of reports from the French era may after all have to do with my "take", already indicated, about official bias / lack of interest. Possibly the French "establishment" essentially took no interest in what they regarded as stuff for kids and ignorant savages -- the material by Maitre (see upcoming post by me) got published against the odds.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
oldrover said:
Les Jungles Moi, can be downloaded or viewed here;

http://www.rhinoresourcecenter.com/inde ... 1165241503

No good to me unfortunately I don't speak French.

Isn't there a Moi or a Loi mentioned in 'On the track...'
I get from the given link only a small amount of material, about rhinos (maybe I’m messing-up, here). However – thanks for mentioning Heuvelmans’s book. In his Nittaewo chapter, there is a long quote (which I’d totally forgotten, till running it to earth just now – was mistaken in thinking that Heuvelmans ignored Indochina) from the book “Les Jungles Moi” by Maître (Henri, not Hend). About his explorations at the beginning of the 20th century, in the mountain country in – if I have it rightly – the south rather than the north, of French Indochina. The quote follows:

“The natives say [these areas shelter] a...peculiar and...legendary beast: I refer to the ‘wild men’. It is not the first time that I have heard this curious legend of nomadic human creatures, living in mountainous forests, and having (according to the Moi) a tail like a monkey. They are almost unknown on the Darlac plateau where the gently undulating country is easy of access and covered with no more than grass and scrub, but were reported to me around the Great Lake and in all the hilly area of the Annam range. According to these local reports the “wild men” of Nam-Noung are small – less than five feet high – covered with a thick coat of reddish hair, and arms or legs which they cannot bend at all. The back of the forearm has a sharp membrane like the blade of a knife which they use for cutting away the bush to make a path through the forest. They cannot climb up trees, since they have neither knees nor elbows, so they sleep leaning against tree-trunks. They live on roots and stalks of plants, and do not know how to build huts, living the same wandering life as other beasts of the forest. The villagers used to run them down and eat them, but the “wild men” have become scarcer and are no longer found. But one sometimes still comes upon the footprints that they leave behind them, like those of other men, but smaller.

This description of ‘wild men’ is almost identical amoung all the villagers who believe in them, whether in the remote Nam-Noung district or in the heart of the Annam range. As I have already remarked they are almost unknown to the Radé of Central Darlac. One village on the plateau, however, not only knows them but even claims to be directly descended from one of them named Kjhat.”

Name a bit reminiscent of Khwit the half-Almas – presumably just a coincidence !

The account as here given, for sure seems fanciful (the anatomical improbabilities); and the creatures involved are small, not giant-like Ngoui Rung. Oddities of anatomy – one would reckon, at best, imaginative “embroidery” by the tribespeople, suggesting that it was likely a long time since the “wild men” had last been encountered. This is overall, I feel, a bit less promising a source, than we might have hoped for. I seem to get the “vibes” that Maître is passing on what he thinks an unlikely native tale; not suggesting that he believes in the “wild men” ’s existence.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
http://www.archive.org/stream/grammaire ... g_djvu.txt

Try this one, I can't translate it using the translate options, and can't read it. It does seem to be enough for a whole book though.

http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1714905 Or this one, it does seem to be out there, but most of the links are in French.

Korean soldiers reportedly captured a couple of them and took them back to Korea or whatever.
Again I agree it seems to be suggesting that what goes to Korea stays in Korea. As if it's some 'other' destination.

The detail about the arm blade thing, doesn't that come up somewhere else as well, like the back to front foot business which keeps popping up.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
oldrover said:
http://www.archive.org/stream/grammairedelala00maspgoog/grammairedelala00maspgoog_djvu.txt

Try this one, I can't translate it using the translate options, and can't read it. It does seem to be enough for a whole book though.

http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1714905 Or this one, it does seem to be out there, but most of the links are in French.
I continue to get "linking" problems; but I'm "the fool of the world" with computers. Will hold back re the matter, till I can get round to my dwelling, a helpful and computer-clever relative, who may be able to assist.

The detail about the arm blade thing, doesn't that come up somewhere else as well, like the back to front foot business which keeps popping up.
Yes -- a couple of pages after the Indochina wild men passage, Heuvelmans tells of a seemingly very close equivalent of same, in the Malay Peninsula: the "just plain" Sakai people told of a race of hairy pygmies, the "hantu Sakai" [="demon Sakai"], living retiringly in the deep forests. These creatures allegedly had "a sharp blade-like bone in their right forearm which they use in the felling of trees...[and for cutting off fruit-bearing high branches of trees]."

As you remark, these curious memes (if that is, correctly, the word that the clever folk use) seem to show up in --- sometimes widely -- separated places.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
I continue to get "linking" problems; but I'm "the fool of the world" with computers. Will hold back re the matter, till I can get round to my dwelling, a helpful and computer-clever relative, who may be able to assist.
It's the links not you. The second one seems to be a valid one but for Australians only.

I'm not sure how something like a forearm blade could get started, from observation of anything corporeal.

It may be simpler though to explain why it also appears in the Malay Peninsula. According to Wiki* they've got linguistic and therefore cultural links with Indochina. Of course there's no way to tell who started it.


* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakai_(tribe)
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
oldrover said:
It's the links not you. The second one seems to be a valid one but for Australians only.
Yes, that's what I found re the second link -- non-Aussies barred. The first link, appears to me (have not as yet ploughed right through it), to be to a grammar of the Cambodian language; with some input from Henri Maitre, but basic focus seemingly on linguistics, not on wild men.
I'm not sure how something like a forearm blade could get started, from observation of anything corporeal.
Heuvelmans does some elaborate musing on the "forearm blade" notion. Suggests misidentification involving gibbons; which have long forearms, and in one species white (looking from a distance, like shining silver?) hands, mistakeable for blade / extensions; or human jungle tribes carrying "bush knives" so habitually often, for the implements to be mistaken for a permanent part of the body.

I have to wonder whether such convoluted theorising, is over-thinking / wishful thinking. Less of a "stretch", perhaps, to suggest people just dreaming up scary tales, for various reasons which could be adduced; or, the involvement of "whatever", which in some sense exists or existed -- but being other than flesh-and-blood-purely-of-this-earth.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
Thanks for link. A scholarly work by the chap, it's plain; but at times, one feels a bit wretchedly that this whole matter goes ever around in the same circles -- no progress ever made. I shall certainly emulate you and use my £150 for something else !
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
You're right, I'd say it comes down to a question of whether there's any there except human creation. Personally I tend to doubt it. I think there are very good reasons to dismiss a flesh and blood perspective, which we've covered here on similar threads. But briefly it's the Yowie that kills it for me.

As for the supernatural (sorry if that's the wrong word) I don't go for it, but that's just because it doesn't fit into my personal schema. On some level though maybe, I don't think you can dismiss it as easily as the flesh and blood explanation.

For me the ones that are different enough not to quite fit in with the general man beast phenomena, are the hobbits and Oran pendeck. As for the Hobbits though, I think it's possible that the stories from Sri Lanka and Flores could be referring to some other modern human group, and the remains of H. Floresiensis are confusing matters. I really do think though that this is an area where there really should be some study. Maybe it's in areas like this that cryptozoology would be most effective. Oran pendeck though, who knows.
 

lordmongrove

Justified & Ancient
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
2,708
Likes
2,000
Points
169
IVE SEEN THE LITTLE BUGGERS FOOTPRINTS AND THEY ARE QUITE DIFFERENT FROM ALL THE KNOWN APES WHOSE SPOOR I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH.
Rats caps, i can't be bothered to correct them now, it 3 in the morning!
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
Which little buggers Oran Pendeck or Hobbits?

I only use the arrows instead of caps lock, too many times I've typed too much, only to look up and find bloody capitols, the one thing you can't fix.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
lordmongrove said:
IVE SEEN THE LITTLE BUGGERS FOOTPRINTS AND THEY ARE QUITE DIFFERENT FROM ALL THE KNOWN APES WHOSE SPOOR I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH.
Rats caps, i can't be bothered to correct them now, it 3 in the morning!
In some fear of peeing-off everyone: context "flesh-and-blood-this-world-only" (which I don't reckon be-all-and-end-all), I'm ready to buy the Orang Pendek as the likeliest for-real cryptid, which I know of.

lordmongrove (don't think I've asked this before) -- a few vague indications of -- within the century gone by -- a supposed giant ape-man in Sumatra -- the "Orang Gadang" (Big Man). Have seen this explained as a misidentified bear of some kind, this by a rather extreme sceptic / debunker (unfortunately couldn't find the reference). Any light to shed on this one?
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
oldrover said:
You're right, I'd say it comes down to a question of whether there's any there except human creation. Personally I tend to doubt it. I think there are very good reasons to dismiss a flesh and blood perspective, which we've covered here on similar threads. But briefly it's the Yowie that kills it for me.

As for the supernatural (sorry if that's the wrong word) I don't go for it, but that's just because it doesn't fit into my personal schema. On some level though maybe, I don't think you can dismiss it as easily as the flesh and blood explanation.

For me the ones that are different enough not to quite fit in with the general man beast phenomena, are the hobbits and Oran pendeck. As for the Hobbits though, I think it's possible that the stories from Sri Lanka and Flores could be referring to some other modern human group, and the remains of H. Floresiensis are confusing matters. I really do think though that this is an area where there really should be some study. Maybe it's in areas like this that cryptozoology would be most effective. Oran pendeck though, who knows.
So much, so???? As you say, a lot of possibility of passed-on tales about more-primitive,and extirpated, hom. sap. sap. -- overall, one seems to come to know less, rather than more. General feeling re mysterious hairy bipeds in Indochina: aside from the supernatural / paranormal (where "all bets are off") -- if there were MHB stuff going on there a few decades ago and before, it would rather seem, "no longer" -- as always on this scene, it would be wonderful and delightful to be proved wrong.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
In some fear of peeing-off everyone:
I don't see why this would bother anyone, personally I don't agree with it, but it's on the table in terms of explanations. My personal opinion is that in all cases except the Oran Pendeck it's only the supernatural and cultural archetype/modern pop culture that's left.

On that subject the Orang Gadang is an interesting one. I'm wondering if even in the potential presence of a real mystery ape like Orang Pendeck, there's still a need to invent one.

it would be wonderful and delightful to be proved wrong.
Wouldn't it just but I don't think you are.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
oldrover said:
In some fear of peeing-off everyone:
I don't see why this would bother anyone, personally I don't agree with it, but it's on the table in terms of explanations. My personal opinion is that in all cases except the Oran Pendeck it's only the supernatural and cultural archetype/modern pop culture that's left.
It's just that I'm ready to admit with all cryptids, a putative paranormal element -- including with the Orang Pendek: just perhaps, they're physically around some, but not all, of the time. I can't speak for lordmongrove, but don't see him viewing that notion favourably.

oldrover said:
On that subject the Orang Gadang is an interesting one. I'm wondering if even in the potential presence of a real mystery ape like Orang Pendeck, there's still a need to invent one.
An element often on this general scene, I feel, of "the more, the better". I believe that in the lore of some Himalayan folk, there is supposedly more than one type of Yeti -- small-human-sized; and considerably larger.

it would be wonderful and delightful to be proved wrong.
oldrover said:
Wouldn't it just but I don't think you are.
In discussion among the American "Bigfoot community", the "believer / sceptic" debate at times becomes heated (especially on the "believer" side), to the point that the next step looks likely to be a shooting war. Most sceptics (some of whom were once proponents of BF's existence) are at pains to point out that that their doubts are not scorn-and-hate-fuelled: they would think it incredibly cool, and a great source of pleasure to them, if BF WERE to be proven as a hitherto undiscovered flesh-and-blood primate species -- it's just that data and reason tell them that it's very unlikely. Some of the more rabid believers just cannot credit this...
 

Analis

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
1,620
Likes
353
Points
99
oldrover said:
Analis am I right in thinking you are French, if so the fact that you can't find any references is a bit off putting. The French would have had lots more time than the Americans to encounter them. But then the Americans already had a cultural reference in Bigfoot to start with.
I was not aware of Maître's book, not of the 1947 report. The fact that they are rarely mentioned shows that they are rare exceptions.
Besides, the description of the "wild men" of Nam-Noung is full of mythological elements. Their oddical anatomies, for example. Like the traditional description of the Yowie as having its feet turned backwards. This is more typical of fairie lore, something the cryptozoologists don't like much.
It might be interesting to see if there were reports from the Japanese during the Second World War.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
Some of the more rabid believers just cannot credit this...
I heard a long time ago that in many circles that particular debate was prone to descend into to a slagging match.

Interesting to hear your perspective on the wild men of Indochina and the lack of reports among the french. As for Japanese reports I think that'd be the next step. Personally though I doubt we'd get anything.

France was a major colonial power, whose territories were similar to Britain, if there is a distinct lack of reports from colonial french areas as opposed to the British I think this would be very interesting.

Analis I was looking through an old thread yesterday on which you said something that I missed first time round so I'm going to bump it. Please if you get a chance to answer my query, it's on 'Monsters we missed'.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
Some of the more rabid believers just cannot credit this...
oldrover said:
I heard a long time ago that in many circles that particular debate was prone to descend into to a slagging match.
Hom.sap.sap. is just plain quarrelsome -- not surprising that MHB, if they spend any significant amount of time on planet Earth, don't (per most reported material) want to have much to do with us.

oldrover said:
Interesting to hear your perspective on the wild men of Indochina and the lack of reports among the french. As for Japanese reports I think that'd be the next step. Personally though I doubt we'd get anything.
Any Japanese-language scholars around here, ready to trawl the Japanese "crypto" sites? (Would put a "smiley" in here, if I knew how.) I'd tend not to be hopeful re Japanese WW2 reports; their presence in the region was, per calendar, fairly brief; and in that time and place they were, shall we say, rather "focused". (As ever, would love to be wrong.)
oldrover said:
France was a major colonial power, whose territories were similar to Britain, if there is a distinct lack of reports from colonial french areas as opposed to the British I think this would be very interesting.
"France and us" over this -- I rather feel, anybody's guess -- respective national emphasis; or "what was or wasn't actually there"? -- Heuvelmans does come up with a certain amount of stuff from colonial French Equatorial Africa. The (meagre) more you hear, the less you feel you know.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
I realise it isn't conclusive but without collaborative reports from the French, I feel this one is severely weakened.

As far as the squabbling is concerned I remember seeing a terrestrial TV (i.e. up on quality down on repeats) documentary some years ago which I seem to remember focused on the fact that many if not all of the 'grand old men' of Sasquatch research weren't speaking to each other. Don’t know whether it was true of course.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
I've just realised how far off topic we've gone about French Indochina etc, this thread started off in the old British territory of Malaya.
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
About a month ago, I seemed to be starting numerous new threads on "Cryptozoology": it seemed more economical to "bump" this thread, to give some recently acquired Indochina info -- on the basis that "it's all South-East Asia".
 

amyasleigh

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
848
Likes
339
Points
69
oldrover said:
As far as the squabbling is concerned I remember seeing a terrestrial TV (i.e. up on quality down on repeats) documentary some years ago which I seem to remember focused on the fact that many if not all of the 'grand old men' of Sasquatch research weren't speaking to each other. Don’t know whether it was true of course.
I gather that it was a bit like that, a few years back. Seemingly nowadays, things sometimes a bit frosty between the revered veterans in this field, but it's not outright war. Maybe something to do with a couple of the stroppiest characters involved, having departed this life in recent years.

There is some dissension and strife surrounding Bob Gimlin -- one of the two guys present for certain, at the shooting of the controversial Patterson-Gimlin film in October 1967 in northern California; film supposedly showing a sequence of a female Sasquatch walking away from the camera. Patterson, who allegedly operated the camera, is long dead; Gimlin, now very well-stricken in years, avers strongly that the film is "for real" -- no funny business with hoaxing. Many aficionados regard Gimlin as a pretty well saintly character, and think it inconceivable that he could be lying; others are, well, not so sure.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,947
Likes
1,365
Points
169
Hom.sap.sap. is just plain quarrelsome -- not surprising that MHB, if they spend any significant amount of time on planet Earth, don't (per most reported material) want to have much to do with us.
Returning to Southeast Asia, about this and particularly the American era, there's an interesting thread from 2003

http://www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7961
 
Top