This page contains affiliate links. As Amazon Associates we earn from qualifying purchases.
Writer:
Language:
Published:
  • 1699
Collection:
Buy it on Amazon FREE Audible 30 days

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 _Graecians_, 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.

_Quae simul ac fugere Imbres, Hyememque Nivalem Cum magno Oceani clangore ferantur ad undas Pygmaeis pugnamque Viris, caedesque 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 Quaeque fuis, Equitum turmae, Peditumque Cohortes, Obvia torquentes Danais vestigia Troes
Ibant, sublato Campum clamore replentes: Non secus ac cuneata Gruum sublime volantum Agmina, dum fugiunt Imbres, ac frigora Brumae, Per Coelum matutino clangore feruntur,
Oceanumque petunt, mortem exitiumque cruentum Irrita Pigmaeis 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 _Pygmaean 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.]

_Athenaeus_[A] out of _Philochorus_, and so likewise _AElian_[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, Athenaeus tells us that it was _Diana_, but _AElian_ 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: _Athenaei Deipnosoph_. lib. 9 p.m. 393.]

[Footnote B: _AElian. 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 interius Pygmaei, 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 _Pygmaean_ 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 assidue spectantur Praelia, 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 _Pygmaeomachia_ 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 _Athenaeas_ 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 _Quaere_.

[Footnote A: _Athenaei 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 Graecia 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, minime mirum, artifici ad formanda Corpora, effigiesque caelandas mobilitate ignea_. 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 praeter ista, in media India homines reperiri nigros, qui Pygmaei 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, quam, apud ullos hominum. Quae quidem ubi illis promissior esse caeperit, nulla deinceps veste uti: sed capillos multo infra genua a tergo demissos, barbamque praeter 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 & caetera jumenta omnia nihilo esse nostris arietibus majora. Tria horum Pygmaeorum millia Indorum regem in suo comitatu habere, quod sagittarij sint peritissimi. Summos esse justitiae 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 _AElian, 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 Graeci, miraculorum fabularumque pleni: res inauditae, incredulae, Scriptores veteres non parvae authoritatis_, Aristeas Proconnesius, & Isagonus, & Nicaeensis, & 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. _verae 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 _AEthiopia_, 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 a 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, totumque pilosos corpus. Sequebantur viros aequales foeminae, & pueri adhuc breviores. Nudi omnes agunt, pelle tantum brevi adultiores verenda tecti, viri pariter ac foeminae: agreste nihil, neque efferum quid prae se ferentes. Quin & vox illis humana, sed omnibus, etiam accolis, prorsus ignota lingua, multoque amplius Nonosi sociis. Vivunt marinis ostreis, & piscibus e 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 AEthiopians _in Chariots with four Horses. The_ Troglodyte AEthiopians _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 AEthiopians_ 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. Tyanaei_, 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 Tyanaeus_ 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 quaedam (sc. Animalia) formant ad diversos conceptus quos habent, sicut Homo & Pygmaeus; & quaedam non faciunt hoc, sicut multitudo fere tota aliorum Animalium. Adhuc autem eorum quae ex ratione cogitativa formant voces, quaedam sunt succumbentia, quaedam autem non succumbentia. Dico autem succumbentia, a conceptu Animae cadentia & mota ad Naturae Instinctum, sicut Pygmeus, qui non, sequitur rationem Loquelae sed Naturae 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 Pygmaeos_ (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 Caesar Scaliger_[B] makes them to be only a Fiction of the Ancients, _At haec omnia_ (saith he) _Antiquorum figmenta & merae Nugae, si exstarent, reperirentur. At cum universus Orbis nunc nobis cognitus sit, nullibi haec Naturae Excrementa reperiri certissimum est._ And _Isaac Casaubon_[C] ridicules such as pretend to justifie them: _Sic nostra aetate_ (saith he) _non desunt, qui eandem de Pygmaeis lepidam fabellam renovent; ut qui etiam e 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 Pygmaeis dicendum erat, qui [Greek: para pygonos] dicti a statura, quae ulnam non excedunt. Verum ego Poetarum fabulas esse crediderim, pro quibus tamen_ Aristoteles _minime haberi vult, sed veram esse Historiam._ 8. Hist. Animal. 12. _asseverat. Ego quo minus hoc statuam, tum Authoritate primum Doctissimi_ Strabonis I. Geograph. _coactus sum, tum potissimum 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 quae Aristoteles Pygmaeos esse scribit, nullibi tamen tam parvam Gentem a se conspectam tradidit, sed Populum esse Mediocris staturae, &_ AEthiopes _tradit._

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

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

[Footnote C: _Isaac Causabon Notae & 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 AEquinoctio ex Ponto, Locisque frigidis fugiunt Hyemem futuram. A Verno autem ex tepida Regione ad frigidam sese conferunt, aestus metu futuri: & alia de locis vicinis discedunt, alia de ultimis, prope dixerim, ut Grues faciunt, quae ex Scythicis Campis ad Paludes AEgypto superiores, unde Nilus profluit, veniunt, quo in loco pugnare cum Pygmaeis dicuntur. Non enim id fabula est, sed certe, genus tum hominum, tum etiam Equorum pusillum (ut dicitur) est, deguntque in Cavernis, unde Nomen Troglodytae a subeundis Cavernis accepere._

In English ’tis thus: ‘At the _Autumnal AEquinox_ they go out of _Pontus_ and the cold Countreys to avoid the Winter that is coming on. At the _Vernal AEquinox_ 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 _AEgypt_, 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 Pygmaeis 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 certe 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 _AEgypt_, 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_) Pygmaeorum Historiam esse fabulosam, quod &_ Strabo _sentit & nosira aetas, cum omnia nunc ferme 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 revera, ut aiunt, Genus ibi parvum est tam Hominum quam Equorum. Julius Caesar 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 Pygmaeis scripsit, quam 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 _AEthiopia_ and _AEgypt_, 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 _Caelius Rhodiginus’s_[B] Character of him is, _Philostratus omnium qui unquam Historiam conscripserunt, mendacissimus._

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

[Footnote B: _Caelij 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 _AEgypt_ 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 _AEthiopian 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 _AEthiopia_, 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, quam 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 Notae 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 Pygmaeis_; 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 Pygmaeis._]

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 a Pygmaeis distinctis_. The _second Chapter, De Pygmaei nominibus & Etymologia_. The _third Chapter, Duplex esse Pygmaeorum Genus; & primum Genus aliquando dari_. He means _Dwarfs_, that are no _Pygmies_ at all. The _fourth Chapter_ is, _Alterum Genus, nempe Gentem Pygmaeorum 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. Pygmaeos) in Septentrionali Thraciae Parte reperiri, (quae Scythiae est proxima) atque ibi cum Gruibus pugnare_. And _Joh. Cassanius_[C] (as he is here quoted) saith, _De Pygmaeis fabulosa quidem esse omnia, quae de iis narrari solent, aliquando existimavi. Verum cum videam non unum vel alterum, sed complures Classicos & probatos Autores de his Homunculis multa in eandem fere Sententiam tradidisse; eo adducor ut Pygmaeos 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, Pygmaeos non solum olim fuisse, sed nunc etiam esse, & homines esse, nec parvitatem illis impedimenta esse quo minus 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 forte 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 suae 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 AEthiopic._ 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 Pygmaei sunt, si forte 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, _Pygmaeorum 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, _Quae certe cum in Animalibus & Vegetabilibus fiant; cur in Humana specie non sit probabile, haud video: imprimis cum detur magnitudinis excessus Gigantaeus; cur non etiam dabitur Defectus? Quia ergo dantur Gigantes, dabuntur & Pygmaei. Quam consequentiam ut firmam, admittit Cardanus,[A] licet de Pygmaeis hoc tantum 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: _Ulterius ut Probabilitatem fulciamus, addendum Sceleton Pygmaei, quod_ Dresdae _vidimus inter alia plurima, servatum in Arce sereniss._ Electoris Saxoniae, _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 Pygmaei. 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, _Pygmaeos 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 indubie in Pygmaeis 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 _AEgypt_; _Homer_’s _Scholiast_ in the middle of _AEgypt_; _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 Pygmaeos ultra Japonem esse_; and adds, _has Autorum dissensiones facile fuerit conciliare; nec mirum diversas relationes a_, 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, _Pygmaeorum Gens_ fuisse _(non jam esse) proditur, creduntque a 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, _Eo quod Terrae Cavernas inhabitent, non injuria dicti sunt olim Pygmaei, Terrae 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 _Terrae 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 Pygmaei 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 Pygmaeorum simias cum Gruibus pugnantes ridicule 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 Pygmaeorum 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, Budaeus, 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 _Calingae_ a Nation in _India, where the Women conceive when five years old, and do not live above eight._ _Gesner_ speaking of the _Pygmies_, saith, _Vitae 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 a 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 _Formicae Indicae_, 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 a quolibet, pari jure Monocerota & alia negare liceret._ 3. _Qui maria pernavigant, vix oras paucas maritimas lustrant, adeo non terras omnes a 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 maxime omni ab omnibus diligentia quaesiti fuissent, nec inventi; fieri potest, ut instar Gigantum jam desierint nec sint amplius_.]

[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, & Pygmaei 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 _AEthiopic History_.[B]

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

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

The _second Testimony_ (saith Sir _Thomas Brown_) _is deduced from Holy Scripture; thus rendered in the Vulgar Translation_, Sed & Pygmaei 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_ Pygmaei, _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_ Pygmaei, _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, _quaedam 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 quam Homines confitentur? Sed omnia Genera Hominum, quae 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 impunita vanitate mentiri._ At last he concludes and determines the Question thus, _Aut illa, quae 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 _Nubae_ or _Nobae_. _Hos Nubas Troglodyticos_ (saith[A] he) _ad Avalitem Sinum esse Pygmaeos 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 Nubae 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 _AEthicus_. And _Ptolomy_ (he tells us) places the _Nubae_ hereabout. 4. Because _Aristotle_ makes the _Pygmies_ to be _Troglodytes_, and so were the _Nubae_. 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 _Nubae_; but afterwards adds, _Quos tamen absit ut putemus Statura fuisse Cubitali, prout Poetae 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 _Nubae_. Besides, he does not inform us, that these _Nubae_ 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 _Nubae_; but ’tis plain that those in _Nonnosus_ could not be a Colony of the _Nubae_; for then the _Nubae_ must have understood their Language, which the _Text_ saith, none of the Neighbourhood did. And because the _Nubae_ 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 _Avalitae_, 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, quam Equorum_; which had _Bochartus_ considered he would not have been so fond it may be of his _Nubae_. And if the [Greek: Noboi Pygmaioi] in _Hesychius_ are such _Pygmies_ as _Bochartus_ makes his _Nubae, Quos tamen absit ut putemus staturta 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. Sacrae_, 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_ Graeculi _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 staturae, & plerosque Coclites. Quorum multitudo in me congregata me deduxit ad Regem suum. Fussit is, ut Captivus detinerer; & inquandam Caveae speciem conjectus sum; eos autem aliquando ad bellum instrui cum viderem, dixerunt Hostem imminere, & fore ut propediem ingrueret. Nec multo post Gruum exercitus in eos insurrexit. Atque ideo erant Coclites, quod eorum oculos hae confodissent. Atque Ego, virga assumpta, in eas impetum feci, & illae avolarunt 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 serio affirmet non esse fabellam, quae de Pygmaeis & Bello, quod cum Gruibus gerant, narrantur. Si quis totam pervadat_ Africam, _nullas vel Grues vel Pygmaeos 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 aestatem ex_ AEgypto _abscedentes, quia Calorem pati non possunt, alis velorum instar expansis, per aerem ad_ Scythicam _plagam recta 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 fabellae non de nihilo fingi & aliquod plerunque continent veri, id ipsum quoque que hic factum esse existimo. Certum quippe est ultra_ Nili _fontes multos reperiri_ Nanos, _qui tamen non cum Gruibus, sed cum Elephantis perpetuum gerant bellum. Praecipuum quippe Eboris commercium in regno magni_ Macoki _per istos transigitur Homunciones; habitant in Sylvis, & mira dexteritate Elephantos sagittis conficiunt. Carnibus vescuntur, Dentes vero_ Jagis _divendunt, illi autem_ Congentibus & Lusitanis.

[Footnote A: _Isaac Vossius ibid_.]

_Job Ludolphus_[A] in his _Commentary_ on his _AEthiopick History_ remarks, That there was never known a Nation all of Dwarfs. _Nani quippe_ (saith _Ludolphus_) _Naturae quodam errore ex aliis justae staturae hominibus generantur. Qualis vero ea Gens sit, ex qua ista Naturae Ludibria tanta copia proveniant, Vossium docere oportelat, quia Pumiliones Pumiles alios non gignunt, sed plerunque steriles sunt, experientia teste; ut plane 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 _Antaeus_, 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 _Antaeus_ 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 _Antaeus’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 AEthiopicam_, 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 Pygmaeos_ (saith [A] _Ludolphus_) _revertamur; fabula de Geranomachia Pygmaeorum seu pugna cum Gruibus etiam aliquid de vero trahere videtur, si pro Gruibus_ Condoras _intelligas, Aves in interiore_ Africa _maximas, ut fidem pene excedat; aiunt enim quod Ales ista vitulum Elephanti in Aerem extollere possit; ut infra docebimus. Cum his Pygmaeos pugnare, ne pecora sua rapiant, incredibile non est. Error ex eo natus videtur, quod primus Relator, alio vocabulo destitutus, Grues pro Condoris nominarit, sicuti_ Plautus _Picos pro Gryphilus_, & Romani _Boves lucas pro Elephantis dixere_.

[Footnote A: _Job Ludolphus Comment, in Historiam suam AEthiopic_. 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 Pygmaeos parvis currit Bellator in armis: Mox impar hosti, raptusque per aera curvis Unguibus a faeva 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 _Pygmaeomachia_; 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 AEthiopum veniunt, Nilique fluenta Turmalim Palamedis Aves, celsoeque per altum Aera labentes fugiunt Athlanta nivosum, Pygmaeos imbelle Genus, parvumque saligant, Non perturbato procedunt ordine densae
Instructis volucres obscurant aera 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_:

_Pygmaei breve vulgus, iners Plelecula, quando Convenere Grues longis in praelia rostris, Sublato clamore fremunt, dumque agmine magno Hostibus occurrit, tellus tremit Indica, clamant Littora, arenarum nimbis absconditur aer; Omnis & involvit Pulvis solemque, Polumque, Et Genus hoc Hominum natura 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 Pygmaeis_, 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 Caesar 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 _Nubae_ or _Nobae_; 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 Pygmaeis scripsit, quam 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_ Pygmaeos _reperiri, aliqui eximiae fidei testes retulerunt; qui postquam ad summum adoleverint, nostratis Pueri denum annorum Mensuram vix excedunt. Meticulosum genus hominum, & garritu Sermonem exprimens, adeo ut tam Simiae propinqui, quam Statura ac sensibus ab justae 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 Tyanaei_, 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.]