The Bat Beast of Kent, sometimes referred to as the ‘Saltwood Mystery’, is often considered to be an extraterrestrial sighting. Let’s begin with the story as it is roughly retold today.
November 16th, 1963, Four teenagers were making their way home from a party through Sandling Lane. Something unusual in the sky caught their attention: a golden oval shaped orb, seemingly a few metres in diameter. The object was intensely bright, they began to run from it, and it followed them, before returning back to its original position, it then slowly descended behind some trees. Curious about what it might have been, the boys headed to where they thought the object had ‘Landed’, but all was now dark. Soon they heard some rustling and felt a change in the air to cold and ‘charged like static electricity’, they looked towards the sound to see a hairy figure, around 5 feet tall, headless, with bat-like wings and webbed feet shambling out of the trees.
The current evolution of the story retains only the bare bones of the original report. Most casual inquiries will insinuate foreshadowing of the mothman encounter that would happen three years later, the common elements being four teens and a headless, winged creature with the inability to walk very well – all reported by a small local newspaper.
Where it all began
The event took place in the village of Saltwood on Sandling Road, Kent, UK. It is occasionally erroneously displaced to the nearby Maidstone, which has a Sandling Lane and Sandling Park. The ‘Bat Beast’ itself is also something of a chimaera, the original story was reported as an apparition, but it has been retconned to follow the preferred narrative of UFO sightings followed by creature sightings, such as The ‘Flatwoods Monster’ and the ‘Kelly-Hopkinsville Encounter’, although often UFO enthusiasts are usually more interested in the unusual lights than the ‘creature’.
There are multiple stages of erosion of the original account, but one of the earliest news reports was in the Kent Messenger, November 29th edition, 1963. In the article one eyewitness, John Flaxton says:
we saw this red light, like a red ball of fire. As we moved towards it we could make out a figure, which seemed to have webbed feet and no head. It was carrying a red lantern. We just ran.
As John states, he wasn’t alone – he (17), was with Mervyn Hutchinson (18), Jenny Holloway (16) and Tony Harrison (17). Initial reports only mention John, Mervyn and Jenny, with Tony seemingly introduced by UFO investigator Charles Stickland (at the time associated with the London UFO Research Organisation, quickly to become the British UFO Research Organisation), who launched his own investigation by visiting Saltwood on around the 6th of December. The group were heading to Sandling railway station for Jenny to catch a train home. Mervyn states “we would not have gone down the hill at all, but John had to see his girl-friend to the station” (Folkestone and Hythe Gazette, 1963).
The group were walking roughly north along a road leading to the railway station; on the left is Brockhill school; there is a bend in the road to the right just after the school, Slaybrook Corner. From here it’s about 1km to the railway station, mostly open fields to the sides of the road, but a few buildings. Beyond the station the train tracks run perpendicular to Sandling road. Sandling road continues over the railway lines, but the lines are sunken, so the road remains flat. Stickland begins to lay out what he discovered from his investigation with Tony:
While they were passing Brockhill school they saw what appeared to be a shooting star fall towards the Sandling station area. A little later they had just passed Slaybrook Corner (a right angle bend), when a glowing object was seen above a hill on the left. No light was projected from it and it did not move , It was slightly oval (but more round than oval). The light was lost sight of behind trees as they walked down a dip in the road. While descending this incline a figure was seen about 20-30 yards away on the road ahead on the right-hand side.
LUFORO Bulletin, Vol4, No.5
When later interviewed by Flying Saucer Review John updated his account of the event in the article ‘The Saltwood Mystery’:
It was uncanny. The reddish yellow light was coming out of the sky at an angle of sixty degrees. As it came towards the ground it seemed to hover more slowly. I grew cold all over as it vanished behind a clump of trees.
FSR, 10, no. 2 – Mar./Apr. 1964
It’s not a huge departure from the original ‘ball of fire’ description, but importantly he adds that there’s a perceived intentionality about the object’s behaviour, like it might be ‘landing’.
The figure
Stickland was eager to focus on the object in the sky, but he does go into the figure a little. He recounts how Tony described it; “It looked like a man with a scarlet cloak and a lantern on the left” (LUFORO, 1964). In an earlier newspaper interview Mervyn also described the figure in a similar way; ‘a man in a red cloak and carrying a lantern’ (Folkestone and Hythe Gazette, 1963). All three of the male witnesses report seeing the lantern.
Regarding the headlessness of the figure, Stickland suggests “it was not possible to see the upper part of the body, as the light was not strong enough”. He then muses, “This probably explains the headless figure descriptions in various reports”. (BUFORO, 1964)
The lights seem to have been seen beyond Brockhill School, but the figure seems to have been seen on Sandling Road, north of the railway station coming over the road ‘bridge’ that goes over the railway tracks, with the entrance to the station itself being off to the right.
When the figure appears in front of them, John describes it in Flying Saucer Review a little differently to the report in the Kent Messenger:
It was all black, about the size of a human but without a head. It seemed to have wings like a bat on either side and came stumbling towards us.
FSR, 10, no. 2 – Mar./Apr. 1964
Mervyn adds, laconically “It was just like a bat, with webbed feet and no head”.
Tony says the figure vanishes while walking over a railway bridge, just past Saltwood station, “the figure, which had reached the centre of a bridge over the railway, disappeared. It is reported that in view of its position it could not have turned down a side road.” (LUFORO, 1964)
The sighting of the lights in the sky is never directly connected to the figure, they are seen in close timing to one another, but there is nothing to suggest they are in any way connected, no specific craft was seen, and the creature was not seen entering, exiting or near a craft.
Afterwards
From this point it seems Jenny catches her train, and the three boys return to Saltwood without seeing anything else. It would seem the remaining three boys headed to the pub, John Huggett, of the Castle Hotel, dismissing the idea of a hoax, says: “Three of the boys came into the pub after seeing the ghost, they were white as sheets—it was no joke.” (Kent Messenger, 1963), There are reports of the three going to the police after the incident, but these seem unconfirmed.
It’s curious how the original newspaper articles didn’t mention the ‘wings’. It’s not inconceivable that they simply omitted the detail, but equally it’s possible it was not mentioned by John or Mervyn at the time, but they did mention a ‘red cloak’, which perhaps evolved into the ‘wings’. It’s also possible the story got editorialised, a ghostly figure is more in keeping with an historic village than a headless, winged UFO occupant.
The Kentish Express ran with John as the main witness and the Kent Messenger cited Mervyn. Stickland gained most of his information from Tony, whose name is frequently omitted from the story, as is Jenny’s. Jenny’s input is limited to saying she didn’t believe in ghosts until the sighting.
The initial newspaper articles are very much reporting on ghosts, with headlines such as “‘Ghost’ Scares teenagers” and “Rector hunts Saltwoods ghost”. The general belief being that the ghost was of one William Tournay, who died in 1903, when cloaks were very much still in style. It’s unclear how much of a local legend the ‘Ghost of William Tournay’ was, and if it would have any bearing on the sighting. Slaybrook Hall is sometimes reported as ‘haunted’ – on the 10th August 2019, ‘Kent Live’ reported it as being a “’haunted’ Hythe mansion”. Given the unusual lights, walking by the allegedly haunted house and being in an unfamiliar place, it’s reasonable to think that the group may have increased anxiety or be somewhat spooked, or at the very least may have ghosts on their minds.
Additional sightings and observations
Shortly after the initial newspaper articles another witness comes forward, who claims he saw the creature eighteen months earlier. Graham Leggett (18) told reporters, “I was walking down the hill to Slaybrook Corner, when I saw a red light, and then this eerie bat-like figure appeared”. (Kent Messenger, 1963). He says he didn’t say anything at the time as he thought no one would believe him.
The local Reverend, Rev. Stanton also offered some opinions: “I’ve heard rumours that a black magic circle meet secretly in the village, but I have no proof. I am making my own investigations. This is the evil sort of thing they would do.” (Kent Messenger, 1963). It’s not clear if Stanton is suggesting that the black magic circle would summon some kind of demon or ghost or if he is just saying they might dress up and generally try to spook people.
On November the 21st Keith Croucher (17) said he “felt a sudden breath of cold wind and saw what looked like a golden mist beginning to cross the pitch. At the centre of the mist was a solid oval light that seemed to move slowly over the ground” (FSR, Mar-Apr, 1964)
On November 23rd John McGoldrick (16) launched his own investigation into the incident, with a friend;
In a clearing in the woods we found a vast expanse of bracken that had been completely flattened- as if some huge and heavy object had rested there. Nearby we found three giant footprints, They were clear footprints, almost two feet long and nine inches across, they must have been a full inch deep.
Kent Messenger, Nov. 25th, 1963
They go back the next day with a newspaper representative, but find nothing. With all due respect to John McGoldrick, this ‘investigation’ is often overplayed, or simply misrepresented as more serious than perhaps it was; conducted by a more senior researcher. Only the Lorenzens in “Encounters with UFO Occupants” acknowledged it was ‘research carried out by teenagers’.
William Waite, however adds a little seniority to this outing: a retired senior civil servant who used to work for the Aeronautical Inspection Board, he was walking his dog in the Slaybrook Corner vicinity about a week before the sighting on the 16th, and when interviewed he said:
I saw this Bright bluish-white light, about the size of a golf ball flying directly ahead of me. It travelled quite slowly in a steady horizontal direction. It definitely wasn’t an aeroplane. The whole thing struck me as very peculiar. The light appeared from the north, crossed Sandling Road where all these strange things have been seen and then it headed out to sea.
FSR Mar-Apr 1964
What was it?
It is clear that Stickland and the Flying Saucer Review were very much biased towards the initial sighting of the lights being a UFO. Stickland has little to no interest in the figure, replying in response to Cecil Harper’s critique of his outline of the case, “I would regard the most probable explanation to be that it was a railway employee”, though Stickland acknowledges he “did not have time to go into this aspect thoroughly”.
Harper also adds that, while the figure is purported as disappearing at the middle point of the bridge, seemingly giving no opportunity to quickly ‘hide’ or runaway, there was in fact, on this bridge, a gate in the middle on the right hand side, with a path that leads down to a small ‘power house’, which a railway worker may have been simply checking on that night.
Stickland reports ‘This lantern looked like a hurricane lamp and gave out a whitish light, flickering irregularly.’ (LUFORO, 1963). British Rail used oil lamps until they were gradually replaced around 1965 by the Bardic hand lamp, furthering support for the ‘railway employee’ hypothesis. It’s also worth noting that while high visibility clothing was available in 1963 it wasn’t used by railway workers until 1964 and was not commonplace until 1974.
There certainly seems to be some kind of unusual lights in the area. There have been some attempts to explain these, Chris Wolfe is claimed to have visited the site a decade or so later; it is difficult to establish a source for his claims, but they have some merit regardless of the legitimacy of the source.
Wolfe claims that the lights could have been a train in the distance partially obscured by fog or trees, coming from the Westenhanger direction; others suggest that the lights could have been lights from the school refracting somehow in the dense fog to seem unfamiliar. Harper suggested that, as Lympne Airfield is nearby to the west, any number of flying objects could be easily explained by standard air traffic to and from the airfield.
While it seems somewhat unnecessary to further explain away the figure, as the ‘railway employee’ hypothesis is more than sufficient, Wolfe is also credited with the ‘crow’ explanation. He is claimed to say that while visiting the site he saw a group of crows strangely illuminated, that in his opinion could be mistaken for a large winged humanoid. This explanation, while perhaps surplus to requirements, is often rather unfairly mischaracterised and dismissed out of hand as Wolfe saying the creature itself was perhaps ‘just a crow’. (Leon, 2022)
There is almost no effort from anyone to address the webbed feet. It is an unusual observation, from the distance of about thirty yards on a poorly lit road. John McGoldrick claims to have found large footprints, but given the creature was seen on the road, any footprints would have to be from the nearby woodland or grassed area, and cannot be directly connected to the sighting. Unless in very soft surface area, such as dry sand, webbed feet would generally leave only a three toed footprint.
If we accept the railway employee hypothesis, then it seems only sensible that they may have been wearing gaiters or wide-bottomed trousers. Meanwhile, some members of the UFO community have suggested the ‘webbed feet’ could be part of a ‘spacesuit’ or similar attire.
The disappointing end
There are a lot of moving parts to this relatively simple story, but they don’t really add up to a coherent, consistent narrative. We end up with a headless, web-footed, bat-winged creature, when we started with an obscure humanoid figure walking over a bridge, holding a lantern.
It’s hard to believe that the reports about the figure holding a lantern have somehow gone under the radar, as they are very much part of the primary source of the whole case – the three main witnesses all mention the lantern. It would seem that no one wants this figure to be holding a lantern because it does not fit their narrative; mothman did not carry a light, and why would an extraterrestrial with no head or eyes need a ‘flickering’ lantern? It undermines both arguments. The same goes for the cape, which has seemingly transformed into wings.
Add to that the inconsistencies of the original eyewitness, the constant amendments to the story itself by publications like Flying Saucer Review and the various news outlets of the time, plus adequate natural earthbound explanations for the lights and the figure, many of which were brought to light immediately after the initial reports. It’s not as though natural explanations had been rigorously ruled out or deemed unlikely or impossible, they were simply ignored or purposefully dismissed in the pursuit of a supernatural explanation.
The UFO aspect of the story never particularly takes off. There is some implication from McGoldrick that he might have found the ‘landing site’, and there certainly appears to be some usual lights in the sky with no clear immediate explanation. Logistically it seems spurious that even if the lights were indeed a landing UFO and the creature were the occupant, it would have had to have quickly exited the craft as soon as it landed to be seen over the bridge, yet the creature is said to shown no great speed and any craft was not said to be seen accompanying the creature.
The other sightings introduce an interesting problem, they suggest that the lights are appearing frequently, possibly running to a schedule, like a train or aeroplane. There is little to suggest that the lights weren’t just the illuminated train windows appearing through trees or mist, which would only compliment the sighting of a railway guardsman being present near the bridge. After all, we do know a train was due to arrive – we know Jenny was there to catch it. It is unclear if a train was heading in the opposite direction while the four were walking towards the railway station.
It seems reasonable to think that there was no evidence of a deliberate hoax, there is some corroboration from the pub landlord that the original group were indeed spooked by the encounter, and there is a fair amount of consistency between the reports from the three boys. While additional sightings of the figure can be questioned as influenced by previous reports or even fabricated, there do appear to be some kind of unusual lights appearing with some frequency in the area, which may have various explanations, although none confirmed.
References
- Gerhart, K, Encounters with Flying Humanoids: Mothman, Manbirds, Gargoyles & Other Winged Beasts. 2013
- Ghost a Flying Saucer? (1963) Kentish Express, December 13th edition, 1963, pg 1
- ‘Ghost’ Scares Teenagers. (1963) Kent Messenger, November 29th edition, pg 3
- Girvan, W (Ed.). (1964) ‘STOP PRESS Landing in Kent’, Flying Saucer Review, 10, no.c1 – JAN./FEB. pg 36
- Girvan, W (Ed.). (1964) ‘The Saltwood Mystery’, Flying Saucer Review, 10, no. 2 – Mar./Apr. Pg 11-12
- Leon, A. (2022) Bat Beast of Kent.
- Lorenzen C.E & Lorenzen J. (1976) Encounters with UFO Occupants
- Rector Hunts Saltwood Ghost. (1963) Kent Messenger, November 29. 13th edition, 1963, pg 1
- Stickland, C.A. & Harper, A.C. (1964) ‘The Saltwood Sightings’ BUFORA Journal Volume 1 No.1 Summer, pg 12-13
- Saltwood’s Ghost, (1963) Kentish Express, 13th December
- Saltwood’s Ghostly Visitant has Glowing Background (Nov 27th, 1963) – Folkestone and Hythe Gazette, pg 2
- Stickland, C.A., LUFORO (1964) ‘SIGHTINGS AT SALTWOOD, NEAR HYTHE, KENT’ Bulletin Vol.4 No.5 Nov-Dec-Jan 1963-64, pg 2-4
- Swancer, B. The Mysterious Bat Beast of Kent, Journal News Online September 6, 2021, viewed 5th Jan 2023
- Bat Beast of Kent, Cryptid Wiki, viewed 21 Nov 2022
- Morphy, R. Bat Beast of Kent (England) Cryptopia, March 5th, 2010, viewed 5th Jan 2023,
- Hatswell, D, (28 Jan 2017) The Bat Like Beast Sandling Park Kent 1963, 28 Jan 2017 (Accessed:5th Jan 2023).
- Swancer, B. The Mysterious Bat Beast of Kent, Mysterious Universe, Sept. 7th 2021, viewed 5th Jan 2023
