M. d’Lisle seems to have been perfectly satisfied as to the human nature of the Government, and of course the people of Zingero, but still he was trammeled with a nation of so-called dwarfs, which in his days were represented to occupy a tract of country more remote than the Abyssinian kingdom of Zingero, so we find that in his map encircling that country to the west and south, a nation of dwarfs is placed, the name of whom, he was informed, was Makoko. Exactly as in the case of the Zingero of Ludolph, Makoko is nothing more but the Amharic term for monkey, and of course the same explanation proves the connexion of these Makoko dwarfs with those animals, and also of their identity with the same reported race of which Ludolph had previously recorded his knowledge, although, as I have before said, their existence as a nation was not so insisted upon by him as it appears to have been by d’Lisle.
I will now direct attention to the principal characteristics of the modern Doko, but I may observe, that no Abyssinian I ever questioned upon the subject, either learned duptera, or Kuffah slave, could give me any information, excepting an old servant of Dr. Krapf, Roophael, who seemed fully acquainted with them, and I have seen him amusing a whole circle of Shoans with his relation of these people. But be it observed that Ludolph’s “History of Ethiopia” formed a part of his master’s library, and he appeared perfectly familiar with the plate of the ant-eating monkeys, to which he always referred as his authority for his strange tale. The fullest account of these dwarfs is found in Major Harris’s recent work, “The Highlands of Æthiopia,” where we are told, “Both sexes go perfectly naked, and have thick pouting lips, diminutive eyes, and flat noses.” “They are ignorant of the use of fire.” “Fruits are their principal food, and to obtain these, women as well as men ascend the trees in numbers, and in their quarrels and scrambles not unfrequently throw each other from the branches.” “They have no king, no laws, no arts, no arms, possess neither flocks nor herds, are not hunters, do not cultivate the soil, but subsist entirely upon fruits, roots, mice, reptiles, ants, and honey.” These, such as they are described, cannot certainly be men possessing reasoning powers, and without that necessary characteristic of human nature, I cannot conceive how the idea could have been entertained for an instant, that the Doko belonged to our species, or that they could have been believed to be the dwarfs, supposed to exist in Africa by those ancient authors who have in their works treated upon the subject. Had it been shown that they possessed any attribute of humanity; a knowledge of God, for example, beyond a mere prostration with their feet against a tree, and a calling upon “Yare! Yare!” when in trouble or pain; or of social order beyond mere gregarious instinct; or of the simplest arts of life requiring the exercise of the least reasoning powers, then there might have been some reason to accord to the Doko the dignity of belonging to our species; but when we are fully acquainted with the character and manner of living of an animal that coincides exactly with the chief characteristics of the habits of the Doko, it would have been more philosophical to have classed them at once with monkeys. In that case, no reasonable objection could have been made to the supposition that they were a new and distinct variety of that animal, and which, perhaps, admitted of domestication to a much greater extent than any with which we are at present acquainted. It is probable, indeed, that this will be found to be the foundation of the whole story, for we are told that “their docility and usefulness, added to very limited wants, render them in high demand. None are ever sold out of the countries bordering the Gochob, and none, therefore, find their way to Shoa.” This I consider to be another evidence of their being monkeys, for had they been real men and women, slave-dealers would most certainly have conveyed some of them either into northern Abyssinia or to Zanzibar. The plea of humanity, which has been stated to actuate these traffickers in human flesh not to separate the faithful and affectionate Doko from his master, I am glad to observe is too absurd not to be suppressed; but it is no reason why I should not mention this part of the statement as an additional evidence of the entirely ridiculous character of the information that has excited lately some little interest and attention among ethnologists in Europe, as to the probable existence of a new variety of the human species in intertropical Africa.
That the Doko may be monkeys admitting of considerable domestication I am the more inclined to believe, from the fact that the ancient Egyptians did call to their aid such a species of animal servants; and in many of the representations of the habits and arts of that interesting people will be found instances where monkeys are employed upon the duty they are so well adapted for—that of collecting fruits for their masters. At the present day we have no practice similar to this in the customs of any known people; but among other novelties to reward future enterprise, will be probably the identification of the Doko of Kuffah with the house-monkey of ancient Egypt, and their docility and usefulness, in that case, may then lead to their being introduced into other countries adapted to their constitutions, and where their services may be required. Such an animal, among a people subsisting upon fruits and vegetables, would be as valuable as the sheep-dog to a herdsman, or as the domesticated cormorant to the fish-eating inhabitants on some of the canals in China.
FOOTNOTES:
[11] One evening, on my return from Abyssinia, in company with the British Political Mission, a Galayla Muditu appeared in the camp. Around his head was placed the brindled shaggy tail of a hyena, which added not a little to the savage appearance of the man. He squatted on his heels in the customary manner, and most of the Europeans surrounded him, to look at the extreme of barbarism his figure and appearance presented. Several of our Kafilah men joined us, volunteering information; among other things, it was observed by a slave-dealer, that the man before us “was a bad man” (pointing at the same time to the Hyena’s tail), “that eats man,” meaning of course, that the man being a Mahomedan, was very wicked for wearing any part of such a corpse-eating beast about his person. I met this very slave-merchant, who had thus expressed himself, some weeks afterwards, in the Red Sea, and as we were together on board the same vessel for several days, our conversation was frequently upon Abyssinian matters. I once recalled the scene of the so-called man-eater, and he was astonished, certainly, when I told him it was reported that the Dankalli were cannibals, and that the picture of this very Galayla Muditu was taken with that idea, as a portrait of a man-eater. Dankalli Mahomed, as he was then called, never came afterwards to sit with me and my friend, Padre Antonio Foggart, but he went through the process of sawing his throat, as if cutting it with a knife, to intimate how any cannibal would be punished if he appeared in their country.
CHAPTER XXVII.
Conversation with Karissa.—Of the origin of the Galla.—Of the word Adam.—Of Eve.—Phœnician history.—Sanchoniathon and Moses.—Of the religion of the Galla.—Of Waak.—Connexion with Bacchus.—Reward of enterprise.—African ethnology.—Of the armoury of the Negoos.—Different kinds of guns.—Of the ammunition.
Karissa remained the whole day at my house, for Tinta had been obliged to send to Ankobar for a spring vice. A discharged servant of the Embassy, named Sultaun, who resided in Aliu Amba, brought two files, which I purchased from him for a few charges of gunpowder, but until the return of Tinta’s messenger, I was obliged to postpone repairing the gun-lock. When the required instrument did come, it was too late to do anything, so Karissa stayed all night, turning in upon an ox-skin, and sharing the porch of my house with Goodaloo.
The next morning (Aug. 25) I set about the business, and managed to put all to rights before noon, during which time we had a long conversation upon the origin of the Galla, and, in fact, of all other nations, for the traditions he related reached to the very remotest times. How far his information was founded upon recorded history I cannot say, but he referred it to the conversations of some priests of Gurague, with whom the early part of his life had been spent, and much of what I collected upon this subject (the ethnology of the inhabitants of Abyssinia) from Karissa, was by his asking if such and such a thing that he had heard were true. Ibrahim was as much amused as I was, for, without supposing it, our Galla friend was contributing considerably to the knowledge of both.
Of the Gallas themselves, he could only tell me that they originally came from Bargamo, which was represented to be a large water, across which the distant opposite side was just visible. That their ancestors, dwelling upon the farther shore, were induced to come over into Abyssinia, which they soon overran and conquered. Karissa always pointed to the south as the situation of Bargamo, or I was inclined to suppose that by this was intended the country around the shores of lake Tchad, the eastern portion of which, we learn from Clapperton and Denham, is called Berghamie. He was very curious to know if I were of a nation of whites of whom he had heard, called Surdi, and which, in his system of mankind lore, constituted one of the three great divisions of mankind into which the whole world was divided. There was no question about himself, for he was a Tokruree, or black, whilst Ibrahim, although not much lighter complexioned, was an Amhara, or red man. The Surdi he insisted as existing, and was contented to believe, although I did not seem to know anything about them, that I was of that race.