Talk:Sawney Bean

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Article states Bean was the head of his family in the "early 15th century" but was born in the "early 14th century" during the reign of King James VI of Scotland (late 16th century - early 17th century.) zannerat 09:01, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

Edinburgh Tourism[edit]

I'm a little unsure about this phrase, isn't Bean supposed to have lived in Ayrshire? This isn't anywhere near Edinburgh, or is it just meant to signify Scottish tourism by mentioning the capital? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.11.9 (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably in there because the Edinburgh Dungeons has a wee bit about he Bean clan. Not really sure if that' notable enough to be in there. - Duncan Sneddon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.212.246.219 (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dating[edit]

I agree that this is nonsense. A brief google suggests that Bean is supposed to have lived in the reign of James I, 1406-1437. I doubt there is any historical basis to either version, but James I is at least more consistent, and seems to be better attested. 10.55 09 November 2005

POV[edit]

The article states:

"Bean tried to take up the family profession, but quickly realized that he had little taste for honest work... He left home with a woman who shared his views on honest labor."

Isn't this a little more than POV? I'd make the change myself, but know very little on the subject. — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:59, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

It's all just unverified legend and myths, and that's the way I've found that the legend is consistently told. How would you change it? - Lifefeed 18:03, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

I could think of a couple of different ways to rephrase this, but to do so would presume that there is a commonly-expressed POV that would endorse or promote the lifestyle of the Bean family. There is NPOV & then there is NPOV (to offer my POV.) -- llywrch 19:21, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Chapbooks[edit]

About when did these chapbooks describing the life of Sawney Bean & his brood appear? Befor the Jacobite Rebellion of '45? Or '05? That would help define whether we have fiction or legend-encrusted fact here. -- llywrch 19:21, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Merge[edit]

Merged information in from Sawney Beane page, which has been redirected here.

I found the writing a bit snappier on that page but more precise information and Wikification on this page. It could definitely use some tightening up, especially eliminating redundancy (some of which was there before I merged!)

The title is also problematic. I think it's more Wiki to use his full name and quote-mark his nickname, but is "Bean" or "Beane" the more common spelling? To me, it's the latter. So perhaps we should move this all to one with the 'e' at the end.

I've done nothing to check the "facts" of the rumor, though, other than a cursory read. --Dhartung | Talk 23:26, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)


Sawney Beane[edit]

This page should be entitled "Sawney Bean". I don't think he is often, if ever, referred to as "Alexander Bean", although I'm sure that there will be some reference to that. That is hypercorrection. Many Scots are referred to by what Dhartung calls a "nickname" above. --MacRusgail 15:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree: this should be moved to Sawney Bean as that is the most common name used in English. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:13, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Google test: "Sawney Bean" 30,100. "Sawney Beane" 16,800.
"Alexander "Sawney" Bean" 413. "Alexander "Sawney" Beane" 40.
Seems pretty clear to me. I support the move to Sawney Bean. --Kathryn NicDhàna 18:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was movable, so I moved it. When I was merging the two articles in 2004 I wasn't yet aware of naming conventions so I chose the article title with more information. But clearly it should be at the most common name. --Dhartung | Talk 09:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


In popular media section[edit]

I made a few changes to the In Popular Media section. Monarch of the Glen was mentioned twice, so I deleted one of them. I moved the mention of the Hills Have Eyes graphic novel to go with the rest of the Hills Have Eyes stuff. I thought it fit better there. Two sections I cut out entirely, and I'm pasting them in here, just in case:

  • An episode of the BBC SF-serial Torchwood dealt with members of the organization uncovering and fighting a clan of cannibals living in a remote village (albeit set in Wales).
  • The X-Files, Season 4, Episode 2 "Home" features the "Peacock Family," a family much based on the Sawney Bean Clan.

I cut those out because I really don't think they have anything to do with Sawney Bean at all. The Torchwood one is at least remotely possible, but it would need a source (and the episode title!). I think the XF one is way off base, though. The Peacock family aren't cannibals, only violent and inbred, and not at all in the same way the Bean clan was. The show itself never mentions Sawney Bean, even in passing, to my memory. If you have a source that says that Sawney Bean was an inspiration for these episodes, they'd be welcome back. --SesanaP (talk) 04:56, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1000 people cannibalised?[edit]

I think a more accurate source is here Murder in the UK. Which states 30-40 murders (or murder-canniablisations) comitted, not the 1000's said to be comitted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cymbelmineer (talk • contribs)

Discrepancies exist for this legend. You can mention the discrepancy in the article and add the source. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

I saw this article needs an infobox which I'm willing to make. I need the list of fields and the answers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crowned jester (talk • contribs) 21:10, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Lurking Fear[edit]

Reading a copy of Lovecraft 'Commonplace Book' I found a (lengthy)note supporting the idea that 'The Lurking Fear' was ispired by this legendary figure through 'Historical and Traditional Tales Connected with the South of Scotland'. Unluckily, I'm not a expert on scottish legends or Lovecraft lore.There is any concrete support for this theory? 'The Lurking Fear' page has 'Sawney Bean' on the 'See also', but nothing more. maybe it can be a worthy addition to both articles. Thanks if anyone will ever reply. 95.249.59.90 (talk) 13:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what a "Commonplace Book" is, but it could be a verifiable reference. If you want to add that tidbit of information, you could use it as a ref. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 14:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the text http://www.wired.com/beyond_the_beyond/2011/07/h-p-lovecrafts-commonplace-book/, year 1919 point 40.The main problem is, mine is an annotated edition and the connection is made in a note done by others, NOT an original one from Lovecraft himself. In a quick search on Google I found only this http://books.google.it/books?id=Q-gJK_zagEcC&pg=PA152&lpg=PA152&dq=Lurking+fear+sawney+bean&source=bl&ots=HNC0LPnp_B&sig=AO_1EYQJXvoMTM0UamXZFZNhPGU&hl=it or this (in Italian, point 11)http://books.google.it/books?id=NdKkDdRYgrsC&pg=PT1216&lpg=PT1216&dq=Lurking+fear+sawney+bean&source=bl&ots=aY9wXhWYT5&sig=qB_aXk8BnU0MhfLfi63gX2ajoKw&hl=it Are they enough? 80.117.30.100 (talk) 22:05, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just note that it is the author's opinion that it is inspired by Sawney Bean and provide the ref. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 23:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ecological Consideration[edit]

Has there been condideration of the amount of food required to sustain the Sawney family? Also how did they obtain it? According to the article there were 48 Beanes. If they relied on human meat, that would require at least 2 cadavers/day, over 600/year. The number of victims would have totaled thousands over a decade. Perhaps they purchased some food from local markets with stolen money, and did some non-human hunting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.25.144.163 (talk) 00:12, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.murderuk.com/cannibal_sawney_bean.html
    Triggered by \bmurderuk\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 17:09, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 10:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sawney Bean. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Im going to change the victim count to disputed[edit]

Currently somebody has written the victim count as 5593. First of all we do not even know if this truly happened. Also I cannot find this figure anywhere online apart from one source from a article written in 2020 which seems to get the figure from here. It seems to me somebody has just simply made up this figure. Also I find it hard to believe that in that day and age somany people would go missing before a massive rescue party would be sent out and measures would have been taken not to travel alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.234.75 (talk) 09:28, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sawney_Bean&oldid=1206205970"