Nearly forgotten associations

When it comes to conceiving of the character Ermentrude Wolfenbarger, it’s primarily based on the odd fact that wolves were actually this associated with witchcraft in some countries like Switzerland before (she is Swiss herself). Mind you even their domesticated relatives dogs were also highly associated with witchcraft in countries like France, Germany and Britain at some point, the association still exists in some African countries like Cameroon and Ghana even not all Africans believe in this themselves. Though there are African sermons and devotionals that do bring this up, they also bring out other topics like forgiveness and arrogance for instance. It is one interest but not the only one around, as they also discuss other matters like love as well.

But even then this is one association that does deserve some reappearance, if one wants a break from the usual stereotype, more often than not it’s informed by a very limited experience with certain things and peoples. Very limited interest in such things and peoples as well to boot, that’s why a number of fictions tend to be kind of dyed in the wool repetitive. TV Tropes might be interesting but not to a reliable extent since most of its obsessions relate to modern pop culture or mass culture in some way or another, not so much earlier folk cultures and high cultures alike. For both of these two, you might as well peruse both older documents (including those dating back to the early modern period) and academia to better delve into such subject matters that don’t appear often in modern mass culture.

And if you want to go the extra mile, then you could also peruse inspirational literatures and journalistic literatures on the same as well, but in a way that makes one wonder if American mass culture/pop culture is kind of very selective in some fashion. Maybe not necessarily selective but more in the lines of being really detached from the past, if because American culture kind of came out of the blue when compared to not only Europe but also China, India, Iran and arguably Senegal, Ghana (when it was both the Ashanti Empire and the Gold Coast), Mali and the Democratic Republic of Congo. From the early modern European standpoint, associating dogs with witchcraft’s rather unsurprising, which goes to show you how common this association was in the past.

It’s not at all forgotten in African countries, if because it’s still relevant to this day. But I feel European countries have gotten more postmodern, alongside the profound American influence that came by. Germany had a vexing attitude to dogs before and still does to this day, only in the past it had a lot to do with witchcraft. At present it’s due to both canine predation and people poisoning dogs out of spite, but either way Germany seems more apprehensive around dogs than America is. The same goes for both Austria and Switzerland, since they also have the same problems as well. It’s kind of befitting that one of the most prominent dogs in Germanophone culture is the demonic familiar of Dr Faust, as popularised by Johann von Goethe.

One that’s more deeply embodied in German culture than what Cujo does for American culture, in some regards a lot moreso. And then there’s Malleus Maleficarum, which brings up the association of wolves with witchcraft. So associating either wolves or dogs with witchcraft in the European mind wasn’t that strange before because it used to be this commonplace, similar associations exist in America as a country but only in isolated pockets among some indigenous communities. This is where the American attitude to dogs diverges from its German counterpart, one that seems more consistently enthusiastic around them. That’s not to say Germans don’t value dogs at all, but it’s undermined by recurring suspicions of foul play. Something America doesn’t have to the same extent, really.

The association of wolves and dogs with witchcraft wasn’t really that strange in early modern Europe, owing to its previous ubiquity, that had a character like Ermentrude Wolfenbarger emerged in say 1618, she wouldn’t have been surprising. She is a witch who not only habitually uses dogs and wolves to attack people, but also bewitches them the same, sends dog spirits to torment them and turns into a wolf herself, a witch who’s right at home in African Pentecostal thought as she would be in early modern European Christian thought. But given Canada’s greater proximity to America that a character like Ermentrude Wolfenbarger would stick out like a sore thumb, as Canada was also formed fairly recently and very much a settler-colony as America is.

On the subject of serial killers and pet dogs, there are instances where such characters do like and care for dogs. Most notably the likes of Harold Shipman (who had a black poodle), Myra Hindley who had a dog named Puppet and Dennis Nilsen who had a dog named Bleep, though the thought of murderers having dogs wasn’t so odd during the witch trials. But that’s got to do with them being associated with or suspected of witchcraft in some way that it was to be expected, Ermentrude Wolfenbarger being a murderous witch who likes dogs is pretty unremarkable in this light and likewise the same would go for Harold Shipman, Dennis Nilsen and Myra Hindley in a way. In modern fiction, the closest equivalent would be Dudley and his dog Muttley, which speaks to a kind of underrepresentation.

As underrepresented as witches with dogs, which are historically interconnected and interrelated in Europe before. To the point where if American fiction is in short supply of villainous dog owners that the only viable alternatives are real life stories of murderous dog owners and folklore involving witches who have dogs for familiars, especially if these beliefs are outside of mainstream American culture (Europe at some point, Africa at present). Ermentrude Wolfenbarger and her dogs would be a return to the earlier portrayal, as found in Johann von Goethe’s Faust, so is her using their wild relatives the wolves to do the exact same thing.

These were even mentioned in the book Demons of Urban Reform, which features mentions of documents encountering similar characters in real life at the time. Ermentrude Wolfenbarger and her canine association might be a controversially refreshing change of pace, a villainous witch who uses both dogs and wolves to antagonise people and animals alike.

The earlier association of witches with wolves

As for this character called Ermentrude Wolfenbarger, she’s Swiss but being a witch who turns into a wolf and even makes wolves attack people, she actually harkens back to a now-forgotten association of wolves with witchcraft. There’s even a recorded Swiss folktale about a witch who turns into a wolf herself, so the association of wolves with witchcraft is kind of nearly forgotten these days. It sounds surprising to a number of people but if witches were said to transform into nearly anything (usually predatory animals like cats, dogs and wolves), then lycanthropy should be rightfully seen as a form of witchcraft itself and is rightfully seen as such in one study. Even today in some countries like Cameroon, witchcraft also involves turning into animals whereas in Ghana they have witches using animals themselves. These animals also includes dogs, which are domesticated wolves and also a rather surprising association.

Though it’s apparently not entirely forgotten in some countries, where in some countries like Ghana we have reports of witches using familiars resembling them, among other animals. I remember one study about children who were accused of witchcraft in the Democratic Republic of Congo were said to turn into dogs and owls, though I suppose the association of owls of witchcraft isn’t forgotten by JK Rowling, who seems to be more of a folklore fanatic than one realises. Harry Potter does magic and keeps an owl as a familiar, so it’s not at all forgotten by Rowling. Though a witch who uses wolves to harass people and turns into one herself would kind of harken back to that association as it was in early modern Switzerland, if you go by the study Demons of Urban Reform. So the association of wolves with witchcraft is an older one, though largely forgotten by now.

Similar associations may not be entirely forgotten in some countries, but it should be noted that there was a time in Britain, France and Germany that both wolves and dogs were associated with witchcraft. Witches were even said to turn themselves into either one of them, or had demons that turned into either one of them, that such mentions are even found in old witchhunting manuals and texts like Discours des Sorciers by Henri Boguet. So what Ermentrude Wolfenbarger does is largely in line with these earlier depictions and documentations, closer to how witches were conceived of in the early modern European imaginary, than how they’ve come to be conceived as in later fantasy fictions. I could understand JK Rowling’s own dissatisfaction with the fantasy school, if because it’s oddly removed from folklore, despite taking inspiration from it.

In the sense of being oddly detached from it in some regards, treating fantasy beings as almost a separate race from humanity, instead of being merely supernatural omens as they would be in folklore. Maybe I’m wrong about JK Rowling since I haven’t read much of her works yet, but it’s not hard to see how there’s a profound discrepancy between fantasy fiction and folklore, despite the former taking inspiration from the latter. It’s like this in urban fantasy where those who shapeshift are treated rather differently from those who merely cast spells, despite shapeshifting being also part and parcel of witchcraft in folklore. So Ermentrude Wolfenbarger is actually a very traditional witch, she doesn’t just cast spells and use familiars (well, dogs and wolves in her case), but also turn herself into a wolf to attack people.

A rather old-school witch that wouldn’t be too out of place in a 16th century witchhunting manual, whereas subsequent witches in some fantasy stories are rather far removed from this.

Don’t Run With The Wolves

I find myself wondering if the mistrust of wolves in the Bible may be warranted, given how actual shepherds have to put up with their presence whenever they go near sheep at all. This attitude’s not unique to Christianity alone as you could find it in Zoroastrianism, an Iranian religion that predates the coming of Islam to Iran. Considering that both Israel/Palestine and Iran are in the Middle East, that it’s logical their own peoples have had unpleasant experiences with wolves enough to have this same attitude enshrined and magnified in their religious beliefs, though Zoroastrianism seems to esteem dogs more consistently than what Christianity does. I feel the Christian attitude to dogs is at best mixed/ambivalent, dependent on if the dog serves the church or not, though it’s also dependent on the individual church itself.

Dogs seem to be more well-integrated in Catholic and Orthodox circles, especially if they have a calling in guarding monasteries and also pest control on the side, despite their own suspicions at times relating to witchcraft. In some African churches, especially those in Ghana and Cameroon, dogs are even associated with witchcraft as it was in early modern Europe, though this could also be due to folkloric influence (this is also true for their European counterparts), even if not all Ghanaians and Cameroonians believe in this. Given how the Bible largely mistrusts dogs, that associating them with witchcraft is practically kind of befitting in this regard. Similar things can be said of their wild counterparts wolves, which makes the comparison of God’s people to sheep even more apt and accurate.

Associating wolves with witchcraft makes even more sense in this regard because witchcraft is regarded similarly as rebellion, and that witches are some things used by the Devil to oppose Christianity. So it would be logical for witches to be linked to wolves in some way or another, perhaps more consistently than you would with dogs since there is at least some Biblical mention of dogs being used for good (healing Lazarus, guarding sheep, guiding Tobit and used as comeuppance for Jezebel’s own misdeeds). This kind of translates to Christian monasteries relying on dogs for protection and pest control, whereas the overall attitude to wolves is largely mistrust. There is the lone Biblical passage of wolves living peacefully with sheep, but that’s when order is restored in the future.

Due to the consequences of Adam’s sins that death entered the world, so animals killing each other is possibly part of this. God undoing this in the new earth, as presaged in Isaiah, would put an end to predation for good. Albeit in a way we don’t expect it to, but God answers problems in his own way that are better than expected. Wolves and possibly dogs living peacefully with prey is part of this, as with lions and possibly cats eating plants with no issue being the same.

When wolves were associated with witchcraft

It’s a rather strange association in this day and age but one that was there before in Switzerland and to some extent, Germany that you have earlier reports of witches being able to either use wolves as familiars of sorts or turn into wolves themselves, that shows there really was a link between wolves and witchcraft. There’s even a Swiss folktale about a witch turning herself into a wolf, which means that lycanthropy could in fact be a form of witchcraft itself. Somebody else also pointed this out in a study they made before, where lycanthropy really is a form of witchcraft helped by that there are reports of witches being able to turn into any (predatory) animal.

This is something that’s not remembered nor honoured in some contemporary fictions where shapeshifting is treated as separate from witchcraft/magic, even though historically shapeshifting was a facet of witchcraft and still is so in some African countries. The fact that at least some European countries associated witchcraft with wolves to varying degrees suggest that this may not have been much of a stretch, it may not have been strange in those days and especially in the early modern period of all things. It also brings a new angle to the historical distrust of wolves, though it’s still ongoing in Europe when it comes to hunters and farmers alike, where what if wolves are distrusted due to their association with witchcraft.

It’s an angle not a lot of people have considered nor realised, even if it makes sense why such an association exists. Sort of like how olive baboons aren’t trusted much in South Africa due to a similar association, that it would not have been a stretch for wolves in early modern Germany and Switzerland in this regard. You could also find something like Demons of Urban Reform online, if you bother doing that to get where I’m coming from.

Demons of Urban Reform

A rather unlikely association at first but one that was there since the fifteenth century, especially if the academic study Demons of Urban Reform’s any indication. The idea that witches can turn themselves into wolves and dogs is there in Britain at some point, if the text The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft’s any indication, so the link between witchcraft and wolves among the Swiss in this regard but it’s a surprising association when it comes to contemporary expectations about witchcraft. The only real difference here is that in Britain, witches are said to turn into wolves and dogs whereas in Switzerland witches merely ride on wolves.

But even then it’s a very interesting association in which witches could be associated with anything else other than cats, though that involves realising some very surprising associations at all. Another text, Tableau de l’inconstance des mauvais anges, states that male witches turn themselves into wolves, dogs and cats so it could be said that lycanthropy is a form of witchcraft itself. If witches can turn themselves into dogs, cats, sheep and hares they can also turn into wolves. Likewise, they can have dogs and wolves as familiars so it doesn’t have to be a cat to be witchy. Even in some African countries like Ghana, witches can have dogs as familiars just like this fellow.

I pretty much recommend this book (and some others if I bothered adding) to those who’re sick and tired of the association of cats with witchcraft, so this study shows a different side to wolves where they’re not just linked to lycanthropy but also witchcraft. The fact that witches in earlier demonology texts, as well as some contemporary texts, are said to turn into any animal (not just cats) is enough to make an argument that lycanthropy is a form of witchcraft in and of itself.

5 out of 5 stars.

Another look at wolf-human interactions

When it comes to wolves and humans, while there’s no doubt these interactions do exist yet attitudes to wolves vary from culture to culture and between individuals and sometimes these attitudes exist in perplexing ways (perplexing for some people). In the case with the Middle East, while Turks and Turkic people revered the wolf the same can’t be said of Iranians where they mistrust it. At some point, Iranians believed that wolves were the creation of Ahriman as the evil counterpart of dogs (which are good animals) hence why they’re similar. (This belief long predated scientific discovery that dogs are wolves.)

Wolves were despised for stealing livestock, while dogs are valued for guarding them. While this isn’t unique to Iranians since some people have similar feelings towards dogs and wolves, but it does give a good insight into what their cultural beliefs are like and why Middle Easterners aren’t all alike when it comes to attitudes to wolves. (For another matter Muslims since some Muslims are very sympathetic to dogs, especially with the Sufis.) While the Middle East’s also another place where dogs were first domesticated, yet attitudes to wolves aren’t universally favourable.

If the ancient Iranians are any indication, even if dogs come from wolves that doesn’t explain why Zoroastrian Iranians mistrust wolves who see them as evil copies of dogs. Either the dog’s imported from elsewhere or that like with the Chinese, Iranians mistrust wolves on some level despite being related to the dog. Consider the Chinese and Japanese, while the Japanese historically loved wolves and the word for wolf contains a word or character for deity, the same can’t be said of the Chinese where they have negative proverbs about wolves.

And that the Chinese word for pervert contains the character for wolf, while proverbs about dogs are more ambivalent (not always favourable but still tolerated). My understanding’s that with both Iranians and Chinese, dogs are tolerated at best for being useful but there’s not much practical use for wolves so they mistrust them a lot even if that’s not case for other animals. But it makes better sense in that animals are treated and regarded differently if there’s any practical use for them.

Cultural and individual attitudes to animals aren’t universal, the point of anthropology’s to study a culture from its own perspective and nearly free from a projected bias. While you might say that wolves are selected to be wild due to persecution, it’s really not that simple in real life where as what some people say or rather imply the bolder wolves get persecuted for going near livestock and human habitation. Dogs also get persecuted, not just for attacking animals but also for their link to witchcraft at some point for some cultures and in some countries.

Retrieverman’s reasoning doesn’t explain why semi-feral dogs exist and why some people allow their dogs to roam freely and why some dogs hunt on their own despite being trained and owned, which means dog domestication isn’t that straightforward as it should be. Wolf-human interactions are complex, but not always for reasons you think it is.

The dangers of anthropomorphism and why it’s not equivalent to the prejudices people face

When it comes to people anthropomorphising animals, some people would liken the plight of animals to the plight of marginalised people while that might be true to some extent they’re not always exactly equivalent to each other. While wolves and dogs are subject to discrimination to some extent, it’s not the equivalent to what black and Asian people go through. For instance, take Asian people and wolves for instance.

Asian people are held to be model minority, submissive (especially if they’re female and additionally if they’re oversexed and objectified), carriers of coronavirus, good at maths/science and martial arts, have small penises (if they’re male), heartless seducers (both male and female, male at some point), not athletic (not skilled in most sports), feminine (this disregards any Asian tomboy in existence) and perpetual foreigners despite those in the diaspora staying in America and Europe for several generations or so.

Most of them are things wolves and dogs aren’t subjected to, dogs even form the majority of pets in the world and while submission in dogs is earned, the submissive stereotype is practically a high standard most Asian women can’t live up to. According to a thread in the forum Lipstick Alley, the Asian women they personally knew were the opposite: bossy, aggressive, unruly and violent. Outside of furry circles, these are usually things not associated with dogs and wolves.

Dogs and wolves aren’t discriminated for being carriers of a disease (not to the same extent that blacks ans Asians are subjected to, with regards to ebola and coronavirus), wearing their hair in a certain way (which’s something black people are subjected to), speaking in a certain way (blacks as well as anybody who speaks in a minority language) and outside of furry circles, they aren’t objectified in the same way blacks and Asians are.

In the sense that among gay men, Asian men are stereotyped as small penis and submissive but black men are stereotyped as promiscuous, well-endowed and tops (a stereotype not many black men live up to and some gay blacks have issues with). As for blacks, they’re stereotyped as gangsters, thugs, well-endowed (if male), promiscuous, unintelligent, tops (the ones who penetrate), mammies, Sapphires, strong black women, masculine (some of the black women I know are feminine), less infantilised (unless if infantilised by liberals) and larger and more supernaturally powerful than whites.

However, if they’re positive stereotypes they aren’t just high standards they can’t live up to but also underestimate how bad their mental health is. There are black women struggling with depression, anxiety and even schizophrenia which goes the same with black men. Likewise, there are gay black men who take issue with the well-endowed top stereotype (some of them are bottoms and others are sides as in the former want to be penetrated, the other doesn’t want to be penetrated in any way) and the black people I know are either celibate or single.

Practically not promiscuous in any way. While wolves and dogs are linked to promiscuity in some cultures, it’s not universally shared by countries and people depending on the language and the like. But stereotypes about blacks and Asians are near-universal in the Western world and to a lesser extent, Asia and Africa with either one or the other. Black people are even discriminated for wearing their hair and speaking in a certain way, that’s something dogs and wolves are spared from.

The only known prejudices that wolves and dogs are universally subjected to are predation (especially if they get targeted by hunters, ranchers and farmers alike), witchcraft, stealing food and filth (which gets dogs poisoned in countries like Germany). While hundehass/hatred of dogs is a problem in Germany and Russia, I still think whatever dogs and wolves are subjected to aren’t always the same as what ethnic and cultural minorities are subjected to.

Prostitutes per excellence?

Bear in mind that wolves were historically linked to prostitution, whether if it’s the she-wolf that’s in heat and mates with other wolves or if wolves are predators hunting down prey (in this case, street walkers prey on gullible men) so some of their domestic counterparts do have a link to prostitution as prostitutes’ pets, especially poodles.

(Poodles were also linked to old maids, so there goes the sexual dubiousness of poodles going both ways.)

It would be almost politically incorrect to say that sheep have masters but dogs have pimps (how much’s the prostitute in the window?) which becomes even cruder to when dogs get bred to have puppies that get sold to other owners that it’s almost tempting to compare it to brothels and baby farms. If there’s something that unites dogs and prostitutes, they’re made to do things.

Bear in mind that dogs have been likened to prostitutes that it’s not a stretch to say they’re made to do something, so a prostitute would be more trainable than a wife is in some regards. If wolves are street walkers on the look out for clients, then dogs are the ultimate courtesans.

It would be even rude to compare dog breeders to pimps and madams but the association of some dogs and wolves with prostitution’s oddly too on the nose at times.

On wolves

If you want me to be honest, I actually wolves to be rather overrated in the sense dogs do many of the same things wolves do and actually aren’t that bad at hunting animals either (actually dogs do kill and eat mice in some things I’ve read so they’re quite good at it). I did have a dog that ate frogs, another ate a lizard so they’re far from bad at hunting in a sense.

But that would make wolves a lot less special, especially when their domestic counterparts are capable of doing many of the things wolves do (especially when it comes to feral dogs and some dogs do have an annual oestrus cycle) where I suspect the boundary between wolf and dog may be more ecologically and behaviourally porous.

Wolves hunt and eat mice and deer, so do dogs that depending on the circumstance it might even be a good thing that dogs do eat rats and mice. Wolves and dogs form packs with hierarchy, some dogs have an annual oestrus cycle and some dogs can’t process starch well (if dingoes count as dogs, then they’re dogs).

Maybe wolves aren’t that overrated, as much as dogs do get underestimated that I think dogs are way more wolflike than most people give credit to when it comes to pack and hunting behaviours that dogs aren’t that bad at it, but that makes wolves a lot less special unfortunately enough.