542 DIGESTION. 



shedding it : the parts of generation were excluded from the table, 

 because the taste, if indulged, might interfere with the reproduction of 

 the species, &c. &c. 



We have said, that, in his arrangement of the digestive organs, man is 

 intermediate between the carnivorous and the herbivorous animal. Not 

 the slightest ground is afforded by anatomy for the opinion of Rousseau, 

 that man was originally herbivorous; or for that of Helvetius, 1 that he 

 was exclusively carnivorous. Broussonet affirms, that he is more herb- 

 ivorous than carnivorous, since, of his thirty-two teeth, twenty resem- 

 ble those of the herbivorous, whilst twelve only resemble those of the 

 carnivorous animal. Accordingly, he infers, that, in the origin of 

 society, the diet of man must have been exclusively vegetable. Mr. 

 Lawrence, 2 too, concludes, that, whether we consider the teeth and 

 jaws, or the immediate instruments of digestion, the human structure 

 closely resembles that of the simige the great archetypes, according to 

 Lord Monboddo 3 and Rousseau, of the human race, all of which are, 

 in their natural state, herbivorous. 



Again: a wide discrepancy between man and animals is observed in 

 the variety of their aliments. Whilst the latter are generally restricted 

 to either the animal or vegetable kingdom, and to but a small part of 

 either, man embraces an extensive range, and by means of his culinary 

 inventions can convert a variety of articles from both kingdoms into 

 materials of sustenance. But it has been argued by those, who are 

 sticklers for the natural, that man probably confined himself, primi- 

 tively, like animals, to one kind of food; that he adhered to this whilst 

 he remained in his natural state, and that his omnivorous practices are 

 a proof of his degeneracy. Independently, however, of all arguments 

 deduced from organization, experience sufficiently shows the inaccuracy 

 of such assertions. If we trace back nations to their state of infancy, 

 we find, that then, as in their more advanced condition, their diet was 

 animal, or vegetable, or both, according to circumstances. Of this fact 

 we have some signal examples in a part of the globe where the lights 

 of civilization have penetrated to a less extent than in most others ; 

 and where the influence of circumstances that prevailed in ancient 

 periods has continued, almost unmodified, until the present time. Aga- 

 tharchides 4 describes the rude tribes, who lived on the coast of the Red 

 Sea, and subsisted on fish, under the name ichthyophagi. Along both 

 banks of the Astaboras, which flows on one side of Meroe, dwelt 

 another nation, who lived on roots of reeds growing in the neighbour- 

 ing swamps. These roots they cut to pieces with stones, formed them 

 into a tenacious mass, and dried them in the sun. Close to them were the 

 hylophagi, who lived on the fruits of trees, vegetables growing in the 

 valleys, &c. To the west of these were hunting nations, who fed on 

 wild animals, which they killed with the arrow. There were, also, other 

 tribes, who lived on the flesh of the elephant and ostrich, elephanto- 



1 De 1'Homme, ii. 23, Londres, 1775. 



a Lectures on Physiology, Zoology, &c., p. 221,Lond., 1819. 



3 On the Origin and Progress of Language, Pt. i. Book 2, Chap. 2, Edinb., 1773. 



4 De RubroMare, in Hudson's Geograph. Minor., i. 37. 



