A Philological Essay Concerning The Pygmies Of The Ancients Part 8

[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 a.s.sertion 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. Ca.s.sanius_ 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 _t.i.tles_; 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 a.s.seritur_. '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.

Ca.s.sanius, 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 c.u.m Gruibus pugnare_. And _Joh. Ca.s.sanius_[C] (as he is here quoted) saith, _De Pygmaeis fabulosa quidem esse omnia, quae de iis narrari solent, aliquando existimavi. Verum c.u.m videam non unum vel alterum, sed complures Cla.s.sicos & probatos Autores de his Homunculis multa in eandem fere Sententiam tradidisse; e 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, _Na.n.u.s 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. Ca.s.sanius 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, ill.u.s.trates very much that _Text_ in _Ezekiel_, on which he spends good part of the next _Chapter_, whose t.i.tle 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 c.u.m in Animalibus & Vegetabilibus fiant; cur in Humana specie non sit probabile, haud video: imprimis c.u.m detur magnitudinis excessus Gigantaeus; cur non etiam dabitur Defectus? Quia ergo dantur Gigantes, dabuntur & Pygmaei. Quam consequentiam ut firmam, admitt.i.t Carda.n.u.s,[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, _alt.i.tudine 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 t.i.tle 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 j.a.ponem 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-sh.e.l.ls. 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 pa.s.sage (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-sh.e.l.ls. But what _Bartholine_ adds, _E 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, a.s.ses, 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 t.i.tle, _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 _Suessa.n.u.s_[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_, _c.u.mani_ 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 _Suessa.n.u.s_'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 c.u.m Gruibus pugnantes ridicule dipinxisse._

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

[Footnote B: _Suessa.n.u.s 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 t.i.tle 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 a.s.serts 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 pa.s.sage 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 l.u.s.trant, 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 c.u.m 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 ill.u.s.trates 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 a.s.sertion, 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 a.s.sert 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 dic.u.n.tur 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 n.o.bis 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 ill.u.s.trate the Text he is commenting upon, and no way a.s.serts their being _Men_. I shall therefore next enquire into _Bochartus_'s Opinion, who would have them to be the _Nubae_ or _n.o.bae_. _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: n.o.boi 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 _Pa.s.ser 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 a.s.serat 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: n.o.boi 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 narra.s.se_. _Navigabam aliquando in mari_ Zingitano, _& impulit me ventus in quandam Insulam_.

_In cujus Oppidum c.u.m devenissem, reperi Incolas Cubitalis esse staturae, & plerosque Coc.l.i.tes. Quorum mult.i.tudo in me congregata me deduxit ad Regem suum. Fussit is, ut Captivus detinerer; & inquandam Caveae speciem conjectus sum; eos autem aliquando ad bellum instrui c.u.m viderem, dixerunt Hostem imminere, & fore ut propediem ingrueret. Nec mult post Gruum exercitus in eos insurrexit. Atque ideo erant Coc.l.i.tes, quod eorum oculos hae confodissent. Atque Ego, virga a.s.sumpta, 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 b.l.o.o.d.y 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 seri affirmet non esse fabellam, quae de Pygmaeis & Bello, quod c.u.m Gruibus gerant, narrantur. Si quis totam pervadat_ Africam, _nullas vel Grues vel Pygmaeos inveniet_. Now one would wonder more at _Vossius_, that he should a.s.sert 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 hc factum esse existimo. Certum quippe est ultra_ Nili _fontes multos reperiri_ Nanos, _qui tamen non c.u.m Gruibus, sed c.u.m Elephantis perpetuum gerant bellum. Praecipuum quippe Eboris commercium in regno magni_ Mac.o.ki _per istos transigitur Homunciones; habitant in Sylvis, & mira dexteritate Elephantos sagittis conficiunt. Carnibus vesc.u.n.tur, Dentes vero_ Jagis _divendunt, illi autem_ Congentibus & Lusitanis.