The “ideal type” of the wild man and his oikotypes

The “wild man” is conceived as a mortal being of flesh and blood, something intermediate between a human and an animal, but closer to a human. The primary markers of his “wildness” are: the lack of skills to cook food with fire and to make clothing (hence his nudity and body hair, which make clothes superfluous); the inability to use articulate speech; and the use of untreated clubs and stones as weapons. Oikotypes (local versions) of the “wild man” legend are found in the form of narratives and beliefs within the folk dialects of Europe, the North Caucasus, Siberia, and Central and East Asia. For a character to be indexed as a “wild man,” it must align with the “ideal type” (Idealtypus, in Weber’s sense) in at least a minimal set of features. Combined with elements provided by narrative possibilities and the local folk-mythological context, the completeness of this set determines the purity of the “real type,” or, conversely, its greater or lesser correspondence to figures from the local lower mythology. It is precisely this proportion that defines specific oikotypes. Oikotypes of the “wild man” are formed with the participation of features that are not part of his “ideal type” and are not unique to him. As a rule, such features (distortions of “human morphology,” magical or mantic properties, assimilation with the image of a master spirit) can be found in different, even very remote, regions. Similarly, most plots in which the “wild Man” can appear are non-specific to him: abducting a human as a marriage partner; attacking a human and fighting with them; capturing and imprisoning (~intoxicating, immobilizing, killing) a “wild man” / hunting him; and exchanging services with the “wild Man,” receiving certain boons from him, including important information – both prophetic and practical (medical, culinary, hunting). Finally, there are features that do not extend beyond a single region and, in this sense, represent purely endemic forms.

1. Bernheimer, R. (1952), Wild Men in the Middle Ages. A study in art, sentiment, and demonology, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA.

2. Emelianov, V.V. (2025), “ ‘The Wedding of Martu’ – a Sumerian folklore text”, Asiatica: trudy po filosofii i kul’turam Vostoka, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 3–23.

3. Forth, G. (2007), “Images of the Wildman inside and outside Europe”, Folklore, vol. 118, no. 3, pp. 261–281.

4. Gurevich, E.A. and Matyushina, I.G. (2000), Poeziya skal’dov [Skaldic poetry], RGGU, Moscow, Russia.

5. Il’ina, I.N. (2015), “Documents from the Russian Academy of Sciences Archives on the study of the ‘Bigfoot’ in the late 1950s”, Otechestvennye arkhivy, vol. 3, pp. 37–43.

6. Ivanov, V.V. and Gamkrelidze, T.V. (1984) Indoevropeiskii yazyk i indoevropeitsy: Rekonstruktsiya i istoriko-tipologicheskii analiz prayazyka i protokul’tury [Indo-European language and Indo-Europeans. Reconstruction and historical-typological analysis of the protolanguage and proto-culture], Izdatel’stvo Tbilisskogo universiteta, Tbilisi, USSR.

7. Neklyudov, S.Yu. (1998), “Zoodemonism”, in Agapkina, T.A., Zhuravlev, A.F. and Tolstaya, S.M., eds., Slovo i kul’tura: Pamyati Nikity Il’icha Tolstogo [Word and culture. In memory of Nikita Ilyich Tolstoy], vol. 2, Indrik, Moscow, Russia, pp. 126–137.

8. Neklyudov, S.Yu. (2022), “Deficits and resources of the other world”, in Antonov, D.I. and Khristoforova, O.B., eds., in In Umbra: Demonologiya kak semioticheskaya Sistema: Al’manakh [In Umbra: Demonology as a semiotic system. Almanac], iss. 11, RGGU, Moscow, Russia, pp. 113–149.

9. Neklyudov, S.Yu. (2024), “Essay on comparative demononymy: the “wild people” of Central and Western Europe”, Problems of onomastics, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 70–92.

10. Pongratz-Leisten, B. (2001), “The Other and the enemy in the Mesopotamian conception of the world”, in Whiting, R.M., ed., Melammu Symposia 2: Mythology and mythologies. Methodological approaches to intercultural influences: Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Symposium of the Assyrian and Babylonian Intellectual Heritage Project (Paris, France, October 4–7, 1999), The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 194–231.