True Accounts of Feral Children

There have been many views and theories on feral children over the years. In 1830, Swedish naturalist K.A. Rudolphi claimed that all feral children were either fictional or congenital idiots and this became the orthodox view. Sir Edward Taylor, often credited as the father of social anthropology, only reinforced Rudolphi's views. In actuality, there are about eighty cases of feral children. In 1758, Carl Linnaeus, a biological classifier, proposed a new species of man to be known as Homo ferens described as a mute quadruped covered in hair, but Robert Kerr dismissed Linnaeus' claims as exaggeration. Then, in 1949, Claude Levi Strauss determined that most, if not all, of the feral children had mental and/or physical defects and that this was the reason that they were abandoned. There were some cases to support this theory such as Dina Sanichar of Sekandra discovered in 1867, the Lucknow child discovered in 1954 and the Ugandan monkey child discovered in 1982 who were all handicapped in one way or another. However, many documented cases of feral children were not handicapped at all or even intentionally abandoned. Many were escapees from abusive parents or lost in the chaos of war. Kasper Hauser and the Midnapore wolf girls known as Kamala and Amala are two such examples.

Other such examples of feral children include Jean de Liege, the Lithuanian bear boy. He stayed in the forest for sixteen years after his family returned to their war torn village. His sense of smell was noted as sharpening intensely during his extended stay in the forest and he was said to have been covered in hair. He was captured around the age of twenty-one and was retaught speech but he lost the intensity he previous had with his sense of smell. Wild Peter of Hannover was captured near Helpensen in 1724 around age twelve. He spent sixty eight years in society without ever mastering language but his hearing and sense of smell were especially acute. The Irish sheep boy was another feral wonder child. He was captured in 1672. His body became much like a sheep and he bleated and ate as sheep did, even to the point of having the same particularities in taste. The Kranenburg girl was kidnapped at sixteen months and was found again in 1717 dressed in sacking and living off of leaves and grass. She learned spinning and sign language but never mastered speech. The savage girl from Champagne was discovered in 1731. She was known for eating meat and using tools in the wild which was unlike most other discovered feral children. She was also known for being able to run remarkably fast.

All of these cases are described in varying detail but the first true, scientific account of a feral child was recorded by the Roman historian Procopius. His account tells of a boy abandoned in the chaos of the Gothic wars circa 250 C.E. which was suckled and raised by a she-goat. When the people of his village returned they named him Aegisthus. This early recorded marvel, and all of those in between, recorded in varying detail, bits and pieces of information about feral children, what they were like and how well they were able to mesh with the new society that they were thrown into. It was a long time before any work with feral children to help them learn language. In 1798, a feral child that came to be known as Victor, was discovered in France. He went to live with a Mr. Itard who worked for the Institute of Deaf-Mutes in Paris. Itard was to study and work with the boy to attempt to assimilate him into his new environment. The author of the article “Wild Child of Aveyron” captures some of Itard's methods and some of Victor's personality traits. It was noted, with the most intrigue, that Victor did not distinguish between his senses the way that others do. Whereas we might differentiate between a pleasant scent and a repulsive odor, it made no difference to this wild child of Aveyron. His moods changed drastically with no noticeable stimuli and he was noted to laugh at changes in the weather. He appeared fascinated with the moon and never failed to wake when it was out, standing silently and staring at it. He also had a complete aversion to sweet foods. When Itard attempted to teach him speech he came across great difficulties. As the author of “Wild Child of Aveyron” puts it, “thus, it appears, that speech is a kind of music to which certain ears, although well organized in other respects, may be insensible.”

It is almost unfathomable that so many children could have been raised by animals or could have raised themselves in the wild.  It certainly says a lot about the human capacity to survive. What I think says even more is the ability of the human body, as expressed in all of these cases, to evolve to handle new conditions. Many of these children became covered in hair, could move differently and faster than other humans, had stronger sense of smell or hearing, but these traits often left when they, if they could, learned human speech. Why? I believe that answering this will tell us a lot more about what it means to be a human. I am quite open to any comments on relevant research done on this topic and/or the topic of teaching language to feral children.