Orang-Outang sive Homo Sylvestris: OR, THE ANATOMY OF A PYGMIE.

THAT the Pygmies of the Antients were a sort of Apes, and not of Humane Race, I shall endeavour to prove in the fol­lowing Essay. And if the Pygmies were only Apes, then in all probability our Ape may be a Pygmies; a sort of Animal so much resembling Man, that both the Antients and the Moderns have reputed it to be a Puny Race of Mankind, call'd to this day, Homo Syl­vestris, The Wild Man; Orang-Outang, or a Man of the Woods; by the Africans Quoias Morron; by others Baris, or Barris, and by the Por­tugese, the Salvage. But observing that under these Names, they describe different Animals; for Distinction-sake, and to avoid Equivocation, I shall call the Subject, of which I am about to give the Anatomy, a Pygmie, from its Stature; which I find to be just the same with the Stature of the Pygmies of the Antients. Tulpius 'tis true, and Bontius, and Dapper do call it, Satyrus. And tho' I am of Opinion, that the Satyrs of the Antients were of the Ape, or rather Monkey-kind; yet for the Reasons alledged in the following Essay, I cannot think our Animal a Satyr. The Baris or Barris, which they describe to be much taller than our Animal, probably may be what we call a Drill. But I must confess, there is so great Confusion in the Description of this sort of Creature, which I find is a very large Family (there being numerous Species of them) that in Transcribing the Authors that have wrote about them, 'tis almost im­possible but to make mistakes; from the want of their well distinguish­ing them. I shall endeavour therefore in my Account of this, so to [Page 2] discriminate it, that it may be easily known again, where-ever 'tis met with. Not that I think in a single Observation I can be so exact, but that I may be liable to make Errors my self, how careful soever I have been.

I will not urge any thing more here, why I call it a Pygmie: 'Tis necessary to give it a Name; and if what I offer in the ensuing Essay, does not sufficiently Account for the Denomination, I leave it to others to give it one more proper. What I shall most of all aim at in the following Discourse, will be to give as particular an Account as I can, of the formation and structure of all the Parts of this wonderful Ani­mal; and to make a Comparative Survey of them, with the same Parts in a Humane Body, as likewise in the Ape and Monkey-kind. For tho' I own it to be of the Ape kind, yet, as we shall observe, in the Organization of abundance of its Parts, it more approaches to the Structure of the same in Men: But where it differs from a Man, there it resembles plainly the Common Ape, more than any other Animal.

And tho' I may seem too tedious in discoursing so long upon a single subject, yet I have this to offer, that if we had an accurate and parti­cular History of any one Species of Animal, it might in a great measure serve for the whole kind. Wherein they differ, might easily be taken notice of, and there would be no need of repeating any thing, wherein they all agreed. So formerly dissecting a Young Lion and a Cat at the same time, I wondred to find so very great Resemblance of all the Parts, both in the one and the other; that the Anatomy of the one might serve for the other, allowing for the Magnitude of the Parts, with very little other alteration: And not only for this, but for several other Animals, that belong to the same Family. I could have wished I had had the like Opportunity, when I was dissecting our Pygmie, of comparing the same Parts with those of an Ape and a Monkey: For want of it, I have referred all along to the Accounts given us of the Anatomy of these Creatures by other Authors; which, tho' it renders my Discourse more prolix, yet I thought it would not be unacceptable to the Curious. But I shall take care to draw up in a shorter view, wherein our Pygmie more resembled a Man, than an Ape and Monkey, and wherein it differ'd.

Now notwithstanding our Pygmie does so much resemble a Man in many of its Parts, more than any of the Ape-kind, or any other Animal in the World that I know of: Yet by no means do I look upon it as the Pro­duct of a mixt Generation; 'tis a Brute-Animal sui generis, and a par­ticular Species of Ape. For when I was dissecting it, some Sea-Captains and Merchants who came to my House to see it, assured me, that they had seen a great many of them in Borneo, Sumatra, and other Parts, tho' this was brought from Angola in Africa; but was first taken a great deal higher up in the Country, and in Company with it there was a Female of the same kind.

I shall have, hereafter occasion to make my Remarks on several Parti­culars, relating to it's way of Living, it's Sagacity, Actions, and the [Page 3] like. I shall now therefore first of all describe its outward shape and figure; then look within, and observe the Mechanism there. But meet­ing with a Text in Aristotle, wherein he gives a general Description of the Ape-kind, I think it not amiss to Transcribe it; and by Commenting upon it, to shew wherein our present Subject agrees with or differs from it; and what I have besides to Remark, I shall afterwards take notice of, and then proceed to the Anatomy of the Inward Parts.

Aristotle's ⁽¹⁾ Text is this, which I shall give with Jul. Caes. Scaliger's Latin Translation: And as you may observe by the Letters of Refe­rence, I have rendred each Paragraph into English, adding my Observa­tions thereon.

(a) Arist. Some Animals are of an intermediate Nature, between a Man and Quadrupeds, as Apes, the Cebi, and Cynocephali.

[...] Theodorus Gaza thus renders this Passage: Sunt quae natura ancipite, partim hominem, partim Quadrupedem imitentur, sicut simiae, &c. Not that an Ape is part a Man, and part a Quadruped; inter Hominem & non Hominem non datur medium; The Terms being contradictory, one must be false. The Philosopher's meaning must there­fore be, that in the formation of the Parts of the Body, the Ape, the Cebus, and Cynocephalus, are intermediate Species between a Man and other Quadrupeds, having several Parts of the Body formed like Brutes; others more resembling those of Men. ⁽²⁾ Scaliger, a little after, hath this Remark; ‘Ad eum namque modum summus Opifex Rerum seriem concatenavit a Planta ad Hominem; ut quasi sine ullo cohaereant in­tervallo, sie [...] cum Plantis Bruta conjungunt; sic cum homine simia Quadrupedes. Itaque in hominis quoque specie inveniamus Divinos, Humanos, feros.’ This Climax or Gradation can't but be taken notice of, by any that are curious in observing the Wonders of the Creation; and the more he observes it, the more venerable Idea's 'twill give him of the great Creator; and it would be the Perfection of Natural History, could it be attained, to enumerate and remark all the different Species, and their Gradual Perfections from one to another. Thus in the Ape and Monkey-kind, Aristotle's Cebus I look upon to be a degree above his Cynocephalus; and his Pithecus or Ape above his Cebus, and our Pygmie a higher degree above any of them, we yet know, and more resembling a Man: But at the same time I take him to be wholly a Brute, tho' in the formation of the Body, and in the Sensitive or Brutal Soul, it may be, more resembling a Man, than any other Animal; so that in this Chain of the Creation, as an intermediate Link between an Ape and a Man, I would place our Pygmie.

[...], &c. The Philosopher here does not enumerate all the se­veral Species that are contained under the Ape and Monkey-kind; they are a very numerous and a large Classis of Animals. Scaliger upon the Place mentions several he had observed of both kinds; and all our Zoographers, and most Journals of Travels give a Description of a great many sorts of them. But for want of well distinguishing them, and ranging them into a Methodical Series, their History as yet is very con­fused and perplext. Mr. Ray ⁽³⁾ places these Animals under this ge­neral Title, Animalia Pede unguiculato Multisido, [...] & [...] 'Tis call'd Pithecus, [...], quia facilè ab ho­mine persuadeatur; and oftentimes this word is taken as a Genus which includes the whole; when strictly taken, it signisies an Ape without a Tail, and in Latin is call'd Simia; that which hath a Tail is call'd Cerco­pithecus, in English a Monkey. Thus ⁽⁴⁾ Martial. [Page 6]

(b) Arist The Cebus is an Ape having a Tail.

⁽⁵⁾ Conradus Gesner thinks, that this Cebus of Aristotle, which he de­scribes only as having a Tail, must be the Cercopithecus or Common Monkey, since he mentions not the Cebus any where else, and the Cercopi­thecus no where. ⁽⁶⁾ Harduinus, in his Notes on Pliny, advises not to mistake the Cepus in Pliny, for the Cebus in Aristotle. (6) Pliny's words are these; Pompeij Magni primum Ludi ostenderunt Chama, quem Galli Ru­sium vocabant, Essigie Lupi, Pardorum maculis. Iidem ex AEthiopia quas vocant [...] quarum Pedes posteriores, Pedibus humanis & cruribus, pri­ores manibus suere similes, hoc Animal postea Roma non vidit. And there­fore because it was so uncommon as to be seen at Rome but once, it could not be the common Monkey. ⁽⁷⁾ Strabo, out of Artemidorus, describes the Cepus thus: [...]. That the Cepus hath the Face of a Lion, the rest of the Body like a Panther, and is of the bigness of a Dorcas or Roe-Buck. ⁽⁸⁾ Diodorus Siculus hath much the same Description, [...]. Which Laurentius Ro­domanus thus renders. ‘Cepus, i. e. Hortus (quem vocant) à totius Corporis decore & staturae venustate nomen accepit, facie Leonem imi­tatur, & reliquo Pantheram, praeter magnitudinem, qua Dorcadi par est. ⁽⁹⁾’ AElian hath given a Description of the same Animal from Pythagoras, from whom, 'tis thought, it first received this Name; and he is more particular. His Account, tho' somewhat long; I will give in P. Gillius's Translation, because I am apt to think this Animal is still in being. ‘Terrenum quoddam Animal Pythagoras scribit secundùm Mare Rubrum procreari & Cepum, hoc est Hortum appositè idcircò nominari, quòd tanquam Hortus variis coloribus distinguatur. Cùm existit confirmata aetate, pari magnitudine est cum Herythriensibus Canibus. Jam porro ejus Colorum varietatem, sicut ille scribit, ani­mus nobis est explicare. Ejus caput & posticas partes ad caudam usque prorsus valde igneo colore sunt, tum aurei quidam Pili disseminati spectantur, tum album rostrum, inde ad Collum aureae vittae pertinent, Colli inferiores partes ad Pectus, & anteriores Pedes omnino albi, Mammae duae manum implentes caeruleo colore visuntur, venter candi­dus, Pedes posteriores nigri sunt, Rostri formae Cynocephalo recte [Page 7] comparari potest.’ The Cepus therefore of Pliny, Strabo, Diodorus Siculus, and AElian, in all probability must be different from the Cebus of Aristotle. Joh. Caius our Country-man sent Gesner a Description of a Mamomet or Marmoset he had observed, which Gesner thinks might be a sort of Cepus; but the Colours were different, as likewise the Magni­tude.

(c) Arist. The Cynocephali have the same shape with Monkeys, but they are bigger, and Stronger, and they have a Face liker a Dogs's, and are of a fiercer Nature, and they have Teeth liker a Dog's, and stronger.

I shall have occasion to Discourse of these Cynocephali in the ensuing Essay. For tho' the Philosopher makes them only a sort of Ape or Mon­key, yet there have been those, that would impose them on the World for a Race of Men; and by ⁽¹⁰⁾ AElian they are call'd [...]; tho' ⁽¹¹⁾ Galen tells us, they are much less like a Man, than an Ape is: For they can scarce stand upright, much less walk or run so. ⁽¹²⁾ Philostorgius mentions the Aegopithecus, the Arctopithecus, the Leon­topithecus, as well as the Cynocephalus, and then adds, [...]. That there is the Goat-Ape, the Bear-Ape, the Lion-Ape, the Dog-Ape; and that the Ape-kind have a resemblance to a great many other Animals; so large and nume­rous is this Classis of Animals, that perhaps there is none that is more; and that are so different from one another. The sierceness of the Cyno­cephali is taken notice of by all; our Pygmie was quite of another temper, the most gentle and loving Creature that could be. Those that he knew a Ship-board he would come and embrace with the greatest ten­derness, opening their Bosoms, and clasping his Hands about them; and as I was informed, tho' there were Monkeys aboard, yet 'twas observed he would never associate with them, and as if nothing a-kin to them, would always avoid their Company. The Teeth of the Cynocephali are like a Dog's; those of our Pygmie exactly resembled a Man's, as I shall shew in the Osteology.

(d) Arist. Apes are hairy on their Backs, as they are Quadrupeds, and on their Bellies, as they are like Men: For in a Man and a Beast this hairiness is quite contrary, as was said before. So that Apes are very hairy in both Places, their Hair being strong or course, and thick, set.

The Place that Aristotle refers to, is this. ⁽¹³⁾ [...]. i. e. That in Brutes the Back or upper Parts are more hairy, the Belly or under Parts either smooth or less hairy: In a Man is observed the contrary. But in our Pygmie we observed it diffe­rent; for here all behind from the Head downwards, 'twas very hairy, and the Hair so thick, that it covered the Skin almost from being seen. [Page 8] But in all the Parts before, the Hair was much thinner, and the Skin every where appeared, and in some places 'twas almost bare. Nature therefore has cloathed it with Hair, as a Brute, to defend it from the Injuries of the Weather; and when it goes on all four, as a Quadruped, it seems all hairy: When it goes erect, as a Biped, it appears before less hairy, and more like a Man. After our Pygmie was taken, and a little used to wear Cloaths, it was fond enough of them; and what it could not put on himself, it would bring in his Hands to some of the Com­pany to help him to put on. It would lie in a Bed, place his Head on the Pillow, and pull the Cloaths over him, as a Man would do; but was so careless, and so very a Brute, as to do all Nature's Occasions there. It was very full of Lice when it came under my Hands, which it may be it got on Ship-board, for they were exactly like those on Hu­mane Bodies. ⁽¹⁴⁾ Seignior Redi observes in most Animals a particular sort of Louse, and gives the Figures of a great many.

The Hair of our Pygmie or Wild Man was of a Coal-black colour, and strait; and much more resembling the Hair of Men than the Furr of Brutes: For in the Furr of Brutes, besides the longer Hair, there is usually a finer and shorter Pile intermixt: Here 'twas all of a kind; only about the Pubis the hair was greyish, seemed longer, and somewhat different; so on the upper Lip and Chin, there were greyish hairs like a Beard: And I was told by the Owners, that once it held the Bason it's self, to be trimmed. The Face, Hands, and Soles of the Feet were bare and without Hair, and so was most part of the Forehead: But down the sides of the Face 'twas very hairy; the hairs there being about an Inch and half long, and longer than in most Parts of the Body be­sides. The tendency of the Hair of all the Body was downwards; but only from the Wrists to the Elbow 'twas upwards; so that at the Elbow the Hair of the Shoulder and the Arm ran contrary to one another. Now in Quadrupeds the Hair in the fore-limbs have usually the same Inclina­tion downwards, and it being here different, it suggested an Argument to me, as if Nature did design it as a Biped. But we will lay no more stress upon it than it will bear: The Hair on the back-side of the Hands did run transverse, inclining to the outside of the Hands; and those of the hinder sides of the Thighs were transverse likewise.

Man, tho' not so hairy as Brutes, and (as Aristotle observes) more hairy before, than behind; yet if exposed to the hardships of the Wea­ther, like them; no doubt, but he would become hairy on the Body likewise; which might possibly be the Case of Nebuchadnezzar. ⁽¹⁵⁾ And very Remarkable is that Story of Peter Serrano a Spaniard, who was castaway, and escaped to a Desart Island, which from him afterwards received it's Name, as 'tis related by the Inca Garcilasso de la Vega. ⁽¹⁶⁾ For having with the greatest difficulty sustained a miserable Life for three [Page 9] Years, ‘The Hairs of his Body grew in that manner, that he was co­vered all over with Bristles; the hair of his Head and Beard reach­ing to his Waste, that he appeared like some Wild or Savage Crea­ture.’

(e) Arist. Their Face hath Many Resemblances to a Man's, for they have Nostrils and Ears alike; and Teeth like a Man's, both the Fore-teeth and the Grinders.

Pliny ⁽¹⁷⁾ seems to have respect to this Text of Aristotle, and what follows, where he tells us, ‘Nam simiarum genera perfectam Hominis imitationem continent, facie, Naribus, Auribus, Palpebris, quas solae Quadrupedum in inferiore habent Genâ. Jam Mammas in Pectore, Brachia & Crura in contrarium similitèr flexa. In manibus, ungues, digitos, longioremque medium. Pedibus paulùm differunt, sunt enim, ut manus, praelongi, sed vestigium Palmae simile faciunt. Pol­lex quoque his & Articuli, ut homini; ac praeter Genitale, & hoc in maribus tantùm. Viscera etiam interiora omnia ad exemplar.’ We will compare both their Accounts, with our Pygmie; and observe where­in they agree or differ from us.

As for the Iace of our Pygmie, it was liker a Man's, than Ape's and Monkeys Faces are: For it's Forehead was larger, and more globous, and the upper and lower Jaw not so long or prominent, and more spread; and it's Head more than as big again as either of theirs: But why the Philosopher, after his general Assertion of the likeness of the Face of an Ape to that of a Man's, should first of all instance in the Nose, which is so much different, may seem strange: Since in a Man the Nose is pro­tuberant and rising, jutting out much beyond the whole surface, and herein 'tis altogether unlike to that of Brutes, and the Ape-kind too. 'Tis not therefore on this account that the Comparison is made, But I rather think, his meaning must be, that an Ape's Nose is like Man's, in that it is not extended to the length of the Rostrum, or upper Jaw, as in Dogs and other Brutes, but reaches only to the upper Lip. à simis Naribus, or this flatness of the Nose, most do derive the word Simia; tho' others, as Vossius, would have it, quasi mimia à [...], imitari, from mimicking. But Scaliger will not allow it. Dicitur autem Simia (saith he) non ab Imitatione, ut Grammatici imperiti, sed à simitate.

The Nose of our Pygmie was flat like an Ape's, not protuberant as a Man's; and on the outside of each Nostril there was a little slit turning upwards, as in Apes. 'Tis observed of the Indian Blacks, that their Nose is much flatter than the Europeans; which may be thought rather Natural to that Nation, than occasioned (as some would make us be­lieve) by the Mother's tying the Infant to her Back, and so when at Work bruising and flatting it against her Shoulders; because 'tis so uni­versal in them all.

[Page 10]As to the Ears, none could more resemble those of a Man, than our Pygmie's; both as to the largeness, colour, shape, and structure. Here I observed the Helix, Ant-Helix, Concha, Alvearium, Tragus, Anti-tragus, and Lobus; only the Cartilage was very fine and thin, and the Ears did not lye so flat to the Head, as they do in a Man. But that may be from the Custom of binding; our Heads, when Infants.

The Teeth of our Pygmie resembled a Man's, more than do those of Apes and Monkeys; as I shall shew in the Ostcology.

(f) Arist. And whereas other Quadrupeds have not Hair on both Eye-lids, these have; But 'tis very fine, especially that on the lower Eye-lid, and very small. But other Quadrupeds have none there.

In our Pygmie the Cilia or Hair of both Eye-lids appeared very fair and plain, but not so large as in Men. The Supercilia or Hair of the Eye-brows, seem'd to be rubb'd off; which might be occasioned by the jutting out of the Cranium in that place, more than in Men: Which is a Provident Provision of Nature, for the better safeguard of the Eyes, and their defence from the Injuries they might otherwise receive in the Woods. But the Philosopher's Assertion, that no Quadruped hath Hair on the under Eye-lid besides Man but the Ape-kind, I cannot justifie; or I do not take his meaning aright: Tho' he has much the same Opinion a little before. ⁽¹⁸⁾ Where he tells us, [...]. Which Scaliger thus renders: Ac Palpebras homo utrâque in Genâ habet tum & in Alis, & in Pube Pilos. Caeterae, Ani­mantes neque in his locis, neque in Genâ inferiore: Sed sub Genam & pau­cos & paucae. Our Pygmie had Hair in the Arm-pits, and that in the Pubis seemed somewhat different from what grew on the rest of the Body; being not so strait, but somewhat curled; and greyish, not black. But I must here Remark, that Pliny uses the words Palpebrae and Gena, in his Translating this Text of Aristotle, different from what commonly they signifie now. For by Palpebrae he means, what Aristotle and Hippo­crates call [...], i. e. the Hair on the Rim of the Eye-lids, à pal­pitatione; and Festus calls Cilia, quia oculos celent & tueantur: And by Gena, he understands the Eye-lid; as appears from that Passage of Pliny I have just now quoted, Palpebris quas folae Quadrupedum in inferiore habent Genâ. And so Scaliger uses these words in this Translation of Aristotle: And he makes Cilium to signifie, Summum Genae ambitum, and not the Hair there.

(g) Arist. They have two Teats or Nipples of small Breasts on the Ster­num.

[Page 11]The Philosopher here observes, That the Ape-kind, common with Hu­mane, have the Mammae on the Sternum or Breast, which is different from Brutes. And tho' the Elephant herein seems somewhat alike, yet he makes this distinction, ⁽¹⁹⁾ [...]. Juxta Pectus potius, quàm in Pectore, as Scaliger renders it; or as Theodorus Gaza, non in Pectore, sed paulò citra. And a little after, ⁽²⁰⁾ he more particularly expresses himself, [...]. Sub Armis, as Gaza ren­ders it; ad Axillas, as Scaliger, where he further tells us, That the Male as well as Female Elephant have these Teats; but they are very small, in respect of the Bulk of it's Body, and so placed that side-ways, you can't see them. The Bear (he adds) hath four Teats; Sheep have but two, and those between the hinder Legs; Cows have four Teats there. Other Animals (he saith) have these Teats in the middle of the Belly, and usually more numerous; as the Dog and Swine-kind: But the Panther hath but four in the Belly: The Camel hath two Mammae there, and four Teats, as a Cow; and a Lioness but two there.

But Apes and Monkeys have their Teats upon the Breast, as Women have; and ⁽²¹⁾ Albertus Magnus gives this Reason for it, Mammillas autem habet in Pectore sicut Mulier, eò quòd manus dedit ei Natura, quibus ad Pectus potest elevare partum, sicut Mulier. Our Pygmie was a Male, yet here the two Papillae or Teats appeared very plain, and were exactly situated as they are in Men. The Mammae or Breasts were small and thin, and not protuberant. The Female Orang-Outang of ⁽²²⁾ Bontius is pictured with pendulous large Breasts, and they are so described by ⁽²³⁾ Tulpius. And ⁽²⁴⁾ Gassendus, in the Life of Peiresky, speaking of the Barris, saith, Huic Mammae ad pedis longitudinem.

(h) Arist. They have Arms like a Man, but hairy; and they bend them and the Legs as a Man does; the flection of the one being contrary to the other.

The Shoulder and Arm of our Pygmie were very hairy outwards, not so hairy inwards. The Contratendency of the Hair here, as that of the Shoulder pointing downwards, and that of the Arm pointing upwards, like Lucan's Pila minantia Pilis, I have already noted. This difference I shall here remark of this fore-limb in our Pygmie, as well as in Apes and Monkeys; that 'tis longer in them proportionably, than in Man. I shall examine this Part more particularly in the Myology and Osteology.

But the Curvature or Flection of the Arms and Legs in our Pygmie, as also in Apes and Monkeys, is just the same as in Man; the Arms bending forwards, and the Legs backwards; whereas in other Brutes, the flection [Page 12] of the fore and hinder Legs is both the sáme way. Homini Genua & Cubita contraria (saith ⁽²⁵⁾ Pliny) item Ʋrsis & simiarum generi, ob id minime pernicibus. I shall examine this Place of Pliny in the Osteo­logy.

(i) Arist. Besides they have Hands, Fingers, and Nails like a Man's, but all these somewhat ruder.

The Hand of our Pygmie was different from a Man's, in that the Palm was much longer; so the Thumb too, was less than the other Fin­gers; whereas in a Man, the Thumb is usually thicker than the rest of the Fingers: In both these respects, it more resembled the Ape-kind. But the Fingers of our Pygmie being so much bigger than those of Apes and Monkeys; and its Nails being broader, and flatter, on both these Ac­counts it was liker a Man. Ʋngues Clausulae Nervorum summae existiman­tur (saith ⁽²⁶⁾ Pliny) omnibus hi, quibus & digiti: sed Simiae imbricati, Hominibus lati.

In the Palms of the Hands of our Pygmie were remarkable those Lines which are usually taken notice of in Palmestry, and at the ends of the Fingers were those Spiral Lines, which are usually in a Man's.

(k) Arist. The Feet are particular; for they are like great Hands, and the Toes like Fingers; the middlemost being the longest; And the Sole of the Foot like the Palm of the Hand, but more extended, or longer.

Pliny (as I have remark'd) renders this Passage thus: Pedibus paulum differunt, sunt enim, ut manus, praelongi; sed vestigium Palmae simile fa­ciunt. Now the Palms of the Hands, and the Soles of the Feet of our Pygmie, were equally long, and longer, proportionably, than in Man; and herein it resembled more the Ape-kind: As it did likewise in the length of the Toes, which were as long as the Fingers, as also in having the middlemost Toe longer than the rest. For in the Hand of a Man, the middle Finger is the longest, but in the Foot, the middle Toe is not. The Philosopher does very well liken it to a Hand, since besides the length of the Toes, like Fingers, it had the great Toe, like the Thumb set off at a distance from the range of the other Toes, as we shall shew here­after.

(l) Arist. The sole of the Foot in the hinder part was more callous, ill, and odly imitating a Heel: For they use their Feet in both Capacities, both as a Hand and Foot, and bend them like Hands.

In the Ape-kind there is a true Os Calcis, besides this Callosity. And in our Pygmie this Heel-bone was liker that in a Man, than theirs is. The Philosopher in the former Paragraph shewed what resemblance this Part had to a Humane Hand, in this, by reason of the Os Calcis, how 'tis like [Page 13] a Foot; and then makes an Inference from the different structure of this Organ, that it performs the Uses and Offices of both.

All which is very agreeable to our Pygmie. But this Part, in the For­mation and it's Function too, being liker a Hand, than a Foot; for the distinguishing this sort of Animals from others, I have thought, whe­ther it might not be reckoned and call'd rather Quadru-manus than Qua­drupes, i. e. a four-handed, than a four-footed Animal.

And as it uses it's hinder Feet upon any occasion, as Hands; so like­wise I observed in our Pygmie, that it would make use of it's Hands, to supply the place of Feet. But when it went as a Quadruped on all four, 'twas awkwardly; not placing the Palm of the Hand flat to the Ground, but it walk'd upon it's Knuckles, as I observed it to do, when weak, and had not strength enough to support it's Body. So that this Species of Animals hath the Advantage of making use of their Feet as Hands, and their Hands as Feet, as there is occasion.

(m) Arist. The Os Humeri, and the Os Femoris are short, in respect of the Ulna and Tibia.

In a Humane Skeleton, the Os Humeri, and the Os Femoris are much longer than the Ʋlna and Tibia. For in a Skeleton of a Woman I have by me, the Os Humeri was Twelve Inches and a half, and the Os Fe­moris Seventeen Inches long; whereas the Ʋlna was but Nine Inches and three quarters, and the Tibia Fourteen Inches long. In our Pygmie, the Os Humeri was Five Inches and a half, and the Os Femoris Five Inches long. The Ʋlna was Five Inches and a half, and the Tibia was Four Inches long. These Bones in the Skeleton of a Monkey, were much of the same length with our Pygmie's, so that herein both differ from a Man, and our Pygmie more resembles the Ape-kind.

(n) Arist. They have no prominent Navel, but something hard in this place of the Navel.

In our Pygmie the Ʋmbilicus or Navel appeared very fair, and in the exact Place, as 'tis in a Man; not prominent nor harder, but in all re­spect Natural and alike.

(o) Arist. They have the upper Parts much larger than the lower, as being Quadrupeds, almost as five to three; and as upon this account, so be because they have Feet like Hands, as if they were compounded of a Hand and Foot: Of a Foot, in respect of the Heel behind; and of a Hand, as to the other Parts; for they have Fingers, and what we call the Palm.

In Quadrupeds usually the Ʋpper or fore-parts are much larger than the Lower or hinder; and 'tis so in the Ape and Monkey-kind, as the Phi­losopher Remarks. But in our Pygmie I think this Observation will not hold. For tho' it was much emaciated, by reason of it's long; illness, so that it seemed very thin and lank in the Belly; yet behind it look'd square enough, and proportionable as a Man. But the Orang-Outang of Tulpius [Page 14] had a large squob Belly. We shall presently give the Dimensions of all the Parts, as soon as we have done with this Text of Aristotle.

We shall hereafter farther consider the structure of the Foot in the Osteology, where we shall describe the Os Calcis, and shew how well it performs its Office, when this Animal stands erect. But since Nature design'd it not always to live on the Ground, but to get it's Prey in the Trees likewise, it hath very wisely formed this Part like a Hand, by which means it can more easily climb them; and when there, shift much better by this Contrivance; as I have shewn in my Discourse ⁽²⁷⁾ upon the Carigueya, seu Marsupiale Americanum, or the Anatomy of an Opossum; which Animal had its hinder Feet formed like Hands

(p) Arist. They live most of their time as Quadrupeds more than as Bipeds, or erect.

Our Merchants tell me, when first they take Apes or Monkeys, to learn them to go erect, they usually tye their Hands behind them. And I am of the Philosopher's Mind, that Naturally they go more on all Four, than erect. But whether 'tis so in our Pygmie, I do suspect; since walk­ing on it's Knuckles, as our Pygmie did, seems no Natural Posture; and 'tis sufficiently provided in all respects to walk erect.

(q) Arist. As Quadrupeds they have no Buttocks; as Bipeds, no Tails; or but very little, like a shew of one.

Our Pygmie had Buttocks or Nates, as we shall see in the Myology, but not so much as in Man. The Os Ischij or Coxendix was very different, as appears in the Skeleton, and as I shall describe in the Osteology. Our Pygmie had no Tail, but an Os Coxygis, as is in Man, which outwardly made a little appearance, as in my Second Figure, and may be what Ari­stotle Remarks. Scaliger has this Note upon it: Caudae notam sive vesti­gium animadvertit, quam vix Oculis deprehendas. Tactu tamen subesse in­telligas, quam si attractare tentes, promptâ mirâque celeritate sese subtrahit, ridiculâ indignatione laesum prae se sert.

(r) Arist. The Female hath the Privy-parts, like a Woman; but the Male, more like a Dog's, than a Man's.

Our Subject was a Male, and this Part here was nothing like a Dog's. For in the Penis of a Dog there is a large Bone, which is not in the Ape and Monkey-kind. Scaliger's Note here does not make out the Assertion: Caninum Genitale dixit Simij, non temerè; nodos enim quosdam deprehen­dimus: differt autem figurâ Glandis. I did not observe these Nodes here; but of this, more in the Anatomy of this Part.

(s) Arist. The Cebi (as was said before) have Tails: As to the Viscera they have them all like a Man's.

[Page 15]So Pliny, Viscera etiam interiora omnia ad Exemplar. But I find this a great Mistake. For, as we shall shew, our Pygmie, who comes much nearer to a Man in the Structure of the inward Parts, than either Apes or Monkeys, yet in a great many things is very different; but where it is so, there it resembles an Ape. But on the other hand, Albertus Mag­nus is much more mistaken, who will not allow any likeness at all. For speaking of an Ape, he tells us, ⁽²⁸⁾ Et sicut in ante habitis dixi­mus, homini in exterioribus simile existens, in nullo similitudinem habet cum interioribus hominis, & minùs fere omnibus aliis Bestiis. Galen ⁽²⁹⁾ is much more in the right, who acknowledges a very great similitude be­tween an Ape and a Man, both in the outward and inward Parts, where he tells US, [...]. i. e. An Ape is the most like a Man of any Quadruped: In the Viscera and the Muscles, and in the Arteries, and Veins and Nerves, because 'tis so in the structure of the Bones. For 'tis from their make, that it walks on two Legs, and uses its fore-limbs as Hands. It hath the largest Breast of any Quadruped, and Clavicles or Collar­bones like a Man, and a round Face, and a small or short Neck.

All which is very agreeable to our Pygmie, whom we shall sind more exactly to answer this Character, than an Ape. And now having compared our Pygmie with this general Description that Aristotle gives of the Ape-kind; we shall compare him with himself, by taking the diffe­rent Dimensions of the several Parts, as well as of the whole Body; and shall observe what Proportions they had to one another.

As from the top of the Head, to the heel of the Foot in a strait Line, it measured Twenty six Inches. The Girth of the Body in the biggest part about the Cartilago Ensiformis, was Sixteen Inches; over the Loins 'twas Ten Inches about. The Compass of the Head over the Eyes and Ears, Thirteen Inches and a half. The aperture of the Eye-lids, three quarters of an Inch. From one corner of the Mouth, to the other, Two Inches and a quarter. From the middle of the upper Lip to the Eye-brow, 'twas two Inches three quarters. From the Eye-brow to the Oc­ciput Seven Inches and a half. The Perpendicular Diameter of the Ear from the Top to the Lobe, was Two Inches and a half. The Horizontal Diameter of the Ear was an Inch and half. The Verge or Compass of the Ear about, was near Five Inches and a half. Where the Ear was fastened to the Head, it measured above an Inch and half. From the Cla­vicula or Collar-Bone, to the Penis, Ten Inches. From the Cartilago En­siformis to the Navel, Three Inches and a half. From the Navel to the Penis, Three Inches. The distance between the two Teats, Three Inches [Page 16] and a quarter. The length of the Arm, from the Shoulder to the end of the Fingers, Seventeen Inches. The Girth of the Shoulder about the middle, Four Inches and a quarter; of the Arm near the Elbow, Five Inches. The Hand from the Wrist to the end of the Middle Fin­ger, measured Five Inches and an half. The Thumb was an Inch and a quarter long; the Fore-Finger Two Inches, the Middle-Finger Two Inches and an half; the Ring-Finger Two Inches and a quarter, and the Little Finger One Inch and an half long. The Girth of the Thumb and the Little Finger, was One Inch; the Girth of the other Fingers was an Inch and a quarter. The Palm of the Hand was Three Inches long, and an Inch and three quarters broad.

From the head of the Thigh-Bone to the Heel, it measured Twelve Inches: From the Heel to the end of the Middle-Toe (which was the longest) Five Inches three quarters. The Girth of the Thigh was Six Inches; of the Leg at the Calf, Four Inches and a quarter; of the Foot at the setting on of the Great Toe, near Five Inches. The Great Toe was an Inch and half long, the Fore-Toe One Inch, the Middle-Toe an Inch and half, the Third Toe an Inch and a quarter, the Little Toe One Inch long. The Sole of the Foot, about the setting on of the Great Toe (where 'twas broadest) was Two Inches over; but nearer the Heel, 'twas an Inch and half broad. The Girth of the Great Toe, where biggest, an Inch and half, the other Toes were an Inch about. These Measures were taken before the Skin was strip't off, in the Skeleton, or the Skin stuff'd, they may prove otherwise.

And having now given these Dimensions of the whole, and of most of the External Parts; you will the better conceive the exact shape of this wonderful Animal by the Figures I have caused to be made of it. As the First Figure represents our Pygmie erect, where you have a view of all the Fore-Parts. Being weak, the better to support him, I have given him a Stick in his Right-Hand. But our Figure being made after he was dead, the Head seems too much fallen in between the Shoulders, as if it had a very shore or little or no Neck, which takes off from the Beauty of the Figure; but this is rectified and mended in the Figure of the Skeleton, where you will see the Neck proportionate. The Head here is large and globous; the Ears standing off, not lying close. The face looks like an Old wither'd Man's, which without doubt was ren­der'd much more so, by an Ʋlcer it had in one of it's Cheeks, occasioned by a Fall it had on Ship-board upon a Cannon, which forced out one of it's Teeth; and the Jaw-bone afterwards proving carious, it might hasten it's Death. The rising of the Cranium just under the Eye-lids, as I have ramark'd, is different from what is in a Man, and renders the Face harder; as does likewise it's flat Nose, and the Ʋpper Jaw being more prominent, and lesser spread, than in a Man; and it's Chin or Ʋnder Jaw being shorter. The Eyes were a little sunk, the Mouth large, the Teeth perfectly Humane. The Face was without Hair, and the Colour a little tawny; the Skin on the rest of the Body was white.

[Page 17]The Shoulders are spread and large, the Thorax or Breast extended al­together like a Man's, the Mammae and Teats the same; the Belly was lank and pinch'd in, not prominent, by reason of it's illness; but here it held a more proportionable breadth to a Man's, than a Quadruped's. The Arms were longer than in a Man, and so were the Palms of the Hands; but the Thumb was much less, the Nails exactly like a Man's, and the Navel the same. The Penis was different, as we shall hereafter shew. Here was no Scrotum, but the Testes were contained in the Re­gion of the Pubis under the Skin, which made it here more protuberant. The Thighs and Legs were somewhat divaricated or stradling, for want of strength, either from it's illness, or being but young. We observed Calves in it's Legs; the Feet long, as likewise the Toes, which were liker Fingers; and the Great Toe exactly like a Thumb, more than that on the Hand.

The Second Figure represents the hinder Parts of this Creature, in an Erect Posture likewise. Where may be observed, the Globous Figure and largeness of the Head, with the Ears standing off; the curious snape and straitness of the Back, and how it spreads. At the Os Coxygis there is a little Protuberance, but nothing like a Tail.

In this Figure I have represented him with the Fingers of one Hand bended, as if kneeling upon his Knuckles, to shew the Action, when he goes on all four: For the Palms of his Hands never touch the Ground, but when he malks as a Quadruped, 'tis only upon his Knuckles. The other Hand is holding a Rope, to shew his Climbing; for he will nimbly run up the Tackle of a Ship, or climb a Tree: And having this hold, he is the better supported, to shew the Sole of the left Foot, and the Heel there; on account of which Heel it may be thought a Foot: But the Great Toe being set off so far from the range of the others, and they all being so large and long, it more resembles a Hand, as has been observed.

If we compare our Figures with those given by Tulpius, Bonlius, and Gesner, we shall find a great difference. That of Tulpius seems the most Natural; but being made sitting, it does not so well represent the Pro­portions of the several Parts. The Chaps or Rostrum is longer, and 'tis less hairy in the fore-parts than ours. The Mammae are larger and pen­dulous, and the Belly more protuberant, Dapper, ⁽³⁰⁾ in his Descrip­tion of Africa, has borrowed this Figure from Tulpius, without naming him, as likewise his Description, which is the same. For avoiding the often quoting it, I will here Transcribe Tulpius's Account: But why I think it not a Satyr, as he and Dapper make it, I will give my Reasons in the following Essay. Tulpius his words are these: ⁽³¹⁾

[Page 18]Quamvis extra forum Medicum, attexam tamen huic telae, Satyrum In­dicum; vostrâ memoriâ, ex Angolâ delctum: & Frederico Henrico, Arau­sionensium Principi, dono datum. Erat autem hic Satyrus quadrupes: sed ab humanâ specie, quam prae se fert, vocatur Indis Orang-Outang: sive homo Sylvestris, uti Africanis Quoias morrou. Exprimens longitudine puerum tri­mum; ut crassitie sexennem.

Corpore erat nec obeso, nec gracili, sed quadrato: habilissimo tamen, ac pernicissimo. Artubus verò tam strictis, & musculis adeò vastis: ut quidvis & anderet, & posset. Anteriùs undique glaber: at ponè hirsutus, ac nigris crinibus obsitus. Facies mentiebatur hominem: sed nares simae, & aduncae, rugosam, & edentulam anum.

Aures verò nihil diserepare, ab humanâ formâ. Ʋti neque pectus; or­natum utrinque mammâ praetumidâ (erat enim fexûs foeminini); venter habebat umbilicum profundiorem; & artus, cum superiores, tum inferiores, tam exactam cum homine similitudinem: ut vix ovum ovo videris similius.

Nec cubito defuit requisita commissura: nec manibus digitorum ordo: ne­dum pollici figura humana: vel cruribus furae: vel pedi calcis fulcrum. Quae concinna, ac decens membrorum forma, in caussâ fuit, quod multoties ince­deret erectus: neque attolleret minùs gravatè, quàm transferret facilè, quale­cunque, gravissimi oneris, pondus.

Bibiturus prehendebat canthari ansam, manu alterâ; alteram verò vasis fundo supponens, abstergebat deinde madorem labiis relictum, non minùs adposit, ac si delicatissimum vidisses aulicum. Quam eandem dexteritatem observabat utique cubitum iturus. Inclinans quippe caput in pulvinar, & corpus stragulis convenientèr operiens, velabat se haud alitèr, ac si vel mol­lissimus illic decubuisset homo.

Quin imò narravit aliquandò affini nostro, Samueli Blomartio, Rex Sam­bacensis, Satyros hosce, praesertim mares, in Insulâ Bornaeo, tantam habere animi considentiam, & tam validam musculorum compagem: ut non semel impetum fecerint, in viros armatos: nedùm in imbellem, foeminarum, puella­rumve, sexum.

Quarum interdùm tàm ardenti flagrant desiderio: ut raptas non semel con­stuprarint. Summè quippe in venerem sunt proclives (quod ipsis, cum li­bidinosis veterum Satyris commune) imò interdùm adeò protervi, ac salaces: ut mulieres Indicae, proptereà vitent, cane pejus & angue, saltus, ac lnstra, in quibus delitescunt impudica haec animalia.

Dapper, who hath transcribed this Account of Tulpius, (as I said) but without taking any notice of him, makes this Preface to it. ‘The Quoias Morrou (of which I have spoken in the Kingdom of Quoia) are bred likewise in the Kingdom of Angola. This Animal, as it hath a great deal of a Man, so a great many have thought it to be the Issue of a Man and an Ape: But the Blacks themselves reject this Opinion.’ Now in the Place that Dapper refers to, he seems to give it as the Opinion of the Blacks, that they are the Issue of Men; but that by their always [Page 19] living in the Woods, they are become half-Beasts. I shall transcribe his Words, and so have done with him: ⁽³²⁾ On trouve dans les bois une Espece de Satyre que les Negroes appellent Quoias-Morrou, & les Portugais, Salvage. Ils ont la ête grosse, le Corps gros et pesant, les bras nerveux, ils n'ont point de queve, et Marchent tantót tout droit, et tantót à quatre pieds. Les Animaux se nourrissent de fruits et de Miel Sauvage, & se battent à tout moment ies uns contre les autres. Ils sont issu des Hommes, à ce disent les Negroes, mais ils sont devenus ainsi demi-bêtes en se tenant toûjours dans les Forêts. On dit qu'ils forcent les femmes & les filles, & qu'ils ont le courage d' attaquer des Hommes armez.

We will now examine Jacobus Bontius's Figure, and compare it with ours: And tho' he tells us, that he had seen some of both Sexes that went erect, especially that Female one, whose Effigies he here gives us; yet I can't but think, he indulged more his Fancy herein, than copied the true Life; or at least it was much different from ours. For ours had no such long Hair on the Head, and all round the Face; the Face of our Pygmie was not so flat and round, nor the Nose and Ʋnder-Lip so rising: The large Breasts in his, answers the Description which is given of it by others; ours being a Male, had but small ones. But the Armes in our Pygmie (as'tis in the Ape-kind) were much longer than they are represented in his Figure, and the Feet are altogether different; for he makes them exactly like Humane Feet, and nothing like Hands, which is so Remarkable a thing in all these Animals, that this Mistake of it self, is enough to discountenance the Truth of his Picture, and render it suspected. I shall not take notice, how ill the Hair is drawn, nor make any further Remarks upon the structure of the Limbs, since I confess I do mistrust the whole Representation. But because he hath ex­press'd, that this Creature had so much Modesty, I have added to his Figure what becomes that Character.

That Figure in Conradus Gesner, ⁽³³⁾ which he tells us he had out of a German Book, wrote about the Holy Land, in some Particulars I think more exact and just: For here he makes the Feet like Hands, the Legs more divaricated, the Face longer, and the Rostrum more extended. But the Arms are too short, and I do not know for what reason there is a Tail clap't on, which sits untowardly enough, which must be surely an Addition of the Painter; or if there is any such Creature in Nature, it must be of another Family, different from ours.

However, I have caused all these Figures to be copyed, that they may be the easier compared: But since they are so disagreeing, as are likewise [Page 20] the Descriptions they give of them, it sufficiently justifies my Complaint of the uncertainty we have of the true Animal, that they are discoursing about; since the same Name probably may be given to different Species of the Ape-kind. Now Orang-Outang, or Homo Sylvestris, or the Wild Man, being a General Name, I have given it also to our Subject: Tho' I confess I am not fully satisfied whether it be exactly the same with that of Tulpius or Bontius; or even whether that of Bontius be the same with that of Tulpius. For Bontius his Account is so very imperfect, that from thence one cannot make a safe Conclusion; and I rather suspect the contrary: For Bontius describes it with soft, tender Passions; Tulpius and Dapper make it Warlike and Fighting. Bontious's words are these: ⁽³⁴⁾ Ast quod majorem meretur admirationem, vidi ego aliquot utri­usque sexûs erectè incedentes, imprimis eam (cujus Effigiem hic exhibeo) Satyram femellam, tanta verecundia ab ignotis sibi hominibus occulentem, tum quoque faciem manibus (liceat ità dicere) tegentem ubertimque lachry­mantem, gemitus cientem, & caetcros humanos actus exprimentem, ut nihil ei humani deesse diceres, praeter loquelam. Loqui verò eos easque posse, Ja­vani aiunt, sed non velle, nè ad labores cogerentur: ridicule mehercules. Nomen ei indunt Ourang Outang, quod Hominem Sylvae significat, cosque nasci affirmant è Libidine Mulierum Indarum, quae se Simiis & Cercopithe­cis detestandâ libidine miscent: ‘Nec pueri credunt, nisi qui nondum aere lavantur.’

And then adds, that in Borneo there are these Wild Men, and with Tails, but much shorter than that pictured in Gesner. Porrò in Insulâ Borneo ( saith Bontius) in Regno Succodana dicto, à nostris Mercatoribus propter Oryzam & Adamantes frequentato, Homines montani Caudati in in­terioribus Regni inveniuntur, quos multi è nostris in Aulâ Regis Succodanae viderent. Cauda autem illis est prominentia quaedam ossis Coccygos, ad qua­tuor, aut paulò ampliùs, digitos excrescens, eodem modo, quo truncata cauda (quos nos Spligiones vocamus) sed depilis.

'Tis for this Reason therefore, that I might more particularly distin­guish our Animal, that I have call'd it a Pygmie; a Name that was for­merly given to a sort of Ape, as I shall prove. But the Poets and Hi­storians too of former Ages have invented so many improbable Stories about them, that they have rendred the whole History concerning them ridiculous, and not to be believed. We shall therefore endeavour to distinguish the Truth from the Fables in the following Essay.

The Barisor Barrislikewise seems to be an Ourang Outang,or a Wild Man; but whether exactly the same with ours, I will not determine, but leave to farther Enquiry. For all the Accounts concerning it that I [Page 21] have at present met with, relate rather it's Docility and Actions, and the Servile Offices 'tis capable of performing in a Family, than any thing particular as to the Description of the Body; only in general that 'tis an Ape like a Man. Thus Peter Gassendus ⁽³⁵⁾ in the Life of Peiresky tells us, that in Java Major were observed by the Sieur de Saint-Amant, Animalia quae forent Naturae homines inter & simias mediae; which being doubted of ,Peireskyproduced a Letter from Natalis or Noël, a Physician who lived in Africa, which gave him this Account. Esse in Guineâ Simias, barbâ procerâ, canâque, & pexâ propemodùm venerabileis, incedere ipsos lentè, ac videri sibi prae caeteris sapere: qui maximi sunt, & Barris dicuntur, pollere maximè judicio; semel duntaxat quidpiam docendos; veste indutos illicò bipedes incedere; scitè ludere fistulâ, Citharâ, aliisque id genus (nam quod everrant domum, convertant veru, pinsant in mortario, aliaque ratione famulatum praestant, haud reputari admodum) foeminas denique in iis pati menstrua, & mares mulierum esse appetentissimos. He likewise produced other Letters from Arcosius or d' Arcos, which related what happened to one of Ferraria when he was at Angola, the Country from whence our Animal, as likewise that of Tulpius came. I will give it in Gassendus's words: Incidit nempè quâdam die in Nigritam Canibus venan­tem Homines ut visum, Sylvestreis. Capto, caesoque i [...]orum uno, inhumani­tatem Nigritae increpuit, qui in suum genus ità saeviret. Ille verò, falleris, inquit, nam hic non est homo, sed bellua homini persimilis, Quippe solâ pascitur herbâ, intestinaque Ovina habet, quod ut credas meliùs, rem ecce; simulque abdomen aperuit. Sequenti die rursus venatum, captique mas & foemina: huic Mammae ad pedis longitudinem: caeterà mulieri simillima fuit; nisi quod Intestina quoque herbis oppleta, & cujusmodi Ovis, habuit. Totum utique pilosum Corpus, sed pilo brevi, ac satis leni.

Our Animal was not so bearded, as that of Natalis; and what Ar­cosius relates of his Wild Man, or Barris; as it's feeding upon Grass, and having it's Intestines like a Sheep's, all this is far different from ours; tho' as to it's docility and capacity of performing those Actions men­tioned, I can't but think our Subject might easily have been taught to do them; and, it may be, others too of the Ape-kind, tho' different: As there are wonderful Instances of this kind given of them by Nierember­gius ⁽³⁶⁾ and others. Dapper's ⁽³⁷⁾ Description is much the same. There is a sort of Ape (saith he) call'd Baris, which they take when young, and breed them up, and make them so tame, that they will do almost all the Work of a Slave: For they go ordinarily upright as Men do; they will beat Rice in a Mortar, carry Water in a Pitcher, and shew such pretty Actions of Address, that they extreamly divert their Masters. And in Nierember­gius ⁽³⁸⁾ there is much the same Account. ‘In Guineâ scribit P. Jar­ricus existere Simias, quae instar famuli in Pilâ tundant quaecunque in [Page 22] eam imponuntur, quae aquam à fluviis in Hydriis capite domùm defe­rant, ità tamen ut ubi primùm domûs fores attigerint, illicò Hydriis exonerandae sint, alioqui eas excidere, casuque isto frangi, atque tùm clamoribus ac fletu compleri universa. Neque ista modo, sed plurima item alia obire de domesticis ministeriis dicuntur hi Simij Baris. To­rosi sunt & robusti.’

But all this does not sufficiently inform us of the particular shape, structure, and make of the Body and the several Parts of this Animal, so as to be fully certain whether it be the same, or a different-Creature from the Ourang-Outang. And tho' I have mentioned it, as a Con­jecture that probably the Baris might be, what we call a Drill, yet I own it as an uncertainty, since I have not met with what can justifie, or fully satisfie me herein.

The Pongo likewise which is described by Purchas, as a sort of Wild Man, is different from our Subject; as it may be also from the rest hi­therto mentioned. The Reason, therefore, why I insert the Descrip­tion of this, as likewise of the others, I own to be, that hereby I might excite some Inquisitive Observers to give us a truer Account of this large and noble Species of Animals. 'Tis an Enquiry that would recompence their Curiosity with abundance of Satisfaction, by the many and useful Discoveries that they would make, and extreamly enrich the Natural History of Animals, whose enlargement, I think, in this Inquisitive Age, hath not advanced so much as that of Botanie. For how great Diligence hath been used of late, to ransack both the Indies, to pry into all the Corners of the World, both inhabited, and uninhabited, to find out a new Plant, not before described? And with what great Expence, and how magnificently are their Figures Printed? And how little hath been done in the Improvement of the History of Animals? Not that I any ways dislike the former, but the latter being a Nobler Subject, I can't but recommend it, as deserving the Labours of the Curious likewise; and if any, this kind, I think, which comes so near to a Man, may be speak the preference.

But I beg the Reader's Pardon for this Digression. Purchas's ⁽³⁹⁾ words are these: This Pongo is in all Proportions like a Man, but that he is more like a Giant-Creature, then a Man: For he is very tall, and hath a Man's Face, hollow-eyed, with long Hair upon his brows. His Face and Ears are without Hair and his Hands also. His Body is full of Hair, but not very thick, and it is of a dunnish colour. He differeth not from a Man, but in his Legs, for he hath no Calf. He goeth always on his Legs, and carries his Hands clasped on the Nape of his Neck, when he goeth upon the Ground. [Page 23] They sleep in the Trees, and build shelters for the Rain. They feed upon Fruits that they find in the Woods, and upon Nuts; for they eat no kind of Flesh. They cannot speak, and have no Ʋnderstanding, no more than a Beast. The People of the Country, when they Travel in the Woods, make Fires, where they sleep in the Night: And in the Morning when they are gone, the Pongoes will come and sit about the Fire, till it goeth out; for they have no Ʋnderstanding to lay the Wood together. They go many toge­ther, and kill many Negroes that Travel in the Woods. Many times they fall upon Elephants, which come to feed where they be, and so beat them with their clubbed Fists, and pieces of Wood, that they will run away roaring from them. These Pongoes are never taken alive, because they are so strong, that Ten Men cannot hold one of them: But yet they take many of their Young Ones with poisoned Arrows. The Young Pongo hangeth on his Mo­ther;s Belly, with his Hands fast clasped about her; so that when any of the Country People kill any of the Females, they take the Young one which hangeth fast upon his Mother. When they die among themselves, they cover the Dead with great heaps of Boughs and Wood, which is commonly found in the Forrests.

Our Pygmie had Calves in his Legs, tho' not large, being emaciated; and it being young, I am uncertain to what height in time it might have grown; tho' I cannot think to the just Stature (if there be any such) of a Man. For different Nations extreamly vary herein, and even those of the same. Nor did our Pygmie seem so dull a Creature as these Pongoes, but on the contrary, very apprehensive, tho' nothing so robust and strong as they are represented to be.

I shall only further add what le Compte, a Modern Writer, tells us of the Savage Man, and so I think I shall have done: For this Argument is so Fruitful, that one does not know when to conclude . ⁽⁴⁰⁾ Lewis le Compte therefore in his Memoirs and Observations upon China, tells us, That what is to be seen in the Isle of Borneo , is yet more Remarkable, and surpasseth all that ever the History of Animals hath hitherio related to be the most admirable, the People of the Country assure us, as a thing notoriously known to be true: That they find in the Woods a sort of Beast, called the Savage Man; whose Shape, Stature, Countenance, Arms, Legs, and other Members of the Body, are so like ours, that excepting the Voice only, ons should have much ado not to reckon them equally Men with certain Barbarians in Africa, who do not much differ from Beasts.

This Wild or Savage Man, of whom I speak, is endued with extraordi­nary strength, and notwithstanding he walks but upon two Legs; yet is he so swift of Foot, that they have much ado to out-run him. People of Quality [Page 24] Course him, as we do Stags here, and this sort of Hunting is the King's usual Divertisement. His Skin is all hairy, his Eyes sunk in his Head, a stern Countenance, tanned Face; but all his Lineaments are pretty propor­tionable, although harsh, and thickned by the Sun. I learn'd all these Par­ticulars from one of our French Merchants, who hath remained some time upon the Island. Nevertheless, I do not believe a Man ought to give much Credit to such sort of Relations, neither must we altogether reject them as fabulous; but wait till the unanimous Testimonies of several Travellers may more particularly acquaint us with the Truth of it.

Passing upon a time from China to the Coast of Coramandel, I did my self see in the Straits of Molucca a kind of Ape, that might make pretty credible that which I just now related concerning the Savage Man.

It marches naturally upon it's two hind Feet, which it bends a little, like a Dog's, that hath been taught to Dance, it makes use of it's two Arms as we do; it's Visage is in a manner as well favoured, as theirs of the Cape of Good Hope; but the Body is all covered with a white, black, or grey Wool: As to the rest, it cries exactly like a Child; the whole outward Action is so Hu­mane, and the Passions so lively and significant, that dumb Men can scarce express better their Conceptions and Appetites. They do especially appear to be of a very kind Nature; and to shew their Affections to Persons they know and love, they embrace them, and kiss them with transports that surprise a Man. They have also a certain motion, that we meet not with in any Beast, very proper to Children, that is, to make a noise with their Feet, for joy or spight, when one gives, or refuses them what they pa [...]sionately long for.

Although they be very big, (for that I saw was at least four Foot high) their nimbleness and slight is incredible; it is Pleasure beyond expression to see them run up the Tackling of a Ship, where they sometimes play, as if they had a particular knack of Vaulting to themselves, or as if they had been paid, like our Rope-Dancers, to divert the Company.

Sometimes suspended by one Arm, they poise themselves for some time neg­ligently to try themselves, and then turn, all on the sudden, round about a Rope, with as much quickness as a Wheel, or a Sling that is once put in mo­tion; sometimes holding the Rope successively with their long Fingers, and living their whole Body fall into the Air, they run full speed from one to the other, and come back again with the same swiftness. There is no Posture but they imitate, nor Motion but they perform; bending themselves like a Row, rowling like a Bowl, hanging by the Hands, Feet, and Teeth, accord­ing to the different Fancies which their whimsical Imagination supplies them with, which they Act in the most diverting manner imaginable; but their Agility to sting themselvs from one Rope to another, at Thirty and Fifty Foot distance, is yet more surprising.

[Page 25]In this Character there are several things I could take notice of, and I may hereafter have occasion to refer to some of the Particulars; But what is mention'd of it's Cry, like a Child's; and it's expressing the Pas­sions of Joy and Grief, by making a Noise with it's Feet, is agreeable enough to the Relation I had of our Pygmie: For I heard it Cry my self like a Child; and he hath been often seen to kick with his Feet, as Chil­dren do, when either he was pleased or angered.

We shall now proceed to the Anatomy, which in a History of Animals, is certainly the most Necessary, most Significant, and Instructive Part. Nor can I see, how an History of Animals can be well wrote without giving the Dissection of the Inward Parts: 'Tis as if one should under­take to describe a Watch, and at the same time, take notice only of the Case or Cover, and tell what fine Garniture there is about it; but inform us nothing of the admirable Contrivances of the Wheels and Springs within, which gives it Life and Motion. Galen ⁽⁴¹⁾ thought the Dissection of Apes very useful for the understanding the Structure of the Parts in Humane Bodies; and recommends it to his Scholars to Pra­ctice themselves herein. Not that he only dissected Apes, (as Vesalius oftentimes charges him with) or preferred it before the Dissection of Humane Body: But where that could not be had, he advises them to get Apes, and dissect them; especially those that come nearest to a Man. Had he known our Pygmie, no doubt but he would have preferred it, for this purpose, as much beyond the Ape, as he does the Ape beyond the Cynoceph [...], and all other Animals. For, as we shall observe, there is no [...], I have [...]i [...]herto met with, or heard of, that so exactly re­se [...] Man, in the Structure of the Inward Parts, as our Pygmie: But w [...]t differs, (as I have remark'd) there it resembles an Ape; being different both from a Man and an Ape: And in many things agreeing with both of them.

The Skin of the whole Body of our Pygmie was whitish; but that on the Head was tawny, and of a darker colour. 'Twas thin, but strong, and adhered pretty firmly, and more than usually to the Flesh; it's greatest adhaesion was at the Linea alba, and in the Palms of the Hands, and the Soles of the Feet, and in the Fingers and Toes; as it is in Men. In the Skin of the Arm-pits, I observed those Glandulae Cutaneae Axillares, which secrete that Orange-coloured Liquor, which in some Men stains the Shift here, with that colour. I call them Cutaneae, to distinguish them from those larger Glands, that lie bedded under in the Fat, and are call'd Glandulae Axillares. For these I have observed to be Lymphatic Glands; and have traced the Lymphaducts thence to the head of the Ductus Thoracicus, where they empty themselves.

[Page 26]Together with the Skin, we took off the Mammae or Breasts, which stuck close to it: And in our Subject, being a Male, they were but small and thin; yet I could plainly perceive they were made up of abundance of small Glands. I have already mentioned, how large the Breasts are in the Female Orang-Outang, and the Baris, so that no Woman's are larger. As to their Situation, and their being placed upon the Pectoral Muscles, this I find is common to the Ape-kind: And they are so described by the Parisians ⁽⁴²⁾ in the Monkeys they dissected; as also in the Apes dissected by Drelincourt: ⁽⁴³⁾ And because I shall have frequent occasion of re­ferring to these Authors, unless I signifie otherwise, I shall always mean the Places here quoted, without mentioning them any more.

In Brutes, next under the Skin, lies a Musculous Membrane, which therefore is call'd Panniculus Carnosus, which gives a motion to it, where­by they can shove off what offends them. In Man 'tis otherwise; for next to the Skin, lies the Membrana Adiposa; or the Fat, and under that, the Membrana Carnosa: And the same I observed in our Pygmie; for the Fat here lay next to the Skin. Drelincourt, in the Apes he dissected, observed the Panniculus Carnosus next to the Skin, as 'tis in Brutes. For in the Male Ape, he tells us, Adeps nullus inter Panniculum Carnosum & Cutim; and in the Female, Panniculus Carnosus cuti cohaerens, nullo adipe inter­jecto, Adiposus nullus. So that in this Particular, our Pygmie is like to a Man, and different from the Ape-kind.

Having separated the Skin and Membrana Adiposa, which in our Sub­ject was not very thick, it being emaciated by it's illness, we come now to the Muscles. But I shall reserve my self to treat of them in the My­ology. Next under the Muscles was the Peritonaeum, a Common Mem­brane, that lines all the inside of the Abdomen, and sends a common outward Membrane to all the Viscera contained therein, and so secures their Situation. In this Membrane in Quadrupeds there is in the Groin of each side, a Perforation, or rather a Processus, by which the Seminal Vessels pass down to the Testes in the Scrotum, as is very plain in Dogs and other Animals. But in Man, whose Posture is erect, 'tis otherwise. For here these Vessels pass between the two Coats, that make up this Mem­brane, the Peritonaeum; so that the inward Coat, that respects the Cavity of the Abdomen, is altogether entire, and continued, and 'tis only the outward Coat that is protruded into this Process; and this for a very good Reason. For otherwise, a Man, whose Posture is erect, would be constantly liable to an Hernia, or a Rupture; which happens when this inward Coat is protruded down likewise; and if there be a descent of the Intestines, 'tis then call'd Entero-cele: If of the Omentum, Epiploo­cele. In our Pygmie I observed the Peritonaeum, in this respect, to be [Page 27] formed exactly as 'tis in Man; and to be entire, and not protruded; as if Nature did design it to go erect. In Apes and Monkeys 'tis otherwise. So Blasius ⁽⁴⁴⁾ observed in the Ape he dissected, Processus Peritonaei (saith he) eodem modo hic se habet, ac in Cane. Datur & hic facilis via stylo ex ventre in Processum dictum inserendo. And the Parisians have remarked the same in the Monkeys they dissected, which is a notable difference of our Pygmie's from the Ape-kind, and an agreement with the Humane. Hereafter, whenever I mention Blasius, unless I specifie otherwise, be pleased to take notice, that I refer to this Quotation.

The Omentum or Caul in our Pygmie was very thin and large, falling over and covering most parts of the Guts. 'Twas fastened a Little to the Peritonaeum in the Left Side. It had but little Fat, and was tinged in many places with a deep Yellow Colour, by the Bladder of the Gall, as was likewise part of the Duodenum. It had numerous Blood-Vessels, and it's adhaesion to the Stomach, Colon, and other Parts, as in Man. The Remarks the Parisians make upon the Epiploon or Omentum of the Monkeys they dissected, were different from our Subject. For they tell us, That the Epiploon was different from that of a Man, in several things. First, It was not fastened to the Colon in so many places, having no con­nexion with the left part of this Intestine. Ours I found was fastened just as 'tis in Man. Secondly, It had another Ligature, which is not found in Man, viz. to the Muscles of the Abdomen, by means of the Peritonaeum, which formed a Ligament; which we have observed in the Hind of Canada. Ours adhered to the Left side: Drelincourt observed it in an Ape, to be fastened to the Right Side. Both I believe to be accidental, as I have frequently seen it in Humane Bodies. And in one Patient I found it fixt to the Peritonaeum in the Groin, which gave him a great deal of Pain and Trouble, especially when his Bowels were any thing extended with Wind. Thirdly, The Parisians say, The Vessels of the Epiploon, which in Man proceed only from the Vena Porta, did nevertheless In one of our Subjects come from the Cava, having there one of the Branches of the Hy­pogastrica, which was united to the Branches of the Porta. In our Animal these Vessels came all from the Porta, or rather emptied themselves into it. But they observing it only in one Subject, and it being different in all other Animals, it must be accidental. Fourthly, In fine, the whole Epiploon was without Comparison greater than it generally is in Man; be­cause, that it did not only cover all the Intestines, which is rarely seen in Man, (whatever Galen says) but it even enveloped them underneath, as it does in several other Brutes; where it is frequently seen, that the Epiploon is lar­ger than in Man, especially in Animals that do run, and leap with a great deal of Agility: As if it were so redoubled under the Inley [...]ward [...] to defend them, with the rest of the Bowels, against the rude jolts which these Parts do [Page 28] receive in running. It is true, that the Membranes of the Epiploon were entire and continued, as in Man, and not perforated like a Net, as they are in the generality of Brutes. The Epiploon or Caul in our Pygmie was very large, yet I have seen the same frequently in Humane Bodies; but when they are diseased, 'tis often less and wasted; so that Galen's Observation may be true. But methinks the Reason they give, why it should be so large in Brutes, may be doubted of; for it being so tender a Part, it would be in danger, upon those violent motions, of being broken, had not Nature made it loose below, and free from any adhaesion; and it being so, it cannot perform the Office they assign it. Drelincourt's Ac­count of the Epiploon, as he observed it in the Female Ape, I like better. Epiploon macrum (saith he) vasis turgidis involvens Intestina omnia, us­que ad pubem, adhaerens Extremo Hypochondrio dextro, quâ parte Colon sub­stratum jecoris limbis. Idem adhaeret ventriculi fundo & Colo, ut in ho­mine. And in the Male Ape he dissected 'twas tinged yellow, as ours was.

We shall proceed now to the Ductus Alimentalis, at least those parts of it that are contain'd in the Abdomen, viz. the Stomach and Intestines; which I make to be the true Characterisk of an Animal, and a Proprium quarto modo. For all Animals have these Parts; and all that have them, are Animals. The Senses, or some of them, are wanting in a great many Animals, and in some we perceive none but that Ʋniversal one, Tactus, yet here we find a Ventricle and Intestines. By these Parts 'tis, that the Animal Kingdom is principally distinguish'd both from the Ve­getable and Angelick. Vegetables, 'tis true, receive constantly Nourish­ment, and without it, they perish and decay; but 'tis in a far different manner; 'tis not received into such an Organick Body, where the Food is prepared and digested, and so the Nutritive parts thereof dispensed afterwards into all the Body, and the rest ejected, as Excrementitious; this is only to be met with in Animals, and in all of them. But yet I find there are intermediate Species of Beings between Vegetables and Ani­mals, as the Zoophyta: the History of which I could extreamly desire might be given us; and can't but think that regularly in compiling a History of Animals, one should commence from them; and amongst these, no doubt, but that there are several degrees of Perfection, till we come to what might be properly called an Animal. I have had no Opportunity of observing any of them, but only one; wherein I could perceive a sensible Motion and Contraction of some of the Parts, but could not distinguish any thing like the Structure of any of the Parts in an Animal, or the Organs that belong to them. An Accident disap­pointed me of perfecting my Observations, otherwise I should have communicated what I had discovered. But am sensible that there are great Curiosities here to be met with, if diligently enquired into; and that they might be, was the occasion of this Digression.

[Page 29]This Canalis Alimentalis therefore, or Inductory Vessel (as I call it, for the Reasons I have often mentioned in my Anatomical Lectures at Chirurgeon's Hall) is commonly distingished into three Parts; The Gula, the Ventricle, and Intestines: The two latter do lie in the Cavity of the Abdomen, the former, in the Thorax and Neck; but being but one con­tinued Canalis, I shall treat of the whole here.

The Gula or Gullet, by ⁽⁴⁵⁾ Tully (in that excellent Anatomical Le­cture he gives us, where he is proving a Providence) is call'd Stomachus. As 'tis also by Celsus ⁽⁴⁶⁾ so likewise in A. Gellius, ⁽⁴⁷⁾ and frequently by Hippocrates. ⁽⁴⁸⁾ And Aristotle ⁽⁴⁹⁾ and Galen ⁽⁵⁰⁾ expresly tell us, that that Part between the Fauces and the Ventricle, which the Antients called Oesophagus, after Aristotle's time, was wont to be call'd Stomachus, tho' now this word is more appropriated to the Ventricle it self, which Tully in the same place calls Alvus. So true is that of Horace,

However I shall follow Horace's Rule, since Custom now hath appro­priated the word Stomach, to the Ventricle, especially our English Tongue, I shall do so too.

This Gula or Gullet is a Hollow Muscle, and fitly enough compared to a Funnel; where the Mouth, which may be thought a Part belonging to it, being more capacious, first receives the Food, and prepares it, by chewing, and then forces it down into this Stem or Pipe, to convey it to the Ventricle. I did not observe, upon the Dissection, any difference of this Part in our Pygmie, from that of a Man. For as in a Man, (and so conformable too in other Circumstances) it passed under the lower Muscle of the Diaphragm, which by that slant running of it's fleshy Fibres over it, may perform to it the Office of a Valve, and prevent the Regurgitation of the Food that way. Which may be the more necessary in our Subject, because being used to climb Trees, and in coming down, to be prono Capite, it might be the more liable to this Accident. But for the better preventing this, I find here, that the Passage of the Gula, a little above where it empties it self into the Ventricle, was straiter, and [Page 30] the inward Membrane here more rugous than in a Man; so that it seemed somewhat Analogous to a Valve. Drelincourt describes it, in the Female Ape he diffected, thus. Orificium ejus superius, nullâ Valvulâ clausum; sed interceptum duplici portione Diaphragmatis carnosâ, ab ejus tendinibus oriundâ.

The Ventricle or Stomach, as we shall call this Part, in our Pygmie, as to it's Situation and Figure, exactly represented a Humane Stomach. When inflated, from the entrance of the Gula along the upper part to the Pylorus, it measured Two Inches and three quarters. Measuring with a Thread from the Pylorus along under the Fundus, up again to the entrance of the Gula, I found it to be Fifteen Inches; in all, near Eighteen Inches. The length of the Stomach in a strait Line, was Six Inches and an half; and it's breadth in a strait Line, where broadest, near Four Inches. The Girth of the Stomach in the middle, was near Twelve Inches. So that I thought the Stomach large, in Proportion to the bulk of the Body. It had numerous Blood-Vessels, spreading themselves all over, as in a Man's; and I could plainly perceive the Inosculations of large Trunks of the Coronary Branches, with those that descended from the upper Parts.

The Parisians observed in their Monkeys, That the Ventricle did like­wise differ from a Man's, it's inferiour Orifice being very large and low; for it was not elevated so high as the superiour, as it is in a Man. I did not observe this in our Pygmie. So Drelincourt tells us in the Female Ape, Ventriculus rugis interiùs nullis gaudet; and some other Particulars he takes notice of. But there was nothing in ours, that I observed, diffe­rent from a Man's.

As to their Food, I find it very different in the Ape-kind; as in part appears by what I have already mentioned of the Ourang Outang, the Baris, the Pongo, &c. So that I can't but think, (like a Man) that they are omnivorous. What chiefly our Pygmie affected, when Wild, I was not informed of; after it was taken, and made tame, it would readily eat any thing that was brought to the Table; and very orderly bring it's Plate thither, to receive what they would give him. Once it was made Drunk with Punch, (and they are fond enough of strong Liquors) But it was observed, that after that time, it would never drink above one Cup, and refused the offer of more than what he found agreed with him. Thus we see Instinct of Nature teaches Brutes Temperance; and Intemperance is a Crime not only against the Laws of Morality, but of Nature too.

[Page 31] Jacobus Bontius ⁽⁵³⁾ tells us, that the Bezoar-stone is bred in the Sto­machs of Apes, as well as Goats, and he prefers it as the best. Porrò vidi (saith he) & Lapides Pa-zahar natos in ventriculis Simiorum, qui teretes sunt & longitudinem digiti aliquandò excedunt, qui praestantissimi om­nium censentur. Pa-zahar, he tells us a little before, signifies in the Persian, contra veneuum, whence may come the word Bezoar. Joh. Georg. Volchamerus ⁽⁵⁴⁾ takes notice of one he had from Grimmius out of the Baboon-kind, as big as a Wallnut. And in the Scholium on that Observation, Joh. Bapt. Tavernier's ⁽⁵⁵⁾ Travels are quoted, where he prefers two Grains of this, before six of the Goat-Bezoar. Tho' Philip. Baldaeus, in his Description of Malabar and Cormandel, does esteem it much cheaper, Casper Bauhinus hath wrote a distinct Treatise of the Bezoar-stone, to whom I refer my Reader; and shall only farther ob­serve of it, that I think this Medicine ought not to be despised, because in Health a Man may take a large Quantity of it, without any Injury; for I have evidently seen in the greatest Weaknesses, most Remarkable Effects from it, and have had Success beyond expectation; it supporting the Spirits, and relieving them, where a more active Medicine might over-power them, and yet not have done that Service.

But this Stone in Goats and Monkeys is a Disease, and not Natural; as well as the Stone in the Bladder or Kidneys of a Man. Bontius ⁽⁵⁶⁾ therefore observing the good Effects of the Bezoar-stones bred in these Animals, argues with himself, why those in Men, which he finds lami­nated in the same manner, might not be of as great an Efficacy; and upon Tryal, he assures us, that they are so. Hoc ceriè compertum habeo, Lapidem in vesicâ hominis repertum, urinam & sudores probe ciere, quod tempore ingentis illius pestis quae Anno 1624 & 1625. Leydam, Patriam means & reliquas Hollandiae Civitates, miserandum in modum vastabat, in pe­nuriâ Lapidis Basaartici, nos exhibuisse memini, & Sudorificum (ausim di­cere) melius & excellentius invenisse, cum admixtâ Theriacâ aut Mithri­datio, cum Olco Succini aut Juniperi guttis aliquot.

We come now to the Third Stage of the Ductus Alimentalis, the Inte­stines; which serve for the separating the Chyle from the Facaes, and so transmitting it into the Vasa Chylifera, or Venae Lacteae;, as they are call'd, which conveys it into the Blood, for the recruiting the constant waste that is made there, and repairing it's loffes; as also for the Nourishment and Augmentation of the Parts: And for the doing this, 'tis requisite that the Intes [...]ines should be long; and they being so, that they should be coyled and winding; that this Separation might be the better per­formed, and so we find the Guls in our Pygmie. For from the Pylorus [Page 32] to the Anus, they measured Thirteen Feet and three Inches, viz. from the Pylorus to the Caecum or beginning of the Colon, was Nine Foot Ten Inches; and the Colon and Rectum were Three Feet and Five Inches long. The Caecum here, or Appendicula vermiformis, was Four Inches and three quarters long. So that the length of the Guts here, in proportion to tne length of the Body, is much the same as 'tis in a Man. But in two of the Sapajous diffected by the Parisians, the whole Intestines were but Five Foot two Inches; and in the other two Monkeys, Eight Foot long. So that herein our Pygmie more resembles a Man, than their Monkeys did.

And as in the length, so likewise in other Circumstances, the Inte­stines of our Pygmie were liker to those of a Man, than those of the Monkey and Ape-kind are. For the Parisians tell us, that in their Mon­keys, the Intestines were almost all of the same bigness, and that the Ileon was in proportion a great deal bigger, than in a Man. In our Subject we found a sensible difference. For the small Guts, which were much of a bigness, being a little extended, measured in Compass about Two Inches and three quarters. The Colon was Three Inches and three quarters about; and the Appendicula Vermiformis (which was in our Pygmie as 'ris in a Man, and is not to be met with in Apes and Monkeys) was about the bigness of a Goose-quill. It's length I have mentioned before.

Into the Duodenum of our Pygmie, a little below the Pylorus, were inserted the Ductus Communis of the Gall, and the Ductus Pancreaticus; they both emptying themselves into the Gut at the same Orifice as is usual in Man. And the same is observed likewise by Drelincourt in the Male Ape he diffected, where he tells us, à Pyloro qui videtur suggrunda [...]sse circularis & carnosa principio Ecphyseos praeposita, ad foramen usque intra candem Ecphysin Commune Ductui Bilario & Wirzungiano, praecise pollex est Mathematicus; ab illo autem foramine intra duplicem Ecphyseos tunicam stilus gracillimus intrusus est in praedictam Vesiculae felleae recurvi­tatem, rursusque ab eodem Intestinali foramine idem stilus compulsus est in Ductum Wirzungianum. But the Parisians observed in the Monkeys, that the Insertion of the Ductus Pancreaticus into the Intestine, (which in Man is always near the Porus Bilarius ) was Two Inches distant there-from. So that in this Particular the Monkey does not so much resemble a Man, as Apes and our Pygmie do.

The Convolutions and Windings of the small Guts in our Pygmie, and their Situation, were much the same, as in a Man: And they were all plentifully irrigated with Blood-Vessels. In the inward Coat of the Intestines I could observe the Miliary Glands, described by Dr. Willis; as also those larger clusters of Glands, mentioned by Joh. Conrad. Peyerus. The Colon I thought proportionably longer, than 'tis in a Man. It had the same Ligaments and Cells, and leaves of Fat hanging to it, as a Man's [Page 33] hath; and the situation, was the same: but it being so long, it had more windings than usually. The Parisians observed in their Monkeys, that the Colon was not redoubled like an S. as in Man, being quite strait. Drelincourt's Ape was more like ours, for speaking of the Colon, he saith, retorquetur variè antequàm producat Rectum; cellulas habet ut in Homine. For the length of the Colon in the Monkeys diffected by the Parisians, was but thirteen Inches; and an Inch in Diameter; whereas, the Colon of our Pygmie with the Rectum, was three Foot five Inches, as I have men­tioned; and therefore liker to a Man's, and requiring these convoluti­ons the more.

In a Man the Intestines are commonly distinguished into Intestina Te­nuia and Crassa: The Tenuia are subdivided into the Duodenum, Jejunum, and Ileon; The Crassa, into the Caecum, Colon and Rectum: and the Cae­cum commonly is reputed that Appendicula Vermiformis, which is placed at the beginning of the Colon, where the Ileon empties it self into it. Now this Part in a Man, being so small; and being observed never to contain any Excrement; I can't think, that it deserves the Name of an Intestine, much less to be reputed one of the Crassa. 'Tis true, in Brutes, this part is often sound to be very large and capacious; and to be filled with faces; and in such, it may be justly esteemed an Intestine. As in a Rabit, 'tis very long and hath a Cochlear Valve; so in an Ostridge, there are two Caecums; each a yard long, with a like Valve, But in Man, 'tis far different. Many therefore do not think this Processus Ver­miformis, to be the Caecum; but rather take for is, that bunching out of the beginning of the Colon; which is projected beyond the entrance of the Ileon; which in the Common Ape and Monkey is more, than in a Man. However, I think it not enough, as to make it a distinct: Intestine; and the number of the Intestines in a Man, ought to be made fewer.

Our Pygmie therefore having this Processus Vermiformis in all Circum­stances, so like to that in a Man; and Monkeys and Apes having nothing like it: it is a remarkable difference of our Subject from them, and an agreement to the Structure of a Humane Body. So the Parisians tell us in their Monkeys, the Caecum had no Vermiform Appendix. So in the Ape dissected by Blasius, he [...]aith, Processus Vermiformis in totum hic desidera­tur. And so Drelincourt, Caecum caret Epiphysi Vermiformi, qualem homi­nes habent. We will see therefore, what kind of Caecum 'tis, that they describe in the Monkeys and Apes.

The Parisians tell us, in the Diffection of their Monkeys; That the Caecum was very large, containing two Inches and half in length; and an Inch Diameter at the beginning: it went pointing, and was fortified by three Ligaments, like as the Colon is in Man; there to form little Cells; this Conformation is wholly different from that of a Man's Caecum. 'Tis true, 'tis more projected, than in a Man; So Blasius in his Ape, makes it jutting [Page 34] out beyond the Insertion of the Ileon, Manûs transversae, seu trium digi­torum spatium. And Drelincourt tells us, duarum unciarum est. But since it hath those Ligaments of the Colon, 'tis plain, that 'tis only a part of it, and not a distinct Intestine; or as Blasius more truly calls it, Principium Coli. He hath given a figure of it, but not very exact; and in another figure he represents the Valve of the Ileon at the Colon, or rather Valves; for he makes more than one. His Description, as 'tis faultily printed; so I am afraid, it is not very accurately drawn up, and therefore do o­mit it.

But what is different from a Man, as also from the Ape and Monkey too, or any other Animal I yet know of; is a sort of Valve I observed at the other Extream of the Colon in our Pygmie, where it passes into the Rectum. For the turn of the Colon here, is very short; and in the in­side I observed a Membranous Extension like a Valve, an Inch in length, which divided the Cavity half way. The Rectum did not much differ from the Colon in the magnitude of it's fistula, but was much the same; and in other respects, as 'tis in a Man.

This great length of the Intestines in our Pygmie was orderly colliga­ted and fastened to the Mesenterie, which kept them in a due situation; and so, as to make in them, several windings or convolutions; that hereby they might the better make a distribution of the Chyle; and the whole was, as 'tis in a Man. But I observed here, the Membranes of the Mesenterie, to be more loosly joyned together, than usually. For by moving them by my fingers, I found the blood vessels which were fasten­ed to the upper Membrane, would easily shove over those, that were fixt in the under Membrane of the Mesenterie; and run on either side of one another, as I would draw them. I have sometimes seen the same in Hu­mane Bodies.

The Mesaraic Vessels here, were very numerous; as they approach the Intestines, they form several Arches, whereby they communicate with one another; and from these Arches, they send out numerous Branches to the Intestines of each side, which run clasping them; after­wards they subdivide, and inosculate with one another in infinite Ramu­li: so that by injecting these Vessels with Mercury, they appeared so nu­merous; as almost wholly to cover the Trunk of the Intestines. And the same is in Man.

I have likewise seen, by injecting the Mesenterick Vessels; that the Mer­cury has passed into the Lymphaeducts; and so into the Venae or Vasa La­ctea. Which is a great contrivance of Nature. For the Motion of all fluids being Pulsion, without this advantage, part of the Chyle, must ne­cessarily stagnate in some of the Vessels; till a fresh distribution of Chyle comes; to protrude it on; and so it would be apt to coagulate and [Page 35] cause Obstructions. But by the Lympha thus passing into them; the Chyle is still forced forwards, and the vessels washed clean of it; and being thus often moistened, they are preserved from becoming over dry, or closed or obstructed. So Provident therefore is Nature, that in the whole Via lactea, not only in the Mesenterie; but into the Receptaculum Chyli, and Ductus Thoracicus likewise; abundance of Lymphaeducts are emptied. Which gives us one good Reason; that Nature does not act in vain, in making such a separation of à Liquor from the Mass of Blood; which is so soon to be return'd to it again; since hereby she performs so great an Office.

In the Mesenterie of our Pygmie I observed several small Glands scat­tered up and down, as in a Man; but not so regularly amassed together in the middle; as the Pancreas Asellij is in Brutes. And Drelincourt ob­served much the same in the Male Ape. Glandulae ad radicem Mesenterij, & passim in ambitu, numerosae & planae, magnitudinem Lentulae, sed Ova­les. Anastomoses frequentissimae Venarum cum Venis & Arteriarum cum Arteriis in universo Mesenterij circulo. And as that part of the Mesenterie which fastens the Colon is call'd Mesocolon; so for the same reason, that slip of it represented in our figure, that runs down to the Processus vermi­formis, may be call'd the Meso-caecum.

We shall next proceed to the Liver, in which part our Pygmie very remarkably imitated a Man, more than our common Monkeys or Apes do. For the Liver here was not divided into Lebes as it is in Brutes; but intire as it is in a Man. It had the same shape; it's situation in the body was the same; and it's Colour, and Ligaments, the same, It measured in it's greatest length about five Inches and an half; where broadest, 'twas about three Inches; and about an Inch and three quarters in thickness. Towards the Diaphragm 'twas convex: it's under part was Con [...]ave, where it receives and emits the Vessels, having a little Lole here, as 'tis in a Man.

The Parisians remark in the Monkeys they diffected, that the Livermas very different from the Liver of a Man, having five Lobes as in a Dog; viz. two on the right side; and two on the left; and a fifth laid upon the right part of the body of the Vertebrae. This last was divided, making as it were two leaves. So Drelincourt in the Male Ape observes , Je [...]ris I [...] duo juxta umbilicalem venam, quorum secundo incuneata crat ves [...]ula f [...]llis, duo alij ventriculum amplectebantur, cum lobulo quinto se insercute in spatium ventriculi intra orificium utrumque. So likewise in the Female Ape he tells us , Jecur opplet regionem Epigastricam quint uplici lobo, uno sexto minimo op­plens cavitatem lunarem ventriculi. But Blasius in the Ape he dissected saith , Epar cum humano minimò, optimè cum Canino convenit, manif [...]stis­simè in lobos VII divisum, tantae magnitudinis ut etiam utrumque Hypoclon­drium [Page 36] occupet. Vesalius ⁽⁵⁷⁾therefore is in the right, where he saith, Quae enim Dissectionum Professores de Jecoris formâ, ac penulis seu fibris (quos [...] Graeci vocant) commentantur; è Canum potiùs, & simiarum sectio­nibus, quàm hominum didicerunt. Humanum enim Jecur in fibras, Porcini, ac multò adhuc minùs Canini Jecoris modo, non discinditur. And that he hints here at Galen, is plain, from what he expresses in his Epistle ad Joachim Roelants, ⁽⁵⁸⁾ where he farther enlarges upon it. And Galen ⁽⁵⁹⁾ himself tells us, that Herophilus was of this Opinion. So Theophilus Protospatarius ⁽⁶⁰⁾ saith, that the Liver is divided into four Lobes; and gives us there a distinct Name for each . Aristotle, ⁽⁶¹⁾ 'tis certain, was much more in the right, where he saith , [...]. Rotundum Jecur hominis est, ac simile bubulo. For the Liver of a Bullock, like a Man's is entire; and not divided into Lobes. However Franciscus Puteus ⁽⁶²⁾ in his Apology, having named several Physicians and Chirurgians, that were with him at the opening of Charles the Ninth, Duke of Savoy, saith , hi omnes per Jovem mihi pos­sunt esse Testes, quod observatum est Epar habuisse quatuor pinnulas. Jaco­bus Sylvius ⁽⁶³⁾ likewise justifies Galen, against Vesalius; and tells us , Quin & Hippocrates Lobos Epatis humani quinque connumerat libro suo de ossibus, Rufus autem quatuor vel quinque. But Renatus Henerus ⁽⁶⁴⁾ hath answered Sylvius as to this matter; and there needs no farther dispute a­bout it, if one will but believe his own Eyes, he may fully satisfie him­self, that, in an Humane Liver there are none of those Lobes, but that 'tis one entire Body; as it was also in our Pygmie. But in Apes and Monkeys the Liver is divided into Lobes.

The great use of the Liver is for to make a separation of the Gall from the Mass of Blood. We will therefore here examine the Biliary Vessels; nor do I find them any thing different from those in a Man; only the Bladder of Gall here in our Pygmie seemed longer, being four Inches in length. It's adhaesion to the Liver was not so much as it is in a Man; for at the fundus or end, it juts beyond the Liver about half an Inch. For about three quarters of an Inch, it is more closely joyned to the Liver; afterwards it is fastened to it only by a Membrane, as is also the Ductus Cysticus. So that the Vesica fellea when inflated with wind, seemed more to represent an Intestine by it's anfractus and length, than the usual shape of the Bladder of Gall; which commonly is more belly­ing out.

The Parisians observed in their Monkeys, that the Bladder was fastened to the first of the two Lobes which were on the right side. That it was an Inch long, and [Page 37] half an inch broad; it had a great Ductus, which was immediately inserted underneath the Pylorus. This Ductus received three others, which instead of that, which in Man is single, and which is called Hepaticus; these three Ductus's had their Branches dispersed like Roots into all the Lobes of the Li­ver, so that the first had four roots, viz. one in each of the three right Lobes, and one in the first of the left; the second and third Ductus had both their roots in the second of the left Lobes, these branches did not run under the Tunicle of the Liver, so that they were apparent, and not hid in the Paren­chyma, as they generally are. But in our Subject the distribution of the Ductus Hepaticus was altogether the same as it is in Man. In the Male Ape, Drelincourt describing the Bladder of Gall, saith, Vesicula fellea longa 22/3 pollicibus à fundo ad cervicem, ubi recurvitatem habet maximam, dimi­diatè haeret mersa substantiae Jecoris.

The Ductus Hepaticus in our Pygmie issued out of the Liver with two branches; one arising from the right, the other from the left part of the Liver; and after a short space, joined into one Trunk; and that, after a little way, joyning with the Ductus Cysticus, do form the Ductus Com­munis, which empties it self into the Duodenum a little below the Pylorus, at the same Orifice with the Ductus Pancreaticus, exactly as 'tis in Man, as I have mentioned.

At the Simous part of the Liver I observed the Vena Porta to enter, as likewise the Epatic Arteries and Nerves, And here in the Membrane about these Vessels, I observed a pretty large whitish Gland. The Vena Ʋmbilicalis entered the Liver at the fissure. It seemed large, but I found it's fistula or pipe was closed. The Vena Cava issued out of the Liver at the Convex part, where 'twas joyned to the Diaphragm.

In the Spleen of our Pygmie I did not observe any thing extraordinary, or different from a Humane Spleen. It was of a lead Colour, and of the shape represented in our figure; 'twas fastened by Membranes to the Peri­tonaeum; and by the Omentum and Vasa brevia to the Stomach, so that upon inflating the Stomach, the Spleen would be brought to lye close on the Stomach, as if it was fastened immediately there. The Spleen here was two Inches and an half long; and one Inch and a quarter broad; and seated as usually in the left Hypochondre under the Bastard Ribs. The Ra­mus Splenicus was very remarkable, sending it's Trunk along the Pancreas, as in Man, and having numerous branches near the Spleen.

The Parisians tell us, that in their Monkeys the Spleen was seated along the Ventricle as in Man; but it's figure was different, in one of our Subjects being made as the Heart is represented in Blazonry; it's Basis containing an Inch. They give a figure of it, but nothing like that of ours, which more represented the figure of an Humane Spleen; tho' in Man it's figure is often observed very different. Blasius in the Ape he dissected, observes [Page 38] that the Spleen triangularis figurae est, exiguus admodùm respectu corporis; coloris nigricantis, laeve equidem molleque valdè corpus, ast exteriùs inaequa­le quasi ex globulis variis confectum, adeò ut etiam conglomeratis Glandulis Substantiam Lienis annumerare velle, tali in subjecto fundamentum ali­quod agnoscat. Ex Ramo Splenico numerosos eosque insignes Ventriculo suppeditat ramos, magnitudinem & figuram externam Fig. 3 ^a. Tab. XI. ex­hibet. But his figure of the Spleen was nothing like to that of ours. For I did not observe those inequalities in the superfice which he represents in his, to exhibit the conglomerate Glands. 'Tis true, having injected the Spleen of our Pygmie the Mercury filling the cellulated body of the Spleen, did make an appearance on the surface somewhat like those ine­qualities in his figure. But Frederic. de Rusch ⁽⁶⁵⁾ is very positive, that neither those Glands, nor Cells mentioned by Malpighius, are to be met with in a Humane Spleen: tho' he grants, that they are in the Spleen of Brutes. Drelincourt in the Female Ape saith, Lien Scalenum figura refert, cohaeret Reni sinistro & liber est [...] Diaphragmate. And in the Male Ape he observes, Lien triangularis & crassior quàm in foeminâ, Pancreas ex­cipiens.

We shall therefore now proceed to the Pancreas, which in our Pyg­mie was situated, just as it is in a Humane Body; lying under the Sto­mach, transverse to ihe Spine, from the Spleen towards the Liver. It was about two Inches long, about half an Inch broad, of a white yellowish Colour; it's surface uneven, being made up of abundance of Glands; it's Secretory Duct emptied it self into the Duodenum, just where the Du­ctus Communis of the Gall doth, as I have mentioned before.

The Parisians in their Monkeys observed, that the Pancreas had only it's secure, which made it to resemble that of Man; it's connection, and inser­tion being wholly particular. For it was strongly fastened to the Spleen; and the insertion of it's Ductus into ihe Intestine (which in Man is always near the Porus Bilarius) was two Inches distant therefrom. Blasius in his Ape describes it thus; Pancreas ventriculo substratum, solidoe admodùm substan­tiae est, nec adcò molle, quàm in Canibus aliisque Animalibus notatur. Lon­gum itidim insigniter, ast latitudinis cjus, q [...]aenè minimi digiti latitudini respondeat. He takes no notice here, how the Ductus Pancreaticus was inser­ted; which Drelincourt tells us in the Female Ape was eight lines above the Porus Bilarius. Pancreas connalum I [...]enali Caudae, & extremo Reni sinistro. Fjus ductus inseritur o [...]to lineis supra Porum Bilarium, contrà ac Canibus, substernitur immediate Ventricilo, & supersternitur brevi Intestino. Tho' in the Male Ape he tells us. 'tis inserted into the Duodenum at the same Orisice with the Duct of the Gall, as I have already mentioned and quoted before.

[Page 39]The Glandulae Renales in our Pygmie were very large, and placed a little above the Kidnies as they are in Man. That on the right side, was of a triangular; that on the left of an oblong figure. They were about three quarters of an Inch long: and almost half an Inch broad. They had the same Vessels, as there are in a Man.

The Parisians in their Monkeys, observe that the Gland called Capsula Atrabilaria, was very visible, by reason that the Kidney was without fat. This Gland was white, and the Kidney of a bright red; it's figure was triangu­lar. Blasius in his Ape tells us, Glandula Renalis triangularis serè figurae­est, notabilis valdè pro ratione Corporis, and gives us a figure of it, which was nothing like ours. What Drelincourt remarks in the Male Ape, is, Capsulae Atrabilariae triplicem Scrobiculum habent, quarum liquor expressus lin­guam non it à constringit, uti in Capsulis foemineis. And in the Female Ape he tells us, Ren Succenturiatus sinister ab Emulgente venam habet; idem major Dextro. This I observed in our Pygmie; but he saith nothing far­ther here of their Liquor, nor did I taste it in ours.

We shall now proceed to the Kidneys. In our Pygmie I did observe very little or no fat in the common or outward Membrane, usually called Adiposa: Drelincourt observed the same, nullus hic Adeps in Tunicâ com­muni vel propriâ, as he tells us of his Ape. The Kidneys of our Pygmie were two Inches and a quarter long, an Inch and an half broad; and about an Inch in depth. They had not altogether so large a Sinus at the Entrance of the Emulgent Vessels, as there is in a Man's; and the whole appeared somewhat rounder; but their situation was the same, as were likewise the Emulgents. Having divided the right Kidney length-ways, I observed the Cortical or Glandulous Part to appear like a distinct Sub­stance, being a of tawny or yellowish colour; and different from the In­ward or Tubulary Part; which was more entire and compacted together, than in a Man's; and was of a red colour, by means of the blood vessels which run between the Tubuli Ʋrinarij or Secretory Ducts, which make up this part of the Kidneys. Which Vessels when inflamed and over­extended, by making a Compression on these Tubuli Ʋrinarij, may cause a Suppression of Urine; in which case Phlebotomy or Bleeding is very ne­cessary. And without doubt was the Cause of the Success Riverius ⁽⁶⁶⁾ met with in a Patient, who had a Suppression of Urine for three days; for upon bleeding freely, he was presently relieved, and in a short time rendered a large quantity of Urine. In this Tubulary Part of a Humane Kidney I always observe these Blood Vessels: but here usually the Cortical or Glandulous Part makes a deeper descent between the heads of this Tubulary, and divides it into several Bodies; and as many of them as ap­pear, so many lesser Kidneys may be reckoned to make up the Body of each Kidney. In Infants the Kidney externally appears more divided [Page 40] than in Adult Persons; but most remarkably they are so, in a Bear, the Porpois and an Ostrich; where there are abundance of distinct small Kid­neys amassed together to make up each.

The Parisians in the Kidneys of their Monkeys observe, that they were round and flat; their situation was more unequal, than in a Man; the right being much lower than the left, viz. half it's bigness. Drelincourt in the Female Ape remarks, Renes globost, dexter intra Hypochondrium incumbit Costae 11. & 12. Sinister locum habet intra Costam ultimam. Altitudo Renis dimidiae unciae. Renalium venarum dextra longè elatior sinistrâ. Rene aperto Carnis discrimen ut in homine, exterior quidem nigricans lineis quatu­or crassa, interior albicans lineis duabus.

The Pelvis of the Kidney in our Pygmie was as 'tis usually in a Man; and the Ʋreters had nothing remarkably different in their Structure, from the common make. They were about the bigness of a Wheat straw; and were inserted into the neck of the Bladder, as represented in our figure; rather somewhat nearer the neck, than in an Humane Bladder.

The Parisians and Blasius have no remarks upon the Ʋreters. Drelin­court in the Male Ape saith, Ʋreteres suprà Psoas Musculo & Iliaco, atque subtùs vasis Spermaticis, quibus decussa [...]im substrati sunt etiam quibus vascula admittunt, sese reflectunt in Hypogastricam, decussantes ramos Iliacos & E­jaculatorios. And in the Female, Ʋreteris expansiones arcuatìm reflexae ut in homine. Vasa habent supernè à Renalibus, infernè à Musculis.

The Bladder of Ʋrine in our Pygmie was of an Oblong figure, not so globous as commonly in Man, for being moderately blown up it mea­sured four Inches in length; and two Inches and half in breadth. In o­ther Circumstances 'twas agreeable enough with an Humane Bladder.

The Parisians tell us, that in the Female Monkey, the Neck of the Bladder had it's hole otherwise than in Women, being very far in the Neck of the Matrix, viz. towards the middle, at the place where it's roughness began, which were seen only towards the Extremity of the Ductus, near the internal Orifice. Blasius saith nothing of it in his Ape; and all that Drelincourt tells us is, Vesica Peritonaeo suspensa ut in aliis Brutis.

Before we proceed to the Parts of Generation (which remain besides to be here described) we shall a little take notice of those large Canales of the Blood, the Arteria Aorta and the Vena Cava, and the Rivulets they e­mit or do receive; all which I find in our Pygmie to be just the same, as they are in a Man. For from the Aorta arises here, the Arteria Caeliaca; the Arteria Mesenterica superior; then the Emulgent Arteries; below them, the Spermatick Arteries; then the Arteria Mesenterica inferior; then the [Page 41] Trunk divides into the Iliac Branches. So the Vena Cava too in our Pygmie exactly imitated that in a Man.

How the Structure of these Vessels are in Monkeys, the Parisians do not tell us, and their figure is very imperfect; as is likewise that in Blasius, which seems altogether fictitious. What he writes, is this; Arteria magna circa Renem dextrum succumbit Venae Cavae, & ubi Iliacos Ramos constituit eandem supergreditur; contrà ac in Homine, Cane, aliisque animalibus fieri reperimus, ubi sinistra occupat, hinc à sinistra ad dextram progreditur supra Arteriam. So Drelincourt tells us in the Male Ape, Aorta descendens mox atque bifurcatur equitat, & adscendenti Cavae incumbit.

We come now to the Parts of Generation; and shall begin with the Vasa Praeparantia; The Arteries and Veins. The Spermatic Arteries in our Pygmie do both arise out of the Trunk of the Aorta, a little below the Emulgent Arteries, as in our figure; and after having ran a little way, they meet with the Spermatic Vein; and are both included in a common Cap­sula, and so do descend to the Testes. These Arteries do carry the blood to the Testes, from whence the Semen is afterwards separated; the resi­due of the Blood is return'd from the Testes by the Spermatic Veins; whereof that on the right side enters into the Trunk of the Vena Cava, a little below the right Emulgent Vein; and that of the left, is emptied into the left Emulgent Vein, just all one as it is in a Humane Body. Ha­ving injected the Spermatic Vein with Mercury, it discovered abundance of Vessels, running waving; which otherwise did not appear: and a great many of them were extreamly fine and small.

The Parisians give no description of the Spermatic Vessels in their Mon­keys; and in their figure the left Spermatic Vein is omitted, or left out. Thomas Bartholine ⁽⁶⁷⁾ in his Anatomy of a Mamomet (which he de­scribes, as not having a Tail; and therefore it must be of the Ape-kind, and not a Cercopithecus, or a Monkey, as he calls it) in his figure of these parts, represents the left Spermatic Vein, emptying it self into the left Emulgent, as it is in our Creature. Blasius therefore in the account of the Ape he dissected, must be mistaken; both in his figure and description too; for in the former, he represents the left Spermatic Vein running in­to the Trunk of the Cava; and justifies it in the latter; in telling us, Vasa Spermatica utroque latere ex Trunco Cavae & Aortae oriuntur, & quidem altiori loco ea quae sunt lateris dextri, inferiore quae sinistri. But Drelincourt certainly is more in the right, who informs us, that in the Male Ape he dissected, Vena Spermatica dextra crassa, & ab interiori trunco Cavae adscen­dentis pollice infra Emulgentem sinistram enascitur, surculosque emittit sini­stros in Membranas vicinas. Arteria Spermatica dextra à trunco anteriori [Page 42] Aortae paulò infra Emulgentem sinistram enascens sub Venâ Emulgente inter­cruciat Cavam ascendentem, quae superinequitat, & conjungitur Venae Conso­ciali eò praecisè loci ubi Vena inseritur suum in truncum. Sinistra Vena Sper­matica inseriturin Emulgentem juxta truncum Cavae, & consocialem Arteri­am admittit eò praecisè loci, in quo enascitur dextra. So in the Female Ape he saith, Spermatica Vena sinistra ab Emulgente sinistrâ, dextra è Trunci parte anteriore, pollice infra Emulgentem sinistram.

We come now to describe the Testes, which in our Pygmie were not contained in a pendulous Scrotum, as they are in Man, but more contract­ed and pursed up by the outward Skin, nearer to the Os Pubis, and were seated by the sides of the Penis, without the Os Pubis; and I observed them bunching out there, before the Dissection; so that it seemed to want a Scrotum; or at least the Skin which inclosed them, was not so di­lated, as to hang down like a Cod; but contracted them up nearer to the Body of the Penis which to me seems a wise Contrivance of Nature. For hereby these Parts are less exposed to the injuries, they might other­wise receive in climbing Trees, or other accidents in the Woods. How­ever, the outward Skin here that incloses them, performs altogether the office of a Scrotum. And if I mistake not, I observed that Sepimentum, as in a Humane Scrotum; which is made by a descent of a Membrane there, which divides each Testicle from one another.

But whether the Testes being thus closely pursed up to the Body, might contribute to that great salaciousness this Species of Animals are noted for, I will not determine: Tho' 'tis said, that these Animals, that have their Testicles contained within the Body, are more inclined to it, than others. That the whole Ape-kind is extreamly given to Venery, appears by insi­nite Stories related of them. And not only so, but different from other Brutes, they covet not only their own Species, but to an Excess are in­clined and sollicitous to those of a different, and are most amorous of fair Women. Besides what I have already mentioned, Gabriel Clauderus ⁽⁶⁸⁾ tells us of an Ape, which grew so amorous of one of the Maids of Honour, who was a celebrated Beauty, that no Chains, nor Consinement, nor Beating, could keep him within Bounds; so that the Lady was for­ced to petition to have him banished the Court. But that Story of Casta­nenda in his Annals of Portugal (if true) is very remarkable; of a Wo­man who had two Children by an Ape. I shall give it in Latin, as 'tis related by Licetus; and 'tis quoted too by Anton. Deusingius ⁽⁶⁹⁾ and others.

In hanc Sententiam faciunt (saith Fort. Licetus ⁽⁷⁰⁾) quae Castanenda retulit in Annalibus. Lusitaniae de filiis ex muliere, ac simio natis, mulierem [Page 43] nempe ob quoddam crimen in insulam desertam navi deportatam, quum ibi exposita fuisset, eam simiorum, quibus fertilis locus er at, agmen circumstetisse fremebundum; supervenisse unum grandiorem, cui reliqui loco cesserint: hunc mulierem blandè manu captam in antrum ingens abduxisse, eique cum ipsum tum ceteros copiam pomorum, nucum, radicumque variarum apposuisse; & nutu ut vesceretur invitâsse; tandem à fer â coactam ad stuprum; facinus hoc multis diebus continuatum adeò, ut duos ex ferâ liberos pepererit: ita miseram (quantò mors optabilior !) vict itâsse per annos aliquot; donec De­us misertus navim eò Lusitanam detulisset; quumque milites in terram aqua­tum ex proximo ad antrum fonte exscendissent: abessetque fortè fortuna simi­us; feminam ad invisos diu mortales accurrisse, & occidentem ad pedes sup­plicâsse, uti se facinore, & calamitosissima servitute irent ereptum, adsenti­entibusque, & casum miserantibus illis, eam cum ipsis navim adscendisse. Sed ecce tibi simium supervenientem inconditis gestibus, & fremitibus conjugem non conjugem revocantem: ut vidit vela ventis data, concito cursu de liberis unum matri ostentat, minatur, ni redeat, in mare praecipitaturum; nec seg­niter fecit, quod minatus: tum recurrit ad antrum, & eâdem velocitate ad littus rediens ostentat alterum, minatur, & demergit: subsequitur, donec undae natantem vicere. Rem totam Lusitania teste notissimam, & à Rege mulierem Ulytsipone addictam ignibus, quorundam precibus vita impetrata, lethum cum claustro perpetuo commutâsse.

But to return to our Business. Our Pygmie in this Particular of the Scrotum, more resembles the Ape- kind, than a Man. For the Parisians tell us, that the Parts of Generation in three of our Subjects, which were Males, were different from those of Man, there being no Scrotum in two of these Subjects, and the Testicles not appearing, by reason that they were hid in the fold of the Groyne. It is true that the third, which was one of the Sa­pajous, had a Scrotum, but it was so shrunk, that it did not appear. Or, as they afterwards express it, The Testicles were shut up in a Scrotum, which joyned them close up to the Penis. So in the Ape Blasius describes, Testes insignes satis, sacculo suo inclusi, non dependent extra abdomen, ad modum eum quo in Homine, Canibus, similibusque Animalibus aliis, sed vicini adeò sunt tendinibus musculorum Abdominis, quos vasa Spermatica transeunt, ac si iis uniti essent, sic ut potiùs in Inguine utroque collocatos eos dicerem, quàm ultra ossa Pubis a Corpore pendulos, And so Drelincourt to the same pur­pose; Scrotum pendulum nullum est, sest Testiculi utrinque juxta Ossis Pu­bis summa latera, vel Spinam summam ejus decumbunt extra prorsus Abdo­minis cavum, & proindè extra Musculorum Epigastrij Aponeuroses.

In the other Parts I am here to describe, I find our Pygmie more con­formable to the Structure of the same in a Man. For the Testes were included in a Tunica Vaginalis, and had a Cremaster Muscle: which be­ing separated, I observed the Epididymis large, and the Body of the Testis to be about the bigness of a Filbird; and it's compounding Parts nothing at all different from those of a Man. Jacobus Syl­vins [Page 44] ⁽⁷¹⁾ in the Ape he diffected, observed, the Testes humanis majores.

The Parisians tell us, that in some of their Subjects the Testicles were long and strait, and but one line in breadth, and eight in length. In one of their Sapajous they were found of a figure quite contrary, and almost as remote from the figure of those of Man, being perfectly round. Drelincourt's ac­count in his Ape is, Tunica Elytroides fibris carneis à Cremaster conspersa, ut in homine. Arteria Spermatica miro lusu, spiratim revolvitur super Testiculi dorsum. Testiculus autem Ventri Epididymidum adhaeret, nisi fibrillis paucis & laxis, capite suo, quo Spermatica Deferentia admittit, separatur illaesus, cauda autem sua, qua ejaculatoria vasa emittit, tot punctula candicantia ex­hibet, divulsus ab Epididymide, quot à Testiculo canaliculi proten­duntur.

From the Epididymis in our Pygmie (as it is in a Man) was continued the Vas Deferens; a slender Ductus, which conveys the Semen from the Testicle to the Vesiculae Seminales. These Vesiculae were two cellulated Bladders placed under the neck of the Bladder of Ʋrine; which on the outside, did seem (as it were) nothing else but the Vas Deferens dilated, and placed in a waving figure there. And as the Body of the Testes was made up of a curious convoluted Contexture of Seminal Vessels, which running into fewer, form at last the Body of the Epididymis; and these Vessels afterwards passing all into one Duct, do make up the Vas Deferens: so this Vas Deferens here, being dilated and enlarged, does form the Vesiculae Seminales. And the same is in a Man.

The Parisians here do take notice of that Passage in Aristotle I have already quoted, where he likens the Parts of Generation in the Male Ape to those of a Dog, more than a Man. But the Philosopher herein, is un­der a Mistake; for, as they instance, in the Penis of a Dog, there is a Bone, which is not in the Monkey's; so likewise in Monkeys, there are Vesiculae Seminales, which are not to be met with in a Dog. They de­scribe them in their Monkeys thus: The Glandulous Prostatoe were small; the Parastatae Cyrsoides were in requital very large; they contained an Inch in length; their breadth was unequal, being four lines towards the neck of the Bladder, and a line and an half at the other end, differing herein from those of Man, who has them slenderest near the neck of the Bladder. They were composed of several little Baggs, which opened into one another. The Caruncle of the Urethra was small, but very like to that of a Man. Bla­sius hath given us a figure of these Parts, which I do not like as nei­ther that of the Parisians. He describes them thus: Vesiculae Seminales hic valdè amplae, quae immisso flatu per ductum Seminalem Ejaculatorium in­signitèr intumescunt, Quod si premantur, manifestissimeè observamus Mate­riam [Page 45] iis contentam moveri in Meatum Ʋrinarium, Vesicae continuum, & quidem per foramen singulare, quod in unoquoque latere unicum est, quae res occasionem videtur dedisse Jacobo Sylvio duos ductûs Seminales in simiâ con­stituendi. All that Drelincourt saith of them is, Vasa ejaculatoria retrò Ve­sicam tendunt in Corpuscula proedura mirè anfractuosa, ut & ipsum initium Epididymidis. Which is very conformable to what I observed in our Pygmie.

Between the root of the Penis, and neck of the Bladder, is seated the Corpus Glandulosum, or the Prostatae, which in our Pygmie appeared the same as in Man. The Parisians tell us in their Monkeys that they were small. Blasius in his figure, besides the Prostates, which he saith are Glandula vesicis adstans, albidior solidiorque represents another, at the Letters (H. H.) viz. Glandula alia, major, rubicunda & plexu Nervorum, aliorumque vasorum praedita; which is no Gland, but the Bulb of the Pe­nis. Drelincourt in his Ape tells us, Corpora Glandulosa duos velut Nates circa vesicae cervicem suprà Sphincterem exhibent.

We come now to the Penis, which in our Pygmie was two Inches long; the girth of it at the root was an Inch and a quarter; but it grew taperer towards the end. It had no fraenum, so that the Praepuce could be retracted wholly down; and herein our Pygmie is different from a Man. The Slit of the Penis here was perpendicular as in a Man. In the figure the Parisians give us, it seems to be horizontal, as it is plainly represented by Bartholine in his third and fourth figure of his Ma­momet, altho by his second figure one would think otherwise. Whe­ther there was any Balanus or Glans in the Penis of our Pygmie, or what it was, I am uncertain: I do not remember I observed any. In my third figure the Penis is represented decurtated at the end, and without the Praeputium, which was left entire to the Skin. Dreclincourt's account of it in the Ape is this; Genitale prorsùs expers est fraenuli ac proinde Prae­putium devolvitur ad radicem usque Penis, & denudatur Glans ipsa, atque Penis integer. Balanus consimilis virili, excepto fraenulo, atque praeterea hiatum maximum exhibet, quâ parte Ligamenta Cavernosa desinant, & Glans utrinque prominet. At the root of the Penis of our Pygmie, we obser­ved the Musculi Erectores to be short, and thicker proportionably than in a Man and the Ligamentum Suspensorium larger: The Musculus accele­rator Ʋrinae was large, covering the Bulb of the Cavernous body of the Ʋrethra. The Corpora Nervosa, or the two Cavernous bodies of the Penis were divided length-ways by a Sepimentum in the middle, as in Man. In the Ʋrethra likewise there was a Cavernous body. The Vessels of the Penis answered exactly to those of a Man.

Blasius in his Ape faith, Penis Nervosum Corpus unicum tantum habere videtur, sepimento notabili destitutum. But I am apt to think he might be mistaken; for in our Subject 'twas very plainly divided, but more re­markably [Page 46] towards the root than forwards. What he adds afterwards, Circa radicem Penis Tuberculum exile occurrit, exteriùs carnosae naturae, in­teriùs reticulari vasorum plexu refertum, interstitia ipsius materiâ rubicundâ occupante, by this I suppose he means the Bulb of the Penis. Drelin­court expresses it better, where he saith, Totus Penis duobus Ligamentis Cavernosis à tuberibus Ischij gaudet. In our Subject these two bodies were very large and cavernous within. But what Drelincourt adds, Ʋrethra, planè carnosa; This was different in our Pygmie; for as I have men­tion'd, the sides of the Ʋrethra, here were Cavernous too, tho' not much.

How the Organs of Generation are in the Female of this Species of A­nimals, I have had no opportunity of informing my self. But by Ana­logy I can't but think, they must be very like to those of a Woman, since they are so even in Monkeys and Apes in several respect; tho' in some, they imitate the Structure of these Parts in Brutes. Thus the Parisi­ans observe, The generative Parts of the Female had also a great many things which rendered them different from those of Bitches, herein resembling those of Women; there were some of them likewise which were as in Bitches, and after another manner than in Woman; for the exteriour Orifice was round and strait, as in Bitches, and the generality of other Brutes, and had neither Nymphae nor Carunculae. The Neck of the Bladder had it's hole otherwise than in Woman, being very far in the Neck of the Matrix, viz. towards the middle, at the place where it's roughness began, which were seen only towards the extremity of the Ductus near the Internal Orifice. The Trunks of the Matrix were also different from those of Women, and resem­bling those of Brutes in that they were proportionably longer, and more redou­bled by various turnings. The Clitoris had something more conformable to that which is seen in other Brutes that have it, than in that of Women, be­ing proportionably greater, and more visible than it is in Women. It was composed of two Nervous and Spongious Ligaments, which proceeding from the lower part of the Os Pubis, and obliquely advancing to the sides of these Bones, did unite to form a third Body, which was ten lines in length. It was formed by uniting of the two first, which a very strong Membrane joyn­ed together, going from one of the Ligaments to the other, besides a hard and nervous Membrane which inveloped them. They terminated at a Gland like to that of the Penis of the Male. The little Muscles, which were fast­ned to these Ligaments, proceeded as usual from the tuberosities of the Ischi­um. These Ligaments were of Substance so thin and spongious, that the wind penetrated, and made them easily to swell, when blown into the Net­work, of the Veins and Arteries which is in this place. This Network was visible in this Subject, being composed of larger Vessels than they proportionably are in Women. It was situated as usually under the second pair of Muscles of the Clitoris. It's figure was Pyramidal, ending from a very large Basis in a point, which run along the third Ligament to it's extremity towards the Gland.

[Page 47]The rest of the Parts of Generation were like to those of Women. The Neck of the Bladder had it's Muscles as in Women: For there were a great number of fleshy Fibres, which proceeding from the Sphincter of the Anus, were fastened to the sides of the Neck of the Uterus, and other such like Fi­bres which did come from the Sphincter of the Bladder to insert them selves at the same place. The Body of the Uterus, it's Membranes, internal Ori­fice, it's Ligaments as well the round as broad, and all it's Vessels had a conformation intirely like to that, which these same Parts have in Women. The Testicles, which were ten lines long, and two broad, were as in Women, composed of a great number of small Bladders, and fastned near the Mem­branes which are at the extremity of the Tubae, and which is called their Fringe.

Drelincourt hath very little on this Subject, all he saith is, Ʋrethra rubicunda solida & brevis. Vagina admodum rugosa, monticulum habens in medio, Papillis extuberans ut in Palato, Pollicem longa, transversim scissa, Pollicem lata. Orificium interiùs valdè solidum. Cervix interior admodùm dura, & paulò intrà osculum internum duritie cartilaginosâ.

We shall proceed now to the Parts of the Middle Venter, the Thorax; and here, as the Parts are fewer, so my Remarks will be also: and the rather, because in our Pygmie we observed so very little difference from the Structure of the same Parts in a Man. I must confess I can't be so particular in all Circumstances, as I would, because for the preserving the Sceleton more entire, I did not take off the Sternum. However, I observed enough to satisfie my self with what I thought most ma­terial.

This Cavity was divided from the Abdomen by the Diaphragm, whose Aponeurosis or Tendon seemed rather larger than in a Man: and the second Muscle which encompassed the Gula, as it passes through it, was very fair.

I made no Remarks upon the Pleura, and Mediastinum: The Thymus in our Pygmie was about an Inch long, and placed as 'tis in Man; downwards 'twas divided, but upwards 'twas joyned together. So in a Man I have often observed it divided. Generally this part is larger in Infants and Embrios than in grown Persons, for the Reasons I have frequently mentioned in my Anatomical Lectures. The Parisians obser­ved in their Monkeys that the Thymus was large. Blasius and Drelincour [...] have no Remarks about it.

The Lungs in our Pygmie had three Lobes on one side, and but two on the other; five in all. Their Colour, Substance, Situation, and all Circumstances exactly resemble a Man's. The Parisians tell us, that in their Monkeys the Lungs had seven Lobes, three on the right side, and as [Page 48] many on the left, the seventh was in the Cavity of the Mediastine, as in the generality of Brutes. This again makes a notable difference between the in­ternal parts of the Ape, and those of Man, whose Lungs have generally at the most but five Lobes, oftener but four, and sometimes but two. Vesalius affirms that he never saw in Man this fifth Lobe, which he reports to be in Apes, supposing that they have but five. The Passage that the Parisians hint at in Vesalius is this, Lobum autem qui in Canbus, simiisque Venae Ca­vae Caudicem suffulcit, nunquam in homine observavi, & hunc illo destitui certo certius scio, quamvis interim Galeni locus in septimo de administran­dis Dissectionibus mihi memoria non exciderit, quo inquit, quintum hunc Pulmonis Lobum eos non latêre, qui recte sectionem administrant; innuens Herophilo & Marino ejusmodi Lobum fuisse incognitum, uti sanè fuit, cùm illi Hominum Cadavera, non autem cum ipso, simiarum ac Canum dun­taxat aggrederentur, in quibus praesenti Lobo nihil est manifestius. ⁽⁷²⁾ Tho Galen be herein mistaken, Vesalius certainly is too severe in his Censure, in charging him, that he never dissected any thing but Apes and Dogs; for the contrary evidently appears in abundance of Instan­ces, that might be produced. And one would think he had not dis­sected Apes and Monkeys in making but five Lobes in their Lungs, whereas in either there are more. In what he argues, that this fifth Lobe in a Man could not lie upon the Vena Cava; because in a Man the Pericardium is fastened to the Diaphragm, and the Vana Cava enters there, and so immediately passes to the Heart; this is true, and the same I observed in our Paymie. So that in the formation of this Part, our Pygmie exactly resembles a Man; and is different from both the Mankey and Ape- kind. The former we have seen; as to the latter, Drelincourt tells us in the Male Ape; Pulmo dexter quadrifidus, Lobus insimus omnium crassissimus, superior minùs crassus, intermedius reapsè medius silu & magnitudine. Quarius demùm crenam insculptam habet, quâ parte Cavae fulcrum praebet. Pulmo sinister bisidus, & Lobus ejus superior bifurcatus. So in the Female Ape, Lobi Pulmonis dextri totalitèr divisi IV, quorum superior, bisidus totus, adeo ut sint quinque in eâ parte: siuister Pulmo bisidus totus, & Lobus superior ultrà dimidium sui divisus.

The Trachaea or wind-pipe in our Pygmie was altogether the same as in a Man; consisting of a regular order of Cartilaginous Annuali, which were not perfectly continued round; but towards the Spine, were joyn­ed by a strong Membrane. Drelincourt saith of it, Trachaeae annuli se ha­bent uti Intestinourm spirae, nervosis Membranis colliguntur. The Compa­rison, I think, is not so well made.

[Page 49]For the present we will leave following the Duct of the Trachaea up to the Larynx, (the Part according to the Method of Nature, we should have began with) and make some farther Observations, on those under our present view. In the Cavity of the Thorax therefore, (as I have re­mark'd) the Pericardium or that Bag that incloses the Heart in our Pyg­mie, was fastened to the Diaphragm, just 'tis in Man. I must confess, when I first observed it, I was surprised, because I had not seen it so in Brutes before. And Vesalius and others make it as a peculiarity to a Man. I will quote Vesalius's words, and make an Inference from our observation, and so proceed.

Vesalius ⁽⁷³⁾ therefore tells us, Caeterum Involucri mucro, & dextri ip­sius lateris egregia portio Septi transversi nerveo circulo validissimè, amploque admodùm spatio connascitur, quod Hominibus est peculiare. Simiis quoque & Canibus & Porcis involucrum à septo mullùm distat. Tantùm abest ut ipsi magnâ sui portione connecteretur, adeò sanè ut & hinc luce clarius constet, Galenum hominis viscera aut oscitantèr, aut neutiquàm spectâsse, Simiasque & Canes nobis describentem, immerito veteres arguisse. He can't forbear at all turns to have a fling at Galen: But he is here in the right, and Galen mistaken. So Blancardus ⁽⁷⁴⁾ tells us, Homo prae caeteris Animalibus hoc peculiare habet, quod ejus Pericardium Septi transversi medio semper accrescat, cum idem in Quadrupedum genere liberum, & aliquanto spatio ab ipso remotum sit.

Now our Pygmie having the Pericardium thus fastened to the Dia­phragm, it seems to me, as if Nature designed it to be a Biped and to go erect. For therefore in a Man is the Pericardium thus fastened, that in Expiration it might assist the Diastole of the Diaphragm: for otherwise the Liver and Stomach being so weighty, they would draw it down too much towards the Abdomen; so that upon the relaxation of it's Fibres in it's Diastole, it would not ascend sufficiently into the Thorax, so as to cause a Subsidence of the Lungs by lessening the Cavity there. In Qua­drupeds there is no need of this adhaesion of the Pericardium to the Dia­phragm: For in them, in Expiration, when the Fibres of the Diaphragm are relaxed, the weight of the Viscera of the Abdomen will easily press the Diaphragm up, into the Cavity of the Thorax, and so perform that Service. Besides, was the Pericardium fastened to the Diaphragm in Quadrupeds, it would hinder it's Systole in Inspiration; or it's descent downwards upon the contraction of it's Muscular Fibres; and the more, because the Diaphragm being thus tied up, it could not then so freely force down the weight of the Viscera, which are always pressing upon it, and consequently not sufficiently dilate the Cavity of the Thorax, and therefore must hinder their Inspiration. Thus we see how necessary it is, [Page 50] that in a Man the Pericardium should be fastened to the Diaphragm, and in Quadrupeds how inconvenient it would be; that from hence I think we may safely conclude, that Nature design'd our Pygmie to go erect, since in this particular 'tis so like a Man; which the common Apes and Monkeys are not; and tho' they are taught to go erect, yet 'tis no more than what Dogs may be taught to do.

We proceed now to the Heart; where we observed that in our Pyg­mie, its Auricles, Ventricles, Valves and Vessels were much the same as they are in a Man's. It's Cone was not so pointed, as in some Animals, but rather more obtuse and blunt, even more than a Man's. What A­vicenna ⁽⁷⁵⁾ remarks of the Heart of an Ape, having a double Cone, must be accidental and extraordinary: for he tells us, Et jam repertum est Cor cujusdam Simij habens duo Capita. And a little after, he denies the Heart to be a Muscle; Jam autem erravit (saith he) qai existimavit, quòd sit Lacertus, quamvis sit similium rerum in co, verùm motus ejus non est volun­tarius. The person he hints at, I suppose, is Hippocrates, who so long ago asserted this; [...] (saith ⁽⁷⁶⁾ Hippocrates) [...]. Cor musculus est validus admodùm non Ner­vo, verùm Carnis spissamento. And Steno and Dr. Lower since have shew­ed us the way of dissecting it, and have made it most evident that 'tis Mus­cular; and it's motion is such; but as Avicenne observes,'tis not a vo­luntary motion, but involuntary. 'Tis pity we had not a better Transla­tion of his Works; for unless it be some particular Pieces, the rest is most barbarously done, as appears from that little I have quoted of him. But to return to our Pygmie; the magnitude and figure of the Heart here, was exactly the same as represented in our Scheme, where part of the Peri­cardium is left lying on it. Both in the right and left Auricle and Ventri­cle, I observed two Polypous Concretions, which plainly represented the Valves both in the Arteria Pulmonalis, and Aorta. I must confess by what I have hitherto observed of them, (and I have very frequently met with such Concretions in Humane Bodies) I cannot think these Polypus's to be any thing else, than the Size of the Blood, or the Serum coagulated after Death. The Observation I formerly gave ⁽⁷⁷⁾ of a Polypus in the Tra­chaea and Bronchiae of a Patient troubled with an Haemoptoe, in it's kind I think remarkable.

The Parisians Observe that the Heart of their Monkey was a great deal more pointed, than it usually is in Man; which is likewise a Character of Brutes. Yet in the interiour Superficies of it's Ventricles, it had that great number of Fibres and fleshy Columns, which are seen in Men. Drelincourt in his Ape observes, Cor solidum in ventriculo sinistro, laxum in dextro; praedurus Conus ejus: Serum in Pericardio salsum. Vasa Coronaria tumida, Praesertim circà Ventriculum. Adeps circà ca nullus.

[Page 51]There was nothing farther, I think, that I observed peculiar in the Thorax of our Pygmie. I shall now therefore follow the Duct of the Trachaea up to the Throat. And here as in Man, I observed placed the Glandula Thyroidea, upon the Cartilago Scutiformis of the Larynx; 'twas red and spungy, full of Blood vessels, not much unlike the inward Part of the Spleen, but somewhat firmer. In a Man I have always observed this part to be red. Drelincourt's Account of it in the Ape is, Glandulae Thyroideae & Cricoideae crassae sunt, & subnigricantes; & illas permeant sur­culi Corotidis Arteriae & Jugular is venae externae; cum surculis Nervi Recur­rentis. There is no sensible account yet given of the use of this part, as I have met with: And I think that from a Comparative Survey of it in other Animals, and a strict Observation of it's Structure, and the Vessels that compound it, it were not difficult to assign other uses of it more satisfactory.

As to the Larynx in our Pygmie, unless I enumerate all the Cartilages that go to form it, and the Muscles that serve to give them their Motion, and the Vessels that run to and from it, and the Membranes and Glands, there is nothing that I can further add, but only say, that I found the whole Structure of this Part exactly as 'tis in Man. And the same too I must say of the Os Hyoides. The Reflection that the Parisians make up­on the observation of this, and it's neighbouring Parts in the Dissection of their Monkey's, I think is very just and valuable. And if there was any further advantage for the forming of Speech, I can't but think our Pygmie had it. But upon the best Enquiry, I was never informed, that it attempted any thing that way. Tho' Birds have been taught to imi­tate Humane Voice, and to pronounce Words and Sentences, yet Quadru­peds never; neither has this Quadru-manous Species of Animals, that so nearly app [...]oaches the Structure of Mankind, abating the Romances of An­tiquity concerning them.

The Parisians therefore tell us, That the Muscles of the Os Hyoides. Tongue, Larynx, and Pharynx, which do most serve to articulate a word, were wholly like to those of Man; and a great deal more than those of the Hand; which nevertheless the Ape, which speaks not, uses almost with as much perfection as a Man. Which demonstrates, that Speech is an Action. more peculiar to Man, and which more distinguishes him from Brutes than the Hand; which Anaxagoras, Aristotle, and Galen have thought to be the Organ which Nature has given to Man, as to the wisest of all Animals; for want perhaps of this Reflection: For the Ape is found provided by Nature of all those marvellous Organs of Speech with so much exactness, that the very three small Muscles, which do take their rise from the Apophyses Styloides, are not wanting, altho' this Apophysis be extreamly small. This particula­rity does likewise shew, that there is no reason to think, that Agents do per­form such and such actions, because they are found with Organs proper there­unto; [Page 52] for, according to these Philosophers, Apes should speak, seeing that they have the Instruments necessary for Speech.

I shall not engage in this Argument here, because it would be too great a digression; hereafter, it may be, I may take an occasion to do it; for this is not the only Instance in our Subject, that will justifie such an Inference: tho' I think it so strong an one, as the Atheists can never answer.

We shall take notice next of the Ʋvula, a Part of some use too in forming the Voice; for where 'tis missing or vitiated, it much alters the sound; and even this I found in our Pygmie to be altogether alike as in Man. It had those two Muscles which are in a Man, the Musculus Sphae­no-Palatinus, and the Pterigo-Palatinus seu Sphaeno-Pterigo-Palatinus; the Tendon of which last, passed over the Pterigoidal Process, which was to it like a Trochlea or Pully, and was afterwards inserted as in a Man.

The Parisians tell us that the Uvula, which is in no other Brutes, was found in our Apes ( it should be Monkeys) wholly resembling that of Man. And so Blasius, Ʋvula in Animalibus aliis praeter hominem & simiam num­quam à me observata. All that Drelincourt saith of it is, Ʋvnla firma est & carnosa.

The Tongue of our Pygmie in all respectts, as I know of, resembled a Humane Tongue; only because 'twas somewhat narrower, it seemed lon­ger: And under the Tongue in our Pygmie we observed the Glandulae Sub­linguales as in Man.

Drelincourt observes in the Ape, Linguae basis non tantùm incumbit Hy­oidi superno, sed amplectitur ejus tuber inferius posticè: Papillas habet Bovinis similes, & tunicam propriam permeantes.

At the Root of the Tongue of each side were placed the Tonsillae in our Pygmie, as they are in a Man. They were protuberant and hard, and not so foraminulous, as usually in Man; very probably being vitiated by the Ʋlcer in the Cheek. For Drelincourt tells us in the Ape, Amygdalae cavae, pertusae & Scrobiculos habentes.

The Parotides under each Ear in our Pygmie were large, and of the same Figure as in Man. Parotis glandula contegit Musculum Sterno-Mastoi­deum, articulationem Maxillae & Musculi Pectroalis portionem, saith Drelin­court.

The Maxillary Gland of the left side (where the Ulcer in our Pygmie was) had two of it's Lobes, globous and protuberant, above the Surface of the other Part, being insected and tumefied by the Ulcerous Matter. These Glands were about an Inch long, and about half an Inch broad; [Page 53] and there were two other small Glands a little distant from the head of the Maxillary. Glandulae salivales ad angulum Maxillae Inferioris oblongae, laxae, molles, albicantes, saith Drelincourt.

But before I leave these Parts, there are some others I must here take notice of, in this Comparative Survey; which tho' they are not to be met with, either in our Pygmie or in Man; yet are very remarkable, both in the Monkey and Ape-kind, viz. those Pouches the Monkeys and Apes have in their Chaps, which serve them as Repositories for to hoard up, up­on occasion, food in; when they are not disposed for the present to de­vour it; but when there Stomachs serve them, they then take it out thence and so eat it. That the Ape-kind has these Pouches, Drelincourt does inform us; where he tells us, Musculus latissimus Mentum universum & buccas obtegit, quâ parts simiae saccum formant, intra quem Esculenta recon­dunt. Pliny is very express, That both Satyrs and Sphinges ( which I make to be of the Monkey kind) have them likewise, ⁽⁷⁸⁾ Condit in Thesauros Maxillarum Cibum Sphingiorum & Satyrorurn Genus. Mox inde sensim ad mandendum manibus expromit; & quod formicis in annum solen­ne est, his in dies vel horas. The account the Parisians give us of this Pouch in the Mouth of the Monkeys they dissected, is this; That it was composed of Membranes and Glands, and of a great many Musculous and Car nous Fibres. It's situation was on the outside of each Jaw, reaching ob­liquely from the middle of the Jaw to the under part of it's Angle, passing un­der a part of the Muscle called Longissimus. It was an Inch and an half long, and almost as broad towards it's bottom. It opened into the Mouth be­tween the Jaw and the bottom of the Gum. 'Tis into this Pouch that Apes use to put what they would keep; and it is probable that the Musculous Fibres which it has, do serve to shut and open it, to receive and put out what these Animals do there lay up in reserve. Now our Pygmie having none of these Pouches in it's Chaps, nor nothing like them; 'tis a notable difference both from the Monkey and Ape-kind, and an Agreement with the Hu­mane.

We should now come to discourse of the five Senses: But there is lit­tle I have at present to remark of them. For in the Organs of those of Tactus, and Gustus, there was no difference I could observe between our Pygmie and a Man. As to those of Hearing and Smelling, I shall make my Observations upon them, in the Ostcology. Here therefore I shall on­ly remark some things of the Eyes, the Organs of Seeing; and so pro­ceed to the Brain.

The Bony Orbit of the Eye in our Pygmie was large, conical, and deep. Here we observed the Glandula Lachrymalls, and Innominate. The Bulb of the Eye in proportion to the Bulk of the Body, was rather larger than in a Man. The Iris was of a light hazel Colour: The Pu­pil [Page 54] round and large: The Crystalline Humour Sphaerical or Lentiformis, and almost as large as in a Man. The Optic Nerve was inserted exactly as in a Man. The Tunica Choroides rather blacker than in a Man. And where­as in Brutes, that are prono Capite, there is usually a Musculus Septimus, which from it's use is call'd Suspensorius; in our Pygmie there was none of this Muscle. All the other Muscles of the Eye, were exactly the same as in Man. This seventh Muscle is also wanting in the Ape, as appears by the figures Casserius ⁽⁷⁹⁾ has given us of the Eye of an Ape. Neither the Parisians nor Blasius, nor Drelincourt do give us any Remarks upon this Part.

We proceed now to the upper Venter, the Head, where at present we shall examine the Brain; that Part, which if we had proceeded accord­ing to the Method of Nature in forming the Parts, we must have began with. For I can't but think, as 'tis the first Part we observe formed, so that the whole of the Body, i. e. all the Containing Parts, have their rise from it. But I shall not enlarge upon this Argument here; it would be too great a digression, to give my Reasons for such an Hypothesis. From what is generally received, viz. That the Brain is reputed the more immediate Seat of the Soul it self; one would be apt to think, that since there is so great a disparity between the Soul of a Man, and a Brute, the Organ likewise in which 'tis placed should be very different too. Yet by comparing the Brain of our Pygmie with that of a Man; and, with the greatest exactness, observing each Part in both; it was very surprising to me to find so great a resemblance of the one to the other, that nothing could be more. So that when I am describing the Brain of our Pygmie, you may justly suspect I am describing that of a Man, or may think that I might very well omit it wholly, by referring you to the accounts already given of the Anatomy of an Humane Brain, for that will indiffe­rently serve for our Pygmie, by allowing only for the magnitude of the Parts in Man. Tho' at the same time I must observe, that proportiona­bly to the Bulk of the Body, the Brain in our Pygmie, was extreamly large; for it weighed (the greatest part of the Dura Mater being taken off) twelve Ounces, wanting only a Dram. The Parisians remark, that in their Monkeys the Brain was large in proportion to the Body, it weighing [...]o Ounces and a half: which nevertheless was inconsiderable to ours; since our Pygmie exceeded not the Stature and Bulk of the Common Mon­key or Ape; so that herein, as in a great many other Circumstances, our Pygmie is different from the Common Monkey and Ape, and more resem­bles a Man.

I can't agree with Vesalius, that the Structure of the Brain of all Qua­drupeds, my all Birds, and of some Fishes too, is the same as in Man. [Page 55] There is a vast difference to be observed in the formation of the Parts, that serve to compose the Brain in these various Animals. And tho' the Brain of a Man, in respect of his Body, be much larger than what is to be met with in any other Animal (for Vesalius makes the Brain of a Man to be as big as those of three Oxen) yet I think we can't safely conclude with him, that Animals, as they excell in the largeness of the Brain, so they do likewise in the Principal Faculties of the Soul: For if this be true, then our Pygmie must equal a Man, or come very near him, since his Brain in proportion to his Body, was as large as a Man's. Vesalius ⁽⁸⁰⁾ his words are these; Cerebri nimirùm constructione Simia, Canis, E­quus, Felis, & Quadrupeda quae hactenùs vidi omnia, & Aves etiam uni­versae, plurimaque Piscium genera, omni propemodùm ex parte Homini cor­respondeant: neque ullum secanti occurr at discrimen, quod secùs de Hominis, quàm illorum Animalium functionibus statuendum esse prae scribat. Nisi fortè quis meritò dicat Cerebri molem Homini, Perfectissimo sanè quod novimus Animali, obtigisse maximam, ejusque Cerebrum etiam tribus Boum Cerelris grandius reperiri: & dein secundum Corporis proportionem mox Simiae dein Cani magnum quoque non secus obtingere Cerebrum, quam si Animalia Cerebri tantum praestarent mole, quanto Principis Animae viribus apertius viciniúsve donata videntur.

Since therefore in all respects the Brain of our Pygmie does so exactly resemble a Man's, I might here make the same Reflection the Parisians did upon the Organs of Speech, That there is no reason to think, that A­gents do perform such and such Actions, because they are found with Organs proper thereunto: for then our Pygmie might be really a Man. The Or­gans in Animal Bodies are only a regular Compages of Pipes and Vessels, for the Fluids to pass through, and are passive. What actuates them, are the Humours and Fluids: and Animal Life consists in their due and regu­lar motion in this Organical Body. But those Nobler Faculties in the Mind of Man, must certainly have a higher Principle; and Matter orga­nized could never produce them; for why else, where the Organ is the same, should not the Actions be the same too? and if all depended on the Organ, not only our Pygmie, but other Brutes likewise, would be too near akin to us. This Difference I cannot but remark, that the Ancients were fond of making Brutes to be Men: on the contrary now, most un­philosophically, the Humour is, to make Men but meer Brutes and Mat­ter. Whereas in truth Man is part a Brute, part an Angel; and is that Link in the Creation, that joyns them both together.

This Digressim may be the more pardonable, because I have so little to say here, besides just naming the Parts; and to tell you (what I have alrea­dy) that they were all like to those in a Man: For the Dura Mater, as a Common Membrane, firmiy secured the situation of the whole Brain strictly [Page 56] adhering to the Sutures of the Cranium above; before to the Crista Galli; and at the basis so strongly, that it was not easily to be separated. By it's anterior Process of the Falx, it divided the two Hemispheres of the Cerebrum; by it's transverse Process, which descended deep, just as in a Man, it separated the Cerebrum and Cerebellum: it enjoyed the same Si­nus's, and in all Particulars 'twas conformable to what is in a Man.

The Pia Mater in our Pygmie was a fine thin Membrane which more immediately covered the Substance of the Brain, and may be reckoned it's proper Membrane; insinuating it's self all along between the Anfractus of the Cerebrum and the Circilli of the Cerebellum; being copiously fur­nished with numerous Branches of Blood Vessels, but they appear'd more on the Convex Part, then at the Basis.

The figure of the whole Brain in our Pygmie was globous; but by means of a greater jutting in of the Bones of the Orbit of the Eye, there was occasioned a deeper depression on the Anterior Lobes of the Brain in this place, than in a Man. As to other Circumstances here, I observed all Parts the same. The Anfractus of the Cerebrum were alike; as also the Substantia Corticalis and Medullaris. On the basis of the Brain, we may view all the Ten pair of Nerves exactly situated and placed as in a Hu­mane Brain; nor did I find their Originations different, or any Parti­cularity that was so. I shall therefore refer to the figures I have caused to be made of the Brain, and their Descriptions; where we may observe the Arteriae Carotides, Vertebrales, and Communicans, and the whole of the Blood Vessels in our Pygmie to be the same as in a Man. Here was the In­fundibulum, the Glandulae duae albae ponè Infundibulum, the Medulla Ob­longata with it's Annular Protuberance, and the beginning of the Medulla, Spinalis, just as in Man. I am here only a Nomenclator, for want of Matter to make particular Remarks upon. And the Authorrs that have hitherto furnished me with Notes, how the same Parts are in Apes and Monkeys, do fail me now; it may be, finding here nothing new or dif­ferent, they are therefore silent. All the Parisians do tell us of the Brain in their Monkeys is this:

The Brain was large in proportion to the Body: It weighed two Ounces and an half. The Dura Mater entered very far to form the Falx. The An­sractuosities of the External part of the Brain were very like those of Man in the Anteriour part; but in the inward parts before the Cerebellum, there was hardly any: they in requital were much deeper in proportion. The Apo­physes, which are called Mamillares, which are great Nerves that do serve to the smelling, were not soft, as in Man, but hard and membranous. The Optick Nerves were also of a Substance harder and firmer than ordinary. The Glandula Pinealis was of a Conical figure, and it's point was turned to­wards the binder part of the Head. There was no Rete Mirabile: for the Carotides being entered into the Brain, went by one single Trunk on each side [Page 57] of the edge of the seat of the Sphenoides to pierce the Dura Mater, and to be distributed into the basis of the Brain. In our Subject I thought the An­fractus of the Brain much the same, both in the anteriour and hinder part. Nor did I observe any difference in the Mamillary Processes or Op­tick Nerves, or Rete Mirabile, but all, as in a Man.

The Cerebellum in our Pygmie was divided by Circilli, as in Man. It had likewise the Processus Vermiformes, Dr. Willis ⁽⁸⁰⁾ makes this Re­mark upon this Part: Cerebellum autem ipsum, in quibusvis ferè Animali­bus, ejusdem figurae & proportionis, nec non ex ejusmodi lamellis conflatum reperitur. Quae Cerebrum diversimodè ab homine configuratum habent, uti Volucres & Pisces, item inter Quadrupedes Cuniculi & Mures, quorum Ce­rebra gyris seu convolutionibus carent; his Cerebelli species eadem, similis pli­carum dispositio & Partium caeterarum compositurae existunt. 'Tis from hence he forms his noted Hypothesis, How that the Animal Spirits that are bred in the Cerebrum, do serve for Voluntary Motions; and those in the Cerebellum for involuntary.

If we survey the inward Parts of the Brain in our Pygmie, we shall here likewise find all exactly as in a Humane Body; viz. The Medullary Substance running up between the Cortical; The Concameration, the Cor­pus Callosum, the Fornix and it's Crura the same. The Ventricles large and spatious. The Corpora Striata, the Thalami Nervorum Opticorum all alike. The Plexus Choroides the same; as were also the three Foramina as in Man; The Glandula Pinealis proportionably large. The Protuberantiae Orbiculares; i.e. The Nates and Testes in our Pygmie were the same as in Man; whereas in Brutes (as Dr. Willis well observes) the Nates are al­ways proportionably larger than in Man; but it was not so in our Pyg­mie. The Valvula major here was very plain. The Cerebellum being di­vided, the Medullary Parts represented the Branches of Trees, as a Man's does. The Medulla Oblongata and Medulla Spinalis the same as the Hu­mane; and all Parts being so conformable here to a Humane Brain, I thought it sufficient just to name them, since I have caused to be made two figures of the Brain in our Pygmie from the Life, and in its Natural Bigness, where all the Parts are plainly represented to the Eye.