As for the rest of the massacres, although direct observation was lacking, I had one very valuable piece of evidence.

As we have seen, the victim does not retaliate, does not defend himself, but simply tries to escape by pulling himself away.
If it were a matter of an ordinary fight, a conflict such as might arise in the struggle for life, the creature attacked would obviously retaliate, since he is perfectly well able to do so; in an ordinary conflict he would meet force by force, and return bite for bite.

His strength would enable him to come well out of a struggle, but the foolish creature allows himself to be devoured without retaliating.

It seems as though an invincible repugnance prevents him from offering resistance and in turn devouring the devourer.

This tolerance reminds one of the scorpion of Languedoc, which on the termination of the hymeneal rites allows the female to devour him without attempting to employ his weapon, the venomous dagger which would form a formidable defence; it reminds us also of the male of the Praying Mantis, which still embraces the female though reduced to a headless trunk, while the latter devours him by small mouthfuls, with no rebellion or defence on his part.