but of the largest Stature, whose height like that of Giants, is rather to be taken by the Cubit than the Foot; in which phrase we read the measure of Goliah, whose height is said to be six Cubits and span.  Of affinity hereto is also the Exposition of Jerom; not taking Pygmies for Dwarfs, but stout and valiant Champions; not taking the sense of [Greek:  pygmae], which signifies the Cubit measure, but that which expresseth Pugils; that is, Men fit for Combat and the Exercise of the Fist.  Thus there can be no satisfying illation from this Text, the diversity, or rather contrariety of Expositions and Interpretations, distracting more than confirming the Truth of the Story.

But why Aldrovandus or Caspar Bartholine should bring in St. Austin as a Favourer of this Opinion of Men Pygmies, I see no Reason.  To me he seems to assert quite the contrary:  For proposing this Question, An ex propagine Adam vel filiorum Noe, quaedam genera Hominum Monstrosa prodierunt? He mentions a great many monstrous Nations of Men, as they are described by the Indian Historians, and amongst the rest, the Pygmies, the Sciopodes, &c.  And adds, Quid dicam de Cynocephalis, quorum Canina Capita atque ipse Latratus magis Bestias quam Homines confitentur?  Sed omnia Genera Hominum, quae dicuntur esse, esse credere, non est necesse. And afterwards so fully expresses himself in favour of the Hypothesis I am here maintaining, that I think it a great Confirmation of it. Nam & Simias (saith he) _& Cercopithecos, & Sphingas, si nesciremus non Homines esse, sed Bestias, possent isti Historici de sua Curiositate gloriantes velut Gentes Aliquas Hominum nobis impunita vanitate mentiri._ At last he concludes and determines the Question thus, Aut illa, quae talia de quibusdam Gentibus scripta sunt, omnino nulla sunt, aut si sunt, Homines non sunt, aut ex Adam sunt si Homines sunt.

There is nothing therefore in St. Austin that justifies the being of Men Pygmies, or that the Pygmies were Men; he rather makes them Apes.  And there is nothing in his Scholiast Ludovicus Vives that tends this way, he only quotes from other Authors, what might illustrate the Text he is commenting upon, and no way asserts their being Men.  I shall therefore next enquire into Bochartus’s Opinion, who would have them to be the Nubae or Nobae. Hos Nubas Troglodyticos (saith[A] he) ad Avalitem Sinum esse Pygmaeos Veterum multa probant. He gives us five Reasons to prove this.  As, 1.  The Authority of Hesychius, who saith, [Greek:  Noboi Pygmaioi]. 2.  Because Homer places the Pygmies near the Ocean, where the Nubae were. 3. Aristotle places them at the lakes of the Nile.  Now by the Nile Bochartus tells us, we must understand the Astaborus,