A Philological Essay Concerning the Pygmies of the Ancients

by Edward Tyson

A PHILOLOGICAL ESSAY

Concerning the PYGMIES, THE CYNOCEPHALI, THE SATYRS and SPHINGES OF THE
ANCIENTS,

Wherein it will appear that they were all either APES or MONKEYS; and not
MEN, as formerly pretended.

By Edward Tyson M.D.

A Philological Essay Concerning the PYGMIES OF THE ANCIENTS.

Having had the Opportunity of Dissecting this remarkable Creature, which not only in the outward shape of the Body, but likewise in the structure of many of the Inward Parts, so nearly resembles a Man, as plainly appears by the Anatomy I have here given of it, it suggested the Thought to me, whether this sort of Animal, might not give the Foundation to the Stories of the Pygmies and afford an occasion not only to the Poets, but Historians too, of inventing the many Fables and wonderful and merry Relations, that are transmitted down to us concerning them? I must confess, I could never before entertain any other Opinion about them, but that the whole was a Fiction: and as the first Account we have of them, was from a Poet, so that they were only a Creature of the Brain, produced by a warm and wanton Imagination, and that they never had any Existence or Habitation elsewhere.

In this Opinion I was the more confirmed, because the most diligent Enquiries of late into all the Parts of the inhabited World, could never discover any such Puny diminutive Race of Mankind. That they should be totally destroyed by the Cranes, their Enemies, and not a Straggler here and there left remaining, was a Fate, that even those Animals that are constantly preyed upon by others, never undergo. Nothing therefore appeared to me more Fabulous and Romantick, than their History, and the Relations about them, that Antiquity has delivered to us. And not only Strabo of old, but our greatest Men of Learning of late, have wholly exploded them, as a mere figment; invented only to amuse, and divert the Reader with the Comical Narration of their Atchievements, believing that there were never any such Creatures in Nature.

This opinion had so fully obtained with me, that I never thought it worth the Enquiry, how they came to invent such Extravagant Stories: Nor should I now, but upon the Occasion of Dissecting this Animal: For observing that 'tis call'd even to this day in the Indian or Malabar Language, Orang-Outang, i.e. a Man of the Woods, or Wild-men; and being brought from Africa, that part of the World, where the Pygmies are said to inhabit; and it's present Stature likewise tallying so well with that of the Pygmies of the Ancients; these Considerations put me upon the search, to inform my self farther about them, and to examine, whether I could meet with any thing that might illustrate their History. For I thought it strange, that if the whole was but a meer Fiction, that so many succeeding Generations should be so fond of preserving a Story, that had no Foundation at all in Nature; and that the Ancients should trouble themselves so much about them. If therefore I can make out in this Essay, that there were such Animals as Pygmies; and that they were not a Race of Men, but Apes; and can discover the Authors, who have forged all, or most of the idle Stories concerning them; and shew how the Cheat in after Ages has been carried on, by embalming the Bodies of Apes, then exposing them for the Men of the Country, from whence they brought them: If I can do this, I shall think my time not wholly lost, nor the trouble altogether useless, that I have had in this Enquiry.

My Design is not to justifie all the Relations that have been given of this Animal, even by Authors of reputed Credit; but, as far as I can, to distinguish Truth from Fable; and herein, if what I assert amounts to a Probability, 'tis all I pretend to. I shall accordingly endeavour to make it appear, that not only the Pygmies of the Ancients, but also the Cynocephali, and Satyrs and Sphinges were only Apes or Monkeys, not Men, as they have been represented. But the Story of the Pygmies being the greatest Imposture, I shall chiefly concern my self about them, and shall be more concise on the others, since they will not need so strict an Examination.

We will begin with the Poet Homer, who is generally owned as the first Inventor of the Fable of the Pygmies, if it be a Fable, and not a true Story, as I believe will appear in the Account I shall give of them. Now Homer only mentions them in a Simile, wherein he compares the Shouts that the Trojans made, when they were going to joyn Battle with the Græcians, to the great Noise of the Cranes, going to fight the Pygmies: he saith,[A]

[Greek: Ai t' epei oun cheimona phygon, kai athesphaton ombron
Klangae tai ge petontai ep' okeanoio rhoaon
'Andrasi pygmaioisi phonon kai kaera pherousai.] i.e.

Quæ simul ac fugere Imbres, Hyememque Nivalem Cum magno Oceani clangore ferantur ad undas Pygmæis pugnamque Viris, cædesque ferentes.

[Footnote A: Homer. Iliad. lib. 3. ver. 4.]

Or as Helius Eobanus Hessus paraphrases the whole.[A]

Postquam sub Ducibus digesta per agmina stabant
Quæque fuis, Equitum turmæ, Peditumque Cohortes,
Obvia torquentes Danais vestigia Troës
Ibant, sublato Campum clamore replentes:
Non secus ac cuneata Gruum sublime volantum
Agmina, dum fugiunt Imbres, ac frigora Brumæ,
Per Coelum matutino clangore feruntur,
Oceanumque petunt, mortem exitiumque cruentum
Irrita Pigmæis moturis arma ferentes.

[Footnote A: Homeri Ilias Latino Carmine reddita ab Helio Eobano Hesso.]

By [Greek: andrasi pygmaioisi] therefore, which is the Passage upon which they have grounded all their fabulous Relations of the Pygmies, why may not Homer mean only Pygmies or Apes like Men. Such an Expression is very allowable in a Poet, and is elegant and significant, especially since there is so good a Foundation in Nature for him to use it, as we have already seen, in the Anatomy of the Orang-Outang. Nor is a Poet tied to that strictness of Expression, as an Historian or Philosopher; he has the liberty of pleasing the Reader's Phancy, by Pictures and Representations of his own. If there be a becoming likeness, 'tis all that he is accountable for. I might therefore here make the same Apology for him, as Strabo[A] do's on another account for his Geography, [Greek: ou gar kat' agnoian ton topikon legetai, all' haedonaes kai terpseos charin]. That he said it, not thro' Ignorance, but to please and delight: Or, as in another place he expresses himself,[B] [Greek: ou gar kat' agnoian taes istorias hypolaepteon genesthai touto, alla tragodias charin]. Homer did not make this slip thro' Ignorance of the true History, but for the Beauty of his Poem. So that tho' he calls them Men Pygmies, yet he may mean no more by it, than that they were like Men. As to his Purpose, 'twill serve altogether as well, whether this bloody Battle be fought between the Cranes and Pygmæan Men, or the Cranes and Apes, which from their Stature he calls Pygmies, and from their shape Men; provided that when the Cranes go to engage, they make a mighty terrible noise, and clang enough to fright these little Wights their mortal Enemies. To have called them only Apes, had been flat and low, and lessened the grandieur of the Battle. But this Periphrasis of them, [Greek: andres pygmaioi], raises the Reader's Phancy, and surprises him, and is more becoming the Language of an Heroic Poem.

[Footnote A: Strabo Geograph. lib. 1. p.m. 25.]

[Footnote B: Strabo ibid. p.m. 30.]

But how came the Cranes and Pygmies to fall out? What may be the Cause of this Mortal Feud, and constant War between them? For Brutes, like Men, don't war upon one another, to raise and encrease their Glory, or to enlarge their Empire. Unless I can acquit my self herein, and assign some probable Cause hereof, I may incur the same Censure as Strabo[A] passed on several of the Indian Historians, [Greek: enekainisan de kai taen 'Omaerikaen ton Pygmaion geranomachin trispithameis eipontes], for reviewing the Homerical Fight of the Cranes and Pygmies, which he looks upon only as a fiction of the Poet. But this had been very unbecoming Homer to take a Simile (which is designed for illustration) from what had no Foundation in Nature. His Betrachomyomachia, 'tis true, was a meer Invention, and never otherwise esteemed: But his Geranomachia hath all the likelyhood of a true Story. And therefore I shall enquire now what may be the just Occasion of this Quarrel.

[Footnote A: Strabo Geograph. lib. 2. p.m. 48.]

Athenæus[A] out of Philochorus, and so likewise Ælian[B], tell us a Story, That in the Nation of the Pygmies the Male-line failing, one Gerana was the Queen; a Woman of an admired Beauty, and whom the Citizens worshipped as a Goddess; but she became so vain and proud, as to prefer her own, before the Beauty of all the other Goddesses, at which they grew enraged; and to punish her for her Insolence, Athenæus tells us that it was Diana, but Ælian saith 'twas Juno that transformed her into a Crane, and made her an Enemy to the Pygmies that worshipped her before. But since they are not agreed which Goddess 'twas, I shall let this pass.

[Footnote A: Athenæi Deipnosoph. lib. 9 p.m. 393.]

[Footnote B: Ælian. Hist. Animal. lib. 15. cap. 29.]

Pomponius Mela will have it, and I think some others, that these cruel Engagements use to happen, upon the Cranes coming to devour the Corn the Pygmies had sowed; and that at last they became so victorious, as not only to destroy their Corn, but them also: For he tells us,[A] Fuere interiùs Pygmæi, minutum genus, & quod pro satis frugibus contra Grues dimicando, defecit. This may seem a reasonable Cause of a Quarrel; but it not being certain that the Pygmies used to sow Corn, I will not insist on this neither.

[Footnote A: Pomp. Mela de situ Orbis, lib. 3. cap. 8.]

Now what seems most likely to me, is the account that Pliny out of Megasthenes, and Strabo from Onesicritus give us; and, provided I be not obliged to believe or justifie all that they say, I could rest satisfied in great part of their Relation: For Pliny[B] tells us, Veris tempore universo agmine ad mare descendere, & Ova, Pullosque earum Alitum consumere: That in the Spring-time the whole drove of the Pygmies go down to the Sea side, to devour the Cranes Eggs and their young Ones. So likewise Onesicritus,[B] [Greek: Pros de tous trispithamous polemon einai tais Geranois (hon kai Homaeron daeloun) kai tois Perdixin, ous chaenomegetheis einai; toutous d' eklegein auton ta oa, kai phtheirein; ekei gar ootokein tas Geranous; dioper maedamou maed' oa euriskesthai Geranon, maet' oun neottia;] i.e. That there is a fight between the Pygmies and the Cranes (as Homer relates) and the Partridges which are as big as Geese; for these Pygmies gather up their Eggs, and destroy them; the Cranes laying their Eggs there; and neither their Eggs, nor their Nests, being to be found any where else. 'Tis plain therefore from them, that the Quarrel is not out of any Antipathy the Pygmies have to the Cranes, but out of love to their own Bellies. But the Cranes finding their Nests to be robb'd, and their young Ones prey'd on by these Invaders, no wonder that they should so sharply engage them; and the least they could do, was to fight to the utmost so mortal an Enemy. Hence, no doubt, many a bloody Battle happens, with various success to the Combatants; sometimes with great slaughter of the long-necked Squadron; sometimes with great effusion of Pygmæan blood. And this may well enough, in a Poet's phancy, be magnified, and represented as a dreadful War; and no doubt of it, were one a Spectator of it, 'twould be diverting enough.

[Footnote A: Plinij. Hist. Nat. lib. 7. cap. 2. p.m. 13.]

[Footnote B: Strab. Geograph. lib. 15. pag. 489.]

——-Si videas hoc
Gentibus in nostris, risu quatiere: sed illic,
Quanquam eadem assiduè spectantur Prælia, ridet
Nemo, ubi tota cohors pede non est altior uno.[A]

[Footnote A: Juvenal. Satyr. 13 vers. 170.]

This Account therefore of these Campaigns renewed every year on this Provocation between the Cranes and the Pygmies, contains nothing but what a cautious Man may believe; and Homer's Simile in likening the great shouts of the Trojans to the Noise of the Cranes, and the Silence of the Greeks to that of the Pygmies, is very admirable and delightful. For Aristotle[B] tells us, That the Cranes, to avoid the hardships of the Winter, take a Flight out of Scythia to the Lakes about the Nile, where the Pygmies live, and where 'tis very likely the Cranes may lay their Eggs and breed, before they return. But these rude Pygmies making too bold with them, what could the Cranes do less for preserving their Off-spring than fight them; or at least by their mighty Noise, make a shew as if they would. This is but what we may observe in all other Birds. And thus far I think our Geranomachia or Pygmæomachia looks like a true Story; and there is nothing in Homer about it, but what is credible. He only expresses himself, as a Poet should do; and if Readers will mistake his meaning, 'tis not his fault.

[Footnote B: Aristotle. Hist. Animal. lib. 8. cap. 15. Edit. Scalig.]

'Tis not therefore the Poet that is to be blamed, tho' they would father it all on him; but the fabulous Historians in after Ages, who have so odly drest up this Story by their fantastical Inventions, that there is no knowing the truth, till one hath pull'd off those Masks and Visages, wherewith they have disguised it. For tho' I can believe Homer, that there is a fight between the Cranes and Pygmies, yet I think I am no ways obliged to imagine, that when the Pygmies go to these Campaigns to fight the Cranes, that they ride upon Partridges, as Athenæas from Basilis an Indian Historian tells us; for, saith he,[A] [Greek: Basilis de en toi deuteroi ton Indikon, oi mikroi, phaesin, andres oi tais Geranois diapolemountes Perdixin ochaemati chrontai;]. For presently afterwards he tells us from Menecles, that the Pygmies not only fight the Cranes, but the Partridges too, [Greek: Meneklaes de en protae taes synagogaes oi pygmaioi, phaesi, tois perdixi, kai tais Geranois polemousi]. This I could more readily agree to, because Onesicritus, as I have quoted him already confirms it; and gives us the same reason for this as for fighting the Cranes, because they rob their Nests. But whether these Partridges are as big as Geese, I leave as a Quære.

[Footnote A: Athenæi Deipnesoph. lib. p. 9. m. 390.]

Megasthenes methinks in Pliny mounts the Pygmies for this expedition much better, for he sets them not on a Pegasus or Partridges, but on Rams and Goats: Fama est (saith Pliny[A]) insedentes Arietum Caprarumque dorsis, armatis sagittis, veris tempore universo agmine ad mare descendere. And Onesicritus in Strabo tells us, That a Crane has been often observed to fly from those parts with a brass Sword fixt in him, [Greek: pleistakis d' ekpiptein geranon chalkaen echousan akida apo ton ekeithen plaegmaton.][B] But whether the Pygmies do wear Swords, may be doubted. 'Tis true, Ctesias tells us,[C] That the King of India every fifth year sends fifty Thousand Swords, besides abundance of other Weapons, to the Nation of the Cynocephali, (a fort of Monkeys, as I shall shew) that live in those Countreys, but higher up in the Mountains: But he makes no mention of any such Presents to the poor Pygmies; tho' he assures us, that no less than three Thousand of these Pygmies are the Kings constant Guards: But withal tells us, that they are excellent Archers, and so perhaps by dispatching their Enemies at a distance, they may have no need of such Weapons to lye dangling by their sides. I may therefore be mistaken in rendering [Greek: akida] a Sword; it may be any other sharp pointed Instrument or Weapon, and upon second Thoughts, shall suppose it a sort of Arrow these cunning Archers use in these Engagements.

[Footnote A: Plinij. Nat. Hist. lib. 7. cap. 2. p. 13.]

[Footnote B: Strabo Geograph. lib. 15. p. 489.]

[Footnote C: Vide Photij. Biblioth.]

These, and a hundred such ridiculous Fables, have the Historians invented of the Pygmies, that I can't but be of Strabo's mind,[A] [Greek: Rhadion d' an tis Haesiodio, kai Homaeroi pisteuseien haeroologousi, kai tois tragikois poiaetais, hae Ktaesiai te kai Haerodotoi, kai Hellanikoi, kai allois toioutois;] i.e. That one may sooner believe Hesiod, and Homer, and the Tragick Poets speaking of their Hero's, than Ctesias and Herodotus and Hellanicus and such like. So ill an Opinion had Strabo of the Indian Historians in general, that he censures them all as fabulous;[B] [Greek: Hapantes men toinun hoi peri taes Indikaes grapsantes hos epi to poly pseudologoi gegonasi kath' hyperbolaen de Daeimachos; ta de deutera legei Megasthenaes, Onaesikritos te kai Nearchos, kai alloi toioutoi;] i.e. All who have wrote of India for the most part, are fabulous, but in the highest degree Daimachus; then Megasthenes, Onesicritus, and Nearchus, and such like. And as if it had been their greatest Ambition to excel herein, Strabo[C] brings in Theopompus, as bragging, [Greek: Hoti kai mythous en tais Historiais erei kreitton, ae hos Haerodotos, kai Ktaesias, kai Hellanikos, kai hoi ta Hindika syngrapsantes;] That he could foist in Fables into History, better than Herodotus and Ctesias and Hellanicus, and all that have wrote of India. The Satyrist therefore had reason to say,

——-Et quicquid Græcia mendax Audet in Historia.[D]

[Footnote A: Strabo Geograph. lib. 11. p.m. 350.]

[Footnote B: Strabo ibid. lib. 2. p.m. 48.]

[Footnote C: Strabo ibid. lib. 1 p.m. 29.]

[Footnote D: Juvenal. Satyr. X. vers. 174.]

Aristotle,[A] 'tis true, tells us, [Greek: Holos de ta men agria agriotera en tae Asia, andreiotera de panta ta en taei Europaei, polymorphotata de ta en taei libyaei; kai legetai de tis paroimia, hoti aei pherei ti libyae kainon;] i.e. That generally the Beasts are wilder in Asia, stronger in Europe, and of greater variety of shapes in Africa; for as the Proverb saith, Africa always produces something new. Pliny[B] indeed ascribes it to the Heat of the Climate, Animalium, Hominumque effigies monstriferas, circa extremitates ejus gigni, minimè mirum, artifici ad formanda Corpora, effigiesque cælandas mobilitate igneâ. But Nature never formed a whole Species of Monsters; and 'tis not the heat of the Country, but the warm and fertile Imagination of these Historians, that has been more productive of them, than Africa it self; as will farther appear by what I shall produce out of them, and particularly from the Relation that Ctesias makes of the Pygmies.

[Footnote A: Aristotle Hist. Animal, lib. 8. cap. 28.]

[Footnote B: Plin. Nat. Hist. lib. 6. cap. 30. p.m. 741.]

I am the more willing to instance in Ctesias, because he tells his Story roundly; he no ways minces it; his Invention is strong and fruitful; and that you may not in the least mistrust him, he pawns his word, that all that he writes, is certainly true: And so successful he has been, how Romantick soever his Stories may appear, that they have been handed down to us by a great many other Authors, and of Note too; tho' some at the same time have looked upon them as mere Fables. So that for the present, till I am better informed, and I am not over curious in it, I shall make Ctesias, and the other Indian Historians, the Inventors of the extravagant Relations we at present have of the Pygmies, and not old Homer. He calls them, 'tis true, from something of Resemblance of their shape, [Greek: andres]: But these Historians make them to speak the Indian Language; to use the same Laws; and to be so considerable a Nation, and so valiant, as that the King of India makes choice of them for his Corps de Guards; which utterly spoils Homer's Simile, in making them so little, as only to fight Cranes.

Ctesias's Account therefore of the Pygmies (as I find it in Photius's Bibliotheca,[A] and at the latter end of some Editions of Herodotus) is this:

[Footnote A: Photij. Bibliothec. Cod. 72. p.m. 145.]

[Greek: Hoti en mesae tae Indikae anthropoi eisi melanes, kai kalountai pygmaioi, tois allois homoglossoi Indois. mikroi de eisi lian; hoi makrotatoi auton paecheon duo, hoi de pleistoi, henos haemiseos paecheos, komaen de echousi makrotataen, mechri kai hepi ta gonata, kai eti katoteron, kai pogona megiston panton anthropon; epeidan oun ton pogona mega physosin, ouketi amphiennyntai ouden emation: alla tas trichas, tas men ek taes kephalaes, opisthen kathientai poly kato ton gonaton; tas de ek tou po gonos, emprosthen mechri podon elkomenas. Hepeita peripykasamenoi tas trichas peri apan to soma, zonnyntai, chromenoi autais anti himatiou, aidoion de mega echousin, hoste psauein ton sphyron auton, kai pachy. autoite simoi te kai aischroi. ta de probata auton, hos andres. kai hai boes kai hoi onoi, schedon hoson krioi? kai hoi hippoi auton kai hoi aemionoi, kai ta alla panta zoa, ouden maezo krion; hepontai de toi basilei ton Indon, touton ton pygmaion andres trischilioi. sphodra gar eisi toxotai; dikaiotatoi de eisi kai nomoisi chrontai osper kai hoi Indoi. Dagoous te kai alopekas thaereuousin, ou tois kysin, alla koraxi kai iktisi kai koronais kai aetois.]

Narrat præter ista, in media India homines reperiri nigros, qui Pygmæi appellentur. Eadem hos, qua Inda reliqui, lingua uti, sed valde esse parvos, ut maximi duorum cubitorum, & plerique unius duntaxat cubiti cum dimidio altitudinem non excedant. Comam alere longissimam, ad ipsa usque genua demissam, atque etiam infra, cum barba longiore, quàm, apud ullos hominum. Quæ quidem ubi illis promissior esse cæperit, nulla deinceps veste uti: sed capillos multò infra genua à tergo demissos, barbámque præter pectus ad pedes usque defluentem, per totum corpus in orbem constipare & cingere, atque ita pilos ipsis suos vestimenti loco esse. Veretrum illis esse crassum ac longum, quod ad ipsos quoque pedum malleolos pertingat. Pygmeos hosce simis esse naribus, & deformes. Ipsorum item oves agnorem nostrotum instar esse; boves & asinos, arietum fere magnitudine, equos item multosque & cætera jumenta omnia nihilo esse nostris arietibus majora. Tria horum Pygmæorum millia Indorum regem in suo comitatu habere, quod sagittarij sint peritissimi. Summos esse justitiæ cultores iisdemque quibus Indi reliqui, legibus parere. Venari quoque lepores vulpesque, non canibus, sed corvis, milvis, cornicibus, aquilis adhibitis.

In the middle of India (saith Ctesias) there are black Men, they are call'd Pygmies, using the same Language, as the other Indians; they are very little, the tallest of them being but two Cubits, and most of them but a Cubit and a half high. They have very long hair, reaching down to their Knees and lower; and a Beard larger than any Man's. After their Beards are grown long, they wear no Cloaths, but the Hair of their Head falls behind a great deal below their Hams; and that of their Beards before comes down to their Feet: then laying their Hair thick all about their Body, they afterwards gird themselves, making use of their Hair for Cloaths. They have a Penis so long, that it reaches to the Ancle, and the thickness is proportionable. They are flat nosed and ill favoured. Their Sheep are like Lambs; and their Oxen and Asses scarce as big as Rams; and their Horses and Mules, and all their other Cattle not bigger. Three thousand Men of these Pygmies do attend the King of India. They are good Archers; they are very just, and use the same Laws as the Indians do. They kill Hares and Foxes, not with Dogs, but with Ravens, Kites, Crows, and Eagles.'

Well, if they are so good Sports-men, as to kill Hares and Foxes with Ravens, Kites, Crows and Eagles, I can't see how I can bring off Homer, for making them fight the Cranes themselves. Why did they not fly their Eagles against them? these would make greater Slaughter and Execution, without hazarding themselves. The only excuse I have is, that Homer's Pygmies were real Apes like Men; but those of Ctesias were neither Men nor Pygmies; only a Creature begot in his own Brain, and to be found no where else.

Ctesias was Physician to Artaxerxes Mnemon as Diodorus Siculus[A] and Strabo[B] inform us. He was contemporary with Xenophon, a little later than Herodotus; and Helvicus in his Chronology places him three hundred eighty three years before Christ: He is an ancient Author, 'tis true, and it may be upon that score valued by some. We are beholden to him, not only for his Improvements on the Story of the Pygmies, but for his Remarks likewise on several other parts of Natural History; which for the most part are all of the same stamp, very wonderful and incredible; as his Mantichora, his Gryphins, the horrible Indian Worm, a Fountain of Liquid Gold, a Fountain of Honey, a Fountain whose Water will make a Man confess all that ever he did, a Root he calls [Greek: paraebon], that will attract Lambs and Birds, as the Loadstone does filings of Steel; and a great many other Wonders he tells us: all of which are copied from him by Ælian, Pliny, Solinus, Mela, Philostratus, and others. And Photius concludes Ctesias's Account of India with this passage; [Greek: Tauta graphon kai mythologon Ktaesias. legei t' alaethestata graphein; epagon hos ta men autos idon graphei, ta de par auton mathon ton eidoton. polla de touton kai alla thaumasiotera paralipein, dia to mae doxai tois mae tauta theasamenois apista syngraphein;] i.e. These things (saith he) Ctesias writes and feigns, but he himself says all he has wrote is very true. Adding, that some things which he describes, he had seen himself; and the others he had learn'd from those that had seen them: That he had omitted a great many other things more wonderful, because he would not seem to those that have not seen them, to write incredibilities. But notwithstanding all this, Lucian[C] will not believe a word he saith; for he tells us that Ctesias has wrote of India, [Greek: A maete autos eide, maete allou eipontos aekousen], What he neither saw himself, nor ever heard from any Body else. And Aristotle tells us plainly, he is not fit to be believed: [Greek: En de taei Indikaei hos phaesi Ktaesias, ouk on axiopistos.][D] And the same opinion A. Gellius[E] seems to have of him, as he had likewise of several other old Greek Historians which happened to fall into his hands at Brundusium, in his return from Greece into Italy; he gives this Character of them and their performance: Erant autem isti omnes libri Græci, miraculorum fabularumque pleni: res inauditæ, incredulæ, Scriptores veteres non parvæ authoritatis, Aristeas Proconnesius, & Isagonus, & Nicæensis, & Ctesias, & Onesicritus, & Polystephanus, & Hegesias. Not that I think all that Ctesias has wrote is fabulous; For tho' I cannot believe his speaking Pygmies, yet what he writes of the Bird he calls [Greek: Bittakos], that it would speak Greek and the Indian Language, no doubt is very true; and as H. Stephens[F] observes in his Apology for Ctesias, such a Relation would seem very surprising to one, that had never seen nor heard of a Parrot.

[Footnote A: Diodor. Siculi Bibliothec. lib. 2. p.m. 118.]

[Footnote B: Strabo Geograph. lib. 14. p. 451.]

[Footnote C: Lucian lib 1. veræ Histor. p.m. 373.]

[Footnote D: Arist. Hist. Animal. lib. 8. cap. 28.]

[Footnote E: A. Gellij. Noctes. Attic. lib. 9. cap. 4.]

[Footnote F: Henr. Stephani de Ctesia Historico antiquissimo disquisitio, ad finem Herodoti.]

But this Story of Ctesias's speaking Pygmies, seems to be confirm'd by the Account that Nonnosus, the Emperour Justinian's Ambassador into Æthiopia, gives of his Travels. I will transcribe the Passage, as I find it in Photius,[A] and 'tis as follows:

[Footnote A: Photij. Bibliothec. cod. 3. p.m. 7.]

[Greek: Hoti apo taes pharsan pleonti toi Nonnosoi, epi taen eschataen ton naeson kataentaekoti toion de ti synebae, thauma kai akousai. enetuche gar tisi morphaen men kai idean echousin anthropinaen, brachytatois de to megethos, kai melasi taen chroan. hypo de trichon dedasysmenois dia pantos tou somatos. heiponto de tois andrasi kai gynaikes paraplaesiai kai paidaria eti brachytera, ton par autois andron. gymnoi de aesan hapantes; plaen dermati tini mikroi taen aido periekalypron, hoi probebaekotes homoios andres te kai gynaikes. agrion de ouden eped eiknynto oude anaemeron; alla kai phonaen eichon men anthropinaen, agnoston de pantapasi taen dialekton tois te perioikois hapasi, kai polloi pleon tois peri taen Nonnoson, diezon de ek thalattion ostreion, kai ichthyon, ton apo taes thalassaes eis taen naeson aporrhiptomenon; tharsos de eichon ouden. alla kai horontes tous kath' haemas anthropous hypeptaesan, hosper haemeis ta meiso ton thaerion.]

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.]

But this Fable of Men Pygmies has not only obtained amongst the Greeks and Indian Historians: the Arabians likewise tell much such Stories of them, as the same learned Bochartus informs us. I will give his Latin Translation of one of them, which he has printed in Arabick also: Arabes idem (saith[A] Bochartus) referunt ex cujusdam Græculi fide, qui Jacobo Isaaci filio, Sigariensi fertur ita narrasse. Navigabam aliquando in mari Zingitano, & impulit me ventus in quandam Insulam. In cujus Oppidum cum devenissem, reperi Incolas Cubitalis esse staturæ, & plerosque Coclites. Quorum multitudo in me congregata me deduxit ad Regem suum. Fussit is, ut Captivus detinerer; & inquandam Caveæ speciem conjectus sum; eos autem aliquando ad bellum instrui cum viderem, dixerunt Hostem imminere, & fore ut propediem ingrueret. Nec multò post Gruum exercitus in eos insurrexit. Atque ideo erant Coclites, quod eorum oculos hæ confodissent. Atque Ego, virgâ assumptâ, in eas impetum feci, & illæ avolârunt atque aufugerunt; ob quod facinus in honore fui apud illos. This Author, it seems, represents them under the same Misfortune with the Poet, who first mentioned them, as being blind, by having their Eyes peck'd out by their cruel Enemies. Such an Accident possibly might happen now and then, in these bloody Engagements, tho' I wonder the Indian Historians have not taken notice of it. However the Pygmies shewed themselves grateful to their Deliverer, in heaping Honours on him. One would guess, for their own sakes, they could not do less than make him their Generalissimo; but our Author is modest in not declaring what they were.

[Footnote A: Bochartus ibid. p.m. 77.]

Isaac Vossius seems to unsettle all, and endeavours utterly to ruine the whole Story: for he tells us, If you travel all over Africa, you shall not meet with either a Crane or Pygmie: Se mirari (saith[A] Isaac Vossius) Aristotelem, quod tam seriò affirmet non esse fabellam, quæ de Pygmæis & Bello, quod cum Gruibus gerant, narrantur. Si quis totam pervadat Africam, nullas vel Grues vel Pygmæos inveniet. Now one would wonder more at Vossius, that he should assert this of Aristotle, which he never said. And since Vossius is so mistaken in what he relates of Aristotle; where he might so easily have been in the right, 'tis not improbable, but he may be out in the rest too: For who has travelled all Africa over, that could inform him? And why should he be so peremptory in the Negative, when he had so positive an Affirmation of Aristotle to the contrary? or if he would not believe Aristotle's Authority, methinks he should Aristophanes's, who tells us,[B] [Greek: Speirein hotau men Geranos kroizon es taen libyaen metachorae]. 'Tis time to sow when the noisy Cranes take their flight into Libya. Which Observation is likewise made by Hesiod, Theognis, Aratus, and others. And Maximus Tyrius (as I find him quoted in Bochartus) saith, [Greek: Hai geravoi ex Aigyptou ora therous aphistamenai, ouk anechomenai to thalpos teinasai pterygas hosper istia, pherontai dia tou aeros euthy ton Skython gaes]. i.e. Grues per æstatem ex Ægypto abscedentes, quia Calorem pati non possunt, alis velorum instar expansis, per aerem ad Scythicam plagam rectà feruntur. Which fully confirms that Migration of the Cranes that Aristotle mentions.

[Footnote A: Isaac Vossius de Nili aliorumque stuminum Origine, Cap. 18.]

[Footnote B: Aristophanes in Nubibus.]

But Vossius I find, tho' he will not allow the Cranes, yet upon second Thoughts did admit of Pygmies here: For this Story of the Pygmies and the Cranes having made so much noise, he thinks there may be something of truth in it; and then gives us his Conjecture, how that the Pygmies may be those Dwarfs, that are to be met with beyond the Fountains of the Nile; but that they do not fight Cranes but Elephants, and kill a great many of them, and drive a considerable Traffick for their teeth with the Jagi, who sell them to those of Congo and the Portuguese. I will give you Vossius's own words; Attamen (saith[A] he) ut solent fabellæ non de nihilo fingi & aliquod plerunque continent veri, id ipsum quoque que hìc factum esse existimo. Certum quippe est ultra Nili fontes multos reperiri Nanos, qui tamen non cum Gruibus, sed cum Elephantis perpetuum gerant bellum. Præcipuum quippe Eboris commercium in regno magni Macoki per istos transigitur Homunciones; habitant in Sylvis, & mira dexteritate Elephantos sagittis conficiunt. Carnibus vescuntur, Dentes verô Jagis divendunt, illi autem Congentibus & Lusitanis.

[Footnote A: Isaac Vossius ibid.]

Job Ludolphus[A] in his Commentary on his Æthiopick History remarks, That there was never known a Nation all of Dwarfs. Nani quippe (saith Ludolphus) Naturæ quodam errore ex aliis justæ staturæ hominibus generantur. Qualis verô ea Gens sit, ex qua ista Naturæ Ludibria tantâ copiâ proveniant, Vossium docere oportelat, quia Pumiliones Pumiles alios non gignunt, sed plerunque steriles sunt, experientia teste; ut planè non opus habuerunt Doctores Talmudici Nanorum matrimonia prohibere, ne Digitales ex iis nascerentur. Ludolphus it may be is a little too strict with Vossius for calling them Nani; he may only mean a sort of Men in that Country of less Stature than ordinary. And Dapper in his History of Africa, from whom Vossius takes this Account, describes such in the Kingdom of Mokoko, he calls Mimos, and tells us that they kill Elephants. But I see no reason why Vossius should take these Men for the Pygmies of the Ancients, or think that they gave any occasion or ground for the inventing this Fable, is there was no other reason, this was sufficient, because they were able to kill the Elephants. The Pygmies were scarce a Match for the Cranes; and for them to have encountered an Elephant, were as vain an Attempt, as the Pygmies were guilty of in Philostratus[B] 'who to revenge the Death of Antæus, having found Hercules napping in Libya, mustered up all their Forces against him. One Phalanx (he tells us) assaulted his left hand; but against his right hand, that being the stronger, two Phalanges were appointed. The Archers and Slingers besieged his feet, admiring the hugeness of his Thighs: But against his Head, as the Arsenal, they raised Batteries, the King himself taking his Post there. They set fire to his Hair, put Reaping-hooks in his Eyes; and that he might not breath, clapp'd Doors to his Mouth and Nostrils; but all the Execution that they could do, was only to awake him, which when done, deriding their folly, he gather'd them all up in his Lion's Skin, and carried them (Philostratus thinks) to Euristhenes.' This Antæus was as remarkable for his height, as the Pygmies were for their lowness of Stature: For Plutarch[C] tells us, that Q. Sterorius not being willing to trust Common Fame, when he came to Tingis (now Tangier) he caused Antæus's Sepulchre to be opened, and found his Corps full threescore Cubits long. But Sterorius knew well enough how to impose upon the Credulity of the People, as is evident from the Story of his white Hind, which Plutarch likewise relates.

[Footnote A: Job Ludolphus in Comment, in Historiam Æthiopicam, p.m. 71.]

[Footnote B: Philostratus. Icon. lib. 2. p.m. 817.]

[Footnote C: Plutarch. in vita Q. Sertorij.]

But to return to our Pygmies; tho' most of the great and learned Men would seem to decry this Story as a Fiction and mere Fable, yet there is something of Truth, they think, must have given the first rise to it, and that it was not wholly the product of Phancy, but had some real foundation, tho' disguised, according to the different Imagination and Genius of the Relator: 'Tis this that has incited them to give their several Conjectures about it. Job Ludolphus finding what has been offered at in Relation to the Pygmies, not to satisfie, he thinks he can better account for this Story, by leaving out the Cranes, and placing in their stead, another sort of Bird he calls the Condor. I will give you his own words: Sed ad Pygmæos (saith [A] Ludolphus) revertamur; fabula de Geranomachia Pygmæorum seu pugna cum Gruibus etiam aliquid de vero trahere videtur, si pro Gruibus Condoras intelligas, Aves in interiore Africa maximas, ut fidem penè excedat; aiunt enim quod Ales ista vitulum Elephanti in Aerem extollere possit; ut infra docebimus. Cum his Pygmæos pugnare, ne pecora sua rapiant, incredibile non est. Error ex eo natus videtur, quod primus Relator, alio vocabulo destitutus, Grues pro Condoris nominârit, sicuti Plautus Picos pro Gryphilus, & Romani Boves lucas pro Elephantis dixere.

[Footnote A: Job Ludolphus Comment, in Historiam suam Æthiopic. p. 73.]

'Tis true, if what Juvenal only in ridicule mentions, was to be admitted as a thing really done, that the Cranes could fly away with a Pygmie, as our Kites can with a Chicken, there might be some pretence for Ludovicus's Condor or Cunctor: For he mentions afterwards[A] out of P. Joh. dos Santos the Portuguese, that 'twas observed that one of these Condors once flew away with an Ape, Chain, Clog and all, about ten or twelve pounds weight, which he carried to a neighbouring Wood, and there devoured him. And Garcilasso de la Vega[B] relates that they will seize and fly away with a Child ten or twelve years old. But Juvenal[C] only mentions this in ridicule and merriment, where he saith,

Adsubitas Thracum volucres, nubemque sonoram
Pygmæos parvis currit Bellator in armis:
Mox impar hosti, raptusque per aera curvis
Unguibus à fævâ fertur Grue.

[Footnote A: Job Ludolphus ibid. pag. 164.]

[Footnote B: Garcilasso de la Vega Royal Comment, of Peru.]

[Footnote C: Juvenal Satyr. 13 vers. 167.]

Besides, were the Condors to be taken for the Cranes, it would utterly spoil the Pygmæomachia; for where the Match is so very unequal, 'tis impossible for the Pygmies to make the least shew of a fight. Ludolphus puts as great hardships on them, to fight these Condors, as Vossius did, in making them fight Elephants, but not with equal Success; for Vossius's Pygmies made great Slaughters of the Elephants; but Ludolphus his Cranes sweep away the Pygmies, as easily as an Owl would a Mouse, and eat them up into the bargain; now I never heard the Cranes were so cruel and barbarous to their Enemies, tho' there are some Nations in the World that are reported to do so.

Moreover, these Condor's I find are very rare to be met with; and when they are, they often appear single or but a few. Now Homer's, and the Cranes of the Ancients, are always represented in Flocks. Thus Oppian[A] as I find him translated into Latin Verse:

Et velut Æthiopum veniunt, Nilique fluenta
Turmalim Palamedis Aves, celsoeque per altum
Aera labentes fugiunt Athlanta nivosum,
Pygmæos imbelle Genus, parvumque saligant,
Non perturbato procedunt ordine densæ
Instructis volucres obscurant aëra Turmis.

To imagine these Grues a single Gigantick Bird, would much lessen the Beauty of Homer's Simile, and would not have served his turn; and there are none who have borrowed Homer's fancy, but have thought so. I will only farther instance in Baptista Mantuan:

Pygmæi breve vulgus, iners Plelecula, quando
Convenere Grues longis in prælia rostris,
Sublato clamore fremunt, dumque agmine magno
Hostibus occurrit, tellus tremit Indica, clamant
Littora, arenarum nimbis absconditur aër;
Omnis & involvit Pulvis solemque, Polumque,
Et Genus hoc Hominum naturâ imbelle, quietum,
Mite, facit Mavors pugnax, immane Cruentum.

[Footnote: A Oppian lib. I. de Piscibus.]

Having now considered and examined the various Opinions of these learned Men concerning this Pygmaeomachia; and represented the Reasons they give for maintaining their Conjectures; I shall beg leave to subjoyn my own: and if what at present I offer, may seem more probable, or account for this Story with more likelyhood, than what hath hitherto been advanced, I shall not think my time altogether misspent: But if this will not do, I shall never trouble my head more about them, nor think my self any ways concerned to write on this Argument again. And I had not done it now, but upon the occasion of Dissecting this Orang-Outang, or wild Man, which being a Native of Africa, and brought from Angola, tho' first taken higher up in the Country, as I was informed by the Relation given me; and observing so great a Resemblance, both in the outward shape, and, what surprized me more, in the Structure likewise of the inward Parts, to a Man; this Thought was easily suggested to me, That very probably this Animal, or some other such of the same Species, might give the first rise and occasion to the Stories of the Pygmies. What has been the [Greek: proton pheudos], and rendered this Story so difficult to be believed, I find hath been the Opinion that has generally obtained, that these Pygmies were really a Race of little Men. And tho' they are only Brutes, yet being at first call'd wild Men, no doubt from the Resemblance they bear to Men; there have not been wanting those especially amongst the Ancients, who have invented a hundred ridiculous Stories concerning them; and have attributed those things to them, were they to be believed in what they say, that necessarily conclude them real Men.

To sum up therefore what I have already discoursed, I think I have proved, that the Pygmies were not an Humane Species or Men. And tho' Homer, who first mentioned them, calls them [Greek: andres pygmaioi], yet we need not understand by this Expression any thing more than Apes: And tho' his Geranomachia hath been look'd upon by most only as a Poetical Fiction; yet by assigning what might be the true Cause of this Quarrel between the Cranes and Pygmies, and by divesting it of the many fabulous Relations that the Indian Historians, and others, have loaded it with, I have endeavoured to render it a true, at least a probable Story. I have instanced in Ctesias and the Indian Historians, as the Authors and Inventors of the many Fables we have had concerning them: Particularly, I have Examined those Relations, where Speech or Language is attributed to them; and shewn, that there is no reason to believe that they ever spake any Language at all. But these Indian Historians having related so many extravagant Romances of the Pygmies, as to render their whole History suspected, nay to be utterly denied, that there were ever any such Creatures as Pygmies in Nature, both by Strabo of old, and most of our learned men of late, I have endeavoured to assert the Truth of their being, from a Text in Aristotle; which being so positive in affirming their Existence, creates a difficulty, that can no ways be got over by such as are of the contrary Opinion. This Text I have vindicated from the false Interpretations and Glosses of several Great Men, who had their Minds so prepossessed and prejudiced with the Notion of Men Pygmies, that they often would quote it, and misapply it, tho' it contain'd nothing that any ways favoured their Opinion; but the contrary rather, that they were Brutes, and not Men.

And that the Pygmies were really Brutes, I think I have plainly proved out of Herodotus and Philostratus, who reckon them amongst the wild Beasts that breed in those Countries: For tho' by Herodotus they are call'd [Greek: andres agrioi], and Philostratus calls them [Greek: anthropous melanas], yet both make them [Greek: theria] or wild Beasts. And I might here add what Pausanias[A] relates from Euphemus Car, who by contrary Winds was driven upon some Islands, where he tells us, [Greek: en de tautais oikein andras agrious], but when he comes to describe them, tells us that they had no Speech; that they had Tails on their Rumps; and were very lascivious toward the Women in the Ship. But of these more, when we come to discourse of Satyrs.

[Footnote A: Pausanias in Atticis, p.m. 21.]

And we may the less wonder to find that they call Brutes Men, since 'twas common for these Historians to give the Title of Men, not only to Brutes, but they were grown so wanton in their Inventions, as to describe several Nations of Monstrous Men, that had never any Being, but in their own Imagination, as I have instanced in several. I therefore excuse Strabo, for denying the Pygmies, since he could not but be convinced, they could not be such Men, as these Historians have described them. And the better to judge of the Reasons that some of the Moderns have given to prove the Being of Men Pygmies, I have laid down as Postulata's, that hereby we must not understand Dwarfs, nor yet a Nation of Men, tho' somewhat of a lesser size and stature than ordinary; but we must observe those two Characteristicks that Homer gives of them, that they are Cubitales and fight Cranes.

Having premised this, I have taken into consideration Caspar Bartholine Senior his Opusculum de Pygmæis, and Jo. Talentonius's Dissertation about them: and upon examination do find, that neither the Humane Authorities, nor Divine that they alledge, do any ways prove, as they pretend, the Being of Men Pygmies. St. Austin, who is likewise quoted on their side, is so far from favouring this Opinion, that he doubts whether any such Creatures exist, and if they do, concludes them to be Apes or Monkeys; and censures those Indian Historians for imposing such Beasts upon us, as distinct Races of Men. Julius Cæsar Scaliger, and Isaac Casaubon, and Adrian Spigelius utterly deny the Being of Pygmies, and look upon them as a Figment only of the Ancients, because such little Men as they describe them to be, are no where to be met with in all the World. The Learned Bochartus tho' he esteems the Geranomachia to be a Fable, and slights it, yet thinks that what might give the occasion to the Story of the Pygmies, might be the Nubæ or Nobæ; as Isaac Vossius conjectures that it was those Dwarfs beyond the Fountains of the Nile, that Dapper calls the Mimos, and tells us, they kill Elephants for to make a Traffick with their Teeth. But Job Ludolphus alters the Scene, and instead of Cranes, substitutes his Condors, who do not fight the Pygmies, but fly away with them, and then devour them.

Now all these Conjectures do no ways account for Homer's Pygmies and Cranes, they are too much forced and strain'd. Truth is always easie and plain. In our present Case therefore I think the Orang-Outang, or wild Man, may exactly supply the place of the Pygmies, and without any violence or injury to the Story, sufficiently account for the whole History of the Pygmies, but what is most apparently fabulous; for what has been the greatest difficulty to be solved or satisfied, was their being Men; for as Gesner remarks (as I have already quoted him) Sed veterum nullus aliter de Pygmæis scripsit, quàm Homunciones esse. And the Moderns too, being byassed and misguided by this Notion, have either wholly denied them, or contented themselves in offering their Conjectures what might give the first rise to the inventing this Fable. And tho' Albertus, as I find him frequently quoted, thought that the Pygmies might be only a sort of Apes, and he is placed in the Head of those that espoused this Opinion, yet he spoils all, by his way of reasoning, and by making them speak; which was more than he needed to do.

I cannot see therefore any thing that will so fairly solve this doubt, that will reconcile all, that will so easily and plainly make out this Story, as by making the Orang-Outang to be the Pygmie of the Ancients; for 'tis the same Name that Antiquity gave them. For Herodotus's [Greek: andres agrioi], what can they be else, than Homines Sylvestres, or wild Men? as they are now called. And Homer's [Greek: andres pygmaioi], are no more an Humane Kind, or Men, then Herodotus's [Greek: andres agrioi], which he makes to be [Greek: theria], or wild Beasts: And the [Greek: andres mikroi] or [Greek: melanes] (as they are often called) were just the same. Because this sort of Apes had so great a resemblance to Men, more than other Apes or Monkeys; and they going naturally erect, and being designed by Nature to go so, (as I have shewn in the Anatomy) the Ancients had a very plausible ground for giving them this denomination of [Greek: andres] or [Greek: anthropoi], but commonly they added an Epithet; as [Greek: agrioi, mikroi, pygmaioi, melanes], or some such like. Now the Ancient Greek and Indian Historians, tho' they might know these Pygmies to be only Apes like Men, and not to be real Men, yet being so extremely addicted to Mythology, or making Fables, and finding this so fit a Subject to engraft upon, and invent Stories about, they have not been wanting in furnishing us with a great many very Romantick ones on this occasion. And the Moderns being imposed upon by them, and misguided by the Name of [Greek: andres] or [Greek: anthropoi], as if thereby must be always understood an Humane Kind, or real Men, they have altogether mistaken the Truth of the Story, and have either wholly denied it, or rendered it as improbable by their own Conjectures.

This difficulty therefore of their being called Men, I think, may fairly enough be accounted by what I have said. But it may be objected that the Orang-Outang, or these wild or savage Men are not [Greek: pygmaioi], or Trispithami, that is, but two Foot and a quarter high, because by some Relations that have been given, it appears they have been observed to be of a higher stature, and as tall as ordinary Men. Now tho' this may be allowed as to these wild Men that are bred in other places; and probably enough like wise, there are such in some Parts of the Continent of Africa; yet 'tis sufficient to our business if there are any there, that will come within our Dimensions; for our Scene lies in Africa; where Strabo observes, that generally the Beasts are of a less size than ordinary; and this he thinks might give rise to the Story of the Pygmies. For, saith he[A] [Greek: Ta de boskaemata autois esti mikra, probata kai aiges, kai kynes mikroi, tracheis de kai machimoi (oikountes mikroi ontes) tacha de kai tous pygmaious apo tes touton mikrophyias epenoaesan, kai aneplasan.] i.e. That their Beasts are small, as their Sheep, Goats and Oxen, and their Dogs are small, but hairy and fierce: and it may be (saith he) from the [Greek: mikrophyia] or littleness of the stature of these Animals, they have invented and imposed on us the Pygmies. And then adds, That no body fit to be believed ever saw them; because he fancied, as a great many others have done, that these Pygmies must be real Men, and not a sort of Brutes. Now since the other Brutes in this Country are generally of a less size than in other Parts, why may not this sort of Ape, the Orang-Outang, or wild Man, be so likewise. Aristotle speaking of the Pygmies, saith, [Greek: genos mikron men kai autoi, kai oi hippoi.] That both they and the Horses there are but small. He does not say their Horses, for they were never mounted upon Horses, but only upon Partridges, Goats and Rams. And as the Horses, and other Beasts are naturally less in Africa than in other Parts, so likewise may the Orang-Outang be. This that I dissected, which was brought from Angola (as I have often mentioned) wanted something of the just stature of the Pygmies; but it was young, and I am therefore uncertain to what tallness it might grow, when at full Age: And neither Tulpius, nor Gassendus, nor any that I have hitherto met with, have adjusted the full stature of this Animal that is found in those parts from whence ours was brought: But 'tis most certain, that there are sorts of Apes that are much less than the Pygmies are described to be. And, as other Brutes, so the Ape-kind, in different Climates, may be of different Dimensions; and because the other Brutes here are generally small, why may not they be so likewise. Or if the difference should be but little, I see no great reason in this case, why we should be over-nice, or scrupulous.

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

As to our Ape Pygmies or Orang-Outang fighting the Cranes, this, I think, may be easily enough made out, by what I have already observed; for this wild Man I dissected was Carnivorous, and it may be Omnivorous, at least as much as Man is; for it would eat any thing that was brought to the Table. And if it was not their Hunger that drove them to it, their Wantonness, it may be, would make them apt enough to rob the Cranes Nests; and if they did so, no doubt but the Cranes would noise enough about it, and endeavour what they could to beat them off, which a Poet might easily make a Fight: Tho' Homer only makes use of it as a Simile, in comparing the great Shouts of the Trojans to the Noise of the Cranes, and the Silence of the Greeks to that of the Pygmies when they are going to Engage, which is natural enough, and very just, and contains nothing, but what may easily be believed; tho' upon this account he is commonly exposed, and derided, as the Inventor of this Fable; and that there was nothing of Truth in it, but that 'twas wholly a Fiction of his own.

Those Pygmies that Paulus Jovius[A] describes, tho' they dwell at a great distance from Africa, and he calls them Men, yet are so like Apes, that I cannot think them any thing else. I will give you his own words: Ultra Lapones (saith he) in Regione inter Corum & Aquilonem perpetua oppressa Caligine Pygmæos reperiri, aliqui eximiæ fidei testes retulerunt; qui postquam ad summum adoleverint, nostratis Pueri denum annorum Mensuram vix excedunt. Meticulosum genus hominum, & garritu Sermonem exprimens, adeo ut tam Simiæ propinqui, quam Statura ac sensibus ab justæ Proceritatis homine remoti videantur. Now there is this Advantage in our Hypothesis, it will take in all the Pygmies, in any part of the World; or wherever they are to be met with, without supposing, as some have done, that 'twas the Cranes that forced them to quit their Quarters; and upon this account several Authors have described them in different places: For unless we suppose the Cranes so kind to them, as to waft them over, how came we to find them often in Islands? But this is more than can be reasonably expected from so great Enemies.

[Footnote A: Paul. Jovij de Legatione Muschovitar. lib. p.m. 489.]

I shall conclude by observing to you, that this having been the Common Error of the Age, in believing the Pygmies to be a sort of little Men, and it having been handed down from so great Antiquity, what might contribute farther to the confirming of this Mistake, might be, the Imposture of the Navigators, who failing to Parts where these Apes are, they have embalmed their Bodies, and brought them home, and then made the People believe that they were the Men of those Countries from whence they came. This M.P. Venetus assures us to have been done; and 'tis not unlikely: For, saith he,[A] Abundat quoque Regio ipsa (sc. Basman in Java majori) diversis Simiis magnis & parvis, hominibus simillimis, hos capiunt Venatores & totos depilant, nisi quod, in barba & in loco secreto Pilos relinquunt, & occisos speciebus Aromaticis condiunt, & postea desiccant, venduntque Negociatoribus, qui per diversas Orbis Partes Corpora illa deferentes, homines persuadent Tales Homunciones in Maris Insulis reperiri. Joh. Jonston[B] relates the same thing, but without quoting the Author; and as he is very apt to do, commits a great mistake, in telling us, pro Homunculis marinis venditant.

[Footnote A: M. Pauli Veneti de Regionibus Oriental. lib. 3. cap. 15. p. m. 390.]

[Footnote B: Jo. Jonston. Hist. Nat. de Quadruped. p.m. 139.]

I shall only add, That the Servile Offices that these Creatures are observed to perform, might formerly, as it does to this very day, impose upon Mankind to believe, that they were of the same Species with themselves; but that only out of Sullenness or cunning, they think they will not speak, for fear of being made Slaves. Philostratus[A] tells us, That the Indians make use of the Apes in gathering the Pepper; and for this Reason they do defend and preserve them from the Lions, who are very greedy of preying upon them: And altho' he calls them Apes, yet he speaks of them as Men, and as if they were the Husbandmen of the Pepper Trees, [Greek: kai ta dendra oi piperides, on georgoi pithekoi]. And he calls them the People of Apes; [Greek: ou legetai pithekon oikein demos en mychois tou orous]. Dapper[B] tells us, That the Indians take the Baris when young, and make them so tame, that they will do almost the work of a Slave; for they commonly go erect as Men do. They will beat Rice in a Mortar, carry Water in a Pitcher, &c. And Gassendus[C] in the Life of Pieresky, tells us, us, That they will play upon a Pipe or Cittern, or the like Musick, they will sweep the House, turn the Spit, beat in a Mortar, and do other Offices in a Family. And Acosta, as I find him quoted by Garcilasso de la Vega[D] tells us of a Monkey he saw at the Governour's House at Cartagena, 'whom they fent often to the Tavern for Wine, with Money in one hand, and a Bottle in the other; and that when he came to the Tavern, he would not deliver his Money, until he had received his Wine. If the Boys met with him by the way, or made a houting or noise after him, he would set down his Bottle, and throw Stones at them; and having cleared the way he would take up his Bottle, and hasten home, And tho' he loved Wine excessively, yet he would not dare to touch it, unless his Master gave him License.' A great many Instances of this Nature might be given that are very surprising. And in another place he tells us, That the Natives think that they can speak, but will not, for fear of being made to work. And Bontius[E] mentions that the Javans had the same Opinion concerning the Orang-Outang, Loqui vero eos, easque Javani aiunt, sed non velle, ne ad labores cogerentur.

[Footnote A: Philostratus in vita Apollonij Tyanæi, lib. 3. cap. I. p. m. 110, & 111.]

[Footnote B: Dapper Description de l'Afrique, p.m. 249.]

[Footnote C: Gassendus in vita Pierskij, lib. 5. p.m. 169.]

[Footnote D: Garcilasso de la Vega Royal Commentaries of Peru, lib. 8. cap. 18. p. 1333.]

[Footnote E: Jac. Bontij Hist. Nat. & Med. lib. 5. cap. 32. p.m. 85.]

* * * * *

[NOTE.—A few obvious errors in the quotations have been corrected, but for the most part they stand as in Tyson, who must, therefore, be held responsible for any inaccuracies which may exist.]