general
Firmly rooted in the imaginations of superstitious laymen of past centuries, the Kraken has found early infamy as inspiration for the most malevolent and frightening monsters in classic literary works such as Homer’s ‘The Odyssey’. The Kraken has starred in less lofty tales found in the myths and folklore of Scandinavia, and told of by fishermen and seafaring men alike.

However, as we delve into the deep ocean and continue to find new marine species, the scientific community continues to build its (admittedly sparse) knowledge in regard to the giant, deep-sea squid. Specimens matching eyewitness accounts have been routinely found on the ocean surface or upon shores, dead or dying. They’ve been hauled up on fishermen’s lines, pieces found in the bellies of whales, and recently photographed and filmed in their indigenous environment. They’ve been given appropriately intimidating names – Architeuthis, the giant squid, and Mesonychoteuthis, the colossal squid. Two separate species with distinct biological differences. Both share commonalities – mainly, they are massive, they are mysterious, and they may very well be the tangible muse behind the Kraken myth.

Still, our woefully inadequate base of knowledge of these giant, deep-sea cephalopods must be taken into consideration. It must be taken into consideration the fact that the deep and open ocean is still largely unexplored.

The questions stand. Have we found the creature which inspired the myths? Or have we simply found clues, stepping stones, harbingers of a flesh-and-blood creature which embodies the Kraken in and of its full scope – size, temperament, and overwhelming power? We know the giants exist in irrefutable fact. The mega cephalopods, the stuff of legends, may have yet to be discovered.
back to top

description/appearance
Eyewitness accounts and folktales paint the Kraken as a creature of intimidating, behemoth size, either red or white, with very large black or green eyes. The tentacles are said to be exceptionally large around and exceptionally long, and the suckers lined with needle-sharp teeth. The beak is almost always described to be like that of a parrot or parakeet, hooked, sharp, and powerful. At times, the Kraken was also described as a giant octopus, although these illustrations and accounts are more of a rarity. The most prevalent descriptions bear stark similarities to the giant squid.

Pontoppidan, author of ‘The Natural History of Norway’ published within his book this early account:

“It is called Kraken or Kraxen…He shows himself sufficiently, although his whole body does not appear, which in all likelihood no human eye ever beheld (excepting the young of this species). Its back or upper part which seems to be in appearance an English mile and a half in circumference, (some say more, but I chuse the least for greater certainty) looks at first like a number of small islands, surrounded with something that floats and fluctuates like sea weeds…at least several bright points or horns appear, which grow thicker and thicker the higher they rise above the surface of the water, and sometimes they stand as high and large as the masts of middle-siz’d vessels.”

Meanwhile, existing specimens of known deep-sea squid – notably the giant and colossal squid – bear extremely similar characteristics on a, usually, much smaller scale. Established knowledge of cephalopods states that many are capable of changing color at will through pigment cells called chromatophores in their skin. They do so by controlling the size of their chromatophores, manipulating not only their coloration, but range of markings. The Humboldt squid is known to flash white and red, for example, in the presence of danger or while hunting.

Bernard Huvelmens, dubbed the ‘Father of Cryptozoology’, in argument for a creature the size of the Kraken in myth, wrote this about the scale and weight of the giant squid in his 1958 book ‘Le Kraken et la poulpe colossal’:

“There must be Architeuthis weighing more than five tons, and some even larger ones which must weigh between two and twenty-seven tons, the normal weight being around eight tons. There are good reasons to believe that there may even exist specimens twice as long as that of Thimble Tickle, which, depending upon their girth, might have weighed between sixteen and two-hundred-sixteen tons, but more likely around sixty-four tons.’ His estimations were backed up by his assertion that “the density of living creatures is only slightly higher than that of water…”

There is one fundamental error in these calculations. While the statement on the density of flesh holds true for most creatures, large squid specimens actually possess flesh which is lighter or equal in density to water due to the high content of ammonium chloride in their flesh. So much to the extent that the History Channel’s ‘Monster Quest’ expedition lead by diver and cameraman Scott Cassell came upon a mild difficulty in finding specimens for study. The difficulty being that typical fishermen’s sonar equipment would read nothing of a specimen save the beak, as there is no variation in density to speak of between the squid’s physiological makeup and the water around it. The ammonium chloride content, as well, keeps the squid neutrally buoyant in the ocean water – perhaps the cause for the many floating dead and dying specimens of Architeuthis found.
back to top

range/habitat
While tales of sea monsters exist all over the world, the chilling plausibility of the Kraken in its specific semi-realism centers on Scandinavia, Norway, and northern Europe. Reported sightings take place from the shores of the sea all the way out to vast, deep ocean waters.

Meanwhile, the Kraken’s scientific parallel – the giant squid and the colossal squid – have been found in a far more diverse range of geographical locations. Remains of the giant squid have been found on the shores of Norway, New Zealand, Newfoundland, Tasmania, and the eastern coast of the United States. A possible sighting of a live specimen of Architeuthis has been recorded in the Sea of Cortez. The colossal squid has been found in Antarctic waters. Photographic evidence states that these creatures primarily exist in waters of up to 3,000 ft (900 meters) deep. Further evidence based on the predatory behavior of sperm whales in relation to giant squid back up this evidence. Sperm whales are known to dive up to 3,000 ft (900 meters) in search of prey.
back to top

history/origin
Because accounts of the Kraken and such monsters like it were handed down mostly in verbal, offhand storytelling, it is difficult to pinpoint when the Kraken, as we know it today, was specified. While accounts of sea monsters are told of in the books of Revelations and Job in the Bible, the boisterous stories of fishermen and man’s attempt to properly express any potential witness to such foreign creatures may have existed long before then. This particular development of a vague ‘sea monster’ concept to a more specific ‘mega squid’ myth can be seen in the linguistic development of the word ‘Kraken’ itself.

Kraken initially meant, simply, ‘sea monster’. Kraken, contrary to today’s common usage of the word, is plural. Singular, Krake, in reference to a krakenbanke. Krakenbanke was a reef or ban where the water was shallower than it was supposed to be, supposedly because there was a huge Krake lying on the bottom of the water. Today, the word Kraken also doubles as the word for ‘Octopus’, according to Haugum (Norwegian biologist and linguist).

The integration of the Kraken folklore to Scandinavian fishermen’s livelihood can be seen in the saying ‘You must have fished on the Kraken’ – a term used for a particularly good catch. It was believed the Kraken would attract a vast number of fish, and it was at the fisherman’s own discrepancy whether or not he would risk disturbing the Krake for a good day’s catch.
back to top

timeline/major sightings
Long have mysterious, monstrous creatures hiding in the deep oceans fascinated man. Such tangible, alien specimens as the Giant and Colossal squid from such a foreign environment certainly would both intimidate and entrance vivid imaginations and inquisitive minds. It’s not difficult, then, to imagine that the Kraken’s diverse history is retold with a grain of truth in even the most embellished myth. Below is a timeline of notable events as well as accounts from fishermen, travelers, story-tellers, enthusiastic naturalists and conservative scientists.

12th Century: Fisherman in Norway commonly spoke of a formidable, tentacle-laden beast – known as the Kraken.

1555: Swedish ecclesiastic Olaus Magnus penned ‘Histstoria de gentibus septentrionalibus’, a compilation of Scandinavian traditions antiquities and folklore. Within the woodcut illustrations is a depiction of a giant tentacle-laden monster – the Kraken.

1639: According to zoologist Johan Japetus Steenstrup, a giant squid specimen was found on this year washed up on an Icelandic beach.

1673: An announcement in Ireland’s Dingle Bay in the month of October claimed –

“A Wonderful Fish or Beast that was lately killed, by James Steward, as it came of its own accord to Him out of the sea to the Shore, where he was alone on Horseback at the Harbour’s Mouth of Dingle-Icoush, which had two heads and Ten horns, and upon Eight of the said Horns about 800 buttons or the reassemblance of Little Coronets; and in each of them a set of Teeth, the said Body was bigger than a Horse and was 19 Foot Long Horns and all, the great Head thereof Carried only the said ten Horns and two very large Eyes. And the little Head thereof carried a wonderful strange mouth and two Tongues in it.”

It’s not difficult to find distinct correlations between this unrefined description from 1673 and today’s knowledge of the biological traits of the Giant Squid – remove the hyper-imaginative accoutrements of the storytelling and the similarities are very clear. The ‘horns’ were the tentacles and arms. The ‘buttons’ may be the toothed suckers on the tentacles. Perhaps even the ‘two Tongues’ speaks of the parrot-like beak all species of squid possess.

Clearly the Giant Squid does not have two heads – one would imagine the ‘little head’ is the siphon, known as the hypenone, which the animal pumps water through to propel itself in the open sea. The size is accurate, although vague – as well, specimens of Architeuthis vary greatly in size, and are known for their ‘very large Eyes’.

1749 – 1767: French naturalist Pierre Denys de Montfort explored the possibility of the Kraken in his unfinished work ‘Natural History of Molluscs’, which was part of Buffon’s prestigious ‘Histoire Naturelle’. He became well-known to the whalers and fishermen of the French Atlantic ports, men who were his primary source of information. Reports from these men told of a giant octopus which pulled a fisherman from his boat. The fishermen’s comrades’ accounts include severing a piece of tentacle measuring twenty feet.

de Montfort located and hand-replicated a painting found in the Church of St. Thomas at Saint-Malo, Normandy, depicting this account. It was offered in gratitude by the thankful sailors who had survived the ordeal. Because of the spectacular nature of de Montfort’s information, lack of evidence and unscientific sources, de Montfort’s contemporaries looked upon his interest with scorn. Unfortunately, the church painting – a small piece of evidence, at best – was destroyed in the Saint-Malo church demolition before anyone else could investigate.

1752-1753: ‘The Natural History of Norway’ by Erik Pontoppidan, Bishop of Bergen, was published with, perhaps, overly-zealous descriptions of the Kraken. ”About an English mile and a half in circumference; some say more’ as well as claimed that its arms could pull ‘the largest man-of-war…down to the bottom”. Otherwise, the descriptions found in Pontoppidan’s publication are fairly correct in correlation to known species of giant squid. Unfortunately for the giant squid and Pontoppidan, it did little good for the reputation of such an elusive creature in the scientific community to be argued as ‘truth’ alongside mermen as seen in Pontoppidan’s work. So the Kraken was dismissed as superstition, imagination and folklore by the scientific community. This instance of complete disregard for such a mysterious creature would not be the last.

1769: Charles Douglas embarked on one of the first European oceanographic voyage on the HMS Emerald. Douglas questioned Norwegians about the Kraken and sea serpent. He discovered little of the Kraken, but discovered much talk of so-called ‘stoor worms’. Upon witnessing ‘stoor worms’ himself, he had this to say:

“…floating upon the surface of the sea, twelve parts of the back of the largest appearing above water; each part being in length about six feet…so that upon the whole he judged the animal could not be less than twenty-five fathoms long, and about one in thickness.”

Is it possible these worm-like creatures could, in fact, be the sizable tentacles of a giant squid? It would not be the last time the giant squid would be used as an explanation for other open-water anomalies.

1806: A ‘giant octopus’ was found washed ashore in St. Augustine, Florida. The specimen, according to records kept, held tentacle measurements of over one-hundred feet and a weight of eighteen to twenty tons. Tissue samples were sent to Professor and authority on cephalopods, Addison E. Verrill. He concluded the tissue samples were, indeed, from an octopus and excitedly named the specimen after himself, ‘Octopus giganteus Verrill’. Later, he retracted the statement – speculated having done so under pressure from fellow academics.

1847: Johan Japetus Steenstrup, Danish zoologist, took an interest in the giant squid which would prove vital to further research in later years. He presented specimens and delivered a lecture to the Society of Scandinavian Naturalists with unfavorable response.

1853: Johan Japetus Streenstrup obtained samples of a pharynx and beak of a giant squid specimen which had washed up on the shore. The rest of the specimen had been cut up by fishermen for bait. Observing the casual manner by which the fishermen handled the specimen as opposed to the fervent disbelief found in the scientific community at that time speaks of a formidable gap between academic knowledge and the wealth of knowledge which could have easily been gleaned from fishermen and whalers themselves. Despite the tendencies for eyewitness accounts to be highly embellished, it is very possible these seafaring men were the first to methodically observe the giant squid.

1857: Streenstrup published a description of the giant squid and gave the animal a scientific name – Architeuthis – which is still used to this day. It would be roughly a decade until the scientific community’s skepticism would lag and give opportunity to further study or even mild consideration of Architeuthis.

1848: There was much debate over the existence of a ‘sea serpent’ as told by Meter M’Quhae, captain of the Deadalus.

“…an enormous serpent, with head and shoulders kept about four feet constantly above the surface of the sea, and as nearly we could approximate by comparing with the length of what our main topsail yard would show in the water, there was at the very least sixty feet of the animal a ‘fleur d’eau’, no portion in which was, to our perception, used in propelling it through the water, either by vertical or horizontal undulation.”

Controversy aside, the illustration which accompanied M’Quhae’s report provides excellent clues to the misidentification of the specimen by eyewitness accounts. There is no known ‘sea snake’ of myth or science which propels itself through the water without undulation. The hypenone used by squid, however, provides exact similarities to such locomotion. The illustration itself seems to depict the fin and mantle of a mega squid’s body, the rest, perhaps, hidden underwater and out of sight.

While it would be unsubstantiated to propose all oddity-at-sea sightings to the giant and colossal squid, multiple accounts with vague details in regard to eye placement and the movement of the specimen (HMS Plumper Anonymous Naval Officer account of 1848-1849, Pontoppidan’s accounts, 1886 ‘Mythical Monsters’ (Charles Gould) included an account by Arthur de Capell Brooke, 1905 observations by naturalists E. G. B. Meade-Waldo and M. J. Nicoll) can lead to suspicions of misrepresentation of eyewitness accounts in regard to these so-called ‘sea serpents’.

1861: On November 30th, the crew of the French gunboat Alecton encountered a formidable sea creature off the Canary Islands. The creature evaded attempts at capture, including gun- and cannon- fire, as well as harpooning. A noose was successfully slipped around the creature’s body, but still it evaded capture, leaving only a small portion of its tail.

The Alecton’s commander brought the tail specimen forward, along his official report of the incidents which took place and the creature’s description, to the French Academy of Sciences. The members were not impressed with the commander’s account and evidence, squarely accusing the crew of the Alecton and their commander of either lying or hallucinations.

1861-1880: Multiple specimens of Architeuthis were found washed ashore in Canada and the east coast of the United States, some with tentacle measurements up to forty-two feet long. Multiple eyewitness accounts, however, tell of specimens some eighty to ninety feet long.

1870’s: Multiple shore-stranded specimens of Architeuthis found on Newfoundland and Labrador shores catch the interest of other, open-minded scientists, including the editor of ‘American Naturalist’ A. S. Packard. This building interest finally kick-started methodical interest in Architeuthis.

1873: Fisherman Theophile Piccot and his son encounter a living specimen of Architeuthis off the shores of Great Bell Island near Saint John’s, Newfoundland. Piccot claimed the squid had attacked his boat, and in the struggle, Piccot and his son managed to hack away a piece of tentacle.

In reporting to investigator Alexander Murray of the Geological Commission of Canada, the tentacle was, allegedly, cut ten feet from the body – putting the total length of the specimen at roughly thirty-five feet. Piccot’s own eyewitness claims were slightly more grandiose. According to him, the animal was roughly an immense sixty feet long, and from five to ten feet across.

1875: In Frank T. Bullen’s ‘The Cruise of the Cachalot’ (published in 1924), Bullen became witness to a formidable battle between Architeuthis and one of its natural predators – the sperm whale. The battle at the mouth of the Malacca Straits is depicted in ‘The Cruise of the Cachalot’ in the following passage:

“There was a violent commotion in the sea right where the moon’s rays were concentrated…[I saw a] very large sperm whale was locked in deadly conflict with a cuttle-fish, or squid, almost as large as himself, whose interminable tentacles seemed to enlace the whole of his great body. The head of the whale especially seemed a perfect network of writhing arms – naturally, I suppose, for it appeared as if the whale had the tale part of the mollusk in his jaws, and, in a business-like, methodical way, was sawing through it. By the side of the black columnar head of the whale appeared the head of the great squid, as awful an object as one could well imagine even in a fevered dream. Judging as carefully as possible, I estimated it to be at least as large as one of our pipes, which contained three hundred and fifty gallons; but it may have been, and probably was, a good deal larger. The eyes were very remarkable from their size and blackness, which, contrasted with the livid whiteness of the head, made their appearance all the more striking. They were, at least a foot in diameter, and, seen under such conditions, looked decidedly eerie and hobgoblin-like.”

Whale-hunters knew of the peculiar circular scar tissue found on the heads and mouths of sperm whales, due to the toothed suckers used by Architeuthis during these epic battles. More so, whale hunters and other seafaring individuals (Bullen included) have been long familiar with the remains of prey animals vomited by harpooned whales – most recognizably, the tentacles of Architeuthis specimens which had become recent prey of the sperm whale. While it is a very common event for sperm whales to regularly hunt giant squid, usually such behavior takes place in very deep waters.

1880: The largest specimen documented by science was found washed upon the shores in New Zealand, measuring in at sixty-five feet. Scientists accounted their observations as such:

“A significant part of this length, probably from ten to twelve meters, consisted of the tentacles, which in a dead squid are notably elastic and easily stretched…In all other squid species the length of tentacles is always regarded as an imprecise component of measurement.”

1880 - 1884: Naturalist Henry Lee became convinced of the validity of Architeuthis and, perhaps, even larger specimens based on the multiple accounts of these creatures found upon the shore. Enough, even, to write ‘Sea Monsters Unmasked’.

1939 – 1945: Accounts of sailors being attacked by giant squid during World War II were not unheard of, and at least one sailor was said to be eaten.

1962: Addison E. Verrill’s tissue sample of an alleged giant octopus was re-examined, having been preserved in the Smithsonian Institute. It was positively identified as belonging to an octopus. The samples, later, were mysteriously ‘lost’.

1988: Dr. Frederick A. Aldrich of the Memorial University of Newfoundland posted advertisements seeking Architeuthis specimens reported from the public for further study.

2001: Deep-sea submersibles filmed new species of squid in the Gulf of Mexico as well as the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans. See: 2007, Shell Oil Company filming.

2003: Fishermen in the Ross Sea in the Antarctic Ocean hauled up a large squid specimen tangled in their longlines. Analysis in New Zealand confirmed this encounter to be the first sighting of a live and healthy specimen, as opposed to the dead and dying ones found floating at the surface of the ocean or deposited on the shore. This is also said to be the second intact specimen to become available to scientists for study.

This particular specimen is called Mesonychoteuthis hamiltoni (colossal squid), in an attempt to distinguish it from the better-known Architeuthis (giant squid). Scientists speculate the colossal squid to grow to forty feet long. Steve O’Shea, Auckland University of Technology, expressed to BBC “[The] giant squid is no longer the largest squid that’s out there. We’ve got something that’s larger, and not just larger but an order of magnitude meaner.” He also described the colossal squid as ‘a true monster’, and Auckland University of Technology research associate Kat Bolstad described it as “…a phenomenal predator and something you are not going to want to meet in the water.”

Richard Ellis, research associate for the American Museum of Natural History and author of ‘The Search of the Giant Squid’ dismissed these claims, stating that the colossal squid is ‘no more a monster than Architeuthis is’ and also stated "I wrote The Search for the Giant Squid to try and dispel some of the crazy ideas that this cephalopod is in any way dangerous to humans, and the same holds true for Mesonychoteuthis."

2004: Japanese scientists photographed a specimen of Architeuthis in the deep waters off Ogasawara Islands. The specimen honed in on a baited line, displaying much more aggressive predatory behaviors than previously believed of Architeuthis. The photographs were taken 2,950 (900 meters) beneath the ocean surface, where no sunlight can penetrate. This breakthrough collection of data was the first set of photographs taken of a living, healthy specimen of Architeuthis, specifically.

2007: Shell Oil Company ROV (remotely operated vehicle) filmed a peculiar squid specimen – known as a Magnappina squid, it possessed ten long arms as opposed to the standard eight short arms and two tentacles found in other squid. This peculiar specimen is, as of recent knowledge, known to grow between five feet to twenty-five feet, depending on the subspecies. The author finds this particular species worth mentioning because of its anomalous physiology which, even to the most dormant imagination, harkens back to myths describing grotesque and unnatural ‘sea-monsters’. The Magnappina squid bears ‘fins’ or flaps along its body and its tentacles are held out from it in a radial pattern. Maintaining the oddity are the ‘elbows’ found closer to the body on the tentacles themselves. Scientists speculate this particular evolutionary quirk indicates the Magnappina squid uses passive, ‘trolling’ hunting techniques (similar to a fisherman’s net) as opposed to actively hunting their prey.

2007: A twenty-six-foot-long Mesonychoteuthis (colossal squid) specimen was captured by fishermen in Antarctic waters. This particular colossal squid is believed to be the largest squid specimen ever captured, and a rare opportunity to give scientists an in-depth look at a healthy Mesonychoteuthis specimen.
back to top

suspected hoaxes
Hoaxes and false truths are both common and difficult to pinpoint in the diverse history of the Kraken. Actual interest in the Kraken was spurred by the well-worn tales found on the boats of fishermen and other seafarers – what is real, and what is false? Often, a genuine specimen’s size would be exaggerated, and it was not until recently that scientists could fully observe and record behavior, thanks to technological advances.

More so, the sheer reluctance of local scientists to fully explore the Kraken hypothesis in the infancy of the Kraken investigation may have dragged groundbreaking discoveries for decades, dismissed knowledge and precious few facts, and perhaps even hid away or dismissed invaluable evidence.

1806: A giant octopus was found washed ashore in St. Augustine, Florida. The specimen, according to records kept, held tentacle measurements of over one-hundred feet and a weight of eighteen to twenty tons. Tissue samples were sent to Professor and authority on cephalopods, Addison E. Verrill. He concluded the tissue samples were, indeed, from an octopus and excitedly named the specimen after himself, ‘Octopus giganteus Verrill’. Later, he retracted the statement – speculated having done so under pressure from fellow academics.

1962: Addison E. Verrill’s tissue sample of an alleged giant octopus was re-examined, having been preserved in the Smithsonian Institute. It was positively identified as belonging to an octopus. The samples, later, were mysteriously ‘lost’.

Advocates for the existence of mega cephalopods use this chain of events as an example of academic and scientific bias, while more conservative zoologists and scientists dismiss this
sample as that of a whale – unimportant and false.

1873: Fisherman Theophile Piccot and his son encountered a living specimen of Architeuthis off the shores of Great Bell Island near Saint John’s, Newfoundland. Piccot returned with a portion of the tentacle he and his son had gathered. In reporting to investigator Alexander Murray of the Geological Commission of Canada, the tentacle was, allegedly, cut ten feet from the body – putting the total length of the specimen at roughly thirty-five feet. Piccot’s own eyewitness claims were slightly more grandiose – according to him, the animal was roughly an immense sixty feet long, and from five to ten feet across.

This is an example of a genuine specimen sample and eyewitness account on record, and yet the eyewitness account contradicts the scientific estimations by almost double. Given the early reluctance of serious study into Architeuthis and the layman’s occasional penchant for embellishment – who do we believe?

1875: Frank T. Bullen became witness to a formidable battle between Architeuthis and one of its natural predators, the sperm whale. The battle at the mouth of the Malacca Straits is depicted in ‘The Cruise of the Cachalot’. The passage itself can be found in the ‘timeline’ section of this article. However seemingly accurate the account was in regard to sperm whale predatory behavior toward the giant squid, Bullen himself was discredited by oceanography writer Richard Ellis. Ellis stated that Bullen was “…no slouch…when it came to fabrication.”
back to top

proposed explanations
Unlike many popular cryptids, the myths behind the Kraken are very clearly based on an existing creature now known to science. The giant squid and the colossal squid have both been sighted in various ocean areas and along the shores of geographical locations correlating directly to the areas which birthed the mythos. The question is – just how large can these particular species get?

Old, written accounts and fisherman’s tales form imagery of a massive, aggressive monster which could drag long-faring ships into the depths of the ocean. Meanwhile, the flesh-and-blood specimens currently studied by zoologists are nowhere near so intimidating. Albeit fascinating and formidable in and of themselves, little speaks to the amalgam of hyper-aggressive, predatory behavior and such sheer size as found in the tales which the giant squid goes by the feared name, ‘Kraken’.

There are sparse pieces of evidence which indicates that the specimens so far found of Architeuthis and Mesonychoteuthis are just a fraction of the full scale these creatures are capable of achieving. One debated piece of evidence can be found on the skin of the giant squid’s foremost predator, the sperm whale.

Circular scars around the mouth and head area of sperm whales are almost commonplace. These scars come from vivid battles between the giant squid and its foremost predator, the sperm whale. While most scars range from one inch to two inches across, there are also documented cases of scars which are as large as eighteen inches across. What formidable specimen would be capable of leaving such a scar?

Skeptics claim that such scars were obtained at the average size – one to two inches – and simply grew as the sperm whale came into maturation.

Huevelmans, Sanderson, other cryptozoologists and liberal scientists dismiss this explanation, citing sperm whale behavior. Huevelmans wrote: “Scars are rare on female whales…A baby whale would be kept well away from such huge brutes, and, if attacked, would hardly survive.”

Meaning it would be rare for young whales to obtain scars of an inch to two in diameter and simply grow the scars to the formidable eighteen-inch examples. It would be concluded, then, that the eighteen-inch scars were inflicted on partially to fully matured sperm whales. This would leave little to no time for the whale’s development to disfigure these scars to such gargantuan proportions.

Nutrition may play a part as to why we tend to see and observe less magnificent specimens in comparison to the Kraken myth. Doug Hijicek – inventor – hypothesizes “My theory is based really on nutrition. What I think happens is that the five, six, eight foot Humboldt squid travel up and down the vertical water column, and on their way up they’re gathering nutrition by way of eating fish and other small game, and traveling and migrating down to the bottom once a day. And there, there are monsters waiting in lair for these smaller squid – basically they’re cannibalizing their own kind – and I believe these monsters never surface, never see the light of day, and basically decompose on the bottom of the ocean. “

While Hijicek discusses the Humboldt squid, it is, at least, a theory based on a slightly similar animal to the giant and colossal squids. The benefit of the Humboldt squid comparison is that fact has gained far more a footing in regard to this species as far as reproductive, feeding, and migratory behaviors. It is, at the very least, a start.

However, as discussed earlier in this article, the hypothesis that mega specimens of the giant squid decomposes at the bottom of the ocean and thus, never see the light of day, may be erroneous based on current knowledge of both Architeuthis and Mesonychoteuthis physiological makeup. Again, the large quantities of ammonium chloride found in large squid specimens create a flesh mass equal or lighter than ocean water. In essence, it makes the squid neutrally buoyant in its environment, which could be an explanation why so many giant squid specimens are found floating on the ocean surface or washed upon the shore.

While a mega squid’s death may remain undetected at such depths due to scavengers, is it really feasible to conclude that such mega-specimens would be continuously undetected? Perhaps not, based on established knowledge, or perhaps so, as such depths could, in theory, provide enough time and space to slow the surfacing of a mega-squid’s carcass, giving predators and scavengers enough time to do away with any useful evidence that such a creature even exists.

In further regard to size, consideration must be taken based on comparisons cited centuries ago. A common seafaring ship in the 1400’s was not unheard of to be of a length of sixty feet, an example of which would be Columbus’ Pinta. Meanwhile, specimens approaching the sixty foot measurement have already been documented. In conclusion, a sea monster the size of a ship is not entirely an unfounded claim.

A heartening piece of evidence which takes a step closer to proving the existence of mega-squid specimens was discovered during the Monster Quest expedition for the History Channel, lead by professional diver and cameraman Scott Cassell. Brief video footage was captured during this expedition in the Sea of Cortez, using innovative, minimally invasive techniques. Analysis by Dr. Roger Hanlon of the Marine Biological Laboratory of Masachusettes was inconclusive as far as narrowing down the squid’s species.

Video analyst expert in motion engineering, specializing in video forensics, Peter Schmidts estimated the size of the animal captured on film. Using data such as camera specs, light throw, and depth of field data, Schmidts was finally able to deliver hard fact in the form of measurements. These measurements were taken into consideration by marine biologists. The conclusions are staggering.

The expedition pursued mega-specimens of the Humboldt squid, specifically. Because the species could not be positively identified, marine biologists based conclusions on both possibilities of the Humboldt squid and Architeuthis, the giant squid.

They concluded the specimen, at Humboldt squid proportions, would be sixty feet long.

At Architeuthis proportions, one-hundred and eight feet long. That is twice the size of the largest recorded Architeuthis specimen and the same size as the blue whale.

It is certainly possible for the giants of myth to exist in the deepest recesses of the ocean – but do these giants also possess the fearsome temperament and will to aggression as the Kraken of lore?

Not much is known of the giant squid through simple lack of opportunity to observe a healthy specimen in its natural environment. Richard Ellis – author of ‘In Search for the Giant Squid’ – claims that hyper-aggressive temperaments, as seen in Kraken myths, are a rarity in many cephalopods. Meanwhile, representatives of the Auckland University of Technology have less forgiving analysis of the temperament of the colossal squid. However, it must be taken into consideration that the singular specimen they had studied was distressed in the process of becoming hooked in fishermen’s lines and pulled to the surface.

A slightly smaller subspecies of squid – the Humboldt squid – is seen at typical measurements of five feet and under, sometimes eight in particularly remarkable instances. Some modern scientists, however, hypothesize that the Humboldt squid could very well grow to the size of a school bus. The Humboldt squid is not particularly known for its size in comparison to its giant cousins, rather, for its hyper-aggressive temperament and their pack-hunting behavior. They are both fished and feared by seamen in the Sea of Cortez, and accounts of attacks and injuries by the Humboldt squid continue to this day.

Roger Hamilton has this to say in regard to Humboldt squid behavior: “I definitely believe the Humboldt is fully capable of attacking, quickly subduing, and eating a human being with little effort.”

Much evidence points to the fact that there are species of squid which may very well be capable of extremely aggressive behavior. The same terrifying predatory displays of power as told in the Kraken myths may not be unfounded.

It is not unimaginable that there may exist in the unknown depths of the ocean a creature which would more closely resemble the as-myth Kraken. Modern science has explored but a fraction of the ocean – 1/10ths of it – and even less of that the deepest, darkest corners of it.

Would it be a subspecies of cephalopod, not quite Architeuthis (giant squid) and not quite Mesonychoteuthis (colossal squid)? Considering the fact that we truly know very little of deep-sea, mega-cephalopods, what behavior, what specimens would we discover in their natural environment? What would we observe of a specimen in full health and within the environmental parameters which would enable more indigenous behaviors?

Perhaps we have already found the Kraken. Perhaps we have found, at the very least, harbingers and small ideologies of what a Kraken truly is. Perhaps the real Kraken, the creature which embodies in full all the nightmarish qualities found in novels and folktales, remains, undetected and unobserved in the vast expanses of the ocean.
back to top

influence on culture
In ‘Twenty Leagues Under the Sea’, Jules Verne wrote of a harrowing battle between the crew of the submarine Nautilus and a twenty-five foot giant squid. Obviously, giant and mega squid have been capturing imaginations for generations. Starring in one of the most favored and harrowing battles found in this classic book is proof enough.

Still, even earlier the Kraken has been found in dedicated poetry and further classical literature, such as the following poem by Tennyson penned in 1830.

“The Kraken sleepeth; faintest sunlights flee
Above his shadowy sides; above him swell…

Winnow with giant arms the slumbering green,
There hath he lain for ages and will lie
Battening upon huge sweaworms in his sleep,
Until the latter fire shall heat the deep;
Then once by man and angels seen,
In roaring he shall rise and on the surface die.”
- Alfred, Lord Tennyson
“The Kraken”

Another literary great the Kraken has clearly influenced in is Homer’s ‘The Odyssey’ – below is a small excerpt in regard to the Scyllia monster.

“Her legs – and there are twelve-
Are like great tentacles…
Hunting the sea around that promontory
For dolphins, dogfish, or what bigger game
Thundering Amphitrite feeds in thousands.
And no ship’s company can claim
to have passed her without loss and grief; she takes
from every ship…”

Other great authors have found inspiration in the tales of the Kraken and reports of giant squid. H.G. Wells’ ‘Sea Raiders’ in 1905 and Ian Flemming’s ‘Dr. No’ of the James Bond Classic Library in 1958. In exceptionally remarkable imagery, Lovecraft draws on giant cephalopods for his classic horror literature, notably the popular and terrifying ‘Cthulu’ found in a few of his stories. In pursuit of the white whale, the crew of the Pequod encounters a giant squid in Herman Melville’s ‘Moby Dick’.

In J.R.R. Tolkien’s ‘The Fellowship of the Ring’, one of the conflicts in the story comes from ‘the watcher in the water’ – a tentacle-laden beast which lurked in a solitary mountain lake. C.S. Lewis mentions the Kraken in a few books in his ‘Chronicles of Narnia’ – notably, ‘The Voyage of the Dawn Treader’.

In the ‘Harry Potter’ series, the lake on Hogwart’s grounds is said to be home to a giant squid. Unlike other fictional accounts of the giant squid, the one found at Hogwarts is depicted to be very docile and helpful, assisting clumsy students who had fallen into the lake and even playing with students who visit it from the shore.

Meanwhile, these giant cephalopods have continued to capture the interest of the movie industry, whether found in book-to-movie adaptations, B-horror movies, and large studio productions such as ‘Pirates of the Caribbean - Dead Man’s Chest’.

In video games, the Kraken plays a part in popular titles such as ‘God of War II’, ‘Tomb Raider: Underworld’, the MMO ‘Everquest’ and multiple versions of the wildly popular ‘Final Fantasy’ series.

Noted oceanographer Jacques Cousteau once wrote of the giant squid: “I saw, through a porthole, a very large cephalopod…it seemed not at all disturbed by the presence of the minisub. It was an unearthly sight, at once astonishing and terrifying. Was it sleeping? Or thinking? Or merely watching? I had no idea. It was there, nonetheless, enormous, alive, its huge eyes fixed on me. Then, suddenly, it was gone.” By the reflective and almost delicate manner this account was written in, it may be concluded that this giant cephalopod fascinated and enraptured even a legendary oceanographer as Jacques Cousteau himself.

Meanwhile, science has met technology as filmed expeditions are aired on widely available television networks such as The Discovery Channel and The History Channel. The History Channel’s ‘Monster Quest’ program, for example, has two episodes wholly dedicated to mega-squid investigations. ‘Chasing Giants: On the Trail of the Giant Squid’ was aired on the Discovery Channel as well. The giant squid appears in cameo appearances in other documentaries, particularly in regard to sperm whales, such as BBC’s ‘Ocean Odyssey’.

Meanwhile, a casual search on the internet will turn up mass results. Merchandise such as t-shirts, plush toys, and art are sold on a bevy of websites. Sites dedicated to the giant squid and Kraken myths are in plenty. Youtube videos are plenty, many of which have been watched and commented on by many fascinated viewers.

The alien image of such mega-cephalopods obviously has wrapped itself around the imaginations of many. As such, it shows no sign of slowing, whether it be in the fields of scientific study, the vast imaginations behind novels, or the special effects of movies. Whether Architeuthis or Mesonychoteuthis or something far vaster, the Kraken is solidly as vivid a part of our storytelling and imagination as it was hundreds of years ago.
back to top