Chapter IV (2)

_Naviganti à Pharsa Nonoso, & ad extremam usque insularum delato, tale quid occurrit, vel ipso auditu admirandum. Incidit enim in quosdam forma quidem & figura humana, sed brevissimos, & cutem nigros, totúmque pilosos corpus. Sequebantur viros æquales foeminæ, & pueri adhuc breviores. Nudi omnes agunt, pelle tantum brevi adultiores verenda tecti, viri pariter ac foeminæ: agreste nihil, neque efferum quid præ se ferentes. Quin & vox illis humana, sed omnibus, etiam accolis, prorsus ignota lingua, multoque amplius Nonosi sociis. Vivunt marinis ostreis, & piscibus è mari ad insulam projectis. Audaces minime sunt, ut nostris conspectis hominibus, quemadmodum nos visa ingenti fera, metu perculsi fuerint._

'That _Nonnosus_ sailing from _Pharsa_, when he came to the farthermost of the Islands, a thing, very strange to be heard of, happened to him; for he lighted on some (_Animals_) in shape and appearance like _Men_, but little of stature, and of a black colour, and thick covered with hair all over their Bodies. The Women, who were of the same stature, followed the Men: They were all naked, only the Elder of them, both Men and Women, covered their Privy Parts with a small Skin. They seemed not at all fierce or wild; they had a Humane Voice, but their _Dialect_ was altogether unknown to every Body that lived about them; much more to those that were with _Nonnosus_. They liv'd upon Sea Oysters, and Fish that were cast out of the Sea, upon the Island. They had no Courage; for seeing our Men, they were frighted, as we are at the sight of the greatest wild Beast.'

[Greek: _phonaen eichon men anthropinaen_] I render here, _they had a Humane Voice_, not _Speech_: for had they spoke any Language, tho' their _Dialect_ might be somewhat different, yet no doubt but some of the Neighbourhood would have understood something of it, and not have been such utter Strangers to it. Now 'twas observed of the _Orang-Outang_, that it's _Voice_ was like the Humane, and it would make a Noise like a Child, but never was observed to speak, tho' it had the _Organs_ of _Speech_ exactly formed as they are in _Man_; and no Account that ever has been given of this Animal do's pretend that ever it did. I should rather agree to what _Pliny_[A] mentions, _Quibusdam pro Sermone nutus motusque Membrorum est_; and that they had no more a Speech than _Ctesias_ his _Cynocephali_ which could only bark, as the same _Pliny_[B] remarks; where he saith, _In multis autem Montibus Genus Hominum Capitibus Caninis, ferarum pellibus velari, pro voce latratum edere, unguibus armatum venatu & Aucupio vesci, horum supra Centum viginti Millia fuisse prodente se Ctesias scribit._ But in _Photius_ I find, that _Ctesias's Cynocephali_ did speak the _Indian Language_ as well as the _Pygmies_. Those therefore in _Nonnosus_ since they did not speak the _Indian_, I doubt, spoke no _Language_ at all; or at least, no more than other _Brutes_ do.

[Footnote A: _Plinij Nat. Hist._ lib. 6. cap. 30. p.m. 741.]

[Footnote B: _Plinij. Nat. Hist._ lib. 7. cap. 2. p.m. 11.]

_Ctesias_ I find is the only Author that ever understood what Language 'twas that the _Pygmies_ spake: For _Herodotus_[A] owns that they use a sort of Tongue like to no other, but screech like _Bats_. He saith, [Greek: Hoi Garamantes outoi tous troglodytas Aithiopas thaereuousi toisi tetrippoisi. Hoi gar Troglodytai aithiopes podas tachistoi anthropon panton eisi, ton hymeis peri logous apopheromenous akouomen. Siteontai de hoi Troglodytai ophis, kai Saurous, kai ta toiauta ton Herpeton. Glossan de oudemiaei allaei paromoiaen nenomikasi, alla tetrygasi kathaper hai nukterides;] i.e. _These_ Garamantes _hunt the_ Troglodyte Æthiopians _in Chariots with four Horses. The_ Troglodyte Æthiopians _are the swiftest of foot of all Men that ever he heard of by any Report. The_ Troglodytes _eat Serpents and Lizards, and such sort of Reptiles. They use a Language like to no other Tongue, but screech like Bats._

[Footnote A: _Herodot. in Melpomene._ pag. 283.]

Now that the _Pygmies_ are _Troglodytes_, or do live in Caves, is plain from _Aristotle_,[A] who saith, [Greek: Troglodytai de' eisi ton bion]. And so _Philostratus_,[B] [Greek: Tous de pygmaious oikein men hypogeious]. And methinks _Le Compte_'s Relation concerning the _wild_ or _savage Man_ in _Borneo_, agrees so well with this, that I shall transcribe it: for he tells us,[C] _That in_ Borneo _this_ wild _or_ savage Man _is indued with extraordinary strength; and not withstanding he walks but upon two Legs, yet he is so swift of foot, that they have much ado to outrun him. People of Quality course him, as we do Stags here: and this sort of hunting is the King's usual divertisement._ And _Gassendus_ in the Life of _Peiresky_, tells us they commonly hunt them too in _Angola_ in _Africa_, as I have already mentioned. So that very likely _Herodotus's Troglodyte Æthiopians_ may be no other than our _Orang-Outang_ or _wild Man_. And the rather, because I fancy their Language is much the same: for an _Ape_ will chatter, and make a noise like a _Bat_, as his _Troglodytes_ did: And they undergo to this day the same Fate of being hunted, as formerly the _Troglodytes_ used to be by the _Garamantes_.

[Footnote A: _Arist. Hist. Animal._, lib. 8. cap. 15. p.m. 913.]

[Footnote B: _Philostrat. in vita Appollon. Tyanæi_, lib. 3. cap. 14. p.m. 152.]

[Footnote C: _Lewis le Compte_ Memoirs and Observations on _China_, p.m. 510.]

Whether those [Greek: andras mikrous metrion elassonas andron] which the _Nasamones_ met with (as _Herodotus_[A] relates) in their Travels to discover _Libya_, were the _Pygmies_; I will not determine: It seems that _Nasamones_ neither understood their Language, nor they that of the _Nasamones_. However, they were so kind to the _Nasamones_ as to be their Guides along the Lakes, and afterwards brought them to a City, [Greek: en taei pantas einai toisi agousi to megethos isous, chroma de melanas], i.e. _in which all were of the same stature with the Guides, and black_. Now since they were all _little black Men_, and their Language could not be understood, I do suspect they may be a Colony of the _Pygmies_: And that they were no farther Guides to the _Nasamones_, than that being frighted at the sight of them, they ran home, and the _Nasamones_ followed them.

[Footnote A: _Herodotus in Euterpe_ seu lib. 2. p.m. 102.]

I do not find therefore any good Authority, unless you will reckon _Ctesias_ as such, that the _Pygmies_ ever used a Language or Speech, any more than other _Brutes_ of the same _Species_ do among themselves, and that we know nothing of, whatever _Democritus_ and _Melampodes_ in _Pliny_,[A] or _Apollonius Tyanæus_ in _Porphyry_[B] might formerly have done. Had the _Pygmies_ ever spoke any _Language_ intelligible by Mankind, this might have furnished our _Historians_ with notable Subjects for their _Novels_; and no doubt but we should have had plenty of them.

[Footnote A: _Plinij Nat. Hist._ lib. 10. cap. 49.]

[Footnote B: _Porphyrius de Abstinentia_, lib. 3. pag. m. 103.]

But _Albertus Magnus_, who was so lucky as to guess that the _Pygmies_ were a sort of _Apes_; that he should afterwards make these _Apes_ to _speak_, was very unfortunate, and spoiled all; and he do's it, methinks, so very awkwardly, that it is as difficult almost to understand his Language as his _Apes_; if the Reader has a mind to attempt it, he will find it in the Margin.[A]

[Footnote A: _Si qui Homines sunt Silvestres, sicut Pygmeus, non secundum unam rationem nobiscum dicti sunt Homines, sed aliquod habent Hominis in quadam deliberatione & Loquela, &c._ A little after adds, _Voces quædam (sc. Animalia) formant ad diversos conceptus quos habent, sicut Homo & Pygmæus; & quædam non faciunt hoc, sicut multitudo fere tota aliorum Animalium. Adhuc autem eorum quæ ex ratione cogitativa formant voces, quædam sunt succumbentia, quædam autem non succumbentia. Dico autem succumbentia, à conceptu Animæ cadentia & mota ad Naturæ Instinctum, sicut Pygmeus, qui non, sequitur rationem Loquelæ sed Naturæ Instinctum; Homo autem non succumbit sed sequitur rationem._ Albert. Magn. de Animal. lib. 1. cap. 3. p.m. 3.]

Had _Albertus_ only asserted, that the _Pygmies_ were a sort of _Apes_, his Opinion possibly might have obtained with less difficulty, unless he could have produced some Body that had heard them talk. But _Ulysses Aldrovandus_[A] is so far from believing his _Ape Pygmies_ ever spoke, that he utterly denies, that there were ever any such Creatures in being, as the _Pygmies_, at all; or that they ever fought the _Cranes_. _Cum itaque Pygmæos_ (saith he) _dari negemus, Grues etiam cum iis Bellum gerere, ut fabulantur, negabimus, & tam pertinaciter id negabimus, ut ne jurantibus credemus._

[Footnote A: _Ulys. Aldrovandi Ornitholog._ lib. 20. p.m. 344.]

I find a great many very Learned Men are of this Opinion: And in the first place, _Strabo_[A] is very positive; [Greek: Heorakos men gar oudeis exaegeitai ton pisteos axion andron;] i.e. _No Man worthy of belief did ever see them_. And upon all occasions he declares the same. So _Julius Cæsar Scaliger_[B] makes them to be only a Fiction of the Ancients, _At hæc omnia_ (saith he) _Antiquorum figmenta & meræ Nugæ, si exstarent, reperirentur. At cum universus Orbis nunc nobis cognitus sit, nullibi hæc Naturæ Excrementa reperiri certissimum est._ And _Isaac Casaubon_[C] ridicules such as pretend to justifie them: _Sic nostra ætate_ (saith he) _non desunt, qui eandem de Pygmæis lepidam fabellam renovent; ut qui etiam è Sacris Literis, si Deo placet, fidem illis conentur astruere. Legi etiam Bergei cujusdam Galli Scripta, qui se vidisse diceret. At non ego credulus illi, illi inquam Omnium Bipedum mendacissimo._ I shall add one Authority more, and that is of _Adrian Spigelius,_ who produces a Witness that had examined the very place, where the _Pygmies_ were said to be; yet upon a diligent enquiry, he could neither find them, nor hear any tidings of them.[D] _Spigelius_ therefore tells us, _Hoc loco de Pygmæis dicendum erat, qui [Greek: para pygonos] dicti à statura, quæ ulnam non excedunt. Verùm ego Poetarum fabulas esse crediderim, pro quibus tamen_ Aristoteles _minimè haberi vult, sed veram esse Historiam._ 8. Hist. Animal. 12. _asseverat. Ego quo minùs hoc statuam, tum Authoritate primùm Doctissimi_ Strabonis I. Geograph. _coactus sum, tum potissimùm nunc moveor, quod nostro tempore, quo nulla Mundi pars est, quam Nautarum Industria non perlustrarit, nihil tamen, unquam simile aut visum est, aut auditum. Accedit quod_ Franciscus Alvarez _Lusitanus, qui ea ipsa loca peragravit, circa quæ Aristoteles Pygmæos esse scribit, nullibi tamen tam parvam Gentem à se conspectam tradidit, sed Populum esse Mediocris staturæ, &_ Æthiopes _tradit._

[Footnote A: _Strabo Geograph._ lib. 17. p.m. 565.]

[Footnote B: _Jul. Cæs. Scaliger. Comment. in Arist. Hist. Animal._ lib. 8. § 126. p.m. 914.]

[Footnote C: _Isaac Causabon Notæ & Castigat. in_ lib. 1. _Strabonis Geograph._ p.m. 38.]

[Footnote D: _Adrian. Spigelij de Corporis Humani fabrica_, lib. 1. cap. 7. p.m. 15.]

I think my self therefore here obliged to make out, that there were such Creatures as _Pygmies_, before I determine what they were, since the very being of them is called in question, and utterly denied by so great Men, and by others too that might be here produced. Now in the doing this, _Aristotle_'s Assertion of them is so very positive, that I think there needs not a greater or better Proof; and it is so remarkable a one, that I find the very Enemies to this Opinion at a loss, how to shift it off. To lessen it's Authority they have interpolated the _Text_, by foisting into the _Translation_ what is not in the Original; or by not translating at all the most material passage, that makes against them; or by miserably glossing it, to make him speak what he never intended: Such unfair dealings plainly argue, that at any rate they are willing to get rid of a Proof, that otherwise they can neither deny, or answer.

_Aristotle_'s Text is this, which I shall give with _Theodorus Gaza's_ Translation: for discoursing of the Migration of Birds, according to the Season of the Year, from one Country to another, he saith:[A]

[Footnote A: _Aristotel. Hist. Animal._ lib. 8. cap. 12.]

[Greek: Meta men taen phthinoporinaen Isaemerian, ek tou Pontou kaiton psychron pheugonta ton epionta cheimona; meta de taen earinaen, ek ton therinon, eis tous topous tous psychrous, phoboumena ta kaumata; ta men, kai ek ton engus topon poioumena tas metabolas, ta de, kai ek ton eschaton hos eipein, hoion hai geranoi poiousi. Metaballousi gar ek ton Skythikon eis ta helae ta ano taes Aigyptou, othen ho Neilos rhei. Esti de ho topos outos peri on hoi pigmaioi katoikousin; ou gar esti touto mythos, all' esti kata taen alaetheian. Genos mikron men, hosper legetai, kai autoi kai hoi hippoi; Troglodytai d' eisi ton bion.]

_Tam ab Autumnali Æquinoctio ex Ponto, Locisque frigidis fugiunt Hyemem futuram. A Verno autem ex tepida Regione ad frigidam sese conferunt, æstus metu futuri: & alia de locis vicinis discedunt, alia de ultimis, prope dixerim, ut Grues faciunt, quæ ex Scythicis Campis ad Paludes Ægypto superiores, unde Nilus profluit, veniunt, quo in loco pugnare cum Pygmæis dicuntur. Non enim id fabula est, sed certe, genus tum hominum, tum etiam Equorum pusillum (ut dicitur) est, deguntque in Cavernis, unde Nomen Troglodytæ a subeundis Cavernis accepere._

In English 'tis thus: 'At the _Autumnal Æquinox_ they go out of _Pontus_ and the cold Countreys to avoid the Winter that is coming on. At the _Vernal Æquinox_ they pass from hot Countreys into cold ones, for fear of the ensuing heat; some making their Migrations from nearer places; others from the most remote (as I may say) as the _Cranes_ do: for they come out of _Scythia_ to the Lakes above _Ægypt_, whence the _Nile_ do's flow. This is the place, whereabout the _Pygmies_ dwell: For this is no _Fable_, but a _Truth_. Both they and the Horses, as 'tis said, are a small kind. They are _Troglodytes_, or live in Caves.'

We may here observe how positive the _Philosopher_ is, that there are _Pygmies_; he tells us where they dwell, and that 'tis no Fable, but a Truth. But _Theodorus Gaza_ has been unjust in translating him, by foisting in, _Quo in loco pugnare cum Pygmæis dicuntur_, whereas there is nothing in the Text that warrants it: As likewise, where he expresses the little Stature of the _Pygmies_ and the Horses, there _Gaza_ has rendered it, _Sed certè Genus tum Hominum, tum etiam Equorum pusillum_. _Aristotle_ only saith, [Greek: Genos mikron men hosper legetai, kai autoi, kai hoi hippoi]. He neither makes his _Pygmies Men_, nor saith any thing of their fighting the _Cranes_; tho' here he had a fair occasion, discoursing of the Migration of the _Cranes_ out of _Scythia_ to the _Lakes_ above _Ægypt_, where he tells us the _Pygmies_ are. Cardan[A] therefore must certainly be out in his guess, that _Aristotle_ only asserted the _Pygmies_ out of Complement to his friend _Homer_; for surely then he would not have forgot their fight with the _Cranes_; upon which occasion only _Homer_ mentions them.[B] I should rather think that _Aristotle_, being sensible of the many Fables that had been raised on this occasion, studiously avoided the mentioning this fight, that he might not give countenance to the Extravagant Relations that had been made of it.

[Footnote A: _Cardan de Rerum varietate_, lib. 8. cap. 40. p.m. 153.]

[Footnote B: _Apparet ergo_ (saith _Cardan_) Pygmæorum Historiam esse fabulosam, quod &_ Strabo _sentit & nosira ætas, cum omnia nunc fermè orbis mirabilia innotuerint, declarat. Sed quod tantum Philosophum decepit, fuit Homeri Auctoritas non apud illium levis.]

But I wonder that neither _Casaubon_ nor _Duvall_ in their Editions of _Aristotle_'s Works, should have taken notice of these Mistakes of _Gaza_, and corrected them. And _Gesner_, and _Aldrovandus_, and several other Learned Men, in quoting this place of _Aristotle_, do make use of this faulty Translation, which must necessarily lead them into Mistakes. _Sam. Bochartus_[A] tho' he gives _Aristotle_'s Text in Greek, and adds a new Translation of it, he leaves out indeed the _Cranes_ fighting with the _Pygmies_, yet makes them _Men_, which _Aristotle_ do's not; and by anti-placing, _ut aiunt_, he renders _Aristotle_'s Assertion more dubious; _Neque enim_ (saith he in the Translation) _id est fabula, sed reverâ, ut aiunt, Genus ibi parvum est tam Hominum quàm Equorum. Julius Cæsar Scaliger_ in translating this Text of _Aristotle_, omits both these Interpretations of _Gaza_; but on the other hand is no less to be blamed in not translating at all the most remarkable passage, and where the Philosopher seems to be so much in earnest; as, [Greek: ou gar esti touto mythos, all' esti kata taen alaetheian], this he leaves wholly out, without giving us his reason for it, if he had any: And Scaliger's[B] insinuation in his Comment, _viz. Negat esse fabulam de his (sc. Pygmeis)_ Herodotus, _at Philosophus semper moderatus & prudens etiam addidit_, [Greek: hosper legetai], is not to be allowed. Nor can I assent to Sir _Thomas Brown_'s[C] remark upon this place; _Where indeed_ (saith he) Aristotle _plays the_ Aristotle; _that is, the wary and evading asserter; for tho' with_ non est fabula _he seems at first to confirm it, yet at last he claps in,_ sicut aiunt, _and shakes the belief he placed before upon it. And therefore_ Scaliger (saith he) _hath not translated the first, perhaps supposing it surreptitious, or unworthy so great an Assertor._ But had _Scaliger_ known it to be surreptitious, no doubt but he would have remarked it; and then there had been some Colour for the Gloss. But 'tis unworthy to be believed of _Aristotle_, who was so wary and cautious, that he should in so short a passage, contradict himself: and after he had so positively affirmed the Truth of it, presently doubt it. His [Greek: hosper legetai] therefore must have a Reference to what follows, _Pusillum genus, ut aiunt, ipsi atque etiam Equi_, as _Scaliger_ himself translates it.

[Footnote A: _Bocharti Hierozoic. S. de Animalib. S. Script. part. Posterior_. lib. 1. cap. 11. p.m. 76.]

[Footnote B: _Scaliger. Comment. in Arist. Hist. Animal._ lib. 8. p.m. 914.]

[Footnote C: Sir _Thomas Brown_'s _Pseudodoxia_, or, _Enquiries into Vulgar Errors_, lib. 4. cap. 11.]

I do not here find _Aristotle_ asserting or confirming any thing of the fabulous Narrations that had been made about the _Pygmies_. He does not say that they were [Greek: andres], or [Greek: anthropoi mikroi], or [Greek: melanes]; he only calls them [Greek: pygmaioi]. And discoursing of the _Pygmies_ in a place, where he is only treating about _Brutes_, 'tis reasonable to think, that he looked upon them only as such. _This is the place where the_ Pygmies _are; this is no fable,_ saith Aristotle, as 'tis that they are a Dwarfish Race of Men; that they speak the _Indian_ Language; that they are excellent Archers; that they are very Just; and abundance of other Things that are fabulously reported of them; and because he thought them _Fables_, he does not take the least notice of them, but only saith, _This is no Fable, but a Truth, that about the Lakes of_ Nile such _Animals_, as are called _Pygmies_, do live. And, as if he had foreseen, that the abundance of Fables that _Ctesias_ (whom he saith is not to be believed) and the _Indian Historians_ had invented about them, would make the whole Story to appear as a Figment, and render it doubtful, whether there were ever such Creatures as _Pygmies_ in Nature; he more zealously asserts the _Being_ of them, and assures us, That _this is no Fable, but a Truth_.

I shall therefore now enquire what sort of Creatures these _Pygmies_ were; and hope so to manage the Matter, as in a great measure, to abate the Passion these Great Men have had against them: for, no doubt, what has incensed them the most, was, the fabulous _Historians_ making them a part of _Mankind_, and then inventing a hundred ridiculous Stories about them, which they would impose upon the World as real Truths. If therefore they have Satisfaction given them in these two Points, I do not see, but that the Business may be accommodated very fairly; and that they may be allowed to be _Pygmies_, tho' we do not make them _Men_.

For I am not of _Gesner_'s mind, _Sed veterum nullus_ (saith he[A]) _aliter de Pygmæis scripsit, quàm Homunciones esse_. Had they been a Race of _Men_, no doubt but _Aristotle_ would have informed himself farther about them. Such a Curiosity could not but have excited his Inquisitive _Genius_, to a stricter Enquiry and Examination; and we might easily have expected from him a larger Account of them. But finding them, it may be, a sort of _Apes_, he only tells us, that in such a place these _Pygmies_ live.

[Footnote A: _Gesner. Histor. Quadruped._ p.m. 885.]

Herodotus[A] plainly makes them _Brutes_: For reckoning up the _Animals_ of _Libya_, he tells us, [Greek: Kai gar hoi ophies hoi hypermegathees, kai hoi leontes kata toutous eisi, kai hoi elephantes te kai arktoi, kai aspides te kai onoi hoi ta kerata echontes; kai hoi kynokephaloi (akephaloi) hoi en toisi staethesi tous ophthalmous echontes (hos dae legetai ge hypo libyon) kai agrioi andres, kai gynaikes agriai kai alla plaethei polla thaeria akatapseusta;] i.e. _That there are here prodigious large Serpents, and Lions, and Elephants, and Bears, and Asps, and Asses that have horns, and Cynocephali,_ (in the Margin 'tis _Acephali_) _that have Eyes in their Breast, (as is reported by the Libyans) and wild Men, and wild Women, and a great many other wild Beasts that are not fabulous._ Tis evident therefore that _Herodotus_ his [Greek: agrioi andres, kai gynaikes agriai] are only [Greek: thaeria] or wild Beasts: and tho' they are called [Greek: andres], they are no more _Men_ than our _Orang-Outang_, or _Homo_ _Sylvestris_, or _wild Man_, which has exactly the same Name, and I must confess I can't but think is the same Animal: and that the same Name has been continued down to us, from his Time, and it may be from _Homer's_.

[Footnote A: _Herodot. Melpomene seu_ lib. 4. p.m. 285.]

So _Philostratus_ speaking of _Æthiopia_ and _Ægypt_, tells us,[A] [Greek: Boskousi de kai thaeria hoia ouch heterothi; kai anthropous melanas, ho mae allai aepeiroi. Pygmaion te en autais ethnae kai hylaktounton allo allaei.] i.e. _Here are bred wild Beasts that are not in other places; and black Men, which no other Country affords: and amongst them is the Nation of the Pygmies, and the_ BARKERS, that is, the _Cynocephali._ For tho' _Philostratus_ is pleased here only to call them _Barkers_, and to reckon them, as he does the _Black Men_ and the _Pygmies_ amongst the _wild Beasts_ of those Countreys; yet _Ctesias_, from whom _Philostratus_ has borrowed a great deal of his _Natural History_, stiles them _Men_, and makes them speak, and to perform most notable Feats in Merchandising. But not being in a merry Humour it may be now, before he was aware, he speaks Truth: For _Cælius Rhodiginus's_[B] Character of him is, _Philostratus omnium qui unquam Historiam conscripserunt, mendacissimus._

[Footnote A: _Philostratus in vita Apollon. Tyanæi_, lib. 6. cap. 1. p.m. 258.]

[Footnote B: _Cælij Rhodigini Lection. Antiq._ lib. 17. cap. 13.]

Since the _Pygmies_ therefore are some of the _Brute Beasts_ that naturally breed in these Countries, and they are pleased to let us know as much, I can easily excuse them a Name. [Greek: Andres agrioi], or _Orang-Outang_, is alike to me; and I am better pleased with _Homer_'s [Greek: andres pygmaioi], than if he had called [Greek: pithaekoi]. Had this been the only Instance where they had misapplied the Name of _Man_, methinks I could be so good natur'd, as in some measure to make an Apology for them. But finding them, so extravagantly loose, so wretchedly whimsical, in abusing the Dignity of Mankind, by giving the name of _Man_ to such monstrous Productions of their idle Imaginations, as the _Indian Historians_ have done, I do not wonder that wise Men have suspected all that comes out of their Mint, to be false and counterfeit.

Such are their [Greek: Amykteres] or [Greek: Arrines], that want Noses, and have only two holes above their Mouth; they eat all things, but they must be raw; they are short lived; the upper part of their Mouths is very prominent. The [Greek: Enotokeitai], whose Ears reach down to their Heels, on which they lye and sleep. The [Greek: Astomoi], that have no Mouths, a civil sort of People, that dwell about the Head of the _Ganges_; and live upon smelling to boil'd Meats and the Odours of Fruits and Flowers; they can bear no ill scent, and therefore can't live in a Camp. The [Greek: Monommatoi] or [Greek: Monophthalmoi], that have but one Eye, and that in the middle of their Foreheads: they have Dog's Ears; their Hair stands an end, but smooth on the Breasts. The [Greek: Sternophthalmoi], that have Eyes in their Breasts. The [Greek: Panai sphaenokephaloi] with Heads like Wedges. The [Greek: Makrokephaloi], with great Heads. The [Greek: hyperboreoi], who live a Thousand years. The [Greek: okypodes], so swift that they will out-run a Horse. The [Greek: opiothodaktyloi], that go with their Heels forward, and their Toes backwards. The [Greek: Makroskeleis], The [Greek: Steganopodes], The [Greek: Monoskeleis], who have one Leg, but will jump a great way, and are call'd _Sciapodes_, because when they lye on their Backs, with this _Leg_ they can keep off the Sun from their Bodies.

Now _Strabo_[A] from whom I have collected the Description of these Monstrous sorts of _Men_, and they are mentioned too by _Pliny, Solinus, Mela, Philostratus_, and others; and _Munster_ in his _Cosmography_[B] has given a _figure_ of some of them; _Strabo_, I say, who was an Enemy to all such fabulous Relations, no doubt was prejudiced likewise against the _Pygmies_, because these _Historians_ had made them a Puny Race of _Men_, and invented so many Romances about them. I can no ways therefore blame him for denying, that there were ever any such _Men Pygmies_; and do readily agree with him, that no _Man_ ever saw them: and am so far from dissenting from those Great Men, who have denied them on this account, that I think they have all the reason in the World on their side. And to shew how ready I am to close with them in this Point, I will here examine the contrary Opinion, and what Reasons they give for the supporting it: For there have been some _Moderns_, as well as the _Ancients_, that have maintained that these _Pygmies_ were real _Men_. And this they pretend to prove, both from _Humane Authority_ and _Divine_.

[Footnote A: _Strabo Geograph._ lib. 15. p.m. 489. & lib. 2. p. 48. _& alibi_.]

[Footnote B: _Munster Cosmograph._ lib. 6. p. 1151.]

Now by _Men Pygmies_ we are by no means to understand _Dwarfs_. In all Countries, and in all Ages, there has been now and then observed such _Miniture_ of Mankind, or under-sized Men. _Cardan_[A] tells us he saw one carried about in a Parrot's Cage, that was but a Cubit high. _Nicephorus_[B] tells us, that in _Theodosius_ the Emperour's time, there was one in _Ægypt_ that was no bigger than a Partridge; yet what was to be admired, he was very Prudent, had a sweet clear Voice, and a generous Mind; and lived Twenty Years. So likewise a King of _Portugal_ sent to a Duke of _Savoy_, when he married his Daughter to him, an _Æthiopian Dwarf_ but three Palms high.[C] And _Thevenot_[D] tells us of the Present made by the King of the _Abyssins_, to the _Grand Seignior_, of several _little black Slaves_ out of _Nubia_, and the Countries near _Æthiopia_, which being made _Eunuchs_, were to guard the Ladies of the _Seraglio_. And a great many such like Relations there are. But these being only _Dwarfs_, they must not be esteemed the _Pygmies_ we are enquiring about, which are represented as a _Nation_, and the whole Race of them to be of the like stature. _Dari tamen integras Pumilionum Gentes, tam falsum est, quàm quod falsissimum_, saith _Harduin_.[E]

[Footnote A: _Cardan de subtilitate_, lib. 11. p. 458.]

[Footnote B: _Nicephor. Histor. Ecclesiiast._ lib. 12. cap. 37.]

[Footnote C: _Happelius in Relat. curiosis_, No. 85. p. 677.]

[Footnote D: _Thevenot. Voyage de Levant._ lib. 2. c. 68.]

[Footnote E: _Jo. Harduini Notæ in Plinij Nat. Hist._ lib. 6. cap. 22. p. 688.]

Neither likewise must it be granted, that tho' in some _Climates_ there might be _Men_ generally of less stature, than what are to be met with in other Countries, that they are presently _Pygmies_. _Nature_ has not fixed the same standard to the growth of _Mankind_ in all Places alike, no more than to _Brutes_ or _Plants_. The Dimensions of them all, according to the _Climate_, may differ. If we consult the Original, _viz. Homer_ that first mentioned the _Pygmies_, there are only these two _Characteristics_ he gives of them. That they are [Greek: Pygmaioi] _seu Cubitales_; and that the _Cranes_ did use to fight them. 'Tis true, as a _Poet_, he calls them [Greek: andres], which I have accounted for before. Now if there cannot be found such _Men_ as are _Cubitales_, that the _Cranes_ might probably fight with, notwithstanding all the Romances of the _Indian Historians_, I cannot think these _Pygmies_ to be _Men_, but they must be some other _Animals_, or the whole must be a Fiction.

Having premised this, we will now enquire into their Assertion that maintain the _Pygmies_ to be a Race of _Men_. Now because there have been _Giants_ formerly, that have so much exceeded the usual Stature of _Man_, that there must be likewise _Pygmies_ as defective in the other extream from this Standard, I think is no conclusive Argument, tho' made use of by some. Old _Caspar Bartholine_[A] tells us, that because _J. Cassanius_ and others had wrote _de Gygantibus_, since no Body else had undertaken it, he would give us a Book _de Pygmæis_; and since he makes it his design to prove the Existence of _Pygmies_, and that the _Pygmies_ were _Men_, I must confess I expected great Matters from him.

[Footnote A: _Caspar. Bartholin. Opusculum de Pygmæis._]

But I do not find he has informed us of any thing more of them, than what _Jo. Talentonius_, a Professor formerly at _Parma_, had told us before in his _Variarum & Reconditarum Rerum Thesaurus_,[A] from whom he has borrowed most of this _Tract_. He has made it a little more formal indeed, by dividing it into _Chapters_; of which I will give you the _Titles_; and as I see occasion, some Remarks thereon: They will not be many, because I have prevented my self already. The _first Chapter_ is, _De Homuncionibus & Pumilionilus seu Nanis à Pygmæis distinctis_. The _second Chapter, De Pygmæi nominibus & Etymologia_. The _third Chapter, Duplex esse Pygmæorum Genus; & primum Genus aliquando dari_. He means _Dwarfs_, that are no _Pygmies_ at all. The _fourth Chapter_ is, _Alterum Genus, nempe Gentem Pygmæorum esse, aut saltem aliquando fuisse Autoritatibus Humanis, fide tamen dignorum asseritur_. 'Tis as I find it printed; and no doubt an Error in the printing. The Authorities he gives, are, _Homer, Ctesias, Aristotle, Philostratus, Pliny, Juvenal, Oppian, Baptista Mantuan_, St. _Austin_ and his _Scholiast. Ludovic. Vives, Jo. Laurentius Anania, Joh. Cassanius, Joh. Talentonius, Gellius, Pomp. Mela_, and _Olaus Magnus_. I have taken notice of most of them already, as I shall of St. _Austin_ and _Ludovicus Vives_ by and by. _Jo. Laurentius Anania_[B] ex Mercatorum relatione tradit (saith _Bartholine_) eos _(sc. Pygmæos) in Septentrionali Thraciæ Parte reperiri, (quæ Scythiæ est proxima) atque ibi cum Gruibus pugnare_. And _Joh. Cassanius_[C] (as he is here quoted) saith, _De Pygmæis fabulosa quidem esse omnia, quæ de iis narrari solent, aliquando existimavi. Verùm cum videam non unum vel alterum, sed complures Classicos & probatos Autores de his Homunculis multa in eandem fere Sententiam tradidisse; eò adducor ut Pygmæos fuisse inficiari non ausim._ He next brings in _Jo. Talentonius_, to whom he is so much beholden, and quotes his Opinion, which is full and home, _Constare arbitror_ (saith _Talentonius_)[D] _debere concedi, Pygmæos non solùm olim fuisse, sed nunc etiam esse, & homines esse, nec parvitatem illis impedimenta esse quo minùs sint & homines sint._ But were there such _Men Pygmies_ now in being, no doubt but we must have heard of them; some or other of our Saylors, in their Voyages, would have lighted on them. Tho' _Aristotle_ is here quoted, yet he does not make them _Men_; So neither does _Anania_: And I must own, tho' _Talentonius_ be of this Opinion, yet he takes notice of the faulty Translation of this Text of _Aristotle_ by _Gaza_: and tho' the parvity or lowness of Stature, be no Impediment, because we have frequently seen such _Dwarf-Men_, yet we did never see a _Nation_ of them: For then there would be no need of that _Talmudical_ Precept which _Job. Ludolphus_[E] mentions, _Nanus ne ducat Nanam, ne fortè oriatur ex iis Digitalis_ (in _Bechor_. fol. 45).

[Footnote A: _Jo. Talentionij. Variar. & Recondit. Rerum. Thesaurus._ lib. 3. cap. 21.]

[Footnote B: _Joh. Laurent. Anania prope finem tractatus primi suæ Geograph._]

[Footnote C: _Joh. Cassanius libello de Gygantibus_, p. 73.]

[Footnote D: _Jo. Talentonius Variar. & recondit. Rerum Thesaurus_, lib. 3. cap. 21. p.m. 515.]

[Footnote E: _Job Ludolphi Comment. in Historiam Æthiopic._ p.m. 71.]

I had almost forgotten _Olaus Magnus_, whom _Bartholine_ mentions in the close of this Chapter, but lays no great stress upon his Authority, because he tells us, he is fabulous in a great many other Relations, and he writes but by hear-say, that the _Greenlanders_ fight the _Cranes_; _Tandem_ (saith _Bartholine_) _neque ideo Pygmæi sunt, si fortè sagittis & hastis, sicut alij homines, Grues conficiunt & occidunt._ This I think is great Partiality: For _Ctesias_, an Author whom upon all turns _Bartholine_ makes use of as an Evidence, is very positive, that the _Pygmies_ were excellent _Archers_: so that he himself owns, that their being such, illustrates very much that _Text_ in _Ezekiel_, on which he spends good part of the next _Chapter_, whose Title is, _Pygmæorum Gens ex Ezekiele, atque rationibus probabilibus adstruitur_; which we will consider by and by. And tho' _Olaus Magnus_ may write some things by hear-say, yet he cannot be so fabulous as _Ctesias_, who (as _Lucian_ tells us) writes what he neither saw himself, or heard from any Body else. Not that I think _Olaus Magnus_ his _Greenlanders_ were real _Pygmies_, no more than _Ctesias_ his _Pygmies_ were real _Men_; tho' he vouches very notably for them. And if all that have copied this Fable from _Ctesias_, must be look'd upon as the same Evidence with himself; the number of the _Testimonies_ produced need not much concern us, since they must all stand or fall with him.

The _probable Reasons_ that _Bartholine_ gives in the _fifth Chapter_, are taken from other _Animals_, as Sheep, Oxen, Horses, Dogs, the _Indian Formica_ and Plants: For observing in the same _Species_ some excessive large, and others extreamly little, he infers, _Quæ certè cum in Animalibus & Vegetabilibus fiant; cur in Humana specie non sit probabile, haud video: imprimis cum detur magnitudinis excessus Gigantæus; cur non etiam dabitur Defectus? Quia ergo dantur Gigantes, dabuntur & Pygmæi. Quam consequentiam ut firmam, admittit Cardanus,[A] licet de Pygmæis hoc tantùm concedat, qui pro miraculo, non pro Gente._ Now Cardan, tho' he allows this Consequence, yet in the same place he gives several Reasons why the _Pygmies_ could not be _Men_, and looks upon the whole Story as fabulous. _Bartholine_ concludes this _Chapter_ thus: _Ulteriùs ut Probabilitatem fulciamus, addendum Sceleton Pygmæi, quod_ Dresdæ _vidimus inter alia plurima, servatum in Arce sereniss._ Electoris Saxoniæ, _altitudine infra Cubitum, Ossium soliditate, proportioneque tum Capitis, tum aliorum; ut Embrionem, aut Artificiale quid Nemo rerum peritus suspicari possit. Addita insuper est Inscriptio_ Veri Pygmæi. I hereupon looked into Dr. _Brown_'s Travels into those Parts, who has given us a large Catalogue of the Curiosities, the _Elector_ of _Saxony_ had at _Dresden_, but did not find amongst them this _Sceleton_; which, by the largeness of the Head, I suspect to be the _Sceleton_ of an _Orang-Outang_, or our _wild Man_. But had he given us either a figure of it, or a more particular Description, it had been a far greater Satisfaction.

[Footnote A: _Cardan. de Rerum varietate_, lib. 8. cap. 40.]

The Title of _Bartholine_'s _sixth Chapter_ is, _Pygmæos esse aut fuisse ex variis eorum adjunctis, accidentibus_, &c. _ab Authoribus descriptis ostenditur_. As first, their _Magnitude_: which he mentions from _Ctesias, Pliny, Gellius_, and _Juvenal_; and tho' they do not all agree exactly, 'tis nothing. _Autorum hic dissensus nullus est_ (saith _Bartholine_) _etenim sicut in nostris hominibus, ita indubiè in Pygmæis non omnes ejusdem magnitudinis._ 2. The _Place_ and _Country_: As _Ctesias_ (he saith) places them in the middle of _India_; _Aristotle_ and _Pliny_ at the Lakes above _Ægypt_; _Homer_'s _Scholiast_ in the middle of _Ægypt_; _Pliny_ at another time saith they are at the Head of the _Ganges_, and sometimes at _Gerania_, which is in _Thracia_, which being near _Scythia_, confirms (he saith) _Anania's Relation_. _Mela_ places them at the _Arabian Gulf_; and _Paulus Jovius docet Pygmæos ultra Japonem esse_; and adds, _has Autorum dissensiones facile fuerit conciliare; nec mirum diversas relationes à_, Plinio _auditas._ For (saith he) as the _Tartars_ often change their Seats, since they do not live in Houses, but in Tents, so 'tis no wonder that the _Pygmies_ often change theirs, since instead of Houses, they live in Caves or Huts, built of Mud, Feathers, and Egg-shells. And this mutation of their Habitations he thinks is very plain from _Pliny_, where speaking of _Gerania_, he saith, _Pygmæorum Gens_ fuisse _(non jam esse) proditur, creduntque à Gruibus fugatos._ Which passage (saith _Bartholine_) had _Adrian Spigelius_ considered, he would not so soon have left _Aristotle's_ Opinion, because _Franc. Alvares_ the _Portuguese_ did not find them in the place where _Aristotle_ left them; for the _Cranes_, it may be, had driven them thence. His third Article is, their _Habitation_, which _Aristotle_ saith is in _Caves_; hence they are _Troglodytes_. _Pliny_ tells us they build Huts with Mud, Feathers, and Egg-shells. But what _Bartholine_ adds, _Eò quod Terræ Cavernas inhabitent, non injuriâ dicti sunt olim Pygmæi, Terræ filii_, is wholly new to me, and I have not met with it in any Author before: tho' he gives us here several other significations of the word _Terræ filij_ from a great many Authors, which I will not trouble you at present with. 4. The _Form_, being flat nosed and ugly, as _Ctesias_. 5. Their _Speech_, which was the same as the _Indians_, as _Ctesias_; and for this I find he has no other Author. 6. Their _Hair_; where he quotes _Ctesias_ again, that they make use of it for _Clothes_. 7. Their _Vertues and Arts_; as that they use the same Laws as the _Indians_, are very just, excellent Archers, and that the King of _India_ has Three thousand of them in his Guards. All from _Ctesias_. 8. Their _Animals_, as in _Ctesias_; and here are mentioned their Sheep, Oxen, Asses, Mules, and Horses. 9. Their various _Actions_; as what _Ctesias_ relates of their killing Hares and Foxes with Crows, Eagles, &c. and fighting the _Cranes_, as _Homer, Pliny, Juvenal_.

The _seventh Chapter_ in _Bartholine_ has a promising Title, _An Pygmæi sint homines_, and I expected here something more to our purpose; but I find he rather endeavours to answer the Reasons of those that would make them _Apes_, than to lay down any of his own to prove them _Men_. And _Albertus Magnus's_ Opinion he thinks absurd, that makes them part Men part Beasts; they must be either one or the other, not a _Medium_ between both; and to make out this, he gives us a large Quotation out of _Cardan_. But _Cardan_[A] in the same place argues that they are not Men. As to _Suessanus_[B] his Argument, that they want _Reason_, this he will not Grant; but if they use it less or more imperfectly than others (which yet, he saith, is not certain) by the same parity of Reason _Children_, the _Boeotians_, _Cumani_ and _Naturals_ may not be reckoned _Men_; and he thinks, what he has mentioned in the preceding _Chapter_ out of _Ctesias_, &c. shews that they have no small use of Reason. As to _Suessanus_'s next Argument, that they want Religion, Justice, &c. this, he saith, is not confirmed by any grave Writer; and if it was, yet it would not prove that they are not _Men_. For this defect (he saith) might hence happen, because they are forced to live in _Caves_ for fear of the _Cranes_; and others besides them, are herein faulty. For this Opinion, that the _Pygmies_ were _Apes_ and not _Men_, he quotes likewise _Benedictus Varchius_,[C] and _Joh. Tinnulus_,[D] and _Paulus Jovius_,[E] and several others of the Moderns, he tells us, are of the same mind. _Imprimis Geographici quos non puduit in Mappis Geographicis loco Pygmæorum simias cum Gruibus pugnantes ridiculè dipinxisse._

[Footnote A: _Cardan. de Rerum varietate_, lib. 8. cap. 40.]

[Footnote B: _Suessanus Comment. in Arist. de Histor. Animal._ lib. 8. cap. 12.]

[Footnote C: _Benedict. Varchius de Monstris. lingua vernacula._]

[Footnote D: _Joh. Tinnulus in Glotto-Chrysio._]

[Footnote E: _Paulus Jovius lib. de Muscovit. Legalione._]

The Title of _Bartholine's eighth_ and last _Chapter_ is, _Argumenta eorum qui Pygmæorum Historiam fabulosam censent, recitantur & refutantur._ Where he tells us, the only Person amongst the Ancients that thought the Story of the _Pygmies_ to be fabulous was _Strabo_; but amongst the Moderns there are several, as _Cardan, Budæus, Aldrovandus, Fullerus_ and others. The first Objection (he saith) is that of _Spigelius_ and others; that since the whole World is now discovered, how happens it, that these _Pygmies_ are not to be met with? He has seven Answers to this Objection; how satisfactory they are, the Reader may judge, if he pleases, by perusing them amongst the Quotations.[A] _Cardan_'s second Objection (he saith) is, that they live but eight years, whence several Inconveniences would happen, as _Cardan_ shews; he answers that no good Author asserts this; and if there was, yet what _Cardan_ urges would not follow; and instances out of _Artemidorus_ in _Pliny_,[B] as a _Parallel_ in the _Calingæ_ a Nation in _India, where the Women conceive when five years old, and do not live above eight._ _Gesner_ speaking of the _Pygmies_, saith, _Vitæ autem longitudo anni arciter octo ut_ Albertus _refert._ _Cardan_ perhaps had his Authority from _Albertus_, or it may be both took it from this passage in _Pliny_, which I think would better agree to _Apes_ than _Men_. But _Artemidorus_ being an _Indian Historian_, and in the same place telling other Romances, the less Credit is to be given to him. The third Objection, he saith, is of _Cornelius à Lapide_, who denies the _Pygmies_, because _Homer_ was the first Author of them. The fourth Objection he saith is, because Authors differ about the Place where they should be: This, he tells us, he has answered already in the fifth Chapter. The _fifth_ and last Objection he mentions is, that but few have seen them. He answers, there are a great many Wonders in Sacred and Profane History that we have not seen, yet must not deny. And he instances in three; As the _Formicæ Indicæ_, which are as big as great Dogs: The _Cornu Plantabile_ in the Island _Goa_, which when cut off from the Beast, and flung upon the Ground, will take root like a _Cabbage_: and the _Scotland Geese_ that grow upon Trees, for which he quotes a great many Authors, and so concludes.

[Footnote A: _Respondeo._ 1. _Contrarium testari Mercatorum Relationem apud_ Ananiam _supra Cap. 4._ 2. _Et licet non inventi essent vivi à quolibet, pari jure Monocerota & alia negare liceret._ 3. _Qui maria pernavigant, vix oras paucas maritimas lustrant, adeo non terras omnes à mari dissitas._ 4. _Neque in Oris illos habitare maritimis ex Capite quinto manifestum est._ 5. _Quis testatum se omnem adhibuisse diligentiam in inquirendo eos ut inveniret._ 6. _Ita in terra habitant, ut in Antris vitam tolerare dicantur._ 7. _Si vel maximè omni ab omnibus diligentia quæsiti fuissent, nec inventi; fieri potest, ut instar Gigantum jam desierint nec sint ampliùs_.]

[Footnote B: _Plinij Hist. Nat._ lib. 7. cap. 2. p.m. 14.]

Now how far _Bartholine_ in his Treatise has made out that the _Pygmies_ of the Ancients were real _Men_, either from the Authorities he has quoted, or his Reasonings upon them, I submit to the Reader. I shall proceed now (as I promised) to consider the Proof they pretend from _Holy Writ_: For _Bartholine_ and others insist upon that _Text_ in _Ezekiel_ (_Cap. 27. Vers. 11_) where the _Vulgar_ Translation has it thus; _Filij Arvad cum Exercitu tuo supra Muros tuos per circuitum, & Pygmæi in Turribus tuis fuerunt; Scuta sua suspenderunt supra Muros tuos per circuitum._ Now _Talentonius_ and _Bartholine_ think that what _Ctesias_ relates of the _Pygmies_, as their being good _Archers_, very well illustrates this Text of _Ezekiel_: I shall here transcribe what Sir _Thomas Brown_[A] remarks upon it; and if any one requires further Satisfaction, they may consult _Job Ludolphus's Comment_ on his _Æthiopic History_.[B]

[Footnote A: Sir _Thomas Brown's Enquiries into Vulgar Errors_, lib. 4. cap. 11. p. 242.]

[Footnote B: _Comment. in Hist. Æthiopic._ p. 73.]

The _second Testimony_ (saith Sir _Thomas Brown_) _is deduced from Holy Scripture; thus rendered in the Vulgar Translation_, Sed & Pygmæi qui erant in turribus tuis, pharetras suas suspenderunt in muris tuis per gyrum: _from whence notwithstanding we cannot infer this Assertion, for first the Translators accord not, and the Hebrew word_ Gammadim _is very variously rendered. Though_ Aquila, Vatablus _and_ Lyra _will have it_ Pygmæi, _yet in the_ Septuagint, _it is no more than Watchman; and so in the_ Arabick _and_ High-Dutch. _In the_ Chalde, Cappadocians, _in_ Symmachus, Medes, _and in the_ French, _those of_ Gamed. Theodotian _of old, and_ Tremillius _of late, have retained the Textuary word; and so have the_ Italian, Low Dutch, _and_ English _Translators, that is, the Men of_ Arvad _were upon thy Walls round about, and the_ Gammadims _were in thy Towers._

_Nor do Men only dissent in the Translation of the word, but in the Exposition of the Sense and Meaning thereof; for some by_ Gammadims _understand a People of_ Syria, _so called from the City of_ Gamala; _some hereby understand the_ Cappadocians, _many the_ Medes: _and hereof_ Forerius _hath a singular Exposition, conceiving the Watchmen of_ Tyre, _might well be called_ Pygmies, _the Towers of that City being so high, that unto Men below, they appeared in a Cubital Stature. Others expound it quite contrary to common Acception, that is not Men of the least, but of the largest size; so doth_ Cornelius _construe_ Pygmæi, _or_ Viri Cubitales, _that is, not Men of a Cubit high, but of the largest Stature, whose height like that of Giants, is rather to be taken by the Cubit than the Foot; in which phrase we read the measure of_ Goliah, _whose height is said to be six Cubits and span. Of affinity hereto is also the Exposition of_ Jerom; _not taking_ Pygmies _for Dwarfs, but stout and valiant Champions; not taking the sense of [Greek: pygmae], which signifies the Cubit measure, but that which expresseth Pugils; that is, Men fit for Combat and the Exercise of the Fist. Thus there can be no satisfying illation from this Text, the diversity, or rather contrariety of Expositions and Interpretations, distracting more than confirming the Truth of the Story._

But why _Aldrovandus_ or _Caspar Bartholine_ should bring in St. _Austin_ as a Favourer of this Opinion of _Men Pygmies_, I see no Reason. To me he seems to assert quite the contrary: For proposing this Question, _An ex propagine_ Adam _vel filiorum_ Noe, _quædam genera Hominum Monstrosa prodierunt?_ He mentions a great many monstrous Nations of _Men_, as they are described by the _Indian Historians_, and amongst the rest, the _Pygmies_, the _Sciopodes_, &c. And adds, _Quid dicam de_ Cynocephalis, _quorum Canina Capita atque ipse Latratus magis Bestias quàm Homines confitentur? Sed omnia Genera Hominum, quæ dicuntur esse, esse credere, non est necesse._ And afterwards so fully expresses himself in favour of the _Hypothesis_ I am here maintaining, that I think it a great Confirmation of it. _Nam & Simias_ (saith he) _& Cercopithecos, & Sphingas, si nesciremus non Homines esse, sed Bestias, possent isti Historici de sua Curiositate gloriantes velut Gentes Aliquas Hominum nobis impunitâ vanitate mentiri._ At last he concludes and determines the Question thus, _Aut illa, quæ talia de quibusdam Gentibus scripta sunt, omnino nulla sunt, aut si sunt, Homines non sunt, aut ex_ Adam _sunt si Homines sunt._

There is nothing therefore in St. _Austin_ that justifies the being of _Men Pygmies_, or that the _Pygmies_ were _Men_; he rather makes them _Apes_. And there is nothing in his _Scholiast Ludovicus Vives_ that tends this way, he only quotes from other Authors, what might illustrate the Text he is commenting upon, and no way asserts their being _Men_. I shall therefore next enquire into _Bochartus_'s Opinion, who would have them to be the _Nubæ_ or _Nobæ_. _Hos Nubas Troglodyticos_ (saith[A] he) _ad Avalitem Sinum esse Pygmæos Veterum multa probant._ He gives us five Reasons to prove this. As, 1. The Authority of _Hesychius_, who saith, [Greek: Noboi Pygmaioi]. 2. Because _Homer_ places the _Pygmies_ near the Ocean, where the Nubæ were. 3. _Aristotle_ places them at the lakes of the _Nile_. Now by the _Nile Bochartus_ tells us, we must understand the _Astaborus_, which the Ancients thought to be a Branch of the _Nile_, as he proves from _Pliny, Solinus_ and _Æthicus_. And _Ptolomy_ (he tells us) places the _Nubæ_ hereabout. 4. Because _Aristotle_ makes the _Pygmies_ to be _Troglodytes_, and so were the _Nubæ_. 5. He urges that Story of _Nonnosus_ which I have already mentioned, and thinks that those that _Nonnosus_ met with, were a Colony of the _Nubæ_; but afterwards adds, _Quos tamen absit ut putemus Staturâ fuisse Cubitali, prout Poetæ fingunt, qui omnia in majus augent._ But this methinks spoils them from being _Pygmies_; several other Nations at this rate may be _Pygmies_ as well as these _Nubæ_. Besides, he does not inform us, that these _Nubæ_ used to fight the _Cranes_; and if they do not, and were not _Cubitales_, they can't be _Homer_'s _Pygmies_, which we are enquiring after. But the Notion of their being _Men_, had so possessed him, that it put him upon fancying they must be the _Nubæ_; but 'tis plain that those in _Nonnosus_ could not be a Colony of the _Nubæ_; for then the _Nubæ_ must have understood their Language, which the _Text_ saith, none of the Neighbourhood did. And because the _Nubæ_ are _Troglodytes_, that therefore they must be _Pygmies_, is no Argument at all. For _Troglodytes_ here is used as an _Adjective_; and there is a sort of _Sparrow_ which is called _Passer Troglodytes_. Not but that in _Africa_ there was a Nation of _Men_ called _Troglodytes_, but quite different from our _Pygmies_. How far _Bochartus_ may be in the right, in guessing the Lakes of the _Nile_ (whereabout _Aristotle_ places the _Pygmies_) to be the Fountains of the River _Astaborus_, which in his description, and likewise the _Map_, he places in the Country of the _Avalitæ_, near the _Mossylon Emporium_; I shall not enquire. This I am certain of, he misrepresents _Aristotle_ where he tells us,[B] _Quamvis in ea fabula hoc saltem verum esse asserat Philosophus, Pusillos Homines in iis locis degere_: for as I have already observed; _Aristotle_ in that _Text_ saith nothing at all of their being _Men_: the contrary rather might be thence inferred, that they were _Brutes_. And _Bochart's_ Translation, as well as _Gaza's_ is faulty here, and by no means to be allowed, _viz. Ut aiunt, genus ibi parvum est tam Hominum, quàm Equorum_; which had _Bochartus_ considered he would not have been so fond it may be of his _Nubæ_. And if the [Greek: Noboi Pygmaioi] in _Hesychius_ are such _Pygmies_ as _Bochartus_ makes his _Nubæ, Quos tamen absit ut putemus staturtâ fuisse Cubitali_, it will not do our business at all; and neither _Homer's_ Authority, nor _Aristotle's_ does him any Service.

[Footnote A: _Sam. Bochart. Geograph. Sacræ_, Part. 1. lib. 2. cap. 23. p.m. 142.]

[Footnote B: _Bocharti Hierozoici pars Posterior_, lib. I. cap. II. p. 76.]