Tags
15 cubits, antedeluvian, Francesco Sansovino, Genesis, Giants, Honorius Augustodunensis, Honorius of Autun, Luigi Pulci, Margutte, Nephilim, Numbers, Og, the Flood, Tuscan folk, Walter Stephens
Q. How do we know how tall Giants are?
A. Giants must be at least 15 cubits tall (23 feet tall).
Why? Yea, it is a matter of logic. The Bible tells us that the Great Flood covered the mountains by 15 cubits, killing all flesh. Yet, the antedeluvian Giants, the Nephilim of Genesis 6, appear alive and well after the flood (in Numbers 13). Ergo, the Giants who survived the flood must have been more than 15 cubits tall!
(This otherwise unimpeachable logic ignores any other ingenious ways that Giants managed to survive the Flood. Some rabbinic sources claim that Og managed to escape the Flood by holding onto the outside of Noah’s Ark).
Walter Stephens, in his wonderful book, Giants in Those Days, describes this lost medieval knowledge, concerning the height of Giants, as “an erudite commonplace”. Stephens mentions the Twelfth-century theologian Honorius of Autun or Honorius Augustodunensis (PL 172.165) and Sixteenth-century Italian man of letters, Francesco Sansovino as two scholars who had amassed much erudition concerning the height of Giants (65).
Sansovino quotes Tuscan folk as saying: “Ed hebbi voglia anco io d’esser gigante / Vedi che sette braccia sono a punto.” According to Stephens, these lines didn’t really originate with Tuscan folk at all. Instead, they reproduce part of the half-Giant Margutte’s self-description in the Fifteenth-century work by Luigi Pulci, Morgante: “Ed ebbi voglia anco io d’esser gigante, / Poi mi penti’ quando al mezzo fu’ giunto, / Vedi che sette braccia sono a punto” (18.113.6-8).
Why was Margutte a ‘half-giant’? Because he was only 7 cubits, not 15 cubits, tall. As Stephens translates the lines quoted from Morgante, above: “And I also desired to be a Giant, but I thought better of it when I had arrived halfway–note that I’m exactly seven cubits tall.”
QED
The Dunedin School 
“Why was Margutte a ‘half-giant’? Because he was only 7 cubits, not 15 cubits, tall. As Stephens translates the lines quoted from Morgante, above: “And I also desired to be a Giant, but I thought better of it when I had arrived halfway–note that I’m exactly seven cubits tall.”
Which is proof that Giants were not skilled mathematicians. Probably why they were unable to build an arc of their own. He was actually a 0.466-(recurring)-giant.
You’re right. As is well known to erudite medieval scholars, Giants are thickies:
Guido da Pisa, Expositiones (1327-1328) 664, notes that Giants had “large bodies and bestial minds.”
Dante’s Vitgilio calls Nimrod (a ‘Giant’ according to the Septuagint) an “anima sciocca” (stupid soul).
Baruch (3.26-28) claims that the Giants perished because they lacked knowledge and wisdom, a claim quoted in Augustine, City of God 15.23.
(All this is included in Stephens (67-69).)
Right yet so very Wrong… ;-)
Is that a hint?
Just some quick feedback from a stranger surfing…nothing in Numbers or Deuteronomy refer to the Nephilim , that I can see, other than mention of family lines exhibiting superior dna of stature and power . Not unlike the Philistine ‘giants’ .
And calling someone animalistic or stupid, does not mean that they were not highly intelligent beings .
Nimrod IS documented as having the same deviant and violent sexual appetite that the ‘Sons of God’ and their offspring the Nephilim had , as well as a dominant disposition towards the peoples he ruled over, wanting to remove the ‘fear of ‘God’ from the peoples , through tyranny . This is supported by the Targums , by Josephus , and through the description of him as Gilgamesh , by the Sumerians and Accadians . I believe that at some point, someone misinterpreted the language and art of information pertaining to Nimrod as literal and not descriptive . Might he have acted ‘as the giants’ ? I guess that decision is made by those who are footing the bill for the grant money that paid for the study, eh ?
It is interesting, that I found your blog while searching for info on Walter Stephens . He has been quoted around the net as refuting Annio da Viterbo and his writings as ‘fabrications’ , pertaining to the possible connection between Etruscan and Semitic languages . Although I have not as yet read all the supposed info to refute his writings , to me it sounds very much like mudslinging . To say he is guilty of ‘willful interpolation’ smacks of censorship and a burying of knowledge , given the topic and implications . The fact that so many books of the time have ‘disappeared’ , particularly in regards to the connections between modern civilization and our ancestors , gives me pause to swallow this whole . ‘Myth’ , is a sold commodity .
I am continuing on to search for more info on the Etruscans . But I felt compelled to comment, that you and Walter seem of similar …’illuminance’.