Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1873-01-24
GT.sN-Ts.

antiquity, we must take into consideration
the fact that II was the custom OF all |
the ancient nations, TO magnify the stature |
Of their kings and heroes. To be consider
ed giant in strength and In size, was the |
ambition Of every warrior. Even great |
Alexander was not free from this vanity, |
for we are told that in one of his A sian ex
petitions, he caused to be made and left |
behind him, a suit OF armor OF huge pro-
portions, in order to induce belief among
the eople he had conquered, that be WAS
Of great stature. Holmes aggepstes the
size and strength OF all the heroes of the
| Trojan war. and leads us to infor that the
| whole race of man. even In his day. bad de-
generated. We may suspect that even
| the Jewish writers were not entirely free
| from a similar failing. Admitting that a
people like the Rephaim existed in Pales-
| tine of greater stature than the Hebrews,
il would require but little stretch OF poet
ic Imagination, to paint them as giants.
| They may have been no larger in compare
! sou with their conquerors than are the
| Patagonians, beside other more civilized
races of to day, yet have seemed immense
to the children of Israel, who were more
over than under the average height.
Again, there is no absolute certainty that
the Biblical text, as we have it, il a. 1t was
| originally written. Our authorized YER
sion makes Goliath, for instance, six cubits
and span in height but the Vatican copy
of the Septuagint (Codex Yaticanus), as old
as any In existence unless the Sinati-
Gus exceeds it,, reads "four cubits and
| l..t ~; ...,, H.
which account are We to ADHERED II 10 the
latter, then the giant Of the Philistines was
only a little over six and half feet in stat
ure, instead of nine and half. The sacred
writer does not give us the measure Of
King Og, but only that Of his bedstead. It
is not necessary to dispute the thirteen and
a half feet of the giant couch, but we are
half inclined to suspect that Og WAS affiict
ed with an ambition similar to that of Alex
ander, and used bedstead not in proper
ton to his actual size, but in proportion to
his fancied Importance. II is curious to
observe that according to Dr. Smith, the
words in Deuteronomy translated "bed-
stead Of iron" are also susceptible of the
rendering, "sarcophagus Of black basalt :"
but this does not initiate against the prsb-
ability of our supposition.
Comparatively modern writer's are not
free from like exaggeration in regard to
the stature of noted men. William of
Malmesbury makes the tomb OF Wslwin,
nephew of King Arthur, and one Of his IA
nous knights fourteen feet in length and
Hollinshead, quoting Sylvester Giraldus,
says that the body OF King Arthur found
in Glastonbury, in l1s9, was two feet high
or than any man who came to see ii. As
Camden. who gives an account Of the dis
covery fails to notice this popularity OF
the corpse, the story is probably without
foundation. In like manner Charlemagne
and his paladns have been represented rs
of great stature. Eginhard says that the
great emperor was "seven Of his own feet
in height from which we must infer ell
Their that he had a very small foot, entirely
ont Of proportion to his size, or that he was
a very tall man. The old writer's would
have rs believe, too, that Roland, the hero
OF Roncesvailes, was also of gigantic stat
ure and strength. Happily we have some
direct evidence on this point. Hakewill,
quoting Camerarius, says: "Francis 1,
King Of France who reigned about a hun
dred years since, being DESTROYS TO know
the truth of those things which were COM
monty spread touching the strength and
stature of Rouland. nephew to CHARLIE
magne, caused his sepulchre to be opened
wherein his bones and bow were found rot
ten, but his armor sound, though covered
with rust, while the king commanding to
> be secured off. and putting upon his own
: body, found il so fit for him, as thereby II
appeared that Rouland exceeded him but
little In business and stature OF body though
himselfe were not excessive tall or big. y
We have similar evidence in relation to the
body OF william the Conqueror; which
was reported to have been dug up four hun.
bred years after burial, and found to b,
eight feet In length for Stowe says thai
when the English took Cannes, in 1862
d SONS eoldiers broke into the monument II
search OF booty and found nothing remark
= able about the bones.
Were II possible 10 get all the truth con
i corning the giants of antiquity, there is lit
tie doubt that half OF them could he showI
to be pure myths, and that nine-tenths o
the remainder could be reduced In siz,
very materially. Pliny's assertion, tina
mankind is gradually degenerating, Il
wholly gratuitous, and has no foundation
in fact. Indeed, vast deal OF proof cal
be adduced tending TO show that the mel
Of to day are equal, and probably superio
in stature to the ancients. The Greeks an,
Romans were OF undoubtedly small size
y The helmets and ord-hits that hav,
come down to us from the heroic ages coul,
: be used by the majority OF soldiers of tn
present European nations. Ancient ring
y. also are generally too small for modern fin
;, gers.
But the classic writer's give testimon,
enough on this point. Cesar, speaking O
the Gauls, says: "Our shortness Of stature
- In comparison with the great size of thei
bodies, is generally a subject of much con
tempt to the men OF Gaul." Tacitus ais
10 describes the Germans as Of robust form
" and of great stature and Strabo says tina
he had seen Britons at Rome who were hal
" foot taller than the tallest Italians. Yo
= there is no pre- of that the men OF these ma
- lions were any larger in ancient times thai
VI they are now. On the contrary, the grave
and barrows tell di fferent story. The no
mains are usually under tue average heigh
s OF men Of the present day. 1t IL the sam
r, with the Egyptian mummles. Accord nj
}; ' to Athen,sus, man of four eubits or ali