Man s Place in Nature The Evolution Debate 1813

1870 Volume VII Thomas H Huxley pdf download

https://ebookgate.com/product/man-s-place-in-nature-the-
evolution-debate-1813-1870-volume-vii-thomas-h-huxley/

Get the full ebook with Bonus Features for a Better Reading Experience on ebookgate.com
Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Papers of Thomas Jefferson Volume 7 The Papers of Thomas

Jefferson Retirement Series Volume 7 28 November 1813 to
30 September 1814 Thomas Jefferson (Editor)
https://ebookgate.com/product/papers-of-thomas-jefferson-volume-7-the-
papers-of-thomas-jefferson-retirement-series-
volume-7-28-november-1813-to-30-september-1814-thomas-jefferson-
editor/
ebookgate.com

Reclaiming American Cities The Struggle for People Place

and Nature since 1900 Rutherford H. Platt

https://ebookgate.com/product/reclaiming-american-cities-the-struggle-
for-people-place-and-nature-since-1900-rutherford-h-platt/

ebookgate.com

Essays upon some Controverted Questions 1st Edition Thomas

Henry Huxley

https://ebookgate.com/product/essays-upon-some-controverted-
questions-1st-edition-thomas-henry-huxley/

ebookgate.com

Mental States Volume 1 Evolution function nature Studies

in Language Companion Series 92nd Edition Andrea C.
Schalley
https://ebookgate.com/product/mental-states-volume-1-evolution-
function-nature-studies-in-language-companion-series-92nd-edition-
andrea-c-schalley/
ebookgate.com
The Place of the Ideal Community in Urban Planning Thomas
A. Reiner

https://ebookgate.com/product/the-place-of-the-ideal-community-in-
urban-planning-thomas-a-reiner/

ebookgate.com

The Great Brain Debate Nature Or Nuture 1st Edition John

E. Dowling

https://ebookgate.com/product/the-great-brain-debate-nature-or-
nuture-1st-edition-john-e-dowling/

ebookgate.com

Language Evolution Studies in the Evolution of Language

1st Edition Morten H. Christiansen

https://ebookgate.com/product/language-evolution-studies-in-the-
evolution-of-language-1st-edition-morten-h-christiansen/

ebookgate.com

Race And Equality The Nature of the Debate 1st Edition

Edition John Harvey

https://ebookgate.com/product/race-and-equality-the-nature-of-the-
debate-1st-edition-edition-john-harvey/

ebookgate.com

Letters on the Laws of Man s Nature and Development 1st

Edition Henry George Atkinson

https://ebookgate.com/product/letters-on-the-laws-of-man-s-nature-and-
development-1st-edition-henry-george-atkinson/

ebookgate.com
The Evolution Debate 1813–1870
Edited by David Knight
 The Evolution Debate 1813–1870
Edited and with new introductions by David Knight

Volume I
Essay on the Theory of the Earth
Georges Cuvier

Volume II
Geology and Mineralogy,
Considered with Reference to Natural Theology, Volume I
William Buckland

Volume III
Geology and Mineralogy,
Considered with Reference to Natural Theology, Volume II
William Buckland

Volume IV
Omphalos
Philip Gosse

Volume V
On the Origin of Species
Charles Darwin

Volume VI
Palaeontology
Richard Owen

Volume VII
Man’s Place in Nature
Thomas Henry Huxley

Volume VIII
The Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man
Charles Lyell

Volume IX
Part I: Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection
Alfred Russel Wallace
Part II: On the Tendency of Species to Form Varieties
Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace
The Evolution Debate 1813–1870
Volume VII
Man’s Place in Nature

Thomas Henry Huxley

with a new introduction by

David Knight
Published in Association with the Natural History Museum

LONDON AND NEW YORK

 First published 1863
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2006.

“To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis
or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to
http://www.ebookstore.tandf.co.uk/.”
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 29 West 35th Street, New York,
NY 10001
Editorial material and selection © 2003 David Knight
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or
by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including
photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission
in writing from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from
the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been
requested

ISBN 0-203-50317-1 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 0-203-60028-2 (Adobe e-Readder Format)

ISBN 0-4150-28922-X (Print Edition) (set)
ISBN 0 415-28929-7 (Print Edition) (volume VII)
Thomas Henry Huxley, F.R.S. (1825–
1895)
© The Natural History Museum,
London
 INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME VII
David Knight

Huxley was born in 1825 over a butcher’s shop in Ealing, west of London.1 His father
was a schoolmaster there, but although the pupils had included the future Cardinal John
Henry Newman, the school failed and the family was always hard up. Huxley defined
himself as a plebeian even when at the end of his life he was an eminent pillar of society.
He was awarded scholarships to attend Charing Cross Hospital in London for training in
medicine, and qualified as a surgeon. He could not afford to continue his education for
the higher status of doctor, and signed on for the Navy. There, Sir John Richardson
recognised his abilities and arranged for him to go as Assistant Surgeon on the survey
voyage of HMS Rattlesnake to Australia and New Guinea.
There he studied oceanic hydrozoa, explored on shore (though not as much as he
would have liked), and met his future wife, Henrietta.2 Back home, he got leave to write
up his researches, was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society, and sought a job: he could
not bear to return to naval duty. He became an excellent essayist, with a trenchant style,
and eventually got a post as palaeontologist at the School of Mines (an ancestor of
Imperial College, London). There he became a great lecturer, making splendid drawings
on the blackboard and able to hold audiences of specialists, and also of working men. He
also lectured before the fashionable audiences at the Royal Institution, and at the annual
meetings of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. He wrote a scathing
review of the evolutionary book Vestiges because of its many inaccuracies; and became
an important advocate of professionalism in science, being particularly indignant about
the effete and clerical universities of Oxford and Cambridge. Nearer home in London, he
fell out with Richard Owen, who had been his patron but then patronised him; and their
quarrel was a much-noted feature of a time when great rows were fairly commonplace
among men of science with large egos. Charles Darwin realised what a useful ally he
would be, and cultivated him: he was delighted with On the Origin of Species, though
never a thoroughgoing believer in natural selection3 (favouring a more jumpy
evolutionary process), and wrote a review for The Times, then Britain’s leading
newspaper.
At the British Association in Oxford in 1860, Huxley clashed with Owen again, this
time over Owen’s claim that the brains of humans were so different from those of gorillas
that they should not be classed together. This was in the context of Owen’s opposition to
Darwin’s evolutionary theory, where we and the apes had a common ancestor, and
Huxley rudely told him he was lying. At the end of that meeting, Huxley was persuaded
to stay on for a public debate about Darwin’s views, where Bishop Samuel Wilberforce
(with whom Owen was staying for the meeting) was to speak. The meeting was poorly
reported because it came after the official programme was over, but the snobbish
Wilberforce probably asked Huxley if he was descended from an ape on his grandmother
or grandfather’s side. Huxley retorted, in good plebeian vein, that he would rather be
descended from an ape than from someone who tried to make fun of the serious work of
scientists: what we do is more important that who our ancestors were. This meeting
turned Huxley into a public figure, a spokesman for evolution, professional science and
education, a Victorian sage.4 In the short run, it led to his bringing out this little book,
Man’s Place in Nature, that made the evolution of humankind central to debate within
and without the scientific world.
Huxley found some extraordinary illustrations, and while he was a liberal in his own
day (stoutly opposing the racism associated with the American Civil War of the 1860s),
his views are not always edifying today. But his visitor from the sphere of Saturn, the
seventh heaven, is a brilliant invention, without pre-conceptions, putting humans, gorillas
and orang-utans in the same group, like horses, donkeys and zebras. Darwin, despite his
alarm about his bellicose ally and the concern of some friends about good taste,
welcomed the book.5 Without the sometimes brash and aggressive Huxley, evolutionary
theory would no doubt have prevailed more slowly than it eventually did; and we meet
him here in lively form. The frontispiece has become an evolutionary icon, but it is not
meant to illustrate progress as most interpret it: the skeletons are not our ancestors’, but
are those of our natural group, modern apes drawn with a human skeleton for comparison
and to make us see with Saturnian eyes.
Durham, October 2002
1 A.Desmond, Huxley, 2 vols, London: Michael Joseph, 1994–7.
2 J.Huxley ed., T.H.Huxley’s Diary of the Voyage of HMS Rattlesnake, New York: Doubleday,
1936.
3 M.A.di Gregorio, T.H.Huxley’s Place in Natural Science. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University
Press, 1984.
4 A.P.Barr ed., Thomas Henry Huxley’s Place in Science and Letters, Athens Ga.: Georgia
University Press, 1997.
5 F.Burkhardt et al. (eds), The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, vol. 11, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1999, pp. 180–1.

Photographically reduced from

Diagrams of the natural size (except
that of the Gibbon, which was twice as
large as nature), drawn by Mr.
Waterhouse Hawkins from, specimens
in the Museum of the Royal College of
Surgeons.
 EVIDENCE

AS TO

MAN’S PLACE IN NATURE.

BY

THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY,

FELLOW OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY

z

WILLIAMS AND NORGATE, 14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN,

LONDON; AND 20. SOUTH FREDERICK STREET, EDINBURGH 1863
 ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER.

THE greater part of the substance of the following Essays has already been published in
the form of Oral Discourses, addressed to widely different audiences, during the past
three years.
Upon the subject of the second Essay, I delivered six Lectures to the Working Men in
1860, and two, to the members of the Philosophical Institution of Edinburgh in 1862. The
readiness with which my audience followed my arguments, on these occasions,
encourages me to hope that I have not committed the error, into which working men of
science so readily fall, of obscuring my meaning by unnecessary technicalities: while, the
length of the period during which the subject, under its various aspects, has been present
to my mind, may suffice to satisfy the Reader that, my conclusions, be they right or be
they wrong, have not been formed hastily or enunciated crudely.
T.H.H.
LONDON: January, 1863.
 I.—
ON THE NATURAL HISTORY OF THE
MAN-LIKE APES.

ANCIENT traditions, when tested by the severe processes of modern investigation,

commonly enough fade away into mere dreams: but it is singular how often the dream
turns out to have been a half-waking one, presaging a reality. Ovid foreshadowed the
discoveries of the geologist: the Atlantis was an imagination, but Columbus found a
western world: and though the quaint forms of Centaurs and Satyrs have an existence
only in the realms of art, creatures approaching man more nearly than they in essential
structure, and yet as thoroughly brutal as the goat’s or horse’s half of the mythical
compound, are now not only known, but notorious.

FIG. 1.—Simiæ magnatum deliciæ.—

De Bry, 1598.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 2

I have not met with any notice of one of these MAN-LIKE APES of earlier date than that
contained in Pigafetta’s “Description of the kingdom of Congo,”* drawn up from the
notes of a Portuguese sailor, Eduardo Lopez, and published in 1598. The tenth chapter of
this work is entitled “De Animalibus quæ in hac provincia reperiun-

tur,” and contains a brief passage to the effect that “in the Songan country, on the banks
of the Zaire, there are multitudes of apes, which afford great delight to the nobles by
imitating human gestures.” As this might apply to almost any kind of apes, I should have
thought little of it, had not the brothers De Bry, whose engravings illustrate the work,
thought fit, in their eleventh “Argumentum,” to figure two of these “Simiæ magnatum
deliciæ.” So much of the plate as contains these apes is faithfully copied in the woodcut
(fig. 1), and it will be observed that they are tail-less, long-armed, and large-eared; and
about the size of Chimpanzees. It may be that these apes are as much figments of the
imagination of the ingenious brothers as the winged, two-legged, crocodile-headed
dragon which adorns the same plate; or, on the other hand, it may be that the artists have
constructed their drawings from some essentially faithful description of a Gorilla or a
Chimpanzee. And, in either case, though these figures are worth a passing notice, the
oldest trustworthy and definite accounts of any animal of this kind date from the 17th
century, and are due to an Englishman.
The first edition of that most amusing old book, “Purchas his Pilgrimage,” was
published in 1613, and therein are to be found many references to the statements of one
whom Purchas terms “Andrew Battell (my neere neighbour, dwelling at Leigh in Essex)
who served under Manuel Silvera Perera, Governor under the King of Spaine, at his city
of Saint Paul, and with him went farre into the countrey of Angola;” and again, “my
friend, Andrew Battle, who lived in the kingdom of Congo many yeares,” and who,
“upon some quarell betwixt the Portugals (among whom be was a sergeant of a hand) and
him, lived eight or nine moneths in the woodes.” From this weather-beaten old soldier,
Purchas was amazed to hear “of a kinde of Great Apes, if they might so bee termed, of
the height of a man, but twice as bigge in feature of their limmes, with strength
proportionable, hairie all over, otherwise altogether like men and women in their whole
bodily shape.* They lived on such wilde fruits as the trees and woods yielded, and in the
night time lodged on the trees.”
This extract is, however, less detailed and clear in its statements than a passage in the
third chapter of the second part of another work—“Purchas his Pilgrimes,” published in
1625, by the same author—which has been often, though hardly ever quite rightly, cited.
The chapter is entitled, “The strange adventures of Andrew Battell, of Leigh in Essex,
sent by the Portugals prisoner to Angola, who lived there and in the adioining regions
neere eighteene yeeres.” And the sixth section of this chapter is headed—“Of the
Provinces of Bongo, Calongo, Mayombe, Manikesocke, Motimbas: of the Ape Mon ster
Pongo, their hunting: Idolatries; and divers other observations.”

*
REGNUM CONGO: hoc est VERA DESCRIPTIO REGNI AFRICANI QUOD TAM AB
INCOLIS QUAM LUSITANIS CONGUS APPELLATUR, per Philippum Piga- fettem, olim ex
Edoardo Lopez acroamatis lingua Italica excerpta, num Latio sermone donata ab August. Cassiod.
Reinio. Iconibus et imaginibus rerum memorabilium quasi vivis, opera et indutria Joan. Theodori et
Joan. Israelis de Bry, fratrum exoroata. Francofurti, MDXCVIII.
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 3

“This province (Calongo) toward the east bordereth upon Bongo, and toward the
north upon Mayombe, which is nineteen leagues from Longo along the coast.
“This province of Mayombe is all woods and groves, so overgrowne that a man may
travaile twentie days in the shadow without any sunne or heat. Here is no kind of corne
nor graine, so that the people liveth onely upon plantanes and roots of sundrie sorts, very
good; and nuts; nor any kinde of tame cattell, nor hens.
“But they have great store of elephant’s flesh, which they greatly esteeme, and many
kinds of wild beasts; and great store of fish. Here is a great sandy bay, two leagues to the
northward of Cape Negro,† which is the port of Mayombe. Sometimes the Portugals lade
logwood in this bay. Here is a great river, called Banna: in the winter it hath no barre,
because the generall winds cause a great sea. But when the sunne hath his south
declination, then a boat may goe in; for then it is smooth because of the raine. This river
is very great, and hath many ilands and people dwelling in them. The woods are so
covered with baboones, monkies, apes and parrots, that it will feare any man to travaile in
them alone. Here are also two kinds of monsters, which are common in these woods, and
very dangerous.
“The greatest of these two monsters is called Pongo in their language, and the lesser is
called Engeco. This Pongo is in all proportion like a man ; but that he is more like a giant
in stature than a man; for he is very tall, and hath a man’s face, hollow-eyed, with long
haire upon his browes. His face and eares are without haire, and his hands also. His bodie
is full of haire, but not very thicke; and it is of a dunnish colour.
“He differeth not from a man but in his legs; for they have no calfe. Hee goeth alwaies
upon his legs, and carrieth his hands clasped in the mape of his necke when he goeth
upon the ground. They sleepe in the trees, and build shelters for the raine, They feed upon
fruit that they find in the woods, and upon nuts, for they eate no kind of flesh. They
cannot speake, and have no understanding more than a beast. The people of the countrie,
when they travaile in the woods make fires where they sleepe 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 understanding to lay the wood together. They goe many together and kill
many negroes that travaile in the woods. Many times they fall upon the elephants which
come to feed where they be, and so beate them with their clubbed fists, and pieces of
wood, that they will runne roaring away from them. Those 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 arrowes.
“The young Pongo hangeth on his mother’s belly with his hands fast clasped about
her, so that when the countrie 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 forest.” *
*
“Except this that their legges had no calves.”—[Ed. 1626.] And in a marginal note, “These great
apes are called Pongo’s.”
†
Purchas’ note.—Cape Negro is in 16 degrees south of the line.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 4

It does not appear difficult to identify the exact region of which Battell speaks. Longo
is doubtless the name of the place usually spelled Loango on our maps. Mayombe still
lies some nineteen leagues northward from Loango, along the coast; and Cilongo or
Kilonga, Manikesocke, and Motimbas are yet registered by geographers. The Cape Negro
of Battell, however, cannot be the modern Cape Negro in 16° S., since Loango itself is in
4° S. latitude. On the other hand, the “great river called Banna” corresponds very well
with the “Camma” and “Fernand Vas,” of modern geographers, which form a great delta
on this part of the African coast.

Now this “Camma” country is situated about a degree and a-half south of the Equator,
while a few miles to the north of the line lies the Gaboon, and a degree or so north of that,
the Money River—both well known to modern naturalists as localities where the largest
of man-like Apes has been obtained. Moreover, at the present day, the word Engeco, or
N’schego, is applied by the natives of these regions to the smaller of the two great Apes
which inhabit them; so that there can be no rational doubt that Andrew Battell spoke of
that which he knew of his own knowledge, or, at any rate, by immediate report from the
natives of Western Africa. The “Engeco,” however, is that “other monster” whose nature
Battell “forgot to relate,” while the name “Pongo”—applied to the animal whose
characters and habits are so fully and carefully described—seems to have died out, at
least in its primitive form and signification. Indeed, there is evidence that not only in
Battell’s time, but up to a very recent date, it was used in a totally different sense from
that in which he employs it.
For example, the second chapter of Purchas’ work, which I have just quoted, contains
“A Description and Historicall Declaration of the Golden Kingdom of Guinea, &c. &c.
Translated from the Dutch, and compared also with the Latin,” wherein it is stated (p.
986) that—
“The River Gaboon lyeth about fifteen miles northward from Rio de Angra, and eight
miles northward from Cape de Lope Gonsalvez (Cape Lopez), and is right under the
Equinoctial line, about fifteene miles from St. Thomas, and is a great land, well and
easily to be knowne. At the mouth of the river there lieth a sand, three or foure fathoms
deepe, whereon it beateth mightily with the streame which runneth out of the river into
the sea. This river, in the mouth thereof, is at least four miles broad; but when you are
about the Iland called Pongo, it is not above two miles broad. …On both sides the river
there standeth many trees. …The Iland called pongo, which hath a monstrous high hill.”
The French naval officers, whose letters are appended to the late M.Isidore Geoff.
Saint Hilaire’s excellent essay on the Gorilla,* note in similar terms the width of the
Gaboon, the trees that line its banks down to the water’s edge, and the strong current that
sets out of it. They describe two islands in its estuary;—one low, called Perroquet; the
*
Purchas’ marginal note, p. 982:—“The Pongo a giant ape. He told me in conference with him, that
one of these Pongoes tooke a negro boy of his which lived a moneth with them. For they hurt not
those which they surprise at unawares, except they look on them; which he avoyded. He said their
highth was like a man’s, but their bignesse twice as great. I saw the negro boy. What the other
monster should be he hath forgotten to relate; and these papers came to my hand since his death,
which, otherwise, in my often conferences, I might have learned. Perhaps he meaneth the Pigmy
Pongo killers mentioned.”
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 5

other high, presenting three conical hills, called Coniquet; and one of them, M.Franquet,
expressly states that, formerly, the Chief of Coniquet was called Meni-Pongo, meaning
thereby Lord of Pongo; and that the N’Pongues (as, in agreement with Dr. Savage, he
affirms the natives call themselves) term the estuary of the Gaboon itself N’Pongo.
It is so easy, in dealing with savages, to misunderstand their applications of words to
things, that one is at first inclined to suspect Battell of having confounded the name of
this region, where his “greater monster” still abounds, with the name of the animal itself.
But he is so right about other matters (including the name of the “lesser monster”) that
one is loth to suspect the old traveller of error; and, on the other hand, we shall find that a
voyager of a hundred years’ later date speaks of the name “Boggoe,” as applied to a great
Ape, by the inhabitants of quite another part of Africa—Sierra Leone.
But I must leave this question to be settled by philologers and travellers; and I should
hardly have dwelt so long upon it except for the curious part played by this word ‘Pongo’
in the later history of the man-like Apes.
The generation which succeeded Battell saw the first of the

FIG. 2.—The Orang of Tulpius, 1641.

*
Archives du Museum, Tome X.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 6

man-like Apes which was ever brought to Europe, or, at any rate, whose visit found a
historian. In the third book of Tulpius’ “Observationes Medicæ,” published in 1641, the
56th chapter or section is devoted to what he calls Satyrus indicus, “called by the Indians
Orang-autang, or Man-of-the Woods, and by the Africans Quoias Morrou.” He gives a
very good figure, evidently from the life, of the specimen of this animal, “nostra memoria
ex Angolâ delatum” presented to Frederick Henry Prince of Orange. Tulpius says it was
as big as a child of three years old, and as stout as one of six years: and that its back was
covered with black hair. It is plainly a young Chimpanzee.
In the meanwhile, the existence of other, Asiatic, man-like Apes became known, but at
first in a very mythical fashion. Thus Bontius (1658) gives an altogether fabulous and
ridiculous account and figure of an animal which he calls “Orang-outang”; and though he
says, “vidi Ego cujus effigiem hie exhibeo,” the said effigies (see fig. 6 for Hoppius’
copy of it) is nothing but a very hairy woman of rather comely aspect, and with
proportions and feet wholly human. The judicious English anatomist, Tyson, was
justified in saying of this description by Bontius, “I confess I do mistrust the whole
representation.”
It is to the last mentioned writer, and his coadjutor Cowper, that we owe the first
account of a man-like ape which has any pretensions to scientific accuracy and
completeness. The treatise entitled, “Orang-outang, sive Homo Sylvestris; or the
Anatomy of a Pygmie compared with that of a Monkey, an Ape, and a Man” published by
the Royal Society in 1699, is, indeed, a work of remarkable merit, and has, in some
respects, served as a model to subsequent inquirers. This “Pygmie,” Tyson tells us, “was
brought from Angola, in Africa; but was first taken a great deal higher up the country;”
its hair “was of a coal-black colour, and strait,” and “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 its knuckles, as I observed it to do when weak and had not strength enough to
support its body.”—“From the top of the head to the heel of the foot, in a strait line, it
measured twenty-six inches.”

These characters, even without Tyson’s good figures (figs. 3 and 4), would have been
sufficient to prove his “Pygmie” to be a young Chimpanzee. But the opportunity of
examining the skeleton of the very animal Tyson anatomised having most unexpectedly
presented itself to me, I am able to bear independent testimony to its being a veritable
Trog- lodytes niger,* though still very young. Although fully appreciating the
resemblances between his Pygmie and Man, Tyson by no means overlooked the
differences between the two, and he concludes his memoir by summing up first, the
points in which “the Ourang-outang or Pygmie more resembled a Man than Apes and
Monkeys do,” under forty-seven distinct heads; and then giving, in thirty-four similar
brief paragraphs, the respects in which “the Ourang-outang or Pygmie differ’d from a
Man and resembled more the Ape and Monkey kind.”
After a careful survey of the literature of the subject extant in his time, our author
arrives at the conclusion that his “Pygmie” is identical neither with the Orangs of Tulpius
and Bontius, nor with the Quoias Morrou of Dapper (or rather of Tulpius), the Barris of
d’Areos, nor with the Pongo of Battell; but that it is a species of ape probably identical
with the Pygmies of the Ancients, and, says Tyson, though it “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,
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 7

FIGS. 3 & 4.—The ‘Pygmie’ reduced

from Tyson’s figures 1 and 2, 1699.
*
I am indebted to Dr. Wright, of Cheltenham, whose paleontological labours are so well known,
for bringing this interesting relic to my knowledge, Tyson’s granddaughter, it appears, married Dr.
Allardyce, a physician of repute in Cheltenham, and brought, as part of her dowry, the skeleton or
the Dr. Allardyce presented it to the Cheltenham Museum, and, through the good offices of my
friend Dr. Wright, the authoritics of the Museum have permitted me to borrow, what is, perhaps, its
most remarkable ornament.

*
“Mandrill” “seems to signify a “man-like ape,” the word “Drill” or “Dril” having been anciently
employed in England to denote an Ape or Baboon. Thus in the fifth edition of Blount’s
“Glossographia, or a Dictionary interpreting the hard words of whatsoever language now used in
our refined English tongue… very useful for all such as desire to understand what they read,”
published in 1681, I find, “Dril—a stone-cutter’s tool wherewith he bores little holes in marble, &c.
Also a large overgrown Ape and Baboon, so called.” “Drill” is used in the same sense in
Charleton’s “Onomasticon Zoicon,” 1668. The singular etymology of the word given by Buffon
seems hardly a probable one.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 8

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.” The name of “Chimpanzee,”
by which one of the African Apes is now so well known, appears to have come into use
in the first half of the eighteenth century, but the only important addition made, in that
period, to our acquaintance with the man-like apes of Africa is contained in “A New
Voyage to Guinea,” by William Smith, which bears the date 1744.
In describing the animals of Sierra Leone, p. 51, this writer says:—
“I shall next describe a strange sort of animal, called by the white men in this country
Mandrill,* but why it is so called I know not, nor did I ever hear the name before, neither
can those who call them so tell, except it be for their near resemblance of a human
creature, though nothing at all like an Ape. Their bodies, when full grown, are as big in
circumference as a middle-sized man’s—their legs much shorter, and their feet larger;
their arms and hands in proportion. The head is monstrously big, and the face broad and
flat, without any other hair but the eyebrows; the nose very small, the mouth wide, and
the lips thin. The face, which is covered by a white skin, is monstrously ugly, being

FIG. 5.—Facsimile of William Smith’s

figure of the “Mandrill,” 1744.
all over wrinkled as with old age; the teeth broad and yellow; the hands have no more
hair than the face, but the same white skin, though all the rest of the body is covered with
long black hair, like a bear. They never go upon all-fours, like apes; but cry, when vexed
or teased, just like children….
“When I was at Sherbro, one Mr.Cummerbus, whom I shall have occasion hereafter to
mention, made me a present of one of these strange animals, which are called by the
natives Boggoe: it was a she-cub, of six months’ age, but even then larger than a Baboon.
I gave it in charge to one of the slaves, who knew how to feed and nurse it, being a very
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 9

tender sort of animal; but whenever I went off the deck the sailors began to teaze it—
some loved to see its tears and hear it cry; others hated its snotty-nose; one who hurt it,
being checked by the negro that took care of it, told the slave he was very fond of his
country-woman, and asked him if he should not like her for a wife? To which the slave
very readily replied, ‘No, this no my wife; this a white woman—this fit wife for you.’
This unlucky wit of the negro’s, I fancy, hastened its death, for next morning it was found
dead under the windlass.”
William Smith’s ‘Mandrill,’ or ‘Boggoe,’ as his description and figure testify, was,
without doubt, a Chimpanzee.
Linnæus knew nothing, of his own observation, of the man-like Apes of either Africa
or Asia, but a dissertation by his pupil Hoppius in the “Amœnitates Academicæ” (VI.
‘Anthropomorpha’) may be regarded as embodying his views respecting these animals.
The dissertation is illustrated by a plate, of which the accompanying woodcut, fig. 6, is
a reduced copy. The figures are entitled (from left to right) 1. Troglodyta Bontii; 2.
Lucifer Aldrovandi; 3. Satyrus Tulpii; 4. Pygmœus Edwardi. The first is a bad copy of
Bontius’ fictitious ‘Ourang-outang,’ in whose existence, however, Linnæus appears to
have fully believed; for in the standard edition of the “Systema

FIG. 6.—The Anthropomorpha of

Linnæus.
Naturæ,” it is enumerated as a second species of Homo; “H. nocturnus.” Lucifer
Aldrovandi is a copy of a figure in Aldrovandus, ‘De’ Quadrupedibus digitatis viviparis,’
Lib. 2, p. 249. (1645) entitled “Cercopithecus formæ raræ Barbilius vocatus et originem a
china ducebat.” Hoppius is of opinion that this may be one of that cat-tailed people, of
whom Nicolaus Köping affirms that they eat a boat’s crew, “gubernator navis” “and all!
In the “Systema Naturæ” “Linnæus calls it in a note, Homo caudatus, and seems inclined
to regard it as a third species of man. According to Temminck, Satyrus Tulpii is a copy of
the figure of a Chimpanzee published by Scotin in 1738, which I have not seen. It is the
Satyrus indicus of the “Systems Naturæ,” and is regarded by Linmæus as possibly a
distinct species from Satyrus sylvestris. The last, named Pygmœus Edwardi, is copied
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 10

from the figure of a young “Man of the Woods,” or true Orang-Utan, given in Edwards’
‘Gleanings of Natural History,’ (1758).
Buffon was more fortunate than his great rival. Not only had he the rare opportunity of
examining a young Chimpanzee in the living state, but he became possessed of an adult
Asiatic man-like Ape—the first and the last adult specimen of any of these animals
brought to Europe for many years. With the valuable assistance of Daubenton, Buffon
gave an excellent description of this creature, which, from its singular proportions, he
termed the long-armed Ape, or Gibbon. It is the modern Hylobates lar.
Thus when, in 1766, Buffon wrote the fourteenth volume of his great work, he was
personally familiar with the young of one kind of African man-like Ape, and with the
adult of an Asiatic species—while the Orang-Utan and the Man-drill of Smith were
known to him by report. Furthermore, the Abbé Prevost had translated a good deal of
Purchas’ Pilgrims into French, in his ‘Histoire générale des Voyages’ (1748), and there
Buffon found a version of Andrew Battell’s account of the Pongo and the Engeco. All
these data Buffon attempts to weld together into harmony in his chapter en-titled “Les
Orang-outangs ou le Pongo et le Jocko.” To this title the following note is appended:—
“Orang-outang nom de cet animal aux Indes orientales: Pongo nom de cet animal is
Lowando Province de Congo.
“Jocko, Enjocko, nom de cet animal à Congo que nous avons adopté. En est l’artical
que nous avouns retranché.”
Thus it was that Andrew Battell’s “Engeco” became metamorphosed into “Jocko,”
and, in the latter shape, was spread all over the the world, in consequence of the extensive
popularity of works. The Abbé Prevost and Buffon between them however, a good deal
more distigurement to Battell’s sober account than ‘cutting off an article.’ Thus ‘Battell’s
state-that that the Pongos “cannot speake, and have no understanding more than a beast,”
is rendered by Buffon “qu’il ne peut parler quoiqu’il ait plus d’entendement que les
autres animaur;” and again, Purchas’ affirmation, “He told me in conference with him,
that one of these Pongos tooke a negro of his which lived a moneth with them,” stands in
the French version, “un pongo lui enleva un petit negre qui passa un an entir dans la
societé de ces animaux.”
After quoting the account of the great Pongo, Buffon justly remark, that all the
‘Jockos’ and ‘Orangs’ hitherto brought to Europe were young; and he suggests that, in
their adult condition, they might be as big as the Pongo or ‘great Orang;’ so that,
provisionally he regarded the Jockos, Orangs, and Pongos as all of of one species. And
perhaps this was as much as the state of knowledge at the time warranted, But how it
came about that Buffon failed to perceive the similarity of Smith’s ‘Mandrill’ to his, own
‘Jocko,’ and confounded the former with so totally different a creature as the blue-faced
Baboon, is not so easily intelligible.

Twenty years later Buffon changed his opinion,* and expressed his belief that the Orangs
constituted a genus with two species,—a large one, the Pongo of Battell, and a small one,
the Jocko: that the small one (Jocko) is the East Indian Orang; and that the young animals
from Africa, observed by himself and Tulpius, are simply young Pongos.

*
Histoire Naturelle, Suppl. tome 7ème, 1789.
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 11

In the meanwhile, the Dutch naturalist, Vosmaer, gave, in 1778, a very good account
and figure of a young Orang, brought alive to Holland, and his countryman, the famous
anatomist, Peter Camper, published (1779) an essay on the Orang-Utan of similar value
to that of Tyson on the Chimpanzee. He dissected several females and a male, all of
which, from the state of their skeleton and their dentition, he justly supposes to have been
young. However, judging by the analogy of man, he concludes that they could not have
exceeded four feet in height in the adult condition. Further-more, he is very clear as to the
specific distinctness of the true East Indian Orang.
“The Orang,” says he, “differs not only from the Pigmy of Tyson and from the Orang
of Tulpius by its peculiar colour and its long toes, but also by its whole external form. Its
arms, its hands, and its feet are longer, while the thumbs, on the contrary, are much
shorter, and the great toes much smaller in proportion.”* And again, “The true Orang, that
is to say, that of Asia, that of Borneo, is consequently not the Pithecus, or tail-less Ape,
which the Greeks, and especially Galen, have described. It is neither the Pongo nor the
Jocko, nor the Orang of Tulpius, nor the Pigmy of Tyson,—it is an animal of a peculiar
species, as I shall prove in the clearest manner by the organs of voice and the skeleton in
the following chapters,” (l. c. p. 64).

A few years later, M.Radermacher, who held a high office in the Government of the
Dutch dominions in India, and was an active member of the Batavian Society of Arts and
Sciences, published, in the second part of the Transactions of that Society,† a Description
of the Island of Borneo, which was written between the years 1779 and 1781, and, among
much other interesting matter, contains some notes upon the Orang. The small sort of
Orang-Utan, viz. that of Vosmaer and of Edwards, he says, is found only in Borneo, and
chiefly about Banjermassing, Mampauwa, and Landak. Of these he had seen some fifty
during his residence in the Indies; but none exceeded 2½ feet in length. The larger sort,
often regarded as chimæra, continues Radermacher, would, perhaps long have remained
so, had it not been for the exertions of the Resident at Rembang, M.Palm, who, on
returning from Landak towards Pontiana, shot one, and forwarded it to Batavia in spirit,
for transmission to Europe.
Palm’s letter describing the capture runs thus:—“Here-with I send your Excellency,
contrary to all expectation (since long ago I offered more than a hundred ducats to the
natives for an Orang-Utan of four or five feet high) an Orang which I heard of this
morning about eight o’clock. For a long time we did our best to take the frightful beast
alive in the dense forest about half way to Landak. We forgot even to eat, so anxious
were we not to let him escape; but it was necessary to take care he did not revenge
himself, as he kept continually breaking off heavy pieces of wood and green branches,
and dashing them at us. This game lasted till four o’clock in the afternoon, when we
determined to shoot him; in which I succeeded very well, and indeed better than I ever
shot from a boat before; for the bullet went just into the side of his chest, so that he was
not much damaged. We got him into the prow still living, and bound him fast, and next
morning he died of his wounds. All Pontiana came on board to see him when we
arrived.” Palm gives his height from the head to the heel as 49 inches.

*
Camper, Œuvres, I., p. 56.
†
Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap. Tweede Deel. Derde Druk. 1826.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 12

A very intelligent German officer, Baron Von Wurmb, who at this time held a post in
the Dutch East India service, and was Secretary of the Batavian Society, studied this
animal, and his careful description of it, entitled “Beschrijving van der Groote
Borneosche Orang-outang of de Oost-Indische Pongo,” is contained in the same volume
of the Batavian Society’s Transactions. After Von Wurmb had drawn up his description
he states, in a letter dated Batavia, Feb.18, 1781,* that the specimen was sent to Europe in
brandy to be placed in the collection of the Prince of Orange; “unfortunately,” he
continues,“we hear that the ship has been wrecked.” Von Wurmb died in the course of
the year 1781, the letter in which this passage occurs being the last he wrote; but in his
posthumous papers, published in the fourth part of the Transactions of the Batavian
Society, there is a brief description, with measurements, of a female Pongo four feet high.
Did either of these original specimens, on which Von Wurmb’s descriptions are based,
ever reach Europe? It is commonly supposed that they did; but I doubt the fact. For,
appended to the memoir “De l’Ourang-outang,” in the collected edition of Camper’s
works, Tome I., pp. 64–66, is a note by Camper himself, referring to Von Wurmb’s
papers, and continuing thus:—“Heretofore, this kind of ape had never been known in
Europe. Radermacher has had the kindness

FIG. 7.—The Pongo Skull, sent by

Radermacher to Camper, after
Camper’s original sketches, as
reproduced by Lucæ.
to send me the skull of one of these animals, which measured fifty-three inches, or four
feet five inches, in height I have sent some sketches of it to M.Soemmering at Mayence,
which are better calculated, however, to give an idea of the form than of the real size of
the parts.”
*
“Briefe des Herrn v.Wurmb und des H.Baron von Wollzogen. Gotha, 1794.”
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 13

These sketches have been reproduced by Fischer and by Lucæ, and bear date 1783,
Soemmering having received them in 1784. Had either of Von Wurmb’s specimens
reached Holland, they would hardly have been unknown at this time to Camper, who,
however, goes on to say:—“It appears that since this, some more of these monsters have
been captured, for an entire skeleton, very badly set up, which had been sent to the
Museum of the Prince of Orange, and which. I saw only on the 27th of June, 1784, was
more than four feet high. I examined this skeleton again on the 19th December, 1785,
after it had been excellently put to rights by the ingenious Onymus.”
It appears evident, then, that this skeleton, which is doubtless that which has always
gone by the name of Wurmb’s Pongo, is not that of the animal described by him, though
unquestionably similar in all essential points.
Camper proceeds to note some of the most important features of this skeleton;
promises to describe it in detail by-and-bye; and is evidently in doubt as to the relation of
this great ‘Pongo’ to his “petit Orang.”
The promised further investigations were never carried out; and so it happened that the
Pongo of Von Wurmb took its place by the side of the Chimpanzee, Gibbon, and Orang
as a fourth and colossal species of man-like Ape. And indeed nothing could look much
less like the Chimpanzees or the Orangs, then known, than the Pongo; for all the
specimens of Chimpanzee and Orang which had been observed were small of stature,
singularly human in aspect, gentle and docile; while Wurmb’s Pongo was a monster
almost twice their size, of vast strength and fierceness, and very brutal in expression; its
great projecting muzzle, armed with strong teeth, being further disfigured by the
outgrowth of the cheeks into fleshy lobes.
Eventually, in accordance with the usual marauding habits of the Revolutionary
armies, the ‘Pongo’ skeleton was carried away from Holland into France, and notices of
it, expressly intended to demonstrate its entire distinctness from the Orang and its affinity
with the baboons, were given, in 1798, by Geoffroy St. Hilaire and Cuvier.
Even in Cuvier’s “Tableau Elementaire,” and in the first edition of his great work, the
“Regne Animal,” the ‘Pongo’ is classed as a species of Baboon. However, so early as
1818, it appears that Cuvier saw reason to alter this opinion, and to adopt the view
suggested several years before by Blumenbach,* and after him by Tilesius, that the
Bornean Pongo is simply an adult Orang. In 1824, Rudolphi demonstrated, by the
condition of the dentition, more fully and completely than had been done by his
predecessors, that the Orangs described up to that time were all young animals, and that
the skull and teeth of the adult would probably be such as those seen in the Pongo of
Wurmb. In the second edition of the ‘Regne Animal’ (1829), Cuvier infers, from the
‘proportions proportions of all the parts’ and ‘the arrangements of the foramina and
sutures of the head,’ that the Pongo is the adult of the Orang-Utan,‘at least of a very
closely allied species,’ and this conclusion was eventually placed beyond all doubt by
Professor Owen’s Memoir published in the ‘Zoological Transactions’ for 1835, and by
Temminck in his ‘Monpgraphies de Mammalogie.’ Temminck’s memoir is remarkable
for the completeness of the evidence which it affords as to the modification which the
form of the Orang undergoes according to age and sex. Tiedemann first published an
account of the brain of the young Orang, while Sandifort, Müller and Schlegel, described
the muscles and the viscera of the adult, and gave the earliest detailed and trustworthy
history of the habits of the great Indian Ape in a state of
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 14

nature; and as important additions have been made by later observers, we are at this
moment better acquainted with the adult of the Orang-Utan, than with that of any of the
other greater man-like Apes.
It is certainly the Pongo of Wurmb;* and it is as certainly not the Pongo of Battell,
seeing that the Orang-Utan is entirely confined to the great Asiatic islands of Borneo and
Sumatra.
And while the progress of discovery thus cleared up the history of the Orang, it also
became established that the only other man-like Apes in the eastern world were the
various species of Gibbon—Apes of smaller stature, and therefore attracting less attention
than the Orangs, though they are spread over a much wider range of country, and are
hence more accessible to observation.
Although the geographical area inhabited by the ‘Pongo’ and ‘Engeco’ of Battell is so
much nearer to Europe than that in which the Orang and Gibbon are found, our
acquaintance with the African Apes has been of slower growth; indeed, it is only within
the last few years that the truthful story of the old English adventurer has been rendered
fully intelligible. It was not until 1835 that the skeleton of the adult Chimpanzee became
known, by the publication of Professor Owen’s above-mentioned very excellent memoir
“On the osteology of the Chimpanzee and Orang,” in the Zoological Transactions—a
memoir which, by the accuracy of its descriptions, the carefulness of its comparisons, and
the excellence of its figures, made an epoch in the history of our knowledge of the bony
framework, not only of the Chimpanzee, but of of all the anthropoid Apes.

By the investigations herein detailed, it became evident that the old Chimpanzee acquired
a size and aspect as different from those of the young known to Tyson, to Buffon, and to
Traill, as those of the old Orang from the young Orang; and the subsequent very
important researches of Messrs. Savage and Wyman, the American missionary and
anatomist, have not only confirmed this conclusion, but have added many new details.*
One of the most interesting among the many valuable discoveries made by Dr.
Thomas Savage is the fact, that the natives in the Gaboon country at the present day,
apply to the Chimpanzee a name—“Enché-eko”—which is obviously identical with the
“Engeko” of Battell; a discovery which has been confirmed by all later inquirers.
Battell’s “lesser monster” being thus proved to be a veritable existence, of course a strong
presumption arose that his “greater monster,” the ‘Pongo,’ would sooner or later be
discovered. And, indeed, a modern traveller, Bowdich, had, in 1819, found strong
evidence, among the natives, of the existence of a second great Ape, called the ‘Ingena,’
“five feet high, and four across the shoulders,” the builder of a rude house, on the outside
of which it slept.
In 1847, Dr. Savage had the good fortune to make another and most important
addition to our knowledge of the man-like Apes; for, being unexpectedly detained at the
Gaboon river, he saw in the house of the Rev. Mr. Wilson, a missionary resident there,“a
*
See Blumenbach, “Abbildungen Naturhistorichen Gegenstände,” No.12, 1810; and Tilesius,
“Naturhistoriche Früchte der ersten Kaiserlich-Russischen Erdumsegelung,” p. 115, 1813.

*
Speaking broadly and without prejudice to the question, whether there be more than one species
of Orang.
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 15

skull represented by the natives to be a monkey-like animal, remarkable for its size,
ferocity, and habits.” From the contour of the skull, and the information derived from
several intelligent natives, “I was induced,” says Dr.Savage, (using the term Orang in its
old general sense) “to believe that it belonged to a new species of Orang. I expressed this
opinion to Mr.Wilson, with a desire for further investigation; and, if possible, to decide
the point by the inspection of a specimen alive or dead.” The result of the combined
exertions of Messrs. Savage and Wilson was not only the obtaining of a very full account
of the habits of this new creature, but a still more important service to science, the
enabling the excellent American anatomist already mentioned, Professor Wyman, to
describe, from ample materials, the distinctive osteological characters of the new form.
This animal was called by the natives of the Gaboon “Engé-ena,” a name obviously
identical with the “Ingena” of Bowdich; and Dr. Savage arrived at the conviction that this
last discovered of all the great Apes was the long-sought ‘Pongo’ of Battell.
The justice of this conclusion, indeed, is beyond doubt—for not only does the ‘Engé-
ena’ agree with Battell’s “greater monster” in its norrow eyes, its great stature, and its
dun or colour, but the only other man-like Ape which in-habits these latitudes—the
Chimpanzee—is at once identified, by its smaller size, as the “lesser monster,” and is
excluded from any possibility of being the ‘Pongo,’ by the fact that it is black and not
dun, to say Bothing of the important circumstance already mentioned that it still retains
the name of ‘Eugeko,’ or ‘Enché-eko,’ by which Battell knew it.
In seeking for a specific name for the ‘Enge-ena,’ however, Dr. Savage wisely avoided
the much misused ‘Pongo’; but in the Periplus of Hanno the word “Gorilla” applied to
certain hairy savage people, discovered by the voyager in an island on the African coast,
he attached the pecific name “Gorilla” to his new ape, whence arises its present well-
known appellation. But Dr. Savage, cautious than some of his successors, by no means
identities his ape with Hanno’s ‘wild men.’ He merely says that the latter were “probably
one of the species of the orange;” and I quite agree with M. Brullé, that there is no ground
for identifying the modern ‘Gorilla’ with that of the Carthaginian admiral.
Since the memoir of Savage and Wyman was published, the skeleton of the Gorilla
has been investigated by Professor Owen and by the late Professor Duvernoy, of the
Jardin des Plantes, the latter having further supplied a valuable account of the muscular
system and of many of the other soft parts; while African missionaries and travellers have
confirmed and expanded the account originally given of the habits of this great man-like
Ape, which has had the singular fortune of being the first to be made known to the
general world and the last to be scientifically investigated.
Two centuries and a half have passed away since Battell told his stories about the
‘greater’ and the ‘lesser monsters’ to Purchas, and it has taken nearly that time to arrive at
the clear result that there are four distinct kinds of Anthropoids—in Eastern Asia, the
Gibbons and the Orangs; in Western Africa, the Chimpanzees and the Gorilla.
*
See “Observations on the external characters and habits of the Troglodytes niger, by Thomas
N.Savage, M.D., and on its organization, by Jeffries Wyman, M.D.,” Boston Journal of Natural
History, Vol. IV. 1843–4; and “External characters, habits, and osteology of Troglodytes Gorilla,”
by the same authors, ibid. Vol. V. 1847.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 16

The man-like Apes, the history of whose discovery has just been detailed, have certain
characters of structure and of distribution in common. Thus they all have the same
number of teeth as man—possessing four incisors, two canines, four false molars, and six
true molars in each jaw, or 32 teeth in all, in the adult condition; while the milk dentition
consists of 20 teeth—or four incisors, two canines, and four molars in each jaw. They are
what are called catarrhine Apes—that is, their nostrils have a narrow partition and look
downwards; and, furthermore, their arms are always longer than their legs, the difference
being sometimes greater and sometimes less; so that if the four were arranged in the order
of the length of their arms in proportion to that of their legs, we should have this series—
Orang Gibbon Gorilla , Chimpanzee . In
all, the fore limbs are terminated by hands, provided with longer or shorter thumbs; while
the great toe of the foot, always smaller than in Man, is far more moveable than in him
and can be opposed, like a thumb, to the rest of the foot. None of these apes have tails,
and none of them possess the cheek-pouches common among monkeys. Finally, they are
all inhabitants of the old world.
The Gibbons are the smallest, slenderest, and longest-limbed of the man-like apes:
their arms are longer in proportion to their bodies than those of any of the other man-like
Apes, so that they can touch the ground when erect; their hands are longer than their feet,
and they are the only Anthropoids which possess callosities like the lower monkeys. They
are variously coloured. The Orangs have arms which reach to the ankles in the erect
position of the animal; their thumbs and great toes are very short, and their feet are longer
than their hands. They are covered with reddish-brown hair, and the sides of the face, in
adult males, are commonly produced into two crescentic, flexible excrescences, like fatty
tumours. The Chimpanzees have arms which reach below the knees; they have large
thumbs and great toes, their hands are longer than their feet, and their hair is black, while
the skin of the face is pale. The Gorilla, lastly, has arms which reach to the middle of the
leg, large thumbs and great toes, feet longer than the hands, a black face, and dark-grey or
dun hair.
For the purpose which I have at present in view, it is un-necessary that I should enter
into any further minutiæ respecting the distinctive characters of the genera and species
into which these man-like Apes are divided by naturalists. Suffice it to say, that the
Orangs and the Gibbons constitute the distinct genera, Simia and Hylobates; while the
Chimpanzees and Gorillas are by some regarded simply as distinct species of one genus,
Troglodytes; by others as distinct genera—Troglodytes being reserved for the
Chimpanzees, and Gorilla for the Engé-ena or Pongo.
Sound knowledge respecting the habits and mode of life of the man-like Apes has
been even more difficult of attainment than correct information regarding their structure.
Once in a generation, a Wallace may be found physically, mentally, and morally
qualified to wander unscathed through the tropical wilds of America and of Asia; to form
magnificent collections as he wanders; and withal to think out sagaciously the
conclusions suggested by his collections: but, to the ordinary explorer or collector, the
dense forests of equatorial Asia and Africa, which constitute the favourite habitation of
the Orang, the Chimpanzee, and the Gorilla, present difficulties of no ordinary
magnitude: and the man who risks his life by even a short visit to the malarious shores of
those regions may well be excused if he shrinks from facing the dangers of the interior; if
he contents himself with stimulating the industry of the better seasoned natives, and
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 17

collecting and collating the more or less mythical reports and traditions with which they
are too ready to supply him.
In such a manner most of the earlier accounts of the habits of the man-like Apes
originated; and even now a good deal of what passes current must be admitted to have no
very safe foundation. The best information we possess is that, based almost wholly on
direct European testimony, respecting the Gibbons; the next best evidence relates to the
Orangs; while our knowledge of the habits of the Chimpanzee and the Gorilla stands
much in need of support and enlargement by additional testimony from instructed
European eye-witnesses.
It will therefore be convenient in endeavouring to form a notion of what we are
justified in balieving about these animals, to commence with the best known man-like
Apes, the Gibbons and Orangs; and to make use of the perfectly reliable information
respecting them as a sort of criterion of the probable truth or falsehood of assertions
respecting the others.
Of the GIBBONS, half a dozen species are found scattered over the Asiatic islands,
Java, Sumatra, Borneo, and through Malacca, Siam, Arracan, and an uncertain extent of
Hindostan, on the main land of Asia. The largest attain a few inches above three feet in
height, from the crown to the heel, so that they are shorter than the other man-like Apes;
while the slenderness of their bodies renders their mass far smaller in proportion even to
this diminished height.

Dr. Salomou Müller, an accomplished Dutch naturalist, who lived for many years in the
Eastern Archipelago, and to the results of whose personal experience I shall frequently
have occasion to refer, states that the Gibbons are true mountaineers, loving the slopes
and edges of the hills, though they rarely ascend beyond the limit of the fig-trees. All day
long they haunt the tops of the tall trees; and though, towards evening, they descend in
small troops to the open ground, no sooner do they spy a man than they dart up the hill-
sides, and disappear in the darker valleys.
All observers testify to the prodigious volume of voice possessed by these animals.
According to the writer whom I have just cited, in one of them, the Siamang, “the voice is
grave and penetrating, resembling the sounds gōek, gōek, gōek, gōek, goek ha ha ha ha
haaāāā, and may easily be heard at a distance of half a league.” While the cry is being
uttered, the great membranous bag under the throat which communicates with the organ
of voice, the so-called “laryngeal sac,” becomes greatly distended, diminishing again
when the creature relapses into silence.
M.Duvaucel, likewise, affirms that the cry of the Siamang may be heard for miles—
making the woods ring again. So Mr. Martin* describes the cry of the agile Gibbon as
“over-powering and deafening” in a room, and “from its strength, well calculated for
resounding through the vast forests.” Mr. Waterhouse, an accomplished musician as well
as zoologist, says, “The Gibbon’s voice is certainly much more powerful than that of any
singer I ever heard.” And yet it is to be recollected that this animal is not half the height
of, and far less bulky in proportion than, a man. There is good testimony that various
species of Gibbon readily take to the erect posture. Mr. George Bennett,† a very excellent
observer, in describing the habits of a male Hylobates syndactylus which remained for
some time in his possession, says; “He invariably walks in the erect posture when on a
level surface; and then the arms either hang down, enabling him to assist himself with his
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 18

knuckles; or what is more usual, he keeps his arms uplifted in nearly an erect position,
with the hands pendent ready to seize a rope, and

FIG. 8.—A Gibbon (H.piliatus), after

Wolf.
*
“Man and Monkies,” p. 423.
†
Wanderings in New South Wales, Vol. II. chap. viii. 1834.
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 19

climb up on the approach of danger or on the obtrusion of strangers. He walks rather

quick in the erect posture, but with a waddling gait, and is soon run down if, whilst
pursued, he has no opportunity of escaping by climbing…. When he walks in the erect
posture he turns the leg and foot out-wards, which occasions him to have a waddling gait
and to seem bow-legged.”
Dr. Burrough states of another Gibbon, the Horlack or Hooluk:
“They walk erect; and when placed on the floor, or in an open field, balance
themselves very prettily, by raising their hands over their head and slightly bending the
arm at the wrist and elbow, and then run tolerably fast, rocking from side to side; and, if
urged to greater speed, they let fell their hands to the ground, and assist themselves
forward, rather jumping than running, still keeping the body, however, nearly erect.”
Somewhat different evidence, however, is given by Dr. Winslow Lewis:*
“Their only manner of walking was on their posterior or inferior extremities, the
others being raised upwards to preserve their equilibrium, as rope-dancers are assisted by
long poles at fairs. Their progression was not by placing one foot before the other, but by
simultaneously using both, as in jumping.” Dr. Salomon Müller also states that the
Gibbons progress upon the ground by short series of tottering jumps, effected only by the
hind limbs, the body being held altogether upright.
But, Mr. Martin, (l. c. p. 418) who also speaks from direct observation, says of the
Gibbons generally:
“Pre-eminently qualified for arboreal habits, and displaying among the branches
amazing activity, the Gibbons are not so awkward or embarrassed on a level surface as
might be imagined. They walk erect, with a waddling or unsteady gait, but at a quick
pace; the equilibrium of the body requiring to be kept up, either by touching the ground
with the knuckles, first on one side then on the other, or by up-lifting the arms so as to
poise it. As with the Chimpanzee, the whole of the narrow, long sole of the foot is placed
upon the ground at once and raised at once, without any elasticity of step.”
After this mass of concurrent and independent testimony, it cannot reasonably be
doubted that the Gibbons commonly and habitually assume the erect attitude.
But level ground is not the place where these animals can display their very
remarkable and peculiar locomotive powers, and that prodigious activity which almost
tempts one to rank them among flying, rather than among ordinary climbing mammals.
Mr. Martin (l. c. p. 430) has given so excellent and graphic an account of the
movements of a Hylobates agilis, living in the Zoological Gardens, in 1840, that I will
quote it in full:
“It is almost impossible to convey in words an idea of the quickness and graceful
address of her movements: they may indeed be termed aerial, as she seems merely to
touch in her progress the branches among which she exhibits her evolutions. In these
feats her hands and arms are the sole organs of locomotion; her body hanging as if
supended by a rope, sustained by one hand (the right, for example), she launches herself,
by an energetic movement, to a distant branch, which she catches with the left hand; but
her hold is less than momentary: the impulse for the next launch is acquired: the branch

*
Boston Journal of Natural History, Vol. I. 1834.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 20

then aimed at is attained by the right hand again, and quitted instantaneously, and so
on, in alternate succession. In this manner spaces of twelve and eighteen feet are cleared,
with the greatest ease and uninterruptedly, for hours together, without the slightest
appearance of fatigue being manifested; and it is evident that, if more space could be
allowed, distances very greatly exceeding eighteen feet would be as easily cleared; so that
Duvaucel’s assertion that he has seen these animals launch themselves from one branch
to another, forty feet asunder, startling as it is, may be well credited. Sometimes, on
seizing a branch in her progress, she will throw herself, by the power of one arm only,
completely round it, making a revolution with such rapidity as almost to deceive the eye,
and continue her progress with undiminished velocity. It is singular to observe how
suddenly this Gibbon can stop, when the impetus given by the rapidity and distance of
her swinging leaps would seem to require a gradual abatement of her movements. In the
very midst of her flight a branch is seized, the body raised, and she is seen, as if by
magic, quietly seated on it, grasping it with her feet. As suddenly she again throws herself
into action.
“The following facts will convey some notion of her dexterity and quickness. A live
bird was let loose in her apartment; she marked its flight, made a long swing to a distant
branch, caught the bird with one hand in her passage, and attained the branch with her
other hand; her aim, both at the bird and at the branch, being as successful as if one object
only had engaged her attention. It may be added that she instantly bit off the head of the
bird, picked its feathers, and then threw it down without attempting to eat it.
“On another occasion this animal swung herself from a perch, across a passage at least
twelve feet wide, against a window which it was thought would be immediately broken:
but not so; to the surprise of all, she caught the narrow framework between the panes
with her hand, in an instant attained the proper impetus, and sprang back again to the
cage she had left—a feat requiring not only great strength, but the nicest precision.”
The Gibbons appear to be naturally very gentlc, but there is very good evidence that
they will bite severely when irritated—a female Hylobates agilis having so severely
lacerated one man with her long canines, that he died; while she had injured others so
much that, by way of precaution, these formidable teeth had been filed down; but, if
threatened, she would still turn on her keeper, The Gibbons eat insects, but appear
generally to avoid animal food. A Siamang, however, was seen by Mr. Beunett to seize
and devour greedily a live lizard. They commonly drink by dipping their fingers in the
liquid and then licking them. It is asserted that they sleep in a sitting posture.
Duvaucel affirms that he has seen the females carry their young to the waterside and
there wash their faces, in spite of resistance and cries. They are gentle and affectionate in
captivity—full of tricks and pettishness, like spoiled children, and yet not devoid of a
certain conscience, as an anecdote, told by Mr. Bennett (l. c. p. 156), will show. It would
appear that his Gibbon had a peculiar inclination for disarranging things in the cabin.
Among these articles, a piece of soap would especially attract his notice, and for the
removal of this he had been once or twice scolded. “One morning,” says Mr.Bennett, “I
was writing, the ape being present in the cabin, when casting my eyes towards him, I saw
the little fellow taking the soap. I watched him without his perceiving that I did so: and he
occasionally would cast a furtive glance towards the place where I sat. I pretended to
write; he, seeing me busily occupied, took the soap, and moved away with it in his paw,
When he had walked half the length of the cabin, I spoke quietly, without frightening
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 21

him. The instant he found I saw him, he walked back again, and deposited the soap nearly
in the same place from whence he had taken it. There was certainly something more than
instinct in that action: he evidently betrayed a consciousness of having done wrong both
by his first and last actions—and what is reason if that is not an exercise of it?”
The most elaborate account of the natural history of the ORANG-UTAN extant, is that
given in the “Verhandelingen over de Natuurlijke Geschiedenis der Nederlandsche over-
zeesche Bezittingen (1839·45),” by Dr. Salomon Müller and Dr. Schlegel, and I shall
base what I have to say upon this

FIG. 9.—An adult male Orang-Utan,

after Müller and Schlegel.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 22

subject almost entirely on their statements, adding, here and there, particulars of interest
from the writings of Brooke, Wallace, and others.
The Orang-Utan would rarely seem to exceed four feet in height, but the body is very
bulky, measuring two-thirds of the height in circumference.*
The Orang-Utan is found only in. Sumatra and Borneo, and is common in neither of
these islands—in both of which it occurs always in low, flat plains, never in the
mountains. It loves the densest and most sombre of the forests, which extend from the
sea-shore mland and thus is found only is the eastern half of Sumatra, where alone such
forests occur, though, occasionally, it strays over to the western side.
On the other hand, it is generally distributed through Borneo, except in the mountains,
or where the population is dense. In favourable places, the hunter may, by good fortune,
see three or four in a day.

Except in the pairing time, the old males usually live by themselves. The old females, and
the immature males, on the other hand, are often met with in twos and threes; and the
former occasionally have young with them, though the pregnant females usually separate
themselves, and sometimes remain apart after they have given birth to their offspring.
The young Orangs seem to remain unusually long under their mother’s protection,
probably in consequence of their slow growth. While climbing, the mother always carries
her young against her bosom, the young holding on by his mother’s hair.* At what time of
life the Orang-Utan becomes capable of propagation, and how long the females go with
young, is unknown, but it is probable that they are not adult until they arrive at ten or
fifteen years of age. A female which lived for five years at Batavia, had not attained one-
third the height of the wild females. It is probable that, after reaching adult years, they go
on growing, though slowly, and that they live to forty or fifty years. The Dyaks tell of old
Orangs, which have not only lost all their teeth, but which find it so troublesome to
climb, that they maintain themselves on windfalls and juicy herbage.
The Orang is sluggish, exhibiting none of that marvellous activity characteristic of the
Gibbons. Hunger alone seems to stir him to exertion, and when it is stilled, he relapses
into repose. When the animal sits, it curves its back and bows its head, so as to look
straight down on the ground; sometimes it holds on with its hands by a higher branch,
sometimes lets them hang phlegmatically down by its side—and in these positions the
Orang will remain, for hours together, in the same spot, almost without stirring, and only
now and then giving utterance to its deep, growling voice. By day, he usually climbs
*
The largest Orang-Utan, cited by Temminck, measured when standing upright, four feet; but he
mentions having just received news of the capture of an Orang five feet three inches high.Schlegel
and Müller say that their largest old male measured, upright, 1.25 Netherlands “el”; and from the
crown to the end of the toes, 1.5 el; the circumference of the body being 1 el. The largest old
female was 1.09 el high, when standing. The adult skeleton in the ‘College of Surgeons’ Museum,
if set upright, would stand 3ft. 6–8 in. from crown to sole. Dr. Humphry gives 3ft. 8 in. as the mean
height of two Orangs. Of seventeen Orangs examined by Mr. Wallace, the largest was 4ft. 2 in,
high, from the heel to the crown of the head. Mr.Spencer St. John, however, in his “Life in the
Forests of the Far East,” tells of an Orang of “5ft. 2 in., measuring fairly from the head to the heel,”
15 in. across the face, and 12 in. round the wrist. It does not appear, however, that Mr. St. John
measured Orang himself.
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 23

from one tree-top to another, and only at night descends to the ground, and if then
threatened with danger, he seeks refuge among the underwood. When not hunted, he
remains a long time in the same locality, and sometimes stops for many days on the same
tree—a firm place among its branches serving him for a bed. It is rare for the Orang to
pass the night in the snmmit of a large tree, probably because it is too windy and cold
there for him; but, as soon as night draws on, he descends from the height and seeks out a
fit bed in the lower and darker part, or in the leafy top of a small tree, among which he
prefers Nibong Palms, Pandani, or one of those parasitic Orchids which give the
primæval forests of Borneo so characteristic and striking an appearance. But wherever he
determines to sleep, there he prepares himself a sort of nest: little boughs and leaves are
drawn together round the selected spot, and bent crosswise over one another; while to
make the bed soft, great leaves of Ferns, of Orchids, of Pandanus fascicularis, Nipa
fruticans, &c., are laid over them. Those which Müller saw, many of them being very
fresh, were situated at a height of ten to twenty-five feet above the ground, and had a
circumference, on the average, of two or three feet. Some were packed many inches thick
with Pandanus leaves; others were remarkable only for the cracked twigs, which, united
in a common centre, formed a regular platform. “The rude hut,” says Sir James Brooke,
“which they are stated to build in the trees, would be more properly called a seat or nest,
for it has no roof or cover of any sort. The facility with which they form this nest is
curious, and I had an opportunity of seeing a wounded female weave the branches
together and seat herself, within a minute.”
According to the Dyaks the Orang rarely leaves his bed before the sun is well above
the horizon and has dissipated the mists. He gets up about nine, and goes to bed again
about five; but sometimes not till late in the twilight. He lies sometimes on his back; or,
by way of change, turns on one side or the other, drawing his limbs up to his body, and
resting his head on his hand. When the night is cold, windy, or rainy, he usually covers
his body with a heap of Pandanus, Nipa, or Fern leaves, like those of which his bed is
made, and he is especially careful to wrap up his head in them. It is this habit of covering
himself up which has probably led to the fable that the Orang builds huts in the trees.
Although the Orang resides mostly amid the boughs of great trees, during the daytime,
he is very rarely seen squatting on a thick branch, as other apes and particularly the
Gibbons, do. The Orang, on the contrary, confines himself to the slender leafy branches,
so that he is seen right at the top of the trees, a mode of life which is closely related to the
constitution of his hinder limbs, and especially to that of his seat. For this is provided
with no callosities, such as are possessed by many of the lower apes, and even by the
Gibbons; and those bones of the pelvis, which are termed the ischia, and which form the
solid framework of the surface on which the body rests in the sitting posture, are not
expanded like those of the apes which possess callosities, but are more like those of man.
An Orang climbs so slowly and cautiously,* as, in this act, to resemble a man more
than an ape, taking great care of his feet, so that injury of them seems to affect him far
more than it does other apes. Unlike the Gibbons, whose forearms do the greater part of
the work, as they swing from branch to branch, the Orang never makes even the
*
See Mr. Wallace’s account of an infant “Orang-utan,” in the “Annals of Natural History” for
1856. Mr. Wallace provided his interesting charge with an artificial mother of buffalo-skin, but the
cheat was too successful. The infant’s entire experience led it to associate teats with hair, and
feeling the latter, it spent its existence in vain endeavours to discover the former.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 24

smallest jump. In climbing, he moves alternately one hand and one foot, or, after having
laid fast hold with the hands, he draws up both feet together. In passing from one tree to
another, the always seeks out a place where the twigs of both come close together, or
interlace, Even when closely pursued, his circumspection is amazing: he shakes the
branches to see if they will bear him, and then bending an overhanging bough down by
throwing his weight gradually along it, he makes a bridge from the tree he wishes to quit
to the next.†
On the ground the Orang always goes laboriously and shakily, on all fours. At starting
he will run faster than a man, though he may soon be overtaken. The very long arms
which, when he runs, are but little bent, raise the body of the Orang remarkably, so that
he assumes much the posture of a very old man bent down by age, and making his way
along by the help of a stick. In walking, the body is usually directed straight forward,
unlike the other apes, which run more or less obliquely; except the Gibbons, who in
these, as in so many other respects, depart remarkably from their fellows.
The Orang cannot put its feet flat on the ground, but in supported upon their outer
edges, the heel resting more on the ground, while the curved toes partly rest upon the
ground by the upper side of their first joint, the two outer-most toes of each foot
completely resting on this surface. The hands are held in the opposite manner, their inner
edges serving as the chief support. The fingers are then bent out in such a manner that
their foremost joints, especially those of the two innermost fingers, rest upon the ground
by their upper sides, while the point of the free and straight thumb serves as an additional
fulcrum.
*
“They are the slowest and least active of all the monkey tribe, and their motions are surprisingly
awkward and uncouth.”—Sir James Brooke, in the “Proceedings of the Zoological Society,” 1841.
†
Mr. Wallace’s account of the progression of the Orang almost exactly corresponds with this.

*
Sir James Brooke, in a letter to Mr. Waterhouse, published in the proceedings of the Zoological
Society for 1841, says:—“On the habits of the Orangs, as far as I have been able to observe them, I
may remark that they are as dull and slothful as can well be conceived, and on no occasion, when
pursuing them, did they move so fast as to preclude my keeping pace with them easily a moderately
forest; and even when obstructions below (such as wading up to the neck) allowed them to get
away some distance, they were sure to stop and allow me to come up. I never observed the slightest
attempt at defence, and the wood which sometimes rattled about our ears was broken by their
weight, and not thrown, as some persons represent. If pushed to extremity, however, the Pappan
could not be otherwise than formidable, and one unfortunate man, who, with a party, was trying to
catch a large one alive, lost two of his fingers, besides being severely bitten on the face, whilst the
animal finally beat off his pursuers and escaped.”
Mr. Wallace, on the other hand, affirms that he has several times observed them throwing down
branches when pursued. “It is true he does not throw them at a person, but casts them down
vertically; for it is evident that a bough cannot be thrown to any distance from the top of a lofty
tree. In one case a female Mias, on a durian tree, kept up for at least ten minutes a continuous
shower of branches and of the heavy, spined fruits, as large as 32-pounders, which most kept us
clear of the tree she was on. She could seen seen breaking them off and throwing them down with
every appearance of rage, uttering at intervals a loud pumping grunt, and evidently meaning
mischief.” “On the Habits of the Orang-Utan,” Annals of Nat. History. 1856. This statement, it will
be observed, is quite in accordance with that contained in the letter of the Resident Palm quoted
above (p. 16).
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 25

The Orang never stands on its hind legs, and all the pictures, representing it as so
doing, are as false as the assertion that it defends itself with sticks, and the like.
The long arms are of especial use, not only in climbing, but in the gathering of food
from bonghs to which the animal could not trust his weight. Figs, blossoms, and young
leaves of various kinds, constitute the chief nutriment of the Orang; but strips of bamboo
two or three feet long were found in the stomach of a male. They are not known to eat
living animals.
Although, when taken young, the Orang-Utan soon becomes domesticated, and indeed
seems to court human society, it is naturally a very wild and shy animal, though
apparently sluggish and melancholy. The Dyaks affirm, that when the old males are
wounded with arrows only, they will occasionally leave the trees and rush raging upon
their enemies, whose sole safety lies in instant flight as they are sure to be killed if
caught.*
But, though possessed of immense strength, it is rare for the Orang to attempt to
defend itself, especially when attacked with fire-arms. On such occasions he endeavours
to hide himself, or to escape along the topmost branches of the trees, breaking off and
throwing down the boughs as he goes. When wounded he betakes himself to the highest
attainable point of the tree, and emits a singular cry, consisting at first of high notes,
which at length deepen into a low roar, not unlike that of a panther. While giving out the
high notes the Orang thrusts out his lips into a funnel shape; but in uttering the low notes
he holds his mouth wide open, and at the same time the great throat bag, or laryngeal sac,
becomes distended.
According to the Dyaks, the only animal the Orang measures his strength with is the
crocodile, who occasionally seizes him on his visits to the water side. But they say that
the Orang is more than a match for his enemy, and beats him to death, or rips up his
throat by pulling the jaws asunder!
Much of what has been here stated was probably derived by Dr. Müller from the
reports of his Dyak hunters; but a large male, four feet high, lived in captivity, under his
observation, for a month, and receives a very bad character.
“He was a very wild beast,” says Müller. “of prodigious strength, and false and wicked
to the last degree. If any one approached he rose up slowly with a low growl, fixed his
eyes in the direction in which he meant to make his attack, slowly passed his hand
between the bars of his cage, and then extending his long arm, gave a sudden grip—
usually at the face.” He never tried to bite (though Orangs will bite one another), his great
weapons of offence and defence being his hands.
His intelligence was very great; and Müller remarks, that though the faculties of the
Orang have been estimated too highly, yet Cuvier, had he seen this specimen, would not
have considered its intelligence to be only a little higher than that of the dog.
His hearing was very acute, but the sense of vision seemed to be less perfect. The
under lip was the great organ of touch, and played a very important part in drinking,
being thrust out like a trough, so as either to catch the falling rain, or to receive the
contents of the half cocoa-nut shell full of water with which the Orang was supplied, and
which, in drinking, he poured into the trough thus formed.
In Borneo the Orang-Utan of the Malays goes by the name of “Mias” among the
Dyaks, who distinguish several kinds as Mias Pappan, or Zimo, Mias Kassu, and Mias
Rambi. Whether these are distinct species, however, or whether they are mere races, and
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 26

how far any of them are identical with the Sumatran Orang, as Mr. Wallace thinks the
Mias Pappan to be, are problems which are at present undecided; and the variability of
these great apes is so extensive, that the settlement of the question is a matter of great
difficulty. Of the form called “Mias Pappan,” Mr. Wallace* observes, “It is known by its
large size, and by the lateral expansion of the face into fatty protuberances, or ridges,
over the temporal muscles, which have been mis-termed callosities, as they are perfectly
soft, smooth, and flexible. Five of this form, measured by me, varied only from 4 feet 1
inch to 4 feet 2 inches in height, from the heel to the crown of the head, the girth of the
body from 3 feet to 3 feet 7½ inches, and the extent of the outstretched arms from 7 feet 2
inches to 7 feet 6 inches; the width of the face from 10 to 13¼ inches. The colour and
length of the hair varied in different individuals, and in different parts of the same
individual; some possessed a rudimentary nail on the great toe, others none at all; but
they otherwise present no external differences on which to establish even varieties of a
species.
Yet, when we examine the crania of these individuals, we find remarkable differences
of form, proportion, and dimension, no two being exactly alike. The slope of the profile,
and the projection of the muzzle, together with the size of the cranium, offer differences
as decided as those existing between the most strongly marked forms of the Caucasian
and African crania in the human species. The orbits vary in width and height, the cranial
ridge is either single or double, either much or little developed, and the zygomatic
aperture varies considerably in size. This variation in the proportions of the crania
enables us satisfactorily to explain the marked difference presented by the single-crested
and double-crested skulls, which have been thought to prove the existence of two large
species of Orang. The external surface of the skull varies considerably in size, as do also
the zygomatic aperture and the temporal muscle; but they bear no necessary relation to
each other, a small muscle often existing with a large cranial surface, and vice versû.
Now, those skulls which have the largest and strongest jaws and the widest zygomatic
aperture, have the muscles so large that they meet on the crown of the skull, and deposit
the bony ridge which separates them, and which is the highest in that which has the
smallest cranial surface. In those which combine a large surface with comparatively weak
jaws, and small zygomatic aperture, the muscles, on each side, do not extend to the
crown, a space of from 1 to 2 inches remaining between them, and along their margins
small ridges are formed. Intermediate forms are found, in which the ridges meet only in
the hinder part of the skull. The form and size of the ridges are therefore independent of
age, being sometimes more strongly developed in the less aged animal. Professor
Temminck states that the series of skulls in the Leyden Museum shows the same result.”
Mr. Wallace observed two male adult Orangs (Mias Kassu of the Dyaks), however, so
very different from any of these that he concludes them to be speciflcally distinct; they
were respectively 3 feet 8½ in. and 3 feet 9½ inches high, and poesessed no sign of the
cheek excrescences, but otherwise resembled the larger kinds. The skull has no crest, but
two bony ridges, 1¾ inches to 2 inches apart, as in the Simia morio of Professor Owen.
The teeth, however, are immense, equalling or surpassing those of the other species. The

*
On the Orang-Utan, or Mias of Borneo, Annals of Natural History 1836.
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 27

females of both these kinds, according to Mr.Wallace, are devoid of excrescences, and
resemble the smaller males, but are shorter by 1½ to 3 inches, and their canine teeth are
comparatively small, subtruncated and dilated at the base, as in the so-called Simia
morio, which is, in all probability, the skull of a female of the same species as the smaller
males. Both males and females of this smaller species are distinguishable, according to
Mr. Wallace, by the comparatively large size of the middle incisors of the upper jaw.
So far as I am aware, no one has attempted to dispute the accuracy of the statements
which I have just quoted regarding the habits of the two Asiatic man-like Apes; and if
true, they must be admitted as evidence, that such an Ape—
1stly, May readily move along the ground in the erect, or semi-erect, position, and
without direct support from its arms.
2ndly, That it may possess an extremely loud voice, so loud as to be readily heard one
or two miles.
3rdly, That it may be capable of great viciousness and violence when irritated: and this
is especially true of adult males.
4thly. That it may build a nest to sleep in.
Such being well-established facts respecting the Asiatic Anthropoids, analogy alone
might justify us in expecting the African species to offer similar peculiarities, separately
or combined; or, at any rate, would destroy the force of any attempted à priori argument
against such direct testimony as might be adduced in favour of their existence. And, if the
organization of any of the African Apes could be demonstrated to fit it better than either
of its Asiatic allies for the erect position mid for effieient attack, there would be still less
reason for doubting its occasional adoption of the upright attitude or of aggressive
proceedings.
From the time of Tyson and Tulpius downwards, the habits of the young
CHIMPANZEE in a state of captivity have been abundantly reported and commented
upon. But trustworthy evidence as to the manners and customs of adult authropoids of
this-species, in their native woods, was almost wanting up to the time of the publication
of the paper by Dr. Savage, to which I have already referred; containing notes of the
observations which he made, and of the information which he collected from sources
which he considered trustworthy, while resident at Cape Palmas, at the north-western
limit of the Bight of Benin.
The adult Chimpanzees, measured by Dr. Savage, never exceeded, though the males
may almost attain, five feet in height.
“When at rest, the sitting posture is that generally assumed. They are sometimes seen
standing and walking, but when thus detected, they immediately take to all fours, and flee
from the presence of the observer. Such in their organization that they cannot stand creet,
but lean forward. Heuce they are seen, when standing, with the hands clasped over the
occiput, or the lumbar region, which would seem necessary to balance or ease of posture.
“The toes of the adult are strongly flexed and turned inwards, and cannot be perfectly
straightened. In the attempt the skin gathers into thick folds on the back, shewing that the
full expansion of the foot, as is necessary in walking, is unnatural. The natural position is
on all fours, the body anteriorly resting upon the knuckles. These are greatly enlarged,
with the skin protuberant and thickened like the sole of the foot.
“They are expert climbers, as one would suppose from their organization. In their
gambols they swing from limb to limb to a great distance, and leap with astonishing
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 28

agility. It is not unusual to see the ‘old folks’ (in the language of an observer) sitting
under a tree regaling themselves with fruit and friendly chat, while their ‘children’ are
leaping around them, and swinging from tree to tree with boisterous merriment.
“As seen here, they cannot be called gregarions, seldom more than five, or ten at
most, being found together. It has been said, on good authority, that they occssionally
assemble in large numbers, in gambols. My informant asserts that he saw once not less
than fifty so engaged; gaged; hooting, screaming, and drumming with sticks upon old
logs, which is done in the latter case with equal facility by the four extremities. They do
not appear ever to act on the offensive, and seldom, if ever really, on the defensive. When
about to be captured, they resist by throwing their arms about their opponent, and
attempting to draw him into contact with their teeth.” (Savage, l. c. p. 384.)
With respect to this last point Dr. Savage is very explicit in another place:
“Biting is their principal art of defence. I have seen one man who had been thus
severely wounded in the feet.
“The strong development of the canine teeth in the adult would seem to indicate a
carnivorous propensity; but in no state save that of domestication do they manifest it. At
first they reject flesh, but easily acquire a fondness for it. The canines are early
developed, and evidently designed to act the important part of weapons of defence. When
in contact with man almost the first effort of the animal is—to bite.
“They avoid the abodes of men, and build their habitations in trees. Their construction
is more that of nests than huts, as they have been erroneously termed by some naturalists.
They generally build not far above the ground. Branches or twigs are bent, or partly
broken, and crossed, and the whole supported by the body of a limb or a crotch.
Sometimes a nest will be found near the end of a strong leafy branch twenty or thirty feet
from the ground. One I have lately seen that could not be less than forty feet, and more
probably it was fifty. But this is an unusual height.
“Their dwelling-place is not permanent, but changed in pursuit of food and solitude,
according to the force of circumstances. We more often see them in elevated places; but
this arises from the fact that the low grounds, being more favourable for the natives’ rice-
farms, are the oftener cleared, and hence are almost always wanting in suitable trees for
their nests…. It is seldom that more than one or two nests are seen upon the same tree, or
in the same neighbourhood; five have been found, but it was an unusual circumstance.”…
“They are very filthy in their habits…. It is a tradition with the natives generally here,
that they were once members of their own tribe: that for their depraved habits they were
expelled from all human society, and, that through an obstinate indulgence of their vile
propensities, they have degenerated into their present state and organization. They are,
however, eaten by them, and when cooked with the oil and pulp of the palm-nut
considered a highly palatable morsel.
“They exhibit a remarkable degree of intelligence in their habits, and, on the part of
the mother, much affection for their young. The second female described was upon a tree
when first discovered, with her mate and two young ones (a male and a female). Her first
impulse was to descend with great rapidity, and make off into the thicket, with her mate
and female offspring. The young male remaining behind, she soon returned to the rescue.
She ascended and took him in her arms, at which moment she was shot, the ball passing
through the fore-arm of the young one, on its way to the heart of the mother….
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 29

“In a recent case, the mother, when discovered, remained upon the tree with her
offspriag, watching intently the movements of the hunter. As he took aim, she motioned
with her hand, precisely in the manner of a human being, to have him desist and go away.
When the wound has not proved instantly fatal, they have been known to stop the flow of
blood by pressing with the hand upon the part, and when this did not succeed, to apply
leaves and grass…. When shot, they give a sudden screech, not unlike that of a human
being in sudden and acute distress.”
The ordinary voice of the Chimpanzee, however, is affirmed to be hoarse, guttural,
and not very loud, somewhat like “whoo-whoo.” (l. c. p. 365.)
The analogy of the Chimpanzee to the Orang, in its nest-building habit and in the
mode of forming its nest, is exceedingly interesting; while, on the other hand, the activity
of this ape, and its tendency to bite, are particulars in which it rather resembles the
Gibbons. In extent of geographical range, again, the Chimpanzees—which are found
from Sierra Leone to Congo—remind one of the Gibbons, rather than of either of the
other man-like apes; and it seems not unlikely that, as is the case with the Gibbons, there
may be several species spread over the geographical area of the genus.
The same excellent observer, from whom I have borrowed the preceding account of
the habits of the adult Chimpanzee, published, fifteen years ago,* an account of the
GORILLA, which has, in its most essential points, been confirmed by subsequent
observers, and to which so very little has really been added, that in justice to Dr. Savage I
give it almost in full
“It should be borne in mind that my account is based upon the statements of the
aborigines of that region (the Gaboon). In this connection, it may also be proper for me to
remark, that having been a missionary resident for several years, studying, from habitual
intercourse, the African mind and character, I felt myself prepared to discriminate and
decide upon the probability of their statements. Besides, being familiar with the history
and habits of its interesting congener (Trog. niger, Geoff.), I was able to separate their
accounts of the two animals, which, having the same locality and a similarity of habit, are
confounded in the minds of the mass, especially as but few—such as traders to the
interior and huntsmen—have ever seen the animal in question.
The tribe from which our knowledge of the animal is derived, and whose territory
forms its habitat, is the Mpongwe, occupying both banks of the River Gaboon, from its
mouth to some fifty or sixty miles upward….

If the word “Pongo” be of African origin, it is probably a corruption of the word

Mpongwe, the name of the tribe on the banks of the Gaboon, and hence applied to the
region
*
Notice of the external characters and habits of Troglodytes Gorilla. Boston Journal of Natural
History, 1847.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 30

FIG. 10.—The Gorilla, after Wolf.

they inhabit. Their local name for the Chimpanzee is Enché-eko, as near as it can be
Anglicized, from which the common term “Jocko” probably comes. The Mpongwe
appellation for its new congener is Engé-ena, prolonging the sound of the first vowel, and
slightly sounding the second.
The habitat of the Engé-ena is the interior of lower Guinea, whilst that of the Enché-
eko is nearer the sea-board.
Its height is about five feet; it is disproportionately broad across the shoulders, thickly
covered with coarse black hair, which is said to be similar in its arrangement to that of the
Enché-eko; with age it becomes gray, which fact has given rise to the report that both
animals are seen of different colours.
 On the natural history of the man-like apes 31

Head.—The prominent features of the head are, the great width and elongation of the
face, the depth of the molar region, the branches of the lower jaw being very deep and
extending far backward, and the comparative smallness of the cranial portion; the eyes
are very large, and said to be like those of the Enché-eko, a bright hazel; nose broad and
flat, slightly elevated towards the root; the muzzle broad, and prominent lips and chin,
with scattered gray hairs; the under lip highly mobile, and capable of great elongation
when the animal is enraged, then hanging over the chin; skin of the face and ears naked,
and of a dark brown, approaching to black.
The most remarkable feature of the head is a high ridge, or crest of hair, in the course
of the sagittal suture, which meets posteriorly with a transverse ridge of the same, but less
prominent, running round from the back of one ear to the other. The animal has the power
of moving the scalp freely forward and back, and when enraged is said to contract it
strongly over the brow, thus bringing down the hairy ridge and pointing the hair forward,
so as to present an indescribably ferocious aspect.
Neck short, thick, and hairy; chest and shoulders very broad, said to be fully double
the size of the Enché-ekos; arms very long, reaching some way below the knee—the fore-
arm much the shortest; hands very large, the thumbs much larger than the fingers….
The gait is shuffling; the motion of the body, which is never upright as in man, but
bent forward, is somewhat

FIG. 11.—Gorilla walking (after

Wolff.)
rolling, or from side to side. The arms being longer than the Chimpanzee, it does not
stoop as much in walking; like that animal, it makes progression by thrusting its arnis
forward, resting the hands on the ground, and then giving the body a half jumping half
swinging motion between them. In this act it is said not to flex the fingers, as does the
Chimpanzee, resting on its knuckles, but to extend them, making a fulcrum of the hand.
 The evolution debate 1813–1870 32

When it assumes the walking posture, to which it is said to be much inclined, it balances
its huge body by nexing its arms upward.
They live in bands, but are not so numerous as the Chimpanzees: the females generally
exceed the other sex in number. My informants all agree in the assertion that but one
adult male is seen in a that when the young males grow up, a contest takes place for
mastery, and the strongest, by killing and driving out the others, establishes himself the
head of the community.”
Dr. Savage repudiates the stories about the Gorillas carrying off women and
vanqmshing elephants, and then adds—
“Their dwellings, if they may be so called, are to similar to those of the Chimpanzee,
consisting simply of a few sticks and leafy branches, supported by the crotches and limbs
of trees: they afford no shelter, and are occupied only at night.
“They are exceedingly ferocious, and always offensive in their habits, never running
from man, as does the Chimpanzee. They are objects of terror to the natives, and are
never encountered by them except on the defensive. The few that have been captured
were killed by elephant-hunters and native traders, as they came suddenly upon them
while passing through the forests.
“It is said that when the male is first seen he gives a terrific yell, that resounds far and
wide through the forest, something like kh—ah! kh—ah! prolonged and shrill. His
enormous jaws are widely opened at each expiration, his under lip hangs over the chin,
and the hairy ridge and scalp are contracted upon the brow, presenting an aspect of
indescribable ferocity.
“The females and young, at the first cry, quickly disappear. He then approaches the
enemy in great fury, pouring out his horrid cries in quick succession. The hunter awaits
his approach with his gun extended: if his aim is not sure, he permits the animal to grasp
the barrel, and as he carries it to his mouth (which is his habit) he fires. Should the gun
fail to go off, the barrel (that of the ordinary musket, which is thin) is crushed between
his teeth, and the encounter soon proves fatal to the hunter.
“In the wild state, their habits are in general like those of the Troglodytes niger,
building their nests loosely in trees, living on similar fruits, and changing their place of
resort from force of circumstances.”
Dr. Savage’s observations were confirmed and supplemented by those of Mr. Ford,
who communicated an interesting paper on the Gorilla to the Philadelphian Academy of
Sciences, in 1852. With respect to the geographical distribution of this greatest of all the
man-like Apes. Mr. Ford remarks:
“This animal inhabits the range of mountains that traverse the interior of Guinea, from
the Cameroon in the north, to Angola in the south, and about 100 miles inland, and called
by the geographers Crystal Mountains. The limit to which this animal extends, either
north or south, I am unable to define. But that limit is doubtless some distance north of
this river [Gaboon]. I was able to certify myself of this fact in a late excursion to the
head-waters of the Mooney (Danger) River, which comes into the sea some sixty miles
from this place. I was informed (credibly, I think,) that they were numerous among the
mountains in which that river rises, and far north of that.
“In the south, this species extends to the Congo River, as I am told by native traders
who have visited the coast between the Gaboon and that river. Beyond that, I am not
informed. This animal is only found at a distance from the coast in most cases, and,
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
Reb’a, tribù arabica, III, 211.
Rebâb, tribù arabica, III, 829.
Rebî’ (Abu-Soleiman), II, 230.
Rebi’a, tribù arabica, 360; III, 211, 737.
Redhwân, II, 521.
Regiâ-ibn-Genâ, II, 211.
Regiâ-ibn-abi-l-Hasan-Ali-ibn-abi-l-Kasim-Abd-er-Rahman-ibn-Regiâ
(Abu-l-Fadhl), III, 752.
Reginaldo, 374.
Reginone, 377.
Regiomontano, III, 658.
Reidân, II, 357.
Reinaud, xxxiii, xxxviii, xl, xli, xlii, xliv, xlvi, xlvii, xlviii, xlix, l, li; III,
202.
Reiske, xxxviii, li, lv.

Reland Adriano, II, 453.

Renan, III, 858.
Renaudot, IX; III, 681.
Rendacium, v. Sisinnio.
Rendasc, II, 184.
Rendâsci, 351.
Renò (Reinault?), canonico, III, 291.
Repostel Guglielmo, III, 25.
Rescîd-ibn-Mo’tamid-ibn-’Abbâd, II, 528.
Rescîd, schiavo d’Ibrahim, II, 53.
Rescîd, signore di Kàbes, III, 411.
Rhentacios, 351.
Riâh, tribù arabica, III, 384.
Ribbah-ibn-Ia’kûb-ibn-Fezara, 330, 331, 343, 353, 385, 390; II, 140.
Riccardo, conte d’Aversa, III, 43, 45, 49, 53.
Riccardo, conte di Caserta, III, 619.
Riccardo, conte di Molise, III, 502.
Riccardo Cuor di Leone, III, 529, 546, 549, 802.
Riccardo I, duca di Normandia, III, 39.
Riccardo II, duca di Normandia, II, 413; III, 26.
Riccardo, gaito, III, 263, 500, 501, 502.
Riccardo, principe di Capua, II, 23, 47, 116, 122, 123, 142, 143, 144,
146, 186.
Richar, II, 325.
Ricimero, 11.
Ricon (?), gaito, III, 263.
Righa, tribù berbera, III, 211.
Righi, III, 211.
Robaldo, III, 288.
Robertino, III, 692.
Roberto, abate del Monte di San Michele, III, 428.
Roberto, arcivescovo di Messina, III, 317, 346.
Roberto, conte di Clermont, III, 195.
Roberto, duca di Normandia, III, 13, 25.
Roberto, figliuolo del duca di Borgogna, III, 347.
Roberto Guiscardo, II, 349, 386, 397, 412, 416; III, 21, 22, 23, 27,
38, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 59, 60, 62,
63, 65, 67, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 87, 88, 89, 102,
104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 112, 114, 115, 116, 117, 120, 121, 122,
123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 133, 134, 136, 138,
139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 150, 158, 160, 161,
162, 163, 164, 165, 182, 183, 184, 191, 196, 207, 214, 265, 266,
271, 273, 274, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 326, 331, 335, 338,
339, 342, 350, 352, 358, 396, 451, 813, 864.
Roberto, vescovo di Traina, III, 192, 193.
Roberto, vescovo di Tricarico, II, 407.
Roctè (?) Giovanni, III, 288.
Rodeina, II, 336.
Rodofilo, II, 89.
Rodolfo, v. Drengot, III, 25, 26.
Rodolfo, conte d’Ivry, III, 20.
Rodolfo Glabro, III, 12.
Rodrigo, 476.
Roll, III, 17, 18, 53, 213.
Roma (corte e Chiesa di), 15, 19, 21, 22, 29, 77, 84, 91, 95, 96, 179,
183, 192, 197, 202, 218, 221, 444, 485, 498, 500, 502, 515, 518; II,
402; III, 11, 45, 46, 48, 49, 192, 193, 205, 207, 217, 274, 304, 348,
389, 394, 395, 430, 432, 468, 549, 569, 570, 574, 595, 701, 816.
Roma (da) Paolo, arcivescovo di Morreale III, 797
Romani, 39, 76, 78, 87, 96, 104, 118, 206, 417; II, 165, 203, 204,
264, 321, 328, 329, 348, 337, 443; III, 58, 145, 393, 431, 468, 550,
566, 593, 746.
Romano I, imperatore (Lecapeno), II, 153, 154, 174, 175, 184, 219.
Romano II, imperatore, II, 259.
Romano III, imperatore (Argirio), II, 366, 367, 379.
Romualdo, arcivescovo di Salerno, III, 438, 440, 466, 481, 495, 502,
503, 558, 560, 842, 849.
Romualdo, principe di Salerno, II, 338.
Rostemidi, 130.
Rotrou (di) Stefano, dei conti di Perche, III, 224, 497, 498, 499, 500,
501, 503, 540, 542.
Rouen (arcivescovodi), III, 49, 217, 559.
Rouen (da) Stefano, vescovo di Mazara, III, 307.
Rozaik, II, 515, v. Mohammed-ibn-Sahl.
Rousseau Alphonse, xxxiv, xxxviii, xxxix, xlv, l, lv; II, 429.
Ruffo, casato, III, 221.
Ruffo Giordano, III, 697.
Ruffo Guglielmo, III, 288.
Ruffo, marchese, xxxv.

Ruggiero, di Amalfi, III, 863.

Ruggiero, conte di Geraci, III, 502.
Ruggiero I, conte di Sicilia, xxxix, xlvii; 236, 417, 469: II, 383, 396,
397, 401, 403, 404, 450, 552; III, 23, 44, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53,
54, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75,
78, 79, 82, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98,
99, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116,
117, 119, 120, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 131, 133, 134, 136,
139, 140, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 156, 158,
159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 174, 175, 176,
177, 178, 179, 180, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190,
191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 201, 207, 214, 217, 218, 225, 229,
230, 233, 236, 238, 241, 245, 247, 254, 255, 257, 258, 261, 266,
267, 269, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 284, 291, 298, 300,
301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 315,
324, 326, 327, 329, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 339, 340, 343, 345,
348, 349, 350, 351, 352, 353, 358, 368, 396, 446, 451, 485, 540,
621, 662, 794, 806, 813, 820, 821, 841, 848, 871.
Ruggiero I, duca di Puglia, III, 22, 146, 165, 178, 183, 184, 185,
186, 187, 239, 271, 272, 274, 343, 813.
Ruggiero, figliuolo di Guglielmo I, di Sicilia, III, 485.
Ruggiero Guiscardo, personaggio supposto, II, 412.
Ruggiero Nanainà, II, 416.
Ruggiero, re di Sicilia, xxxix, xli, xliii, xlv, xlvii, l, liii; 236, 466, 469,
470, 488, 492, 494; II, 414, 429, 445; III. 48, 58, 153, 190, 195,
196, 198, 200, 215, 223, 226, 228, 234, 252, 255, 262, 267, 275,
276, 277, 284, 290, 294, 295, 296, 308, 309, 314, 323, 326, 332,
333, 339, 343, 344, 345, 346, 348, 350, 351, 359, 360, 362, 363,
364, 365, 366, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 376, 378, 379, 380,
381, 383, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397,
398, 399, 400, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415,
417, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 428, 430, 431, 432, 433,
434, 433, 437, 438, 439, 440, 441, 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447,
448, 449, 450, 451, 452, 453, 454, 456, 458, 459, 460, 461, 462,
463, 464, 465, 468, 474, 491, 493, 494, 504, 552, 557, 621, 655,
657, 660, 661, 662, 663, 665, 669, 670, 673, 677, 678, 679, 680,
681, 682, 684, 685, 689, 691, 693, 699, 700, 719, 746, 752, 754,
755, 758, 759, 760, 762, 769, 771, 772, 773, 775, 778, 780, 781,
784, 786, 787, 798, 799, 801, 805, 806, 808, 811, 813, 814, 818,
819, 841, 842, 846, 848, 849, 855, 888.
Ruggiero Schiavo, III, 223, 226, 448.
Ruggiero, di Traina, III, 290, 291.
Ruggiero, vescovo di Siracusa, III, 307.
Rûm, 86, 104, 206, 247, 329; II, 73, 194, 242, 251, 269, 273, 310,
362, 439, 501, 532; III, 6, 218, 325, 366, 367, 382, 386, 418, 472,
490, 830, 860.
Rûm-Afarika, II, 6.
Rumâniùn, III, 366.
Ruzabeh, III, 826.
Ruzaik-ibn-Abd-Allah, II, 541.
 S

Saba, 359.
Sabatier Francesco, III, 861.
Sabato, III, 209.
Sabbatio, 491.
Sabbioneta (da) Gerardo, III, 695.
Sâber, v. Sareb, II, 179.
Sabii, III, 703, 764.
Saccano Iacopo, III, 57.
Sa’d, tribù arabica, II, 33; III, 766.
Sa’d-ibn-abi-Wakkâs, 60.
Sa’d-ibn-Zeid-Monat, tribù, II, 505.
Sadr-ed-dîn, Kunewi, II, 493.
Safadino, v. Malek-Adel.
Safi, capitano, II, 341.
Sahl-ibn-Mohammed, Segestani (Abu-Hâtim), xxv.
Sa’îd-ibn..., II, 299.
Sa’îd-ibn-Heddâd, II, 217.
Sa’îd-ibn-Fethûn-ibn-Mokram, da Cordova, II, 472.
Sa’îd-ibn-Jûsuf, da Calatayud, II, 481.
Sa’îd-ibn-Hosein, v. Obeid-Allah, II, 118, 120, 132.
Sa’îd-ibn-Othman, II, 222, 225.
Sâih, xlvi.

Sâin, v. Saber e Sareb, II, 176, 177, 178, 179.

Sakhr, tribù arabica, III, 384.
Saklab, II, 433.
Saladino, xlv, xlvi, xlvii, xlviii, xlix, li; 267, 396; II, 240; III, 264, 412,
505, 506, 507, 508, 509, 510, 511, 512, 513, 515, 519, 521, 522,
523, 524, 526, 527, 528, 529, 530, 536, 634, 637, 638, 649.
Sâlem, 340.
Sâlem-ibn-Ased-ibn-Râscid-el-Kenâni (Kotami?), II, 160, 170, 181,
182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 191, 195, 204.
Sâlem-ibn-Râscid, v. Sâlem-ibn-Ased, ec., II, 160.
Salinas Antonio, III, 129, 795, 856.
Salisbury (da) Giovanni, III, 496.
Salomone, 125.
Salomone Marino, III, 887.
Sallustio, 105.
Sambucino (abate di), III, 574.
Sammartino (duca di), xxxv.

Samuele, maestro, III, 868.

Samuele-ibn-Tibbon, III, 706.
Sanâb o Sebâb, II, 362.
Sant’Adriano (cardinale di), III, 571.
Sant’Agatone, 29.
Sant’Agrippina, 279.
Sant’Agrippino, II, 253.
Sant’Ambrogio, II, 389.
Sant’Anseimo, arcivescovo di Canterbury, III, 187, 188.
Sant’Antonio, siciliano, II, 409.
Sant’Antonio, eremita, II, 317.
San Bartolommeo, 356, 503.
San Benedetto, 101, 366.
San Bernardo, III, 395, 413, 432.
San Brandano, III, 679.
Sant’Elia, da Castrogiovanni, II, 70, 80, 81, 96, 441.
Sant’Elia, da Reggio, II, 410.
San Fantino, 230, 231.
San Filareto, 293, 487, 490.
San Filippo, 45.
San Gennaro, II, 253.
San Gerlando, III, 210, 339.
San Geronimo, 75.
San Giacomo, vescovo, 220.
San Giorgio, II, 385; III, 99.
San Giorgio (principe di), v. Spinelli Domenico, III, 812.
San Giovanni Damasceno, 177.
San Giovanni Therista, II, 346, 412.
San Giuseppe Innografo, 30, 219, 221, 231, 502, 503, 505, 521.
San Gregorio, 12, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 85,
196, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207, 291, 293, 482, 520; II, 403, 433, 490.
Sanhâgia, Senhâgia e Sinhâgia, tribù berbera, viii, xxx; II, 36, 202,
287, 288, 355, 358; III, 92, 373, 478.
Sant’Ignazio, patriarca di Costantinopoli, 420; II, 385.
Sant’Ilarione, II, 317.
San Leoluca, 519.
San Leone, di Ravenna, 218, 219, 220.
San Luca, 492, II, 92.
San Luca, di Demona, II, 346, 403, 407, 408, 409, 410, 412.
San Marciano, 15, 16.
San Massimo, 91, 96.
San Niccolò, di Bari, III, 812.
San Niceforo, vescovo, II, 213, 214.
San Nilo il Giovane, II, 313, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 346.
Santa Oliva, 520.
San Pancrazio, 15, 18, 493; II, 80.
San Pantaleone, 494.
San Paolo, 15, 16; II, 167.
San Pietro, 15; II, 90, 95, 167.
San Placido, 101, 103.
San Procopio, vescovo di Taormina, 520; II, 59, 402.
San Quintino (Giulio, dei conti di), III, 197.
San Ranieri, III, 796.
San Saba, abate, II, 410; III, 258.
Sari Severino, II, 91, 92, 95.
San Simeone, II, 412, 413.
San Teodoro, siciliano, III, 409.
San Teodoro (cardinale di), III, 571.
San Vitale, di Castronovo, II, 403, 406, 407, 412.
Sant’Agata, 17, 508.
Santa Lucia, 17; II, 391.
Santa Lucia (abate di), III, 309.
Santa Ninfa, 17.
Santa Venera, da Gala, 520.
Saluti Pietro, II, 205, 875.
Sara, 75.
Saraceni, 75, 76, 84, 85; II, 87, 88, 153, 165, 170, 171, 181, 215,
312, 319, 321, 322, 328, 329, 338, 342, 343, 385, 408; III, 2, 8, 13,
41, 58, 65, 83, 102, 105, 108, 120, 123, 132, 138, 142, 145, 159,
184, 185, 186, 192, 194, 206, 251, 264, 266, 296, 321, 326, 344,
368, 388, 389, 397, 398, 489, 498, 530, 538, 543, 545, 574, 575,
577, 580, 585, 586, 587, 588, 592, 593, 594, 595, 596, 601, 602,
603, 604, 607, 609, 611, 612, 613, 614, 616, 618, 620, 632, 641,
688, 712, 713, 788, 792, 870, 891.
Sardegna (giudici di), III, 7.
Sâreb, v. Sâin e Saber, II, 179.
Sassanidi, 40, 76, 142; II, 109, 110; III, 732, 825, 837.
Sassoni, II, 322, 372; III, 40.
Sato (Sa’îd?), II, 342.
Saudan (sultano), 436.
Savoia (casa di), III, 803.
Savonarola, II, 485.
Scaldi, II, 380.
Scandinavi, II, 380; III, 15, 16, 17, 20.
Sceaboddino, v. Abmed-ibn-Iehia.
Scedîd, III, 572.
Scehâb-ed-dîn-ibn-Abi-l-Damm, liii.

Scehâb-ed-din ’Omari, v. Ahmed-ibn-Iehia.

Sceikh-ed-dawla, v. Abd-er-Rahman-ibn-Lûlû.
Scekr, detto il Siciliano, II, 228.
Scems-ed-dîn, da Ormeia, III, 641.
Scerf-ed-dawla, 359.
Scerf-ed-dîn-Ahmed, Zenkeluni, xxvi.

Scherif-Elidris, v. Edrîsi.
Schiavi, 4, 5, 10, 28.
Schiavo Domenico, xliv; III, 286.
Schiavoni, 380; II, 88, 129, 158, 169, 297, 298, 299, 362.
Scolaro, prete, II, 400; III, 234, 257, 258, 338, 656.
Schultens, xlviii.

Sciabtai Donolo, II, 319.

Sciafe’i, 474; II, 507.
Sciahuan, III, 368, 371.
Sciami, III, 211.
Scî’i, v. Sciiti.
Sciiti o Scî’i, II, 102, 105, 108, 115, 119, 124, 125, 128, 131, 136,
359, 360, 361; III, 719.
Scilitze, viii.

Scinà Domenico, xii, li; 15.

Scipione, 60; II, 80.
Sclavi, II, 174, v. Slavi.
Scorso, 488, 489.
Scoto Michele, III, 696, 697, 707.
Scrofani Saverio, xv.

Sedicto (Siddik?), gaito, III, 263, 500.

Sédillot, 57.
Seduikisc, tribù berbera, III, 495.
Sefedi, lii; 154; III, 699.
Sefetiti, II, 99.
Sehnûn, v. Abd-es-Selâm-ibn-Sa’îd.
Sehnûn-ibn-Kâdim, 264.
Seif-ed-dawla, della dinastia di Hamadan, II, 365.
Seif-ed-dawla, v. Jûsuf-abu-l-Fotûh
Seif-el-islam, principe aiubita, III, 264.
Sekhawi, xxxvii.

Selâh-ed-din, di Arbela, III, 641, 642.

Seleuro, 8.
Sema’ûn?, 404.
Sementari, II, 482, 490, 491, 493.
Semiti, II, 496.
Semnoen v. Sema’ûn, 403.
Semoul (di) Gualtiero, III, 105.
Seneca, 199.
Senhâgi, xxxviii, xli.

Senhâgia, v. Sanhâgia.
Serbi, II, 169.
Sergio, da Castronovo, II, 406.
Sergio, consolare, 213.
Sergio, console di Napoli, 364.
Sergio, duca di Napoli, 448, 450.
Sergio, monaco, 505, 521.
Sergio, papa, 29, 195.
Sergio, patrizio di Sicilia, 213, 217, 250.
Serlone, III, 64, 95, 98, 99, 101, 133, 134, 135, 136, 300.
Serradifalco (duca di), xxxiv, xliii; III, 819.
Serrâg-ibn-Ahmed-ibn-Regiâ (Abu-d-Dhaw), III, 752, 753.
Settimello (da) Arrigo, III, 700.
Sewâda, II, 56.
Sewâda-ibn-Mohammed-ibn-Khafagia, 423, 424, 425, 428.
Sibilla Eritrea, xxx; III, 460, 461, 660.
Sibilla, regina, III, 559, 560.
Sicani, II, 31.
Sicardi, vescovo di Cremona, III, 352.
Sicardo, 312, 354, 355, 357.
Sichaimo, v. Soheim, 456.
Sichelgaita, III, 146.
Sicilia (di) Giovanni, III, 690, 691, 693.
Siciliani a Damasco, 84.
Siciliani, appellazione di coloni musulmani, 429.
Siconolfo, 354, 357, 360, 361, 362, 369, 370.
Siculi, 194, 196.
Sid-es-Sarkusi, soprannominato Ibn-es-Susi, III, 213.
Sifanto, III, 526.
Sifriti, 127, 133; II, 287.
Sikilli, casato, III, 212.
Silefi, tradizionista, II, 476, 489.
Silvestro II, papa, III, 3.
Silvestro, conte di Marsico, III, 784.
Silvia, 23.
Simeone, re dei Bulgari, II, 173, 174.
Simmaco, 12.
Simone, maestro, 242, 243, 249.
Simone, figliuolo d’Arrigo, dei marchesi Aleramidi, III, 226, 488.
Simone, figliuolo del conte Ruggiero, III, 183, 195, 345, 346, 347,
806.
Simsàm-ed-dawla, v. Hasan-ibn-Jûsuf.
Sinagia, v. Sanhâgia.
Sinan, detto il Vecchio della Montagna, III, 649.
Sind-ed-dawla, v. Abu-l-Fotûh-ibn-Bodeir.
Sinhagia, v. Sanhâgia.
Sinimmar, III, 825.
Siracusa (Leopoldo, conte di), xxxiv, xxxv, xliii; II, 522.
Siracusa (vescovo di), III, 304, 574.
Sicelioli, 196.
Sisinnio, 350; II, 184.
Sisto V, papa, 101, 103.
Sittelkiul, figlia del Kaid-Se’ûd, III, 256.
Slavi, II, 50, 169, 170, 176, 177, 179, 199, 217, 218, 292, 366; III,
15, 157.
Smagardo, II, 340, 342; III, 25.
So’àd. III, 758, 759.
Società Orientale di Germania, xxii.

Socrate, 509; III, 703.

Socrate, legato bizantino, II, 253.
Sofian-ibu-Sewàda, 340, 427.
Sofronio, 403.
Soheim?, 456.
Soiûti, xxvi, xxxvii, lv; III, 716.
Soleim, tribù arabica, 135; II, 547.
Soleiman-ibn-Afia, 288.
Soleiman-ibn-Amran, 230, 260.
Soleiman(Abu-Dàwûd), II, 479.
Soleiman-ibn-Hasan, II, 116.
Soleiman, Kurdi, II, 484.
Soleiman-ibn-Iehia-ibn-Othmàn-ibn-Abi-Duma, II, 487.
Soleiman-ibn-Mohammed, da Trapani, II, 535.
Solimano, califo omeiade, 125; II, 28.
Sordavalle (di) Guglielmo, III, 221.
Sordavalle (di) Roberto, III, 162, 221.
Sordavalle (di) Sansone, III, 389.
Soret, xxiv.

Soweika (fazione della), III, 429.

Spedalieri, frati. III, 646.
Spelecte (Sant’Elia, di Reggio), v. Sant’Elia.
Spinelli Domenico, xvii, xxiv; III, 343, 344, 812 a 815.
Spinola Niccolò, III, 357, 359, 629, 632.
Spinola Oberto, III, 379.
Spoto, barone. III, 605.
Sprenger, xl.

Springer, III, 858, 862, 879.

Stabile Mariano, xxxv.

Stefano, ammiraglio greco, II, 379, 391, 392, 393.

Stefano, ammiraglio, figliuolo di Majone, III, 356.
Stefano Aniciese, 102.
Stefano Bizantino, 9.
Stefano, consolare, 213.
Stefano, dei conti di Perche, III, 215, 216, 493.
Stefano, figliuolo di Niccolò, d’Eugenio, ammiraglio, III, 353.
Stefano, fratello di Majone, III, 356, 480.
Stefano Massenzio, 440.
Stefano IV, papa, 29.
Stefano V, papa, 517.
Stefano IX, papa, III, 45.
Stefano, patrizio, II, 366.
Stefano, di Siria, II, 218.
Stefano, vescovo, II, 90.
Steinschneider, III, 706.
Stesicoro, III, 542.
Strabone, 7, 8, 9; III, 684.
Strambo, cognome, III, 206, 875.
Strato, cognome, III, 221.
Struppa Salvatore, III, 816.
Subula, casato, III, 205.
Sufiti, II, 492, 536.
Sultano, supposto nome proprio, 359, 360.
Sultano o Soldano di Bari, v. Moferreg-ibn-Sàlem, 372, 380, 382,
383, 436.
Sultano di Sicilia, II, 233, 240.
Sunniti, II, 98, 108, 131, 136; II, 719, 727.
Svevi (dinastia), xxxi; II, 300; III, 406, 530, 889.
Symeon, magister, 164.

Tabat, abate, III, 246.

Tabari, xxxix, xli; 60.
Tacito, 73; III, 557.
Tafuri Michele, II, 459; III, 344.
Tag-ed-dawla, v. Gia’far-ibn-Jûsuf.
Tag-ed-dîn, Abu-Abd-Allah-es-Singiàri, III, 734.
Tag-ed-dîn, el-Kendi, III, 730.
Taghleb, tribù arabica II, 511.
Tàher-ibn-Mohammed-ibn-Rokbâni, II, 511, 342
Taheriti, dinastia, II, 4.
Taki-ed-dîn, III, 698.
Tamerlano, liii.

Tarmîm, v. Temîm.
Tancredi, conte di Lecce, III, 509.
Tancredi, conte di Siracusa, II, 396.
Tancredi, di Hauteville, III, 38, 39, 42, 45, 49, 112, 451, 813, 814,
815.
Tancredi, re di Sicilia, III, 342, 503, 521, 531, 544, 546, 548, 550,
555, 558, 560, 562, 566, 568, 592, 594, 802.
Tantawi, xlvi.

Taormina (di) Timeo, III, 671.

Taranto (arcivescovo di), III, 579.
Tardia, x, xvii, xliv; III, 203.
Tarik, 125.
Tâwâli, 429.
Teaîd-ed-dawla, v. Ahmed-ibn-Jûsuf, II, 364.
Tedeschi, 247, 248, 282; II, 322, 348; III, 43, 46, 298, 413, 543,
544, 548, 552, 557, 558, 563, 564, 567.
Teja, martire, 15.
Telemsen (re di), III, 379.
Telese (abate di), III, 347, 440.
Temîm-ibn-Mo’ezz-ibn-Badîs, principe Zirita, xxxviii; II, 92, 93; III,
92, 93, 94, 109, 110, 136, 150, 158, 167, 168, 169, 170, 172, 173,
189, 361, 362, 366, 368.
Temîm (tribù di), II, 480, 488, 504, 505, 506; III, 211, 409.
Temistocle, II, 272.
Temmâm, 145.
Templari, III, 645, 646.
Teobaldo, priore di Crepy, III, 498.
Teocrito, II, 542.
Teoctisto, 190, 193.
Teodicio, figliuolo d’Eugenio, ammiraglio, III, 353.
Teodora, 492.
Teodora, di Roma, II, 160.
Teodora, imperatrice, 315, 338, 498, 510.
Teodorico, 12, 211.
Teodoro, ammiraglio, figliuolo di Niccolò, d’Eugenio, ammiraglio, III,
353, 356.
Teodoro, consigliere in Roma, 203.
Teodoro, consolare, 213.
Teodoro Crethino, 298.
Teodoro, filosofo, III, 692, 693, 694, 695.
Teodoro, spatario e cartulario, 213.
Teodoro, patrizio, 180, 188, 189.
Teodosio, 17, 200.
Teodosio, monaco, 394, 398, 401, 403, 404, 405, 406, 408, 409,
521; II, 32.
Teodosio, patrizio, 357.
Teodoto, 185, 188, 248, 282, 283, 285, 288, 289, 290.
Teofane, abate, 29.
Teofane Cerameo, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 493, 495, 496, 503,
521; II, 439.
Teofane, discepolo di San Giuseppe Innografo, 505.
Teofane, istorico, 21, 84, 86, 91, 93, 96, 98, 121, 223.
Teofania, imperatrice, moglie di Ottone II, II, 326, 327.
Teofano, principessa greca, II, 311, 312.
Teofilatto, 462.
Teofilo, imperatore, 220, 291, 297, 298, 315, 357, 492, 494, 497,
498, 503, 505.
Teofilo, prefetto imperiale, 213, 287, 288.
Teognosto, 241, 242, 244.
Teopisto, 229.
Tessaracontarii, 164.
Thâbit il Siciliano, II, 487.
Tharec, 170, v. Tarik.
Thâbit-ibn-Hathîm, 172.
Thedibia, II, 408.
Thelgi, II, 111.
Thierry, vescovo di Metz, II, 326.
Thiket-ed-dawla, II, 332, 336, v. Jûsuf-ibn-Abd-Allah.
Tiberio, 9.
Tiberio II, imperatore, 121.
Tiberio, usurpatore, 217.
Tigiani, xxvii, l.
Togibiti, II, 472.
Tolomeo, xxx; 9, 10, 75; II, 432, 433, 437, 469; III, 178, 657, 658,
669, 670, 671, 679, 707.
Tolunidi, II, 4, 50, 76, 77; III, 847.
Tommaso, schiavo di San Gregorio, 202.
Tommaso, conte d’Acerra, III, 641.
Tommaso, di Cappadocia, 164, 193, 240, 242, 250.
Tommaso, conte di Savoia, III, 810.
Tonûkh, tribù arabica, II, 220, 335.
Torceto (de) Rogerius Acquinus, III, 221, 223.
Tornberg, xlvii, l, li, liii.

Toscana (marchese di), II, 2.

Toscana (granduchi di), III, 681, 682.
Traina (vescovo e Chiesa di), III, 341, 349, 353.
Traina Antonino, III, 884, 887.
Traina (da) Viviano, III, 288.
Traci (di) Pietro, III, 116.
Trani (conte di), III, 123.
Trasimondo, marchese di Spoleto, II, 312.
Tribellio Pollione, 10.
Tricari Basilio, III, 281.
Troia (vescovo di), III, 582.
Trostaino, III, 29.
Troysi, xxxv.

Tunis (re di), III, 630.

Tûra, supposto re di Taormina, II, 439.
Turan-Sciah, fratello di Saladino, III, 506.
Turchi, 123; II, 371, 462; III, 282, 506.
Turcopoli, III, 508.
Turungi, III, 212.
Tusculani, III, 550, 558.
Tychsen, x, xxiv; 283, 296, 321; II, 6; III, 342.
Welcome to Our Bookstore - The Ultimate Destination for Book Lovers
Are you passionate about books and eager to explore new worlds of
knowledge? At our website, we offer a vast collection of books that
cater to every interest and age group. From classic literature to
specialized publications, self-help books, and children’s stories, we
have it all! Each book is a gateway to new adventures, helping you
expand your knowledge and nourish your soul
Experience Convenient and Enjoyable Book Shopping Our website is more
than just an online bookstore—it’s a bridge connecting readers to the
timeless values of culture and wisdom. With a sleek and user-friendly
interface and a smart search system, you can find your favorite books
quickly and easily. Enjoy special promotions, fast home delivery, and
a seamless shopping experience that saves you time and enhances your
love for reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and
personal growth!

ebookgate.com